■%. 
 
 '^^ 
 
 'K^: 
 >*>■ 
 
 ^ ^■ 
 
 ^^*Xi 
 
 /*,. ^%^ i»«^ 
 
 ■%m-^' 
 
 
 
 lb«t*j 
 
 *#ta 
 
 '(IX"'!^'. •r* 
 
 ^S, f 
 
 f«/ 
 
 
 
 V,' '*. 
 
 >^ 
 
 ^5^^' 
 
 v^^ 
 
 ¥*,-«L)ki,*<*; 
 
 « •<j''^j:'^ 
 
 |W_»i 
 
 ^"' 
 
 4''€:^ 
 
 ^ 
 
H~0 
 
 CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
924 092 586 159 
 
Q0(&MjLe^\«^t4_, 
 
 
»/ 
 
 ^« 
 
 Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924092586159 
 
IRELAND (GRASS LANDS, &c.) 
 
 RETURN 
 
 (Pursuant to an Order of the House of Loeds, dated 24th January 1881,) 
 
 SHOWING 
 
 The Total Area of " Grass Lands," including Meadows and Pastures, and 
 the Total Area of "Tillage Lands," including all kinds of Crops and 
 Fallows, in Ireland, for the Years 1850, 1855, 1860, 1865, 1870, 1875, 
 and 1880. 
 
 
 Years. 
 
 Grass Lands 
 
 (including Meadow 
 
 and Pastures). 
 
 Tillage Lands 
 
 (including all Crops 
 
 and Fallows). 
 
 
 
 
 Statute Acres. 
 
 Statute Acres. 
 
 
 
 1850 
 
 * 
 
 t 4,558,168 
 
 
 
 1855 
 
 10,872,968 
 
 4,436,035 
 
 
 
 1860 • 
 
 11,078,152 
 
 4,411,454 
 
 
 
 1865 
 
 11,501,905 
 
 3,998,968 
 
 
 * 
 
 1870 
 
 11,740,706 '^ 
 
 3,885,945 
 
 
 
 1875 
 
 12,354,005 
 
 3,399,001 
 
 
 
 1§80 
 
 12,168,933 
 
 3,186,665 
 
 
 * Extent of Land under Grass not published in the Agricultural Report for ISiSO. 
 t Exclusive of Fallow not published in the Agricultural Report for 1850. 
 
 General Register Office, 
 
 Charlemont House, Dublin, 
 
 31st January 1881. 
 
 T. W. GEIMSHAW, 
 
 Registrar- General. , 
 
 
 ■/-■>■; 
 
 ^m 
 
 \H^ 
 
 (23.) 
 
A . -5 (^4-0^ 
 
 SuT 
 
 ^COH^: 
 
 p ^,' :"■ ? 
 
 \ 
 
 TY 
 
 ^„ UBRABV / 
 
 02 
 
 Si. 
 >4 
 
 
 I- 
 
 s 
 
 « 
 
 8 
 
 «SS 
 
 3 
 
 12! 
 
 Pj o 
 
 ■=-10 
 to Ma 
 
 is- 
 
 '-I H 
 •- o 
 
 o 
 a 
 
 
 6 
 
 > 
 in 
 
 CD 
 
 21 
 O 
 CD 
 
IRISH LAND BILL, 1870. 
 
 RETURN 
 
 To an Ordkr of the House op Lords, dated 12th May 1881, 
 
 FOK 
 
 Pkint of the Irish Land Bill^ 1870, as read a first time in the House 
 of Lords, showing by difference of Print or Ink, or by both Methods, 
 the Amendments made in the Bill as returned to the Commons, 
 and what afterwards became of such Amendments, i.e., whether 
 Agreed to or Disagreed to or further Amended. 
 
 [Note. — The Lords' Amendments are shown in red ink, those in ordinary type being the 
 Amendments miido dnring the passage of the Bill through the House, those in italic being made 
 on consideration of the Amendments made by the Commons to the Lords' Amendments. 
 
 The Amendments made by the Commons on consideration of the Lords' Amendments are shown 
 'n black ink and italic type. 
 
 The words struck through in red ink were omitted by the Lords ; the words in red struck through 
 in black were inserted by the Lords and omitted ))y the Commons. 
 
 Where either House disagreed to an Amendment, the words " Disagreed to " are printed in 
 thick type, and in the distinguishing coloui' — -black for the Commons and red for the Lords. 
 
 Further explanations are given when necessary in foot notes.] 
 
 BILL 
 
 intituled 
 
 An Act to amend the Law relating to the Occupation and 
 Ownership of Land in Ireland. 
 
 TT7HEBEAS it is expedient to amend the law relating to the 
 * ' occupation and ownership of land in Ireland : 
 Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and 
 with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, 
 and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the 
 authority of the same, as follows : — 
 
 PART I. 
 
 Law oe Compensation to Tenants. 
 Claim to Compensation. 
 1. The usages prevalent in the province of Ulster, which are Legality of 
 known as, and in this Act intended to be included under, the ^^^'®'' 
 denomination of the Ulster tenant-right custom, are hereby declared cu^tom"^ * 
 to be legal, and shall in the case of any holding in the province 
 (84) A 
 
Legality of 
 tenant 
 
 custom other 
 than Ulster 
 custom. 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 of Ulster proved to be subject thereto, be enforced in manner 
 provided by this Act. 
 
 Where the landlord has purchased or acquired or shall hereafter 
 purchase or acquire from the tenant the Ulster tenant-right custom 
 to which his holding is subject, such holding shall thenceforth cease 
 to be subject to the Ulster tenant-right custom. 
 
 A tenant of a holding subject to the Ulster tenant-right custom, 
 and who claims the benefit of such custom, shall not be entitled to 
 compensation under any other section of this Act ; but a tenant of 
 a holding subject to such custom but not claiming under the 
 UMor tenant right oustom same shall not be barred from making 
 a claim for compensation, with the consent of the Court, under any 
 of the other sections of this Act except the section s ovon relating to 
 compensation in respect of ■paj/ment to incoming tenant ; and where 
 such last-mentioned claim has been made and allowed such holdings 
 shall not be again subject to the Ulster tenant-right custom. 
 
 2, If, in the case of any holding not situate within the province of 
 Ulster, it shall appear that an usage prevails which in all essential 
 particulars corresponds with the Ulster tenant-right custom, it shall 
 in like manner, and subject to the like conditions, be deemed legal, 
 and shall be enforced in manner provided by this Act. 
 
 Where the landlord has purchased or acquired or shall hereafter 
 purchase or acquire from the tenant the benefit of such usage as 
 aforesaid to which his holding is subject, such holding shall thence- 
 forth cease to be subject to such usage. 
 
 A tenant of any holding subject to such usage as aforesaid, and 
 who claims the benefit of the same, shall not be entitled to claim 
 compensation under any other section of this Act, but a tenant of 
 a holding not claiming the benefit of such usage shall not be barred 
 from making a claim for compensation with the consent of the Court 
 under any of the other sections of this Act, and where such last- 
 mentioned claim has been made and allowed, such holding shall not 
 be again subject to such usage as aforesaid. 
 
 Compen- 
 sation in 
 absence 
 of custom. 
 
 Disagreed to. 
 
 3. Where the tenant of any holding held by him under a tenancy 
 created after the passing of this Act is not entitled to compensation 
 under sections one and two of this Act, or either of such sections 
 or if entitled does not seek compensation under said sections or 
 either of them, and is disturbed in his holding by the act of the 
 landlord, he shall be entitled to such compensation for the loss which 
 the Court shall find to have been be sustained by him^nby reason of 
 quitting his holding, to be paid by the landlord, as the Court may 
 think just, so that the sum awarded doer, not exceed the scale fol- 
 lowing ; that is to say. 
 
 In the case of holdings valued under the Acts relating to the 
 valuation of rateable property in Ireland at an annual value 
 of— 
 
 "^ iS&iO- £4 and under a sum which shall in no case exceed 
 seven years rent ; 
 
 (1-; 
 
( ^ ) 
 
 (2.) Above ^£4 and not exceeding £10, a sum which shall Disagreed to. 
 
 in no case exceed six years rent ; 
 (2.) Above £10 and not exceeding ^eB#£ 20, a sum which Disagreed to. 
 
 shall in no case exceed five years rent ; 
 (3.) Above'H6^£20, and not exceeding £40, a sum which Disagreed to. 
 
 shall in no case exceed four years rent ; 
 (4.) Above £4iO and not exceeding £50, a sum which shall 
 
 in no case exceed three years rent ; 
 (5.) Above £50 and not exceeding £100, a sum which shall 
 
 in no case exceed two years rent ; 
 (6.) Above £100 a sum which shall in no case exceed one 
 year's rent ; 
 But in no case shall the compensation excqed the sum of £250. 
 
 Any tenant in a higher clasB ot the - eoalo mayi at Mo option, 
 olaim to bo oomponoatod on oo muoh only of hio rent aa will bring 
 him into a Iowqj olaoo. 
 
 Any tenant in a higher class of the scale may, at his option, 
 claim compensation under a lower class, provided such compensation 
 shall not exceed the sum to which he would be entitled tmder such 
 lower class, on the assumption that the annual value of his holding 
 is reduced to the sum {or where two sums are mentioned the highest 
 sum) stated in such lower class, and that his rent is proportionally 
 reduced. \ 
 
 If it shall appear to the Court that during the tenancy in respect 
 of which compensation is claimed under this section the landlord 
 or his predecessor in title has within the twenty yeaxs preceding 
 expended money in improvements on the holding, and the rent has 
 been increased in consequence of such expenditure, then the rent by 
 reference to which compensation shall be assessed under this section 
 shall be the actual rent after deducting the annual sum by which 
 the same has been increased in conseciuence of such expenditure, 
 but so that the annual sum thus deducted shall not exceed interest 
 after the rate of 5^. per cent, per annum on the sum expended; and 
 whenever there shall appear to have been an increase of rent since 
 the expenditure in improvements by the landlord or his predecessor 
 in title, it shall be presumed, in the absence of evidence to the 
 contrary, that the increase was in consequence of the expenditure, - 
 Provided, that no tenant of a holding valued at a yearly sum 
 exceeding -^10 £A , and claiming under this section more than Disagreed to. 
 four years rent, and no tenant of a holding valued at a yearly sum 
 not exceeding-£4a £4 , and claiming as aforesaid more than five Disagreed to 
 years rent, shall be entitled to make a separate or additional claim 
 for improvements other than permanent buildings and reclamation 
 of waste land. 
 Provided that, — 
 
 (1.) Out of any moneys payable to the tenant under this section 
 all sums due to the landlord from the tenant or his 
 predecessors in title in respect of rent, not exceeding ^Aree Disagreed to. 
 years rent, or in respect of any deterioration of a holding 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 xn 
 
( 4 ) 
 arising from non-obseryance on the part of the tenant of 
 any express or inaplied covenant or agreement may be 
 deducted by the landlord, and also any taxes payable by 
 the tenant due in respect of the holding, and not recover- 
 able by him from the landlord : _ 
 (2.) A tenant of a holding who at any time after the passing of 
 this Act subdivides such holding or sub-lets the same or 
 any part thereof without the consent of the landlord m 
 writin"-, or aftef he has been prohibited in tcntmg by the 
 landlord or his agent from so doing lets the same or any 
 part thereof in conacre, save for the purpose of being solely 
 used and which shall be solely used for the growing of 
 potatoes or other green crops, the land being properly 
 mured, aftor ho ban boon prohibited in writing by 
 
 ma') 
 
 landlord or bio agent from do doing r shall not, nor shall 
 any sub-ienant of or under any such tenant as last afore- 
 said be entitled to any compensation under this section, 
 with thio qualifioation, that in tho oaoo of holdinge of 
 tw e nt y " five a e f oo and upwardo of tillage land^ tlio lotting 
 by a tenant of a portion of land to agrioultm-al labourop e 
 b o n a fide r eq uired foi ^ tho oultivation of tho holding for 
 cottages or gardono, not oxoooding half an aoro in oaoh oaoo, 
 and not being in numboj ouoh ao to raiao the total of ouch 
 cottages on the holding to moro than ouo for ovory twenty 
 five sicres of tillage land, chall not bo doomod to bo a eub 
 divi s ion or s ub - letting of land for tho purpococ of this 
 s e ction i 
 Provided that no tenant of any holding s hall erect a ny 
 labourog's oottago on hie holding without fir s t applying to 
 ' tho landlord or bio Imown agent for libci ' by 30 to do ; and 
 in case the landlord shall within twolvo monthc from ouoh 
 app l ication ev&(ti the cnttngp nt bis nwn ^^pp^-"^^, ^^^^^ 
 
 s aid holding : 
 (3.) A tenant of a holding under a lease made after the passing 
 of this Act, and granted for a term certain of not less than 
 Disagreed to. thirty ono twenty-one years, shall not be entitled to any 
 
 compensation under this section, but he may claim com- 
 pensation under section four of tiiis Act. 
 The tenant of any holding valued under the Acts relating to the 
 valuation of rateable property in Ireland at an annual value of not 
 more than one hundred pounds and held by him under a tenancy 
 from year to year existing at the time of the passing of this Act 
 shall, if disturbed by the Act of his immediate landlord, be entitled 
 to compensation under and subject to the provisions of this section. 
 Any contract made by a tenant by virtvie of which he is deprived 
 of his right to make any claim which he would otherwise be entitled 
 to make under this section, shall, so far as relates to such claim, 
 be void both at law and in equity ; this provision shall be subject 
 
( 5 ) 
 
 to the enactment contained in the Iwelf ^ i ' section of this ■ Act 
 relating to the partial exemption of certain tenancies ofithio Aot and 
 remain in force for twenty years from the first day of January one 
 thousand eight hundred and seventy-one, and th e r e aft e r until no 
 longer unless Parliament shall otherwise determine. 
 
 4. Any tenant of a holding who is not entitled to compensation Compeiisa- 
 under sections one and two of this Act, or either of such sections, ^'o"! '" J?' 
 
 ' ■ ' speet 01 im- 
 
 or if entitled does not make any claim under the said sections, or provemenis. 
 either of them, may on quitting his holding, and subject to the 
 provisions of section three of this Act, claim, compensation to be 
 paid by the landlord under this section in respect of all improve- 
 ments on his holding made by him or his predecessors in title. 
 Provided that,— 
 
 (1.) A tenant shall not be entitled to any compensation in Exception of 
 respect of any of the improvements following, that is to !'r'^*'^g|^g^tg 
 say,— 
 
 {a.) In respect of any improvement made before the 
 passing of this Act and twenty years before the pa ss ing 
 o f thio Act claim of such compensation shall have been 
 made except permanent buildings and reclamation of 
 waste land ; or, 
 
 (6.) In respect of any improvement prohibited in 
 writing by the landlord as being and appearing to the 
 Court to be calculated to diminish the general value of 
 the landlord's estate and made within two years after 
 the passing of this Act, or made during the unexpired 
 residue of a lease granted before the passing of this 
 Act ; or, 
 
 (c.) In respect of any improvement made either 
 before or after the passing of this Act in pursuance 
 of a contract entered into for valuable consideration 
 therefor; or, 
 
 {d.) (Subject to the rule in this section mentioned as 
 to contracts) in respect of any improvement made, either 
 before or after the passing of this Act, in contravention 
 of a contract in writing not to make such improvement ; 
 or, 
 
 {e.) In respect of any improvement made either 
 before or after the passing of this Act, which the land- 
 lord has undertaken to make, except in cases where the 
 landlord has failed to perform his undertaking within a 
 reasonable time. 
 (2.) A tenant of a holding under a lease or written contract made Exception 
 before the passing of this Act shall not be entitled on of certain 
 being disturbed by the act of the landlord in or on 
 quitting his holding to any compensation in respect of 
 any improvement, his title to which io right to which 
 compensation is expressly excluded by such lease or 
 contract : 
 (84) B 
 
( 6 ) 
 
 (3 ) A tenant of a holding under a lease made fter before or 
 ^ ^ after the passing of this Act, for a ternacertam of not le^s 
 
 than thirty-one years, or in case of leases naade before the 
 passing of this Act for a term of a life or liYes with or 
 without a concurrent term of years, and which leases shall 
 have existed for thu-ty-one years before the making of the 
 claim, shall not be entitled to any compensation m respect 
 of any improvement unless it is specially provided in the 
 lease that he is entitled to such compensation, except 
 permanent buildings and reclamation of waste land ; and 
 tillages or manures, the benefit of which tillages or 
 manures is unexhausted at the time of the tenant quitting 
 his holding : 
 (4.) A tenant of a holding, who is quitting the same voluntarily, 
 shall not be entitled to any compensation in respect of any 
 improvement when it appears to the Court that such 
 tenant has been given permission by his landlord to dis- 
 pose of his interest in his improvements to an incoming 
 tenant upon such terms as the Court may deem reasonable, 
 and the tenant has refused or neglected to avail himself of 
 such permission : 
 (5.) Out of any moneys payable to the tenant ander this section 
 all sums due to the landlord from the tenant or his 
 predecessors in title in respect of rent, not exceeding three 
 Disagretid to, years reiit,ov in respect of any deterioration of the holding 
 
 arising from non-observance on the part of the tenant of 
 any express or implied covenant or agreement may be 
 deducted by the landlord, and also any taxes payahle by 
 the tenant due in respect of the holding and not 
 recoverable by him from the landlord. 
 Any contract between a landlord and a tenant whereby the tenant 
 is prohibited from making such improvements as may be required 
 for the suitable occupation of his holding and its cultivation in a 
 due cours Q of huebandr^i - (J^e ciiin^ .siou, shaU be void both at law 
 and in equity, but no improvement shall be deemed to be required 
 for the suitable occupation of a tenant's holding and its cultivation 
 in a duo oonrno of bucbandry due cultrvoi iod, which appears to the 
 Court to diminish the general value of the estate of the landlord ; 
 nor shall anything in this Act contained authorise or empower any 
 tenant or occupier^ without the previous consent in writing of the 
 landlord, to break up or till any land or lands usually let, occupied, 
 or used as grazing or grass lands, or let expressly as grazing or 
 meadow land, or to cut timber without the consent of the landlord ; 
 provided that the tenant may cut timber planted and registered by 
 him or his predecessors in title. 
 
 Any contract made by a tenant by virtue of which he is deprived 
 of his right to make any claim which he would otherwise be entitled 
 to make under this section shall, so far as relates to such claim, be 
 void both at law and in equity, subject, however, to the enactment 
 contained in the i^vtlCiL section of this Act relating to the partial 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 exemption of certain tenancies, and to the provision in tbis section 
 as to any improvement made iu pursuance of a contract entered 
 into for valuable consideration therefor. 
 
 Where a tenant has made any improvements before the passing 
 of this Act on a holding held by him under a tenancy existing at 
 the time of the passing thereof, the Court in awarding compensation 
 to such tenant in respect of such improvem.ents shall, in reduction 
 of the claim of the tenant, take into consideration the time during 
 which such tenant may have enjoyed the advantage of such 
 improvements, also the rent at which such holding has been held 
 and any benefits which such tenant may have received from his 
 landlord in consideration, expressly or impliedly, of the improvements 
 so made. 
 
 5. For the purposes of compensation under this Act in respect of Presumption 
 improvements on a holding which is not proved to be subject either ^^ I'^spec o 
 to the Ulster tenant-right custom or to such usage as aforesaid, ments. 
 or where the tenant does not seek compensation in respect of such 
 custom or usage, all improvements on such holding shall, until the 
 contrary is proved, be deemed to have been made by the tenant or 
 his predecessors in title, except in the following cases where com- 
 pensation is claimed in respect of improvements made before the 
 passing of this Act, — 
 
 (1.) Where sach improvements have been made previous to the 
 
 time at which the holding in reference to which the claim 
 
 is made was conveyed on actual sale to the landlord or 
 
 those through whom he derives title : 
 
 (2.) Where the tenant making the claim was tenant under a lease 
 
 of the holding in reference to which the claim is made : 
 (3.) Where such improvements were made twenty years or 
 
 upwards before the passing of this Act : 
 (4.) Where the holding upon which such improvements were 
 made is valued under the Acts relating to the valuation of 
 rateable property in Ireland at an annual value of more 
 than one hundred pounds. 
 (5.) Where the Court shall be of opinion that in consequence of 
 its being proved to have heen the practice on the holding, 
 or the estate of whicli such holding forms part, for the 
 ^ landlord to make such improvements, such presumption 
 ought not to be made : 
 (6.) Where from the entire circumstances of the case the Court 
 is reasonably satisfied that such improvements were not 
 made by the tenant or his predecessors in title : 
 Provided always, that where it is proved to have been the practice 
 on the holding, or the estate of which such holding forms part, for 
 the landlord to assist in making such improvements, such presump- 
 tion shall be modified accordingly, 
 i ' « . Any landlord m- and tenant who may be desirous of preserving Clause a. 
 
 yimendments I evidence of any improvements made by himeolf or by hiu themselves ^®™'ss?e 
 Disagreed to. I or either of them or by their or either of their predecessors in title of improve- 
 
 * ments. 
 
■ Compen- 
 sation in 
 respect of 
 payment to 
 incoming 
 tenant. 
 
 ( 8 ) ^ 
 
 before or after the passing of this Act, may jointly atauytime 
 (oubjcot to tho proidoi'ju ' hoi i uin aftor nutm 
 
 file a schedule 
 
 frri 111 
 
 *«^i vidence 
 
 in the Landed Estates Coiu't, specifying such improyements, and 
 claiming the, same ...^ ,nadr hy liimudf or hia pi L du,^ i - . t itlr- 
 accordingly ;xw\ such schedule so filed shall be !■ ■ i^-'' f 
 that such improvements were made as therein mentioned : 
 always, that notice in trritin^^ P tho intention to fil e o ue-h 
 together - with a copy Llicrcof, Dhall be gi^^i^ by 
 
 ■ , ^,, i' i ^M . f . - i r -1 M.. — bciug of the il ' il I' l 
 
 V itfi'l 
 
 i*4- 
 
 I II ! .' 
 
 -ttrH 
 
 Mf+e4- 
 
 nt- 
 
 ■t+i- 
 
 laif.ry' 
 
 -fflr 
 
 ■ mado (oj 
 the p 
 
 i T'Ofjc,') ;.''<-. ' i 
 
 rurin i 3rM'r 
 
 ii i ijH I ' l i r''ii, "B 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 bo 
 02 
 
 02 
 
 to filr r] 
 
 n.ie th" — ' 
 
 
 TT+TTT 
 
 ■^Y 
 
 #4- 
 
 — 4*i 
 
 pcraon 
 
 
 )cv\ij within tho ] rib 
 
 ..TTTTt- 
 
 -tr 
 
 rrn 
 
 ipply to •'•he Civ J ' '1 C 
 
 ; i .il 'U'l. ' 
 
 -TTTtT^ 
 
 ' It iinl 
 
 II cc, an 
 oil lcav(. 
 
 ch caac — — b- 
 
 avc bcc ive.j- ' lile 
 
 e.iLiii.'j 
 
 !' i.' s ■ n\ 
 
 Dill Cuurt, pruv 
 
 ! i or in any ', . — idfcd form by the . '"^ 
 
 I bat bcloi. 
 
 I any Auch scli 
 
 pruuf b^'Hll 1,1 
 
 L^mded Es^ 
 
 by &fca ' .u.L 
 
 CD 
 
 a 
 
 <! 
 
 in 
 O 
 
 o 
 O 
 
 dbelar?^ 
 
 liei ' eb'- 
 
 fTT 
 
 "TTnt 
 
 by the parly r. 
 
 buei 
 
 -FrtjT 
 
 uuLi 
 
 urL ; or (ii 
 
 any -iiMj h appllualluii has bwn madu) lliai le^v.^ ' i- 'a given by, 
 LLij Civil Bill CuuH Lu file such bcbedule .* 
 
 6. Where any tenant of a holding does not claim or has not 
 obtained compensation under sections one, two, or three of this Act, 
 and it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that any such tenant, 
 or that his predecessors in title on coming into his holding paid 
 money or gave money's worth with the express or implied consent 
 of the landlord on account of his so coming into his holding, the 
 Court shall award to such tenant on quitting, his holding in respect 
 of the sum so paid such compensation as it thinks just, having 
 regard to the circumstances of the case ; but such tenant shall not 
 be entitled to any compensation under this section when it appears 
 to the Court that such tenant has been given permission by the 
 landlord to obtain such satisfaction from an incoming tenant in 
 respect of the money so paid, or the money's worth so given by 
 him, and on such terms as the Court may think reasonable, and 
 such tenant has refused or neglected to avail himself of such per- 
 mission ; moreover where the money or money's worth paid or given 
 by any tenant claiming compensation under this section on coming 
 into his holding was paid or given in whole or in part in respect 
 or as covering the value of any improvements on Jwg. the holding 
 care shall be taken that such tenant shall not receive compensation 
 m respect of the same improvements under this section and also 
 under some other section of this Act : Provided, that out of any 
 
 * The Commons Amendments being disagreed to, this Clause passed in the form 
 originally proposed by the Lords. 
 
( ) 
 
 moneys payable to the tenant under this section all sums due to the 
 
 landlord from the tenant or his predecessors in title in respect of 
 
 rent not exceeding three years rent or in respect of any deterioration Disagreed to. 
 
 of a holding arising from non-observance on the part of the tenant 
 
 of any express or implied covenant or agreement, and also any 
 
 taxes payable by the tenant due in respect of the holding, and not 
 
 recoverable by him from the landlord, may, if not deducted under 
 
 the provisions of section four of this Act, be deducted by or on 
 
 behalf of the landlord : Provided always, that this section shall not 
 
 apply when such money or money's worth has been paid during the 
 
 existence of a lease made before the passing of this Act. 
 
 7. Where a holding is proved to be subject to the Ulster tenant- Compen- 
 
 right custom, or such usage as aforesaid, and where the tenant nation in 
 ° ' ° ' respect ot 
 
 claims under such custom or usage and such custom or usage extends crops, 
 to away-going crops, the compensation payable in respect of away- 
 going crops shall be dealt with according to the custom or nsage, 
 but the tenant of every other holding, which is not proved to be 
 subject to the Ulster tenant-right custom or such usage as afore- 
 said, or in respect of which no claim is made under such custom or 
 usage, shall, in the absence of any agreement in writing to the con- 
 trary, on quitting his holding, be entitled to all his away-going 
 crops, or at the option of the landlord to be paid the value of the 
 same. 
 
 8. For the purposes of this Act ejectment for nonpayment of Limitation 
 
 rent or for breach of any condition against assignment, sub-lettinsr, ^^ todiaturb- 
 , ■, . .1 1 11 ; , n ,1. ^'ance in hold- 
 
 bankruptcy, or insolvency shall not be deemed disturbance of the ing. 
 
 tenant by act of the landlord, unl e ss th e Court dooidoo that it ought 
 o n spooial grounds to bo oo doomed in the oaac of a pcraon claiming 
 c ompensation on th e determination by such ejectment of a tonaucv 
 e xi s ting at the time of tho passing of thio Aot, and continuing to 
 e xist without any alt e ration of rent up to the time of auch det e r- 
 mination;* and for the purposes of this Act a person who is ejected 
 for nonpayment of rent, or for breach of any such condition as 
 aforesaid and is not disturbed by act of the landlord within the 
 meaning of this Act, shall stand in the same position in all 
 respects as if he were quitting his holding voluntarily. Provided, 
 that in the case of a person claiming compensation on the deter- 
 mination by ejectment for nonpayment of rent of a tenancy existing 
 at the time of the passing of this Act, and continuing to exist 
 without alteration of rent up to the time of such determination, the 
 Court may, if it think fit, treat such ejectment as a disturbance if 
 the arrear of rent in respect of which it is brought did not wholly 
 accrue within the three previous years, and if any earlier arrear 
 remained due from the tenant at the time of commencing the eject- 
 ment :f or if in case of any such tenancy of a holding vffhwd imdoi^. 
 
 * This Amendment was disagreed to by the Commons and insisted on by the Lords. 
 
 t This proviso was originally disagreed to by the Commons and insisted on by the 
 Lords. The Commons then added the words in itah'cs, which again were amended by 
 the Lords as above. 
 
 (84) C 
 
Exception 
 in case of 
 lands re- 
 quired for 
 labourers 
 cottages. 
 
 Derivative 
 title of 
 tenant. 
 
 Partial 
 exemption 
 of certain 
 tenancies. 
 
 Clause B. 
 Eestrictioii 
 as to com- 
 pensalion in 
 certain cases 
 of assign- 
 ment. 
 
 ( 10 ) 
 
 t he Aot& poimtin^ id th& miMotUoa of mioMo p^^opo^'tij m Jv^hmd 
 heldat an cmtmal vtOm- rent not ea;ceeding fifteen pounds the Court 
 shall boofopimon certify that the nonpayment of rent causing the 
 evietion has arisen from the rent being an e momim eceorUtanP'ent : 
 Provided, that no tenant who shall have given notice of surrender, 
 and afterwards refuse to give up possession in pursuance of such 
 notice, shall he entitled to any compensation under section three 
 of this Act though evicted by the landlord in a suit founded on 
 such notice. 
 
 9. Any landlord may, after six months notice in writing, to he 
 served upon the tenant, or left at his house, resume possession from 
 a yearly tenant of so much land (not to exceed in the whole one 
 twenty-fifth part of any individual holding), as he may require for 
 the bona fide purpose of erecting thereon one or more labourers 
 cottages, with or without gardens attached, and such resumption 
 of land shall not, unless the Court shall be of opinion that same 
 was unreasonable, be deemed a disturbance of the tenant within 
 the meaning of this Act, and shall not subject the landlord to any 
 claim for compensation, except in respect of improvements, beyond 
 a propoptioncuto an abatement of rent proportionate to the anniial 
 value of the land so taken by the landlord. 
 
 10. i'or the purposes of this Act a tenant shall be deemed to have 
 derived his holding from the preceding tenant if he has paid to 
 such preceding tenant any money or given to him any money's 
 worth in respect of his holding, or has taken such holding by 
 assignment or operation of law or by s ticce ss ion from the preceding 
 tenant ; and where a succession of tenants have derived title each 
 from the other the earlier in such succession shall be deemed to 
 be the predecessor of the later, and the later in such succession 
 shall be deemed to be the successor of the earlier. 
 
 11. A tenant of a holding which is not proved to be subject 
 to the Ulster tenant-right custom or such other usage as aforesaid, 
 whose holding or the aggregate of whose holdings in Ireland is 
 valued under the Acts relating to the valuation of rateable property 
 in Ireland at an annual value of not less than fifty pounds, shall 
 not be entitled to make any claim for compensation under any 
 provision of this Act in cases where the tenant has contracted in 
 writing with his landlord that he will not make any such claim. 
 
 Where the holdmg In respect of wliieh compensation is 
 claimed under section three of this Act is held under a tenancy from 
 y^ar to year existing at the time of the passing of this Act, and 
 such tenancy is assigned without the consent of the landlord, and 
 the landlord does not accept the assignee as his tenant, no compen- 
 sation shall be payable by the landlord under the said section in any 
 of the cases following : 
 
 (1.) Where the rent of such holding is in arrear at the time of 
 such assignment so as to render the tenant liable to evic- 
 
( 11 ) 
 
 tion for nonpayment of rent, and such arrear is due by the 
 
 tenant : 
 (2.) Where such holding forms part of an estate upon which the 
 
 assignment "Kf holdings without the consent or approval of 
 
 the landlord is contrary to or not warranted by the practice 
 
 prevalent upon such estate : 
 (3.) Where the Court shall be of opinion that the refusal of the 
 
 landlord to accept such assignee as tenant is a reasonable 
 
 refusal : ' 
 Provided always, that the transmission of a tenancy by bequest to 
 the husband or wife, or to any one child or grandchild, or to any one 
 brother or sister, or to any one child or grandchild of a brother or 
 sister of the tenant, ov the devolution of a tenancy by operation of 
 law upon an intestacy or marriage, shall not be deemed an assign- 
 ment within the meaning of this section. 
 
 Where it is proved to the Court that the tenant of any Clause C. 
 ■^ . , . Eviction in 
 
 holding held under a tenancy from year to year existing at the time certain cases 
 
 of the- passing of this Act is evicted by the landlord by reason of ^ot'^'^J'® 
 
 the persistent exercise by such "tenant of any right not necessary disturbance. 
 
 ' to the due cultivation of his holding, and from which such tenant 
 
 is debarred by express or iinplied agreement with his landlord, 
 
 such eviction shall not be deemed a disturbance of the tenant by 
 
 the act of the landlord, or where the tenant of any holding so held 
 
 as last aforesaid at the time of the passing of this Act is evicted 
 
 by the landlord by reason of the tenant's unreasonable refusal to 
 
 allow the landlord, or any person or persons authorised, by him in 
 
 that behalf, he or they malsing reasonable amends and satisfaction . 
 
 for any injury to be done or occasioned thereby, to enter upon the 
 
 holding for any of the purposes following; that is to say. 
 
 Mining or taking nainerals ; 
 
 Quarrying or taking stone, marble, gravel, sand, or slate ; 
 
 Cutting or taking timber or turf ; 
 
 Opening or making roads, drains, and watercourses ; 
 
 Viewing or examining the state of the holding and all buildings 
 or improvements thereon ; 
 
 Hunting, shooting, or fishing, or taking gaine or fish : 
 Such eviction shall not be deemed a disturbance of the tenant by the 
 act of the landlord, unless it shall be shown that the landlord is 
 persisting in such eviction after such refusal has been withdrawn by 
 the tenant. 
 
 12. No compensation shall be payable under the preceding pro- Exemption 
 
 • • P j-i • A I • J. £ of certain 
 
 Visions of this Act m respect oi — j^j^^g 
 
 (1.) Any desmesne land, or any holding ordinarily termed 
 " townparks " adjoining or near to any city or town which 
 shall bear an increased value as accommodation land over 
 and above the ordinary letting value of land occupied as a 
 farm, and shall be in the occupation of a person living in 
 such city or town, or the suburbs thereof, or any holding 
 
( 12 ) 
 
 let to be ^secl wholly or mainly for the purpose of pasture, 
 and valued under the Acts relating to the valuation of 
 property in Ireland at an annual value of not less than 
 fifty pounds, or any holding let to be used wholly or 
 mainly for the purposes of pasture the tenant of which 
 does not actually reside on the same, unless such holding 
 adjoins or is ordinarily used with the holding on which 
 such tenant actually resides : Provided, that nothing 
 herein contained shall prevent the tenant of any such 
 holding making any claim which he otherwise would be 
 entitled to make under sections four, five, and sis, seven, 
 of this Act ; or, 
 
 (2.) Any holding which the tenant holds by reason of his being 
 a hired labourer or hired servant of the landlord-; or, 
 
 (3.) Any letting in conacre or for the purposes of agistment or 
 for temporary depasturage ; or, 
 
 (4.) Any holding let and expressed in the document by which it 
 is let to be so let for the temporary convenience or to meet 
 a temporary necessity either of the landlord or tenant, and 
 the letting of which has determined by reason of the cause 
 having ceased which gave rise to the letting ; 
 
 (5.) Any cottage allotment not exceeding a quarter of an acre. 
 
 Troceedings in rested of Claims. 
 
 13. Every tenant entitled under this Act to make any claim 
 in respect of any right or for payment of any sums due to him 
 by way of compensation, and about to quit his holding, may 
 within the prescribed time serve a notice of such claim on his 
 landlord, or in his absence his known agent. The notice shall be 
 in writing in the prescribed form, and shall state the particulars 
 of such claim, subject to such amendment as the Court may allow,, 
 together with the dates at which and the periods within which 
 such particulars are severally alleged to have accrued, a-^d, where 
 such claim or any part of the same is in respect of compensation 
 under the provisions of section three of this Act, the number of 
 years rent claimed shall be specified. 
 
 14. On the receipt of the notice the landlord shall be deemed to 
 
 have admitted the claim made by the tenant unless within the 
 
 prescribed time and in the prescribed manner he serves a notice 
 
 on the tenant, stating that he disputes the whole or some portion 
 
 of the claim made by the latter, and upon service of such notice 
 
 by a landlord on the tenant a dispute shall be deemed to have arisen 
 
 between the landlord and the tenant as to the whole or a portion of 
 
 such claim, and such dispute shall be decided by the Court , unless 
 
 within the time and in the manner prescribed in that behalf such 
 
 dispute shall have been settled by agreement between the landlord 
 
 and tenant. 
 
 15. On the hearing of any dispute between landlord and tenant 
 randlordand under this Act, either party may make any claim, urge any objec- 
 
 tenant. 
 
 Proceedings 
 by tenant. 
 
 Proceedings 
 by landlord. 
 
 Equities 
 between 
 
( 13 ) 
 
 tion to the claim of the other, or plead any set-off such party may 
 think fit (including in the case of a landlord any moneys paid on 
 account of the purchase of the right of the tenant under the [Jlster 
 tenant-right custom or such usage as aforesaid), and the Court shall 
 •take into consideration any such claim, objection, or set-off, also 
 ■any such default or unreasonable conduct of either party as may 
 •appear to the Court to affect any matter in dispute between the 
 -parties, and shall admit, reduce, or disallow altogether any such 
 ^Jaim, objection, or set-off made or pleaded on behalf of either party 
 as the Court thinks just, giving judgment on the case with regard 
 to all its cu'cumsta.nces, including such consideration of conduct as 
 aforesaid, and. the Court shall have jurisdiction at the hearing of any 
 such dispute to ascertain what sums, if any, shall be deemed due 
 by the tenant to the landlord under sections three, four, and ^*- 
 seven of this Act, or any set-off in respect of unliquidated oi- 
 liquidated damages under said sections, or any of them ; and in any 
 case in which compensation shall be claimed under section three 
 of this Act, if it shall appear to the Court that the landlord has 
 been and is willing to permit the tenant to continue in the occu- 
 pation of his holding upon just and reasonable terms, and that such 
 terms have been and are unreasonably refused by the tenant, the 
 claim of the tenant to such compensation shall be disallowed. 
 
 In every case of dispute between landlord and tenant heard Claused. 
 before the Civil Bill Court the order of the Court shall be reduced court to be 
 into writing in the form of a decree or award (as the case may be), in writing, 
 and shall state the items of claim allowed, that is to say, the parti- 
 culars-ft«d e*- eba raotor * of loss Sustained by the tenant in quitting his 
 holding, and of the improvements and payment to his predecessor 
 in title in respect to which compensation may have been awarded 
 to the tenant under the third, fourth, and seventh sections, and 
 also the particulars of any set-off, objection, default, or conduct 
 allowed or taken into account. Such decree or award to be made 
 in the prescribed form. 
 
 16. Where in the case of any holding there are several persons Provision in 
 standing in the relation to each other of landlord and tenant, and T^^ °^. 
 
 . . ' derivative 
 
 the circumstance ot any one ot such tenants quitting his holding by estates iu 
 reason of disturbance or otherwise involves the interest of any of hj.idln™*' 
 such persons other than the tenant quitting his holding, the Court 
 shall determine the whole amount payable under this Act on the 
 occasion of such tenant quitting his holding, and shall direct pay- 
 ment of the same by such person and to such one or more of the 
 persons interested, and in such manner as the Court thinks just : 
 Provided, that this section, shall not affect the Ulster tenant-right 
 custom or such usage as aforesaid to which any holding is proved 
 to be subject. 
 
 * The Lords proposed " particulars and character." The Commons substituted 
 " particulars or character." The Lords thereupon struck out " or character " re- 
 quiring particulars only in all cases. This Amendment was disagreed to by the 
 "Commons, but insisted on by the Lords. 
 
 (84.) D 
 
Restriction 
 on eviction 
 of tenant. 
 
 Court to 
 mean Clivil 
 Bill Conrt 
 or Court of 
 Arbitrotion. 
 
 Civil Bill 
 Court. 
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 17. A tenant who may be decided by the Court to be entitled to 
 compensation to be paid by any landlord shaU not be compelled by 
 process of law to quit his holding until the amount of compensation 
 due to him has been paid or i^ u L l ui lod, imlcoa - Lho jud^ c or ^etemttim 
 bcfuit whv,m Lhu L/ML jhall be kitd ahall uOhtnti^t diiLul, upun Lhi; 
 payment of ouoh oum into CoiiH-<i^ Hio jud^^ ui "^"■'■"' '";;^;Y 
 order,- and any amount payablo phnll bo doom of l t o b u a t lGbt^ fee 
 to him from ouoh landlord/ and tho iomni may not uH ulllL delif 
 againat any ront for tho timo boing duo from him L u u uob Im ifl lnM 
 in rcapcot of hi o holding, but not oo ao to defeat an ojo o Lmont iov 
 
 in ojootmont for nonpayment of rent chall rodoom, purauant to the 
 S tatutoD in that bohalf , tho amount duo for ouoh oomponpation m 
 f iforoaaid ohall not bo doduotod in ootimating tho amount payable 
 for redemption deposited in manner herein-after mentioned. A 
 landlord shall in all cases have the option of depositing in the 
 manner prescribed the amount of compensation due ; and if at any 
 time after the making of a claim for compensation as herein-before 
 directed, and before finally giving up possession of his holding, a 
 tenant shall be alleged to have done any damage to his holding or 
 the buildings thereon, the Court shall inquire into the same, and 
 allow to the landlord out of the money so deposited such compen- 
 sation as it may deem just, including mesne rates. In no case 
 shall a tenant, except by special leave of the Court, be entitled to 
 receive the money so deposited until he shall have given up 
 pqssession of his holding. Where compensation is awarded in 
 respect of any holding to be paid by any landlord who is himself a 
 tenant of such holding, the tenant to whom such compensation is 
 awarded shall not by reason of such compensation not being paid 
 or deposited in manner iaforesaid by such landlord be entitled under 
 this section, as against a superior landlord not liable to such com- 
 pensation, to retain possession of the holding after the expiration or 
 determination of the title thereto of the landlord bv whom such 
 compensation was so awarded' to be paid as aforesaid. 
 
 Court to award Coiupensation . 
 
 18. Tor the purposes of this part of this Act the Court shall 
 mean one or other of the tribunals following ; that is to say, — 
 
 The Civil Bill Court of the county where the matter requiring 
 the cognizance of the Cotirt arises ; or. 
 
 The Court of Arbitration constituted as in this Act mentioned. 
 
 "Where a matter requiring the cognizance of the Court arises in 
 respect of a holding situate within the jurisdiction of more than 
 one Civil Bill Court, any Civil Bill Court within the jurisdiction of 
 which any part of the holding is situate may take cognizance of the 
 matter. 
 
 19. The judge of the Civil Bill Court (herein-after called the 
 chairman) shall in all cases brought before him under the provisions 
 of this Act have power to take evidence upon oath, and to compel 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 the attendance of witnesses, and shall have all and the same powers, 
 jurisdiction, and authority as in cases of Ciyil Bill ejectment 
 coming within his jurisdiction as such judge : Provided always, 
 that the judge shall himself without a jury decide any question of 
 fact arising in any case brought before him under this Act. 
 
 Tiie chairman may, with the consent of both parties, hear and 
 determine any case brought before him under this Act in chamber 
 if he so thinks fit, and when so sitting in chamber he shall have all 
 and the same powers, jurisdiction, and authority in respect to cases 
 so heard as if sitting in open court. 
 
 The chairman may, within the prescribed time after making any 
 order, review or rescind or vary any order previously made by him, 
 but, save as aforesaid, and as provided by this Act with respect to 
 appeal, every order of the Civil Bill Court shall be final. 
 
 Any order made by the chairman under this Act may be enforced 
 by attachment or otherwise in the same manner as if it were the 
 order of any of the suj)erior courts of common law at Dublin, and 
 if such order made by the chairman be for the payment of money 
 it may also be enforced in the same manner as civil bill decrees for 
 money demands made by such chairman. 
 
 20. Any person aggrieved by any order of the chairman made Appeal from 
 under this Act may, within the prescribed time and in the pre- (jourt. 
 scribed manner, appeal therefrom in manner following ; that is 
 to say, 
 
 (1.) Where such order has been made in the county or the 
 county of the city of Dublin to two judges of the superior 
 courts of common law to be from time to time selected by 
 the Court for Land Cases reserved : 
 
 (2.) Where such order has been made elsewhere to the judges of 
 assize of the county in which such order has been made : 
 And every such appeal , so far ao tho came involvoe quoetionc of 
 ia<st, may be heard and determined by one of the said judges ; but 
 in case any question of law shall arise upon any such appeal the 
 judge before whom such questian arises may, if he thinks fit, 
 require that the same shall be heard and determined by both the 
 said judges, and thereupon such question shall be heard and deter- 
 mined by both the said judges, who shall for such purpose sit 
 together. 
 
 The judge or judges hearing such appeal may give judgment 
 affirming, reversing, or modifying the order appealed from, and 
 may finally decide thereon, and make such order as to costs in the 
 Court below and of the appeal as may be agreeable to justice ; and 
 if the judge or judges alter or modify the order, such order so 
 altered or modified, and signed by the judge or judges, shall be of 
 the like effect as if it were the order of the Civil Bill Court. The 
 judge or judges may also, in cases where he or they think it 
 expedient so to do, instead of making a final order, remit the case, 
 with such directions as he or they may think fit, to the Court 
 below. 
 
( 16 ) 
 
 The judges to whom any such appeal may be made may, where 
 they deem it expedient, reserve any matter or question arismg 
 upon such appeal by way of case stated lor the consideration of the 
 Court for Land Cases reserved at "Dublin. 
 
 The Court for Land Cases reserved at Dublin shall, for the 
 purposes of this Act, be constituted Id manner following ; that is 
 to say, the Lord Chancellor, the Master of the liolls, the Lord 
 Justice of Appeal, the Vice-Chancellor, and all the judges of the 
 Common Law Courts shall be judges of the said Court for Land 
 Cases reserved, and any five of such judges, the Lord Chancellor 
 or Master of the Rolls or Lord Justice of Appeal or the Vice- 
 Chancellor or oce of the chief judges of the Common Law Courts 
 being one, shall have power to hear and determine any matters 
 that shall be brought before the said Court. 
 
 The officers of the Court of Exchequer Chamber shall act as 
 officers of the Court for Land Cases reserved. 
 
 All cases referred to the Court for Land Cases reserved shall be 
 prosecuted, heard, and determined by such Court, in such manner 
 and form and subject to such rules and regulations as the said Court 
 may from time to time, by rule direct. 
 
 The Court for Land Cases reserved shall give such judgment as 
 ought to have been given in the Court below by the judges thereof, 
 and such judgment shall be of the like effect, as if it were the 
 judgment of the said judges, or the Court of Land Cases reserved 
 may remit the case with such directions as they think fit to the 
 Court below. 
 
 Court of 21. Where the parties to any such dispute as aforesaid respectiug 
 
 any holding are desirous that such dispute should be settled by 
 arbitration, they shall, in the prescribed manner and within the 
 prescribed time, refer the same to an arbitrator or arbitrators, with 
 an umpire to be appointed in manner appearing in the schedule 
 annexed hereto, and the tribunal so selected shall be deemed in 
 respect of such dispute the Court of Arbitration under this Act. 
 
 The Court of Arbitration shall, in all cases brought before it under 
 this Act, have all and the like powers, jurisdiction, and authority as 
 a Civil Bill Court under this Act, with this exception, that the 
 Court of Arbitration shall have no power to punish persons for 
 contempt, or to enforce its awards ; but it may report to the Civil 
 Bill Court the name of any person refusing to give evidence, or to 
 produce documents, or guilty of contempt of the Court when sitting 
 judicially ; and the Civil Bill Court may, upon such report, punisli 
 the offender in the same manner as if the offence had been com- 
 mitted in, or in respect of a matter under the cognizance of the 
 Civil Bill Court. 
 
 The award of the Court of Arbitration may, at the instance of 
 either party, be recorded in the prescribed manner and within the 
 prescribed time in the Civil Bill Court, and when so recorded shall 
 be enforceable as if the same were an order of said Court. 
 
( 17 ) 
 
 No such award shall, so far as relates to the dispute under this 
 Act, be held to be invalid by reason of the violation of or non- 
 compliance with any technical rule of law respecting awards, where 
 such award substantially decides the dispute referred to the Court 
 of Arbitration. 
 
 No appeal shall lie from an award of the Court of Arbitration, nor 
 shall any such award be removable by certiorari. 
 
 Powers of limited Owners. 
 
 22. The expression " limited owner " shall in this Act mean as "Limited 
 
 owner." 
 follows : 
 
 (1.) Any person entitled mider any existing or future settlement 
 at law or in equity, for his own benefit and for the term of 
 his own life, to the possession or receipt of the rents and 
 profits of laad, whether subject or not to incumbrances, in 
 which the estate for the time being subject to the trusts 
 of the settlement is an estate for lives or years renewable 
 for ever, or is an estate renewable for a term of not less 
 than sixty years, or is an estate for a' term of years of which 
 not less than sixty are unexpired, or is a greater estate 
 than any of the foregoing estates : 
 
 (2.) Any body corporate, any corporation sole, ecclesiastical, or 
 lay, any trustees for charities, and any commissioners or 
 trustees for ecclesiastical, collegiate, or other public pur- 
 poses, entitled at law or in equity, in the case of freehold 
 land to an estate in fee simple or in fee farm, and in the 
 case of leasehold land to a lease for an unexpired residue 
 of not less than thirty-one years, or for a term of years or 
 of lives renewable for ever, or renewable for a period of not 
 less than thirty-one years. 
 
 23. A landlord, being a limited owner, shall have power to agree Agreement 
 with a tenant as to the amount of compensation payable to him owner'*^ 
 under this Act, and on payment of the same to the tenant, may 
 
 apply to the Civil Bill Court for an order charging the holding with 
 an annuity in respect of such payment, and the Court, upon being 
 satisfied of such payment having been made, shall charge the 
 holding with an annuity of five pounds for every one hundred 
 pounds of the sum so paid to the tenant, and so on in propor- 
 tion for any less sum, such annuity to be limited in favour of the 
 limited owner, his executors, administrators, and assigns, and to 
 be payable for a term of thirty-five years on the anniversary of 
 such date: Provided, that no such order shall be made by the 
 Court unless notice of the application for the same shall have 
 been given in the prescribed form to the person for the time 
 being entitled to the first estate of inheritance, if any, expectant 
 upon the determination of the estate of the limited owner, or if 
 such person shall be a married woman, infant, or lunatic, to his or 
 her husband, guardian, or committee respectively. Any annuity 
 (84.) E 
 
( 18 ) 
 
 Power of 
 limited 
 owner to 
 lease. 
 
 Effect of 
 lease by 
 limited 
 owner. 
 
 created under this section shall be a charge upon the holding 
 having priority oyer all estates and interests subsequent to the 
 estate or interest of the limited owner, but subject to any estates, 
 mortgages, or other interests having priority over or charged on ttie 
 estate of the limited owner. 
 
 24. Any limited owner shall have power to grant agricultural 
 leases, for any term of years absolute, or determinable at fixed 
 periods, subject to the following restrictions : 
 
 (1.) The term of any lease shall not exceed thirty- ono thirty-five 
 years : 
 
 (2.) The power of leasing conferred by this Act shall not include 
 any mansion house or demesne lands : 
 
 (3.) The lease shall take effect in possession, or within one year 
 after the execution thereof, and not in reversion, and there 
 shall be reserved thereby a fair yearly rent, to be inci- 
 dental to the immediate reversion of the holding without 
 taking anything in the nature of a fine, premium, or fore- 
 gift ; and in estimating such yearly rent it shall not be 
 necessary to take into account against the tenant the 
 increase (if any) in the value of the holding arising from 
 
 any improvements executed by him or his predecessors in 
 title: 
 
 (4.) The lease shall imply a condition of re-entry for nonpay- 
 ment of the rent thereby reserved : 
 (5.) The lease, if it includes any building, shall contain a clause 
 declaring whether the landlord or the tenant is bound to 
 rebuild such building in the case of the same being de- 
 stroyed during any part of the tenancy by fire, lightning, 
 or tempest, and whether the landlord or the tenant is bound 
 to keep the same in repair : 
 (6.) The lessee shall execute a counterpart of every lease, and 
 shall thereby covenant for the due payment of the rent 
 reserved : 
 Upon the application of any landlord or tenant the Civil Bill Court 
 may confirm any lease granted or proposed to be granted imder this 
 Act, and such Court may, if it thinks just, confirm or refuse to 
 confirm such lease with or without modifications, and the confir- 
 mation of any such lease shall be deemed conclusive evidence of the 
 lease being within the powers of this Act ; the confirmation of a 
 lease shall be certified in the prescribed manner. 
 
 25. Aay lease granted in pursuance of this Act by an individual 
 limited owner shall be valid against the person granting the same, 
 and against all persons entitled to any estate or interest subsequent 
 to the estate or interest of such limited owner; and any lease 
 granted in pursuance of this Act by any limited owner, being a 
 body corporate, corporation sole, trustees for charities, commissioners 
 or trustees for ecclesiastical, collegiate, or other public purposes, 
 shall bind all the estate and interest of such last-mentioned limited 
 
( 19 ) 
 
 owner ; but no lease granted by an owuor holding himself under a 
 lease shall continue after the expiration of the term granted by 
 such owner's lease. 
 
 26. AH powers of leasing given by this Act shall be deemed to Leasing 
 be in addition to any other powers any limited owner may possess, ^cTto^'be 
 and such owner may exercise any other power of leasing vested in cumulative. 
 him in the same manner as if this Act were not passed. 
 
 27. The Court for Land Cases reserved, or any five of the judges Rules for 
 of the said Court (the Lord Chancellor or Master of the Rolls Lord ^.^"/p^f^ ^f 
 Justice of Appeal or Vice-ChaucelTor or one of the chief judges of Act into 
 the Common Law Courts being one) may from time to time make, 
 
 and when made may rescind, annul, or add to rules with respect to 
 the following matters : — 
 
 (1.) The proceedings in the Civil Bill Court and Court of Arbi- 
 tration under this part of this Act : 
 (2.) The proceedings in Appeals under this part of this Act : 
 (3.) The proceedings in Land Cases reserved under this part of 
 
 this Act : 
 (4i.) The circulation of forms and directions as to the mode in 
 which this part of this Act is to be carried into execution : 
 (5.) The scale of costs and fees to be charged in carrying this 
 part of this Act into execution, and the taxation of such 
 costs and fees, and the persons by whom or from whom 
 and the manner in which such costs and charges are to be 
 paid or deducted, subject nevertheless to the sanction of 
 the Treasury as to the amount of fees to be charged : 
 (6.) The service of notices on incumbrancers and other persons 
 interested, and any other matter by this part of this Act 
 directed to be prescribed : 
 (7.) As to any other matter or thing, whether similar or not to 
 those above mentioned, in respect of which it may be 
 expedient to make rules for the pui*pose of carrying this 
 part of this Act into effect. 
 Any rules made in pursuance of this section shall be deemed to 
 be within the powers conferred by this Act, and shall be of the same 
 force as if enacted in this Act, and shall be judicially noticed. 
 
 Any rules made in pursuance of this section shall he laid before 
 Parliament within three weeks after they ' are made if Parlia- 
 ment be then sitting, and if Parliament be not then sitting, 
 within three weeks after the beginning of the then next session of 
 Parliament. 
 
 PART 11. 
 
 Sale of Land to Tenants. 
 
 28. Subject to the restrictions herein-after mentioned the landlord Application 
 and tenant of any holding in Ireland may agree for the sale of the *'°,^°"^* ^^^ 
 holding to the tenant at such price as may be fixed between them ; ™g- 
 
( 20 ) 
 
 Restrictions 
 on sale of 
 Jiolding. 
 
 and upon such agreement being made they may jointly, or either 
 of them may separately, with the assent of the other, apply to the 
 Landed Estates Court in this part of this Act referred to as " the 
 Court " for the sale to the tenant of his holding. 
 
 29. No sale shall be made under this part of this Act unless the 
 landlord is the absolute owner of the land which forms the holding^ 
 of the tenant, or such tenant for life or other limited owner as is in 
 this section mentioned. 
 
 "Absolute owner "• shaU in the case of freehold land mean the 
 owner in fee simple or in fee farm, or person capable of appointing 
 or disposmg of the fee, whether subject or not to incumbrances, and 
 in the case of leasehold land mean the owner or person capable of 
 disposing of the whole interest in the lease under which the land is 
 held, whether subject or not to incumbrances. 
 
 No holding of leasehold tenure shall be sold under this part of this 
 Act unless the lease under which the landlord is possessed of the 
 land which forms the holding is a lease for lives or years renewable 
 for ever, or a lease for a term of years of which not less than sixty 
 are unexpired at " the time of the sale being made ; and no sale 
 shall be made under this part of this Act by a landlord being the 
 owner of a leasehold under a lease containing a prohibition against 
 alienation unless such prohibition has determined or is waived. 
 
 " Tenant for life " shall, for the purposes of this part of this Act, 
 mean any person entitled under any existing or future settlement at 
 law or in equity for his own benefit and for the term of his own life 
 to the possession or receipt of the rents and profit of land, whether 
 subject or not to incumbrances in which the estate for the time being, 
 subject to the trusts of the settlement, is an estate in fee simple or 
 fee farm or a lease of such duration as is in this section mentioned. 
 " Other limited owner " shall mean any body corporate, any 
 trustees for charities, and any commissioners or trustees for colle- 
 giate or other public purposes, having an estate in fee simple or fee 
 farm, or possessed of such leasehold as is in this section mentioned, 
 whether subject or not to incumbrances. 
 
 30. The application shall be accompanied by a deposit of such 
 sum (if any) to be deposited by the landlord by way of security 
 for costs, as the Court may require. Upon the foregoing conditions 
 being complied with tlie Court shall make such inquiries as to the 
 circumstances of the holding in respect of which the application is 
 made, and as to the parties interested therein, either as incum- 
 brancers, owners, or otherwise, and as to the sufficiency of the price 
 and of the capacity of the landlord to sell the same, as the Court 
 raay think fit, and if the Court approve of the application, it shall 
 carry such sale into effect accordingly, and execute the necessary 
 conveyance to the tenant. 
 
 "^urSLer ^^' ^^^ conveyance by the Court under this part of this Act of a 
 
 I'o^be free holding to a tenant shall in the case of freehold land confer on the 
 
 Wcer"" ^'^'^^^^ ^^ ^^*^*® '"^ ^^® ^^"^P^^ °^* ^^® ^^^'^^' as ^^^ case may be, in 
 
 Sale of 
 holding by 
 Court. 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 such holding, together Avith all rights, privileges, and appurtenances 
 enjoyed or reputed as helonging or appertaining thereto, subject to 
 such charges and interests, if any, as are in this part of this Act 
 declared not to be incumbrances, and in the case of estates in fee 
 farm to the rents, covenants, and conditions expressed in the grant 
 relating to the land of which the holding forms the whole or part, 
 and on the part of the grantee, his heirs, executors, administrators, 
 and assigns, to be paid, observed, and performed, but free from all 
 other estates, iucumbrauces, and interests whatever, and shall in 
 the case of leasehold land vest the holding in the tenant for the 
 period, and subject to the rents, covenants, and conditions, expressed 
 in the lease relating to the land of which the holding forms the 
 whole or part, and on the part of the lessee, his executors, adminis- 
 trators, and assigns to be paid, observed, and performed, subject to 
 such charges and interests, if any, as are in this part of this Act 
 declared not to be incumbrances, but free from all other incum- 
 brances and estates whatsoever. 
 
 32. The following charges and interests shall not be deemed in- Certain 
 cumbrances within the meaning of this part of this Act ; that is ^nculT "° 
 to say, brances. 
 
 (1.) Quitrents and rentcharges in lieu of tithes : 
 
 (2.) Rights of common, rights of way, watercourses, and rights of 
 
 water and other easements : 
 (3.) Heriots, manorial rights of all descriptions, and franchises : 
 (4.) Charges for drainage, or other charges created under Act of 
 ParKament, and to be specified in the conveyance. 
 And every holding sold under this part of this Act shall, unless the 
 contrary is expressed, be deemed to be subject to such of the above 
 charges and interests as may be for the time being subsisting 
 thereon. 
 
 33. The Court shall determine the rights and priorities of the Distribution 
 several persons entitled to or having charges upon or otherwise ^^ P'^'""^^^^® 
 interested in any holding sold in pursuance of this Act, and shall 
 distribute the purchase money in accordance with such rights and 
 priorities. 
 
 Where any moneys arising from a sale under this part of this Act 
 
 are not immediately distributable, or the parties entitled thereto 
 
 cannot be ascertained, or where from any other cause the Court 
 
 thinks it expedient for the protection of the rights of the parties 
 
 interested, the Court may order the moneys to be lodged in Court 
 
 or in the prescribed bank to the prescribed account, and may by its 
 
 order declare the trusts affecting such moneys, so far as the Court 
 
 has ascertained the same, or state the facts or matters found by it 
 
 in relation to the rights and interests in such moneys ; and the 
 
 Court may from time to time make such orders in respect to any 
 
 such moneys, and the investment or application thereof, or the 
 
 payment thereof to the parties interested, as the circumstances of 
 
 the case may require. 
 
 (84.) F 
 
( 32 ) 
 
 Costa of 
 sale. 
 
 Cost of 
 distribution 
 of purchase 
 money. 
 
 General 
 powers of 
 Court in 
 conduct of 
 Sfile of land. 
 
 Rules for 
 carrying 
 second part 
 of Act into 
 effect. 
 
 34. There shall be charged, in respect of any sale made in pur- 
 suance of this part of this Act, such per-centage fee on the price 
 paid as the Treasury may prescribe, and the fees so charged shall 
 be paid in to the receipt of Her Majesty's Exchequer and carried 
 to the account of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom 
 of Great Britain and Ireland. 
 
 35. Where any purchase moneys have been so lodged in Court 
 or in the prescribed bank, provision shall be made in the prescribed 
 manner with the sanction of the Treasury for the payment without 
 cost to the persons entitled to any estate or interest in or having 
 charges upon the holding so sold of any principal or interest moneys 
 to which such persons may be entitled in respect of such estate 
 and interest : Provided that any provision so made shall not 
 extend to any expense caused by disputed titles, or any expense 
 incurred by the failure of any person to comply with the rules for 
 the time being in force relating to the distribution of such purchase 
 moneys. 
 
 36. The Court shall have full power to apportion charges, rents, 
 and covenants, and decide all questions whatsoever, which it may 
 be necessary to decide for the purposes of this Act, and shall not 
 be siibject to be restrained in the due execution of their powers 
 under this Act by the order of any Court. 
 
 37. The Privy Council in Ireland may from time to time make, 
 and, when made, may rescind, annul, or add to, rules with respect 
 to the following matters : 
 
 (1.) The proceedings to be had under this part of this Act : 
 (2.) The circulation of forms and directions as to the mode in 
 which this part of this Act is to be carried into execution :- 
 (3.) The scale of costs and fees to be charged in carrying this 
 part of this Act into execution, and the taxation of such 
 costs, and the persons by whom such costs and fees are to 
 be paid, subject nevertheless to the sanction of the Treasury 
 as to the amount of fees to be charged : 
 (4.) The giving of notices to incumbrancers and other persons 
 interested, and the service of such notices and any other 
 matter by this part of this Act directed to be prescribed : 
 (5.) As to any other matter or thing, whether similar or not to 
 those above mentioned, in respect of which it may be 
 expedient to make rules for the purpose of carrying this 
 part of this Act into execution : 
 ^ In framing rules under this section the Privy Council shall pro- 
 vide that notice of any sale to be made under this part of this Act 
 shall be served upon every registered incumbrancer by sending it 
 through the post in a prepaid letter addressed to such incumbrancer 
 and in proving service of any such notice it shall be sufficient to- 
 prove that such notice was properly directed to the incumbrancer at 
 his last known place of abode, and that it was put as a prepaid 
 letter into the post office. 
 
( 23 ) 
 
 Any rules made in pursuance of this section shall be deemed to 
 be within the powers conferred by this Act, and shall be of the same 
 force as if enacted in this Act, and shall be judicially noticed. 
 
 Any rules made in pursuance of this section shall be laid 
 before Parliament within three weeks after they are made, if Par- 
 liament be then sitting, and if Parliament be not then sitting, 
 within three weeks after the beginning of the then next session of 
 Parliament. 
 
 PART III. 
 
 Advances hy and Power's of Board. 
 
 38. Where any sums are due in respect of compensation under Advances to 
 this Act from a landlord to a tenant who is quitting his holding, compensa-"'^ 
 but has not been distiu-bed by his landlord, the Commissioners of tion for im- 
 Pablic Works in Ireland, m this Act referred to as the Board, may, 
 
 upon the application of such landlord, advance to the tenant on 
 behalf of the landlord the whole or such portioa of the sum so due 
 as they may think expedient, and upon such advance being made 
 suoh holding ohall upon an order being made to that effect by the 
 Civil Bill Court, and upon such advance being miade by the Board 
 such holding shall be deemed to be charged with an annuity of five 
 pounds for every one hundred pounds of such advance, and so in 
 proportion for any less sum, such annuity to be limited in favour of 
 the Board, and to be declared to be payable within a term of thirty- 
 five years, oommonoing at tho date of tho advanoo. 
 
 39. The Board may from time to time upon such security as they Advances to 
 may approve advance such sums as they may think fit to any land- improvement 
 lord in Ireland, for the purpose of enabling him to reclaim waste °f '^^^^^ 
 lands ; and where any landlord has contracted for the sale of any 
 
 waste land the Board may advance upon, security jointly given by 
 the vendor and pur<ihaser such, sums as they may think- fit, not 
 exceeding a moiety o£ the purchase money contracted to be paid ; 
 and upma aay SHch a t lvaooe b e ing made such waste land, and any 
 other lands included in. any. such security-, shall, upon an order 
 being made to that effect by the Civil Bill Court, and upon such 
 advance being made by the Board, be deemed to be charged with 
 an annuity of five pounds for every one hundred pounds of such 
 advance, and so in proportion for any less sum, such annuity to be 
 Jimited in favour of the Board, and to be declared to be repayable 
 within a period of thirty-five years, ^r>mmpnr.i'Tig f|.r>y^ ^^^o ^^^^^ ^^ 
 the advance 
 
 40. The Board, if they are satisfied with the security, may Advances to 
 advance to any tenant for the purpose of purchasing his holding in pu"chase'of 
 pursuance of this Act any sum not exceeding two thirds of the l^oldings. 
 price of such holding, and upon cuoh advanoo being made the ' 
 holding ohall, upon an order being made by the Civil Bill Court to 
 
 that effect, and upon such advance being made by the Board such 
 
( 24 ) 
 
 holding shall be deemed to be charged with an annuity of five 
 pounds for every one hundred pounds of such advance, and so in 
 proportion for any less sum, such annuity to be limited in favour 
 of the Board and to be declared to be repayable in the term of 
 thirty-five years, oommonoing Svoui ihg tlatp of tlia ndv.nno<a . 
 
 No purchaser, or j)erson deriving title through him, of any 
 holding to whom any advance has been made under this section 
 shall without the consent of the Board alienate, assign, subdivide, 
 or sublet his holding during such time as any part of the annuity 
 charged on such holding remains unpaid, and any part of such 
 holding alienated, assigned, subdivided, or sublet in contravention 
 of this section shall be forfeited to the Board, to be held by them 
 for public purposes. 
 
 Advances to 41, Where an absolute order for the sale of any estate has been 
 purchases of made by the Landed Estates Court, and the tenant of any holding 
 
 holdings in 
 Landed Es- 
 tates Court. 
 
 forming part of such estate is desirous to purchase such holding, he 
 may apply to the Board in the prescribed manner to advance any 
 sum not exceeding two thirds of the amount he may pay for the 
 purchase of the same, and the Board may, subject to such con- 
 ditions as to the price to be paid for such holding and to any 
 matter relating to such purchase as they think fit, agree with such 
 tenant to make such advance. 
 
 When any such tenant has been declared the purchaser of a 
 holding, and has paid one third or any greater part of the purchase 
 money, the Board may pay the balance of such purchase money 
 instead of such tenant ; and upon such payment being made by the 
 Board the Landed Estates Court shall by order declare such holding 
 to be charged with an annuity of five pounds for every hundred 
 pounds of such advance, and so in proportion for any less sum, 
 such annuity to be limited in favour of the Board and to be 
 declared to be repayable in the term of thirty-five years, com - 
 
 TYiinnniTig fiimn tlin rlnfn nf fTin nrl-rrnnnnj in ngi-inl T^^lf JCgrlj pajmontc 
 n^^ . f^^Tav^T fivr^^ riny nf Mitt mifl fiiicf rloy r.f AT»-,r»^U^y flnring thc 
 gmVI fnrm Tinih cnnTi ^ippnr-HnnmQnf^ if o-njr oc ,.^»^r 1^^ v,^»^y^^j,^. ^^^ 
 
 Any holding charged by order of the Landed Estates Court in 
 manner aforesaid shall not, without the consent of the Board, be 
 alienated, assigned, subdivided, or sublet during such time as any 
 part of the annuity charged on such holding remains unpaid, and 
 any part of such holding alienated, assigned, subdivided, or sublet 
 in contravention of- this section shall be forfeited to the Board, to 
 be held by them for public purposes. 
 
 Landed 42. The Landed Estates Court shall on the sale of estates by 
 
 Court'to ^^^^^ ^°"^'*' ^" *^^' ^« is consistent with the interests of the persons 
 afibrd faciii- interested in the estates or the purchase money thereof, afford, by 
 purchase by ^he formation of lots for sale or otherwise, all reasonable facilities 
 tenS"^ *" occupying tenants desirous of purchasing their holdings under 
 the provisions of this Act, and for that purpose shall hear any 
 
( 25 ) 
 
 application in that behalf made by the Board or any such occupying 
 tenant. 
 
 43. Where the landlord of an estate is willing to contract for the Advances to 
 sale under the second part of this Act of his estate in its entirety ptli^diases of 
 but not in part, and the tenants of the holdings cornprising four '""'"''^ ^s- 
 fiftlis in value of such estate are willing to purchase their holdings, 
 and other purchasers can be found to buy the residue of such estate, 
 and to pay one half of the purchase money payable in respect of 
 such residue, such sale may be made accordingly under the second 
 part of this Act in the same manner as if the whole of the purchasers 
 of the estate were tenants of the landlord, and the Board may advance 
 to such other purchasers one half of their purchase money upon the 
 security of the residue of the estate, and such advance may at the 
 discretion of the Board be made to such purchasers collectively on 
 the secui'ity of the whole of the residue of such estate, or to such 
 purchasers severally on the security of the portions bought by them 
 respectively, or j^artly in one way and partly in the other. Where 
 any advance is made to purchasers or a purchaser under this section, 
 the land bought by such purchaser or purchasers shall, on an order 
 made to that effect by the Civil Bill Court, be charged with an 
 annuity of iive pounds for every one hundred pounds of such advance, 
 and so in proportion for any less sum, such annuity to be limited in 
 favour of the Board, and to be declared to be repayable within the 
 term of thirty -five years, oommonoing from the date of the advanooi 
 
 4r4r. Every annuity created in favour of the Board in pursuance Advances 
 of this Act shall be a charge on the land subject thereto, having on'^eSate 
 priority over all existing and future estates, interests, and incum- by way of 
 brances, with the exception of quit-rents and other charges incident 
 to the tenure, to rentcharges in lieu of tithes, and any charges 
 created under any Act authorizing advance of public money, or 
 under any Act creating charges in respect of improvements on 
 lands, and passed before this Act, with the exception also (in cases 
 where the lands are subject to a fee-farm rent, or held under a lease 
 reserving rent) of such fee-farm rent or rent reserved as aforesaid. 
 
 The term during which every such annuity shall be payable shall 
 be computed from the date of the advance in respect of which the 
 same shall be charged, and every such annuity shall be payable in. 
 equal half-yearly payments on every first day of May and every 
 first day of November during the said term of thirty-five years, 
 with such apportionment, if any, as may be necessary in respect of 
 the first and last of such payments. 
 
 45. Every annuity created in pursuance of this Act shall be Eecovery of 
 recoverable by the Board or by or in the name of the Attorney- ^^^^^^J"- 
 General for Ireland in manner in which rentcharges in lieu of tithes 
 are recoverable in Ireland ; a certificate purporting to be under the 
 hand of a member for the time being of the Board shall be evidence 
 that the amount of any annuity or arrears of annuity stated therein 
 (84) ' G 
 
( 26 ) 
 
 Arrears of 
 annuity. 
 
 Power of 
 owner to 
 redeem 
 annuity. 
 
 Power of 
 Board to 
 commute and 
 compromise. 
 
 to be due unjler this Act from any person named therein is due to 
 the Board from such person. 
 
 46. No arrears of any annuity charged on land in pursuance of 
 this Act shall be recoverable after the expiration of two years from 
 the date at which the sum in arrear became due ; and as between 
 owners having successive interests in any land so charged it shall be 
 the duty of the owner for the time being in possession or in receipt 
 of the rents and profits of such land to prevent such arrears arising, 
 and if he make default in doing so, and the owner next entitled 
 in possession pay any arrears caused by such default, the amount so 
 paid shall be a debt due to the owner who has paid the same from 
 the owner by whose default it became necessary to make such 
 payment. 
 
 47. Where any land is charged with an annuity in favour of 
 the Board, it shall be lawful for any person liable to pay such 
 annuity to redeem the said annuity, or so much thereof as may at 
 any time remain tmexpired, by payment to the Board of a sum of 
 money equivalent to the then value of the said annuity, such value 
 to be calculated according to the table in the schedule annexed 
 hereto. 
 
 48. Where any person is entitled to receive any principal moneys 
 in pursuance of the sale of any holding made by them in pursuance 
 of this Act, the Board may, on the application of such person, 
 commute such principal moneys for the payment of an annuity of 
 equivalent value, the value of money being reckoned at three pounds 
 ten shillings per cent, per annum, and where any such person as 
 aforesaid is entitled, to the payment of a sum annually, the Board 
 may commute the same for the payment of a principal sum of 
 equivalent value, the value of money being reckoned at three 
 pounds ten shillings per cent, per annum. 
 
 The Board may also, with the assent of the claimant, compromise 
 by the payment of any principal or annual sum any postponed 
 contingent or doubtful or other claim of any person to any share 
 or interest in the purchase money arising from the sale of any 
 holding under this Act. 
 
 Control of 49. The Board shall in making advances, in the mode of invest- 
 
 Treasury,&c. ^^S ^^^ dealing with the funds that come into their possession, and 
 in the mode of accounting for the same, and generally in the per- 
 formance of their duties under this Act conform to any directions, 
 whether given on special occasions or by general rule or otherwise, 
 which may from time to time be given to them by the Treasury, 
 and shall report within such time and in such manner as the Treasury 
 may direct to the Treasury all matters which may be transacted by 
 the Board. 
 
 Issues of 50. There shall be issued to the Board for the purposes of this 
 
 BoaiT *° -^^^ ^^ ^^^^ *^^®® ^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^"^^ ^^^ ^^ ®^°^ manner as the 
 Treasury may determine any sums of money not exceeding in the 
 
( 27 ) 
 
 whole one million pounds, and the Treasury may from time to time 
 issue to the said Board the said sum of one million pounds out of 
 the Consolidated Fund or the growing produce thereof. 
 
 51. All repayments to the Board of principal sums or by way Repayment 
 of annuities in respect of advances made by them shall from time ^ated Fund 
 to time be paid back to the Consolidated Fund in such manner as °f advance, 
 the Treasury may direct. 
 
 52. The Civil Bill Court shall on the application of any person Duty of 
 entitled to an annuity by this Act directed to be charged by order Qourt ^s to 
 of the Civil Court, make an order charging the same accordingly, charging 
 
 . orders. 
 
 and the clerk of the peace of the county in which such Court has 
 jurisdiction shall keep an alphabetical registry in his office of all 
 charging orders so made by the Court, and shall allow any person 
 to inspect the same at all reasonable times on the payment of one 
 shilling. 
 
 For the purpose of making charging orders in respect of any 
 holding the Civil Bill Court of the county in which such holding, 
 or any part thereof, is situate shall be deemed to have jurisdiction 
 over such holding. 
 
 PART IV. 
 
 Supplemental Provisions. 
 
 As to Legal Proceedings and Court. 
 
 53. There shall be paid in respect of every notice to quit to be Duty on 
 served on a tenant of a holding as defined under this Act a duty of quit.'''' 
 two shilKngs and sixpence, and such payment shall be denoted by a 
 stamp on the notice. 
 
 54. No notice to quit shall be valid unless it is printed or liegula- 
 written, or partly in print and partly in writing, and signed by the ^g""^ notice 
 landlord or his agent, lawfully authorised thereunto, nor imless to quit- 
 such notice at the time of the service thereof is dvily stamped with 
 
 a stamp denoting the payment of a duty of two shillings and six- 
 pence. A notice to quit shall not in the case of a tenant from year 
 to year take effect until after the expiration of a period of not less 
 than a year six calendar months from the date of the service of the 
 notice, such period of a yoaig ; six calendar months in the absence of 
 agreement to the contrary, to terminate on the last gale day of the 
 calendar year. Any person serving on a tenant a notice to quit 
 that is not in conformity with this section shall incur a penalty 
 not exceeding forty shillings, to be recovered summarily under the 
 provisions of the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851. 
 
 In any proceedings between landlord and tenant, where the due 
 service of a notice to quit has been proved, such notice to quit 
 shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed to have been duly 
 stamped. 
 
( 28 ) 
 
 Administra- 
 tion on death 
 of tenant. 
 
 Provision as 
 to married 
 women. 
 
 Provision 
 as to other 
 persons 
 under dis- 
 ability. 
 
 Additional 
 sittings of 
 Civil Bill 
 Court. 
 
 55. The Civil Bill Court in any county on being satisfied that 
 a tenant in such county has died, and that there is no legal personal 
 representative of such tenant or no legal personal representative 
 whose services are available for the pui-poses of this Act, may, if a 
 legal representation of the tenant is required for the purposes of 
 this Act, by order appoint such person as it tliinks best entitled to 
 be administrator of the deceased tenant limited to the purposes of 
 this Act, and any such limited administrator shall for all the pur- 
 poses of this Act represent the deceased tenant in the same manner 
 as if the tenant had died intestate and administration had been 
 duly granted to such limited administrator of all the personal estate 
 and effects of the tenant. 
 
 56. A married woman entitled to her separate use, and not 
 restrained from anticipation, shall for the purposes of this Act 
 be deemed a feme sole ; but where any other married woman is 
 desirous of making any application, giving any consent, or doing 
 any act, or becoming party to any proceeding under this Act, in 
 relation to any holding, her husband's concurrence shall be required, 
 and she shall be examined by the Civil Bill Court of the county 
 where she may for the time being be, or of the county where the 
 holding is situate, apart from her husband touching her knowledge 
 of the nature and effect of the application or other act, and it 
 shall be ascertained that she is acting freely and voluntarily. 
 
 57. Where any person who (if not under disability) might have 
 made any application, given any consent, done any act, or been 
 party to any proceeding in relation to any holding under this Act, 
 is a minor, idiot, or lunatic, the guardian or committee of the 
 estate respectively of such person may make such applications, give 
 such consents, do such acts, and be party to such proceedings, as 
 such person respectively, if free from disability, might have made, 
 given, done, or been party to, and shall otherwise represent such 
 person for the purposes of this Act ; where there is no guardian or 
 committee of the estate of any such person as aforesaid, being 
 infant, idiot, or lunatic, or where any person the committee of 
 whose estate if he were idiot or lunatic would be authorised to act 
 for and represent such person under this part of this Act is of 
 unsound mind or incapable of managing his affairs, but has not 
 been found idiot or lunatic under an inquisition, it shall be lawful for 
 the Civil Bill Court of the county in which the holding is situate 
 to appoint a guardian of such person for the purpose of any pro- 
 ceedings under this part of this Act, and from time to time to 
 change such guardian ; and where such Civil Bill Court sees fit it 
 may appoint a person to act as the next friend of a married woman 
 for the purpose of any proceeding under this Act, and from time 
 to time to remove or change such next friend. 
 
 58. For the purposes of carrying into effect the provisions of 
 this Act, the judges of Civil Bill Courts in Ireland shall, in 
 addition to the Civil Bill Courts now by law dii-ected, hold such 
 
( 29 ) 
 
 Courts in such places within their respective jurisdictions as may 
 be prescribed by the Privy Council in Ireland. 
 
 59. There shall be paid to the judges and officers of the Civil Additional 
 Bill Courts and to the officers of the Court of Exchequer Chamber |u(fJerand 
 in Ireland, by way of remuneration for the additional duties by this officers of 
 Act imposed upon them, such annual sums by way of additional Courts. 
 salaries respectively as the Lord Lieutenant may direct and the 
 Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury may approve, and all such 
 
 sums shall be paid by tlie said Commissioners out of moneys to be 
 provided by Parliament for that purpose. 
 
 60. In case it shall appear to the Lord Chancellor that from any Appoint- 
 reasonable cause the judge of any Civil Bill Court cannot con- ^i^tute°ii™ " 
 veniently hold the Courts prescribed under this Act, he may appoint Civil Bill 
 any other judge of a Civil Bill Coiirt to hold such Courts in his 
 
 stead ; and thereupon the judge so appointed shall hold such Com-ts 
 as aforesaid, and shall for the purposes thereof have all and every 
 the powers, authority, and jiuisdiction of the judge in whose stead 
 he shall have been ajjpointed ; and so long as he shall continue to 
 act in his stead, there shall be paid to him instead of to the said 
 judge, the additional salary payable to the said judge under this 
 Act. 
 
 PART V. 
 
 Miscellaneous. 
 
 61. Any person who, under any tenancy whatsoever created Mode of 
 after the passing of this Act, becomes the occupier of any premises ^p^^^^ur" 
 liable to grand jury cess, and who is liable to pay a rent in respect cess in 
 
 of the same, may deduct from such rent, for each pound of the ^'^^ am eases. 
 rent which he is liable to pay, one half of the sum which he has 
 paid as grand^ ]\xxj cess in respect of each pound of the net annual 
 value of such premises as valued for tbp puvpnsps a.g anpii r-p.ca 
 
 under the Acts relating to the valmatioii of rateable property in 
 Ireland ^^^ ^^. ^^ proportion for any less sum than a pound : 
 Provided always, that it shall not be lawful for any such person to 
 dedu.ct from the rent payable by him for such premises a larger sum 
 than one half of the amount of the cess that has been paid bv him 
 in respect of the same. 
 
 Any person receiving rent in respect of any premises liable to 
 grand jury cess, who also pays a rent in respect of the same, shall, 
 if such rent is received and paid under contracts entered into 
 after the passing of this Act, be entitled to dediict from the rent so 
 paid by him a sum bearing such a proportion to the amount of the 
 cess deducted from the rent received by him as the rent paid by him 
 bears to the rent received by him. 
 
 62. Whenever the net annual value of the wliole of the premises Where value 
 situate in any county of a city, county of a town, or barony, ^o^J'^'"!*®^- 
 occupied by any person under any tenancy whatsoever created after exceed Ai. 
 
 (84.) H . immediate 
 
( 30 ) 
 
 lessor to pay the passing of this Act, does not exceed four pounds, as valued 
 grand jury ^ ^^. ^.^^ piiv pn"rr nf z^'"""^ 3"T '^'"''' under the Acts relating to the 
 valuation of rateable property in Ireland, and the same are liable to 
 grand jury cess, then such cess shall, after the passing of this 
 Act, be paid and payable by the immediate lessor or lessors of 
 such person, and may be recovered from such immediate lessor 
 or lessors in like manner as but for the provisions of this section 
 it might have been recovered from the person occupying such 
 
 premises. 
 
 If any such cess payable by any such immediate lessor be not 
 paid within four months after the same has become due, the person 
 duly authorised to collect the same may give notice in writing to 
 the occupier for the time being of such premises to pay the cess 
 due in respect of such, premises, and after the expiration of one 
 calendar month from the time of giving such notice it shall be 
 lawful to recover such cess from such occupier, or in his default 
 from any subsequent occupier of the premises, in like manner as if 
 the same were cess due in respect of premises of a net annual value 
 greater than four pounds. 
 
 And every such occupier so paying such cess may deduct 
 from the rent he may be then or next thereafter liable to pay in 
 respect of any such premises the whole of any such cess that he 
 may have paid in respect of the same premises, and if rent sufficient 
 to cover such cess, be not then or do not thereafter become' due 
 from such occupier, he shall be entitled to recover the same from 
 such immediate lessor by Civil Bill. 
 
 Exception 63. Nothing in the two next preceding sections of this Act 
 
 cess levied'^ contained shall apply to any county cess levied under the authority 
 m certain of any presentment made for the compensation of any person for 
 any loss or damage occasioned by any malicioiis injury, or of any 
 presentment made under the authority of section one hundred and 
 six of the Act passed in the session of Parliament held in the sixth 
 and seventh years of the reign of -His late ^Majesty King William 
 the Eourth, chapter one hundred and sixteen, or under the authority 
 of " The Peace Preservation (Ireland) Act, 1870," or to any moneys 
 levied as county cess by the direction of the Lord Lieutenant of any 
 district under the aiithority of " The Peace Preservation (Ireland) 
 Act, 1856," or any Act or Acts amending or 
 now in force. 
 
 cases. 
 
 continuing the same 
 
 for'r"e™^' ^^^ ^""^ P^'^^^'^ '^^«' ^^^^^^ ^^^^ passing of this Act, shall take at 
 land covered an acreable rent land adjoining or intersected by any public road or 
 roadf ^" P^^li« ^o^ds, shall not, in the absence of an agreement to the con- 
 
 trary,^ be liable to rent for any portion of such land as may be 
 
 contained in the public road or roads. 
 
 Tenancies 
 at will. 
 
 65. Where any tenancy at will or less than a tenancy from year 
 to year is created by a landlord after the passing of this Act, the 
 tenant under such tenancy shall on quitting his holding be entitled 
 to notice to quit and compensation in the same manner in all 
 
( 31 ) 
 
 respects as if he liad been a tenant from year to year : Provided 
 that this section shall not apply to any letting or contract for the 
 letting of land made and entered into bona fide for the temporary 
 convenience or to meet a temporary necessity either of the landlord 
 or tenant. 
 
 66 . It shall not b e lawful for any l aiad lo rd to maVp R i ny rhstrnss DistresB. 
 
 tho paooing of this Act unle s s such holding shall be so held nnf l er a 
 loaoo or written agroomont regulating the terms of such - teaa i ncy a . nd 
 giving ft right of dietr es s to th e landlord. 
 
 Definitions. 
 
 67. In the construction of this Act the following words and < Jfneral defi- 
 
 T , nitions. 
 
 expressions shall have the force and meanmg hereby assigned to 
 
 them, unless there be something in the subject or context repugnant 
 
 thereto : 
 
 The term " person " or " party " shall extend to and include any 
 body politic, corporate, or collegiate, whether aggregate or sole, 
 and any public company : 
 The term " county " shall extend to and include county of a 
 city, and county of a town, and a riding of a county : where 
 such county of a city, county of a town, or riding of a county 
 is appointed for civil bill purposes : 
 The term " prescribed " shall mean prescribed by any rules made 
 
 in pursuance of this Act : 
 The term " lease " shall include an agreement for a lease : 
 
 . The term " settlement " as tised in this Act shall include any 
 Act of Parliament, will, deed, or other assurance or connected 
 set of assurances whereby particular estates or particular 
 interests in land are created, with remainders or interests ex- 
 pectant thereon; and every estate and interest created by 
 appointment made in exercise of any power contained in any 
 settlement or derived from any, settlement shall be considered 
 as having been created by the same settlement, and an estate 
 or interest by way of resulting use or trust to or for the settlor, 
 or his heirs, executors, or administrators, shall be deemed to be 
 an estate or interest under the same settlement : 
 
 The term " landlord " in relation to a holding shall include a 
 superior mesne or immediate iandlord or any person for the 
 time being entitled to receive the rents and profits or to take 
 possession of any holding : 
 The term "tenant" in relation to a holding shall mean any 
 . tenant from year to year and any tenant for a life or lives or 
 for a term of years under a lease or contract for a lease, 
 whether the interest of such tenant has been acquired by , 
 original contract, lawful assignment, devise, bequest, or act and 
 operation of law, and where the tenancy of any person having 
 been a tenant under a tenancy which does not disentitle him 
 to compensation under this Act is determined or expiring, he 
 
( 32 ) 
 
 Special defi- 
 nitions. 
 
 shall, notwithstanding such determination or expiration, be 
 deemed to he a tenant until the compensation, if any, due 
 to him under this Act has been paid or deposited as in this 
 
 Act provided : 
 The term " improvements " shall mean in relation to a holding,— 
 (1.) Any work which being executed adds to the letting value 
 
 of the holding on which it is executed, and is suitable. 
 
 to such holding ; also, , 
 (2.) Tillages, manures, or other like farming works, the benefit 
 
 of which is unexhausted at the time of the tenant 
 
 quitting his holding. 
 68. Eor th e purposi'S "-f ^^^» ^^t th p tprms lim-pin-aftpv mpntionPid 
 
 otifll^ >ioyQ i^^^ mpg-ninga TiAwin-af fpv n.aaignpfl in ihrnrtj fl.nrl no nfhftr 
 
 meaniTigsij that 1*8 to isnyj 
 
 Thp tprm "hnlf^JTig-" sha.ll mean a farm or other holding of a 
 tpnant wTnV.h is a.gricnitnval or pastoral in its character, or 
 partly agrip.nltnral and partly pastoral : 
 'T'liP tmnn "Im-iflln^^ri " in rplafinn in a, hnl fling .sha.ll mp,an any 
 gnppvir.r mpgriA nv iminpfliat.p la.nfllor fl or any person for thp 
 iimp I^PJTig Pn titlpd in i^pnp.ivp tlip rpnts and profits or to take 
 
 possession of any holding ; 
 
 The term "tenant" in relation to a bolfling sbflill mean any 
 tenant from year to year and any tena . nt fnv a, life nr lives or 
 for a. fprm of yp.a.vs under n, leas e or Contract for a lease, and 
 lYliPT-e ihe fenaney of any person ha.Anng heen a tenant nnder a, 
 ienani^y whieli r^oes not disentitle him to compensation nnder 
 f.Tiis Ao.i is /Ip.terminefl or eypiring^ be shall, notwithstanding 
 sneh fletermination or e xpiration, be deemed to be a, tenant 
 11-ni.U hp has rpppiverl the eompensation, if any, dne to him 
 midpr this A ei • 
 
 The real and persona,! representatives of any tenant shall also be 
 inelnded nnder the term " tenant :" 
 
 The term " improvement's " shall mea n in relation to a holding.— 
 
 (1.) Any work whieh heing eyeente d adds to the letting value 
 of the holding on which it is executed : and is suitable 
 to sneh l.olding ; alsn^ 
 
 (9 ) Tillagpg mamn'es, fallows, or other like farming works. 
 the henefit of whieh is nne xbausted at the time of the 
 tpnant n^nitting his holding. 
 
 Clausk E. 
 Agricultural 
 holdings 
 only subject 
 to Act. 
 
 Short title 
 of Act. 
 
 Application 
 of Act. 
 
 This Act shall not apply to any holding which is not agri- 
 cultural or pastoral in its character, or partly agricultural and 
 partly pastoral ; and the term " holding " shall include all land of 
 the above character held by the same tenant of the same landlord 
 for the same term and under the same contract of tenancy. 
 
 69. This Act may be cited for all purposes as " The Landlord 
 and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870." 
 
 70. This Act shall apply to Ireland only. 
 
( ^3 ) 
 
 SCHEDULE. 
 
 Arbitrations. 
 
 (1.) If both parties concur a single arbitrator may be appointed : 
 
 (2.) If the single arbitrator dies or becomes incapable to act 
 before he has made his award, the matters referred to him 
 shall be determined by arbitration under the provisions of 
 this Act in the same manner as if no appointment of an 
 arbitrator had taken place : 
 
 (3.) If both parties do not concur in the appointment of a single 
 arbitrator, each party on the request of the other party 
 shall appoint an arbitrator ; 
 
 {4.) An arbitrator shall in all cases be appointed in writing, and 
 the delivery of an appointment to an arbitrator shall be 
 deemed a submission to arbitration on the part of the party 
 by whom the same is made, and after any such appoint- 
 ment has been made neither party shall have power to 
 revoke the same without the consent of the other : 
 
 (5.) If for the space of fourteen days after the service by one 
 party on the other of a request made in writing to appoint 
 an arbitrator such last-mentioned party fails to appoint an 
 arbitrator, then upon such failure the party making the 
 request may apply to the Court, and thereupon the dispute 
 shall be decided by the Court according to the provisions 
 of this Act : 
 
 (6.) If any arbitrator appointed by either party dies or becomes 
 incapable to act before an award has been made the party 
 by whom such arbitrator was appointed may appoint some 
 other person to act in his place, and if for the space of 
 fourteen days after notice in writing from the other party 
 for that purpose he fails to do so the remaining or other 
 arbitrator may proceed ex parte : 
 
 (7.) If where more than one ai'bitrator has been appointed either 
 of the arbitrators refuses or for fourteen days neglects to 
 act, the other arbitrator may proceed ex parte, and the 
 decision of such arbitrator shall be as effectual as if he had 
 been the single arbitrator appointed by both parties : 
 
 i(8.) If, where more than one arbitrator has been appointed, and 
 where neither of them refuses or neglects to act as afore- 
 said, such arbitrators fail to make their award within 
 twenty-one days after the day on which the last of such 
 arbitrators was appointed, or within such extended time 
 (if any) as may have been appointed for that purpose by 
 (84.) I 
 
( 34 ) 
 
 both such arbitrators under their hands, the matters 
 referred to them shall be determined by the umpire to be 
 appointed as hereafter mentioned : 
 
 (9.) Where more than one arbitrator has been appointed, the 
 arbitrators shall, before they enter upon the matters re- 
 ferred to them, appoint by writing under their hands 
 an umpire to decide on any matters on which they may 
 differ : 
 
 (10.) If the umpne dies or becomes incapable to act before he 
 has made his award, or refuses to make his award within 
 a reasonable time after the matter has been brought within 
 his cognizance, the arbitrators shall forthwith after such 
 death, incapacity, or refusal appoint another umpire in his 
 place : 
 
 (11.) If in any of the cases aforesaid the said arbitrators refuse, 
 or for fourteen days after request of either party to such 
 arbitration neglect, to appoint an umpire, the Civil Eill 
 Court, as defined by this Act, shall, on the application of 
 either party to such arbitration, appoint an umpire : 
 
 (12.) The decision of every umpire on the matters referred to him 
 shall be final. 
 
( 35 ) 
 
 Table for Redemption of Annuities or Rent-charges. 
 
 Term unexpired. 
 
 Redemption Money to te 
 
 paid in respect of each 
 
 10?. of Annuity.* 
 
 Term unexpired. 
 
 Redemption Money to be 
 
 paid in respect of each 
 
 10^ of Annuity.* 
 
 
 £ S. d. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 1 
 
 9 14 10 
 
 19 
 
 137 18 8 
 
 2 
 
 19 3 1 
 
 20 
 
 142 19 5 
 
 O 
 
 28 4 11 
 
 21 
 
 147 16 9 
 
 4 
 
 37 6 
 
 22 
 
 152 10 10 
 
 5 
 
 45 10 1 
 
 23 
 
 157 1 8 
 
 6 
 
 53 13 11 
 
 24 
 
 161 9 5 
 
 7 
 
 61 12 2 
 
 25 
 
 165 14 1 
 
 8 
 
 69 5 1 
 
 26 
 
 169 16 
 
 9 
 
 76 12 8 
 
 27 
 
 173 15 
 
 10 
 
 83 15 3 
 
 28 
 
 177 11 5 
 
 11 
 
 90 13 
 
 29 
 
 181 5 2 
 
 12 
 
 97 6 1 
 
 30 
 
 184 16 5 
 
 13 
 
 103 14 7 
 
 31 
 
 188 5 3 
 
 14 
 
 109 18 8 
 
 32 
 
 191 11 8 
 
 15 
 
 115 18 7 
 
 33 
 
 194 15 11 
 
 16 
 
 121 14 5 
 
 34 
 
 197 17 11 
 
 17 
 
 127 6 3 
 
 35 
 
 200 17 10 
 
 18 
 
 132 14 3 , 
 
 
 
 jSfote. — This table is calculated on the assumption of the original purchase money- 
 being repaid in 35 years with interest at 3^ per cent, payable half-yearly. 
 
 * Where the unexpired term includes part of a year such addition, if any, as may 
 be necessary, shall be made to the redemption money in respect of such part of a year. 
 
00 
 
 •-3 
 
 ci 
 
 a" 
 
 S^ 
 
 03 
 
 Siu 
 
 2. 
 
 5. 
 
 
 
 P- 
 
 Oi 
 
 i-i 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 s- 
 
 s 
 
 
 L ^ 
 &§ 
 
 e B 
 
 a 
 
 H 
 
 i-fti je Cb 
 
 tr 
 
 CD 
 
 H 
 SI 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 H 
 
 B 
 
 p 
 
 Sj 3. 
 
 CD 
 
 B 
 o 
 
 -3 
 
 
 hJ 
 
 W 
 o 
 
 
 CD 
 
 cr 
 
 CD 
 
 P 
 
 
 2 W 
 
 
 o 
 
 S! 
 C 
 
 w 
 
 F- 
 1-1 
 
 c» 
 o 
 
 S =^ 
 
 a CD 
 
 a n 
 
 p 
 
 O CD 
 
 m ^ 
 
 o 
 
 CD 
 
 p 
 
 B 
 O 
 
 §■ a- 
 
 CD -S 
 to p+ 
 
 ? S" 
 
 so c 
 ■'I d 
 
 s « 
 
 S o 
 
 t-l 
 o 
 
 H 
 O 
 
 d 
 
 t 
 
 M 
 
IRISH LAND ACT, 1870 (NOTICES TO QUIT). 
 
 RETURN to an Order of the Honourable The House of Commons, 
 dated 18 January 1881 ;—for. 
 
 EETUEN " of the Number of Notices to Quit served in the respective Years from 
 1871 to 1880, inclusive, as shown by the Stamps issued of the Denomination 
 required for such Notices according to the Provisions of the Land Act of 1870." 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 EETUEN showing the Number of Stamps denoted by means of the Appropriated Die 
 upon Notices to Quit in the following periods. 
 
 Stamps. 
 
 From 16th October to 31st December 1875 - . - - 403 
 
 Year ended 31st December 1876 --..__ 5,531 
 
 „ „ 1877 6,087 
 
 1878 4,493 
 
 1879 - - - - - - 3,164 
 
 1880 1,894 
 
 « 
 
 3J 
 
 N.B. — The Appropriated Die for Notices to Quit (Ireland) was brought into use on 
 the 16th October 1875. Previous to that time such duties were denoted by the General 
 Duty Die, and no separate account was kept. 
 
 Stamps and Taxes^ \ rrr n m 7 /-. 
 
 Dublin, 26 January 1881./ ^'"- ^' Phelps, Comptroller. 
 
 5^- 
 

 2, 
 
 &o S 
 
 ^ s 
 I s. 
 
 o 
 
 - o 
 
 - B 
 
 °° B ' 
 00 5 
 
 — p 
 
 «3 
 
 9 
 
 
 00 
 
 3" 
 
 P 
 C5 
 
 ® S' 
 
 S. "> 
 
 ° I 
 
 » g 
 
 2 '^ 
 
 S S. 
 
 "* .^ 
 
 CO tri 
 
 TO *T3 
 
 o ~ 
 
 c 
 
 CO 
 
 b. !2! „. OD 
 
 o 
 
 „ o o 
 S 3 g 
 •a 
 
 O 
 
 CD 
 
 w 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 H 
 
 2 rt- 
 
 o 
 
 12| 
 O 
 
 o 
 
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND). 
 
 n E T U R N 
 
 (Pursuant to an Order of the House of Lords, dated 25th July 1881,) 
 
 OF 
 
 Reprint of the Tables published in the Judicial Statistics of Ireland of 
 Proceedings under the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, in 
 each Year since the passing of that Act up to 31st December 1879 ; 
 and similar Return for the Year 1880. 
 
 {Ihe Lord Privy Seal.) 
 
 Ordered to be printed 25th July 1881. 
 
 (181.) 
 
( 3 ) 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland). 
 
 Reprint of the Tables published in the Judicial Statistics of 
 Ireland of Proceedings under the Landlord and Tenant 
 (Ireland) Act, 1870, in each Year since the passing of that 
 Act up to 31st December 1879 ; and similar Return for the 
 Year 1880. 
 
 (181.) A 2 
 
4 
 
 1870-71. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 COURTS OF CHAIRMEN OF COUNTIES AND RECORDERS.— TABLE 3.— RETURN of PROCEEDINGS in the Years 1870 and 1871, 
 
 the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Returns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 PROCEEDINGS, 
 
 Notices of claims lodged 
 
 1. Under Ulster Tenant-right or similar') 
 
 usage . . . . .i 
 
 (a) AVTiere sole ground of claim . 
 
 (6) Where joined with other ? 
 
 grounds of claim . . J 
 
 2, For loss on quitting holding- 
 
 fa) Where sole ground of claim 
 (b) Where joined with 
 
 grounds of claim 
 
 other \ 
 
 3. For incoming payments— 
 
 (a) Where sole ground of claim 
 (6) Where joined with other! 
 grounds of claim . . J 
 
 29 
 
 4. Eor improvements — 
 
 (a) Where sole ground of claim 
 
 (b) Where joined with other" 
 
 grounds of claim . . J 
 
 Cases disposed op at Land Sessioss. 
 Total eases , • . . . 
 
 Cases withdrawn and settled . 
 Decrees ...... 
 
 Dismisses ...... 
 
 Eeferred to arbitration 
 
 Postponed and adjourned 
 
 Buled"nil" . . . . . 
 
 Appeals. 
 Appeals to Judge of Assize lodged 
 Appeals to Judge of Assize heard 
 Judgments aSarmed .... 
 Judgments reversed .... 
 Judgments varied . » . . 
 
 Judgments held over .... 
 Cases reserved for Court of Land Cases reserved 
 Cases reserved for Court of Land Cases heard 
 Judgments affirmed .... 
 Judgments reversed .... 
 Judgments varied .... 
 
 Other Peoceedin&s. 
 
 Awards on arbitration recorded 
 
 Awards rejected by Court 
 
 Compensation charged on holding under 27th ■) 
 section . i . . . ) 
 
 Application by Lessors to confirm acceptance I 
 of lease , , , , ./ 
 
 Application by Lessees to confirm granting 1 
 of lease , . . . .) 
 
 Leases confirmed, 28th section . 
 
 Leases confirmed with modification . 
 
 Leases which the Court refused to confirm . 
 
 Notices— (a) By Landlord of intention to I 
 register improvements . J 
 
 (6) By Tenant of intention to re- 
 gister improvements 
 
 •} 
 
 28 
 
 17 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 21 
 
 18 
 
 48 
 
 1 1 
 
 1 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 13 
 
 16 
 
 10 
 
 43 
 
 a Not including city of DubUn. but no proceedings for holdings such as faU within the Land Act are likely to be ^'^Z^^^^Z 
 
 b RefOTcd to arbrtrafon, and when landlord refused to abide by, were dismissed. "^ ' ""''"'' ^7'*^ ''^°"™" 
 
 c These fi^r«, d„ f^ ^"^Tl^' """"^ ^"'^'""^ ""^ ^«**'^ ™ '"'P^=''' "■' »"8Sestion of Judge of Assize " '"' ""^ ''"' 
 
 These figures do not include the counties of Antrim, Down, Dublin, Dublin City, Kildare, Monagl^^rand Qneen's county. 
 
 boundary, 
 given. 
 
IRELAND. 
 
 1870-1871. 
 
 CotJETS of Chairmen of Counties and Recoeders. — Table 4. Proceedings at Laito Sessions under the Landlord 
 and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, showing Amount claimed and awaeded with Costs. 
 
 
 Total of 29 Land 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Couets in Ireland 
 
 
 
 
 
 Pkoceedings. 
 
 (no Return from 
 Seven Land Courts). 
 
 Antkhi. 
 
 Armagh. 
 
 Caelow. 
 
 Cavan. 
 
 
 & s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 & s. d. 
 
 & s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Amount of all Claims lodged 
 
 142,307 13 
 
 12,686 4 6 
 
 4,719 8 11 
 
 761 12 10 
 
 255 3 8 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases settled 
 
 80,604 7 11 
 
 2,022 18 9 
 
 1,900 7 9 
 
 479 10 5 
 
 — 
 
 or disposed of otherwise than by 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Decree or Dismiss on hearing. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases on Dis- 
 
 19,609 2 4 
 
 1,364 6 
 
 1,028 6 4 
 
 223 17 5 
 
 — 
 
 miss on hearing. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases in -which 
 
 42,094 2 9 
 
 9,298 19 9 
 
 1,790 14 10 
 
 48 5 
 
 255 3 8 
 
 there were decrees. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Compensation Awahtied at 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount of Claims established by 
 
 13,663 11 5 
 
 3,093 7 4 
 
 557 4 8 
 
 12 
 
 145 11 4 
 
 Decrees. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount allowed in Decrees for set- 
 
 2,207 1 
 
 167 15 8 
 
 198 9 6 
 
 3 10 
 
 35 3 8 
 
 off, objection, default, or conduct 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 of Tenant. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Net sums decreed or paid to 
 
 11,456 10 5 
 
 2,925 11 8 
 
 358 15 2 
 
 8 10 
 
 110 7 8 
 
 Claimant. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Appeals to Judge op Assize. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 
 373 5 10 
 
 172 9 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 original Decrees increased. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 
 240 5 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 __ 
 
 original Decrees reduced. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cases in Court op TiAnd Cases 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Eeseeved. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 vious Decrees increased. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 ■ — 
 
 . 
 
 vious Decrees reduced. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Other Peocebdings. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount of Compensation awarded 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 in arbitrations recorded. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount lodged by Respondents 
 
 1,797 16 8 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 , 
 
 under 21st section. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount of Compensation paid out 
 
 1,396 12 2 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 by Clerk of Peace. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount charged upon Holdings 
 
 — 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 under 27 th section. 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 Costs and Expenses Aixowed. 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 To Claimants in Decrees 
 
 463 14 1 
 
 f 
 
 14 14 6 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 „ Bespondents in Dismisses 
 
 133 2 8 
 
 
 4 6 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 „ Claimants on Appeals at Assizes 
 
 22 8 4 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 „ Respondents on Appeals at 
 
 — 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 Assizes. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 „ Claimants on Cases reserved 
 
 — 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 , 
 
 „ Respondents on Cases reserved - 
 
 — 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 
 In 
 
 
 Decrees 
 
 Cases 
 
 
 were 
 
 of 
 
 were 
 
 of 
 
 were 
 
 of 
 
 were 
 
 of 
 
 were 
 
 of 
 
 Scale op Compensation fob Loss 
 
 made. 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 made. 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 made. 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 made. 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 made. 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 on Quitting Holding : 
 
 ■d 
 
 ri 
 
 ■6 
 
 -d 
 
 ■ ni 
 
 ri 
 
 "S 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 '6 
 
 ■s 
 
 -a 
 
 ■a 
 
 tj 
 
 -a 
 
 'S 
 
 Tj 
 
 . 
 
 nH 
 
 rrj 
 
 Number of Cases — (1) where De- 
 
 S 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 % 
 
 i 
 
 % 
 
 
 03 
 
 0) 
 
 g 
 
 
 i 
 
 % 
 
 0) 
 
 g 
 
 % 
 
 g 
 
 £ 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 crees were made ; (2) of Appeal, 
 where each Class of the Scale was 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 < 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 O 
 5 
 
 < 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 o 
 5 
 
 c3 
 
 3 
 
 O 
 5 
 
 ■s 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 5 
 
 claimed and allowed. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 . Not exceeding 7 Years' and 
 
 40 
 
 12 
 
 , 
 
 , 
 
 , 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 , 
 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 above 5 Years' Rent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2. Not exceeding 5 Years' and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 4 Years' Bent — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 
 23 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 , 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (6.) Without Minor Improve- 
 
 . 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 . 
 
 , 
 
 , 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3. Not exceeding 4 Years' and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 3 Years' Rent — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (a.) With. Minor Improve- 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 
 1 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 , 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (6.) Without Minor Improve- 
 
 . . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 , 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4. Not exceeding 3 Years' and 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 2 Years' Rent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5. Not exceeding 2 Years' and 
 
 7 
 
 , 6 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 2 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 above 1 Year's Rent. " 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 6. Notfixceeding 1 Year's Rent 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 87 45 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 6 
 
 • 
 
 
 • 
 
 1 
 
 
 (181.) 
 
 A 3 
 
1870—1871. IRELAND. 
 
 ConHxs of Chaxkmkk of Co.™ and Recoebbhs -Table 4. P-ocBBDiNas at LAm,^SB^ssio^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 Pkooeedings. 
 
 Amount of all Claims loaged 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases settled or 
 disposed of otherwise than by 
 Decree or Dismiss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases on Dis- 
 miss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases in which 
 there were Decrees. 
 
 Compensation Awakdbd at 
 Land Sessioks. 
 
 Amount of Claims established by 
 Decrees. 
 
 Amount allowed in Decrees for set- 
 off, objection, default or conduct 
 of Tenant. 
 
 Net sums decreed or paid to 
 Claimant. 
 
 Appeals to Judge of Assize. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees reduced. 
 
 Cases in Coukt op Land Cases 
 Eesbkved. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by -which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees reduced. 
 
 Othek Peocbedings. 
 
 Amount of Compensation awarded 
 
 in arbitrations recorded. 
 Amount lodged by Eespondents 
 
 under 21st section. 
 Amount of Compensation paid out 
 
 by Clerk of Peace. 
 Amount charged upon Holdings 
 ' under 27th section. 
 
 Costs and Expenses Allowed. 
 
 To Claimants in Decrees - 
 „ Respondents in Dismisses 
 „ Claimants on Appeals at Assizes 
 „ Eespondents on Appeals at 
 
 Assizes. 
 „ Claimants on Cases reserved 
 „ Eespondents on Cases reserved - 
 
 Scale OP Compensation fob Loss 
 on Quitting Holding 
 
 Number of Cases— (1) where De- 
 crees were made ; (2) of Appeal, 
 where each Class of the Scale was 
 claimed and allowed. 
 
 1. Not exceeding 7 Years' and 
 
 above 5 Years' Bent. 
 
 2. Not exceeding 5 Years' and 
 
 above 4 Years' Eent — . 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (J.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 3. Not exceeding 4 Years' and 
 
 above 3 Years' Eent — 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (b.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 4. Not exceeding 3 Tears' and 
 
 above 2 Years' Eent. 
 
 5. Not exceeding 2 Years' and 
 
 above 1 Year's Eent. 
 
 6. Not exceeding 1 Year's Eent 
 
 Clabb. 
 
 Cork, 
 East Eiding. 
 
 Cork, 
 West Biding. 
 
 Cork City 
 (Eecorder). 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 1,646 1 6 
 1,082 15 6 
 
 563 6 
 
 104 3 
 
 77 3 
 
 27 
 
 88 11 6 
 
 A a. d. 
 5,519 3 5 
 2,942 5 8 
 
 1,606 10 
 970 8 2 
 
 284 5 
 143 5 
 
 141 
 
 & s. d. 
 7,959 2 10 
 5,433 2 10 
 
 310 
 
 2,216 
 
 772 13 8 
 227 16 6 
 
 544 17 2 
 
 9 15 
 
 27 4 5 
 zl8 9 8 
 
 "Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 53 5 8 
 
 1" 
 
 /9 
 
 jn3 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 23 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 al2,469 19 2 
 
 69,081 19 2 
 
 cl,080 
 rf2,308 
 
 eSlO 12 
 
 /96 4 
 
 ^714 8 
 
 6 
 
 (1870)194 8 
 
 7(28 14 4 
 A18 1 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 ol 
 Appeal. 
 
 a. Including 1,520Z. for the year 1870. b. Including l,\50l. for 1870. c. Including 70/. for 1870 
 
 d. Including 300/. for 1870. e. Including 210/. 12s. fer 1870. /. Includmg 16/. 4s. for 1870. 
 
 . Including 194/. 8s. for 1870. Ti. Including 4/. 1 \s. ad. for 1870. i. Two of the 6 Dismisses not ffled or costs" made out. 
 
 j. Not stated in return whether with or without Minor Improvements. k. Including 2/. 3s. for 1870. 
 
IRELAND. 
 
 1870-1871. 
 
 Courts of Ch^urjien of Counties and Recorders. — Table 4. PKOCEEDiNas at Land Sessions under the Landlord 
 and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, showing Amount claimed and awarded with Costs — continued. 
 
 Pkoceedings. 
 
 Down. 
 
 Dublin County. 
 
 DUBLIH CiTT. 
 
 Fermanagh. 
 
 GiLTTAT County 
 
 including 
 
 GaiwAt Town 
 
 (Recorder's Court). 
 
 Amount of all Claims lodged 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases settled or 
 disposed of otherwise than by 
 Decree or Dismiss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases on Dis- 
 miss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases in which 
 there were Decrees. 
 
 Compensation Awakded at 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 Amount of Claims established by 
 Decrees. 
 
 Amount allowed in Decrees for set- 
 off, objection, default or conduct 
 of Tenant. 
 
 Net sums decreed or paid to 
 Claimant. 
 
 Appeals to Judge oe Assize. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees reduced. 
 
 Cases in Coukt of Land Cases 
 Reserved. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 voius Decrees reduced. 
 
 Otheb Proceedings. 
 
 Amount of Compensation awarded 
 
 in arbitrations recorded. 
 Amount lodged by Respondents 
 
 under 21st section. 
 Amount of Compensation paid out 
 
 by Clerk of Peace. 
 Amount charged upon Holdings 
 
 under 27th section. 
 
 Costs and Expenses Allowed. 
 
 To Claimants in Decrees 
 „ Respondents in Dismisses 
 „ Claimants on Appeals at Assizes 
 „ Respondents on Appeals at 
 
 Assizes. 
 „ Claimants on Cases reserved 
 „ Respondents on Cases reserved - 
 
 Scale op Compenlation for Loss 
 , ON Quitting Holding : 
 
 Number of Cases — (V) where De- 
 crees were made ; (2) Cf Appeal, 
 wljere each Class of the Scale was 
 claimed and allowed. 
 
 1. Not exceeding 7 Years' and 
 
 above 5 Years' Rent. 
 
 2. Not exceeding 5 Years' and 
 
 above 4 Years' Rent — 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (5.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 3. Not exceeding 4 Yeass' and 
 
 above 3 Years' Rent — 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (5.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 4. Not exceeding 3 Years' and 
 
 above 2 Years' Rent. 
 
 5. Not exceeding 2 Years' and 
 
 above 1 Year's Rent. 
 
 6. Not exceeding 1 Year's Rent 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 3,891 1 6 
 
 1,294 15 6 
 
 9^4 2 6 
 
 1,642 3 6 
 
 925 7 10 
 
 925 7 10 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 1,590 8 3 
 
 566 14 
 
 98 1 6 
 925 12 9 
 
 158 10 
 
 158 10 
 
 S. d. 
 
 o 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 10,.')28 1 4 
 
 6,544 15 10 
 
 541 6 6 
 3,241 19 
 
 449 11 6 
 62 16 2 
 
 386 15 4 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 a2,905 9 5 
 
 61,316 14 
 
 c780 14 5 
 
 (/808 1 
 
 el07 2 5 
 
 «107 2 5 
 
 yi4 9 
 g\Z 9 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 In 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 13 
 
 a. Including 898/. 15s. for 1870, 
 d. Including 265/. for 1870. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 A 4 ■ ■ 
 
1870—1871. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 on^ .^TT.= ^r.A TJFnoROTRS —Table 4. Proceedings at Land Sessions under the Landlord 
 ^^"^" l^'^^^rfraiaXAlT S^^ CLAIMED and AWARDED with Cosxs-....-..e.. 
 
 Proceedings. 
 
 Amounts of all Claims lodged 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases settled or 
 disposed of otherwise than by 
 Decree or Dismiss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases on Dis- 
 miss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases in -which 
 there were Decrees. 
 
 Compensation Awahded at 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 Amount of Claims established by 
 Decrees. 
 
 Amount allowed in Decrees for set- 
 off, objection, default or conduct 
 of Tenant. 
 
 Net sums decreed or paid to 
 Claimant. 
 
 Appeals to Judge op Assize. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees reduced. 
 
 Cases in Coukt of Land Cases 
 Kesekved. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees reduced. 
 
 Other Pkoceedings. 
 
 Amount of Compensations awarded 
 
 iu arbitrations recorded. 
 Amount lodged by Eespondents 
 
 under 21st section. 
 Amount of Compensation paid out 
 
 by Clerk of Peace. 
 Amount charged upon Holdings 
 
 under 27th section. 
 
 Costs and Expenses Allowed. 
 
 To Claimants in Decrees - 
 „ Respondents in Dismisses _ - 
 „ Claimants on Appeals at Assizes 
 „ Eespondents on Appeals at 
 
 Assizes. 
 „ Claimants on Cases reserved - 
 „ Respondents on Cases reserved - 
 
 Scale of Compensation eok Loss 
 
 ON QuiTriNG Holding : 
 Number of Cases— (1) where De- 
 crees were made ; (2) of Appeal, 
 where each Class of the Scale was 
 claimed and allowed. 
 
 1. Not exceeding,? Years' and 
 
 above 5 Years' Rent. 
 .2. Not exceeding 5 Years' and 
 above 4 Years' Rent — 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (h.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 3. Not exceeding 4 Years' and 
 
 above 3 Years' Rent— 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (6.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 4. Not exceeding 3 Years' and 
 
 above 2 Years' Rent. 
 
 5. Not exceeding 2 Years' and 
 
 above 1 Year's Rent. 
 
 6. Not exceeding 1 Year's Rent 
 
 Kbbet. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 1,434 9 6 
 
 448 
 
 605 3 
 381 6 6 
 
 218 19 6 
 109 1 11 
 
 109 17 7 
 
 Kxldaee. 
 
 Kilkenny 
 County. 
 
 King's, 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 1,178 10 8 
 
 647 16 6 
 
 80 6 2 
 450 8 
 
 70 4 
 
 70 4 
 
 10 8 8 
 13 15 
 
 "Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 & s. d. 
 170 
 146 10 
 
 23 10 
 
 8 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 2 5 6 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 al8,980 8 6 
 
 16,044 5 4 
 
 2,712 13 3 
 223 10 
 
 109 5 
 51 11 
 
 58 4 1 
 
 54 19 6 
 54 17 
 
 7 8 
 4 11 8 
 
 "Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 2 2 
 
 "Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 a. Includmg 3,0551. 2s. for 1870. 
 
IRELAND. 
 
 1870—1871. 
 
 9 
 
 Courts of Chair!hen of CoiiNTrEs and Rbcoeders. — Table 4. PROCBBDmists at Land Sessions under the Landlord 
 and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, showing Amount claimed and awarded with Costs — continued. 
 
 Pkooeedings. 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 Londonderry. 
 
 LONGF ED. 
 
 LOTJTII. 
 
 Mato. 
 
 Amount of all Claims lodged 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases settled 
 or disposed of otherwise than by 
 Decree or Dismiss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed iu Cases on Dis- 
 miss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases in which 
 there were Decrees. 
 
 CoMrENSATION AWARDED AT 
 
 L.4.ND Sessions. 
 
 Amouat of Claims established by 
 . Decrees. 
 
 Amount allowed in Decrees for set- 
 off, objection, default or conduct 
 of Tenant. 
 
 Net sums decreed or paid to 
 Claimant. 
 
 Appeals to Judge of Assize. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees reduced. 
 
 Cases in Court of Land Cases 
 Kesekved. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees reduced. 
 
 Other Proceedings. 
 
 Amount of Compensation awarded 
 
 in arbitrations recorded. 
 Amount lodged by Respondents 
 
 under 21st section. 
 Amount of Compensation paid out 
 
 by Clerk of Peace. 
 Amount charged upon Holdings 
 
 under 27th section. 
 
 Costs and Expenses Allowed. 
 
 To Claimants in Decrees - 
 „ Respondents in Dismisses 
 „ Claimants on Appeals at Assizes 
 „ Respondents on Appeals at 
 
 Assizes. 
 „ Claimants on Cases reserved 
 „ Respondents on Cases reserved - 
 
 Scale op Compensation foe Loss 
 on Quitting Holding : 
 
 Number of Cases — (1) where De- 
 crees were made ; (2) of Appeal, 
 where each Class of the Scale was 
 claimed and allowed. 
 
 and 
 
 and 
 
 1. Not exceeding 7 Years' 
 
 above 5 Years' Rent. 
 
 2. Not exceeding 5 Years' 
 
 above 4 Years' Rent — 
 ^ (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. ■* 
 (J.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 3. Not exceeding 4 Years' and 
 
 above 3 Years' Rent — 
 (a.) With . Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (6.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 4. Not exceeding 3 Years' and 
 
 above 2 Years' Rent. 
 .5. Not exceeding 2 Year's and 
 
 above 1 Year's Rent. 
 6. Not exceeding 1 Year's Rent - 
 
 & s. d. 
 4,311 17 9 
 3,047 14 3 
 
 973 1 3 
 291 2 3 
 
 147 12 2 
 46 19 11 
 
 100 12 3 
 
 8 14 
 10 10 8 
 
 & s. d. 
 
 15,163 17 1 
 
 8,958 4 1 
 
 2,046 
 4,159 13 
 
 2,119 5 9 
 543 12 11 
 
 1,575 12 10 
 
 20 
 782 19 
 187 9 
 
 86 
 7 10 
 
 £ s. d. 
 141 8 
 
 141 8 
 
 £ s. d. 
 95 10 
 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 a4,835 10 6 
 
 3,574 11 9 
 
 539 11 6 
 
 721 7 3 
 
 217 7 6 
 157 4 9 
 
 60 2 9 
 
 2 3 
 
 4 4 8 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 c\ 
 
 c\ 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 a 
 
 In 
 
 Oases 
 
 of 
 
 Appeal, 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 In 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 16 6 8 
 5 13 S 
 
 Wliere 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 oL 
 
 .Appeal. 
 
 a Including 169Z. 12s. Id. for year 1870. 6 Information as to the scale of compensation not given in Return for Londonderrv 
 
 c Not stated in Return whether with or without Minor Improvements. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 B 
 
10 
 
 1870—1871. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Courts of Chairmen of Counties and Recorders.— Table 4. Proceedings at Lasd Sessions under the Landlord 
 and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, showing Amount claimed and awarded with Costs— continued. 
 
 Pkoceedings. 
 
 Mbath. 
 
 MONAGHAN. 
 
 Queen's. 
 
 Boscommon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 
 & s. d. 
 
 £, s. d. 
 
 
 iC s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £, s. d. 
 
 Amount of all Claims lodged 
 Amount claimed in Cases settled 
 
 3,116 14 7 
 2,985 4 3 
 
 1,107 19 6 
 
 2,102 8 1 
 418 16 2 
 
 1,925 16 7 
 1,614 17 1 
 
 a4,178 9 10 
 17,13 11 
 
 or disposed of otherwise than by 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Decree or Dismiss on hearing. 
 
 
 
 1,425 4 5 
 
 65 
 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases on Dis- 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 miss on hearing. 
 Amount claimed in Cases in which 
 
 131 10 4 
 
 1,107 19 6 
 
 258 7 6 
 
 245 19 6 
 
 2,465 8 11 
 
 there were Decrees. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Compensation Awakded at 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount of Claims established by 
 
 75 2 
 
 373 
 
 41 17 6 
 
 45 
 
 4277 
 
 Decrees. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount allowed in Decrees for set- 
 
 — 
 
 12 7 9 
 
 13 2 6 
 
 — 
 
 3 15 
 
 off, objection, default, or conduct 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 of Tenant. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 et sums decreed or paid to 
 
 75 2 
 
 360 12 3 
 
 28 15 
 
 45 
 
 273 5 
 
 Claimant. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Appeals to Judge of Assize. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 19 19 4 
 
 62 1 
 
 original Decrees increased. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 
 — 
 
 142 16 3 
 
 10 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 original Decrees reduced. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cases in Coukt op Land Cases 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Eesekyed. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 vious Decrees increased. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 vious Decrees reduced. 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 A 
 
 
 Other Pkoceedings. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount of Compensation awarded 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 in arbitrations recorded. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount lodged by Respondents 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 246 
 
 under 21st section. , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount of Compensation paid out 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 346 
 
 by Clerk of Peace 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Amount charged upon Holdings 
 
 — 
 
 rd 
 
 rQ 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 under 27th Section. 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 Costs and Expenses Allowed. 
 
 
 3 
 
 0) 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 To Claimants in Decrees - 
 
 2 10 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 5 13 4 
 
 5 13 
 
 „ Respondents in Dismisses 
 
 4 11 8 
 
 |2i 
 
 "A 
 
 3 16 8 
 
 
 „ Claimants on Appeals at Assizes 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 7 8 8 
 
 4 11 8 
 
 „ Respondents on Appeals at 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 Assizes. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 „ Claimants on Cases reserved 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 „ Respondents on Cases reserved - 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In 
 Cases 
 
 Where 
 Decrees 
 
 In. 
 
 
 Cases 
 
 Scale op Compensation foe Loss 
 ON Quitting Holding : 
 
 were 
 made. 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 were 
 made. 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 were 
 made. 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 were 
 made. 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 were - 
 made. 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Number of Cases — (1) where De- 
 
 .3 
 
 
 -6 
 
 t3 
 
 
 
 •g 
 
 ■s 
 
 -% 
 
 "% 
 
 ■i 
 
 ■2 
 
 ■s 
 
 •t 
 
 -% 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 "i 
 
 crees were made ; (2) of Appeal, 
 where each Class of the Scale was 
 rlainipfl HTid allowed 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 6 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 a 
 6 
 
 ^ 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 'A 
 
 5 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 ]. Not exceeding 7 Years' and 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 5 Years' Rent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 2. Not exceeding 5 Years' and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 4 Years' Rent — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (i.) Without Minor Improve- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 * 
 
 * 
 
 * 
 
 ■ 
 
 ' 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 ' 
 
 3. Not exceeding 4 Years' and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 3 Years' Rent — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 * 
 
 * 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 ' 
 
 ,, (i.) Without, Minor Impove- 
 
 
 , . 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 ments. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 ' 
 
 ' 
 
 4. Not exceeding 3 Years' and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 2 Years' Rent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 " 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 5. Not exceeding 2 Years' and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 above 1 Year's Rent. 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 * 
 
 ■ * 
 
 ■ ' 
 
 ' 
 
 ■ • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 • 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 6, Not exceeding 1 Year's Rent - 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 . 
 
 • 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 n Tnnl.i.1i«n. RC/ 10„ CJ J„.. XT 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 1 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 • 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 claim 
 
 L^waffoTl.Oltf ''°° "'^'^'""^fo^^P'^^^^'aents to be registered; part of claim allowed, but without sums of money allowed. 
 
 The 
 
IRELAND. 
 
 1870-1871. 
 
 11 
 
 Courts of Chairmen of Counties and Recorders. — Table 4. Proceedings at Land Sessions under the Landlord 
 and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, showing Amount claimed and awarded with Costs — concluded. 
 
 Proceedings. 
 
 TiPPBEART. 
 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 Westmeatu. 
 
 Wexford. 
 
 WiCKLOW. 
 
 Amount of ail Claims lodged 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases settled 
 or disposed of otherwise than by 
 Decree or Dismiss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases on Dis- 
 miss on hearing. 
 
 Amount claimed in Cases in which 
 there were Decrees. 
 
 Compensation Awarded at 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 Amount of Claims established by 
 Decrees. 
 
 Amount allowed in Decrees for set- 
 off, objection, default, or conduct 
 of Tenant. 
 
 Net sums decreed • or paid to 
 Claimant. 
 
 Appeals to Judge of Assize. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in 
 original Decrees reduced. 
 
 Cases ix Court of Laxd Cases 
 Reserved. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees increased. 
 
 Amount by which net sums in pre- 
 vious Decrees reduced. 
 
 Other Proceedings. 
 
 Amount of Compensation awarded 
 
 in arbitrations recorded. 
 Amount lodged by Respondents 
 
 under 21st section. 
 Amount of Compensation paid out 
 
 by Clerk of Peace. 
 Amount charged upon Holdings 
 
 under 27th section. 
 
 Costs and Expenses Allowed. 
 
 To Claimants in Decrees - 
 „ Respondents in Dismisses 
 ,, Claimants on Appeals at Assizes 
 „ Respondents on Appeals at 
 
 Assizes. 
 ,, Claimants on Cases reserved 
 „ Respondents on Cases reserved - 
 
 Scale of Compensation for Loss 
 ON Quitting Holding : 
 
 Number of Cases — (1) where De- 
 crees were made ; (2) of Appeal, 
 where each Class of the Scale was 
 claimed and allowed. 
 
 1. Not exceeding 7 Years' and 
 
 above 5 Years' Rent. 
 
 2. Not exceeding 5 Years' and 
 
 above 4 Years' Rent — 
 (a.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (6.) Without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 ■3. Not exceeding 4 Years' and 
 above 3 Years' Rent — 
 («.) With Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 (6.) without Minor Improve- 
 ments. 
 
 4. Not exceeding 3 Years' and 
 
 above 2 Years' Rent. 
 
 5. Not exceeding 2 Years' and 
 
 above 1 Year's Rent. 
 
 6. Not exceeding 1 Year's Rent - 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 ((2,463 \ 8 
 
 434 11 
 
 1,679 18 8 
 347 12 
 
 166 11 6 
 
 166 11 6 
 
 .(; s. d. 
 
 8,475 8 
 5,260 16 10 
 
 496 4 
 
 2,717 19 
 
 1,482 2 
 
 185 14 
 
 1,296 6 2 
 
 24 7 3 
 
 £ s. d. 
 2,655 12 5 
 2,015 1 4 
 
 446 1 7 
 204 9 6 
 
 235 10 6 
 35 18 4 
 
 199 12 2 
 
 8 16 
 
 713 18 2 
 713 18 2 
 
 & s. d. 
 
 778 17 
 544 19 6 
 
 233 17 6 
 
 165 14 6 
 17 14 6 
 
 148 
 
 40 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 547 6 
 
 547 6 
 
 136 16 7 
 8 15 
 
 128 1 7 
 
 47 8 10 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 3,904 12 
 
 84 
 
 306 5 
 3,514 7 
 
 353 16 
 2 10 
 
 351 6 
 
 89 
 
 5 8 
 
 55 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 Where 
 
 In 
 
 Decrees 
 
 Cases 
 
 were 
 
 of 
 
 made. 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 r-i 
 
 T3 
 
 -a 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 li 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 
 
 Q 
 
 a . 
 
 ^ 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 of 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 5 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 ol 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 6 
 
 2 3 
 
 9 14 
 
 6 6 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 Where 
 
 Decrees 
 
 were 
 
 made. 
 
 In 
 Cases 
 
 of 
 Appeal. 
 
 a Including 325/. 18s. for the year 1870. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 h Information as to scale of compensation not given for Waterford 
 
 B 2 
 
( 12 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 1872. 
 
 Courts of Ceaiemen of Counties and Courts of Recokdeks— Table 3 
 
 , — PeOCEedings under the 
 
 counties 
 
 arranged in 
 
 provinces. 
 
 ere held. 
 
 Number ot Cases ektebed. 
 Nature oe Claims. 
 
 AND 
 
 1 
 
 g 
 
 .a 
 
 Number withdrawn and 
 settled. 
 
 Number ol Dismisses. 
 
 1 
 
 If 
 15 
 
 ■fi 
 
 
 1 
 S 
 
 II 
 
 m 
 
 if 
 
 i 
 
 r- 
 
 =1 
 
 ll 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 ■Is 
 
 1. 
 
 s 
 
 i 
 If 
 
 1^ 
 
 ll 
 
 n 
 
 Leinster : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Carlow 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 "i 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 I 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 * ' ' 
 
 *" 
 
 ... 
 
 Dublin (1871) - 
 
 La 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kildare 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kilkenny - 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 " ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 K's. County (1871) 
 
 La 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Longford 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Louth . - - 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Meath (1871) 
 
 .5 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Q's. County (1871) 
 
 5 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 al 
 
 
 Westmeath - 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 Wexford - 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 66 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 Wicklow 
 Total of Leinstek 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 4 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 34 
 
 43 
 
 34 
 
 26 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 13 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 MUKSTEK : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Clare - 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 • ■• 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cork,E.R. (1871) 
 
 5 
 
 29 
 
 23 
 
 6 
 
 ... 
 
 
 7 
 
 11 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Cork, W.R. (1871) 
 
 5 
 
 34 
 
 24 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 
 ... 
 
 c'ln 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Kerry - - - 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 
 ... 
 
 11 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 Limerick 
 
 2 
 
 18 
 
 9 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 7 
 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 Tipperary - 
 
 5 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 
 ... 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 Waterford - 
 
 Total of MUNSTEK 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 11 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 3 
 
 .... 
 
 
 I 
 
 31 
 
 130 
 
 103 
 
 62 
 
 ... 
 
 '••• 
 
 47 
 
 37 
 
 27 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 [7] 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 Ulster : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Antrim 
 
 2 
 
 42 
 
 25 
 
 25 
 
 17 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 Armagh 
 
 3 
 
 59 
 
 55 
 
 49 
 
 53 
 
 37 
 
 23 
 
 15 
 
 7 
 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 Cavan - - - 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 I 
 
 
 2 . 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Donegal 
 
 3 
 
 31 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
 22 
 
 i 
 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 6- 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 Down (1871) 
 
 [3 
 
 24 
 
 19 
 
 17 
 
 12 
 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 Fermanagh - 
 
 2 
 
 58 
 
 52 
 
 57 
 
 46 
 
 2 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 Londonderry(187i; 
 
 \i 
 
 51 
 
 20 
 
 35 
 
 44 
 
 3 
 
 29 
 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 ... 
 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Monaghan (1871) 
 
 |2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Tyrone 
 Total of Ulster 
 
 4 
 
 69 
 
 41 
 
 43 
 
 43 
 
 11 
 
 22 
 
 20 
 
 i 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 25 
 
 340 
 
 231 
 
 268 
 
 240 
 
 56 
 
 117 
 
 81 
 
 47 
 
 60 
 
 21 
 
 20 
 
 1 
 
 
 CONNAtrOHT : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Galway 
 
 6 
 
 17 
 
 14 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 Leitrim 
 
 3 
 
 19 
 
 16 
 
 19 
 
 
 •2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Mayo - - - 
 
 6 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 20 
 
 ... 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 4 
 
 I 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 Roscommon 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 Sligo - 
 Total of CON- 
 
 NATIGHT - 
 
 Total of Ireland 
 
 2 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 80 
 
 71 
 
 78 
 
 
 2 
 
 26 
 
 15 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 17 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 115 
 
 599 
 
 439 
 
 434 
 
 241 
 
 59 
 
 203 
 
 145 
 
 98 , 
 
 85 
 
 48 
 
 20 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 a. Not proceeded with. 
 
 b Including claims for improvements. c Referred to arbitration, and when landlord refused to 
 
 abide by, were dismissed. 
 
( 13 ) 
 
 1872. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant ("Ireland) Act, 1870, in tlie Year 1872, from Eeturns made by the Clf.eks of the P 
 
 EACE. 
 
 Total. 
 
 POE Loss ON QUIITIKO 
 
 HOIBIN e AND iMPEOVE- 
 
 MBNTS TOOETHEB. 
 
 FoK Ulster 
 Tenant-Risht. 
 
 Foe DI3TISCT 
 
 GE0UHD3. 
 
 AaOREGATE 
 
 or msTiifOT 
 Geounds of 
 
 CiAIM. 
 
 Amount ov 
 
 Costs 
 Adjudoed. 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 AKRANGBD IN 
 
 PROTINCES. 
 
 
 ill 
 
 < 
 
 a 
 
 II 
 
 is 
 
 §11 
 
 4 
 
 ■go . 
 -=1 
 
 1 
 
 it 
 
 1° 
 
 h 
 III 
 
 o K o 
 
 it 
 ■si 
 
 
 Amount Decreod, 
 exclusive of Costs. 
 
 ■s _ 
 
 12; 
 
 1 
 o 
 
 -If 
 
 
 II 
 
 gat 
 
 i 
 
 > " .: 
 
 Sad 
 
 ftg o 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 & 
 
 , £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Leinster : 
 Carlow. 
 
 
 158 
 
 
 158 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 1 
 
 Dublin (1871). 
 
 
 40 
 
 6 
 
 34 
 
 ::; 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ::: ] 
 
 7 
 
 Kildare, 
 
 Kilkenny. 
 
 King's Cnty.Cl871) 
 
 Longford. 
 
 
 417 
 
 210 
 
 207 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 220 
 
 197 
 
 210 
 
 207 
 
 A9 
 
 2 
 
 Louth. 
 
 
 T5 
 
 
 75 
 
 
 • •• 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 • *< 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... ■ 
 
 Meath (1871). 
 
 
 42 
 
 13 
 
 29 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ••• . 
 
 Queen'sCty.(1871) 
 Westmeath. 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 Wexford. 
 
 
 663 
 
 412 
 
 251 
 
 487 
 
 300 
 
 187 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 176 
 
 ... 
 
 112 
 
 64 
 
 11 
 
 
 Wicklow. 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 
 1,415 
 
 641 
 
 774 
 
 487 
 
 300 
 
 187 
 
 .,. 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 416 
 
 197 
 
 322 
 
 291 
 
 22 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 MUNSTER: 
 
 
 829 
 
 314 
 
 515 
 
 620 
 
 240 
 
 380 
 
 
 
 
 
 209 
 
 
 74 
 
 135 
 
 4fi 
 
 
 Clare. 
 
 
 284 
 
 143 
 
 141 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 • a* 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 Cork, E. R. (1871) 
 
 
 773 
 
 228 
 
 545 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 Cork, W.E. (1871) 
 
 
 430 
 
 120 
 
 310 
 
 430 
 
 120 
 
 310 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 8 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 
 1,713 
 
 686 
 
 1,027 
 
 53 
 
 8 
 
 45 
 
 *.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 1,660 
 
 678 
 
 982 
 
 c... 
 
 c... 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 
 1,540 
 
 1,036 
 
 504 
 
 1,288 
 
 1,036 
 
 252 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 232 
 
 
 252 
 
 5 
 
 
 Tipperarj'. ' 
 
 
 506 
 
 2 
 
 504 
 
 506 
 
 2 
 
 504 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 Total of MUKSTER. 
 
 
 6,075 
 
 2,529 
 
 3,546 
 
 2,897 
 
 1,406 
 
 1,491 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 229 
 
 1,892 
 
 752 
 
 1,369 
 
 81 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 UlSiee : 
 
 
 922 
 
 28 
 
 894 
 
 49 
 
 28 
 
 21 
 
 873 
 
 
 873 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 26 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 
 1,463 
 
 98 
 
 1,365 
 
 55 
 
 7 
 
 48 
 
 1,040 
 
 45 
 
 995 
 
 12 
 
 253 
 
 103 
 
 46 
 
 322 
 
 57 
 
 19 
 
 Armagh. 
 
 
 38 
 
 7 
 
 31 
 
 38 
 
 7 
 
 31 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 Cavan. 
 
 
 939 
 
 80 
 
 859 
 
 
 
 
 887 
 
 62 
 
 825 
 
 
 
 52 
 
 18 
 
 34 
 
 58 
 
 19 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 
 925 
 
 
 925 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... ] 
 
 Down (1871). 
 
 
 1,202 
 
 137 
 
 1,065 
 
 
 
 
 640 
 
 lU 
 
 630 
 
 
 485 
 
 77 
 
 127 
 
 435 
 
 32 
 
 23 
 
 Permanagh. 
 
 
 2,119 
 
 543 
 
 1,576 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 1 
 
 Londouderry(187l) 
 
 
 373 
 
 12 
 
 361 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... ] 
 
 Monaghan (1871). 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 
 2,851 
 
 330 
 
 2,521 
 
 640 
 
 18 
 
 460 
 
 1,661 
 
 60, 
 
 1,601 
 
 ... 
 
 361 
 
 189 
 
 90 
 
 460 
 
 127 
 
 30 
 
 
 10,832 
 
 1,235 
 
 9,597 
 
 782 
 
 222 
 
 560 
 
 5,101 
 
 177 
 
 4,924 
 
 12 
 
 1,099 
 
 421 
 
 281 
 
 1,251 
 
 289 
 
 121 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 COXN'AUGHT : 
 
 
 169 
 
 37 
 
 132 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 57 
 
 112 
 
 37 
 
 132 
 
 c... 
 
 c... 
 
 Galway. 
 
 
 178. 
 
 90 
 
 88 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... ■ 
 
 
 178 
 
 
 90 
 
 88 
 
 3 
 
 30 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 
 349 
 
 49 
 
 300 
 34 
 
 265 
 
 37 
 
 228 
 
 
 
 
 
 84 
 
 
 12 
 
 72 
 
 27 
 
 6 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 • •. 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 
 315 va 
 
 243 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 78 
 
 237 
 
 72 
 
 243 
 
 28 
 
 ".; 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 rotal of CONNAUQHT. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 
 1,045 
 
 248 
 
 797 
 
 265 
 
 37 
 
 228 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 349 
 
 211 
 
 535 
 
 61 
 
 36 ' 
 
 
 19,367 
 
 4,653 
 
 14,714 
 
 4,431 
 
 1,965 
 
 2,466 
 
 5,101 177 
 
 4,924 
 
 12 
 
 2,141 
 
 2,859 
 
 1,566 
 
 3,446 
 
 153 
 
 176 
 
 
 c Not returned. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 B 3 
 
( 14 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 1873. 
 
 Courts of Chairmen of Counties and Coukts of Recokdeks.-Table 3.— Pkoceedings under the 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 ARRANGED IN 
 
 PROVINCES.- 
 
 |1 
 
 |i 
 II 
 
 11 
 1^ 
 
 NuMBEB OP Cases enteeed, 
 Natuee op Claims. 
 
 AND 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 •s 
 1 
 
 Iz; 
 
 g 
 
 u 
 
 II 
 II 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
 o 
 I- 
 
 1 
 g 
 
 H 
 Ii 
 if 
 
 15 
 
 ■g 
 
 13 
 
 i 
 
 II 
 
 
 la 
 
 1 
 
 
 ■S3 
 g 
 
 Ill 
 
 
 g 
 
 o bn 
 
 si 
 
 Pi 
 
 1^ 
 
 ""I 
 
 ii 
 II 
 
 Pi 
 
 
 Leisstek : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Carlow 
 
 2 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 Dublin 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kildare 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Kilkenny 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 King's County 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Longford 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Louth - 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Meath - 
 
 5 
 
 a6 
 
 
 ■ .■ 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Queen's County - 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 "e 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 "2 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Westmeath - 
 
 3 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Wexford 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 "l 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 Wicklow 
 Total of Leinstek 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 "i 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 37 
 
 88 
 
 75 
 
 38 
 
 
 ... 
 
 43 
 
 22 
 
 16 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 ... 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 MUNSTER : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Clare - 
 
 2 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 6 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cork, E. E. - 
 
 5 
 
 21 
 
 14 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Cork, W. E. 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Kerry - - - 
 
 3 
 
 60 
 
 12 
 
 48 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 19 
 
 14 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Limerick 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tipperary - 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 15 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 *■» 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Waterford - 
 Total of MUNSTEB 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 ... 
 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 "3 
 
 
 25 
 
 141 
 
 79 
 
 121 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 54 
 
 25 
 
 29 
 
 16 
 
 15 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 XJl-STEK : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Antrim 
 
 2 
 
 46 
 
 32 
 
 40 
 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 7 
 
 14 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ^ ■> 
 
 Armagh 
 
 3 
 
 47 
 
 29 
 
 32 
 
 24 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 22 
 
 13 
 
 , ,, 
 
 
 ■ •• 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 '•-1 
 
 Cavan - - - 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 • •> 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 Donegal 
 
 3 
 
 31 
 
 9 
 
 12 
 
 24 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 • • • 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Down (1871)* - 
 
 [3 
 
 24 
 
 19 
 
 17 
 
 12 
 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ...] 
 
 
 Fermanagh - 
 
 2 
 
 58 
 
 50 
 
 56 
 
 49 
 
 1 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 1 ' 
 
 20 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 Londonderry 
 
 4 
 
 76 
 
 24 
 
 22 
 
 40 
 
 6 
 
 11 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 25 
 
 3 
 
 11 
 
 • •. 
 
 
 
 
 Monaghan - 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 12 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tyrone 
 Total of Ulstek - 
 
 4 
 
 77 
 
 73 
 
 73 
 
 75 
 
 12 
 
 25 
 
 20 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 "7 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 26 
 
 382 
 
 255 
 
 272 
 
 257 
 
 40 
 
 106 
 
 87 
 
 66 
 
 71 
 
 32 
 
 20 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 CONNAUGHT : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Gal-way 
 
 6 
 
 14 
 
 11 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Leitrim 
 
 3 
 
 28 
 
 25 
 
 27 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 Mayo - - - 
 
 6 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 ... 
 
 
 13 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Eoscommon ■ 
 
 5 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 
 7 
 
 24 
 
 .. . 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Sligo - 
 Total of Cox- 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 ■•• 
 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 22 
 
 115 
 
 109 
 
 112 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 33 
 
 21 
 
 17 
 
 14 
 
 29 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 '1 
 
 NAtranT. 
 Total of Ireland 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 123 
 
 726 
 
 518 
 
 543 
 
 260 
 
 45 
 
 236 
 
 155 
 
 128 
 
 104 
 
 80 
 
 23 
 
 9 
 
 56 
 
 3 
 
 
 * To obviate, as far as possible, the effect upon the totals of Ulster and of Ireland of the omission of the Clerk of the Peace for the 
 county of Down to furnish the required Eeturn, it has been found necessary to re-publish the figures from the Return last obtained viz., iu 
 the year 1871. ' 
 
 a Nature of claims not stated. b This total in table is erroneously given as 4. 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 1873. 
 
 lUELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, in the year 1873, from Returns made by the Clekks of the Peace. 
 
 Total. 
 
 rOB Loss ON QDITT1K& 
 
 Holding and Improve- 
 ments TOSETHEK. 
 
 Foe Ulbtek 
 Tenant- Ri&HT. 
 
 For distinct 
 Gkounds. 
 
 AaQKEGJATE 
 
 ou distinct 
 
 Gbounds op 
 
 Claim. 
 
 Amount op 
 
 Costs 
 Adjudged. 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 
 ^■i 
 
 fe 
 
 ■So 
 
 -4^73 
 
 § 
 
 "So 
 
 ^■. 
 
 § 
 
 Amount Decreed, 
 
 ■ri 
 
 8 
 
 
 •Bi 
 
 o o a 
 en 
 
 
 Hi 
 1=^ 
 
 1^ 
 
 ili 
 lis 
 
 »1 
 |o5 
 
 
 ill 
 
 <1 
 
 
 4^ 
 
 1=1 
 
 II 
 
 exclusive of Costs. 
 
 o 
 
 4^ 
 
 !5 
 
 1 
 
 AREANGED IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 ill 
 
 m 
 
 aa 
 
 o p 
 
 OHO 
 
 gas 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 .* 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 & 
 
 £ 
 
 & 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 • 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Leinster : 
 
 316 
 
 209 
 
 107 
 
 316 
 
 209 
 
 107 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 ... 
 
 Carlow. 
 
 164 
 
 60 
 
 104 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 134 
 
 30 
 
 60 
 
 104 
 
 7 
 
 ... 
 
 Dublin. 
 
 727 
 
 102 
 
 625 
 
 363 
 
 51 
 
 312 
 
 
 
 
 
 105 
 
 259 
 
 51 
 
 313 
 
 
 
 Kildare. 
 
 333 
 
 87 
 
 246 
 
 333 
 
 87 
 
 246 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ..'. 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Kilkenny. 
 
 690 
 
 
 690 
 
 690 
 
 
 690 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 King's County. 
 
 70 
 
 15 
 
 55 
 
 70 
 
 15 
 
 55 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 
 446 
 
 
 446 
 
 446 
 
 
 446 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 23 
 
 5 
 
 Meath. 
 
 55 
 
 15 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 55 
 
 15 
 
 40 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 
 70 
 
 
 70 
 
 7*0 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 Wexford. 
 
 381 
 
 272 
 
 109 
 
 117 
 
 8 
 
 109 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 74 
 
 190 
 
 264 
 
 ... 
 
 9 
 
 ... 
 
 Wicklow. 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 3,252 
 
 760 
 
 2,492 
 
 2,405 
 
 370 
 
 2,035 
 
 
 
 
 
 313 
 
 534 
 
 390 457 
 
 59 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 MirNSTEE : 
 
 1,100 
 
 248 
 
 852 
 
 1,054 
 
 246 
 
 808 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 46 
 
 2 
 
 44 
 
 132 
 
 14 
 
 Clare. 
 
 538 
 
 40 
 
 498 
 
 288 
 
 40 
 
 248 
 
 
 
 
 
 64 
 
 186 
 
 .. • 
 
 250 
 
 18. 
 
 
 Cork, E.R. 
 
 778 
 
 58 
 
 720 
 
 389 
 
 58 
 
 331 
 
 
 
 
 
 255 
 
 134 
 
 
 389 
 
 37 
 
 6 
 
 Cork, W.R. 
 
 1,238 
 
 409 
 
 829 
 
 1,238 
 
 409 
 
 829 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 94 
 
 17 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 531 
 
 359 
 
 172 
 
 337 
 
 229 
 
 108 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 174 
 
 120 
 
 74 
 
 10 
 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 968 
 
 73 
 
 885 
 
 484 
 
 73 
 
 411 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 404 
 
 80 
 
 
 484 
 
 
 
 Tipperary. 
 
 965 
 
 343 
 
 622 
 
 965 
 
 343 
 
 622 
 
 ■*• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Waterford. 
 Total of MimsTEE. 
 
 6,118 
 
 1,530 
 
 4,588 
 
 4,755 
 
 1,393 
 
 3,357 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 743 
 
 620 
 
 122 
 
 1,241 
 
 291 
 
 37 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ulster : 
 
 649 
 
 33 
 
 616 
 
 254 
 
 17 
 
 237 
 
 121 
 
 
 121 
 
 
 98 
 
 176 
 
 16 
 
 258 
 
 47 
 
 67 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 1,854 
 
 102 
 
 1,752 
 
 892 
 
 102 
 
 790 
 
 70 
 
 ... 
 
 70 
 
 
 356 
 
 536 
 
 ... 
 
 892 
 
 48 
 
 37 
 
 Armagh. 
 Cavan. 
 
 54 
 
 16 
 
 38 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 45 
 
 9 
 
 16 
 
 38 
 
 9 
 
 
 835 
 
 109 
 
 _ 726 
 
 35 
 
 2 
 
 33 
 
 742 
 
 100 
 
 642 
 
 
 ... 
 
 58 
 
 7 
 
 51 
 
 71 
 
 43 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 925 
 
 
 925 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... ] 
 
 Down (1871). 
 Fermanagh. 
 
 441 
 
 108 
 
 333 
 
 350 
 
 76 
 
 274 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 91 
 
 32 
 
 59 
 
 59 
 
 794 
 
 54 
 
 740 
 
 259 
 
 13 
 
 246 
 
 535 
 
 41 
 
 494 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Londonderry. 
 
 Monaghan. 
 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 1,374 
 
 129 
 
 1,245 
 
 844 
 
 40 
 
 804 
 
 500 
 
 89 
 
 411 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 30 
 
 68 
 
 25 
 
 1,522 
 
 135 
 
 1,387 
 
 1,138 
 
 110 
 
 1,028 
 
 154 
 
 ... 
 
 1.54 
 
 
 230 
 
 
 25 
 
 205 
 
 107 
 
 42 
 
 8,448 
 
 686 
 
 7,762 
 
 3,772 
 
 360 3,412 
 
 2,122 
 
 230 
 
 1,892 
 
 
 729 
 
 900 
 
 96 
 
 1,533 
 
 409 
 
 214 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CONNAUGHI : 
 
 344 
 364 
 
 114 
 146 
 
 230 
 218 
 
 153 
 
 83 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 
 
 233 
 141 
 
 111 
 70 
 
 114 
 63 
 
 230 
 
 148 
 
 a... 
 
 a ... 
 50 
 
 Gal way. 
 
 785 
 60 
 
 267 
 
 177 
 
 6 
 
 21 
 
 608 
 
 54 
 
 246 
 
 577 
 
 60 
 
 127 
 
 125 
 
 6 
 
 21 
 
 452 
 
 54 
 
 106 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 91 
 
 208 
 49 
 
 52 
 
 156 
 140 
 
 a... 
 3 
 9 
 
 a ... 
 3 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Eoseominon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Total of CoN- 
 
 1,820 
 
 464 
 
 1,356 
 
 917 
 
 235 
 
 682 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 465 
 
 438 
 
 229 
 
 674 
 
 42 
 
 53 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 NAUGHT. 
 
 Total of Ieeland. 
 
 19,638 
 
 3,440 
 
 16,198 
 
 11,849 
 
 2,363 9,486 
 
 2,122 
 
 230 
 
 1,892 
 
 
 2,250 
 
 2,492 
 
 837 
 
 3,905 
 
 801 
 
 315 
 
 a No record kept. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 B 4 
 
( 16 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 1874. 
 
 Courts of Chaiemex of Counties and Courts of Eecoeders- 
 
 -Table 3. — Proceedings under th 
 
 counties 
 
 abbangbd in 
 
 provinces. 
 
 n 
 11 ■ 
 
 II 
 
 NxTMBEE OP Cases entekei 
 Nature os Claims. 
 
 .AND 
 
 O 
 §3 
 
 a 
 
 1 
 
 Il 
 
 -j: 
 
 1 
 
 •a . 
 ■f . 
 
 |.| 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 'a 
 m 
 1 
 
 11 
 
 t-i 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 II 
 
 || 
 if 
 
 {1 
 
 1 
 
 "a 
 
 gs 
 
 §■0 
 
 3i 
 
 *3 ti) 
 
 •3.S 
 
 i 
 
 > 
 
 o 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 
 2". 
 
 
 o ^ 
 
 o B 
 
 
 !§ 
 
 K 
 
 12; 
 
 a 
 
 K 
 
 Iz; 
 
 -I 
 
 •? 
 
 ■f 
 
 Leinstee : 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Carlow 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 1 
 
 f 
 
 I 
 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 
 Dublin (1873) - 
 Kildare 
 
 [3 
 4 
 
 4 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 6 
 
 
 
 3 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Kilkenny (1873) - 
 
 [2 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 King's County 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Longford 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Louth (1873) 
 
 [ 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Meath (1873) 
 
 [4 
 
 a 6 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Queen's County - 
 
 5 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 I 
 
 
 Westaieath - 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wexford 
 
 4 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wicklow 
 Total of Leinstbr 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 .\. 
 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 70 
 
 49 
 
 52 
 
 .... 
 
 2 
 
 37 
 
 16 
 
 12 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 
 Mtjnstek : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Clare - 
 
 2 
 
 32 
 
 32 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cork, E.R. - 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 12 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 2 
 
 
 Cork, "W.E. - 
 
 5 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 .. 
 
 
 Kerry - - - 
 
 3 
 
 35 
 
 35 
 
 29 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 ... 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 Limerick 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 
 1 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tipperary - 
 
 5 
 
 18 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 Waterford - 
 Total of MuNSiER 
 
 3 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 • 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 136'' 
 
 125 
 
 118 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 64 
 
 17 
 
 23 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 3 
 
 19 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 Ulstek : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Antrim 
 
 2 
 
 28 
 
 24 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 11 
 
 11 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Armagh 
 
 3 
 
 63 
 
 58 
 
 55 
 
 58 
 
 20 
 
 15 
 
 39 
 
 9 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Cavau - - - 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Donegal 
 
 3 
 
 40 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 30 
 
 I 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Down - - - 
 
 3 
 
 15 
 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Fermanagh - 
 
 2 
 
 44 
 
 44 
 
 42 
 
 40 
 
 4 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Londonderry 
 
 3 
 
 164 
 
 23 
 
 54 
 
 158 
 
 
 9 
 
 37 
 
 12 
 
 65 
 
 5. 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 Monaghan - 
 
 2 
 
 18 
 
 17 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tyrone 
 
 Total of Ulster - 
 
 4 
 
 411 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 404 
 
 2 
 
 20 
 
 11 
 
 15 
 
 362 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 791 
 
 222 
 
 228 
 
 724 
 
 34 
 
 91 
 
 115 
 
 70 
 
 454 
 
 21 
 
 40 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 CONNADGHT : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Galway (1873) - 
 
 [6 
 
 14 
 
 11 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 
 ., 
 
 ..» 
 
 ... 
 
 Leitrim 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • •. 
 
 
 Mayo - - - 
 
 6 
 
 18 
 
 18 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Roscommon - 
 
 5 
 
 13 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 
 5 
 
 •5 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 .. 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Sligo - 
 
 Total of GON- 
 
 2 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 11 
 
 
 ... 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 22 
 
 64 
 
 59 
 
 51 
 
 
 I 
 
 30 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 I 
 
 3 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 NAUOHT. 
 
 Total of Ireland 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 107 
 
 1,061 
 
 455 
 
 449 
 
 725 
 
 41 
 
 222 
 
 168 
 
 115 
 
 471 
 
 41 
 
 44 i 
 
 20 
 
 8 
 
 ... 
 
 a Details not given. 
 
( 17 ) 
 
 1874. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, in the Yetir 1S74, from Returns made by tlie Clerics of the Peace. 
 
 Total. 
 
 3 o 55 
 
 2 Xr^ 
 
 
 
 J3 
 
 POK Loss OS QUITTING 
 
 Holding ASD Improve- 
 ments TOGETHEK. 
 
 ©H 
 
 fe 
 
 Foe Ulstee 
 Tekaht-Uigbt. 
 
 Foe DISTINCT 
 Geounds. 
 
 3 w M 
 O M O 
 
 a '^o 
 
 Amount Decreed, 
 exclusive of Costs. 
 
 
 .si 
 
 CO tf r-H 
 
 O S o 
 
 g P 
 
 Aggeegate 
 
 
 Of DISTINCT 
 
 Costs 
 Adjudged. 
 
 Geounds of 
 Claim. 
 
 ■A 
 
 fe 
 
 
 ■Si 
 
 ^ 
 
 +3 
 
 
 ■go 
 
 Hi 
 
 ^^ 
 
 +s 
 
 o 
 
 
 PJ 
 
 5"S 
 
 !| 
 
 ^1 
 
 1 
 
 
 tK 
 
 !^ 
 
 H 
 
 H 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 AE.EANGED IN 
 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 I 
 
 £ 
 
 271 
 
 35 
 
 164 
 
 60 
 
 141 
 
 40 
 
 333 
 
 87 
 
 199 
 
 40 
 
 54 
 
 8 
 
 446 
 
 
 437 
 
 53 
 
 155 
 
 
 75 
 
 29 
 
 183 
 
 30 
 
 236 
 104 
 101 
 246 
 159 
 46 
 
 446 
 384 
 155 
 46 
 158 
 
 £ 
 
 & 
 
 £ 
 
 271 
 
 35 
 
 236 
 
 141 
 
 40 
 
 101 
 
 333 
 
 87 
 
 246 
 
 199 
 
 40 
 
 159 
 
 27 
 
 8 
 
 19 
 
 446 
 
 
 446 
 
 56 
 
 
 56 
 
 34 
 
 3 
 
 31 
 
 36 
 
 
 36 
 
 2,463 
 
 6,358 
 
 382 
 
 1,913 
 
 471 
 
 310 
 
 104 
 
 559 
 
 147 
 
 1,157 
 
 356 
 
 1,052 
 
 416 
 
 693 
 
 138 
 
 674 
 
 52 
 
 2,081 
 
 1,543 
 
 1,442 
 206 
 412 
 801 
 636 
 555 
 622 
 
 1,684 
 
 407 
 
 2,690 
 
 22 
 
 534 
 
 680 
 
 335 
 
 2,280 
 
 563 
 
 1,675 
 
 135 
 
 57 
 
 4 
 
 110 
 51 
 23 
 
 132 
 63 
 
 563 
 
 9,186 
 
 1,138 
 
 4,674 
 
 272 
 
 2,633 
 
 18 
 
 424 
 
 629 
 
 312 
 
 2,148 
 
 500 
 
 1,112 
 
 1,413 
 
 65 
 
 559 
 
 1,073 
 
 285 
 
 693 
 
 5 
 
 213 
 
 1,330 
 
 386 
 
 1,027 
 
 
 65 
 
 147 
 
 412 
 
 337 
 
 736 
 
 64 
 
 221 
 
 138 
 
 55.i 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4,093 1,074 
 
 3,019 
 
 383 
 225 
 
 201 
 420 
 235 
 
 547 
 
 8,048 
 
 344 
 )75 
 297 
 2G9 
 358 
 
 114 
 40 
 97 
 17 
 70 
 
 1,443 338 1,105 
 
 230 
 135 
 200 
 252 
 
 288 
 
 2,011 
 
 117 
 . 297 
 : 269 
 
 358 
 
 12] 
 3 
 
 61 
 44 
 23 
 
 271 
 
 262 
 222 
 
 140 
 376 
 212 
 
 276 
 
 134 
 
 10 
 
 332 
 41 
 
 30 
 
 17 
 
 105 
 99 
 
 60 
 
 53 
 
 26 
 30 
 
 585 335 
 
 119 
 
 84 
 80 
 
 387 
 
 381 
 245 
 
 687 
 282 
 
 2,260 
 270 
 
 2,280 
 563 
 581 
 
 132 
 63 
 21 
 
 2,206 
 255 
 
 2,148 
 500 
 560 
 
 22 
 
 670 1,595 
 
 76 
 22 
 63 
 
 324 
 
 169 
 
 104 
 
 19 
 352 
 
 50 
 
 £ 
 104 
 
 "27 
 
 384 
 99 
 15 
 
 122 
 
 751 
 
 415 
 141 
 
 65 
 415 
 
 619 
 
 12 
 
 23 
 
 169 
 19 
 
 36 
 
 610 1,655 349 
 
 24 
 107 
 
 260 
 100 
 
 223 
 
 523 
 
 1,488 
 
 13 
 
 97 
 17 
 70 
 
 104 
 
 200 
 252 
 288 
 
 5,954 
 
 285 
 
 5,669 
 
 22 
 
 485 
 
 714 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 34 
 
 7 
 
 271 
 
 10 
 
 205 
 
 18 
 
 29 
 
 253 
 
 100 
 
 276 
 
 330 
 
 891 
 
 80 
 112 
 
 400 
 
 233 
 30 
 
 19,450 
 
 3,542 
 
 15,908 
 
 1,041 
 
 8,688 
 
 197 
 
 2,007 
 
 884 
 
 6,681 
 
 5,954 285 
 
 5,669 
 
 22 
 
 263 
 
 2,003 
 
 111 
 
 28 
 
 114 
 
 27 
 
 139 141 
 
 230 
 31 
 
 15 
 
 261 
 
 2,783 1,250 3,558 
 
 15 
 
 870 
 
 ...] 
 
 2] 
 5] 
 
 10 
 2 
 
 106 28 
 
 9 
 
 42 
 
 51 
 
 16 
 
 9 
 
 5 
 75' 
 
 23 
 
 9 
 60 
 
 197 
 
 276 
 
 Leinstek : 
 
 Carlow. 
 Dublin (1873). 
 Kildare. 
 
 Kilkenny (1873). 
 King's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth (1873). 
 Meath(1873). 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 Wexford. 
 Wicklow. 
 
 Total of Leinstek, 
 
 Mdnstee : 
 
 Clare. 
 
 Cork, E.E. 
 
 Cork, W.K. 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 Tipperary. 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 Total of MUNSTEK, 
 
 Ulster : 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 Armagh. 
 
 Cavan. 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 Down. 
 
 Fermanagh. 
 
 Londonderry. 
 
 Monaghan. 
 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster : 
 
 Connaught : 
 
 Galway (1873). 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 C 
 
( 18 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 1875. 
 
 OotTKTS OF Chairmen of Counties and Courts of Eecokdees — Table 3. — Proceedings under the 
 
 1 
 
 
 NuMBEK o'S Cases enteeed. 
 
 AND 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 1 
 
 ■•g 
 
 
 5 
 i 
 
 
 -2^ 
 
 
 It 
 
 
 Natoee oe Claims. 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 s 
 
 ■rf 
 
 |1h 
 
 *4 
 
 
 
 
 ID . 
 
 i 3 
 
 i'C 
 
 counties 
 
 arranged in 
 
 provinces. 
 
 S-i 
 
 II 
 II 
 
 ?5 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 g 
 S 
 
 ■3 
 
 g 
 
 If 
 
 M 
 
 -*3 
 
 s 
 
 s . 
 
 0) o 
 
 CO 
 
 i 
 
 in H 
 
 |i 
 1^ 
 
 §1 
 
 Ho 
 
 II 
 1^ 
 
 IS 
 
 4J to 
 
 c.a 
 
 §§ 
 o to 
 
 ^ a 
 
 i 
 
 § 
 1^ 
 
 fell 
 
 P4 
 
 
 Leinstek: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 Carlow 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 .. 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 Dublin 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Kildare 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Kilkenny - 
 
 2 
 
 i' 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 King's County - 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 Longford 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Louth - - ,- 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Meath - 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Queen's County - 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 % 
 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 Westmeath - 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wexford 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2» 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 "Wicklow 
 Total of Leinstek 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 1 
 
 _1 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 58 
 
 51 
 
 33 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 30 
 
 13 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 •• 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 MUNSTEK : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Clare - - - 
 
 2 
 
 29 
 
 27 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 Cork, B.R. - 
 
 5 
 
 19 
 
 10 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 4 . 
 
 3 
 
 
 Cork, W.B. - 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 
 I 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 • • t 
 
 2 
 
 
 Kerry - - - 
 
 3 
 
 38 
 
 28 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 7 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 .. 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 Limerick 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tipperary - 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 12 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Waterford - 
 
 Total of MUNSTEK 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 
 ... 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 25 
 
 133 
 
 98 
 
 82 
 
 
 
 69 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 ' 
 
 16 
 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 ... 
 
 Ulster : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 Antrim 
 
 '2 
 3 
 
 34 
 51 
 
 33 
 41 
 
 34 
 .49 
 
 14 
 49 
 
 9 
 
 24 
 
 8 
 12' 
 
 10 
 26 
 
 4 
 9 
 
 12 
 
 
 ... 
 
 4 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 Armagh 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cavan - - - 
 
 3 
 
 19 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 18 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Donegal 
 
 Down - - - 
 
 3 
 2 
 
 32 
 
 46 
 
 46 
 
 1 
 46 
 
 31 
 
 42 
 
 4 
 
 12 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 11 
 5 
 
 5 
 10 
 
 '2 
 
 4 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Fermanagh - 
 Londonderry 
 Monaghan - 
 
 3 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 30 
 
 H 
 
 401 
 
 4 
 U 
 35 
 
 6 
 11 
 35 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 391 
 
 5 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 3 
 
 23 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 282 
 
 4 
 
 88 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Tyrone 
 Total of Ulstek - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 630 
 
 189 
 
 200 
 
 578 
 
 60 
 
 91 
 
 341 
 
 124 
 
 41 
 
 20 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 CoiraATJGHT'-. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 
 Galway 
 Leitrim 
 
 6 
 3 
 
 10 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 4 
 
 
 ... 
 
 7 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 ..• 
 
 Mayo - - - 
 Koscommon- 
 
 6 
 
 13 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 
 .•• 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 , , 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 65 
 
 60 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 
 8 
 
 26 
 
 3 
 
 17 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 SUgo - 
 
 2 
 
 16 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 'a 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total of Coy- 
 
 22 
 
 108 
 
 95 
 
 42 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 11 
 
 18 
 
 5 
 
 U 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 NAIIGHT 
 Total of IllELANI 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 ) 107 
 
 1 929 
 
 433 357 
 
 583 
 
 52 
 
 221 
 
 408 
 
 167 
 
 66 
 
 41 
 
 16 
 
 10 
 
 13 
 
 10 
 
 
( 19 ) 
 
 1875. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, in the Year 1875, from Returns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 Total. 
 
 ■go 
 
 CD 
 
 P o « 
 
 1^- 
 
 Fob Loss on quitting 
 
 HOLDlNa AKB IMPBOTE- 
 MENTS TOGETHEE. 
 
 l^s 
 
 015 
 
 T?OB Ulster 
 Tenant-right. 
 
 
 Foe distinct 
 Gbounds. 
 
 Aggeegate 
 
 op DISTINCT 
 
 Geounds OE 
 Claim. 
 
 Amount Decreed, 
 exclusive of Costs. 
 
 ^ « ,1^ 
 K a S 
 
 B a=3 
 
 o+= 
 
 •=1 a 
 
 Afflo 
 
 UNT OE 
 
 Costs 
 
 Adjudged. 
 
 
 fl OT 
 
 
 r^Q 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ^-o 
 
 Pi 
 
 f3 ., c^ 
 
 
 
 f< 
 
 o u9 
 
 o 
 
 H 
 
 EH 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 AEEANGBD IN 
 
 PEOVINCES. 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 1,031 
 
 223 
 
 148 
 
 99 
 
 746 
 
 422 
 
 50 
 
 7 
 
 100 
 
 " * 
 
 43 
 
 1 
 
 350 
 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 319 
 
 118 
 
 2,807 
 
 880 
 
 808 
 
 49 
 
 324 
 
 43 
 
 100 
 42 
 
 350 
 10 
 
 201 
 
 1,031 
 
 118 
 
 696 
 
 25 
 
 100 
 
 43 
 
 350 
 
 £ 
 
 ^ 
 
 223 
 
 808 
 
 90 
 
 28 
 
 417 
 
 279 
 
 7 
 
 18 
 
 
 100 
 
 1 
 
 42 
 
 
 350 
 
 1,927 
 
 2,363 
 
 738 
 
 660 
 158 
 557 
 1,650 
 195 
 776 
 605 
 
 106 
 
 29 
 
 115 
 
 395 
 
 .31 
 
 167 
 
 36 
 
 4,601 
 
 550 
 
 1,760 
 
 252 
 
 162 
 
 228 
 
 562 
 
 4,815 
 
 138 
 
 3,205 
 
 11,672 
 
 879 
 
 21 
 163 
 
 10 
 
 76 
 725 
 
 58 
 355 
 
 1,408 
 
 554 
 129 
 442 
 1,255 
 164 
 609 
 569 
 
 553 
 119 
 
 485 
 951 
 163 
 
 605 
 
 76 
 
 100 
 
 181 
 
 31 
 
 36 
 
 3,722 
 
 2,376 
 
 1,625 
 
 477 
 119 
 385 
 770 
 132 
 
 569 
 
 424 2,452 
 
 529 
 
 1,597 
 
 252 
 
 152 
 
 228 
 
 486 
 
 4,090 
 
 80 
 
 2,850 
 
 550 
 359 
 
 267 
 1,057 
 
 591 
 
 21 
 
 77 
 
 35 
 
 217 
 
 103 
 
 10,264 
 
 2,824 
 
 453 
 
 207 
 
 53 
 
 76 
 
 42 
 
 161 
 
 35 
 
 1,111 
 
 170 
 
 549 
 
 35 
 
 154 
 
 34 
 
 126 
 
 941 
 
 514 
 
 207 
 
 76 
 
 161 
 
 1,103 
 
 505 
 
 53 
 
 42 
 
 35 
 
 165 
 
 35 
 
 529 
 282 
 
 232 
 840 
 
 488 
 
 2,371 
 
 154 
 34 
 126 
 938 
 470 
 
 1,042 
 
 112 
 228 
 
 2,701 
 115 
 
 2,023 
 
 6,221 
 
 11 
 
 20 
 319 
 
 30 
 50 
 14 
 
 350 94 
 
 10 
 
 291 
 
 53 
 
 150 
 
 504 
 
 1,032 
 
 112 
 
 228 
 
 2,410 
 
 62 
 
 1,873 
 
 107 
 
 72 
 
 508 
 
 406 
 
 39 
 
 191 
 
 32 
 
 370 
 
 
 ... 
 
 33 
 
 9 
 
 21 
 
 11 
 
 5 
 
 45 
 
 ,. , 
 
 ... 
 
 25 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 118 
 
 201 
 
 13 
 
 142 
 
 1,093 
 
 .5,717 
 
 269 
 
 252 
 50 
 
 103 
 
 243 
 
 10 
 
 242 
 
 1,169 
 
 44 
 
 632 
 
 90 
 
 192 
 
 814 
 
 13 
 
 349 
 
 30 
 
 29 
 
 15 
 
 214 
 
 167 
 
 302 
 
 79 
 
 77 
 10 
 57 
 
 485 
 32 
 
 609 
 
 455 1,270 
 
 76 
 
 10 
 
 41 
 
 217 
 
 5 
 
 102 
 
 1,458 
 
 451 
 
 283 
 
 252 
 
 40 
 
 254 
 
 840 
 
 18 
 
 489 
 
 101 
 12 
 42 
 
 154 
 16 
 
 28 
 
 353 
 
 19 
 56 
 
 10 
 
 46 
 
 a... 
 
 7 
 
 135 
 
 
 2,176 273 
 
 2,104 
 
 21,184 
 
 335 
 
 1,769 
 
 3,502 
 
 17,682 
 
 2,052 
 
 10,115 
 
 3 
 
 44 
 
 330 
 
 1,945 
 
 1,722 
 
 8,170 
 
 6,221 
 
 504 
 
 5,717 
 
 44 
 
 44 
 
 2,620 
 
 2,184 
 
 47 
 
 1,053 3,795 
 
 16 
 a... 
 
 24 
 
 46i 
 
 5 
 16 
 
 14 
 
 35 
 
 11 
 40 
 10 
 25 
 
 28 
 
 50 
 
 164 
 
 U 
 22 
 
 12 
 
 45 
 
 53e 
 
 251 
 
 Leinstee : 
 
 Carlow. 
 
 Dublin. 
 
 Kildare. 
 
 Kilkenny. 
 
 King's County. 
 
 Longford. 
 
 Louth. 
 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 
 Westmeatli. 
 
 Wexford. 
 
 Wioklow. 
 
 Total of Leinsiek. 
 
 MUNSTEE : 
 
 Clare. 
 
 Cork, E.E. 
 
 Cork, W.E. 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 Tipperary. 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 Total of MUNSTEK. 
 
 Ulster : 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 Armagh. 
 
 Cavan. 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 Down. 
 
 Fermanagh. 
 
 Londonderry. 
 
 Monaghan. 
 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulstee. 
 
 Conn AUGHT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 a No record kept. 
 
 b. In table the total is given as 48 in error, therefore total at c should be 751. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 C 2 
 
( 20 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 1876. 
 
 CooKTS OF Chairmen op Counties and Couets op Recoeueks — Table 3. — Pkoceedings under tl 
 
 
 21 
 S 
 
 NuMBEE OP Cases enteked, and 
 Natuee oe Claims. 
 
 
 •a 
 
 
 1 • 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 in 
 
 5» 
 II 
 
 2 
 
 § 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 AUEANGED IN 
 
 PROVINCES, 
 
 IE 
 ll 
 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 p 
 
 
 1 
 p.© 
 
 n 
 g 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 .11 
 
 H 
 
 03 
 CD 
 
 ■S.3 
 
 g 
 
 9 ■ 
 
 o 
 
 
 bo 
 ■§»• 
 
 " 1 
 
 C 
 
 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 
 oa-3 
 
 
 s 
 
 ^ 
 
 §■2 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 II 
 
 P+3 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ft 
 
 a 
 
 
 1? 
 
 B 
 
 |i( 
 
 c^ 
 
 PH 
 
 Ph 
 
 fe 
 
 15 
 
 |2! 
 
 Iz; 
 
 !zi 
 
 fs; 
 
 |2i 
 
 <i 
 
 <3 
 
 <J 
 
 IiEIMSTEIt : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Carlow 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ' 
 
 
 Dublin . - - 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 .>. 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Kildare 
 
 4 
 
 11 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Kilkenny 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 . .. 
 
 • •• 
 
 1 
 
 
 King's County 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Longford 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Louth - - - 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 Meath - 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Queen's County - 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Westmeath - 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wexford - 
 
 4 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 
 ... 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wicklow 
 Total of Leinstbk 
 
 2_ 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 ..'. 
 
 3 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 67 
 
 53 
 
 45 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 9 
 
 15 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 MUHSTEE : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Clare - 
 
 2 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cork, E.E. 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 Cork, W.R. - 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 ... 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 Kerry - 
 
 3 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 ... 
 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 Limerick 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 ... 
 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 Tipperary - 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 « 1 
 
 
 Waterford 
 
 Total of MUNSTEE 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 51 
 
 31 
 
 37 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 22 
 
 11 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 
 Ulstee : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Antrim (1875) - 
 
 2 
 
 34 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 14 
 
 9 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 4 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 Armagh 
 
 3 
 
 . 24 
 
 24 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cavau - - - 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Donegal 
 
 3 
 
 21 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 20 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Do^vn - 
 
 4 
 
 25 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 21 
 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Fermanagh - 
 
 2 
 
 34 
 
 34 
 
 34 
 
 28 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Londonderry 
 
 3 
 
 52 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 42 
 
 
 19 
 
 21 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 Monaghan - 
 
 2 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 12 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tyrone 
 
 4 
 
 65 
 
 55 
 
 54 
 
 55 
 
 11 
 
 31 
 
 7 
 
 5 
 
 13 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Total of Ur.?TER- 
 
 CofiNATJCIIT ; 
 
 26 
 
 275 
 
 188 
 
 183 
 
 217 
 
 40 
 
 95 
 
 53 
 
 33 
 
 47 
 
 39 
 
 8 
 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Galway 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Leitrim 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Mayo • 
 
 6 
 
 26 
 
 19 
 
 26 
 
 ... 
 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 / 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hoscommon - 
 
 5 
 
 34 
 
 34 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 
 
 Sligo . - 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Total of Cox- 
 
 22 
 
 79 
 
 70 
 
 74 
 
 
 1 
 
 24 
 
 16 
 
 9 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 
 
 NAUGHT. 
 Total of luELAXD 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 108 
 
 472 
 
 342 
 
 339 
 
 217 
 
 41 
 
 175 
 
 89 
 
 66 
 
 75 
 
 47 
 
 20 
 
 
 9 
 
 11 
 
 ■• 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 1876. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, in the Year 1876, from Returns made by tlie Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Foe Loss on quittins 
 Holding and Impkote- 
 
 MENT TOeETHEE. 
 
 Foe Ulstee 
 
 TiJNANT-lllGIIT. 
 
 Foe DrsTiucT 
 Geounds. 
 
 Aggeegate 
 
 op DISTINCT 
 
 Geounds of 
 Claim. 
 
 Amount of 
 
 Costs 
 Adjudged. 
 
 
 1° 
 
 ij^ 
 
 g 
 
 ■s° 
 
 i-^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 1° 
 
 r 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 Amount Decreed, 
 
 T3 
 
 
 
 - -i) 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 
 HO . 
 
 Sal 
 
 ■5 
 
 B ^ 
 
 s 
 
 111 
 
 oS ° 
 
 r 
 
 3 •? 
 
 1 . 
 
 <1 
 
 II 
 
 1^ 
 
 exclusive of Costs. 
 
 "o 
 
 !l 
 
 >X2 
 
 
 
 ^5 
 
 areangbd in 
 
 ill 
 
 <1 
 
 C H 
 
 0.5 .s 
 
 
 PEOVINCES. 
 
 £ 
 
 £. 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Leikster : 
 
 100 
 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 ■ •- 
 
 100 
 
 • 1 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Carlow. 
 
 131 
 
 19 
 
 112 
 
 131 
 
 19 
 
 112 
 
 
 
 
 ••■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dublin. 
 
 758 
 
 448 
 
 310 
 
 758 
 
 448 
 
 310 
 
 ..• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kildare. 
 
 353 
 
 165 
 
 198 
 
 305 
 
 155 
 
 151 
 
 
 
 
 
 "57 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 47 
 
 16 
 
 '"7 
 
 Kilkenny. 
 
 42 
 
 10 
 
 32 
 
 42 
 
 10 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 
 
 .,. 
 
 . 
 
 
 . . • 
 
 
 
 
 King's County. 
 
 90 
 
 5 
 
 85 
 
 90 
 
 5 
 
 85 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 
 522 
 
 100 
 
 "422 
 
 522 
 
 100 
 
 422 
 
 
 
 
 . .- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 Meath. 
 
 207 
 
 12 
 
 195 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 "57 
 
 150 
 
 12 
 
 195 
 
 
 
 Queen's County. 
 
 101 
 
 22 
 
 79 
 
 22 
 
 6 
 
 16 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 29 
 
 16 
 
 63 
 
 10 
 
 4 
 
 Westmeath. 
 
 395 
 
 134 
 
 261 
 
 16 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 
 • .. 
 
 
 
 23'/ 
 
 142 
 
 127 
 
 252 
 
 4 
 
 
 Wexford. 
 
 573 
 
 89 
 
 484 
 
 553 
 
 89 
 
 464 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 27 
 
 
 Wicklow. 
 
 3,282 
 
 1,00+ 
 
 2,278 
 
 2,540 
 
 839 
 
 1,701 
 
 
 
 
 
 421 
 
 321 
 
 165 
 
 577 
 
 86 
 
 20 
 
 Tota] of Leinster. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mukstee : 
 
 85 
 
 21 
 
 64 
 
 55 
 
 11 
 
 44 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 30 
 
 
 10 
 
 20 
 
 8 
 
 
 Clare. 
 
 127 
 
 23 
 
 104 
 
 127 
 
 23 
 
 104 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 Cork, E.R. 
 
 208 
 
 93 
 
 115 
 
 208 
 
 93 
 
 115 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Cork, W.R. 
 
 437 
 
 95 
 
 342 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "70 
 
 367 
 
 95 
 
 342 
 
 23 
 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 35 
 
 9 
 
 26 
 
 35 
 
 9 
 
 26 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 147 
 
 99 
 
 48 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 122 
 
 25 
 
 99 
 
 48 
 
 3 
 
 14 
 
 Tipperary. 
 
 156 
 
 8 
 
 148 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 66 
 
 90 
 
 8 
 
 148 
 
 16 
 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 1,195 
 
 348 
 
 847 
 
 425 
 
 136 
 
 289 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 288 
 
 482 
 
 212 
 
 558 
 
 60 
 
 22 
 
 Total of MUNSTEK. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ulstek : 
 
 550 
 
 21 
 
 529 
 
 550 
 
 21 
 
 .529 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 11 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 555 
 
 150 
 
 405 
 
 
 
 
 130 
 
 54 
 
 76 
 
 
 358 
 
 "57 
 
 96 
 
 329 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 Armagh. 
 
 565 
 
 78 
 
 487 
 
 19 
 
 "9 
 
 10 
 
 546 
 
 69 
 
 477 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 Cavan. 
 
 1,594 
 
 120 
 
 1,474 
 
 10 
 
 
 10 
 
 1,584 
 
 120 
 
 1,464 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 48 
 
 26 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 897 
 
 319 
 
 578 
 
 77 
 
 
 77 
 
 662 
 
 292 
 
 370 
 
 
 "88 
 
 "70 
 
 "27 
 
 131 
 
 a... 
 
 a... 
 
 Down. 
 
 484 
 
 83 
 
 401 
 
 384 
 
 65 
 
 319 
 
 100 
 
 18 
 
 82 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 3 
 
 Fermanagh. 
 
 1,812 
 
 72 
 
 1,740 
 
 265 
 
 17 
 
 248 
 
 1,394 
 
 55 
 
 1,339 
 
 
 
 133 
 
 
 153 
 
 a... 
 
 a,.. 
 
 Londonderry. 
 
 25 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 Monaghan. 
 
 2,728 
 
 313 
 
 2,415 
 
 220 
 
 52 
 
 168 
 
 2,086 
 
 209 
 
 1,877 
 
 
 197 
 
 225 
 
 52 
 
 370 
 
 165 
 
 16 
 
 Tyrone. 
 
 9,210 
 
 1,168 
 
 8,042 
 
 1,525 
 
 164 
 
 1,361 
 
 6,502 
 
 817 
 
 5,685 
 
 
 643 
 
 540 
 
 187 
 
 996 
 
 314 
 
 91 
 
 Total of Ulstee. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Connattght : 
 
 137 
 
 
 137 
 
 137 
 
 ... 
 
 137 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 Galway. 
 
 63 
 
 23 
 
 40 
 
 63 
 
 23 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 Lei trim. 
 
 . 564 
 
 56 
 
 508 
 
 391 
 
 46 
 
 345 
 
 
 
 
 
 46 
 
 127 
 
 10 
 
 163 
 
 a... 
 
 a... 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 312 
 
 70 
 
 242 
 
 312 
 
 70 
 
 242 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 260 
 
 70 
 
 190 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 60 
 
 
 200 
 
 70 
 
 190 
 
 10 
 
 ... 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 rotal of CONNATJOHT. 
 
 Total of Ieeland. 
 
 1,336 
 
 219 
 
 1,117 
 
 903 
 
 139 
 
 764 
 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 46 
 
 327 
 
 80 
 
 353 
 
 26 
 
 
 15,023 
 
 2,739 
 
 12,284 
 
 5,393 
 
 1,278 
 
 4,115 
 
 6,502 
 
 817 
 
 5,685 
 
 60 
 
 1,398 
 
 1,670 
 
 644 
 
 2,484 
 
 486 
 
 133 
 
 a No record kept. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 3 
 
( 22 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 1877. 
 
 CoDETS of County Court Judges and Chairmen ( 
 
 COUNTIES 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 3 
 
 O 
 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 fe> 
 
 a 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t3 
 
 
 
 
 
 « 
 
 <x> 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 1 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 
 P^ 
 
 CI] 
 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 y 
 
 
 
 
 
 0) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 r-l 
 
 
 
 
 
 g .; 
 
 ■^-i o 
 
 >-, 
 
 
 
 B. 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 ^Ph 
 
 
 umber of 
 lodged. 
 
 
 i 
 
 .2 
 
 o ° 
 
 ^3 
 
 n 
 o , 
 
 p." 
 
 ^ 
 
 « 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 '^ 
 
 <j 
 
 11 
 
 ;^ o 
 
 en 
 
 Appeals. 
 
 a 
 
 Kesitlt of Appeals 
 
 HEIBD. 
 
 
 - 
 
 13 
 
 
 g 
 
 ■o 
 
 C3 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 T3 
 
 a 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 o 
 
 ■3 
 
 
 .Q 
 
 pQ 
 
 TS 
 
 'O 
 
 
 o; 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 tS 
 
 ni 
 
 -*J 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 -3 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 
 Lein'stek : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny 
 King's County 
 Longford 
 Loath 
 Meath - 
 Queen's County 
 Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wicklow 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 MuNSiEp. : 
 Clare - 
 Cork, E. R. 
 Cork, W. R. 
 Kerry 
 Limerick * 
 Tipperary 
 Waterford 
 
 Total of Munster 
 
 Ulster : 
 Antrim - 
 Ai'magh - 
 Cavan •■ 
 Donegal 
 Down 
 Eermanagh 
 Londonderry 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 Total of Ulster 
 
 Conkaugiit : 
 Galway - 
 
 ^ Leitrim - 
 Mayo 
 
 Roscommon 
 Sligo - 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naugbt. 
 
 Total of Ireland - 
 
 3-t 
 
 26 
 
 23 
 
 108 
 
 2 
 1 
 8 
 7 
 6 
 5 
 5 
 12 
 10 
 
 28 
 
 14 
 
 *2 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 14 
 
 27 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 15 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 11 
 
 91 
 
 21 
 8 
 6 
 23 
 25 
 52 
 86 
 13 
 83 
 
 317 
 
 38 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 17 
 
 11 
 
 5 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 21 
 
 4 
 2 
 3 
 1 
 
 10 
 3 
 
 59 
 3 
 9 
 
 83 
 
 14 
 9 
 4 
 
 89 
 6 
 
 122 
 
 94 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 
 31 
 
 16 
 
 138 
 
 17 
 
 598 166 
 
 133 
 
 60 
 4 
 
 ■I 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 4 
 4 
 
 58 
 2 
 
 13 
 
 90 
 
 3 
 4 
 3 
 
 53 
 2 
 
 11 
 
 11 
 
 79 
 
 *4 
 22 
 
 73 
 
 26 
 
 252 
 
 28 
 
 14 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 113 18 
 
 * Pending at close of year. 
 
 82 
 
( 23 ) 
 
 1877. 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 QuAETEE Sessions and EEConDERs. — Table 3. 
 
 A3I00NT Claimed 
 
 
 £ 
 
 557 
 
 1,594 
 
 143 
 
 185 
 
 703 
 
 t972 
 
 2,639 
 
 2,193 
 
 864 
 
 4,951 
 
 4,188 
 
 18,989 
 
 1,769 
 4,364 
 5,686 
 2,123 
 1,405 
 5,264 
 515 
 
 21,126 
 
 5,352 
 3,530 
 1,498 
 
 38,855 
 6,158 
 
 14,782 
 
 77,622 
 6,440 
 
 42,996 
 
 197233 
 
 1,860 
 
 776 
 
 500 
 
 12,025 
 
 2,716 
 
 P3 
 
 17,877 
 
 2552 
 
 O 
 
 O to 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 646 
 
 185 
 f300 
 722 
 346 
 120 
 
 3,253 
 2,101 
 
 £ 
 
 416 
 
 757 
 28 
 
 279 
 
 1,032 
 
 876 
 
 544 
 
 1,626 
 
 2,087 
 
 Amount Deceeed, and Costs. 
 
 I 
 
 a 
 
 4 
 
 to 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 u 
 
 a 
 
 Foe Loss on quittin-g Holding 
 
 OR DiSTUEBANOE, WHEN ClAI3IED 
 
 OE Decreed separately. 
 
 Anioimt Claimed. 
 
 D 
 
 CU 
 
 to 
 
 .s M 
 
 
 ^H 
 
 s 
 
 ja -S 
 
 O 
 
 ^M 
 
 &P 
 
 1 
 
 • r-l 
 
 •'fl ^ 
 
 
 m ,2 
 
 
 
 
 
 c3 f^ 
 
 to « 
 
 O ca 
 
 O^ 
 
 
 rt 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 141 
 191 
 115 
 
 124 
 
 250 
 
 1,261 
 
 1,197 
 
 320 
 
 72 
 
 7,673 
 
 7,645 
 
 3,671 
 
 3,618 
 
 2,014 
 
 270 
 
 438 
 
 187 
 
 6,527 
 
 1,616 
 
 2,355 
 
 64 
 
 35,466 
 2,905 
 8,741 
 6,982 
 4,242 
 
 28,510 
 
 329 
 
 90,881 
 
 20 
 
 680 
 
 2,231 
 
 1,651 
 
 857 
 5,046 
 
 10,485 
 
 3,.501 
 368 
 676 
 3,299 
 1,777 
 5,294 
 2,559 
 1,318 
 11,502 
 
 1,749 
 
 66 
 
 1,441 
 
 202 
 
 110 
 
 31 
 
 515 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 123 
 
 
 123 
 
 . •• 
 
 424 
 
 132 
 
 292 
 
 12 
 
 28 
 
 21 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 49 
 
 14 
 
 35 
 
 8 
 
 923 
 
 14 
 
 909 
 
 109 
 
 100 
 
 
 100 
 
 67 
 
 161 
 
 37 
 
 124 
 
 21 
 
 767 
 
 175 
 
 592 
 
 38 
 
 658 
 
 303 
 
 355 
 
 10 
 
 3,233 
 
 696 
 
 2,537 
 
 269 
 
 19 
 6 
 
 ■'28 
 
 20 
 177 
 487- 
 606 
 244 
 756 
 
 4,114 
 
 2,290 
 
 235 
 
 807 
 
 758 
 
 90 
 
 1,476 
 
 747 
 
 68,081 
 
 880 
 
 2,984 
 
 30,294 76,058 
 
 660 
 163 
 
 11,192 
 
 1,679 
 
 775 
 284 
 500 
 
 727 
 771 
 
 425 
 
 106 
 266 
 
 329 
 
 329 
 
 13,694 
 
 118775 
 
 3,057 
 
 797 
 
 51,481 
 
 84,640 
 
 1,736 
 126 
 280 
 
 1,254 
 502 
 
 1,292 
 
 1,293 
 268 
 
 2,126 
 
 8,877 
 
 
 20 
 
 35 
 
 142 
 
 65 
 
 422 
 
 110 
 
 496 
 
 
 244 
 
 279 
 
 477 
 
 12 
 20 
 48 
 26 
 63 
 
 489 ],801 
 
 212 
 20 
 74 
 
 105 
 2 
 
 214 
 90 
 52 
 
 149 
 
 918 
 
 1,524 
 106 
 206 
 
 1,149 
 500 
 
 1,078 
 
 1,203 
 216 
 
 1,977 
 
 7,959 
 
 230 
 165 
 161 
 210 
 235 
 
 26 
 61 
 56 
 
 75 
 
 1,001 
 
 218 
 
 230 
 139 
 100 
 154 
 160 
 
 169 
 
 47 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 
 39 
 
 67 
 
 15 
 137 
 
 326 
 
 17 
 18 
 13 
 12 
 
 783 
 
 15,401 
 
 2,321 
 
 13,080 
 
 60 
 
 34 
 6 
 
 4 
 10 
 
 .e 
 
 251 
 725 
 119 
 
 398 
 642 
 606 
 
 7 
 7.50 
 
 3,586 
 
 306 
 
 162 
 
 {422 
 
 346 
 
 46 
 
 71 
 
 1,353 
 
 180 
 
 310 
 
 28 
 
 7 
 679 
 
 £ 
 
 Vi 
 
 109 
 91 
 
 113 
 
 220 
 
 260 
 
 42 
 
 £ 
 
 90 
 
 277 
 28 
 
 41 
 
 30 
 
 73 
 
 284 
 
 1,327 
 
 174 
 624 
 520 
 986 
 242 
 1,418 
 372 
 
 54 4,336 
 
 
 
 428 
 
 96 
 
 270 
 
 187 
 
 20 
 130 
 
 304 
 
 600 
 
 200 
 
 1,210 
 
 981 2,464 
 
 906 
 
 823 
 
 154 
 66 
 
 120 
 
 116 
 42 
 21 
 
 372 
 
 20 
 
 52 
 
 260 
 
 293 
 
 558 
 
 891 1,183 
 
 10 
 
 4 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 25 
 
 66 
 
 13 
 
 824 
 
 161 
 
 240 
 
 240 
 
 408 
 
 24 
 
 3,364 
 
 2,168 
 
 67 
 547 
 
 
 4,626 
 
 2,432 
 
 235 
 
 959 
 
 32 
 355 
 
 1,581 
 
 383 
 
 ■ 78 
 
 251 
 
 54 
 
 289 
 
 115 
 
 174 
 
 ... 
 
 590 
 
 ,216 
 
 > 
 
 158 
 
 216 
 
 149 
 
 237 
 
 35 
 192 
 
 613 
 
 130 
 
 742 
 
 32 
 69 
 
 963 
 
 COUNTIES 
 ARKANGED 
 
 IN 
 PKOVIKCES. 
 
 136 
 24 
 
 1,262 
 
 409 
 
 13,810 
 
 5,175 
 
 583 
 
 270 
 
 16 
 
 5,955 
 
 2,680 3.129 
 
 Leinster : 
 CarIoT\'. , 
 Dublin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny, 
 icing's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath, 
 Wexford. 
 WiokloTV. 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 MUNSTEE : 
 
 Clare. 
 
 Cork, E. K. 
 
 Cork, W. R. 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 Tipperary. 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 Total of Munster. 
 
 Ulster: 
 Antrim. 
 Armagh. 
 Cavan. 
 Donegal. 
 Down. 
 Fermanagh, 
 Londonderry. 
 Monaghan. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 COKNAFGHT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 Sliffo. 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 f Including 218/. in t-wo cases pending at close of year. 
 
 4 
 
( 24 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 1877. 
 
 [Table 3 — continucd.'\ — Proceedings in the year 1877, undw the 
 
 
 FOK IjirEOVEMENTS, 
 
 WHEN (CLAIMED OR DEOKEED' 
 
 SEPAKATELT. 
 
 Foe Loss on quitting Holding, 
 OE Disturbance and Impeove- 
 
 MENTS, WHEN CLAIMED OE DE- 
 CKEED NOT SEPARATELY. 
 
 EoE Ulster Tenant-Eight on 
 SIMILAR Custom, oe Incoming 
 
 PAyMENTS. 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 Amount claimed 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 OJ 
 
 .£ 
 
 o 
 
 >i 
 
 V 
 
 -a 
 
 V 
 O 
 ra ■ 
 
 fl 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 g 
 < 
 
 Amount claimed 
 
 CO 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 .s 
 
 3 
 
 £ ■ 
 
 o 
 
 ni 
 
 § 
 
 1 
 <i 
 
 Amount claimedj 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 '6 
 
 "5 
 
 a 
 
 ^ CO 
 
 IS 
 .11 
 
 la 
 
 O^ 
 a 
 1— ( 
 
 CO 
 U 
 
 p 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 .9 
 
 CO 
 
 ■ CD . 
 
 a| 
 
 1— I 
 
 QJ 
 
 en 
 w 
 
 1 
 
 ■'3 
 
 O 
 fl 
 
 13 
 
 g 
 
 ID 
 fl 
 
 a; 
 
 EO 
 
 
 
 ■|.i 
 
 o o 
 
 11 
 
 d 
 
 to 
 
 ID 
 OJ 
 
 o 
 
 .3 
 
 hH 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 o 
 
 fl 
 
 1— t 
 
 -d 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 1— I 
 
 15 . 
 fe.S 
 
 k 
 
 oP 
 •c S 
 
 § 8 
 
 .20 
 
 fl 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 0) 
 
 p 
 
 ',3 
 .g 
 
 tv . 
 
 SI 
 
 1— 1 
 
 13 
 V 
 
 'a 
 ■■B 
 
 ta 
 <D 
 m 
 cS 
 
 fl 
 
 
 
 •« 
 
 fl 
 a 
 
 
 a 
 
 Leinstke : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny 
 King's County 
 Longford 
 Louth 
 Meath - 
 Queen's County 
 Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wicklow 
 
 306 
 
 869 
 
 24 
 
 185 
 
 264 
 
 330 
 
 1,583 
 
 2,103 
 
 588 
 
 1,264 
 
 3,433 
 
 & 
 
 340 
 
 185 
 
 97 
 
 J300 
 
 74 
 2,030 
 
 236 
 447 
 
 156 
 
 686 
 
 876 
 
 268 
 
 1,264 
 
 1,408 
 
 & 
 
 70 
 82 
 24 
 
 11 
 
 30 
 
 897 
 
 1,155 
 
 320 
 
 £ 
 
 33 
 147 
 
 8 
 
 603 
 100 
 96 
 694 
 251 
 
 £ 
 
 450 
 
 276 
 3,680 
 
 3,253 
 
 .e 
 
 346 
 
 276 
 355 
 
 £ 
 
 104 
 72 
 
 £ 
 
 320 
 
 35 
 
 123 
 
 £ 
 41 
 
 £ 
 t'il 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 10,9.36 
 
 3,026 
 
 5,341 2,589 
 
 1,932 
 
 4,406 
 
 3,253 
 
 977 
 
 176 
 
 478 
 
 41 
 
 41 
 
 
 
 
 MuNSTER : 
 
 Clare - 
 Cork, E.R. 
 Cork, W.E. - 
 Kerry - 
 
 Limerick 
 
 Tippcrary 
 
 AVaterford 
 
 764 
 3,545 
 2,093 
 1,137 
 1,163 
 3,846 
 
 143 
 
 3,190 
 89 
 
 438 
 
 355 
 1,367 
 1,051 
 
 657 
 3,836 
 
 764 
 
 637 
 86 
 68 
 10 
 
 143 
 
 85 
 155 
 313 
 
 244 
 198 
 
 831 
 
 195 
 
 3,073 
 
 1,829 
 
 195 
 560 
 
 831 
 
 684 
 
 40 
 72 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Total of :>.run5t.jr 
 
 12,691 
 
 3,717 
 
 7,266 
 
 1,708 
 
 995 
 
 4,099 
 
 1,829 
 
 755 
 
 1,515 
 
 112 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 TJlstkr : 
 Antrim - 
 Armagh - 
 Cavau - 
 Donegal 
 Down ,- 
 I'ermanagh 
 Londonderry - 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 190 
 
 400 
 
 115 
 4,o92 
 
 412 
 
 IIG 
 40 
 
 2,628 
 
 61 
 141 
 
 1,664 
 412 
 
 13 
 
 309 
 
 115 
 100 
 
 61 
 
 200 
 
 35 
 30 
 
 2,180 
 3,340 
 
 14,030 
 2,422 
 
 806 
 3,361 
 19,024 
 
 1,043 
 2,355 
 
 13,491 
 1,200 
 
 302 
 2,632 
 12,440 
 
 1,011 
 
 178 
 
 449 
 942 
 
 504 
 
 324 
 
 5,899 
 
 126 
 807 
 
 90 
 280 
 
 405 
 685 
 
 288 
 46 
 
 342 
 
 317 
 
 96 
 
 1,347 
 
 2,742 
 190 
 600 
 24,825 
 3,621 
 7,026 
 76,816 
 2,600 
 23,425 
 
 217 
 
 21,975 
 1,705 
 3,945 
 6,680 
 1,610 
 16,070 
 
 2,429 
 190 
 300 
 
 2,850 
 835 
 
 2,671 
 
 2,055 
 550 
 
 5,248 
 
 96 
 300 
 
 1,081 
 
 410 
 
 68,081 
 
 440 
 
 2,107 
 
 1,38! 
 
 8C 
 
 15C 
 
 1,254 
 16C 
 35C 
 97c 
 10£ 
 69C 
 
 Total of Ulster - 
 
 .j,599 
 
 2,784 .2,278 
 
 537 
 
 • 
 
 326 
 
 45,163 
 
 33,463 
 
 9,307 
 
 2,393 
 
 2,436 
 
 141845 
 
 52,202 
 
 17,128 
 
 72,515 
 
 5,152 
 
 C0X>'.tCGIIT 1 
 
 Gal way - 
 Leitrim - 
 Mayo 
 
 Eoscommon - 
 Sligo 
 
 744 
 158 
 
 2,126 
 
 348 
 
 48 
 
 1,463 
 
 183 
 110 
 
 613 
 
 213 
 50 
 
 29 
 11 
 
 235 
 
 703 
 
 500 
 12,025 
 
 234 
 11,192 
 
 341 
 
 500 
 
 727 
 
 158 
 106 
 
 230 
 
 150 
 186 
 
 • . • 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 lotal of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 3,028 
 
 1,859 
 
 906 
 
 263 
 
 275 
 
 13,258 
 
 11,426 
 
 1,568 
 
 264 
 
 566 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Total of Ieela>-d 
 
 32,274 
 
 11,386 
 
 15,791 
 
 5,097 
 
 3,528 
 
 66,926 
 
 49,971 
 
 12,607 
 
 4,348 
 
 3,592 
 
 141886 
 
 52,243 
 
 17,128 
 
 72,515 
 
 5,15 
 
 . t Including an adjourned case pending at close of year, in ivhich claim is as follows :— For loss on quittine holding 213? • fo 
 improvements, 201/. ; total, 414/. f Including 19?. in a case pending at close of year. ^ ^' ' 
 
( 25 ) 
 
 1877. IRELAND. 
 
 Laadlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Returns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 Appeals fkom Land Sessions. 
 
 Amount Decreed at Sessions. 
 
 s 
 
 D 
 
 a, 
 a 
 
 
 
 V, 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 .Q 
 
 .Q 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 niJ 
 
 -o 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 t 
 
 s; 
 
 ^ ■ 
 
 
 rid 
 
 ti 
 
 M 
 
 -S 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 XI 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 s 
 
 § 
 
 
 
 
 
 §-« 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 -13 
 
 •3 
 
 p 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 a, 
 
 
 .a 
 
 II 
 
 
 a 
 
 t-4 
 
 a 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 Amount 
 added on 
 Appeal. 
 
 a 
 
 ua 
 
 *P 
 O 
 
 .a 
 
 ^ 
 
 a "o 
 
 Amount 
 
 reduced on 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 -q 
 ^ 
 
 1-^ 
 
 < CD 
 
 1^ 
 
 Amount Decreed at 
 
 Assizes or Consolidated 
 
 Nisi Prius. 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,Q 
 
 ^ 
 
 fO 
 
 t3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t3 
 
 r:* 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 fl 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 0) 5^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ji a 
 
 J3tC 
 
 COUNTIES 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 231 
 
 963 
 
 88 
 444 
 
 1,726 
 
 231 
 
 963 
 
 88 
 444 
 
 55 
 
 1,726 
 
 55 
 
 389 
 
 389 
 
 885 
 
 835 
 
 231 
 
 78 
 88 
 
 397 
 
 264 
 
 264 
 
 55 
 
 585 
 
 55 
 
 77 
 
 77 
 
 77 
 
 77 
 
 814 
 
 58 
 
 86 
 
 710 
 
 128 
 
 1,734 
 
 3,530 
 
 323 
 
 283 
 
 531 
 
 
 58 
 
 38 
 
 48 
 
 
 71b 
 
 
 128 
 
 2 
 
 1,732 
 
 3,207 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 1,107 
 
 1,107 
 
 268 
 
 
 531 
 
 
 58 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 710 
 
 128 
 
 
 140 
 
 485 
 
 1,820 
 
 585 
 
 300 
 653 
 
 231 
 
 88 
 
 658 
 
 300 
 
 397 
 
 30 
 
 30 
 
 1,024 
 
 1,024 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 25 
 «124 
 234 
 
 383 
 
 5,716 
 
 323 
 
 25 
 124 
 234 
 
 383 
 
 5,393 
 
 67 
 
 1,496 
 
 25 
 234 
 
 259 
 
 1,489 
 
 124 
 
 124 
 
 2,341 
 
 1,288 
 
 67 
 
 42 
 20 
 
 62 
 
 47 
 
 2,131 
 
 2,131 
 
 86 
 120 
 
 206 
 
 531 
 58 
 36 
 
 710 
 
 485 
 
 1,820 
 
 20 
 43 
 
 63 
 
 740 
 
 2,784 
 
 5 
 191 
 
 196 
 
 74'J 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow. 
 Dublin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny. 
 King's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 Wexford. 
 Wicklow. 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 Mdnster : 
 Clare. 
 Cork, E.R. 
 Cork, W.R. 
 Kerry. 
 Limerick. 
 Tipperary. 
 Waterford. 
 
 Total of Munster. 
 
 Ulstbk : 
 Antrim. 
 Armagh. 
 Cavan. 
 Donegal. 
 Down. 
 Fermanagh. 
 Londonderry. 
 Monaghan. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 CONNAUGHT ; 
 
 Galway. 
 Leitrim. 
 
 124 
 
 124 
 
 2,341 
 
 Koscommon. 
 Sligo, 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ikei.and. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 D 
 
( 26 ) 
 
 IRELAND. 1878. 
 
 (58.) County Courts.— Table 4.— Land Sessions— Peocebdings in the year 1878, under the 
 
 
 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 Appeals. 
 
 Result oe 
 Appeals heaIkd. 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 Applications of 
 
 Applications of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■(« 
 
 Land Claim Cases. 
 
 Tenants to confirm 
 
 Tenants to register 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 T3 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 TJl 
 
 1 
 
 
 Leases. 
 
 Improvements. 
 
 
 
 
 e 
 
 1 
 
 '3, 
 
 O 
 
 -9 
 Ft 
 
 •d 
 § 
 
 3 
 
 
 ARRANGED 
 IN 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 nj 
 
 
 
 
 rd 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 PROVINCBS. 
 
 "2 § 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 cS 
 
 ??n 
 
 ■d 
 
 
 "s 
 
 h 
 
 
 '6 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 0) 
 
 
 ce 
 
 
 
 TS 
 
 t^ 
 
 -o 
 
 a> 
 
 i 
 
 ITS 
 
 "^ 
 
 OJ 
 
 <B 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 .s. 
 
 ja 
 
 to 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 CU 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 § 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 CJ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 u 
 
 er entered 
 uding thos 
 inninp^ of v 
 
 
 
 U3 
 
 
 a 
 
 •■a 
 
 m 
 
 ■fe 
 
 1 
 la 
 
 be 
 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 w 
 
 CI 
 
 o 
 
 bB 
 
 .g 
 
 •a 
 
 13 
 
 1 
 
 d 
 .2 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
 H 
 O 
 
 1 
 
 -a 
 a 
 v 
 
 -i 
 
 o 
 
 
 5 
 
 o 
 
 at 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 to 
 
 S 
 
 o 
 
 
 1 
 
 ■So t" 
 
 1.9 .g 
 
 D 3) 
 
 i 
 
 rg 
 
 o 
 
 t3 
 1 
 
 ■ 8 
 
 1 
 
 'P4 
 
 a. 
 < 
 
 6 
 
 d 
 
 |2i 
 
 
 "3. 
 < 
 
 ft 
 
 CD 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 02 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 
 Leikstek : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Carlow - 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 .1. 
 
 Dublin - 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Kildare - 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Kilkenny 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 King's County 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Longford 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 r*i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Louth 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Meath - 
 
 4 
 
 9 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 1 
 
 Queen's County- 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 <.. 
 
 
 
 Westmeath - 
 
 3 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 . . . 
 
 
 1 
 
 Wexford 
 
 4 
 
 14 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *3 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 Wicldow 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 ] 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 1 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 34 
 
 73 
 
 29 
 
 19 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 Mdnstek : 
 Clare - 
 
 2 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 Cork, E.R. - 
 
 5 
 
 14 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 Cork, W.E. - 
 
 5 
 
 13 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kerry 
 
 3 
 
 17 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 8 
 
 t4 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 
 2 
 
 Limerick 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 • >. 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Tipperary 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Waterford 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Total of Munster 
 
 25 
 
 84 
 
 32 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 7 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 21 
 
 7 
 
 14 
 
 4 
 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 Ulstee : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Antrim - 
 
 2 
 
 44 
 
 14 
 
 5 
 
 23 
 
 2 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 5 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 4 
 
 Armagh - 
 
 3 
 
 11 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Cavan 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Donegal - 
 
 3 
 
 30 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 8.H 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 Down 
 
 4 
 
 15 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 Fermanagh - 
 
 2 
 
 38 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 22 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 Londonderry - 
 
 3 
 
 39 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 ' 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 Monaghan 
 
 2 
 
 22 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 Tyrone - 
 
 4 
 
 58 
 
 18 
 
 2 
 
 37 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 Total of Ulster - 
 
 26 
 
 270 
 
 78 
 
 20 " 
 
 152 
 
 20 
 
 22 
 
 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 24 
 
 8 
 
 21 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 7' 
 
 CONNADGHT : 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Galway - 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 «•• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Leitrim - 
 
 3 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 9 
 
 Mayo 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 9. 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 Roscommon - 
 
 6 
 
 46 
 
 12 
 
 • • • 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 ^ 
 
 V, 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 Sligo - - 
 
 2 
 
 13 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Total of Con- 
 
 23 
 
 87 
 
 34 
 
 7 
 
 35 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 q 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 naught. 
 
 
 
 
 
 225 
 
 48 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 35 
 
 Total of Ikbland 
 
 108 
 
 514 
 
 173 
 
 68 
 
 38 
 
 36 
 
 ... 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 71 
 
 19 
 
 52 
 
 7 
 
 „ _ „ f Includes two adjourned Cases. 
 
 M 'p?'^ ot these cases was not decided, being reserved for High Court of Appeal. 
 
 Judil r^eser?ed hif dSn!'" '' "°^"' *" "^'' ^°^ *''" ^^'^' ^''' ^''"^"'^^ °^' ^' '° ^^' "^ *°'' ^^^'^ ^* ^P^^^g ^«s'==«' *' 
 
( 27 ) 
 
 1878. lEELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Eeturns made by the Clerks ofthe Peace, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Fob Loss on quitting Holding, ok 
 
 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 
 Amount decreed, and Costs. | 
 
 . Distdrbance, when claimed or 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 DECREED SEPARATELY. 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 sg 
 
 1 
 
 Amount claimed 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 I0 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 X 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 S 
 
 ^ 
 
 •s 
 
 
 
 GJ 
 
 1 
 
 (A 
 
 a 
 
 R 
 
 
 
 
 
 U 
 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 S 
 
 0) 
 
 
 
 AEBANGED 
 IN 
 
 
 GJ 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 
 nS 
 
 'S 
 
 ^^ 
 
 t; 
 
 .SP 
 
 So 
 
 
 .S.s 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 
 'en 
 
 
 
 OJ 
 
 °s 
 
 a 
 
 
 s 
 
 X 
 
 •2- 
 
 «2 
 
 1= 
 
 
 ■6 
 
 S 
 
 -s 
 
 
 a 
 
 E3 
 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 
 to 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 — < 
 
 •2 a 
 
 w en 
 
 IS 
 •-sg 
 
 en w 
 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 03 
 
 •1 
 g 
 
 13, 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 f 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 tfi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■4-S 
 
 § 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 T3 0) 
 
 s 2: 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 S . 
 
 a 
 1— ( 
 
 
 la 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 % 
 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 1— ( 
 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 S 
 1 
 
 d 
 
 M 
 
 
 A 
 
 .5 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 & 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 ■S, 
 
 £ 
 
 & 
 
 ■£ 
 
 & 
 
 & 
 
 & 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 & 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Leinstek : 
 
 
 804 
 
 709 
 
 
 ... 
 
 95 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .•• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Carlow. 
 
 
 914 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 914 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dublin. 
 
 
 703 
 
 180 
 
 
 523 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 180 
 
 180 
 
 
 
 .. . 
 
 
 KUdare. 
 
 
 941 
 
 ... 
 
 846 
 
 95 
 
 
 475 
 
 310 
 
 165 
 
 23 
 
 
 540 
 
 
 540 
 
 
 
 241 
 
 Kilkenny. 
 
 
 436 
 
 
 88 
 
 113 
 
 235 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 223 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 196 
 
 
 King's County. 
 
 
 1,113 
 
 19 
 
 1,094 
 
 ... 
 
 
 528 
 
 300 
 
 228 
 
 24 
 
 
 677 
 
 14 
 
 663 
 
 
 
 441 
 
 Longford. 
 
 
 2,672 
 
 2,562 
 
 110 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 28 
 
 42 
 
 5 
 
 
 323 
 
 213 
 
 110 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 Louth. 
 
 
 1,707 
 
 125 
 
 566 
 
 853 
 
 163 
 
 235 
 
 21 
 
 214 
 
 33 
 
 15 
 
 1,123 
 
 125 
 
 566 
 
 269 
 
 163 
 
 235 
 
 Meath. 
 
 
 950 
 
 35 
 
 219 
 
 696 
 
 
 30 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 9 
 
 
 105 
 
 35 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 ... 
 
 Queen's County. 
 
 
 2,031 
 
 320 
 
 457 
 
 904 
 
 350 
 
 113 
 
 83 
 
 30 
 
 36 
 
 i's 
 
 994 
 
 213 
 
 151 
 
 380 
 
 250 
 
 ioi 
 
 Westmeath. 
 
 
 3,650 
 
 133 
 
 2,751 
 
 610 
 
 156 
 
 1,086 
 
 211 
 
 875 
 
 64 
 
 5 
 
 .•• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wexford. 
 
 
 5,540 
 
 2,005 
 
 530 
 
 2,400 
 
 605 
 
 530 
 
 141 
 
 389 
 
 18 
 
 
 2,693 
 
 2,005 
 
 194 
 
 174 
 
 320 
 
 194 
 
 Wicklow. 
 
 
 21,461 
 
 6,088 
 
 6,661 
 
 6,194 
 
 2,518 
 
 3,080 
 
 1,110 
 
 1,970 
 
 212 
 
 35 
 
 6,858 
 
 2,785 
 
 2,261 
 
 893 
 
 929 
 
 1,282 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 MUNSTEE : 
 
 
 3,973 
 
 370 
 
 1,308 
 
 1,370 
 
 925 
 
 626 
 
 153 
 
 473 
 
 63 
 
 
 299 
 
 
 100 
 
 199 
 
 
 70 
 
 Clare. 
 
 
 2,525 
 
 1,085 
 
 1,088 
 
 144 
 
 208 
 
 469 
 
 118 
 
 351 
 
 24 
 
 
 2,281 
 
 971 
 
 1,088 
 
 144 
 
 78 
 
 469 
 
 Cork, E,E. 
 
 
 7,682 
 
 2,626 
 
 4,089 
 
 967 
 
 ... 
 
 743 
 
 219 
 
 524 
 
 116 
 
 '9 
 
 324 
 
 120 
 
 184 
 
 20 
 
 
 172 
 
 Cork, W.E. 
 
 
 6,139 
 
 2,899 
 
 1,572 
 
 361 
 
 1,307 
 
 714 
 
 210 
 
 504 
 
 66 
 
 10 
 
 1,798 
 
 423 
 
 568 
 
 89 
 
 718 
 
 373 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 
 1,866 
 
 328 
 
 664 
 
 874 
 
 
 203 
 
 53 
 
 150 
 
 18 
 
 2 
 
 1,003 
 
 164 
 
 345 
 
 494 
 
 
 145 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 
 2,666 
 
 2,275 
 
 36 
 
 355 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Tipperary. 
 
 
 3,531 
 
 337 
 
 3,135 
 
 59 
 
 
 1,070 
 
 ... 
 
 1,070 
 
 175 
 
 t45 
 
 902 
 
 228 
 
 674 
 
 
 
 225 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 
 28,382 
 
 9,920 
 
 11,892 
 
 4,130 
 
 2,440 
 
 3,830 
 
 753 
 
 3,077 
 
 365 
 
 66 
 
 6,607 
 
 1,906 
 
 2,959 
 
 946 
 
 796 
 
 1,454 
 
 Total of Munster. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ulster : 
 
 
 7,571 
 
 3,886 
 
 2,388 
 
 816 
 
 481 
 
 1,292 
 
 446 
 
 846 
 
 80 
 
 28 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 
 3,507 
 
 1,877 
 
 1,283 
 
 347 
 
 
 381 
 
 162 
 
 219 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Annagh. 
 Cavan. 
 
 
 4,423 
 
 1,692 
 
 2,731 
 
 
 
 ^38 
 
 266 
 
 272 
 
 27 
 
 
 1,016 
 
 312 
 
 704 
 
 
 
 195 
 
 
 31,898 
 
 16,38C 
 
 5,344 
 
 699 
 
 9,475 
 
 739 
 
 40 
 
 699 
 
 35 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 . . > 
 
 
 
 
 Donegal. 
 Down. 
 
 
 4,554 
 
 809 
 
 2,729 
 
 657 
 
 359 
 
 637 
 
 120 
 
 517 
 
 ... 
 
 
 199 
 
 96 
 
 *. . 
 
 
 103 
 
 
 
 15,84.3 
 
 12,874 
 
 2,541 
 
 256 
 
 172 
 
 1,048 
 
 250 
 
 798 
 
 69 
 
 5 
 
 2,847 
 
 1,878 
 
 871 
 
 56 
 
 42 
 
 254 
 
 Fermanagh. 
 • Londonderry. 
 Monaghan. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 
 16,262 
 
 4,353 
 
 1,242 
 
 667 
 
 ... 
 
 1,295 
 
 174 
 
 1,121 
 
 
 
 82 
 
 64 
 
 18 
 
 
 .** 
 
 187 
 
 
 11,368 
 
 8,615 
 
 1,950 
 
 803 
 
 
 244 
 
 171 
 
 73 
 
 15 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 25,684 
 
 17,025 
 
 5,727 
 
 837 
 
 2,095 
 
 2,131 
 
 58 
 
 2,073 
 
 118 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 1,593 
 
 
 ... 
 
 '"7 
 
 
 UlllC 
 
 67,511 
 
 25,935 
 
 5,082 
 
 12,582 
 
 8,305 
 
 1,687 
 
 6,618 
 
 344 
 
 73 
 
 4,144 
 
 2,350 
 
 56 
 
 145 
 
 643 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Con NAUGHT : 
 
 
 1,162 
 
 
 253 
 
 775 
 
 134 
 
 59 
 
 2 
 
 57 
 
 7 
 
 ... 
 
 302 
 
 
 113 
 
 138 
 
 51 
 
 46 
 
 Galway. 
 Lei trim. 
 
 
 1,752 
 
 320 
 
 397 
 
 
 1,035 
 
 381 
 
 170 
 
 211 
 
 26 
 
 ... 
 
 319 
 
 169 
 
 150 
 
 
 
 119 
 
 
 5,151 
 
 
 850 
 
 "56 
 
 4,245 
 
 392 
 
 40 
 
 352 
 
 34 
 
 5 
 
 ... 
 
 <•> 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mayo. 
 Koscommon. 
 
 
 .6,630 
 
 4,298 
 
 1,862 
 
 
 470 
 
 679 
 
 75 
 
 604 
 
 68 
 
 
 118 
 
 118 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 1,309 
 
 432 
 
 691 
 
 
 186 
 
 337 
 
 136 
 
 201 
 
 
 ... 
 
 625 
 
 114 
 
 361 
 
 
 150 
 
 309 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 
 16,004 
 
 5,050 
 
 4,053 
 
 831 
 
 6,070 
 
 1,848 
 
 423 
 
 1,425 
 
 135 
 
 5 
 
 1,364 
 
 401 
 
 624 
 
 138 
 
 201 
 
 474 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 
 176957 
 
 88,569 
 
 48,541 
 
 16,237 
 
 23,610 
 
 17,063 
 
 3,973 
 
 13,090 
 
 1,056 
 
 179 
 
 18,973 
 
 7,442 
 
 7,427 
 
 2,033 
 
 2,071 
 
 3,853 
 
 Total of Ieeland 
 
 X Costs estimated hy Clerk of the Peace. 
 If In Londonderry no records for October Session were kept by the late Clerk of the Peace. The figures tie refore 
 are estimated from the Returns made for Hilary, Easter, and Summer Sessions 
 
 1) 2 
 
( 28 ) 
 
 lUELlND. 1878. 
 
 (58.) CouNTT CouETS.— Table 4 continued.— Lk-Tnn Sessions— Proceedings in the year 1878, under the 
 
 
 FokI 
 
 MPKOVBMBNTS, WHEN CLAIMED 
 OB DECREED SEPARATELY. 
 
 For Loss on quitting Holding or 
 
 Disturbance, and Improvements 
 
 when claimed ok decreed not 
 
 separately. 
 
 For Ulster Tenant-Rioht ob 
 
 SIMILAR Custom, or iNcoMijfo 
 
 Payments. 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 t 
 
 •s 
 
 s 
 
 ■S 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 i 
 
 ■ o 
 
 .5 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 Amount claimed. - 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 l 
 
 CO 
 
 a 
 
 
 K 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 § 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 ARRA^■GED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 i 
 
 a 
 
 ■& 
 •& 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 QQ CO 
 
 ■£.s 
 
 II 
 
 1* 
 
 n 
 
 1—1 
 
 o 
 
 at 
 
 P 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 Jl 
 
 a 
 
 M 
 
 J 
 
 a 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 M 
 
 '6 
 £ 
 
 a 
 
 m 
 
 s 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 V ^ ■ 
 
 .S.2 
 o o 
 o g 
 
 5" 
 
 09 
 
 § 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 c» 
 
 a 
 
 13 
 
 a 
 
 T3 
 
 a 
 a 
 
 1 
 
 Q. 
 S 
 
 S Si 
 o g 
 
 1— 1 
 
 CD 
 
 1 
 
 CO 
 
 g 
 
 d 
 
 hH 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 B 
 
 l| 
 
 03 ^ 
 
 is 
 
 -g 
 1 
 
 .S 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 1— 1 
 
 "i 
 
 to 
 
 ■3 
 
 o 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 V 
 
 m 
 
 g 
 
 s 
 
 1— < 
 
 Leinstee : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny 
 King's County 
 ' Longford 
 Louth 
 Meath - 
 Queen's County 
 Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wioklow 
 
 914 
 523 
 
 213 
 
 417 
 
 824 
 
 584 
 
 845 
 
 1,037 
 
 2,928 
 
 2,847 
 
 & 
 
 5 
 
 824 
 
 107 
 
 £ 
 
 01 
 412 
 
 219 
 306 
 
 2,401 
 336 
 
 & 
 
 523 
 113 
 
 584 
 626 
 524 
 527 
 2,226 
 
 & 
 
 914 
 39 
 
 100 
 285 
 
 & 
 
 13 
 
 87 
 
 30 
 
 12 
 
 1,031 
 
 336 
 
 804 
 401 
 240 
 
 722 
 
 £ 
 709 
 
 240 
 133 
 
 £ 
 306 
 
 350 
 
 £ 
 
 ... 
 ... 
 
 95 
 83 
 
 £ 
 95 
 
 156 
 
 £ 
 234 
 
 55 
 
 £ 
 
 19 
 1,285 
 
 £ 
 1,285 
 
 £ 
 
 19 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 ... 
 ... 
 
 £ 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 11,132 
 
 936 
 
 3,735 
 
 5,123 
 
 1,338 
 
 1,509 
 
 2,167 
 
 1,082 
 
 656 
 
 178 
 
 251 
 
 289 
 
 1,304 
 
 1,285 
 
 19 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 MUNSTER : 
 
 Clare - 
 Cork, B.R. 
 Cork, W.R. - 
 
 Kerry - 
 Limerick 
 Tipperary 
 Waterford 
 
 525 
 244 
 7,112 
 4,341 
 863 
 1,935 
 2,629 
 
 16 
 
 114 
 
 2,506 
 
 2,476 
 
 764 
 
 1,580 
 
 109 
 
 139 
 
 3,905 
 
 1,004 
 
 319 
 
 2,461 
 
 370 
 
 ^■{ 
 272 
 380 
 355 
 59 
 
 130 
 589 
 
 52 
 
 571 
 
 341 
 
 58 
 
 535 
 
 3,149 
 246 
 
 731 
 
 354 
 
 ... 
 
 695 
 
 1,069 
 36 
 
 801 
 246 
 
 925 
 
 504 
 
 5 
 310 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 Total of Munster 
 
 17,649 
 
 6,965 
 
 7,828 
 
 2,137 
 
 719 
 
 1,,557 
 
 4,126 
 
 1,049 
 
 1,105 
 
 1,047 
 
 925 
 
 819 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ,., 
 
 Ulstek : 
 Antrim - 
 Armagh - 
 Cavan - 
 Donegal - 
 Down - 
 Fermanagh 
 Londonderry - 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 218 
 
 777 
 494 
 
 5,206 
 
 167 
 
 150 
 494 
 
 4,256 
 
 51 
 627 
 
 820 
 
 100 
 
 30 
 
 123 
 
 8 
 
 15 
 
 34 
 
 268 
 
 26 
 
 4,337 
 1,679 
 
 10,005 
 1,510 
 
 657 
 6,337 
 11,617 
 
 1,443 
 999 
 
 6,903 
 2.53 
 
 520 
 5,070 
 6,917 
 
 1,747 
 553 
 
 1,854 
 924 
 
 147 
 790 
 
 2,718 
 
 666 
 127 
 
 24 
 
 277 
 
 477 
 687 
 
 481 
 
 1,224 
 56 
 
 1,295 
 
 736 
 61 
 
 44 
 126 
 
 62 
 190 
 
 3,016 
 
 1,828 
 
 2,630 
 
 21,399 
 
 2,845 
 
 7,790 
 
 5,513 
 
 5,031 
 
 14,067 
 
 2,276 
 878 
 1,230 
 8,983 
 460 
 6,740 
 3,769 
 3,545 
 10,108 
 
 590 
 730 
 1,400 
 8,490 
 1,805 
 850 
 1,077 
 1,160 
 3,009 
 
 1.50 
 220 
 
 675 
 380 
 100 
 667 
 326 
 150 
 
 8,251 
 
 200 
 
 100 
 
 800 
 
 433 
 320 
 335 
 695 
 496 
 760 
 840 
 182 
 1,908 
 
 Total of Ulster - 
 
 6,695 
 
 5,067 
 
 1,498 
 
 100 
 
 30 
 
 474 
 
 36,152 
 
 22,105 
 
 8,733 
 
 2,258 
 
 3,056 
 
 1,219 
 
 64,119 
 
 37,989 
 
 14,111 
 
 2,668 
 
 9,351 
 
 5,969 
 
 •CoNNAUOHT : 
 
 Galway - 
 Leitrim - 
 Mayo 
 
 Roscommon - 
 SUgo 
 
 860 
 
 278 
 
 4,245 
 
 684 
 
 151 
 318 
 
 140 
 
 127 
 
 330 
 
 637 
 
 83 
 
 4,245 
 
 36 
 
 13 
 
 86 
 
 28 
 
 1,155 
 
 906 
 
 6,512 
 
 4,180 
 
 120 
 
 850 
 
 1,862 
 
 .56 
 
 1,035 
 470 
 
 176 
 392 
 674 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 6,067 
 
 469 
 
 597 
 
 637 
 
 4,364 
 6,451 
 
 127 
 
 8,573 
 
 4,180 
 
 2,832 
 
 56 
 
 1,505 
 
 1,247 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total of Ireland - 
 
 41,543 
 
 13,437 
 
 13,658 
 
 7,997 
 
 3,667 
 
 51,018 
 
 28,416 
 
 13,326 
 
 3,539 
 
 5,737 
 
 3,574 
 
 65,423 
 
 39,274 
 
 14,130 
 
 2,668 
 
 9,351 
 
 ,'),969 
 
( 29 ) 
 
 1878. IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Returns made by the Cleeks of tlie Peace. 
 
 Appeals from Land Sessions. 
 
 Amount decreed at Sessions. 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 .Q 
 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 f^ 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 (U 
 
 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 
 O 
 
 h 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 'i 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 r3 
 
 
 3 
 u 
 
 to 
 
 ■a 
 
 o3 
 
 CO 
 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 
 S1 
 
 Q 
 
 <1 s 
 
 2.3 
 .Si 
 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 < ■ 
 
 2 
 
 o> 2 
 
 l.s 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 M 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 2a 
 
 Amount 
 added on 
 Appeal. 
 
 ^ 
 
 S 
 
 
 Amount 
 
 reduced 
 
 on Appeal. 
 
 ^ 
 
 Amount decreed at 
 
 Assizes or Consolidated 
 
 Nisi Prius. 
 
 0! 2 
 
 .=1.9 
 
 ^ 
 
 COUNTIES 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES, 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 209 
 
 
 209 
 
 11 
 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 
 138 
 
 138 
 
 
 30 
 
 30 
 
 
 274 
 
 *120 
 
 154 
 
 674 
 
 300 
 
 374 
 
 150 
 
 150 
 
 267 
 347 
 271 
 370 
 
 239 
 
 6,494 
 
 196 
 21 
 
 802 
 
 696 
 533 
 
 177 
 41 
 
 2,466 
 
 
 267 
 
 110 
 
 237 
 
 271 
 
 
 t354 
 
 16 
 
 « 
 
 239 
 
 735 
 
 759 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 21 
 
 213 
 33 
 
 267 
 
 109 
 192 
 249 
 
 550 
 
 5,184 
 
 137 
 
 137 
 
 1,439 
 
 196 
 
 
 {802 
 
 
 ?483 
 
 
 500 
 
 
 177 
 
 
 41 
 
 
 2,199 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 17 
 
 142 
 
 1.59 
 
 31 
 
 31 
 
 178 
 11 
 
 193 
 
 150 
 
 158 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 178 
 11 
 
 19.3 
 
 267 
 
 
 
 236 
 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 239 
 
 
 20 
 
 742 
 
 1 
 
 45' 
 
 465 
 
 500 
 35 
 
 1,000 
 
 179 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 30 
 
 41 
 
 
 220 
 
 35 
 
 177 
 
 35 
 
 212 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 196 
 101 
 
 236 
 
 533 
 
 92 
 
 500 
 
 15 
 
 607 
 
 25 
 
 20 
 
 45 
 
 71 
 135 
 
 209 
 
 •• 
 
 194 
 
 373 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 177 
 
 20 
 
 35 
 
 371 
 
 393 
 
 179 
 
 41 
 
 220 
 
 109 
 192 
 112 
 
 413 
 
 3,745 
 
 166 
 
 162 
 
 112 
 
 112 
 
 1,885 
 
 106 
 192 
 
 298 
 
 ri2 
 
 80 
 
 214 
 
 16 
 
 25 
 
 1,323 
 
 80 
 
 376 
 
 87 
 
 87 
 
 712 
 
 106 
 192 
 
 298 
 
 712 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow. 
 Dublin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny. 
 King's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 Wexford. 
 WicWow. 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 MUNSTER : 
 
 Clare. 
 
 Cork, E.R. 
 
 Cork, W.R. 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 Tipperarj'. 
 
 Waterford, 
 
 Total of Munster. 
 
 Ulster : 
 Antrim. 
 Armagh. 
 Cavan. 
 Donegal. 
 Down. 
 Permanagh. 
 Londonderry. 
 Monaghan. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 CONNAUGHT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 * Amount of three cases adjourned. f Includes two cases adjourned ; amount 139/. 9s. 5d. 
 
 I 337/. in case reserved for High Court of Appeal. 
 § The Clerk of the Peace is unable to state how these cases were disposed of, as in five of those heard at Spring Assizes 
 the Judge reserved his decision. || Judge's decision reserved. 
 
 D 3 
 
( 30 ) 
 lEELAND. 1879 . 
 
 (58.) County Courts.— Table 4.— Land Sessions— Peoceedings in the year 1879, under the 
 
 
 2 ■ 
 
 o 
 .d 
 
 £■ 
 
 to 
 
 1=1 
 .2 
 
 'to 
 CO 
 
 ',3 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 t 
 
 §3 
 .a 
 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 Appeals. 
 
 RBSnLT F 
 
 Appeals hbakd. 
 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 Land Claim Cases. 
 
 Applications of 
 
 Tenants to confirm 
 
 Leases. 
 
 Applications of 
 
 Tenants to register 
 
 Improvements. 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 
 i 
 
 > 
 g 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 to 
 
 QJ 
 
 R 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 u 
 
 1 
 
 -s 
 
 u 
 
 s 
 
 rt 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 •d 
 
 01 
 
 a 
 
 y 
 
 
 % 
 .0 
 
 ■s 
 
 '3 
 
 3 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 US 
 
 ■U 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 -A 
 
 i 
 p 
 
 to 
 
 CO 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
 O 
 
 TJ 
 
 0) 
 
 M 
 
 .a 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 g 
 
 '6 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 d 
 
 12; 
 
 "3 
 
 C3 
 
 bo 
 a 
 •1 
 
 1 
 
 J 
 
 
 Cu . 
 P. 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 
 rt 
 
 ■s 
 
 1 
 
 § 
 
 p< 
 
 
 re 
 
 t 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 d 
 
 1 
 
 ;-! 
 
 CO 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 • i-C 
 
 1 
 
 'a 
 1 
 
 CO 
 
 .2 
 
 1 
 t 
 
 g 
 
 bO 
 
 a 
 •-3 
 
 
 Leinster : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny 
 King's County 
 Longford 
 Louth 
 Meath - 
 Queen's County 
 Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wicklow 
 
 2 
 3 
 4 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 4 
 4 
 3 
 4 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 6 
 1 
 6 
 3 
 2 
 4 
 4 
 4 
 11 
 5 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 4 
 1 
 1 
 3 
 1 
 1 
 5 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 1 
 2 
 
 1 
 2 
 5 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 t3 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 1 
 
 ji 
 
 "3 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 34 
 
 53 
 
 21 
 
 17 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 2 
 
 12 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 
 MnNSTEE : 
 
 Clare 
 
 Cork, E.R. - 
 
 Cork, W.R. - 
 
 Kerry - 
 
 Limerick 
 
 Tipperary 
 
 Waterford 
 
 2 
 5 
 5 
 3 
 o 
 
 5 
 3 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 8 
 
 17 
 
 1 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 4 
 9 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 1 
 7 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 2 
 
 "i 
 
 2 
 
 "3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 4 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 §1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 2 
 
 
 
 Total of Munster 
 
 25 
 
 61 
 
 21 
 
 13 
 
 18 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 ... 
 
 7 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 Ulster : 
 Antrim - 
 Armagh - 
 Cavan - 
 Donegal - 
 Down 
 Fermanagh 
 LondondeiTy - 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 2 
 3 
 3 
 3 
 4 
 2 
 3 
 2 
 4 
 
 21 
 16 
 
 5 
 26 
 17 
 46 
 27 
 
 6 
 39 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 4 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 9 
 3 
 3 
 
 1 
 8 
 1 
 1 
 
 15 
 
 4 
 
 12 
 4 
 
 35 
 6 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 5 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 32 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 2 
 1 
 
 "5 
 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 111 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 "4 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 "7 
 
 ... 
 
 
 '2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 6 
 
 
 Total of Ulster - 
 
 26 
 
 203 
 
 58 
 
 28 
 
 102 
 
 15 
 
 32 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 23 
 
 9 
 
 * 
 
 14 
 
 ... 
 
 
 5 
 
 9- 
 
 
 CONNATIGHT : 
 
 Galway - 
 Leitrim - 
 Mayo 
 
 Roscommon - 
 Sligo - 
 
 6 
 3 
 6 
 6 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 14 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 5 
 3 
 5 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 2 
 I 
 4 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 . t . 
 
 
 /= 
 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 23 
 
 46 
 
 20 
 
 6 
 64 
 
 15 
 144 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 Total of Ireland - 
 
 108 
 
 363 
 
 120 
 
 35 
 
 35 
 
 35 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 11 
 
 9 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 49 
 
 15 
 
 34 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 15 
 
 
 * Estimated by Clerk of Peace. 
 
 •f Granted as to some improvements, and refused as to others. 
 
( 31 ) 
 1879. IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Returns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 Amount Claimei>. 
 
 Amoukt deceeed, and Costs. 
 
 03 
 
 Q 
 
 CO 
 
 r^ "a 
 
 as 
 
 .2 M 
 
 t3 O 
 
 a 
 
 .g 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 "4 
 a 
 
 c3 
 bo 
 
 a 
 ■■3 
 
 o 
 
 £ 
 
 1,334 
 
 4,381 
 
 1,671 
 
 504 
 
 505 
 
 850 
 
 1,873 
 
 2,153 
 
 998 
 
 1,409 
 
 2,156 
 
 986 
 
 18,821 
 
 220 
 
 745 
 
 1,823 
 
 20 
 
 17 
 
 685 
 
 245 
 
 160 
 
 3,915 
 
 961 
 416 
 
 299 
 105 
 
 50 
 2,133 
 
 87 
 350 
 891 
 375 
 
 148 
 
 111 
 504 
 
 207 
 
 688 
 
 374 
 
 1,020 
 
 451 
 
 5,667 3,503 
 
 1,186 
 
 3,420 
 
 924 
 
 206 
 
 a 
 
 g 
 
 % 
 
 I 
 
 5,736 
 
 288 
 116 
 
 136 
 
 82 
 
 10 
 
 602 
 
 15 
 
 135 
 
 471 
 
 134 
 
 89 
 55 
 
 60 
 26 
 
 94 
 
 125 
 
 11 
 
 110 
 
 FOK Loss ON QUITTING HOLDING, OR 
 
 DiSTUKDANOE, WHEN CLAIMED OK 
 
 DECREED SEPARATELY. 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 O 
 
 c 
 
 o S 
 
 to >> 
 
 .2 r^ 
 
 ■3 § 
 
 o.i- 
 
 J' 
 
 CC <V 
 
 OS -tJ 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 199 31 
 61 *10 
 
 570 
 
 76 
 56 
 10 
 '508 
 15 
 10 
 460 
 24 
 
 1,419 
 
 13 
 
 389 
 129 
 
 373 
 369 
 226 
 
 17 
 485 
 
 598 
 
 215 82 
 
 2,373 
 1,751 
 1,514 
 3,681 
 113 
 2,159 
 1,739 
 
 13,330 
 
 500 
 254 
 480 
 710 
 
 1,189 
 807 
 
 3,940 
 
 116 
 536 
 858 
 2,720 
 113 
 
 857 
 
 5,200 
 
 859 
 
 747 
 
 35 
 
 251 
 
 501 
 
 2,393 
 
 898 
 214 
 141 
 
 469 
 75 
 
 1,797 
 
 77 
 247 
 325 
 688 
 
 26 
 
 247 
 
 1,610 
 
 29 
 101 
 
 98 
 275 
 
 10 
 
 180 
 
 693 
 
 48 
 146 
 227 
 413 
 
 16 
 
 67 
 
 917 
 
 153 
 
 3,608 
 5,220 
 
 732 
 13,328 
 6,523 
 11,352 
 9,963 
 
 798 
 21,217 
 
 72,741 
 
 1,487 
 983 
 
 2,126 
 793 
 9,866 
 1,097 
 43 
 13,366 
 
 1,730 
 2,036 
 4,845 
 3,416 
 1,412 
 
 13,439 
 
 118331 
 
 29,761 
 
 1,203 
 
 698 
 
 294 
 
 3,059 
 
 5,143 
 
 1,428 
 
 3,857 
 
 555 
 
 5,541 
 
 21,778 
 
 1,484 
 412 
 
 4,245 
 512 
 637 
 
 7,290 
 
 44,906 
 
 246 
 1,568 
 
 340 
 2,532 
 
 711 
 
 5,397 
 
 38,042 
 
 918 
 
 
 277 
 
 88 
 
 3,359 
 
 180 
 
 158 
 
 49 
 
 212 
 
 226 
 
 125 
 
 
 1,064 
 
 7,079 
 
 892 
 
 118 
 
 . t • 
 
 587 
 
 2,860 
 
 291 
 
 58 
 
 
 489 
 
 116 
 
 1,379 
 
 3,630 
 
 1,585 
 
 159 
 
 200 
 
 
 270 
 
 31 
 
 2,000 
 
 310 
 
 1,002 
 
 94 
 
 9,190 
 
 12,012 
 
 7,658 
 
 946 
 
 189 
 
 . 109 
 125 
 774 
 
 2,569 
 373 
 
 1,426 
 239 
 908 
 
 25 
 20 
 
 40 
 
 67 
 47 
 78 
 24 
 *54 
 
 6,712 
 
 56 
 260 
 
 64 
 
 380 
 
 15,466 
 
 372 
 
 372 
 
 19,9i; 
 
 100 
 743 
 127 
 168 
 259 
 
 1,397 
 
 12,654 
 
 37 
 318 
 17 
 82 
 27 
 
 481 
 
 2,690 
 
 63 
 425 
 110 
 
 86 
 232 
 
 916 
 
 9,964 
 
 355 
 
 60 
 
 67 
 
 2,586 
 
 153 
 
 268 
 
 355 
 
 17 
 
 17 
 
 100 
 
 160 
 
 1,070 
 
 145 
 
 105 
 
 14 
 
 209 
 
 250 
 
 221 
 
 944 
 
 91 
 129 
 
 135 
 
 217 
 
 1,109 
 
 459 
 
 544 
 
 1,366 
 
 45 
 
 387 
 
 92 
 
 4,002 
 
 257 
 
 115 
 
 538 
 
 173 
 17 
 
 1,100 
 
 29 
 119 
 331 
 690 
 
 45 
 
 1,214 
 
 20 
 
 105 
 
 45 
 
 
 13 
 
 118 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 976 
 
 4 
 
 3,504 
 
 42 
 
 723 
 
 *14 
 
 l,'l'56 
 
 169 
 
 6,582 
 
 105 
 
 288 
 3,063 
 
 909 
 
 4,365 
 
 123 
 
 846 
 
 32 
 
 340 
 
 821 
 393 
 
 57 
 380 
 
 1,651 
 
 14,821 
 
 575 
 187 
 
 73 
 
 835 
 
 7,370 
 
 102 
 
 465 
 425 
 567 
 
 247 
 
 1,806 
 
 572 
 
 a 
 
 COUNTIES 
 AKRANOED 
 
 IN 
 PEOVINCES. 
 
 490 
 176 
 
 138 
 128 
 
 932 
 
 73 
 
 82 
 
 4 
 
 105 
 
 125 
 
 110 
 
 499 
 
 333 
 
 164 
 
 98 
 
 756 
 
 14 
 223 
 
 16 
 156 
 
 174 
 
 246 
 150 
 
 "57 
 307 
 
 760 
 
 4,724 
 
 56 
 
 56 
 
 1,734 
 
 237 
 
 993 
 
 29 
 142 
 
 55 
 307 
 
 26 
 
 559 
 
 256 
 168 
 
 38 
 
 468 
 
 100 
 80 
 
 35 
 
 173 
 
 388 
 
 1,914 
 
 Leinster : 
 Carlow. 
 Dublin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny. 
 King's County. 
 Longfbrd. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 Wexford. 
 Wioklow, 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 Munster : 
 Clare. 
 Cork, E.E. 
 Cork, W.E. 
 Kerry. 
 Limerick. 
 Tipper ary. 
 Waterford. 
 
 Total of Munst«r 
 
 Ulster : 
 Antrim. 
 Armagh. 
 Cavan. , 
 Donegal, 
 Down. 
 Fermanagh. 
 Londonderry. 
 Monaghan. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 CONNAUGHT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 J Case stated for Court for Land Cases Reserved. 
 
 § This was an application to register improvements which was granted on Appeal with costs. 
 
 II Fending at end of year. 
 
 D 4 
 
IRELAND. 
 
 { 32 ) 
 1879. 
 
 (58 ) County Courts.— Table 4 continued.— Lj^d Sessions— Proceedings in the year 1879, under the 
 
 COUNTIES 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 FoK Improvements, when claimed 
 
 OR DECKBED BEPAKATBLT. 
 
 Foe Loss on quitting Holding, or 
 
 Disturbance and Improvements 
 
 when claimed or decreed not 
 
 separately. 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 
 Leinster : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny 
 King's County 
 Longford 
 Louth - 
 Meath - 
 Queen's County 
 Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wicklow 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 Munster: 
 Clare - 
 Cork, E. R. ;- 
 Cork, W. R. - 
 Kerry 
 Limerick 
 Tipperary 
 Waterford 
 
 Total of Munster 
 
 Ulstek- 
 Antrini - 
 Armagh. - 
 Cavau - 
 Donegal - 
 Down 
 Fermanagh 
 Londonderry 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 Total of Ulster - 
 
 Connaught : 
 Galway - 
 Leitrim - 
 Mayo 
 
 Roscommon 
 Sligo - 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland 
 
 £ 
 
 1,186 
 
 3,420 
 
 1,258 
 
 375 
 
 477 
 995 
 3 
 894 
 924 
 210 
 388 
 
 10,130 
 
 1,264 
 326 
 970 
 
 2,315 
 68 
 
 1,772 
 380 
 
 s a 
 
 .a ,2 
 o o 
 
 O " 
 ^^ 
 
 ^ t» 
 
 in c3 
 
 6M 
 
 X at 
 
 O 03 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 en 
 '■3 
 
 O g 
 
 67 
 
 477 
 
 968 
 
 3 
 
 585 
 
 £. 
 247 
 
 27 
 
 100 
 210 
 154 
 
 20 
 375 
 
 239 
 
 234 
 
 £ 
 
 1,186 
 
 3,420 
 
 924 
 
 206 
 
 43 
 
 10 
 
 142 
 
 24 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 5 
 a 
 
 O 
 
 0) 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 ,S.2 
 
 p 
 
 of-l 
 
 
 «4H tH 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 ra a 
 
 r^a 
 
 % t 
 
 ^ 
 
 o S 
 
 
 .^fi 
 
 a 
 
 -o >. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 6^ 
 
 o« 
 
 p) 
 
 C3 
 
 l-H 
 
 '"' 
 
 ■5 
 
 £ 
 
 148 
 961 
 
 506 
 
 1,924 
 
 87 
 
 1,946 
 
 245 
 
 961 
 
 299 
 
 1,924 
 
 87 
 
 681 
 
 £ 
 148 
 
 207 
 
 1,020 
 
 2,100 738 
 
 1,556 5,736 
 
 243 
 
 365 
 172 
 
 1,016 
 
 87 
 
 117 
 
 527 
 
 2,030 
 
 68 
 
 386 
 
 369 
 
 159 
 
 35 
 
 113 
 
 373 
 
 7,101 
 
 1,796 
 
 3,215 I 
 
 189 
 
 
 1 
 67 
 
 1,404 
 
 358 
 
 970 
 
 2,588 
 
 2,158 
 
 418 
 
 864 
 
 
 695 
 
 5^965 
 
 3,994 
 
 1,971 
 
 565 
 50 
 43 
 
 383 
 
 225 
 
 48 
 105 
 270 
 186 
 
 247 
 
 5,572 
 
 245 
 
 966 
 
 1,261 
 
 254 
 
 790 
 
 3,952 
 
 1,375 
 
 300 
 
 471 
 
 1,041 
 
 856 2,227 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 169 
 
 11,010 6,516 
 
 4,121 191 
 
 909 
 1,643 
 
 4,245 
 
 514 
 
 7,311 
 
 35,552 
 
 909 
 225 
 
 4,245 
 
 110 
 
 5,489 
 
 15,895 
 
 1,418 
 
 404 
 
 112 
 76 
 
 188 
 
 71 
 
 90 
 
 10 
 
 213 
 
 270 
 
 59 
 
 713 
 
 1,044 
 
 3,313 
 1,231 
 
 125 
 1,912 
 
 196 
 
 598 
 
 771 
 
 412 
 
 412 
 
 O 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 £ 
 288 
 
 136 
 
 497 
 15 
 
 329 
 
 1,265 
 
 195 
 
 195 
 
 For Ulster Tenant-Right or 
 
 SIMILAR CdSTOM, OR INCOMING 
 
 Payments. 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 24 
 
 509 
 
 0) CD 
 O O 
 
 .Sfl 
 ■° >. 
 
 OS ^ 
 03 S 
 
 500 
 
 o 
 
 ■-g 
 
 o g 
 
 a 
 
 24 
 
 533 
 
 500 
 
 33 
 
 1,382 
 394 
 
 235 
 
 57 
 
 43 
 
 7,374 
 
 2,111 
 
 1,013 
 448 
 125 
 934 
 
 555 
 
 3,075 
 
 T89 
 
 364 
 
 379 
 138 
 
 1,671 517 
 
 663 
 
 1,822 
 
 749 
 
 9,896 
 
 2,796 
 
 6,965 '2,543 
 
 600 
 
 3,359 
 
 518 
 
 512 
 454 
 
 4,477 966 
 
 340 
 
 2.475 
 
 260 
 
 64 
 
 2,815 324 
 
 19,650 
 
 4,366 
 
 10,613 
 
 3,782 
 
 372 
 
 20 
 
 125 
 
 22 
 
 34 
 
 270 
 
 557 
 
 127 
 133 
 
 190 
 
 3,989 
 
 300 
 
 11,416 
 
 3,948 
 
 5,260 
 
 8,376 
 
 200 
 
 14,096 
 
 589 
 
 1,891 
 
 90 
 
 4,645 
 
 1,097 
 
 8,463 
 
 47,775 
 
 16,775 
 
 190 
 250 
 
 2,125 
 
 3.708 
 
 685 
 
 2,595 
 
 3,323 
 
 2,970 
 200 
 700 
 
 30 
 
 1,054 
 
 200 
 
 2,000 
 
 180 
 
 100 
 
 6,700 
 
 150 
 
 3,630 
 
 310 
 
 12,776 
 
 7,154 
 
 120 
 138 
 
 780 
 
 2,810 
 
 20 
 
 1,U7 
 
 905 
 
 11,070 5,920 
 
 372 
 
 260 
 
 889 2,277 
 
 48,308 17,275 12,809 7,154 
 
 11,070 
 
 5,9aoE 
 
( 33 ) 
 1879. IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Returns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 Appeals thom Land Sessions. 
 
 Amount decreed at Sessions. 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 p: 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 (U 
 
 
 
 
 ■a 
 
 r^ 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 13 
 
 Ti 
 
 =3 
 
 
 fe 
 
 <u 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 'P 
 
 ,S 
 
 'd 
 
 ■a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 « 
 
 .a 
 
 <1> 
 
 o > 
 
 O 
 
 ■Ji 
 
 1 
 
 a, 
 
 <! 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 
 O 
 
 p 
 
 ja.S 
 
 11 
 
 a 
 
 M 
 
 p 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 si 
 
 Amount 
 added on 
 Appeal. 
 
 
 
 Amount 
 
 reduced on 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 
 Amount decreed at Assizes 
 or by Judges of Consoli- 
 dated Jury Trial Court. 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 <l> 
 
 
 rO 
 
 .Q 
 
 •xi 
 
 Kl 
 
 o 
 
 <D 
 
 
 <U 
 
 f~* 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 0) 
 
 
 rd 
 
 n:3 
 
 ■+J 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 ^v, 
 
 S-ri 
 
 < 3 
 
 ^ s 
 
 i" 2J 
 
 p a 
 
 II 
 
 11 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 S3 S 
 te: 
 
 COUNTIES 
 AREANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 148 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 309 
 
 10 
 
 482 10 
 
 47 
 
 24 
 187 
 
 191 
 
 & 
 148 
 
 15 
 
 309 
 
 472 
 
 120 
 
 15 
 
 142 
 
 148 
 
 47 
 
 62 
 
 25 
 
 10 
 
 92 
 
 62 
 
 120 157 195 
 
 62 
 
 156 
 
 449 156 
 
 47 
 
 24 
 31 
 
 191 
 
 293 
 
 24 
 31 
 
 55 
 
 47 
 
 191 
 
 238 
 
 61 
 
 680 
 78 
 
 500 
 
 1,455 
 
 159 
 
 298 
 
 2,774 457 
 
 32 
 
 61 
 
 521 
 
 78 
 
 500 
 1,157 
 
 2,317 
 
 32 
 
 32 
 
 496 
 
 78 
 
 500 
 67 
 
 1,141 
 
 32 32 
 
 3,737 
 
 623 
 
 3,114 
 
 32 
 
 175 
 
 61 
 
 25 
 
 1,090 
 
 25 
 
 25 
 49 
 
 74 
 
 1,176 
 
 102 62 
 
 29 
 
 34 
 
 63 
 
 1,536 
 
 1,371 
 
 62 99 
 
 32 
 
 32 
 
 60 
 2 
 
 200 
 
 145 
 
 145 
 
 49 
 80 
 
 129 
 
 269 
 
 32 434 
 
 50 
 
 55 
 
 148 
 
 47 
 
 195 
 
 18 
 
 157 
 
 175 
 
 436 
 
 76 
 
 300 
 60 
 
 61 
 
 1,090 
 
 872 
 
 1,176 
 
 62 
 
 274 
 
 1,102 
 
 1,371 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow. 
 Dublin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny. 
 King's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 Wexford. 
 Wicklow. 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 Mcnstek: 
 Clare. 
 Cork, E. K 
 Cork, W. R. 
 Kerry. 
 Limerick. 
 Tipperary. 
 AVaterford. 
 
 Total of Munster. 
 
 UlstEK : 
 Antrim. 
 Armagh. 
 Cavan. 
 Donegal. 
 Down. 
 Fermanagh. 
 Londonderi'y. 
 Monaghau. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 CONNAUGIIT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Roscommon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 E 
 
'"m 
 
 ( 34 ) 
 lEELAND. 1880. 
 
 (58.) County Courts.— Table 2.— Land Sessions— Prockedings in the year 1880, under the 
 
 
 09 
 
 § 
 
 CO 
 
 dj 
 
 -§ 
 ',3 
 
 03 
 CA 
 V 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 Land Sessions. 
 
 Appeals. 
 
 Result op Ap- 
 peals HEARD. 
 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 Land Claim Cases. 
 
 Applications of 
 
 Tenants to confirm 
 
 Leases, 
 
 Applications of 
 
 Tenants to register 
 
 Improvements. 
 
 1 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 1 
 p< 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 CJ 
 
 3 
 
 33 
 
 
 i 
 s 
 
 t> 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 <D 
 
 CQ 
 
 o 
 
 en 
 a> 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 _a 
 
 o 
 % 
 .a 
 
 -a 
 
 a; 
 
 o 
 t3 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 < 
 
 ■TJ 
 
 O 
 
 3 
 
 ■a 
 
 o 
 
 13 
 
 .Q 
 
 -a 
 OJ 
 
 <u 
 
 -a 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 S 
 < 
 
 ■a 
 a 
 
 8 
 
 (ft 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
 O 
 
 (4 
 
 g 
 
 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 « IS 
 
 S 01 
 
 s a^.a 
 
 '-'2 a 
 
 s.aM 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 GJ 
 
 1 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 -a 
 u 
 
 W 
 
 o 
 ft. 
 
 '-3 
 
 -a 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 F4 
 
 o 
 
 nd 
 a 
 ci 
 
 ■13 
 
 £ 
 <l> 
 
 a 
 m 
 
 d 
 
 Ql 
 M 
 
 o 
 
 1 
 
 id 
 
 O 
 
 ■a 
 g 
 
 13 
 a 
 
 'i 
 
 d 
 
 i 
 
 1=1 
 
 ct 
 
 1 
 
 d 
 
 ■e 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 o 
 "p. 
 
 ni 
 
 1 
 m 
 
 1 
 
 "S 
 
 i 
 
 O 
 
 i3 
 a 
 
 bo 
 
 a 
 a 
 
 Qi 
 
 P. 
 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny 
 King's County 
 Longford 
 Louth 
 Meath - 
 Queen's County 
 "Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wicklow 
 
 2 
 3 
 4 
 8 
 2 
 2 
 2 
 3 
 3 
 2 
 6 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 3 
 1 
 6 
 3 
 1 
 2 
 3 
 2 
 9 
 2 
 
 2 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 2 
 
 2 
 1 
 2 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... ... 
 
 1 ■" 
 
 ::: i ;:; 
 
 ... 1 1 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 .'■■ 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 *i 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 ) 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 ... 
 ... 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 39 
 
 39 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 .... 
 
 1 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 Munstbk; 
 Clare - 
 Cork, E. R. - 
 Cork, W. R. - 
 Kerry 
 Limerick 
 ripperary 
 Waterford 
 
 2 
 5 
 5 
 3 
 2 
 4 
 3 
 
 7 
 17 
 5 
 9 
 3 
 5 
 6 
 
 3 
 5 
 5 
 .5 
 1 
 1 
 3 
 
 1 
 6 
 
 3 
 2 
 2 
 
 2 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 ... 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 6 
 
 1 
 2 
 
 ill 
 3 
 
 ill 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 Total of Munster 
 
 24 
 
 52 
 
 23 
 
 14 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ...1... 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 Ulster: 
 Antrim - 
 Armagh - 
 Cavan - 
 Donegal - 
 Down 
 Fermanagh 
 Londonderry - 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 2 
 3 
 3 
 3 
 
 4 
 2 
 3 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 12 
 15 
 23 
 
 9 
 22 
 23 
 
 7 
 18 
 
 4 
 6 
 9 
 9 
 4 
 5 
 5 
 4 
 3 
 
 2 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 5 
 
 5 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 12 
 
 3 
 
 14 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 • •• 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 4 
 2 
 8 
 2 
 
 4 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 1 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 
 Total of Ulster - 
 
 26 
 
 134 
 
 49 
 
 11 
 
 61 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 8 
 
 22 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 14 
 
 
 CoNNATJGHT : 
 
 Galway - 
 Leitrim - 
 Mayo 
 
 Roscommon - 
 Sligo 
 
 12 
 3 
 6 
 
 10 
 
 92 
 3 
 
 12 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 186 
 2 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 t'i 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 1 
 
 h 
 
 ,,. 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 31 
 
 118 
 
 10 
 95 
 
 1 
 39 
 
 92 
 172 
 
 10 
 32 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 S 
 
 
 2 
 4 
 
 48 
 
 16 
 
 32 
 
 2 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 Total of Ireland 
 
 120 
 
 338 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 19 
 
 
 Pending at end of year. t Approximated by Clerk of Peace. 
 
 t The Clerk of, the Peace states that the alleged value of the improvements sought to be registered amounted to the sum of 
 18,439/. 13«. lid. 
 
( 35 ) 
 1880. IRELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Eeturns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 
 Amouxt Claimed. 
 
 Amount decreed, a.nu 
 Costs. 
 
 For Loss on quitting Holding, oc 
 
 DiSTUllBAKOE, wmcN CLAIMED OR 
 
 Decreed separately. 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 £ 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 ci 
 m 
 
 1 
 
 O 
 
 11 
 
 IS 
 
 ■■3g 
 
 Pi o 
 
 a 
 
 ^ 1 
 
 a 
 
 i 
 
 CD 
 
 p 
 
 .9 
 S 
 
 5 
 
 
 1— 1 
 
 T3 
 Ol 
 
 1 
 
 CO 
 
 *^ 
 
 to 
 
 i 
 
 >% 
 o 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 a 
 -3 
 
 a 
 
 p< 
 
 w. 
 
 6 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 .& 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ! 
 
 >t-9 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 % 
 
 a 
 a 
 
 S 
 
 o 
 
 g 
 
 
 
 SB 
 ■a 
 
 ■% 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 ho 
 na 
 
 =1 
 
 ¥ 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 § 
 
 a 
 <1 
 
 t 
 
 a 
 ■S. 
 
 R 
 
 
 f 
 t 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 
 e+H 
 
 
 a 
 =1 
 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 Amount Claimed. 
 
 i 
 
 
 M 
 
 CD 
 
 rd 
 CL) 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 
 -a 
 
 § 
 
 CO 
 
 2J . 
 II 
 
 IS 
 
 t % 
 CO F-l 
 
 Oh (U 
 
 |« 
 
 OJ "^ 
 
 i a 
 
 a 
 1-1 
 
 p 
 
 1 
 
 .g 
 
 d 
 1— ( 
 
 -A 
 
 to 
 
 1 
 
 CD 
 
 d 
 
 
 A 
 
 ■Jfl 
 
 bo 
 
 a 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 g 
 1*. 
 
 d 
 
 AERANGBD 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 
 & 
 
 1,359 
 
 3,809 
 
 2,835 
 
 585 
 
 919 
 
 250 
 
 587 
 
 §1,827 
 
 514 
 
 468 
 
 4,226 
 
 241 
 
 1,336 
 
 1,827 
 
 - 247 
 
 1,401 
 
 £ 
 1,137 
 
 285 
 924 
 
 493 
 57 
 
 587 
 
 89 
 
 1,235 
 
 161 
 
 & 
 
 222 
 104 
 
 221 
 193 
 
 267 
 
 379 
 
 1,412 
 
 80 
 
 s. 
 
 3,420 
 575 
 585 
 205 
 
 178 
 
 & 
 
 343 
 129 
 166 
 
 158 
 
 23 
 
 148 
 
 26 
 
 567 
 
 18 
 
 £ 
 
 186 
 35 
 
 104 
 11 
 60 
 
 9 
 
 112 
 
 9 
 
 £ 
 157 
 
 94 
 166 
 
 54 
 
 12 
 88 
 
 "17 
 
 455 
 
 9 
 
 £ 
 27 
 10 
 27 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 10 
 
 '4 
 
 52 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 19 
 
 17 
 
 7 
 
 "4 
 
 £ 
 303 
 
 448 
 98 
 132 
 181 
 61 
 151 
 212 
 153 
 
 £ 
 
 181 
 200 
 
 £ 
 250 
 
 118 
 
 18 
 
 132 
 
 11 
 12 
 73 
 
 £ 
 63 
 
 173 
 80 
 
 6.1 
 
 140 
 
 80 
 
 £ 
 157 
 
 94 
 
 88 
 17 
 88 
 
 "8 
 13 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow. 
 Dublin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny. 
 King's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath . 
 Wexford. 
 Wioklow. 
 
 
 17,620 4,811 
 
 4,968 
 
 2,878 
 
 4,963 
 
 1,578 
 
 526 
 
 1,052 
 
 147 
 
 63 
 
 1,739 
 
 381 
 
 614 
 
 587 
 
 157 
 
 308 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 
 1,348 
 3,852 
 
 923 
 1,733 
 
 730 
 2,270 
 1,420 
 
 194 
 471 
 
 95 
 
 1,048 
 530 
 
 550 
 1,243 
 
 922 
 
 1,061 
 
 99 
 
 236 
 
 890 
 
 65 
 1,530 
 
 577 
 631 
 986 
 
 539 
 
 608 
 
 229 
 563 
 434 
 286 
 15 
 139 
 333 
 
 85 
 328 
 113 
 153 
 
 51 
 229 
 
 144 
 235 
 321 
 133 
 15 
 88 
 104 
 
 35 
 33 
 
 32 
 
 5 
 
 27 
 
 11 
 t5 
 
 546 
 184 
 467 
 303 
 305 
 
 344 
 
 53 
 
 184 
 
 84 
 
 243 
 
 467 
 
 296 
 
 79 
 
 260 
 
 7 
 226 
 
 250 
 
 199 
 
 232 
 
 127 
 
 15 
 
 301 
 
 Munster: 
 Clare. 
 
 Cork, E. R. 
 Cork, W. R. 
 Kerry. 
 Limerick. 
 Tipperary. 
 Waterford. 
 
 
 12,275 
 
 2,338 
 
 5,001 
 
 3,789 
 
 1,147 
 
 1,999 
 
 959 1,040 
 
 i 
 
 132 
 
 16 
 
 2,149 
 
 321 
 
 1,34'5 
 
 233 
 
 250 
 
 874 
 
 Total of Munster. 
 
 
 1,472 
 2,194 
 4,017 
 14,225 
 2,996 
 6,955 
 19,686 
 1,409 
 7,545 
 
 814 
 332 
 2,658 
 2,027 
 3,917 
 12,672 
 598 
 5,858 
 
 1,29.'5 
 
 1,155 
 
 2,964 
 
 3,201 
 
 561 
 
 1,673 
 
 1,204 
 
 811 
 
 987 
 
 200 
 150 
 408 
 117 
 4,810 
 
 177 
 
 225 
 
 521 
 
 8,216 
 
 1,248 
 1,000 
 
 700 
 
 344 
 358 
 1,272 
 1,071 
 144 
 290 
 327 
 189 
 173 
 
 136 
 
 110 
 51 
 
 203 
 64 
 
 108 
 69 
 17 
 32 
 
 208 
 248 
 1,221 
 868 
 80 
 182 
 258 
 172 
 141 
 
 23 
 
 34 
 
 73 
 
 69 
 
 4 
 
 t28 
 28 
 
 123 
 20 
 
 10 
 7 
 9 
 4 
 
 33 
 
 205 
 
 53 
 
 526 
 
 1,542 
 
 1,313 
 
 35 
 
 91 
 
 959 
 
 1,048 
 
 • 35 
 
 205 
 
 53 
 
 212 
 297 
 134 
 
 223 
 32 
 
 254 
 131 
 
 8 
 
 42 
 121 
 105 
 
 29 
 
 35 
 
 Ulster : 
 Antrim. 
 Armagh. 
 Cavau. 
 Donegal. 
 Down. 
 Fermanagh. 
 Londonderry. 
 Monaghan. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 
 60,499 
 
 28,876 
 
 13,851 
 
 5,685 
 
 12,087 
 
 4,168 
 
 790 
 
 3,378 
 
 302 
 
 63 
 
 3,674 
 
 2,133 
 
 901 
 
 255 
 
 385 
 
 340 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 
 12,113 
 
 272 
 
 1,838 
 
 937 
 
 11,203 
 
 157 
 524 
 210 
 
 115 
 
 1,002 
 
 465 
 
 910 
 312 
 
 262 
 
 66 
 260 
 133 
 
 22 
 
 94 
 
 132 
 
 "44 
 
 166 
 
 1 
 
 "7 
 51 
 
 30 
 
 114 
 
 118 
 
 "44 
 
 "70 
 
 ... 
 
 118 
 
 66 
 
 CONNAUGIIT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leiti-im. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Rosccmmou. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 
 15,160 
 
 12,094 
 
 1,582 
 
 1,222 
 
 262 
 
 459 
 
 248 
 
 211 
 
 58 
 
 30 
 
 232 
 
 44 
 
 70 
 
 
 118 
 
 66 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. \ 
 
 
 105554 
 
 48,119 
 
 25,402 
 
 13,574 
 
 18,459 
 
 8,204 
 
 2,523 
 
 5,681 
 
 639 
 
 172 
 
 7,794 
 
 2,879 
 
 2,930 
 
 1,075 
 
 910 
 
 1,588 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 § The Clerk of the Peace reports that these cases were settled. 
 The Clerk of the Peace reports that this case was withdrawn or settled. 
 1: Eighty-two cases settled in Court during progress of trial. 
 
( 36 ) 
 
 lEELAND. 1880. 
 
 (58.) County CoimTS.— Table 2 continued.— Land Sessions— Proceedings in the year 1880, under the 
 
 COUNTIES 
 AEEANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny- 
 King's County 
 Longford 
 Louth 
 Meath - 
 Queen's County 
 Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wicklow 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 Munster: 
 Clare 
 
 Cork, E. E. 
 Cork, W. E. 
 Kerry 
 Limerick 
 Tipperary 
 Waterford 
 
 Total of Munster 
 
 Ulster : 
 Antrim - 
 Armagh - 
 Cavan - 
 Donegal - 
 Down 
 Fermanagh 
 Londonderry - 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 CoNNADaHT : 
 GalTvay - 
 Lietrlm - 
 Mayo 
 
 Eoscommon 
 Sligo - 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 EoK Improvements, when claimed 
 
 OR DECREED SEPABATELT. 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 
 
 -N 
 
 
 h a 
 
 QJ 
 
 r^ -^ 
 
 Q 
 
 ■SP 
 
 
 <4h Vh 
 
 ,^ 
 
 O O 
 
 o 
 
 ■^ 4) 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CM OJ 
 
 a 
 
 •^1^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O) *" 
 
 i! .-. 
 
 -1 
 
 oJ THJ 
 
 0| 
 
 a 
 
 l=! 
 
 1— I 
 
 i— 1 
 
 o 
 
 .li 
 
 1,359 
 
 3,506 
 
 2,835 
 
 585 
 
 471 
 
 152 
 
 50 
 
 1,646 
 
 206 
 
 317 
 
 2,620 
 
 1,336 
 
 1,646 
 
 1,201 
 
 13,835 
 
 4,183 
 
 802 
 
 1,407 
 
 374 
 
 660 
 
 425 
 
 1,700 
 
 1,076 
 
 6,444 
 
 141 
 
 152 
 
 95 
 
 950 
 
 446 
 
 1,784 
 
 £ 
 
 1,137 
 
 35 
 
 924 
 
 375 
 40 
 50 
 
 78 
 
 2,727 
 
 307 
 647 
 374 
 565 
 20 
 
 630 
 
 2,543 
 
 it 
 
 222 
 
 51 
 
 48 
 112 
 
 206 
 
 239 
 
 1,241 
 
 For Loss on quitting Holding, ok 
 
 Disturbance and Improvements, 
 
 when claimed ok decreed not 
 
 separately. 
 
 ■c 
 
 3,420 
 
 575 
 
 585 
 
 48 
 
 178 
 
 2,119 
 
 4,806 
 
 65 
 
 405 
 750 
 
 1,220 
 
 680 
 
 545 
 
 2,308 
 
 1,063 
 
 4,761 
 
 3,963 
 
 372 
 
 372 
 
 100 
 936 
 429 
 
 35 
 35 
 
 289 
 608 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 =S o 
 
 o c3 
 
 to rC 
 
 O .a 
 
 £ 
 343 
 
 35 
 166 
 
 70 
 
 B 
 
 38 
 
 18 
 18 
 
 305 
 
 247 
 
 1,394 
 
 247 
 
 694 1,946 
 
 30 
 
 339 2,261 
 
 170 81 
 
 159 50 
 
 32 
 
 897 
 
 730 
 
 570 
 
 c3 fcj 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 ns 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 ■u 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 C3 
 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 bo 
 
 
 !S 
 
 
 
 
 •| 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 p< 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 
 1— ( 
 
 1— 1 
 
 
 o 
 
 Foe Ulster Tenant-Eight ok 
 
 srsiiLAE Custom, or Incoming 
 
 Payments. 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 
 305 
 
 1,222 
 
 17i 
 
 247 1,527 
 
 135 
 
 98 
 
 596 
 81 
 
 236 
 
 172 
 
 1,530 
 
 50 
 
 236 
 
 2,962 
 
 274 
 369 
 
 23 
 60 
 
 577 
 
 1,015 
 
 1,978 
 
 2,822 
 
 79 
 
 188 
 
 532 
 
 2,189 
 
 233 
 
 913 
 
 1,816 
 
 22 
 
 554 
 
 576 
 
 224 
 32 
 
 139 
 
 395 
 
 574 
 232 
 558 
 
 188 
 
 96 
 
 1,972 
 
 490 
 
 330 
 
 1,,500 
 
 1,198 
 
 79 
 
 436 
 217 
 
 87 
 111 
 246 
 1,066 
 
 86 
 292 
 672 
 264 
 
 25 
 
 O 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 720 
 
 li 
 in 
 
 o o 
 
 n3 0) 
 a 9 
 
 g 3 
 
 ■-^ 1^ 
 
 CO o 
 
 a 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 200 
 
 720 
 
 ... 
 
 690 
 
 
 1,179 
 
 240 
 
 2,039 
 
 100 
 
 11,360 
 
 2,100 
 
 1,711 
 
 1,390 
 
 3,105 
 
 1,895 
 
 13,424 
 
 7,474 
 
 505 
 
 130 
 
 5,321 
 
 3,851 
 
 200 
 
 600 
 825 
 1,464 
 1,9.50 
 171 
 440 
 640 
 375 
 770 
 
 O 
 
 •d 
 
 
 a 
 
 > 
 
 (U 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 03 
 
 
 
 >4 
 
 SO 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 -g 
 
 
 
 Pi 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 m 
 
 -a 
 
 O) 
 
 
 r-) OS 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 520 
 
 520 
 
 200 
 
 150 
 
 150 
 
 50 
 
 4,810 
 
 90 
 114 
 
 275 
 7,150 
 
 720 
 500 
 
 700 
 
 250 
 
 66 
 
 600 
 
 765 
 
 125 
 298 
 164 
 138 
 
 8,121 
 
 910 
 1.58 
 
 465 
 
 5,943 
 
 1,465 
 
 455 
 113 
 
 1,533 
 
 Total of Ireland. 29,933 
 
 568 
 
 12,478 
 
 45 
 465 
 
 70 
 
 643 
 
 83 
 
 455 
 
 510 
 
 •,245 
 
 455 
 
 133 
 
 9,380 
 
 3,620 4,250 
 
 11,203 
 
 1,838 
 354 
 
 133 
 
 3,864 
 
 6,346 
 
 1,640 
 
 13,395 
 
 10,748 
 
 524 
 210 
 
 1,002 
 
 11,482 
 
 27,683 
 
 15,582 
 
 1,002 
 
 7,692 
 
 455 
 312 
 
 1,510 
 
 144 
 
 1,339 
 
 260 
 
 39,324 
 
 17,180,7,235 
 
 6,360 
 
 9,549 
 
 767 144 
 
 2,755 
 
 1,654 
 
 260 
 
 2,570 
 
 40,144 
 
 17,180 
 
 7,535 
 
 2,406 
 
 5,880 
 
 9,549 2,406 
 
( 37 ) 
 1880. lEELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, froni Eeturns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 ^ Appeals fkom Land Sessions. 
 
 
 Amount decreed at Sessions. 
 
 Amount 
 added on 
 Appeal. 
 
 Amount 
 
 reduced on 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 Amount decreed at Assizes 
 or hy Judges of Consoli- 
 dated Jury Trial Court. 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 In Appeals entered. 
 
 1 
 
 OS 
 
 1 
 
 < 
 
 t— t 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 'd 
 
 
 
 ■'qj 
 
 -l 
 
 1 
 
 l.g 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 ^ a 
 
 '6 
 2 
 
 a» 
 
 >■ 
 
 1 
 .2 
 
 a 
 "r 
 s 
 
 OJ 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 .S.g 
 
 an 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ll 
 Jl 
 
 .0 
 
 •1-3 
 
 § 
 1' 
 
 a 
 
 s 
 
 s 
 
 u 
 
 0) 
 
 R . 
 
 'S 
 oj a 
 t' a 
 
 ARRANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 129 
 "l8 
 
 
 129 
 
 18 
 
 £ 
 
 18 
 
 .e 
 
 129 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 32 
 
 £ 
 
 & 
 
 £ 
 
 50 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 i'29 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow. 
 Duhlin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny. 
 King's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 Wexford. 
 Wicklow. 
 
 147 
 
 ... 
 
 147 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 129 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 50 
 
 
 129 
 
 Total of Leiuster. 
 
 47 
 66 
 
 97 
 "64 
 
 13 
 
 47 
 . 66 
 
 "97 
 51 
 
 ... 
 
 29 
 
 47 
 
 51 
 
 66 
 68, 
 
 ^;;;! 
 
 19 
 
 
 29 
 
 51 
 
 ... 
 
 48 
 
 18 
 
 66 
 68 
 
 MUNSTEK : 
 
 Clare. 
 
 Cork, E. E. 
 
 Cork, W. R. 
 
 Kerry. 
 
 Limerick. 
 
 Tipperary. 
 
 Waterford. 
 
 274 
 
 13 
 
 261 
 
 
 29 
 
 98 
 
 134 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 80 
 
 
 48 
 
 18 
 
 134 
 
 Total of Munster. 
 
 68 
 
 920 
 
 83 
 
 2,414 
 
 125 
 
 8 
 
 61 
 
 500 
 
 12 
 12.5 
 
 34 
 
 68 
 
 420 
 
 83 
 
 2,402 
 
 '"s 
 
 "27 
 
 147 
 
 68 
 
 273 
 
 1,485 
 
 83 
 
 917 
 
 8 
 27 
 
 ... 
 
 103 
 
 147 
 
 150 
 172 
 
 
 171 
 
 123 
 1,313 
 
 83 
 917 
 
 8 
 
 27 
 
 Ulster : 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 Armagh 
 
 Cavan. 
 • Donegal. 
 
 Down. 
 ■ [Fermanagh 
 
 Londonderry. 
 
 Monaghan. 
 
 Tyrone. 
 
 3,679 
 
 671 
 
 3,008 
 
 147 
 
 68 
 
 1,768 
 
 1,035 
 
 
 103 
 
 147 
 
 322 
 
 
 171 
 
 1,436 
 
 1,035 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 .1. 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 Connaught : 
 Galway. 
 Leitrim. 
 Mayo. 
 
 Roscommon, 
 Sljgo. 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 
 TotalofConuaught 
 
 4,100 
 
 684 
 
 3,416 147 115 1,856 
 
 1,298 
 
 
 154 
 
 147 
 
 402 
 
 ... 
 
 269 
 
 1,454 
 
 1,298 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
OO 
 
 ?^ 
 
 ITS 
 
 Ob 
 
 B' 
 
 -t 
 
 
 CD 
 
 Ol 
 
 P- 
 
 
 to 
 
 o 
 
 
 J* 
 
 C 
 
 
 =H 
 
 
 P 
 >< 
 
 
 
 o 
 14 
 
 to Qj 
 
 tt 
 
 U> CO 
 
 
 ^0 
 
 H 
 
 c^S, 
 
 H 
 
 S- & 
 
 
 "< a 
 
 d 
 
 00 
 
 
 fed 
 
 '-' d 
 
 
 "3 
 
 ^ 
 
 t-l 
 
 o 
 w 
 o 
 
 
 O 
 
 S 
 ^ 
 
 s 
 
 b 
 
( 35 ) 
 1880. 
 
 lEELAND. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Returns made by the Clerks of tlie Peace. 
 
 Amoukt Claimed. 
 
 O 
 
 
 g s 
 ■-3 S 
 
 o. 
 
 
 o 
 
 u 
 
 o 
 
 Amoint decreed, and 
 Costs. 
 
 O 
 
 <5 
 
 
 
 Sri 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .y 
 
 
 2 
 
 03 
 
 n3 
 
 
 
 Ph 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1? 
 
 H 
 
 rd 
 
 l-q 
 
 ■S 
 
 bo 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 Vh 
 
 CD 
 
 "S 
 
 to 
 
 a 
 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 T=l 
 
 o 
 
 02 
 
 >i^ 
 
 O 
 
 
 a 
 
 CM 
 
 o 
 
 ri 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 [4 
 
 
 a 
 
 !=l 
 
 <H 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 a> 
 
 H 
 
 < 
 
 iz; 
 
 <J 
 
 o 
 
 FOK Loss ox QUITTING HOLDING, OK 
 DiSTUKBAKCE, WHEN CLAIMED Oli 
 
 Ueckeed sepakately. 
 
 Amount Claimed. 
 
 O 
 
 1=1 
 
 a:> 
 
 m 
 
 
 W m 
 
 QJ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^1 
 
 
 U 
 
 O 
 
 
 <4h S-> 
 
 .q 
 
 
 
 
 Tii 
 
 
 a 
 
 (U cu 
 
 &: 
 
 
 
 
 O O 
 
 Oh OJ 
 
 d 
 
 a 
 
 ■ SP 
 
 
 .23 
 
 -^ r>. 
 
 CO 
 
 -a 
 
 CO i^ 
 
 
 
 ei i 
 
 51 
 
 c3 
 
 O J 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 PI 
 
 
 
 
 
 H-4 
 
 1— 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 COUNTIES 
 AEKANGED 
 
 IN 
 PROVINCES. 
 
 £ 
 
 1,359 
 
 3,809 
 
 2,835 
 
 585 
 
 919 
 
 350 
 
 587 
 
 §1,827 
 
 514 
 
 468 
 
 '4,226 
 
 241 
 
 17,620 
 
 1,336 
 
 1,827 
 247 
 
 1,401 
 
 £ 
 1,137 
 
 28a» 
 924 
 
 493 
 
 57 
 587 
 
 89 
 
 1,235 
 
 161 
 
 £ 
 
 222 
 104 
 
 221 
 193 
 
 267 
 
 379 
 
 1,412 
 
 80 
 
 4,811 
 
 4,968 
 
 1,348 
 3,852 
 
 922 
 1,733 
 
 730 
 2,270 
 1,420 
 
 12,275 
 
 194 
 471 
 
 95 
 
 1,048 
 530 
 
 2,338 
 
 1,472 
 
 2,194 
 
 4,017 
 
 14,225 
 
 2,996 
 
 6,955 
 
 19,686 
 
 1,409 
 
 7,545 
 
 60,499 
 
 814 
 332 
 2,658 
 2,027 
 3,917 
 12,672 
 598 
 5,858 
 
 550 
 1,243 
 
 922 
 
 1,061 
 
 99 
 
 236 
 
 890 
 
 2,878 
 
 i,420 
 575 
 585 
 205 
 
 178 
 
 4,963 
 
 £ 
 
 343 
 129 
 166 
 
 158 
 
 23 
 
 148 
 
 26 
 
 567 
 
 18 
 
 1,578 
 
 65 
 1,530 
 
 577 
 631 
 986 
 
 539 
 
 608 
 
 229 
 563 
 434 
 286 
 15 
 139 
 333 
 
 5,001 
 
 1,295 
 
 1,155 
 
 2,964 
 
 3,201 
 
 561 
 
 1,673 
 
 1,204 
 
 811 
 
 987 
 
 28,876 
 
 12,113 
 272 
 
 1,838 
 937 
 
 11,203 
 157 
 524 
 210 
 
 13,851 5,685 
 
 3,789 
 
 1,147 
 
 200 
 150 
 408 
 117 
 4,810 
 
 115 
 
 1,002 
 
 465 
 
 15,160 
 
 105554 
 
 
 12,094 
 
 1,582 
 
 48,119 
 
 25,402 
 
 910 
 312 
 
 1,222 
 
 177 
 
 225 
 
 521 
 
 3,216 
 
 1,248 
 1,000 
 
 700 
 
 12,087 
 
 1,999 
 
 344 
 358 
 1,273 
 1,071 
 144 
 290 
 327 
 189 
 173 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 186 
 
 157 
 
 35 
 
 94 
 
 
 166 
 
 104 
 
 54 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 60 
 
 88 
 
 9 
 
 17 
 
 112 
 
 455 
 
 9 
 
 9 
 
 526 
 
 1,052 
 
 85 
 
 144 
 
 328 
 
 235 
 
 113 
 
 321 
 
 153 
 
 133 
 
 
 15 
 
 51 
 
 88 
 
 229 
 
 104 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 27 
 
 
 10 
 
 t8 
 
 27 
 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
 19 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 52 
 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 147 
 
 63 
 
 35 
 
 
 33 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 5 
 
 t5 
 
 27 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 303 
 
 
 448 
 
 ... 
 
 98 
 
 
 132 
 
 
 181 
 
 181 
 
 61 
 
 
 151 
 
 
 212 
 
 200 
 
 153 
 
 
 1,739 
 
 381 
 
 £ 
 250 
 
 lis 
 
 18 
 132 
 
 11 
 12 
 73 
 
 614 
 
 546 
 184 
 467 
 303 
 305 
 
 344 
 
 53 
 
 184 
 
 84 
 
 959| 1,040 132 
 
 136 
 
 110 
 51 
 
 203 
 64 
 
 108 
 69 
 17 
 32 
 
 4,168 
 
 790 
 
 208 
 248 
 1,221 
 868 
 80 
 182 
 258 
 172 
 141 
 
 23 
 34 
 73 
 69 
 4 
 
 t28 
 28 
 
 t23 
 20 
 
 16 
 
 2,149 
 
 205 
 
 53 
 
 526 
 
 1,542 
 
 1,313 
 
 35 
 
 3,378 
 
 302 
 
 262 
 
 262 
 
 13,574 18,459 
 
 66 
 260 
 133 
 
 459 
 
 8,204 
 
 22 
 
 94 
 
 132 
 
 44 
 
 166 
 
 1 
 
 63 
 
 3,674 
 
 321 
 
 243 
 
 467 
 
 296 
 
 79 
 
 260 
 
 £ 
 53 
 
 173 
 80 
 
 61 
 
 140 
 
 80 
 
 157 
 
 587 
 
 7 
 226 
 
 1,345 
 
 91 
 
 959 
 
 1,048 
 
 35 
 
 205 
 
 53 
 
 212 
 297 
 134 
 
 233 
 
 223 
 32 
 
 157 
 
 £ 
 94 
 
 17 
 
 8 
 13 
 
 308 
 
 250 
 
 199 
 
 232 
 
 127 
 
 15 
 
 301 
 
 250 
 
 874 
 
 254 
 131 
 
 2,133 
 
 30 
 
 248 
 
 2,523 
 
 211 
 
 5,681 
 
 58 
 
 639 
 
 30 
 
 114 
 118 
 
 44 
 
 901 
 
 255 
 
 385 
 
 42 
 121 
 105 
 
 29 
 
 35 
 
 340 
 
 70 
 
 232 
 
 172 7,794 
 
 44 
 
 2,879 
 
 70 
 
 2,930 
 
 118 
 
 1,075 
 
 118 
 
 910 
 
 66 
 
 66 
 
 1,588 
 
 Leinstek : 
 Carlow. 
 Dublin. 
 Kildare. 
 Kilkenny. 
 King's County. 
 Longford. 
 Louth. 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 Westmeath. 
 Wexford. 
 Wicklow. 
 
 Total of Leinster. 
 
 Munstek: 
 Clare. 
 
 Cork, B. E. 
 Cork, W. K. 
 Kerry. 
 Limerick. 
 Tipperary. 
 Waterford. 
 
 Total of Muuster. 
 
 Ulstee : 
 Antrim. 
 Armagh. 
 Cavan. 
 Donegal. 
 Down. 
 Permanagh. 
 Londonderry. 
 Monaghan. 
 Tyrone. 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 CONNAUOHT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Eosccmmon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught, i 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 (181.) 
 
 § The Clerk of the Peace reports that these cases were settled. 
 The Clerk of the Peace reports that this case was withdrawn or settled. 
 Tf Eighty-two cases settled in Court during progress of trial. 
 
( 36 ) 
 
 lEELAND. 1880. 
 
 (58.) County Couets.— Table 2 continued.— Land Sessions— Peocbedings in the year 1880, under the 
 
 COUNTIES 
 ARRANGED 
 
 m 
 
 rROVINCES. 
 
 EoR Impkovembnts, when claimed 
 
 OK DECREED SEPAKATELT. 
 
 Amoun.t claimed. 
 
 
 
 
 to 
 
 fe 
 
 S2 
 
 
 a 
 
 O 
 
 p 
 
 <^ 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 n:} 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ft ttJ 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 f^ 
 
 OJ 
 
 .Q 
 
 o 
 
 § 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1— I 
 
 
 CO O) 
 
 d 
 
 Leinstee : 
 Carlow - 
 Dublin - 
 Kildare - 
 Kilkenny 
 King's County- 
 Longford 
 Xiouth 
 Meath - 
 Queen's Coiinty 
 Westmeath 
 Wexford 
 Wieklow 
 
 Total of Leinster 
 
 Munstek: 
 Clare - 
 Cork, E. R. 
 Cork, W. R. 
 Kerry 
 Limerick 
 Tipperary 
 Watertord 
 
 Total of Monster 
 
 Ulster : 
 Antrim - 
 Armagli - 
 Cavan - 
 Donegal - 
 Down 
 Fermanagh 
 Londonderry 
 Monaghan 
 Tyrone - 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 CoiraAUGKT : 
 Galway - 
 Lietrim - 
 Mayo 
 
 Roscommon - 
 Sligo 
 
 Total of Con- 
 naught. 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
 £ 
 
 1,3!59 
 
 3,506 
 
 2,835 
 
 685 
 
 471 
 
 152 
 
 50 
 
 1,646 
 
 206 
 
 317 
 
 2,620 
 
 13,835 
 
 1,336 
 
 1,646 
 
 1,201 
 
 4,183 
 
 2,727 
 
 802 
 
 1,407 
 
 374 
 
 660 
 
 425 
 
 1,700 
 
 1,076 
 
 141 
 153 
 
 95 
 
 950 
 446 
 
 6,444 1,784 
 
 680 
 2,308 
 4,761 
 
 372 
 
 ■& 
 
 1,137 
 
 35 
 
 924 
 
 375 
 40 
 50 
 
 78 
 
 EOR Loss ON QUITTING HOLDING, OK 
 
 DlSTDRBANCE AND IMPROVEMENTS, 
 
 WHEN CLAIMED OK DECREED NOT 
 
 SEPAKATELY. 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 O 
 
 £ 
 
 222 
 
 51 
 
 48 
 112 
 
 206 
 
 239 
 
 1,241 
 
 OS 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 s 
 
 
 IS 
 
 « 
 
 
 =n j; 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 o o 
 
 
 
 '^ S 
 
 XI 
 
 
 
 >■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^P 
 
 s 
 
 
 -y p.. 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A ^ 
 
 < ) 
 
 
 C rC3 
 
 
 9 
 
 d 
 
 13 
 
 
 3,420 
 
 585 
 48 
 
 178 
 
 2,119 
 
 4,806 
 
 307 
 647 
 374 
 565 
 20 
 
 630 
 
 2,543 
 
 65 
 
 405 
 750 
 
 1,220 
 
 289 
 608 
 
 £ 
 343 
 
 35 
 166 
 
 70 
 6 
 
 18 
 18 
 
 694 
 
 30 
 339 
 170 
 159 
 
 897 
 
 730 
 
 545 
 1,063 
 3,963 
 
 372 
 
 100 
 936 
 429 
 
 35 
 35 
 
 274 
 369 
 
 305 
 
 247 
 1,394 
 
 247 
 
 1,946 
 
 2,261 
 81 
 50 
 
 570 
 
 247 
 
 135 
 
 98 
 
 O 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 ]?OK Ulster Tenant-Right oe 
 
 similak cu.3t0m, ok incoming 
 
 Patments. 
 
 Amount claimed. 
 
 a 
 g 
 
 a 
 
 305 
 
 1,222 
 
 172 
 
 1,527 
 
 596 
 
 81 
 
 236 
 
 172 
 
 1,530 
 
 50 
 
 236 
 
 2,962 
 
 23 
 60 
 
 577 
 
 1,015 
 
 1,978 
 
 2,822 
 
 79 
 
 188 
 
 532 
 
 2,189 
 
 233 
 
 574 
 232 
 558 
 
 188 
 
 96 
 
 1,972 
 
 913 1,816 
 
 22 
 
 554 
 
 576 
 
 03 
 
 o 
 
 ■a 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 li 
 
 IS 
 
 o o 
 
 224 
 32 
 
 139 
 
 395 
 
 490 
 
 330 
 
 1,500 
 
 1,198 
 
 79 
 
 436 
 217 
 
 87 
 111 
 246 
 1,066 
 
 8,121 
 
 910 
 158 
 
 465 
 
 5,943 
 
 455 
 113 
 
 1,533 
 
 29,933 
 
 568 
 
 12,478 
 
 1,465 
 
 45 
 465 
 
 70 
 
 643 
 
 83 
 
 455 
 
 510 
 
 7,245 
 
 455 
 
 133 
 
 9,380 
 
 3,620 4,250 
 
 11,203 
 
 1,833 
 3,54 
 
 133 
 
 3,864 6,346 1,640 
 
 13,395 
 
 10,748 
 
 524 
 210 
 
 1,002 
 
 11,482 
 
 27,683 15,582 
 
 1,002 
 
 7,692 
 
 455 
 312 
 
 1,510 
 
 144 
 
 86 
 292 
 672 
 264 
 
 25 
 
 720 
 
 720 
 
 690 
 1,179 
 2,039 
 11,360 
 1,711 
 3,105 
 13,424 
 
 505 
 5,321 
 
 1,339 
 
 to OJ 
 
 "J 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 200 
 
 39,324 
 
 240 
 100 
 2,100 
 1,390 
 1,895 
 7,474 
 130 
 3,851 
 
 200 
 
 600 
 825 
 1,464 
 1,9,50 
 171 
 440 
 640 
 375 
 770 
 
 O 
 
 ■d 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 OS 
 
 
 s 
 
 bn 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 •2 
 
 
 
 
 Pi 
 
 
 O 
 
 rn 
 
 
 T3 
 
 a) 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 t 
 
 
 >. 
 
 fl 
 
 ti 
 
 
 < 
 
 520 
 
 520 
 
 17,180 
 
 7,235 
 
 200 
 
 150 
 
 150 
 
 50 
 
 4,810 
 
 90 
 
 114 
 
 275 
 
 7,150 
 
 720 
 500 
 
 700 
 
 5,360 
 
 9,549 
 
 260 
 
 767 144 
 
 2,755 1,654 
 
 260 
 
 3,570140,144 
 
 17,180 
 
 250 
 
 66 
 
 600 
 
 765 
 
 125 
 298 
 164 
 138 
 
 2,406 
 
 7,.535 
 
 5,880 
 
 9,549 
 
( 3V ) 
 1880. lEELAND. 
 
 ,ndlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, from Returns made by the Clerks of the Peace. 
 
 Appeals from Land Sessions. 
 
 
 Amount decreed at Sessions.- 
 
 Amount 
 added on 
 Appeal. 
 
 Amount 
 
 reduced on 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 Amount decreed at Assizes 
 or by Judges of Consoli- 
 dated Jury Trial Court. 
 
 COUNTIES 
 
 Pi 
 < 
 
 1 
 
 "3 
 
 
 a 
 
 m 
 
 1 
 
 a. 
 < 
 
 □Q 
 
 1 
 
 a 
 1— 1 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
 to 
 
 % 
 s 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 11 
 
 l.g 
 
 1 
 
 1=1 ■ 
 ft) :i 
 
 .si 
 
 1 
 
 CO 
 
 2 
 
 P . 
 
 ^ R 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 Cfi 
 
 ■| 
 P 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 i 
 
 a> 2 
 1.1 
 
 1 
 t 
 
 in 
 
 cu 
 <u 
 
 
 
 a> 
 
 P 
 
 1 
 .a 
 
 lU 
 
 3 
 
 
 2 
 
 i 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 <U 
 
 -s 
 
 1 
 
 .a.s 
 
 ,0 
 
 S 
 
 13 
 
 a 
 
 |3 
 
 || 
 
 <U s 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 
 CD 
 
 P . 
 2I 
 
 0) H 
 
 AEEANGED 
 IN 
 
 PEOVINCES. 
 
 129 
 18 
 
 e, 
 
 129 
 18 
 
 & 
 
 18 
 
 £ 
 
 129 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 32 
 
 ,s 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 50 
 
 £ 
 
 129 
 
 V 
 Leinstek. ; 
 
 Carlow. 
 
 Dublin. 
 
 Kildare. 
 
 Kilkenny. 
 
 King's County. 
 
 Longford. 
 
 Louth. 
 
 Meath. 
 
 Queen's County. 
 
 Westmeath. 
 
 Wexford. 
 
 Wicklow. 
 
 147 
 
 
 147 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 129 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 50 
 
 
 129 
 
 Total of Leiuster 
 
 47 
 66 
 
 "97 
 64 
 
 13 
 
 47 
 66 
 
 97 
 "51 
 
 ... 
 
 29 
 
 47 
 51 
 
 66 
 68 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 29 
 51 
 
 ... 
 
 48 
 
 18 
 
 66 
 68 
 
 MUNSTEK : 
 Clare. 
 Cork, E. E. 
 Cork, W. K. 
 Kerry. 
 Tiimerick. 
 Tipperary. 
 Waterford. 
 
 274 
 
 13 
 
 261 
 
 ... 
 
 29 
 
 98 
 
 134 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 80 
 
 
 48 
 
 18 
 
 134 
 
 Total of Munster, 
 
 68 
 
 920 
 83 
 
 i,414 
 
 125 
 
 8 
 
 61 
 
 500 
 
 12 
 
 125 
 
 34 
 
 68 
 
 420 
 
 83 
 
 2,402 
 
 "8 
 
 27 
 
 147 
 
 68 
 
 273 
 1,485 
 
 83 
 917 
 
 8 
 
 "27 
 
 
 103 
 
 147 
 
 150 
 172 
 
 ••■ 
 
 171 
 
 123 
 1,313 
 
 83 
 917 
 
 8 
 
 27 
 
 Ulstee : 
 
 Antrim. 
 
 Armagh 
 
 Cavan. 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 Down. 
 1 [Fermanagh 
 
 Londonderrj'. 
 
 Monaghan. 
 
 Tyrone. 
 
 ,679 
 
 671 
 
 3,008 
 
 147 
 
 68 
 
 1,758 
 
 1,035 
 
 
 103 
 
 147 
 
 322 
 
 
 171 
 
 1,436 
 
 1,035 
 
 Total of Ulster. 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 . 
 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 • •• 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 CoNNAUGHT : 
 
 Galway. 
 
 Leitrim. 
 
 Mayo. 
 
 Eoscommon. 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 TotalofConnaught. 
 
 ,100 
 
 684 
 
 3,416 
 
 147 
 
 115 1,856 
 
 1,298 
 
 
 154 
 
 147 
 
 402 
 
 269 
 
 1,454 
 
 1,298 
 
 Total of Ireland. 
 
■00 
 
 
 CT 
 
 
 CIS 
 
 si 
 
 0=^ K S^ fZ2 
 
 1^ 'T3 
 
 
 CD 
 
 n 
 
 00 
 O 
 
 CO M' 
 
 tJQ 
 
 a 
 
 QO O 
 00 2 
 
 CD 
 
 00 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 
 CD 
 
 Cfi 
 
 
 Cfi_ 
 
 S' 
 
 w 
 
 s 1> 
 
 s 
 
 H 
 
 w 
 t-l 
 
 a; 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 ^ 5 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 03 O 
 
 o 
 w 
 
 a 
 
 pi 
 
REPORT 
 
 OF 
 
 HER MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS OF INODIRT 
 
 INTO 
 
 THE WORKING OP THE 
 
 LANDLORD AP TENANT (IRELAND) ACT, 1870, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 ACTS AMENDING THE SAME. 
 
 '^^ttBtnUti ia hoi^ ^amtB ai ^arliamenf bg (|[;0inmantr 0f "^tt H^tstg. 
 
 DUBLIN: 
 
 PRINTED BY ALEX. THOM & CO., 87, 88, & 89, ABBEY-STEEET, 
 
 THE QUEEN'S FEINTING OFFICE. 
 FOR HER majesty's STATIONERY OFFICE. 
 
 1881. 
 
EEPOET 
 
 ov 
 
 HER MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS OF INQUIRY 
 
 INTO 
 
 THE WORKING OF 
 
 THE LANDLOED MD TENMT (IRELAOT)) ACT, 1870, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 ACTS AMENDING THE SAME. 
 
 IPnsmtth to bat^ Jiotises of iparliammt % Commanir of '§tx W^vqmt^, 
 
 DUBLIN: 
 PRINTED BY ALEX. THOM & CO., 87, 88, & 89, ABBEY-STREET, 
 
 THE queen's printing OFFICE. 
 FOB HEE MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE. 
 
 1881. 
 
 [C— 2779] Price 9d. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 p«g« 
 
 COMMISSION, iii 
 
 REPORT, ............ 1 
 
 Papers referred to in Report : — 
 
 No. 1. — Circular Letter, . . . . . . . . . .65 
 
 No. 2. — Heads of Inquiry, . . . . . . . . .65 
 
 No. 3. — Circular Letter, . . . . . . . . . .67 
 
 No. 4. — Circular Letter, ...... .... 67 
 
THE COMMISSION. 
 
 VICTORIA REG. 
 
 VICTORIA, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
 Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, to Our nght Trusty and Well-beloved Cousin, 
 Fredekick George BRiBAZON, Earl of Bessborough ; Our right Trusty and Well- 
 beloved Councillor, Richard Dowse, one of the Barons of the Exchequer Division of 
 Our High Court of Justice in that part of Our said United Kingdom of Great Britain 
 and Ireland called Ireland ; Our Trusty and Well-beloved Charles Owen O'Conor, 
 Esquire (commonly called The O'Conor Don) ; Our Trusty and Well-beloved Arthur 
 MacMorrouqh Kavanagh, Esquire; and Our Trusty and Well-beloved William Shaw, 
 Esquire, Greeting : 
 
 Whereas We have deemed it expedient that a Commission should forthwith issue to 
 inquire into and report upon the working and operation of the " Landlord and Tenant 
 (Ireland) Act, 1870," and the Acts amending the same, and whether any and what 
 further amendments of the law are necessary or expedient with a view (firstly) to 
 improve the relation of Landlord and Tenant in that part of Our said United Kingdom 
 called Ireland, and (secondly) to facilitate the purchase by Tenants of their holdings. 
 
 Now Know \e, that We, reposing great trust and confidence in your knowledge, 
 discretion, and ability, have authorized and appointed, and by these presents do authorize 
 and appoint you the said Frederick George Brabazon, Earl of Bessborough, Richard 
 Dowse, Charles Owen O'Conor, Arthur MacMorrough Kavanagh, and W^illiam Shaw 
 to be Our Commissioners for the purposes aforesaid. 
 
 And for the better effecting the purposes of this Our Commission, We do by these 
 presents authorize and empower you, or any two or more of you, to call before you, or 
 any two or more of you, such persons as you may judge necessary to examine, and by 
 whom you may be the better informed in the several matters hereby submitted for 
 your consideration and everything connected therewith, and generally to inquire of and 
 concerning the premises by all other lawful ways and means whatsoever. 
 
 And also to call for, have access to, and examine such books, documents, papers, 
 writings, or records as you or any two or more of you shall judge likely to afford the 
 fullest information concerning the several matters hereby submitted for your considera- 
 tion. 
 
 And We also by these presents authorize and empower you, or any two or more of 
 you, to visit and personally inspect such places as you, or any two or more of you may 
 deem expedient for the more effectually carrying out the purposes aforesaid. And also 
 to employ such persons as you may think fit to assist you in undertaking any inquiry 
 which you may deem it expedient to make. 
 
 And Our Further Will and Pleasure is that you, or any two or more of you, do report 
 to us with all convenient speed, in writing under your hands and seals, your several 
 proceedings by virtue of this, Our Commission, and what you shall find touching or 
 concerning the premises, together with your opinion upon the matters hereby referred 
 for your consideration. 
 
 And We Further Will and Command and by these presents ordain that this, Our 
 Commission, shall continue in full force and virtue. And that you. Our Commissioners, 
 do from time to time proceed in the execution thereof, although the same be not con- 
 tinued from time to time by adjournment. 
 
 And for your further assistance in the execution of these presents. We do hereby 
 appoint Our Trusty and Well-beloved Sir George Young, Baronet, to be Secretary to 
 this. Our Commission, and require you to nse his services and assistance from time to 
 time as occasion may require. 
 
 Given at Our Court at Saint James's, the Twenty-ninth day of July, 
 1880, in the Forty -fourth Year of Our Reign. 
 
 By Her Majesty's Command, 
 
 (Signed), W. V. HARCOURT. 
 
 The Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Acts Inquiry Commission 
 
HEADS OF REPORT. 
 
 I. Proceedings of tlie Commission, .... 
 
 II. Tenant-right in Ireland, ..... 
 
 III. Conclusions from the Evidence, .... 
 
 IV. Whether it is sufficient to preserve the lines and amend the details 
 Y. Proposals for Legislation, ..... 
 
 VI. Purchase of their Holdings by Tenants, 
 
 711. The Condition of the Poor, ... 
 
 VIII. Conclusion, . . . 
 
 Supplementary Report by The O'Conoe Don, 
 
 Supplementary Report by W. Shaw, Esq., m.p., ... 
 
 Separate Report by Arthur McM. Kavanagh, Esq., 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 7 
 
 of the Land Act of 1870, 
 
 18 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 31 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 37 
 
 
 38 
 
 
 ' 52 
 
 
 55 
 
p ;>;■■' ■ Tj'*'} ■; 
 
 ?r 
 
 TO THE QUEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY. 
 
 N:B. — References in 
 ~ italics a,r& to evidence 
 
 difegreeing with, or 
 qi^alifying the con- 
 
 Mat it please Your Majesty, elusions expressed. 
 
 1. Your Majesty's Commission, bearing date the 29th of July, 1880, having directed The Commiasion, , 
 us to inquire into the working and operation of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) 
 
 Act, 1870, and the Acts amending the same, and whether any and what further amend- 
 ments of the law are necessary or expedient with a view (firstly) to improve the 
 relation of Landlord and, Tenant in.Ireland, and (secondly) to facilitate the purchase 
 by tenants of their holdings, we have to the best of our ability conducted the inquiry 
 committed to us, and having conferred together, we have now the honour to present our 
 Report. 
 
 1. Proceedings of the Commission. 
 
 2. AVe met in Dublin on the 7th of August, and appointed the 1st of September Circulars issued 
 to begin the examination of witnesses. In the meantime steps were taken to make by the Com- 
 known as widely as possible the existence and scope of the Commission, and evidence mission. 
 
 was tendered to us by a large number of persons. For the purpose of selecting the 
 persons best qualified to assist us in our inquiry, the circular (No. 1), which is printed 
 in the Appendix to our Report was sent to all persons tendering evidence, and in 
 reply thereto we received many valuable communications. We also issued a series 
 of questions, suggestive of the principal points on which we desired information, which, 
 was very widely distributed, and will be found reprinted in our Appendix (No. 2). 
 These questions were accompanied by a circular (No. 3) in which the object of our 
 seeking for answers to such questions was explained to be, not in order to their publica- 
 tion, but chiefly as a guide to ourselves in the selection of witnesses. 
 
 3. It has been impossible, in the short time at our command, to exhaust all the The evidence 
 evidence tendered on the various subjects of inquiry, and even to take from every taken by the Corn- 
 locality a specimen of the evidence- that was offered ; but it has been our endeavour ™^^^^°'^- 
 
 to aflford, in the printed evidence which forms the appendix to our Report, a fair 
 sample of the facts and opinions which constitute the material of the Landlord and 
 Tenant Question ; and we desire to place on record our conviction that the joicture so 
 presented, when taken in its entirety, is a fairly accurate and impartial representation 
 of the condition of the relations between Landlord and Tenant in Ireland, and of 
 the working of the law which regulates those relations at the present day. We 
 commenced taking evidence with the examination in Dublin of some of the judicial 
 and official authorities concerned in the administration of the Land Act of 1870 ; and 
 after hearing several other witnesses, chiefly from the counties near Dublin, of the 
 landlord and tenant classes, we proceeded on the 21st September to Belfast, and for the 
 remainder of that month were employed at that place and at Londonderry in hearing 
 evidence asio the working of the Act of 1870, chiefly in so far as it affected estates and 
 holdings subject to the Ulster custom of tenant-right. In the course of October and 
 November we visited in succession Sligo, Donegal, Castlebar, Roscommon, Galway, 
 Limerick, Killarney, Cork, Skibbereen, and Clonmel, taking evidence from the districts 
 surrounding those places, and thus obtaining representative testimony from the greater 
 part of Connaught and Munster ; and in December we held a second series of sittings 
 in Dublin, at which evidence was taken from many of the districts unavoidably passed 
 over in our journey, especially from the counties of Leinster previously omitted, and 
 also from several persons who from their published writings or personal reputation 
 appeared qualified to give valuable assistance. We have held in all sixty-five sittings, 
 at sixty-one of which evidence was taken ; and at these sittings we were favoured with 
 the experience and opinions of upwards of seven hundred witnesses. Among those- 
 who were examined were ■ eighty landowners, seventy land agents and five hundred 
 tenant farmers, together with several clergymen of different denominations, and some 
 ofiicials, barristers, solicitors, land-surveyors and professional valuators. 
 
 B 
 
Evidence in reply 
 to statements 
 affecting indi- 
 viduals. 
 
 2 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 4 In the course of this evidence many statements were made aflfecting individuals, 
 which there were no means at the time of verifying. Under these circumstances 
 we adopted the usual course of sending to the parties affected copies of the evidence 
 affecting them, accompanied with a circular (No. 4) which will be found printed 
 in the Appendix, offering to them the choice of appearing before us and giving evidence 
 in answer to those statements, or else of having printed m the Appendix to our Eeport 
 statements by themselves or their agents in reply. The evidence taken m pursuance 
 of this circular will be found printed in our Appendix (B), and the communicatioDl 
 received from those who were unable or who did not desire to attend are also printed 
 in their proper place (C). 
 
 Evidence from 5. Some evidence tendered us from the remoter parts of Donegal it proved impossible, 
 
 Western Donegal, consistently with our arrangements, to receive at any sitting of the Commission while- 
 
 we were on our journey ; and it was also difficult, from the great distance, to bring the. 
 
 witnesses to Dublin. Under these circumstances we directed our Assistant Secretary 
 
 to visit these parts, and the evidence submitted to him on the spot will be found: 
 
 embodied in his report to us in the Appendix (U). 
 
 Answers from 
 County Court 
 Judges. 
 
 6. Of the communications we have received, we desire to call attention to a valuable' 
 series of answers from County Court Judges to questions we issued, in reference to 
 points of difficulty in the working of the Act of 1870, which will be found printed in 
 our Appendix (E). 
 
 II. Tenant-Right in Ireland. 
 
 The Irish yearly 
 tenancy. 
 
 Compare Report 
 of the Devon 
 Commission, p. 
 15 ; Longfield, 
 39800, 39843. 
 
 Tenant-right (a.) 
 in Ulster. 
 
 M'Elroy, 4654 ; 
 Dufferin, 33066 ; 
 Marum, 35830 ; 
 Blake, 39757. 
 
 Devon Report, p. 
 14. 
 
 Townshend, 1641 
 Hanna, 8890. 
 
 7, We do not propose, after all that has been said and written on the subject, to 
 recount at length the recent history of the Irish Land Question. A few words only, 
 are necessary by way of preface. For many generations the great bulk of the land^ 
 under cultivation in Ireland has been Iield in small farms of under thirty acres, without 
 leases, upon parol tenancies from year to year. In these tenancies by the common law 
 the tenant has always had a right of property, which he might dispose of, and which, 
 was only determinable subject to conditions, the principal of which was the requirement 
 of six months' notice to quit, recently extended by the Act of 1877 to twelve months, 
 But this notice was too short, and the property right in consequence too evanescent, to 
 make the tenant's condition materially better than what it is sometimes popularly, 
 called, a tenancy at the will of the landlord. The landlord might, from year to year, 
 practically alter the future rent as he pleased ; and was entitled to turn out the tenant,, 
 if so minded, without assigning any reason. 
 
 8. Nevertheless, by a species of popular consent, almost universal, though without 
 legal sanction, tenants in this position have been regarded as possessing an interest in 
 their holdings, of which, so long as they paid their rents, it was thought unfair that 
 they should be deprived. In Ulster this consent was embodied in the well-known, 
 Custom of Tenant-Kight, which was variously defined, and has been based upon theories, 
 historical and juridical, of its origin, with which it is unnecessary here to deal. The, 
 report of the Devon Commission describes it as " a claim generally exercised by the 
 tenant to dispose of his holding for a valuable consideration," and it is at the present 
 day, usually stated for purposes of litigation in the following form : — " A usage whereby, 
 the tenant in occupation is entitled to sell his interest, commonly known as his tenant- 
 right, in his holding, subject to the rent at which it is held, or such altered rent as 
 shall not encroach upon the said interest or tenant right, at the best rate, to any solvent 
 tenant to whom the landlord shall not make reasonable objection ; or, if about to quit 
 the said holding, or on resumption of the said holding by the landlord, or if the land- 
 lord has indicated his intention to resume the said holding, is entitled to the value of 
 the said interest, or tenant-right, as if so sold to a solvent tenant." Of these two state-. 
 ments the first makes the tenant-right to consist solely in the right to sell, the second, 
 centres it upon that right. But it would be a mistake to suppose that the genera^ 
 consent, or prevailing sentiment, to which we have referred, was limited to this righf , 
 .of sale. Without a feeling that tenants were entitled to an actual interest or right of 
 occupancy in their holdings, larger than the legal tenancy, there could have been no 
 prevailing sentiment in favour of their right to realize that interest. That it was a 
 larger interest, and not the mere yearly tenancy, which the tenant sold, is obvious from 
 the price that was paid for tenant-right, which often amounted to from twenty to thirty 
 
REPORT. 3 
 
 .years' purchase of the rent, and sometimes to a greater number oi years' purchase* 
 Moreover if the prevailing sentiment had stopped short at the question of sale, and had 
 not aiFected the legal right of the landlord to raise the rent at his discretion, it is not Patterson, 36674. 
 
 -likely that there would long have remained anything for the tenant to sell. The state-' S. C. M'Elroy, 
 
 - ment of one of its advocates describes the Ulster custom as consisting of " the right of 4654. . 
 free sale on the part of an outgoing tenant, and continued occupancy, at a fair rent." ?*'^*®"^^p*J'^. ^'^' 
 To this it must be added that, under each of these three heads limitations have been ^^73 j ' "^^ *' 
 established, some of which are universally received as modifying elements in the 
 custom. Upon the right of sale there is the limitation that the landlord can exercise 
 
 , a veto as to the purchaser upon "reasonable grounds." To the right of continuous 
 occupancy there is this exception, that the landlord can terminate it, if he chooses to 
 pay the tenant the market value of his tenant-right. The right to a fair rent has never Hill, 3123 ; 
 been itself defined, and therefore the limitation of it remains undefined also. It is Young, 5873. 
 allowed that the tenant has no claim that the landlord shall forbear to raise the rent 
 
 .from time to time, as circumstances may allow, and as the condition of agricultural 
 profits may seem to justify. It is allowed on the other hand that the landlord has no 
 claim to raise it to such an extent as to destroy the tenant-right, or to absorb the 
 profit due to improvements made by the industry of the tenant. But no principles for 
 the calculation of a fair rent, as distinguished from a full commercial rent, have ever 
 been so generally received as to become a part of the custom. We postpone for the 
 present certain questions as to the true extent of the Ulster custom of tenant-right, 
 which will be considered in the sequel. 
 
 9. Outside Ulster something analogous to these usages has existed, though fitfully Tenant-right (b.) 
 a.nd without general prevalence in any locality. Thus, a tenant who pays his rent is outside the Ulster 
 very seldom evicted ; and even if the rent falls into arrear, it has not been the general ^^^'^*'°™- 
 
 or the prevaihng rule that ejectment should follow as a matter of course. Farms have 
 remained in the same families, have descended from father to son, and are considered to 
 be fully as much the family property of the tenant as the reversion of them is part of the 
 family property of the landlord.f These tenants have not been protected by law, or by 
 any such general acknowledgment of their interest as could be called a local custom. 
 Such protection as they had was due to the prevailing sentiment, Avhich affected the 
 ■conduct, though it could not modify the legal rights of landlords. Again, the sale of 
 holdings was a very common practice in all parts of Ireland.! Here and there it was 
 allowed ; and even when it was effected without formal permission, the result was often 
 sanctioned by the easy admission of a purchaser as tenant on the recommendation of the 
 outgoing tenant. More often, however, strenuous efforts were made to prevent any- 
 thing of the kind. Lastly, though the amount of rent was always at the discretion of 
 • the landlord, and the tenant had in reality no voice in regulating what he had to pay, 
 nevertheless it was unusual to exact what in England- would have been considered as a 
 full or fair commercial rent. Such a rent, over many of the larger estates, the owners 
 of which were resident and took an interest in the welfare of their tenants, it has never 
 been the custom to demand. The example has been largely followed, and is to the 
 present day rather the rule than the exception in Ireland. 
 
 10. From one point of view it has been urged, not without show of reason, that the Improvements by- 
 valuable interest which an Irish yearly tenant enjoys, and which he sometimes wishes t ■i:;uits general, 
 to sell, is enjoyed by him through the forbearance of his landlord, in exacting a rent less ""'^ one cause of 
 than the commercial rent of his holding. But there is another and perhaps a juster ^'''^""^^■''^S^* 
 point of view, according to which the low rent was but the recognition of an existing 
 
 existing. 
 
 * Hill, 3181 ; Simpson, 3336 ; McElroy, 4443 ; ShiUington, 4968 ; Young, 5888 ; Waring, 6919 ; Forde, 
 7002; Beatty, 7319; Watson, 7468; Ker, 8079; Alexander, 8779; Sinclair, 11412; Donaldson, 11576 ; 
 Olphert, 11547; Brooke, 11595; Lepper, 11638; Loughrey, 12118; Baldwin, 32052, 32424; La Tor.che, 
 34748. 
 
 t De Moleyns, 144 ; Sweetman, 1137, 1206 ; O'Brien, 3932 ; Hamill, 4278 ; French, 19122 ; Daly, J. A 
 19820; Bailey, 20263; M'Sweeny, 25180; Townshend, 33958; Keane, 35763. 
 
 + Ormsby, 617; Reeves, 1981, 2000; Meagher, 2247 ; Derham, 2471 ; Murphy, 2754; Kirkpatrick, 3^56 ; 
 O'Brien, 4015; Murphy, E., 10192; Cooper, 12419; Mackenzie, 13010; L'Estrange, 13090; OConor, 
 13706, 13713; King-Hai-man, l4l21 ; Olpherts, 14340 ; Stoney, 16537; Thomas, 16712; Gore 16921- 
 Knox, 17004; Clancy, 18144 ; Blake, 18822 ; Daly, W., 19026 ; French, 19120 ; O'Flaherty, 19415 ; O'Hv,' 
 19469; Lambert, 19519; Halliday, 19560; Robinson, 20693; Macdonnell, 21291 ; Hunt, 21532; O'Fkhe.-tv' 
 21862; Barry, 21990; Morice, 23918; Spaight, 24416; Newman, 25104; O'Sullivan, 25761; Keatino'e' 
 25870; Leaihy; 271202; Barry, 28741; Sanders, 29058, 29168; Fitzgerald, 29522; Nyhan, 29575- Pa-.ne' 
 30410; Becher, 30625; Hegarty, 30681; Sherlock, 30947; Anthony, 31946; Baldwin, 32455; Roberts! 
 33461; Townshend, 33948; Latouche, 34740; Vernon, 35254; Johnstone, 35575; Irvine, 35661, 35731- 
 Deane, 37327; Healy, 37375; Lansdowne, 37475; Bole, 38044; Curling, 39344; Little, 39477- Adam<^or' 
 39587 ; Rochfort Boyd, 39889. 
 
 B 2 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 interest, with which it would have been, though not illegal, yet inequitable to meddle, 
 Latoucht, 930 ; The credit is, indeed, due to Irish landlords as a class, of not exacting all that they, were 
 Kobertson, 1426. by law entitled to exact. But their forbearance has been the result^ nat merely of 
 kindliness of disposition, but also of common honesty, which forbade them to appfo- 
 Kirkpatrick, 3818 priate the results of their tenants' labour in improving the soil. The question ho\? far 
 FowUr, 39262. the improvements made on the soil have been the work of landlords, and how far of 
 tenants, is eagerly debated. But it is not denied by anyone that in- Ireland- it ^-~ 
 been the general rule for tenants to do more, at all events, than the mere agricu?^ 
 operations necessary to insure them such a profit as could be realized within the „„^ 
 which constituted the legal term of their tenancies ; and this, of itself, is enough to 
 establish in their favour a presumption that they were morally entitled to a larger 
 interest in their holdings than was ever recognised by law. As a fact, the removal 
 of masses of rock and stone, which in some parts of Ireland incumber the soil, the 
 drainage of the land and the erection of buildings, including their own dwellings, have 
 generally been effected by tenants' labour, unassisted, or only in some instancesi assisted, 
 by advances from the landlord.* ' 
 
 and society, 
 another. 
 
 The circumstances H- Nor is this all. That condition of society, in which the land suitable for tillage 
 of Irish history can be regarded as a mere commodity, the subject of trade, and can be let to the highest 
 bidder in an open market, has never, except under special circumstances, existed in 
 Ireland. Not, certainly, in the times of Irish independence, when chiefs and their septs 
 held land under some form of common ownership ; not in the times of its disintegration, 
 when the chiefs had become owners and dealt with their followers at pleasure, butnever, 
 we may be sure, allowed any but their own personal dependents to settle on their land; 
 nor yet in the later days of English settlement, when landowners were glad to invite 
 tenants of the same race and religion to settle round them on easy terms in order to 
 secure themselves in their estates, was there any trace of an open land market, and of 
 land let by competition at a commercial rent. The epoch of wars closed, and the 
 population multiplied ; but the condition of society remained the same. ManufactiiriS| 1 
 industries failed, from well-known causes. Instead of a native landowning class rooted 
 in the soil, the landlords of Ireland were as a class alienated from the mass of the people 
 by differences of religion, manners, and sympathy, and were many of them strangers 
 and "absentees." Instead of a cultivating class deeply imbued with traditions of 
 migration and of adventure, with other modes of life open to them besides agriculture, 
 and a Poor Law to fall back upon in the last resort, Ireland swarmed with a home- 
 keeping people, without manufactures, colonies or commerce, dependent upon tillage, 
 and holding on, for life and living, to the soil of which they were not the owners, 
 Not even when the numbers of the population became excessive did the commercial : 
 theory begin to regulate the letting of farms in Ireland. The economical law of supply 
 and demand was but of casual and exceptional application. It is generally admitted 
 that to make it apphcable the demand must be what is called " effective;" in this 
 instarice it may be said that, whatever was the case with the demand, the supply was never 
 effective. It was of little use to the landlord, who thought of rent-raising, that there 
 were hundreds of applicants for a farm of his, when a tenant, or a swarm of tenants, 
 already occupied it, Avhom the law itself was frequently not able to eject. Famine super- 
 vened, and wholesale emigration ; the pressure was lightened in some places, while Id 
 others the return of prosperity sustained it. But the Irish farmer remained, as before, 
 faithful to the soil of his holding, and persistent in the vindication of his right to hold 
 it. In the result, there has in general survived to him, through all vicissitudes, in 
 despite of the seeming or real veto of the law, in apparent defiance of political economy, 
 a living tradition of possessory right, such as belonged, in the more primitive ages of 
 society, to the status of the man who tilled the soil. 
 
 12. A high authority on the subject, an authority favourable to the policy of the law, 
 bears weighty testimony to the fact of its failure. In the Eeport of the Devon Com- 
 mission, though no misgiving is expressed as to the absolutely beneficial tendency of 
 the law which refused recognition to the tenants' interest, the existence of the Ulster | 
 Tenant-right is acknowledged, and its claim to consideration is not denied. The custom ; 
 of Ulster Tenant-right, the Eeport says— 
 
 ''Dates from a very early period, having probably sprung up as a natural consequence from the manner in 
 winch property was generally granted and dealt with in that part of the country From this 
 
 * De Moleyns, 98 ; Ferguson, 315 j Sweetman, 1193 ; O'Connell, 3009, 3047 : Hill, 3192 ; HamiU, 4266)-) 
 
 Testimony of the 
 Devon Commis- 
 sion to the exist- 
 ence of tenant- 
 
 right. 
 
 p. 14. 
 
REPORT. 
 
 state of things a feeling of proprietorsliip appears to have grown up in the tenant, which continues in a great 
 degree to the present day . . . . Anomalous as this custom is, if considered with reference to all ordinary- 
 notions of property, it must he admitted that the district in which it prevails has thriven and improved, in 
 comparison with other parts of the country; and although we can foresee some danger to the just rights of 
 property from the unlimited allowance of this tenant-right, yet we are sure that evils more immediate and of a 
 still greater magnitude would result from any hasty or general disallowance of it, and still less can we recom- 
 mend any interference with it hy law." 
 
 Outside Ulster the Report recognizes the existence of general uneasiness, and of a 
 want of harmony in the language used by landlords and tenants respectively, when 
 speaking of their rights. ' It says — 
 
 "The most general, and indeed, almost universal topic of complaint brought before us in every part of Ireland, 
 was the ' want of tenure ' — to use the expression most commonly employed by the witnesses. It is well known 
 that the want of ' fixity of tenure ' has, for some time past, been put sedulously forward as one of the most 
 prominent grievances of the Irish tenant. Some few of the witnesses before us have given to that term a 
 meaning wholly inconsistent with any regard for the most generally admitted rights of the proprietors of the 
 soU ; but this is not common ; most of them have referred to this subject in much more Oioderate and reason- 
 able language. The uncertainty of tenure is, however, constantly referred to as a pressing grievance by all 
 classes of tenants. It is said to paralyze all exertion, and to place a fatal impediment in the way of improve- 
 ment." 
 
 p. 16. 
 
 Sweetman, 1086, 
 1155 ; Robertson, 
 1515; Murphy, 
 10190 ; Verluig, 
 29280; Sherlock, 
 30969 ; Anthony, 
 31961 ; Baldwin, 
 32086. 
 
 13. The Land Law of England, a country differently situated, and in which the social Discrepancy 
 system has received a different development, has been, by force of circumstances, im- ^^^T'^^ the law 
 posed upon Ireland ; and in many instances, principally in connexion with the law of t^jition^^^^ ™^ 
 ejectment, powers have been conferred upon the landlords in Ireland that have no 
 existence in England. That law may have been beneficial in its operation in a country Hamill, 4253. 
 where it was merely the embodiment of existing relations, or the expression of pre- 
 vailing tendencies ; but when transplanted into a country where the relations between 
 landlord and tenant were of a different character, and were being developed after a 
 different fashion, not only did it fail to change those relations into the likeness of 
 English traditions, but also, by its attitude of continual antagonism to the prevailing 
 sentiment, it became detestable to tenants, and helped to bring the Courts that ad- 
 ministered it, and the Government that enforced it, into undeserved odium. In the 
 result, a conflict of rights, legal and traditional, has existed in Ireland for centuries. 
 The degree of quiet which the country has enjoyed has been due quite as largely to 
 non-enforcement of the legal right, as to the overriding by it of the traditional. 
 Poverty and ignorance, and the absorption of political feeling by other subjects of 
 interest, have retarded the arrival of the controversy at its present acute stage. 
 Ireland is now richer and has fewer grievances of a social or political sort than at any 
 previous period of her history. For this very reason the great grievance that remains 
 has now come to the front, and demands an instant remedy. But the difficulty is no 
 new one. A note of alarm is sounded in the introductory chapter to the Digest 
 issued by Lord Devon of the Evidence taken before the Commission over which he pre- 
 sided, warning landlords of the irreconcilable difference between the rights claimed by 
 tenants and those conceded to themselves by law, and impressing on them the 
 extreme danger which impended over their legal position, if this conflict of right were 
 not speedily terminated. But even here it was not proposed to extinguish the claims 
 of tenants by legislation. 
 
 " The whole of that vast mass of evidence taken by the Commission, in reference to the mutual relation 
 existing between the proprietors and occupiers of land in Ireland, is at once conclusive, painfully interesting, 
 and most portentous in its character. It proves that the safety of the country, and the respective interests 
 of both those classes, call loudly for a cautious but immediate adjustment of the grave questions at issue 
 between them. In every district of the country we find that a widely spread and daily increasing confusion as 
 to the respective rights and claims of these classes exists; and it is impossible to reject the conviction, that 
 imless they be distinctly defined and respected, much social disorder and national inconvenience must inevi- 
 tably be the consequence. It appears, on the one hand, that the tenant claims what he calls a tenant-right in 
 the land, irrespective of any legal claim vested in him, or of any improvement effected by him — that the value 
 of this claim is estimated at different rates in different localities — that it is either openly admitted or sdently 
 acquiesced in by the landlords in some districts, whilst it is considerably restricted or absolutely denied by 
 others. In the north of Ireland this system is pretty generally either authorized or connived at by the laml- 
 lord, and it is not uncommon for a tenant without a lease to sell the bare privilege of occupancy or possession 
 of his farm, without any visible sign of improvement having been made by him, at from ten to sixteen, up 
 to twenty, and even forty years' purchase of the rent, and the comparative tranquillity of that district may, 
 perhaps, be mainly attributable to this fact. In the remaining portions of the country the evidence would lead 
 to the conclusion that the practice, although equally claimed by the tenant as his right, is not allowed, either 
 openly or by sufferance, by proprietors, except in rare individual instances, and then upon a very much modi- 
 fied scale. It is difficult to deny that the effect of this system is a practical assumption by the tenant of a 
 
 joint proprietorship in the land Landowners do not appear aware of the peril which 
 
 thus threatens their property, and which must increase every day that they defer to establish the rights of 
 the tenant on a definite and equitable footing. . . . They do not perceive that .... an established 
 
 1. 
 
Leases not accept- 
 able. 
 
 :g IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 practice not only may, but must, erect itself finally into law; and any one wlio will take the pains to analyse 
 this growin" practice, will soon perceive how inevitable that consequence must be in the present case, unless 
 the practiceltself be superseded by a substitute that shall put the whole question on a sound, equitable, and 
 invigorating basis. This basis can only be one that shall accurately define the property of the landowner from 
 thatV his tenant, and ensure to each the full enjoyment of his own." 
 
 14. Many of those who have devoted thought to the settlement of the difficulty bve 
 come to the conclusion that the true remedy for all the evils of insecure tenure, and 
 • of discrepancy between law and tradition, lay in the gradual introduction and universa/ 
 adoption of a system of Leases. The Report of the Devon Commission above quotg, 
 points in this direction. The tenants, however, in general refuse_ leases.* The offer 
 of security in their holdings for a term of years presents no attraction to them. They 
 see in it, not a lengthening of the legal yearly tenancy, but a shortening of the con- 
 tinuous traditional tenancy. A lease generally involves an immediate increase of 
 rent : at all events, rents are found almost invariably to be raised on its termi- 
 nation. It has seemed better to abide by the tradition, and trust to the easiness of 
 the landlord, and the chapter of accidents. The number of leases in Ireland does not 
 appear to be materially increasing ; and this method of settling the land question has 
 apparently become hopeless. 
 
 Effect of the 1 5. It is probable that the warning given by Lord Devon had a considerable effect in 
 
 transfer of estates causing efforts to be made, far more systematically than before, to repress the tendency 
 under the Landed q£ ^j^g daims of tenants to become established in the form of local customs. Another 
 cause which has operated in the same direction has been the extensive transfer, under 
 the action of the Encumbered Estates Court and of the tribunals which have taken 
 its place, ever since the famine of 1846, of ancient properties, previously managed in a 
 more or less patriarchal fashion, to new owners.t Most of the purchasers were ignorant 
 of the traditions of the soil ; many of them were destitute of sympathy for the historic 
 condition of things. Some purchased land merely as an investment for capital, and with 
 the purpose — a legitimate one so far as their knowledge extended — of making all the 
 money they could out of the tenants, by treating with them on a purely commercial 
 footing. A semi-authoritative encouragement was given to this view of their bargains 
 by the note which it was customary to insert in advertisements of sales under the 
 Court — "The rental is capable of considerable increase on the falling in of leases.". 
 This hint has often been acted on, and rents greatly above the old level — ^in some cases 
 probably above the full commercial value — have been demanded and enforced, with 
 the natural result, in a few years' time, of utterly impoverishing the tenants. 
 
 Estates Court. 
 
 Hill, 3114; 
 Blake, .39747 
 
 The Landlord and 
 Tenant Law 
 Amendment Act, 
 1860, 23 & 24 
 Vict., cap. 154, 
 s. 3. 
 
 The Land Act, 
 1870, 33 & 34 
 Vict., cap. 46. 
 
 S. 1. 
 
 S. 2. 
 
 16. The last step in the development of what may be called the English Land Law in 
 Ireland was the passing of the Act of 1860, whereby it was enacted that "the relation 
 oflandlord and tenant shall be deemed to be founded on the express or implied contract 
 of the parties, and not upon tenure or service." This enactment has produced little 
 or no effect. It may be said to have given utterance to the wishes of the Legislature 
 that the traditional rights of tenants should cease to exist, rather than to have seriously 
 affected the conditions of their existence. 
 
 17. The Act of 1870 constituted a reversal of this policy, and the establishment of a 
 new order of ideas. For the first time it was decided in some measure to recognize the 
 existing state of things. The attempt was abandoned to establish by law the commercial 
 system of dealing with tenancies of agricultural land. In Ulster, where the traditional 
 rights of tenants had attained the consistency of a custom generally recognized, that 
 custom was now legalized, and became a part of the law ; and in the case of any holding^ 
 not situated in Ulster where a usage prevailed in all essential particulars corresponding 
 with the Ulster tenant-right custom, it also was legalized. Where the Ulster custom! 
 did not exist, a legislative sanction was given to the pre-existing sentiment that a tenant 
 ought not to be deprived of an interest, which, nevertheless, the statute did not in 
 terms declare him to possess. But in all cases the only weapons given by the statute'* 
 for vindicating the rights of the tenants were in the nature of compensations for the 
 
 * Allen, 1901; Forde, 7019; Watson, 7478; Sinclair, J., 11355; Caskey, 12339; Knox, 16995; Mahon,-. 
 .21169; Hunt, 21664; Beeves, 23371; Hussey, 25260; Crosbie, 26201; Barrett, 30551; Hegarty, 30691) 
 Fell, 30757 ; EochfortBoyd, 39901. ' ^' > , ^ S, 
 
 + Robertson, 1538; Coleman, 2544 ; Everitt, 2544, 2567 : Simpson, 3342 ; Quin, 5756 ; Brush, 6694, 6710, 
 6719; Watson, 7526; Murphy, 10115; Ashe, 11995; M'lntyre, 13336; Cawlev, 14076; Bourne, 15178; 
 Barbour, 15621; Gore, 16977; O'Hara, 19505; Bailey, 20246 ; Seymour, 20668;' Kilmartin, 21035; Joyce.i 
 210Gy; Stntch, 24357; O'Sullivan, 25804; Walpole, 26187; Barry, 28729; Fitzgerald, 29544; Burdon," 
 31602; M'Mahon, 34398. . ' ^ , > 
 
REPORT. ■ 7- 
 
 wrongful deprivation of his interest in his holding. Thus the tenant unprotected by Gave only indirect 
 the" Ulster custom became entitled, on quitting his holding, to compensation, subject to piotection to 
 many restrictions, for his improvements ; to compensation, within limits, for money paid f^'^^% interasts. 
 when he entered on his holding; and, more important still, to compensation subject to g"y ' ' " 
 a scale for the mere fact of disturbance, apart from any consideration of improvements g 3 
 made or of money paid on entering. The remedies given to a tenant under the Ulster 
 Custoni were similar in kind. The tenant who was served with a notice to quit to 
 determine his tenancy was to make a claim on his landlord for the value of his tenant- g. le. 
 right. Logically speaking, such a claim ought to have justified a decree to enforce the- 
 Custom, by way of specific direction to the landlord who was found to be violating it to 
 abstain from doing so, and to charge no more than a fair rent, if he were found to have 
 unduly raised it. But the absence of such a provision in the Custom itself, and conse- 
 quently in the law legalizing it, and the general tenor of the subsequent sections, 
 have caused the word " claim " to have a signification, in all cases, of a claim for money 
 representing the value of the tenant-right ; in other words, for compensation for the 
 loss of it. 
 
 18. The full bearing of these observations will not be appreciated, unless it be remem- In what respects 
 bered that, in nearly all cases of dispute between tenant and landlord, what the ^* ^^^ failed. 
 aggrieved tenant wants is, not to be compensated for the loss of his farm, but to be 
 continued in its occupancy at a fair rent. This, as the law now stands, he cannot De Moleyns, 118; 
 have ; and in order to raise a question before the Court, he is forced to begin by a Everitt, 2489 ; 
 surrender of the only thing for which he really cares. The plaintiff in a land claim, if Cmmin'^h^t^^' 
 he fails to prove his case, is turned out without the compensation that he claimed ; 9433 ' 
 
 but if he proves it, he is turned out all the same. Even the chance that he might, 
 by consent of the landlord, be allowed to continue in possession at the higher rent, the 
 demand of which in many cases has been the sole cause of the suit, and his refusal to 
 pay which has led to the service of the notice to quit upon him, is lessened by the 
 bitterness naturally engendered in a contc st at law between himself and his landlord. The 
 Act was intended to confer security upon tenants, and has to some extent succeeded in so 
 doing ; but it has in this respect introduced a new element of insecurity. It has converted 
 ordinary disputes over the amount of rent, and over a tenant's dealings with his 
 holding, into one-sided wagers of battle, where the prize at stake is in all cases first 
 adjudged to the landlord, and the tenant, if successful, is obliged to put up with a 
 substitute. In a word, once the tenant comes into court, all the law can give hint 
 is compensation in money. The very fact of his making a claim at all presupposes that 
 he is to leave the land. It is obvious that a statute of this description, the utmost scope Hill, 3158 ; 
 ;0f which is to give compensation for the loss of a valuable interest, but no right to be Alexander, 8775. 
 {protected in its enjoyment, or to have it restored when it has been taken away, fails 
 to afford protection on the usual lines to the tenant's interest in his holding, if that 
 interest be considered as a genuine proprietary right; and at the same time it is hard 
 to see on what grounds such legislation is to be justified, if the existence of any proprietary 
 right in the tenant is denied. However useful as a temporary measure, at a transitional 
 period, it appears to us that the Land Act contained in itself the seeds of failure, as a 
 permanent settlement. As such, now that it has been fairly tried, it is impossible to 
 resist the conclusion that it has failed to give satisfaction to either party. 
 
 ^' III. Conclusions from the Evidence. 
 
 y 19. It appears from the evidence that the Land Act of 1870, notwithstanding its The Land Act 
 defects, has conferred advantages upon the tenant farmers of Ireland, especially in ^^s conferred 
 jUlster. It has, however, failed to afford them adequate security, particularly in insufficient protec- 
 protecting them against occasional and unreasonable increases of rent. The weight of in^resnc' -t of^At- 
 evidence proves indeed that the larger estates are, in general, considerately managed ; raising. 
 but that on some estates, and particularly on some recently acquired, rents have been 
 raised, both before and since the Land Act, to an excessive degree, not only as 
 compared with the value of the land, but even so as to absorb the profit of the tenant's 
 own improvements. This process has gone far to destroy the tenant's legitimate 
 interest in his holding. In Ulster, in some cases, it has almost "eaten up" the tenant- 'i\)v,-ns:liend 1653: 
 right. Elsewhere, where there is no tenant-right, the feeling of insecurity produced Hill, 3132 • 
 by the raising of rent has had a similar effect. The extent and mischief of this feeling J>1 'Eln..y^_4597 ; 
 of insecurity are not to be measured by the number of cases of rent-raising whicli MW-'imU- 
 liave been brought into court, nor even by the number of cases where the rent has lianlii'ion, 3334,5 • 
 actually been unduly increased, or of estates on which the owner has been thought to Bhke, SJTOi. 
 
Feigason, 353 j 
 Bailey, 20252. 
 
 urn, 3225 ; 
 Simpson, 3342 ; 
 Baldwin, 32104, 
 
 Illustrations from 
 the Evidence, 
 
 8 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 have unduly raised the rent of one or more of his tenants. The feeling is contagious^ 
 and has spread far and wide, . Even a single case, very likely misapprehended, in which 
 a landlord, of previously good reputation in this respectji is thought to have • acted 
 unfairly by a tenant, may largely affect the condition, and the good feeling of an 
 entire neighbourhood. Since the Land Act, cases of this ^ kind have been more 
 fiercely canvassed and more widely known. Some landlords, who previously werfi 
 content to take low rents, appear to have begun a system of rent-raising when- th& 
 Land Act was passed, either because they judged that their former forbearanGi^s 
 not suitable to the new relations which legislation had established between themselves 
 and their tenants, or because the profits of agriculture just then were high, or because 
 the high price fetched by tenant-right, under the stimulus of the satisfaction engendered. 
 by the passing of the Act, made them think that they had hitherto been mistaken 
 in letting their land so cheaply. , ' 
 
 20"'. Thus Mr. S. M'Elroy, Secretary of the co. Antrim Tenants' Right Defence Asso-; 
 ciation, says, Q. 4489 : — 
 
 " Putting on one side tlie amount of rents raised on account of the misapprehension created in some land- 
 lords' minds by the Land Act, with the advantages gained by the tenant on the other side, throngt 
 compensation in the Land Court, I believe the tenants have lost more by increased rents than they have gajned 
 by the compensation given in the Land Court." 
 
 Mr. Shillington, Chairman of the Armagh Tenant Farmers' Association, says, Q, 
 
 5074 :— 
 
 " You think the eflfect of raising rents in the north has been more or less to interfere with the tenant-right !- 
 The effect has been to reduce the value of the tenant-right, and it has interfered with the comfort and content 
 ment of the farmers, and made them discontented, and producing a great deal of agitation and discontent mtl 
 the existing state of things. Q. Has it affected the sense of security they feel for their interest in the landl- 
 Very greatly. It has produced a very general uneasiness and sense ot insecurity — ^the gradual raising o 
 rents. Q. Am I right in thinking that it would be possible, by increasing the rent on every farm in that way 
 to do away with tenant-right altogether 1 — Quite so. It is a question of time whether the Ulster tenant-rigtt, 
 on many estates, will not disappear altogether, under the existing law. The facts of the past ten years prove 
 that it is merely a question of time." 
 
 Mr. Joseph Alexander, of Imlick, co. Londonderry, says, Q. 8688 ; — 
 
 "The Land Act of 1870 affords no protection to the tenant farmer for his improvements, nor as regards 
 rent. Q. You mean it gives no protection against increase of renf? — None. It gives no pj-otectioa against 
 increase of rent for improvements. Q. Improvements made by the tenant ? — Made exclusively by the tenant, 
 . . . Q. The intention of the Act was to give the tenant security for all his rights as they existed at the time 
 of the passing of the Act ? — Quite so. Q. You think the Act was not bufScient to secure that 1 — Not sufficieiiti 
 because the landlord can raise the rent to any amount he choses. Of course the tenant has three alternatives- 
 he either sits under the increased rent, or he sells his interest and walks out, or he delivers up the farm to the 
 landlord, and iights him in the law court. Q. And they object to fighting ? — -They do. It is something liie 
 the three alternatives that were offered to the ancient King of Israel — three iaonths before the sword of tk 
 enemy, three years' famine, or three days' pestilence. There have been no land cases in our county court for a 
 considerable time. Q. The tenants prefer to submit to the increase of rent rather than go to law? — Yei, 
 Q. Going to law means going out of your farm 'i — It does ; and it also means going to a place that we don't 
 know what will happen to us — no more than we do of a future state of existence. We never can tell whit 
 may be the resu.lt of litigation." 
 
 * See also, among others; Eerguson. 227; Sweetman, 1179, 1190; Robertson, 1403, 14t)5 j Allen, 
 1946, 1951; Coleman, 2283, 2298, 2303; Drew, 2726, 2740; O'Connell, 3023, 3031; HUl, 3086, 3134; 
 Simpson, 3314; Knipe, 3639, 3646; Fenlon, 3715, 3760, 3766, 3772; M'Elroy, 4551, 4559,4581,4597; 
 Shillington, 4987, 5079,5114; Kuddell, 5271; Quin, 5660, 5691, 5701 ; O'Callaghan, 5824; Swann, 6127; 
 Perry, 6246; Murray, 6352 ; Lennon, 7540, 7610 ; Campbell, 7656 ; Henry, 7770 ; Gault, 8388 ; WaUwie, 
 8529; M'Nair, 8649; Alexander, 8689, 8772; Hanna, 8912 ; Gamble, J., 8986; M'Glinchy, 9151; Cun- 
 ningham, 9404; Flanagan, 9639, 9654, 9675 ; Dunne, 10025 ; Norris, 10219, 10235 ; Warnock, 10312, 10324; 
 Monison, 10449; Caldwell, 10545; Coyle, 10572, 10599, 10642; Adams, 10605, 10633; Cole, 10662; 
 M'Connell, 10685; Laughlin, 10686; Gregg, 10719; M'Intyre, 10778 ; Gamble, W., 10873, 10886, 109021 
 Loughrey, 11117; Sinclair, /cimes, 11391 ; Sinclair, William, 11424; Brooke, 11603; Craig, W., 11666; 
 M'Kinley, 11681 ; Ashe, 11990 ; Craig, R, 12172 ; Mannion, 12641 ; M'Donough, 12841; Shavley, 13237; 
 Cunningham, 13396; M'Kenna, 13839, 13919; Martin, 13954,13985; Cawley, 1404; Hanlon,. 14376) 
 Gallagher, 14632 ; Jackson, 14847 ; Ward, 14934 ; Flaherty, 14982 ; Fawcett, 15091, 15102 ; Moore, 15136; 
 Grean, 15729; Heraghty, 16438, 16351; Gibbons, 16479; Hogan, 16475 ; Corcoran, 17333 ; Dowling, 1 
 18060; Morris, 18409 ; Kilmartin, 20944; Joyce, 21065 ; Bolster, W., 21675 ; O'Flaherty, 21,842; Casey, 
 21960; Barry, 22021 ; Cahir, 22946; Gubbins, 23508, 23516; Madden, 23522 ; Stoney, 23608; O'Conuov, 
 M., 24537, 24583, 24589 ; Moynahan, 24619, 24625 ; O'Connor, T., 24,650 ; Carroll, 24785 ; AUman, 24833; 
 O'Donoghue, 25025; O'Connor, M. 25212; Warren, 25498; Clifford, 25683; Fitzgerald, 25715; GriflBn, 
 25,885; Walpole, 25982; O'Connor, P., 26303 ; Foley, 26358; Lane, 26464; Riordan, 26722; Barry, 
 28729; O'SuUivan, 28942; Sheehan, 29017; Verling, 29275; Nyhan, 29557 ; Daly, 29993 ; M'Carty, 30249; 
 Finn, 31297; Nugent, 31330; Mulcahy, 31349; Maher, 31362; Finn, 31370; Burdon, 31585; CrooiBj, 
 31998; M'Mahon, 34361 ; Orr, 34941 ; Walsh, 35504; Marum, 35848; O'Halloran, 35960; Foley, 35984,? 
 35993, 36006; Murphy, 36230; Pringle, 36770; Gartland, 36954; M'Keogh, 37061, 37067, 37074S' 
 M'Govern, 37230, 37240; Phelan, 37275; Smith, 38411, 38417; Sproule, 38337, 38,645; Pringle, 3877J) 
 38783; Galvin, 38833; Holahan, 39192. See also Appendix B, C, and Reference Table. 
 
REPORT. 9 
 
 Mr. H. Ward, county cess collector, Ballintra, co. Donegal, says, Q. 14980 : Illustrations from 
 
 "A. great portion of the landlords of this country are doing everything they can to put down the Laud *^® Evidence. 
 Act of 1870, to make it a useless letter in the Statute Book, for the rise of rent prevents the tenant-right 
 
 being any use, and a man won't buy This great contention between the landlords and 
 
 the people did not so muchexist until after the Land Act. The landlords are death on the people. Q. Stand- 
 ing on their rights I—Yes, and saying we will not allow this Tenant-Right Bill to have effect at all, and we 
 will put on a rent that will destroy it, and has destroyed it." 
 
 Edmund Langley Hunt, Esq., of Curraghbridge, Adare, co. Limerick, says, Q. 
 21653 :— 
 
 " On the properties you are acquainted with are there periodical valuations ? — No, there are not. Q. 
 On a change of tenancy I suppose there is a change of rent 1 — As I say, that is done very quietly You sec 
 the rents raised and raised, and you find it hard to know" how it has been done. The tenant must arrange it, 
 as a matter of fact." 
 
 Thomas Sanders, Esq., of Sanders Park, Charleville, co. Cork, says, Q. 29087 : — 
 
 " Do you feel any difficulty in fixing the rents with the tenants at all 1 — I can't say I do ; on the falling 
 out of a lease, I have had very little difiiculty in increasing the rents. Q. Supposing a man is in possession 
 of a farm and you want to increase his rent, and he disagreed, how would you settle the matter — does it end by 
 having your own way ? — I end it by having my own way. Q. You would not call that freedom of contract — 
 would you'! — It would be perfect freedom of contract, if I were dealing with an outsider. Q. Exactly. 
 But when a man is in possession, and has nowhere else to go to — what would you call it then 1 — In some in- 
 stances it would be perfectly free. Q. But there are some that would not be perfectly free — what would 
 you do when they suggested a perfectly fair commission to fix the rent f — I would do what I considered 
 fair. Q. That is fix the rent yourself? — Fix what I considered a fair rent." 
 
 Professor Baldwin, of Glasnevin Model Farm, says, Q. 32106. 
 
 " I found the action of one unwise or bad landlord brings disfavour on the whole class in the county or 
 province, and drives actually terror into the minds of the people for miles and miles. Q. The feeling of the 
 tenants is what has happened in one place may happen in others 1 — That is what is in their minds." 
 
 William Rochfort, Esq., of Burrin House, co. Carlow, says, Q. 33255 : — 
 
 " The Land Act, in my opinion, failed in protecting small holders from liability to pay exacting rents, I 
 do not think it affords adequate protection in cases in which the landlord wishes to raise the rent, more 
 especially on the tenants' improvements ; but any legislation ought to be strictly confined to the small men 
 who cannot protect themselves. I do not think the small holders are free agents. Q. You think the large 
 men can protect themselves 1 — Yes. Q. Where would you draw the line ? — Well, I cannot answer that." 
 
 J. E. Vernon, Esq., of Wilton-place, Dublin, says, Q. 35302 : — 
 
 " You have to deal with the quantity of land in Ireland at this moment that is let at rents that are too 
 
 high. You must deal with that fact — you cannot shirk the question. It is a serious qtiestion in a legislative 
 
 point of view, but I do not think you can .shirk it. Q. Do you think that arises from frequent rises of rent 
 
 : since the Land Act? — Partly from that cause, there is no doubt about it. I think it began with the Incum- 
 
 . bered Estates Court. A number of men bought land in that court on speculation, and increased the rents. 
 
 . I could mention estates on which, since the establishment of the Incumbered Estates Court, I have known 
 
 [ the rents raised twice. Q. Have you known many cases of rise of rent since the Land Act 1 — I have. I think 
 
 J. the passing of the Land Act has had the efiect of raising the rents, for this reason, 1 think men have been 
 
 J brought much more within the lines of business. Previous to the passing of the Land Act the landlords let 
 
 the thing run on ; they had the feeling that whenever they thought proper they could raise the rents. The 
 
 Land Act laid down a Hue, what you could do, and what you could not do ; and that drew the attention of 
 
 a great many men to their rights in that sense." 
 
 21. Under these circumstances the Act of 1870 has been vainly appealed to for an The remedy in the 
 adequate remedy. It gives no regular jurisdiction over questions of rent. When rent is Land Act Lsindi- 
 raised, although the rise may eat into the value of the tenant-right, although it may ^^ct and therefore 
 deprive the tenant of the benefit of his own improvements, although it may make it "^^ffi<=^®»*- 
 difficult for him to get a living on the farm, he must, as a rule, submit. The evidence 
 shows that, under a system of gradual small increases of rent, tenants have submitted, 
 long past the point at which they consider themselves to be unfairly rented. When at 
 last they decide to make a stand, they refuse to pay the additional rent. If the landlord 
 withdraws his demand, matters go on as before. If he does not, he serves a notice to 
 quit, which at law determines the tenancy. The tenants must then file a "claim," if How it works (a) 
 under the Ulster Custom for compensation for their tenant-right, if otherwise for com- under the Ulster 
 pensation for disturbance, and for their improvements, if any. Under the Ulster *-'^*°™' 
 Custom, the Court inquires whether the custom exists on the estate, and whether 
 the usages applicable to the particular holding support the tenant in his claim for -g, , 3970* 
 tenant-right on quitting his holding at the demand of the landlord. These points being ' 
 
 decided in the tenant's favour, the Court proceeds to examine into the value of the 
 tenant-right, and to adjudicate him a sum of money accordingly. In so doing it is 
 necessary to take into account the amount of rent, upon which, as compared with the 
 gross value of the holding, the value of the tenant-right in the first place depends ; 
 and in considering, as the statute authorizes, any objection or set-off which either party g_ 13, 
 may urge, and any default or unreasonable conduct of either party affecting the matter 
 in dispute, the point may arise for consideration whether the landlord was unreasonable 
 
 C 
 
10 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Perguson, 220, 
 J41 ; Robertson, 
 U78 ; Hill, 3323 ; 
 Hamill, 4204 ; 
 Blake, 39720. 
 
 (b) Where the 
 Ulster Custom 
 does not exist, 
 s. 18, end. 
 s. 4, end. 
 s. ». 
 
 Hamill, 4233 ; 
 Vernon, 35351. 
 
 in demanding the increased rent, and whether the tenant was unreasonable in refusing 
 it. In this way the question of rent becomes an element in the settlement of the 
 amount to be paid by way of tenant-right. But no jurisdiction is given to the Court to 
 adjudge or to propose a fair rent as a settlement of the dispute. However, m the exercise 
 of their discretion, some county court judges have taken advantage of the stage of the 
 proceedings at which the question of rent is before them to declare extra-judicially 
 what they think would be a fair rent, and by consent to put the question in train for a 
 settlement, upon the basis that the tenant shall be continued in his occupancy at tht 
 rent. Outside the protection of the Ulster custom, a claim for compensation is similattly 
 inquired into and settled without any jurisdiction over the question of rent, in this case 
 the court is expressly directed to disallow the tenant's claim to compensation for dig. 
 turbance, if it appears that the landlord is willing to permit the tenant to continue m 
 occupation upon just and reasonable terms, and that the refusal of the tenant to accept 
 his terms is unreasonable. There is also an express provision that the amount of the 
 old rent is to be considered by the court, in reduction of the claim of the tenant for 
 compensation for his improvements. The only case in which the amount of rent is to 
 be taken into account in a sense favourable to the tenant is a provision by way of 
 exception to the enactment depriving an ejected tenant of compensation where his rent 
 has not been paid. In the case of a holding not exceeding £15 rental, ejectment for 
 non-payment of rent may be declared a disturbance where the non-payment is found 
 to have been due to the rent having been " exorbitant." This provision has been 
 almost inoperative, and for the most part unnoticed. The, use in it of the word 
 " exorbitant" has contributed to this result. Thus, with the exception of the informal 
 proceedings resorted to by some County Court judges outside the strict hmits of 
 their function, the Act provides no effectual resource accessible to a tenant against 
 an undue increase of rent ; nor does it hold out to him any benetit whatever, in cases 
 of rent-raising, consistently with his remaining in possession of his holding. 
 
 Haisiug of Rent 
 at the time of Sale 
 of Tenant-right 
 under the Ulster 
 Custom, a way in 
 which the Act has 
 been rendered in- 
 operative. 
 Simpson, 3390 ; 
 Knipe, 3626 ; 
 Hamill, 4261 ; 
 Leitrim, 11281. 
 
 Mode iii which 
 this has been 
 brought about. 
 Hill, 3136. 
 
 Wamock, 10383 
 Morrison, 10483.' 
 
 22. On estates subject to the Ulster custom an easy way has been found to 
 render the Act in this respect entirely inoperative, by selecting the time when the 
 tenant-right was in the market for announcing increases of rent. This practice appears 
 to be comparatively a new one, since the Land Act of 1870. Before that time there 
 was a delicacy in meddling with sales of tenant-right. The right of free sale was at 
 once the element in the custom which least affected the landlord's actioii, the right to 
 which he had established the most satisfactory limitation, namely, the veto to a 
 purchaser on reasonable grounds, and the right most" clearly established. It was, 
 moreover, the one point in the custom from which the landlord himself derived a distinct 
 benefit. The proceeds of a sale were his acknowledged security against arrears of rent. 
 The discovery of the large sums that were paid for tenant-right might often suggest ; 
 to landlords that the time had come for raising rents ; but they did so generally 
 at their own convenience, either at fixed periods, or on occasion of the general^ 
 revaluation of an estate. After the Land Act, a demand for an increase of rent, if 
 followed by a notice to quit, became liable to the inconvenience that a tenant might 
 refuse to pay, and might serve a claim for compensation for his tenant right. In this 
 way the landlord, if he persisted in his notice to quit, might be forced unexpectedly 
 to pay down a large sum of money, when he had only calculated on receiving an 
 increase of rent. _ To wait for a sale of the tenant-right,, and then announce the increase, 
 .was a course which made it in the highest degree improbable that any resistance would 
 be made to the landlord's demand. This is what happens ; if the sale goes on, and 
 the mcrease of rent is submitted to, the outgoing tenant generally has to bear the loss; 
 in which case it is common to deduct £20 from the purchase-money for every £1 added 
 to the rent. In other cases the purchaser, who is in the nature of things generally 
 richer and more sanguine than the vendor, may be weak enough to pay the full value of 
 the tenant-right, and the higher rent as well. No purchaser if well advised will pay 
 the original purchase-money, and go into possession of the farm against the landlord's 
 consent, while refusing to pay the additional rent. If he does, he will be served with 
 a notice to quit, and will thus have bought a lawsuit. If he makes a claim under these 
 circumstances, he will only get the diminished value of the tenant-right at the increased 
 rent, unless he can show conclusively that the additional rent demanded is excessive. 
 He also runs the risk, having purchased without the landlord's consent, of having his 
 claim entirely disallowed. If no sale is concluded, as very often happens, the disappointed 
 vendor generally in difficulties, and eager to realize, is obliged either to begin treating 
 again for a sale at the reduced value, or else to come to terms with the landlord 
 under disadvantageous circumstances. The discontent resulting from these proceedii^ 
 will be found reflected in the evidence. 
 
REPORT. 11 
 
 23.* Thus Mr. S. M'Elroy says, Q. 4522 : — Illustrationii fmi 
 
 " Very much evil has arisen with regard to the raising of rents at the change of tenancies Evidence. 
 
 The same principle holds good over the greater number of properties in the north of Ireland, and creates a 
 
 great deal of bad feeling," 
 
 Mr. James Ferguson, of Silversprings, co. Antrim, says, Q. 4888 : — 
 
 " Are the rents raised before the sales 1 — Yes ; the parties are told that the rent will be increased, and then 
 when the farm is bought they add something to the rent. Q. The rents are creeping up 1 — Creeping \ip by 
 degrees." 
 
 Mr. Shillington says, Q. 4987 : — 
 
 " There are several circumstances taken advantage of by landlords to advance rents. On one of the estates 
 
 I have named it is an invariable custom, on a change of tenancy, to increase the rent 
 
 " Q. 4990. I do not know that the custom existed until the agitation took place in reference to the Land 
 •Act. I think about 1869 is the first instance I have. Q. You consider it was in connexion with the Land 
 Act, or the proceedings before the Land Act 1 — Yes." 
 
 Mr, Joseph Perry, formerly Secretary of the Down Tenant Farmers' Association, 
 says, Q. 6228 :- 
 
 " Where tenant-right cannot be denied, in several cases since the Land Act came in, where they cannot 
 prevent free sale they have adopted the plan of raising rent at the time of the transfer of a farm. . 
 
 " Q. 6232. Rents raised at the termination of a lease or on change of tenancy? — Yes; it is on change of 
 tenancy we complain of, and it is not on the termination of the lease — that, we think, is natural. We don't 
 object to it 
 
 " Q. 6240. At a regular fixed period I would rather have it, than at the time of a sale, because it destroys 
 the confidence of parties." 
 
 Mr. Joseph Beatty, of Keenan, Lurgan, says, Q. 7358 : — 
 
 " You say there is a general tendency on the part of landlords to increase the rent ?— I do. Q. To " nibble 
 it up " 1 — To nibble it up. Q. Is that done at stated intervals 1 — Generally at the fall of a lease or change of 
 tenancy. Q. If a lease was made a long time ago, say forty or fifty years ago, and that the land was let 
 iheap, do you think it would be wrong to raise the rent on the termination of the lease? — I^o; of course in 
 such a case as that it would be right to make a change. Q. You say the rent is increased on a change of 
 tenancy t — Yes ; if a man wished to sell his farm, and another man wants to buy it, and they go into the office 
 in order to get the jaurchaser accepted as the tenant, and his name put in the book, his rent is generally 
 increased. Q. Is it unjustly increased, in your opinion? — In very many cases it is ; in some cases it is not." 
 
 Mr. Joseph Laird, of Ballyclare, co. Antrim, says, Q. 8420 : — 
 
 " Is there any fixed rule as to the times when rent may be raised ? — No Hxed rule. Whenever you sell a 
 farm the rent' is raised, even if it had been raised two years before. Q. There is an increase of rent upon every 
 change of tenancy? — Yes; and in fixing the rent they never examine the subsoil or anything else; they just 
 say it is worth so much, and the tenant must submit. I believe the landlord shovild get the fair value of the 
 farm, deducting the improvements the tenants have made." 
 
 Mr. John Donnell, of Dunnamanagh, Strahane, co. Tyrone, says, Q. 10981; — 
 
 " Is it a fact that you have not heard of this rule of increasing rent on a sale of tenant-right being adopted 
 upon the estates until after the Land Act ? — Yes. Q. It was not adopted on the estates in your neighbourhood? 
 — Not in any part that I heard of." 
 
 Major James Hamilton, of Brownhall, Ballintra, co. Donegal, says, Q. 14742 : — 
 
 " But what they complain of is the introduction of the custom of a rise of rent on the change of tenancy ? 
 — That I understand has been the custom here about Donegal. I was going to try that at one time, because 
 when prices rise, a landlord has to rise his rent at some time or other. I thought it would be a good thing 
 to do it at the time of the sale, but I found land might be sold two or three times, and it was confusing, I had 
 to drop it. Q. Do you have periodical rises of rent 1 — On one part of my property it has not been raised since 
 1826. -Q. You think it destroys tenant-right ? — Well, I think a rise on sales might deter the purchaser." 
 
 Mr. Alexander Caruth, solicitor, Ballytnena, co. Antrim, says, Q. 34643 : — 
 
 " Is the practice of inoi-easing rent on change of tenancy a common practice ? — I should not say it is 
 common, but latterly it has grown more into practice than formerly. Q. Since the passing of the Land Act ? 
 Yes ; my attention has been more called to it. I never had occasion to think of it before." 
 
 * See also, among others: — Simpson, 3307, 3355, 3389; Knipe, 3642; Robinson, 5321, 5338; 
 Walker, 5381 ; Quinn, 5660, 5731, 5747, 5756; M'Geany, 5855; Swann, 6167; Gray, 6169; Perry, 6240, 
 6257 ; Gardner, 6301 ; Moore, 6343 ; Murray, 6374 ; M'Aleena, 6380 ; Beatty, 7366 ; Lennon, 7543, 755.'-:, 
 7602 ; M'Kean, 7908, 7929 ; Midholland, 8345, 8352 ; Wilson, 8433 ; M'Murtry, 8460 ; Wallace, 8555 ; 
 Alexander, 8853; M'Glinchy, 9116, 9129, 9148, 9156; Hanna, J. S., 9615 ; Flanagan, 9733 ; Browne, 
 9783,9928; Douglas, 10015 ; Dunne, 10035 ; Norris 10249,10253; Warnock, 10374; Rankin, 10504; 
 CaldweU, 10554; Coyle, 10593; Cole, 10670; Donnell, 10969; Loughrey, 11095; M'Kinley, 11686; 
 M'Kenna, 13780; Smollen, 14599 ; Gallagher, 14635; M'Gaharen, 14665 ; Kelly, 14695 ; Jackson, 14861 ; 
 Thomas, 14990; Moore, 15142; Clarke, 15685; Crean, 15791; Hunt, 4654 ; O'Sullivan, 24913 ; Caruth, 
 34637 ; Pringle, 36701 ; Smollen, 36811 ; Phelan, 37281 ; Gibson, 38838 ; Read, 38857. 
 
 2 
 
12 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 The Act has con- 24 The question of rent thus raised appears to US to underlie evefy otlier. But, apart 
 ferred inadequate from increases of rent, it has been shown by the evidence that the insecurity of the 
 security on tenants pj-ggent system of tenure, though diminished by the Land Act, still operates, as it has 
 m respect of their f^^^^^i operated, to cause discontent. The Act has, indeed, been successful to some 
 of^tS"^^ extent in checking capricious and arbitrary evictions, by the imposition of a payment 
 
 in the nature of a fine. But it has, as has been shown already, introduced a new 
 element of insecurity, by intensifying the struggle in cases of dispute, and by obliging 
 all proceedings to begin with a notice to quit, to be followed by an ejectment and 
 loss of possession, even though the tenant might be successful* 
 
 Compensation for 25. We have further to report that the scale of limits imposed upon the amounts 
 
 disturbance under fecoverable, outside the Ulster custom, for disturbance, has been found inadequate. 
 
 •. 3, inadequata ^^ .^ .^ evidence that it has been found possible for a landlord to evict a tenant, to 
 
 pay him the full amount that could be awarded by the Court, and to recoup himself, 
 
 and put money in his pocket, by the incoming payment of a new tenant at the same 
 
 rent. 
 
 lUustrations from 26 A Robert Ferguson, esq., Q.c, County Court Judge for the West Riding of the 
 the Evidence. County of Cork, says, Q. 221 :— 
 
 " I think, with sufficient power to inflict a penal compensation where the case was unjust, I could have 
 prevented every unjust eviction ; but my powers were shorthanded altogether. Of course the compensation 
 for disturbance is a penal character to a certain extent, but it ought to have been double. My power to make 
 it really effective should have been double what it is, because in the cases where men were really anxiou! 
 to get possession the compensation for disturbance was insufficient. They were cases where the landlord wai 
 very much of the class of the tenantry, and was prepared, at any peril, to get up his land for the purpose of 
 possessing it himself, or giving it to some tenant who would pay him more than any compensation I could 
 give, and I have had very strong cases to that effect. One of them is worthy of note, but the landlord there 
 was a man of position, a gentleman resident out of the country, and he deliberately brought two evictions 
 of a very distressing character, with a full knowledge that I would give every penny of compensation I could 
 give, but, with the perfect knowledge also that he could get, on the same estate, a larger sum for the tenancy 
 than anything I could give. He put out one man and paid the compensation, receiving a larger sum from 
 another tenant whom he subsequently ejected from another farm, receiving a large fine for this farm also. 
 Q. That was two evictions on the same estate 1 — On the same estate ; by each of which he put into hin 
 pocket a considerable sum, more than I compelled him to pay ; the case is well known, Mr. Shaw knows it. 
 Q. That is the same holding evicted twice?— No, but two evictions on the same estate. One tenant covetous 
 of the farm of another said to the landlord, ' If you put that man out I will pay you so much,' he put him out, 
 I gave compensation, but he gained considerably by the eviction. When he went to deal with the man 
 whom he had put out he said to him, ' You need not have done that to me, I would have paid you as much 
 perhaps ; besides that man has two farms, the one he has himself is as valuable as the one he has taken from 
 me.' 'Do you say so,' he said, 'Would you pay the same for it?' He agreed to do so, and proceedings 
 were immediately taken by the landlord to get possession of this farm also.' " 
 
 The Rev. Charles Davis, p.p. of Baltimore, co. Cork, mentions a case, Q. 29684 ; — 1 
 
 " The County Judge pronounced the tenant to have been capriciously evicted, and gave him the full 
 compensation allowed by the Act of Parliament — namely, £90 ; but the landlord got the man who succeeded 
 him to double the rent and give £210 fine." 
 
 John Chute Neligan, esq., Q.c, County Court Judge for Meath, says, Q. 34875 : — 
 
 " In the ]..aper which you sent to us, you draw attention to one of the clauses of the Land Act, which in your 
 opinion works injuriously? — Yes — I refer to the fourth paragraph of the third section of the Act. I would 
 suggest the repeal of that clause. I have had cases before me, where I have been compelled to put the tenant 
 to his election and say, ' you must either reduce the number of years' rent you claim for disturbance, or I 
 cannot give you anything for your improvements.' I think that clause has worked hardly in several 
 instances. I would repeal it in toto. I see no reason whatever for it, and I have known it to work unjustly- 
 Q. Has not the tenant the power of election 1 — Yes, but still the result is to deprive him in some cases, 
 either of the compensation for improvements, or of a portion of the claim for disturbance, which I would have 
 given him. Q. Baron Dowse — I have known instances myself, where it worked hardly — I have seen it in 
 cases that came before the Land Court on appeal ? — Yes ; it ought, I thiak, to be repealed." 
 
 Arthur Hamill, esq., Q.C., County Court Judge for Sligo, says, Q. 4197; (compare Q. 
 4216) : — 
 
 " I am of opinion if the third clause, which is the disturbance clause, could be enlarged, it might be done 
 beneficially. I have taken the liberty of putting my view of this clause on paper. I think if the compensa- 
 tion for disturbance was increased to the extent often years of the annual rent, instead of the seven years, it 
 might be beneficial." 
 
 * De Moleyns, 15, 65; Allen, 1876; HamUl, 4225; Tute, 13986; O'Connor, 24489. 
 
 .^See aho, among o«/iers .•— Sweetman, 1126; Eobertson, 1436; O'Brien, 4052; Mahon, 21159; Bolster, 
 21(61; Herbert, 22776; Fitzgerald, 22277 ; O'Connor, M., 24497; Moyniban, 24620; O'Sullivan, 24928; 
 r. °" o' ^^^^^' Eiordan, 26751; Cronin, 29383; Murphy, 29404; O'HaUoran, 31549; Bowling, 34456, 
 34469 ; SmoUen, 36901 ; Maher, 37209 ; M'Govem, 37238. > > 6> 
 
REPORT. 
 
 13 
 
 27. It has also appeared that landlords have ejected tenants holding under the Compensation for 
 Ulster custom, have paid them the amount awarded for their tenant-right, and have I^Xq^te 
 relet the lands at a profit. 
 
 28.* Thus, Mr. John Wallace, of Alta Hammond, Carrlckfergus, co. Antrim, says, l^^^^^i^^^'''''^ 
 q, 8527 :— 
 
 "Mr Biggar's father purchased a portion, and he and Mr. Raphael made the greatest rise m the rents. 
 Q Mr. Biggar's father ?-Yes, he is now dead. Q. Did they raise the rents, when they bought, on the tenants 
 then in occupation t-Mr. Biggar did not raise them for some Uttle time, but I think he did so for this reason, 
 that he told me himself he would not settle what the rent would be till it was ^^'^"^'^ J^^J JJVrTtHL S 
 land question would be. Then afterwards he fixed the rent, when he knew the new law. The first thing he 
 did was: there was a widow who said it was impossible that she could pay the rent he had P«* °°, ^e gave 
 Z notice of ejectment. That was one of the first cases tried in this country. Q. Mr SHAW-Wha^^^was the 
 result of it^ishe obtained £400 on a farm of forty acres. Q. And she was put ^^JJ-^^^^^f • , X 
 O'CONOR DON-What did he do with the land]-He got a person to take it at the £400, and raised the 
 ' rent; and it is now £2 10s. an acre, I thiak. 
 
 ^ 29. The feeling of insecurity has operated to check the process of improvement J^^^f^^^^^^; 
 of the soil The restrictions which the Act imposes on compensatioii tor improvements .g^^rity on tenants 
 have prevented the tenants outside the Ulster tenant-right from receivmg a fair equiva- ^^ compensation 
 lent ?or the results of their industry. These restrictions bar compensation for for their improve- 
 improvements other than permanent buildings and reclamation of waste lands, if made ments 
 before the passing of the Act and twenty years before the claim for compensation. ^- ^ W 
 =Thev allow the right to compensation to be barred by express contract, it the «. 12, 4, la^t para. 
 ;improvement is such as would appear to the Court to be ca,lculated to dimmish the g^aphbutone. 
 ^general value of the landlord's estate, and, in all cases, if the value of the holding .4(32- 
 Is not less than £50 a year. They bar it, with certain exceptions m the absence of s. , 
 ^express contract, on the termination of leases, if such leases should have existed for 
 ^thkty-one years before the claim. Still more important is the direction to the 
 Court to take into consideration the time during which the tenant ™Y/^''\^TI!; 
 the advantage of his improvement and the rent at which he has held his holding, 
 w^?h a 4w to the reduction of his claim. Claims for improvement arising from Battersby.Dam- 
 the proper cultivation of the soil in the course, of husbandry have b-n hdd ^t^^^^ LTl j! Isz"": 
 excluded from the benefits of the section. Most injurious of all has been the result oi 
 •decSonsas to the construction to be placed on the words "Made by himself or his 
 'predecessors in title," which have been interpreted to exclude from benefit a,ll tenants parragh^. Mur- 
 Cse continuity of possession and title has been broken by any change m their legal dock DonnelVs 
 Wncy since the improvements were made. This has opened many easy ways to Irish Land Act. 
 ivade the section altogether. A tenant remaining m possession after the eWtion '^^^^^ 
 Sn lease, so soon as he has paid rent, becomes, m law, a tenant from year to year D„^,n's R., 175. 
 inder such terms of the lease as are applicable to that species of tenancy. If a n 
 Intr^stve^a notice to quit and then o^Tits expiration arranges with h.^t^^^^^^^ for MdW.Hardy, 
 mv change in the rent, a new tenancy may be created. If farms are re-arranged^ Dy .^ ^^^^ 
 
 khJ transfer of a portion of the farm from one tenant to another, and a re-arrangement ^^^^^^ j^ 527. 
 mrHpa7 to the rent or if a change is made in the rent merely, it is considered by Nolan and Kane, 
 Tome County Court Judges that aLw tenancy is created In all these cases the claim ;;THeStatu^e W 
 TfThetenaSfor compensation is now considered to be barred ev hough he ^^^^ 1^ ..^ ^- ^^ '"" 
 /kimself have continued throughout in possession. In the result,t the Land Act seems ^ '^ 
 Ss first passing to have stimulated tenants, especially m Ulster, to improve while 
 
 jaffairs of the country. 
 
 30.t Thus Mr. Eobert Ferguson says, Q. 257 :— .,.,.». ^ Illustrations from 
 
 .* „ . X j.1,^ A „+ 4= mnrp nprfect but Still defective. I have felt hampered the hjvidence. 
 
 ■ ' i . & .&., am^ .fc».-M-Elr,y, 4565 ; L.ird, 8411 ; Morrison, 10470 ; M,ek, 12293 ; J„to., 14910 ; 
 
 a^.,A: Joyce, 21071; C-osbie 26224 ;^toWk 30958 "^Jj 37\8» ^^^ 
 
 _M,rpbr,2789; Ke y. 3691 : ^"'7;,f ,"' t^b W636 O'FlLrt,, 21890 ; Frost. 23313; O'Sull™- 
 -15S;o%t5w"50il"ffi4;*"ii«E2507rw.™, 254^6; K™,, 26100; D.,g«., 28891 ; 
 Dowling, 34490 ; Tracey, 36302. 
 
14 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Illustrations from 
 the Evidence. 
 
 landlord such as a new lease or a new tenancy created, the result of which was, perhaps, without the attention 
 of either party being called to it, the result of that new agreement, beneficial apparently to the tenant, 
 giviii.'- him a continuance of his title, was actually, in my view of the law, the destruction of all his claim for 
 improvements. And that should be remedied by an enactment that no new tenancy created between the gamft 
 parties should destroy the right of the tenant to compensation for his improvements in the absence of an 
 express contract between them to that efi'ect. Very hard cases have occurred where unconsciously the new 
 tenancy was created, and I have had to refuse compensation for improvements made before the new tenancy. 
 Q. 296. Referring to section 4 of the Land Act, do the cases of exception, in your opinion, work well?-! 
 consider the exceptions are too numerous. I think the briefer legislation is upon such subjects the better, For 
 instance, the exception of tenants holding under leases made before the passing of the Act is, I thint,, 
 inadvisable. I think a tenant holding under a lease made before the Act ought to be in the same poBilion 
 as one who holds under a lease made after the Act. I think the right to compensation for disturbance oi^ht 
 to go further, and that it ought to exist independently of the length of the term — subject of course to the 
 discretion of the Judge. I do not see why, if, at the termination of a thirty-one years' lease compensation i& 
 to be given for disturbance, it should riot be given at the termination of a lease for a longer period. The 
 same harslmess would arise in the one case as in the other. I donot see why the judge should be deprived of 
 the power of giving compensation in a case requiring it in point of justice. I think the limitations and 
 exceptions are too numerous and without sufficient cause. Q. The reason for excepting the holder under a lease 
 for so long a nimiber of years, was, of course, that it was presumed he would have been sufficiently compensated 
 during his long occupation for any improvements he had made "i — Well, those are theories which I never find 
 justified in practice. I think the only justice in those cases would be the discretion of the judge. I think 
 these are troublesome limitations and too much in the landlord's interest." 
 
 John La Touche, Esq., says : — 
 
 " Q. 885. Are there any special jDoints in the Act as to which you are prepared to give some information ix> 
 the Commissioners with a view to improve the relation between landlord and tenant in Ireland ? — As far as my 
 knowledge goes it works extremely well, but I should be myself inclined to extend the provisions- of the Act 
 so as to apply not only to tenants-at-will but to tenants having leases, and I should provide full compensation 
 to tenants for the improvements they have made on their farms on leaving their holdings, whether voluntaiily 
 or not. Q. Is not that the present law ? — I rather think not. Q. Are not tenants entitled to compensation for 
 improvements no matter how they leave their farms t — Not all tenants. Tenants holding uj> to a certain 
 valuation are — not tenants holdiiig under a long lease. T would extend to all tenants the advantages and 
 privileges of the provisions of that Act. I know some cases myself where if the landlord had not been very 
 kind indeed improvements made by the tenants would certainly have been sacrificed. Q. That is probably in 
 the case of leases made before the passing of the Land Act t — It is.'' 
 
 Professor Baldwin, of Glasnevin Model Farm, says, Q. 32333 : — 
 
 " After the first year of the Land Act there was a far greater amount of work done by the tenant than had 
 been done in the preceding six years. But the people were made to expect — they did not understand the 
 Land Act — in a general way they got the opinion it was a good thing, and they had security ; but when 
 a number of cases came up to be tested in the Courts, the amounts awarded in compensation for improvements! 
 fell so immensely short of the expectations of the people that it practically killed all improvements, and 
 there has been little done since 
 
 " Q. 32335. The O'Conoe Don. — Do you think the Court awarded less than the improvements? — I do. ^ 
 Q. Have any cases of that kind come under your notice ?— Yes ; and it appears to me that Act almost left 
 very little option to the County Court Judge. Q. Baron Dowse. — The Act directed the County Court Jiulge 
 to take into account the length of time the tenant had enjoyed the impro's-ements ? — Exactly 1 
 
 " Q. 32340. You think if a property was rented very low, that ought not to have any effect in the compen- 
 sation the tenant would derive from improvements ■?- -Certainly not. I contend if a tenant really lifted the 
 stones, as I saw them lifted on that veiy estate' of Lord Dillon's — I actually saw the 'stones lifted from a field, 
 I thought it was a graveyard — and a poor man named Campbell had made an outlay there that a landlord 
 would have had to pay £30 an acre for. Lord Powerscourt took it into his head to reclaim a little field near 
 Glencree, to see what it would cost him. He reclaimed fuur acres, and it cost him £30 an acre. Your 
 lordship's predecessor reclaimed fields on the Garryhill estate, and it will cost almost the same — not quite 
 as much. Now, these improvements, When there is a ])ermaneut change in the land — the land no linger 
 is what it was originally — aud for that lasting change I cimsider the tenant is just as much entitled 1» 
 compensation as the landlord." 
 
 31. We desire so far as jjossible to keep the discussion of the rights of the case * 
 the Irish tenantry separate from any considerations arising out of the present condition 
 of Irish politics and society. The agitation on the land question has not hindered 
 us, in any respect, from obtaining evidence, and will be found to have exercised, 
 upon the character of the evidence :tendered to us, less influence than might have 
 been expected. Nevertheless it is impossible to ignore circumstances which so. 
 largely increase our responsibility in offering, as it is our duty to do, recommendations 
 for legislation now to be undertaken. Tenants have been advised to withhold their ! 
 rent, or to pay no rent beyond a certain standard, until a measure shall have been j 
 passed, the outlines of which have never been accurately defined. ; 
 
 - I 
 Not a reason for 32. We regard the present condition of affairs as a symptom of deep seatedj 
 refosmgtolegis- disorder in the body politic; and we are not blind to the difficulties of legislating for 
 ^^ removal of grievances, at a time when many of those who complain of the© 
 have behaved in a manner calculated to dishearten the friends of good government. 
 If we are right in maintaining that grievances exist, for which the present law provides 
 no remedy, justice requires "that a remedy should be provided, whatever may h^re 
 
 The movement 
 ajjainst rent. 
 
 j_ 
 
REPORT. 15 
 
 been the conduct of individuals, and however widely the example set by them may 
 have been followed. We are not careful to answer the objection that legislation 
 under these circumstances is legislation under the influence of panic. It is to the 
 refusal of justice, through dread of consequences, that the imputation of panic appears 
 more appropriate. It may be said that, at a time when a part of the community are 
 making demands beyond what is just and reasonable, to give them what is just will 
 never satisfy them, and will only encourage them to continue agitating for more. 
 This_ might have weight, if the legislature and the discontented section of the com- 
 munity could be regarded as two high contracting parties, and .if the concession of 
 justice on the one hand could be considered as the price for a cessation of agitation on 
 the other. Such views are evidently subversive of the first principles of order. Let 
 right be done, Avithout regard to any considerations, save those which belong to the 
 matter in debate. What should be done if, after all just grievance is removed, 
 discontent continues, and something more is asked than justice, is not hard to say. 
 The experience of legislation in a free community seems to prove that no such 
 consummation is to be apprehended. It is far more frequently found that even an 
 incomplete measure of justice will succeed, for a time, in stilling the most violent 
 agitation. 
 
 33. The gravity of the present occasion does indeed require that the remedy Moderate tone of 
 now to be proposed, for an admitted grievance, should be complete. We wish to place the evidence given 
 on record our decided opinion that unless the measure is a full and exhaustive Bdater^21829^-'^' 
 one, going to the root of the whole matter, and settling it permanently, it would be Leahy, 27219. ' 
 better not to inteifere Avith the question at all. We are able to point to evidence 
 that a complete measure of justice, though it may not be nearly all that is 
 demanded by the more extreme, will bear along with it a more than usually good 
 promise of acceptance. Nothing is more noticeable, in the immense mass of 
 evidence we have taken, than the general moderation of the tone of those who feel 
 themselves aggrieved by the existing law, and the almost complete absence of demands 
 for measures of confiscation, and of proposals tending to create antipathy between 
 >class and class. It may be said that the present state of popular excitement is 
 not accurately reflected by such evidence. This may be true, for the moment ; but 
 the deeper feeling, the truer utterance of the tenant-farmers in all parts of Ireland will be 
 found, we are convinced, in their own deliberate statements, made in answer to an 
 impartial inquiry, with a view to their being placed on record, and for the express 
 purpose of influencing legislation. If by the general consent of such men, selected in a 
 variety of ways, some on their personal application, some as representatives of associa- 
 tions, some of localities, or as delegates of meetings convened for the purpose, some 
 sought out and summoned by ourselves with no object but to obtain the fullest 
 representation of their views, the tenant>farmers of Ireland declare that they do 
 not desire the expropriation of landlords, or the confiscation for their own benefit of 
 the property of others, but that they do desire to cultivate their farms in security, and 
 tp receive the full profits of their industry, while rendering a fair rent for the land 
 they occupy to those whose means have been invested in it, we cannot consent to set 
 aside such testimony for less calm, less representative and less responsible utterances. 
 
 34.'^^ Mr. John Everitt, of the Drogheda Board of Guardians, says, Q. 2628 : — Illustrations ftom 
 
 " If that is done, and the tenant holds the land and is allowed to sell it, and cannot be turned out as long as ^^^ Jividence. 
 
 he pays the rent, you think ? — That would settle Ireland, there would be no more about anything. It 
 
 wiU settle the whole country. I suppose I spoke to a hundred tenants since I was speaking to Mr. 
 Donnell, every man said they would be satisfied with that. Q. What do you think of buying landlords 
 out and out with thi-ee hundred millions of money % — Oh, nonsense. I would be sorry they would leave the 
 country. In the first place those three gentlemen I have mentioned, they give a tone to society in the country. 
 Q. And there would be nobody left to grumble at if the times were bad ? — Exactly. I could not get a 
 man to give evidence here for me only three resident landlords. I could not get any tenant farmer to come 
 forward like a man until these gentlemen came forward." 
 
 So Mr. James Ferguson., of Silversprings, Doagh, co. Antrim, Q. 4875 : — 
 
 "The tenantrv should get a right to purchase their holdings if the estate comes into the market, and the 
 Government should assist them, and then we would have peace. Q. You would not compel a landlord to sell ? — 
 I would not. Q. A gentleman who was examined to day said that the tenants should have a right to compel 
 their landlord to sell whether he liked it or not ? — That was nonsense." 
 
 * See also, among others: — Robertson, 1457; Coleman, 2391; Murphy, 2812; Fenlon, 3777; M'Elroy, 
 4513; Shillington, 5092, 5108, 5163; Wilson, 8453; Rankin, 10529; Caldwell, 10664; Bolster, 21706; 
 Sferkey, 22613, 22637 ; Hogan, 23784 ; O'Sullivan, 24953 ; Walpole, 26067, 26082 ; Bennett, 28428 ; 
 Roche, 34294; Bowling, 34492, 34551 ; Smollen, 36883; Magher, 37220. 
 
IG 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Illustrations from 
 the Evidence. 
 
 Mr. Henry M'Kean, of Benburb, co. Tyrone, says, Q. 7981 : — 
 
 " You are of opinion that the landlord has a right to seek a rise of rent if he thinks the land is too 
 
 low ? -Yes. Q. And the tenant to seek a reduction if he thinks that it is set too high 1 — Certainly. Q, If 
 
 that system were established, do you not think there would be in the country a great deal of excitement and 
 re-valuing ?— There might be, but I have been working amongst tenant farmers for some years, and have 
 been iatimately acquainted with them, and it is only in exceptional cases that I have heard a man say that 
 he would not j)ay a fair rent." 
 
 Mr. William Heron, Valuator and Tenant Farmer, of Doonamurray, Collooney, co. 
 Sligo, says, Q. 1407 4;— 
 
 " I know an estate on which the tenants acted very fair. The landlord sent a valuator, and they would not 
 agree to that, and they named me. The landlord said, I will take him too, and I had the difficulty of acting. 
 for both, and I satisfied all the tenants except one. Q. Sometimes people won't be satisfied? — The land 
 was, most of it, naturally good. They said, _ ' The land God Almighty made good we will pay the value of,- 
 but the land we made good we will pay accordingly for,' and if you take that into account, you generally please 
 them." 
 
 Mr. James Daly, of Castlebar, co. Mayo, says, Q. 17669 : — 
 
 "If there was a bill passed giving perfect security and arranging the valuation between landlord and tenant^ 
 allowing the tenant to sell his interest whenever he likes, with provision for the creation of a peasant proi 
 prietorship, would that meet the case 1 — Yes, that would do. If you give facilities to create peasant proprietor* 
 you woi'ld make the peasants more conservative than the Conservatives. I am a Land Leaguer myself, and I 
 would not be a Land Leaguer if it had anything behind it like revolution. I would fight against it. Q. Yon 
 don't want to do anything of that kind, but you want to improve the country you are in ? — Yes. I believe- 
 the people are misrepresented, and I very often saw myself misrepresented. Instead of bettering me it would 
 make me more disloyal ; they arrested me and brought me down to Sligo, and instead of retarding me in the 
 work it made me a spoiled child." 
 
 Mr. James Kilmartin, of Loughrea, co. Galway, says, Q. 20958 : — 
 
 "Have you turned yotir attention to the promoting of peasant proprietorship? — I think that would h» 
 very desirable, but I don't think the Government would be able to pass a measure expropriating the landlords, 
 Mr. Gladstone would not have the power, T believe, to do it. Q. Do you think Mr. Pamell could do it!-- 
 Not at all. Q. Would you not think that buying out all the landlords of Ireland and letting to the tenants 
 would be beneficial ? — I think it would be beneficial. Q. But not practicable 1 — No ; but with absent land- 
 lords it might. I believe that peasant proprietary is the basis of a fair settlement of the land question, but I 
 don't believe that in the present state of parties it is possible. Q. But wherever you find an industrious tenant, 
 and the landlord willing to sell, you would oiTer every facility ? — I would. Q. Gradually that would spread 
 over the whole country, and become a national institution in course of time ? — ^Yes. Q. But would you not 
 turn out the landlords without their own consent ? — I would not think it fair. Q. Nor without giving them 
 compensation 1 — That would be the amount of the purchase-money. Q. You would not take anything from 
 them 1 — I would not. Q. And you think the tenant should pay a fair rent for his holding ? — That is the 
 
 extent of the whole question If the Ulster custom were defined in this way, and extended 
 
 in this way to all parts of Ireland, it would be easy to settle the land question. 
 
 " Q. 20969. "Would it satisfy the people, do you think? — I think it would From my knowledge 
 
 of the people and of these agitators, no one asks for the land for nothing. They distinguish between 
 what is right and what is wrong, and want only what is fair, I think." 
 
 Mr. William Bolster, ex-president of the Limerick, Clare, and Tipperary Farmers' 
 Club, says, Q. 21833 : — 
 
 " I think it would be a wise thing for the landlords to settle the land question, for I find every year it becomes 
 worse. When I first became president of the Farmers' Club, I think before we had Mr. Butt in Limerick, our 
 idea was a thirty-one years' lease ; that is sixteen years ago. We crept from that to a sixty-one years' lease. 
 Then Mr. Butt came in, and it was the three F's, and we forgot these two things which we thought at one 
 time would be satisfactory, and now we believe we must sweep the landlords away altogether; and I believe 
 really that if the question is not settled soon, I don't know where it will end. Q. Baron Dowse.— That 
 is a dangerous doctrine, for if it was settled you might still keep creeping on? — No; these three F's would 
 satisfy us. Q. Mr. Shaw. — You only state this as showing the wisdom of settling the question at once?— Yes." 
 
 Mr. Thomas O'Rourke, of Tralee, says, Q. 25080 :— 
 
 "I would prefer a peasant proprietary, if it could be established without sending the landlords out of the 
 country. I believe the landlords of the country should be treated justly. I would not confiscate a single- 
 pennyworth of property from them; but, at the same time, I would wish to see the tenants rooted on the soil," 
 
 And by land 
 owners. 
 
 35. We desire to call attention, in this connexion, to the tone of similar moderatioB| 
 which pervades the great bulk of the evidence tendered on the side of landowners. It 
 is a hopeful sign ot the success which awaits a measure of well-considered reform, 
 when the moderate men on either side are found coming forward to express their 
 willingness to support it. Many of the landlords and agents who have appeared, 
 before us have given us abundant evidence of their desire to see this question settled 
 by meeting the tenants half way ; although by so doing they should concede much 
 that has hitherto been held to be their indisputable right. Under these good auspices, 
 though the task is arduous, there seems no reason for considering it impossible. 
 
REPORT. 17 
 
 36.* Thus Alexander Kirkpatrick, Esq., Coolmine House, Clonsilla, Agent to Lord Illustrations from 
 ortarlmgton, Q. 3bi)0 : — the Evidence. 
 
 "You would be in favour of giving tenants perfect security in their holdings?— I would, indeed. Q. Yoii 
 ould not turn them out except for just cause, except, say, for non-payment of rent or dilapidating their 
 )ldmgs in some way 1— No. Q. You would allow them to sell freely?— I would. Q. And you think that 
 ould be m favour of the landlord in the long run ?— I do. I have not known, but I have heard of what 
 ippened long before my time; that in former times to show that the landlord had full power over his 
 inants ; he would shift them about like pieces on a chess-board for his own whim, to show them that he had 
 lem in his power. I think that could not possibly be done now." 
 
 Frederick Wrench, Esq., Brookeborough, Agent for Sir Victor Brooke, Lords Kath- 
 onnell and Lanesborough, &c. ; Q. 5600 : — 
 
 " If there was a Government valuation made, the valuation might stand, I think, for a period of twenty- 
 ae or perhaps thirty-one years. Q. That is, a valuation for purposes of rent] — Yes. I cannot see how it is 
 ) be better arranged than by a Government valuation being made, such valuation to stand for a fixed period 
 F say twenty-one or thirty-one years, which would give the tenant a feeling of security. And I think it 
 ould be right and just to extend a defined Ulster custom all over Ireland, giving the landlord a right of 
 jlecting his tenant, or a right of pre-emption at the price ofi'ered, hand fide, by a solvent tenant, and reserving 
 ) the landlord, in districts where the Ulster custom has not previously been in force, a right to be paid 
 at of the purchase-money the fair value of any improvements made by him and in existence at the time of 
 18 sale, or the right to put a per-centage on the amount of the value of the improvements in the shape of 
 n increased rent when the custom is introduced on the estate. Q. You see no reason why that should not 
 xtend to the whole of Ireland 1 — No, and I believe the landlord would find it advantageous as well as the 
 enant." 
 
 Mark Seton Synnot, Esq., of Ballymoyer, Newtownhamilton, Q. 7266 : — 
 
 " If you could get a tribunal of practical judicious men, would it not be satisfactory? — It would be very 
 esirable. Q. If the amount of the rent was settled in that way, the tenant to be allowed to remain as long 
 s he paid the rent, and to be allowed to sell his interest in the way you mention, do you think it would be 
 itisfactory ? — Yes, I think it would. Landlords, as a rule, don't want to evict tenants, except in an extreme 
 ase where he owes several years rent or something of that sort. Q. The O'Conor Don. — Do you mean that 
 , tenant should have the right of permanent occupancy so long as he paid his rent 1 — Practically it is so now — 
 hey remain as long as they like, and are never disturbed, as long as they pay the rent. Q. Would you 
 onsider it advisable that the law should give them a right to remain in occupation, even if the landlord 
 ranted the land for himself ? — I think it would be a hard thing if a man wanted his own land, that he should 
 lot get it, but he certainly should give the tenant compensation for it. Such cases are unknown, I may tell 
 TOU, in our part of the country." 
 
 Colonel E. E,. King-Harman, Rockingham, Co. Roscommon, Q. 141 89; — 
 
 '■ Have you considered the question of a Government court of arbitration 1 — I have. Q. You introduced a 
 rill into the House of Commons in 1878 on the subject? — Yes, for settling rents. Q. What was the measure ? 
 —Providing a Government land judge whenever it was required in cases <jf dispute, the tenant to chose one 
 irbitrator, and the landlord another, and if they did not agree, the Government land judge to be called in, 
 he party against whom the decision was to pay the costs. Q. So it would not be a general revaluation, 
 )ut only whenever the Government arbitrator was called in? — Whenever a dispute arose. Q. Would you 
 ixtend that to every class of tenancy? — I don't see why it should not be. Q. It would be a good thing for 
 he landlords, and prevent many disputes and cases of ill-feeling, for it would be known the rent had been 
 ixed by an impartial person 1 — I think the provision to make the parson against whom the award was given 
 lay the costs, would stop a good deal of litigation. Q. Would you deprive the landlord of all capability of ever 
 esumiug possession of his land if he had it once let? — Practically I think that is the case now. Q. Wo-.dd 
 ou applv this to every description of tenancy in the country — there are many cases in which the landlord 
 .as let the land for temporary purposes, and perhaps to a non-resident tenant ? — T would apply it to all cases 
 hat came under the Act of 1870, all agricultural holdings, of course I exclude demesnes and townparks. 
 J. But in all agricultural holdings you would give the present occupiers perpetuity ? — It would practically 
 mount to that. Q. You consider they have that on good estates ? — Yes. Q. You don't mean there is to b-; 
 ne final settlement of rent for ever 1 — No. I think the rents should go up and down the same as any other 
 ommodity. Q. Periodically and not fitfully ? — Yes." 
 
 Burton Persse, Esq., Moyode Castle, Athenry, Co. Gal way, Q. 18932: — 
 
 " Supposing that any disputes took place between you and your tenants as to rent, would you have any 
 bjection to any tribunal to settle them? — I would be very glad if there was such. Q. And one that would 
 itisfy both landlord and tenant ? — Yes. Q. If the law said you were not to turn out the tenailt if he paid 
 lie rent, you would be satisfied ? — I would not turn him out. Q. Practically, they have fixity of tenure with 
 ou? — Quite so." 
 
 Colonel C. G. Tottenha n, of Ballycuny, Ashford, Co. Wicklow, Q. 40278 :— 
 
 " What would be your opinion of the extension of fixity of tenure — would you be opposed to it? — I should 
 ot be oppo.sed to fixity of tenure, but I should be opposed to free sale. Q. How about fair rents in case of 
 
 * See also O'Brien, E. W., 3913, 4001, 4086; Bru.sh, 6675, 6694, 6709; Winder, 6798, 6837, 6.vJ7 
 878; Waring, 6977; Murphy, E., 10123, 10129, 10194; Scott, James, 15950; Knox, 17047; Gore, ITuG J ■ 
 Hake, 18830; Halliday, 19640; Hunt, 21574; Delmege, 23473; Crosbie, 26239; Leahy, 27191; Campi.vi,' 
 9621; Fitzgerald, 29541, 29551; Barrett, 30558; Ardagh, 31430; Roberts, 33563; Ventry, S.'ii U ; 
 I'Demiot, 35183; Browne, 35201; Vernon, 35258, 35287, 35319, 35327, 35348; Keane, 35763, 35792 
 lifford, 36464; Tener, 36628; Deane, 37355; Healy, 37399; Bole, 38110; D'Arcy, 38917; Curling, 3'J3si; ■ 
 louglas, 39466 ; Adamson, 39650 ; Greer, 39950 ; King, 40346. 
 
 D 
 
18 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 ■TlHictrations from disputes-would you be opposed to arbitration ?-I sliouldlike to see a general revaluation at a gross ' value, but 
 .imiOTrauons nom ^ ^^^,^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ arbitration— I don't see liow you can compel the landlord to let his land. Q. 
 the Jividence. ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ trammel the landlord'? power of letting the land in any way ^— I think the landlord's power of let- 
 
 ting or not letting the land should'be left untouched. Q: Mr. Shaw.— Toti would keep the power of fixing any 
 rent he pleased?— "i^es, but there should 4)6 « recognised standard. -Q. Of rent ''—Yds. Q. How would that 
 be ?— By general valuation. Q. Mr. KAVAifAGH.r— You don't consider that by making fixity of tenure Hegal 
 the landlord would lose any right ?—Undoukedly he would. Q. Any valuable right?— I think the landlotd 
 ought to be prepared to sacrifice whatever right lie has in that for the good of the country." 
 
 Security against 
 disturbance by 
 extension of s. 3. 
 
 Security for im- 
 provements by 
 extension of s. 4. 
 
 ' lY. Whether It is siificient to preserve the lines and amend the details ' ; 
 
 of the Land Act of 1^70. 
 
 37. A thorouo-h and very general change in the system of land tenure seems impera- 
 tively required ; . such, a change as shall bring home to the tenants a sense of security, 
 shall guard them against undue increases of rent, shall render them no longer liahle to 
 the apprehension of arbitrary disturbance, and shall give them full security for their 
 improvements. It is natural first to consider whether this -change can be eifected by 
 any modification of the Land Act of 1870, which, without varying its principle, 
 shall supplement its deficiencies. The principle of the Land Act is, as we have 
 stated, to increase the security of the tenant's interest in his holding by_ indiirect 
 means, while refusing him the direct protection which belongs to a proprietary right; ' ft 
 would probably be necessary, first, to abolish the limits of compensation for disturbance, 
 for holdings not under the Ulster custom, and to remove exceptions from its operation, 
 with a view to make arbitrary eviction so expensive, as to confer upon the tenant a 
 security practically equivalent to fixity of tenure. If the scale of compensatioa-? be 
 not made prohibitory, it will be of little use ; whilst if it be so, the landlord will be 
 left with but the shadow of the right which it is intended he should retain. It is a 
 question if this could be effected without placing landlords at an unfair disadvantage in 
 the legitimate exercise of their rights. On the side of the tenant, too, it would still be 
 necessary for him to go out of his holding first, and trust to the chances of a lawsuit 
 to recover what would now be, perhaps, more than the value of his interest in it.^ 
 The same arguments apply to an attempt, by the removal of the present restrictions,! 
 to give the tenant full securitj^, by indirect means, for the undisturbed enjoyment of the 
 benefit of his improvements. In short, the plan of giving only indirect protection to a 
 valuable interest would result, if it - were extended till it became effectual, in doing 
 equal injustice to both sides. 
 
 Security against 
 increase of rent by 
 extension of s. 18 ; 
 
 By extension of 
 s. 9. 
 
 One Land La\', for 
 Ireland desiraWp. 
 
 38. In order to give security on the indirect principle against; undue increase of rent, 
 whether as absorbing the value of a tenant's improvements, or that of his general 
 interest in his holding, it would be probably necessary to make it compulsory on the 
 landlord, instead of optional as at present, except in special cases, to offer to a disturbed 
 tenant "reasonable terms"; and by giving a penal sum for compensation, wb^re the 
 landlord is found to have unreasonably omitted to offer such terms, or where the terms 
 offered are themselves judged to be unreasonable, a jurisdiction might be secured to the 
 court to give an indirect protection suitable to the case. Here, however, as before, the 
 landlord who was only claiming his rights would be placed at an unfair disadvantage ; 
 and a tenant would remain subject as at present to the disadvantage of which he most 
 grievously complains, namely, that before he can make up his mind to go out of his 
 holding with a view to compensation, a system of gradual rent raising will by degrees^ 
 have " eaten up" a great part of the value of his interest. A remedy which should; 
 proceed by way of extension of the other provision in vv^hich rent is mentioned^ that 
 which provides that ejectment for non-payment of rent may be disturbance if the rent 
 is deemed exorbitant, is open to still graver objections. In order to avail himself of 
 this provision the tenant must cause the landlord to eject him by non-payment of his 
 rent. If disturbance by the landlord is an objectionable way of raising the question 
 whether the rent is fair, a refusal to pay rent with a view to provoking such 
 disturbance is at least doubly objectionable. To invite a tenant to withhold his rent, 
 and a landlord to serve an unnecessary ejectment, by way of setting the court in 
 motion which is to appease their differences, does not appear, in the present state 
 of Ireland, a hopeful way of promoting harmony. 
 
 39. In so far as the principle of the Land Act was to give protection by indirect 
 means alone to the tenant's interest in his holding, we do not think it advisable to 
 proceed by way of amendment and extension of its provisions. In so far as it consisted 
 in a recognition of the actual condition of things, and in an amendment of the land law 
 with the least possible disturbance of existing relations, we are inclined to regard H 
 
REPORT. 19 
 
 with favour. But in one respect this recognition appears to have been mistaken, and ' " - 
 
 to haveintroduced into the law an unnecessary variety. The relations of landlord and ' ' 
 
 tenant in Ulster differed from those in the rest of Ireland rather in degree than in 
 kmd. Ihe interest of the tenant in his holding outside the limits of the Ulster custom 
 Avas analogous, though not equivalent, to an Ulster tenant-right. By legalizing the 
 custom of Ulster as it stood, and partially recognizing a less perfect tenant-right else- 
 where, a difference was established vvhich has no sufficient justification. The Ulster 
 custom as legalized has now proved insufficient ; and the points at which it has broken 
 down are the same as those at which the law for the rest of Ireland has broken down 
 also. It seems desirable that in future the same land law should prevail throughout 
 Ireland, and that the yearly tenant, in every part of the kingdom, should possess the 
 same rights, and be subject to the same obligations. But we do not propose to effect 
 this -nnity of system by means of any plan which can be legitimately described as 
 extending the Ulster custom to the rest of Ireland. Some points indeed in the Ulster Extension of 
 custom appear worthy of wider application. ]3ut these are not peculiar to Ulster. The Ulster custom not 
 scheme of the Ulster sections of the Land Act, whereby an attempt was made to give approved, 
 the custom as it existed a fair trial, Avithout limitation or even definition of it, but 
 leaving ifr to be established by evidence in court, is inconsistent with the extension of 
 these sections, or anything resembling them, to counties Avhere no general custom 
 exists. To enact for all Ireland the Ulster custom in its most prevalent form; as 
 stated by the best authorities, and embodied in the decisions of the courts during the 
 la^ ten years, would be indeed possible, but absurd. As it stands it has failed, even 
 in' its native soil. If it were enacted in an amended form, it would no longer be, even 
 in name, the Ulster custom. The question requires to be considered independently. 
 
 y. Proposals for Legislation. 
 
 40. The principle which we adopt as a guide is that partially embodied in the Land A new tenure, 
 
 Act, of giving legal recognition to the existing state of things. It appears to us that '^'^^^ continuous 
 
 the conditions under which land has been held by yearly tenants in Ireland have been ^'^'^'^V^^^Jj^^ * '' 
 , , , . , ^ , • 1 •'• 1 , , , • settling or rent by 
 
 such, that the occupiers have, as a general rule, acquired rights to continuous occupancy impartial autto- 
 
 which; in the interest of the community, it is desirable legally to recognize. We think rity in cases of 
 
 the farmer should no longer be liable at law to the displacement of his interest in his disputes. 
 
 holding, either directly by ejectment, or indirectly by the raising of his rent, at the ^^'^f'^^t'^' ^ ' 
 
 discretion of 'the landlord. The landlord's right to eject should, we think, be limited 3390 ■ O'Bnen 
 
 to certain stated cases ; and some way should be provided for the determination of the 3914; Hunt, 
 
 fair amount of rent to be paid in cases of dispute. The legal effect of these changes 21574; Roclie, 
 
 may be described as amounting to the enlargement of the tenancy from year to year o^^oa! r /If^^' 
 
 into a new kind of statutory tenure, defeasible only upon decree of the Land Court, for 32571 • Han^^ 
 
 the breach of certain well ascertained conditions, and held subject to the payment of a 33429; Bagwell,' 
 
 rent, -the amount of which should in the last resort be fixed, neither by the landlord nor 34430 ; Curling, 
 
 by the tenant, but by constituted authority. 39386 ; Bruen, 
 
 J ' J J 40296. 
 
 41. To these two concessions, commonly spoken of under the names of Fixity of Fixity of Tenure, 
 tenure and Fair rents, that of a right of Free sale has usually been appended. This Fair Rents, and 
 also, on the same principle of recognizing the existing condition of things, we think it "^^®® ^^^®' 
 expedient to establish. In a word, so far as concerns yearly holdings within the Land 
 
 Act of 1870, we advocate the reform of the Land Law of Ireland upon the basis known 
 as " The Three F's," i.e. Fixity of Tenure, Fiiir Rents, and Free Sale. Each of these 
 heads requires some observations. 
 
 42. The conditions of the new Tenure should, we think, be these. Subdivision or Fixity of Tenure. 
 subletting, without the landlord's consent in writing, persistent waste, that is to say 
 
 the dilapidation of buildings and the systematic deterioration of the soil, when persisted 
 in after a notice in writing from the landlord to desist, conviction for any serious 
 criminal offence, and the Acts enumerated in section 14 of the Land Act, "per- 
 sisting in the exercise of any right not necessary to the due cultivation of the tenants' 
 holding, and from which he is debarred by express or implied agreement with the 
 landlord, unreasonably refusing to allow the landlord to enter for purposes of mining or 
 taking minerals, quarrying or taking stone, &c., cutting or taking timber or turf, openino- 
 or making roads, drains, and watercourses, viewing the state of the holding, hunting, 
 shooting, fishing, and taking game or fish," should authorize the landlord to serve a 
 notice to quit for the breach of these conditions, or entitle him to compel the tenant 
 by a decree of the Land Court to sell his holding. If the law of ejectment is retained, 
 the landlord should be entitled to maintain an ejectment after two years' rent is 
 
 D 2 
 
20 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Liinn, 6562 ; 
 alliday, 19648 : 
 mer, 36550. 
 
 eadjustment of 
 e time allowed 
 r redemption. 
 
 Iternative pro- 
 sed, to substi- 
 te an action for 
 cree of sale for 
 oceedings in 
 sctment. 
 nox, 17061 ; 
 Arcy, 38906 ; 
 iamson, 39645. 
 
 le Landlord 
 mid be entitled 
 arrears of rent 
 t of the proceeds 
 sale. 
 
 irkpatrick, 
 '65, 3874; 
 Brien, 4018 ; 
 amill, 4274, 
 !99; Forde, 
 i85. 
 
 due ; and the tenant should be entitled to sell his holding up to the expiration of 
 the time allowed for redemption. 
 
 43. The present period of six months allowed for redemption, should be reckoned 
 before, instead of after the actual eviction ; thus practically respiting the execution : 
 of the writ of possession, or of the decree, for six months after the judgment in eject- 
 ment or decree to possession is pronounced.* 
 
 44. The substitution of a decree for sale of the holding in place of ejectment has 
 also been suggested, and deserves consideration. 
 
 4.5. The arrears of rent, as at present under the Ulster custom, including any hanging 
 gale, would be paid to the landlord out of the proceeds of the sale, and the tenant 
 would be entitled to the balance. It is to this provision that we look for giving to the 
 landlord an advantage under the new system, which would in some measure compensate 
 him for what he loses. The amount annually lost by landlords in arrears is under 
 the present system very large, except in Ulster. The right of being recouped out 
 of the proceeds of a sale of the tenant's interest is in Ulster the landlord's great secu- 
 rity. It has been of so much obvious benefit to landlords to have this reserve to draw 
 upon, that they have looked on, for the most part, with comparative indifference, while 
 the notion of tenant-right first grew into a custom, and was afterwards embodied in 
 law. The tenant who gets behindhand with the Avorld is urged by the agent to 
 sell ; he is even anxious to sell, if he sees no chance of righting his affairs, before 
 his whole interest is swallowed up by debts and arrears of rent. He takes his 
 money, or what remains of it, and buys a smaller farm, or emigrates, or betakes him- 
 self to a humbler calling. No "agrarian outrage" follows, and the descent, if any, 
 in the social scale is arranged for with as little hardship and heart-burning as possible. 
 
 .ndlord's right 
 resumption. 
 'Elroy, 4647; 
 illington, 5092; 
 )bb, 5201 ; 
 Try, 6270 ; 
 'Ughrey, 11168; 
 illiday, 19640; 
 hite, 23214; 
 ildwin, 32575. 
 
 Dw far fixity of 
 Hire is a change 
 )m the pi-esent 
 ite of thinars. 
 
 46. We propose that the landlord should retain a right to resume possession of a 
 holding, or of any portion thereof, for special reasons, on payment of the full selling 
 price of the tenant's interest. Such special reasons would include the occasions for which 
 provision has already been made in the Land Act, of land being required for labourers' 
 cottages and gardens, and would extend to the case of many exceptional lettings, but 
 not to lettings for ordinary agricultural purposes. If any question arose as to the 
 reason for resumption, or the amount to be paid, it should be decided by the Land 
 Court. 
 
 47. Even with these limits, there is no denying that the conferring of such a tenure 
 upon the yearly tenants of agricultural holdings, that is to say upon the great body of 
 Irish farmers, is, from the point of view of the existing law, a very considerable change, 
 and would confer great advantages upon tenants. But from the point of view of the 
 existing relations of landlord and tenant, on most well ordered estates, there is already, 
 and has been for generations, a virtual fixity of tenure,! and the change would practically 
 be not great, after all. The control of the landlord, which is now absolute at law, but 
 confined in fact to very narrow lines, would be legally confined, in future, to those same 
 lines on which it is now beneficially and generally exercised. There is a certain loss 
 to the landlord, namely, that of his legal reversion, considered as a piece of substantive 
 property. His greatest loss, however, would be that of sentiment — of the sentiment 
 of ownership. In so far as the tenant is made into an owner, the landlord must be 
 less of an owner than before. The strength of attachment with which men reo^ard 
 their property remains often undiminished even w^hen the shadow of property, rather 
 than property itself, is in question. Moreover, this sentiment of ownership is the 
 shadow of more than a mere right of property— of political influence, once exclusively 
 attached to the ownership of land, and of old family traditions, not to say, in some 
 cases of historic associations bound up with it. We do not under-estimate such 
 considerations. We merely plead that all the circumstances must be taken into account, 
 before it is decided that the interference with private right which we advocate is too 
 great to be contemplated. It would be a far greater interference wdth the existing 
 state of things to cai-ry out in practice the theory of the existing law. A chasm 
 
 39752' '^'' ^'^^^^''^^'^' 22368; Hewson, 23061; Hamilton, 33449; Keane, 35779; French, 37887; Blake, 
 ,/-,-,¥"'T.hy> 10120; Blake, 18816, 18830; Persse, 18935; French, 19122; O'Flaherty 19410. Mahon 
 
 SSV;.sf S '' T'' \ ^'T^\IfP^ ^™^™'' ''''' ' "P^^^"^*' ^^^^" ■' ^'^'-^y' 25932 riahV.Sl'; 
 39893 -Townshend, 34010; Lewm, 34795; Lansdowm, 57516; /"M^fer, 39528 ; Rochfbrt-Boyd, 
 
REPORT. 21 
 
 exists, beUyeen the law and the facts, which has to be filled up somehow. In order 
 to hil it, either the realities of society as we find them, which liave existed for centu- 
 ries must at last be moved from their foundations, or the law must be altered. If 
 the la,w is altered as we propose, there will be in most cases no great interference with the 
 practical power of a landlord over his property, with his way of managing it, or with 
 the present income he derives from it, but a good deal with his nominal rights, and 
 with his sentiment of ownership. 
 
 48. Fixity of Tenure, without Fair Rent, is an absurdity. It would be nugatory Fair Rent, 
 to secure to the tenant a proprietary right, of which the value depended on the 
 
 will of another.' But it is highly probable that the proposal for settling disputes as 
 
 to rent by arbitration, or by authority in any form, will appear to many a still greater 
 
 innovation than the proposal to give yearly tenants a secure tenure. The proposal is 
 
 sometimes spoken of as if it were analogous to the attempts so often made, in the 
 
 middle ages, to fix the rate of wages, or the price of commodities, by legislation. It is 
 
 often assailed with arguments drawn from the armoury of Free-traders, in their war 
 
 against Protection. The principle is invoked of "freedom of contract"; and it is Wright, 28381 ; 
 
 asked whether in this case alone there exists an exception to the principles which p?™,^*!^*' ^<fjl^ir' 
 
 have been established by political economists, as infallible guides to legislation in 34538 . i^'vine ' 
 
 promoting the wealth of a community. On this subject of freedom of contract we 35753'; Kincai'd, 
 
 have a few words to say. The proposal of settling rent by authority is undoubtedly 40226. 
 
 inconsistent with the ideal freedom of contract between landlord and tenant, which 
 
 the Act of 1860 postulates, and which is by many imagined to exist. That ideal pictures 
 
 the landlord as possessor, and the tenant as desirous of possession, bargaining together 
 
 and coming to an agreement, by which land in the landlord's possession is transferred, 
 
 under certain conditions of proper cultivation, rent-payment, and ultimate restitution, 
 
 to the tenant. But what are the facts? It is, in the large majority of cases, the 
 
 tenant, and not the landlord, who is, and has been for years, in possession of the holding. 
 
 The process of bargaining may end, and under the Land Act of 1870 it is bound to 
 
 end, unless the tenant submits to the landlord's demands, with a dispossession of the 
 
 tenant by the landlord, against which there is no resistance possible, and no appeal. 
 
 An ejected farming tenant in Ireland has nothing to turn to, except the chance of 
 
 purchasing another holding ; the offers of which are limited, and the prices high. .JSfot 
 
 to come to terms with his landlord means, for him, to leave his home, to leave his 
 
 employment, to forfeit the inheritance of his fathers, and, to some extent, the investment 
 
 of his toil, and to sink at once to a lower plane of physical comfort and social rank. 
 
 It is no matter to him of the chafier of the market, but almost of life and death. 
 
 The farmer bargains with his landlord, under sentence of losing his living, if the 
 
 bargain goes off. 
 
 You take my life, when you do take the means 
 By which I live. 
 
 We grant that it would be inexpedient to interfere with freedom of contract between 
 landlord and tenant, if freedom of contract really existed; but freedom of contract, in 
 the case of the majority of Irish tenants, large and small, does not really exist.* 
 
 49. In settling what is a fair rent, the present rent, or such rent as is agreed upon, M 'tioi of set t'.i as- 
 under the new system, between landlord and tenant, may be assumed, in the absence -^ ^a-f lent io be ° 
 of any demand for its alteration, to be the fair rent required. If a dispute arises either ''^ arbitration 
 through the desire of the landlord to raise the rent, or of the tenant to have it lowered, ^'"^ *™^ ** ^^^^ 
 to an extent which the other party will not accept, some procedure in the nature of 
 an arbitration, or of a trial at law, must be provided for its settlement.t To a new 
 Government valuation throughout Ireland to be undertaken for the purpose of fixing the 
 rent of every separate agricultural holding, as between landlord and tenant, there 
 appear to us to be insuperable objections, to which we shall recur further on. It is 
 enough here to say that the economy of legislation, and the principle we follow of 
 recognizing so far as possible the existing state of things, are in favour of the scheme 
 
 * O'Brien, 4011 ; Shillington, 4963 ; Brosnan, 25625 ; Crosbie, 26221 ; Lane, 26563 ; Sawlers 9914s • 
 Payne, 30441; Fell, 30808; Tobin, 31682; M'Bnerny, 31772; Roberts, 33606; Vernon, 3539 ■' Prinale' 
 38769. ' ° ' 
 
 Halliday, 19631 ; Burke, 19747 ; O'Flaherty, 19419 ; Bailey, 20214 ; Morice, 23952 ; Hussey 25303 ■ Le.ihv' 
 27191; Sanders, 29094; Sherlock, 30962; Roohfort, 33245; Browne, 35232; Johnston, 35621 ■ Redmonil' 
 36375 ; LifFord, 36466 ; Curling, 39382 ; Douglas, 39467; Little, 39510. 
 
 or 
 
22 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 O'Brien, 4009 ; 
 M'Elroy, 4537 ; 
 Brush, 6694 ; 
 Loughrey, 11149 ; 
 Crean, 15864. 
 
 The function of 
 authority should 
 be minimized. 
 
 we advocate. There seems no reason for calling in the aid of State ■ machinery in the 
 large number of cases where landlord and tenant succeed in coming to an arrangement) 
 of their dispute, or in the still larger number where no dispute arises. 
 
 ■ ■■ -'• ■■■'■n:'. 
 
 50. An objection may be urged to the settlement of rent, under any circumstances, 
 by authority, which deserves serious consideration. It will be said that the prmciples on 
 which the tribunal proceeds in deciding what, in each case, is a fair rent, will be open to 
 criticism, will invite objection, and will be the mark, in future times, _ of political 
 agitators ; that a new movement will speedily be begun to modify these principles in a 
 popular sense ; that elections will turn upon it, and a league be formed to promote an 
 alteration of the law ; in a word, that no final settlement can be effected, which depends ■ 
 upon the acquiescence of Irish tenants possessing political power in the decisions of 
 constituted authority. This argument will naturally have weight with thpse who^ see no 
 just grievance in the present condition of the Irish- farmer, and who ascribe the present 
 movement, and the inveterate discontent of the class, entirely to the wiles of agitatersjr. 
 and- to the recent scarcity. It will not have so much weight with thosewho consider 
 the present land system as responsible for the- mischief, and who are believers in the 
 healing influence of justice. But precaution is necessary. It will be wise to minimize • 
 the function of the State, to make legislation responsible for as few rules,. and those asi 
 simple, as possible, and to call upon authority for particular decisions only when no other 
 resource is available. For this reason a provision for cheap arbitration appears to us 
 indispensable ; and it is our trust that in the maj ority of cases no further proceedingr^ 
 will be resorted to. 
 
 Procedure by way 
 of arbitration. 
 
 M'Elroy, 4528 ; 
 Hanna, 8895 ; 
 Eankin, 10530 ; 
 Connison, 10956 ; 
 Barbour, 15637 ; 
 Wright, 28378. 
 
 Alternative me- 
 tliod.s of procedure 
 by arbitration 
 suggested. 
 
 M'Neill, 6080 ; 
 M'Causland,9339; 
 Loughrey, J., 
 12065 ; Hardy, 
 20855 ; Scott, 
 22516 ; Dclniege, 
 23S14 ; Roberts, 
 33595. 
 
 Pynnot, 72Cir> ; 
 ?iiui-pliy, 10112 ; 
 ilori-isou, 10452; 
 <iood, 32G60. 
 
 51. If the ordinary form of arbitration is preferred, recommended by its simplicity, 
 and by the familiarity which it derives from its employment on many estates, and from 
 its establishment by law for such cases as the taking of lands for public purposes, . 
 the course of procedure may be as follows : — In case either party demanded that the 
 rent of a holding should be varied, and the other refused or was . unwilling to agree 
 to the demand, it should be lawful for the party demanding to serve a notice 
 requiring the party refusing within a given time to nominate an arbitrator, and stating..-- 
 in the notice the arbitrator proposed by himself. It should be open to the- party', 
 receiving the notice to set up his counter claim for an- increase, or reduction, as the 
 case might be. In case both the arbitrators are nominated, they should forthwith 
 appoint an umpire, and the award in writing of the arbitrators, or of the umpire if they. i 
 disagree, should fix the rent to be paid for the holding.. If the party contesting the 
 demand refused or neglected to appoint an arbitrator, or if the arbitrators did not agree; 
 upon an umpire, the party complaining should be entitled to serve a claim before thei 
 court or tribunal designated for the purpose. The decision of the arbitrators, or in case 
 of their disagreement, of the umpire, would be final. 
 
 52. The evidence shows that, at all events in the present state of feeling, landlords 
 will be in many cases unwilling to submit their claims to the decision of arbitrators.. 
 The professional valuators who must in general be called in as arbitrators, though, 
 not less able or conscientious than other men, are not a sufficiently independent class 
 to inspire confidence under the extraordinary circumstances of the present time. It is 
 likely, ijherefore, that at first a large number of cases will be brought for decision before , 
 the ultimate authority. As matters become settled, and the principles of decision 
 become _ better understood, the cheap and summary way of settling a dispute by 
 arbitration will be resorted to in all ordinary cases. A scheme of arbitration has 
 been suggested which is intended to obviate the want of confidence which might be 
 felt in arbitrators called in for the occasion, and at the same time to increase the 
 chances of an agreement being arrived at by way of arbitration. If a standing com- 
 mittee of local arbitrators could be formed, composed of men whose reputation, for 
 fairness and practical knowledge commanded the respect of a neighbourhood, it is 
 probable that more cases would be submitted to such a tribunal, than to arbitrators , 
 selected on the usual system. In every district, of Ireland such men are to be found, 
 men v^-ho have lived on the land and 'studied it, who possess the confidence both of 
 landlords and tenants, of whom it is freely allowed on all hands that they would, 
 never knowingly give an unfair decision. Such men understand, better than any others, 
 the circumstances of the neighbourhood in which they dwell. They are acquainted not 
 mcTuly with the capabilities of the soil, and with the state and accessibility of markets, 
 bu. also with the past histo]-y of the relations between landlord and tenant, and with 
 all tno:-e long-established usages, Avhich deserve respect, although they may be too 
 partial and indefinite to admit of being erected into a custom. The opinion of such 
 
EEPORT. 
 
 23 
 
 men IS, throughout the Ipcahty, of more weight than that of any person from a distance, 
 or ot any, oflicial authority. Their reputation for judgmerit is valuable to themselves, 
 ana tftey are ^above the suspicion of trading on it. They have an interest in peace and 
 quietness,, and are capable of looking at a question from other points of view besides 
 their own. Many landlords and many tenant-farmers are such men ; and the calling of 
 a land agent, which forms so peculiar a feature in Irish country life, as well as that of 
 a protessional valuator, will supply representatives of the class in all neighbourhoods. 
 Supposing two elected representatives of landlords, and two of tenants, to be appointed 
 for aterm of years, so as to constitute a standing committee of arbitrators for a given 
 district, the agreement of any three of whom should be final ; it seems likely that men 
 would be elected, not — as is too likely to be the case when each party to a dispute 
 nominates, and the umpire may be expected to split the difference — from their known 
 character as extreme landlord men or tenant men, dependent for custom upon their 
 reputation for giving a good decision for their respective employers, but from their 
 reputation as practical men, likely to wish to settle matters without further difficulty. 
 To compare small things with great, the institution of a standing committee of 
 arbitrators has been tried and found satisfactory in Friendly Societies ; and the device 
 , has found such favour with the legislature, that in this case alone has the unique 
 -privilege been conferred of making the reference to arbitration compulsory, and of 
 excluding complainants, when a standing committee has previously been nominated 
 according to law, from prosecuting their differences with the society in any court of 
 justice. It may be that the state of feeling in Ireland is not such as to tolerate for the 
 present even this form of local settlement. A modification in the same direction of the 
 old^ form of arbitration, whereby the agreement of two at least of the three, of the 
 arbitrators and umpire, should be required, and in default, a reference be allowed to the 
 tribunal, may be suggested. as a second alternative, calculated to strengthen confidence 
 in resorting' to arbitration. 
 
 The ultimate 
 tribunal. 
 
 Wright, 28380 ; 
 Hely, 31506. 
 
 Hamill, 4293 ; 
 O'Mahony, 26644: 
 Fell, 30810; 
 Neligan, 34924. 
 
 53. If the state of public feeling should be thought to permit it, the ascertainment of 
 a fair rent would seem to be work better suited for the decision of laymen than of 
 lawyers, and for adjudication by a local than by an imperial tribunal. But in any 
 case the necessity remains for a strong central court to decide the cases which are 
 not referred to arbitration, or are not decided by it. If the County Court Judge is 
 entrusted with the work, he must have the assistance of an assessor or assessors, prac- 
 tically acquainted with the value of land. Otherwise — and this view meets most 
 favour from the witnesses who have appeared before us — it would be necessary to create 
 an independent tribunal, consisting of persons above the suspicion of class leeling, to 
 which official valuators might be assigned, as at present under the Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, which should hear the case of both parties, and the report of the 
 official valuator,, and decide the amount of a fair rent, in accordance with the principles 
 laid down for its guidance.^^ In any case the amount of rent fixed should be recorded 
 in the office of the Clerk of the Peace of the county in which the farm is situated, or 
 in the office of the Petty Sessions Clerk of the districtt ; and the party failing should pay 
 the costs, if his demand or refusal is found to have been unreasonable. | 
 
 54. If it is considered desirable that some principles or general rules should be laid Principles for 
 down by law for deciding what is a fair rent, we beg to submit the following suggestions ; ascertainment of 
 though persons of authority think it unadvisable that any rules should be laid down ^ ^®'^*' 
 
 by the. legislature on the subject. § It is necessary at once to negative the idea that 
 it means what in England is known as a full, or fair, commercial rent, but in Ireland as 
 a rack-rent. II It is not contemplated that after deducting for the tenant, to use the 
 language of political economy, the cost of cultivation, and the ordinary profits of his 
 trade, the whole of the surplus receipts should be the unquestioned property of the 
 landlord. As a fact, the Irish tenant farmer has in general possessed something more ; 
 as a jight, it is proposed to secure him in that possession. The difficulty is to settle 
 what, in each case, is the existing fair rent. The computation should in general start 
 with an estimate, first, of the gross annual produce, and secondly, of the full com- 
 mercial rent, according to the rules observed by the best professional valuators. From 
 
 * Murphy, 10121; Errington, 13071; Hardy, 20912; Brosnan, 25C70 ; Crosbie, 26239; Eany, 28722; 
 Baldwin, 32137; Dufferin, -83139 ; Gartlan, 36964. 
 
 f Ormsbt/, 589, 610. 
 
 X Loughrey, 11149. 
 - § Shillington, 5005; Morrison, 10452; Loughrey, 11158; Kilmartin, 20972; B.ildwm, 32495 ; Eochforf, 
 33286 ; Longfield, 39809. 
 
 II Baldwin, 32379; Townshend, 33984. 
 
24 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Greene, 834 ; 
 Baldwin, 32415. 
 
 Ferguson, 257 ; 
 Meagher, 2120; 
 Kelly, 3692. 
 
 Limitation of the 
 above, where 
 rent has been 
 acquiesced in for 
 a considerable 
 period. 
 
 Commutation of 
 increased rent due 
 to landlords for 
 impro^-einents for 
 a charge on 
 tenant's interest. 
 De Moleyns, 107; 
 Allen, 19C1 ; 
 Eeeves, 2036, 
 2110; 
 
 Lough re}'-, J., 
 1211G; 
 
 Hussey, 25309 ; 
 Mahony, 25920 ; 
 Crosbie, 26222 ; 
 Jones, 26955 ; 
 Fell, 30781 ; 
 Baldtvin, 32449 ; 
 Vernon, 35339 ; 
 CurliiiL', 39384 ; 
 Bvu en, 40138. 
 
 this last should be deducted, as a rule, any portion of the annual value which is found to 
 be due to improvements not made or acquired by the landlord. The Act of 1870 provided 
 that with certain exceptions all improvements on a holding should, until the contrary 
 was proved, be deemed to have been made by the tenant or his predecessors in title. 
 Some term must, therefore, be fixed, beyond which the presumption should be that the 
 improvements, even if not made by the landlord, were made by tenants who_ were not 
 predecessors in title of the present tenant. Otherwise the rent of an ancient farm 
 might in many cases be liable to reduction to the value of so much waste land. "We 
 suggest a term of thirty-five years. Within this term no considerations oi the length 
 of time during which the tenant may have enjoyed a return from his improvements 
 should exclude the tenant from the benefit of them, in so far as they are found to be 
 actually at the present time still adding to the annual value of the holding. Within 
 this term, moreover, no technical breach of the legal tenancy should operate to deprive 
 him of the benefit, when he can show that he substantially claims through those who 
 have preceded him in the occupation of the farm. With regard to landlord's improve- 
 ments, either on or outside the holding, the amount of the present annual value which 
 his expenditure might be shown to have added to the holding will be included, of 
 course, without deduction, in the computation of the full commercial rent. Subject to 
 the above, the arbitrators or tribunal will proceed to estimate the fair rent; in which they 
 will have regard to any sum paid by the tenant on incoming, or to sums which have 
 ordinarily been paid by tenants in the locality on purchasing, in so far as such sums 
 represent an existing valuable interest in the tenant, over and above any value due to 
 improvements made by himself or his predecessors in title; to any other reasonable way 
 in which the value of the tenants' interest in the farm can be ascertained ; and also to 
 the rents which have commonly been paid by tenants in the locality whose rents are 
 considered to be fair. With the addition of an Equities Clause, upon the model of the 
 first part of the 18th section of the Land Act, whereby the court may take into con- 
 sideration any claim, objection, or set off made, urged, or pleaded by the party refusing 
 the demand, and any default or unreasonable conduct of either party which may appear 
 to the Court to affect the matters in dispute between them, and give judgment on the 
 case with regard to all its circumstances, this will, we think, indicate the lines on 
 which the law should be laid down for the guidance of arbitrators and of the tribunal 
 in estimating a fair rent. 
 
 55. It must not be supposed that the whole of this process will require to be gone 
 through in all cases. It will generally be possible to start from some time when the 
 rent was, in the opinion of both parties, considered fair, and to confine the investigation 
 to the circumstances alleged, on the one side, as altering the conditions then existing, 
 or, on the other, as a set off against these circumstances. It will be expedient, further, 
 to lay down that a rent which was paid at any time within the last twenty years and 
 which continued for not less than ten years to be regularly paid, shall be, in all cases, 
 taken to be such a starting point. 
 
 56. There are holdings where the fair rent thus estimated, and however estimated, 
 will be above the existing rent. They are not so numerous as would be supposed by 
 a stranger, ignorant of the degree to which the improvements on farms have been made 
 by the tenants, and of the distinctness with which the existence of an interest in the 
 tenant has been allowed, even by landlords who would not permit it to be sold. But 
 there are landlords who have spent large sums in improving their estates, who had no im- 
 mediate intention of raising their rents in consideration of the value thus added to the 
 farms, but who may very naturally desire to reap some present return for their improve- 
 ments, when they are deprived of the legal reversion, and of the sense of sole ownership 
 in the soil, without which they might not have cared to make them. It would be unfair 
 to provide these landlords with no better means of recovering the value than the 
 necessity of demanding to have the rents raised within the specified time, thus incurring 
 odium, and coming into confiict with their tenants, some of whom, moreover, might 
 really be unable to pay the increased rent found to be fair under the circumstances; 
 and it wpuld be unfair to the tenants to make them pay an increased rent for improvements 
 made without any immediate intention on the part of the landlord of adding to the rent. 
 In such a case, instead of an addition to the rent, the capitalized present value of the 
 improvements might be made a first charge on the tenant's interest in his holding, to 
 be met and satisfied in the manner hereafter mentioned. Provision should also be 
 made for the fining down of the increase of rent, if any, arising from a demand on the 
 part of the landlord ; to which process Government assistance might be given in the 
 manner hereafter described. 
 
REPORT. 2,3 
 
 57. At this point it becomes necessary to consider the effect which the changes pro Effect of Fixity 
 posed in tenure of land by tenants, and in their relations with their landlords, are Tenure and Fail 
 calculated to have upon the public interest, as concerned with the improvement of ^"""^^ "P°'^ "^■ 
 the soil. Except for main drainage and similar improvements on a large scale, which P\°^®'"^'^' °* 
 may be undertaken^ by landlords as a commercial speculation, the result of depriving 
 
 them of the sentiment _ of sole ownership must inevitably be to discourage still 
 further, if not to extinguish, their expenditure upon the soil of land not in their own 
 occupation. Evidence has been tendered us showing that sums have been and still 
 are being expended by landlords in works on their estates. The cessation to any 
 extent of this expenditure wiU be an evil ; but it will be rendered still more injurious 
 if steps are not taken to ensure in its place a more steady and general outlay of labour 
 and capita] upon the improvement of their holdings by tenants. 
 
 58. Full encouragement is not given to a man to undertake a work of any kind Proposal for a 
 where the returns of his undertaking, whether ordinary or extraordinary, are not tenure at a perp 
 secured to him. It has been urged that Irish tenants will not have sufficient motive to p'Jo^fg^^'^ ' ^ '^ 
 
 i improve unless they are secured against any future increase of rent, such as may 
 seem to them, whether justly or not, to hand over to the landlord the fruits of their labour. 
 To meet this difficulty it has been proposed that, wherever a dispute as to rent has 
 been brought before the Land Court, the tribunal shall fairly value all just rights of 
 the landlord, and fix a fair perpetuity rent on the holding, to which it shall be com- 
 pulsory on the landlord to agree.* The effect of this would be, the conversion of yearly 
 tenancies into a perpetual tenure, subject to a quit rent, which will in most cases 
 slightly exceed the present rent paid. The compulsory establishment of this form of 
 tenure is objectionable, and we do not recommend its adoption. t. 
 
 59. We return to the proposal of fair rent, liable to future revaluation. The rent Term of settle- 
 as settled should remain fixed for a certain period, or for such other term as may from naent of a fair 
 time to time be determined by mutual consent. The statutory period must not be ^®^*- 
 
 made too long ; for if, as some apprehend, Ave are now to look forward to depre- Ferguson, 309 ; 
 
 elation in the profits of agriculture, it must be remembered that this depreciation Robertson U85 ; 
 
 would prey, during the statutory period, exclusively upon the tenant, and it is not LouXey llU? 
 
 desirable, in the interest of either party, that this process should continue too far. But Curling, 39390. 
 some term must be fixed, before the question can be re-opened, in the interest of both 
 parties. We propose a term of thirty-one years. 
 
 I 
 
 60. At the expiration of this period, or of any period that may, meantime, have Principles for re- 
 been substituted by mutual agreement, any re-valuation that might be demanded for valuation. 
 
 the purpose of re-ascertaining the fair rent would start with the rent previously settled, Alexander, 8720. 
 and be limited to the investigation of circumstances which might since have occurred 
 to increase or dimmish the annual value of the holding. The case of increase calls 
 first for consideration. An increase in annual value may arise from three causes : 
 First, from landlords' improvements ; secondly, from those of tenants ; thirdly, from' 
 causes independent of the action of either, constituting what the late Mr. Mill was ' 
 accustomed to call the " unearned increment " of landed property. The two first of 
 these causes occasion no difficulty. 
 
 _ 61. With regard to the third cause, the unearned increment arising from external " Unearned incre 
 circumstances, it will, we think, be necessary, in the public interest, to give the tenant a ment," and de 
 share in this source of profit, if he is allowed to be, in any sense, a part owner of his hold- ''^^^^^ ''^"^^d by 
 ing. The tiller of the soil will hardly have due encouragement to speculate in im- ^^^^"^^ <'^^^^^- 
 provements, if his profits, unlike those of other speculators, are never to be permitted ^''°''^' ^^^^^• 
 to exceed the average profits of money, skill, and labour invested in the pursuit of 
 his calhng. In the absence of first principles on which it can be settled what proportion 
 ot the chance profit should be assigned to each, we propose that the landlord and 
 tenant should be declared, m this respect, equally entitled, and that one half of the 
 increase or decrease as the case maybe, should be taken into account in estimating 
 the fair rent of a holding. ° 
 
 ooL'?""'/'"^' ^^^^' ^^^V^o'h 3363, 3411; O'Brien, 4039, 4097; Loughrey, 11148- Hart 199^0- n .... 
 22053 ; Lane, 26537 ; Barry, 28723 ; Bavis, 29607 ; Hill, 30312 ; '^/«i,,^30825 ;F.™:;;' 35373 ; VtS; 
 
 + M'Causland, 9314, 9321 ; Lane, 9575; Donnell, 11001 ; Ashe, 11911 ; Dalv 19901 • r««<.,Vl,. o-.„ 
 Ferguson, 4875 ; Brown, 9847 ; Brosnan, 25655 ; Fell, 30847 Baldwin, 32397^^^116 35821 ■' ' 
 
 E 
 
26 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Increase due to 
 latent capacity of 
 fee soil. 
 Compare Lord 
 Devon's Digest, 
 Tol. ii, p. 5. 
 Donaldson, 
 11534; King. 
 Harman, 1-1229. 
 
 62. A special' case remains for consideration, where the increase brought about 
 by landlords' or tenants' improvements, as the case may be, is due not solely to the 
 labour, skill, and capital employed, but in part to the development ol latent capacity or 
 " inherent quality " of the soil, to an extent incommensurable with the effort expended. 
 A familiar instance of this is the case of " cut-away bog " in Ireland, where the land 
 laid bare by the profitable removal of turf proves capable, with little further eifort, 
 of profitable cultivation ; or the case where the land lends itself so kindly to the 
 improver, that the profits of one or more crops may go far to remunerate the husband- 
 man for the labour that Avas needed to adapt it for tillage. To meet this case it 
 might be provided that a tenant demanding a decrease of rent, or objecting to its 
 increase, should be called on. in case of objection or counter objection on this account, 
 to put in evidence the nature of the operations which he claims to have conducted, 
 and that the Court or arbitrators should, if they thought the objection or counter 
 objection reasonable, take account of the resulting increase of value in the same manner 
 as if it had arisen from external circumstances. 
 
 limit of time for 
 first valuation. 
 
 Griffith's valua- 
 tion. 
 
 63. The importance of legislating for such contingencies is not to be measured by 
 their apparent remoteness. The sentiment of ownership, in a tenant as well as in a 
 landlord, reaches far forward. There is, moreover, a large class of probable cases in 
 which the contingency is by no means remote. A time Avithin which a demand for 
 " first valuation" must be made should be .specified in the statute. Demands for the 
 increase or decrease of rent, if not made before that time, will come under the rule 
 here laid down for re-valuation ; it being assumed that the rent was, at the time of the 
 passing of the statute, acknowledged to be " fair" by both parties. It may thus 
 happen that within a. very few years the question will arise for decision, to whom 
 does the "unearned increment," or the excess of increase arising from "latent capacity" 
 belong ? 
 
 64. If anything has been clearly established on evidence during this inquiry, the 
 fact tliat the present Government valuation is not a trustworthy standard for the 
 settlement of rents has been most thoroughly demonstrated.* Fair as it may have 
 been for the purposes of local taxation in the years Avhen it was made, the evidence 
 shows that even then it Avas considered as beloAv the fair letting value of the land* 
 Those who argue to the contrary ignore the fact that while there was nowhere any 
 motive at Avork to cause the officials employed to value too highly, there was a 
 universal pressure to force down the valuation, to which it Avas not unnatural for 
 the valuators to yield. No injustice was done to anybody, while every body Av^as 
 satisfied, so long as the under-estimate Avas general and uniform. 
 
 Proposal for a new 
 geiieral valuation 
 in order to afford 
 a basis for the set- 
 tlement of a fair 
 rent,not approved. 
 
 noAV general 
 
 65. We are hoAvever unable to agree Avith those AA'ho urge that a 
 valuation should noAV be made, either by Avay of settling, on the authority of valuators 
 employed by Government, Avhat shall, in all cases, be the fair rent of a holding, or in 
 order to ascertain the annual gross value, or the full commercial rent of each holding, 
 as a guide to the arbitrators, or tribunal, who will have to settle the fair rent. 
 To interfere with rent, except where a dispute arises, is to raise more difficulties than 
 are solved.f It is objectionable to bring the authority of the central Government into 
 direct universal and unnecessary collision Avith the interests of landlords and tenants. 
 The delay that Avould occur before a new valuation could be completed is another serious 
 objection. J If anew valuation is required for rating purposes, it should rather be made 
 at a time when there exists no general desire to convert it to purposes of rent- 
 settlement. 
 
 * Greene, 657, 741 ; Townshend, ir)71, 1644, 33938 ; Allen, 1846, 1967 ; Meagher, 2148 ; Derham, 2441; 
 Everitt, 2575, 2592, 2615 ; Kirkpatrick, 3898 ; M'Elroy, 4582 ; Shillington, 4997 ; Flanagan, 9658 ; Murphy, 
 10132; Louglirey, John, 12096; Cooper, 12465; O'Conor, 13724; Fa wcett, 15119 ; Carnegie, 15413 ; Clarke, 
 15720; Larminie, 16218; Thomas, 16808; Gore, 16969; Clancy, 18165; Blake, 18767; Persse, 18860; 
 Cooley, 19349; Hart, 19176; Bailey, 20210; Kilmartin, 20980; Graham, 21306; Leonard, 21483; Bariy, 
 22018 ; Townshend, W. U., 22172 ; Frost, 22251 ; Fitzgerald, 22287 ; Gahir, 22981 ; \Vhite, 23150 ; Delmege, 
 23464 ; Hogan, 23798 ; Morioo, 23945 ; Frost, 24094 ; O'Connor, 24600 ; O'SuIlivan, 24968 ; O'Donoglvm, 
 25052; M'Sweeny, 25184; O'Connor, 25216 ; Hussey, 25281 ; Mahony, 25949 ; Walpole, 26081 ; Kearney, 
 26115; Croshie, 26212 ; Lane, 26539; O'Mahony, 26636; Jones, 26819; Leahy, 27191; Bennett, 28446; 
 Roche, 28818 ; O'SuIlivan, 28934 ; Sanders, 29085, 29144 ; Campion, 29264 ; Daly, 29996 ; Colthnrst, 30354 ; 
 Payne, 30459 ; Deane, 31020; Ardagh, 31447; Nugent, 31746; Anthony, 31933; Baldwin, 32411 ; Lewin, 
 34840; Irvine, 35737 ; Marwn, 35907 ; Carroll, 36197; Tracey, 36316 ; Smollen, 36908; M'Keogh, 37130; 
 Trench, 37866 ; Bole, 38097 ; D'Arcy, 38770 ; Little, 39493 ; Eochfort-Boyd, 39929 ; Bnieu, 40138. 
 
 + Stoney, 23566 ; Hogan, 23826 ; Frost, 24119 ; Keane, 35794 ; Dease, 37355. 
 
 X Greene, 751 ; M'Sorley, 38510. 
 
REPORT. 27 
 
 66. We consider that the tenant upon whom has been conferred fixity of tenure, at Free sale. 
 a fair rent, will be in a position differing little from that of a legal owner of property 
 
 in the" soil ; and that he ought not to be unnecessarily deprived of any of the ordinary 
 incidents of property. _ Therefore he should be at liberty to sell his interest, that is to 
 say, his right of continuous occupancy, the improvements made by himself or his 
 predecessors in title, and all the title he has in the land, either under the law now in 
 force, whether common law or statute, or under the statute now to be proposed, 
 in any way he wishes ; subject, however, to some reasonable restrictions, which are 
 suggested by the nature of the tie between himself and the landowner, and appear to 
 be called for upon public grounds. We believe this proposal will be found beneficial, 
 at least as much to the landowner as to the tenant ; and it seems to us a necessary 
 consequence of what has been proposed above. 
 
 67. To the proceeds of a sale, either voluntarily resorted to by a tenant who finds Fiee sale provides 
 himself unable profitably to farm his holding, or ordered by the court, we look con- f '''^?"'?® ^^'^'■ 
 fidently for a resource, available to landlords, for the recovery of arrears of rent. aTreai'soVrent.''' 
 Such, as above-mentioned, the right of sale of tenant-right has proved in Ulster ; and 
 
 it has become a common place of observers, that landlords suffer much less from 
 arrears, and tenants from eviction for non-payment of rent, where the right of sale 
 exists.* It is true that the spread of this usage, although it is the part of the Ulster 
 Custom which most obviously conduces to the landlord's benefit, has outside Ulster 
 been more opposed by landlords than any otlier.f It appears from the evidence that it 
 is the opinion of many landlords that while to give legal fixity of tenure at a fair rent 
 would not involve any great practical change as regards the majority of large land- 
 owners in their relations with their tenants, the concession of a right of free sale 
 would be an upsetting of the rale of management most generally regarded by land- 
 lords as beneficial, and most strenuously enforced by many of them. We maintain, 
 nevertheless, that without a right of sale in the tenant, free from unnecessary restric- 
 tions, the value of the tenant's interest will not readily be made > available to satisfy 
 a claim of the landlord for arrears. To oblige him to come upon the land for his 
 remedy, and evict the tenant, would be to leave the old sore unhealed. It would even 
 be worse in future than before ; for, the tenant's interest being recognized at law, 
 and having become in every sense of the word a valuable property, it Avould be inequit- 
 able to infiict a forfeiture for non-payment of rent without a power of sale. This would 
 be like returning to the days of foreclosure in cases of mortgage, before the invention of 
 the equity of redemption, and would revive hardships from which Courts of Equity 
 stepped in to relieve the ancestors of the landowners of to-day. It is impossible in 
 this connexion to overlook the important testimony of the benefit a landlord may 
 derive from allowing his tenants the right of sale, which is afforded by the experience of 
 several estates out of Ulster. J 
 
 68. It appears to us further that to confer a valuable interest, and refuse the right of Free sale will 
 alienating it, will not be a judicious measure. The lack of right to convert into money loosen tke undue 
 the interest which, the Irish cultivator really possessed in the soil of his holding has f^^^^cl^"^®^* °* °"^' 
 been one cause of his too great attachment to the spot where he found himself The soir"*^^ *° 
 
 ■ concession of free sale will introduce a much needed solvent.§ Men will not go away 
 willingly if they have to leave their property behind. The money often paid to them 
 by the landlords who have promoted emigration has been looked on, we fear, rather as 
 a bribe to go, than as the fair purchase money of their interest in their holdings. Let 
 the sale be free and fair, and there will then be no feeling in the emigrant that he has 
 been ousted, and no outcry at home against " ruthless exterminators." 
 
 69. There is even great reason to doubt whether a prohibition of sale will be feasible Prohibition of 
 under the new condition of things. It has been found difficult to prevent it from sale practically 
 creeping in, even when the tenant, had, at law, nothing but a bare yearly tenancy to impossible, 
 sell.ll Certainly there would be required an almost penal code of fines and forfeitures, 
 
 enough to neutralize the healing influence of other concessions, to repress it. 
 
 * Kirkpatriek, 3866 ; Forde, 7085 ; Steel, 9061 ; Houston, 7195 1 Longhrey, 11162. 
 
 I O'Brien, 4005 ; Mahony, 25955 ; Crosbie, 26245; Townshend, 33968; Ventry, 35141- Lansdowne 
 37526. 
 
 + Reeves, 1981 ; Kirkpatrick, 3793; Hunt, 21533; Townsliend, W. U., 22111 ; Stoney, 23555 • Sherlock 
 34949; Roberts, 33461, 33563; Vernon, 35255; Little, 39576. ' 
 
 § O'Brien, 3930; Fitzgerald, 8285 ; Kearney, 26149 ; O' Donovan, 29798; Nolan, 31489 ■ Prin^yle 35785 • 
 Adamson, 39631. > a ; , 
 
 II Kirki)atrick, 3793; Larminie, 16209; Blake, 18695, 18822; French, 19120 ; Jackson 19132 ■ Rppvp=!- 
 23356 ; Fell, 30753; DowHng, 34505 ; Vernon, 35292 ; Bole, 38U4. ' ' 
 
 E2 
 
28 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Landlord's veto 
 on purchaser 
 on reasonable 
 grounds. 
 
 Purchaser to 
 reside, and to Imy 
 the entirety. 
 Meagher, 2226 ; 
 Kilmartin, 21010; 
 Wright, 27300. 
 
 Objection to sale 
 of tenant's 
 interest by 
 auction, not 
 agreed to. 
 Wrench, 5462; 
 CasJeei/, 12344; 
 Winder, 6763 ; 
 Vernon, 35317 ; 
 Tener, 36636. 
 
 Estate rules 
 limiting price of 
 tenant's interest. 
 
 Preemption to 
 landlord. 
 
 Discharge of 
 charge for 
 landlord's 
 improvements 
 out of proceeds. 
 Wrench, 5603. 
 
 70. For the restrictions which it may be right to impose on the sale of a tenant's 
 interest it is natural to look first to the experience of those parts of Ireland where such 
 sale has hitherto been allowed. Under the Ulster tenant-right, the condition is uni- 
 yex-sal— it is even recognised as a part of the Custom itselt^— that the landlord shall 
 have a veto on the purchaser as tenant, upon "reasonable grounds." Such grounds 
 are, that he is in insolvent circumstances, that he is of bi.d character, or has failed 
 already as a farmer. This rule of restriction is well understood, is not complained of 
 by any one and may, we think, judiciously be adopted.* The reasonableness of the 
 exercise of the veto, if disputed, should be determined by the County Court Judge in 
 the Land Sessions, or by the Land Tribunal. 
 
 71. We add a condition, not indeed recognized as part of the Ulster custom, but 
 springing out of the nature of the relation between the landlord and tenant of an 
 agricultural holding, and only not hitherto defined as usage, because the landlord's 
 legal power has been sufficient to eriforce it. The purchaser should in every case be 
 bound to become himself the actual tenant of the farm, and to continue practically in 
 direct occupation of it ; a breach of this condition should authorize the landlord, as in 
 the case of subletting, to eject, or to compel a resale. Similarly, a sale of the holding 
 to two or more should not be permitted without consent in writing, on the same principle 
 that subdivision is prohibited, and for the same reasons. 
 
 72. Evidence has been given of objections entertained, not without some reason, to 
 a sale of the tenant's interest by public auction. It is clear that in many cases, under 
 the stress of excitement, and of the prevailing desire for land, sums have been bid far 
 beyond the real value of the holding ; with the necessary consequence, that the pur- 
 chaser has been unable to cultivate at a profit. This is an evil that must be left, we 
 think, to right itself.t It is obvious that, with free sale generally allowed, there will 
 follow a considerable easing of the land-market ; and a legal prohibition of sales by 
 auction can so easily be evaded, that it is not worth while to insist upon it. 
 
 ■ i 
 
 73. A controvei'sy has raged in Ulster over the "estate rules," whereby landlordsj 
 have endeavoured to prevent the price of tenant-right from rising so high as to absorb 
 the value of the landlord's interest.J By these rules it has generally been laid down 
 that the price paid for tenant-right shall not exceed three or five years' purchase of the 
 rent paid. ' They have probably been largely evaded, except where the landlord has 
 gone further, and selected a purchaser who is willing to pay the maximum allowed.§ 
 It seems unnecessary to enter into the question how far these rules are or are not a 
 violation of the custom, as existing before the Land Act. They have been treated in the 
 Land Courts as usages to be established or refuted by evidence. In future the landlord's : 
 interest would be protected by the rule of " fair rent," and there seems to exist no 
 sufficient reason for further interference with the selling price of the tenant's interest. 
 The argument in favour of establishing such rules, that they have a tendency to protect 
 the interests of members of the farmer class who may wish to buy farms, by keeping 
 down the selling price, may easily be pressed too far.|| In this case, as in that of sales 
 by auction, farmers will soon learn, like other people, to take care of themselves, when 
 they have been placed in a position of security by law. 11 
 
 74. The landlord should have a right of pre-emption at the highest j)rice offered by 
 a bona fide purchaser in open market. 
 
 75. In case the value of landlord's improvements has been left, under the proposal 
 suggested above, as an outstanding charge upon the tenant's interest, it should be either 
 
 * Robertson, 1497; Meagher, 2141; Hill, 3154; Simpson, 3581; O'Brien, 4016; M'Elroy, 4547,4618; 
 ShiUington, 5026; Robb, 5200; Fitzgerald, 8286; Lane, 9593; Planagan, 9692; M'Intyre, 10753; Boyle, 
 12255; Caskey, 12347; Ryan, 24251; Leahy, 27191; Hegarty, 30683; Ardagh, 31430; Baldwin, 32458 ; 
 Roche, 34316; Browne, 3532.3. 
 
 t De Moleyns, 200 ; Baldwin, 32462 ; Beatty, 7406 ; Scott, 9461 ; Brown, 9929 ; M'Intyre, 10835 ; 
 Longfield, 39863. > J> , > > , , J > 
 
 JQiiinn, 0407; Ward, 7104; Ker, 8018; M'Causland, 9189; Scott, 9472; Simpson, 10536; Caskey, 
 12368. ' > ' > V > 
 
 § Waring, 6899 ; Beatty, 7342 ; Ker, 8096 ; Murphy, 10087, 10167. 
 
 \\La Touche, 969; Davys, 14171; Townshend, W. U., 22098; Jones, 26969; Cornwall, 28663; QQ- 
 28697-28703; l-itej^eraW, 29522; Zi«fe, 39482. 
 
 H De Moleyns, 137, 186 ; Simpson, 3590 ; Leahy, 27186 ; Baldwin, 32422 ; Lewin, 34840 ; Neligan, 34880 ; 
 Vernon, 35344. 
 
REPORT. 29 
 
 paid off in full, out of the proceeds of the first sale of the tenant's interest, or might 
 be spread over the first and future sales, under equitable regulations for its final dis- 
 charge. 
 
 76. There are cases where a landlord may, under the Land Act, have purchased or Tenant-right 
 acquired the tenant-right of a farm, and have let it again to a tenant without already purchased 
 receiving any fine, and without imposing a full commercial rent. In such a case, as f^^ ,[^ ^^^ 7^ 
 in the parallel case of improvements made by landlords, the landlord may not care declared a charge 
 to have the rent raised, although he may not be receiving so much as would be upon the tenant's 
 adjudged a fair rent of the holding. If so, he should be entitled to serve a claim to interest. 
 
 have the value of the tenant-right which he has bought declared a charge upon the 
 tenant's interest, as in the case of improvements made by the landlord, and to have it 
 satisfied, after the same fashion, out of the proceeds of sales of that interest.* 
 
 77. The right of free, sale, even more than fixity of tenure, interferes with the land- The right of fre« 
 lord's right of control over his property, in respect of his power to choose the tenants ?'^|® ^ ^^^^ 
 
 by whom he is surrounded, and to surround himself with those whom he prefers. It i^nTlowl's right of 
 renders him liable to the intrusion of a tenant to whom he may have a strong control, 
 personal objection, unless that objection should fall within the definition, as interpreted 
 by the tribunal, of a reasonable veto. But it is not calculated to lessen the value of 
 his property. Compensation for such an interference has been suggested to be due, 
 in cases where the right of sale has never been recognised. If this suggestion is 
 entertained, the compensation must necessarily be estimated on a basis more or less 
 speculative. 
 
 78. The object of the legislation now to be proposed, like that of the Act of 1870, Tenancies ex- 
 is to make better provision for the tenure of agricultural holdings. From the benefits of eluded from the 
 the Land Act were excluded all holdings which are not agricultural or pastoral in l^^^ °^ *^® 
 their character, or partly agricultural and partly pastoral ; that is to say all lettings " ^^ ^°^^ 
 of houses or buildings, and practically all lettiugs in towns and villages.! By another 
 
 section are excluded holdings held by the tenant by reason of his being a hired S. 71. 
 labourer or hired servant, lettings in con-acre and for other temporary purposes, and 
 " cottage allotments." Demesne lands,| townparks,§ grazing farms at and above £50 S. 15. 
 valuation, and non-residential grazing farms,|| are excluded from the provision for giving 
 compensation for disturbance, but not from those giving compensation for improvements 
 and for incoming payments. All tenancies of £50 valuation or over may be contracted S. 3. 
 out of all the benefits of the Act. We do not recommend that all these exceptions S. 12. 
 should be maintained. We think all lettings of houses or buildings, and all holdings 
 which are not at least in part agricultural or pastoral, should not be included in any 
 statute giving fixity of tenure at fair rents with the right of sale. Demesne lands, 
 townparks, and all lands at present let for grazing purposes, if not residential, as 
 defined in the Act, or above £50 rental, should, we think, be left as at present.! For 
 future lettings of land now held under these descriptions, whether for purposes of tillage 
 or otherwise, it might, Ave think, be lawful to bar the operation of the statute by 
 contract. It is not desirable to place obstacles in the way of the breaking up of grass 
 farms, if the conditions of the market should again make it profitable. Liberty to 
 contract out of the Act should also be allo\^'ed in the case of holdings held by a tenant 
 by reason of his being a hired labourer or servant, of lettings in con-acre, and for special 
 or temporary purposes ; among which last we include the case of a letting to a new 
 tenant during the minority of the person entitled to the land. 
 
 79. With these exceptions, we do not propose that tenants entitled to the benefit Contracting out 
 of the changes we contemplate should be left free to contract themselves out of the new of *« benefits of 
 tenure ; but on the contrary, it ought to be provided that they should not. The *^® "^'^^ tenure 
 change, if made, would not be made solely for the sake of existing tenants, but in order mitttd^^ ^^^" 
 to confer upon the country the blessings of a settled harmony, to which it has long been -r- 
 strange. There will probably be estates, among those which have been kindly LeahT°272^22^ ^ 
 
 ♦O'Brien, 4171; Gamble, W., 10907 ; Ashe, 11974 j Gairdner, 20278; Scott, 22509 ; Fiost 24063- 
 Crosbie, 26184 ; Jones, 26937; Greer, 40055. 
 t Kelly, 3691;. Boyd, 4940; Gamble, 8956; Lapsley, 9005; M'Donnell, 18212, 
 t Hunt, 21522; White, 23222. 
 § Canning, 12125 ; Browne, 12306. 
 
 II M'Eb-oy, 4631 ; Clancy, 18197 ; Starkey, 22642; Vernon, 36337 
 IT Murphy, 10128. 
 
32 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 legal part of tlie business was done for Hm : secondly, to the advantageous terms on wt 
 the purchase could be. made, including not merely the advance of three-fourths of k 
 purchase-money, but also the absenc^ of stipulations binding down the purchaserj" to 
 any conditions except those of abstaining from sub-division and of paying regularly^ 
 an annual sum not exceeding the amount of his original rent. There is no prohibi. 
 tion ot alienation, of sub-letting, or of charging the holding with a second incum 
 brance ; but the purchaser is treated, except in regard to sub-division, as a full pro, 
 pnetor from the commencement. 
 
 Purchase ra under 
 the Land Act, 
 1870, purt ii. 
 
 87. By the Land Act of 1870 two methods were proposed to effect the same pur- 
 pose of facilitating the acquisition by tenants of their holdings. The first was by 
 i;iving inducements and facilities to landlords, whether limited owners or owners in 
 tec, to agree with their tenants for the sale or purchase of their holdings through- {{q ' 
 medium of the Landed Estates Court. The Board of Works of Ireland was authomed I 
 1.) advance, by way of mortgage on the land thus sold to tenants, two-thirds of the 
 price of the land, rojiayabl; by equal half-yearly instalments spread over a period of 35 
 y.'ars, at tlui vaiu of £5 for every £lOO so advanced, a rate which makes the interest i 
 thri'c and a-half i)ci' cent, riu; terms, therefore, were, in respect of the rate of interest, 
 more lavonral)U> than those of the Church Commissioners, namely, three and aklfper 
 I'cnt. in lieu of four per cent., but the proportion to be advanced on mortgage was less— 
 naini'ly, two-thirds in lieu ot three-fourths of the purchase-money. There were also 
 stiiiii^-oiitiirovisioiis against the purchasing tenants mortgaging, alienating, assigning, 
 cliar^iiiL;", .sul)-dividing, or sub-letting their holdings, without the consent of the Board 
 of Work.s, while any part of the annuities remained unpaid; any such act was to ope- 
 rate as an absolute forfeiture of the land to the Board of Works. Complaint has 
 been made in evidence that the Board of Works extend the construction of these forfei- 
 tures to include the case of an assignment by will. Under the first process contem- 
 plated by the Act, where the vendors are tenants for life, or limited owners, the Landed 
 Estates Court was empowered to distribute the purchase-money in repayment of 
 charges upon the land, in accordance with priorities, or the purchase-money might be 
 lodged in court for investment in other land, subject to the same trusts, and, pending 
 such purchase, might be invested in consols. The land sold to the tenants under this 
 part of the Act was to be free from incumbrances, except rights of way, and other' 
 matters specified in the Act. The Treasury was directed to prescribe the fees to be 
 charged in respect of such sales, and the Court was empowered to apportion rents, charges 
 and covenants, &c., in respect of land thus sold. 
 
 8S. This first process having totally failed of effect, through the fact that the 
 purchase-money of singl-e holdings would not bear the cost of the investigation ot title 
 for the purpose of a sale in the Estates Court, an amending Act was passed in 18/^ 
 whereby the Board of ^^'orks was enabled to make advances to tenants purchasing Dy 
 agreement from their landlords, upon being satisfied as to the title, without passing 
 the pi-operty through the Landed Estates Court. The sum to be advanced was 
 now fixed at two-thirds of the value of the holding, instead of the price, asmtne 
 Greene, 759,765; principal Act; and this apparentlv led to the adoption of a rule, dictated by the' irea- 
 Derham, 2448; ^^^.y ^^ ^^e Board of Works, of never advancing more than twenty years' purchase at 
 Bovd. 4948 ; ^j^^ tenement valuation, except after special valuation at the expense of the purchasing 
 
 tenant. A poSver was given to the Board to commute the forfeitures of the principal 
 Act for a sale, and to pay the balance of the proceeds to the original pui*chj«er. 
 The amending Act has had no better success than the principal Act. The Board 
 Works proved unequal to the task of satisf\ing itself as to the titles of estates suD- 
 mitted to it. 
 
 Till-' Aiiii'iiilihi; 
 Aef of lb72, .•!5 & 
 36 Virt.,c-i|i. :'>-2, 
 
 s. 1. (■•;.) 
 
 S. I. (I.) 
 
 Boyd, 4948 ; 
 Baldwin, 33508 
 
 S. 2. 
 
 Purcha.siT.s iin 
 s. 46. 
 
 S. 47. 
 Boyle, lL'1'41. 
 
 Ferguson, -iH^'-l 
 Jay, 7439. 
 
 89. The second method j-iroposed under the Land Act for facilitating the acquisition 
 by tenants of their holdings was by directing the Landed Estates Court, in the course 
 of the sale of landed property in the usual course in the Court, to afford, by the 
 formation of lots for sale, or otherwise, all reasonable facilities to occupying tenants 
 desirous of purchasing their holdings, so far as should be consistent with the interest 
 of the owners of the j^roperties thus dealt with. The clause for advance of two-thirds 
 of the purchase-money applied also to these sales, and there was a further provision 
 that when four-fifths of the tenants of an estate were willing to purchase, and othe 
 purchasers could be found to buy the residue of the estate, one-half the purchast 
 money of the residue might be advanced to such other purchasers collectively, 
 the secm-ity of the residue. The failure of this method has not been so signal a 
 Some sales have been effected, and the purchasers are well satisfle 
 
 that of Part II. 
 
REPORT. ^^ 
 
 .ch their bargains.* But it has been a failure, nevertheless. The number of sales has 
 
 been decreasing of late years, and few are now eifected. The principal reason has been 
 
 the general refusal of the authorities of the Landed Estates Court, acting in the interest 
 
 of owners and incumbrancers, to arrange lots so as to suit the convenience of purchasing 
 
 tenants. It may seem btrange that it should have been found to be for the interest of 
 
 owners or incumbrancers so to arrange the lots as to exclude one description of purchaser 
 
 altogether, and that a purchaser, as has been showu by the experience of the Churcli 
 
 Temporalities Commissioners, generally ready to give as high a price as any man.f 
 
 But the dread of being left with unsaleable residues on hand has had, perhaps, a 
 
 somewhat excessive influence in this respect.+^ Other causes have also operated. There 
 
 has been a total absence of any direct means of bringing home to the tenants a knowledge 
 
 of their rights, such as were employed with success by the Church Temporalities 
 
 Commissioners, and of cheapening their law costs, and putting them genera ly m the 
 
 way of making their bargain. The interference of the Treasury above noticed, and 
 
 the mistake, as we cannot but consider it, of introducing the Poor Law valuation 
 
 as a measure of the value of an estate, has operated to cut down the two-thiids o 
 
 the purchase-money which it was intended by the Legislature should be advanced, anrl 
 
 to put obstacles in the way of obtaining the full amount. Complexities have arisen m 
 
 cases where a portion of the holding was not let, or where the estate was incumbered, 
 
 or where easements existed, causing either delay, or expense, or both, iiie restraints 
 
 on alienation, and on charging with a second incumbrance, have caused the Board ot 
 
 Works' advances to be regarded with less favour; and that prohibiting assignment Coleman .o:U ; 
 
 by will, if, indeed, imposed by the Act, appears to be oppressive. ' ' ' - 
 
 90. These causes of failure were thoroughly investigated ^J f e Com^^^^^^^^ IreV/co.l 
 
 the House of Commons of 1877-1S78 ; and in the conclusions of the Beport piesented ^^^ Committee 
 by that Committee, which were ratified by a resolution of the House ot Commons of 1877-1878^ 
 iuring the last Parliament, we desire to express a general concurrence. The principal 
 paragraphs of this Report are as follows : — 
 
 " « Your Committee are of opinion that it is very desirable that further facUities should be given for the 
 purchase by tenants of the fee-simple of their holdings. Your Committee find that, when estates are offered 
 for sale, there is a general desire on the part of the tenantry to become absolute owners of their_ farms ; and 
 they believe that a substantial increase in this way in the number of small proprietors would give stability 
 bo the social system, and would tend to spread contentment, and promote industry and thrift amongst „ , -. , «, 
 
 the Irish peasantry That a large proportion of the estates offered for sale m ^g 24 Robertson 
 
 the Landed Estates Court are held under fee-farm grants and leases for long terms. _ 1516 ' Bernard ' 
 
 "That the apportionment of the rents reserved by these grants and the leases, and the conditions of sale as ^^^^ ; Allen ' 
 to the indemnities consequent thereon, have increased the inconvenience of dividiiig such estates into small lots. '_ ' 
 
 « That many estates are subject to annuities and jointures, and the effect of the charging orders in respect -^ > Alp ander 
 
 of loans to tenants is to displace the priority of such annuities, and, in the case of sale or forfeiture, to gg^g '. '/^ ' 
 
 destroy them. Obstacles have arisen in the making of advances to tenants upon such estates, inasmuch as ^^^^ ' NoiTis' 
 these advances in some cases prejudice the security of such annuitants. 10'>8s'- ]\r -'l 
 
 " That the existing state of the law in respect of rights of turbary and pasturage, rights of way, and other -- • j ^'i'P^7) 
 easements affecting estates sold in the Landed Estates Court, has enhanced the expense of carrying out ° ; '^r ' 
 
 sales to tenants in that (Jourt. ^ 0(10 1 
 
 "That the cost of investigating the titles of estates, both of landlord and tenant, and the impediments *? ^' , nn J, 
 ;o the application of the purchase money in the cases of settled estates, or estates subject to incumbrances, ^ y^ ^■^-(■\i . 
 - lave seriously impeded the working of the second part of the Act. „ _ J' nncs^n \ 
 
 "That on some estates the tenants hold their farms in rundale, and in detached plots, and in such cases the t''^^ qpi?//. ■" 
 lifficulties in lotting have been much increased. P^l+T' ^+ ^O^Qfl • 
 
 " That your Committee have no doubt that many tenants have failed to make use of the advantages offered t^^T^^ o Aofio ' 
 ;hem by the Act for want of information as to the terms upon, and the amounts for which loans could be ^^f^®\' o^^^k 
 :)btained by them, and that the strictness of the prescribed conditions, especially the clauses against alienation r^^ !;, '!'^' '^oi io ' 
 md mortgage, have prevented others from endeavouring to acquire the fee-simple of their holdings. iv'^ I'^'^'^qr- ,t!> ' 
 
 " That, for the purpose of effectually promoting the purchase of land by occupying tenants, your Committee -"-S^v') •' ' *•'"• 
 ire of opinion that, with respect to the sale of estates by the Land Judges of the High Court of Justice — 
 and lands are usually thus sold in Ireland — some provision must be made to meet what the evidence shows to 
 be the fundamental difficulty of the present system ; that is to say, the difficulty, if not impossibility (sa^-e in 
 rare instances), of forming the lands into lots to suit the tenant purchasers, and at the same time paying 
 due regard to the interests of those whose property is being sold through the Court. So long as these prac- 
 tically inconsistent duties continue to be imposed on one and the same functionary, your Committee believe 
 that no substantial results can reasonably be expected from the clauses of the Ii-ish Land Act to which their 
 inquiry has been directed. They therefore think that, whilst leaving to one body the function of selling to 
 the best advantage such estates as may be offered for sale, another distinct and equally independent body 
 should be constituted, specially charged -svith the duty of superintending and facilitating the purchase of their 
 several farms by the occupying tenants. Your Committee, accordingly beg to recommend that some properly 
 
 * M'Causland, 9271 ; Cunningham, 9412 ; Lane, 9566 ; Brown, 9805 ; Brennan, 10068 ; Murphy, 10158 ; 
 Warnock, 10345, 10354; Morrison, 10385; Gamble, 10895; Gaskey, 12369; Cooper, 1252:); ii^a/ce, 18749 ; 
 Baldwin, 32505. 
 
 + Meagher, 2267; Morrison, 10485; White, 23167; O'Connor, 24551. 
 
 ; Booth, 14326; Jones, 26941. 
 
 F 
 
go IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. • 
 
 managed, where the large allowances made to improving tenants, the materials given or 
 sold under cost price, and the many other benefits conferred by a good landlord 
 would be preferred, by some at all events, to fixity of tenure and free sale. A time 
 mio-ht come when they would change their minds, and when it would be more diflScuIt 
 if not impossible, to arrange equitably the conditions on which they could be admitted 
 to the benefits of the prevailing law. It does not follow, of course, that all these 
 kindly offices will be withdrawn by the landlords who have been accustomed to confer 
 them. In any case it is impossible to secure to a class the benefits at once of the 
 patriarchal and independent conditions of tenure. The evidence shows that the amount 
 of rent or of annual value constitutes no satisfactory ground for refusing the protection 
 of the statutory tenure.* 
 
 Leases. 
 
 S. 3. (3.) 
 S. 4. (3.) 
 
 Everitt 27i9; 
 Vernon, 35341, 
 
 Guiry, 31569 ; 
 Vernon, 35380 ; 
 Longfield, 39843. 
 
 Meagher, 2239. ; 
 Colthurst, 30405. 
 
 80. A case of great difficulty is that of existing leases. We have noticed the general 
 reluctance of yearly tenants to accept leases. This reluctance has been increased by the 
 stringent conditions usually inserted in leases, some of them due rather, it may be 
 suspected, to the zealous ingenuity of lawyers, than to any intelligent notion of the right 
 way to promote better cultivation. In Ulster there has been a controversy, still undecided, 
 as to the continued existence of tenant-right on the expiration of a lease ;t tenants 
 maintaining that such survival was a part of the Ulster Custom, while the County Court 
 Judges have held that, under the Land Act, it is necessary for each tenant to prove the 
 allowance of tenant-right under these circumstances, as a usage applicable to his own 
 In the result, tenants have generally failed to establish the usage, and great 
 
 case. 
 
 dissatisfaction is expressed in consequence. On the general use that has been made of 
 the provision in the Land Act allowing tenancies of not under £50 value to be contracted' 
 out of its benefits, without some corresponding security by agreement, we look with 
 regret. The fact that a lease for thirty-one years bars the tenant from claiming com- 
 pensation for disturbance, and to some extent for improvements, has induced the 
 pressing of such leases upon tenants. Much discontent appears to have arisen from this 
 cause, and in some instances, with good foundation. Leases have been imposed on tenants 
 against their will, which from their legally helpless condition they could not refuse ;| 
 sometimes increasing the rent beyond what, to all appearance, would be held a fair rent 
 by arbitrators, sometimes imposing unwelcome conditions, and very commonly, since the 
 Land Act, barring or attempting to bar their claims to compensation, not merely for 
 disturbance and incoming payments, but even for improvements made by themselves, 
 or by their predecessors in title ; and this even irrespective of the amount of the valuation. 
 To make no provision for such cases would be to leave a portion of the work undone. 
 In the case of all leases, whether made before or wince the Land Act, the tenants 
 should have the right, on the expiration of the lease, to continue in occupation under 
 the same conditions as if they liad been tenants from year to year ; but in these cases 
 any demand to have the fair rent settled would proceed on the conditions laid down for 
 second or subsequent valuation, the rent reserved under the lease being taken to have 
 been a fair rent, and the inquiry being limited to circumstances which rday since have 
 occurred to affect the value of the holding. We propose that if it should be proved 
 by evidence that any leaseholder under a lease made since the Land Act, 1870, has 
 been compelled to accept a lease by receiving a notice to quit or threat of eviction, 
 and that the rent reserved by such lease is excessive, a valuation shall be ordered, 
 and a fair rent fixed, as in the case of a yearly tenant. These provisions should not 
 apply to the cases, comparatively few, where the English or commercial system has 
 been effectively introduced; that is to say, where a farm was handed over at the 
 commencement of the lease in a fit state for cultivation, and with suitable buildings, to 
 a new tenant, not previously, by himself or any person through whom he claims, in 
 occupation thereof, and who has given no consideration beyond the rent and covenants 
 in the lease. For future lettings of such holdings it might be lawful to exclude the 
 statutory tenure by contract. 
 
 *Pattevson, 1358; Eobertson, 1463; Coleman, 2293; Everitt, 2548; Erost, 24085 : Walpole, 26003; 
 Riordan, 26751 ; Eochfort, 33255. 
 
 t Hill, 3239; M'Elroy, 4465; Fergtison, 4750; Wrencli, 5614; Young, 5736; Perry, 6233; Quinn, 
 6448; Alexander, 8709; Non-is, 10215; "Warnock, 10346; Gamble, 10862; Donaldson, 11542; Craig, 
 12170; Hamilto7i,\i1Q'l ; Baldwin, 32463; DufFerin, 33050. 
 
 :j; Ferguson, 316; Patterson, 1282; Eobertson, 1380; Eeeves, 1989; Bowling, 2914; Eenlon, 3733 ; 
 Forde,7025; MnlboUand, 8335 ; Gamble, 8988; Kilmartin, 21015 ; Hunt, 21529 ; Starkey, 22595 ; Cobbett, 
 23886; O'Donoghue, 25029 ; Walpole, 25997 ; Lane, 26449; M'Mabon, 28575; Sherlock, 30961 ; Baldwin, 
 32472; Walsh, 35496; Tracey, 36290; Magber, 37178. 
 
REPORT. 
 
 31 
 
 VI. Purchase of their Holdings by Tenants. 
 
 . 81. There appears to be a general feeling of regret that the " purchase clauses " in the 
 Land Act have failed. Even of those who do not believe in small proprietors, as a rule, 
 and who expect the eventual failure of any scheme for multiplying them to any great 
 extent, the great majority appear heartily to desire the trial of the experiment, and to 
 expect good results from it if it should succeed. 
 
 82. By the Church Disestablishment Act, 1869, the Church Temporalities Commis- 
 sioners were directed, when'disposing of the landed property of the Church, to give the 
 occupying tenants the preference of purchase at a fair market value. They were 
 empowered to assist tenants in the purchase by leaving three-fourths of the purchase- 
 money on mortgage at 4 per cent., the whole debt, including principal and interest, 
 being made repayable by equal half-yearly instalments spread over thirty-two years. 
 The interest and instalments together would thus amount to a trifle over 5^ per cent. 
 upon the money advanced. The property, exclusive of perpetuity holdings, consisted 
 of glebes and episcopal estates to the extent of 108,000 acres, in the occupation of 
 8,432 tenants, paying an aggregate rent of £95,430, thus giving an average for the 
 holdings of 13 acres, and" for the rent of £11 6s. i^d. each. The whole of this 
 property is now sold, except 49 chief rents, stipends, &c. Of the 8,432 holdings 6,057 
 have been sold to tenants for £1,674,841, an average of £276 10s. each. The price 
 thus obtained has averaged 22| years' purchase of the rental, which is higher than the 
 average of estates sold during the same period in the Landed Estates Court. A fair 
 price has also been obtained for the residue, of 2,326 holdings, which have been sold 
 to the general public. Owing to the expectation that the powers of the Commissioners 
 would shortly lapse, their sales have been, at the last, effected for somewhat less than 
 might otherwise have been obtained ; and some regret is expressed that a further 
 opportunity has not been afforded to the occupying tenants to purchase, by delaying 
 the sales of the residue to the general public. 
 
 GeiiM-al concur- 
 reiic:^ in approval 
 of the experi- 
 ment. 
 
 Purchasers undsr 
 the Church Dis- 
 establishment 
 
 Act. 
 
 Bernard, 1 GGy ; 
 O'Brien, M., 
 3-27-2K 
 
 Heffernan, 31199; 
 
 Townshend, 
 
 34052, 
 
 83, It appears that the new purchasers have paid the interest and instalments of The purchasers 
 capital with commendable regularity.* Out of the whole number of 6,057 oiily 388 have paid up 
 were in arrear, according to the last returns available, to an aggregate amount of £5,914, ^^^^ ^^ ^' 
 and it is not expected that any portion will eventually be lost.t When this state of things 
 is compared with that of the arrears now outstanding on most of the estates occupied 
 by small holders, it will be seen that the " experiment " has successfully stood a test of 
 more than usual severity. 
 
 • 84. It is not denied that a portion of the tenant purchasers have assigned their right, Some have 
 for the most part as security for the balance of the purchase-money, to others ; or succumbed, 
 that several of the original purchasers have succumbed to the pressure of recent bad 
 harvests^ and have parted with their holdings, as well as with their proprietary right. 
 The fact remains that these transactions have led to no breaches of the law, and 
 produced no concerted refusal to pay what the purchasers, from old habit, still call 
 "the rent." 
 
 85. Some complaints have, indeed, been made to us that the 
 
 charges 
 
 upon glebe Some are in 
 lands, so purchased by tenants, are too high to allow the purchasers to live. We find distress, but owing 
 that this is not due to their having more now to pay than formerly, but to the recent *° recent bad 
 distress. It is not, therefore, a complaint specifically arising from the experiment of pur- tha^T th*^^"" 
 chase by tenants. _ It may be difficult, in the case of such a tenant, to suggest a feasible haXg purchased 
 remedy for his grievance ; but in the last resort, if he is compelled to leave his hold- 
 ing, he will do so peaceably, by an ordinary process of sale, and will probably carry 
 away with him more salvage from the wreck of his fortunes than he could have obtained 
 under the old system by the sale of his tenant-right, where such right existed. 
 
 86. The success of this experiment is attributable, first, to the care that was taken to Causes of success 
 make the process easy to an illiterate man, and the comparatively low cost at which the of the experiment. 
 
 * Knipe, 3609; ShHlington, 4998; Euddell, 5223; Walker, 5359; Wrench, 5530; Quia, 5777 • Quinu 
 
 6488; Synnott, 7251 ; Fitzgerald, 8309; M'Intyre, 10774; Connison, 10920; Loucrhrey l'll40- Sinclair 
 
 , 11593 ; Haslett. 11821 ; Hemj, 11865 ; M'Kenna, 13851 ; Olpherts, F. M., 14368 'Baldwin 
 
 W., 11436 
 
 32516 ; O'Brien, 32739. 
 
 t O'Brien, 3977; Olpherts, W., 11569 ; O'Brien, M., 32738 ; Townshend, Zi06± 34087- Roche 34300- 
 Vernon, 35481 ; Greer, 40003. ' , owy. 
 
32 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 legal part of the business was done for him : secondly, to the advantageous terms on -w. 
 the purchase could be made, including not merely the advance of three-fourths of . 
 purchase-money, but also the absence of stipulations binding down the purchaser to 
 any conditions except those of abstaining from sub-division and of paying regularlyS 
 an annual sum not exceeding the amount of his original rent. There is no prohibi. 
 tion of alienation, of sub-letting, or of charging the holding with a second incum 
 brance ; but the purchaser is treated, except in regard to sub-division, as a full pro- 
 prietor from the commencement. 
 
 Purcliasei-s under 87. By the Land Act of 1870 two methods were proposed to effect the same pur- 
 1870 "^rt if' P*-*^^ ^^ facilitating the acquisition by tenants of their holdings. The first was by 
 ' ' giving inducements and facilities to landlords, whether limited owners or owners in 
 
 fee, to agree with their tenants for the sale or purchase of their holdings through the 
 medium of the Landed Estates Court. The Board of Works of Ireland was authorized 
 to advance, by way of mortgage on the land thus sold to tenants, two-thirds of the 
 price of the land, repayable by equal half-yearly instalments spread over a period of 35 
 years, at the rate of £5 for every £lOO so advanced, a rate which makes the interest 
 three and a-half per cent. The terms, therefore, were, in respect of the rate of interest, ' 
 more favourable than those of the Church Commissioners, namely, three and a-half per 
 cent, in lieu of four per cent., but the proportion to be advanced on mortgage was less— 
 namely, two-thirds in lieu of three-fourths of the purchase-money. There were also 
 stringent provisions against the purchasing tenants mortgaging, alienating, assigning, 
 charging, sub-dividing, or sub-letting their holdings, without the consent of the Board 
 of Works, while any part of the annuities remained unpaid ; any such act was to ope- 
 rate as an absolute forfeiture of the land to the Board of Works. Complaint has 
 been made in evidence that the Board of Works extend the construction of these forfei- 
 tures to include the case of an assignment by will. Under the first process contem- 
 plated by the Act, where the vendors are tenants for life, or limited owners, the Landed 
 Estates Court was empowered to distribute the purchase- money in repayment of 
 charges upon the land, in accordance with priorities; or the purchase-money might be 
 lodged in court for investment in other land, subject to the same trusts, and, pending 
 such purchase, might be invested in consols. The land sold to the tenants under this 
 part of the Act was to be free from incumbrances, except rights of way, and other' 
 matters specified in the Act. The Treasury was directed to prescribe the fees to be 
 charged in respect of such sales, and the Court was empowered to apportion rents, charges 
 and covenants, &c., in respect of land thus sold. 
 
 The Auioiidiiig 88. This first process having totally failed of effect, through the fact that the 
 
 Act of 1872, ■■',n& purchase-money of singfe holdings would not bear the cost of the investigation of title 
 s\ (3*)'°^'^ ' ' for the purpose of a sale in the Estates Court, an amending Act was passed in 1872 
 whereby the Board of Works was enabled to make advances to tenants purchasing by 
 Bremum, KKi-i-t. agreement from their landlords, upon being satisfied as to the title, without passing 
 S. 1. (1.) the property through the Landed Estates Court. The sum to be advanced was 
 
 now fixed at two-thirds of the value of the holding, instead of the price, as in the 
 Greene, 759,765; principal Act; and this apparently led to the adoption of a rule, dictated by the Trea- 
 bT^IlUS^-^ ' ^^^^ *^ *^® Board of Works, of never advancing more than twenty years' purchase at 
 Bafdwia 33508. ^^^ tenement valuation, except after special valuation at the expense of the purchasing 
 , ' tenant. A poVer was given to the Board to commute the forfeitures of the principal 
 
 '^^ Act for a sale, and to pay the balance of the proceeds to the original purchaser. 
 
 The an\ending Act has had no better success than the principal Act. ' The Board of 
 Works proved unequal to the task of satisfying itself as to the titles of estates sub- 
 mitted to it. 
 
 Purchasers under" 89. The second method proposed under the Land Act for facihtating the acquisition 
 
 ^- *®- by tenants of their holdings was by directing the Landed Estates Court, in the course 
 
 of the sale of landed property in the usual course in the Court, to afford, by the 
 
 formation of lots for sale, or otherwise, all reasonable facilities to occupying tenants 
 
 desirous of purchasing their holdings, so far as should be consistent with the interests 
 
 of the owners of the properties thus dealt with. The clause for advance of two-thirds 
 
 ^- ^'- of the purchase-money applied also to these sales, and there was a further provision,. 
 
 Boyle, iL'L'll. that when four-fifths of the tenants of an estate were willing to purchase, and other 
 
 purchasers could be found to buy the residue of the estate, one-half the purchase- 
 
 Ferusou, Isii.J; money of the residue might be advanced to such other purchasers collectively, on 
 
 JayJ439. ' the security of the residue. The failure of this method has not been so signal as 
 
 that of Part 11. Some sales have been effected, and the purchasers are well satisfied 
 
REPORT. 
 
 83 
 
 with their bargains.* But it has been a failure, nevertheless. The number of sales has 
 
 been decreasing of late years, and few are now effected. The principal reason has been 
 
 the general refusal of the authorities of the Landed Estates Court, acting in the interest 
 
 of owners and incumbrancers, to arrange lots so as to suit the convenience of purchasing 
 
 tenants. It may seem strange that it should have been found to be for the interest of 
 
 owners or incumbrancers so to arrange the lots as to exclude one description of purchaser 
 
 altogether, and that a purchaser, as has been showD by the experience of the Church 
 
 Temporalities Commissioners, generally ready to give as high a price as any man.+ 
 
 But the dread of being left with unsaleable residues on hand has had, perhaps, a 
 
 somewhat excessive influence in this respect.:]; Other causes have also operated. There 
 
 has been a total absence of any direct means of bringing home to the tenants a knowledge 
 
 of their rights, such as were employed with success by the Church Temporalities 
 
 Commissioners, and of cheapening their law costs, and putting them generally in the 
 
 way of making their bargain. The interference of the Treasury above noticed, and 
 
 the mistake, as we cannot but consider it, of introducing the Poor Law valuation 
 
 as a measure of the value of an estate, has opei-ated to cut down the two-thirds of 
 
 the purchase-money which it was intended by the Legislature should be advanced, and 
 
 to put obstacles in the way of obtaining the full amount. Complexities have arisen in 
 
 cases where a portion of the holding was not let, or where the estate was incumbered, 
 
 or where easements existed, causing either delay, or expense, or both. The restraints 
 
 on alienation, and on charging with a second incumbrance, have caused the Board of 
 
 Works' advances to be regarded with less favour ; and that prohibiting assignment Coleman, 2 
 
 by will, if, indeed, imposed by the Act, appears to be oppressive. Little, 39^); 
 
 .■i;U 
 
 52. 
 
 1516 
 1684 
 1882 
 2013 
 8805 
 9805 
 
 90. These causes of failure were thoroughly investigated by the Committee of Report of the 
 the House of Commons of 1877-1S78 ; and in the conclusions of the Eeport presented House of Com- 
 ' by that Committee, which were ratified by a resolution of the House of Commons ^^ 1877-T878 ^^ 
 during the last Parliament, we desire to express a general concurrence. The principal 
 paragraphs of this Report are as follows : — 
 
 " Your Committee are of opinion that it is very desirable that further facilities should be given for the 
 purchase by tenants of the fee-simple of their holdings. Your Committee find that, when estates are offered 
 for sale, there is a general desire on the part of the tenantry to become absolute owners of their farms ; and 
 they beKeve that a substantial increase in this way in the number of small proprietors would give stability 
 to the social system, and woiild tend to spread contentment, and promote industry and thrift amongst 
 the Irish peasantry. ...... That a large proportion of the estates offered for sale in 
 
 the Landed Estates Court are held under fee-farm grants and leases for long terms. 
 
 "That the apportionment of the rents reserved by these grants and the leases, and the conditions of sale as 
 to the indemnities consequent thereon, have increased the inconvenience of dividiiig such estates into small lots. 
 
 " That many estates are subject to annuities and jointures, and the effect of the charging orders in respect 
 of loans to tenants is to displace the priority of such annuities, and, in the case of sale or forfeiture, to 
 destroy them. Obstacles have arisen in the making of advances to tenants uj^on such estates, inasmuch as 
 these advances in some cases prejudice the security of such annuitants. 
 
 " That the existing state of the law in respect of rights of turbary iind pasturage, rights of way, and other 
 easements affecting estates sold in the Landed Estates Couit, lias enhanced the expense of carrying out 
 sales to tenants in. that Coui-t. 
 
 "That the cost of investigating the titles of estates, both of landlord and tenant, and the impediments 
 to the application of the purchase money in the cases of settled estates, oi' estates subject to incumbrances, 
 have seriously impeded the working of the second part of the Act. 
 
 "That on some estates the tenants hold their farms in riindale, and in detached plots, and in such cases the 
 difficulties in lotting have been much increased. 
 
 " That your Committee have no doubt that many tenants have failed to make use of the advantages offered 
 them by the Act for want of information as to the terms upon, and the amounts for which loans could be 
 obtained by them, and that the strictness of the prescribed conditions, especially the clauses against alienation 
 and mortgage, have prevented others from endeavouring to acquire the fee-simple of their holdings. 
 
 " That, for the purpose of effectually promoting the purchase of land by occupying tenants, your Committee 
 are of opinion that, with respect to the sale of estates by the Land Judges of the High Court of Justice — 
 and lards are usually thus sold in Ireland — some provision must be made to meet what the evidence shows to 
 be the fundamental difficulty of the present system ; that is to say, the difficulty, if not impossibility (saA-e in 
 rare instances), of forming the lands into lots to suit the tenant purchasers, and at the same time paying 
 due regard to the interests of those whose property is being sold through the Court. So long as these prac- 
 tically inconsistent duties continue to be imposed on one and the same functionary, your Committee believe 
 that no substantial results can reasonably be expected from the clauses of the Irish Land Act to which their 
 inquiry has been directed. They therefore think that, whilst leaving to one body the function of selling to 
 the best advantage such estates as may be offered for sale, another distinct and equally independent body 
 should be constituted, specially charged mth the duty of superintending and facilitating the purchase of their 
 several farms by the occupying tenants. Your Committee, accordingly beg to recommend that some properly 
 
 Sweetman, 1151, 
 1224; Robertson, 
 Bernard, 
 Allen, 
 Beeves, 
 Alexander, 
 Brown, 
 Norris, 
 10283; Murphy, 
 10158; Scot/, 
 15959 ; Richard- 
 son, 19005 ; 
 Dcd//, 19050; 
 Hussey, 25634 ; 
 Crosbie, 26229 ; 
 Jones, 26944 ; 
 Colthurst, 30390 ; 
 Becher, 30662 ; 
 Baldwin, 32510 ; 
 Dufferin, 33168 ; 
 Healy, 37436. 
 
 * M'Causland, 9271 ; Cunningham, 9412 ; Lane, 9566 ; Brown, 9805 ; Brennan, 10068 ; Murphy, 10158 ; 
 Warnock, 10345, 10354; Morrison, 10385; Gamble, 10895; 6'a«%, 12369; Cooper, 12525; Blake 18749' 
 Baldwin, 32505. 
 
 I Meagher, 2267; Morrison, 10485; White, 23167; O'Connor, 24551. 
 
 I Booth, 14326; Jones, 26941. 
 
 F 
 
'64> 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Ferguson, 3tJ2 ; 
 O'Brien, 4141; 
 Frost, 24128 ; 
 Lewin, 3481:]; 
 VeruoD, 3544 ; 
 Greer, 40028. 
 
 Ilemoval of 
 hindrances tc 
 
 Ormsby, G24 ; 
 Alexander, 8820 
 Hussey, 25391 
 
 3Errington, 13074. 
 
 constituted body should be entrusted with sufficient funds to enable them to purchase suitable estates, oi- 
 parts of estates, when offered for sale, with the viesv of afterwards selling to as many of the tenants as, 
 with the aid of advances through the Board of Works, may be able and willing to buy, and disposing of the 
 residues (if any), at such times, and in such manner as they may think will be most productive. 
 
 " Your Committee are of opinion that the body thus constituted should put themselves into_ communieatioii 
 with the tenants of properties offered for sale, in the Landed Estates Court ; should explain to them the 
 facilities offered by the Act ; should represent their interests before the Court in the lotting of properties 
 or otherwise ; and should only purchase and re-sell properties in lots as aforesaid, when satisfied that such a 
 proportion of the tenants are prepared to buy as will prevent any loss to the funds at their disposal." 
 
 91. We agree with the Committee in thinking that a larger proportion than two-thirds 
 of the purchase-money, say four-fifths, might, as a rule, be safely advanced. We agree 
 further that when tenants comprising one-half in value of a lot, instead of four-fifths 
 in value of the whole estate, are willing to purchase, and other purchasers can be found 
 for the residue of the lot, the advances under the 47th section might be made to such 
 other purchasers ; and that the benefit of these advances should be extended to sales 
 under the third part of the Act, that is, to sales not made under agreements between 
 landlord and tenant, but in open Court; also that the restrictions against ahenations 
 and assignments should be repealed. We add that a stile should be substituted for 
 forfeiture in all cases, and that purchasers should be entitled to pay off at any time 
 parts of the debt due, so as to give them encouragement to save for that object. There 
 may be conveniences in joining the functions of the Commission to be appointed for this 
 purpose with those of the Court or Commission to be appointed as an ultimate tribunal 
 in disputes as to rent ; but their functions are distinct, and the consolidation of the two 
 is rather, perhaps, to be recommended on grounds of sentiment and convenience, than 
 of any very strong expediency. 
 
 Tikynients not to 
 exceed original 
 Tents. 
 
 Greene, 877 ; 
 Bernard, 1804. 
 Baldwin, 32.526 ; 
 
 Ormshy, 515 ; 
 Mitrphy, 2812 ; 
 Hallichuj, IOC, 22. 
 
 Proposal to give 
 landlords the 
 power to compel 
 the State to 
 pnrchajse, 
 disapproved. 
 
 O'Brien, :3'J5() ; 
 Chichester, 34575; 
 Vernon, 35436. 
 
 Purchases of 
 pei-petuities by 
 
 tenants. 
 
 92. In selling to tenants, it would be well to arrange that the annual payments'- 
 should not exceed the former yearly rent. That this might be effected, even where th^f 
 tenant pi'ovides no part of the original purchase-money, has been shown in the sale of 
 tithe rent-charge to landowners, and it might certainly be effected where he finds one- 
 fifth of it, unless (which ought never to be the case) the purchase was effected at an 
 exorbitant price. For instance, if a holding of which the rent was £100 a-year were 
 bought for £2,500, the tenant providing £500, and the remaining £2,000 were advanced 
 him by the Board of Works, a payment of £5 per cent, upon that advance, or £100 
 a-year, would be equal to the original rent, and would discharge the amount of the 
 debt, with interest at 3^ per cent., in 35 years. If the whole were advanced, 4 per 
 cent, would equal the original rent, and this Avould discharge the debt, with interest at 
 8 J per cent., in 55 years. It is obvious that the principle of these clauses will admit 
 of an almost indefinite extension, if, at the highest rate at which sales of land are ordi- 
 narily effected in Ireland, it is possible so to adjust the loan and its repayment that the 
 whole of the purchase-money may be advanced to a tenant, and repaid by him in the 
 course of half a century, without adding a penny to his former rent. 
 
 93. It is true that if the land question is now peacefully settled, the value of land may 
 be expected to rise.* But at first it may rather be apprehended that a considerable 
 number of estates will be thrown on the market, from the inevitable distaste with 
 which some landlords will regard the changes which we have found it our duty to 
 recommend. This dislike is indeed so strongly expressed, as to have caused an expres- 
 sion of opinion, that it would be unjust to oblige landlords to concede fixity of tenure 
 at fair rents, with, above all, the right of free sale, without providing that those who 
 prefer it should be entitled to sell their estates to the State at a value to be settled by 
 arbitration.t We agree so far with this view, that we desire to see every facility 
 given for such sales, short of an actual compulsion on the State to take over all the land 
 offered them, especially without retaining any adequate control over the rate at which 
 the process of conversion of tenants into freeholders is to be urged forward, or over the 
 fancy prices which would inevitably be imposed. It is necessary not to incumber the 
 State with large numbers of tenants who are not willing or perhaps able to purchase. 
 
 94. Another proposal has been made, especially as being the best way of disposing of 
 the residues which may remain on hand, after the purchase of an estate, and the sale of 
 portions to the tenants. It is that perpetuities should be granted to the tenants of 
 estates thus purchased, either upon payment of a fine, or at such increased rent as may 
 be reasonable. To this we see no objection. It has also been proposed that tenants 
 
 *Hunt, 21612; Jones, 26940. 
 
 I Fowler, 3906. 
 
REPORT. 35 
 
 should be assisted to purchase perpetuity leases from tlieir landlords.* We are of 
 opinion that where an agreement between landlord and tenant has been entered into to 
 that eiFect, facilities should be afforded to the tenant to purchase a perpetuity, and to fine 
 down the perpetuity rent Avhen settled, by advances of the same kind, and to the same 
 extent, as in the case of purchases of the fee. 
 
 95. By providing funds liberally for the purpose of purchase, by judicious arrange- Purchases by 
 ments for the conduct of sales, and by energetically pushing the work, through the t^^^^^^J^^J^ **" 
 agency of a body specially constituted to do it, we consider that means may be provided ^ J^ed!'^ 
 
 for satisfying all, or nearly all, that landlords in this respect have a right to demand ; 
 and at the same time for rendering the experiment of proprietor-cultivators a real factor 
 in the social and political life of Ireland. But when all is done that can be done in this 
 direction, the tardiness of the process, and the many inevitable drawbacks, will still 
 prevent the "purchase clauses" from being the main feature in any future land system. f 
 'J'here will still remain the great mass of tenants and the great mass of landlords. Tlie 
 settlement of their mutual relation must still he the most important part of the task 
 before the legislature, and the substitution of other conditions for that relation will be 
 but secondary after all. 
 
 96. If we look forward a little, to the time when a large number of peasant proprietors The necessity for 
 will have been constituted, either as owners in fee, or as perpetuity tenants, it becomes ^^^^*^^*^[j ^^^^^ 
 evident that the purchase clauses cannot by themselves afford a settlement. Some, q^_^. g^^ . 
 probably many, of the new owners will fail. They will borrow on their holdings, and Latouche, 984 ; 
 will only quit them, when the mortgage has practically swallowed up the value. The Robertson, 1519 ; 
 new owner will be, in many cases, a creditor ; a man who does not himself farm. He O'Brien, 3968 ; 
 will perhaps sell, but will most likely let the holding. The relation of landlord and ^f'J^'^^^Qgg^^ ' 
 tenant will be reconstituted. Similarly many peasant proprietors and many perpetuity ^ ®' 
 tenants will become lessors. Unless the protection of a statutory tenure is alfforded to 
 
 the new tenant, the land question will speedily revive. 
 
 97. For the purpose of aiding landowners who may wish to sell, we think the Power to limited 
 time has come when it will be necessary to provide a remedy for the condition of owners and cor- 
 settled estates, by enacting. that a limited owner, whose interest is not less than an estate po^!'*!^^ to ^^'■'■ 
 for life, shall in all cases have the same power to sell settled land in open market for the ^ " .^^r^f--. 
 best price, and to require the holders of the legal estate to make a title thereto, as if he ]srewmarr 2.5144 • 
 were the owner in fee; all limitations under the settlement and all incumbrances being Hussey, 2.5378. * 
 thenceforward transferred to the purchase-money, which should be invested on securities 
 
 authorized by the Court of Chancery, in the name of the Accountant-General, for the 
 
 benefit of those entitled. . The money arising from the sale of perpetuities to tenants, or 
 
 from fining down of rents as above recommended, should be subject to the same 
 
 provisions as to investment for the benefit of those interested in the estate. A similar Lefroy, 39210. 
 
 provision should be made to facilitate sales by Corporations. The Irish Society, the 
 
 London Companies, and certain charitable corporations own a large quantity of land in 
 
 Ireland. It does not appear that they compare unfavourably with other landlords.! 
 
 There must inevitably be a want of that intelligent sympathy with the circumstances of 
 
 individ.ual tenants which is shown by a good resident landlord, or even by a good agent, 
 
 but they appear in many cases to spend money freely, and not to be exacting in matters 
 
 of rent. 
 
 98. The power to advance money under the Land Act for purposes of reclamation f t i ^ 
 should be extended to enable advances to be made to landowners for the purchase of to advance''"'^^'"* 
 quit-rents, tithe rent-charge, and other permanent charges on their estates, and for money to 
 effecting permanent improvements and drainage ; and the benefit of the section l^^idlords and 
 should be extended to tenants equally with landlords. If the landlord and tenant o'^To*'- 
 should join in an application, their joint security might entitle them to a larger advance n> 
 proportioned to the combined value of the landlords' and tenants' interests. ' KSnT' 
 
 * Meagher, 2268; Derham, 2477; O'Brien, 3989, 4042 ; Perry, 6289 ; Brown, 9886 : Donnell 11000- 
 Barry, 22053; Fitzgerald, 22323 j O'Mahony, 26575; Vernon, 35437 ; Keane, 35793 ■ Healy 3744V 
 Little, 39540 ; Longfield, 39876. > >^'>, -neaiy, d/443, 
 
 I Ferguson, 320 ; Robertson, 1534 ; Meagher, 2269; Hill, 3260; O'Brien, 3944; Brush 6680 ■ Wari^n. 
 6950; Gamble, 10896; Heron, 14051; O'Flaherty, 19433; Lambert, 19529; W 1^85 Robf. n^' 
 20748; Kilmartin, 20990; O'Donoghue, 25055 ; Brcsnan, 25655 ; Crosbie, 26232 • Jones 26944 iT^ 
 27203; Bennett, 28034;. Cronin, 293i6 ; Davis, 29739 ; Daly, 30048 ; Ardagh, 3UM Soltn' ^Ir^' 
 Baldwin, 32166, 32505; Vernon, 35434; Johnston, 35595; Rochfort-Boyd, 39906 ' ' 
 
 t Shillington, 4998 ; Osborne, 9036 ; Lane, 9507 ; Hanna, 9606 ; Brown, '9847 • Dnnnp inni« n/r • 
 10443; Gather, 10707; M'Intyre, 10763, 10802 ,- Meek, 12266 Brown 12294 X5 2003l'-^°''''°''' 
 25590, 25674 ; Pringh, 36786 ; Pyne, 38988 ; Longfield, 39828. ' ' ^°°^^ ' Srosnan 
 
 E2 
 
 , 4060 
 .Keane. .'15818. 
 
36 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Simplification of 
 land-transfer. 
 
 99. The transfer of land should be simplified, and the expense lessened; and local 
 .Registry courts should be established, at the offices of the Clerks of the Peace or else- 
 where, for recording cheaply and quickly all dealings either by a landlord or a tenant 
 with his interest in land. 
 
 Poor tenants. 
 
 Ferguson, 399 ; 
 Leitrim, 11316 ; 
 Baldwin, 32262. 
 
 Emigration and 
 waste lands. 
 
 Agricultural 
 labourers. 
 
 VII. The Condition of the Poor. 
 
 100. The condition of the poorer tenants in numerous parts of Ireland, where it 
 is said they are not able, if they had their land gratis, to live by cultivating it, ig, 
 by some, thought to be an almost insoluble problem.* Frequently however amoug 
 this class high rents appear to be paid ; and we may hope that in this respect 
 a full investigation, followed by reduction where necessary, will do something to 
 improve the condition of a depressed class. The solvent of free sale will do something 
 also. It is said, indeed, that where all are so poor there might be none to buy ; but 
 this we doubt. Money is generally forthcoming whenever there is a single farm in the 
 market. Free sale will bring a wealthier order of tenants to the soil that needs 
 them ; fixity of tenure and fair rents will give them a chance to thrive on it. 
 
 101. We are unable to see that any special need has been proved by the recent scarcity •' 
 for a great State aided emigration. Whether Ireland is capable of maintaining her 
 present population or not, we think that emigi'ation may be well left to the operation 
 of natural causes. Voluntary emigration, in the future as in the past, will be found 
 suflScient. We should be unwilling to encourage the idea that by pressure from without 
 the Irish people were induced to leave their native land. Jleither can we strongly 
 support the schemes, most energetically advocated, for a system of State-aided planting 
 of the poorer tenants and labourers upon the waste lands of Treland.f Lands which are 
 pure waste will never repay the outlay for reclamation ;J and those of a better class 
 are held for grazing purposes, and are highly prized by those tenants who have 
 privileges on them.§ Experience seems to show that the reclamation of these inferior 
 soils, left till the last in the settlement ot the country, can only be profitably undertaken 
 by the employment of capital which can be watched over and administered by the colonist 
 himself I! The State is, of all agencies, the least fitted to direct or supervise the work of 
 reclamation. Lands suitable for reclamation, which shall fall into the hands of the 
 State by the operation of the purchase clau'ses, may be made use of to try the experi- 
 ment, under the administration of the Commission if desired, or as we should prefer, 
 under the management of private individuals or companies possessing capital, with 
 provisions for giving a fair chance to the cultivating tenant, and for his obtaining either 
 the fee, or a perpetuity, or the statutory tenure in the land he might reclaim.lT The 
 offer of these privileges should not be confined to the actual tenants of holdings, but 
 should be open to the applications of industrious sons of tenants, or labourers, who 
 could show sufficient capital to embark in the work of reclamation. It is, however, 
 rather in the improvement of lands already cultivated, and in the full reclamation of 
 those already half reclaimed that we expect the capital of the tenant class to find, for 
 years to come, its most profitable employment.** If the Government saw its way to adopt 
 such a scheme as that suggested in the Pamphlet quoted in the Appendix F to this 
 Report, a great body of public opinion would be gratified by even its partial adoption. 
 
 102. The bearing of the questions committed to us for inquiry upon the condition 
 and welfare of the agricultural labourer, a point suggested by references in the Land 
 ^Lct, engaged our attention early, and we have taken a large mass of evidence respecting 
 it. ft The subject appears to demand speedy consideration for the sake of the country, as 
 
 * Greene, 753 ; Allen, 1921 ; Meagher; 2159 ; Brooke, 11604 ; Hamilton, 14719 ; Clarke, 15708 ; Thomas, 
 16720; "Waters, 16850; Lyons, 17077; Jackson, 19132; O'Flaherty, 19421; Gairdner, 20304; Joyce, 
 21094 ; Cronin, 29350 ; Baldwin, 32142 ; Lewin, 34811 ; Dease, 37,347. 
 
 ] Daly, 17689 ; Stephens, 17709 ; Brosnan, 25660 ; Murphy, 26173 ; Baldwin, 32182. 
 
 :j: O'Donnell, 17683 ; Clancy, 18192 ; Colthurst, 30397 ; Baldwin, 32250; Lifford, 36419. 
 
 § Leitrim, 11228; Sinclair, W., 11432; Brooke, 11612; Crean, 15845; Mahon, 21:307 ■ Fitz-r-raU, 
 29533 ; Hegarty, 30718; Baldwin, 32188 ; Lifford, 36431. 
 
 II Cooper, 12522 ; Gore, 16963 ; M'Mahon, 28548 ; Baldwin, 32209, 32292, 32300. 
 
 IT Reeves, 2028 ; Baldwin, 32214 ; Sayers, 37456. 
 
 ** Hussey, 25336. 
 
 +t Robertson, 1560; Butler, 4301; Shillington, 5397; Swann, 6160; Hanna, 8918 ; Flanacan, 9661; 
 Murphy, 10168; Sinclair, W., 11486, 11593; Haslett, 11837; Ashe, 12004; King-Harman 14258; 
 Hamilton, 14778 ; Blake, 18764 ; Gairdner, 20348 ; Hardy, 20890 ; Hunt, 21546 ; Bolster, 21727 ; Hewson, 
 23073; O'Shaughnessy, 23386; Newman, 25147; Walpole, 26006; Kearney, 26142; Lane, 26540; Jones, 
 26897; Johnson, 26979; Leahy, 27215; Bennett, 28439; Cronin, 29387; Davis, 29654- Hegarty, 20730; 
 Loffan, 31525; Roche, 34346; Johnston, 35632; Curling, 39422. 
 
REPORT. 37 
 
 well as for that of the labourers themselves. We do not think that in the proposals 
 we have made there is anythincj calculated to intensify the poverty of the poor. The 
 Irish agricultural labourer and the Irish farmer are not two classes, but one. The 
 labourer is a farmer who is without a tarm. Wild and subversive proposals, which 
 tend to shake confidence in the public sobriety and drive the capital of the wealthy out 
 of the country, must injure most of all the man who lives by daily wages. It does 
 not fall to us to make suggestions for legislation for the improvement of the dwellings 
 of labourers, for securing them gardens, or for facilitating, except in a general way, 
 their acquisition of farms ; but we trust that the tranquillity which will follow on a 
 well-considered measure of Land Tenure Reform will be a blessing alike to all classes, 
 and especially to the poorest. 
 
 VIII. Conclusion. 
 
 103. The Land Act of 1S70 will be so materially affected by the adoption of the The form of the 
 changes we have recommended that it may be necessary to repeal it, and to re-enact land law in future, 
 such of its provisions as it is deemed advisable to retain. The advantage _ of having 
 
 only one statute dealing with the subject is obvious. Simplicity and conciseness are 
 essential in legislating on the Irish Land Question. We have found ignorance of the 
 law, as it now stands, in places where it might least have been expected. If it is 
 thought better to have a new statute, dealing with the proposed changes only, a con- 
 solidating Act, to embody in an intelligible form the provisions remaining unrepealed 
 of the statutes of 1860 and 1870, which will for the most part constitute the law 
 of landlord and tenant outside the statutory tenure, will be almost as necessary as the 
 new statute. 
 
 104. The question will be asked — if all that is here proposed were now enacted, will Prospects for th« 
 the tenants be satisfied, and will Ireland be pacified ? Upon this head it is well to use future. 
 
 no strong or sweeping language of anticipation. The habit of agitation, to which the 
 existence of just grievances has given a plea, is not unlearned in a day. There are 
 many to whom the concession of justice, as we deem it, will seem only the extortion of 
 an instalment, from the fears of the legislature, of what may yet be obtained by 
 'pressure ; and such, no doubt, will endeavour to continue agitating, some in the convic- 
 I tion that they are acting patriotically, some from less worthy motives ; but the .great 
 _mass of cultivating tenants, we believe, will be satisfied with the concession of the 
 statutory tenure here proposed. There is a familiar saying, " That it is better to give 
 a man the whole of what he ought to have, than the half of what he asks for." We 
 have endeavoured to put forward a scheme which shall avoid the error of making 
 up for giving one man too little by giving another of the same class too much. We are 
 aware that many circumstances, many rights, and many grievances, some of them, no 
 doubt, all-important to particular individuals, must have been overlooked. We have 
 not attempted to offer suggestions for the solution of all the difficulties that may arise. 
 It will have been enough if we succeed in strengthening the argument for attempting 
 a solution, in all cases, upon these two principles — to do equal justice patiently between 
 man and man, and to recognize by legislation the abiding and prevailing traditional 
 sentiment that the cultivator has a property in the soil he cultivates, to which in past 
 ages, legal recognition has so unfortunately been denied. 
 
 (Signed), 
 
 BESSBOEOUGH 
 
 R. DOWSE 
 ^O'CUNOR DON 
 ■"W. SHAW 
 
 January iih, 1881. 
 
 * See Supplementary Reports hereto appended. 
 
38 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY EEPORT BY THE O'CONOR DON. 
 
 The inquiry which we have been conducting during the last few months has been 
 by the very terms of our Commission divided into two branches : the one relating to 
 the working and operation of the existing land laws of Ireland ; the other dealing with 
 alterations and amendments in these laws. Upon the first branch of the inquirj J 
 quite concur with my colleagues in the foregoing report; I also agree in several of the 
 recommendations relating to the second branch ; and although I differ on what may 
 be considered, and what I myself consider very essential points in regard to the 
 remedy proposed for existing evils, T have not felt myself debaiTed from signing a 
 report with most of the views expressed in which I agree. In signing it I feel bound 
 to state as distinctly and clearly as I can the points on which I differ, and in doing so 
 it will be impossible for me to avoid entering into something like a criticism of the 
 recommendations from v/hich I dissent. 
 
 The first point to which I must allude, and which has not received, I think, the 
 prominence it deserves is this — that not only is the ordinary occupying tenure of land i 
 in Ireland insecure, but the ownership of land is confined to a few. So far as the mere ' 
 occupation of land is concerned I do not know that the position of affairs is worse 
 in Ireland than in other countries ; on the contrary, I believe it would be found that, 
 regarding the occupier as a mere hirer of the land, his legal rights are superior, and 
 his security greater, than in most other countries in Europe, whilst his practical 
 rights — those recognised by the majority of landlords, and enjoyed by the majority of 
 tenants — are in excess of the rights or the security ordinarily given elsewhere. 
 
 Ireland is peculiarly a land of numerous occupiers and a very restricted class of 
 owners — hundreds of thousands of tenants and a mere handful of landlords; and this 
 in a country where not only are the tenants very numerous as compared with the 
 owners, but numerous as compared with the entire population. 
 
 It is estimated that there are about 500,000 tenants occupying land in Ireland — 
 that is to say, 500,000 families — and setting down an average of five individuals for 
 each family, this would give us at once 2,500,000 persons, or about half the population, 
 directly connected vfith the land, as occupiers of the soil ; and if to these we add all the 
 outside relatives of these families and all persons dependent on them, such as the small 
 Country traders and dealers, it will at once appear that the strength of this class is 
 irresistible ; that their views and opinions must be the views and opinions of the 
 country ; and that no matter what the law may lay down, no matter what rights 
 it may give against them, such rights, if not acquiesced in by them, can never be 
 universally enforced without giving rise to a revolution. 
 
 We must also bear in mind that these people are now educated, that they practically 
 possess the highest political power, that they are all able to take an intelligent view of 
 their own position, and that the view they are likely to take will not be one disi 
 advantageous to themselves. If Ireland were not united with England, if\she were lefl 
 to herself, there can be little doubt, I think, that with or without compensation, the existing 
 rights connected with the ownership of land would be swept away or greatly resferictedj 
 whilst, on the other hand, if we had some hundreds of thousands of owners replacing the 
 existing 10,000 landlords, instead of restriction on transactions relating to land, we should 
 have a demand for the most perfect freedom of contract. From this it seems to me to 
 follow that if we are to get to the bottom of the real difficulty of Irish land tenure, and 
 if we are to settle it on any real permanent basis, it is not merely the relations between 
 landlord and tenant that have to be considered and adjusted, but whether these 
 relations should be continued to the same extent as they now exist, and therefore, I 
 fear that _ any Act based merely or mainly on proposals to modify the conditions 
 under which the occupier is brought into relation with the owner, will be only like 
 the Act of 1870, a mere temporary expedient, fit for a transition period, but 
 containing within itself the seeds of failure as a permanent settlement. Another 
 slice, and _ a very large slice of what is now recognised as the legal property of the , 
 owner, will be taken away without satisfying the occupiers, and above all 'without 
 establishing any just principles on which this transference of property should take 
 place. Under these circumstances, I am obliged to dissent from the recommendation! 
 Avhich places compulsory fixity of tenure in the first rank, and merely deals with 
 occupying ownership as a slow and very secondary alternative. The establishment of 
 a peasant proprietary or occupying ownership, first, with facilities for voluntary 
 arrangements for fixity of tenure in certain cases as a subsidiary measure, and 
 compulsory fixity of tenure and adjustment of rents as a last resort, would be my 
 remedy. Before stating how I would propose to carry this out, I must deal with 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY THE O'CONOR DON. 3D 
 
 what I consider the serious objections to the scheme from which I differ, and in doing 
 so I desire to deal with it generally, as submitted to us by the witnesses, and not 
 merely as recommended in the report — 
 i 1st. I believe it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, justly to carry it out. 
 
 2nd. Even, if established, it would not give a satisfactory tenure. 
 
 3rd. It made the general rule of the country it would be but the starting point 
 for a new and most formidable agitation. 
 
 And lastly. If extended to future lettings it could not be maintained or upheld 
 without the most disastrous legal interference with, and legal restrictions on, matters 
 of everyday life which I could never approve of. 
 
 - Obviously fixity of tenure would be an absurdity without some control over 
 rent-raising. To give the occupier the right to fixity of tenure and, at the same 
 ^time, to allow the owner to charge what -rent he pleased, would be to do nothing 
 effective, as, in the words of the Eeport, it would be nugatory and absurd to confer on 
 the tenant a proprietary right of which the value depended on the will of the landlord. 
 Indeed control over rent is what has been most called for by the witnesses who came 
 before us, and rent-raising, rather than, eviction, has been the great grievance com- 
 plained of Although we might have " fair rents" without " fixity of tenure," we 
 cannot establish " fixity of tenure " without " fair rents ; " and it is in arriving at 
 fair rents that I think the greatest difficulty will be found. 
 
 ' Fixity of tenure at fair rents has, no doubt, received the sanction of the majority of 
 the witnesses who appeared before us, and the principle involved in it has been supported 
 by many landlords as well as tenants. In short, a sort of general consensus of public 
 opinion in its favour has been claimed for it by its adherents. Unanimity of opinion 
 which is based on such general terms as " fair " and " reasonable " may not, however, 
 be so very real when we come to test the meaning placed on these words by the diffe- 
 rent persons using them. Can it, for instance, be truly said that there is any rea 
 ' unanimity of opinion between the landlord who upholds fair rents, and the advocate of , 
 the tenants' cause who holds the same ostensible doctrine, but who thinks that the fair 
 rent of land, which a hundred years ago was reclaimable waste land, should be calcu- Morton, 4684-6, 
 lated on the assumption that it ^vas still in an unreclaimed condition, unless the land- 4731 ; M'Kenley,. 
 lord could prove that all the improvements that had been made in it, had been executed JH^g '. ^°'i^J^7> 
 at his expense or that of his predecessors? A large proportion of the witnesses on the 10262-7 ' 
 
 'tenants' side have told us that they consider Griffith's Valuation, as it is called, quite 
 a sufficiently high standard for a "fair" rent, and numbers of them told us that 
 they considered it far too high, although that valuation was made on a standard of 
 prices exceptionally low, and under circumstances in which it was the interest of every- 
 body, both landlords as well as tenants, to keep it as low as possible.* Again, rents that 
 have not been increased for twenty, thirt}. , or even forty years, have been protested 
 against as rack rents, and even where large sums have been paid for the tenants' 
 interest at those rents, they have still been represented as far above the standard of 
 -fairness. ■[ Is it likely that this is the meaning placed on the same term " fair " by the 
 •landlords who have advocated it, and is it not pretty certain that " fair rents " if estab- 
 lished must disappoint one side or the other? 
 
 ' It is of course proposed by every advocate of the system, that arbitrators, or a court 
 of some sort, should be established for settling all disputes as to rent, and it is 
 expected and hoped that the cases which would be brought forward for settlement 
 would be few and far between, that disputes as to rent would only gradually arise 
 that, so arising, the decision of the arbitrators or courts would become precedents, and 
 the principles of these decisions becoming generally known, some cheap and summary 
 ■way of settling disputes as to rent would be resorted to in all ordinary cases. Were we 
 dealing with the. land question in ordinary and quiet times, when the prices of farming 
 produce were up to their ordinary standard, and farming profits were in their normal 
 Condition, there might be some foundation for these expectations, although, even then, 
 I doubt whether the passing of such a law would not lead to a general commotion, but 
 in the present state of affairs, the making of an offer to all the tenants of Ireland to 
 have their rents fixed by arbitration must, I apprehend, lead to a general demand for 
 this. If this arose, where could the competent and trustworthy valuators or umpires 
 'be found ? To estimate correctly even the fair commercial letting value of land is not 
 an easy task.\ The valuator, or in case of arbitration, the umpire, to be competent 
 should be a local man, having local knowledge of the particular land he is asked to 
 
 * Everitt, 2575-2615 ; Flanagan, 9658; Leonard, 21483; Hogan, 23798; O'Connor, 24600; O'Sullivan, 
 
 24968; Lane, 26539; Carnegie, 15413; Corbett, 23892; Clements, 38643; Marum, 35907; Tracy, 36316 • 
 
 'Hpwley, 36054 ; Smollen, 36908 > Higgins, 13330; O'SulHvan, 28987; M'Elroy, 4582; O'Donoghue, 25052^ 
 
 I SulUvan, 22716 ; M'Loughlin, 15483-5; Healy, 15460-3; Flynn, 13468; Higgins, 13319. 
 
40 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Roche, 28803 ; 
 
 M'Cormick, 
 
 36127; 
 
 Corscaddan, 
 
 38295. 
 
 Hill, 3126-30 ; 
 Caldwell, 
 10551-2 ; 
 Ashe, 12007-8 ; 
 Clements, 38609 
 M'Crea, 38462 ; 
 Lord Ventiy, 
 35169. 
 
 Derham, 2162-3 ; 
 Hill, 3144 ; 
 Alexander, 8722 ; 
 Hanna, 8940. 
 
 value, of its past history, and its capacity for production as tested by experience, and if 
 he he a local man he can scai'cely he free from local prejudices, local feelings, and above 
 all, from local suspicions. With this local knowledge, he must possess thorough inde- 
 pendence of all classes, and must be placed above the range of either bribery or intimi- 
 dation ; and one of the first and great difficulties will be to find a sufficient number of 
 men possessing these qualifications. Supposing a sufficient number of these men were 
 got they cannot be left without some general principles to guide their decisions, if they 
 were, there would be no end to the dissimilarity in their judgments. . Already, tJie 
 greatest complaints are made in regard to the decisions of the County Court Judges 
 on the ground that different Judges take different views, and that there is nothing like 
 similarity amongst them ; but the differences of opinion between men as to the value 
 of land, if left altogether to themselves to decide it, would be tenfold greater, 
 
 Arbitration or reference to a court for settling rent may work very well where it is 
 entered into voluntarily, where both sides know that it is voluntary, and where, conse- 
 quently, there is no temptation to make any exaggerated demands on either side, but 
 compulsory arbitration would almost always mean settlement by the umpire. The fact 
 that compulsory arbitration for settling the value of land already takes place and works 
 on the whole, satisfactorily, may be quoted as a proof that the sj'stem might easily be 
 extended, but there is a most essential difference between these arbitrations and arbi- 
 trations for settling rent. Where compulsory arbitration now exists the whole feeling 
 of the community is in favour of the person, whose property is being taken away, 
 getting not only the value, but something more than the value for that property, and 
 this is recognised by the public company or other body that is purchasing. In the 
 question of rent the exact converse would be the case, and there the general public 
 feeling would be against the person compulsorily dealt with. 
 
 The ordinary difficulties of estimating the value of land are also enhanced by the 
 proposal, sanctioned by most of the witnesses, that the improvements, effected at any 
 time by landlord or tenant, and any payment made for the tenants' interest should be 
 taken into consideration. Any one of these questions in itself may lead to no end of 
 trouble. Take for instance the question of improvements. We know that this question^ 
 has given rise to an immense amount of dispute and litigation even under the present 
 Land Act; but this can scarcely give us any idea of the disputes that may, and I think 
 must arise, if from the valuation of the land is to be excluded any value added lo lit 
 by the occupier. How it will be possible to estimate this I am at a loss to conceive, 
 and the justice of its universal application seems to me more than doubtful. The 
 records of the land courts show the extravagant character of the claims made for 
 improvements ; but if we are to go back to an indefinite period as recommended by 
 some witnesses, or even for thirty-five years, as mentioned in the Report, the field for 
 dispute and litigation, and doubt and difficulty, will be immensely enlarged. 
 
 With respect to some land, no one could really tell except by a guess, what its value 
 ought to be with all these deductions. Whether the improvements are to be calcu- 
 lated at what they cost, or on their results, or on both ; whether they have been made 
 by the landlord or by the tenant, are all questions on which difficulties must arise. It 
 seems to me it will be impossible to separate into two distinct classes the value of 
 land arising out of its inherent qualities, and value added to it by works executed 
 thirty or forty years ago, and the effect on particular farms of such general improvements 
 as road making, main drainage, &c., will be most difficult to determine. Even taking 
 such an ordinary, well defined improvement as building a tenant's house, a question 
 may arise whether the letting value of the farm is increased in proportion to the cost 
 of the house. Then there are other classes of improvements, such as those executed 
 by loansunder the Board of Works, where the tenants liave paid all the instalments, 
 which will certainly give rise to contention unless their ownership be clearly defined 
 by law. It has been held by many witnesses that these ought to belong to the tenants 
 --although it was to the landlord the money was lent — although he undertook all the 
 risk, and although, if properly carried out, the land itself, by its improved value, should 
 have more than repaid the annual instalments. 
 
 1 will not dwell upon the difficulties arising out of payments made to previous 
 occupiers for their tenant-right. These payments have, in some cases, exceeded the full 
 value of the interest of the owner in fee, and they cannot be justly excluded from the 
 cakulation of rent, but how far they should be allowed will be a matter of no httle 
 aifhculty to determine. 
 
 iW^V ^^"^^ ^^^^^ ^*^ consider at what standard is the fair rent to be calculated. I do not 
 think we should be justified in recommending a general compulsory system of valuation 
 rents unless we were agreed as to the principles on which it should be conducted. It 
 would not be worthy of our position to recommend it in tlie same loose and general 
 way m which it has been recommended to ourselves. This would be but shifting the 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY THE O'CONOR DON. *1 
 
 difficulty which we ought really to face, and would render our Report on this point 
 almost worthless. There is no paragraph in the Report in which I more thoroughly 
 concur, than that which states that a fair rent, as understood in Ireland, means a 
 very different thing from a full, fair, commercial rent, as understood in England. It is 
 well clearly to understand the full force of this admission. The fair rent must be some- 
 thing less — I am bound to express my own opinion — it must be something considerably 
 less than the fair commercial full letting value of the land. To impose the adoption of 
 this rent upon every owner would, in most cases, mean, not the deprivation of a mere 
 sentimental right, but the deprivation of very tangible property, the safe enjoyment of 
 which had, in some cases, been lately guaranteed by law. Private rights, I know, must 
 give way to public necessities, but in all cases where clearly recognised rights have 
 been taken away, rights which were given or purchased without any qualification, the 
 withdrawal of the rights or the valuable property they represented has been accompanied 
 with compensation. 
 
 Can it then be said that a landowner in Ireland, who has let his land up to the full 
 and fair commercial value, or who purchased the land when let at that standard, and 
 has since upheld it, has committed any moral wrong, or that his rent is an unjust one? 
 One class of owners of land have, I may say, been almost wholly unrepresented in the 
 evidence given to us, not through any fault of the Commission, for we were ready to 
 hear them if they came forward, but through their own abstention. I refer to the 
 small and new purchasers in the Landed Estates Court. They are not a very popular 
 class, probably not a very deserving class, they may have kept away because they 
 might not have been able to defend all their actions, but they represent, very often, 
 thrifty, hard-working. Irishmen, who have, by dint of hard work, laid by a competence 
 which -they have invested in land in their own country, and to many of these men such 
 an enactment as lowering their rents to the standard at which an easy-going, affluent, 
 and old proprietor was satisfied to let his land, would mean absolute ruin. Keane, 3579>. 
 
 Whether this would be just or unjust, and whether it should consequently be accom- 
 panied with or left without compensation really depends on the question whether a full 
 fair commercial rent is in itself an inj ustice, and it requires a stronger argument to 
 prove this than a statement of the fact that large and wealthy proprietors have been 
 content to do with less. Again, what would be a fair rent at one time would be 
 unfair at another. Had rents been adjusted four or five years ago, when the times were 
 prosperous and farming profits were high, there can be little doubt such rents could not 
 now be kept up, whilst it they had been adjusted in a time of depression, no matter how 
 low, they could not be raised. The bargain would thus not be an equal one, the very 
 
 ; same forces which now exist to control landlords from exercising their full legal rights 
 would control the exercise of any new ones, but it certainly could not be beneficial to the 
 country, and I cannot think it would be satisfactory to the occupiers to have to look 
 
 ■. forward to periodical strikes against rent, or demands for abatements in the future as in 
 the past. Such a system is degrading to the tenant, injurious to the landlord, and 
 
 : demoralizing to the country, and, therefore, I believe that wherever the relations of land- 
 lord and tenant are to be maintained at valued rents, these rents must be low, and 
 if they are to be variable, some self-acting principle such as is involved in the Longfield 
 lease would be preferable to periodical revisions. 
 
 It must not either be too confidently expected that those who are known as good land- 
 lords will not take advantage of any rights left to them under the proposed new law. 
 There is scarcely any proprietor who will not find if he takes the rents over all his 
 property and strikes an average that some rents should be raised and others lowered, 
 
 : and if it be the right of individual tenants to claim this average it can scarcely be 
 doubted the landlord in the other instances will claim it also. 
 
 One necessary effect of such legislntion as is now proposed and of all attempts to reo-u- 
 late by law matters which h?.d heretofore been left to voluntary arrangement must be°to 
 make every one assert more vigorously and carefully the rights and privileges which are 
 either left to him or conferred on him. 
 
 This has already been one of the effects of the Land Act of 1870, and that the same 
 effect will follow from further legislation we can scarcely doubt. Give the tenant com- 
 pulsory fixity of tenure at rents valued by law with the right of free sale and the race 
 of good landlords as well as of bad landlords is gone, and in place of both there will be 
 the statutory landlord until such time as he becom.es so obnoxious that every well- 
 wishing man, inck>ding himself, will desire his extinction. 
 
 1 These are some of the difficulties which will arise if universal compulsory valuation of 
 
 I rents be determined on, and they are by no means imaginary ' difificulties Examples of 
 
 t them all have been brought before us. That they have not been overlooked in framino- 
 the recommendations in the Report from which I dissent, I frankly admit. An 
 
 G 
 
42 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Marmion, 12655 
 Hart, 128ir); 
 M'Goldrick, 
 15285; Sullivan, 
 32716 ; M'Longl 
 lin, 15483. 
 
 endeavour is there made to take the existing state of things as far as possible as a starting 
 point, and the recommendation that rents, which have been regularly paid during ten 
 years out of the last twenty, sliould be regarded as fair, and should not be subject to 
 immediate revaluation, except under special circumstances, would go a long way in 
 meetmg many of the difficulties I have suggested. Bemembering that many of the rents 
 objected to before us, were rents arranged more than twenty years ago, I fear that tbe 
 ; adoption of this principle will itself give rise to new difficulties and inequalities; bnt, 
 nevertheless, if the scheme of fixity of tenure, and valuation rents be made general and 
 compulsory, I believe some such principle must be accepted. Indeed, if I believeitie 
 . tenure itself a satisfactory one, I would not feel bound to urge the diflnculties against its 
 adoption as strongly as I have done, and where it is necessary to have recourse to com- 
 pulsory valuation of rent, I believe the scheme embodied in the Eeport as good a one as 
 can be suggested. 
 This bi-iiigs 11 K 
 at all a satis 
 
 )etuitv at a fix(;d r(_'n 
 
 licfroy, 39210; 
 Browne, 35193. 
 
 Warnock, 10348 
 Roberts, 33578. 
 
 J to my second objection, namely, that the proposed tenure would not be 
 u-toi'y one. It lias been suggested to us in a twofold character. It may be 
 a ]U'ii)etiuty at a fix(;d r('nt, or a perpetuity at a variable rent. If the former, the land- 
 lord is changed into a mere annuitant or rentcharge owner. He will no longer have any 
 interest iu or ]>(>wcf over liis property, his sole connexion with it will be to draw outof it 
 a (Titiiiu ilxcd ])iiyiueiit each year. The nominal owners having no other connexion with 
 their property, aljsfiitceism will most certainly increase, and in a very short time this 
 payment to the landlords will be regarded as a huge tax paid by the multitude for the 
 benefit of a few, whose names will, in many instances, be scarcely known to the occupiers 
 of the soil. If, on the other hand, the perpetuity be at a variable rent, and that 
 certain general rights are preserved to the landlord, the property may be of more value to 
 the owner, but it will equally be very precarious in its character. In its origin it may not 
 correspond to a copyhold, but if all the occupiers of land in Ireland who now hold as 
 tenants from year to year held under this tenure, there can be little doubt that before 
 long they would all combine to have it changed into a copyhold, and if they did so 
 combine, it would be impossible to resist the combination. Perpetuities at variable rents 
 wherever they have been tried have failed to give satisfaction. The Trinity College 
 leases form a notable example of this. There the tenants having fixity of tenure and free 
 sale with variable rents, adjusted according to the prices of agricultural produce, are 
 wholly dissatisfied with their position. The tenure has not led to improvements, and is 
 regarded as so objectionable that a private Bill is about being promoted in Parhamentto 
 change the variable rent into a fixed one. 
 
 Divided ownership cannot, I think, be a desirable tenure universally to create, 
 although where it is in existence or entered into voluntarily it may not be desirable to 
 interfere with it. That it would be an improvement on the present system and a stimu- 
 lant to exertion on the part of the occupier, I admit, although it would not be so great a 
 stimulant as actual ownership, but so far as the landlord was concerned it would be abar 
 to his doing anything for the land. The owner Avould be deprived under this system oi 
 the real position of an owner, whilst the occupier would not have gained that position. iM 
 magic influence of ownership would be taken away from both parties, no one would feel 
 that he was owner, and one of the stronsfest incentives to exertion would be done away 
 with. , 
 
 What would be the value of the perpetual or variable rent to the owner, is alsoa 
 matter which has to be considered, and unless it were adjusted at a low standard, I fear it 
 would be almost unsaleable. A perpetuity rent, even of the most secure description, where 
 the rent is low and what is known as the margin of security very considerable, does not 
 now sell, and never has sold, at anything like the same rate of purchase as higher rents 
 accompanied with absolute ownership. A perpetuity rent near the fair letting value ot 
 the land would, in reality, be subject to all the variations and fluctuations of the times, 
 so far as they told against the o-wner, whilst he would be debarred from any corresponding 
 advantage when they told in his favour, as his hands would be absolutely tied for ever, 
 or during the continuance of the first term of the tenure. 
 
 This is not mere theory, it has been practically developed and proved by what has 
 lately taken place in Ireland. By the free will of the landlords on several estates a 
 practical perpetuity tenure at moderate rents has been established, and yet, to the tenants 
 holding at these moderate rents, abatements have had to be made just as in other cases. 
 If a perpetuity rent of any sort is to be established, I therefore hold that it must be at a 
 very low standard. 
 
 In the next place this system if universally, or even generally, established, woulc 
 be but the stand point for a new and most formidable agitation — this follows almos' 
 necessarily from what I have already written. If the tenure would not o-ive satisfactio! 
 to the occupiers, it certainly would not have diminished or decreased their strength. ^ 
 
STJPPLEMENTA-RY REPORT BY THE O'CONOR DON. 43 
 
 the same relationshio as to numLpr^ K->-fv'o^n ^, i • , . 
 
 in the future as the/ now axis? The swX 1^ f^ """'T''" '^'f! *' 3""''^ 
 
 n +li« cn,v,A TV./,.„ • 11 '"'' "^® struggle tor absolute ownership would continue 
 
 ^11 the same. The vanahle rent would, most certainly, have to be changed into a 
 
 ^^ perpetuity which, in its turn, would have to give way to ownership. Hav!ng gained 
 
 V «o.^^^^«^ '^* ''i,*^^^, ^,^^^ comparatively weak, can it be imagined that when strengthened 
 
 with more than halt ownership, they would desist in the efforts to get the whole or 
 
 that the whole could be kept from them ? What would be left to the landlords even if 
 
 the rents were to be variable, would be very little worth fighting for. The first assault 
 
 - would be to turn them into perpetuities and this being done, their extinction would be 
 
 but £i matter of time. 
 
 Lastly, such a system could not possibly be kept up with regard to future lettings 
 without legal restrictions and interference which would be mischievous to all parties 
 concerned, useless for the purposes for Avhich they were created, and, in the end, 
 intolerable to every one. Whether just or unjust it would be quite possible at once to 
 make all the occupiers of farms in Ireland hold by a fixed tenure, and at a rent 
 arranged by valuation, but, to extend this to future lettings, would be quite a different 
 thing. If a man has now a holding of land in his own possession, and if he be free to 
 hold it or to let it, it will be found in practice impossible to prevent his getting its full 
 market value when he lets it. Just as the landlords in the north of Ireland who 
 have tried to limit the price of the tenant-right have failed to do so, money being paid 
 outside the office in excess of that given in presence of the agent or landlord, so would 
 
 - the law fail which attempted to fix the price to be paid for the hire or use of the land. 
 Just as the usury laws failed, so would this law fail, and, instead of benefiting ^the 
 
 '- persons intended to be benefited, the result would be just the reverse. Applied to 
 
 - future lettings the establishment of these restrictions would be a step backward instead 
 of forward — instead of freeing the transfer of land from diffrculties, they would create 
 new ones, and the system could not possibly last. 
 
 Even still more objectionable would be the proposal of fixity or perpetuity of tenure 
 as apphed to new lettings, I cannot justify the principle that a man should either 
 keep land in his own possession or part with its occupation for ever. This, in practice, 
 would be found intolerable. In the words of Judge Longfield, the public would not 
 . long bear a law which prevented two men from making a bargain, just in itself, useful 
 to the public, and profitable to both parties. A. holds a farm which he wishes to let 
 for a short period ; for this purpose he is willing to let it at a lower rent than if he let it 
 for ever. B. just wants such a farm, and it suits him better than paying a higher rent 
 or a large fine for a longer tenure. Will it be tolerated that the law should step in and 
 say this cannot be permitted, and either A must continue to work his farm in person at 
 a. loss or give it up for ever, and B must do without its temporary use or pay a heavy 
 fine which he is unable to raise. The scheme of fixity of tenure and valued rents must 
 be applied only to existing tenancies. Its application to them may be necessary and 
 justifiable, but with this its existence must cease, and once it has established a large 
 number of the occupiers in secure occupation of their farms it must give place again to 
 freedom of contract. 
 
 For these reasons I have felt obliged to dissent from some of the most important recom- 
 mendations in the Eeport. They seem to me to fail in having any lasting basis to stand 
 Upon ; but mere dissent from them does not solve the problem. The difficulty we have 
 really to face is this : we want to confer on the tenants of Ireland valuable rights which 
 ' they do not now possess — rights possessing a considerable intrinsic and money value, 
 which the occupiers are not able fully or immediately to buy, and which cannot be justly 
 ■: taken from the existing owners without some option or compensation. Is it possible to 
 , reconcile these two interests without injustice ? It seems to me to be so, but not 
 ^ without the interference of the State, and the very considerable interference of the btate, 
 ¥ in the way of advancing money. I beheve that with a combined system of voluntary 
 (/^arrangement between landlord and tenant for fixity of tenure, at either perpetuity 
 r rents or variable rents and compulsory sales, the problem can be met. _ 
 
 The objections 1 have urged against the compulsory and universal ^f e^^/^* *^^^ 
 l\ principle if fixity of tenure with valuation rents do not apply with so/"^«^ ^^^^ ^^'"f^^ 
 ^m which this isl matter of arrangement between the owner ^^^^ .^^^^^^^Xf: sor anv 
 4the owner and the occupier mutuluy agree as to the terms °\^J^^!^ P^JP^^^^^^^^^ 
 f other form of tenure are to be granted, or when ^^^y/gjf.^.f/^^l ^^^^^^^ 
 ^any court, tribunal, or arbitration, I think the difficulty f ^^ttlmg a fan rent is greatly 
 
 ''i^^^^:;^^^^:zTr^rt the se^unty of th^ w to 
 
44 IRISH LAN-D ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 enable tenants to purchase perpetuities at low rents from the owners ; and I recommend 
 this not as a secondary or subsidiary proposal, but as the chief means of establishing 
 fixity of tenure at fair rents in such cases as it is desirable to establish it. Another 
 means would be to provide that where the rents are already low, if the landlord and 
 tenant agree to a long term at that rent, the landlord should be entitled to be paid 
 a certain proportion of the purchase money of the tenant's interest on the occasion of 
 its first sale. It would, I think, be manifestly unjust, taking as an example the Province 
 of Ulster, to give to tenants on estates there, where sales had not been previously allowed 
 the same rights and privileges as where they bad been allowed. The present occupier 
 on one estate may have paid 20 years' purchase for the good-will of the farm,- the 
 occupier on another nothing, or he may have been limited to three or four years' rent • 
 the landlord on one estate may have had all old arrears and bad debts paid off through 
 the tenant-right, the landlord on the other may have forgiven these debts in order to 
 have a tenant with capital coming into his farm ; and it would not be fair to treat the 
 one man in the same way as the other, and to allow both, without increase of rent, to sell 
 their farms to the highest bidder. At the same time, any immediate raising of the rent 
 on the farm where the tenant had not paid for tenant-right would be productive of 
 mischief and dissatisfaction ; and as it is desirable to have rents kept at a low standard, 
 this could be accomplished better by entitling the landlord to a portion of the purchase- 
 money on the fii'st sale of the tenant's interest. 
 
 Perpetuity of tenure at low rents, rents considerably under the full letting value, 
 may be sufficient in a number of cases to meet the wants of the country, and where the 
 landlord was willing to grant these, he should be encouraged to do so; first, by advances 
 to the tenant to enable the tenant at once to purchase it ; secondly, if the tenant did not 
 purchase at once, by entitling the landlord to receive payment for it on the occasion 
 of the first sale of the tenant's interest ; thirdly, by securing the landlord in all 
 pre-existing arrears, and by giving very quick, sharp, and decisive remedies for the 
 recovery of rent, or possession of the land where the rent was not paid. , 
 
 But this, after all, I would consider but a very small portion of the scheme that I 
 would be required. Absolute ownership is what must be looked to as the essential \ 
 element of any really effective proposal, and I do not think that in order to bring this ■ 
 about it would be necessary to have universal or even general compulsory expro- i 
 priation of landlords. If landlords were given merely the alternative of granting I 
 the perpetuities proposed in the report, or submitting their estates for sale, I believe j 
 it would be found there would be ample field for creating occupying ownership. | 
 To every tenant of an agricultural holding, with certain exceptions to which I shall J 
 refer hereafter, I would give the right to demand the fixity of tenure and fair rents 
 suggested in the Report, and if the landlord refused to grant it, I would compel him to 
 sell to the State. The State having purchased, should then if possible, sell outright 
 to the occupier and establish absolute ownership at once, or should create a tenancy 
 convertible into absolute ownership at the earliest possible date. I believe this could 
 be done without any loss to the State, without the assumption of any undue responsi- 
 bility, and without sacrificing those private rights, which without some such system, 
 will and must be sacrificed. 
 
 Except in this indirect way, I do not propose any compulsory sales. Compulsory 
 sales in certain cases have been advocated by some of those who have appeared before 
 us, but it strikes me it is not so much compulsory sales as compulsory purchasers that 
 would be required. _ No one, I presume, would say it would be just to compel any pro- 
 prietor, Avhether individual or corporation, to sell, unless he or they were secured in the 
 full value of their property. 
 
 In every proposal that has been mooted in regard to compulsory sale, it is always 
 presumed that the State, which for the good of the public, compels sale, will step 
 in and purchase on behalf of the public, and that the seller will get the full value of 
 the property. _ If this be secured to the seller I do not see any unwarrantable inter- 
 ference with his right in compelling him to sell, especially if this be accompanied with 
 the alternative of granting to his tenants that security of tenure, which looking to the 
 general good of the country seems to be required. Certainly an owner with this option 
 presented to him is not at least in a worse position than if he were compelled without 
 an option to give the tenure above referred to, and therefore, so far as the owner is 
 concerned, he would have far less reason to complain of unjust interference with his 
 rights than if he had forced on him, without any alternative, the granting of the 
 perpetuities. 
 
 _ I here is no doubt, involved in this a very much larger question than the rights or 
 interests of the owner, and that is the responsibility of the State ; and the question 
 arises, whether if all the owners of land in Ireland were willing to sell their estates 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY THE O'CONOR DON. 45 
 
 at their fair value, the State ought to become even the intermediary purchaser, and 
 buy them up with the view of selHng them to the occupiers, or making these occupiers 
 tenants on tenures that would be more conducive to the good of the pubhc at large. 
 There is also involved in this the ascertainment of what would be the real fair selling 
 value of the property ; and it may be urged it would be as difficult to ascertain the 
 fair selling value as the fair letting value, that the one hangs upon the other, and that 
 all the difficulties I have enumerated, in regard to settling the fair rent, would have 
 to be encountered in settling the fair selling value. 
 
 With regard to the first question — the responsibility of the State — I think it is to 
 be regarded in two aspects. First, Js it a just responsibility? is it one that the 
 State ought justly to undertake ? Secondly, Is it likely to be of an overwhelming 
 character ? With regard to the first point it seems to me to be a most just respon- 
 sibility. The position of affairs is this : — Under the existing law certain persons, called 
 landlords, have the ownership of the land of the country guaranteed to them. They have 
 certain rights in that land, as owners, which it is considered expedient for the public 
 good to do away Avith ; and if the deprivation of these rights depreciates the value 
 of their property, it is in accordance with all the practice of British legislation to give 
 compensation to the persons deprived of these legal rights, or to take up from them 
 their property at its pre-existing value. 
 
 If the granting of the new tenure would not depreciate the value of the landlord's 
 property, there could be no great risk involved in taking it off his hands, granting 
 the perpetuity, and then re-selling to the outside public. Until the last year or eighteen 
 months there was no lack of purchasers for Irish landed property when put up for 
 sale ; and if the new tenure gave satisfaction, and that it did not materially depre- 
 ciate the value of the owner's property, there would be no great responsibility or loss 
 involved in buying up all the property offered for sale under such circumstances. In 
 any case it seems to me that the change in the position of landlord and tenant being 
 efiected for the public good, and not for the good of the individual owner, any loss, 
 should loss arise, should be borne by the public ; and that therefore the responsibility 
 is one that might justly be accepted by the State. 
 
 It has been suggested that this responsibility would be of enormous magnitude. I 
 cannot join in this apprehension. I do not believe that all or the great majority of the 
 landlords of Ireland, sooner than grant fixity of tenure at valued rents, would rush in and 
 demand that their estates should be purchased. But if there were grounds for this appre- 
 hension, nothing could more clearly show the adverse opinion entertained by these owners 
 as to the effect which the new compulsory tenure would have on their relations with 
 their tenants. It must also be remembered that the utmost responsibility accepted by 
 the State, even in such a case, would be an obligation to grant this very same tenure 
 to the occupiers ; and if the tenure did not depreciate the value of the property there 
 surely could not be much risk in the transaction, as the State, having granted the 
 perpetuity, could at once re-sell to the highest bidder. 
 
 We have had a great number of landowners before us, and very many of them 
 have expressed themselves most decidedly hostile to anything like compulsory sales, 
 but quite satisfied to give fixity of tenure. A landloi-d committee has been formed 
 in Dublin, and has formulated a scheme for the settlement of the land question ; 
 and it is based on fixity of tenure, and compulsory sale recommended only in regard 
 to particular estates belonging to corporations. 
 
 I cannot suppose that all this is mere idle talk, and that if the owners had the 
 two options presented to them they would all prefer that which they have openly 
 denounced rather than what they have advocated. There are, moreover, a large 
 number of landlords who could not sell Avithout seriously diminishing their incomes. 
 The owners of life estates, for instance, who would have to invest the money arising 
 out of the sale in some Government securities at some low rate of interest ; and to 
 such as these granting of perpetuities, at either fixed or variable rents, would be 
 preferable. But whilst I do not think the granting of the alternative would lead to 
 universal or very general sales, I am certainly of opinion that it would bring a very 
 large quantity of land at once into the market. If I did not think so I would not 
 defend its being tried ; and it is mainly because I feel convinced that it would at once 
 enable the experiment of occupying ownership or peasant proprietary to be tried on 
 a very large scale that I recommend it. The experiment, so far as it has been tried 
 in Ireland, has, I think, been a great success. Evidence was given to us, showing that 
 the vast majority of the owners created under the Church Act and the Land Act 
 have been prospering, and are contented; and the year which we have lately passed 
 is one which must have severely tried the system. On all sides tenants, holding at S^Jo^^ "^^g^g'. 
 the most moderate rents, were receiving abatements, arrears were growing apace, and R^xddell, 5235; ' 
 
46 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Iiityre, 10774 ; 
 anison, 10922 ; 
 ughrey, 11130. 
 islett, 11823; 
 sments, 38633 ; 
 Brien, 32734 ; 
 lith, 38458 ; 
 Causland,9271; 
 mungham, 
 36; 
 
 own, 9825 ; 
 ennan, 10068 ; 
 amockj 10345, 
 354; 
 
 Drrison, 10388; 
 imlole, 10895 ; 
 tzgerald, 24296; 
 )c]ie, 34300-3 ; 
 ner, 36579; 
 ingle, 36776 ; 
 
 i'Grath, 20147 ; 
 avoren, 2 1386-9; 
 ■ISTeill, 38574-6 ; 
 Droule, 38393j 
 ilmartin, 
 )990-2. 
 
 rent-paying in many cases liad altogether ceased ; yet no abatements were made to 
 these purchasers, and the remarkable fact remains, that out of a rental, largely paid 
 by very small occupiers, only 1 per cent, of arrears appeared to be due to the Church 
 Commissioners at the end of the year 1879, and the whole of this they expected 
 to recover. In some individual cases the purchasers have failed, some have sold their 
 purchases, others are in debt, and will have to sell. This was to have been expected ; 
 but these cases are the rare exceptions, and that they should be so few after such 
 trying times, and that those few should leave tlteir holdings quietly when they found 
 themselves unable to retain them, are the strongest arguments in favour of the system. 
 
 I consider the option of sale, or offer to purchase on the part of the State, the most 
 important portion of my proposal, and by itself I think it would accomplish much of 
 what is wanted. Quite apart from the disadvantages arising out of insecurity of 
 tenure on the part of the occupiers, I believe the disadvantages of having the ownership 
 of land held by a mere handful of the population are in themselves most serious. 
 Security of tenure has long been the demand of the occupiers ; it will soon be the turn 
 of the owners to cry out for the security of their tenure, and their security will be 
 most unsafe unless it be largely participated in by the mass of the population which 
 now really governs the country. 
 
 In undertaking sucli a purchase, the State must of course be secured against having 
 to pay more than the real value of the land, and one of the first conditions ought to he 
 that the purchase-money should not be of a character to tempt the owner to part 
 with his property mainly with the view of getting a fancy price for it. In arriving at 
 the value of an estate offered for sale it would not be fair to proceed altogether on the 
 basis of the existing rental, and, therefore, it would be necessary in some cases to 
 have a valuation of the land irrespective of that rental, and here we may have to 
 meet with the same difficulty as would arise in valuing for a fair rent. The difficulty 
 is undoubtedly of the same nature, but not at all to the same extent. The valuation 
 of a rent for the purpose of purchase will be found much more easy than a calculation 
 of rent for the purpose of an annual payment. One of the greatest difficulties in 
 arriving at a fair rent as between landlord and tenant, on a uniform scale all over 
 Ireland, will be that such uniform scale would necessarily result in many raisings of 
 rents. This difficulty certainly will not exist to the same extent, and it may not exist 
 at all in regard to lands purchased by the State, and that because the State can afford 
 to take much lower rents than anyone else, and to do this without any loss. The 
 difference in the rate of interest at which the State can raise loans and that required 
 by any private individual being the explanation. 
 
 This may be illustrated by an example : Let us take the cases of two holdings on 
 different estates of really the same value — the one let at £90 -a year, the other at 
 £110 — the true letting or fair rent of each let us suppose to be £100 a year. If 
 perpetuity of tenure at fair rents were to be established, the one tenant's rent would 
 have to be raised £10 a year, whilst the other would be lowered £l0, and even if this 
 gave satisfaction to the one man the other would be certain to be dissatisfied ; but if 
 instead of this the State were to purchase the two holdings at 22|^ years' purchase of 
 the fair rent, and to charge interest say at four per cent., there would not be the same 
 dissatisfaction. Each holding would cost £2,2.50, and four per cent, on this would 
 equal £90, so that the one tenant would have his holding for the future at the 
 same low rent as before, and the other would have a very considerable reduction 
 —from £110 to £90. 
 
 I believe that in order to become the actual owner of his holding, the occupier would 
 be willing to pay a larger sum than for a perpetuity lease, and that there would be less 
 dissatisfaction at the rents being fixed at their fair value in such cases, than where the 
 occupiers were still to continue as tenants. Again, there is something in the very 
 certainty of the amount which has to be paid or received which renders it much more 
 easy to determine than if it is a recurring payment in the future. A lump sum paid 
 down at once as the price of a commodity is much more easily arrived at by arbitra- 
 tion or valuation than a periodical payment for the use of that commodity. Averages 
 also could be taken more easily into account in the one case than in the other. The 
 selling value of land should be ascertained by taking into account its average value 
 over a certain number of years. It would not be fair either to the seller or the pur- 
 chaser to calculate on an exceptionally high year or an exceptionally low one. The 
 same principle ought to apply in calculating the rent at which the land ought to let; 
 but it wouldbe far more difficult to apply it. In estimating the present rent to be paid 
 it would be impossible to give satisfaction by arranging it on the basis of an average of 
 years, as such rent, at the present time, would appear too high, and, on the other 
 hand, it would be unjust to fix it at the low standard of an exceptional period. If it be 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT EY THE O'CONOR DON 47 
 
 granted that the land question in Ireland cannot be settled except on the basis of low 
 rents or low annual payments, payments under the real letting value ; and if this basis 
 cannot be taken without loss to the owners, I think the interference of the State is 
 absolutely necessary. It does not appear to me that the credit of the State would be 
 injured even if a considerable sum of money should be lost in these transactions. 
 Millions of money have been scattered broadcast in upholding the dignity of England 
 in Abyssinia, in trying to teach the Turk a lesson of good government in Cyprus, and 
 in attaining a scientific frontier in India, and yet the credit of Great Britain has not 
 been impaired, and I am bold enough to believe that even if some millions were 
 lost in pacifying Ireland the money would not be thrown away, nor the credit of the 
 Empire lessened. 
 
 What I therefore suggest is, that a commission should be appointed, with ample 
 funds guaranteed by the State, to purchase up, at a fair selling value, all the 
 estates offered for sale by the existing owners ; that, having purchased these lands, 
 they should be resold to the occupiers wherever tlie occupiers could pay down in cash 
 one-fifth of the purchase-money, four-fifths being advanced at annual payments, such 
 as would extinguish the principal and interest in a given number of years, which I 
 wovild suggest to be thirty-five. 
 
 Where the occupiers are not able to provide one-fifth of the purchase-money, they 
 should either have perpetuity grants made to them of the lands at a fair rent, and 
 these perpetuities should be sold to the public, or the perpetuity grants should be 
 made to them at an annual payment which would repay four-fifths of the purchase- 
 money, interest and principal, in thirty -five years ; that this should be paid to the Com- 
 mission simply as interest or rent, until such time as the first sale of the tenants' interest 
 took place, when, out of the purchase-money, realized by such sale, the original one-fifth 
 should be paid to the Commission, and that from that date the re-payment of 
 principal should commence. I propose this mode of repayment because I believe 
 that although many occupiers could not now, or at once, advance any portion 
 of the purchase-money; yet, on the first sale of their interest in the land, ample 
 funds would be forthcoming. In proof of this I refer to the enormous sums now 
 paid for the tenants' interest in Ulster. Under this proposal, taking the example I 
 have already given, if a holding worth £100 a year were purchased for £2,250, and 
 the tenant was not able to pay one-fifth of the purchase-money, or £450, his annual 
 payment should be fixed at five per cent, on £1,800, or £90, which should be regarded 
 simply as interest or rent, until such time as the £450 was paid to the Commission, 
 after which time the re-payment of principal should commence, the payment of the 
 £450, if not previously made, being obligatory on the first sale of the occupier's 
 interest. 
 
 The probable immediate results I' would anticipate for this scheme are the follow- 
 ing : — First, that a very large quantity of land would be at once brought into the 
 market, and rendered available for peasant proprietary. Secondly, that the land so 
 brought into the market would to a great extent be the property which it_ would be 
 most desirable to take from its present owners. Thirdly, that these operations would 
 not be confined to any particular district or portion of Ireland, but would be general, 
 and make its influence felt everywhere. And lastly, that the absolute ownership thus 
 conferred on such a large number of proprietors would have such a general 
 wholesome effect, that even the relations between the occupiers and owners where 
 sales did not take place would be greatly benefited. That a large quantity of land 
 would, at once come into the market for sale, and that on very reasonable terms, 
 cannot, I think, be doubted. But if, by any chance, this turned out not to be the case, 
 I would be quite prepared to go further and compel sales. Where a property was 
 incumbered to a certain proportion of its absolute value, I would compel its sale, 
 and then the requisite amount of land for peasant proprietary could be easily got, but 
 before having resort to this compulsion, the offer of general purchase should be 
 first tried, and I cannot doubt it would be found quite sufficient. 
 
 In the next place the estates that would be offered for sale would be just those 
 which it would be most desirable to have sold. Most probably if the alternative 
 of granticg perpetuities at fixed or variable rents to the tenants, or of selling to 
 the State were offered to all proprietors, the old established residential owners, 
 between whom and theirtenants,feelingsof good-will had always existed, and who had 
 always asked for only low rents and permitted practically fixity of tenure to exist, would 
 'come to an arrangement voluntarily, with their tenants, and would grant legally what 
 they had previously been in the habit of allowing. Neither landlords nor tenants in 
 such cases would like to part company. Some general rights of ownership, such as 
 rio-hts of shooting, rights over bogs, quarries and minerals could be reserved to the 
 
48 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 owner, which would give him an incentive to retain his land even on the altered con 
 ditions. Lowness of rent and fixity of tenure being secured to the tenant, he, too, 
 would be satisfied to remain in his present position. . 
 
 The case would be different with the new purchasers ; the men known as the rack- 
 renters. Those who had no interest in the possession of the land, beyond that of getting 
 the most they could out of it. They would be almost certain to sell even if they had 
 to sell at a loss compared with the prices which they themselves had paid. The first 
 loss to them would be better than a perpetual loss in getting only a Ioav rate of interest 
 for their money, and having all the expense and perplexities of collecting an unwillingly 
 paid rent. Again, where estates were heavily incumbered, most probably an amount 
 sufficient to pay off the incumbrances would be sold, and one of the gi-eatest disadvan- 
 tages of the present system where land is nominally owned by one man, and is in 
 reality the property of another would be done away with. Outlying townlands, distant 
 from the residence of the owner, and the estates of absentee proprietors who took no 
 interest in their property, would probably be amongst the first to be sold. 
 
 This would also take place all over Ireland; it would not be confined to any par- 
 ticular district or county, and everywhere throughout the length and breadth of the 
 land, occupying owners would be established, influenced by every feeling that actuates 
 the human breast to maintain and to uphold the rights of property, a state of things 
 which could not but affect even the relations between landlord and tenant where these 
 relations still continued. 
 
 Of course in opposition to this the financial difficulties of carrying it out have to be 
 considered. For the State all at once to become as it were the landlord of the 
 majority of the tenants in Ireland would be a most serious responsibility, and if the 
 occupiers were to refuse to pay the Government a very serious state of affairs might 
 arise. 
 
 This is really not to be apprehended and it could be met effectually, if apprehended, 
 by placing a limit on the price beyond which the State would not go in purchasing pro- 
 perty. Assuming, however, as we are bound to assume, that a very large amount of 
 property would be sold, where is the money to come from, and how is the repayment of 
 interest and principal to be secured ? 1 believe a great deal of the money could be found 
 in Ireland itself A large amount of money is now lodged on deposit at very low 
 interest at the banks, and if land debentures were created, guaranteed by the Govern- 
 ment, and bearing interest say at three and a half per cent. , and issued for very small 
 sums, I believe they would be largely taken up through the country. 
 
 In order to secure this it might also be provided that the landowners selling their 
 property should take a considerable portion of the purchase-money in these debentures. 
 What is wanted is not so much a large amount of money as the guai'antee of the State, 
 and if this were once given there would be little difficulty in finding capital. 
 
 The next question which arises is, Whether this could be safely given? If it were 
 necessary that the Government should directly stand in the position of landlord to a vast 
 number of occupiers, I think the objection would be a serious one, but here again I think 
 local machinery might be introduced. The example of other countries might be imi- 
 DufFerin 33168 ^^^ed in this respect. In the evidence given to us by Lord Dufferin, the course pursued 
 by Russia under somewhat similar circumstances was quoted to us, and by making 
 some such local unit as the poor law union responsible for the payment of the annual 
 instalment, I think this difficulty could be got rid of 
 
 The course which should have to be provided would be to transfer to the union autho- 
 rities the duties of collecting the annual payment from the occupiers, and in default of 
 payment by any individual occupier, to make the rateable property within the poor law 
 union responsible, giving of course to the authorities the most summary powers of seizing 
 and selling the interest of any defaulter. 
 
 _ The result of this proceeding would be, to make every occupier of land within the 
 district, and every man who had paid his own instalment, interested in having the pay- 
 ments punctually made ; and, instead of public sympathy running in favour of the 
 defaulter, it would run in exactly the opposite direction. Moreover, every man who had 
 invested his capital in any of the debentures, would also have a stake in the country, 
 and become little desirous to see any revolutionary changes. 
 
 ^ When once these perpetuity holders or occupying owners are established, other 
 difficulties will still liave to be met. Every one interested in the well-being of Ireland, 
 must desire that some check should be placed on subdivision or subletting. Excessive 
 subdivision of land has been in many instances one of the greatest curses of the country ; 
 yet it will be extremely difficult to prevent it unless the habits of the people change, 
 and that greater intelligence and foresight is produced by the new position in which 
 they will find themselves. Subletting might possibly be prevented during the time 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY THE O'CONOR DON, 49 
 
 that 9-ny instalment of purchase money was due to the State, and both it and subdivi- 
 sion should be strictly prohibited. 
 
 Theoretically, I am opposed to any unnecessary interference with the rights of the 
 new others, m disposing of their property, and practically I fear it will be next to 
 impossible toprevent subdivision so long as the people themselves look to it as a means 
 of providing for their famihes, and to a change in their habits and views we must look, 
 in the long run, for a remedy. ' 
 
 One of the curious anomalies of the present state of affairs is, that whilst the Land 
 Act places penalties upon subdivision and subletting, the common law of the country 
 seems to encourage subdivision. The Laud Act makes subdivision penal, and yet it has 
 created a property, which, by the common law of the country, is divisible, in case of 
 intestacy amongst all the children of a deceased tenant. When a tenant dies intestate, 
 if the land be not divided amongst all the family, it must be sold and the profits of the 
 sale divided amongst them, so that either division of the land, which is subject to 
 penalties, or sale of the holding, to which the tenant has no right, should legally be 
 resorted to in many cases. The difficulties arising out of this have been adverted to by 
 many witnesses, and these difficulties will exist with regard both to perpetuities and 
 ownerships, unless by law one person is made to inherit the whole. 
 
 This_ brings prominently forward a fact which is well worth noting, and that is — 
 that with a perpetuity tenure and free sale, and a prohibition against subdivision, the 
 land of the country, unless the law of primogeniture prevents it, will in a very short 
 time be held at its full market competitive value. Landlordism, with its full rights, is the 
 only system under which, in the long run, land, Avithout subdivision, can be held by the 
 occupiers at a less rate than its full competitive value. With free sale replacing the 
 landlord's control, on the death of every occupier, where no will is' made, either the 
 holding must be subdivided, or it must be put for sale, or one of the family may get it, 
 paying to the other members of the family its full market value. 
 
 As a check against sub-division it has been proposed that power should be left to 
 the landlord to prevent it, either by ejectitfg the tenant or compelling a sale. It is 
 worthy of notice, I think, that this very provision may have the opposite effect to that 
 which is intended. It is intended as a check against sub-division, yet it gives to the 
 landlord what may turn out to be an induce^nent to permit it. To him is still left the 
 privilege of prohibiting sub-division on the part of the tenant, but this is a privilege 
 which of course could be waived, in consideration of a money payment, and it may turn 
 out that it will be the only, real means left to a landlord of getting an increased pay- 
 ment for his land under a perpetuity at either variable or fixed rent. There can be 
 little doubt that in many cases the tenant, anxious to sub-divide, would be willing 
 to make a payment for it ; and, under the nominal prohibition, there is, therefore, so far 
 as a landlord is concerned, a sort of premium on sub-division. 
 
 ■ Sub-division or sub-letting, where the State either directly or indirectly stands in the 
 position of the landlords, will, I admit, be very difBcult to prevent. It would probably 
 be most effectively prevented by giving a legal right to the sub-tenant or persons 
 with whom the land is divided, to claim the whole holding, but whether such a severe 
 remedy as this would be thought just or expedient I do not undertake to determine. 
 
 If any of the proposals which I have recommended be adopted, it is scarcely 
 necessary to add that very enlarged powers of sale must be given to limited owners, 
 that the interests of remaindermen and mortgagees, will have to be carefully looked 
 after, and that all the proposed proceedings will have to be carried out through 
 a Court specially provided for the purpose. Even the establishment of these occupying 
 owners will not be nearly sufficient if the laws relating to the charging and transfer of 
 land remain as complicated and expensive as they are, and no reform of the Land Ques- 
 tion in Ireland can be complete without a very great simplification of the law relating 
 to land transfer. This in itself is such a large question, and it has occupied the attention 
 of so many special commissions, that it would be impossible to deal with it properly here, 
 although it is by no means one of the least important questions which have to be dealt 
 
 with. 
 
 To recapitulate, then. The scheme which seems to me most likely to meet the present 
 wants of the country is one, first, securing occupying owners on a large scale through- 
 out every part of the country ; secondly, securing a certain class of tenants fixity of 
 tenure at low rents, with the right of free sale ; thirdlj^ simplifying as far as pos- 
 sible the dealings in connexion with the transfer of land. _ 
 
 It remains now to be considered what class of occupiers in Ireland should be 
 entitled to claim these rights. I do not think they, should be granted at once to every 
 accidental occupier of the land. I cannot recognise any claim founded on justice or 
 even expediency coming from a man who hired the use of land a few years ago 
 
 H 
 
52 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 In the conclusion of the Eeport 1 most cordially join, and although I may differ in 
 some points as to what the Irish occupier most wants, no one is more desirous than 
 I am that he should receive everything to which he is justly entitled, and no one is more 
 decidedly of the opinion expressed in the Report, that unless the expected new Land Bill 
 is a full and exhaustive one, going to the root of the whole matter, and settling it perma- 
 nently, it would be better not to interfere with it at all. 
 
 O'CONOR DON. 
 
 10th January, 1881. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY W. SHAW, ESQ., M.P. 
 
 Owing to the early meeting of, and the important business that engages the attention 
 of Parliament, I have not been able to attend the recent meetings of the Commissioners, 
 to discuss the clauses of the report in detail. I think it necessary, therefore, to reprint 
 the first suggestions I made as a basis for a report, with explanation. Had I been able 
 to attend, I would have moved the omission of some clauses in the report, and the 
 alteration of others ; viz. : — clauses 31 and 32 ; the clauses dealing with the question 
 of rent, clauses 48 to 56, inclusive; and several minor statements, arguments, and 
 implications, scattered through it. But agreeing, as I do, with the main recommenda- 
 tion of the report, that is, the legalizing of the three F's, and a large scheme for estab- 
 lishing tenant proprietors, I sign the report. 
 
 I propose : 
 
 A. Land Tenure. 
 
 1. That no tenant of an agricultural holding in Ireland shall be disturbed in his 
 holding by his landlord so long as he fulfils the conditions of h's tenancy, viz., pays 
 the rent, does not waste or dilapidate, does not unreasonably divide or sublet. 
 
 [This should extend to the whole of Ireland, and to all classes of agricultural holdings. 
 I am opposed to the exceptions in the report and in the Land Act. Such exceptions 
 are sure to work injustice, as with townparks in Ulster, which, before the Land Act, 
 were subject to tenant-right. So with grass farms; in many cases they have been 
 brought to their present state of fertility by the outlay of the tenant. The Land 
 Commissioners (to be constituted under the Act now to be proposed), should have 
 power to decide on any particular case or class of cases, such as natural grass lands and 
 temporary lettings, whether or not they should be excepted. The Commissioners 
 should also decide in cases where the landlord sought to resume possession. He 
 should state distinctly the grounds, but in no case should it be allowed for the 
 purpose of re-letting for agricultural purposes. In case the Commissioners decide 
 in favour of resumption, they should av/ard the tenant full compensation for his loss.] 
 
 2. That when a dispute arises between the landlord and the tenant of an agricultural 
 holding as to rent, in case it is not settled by agreement or arbitration, the question 
 shall be referred to the Land Commissioners who shall have at their disposal a staff 
 of competent and experienced assistants. 
 
 3. That, in ascertaining what is a fair rent, they shall take into consideration the 
 natural qualities of the land, the average prices for the last seven years of the articles 
 principally produced on the farm, the cost of production, and any other circumstance 
 ihat may affect its rent-paying power ; also any outlay made by the landlord within 
 ten years calculated to increase the productive power of the holding, and for which 
 he has not been recouped in rent or otherwise, but shall not take into considera- 
 tion any improvement made by the tenant in or on the farm ; and that, as periodical 
 valuations impede improvements, the Commissioners shall fairly value all just rights of 
 the landlord, and fix a fair perpetual rent on the holding. 
 
 [It is clear from the evidence that the question of rent is the great grievance and 
 difficulty with the tenant farmer, and there is a remarkable concurrence of opinion in 
 favour of having some outside tribunal to arbitrate on the subject between landlord and 
 tenant, when a difference arises. It is evident that Griffith's valuation could not be 
 taken as a fair measure of rent all over Ireland without great injustice, both to 
 landlord and tenant. Neither is it possible, if it were desirable, to make a new general 
 valuation available for rent purposes. After giving the subject the most mature 
 consideration, I am compelled to differ from the recommendation in the report, and, 
 instead of periodical valuation, would fix the rent at once and perpetually. Periodical 
 revision will leave the question still unsettled. We shall have periodical excitement; 
 we should have tenants allowing the farm to run down at the end of the term ; we 
 should have improvements discouraged, and a strong feeling in the minds of the people, 
 ignorant and suspicious, that in their revaluations the landlords would manage to mani- 
 pulate matters in their own fiivour. There would be, moreover, a great and increasins: 
 difficulty for any valuators to disentangle and separate the separate interests and 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT BY W. SHAW, ESQ., M.P. 53 
 
 elements of value. By fixing the rent you give the strongest motive possible to 
 miprovement. All doubt and uncertainty are taken away from both landlord and 
 tenant. The one has a fixed income and fixed security, much preferable from any 
 point of view, to a variable one; and the other can throw all his energy and capital into 
 his farm, with the feeling of absolute security. It is objected that in fixing the rent thus 
 you must value the landlord's prospective rights to an increase, and that this will lead 
 to an advance on the present rent— this is not my opinion. Are rents likely to continue 
 high, or to increase, as long as free trade legislation is not reversed, and in- face of the 
 immense and increasing imports from America? The sooner landlords realize the 
 facts and necessities of their position, the better. 
 
 If, as I propose, the tenant is enabled to fine down the rent by money advanced to him 
 at a low rate of interest, the landlord will be relieved, and the tenant's annual payments 
 "will be lessened. 
 
 Again, it is objected, you reduce the landlord to the position of a rentcharger by 
 fixing his income ; you remove all motive to exertion in the improvement of his estate. 
 There are exceptions, but as a class landlords have in the past contributed but little 
 to the improvement of the country. The land of Ulster has been won, by the indomitable 
 energy and industry of its people, from the mountain and the bog ; and the rental of 
 Ulster has enormously increased within the century. So with the rest of Ireland. 
 But the outlay of the landlords, even on their own showing, has been small. They 
 have taken their share of, but have contributed little to national prosperity. In 
 fact they have not been and are not able to do much ; they are largely encumbered. 
 You are not cutting off a class of improving capitalists from interest in their property ; 
 and they still have a strong motive of self-interest, to induce them to assist in general 
 and local improvement. They have a fixed preference share, and can make it, instead 
 of a doubtful, a first class security. Looked at, then, from the point of view of the 
 landlord, the tenant, and the general interests of society, I have no hesitation in 
 strongly advocating the settlement of the rent at once and for ever. 
 
 It may seem unjust to force the fixing of rent on landlords and tenants against their 
 will ; and of course, if they agree to remain under the system of periodical valuation, 
 they should be allowed to do so. But, in the general interests of society, the State 
 should encourage the fixing of rents ; and where the perpetuity rent had been fixed by 
 agreement, by arbitration, or by the Commission, money should be advanced, on very 
 easy terms, to bring the rent to a moderate figure, making it, in fact, a head-rent ; the 
 landlord still retaining his ownership in fee, and his connexion with the property.] 
 
 4, That any leaseholder of an agricultural holding, the lease of which has been 
 made since the passing of the Land Act, may claim a reduction of the rent reserved 
 in his lease, and shall lay before the Commissioners the grounds on which he claims 
 the reduction, and if they consider the grounds as stated sufficient to justify an inquiry, 
 they shall give notice to the landlord, who may lodge a counterclaim, and the Com- 
 missioners, after inquiry, may, if they think fit, vary the rent reserved. 
 
 All agricultural holdings now held under lease should, on termination of the lease, 
 come under the Act. 
 
 All clauses and conditions in leases and agreements inconsistent with the Act 
 should have no effect. 
 
 5. That all agricultural tenants shall have the right of selling their holdings to the best 
 advantage, the landlord to have the right of reasonable objection to the incoming tenant. 
 
 B. Land Purchase. 
 
 1. That to carry out the provisions of this Act a Land Commission shall be con- 
 stituted, consisting of , with a staff of Assistant Commissioners, and all 
 questions and disputes arising between landlord and tenant shall be referred to them 
 for settlement. 
 
 2. That as it is desirable to give greater facilities to enable tenants to become owners 
 of land, a sum of I. shall be placed at the disposal of the Commissioners, with 
 power to issue debentures for any further sum that may be required. 
 
 [The Report does not give any distinct recommendation as to the machinery by 
 which the Act is to be worked. I think the evidence proves clearly that the non-success 
 of the Act of 1870 arose very much from the unfitness of the County Courts and the 
 Board of Works to perform the duties assigned them. The Judges of the County Courts 
 had, with few exceptions, no knowledge of the questions affecting land. Their decisions 
 varied. The expenses were heavy, especially on small holdings, and the results uncer- 
 tain ; and no machinery more unsuitable could be named than the Board of Works to 
 carry out the purchase clauses. I fully beheve that the success of any new_ legislation 
 will depend in a great measure on the establishment of a high-class commission with 
 ample power, who shall have the settlement of all questions and disputes relating to land 
 
50 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. J. Hegarty, 
 30746 ; Mr. B. L. 
 Fell, 30208 ; Mr. 
 Vernon, 35330, 
 
 Professor 
 Baldwin, 32411- 
 21 ; J. Hegarty, 
 30695-99 
 
 rents in unscrupulous hands ; and^ although I admit that in adopting the suggestion 
 of a system ot arbitration for the settlement of disputes as to rents and other matters 
 of valuation, I am endorsing an interference ' with rights of property and freedom of 
 contract, open to grave economical objections, and which to the great majority of land- 
 owners who have not abused their powers, will, I have no doubt, appear unwarrantable 
 yet, having regard to the mischief which the unjust exercise of the power has 
 occasioned, I can come to no other conclusion than that, in any proposed alteration of 
 present rents, whether at the instance of landlord or tenant, when the two parties 
 cannot agree, the question should be left to arbitration, with final reference, in the event 
 of the arbitrators being unable to agree upon an umpire, to a Land Court, or Commis- 
 sion, which should be appointed for that and other purposes. It will, I think, be 
 apparent that, if the Government see fit to interfere in the question of rents, they are 
 bound to substitute for the landlord's power which they displace an impartial tribunal 
 which will command the confidence of the public and that they are further bound, as 
 essential to the fair settlement of the rent question, to have a new general valuation 
 of the country. If anything has been clearly established on evidence during this 
 inquiry, the fact that the present Government valuation is not a dependable standard' for 
 the settlement of rents, has been most thoroughly demonstrated. Fair as it may have 
 been for the purposes of taxation in the years when it was made, the evidence shows 
 that even then it was considered as below the fair letting value of the land ; and this 
 fact is corroborated by the written testimony of the late Sir Richard Griffith, who Was 
 head of the Commission, as well as by the evidence of many other trustworthy and 
 independent witnesses. 
 
 I must add that I am opposed to the attempt to draw out any rules for the guidance 
 of arbitrators in their task of determining what a fair rent may be, further than the 
 general instructions which are in justice too apparent to require mention, that the 
 improvements effected by the tenants should be fully credited to them, as well as that 
 any expenditure made by the landlord for a like purpose should be put to his account. 
 
 The evidence has, as might be expected, proved that the great desire of the tenant 
 farmers is for fixity of tenure and free sale. It is urged in favour of these that the first 
 exists in practice on all the large well-managed estates, and that the second is onlya 
 logical sequence of it, that in fact the Land Act in clause 3 gives an interest, and that 
 a vendable interest, and that therefore no very great practical change in the circum- 
 stances now existing on the largest portion of the lands in Ireland would be the result 
 of the concession. It is further urged, on the grounds of the importance of giving to 
 the tenants full security in the enjoyment of, and compensation for, the improvements 
 they have made, and this argument is, in my mind, the only one of real weight in this 
 matter, backed up as it is by instances of hardship, and oppressive action on the part of 
 some of the small proprietors, to whom I have already alluded. In the shibboleth of 
 agitation, "Fixity of Tenure" and "Free Sale" are coupled together as if they were 
 one term, but I cannot regard them in that light. The Land Act, while giving com- 
 pensation for disturbance which some call an interest, leaves the sale of that interest 
 subject to the landlord's power of eviction, and it is idle to assert, that because a land- 
 lord from_ right feeling gives to his tenants the right of continuous occupation, so long 
 as they discharge their obligations towards him, he thereby conveys to them the right 
 to sell their holdings. To give fixity of tenure by law, although a very considerable 
 and arbitrary interference with landlords' rights, would not it is true involve any great 
 practical change as regards the majority of large landowners (provided it was given to 
 the tenant under certain approved conditions) in their present relations with their 
 tenants ; but to extend at once to all parts of the country the right of free sale would 
 be in those districts not now subject to clauses 1 and 2 of the Land Act, a very im- 
 portant change, and a very material and practical interference with the rights of 
 property, and, therefore, it appears to me simpler to try to deal with two questions 
 separately. 
 
 First as to fixity of tenure — It is contended, that the Land Act in clause 3, admits 
 the principle in the case of certain holdings by giving the occupiers a claim for dis- 
 turbance if turned out by the act of the landlord for any other cause than non-payment 
 of rent, the fact is clear that it does so within a certain limit of duration. But it 
 does not give interminable fixity of tenure, and the proof of this is to be found in the 
 Act itself. A lease of thirty years is made the equi-s^alent of a disturbance claim, and 
 the landlord by giving that can free himself at its expiration from the penalty on the 
 recovery of the possession of his own land. It is therefore I think clear, that any Act 
 of the Legislature giving to the tenant perpetual fixity of tenure would be foreign to 
 the principle of the _ Act of 1870; those who advocate its extension as an existing 
 prmciple would be in my opinion much more logically correct in adducing as their 
 
SEPARATE REPORT BY A. McM. KAVANAGH, ESQ. 57 
 
 example, or warrant for this argument, the numerous cases on the old estates where 
 the tenants are never turned out so long as they pay their rents, but whether it is right 
 or just to depriye good landlords of a right which from good feeling they seldom if ever 
 exercise, because some bad ones abuse it, is a question I must leave Parliament to 
 answer. However that may be, the change would not be one, as I have shown, which 
 would practically interfere with rights often used— this has been in fact admitted by 
 the majority of large landowners, who have given evidence before us, and the advisa- 
 bility of the general extension of the principle has been endorsed by not a few of 
 them, as also by many agents of great experience on behalf of others, as well as by 
 County Court Judges and other independent witnesses ; in short there ha;s been much 
 less disagreement on this point than I was at all prepared for, and if I was only 
 acting for myself, and if my own interests were alone at stake, I should have no 
 hesitation in agreeing to their recommendations. But on the other hand we have a 
 number of the largest landowners whose estates have been always managed on the very 
 best principles, whose opinions are fairly represented by the evidence of Lords 
 Lansdowne and Dufferin, who while never arbitrarily exercising their power entertain 
 the strongest objection to legislative interference with it. In this view they are 
 supported by the evidence of Mr. Ferguson, q.c. County Court Judge, who while 
 wishing to extend the principle considers it would be destructive of ownership and 
 difficult to compensate the landlords ^for it, and although my own opinion is what I 
 have stated, I can not disregard the unmistakable weight and truth of such evidence, 
 and what I believe to be the fact, that had it been possible to receive further evidence 
 on the subject many landlords would have come forward to endorse it — the circumstance 
 that they had not that opportunity I regret the more, as I may naturally enough 
 perhaps be held responsible for it. 
 
 Under all these circumstances, I am not prepared to recommend the general extension 
 of fixity of tenure. My opinion on the most material point remains unchanged — that the 
 Land Act, as it now stands, does not give sufficient security to the tenant, and that it is 
 both just and expedient that this security should be increased. But it seems to me 
 that there is another mode of attaining the same end and of giving practical security of 
 .tenure to the tenant, without such a direct and sweeping interference with the rights 
 of property as the first would involve ; and that mode is to stand by the principles laid 
 down in the Act of 1870. By some of the County Court Judges it was recommended 
 to increase the penalties on eviction in clause 3, and by others to abolish all limit, 
 leaving the amount of the penalty to be inflicted altogether to the discretion of the 
 court, and where they deemed the justice of the case required it, to refuse to give a 
 decree for possession. This, it was asserted, would have the efiect of giving practical 
 security of tenure to all tenancies coming within the provisions of that clause. Some 
 substantial extension of this power I am quite prepared to recommend, so far as 34393 ^^'' 
 residential occupiers are concerned, believing that, without conveying to the tenants 
 a direct share in the property of the landlords, which, granting "fixity of tenure," 
 undoubtedly would do, it would confer upon them that practical security to which the 
 majority, from the peculiar circumstances of their positions, are fairly entitled to. But 
 I am bound to add that, although I recommend its application only to existing residential 
 tenancies and not to bona Jide new lettings, there is no concealing the fact that the 
 recommendation, if successful, will practically deprive the landlord class of the, rights of 
 both reversion in and control over the majority of holdings on many properties. For 
 the arbitrary interference with which by the State it is only just that they should receive 
 fair compensation. 
 
 As to the extension of free sale, although the majority of the evidence of tenant- 
 farmers has been in favour of it, there has not been the same unanimity of opinion on 
 this as on the former point. Some— few, I allow — looking farther than the present, 
 have objected to the tax which the universal extension of free sale would impose upon 
 those anxious to obtain land in the future, and in this view they have been supported 
 by the evidence of both the landlords and a,gents who have had the most experience 
 in the working of the different phases of the Ulster custom ; so that even in the North, 
 where the custom of sale exists already, the wisdom of removing such limitations as are 
 now in force is not unquestioned ; and when we come to the proposal to make the 
 extension universal — to create it de novo in districts where no trace of it has ever existed 
 — ^the difficulty, if justice or fair play is to be considered, is most materially increased. Mr. J. La Toucl 
 It is further shown by those whose views are not solely limited to the benefit of the 930-945 ; Mr. , 
 present occupiers, but who consider the prospects of the future, that such a general ^^^^'^1^> 
 extension would not only limit the future possession of land to those who have capital, 6525-7- R^( 
 and thereby preclude a very considerable portion of the population, whose only capital Quinn^ 5737. ' 
 is their labour, from the possible chance of its acquisition, but would saddle all future 
 
58 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. R. L. Fell, tenancies with a rack-rent — no matter how liberal or indulgent the landlord might be, 
 30315 ; Professor as the rent reserved to ?him would only be a portion — and it might be only a small 
 Baldwin, 32422- portion— of the true annual charge to which the holding would be subject, as the 
 Mr J La Touche interest on the sum paid for its acquisition, although a voluntary imposition on the 
 946. ' tenant's part, must necessarily be added. I am bound, therefore, to say that, having 
 
 regard to the future, I fail to see that its general extension must necessarily convey the 
 unmixed blessing to the commonwealth which some anticipate. That the general 
 evidence of the tenant-farmers is in favour of it is only natural, as they are in the status 
 of present occupiers, whose position would necessarily be much improved, and cannot 
 therefore cause surprise. Evidence was given by one or two labourers and by some 
 other witnesses on their behalf^ and the tenor of it was, if I remember right, opposed 
 to the farmers' claims, with whom they seemed to have no great common interest; 
 but to pursue this subject now would be to go into the great question of the over- 
 populated and poverty-stricken districts, which I must reserve for another part. 
 
 On the other hand, the evidence in favour of its extension has been based upon the 
 assertion, which is I believe a fact, that on the majority of holdings, the improvements, 
 if such they can be called, if not altogether have been chiefly made by the tenants, and 
 that without the right of sale, in the event of their leaving they would not adequately 
 be compensated for them. 
 
 It was further urged in favour of its extension,* that the custom already exists on 
 many estates outside of Ulster, those of Lord Devon, Lord Portsmouth, and Lord 
 Portarlington, were specially named, and on them it was proved, that it worked 
 admirably, stimulating improvements, producing contentment, and rendering eject- 
 ments almost unnecessary for the recovery of rent — some landlords and not a few 
 agents believing that these results would be the natural consequences of its further 
 development advocated it, and in this they were supported by the evidence of 
 many of the County Court Judgest — other landlords I'egarding it chiefly from the 
 point of view of affording to them increased security for their rent, and as a possible 
 temporary sop to agitation were inclined to acquiesce, yielding more perhaps to the 
 present pressure than to what they deemed the justice of the case; but with very rare 
 exceptions all classes of witnessesj agreed that where no payment had been made, 
 either by the occupying tenant or his predecessors, for the acquisition of the good-will 
 or improvements, the landlord should receive adequate compensation for the transference 
 of the right, and it was as generally admitted that the landlord should have a right of 
 veto to protect himself against the intrusion of objectionable characters upon his estate. 
 Except by some few graziers themselves, the extension was not advocated to those 
 kinds of holdings, as regards them it was asserted that a man's capital was all required 
 to stock his farm, and that it was not desirable that it should be absorbed in the pur- 
 /*Ir. S.jJ. Allen, cliase of the good-will, and as to improvements on them it was asserted that in the 
 1355; J.E. Vernon, real permanent sense of the term, there could be and were none, and it was further 
 '^■' stated that even if the right was extended to those, or indeed to any very large 
 
 class of farms, the price they would fetch would be small, as the competition was 
 limited. 
 
 I have now, as shortly, as fairly, and as clearly as I can, given the pros and cons 
 which were adduced by either side on this great question, for I regard it as about the 
 gravest and most difficult that was submitted to us ; for my own part I must ^say that 
 I entertain no disinclination whatever to extend this right to the majority of holdings 
 on my own property, although 1 have spent very large sums myself in the improve- 
 ment of them, and I must confess that strongly as 1 was opposed to its general extension 
 before I entered upon this inquiry, the evidence I have heard, and done my best to 
 sift, has convinced me that doing so would confer more advantages on the present 
 occupiers than disadvantages on me. I can say, moreover, that I would be glad to 
 see its appHcation made general, if it could be justly done, behoving that it is the 
 simplest and most efficacious way of giving that perfect security to the tenants which 
 I do think, where the improvements are all or mainly their own, they ought to have, 
 and giving that would, I am of opinion, be such general advantage to the country, that 
 
 * Mr. J. Sweetman, 1160 ; Mr. R. Reeves, 1903-9 ; Mr. A. Kirkpatriok, 3793, 3356-7, 364-7 
 t E. De Moleyns, q.c, 132-140 ; R. Ferguson, q.c, 331, 332, 333, 392-395 ; A. Hamill, q.c, 4262-3 4300 : 
 Mr. E. O'Brien, 3933, 4018, 4032 ; Mr. F. Wrench, 5601 ; Mr. S. J. Allen. 1351-4 ; Mr. T Robertson' 1430 : 
 Mr. R. 0. Bnish, 6675 ; Mr. J. E. Barrett, 30566; Mr. J. K. Sherlock, 30947 ; J. 0. JSTeligan o c 34378 
 
 t Mr. T. ShiUiugton, 5151, 5165; Mr. E. O'Brien, 4110, 4170-3-4; Mr. S. J. Allen 1361-2 • Mr' W. 
 Simpson, 3343, 3350; A. Hamill, q.c, 4267; Mr. F. Wrench, 5603-4; Mr. J. E. Barrett, 30566 •' Professor 
 
SEPAKATE REPORT BY A. McM. KA7ANAGH, ESQ. 59 ■ 
 
 the landlords might be content to make some sacrifice to attain it — in those districts 
 where the improvements have all been made by the tenants the difficulty or injustice, 
 so far as the landlord's rights are concerned, is not so glaringly apparent, provided the 
 power of using a veto on their part is preserved against an objectionable incoming 
 tenant, but in pther districts where enormous sums have been spent by the landlords in 
 improving their properties— on some few properties it has been proved that the English 
 system exists in its purity, the landlord having made all the improvements— and on 
 holdings where tenant-right formerly existed, and has been brought up by the landlord, 
 instances of which have been proved, its extension or re-establishment would, in Professor 
 my opinion, be simple confiscation, and an unwarrantable and arbitrary interference Baldwin, 32448- 
 with rights of property which the circumstances could in no sense justify. I am, ^^' 
 therefore, on these grounds not prepared to recommend its absolutely general, or 
 universal extension, so far as those special districts to which I have referred are con- 
 cerned, without the free consent of the landlords themselves. The majority of the 
 witnesses who advocated its extension to those districts where it did not already exist, 
 coupled their recommendation with the condition, as I have already stated, that the 
 landlord should receive adequate compensation for the transference of the right. This 
 principle I maintain is strictly a just one, and it is only subject to it, that I am 
 prepared to recommend the extension of the right of sale to those holdings now coming 
 under the provisions of the Land Act, where the tenants have made all or the chief part 
 of the improvements. 
 
 With these three safeguards which I have now recommended, i.e., the check upon 
 raising rents — ^giving increased power to the court in reference to evictions, where such 
 apply to residential occupiers— extending to all holdings now under the Land Act, upon 
 which the improvements have been made by the tenant, the right of sale, I believe the 
 position of the present occupiers, or their representatives, would be such that they 
 would have nothing to fear from the action of any landlord, no matter how harsh or 
 unscrupulous he might be ; but, on the other hand, I am bound to add that, although 
 in weighing the evidence I have endeavoured to eliminate all revolutionary proposals, 
 my three recommendations do involve very arbitrary and material interference with 
 the rights of landlords to which many would entertain, and with every reason, the 
 strongest objection, and that if the Government see fit to adopt them, or to propose 
 legislation in their direction, that proposal should be accompanied in fair justice by 
 an offer of purchase at a fair price guaranteed by the State from those landlords, 
 of either the whole or such portions of their estates, as they objected to have 
 such made applicable to. And I think it will be admitted that my position in 
 urging this is much strengthened by the fact — which in my opinion is proved in the 
 evidence — that so far as the management of the large estates is concerned, and it is of 
 importance to remember that they comprise the greatest agricultural and pastoral 
 area in the country, no change in the present law would appear to be called for. 
 
 On the subject of the "North," and the different customs existing there, much evidence 
 was given, as distinct from the question of the extension of the right of sale to those 
 districts where such does not now exist. In my opinion it was shown, as I have already 
 stated, that the exercise of the power of raising rent on the part of the landlords, 
 where' unduly used, was the grievance most severely felt, and that I would hope the 
 proposal for the settlement of disputes with regard to rents, by means of arbitration, 
 would fully meet ; but still, as is only natural in a system so complex, there were other 
 points brought under our notice, such as office rules, which, although distinct from the 
 rent question, affected more or less directly the value of the interests involved. The 
 most important named was the custom existing on many large and well-managed estates, 
 of limiting the price to be paid for the tenant-right. On this point there was a great 
 conflict of opinion, those in favour of it asserting that it afforded most material and 
 salutary protection to the incoming man, keeping the price to be paid from reaching 
 the exorbitant amount which it was often proved to do on account of the reckless 
 competition (especially in the case of the smaller holdings) for the acquisition of land. 
 Instances of almost incredible sums thus paid were freely given ; the natural consequence 
 was also dwelt on with much force— that in the absence of some limitation a purchaser 
 had often not only to spend all his own capital, but had to borrow largely, thus starting 
 with a load of debt about his neck. To my mind the economic principle is indisputable, 
 and the rule a most salutary one. But on the other hand I ana bound to admit that the 
 weiffht of evidence was clearly in favour of its abolition, and by the weight of evidence 
 I do not refer to numbers— some landlords and many agents of the greatest practical 
 experience, admitting the wisdom of the principle, condemned its working as almost 
 impossible. It was asserted, indeed I might say proved, that where a limit was 
 
60 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 attempted to be enforced, sums of money were invariably paid outside the office in an 
 underhand way, and the limit utterly disregarded. It was further shown that the 
 attempt to enforce a limit was a source of an immense amount of soreness and discontent 
 among the tenant class. It was contended on their behalf that a man could only sell 
 what he had, and that any attempt to lessen or limit the value of that was most unjust. 
 On Colonel Forde's estate especially, and on some others, what would appear to be a 
 most satisfactory system of settling this point by means of arbitration, was shown to exist, 
 and, perhaps, the proposal for settling disputed rents might be found applicable generally 
 in this case also. If it did command the confidence of the parties interested, it would 
 certainly appear to me to be the wisest course, in the interest of the tenants themselves, 
 to adopt; but if it did nob, and the feeling of discontent and soreness was likely to be 
 continued, I think, in the interests of the landlords, it would be better that the rule 
 should be abolished. 
 
 The question of the method of sale, " public auctions v. private sales," was also one 
 upon which there was a good deal of difference of opinion, and on this I think the weight 
 of evidence, even in the tenants' interest, was more against than for the public sale. 
 It was urged, and I think with great force, that the excitement of public competition, 
 sometimes increased by fictitious offers, often induced buyers to make bids which in their 
 cooler moments they would never have done, and recklessly to incur liabilities which 
 most materially embarrassed their future, and it was further shown that the highest 
 bona fide price could always be obtained by either private sale, or what is termed a 
 private auction — a species of sale which it appears is customary among them, neither 
 of which are open to the objections urged against the other. On these grounds I am 
 clearly of opinion that the landlord's right to forbid public sales by auction should be 
 retained. Another point was as to the landlord's right of selection of the incoming 
 tenant. By all sides it was admitted that he should have the right of veto, to protect 
 himself against the introduction of objectionable characters or insolvent tenants upon 
 his property. But it was further urged that he should have the power of giving the 
 preference, if so inclined, to a tenant on his estate. This would appear to me to be a 
 very reasonable and natural discretion to give him, and provided, but only on that 
 condition, that the value of ithe tenant-right was not lessened thereby, I would be in 
 favour of the preservation of that right. There may have been other points referred to 
 in the course of the evidence relating to the Ulster Custom, but as I do not pretend to 
 make my report an exhaustive one, I have only attempted to touch upon those which 
 appeared to me to be of real importance, and of those there is, I believe, only one more 
 that I need mention, and that is securing to the Northern tenant resident on his holding 
 the continuous occupancy, or security of tenure, which I propose to give to tenants 
 under the same condition in the other disti'icts, and that I believe would be achieved 
 by the Act as it stands, with the extension of power that I suggest should be given to 
 the Court under clause 3. The Act, in clauses 1 and 2, gives to the tenants under them 
 the right to claim under any of the other sections of the Act, which would clearly allow 
 them, in the event of an eviction, to come before the Court under the extended powers 
 in clause 3, when the Court could leave them in possession by refusing to grant a decree. 
 
 Having by these recommendations, as I believe, thoroughly protected the interests of 
 all the present occupiers now coming under the provisions of the Act of 1870, and their 
 representatives, I am most decidedly of opinion that for the future all bona fide new 
 lettings, whether within or beyond the same scope, should be subject to entire and 
 absolute freedom of contract. 
 
 Powerful evidence was given to show that in the present lawless state of affairs, the 
 fairest and justest landowners were not sufficiently protected in the enforcement of 
 their most obvious rights, and in any change of the law, increased facilities should be 
 given for the assertion of just rights, and for the summary punishment of those who 
 by terror or otherwise interfere therewith, or retake the possession of lands which 
 have been legally given up to the landowner. If the evidence shows that under the 
 existing land code, tenants were not sufficiently protected from some hardships, it also 
 demonstrates that under the same law, landlords have been unable during the past few 
 months to assert any rights whatever. 
 
 I do not feel called upon to discuss the present agitation, or the proper mode of 
 dealing with the prevailing anarchy, or whether it should affect the selection of a period 
 for legislation in reference to land, or to speculate upon the effect which any such 
 legislation might have upon the present critical estate of afiairs. These grave topics 
 demand the earnest consideration of Parliament, but appear to be outside the scope of 
 our reference. It must be borne in mind that the present development of the agitation 
 IS not reflected by the evidence given by tenant-farmers some little time ago before us, 
 
SEPARATE REPORT BY A. McM. KAVANAOH, ESQ. 61^ 
 
 and that tlie proceedings of the Land League meetings give a representation of opinion 
 in favour of the most extreme communistic and revolutionary views which no legislature 
 can fulfil or satisfy. 
 
 To every one who has either heard or read the evidence it must be apparent that there 
 are circumstances_ existing in some parts of the country requiring both stringent and 
 immediate remedies, which satisfying the popular cry for the " Three F's," would not 
 touch. Evidence of the strongest nature was given during the inquiry of a condition of 
 affairs existing in the West and other over-populated districts, which the establishment 
 of fixity of tenure, even coupled with free sale would, in my opinion, only perpetuate, 
 without alleviating. It is contended that by the granting of the right of free sale these 
 small holdings would be ultimately absorbed, and so the present evil would be removed. 
 But inasmuch as the whole population of these districts are paupers, I fail to see who ' 
 •would be the purchasers, unless the purchase by outsiders is contemplated, which would 
 only have the effect of making a change in, not lessening, the population, or establishing 
 a class of middlemen which has been unanimously condemned ; but, even if there was 
 this local absorption assumed, the process would be so slow that the country would 
 have to undergo many of its past trials before the remedy could be ejBficacious. . In my 
 opinion, the circumstances of these over-populated districts can only be dealt with by 
 State interference, in the way of a liberal and humane scheme of emigration, by sending 
 the people out in charge of their ministers to the large and fertile districts of unpopulated 
 land in Western Canada, where homes and the means of acquiring their living could be 
 provided for them, such as they could never have in this country, and opportunities 
 would be afforded to enlarge the holdings of those who remain behind. 
 
 A scheme was proposed, and strongly advocated by some witnesses, that these 
 crowded districts should be relieved of the surplus population by transplanting the 
 people to the tracts of waste land in different parts of the country, where they should be 
 paid as labourers by the State until these lands were sufficiently reclaimed to support 
 them ; but 1 must say it is a recommendation that I could not take upon myself the 
 responsibility of endorsing. I believe, if they are to be moved (and I can see no other 
 <3ure for such cases), emigrating them to good lands is a much wiser course than 
 migrating them to lands as bad, if not worse, than those they left. 
 
 Much evidence was also given as to the labouring class, and the condition of many of 
 them shown to be bad, both in respect of their dwelhngs and means of support ; but no 
 practical suggestion that I can call to mind was offered for their amelioration. The 
 giving to them gardens and dwellings, which some suggested the Church Surplus Fund 
 -should be devoted to, would only be planting them on plots insufficient for their support, 
 without placing any more certain means for earning or gaining their subsistence within 
 their reach. They (the labourers) are not incorrectly described as small farmers with- 
 out farms,; and I fear a change in the present land law, which makes the possession of 
 a certain amount of capital a "sine qua non" for the possession of a farm, will not do 
 much to improve either their present position or their future prospects. In my opinion, 
 the reason of their poverty and want in many districts where small holdings are in the 
 preponderance is the fact that small farmers are simply labourers with farms, who do 
 not require extraneous aid to till their farms, and, therefore, save in the seasons of 
 seed-time and harvest, in such districts, the labouring classes who depend on labour only 
 for their support must always suffer more or less acutely from the want of employment. 
 Gne of the effects of the Land Act of 1870, as shown by the evidence before us, was that 
 it had stopped many landlords from spending money in improvements on their estates, 
 and I greatly fear that the further interference with their rights now suggested must, if 
 adopted, have a much more marked effect in that direction, and, insomuch as it has, the 
 future prospects of the labouring classes in the way of obtaining employment must be 
 injuriously affected. It is only another, although a less extreme, phase of over- 
 population, I and can only see relief in the same, although a less extensive, application 
 ^f the emigration scheme. 
 
 PEASANT PEOPEIETOES. 
 
 This subject has been touched upon by almost every witness, and the evidence has J^'- ^ Bernard, 
 been as conflicting as voluminous. While originally in favour of it when I entered upon (yComd 3061 ■ 
 the inquiry, believing that in the common sense view of the matter an owner of property Mr. T. Knipe, ' 
 of sufficient size to afford to him an adequate subsistence, would be opposed to revolution, 3645 ; Mr. 
 and anxious to preserve what he had, and that by creating such a class in Ireland, fr^^f^^'"'^^^*' 
 we should be adding to the ranks of those interested in the support of law and order, ir^aWtV " 
 and diminishing the numbers who are now at the beck of every agitator, no matter 19448 ; Professor 
 iow wild his theory or communistic his principles, I must admit that considerations Baldwin, 32510; 
 
6% 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Ashe's 
 evidence of the 
 state of the 
 Vintners' 
 property. 
 
 Mr. St. George 
 Johnston, 35595. 
 
 Mr. Ashe. 
 Mr. La Touche, 
 1054-5 ; R. 
 Ferguson, Q.C., 
 333-4 ; Mr. Allen, 
 1322-24 ; Mr. 
 Boyd, 4937,4953- 
 59 ; Mr. J. 
 Hegarty, 30723, 
 et seq. 
 
 Mr. Sinclair ; 
 Mr. J. Bveritt, 
 2578 ; Mr. A. 
 Derham, 2368 ; 
 Mr. Young, 5973; 
 Mr. Wrench, 
 5530-3. 
 
 Mr. Bernard, 
 1573-9 ; Mr. 
 Allen, 1736-90; 
 Mr. T. Knipe, 
 3609, 13 ; Mr. 
 T. Dowling, 
 2904-6; Mr. 
 M'Murrongh 
 O'Brien, 32744 
 and 32789. 
 
 Mr. Quinn, 5769, 
 
 Mr. Robertson, 
 1522-3. 
 Mr. Everitt, 
 2629 ; Mr. 
 Murphy, 2815 ; 
 Mr. Wrench, 
 5540 ; Mr. 
 O'Brien, 3948 to 
 59 ; Mr. S. 
 
 M'Elroy, 4647 ; 
 Mr. O'Connell, 
 3061 ; Mr. Blake, 
 18757. 
 
 R. Perguson, q.c, 
 334 ; Judge 
 Ormsby, 547; 
 J. La Touche, 
 932-37 ; Mr. J. 
 Hegarty, 30723, 
 et seq.. 
 
 Mr. La Touche, 
 999. 
 
 Mr. Wrench, 
 5596. 
 
 of a very weighty nature have been urged against the scheme by those who view jfc 
 from the point of its possible, if not probable, results, and their opinions, it is only 
 fair to say, are formed from the experiences of the past. As illustrations of their views 
 the examples of the old perpetuity leases have been given us in evidence, where the 
 lessees holding on grants for ever at a nominal rent, have been, so far as the queis- 
 tion is practically concerned, in the same position as owners in fee ; and the condition of 
 those properties now have been cited as exemplifying what the result of peasant pm- 
 prietors would be, and if they can be taken as a fair example of what the result of a futijlr© 
 experiment in that direction would result in, I think that even the most ardent advocate 
 of that scheme would not consider it as encouraging. By the evidence it is shown thait 
 very few of the representatives of the original lessees are now in possession; ruined by 
 idleness and extravagance, their grants soon passed into the hands of mortgagees 
 who, looking only to gain, let and sublet, divided and subdivided their lands, till ov^ 
 population with its consequent ills of never ceasing want and periodical famine were 
 stereotyped in those districts, and even in the few instances which remain of the repre- 
 sentatives of the original lessees still continuing in possession, the condition is no better. 
 It is shown that as occasion arose for each owner to make provision for his family the 
 same course was adopted, till the successive increase of each generation reduced the 
 holdings to a size utterly inadequate to the support of those depending on them for even 
 a bare subsistence. The difficulty, almost impossibility of preventing subdivision under 
 such a system has been dwelt upon by many witnesses, while the danger of it has 
 been admitted by almost all. 
 
 The condition of those who have already become purchasers of their holdings under 
 the Church Commissioners, and the Bright clauses of the Land Act, has also been the 
 subject of very conflicting evidence ; by some the present position of many is described a* 
 worse than before they bought — the late bad seasons — the small area and bad land of 
 some of the holdings— the high prices which were paid, the large amount of costs/ 
 especially of purchases made under the Bright clauses — the high amount of interest 
 charged when the amount to be paid down by the purchaser had to be all, or partly, 
 borrowed, being, aniong other causes, given as the reasons, and it certainly does seem a 
 reasonable assumption, that when a purchaser has to borrow all, his position can not be 
 improved by the change. 
 
 On the other hand, it has been shown that many have prospered well, and that in 
 such cases the sense of contentment and security has resulted in a very marked degree 
 in the great improvements of their allotments. As might naturally be supposed, this' 
 satisfactory condition is almost entirely limited to those, who having money of' their 
 own, were saved from the necessity of going to the money lenders to provide the 
 amount^ required by the Acts to be paid down and their success would clearly seem to- 
 be due in a greater degree to their own thrift and industry, which enabled them to save 
 this money than to the fact that they were saved the high rate of interest to which 
 others had to submit. 
 
 Varied however as the opinions have been upon the subject, the weight of evidence; 
 has most unmistakably gone in favour of, subject to certain safeguards and hmitations, 
 what may be termed a gradual scheme for the establishment of tenant proprietors in 
 suitable localities throughout the country. The proposal which some very few I admit 
 — advocated, for the Government to buy out all the landlords in Ireland, in order to 
 resell the lands to the tenants, was one which was almost unanimously condemned not 
 only as unpracticable, but in the highest degree injurious, and is in my opinion altogether" 
 too wild, even to admit of discussion. 
 
 The suggestions as to limitations and safeguards in carrying out the gradual scheme- 
 were many, but may I think be summarized under a few heads. First subdivision 
 w^ admitted by_ almost all to be the great danger to be guarded against; the great 
 difhculty almost impossibility of its prevention was urged as an insuperable obiection 
 against the scheme at all, and it must be apparent that great difficulty does exist in the 
 future. So long as any of the instalments of the purchase-money advanced by the 
 State remain unpaid, the provisions of the Acts are stringent and cogent enouih to- 
 prevent it, and it is only after that, when under the present law, all State control 
 WOTild cease, that the danger would arise ; on this point it was suggested that the 
 ditticulty would be met by making these sales to the occupiers, grants from the Crown 
 subject to a nominal perpetuity rent (which would warrant a small reduction in the 
 first cost to the purchaser), and to a condition against subdivision or subletting in fact 
 against alienation of any part less than the whole ; it was further su^ffested 'on this 
 point and I think wisely, that the purchaser should not be prevented f?om mortaao-ina- 
 or selhng his interest, so long as he dealt with the whole; interference with either 
 of these rights, would certainly appear to me to be both unjust to the purchaser and itt.- 
 
SEPABATE REPORT BY A McM. KAVANAGH, ESQ. 63 
 
 no way necessary for the security of the State ; if mortgaged before the instalments 
 had been paid off, their priority would not be interfered with, and if sold the same 
 conditions that were binding on the original purchaser, would continue so on his 
 suoeessor. 
 
 2nd. As to fixing a minimum limit to holdings that were to be sold to occupiers, 
 a considerable amount of evidence was given, and varied opinions expressed as to the Rev. Thos. 
 smallest, quantity of land upon which a family could subsist — some witnesses were of Meagher, 2103 
 opinion that ten acres was sufficient, but the majority named the minimum as between Mr. Robb, 540' 
 twenty and forty acres ; others maintained that sales should not be made to holders lyr a j) .t, 
 of less than fifty acres, and others named 100. The question is a difficult one, but of 2365 ■ Mr. Kr 
 :not the less importance to the well-being of the country, if the scheme of a peasant 17045 ; Mr. B. 
 proprietary should be seriously entertained by. the Government. It would, in my Deane, 31034. 
 opinion, be worse than a dangerous experiment to establish owners on plots of ground 
 which were not of either sufficient size or quality to support them, it would only be 
 tending to perpetuate the misery and want which now exists in many districts, its ^qifio "^ m'*'' 
 only recommendation is the chance that in the future these small owners would be Halliday' 196; 
 obliged to sell, and that gradual consolidation would ultimately remedy the evil ; but Mr. J. Gardne 
 to establish a system the only recommendation for which is the chance that it might 20323. 
 -die out, is hardly a commendable policy. As to the other class of holdings, of from 
 twenty to forty acres, I certainly would be in favour — where thrifty industrious men 
 CQuld be found able to provide the necessary proportion of the purchase-money them- 
 selves^of affording them facilities to purchase their holdings, subject to the safeguards 
 I have mentioned — when estates were brought into the market provided the sale of 
 the remainder was not thereby prejudiced — or where landlords of themselves were 
 willing to sell; but while I would afford facilities to them, I must confess that it is ^^'JH,^^^^^^ 
 the establishment of the larger class of holders, of from 100 acres upwards, that I ]y[j. ;r, Reeres 
 would most strongly approve of, and it is from men of that class that I think the most 1920. 
 material benefits to the community would be derived. 
 
 A modified scheme of establishing a peasant proprietary was dwelt on with much force jyjj.. e. O'Briei 
 by some witnesses, in which they recommended that the State should advance money 3990-4000 ; ]\ 
 to tenants to purchase long- leases or perpetuities from the landlords at the present or George Hely, 
 reduced rents, and in favour of it I must admit there is a good deal to be said ; it t) oyqL 
 would facilitate and encourage a lasting agreement between landlords and tenants which ' 
 
 would remove their relations out of arena of dispute, and would contribute to the peace 
 of the country. Many landlords, I have no doubt, would be willing (where they had 
 the power) to grant long leases or perpetuities, at reduced rents if they received any 
 fair consideration for doing so, and others whose rents are admittedly now much below 
 the value, would be ready on a like condition to do the same — the case of limited -r , ^ 
 owners would be easily dealt with, and the interests of remaindermen secured by law. 5)^4 ^^m^e ^ 
 It might moreover be found to be a very valuable alternative to offer to landlords who O'Brien, 3939 
 not wishing to sell their properties objected to the other interferences with them which Mr. O'Connell, 
 have been suggested. The suggestions on other points were many as might have been ^^\} ^^^- ^• 
 expected from the number of witnesses examined — such as to the further facilities which Rev T Mea^h 
 it would be advisable to afford to those desirous of purchasing their holdings, as to 2168-70 • Re-? 
 the removal of limitations and restraints existing under the present law, or under rules Quin, 5774. 
 made by the Board of Works and other matters. 
 
 As to the first, it was contended by many that the larger proportion of the purchase ^^^ q q^j^ 
 money recommended in the Report of Mr. Bhaw Lefevre's Select Committee, might safely 5775. " ' 
 be advanced by the State, more especially in the North, where there would be the 
 ^ additional security of the value of the tenant-right. 
 
 By others it was submitted that thrift and industry should be made a necessary 
 qualification to entitle would-be purchasers to aid from the State, and that no advance 
 should be made to those who could not provide out of their own resources the amount 
 required to be paid down, and, although it is not easy in a case of this kind to devise a 
 hard and fast rule which would not be subject to objections, it does seem to me that 
 some test or qualification of this sort would be of use. 
 
 A considerable amount of evidence was given as to the different systems of purchase 
 under the Church Temporalities Commissioners, and the Bright Clauses of the Land Act, 
 carried out under the direction of the Board of Works, and the latter was shown to con- 
 trast most unfavourably with the former, which was stated to be much cheaper and simpler 
 in its method. It was further asserted that many whowere most anxious to purchase 
 were debarred from doing so by the expense, complications, and delay, which purchases 
 under the Bright clauses entailed ; these with other suggestions, which I do not touch 
 upon, are minor points of detail with which the Legislature can have no great difficulty 
 in dealing. To me it would appear as hardly admissible, that if the main principle a/7.'J 
 
[ 65 ] 
 
 APPENDIX TO BEPOET. 
 
 PAPEES EEFERRED TO IN REPORT. 
 
 No. 1. 
 
 Boyal Commission on Landlord and Tenant Act, 1870, 
 5, Ely-place, Dublin. 
 
 Dear Sir, ---In reply to your communication, dated , offering to assist tliis Commission in its inquiry, 
 
 I am directed bo ask you kindly to send me a brief statement of tte Heads of the Evidence you would wish to 
 give, or of the points which you desire to bring to the notice of the Commissioners, for their information,- and 
 in order to guide them in examination, should they decide to require your evidence. 
 
 I have the honour to be, faithfully yours, 
 
 George Young, Secretary. 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Acts Inquiry Commission. 
 
 Heads of Inquiry as to the Actual Condition, Customs, and Ch'cumstances of particular Districts 
 
 or Estates. 
 
 1. Personal. 
 
 2a. Ulster Tenant-right. 
 
 2b. Sale and Disposition op Holdings outside 
 
 Ulster. 
 .3. Leases. 
 
 4. Rents. 
 
 5. Improvements. 
 
 6. Purchase by Tenants op their Holdings. 
 
 7. Waste Land. 
 
 8. Land Act, 1870. 
 
 I. — Personal. 
 
 1. Name and address. 
 
 2. Occupation and nature of connexion (if any) 
 with the land, as owner, agent, tenant-farmer, <fec. 
 
 3. Acreage of estate, agency, or holding with which 
 you are connected. 
 
 4. Eor what district or estate are you. prepared to 
 ffive evidence? 
 
 II a. — Ulster Tenant-right. 
 
 1. Does the Ulster Tenant-right custom exist in 
 your district 1 State whether universally, generally, 
 or on some estates only. 
 
 2. What do you understand by the Ulster custom? 
 
 3. What is the usual selling rate of the tenant-right, 
 per year's purchase of the rent, or per acre \ 
 
 4. What are the causes which generally influence 
 
 the selling rate ? - -, ^- „ 
 
 5. Are there any " office rules or local regulations 
 affecting the Ulster custom on any of the estates in 
 your district? If so, state them, aind say how long 
 they have been in existence. 
 
 6. When the price of the tenant-right is limited, is 
 it common for money to pass, beyond the limit fixed 1 
 
 7. Was it usual before the Land Act, 1870, for 
 leaseholders to obtain the benefit of the Ulster custom 
 
 on the expiration of their leases ? Has any change 
 taken place in this respect ? 
 
 8. Are there many or any cases where from the 
 size of the farm, the length of the lease, the fact of the 
 landlord making the improvements, or other circum- 
 stances, the Ulster Tenant-right custom does not 
 apply ? 
 
 9. Do you suggest any alterations in or amend- 
 ments of the existing law as it afiects holdings under 
 the Ulster custom ? 
 
 decreasing in 
 
 II. b. — Sale and Disposition op Holdings. 
 (For districts and estates outside Ulster.) 
 
 1. Do outgoing tenants sell their holdings in your 
 district? State whether universally, generally, or 
 here and there only ? 
 
 2. Are such sales increasing or 
 frequency ? 
 
 3. On quitting voluntarily, in ordinary times, how 
 many years' purchase of the rent can a selling tenant 
 generally obtain ? 
 
 4. Does the landlord recognise sales ? 
 
 5. Does he forbid them ? If so, does he make an 
 allowance to the outgoing tenant ? 
 
 6. Does he claim a right of pre-emption ? 
 
 7. Does he insist on clioosing the purchaser ? 
 
 K 
 
66 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 8. Does he exercise a veto on the purchaser, and on 
 -what grounds is it generally exercised ? 
 
 9. Doos he fix a limit on the purchase-money, and 
 to what extent 1 
 
 10. Is it common for money to pass, beyond the 
 limit fixed f 
 
 11. Is the rent generally raised on the occasion of 
 a purchase t 
 
 12. Does the landlord recognise a right in the 
 tenants to charge their holdings, or to dispose of them 
 by will 1 
 
 13. Are there many or any cases where from the 
 size of the farm, the length of the lease, the fact of 
 the landlord making or contributing to the improve- 
 ments, or other circumstances, the absence of the 
 power to sell is completely established, and accepted 
 as satisfactory by the tenants ] 
 
 14. Is the recognition by landlords of the right of 
 sale on the increase ? 
 
 15. Are rents generally higher or lower when the 
 right of sale exists 1 
 
 16. What have been the eflfects of the section in the 
 Act of 1870 (s. 7), which gives compensation in respect 
 of incoming payments 1 
 
 17. Has its operation been neutralized or evaded in 
 any way ? 
 
 18. How far has the section in the Act of 1870 
 (s. 3), which gives compensation for disturbance been 
 efiectual to check evictions in your district 1 
 
 19. Has its operation been neutralized or evaded in 
 any way f 
 
 20. Are the limits of the scale of compensation 
 reasonable ? 
 
 21. Has this section led tenants to mortgage or 
 charge their holdings, in order to secure money they 
 have borrowed ] 
 
 III. — Leases. 
 
 1. Do leases exist in your district? State whether 
 universally, generally, or here and there only 1 
 
 2. Are leases increasing or decreasing since the 
 Land Act? 
 
 3. For what term are leases usually given ? 
 
 4. Are leases generally held at reduced or advanced 
 rents, as compared with yearly tenancies 1 
 
 5. Is any fine paid on taking a lease? 
 
 6. Is it common to re-value the rent on the expira- 
 tion of a lease ? 
 
 7. Were the conditions of leases before the Land 
 Act generally the same as of those given by the same 
 landlord at present, or in what respects different 1 
 
 8. Are leases to any extent being introduced which 
 bar the operation of the Land Act, 1870, or any of its 
 provisions ? 
 
 9. Do tenants readily accept leases 1 
 
 10. Is the condition of the leaseholders, and their 
 farming, superior or the contrary to that of the yearly 
 tenants ? 
 
 IV. — Rents. 
 
 1. What proportion does the Tenement Valuation 
 generally bear in your district to a fair rent 1 
 
 2. Has raising of rent been on the increase since 
 the Act ot 1870? 
 
 3. At what intervals is it usual for rents to be re- 
 valued ? 
 
 4. Is arbitration ever or often resorted to as a 
 means of settling the rent ? 
 
 5. Is distress for rent often resorted to ? 
 
 V. — Improvements. 
 
 1. What improvements are generally made by 
 landlords in your district ? 
 
 2. What improvements are generally made by 
 tenant 1 
 
 3. In case of co-operation in improvement, what 
 is the part usually undertaken by each ? - 
 
 4. Has the Act of 1870 encouraged or checked 
 tenants' improvements ? 
 
 5. Has it encouraged or checked improvements by 
 landlords ? 
 
 6. Have many or any cases occurred in your district 
 where an outgoing tenant has obtained insufiicient 
 compensation for his improvements ? 
 
 7. Have the pi-o visions of the Act of 1870 in 
 respect of compensation for improvements been 
 neutralized or evaded in any way ? 
 
 VI. PUBCHASE BY TENANTS OF THEIR HOLDINGS 
 
 1. Have there been in your district any sales to 
 tenants of their holdings by agreement out of court ? 
 
 2. Have there been any such sales in the Landed 
 Estates Court? 
 
 3. Have any difficulties been experienced in cariy- 
 ing out such sales ? 
 
 4. Have there been any difficulties in obtaining 
 the statutory advances from the Board. of Works ? 
 
 5. What is the present condition of any such pur- 
 chasing; tenants as compared with the yearly tenants 
 about them t 
 
 6. To what extent (if any) have they mortgaged or 
 incumbered their holdings since purchase ? 
 
 7 To what extent (if any) have they subdivided ? 
 
 8. Can you suggest any measures for amending 
 these clauses and rendering them more effectual ? 
 
 9. Is it desirable that further legislative measures 
 should now be taken (beyond those contained in the 
 Land Act, with any suggested amendments) for the 
 establishment of tenants as owners in fee of farms ? 
 Give reasons. 
 
 10. If so, in what manner should such establishment 
 be attempted ? and on what terms, either of payment 
 by tenants, compensation to landlords, or otherwise ? 
 
 11. Should waste land or land already reclaimed be 
 selected for such establishment ? 
 
 12. Should any such regulations as those of the 
 Land Act which forbid alienation, assignment, sub- 
 letting, or subdividing, or any of them, either 
 temporarily or in permanence, be enforced upon pur- 
 chasing tenants 1 
 
 VII. — Waste Land. 
 
 1. What do you understand by waste land ? 
 
 2. To what extent has waste land been reclaimed 
 by tenants in your district within living memory ? 
 
 3. Is the reclamation of waste land now progressing 
 or decreasing ? 
 
 4. Is there much land still waste which is capable of 
 profitable reclamation ? 
 
 VIII.— Land Act, 1870. 
 
 1. Has any unfairness resulted in your district from 
 the exception in the Land Act, 1870, of (a) Demesne 
 Land (6) Town Parks and (c) large pasture farms from 
 the holdings in respect of which compensation may 
 be claimed ? 
 
 2. Are there any and what descriptions of holdings 
 in your district, now excepted, to which it is 
 desirable to extend the benefit of the Act of 1870 ? 
 
 3. Has the section in the Act of 1870 which 
 divides the Grand Jury Cess between landlord and 
 tenant (65) been effectual to any extent in your district? 
 
 4. Are express contracts common for payment by 
 the tenant of the entire Cess ? 
 
 5. Has the section (68) which excuses the payment 
 of rent for land covered by a public road been effectual 
 to any extent in your district ? 
 
 6. Do you suggest any alterations in or amendments 
 of the existing law regulating the relation of landlord 
 and tenant ? 
 
APPENDIX TO REPORT. 67 
 
 No. 3. 
 
 Royal Commission on Landlord and Tenant Act, 1870, 
 5, Ely-place, Dublin. 
 
 Sir, — The inclosed Forms suggest the principal points on -which bhe Commissioners desire information. 
 "Witnesses desiring to give evidence are requested to communicate in writing to the Commissioners the subjects 
 on which they feel best qualified to give information, either in the form of answers to these questions or in any 
 other form they please. 
 
 It must be understood that the Commissioners will not confine themselves in the examination of witnesses 
 to the contents of these papers, which are not intended as exhaustive of the topics of inquiry. 
 
 Communicatious in writing will not be published, and are chiefly sought for as a guide to the Commissioners 
 in the selection of witnesses. Further copies of the Forms may be had on application to me at 5, Ely-place, 
 Dublin. 
 
 I am, yours faithfully, 
 
 Geoege Young, Secretary. 
 
 No. 4. 
 
 Royal Commission on Landlord and Tenant Act, 1870, 
 5, Ely-place, Dublin. 
 
 Sir, — I am directed by the Commissioners to transmit to you the inclosed statements given in evidence 
 before them. It is a rule with the Commissioners, whenever a statement is made by a witness which may 
 appear prejudicial to any person, to make the party affected aware of the fact, and of the nature of the statement. 
 TQie Commissioners will be ready to hear your evidence in reference to these statements, if desired, or to print 
 with the evidence a statement from yourself in reply thereto. If you prefer to attend the Commission for this 
 purpose, you are requested to bring with you a statement in writing of the reply or explanation you wish to- 
 make, which may be embodied in the evidence. An answer is requested at your earliest convenience. 
 
 I have the honour to be, faithfully yours, 
 
 George Youko, Secretary. 
 
DUBLIN : PRINTED BY AI.EX. THOM & CO., 87, 88, * 89, ABBET-STREET, 
 
 'IKE QUEES'S PRINTING OFFICI, 
 
 roK HBR majesty's STATIONEBT OrntMSi 
 
REPORT 
 
 OF 
 
 HER MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS OF INQUIRY 
 
 INTO 
 
 THE WORKING OF THE 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) ACT, 1870, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 ACTS AMENDING THE SAME. 
 
 |gir«sml*i» lo bol^ fousis oi |^arliaii«ul bg CDnunanb of P^r IfiCajtittii. 
 
 DUBLIN: 
 PRINTED BY ALEX. THOM & CO., 87, 88, & 89, ABBEY-STREET, 
 
 THE QUEEN'S PRINTING OFFICE. 
 FOR HER majesty's STATIONERY OFFICE. 
 
 1881. 
 
REPORT 
 
 OP 
 
 HER MiJESTT'S COMMISSIONERS OF INQUIRY 
 
 INTO 
 
 THE WOEKING OP THE 
 
 UNDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) ACT, 1870, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 ACTS AMENMNa THE SAME. 
 
 VOL. II. 
 
 DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE, PAET I. 
 
 ^xmxdtb ia hat\[ §aW$^ d f arlmment^bg CjJinmmtir *of J^r 3w»k' 
 
 DUBLIN: 
 
 PRINTED BY ALEX. THOM & CO., 87, 88, & 89, ABBEY-STREET, 
 
 THE QUEEN'S FEINTING OFFICE. 
 FOR HEB majesty's STATIONERY OFFICE. 
 
 1881. 
 
 ^C._2779 1.] Price 9s. 6d. 
 
EEPORT 
 
 HER MAJESTY'S COMMISSIONERS OF INQUIRY 
 
 THE WORKING OF 
 
 THE LMDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) ACT, 1870, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 ACTS AMENDING THE SAME. 
 
 YOL. II. 
 
 DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, PAET I. 
 
 "^tmntiH ia hai^ fotrses of f arliammt hio Commanir of f «r Pajfstg. 
 
 DUBLIN : 
 
 PRINTED BY ALEX. THOM & CO., 87, 88, & 89, ABBEY-STREET, 
 
 THE queen's printing OFFICE. 
 FOR HEB majesty's STATIONERY OmCE. 
 
 1881. 
 
 [C— 27791.] Price 9s. 6d. 
 
CONTENTS OF VOL. II. 
 
 LIST OF WITNESSES, in Order of Examination, ...... 
 
 LIST OF WITNESSES, in Alphabetical Order, 
 
 INDEX TO REPLIES OF PERSONS affected by Statements in Minutes of Evidence, Part I.; 
 
 DIGEST OF EVIDENCE, ......... 
 
 APPENDIX A.— MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, Part I., . 
 
 Evidence taken at : — ^ 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 Diiblin, 
 
 1 
 
 Donegal, 
 
 . 475 
 
 Galway, . 
 
 Belfast, 
 
 . 159 
 
 Sligo, . 
 
 . 498 
 
 Limerick, 
 
 Londonderry, 
 
 . 297 
 
 Castlebar, 
 
 . 513 
 
 
 Sligo, 
 
 . 419 
 
 Roscommon, 
 
 . 573 
 
 
 P»ge 
 iii 
 viii 
 xiii 
 xix 
 1 
 
 592 
 663 
 
LIST OF WITNESSES, IN ORDER OF KXAMINATION. 
 
 Fage 
 
 Dublin. 
 Wednesday, Sept. 1, 1880. 
 
 T. De Moleyns, esq., Q.c, . 1 
 
 Robert Ferguson, esq., Q.c, 10 
 
 Thursday, Sept. 2, 1880. 
 
 
 Right Hon. Judge Ormsby, 
 Jolin B. Greene, esq.. 
 
 20 
 29 
 
 Friday, Sept. 3, 1880. 
 
 
 Jolin LaTouche, esq., 
 John Sweetman, esq., 
 Rev. S. Patterson, 
 Thomas Robertson, esq., . 
 
 36 
 42 
 46 
 50 
 
 Saturday, Sept. 4, 1880. 
 
 Charles TJ. Townshend, esq., 58 
 
 "William L. Bernard, esq., . 64 
 
 Mr. S. J. .Allen, . . 69 
 
 Robert E. Reeves, esq., . 73 
 
 Monday, Sept. 6, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Thomas Meagher, p.p., 78 
 
 Bernard Coleman, esq., . 85 
 
 Mr. Andrew Derham, 90 
 
 Tuesday, Sept. 7, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James Everitt, . 94, 106 
 
 Mr. James R. Drew, . . 102 
 
 Mr. Thomas Dowling, . 106 
 
 Mr. John O'Connell, . . 113 
 
 Wednesday, Sept. 8, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Robert G. HUl, . 
 Mr. "William Siinpson, 
 Mr. Thoipas Knipe, . 
 E. M. Kelly, esq., 
 Mr. Edward Fenlon, . 
 
 117 
 123 
 126 
 128 
 132 
 
 Thursday, Sept. 9, 1880. 
 
 Alexander Kirkpatrick, esq., 136 
 
 B. W. O'Brien, esq., . . 140 
 
 A. Hamill, esq., q.c, . 149 
 
 Mr. R. H. Battersby, . 157 
 
 Belfast. 
 
 Tuesday, Sept. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. S. 0. M'Elroy, 
 
 Mr. S. Black, 
 
 Mr Thomas M'llderry, 
 
 Mr. James Morton, . . 175 
 
 Mr. James Ferguson, . 179 
 
 W. S. Boyd, esq., . . 184 
 
 159 
 
 Wednesday, Sept. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Shillington, 
 
 jun., - . . . 186, 198 
 Mr. Hamilton Robb, . . 194 
 Mr. Nelson Ruddell, . 194 
 
 Page 
 Mr. John Robinson, . . 196 
 Mr. John "Walker, . .198 
 F. Wrench, esq., . . 199 
 
 Rev. C. Quinn, . 205, 213 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Callaghan, . 212 
 Mr. Michael Barry, . . 213 
 Rev. P. Mageaney, . 'il3 
 
 Thursday, Sept. 23, 1880 
 
 John Yoiing, esq., 
 Edmond M'Neill, esq.. 
 Mr. Thomas Swann, . 
 Mr. W. Gray, . 
 A. B., . . . 
 Mr. Joseph Perry, 
 Mr. Edward Gardner, 
 Mr. W. J. Moore, 
 Mr. Patrick Murray, 
 Mr. James M'Aleena, 
 Peter Quinn, esq., 
 Richard C. Brjish, esq., 
 J. G. "Winder, esq., . 
 Lieut-Col. Waring, 
 Colonel Forde . 
 Hon. Somerset "Ward, 
 J. Blakiston-Hoiiston^ esq 
 M. S. Synnott, esq., . 
 Joseph Atkinson, esq., 
 Mr. Joseph Beatty, . 
 Mr. "William Say, 
 Mr. "WUliam J. "Watson, 
 
 236, 
 
 Friday, Sept. 24, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John Lennon, 
 Mr. N. Wilson, 
 Mr. B. CampbeU, 
 Mr. W. J. Hamilton, 
 Mr. John Cranston, . 
 Mr. B. Henry, . 
 Mr. Henry M'Kean . 
 A. Murray Ker, esq., 
 Mr. W. M. Fitzgerald, 
 Mr. A. Mulholland, . 
 Mr. William Gault, . 
 Mr. Joseph Laird, 
 Mr. Hugh "Wilson, . 
 
 Saturday, Sept. 25, 1880. 
 Mr. William M'Murtry, 
 Mr. John Wallace, . 
 Mr. Manlis M'Grogan, 
 Mr. Samuel Stewart, . 
 Mr. James M'Nair, . 
 
 m 
 
 219 
 222 
 224 
 225 
 226 
 229 
 231 
 233 
 235 
 244 
 241 
 245 
 247 
 251 
 253 
 256 
 256 
 259 
 260 
 263 
 264 
 
 267 
 269 
 269 
 271 
 271 
 272 
 275 
 279 
 284 
 286 
 287 
 288 
 289 
 
 290 
 291 
 294 
 295 
 296 
 
 LONDONDEREY. 
 
 
 Monday, Sept. 27, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Alexander, 
 
 297 
 
 Mr. W. J. Hanna, . 
 
 303 
 
 Mr. John Gamble, 
 
 306 
 
 Mr. James Lapsley, . 
 
 307 
 
 Mr. Samuel Osborne, 
 
 308 
 
 Mr. John Steel, 
 
 311 
 
 Mr. James M'Glinchy, 
 
 311 
 
 Mr. WilHam Doherty, 
 
 . 313 
 
 0. T. M'Causland, esq.. 
 
 . 314 
 
 Anonymous, 
 
 . 319 
 
 Mr. John Cunningham 
 
 . 320 
 
 W. E. Scott, esq.. 
 
 322 
 
 Mr. B. H. Lane, 
 
 323 
 
 Friday, Sept. 28, 1 
 
 Mr. James S. Hanna, 
 Mr. John Flanagan, . 
 Rev. N. M'A. Brown, 
 Mr. Joseph J. Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert Dunn, 
 Mr. James Dreunan, . 
 Rev. G. W. Hamill, . 
 Edmund Murphy, esq., 
 Mr. John Reed Norris, 
 Mr. Thomas Warnock, 
 H. R. Morrison, esq., | 
 Rev. Dr. Madill, / 
 
 Mr. John Rankin, 
 Mr. John Simpson, . 
 Mr. Grocer Caldwell, 
 Mr. Richard Coyle, . 
 Mr. Robert Adams, . 
 Mr. Walter Osborne, 
 Mr. Patrick Cole, 
 Mr. John M'Connell, 
 Mr. Bernard Loiighlin, 
 
 Page 
 
 880. 
 
 327 
 328 
 334 
 339 
 341 
 342 
 343 
 343 
 347 
 350 
 
 353 
 
 357 
 358 
 358 
 359, 361 
 360 
 361 
 361 
 362 
 362 
 
 Wednesday, Sept. 29, 1880. 
 
 George Cather, esq., .- . 363 
 
 Mrs. Susanna Gregg, . . 363 
 
 Mr. James H. M'Intyre, . 364 
 
 Mr. WUliam Gamble, . 368 
 
 Mr. Walter Connison, 370, 376 
 
 Mr. John Donnell, . '. 372 
 
 Mr. John Rossborough, . "375 
 
 Rev. Edward Loughrey, . 376 
 
 The Earl of Leitrim, . . 381 
 
 James Sinclair, esq., . . 386 
 
 William Sinclair, esq., 388, 394 
 
 Mr. Samuel Donaldson, . 391 
 
 Wybrants Olphert, esq., . 393 
 
 Arthur Brooke, esq., . . 394 
 
 Robert Lepper, esq., . . 395 
 
 Mr. William Craig, . . 396 
 
 Thursday, Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Hugh M'Kinley, 
 Dr. S. T. Haslett, 
 Mr. Daniel Henry, \ 
 Mr. Francis Convery, V 
 Mr. John Traynor, j 
 T. Spottswood Ashe, esq., 
 Mr. J ohn Loughrey, . 
 Mr. James Canning, . 
 Mr. Daniel M'Lo'ughliu, 
 Mr. Richard Craig, . 
 Mr. Charles M'Caliion, 
 Mr. D. J. Boyle, 
 Mr. Thomas Meek, . 
 Mr. Andrew Brown, . 
 Mr. James Caskey, 
 
 397 
 400 
 
 403 
 
 404 
 407 
 410 
 411 
 412 
 413 
 413 
 415 
 416 
 417 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Thursday, Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 Colonel E. H. Cooper, . 419 
 
 Mr. Jam,es Mannion, . . 426 
 
 Mr. John Mannion, . . 426 
 
 Mr. Owei»Hart, . . 427 
 
 Mr. John Young, . . 428 
 
 Mr. John Gilroy, . . 429 
 
 Mr. Michael Hart, . . 429 
 
 Mr. Patrick M'Donough, . 430 
 
 Mr. Michael M'Laughliu, . 431 
 
IV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Conlon, . 
 Mr. John M'Manns, . 
 Mr. C. P. !\lacKenzie, 
 George Errington, esq, 
 
 M.P., 
 
 Christopher L' Estrange, 
 
 esq., _ . 
 Mr. Patrick Boyle, sen., 
 Mr. Michael Nicholson, 
 Mr. James Smith, 
 Mr. Peter Boyle, 
 Mr. John Clancy, 
 Mr. James Clancy, 
 Mr. Thomas Meehan, 
 Mr. Patrick Boyle, jun., 
 Mr. Thomas Shanley, 
 Mr. Patrick Healy, 
 Mr. Patrick M'Loughlin. 
 Mr. Patrick Corrity, 
 Mr. Peter Gillan, 
 Mr. John Hannigan, 
 Mr. Daniel Moylan, 
 Mr. Daniel Waters, . 
 Mr. Charles Higgins, 
 Mr. Hugh M'Intyre, . 
 Mr. William Million, 
 Mr. Denis Hunt, 
 Mr. Andrew Cunningham 
 Mr. John Keeney, 
 Mr. Michael Flynn, . 
 Mr. James Gilgan, . 
 Mr. Patrick Hargaden, 
 Mr. Myles Ward, 
 Mr. Charles Gallagher, 
 Mr. Thomas M'Clean, 
 Mr. Thomas M'Laughlin, 
 Mr. Michael Jordan, . 
 Mr. Patrick Devaney, 
 Mr. James Taggart, . 
 Mr. James Hart, 
 A. B., 
 A. B., 
 
 Page 
 431 
 
 432 
 
 434 
 
 434 
 437 
 
 439 
 
 400 
 
 441 
 
 441 
 
 442 
 442 
 443 
 444 
 444 
 446 
 446 
 447 
 447 
 447 
 447 
 448 
 448 
 448 
 449 
 449 
 449 
 450 
 451 
 
 Friday, Oct. 15, 188C 
 
 ». 
 
 Peter O'Connor, esq., 
 
 451 
 
 Rev.' Eugene M'Kenna, 
 
 454 
 
 Mr. John Martin, 
 
 458 
 
 Mr. William C. Tute, 
 
 . 460 
 
 Mr. William Heron, . 
 
 461 
 
 Mr. P. P. Cawley, . 
 
 464 
 
 Col. E. R. King-Harman, 
 
 466 
 
 Mr. Cochran Davys, . 
 
 470 
 
 Sir Henry W. Gore Booth 
 
 472 
 
 Francis M. Olpheris, esq., 
 
 . 473 
 
 Donegal. 
 
 Saturday, Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Lanty Hanlon, . . 475 
 
 Mr. Hugh M'Ginty, . , 477 
 
 Mr. Francis Thomas, . . 478 
 
 Mr. James Smullen, . . 478 
 
 Mr. Hugh Gallagher, . 479 
 
 Mr. John M'Gaharen, . 480 
 
 Mr. James Kelly, . . 481 
 
 Major James Hamilton, . 481 
 
 Mr. William Hammond, . 485 
 
 Mr. James Davis, . . 485 
 
 Mr. Joshua Jackson, . . 486 
 
 Mr. John Ward, . . 489 
 
 Mr. Patrick Flaherty, . 492 
 
 Mr. Edward Flaherty, • . 492 
 
 Mr. John Thomas, . . 492 
 
 Mr. James Morrogh, . . 492 
 
 Mr. John Henderson, . 492 
 
 Mr. James Cassidy, . . 492 
 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Ml. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 Mr. 
 
 James M'Caffery, 
 James Doherty, . 
 Timothy M'Mullan, 
 John M'Gilligan, 
 Philip Melly, 
 WUliam Gillespie, 
 Connell Gallagher, 
 Thomas Monahan, 
 James Cassidy, . 
 Francis Faucett, . 
 George Moore, 
 John Mullan, 
 
 Page 
 
 492 
 493 
 493 
 493 
 493 
 493 
 493 
 494 
 494 
 494 
 497 
 497 
 
 Sligo. 
 
 Monday, Oct. 18, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Robert W. Bourns, 
 Rev. Andrew Quian, . 
 Mr. Andrew M'Goldrick, 
 Mr. Hugh Fowler, . 
 Mr. Michael Conuington, 
 Mr. John Carilegie, . 
 Mr. William Healy, . 
 Mr. John M'Loughlin, 
 Mr. William Foran, . 
 Mr. Roger Fehily, 
 Mr. Dominick Brennan, 
 Mr. Francis MuUaly, . 
 Mr. Roger Ferney, . 
 Mr. Brian M'Laughlin, 
 Mr. John Healy, 
 Mr. Bartley Cox, 
 Widow M'Hugh, 
 Mr. Francis Kavanagh, 
 Mr. James Milmo, 
 Mr. Stephen Hughes, 
 Mr. Daniel M'Loughlin. 
 Mr. Peter Garvey, 
 Mr. Francis Barbour, 
 Mr. Edward Kelly, . 
 Mr. William Clarke, . 
 
 Castlebar. 
 
 Tupsday, Oct. 19, 1880 
 John Crean, esq., 
 James Scott, esq., 
 Mr. John Craven, 
 Mr. James Tunny, . 
 Mr. Patrick O'Brien, 
 Mr. Anthony Clarke, 
 Mr. Denis Duffy, 
 Rev. Mr. O'Malley, . 
 Alex. C. Larminie, esq., 
 W. R. Larminie, esq., 
 Mr. John Staunton, . 
 Mr. Martin Conway, . 
 Mr. Edward Fitzgerald, 
 Mr. John Duffv, 
 Rev. J. M'Eviily, . 
 Mr. Patrick M'Ginn, 
 Mr. Anthony Kerrigan 
 Mr. Edward Heraghty, 
 Mr. Thady Heraghty, 
 Widow Heraghty, . 
 Widow Walsh, 
 Mr. Patrick Maguire, 
 Mr. Michael .Nugent, 
 Mr. Patrick Melia, . 
 Mr. Thomas Shanley, 
 Mr. Patrick Malley, . 
 Mr. John Carney, 
 Mr. Thomas Heraghty 
 Mr. Michael M-Donnell 
 Mr. Thomas Burke, . 
 Mr. Thomas Horan, , 
 Mr. Martin Murphy, 
 Mr. William Hogan, . 
 
 498 
 50i 
 502 
 502 
 503 
 504 
 506 
 506 
 506 
 506 
 506 
 506 
 506 
 507 
 507 
 507 
 507 
 508 
 508 
 509 
 509 
 509 
 509 
 511 
 512 
 
 513 
 
 518 
 
 521 
 
 522 
 
 524 
 
 525 
 
 526 
 
 522 
 
 526 
 
 528 
 
 529 
 
 529 
 
 529 
 
 53.0 
 
 530 
 
 530 
 
 530 
 
 531 
 
 531 
 
 531 
 
 531 
 
 531 
 
 531 
 
 532 
 
 532 
 
 532 
 
 532 
 
 533 
 
 533 
 
 533 
 
 534 
 
 534 
 
 534 
 
 Mr. Walter Gibbons . 
 Mr. Owen Malley, . 
 Mr. Pat Maley, 
 Robert V. Stoney, esq., 
 Mr. Patrick Burke, . 
 Mr. Patrick Butler, . 
 Mr. Michael Duffy, . 
 Mr. Stephen Flynn, . 
 Mr. Patrick Kane, . 
 Mr. Patrick Higgins, 
 Mr. Patrick O'Donnell, 
 
 Page 
 534 
 534 
 534 
 535 
 536 
 537 
 537 
 537 
 538 
 538 
 538 
 
 Wednesday, Oct. 20, 1880. 
 
 Edwin Thomas, esq., . 539 
 
 Rev. A. Waters, . . 542 
 
 Sir Charles Gore, . . 544 
 
 Utred A. Knox, esq., . 548 . 
 
 Edmond H. Pery, esq., . 550 
 
 Rev. Patrick Lyons, . . 551 
 
 Mr. John Hopkins, . . 552 
 
 Mr. Michael Moran, . . 552 
 
 Mr. Michael Dunne,, . . 552 
 
 Mr. Patrick Joyce, . . 552 
 
 Mr. Peter Philpin, . . 552 
 
 Mr. Patrick Roche, . . 552 
 
 Mr. Michael Flynn, . . 552 
 
 Mr. John Hanning, . . 552 
 
 Mr. John Cunniagham, . 652 
 
 Mr. Patrick Roche, (2) . 552 
 
 Mr. Michael M'Donnell . 552 
 
 Mr. John Molloy, . . 552 
 
 Mr. John Kenny, . . 552 
 
 Mr. John O'Donnell, . 552 
 
 Mr. Patrick Moran, . . 552 
 
 Mr. Thomas Philpin, . 522 
 
 Mr. John Flannery . . 552 
 
 Mr. Patrick Corcoran, . 552 
 
 Mr. Patrick Kearney, . 552 
 
 Mr. Thomas Gibbons, . 554 
 
 Mr. Edmund Larkin, . 554 
 
 Mr. Patrick M'Donnell, . 554 
 
 Mr. Thomas Flannery, . 555 
 
 Mr. John MuUins, . . 555 
 
 Mr. Patrick Hyland, . 555 
 
 Mr. John Delaney, . . 555 
 
 Mr. James Amber, . . 555 
 
 Mr. John Barrett, . . . 556 
 
 Mr. Martin Sheridan, . 556 
 
 Mr. James Highland, . 556 
 
 Mr. Pat. Shiels, . . 657 
 
 Mr. Pat. Moran, . . 557 
 
 Mr. Edward Mitchell, . 558 
 
 Mr. Thomas M'Hale, . 558 
 
 Mr. Stephen Burke, . .558 
 
 Mr. James Armstrong, . 658 
 
 Mr. John Corcoran, . . 558 
 
 Mr. Thomas Hastings, . 559 
 
 Mr. John Walsh, . . 559 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Byme, . 559 
 
 Mr. Patrick M'Doimell, . 659 
 
 Mr. Michael O'Donnell, . 559 
 
 Mr. James Saunders, , 560 
 
 Mrs. James Flanagan, . 560 
 
 Mr. John Philbin, . . 560 
 
 Mr. Peter Philbin . .660 
 
 Mr. Michael Doyle, . ,560 
 
 Mr. Patrick Gorman, . 561 
 
 Mr. James Kenned}-, . 561 
 
 Mr. Martin Flynn, . . 561 
 
 Mr. Henry Horan, . • . 662 
 
 Mr. Anthony Malley, . 562 
 
 Mr. John Egan, . 662 
 
 Mr. Mark Walsh, . . 662 
 
 Mr. James Gannon, . , 663 
 
 Mr. Francis O'Donnell, . 663 
 
 Mr. James Daly, . . 666 
 
 Rev. John Stephens, . . 572 
 
LIST OF WITNESSES. 
 
 Page 
 
 Roscommon. 
 Thursday, Oct. 21, 1880. 
 Mr. Patrick Fox, senr., 
 Mr. Waiiam Fox, 
 Mr. Patrick Garrihaii, 
 Mr. James Garrihan, sen. 
 Mr. James Garrihan, jun., 
 Mr. Thomas Hanly . 
 Mr. Thomas Gannon . 
 Mr. James Shea, 
 Mr. John M' Garry, . 
 Mr. John M'Donnell, 
 Mr. Thomas Murphy, 
 Mr. Thomas Hunt, . 
 Mr. Pat Monaghan, . 
 Mr. William Banahan, 
 Mr. Pat. Conry, 
 Mi. Thomas M'Dernott, 
 Mr. John O'Mally, . 
 Mr. John Ward 
 Mr. Pat. Madden, 
 
 Mr. John Farrell, 
 
 Mr. Pat. Farrell, 
 
 Mrs. Farrell, 
 
 Mrs. Brennan, . 
 
 Mr. Pat. Kelly, 
 
 Mr. James Kilroe, 
 
 Mr. Joseph Dowling, 
 
 Mr. Denis O'Brien, . 
 
 Mr. John Doorley, . 
 
 Mr. James Glancy, . 
 
 Mr. Farrell M'Donnell, 
 
 A. B., 
 
 Mr. James Mullaley, 
 
 Mr. Michael Mills, . 
 
 Mr. Laurence Kilroe, 
 
 Mr. Michael Kelly, . 
 
 Mr. Thomas Kilmartin, 
 
 Mr. Andrew Doran, . 
 
 Mr. Martin J. Waldron, 
 
 Mr. J. C. Doorley, 
 
 Mr. John Kelly, 
 
 Mr. Peter Flynn, 
 
 Mr. John Flynn, 
 
 Mr. Patrick Morris, . 
 
 Mr. John Kennedy, . 
 
 Mr. Edward Kelly, . 
 
 Mr. Michael Fox, 
 
 Mr. William Kelly, . 
 
 Mr. Michael Brannon, 
 
 Mr. Bernard Kelly, . 
 
 Mr. Patrick Naughten, 
 
 Galway. 
 
 573 
 
 573 
 
 573 
 
 573 
 
 574 
 
 574 
 
 574 
 
 574 
 
 574 
 
 575 
 
 575 
 
 576 
 
 57 G 
 
 576 
 
 576 
 
 577 
 
 577 
 
 577 
 
 578 
 
 578 
 
 578 
 
 578 
 
 578 
 
 578 
 
 579 
 
 580 
 
 581 
 
 582 
 
 583 
 
 584 
 
 585 
 
 586 
 
 586 
 
 587 
 
 587 
 
 588 
 
 588 
 
 588 
 
 589 
 
 589 
 
 589 
 
 590 
 
 590 
 
 590 
 
 590 
 
 590 
 
 591 
 
 591 
 
 591 
 
 591 
 
 Friday, Oct. 22, 1880. 
 Charles 0. Boycott, esq., 
 Eev. J. G. Robb, 
 J. H. Blake, esq., 
 Burton Persse, esq., 600, 605, 607 
 N. J. I^ichardson^ esq., 
 William Daly, esq., . 
 Acheson French, esq., 
 Mr. James E. Jackson, 
 Mr. William Malley, 
 Mr. Patrick Malley, . 
 Mr. Peter Moloney, . 
 Mr. Thomas Cooley, . 
 M. F. O'Flaherty, esq., 
 Col. James O'Hara, . 
 Thomas C. Lambert, esq., 
 William H. Halliday, esq., 
 
 592 
 596 
 597 
 
 602 
 604 
 605 
 606 
 607 
 608 
 C08 
 609 
 611 
 614 
 615 
 617 
 
 Saturday, Oct. 23, 1880. 
 
 George E. Burke, esq., . 622 
 
 Mr. John Gill, . . .624 
 
 Col. John A. Daly, . . 626 
 
 Mr. Martiii R. Hart, . 628 
 
 Mr. Michael Joyce, 
 Mr. Michael M'Gratli, 
 Mr. Mark Kerins, 
 Mr. Abner Bailey, . 
 Mr. John Gairdner, . 
 Mr. Timothy Kyne, . 
 iVlr. John Kyne, 
 Mr. Patrick Flynn, . 
 Mr. Patrick Barrett, . 
 Mrs. Margaret Hussey, 
 Mr. Patrick Carey, . 
 Mr. Darby Curran, . 
 Mr. John Griffin, 
 Mr. John Flaherty, . 
 Mr. Michael O'Sullivan, 
 Mr. Thomas O'Flyn, . 
 Col. Thomas Seymour, 
 George J. Robinson, esq., 
 Mr. Patrick Noon, . 
 Mr. Peter Codyra, 
 Mr. Michael Heffernan, 
 Mr. Martin Toole, 
 Mr. Edward Toole, . 
 
 Monday, Oct. 25, 1880 
 
 Joseph Hardy, esq., . 
 Mr. James Kilmartin, 
 Mr. Thomas F. Joyce, 
 Thomas Palmer, esq., 
 John Ross Mahon, esq., 
 Martin M'Donnell, esq., 
 Mr. John Graham, 
 Mr. Patrick Hanly, 
 Mr. Thomas Davoren 
 Mr. Darby Tarpey, 
 Mrs. Bolton, 
 Mr. Mathew Nolan, 
 Mr. Francis Leonard. 
 
 Page 
 
 633 
 633 
 634 
 634 
 636 
 639 
 639 
 640 
 640 
 641 
 641 
 642 
 642 
 642 
 643 
 643 
 643 
 644 
 646 
 647 
 647 
 647 
 648 
 
 648 
 650 
 653 
 655 
 655 
 658 
 659 
 660 
 661 
 661 
 662 
 663 
 663 
 
 LiMEKICK. 
 
 Tuesday, Oct. 26, 1880. 
 
 Edward L. Hunt, esq., . 
 Mr. William Bolster, 
 Mr. Mathew O' Flaherty, 
 Mr. Joseph Casey, 
 James G. Barry, esq., 
 William U. Townsend, esq., 
 Mr. John Froste, 
 Foster Vesey Fitzgerald, 
 
 esq., . 
 Mr. Michael Lane, . 
 Mr. Patrick Kane, . 
 Mr. Michael Kane^ . 
 Mr. Patrick G'rady, . 
 Mr. John Hartigan, . 
 Mr. William Howard, 
 John W. Scott, esq., . 
 Mr. James Starkey, . 
 Mr. Michael Perry, . 
 Mr. Martin Hamilton, 
 Mr. Andrew Dundas, 
 Mrs. Keegan, . 
 Mr. James Madden, . 
 Mr. Maurice Sullivan, 
 Mr. William Halpin, 
 Mr. JohnTuthill, . 
 Mr. James Kane, 
 Mrs. Tuthill. . 
 
 Oli.-'j 
 668 
 673 
 675 
 676 
 681 
 683 
 
 684 
 688 
 689 
 689 
 689 
 690 
 690 
 690 
 692 
 694 
 695 
 695 
 695 
 695 
 695 
 696 
 696 
 696 
 697 
 
 Wednesday, Oct. 27, 1880. 
 Mr. Maurice Herbert, . 697 
 
 Rev. Patrick Meehan 
 Mr. Patrick Lawlor, 
 Mr. Thomas Colleran 
 Mr. John Mahony, 
 John B. Hewson, esq. 
 
 698 
 700 
 701 
 701 
 
 703 
 
 
 Page 
 
 Edward White, esq., . 
 
 70U 
 
 Mr. Soloman Frost, . 
 
 713 
 
 R. W. 0. Reeves, esq., 
 
 716 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Shaughii-iSSy, 
 
 718 
 
 John C. Delmege, esq., 
 
 7:^0 
 
 Rev. W. Gubbms, . 
 
 722 
 
 Mr. William Madden, 
 
 723 
 
 Sadlier Stoney, esq., . 
 
 724 
 
 Mr. Daniel Connell, . 
 
 727 
 
 Thursday, Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Richard Stackpoole, esq., . 728 
 
 Mr. Michael Hogan, . . 731 
 
 Mr. Thomas Corbett, . . 734 
 
 Francis Morice, esq., . . 735 
 
 Mr. James Frost, . . 740 
 
 Rev. Thomas Meagher, . 742 
 
 Mr. Daniel Barry, . . 742 
 
 Rev. Thomas Meagher, . 743 
 
 Mr. Daniel Ryan, . . 743 
 
 Mr. Michael Fitzgerald, . 746 
 
 Mr. Michael Meehan, . 747 
 
 Mr. Michael Stritoh, . . 748 
 
 The Earl of Limerick, . 749 
 
 William Spaight, esq., . 751 
 
 KiLLAKNBT. 
 
 
 Friday, Oct. 29, 1880 
 
 
 Rev. M. O'Connor, . 
 
 753 
 
 Rev. A. Moynihan, . . 
 
 759 
 
 Rev. D. O'Donoghue, 762, 7 
 
 66,771 
 
 Mr. Thomas O'Conuor, 
 
 763 
 
 Mr. Edmond Ryall, . 
 
 764 
 
 Mr. Patrick Carroll, . 
 
 764 
 
 Mr. Thomas Carroll, . 
 
 765 
 
 Mr. Thomas Allman, . 
 
 766 
 
 Mr. Florence O'Sullivan, . 
 
 767 
 
 Mr. Thomas O'Rourke, 
 
 776 
 
 John R. Newman, esq., 
 
 778 
 
 Mr. Peter M'Sweeney, 
 
 780 
 
 Mr. Thomas Marshall, 
 
 781 
 
 Mr. Maurice O'Connor, 
 
 781 
 
 Samuel M. Hussey, esq., . 
 
 783 
 
 Henry Herbert, esq.. 
 
 788 
 
 Saturday Oct. 30, 188 
 
 0. 
 
 Mr. Michael Warren, 
 
 789 
 
 Very Rev. Canon Brosnan, 
 
 793 
 
 Mr. Daniel Clifford . 
 
 797 
 
 Mr. Edward Fitzgerald, 
 
 797 
 
 Mr. Daniel O'Sullivan, 
 
 796 
 
 Mr. Jeremiah Keating, 
 
 800 
 
 Mr. James Griffin, . 
 
 .. 802 
 
 Richard J. Mahony, esq.. 
 
 802 
 
 Mr. Jonathan Walpole, 
 
 . 805 
 
 Mr. Maurice Kearney, 
 
 808 
 
 Mr. Maurice Murphy, 
 
 . 810 
 
 W. T. Talbot Crosbie, esq. 
 
 812 
 
 Rev. P. O'Connor, 
 
 817 
 
 Mr. John Connor, 
 
 818 
 
 Mr. Brien O'Brien, . 
 
 . 819 
 
 Mr. Denis Foley, 
 
 820 
 
 Mr. Michael Larkin, . 
 
 820 
 
 Mr. Michael Reardon, 
 
 820 
 
 Mr. Timothy Flynn, . 
 
 . 821 
 
 Mr. Timothy Teehan. 
 
 . 821 
 
 Mr. Denis Leary, 
 
 . 821 
 
 Cork. 
 
 Tuesday, Nov. 2, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John Lane, . . 823 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Mahony, . 826 
 
 Mr. Simon K. Tierney, . 828 
 
 Mr. Daniel J. Riordan, . 829 
 
 h 2 
 
VI 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 W. Bence Jones, esq., 
 Mr. Philip F. Johnson, 
 Mr. Thomas Bolster, . 
 Daniel F. Leahy, esq., 
 Thomas B. Wright, esq., 
 Mr. Henry Bennett, . 
 
 Page 
 
 832 
 840 
 843 
 844 
 849 
 855 
 
 Wednesday, Nov. 3, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Mathias M'Mahon, . 857 
 
 J. T. Cornwall, esq., . . 862 
 
 W. H. Barry, esq., . . 864 
 
 Lieui>Gen. Roche, . . 867 
 
 Mr, Francis H. Power, . 870 
 
 Mr. John JSr. Dorgan, . 871 
 
 Rev. Cornelius O'Sullivan, 873 
 
 Mr. Patrick D. Sheehan, . 877 
 
 Mr. Thomas Quane, . . 878 
 
 Thomas Saunders, esq., . 878 
 
 Richard G. Campion, esq., ' 884 
 
 Thursday, Nov. 4, 1880. 
 
 Bartholemew Verling, esq., 
 Mr. Timothy Cronin, . 
 Mr. Timothy Murphy, 
 Mr. Joseph W. Tarr, 
 Mr. Edmund Fitzgerald, 
 Mr. John Moore, 
 Mr. Patrick Moore, . 
 Mr. Richard Moloney, 
 R. 17. Penrose Fitzgerald, 
 
 esq., 
 Mr. Daniel Nyhan, . 
 
 Skibbereen. 
 
 Thursday, Nov. 4, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Charles Davis, . 
 The O'Donovan, 
 Mr. Patrick Donovan, 
 Mr. Bat Donovan, 
 Mr. James Sheehy, . 
 Mr. Michael Sheehy, 
 Mr. John Sullivan, . 
 Mr. Donald Collins, . 
 Mr. Patrick Crowley, 
 Mr. Michael Sullivan, 
 Mr. Jeremiah Daly, . 
 Henry R. Marmion, esq., 
 Mr. Patrick Ronayne, 
 Mr. Florence M'Carthy, 
 Mr. Florence Sullivan, 
 Mr. Jeremiah Sullivan, 
 Mr. James Evans, 
 Mr. Timothy Harrington, 
 Mr. Denis Berry, 
 Mr. Eugene M'Carty, 
 Rev. P. Hill, . 
 
 Cork. 
 
 889 
 892 
 893 
 894 
 895 
 896 
 896 
 
 897 
 899 
 
 901 
 906 
 909 
 909 
 909 
 910 
 910 
 911 
 911 
 912 
 912 
 915 
 918 
 920 
 920 
 920 
 920 
 920 
 920 
 920 
 921 
 
 Friday, Nov. 5, 1880. 
 
 Sir George Colthurst, 923, 934 
 
 John Warren Payne, esq., . 927 
 
 John E. Barrett, esq., . 929 
 
 John Wrixon Becher, esq., 934 
 
 Mr. Jeremiah Hegarty, . 935 
 
 Richard L. Fell, esq., . 938 
 
 Rev. Canon Murphy, . 942 
 
 Rev. John Carver, . . 943 
 
 Edward D. Stokes, esq., , 944 
 
 Very Rev. Canon M'Swiney 945 
 
 George K. Sherlock, . . 947 
 
 Mr. John Murphy, . . 949 
 
 Clonmel. 
 
 Friday, Nov. 5, 1880. 
 
 Benjamin Deane, esq., 
 Rev. Maurice Mooney, 
 Mr. John Heffernan, . 
 Charles S. Dennis, esq. 
 Rev. Thomas Finn, . 
 Mr. John Nugent, 
 Mr. Patrick Mulcahy, 
 Mr. John Walsh, 
 Mr. John Meara, 
 Mr. Edward Nugent, 
 William M. Ardagh, . 
 Mr. Michael Nolan, . 
 John George Hely, esq.. 
 Dr. Thomas Laffan, . 
 Mr. John S. O'Halloran, 
 Mr. Jerome J. Guiry, 
 
 Saturday, Nov. 6, 1880. 
 
 Rev. David Burden, . 
 Mr. Michael Hackett, 
 Mr. James Tohin, 
 Mr. Michael Tobin, . 
 Mr. Pierce Butler, 
 Mr. Patrick Nugent, . 
 Mr. Denis M'Enerney, 
 Mr. Patrick O'Donnell, 
 Mr. Michael Hanly, . 
 Mr. Michael A. Anthony, 
 Mr. William Groom, . 
 
 Page 
 
 950 
 952 
 955 
 957 
 958 
 960 
 960 
 960 
 961 
 961 
 962 
 964 
 965 
 966 
 967 
 968 
 
 968 
 973 
 974 
 974 
 974 
 975 
 976 
 977 
 978 
 979 
 980 
 
 Dublin. 
 
 Tuesday, Nov. 16, 1880. 
 
 Professor Thomas Baldwin 
 Mr. W. J. Goode, . 
 Murrough O'Brien, esq., 
 Lord Dufferin, . 
 William Rochfort, esq., 
 James P. Hamilton, q.c, 
 
 981 
 1004 
 1006 
 1015 
 1025 
 1029 
 
 Thursday, Nov. 18, 1880. 
 
 George Collins Roberts, 
 esq., .... 
 Mr. James Ganly, 
 Cecil Moore, esq., 
 C. Uniacke Townsend, esq., 
 
 1034 
 1039 
 1040 
 1047 
 
 Friday, Nov. 19, 1880. 
 
 Rev. George M'Cutohan, , 
 Mr. John Roche, 
 Mr. John M'Mahon, . 
 Richard Bagwell, esq., 
 Mr. Thomas Dowling, 
 Col. C. llaleigh Chichester, 
 Mr. Alexander Oaruth, 
 Francis Latouche, esq., 
 Frederick T. Lewin, esq., . 
 
 1055 
 1058 
 1061 
 1063 
 1065 
 1068 
 1072 
 1074 
 1076 
 
 Saturday. Nov. 20, 1880. 
 
 John 0. Neligan, Q.C, . 1079 
 
 Dr. Gawn Orr,. . 1084, 1089 
 
 Mr. James Anderson, . 1086 
 
 Mr. Andrew S. Oswald, . 1088 
 
 LordYentry, . . . 1089 
 
 The MacDermot, Q c, . 1093 
 
 George fe. Browne, esq., . 1094 
 
 Page 
 
 Monday, Nov. 22, 1880. 
 
 John E. Vernon, esq., 
 
 1097 
 
 Very Rev. W. J. Walsh, 
 
 1109 
 
 Anthony Oassidy, esq., 
 St. George Johnston, esq., 
 Col. J. G. Irvine, 
 
 1119 
 1120 
 1125 
 
 Marcus Keane, esq., . 
 
 1128 
 
 Tuesday, Nov. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mullhallen Marum, esq. 
 
 
 M.P. 
 
 1131 
 
 Rev. Daniel O'Halloran, 
 
 1138 
 
 Mr. James Foley, 
 Mr. Denis Drennan . 
 
 1139 
 1140 
 
 Rev. M. Howley, 
 
 Mr. James M'Cormack, 
 
 1140 
 1142 
 
 Mr. John Fielding, . 
 
 1143 
 
 Mr. John Carroll, 
 
 1144 
 
 Mr. Peter Murphy, . 
 Mr. Michael Tracey, , 
 Mr. Matthew Walsh, 
 
 1145 
 
 . 1146 
 
 1147 
 
 Alderman C. Redmond, 
 
 1149 
 
 Viscount Lifford, 
 
 1152 
 
 Wednesday, Nov. 24, 1880. 
 
 Rev. P. F. Nolan, . . 1154 
 
 Mr. Henry T. Rathbome, . 1155 
 
 Edward S. Tener, esq., . 1156 
 
 Mr. Hugh GUI Patterson, . 1159 
 
 Mr. Charles Pringle, . . 1161 
 Rev. Canon Smollen, 1165, 1173 
 
 Mr. T. M'Evoy Gartlan, . 1168 
 
 William Ancke till, esq., . 1170 
 
 Rev. W. J. M'Keogh, . 1173 
 
 Mr. Michael Magher, . 1176 
 
 Mr. Thomas M'Govem, . 1177 
 
 Colonel Gerald Dease, . 1181 
 
 Gorges Hely, esq., . . 1183 
 
 Edward B. Sayers, esq., . 1185 
 
 Thursday, Nov. 25, 1880. 
 
 
 The Marquess of Lana- 
 
 
 downe, .... 
 
 1186 
 
 J. Townshend Trench, esq., 
 
 1193 
 
 Mr. Harry M'Cann, . 
 
 1204 
 
 Rev. Richard O'Keeffe, 
 
 1207 
 
 Ambrose Bole, esq., . 
 
 1209 
 
 Mr. George H. Miller, 
 
 1211 
 
 Mr. Thomas Corscadden, . 
 
 1213 
 
 Hon. Charles J. Trench, 
 
 
 Q.c, . . . . 
 
 1215 
 
 Friday, Nov. 25, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Robert Sproule, . 
 Mr. Joseph Smith, 
 Mr. John M'Crea, 
 Mr. Owen M'Sorley, . 
 Mr. James Clarke, 
 Mr. John Rutledge, . 
 Mr. Hugh O'Neill, . 
 Mr. James Johnstone, 
 Mr. Robert S. Clements, 
 Rev. Callaghan M'Carthy, 
 Rev. James Brady, . 
 Mr. Henry Pringle, . 
 Mr. Henry Ferney, . 
 Mr. William Dwyer, . 
 Mr. William Gibson, . 
 Mr. Samuel Read, 
 Major John T. D'Arcy, 
 Rpv. ,Tohn Pyne, 
 
 1218 
 1221 
 1222 
 1223 
 1226 
 1227 
 1229 
 1229 
 1230 
 1232 
 1233 
 1237 
 1238 
 1239 
 1240 
 1240 
 1241 
 1243 
 
LIST OF WITNESSES. 
 
 Vll 
 
 Mr. William Naiighton, 
 Mr. Christopher King, 
 Mr. Daniel Harney, . 
 Mr. Patrick Egan, 
 Rev. James Holahan, 
 _ Thomas Lefroy, esq., Q.C.," 
 J. 0. Stronge, esq., . 
 William Kirk, esq., . 
 Mr. Alfred M'Dermott, 
 
 Page 
 1245 
 
 1246 
 
 • 1246 
 
 1247 
 
 1248 
 
 1253 
 
 Saturday, Nov. 27, 1880. 
 
 Robert Fowler, esq., . . 1256 
 
 Charles Curling, esq., . 1261 
 
 Richard M. Douglas, esq. . 1264 
 
 Simon Little, esq., . . 1265 
 
 George H. Adamson, esq., . 1269 
 
 P. J. Blake, esq., q.c, . 1273 
 
 Monday, Nov. 29, 1880. 
 Right Hon. M. Longfield, . 
 James Greer, esq., . •• . 
 
 Rev. John Doherty, . 1284, 
 Henry Bruen, esq,, . 
 Samuel F. Adair, esq., 
 Col. E. H. King-Harman, 
 Hon. F. A. J. Chichester, 
 Charles U. Townshend, esq. 
 J. Stewart Kincaid, esq., 
 Toler R. Garvey, esq., 
 Robert U. F. Townshend, 
 
 esq., 
 C. 0. B. White, esq., . 
 Col. C. G. Tottenham, 
 Michael King, esq., . 
 
 Page 
 
 1302 
 1290 
 1295 
 1296 
 1297 
 1298 
 1298 
 1299 
 
 1300 
 1301 
 1301 
 1305 
 
 Tuesday, Nov. 30, 1880. 
 Michael King, esq., con., . 1305 
 
 1276 
 1281 
 
 Monday, Jan. 3, 1881. 
 
 Mr. Robert E. Stack, 
 Major Robert P. Maxv\rell, 
 
 1309 
 1311 
 
 Col. Deane Mann, 
 Col. W. B. Forde, 
 W. G. Robinson, esq., 
 William Shaw, esq., 
 Dr. Robert Hamilton, 
 Robert Fitzgerald, esq. 
 Walter M. Bourke, esq., 
 Richard Powell, esq., 
 James C. M'Donnell, esq., 
 
 Pago 
 1315 
 1316 
 1317 
 1318 
 1320 
 1322 
 1323 
 1324 
 1325 
 
 Wednesday, Jan. 5, 1881. 
 
 Charles W. Hamilton, esq., 1325 
 
 Earl of Carrick, . . 1333 
 
 Sir James Mackey, . . 1335 
 Sir Erasmus D. Borrowes, 
 
 bart., . "■ . . . 1336 
 
 Alex. C. Lambert, esq., . 1336 
 Mr. John Ryan, , . .1337 
 
 Mr. Frederick Russell, . 1338 
 
 Mr. Robert Henry, , . 1338 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 INDEX OF WITNESSES IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Question. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Question. 
 
 A. B. 
 
 226 
 
 6186-6207 
 
 Caldwell, Grocer 
 
 35ft 
 
 10541_l0.5fi« 
 
 A. B 
 
 450 
 
 13648-1.3680 
 
 Campbell, B. 
 
 269 
 
 7650-7726 
 
 A. B 
 
 451 
 
 1.3681-13703 
 
 Campion, Richard G. ... 
 
 884 
 
 29169--29271 
 
 A. B., 
 
 585 
 
 18226-18249 
 
 Canning, James 
 
 410 
 
 1212i-121.38 
 
 Adair, Samuel F. 
 
 1295 
 
 ( 40173-40193 
 1 40263 
 
 Carey, Patrick 
 Carnegie, John 
 
 641 
 504 
 
 20559-20578 
 153 5-15447 
 
 Adams, Robert ... 
 
 360 
 
 10603-10640 
 
 Carney, John 
 
 532 
 
 164-20-16431 
 
 Adarason, George H. ... 
 
 1269 
 
 39581-39697 
 
 Carriok, Earl of .., 
 
 1.333 
 
 40607-40613 
 
 Alexander, Joseph 
 
 297 
 
 8678-8884 
 
 Carroll, John 
 
 1144 
 
 36190-36217 
 
 Allen, S. J. ... . ... 
 
 69 
 
 1836-1967 
 
 Carroll, Pat 
 
 764 
 
 24744-24779 
 
 AUman, Thomas ' ... 
 
 766 
 
 24822-24874 
 
 Carroll, Thomas 
 
 765 
 
 24780-24821 
 
 Amber, James 
 
 555 
 
 17228-17238 
 
 Caruth, Alexander 
 
 1072 
 
 34625-34723 
 
 Ancketill, William 
 
 1170 
 
 36974-37054 
 
 Carver, Rev. .John 
 
 943 
 
 30837-30864 
 
 Anderson, Jtimes 
 
 1086 
 
 35013-35079 
 
 Casey, Joseph 
 
 675 
 
 21938-21983 
 
 Anonymous ... 
 
 319 
 
 9346-9389 
 
 Caskey, James 
 
 417 
 
 12324-12403 
 
 Anthony, Michael A. ... 
 
 979 
 
 31904-31987 
 
 Cassidy, Anthony 
 
 1119 
 
 35548-35569- 
 
 Ardagh, William M. ... 
 
 962 
 
 31393-31460 
 
 Cassidy, James 
 
 492 
 
 15015 
 
 Armstrong, James 
 
 558 
 
 17316-17332 
 
 Cassidy, James 
 
 494 
 
 16060-15080- 
 
 Ashe, T. Spottswood ... 
 
 404 
 
 11911-12057 
 
 Gather, George 
 
 363 
 
 10707-10717 
 
 Atkinson, Joseph 
 
 259 
 
 7270-7308 
 
 Cawley, F. P. 
 
 464 
 
 14076-14116 
 
 
 
 
 Chichester, Col. C. R. 
 
 1068 
 
 34552-34624 
 
 
 
 
 Chichester, Hon. F. A. J. 
 
 1297 
 
 40201-40213 
 
 Bagwell, Richard 
 
 1063 
 
 34405-34446 
 
 Clancy, James 
 
 439 
 
 13,175-13218 
 
 Bailey, Abner ... 
 
 635 
 
 20195-20271 
 
 Clancy, John 
 
 439 
 
 13175-13218 
 
 Baldwin, Thomas 
 
 981 
 
 32043-32607 
 
 Clarke, Anthony 
 
 525 
 
 16135-16160 
 
 Banahan, William 
 
 576 
 
 17872-17877 
 
 Clarke, James 
 
 1226 
 
 38516-385,34 
 
 Barbour, Francis 
 
 509 
 
 1.5595-15651 
 
 Clarke, William 
 
 512 
 
 15678-15724 
 
 Barrett, John 
 
 556 
 
 17239-17250 
 
 Clements, Robert S. 
 
 1230 
 
 38603-38653 
 
 Barrett, John E. 
 
 929 
 
 30466-31)618 
 
 Clifford, Daniel 
 
 797 
 
 25677-257 12 
 
 Barrett, Patrick 
 
 640 
 
 20530-20549 
 
 Codyra, Peter 
 
 647 
 
 20785-20798 
 
 Barry, Daniel 
 
 742 
 
 24 139-24 181 A 
 
 Cole, Patrick 
 
 36i 
 
 10644-10672 
 
 Barry, James G. 
 
 676 
 
 21984-22093 
 
 Coleman, Bernard 
 
 85 
 
 2273-2408 
 
 Barry, Michael 
 
 929 
 
 30466-30618 
 
 Coleran, Thomas 
 
 701 
 
 22861-22870 
 
 Barry, William H. 
 
 864 
 
 28704-28794 
 
 Collins, Donald 
 
 911 
 
 29912-29927 
 
 Battersbv, R. H. 
 Beatty, Joseph 
 
 157 
 260 
 
 4366-4405 
 7309-7428 
 
 Colthurst, Sir George ... -j 
 
 223 
 934 
 
 30321-30405 
 30619-30622 
 
 Becher, J. Wrixon 
 
 934 
 
 30623-30677 
 
 Conlon, Patrick 
 
 431 
 
 12900-12924 
 
 Bennett, Henry 
 
 855 
 
 28383-28454 
 
 Connell, Daniel 
 
 7-27 
 
 23620-23668 
 
 Bernard, W. Leigh 
 
 64 
 
 1665-18.35 
 
 Connington, Michael ... 
 
 503 
 
 15319;15323 
 
 Berry, Denis ... 
 Black, Samuel 
 
 920 
 160 
 
 30250-30260 
 
 4427-4653 
 
 Connison, Walter ... ■? 
 
 370 
 376 
 
 10909-10956 
 11060-11061 
 
 Blake, J. H 
 
 597 
 
 18690-18835 
 
 Connor, John 
 
 818 
 
 26313-26333 
 
 Blake, P. J 
 
 1273 
 
 39698-39759 
 
 Conry, Patrick 
 
 576 
 
 17878-17886 
 
 Blakistou-Houston, J. ... 
 
 256 
 
 7162-7198 
 
 Convery, Francis 
 
 403 
 
 
 Bole, Ambrose 
 
 1209 
 
 3R03H_.38118 
 
 Conway, Martin 
 
 5-29 
 
 16277-16312 
 
 Bolster, Thomas 
 
 843 
 
 2709.'-27137 
 
 Cooley, Thomas 
 
 609 
 
 19328-19379 
 
 Bolster, William 
 
 668 
 
 f 2I661--21836 
 I 21982-3 
 
 Cooper, Col. E. H. 
 
 419 
 
 1 -'404- 12621 
 
 
 
 Corbett, Thomas 
 
 734 
 
 23857-23894 
 
 Bolton, Mrs. ... 
 
 662 
 
 21240-21461 
 
 Corcoran, .Tohn 
 
 558 
 
 17333-17347 
 
 Booth, Sir Henry W. Gore 
 
 472 
 
 14297-14338 
 
 Corcoran, Patrick 
 
 552 
 
 171 194-1 7 173 
 
 Borrowes, Sir E. D., bart. 
 
 1336 
 
 40622-40626 
 
 Cornwall, J. T. 
 
 862 
 
 28618-28703. 
 
 Bourke, Walter M. 
 
 1323 
 
 40490-40495 
 
 Corrity, Patrick 
 
 441 
 
 13265-13267 
 
 Bourns, Robert W. 
 
 498 
 
 151 57-1 .5254 
 
 Corscadden, Thomas ... 
 
 1213 
 
 88200-38302 
 
 Boycott, Charles C. ... 
 
 592 
 
 18463-18632 
 
 Co3f, Bartley 
 
 507 
 
 1549-2-15521 
 
 Boyd, William S. 
 Boyle, D. J. ... 
 
 184 
 413 
 
 4919-4959 
 12230-1226.3 
 
 Coyle, Richard 
 Craicr, Richard 
 
 359 
 361 
 
 10569-10603 
 10642-10644 
 
 Boyle, Patrick, junr. ... 1 
 
 
 
 412 
 
 12170-12-207 
 
 Boyle, Patrick, senr. ... V 
 
 439 
 
 13175-1,3218 
 
 Craig, William 
 
 396 
 
 11654-11674 
 
 Boyle, Peter ... ) 
 
 
 
 Cranston, John 
 
 271 
 
 7757 
 
 Brady, James 
 
 1233 
 
 .38691-38760 
 
 Craven, .John 
 
 521 
 
 16009-16041 
 
 Braiinon, Michael 
 
 591 
 
 184.50-18454 
 
 Crean, John 
 
 513 
 
 15725-15879 
 
 Brennan, Dominick 
 
 506 
 
 15447-15491 
 
 Crosbie, W. T. Talbot "'. 
 
 812 
 
 26176-26279 
 
 Brennan, Mrs. 
 
 578 
 
 17957-17964 
 
 Cronin, Timothy 
 
 889 
 
 29323-29387 
 
 Brooke, Arthur 
 
 394 
 
 11594-1 16-20 
 
 Croom, William 
 
 980 
 
 31989-32041 
 
 Erosnan, Very Rev. Canon 
 
 793 
 
 25571-25676 
 
 Crowley, Patrick 
 
 911 
 
 29928-29956 
 
 Brown, Andrew 
 
 416 
 
 12294-12323 
 
 Cunningham, Andrew ... 
 
 444 
 
 133N0-13387 
 
 Brown, Rev. N. M'A. 
 
 334 
 
 976'2-9955 
 
 Cunningham, John 
 
 320 
 
 9390-9453 
 
 Browne, George R. 
 
 1094 
 
 35184-35-248 
 
 Cuniiinghain, .Tohn 
 
 552 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 Bruen, Henry 
 
 1290 
 
 140136-40173 
 \ 40267-40274 
 
 Curling, Charles 
 
 1261 
 
 3<i34 1-39429 
 
 
 Curran, Darby 
 
 641 
 
 20579_'20592 
 
 Brush, R.C. 
 
 241 
 
 6616-6735 
 
 
 
 
 Biirdon, Rev. David ... 
 
 968 
 
 31578-31634 
 
 Daly, Col. .John A 
 
 626 
 
 19812-19907 
 
 Burke, George E. 
 
 622 
 
 19681-19749 
 
 Daly, .James 
 
 566 
 
 17669-17708 
 
 Burke, Patrick 
 
 536 
 
 16565-16573 
 
 Dalv, Jeremiah 
 
 912 
 
 29970-30061 
 
 Burke, Stephen 
 
 558 
 
 17295-1 7. ■U5 
 
 Daly, William 
 
 604 
 
 19021-19086 
 
 Burke, Thomas 
 
 533 
 
 16449-16466 
 
 Darcy, Major J. T. 
 
 1241 
 
 38861-38318 
 
 Butler, Patrick 
 
 537 
 
 1 6577-1 H596 
 
 Davis, Rev. C. 
 
 9iil 
 
 29596-29746 
 
 Butler, P. B. 
 
 1.56 
 
 430l-4.3r,5 
 
 Davis, .lames 
 
 485 
 
 14827-14846 
 
 Butler, Perce 
 
 974 
 
 3in9('-31714 
 
 DnvorcMi, Thomas 
 
 ()(il 
 
 21 367-2 I3;i3 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES. 
 
 IX 
 
 Name. 
 
 Davys, Cochrane 
 DeiiiiB, Benjamin 
 Dense, Col. Gerald 
 Delaney, .lohn 
 Delmege, .John C. 
 De Moleyns, T. 
 Dennis, Charles S. 
 Derhiim, A. 
 
 Devaney, Patrick 
 
 Doherty, James 
 
 Doherty, Rev. John 
 
 Doliertv, William 
 Donaldson, Samuel 
 Donovan, Bat. 
 Donovan, Patrick 
 Donnell, John 
 Doorley, .John 
 Doorley, J. C. 
 Doran, Andrew 
 Dorgan, John N. 
 
 Douglas, Joseph J. 
 
 Doualas, Richard M. 
 Dowling, Joseph 
 Dowling, Thomas 
 Dowling, Thomas 
 Doyle, Michael 
 Drennan, Denis 
 Drennim, James 
 Drew, J. R. 
 Duflferin, Lord 
 Duffy, Penis 
 Duffv. John 
 Duffy, Michael 
 Dundas, Andrew 
 Dunn, Robert 
 Dunno, Michael 
 Dwyer, William 
 
 Egan, John 
 Egan, Patrick 
 Errington, George 
 Evans, James 
 
 Everitt, James 
 
 Farrell, John 
 
 Farrell, Patrick 
 
 Farrell, Mrs. 
 Faucfttt, Francis 
 Fehilv, Roger 
 Fell, Richard L. 
 Fenlon. Edward 
 Ferguson, James 
 Ferguson, Robert 
 Ferney, Henry 
 Ferney, Roger 
 Fielding, John 
 Finn, Rev. Thomas 
 Fitzgerald, Edmond 
 Fitzgerald, Edward 
 Fitzgerald, Edward 
 Fitzgerald, Foster V. 
 Fitzgerald, Michael 
 Fitzgerald, R. U. P. 
 Fitzgerald, Robert 
 Fitzgerald, W. M. 
 Flaherty, Edward 
 Flaherty, John 
 Flaherty, Patrick 
 
 Flanagan, .lames 
 
 Flanagan, John 
 
 Flannery, John 
 
 Flannery, Thomas 
 
 Flynn, John 
 
 Flynn, Martin 
 
 Fivnn, Michael 
 
 Flynn, Michael 
 
 Flynn, Patrick 
 
 Flynn, Peter 
 
 Flynn, Stephen 
 
 Flynn, Timothy 
 
 Foley, Denis 
 
 Page. 
 
 470 
 
 950 
 
 1181 
 
 555 
 
 7-iO 
 
 1 
 
 957 
 
 90 
 
 449 
 
 493 
 
 1284 
 
 1302 
 
 313 
 
 391 
 
 009 
 
 909 
 
 372 
 
 582 
 
 .589 
 
 58 S 
 
 871 
 
 339 
 
 313 
 
 1264 
 
 . . 5S0 
 
 108 
 
 1065 
 
 ■ 560 
 
 1140 
 
 342 
 
 102 
 
 1015 
 
 .5-26 
 
 530 
 
 537 
 
 695 
 
 341 
 
 552 
 
 1239 
 
 562 
 1247 
 434 
 920 
 94 
 106 
 
 578 
 
 578 
 
 £78 
 494 
 506 
 938 
 13J 
 179 
 10 
 
 1238 
 
 • 506 
 
 1143 
 9.58 
 894 
 798 
 629 
 684 
 746 
 897 
 
 1322 
 284 
 492 
 642 
 492 
 560 
 
 328 
 
 552 
 
 555 
 
 590 
 
 501 
 
 552 
 
 446 
 
 640 
 
 589 
 
 537 
 
 821 
 
 820 
 
 'Question. 
 
 Name. 
 
 14265-14296 
 
 30986-31056 
 
 37;!2 1-37367 
 
 17219_l72-i7 
 
 23464 
 
 1-206 
 
 31226-31269 
 
 2410-2488 
 
 f 13589-13600 
 
 \ l:)H 11-13612 
 
 15018-15018 
 
 40069-40135 
 
 40229-40323 
 
 9162-9180 
 
 11496-11.544 
 
 29836-29813 
 
 2981 0-29835 
 
 10957-1 1026 
 
 18121-18137 
 
 18385-18391 
 
 18357-18370 
 
 28877-28919 
 
 9956-10015 
 
 10076-10078 
 
 39430-39472 
 
 18019-18096 
 
 27.54-2974 
 
 34447-34551 
 
 17435-17442 
 
 36008-36035 
 
 10041-10075 
 
 2655-2745 
 
 33038-33194 
 
 1616U16i84 
 
 16313-16320 
 
 16597-16605 
 
 22677-22682 
 
 100I6-I0040 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 38804-38812 
 
 17528-17548 
 39088-3912! 
 13055-13082 
 30250-30260 
 2489-2654 
 2746-2753 
 
 17927-17929 
 / 17930-17934 
 \ 17952-17956 
 17935-17951 
 1508!_I5130 
 15447-15491 
 30748-30816 
 3713-3783 
 4749-4918 
 207-400 
 38784-3.^803 
 1.5447-15491 
 36141-36180 
 31270- 
 2943N-29457 
 257 I 3-2573-^ 
 16270'- 16276 
 22260-22374 
 24262-24300 
 29505-29552 
 40487-40489 
 8423-8 525 
 14984-14989 
 2ii6i 1-2(1630 
 14982-149N3 
 17405-17411 
 9627-9761 
 17094-17173 
 17197-17206 
 
 18404 
 17481-17492 
 17094-17173 
 13464-13490 
 20516-20529 
 18397-18103 
 16606-16()39 
 26395-26398 
 26354-26372 
 
 Foley, James 
 Foran, William 
 
 Forde, Colonel W. B. .. 
 
 Fowler, Robert 
 Fowley, Hugh 
 Fox, Michael 
 Fox, Patrick, sen. 
 Vox, William 
 Fieneh, Acheson 
 Frost, James 
 Frost, Solomon 
 Froste, John 
 Furnc'v, Simon K. 
 
 Gairdner, ,Tohn 
 Gallagher, Charles 
 Gallagher, Connell 
 Gallagher, Hugh 
 Gamble, .lohn 
 Gamble, William 
 Ganly, James 
 Gannon, James 
 Gannon, Thomas 
 Gardner, Edward 
 Garrihan, .Tames, sen. .. 
 Garrihan, James, jun. .. 
 Garrihan, Patrick 
 Gartlan, T. M'Evoy .. 
 Garvey, Peter 
 Garvey, Toler R. 
 G.iult, William 
 Gibbons, Thomai 
 Gibbons, Walter 
 Gibson, William 
 
 Gilgan, James 
 
 Gill, .Tohn 
 Gillan, Peter 
 Gillespie, William 
 Gilroy, John 
 Glancy, .Tames 
 Goode, W. J. 
 Gore, Sir Charles 
 Gorman, Patrick 
 Grady, Patrick 
 Graham, John 
 Gray, William 
 Greene, J. B. 
 Greer, .Tames 
 Gregg, Susanna 
 Griffin, .Tames 
 Griffin, John 
 Gubbins, Rev. W. 
 Guiry, Jerome J. 
 
 Hackett, Michael 
 Halliday, W. H. 
 Halpin, William 
 Hamill, Arthur 
 Hamill, Rev. G. W. ..'. 
 Hamilton, Chailes W. ... 
 Hamilton, James P. 
 Hamilton, Major James 
 Hamilton, Martin 
 Hamilton, Dr. Robert ... 
 Hamilton. W. G. 
 Hammond, William 
 Hanlon, Lanty 
 Hanly, Michael 
 Hanly, Patrick 
 Hanly, Thomas 
 Harm a, James S. 
 Hanna, W. J. 
 Hannigan, John 
 Banning, John 
 Hardy, Joseph 
 Hargaden, Patrick 
 Harney, Daniel 
 Harrington, Tim. 
 Hart, James ... 
 Hart, Martin R. 
 Hart, Mii'hael 
 Plart, Owen ... 
 Hartigan, ./ohn 
 Haslett, Dr. S. T. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Question. 
 
 1139 
 
 35983-36007 
 
 506 
 
 15447-15491 
 
 251 
 
 6998-7098 
 
 1316 
 
 40417-404-21 
 
 1256 
 
 39239-39340 
 
 502 
 
 15298-15364 
 
 590 
 
 10433 
 
 573 
 
 17712-17734 
 
 573 
 
 17734 
 
 605 
 
 19087-19126 
 
 740 
 
 24054 
 
 713 
 
 23246-23317 
 
 683 
 
 22199-22259 
 
 828 
 
 26646-26664 
 
 636 
 
 20272-20378 
 
 447 
 
 13522-13539 
 
 493 
 
 15049-15055 
 
 479 
 
 14632-14662 
 
 306 
 
 8953-9002 
 
 -..368 
 
 10855-10908 
 
 1039 
 
 33607-33688 
 
 563 
 
 17549-17576 
 
 547 
 
 17781-17798 
 
 229 
 
 6295-6333 
 
 573 
 
 17757-17770 
 
 574 
 
 17771-17776 
 
 573 
 
 17735-17756 
 
 1168 
 
 36916-36973 
 
 .509 
 
 15591-1.5594 
 
 1299 
 
 40240-40255 
 
 287 
 
 8364-8407 
 
 554 
 
 17174-17177 
 
 '534 
 
 16478-16481 
 
 1240 
 
 38813-38853 
 
 447 
 
 / 13491-13498 
 { 13510-13514 
 
 624 
 
 19750-19811 
 
 441 
 
 1 3273-13283 
 
 493 
 
 15018-15048 
 
 429 
 
 127.«6-12801 
 
 583 
 
 181.S9-18211 
 
 1004 
 
 32608-32727 
 
 544 
 
 16909-16985 
 
 561 
 
 17443-17475 
 
 689 
 
 22451-22463 
 
 659 
 
 21294-21331 
 
 224 
 
 6169-6185 
 
 . 29 
 
 636-880 
 
 1281 
 
 39935-40068 
 
 363 
 
 10717-10738 
 
 802 
 
 25880-25910 
 
 642 
 
 20593-20610 
 
 722 
 
 23496-23520A 
 
 968 
 
 31554-31577 
 
 973 
 
 31635-31658 
 
 ,617 
 
 19560-19680 
 
 696 
 
 22718-22752 
 
 140 
 
 4187-4300 
 
 343 
 
 10079 
 
 1325 
 
 40504-40606 
 
 1029 
 
 33317-33451 
 
 481 
 
 14704-14780 
 
 695 
 
 22667-22675 
 
 1320 
 
 40448-40467 
 
 271 
 
 7720-7757 
 
 485 
 
 14780-14826 
 
 475 
 
 1 43 7 C- 14.502 
 
 978 
 
 318:3-31903 
 
 660 
 
 21333-21366 
 
 .574 
 
 17777-17783 
 
 327 
 
 9601-9626 
 
 303 
 
 8S,s,5-8952 
 
 442 
 
 13291-13306 
 
 552 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 648 
 
 20837-20934 
 
 447 
 
 13499-13509 
 
 1246 
 
 39063-39087 
 
 920 
 
 30250-30260 
 
 449 
 
 13618-13647 
 
 628 
 
 1990S_20037 
 
 429 
 
 12802-12840 
 
 427 
 
 12696-12738 
 
 690 
 
 224G4-22474 
 
 400 
 
 11766-11864 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 Name. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Question. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Question. 
 
 Hastings, Thomas 
 Healey, Patrick 
 Healy, Gorges 
 Healy, John ... 
 Healy, William 
 HefFernan, John 
 Heffernan, Michael 
 Hegarty, Jeremiah 
 Hely, John George 
 Henderson, John 
 Henry, Bernard 
 Henry, D. 
 Henry, Robert 
 Heraghty, Edward 
 Heraghty, Thady 
 Heraghty, Thomas 
 Heraghty, Widow 
 Herbert, Henry 
 Herbert, Maurice 
 Heron, William 
 Hewson, John B. 
 Highland, James 
 
 Higgins, Charles 
 
 Higgins, Patrick 
 Hill, Rev. P. 
 Hogan, Michael 
 Holahan, Rev. Jame» 
 Hopkins, John 
 Howard, William 
 Howley, Rev. M. 
 Hughes, Stephen 
 
 Hunt, Denis ... 
 
 Hunt, Edward L. 
 Hunt, Thomas 
 Hussey, Margaret 
 
 Hussey, Samuel M. 
 
 Hyland, Patrick 
 
 Irvine, Col. J. G. 
 
 Jackson, James E. 
 Jackson, Joshua 
 Johnson, Philip F. 
 Johnston, St. George 
 Johnstone, James 
 Jones, W. Pence 
 Jordan, Michael 
 Joyce, Michael 
 Joyce, Patrick 
 Joyce, Thomas F. 
 
 Kane, James i.. 
 Kane, Michael 
 Kane, Patrick 
 Kane, Patrick 
 Kavanagh, Francii 
 Keane, Marcus 
 Kearney^ Maurice 
 Kearney, Patrick 
 Keating, Jeremiah 
 Keegan, Mrs. 
 Keeney, John 
 Kelly, Bernard 
 Kelly, Edmund M. 
 Kelly, Edward 
 Kelly, Edward 
 Kelly, James 
 Kelly, John ... 
 Kellv, Michael 
 Kelly, Patrick 
 Kelly, William 
 Kennedy, James 
 Kennedy, John 
 Ker, A. Murray 
 Kerins, Mark 
 Kerrigan, Anthony 
 Kilroe, James 
 Kilroe, Laurence 
 Kilmartin, James 
 Kilmartin, John 
 Kincaid, J. S. 
 King, Christopher 
 King, Michael 
 
 559 
 441 
 
 1183 
 507 
 506 
 955 
 647 
 935 
 965 
 492 
 272 
 403 
 
 1338 
 531 
 531 
 533 
 531 
 788 
 697 
 461 
 705 
 556 
 
 442 
 
 117 
 921 
 731 
 
 1248 
 552 
 690 
 
 1140 
 509 
 444 
 445 
 663 
 576 
 641 
 782 
 
 1303 
 555 
 
 1125 
 
 606 
 4H6 
 840 
 1 120 
 1229 
 832 
 448 
 633 
 552 
 653 
 
 696 
 689 
 538 
 689 
 508 
 
 1128 
 .808 
 552 
 800 
 695 
 446 
 591 
 128 
 590 
 511 
 481 
 589 
 587 
 587 
 591 
 561 
 590 
 279 
 634 
 530 
 579 
 587 
 650 
 688 
 
 l'2H8 
 
 1246 
 
 1305 
 
 17348-17364 
 
 13241-13-264 
 
 37368-37449 
 
 15492-15521 
 
 15447-15491 
 
 31125- 
 
 20799-20810 
 
 30677-30747 
 
 31491-31524 
 
 15006-15014 
 
 7758-7868 
 
 11865-11910 
 
 40669-40670 
 
 16349-16359 
 
 16349-16359 
 
 16432-16444 
 
 16.360-16371 
 
 25448-25471 
 
 22762-22801 
 
 14011-14075 
 
 22991-23101 
 
 17256-17265 
 
 ( 13307-13331 
 
 [ 13359-13361 
 
 3070-3298 
 
 30261-30320 
 
 23741-23856 
 
 39122-39205 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 22475-22490 
 
 36036-36085 
 
 15562-15579 
 
 13378-13379 
 
 13437-13451 
 
 S 1499-21660 
 
 17862-17869 
 
 20550-20558 
 
 25244-25446 
 
 40468-404 H6 
 
 17211-17218 
 
 35656-35758 
 
 19132- 
 14847- 
 2fi976- 
 35570- 
 38578- 
 26781- 
 1 3570- 
 20038. 
 17094- 
 21036- 
 
 .19177 
 -14919 
 27091 
 35655 
 38603 
 .26976 
 .13588 
 .20099 
 .17173 
 21114 
 
 22757-22759 
 22442-22450 
 16640-16647 
 22434-22441 
 15522-15532 
 35759-35824 
 26088-26149 
 17094-17173 
 25826-25877 
 2268S-22«87 
 13462-13463 
 18+55-1846i 
 
 3687-3712 
 18428-18434 
 15652-15677 
 14679-14703 
 18392-18396 
 18303-18334 
 
 17965 
 18445-18449 
 17476-17480 
 18424-18429 
 
 80 1 2-8242 
 20151-20194 
 16336-16343 
 17966-18018 
 18276-18302 
 20936-21 0.J5 
 18385-18356 
 40214-40240 
 39i)2l-390fi2 
 40324-40346 
 
 King-Harman, Col. E. R. 
 
 Kirk, William, 
 Knipe, Thomas 
 Knox, Utred A. 
 Kyne, John ... 
 Kyne, Timothy 
 
 Laird, Joseph 
 Laffan, Dr. Thomas ... 
 Lambert, Alexander C. ... 
 Lambert, Thomas C. ... 
 Lane, B. H. 
 Lane, John 
 Lane, Michael 
 Lansdowne, Marquis of 
 Lapsley, .lames 
 Larkin, Samuel 
 Larkin, Michael 
 Larminie, Alexander C. 
 Larminie, W. R. 
 LaTouche, .lohn 
 LaTouohe, Francis 
 Lawlor, Patrick 
 Leahy, Daniel F. 
 Leary, Denis 
 Lefroy, Thomas 
 Leitrim, The Earl of ... 
 Lennon, John 
 Leonard, Francis 
 Lepper, Robert 
 L'Estrange, Christopher 
 Lewin. Frederick T. ... 
 l-ifford, Viscount 
 Limerick, Earl of 
 Little, Simon 
 Longfield, St. Hon. M.... 
 Loughlin, Bernard 
 Loughrej', John 
 Loughrey, Rev. E. 
 Lyons, Eev. P. 
 
 MacDermot, The, q.c. 
 Mackey, Sir James 
 Mackenzie, C. R. 
 Madden, James 
 Madden, Patrick 
 Madden, William 
 MadiU, Rev. Dr. 
 Magher, Michael 
 Maguire, Patrick 
 Mahon, John Ross 
 Mahony, Richard J. 
 Maley, Patrick 
 Malley, Anthony 
 Malley, Owen 
 Malley, Patrick 
 Malley, Patrick 
 Malley, William 
 Maloney, John 
 Mann, Colonel Deane ... 
 
 Mannion, James 
 
 Mannion, John 
 Marmion, Henry R. 
 Marshall, Thomas 
 Martin, John 
 Marum, Mulhallen 
 Maxwell, Major R. P. 
 
 Meagher, Rev. T. 
 
 Meara, John 
 Meehan. Michael 
 Meehan, Rev. P. 
 Meehan, Thomas 
 Meek, Thomas 
 Melia, Patrick 
 Melly, Philip 
 Miller, George H. 
 
 Million, William 
 
 Mills, Michael 
 Milino, .lames 
 Mitchell, Edward 
 
 466 
 1296 
 1253 
 126 
 548 
 639 
 639 
 
 288 
 966 
 1336 
 615 
 3-23 
 823 
 688 
 1186 
 307 
 554 
 820 
 526 
 528 
 35 
 1074 
 7011 
 8)4 
 821 
 1253 
 381 
 2i.7 
 663 
 '395 
 437 
 1062 
 1152 
 749 
 1265 
 1276 
 362 
 407 
 376 
 551 
 
 1093 
 '1335 
 
 434 
 ■■ 695 
 •■578 
 
 723 
 
 353 
 1158 
 
 531 
 
 655 
 
 802 
 
 535 
 ■■'5C2 
 *"534 
 
 5.12 
 
 608 
 
 607 
 
 701 
 1315 
 
 426 
 
 426 
 ■ 915 
 
 781 
 
 458 
 
 1131 
 
 1311 
 
 78 
 
 742 
 
 743 
 
 961 
 
 747 
 
 698 
 
 439 
 
 415 
 
 532 
 
 493 
 1211 
 
 443 
 
 586 
 508 
 558 
 
 14117-14264 
 40193-4020] 
 39206-39240 
 3599-3686 
 16986-17063 
 20427-20515 
 20379-20426 
 
 8408-8425 
 31525-31537 
 40627-4064 2 
 19508-19559 
 95n7-960a 
 26438-26564 
 22375-22433 
 37473-37663 
 9003-9035 
 17178-17186 
 26373-26392 
 16185-16239 . 
 16240-16259 
 881-1078 
 34724-34794 
 228-26_2286a 
 27138--27227 
 26402-26436 
 39206-39240 
 11186-11336 
 7537-7641 
 21475-21498 
 11651-11 653 
 130)^3-13174 
 34795-34841 
 36416-36468 
 24381-24415 
 39473-39583 
 39760-39934 
 10686-10706 
 12058-12124 
 11062-11185 
 17077-17093 
 
 35174-35183 
 40614-40621 
 1300.5-13054 
 22688-2-2702 
 
 17929 
 23521-23554 
 
 37174-37222 
 1 6372-1 (i3H3 
 21147-21243 
 25911-25975 
 16485-16486 
 17505-17527 
 16482-16484 
 16397-16408 
 19231-19249 
 191811-19-230 
 22871-22944 
 40415 
 ■ 12622-12649 
 ' 12651-12657 
 12659-12695 
 12650-12658 
 3001 2-10188 
 25195-2..206 
 13930-139H5 
 35825-35959 
 40402-404 13 
 2112-2272 
 241 35-24 138i. 
 
 24182 
 313.5,5-31372 
 24301-24350 
 22802-22825 
 13175-13218 
 12266-1-2293 
 16.S84-lf.396 
 13018-15048 
 38 II 9-38 1 99 
 13367-1 •■ 378 
 133S8-13425 
 18258-1H275 
 15533-15.161 
 17-95-17315 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES. 
 
 XI 
 
 Name. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Question. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Question. 
 
 Molloy, .lohn 
 Moloney, Peter 
 Moloney, Richard 
 Moniifflian, Patrick 
 Monahan, Thomas 
 Mooney, Rev. Maurice 
 Moore, Cecil 
 Moore, George 
 Moore, .Tohn 
 Moore, Patrick 
 Moore, VV. ,T. 
 Moran, Michael 
 Moran, Patrick 
 Moran, Patrick 
 Morice, Patrick 
 Morrison, H. R. 
 Morrogh, James 
 
 Morton, James 
 Moyniliiin, Rov. A. 
 Mulcahy, Patrick 
 
 Mulholland, A. 
 
 Miillaley, James 
 
 MulLily, Francis 
 
 MuUan, John 
 
 Murphy, Very Rev. Canon 
 
 Alurphy, Edmund 
 
 Murphy, John 
 
 Murphy. Martin 
 
 Mur|)hy, Maurice 
 
 Aluipliy, Peter 
 
 Murphy, Thomas 
 
 Murphy, Timothy 
 
 Muiray, Patrick 
 
 MAleena, James 
 
 M'Caffery, .Tames 
 
 M'Callion. Charles 
 
 M'Cann, Harry 
 
 M'Carthy, Rev. Callaghan 
 
 M'Cartliy, Eugene 
 
 M'Carthy, Florence 
 
 M'Cau.-land, C. T. 
 
 M'Clean, Thomas 
 
 M'Cormack, James 
 
 M'Connell, John 
 
 M'Crea, ,Iohn 
 
 M'Cutchan, Rev. George 
 
 M'Dennott, Alfred 
 
 AI 'Dermott, Thomas ... 
 
 M'Donnell, Farrell 
 
 M'Donnell. James C. ... 
 
 M'Donnell, John 
 
 M'Donnell, Martin 
 
 M'Donnell, Michael ... , 
 
 M'Donnell, Patrick 
 
 M'Donnell, Patrick 
 
 M'Donough, Patrick ... 
 
 M'Elderry, Thomas 
 
 M'Elroy, S. C. 
 
 M'Enerney, Denis 
 
 M'EviUy, Rev. Jer. ... 
 
 M'Gaharen, John 
 M'Garr\-, John 
 M'Geaney, Rev. P. 
 M'(jilligan, .John 
 
 M'Ginn, Patrick 
 
 M'Ginty, Hugh 
 M'Glinchy, James 
 M'Gohlrick, Andrew ... 
 M'Govern, Thomas 
 M'Grath, Michael 
 M'Grogan, Manus 
 M'Hale, Thomas 
 M'Hugh, Widow 
 MTntyi-e, Hugh 
 M'lntyre, James H. 
 M'Kean, Henry 
 M'Kenna, Rev. E. 
 M'Keogh, Rev. W. J. ... 
 M'lvinley, Hugh 
 M'l.ou^hlin, Bryan 
 M'Louohlin, Michael ... 
 M'l.oughlin, Daniel 
 M'!.,oughlin, Daniel 
 
 :j.02 
 fiOS 
 890 
 .J7G 
 491 
 
 lOiO 
 497 
 89.) 
 896 
 '231 
 
 557 
 
 5J2 
 
 552 
 
 353 
 
 492 
 
 175 
 
 759 
 
 960 
 
 280 
 
 58fi 
 
 5116 
 
 497 
 
 ,X42 
 
 34! 
 
 949 
 
 434 
 
 810 
 
 1145 
 
 575 
 
 832 
 
 233 
 
 'i35 
 
 492 
 
 413 
 
 1204 
 
 1232 
 
 920 
 
 920 
 
 314 
 
 448 
 
 1142 
 
 362 
 
 1222 
 
 1055 
 
 1253 
 
 577 
 
 584 
 
 1325 
 
 575 
 
 658 
 
 552 
 
 430 
 
 559 
 
 4.30 
 
 162 
 
 159 
 
 976 
 
 530 
 
 4S0 
 574 
 21.3 
 493 
 
 530 
 
 477 
 311 
 502 
 
 1177 
 533 
 294 
 558 
 507 
 442 
 .•364 
 275 
 454 
 
 1173 
 397 
 507 
 431 
 509 
 411 
 
 17094-I7l7:i 
 19250-19327 
 294^*2-29.305 
 I7870-17H71 
 150.56-15058 
 31057-31124 
 33689-33937 
 15131-151-15 
 ■2945a-294[i7 
 29468-29481 
 6334-6351 
 17094-17173 
 17277-17294 
 17094-17173 
 17094-17173 
 10385-10497 
 15001-15005 
 4B55-4748 
 2461 2-24 (i38 
 31346-31349 
 8326-8363 
 18250-18257 
 l.5447-154ni 
 15U6-I5156 
 30817-30836 
 10080-10196 
 30970-30985 
 16468-16-174 
 26150-26175 
 36222-36282 
 1783t)-17862 
 29388-29-115 
 6352-6377 
 6378-6393 
 15015 
 12208-12229 
 37942-37997 
 38654-38C90 
 30250-30260 
 302.50-30260 
 9181-9345 
 13540-13557 
 36086-36140 
 10673-10685 
 38400-38)79 
 34108-34258 
 39200-39240 
 17887-17902 
 18212-18225 
 40500-40501 
 17818-17835 
 21244-21293 
 17094-17173 
 12841-1288.5 
 17382-17386 
 17.382-17386 
 4458-4571 
 4 405-4654 
 317.59-31829 
 16320-16324 
 16383; 16419 
 16443-16445 
 146fi3-14678 
 17805-17817 
 
 3855 
 
 1.5018-15048 
 
 f 16325-16335 
 
 116344-16388 
 
 14503-14561 
 
 9092-9161 
 
 15283-15297 
 
 372-23-372.55 
 
 20100-20151 
 
 8585-8626 
 
 17295-17318 
 
 15492-15521 
 
 13332-13366 
 
 107.39-10854 
 
 7869-801 1 
 
 13776-13929 
 
 37056-37173 
 
 11675-11765 
 
 154!)-2-].552l 
 
 12886-12899 
 
 15580-15590 
 
 12139-12169 
 
 M'Luughlin, John 
 M'Louyhlin, Patrick ... 
 MLoughlin, Thomas .... 
 M'Mahon, John 
 M'jNlahon, Rev. M. ... 
 M'lS-Ianus, John 
 M'Mullan, Tim. 
 M'Murtry, William ... 
 M'Nair, James 
 M'Neill, Edmund 
 M'Sorley, Owen 
 M 'Sweeney, Peter 
 M'Swiney, Canon 
 
 Xaiighten, Patrick ,.. 
 Naughton, William 
 Xeligan, John C. ... 
 
 Newman, John R. 
 Nicholson, Michael 
 Nolan, Matthew 
 Nolan, Michael 
 Nolan, Rev. P. F. 
 Noon, Patric!: 
 Norris, .John R. 
 Nugent, Edwin 
 Nugent, .John ... 
 
 Nugent, Michael 
 Nugent, Patrick 
 Nyhan, Daniel 
 
 O'Brien, Brien 
 O'Brien, Denis 
 O'Brien, Edward W. ... 
 O'Brien, Murrough 
 O'Brien, Patrick 
 O'Bvrne, Patrick 
 O'Ckllaghan, P. 
 O'Connell, John 
 O'Connor, Maurice 
 O'Connor, Reverend M. 
 O'Connor, Reverend P. 
 O'Connor, Peter 
 O'Connor, Thomas 
 O'Donnell, Francis 
 O'Donnell, .John 
 O'Donnell, Michael 
 O'Donnell, Patrick 
 O'Donnell, Patrick 
 
 O'Donoghue, Rev. D. ... 
 
 O'Donovan, The • ... 
 O'Flaherty, Mathew ... 
 O'Flaherty, M. F. 
 O'Flynn, Thomas 
 O'Halloran, Rev. Daniel 
 O'Halloran, John S. ... 
 O'Hara, Col. .James 
 O'Keelfe, Rev. Richard 
 Olphert, Wybrants 
 Olphert, Francis M. 
 O'Mahony, Patrick 
 O'Malley, Rev. W. ... 
 O'Malley, John 
 O'lNeill, Hugh 
 Ormsby, .ludge 
 O'Rourke, Thomas 
 
 Orr, Dr. Gawn 
 
 Osborne, Samuel 
 Osborne, Walter 
 OShauyhnessy, Patrick 
 O'Sullivan, Rev. C. 
 
 O'Sullivan, Daniel 
 
 O'Sullivan, Florence ... 
 O'Sullivan, Michael 
 Oswald, Andrew S. 
 
 Palmer, Thomas 
 Patterson, Hugh Gill ... 
 Patterson, Rev. S. 
 Payne, J Warren 
 
 Persse, Barton 
 
 Pery, EdmOnd H. 
 
 506 
 
 15447-15491 
 
 441 
 
 13268-13272 
 
 448 
 
 13558-13569 
 
 1061 
 
 34358-34404 
 
 857 
 
 28454-286 1 7 
 
 432 
 
 12925-13004 
 
 448 
 
 13558-13569 
 
 290 
 
 845.5-8572 
 
 296 
 
 8646-8677 
 
 219 
 
 6041-6103 
 
 1223 
 
 38480-38515 
 
 780 
 
 25174-25194 
 
 945 
 
 30919-30932 
 
 591 
 
 18435-18444 
 
 1245 
 
 38993-39020 
 
 1079 
 
 34842-34928 
 
 778 
 
 25101 
 
 439 
 
 13175-13218 
 
 663 
 
 21461-21475 
 
 964 
 
 31461-31490 
 
 1154 
 
 36469-36489 
 
 646 
 
 20759-20784 
 
 347 
 
 10197-10302 
 
 961 
 
 31373-31392 
 
 ofiO 
 
 31330-31345 
 
 5-U 
 
 16372-16383 
 
 97.5 
 
 31715-31758 
 
 899 
 
 2955.3-29595 
 
 819 
 
 26334-26353 
 
 581 
 
 18097-18120 ■ 
 
 140 
 
 3906-4186 
 
 1007 
 
 32728-33037 
 
 524 
 
 16(183-16134 
 
 559 
 
 17378-17381 
 
 212 
 
 5729-5839 
 
 113 
 
 2975-3069 
 
 781 
 
 25207-25243 
 
 753 
 
 24467-24611 
 
 817 
 
 26280-26312 
 
 451 
 
 13704-13775 
 
 763 
 
 24U42-24712 
 
 563 
 
 17577-17668 
 
 552 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 ,559 
 
 17387-17391 
 
 53M 
 
 1667.5-16702 
 
 977 
 
 31830-31872 
 
 7fi2 
 
 24639-24641 
 
 771 
 
 25024-2.5059 
 
 766 
 
 •24821 
 
 90G 
 
 29747-29809 
 
 a73 
 
 21 837-2 193S 
 
 611 
 
 19380-19462 
 
 643 
 
 2il(i48-20667 
 
 1138 
 
 35960-35982 
 
 967 
 
 31539-31.553 
 
 614 
 
 19463-19505 
 
 1207 
 
 37998-38038 
 
 393 
 
 11545-11592 
 
 473 
 
 14339-14375 
 
 826 
 
 26565-26645 
 
 522 
 
 16123 
 
 578 
 
 17903-17912 
 
 1229 
 
 38562-38577 
 
 20 
 
 401-636 
 
 776 
 
 25060-25100 
 
 1084 
 
 34929-35012 
 
 1089 
 
 35112-35114 
 
 308 
 
 9036-9077 
 
 361 
 
 10641 
 
 718 
 
 23386-23463 
 
 873 
 
 28920-2B016 
 
 798 
 
 25739-25825 
 
 801 
 
 25878-25879 
 
 767 
 
 24876-25023 
 
 643 
 
 20631-^0647 
 
 1088 
 
 35080-3511] 
 
 655 
 
 21115-21146 
 
 I15H 
 
 3663!)-36689 
 
 46 
 
 1249-1364 
 
 927 
 
 30406-30465 
 
 600 
 
 f 18836-18939 
 
 \ 19127-19131 
 
 550 
 
 17064-17076 
 
xu 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Question. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Question. 
 
 Perry, Joseph 
 
 226 
 
 6208-6294 
 
 Starkey, James 
 
 692 
 
 22554-22652 
 
 Perry, Michael 
 
 694 
 
 22653-22666 
 
 Staunton, John 
 
 529 
 
 16260-16270 
 
 Philbin, John ... ..i 
 
 560 
 
 17421-17423 
 
 Steel, John ... ... 
 
 311 
 
 9078-9091 
 
 Philbin, Peter 
 
 560 
 
 17424-17435 
 
 Stephens, Rev. John ... 
 
 572 
 
 17709-17711 
 
 Philpin, Peter 
 
 552 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 Stewart, Samuel 
 
 295 
 
 8627-8645 
 
 Philpin, Thomas 
 
 532 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 Stokes, Edward D. 
 
 944 
 
 30865-30918 
 
 Powell, Richard 
 
 1324 
 
 40496-40499 
 
 Stoney, Robert V. 
 
 535 
 
 16487-16564 
 
 Power, Francis H. 
 
 870 
 
 28846-2S876 
 
 Stoney, Sadlier 
 
 724 
 
 23555-236 19a 
 
 Pringle, Charles 
 
 1161 
 
 36690-36801 
 
 Striich, Michael 
 
 748 
 
 24351-24380 
 
 Pringle, Henry 
 
 1237 
 
 38761-38784 
 
 Stronge, J. C. 
 
 1253 
 
 39206-39240 
 
 Pyne, Rev. John 
 
 1243 
 
 38919-38992 
 
 Sullivan, Florence 
 
 920 
 
 30250-30260 
 
 
 
 
 Sullivan, Jeremiah ,.. 
 
 920 
 
 30250-30260 
 
 Quane, Thomas 
 
 878 
 
 29025-29052 
 
 Sullivan, John 
 
 910 
 
 29884-29969 
 
 Quinn, Rev. Andrew ... 
 
 501 
 
 1525.5-15282 
 
 Sullivan, Maurice 
 
 695 
 
 22703-22717 
 
 Quinn, Rev. C. 
 
 /205 
 1213 
 
 5649-5798 
 
 Sullivan, Michael 
 
 912 
 
 29957-29969 
 
 5856-5857 
 
 Swann, Thomas 
 
 222 
 
 6104-6168 
 
 Quinn, Peter 
 
 (236 
 |244 
 
 6394-6615 
 
 Sweetman, John 
 
 42 
 
 1079-1248 
 
 6736-6755 
 
 Synnott, Mark S. 
 
 256 
 
 7199-7269 
 
 Rankin, John ... ..i. 
 
 357 
 
 10498-10533 
 
 
 
 ( 13601-13610 
 \ 13613-13617 
 
 Rathborne, H. T. 
 
 1155 
 
 36490-36524 
 
 Taggart, James ... 
 
 449 
 
 Read, Samuel 
 
 1240 
 
 38854-38859 
 
 Tarpey, Darby ... ... 
 
 661 
 
 21394-21419 
 
 Reardon, Michael 
 
 821) 
 
 26393-26395 
 
 Tarr, Joseph W. 
 
 893 
 
 29416-29437 
 
 Redmond, Aid. C, 
 
 1149 
 
 36367-36415 
 
 Taylor, John 
 
 328 
 
 21394-21419 
 
 Reeves, R. E. 
 
 79 
 
 1968-211 1 
 
 Teehan, Timothy 
 
 821 
 
 26399-26401 
 
 Reeves, R. W. C. 
 
 716 
 
 23 31 8-233 B5 
 
 Tener, Edward S. 
 
 1156 
 
 365-J5_366?8 
 
 Richardson, N. J. 
 
 602 
 
 18940-19020 
 
 Thomas, Edwin 
 
 539 
 
 16703-16828 
 
 Riordan, Daniel J. 
 
 829 
 
 26665-26780 
 
 Thomas, Francis 
 
 478 
 
 1456 1-1 4589. 
 
 Robb, Hamilton 
 
 194 
 
 5200-5221 
 
 Thomas, John 
 
 492 
 
 14990-15000- 
 
 Robb, Rev. J. G 
 
 596 
 
 1863.3-18689 
 
 Tobin, James 
 
 974 
 
 31659-31677 
 
 Roberts, George G. 
 
 1034 
 
 33452 
 
 Tobin, Michael 
 
 974 
 
 31678-31689 
 
 Robertson, Thomas 
 
 50 
 
 136.5-1569 
 
 Toole, Edward 
 
 648 
 
 20828-20836 
 
 Robinson, George J. ... 
 
 644 
 
 20690-20758 
 
 Toole, Martin 
 
 647 
 
 20811-20827 
 
 Robinson, John 
 
 196 
 
 5283-5357 
 
 Tottenham, Col. C. G. ... 
 
 1301 
 
 40275-40296 
 
 Robinson, W. G. ... | 
 
 1299 
 
 40422-40442 
 
 Townsend, C. TJ. ... ■] 
 
 58 
 
 1570-1564 
 
 1317 
 
 404+7 
 
 1047 
 
 33938-34106; 
 
 Roche, John 
 
 1058 
 
 34259-34357 
 
 1298 
 
 40213 
 
 Roche, Lt.-Gen. 
 
 867 
 
 28795-28845 
 
 Townsend, R. U. F. ... 
 
 1300 
 
 40258-40262 
 
 Roche, Patrick 
 
 552 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 Townsend, W. U. 
 
 681 
 
 22096-22198 
 
 Roche, Patrick (2) 
 
 552 
 
 17094-17173 
 
 Tracey, Michael 
 
 1146 
 
 36283-36325 
 
 Rochfort, William 
 
 1025 
 
 33195-33316 
 
 Traynor, John 
 
 403 
 
 11865-11910 
 
 Ronayne, Patrick 
 
 918 
 
 30189-30249 
 
 Trench, Hon. C. J. 
 
 1215 
 
 38303-38328 
 
 Rossborough, John 
 
 375 
 
 11027-11059 
 
 Trench, John Townshend 
 
 1193 
 
 37664-37941 
 
 Ruddell, Nelson 
 
 194 
 
 5222-5282 
 
 Tunny, James 
 
 522 
 
 16042-16082 
 
 Russell, Frederick 
 
 1338 
 
 40661 -4 0C68 
 
 Tute, William C. 
 
 460 
 
 13986-14010 
 
 Rutledge, John 
 
 1227 
 
 38535-38561 
 
 Tuthill, John 
 
 696 
 
 22753-22756 
 
 Ryall, Edmond 
 
 764 
 
 24713-24743 
 
 Tuthill, Mrs. 
 
 697 
 
 22760-22761 
 
 Ryan, Daniel 
 
 743 
 
 24183-24260 
 
 
 
 
 Ryan, John 
 
 1337 
 
 40643-40660 
 
 Ventry, Lord ... 
 
 1089 
 
 35115-35173 
 
 
 
 
 Verling, Bartholomew ... 
 
 888 
 
 29272-29322 
 
 Sanders, Thomas 
 
 978 
 
 29053-29168 
 
 Vernon, John E. 
 
 1097 
 
 35249-35485 
 
 Saunders, James 
 
 560 
 
 17392-17404 
 
 
 
 
 Say, William 
 
 263 
 
 7429-7459 
 
 Waldron, Martin J. ... 
 
 388 
 
 18371-18384 
 
 Sayers, E. B. ... 
 
 1185 
 
 37450-37472 
 
 Walker, John 
 
 198 
 
 5358-5396 
 
 Scott, James ... 
 
 518 
 
 15880-16008 
 
 Walliice, John 
 
 291 
 
 8513-3584 
 
 Scott, John W. 
 
 690 
 
 22491-22553 
 
 Wiilpole. Jonathan 
 
 805 
 
 25976-26087 
 
 Scott, W. E. ... 
 
 322 
 
 9454-9506 
 
 Walsh, John 
 
 559 
 
 17365-17377 
 
 Seymour, Col. Thomas... 
 
 643 
 
 20668-20689 
 
 Walsh, John 
 
 960 
 
 31350-31354 
 
 Shanley, Thomas 
 
 532 
 
 16409-164 19 
 
 Walsh, Mark 
 
 562 
 
 1 7528- 1 7548 
 
 Shanley, Thomas 
 
 440 
 
 13219-13240 
 
 AValsh, Matthew 
 
 1147 
 
 36326-3fi3K6 
 
 Shaw, William 
 
 1318 
 
 40443-40446 
 
 Walsh, Widow 
 
 531 
 
 16360-16371 
 
 Shea, James ... 
 
 574 
 
 17799-17804 
 
 Walsh, Very Rev. W. J. 
 
 1109 
 
 35486-35547 
 
 Sheehan, Patrick D. 
 
 877 
 
 29017-29024 
 
 Ward, Hon. S. 
 
 253 
 
 7099-7161 
 
 Sheehy, .lames 
 
 909 
 
 29844-29806 
 
 Ward, John 
 
 489 
 
 14920-14981 
 
 Sheehy, Michael 
 
 910 
 
 298(i7-29883 
 
 Ward, -Tohn 
 
 577 
 
 17923-17927 
 
 Sheridan, Martin 
 
 556 
 
 17251-17265 
 
 A\'ard, Myles 
 
 447 
 
 13515-13527 
 
 Shillington, T. ... | 
 
 186 
 
 4960-5221 
 
 Waring, Lt.-Col. 
 
 247 
 
 6881-6997 
 
 198 
 
 5397-5413 
 
 Wariiock, Thomas 
 
 350 
 
 1 0304-10334 
 
 Shiels, Pat ... 
 
 557 
 
 17206-17276 
 
 Warren, Miehaiel 
 
 7t^9 
 
 25472-25570 
 
 Simpson, John 
 
 358 
 
 lC5:i4-10540 
 
 Waters, Rev. A. 
 
 542 
 
 16829-10908 
 
 Simpson, William 
 
 123 
 
 3300-:!598 
 
 Waters, Daniel 
 
 441 
 
 13284-1 3290 
 
 Sinclair, James 
 
 386 
 
 113S7-I1407 
 
 Watson, \V. J. 
 
 264 
 
 7460-7536 
 
 Sinclair, William ... -j 
 
 388 
 
 11408-11495 
 
 White, C.C.B 
 
 1301 
 
 40264-40267 
 
 394 
 
 11593 
 
 White, Edward 
 
 709 
 
 23102-23245 
 
 Smith, James 
 
 439 
 
 
 Wilson, Hugh ... .,, 
 
 289 
 
 8436-8454 
 
 Smith, Joseph 
 
 1221 
 
 38411 -384 59 
 
 Wilson, N 
 
 269 
 
 7642-764 9 
 
 Smollen, Very Rev. Canon < 
 
 1165 
 
 36802-36915 
 
 Winder, .1. G. 
 
 244 
 
 6756-6880 
 
 1173 
 
 37055 
 
 Wrench, Frederick 
 
 199 
 
 5414-5648 
 
 Smullen, James 
 
 478 
 
 14590-14631 
 
 Wright, Thomas R. ... 
 
 849 
 
 27228-28383 
 
 Spaicflit, W'i Ilium 
 
 751 
 
 24 416-244^6 
 
 
 
 
 Sproule, Robert 
 
 1218 
 
 3SM-J9- 18410 
 
 Toiing, .lohn 
 
 214 
 
 5858-6040 
 
 Stack, Robert E. ... .[[ 
 Stackpoole, Kicliard ... 
 
 1309 
 728 
 
 40;49-40401- 
 23669-23740 
 
 Young, John 
 
 428 
 
 12739-12785 
 
INDEX TO REPLIES OF PERSONS AFFECTED BY STATEMENTS IN 
 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, PART I. 
 
 Note. — This Index is not yet fully completed, and will be reprinted with additions in Volume III. The letter in the 
 last column indicates the Appendix, and the number following is that of the question or statement. 
 
 ■S^umber of Question. 
 
 Name of Witness. 
 
 Name of Persou replying. 
 
 Owner of Property mentioned. 
 
 Letter 
 and No. 
 
 1249, &c., . 
 
 Rev. S. S. Patterson, 
 
 C. W. Hamilton, esq., . 
 
 His Grace the Duke of LeLnster, 
 
 A, 40504. 
 
 2334, he, . 
 
 Bernard Coleman, 
 
 Robert E. Stack, esq., . 
 
 Board of Works, . 
 
 A, 40349. 
 
 2417-2437, 
 
 Andrew Derham, 
 
 Henry Alexander Hamilton, 
 esq., J. p., agent. 
 
 Ion Trant Hamilton, esq.,M.p., 
 
 C, 68. 
 
 2567-74, . 
 
 James Everitt, . 
 
 Henry Booker, esq.. 
 
 Henry Booker, esq., 
 
 0. 
 
 2661-2685, 
 
 J. K Drew, . 
 
 J. Scott, esq.. 
 
 Henry Cox, esq., . 
 
 C, 104. 
 
 2719-2726, 
 
 J. R. Drew, 
 
 Earl of SLefficia, . 
 
 Earl of Sheffield, . 
 
 c. 
 
 2740-2745, 
 
 J. R. Drew, 
 
 Messrs. Townshend, agents, . 
 
 Captain Caldwell, . 
 
 C, 184. 
 
 2746-2753, 
 
 James Everitt, 
 
 Henry Smith, esq., 
 
 Henry Smith, esq.. 
 
 0,96. 
 
 3016-20,3023-4, 
 
 John O'ConneU, 
 
 Daniel F. Leahy, e,sq., d.l., . 
 
 Earl of Cork, 
 
 C, 1. 
 
 3038-9, 3047. 
 
 
 
 
 
 3030-1, . 
 
 John O'Connell, 
 
 H. Longfield, esq., 
 
 H. Longfield, esq., 
 
 C. 
 
 3051-3055, 
 
 John O'Connell, 
 
 Henry Trench, esq., land agent, 
 
 Eaii of Egmont, . 
 
 0,2. 
 
 3070-3298, 
 
 R. G. Hill, 
 
 Fredk. Capron, esq., agent, . 
 
 Sir Richd. Wallace, bart.,M.p., 
 
 C, 83. 
 
 ^620-1, . 
 
 Thomas Knipe, 
 
 Earl of Caledon, . 
 
 Earl of Caledon, . . , 
 
 C, 3. 
 
 3626-32, . 
 
 Thomas Knipe, 
 
 Sir James Stronge, bart.. 
 
 Sir James Stronge, bart.. 
 
 0,4. 
 
 3647, 
 
 Thomas Knipe, 
 
 Lieut. -Colonel Cross, 
 
 Lieut.-Colonel Cross, 
 
 0,5. 
 
 3705-10, . 
 
 Edward Meares Kelly, 
 
 John E. Vernon, esq., agent, 
 
 Earl of Pembroke, 
 
 0,6. 
 
 4387-98, . 
 
 R. H. Battersby, 
 
 J. L. Naper, esq.. 
 
 J. L. Naper, esq.. 
 
 0, 43. 
 
 4396-4401, 
 
 Robert H. Battersby, 
 
 W. G. C. Wade, esq., . 
 
 W. G. C. Wade, esq., . 
 
 0,7. 
 
 4545, 
 
 S. C. M'Elroy, . 
 
 Edmund M'Neill, esq., agent. 
 
 Late A. Montgomery, esq., . 
 
 C, 76. 
 
 4565-4569, 
 
 S. C. M'Elroy, S. Black, . 
 
 S. Allen, esq., 
 
 S. Allen, esq.. 
 
 o. 
 
 4573-6, . 
 
 S. C. M'Elroy, . 
 
 Lord Robert Montagu, . 
 
 Lord Robert Montagu, 
 
 0, 23. 
 
 4629, 
 
 S. 0. M'Elroy, . 
 
 Hon. Somerset Ward, . 
 
 Viscount Bangor, 
 
 0, 24. ■ 
 
 4749-4779, 
 
 James Ferguson, . . 
 
 Geo. M'Auliffe, esq., 
 
 — ' — Langtry, esq., ' . 
 
 €, 56. 
 
 4780-806, 
 
 James Ferguson, 
 
 James Torrens, esq., agent to 
 the Marquess of Donegall. 
 
 Marquess of Donegall, . 
 
 0, 26. 
 
 48^4, 
 
 James Ferguson, 
 
 Viscount 'Templetown, . 
 
 Viscount Templetown, . 
 
 0, 34. 
 
 4983-5, and 
 
 Thomas Shillington, junior, 
 
 C. W. O'Brien, esq., agent to 
 
 Duke of Manchester, 
 
 0, 26. 
 
 5070-6. 
 
 
 the Duke of Manchester. 
 
 
 
 .5077-82, . 
 
 Thomas Shillington, junior, 
 
 R. B. Templer, esq.. 
 
 R. B. Templor, esq.. 
 
 0. 
 
 5201-5, . 
 
 Hamilton Robb, 
 
 C. W. O'Brien, esq., . 
 
 Duke of Manchester, 
 
 0, 25. 
 
 5339-5344, 
 
 John Robinson, 
 
 Earl of Banfurly, 
 
 Earl of Ranfurly, 
 
 O, 44. 
 
 5339^5344, 
 
 John Robinson, 
 
 John Shillington, esq., agent. 
 
 Earl of Ranfurly, 
 
 C, 45. 
 
 5667, 
 
 Rev. C. Quinn, 
 
 W. G. Robinson, esq., . 
 
 Countess of Castlestuart, 
 
 A, 40422, 
 and 40447. 
 
 5714-5746, 
 
 Rev. C. Quinn, 
 
 J. G. Eichai'dson, esq.. 
 
 J. G. Richardson, esq., 
 
 0, 166. 
 
 5792-^8, . . 
 
 Rev. C. Quinn, 
 
 W. F. Littledale, esq., soli- 
 citoi" 
 
 W. F. Littledale and others. 
 
 0,27. 
 
 5820-5, . 
 
 Patrick O'Callaghan, 
 
 Earl of Gosford, . 
 
 Earl of Gosford, . 
 
 0, 46. 
 
 5826-5830, 
 
 Patrick O'Callaghan, 
 
 Peter Quinn, esq., agent. 
 
 Trustees of Edward Quinn, . 
 
 0, 14. 
 
 6169-6176, 
 
 William Gray, . 
 
 SirThomasBateson,bart., M.P., 
 
 Sir Thomas Bateson, bart., M.P., 
 
 0, 2S. 
 
 6175-6176, 
 
 William Gray, . 
 
 Sir Thomas Bateson, bart. , M. p. , 
 
 Sir Thomas Bateson, bart., M.P., 
 
 0. 
 
 6177-6181, 
 
 William Gray, . 
 
 Fred. Capron, esq., agent. 
 
 Sir Richard Wallace, bart. , m. P. , 
 
 0, 85. 
 
 6187-6207, 
 
 A. B., . . . . 
 
 Fred. Capron, esq., agent. 
 
 Sir Richard Wallace, bart., M.p., 
 
 0, 84. 
 
 6218, <fcc., . 
 
 Joseph Perry, . 
 
 Major Robert Perceval Max- 
 
 "Wfll T\ T 
 
 Major E. P. Maxwell, 
 
 A, 40402. 
 
 6219, 
 
 Joseph Perry, . 
 
 Wtjllj U.Li. 
 
 Colonel William B. Forde, . 
 
 Colonel William B. Forde, . 
 
 A, 40417. 
 
 .6305, 
 
 Edward Gardner, 
 
 J. A. Lyle, esq., examiner, . 
 
 Court of Chancery, 
 
 0, 47. 
 
 6308-10, . 
 
 J. Perry and E. Gardner, . 
 
 A ubrey de Vere Beauclerk, esq. 
 
 Aubrey de Vere Beauclerk, esq. 
 
 0. 
 
 6311 and 6329, . 
 
 Edward Gardner, 
 
 Hon. Somerset Ward, . 
 
 Viscount Bangor, 
 
 C, 8. 
 
 6319,- &c., . 
 
 Joseph Perry, . 
 
 Major Robert Perceval Max- 
 well, D.L. 
 
 Major Robert Perceval Max- 
 well, D.L. 
 
 A, 40,409. 
 
 6330, 
 
 Edward Gardner, 
 
 Earl of Dufferin, . 
 
 Earl of Dufferin, . 
 
 C, 120. 
 
 6335, 
 
 William James Moore, 
 
 Aubrey de Vere Beauclerk, 
 esq. 
 
 Aubrey de Vere Beauclerk, 
 esq. 
 
 0. 
 
 6348, 
 
 Willia,m James Moore, 
 
 'John Mnlholland, esq., M.P., , 
 
 John Mulholland, esq., M.P., . 
 
 C, 30. 
 
 G370, 
 
 Patrick Murray, 
 
 William Shaw, esq., J. p., ,• . 
 
 Earl Annesley, . . . 
 
 A, 40443. 
 
 6374, 
 
 Patrick Murray, 
 
 H. S. M'Clintock, esq., 
 
 Marquess of Downshire, 
 
 •C. 
 
 7654, 
 
 Bernard Campbell, . 
 
 Colonel Deane Mann, . 
 
 Colonel Deane Mann, . 
 
 -A, 40415. 
 
 7758, 
 
 Bernard Henry, 
 
 Edmund M'Neill, esq., . 
 
 Edmund M'Neill, esq., . 
 
 C, 31. 
 
 7871-7899, 
 
 Henry M'Kean, 
 
 Viscount Powerscourt, . 
 
 Viscount Powerscourt, . 
 
 C, 9. 
 
XIV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Jf umber of Question. 
 
 7907-7918, 
 
 8324, 
 
 8332-8347, 
 
 8399, 
 
 8399-8405, 
 
 8411-8420, 
 
 8427-8431, 
 8451-8452, 
 8459-8512, 
 
 and 
 
 8527-8546 
 
 8563. 
 8957-8971, 
 8986-97, . 
 8978-9, . 
 900.3-23, . 
 9036-9091, 
 9110-13,9127-8, 
 
 9148-9. 
 9150-9161, 
 9226, 
 
 9346-9389, 
 9635, &c., . 
 9694, 
 9694, 
 
 9694, . ■ . 
 9707-9722, 
 9725-9728, 
 9731-4 and 9735, 
 9776-9792, 
 9927-9941, 
 9956-9978, 
 9997-10012, 
 1001.3, 
 10019, 
 
 10048, 
 10225, 
 10315, &c., 
 10346, 
 10367-82, . 
 10378, 
 10438, 
 10440-5, . 
 
 10536-10540, . 
 
 Name of Witness. 
 
 10583- 
 10654- 
 10658- 
 10676- 
 10683- 
 10717- 
 10763- 
 10806- 
 10873, 
 10963- 
 11071- 
 11095- 
 and 
 11105- 
 11119- 
 11436- 
 
 -10592, . 
 
 ■10662, . 
 
 -10670, . 
 
 -10685, . 
 
 ■5, . . 
 
 -10738, . 
 
 -10794, . 
 
 -10811, . 
 
 -10970, '. 
 
 -11073, . 
 -6, 11098, 
 11,100. 
 
 -8, . . 
 
 -11127, . 
 
 -11446, . 
 
 11436-11451, 
 
 11675-11765, 
 12125-12138, 
 
 12140, 
 12266, 
 12291, 
 1220S-12320, 
 
 Henry M'Kean, 
 William M. Fitzgerald, 
 Arthur Mulliolland, . 
 "William Gault, . 
 William Gault, . 
 Josepli Laird, . 
 
 Hugh Wilson, . . ' . 
 Hugh Wilson, . 
 William M'Murtry, . 
 
 John Wallace, . 
 
 John Gamble, . 
 
 John Gamble, . 
 
 John Gamble, . 
 
 James Lapsleye, 
 
 Samuel Osborne, John Steel, 
 
 James M'Glinchy, 
 
 James M'Glinchy, 
 
 Conolly F. M'Causland, . 
 
 Name not given, 
 
 John Flanagan, JohnTaylor, 
 
 John Flanagan, John Taylor, 
 
 John Flanagan, John Taylor, 
 
 John Flanagan, 
 
 John Flanagan, JohnTaylor^ 
 
 John Flanagan, 
 
 JohnFlanagau, JohnTaylor, 
 
 Rev. N. Brown, 
 
 Rev. ISJ". Brown, 
 
 Joseph Douglas, 
 
 Joseph Douglas, 
 
 Eov. N. Brown, 
 
 Robert Dunne, . 
 
 Mr. James Drennan, 
 John Norris, 
 Thomas Warnock, 
 Thomas Warnock, 
 Thomas Warnock, 
 Thomas Warnock, 
 W. R. Morrison, 
 W. R. Morrison, Dr. Madill, 
 
 John Simpson, . 
 
 Richard Coyle, . 
 Patrick Cole, 
 Patrick Cole, 
 John M'Connell, 
 John M'Connell, 
 Mis. Susanna Gi'egg, 
 J. H. M'Intyre, 
 J. H. M'Intyre, 
 William Gamble, 
 John Donnell, . 
 Rev. Edward Loughrey, 
 Rev. Edward Loughrey, 
 
 Rev. Edward Loughrey, 
 Rev. Edward Loughrey, 
 William Sinclair, 
 
 William Sinclair, 
 
 Hugh M'Kinlay, 
 Jnmes Canning, 
 Daniel M'Laughlin, . 
 Tliomas Meek, . 
 Thomas Meek, . 
 Andrew Brown, 
 
 Name of Person replying. 
 
 Owner of Property mentioned. 
 
 Earl of Dartrey, . 
 
 Frederick Wrench, esq., 
 
 J. Fetherston-H. Lowry, esq.. 
 
 Viscount Templetown, . 
 
 G. W. Clarke, esq., 
 
 Charles A. W. Stewart, esq., 
 
 agent. 
 Malcolm M'Neill, esq., agent; 
 A. M'Donald, esq., agent, 
 Charles A. W. Stewart, esq., 
 
 agent. 
 Joseph G. Biggar, esq., m.p.^ 
 
 William Rankin, esq., . 
 Colonel Lyle, 
 John Loughrey, esq., J.P., 
 J. W. D. Humphreys, esq., . 
 Durie Millar, esq., secretary, . 
 Mrs. Elizabeth Young, . 
 
 Samuel Thompson, esq., 
 Marquess of Waterf ord, 
 Duke of Abercorn, 
 A. M. Stewart, esq., 
 M. P. Lloyd, esq., agent. 
 Viscount Lifford, . 
 Mrs. Young, 
 William M'Grorty, esq., 
 Mrs. Young, 
 
 Sir F. W. Heygate, Bart., . 
 Conolly M'Causland, esq., 
 E. H. Draper, esq., b.a., clerk, 
 Conolly M'Causland, esq., 
 Marquess of Waterford, 
 Marquess of Waterford, 
 Conolly M. Gage, esq., and W. 
 
 C. Gage, esq. 
 Robert E. Stack, esq., . 
 Dr. Robert Hamilton, . 
 Rev. Marcus M'Causland, 
 Captain B. M. Giveen, . 
 Sir Hervey Bi'uce, bart.. 
 Sir Hervey Bruce, bart.. 
 Marquess of Waterford, 
 Edmund Stronge, esq., agent, 
 
 Edmund Stronge, esq., agent. 
 
 Major Scott, 
 
 Major Scott, 
 
 M. P. Lloyd, esq., 
 
 Sir Robert Montgomery, k. c. b. 
 
 Robert 1 epper, esq., 
 
 GeoT'ge V. Hart, esq., . 
 
 Durie Mider, esq., 
 
 R.L. Moore, esq., 
 
 James Greer, esq., 
 
 James Greer, esq., 
 
 E. HerbertDraper, B.A., clerk 
 
 S. H. Bruce, esq., 
 
 S. H. Bruce, esq., 
 
 J. Barre Beresford, esq., d.l.. 
 
 Right Hon. G. Shaw Lefevre, 
 
 M.P. 
 
 Denis Godley, esq., secretary, 
 
 Thomas Colquhoun, esq., 
 
 A. M'Donald, esq., agent, 
 
 G. M. Harvey esq., 
 
 H. E. Caitwright, esq., j.p., 
 
 Robert Staples, esq., 
 
 H. E. Cartwright, esq., j.p.. 
 
 Earl of Dartrey, . 
 
 Sir Thomas Lennard, bart., . 
 
 R. W. Lowry, esq.. 
 
 Viscount Templetown, . 
 
 G. W. Clarke, esq., 
 
 Conway Richard Dobbs, esq., 
 
 Agnew, 
 
 Letter 
 and No, 
 
 esq., 
 Earl of Antrim, 
 Conway Richard Dobbs, 
 
 Biggar, esq.. 
 
 William Rankin, esq., . 
 Colonel Lyle, . . . 
 
 John Loughrey, esq., J.P., 
 Duke of Abercorn, 
 Hon. the Irish Society, 
 Late William Young, esq., J.P,, 
 
 Samuel Thompson, esq., 
 Marqu.ess of Waterford, 
 Duke of Abercorn, 
 Rev. R. Delap, 
 Mrs. Thomas Knox, 
 Viscount LifForil (Meenglass), 
 Late William Young, esq.,j.p., 
 William M'Grorty, esq., 
 Late William Young,esq., j.p.. 
 Sir F. W. Heygate, bart., 
 Conolly M'Causland, esq., 
 Skimiers Company, 
 Conolly M'Causland, esq.. 
 Marquess of Waterford, ' . 
 Mai-quess of Waterford, 
 Fishipongers Company, ' . 
 
 Board of Works, . 
 
 Dr. Robert Hamilton, . 
 
 Rev. M. M'Causland, . 
 
 Captain B. M. Giveen, . 
 
 Sir Hervey Bruce, bart., 
 
 Sir Hervey Bruce, bart.. 
 
 Marquess of Waterford, 
 
 Worshipful Company of Iron- 
 mongers. 
 
 The Worshipful Company of 
 Ironmongers. 
 
 Major Scott, 
 
 Major Scott, 
 
 Davidson, esq.. 
 
 Sir Robert Montgomery, K. c. B. , 
 
 Jan'.es Steel Nicholson, esq., . 
 
 George V. Hart, esq., . 
 
 Hon. the Irish Society, . 
 
 E. L. Moore, esq., 
 
 Earl of Castlestuart, 
 
 C. W. Ogilby,esq., 
 
 Skinnei's Company, 
 
 S. H, Bruce, esq., 
 
 S. H. Bruce, esq., 
 
 J. Barre Beresford, e,sq., d.l.. 
 
 Right Hon. G. Shaw Lefevre, 
 
 MP. 
 
 Commissioners of Church 
 
 Temporalities. 
 Colonel Knox, 
 Karl of Antrim, . 
 Mrs. Doherty, 
 
 Worshipful Salters Company, 
 Robert Staples, esq.. 
 Worshipful Salters Company, 
 
 C, 32. 
 C, 48. 
 C, 10 & 33, 
 C, 34. 
 C, 35. 
 C, 127. 
 
 C, 36. 
 
 C, 49. 
 
 0, 127, - 
 
 C, 37. 
 
 C, 38. 
 
 0. 
 
 0,15. 
 
 C. 
 
 C, Sfi. 
 C, 16. 
 
 0,57. 
 0, 52. 
 0, 87. 
 C. 201. 
 0, 95. 
 C 17. 
 0, 69. 
 C, 39. 
 C, 69. 
 C. 
 0. 
 
 0, 12L 
 0. 
 
 0, 52. 
 C, 52. 
 C. 
 
 A. 40382. 
 A, 40448. 
 C, 18. 
 C, 50. 
 0, 19. 
 C. 
 
 0,51. 
 0,40, 
 
 0, 58. 
 
 C, 59. 
 0, 59. 
 0, 95. 
 0, 158. 
 0, 53. 
 0, 60, 
 0. 
 
 C, 70. 
 0. 
 0. 
 
 0, 121. 
 0. 
 
 C. 
 
 0,88. 
 0. 
 
 0. 
 
 c. 
 
 0, 61, 
 0. 190. 
 0,71. 
 0, 77. 
 0, 71. 
 
INDEX TO REPLIES. 
 
 i\r 
 
 Number of Question. 
 
 Name of Witness. 
 
 Name of Person replying. 
 
 Owner of Property mentioned. 
 
 Letter 
 and No. 
 
 12624-12643-5, 
 
 James Maniiion, 
 
 R. St. G. Robinson, esq., 
 
 Miss Mossman, 
 
 C, 41. 
 
 12900, 
 
 Patrick Conlon, 
 
 Edward Howley, esq., . 
 
 E. Howley, esq., . 
 
 0. 
 
 13067-70, . 
 
 Geo. Errington, M.P., 
 
 Matthew Weld O'Connor, esq., 
 agent. 
 
 Lord Annaly, 
 
 0. 
 
 13367-13379, . 
 
 William Million^ 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., 
 
 0,89. 
 
 13437-50;lk52- 
 
 Denis Hunt, John Keeny, 
 
 William Chambers, esq., agent, 
 
 Earl of Erne, 
 
 C, 110. 
 
 13463. 
 
 
 
 
 
 13465-13490, . 
 
 Michael Flynn, 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 0,89. 
 
 13491-13498, . 
 
 James Gilgan, . 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 0,89. 
 
 13540-69, 
 
 Thomas M'Lean, Thomas 
 M'Laughlin. 
 
 E. Hornan, esq., . 
 
 Barnett, esq.. 
 
 0. 
 
 13589-13600, . 
 
 Patrick Devaney, 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., , 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 0, 89. 
 
 13601-13610,- . 
 
 James Taggart, 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 0, 89. 
 
 13618-13647, . 
 
 James Hart, 
 
 James Kidd, esq.. 
 
 Lady Louisa Tenison, . 
 
 0. 
 
 13783&13787,&c. 
 
 Rev. Eugene M'Kenna, _ . 
 
 Michael Burke, esq., 
 
 R. Collum, esq., m.d., . 
 
 0. 
 
 13809, . ". 
 
 Eev. Eugene M'Kenna, 
 
 Charles Deazely, esq., m.d., . 
 
 Charles Deazely, esq., M.D., . 
 
 0. 
 
 13858-13862, . 
 
 Rev. Eugene M'Kenna, . 
 
 F. E. W. D'Arcy, esq., . 
 
 F. E. W. D'Arcy, esq.. 
 
 0, 62. 
 
 14376, 
 
 LantyHanlon, . 
 
 Charles Deazely, esq., M.D., . 
 
 Charles Deazely, esq., m.d., ._ 
 
 0. 
 
 14679 - 14703 ; 
 
 J. Kelly, J. Dogherty, T. 
 
 Arthur Brooke, esq. , agent, . 
 
 H. Granville Murray Stewart, ^ 
 
 C, 150, 
 
 15018-15028; 
 
 M'Mullan, W. Gillespie, 
 
 
 esq. 
 
 
 15038 48. 
 
 P. Melly, J. M'GiUigan. 
 
 
 
 
 14796, &c.. 
 
 William Hammond, . 
 
 Messrs. J. Colquhoun, . _ . 
 
 Colonel G. Knox, . 
 
 C. 
 
 14922-4, . 
 
 John Ward, 
 
 Messrs. Colquhoun, . _ . 
 
 Colonel G. Knox, . 
 
 0. 
 
 14935-14938, . 
 
 John Ward, . . _ . 
 
 Thomas J. Atkinson, esq., . 
 
 Thomas J. Atkinson, esq., 
 
 0, 72. 
 
 14938-14946, . 
 
 John Ward, . . 
 
 Thomas Tee van, esq., . 
 
 Thomas Teevan, esq., . 
 
 0, 54. 
 
 14982-14983, . 
 
 Patrick Flaherty, 
 
 Thomas Colquhoun, esq.. 
 
 Thomas Colquhoun, esq.. 
 
 0, 63. 
 
 14984-14989, . 
 
 Edward Flaherty, 
 
 Thomas Colquhoun, esq.. 
 
 Thomas Colquhoun, esq., 
 
 0, 63. 
 
 15049-55, . 
 
 Connell Gallagher, . . 
 
 Major James Hamilton, agent. 
 
 .John Hamilton, esq.. 
 
 0,138; 194 
 
 15131-15145, . 
 
 George Moore, . 
 
 Thomas Colquhoun, esq., 
 
 Colonel Knox, 
 
 0. 
 
 15283-15297, . 
 
 Andrew M'Goldrick, 
 
 William Middleton, esq., 
 
 William Middleton, esq., 
 
 0,55. 
 
 15447-15491, . 
 
 W. Healy, J. M'Laughlin, 
 W. Foran, Roger Fehily, 
 D. Brennan, F. MuUaly, 
 R. Ferney. 
 
 Francis Barker, esq., . , 
 
 Major Jones, 
 
 0,11. 
 
 15522-32, . 
 
 Francis Kavanagh, . 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq., . 
 
 Richard Gethin, esq.. 
 
 0,89. 
 
 15533-61, . 
 
 James Milmo, . 
 
 F. M. Olpherts, esq.. 
 
 Wynne, esq., 
 
 0. 
 
 15671-7, . 
 
 Edward Kelly, . 
 
 F. M. Olpherts, esq.. 
 
 — Wynne, esq.. 
 
 0. 
 
 16037-41, . 
 
 John Craven, . 
 
 Sir Charles Knox Gore, bart. 
 
 Sir Charles Knox Gore, bart.. 
 
 0, 20. 
 
 16260-16269, . 
 
 John Staunton, . 
 
 William Livingstone, esq.. 
 
 William Livingstone, caq.. 
 
 0. 78. 
 
 16270-16276, . 
 
 E. Fitzgerald, ■. 
 
 William Livingstone, esq., . 
 
 William Livingstone, esq., . 
 
 C. 78. 
 
 16261-16276, . 
 
 Edward Fitzgerald and 
 Martin Conway. 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 16325-35, . 
 
 Patrick M'Ginn, 
 
 
 
 
 16336-48, . 
 
 Anthony Kerrigan, . 
 
 
 
 
 16349-59, . 
 
 Edward & Thady Heraghty, 
 
 
 
 
 16360-71, . 
 
 Mr.s. Heraghty and Mrs. 
 Walsh. 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 16372-83, . 
 16384-96, . 
 16397-408, 
 
 Pat. Maguire and M. Nugent, 
 
 Pat. Melia, 
 
 Pat. Mally, . . ' . 
 
 " Marquess of Sligo and Sidney 
 Smyth, esq., agent to Lord 
 SUgo. 
 
 > Marquess of Sligo, 
 
 0, 21 & 22. 
 
 16420-31, . 
 
 J. Carney, 
 
 
 
 16432-45, . 
 
 T. Heraghty, . 
 
 
 , 
 
 
 16446-8, . 
 
 Michael M'Donnell, . 
 
 
 
 
 16449-67, 
 
 Thomas Burke, 
 
 
 
 
 16475-7, . 
 
 Wm. Hogan, . 
 
 
 
 
 16478-81, 
 
 Walter Gibbons, . . 
 
 
 
 
 16482-^ .; . 
 
 Owen Maliey, . 
 
 
 
 
 16485-6, . 
 
 Pat Maley, 
 
 
 
 
 16606-16674, . 
 
 Stephen Flynn, Pat Kane, 
 Pat Higgins. 
 
 Charles Grotty, esq.. 
 
 Charles Crotty, esq.. 
 
 0,12. 
 
 16675-16700, .' 
 
 Patrick O'Donnell, . 
 
 Stephen Gibbons, esq., . 
 
 Stephen Gibbons, esq., . _ 
 
 0, 13. 
 
 16862, 
 
 Rev. Anthony Waters, 
 
 James C. M'Donnell, esq.. 
 
 J. C. M'Donnell, esq., . 
 
 A, 40500. 
 
 16888, 
 
 Rev. Anthony Waters, . 
 
 Sir R. L. Blosse, bart., 
 
 Sir R. L. Blosse, bart., . 
 
 C. Vy..:,U, 
 
 17077-93, 
 
 Rev. Patrick Lyons, 
 
 William Pike, esq.. 
 
 William Pike, esq.. 
 
 C. ' ' i JIM 
 
 17095, &c., 
 
 Tenants of C. S. Fitzgerald, 
 
 Richard Powell, esq., agent, . 
 
 C. S. Fitzgerald, esq., . 
 
 A, 40496. ' 
 
 17174-7, . 
 
 esq. 
 Thomas Gibbons, 
 
 Sir R. L. Blosse, bart,, . 
 
 Sir R. L. Blosse, bart.. 
 
 0. 
 
 17178-86, 
 
 Edmund Larkin, 
 
 J. F. B. Tardy, esq., agent, .. 
 
 — 
 
 0. 
 
 17278-91, 
 
 Patrick Moran, . 
 
 Stephen Gibbons, esq., J. p., . 
 
 Stephen Gibbons, esq., j.p., . 
 
 0, 164. 
 
 17295-315, 
 
 E. Mitchell, T. M'Hale.and 
 
 ) 
 
 
 
 
 S. Burke. 
 
 y A. C. Larminie, esq., . 
 
 EarlofLucan, 
 
 0. 
 
 17316-32, 
 
 James Armstrong, 
 
 ) 
 
 
 
ivi 
 
 IRISH -LANJ) ACT < 'OMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Nntnber of Question. 
 
 i 
 
 Name of Witness. ; Name of Person replying. 
 
 Owner of Property mentioned. 
 
 Letter 
 and No. 
 
 17333-47, 
 
 John Corcoran, 
 
 
 
 
 17348-64, 
 
 • Thomas Hastings, 
 
 
 
 
 
 17365-77, 
 
 John Walsh, . 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 17378-81, 
 
 Patrick O'Byrne, 
 
 
 
 
 
 17382-6, . 
 
 Patrick M'Donnell, 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 17387-91, 
 
 Michael O'Donnell, 
 
 
 > A. C. Larminie, esq.. 
 
 Earl of Lucan, , . , 
 
 c. 
 
 17392-404, 
 
 James Saunders, 
 
 
 
 
 
 17405-11, 
 
 James Flanagan, 
 
 
 
 
 
 17412-23, 
 
 • John Philbin, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 17424-35, 
 
 Peter Philbin, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 17435-42, 
 
 Michael Doyle, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 17443-80, 
 
 P. Gorman, J. Kennedy, and 
 others. 
 
 Francis O'Donel, esq., agent. 
 
 " Miller &. Ormsby's Estate," 
 
 C, 64. 
 
 17505-27, 
 
 Anthony Malley, 
 
 Francis O'Donel, esq., agent. 
 
 " Miller <fe Ormsby's Estat^' 
 
 C, 65. 
 
 17549, 
 
 James Gannon, 
 
 
 Robert Baxter, esq.. 
 
 Colonel CufFe, 
 
 C, 131. 
 
 17671-3, . 
 
 James Daly, 
 
 
 Colonel Seymour, 
 
 Colonel Seymour, 
 
 C, 165. 
 
 17673, 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 Martin M'Donnell, esq.. 
 
 Martin M'Donnell, esq.. 
 
 C. 
 
 17673, 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 Thomas Higgins, esq., . 
 
 J. Martyn, esq., . 
 
 c. 
 
 17673, 
 
 ji 
 
 
 Alexander 0. Lambert, esq., . 
 
 Alexander C. Lambert, esq., . 
 
 A, 40627. 
 
 17675-8, . 
 
 )j 
 
 
 Wm. Joynt, esq., . 
 
 Wm. Joynt, esq., . 
 
 C, 133. 
 
 17678, 
 
 '? 
 
 
 Anthony Ormsby, esq.. 
 
 Anthony Ormsby, esq.. 
 
 C, 163. 
 
 17678, 
 
 !) 
 
 
 M. Pratt, esq., 
 
 M. Pratt, esq.. 
 
 C, 107. 
 
 17678, 
 
 '5 
 
 
 Bernard Coyne, esq., J.P., 
 
 Bernard Coyne, esq., J.P., 
 
 C, 111. 
 
 17678, 
 
 1) 
 
 
 John Walsh, esq., 
 
 John Walsh, esq.. 
 
 C, 114. 
 
 17678, 
 
 5' 
 
 
 Captain J. 0. Sheffield, 
 
 Captain J. C. Sheffield, 
 
 C, 172. 
 
 17678, 
 
 
 
 Sir E.. L. Blosse, bart.. 
 
 Sir R. L. Blosse, bart.. 
 
 0. 
 
 17678, 
 
 ?? 
 
 
 Myles Jordan, esq., 
 
 Myles Jordan, esq.. 
 
 C. 
 
 17678, 
 
 ?J 
 
 
 Lord Oranmore, . 
 
 Lord Oranmore, . 
 
 C. 
 
 17678, 
 
 J) 
 
 
 H. R. Vereker, esq., agent, . 
 
 Representatives of late G. R. 
 Acton. 
 
 C, 66, 
 
 17678, 
 
 1) • 
 
 
 Walter M. Burke, esq., 
 
 Walter M. Burke, esq.. 
 
 A, 40 490. 
 
 17685, 
 
 Jt 
 
 
 Allan K. Algie, esq., agent, . 
 
 Lord de Cliffiard, . . 
 
 C, 79. 
 
 17685-6, . 
 
 :j 
 
 
 Malachy Tuohy, esq., . 
 
 Malachy Tuohy, esq., . 
 
 C. 
 
 17687, 
 
 )f 
 
 
 Captain C. C. Boycott, . 
 
 Earl of Erne, "... 
 
 C, 109. 
 
 17701, 
 
 JT 
 
 
 Sir R. L. Blosse, bart., . 
 
 Sir- R. L. Blosse, bart., . 
 
 C. 
 
 17716 and 17718, 
 
 Patrick Fox, 
 
 
 Rev. R. Noble Jackson, 
 
 Rev. R. Noble Jackson, 
 
 C. 
 
 17719, 
 
 )j 
 
 
 C. Allen, esq., agent. 
 
 
 0, 139. 
 
 17784, 
 
 Thomas Gannon, 
 
 
 Rev. R. Noble Jackson, 
 
 Rev. R. Noble Jackson, 
 
 C 
 
 17816, &c., 
 
 John M'Garry, . 
 
 
 Rev. R. Noble Jackson, 
 
 Rev. R. Noble Jackson, 
 
 C. 
 
 18004, 
 
 James Kilroe, . 
 
 
 Henry Smith, esq., J. P., agent, 
 
 Mrs. Blakeney, 
 
 C, 73. 
 
 18097-138, 
 
 Denis O'Brien &Jno. Doorly, 
 
 Henry T. Finlay, esq. receiver. 
 
 " Dunnes, minors," 
 
 C, 136. 
 
 18097-120, 
 
 • 
 
 Chai'les Dunne, esq.. 
 
 
 C. 
 
 18250-7, . 
 
 James MuUaley, 
 
 J. P. Conroy, esq., 
 
 J. P. Conroy, esq.. 
 
 C. 
 
 18258-75, . 
 
 Michael Mills, . 
 
 
 
 
 c, 
 
 18276-302, 
 
 Laurence Kilroe, 
 
 
 J. P. Mahon, esq., 
 
 ,, ... 
 J. P. Mahon, esq., 
 
 c. 
 
 18335-56, . 
 
 Thomas Kilmartin, 
 
 
 HenryT. Finlay, esq., receiver. 
 
 " Dunnes, minors," 
 
 C, 136. 
 
 18357-70, . 
 
 Andrew Doran, 
 
 
 
 
 C, 136. 
 
 18371-84, . 
 
 Martin J. Waldron, . 
 
 
 William Jameson, esq., 
 
 5) ... 
 
 William Jameson, esq., ; 
 J. P. Mahon, esq., 
 
 C' 42. 
 
 18397-403, 
 
 Peter Fljnn, . 
 
 
 J. P. Mahon, esq.. 
 
 J 
 
 C. 
 
 - 18405-34, . • . 
 
 P. Morris, J. Kennedy, E. 
 
 Kelly. 
 Patrick Naughten, & others. 
 
 R. W. Waithman, esq.. 
 
 R. W. Waithman, esq.. 
 
 C, 74. 
 
 18435-44, . 
 
 J. Fa-wcett, esq., . 
 
 J. Fawcett, esq., . 
 
 C, 162. 
 
 18474, 
 
 Captain C. C. Boycott; 
 
 Rev. John O'Malley, p.p., 
 
 Earl of Erne, 
 
 C, 91. 
 
 19254, 6, 19302, 
 5, 17, 23, 24, 
 
 Peter Moloney, . 
 
 Henry Ede, esq., . 
 
 Henry Ede, esq., . 
 
 C. 
 
 19274. 
 
 
 
 
 
 20379-430, 
 
 Timothy Kyne, 
 
 Surgeon-Major Kilkelly, 
 
 Surgeon-Major Kilkelly, 
 John Brown, esq., 
 Francis Comyn, esq.. 
 
 C, 176. 
 
 20550-8, 
 
 Margaret Hussey, 
 
 John Brown, esq.. 
 
 C, 67. 
 
 20559, &c., and 
 20611, (fee. 
 
 Patrick Carey, John Flaherty 
 
 Francis Comyn, esq., 
 
 C. 
 
 20580-8, 
 
 Darby Curran, 
 
 Colonel T. Daly, . 
 
 Colonel T. Daly, . 
 
 C, 117. 
 
 20759-84, 
 
 Patrick Noon, 
 
 
 William Burke, esq., . 
 
 Lord Clanmorris, . 
 
 C. 
 
 20944, 
 
 James Kilmartin, 
 
 
 Thomas J. TuUy, esq., . 
 
 Thomas J. Tully, esq., . 
 
 C. 
 
 21015, 
 
 James Kilmartin, 
 
 
 H. T. Potts, esq., . 
 
 William Potts, esq., 
 
 C, 199. 
 
 21020, 
 
 James Kilmartin, 
 
 
 Edward W. Fowler, esq., agent. 
 
 Earl of Clancarty, 
 
 C, 101. 
 
 21026-21035, . 
 
 James Kilmartin, 
 
 
 Mrs. Denis O'Brien, 
 
 Mrs. Denis O'Brien, 
 
 C, 75." 
 
 21053-21063, . 
 21322, 
 
 ^^ t ^ r\ n j^ "^ c\ /^ ^\ 
 
 Thomas F. Joyce, 
 
 
 Robert Staples, esq., • . 
 
 Robert Staples, esq.. 
 
 c! 77. 
 
 John Graham, . 
 
 
 Colonel Seymour, 
 
 Colonel Seyjjiour, 
 E. Mulchinock, esq., 
 
 C. 
 
 21333-21366, . 
 21367-21393, , 
 
 Patrick Hanley, 
 Thomas Davoren, 
 
 
 M. C. Barry, esq., agent, 
 
 c. 
 
 21420-21460, . 
 21461-21475, . 
 21475-21483, . 
 
 Mrs. Bolton, 
 Mathew Nolan, 
 Francis Leonard, 
 
 
 „ ... 
 R. Smyth Dickson, esq., 
 Martin Hackett, esq., . 
 P. Crowe, esq., . . . 
 
 J) ... 
 Alliance Insurance Company, 
 Martin Hackett, esq., . 
 P. Crowe, esq., 
 
 c. 
 c. 
 
 0, 146. 
 
INDEX TO REPLIES. 
 
 xvu 
 
 Number of Question. 
 
 Name of Witness. 
 
 Name of Person replying. 
 
 Owner of Property mentioned. 
 
 Letter 
 and No. ■ 
 
 21690, 
 
 "William Bolster, 
 
 J. G. Barry, esq., . 
 
 Lord Enily, . . . . 
 
 C. 
 
 •21899-21901, . 
 
 Mathew OTlaherty. 
 
 
 Earl of Dvmraven, 
 
 Earl of Dunraven, 
 
 C. 
 
 21940-21941, . 
 
 Joseph Casey, . 
 
 
 Sir Thomas Bateson, bart., m.p. 
 
 Sir Thomas Bateson, bart., m.p. 
 
 C, 29. 
 
 22375-22414, . 
 
 Michael Lane, . 
 
 
 Colonel M'Adam, 
 
 Colonel M'Adam, 
 
 C. 
 
 22416-22433, . 
 
 Michael Lane, . 
 
 
 Captain Mark Maunsell, 
 
 Captain Mark Maunsell, 
 
 C, 80. 
 
 22434-22441, . 
 
 Patrick Kane, . 
 
 
 Colonel M'Adam, 
 
 Colonel M'Adam, 
 
 C. 
 
 22442-22450, . 
 
 Michael Kane, . 
 
 
 „ ... 
 
 ,, • • . 
 
 C. 
 
 22451-22463, . 
 
 Patrick Grady, 
 
 
 » ... 
 
 ,, . . . 
 
 C. 
 
 22464-22474, . 
 
 John Hartigan, 
 
 
 John J. Twigg, esq., 
 
 Finch White, esq.. 
 
 0. 
 
 22475-22490, . 
 
 William Howard, 
 
 
 Colonel M'Adam, 
 
 Colonel M'Adam, 
 
 C. 
 
 22571-22581, . 
 
 James Stark ey, 
 
 
 D. A. M'Cready, esq., . 
 
 Henry Trench, esq.. 
 
 C, 181. 
 
 22653-22662, . 
 
 Michael Perry, 
 
 
 Captain Mark Maunsell, 
 
 Captain Mark Maunsell, 
 
 C, 80. 
 
 22723-22733, . 
 
 William Halpin, 
 
 
 F. Burton, esq., . 
 
 F. Burton, esq., . 
 
 C, 143. 
 
 22753-22756, . 
 
 John Tuthill, . 
 
 
 Captain O'Callaghan, 
 
 Captain O'Callaghan, 
 
 C, 98. 
 
 22802-22815, . 
 
 Rev. Patrick Meehan, 
 
 Thomas Gabbett, esq., late 
 agent to R. Moore, esq. 
 
 R. Moore, esq.. 
 
 C, 161. 
 
 22862, 
 
 Thomas Colleran, 
 
 Robert Henry, esq., 
 
 Robert Henry, esq.. 
 
 A, 40669. 
 
 22871-22873, . 
 
 Mr. John Maloney, . 
 
 Thomas Saunders, esq., agent, 
 
 Lady Cooper, 
 
 C, 140. 
 
 22879-22899, . 
 
 John Moloney, . 
 
 Wm. Townsend, esq., agent, . 
 
 Lord Ashtown, 
 
 C, 112. 
 
 22945-22958, . 
 
 Rev. James Cahir, 
 
 Michael Stiiddert, esq., . 
 
 Michael Studdert, esq., . 
 
 C, 200. 
 
 23246-23272, . 
 
 Mr. Solomon Frost, . 
 
 C. W. Smith, esq.. 
 
 C. W. Smith, esq., 
 
 — 
 
 23449-23461, . 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Shaughnessy, 
 
 J) 
 
 Lord Carbery, 
 
 — 
 
 23504-23507, . 
 
 Eev. W. Gubbins, . 
 
 jj 
 
 Cooper, 
 
 — 
 
 23508-23509, . 
 
 Rev. W. Gubbins, . 
 
 Wm. Townsend, esq., agent, . 
 
 Lord Ashtown, 
 
 C,ill2. 
 
 23516, 
 
 )) 
 
 Thomas Saunders, esq.. 
 
 William Cooper, esq., . 
 
 C, 140. 
 
 23520-23551, . 
 
 Mr. W. Madden, 
 
 jj 
 
 Earl of Kenmare, . 
 
 — 
 
 23628-31, . 
 
 Daniel Connell, 
 
 R. S. O'Brien, esq., agent. 
 
 Arthur, esq.. 
 
 C, 142. 
 
 23745-51, . 
 
 Michael Hogan, 
 
 Thomas Moran, esq.. 
 
 Thomas Moran, 
 
 C. 
 
 23857-23874, . 
 
 Mr. Thomas Corbett, . 
 
 ' ?? 
 
 — — Creagh, esq., 
 
 — 
 
 23520, 
 
 William Madden, 
 
 S. M. Hussey, 
 
 Earl of Kenmare, 
 
 A, 40477. 
 
 23746-23751, . 
 
 Michael Hogan, 
 
 Mr. Thomas Moran, 
 
 Mr. Austin Moran, 
 
 — 
 
 23788-23793, . 
 
 lljichael Hogan, 
 
 jj 
 
 Captain Blackburne, 
 
 — 
 
 24169-24182, , 
 
 Mr. Daniel Barry, 
 
 )3 
 
 Sir Edmund Waller, bart., . 
 
 — 
 
 24253-24260, . 
 
 Mr. Da.Tiiel Ryan, 
 
 iy 
 
 Duggan, esq., 
 
 — 
 
 24267-77, 
 
 Mr. Michael "Fitzgerald, . 
 
 Robert Hunt, esq.. 
 
 Robert Hunt, esq.. 
 
 — 
 
 24285-24290, . 
 
 Mr. Michael Fitzgerald, 
 
 J) 
 
 Lord Monteagle, . 
 
 — 
 
 24289-24291, . 
 
 Mr. Michael Fitzgerald, 
 
 ?> 
 
 Sayers esq., . 
 
 — 
 
 24301-24324, . 
 
 Mr. Michael Meehan, 
 
 Captain Gloucester, 
 
 Captain Gloucester, 
 
 C, 160. 
 
 24329, 
 
 Mr. Michael Meehan, 
 
 W. Sydney Cox, esq., agent, . 
 
 Captain Gloucester, 
 
 — 
 
 24362-24376, . 
 
 Mr. Michael Stritch, 
 
 Edward Joynt, esq:. 
 
 Edward Joynt, esq., 
 
 C, 189. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ^* The names of counties stand for those in respect to which the evidence was given J the names of places 
 in italics are those of the places where the evidence was taken. 
 
 BfMoleyns, Thomas, Esq., Q.C., Coimty Court Judge 
 for Kilkenny County ; Dublin. 
 
 There have been only fifteen or sixteen Land 
 cases in County Kilkenny since the passing of the 
 Land Act, 5. The difficulty in estimating com- 
 pensation for improvements largely got over by the 
 Judge seeing the farm for himself, where reason- 
 ably practicable, 13, 83. Every facility given by 
 both landlords and tenants for such personal inspec- 
 tion, 14. Compensation for disturbance operates 
 silently to discourage causeless evictions, 15, 65. 
 Never gave the maximum amount in any instance, 
 19. Compensation for disturbance insufficient 
 from tenant's point of view, 19. Case in which a 
 question of reasonable rent arose, on landlord's 
 plea for an increase of rent, decided it was not a 
 reasonable increase — compensation for disturbance 
 accordingly given, 21. The purchaser of a tenant's 
 holding, without the owner's knowledge, is by the 
 Act, entitled to compensation for improvements, 
 44. If demesne lands are let for a continuous 
 number of years, they may lose their character, 48. 
 Case where witness held this to be the case, 49. 
 But it is a question of fact, 48, 52. Thinks the 
 Equities section gives a very large but useful dis- 
 cretion to the Court, 53. There has been no 
 agrarian crime in the County Kilkenny for the 
 last ten years, 77-9. Five appeals from his deci- 
 sions in land cases, but no reversal, 80-2. Rather 
 objects to assessors as far as his experience goes ; , 
 the country people would sooner do without them, 
 85, 86. Knows of no attempts on the part of the 
 landlord to get the tenant to contract himself out 
 of the Act, 93, 94. The improvements are gene- 
 rally made by the tenants, but on a few large 
 estates — the Clifton, Col. Tighe's, and Lord Bess- 
 I borough's, the improvements are made by the land- 
 lords, 95-98, 107. The Act tends to stimulate the 
 tenant to make improvements, 102. Landlords 
 should specify their improvements and register 
 them, 105. As a general rule ejectments should 
 only be for non-payment of rent, 116-117. 
 Considers that the scale of compensation for dis- 
 tixrbance might be enlarged, so as to meet any 
 possible cases of great hardship, 132-128. In 
 favour of extending the Ulster custom to Ireland, 
 132-135. Origin of Ulster custom, 139-141. A 
 tenancyfrom year to year as much a term as a regular 
 lease, 145. KUkenny a model county ; very little 
 rent raising, and few ejectments for non-payment, 
 146—150. In one case, where there was an attempt 
 to increase the rent, considered increase unjust, and 
 gave compensation for disturbance, 151-52. Land- 
 lords do not as a rule allow their tenants to sell ; 
 no general custom like the Ulster custom, 156-160. 
 Considers it vei-y objectionable that the County 
 Court Judge should be a resident in the coimty, 164. 
 Considers it desirable to have a scale of compensation 
 for disturbance, since the substituting of discretion 
 for law should be avoided as far as possible, 1 65-168. 
 Thinks assessors would be of considerable assist- 
 ance if they were first-class persons in a position of 
 independence, 172. Tenants from year to year are 
 often burdened with jointures and fortunes, and 
 their tenancies made the subject of rough settle- 
 ment, 188-193. The value of the disturbance is 
 taken for purposes of administration, 194-7. Other 
 tenants are willing to meet the claim for disturb- 
 ance upon a landlord who has evicted a tenant — 
 that is, the incoming tenant gives a certain sum to 
 the outgoing tenant with the landlord's consent, 
 204. Custom must be established by a multitude 
 of instances : the practice on a single farm will not 
 suffice, 205, 206. 
 
 jttm 
 
 Ferguson, Robert, Esq., Q.C, County Court Judge for 
 the West Riding of Cork County ; Dublin. 
 There are about forty Land cases yearly in the 
 West Riding of Cork, arising out of notices to quit 
 and ejectments, with a view of raising rents or 
 getting possession, 211, 215. A land claim is 
 seldom brought except after decree for possession is 
 given, 215. The claims are generally for disturbance 
 and improvements, 216. As a rule, decrees are given 
 in favour of tenants, 217. Claims generally are for 
 compensation for disturbance, and for improvements : 
 decrees in most cases in favour of the tenant, 216, 
 217. Actual evictions not at all in proportion to 
 the number of claims — the dispute being often 
 settled through the interference of the Chairman, 
 pending proceedings for compensation, 220. There 
 have been cases where landlords of much the same 
 class as their tenantry were prepared to take the 
 land into their own occupation, or give it to another 
 tenant, who would pay them more than the 3rd 
 section would allow, and where a compromise could 
 not be arranged, 221. There was one case of a 
 landlord of position who evicted twice, and each 
 time got more from the tenant than the compensa- 
 tion, the maximum for disturbance being awarded, 
 221—3. Where ejectments are brought into the 
 County Court, the Judge has many opportunities 
 of bringing about an amicable settlement, 241. In 
 nearly every case, the Judge was successful, where 
 the ejectment was for non-payment of rent, in 
 getting time extended, 241. Cases of ejectment 
 for non-payment of rent should not be brought in 
 the Superior Courts, as it deprives the County 
 Court Judge of all chance of settling between the 
 parties, 241. Suggests power to be given to remit 
 arrears, and give compensation in cases of eject- 
 ment for non-payment of rent, if fair terms are 
 rejected by the landlord, 242. The County Court 
 has power to postpone execution of decree for one 
 year, 243, Nearly every case of ejectment for non- 
 payment of rent settled through intervention of the 
 Judge, in consequence of this power, 246-8. An 
 independent valuator or valuators, if possible be- 
 longing to the district, essential for guidance of 
 County Court Judge, in cases of disputes about 
 rent ; disputes as to rent should first come before 
 the valuator, and if not then settled, ejectment for 
 non-payment of rent should come before the County 
 Court Judge, with appeal as at present, 249-253. 
 Compensation for Improvements clause defective, 
 254-6. No new tenancy between same parties 
 should destroy right of tenant to compensation for 
 improvements, in absence of contract to that effect, 
 257-9. Does not hold that a notice to quit consti- 
 tutes a new tenancy, but new lease does 260-3. 
 Few cases of hardship, and mostly on small estates, 
 where landlord and tenant are much of same class. 
 On large estates, seldom come to Court, 264—6. 
 Cases in Superior Courts, causing ill-feeling, 267-8. 
 If no defence in Superior Courts, no opportunity of 
 compromise and more costs, 271-2. Compensation 
 claim can only arise after tenant being finally 
 put out, and land given up, 276-9. No ad- 
 vantage in diminishing period for redemption, 
 282-4. Tenant generally reinstated as caretaker, 
 285-91. Cases of redemption generally the act of 
 mortgagees, 292-5. Exceptions in section 4 of Land 
 Act too niunerous, 296-7. " Equity clauses" 
 most valuable, 299. In favour of perpetuity of 
 tenure, 303-5. Suggestions of means of fixing rent, 
 306-11. Should be illegal to contract out of Land 
 Act, 312-13. Compulsory division of county cess 
 314. Improvements made by tenant, 315. Leases 
 avoiding claim under Land Act increasing, 316. 
 In land cases, personally inspects farm where prac- 
 
 d 
 
XX 
 
 lEISfl LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Ferguson, Robert, Q.c. — continued. 
 
 ticable, 317. Not worth wliile appointing asses- 
 sors, 319. Disapproves of peasant proprietary on a 
 large scale, 32,0-2J, In cases where tenants had a 
 large share of th^ purchase money, would be an 
 advantage, 321-2. To jmrchase oul all landlords 
 an impossibility, 325. Some land in Cork so poor 
 tenant could not lire if rent free. Distress the 
 cause of present agitation, 327-30. A good mea- 
 sure of tenant-right all over Ireland sufficient, with 
 clauses against sub-letting and subdivision, 331-3. 
 Especially necessary with peasant proprietors, 334-7 
 Tenants, as a rule, well disposed towards their 
 landlords, 339. The labour question, 339-40. 
 Cases of hardship rare on large properties, 341. 
 Some of the best landlords opposed to any legisla- 
 tion, 343-4. Landlords' hands tied by mortgages, 
 344-5. One bad case of hardship afi'ects a wiiole dis- 
 trict with a feeling of uncertainty, 353-5. Rent 
 higher where land let by English than Irish acre, 
 357-8. A body to purchase land for tenants a great 
 advantage, 362-4. Many landlords would sell if facili- 
 ties given, 365-G. No indisposition to pay fair rents, 
 367-8. Present Land Act affords ijisufficient jjio- 
 tection, but has done much good, 375. The Act 
 gives tenant facilities for borrowing, 378. Deters 
 landlords from rent raising, 379. In unjustifiable 
 evictions, always gives the maximum compensation, 
 383-4. "Would preserve ownership, but give 
 security to tenant, 391. Tn favour of compulsory 
 tenant-right, 392-5. Would not limit peasant pro- 
 prietary to large holdings, 3 '.J 6 -8. Case of a labourer 
 purchasing tenant-right, 399-400. 
 
 Ormshy, Bight Hon. Henry, Judge of Land Court.— 
 Dublin, 
 Discharges all receiver business, 401-7. Hears 
 applications for reduction of rent, except in lunacy 
 matters, 408-9, 421. Has control of receivers and 
 management of estates, 410-1. Abatement of rent 
 generally granted, except where tenants well able 
 to pay their rents, 412-3, 422-3, G20-1. Procedure 
 in such cases, 413-5, 424, 466-8. Number 
 of receivers appointed in 1879 and 1880 by Land 
 Judges, and previously, 416-418. Gross rental 
 under receivers, £438,429, 418, 559, 560. Few 
 applications for abatements from Ulster, 425-429. 
 Rents generally higher than tenement valuation, 
 430. Applications for abatements are on ground 
 of bad seasons, failure of crops, and i-ent too high, 
 431-3. Generally made when a year's rent due, 
 434-442. Mode of letting land in Court, 444-8. 
 Ejectment rare by receivers except for non-payment 
 of rent, and with leave of Judge, 449-459. Appoint- 
 ment and payment of receivers, 460-4. Transfer 
 permitted by tenant if party solvent and proper, 
 469-476. No inquiry as to amount of purchase- 
 money, 473-4. Applications for sales by tenants 
 come from all parts, 475-6. Cases of sales to 
 tenants under Bright clauses, 477-480. Case of 
 the Harenc estat«, 480-499. Suggestions for 
 amendment of Bright clauses — Board of Works 
 might be enabled to lend, subject to rent-charges or 
 jointures, where security good, 500- .504, 518-524. 
 Cases in point, 504. Expenses of loans, 507-513. 
 Not desirable to encourage purchase by tenants 
 where whole purchase-money is borrowed, 515-7. 
 Increase of receivers owing to delay in sales 
 through want of demand, and operation of Judica- 
 ture Act facilitating appointment of receivers, 
 525-9. House property sells better last two years, 
 530-2. Selling value of land in Landed Estates 
 Court, 534-540. Existence of tenant-right con- 
 tributes to higher selling rate of Ulster estates, 
 540-1. Proportion between rent and tenement 
 valuation, 542-6. Danger of peasant proprietary 
 m next generation subdividing, 547-550. Scheme 
 should be confined to industrious tenants, 551. 
 Sales m Court of lands to pay off paramount 
 charges, 562-6. Cases of agreements for sale to 
 tenants outside Court, 567-8. Costs in such cases, 
 
 568-570. Procedure in forming lots to facilitate 
 sales to tenants, 571—3. A separate Commission 
 not necessary, but wouldsave trouble to Court, 5 7 4-5. 
 Course of procedure where trustee for tenants 
 buys, 576-584. District registries of title not re- 
 quired, 589. Working of Record of Title, 590- 
 607. Practically a failure, 593. Tenants seldom 
 record title, 608. Local registries would require 
 very competent men ; cause confusion where land 
 held by same owner in different districts, 610-3. 
 Buyers in trust for tenants are regarded by the Court 
 as themselves the purchasers ; no practical danger of 
 fraud, 614-5. Abatements fewer where tenant-right 
 exists, 616. Sales of tenants' interests are sanctioned 
 apart from custom,617-8. Postponeinents of rent till 
 after harvest frequent,622-3. Alienation unobjection- 
 able in case of purchases under Bright clauses, 624. 
 Would not object to puisne mortgaging, 625-6. 
 Abatements of rent do not affect incumbrancers, 
 627-633. Cases of sales of tenant purchasers' pro- 
 perties by judgment mortgagees must be with con- 
 sent of Board of Works, 633-5. 
 
 Greene, John Ball, Esq., C.B., Commissioner of 
 Valuation. — Dublin. 
 
 History of valuation in Ireland, 637. Basis 
 of townland valuation of 1826, 637-651. Valuation 
 Act of 1846, 645, 652. Valuation Act of 1852 
 (Griffith's), 652. Basis of Griffith's valuation, 
 657. Scale of prices in Act of 1852, and in 
 1877-8, 658-674. Valuation of part of Ulster on 
 higher scale than south and west. Been later 
 made, and greater produce there, 675-7. Valuation 
 not a standard where tenant-right exists, 678. 
 Interest on the tenant-right purchase should 
 be added to the rent, 678, but on revaluation not 
 possible to take this into account, 679-81. Change 
 from arable into pasture since valuation, 682-7. 
 No alteration in valuation of land, 'but there is of 
 houses, 690-4. Total valuation of land and houses, 
 695. Statistics of arable and non-arable land, 698. 
 No. valuation for shooting purposes, 713-5. No of 
 holdings in Ireland, 723. Area under crops in 
 1859 and 1870-72, 725-732. In 1876, addition of^ 
 33 per cent, estimated for a new valuation, 744-5. * 
 A fair rent would be above Griffith's valuation, 
 747-58. Special valuations in view of loans under 
 the Bright clauses, 759. Board of Works now 
 advance thirty years' purchase on Griffith's valu- 
 ation, 759-760. ' Special valuation paid for by 
 tenant, 765. Peasant proprietary might be tried 
 with farms of considerable size, and tenants who 
 had the money, 775-782. Valuation began in 
 1853, and ended in 1865, 783-9. Additions re 
 quired to bring other counties to Ulster standard, 
 790-5. Ulster valuation on scale of prices lower 
 than at present, 795-6. County Dublin, revalued 
 50 per cent, increase, including buildings, 797- 
 811. Valuation of inferior land nearer actual value 
 than better land, 815-8, 855-6. Scale of prices 
 under Townland Valuation Act, 819. Valuation 
 of Munster, 822-4. No. of farms consolidated 
 from 1872 to 1876-7, 824-8. Mode of valuation 
 adopted and sort of valuers employed for tenement 
 valuation, 829-833. Principles to be adopted in 
 new valuation, 834-847. Ulster valued higher 
 because farmed better, 848-50. Valuation of 
 light land in county Cork, 851-6. New valuation 
 of county Dublin not Ijased on scale of prices, but 
 actual letting value, 857-862. Valuation Office 
 able to furnish competent men to settle fair rent in 
 disputes between landlord and tenant, 863-9. No. 
 of agricultural holdings in Ireland less than 
 600,000, 870-2. Persons living near towns, might 
 be helped to purchase four or five acres, but not in 
 remote country places, 873-6. Increase of annual 
 payments over rent in case of advances under 
 Bright clauses, when purchase-money twenty-five 
 and twenty-seven years' purchase, 877-8. But 
 need not be if loan at lower rate, or period of 
 repayment extended, 879, 880. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xXi 
 
 La Touche, John, Esq., Harristowu ; counties Kildare, 
 Leitrim, Dublin, Tipperaiy, Limerick, land- 
 owner. — Dublin. 
 The Land Act works extremely well, 885. Should 
 be extended to leaseholders, and provide full compen- 
 sation for improvements on quitting. 885. Ad^-an- 
 tages of Act, as to compensation for improvements, 
 should be extended to all tenants, 887, 909, 917- 
 920. The exceptions should be removed, 889-890. 
 All tenants should be protected from contracting 
 themselves out of the Act, 891-4. Case where 
 witness could have appropriated all the tenant's im- 
 provements, 895-909. Lease at low rent in con- 
 sideration of tenants' improvements, not case for 
 compensation, 910-2. Eegistration of improve- 
 ments might be done at Petty Sessions courts, 913- 
 5. Does not recognise sale of the good-will, 922- 
 929. Even in case of voluntary surrender, and 
 where landlord is unable to pay for the improve- 
 ments, 941-5, 974-981. General introduction of 
 tenant-right would be unjust to landlord who lets at 
 low rents, 930, 953-964, 970. A tenant selling to 
 recoup himself for improvements, 935, 973-4. The 
 Ulster tenant-right system cripples the incoming 
 tenant, 946. Has run up land beyond its legitimate 
 value, 946-950. Tenants offer more than a fair 
 rent, 953-969. Improvements should include all 
 added value not exliausted, 971-3. Oases of te- 
 nants in county Leitrim under loiig leases — unable 
 to pay rents — holdings greatly subdivided , 984. 
 Purchasers under Bright clauses would subdivide, 
 984-7. Advanced money for emigration to 
 tenants surrendering, 988, 1013-4. Another 
 case in Kildare of a long lease greatly subdivided, 
 991. Would promote peasant proprietorship 
 solely by simplifying and cheapening the 
 transfer of land, 992-3. Cost of present system 
 of land transfer,994-5, 997. Class of substantial 
 yeomen proprietors would be a great benefit, 1001- 
 2. Tendency to subdivision still ^exists, 1008- 
 1012 ; but not to same extent since emigration set 
 in, 1013-17, 1022. Farms of less than fifteen acres 
 too small, 1027-30. A body to purchase and resell 
 to tenants would lessen costs of transfer, 1036-7. 
 Would not limit the power of mortgaging small 
 holdings or large estates, 1056-60. Would pro- • 
 hibit subdivision without limit in case of peasant pro- 
 prietors, 1072. Similar objectionsto subletting, 1078. 
 
 Sweetman, John, Esq. , Menion-square ; counties Kildare 
 and Meath, Parmer proprietor. — Dublin. 
 Gave two tenants leases of 999 years ; great im- 
 provements made in consequence, and security for 
 rent improved, 1083, 1105-6, 1116-19, 1146-7. 
 Punctual payment of rent and no reduction asked, 
 1112-3. Experiment satisfactory, 1244-8. Great 
 expense of leases — instances, 1086-91, 1096-1104, 
 1111. Leases contained clauses against letting 
 in conacre, but not against subdivision, 1092-5. 
 Tenants of seven acres can live by aid of sons' 
 work or dealing in cattle, 1121-4. Compensation 
 for disturbance insufficient ; in fact no compensa- 
 tion wiU satisfy small tenants, 1126-30. Consoli- 
 dation by Mr. Nicholson and eviction before and 
 since Land Act to turn farms into grazing land, 
 1131-7. Ill-feeling in consequence, 1137-43. 
 Ejectment only for non-payment of rent woidd give 
 security, 1144-5. Peasant proprietorship would 
 encourage thrift, and through natural causes the 
 farms will get into best hands, 1151-6. . But a 
 general scheme not practicable financially, 1157-8. 
 Fixity of possession except for non-payment of rent 
 would give sxifBcient security and satisfaction, 
 1159-60. The right to sell most important, as the 
 thrifty suppliant the lazy, 1160. Case of Mr. 
 Elcock who got highest compensation under Act, 
 but insufficient, some buildings not being agricul- 
 tural, and he lost several thousand pounds, 
 1161-78. Tenant will agree to any rent sooner 
 than be evicted, 1179, 1190-2. In case of dispute 
 
 . as to rent there should be arbitration, 1181-9, 
 
 1197-8. Improvements generally made by tenant, 
 1193-4. Tenants consider the land their 
 property as long as they pay a fair rent, 
 1 1 95-6. Member of Tenants' Defence Association, 
 1201-4. Case of ejectment by landlord resuming 
 possession; bitter feeling prodiiced, 1206. No 
 danger of excessive subdivision, 1213-5. Con- 
 acreing exhausts the soil, 1216. Studied question 
 of peasant proprietorship on Continent, 1218-23. 
 Peasant proprietorship would improve farming and 
 character of peoph^ socially and as citizens, 
 1224-30. In Cavan many small farms on which 
 tenants live comfortably, 1231-6. Tenant-right 
 exists to a great extent in Cavan, 1238. Not 
 generally in Meath, 1241-2. Case of renWaising 
 on death of tenant, causing ill-feelingj 1239—40. 
 
 Patterson, Rev. Samuel S., Bally^oran ; Co. Kildare, 
 Wesleyan Minister. — Dcblin. 
 Is a tenant farmer, 1254-9. His action 
 against Duke of Leinster, 1260-9, 1272-5. 
 Yearly lease offered him, with stringent cove- 
 nants, barring compensation except for improve- 
 ments agreed on, 1270, 1281-94. Effect of 
 lease to disturb and unsettle the tenants on the 
 estate, 1292. Consent of landlord to tenant im- 
 proving should not be required, 1296-7. ' Duke 
 of Leinster improves with money from Board of 
 Works and tenants pay increased rent, 1304-7. 
 No general custom of improvements by landlord, 
 1309. Eviction of trustees of College of Maynooth 
 on refusal to take lease, 1309-13. Lease refused 
 by few tenants of estate ; generally signed, but re- 
 luctantly, 131-4-5. Rent should be subject to 
 arbitration or decision of court, 1317-8. And 
 tenant paying such rent should not be ejected, 
 1319. Such a law would produce tranquility and 
 prospei-ity, 1320-7. Tenant-right custom of the 
 greatest advantage in North, 1329. With security 
 witness could double produce of farm, 1329. With 
 security Irish tenants would be industrious, 1330. 
 Tenants agree to pay too high rents, 1331-4. Land 
 Act conferred great benefits, 1337. And has 
 worked fairly, though it does not go far enough, 
 1337. Power of ejectment checks improvement, 
 1340. Free sale would lead to consolidation of 
 holdings, 1341-6. Case of eviction by Duke of 
 Leinster, 1347-50. Incase of ejectment for non- 
 payment of rent, tenant should have right of sale, 
 1353-4. Greatest defect of. Land Act is power of 
 contracting out of it in tenancies over £50, 1355. 
 Large tenants in great distress and want protection 
 as much as small, 1356-63. 
 
 Robertson, Mr. Thomas, Narraghmore; counties Kildare 
 and Louth, Tenant-farmer. — Dublin. 
 Insecurity of tenant prevents improvement, 1375. 
 Land Act failed in being permissive in its pro- 
 visions, and in the absolute power given to Judge, 
 1376-7. Case of Trye v. Duke of Leiaster, 1380, 
 1 393-1 402. Compensation insuflScient, 1 380, 1 386. 
 Should be a jury in land cases, 1381-5. Would ap- 
 prove of a valuator as assessor, or of County Court 
 Judge, 1403. Cases of rent unduly increased 
 imder pressure of notice to quit, and of tenants com- 
 pelled to sign lease ousting claim under Land Act, 
 1404-23. In favour of fixity of tenure, valued 
 rent, and free sale, 1424. Tenants have as much 
 capital invested in the land as the landlords, 
 1426-1430. Payment of compensation no bar to - 
 eviction ; landlord gets it back from incoming 
 tenant, 1436-7. Case of landlord on purchasing 
 estate raising rents and compelling tenants to take 
 leases, 1438-46. As a rule, landlords do not im- 
 prove, and all improvements are by tenant, 1447-52. 
 Ireland would require expenditure of twenty years' 
 rental to bring it to same condition as Great Britain, ■ 
 1453-6. The three F's would settle the land ques- 
 tion, 1457-8. Permissiveness of Land Act its 
 gi-eatest defect, 1461-4. Procedure to obtain com- 
 pensation objectionable ; would prefer a jury or 
 arbitration, 1465-70. Land Act has led to general 
 
 d2 
 
XXll 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Robertson, Thomas, Esq. — continued. 
 
 raising of rent, 1472. Eents should be settled by 
 arbitration, 1475. Land Act admits principle of 
 rent valuation by the Land Court, 1478-83. Either 
 party should at any time have right to get new 
 valuation of rent, 1484-91. Tenant should have 
 power of sale to highest bidder, subject to reason- 
 able veto, 1493-1500. Would have power of evic- 
 tion for deterioration, 1503-5 ; but not for sub- 
 dividing or subletting, 1506-7 ; nor for bad 
 character, 1509-12. Power of raising rent on tenants' 
 improvements prevents them improving, 1512-3, 
 1515. Fair to raise rent if landlord improved, 1514. 
 In favour of peasant proprietary as a gradual process, 
 and of free trade in land, 1516-22. Estates should 
 be sold in holdings, 1523-4. Great costs of sales 
 in Court obstacle to working of Bright clauses, 
 1525, 1537. Government should advance entire 
 purchase money, 1528-30. Landlord should bear 
 costs of investigating title, 1534. No sales to 
 tenants of their farms in KQdare, 1539. Great 
 improvements made by peasant proprietors on 
 commons of Kildare, 1540-5. Distraint rare, 
 1546-8. An invidious power, 1547. Sales per- 
 mitted by Duke of Leinster of tenants' interests, 
 but subject to acceptance of Leinster Lease, 1550—5. 
 Tenant-right not in northern part of County Louth, 
 except in a few estates, 1558-9. Condition of 
 labourers, 1561-9. Wages falling last two years, 
 1564 ; now Is. Qd. & day, 1567. 
 
 Toumshend, Charles U., Esq., Molesworth-street, Land 
 Agent. — Dublin. 
 In Counties Antrim, Cavan, Down, Dublin, Kil- 
 dare, Kilkenny, Monaghan, Tipperary, Tyrone, 
 Monaghan, Waterford, Wexford, and of general 
 experience, 1570-3. Griffith's valuation and Ord- 
 nance maps of great value, 1574. History of valua- 
 tion from 1826, 1574-6. Error in Act of 1852 in 
 directing deduction of all rates and taxes led to low 
 valuation of counties first valued, 1576. Govern- 
 ment valuation is a guide to letting value, but it 
 varies, and in mixed arable and pasture land 25 to 
 30 per cent, might be added, 1577. In pasture 
 lands sometimes 100 per cent., and in mountain 
 districts 500 per cent., 1578-79, 1633-7. The 
 valuation is not relatively fair as between North 
 and South, 1580-4. More tillage and more produce 
 in North than in South, 1585-1590. Southern 
 tenant being lower valued gets higher compensa- 
 tion for disturbance under sec. 3 than the Northern 
 tenant, 1592-5, 1598-1600. Rent as fair in South 
 as in North, 1596-7. Table of prices of produce 
 under Act of 1852, in 1867, and in 1877, 1605. 
 Variations in prices of cattle since 1877, 1606-12. 
 Elements of valuation of land, 1613-24. Return 
 from Fanner's Gazette of prices of agricultural pro- 
 duce from 1830 to 1879, 1624-7. Farms seldom 
 change hands, 1639. And rents little raised last 
 twenty years, 1640. Rents raised more in large 
 than in small holdings, 1641. Grifiith's valuation 
 fallacious, 1643-6. A general valuation should 
 not extend over two or three years, 1647. Revi- 
 sion of valuation only for houses, 1648. A new 
 valuation would not distinguish improvements of 
 landlord and tenant, 1649-1650. Elements of 
 valuation for rent — price of labour, locality, mar- 
 ket, elevation, general improvements of country, 
 1655-1660. 
 
 Bernard, WiHiaxa L., Esq., Chief Clerk to 'Commis- 
 sioners of Church Temporalities. — Dublin. 
 Modes of mortgaging under Church Act and under 
 Bright clauses, 1668-9. Freedom of alienation to 
 purchasers borrowing from Church Commissioners, 
 1669-1672. Similar freedom would aid working 
 of Bright clauses. Purchase clauses in Church Act 
 have been very successful, 1678. Great improve- 
 ments by the new owners, 1679. Great punctuality 
 m pajTiient of annuities, 1680-2, 1821. Creation of 
 peasant proprietors would promote loyalty and order, 
 1684-6. Should be promoted gradually, not by 
 •wholesale purchase, 1687-8. Board should have dis- 
 
 cretion to lend entire purchase money, 1689-1691. 
 Owners of estates wishing to sell would accept 
 State debentures through Public Board constituted 
 for purpose, 1692-9. Stamp duty and cost of con- 
 veyancing would be remitted by Board, and adding 
 a small percentage to purchase money, 1700-2. 
 Mode of conveyancing under Commissioners, and 
 costs, 1703. Disputes of Commissioners with their 
 Solicitor, 1708-12. Action of Incorporated Law 
 Society, 1710. Commissioners' scheme of con- 
 veyancing and costs worked well, 1719. London 
 Companies and other corporations should be com- 
 pelled to sell at prices fixed by impartial tribunal, 
 and be paid in State debentures, 1720-6, 1737, 
 1821-32. Suggestions as to creation of a three and 
 a half per cent, land stock, 1732-3. And as to 
 charging orders, exempt from stamp duty, in lieu of 
 ordinary conveyances and mortgages, 1734, 1833-5. 
 Mode of determining amount of purchase money 
 by tenants under the Church Commissioners, 1754-7, 
 1792-9. Mode of dealing with the residue unsold 
 to tenants, 1758. The Church lands sold to tenants 
 were principally in Ulster, but scattered all over 
 Ireland, 1761-6. Difference of law as to right of 
 apportionment of head rent, 1768-7.3. Fee-farm 
 rents should be apportionable, when sales made to 
 tenants, 1774-8. Or placed upon one lot idemni- 
 fying the others, 1779-1791. Proportion of fee- 
 farm rents to value of estate, 1789-91. One Com- 
 mission should manage the whole system of sales 
 to tenants, 1802. Following the system and 
 having the powers of the Church Commissioners, 
 1803-4. With option to tenant to purchase by 
 terminable annuities, 1805-12. Mode of collecting 
 payments by Church Commissioners through re- 
 ceivable orders, 1816. Valuations for purposes of 
 sale to Commission, 1821. 
 
 Allen, Mr. Samuel Joseph, Income Tax Surveyor. — 
 Dublin. 
 In Counties Cavan, Donegal, Fermanagh, Gal- 
 way, Leitrim, Mayo, Monaghan, Roscommon and 
 Tyrone, 1836-7. Had opportunities of knowing 
 proportion between rent and valuation, 1838-41. 
 In Union of Loughrea, rent very frequently double 
 the valuation, 1842. In Clifden and Oughterard 
 Unions, sometimes four times the valuation, 1843. 
 In Donegal, Fermanagh, Tyrone, rent often under 
 Government valuation, 1844-52. Mountain land 
 low valued in the West, 1853. Mountain 
 grazings sometimes held separate from, some- 
 times appurtenant to arable holdings, 1854-62. 
 Tendency to consolidation in the West, but not on 
 a large scale, 1863-4. Consolidation greater before 
 1870 than since, by checking evictions through com- 
 pensation clauses, 1874-1881. Great anxiety of 
 tenants to become purchasers of their holdings, 
 1882-4. Purchasers in the North working hard 
 and living frugally to repay advances, 1886-8, 
 1890. Very satisfied, 1889. In Tyrone large 
 number of farmer proprietors of old date, 1891-6. 
 Subdivision not common, norto undue extent, 1896- 
 8. Very few leases in Galway and Mayo, 1899- 
 1900. Very few since Land Act, 1901. Tenants 
 in West and North prefer leases to yearly tenancies, 
 but landlords before and since 1870 have been 
 unwilling to grant them, 1902-4. In the North, 
 tenants desire leases, if at a fair rent, and they did 
 not sacrifice the tenant-right, 1905-1915. Distur- 
 bances in Mayo due to evictions and passionate 
 attachment of tenants to their farms, 1919. And 
 to want of security, 1933-4. In West great poverty 
 through extreme subdivision in some parts, while 
 other parts are held in large farms, 1920-4. Owner 
 of twenty acre farm in West could live in comfort, 
 1929-30. Or, if tenant, he had security, 1931-2. 
 Tenant-right in Donegal, cause of quiet, 1933-7. 
 In Galway and Mayo tenants save money, but do 
 not improve, 1938. Case of tenants improving 
 under sense of security on Mr. Tighe's estate, 1939- 
 
 1942. Land Act at first stimulated improvements, 
 
 1943. Landlords seldom contribute to tenants' 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCK 
 
 XXIU 
 
 jlllen, Mr. Samuel Joseph — continued. 
 
 improvements, 1943. No tenant-right in Gal way 
 or Mayo, but sale permitted, 1944. Rent 
 often raised on tenants' improvements, 1946-7. 
 No general increase of rent, 1950. Tenant 
 unable to resist demand of exorbitant rent, 1951-2. 
 Extension of Ulster custom to all except! grazing 
 farms would be beneficial, 1953-8, 1964-5. "A 
 dumb priest gets no parish," 1959. It would 
 be acceptable even where landlord makes the 
 improvements, 1960-2. Landlord should be com- 
 pensated for his improvements by increased rent, 
 1961—2. Independent arbitration to settle disputes 
 about rent, 1964. Griffith's valuation practically 
 useless for rent or taxation purposes, 1967. 
 
 Reeves, Hobert Edward, Esq., Landowner and Land 
 Agent — Dublin. 
 In Kilkenny, Limerick, Queen's County, and 
 Tipperary, 1968-70. Tillage land in Tipperary 
 dearer at Government valuation than grass farms 
 at 20 per cent, over, 1975—6. Witness has reduced 
 rents of tillage lands since 1 8 6 8 to about G o vernment 
 valuation, 1978-9, 2009-2010. Tenant is not 
 evicted — allowed to sell, and arrears deducted from 
 purchase-money, 1981-2. No consolidation of 
 farms to any extent, 1985. Leases of thirty-five 
 years general with clauses for good husbandry, to 
 ' keep in repair and against oonacreing, burning, sub- 
 letting, and selling with assent, 1986-1990, 1998. 
 The good will of holdings sells at fourteen to fifteen 
 years' purchase : Instances, 1992—7. Landlord 
 exercises reasonable veto on incoming tenant, 1999. 
 Permission to sell not general in Tipperary or 
 Queen's County, 2000. Since 1875 sale by tenants 
 At will — at seven years' ])urchase for small mountain 
 farms; one tenant bought four holdings, 2001-6. 
 Right of sale would be important, but rents are some- 
 times too low, and sometimes too high, 2007. On 
 Lord Devon's estate, pennission to sell is recognized. 
 In Switzerland half the farms are mortgaged, 
 2011-4. Is opposed to peasant proprietary, 2013. 
 French in wine districts thrifty and industrious, 
 but poor, 2015-7. Landowners of 100 to 150 acres 
 would be an advantage, 2020. Near towns smaller 
 proprietors would be valuable, 2021. Rent of 
 land in North higher than in South, 2026. Lands 
 of old proprietors in Limerick and Tipperary are 
 low let ; of English purchasers are high let, 2029-31, 
 2080-3, 2100-3. Rents of latter raised much; 
 result, very much dissatisfaction and danger, 2031-3. 
 Farms should not be let by competition, nor where 
 landlord lays out nothing, at more than fair rent, 
 3034-5, 2070. Large improvements on Mr. R. 
 Pigot's estate, and no increase of rent, 2036. Raising 
 rent where land let fairly checks tenants' improve- 
 ments, 2037, Landlord should be compensated 
 for his improvements by moderate increase of rent, 
 2035-9, 2071-4. In Limerick much improvement 
 by landlords, 2040. In case of dispute as to rent, 
 arbitration is the only course possible, 2043-5. 
 Much improvements by tenants on mountain lands 
 in Galtees and Slievebloom, 2047-52. Tenants very 
 poor, though low-rented, and having practical fixity 
 -of tenure, 2054-60. The Swiss marvellously indus- 
 trious; better clothed and housed, but worse fed than 
 the Irish, 2062-8. Loans should be given to tenants 
 for improvements under superintendence of Board 
 of Works, 2075. Leases at fair rents, rent at 
 termination only to be raised on landlord's improve- 
 ments would give security to landlord and tenant, 
 2076-9. In favour, up to recent time, of periodical 
 revisions of rent, 2085. Rents likely to fall in the 
 future, 2086-7. Should be periodical revision of 
 rent, at wish of either party, 2088-90. On intro- 
 duction of a compulsory tenant-right, a new valua- 
 tion, 2091-2. Too much rent offered for land, 2099. 
 Desirable that tenants on sale of estate should have 
 opportunity of purchasing their holdings, 2102. 
 Difficulty in fixing purchase-money, by tenant having 
 right of pre-emption, 2104-5. Poor rate and county 
 .cess should be divisible between landlord and tenant, 
 
 2105. Tenants this year assisted to borrow for 
 improvements, 2108-9. In general, landlords con- 
 tribute largely towards improvements on farms, 
 2110-1. 
 
 Meagher, Rev. Thomas, p.p., Newport., Co. Tipperary. 
 — Dublin. 
 Condition of tenants not naterially improved by 
 Land Act, 2 1 1 3. Absence of j ury a great blot, 2113- 
 6, 2129-32. Set-off for dilapidation is valued at pre- 
 sent prices, whilst tenants' improvements are valued 
 at prices of time when made, 2118. Meaning put 
 upon "predecessors in title" has led to evasions of 
 provisions for compensation, 2120-2. A jury 
 of arbitrators should decide compensation, 2130-2. 
 In favour, for North and South, of perpetuity of 
 tenure at fixed rents, 2138-9. Tenants should have 
 power of free sale and of subdivision, 2140-3. A 
 fair rent should exclude tenants' improvements, and 
 in case of dispute, be fixed by arbitrators, 2145-6, 
 with umpire, appointed by Government, 2151, 6. 
 In favour of Griffith's valuation, minus tenants' 
 improvements, as basis of fair rent, 2149-51. 
 High-class pasture lands are low valued in tenement 
 valuation, 2153. Subdivision should be permitted 
 down to a certain point — say twenty acres, 2156- 
 9, 2194-5. Evicted persons starving in adjoining 
 villages, 2160-7. Farmers have only three months' 
 labour for labourers in the year, 2168. Wages are 
 Is. to Is. 2d. a day, 2169-70, 2173. Eviction of 
 small holders due to provision as to payment of poor 
 rates on holdings valued at and under £4, 2171. 
 No poor rate should be charged on holdings under 
 £4 valuation, 2180. Erection of labourers' cottages 
 should be made compulsory on landlord and tenant, 
 2181. On pain of landlord forfeiting his rent, and 
 of tenant losing his fixity of tenure, 2182-2193. 
 Large pasture farms should be broken up into re- 
 sidential farms, 2195-8. The labourer should be 
 under the landlord, 2201. Peasant proprietorship 
 scheme should not extend toigra,ss lands or holdings 
 beyond £100 value, 2204-8. Ejectment should be 
 for not less than two years' rent due — in analogy to 
 Roman Law, 2208-1 1. Hanging gale is going out 
 of use, 2212. Leases of thirty-five years at fair 
 rent, as under 28th section of Land Act, should be 
 made compulsory, 2213-6. Where tenant has made 
 improvements, he should have a fixed interest, 
 2218-2222. Tenant should be debarred contracting 
 himself out of Act, 2222-3. Fixity of tenure 
 should be confined to residential holdings under 
 £100 valuation. Above that limit, or where land- 
 lord makes all improvements, there should be free 
 contract, 2228-40. Except on one or two estates, 
 landlords do not make improvements, 2244. 
 Limited right of sale generally exists, 2247-8, In 
 favour of free sale, 2249-51. And without a veto 
 on incoming tenant, 2252-3. Landlord should 
 have right of pre-emption, if he pays full price, 
 2254-5. High rents not usual, nor is rent-raising, 
 2257-61. Instances of rent raised on tenants' im- 
 provements, 2262. Scheme for promoting peasant 
 proprietorship by Registry of Title and Land De- 
 bentures, 2267-2270. Produces evidence from a 
 meeting of tenant farmers as to rents and valuation 
 in the parish of Newport, 24135. Right of sale 
 exists here and there, 24136. Messrs. Hamilton 
 and Hussy have raised rents, 24182. 
 
 Coleman, Mr. Bernard, Ballybarrack, Dundalk ; Co. 
 Louth, Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Farmer proprietor, with a few tenants, 2273-80. 
 Case of increase of rent under notice to quit to more 
 than fair rent, 2283-2290, 22S7-8. Compen- 
 sation for disturbance should not be limited to 
 tenants of under £100 valuation, 2293. Case of 
 farm unlet where tenant evicted for nonpayment of 
 rent, 2293. Loss of part of a farm affects 
 system of farming, 2297. Case of several rises 
 of rents on tenants' improvements, 2302-4. ' Case 
 of purchase in Land Court by witness, forced to 
 give upset price, beyond its value, 2305-9. Price 
 included value of his own improvements, 2310. 
 
XXIV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Coleman, Bernard — continued. 
 
 Sheep-feeding enriches land much, 2.307. If 
 evicted by new purchaser he could have recovered 
 nothing for disturbance, and for improvements, 
 little, 2308. Rent had been raised in 1874 on 
 tenant's improvements, 2308. Compensation for 
 disturbance should extend to tenancies of any valua- 
 tion, 2326. Permission to sell given, but not as a 
 right, 2327-9. Case of tenant-purchaser borrowing 
 and refused alienation by will, 2334-47. Could not 
 get two-thirds of purchase-money, 2335. Purchaser 
 has no control over his property till advances repaid, 
 2346-8. Does not object to prevention of sublet- 
 ting and subdivision, 2347. Though the Board has 
 only advanced one-third, purchaser is subject to for- 
 feiture if he charges it with a shilling, 2349-58. 
 No deduction for income tax by Board, 2350. 
 System of loans under Bright clauses no advantage, 
 2351-63. With better security tenants would 
 make more improvements, 2366-7. Tenant-right 
 in Louth would be a benefit, 2380-2. Does not 
 think valuation of rent by independent authority 
 practicable, 2383, 239.3i Compensation should not be 
 less than one year's rent in any case, 2387. Ge- 
 neral feeling in favour of fixity of tenure at valued 
 rents, 2391. In favour of right of sale by tenant, 
 2394. No necessity for veto in landlord, 2395. 
 Little capricious eviction In county Louth, 2396. 
 In favour of retaining right of eviction, and of 
 altering rents, 2398-2405. Difficulty of valuing 
 rents, 2406. In favour of enlarged scale of com- 
 pensation in case of farms of all sizes, 2407-8. 
 
 Derham, Mr. Andrew, Skerries ; Co. Dublin, Farmer. — 
 Dublin. 
 Tenant-farmer and small owner in fee, 2410-6. 
 On Mr. I. T. Hamilton's estate Ulster custom pre- 
 vailed before 1870, but since, a movement to break 
 it down, 2417-8, 2425-6. Case of tenant-right 
 purchase by witness, 2417-24. Case of tenant re- 
 fused liberty to sell, who held on till evicted for non- 
 payment of rent, when he got stipend for life, 2428- 
 31, 2434-7. Custom was approval by landlord of 
 tenant incoming, but not of price, 2432-3. Matters 
 in which Land Act has failed — 1st, insufficient 
 compensationforimprovements, 2439. Compensation 
 should not be lessened for time of enjoyment, 2439. 
 2nd. As to tenure, there should be perj^etuity, with 
 free sale. Prevention of sale pernicious — as land 
 becomes deteriorated : case in point, 2439-2440, 
 2460. Rent should be regulated by some court or 
 Government official, 2441-2. Estates of absentees 
 should be sold to tenants. State advancing three- 
 fourths of purchase-money, 2442-3. Exorbitant 
 rents lead to deterioration of land — case, 9444-7. 
 Corporations' estates should be sold to tenants^ 
 2448. Landlords do not mingle with their tenants 
 sufficiently, 2448. Advances by Board of 'Works 
 insufficient where tenant has made valuable im- 
 provements, 2448. Witness got loan of only £2,400 
 out of between £7,000 and £8,000 purchase-money, 
 2450-3. Payment of county cess should be divided 
 between landlord and tenant, 2454. County cess 
 section of Land Act excluded in new leases, 2454-6. 
 Landloid should not be allowed to contract himself 
 out of his liabilities under Land Act, 2457. Ex- 
 tension of Ulster custom satisfactory, if landlord 
 prevented putting on an unfair rent, 2458-60. 
 Tenants' improvements should be excluded, land- 
 lords' included, in valuation for rent, 2462-4, 
 2481-4. Revaluation of land for rent might be 
 every twenty years, 2461. Repayments by tenant 
 purchasers at 5 per cent, are too heavy ; time of re- 
 payment should be extended and rate lowered, 
 2466-71, 2476, 2478. Those who have money 
 could pay oflF quicker, 2471. Extension of Ulster 
 custom would give most employment and prosperity, 
 2472. When estate comes to be sold, tenants should 
 have privilege of purchasing, 2472. Lands of cor- 
 porations and absentees should be compulsorily sold 
 to the tenants, 2473. Doubtful if tenants could pay 
 
 an increase on present rent to secure ownership,. 
 2474. State of crops in 1880, 2474^5. Non- 
 alienation clauses in case of Board of Works loans 
 objectionable, 2476. Tenant should have perfect 
 security, 2477. Tenants should have option of 
 purchasing perpetuity, or the fee, or get Ulster 
 custom, 2477-80. Improvements usually made by 
 tenants, except in case of drainage by landlord with 
 loans from Board of Works, 2485-6. 
 
 Everitt, Mr. James, p.l.g., Drogheda; Co. Meath, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Great expense and hardship of proving land 
 claims ; case, 2489. Difficulty in tenant getting^ 
 witnesses, 2489, 2501-2, 2520-1. Protracted 
 litigation, 2492-9. Case of eviction; compensa^ 
 tion awarded by court inadequate, 2503-12. 
 Landlord no gainer by the eviction, 2514. Tenants 
 deprived of possession may not get compensation for 
 two years, 2522-3. Grievance that land judges 
 hold that ten years' enjoyment recoups tenant for 
 outlay : cases in point, 2524-35, 2542. Improve- 
 ments on pasture lands not sufficiently compensated, 
 2536-7. To make good fattening land, requires 
 twenty years, 2538-2540. Purchasers in Landed 
 Estates Court generally raise rents arbitrarily, 
 2544-7. Loss in farming last year in Meath, 
 2548. Defect of Land Act, that large tenants 
 are not entitled to compensation for disturbance, 
 case. 2548-2553. Defect of present land sys- 
 tem — no resident landlord or agent, 2554-9. 
 Unwillingness of absentee landlords to improve, 
 2560-4. Landlords who themselves make the 
 improvements are more willing to reduce rents, 
 2564-5. Unwillingness of tenants to go into Land 
 Court, 2566. Case of rent unduly advanced since 
 Land Act, 2567-72. Description of the "Land 
 Shark," and of his mode of operating, 2573. Security 
 of tenure with fair rents and free sale, the best 
 remedy, 2566-2574. Griffith's valuation, a fair 
 rent generally, 2575-7, 2592, 3, 2615-6. Price of 
 labour has increased in equal proportion with price 
 of produce, 2577-8, 2617. Extension of time of 
 repayment under the Bright clauses advisable, 
 2578. Instance of great improvements made on 
 perpetuity tenure, 2579. Tenants should get loans 
 for improvements if landlords unwilling to improve, 
 2579-82, 2644-5. Laws of primogeniture and 
 entail a main cause of distress, and of unwillingness 
 to improve, 2584. No change of law required 
 where landlords have made the improvements, 
 2593-2614. Takes £30 an acre to make good 
 fattening pasture, 2619-22. Free sale will cure 
 itself, 2623-6. Tenants generally would be satis- 
 fied with fixity of tenure at fair rents, with free 
 sale, 2628, 2653-4. Against expropriation of 
 landlords, 2629-30. Land not much over Griffith's 
 valuation, 2631. Pasture lands capable of great 
 improvements by draining, 2633. Rate of wages, 
 2577-8, 2634-8. Clause as to building labourers' 
 cottages should be made compulsory, 2640. Few 
 small tenants in Meath, scanty population, 2645-7. 
 Small western tenants might be planted in pasture 
 lands of Meath, 2647-8. Purchasers under Bright 
 clauses in Meath bought too dear ; advances in- 
 sufficient, 2651-2. Pvirchasers of Church lands not 
 satisfied with their purchase, 2653. Case of tenant 
 evicted at end of lease, without getting value of his 
 improvements, 2749-53. 
 
 Drew, Mr. James Richard, p.l.g., Drogheda; county 
 Meath, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Tenant under Earl of Sheflield and Judge 
 Little, grazing and tillage farms, 2655-66. Case 
 of mill built by tenant, and land taken with it,, 
 outside Land Act, 2661-2675. Want of local 
 registry of title, 2673-7. Want of arbitration 
 tribunal in disputes aboiit rent, 2683, 2691-6. 
 Coiinty Court Judges not sufficiently practical in 
 cases of rent and land compensation, 2697. Tenants 
 have no confidence in Chairman, 2698. Prefers 
 purchase of land for tenants, giving landlords 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XXV 
 
 Drew, James Richard — contmued. 
 
 consols in payment, 2699-2702, 2716. Not in 
 favour of fixity of tenure at fair rents, as he sees 
 no means of settling rents, 2703-5, 2708-2713. 
 Present rents not to be taken as a standard, 
 2706-7. Small tenant would get increased em- 
 ployment if peasant proprietorship general, 2713-5. 
 Farming losses last year, 2719. Tenants lose their 
 independence if they improve, 2724. Fear of rent 
 being raised on tenants' improvements, 2726-7. 
 "Rate of wages, 2728. Use of machinery in agri- 
 cultural work, 2736-9. Case of rent unduly raised, 
 no means of reduction, 2740-5. 
 
 Murphy, Mr. James, Dundalk ; Co. Louth, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Tenant farmer and corn dealer, 2754-60. Pur- 
 chase of tenant right on Lord Clermont's estate, 
 2761-2785. And on Sir C. Forster's, 2785-7. 
 Tenant right custom on Lord Clermont's and Sir C. 
 Forster's estates. 2767,2788. Insufficient compen- 
 sation under Land Act, 2789, 2794. Tenantry 
 want fixity of tenure, fair rents, and free sales, 
 2796-7, 2839. Rent to be settled by arbitrators, 
 2799, 2800. Would not permit subdivision or 
 subletting, 2802-3. Would not disturb tenant for 
 bad husbandry, 2804-5. Landlord should have no 
 veto on sale ; case of loss through veto to tenant 
 selling, 2806-9. Only in favour of peasant proprie- 
 torship when tenant is able to purchase, or to pay 
 portion, 2812-20. Rents not high, but great 
 poverty in Louth, 2821, 2839-43. All improve- 
 ments made by tenants ; but Lord Clermont gave 
 slates and timber, 2822-30. Lord Clermont tuilds 
 labourers' cottages, 2823-5. General valuation 
 made by Lord Clennont in 18.'i2, no account taken 
 of tenants' improvements, 2832. Exception in 
 witness's own case, 2832-8. Low price of oats and 
 bad produce of potatoes, 2844-8. 
 
 Dowling, Mr. Thomas, Terenure ; County Tipperary, 
 Land Owner and Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 
 Cases of sales out of court under Bright clauses, 
 2852, 2862. Residue of estate not under Bright 
 clauses, if landlord willing to sell the four-fifths to 
 tenants, 2859-62. Isolated sales to tenants not 
 advantageous to landlord orcountry, 2865. Assistance 
 to outsiders to purchase should be on condition to give 
 security of tenure to the tenants, 2868-71 ; e. g. 
 60 years' leases, 2872-3. County Court should 
 have controlling power over rent, 2874-8, 2965. 
 Fixed rents better than periodical valuations, 
 2879-80. Landlord should retain control over 
 husbandi-y of estate, 2881—2. Subdivision of ten- 
 ancies not of peasant properties below 20 Irish 
 acres improper, 2883-4. Griffith's valuation a 
 tolerably fair guide, in some cases excessive, 2885. 
 In favour of a new valuation of Ireland, 2885. 
 Case of difference between valuation and rent 
 caused by landlords' improvements, 2886-90. One 
 result of low valuation is small advance under 
 Rright clauses, 2888 ; but new valuation can now 
 be had, 2888. No general desire to become pro- 
 prietors where rents fair and landlord just, 2893. 
 Tenant purchasers are paying off their charges, 
 2893. Tenant purchasing should have liberty to 
 charge after Board of Works charge, 2898-9. It 
 cannot be prevented, cases in point, 2895, 2900. 
 Holdings of tenant purchasers substantially im- 
 proved, 2904-6. Three-fourths could be safely 
 advanced under Bright clauses, 2908. Owners pay^ 
 for new valuation for Board of Works loan, 2912. 
 Leases to bar the Land Act increasing, 2914. 
 Tenants prefer to be without them, 2915. County 
 cess, and public road sections, have been a nullity, 
 2915-8. In favour of statutable form of lease, 
 2919-21. To be made compulsory, 2922-3. An 
 Act of Parliament regulating tenure of land would 
 have the same effect, 2924. Would prevent letting 
 for shorter term or otherwise than regulated by 
 Act of Parliament, 2928-9. Cost of conveyances 
 in case of loans by Board of Works, 2930-2. De- 
 
 fect of Board of Works' conveyance is that title 
 is not indefeasible, 2932-3. Covenants in leases 
 to pay rents quarterly, 2933-7. Seldom enforced 
 but power retained, 2938-9. Cases of evictions 
 from farms, where rents paid and farming proper, 
 2939-44. Erection of labourers' cottages .should 
 be compulsory, 2952-5. Union rating would pre- 
 vent housing of labourers far from work, 2956. 
 System of fining for non-punctual payirient of rent, 
 2956-7. Rents in Kerry higher iu proportion to 
 valuation than elsewhere in Munstei-, 2958. Cer- 
 tainty of payment of rent would compensate 
 landlord for 60 years' leases, 2959, 2961. Woiild 
 not increase rent for length of lease, 2962. Rents 
 should be fixed on average prices of produce for 
 previous five years, 2966. Tenant's improvements 
 made under covenant should be treated as land- 
 lord's improvements, 2967. Landlord woiald not 
 lose by, and should not be compensated for legal 
 security given to tenant, 2968-9. Except to a 
 limited extent in individual cases of loss, 2970. 
 Estate under 60 years' leases would not sell lower 
 than without, 2971-2. Covenants in statutory 
 lease, 2973-4. 
 
 O'CojmeZZ, Mr. John,LahernIIouse,Boherbuoy; county 
 Cork, Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Purchaser under Bright clauses, 2975-2983. 
 Cases of failure to purchase under Bright clauses, 
 whfere small labourers' houses on tenants farms, 
 2984-2993. Loss caused thereby, 3000-3006. 
 Cost of obtaining loan from Board of Works, 2994. 
 Form of lease barring the Land Act prevalent on 
 estate of Earl of Cork, 3007-13. All improve- 
 ments on that estate made by the tenants, 3009— 
 3016. Tenants very poor in many cases, 3016. 
 Their land is too highly rented, 3017-18. Rents 
 raised on change of tenancy on tenants' improve- 
 ments, 3023-4. High poor-rates, 3019-22, 3024-6. 
 Reiits high also on Mr. Longfield's and Mr. Down- 
 ing's estates, 3027-31. Rents raised on change of 
 tenancy on these estates, 3031. Thirty -one years' 
 leases general since Land Act, 3032-8. Sale on 
 Lord Cork's estate is subject to his approval, 3038. 
 Case, of tenant refused leave to sell, 3039. No evic- 
 tions on his estate, 3040-1. Improvements by 
 witness since his purchase of fee, 304,')-6. Few im- 
 provements by landlords, 3047. On Lord Egmont's 
 estate, no leases, but low rents, and rents raised on 
 change of tenancy ; no right of sale, 3048-51. Case 
 of threatened eviction prevented by dii-ect appeal to 
 landlord resident in England, 3054-8. Tenants 
 should have preemption on sale of estate, with ad- 
 vance of four-fifths of purchase money, at reasonable 
 rate, 3059-61. In favour of forced sale of estates 
 of absentees and corporations, 3059. Fixity of 
 tenure with fair rents, free sale, and facilities for 
 purchase by tenant, would settle Land Question, 
 3062. Sense of insecurity through rent being raised 
 on tenant's improvements. Case of contributions 
 forced on tenants for wedding present to sub-agent's 
 daughter, 3068-9. 
 
 Hill, Mr. Robert George, Brookfort, Lisbum ; county 
 Antrim, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Tenant farmer on Sir Richard Wallace's estate, 
 3070-1. Tenant erected all buildings, and improved 
 soil, 3080-2, 3088. Buildings cost XI, 500 to 
 £2,000, 3102. Land Act has made tenants more 
 independent, and is in many respects satisfactory, 
 3084-5. Unsatisfactory in not preventing undue 
 rise of rent, 3086 ; or rent valued on tenants' im- 
 provements, 3088-9. System of fines on the Hert- 
 ford (Sir R. Wallace's) estate, 3092. Proceeding 
 necessary whereby over-rented tenants may obtain 
 reduction of rent, to suit altered circumstances, 
 3097-8. Tillage farming only paid witness one 
 year out of last six, 3098-3101. Flax crops ex- 
 haust land if grown oftener than once in 10 years 
 3105-3111. On Sir Richard Wallace's estate per- 
 fectly free sale not permitted of late years, 3114. 
 Price is left to arbitration if a neighbour wants the 
 
XXVI 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 mil, Robert George — continued. 
 
 holding, formerly lie had to give the price oflTered 
 by the highest bidder, 3114-7. This alteration has 
 come in since the Land Act, 3120-1. Ulster cus- 
 tom implies free sale, fair rent, and continued 
 occupancy, 3122. DiiEculty as to settling fair rent, 
 3123. Arbitration not always satisfactory, 3125. 
 Different estimate of compensation by different 
 County Court Judges, 3126-3131. Ulster custom, 
 as legalized, offers no barrier to unjust rise of rent, 
 3132-3. Ulster tenant-right is being eaten away 
 by gradual rises of rent, 3134-7. Present rents too 
 high, 3140-2. Tenants give more than landis worth 
 because the land is their only resource, 3142-3. 
 Farmers want rent settled excluding tenants' im- 
 provements, 3144-6. Continuous occupancy at 
 fair rents, with free sale would satisfy tenants, 
 3147-53. Landlord should have reasonable veto 
 on incoming tenant, 3154-7. Dispute in Land 
 Court necessitates tenant leaving, 3158-9. No 
 limit to price of tenant-right on Sir R. Wallace's 
 estate, 3160. No general rise of rent on his estate, 
 3161. Rent about 21s. on English acre, 3163-4, 
 but not worth more than half, 3169-70. Labour 
 and taxes higher, produce less, the last ten years, 
 3167-8. Tenants ought to have free sale of tenant- 
 right, as of any other property of theirs, 3171-2. 
 On Sir R. Wallace's estate, all improvements made 
 by tenant, 3173. Witness's farm consolidated out 
 of four previous tenants' farms, whose tenant-right 
 was bought, 3174-8. Value of witness's incoming 
 payments and improvements would be £40 an acre, 
 3179-80. Tenant-right in his farm worth more 
 than fee simple, 3181-4. Tenant-right purchase a 
 heavy burden, but it is tenant's property and gives 
 him confidence, 4186-9. Tenant-right seldom 
 amounts to tenant's outlay, 3187-9. Tenant should 
 not sell landlord's improvements, 3191-2. Im- 
 provements always made by tenants, 3192. Tenant 
 considers he has interest in the land as long as he 
 pays the rent, 3193-7. On Sir R. Wallace's estate 
 tenants make improvements on farms, 3198-9. 
 Decline in value of tenant-right last two years, 
 3205-11. System of fining down rents on Hert- 
 ford estate, 3212-8. No raising of rent by Sir R. 
 Wallace, 3219-20. Landlord in Ulster can raise 
 rent, and if tenant resists, he must leave, taking 
 compensation, 3323-35. The compensation never 
 equal to value of tenant-right, 3236-8. Difficulty 
 of proving leasehold tenant-right and hardship of 
 its denial, 3238-3241 . Leases are for three lives or 
 thirty-one years, or three lives and thirty-one years, 
 3242. Where leases dropped tenants contiuued as 
 yearly tenants at fair rents, 3247-8. No purchases 
 of tenant-right by landlord, 3249-50. No general 
 desire to purchase the fee, 3252-5. Ulster custom 
 in its integrity would give perfect security, 3258-9. 
 Bright clauses not likely to be much availed of, 
 3260-1. Farming losses last six years, 3271-82. 
 A fully legalized tenant-right better than purchase 
 of fee, 3285. Objections to clauses preventing willing 
 to other than one child or grandchild, 3296-9. Little 
 planting done of late years, 3291-3. The fine was 
 not for length of lease, but to reduce rent, 3296-8. 
 
 Simpson, Mr. William, Armagh ; Co. Axmagh, Tenant 
 Farmer and small Land Proprietor. — Dublin. 
 Tenant-right custom on Lord Gosford's and on 
 Lord Charlemont's estates, 3307. On Lord Charle- 
 mont's rents raised on transfer of farms, 3307-13, 
 3390. Cases of rents raised unduly, 3314-9. 
 Tenants objected but submitted — did not want to 
 leave, 3320-4. Present fall in value of tenant- 
 right, 3325-7. Tenant-right is free sale and no 
 office rules, 3328. Rent should vary with prices, 
 and be settled by arbitration or Government 
 umpire, 3329-33, 3397-9. Tenants afraid rents 
 will be raised if they improve, 3334. General 
 value of tenant-right £15 to £23 an acre, 3336. 
 Higher on small farms, 3338. Cases of rents 
 raised since Land Act by Mr. M'Geough, and 
 
 reference to arbitration — lower rent fixed than- 
 demanded, 3340-7. Power of raising rents^ 
 unduly destroys tenant-right, 3349-53. Casea- 
 on Lord Charlemont's estate of rents raised unduly 
 at time of sale on tenants' improvements, 3355-62 
 3389. Would prefer rents fixed once for all, 3363.' 
 Present rents are high, 3364-70, 3381-2. Tenants 
 would extensively avail themselves of Bright 
 clauses, 3373-80. Leases for thirty-one years on 
 Lord Gosford's estate, 3391-4. Tenant-right re- 
 cognized at end of lease, 3395. On sale of tenant- 
 right, good will and improvements are sold, 3540-2. 
 But landlord should be compensated for his im- 
 provements, 3543-7, 3555-6. And for prospective 
 increase in value of his propei-ty, 3550-1. Either 
 party should have right to call for valuation of rent,^ 
 3552-4. The three P's would be satisfactory, 3557!^ 
 Improvements generally made by tenants, 3558, 
 Landlord should have right to impose rent for his 
 improvements, 3559-61. Landlord should have 
 reasonable veto on incoming tenant, 3562-3. Case 
 of Mr. M'Geough : £5 limitation held not to be 
 custom, 3565. Increase of rent since, on change 
 of tenant, 3566. Depreciates value of tenant-right, 
 3567-8. Tenant should have right to sell at best 
 price, 3574-5, 3577, 3588-9. High prices of 
 tenant-right and of land in county Down^ 3576- 
 3598. 
 
 Knipe, Mr. Thomas, Killyleagh; Co. Armagh, Tenant 
 Farmer and Farmer Proprietor. — Dublin. 
 Tenants purchasing under Church Act are doing 
 well, and satisfied with their position and purchase, 
 3609-13. Have improved by building, 3614. 
 Landlords make few improvements, and for those . 
 they charge the tenant additional rent : case in poiot, 
 3617, 3620-1. The additional charge becomes a 
 perpetual addition to the rent, 3620. Large im- 
 provements made by witness on faith of tenant-right, 
 3623-4. Cases of tenants' improvements absorbed 
 by increase of rent, 3626-3630. Tenant-right on 
 Sir James Stronge's estate, no limit to price, 3631-3. 
 Case of rent raised on sale, and value of tenant- 
 right depreciated, 3635-6. Tenants would farm 
 better if they had security, 3638, 3641. Rents 
 generally raised on improving tenants, 3639-40. 
 Rent raising on change of tenancy has increased 
 since Land Act, 3642. Tenants anxious to pur- 
 chase their holdings if greater facilities offered, 
 3642-5. Cases of rent-raising on tenant-right 
 estate on change of landlord, 3646-53. The tenant- 
 right system, as legalized, does not prevent undue 
 rent-raisiug, 3654-6. Compensation awarded by 
 Court does not equal amount got by free sale, 3656. 
 On Lord Charlemont's estate rents raised on change- 
 of tenancy, 3657, and on fall of leases, 3658-9. This 
 creates feeling of unoertaiuty, and prevents im- 
 provements, 3660-2. Rents too high at present, 
 3662. Tenants formerly lived by weaving, 3663. 
 Forty or fifty acres a big enough farm, 3664. 
 Small farmers, when industrious, and can sell their 
 improvements, do well, 3665. Peasant proprietor- 
 ship would make the country more contented and 
 prosperous, 3666. Two-thirds of purchase money 
 advanced by Government would be suflicient,. ■ 
 3667-8. Middlemen's rents and new purchasers' 
 generally highest, 3668-9. Lord Charlemont's 
 rents of unl eased land not lower than those of ad- 
 joining estates, 3670-1. Rents near the Govern- 
 ment valuation, which is high in County Armagh, 
 3672-4. Farming losses of last two years, 3676-8. 
 People live better than they used. Complain of 
 want of free sale and of rise of rents, 3679-80. 
 Not in favour of forced sales of landlords' estates, 
 3681-2. Land Act an advantage to tenants, but 
 has many defects, 3685-6. 
 
 Kelly, Edward Meares, Esq., Dublin; Co. Dublin, 
 Barristcr-at-Law. — Dublin. 
 Holds villa and five acres under Earl of Pem- 
 broke, 3687-90. Suggestions for improvement 
 of Land Act. Extension of tenant-right to all 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xxvn 
 
 Kdly, Edward Meares — continued. 
 
 holdings, ui'ban and rural — i.e., fixity of tenure, 
 fair rents, and free sale, 3691. Fixity of temire 
 subject to punctual payment of rent, 3691. Fair 
 rents to be settled by arbitration, but not to include 
 tenant's improvements, except made under express 
 contract. , Qualifications of right of free sale, 3691. 
 Principles of compensation for improvements, 
 3691-2. Amendment of 4th section of Land Act 
 by extending it to town improvements ; and that 
 deduction for time of enjoyment should be repealed, 
 3691-2. "Predecessors in title" should include all 
 occupiers, unless new lease excludes right to com- 
 pensation for prior improvements. Holt v. Harhur- 
 ton criticized, 3692. 70th section of Land Act 
 defining " holdings" should be amended, so as 
 to include holdings where the land is not the prin- 
 cipal subject of the demise, 3692. County Cess sec- 
 tion should apply to all holdings, 3692-6, 3698. 
 Case of Alderman Campbell's villa, with forty acres 
 of land attached, held not within Land Act, 3696-9. 
 Case of Powerscourt v. Mitchell criticized, 3700. 
 Coxmty Cess section should apply to all new tenan- 
 cies, 3704-5. Witness's o-war case of large building 
 improvements on residence (urban), and which are 
 not protected by Land Act, 3706-9. Tenant pays 
 income-tax on landlord's portion of poor-rate, 
 3710-2. 
 
 Fenlon, Mr. Edward, Kilcullen, County Kildare, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Four cases of rents unduly raised on tenants' 
 improvements, unimproving tenants' rents are not 
 raised, 3715-24, 3760-2. New leases forced on 
 tenants, 3725-6. Tenants have no alternative but 
 to pay rent demanded, 372S, 3744-7. Case of rent 
 raised on witness's improvements, 3729-32, 3739 ; 
 and of lease, barring compensation for improve- 
 ments, 3732-3. If more security, tenants, would 
 manure better and improve more, 3743. In favour 
 of arbitration where landlord and tenant disagree as 
 to rent, 3748, 3755. Too high rents dishearten 
 tenant, 3750. Arbitrary directions to valuator as 
 to increase of rent, 3751. Power of ejectment 
 where rent paid and farming good, should be taken 
 away, 3753-4. Tenants make the improvements, 
 3755. Landlord should get higher rent for his 
 improvements, 3756-7. Want of security causes 
 dissatisfaction and prevents impi-ovements, 3759-60. 
 Case of purchase of fee failing, though price 
 offered higher than average of estate, 3763-4. 
 Arbitrary raising of rents on tenants' improvements, 
 3766-70. Tenants have very little confidence in 
 working of Land Courts, 3771. Tenants want 
 security against increase of rent at end of leases, 
 3772. Tenant seldom gets fai'i' conpensation for 
 improvements, 3773. High rents a loss to land- 
 lord in the long run ; case in point, 3774. Eight 
 of free sale would be rarely exercised, 3778. In- 
 solvent or deteriorating tenant should be compelled 
 to sell by decree of Land Tribunal, 3779. But not 
 a person of bad character, 3780. Tenants' building 
 improvements increase Griffith's valuation, 3783. 
 
 Jiirlcpatrick, Alexander, Esq., Coolmine House, Clon- 
 sUla ; Counties Tipperary, Kildare, Kings' and 
 . Queen's Counties, Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 During thirty-one years' experience has known of 
 only two so-called evictions, no bad feeling what- 
 ever ; one of them was done for the sake of the 
 family, and the good will of the farm was allowed 
 to be sold, 3790-3792. The sale of good-will has 
 crept in on Lord Portarlington's estate, who did not 
 think it existed ten years ago, 3793-97. Has 
 worked well, in one case got rid of a bad tenant and 
 got a good one, 3798. Thinks it prevents litiga- 
 tion, 3802-03, 3857. Tenants are aided in making 
 improvements with money borrowed from Board 
 of Works, the interest being added to their rent, 
 3804-6. A tenant should not therefore be charged 
 
 with his improvements, at end of lease, by raising 
 the rent, if he has paid interest for them during 
 lease, 3817-19. Ejectments may take place; not 
 brought by landlord at all, 3828-30. The Sherifi;" 
 can sell a leaBefor years^ or a tenancy from year to 
 year, 3831-33. Ejectments seldom come to evic- 
 tions, 3834, 3858-60. Ejectment being the preli- 
 minary proceeding ; eviction the taking possession, 
 3834. Is in favour of leases ; makes tenant more 
 secure, 3843-45. Case in point, 3847. A good 
 landlord, 3849. If a tenant cannot pay his rent, 
 allows him to sell ; incoming tenant paying the 
 arrears of rent and giving balance to the outgoing 
 tenant, 3864-66, 3875. Tenants have; made great im- 
 provements, owing to the feeling of security the rule 
 of the estate gives them, 3883-84. Is in favour of 
 giving perfect security to tenants, with right of 
 sale, 3890-93, and having a new valuation by 
 Government, 3898-3901. 
 
 O'Brien, Edward William, Esq., Cahermoyle ; County 
 Limerick, Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Tenants should be independent of the laiidlord to 
 a great extent ; should be practically or virtually 
 the owners of their farms, 3913-14, 4086-88. Is 
 in favour of the three F's., 3918, 4001. The pre- 
 sent system unsatisfactory, 3920. Practically a 
 landlord cannot make improvements — a tenant will 
 not, from want of security, 3924. Free sale would 
 improve the country, 3930-35. Imjirovements as a 
 rule made by landlord, minor ones done by tenant, 
 3937. Is in favour of the Bright clauses of the 
 Land Act, 3938. Ulster Custom gives great 
 security to a tenant to lay out his money in improv- 
 ing, 3938. The sooner peasant proprietary is intro- 
 duced the better for the country, 3943. Would 
 force landlord to sell, if it could be shown his in- 
 terest was not injured by it, 3945-3959. A tenant, 
 obtaining money under the Bright clauses to be 
 allowed to mortgage, but not subdivide, 3962-3.. 
 A cheap and simple system of registration of title 
 wanted, 3966. Would guard against fictitious sales;, 
 case under the Church Act, 3976-78. About 
 10 per cent, of the tenantry in a fairly average 
 county could buy under the Bright clauses, 3981— 
 83, 3897. Tenants, with certain exceptions, should 
 be able to claim a lease for ever, or shorter term 
 from the landlord, on payment of a certain sum 
 subdivision being prohibited, with power to redeem 
 rent by payment of £100 for every £4 of xent he- 
 bought up, thus giving the landlord 4 per cent., 
 3993-4. A custom of this kind prevails in part of 
 Ireland, 3995-96. Ascertaining a fair rent, the great 
 difficulty, 4003. Undesirable for a third party to step 
 in between landlord and tenant, except as a last re- 
 source, 4009. A fair rent is one agreed upon by two. 
 parties independent of one another, 4009. Irish ten- 
 ants not independent, 4010-12. The rio-ht of sale 
 generally recognised in the country, with a few excep- 
 tions and restrictions, 4015-17. Kight of sale advan- 
 tageous to the landlord, 4018. The hanging gale a . 
 bad system, but not easily obviated, 4023-26. There, 
 should be no distinction between North and South 
 but one law or custom for all Ireland, 4033-4. In 
 favour of a court of some kind, presided over by a 
 lawyer with practical experience of the countrv 
 4037-38, 4092-4141. Ulster tenant-right might be 
 introduced, 4044-99. Arbitration perhaps the 
 most practicable plan, if other means fail, 4048-50 
 Compensation scale inadequate, should be left to a 
 strong court, 4052. Tenants should be allowed to 
 borrow from Board of Works, but is of opinion that 
 neither landlord or tenant should be allowed to 
 obstruct improvements, 4060-66. State emigration 
 dangerous, 4078. If left to nktural causes ml^lit be 
 beneficial, 4085. The Ulster Custom should be ex ■ 
 tended to the whole of Ireland, but not eaten away 
 by office rules or unfair increases of rent 4099 
 4104. Any tribunal should be slow to increase or 
 
 lower rents paid for a number of years, 4115-19 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COiimSSION, 1880. 
 
 O'Brien, Edward William- continued. 
 
 The powers of limited owners should be increased — 
 they could then give leases for ever with a fine, 
 4125-29. "Would advocate State advances in certain 
 cases, indiscriminate loans might, be dangerous 
 4131-33. A commission necessary to carry out 
 sales under "Bright Clauses, 4141-48. Knows of no 
 evictions other than for non-payment of rent, 41-57- 
 59. If Ulster Custom was extended to estates 
 hitherto without it, would give landlord compensa- 
 tion, 4170-75. 
 
 Hamill, Arthur, Esq., Q.C., County Court Judge for 
 the Counties of Roscommon and Sligo ; Dublin. 
 Had a great number of land cases while Chair- 
 man of the "West Riding of Cork, only one appeal 
 against his decision, that turned on a point of law, and 
 was reversed, 4191. Heard 190 cases in Roscommon 
 in seven years, 4192. Case in court, as to improve- 
 ments, showing that to make Land Act as useful as it 
 could be, some changes must be made, such as the 
 principle of Ulster tenant-right, 4194, or enlarge- 
 ment of disturbance clause, 4197. In Roscommon 
 had a number of cases, through landlords trying to 
 raise the rent, which in many cases he was able to 
 settle, by getting landlord to grant leases, bog being 
 attached to each farm at 7s. Qd. per aci-e ; leases 
 had maps upon them, and were drawii up at a very 
 moderate cost, as a common form .was settled for 
 them all. Has heard no complaints, 4204-08. 
 Has awarded the maximum scale for disturbance in 
 six or seven cases, 4214. Suggests a new scale of 
 compensation for disturbance, 4216. Case where 
 landlord turned out a tenant, thinking he could get 
 more than the compensation from the incoming 
 tenant, 4218. Had no difficulty as to the meaning 
 of " predecessor in title," 4220-21. Had no claim 
 made by tenant for reduction of rents, had actions 
 by landlords for an increase, 4223-24. Land Act 
 discouraged evictions, through compensation for im- 
 provements ■ and disturbance, 4225-7. A case on 
 Colonel King-Harman's estate of a claim under Land 
 Act, 4236. Gives a list of ejectments for overholding 
 and on title, in County Roscommon, 4238. A tenant 
 should not be turned out till he is paid for his own 
 improvements, 4240-1. Execution should be sus- 
 pended until appeal has been heard, 4243. Does 
 not issue execution till the crops are saved, 4244- 
 45, 4285. Suggests that in tenancies from year to 
 year, extreme execution should not be put in, till 
 two years are due : had many ejectments for one 
 year's rent, 4251. Deasy's or Gardwell's Act facili- 
 tates ejectments, 4253-4254. Even with Ulster 
 custom there should be some means of ascertaining 
 the rent, so that the custonr may not be eaten 
 away by rent-raising, 4260-61. Would extend an 
 amended Ulster tenant-right to all Ireland, 4263. 
 Tenants as a rule make improvements, 4266. 
 Landlords should be allowed for improvements 
 in the rent, 4267. Large landlords most liberal — 
 cases of liberality on Lord Bandon's and Lord 
 Bantry's estates, 4269. Would give a tenant the 
 value of his improvements even if he owed two 
 years rent ; minus the arrears, or a proper deduc- 
 tion, 4276-77. Legal expenses deter tenants from 
 fighting a rise of rent, 4289. Suggests a settled form 
 ■of lease, 4289. If a tenant owes two years' rent, he 
 should not be entitled to any thing for the good- 
 will of the place, as he shows he does not value it, by 
 neglecting to pay his rent, 4298. Ulster right of sale 
 good for landlords, 4300. 
 
 Butler, Mr, Patrick F., Mullinavat; Counties Water- 
 ford and Kilkenny ; shopkeeper, formerly 
 agricultural labourer. — Dublin. 
 Statements in reference to the condition of farm 
 labourers, their dwellings, which are unsuitable for 
 human habitation, 4302-4310, 4354. They arerented 
 too high and have no gardens or haggarts, paying fi-om 
 £3 to £5 peryear, 4311-12. Wages from 5s. to 6s. 
 
 a week in Waterford and Kilkenny, not including 
 their houses, 4315-18. But are fed in addition to 
 theirwages, 4320. During harvest they get 2s. 6d to 
 3s. a day for eight or ten day, 4326. Employment 
 being very scarce, they are discontented, 4329. If 
 better housed and educated, would be better disposed, 
 
 4331. Suggests giving them gardens for potatoes, 
 
 4332. And employing them in reclaiming waste 
 lands, and drainage in the dull seasons, 4333-35. 
 Wov:ld use the Church suiplus to build them, houses 
 and gardens, to be paid back by a yearly rent : 
 the labourers would give up their claim to Poor- 
 rate relief if this were done, 4336-39. Farmers 
 manage by having servant boys in the house and 
 employ few labourers, 4351-52. 
 
 Battershy, Mr. Robert H., Lakefield, Crossakeel ; 
 County Meath, Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds largely under Lord Darnley, under lease 
 for twenty-one years, from 1854, 4366-69. Made 
 great improvements, was offered fee of farm for 
 .£5,000, 4372-76. At end of lease was told he would 
 be accepted as tenant, if he paid £35 a year increase, 
 and signed an agreement terminable on six months' 
 notice, 4377. Gives clauses in agreement, 4378- 
 80. Refused to sign agreement, was evicted, 
 4381. The case in court, 4342. Obtained £525, 
 which did not nearly compensate him, as he 
 had to pay costs, 4384-8G. Also holds from Mr. 
 Napper 131 acres, rent raised from £92 16s. id. to 
 £201), owing to his imjirovements ; has it for his 
 life, 4388-98. A lai-ge number of valuable trees, 
 planted by his father, valued by agent, who put lus 
 own value on them, 4393-95. Opinion of Judge 
 Fitzgerald on tliis suVjject, 4395. Gives another 
 case, of high rent, under a different landlord, 4398- 
 4401. Complains of a perpetuity lease, 4402-4405. 
 
 M'Elroy, Mr. Samuel C, Ballymoney ; Counties 
 Antrim and Down, Newspaper Proprietor and 
 A uctioneer. — Belfast. 
 Secretary of Antrim Tenant-right Association and 
 Route Tenants' Defence Association, 4405-7. Bel- 
 fast resolutions at Tenant-right Conference in Bally- 
 money, in 1870, 4411-3. Resolution of Route 
 Tenants' Defence Association, 28th February, 1870, 
 defining Ulster Tenant-right, 4413-6. Definition 
 of Ulster Tenant-right adopted by Belfast National 
 Land Conference, in 1874, 4419-24. A Statutory 
 right to hold at fair rent, with free sale, subject to 
 reasonable veto on incoming tenant, and not to be 
 disturbed while rent paid and land tilled in hus- 
 bandlike manner, would give general satisfaction, 
 4425-7. If tenants were owners, no need for 
 clauses against siibdivision, 4427. Removal of ob- 
 structions on free sale of land would remove most of 
 the evils of land occupation in Ireland, 4429. By 
 abolition of entail, primogeniture, and settlements, 
 4429-31. Resolutions of Dublin Land Conference, 
 1875, adopting jtrevious Dubliir and Belfast Con- 
 ference resolutions, 4432. Resolutions of Dublin 
 Land Conference, 1873 — (a.) Failure of Land Act 
 in giving sense of security, (6.) Every Irish tenant 
 should have benefit of Ulster Custom. Definition 
 of Ulster Custom. Right to continue in occupation 
 at fair rent, fixed at intervals not less than thirty- 
 ono years, and excluding tenant's interests and im- 
 provements. This right the ancient historic 
 tenant-right of Ulster, 4432. The Ulster Custom 
 gives security, which is the basis of the prosperity 
 of the province, 4433-8. Resolutions at public 
 meeting in Ballymoney, 23rd January, 1880, in 
 favour of conferring on all tenants firm tenure, pro- 
 tection against frequent and unjust claims for in- 
 crease of rent, and free siile — these being the incidents 
 of the genuine tenant-right custom, 4442. Peasant 
 proprietorship would elevate the social condition of 
 farmers, and be of unspeakable advantage to country 
 and State. Restrictions on working of Bright 
 clauses should be removed, and landlords be en- 
 abled to give perpetuity leases at fair rents, 4442. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XXIX 
 
 M'Ulwij, Samael C. — continued. 
 
 List of sales of tenant-right in Ballymoney district 
 from 1865 to 1880, giving acreage, rate of purchase, 
 and tenure, 4443-6. Where tenant-right exists, 
 tenants are prosperous, rents well secured, and fee- 
 simple sells better, 4454-5. Small lots sell best, 
 4456-60. Fee-simple and tenant-right interest are 
 never sold together, 4461. Case of purchase and 
 subsequent sale by landlord of tenant-right, 4462. 
 Free sale of land would raise its piice very much, 
 446 1. Tenant-right exists at end of leases, and is 
 recognised by landloi-ds as well as tenants, 4465-6. 
 Landlords in Ballymoney district, 4467. All the 
 Antrim landlords recognize the Ulster Tenant Cus- 
 tom, 4468. Case of sale of tenant-right immediately 
 after expiration of lease, 4469-77. When lease ex- 
 pires tenant has right to hold on at a fair rent as 
 the continuous occupant, 4493-5, Rents have not 
 been lower during last ten years. Value of tenant- 
 right has increased last fifteen years, 4480-2. Sales of 
 tenant-right in 1880 difficult to effect, 4482. Men 
 are not disposed to sell, as there is no proper com- 
 petition at present, 4483. None of those in list were 
 FL Fa. sales, 4484. Since Land Act land has produced 
 more, 4487, and tenants feel more secure, 4488. 
 Land Act has done more for Ulster than for rest 
 of Ireland, 4489. Ulster tenants have lost more 
 by increased rents than they have gained by com- 
 pensation given in the Land Courts, 4489-91. Bad 
 crops in 1868, 4492. Custom is, that the tenant 
 has, at end of lease, the same tenant-right that his 
 neighbour has, 4493. Judge Barry's decision in 
 M'Keown v. Beauckro'didi more injury than any 
 other as to leasehold tenant-right, 4494-5. Price 
 of tenant-right is affected by various local circum- 
 stances, 4496—7. If in a tenant-right district, 
 leasehold tenant-right should be presumed, 4497—9. 
 Continuous occupancy, with fi-ee sale and fair 
 rent, would meet all difficulties, 4500. First 
 brunt of a bad year is, in tenant-right district, 
 borne by tenant, 4501. Very often, before the fee- 
 simple cordd be touched, the whole tenant-right 
 mipht be lost, 4502. More sales of tenant-right in 
 good than in bad year, 4504. In bad years they 
 hold on, 4505. Getting time from creditors, 
 4506-7. And from landlord, 4508. A landlord 
 who gives right of sale is clear from all claim, 4509. 
 A term near its end sells as well as a long term — 
 as the transaction is based on the custom, 4510-1. 
 Usual to increase rent at end of lease, 4512. 
 Tenant does not object to fair increase, 4513. 
 Tenant being partner with his landlord should have 
 a voice in settling the rent, 4513. Extra rent may 
 eat up the tenant-right. Two cases of landlords ad- 
 vancing for improvements, and charging tenants 
 percentage therefor, 451 4-45 2 1 . Bad f eeliag created 
 by raising of rent on change of tenancies on 
 Downshire and other estates, 4522. Rent should 
 be settled by arbitration with right of appeal to 
 Land Court, 4523-8. Compulsory arbitration with 
 umpire appointed by arbitrators, or if they could 
 not agree to umpire, a Govei-nment arbitrator, 
 4529-4537. Objection that where land set low, 
 tenant sells the landlord's property, would be met by 
 the scheme of arbitrated rent, 4538-40. Case of 
 M'Peahe v. Stewart in County Antrim Land Court. 
 Tenant sold by auction, and landlord refused to accept 
 purchaser at £540, 4541. Claim against landlord 
 for £540 dismissed because sale by auction not 
 customary, and because no notice to quit served, 
 and claim excessive _ in amount (Chairman thought 
 £252 enough), 4542-5. Right of free sale should 
 be capable of enforcement in court, 4545. Case 
 of Robert Crawford. Attempted sale of lease of 
 99 acres at £70 rent, under Mr. Alexander 
 Montgomery for £712, to Mr. Dinsmore, highly 
 respectable and solvent. Agent refused to accept 
 him as tenant on ground of alleged understanding 
 Crawford was to expend, but did not, £100 on 
 building improvements, 4549. Price not excessive, 
 
 4548, 4545. Subsequently sold in 1879 for £400, 
 4545. Landlord should have reasonable veto on 
 purchaser, 4546. The reasonableness of the veto to 
 be inquired into by Land Judge, .4547. Landlord 
 taking up farm should give market value, 4547-50. 
 No redress under liand Act where landlord does 
 not disturb, 4551. The Ballywillan cases (Mr. 
 W. G. Lawi-ence, landlord) of increased rent. 
 Rents raised excessively at end of lease. Tenants 
 submitted because the decision on leasehold point 
 would be against them, 4551. Present rents are rack- 
 rents, 4552-5. And notliing could be got for tenants' 
 interests, 4556. Case of Mr. John Adams (W. 
 G. Lawrence, landlord), 4559-4564. Case oi Field v. 
 Allen. Inadequate compensation given by Chair- 
 man. Loss of £500 by decision, 4565. Case of 
 lease offered by agent of Macartney estate forfeiting 
 the entire tenant-right interest, 4569. Purchasers 
 give more outside the office than estate i-ules permit, 
 4572. Case of agreement required by Lord Robert 
 Montague from purchaser of tenant-right, that at 
 end of lease he would make no claim for money 
 paid under existing or future Land Act — though 
 tenant-right in form of private sale exists on 
 estate, 4573. All tenants, large and small, should 
 be prohibited contracting themselves out of Land Act, 
 4577. The Ulster custom being beneficial to land- 
 lord, tenant, and country, should be preserved 
 against encroachments of landlord. The public 
 have an interest in its preservation, 4578. List 
 of tenants' rents raised in 1876, giving old and new 
 rent and Government valuation, 4581. Case of 
 rent raised five times since 1865 and now double 
 what it was then, 4581. Government valuation of 
 heavy clay soils too high even for a letting rent ; 
 but fair on light loamy soils, or light warm lands 
 generally, 4582-3. Heavy clayey soils are a drug 
 in the market, 4584-5. In wet seasons produce 
 little, 4586-90. Government valuation of land in 
 Ulster higher than in South or West, 4591. Case 
 of enormous rent destroying the tenant-right, 
 4597-9. Case of limitation of price of the tenant- 
 right which a tenant could have got from an un- 
 objectionable tenant, 4600-2. Where tenant-right 
 sells highest, estates ai'e best conditioned and 
 farmers most prosperous, 4603. Ulster tenants 
 not disposed to give fancy price for tenant-righo, 
 
 4604. A man may have to borrow part of the 
 purchase money and yet be a solvent purchaser, 
 
 4605. Inquiry into circumstances of tenant un- 
 necessary. An insolvent tenant would soon have 
 to sell, and another would get it, 4606, 4611. 
 Landlord's objection to incoming tenant should be 
 confined to character, 4609-12. Landlords should 
 not have right to evict for dilapidation or deteriora- 
 tion, 4613-6. Deterioration could hardly ever 
 affect the landlord's security, if the rent were fair ; 
 and it would be better to let it occur in an isolated 
 case or two, than establish an inquisitorial investi- 
 gation into the position and circumstances of indi- 
 viduals, 4617. Would permit eviction for non- 
 payment of rent, 4618. Would give landlord a 
 reasonable veto as to solvency and character, 4619- 
 21. Case of rent raised from £23 10s. to £35 
 on sale of tenanl^right — involving loss to seller, 
 4622. Increase of rents at time of transfer, in- 
 fringements of the Custom. They prevent sale. 
 Revisions of rent should be made periodically, 
 4622-5. Two estates on which since 1872, tennnts 
 not allowed to sell for more than ten years' pur- 
 chase, 4626. Farms worth fifteen yeai-s' purchLis?,, 
 4627. Case of farm offered by public auction, on- 
 Lord Bangor's estate, the agent offering to recnm- 
 mend for acceptance as tenant, any solvent and 
 respectable person who might become purchaser, at 
 rateof £5 per acre, 4629-30. Land Act has 
 abolished Ulster custom on townparks, 4631-2. 
 Cases of true agricultural holdings denominated 
 townparks in the tenement valuation, 4632. The 
 Act, excepting townparks from section 1, the land- 
 
 e 2 
 
XXX 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 M'Elroy, Samuel C. — contimiecL 
 
 lords abolished the Ulster cvistom upon such 
 holdings, 4633. Custom in case of Ballymoney 
 townparks up_to 1865, to sell, subject, to usual 
 custom of estate. No sale permitted since 1870, 
 4634. Por revival of Ulster custom upon all 
 townparks, whether held by occupiers or farmers, 
 4635-6. Ulstei' custom formerly existed in certain 
 towns and villages, 4637. In favour of village 
 tenant-right, 4638-9. Would apply Ulster custom 
 to pasture lands, excepted by section 15, even held 
 by big graziers, 4640-1. Graziers in many cases 
 not allowed to till, 4644. Objections to expropri- 
 ation of landlords, 4645; It would be a^ national 
 calamity, 4647. In case of eviction tenant should 
 get a penal sum of one-third in addition to full 
 market value, 4648-9. Removal of obstructions to 
 free sale of estates, would lead to a considerable 
 proportion of the land being owned, before a 
 century, by the occupiers, 4650-3. Paper of Dr. 
 IiI'Knight, on tenant-right custom of Ulster, 
 adopted by witness, 4654. Origin of the custom 
 in the "orders and conditions of the Plantation of 
 Ulster." The Plantation had regard not to the 
 King's or the Undertaker's private jjrofit, but the 
 public peace and welfare, and the advancement of 
 the public service. Three classes of Undertakers — 
 1. English and Scottish. 2. Servitors in Ireland. 
 3. Irish to be made freeholders. Different head- 
 rents paid by these three classes. Crown rents 
 only charged on land fit for agricultural occupancy, 
 bogs, barren lands and forests being free fi'om 
 Crown charge. All improvements in successive 
 ages made by tenants. So that ests^tes enlarged 
 tenfold. Instance, the great Wood of Glenconkein, 
 co-anty Derry, all now reclaimed. For rebuilding 
 Deny city, Crown granted £50,000 worth of oak 
 timber from Glenconkein. Crown Commissioners 
 to inquire into plantation. Tenancies at will pro- 
 hibited. Confiscation by Charles I., of estates of 
 London companies in county Derry. Plantation 
 rents should not exceed one-half of a rack-rent. 
 Bog rents a modern usurpation. The original 
 Undertakers bound to let one-third in perpetuity, 
 and remainder for years, life in tail, or fee-simple. 
 The original Ulster custom. " Hearts of Steel " 
 insurrection caused by attempt to destroy the 
 custom. Case in 1830, tried at county Armagh, 
 when custom held not binding in law. Attempt 
 to restrict and finally abolish the custom. The 
 Tommy Downshire Boys. Shai-man Crawford's 
 first Bill, 1835. Crawford and Shiels' Bill, 1836. 
 The Devonshire Commissioners' report, hostile to 
 tenant-right, led to the estate rules. Ulster custom 
 implies jjroprietary right or interest in tenant with 
 right to sell to highest honafide purchaser, implying 
 the right of continued occupancy and negativing 
 arbitrary eviction. Estate rules are not usages 
 within meaning of Land Act. Any interference 
 with the custom should be matter for direct aj^pli- 
 cation to the Land Court by either party. Dis- 
 traint should be abolished, 4654. 
 
 Morton, Mr. James, Belfast ; Counties Antrim and 
 Wicklow, Solicitor. — Belfast. 
 Definition of Ulster tenant-right custom, 4659. 
 Its origin the Plantation of Ulster, 4659. Its 
 working at present very unsatisfactory, as there is 
 no means of settling fair rent, 4660. Rent should 
 be found by valuing the land, less the value of the 
 tenant's permanent improvements, 4661. The 
 rent at Avhich the tenant took it, or at which it was 
 held when fee was last purchased, should be de- 
 clared perpetual, 4662-5. Or subject to altei,'- 
 ations at stated periods, 4666, to be settled by 
 arbitration, and failing that by County Court Judge, 
 on skilled evidence, 4667. The equity of the Ulster 
 custom exists in other parts of Ireland — other 
 parts have been planted, and other planters have 
 improved. Many such cases in Wicklow and 
 
 Carlow, 4668. Should be extended to all Ireland, 
 4669. In poor small holdings little would be done ; 
 but in time the weaker would be purchased out by 
 the stronger, 4671-2. Defect of Act was not 
 putting all landlords on same footing, fixity of 
 tenure, 4673-5. Greater improvements made by 
 tenants in Leinster, where no custom, and on 
 tenancies from year to year, or on short leases, 
 4675-7. Case of improving tenant evicted, but 
 his family retained in occupation, and himself 
 receiving annuity, 4678-4683, 4696-8. Tenant is 
 entitled to added value, caused by his improve- 
 ments, 4684-4695. Leases must be long ones, to be of 
 any advantage, 4699-4700. Rent raising in Ulster, 
 4701-2. Compulsory power of purchase for hold- 
 ings over £50 a year, 4703-5. Against purchasing 
 out landlords of Ireland at one swoop, 4707. Only 
 where tenant possessed one-third of the money, 
 4708-9. Facilities for borrowing remainder, 4710. 
 Costs of title too high, 4711. Price should recoup 
 landlords, 4712. Power of piurchase largely taken 
 advantage of in Ulster and Leinster, 4713. 
 Further powers to County Court Judge, 4714. 
 Suggestions on law expenses, 4716-19. Arterial 
 drainage should be tmdertaken by State, 4720. 
 Howi^aidfor, 4721. Points in Land Act requiring 
 amendment, 4725-28. Case of hardship, tenant 
 evicted at end of lease without compensation for 
 tenant-right or improvements, 4729. Would com- 
 pensate for improvements, no matter when made, if 
 unexhausted, 4731. Ulster custom keeps down rent, 
 4733-6. Case of rent raising 130 per cent., 
 4737-8. Statement in relation to the settlement of 
 the barony of Shillelagh, 4741-7. Fixity of tenure 
 the only remedy, case in point, 4748. 
 
 Ferguson, Mr. James, Silversprings ; County Antrim,, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Member of several associations, 4749. Case of 
 loss of tenant-right at end of lease, 4750 ; and in- 
 crease of rent on own improvements, 4750—4. Old 
 lease thirty-one years ; on its expiration forced into 
 taking new one at increased rent, debarring all 
 claim under Land Act, 4760-1 ; 4768-9. Yearly 
 tenants in better condition, no increase of rent, 
 4764-5. Paid large sum for lease (with con- 
 sent of agent) in expectation of tenant-right at 
 termination of lease, 4771-3, 'So claim except in 
 case of eviction, 477S-9. Another instance 
 of rent r-aised on tenants' improvements, 
 4781-90. Case where reasonable increase might 
 take place, 4796-4802. Rent raising a common 
 practice. Lord Cairns' lease, 4807-9. The law in 
 fault not the landlords, 4810. Fixity of tenure at 
 fair rents, no disturbance save for non-payment, 
 landlord to have right of pre-emption, 4812-15. No 
 security for improvements, 4816-17. Case of, 
 4819-22, 4831. Compulsory leases ^\T.th fine, 
 4823-6. Case of refusal and notice to quit, 4827-30. 
 To contract out of Land Act should be illegal, 
 4834. Case of purchase on Lord Cairns' estate by 
 the tenantry without taking advantage of Bright 
 clauses, 4841-5. List of prices paid, 4845. Diffi- 
 culty of getting money from Board of Works, 
 4847-50. Great desire in North to purchase, 
 4858. One-third too large a proportion of pur- 
 chase-money for tenant to pay, 4859. Afraid to 
 improve from fear of increase of rent, 4859-60. 
 Condition of purchasers from Lord Cairns, 4861-3. 
 Tenant purchasers from Mr. Agnew ; their circum- 
 stances since, 4863-6. Prevention of subletting and 
 subdivision by Board of Works unreasonable, 
 4869-71. Would not force landlords to sell, 4875-7. 
 Towards end of lease farms are letrun down from feel- 
 ing of insecurity, 4878-9. In favour of arbitration, 
 4880-2. On Lord Donegall's estate, rents iacreas- 
 ing, tenants improvements valued, 4882-3. Drainage 
 by Lord Templeton under Board of Works, tenant 
 paying interest, 4884. Ofiice rules more numerous 
 since Land Act, 4885-7. Rent raising previous to 
 
DIGEST' OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XXXI 
 
 Ferguson, James. — oontinued. 
 
 sale, 4888-9. Against limiting tenant-right, 
 4890-7. In oases of purchase, disapproves of small 
 holdings and subdivision; case on Mr. Owens' 
 estate, 4906-11. Labourers' wages, 4912-13. 
 Would give reasonable veto to landlord, 4914-16. 
 
 Boyd, Mr. W. Sinclair, Belfast ; Co. Down, merchant 
 and underwriter. — Belfait. 
 The working of Land Act, 4919. In the case of 
 the lands of Bloomfield in County Down, 4921-31. 
 Land Act a great benefit, 4931-6. In favour of 
 extending Bright clauses, but fears subdivision, 
 4936-9. Bright clauses should be madfi applicable 
 to town properties, 4940-3. Would extend powers 
 of tenants for life, 4944. Against forcing landlords 
 to sell, 4945. If estate in market, would assist 
 tenants to purchase, 4946-7. System of loans 
 under Bright clauses, spoilt by Board of Works' 
 rules, 4948-52. In case of State loans, a check 
 on subdivision necessary, 4953-9. 
 
 Shilling ton, Mr. Thomas, junior, A.ltavilla, Portadown; 
 
 county Armagh, Linen Manufacturer.. — 
 
 Belfast. 
 Relations between landlord and tenant unsatisfac- 
 tory, 4963. The origia of Ulster Custom, 4964-65 ; 
 Want of security under Land Act, 4966—7. Modes 
 of ascertaining value of tenant-right, 4968-71. Ya- 
 riations in rent according to price of produce, 4972-3, 
 5047-8. Instances of variety in rents for same dis- 
 cription of land, 4974-5. Improvements by land- 
 lord might be taken as basis of an additional rent, 
 4978-9. Instance of uncertainty under which tenants 
 hold, 4971-3. Caseof exorbitant rent, 4984. Bene- 
 ficial effect of Land Act, 4986, has not checked 
 unfair advance of rent, 4987. Caseinpoinf,4988-91. 
 Average rents in Armagh, land insufficiently cul- 
 tivated from want of security and money, 4992-4. 
 Now valuation at fixed periods, 4995. Tenement 
 valuation no criterion of letting value, 4997. Sales 
 ■under Church Act, 4998. Suggestions for a new 
 legislation, 4999, 5004 ; and for new system of tene- 
 ment valuation, 5005-6. Registration to be done 
 in Court, 5007. All exceptional powers for recovery 
 of rent should be abolished, 5008-15. Would abolish 
 law of distress, 5017-19. Landlord to have right of 
 veto, 5026-7. Would like Land Court amended, 
 5030-1. Land Act does not give sufficient security, 
 5034-7. Rent to be decided by arbitrators, with new 
 valuation as basis, 5038-40. With right of appeal 
 to some tribunal, 5041-3. Latent power of land 
 should be taken in account on behalf of landlord, 
 5044-6. Rent raising on tenant's improvements, 
 5049-56. Tendency to raise rents since Land Act, 
 tenant-right in consequence depressed, 5064-9, 
 5074, 5114. Tenant-right can be totally destroyed 
 by increases of rent, 5075-83. Compulsory for 
 London Corporations to sell, but not ordinary pro- 
 prietors, 5089. Law of entail injurious, 5090-1. 
 Not in favour of a wholesale proprietary, would assist 
 in some cases, 5092-5. Landlords in the north do not 
 make improvements, 5096. Case showing rent should 
 be lowered, 5102-3. Few sales in Landed Estates 
 Court, 5 1 04-5. All vested interests should be com- 
 pensated for in case rents lowered,5108-ll. Inmost 
 cases, with Government advancing three-fourths, 
 tenants would be able to purchase, 5128-30. 
 Considers it a fair thing to say to landlords — -"You 
 must give perpetuity, or sell to your tenants,"5131-2. 
 Artificial manure seldom used, land deteriorating, 
 5138-9. Instances of compulsory cultivation of 
 land reclaimed by lowering of Lough Neagh, 
 6147-9. No tenant-right on holdings obtained 
 without payment, 5151-2. Practically there 
 is a good-will in every tenancy from year to year, 
 5153-5.' Tenant-right once purchased by landlord 
 should, remain his, and all his improvements, pur- 
 chased or made, should be ground of additional 
 
 rent, 5162-5. Office rules on Duke of Manchester's 
 estate, 5166-76. Considers landlord's interest the 
 letting value, minus what belongs to the tenant, 
 5184-9. Probable origin of tenant-right, 5190-9.' 
 Evidence concerning labourers, their wages and 
 houses ; no gardens as a rule, 5397-99. Not very 
 dependent on the farmers, as they hold no land, 
 5401. Difficulty somethnes in case of death, 
 5401-2. Condition of farm labourers deserving of 
 great attention, 5407. Hand loom weaving as an 
 industry dying out; wages very low, 5408-10. 
 
 Sobh, Mr. Hamilton, EJenderry, Portadown ; county 
 Armagh, Linen Manufacturer. — Belfast. 
 Landlord's power of veto, 5200. Right of pre- 
 emption only at highest value, 5201-6. A tenant 
 should not be evicted as long as he pays his rent, 
 5208-11. If a landlord wishes to take land into 
 his own hands, something should be added for com- 
 pulsory purchase, 5214-17. Tenants not free agents, 
 5220-1. . 
 
 Buddell, Mr. Nelson, Aughacommon, Lurgan ; county 
 Armagh, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Concurs generally with Mr. ShUlington, 5223. 
 Circumstances attending purchase from Church 
 Commissioners, 5223-33. . The interest of proprie- 
 tor^ to improve, 5235. Ulster Custom still continues 
 on Church lands bought by other than tenants, 
 5238-9. Gave twenty-two and a half years' purchase 
 at 28s. per acre, 5251-6. Rent raised at end of leases, 
 5265. Tenant generally makes improvements, 
 5266-7. Instance of improvement stopped from 
 feeling of insecurity, 5275-81. Tenant-right on 
 Church property sells from £12 to £17 per English 
 acre, 5282. 
 
 Bobinson, Mr. John, Druminally, Portadown ; Co. 
 Armagh, Tenant Parmer. — Belfast. 
 Hard case where, on dropping of lease, tenant 
 ejected without any com2)ensation ; great improve- 
 ments made ; large increSise of rent askedj 5287. 
 The lease for thirty-one years, or three lives, fell in 
 in 1868, 5288-9. Refused to pay increased rent ; 
 was evicted ; no compensation for improvements ; 
 paid rent for one year tinder Emblements Act, 
 5292-5301. No tenant-right on estate; grand- 
 father and father made all improvements ; landlord 
 did not even allow for drainage, 5308-9. Increase 
 of rent on Lord Lurgan's estate at change 
 of tenancy or death, 5321-3. Case where tenant 
 got leave to sell, and not finding a purchaser had to 
 pay increased rent or go, 5324-6. Another case in 
 point, 5327-30. Custom at expiration of lease to 
 make tenant pay £2 per acre for shore land, re- 
 claimed from Lough Neagh, 5335-7. Tenant-right 
 eaten away by rent raising ; cases on Lord Ran- 
 furly's estate, 5338-43, 5344-5. No security for 
 improvements ; only want fair rent, free sale, and 
 fixity of tenure, 5346-51. Many would borrow, 
 and buy under amended Bright clauses, 5352-4. 
 Legal security the only remedy, 5357. 
 
 Walker, Mr. John, Seagoe Villa, Portadown; Co. 
 Armagh, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 A purchaser under Church Temporalities, 5359- 
 60. Was charged twenty-two years' purchase on 
 Lough Neagh drainage rate, instead of eight 
 years; had no remedy, 5361-8. A great benefit 
 if security were given, 5374-6. Quite agrees with 
 Mr. Shillington's evidence and jwoposals, 5378-80. 
 Rent always raised at change of tenancy, 5381-4. 
 Which reduces tenant-right, 5386-7. Free sale 
 would improve the country, 5388-92. No sales 
 during last year, 5396. 
 
 Wrench, Frederick, Esq., Brookborough ; County'Fer- 
 managh, Land Agent—Belfast. 
 Agent to Sir Victor Brooke, Lords Rathdonnel 
 and Lanesborough, Sir Thomas B. Lennard, anl 
 
XXXll 
 
 IRISH LAND AOT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Wrench, Frederick — continued. 
 others; collects about £40,000 a year, 5415-17. 
 Has experience of management of estates ia Cavan, 
 
 . Westmeath, and Cork, 5418-19. Tenant-right 
 prevails on all the properties he is agent over, 
 5420-6. Custom on Sir Victor Brooke's estate ; 
 valuators chosen by outgoing and incoming tenant ; 
 landlord apporuts umpire accejjtable to both, 5427- 
 29. Form signed, called Change of Tenant ; accepted 
 tenant often pays largely for outgoing tenant's im- 
 provements, which are valued; case in point, 
 5430-6. No general increase of rent at fall of a 
 lease or change of tenancy; if rent is very low 
 sometimes inci-eased, but never on tenants' im- 
 provements, 5437-9. This system is called custom 
 of arbitration, and is most satisfactory ; no disputes 
 or complaints, 5440-2. On Sir Thomas B. Len- 
 nard's estate the custom is, permission to sell by 
 private contract to solvent tenant, approved of by 
 landlord ; price not restricted, 5444-6, 5454. In 
 case of dispute is often asked to settle between 
 them ; for all practical purposes the tenants hold at 
 fair rents, with fixity of tenure, 5453-6. A very good 
 feeling exists; few cases of rent raising, 5457-8. 
 Objects to tenants having to pay for their own im- 
 provements ; never makes them ; public auctions not 
 allowed; does not approve of them, 5459-66. 
 Buildings not valued, except those erected by land- 
 lord ; practically tenants make all improvements, 
 5468-74. Against free sale ; landlord should have 
 right of veto, and adjoining tenant the preference, 
 5481-4. Price of tenant-right affected by various 
 causes ; quality of land, competition, situation, mar- 
 kets, and the character of the landlord, 5490-2. 
 No substantial difference between improvements on 
 Sir Y. Brook's and tenant-right on other estates 
 5493-6. System of arbitrators and umpires work 
 well, 5497. Price of sale not interfered with; 
 arrears of rent deducted, 5499, 5503. One claim 
 under Land Act in eleven years, 5503-7. The 
 case, 5506-13. No evictions, except for non-pay- 
 ment of rent ; only two finally evicted, 5516-18. 
 As tenant's interest was sold, renj; paid, and balance 
 handed back, 5519-21. Never distrain, 5522. 
 Rents reasonable ; tenants well off, 5526-9. What 
 he knows of purchasing under Church Temporali- 
 ties ; not a success ; could not pay instalments ; had 
 to sell, 5530-9. In favour of peasant pi-oprietary, 
 if the result of natural causes, provided it was not 
 forced, and a tenant had at least one-third of the 
 money, 5540-6. These purchasers had no means of 
 living, but the land, 5551-56. Tenants do not im- 
 prove more, landlords have almost all ceased to do so 
 since the Land Act, 5560-8. Would rather make im- 
 provements themselves, than pay per-centage to land- 
 lords, 5564-5. Small tenants would prefer to be 
 • under good landlord, at fair rent, to buying their hold- 
 ings, 5566. The custom as to labourers; their relation 
 with the farmers, 5567-73. Great dissatisfaction 
 among them, 5575-80. Their wages, 5581-2. Node- 
 mand for leasas since Land Act ; where lease did 
 fall in tenant-right allowed, 5583-5. Objection to 
 County Court Judges as arbiters ; in favour of new 
 Government valuation, 5586-8. Compulsory 
 peasant proprietary ; the substitution of one class of 
 landlord for another, and that a lower class, 5593-5. 
 Impossible lo prohibit peasant proprietors from sub- 
 letting, 5596-99. Periodical valuation a better plan, 
 5600. In favour of extending a well-defined Ulster 
 custom to all Ireland, 5601-7. It is not the custom, 
 as far as his expeiience goes, to raise rents, and thus 
 eat away tenant-right, 5608-12. No cases of leases 
 barring claims under Land Act, 5613-18. When 
 rents are raised, only to a fair amount, 5619. 
 When tenant leaves improvements are taken into 
 account, as well as the good will, 6629-34. Sug- 
 gests Government valuation, by really competent 
 men, of good position, with right of appeal to judge 
 of assise, as means of settling rent question, 5637-8. 
 Tenants, where fairly dealt with, are well disposed. 
 
 5643-44. The present valuation does not repre- 
 sent the fair letting value, 5645-6. Case where 
 tenant got into difficulties ; farm sold by creditors 
 5648. 
 
 Quin, Rev. Charles, P.P., Lower Killery, Camlough ; 
 county Armagh. — Belfast. 
 President Camlough Tenant-right Association,, 
 5649. Farms in counties Tyrone and Derry, 5651. 
 Evidence in regard to reclaimed land in Armagh 
 and Tyrone, 5654. No uniform defined custom in 
 Ulster, 5655-7. Proi)rietary rights of landlords^ 
 5658. Tenant-light subject to these rights, 5659. 
 Rents increased on change of tenancy, on tenant's 
 improvements, since Land Act ; landlords have 
 invaded tenants rights very much, 5660-3. 
 Cases of rent-raising on Lord Castlestuart's estate.. 
 5664-71. Case of Edward Monahan, 5674-6, 
 Rent too high even if landlord made improvements, 
 5677-9. Landlord should be allowed for latent 
 power in land, 5680-1. Eighty ejectments for non- 
 payment of rent ; evicted ; are now caretakers, 
 5685-9. Rent raising on Sir John Stewart's, 
 estate in 1852 ; a second increase tried, but re- 
 sisted, 5691-8. Other instances before and after 
 Land Act on Mr. Henry's estate, 5701-7. Tenant- 
 right 3,llowed, but of no vakie from high renting, 
 5708-10. Revision of rents, 5711-12. Office 
 rules and threatened rise of rent on Mr. Richard- 
 son's estate, 5715-23. Inci'ease based on tenant's 
 improvements, 5724-5. Estates when bought as a 
 speculation, 5728. Rights of landlord and tenant 
 want defining, 5730. Increase of rent on a sale; 
 purchase money must be paid through office ; sale 
 limited to adjoining tenants, 5731-2. Price 
 limited, but limitation withdrawn, 5736. No sub- 
 division without consent, 5739. Considers office 
 rules illegal, 5740-2. Tenant-right diminished by 
 office rules, 5743-46. Increase of rent on every 
 change of tenancy, yearly or leasehold, on Mr. Quinn's 
 estate ; rents are now rackrents, 5747-55. Manage- 
 ment of Mr. R. Bond McGeough's estate, rent raised 
 on every excuse, 5756-8. Raised three hundred 
 per cent, on tenant's improvements ; tenant-right 
 limited to £5, but resisted, 5759-60. List of evic- 
 tions ; case of Mrs. Catherine Hart, 5760-68. In 
 favour of peasant proprietaiy from experience, but 
 would not interfere with jvist rights of landlords, 
 5769-71. Good for the country and for the land- 
 lords if fair price given, 5772. Government as- 
 sistance needed by advancing money on the security 
 of the land, 5774-5. Would compel London Com- 
 panies to sell, 5776. Government to raise money 
 by means of Vjonds ; cases of purchase under Church 
 Act ; marked improvements made, 5777-8. No 
 advocate for compulsory sale, only when estate was 
 in market would largely assist tenants to buy — 
 amount at present advanced not large enough, 
 5779-85. A well-defined tenant-right, as regards 
 rent, might be extended to all Ireland, 5787-9. 
 Impartial tribunal or arbitration to fix rents, 5792. 
 Cases of high rents under lease held on Mr. 
 Whaley's property, 5792-8. In almost every in- 
 stance the tenants are forced to pay the whole 
 county cess, roads being measured in farm — a great 
 grievance ; case in point ; Land Act useless as far 
 as county cess is concerned, 5857. 
 
 O'Gallaghan, Mr. Patrick, Lisseragh, Castleblaney ; 
 county Monaghan, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Present law a clog upon industry, afraid to con- 
 tinue improving for fear of rent being raised, 5803-8. 
 Many tenants on estate would improve if they had 
 security, 5.809-10. Rent increased at will of land- 
 lord, 5812-13. The man who will give highest 
 rent is chosen by landlord, 5815-1 6. Rule on Lord 
 Gosford's estate at fall of lease, 5820. Case of rent- 
 raising on tenant's improvements on above estate, 
 5824-5. Another instance on Mr. Quinn's estate, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XXXIU 
 
 O'Callaghan, Patrick — continued. 
 
 5826-30. Complains that landlords will not allow 
 more than a certain nvimber of laboiirers on their 
 estates, as in bad times they go to the workhouse, 
 and so increase rates, 5821-2. Condition of 
 labourers, 5833-7. In favour of peasant proprie- 
 tary, 5839. 
 
 Barry, Mr. Michael, P.L.G., The Cross, Camlougb ; 
 County Armagh, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Agrees with previous witnesses, 5841 . Case of rent 
 Toeing raised on tenants' own improvements, 58-12-48. 
 No increase since Laud Act, but afraid to improve, 
 5849. Eent fixed by arbitration ; fixity of tenure 
 and free sale would satisfy him, 5850-4. 
 
 McGeany, Rev. Patrick, R.C.C., Ai-magh. — Belfast. 
 Agrees substantially with evidence of Rev. Mr. 
 Quin ; case of tenant-right being diminished by in- 
 creases of rent on Lord Charlemont's estate, 5855. 
 
 Young, John, Esq., Galgorm Castle, Ballymena ; 
 County Antrim, Landowner. — Belfast. 
 Definition of tenant-right, considers the right of con- 
 tinuous occupation has never either been claimed by 
 tenant, or acknowledged by landlord, 5861-4. Land 
 Act has, in his opinion, merely rendered legal the 
 customs formerly permitted by landlords, 5865-7. 
 Never knew of a case of eviction save for nonpayment, 
 5868-71. Value of tenant-right fixed by arbitration, 
 just as well as by auction, 5872. A fair representa- 
 tion of tenant-right would be that on a fair rent 
 being paid, revalued at certain intervals, tenant is 
 not to be disturbed, unless land is wanted for some 
 fixedpurpose, 5873-5. Right of notice to quit acknow- 
 ledged, 5876. Where tenant-right is acknowledged 
 no claim for improvements admitted and vice versd, 
 5877-80. High tenant-right advantageous to land- 
 lord, unless tenant from competition gives more than 
 the value, 5882. Landlord should always have 
 choice of tenant, 5883-6. Exorbitant prices given 
 every day, 5888. The result, 5889-91, 5894-6. 
 Objects to auction on ground, that it is invidious 
 for landlord to object to highest bidder, 5892- 3. 
 Large and liberal tenant-right on his own estate, 
 5897-8. Was leased in 1844 for thirty years, was 
 revalued and relet in 1874, when leases expired, 
 5899-5902. Valuator appointed, tenants improve- 
 ments not valued,16 or 17 per cent, increase, 5903-9. 
 Farms are small,not much capital required, 5912-16. 
 A case of money making on fifteen acres, 5920-22. 
 Selling value of tenant-right influenced by sur- 
 roundings, rent, landlord's character, situation, 
 5923. As a matter of practical experience, there is 
 no feeling of insecurity,5924-5. No change of rent 
 without revaluation, 5926-8. Suggests a revalua- 
 tion every twenty or thirty years over whole pro- 
 perty, giving full consideration to tenants' improve- 
 ments 5930-5. Tenant, at falling in of lease, should 
 have protection, 5936. No undue rent raising, or 
 clauses barring tenant-right, 5937-9. Landlords 
 liberality towards improvements checked by Land 
 Act, 5941-7. Has in his own leases inserted clauses 
 guaranteeing tenant-right, 5947-9. No unwilling- 
 ness to take leases where above clause is inserted, 
 5950-1. Rents moderate in his district, 5952-3. 
 Under-tenants in wretched condition, paying double 
 in comparison to head tenant, 5057-60. Labourers 
 partly agricultural, partly linen weavers, 5961-4. 
 Their relations with farmers, 5965-71. Entirely in 
 favour of tenant-right with proper restrictions, land- 
 lord's right of pre-emption, arbitration, in case tenant 
 cannot pay rent fixed by landlord, to determine his 
 interest in farm. Landlord should not be restricted 
 in fixing rent by Government umpires, 5977-91. 
 Tenant getting full value of tenant-right has no 
 right to complain, 5997-8. Denies emphatically 
 that tenant-right is eaten away by increases of rent. 
 
 6000. Landlords right to resumption should not be 
 interfered with, cases in point, 6002-7. Considers 
 landlord has a right to any rent he can get paying 
 tenant existing tenant-right, opposed to fixity of 
 tenure, as infringement of rights, 6008-14. Tenants 
 influenced by having to go to court, and before a 
 judge who knows nothing about land, 6018-19. 
 Approves of any fair system for preserving value of 
 tenant-right, but in case of dispute landlord to have 
 power of resuming possession on payment of tenant- 
 right, 6025-27. An injustice to extend tenant- 
 right to all Ireland, 6028-31. Existing prices the 
 standard for rent, 6035-38. 
 
 2PNeill, Edmund, Esq., Craigdun ; County Antrim, 
 Landowner and Agent. — Belfast. 
 Farms under a landlord, 6043. Agent over 
 55,000 acres, exclusive of perpetuity holdings, 
 604 4-7 . Agrees with Mr. Young as to tenant-right, 
 0049-51. Always insists on provision being made 
 for widow, 6052. The power of making a will, 
 since Land Act, the cause of great disputes ; in case of 
 no will becomes the property of whole family ; in- 
 stances, 6053-6. No eviction under notice to 
 quit for twenty-five years,has had ejectments for non- 
 payment, but no eviction up to the passing of Land 
 Act, has been obliged since then, to protect tenant 
 against his creditors, 6057-59. Tenants have bor- 
 rowed since Land Act to an injurious extent and are 
 sold up ; against rules of estate to mortgage or sell 
 without permission, cases of; subsequent proceedings, 
 6061-70., Few leases, have all fallen in, revalued 
 farms on each occasion; taking tenant's improve- 
 ments into consideration, no disputes, instances in 
 point, 6071-7. Not in favour of fixing rents by 
 arbitration, 6079-80. Present valuation not relia- 
 ble, a new valuation if skilfully done, desirable, 
 6081-2. Suggestions for new valuation, a standard 
 of value, 6083-87. Improvements by landlords 
 checked since Land Act, as they are afraid they will 
 become property of tenant, 6091-3. Case in point, 
 6094. Was agent over small estate, since sold 
 to the tenants, who do not think much of their pur- 
 chase, 6095-6101. No desire on part of tenants to 
 buy where tenant-right is fully acknowledged, 
 6102-3. 
 
 Swann, Mr. Thomas, Lisburn ; county Antrim, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Belfast. 
 
 Tenant on Earl of Yarmouth's estate, 6105-6. 
 Attempt on Hertford estate to limit tenant-right, 
 great objection to this throughout the country, 
 6112-13. The question as to value of tenant-right 
 at present in confusion ; few sales occurring lately, 
 6118-19. Interference by oflice would not prevent 
 sales from taking place, 6120. Tenant-right at 
 end of lease not disputed, but rent invariably raised, 
 6121-3. Instance of, 6124-7. Rents always 
 creeping up and indirectly confiscating tenant-iight, 
 6128-29. Case in point, 6129-85. In favour of 
 arbitrators in case of disputes, with a skilled umpire. 
 Most anxious that tenants' improvements and land- 
 lords' interest should be kept separate, 6136-9. 
 Considers, in case of revaluation., that rents would 
 be lowered, in fact agriculture demands it, 6141-2. 
 Arbitration the only opening at present, 6152. No 
 cases of purchase under Bright clauses, farmers 
 could not generally pay one-third, 6153-4. Great 
 feeling of insecurity exists, 6155-7. Farming very 
 good, and labour always plentiful, 6158-9. Con- 
 dition of labourers, the relation between them and 
 the farmers very good; wages 10s. to 12s. per 
 week, house and garden free, with land for potatoes, 
 6161-6. Custom on Downshire estate to raise 
 rents on falling in of lease, or a change of tenancy, 
 
 6167. Power of rent raising the great grievance, 
 
 6168. Instance of landlord forcing tenant to pay 
 share of income tax, 6206. 
 
Xxxiv 
 
 IRISH LA.ND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Gray, Mr. William, Laganbrae ; Counties Antrim and 
 Down, Tenant Fanner. — Belfast. 
 Eent raising on Sir Thomas Bateson's estate, 
 case of a farmer named GUliland, 6169-4. Rent 
 raising on Sir Thomas Bateson's estate an innova- 
 tion since 'Land Act; sale restricted to £10, case 
 of Mr. Wood's, 6175-6. Case on Sir Richard 
 Wallace's estate, showing the cnsTtom has been 
 changed since Land Act, G180. Further instances 
 on late Marquis of Hertford's estate, proving this 
 to be so, 6181. Proposes in reference to arbitration, 
 that a registration office be established in each 
 petty sessions district, 61,82-5. Complain not of 
 landlords but of land law, 6202. Land Act did not 
 provide sufficient remedy, 6204-5. 
 
 A , B , Stoueford, near Lisburn ; County 
 
 Antrim, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Tenant of Sir Richard Wallace's. Improved and 
 reclaimed his farm, revalued and rent raised, 
 6187-91. Now holds a lease, tenant-right secure 
 at fall of lease, but uncertaui as to how much his 
 rent may be raised, 6195-6201. Anecdote of 
 valuator takiag bribe, 6207. 
 
 Perry, Mr. Joseph, Grovehill, Downpatrick ; County 
 Down, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 For four years secretary to Co. Down Farmers' 
 Association, 6210. Ulster custom is, continuous 
 occupation, free sale and fair rents, 6214-15. 
 Evidence with regard to restrictions placed on tenant- 
 right : fifty years ago, same custom of free sale existed 
 on all, 6216. The custom first limited, then denied 
 on John Waring Maxwell's estate in 1834, but 
 allowance for drainage, 6217-18, 6224. Colonel 
 Forde selected tenant and appointed his own valuator 
 to fix the price of sale, but now allows arbitration, 
 6219-23. Restricted on Lord Bangor's estate to 
 £5 per acre, but. larger sums given behind backs, 
 6224-5. Where "free sale cannot be stopped, plan 
 of raising rent at transfer is adopted since the Land 
 Act, 6228-32. The question of tenant-right con- 
 tiniiing at termination of lease ; celebrated case of 
 M'Keown v. Beauclerc in 1872, 6223-4. Tenants 
 have no security in improving, 6235-6, 6242. In 
 favour of valuations at fixed periods, 6239-40. 
 Would exteAd Ulster custom to Ireland, 6244-6281. 
 Rent should be decided before instead of after an 
 eviction^ 6245^6. Arbitration a fair mode of 
 settling differences as to rent, landlord to name 
 one arbitrator, tenant another, and an impartial 
 umpire selected by the two appointed, 6248-50. 
 Land Act has checked improvements both by land- 
 lord and tenant, and has induced rent raising, 
 6253-8. Land Act fairly interpreted by County 
 Court Jvidges, 6259-60. A good deal of reclama- 
 tion going on, but decreased lately in consequence 
 of increased jirice of labour, 6263. Condition of 
 labourers, 6264-5. Tenant quitting voluntarily 
 cannot claim for disturbance, 6267-8. Should 
 be no right of disturbance except for public 
 purposes, 6269-70. All the improvements that 
 have been made are the result of tenant-right, 
 6273-4. Gradual increase of rent, will result in 
 great calamity to the country, 6275-6. Perpetuity 
 leases much better than peasant proprietorship, and 
 to the advantage of tenants to have a certain amount 
 of rent to pay, 6292-4. 
 
 Gardner, Mr. Edward, LL.B., Downpatrick ; County 
 Down, Solicitor. — Belfast. 
 Agent to Colonel Craig and Mr. Craig-Laurie, 
 6295. Agrees with evidence of Mr. Perry in re- 
 ference to Ulster custom, and the feeling of inse- 
 curity produced by restrictions and office rules, such 
 as rent raising on transfers. Examples of this, 6298- 
 6304. Tenant-right encroached upon by advances 
 of rent, case of Mrs. Stitt, 6305-7. Another in- 
 stance on Ardglass estate of a man named Grogan, 
 6308-12. Right of sale denied on Mr. Maxwell's 
 estate ; limited sale up to time of Land Act, since 
 
 which the right has been denied, 6314-22. Case 
 of Mrs. Robinson on Finnehogue estate, 6322-6. 
 Forms of agreement for yearly tenancies have come 
 into use since Land Act. The form in use on 
 Ardglass property, 6326-7. Agreeinent used on 
 Lord Bangor's estate, with clause against claim 
 for comjjensation, 6328-9. These were used on 
 change of tenancy. The DufFerin lease, 6330. Case 
 of Mr. Hughes, 6331. A desirable thing to secure 
 fixity of tenure, with fair rents, 6332. 
 
 Moore, Mr. WUliam James, 39 Cromwell-road, Belfast; 
 County Down. — Belfast. 
 Further particulars of Mrs. Hughes's case (see 
 No. 6331). Also case of John Menown, 6335. 
 Tenants are deterred from contesting any question 
 by the expenses of proceedings in Court, 6336-7. 
 Rent raised whenever landlord chose, and custom 
 infringed both before and since the Land Act ; 
 hard case of Hugh Christian, 6340-44. Instances 
 of rent raising on tenant improvements on Count 
 Russell's property, 6345-8. Case of infringement 
 of custom by forbidding sale on Mr. Mulholland's 
 property, 6348-9. Another instance of limiting 
 sale contrary to custom. Case of Arthur Atkinson, 
 5349. Where estate is for sale tenant should have 
 preference, witlj. Government advance of four-fifths 
 of the purchase-money, 6851. 
 
 Murray, Mr. Patrick, Castlewellan; County Down, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 AttemjDt to raise rents all over Lord Annesley's 
 estate, and proposal to re-value the whole property, 
 6352-4. Sample cases on each townland, of in- 
 crease, C355. Witness and another tenant resisted 
 increase, served with notice to quit, 6356-8. Held 
 under lease ; reclaimed a good deal. When lease 
 dropped rent was raised, 6360-2. His case, 6363. 
 Deputation to Lord Annesley, 6363-4. Agree- 
 ment in use protecting tenant-right, but with clause 
 against bankruptcy, 6365-8. Tenant-right sells for 
 £30 per acre. No improvements made by land- 
 lord. Further cases of increase, 6369-72. Case 
 of Widow Murphy on Mr. Thompson's estate came 
 into Court. Chairman would not allow increase, 
 and gave decree for £40 an acre, 6373-4. Increases 
 of rent at change of tenancy a great hardship. 
 Land should be valued by a local man who knows 
 the district and what the land can produce, 6374—77. 
 
 M'Aleena, Mr. James, Castlewellan ; County Down, 
 Auctioneer. — Belfast. 
 System of purchase on Downshire estate, 6379. 
 Rent considerably increased at every transfer; 
 cases in point, 6380—1. When an increased rent 
 takes place landlord pays half county cess, 6381-2. 
 Tenant-right destroyed by increased rent ; instance 
 of, 6383. Mr. Gartlan compels son on succeeding 
 his father to pay all arrears due before 1847, or his 
 name will not be entered in rental, 6384. Custom 
 on Lord Roden's estate, no tenant-right, out- 
 going tenant gets a consideration, 6385-6, 6388, 
 6398. Up to Land Act sale by auction permitted 
 on Lord Annesley's estate, not since, 6387. Tenants 
 very poor and in a bad state. A great many private 
 sales, 6391-3. 
 
 Quinn, Peter, Esq., J.p., Newry; Counties Armagh, 
 Down, and Tipperary, Land Agent. — Belfast. 
 Is land agent in county Armagh for forty years, 
 on estates of Mr. Close, Mr. Hal], Lord Waterford, 
 the Newtownhamilton estate, the Forkhill estate, 
 and in Tipperary and Down; 28,000 acres in 
 Ulster, and 8,000 in Tipperary, 6394-6, 6408-10. 
 Tenant-right — the power of the outgoing tenant to 
 dispose of his interest in his farm, subject to the 
 rule of the office, 6397-8. The custom elsewhere 
 in Ulster the same, except that on some estates no 
 restrictive office rules apply, 6399. On estates over 
 which he is agent, no disturbance, but continuous 
 occupancy provided the rent is paid, 6401-2. And 
 there are in the office rules restrictions on selection of 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XXXV 
 
 Qtdnn, Peter, J.P. — continued. 
 tenant and price of tenant-right, 6403, 6439. 
 Tenant-riglit has worked satisfactorily, 6404. 
 Recent agitation in Armagh in favour of free sale, 
 6405. Limit and price of tenant-right is £15 per 
 acre, and tenant must be approved of by landlord, 
 6407. These limits advantage landlord and do not 
 disadvantage tenant, 6412, 6475. Improvements 
 enter little into price of tenant-right ; which is given 
 for sake of possession — to make a Uveliliood, 
 6413-5. Selection of tenant gives opportunity to 
 adjoining tenant to become purchaser, 641 G_7. 
 Adjoining tenant has preference, 6418. On Mr. 
 Close's estate tenants fixed maximum limit of £15 
 an acre, 6412, 6420-5. They were previously 
 restricted to £10 an acre, 6426. No minimum, 
 6424. Never less than £10 or £12 per acre given, 
 6426. "When limit £10, payments under the rose, 
 6426, 6429. Limit also exists on Major Shortall's 
 estates in counties of Down and Ai-magh, and on 
 Forkhill estate, 6432-3. Limit on Mr. John 
 Martin's estate in county Tyrone is £8 an acre, 
 6434-7. Witness only agent eight years there, 
 6463. No general raising of rents last twenty-five 
 years, but on expiration of leases, if rent low, there 
 is, 6440, 6445-7, 6511-7. Leaseholders at end of 
 lease entitled to same tenant-right as yearly tenants, 
 6448-50. Case of land claim by tenant who refused 
 agent's ofier to sell to adjoining tenants preferentially, 
 6453. Land Act has not afiected practice on estate, 
 6458-60. Only interference with management is 
 that indebted tenants defeat small creditors' claims, 
 6461—5. Former practice in case of tenant insolvent, 
 6465. Some decrees for nonpayment of rSnt, but 
 no actual evictions, 6466-7. Tenants pretty well 
 ofi", 6468. Improvements generally made by tenant, 
 6469-70. Distraint very rare, 6471-2. Limitation 
 of price no material benefit to landlord except in 
 selection of tenant, 6476-9, 6518-9. On Tipperary 
 estate, four tenants, three having leases, 6480-6. 
 Case of purchaser from Church Commissioners who 
 sold out at a profit for want of capital, 6488-91, 
 6577-6594. In favor of enabling tenants with 
 some capital to buy their holdings on favourable 
 terras, 6491-3. Would not force landlords to sell, 
 6494. Case of depreciation of landlord's estate by 
 offer of tenants to purchase, 6494. Case of sales to 
 tenants since Land Act ; some have since done well ; 
 they did not borrow under Bright clauses, 6494- 
 6502. Would allow alienation, but not subletting 
 or subdivision, under Bright clauses, 6504-8. Case 
 of leases at low rents granted 100 years ago — great 
 subdivision since, 6508-10. No ground for sense 
 of insecurity through raising rents, 6511. Rents 
 not generally raised on tenants' improvements — not 
 on change of tenancy or death of tenant, 6514-7. 
 Tenant-right makes rent sure, 6519. No fear of 
 loss of rent or deterioration through nou limitation 
 of price, 6518-23. In county Tipperaxy the land- 
 lords made the improvements, and the leases bar 
 any claim to tenant-right, 6525-6. Where land- 
 lords make improvements, tenants have no just 
 claim to sell good- will; but they could recoup 
 themselves in increased rent ; which at present' 
 would be a doubtful prospect, 6527-32. Ulster 
 plantation gave no pai-t of property in the land to 
 tenant, 6533-9 (Jlster tenant-right grew up by 
 good nature of landlord, 6540. Extension of it to 
 south would not be just, but would be easiest 
 settlement for southern landlords, 6541. Landlord 
 might be compensated by payment of money, lent 
 by Government, on occasion of new tenancy, 6542-5. 
 Leases not asked for before or since Land Act, 
 6548. Only leases are on Newtownhamilton estate, 
 6547. On two estates prior to Land Act, landlords 
 gave slates, and sometimes timber to tenants build- 
 ing, 6549. Since ceased, 6550. £15 limit existed 
 before Land Act, 6551. Eent about, or a little 
 under Government valuation in Armagh ; double 
 in Tipperary, 6552-3. Valuation lower in south 
 
 than in north, 6553-4. Answer to statements 
 before Commission of Doyle, a tenant of late 
 Edward Quinn, 6355-6361. Tenant under Ulster 
 ' custom, in arrear of rent, is allowed to sell, even 
 though evicted, 6562-8. Tenant-right supplies a 
 fund, out of which arrears of rent are paid, 6564. 
 Tenants near Newry refusing to pay rent, 6568-73. 
 Case of tenants purchasing from Church Com- 
 missioners their own holdings, and fairly prosperous, 
 6574-82, 6595-6608. In fixing rents on expiration 
 of leases regard is had to general valuation made in 
 1832, and to rents of adjoining tenants, 6608-10. 
 Rents on Mr. Close's estate 21s. per English acre 
 6611-2. Ulster system would be wisely accepted 
 by southern landlords, if it settled the question, 
 6613-5. Acted as umpire in arbitration between 
 Mr. R. J. M'Geough and his tenants ; result, rents 
 reduced below landlord's demand, but above tenants' 
 offer, 6736-59. Raisingrentunroasonably diminishes 
 value of tenant-right, 6754-5. 
 
 Brush, Richard C, Esq., j.p., Armagh; Cos. Armaf,'h 
 and Tyrone, Land Agent. — Belfast. 
 Land agent since 1863, of Richhill estate (7,000 
 acres) in county Armagh, and of Lord Belmore's 
 estate (14,000 acres) in county TjTone, 6616-8, 
 6640-1, 6650-1. Rental of Arma,gh estate, £6,400, 
 Government valuation for land, excluding houses, 
 £7,680, 6619. Rental 'of Lord Belmore's, Tyrone 
 estate, £8,000 ; Government valuation a little less, 
 6620. Tenant right custom prevails on both estates, 
 no limit to price, continuous occupancy as long as 
 rent is paid, landlord has reasonable veto on incom- 
 ing tenant, but no pre-emption, 6621, 6631, 6635. 
 System works remarkably well, outgoing tenant 
 has something to pay his debts, and go away; 
 contributes to peace and prosperity of community 
 and estate, 6632-3, 6636-8. Purchase money not 
 paid into rent office, though formerly the system on 
 Tyrone estate, 6634. Same custom prevails gener- 
 ally on adjoining estates, 6639. Good market near 
 estates, tenants well able to pay rents, 6642-6. A 
 hangiag gale allowed, 6647-9. Land Act has on 
 Tyrone estate, not on Armagh estate, stopped land- 
 lords' contribution, in shape of timber and slates for 
 buUdingj and for drains, to tenants' improvements 
 6652-6. Only increase of rent is at end of leases, 
 when rent is brought up to that of adjoining tenants, 
 6657-9. Tenant not charged rent on his own 
 improvements, 6660. Land Act, save lq one case, 
 has made no alteration as to county cess, 6661-3. 
 Farm roads may, but county roads are not measured 
 for rent against tenant, 6664-5. Boa' kept in 
 landlord's hands, tenant paying 1 s. a rood forturbary, 
 6669-71. Cut-away bog is reclaimed by tenant^ 
 no rent imposed till general revision of rent' 
 6672-3. Tenants are satisfied with that arrano-e- 
 ment, 6674. Tenant-right system the best that 
 could be, should be extended to whole country, 
 secures landlord his rent, and peace in the country^ 
 6675-7. Thinks general system of purchase by 
 tenants of their farms in fee would be erroneous • 
 gives reasons, 6678-83. Only one actual eviction 
 on Tyrone estate since Land Act, 6684. No cases 
 under Land Act, 6685 ; nor settled out of court, 
 6686. Ejectment for non-payment of rent, use(l 
 only to compel payment of arrears, 6687-90. In 
 rural districts, distraint never resorted to ; might 
 be safely abolished, 6690-3. Rack-renting princi- 
 pally practised with recent Landed Estates Court 
 purchasers, 6694, 6710, 6719-20. Tenants should 
 be protected against this by outside tribunal 6695 
 General valuation by Government valuators as 
 basis of fair rents, useful for tMs, 6694-8. Govern- 
 ment valuation tolerably uniform in counties but 
 low in county Tyrone, high in Armagh 6699 
 Griffith's valuation is in county Tyrone twenty-five 
 and m county Armagh, 10 per cent, below iust 
 letting value, 6701. On county Armagh estate 
 rent is 5 per cent, below valuation; on county 
 
^XVl 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Brusli, Eichard C, J. P. — continued. 
 
 Tyrone estate, alooxit 1^ per cent, above Govern- 
 ment valuation, 6702. Rents for Armagli estate 
 not revised for forty years ; of Tyrone estates not 
 since 1858, 6702-3, 6704. Leases not general, and 
 not asked for ; tenant-right on expiration of lease 
 recognized, same as on tenancies from year to year, 
 6705-6. Rent might be settled by arbitrators 
 appointed by Government for each district, 6709-10. 
 Complaints as tp excessive rents have foundation on 
 small estates, 6711. Tenants unwilling to take 
 leases unless tenant-right preserved, 6714. Does 
 not think leases are forced on tenants, 6715-8. 
 Neither on estates witness or his brother manages 
 are rents raised on change of tenancy, or on tenant's 
 death, 6,721. Opposed to peasant proprietors, they 
 would subdivide, and be cumbered with debts, and 
 mortgages: — thinks so, but has no facts to guide him, 
 6723-30. Would assist a thrifty industrious tenant 
 to purchase his holding, if such a case arose, 6731-5. 
 
 Winder, John G., Esq., j.p., Armagh; Co. Armagh, 
 Land Agent. — Belfast. 
 Land agent for estates of Mr. Cope, Archdeacon 
 Darby, Miss Olpherts, and others in county Armagh, 
 and for estates of Sir Oapel Molyneux, in counties 
 Armagh, Dublin, Kildare, Limerick, and Queen's 
 County, in all of the annual value of £17,000, of 
 whichf8,000or£9,000isinUlster, 6756-62, 6853-4. 
 In all the fullest tenant-right exists, the only resti-ic- 
 tions being that adjoining tenants should have tirst 
 offer, and that sale should not be by auction, 6703—72, 
 6778. Price seldom disputed when adjoining tenant 
 willin;,' to buy ; but if disputed, reference to neigh- 
 bours, 6773. Price varies little on same estate, 
 6773-7, 6779. Yariation principally caused by 
 character of landlord, 6774. Prices not much altered 
 •since Land Act, 6782; £12 an acre average price 
 in Armagh, 6782-3. No alteration of rents at sale 
 of tenant-right, nor except on fall of lease, 6785-6. 
 No fixed interval for revaluation of rents, but Mr. 
 Darley's and Mr. Cope's estates valued about twenty 
 years ago, 6787-8. Tenants generally make the 
 improvements, and have laid out much on them, 
 6789, 6791, 6855-6. Landlords occasionally con- 
 tribute ; witness on one estate contributed to making 
 drains, 6790. Never raised rents on tenants' im- 
 provements, but dares say many have, 6792, 6794 
 -6. Not in favour of a Government valuation as 
 basis for rents, 6793. Thinks present law suffi- 
 ciently protects tenants in Armagh, 6797. Sees no 
 harm in extending tenant-right to South and West, 
 6798, 6844, 6868-77. County Court Judges 
 settle at present disputes about rent ; does not 
 think them satisfactory tribunal for this, 6799- 
 6805. Neither party is satisfied, 6805. Would 
 prefer arbitration, but thinks it an interference witli 
 the rights of property, 6807-8. Recognizes tenant- 
 right on estates oiitside Ulster, but it is only occa- 
 sionally va. operation, 6814-5, 6843. Price not so 
 high as in Ulster, 6814. Found the custom, to a 
 certain extent, in existence there fourteen years ago, 
 when he became agent, 6816-7. Landlords out of 
 Ulster make most building improvements — more 
 generally than in Ulster, 6818-22. Rents lower in 
 Munster than in Ulster, 6823, 6826-8. In Armagh, 
 little difference between rent and valuation ; in 
 Munster, rent considerably higher than valuation, 
 6824-5. Had three land cases, two in Ulster, 
 6829-31, 6836. Case of Hillock v. Cope— sale 
 under 7?. fa. by auction, against will of agent — claim 
 dismissed, 6831-3. Case of claim in respect of 
 demesne land ; small sum awarded tenant as compen- 
 sation, 6834-5. Tenant-right system works well — it 
 is fair and just ; does the landlord no harm, and serves 
 the tenant, 6837-43. Land Act affected little the 
 tenant-right estates, but of advantage elsewhere, 
 6845-6. Raising rents unduly would extinguish 
 tenant-right, 6847 ; 6859-60 ; 6866. Incidents of 
 tenant-right are a fair rent, and not to be evicted 
 
 for nonpayment, 6848-9. Case of tenant evicted 
 because he beat his landlord in an action, 6850-1. 
 Never resorts to distress ; nobody in Armagh does, 
 6852. Feeling of insecurity not general ; never had 
 dispute with a tenant, 6857-8. But good landlords 
 or agents are not immortal, 6861-2. Any insecvu'ity 
 arises from fear of undue raising of rents, 6863-7. 
 Would approve of fixing rent by arbitration, if dis- 
 pute arose, 6867. Landlord should have right to 
 resume possession, but he should pay for it, 6878. 
 But not, if tenant paid nothing on incoming and 
 made no improvements, 6879-80. 
 
 Waring, Lieutenant-Colonel, D.L., Waringstown ; 
 Co. Down, Land Owner. — Belfast. 
 Landowner in County Down of 4,000 acres, 6881- 
 4. Tenant-right custom now prevails universally 
 in his district, 6884-5, 6896. It is the right to 
 sell the good- will to person approved of as to solvency 
 and character, 6886. Price never limited, 6887- 
 8. Affected by character of landlord, and situation 
 of land, 6889. No office rules, 6890. The system of 
 tenant-right very satisfactory to landlord and tenant, 
 6891-3, 6919, 6925, 6942-3. Right of approving 
 incoming tenant useful for tenants and landlord, 
 6894. Adjoining tenant has pre-emption, 6895. 
 Tenant who had paid all his capital to outgoing 
 tenant not objected to as insolvent, 6900-2. No 
 material increase of rent in his district in his time, 
 6903. Some old leases of 1823-8, on his estate for 
 three lives and twenty-one years, 6904-5. On fall 
 of leases, tenants put on same rent as yearly tenants ; 
 generally a slight rise, 6905-6, 6909. In case of 
 leases granted during war, generally a reduction of 
 rent on dropping of lease, 6906, 6916-7. Tenants 
 do not fear raising of rents, 6907-8. Acknowledges 
 leasehold tenant-right, 6910-1, 6915. Exceptional 
 case, where denied successfully in court, but tenant 
 got compensation for his improvements, 6912-4. 
 Had only one eviction — a formal one, 6918. Large 
 prices paid for tenant-right, 6919-23. No dis- 
 training on agricultural holdings, 6924. Estates 
 of his father, who made the improvements and 
 introduced tenant-right, 6926-7. Since then, the 
 improvements made by the tenants, 6928. Tenants 
 generally make the improvements, except main 
 drainage, .tc, 6929-30. Growth of wheat and 
 barley discontinued lately — wheat, from American 
 
 , competition, 6932-3. Principal crops grown, 6934- 
 6. Temporary depression among farmers, 6931. 
 Flax not exhaustive, if not too frequently grown, 
 6937-8. No difficidty in getting rents, 6940. 
 Recommends a system of arbitration in disputes 
 between landlord and tenant, 6941. In district 
 circumstanced as his own, tenant-right would work 
 well; but does not know how it would "work in 
 large dairy and grazing fnrms, 6944-7. For tenants 
 to purchase the fee would be to throw away their 
 tenant-right, 6949-52. Facilities might be given to 
 thrifty tenants to buy, if subdivision prevented, 
 6953, 6960. Cases of tenants under old leases for 
 ever — bad results, subdivision and poverty, 6953- 
 6, 6981-6, 6988. Artificial creation of a peasant 
 proprietory would not be beneficial, 6961-4. Little 
 waste land, 6965. Cut away bog let for seven years 
 for nothing ; then at moderate rent, system satis- 
 factory, 6966-9. Tenants prefer to pay county cess 
 to paying average equivalent in increased rent, 
 6970. Farms let by bulk ; hence no question as to 
 county roads, 6971. Arbitration in case of difference 
 as to price of farm, 6972. Tenants satisfied with 
 present system, 6973-4. Does not know of rent 
 raised to destroy the tenant-right, though ho does 
 to diniinish it, 6975-6979. Would not object to 
 tribunal settling rent, but hard to find competent 
 and independent tribunal, 697f-80. Case of Land 
 Act acting as deterrent on landlord raising rents 
 unduly, 6989-92. Compensation sufficient protec- 
 tion against increase of rent, 6993-6. Land Act 
 did not affect price of tenant-right, 6997. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XXXVll 
 
 Forde, Colonel, D.L., Seaforde ; Co. Down, Land 
 Owner. — Belfast. 
 Landowner in County Down, of 20,600 acres, 
 all subject to tenant-right, 6998-7001. Ulster 
 Bustom involves compensation for improvements 
 and good-\rill : price varies from £8 to £20 an acre, 
 According to quality of land, 7002-7004. Tenant has 
 right to stay on as long as he pays the rent ; witness 
 never dispossessed a tenant, 7003. Adjoining tenant 
 has first offer, and price is fixed by arbitration — 
 no limit to price, 7005-9. Has always gi-anted 
 "Ulster custom on expiration of lease, same as in 
 tenancies from year to year, 7011-5. Only two 
 exceptional farms, where tenant-right does not apply 
 — one, demesne land improved by landlord, and let 
 on nineteen years' lease, the other, where tenant- 
 right purchased by landlord, and farm relet, 7016. 
 Present law sufficient, but if any change, his own 
 usage best, 7017. Very few leases and decreasing 
 since Land Act, 7018-9. Tenants don't take leases, 
 7020, 7026-7. If rents in leases low, on their expi- 
 ration, rents are raised to surrounding standard, 
 7021-5. Old perpetuity leaseholders do not cultivate 
 as well as yearly tenants, 7 02 8. Rents on his es- 
 tate about equal to, in thedistrict rather over Govern- 
 m.ent valuation of lands without buildings, 7029- 
 30. Raising of rents since Land Act not the rule, 
 ?034-5, 7096. No general revaluation since 1837, 
 7036. No disputes about rent ; no land cases ; 
 no distraining, 7037-9. Arterial drainage done by 
 landlord, with money from Board of Works, and 
 instalments paid by tenants separate from rent, 
 7040-3. Minor improvements made by tenants, 
 7b44. No change through Land Act, as to im'^rove- 
 ments, '7046—6. Landlords' contributions to tenants' 
 iinprbvements checked by Land Act, 7048. No 
 cases of insufficient compensation for improvements 
 in his district, 7049. Little barren land in Down ; 
 no waste land reclaimed except bog or mountain 
 with oreat labour, 7051-3. Bogs let in County 
 Wexford for seven years for nothing, to compensate 
 for reclamation, and then rent put on, 7054-8. No 
 large pasture farms in County Down, 7059. Town- 
 parks should not be subject to tenant-right or com- 
 pensation, 7060. No necessity for change in Land 
 Act, to include other holdings than those subject to 
 it, 7061-2. No change as to payment of county 
 cess, 7063. Noi as to ground covered by roads ; 
 no hardship in this, 7064-72. Land Act checks 
 imposition of exorbitant rent, and protects all parties, 
 7073, 7091-5. Legalization of tenant-right abenefit 
 7075-7. Tenant paying nothing on incoming 
 should only get compensation for improvements, 
 7078-80. Ulster tenant better off than southern 
 tenant, but thinks tenant-right of North should not 
 be extended, 7081-4. Northern tenant taking land 
 in famine times paid nothing but got tenant-right ; 
 approves of this — ^it secures the landlord his rent, 
 7085-90. 
 
 Wa>rd, Hon. Somerset, J. P., Strangford ; Co. Down, 
 Land Agent. — Belfast. 
 Land agent for Lord Bangor (7,000 acres), Mr. 
 Ward (500 acres), and Major Nugent (700 acres) in 
 Cb. Down, 7099-7101. Concurs generally with 
 Colonels Waring and Forde, 7102-3. Ten years 
 ' ago tenant-right- limited on Mr. Ward's estate to 
 £5 per statute acre ; found this discouraged tenants' 
 improvements ; has substituted, with approbation 
 of tenants, on his and Major Nugent's estate, 
 system of arbitration, similar to Colonel Forde's, 
 7104-5, 7128- 9. Adjoining tenants have preference ; 
 incoming tenant to be approved of by land- 
 lo'rd, 71.06. Rent raised only in special cases, 
 where rent very low, 7107. Rents on Lord 
 Bangor's estate below, on Mr. Ward's about equal 
 to, and on Major Nugent's, owing to convenience 
 of sea-weed, considerably above Government valua- 
 tion, 7108-7117. Free sale of tenant-right rack- 
 rents incomer, and would lead to landlord raising 
 his rent, 7109-10. No money expended by his 
 
 Tee saJe question, 
 
 7111-7118. Tenants make the improvements as a 
 rule; landlords assist in drainage, 7112-7117. 
 Might be useful to have independent tribunal, to 
 appeal to, where tenant rack-rented, 7113-5. TeS. 
 per cent, over Government valuation, excluding 
 buildings, a fair rent for farms, 7116, Ordinary 
 class of tenants have no money to buy and do not 
 desire to become proprietors ; they are better off 
 under tenant-right system, 7122-7. Woidd limit 
 tenant-right to 10 years' purchase, 7130-6. Evilfe 
 of free sale, 7136. No case of tenant forced to 
 pay increased rent on his own improvements, 7138. 
 Tenants' rents, if low rented, on death of tenant, on 
 Loi'd Bangor's estate, raised to general valuation of 
 estate, 7139. But not beyond fair letting value, 
 7140, No case of tenant-right affected by raising 
 rent, 7141-2. On Lord Bangor's estate tenant- 
 right has not exceeded ten years' purchase, 7143-4. 
 Average price ten years' purchase or £10 an acre, 
 statute, 7146. When price liinited, underhand 
 dealings likely, 7145. Present Act prevents undue 
 raising of rents ; but some more satisfactory mode 
 of adjusting differences would be desirable, 7147-55. 
 If law altered a new vakiation necessary, 7156. 
 Putting landlord on level with ordinary creditor 
 would be injury to tenant, 7157-61. 
 
 Blakiston-Houstoh, J., Esq., D.L., Orangefield ; Co. 
 Down, Land Owner. — 'Belfast. 
 Landowner in Co. Down (8,000 acres), 7162-3. 
 Concurs generally with evidence of Colonels Waring 
 and Forde, and Hon. Mr. Maxwell, 7164-5. Ulster 
 custom is right to sell goodwill of farm, subject to 
 the rules of the estate, 7166. Rules on his estate 
 are, farm may be re-valued; adjoining tenant^ 
 giving fair price, has preference ; tenant on estate 
 has preference over stranger, 7167. No limit of 
 price, 7178-9. Rents reduced in famine times j 
 readjusted in 1852 ; a few years ago four townlands 
 raised to general level — ^still 12 per cent, below 
 Government valuation — increase 9 to 11 per cent., 
 7180-9. Tenants agreed, 7185. System of valua- 
 tion adopted, 7184. One-half per cent, of holdings-, 
 where, owing to exceptional circumstances, tenant- 
 right does not apply, 7190-1. Hardly any leases, 
 except on portion purchased ten years ago, 7191. 
 Land Act has checked landlords' improvements ; 
 previously expended j£l 0,000 and no per centage 
 charged thereupon, except where leases, 7193-4. 
 Tenant Right system works perfectly — satisfies 
 tenant and secures rent, 7195-7. Recognises lease- 
 hold tenant-right, 7198. 
 
 Synnott, Mark Seton, Esq., D.L., Ballymoyer ; Cb. 
 Armagh, Land Owner. — Belfast. 
 Owner of land (7,377 acres) in Co. Armagh- 
 all arable except portion of bog, 7199-7202. 
 Tenant-right prevails on his and adjoining estates, 
 7203-5. Tenant has right to sell to purchaser 
 approved of by landlord, without limit of price, but 
 adjoining telaailt has preference, 7206-9. On large 
 holdings price is about £20 an acre, statute, 7209- 
 10. Rent has been raised on change of tenancy, 
 but ho substantial increase, to assert landlord's 
 right to settle rent, 7212-4. General valuations of 
 estate in 1844 and 1877, 7215. In the interval 
 100 acres out of 1,200 of bog, reclaimed by tenants 
 on the margin of their farms, 7215. Paid nominal 
 rent for a few years ; when reclaimed valued, 
 7215-9. Cases of tenant-right sold at from £20 to 
 £28 per aere ; high price not due to quality of 
 land, 7220-31. Price affected by character of 
 landlord or agent, 7232-3. Tenant-right works 
 well, but would prefer more reasonable prices ; 
 but to alter system would not be fair to existing 
 tenants, 7234. Only once in four or five years is 
 a purchaser objected to by landlord, 7235. Only 
 one ejectment last 30 years, 7236. No case under 
 Land Act, 7237. Twice only distrained during last 
 six years, 7238. Right of distress and landlord's 
 priority for rent, useful to tenant, 7239--41. Tenant- 
 right prevails over the whole of Armagh, with 
 
 /2 
 
■XXXVUl 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Symwtt, Mark Seton, D.L. — continued. 
 
 limits on some estates. On Mr. Cope's estate, £15 
 per acre limit was evaded, and about 25 years ago 
 nile was rescinded, 7242. Very few leases ; only 
 asked for as security to raise loan, 7243. Admits 
 leasehold tenant-right, rent at end of lease being put 
 up on the scale of adjoining yearly tenants, 7244-6. 
 Eents not raised on buildings erected by tenant, 
 7247-8. Tenants make the improvements as a 
 rule ; landlords sometimes assist, 7249-50. Cases 
 of two tenants unable to buy from Church Com- 
 missioners ; begged witness to buy ; bought, re-let 
 to them, and lost by transaction, 7251-5. Tenants 
 under good tenant-right system are better off than 
 if they bought the fee, 7256-8. Want of uni- 
 formity LQ County Court decisions, 7259-60. 
 Thinks a tribunal of practical judicious men to 
 . settle rent, tenant having right of sale as on witness's 
 estate, and to hold on as long as he paid the rent 
 would be a satisfactory settlement, 7261-7. Tenants 
 have practically at present the right of permanent 
 occupancy ; never disturbed as long as they pay the 
 rent, 7l!67-8. If landlord wants land, he should 
 give compensation for it ; but such cases unknown 
 in the district, 7269. 
 
 Atkinson, Joseph, Esq. ; Co. Armagh, Ijand Owner. — 
 Belfast. 
 Landowner of 1,000 acres in County Armagh, 
 7270-1. Tenant-right exists on estate, viz., the 
 right of tenant to sell at a fair and reasonable rate, 
 with preference to adjoining tenant, 7273-83. In 
 case of difference as to price, landlord or arbitrators 
 settle what is fair, having regard to value of im- 
 provements and of good-will, 7278-82. Sale to 
 highest bidder would prevent consolidation of farms, 
 7275-6. Value of good-will runs from £6 to £18 
 per acre, 7280. Leases not now asked for, 
 7284-7289. Admits leasehold tenant-right, 7285. 
 Revision of rent on fall of lease, if rent under lease 
 low, 7286-7291. No evictions and no land cases, 
 7287. Rent and valuation are about equal, 7290. 
 No general advance of rents for last fifty years, 
 7291-3. _ Land Act has checked landlord's im- 
 provements, 7294. Landlord conti-ibutes to some 
 improvements — arterial drainage, roads, houses, 
 draias, and charges no extra rent therefor, 7295-6. 
 No waste land, 7298. Average size of farms, 
 fifteen acres, 7299. Landlords and tenants perfectly 
 satisfied with present law, 7302-7. Raising the 
 rent unreasonably is robbery, and should be pre- 
 vented ; but knows no case of such, 7307-8. 
 
 Beatty, Mr. Joseph, Keonan; Co. Down, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Tenant on Downshire estate of twenty-nine acres, 
 and farmer proprietor of fifty-six acres Irish, in 
 County Down, 7309-14. Tenant-right exists 
 universally in district, 7315. That is, the right of 
 tenant to sellto sol vent and respectable man, without 
 limit on price, 7316-8. Usual price £20 to £25 per 
 Irish acre, 7319. Causes raising prices are, desire to 
 square adjoining farm, situation, improvements, 
 character of landlord and agent, &c., 7320-5. Where 
 landlord desires to square farm, price is left to arbi- 
 tration, 7330. Case of landlord attempting to raise 
 rents exorbitantly, and decreed to pay compensation, 
 7327-8. Leasehold tenant-right acknowledged on 
 Downshire estate, 7332-3. Knows no exceptional 
 cases where tenant-right does not apply, 7334-5. 
 Rent may be raised to diminish the tenant-right, 
 7336-8. Limiting the price of tenant-right would 
 be no use, and would be impalatable to tenants, 
 7339-43. Eviction unknown, 7345. Tenants not 
 willing to purchase their holdings, because they 
 would lose their tenant-right, which would merge in 
 the fee, 7347-50. Few leases, and tenants not 
 caring for them, 7351-3. Rents too high generally ; 
 Government valuation in many cases very high, and 
 rent is generally a little under it, 7353-7. General 
 tendency to " nibble up" rents on fall of lease or 
 change of tenancy; in many cases unjustly. 
 
 7358-63, 7366-70. Rent sometimes put on tenants 
 improvements, 7364-5. All improvements done by 
 tenants, 7371-2, 7421. Drainage costs, £12 10s., 
 and fencing five acre fields, £6 10s. per acre,- 
 7376-80. Annual payments of tenant, 7374-82! 
 Griffith's valuation, not a proper basis for rent, 
 7383-4. On death of tenant, no breach of tenancy, 
 but rent revised sometimes, 7386. One tenant 
 taken, who pays to others of the family their share 
 of the value of the tenant-right, found by valuation, 
 7387—91. An impartial tribunal to settle rent 
 desirable, 7393-5. Tenants pay too much for 
 tenant-right, but if price limited, money paid behind 
 backs, 7396-7400. Advantages of purchaser pay- 
 ing money into office, 7401-6. Sale by proposals 
 practically sale by auction, 7407-8. Subdivision 
 getting into bad odour, 7410. Cases of perpetuity 
 farmers subdividing, 7414-5. Thirty acres smallest 
 holding a man can live comfortably on, 7411-2. 
 Condition of labourers and rate of wages, 7416-7, 
 7419-20. Better offthan very small farmers, 7418. 
 Landlords sometimes give tiles for drainage, but 
 deduct the value wJien farm sold, 7422-5. 
 
 Say, Mr. William, Kilmore ; Co. Down, Farmer. — 
 Belfast. 
 Tenant of six acres, farmer-proprietor of thirty 
 acres, and landlord of twelve tenants in county 
 Down, 7429-38. Better satisfied with being owner 
 than being tenant, 7439. Tenant feels as safe with 
 tenant-right under a large landowner, but not under 
 a small proprietor, 7440-3. Custom on his land- 
 lord's, Mr. Cleland's, estate, and on his own, for 
 landlord, on tenant leaving, to pay him arbitrated 
 value of tenant-right, 7444-7. Usual amount paid, 
 £10 to £20 per acre, 7448. Labourers pretty well 
 off, 7457. Thinks a certain number of small occu- 
 piers desirable, 7458. Case of two townlands held 
 in perpetuity for seventy years — long since out of 
 hands of original occupiers, 7459. 
 
 Watson, Mr. Wm. J., Aughavilla ; Cos. Antrim and 
 Down, Land Agent, Belfast. 
 Land agent of estates in counties of Antrim and 
 Down (5,300 acres) and Wexford, . 7460-2. Land 
 Act has not affected landlord or tenant on these 
 estates, 7463. Tenant-right prevails ; only restric- 
 tions ; landlord's veto on purchase, and auction for- 
 bidden, 7466-7, 7483. Price of tenant-right £25 
 to £46 per acre, 7468, 7477. Case of sale of six Irish 
 acres at £46 per acre ; rent £6, but price of tenant- 
 right not affected by increase to £9, 7469-76. Ten- 
 ants build the houses which are not part of landlord's 
 interest in farm, 7474. From six to eight acre 
 farms most sought after, 7473. Rents generally 
 under Government valuation, 7477. Leases dying 
 out, 7478. Case of estate revalued in 1850, and 
 rents lowered 17 per cent., and never since raised, 
 7479-82. Re valuation of rents on expiration of leases 
 — some raised, some lowei-ed, 7479. Few ejectments, 
 and those as a spur to make tenant pay up, 7487-9. 
 Tenants ejected for non-payment of rent are allowed 
 to sell, 7489-90. Good feelings between landlord 
 and tenant, 7491-2. Leasehold tenant-right recog- 
 nised, 7493-4. Tenant only asks for lease when he 
 wants to borrow, 7495 ; 7502. Case of estate re- 
 valued in 1850, and lowered 25 per cent., and 
 never since raised, 7496. Case of estate (mountain 
 land) reclaimed by tenants at low rents, and not re- 
 valued for thirty years, 7496-8. The new rents 
 17 per cent, below the Government valuation, 
 7499. Case of estate not revalued for forty-five 
 years; new rent about Government valuation, 
 7499-7502. Leases more in favour in county 
 Wexford than in Ulster, 7502. Leases there 
 for thirty-one years, 7503. Endeavouring to 
 establish tenant-right there, 7504-6. Tenant- 
 right a great thing for the landlord; his rent 
 is safe, and he can give tenants time; and it 
 encourages tenant to work cheerfully and industri- 
 ously, 7505. Rent in county Wexford 15 per cent, 
 above valuation, but not higher rents than on Ulster 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XXXIX 
 
 Watson, "William J. — continued. 
 
 estates, 7508-12. Wexford rents not changed for 
 forty years, 7512. Poor-law valuation variable, 
 7508-1 0. No ej ectments in county "Wexford estate, 
 and rents well paid, 7513-4. Arterial drainage done 
 by landlords, other improvements by tenants, 7515- 
 7. In county Down estates landlords used to con- 
 tribute timber and slates for buildings ; loans 
 given for this purpose stUl — repayable by instal- 
 ments, without interest, 7517-20. Holdings larger 
 than twenty years ago, because adjoining tenant 
 generally manages to buy, 7524. Eecent purchasers 
 of small estates screw up rents fearfully, and limit 
 tenant-right, 7526-8. High prices for tenant-right 
 wUl right themselves, without interference, 7528. 
 In case of rents raised exorbitantly on properties 
 soldsince 1870, woiild givetenant appeal to independ- 
 ent tribunal to revise rent, 7529-7534. In case of 
 dispute about rent, would approve of Judge Long- 
 ■ field's scheme of compensation, substituting ten for 
 seven years' rent, 7534-6. 
 
 Lennon, Mr. John, Benbvirb ; county Tyrone, Tenant- 
 farmer — Belfast. 
 Complains that his rent was raised whenever he 
 made improvements, 7540. Bought a piece of land 
 in 1873, after the purchase the rent was raised, had 
 no notice of this when buying, 7543-50. Tenants 
 are afraid to improve for fear of an increase, 7552-3, 
 7561. As a general custom rents are raised on a 
 change of tenancy, such was not the case before the 
 Land Act, 7558, 7602. Increases of rent diminish 
 tenant-right, 7566. The tenants made to sign an 
 agreement lessening the power of the Land Act, 
 7594-96. Part of the land jraised 7s. 6d!. per acre 
 since the Land Act, 7610. Agent makes any in- 
 crease he likes, 7615-19. If they do not pay to the 
 day ejectments served, 7628-32. Petition for time 
 to landlord, 7633. Tenants lose the franchise, by 
 their names not being put in the receipt on death of 
 predecessor, 7638-41. 
 
 Wilson, Nathaniel, Tenant-farmer, see Henry M'Kean, 
 . 7869. 
 
 Campbell, Mr. Bernard, Corr, Dungannon ; county 
 Tyrone, Tenant-farmer. — Belfast: 
 Case where rent was raised by a new agreement 
 at end of lease to double what it was during it, 
 7656, 7676-77. Lease had been running for sixty 
 years, fell out in 1874, 7659-60. Made great 
 improvements at own cost, 7662. Resisted increase, 
 but had to pay or go, 7671. If they left then 
 were excluded from the benefit of sale, being at end 
 of lease, 7673, 7702. Have liberty of sale; rent 
 too high to find a purchaser, 7676. By a new 
 agreement can not make fuel in the bog, 7679; 
 biit pay the same rent as if they had right of turbary, 
 7686. Tenants all dependent on the land, 7708. 
 Contracted out of their tenant-right by terms of 
 lease, 7714. 
 
 Hamilton, Mr. William John, Corr; county Tyrone, 
 ■ Tenant-farmer. — Belfast. 
 
 Holds under same landlord, when the rent was 
 being raised, the landlord sent for a farmer valuator, 
 but would not afterwards take his valuation, but 
 fixed rent himself, 7727-29. Tenant-right de- 
 stroyed by increases of rent, case in point, 7753-56. 
 
 Servry, Mr. Bernard, Tyanee ; counties Antrim and 
 Derry, Tenant-farmer. — Belfast. 
 Holds about forty acres, 7761. Complains that 
 they pay too high for the land, but have to pay for 
 the peat moss as well, 7765. Is rented for his own 
 improvements, 7769. Allowed to sell, but public 
 sale not recognized, 7779. Rent so high, tenant- 
 right of little value, 7780-1. Very few sales took 
 place during last twenty years, where they did £14 
 was the maximum per acre, some could not sell at 
 all, 7799, 7802. Suggests Government valuators ; 
 
 thinks Land Act has not done much good, 7803-4, 
 Case of infringing rights of tenants in turbary, 
 7814-18. Resolutions of land meeting in Kilrea, 
 7837. Is a fact that peat mosses were settled by 
 the Crown on the people of Ulster, for their use, 
 and was always allowed by the landlords, till the 
 passing of the Land Act, 7842-45. Has been 
 successfully resisted, 7848. Case of rent raising on 
 the Mercers' estate, 7854-55. Labourers wanted, 
 7867. 
 
 M'Kean, Mr. Henry, Benburb, Moy ; county Tyrone, 
 Manufacturer and Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Law suit between Lord Powerscourt and his ten- 
 antry, followed byan arbitration, 7844. LordPowers- 
 court granted free sale, when he came of age, 7877. 
 Wanting to sell his estate, was ofiered twenty-five 
 years' purchase on the rent by the tenants, would 
 not take less than thirty-seven years, 7877-79. 
 New valuation made, rental J2,000 of an increase, 
 tenants refused to ]3ay increase. 700 notices to quit 
 served,7881-82. Another valuation with £1,000 in- 
 crease, two-thirds of the tenantry agreed to this, 7884— 
 87. Cases of others came into court, and all former 
 proceedings annulled, 7887-8 ; more notices to quit. 
 Tenants finally agreed to pay rents which were 
 exorbitant, and which depressed the tenant-right, 
 7888-90, 7898. Leases given for thirty-one years, 
 as a final arrangement, 7892. £1,000 spent on law 
 costs, 7896. Estate sold for £40,000 less than 
 tenants ofiered for it, 7900—7906. Case in county 
 Armagh, of landlord refusing to accept only son of 
 deceased tenant, except on an increase of rent ; a 
 new rule on the property, 7908-9. A land claim 
 was brought in court; Judge held the landlord in 
 the right, and adjourned the hearing to let them 
 settle, 7916-19. Another case where price of 
 tenant-right was suddenly restricted, such a thing 
 never being done before, 7922-26. Case where 
 tenant-right was lessened by an increase put on 
 incoming tenant, 7929-33. Rents increased before 
 Act on Mr. Parnell's property, 20 per cent. ; attempt 
 made to make tenants pay a half-yearly gale, instead 
 of a yearly gale, 7938-39. Landlord tried to sell to 
 tenants, too poor to buy, 7940-43. Security of 
 tenure, and free sale would improve the country, 
 7953. Extracts from memorial to Lord Powers- 
 court, 7976. Thinks landlord has a right to seek a 
 rise of rent, if he thinks the land is too low ; and 
 the tenant a reduction^ if he thinks it too high, 
 7981-3. Tenants object to landlords' valuators, 
 gives a case, 7984. The Land Judge not the person 
 to decide rent; ought to be a skilled man, 7993-4. 
 Government help towards purchase-money, most 
 advantageous, 8006-7. 
 
 Ker, Andrew Murray, Esq., Newbliss ; county 
 Monaghan, Landed Proprietor and Land 
 Agent. — Belfatt. 
 Was agent to Lord Dartrey for twenty-seven 
 years, 8014. And is still agent to Colonel Clements, 
 in county Cavan, 8083-4. Tenant-right exists, 
 but is restricted to £10 per acre; landlord has 
 choice of tenant, 8018, 8020. Where tenant made 
 good improvements a higher price was permitted, 
 8022. Case in point, 8025. On his own estate no 
 limit to price^ but as is universal in Monaghan, a 
 tenant on the property gets the preference, 8028-9, 
 8062-4. Limit often exceeded by private arrange- 
 ment, 8030, 8066-7. On Lord Dartrey's estate 
 tenant-right was allowed, as if there had been no 
 lease, 8036-7. Renewal of lease seldom asked for • 
 were more anxious for leases before Land Act ^• 
 case on his own property, 8038-43. Lord Dai-trey 
 allowed for buUdings up to the passing of Land 
 Act; not since; Land Act has done harm in 
 Monaghan, as it has not made the tenant improve 
 and has kept back the landlords, 8045-46, 8048'. 
 Legalizing tenant-right has been an improvement to 
 the tenant, but has separated landlord and tenant, 
 8049-52. Less raising of rents than there used to 
 
xl 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Ker, Andrew Murray — continued. 
 
 be, 8056-8. Raising the rent on a change of ten- 
 ancy ; depreciates the tenant-right, 8073-4, 8170. 
 Ridiculous prices sometimes given for tenant-right, 
 8079. His experience is, that it is no use restrict- 
 ing the price of tenant-right, as money -will be given 
 behind backs, 8096. Would be possible by unduly 
 raising rent to make tenant-right of no value, 8102. 
 Ulster tenant-right works weU, 8113, 8169. No 
 necessity for a tribunal to settle rents, 8114-17. 
 County Court Judges not satisfactory, 8123, 8125. 
 An honest and competent tribunal, 8126. Would 
 not advance money to aid tenant in buying, 8128. 
 If he bad the money, and the landlord was willing, 
 would let him buy, 8129-30. Against compulsory 
 sales, and advances of public money, 8131-2. Ten- 
 ant borrowing to purchase has not worked well ; a 
 case, 8133-37. Tenants make few improvetaents, 
 8124. Had 6 or 7 cases under Land Act on Lord 
 Dartrey's estate, 8159. Landlords should have 
 powers beyond other creditors, 8163—5. Bad case in 
 Monaghan of landlord raising rents ; was fired at, 
 8175-6. GriSith's valuation not to be depended 
 on, 8185-6. 
 
 Fitzgercdd, Mr. Willnim M., Clona villa. Clones ; 
 county Monaghan, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 GriiEth's valuation not a fair test for the letting 
 value of all kinds of lands, 8258. Advantages of 
 situation, and proximity to markets, not sufiiciently 
 considered, 8260. Against public auctions, 8263. 
 At expiration of lease allowed tenant-right, 8264. 
 On one estate, tenants on taking lease must sign 
 away tenant-right, 8265, 8267. Case of turning 
 land into townparks, and raising rent, 8272. Lease 
 not asked for ; unfair to limit tenant-right, 8277—8. 
 It checks improvements, 8285. Landlord should 
 have right of selecting tenant, 8286. This usually 
 fairly exercised, 8287. Since 1870 landlords have 
 cfeased improving, 8288. Would extend Ulster cus- 
 tom to all Ireland, 8293-95. Landlord an absentee, 
 8307. Case of buying under Church Act, 8309. 
 No tenant-right on Church property ; rent too high, 
 and bad land, 8314. Tenants who have bought 
 their holdings ; no better Off than when under land- 
 lord, if not worse, 8316-19. 
 
 Mulholland, Mr. Arthur, Pomeroy ; coltnty Tyrone, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Held under lease ; at expiration rent greatly in- 
 creased, 8329-32. Asked to sign agreement (pro- 
 duced), but refused, 8335. Afterwards signed a 
 modified one, 8336. Last clause not objectionable; 
 brought it before the chaii-man of the county ; has 
 never been presented to tenants since, 8337-40, 
 8357. Government valuation not a fair criterion, 
 8342. On dropping of lease, tenant-right lost; sale 
 allowed, if tenant pays an increased rent, 8345. 
 On change of tenancy rent always raised, 8346-48. 
 Tenants going down, through rents always creeping 
 tip, 8349, 8352. Paid rent in name of old tenant, 
 and by-and-bye became tenant, without any agree- 
 ment, the object of which was to defeat tenant- 
 right, 8358-60. Landlord liable if money is given 
 with his consent, 8361. 
 
 Gmilt, Mr. William, Ballyclare ; county Antrim, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Chairman, Ballyclare Tenants' Association, 8364. 
 Family had farm for 100 years, at end of every 
 twenty- one years' lease, rent raised, estate sold 
 twenty years ago, purchaser raised rent 5s. to 1 Os. 
 per acre, and three years' rent as fine for a forty-one 
 years' lease, either pay or leave ; tenant made all im- 
 provements, 8573. The word " customs " in Act of 
 1870 injurious to him, 8581-86. Eents increased 
 and tenant-right injured thereby, 8388-92. No 
 improvements made from feelings of insecurity, 
 8393-4, 8407. A tribunal to determine rentsj 8395. 
 Pay high rents not to be disturbed, 8398. Tenants 
 do all improvements, case of wholesale eviction by 
 
 landlord before Act of 1870. Tenants put back a» 
 caretakers, 8399. 
 
 Laird, Mr. Joseph, Ballyclare ; county Antrim, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Wants free sale ; case of landlord refusing sale, 
 8411. Came to Land Court, landlord paid compensa- 
 tion, 8414-15, and got a new tenant, 8415-16. Selec- 
 tion of purchaser has been the practice since Land Adt, 
 8417. Rent increased on change of tenancy, landlord 
 puts value onfarm,and tenant must pay, always onhis 
 own improvements, 8420-21. Tenants will not be 
 satisfied until improvements are made their own hy 
 law, 8422. Landlord no right to restrict sale, 8424. 
 
 Wilson, Mr. Hugh, Drumaboe, Lame ; county Antrim, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Objects to rent raising, and oflBce rules, 8427, 
 8451-2. Landlord got valuator, and did not stand 
 by his valuation, 8431. Case of a neighbour, a 
 yearly tenant, whose rent was doubled, 8433-35. 
 When the tenant-right was sold, the increase of 
 rent lessened it by £500, 8437-39, 8446. Three 
 F's would satisfy everybody, 8448-50. 
 
 M^Murtry, Mr. William, Eglinton-place, Belfast y 
 county Antrim, Mechanic. — Belfast. 
 Was a farmer for forty years, 8456. Got farito 
 with his wife, name not in rent-book, paid his father- 
 in-law ; when lease fell in the agent reserved seven 
 out of fifteen acres to make townparks, and 
 then raised it £12 over the original rent, 8459, 
 8473-4. Got leave to sell out to a neighbour, who 
 knowing he would get it if sold, would not give 
 sufficient tenant-right, so held on; finally sold, 
 but had to refund £20, in consequence of risfe 
 of rent after sale, 8460-62. Against usage of 
 estate, 8465-6. Unfair to include roads and water 
 in measurement of land, could not cut his own trees, 
 8467-8. Case of rent rising twice, and a third time, 
 tried in twenty years, 8478. Case of raising rents 
 for improvements, 8480. Voting as he chose the 
 cause of his harsh treatment, 8512. 
 
 Wallace, Mr. John, Alta Hammond, Carrickfergus ; 
 County Antrim, Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Estate sold in 1869, to six different people, 8519- 
 20. Were then served with notice to quit, and rent 
 raised on all divisions except one, the tenants on 
 which were this yiear given perpetuity leases at low 
 rents, without fine, 8523. Case of rent raising 
 after Land Act ; came to Court, 8529. Compen- 
 sation given, old tenant put out, incoming tenant 
 paid it, rent being raised as well, 8530-32. Case 
 of restricting tenant-right by Mr. Biggar, M.P., 
 through which tenant is left destitute, 8537-40.. 
 Rental increased £1,000 on estate of 4,000 acres in 
 ten years, 8541-44. Rent increased through tenant's 
 improvements, 8547-8. Should not restrict tenant- 
 right, 8551. A new landlord ought not to have 
 power of increasing rent on tenant's improvenjents, 
 8556-8. Land Act as it stands no use to them, 
 does not give security, 8563-5. Chairman not 
 being acquainted with farming, should have skilful 
 help, 8566. Get more under Ulster Custom than 
 under compensation clauses of Act, 8568-9. Per- 
 petuity tenants independent 8572-3. Taking 
 duration of improvements into account in the Act 
 of Parliament, an unfair principle, 8577-8. Acta 
 of Parliament annulled by office rules, 8584. 
 
 M'Grogan, Mr. Manus, Castledawson ; county Derry, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Holds under a middleman, 8587. Rent much 
 too high, 8596. Twenty years ago raised from 18s. 
 to 25s., at time of Income Tax BUI to 32s. 6rf., 
 8602-5. One tenant resisted owing two years rent, 
 was put out, rent had to be lowered to get another 
 tenant, 8609. Tenant-right of no value, rent too 
 high, 8613. Government should pass a bill preventing 
 unfair i-eilt, 8619. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xU 
 
 Stewart, Mr. Samuel, Ballydcjran ; County Down, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Belfast. 
 Held under lease, which expired in 1846, rent 
 at once raised £10, although £300 were spent 
 in improvements, 8631-2, 8642. This was paid 
 till bad times came, could not then pay, was evicted, 
 8634. Did not know of compensation for improve- 
 ments in case of non-payment of rent, so got 
 nothing, 8643, 864:5. 
 
 M'Nair, Mr. James, Ballinure, Carrickfergus ; County 
 Antrim, Tenant Farmer. — Beljast. 
 Rent raised in consequence of improvements, 
 8655-6.- New office rules served on tenants last 
 year, 8658. Cannot build without consulting land- 
 lord, 8663. No feeling of security that rent will not 
 be raised at landlord's will, 8665-67. 
 
 Alexander, Mr. Joseph, Imlick ; County Donegal, 
 Tenant Farmer ; Member of Donegal Tenant 
 Farmery' Association. — Londonderry. 
 Land Act no protection against increase of rent 
 for improvements, 8689. No fixed time for settling 
 rent, 8691. Case of increase of rent on tenant's 
 improvements on his father's farm, 8692. £24 rent, 
 8694. Eent raised to £32 lis., 8695. Offer to 
 reclaim all reclaimable land if lease at higher rent 
 of thirty years granted, but lease refused, 8696. In 
 twenty-one years reclaimed seventy-four acres, rent 
 then raised to £62 8s., 8701. Expenditure of 
 witness in improvements, 8702 ; 8883-4. Leases 
 with clauses barring compensation more frequent 
 since Land Act, 8709. Case of rent raised under 
 notice to quit, 8711. Small proprietors since Land 
 Act look more sharply after their interests, 8715. 
 Large proprietors do not generally revalue or change 
 rents for twenty-one years, 8715. Tenants admit 
 landlord's right to raise rent when farmers' produce 
 realizes more profit, 8717. Rents should be read- 
 justed at intervals not less than twenty-one years, 
 8721 ; 8746-7. After rents first settled by arbitra- 
 tion future readjustments should be according to 
 tables of prices and wages, but not according to 
 appearance of land, 8723. On an average of seven 
 years previous, 8736. Rent raised on witness's 
 improvements, 8729. Landlords in his district 
 make no improvements, 8739. Improving tenants, 
 8740. And rents of all raised, 8743. At the 
 periodical valuation of the estate, 8745. Mode of 
 valuation, 8748. After Board of Works advances 
 paid off, new valuation. Rent thereby raised beyond 
 instalments on advances, 8754. Rent raised on these 
 improvements though instalments fully paid off by 
 tenants, 8758. Dissatisfaction at present relations of 
 landlord and tenant, and working of Land Act, 8766. 
 For last three years improvements have been checked, 
 8768. Landlords can raise rent to any amount, 
 8772. Tenants prefer to submit to increase of 
 rent rather than go into Land Courts, 8774. Case 
 of Mrs. Algeo, compensation arbitrarily cut down 
 from £400 to £150, 8775. Dislike to Land 
 Courts owing to expense and uncertainty, 8778. 
 Value of tenant-right fifteen to thirty years 
 purchase; very few sales lately, 8779. Small 
 or medium sized farm sells best, 8780. Say thirty to 
 eighty acre farm, 8782. Many reclamations from 
 1845 consequent upon favourable Report of Devon 
 Commission on compensation for improvements, 
 8784. Reclamationprincipally cutaway turf bog and 
 hea^h, 8785. Reclaimable land in Donegal and 
 Tyrone equal to arable land, 8786. On Duke of Aber- 
 <:om's Donegal estate 40 per cent, of his property 
 reclaimed by tenants, 8787. And rents incre^ed in 
 proportion, 8789. Service of twenty-fivp notices to 
 quit by Duke of Abeircorn in village of ^t. Johns- 
 town, 8790. Villagers had built substantial hpuses 
 worth £100 to £200 each, 8792. With sanction 
 and approval of the ofiice, 8793. If rent was fixed 
 as witness proposes, plenty of money would be ex- 
 pended, 8794. And Ireland would become "valu- 
 
 able to the empire, 8795. Purchase by tenants 
 from Church Commissioners has been, successful, 
 8802. Tenant purchasers satisfied, 8803. Eighty 
 cases of farmer proprietors (old and recent), the 
 most prosperous occupiers in Donegal, 8803. A 
 few poor proprietors mortgaged too largely as pro- 
 vision for other members of their family, 8816. 
 No subdivision, 8817. ^.gainst subdivision below 
 fifty acres, 8820. Difficult to prevent subletting in 
 certain cases, 8820. As by putting it in hands of 
 trustees to manage, 8823. Against clauses interfer- 
 ing with alienation and assignment, 8825. But 
 not against clauses preventing subletting, 8829. 
 Smallest holding to support a family, twenty acres, 
 Irish, 8832. Subdividing and subletting should be 
 permitted with consent of a Court, 8835. But 
 should not be prohibited by Act of Parliament, 
 8836. Expense and delay in purchases under 
 Bright's clauses, 8839. Case of high costs — sale of 
 Lord Wicklow's estate in county Donegal, 8841. 
 Small charges in sales by Church Commissioners, 
 8843. Raising of rent by small proprietors, 8848. 
 Respective value of landlords' and tenants' interests; 
 witness's own case, 8849. Sale of tenant-right on 
 Duke of Abercprn's estate generally subject to rise 
 of rent, 8853. Sale is by proposals. Landlord 
 choosing incoming tenant, 8854. No maximum 
 price fixed, 8856. A fixed price contrary to Ulster 
 custom, 8857. Many tenants would be able to pay 
 three-fourths of purchase-money, 8858. Would like 
 to do it, 8860. Prefers the " three F's " which could 
 be universally adopted, but peasant proprietary 
 could only be partially adopted, 8860. Imjjrove- 
 ments made by witness, 8863. Buildings, 8865, 
 8869 ; 8878. Labourers' dwellings, 8867. 
 
 Hanna, Mr. W. J. , Whitehouse, Carrigans ; CoiTnty 
 Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Suggests arbitration to decide respective interests 
 of landlord and tenant, 8890. Rents should be 
 subject to arbitration, 8893. Government umpires 
 would be suspected of being under landlord influ- 
 ence, 8896 ; 8909. Might be selected out of a staff 
 appointed by a Government department, 8897. 
 Umpire should be a skilled man in the qualities of 
 soil and values —practical as well as scientific, 8902. 
 Compensation under Land Act is insufficient in case 
 of industrious tenant, 8908. Not one half what 
 he ought to get under the Ulster custom, 8909. 
 Judge hears only extreme cases on both sides, and 
 splits the difference, 8909. Tenants' claim may be 
 reduced by increased rent, enforced by notice to 
 quit, 8912. Feeling of tenants they will lose value 
 of improvements and of their tenant-right by rise 
 of rent, 8913. Tenants who do not keep accounts 
 cannot satisfy strict proof required by Courts of 
 value of their improvements, 8914. Landlord 
 keeps accounts, and is prepared with proper evi- 
 dence, 8915. Case of increase of rent on tenant's 
 improvements, 8917. Improvements on witness's 
 farm, 8917. Case of improvement of labourers' 
 cottages, 8917. Cost of improvements, 8918; 8922. 
 Landlord unable by settlement to grant more than 
 thirty-five years' lease, 8922. Cost of improve- 
 ments, reclamation of rocky and whinny land, 
 
 8922. No landlord's improvements in his district, 
 
 8923. Refused lease with restrictive covenants 
 
 8924. Except one to keep in repair, 8929. Land- 
 lord can raise rent so as to swallow tenants' im- 
 provements, 8929. Uncertainty as to rent retards 
 prosperity of country, 8930. Security would lead 
 to plenty of employment of labout, 8930 ; 8934. 
 No want of capital, 8931. A satisfactory 'tenant^ 
 right better than scheme of peasant proprietary. 
 It would secure rent, and advance the resources of 
 the country, 8933. Case of rise of rent on death 
 of tenant on Abercorn estate, 8935 ; 8939. Rents 
 should rise if net prices of produce increase, 8940 
 Periodical revisions of rent, at intervals of twenty- 
 one years, 8947. Farmer proprietors, 8949. 
 
xlii 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Gamhle,'Mx. Jolm, Londonderry, Tenant Farmer, county 
 Donegal, and Seed Merchant. — Londonderry. 
 Village of Carndonagh, 8957. 153 houses built 
 by the tenants, with the landlord's consent and en- 
 couragement, without leases, 8961. Valuation of 
 land and houses. Free sale allowed of tenant-right 
 in houses, 8962 ; 9001. Tenant-right value of these 
 houses, £19,505, 8965, Tenants in terror lest 
 ownership should change hands, 8963 ; 9002. 
 Leases lately offered of a hundred years, but with 
 clauses increasing the rent and to give up improve- 
 ments at end of term, 8965. Tenants have a 
 tenant-right left unprotected by Land Act, 8968. 
 Want of seciirity checks building of decent homes, 
 8971. One hundred years' lease insufficient in vil- 
 lages, 8972. All the farmers of the townland live 
 in vUlages, 8975. Village of Cross built by tenants 
 with leases, 8977. Case of a house cost £1,800 ; 
 rent raised from £2 15 s. to £13 10s. at time of 
 sale, 8978. No bid at that rent, 8979. No more 
 building since, 8979. Would extend Land Act to 
 business men in villages who have improved, 8982. 
 Cases of ai'bitrary raising of rent, 8986. On 
 tenant's improvements, 8988 ; 8993 ; 8997. Tenants 
 make all the improvements, 8994. Colonel Lyle's 
 estate, 8995. Tenant-right destroyed by raising of 
 rent, 8996. Excessive rents, 8997. 
 
 Lapsley, Mr. James, St. Johnstown ; county Donegal, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Village of St. Johnstown, 9003. Twenty houses 
 built without leases, on faith of Ulster custom, 
 9006; 9013. Now under notice to q^uit, other- 
 wise rent would be doubled, 9013. Some hold land, 
 others are tradesmen and shopkeepers, 9023. Case 
 of eviction on disagreement as to value of tenant- 
 right of portion of land resumed by landlord, 9034. 
 
 Osborne, Mr. Samuel, Springtown, Co. Londonderry ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Irish Society's estate, 9038. Case of tenant of 
 Irish Society, refused sixty-one years lease, having 
 expended £6,000 on improvements, 9039. Offered 
 fourteen years lease at increased rent, and excluding 
 tenant-right, 9039. Case of tenant of Irish Society 
 served with notice to quit, for attempting to drain 
 forty acres of his holding which Society had under- 
 taken but failed to drain, 9041. Rent raised and 
 leases offered. Draft lease excluding tenant-right. 
 Further rise, 9045. Illustration of valuators' 
 differences, 9047. Reluctance of tenants to go into 
 Land Courts owing to expense and uncertainty, 
 9049. Increase of rent, due to tenant's improve- 
 ments, 9053. Irish Society are trenching on Ulster 
 Custom, 9055. Resolution of the tenants protesting 
 against the action of the Society in forcing on tenants 
 leases with uniisual clauses and undue interference on 
 sale of holdings, 9060. Notice interfering withsale.of 
 tenant-right, 9062. Origin of the Ulster Custom, 
 9065. Violation by Irish Society of articles of the 
 plantation of Ulster, 9066. Society at one time 
 built farm steadings, 9070. Rents raised on tanants' 
 improvements by Irish Society, 9071. Tenants 
 would purchase their holdings and most could pay 
 one-fourth or one-third, 9075. Uncertainty as to 
 rents hinders improvements, 9076. 
 
 Steel, Mr. John, The Park, Co. Londonderry; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Notice interfering with sale by tenants, 9079. 
 Improvements by tenants, 9089. Tenant-right gives 
 the landlord security for his rent, 9091. 
 
 M'Glinchy, Mr. James, Kindrayhead, County Donegal; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Estimate of Mr. James Steel Nicholson, 9093. 
 Estate of Mr. William Young, 9096. Case of in- 
 crease of rent on tenant's improvements, 9097 ; 
 9109. Tenant-right denied but established by 
 Land Court, 9106. Tenant-right can be extinguished 
 
 by raising rent, 9107. Mr. Nicholson's tenants- 
 have no grievancies, 9111. Case of estate where 
 tenant-right is restricted to five years purchase 
 (Mr. Young's), 9128; 9115. And where rent is 
 raised on every sale of tenants' interests, ,9116 
 (9129). Objection to restricting value of tenant- 
 right — Tenant gets no compensation for his improve- 
 ments, 9116. It checks improvements, it puts the 
 imijroving and industrious on the same level as the 
 unimproving and idle, 9117. Large extent of waste 
 land in Ennishowen capable of reclamation (turf 
 bog and mountain), 9118 ; 9121. Tenants would 
 reclaim if they had security, 9119 ; 9122. Land- 
 lords have permitted subdivision to too great an 
 extent. Consequent poverty, 9120. Tenants on 
 mountain farms suffer most from increase of rent, 
 9122. Holding in common of waste land has dis- 
 appeared, 9123. Tenant cannot live comfortably on 
 less than twenty or twenty-five acres. Few farmers 
 in Ennishowen have so much, 9125. Have no 
 other industry, 9126. Mr. Young's estate. High 
 rent as compared with valuation, 9127. Case of 
 increase of rent on tenant's improvements, 9130. 
 Evicted tenant getting only part of incoming 
 tenant's payment, 9134 ; 9139. Before Land Act, 
 9135. No case since Land Act, 9138. On this 
 estate custom within living memory to allow free 
 sale, 9140. The restriction detracts from the value 
 of tenant-right, 9144. Second case of increase of 
 rent and denial of sale on Mr. Yoimg's estate, 
 9148. Cases on Mr. Thompson's estate of rent- 
 raising on tenants' improvements, 9151. Sales by 
 auction formerly allowed, but now forbidden. Sale 
 by proposals. Agent raises rent on sale, 9156. No 
 limit to prices 9158. Fifty-five years of purchase 
 given for tenant-right. High prices of tenant-right 
 due to excessive competition through want of other 
 industries, 9161. 
 
 Doherty, Mr. William, Buncrana, county Donegal, 
 Auctioneer. — Londonderry. 
 Auctioneer's sales of tenant-right in barony of 
 Donegal, county Donegal. Average prices from 
 1874 to 1880 of tenant-right. Fall in value of 
 tenant-right partly due to Land Act, 9164. Fifteen 
 years purchase for largest farm sold. In barony of 
 Innishowen principal landlords absentees or buyers 
 of land on speculation, 9167. Rents of these are 
 very high — £2 an acre for inferior land, 9168. 
 Table of sales from 1873 to 1880, 9170. 
 
 M'Causland, ConnoUy Thomas, Esq., Drenagh, Lima- 
 vady, county Derry, Landowner. — Londonderry. 
 Estate 11,000 acres, 9183. On one estate a 
 limited usage, 9185. In existence forty years, 
 9188; 9193. Limited custom is three years' rent 
 for good-will, £4 an acre for manure land, £1 an 
 acre for seeds and compensation for drains and 
 permanent improvements, 9189. Money is paid 
 intotheofiice,9190. FoundbyLand Court in amicable 
 suit to be the custom of estate, 9194. Custom very 
 satisfactory to tenants, 9196. Tenants of the estate 
 have first right to buy, 9197. Incoming tenants 
 get farms cheap, 9197 ; 9328. Only Ul-to-do 
 tenants leave, 9200. Shopkeepers refused credit, 
 9201 ; 9331. In twenty years spent £14,000 on 
 buildings and reclamations, 9203. Tenants very 
 well-to-do, 9208. Average holding forty acres, runs 
 down to five in mountainous parts, where they are 
 comfortable, 9210. On the three mountain town- 
 lands, five years are allowed for good will, 9211. 
 Restriction no check on improvements, 9216. 
 Landlord makes all the improvements, 9217. 
 Tenants and landlord perfectly satisfied with Land 
 Act, 9222. 'Under this usage, tenant outgoing gets 
 money at once — has not to wait for a purchaser in 
 bad times, 9226. Witness, when through deaths 
 of tenants, farms fall into his hands, makes improve- 
 ments and lets at improved value, 9227. Estates^ 
 five miles from Limavady, 9230. Rents one-fourth 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xliii 
 
 M'Causland, Connolly Thomas. — continued. 
 
 over Government valuation, 9232. In valuing 
 buUdings, ' landlonl and tenant appoint a valuer (a 
 builder), 9237 ; 920-5. No cases of drainage or 
 reclamation of waste lands, 9239. On Lord 
 Waterford's estate tenants reclaimed much on long 
 leases, 9241. Tenants don't reclaim on witness's 
 estate, 9242. Mountain tenants make less improve- 
 ments, 9245, Not so well off', 9246. Reductions 
 last year on mountain tenancies and heavy clay 
 lands, 9249. Made some improvements on principal 
 mountain townland and rents raised to Government 
 valuation, 9250. Estate in county Roscommon, 
 9252. No landlord's improvements, 9254. Some 
 large farms, 9255. Few leases, 9 250. .£3,000 a year 
 rental, 9257. Rent reduced last year to Government 
 valuation, 9230. Government valuation very low 
 in Roscommon, 9202. Landlord appointing the 
 valuator, 9265. Case of j;enant purchasing at 
 high rate the tenant-right of out-going tenant, 
 and who was in arrear and the land in 
 wretched state, 9269. Purchasers on Water- 
 foi-d estate are holding their own, 9271-2. Rents 
 never raised by witness under twenty years, 
 9275. On Lord Waterford's and Fishmongers' 
 estate leases general, 9276. On Lord Waterford's 
 there had been no change of rent for forty years, 
 9278. On estates of good resident landlords no 
 periodical valuations of rent, they let it go on 
 haphazard, 9281. Objections to Ulster custom : 
 it leaves nothing for the landlord to do, 9283. A 
 bad thing for tenants as they have to borrow money. 
 Average price of tenant-right twenty years' purchase, 
 sometimes fifty, 9286. The Ulster custom would 
 prevent landlord draining or improving, 9288. A 
 tenant in Roscommon getting tenant-right would 
 be able to sell what is the landlord's, 9290. Under 
 Ulster custom landlord has no interest in his 
 property, 9292. Thinks it unfair to extend Ulster 
 custom to a county where they never had it, 9299. 
 The labourers are under the farmers, 9309. ^Vho 
 generally charge them for lodging, 9310. Pretty 
 comfortable as a rule, 9313. Perpetuity tenants 
 have not flourished, 9314; 9321. Have subdivided 
 too far, 9317. Some of them vei-y small holdings, 
 9322. Through subdivision, 9323. Subdivision 
 below a certain average should be prevented, 9324. 
 Say 100 acres, 9327. Under witness's system 
 money couldjiot pass suh rosa, 9333. In regulating 
 rent, 9337. Should be a public valuator or 
 arbitrator or Count Court Judge, 9339. A regular 
 public officer in the county, 9342. 
 
 Co. Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 
 Case of tenant of Duke of Abercorn compelled to 
 take seven and a half years' purchase for one farm 
 and ten years for another, 9347. This would not 
 pay for buildings erected, 9353. Compelled to 
 leave farm of one hundred and three acres, worth 
 between £2,000 and £3,000, and accept one of fifty 
 at a distance without compensation, 9355-8. Rent 
 of latter raised when witness entered it, 9362. 
 Erected threshing mill, and churning machine, 
 which was retained by his successor (Duke of Aber- 
 corn's agriculturist), 9366. Received value of them 
 at law, 9367. Fined £1 for letting his dog out in 
 the fields annoying the pheasants, 9369. Charged 
 10,?. for cutting a fence, 9370. Rise of rent on fall 
 of leases, 9375. Tenant since Land Act offered 
 £1,700; compelled to accept lowest offer, £900, 
 9376. Favoured tenant was tenant of estate, 
 others were not, 9379. Tenants make all improve- 
 ments, 9382. Board of Works charges are paid by 
 tenants, 9385. 
 
 Cimningham, Mr. John, Milfield, Buncrana, Co. 
 Donegal, Com Merchant, Land Agent, and 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Greater security against increase of rent and in- 
 terference by landlord required, 9395. Farmers 
 
 slow to gQ into Land Court, 9396. District about 
 Newtowncunningham originally nearly all moor- 
 land ; tenants reclaimed, 9400. And made all im- 
 provements, 9402. Improvements : drains, enlarging 
 fields, building better farms and houses, 9403. 
 Case of tenant — rent doubled, confiscating tenant's 
 interest, 9404. Rent of other tenants on estate 
 raised, but not in same proportion, 9408. Sale in 
 1875 by Lord Wicklow to tenants for £50,000 
 under Bright clauses, 9412. High costs of tenants' 
 solicitor, 9417. Estate sold in lots (33 or 34), 9421. 
 High costs of tenants' solicitor under Bright clauses, 
 9422. Low costs in sales by Church Commis- 
 sioners, 9423. High costs under Bright clauses, 
 9424. Sold high, 9425. Board of Works could safely 
 have advanced more money ; restrictions on aliena- 
 tion very hard, 9426. Restriction against sub- 
 division not required, 9428, Tenants not inclined 
 to cut up too small,. 9428. Loans required in most 
 cases, 9431. Yearly payments now greater than 
 rent, 9432. Fixity of tenure, with free sale, at 
 fair rent, sufficient and more practicable, 9433. 
 Government might safely advance more, 9434. 
 Farms of former purchasers improved since people 
 better off, and feeling of contentment and security, 
 9436. Objection to notices to quit in case of dis- 
 putes Elbout rent, 9438. Increase of rent the chief 
 nardship ; value of tenant-right, 9440. No change 
 in value since Land Act, 9442. Custom of Mr, 
 Stephens' estate (county Donegal) ; free sale, but 
 preference to tenant on estate if he gives as much 
 as another, 9444, Rent thirteen to fourteen per 
 cent, over valuation, 9446, Carriage of corn less 
 from Baltimore to Derry than from Lagan Valley 
 (Donegal) to Derry, 9447; 9452, Tenant-right 
 promotes good farming and industry of tenants, 9450. 
 
 Scoti, Major William Edward, Willsboro', Co. Derry, 
 Landowner. — Londonderry. 
 Extent of his two estates, 9456, Usage of one — 
 unlimited price, with veto on purchaser^ with right 
 of pre-emption to landlord, and with preference of 
 tenant on the estate, paying as much as another, 
 9457-9. Since Land Act restrictions have been 
 abandoned, except on sheriff's' sales, 9462. Difficulty 
 in case of tenant's intestacy in selecting successor ; 
 case of ruinous litigation in Court of Chancery, 
 9463. Only alteration in rents since 1837 re- 
 duction ; landlord reclaimed from deep bog^ 9464. 
 Let originally at £2 an acre, 9465. Landlord gave 
 timber, slates, and lime for tenants' houses, 9468. 
 Tenants pay interest on Board of Works' loans, 
 9269. Usage of second estate — five years' rent 
 9472. Former owner had fixed this limit in 1846-7,' 
 as he made great improvements, and tenant-rio-ht 
 was not then worth more than two or three years 
 rent, 9473. No payme)its underhand, for payments 
 made by landlord, and the farm generally divided 
 among adjoining tenants, 9476-7. Rent "is thirty- 
 two per cent, over Government valuation, 9481. 
 Value of tenant-right has risen since 1848 from 
 three to fifteen years' purchase per Cunningham 
 acre, 9482. Not one-third of Grocers' estate lately 
 sold bought by tejiants, 9486. Rise of rent on 
 change of tenancy by landlord purchasers of parts 
 of Grocers' estate, 9487. No limit to price of 
 tenant right on Grocers' estate, 9489. Parts of it 
 very much improved, 9491. Against restrictions 
 of prices, but landlord should have control over 
 management of estate, 9492-3. Difficulties in 
 case of estate improvements, 9493, Increases of 
 rent on Company's estate moderate, settled by 
 valuator, and at long intervals, 9498, Somerset 
 estate revalued in 1856-7, 9499. General rule to 
 revalue at end of a fixed period, generally twenty- 
 one years, but not on change of tenancy or fall of 
 lease, 9501. Understanding with predecessor of 
 witness that rent should not be altered for twenty- 
 one years or in case tenant built, thirty-one years 
 Improvements not valued, unless tenant repaid— as 
 
 <J 
 
xliv 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Scott, Major William Edward — continued. 
 
 in case of drains, 9504. New buildings exempted 
 unless built by landlord, 9505. 
 
 Lane, Benjamin H., Esq., Limavady, Co. Derry, Solici- 
 tor, Land Agent and Tenant Farmer. — Londo7i- 
 derrtj. 
 Mercers' Company ; extent, rental, and valuation 
 of estate and number of tenants. ISTearly 700 out 
 of 1,200 at under £10 a year rent, 9511. Rental 
 in 1831 under middleman £9,205. Reduced to 
 £9,000, until 1853, v/lien revalued and settled at 
 £10,118, from 1855; custom of vakuition, 9513. Two 
 valuators separately. Company striking an average 
 between tlie two valuations, 9515. Buildings not 
 valued for rent, 95 1 6. Period of revaluation, twenty- 
 one years. Fresh valuation in 1875, 9516. 
 , Amount of rents received, expenditure in improve- 
 ments and costs qf management, 9517. Suggested 
 amendment of law in case of disputes about rent. 
 Instance of difficulties under present law, 9518. 
 Tenant should simply be noticed in case of dispute 
 to show cause before County Court Judge why sum 
 demanded should not be the rent, 9520. Tenant to 
 hold at rent held reasonable or sell his tenant-right, 
 9524. Onlj' limit to custom is where small holding 
 is desired by adjoining tenant, there arbitrator is 
 appointed, 9527. Salters' Company — Rental, ex- 
 tent, and valuation, 9528. Got possession in 1853, 
 when lease of Sir Thomas Bateson expired. Rent 
 raised 10 per cent., with further rise in 1878 of 10 
 per cent., not insisted on, 9529. Tenant-right by 
 private sale, 9531. Price unlimited with preference 
 to tenants on estate, 9532-3. Expenditure on im- 
 provements, public and charitable institutions. 
 Skinners' Company — Rental, valuation, extent. 
 Tenant-right by private sale, price unlimited, up to 
 thirty years' purchase, 9534-5. Got possession in 
 1872 from lessee, Mr. Ogilby, 9536. Rent not 
 altered for forty years. Increase of 2s. Qd. in the 
 pound on agricultural rents, and 3s. on town rents. 
 Expenditure on improvements, public and charitable 
 appointments, and costs of management. No dispute 
 with tenants on change of rent, 9537. Fishmongers' 
 ■ Company — Rental, valuation, improvements, 9538. 
 Leases general. Leases since Land Act saving 
 tenant-right at end of lease, 9539. Rents fair, 
 9540. Rate of tenant-right twenty-five years' rent 
 on average, in some cases forty, 9541. Case of Mr. 
 Steele. Custom to give notice of intention to sell, 
 9544. Rule, where rent of tenant from year to year 
 has not been raised for twenty-one years, to revise 
 rent on change of tenancy, 9546. Object of notice 
 to warn purchaser, 9548. Case of Mr. S. Osborne, 
 9549. His rent had not been raised for a very long 
 period, 9551. Much land let for leases of a life — on 
 dropping of life in 1874-5, tenants offered thirty-one 
 years' leases, 9552. With covenant i-eserving 
 tenant-right, 9553. Unlimited in amount. £40,000 
 to make Derry-bridge toll free, 9554. No advan- 
 tage to tenants to purchase fee ; they could not buy 
 (except on Fishmongers', where a great many 
 could buy) without incumbering themselves very 
 heavily, 9557-8. Acted as solicitor for tenant pur- 
 chasers on Marquis of Waterford's estate in 1871, 
 and for other purcha.sers in and out of Court since, 
 9562. Requirements as to surveys in Landed 
 Estates Court are unnecessary. Sale should be sub- 
 ject to existing rights of way and easements, and in 
 case of sale of individual farms no inquiry as to ease- 
 ments of each separate holding, 9563. These in- 
 quiries as to easements cause delay and expense, 
 9564. Re-survey required, where conveyance of 
 separate holding, part of a lot, 9565. Tenant pur- 
 chasers who had money doing well. Some few 
 have improved their dwelling-houses, 9566. Many 
 pay more yearly to Government and money-lenders 
 than formerly in rent, 9567. A few have resold, 
 9568. _ Some are large, most small farms, 9569. 
 No objection to advancing more than two-thirds, if 
 there is sequrity, which depends on rate of purchase. 
 
 . 9572-3. Perpetuity tenants at Limavady on Manors 
 which belonged to the Right Hon. William and 
 Thomas Connolly (part of Vintners' Company 
 estate). Badly farmed, holdings small, occu- 
 piers poor, 9575. Great subdivision, 9576. Forty- 
 six tenants in 1833 on renewal of lease granted to 
 five lessees, 9577. No emigration then, 9579. 
 They did not underlet, 9585. Subdivision should 
 and may be guarded against, 9586. In normal con- 
 dition of things an unrestricted price is objection- 
 able, 9589. Tenants as anxious to go on the 
 restricted properties as on others, 9591. Landlord 
 should have a veto on incoming tenants, 9593. 
 18th section useful check on unreasonable tenant, 
 
 9594. Rents should only be raised periodically, 
 
 9595. Rents on Mercers' Company's estate are 
 reasonable, 9597. Tenants are very industrious 
 and thrifty, 9598. 
 
 TIanna, Mr. James Steele, Campsey, Carrowkeel, Co. 
 Derry, Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Tenant-right on Grocers' Company's estate, 9606. 
 Case of notice since Land Act by Mr. H. Eyle, 
 landlord of estate (formerly part of Goldsmith's 
 estate) to raise rent in case of sale from £57 to £64, 
 9615. Up to 1858 rent £37 14s. M., 9616. Seller 
 had purchased another farm and had to sell. Com- 
 promised by paying landlord £80 as price of old rent 
 being continued, 9617. Sold for £850, offered £200 
 more before notice served, 9618. Tenant-right pro- 
 perty, 9622. First sale for many years, 9623. Seller 
 had expended £500 on buildings, 9625. 
 
 Flanagan, Mr. John ; Taylor, Mr. John, Castlefinn, 
 Co. Donegal, Tenant Farmers. — Londonderry. 
 Members of Castlefinn Tenants' Defence Associa- 
 tion, 9630. Mr. Flanagan is tenant of the Rev. Robert 
 Delap, 9635. Excessive increase of rent in 1876 on 
 witness's farm, 9639. On tenant's improvements (all 
 made by tenant without assistance from landlord), 
 9642-3. At time of general assessment on the 
 valuation, 9645. Tenants noticed to quit on re- 
 fusal to pay increased rent (and decrees of ejectment 
 got) and sign agreement to pay whole county cess, 
 9648. Agreed to sign and pay increased rent sooner 
 than leave and claim compensation, 9650. Land 
 Act gave some help, but failed to give security to 
 tenant or to prevent landlord raising rent to any . 
 height he pleases, 9654. Should be fixity of tenure 
 at a fair rent, determined by a fair valuation, 9657. 
 Griffith's valuation, excluding tenants' buildings, 
 would be fair, 9658. Wages increased from time 
 of Griffith's valuation from 6c?. a day to Is. 6rf. and 
 2s. a day, 9661. General -wages from £18 to 
 £20 a year, and board in farmer's house, 9666. 
 With a cottage, labourer gets 8s. a week and 
 a rood of potatoes ready to dig — seed and 
 manure supplied by farmer, 9667-8. Wages 
 four times what they were in 18f6, 9669. And 
 twice what they were in 1856, 9-672. The farmers 
 build and keep in repair their labourers' houses, 
 9675. List of rent-raising in 1876 on Shanvally 
 estate of Rev. Robert Delap, showing name of 
 tearant, tenement valuation, and former and present 
 rent, 9675. Rents are exorbitant; tenants not 
 able to pay them, 9679. Tenants compelled to 
 sign a document, 9680. Not permitting assignment 
 or subletting without consent, 9681. A nd entitling 
 landlord to enter, and make roads, drains, and 
 water-courses, 9685. Declaring that document is 
 not to interfere with tenant's claim to such tenant- 
 right as his holding may be subject to, except so far 
 as such tenant-right is inconsistent with the estate 
 rules or agreements in the deed, 9688. No limit to 
 price of tenant-right, 9690. Sale by proposal, 
 9691. Landlord has veto on purchaser, 9692. 
 Grievances: (1) exorbitant rent; (2) rent charged 
 on land occupied by railways, rivers, and roads; 
 (3) paying entire county cess ; (4) asking tenants to 
 sign deeds depriving them of tenant-right ; (5) sale 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xlv 
 
 Flanagan, Jolin ; Taylor, Jolin — continued. 
 
 must be by proposals, 9C93. Return of rent-raising 
 on estate of Ebenezer Bustard, Esquire (9740), 
 before Land Act, 9694 ; 9742. On estate of 
 Joseph Johnston, Esquire, 9700-3, and estate of 
 Sir Frederick legate, 9694; 9713. Case of Mr. 
 Joseph Johnston resuming possession of portion of 
 tenant's farm, and selling it back t(i tenant on in- 
 creased, rent 9694 ; 9705-6. Office rules on Sir 
 Frederick Heygate's^estate ; tenants must ask leave 
 to sell by proposals ; rent increased on change of 
 ■occupancy by sale or death, 9694 ; 9731-4. Case 
 on Ebenezer Bustard's estate, on tenant's death ; 
 next-of-kin evicted without compensation ; landlord 
 raised rent, and sold tenant-right to a stranger for 
 Ms own profit, 9735-7 ; 9694. Cases on Sir 
 Frederick Heygate's estate of tenants paying rent 
 for bog on theii- holdings, yet landlord receives 
 bog rent ; tenants afraid to reclaim bog, as rent is 
 always raised on improvements, 9738-9. Tenants 
 made sign agreement to pay whole county cess, 9739. 
 Return of rent-raising on Lord Lifford's estate ; on 
 Lord Lifford's estate no improvements made by 
 landlord ; tenants drain, reclaim, build dwelling- 
 houses and ofhces, and make farm roads ; quantity 
 reclaimed by tenants trebled in sixty years ; twenty- 
 
 ■ eight of his tenants received assistance from relief 
 committee, 9725. Mr. William Young's estate; case 
 of exorbitant rent on tenant's own improvements, 
 9725. His neighbours as badly treated ; return of 
 rent-raising on Lady Thomas Knox's estate, 9729. 
 On Mr. William M'Grorty's estate, 9707-8. One 
 tenant's rent lowered, after litigation, for portion 
 taken by railway, 9709. Rents raised on Mr. 
 M'Grorty's estate, on account of Government im- 
 provements made on land, and paid for by tenants, ■ 
 9714. On this estate rise of rent on change of 
 tenancy, or death of tenant, 9718-22 ; 9694. 
 Tenants near Castlefinn higher rented by Mr. 
 Joseph Johnston than three miles out, though not 
 more convenient to market, 9695-7. Another 
 reason alleged for higher rent was existence of fac- 
 tory near Castlefinn, now discontinued, 9698. Rent 
 not raised by Mr. Joseph Johnston, 9703. Rents 
 raised by Mr. John Colquhoun, who sold it to Mr. 
 M'Grorty, 9707. Before Land Act, 9708. Tenants 
 got no compensation from railway for lands taken, 
 yet rent not reduced ; Rev. Mr. Delap undertook to 
 sell land for tenants; Mr. Robert Taylor got no 
 compensation, nor abatement of rent, 9713. Case 
 of tenants consenting to pay increased rent, on the 
 landlord, Mr. H. W. Smith, undertaking to spend 
 rise in improvements ; reclaimed eight acres ; got 
 nothing for land, 9742 ; 9745. Built a scutch mill 
 at £600 or £700, 9743. Spent altogether £1,000 
 on improvements, and no security, 9744. Got no- 
 thing from railway or landlord for land taken by 
 railway, 9747. Muchreclaimableland, 9748. Tenants 
 afraid of rise of rent if they improve, 9749. Waste 
 land is only in small plots, 9751. Tenant-right 
 often sells for more than value of fee-simple, 9755 ; 
 9757. Mr. Taylor's uncle bought from Church 
 Commissioners; purchase only completed, 9756. A 
 great many tenants could advance one-fourth of 
 purchase-money of their holdings, but more could 
 advance nothing, through bad years ; tenant-right 
 rose in value during American Civil War ; decreas- 
 ing in value since ; now little worth, 9757, No 
 trade and no public works, hence twice more given 
 for land than it is worth ; to have a place to live in, 
 9760. Would not limit the purchase money of 
 tenant-right ; to do so would rob the tenant of his 
 improvements ; in favour of fixity of tenure, at fan- 
 rents, 9761. 
 
 Brown, Rev. Nathaniel M'A., Hon. Sec. of Kennaught 
 
 Farmers' Association, Limavady, Co. Derry, 
 
 Presbyterian Minister. — Londonderry. 
 
 In barony of Kennaught, 9766. Before "Land 
 
 Act, Ulster tenant-right custom was being broken 
 
 down everywhere, 9767-9902. Butfor Land Act there 
 would not have been left a residue of tenant-right, 
 9768. It was formerly one universal custom, 9769, 
 to sell to highest and best bidder by public sale, 9770. 
 Now in some cases landlords limit price to three, and 
 in others five years' purchase, including improve- 
 ments, but since Land Act tenants are claiming, in 
 addition value of imjirovement and for manured 
 land, 9772-5. Mr. Conolly M'Causland allows 
 value of improvements since Land Act — not before 
 Act, 9777. His tenants make the improvements, 
 but he lends money to them to make the improve- 
 ments at 5 jDer cent, as an investment, with which 
 they are building slated houses in many cases, 9790 ; 
 9779-80. On his estate advance of rent on every 
 change of tenancy, 9783. His tenants are dissatis- 
 fied, 9787. They want free sale, 9788. Marquis 
 of Waterford's estate, lately revalued, and rents now 
 as high as on adjoining estates, 9790. Tenants 
 generally make improvements themselves, 9782. 
 Tenants, with exception of two estates, erect all 
 buildings out of their own pockets, 9784. Those 
 who have small means improve gradually, 9795. 
 By their own labour mainly, getting credit for ma- 
 terials, 9796. Landlords claim all improvements 
 as theirs, made by tenants with money advanced by 
 landlord, for which he gets full return, 9799-9800. 
 Purchases , by tenants of their holdings, 9803. 
 150 agricultural tenants purchased on Marquis of 
 Waterford's estate, and twenty-three others, 9805. 
 Borrowed from Board of Works, 9808. Difficulty 
 in borrowing from Board of Works, owing to appli- 
 cation not being made till after purchase, 9810. 
 Cured by Amending Act of 1872, 9812. Wit- 
 ness gave twenty -nine and half years' purchase 
 for his holding, 9816. Purchaser's expenses of con- 
 veyance were £30 on £1,014 piirchase-money, 9818. 
 Purchasers are paying a rent and a half, yet none 
 worse off than their neighbours and many better 
 ofi", 9825. Most had to borrow the balance beyond 
 Board of Works' advance, 9826. Some have paid 
 off part of the principal, 9828. The prohibition of 
 alienation forced tenants into hands of usurers, 
 9831. Would not prohibit subdivision, the security 
 of the Government being undiminished, 9834. No 
 danger now of subdivision and subletting to an inju- 
 rious extent, 9837, 9840-1, 9853-4. Farms gener- 
 ally about thirty acres, 9839. Purchasers building, 
 draining and improving generally, 9843. In favour 
 of recommendations of Mr. Shaw Lefevre's Com- 
 mittee, 9845. Would not compel landlords to sell, 
 9847, and London Companies more liberal to tenants 
 than private landlords, 9847. Some of their tenants 
 would be able to provide one-fourth of purchase- 
 money of their holdings, 9850. In mountain 
 districts they are poor. Should be no limit to size 
 of holdings purchased under Bright clauses, 9852. 
 Tenant-right restored to its natural state, fixity of 
 tenure, fair rents and free sale would satisfy tenants, 
 
 9855. Tenants should have voice in fixing rent, 
 
 9856. Rent should be settled by arbitration — two 
 arbitrators and an umpire, the County Court J udge 
 or Governinent valuator, 9858-9. Either landlord 
 or tenant should have right to call for revision of 
 Rent, 9863. Rents average 35s. per Irish acre for ' 
 fair land near a town, 9866-8. Tenant-right runs 
 from fifteen to forty years purchase, 9870. In some 
 cases no bidders now, 9871. From bad years and 
 prospect of bad prices, 9873. Prices of produce 
 nearly one-third less than four years ago, 9877. 
 Beef in district is stall-fed, 9883. Landlord is 
 entitled to periodical revision of rent, 9885. Perpe- 
 tuities at fixed rents would not be so satisfactory 
 as farmers being their own proprietors, but would 
 give security for improvements and put an end to 
 disputes between landlord and tenant, 9886-7. 
 Peasant proprietors should be of gradual introduc- 
 tion, 9888. Board of Works should be at liberty 
 to advance whole of the purchase-money, where the 
 tenant-right afforded an ample margin of security 
 
 ^2 
 
xlvi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Brown, Rev. Nathaniel, M'A. — continued. 
 
 and purchase was not too high, 9890. Agrees with 
 Dr. M'Knight's estimate of the Ulster custom, 
 9894. Cases of Gault and Stewart on Mr. M'Caus- 
 land s estate, where improving tenants got only the 
 three years' rent, 9905. And one who paid on 
 incoming in his father's time more than three years' 
 rent, 9911. Mr. M'Causland's rule is about thirty 
 years old, 9913. No restriction on price of tenant- 
 right on jNIr. M'Causland's and Major Scott's estates. 
 On Major Scott's limited to five years about thirty 
 yearsago, 99i!0, 9926. Raising of rent on change of 
 tenancy is common. Skinners' Company have sub- 
 stituted private sale for public sale, 9928. Case of 
 a " mike-believe" private sale, to fall in with the 
 office rule, 9929. Case of a tenant of grazing farm 
 deprived of compensation in court, on refusal to pay 
 rent, demanded by Skinners' Company, 9936. 'The 
 tenant right was worth £1,000, 9938. The excep- 
 tions in section 15 to tenant-right should be 
 repealed, 9941. Major Scott's estate — case twelve 
 years ago of two minors, sons of deceased tenant 
 compelled to take from agent five years' rent, 
 though their uncle was willing to manage fann for 
 them, 9943. Tenant had improved, but £100 de- 
 ducted to build a new house on alleged ground that 
 old house was out of repair, 9944. The old house 
 was as good as the neighbouring houses, 9952. 
 
 Douylass, Mr. Joseph Irwine, Derrybeg, Limavady, 
 Co. Derry, Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Case of Mr. Gault on Mr. M'Causland's estate 
 before Land Act, 9957, 9971. He got some com- 
 pensation for buildings (farm offices), 9958. The 
 tenant had drained, 9959. He bought for more 
 than three years' rent, 9964. Stewart's case — 
 tenant bought tenant-right, subsequently improved 
 by draining and clearing away stones. Allowed £4 
 an acre for manured land, 9965. Before Land Act, 
 9971. Whyte's case — three years' rent and some 
 allowance for manures. On mountain lands five 
 years' rjnt, 9972. In one case since Land Act 
 tenant got his incoming payments and value of 
 buildings erected subsequently, 9974. Mr. Church's 
 estate, 9979. Before Land Act, 9992. When lease 
 expires he sells the tenant-right putting mioney into 
 his own pocket and granting purchaser a new lease. 
 His sister-in-law's case, when he pocketed between 
 £500 and £600. Gave nothing to outgoing tenant, 
 9981-5. Case on Marquis of Waterford's estate of 
 rents raised on tenants' improvements and buying - 
 fee at thirty years' purchase of such rent, 9997. In 
 revising rents the valuator's return is not shown to 
 tenants, and very often a considerable percentage 
 added in office, 10013. Cases of this on Mr. M'Caus- 
 land's estate and Fishmongers' estate. On Sir 
 Frederick Heygate's restrictions as to price aban- 
 doned ; but bailifl' or agent announces at sale that 
 rent will be raised, 10015. 
 
 Dunne, Mr. Robert, Ballykelly, Co. Londonderry, 
 Tenant Fanner. — Londonderry. 
 Fishmongeis' Comjjany, 10018. General re- 
 valuation in 1872 on fall of leases, 10019. New 
 21 years lease offered with clause barring tenant- 
 right at rents higher than their own valuator's 
 (Nolan's) figures, 10020. On remonstrance this 
 clause was given u].), and a clause substituted giving 
 benefit of Ulster custom at end of lease, and 
 valuator's valuation adopted, 10023. Tenant-right 
 existed so far as memory went, 10024. In witness's 
 case, rent demanded was £30 more than Company's 
 valuator's valuation, 10025. Nolan's valuation, a 
 full rent, 10027. Case on Grocers' estate of, on 
 tenant's death, Ms executor desiring to sell, but was 
 compelled to sell on terms that at expiration of 
 lease, rent would be advanced £20, thereby he lost 
 £400 or £500, 10034-5. Usage on Grocers- 
 estate— free sale, but revaluation at end of lease, 
 10037. ' 
 
 Brennaji, Mr. James, Carse Hall, Limavady, Co. 
 Londondei-ry, 'Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Mr. Boyle's estate, 10044. In 1876 witness 
 and four other tenants purchased from landlord 
 privately. Board of Works refused the loan, unless 
 sale was made through Landed Estates Court, 10044- 
 51. Thiswas done atexpenseof£260on 1,400 acres ; 
 delay in completion till 1880, 10052-9. Should be 
 great facilities for loans and the Board should grant 
 advance on good title shown, and alienation should 
 be permitted, 10059. Witness got £2,800, himself 
 advancing £1,400, 10059-60. Limit of subdivision 
 should be 35 acres while Government loans are 
 unpaid, 10063-7. Generally farmer purchasers are 
 improving, 10068. In favour of 35-acre limit 
 to subdivision in all cases, 10070-2. Present re- 
 strictions on Bright clauses prevent more extensive 
 advantage being taken of them. Purchaser is too 
 tightly tied up, 10073. 
 
 Hamill, Rev. G. W., Limavady, Co. Derry, Presbyterian 
 Minister. — Londonderry. 
 Generally concurs in evidence of four preceding 
 witnesses, 10079. 
 
 Murphy, Edmund, Esq., Dunfanaghy, Co. Donegal, 
 Land Agent. — Londonderry. 
 Government Arbitrator, under Lands Clauses. 
 Act, Inspector of Land Improvements under Board 
 of Works, 10080. Experience of North and middle 
 counties, 10081 . 50,000 acres in Donegal and Down, 
 10080-83. Tenant-right prevails on all in one 
 form, 10084-5. Custom is — tenant has right to 
 sell, subject to approval of tenant by landlord, 
 adjoining tenant having first offer. No limit to 
 jjrice, 10086-7. Twenty-five years ago, a limit 
 of six and a half years purchase, but tenants 
 paid larger sum sid) rosa, and limitation abolished, 
 10087. Estates for which witness is agent — 
 Stewart's of Ards (in Donegal and Down) ; 
 Mr. Brook of Lough Esk in Donegal ; Colonel 
 Stewart of Rockhill, Letterkcnny ; the Honoratle 
 -Ernest Cochrane, 10088. If adjoining tenant 
 do not wish to bid, then jiublic auction, 10089- 
 92. When adjoining tenant dies, price is settled by 
 arbiti-ation, witness acting as umpire, 10090-1. 
 On small farms price of tenant-right is exorbitant. 
 Usual price ten to fiftern and twenty years' pur- 
 chase, 10093. Case of farm of six acres, rent £10, 
 sold at £320, 10093-4. Limit to price is sum of 
 money tenant has got ; he wants to get a place he 
 can live by, 10095. Tenant purchaser often borrows 
 at high interest — 10 per cent., 10095-6. Rule 
 restricting price of tenant-right would be beneficial. 
 On Mr. M'Causland's estate, where price is restricted 
 and landlord expends much on improvements, tenants 
 are very prosperous, 10097-10100. Tenants don't 
 like Mr. M'Causland's three years rule for good-will 
 10099. With improvements, practical result is 
 six or seven years purchase, 10099. Witness held 
 sworn inquiry as to Land Clauses Arbitration in 
 case of land taken by railway on Mr. M'Causland's 
 estate, 10099, 10101-5. Tenant in a tenant-right 
 district especially, and not landlord, is entitled to com- 
 pensationfor severance, 10108. Some leases inDone- 
 gal, very many inDown, 10109. At lease revaluation 
 (excludingtenants' improvements), 10110. Tenant- 
 right at end of lease acknowledged, 10110. Failure 
 of Act due to its not being accepted by landlord and 
 tenant. Suggestions — valuator seeing the land 
 should act as assessor in cases of dispute about rent 
 and compensation, 10111. Arbitration with umpire 
 appointed by public board would be possible, 10112,. 
 10122. Landlord by raising rent can destroy tenant- 
 right, 10114. As v/here change of landlord by sale, 
 10114-7. Sale of estate in Landed Estates Court' 
 should have conferred lease on tenants, 10117-8. 
 Fixity of tenure at fair rent would be a satisfactory 
 settlement, 10119. 2,000 tenants over whom 
 witness is agent, with practical fixity of tenure, 
 10120. Inspector of Land Com-t moving about, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xlvii 
 
 Murphij, Edmund — contiimed. 
 
 ■would give more uniformity of decision than under 
 present system, 10121. Want of uniformity in 
 Chairmen's decisions, 10121, 10125-6. Witness 
 as arbitrator decided on value of property worth 
 £400,000 in last six months, and only three appeals, 
 10121. No difficulty in fixing fair and equitable 
 rent, 10121. Arbitration would make rents more 
 secvire and landlord's improvements more secure, 
 10123. No compensation will satisfy the tenant, 
 the mountain tenant especially, 10127. No im- 
 provements in Waterford and Cork grazing farms, 
 since 1847, 10128. Where tenant has made im- 
 provements on grass farms or not, they shbuld be 
 protected against eviction, 10129—30. Never 
 knew a case of very extravagant rent, 10131. 
 Government valuation too low by 20 to 30 per cent. 
 in the mountain districts of Donegal. In Down, 
 valuation is close up to the rent, 10132. Not mncli 
 reclamation in Donegal since Griffith's valuation, 
 10133. Valuation lower in south and west than in 
 north, owing to lai-ge deduction for taxes and rates 
 in bad times, when valuation made, 10134. Griffith's 
 valuation is useful in directing attention to cause of 
 discrepancy between it and rent, 10135. During 
 last twenty-five years landlords make the improve- 
 ments, 10136. Few required in Down, 10137-8. 
 Mr. Stewart drained before Land Act, 10138-40. 
 Since, improvements done by the tenants, 10141. 
 Majority of improvements in Ireland are made by 
 tenants ; in the south majority made by landlords, 
 10142-3. Draining, fencing and roads, 10143-55. 
 Landlord gives slates for the houses, tenants build 
 the house, 10156-7. Since Land Act landlords 
 have ceased to assist tenants in improvements, 
 10157. Tenants who purchased their holdings are 
 doing well, some had to borrow at exorbitant interest, 
 10158-9. Some are borrowing from Board of 
 Works for improvements, 10160. These improve- 
 ments are well carried out, 10160-2. In favour of 
 extending facilities for pui'chase of fee by tenant, 
 10163-4. Rents as high in the north as in the south, 
 10166-7. Labourers on Mr. Stewart's estate have 
 9s. a week, a house, acre of land, grass of a cow and 
 turf, 10168-9. In Donegal labourers are under 
 farmers, their houses and families in miserable con- 
 dition, 10170-2. Sometimes farmers pay in kind, 
 101 72. In Donegal slightly better off tht!,n in south, 
 10172. Wages risen 20 percent. sincel852, and cost 
 of labour still more, 10173-6. Labourers not yet 
 discontented-, 10178-9. No superabundance of 
 labourers in north, 10182-3. In one estate in 
 south, labourers in a miserable condition, who rent 
 from farmers. In north no rent charged by farmers, 
 10184-7. Dissatisfaction in Waterford, T'ipperary, 
 Cork and Limerick arises from high rents and from 
 fear of rents being raised, also from fact that rents 
 are unequal, 10190-1. Generally a sort of tenant- 
 right there, limited more by the people themselves 
 than by landlord, and rather money to help the 
 tenant away than a sale, 10192-3. Thinks security 
 with long lease better for south and even for north, 
 than the tenant-right system, 10194. Knowledge 
 of south from making a survey of some estates, 
 10195. Onsomeestatesaprivilegeof selling, 10196. 
 
 Norris, Mr. John Reed, Coleraine, Cos. Derry and 
 Antrim : Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Tenant-farmer, and Secretary, Coleraine Tenants' 
 Association, 10197. Farms 120 acres. Land- 
 lord, the Rev. John Lyle, 10199-10200. With 
 whom tenant-right prevails, 10201. Formerly 
 held under Mr. Lawrence, who is trying to 
 do away with tenant-i-ight, 10202. Case of 
 witness's father, who held under Mr. Lawrence 
 by lease, for three lives, at £42 rent, and when last 
 life dropped, demand made for new rent of £125, 
 on refusal to pay this ejectment and land claim. 
 Chairman gave compensation under Ulster custom, 
 but was reversed on appeal by Chief Justice 
 
 Whiteside, though father paid £680 for tenant- 
 right of farm eight years before lease fell, 10203 
 -17. Brother who succeeded father was compelled 
 to sign admission that no fine was paid, nor tenant- 
 right existed, nor right to compensation under Ulster 
 custom or usage, 10217. Mr. Lawrence has other 
 tenants in counties Antrim and Down. Amount 
 of increase of rent in case of five tenants in Antrim, 
 at end of lease, on same occasion, 10219-24. Case 
 five years ago of tenant of Dr. Hamilton refused 
 leave to sell unexpired term of twenty-five years, 
 unless purchaser signed admission that tenant-right 
 did not exist at end of lease. Sale fell through, no 
 other purchaser could be got since, 10225-28. More 
 restrictions on and infringement of tenant-right 
 custom since Land Act than before, 10231-5, 10254. 
 Case of rent raised four times within thirty years 
 on tenants' improvements, and last time after tenant 
 had built a comfortable new dwelling-house, 10235- 
 42. Custom was acknowledged after lease ; but 
 not now, 10246 ; 10256-9. Tenants generally make 
 all improvements, in a few cases slates given, 10247. 
 Generally understood custom that tenant had right 
 to sell to a solvent tenant without restriction with 
 periodical revaluation, but in late times agents raise 
 rent as often and to what height they, please. Case 
 of a farm offered for sale, but could not be sold on 
 account of rent being too high, 10249-53, 10255. 
 Rent should be adjusted by arbitration — tenants' 
 improvements not to be taken into consideration, 
 10260-5. Improvements in North are generally 
 buildings, reclamation, making roads and fences, 
 10266. Tenants make ail improvements, 10'^66. 
 Value of improvements should go into the tenant- 
 right, 10267. Should be no eviction except 
 for non-payment of rent ; and, even then, tenant 
 should have right of sale, 10268-9. Rent should 
 be fixed for a period, and altered according to change 
 in average jjrices, 10270—1. Present tribunal not 
 satisfactoryfor deciding value of tenant-right, 10272. 
 Leases for twenty-one and thirty-one years, with 
 clause barring tenant-right, are since Land Act. 
 oftener offered, but not so generally taken as before 
 Land Act, 10274-80. More improvements wi,th 
 leases than without, 10281. Case of tenants pur- 
 chasing the fee before Land Act — since getting on' 
 well, cultivate better, 10283-92. On only one 
 estate is part of Grand Jury cess paid by landlord, 
 even in case of change of tenancy, 10293-6. Poor 
 i'ate is lOc^. and county cess Is. %d. in the pound, 
 10297-9. Tenants would prefer landlord paid half 
 county cess, though rent raised proportionally, 
 10301-2. 
 
 Warnock, Mr. Thomas, Coleraine ; County Derry, 
 Tenant Farmer.. — Londonderry. 
 Generally concurs with Mr. J. E. Norris, 10304. 
 Tenant-farmer of fifty statute acres under Rev. 
 Marcus M'Causland, 10308. Tenant-right exists 
 to fullest extent, 10311. Cases on Mr. Lawrence's 
 estate of rent raised on fall of lease, tenants not 
 being able to establish tenant-right at end of lease, 
 where rent raised on tenants' improvements — in 
 some cases two-thirds of farm reclaimed by tenant, 
 10312-20. Rent should be adjusted by local arbi- 
 trator with Government umpire, 10321-4. Rent 
 arbitrarily raised on tenant's improvements, 10324. 
 In these cases tenants must pay raised rent oi^ 
 lease, 10325. Rev. Mr. Bennett, landlord— case of 
 industrious tenant who had, by purchasing tenant- 
 right of three farms, consolidated into one, and 
 whose crops failed through wet season, refused 
 abatement, though rent raised eight years before 
 10325-35. Rev. Marcus M'Causland gave abate- 
 ment in 1879unsolicited, 2s. M. and3s. on gross rent 
 10336. Abatement not general, 10337. Opinion 
 of some landlords that twenty years' enjoyment is 
 sufficient to recoup tenant for any improvements, 
 and that as tenants had got their Land Act, the 
 landlords should stand on their strict rights, 10337, 
 
xlviii 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSIOK 1880. 
 
 Warnock, Tliomas — contmned. 
 
 Witness's laqdloid gave liis valuator instructions 
 not to ]3ut rent on tenant's improvements, 10338. 
 Witness made land not worth more tlian 2s. 6d. 
 
 ■ when he took it, worth now 15s. to £1 an acre. 
 Expended .£800 in twenty years on farm, J 600 on 
 scutch mills, 10338-9. Never offered lease, but 
 would not accept it, 10342. Has perfect confidence 
 in present and coming landlord, 10343. Case of 
 tenant purchaser under Bright clauses who has in 
 seven years reclaimed forty-eight acres of cut-away 
 bog, how growing luxuriant crops, thorough-drained, 
 and squared fields of whole farm, 10345. Case of 
 landlord who seven years ago set about reclaiming 
 cut-away bog, and stopped short, whereas practical 
 farmer with security would have reclaimed the 
 whole of it, 10345. Case of tenants under lease 
 reclaiming, building houses, squaring fields and 
 farm-yard, at cost of £1,000, and whose landlord 
 purchased fee at £600 two years before grant ot 
 lease. Present landlord. Captain Civeen, threatens 
 at expiration of lease to deny all tenant-right and 
 compensation, 10346-7. Under Chief Justice 
 Whiteside's decision in Norris v. Lawrence these 
 leaseholders would not get tenant-right compensa- 
 ■ tion, but they would get what Chairman thought 
 was value of unexhausted improvements, 10348-50. 
 This decision has stopped to a large extent per- 
 manent improvements, 10351. Purchaser under 
 Bright clauses who had reclaimed fresh land grew 
 best flax in district, 10354-9. Time of enjoying it 
 should not be regarded in compensating for improve- 
 ments, 10360. Cases of purchasers under Bright 
 clauses finding difficulty in conveying their pur- 
 chases till loan re})aid, 10362-3. Tenants not 
 anxious to purchase their holdings unless at 
 diminished yeai's' purchase, rents are now so high, 
 10366-7. Case of widow on tenant-idght estate of 
 'Sir Henry Bruce, wishing to sell, but kept hanging 
 •on for years, until she accepted what landlord was 
 willing to allow her, 10367. Case on Downhill 
 estate of Sir Hervey Bruce, where rent raised on 
 ,sale twenty -five per cent., and raised tenant-right 
 price twenty-five per cent., 10367. On Sir Hervey 
 Bruce's estate, purchased from Clothworkers' Com- 
 pany, tenant-right with restriction of price is estab- 
 lished ; on Downhill estate, limit is five years' rent 
 without allowance for improvements, 10368-72, 
 10380-1. Almost invariably rent is raised on 
 change of tenancy, 10373-4. General revaluation 
 on purchase from Clothworkers' Company, 10375. 
 Since Land Act he has opposed sale of tenant-right, 
 and contrary to custom of Clothworkers' estate, com- 
 pels tenant to sell to him and then sells tenant-right 
 himself at best price, 10378. Auctioneer states at 
 .sale that sale of tenant-right is not allowed, and 
 tenant does not like to purchase the tenant-right 
 with a lawsuit along with it, 10382-4. 
 
 2Iorrison, Mr. H. E. , Moneydig, Co. Derry, Parmer Pro- 
 prietor ; with Mo dill, Dr., Garvagh Tenants' 
 Association. — Londonderry. 
 Purchaser under Bright clauses, 10385-7. Satis- 
 fied with his purchase at twenty-nine years' rent, 
 high rate, but glad to do it rather than risk change 
 of landlord, 10387-94. Had purchased tenant- 
 right of part of it, 10395. Great delay and costs 
 in getting advances from Board of Works, in case 
 of sale of Marquis of Waterford's estate, in 1871, 
 10400-1. Tenant-purchasers are generally well 
 satisfied, and improving, but two are not getting on 
 well, who were in back-water befoi'e purchase, 
 10403-6, 10435. Tenants would be anxious to 
 purchase their holdings, but few able to satisfy the 
 Treasury requirements, 10407-8. Alienation 
 should be permitted, but borrowing on security of 
 land, either by tenant farmer, farmer proprietor or 
 landlord, should be illegal, 10409-13, 10421-25. 
 Except m case of loan from the Board, 10414. Too 
 much credit also in all ra}iks of business, but would 
 
 not extend same principle to business, 10415-6. 
 Facilities for purchase should be extended, 10436. 
 On Ironmongers' estates, trying for some time to limit 
 tenant-right to ten years' rent, before Land Act, 
 10439-42. Not usual to raise rent on change of 
 tenancy, 10443. But usual on fall of leases, 
 10444. Very few leases, 10444. Eents are fair and 
 revised every twenty-one years, 10445. This is usual 
 with London Companies, 10446. A London and a 
 local valuator employed by Mercers' Company tore- 
 value for rent ; but tenants dissatisfied because they 
 did not see the valuation, and did not get it, 10447-8. 
 Raising of rent since Land Act by purchasers of 
 Marquis of Waterford's estate, and by Mercers' 
 Company has injured tenant-right, 10449-50. 
 Case of Gihiwre v. Kennedy, where disputes as to 
 rise of rent, and Chairman referred it to sworn 
 valuator to settle a fair rent wliich would not 
 infringe on Ulster custom, 10452-4. Result a 
 rent too high, 10455-6. Difficulty raised by im- 
 position of bog-rents, 10458-60. Value of tenant- 
 right — Sale at sixteen years purchase, 10463. Case 
 in wliich judge on appeal gave over £21 an acre, 
 10464-5. Landlord had privately attempted to 
 enforce a limit of ten years' purchase, 10465, but 
 was defeated by this decision, 10465-8. Earm was 
 subsequently divided between two adjoining tenants, 
 who paid landlordcompensation awarded and his costs, 
 10469-70. Case of Connell v. Rankin, where land- 
 lord dissatisfied with Petty Sessions decision as to hog, 
 served notice to quit and ejected the tenant (success- 
 ful at Petty Sessions), and on land claim, Chairman 
 adjourned case till next Sessions, for sale, but no 
 one would bid, but son, whom Chairman did not 
 recognise as bidder, and Chairman finally awarded 
 compensation for tenant-right, 10472-7. Cases of 
 some capricious evictions, 10478. Puffers em- 
 ployed at sale of Marquis of Waterford's property 
 in Landed Estates Court in 1871, 10485-8. Costs 
 of sale — £14 where purchase-money £35, and £20 
 where purchase-money £70, 10488-90. ^Suggestions 
 to amend section 47, by lending to tenant to pur- 
 chase the whole amount of the purchase-money, at 
 higher rate of interest, but not including repayment 
 of principal, 10491-2. Section 47 does not apply 
 to sales by Landed Estates Court, 10493. Repre- 
 sentative of Garvagh Tenants' Defence Association, 
 10496-7. 
 
 Rankin, Mr. John, Curragh, Co. Derry ; Tenant 
 Earmer. — Londonderry. 
 Tenant farmer of 126 acres on the Richardson 
 estate, 10498-500. Member of Aghadoey Tenants' 
 Defence Association, 10501. Case of sale on estate 
 of William John Derby, Esquire, where after sale 
 rent raised £5, and purchase of tenant-right dimin- 
 ished £25, 10504. Purchaser expended over £100 
 and now wishes to sell ; no one will buy, fearing 
 further increase of rent, 10502-8. Could sell at 
 rent before last rise, 10517-8. Four successive 
 increases of rent on this farm since 1860, 10509, 
 10514-9. Cases of tenants on Edward Bennett's 
 estate having rent raised on sale of tenant-right, 
 10511-3. In some cases tenants continue to make 
 improvements, but not when near end of leases, 
 10520-3. Leases infrequent last fifty years, 
 10524-5. Tenants object to take the leases with 
 clauses inserted by landlords since 1870, 10526-8. 
 In favour of rents, in case of disputes, being settled 
 by arbitration, with umpire appointed by indepen- 
 dent Government Board, 10528-33. 
 
 Simpson, Mr. John, Aghadoey, Co. Derry; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Tenant farmer of sixty-five acres under Iron- 
 mongers Company, rule of twenty years originally 
 attempted to be enforced restricting price of tenant- 
 right to ten years purchase, 10534-5. This rule 
 puts improving and unimproving tenants in the 
 same position when leaving, 10536-7. In favour 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xlix 
 
 Simpson, John — continued. 
 
 of free sale and fair play between landlord and 
 tenant,] 0538. Revaluation of rent every twenty-one 
 
 • years, 10539. Case of Eev. Dr. Brown's farm — 
 incoming tenant approved of by office compelled to 
 pay amount offered by purchaser at auction, 10540. 
 
 CaJJioell, Mr. Grocer, "Whitehall, Eglinton, Co. Lon- 
 donderry ; Tenant Farmer. — Londmiderrij. 
 Tenant farmer of twenty acres under Grocers 
 Company (now Mr. Davidson), 10541-3. For 
 about four years after Land Act, indiistry of 
 tenants stimulated, but experience of working of 
 Act disappointed them, and there is nothing done 
 biit manuring and raising crops, 10r)43. Landlords 
 have same power of raising rent under Act as before 
 it. Where no lease. Grocers' Company put a 
 new rent on purchaser and introduce new rules, 
 10546-7. Landlord has same power to i-aise rent 
 and evict since Land Act a-s before, 10547-8. 
 Practice under Company before Act was better for 
 tenants than since Act, 10550. Chairman's Court 
 not satisfactory, 10551-2. Should be on question 
 of rent independent arbitration between landlord and 
 tenant, 10553. On his County Derry (formerly 
 Goldsmiths' estate), Baron Martiii improved and 
 added 5 per cent, on rent for im])rovements, 10554, 
 10556. Since Land Act case on this estate where on 
 sale for £600 rent was attempted to be raised £17 
 sale fell through, and farm sold at considerable loss 
 to the tenant, 10554-5. Tenants want and are 
 willing to pay rent, fair to landlord and tenant, and 
 excluding tenant's improvements, 10563-5. A 
 surveyor does not see the tenant's improvements. 
 " They do not see the tenant with his coat off," 
 10565. Knows hundreds of acres of land reclaimed 
 within last twenty years by tenants, 10567. 
 
 Goyle, Mr. Richard, Carnmoney, Eglinton, Co. London- 
 derry ; Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Tenant farmer under Marquis of Londonderry, 
 10569-70. Complains that while all improvements 
 are made by tenants, landlords can raise rent and 
 diminish value of tenant-right, 10572, 10599. 
 Witness's rent raised twelve years ago forty per 
 cent, on expiration of lease, 10573-80. Head agent 
 made the valuation, 10581. Bents on Marquis of 
 Londonderry's estates above fair value, and on 
 Major Scott's estate, though rents not raised for over 
 fifty years — since time of French wars, 10582-6. On 
 change of tenancy Major Scott raises rent, 10587. 
 Sale in Landed Estates Court of tenant's farm pre- 
 vented by notice of increase of £10 rent yearly, 
 10587-90. Tenants made all the improvements on 
 this estate, 10590. Case of tenant-right of farm at 
 £7 rent, sold at £135 — but tenant signed agreement 
 to agree to additional rent when landlord pleased, 
 10591-6. On Marquis of Londonderry's estate 
 tenant-right sells at twenty-five years purchase, 
 10597. No limit, 10598. Free sale except in one 
 instance permitted, 10599. Case of landlord and 
 tenant in 1874 agreeing to valuator and landlord 
 (Captain Young) demanding some shillings per acre 
 over this valuator's valuation, 10642-4. 
 
 Adams, Mr. Robert, Co. Londonderry ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Tenant farmer of sixty-two statute acres under 
 Marquis of Londonderry, 10603-4. On fall of 
 lease in 1873, rent raised on tenants' improvements 
 and too high, 10605-18. All improvements made 
 by tenant, 10620. Former agent told tenants the 
 improvements would be their own, 10620. Case of 
 tenant compelled to sell to neighbouring tenant and 
 losing £72, within past year, 10621-9. Since Landr 
 Actnew restrictions ontenant-rightestateintroduced, 
 10625. Rents too high under Marquis of London- 
 derry and Major Scott, 10630-2. And are raised 
 on tenants' improvements, case in point,19633-5. 
 
 Oninirm rro-n^iY'.anTr +l>o+ i^q-m+ci clT^ml^ l^p SPttlpd ^iO 
 
 that the tenant-right may not be eaten away, 
 10636-40. 
 
 Osborne, Mr. Walter. — Londonderry. 
 
 The value of the tenant-right in Derry and Done- 
 gal is equal to the fee-simple, 10641. 
 
 Cole, ]Mr. Patrick, son of Tenant Farmer, Co. London- 
 derry. — Londonderry. 
 Father, having purchased tenant-right, invested 
 £2,000 on faith of Ulster Custom on leasehold 
 property, and as land stands has no benefit of the 
 Ulster Custom, and on Major Scott's estate cannot 
 sell during nor after lease, 10646-56. On another 
 farm under Mr. Davidson (formerly Grocers' Estate), 
 witness's father bought tenant-right, and landlord, 
 proposing new valuation of part, refused to permit a 
 tenant's valuator to accompany landlord's valuator, 
 10658-9. Increase of rent four years ago on 
 witness's farm on Major Scott's estate, on tenants' 
 improvements, on fall of lease, 10662-4. All county 
 cess paid by tenant and no allowance for roads, 
 10665. Tenants do all improvements and want 
 security with a fair rent, 10666-8. Continuous 
 occupancy generally admitted in district, 10669. 
 On Mr. Davidson's estate, additional rent on change 
 of tenancy through death or sale ; instances, 
 10670-2. 
 
 M'Connell, Mr. John, INIoville, Co. Donegal ; son of 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Practice on Gulladuff estate tb compel duty 
 work — work of horse, and cart, and man for a day 
 for landlord, 10674-6. Nibbling away of tenant- 
 right by increases of rent, which destroy tenant- 
 right, and prevent improvements, 10676. Much 
 improvable waste land in Innishowen, 10676. Sir 
 Robert Montgomery charges tenants two shillings an 
 acre for moiintain grazing, they formei4y had free, 
 besides letting parts of the mountain into farms, 
 10676. Case of rent raised on tenant's reclamations; 
 from £2 10s. to £18 rent; another similar case, 
 10678-83. Case of rent raised on tenant's im- 
 provements by Mr. James Steel Nicholson, 10683-4. 
 Rents raised since Land Act by Sir Robei't Mont- 
 gomery on tenant's improvements, 10685. 
 
 Loughlin, Mr. Bernard, Kionigijlen, Cookstown, Co. 
 Tyrone ; Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Raising rents on Lady Castlestuart's estate from 
 £3 to £9 (Government valuation £3), 10686-8. 
 Another case of rent quadrupled, where tenant 
 made all improvements, 10688-98. About 100 
 ejectments executed, and tenants in as caretakers,, 
 10698. Rents cannot be paid, 10701-5. 
 
 Gather, George, Esq. (High Sheriff), Carrickue ; Co. 
 Londonderry. — Londonderry. 
 Information with regard to estates of the London 
 Companies; letter of Charles the First to Sir 
 Thomas Phillips, 10707. Extracts from letter, and 
 a Parliamentary return showing their income in 
 1727, 10708. Great increase in rental between 
 years 1635 and 1727. Minutes of rental in 1768, 
 10710-11. Tenement valuation, 10713. Further 
 minutes, 10714. Total rental of all the companies, 
 10715. Increase attributable to system of tenant- 
 right that was pursued, and general improvement 
 of the country, 10716. Owners co-operated with 
 tenants in many cases in making improvements 
 10717. 
 
 Gregg, Mrs. Susanna, Tenant Farmer, Culmore, near 
 Derry. — Londonderry. 
 Lease for twenty-one years, expired last year • 
 rent immediately raised, 10719. New valuation, 
 made, based on tenants' own improvements 10722 
 £415 laid out in improvements, which they Aow -pay 
 rent for, 10729. Tenant-right of less value now • 
 free sale allowed, 10736-8. Landlord does not par 
 ■county cess, 10738. " 
 
1 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 M'Intyre, Mr. James A., G-ortin, Co. Londonderry, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londp nderry. 
 "Farms largely in Derry and Tyrone, 1074L 
 Would have tenant-right at end of lease legalised, 
 10749, 10759, 10761. Case of rent raising unde)- 
 Irish Society, 10765-71. Casesof2Durchasers under 
 Church Act, improving, and doing well, although Yw- 
 ing before purchase under same conditions, 10774-5. 
 More cases of increases of rent by the Irish Society, 
 much money being spent and great improvements 
 made by tenants, without any assistance from the 
 landlords, 10778-9, 10780-94. Case of rent being 
 raised from £11 to £38 94'. in twenty-one years, 
 tenant having tb pay county cess besides, 10795-6. 
 Another case of rent raising by Irish Society, 10802- 
 0. Eent always raised on lease falling in, case in 
 point, 10811-13. The practice of raising rent the 
 great grievance, 10815-10. Suggests a G-overn- 
 uient umpire, 10817. In cases of difference of 
 opinion as to rent, there should not be a notice to 
 quit issued, 10818-19. Does not wish to be at 
 variance with landlord ; disapproves of landlords 
 being forced to sell, 10825-26. Management gene- 
 rally of the Abercorn estate, 10829-44. If the 
 practice on the Luke of Abercorn's estate was 
 adopted throughout the country, people more satis- 
 lied, 10845. In land cases in court, tenant must 
 prove tenant-right exists, 10846. Office rules abo- 
 lished, 10847. Tenants not much interested in 
 peasant proprietary, only want security, fair rent, 
 and liberty to sell, 10852-4. 
 
 Gamble, Mr. William, Bridge Hill, Castlederg, Co. 
 Tyrone, Tenant Fanner. — Londonderry. 
 ■ Holds under lease for lives ; has made very great 
 improvements, but is now afraid, from questions 
 raised about tenant-right at end of lease, that his 
 property is insecure, 10862. Afraid of losing his 
 tenant-right and of a rise of rent at fall of lease, 
 10866-67. Cases of increase of rent and loss of 
 tenant-right at end of lease, 10873. Rent rais- 
 ing in 1866, by Duke of Abercorn, on falling in of 
 leases, 10873-77. Rent raising will totally destroy 
 tenant-right, 10886. Rent should be settled by ar- 
 bitration by a court under the control of Govern- 
 ment, 10888. Case of rent ra,ising which came be- 
 fore County Court Judge ; two valuations put 
 in by tenant and two by landlord; Judge split 
 the difference between them ; landlord would not 
 agree to this ; tenant eventually joaid more 
 than judge settled, but less than landlord wished, 
 10888-90. Cases of sales out of court, 10891-3. 
 Suggests, if a property is in the juarket. Govern- 
 ment should advance three-fourths of the purchase- 
 money, and appoint responsible person to deal with 
 landlord on behalf of the tenant; twenty-five years' 
 ]iurchase fair ; would not force landlords to sell, 
 10895-6. Would not include buildings made by 
 tenant in valuation for rent, 10897-8. More cases 
 of rent-raising ; part of holding taken away, rent 
 at same time being raised, 10902-25. Knows of 
 very few improvements made by landlords, 10907. 
 
 (lonnison, Mr. Walter, Donamanagh, Co. Tyrone, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Chairman of the county Tyrone, Tenants' Pro- 
 tection, and Land Law Reform, i^ ssociation, gave 
 evidence on behalf of the association, 10914-5. 
 Re.solutions of association, 10915. Cases of purchase 
 under Church Act, and Bright Clauses of Land Act, 
 10917-18. Sales under Church Act much more 
 satisfactory to tenants than those under Board of 
 Works, 10920-21. Such purchasers have with one 
 or two exceptions done well. Costs of transfer of 
 I'roperty under Land Act too high, 10927, 10928. 
 Case of purchasing tithes from Commissioners at 
 twenty-one year's purchase, and selling a month 
 afterwards to tenant at twenty-seven years' purchase, 
 10931. Tenants made i-esponsible for Carrying out of 
 their purchases by landlord and his solicitor; had no 
 solicitor of their own, and had to pay all the costs, 
 
 10932-37. Suggests a registry of title in each 
 district for sales of land, 10939-40. Sales damped 
 from fact that tenant-right can be sold by creditors, 
 on execution from superior courts, 10945. Gi-eat. 
 grievance to small farmers if not allowed to pur- 
 chase, as well as larger ones ; as the property 
 might be bought over them, and rent raised, 
 10950-2. In cases of disputes, landlord to have 
 arbitrator, tenant another ; the county court, or 
 some other authority to decide finally, 10956. 
 
 Donnell, Mr. John, Donamanagh, Strabane, Co. 
 Tyrone, Farmer Proprietor. — Londonderry. 
 Holds by lease foi' lives renewable for ever, 10959. 
 Case of tenant wishing to sell, was at once noticed 
 that his rent would be raised ; purchaser would 
 not complete purchase on hearing this ; case came 
 into court ; chairman split the difference ; matter 
 settled on these terms, 10965-69. Did not know 
 of increasing rent on a sale of tenant-right^ till after 
 Land Act, 10981-2. Relations between landlord 
 and tenant fairly good, 10988. Land Act requires 
 some amendment to define more clearly the position 
 and right of the tenant, 10991. Case of refusing 
 to allow tenant-right, 10994-5. Notes as to the 
 condition of farms, 10,000 acres in all, held in j)er- 
 petuity, 11001, 11004, 11007, 11011, 11015, 1 1017, 
 1 1020. Rate of purchase is generally fifty yeaj-s on 
 valuation, subj ect to the chief rent, 11002-3. Tenan ts 
 in worse circumstances where system of rundale 
 exists, 11006. Instance where tenants in the 
 year 1790 were offered leases for ever, with 
 small fine, mostly refused, 11007. Tenants do 
 not erect good buildings on terminable leases, 
 11011. Glencoppogah, 1,080 acres; farms well 
 cultivated, good houses and offices, no rundale, 
 no subdividing for last thirty years, 11011. Low- 
 town farms, seventeen to fifty acres, no subdivision 
 since 1850, nearly all prosperous, have reclaimed a 
 good deal of waste land, 11015, 11017. The 
 system of rundale very prejudicial to improvements, 
 11020. Aghalane, 352 acres; farms well culti- 
 vated, good houses, no subdivision for thirty years, 
 11020. Several other instances in point, in all 
 about 20,000 acres, 11021. Half of the estates in 
 hands of perpetuity owners, the other in those of 
 middlemen ; condition of land in the hands of per- 
 petuity owners, by far the best, 1102-4. The 
 existence of rundale the only drawback, 11025. 
 
 Bosshoroxigh, Mr. John, Ballinacross, Donamanagh, 
 Co. Tyrone, Proprietor, and Tenant Farmer.— 
 Londonderry. 
 An estate without tenant-right the exception, 
 11034. Rent does not seem to affect tenant-right 
 much, 11037. Sometimes alter rent on change of 
 tenant, 11039. Landlord borrowed from Board of 
 Worksfor improvements, and charged interfest on the 
 rents, 11045-6. Tenants allowed to sell if they 
 have made improvements themselves, 11048. In- 
 coming tenant pays for improvements, 11050. 
 Case of tenant actually in possession paying to 
 acquire the tenant-right, 11058-9. 
 
 Loughrey, the Rev. Edward, Altanure, Park, Co. 
 Londonderry, C.C. — Londonderry. 
 Attended with others on behalf of Claudy 
 Tenants' Association. On some estates there is 
 unlimited free sale, fair rents, and fixity of tenure, 
 11065. On others so many restrictions, it is not 
 tenant-right at all, 11070. Form eily on estate of 
 Skinners Company, free sale existed ; now they are 
 trying to do away with it, as are other landlords, 
 11072-4. Limit to tenant-right affects tenant's 
 interest m improvements, 11 080-1 1101. Case of 
 restricted sale and loss of improvements, 11086-89. 
 Case of rent raised to double without reasonable 
 cause, 11096-8. Tenants make all the improve- 
 ments, 11105. Tenant-right varies from twenty to 
 fifty years' purchase in the district, 1 1 106. Case of 
 disputed sale, judgment against landlord in court, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Lomjhrey, The Rev. Edward —continued. 
 
 11105-11108. Clause in lease of Fishmongers' 
 Company injurious to tenants, successfully resisted, 
 11110. Valuator is sent by landlord, whom tenant 
 does not even see, nor the items of valuation given, 
 his rent is raised, and he is simply told, " |.iay or 
 go." No focMS stanc^i for tenant, 11117-18, 11123. 
 Tenants' own improvements included in valuation, 
 11128. Purchasers under Church Act who had 
 not to borrow in a flourishing condition, 11132. 
 Not anxious for peasant proprietary if they got the 
 three F's, 111 33-4. Woiild not force landlord to sell. 
 1 1 1 35-6. Charges for turbary too high, 1 1 1 39-40. 
 bight of turbary restricted, 11142-3. A period 
 not unreasonable for le valuing rents to be fixed on, 
 and a tribunal should be established where tenants 
 would be represented, 11147-8, 11159. In case of 
 dispute between landlord and tenant, the party in 
 the wrong to pay all costs, 11149-50. No eviction 
 under three years' arrear, landlord can then sell, 
 retaining arrear and costs, biit should hand over 
 balance to tenant, 11154-5. Landlord should 
 recover rent by ordinary process, 11155. Means of 
 estimating a fair rent, 11158-9. Where two 
 valuators could not agree, umpire to be appointed 
 bv County Court Judge, 11160-1. A tenant maj- 
 be evicted if for the public good, 11168. Tenant 
 proprietors to be encouraged ; would limit sub- 
 division, 11168-73, 11178. Instance of tenant 
 letting farm to another and going to England to 
 labour, conditions of, 11179-81. In favoiu- of alter- 
 ing law of primogeniture, 11 185. 
 
 The Earl ofLeitrim, Manor Vaughan, Mil ford, Letter- 
 kenny, Co. Donegal, Landowner. — London- 
 derry. 
 Landowner in the counties Donegal and Leitrim, 
 11186. Ulster custom on Donegal property not in 
 Leitrim, 11188. In case ofa sale, tenants have the 
 preference, if they can give a fair price, 11191-4. 
 Outgoing tenant subject to a rise of rent, before the 
 sale, if prices rise, 11196-8. Instances of great 
 distress from long leases and subdivision, 11201-8, 
 11214. System continued since Land Act, 11209. 
 Industries wanted, 11211-12. Case of improve- 
 ment by landlord, resisted by one tenant, while re- 
 mainder were willing, 11216-20. Difficulty of. 
 dealing with subtenants when lease drops, 11222-4. 
 Unwilling to be drafted, would sooner emigrate, 
 11228-31. Predecessors in allowing subdivision 
 have committed themselves, causing difficulty under 
 Land Act, 11233-11236. Where no subdivision, 
 allow tenant-right at end of lease, if turned out re- 
 compense them, 11245-8. Leitiim tenants 
 better off, farms larger, 11253-4. Desire tenant- 
 right, 11257. If evicted for non-pa5TiLent, give 
 kind of compensation, 11258. In one case per- 
 mission given to sell, 11261-3. Landlord makes 
 improvements, 11266. No desire for leases, 
 11269-70. Instances of sale of good- will, during 
 bad times, 11276-8. Is in favour of raising rent on 
 change of tenancy, as the most suitable period, 
 reasons for, 11281-2. Not in favour of a Board of 
 Arbitration, 11284-7. Suggests practical valuators, 
 11289. Case where rent might be fairly increased, 
 11291. Want of agreements in writing mischievous, 
 11295. Statement of Mrs. Martha M'Connell 
 replied to, 11296-11306- Case with regard to 
 letting of land, 11307. Three or four years due on 
 most holdings^ 11311. Tenant-right leads to con- 
 solidation of farms, 1 1 31 6, 1 1 321-1 . Tenant-right 
 satisfactory to both parties, 11325. Borrowed from 
 Board of Works, tenants pay five per cent for 
 principal and interest; get good- will for it afterwards, 
 1 1 326-8. Labouring class — mostly cottier tenants, 
 11332-3. Sheriffs costs should not be payable by 
 tenants; case in point, 11334-5. 
 
 Simalair, James, Esq., Dundarg, Coleraine, Landowner 
 and Agent. — Londonderry. 
 Agent over properties in Ajitrim, Tyrone, Down, 
 Derry, and Donegal, 11337, 11355. Eree sale on 
 
 all, 11340. Right of choice reserved, 11342. 
 Neighbours have preference, 11343-4. Rent raised 
 only on dropping of old lease, 1 1 3.i 1-2. Not many 
 leases, 113.54-6. Rents about .5 per cent, over 
 valuation, 11361. Buildings erected by tenants, 
 11363. Landlord improved largely before Land 
 Act, not so much since, 11364-6. Where new 
 valuation tenant allowed half county cess, 11369. 
 Roads never measured in farm, 11370-3. Dis- 
 approves of sale by auction, 11375-6. Reclamation 
 as a rule done by tenants, 1 1 385-6. Tenants borrow 
 largely and hamper themselves, 11389-90. No 
 experience of rent raising affecting tenant-right ; 
 case in point, 11391-4. Buildings not valued in 
 oixlinary agricultui'al holdings, 11399. Great im- 
 provements by landlord on Somerset property, 
 11402. 
 
 Sinclair, William, Esq., Hollyhill, Cos. Tyrone and 
 Donegal, Landowner. — Londonderry. 
 Landowner in Donegal and Tyrone, 1 1 408. Under 
 Ulster Custom, 11409. Instances of high prices of 
 tenant-right, 11412-18. Tenant-right lessened by 
 American competition, 11419. A strong advocate 
 for tenant-right, and of extending it to Ireland, 
 11420-1. No belief in increases of rent eating 
 away tenant-right, 11422. Case in point, 11424. 
 Beneficial leases granted for purposes of reclamation, 
 11425-6. Reclamation repays tenant in six or 
 seven years ; would give reasonable time after that, 
 11430-1. No land for Government to reclaim ; all 
 occupied by tenants ; if evicted for purpose would 
 feel injured; case showing this, 11432-4. Objection 
 to leases, 11434. State of proprietors under Church 
 Commissioners in Donegal, 11436-11593. Mr. 
 Tuke's and Mr. Lefevre's accounts incorrect, 11437, 
 11441. Speaks from personal knowledge, 11445. 
 Instalments not paid since 1876, 11450-9. Case of 
 purchase under Board of Works, 11462. Better off 
 with tenant-right than as proprietors. Instances 
 of borrowing to buy tenant-right, 11469. Has im- 
 proved under Board of Works, and privately before 
 Land Act, 11475. Has not borrowed since, 11476. 
 Land Act has not affected relation of landlord and 
 tenant, 11480. State of labourers, wages good, 
 11482-11593. Have buildings rent free as part of 
 wages, 1 1483-8. Case of a creditor suing tenant in 
 superior courts, 11489. Up to a certain amount 
 should be confined to County Court Judges, 11490- 
 93. In favour of Bill, limiting costs, 11495. 
 
 Donaldson, Mr. Samuel, Welshtown, Co. Donegal, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Londonderry. 
 Farms 100 acres, 11498. Under tenant-right, 
 11496. Has lease of portion, 11500. Secure of 
 tenant-right at end of lease, 1 1507. Feeling between 
 landlord and tenant satisfactory, 11512. Tenant- 
 right sells at twenty-five or thirty years purchase, 
 11516-17. Suggest Government valuator in each 
 county, 11520. Against rent raising at sale, but 
 at fixed periods, 11521-3. Revaluation of land, 
 1 1524. Extensionof tenant-rightadvisable, 11526-9. 
 Landlord has a certain interest in reclaimed land, 
 11534-6. Tenant-right at end of lease should be 
 sanctioned by law, 11542. Fixity of tenure at fair 
 rents, better than peasant proprietorship, 11544. 
 
 Olphert, Wybrants, Esq., Falcarragh, Co. Donegal; 
 Landowner. — Derry. 
 Owner of 20,000 acres, 11545-46. Unlimited 
 tenant-right exists, the price varying from thirty to 
 seventy years' purchase, 11547-51, ; 11585. 
 Holdings are small, from J£2 to £8 rent ; turbary 
 and mountain grazing being attached to most 
 farms, 11552-56. Small farmers are not badly 
 off; many did not pay their rents last year. 
 Abatements were not given last year, and would 
 not have been of any use, 11557-60. Sales of 
 tenant-right are common; preference is given to 
 the adjoining tenant in order to promote consolida- 
 tion ; there is a tendency to subdivision, and land- 
 
 h 
 
lii 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Olphert, Wybrants — continued. 
 
 lord influence is required to check it, 22561-67. 
 The small holders fish, and work in Scotland at 
 harvesting, 11568. Knows of glebe lands sold to 
 tenants ; objects to a peasant proprietary, super- 
 vision necessary to prevent subdivision and family 
 quarrels, 11569-75. Has 500 small tenants, many 
 are in arrear, and were in receipt of relief last year, 
 11576-81. The district is poor; farmers would be 
 worse off if they had no rent to pay, it makes them 
 more industrious to have rent to pay, 11582-84. 
 Has spent money on improvements ; the tenants 
 have reclaimed, improved, and made all buildings ; 
 assistance given before Land Act, now withheld, 
 11586-88. Without landlords small farmers could 
 not exist ; is in favour of emigration, 11588-91. 
 
 Brooke, Arthur, Esq., Killybegs, Co. Donegal ; Land 
 Agent. — Derry. 
 Is land agent to Messrs. Musgrave and Murray 
 Stewart, 11594. Murray Stewart estate comprises 
 50,000 acres, with 1,320 tenants, 11595-6. The 
 average price of tenant-right during past fourteen 
 years has been seventeen and a quarter years' pur- 
 chase, from five to sixty-eight years' purchase, 11597. 
 Since 1872 rents have been increasd in some cases on 
 sale of farms, but without afiecting the average price 
 obtained — sale by auction is not permitted ; when 
 adjoining tenants buy no increase in rent is made, 
 11598-9. From £30,000 to £40,000 have been laid 
 out on roads, schools, buildings, and other improve- 
 ments, 11600; the increase in rental since 1847 
 has been £1,389, 11600; small increases of rent 
 create a feeling of insecurity, 11603. Population 
 is very thick along the shore, and £5,000 were 
 distributed in relief — the coast fisheries attracted 
 the population, but these have become unremunera- 
 tive — even if paying no rent the people could not 
 live in comfort ; about half the rents were paid last 
 year ; the landlords supplied potatoes at cost price 
 last year, but gave no abatement of rent, 11604-9. 
 The only remedies are employment and emigration 
 of families ; the able-bodied emigrate in numbers 
 and send money home ; cultivation is bad because 
 of the scarcity of efficient labour ; rent is frequently 
 paid, and farms bought by means of the remittances 
 from America, 11610. There is no waste land avail- 
 able for reclamation, as it is all occupied for graz- 
 ing, 11612. Mr. Musgrave borrowed £5,000 from 
 Board of Works at low rate, and is laying this out 
 on roads, and improving land in his own occupation, 
 11613-18. The credit system is ruination to the 
 farmers, 11618-19. 
 
 Lepper, Robert, Esq., Eoyleview, Co. Donegal; Land 
 Agent. — Derry. 
 Is land agent to several proprietors whose estates 
 comprise 37,000 acres in Inishowen, 11621-25. 
 Unlimited tenant-right prevails on all estates, ex- 
 cept that of Lord Donegall, who instead gives leases 
 with liberty to sell ; the tenants are satisfied with 
 tenant-right as it exists, 11621-30. Suggests a 
 public valuator in cases of disagreement as to rent, 
 11631-32. Rents have scarcely been changed since 
 1847, 11633-37. Tenant-right sells from six to 
 thirty-five years' purchase ; has been higher since 
 1870, 11638-39. Rents have been badly paid dur- 
 ing past two years ; ejectments are brought to com- 
 pel tenartts to sell ; those who sold went to America 
 or became labourers ; crops are good this year ; 
 the tenants fish a good deal, 11640-50. Landlords 
 have not laid out much on imjirovements, nor have 
 the tenants recently ; houses are usually thatched, 
 11651-5.3. 
 
 Craig, Mr. William, Broadlea, Co. Donegal; Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Derry. 
 
 Holds forty-four acres at £40 3s., on Abercorn 
 
 estate ; rent has not been raised for twenty years ; is 
 
 satisfied with the tenant-right and rules of this estate, 
 
 11654-62. There are no fixed periods for raising 
 
 rent : leases are unusual ; possibility of revaluation 
 deters from improvement, 11663-68. Has built, 
 fenced, drained, and reclaimed ; cannot state amount 
 of outlay, 11669-72. There are few small farms, 
 they are from thirty to seventy acres, 11673-74. 
 
 M^Kinley, Mr. Hugh, Ballintra, Co. Donegal ; Tenant 
 Parmer. — Berry. 
 Holds forty-nine acres at £30 16s. Id. from 
 Colonel Knox ; has received notice of increase of 
 rent — the tenants objected to increased rent in 
 1877, and since then at all sales of land the bailiff 
 has given notice that purchasers would have to pay 
 increased rent, 11675-87. Attributes proposed in- 
 crease to improvements made by self; complains of 
 excessive rents ; rent might be fixed by arbitration ; 
 gives receipts and expenditure on farm, showing a 
 loss; his farm is considered cheap, 11691-11708. 
 This year will be as bad as last ; prices are low ; 
 potatoes have failed ; could not live except by en- 
 gaging in other business than farming, 11709-11717, 
 11733-37. Farms average from fifteen to twenty 
 acres, 11721. Complains of harsh collection of rent 
 and management, 11723-25, 11744-45. Tenant- 
 right varies from five to thirty years' purchase ; 
 gives explanation of prices, and rules as to sale of 
 tenants' interests, 11726-32. Thinks eviction for 
 one year's rent should not be permitted; case of hard- 
 ship, 11738-41. Houses in district usually thatched, 
 1 1742. Further explanation as to excessive rents ; 
 low profits from farming, 11746-11754. Complains 
 of rent increased because of tenant's improvements, 
 11758-60. Rents should be valued, excluding 
 tenant's outlay, 11761-62. Security needed ; con-' 
 tinned outlay required on some land, 11763-65. 
 
 Haslett, Samuel T., Esq., m.d., Flowerhill, Co. Donegal. 
 — Derry. 
 Holds land in perpetuity, 11768. Great destitu- 
 tion, and even starvation, during past two years, 
 among farmers and labourers ; cause, failure of 
 crops and- foreign competition, 11771-75, 11789, 
 11804. Describes cultivation, food, and condition 
 offarmers in district, 11776-77. Rents too high 
 on some estates, 11779. Larger holders get on 
 best ; a few have corn and flax mills, and there is 
 fishing on the coast, 11780-86. Describes condi- 
 tion of people ten and twenty years ago, and compares 
 prices with those at jiresent, 11787-95. Diminution 
 of stock recently, 11796. Size of farms, thirty, forty, 
 fifty acres, 11798, 11807. Absence of open mar- 
 kets, 11800-1. Some rents have been raised; 
 condition of tenant varies with the estate, rents, 
 management, 11803-6. No over population, want 
 of security prevents proper cultivation ; illustration 
 of this owing to demand for increased rents, 11812, 
 11820. Knows purchasers of Church lands ; they are 
 contented and feel secure ; their farms were let at 
 average rate ; their payment of interest is slightly 
 above the rents, 11821-30. Conolly estate fairly 
 rented, 11831-32. Opinion as to rents on other 
 estates, 11833-36. Describes condition of labour- 
 ers and small farmers ; want of employment, low 
 wages ; many go to England, Scotland, and America 
 for work ; they would remain if there was work, 
 the young emigrate, 11837-48. Railways in pro- 
 gress are giving much employment at present, 
 11849-53. Discontent is increasing, and is chiefly 
 due to arbitrary raising of rent ; reclamation is 
 checked ; valuation by officials suggested as a re- 
 medy, 11854-57. Case of harsh treatment of 
 tenants, 11857-64. 
 
 Henry, Mr. Daniel, Drumsamney, Desertmartin, Co. 
 Derry; Farmer. — Derry. 
 Holds eighteen acres, purchased from Church 
 Commissioners; before purchase each successive 
 rector raised the rents on glebe ; he and others on 
 this glebe regret having purchased, 11865-73. 
 Complains of high interest and high prices charged, 
 owing to past increases of rent ; no reduction made 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 liii 
 
 Henry, Daniel- -continued. 
 
 by Church Commissioners ; excessive legal expenses, 
 11875-94. Has paid interest reg^ilarly since pur- 
 chase in 1871 ; but has not paid off any part of loan. 
 All on glebe regret purchase, thinking now the 
 prices were too high, 11895-11905. Case of other 
 lands adjoining purchased, 11907-11910. 
 
 Convery, Francis, Drumsamney, Desertmavtin, Co. 
 Deny ; Farmer. — Derry. 
 Concurs in evidence of Daniel Henry, 11910. 
 
 Traynor, John, Drumsamney, Desertmartin, Co. Derry 
 Farmer. — Derry. 
 Concurs in evidence of Daniel Henry, 11910. 
 
 Ashe, Thomas Spottiswood, Esq., Bellaghy, Castledaw- 
 son ; Land Agent. — Derry. 
 Manages Bellaghy estate, foi-merly belonging to 
 the Vintner's Company. Describes subdivision re- 
 sulting from leases for ever, poverty of occupiers, 
 and small holdings on this estate, 11911-11967, 
 12041-12057. Manages other estates, comprising 
 20,000 acres, 11968. Few leases given; tenant- 
 right admitted on expiration of lease, 11969-72. 
 Has bought up tenant-right to extinguish it, 
 11974, 12026, 12034. Recommends limit to be 
 placed on amount paid for tenant-right, 11975-77. 
 Griffith's valuation is unreliable, 11978—79. Rents 
 are revised every twenty years ; tenants' improve- 
 ments not intentionally included in valuation, 
 11980-86,12035-12040. Landlords contribute to- 
 wards estate improvement, but not so much since 
 Act of 1870, 11987-89. Thinks the fixing of a fair 
 rent would be desirable, but makes no suggestion 
 as to method, 11990-97. Explains as to wasteland, 
 11998-99. County cess usually paid by tenant, 
 12001-03. Labourers are well off, and have plenty 
 of em^ployment, 12004-06. Diversity of county 
 court judges decisions make a new land court desir- 
 able, 12007-10. Objects to court settling rent 
 12011-17. Explains practice as to sale of farms, 
 and selection of new tenant, 12018—25. 
 
 Loughrey, John, Esq., Clonmanny House, Co. Derry; 
 Landowner. — Derry. 
 Owner of 4,000 acres, 12058-59. Tenant-right 
 subject to landlord's veto, 12060-62. Case of 
 veto exercised, 12063-64. Suggests valuation by 
 a Government official between landlord and tenant, 
 objects to arbitration, 12065-70, 12105-8. Case 
 illustrating difficulty of getting tenants to agree to 
 new rents, and explanation of land claims resulting, 
 12071-95,- 12097-12104, 12119-24. Present 
 Government valuation worthless, 12096. Nine- 
 teen of his tenants are imder notice to quit for the 
 purpose of settling new rents, 12110-15. In case of 
 land let low for the object of being reclaimed it is 
 difficult to increase rent afterwards, 12116-18. 
 Prices obtained by tenants for their farms, 1211 8-1 9. 
 
 Gamming, Mr. James, Londonderry, Co. Antrim ; 
 
 Farmer. — Derry. 
 
 Was evicted from a holding near Ballymoney, 
 
 Co. Antrim, which the landlord claimed to be a 
 
 townpark. Explains circumstances and proceedings 
 
 in case, 12125-38. 
 
 M^Loughlin, Mr. Daniel, Carrickmaquilty, Redcastle, 
 Co. Donegal ; Tenant Farmer. — Derry. 
 Complains of rent of farm being raised, 12139- 
 48. Restriction p],aced on sale contrary to custom 
 of the estate, 12149. Case in Land Court re- 
 peatedly adjourned and now standing to be heard 
 on appeal, 12149-51. The poor are at a disadvan- 
 tage in all such litigation ; a fair valuation without 
 any law would satisfy the tenants, 12152-54. 
 Gives other cases of eviction, 12155-69. 
 
 Craig, Mr. Richard, KUnapjjy, County Derry ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Derry. 
 Explains case known as Tomkins' case, in- 
 volving question of tenant-right at expiration of 
 lease, 12170-97. Contrasts rent of recent lettings 
 with the valuation, 12198-12199. Right to sell 
 
 admitted in leases taken recently, but doubt exists 
 whether tenant-right is not extinguished, 12199- 
 202 In this case the farms were let at valua- 
 tion made on behalf of the tenants, 12203-12207. 
 
 M'Gallion, Mr. Charles, Island of Inch, Co. Donegal ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Derry. 
 Tenant on Lord Templemore's estate. Com- 
 plains of rent being unjustly increased from £14 
 to £26, 12208-14. Rent paid by friends in 
 America,12215-16. Has asked for a re- valuation ; 
 other farms are cheaper, 12218-20. Has made no 
 improvements lately ; nor did the landlord ; the 
 increased rent has disheartened him, 12222-24. 
 Tenant-right exists, 12225-7. Case of tenant being 
 obliged to pay the agent for tenant-right of part of 
 his own farm, 12228-29. 
 
 Boyle, Mr. D. J., Feeny, Co. Derry ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Derry. 
 Holds from three landlords, the Skinners Company, 
 Lord Waterford, and Mr. Miller ; tenant-right 
 varies on the three estates, 12230-39. Explains 
 failure of Bright clauses in his case to enable him and 
 many others to buy at sale of Waterford estate, 
 12240-43. Deputation to Mr. Gladstone explained 
 the probable occurrence of this difficulty, 12244-45.. 
 Part of the property bought in for Lord Waterford, 
 12246-47. Opinion as to raising rent, Griffith's 
 valuation. Exclusion of tenants' improvements, 
 12248-54. Landlord should have voice in selec- 
 tion of tenant, 12255. Restrictions on tenant- 
 right sales by Skinners Company is a grievance. 
 Sale by auction . should be permitted, 12256-58. 
 Hardship of enforcing increase of rent by notice to 
 quit, 12259. Purchase of a farm on Waterford 
 estate has led to increased improvement, 12261. 
 Sub-division undesirable ; re-shaping of farms much 
 needed, 12262-65. 
 
 Meek, Mr. Thomas, Moneymore, Co. Derry; Tenant 
 Farmer.— Derry. 
 Holds land from Salters Company. Complains 
 of agreement tenants have to take restricting price 
 of tenant-right, 12266-77. Salters Company en- 
 deavoured to sell their estate but without offering 
 it to the tenants ; tenants should have right of 
 pre-emption in all sales, 12278-82. Case of the 
 Drapers Company interfering with tenants in 
 townparks and houses built by tenants, 12283- 
 90. Mentions case of increase of rent com- 
 plained of by tenant who does not wish his name 
 mentioned. Case of interference with tenant-right 
 sales ; rule limiting price of tenant-right ; and case 
 of ejectment ; land claim in consequence of tenant's 
 refusal to agree to landlord's terms, 12291-93. 
 
 Brovm, Mr. Andrew, the Cottage, Magherafelt, Co. 
 Derry, Merchant. — Derry. 
 Complains of restrictions by Salters Company on 
 tenant-right ; disregard of tenants' remonstrances, 
 12294-305. Section of Land Act exempting town- 
 parks has been taken unfair advantage of, and 
 tenants have been deprived of rights they had 
 before, 12306-10. Increase of rent demanded for 
 townparks in 1878, 12311-12. Townparks of 
 small towns are really agricultural holdings, 12313- 
 16. Perpetuities of houses only, given by Salters 
 Company, 12317. Rent of houses with which 
 townparks were held has been raised ninefold, and 
 now 20 per cent, is added to rent of land, 12319. 
 Case of price of tenant-right reduced o-*-ing to 
 increase of rent, 12320. Improvements made by 
 tenants. The Salters estate was formerly let to 
 middlemen, and. under them tenants built without 
 leases and the rents were afterwards raised by the 
 Company, 12321-23. 
 
 Gaskey, Mr. James, Drummond, Limavady, Co. Derry ; 
 
 Tenant Farmer. — Derry. 
 
 Holds forty acres from Mr. M'Causland, at £100, 
 
 the valuation being £70, 12324-27. Government 
 
 valuation a fair basis for rent ; not dissatisfied with 
 
 his rent, 12330-31. Explains the tenant-right 
 
 h 2 
 
liv 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Caskey, James — continued. 
 
 custom existing ; amount allowed, and increase of 
 rent, 12333-36, 12349, 12353-55. Improvements 
 iisually made by landlord, 12338, 12350-52. 
 Leases unusual ; tenants don't care for them, 
 12339-41. No limit on tenant-right on Waterford 
 estate, 12342-43. Reasons in favour of limitation 
 and restriction of tenant-right, 12344-48, 12368. 
 Mr. M-'Causland does not take advantage of tenants' 
 improvements, 12356-58. Cases of reported hard- 
 ship incorrect, 12359-05. Land Act has not affected 
 price of tenant-right, 12366. Evictions unknown, 
 12367-68. Purchasers under Bright clauses are 
 no better off than before, 12369-73. Tendency to 
 sub-division, 12374-76. Smallest farm for support 
 of a family, forty or fifty acres, 12377. Labourers 
 well off, make no complaints, 12379-82. Explains 
 circumstances of his farm, improvements partly 
 made by landlord, charging interest on outlay, 
 12383-92. Mountain farmers have suffered most 
 during past two years ; limit on tenant-right does 
 not ])revent improvement ; but little of the moun- 
 tain land improveable ; explains further as to estate 
 management, 12394-403. 
 
 Cooper, Colonel Edward Henry, Markree Castle, 
 Collooney, Co. Sligo ; Landowner. — Sligo. 
 Owner of 30,000 acres, and Lord Lieutenant of 
 county, 12404-05. Tenant-right sales' not allowed, 
 but compensation is given for improvements, 12406- 
 10. This is the usual practice in county Sligo, 
 12411-18. Secret payments for good-will may 
 occur, but are not recognized, 12419-22. Tenants 
 are satisfied with the Land Act, 12423-25. Hents 
 are increased only on change of tenancy, or fall of 
 lease — no general revaluation for twenty-two years 
 on his property, 12423-30. Has spent during past 
 ten years, £15,000 on improvements, about 5 per 
 cent, being charged to tenants on outlay. Land 
 Act has deterred some owners from improving, 
 12431-40. Explains system on which improve- 
 ments are now made, and foi-mer system, 12441-49. 
 Tenants charge their farpis to })rovide for their 
 families ; such transactions are not acknowledged 
 by landlord, 12450-56. Capricious evictions rare, 
 except on properties of middlemen, 12457. On fall 
 of middlemen's leases the occupiers are accepted as 
 tenants, 12458-60. Leases not sought for since 
 Land Act ; covenants in old leases against sub- 
 division not enforced, 12461-64. This and other 
 large estates let at about the Government valuation ; 
 the valuation is unreliable ; good land valued too low, 
 12465. • Poor land too high, 12466-70. Explains 
 system of valuation for rent, 12471-75, 12595-97. 
 Fewer improvements made of late, owing to Land 
 Act and high price of cattle ; tillage land must 
 be drained, 12476-82. Describes operations of 
 Waste Land Company ; money spent which proved 
 unremunerative ; the tenants unable to pay the 
 rents ; the houses built by Company now in ruins ; 
 the land has reverted to its original state. Rent 
 paid by the Company was high ; contrasts condition 
 of this estate with his own land adjoinmg, which 
 the tenants are reclaiming by degrees, 12483-521. 
 The only method of reclamation is to let the tenants 
 do it, 12522-24. Condition of small landowners 
 who have recently purchased, 12525-34. Change 
 in law required to jirovide that farms shall descend 
 to one member of family ; explains difficulties that 
 arise in case of intestates owing to Land Act having 
 limited landlord's control, 12535-50. Incum- 
 brances on tenants' interests undesirable, 12550. 
 Oases of litigation between claimants of farms, 
 12555. Costs in land cases are excessive. Case 
 showing difficulty of proving whose expenditure has 
 improved holding ; presumption should be in favour 
 of ^ landlord. The law encourages unreasonable 
 claims, 12556-63. Litigation encouraged by pro- 
 fessional men; arbitration would be preferable, 
 12564-67. County-cess usually paid by tenants, 
 1 2568-71. Increased indebtedness of farmers since 
 
 Land Act, evidenced by Stamp Office returns, 
 12572-74. Contrasts ejectments before 1867, with 
 three last years, and explains evictions during last 
 nine years on his estate, 12575-85. Cases of tenants' 
 farms changed voluntarily explained, 12588-91. 
 Unoccupied land would let at higher rate than the 
 tenants pay, 12593-94. Objects strongly to ex- 
 tension of Ulster custom ; it would not injure him 
 pecuniarily, but would deprive him of power over 
 his estate, 12598-12608, 12615-18. Tenants 
 would object if Ulster custom led to increased rents, 
 12609-14, 12G21. Arbitration on rents impos- 
 sible, 12619-20. 
 Mannion, Mr. James, Tully, Co. Sligo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Sligo. 
 His farm is too highly rented ; offered a lesser 
 rent, which was refused, and process served by the 
 agent, 12622-40. Has other land; describes con- 
 dition and gradual increases of rent, 12641-62. 
 Buildings were made by tenant, 12663-57. Rent 
 formerly paid by seaweed, which has been taken 
 from him without reduction of rent, 12669-72. No 
 turf on land, 12674-76. Rent higher than valua- 
 tion, 12677-79. Reduction offered by landlord in- 
 suflicient, 12682. Account of crops, prices, and 
 stock on farm, 12683-95. 
 
 Mannion, Mr. John, Tully, Co. Sligo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 See Mannion, James. — Sligo. 
 
 Hurt, Mr. Owen, Tubbemareen, Co. Sligo; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Complains of high rent of his father's farm ; he 
 was turned out of another farm, and his own was let 
 by competition, and is higher than adjoining farm, 
 12696-712. Is unmarried, having no way of living 
 to get married; deals in cattle, 12715-16. House 
 repaired and offices built wholly by tenant, 12717- 
 720. The land is poor; could pay same rent as the 
 other tenants, and would improve it, 12721-32. 
 Abatement was given last year, and rent paid, 
 12734-38. 
 
 Young, Mr. John, Tenant Farmer, Attyduff, Ballyscan- 
 nell. — Sligo. 
 Complains of excessive rent on Mr. Jones' estate ; 
 refusal of landlord to reconsider the rent ; harsh 
 management and miserable condition of the 
 tenantry, 12744-12767, 12769-12775, 12783. De- 
 cline of kelp trade has reduced the value of the 
 firms, 12768, 12779-81. Holds land from Sir 
 E[. Gore-Booth, who is an excellent landlord, and 
 lets his land low, 12739-43, 12782. Mr. Jones 
 refvised to compensate him and take the land, and 
 charges too high for turf, 12783-85. 
 
 Gilroy,Mi: John,Drumcliffe, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Sligo. 
 Evicted many years ago; complains of loss of 
 improvements and prodvice, 12786-801. 
 
 Hart, Mr. Michael, Tenant Farmer, Shancough. — Sligo. 
 Holds farms from three landlords, 12802-11. 
 One farm, valued at £11 5s., at £20 rent, which is 
 too dear, inasmuch as the land has been improved at 
 his expense, 12812-21. Built the house on other 
 farm, which is also too dear, and in excess of the 
 valuation, 12822-29. Has no lease, 12830. Rents 
 have not been raised for a long time, but were too 
 high even in good years, and were complained of, 
 but no abatement obtained, 12831-35. His three 
 farms were originally on one estate, but were sold 
 to different persons, one of whom increased the rent, 
 12836-40. 
 
 M'Donough, Mr. Pat., Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Holds eighteen acres, of which rent hag been 
 increased from £27 to £42, 12841-44. Built on, 
 improved, and reclaimed the farms without help 
 from landlord, except a little time, 12848-58. Rent 
 too high, 12859-61. Case of neighbour whose farm is 
 similarly highly rented, though improved by tenant, 
 12862-68. Rents have been regularly paid till now, 
 12869-70. Bad crops owingto bad seed, 12871-81. 
 Lime of little use for manure, 12882-85. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 M'Laughlin, Mr. Michael, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Holds a farm valued at £13 15s. at £29 rent ; 
 complains of increase of rent, and legal proceedings 
 to recover rent, 12886-99. 
 
 Cordon, Mr. Patrick, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 
 Hands in schedule showing rents and valuation 
 of farms on estates of Messrs. Thompson and 
 Howley, 12900. Landlords are to blame for the 
 disturl.iances ; they are absentees ; rents have been 
 increased owing to tenants' improvements, and a7-e 
 excessive, 12901-12920. 
 
 M'JJaiius, Mr. John, Barony Constable, Oollooney, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Holds 300 acres from two landlords; 240 acres 
 held by lease, 1292.5-38. His own rent is 
 fair, 12939-46. Has improved his land, relying 
 on the custom of the estate ; built a house costing 
 £600, without help from landlord, 12947-12951, 
 12953-56. Landlord gives ussistance towards 
 buildings, 12952. Rents are excessive on some of 
 the smaller estates ; tenants continually in debt 
 owing to high rents, 12958-67. Rents punctually 
 paid, although too high, before the present depres- 
 sion, 12968-12972. Government valuation in 
 places is high enough for rent, 12973-12977. 
 Williams' estate highly rented, but much employ- 
 ment given, 12977-80, 12993. Farmers would be 
 satisfied with an independent valuation, 12981-83. 
 Dolan's pj-operty highly rented, 12983-85. No use 
 to make poor tenants proprietors, 12986-88. 
 ^Mountain pasture taken from tenants, 12989-92. 
 Sale and charging of holdings not allowed without 
 consent of landlords, 12994-96. Rents on Cooper 
 estate moderate, 12997-99. Condition of labourersin 
 district is good, owing to public works, 13000-4. 
 
 IPKenzie, Mr. Charles P., Collooney, Sub-Agent. — 
 Sligo. 
 Siib-agent on O'Hara's propeity of 22,000 acres ; 
 agent being non-resident, 13005-09. Free sale of 
 holdings allowed ; average price from six to eight 
 years' purchase, 13010-17. Farms are from ten 
 to twenty acres, and too small for farmers to live on, 
 J3019 — 22. Few improvements made, 13024-25. 
 No evictions for twenty years, 13027. Rents are 
 moderate ; landlord lays out money without charging 
 interest, employing ma,nytenants, 13029-39, 13045— 
 13054. Tenant-right on O'Hara's estate is like that 
 in the North, 13040-44. Landlord is resident, 
 rents moderate, people contented, 13047-49. Fann- 
 ing needs improvement ; hovises generally good, 
 being partly built by landlord, 13050-54. 
 
 Errington, George, Esq., ii.p. for Co. Longford. — Sligo. 
 Mentions case of Jessop estate, the harsh and 
 oppressive management of which has been produc- 
 tive of outrages ; murder of bailiff Flynn, shooting 
 of Cusack in Dublin, 13055-60. Cases of evic- 
 tions ; refusal of rents when tendered, keeping 
 tenants in a state of unsettlement ; harsh enfoi'ce- 
 ment of penal rents, 13061-67. Increase and harsh 
 enforcement of rents, and evictions on Annaly 
 estate, 13068-70, Suggests creation of a Land 
 Court to fix rents on basis of prices of produce, to 
 give security of tenure and light of sale to tenants, 
 to value for taxation, and to purchase estates for 
 resale to tenants, 13071-74. Condition of migratory 
 labourers in West makes amendment of Poor Law 
 necessary, 13075-79. Relations of landlord and 
 tenant in Longford are in general satisfactory, 
 13080-82. 
 L'Estrange, Christopher, Esq., Counties Mayo and 
 Sligo, Land Agent. — Sligo. 
 Manages property in Mayo and Sligo ; most of 
 it very poor, and rents badly paid ; some tenants 
 afraid to pay, 13083-89. No tenant-right exists ; 
 limited sale of farms permitted, subject to land- 
 lords' control, 13090-101. Increase of rent by 
 middlemen, 13003. Ejectments rare, except to 
 compel -payment of rent; none brought this year, 
 13104-08. Has given abatements on account of 
 
 the distress, 13109-12, 13158-63. Leases are rare ; 
 have been declined by tenants since Land Act, 
 partly owing to objectionable covenants, 13103-120. 
 Land Act has given satisfaction to tenants ; they 
 complain of rents as too high. Valuation has 
 been fairly made ; no charge for reclaimed land ; 
 rent generally one-fifth to one-sixth over tene- 
 ment valuation, 13121-27. Assistance given 
 by landlords for building discontinued since 
 Land Act, 13128-32. Government valuation 
 uneven, 13133-35. Rents rarely raised, 13135- 
 37. Arterial drainage required to promote recla- 
 mation ; much land reclaimed by tenants, who are 
 not charged for it, 13138-47. Difficulty of ascer- 
 taining a fair rent ; arbitration with appeal to a 
 - Land Court might be introduced, 13148-57. Out- 
 lay by landlords on estate improvement on main 
 drainage and buildings, 13164-66. Houses bad, 
 and with few exceptions, thatched ; farms small in 
 general, 1367-70. Agitation has led to non-pay- 
 ment of rent, 13171-74. 
 
 Boyle, Mr. Patrick, Dunfour, vsrith Nicholson, Mr. 
 Michael, and others. Tenant Farmers. — Sligo. 
 Gives list of tenants who complain of excessive 
 rents on estate of Sir H. G. Booth. These rents 
 were fixed by a middleman, and have not been 
 reduced, 1317 5-8 3,13193-96. No agent employed 
 on estate, 13184-85. Improvements made, re- 
 claiming and building, 13186-90. Tenants are 
 fishermen also, 13191-92. Would like to have 
 farms fairly re-valued ; the rents are too high, the 
 lands boggy, and subject to flood ; turf obtained at 
 a distance, 13197-211. Sale of farms has been per- 
 mitted lately, 13212-15. Hasno comjjlaint except 
 as to rent, 13216-18. 
 
 Slmnley, Mr. Thomas, Curgullian, Co. Roscommon, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Holds lands from Sir Gilbert King, 13219-22. 
 Has no complaint to make, 13221. Rent has been 
 raised six times since 1848, 1322-27. Valuable 
 improvements made on farm by tenant make it 
 cheap at increafsed rent. Protection needed for the 
 industry of tenants, 13230-40. 
 
 Healy, Mr. Patrick, Ballyconnell, Co. Sligo, and 
 others, Tenant Farmers. — Sligo. 
 Complains on behalf of self and other tenants on 
 Gethin estate of high rents, 13241-9. The land 
 reclaimed and built upon by tenant is not worth 
 the rent, 13249-62, "" 
 13250-63, 4. 
 
 Has no other means of living, 
 
 Corritty, Mr. Patrick, Ballyconnell, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 His rent too high, 13265-67. 
 
 M'Loughlin, Mr. Patrick, Ballyconnell, Co. Sligo, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Rent too high. Abatement of 25 per cent, given. 
 Pays 4s. Id. in pound for seaweed, 13268-72. 
 
 Gillan, Mr. Peter, Kiltagh, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. 
 
 — Sligo. 
 
 Rent too high. Land reclaimed by tenant, 
 
 13273-78. Bought the land from preceding occu- 
 
 jjier, but the landlord took away best part of the 
 
 farm -and charged a high rent for the rest, 1 3279-83. 
 
 Waters, Mr. Daniel, Ballyshannon, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Is tenant to John Sullivan, an absentee.' His 
 rent has been raised owing to improvements made 
 by self, 13284-90. 
 
 Ilamnigan, Mr. John, Kiltagh, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 
 Holds 6| acres poor land, which he has much 
 
 improved. The rent has always been too high, 
 
 13291-98. Gives particulars of other tenants' 
 
 holdings and condition on same estate, 13299-306. 
 
Ivi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Higgins, Mr. Charles, Mount Temple, Co. Sligo, Ten 
 ant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Holds a farm on estate of Hon. Evelyn Ashley- 
 Complains of high rent and attempts to increase it, 
 13307-21. Prices are low and uncertain. Govern- 
 ment valuation is too high, 18322-31. 
 
 M'Intyre, Mr. Hugh, Grellagh; Co. Sligo, Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Sligo. 
 Farmer on Hon. Evelyn Ashley's estate. Holds a 
 fishery also. Does not complain much of his own 
 rent, 13332-36. Complains of rents being raised by 
 purchasers in Landed Estates Court where tenants 
 have improved the land, 13336-46. Insecurity 
 deters tenants from improving, 13349-50. Recla- 
 mation on Palmerston estate has been remunera- 
 tive, 13351-54. Improvement loans should be made 
 to tenants, 13355-58. Free sale, fair rents, and 
 security wanted, 13359-60. High rents make 
 saving impossible. Prices are low, and there is no 
 fishing. Tenants earn money at English and Scotch 
 harvest. The young are emigrating, 13360-62. 
 Cases of agent requiring tenants to borrow from 
 bank to pay rent, 13363-66. 
 
 Million, Mr. William, Knocknarea, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Holds land from three landlords ; hands in table 
 showing rents and valuation of several farmers, and 
 complains of rents being too high, 13367-78. The 
 agent has taken the prime of the estate into his own 
 possession, 13388-92. No other means of living ; 
 prices low, 13394-95. Improvements made wholly 
 by tenants ; the Land Act does not prevent unjust 
 increases of rent, 13396-402. Cases of increases 
 of rent owing to tenants' impiovements, 13402-407. 
 Sale of tenants' interests not allowed, 13408-11. 
 Leinster leases forced on tenants ; they are yearly 
 leases, 13412. Case of tenants dispossessed by Mr. 
 Walker, who took the farms into his own hands, 
 13413-17. Wants fixity of tenure, fair rents, and 
 power of sale, 13418-19. Prefers a peasant pro- 
 prietary^ and thinks tenants could provide part of 
 the purchase money, 13420-24. No distress ' for 
 rent since Land Act, 13425. 
 
 Hunt, Mr. Denis, Brecogue, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Sligo. 
 Gives particulars of his farm of ten acres, 
 13378-79. Is tenant on Erne estate ; complains of 
 rack-rent and increase of rent on fall of lease, and his;h 
 valuation of farm which he has improved, 13437-44. 
 Would like to purchase farm ; would endeavour to 
 do so if lie held at a fair rent, so that he might 
 save, 13445-46. Sale of tenant-right is limited on^ 
 Erne estate, to detriment of tenants, 13446-50. 
 
 Cunningham,, Mr. Andrew, Knocknarea, Co. Sligo, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Complains of rent being too high ; of exaction of 
 fines and dispossession of tenants, 13380-88. 
 Complains of unreasonable ejectment of self and 
 others on Mr. Blake's property, 13426-33. Exces- 
 sive rents exacted on Barrett's estate, 13433-36. 
 
 Keeney, Mr. John, Brecogue, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. 
 
 — Sligo. 
 
 Tenant on Erne estate, 13452. Complaint of 
 
 high rent and increase on farm which he has 
 
 improved ; abatement of ten per cent, given last 
 
 year, 13453-62. 
 
 Flynn,M.v. Michael, Ballure, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Sligo. 
 Tenant on Gethin estate, 13464. Complains of 
 high rent and loss of privileges formerly enjoyed, 
 13465-72. A lease forced upon him which he 
 thinks will deprive him of benefit of Land Act, 
 13473-77, 13485-90. Has reclaimed and improved 
 farm; the soil is bad, and burns up, 13479-80. 
 Landlord makes no improvements, 13481. No 
 payment made on entering farm— he iaherited it 
 from his father. 
 
 Gilgan, Mr. James, Ballure, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer.. 
 — Sligo. 
 Rent of his farm on Gethin estate is too high ;- 
 land improved by tenant, 13491-98. Privileges 
 taken away, 13514. Gives particulars of land taken 
 from his uncle on Wynne's estate, no reduction 
 being made in the "rent, 15510-12. No complaint 
 of the present Mr. Wynne, except that the rents 
 are all too high, 13512-14. 
 
 Ha/rgaden, Mr. Patrick, Tully, Co. Sligo, Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Sligo. 
 Tenant on Wynne's estate ; rent too high ; land 
 poor, and burns up, 13499-502, 13506-09. Bog and 
 timber given free to tenants, and county cess paid 
 for them in 1879, 13503-05. 
 
 Ward, Mr. Myles, Aughamore, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer, and others. — Sligo. 
 Complains of high rent for poor land on Carroll's 
 estate, 13515-29. Carroll is an absentee ; does not 
 know agent's name, 13530-32. Potatoes good this 
 year, 13535. Rents paid last year on being 
 processed for it, 13535-39. 
 
 Gallagher, Mr. Charles, Aughamore, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Complains of high rents on Carroll's estate, and 
 injury done by flood from lake, 13522-29. 
 
 M' Clean, Mr. Thomas, Carnamadda, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Complains of high rents on Barrett's estate, 13540- 
 50. The land is bad, but has been improved by 
 tenant, who removed rocks and stones, 13551-57. 
 
 M'LoughUn, Mr. Thomas, Carnamaddy, Co. Sligo, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Rent of farm on Barrett's estate is twice too high, 
 13558-64. Taxes high, 13566. Sale of tenant-right 
 permitted, 13567-69. 
 
 Jordan, Mr. Michael, Co. SUgo, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo,- 
 Complains of high rents of his two farms ; rent 
 increased by present owner on purchase, 13570-80. 
 No improvements made except by tenant, 13582-85. 
 Would neither take a lease nor buy at present rent, 
 13587-88. 
 
 Bevaney, Mr. Patrick, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo, 
 Rent of his farm is too high; increased ten years 
 ago, 13611-12. Would not take a lease for ever at 
 present rent, 13589-95, 13599-600. Lives by road 
 contracting, 13596-97. If lands revalued now, 
 would be reduced, 13611-2. 
 
 Taggart, Mr. James, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo, 
 Rent of his farm, which he has improved is too 
 high ; was promised, but never got compensation 
 from landlord, 13601-610, 13613-14, 13616. Rent 
 paid for last year, 13615. No other means of 
 living, but the land, 13G17. 
 
 Bart, Mr. James, Rusheen, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Sligo. 
 Rent of his farm on Tenison estate is too high, 
 13618-24. Got insufiicient compensation, and no 
 reduction of rent for land taken by railway, 13625- 
 30. Valuation of farm.includes improvements made 
 by tenant, 13631-38. No change in rent since 
 1850, 13639-40, 13642. Sales of farms permitted 
 with consent of agent ; case of purchase and 
 depreciation of tenant-right, 13643-47. 
 
 A.B., Ballysodare, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. . 
 Complains of high rents and estate rules, 13648- 
 53. Gases of rent increased on change of tenancy 
 by purchase of tenants' interest, 13504-71. Tenant- 
 right would not sell as high as when he bought, 
 13672. The land has been improved by fencing 
 and open drains, 13673-77. Tenants might all 
 improve if they got facilities, 13679. Open drains 
 preferable to under drains, 13680. 
 
 A.B., Carroquin, Co. Sligo, Tenant Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Complains of high rent imposed by middlemen, 
 and continued under present owner, .13681-91, 
 13697-703. E,eceived an abatement last year, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ivii 
 
 Ji . B. — continued. 
 
 13692. Pays for seaweed for manure ; turf has to 
 be brought fourteen miles, 13693-96. 
 
 O'Gonor, Peter, Esq., Cairnsfoot, Co. Sligo, Land- 
 owner.— <S'//g'o. 
 Owner of 5,000 acres in county Sligo, 13704-05. 
 Permits sale of tenants' interests without limit of 
 price, giving lease for thirty-five years to pvircliaser, 
 13706-11. Approves of free sale, 13712. Right 
 of sale frequently allowed in county Sligo, 13713-14 
 Increase of rent on sale, 13715-16. Leases occa- 
 sionally given; building leases for ninety-nine 
 years, 13717-21. Circumstances and condition of 
 leaseholders, 13722-23. Government valuation 
 uneven, rent varies from five to twenty- five per cent, 
 over the valuation, 13724-36. Persons having 
 charges on property should contribute towards 
 poor-rate, 13724-25. Particulars of improvements 
 made on his property during the past twenty 
 years at cost of £8,000. Explains nature 
 of improvements "made by tenants, and his view of 
 what would be fair under such circumstances, 
 13735-45. Only five ejectments since 1850 ; no 
 land cases ; rents fairly paid last year, 13747-49. 
 Recommends and explains S9heme of emigration of 
 families from over-peopled districts, 13750-58. Ex- 
 planation of complaints made by tenants of high 
 rents, 13759-66. Particulars of estate purchased 
 at request of tenants who took leases for thirty-one 
 years, 13707. Subletting should be prevented, 
 13768. Peasant proprietary, if farms are suitable, 
 is desirable, 13769. Discontent has recently arisen 
 among farmers, 13772-73. In distress, tenants 
 should be employed on their own farms, 13770-71 
 13774-75. 
 
 M'Kenna, Eugene, Rev., CO., Enniskillen, Co. 
 Fermanagh. — Sligo. 
 Acquainted with relations of landlord and tenant 
 in Monaghan, Tyrone, and Fermanagh, 13776-79. 
 Tenant-right generally exists subject to limitations, 
 13780-82. High rents have rendered tenant-right 
 valueless ; case of this ; and oppressive covenants in 
 lease on estate of GoUum, an absentee, 13783-95, 
 . 13896-918. Rent raised i-epeatedly owing to im- 
 provement by tenant, who was compelled to take 
 lease, 13796-805. Cases where landlords have 
 altogether done away with right of sale, 13809-16. 
 Limited tenant-right exists on large estates in Fer- 
 managh ; tendency of landlords to deny it, 13817- 
 21. Instances of land cases showing expense and 
 uncertainty of litigation, and insufficient protection 
 afforded, 13822-36. Insecurity prevents improve- 
 ment, 13837-40. Oases of tenants refraining from 
 spending money on their farms for fear of rent being 
 raised, 13841-49. Security would make the people 
 loyal, 13850. Knows purchasers of Church lands ; 
 they are improving ; their farms were small, 
 13851-58. Instances of rent-raising, 13859-84. 
 Condition of labourers ; their houses bad ; generally 
 hold some land ; many are farmers' sons, 13885-95. 
 Case of increase of rent on townparks near Ennis- 
 killen, and failure of arbitration to settle dispute, 
 13919-29. 
 
 Martin, Mr. John, Drumlone, LisbeUaw, Co. Fer- 
 managh, Farmer and Miller. — Sligfi. 
 Farmer and owner of flax, corn, and saw mills, 
 13930-34. Describes custom of sale on J. G. V. 
 Porter's property; his limitations and rules are 
 imreasonable, 13935-43. Arbitration on Sir V. 
 Brooke's estate, 13943-49. Tenant-right custom 
 encroached on since Land Act, 13950-53. Cases of 
 increased rents and oppressive covenants enforced 
 by notices to quit, 13954-55. Tenant should be 
 entitled to compensation on surrender ; increases of 
 rent are destroying tenant-right, 13956-61. Tenants 
 unwilling to take leases lest tenant-right should be 
 extinguished, 13962-63. Rents generally high, and 
 tendency to increase them, 13964-65. Has spent 
 £1,000 on his farm ; all tenants on the estate have 
 received notices to quit for the purpose of raising 
 
 rents, 13966-69. Agreements forced on tenants 
 through fear of eviction, and payment of " hanging 
 gale" enforced, 13970-72. Liability to increase of 
 rents prevents improvement, 13973-78. Want of 
 security for outlay on mills and workers' cottages, 
 13979-82. Land Act iinsatisfactory and insuffi- 
 cient to protect the people, 13983-85. 
 
 Tute, Mr. William Clifford, Sligo, Stamp Distributor. 
 — Sligo. 
 Gives return showing gradual increase in eject- 
 ment processes, 13986-98. Great indebtedness of 
 small farmers to traders and money-lenders indicated 
 by stamps issued, 13999-14009. Fraud on Revenue 
 practised by serving copy processes without taking 
 out originals, 14010. 
 
 Heron, Mr. William, Doonamurray, Co. Sligo, Farmer 
 and Surveyor. — Sligo. 
 Superintends outlay of Board of Works loans, and 
 values tenants improvements, 14011-17. Valued 
 Colon,el Cooper's estate for rent, increasing the 
 rental about one-twelfth, 14018-21. Government 
 valuation too low on good land ; too high on bad, 
 14022-24. Evictions rare, 14025-27. Difficulty 
 of re-arranging and improving farms where run- 
 dale exists, 14028-32. Credit system ruuiing the 
 country ; instance of sherift's sale of debtor's farm, 
 14033-37. Eviction for subletting and two land 
 cases onColonel Cooper's estate, 14038-41. Land 
 Court satisfactory to tenants, 14042. Overcrowd- 
 ing on properties of middlemen, and impossibility 
 of people prospering where over-population exists, 
 14043-47. Farmers won't adopt system of hou^se- 
 feeding cattle, 14048-50. Farmers holding at low 
 perpetuity rents, and peasant proprietors worse oif 
 than yearly tenants, 14051-55. Standard of living 
 too low, 14056-57. Much waste land irreclaim- 
 able. Disinclination of farmers to drain and im- 
 prove their farms ; tillage farming unprofitable, 
 14058-60. Tenant's improvements not confiscated 
 on large estates, 14061-63. Ordnance map should 
 be received as evidence, 14064-67. Suggestions as 
 to alteration of existing scale . of compensation for 
 disturbance, 14068. Appointment of agricultural 
 assessors and valuation by arbitrators, 14069-75. 
 
 CoAJuley, Mr. F. P., Gurteen, Ballymote, counties 
 Sligo, Mayo, and Roscommon, Farmer, Sur- 
 veyor, and Valuer. — Sligo. 
 Complaints of rent-raising spring from the action 
 of small proprietors, and recent purchasers ; no com- 
 plaint on large estates, 1 4076-80. Lenient manage- 
 mentof The O'ConorDon'sproperty; sincesold, 14081 
 -83. Leases should be granted on properties sold in 
 Land Courts, 14084. Case of arbitration to' settle 
 rents on Miss Molloy's property, 14085-90. Want 
 of capital and intelligence are the causes of bad farm- 
 ing and complaints of high rents, 14091-92. Case 
 of townpark holding at Elphin taken up by land- 
 lord, 14092-97. Case of high rent demanded in 
 County Mayo, and interference of Land League, 
 14098-103. Case of increase of rent based on 
 tenant's improvements showing insufficiency of Land 
 Act, 14104-06. Expenses and difficulties of 
 Bright Clauses, 14107-8 ; few tenants could provide 
 one-fourth purchase-money, 14109-10. Expropria- 
 tion of landlords undesirable, 1411 1. Cases of high 
 rents imposed ; expenses and worry of litigation, 
 14111-14. Suggestions as to changes in law to 
 afibrd security of tenure at fair rents, 14113-16. 
 
 King-Hourman, Col. E. R., Rockingham, Boyle, Co. 
 Roscommon, Landowner. — Sligo. 
 Is a resident landlord, and owner of 72,572 acres 
 valued at £40,100, and let a little lower than 
 valuation, 14117-20. Explains custom correspond- 
 ing to Ulster tenant-right that prevails on his 
 estate, 14121-35. Practice as to improvements 
 varies, the landlord in some cases doing all, in other 
 cases assisting tenants, or letting reclaimed bog at a 
 nominal rent, 14136-56. Improvements by tenants 
 
Iviii 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 King -Har man, E. R. — continued. 
 
 directed by surveyor ; sometimes inefficiently done, 
 14157-62. Landlord has a veto in case of sale, and 
 limits price, 14163-68, 14175-80. Land Act has 
 worked well ; cases of injustice or capricious 
 eviction rare ; disapproves ofgiving County Court 
 Judge veto on notice to quit, 14169-74. Local 
 bankrujjtcy courts requii'ed to deal with the great 
 indebtedness of. farmers, the landlord having prior 
 claim for one year's rent only, 14181-88. Plan of 
 arbitration with appeal to a land judge, 14189-94. 
 Agricultural tenants should practically have per- 
 petuities subj ect to fair revision of rents, 181 95-200. 
 Favours the principle of peasant jiroprietary, but 
 those cases where it has been tried within his ex- 
 perience have turned out badly ; would like to see 
 it tried in selected cases, 14201-18. Security at 
 fair rents is what most intelligent tenants want, 
 14219-22. His father laid out £40,000 on estate, 
 £5,000 already laid out by himself; £60,000 being 
 expended, 14223,14228. " The Land Committee will 
 furnish accounts of outlay by landlords, 14224-27. 
 Landlord reasonably entitled to share in improve- 
 ments made by tenant, reclaiming waste land, 
 14229-33. No large tracts of waste lands on estate, 
 14233-34. Rents moderate, and have only been 
 raised on fall of leases, 14235—38. Tenants of 
 middlemen rack-rented, and treated opj^ressively, 
 14239-43. Right of sale has grown up since Land 
 Act, 14244-45. Rents badly paid last year ; em- 
 ployment and seed given to tenants, who are now 
 mclmed to pay, 14246-53. High rents charged by 
 farmers for con-acre, 14253-57, 14262-64. 
 Labourers' houses very bad ; wages low except at 
 harvest time, 14258-61. 
 
 Davys, Mr. Cochran, Sligo, Solicitor. — Sligo. 
 
 Is Solicitor to Grand Jury, and largely employed 
 by landlords, 14265-68. Sale of holdings rarely 
 allowed, and then with covenants to protect land- 
 lord; disapproves of right of sale, 14269-71. Few 
 changes of tenancy take place ; no cases of capri- 
 cious evictions, 14272—73. Cases .of evictions for 
 unreasonable conduct of tenants, 14273-74. Cases 
 of harsh eviction by a member of the Land League, 
 and by m iddlemen, 14274-75. Instance of property 
 highly rented ; tenants refused to have a revalua- 
 tion ; rent raising seldom occurs, 14276-82. 
 Farmers deeply in debt to banks and shopkeepers, 
 who have been pressing them for payment, 14283-87. 
 particulars of evictions in county Sligo since 1872 ; 
 few are carried out, 14288-92. Agitation has niade 
 the tenants regardless of law, 14293. Cases of 
 hardship arising from law as to administration in 
 case-of intestates, 14294-96. 
 
 Gore-Booth, Sir Henrj W., Lisadill, Co. Sligo, Land- 
 owner. — Sligo. 
 Owner of 24,000 acres managed by himself, 
 14297-300. Rules as to succession to farms, 
 14301-03. Rent of tenants who complained is not 
 excessive, though higher than rest of estate, and 
 was abated last year, 14304-08. Has lately allowed 
 sale of tenants' interests subject to restrictions, 
 14309-14. No evictions except for non-payment 
 rental of estate less than Government valuation 
 rents seldom raised, 14315-18. Contributes to 
 wards improvements made by tenants without 
 charging interest, 14319-20, 14322-25. Land Act 
 has not increased number of leases given, 14321. 
 Is in favour of legislation enabling tenants to pur- 
 chase ; would gladly sell entire townlands, but not 
 separate farms, 14326-31. Restrictions necessary 
 against subdivision, 14331-32. FamDy quarrels 
 frequent, 14333. Want of industry characteristic 
 of Irishmen, 14335-38. 
 
 Olpherts, Francis M., Esq., Mountshannon, Cos. Sligo 
 
 and Leitrim, Land Agent. — Sligo. 
 
 Agent for several proprietors in Sligo and Leitrim, 
 
 14339. Limited sale of holdings allowed, 14340-47. 
 
 Evictions veiy rare, 14348-51. No improvements 
 
 made by tenants except farm buildings, 14352-56, 
 No revaluation of estate except on part held under 
 bishop's lease, 14350-56. Cases of tenants declining 
 to purchase their farms, 14364-67. Purchasers of 
 Church lands badly off, 14368-71. Hesitation of 
 tenants to answer queries of Land Commission, 1 4372. 
 Estates he manages moderately rented and has 
 been improved by landlords, 14372-75. 
 
 Hanlon, Mr. Lanty, Lettermacaward, Co. Donegal, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Tenant of Deazley, an absentee, who bought part 
 of Connolly estate, 14376-85. Rent raised after 
 sale from £24 to £41, 14386-95. Buildings and 
 improvement of land made at tenants' expense, except 
 estates given by Mr. Connolly — ^no allowance or 
 abatement given by present owner — improvements 
 discouraged by rent raising, 14395-411, 14439-40. 
 Rent higher than Government valuation, 14412-15. 
 Free sale allowed, 14416-23. Turbary charged for. 
 14424-33. Recent depreciation of tenant-right, 
 14434-38. Increase of rent submitted to for fear 
 of ejectment, 14445-48. Land Act has not in- 
 creased tenants' security, 14449. Anxiety of tenants 
 to retain their homes, 14450. Government Valua- 
 tion would be a fair rent, 14453-59. Hanging gale 
 has been paid vxp, or struck off, 14464-71. Tenants 
 have fixity of tenure, and free sale, but not fair 
 rent, 14472-77. .Tenants would endeavour to buy 
 their farms if they had an opportunity, 14478-81. 
 Instances of increase of rents on labourers' holdings, 
 and small farms, 14486-502. 
 
 M'-Ginty, Mr. Hugh, Finnybawn, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Do negal. 
 Holds nine acres from Lord Arran and complains 
 of rent having been raised twenty years ago — fear 
 of dispossession made tenants agree to increase, 
 14503-18, 14540-42. Houses built and land re- 
 claimed wholly at tenants expense, 14519-31. 
 Government valuation lower than rent, 14532. 
 Free turbary on Arran Estate, 14534-39. No 
 abatement of rent during distress, 14543. Tenant- 
 right on Arran estate has been destroyed by rule 
 that twenty-five per cent, should be added to rent' 
 on sale of farms, 14544-14555. Inability of tenants 
 to pay present rents out of their farms, 14555-60. 
 
 Thomas. Mr. Francis, Birclihill, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Tenant often acres on Arran estate, 14561-62. 
 Particulars as to successive increases of rent enforced 
 by notices to quit. The rents are excessive, 14563- 
 65, 14571-81. Improvements all made by tenant, 
 14565-71, 14587. No evictions except for non- 
 payment of rent, 14582. Increase of rent has 
 destroyed tenant-right, 14583. Government valua- 
 tion lower than rent, 14584-85. Fraud committed 
 by former agent of Arran estate, 14588-89. 
 
 Smullen, Mr. James, D.onegal, Co. Donegal, Hotel- 
 keeper and Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Holds several farms by lease, and as a yearly 
 tenant, 14590-97. Complains of increase of rent on 
 farm purchased from agent of Arran estate, 14598- 
 603. Improvements made wholly by the tenants, 
 145604-06, 14609, 14619-25. Rule of adding 25 
 per cent, to rent on sale of farms has destroyed tenant- 
 right, 14606, 14626-27. Rents are higher than 
 Government valuation, 14610-12. Has no lease, 
 and would not take one at present rent, 14617, 
 14628-29. Exclusive of tenant's improvements, 
 farm is not vs^orth rent formerly paid, 14630-31. 
 
 Gallagher, Mr. Hugh, Drumlonogher, Co. Donegal, 
 Auctioneer. — Donegal. 
 Explains injury done to tenantry on Arran estate 
 by adding 25 per cent, to rent in case of tenant- 
 right sales, giving instances, 14632-43. Free sale 
 allowed on Hamilton's estate, adjoining, 14644-47. 
 Limitations on sale of tenant-right on estates of 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 lix 
 
 Gallagher, 'S.-a^— continued. 
 
 Lord Conyngham, Brooke, and Mnrray-Stewart, 
 14648-55. Increase of rent on Arran estate 
 checked improvements, 1 46o7-59. Embroidery and 
 knitting done by farmers' families, 14660-62. 
 
 M'Gahar6n, Mr. Jolm, Drumlonagher, Co. Donegal, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Explains circumstances of fai-m purchased on 
 Arran estate in 1873, the rent of which vas raised 
 25 per cent, in accordance with oiiice rule lately in- 
 troduced, 14663-78. 
 
 Kelly, Mr. James, Killymard, Co. Donegal, Farmer 
 
 and Miller. — Donegal. 
 
 Is a tenant on Murray-Stewart estate, and com- 
 
 • plains of increase of rent on his purchasing a farm 
 
 in 1876 from his father-in-law, 14679-96. House 
 
 ■ built and land much improved by tenant, 14697- 
 
 701. The farm is held as an accommodation, being 
 
 near the town, 14702-03. 
 
 Hamilton, James, Esq., Brownhall, Ballintra, Co. 
 Donegal, Landowner. — Donegal. 
 Owner of an estate of .£2,000 a year ; is agent to 
 Ms father, and was formerly agent of ConoUy's 
 estate, 130,000 acres, 14704-709. Resigned the 
 agency in conseqiience of being asked to collect the 
 running year of rent, 1 47 1 0-1 2. Rents on Deazley's 
 property were low, having been reduced in famine 
 year, 14714-15. No part of ConoUy estate bought 
 by tenants, 14716-17. Tenantry cannot prosper on 
 small farms, 14719-211. No real improvements made 
 ' by tenants, 14721-23. Assistance to build given 
 by landlords, 14724-28. Explains custom as to rent 
 of land let for reclamation, and difficulty 'of im- 
 proving farms held in rundale, 14729-37. Tenant- 
 right prevails everywhere in Donegal, 14739. 
 Capricious evictions rare, 14740. liaising rent on 
 sale of farms does not work fairly ; explains his 
 practice as to fixing of rent, 14741-46. Objects to 
 landlord being made liaUe to county cess on holdings 
 under £4 rating, and to new buildings being rated, 
 14747-49. Full power over game and turbary 
 should be given to the landlord, 14750-58. Ex- 
 plains difficulty and hardship of the law as to suc- 
 cession to farms arising from the landlord's control 
 being limited, 14759-07. Tenant-right on termi- 
 nation of lease should not be recognized where it did 
 not exist at commencement, 14767-76. Great want 
 of employment ; small holders go to England and 
 Scotland for harvest, 14778-80. 
 
 Hammond, Mr. William, Bridgetown, Co. Donegal, 
 Merchant and Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Holds 150 acres from several landlords, 14783- 
 87. Holds two farms from Major Knox, one a 
 tenant right farm, the other for grazing 14788- 
 14795-800. Has irhproved by draining, fencing, 
 and manuring, and with all other tenants on estate 
 has been noticed to pay an increase of rent, which 
 would destroy his interest, 14790-93, 14800-20. 
 Tenants have no complaints, and are doing fairly 
 on Connolly and Hamilton's estates, 14821-2G. 
 
 Davis, Mr. James, Donegal, Co. Donegal, Farmer. — 
 Donegal. 
 Holds some freehold land, and four acres as yearly 
 tenant from Lord Arran, 14827-28. Complaints 
 of successive increases of rent on farm, held from 
 Lord Arran, the land having been improved by 
 tenant, 14829-34. Landlord's claim that the holding 
 is a town park disputed, 14838-39. Complains of 
 increase of rent of farm on Murray-Stewart's estate, 
 and unreasonable conduct of landlord with reference 
 to improvements, 14840-46. 
 
 Jackson, Mr. Joshua, Donegal, Co. Donegal, Land 
 Steward. — Donegal. 
 Has been superintendent of Arran estate for 
 twenty-three years, 14847-51. Gives number of 
 tenants, size of farms, and rents on Arran estate, 
 14853-59, 14873. Explains circumstances of re- 
 valuation of estate in 1857, successive increases of 
 
 . rent, and introduction of rule to add 25 per cent. 
 
 ■ on sale of tenant-right, 14860-61. Instances of 
 . sale of farms in which addition of 25 per cent, was 
 
 made to rent, 14862-72. Contrasts poor law 
 valuation with rental 14874, 14878-81, 14916-17. 
 Improvements generally made by tenants, 14875- 
 
 ■ 77. Explains circumstances of increase of rent on 
 farms of witnesses Davis, Smullen^ and M'Gaharen, 
 14882-99. Improvements made by tenants lead 
 to increase of rent, and insecurity prevents improve- 
 ments ; suggests as remedy thirty-one years' leases 
 on fines equal to half year's rent, 14801-09, 14914. 
 Land Act has not gi\'en sufficient security, 14910- 
 1 3. Few evictions, except for non-payment of rent, 
 14915-16. Fair rents would satisfy most tenants 
 14918. High juice of tenant-right leads landlords 
 to increase rents, 14919. 
 
 Ward, Mr. John, Ballintra, Co. Donegal, County Cess 
 Collector. — Donegal. 
 Is a farmer and sheriff's officer, 14920-21. Gives 
 instances of rents being raised where tenants had 
 
 ' improved their farms, and of excessive rents causing 
 discontent and emigration, 14922-46, 14956. Eents 
 have not been raised, and contentment prevails on 
 the Conolly estate ; high prices obtained for tenant- 
 right, 14947. High rents and prohibition of sales 
 make interference of legislature necessary, 14948; 
 Government valuation uneven, too high on bad land, 
 too low on good, rents generally above the valuation, 
 14949-55. Great indebtedness of tenantry owing 
 to bad seasons, 14957-67. General increase of rent 
 in 1878 on estate of Foster of Bellisle, 14968-72. 
 ■ uncertainty of rent checks improvement, encourages 
 idleness, 14973-74. Instances of ejectment for 
 non-payment of high rents, 14975-79. Landlords 
 endeavoitrto frustrate Act of 1870, 14980. JSTecessity 
 for fixing rents impartially by arbitration, 14981. 
 
 Flaherty, Patrick, Dromore, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Complainsof successive rncreasesofrent, 14982-83. 
 
 Flaherty, Edward, Dromore, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Complains of increase of rent, 14984-87. Im- 
 provements made by tenant, 14988-89. 
 Thomas, John, Lough Eske, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Rent of his farm on Brooke's estate is excessive ; 
 practice of raising rents on sale of farm, 14990-94, 
 14999-15000. Depreciation of tenant-right, and 
 high price paid for his i'arm to secure right of way, 
 14995-98. 
 
 Morrogh, James, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Complains of ijici'ease of rent on Arran estate, 
 15001-05. 
 
 Henderson, John, Donegal, Tenant ^exm.&c.-^Donegal. 
 Gives particulars of successive increases of rent 
 on his farm held from Lord Arran and improved by 
 self, 15006-15. 
 
 Cassidy, James, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Complains of successive increases in rent on Arran 
 estate, 15015. 
 
 M'Gaffrey, James, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Complains of su.ccessive increases of rent on 
 Arran estate, 15015-16. 
 
 Doherty, James, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Rent of his farm on Murray-Stewart .estate 
 raised from £-15 to £19 ; landlord gave him slates 
 and timber ; land drained by tenant, 15018-23. 
 
 M'Mullen, Timothy, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. 
 
 Donegal. 
 Rent of farm on Murray-Stewart estate raised • 
 increase of rent on sale destroys tenant-rio-ht 
 15024-28. ' 
 
 M'Gilligan, John, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 His rent is £31 5s., Government valuation £22. 
 Rent has not been raised, 15029-32. 
 
1> 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Melly, Philip, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 His rent is £40 4s. Valuation £30 10s. 15033-34. 
 
 t-'itojoie, William, Donegal, Tenant Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Injury done to tenants by losLag their turbary. 
 15035-38. Open sale not allowed ; addition of 25 
 jier cent, to rent would make farm valueless. 
 15038-41. High rent and insecurity prevent im- 
 provement, 15042-46. Adjoining estate let cheaper 
 than Murray-Stewart's, 15047-48. 
 Gallagher, Connell, Ballintra, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Tenant on T. Hamilton's estate ; rent increased 
 from £2 10s. to £11 10s. Misunderstanding with 
 agent as to reduction of rent on account of road 
 made bytenant, 15049-55. 
 
 Monahan, Thomas, Ballintra, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Donegal. 
 His rent is too high, and above the Government 
 valuation, 15056-58. 
 Cassidy, James, Donegal, Tenant Fai-mer. — Donegal. 
 Rent of whole estate raised, 15060-63, 15068. 
 No allowance given for drainage, 15063-65. No 
 tenant-right, but sale of farm recently allowed, 
 15069-72, 15079. Much improvable land in dis- 
 trict, 15073-78. 
 
 Faucett, Mr. Francis, Rockfield, Belleek, Cos. Antrim, 
 Donegal, Fermanagh and Leitrim, Tenant 
 Farmer and Landowner. — Donegal. 
 Is a landowner and tenant occupying 800 acres, 
 15081-83. Explains negotiations for obtaining a 
 new lease of farm, diflSculty as to rent, right to game, 
 and securing his tenant-right interest, 15084-90, 
 Had to surrender a farm on account of high rent 
 demanded, 15091-94. Increase of rent on sale of 
 farms on Tervan's property, 15095-96. A-dvantages 
 of free sale on property which he manages in 
 Leitrim, 15097-100. Necessity for a law to pre- 
 vent rent raising, and protect tenants' improve- 
 ments, 15101-05. Objects to restrictions on 
 tenant-right recently introduced on Ely estate, 
 15105-07. Sub-division should be controlled, 
 15108. Reform of Grand Jury laws requi- 
 site, 15109-13. Discontent increasing, neces- 
 sity for permanent settlement of land question, 
 15114-16. Improvement of Morley estate due to 
 liberal tenant-right allowed, 15116-17. Tenant- 
 right 'should attach to grazing lands if purchased, 
 15118. Government valuation is' uneven, unre- 
 liable, and carelessly made, 15119. Disajjproves of 
 peasant proprietors ; procedure for obtaining loans is 
 complicated ; purchasers of Church lands worse off 
 than before, 15120-26. Waste land might be re- 
 claimed by adding portions to existing farms, 
 15127-30. Protection should have been given to 
 tenants on estates purchased in Landed Estates 
 Court, 15130. ■ 
 
 Moore, Mr. George, Ballintra, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Fai-mer. — Donegal. 
 Holds two farms from Colonel Knox at rent of 
 £77, 15131-35. Improved his land with consent 
 of agent, and his rent is now to be raised. A 
 general valuation of estate has been made, but on 
 account of bad seasons increase has not yet been 
 enforced, 15136-40. Increases of rent are destroy- 
 ing tenant-right, 15142. He and 20 other tenants 
 received ejectments without notice on account of 
 delay in paying rent, 15143-45. 
 
 Mullen, Mr. John, Tullyearle, Co. Donegal, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Donegal. 
 Rent was increased 5 years ago, and is too high, 
 landlord has spent nothing on farm. No turbary 
 on estate, 15146-56. 
 
 Bourns, Mr. Robert W., Hatley, Carrick-on-Shannon, 
 
 Co. Leitrim, Tenant Farmer, Valuator and 
 
 Agent. — Sligo. 
 
 Farmer and land agent in Leitrim, 15157-62. 
 
 Deterioration of land from wet seasons and want of 
 
 drainage should be met by allowing tenants to break 
 up pasture land and borrow for land improvement 
 from Board of Works, 15163-72, 15232-33. Peasant 
 proprietary scheme necessary as a concession to 
 excited public opinion, 15173-77. Instances of 
 purchasers in Landed Estates Court raising rent, 
 15178-84. Rents should be settled by arbitration, 
 15185-87. Tenant-right custom might be intro- 
 duced with advantage into his district. Control 
 over estate should not be taken away from landlord, 
 15188-92. Agitation rather than bad crops is 
 creating demand for land reform, 15193-95. Potato 
 crop bad this year ; other produce plentiful, with 
 good prices, but owing to previous bad seasons- 
 farmers have not recovered yet, 15196-200. In- 
 stance of failure of peasant proprietor, 15201-7. 
 Danger of subdivision great, 15207-10. Consider- 
 able emigration from his district, 15211-14. 
 . Evicted tenant forcibly reinstated, 15215-18. 
 Much reclaimable land in his district, 15219- 
 15226-29. Landlords have refused to permit re- 
 clamation since Act of 1870, for fear of being made 
 liable to compensate tenants, 15230-31. Damage 
 done by flooding of Shannon, 15234-37. Owing to 
 agitation no rents jsaid this year in excess of 
 Government valuation, which is considerably below 
 usual rent, 15238-44. To carry oiit sale of farms 
 to tenants suggests that they should pay an addition 
 to their rents as an annuity for 35 years to land- 
 lord, 15245-48. Legislation should be in accord- 
 ance with sentiments of the people, who are led to 
 think that land should be '•' free" of rent, 15248-54. 
 
 Quinn, Rev. Andrew, p.p., Riverstown, Co. Sligo. — 
 Sligo. 
 Hands in areas, rents, and vahiations of sixty 
 farms, showing that rents are high, and very much 
 in excess of valuation, though not recently raised, 
 15255-58, 15330-36. During last four years 
 farmers have become distressed owing to failure 
 of crops and necessity of parting with stock, 15337- 
 41. Farmers ready to pay a fair rent, 15343. 
 Tenants want fixity of tenure, and have no desire 
 to purchase their farms, 15349. Would be glad 
 to invest any means they had in buying their farms, 
 15351. Rent of his farm, on which glebe house has 
 been built at cost of £1,200, and which has been 
 much improved, has been raised very much, 15351- 
 64. 
 
 Conniiigton, Mr. Michael, Turvough, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer and ex-Constable. — Sligo. 
 Holds a farm of thirty acres from a middleman, 
 paying him a profit rent ; entered farm without fine 
 15259-74. Knows county Sligo well, and con- 
 siders Government valuation high enough for rent ; 
 case of townland let at 50 per cent, above valua- 
 tion ; so high that rent had to be abated, 15275- 
 82. Complains of influence used at election times, 
 15351. 
 
 M'Goldrich, Mr. Andrew, Aghoo, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Gives particulars of his own and other tenants 
 rents, which are much in excess of valuation. 
 Rents were raised twenty four years ago by 
 former landlord, and he considers them too high, 
 15283-97. 
 
 Fowley, Mr. Hugh, Carrowkeel, Co. Sligo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Rent of his farm, for which he paid a fine, is too 
 high, owing to failure of crops, and deterioration of 
 land from successive wet seasons, 15298-305, 
 15313-18, 15347. Potatoe crop very bad this year, 
 15319-23. Farms bad and exposed, 15329-26. 
 Does not know whether tenants are allowed to sell 
 their interests; no one would buy now, 15327-28. 
 Abatement of rent necessary to enable farmers to 
 live, 15344-45, 15310-12. A fair rent is all the 
 tenants want, 15348. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixi 
 
 Carnegie, IVIr. John, Fortland, Easkey, Co. Sligo; 
 Tenant Farmer antl Land Steward. — Sligo. 
 Tenant farmer and land steward to John Lloyd, 
 Brinkley, 15365-15369. Complains of want of 
 securitv on his farm where his interest is more than 
 the landlord's, 15369-15377. Circumstances of his 
 becoming tenant, 15379. Sale of interest not re- 
 cognised, 15382, 16424. A great deal of reclaimable 
 land on Fortland estate in owner's hands j most 
 successfully reclaimed by Mr. Brinkley about fifteen 
 years ago. Tenants have not succeeded; well 
 qualified strangers ought ; turf would have to be 
 cut away ; not beneficial to neighbourhood that 
 turf shoiild be cut rapidly, 15386-15401. Tenants 
 get turf for own use free ; charged for what they 
 sell, 15402. Since Land Act tenants, especially 
 lessees, impr'ove more ; less vmited action between 
 landlord and tenants ; tenants feel more, bvit not 
 quite, secure ; freedom at elections, 15403-8. 
 Tenement valuation a fair rent, except on good 
 lands, which are worth more, but it varies, 15413. ■• 
 15434-6. Owing to wet seasons tillage land will 
 require to be broken up to get rid of rushes, &c., 
 15414-9. Not many changes of tenancy ; few 
 evictions, 15421-8. Many tenants could pay one- 
 fourth of purchase money of their holdings, but 
 would prefer a settlement at a fair rent, 15429- 
 33. Mr. Brinkley purchased shortly before Land 
 Act and then raised rents, not since, 15440-2. If 
 landlord or tenant thinks rents should be changed, 
 he ought to be able to have sent down at own ex- 
 pense Government valuator to decide, 15445. 
 
 Healy, William, and six others, Lisbally, and Bally- 
 soannel, Co. Sligo ; Tenant Farmers. — Sligo. 
 Tenants on Major Jones's estate. Rabbit burrow 
 on tenant's holding reclaimed and taken away by 
 landlord without reduction of rent, 15447—51. 
 Eents too high, fixed aboiit thirty years ago, 15453, 
 15463. Seaweed charged , for, 15457. Mr. 
 Barbour was agent, Mr. Jones's brother is now, 
 15479. 
 
 M'Laughlin, Brian, and three others. Tenant Farmers. 
 — Sligo. 
 Tenants on Blake's estate. Rents raised twenty 
 years ago, and leases forced by notices to quit on 
 tenants, with fines, 15492-5. 
 
 Kavanagh, Francis, Ballymote, Co. Sligo ; Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 
 Tenant to Mr. Gethin. Produced agreement in 
 
 which he covenanted not to claim compensation for 
 
 payment to outgoing tenant, and to pay entire 
 
 county cess, 15522-32. 
 
 Milmo, James, Dunalley, Co. Sligo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Sligo. 
 Tenant to Mr. Wynne. Under uncle's will suc- 
 ceeded to tenancy two years ago, and rent was 
 raised, and is too high, 15533-50. Rent £38 ; 
 Tenement valuation, £24 10s., 15557. Witness 
 sublets, 15560. 
 
 Hughes, Stephen, Cleever-road, Sligo, Tenant Farmer. 
 
 — Sligo. 
 
 Twenty years ago bought for £1 00 the goodwill 
 
 of a £10 holding on Palmerston estate, believed 
 
 with consent of landlord, and since then was not 
 
 allowed to resell, 15562-79. 
 
 M'LoTighlin, Daniel, Ballyconnell, Co. Sligo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Sligo. 
 Witness and Peter Garvey deputation from 
 Gethin estate to complain of high rents for bad land. 
 Rents fixed about 1846, 15580-94. 
 
 Ba/rhour, Mr. Francis, Dunfour, Co. Sligo ; Tenant 
 Farmer and Agent. — Sligo. 
 Holds under Sir H. Gore Booth. Used to be 
 land agent for Major Jones, 15595-6. Rents on 
 Jones' estate not high ; land poor, but improvable, 
 15600-2. Tenants not charged for seaweed, 
 15604. Three quarters of an acre of rabbit burrow 
 taken from a man by witness to be reclaimed, in- 
 tended to return it, but ceased to be agent ; tenant 
 
 l^ays old rent, it is a gi-ievance, 15608-16. No com- 
 plaint- as regards his own landlord; witness had a 
 lease, expended several thousands in improvements, 
 and was given renewal at old rent, 15617-9. 
 Jjandlords generally are fair ; new jjurchasers are a 
 curse, 15621. Some raise rents too frequently, and 
 thereby stop improvements ; on some estates no 
 change. Tenants oviglit to have more industry and 
 less whiskey. Landlords ought not to take whole 
 value of tenants' improvements, 15622-7. Never 
 knew an ejectment on Booth jjroperty. Too fre- 
 quently in some cases, 15628-»9. Confidence must 
 exist between landlord and tenant to induce im- 
 provements, 15631-6. A. good plan to have two 
 arbitrators and an umpire to fix a fair rent when a 
 dispute arose, 15637-8. Witness had a lawsuit 
 with Major Jones to recover money spent in im- 
 provements by agent for landlord, 15643, 
 
 Kelly, Edward, Ballytibnan, Co. Sligo; Tenant Far- 
 m.er. — Sligo. 
 
 Comj)lains of too high rent on Palmerston estate, 
 15652-71. For a garden on Wynne's estate paid £6 
 a year. Served with notice to quit for voting, 
 withdrawn. Place sold by Mr. Wynne, and pur- 
 chaser ejected witness, who lost all his improve- 
 ments, 15671-7. 
 Clarke, Mr. William, Sligo, counties Roscommon and 
 Sljgo ; Land Surveyor, and Tenant Farmer. — 
 Sligo. 
 
 Does Mr. Wynne's business among others, 
 15678-80. No complaint about ownholding, 15681. 
 James Milmo knew by custom of estate rent would 
 be raised, and was glad to get the farm at it, 
 15684-91. Was consulted on Land Bill of 1870 
 as regards value of tenancies, and his figures were 
 adopted ; Milmo would get five years' purchase, 
 15692-3. Right of sale of interest allowed on 
 Wynne estate to fellow-tenants, failing which land- 
 lord buys, 15694-15700. No evictions; rents well 
 paid, 15701-2. Incumbered Estates purchasers 
 most injurious, 15703. Rents on Sir G. King's 
 estate reasonable, and well paid ; farms tolerably 
 large, 15705-8. Small farms the ruin of Ireland, 
 15708. Mr. Wynne's tenants improve ; he helps 
 with timber, 15713—6. Landlords do less since 
 Land Act, 15717. Present tenement valuation 
 unequal and misleading to many people ; a revision 
 of it would be most useful, 15720-4. 
 
 Crean, John, Esq., Ballina, counties Mayo and Sligo ; 
 Land Agent. — Castlebar. 
 Agent for Lord Arran's estate in Mayo and 
 Sligo, 15725-6. Valuation of Arran estate in 
 Donegal made by Brassington and Gale in 1855 on 
 live and let live principle ; amount of new rents to 
 be raised by annual instalment, f o be easy on the ' 
 tenants — to whom, unfortunately, this was not ex- 
 plained; rents not too high for good times, 15729- 
 38. An incoming tenant, by purchase, has rent raised 
 twenty-five per cent., including cess, 15739. The 
 1855 valuation included what tenants' improve- 
 ments existed, but they held the land without rise 
 of rent for twenty-four or twenty-five years, 15740- 
 41. When Lord Arran saw large prices given for 
 tenant-right he raised rents on incomer to get his 
 share of value of land, 15747-8. Lord Arran 
 follows Land Act about county cess, 15750. In- 
 stances of rent in excess of valuation, 15754-8. 
 Mayo estate comprises 23,600 acres, exclusive of 
 leaseholds or fee-simple ; rents about eighteen per 
 cent, over valuation, 15759-61. Tenement valua- 
 tion unfair for rent, fair for taxation, except in 
 cases of mistake; differs in same townland, not 
 uniform, 15762-7. No tenant-right exists on 
 Mayo estate, 15769. No difficulty about rents 
 until present agitation, 15771-3. In 1854 six or 
 eight acres of cut-away bog given to each tenant, at 
 2s. 6d. an acre, to be reclaimed -without increase of 
 rent, 15778-83, 15814-7. Tenants holding at £1 
 an acre have relet in conacre at £3 or £4 for one 
 year, 15783. Lord Arran has not improved since 
 
 i2 
 
l..i 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Crean, Jolin — continued. 
 
 Land Act, 15784. In twenty years before 
 Act lie spent £6,800 on Mayo estate, besides money 
 borrowed from Board of Works ; no interest 
 charged to tenants, 15785-9, 15794-6. No par- 
 ticular cases of rent raising on tenant's improve- 
 ments, 15790. Change of rent when new tenant 
 unconnected with family comes in — not otherwise 
 with new tenants, 15791-3. One eviction in last 
 ten years ; tenant who sold interest without ap- 
 proval of Lord Arran ; payer of fine lost it 
 15797-9. Turf f^ee for tenants' own use, 15800-3. 
 Tenants' improvements are breaking up mountain 
 land, open-draining, and fencing ; Lord Arran has 
 estate superintendents for tenants' assistance, 
 15803-9, 15817-25. Lord Arran supplies medical 
 aid to his tenants, 15810-3. Very few changes in 
 tenancies; about a dozen in twenty years, 15828. 
 Out of 596 tenants, 408 pay less than £10 per 
 annum, 15830. Tenants dislike taking leases on 
 account of solicitor's costs, 15S32-44. A great deal 
 of reclaimable land on Lord Aryan's lands, but 
 tenants have grazing rights, and would object to 
 reclamation unless for themselves, 1 5 8 45-5 3. Much 
 planting done by landlord, none by tenantsj 
 15854-6. Landlord and tenant on very best terms 
 until present agitation, 15859. There ought to be 
 a general revaluation, and rents fixed thereon, 
 15864. Some tenants twenty-five per cent, over 
 tenement vahiation prosperous and pay well, while 
 others under tenement valuation are a couple of 
 years rent in arrear, 15865-70. Rents not well 
 paid last year ; ten per cent, abatement offered ; 
 both inability and unwillingness to pay existed, 
 15871-5. Lord Arran obliged to be absent as 
 family residence leased before he succeeded, 15879. 
 
 Scott, James, Esq., Woodbine, Co. Mayo, Land Agent. 
 — Gastlehar. 
 Sir C. Gore's agent. Rental £10,000; 25 per 
 cent, over tenement valuation, 15880-2, 15909. 
 Sale of good-will allowed subject to approval of 
 incoming tenant. Seven years purchase usual price, 
 15883-95. Not many leases ; small tenants don't 
 want them, and costs large. Since Land Act yearly 
 tenancy more valuable, 15896-15908. Tenement 
 valuation no test of rent. Uneqiial. Instance, 
 15910-3. No change of rents or tenancies lately 
 on Gore estate, 15914-7. No actual evictions, 
 15918-21. Never distrained except where tenants 
 voluntarily gave up crops, 15922-5. Very little 
 improvement ; done by both landlord and tenant, 
 15926. In last two years Sir C. Gore spent £2,340 
 in drainage ; borx-owed from Board of Works ; 
 tenants not charged, 15927-30. Tenants reclaim 
 badly. Much reclaimable land on neighbouring 
 estates in occupation of tenants, 15931-6, 15940-5, 
 15990-7. Poverty result of laziness, 15939. Tenants 
 pay all county cess, 15946. Wishes for new valua- 
 tion by agriculturists appointed by Government, 
 15948-9. Free sale ought to be allowed to tenants, 
 15950. Approves of free sale and fixity of 
 tenure, 15950. Rents ought to be fixed by valua- 
 tion. Change to be made by arbitration, with 
 modification of Longfield jjlan, 15951. All tenants 
 owe one and a-half years rent ; abatement offered ; 
 intimidation against payment, 15952-8. Few tenants 
 could pay any portion of purchase money for 
 holdings. Peasant proprietary would ruin the 
 country. Gombeen men would lend money and 
 have tenants in their power, and would eventually 
 resell land at high price. Consolidation of holdings 
 would be advantageous if done properly, but in this 
 way^ good would be replaced by bad landlords, 
 1.1 959-78. An advocate for reclamation. Much 
 could be done. Successful case, 15979-89, 16002-5. 
 Labourers have cottage and garden as part wages, 
 16000-1. r n ' 
 
 Craven, Mr. John, Ballina, co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 ■ — Castlebar. 
 Holds gi-azing farms from Sir C. Gore. Lives on 
 Captain Kirkwood's estate ; 49 acres on Gore and 
 
 26 acres on Kirkwood estate, 16009-13. Kirkwood 
 rents too high. Raised from £1 an acre (1849) to 
 £1 17s. M. in 1850. Rent £48 15s.; tenement 
 valuation £35 15s., 16014-25. Improvements made 
 before and after change of rent, 16017, 16026-30. 
 Sir C. Gore's rents rather high, 16033. 
 Tunny, Mr. James, Castlebar, Co. Mayo; Tenant 
 Farmer and Shopkeeper. — Gastlehar. 
 Tenant of Henry Joynt. Land bad; rent too 
 high, 16042-5. Sale of interest not allowed except 
 in special cases. Case, 16052-61. Agent, Francis 
 O'Donnell, tried to raise rent after purchase, 16062. 
 Turf charged for on land held by tenants, 16063. 
 Tenants ill-treated by agent. Instances, 16070-4. 
 On taking of land by railway company landlord 
 took tenant's compensation, 16076. 
 
 O'Brien, Patrick, Corrobeg, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar, 
 Holds about ten acres, at £11 15s., from Sir R. 
 Palmer, 16083-5. Rent raised, and striping in- 
 jurious, 16086-8. Has improved ; landlord has not. 
 16089. Fines from 5s. to £5 for undeclared office 
 rules about whitewashing houses, cutting turf, and 
 trespassing; no fines in last six years, 16098- 
 16118. Agent, Francis O'Donnell, requires tenants 
 to work for him ; cases, 16116-24. People in debt 
 and cannot pay rent, 16127-32. 
 
 Clarhe, Anthony, Ballinmaroe, Co. Mayo j Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Holds twenty-seven acres at £19, tenement valua- 
 tion, £ 1 6 1 Os. from Sir R. Palmer, 16135-40. Lost by 
 striping, 16141-4, 16149-53. His father built house, 
 and drained andfenced, 16145-6. Case of ejectment, 
 not actual eviction, on estate, with fine imposed by 
 agent, 16157-60. 
 
 Duffy, Denis, Ballinmaroe, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Gaatlebar. 
 Holds eight acres, at £7, from Sir R. Palmer, 16161 
 -63. Lost by striping, and had to contribute to 
 building house for another tenant, 16164-76. Fine 
 for not preserving game, 16177. Brother-in-law, a 
 railway ganger, not allowed to lodge with him while 
 works being done on the spot, 16180. No fines 
 since -Land Act, 16182. Unable to pay rents, 
 owing to bad seasons, 16183. 
 
 Larminie, Alexander, Esq., Castlebar, Co. Mayo ; 
 Land Agent. — Castlebar. 
 Agent to Lord Lucan for about 70,000 acres ; 
 not much leased ; very many small farms ; 200 pay 
 no more than £4 a year, 16185-97. Lord Lucanhas 
 reclaimed much land iu his own occupation, 16198. 
 Tenants' houses very old ; built by themselves ; 
 some tenants have reclaimed, 16199—16205. Rents 
 well paid up to last year ; very little change in rents 
 in last twenty years ; some not changed in century, 
 16206-7. Sale of interest has occasionally taken 
 place, but contrary to rules of estate, 16208-9. 
 Some lands let too high thi'ough competition, 16212 
 —13. Tenement valuation no test for rent, 16218-21. 
 No eviction for sixteen years or change of tenant,^ 
 16228-30. Cannot suggest alteration in laws; 
 had no trouble with tenants till lately, 16234. 
 Arterial drainage carried out by Lord Lucan without 
 charge to tenants, 16235-8. Tenants have not 
 drained in connexion ; wishes they could be in- 
 duced to improve their holdings, 16239. 
 
 Larminie, W. R., Esq., Civil Service, Lower Bengal. — 
 Castlebar. 
 Coming home at intervals of seven or eight years 
 has seen great increase in scale of comfort, 16240-1. 
 Explained system of tenure in Lower Bengal, a kind 
 of fixity of tenure at fair rents, which he considered 
 would be suitable for Ireland, 16255. 
 
 Staunton, John, and others, Cloughna East, Co, Mayo ; 
 Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Holds eighteen acres at £23 6s. from William 
 Livingstone, who purchased from Lord Sligo in 
 1853, when rent was £6 10s., 16260-9. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixiii 
 
 Fitzgerald, Edward, Clouglma East, Co. Mayo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Tenants built houses and made improvements ; 
 timself spent £269 ; gave particulars of rent-raising 
 on property, 16270-6. 
 
 Conway, Martin, Cloughna East, Co. Mayo; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Cdst/ebar. 
 Holds six and a half acres at £1'2 16s., 
 in partnership, under lilv. Jordan, Crown Solicitor ; 
 Mr. Livingstone, head landlord. Rent fixed at 
 beginning of tenancy, twenty years ago. Land can 
 only be tilled in patches. Not able to pay rent. 
 Land worn out, 16277, 16312. 
 
 Dv^y, John, and others, Aughagower, "Westport, Co. 
 Mayo ; Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Tenants to Colonel Logan, Sydney Smyth, agent ; 
 C. M'Donnell oAvned estate in 1845. O'Flaherty 
 purchased from him in 1851, when rent of townland 
 raised from £45 to .£197, 1613-8. Colonel Logan, 
 whose sister purchased from O'Flaherty, reduced rent 
 to £179 17s. M. on succeeding to her, 16319-24. 
 
 McGinn, Patrick, Arderry, Aughagower, Co. Mayo ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Tenant to Lord Sligo. Rent was £28 in 1851 ; 
 £60 in 1853, £81 in 1854, £98 in 1859. Mr. 
 Sydney Smyth before Land Act raised rents from 
 day to day until tenants became a parcel of paupers, 
 16325-35. 
 
 Kerrigan, Anthony, and others, Toulegee, Co. Mayo ; 
 Tenant Farmei-s. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Rent in 1850 £50 8s., in 
 1862, £6f), subsequently raised to £84, and again to 
 £94, present rent ; tenement valuation, £81. Forty 
 houses on townland in 1850 ; only four now ; value 
 of forty houses included in tenement valuation, 
 16336-48. 
 
 Heraghty, Edward and Thady, Claddy, Co. Mayo ; 
 Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Evidence similar to foregoing 
 as to raising of rents. Original notice of agent as to 
 raising rents handed in, 16349-59. 
 
 Heraghty and Walsh, Widows, Bracklagh, Co. Mayo ; 
 Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Evidence as to raising of 
 rents, 16360-71. 
 
 Maguire, Patrick, and Nugent, Michael, Keelkill, Co. 
 Mayo ; Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Loi'd Sligo's estate. Evidence as to raising of 
 rents ; turf on own holdings charged for, 16372-83. 
 
 Melia, Patrick, Derryalra, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Evidence as to raising of 
 rent ; turf charged for, 16384-96. 
 
 Malley, Patrick, Bunraven, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Rents raised, 16397-16408. 
 
 Shanley, Thomas, Lackane, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Castlebar. 
 Lord Lucan's estate. Eight tenants in partner- 
 ship pay £71 iOs. 8(i. ; sixteen years ago rent was 
 £15 less ; £8 added then, and £7 about ten years 
 ago ; bog charged for, 16409-19. 
 
 Carney, John, Aughagower, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Rents raised ; built a house 
 without help from landlord ; made drains, and got 
 £10, 16420-31. 
 
 Heraghty, Thomas, Mayneen, Co. Mayo; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent raised by Lord Sligo in person, 1 6438. Land 
 taken by railway company about fifteen years ago, 
 and no compensation paid to tenant ; rent then £12; 
 was reduced to £10 on account of land taken; 
 again raised to £13 10s. in 1875, 16438-40. Pays 
 rates on full valuation, 16441. 
 
 M'Evilly, Rev. Jeremiah, p.p.', Aughagower, Co. Mayo. 
 — Castlebar. 
 Mentioned cases of excessive rents on estate of 
 Mrs. Burke who holds under Lord Lucan, 16443-5, 
 16465, 16467. 
 M'Donnell, Michael, Carramore, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farm er. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. List of rents and tenement 
 valuation of some tenants, 16446-8. 
 Burke, Thomas, Ayle, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Rents raised ; had been 
 improving, but had to stop it at third rise of rent, 
 16449-64. 
 Horan, Thomas, and Murphy, Martin, Dooncastle, 
 Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Lucan's estate. Rent raised within ten 
 years, 16468-74. 
 //o^raw, William, Tenant Farmer,Co. Mayo. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Bent raised ; got £100 from 
 America ; built house and reclaimed ; now cannot 
 meet his calls ; has a family of ten, 16475-7. 
 Gibbons, Walter, Bunrowan, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent raised; made improvements; rent unjust; 
 Lord Sligo refused personally to do anything for 
 him, 16478-81. 
 Malley, Owen, Carraroe, Aughagower, Co. Mayo ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Rent raised, 16482-4. 
 Maley, Pat, Aughagower, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Castlebar. 
 Lord Sligo's estate. Rent raised, 16485-6. 
 Stoney, Robert Vesey, Esq., Newport, counties Mayo 
 and Roscommon ; Landlord and Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 Holds under lease grass lands, at £400, on King- 
 Harman and Kennedy estates, 16487-93. Nearly 
 all his own are yearly tenants, 16496-7. There 
 ought to be jurisdiction before magistrates to 
 present subdivision by small tenants, 16499. In- 
 stance on own property of great subdivision, 
 16502-25. Assisted emigration the only remedy, 
 16526. 1,000 acres could be reclaimed, but not 
 remunerative, 16527. A new valuation ought to 
 be made; present no basis for rent, 16532-6. 
 Would approve of modified form of Longfield lease, 
 16536. Witness's father allowed tenant right in 
 Roscommon ; landlord chooses tenant, and slightly 
 raises rent ; rent raised by valuation on change of 
 tenancy, or dropping of lease, 16537-41. People 
 not dissatisfied until two years ago ; some are not. 
 paying ; fear to pay only an excuse, 16542-6. One 
 ejectment in Roscommon ; one in Newport town ; 
 woman returned time after time, and fined ;, 
 Land League paid fine ; rents can only be got by 
 coaxing, 16547-50. Spent £7.000 or £8,000 in 
 draining and reclaiming clay land ; reclaimed some 
 mountain, but it did not pay, 16550-5. It would 
 pay tenants to reclaim clay land, 16556. Never heard 
 of an eviction in neighbourhood but for non- 
 payment of rent, 16558. Thrift is wanted, not one 
 in a hundred thrifty, 16560. Would approve of 
 assisting a thrifty man, who had saved one-fourth 
 of the purchase money, to become a peasant pro- 
 prietor, 16561. 
 
 Burke, Patrick, Co, Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — Castle- 
 bar. 
 M'Cabe's estate. Rent raised over twice tenement 
 valuation ; landlord a middleman ; did some drain- 
 ing, 16565—76. 
 
 Butler, Patrick, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmei*. — Castle- 
 bar. 
 M'Cabe's estate. Lord Gilford head landloi'd. 
 Rent, £12 ; tenement valuation either 3Gs. or £1 • 
 rent used to be £8 10s., then £10 ; land all bo" 
 until reclaimed by witness ; rent raised after 
 building of house, 16577-96. 
 
J XIV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Duffy, Michael, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — Gastle- 
 har. 
 M'Cabe's estate. Eent raised ; present rent, £1 ; 
 tenement valuation, £1 bs. ; got £4 redaction last 
 year, lG.597-16605. 
 Flynn, Stephen, Kinnury, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Castlebar. 
 Charles Crotty's estate. Rent, £7 Is. &d. : 
 tenement valuation, £4: ; reclaimed bog ; evicted off 
 good land — not for non-payment of rent — about 
 twenty years ago ; landlord farms that land liLmself, 
 16G06-16. Fined for subletting, 16628-30. Rent 
 of townland raised by Mr. (Grotty from £100 to 
 £144 ■when he came in thii'ty years ago, 16633-7. 
 Evicted eleven tenants to make a farm for himself, 
 and made tenants pay costs of eviction, 16638-9. 
 Kane, Patrick, Kinnury, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Castlebar. 
 Crotty's estate. Rent too high ; bog money 
 charged ; paid as much rent as he could this year, 
 16640-7. 
 Iliggiiis, Patrick, Kinnury, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Fai'- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 Crotty's estate. Rent, £26 3s. ; tenement valua- 
 tion, £4 15s. ; rent raised by degrees from £9 (fifty 
 years ago), 16648-57. Has drained his holding, 
 16658-62. Mr. Crotty's life was attempted once 
 or twice, 16674. 
 O'Donnell, Patrick, near Westport, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Stephen Gibbons' estate. Rent too high to be 
 raised, 16679 ; reclaimed and drained some clay 
 land, 16683-8. Built two houses, 16691 ; rent 
 paid in good times, but some owed two years' rent 
 before, 16699. Did not work in England ; some of 
 tenants did, 1G701-2. 
 
 Thomas, Edwin, Esq., Barley Hill, Westport, Co, 
 Mayo ; Land Agent. — Castlebar. 
 Tenant farmer and agent for county Mayo estates 
 of Sir G. O'Donnell, Mr. J. N. Ferrall, and, formerly, 
 trusteesofAchill Mission, 16703-11. Tenant-right 
 exists on these estates; sale with consent of land- 
 lord ; no restrictions as to price or as to purchaser 
 unconnected with estate, 16712-14. Evictions un- 
 affected thereby ; sales now prevented by , Land 
 League not by financial reasons, 16715-9. Average 
 holdings seven or eight acres ; too small to support 
 families who workin Englandand Scotland, 16720-1 . 
 In Achill Island 4,000 acres of reclaimed mountain 
 for 600 tenants ; fit for tillage, but badly drained, 
 done by tenants, 16722-6. A mountain common- 
 age ; 5s. a head charged for cattle. Rents vary 
 from 5s. to £1 an aci-e, 16727-8. Tenants paying 
 highest rents live in villages away from their 
 holdings ; a bad system ; holdings here average fovn- 
 acres ; plenty of fishing but no suitable boats, 
 16729-33. Employment for reclamation wovild 
 do no good ; not enough land to sustain people ; 
 not enough sea manure at present even ; reclama- 
 tion would not be remunerative ; tenants do not 
 wish to purchase holdings ; assisted emigration of 
 two-thirds of small tenants only remedy ; probably 
 many families would go, 16737-48. Thinks Mr. 
 Pike, of Achill, allows tenant-right. Unrecognized 
 subdivision takes place. Men go to England ; girls 
 to Scotland ; really English and Scotch labourers ; 
 bring back from £7 to £15, out of which rent 
 paid ; free turf. Probably enough potatoes out of 
 holding for three or four months, but nothing else. 
 No branch of industry on island, 16749-61. Damp 
 climate and boggy land cause reclamation not to pay, 
 16762-4. Rents paid well till last few 3'ears, 16765. 
 Some of Sir G. O'Donnell's land very good. No eject- 
 ment but for nonpayment. No improvement by 
 landlord since Land Act. Sir George's father spent 
 £14,000 on estate. Large tenants and lessees are 
 well off. Small tenants pay about £7 or £8 a year ; 
 allowed to reclaim as much as they can without 
 additional rent. Free grazing. Tenants prosperous 
 
 and improving. Rents well paid, 17666-82. Mr. 
 Ferrall's estate between Castlebar and Ballyhaunis. 
 Farms fairly large. No mountaia grazing. But little 
 bog, 16783 -6. Tenant-right exists; sales were general, 
 none now. Rents fairly paid till last year. At 
 collection of May rents Land Leaguers outside office 
 to see whether reductions were given ; tenants had 
 rents, but not allowed to pay. Twenty-five per cent, 
 allowedonlastyear'srent; 10 percent.onhalf-yeardue 
 1st November, 16787-91. Subdivision may be said 
 not to exist, 16792. In Achill there is subdivision, 
 sometimes with disputes. Villagers before referred 
 to are squatters on common, and pay no rent for 
 houses; are wretchedly miserable, 16792-8. Sub- 
 division not allowed on Sir G. O'Donnell's estate ; 
 more easily prevented as tenant resides on holding. 
 Many go to America. Holding reckoned the share 
 of one, generally eldest, of family, 16800-4. In 
 Achill hardly any leases; many of Sir George's 
 tenants have leases ; they know better than to sublet, 
 16805-7. Ulster tenant-right ought to be extended 
 to all parts; a revaluation made instead of tenement 
 valuation ; and rents fixed accordiagly. Tenement 
 valuation no test to let land by ; dissatisfaction too 
 caused by excess of rent over valuation, 16808-10. 
 Written agreements ought to exist between landlord 
 and tenant that both might know exact terms of 
 tenure, 16811-2. No "labourers" in Achill; are 
 on some estates ; under farmers, house and garden 
 part of wages, pretty comfortable, fair cottiers' 
 houses, built by farmers. Veiy few labourers under 
 Sir G. O'Donnell. Most farms about Newport in 
 grass. Climate bad for ripening crops, 16813-20. 
 Last three very bad seasons ; previous seasons very 
 good for s6me time. People got to live in expensive 
 style ; instead of retrenching got into debt, 16821—4. 
 But little poultry in district; dealers in eggs and 
 poultry live in Westport and Newport. Fishing 
 utterly neglected ; much might be made of it ; 
 boats needed and instruction how to work them 
 16825-8, 
 Waters, Rev. Anthony, R.C., Administrator, Castle- 
 bar, Co. Mayo. — Castlebar. 
 Knows Falkiner's estate two miles from Castle- 
 bar. Mentioned cases of excess of rent over valua- 
 tion. Mr. Falkiner did not raise rents same as 
 when he bought seven or eight years ago from Mr. 
 Sheridan, who raised rents for purpiose of sale. 
 Tenants not improving. Lands cold and worn- 
 out. Too many tenants. Rental £500 or £600 
 16829-49. Mr. Ireland owned Corres. Mort- 
 gaged to National Bank. He became bankrupt. 
 Bank Manager receives . rents ; excessive, not 
 raised by Bank". Land bad. Bank unable to sell. 
 Tenants did not offer to buy. Could not make up 
 the money. Some might if helped with loan, 
 16850-60. Was priest, in Clare Island when 
 offered for sale by Mr. Berridge. Tenants could 
 not raise one-fourth of purchase-money. Mr. 
 M'Donnell bought for £11,500. Tenants poor. 
 Not a fit place to live in ; markets difficult of 
 access. Boats too small for deep sea fishing ; no 
 quay. Reclamation would be remunerative ; 
 people not numerous enough if reclamation was to be 
 done, 16860-71. M'Namaraon Lord Sligo's estate 
 Used to pay 15s. for an acre and a half; built a 
 house on it ; rent raised to £3 when house built ; 
 £5 afterwards demanded, but refused, 16872-3. 
 Knockagreenane tenants (Mr. Quinn's), in bad cir- 
 cumstances ; land worn-out and over-populated ; 
 could not make a living rent-free. People are 
 English labourers. In Achill families go to Eng- 
 land in spring, locking their houses, and come back 
 in August. At Louisburgh only men go and bring 
 home the rent, 16874-85. Tenants evicted from Sir 
 R. Blosse's estate for selling turf came to Mr. 
 Quinn's, Brrew, and overcrowded it, 16886-8. At 
 Oloonkeen, Lord Lucan's, there is a large joint-take. 
 Valuation £79 16s. 8rf. Rent, £123, which must 
 be paid in one sum; one or two names on rental, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixv 
 
 Waters, Rev. Edward — continued. 
 
 but liolding divided into lots averaging fourteen or 
 fifteen acres ; land good ; tenants most prosperous ; 
 large bank accounts ; rents not raised for lifteen or 
 sixteen years, 16888-16902. A small tenant with 
 family of five or six could live comfortably if he 
 had grass for five or six head of cattle, an acre of 
 potatoes, an acre and a half of oats, and free turf ; 
 that is about ten or twelve acre's of poor, or six of 
 good land. Potatoes and meal chief diet now ; 
 not many drunkards, 16903-8. Castlebar shop- 
 keepers owed large sums by farmers, 16908. 
 
 Gore, Sir Charles, Bart., Belleek Sfanor, Ballina, 
 Counties Mayo and Sligo ; Landowner. — 
 Gastlehar. 
 Owns 15,328 acres in Mayo, number of tenants 
 405,290 under £10 valuation; also owns 8,713 
 acres in Sligo, number of tenants 281,232 under 
 £10 valuation, 16909-13. Each estate has a very 
 large, as a kind of model, farm ; both in hands of 
 Scotchmen at high rents ; successful as regards 
 payment of rents up to this,16914-7. Competition 
 existed till lately for vacant farms, which were 
 generally partitioned among adjoining tenants, 
 16918-20. Sale of holding allowed subject to 
 tenant being approved ; does not know that such 
 right of sale tends to increase size of farms. Earms 
 are too small ; could not fix a size ; depends on 
 energy of man, and help at his disposal, 16921-6. 
 Tenants have not made valuable improvements. 
 Gives timber for building. Some open drainage ; 
 has been imperfectly done by tenants. Sir A. Gore 
 constant resident for forty years ; he made roads, 
 fenceSj and main drains in connexion with arte- 
 rial. System of agriculture bad ; fences bad ; 
 houses scarcely sanitary. Land stony or boggy, 
 stones partly removed, 16927-31. No record of 
 money spent by Sir A. Gore. £2,500 got in 1847 
 from Board of Works ; partly repaid by tenants ; 
 half by some, none by others. During last seven 
 years witness borrowed from Board of Works for 
 Sligo estate £1,440, and for Mayo £2,050, partly 
 under Relief of Distress Act, 16932-4. Rents not 
 raised by present owner ; not generally raised on 
 estate for"* twenty years ; in case of large tenants 
 interest on borrowed money added to rent ; rents 
 not raised upon change of tenancy ; valuations 
 made upon expiration of leases — such satisfactory 
 to both; tenants' improvements valued if he was 
 thought to have had the value of them. Holding 
 reclaimed ; land at a lovr rent for a certain 
 number of years would recoup tenant. Govern- 
 ment would tax landlords for reclamation. Usually 
 assists in reclamation. Not many leases on 
 estate, 16935-43. Land has risen in value as 
 well as other things ; during last favourable years 
 an opportunity of raising rent in. proportion to, 
 not up to, increased prices ; had not rents gene- 
 rally raised ; when land underlet, rent raised on 
 live and let live principle, 16944-50. Model farms 
 a success to limited extent, 16951. Reclamation 
 o-oes on slowly ; reclaimable land included in 
 farms; rents not increased for reclaination ; rents 
 have been raised on such farms^ not for improve- 
 ments by tenants; cannot say that valuator ex- 
 cluded such ; such tenants would not take leases, 
 16952-7. Mayo estate rental 25 per cent. Sligo 
 30 per cent, over tenement valuation, 16958-60. 
 Plenty of reclaimable land, but no capital to work 
 it ; if farmers were lent money, and had a certainty 
 that rents would not be raised, they might reclaim 
 vigorously, but supervision would be necessary to 
 enforce works of a general kind by tenants in con- 
 cert ; much reclaimable land absolutely in land- 
 lord's hands, 16961-8. Tenement valuation is not 
 uniform ; some qualities valued more highly than 
 others, 16969-71. Ten evictions fully carried out 
 in last ten years for non-payment only ; none last 
 year ; no difficulty in collecting rents on Mayo 
 
 - estate, some on Sligo. Made abatements and 
 started works. No open outrage in barony, 
 16972-7. Small purchasers of land anxious to ob- 
 tain highest interest for capital; such owners 
 afford grounds for allegations that are made against 
 landlords as a class, 1G977-81. When tenants 
 sell their interest useless to inquire amount paid, 
 16981-5. Does not see why Government should 
 interfere more in land than in other property ; ad- 
 mits there may be a necessity to check small land- 
 lords, 17059-60. Thinks that compensation for 
 disturbance ought to be abolished where free sale is 
 allowed. Secondly, that instead of the chairman, 
 a land court consisting of three persons qualified 
 by training and experience should be appointed,, 
 to which a lawyer might be added, to deal with 
 all land cases, including the ascertaining of fair 
 rent. Thirdly, that a Provincial Court of Appeal 
 should exist for review of appeals from Land Court ; 
 Appeal Court to be composed of members taken 
 from Land Courts — no further appeal, 17066-68. 
 
 Knox, Utred Augustus, Esq., Mountfalcon, Ballina, 
 Counties Mayo and Sligo ; Landowner. — 
 Castlebar. 
 
 Owns 5,011 acres in Sligo and 2,000 in Mayo. 
 Agrees generally with views of Sir C. Gore, 16986- 
 
 9. Not the v/ishes of tenants but intimidation 
 prevents payment of rents ; some tenants pay 
 in dribs and drabs to avoid intimidation, 16990-4. 
 Has 176 tenants on Sligo estate, near Tubbercurry, 
 127 under £10 valuation — seventy-three in Mayo, 
 fifty -three under £10 valuation. No leaseholder on 
 estate for last thirty odd years. His father made 
 twenty-one years' leases to all his tenants, which 
 expired about 1840, when they became tenants at 
 will, and rents have remained unchanged in all 
 cases, 16995-17003. Sale of holdings allowed 
 subject to landlord's approval of solvency and cha- 
 racter of incoming tenant, who is advised not to 
 over-burden himself by paying too high a price. 
 Generally prefers that adjoining tenant should get 
 a vacant farm, as not prudent to have small holdings 
 (under ten acres), 17004-7.. Has waste mountain 
 land. Small tenants isannot thoroughly improve 
 as going on adjoining land is necessary, 17008— 
 
 10. His tenants have written agreements; no re- 
 servation of right to make drains and roads ; roads, 
 made by landlords. Agreements (in. force for niner 
 years) are to pay rent from year to year, and not to 
 sublet or assign; similar to Chancery agreements, 
 17011-14. Describes arrangements at creation of a 
 new tenancy, 17015-9. Tenants have not thorough 
 drained, 17020-3. Had one eviction in last ten 
 years. Rents were not well paid last year ; tenants, 
 used to pay when able ; as a rule they owe three 
 half years' rent, 17024-7. Has always resided in. 
 the county, 17031-2. Has spent a good deal in 
 improvements; his father spent £22,000 on Mayo 
 estate, on farm roads, and on reclaiming demesne ; 
 has been in habit of helping Mayo tenants in build- 
 ing — not the Sligo tenants ; houses are generally 
 built by tenants, 17032-44. Holdings of less than 
 fifty acres are not beneficial to the country ; small 
 tenants after passing of Land Act got into debt 
 with shopkeepers, 17045-6. Tenancies ought to be 
 created by agreements in writing, and registered in 
 Land Court to be formed of non-resident practical 
 agriculturists, not by County Court Judge which is 
 an unsatisfactory tribunal ; improvements should 
 be registered in Court ; would leave the fixmg of 
 rents to such a Court, 17047-57. Large land- 
 owners do not rack rent their tenantry, Ijut little 
 gombeen men do; tenants' fearful rage for land 
 makes rack renting possible; believes emigration 
 necessary, 17057-9. Would prevent subdivision 
 by forfeiture of the farm; would stop evictions 
 substituting sale of tenants' interest. Exercise of 
 franchise ought to be dependent upon payment of 
 rent up to May, as in Poor Law, 17061-3 
 
Ixvi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Perij, Eclmond Henry, Esq., Coolcronan, Ballina, Co. 
 Mayo ; Landowner. — C'astlebar. 
 Agrees with, opinions of Sir C. Gore, 1706i-5. 
 Owns 5,000 acres in Mayo ; farms 500 acres ; has 
 spent about .£20,000 in improvements ; rents not 
 raised since 1868 ; tenants have changed among 
 themselves; no other changes, 17069-76. 
 
 Lyons, Rev. Patrick, C.C., Castlebar, I. of Achill. — 
 Castlehar. 
 Authorised by some Achill people to speak of 
 estate of Mr. Pike, 17077. Witness speaks from 
 trustworthy hearsay of time between 1851 and 
 1870 — since 1870 from personal knowledge. Mr. 
 Pike bought in 1851 ; the rental was £500 ; it is 
 now £1,400. About 1856 Mr. Pike evicted many 
 tenants from land reclaimed by themselves, sending 
 them to unreclaimed land at same rent ; two 
 graziers hold vacated fai-ms at £200 per annum. 
 Up to 1857 thousands of acres were free pasture 
 commonage ; then a trifling charge for each head of 
 cattle, amounting in all to .£100, was charged to 
 establish right ; this soon doubled. A charge also 
 made for first time for seaweed, 17078. After Land 
 Act Mr. Pike neutralized benefit as to rates l>y 
 adding equivalent to rents, 17079. Mr. Pike en- 
 courages subletting, as it is a bar to claim for com- 
 pensation for disturbance and he charges £1 a year 
 for every new house built, 17080. Achill people 
 do not know enough English to get on in America ; 
 some return. They could not live but for English 
 and Scotch work, 17083-4. In 1876 the charges 
 for grazing were again raised after resistance ; pro- 
 cesses were served, and tenants consented to arbi- 
 tration, which mitigated Mr. Pike's demand, 
 17084-6. Even in best years there is destitution ; 
 holdings average about three or four acres of 
 i-eclaimed bog. People could not live rent free ; 
 they live on money earned in England and Scotland, 
 17083-9. Witness considers Mr. Pike makes hard 
 terms about reclamations, 1708-9. 
 
 Hoj)Mns, John, (Jlonkesh, and others, Ballyvilly, Co. 
 Mayo ; Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Mr. Hopkins and eighteen other tenants, on estate 
 of ]\Tr. C. L. Fitzgerald, Turlough, complain of rents 
 much higher than valuation — the land bad, shaking 
 * bog, some of it, 17094, &c. ; made all buildings and 
 improvements themselves, 17098, &c.; would like 
 to emigrate in a body with their families ; it would 
 1)0 better than going to England to earn money for 
 the landlord — "like wild geese," 17155. One 
 tenant, J. Flannery, who pays £66 8s. 8rf., produced 
 agent's letter, threatening legal proceedings on 15th 
 February for half-year's rent due 1st November 
 last, 17163; rabbits on his farm are worth more 
 j)er annum than amount of his rent ; the}' injured 
 liis farm, and he is not allovred to touch them, 
 17167. 
 
 Gtibbiiis, Thomas, CuUabulane, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Hands in statement of tenants complaining of 
 not being allowed to burn weeds, raise mud for 
 manure, or cut bushes ; and of having to preserve 
 game, on Sir Pi. L. Blosse's estate, 17174-6. Rent, 
 £13, valuation, £7 10s., 17147. No rise of rent 
 for last seventeen years, 17177. 
 
 Larkin, Edmund, CuUabulane, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Paid rent till half a year ago, then asked for time, 
 and was refused, 17178-83. Rent, £22, raised in 
 1862, 17179-81. 
 
 l\PDonneU, Patrick, Clonci-omeen, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent too high, 17187-90. Grass land, very wet, 
 17192. Has improved, built house, 17194-5. 
 Landlord does not help, 17196. 
 
 Flannery, Thomas, Logahilla, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent too high, £17, 17197-201. Made improve- 
 ments, built three houses, 17202-3. Got no allow- 
 
 ance, 17204. Had a reduction of 4s. in the bad 
 times, 17205-6. 
 Mullins, John, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — Castle- 
 bar. 
 Was raised in 1855 and 1862, 17207. Has 
 improved, 17208. Rent, £7 10s., valuation, £4 16s., 
 17207-10. 
 Ilijlancl, Patrick, Cc, Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — Castle- 
 bar. 
 Was raised in 1854, 17211. Has to pay for turf, 
 now, 17215. Rent, £11 8s. ; valuation was £7 10s., 
 is now £10 5s., 17214. 
 Delaney, John, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — Castle- 
 bar. 
 Has paid the same rent for thirty-two years, 
 17220-4. The land is not able to support his 
 family, 17222-4-6. 
 Amber, James, Lisnolan, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Castlebar. 
 Tenant to Sir C. Domvile, 17237. Rent was 
 raised three times, the last time in 1859, 17228- 
 34. Drained it some time ago ; it is worth nothing 
 now, 17237-8. 
 Barrett, John, Lisnolan, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Castlebar. 
 Tenant to Sir C. Domvile, 17242. Hands in 
 statement of complaint of high rent, and rise of 
 ditto in 1859 for acres taken by him from bog, 
 17245. Last year was served with a writ, and put 
 to .£5 expense, for one year's arrear of rent, 17245— 
 50. 
 
 Sheridan, Martin, Lisnolan, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 The land charged at 25s. an acre is not worth 
 15s., 17254. 
 
 Highland, James, Lisnolan, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 Hands in statement of rents and Government 
 valuation in townlands of Lisnolan and Smuthnagh, 
 Sir C. Domvile's estate, 17260. Rents raised 
 twenty years ago, on tenants' improvements, 17260. 
 All are in debt to shopkeepers, 17263-4. Could 
 not save off the land; 17265. 
 
 Shells, Patrick, Lisnolan, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer, 
 — Castlebar. 
 Pays more rent than he can stand in future, 
 172G5 ; would not buy on terms of paying present 
 rent for thirty-five years, 17266-9 ; would not go to 
 America, there are more in it than can get land, 
 17270. 
 
 Brennan, Thomas, Lisnolan, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 M any have had to come back from America, life 
 there lieing unsafe, 17271 ; they could only support 
 , themselves there, but not dispose of their stock, 
 17272; has been in America, and would rather 
 stay at home at a fair rent, 17274-76. 
 Moran, Patrick, Ballynacargy, Co. Mayo; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Tenant on Gibbon's estate ; rent exhorbitant, 
 17277; can make nothing out of his farm, and 
 owes a couple of years' rent; rent, £18 10s. ; valua- 
 tion, £11, 17278. Bought his brother's share in 
 farm for £20 ; has improved the farm, 17280-94. 
 Mitchell, Edward, Milebush, Aglish, Co. Mayo, and 
 others. Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Tenants of Jjord Lucan, 17295. Rent last raised 
 twenty years ago, 17297. Landlord cannot pay 
 rent at all, 17300. No abatement, 17301. Built 
 the house, 17303. Other similar cases, 17313-5. 
 
 Armstrong, Mr. James, Milebush, Co. Mayo, Hotel- 
 keeper. — Castlebar. 
 Holds ten acres accommodation land of Lord 
 Lucan, 17316-28. Pretty fair- land, but did a good 
 deal of the improvement himself, 17318. The 
 valuation would be a good rent, 17321. Lord 
 Oranmore pays £1 an acre, 17323-6. Is satisfied 
 with his rent in another farm, 17330-2. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 jxvii 
 
 Corcoran, John, Milebusli, Co. Mayo, Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Gastlehar. 
 Pays £35; valuation, £19 10s., 17353. The 
 old rent w&n £19 ; the rise was within the last three 
 years, on the falling-in of a lease, 17336-41. The 
 rise is excessive, 17342. Reclaimed every bit of it 
 17343. 
 
 Hastings, Thomas, Augliadrinagh, Co. Mayo, Ten- 
 ant Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent raised from £14 to £20, twenty years ago, 
 17348-55. Bog taken away, 17356-62. 
 
 Walsh, John, Ardvarney, Co. Mayo, Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent£ll 10s. ; valuation, £7 15s., 17366. Made 
 proposal for it, 17370. Built a house, which was 
 burnt ; rebuilt it, and got half a year's rent, but 
 never had a clear receipt since, 17373. 
 
 0' Byrne, Patrick, Ardvarney, Co. Mayo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent, £11 10s. ; valuation, £7 15s. 
 VBonnell, Patrick, Ardvarney, Co. Mayo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent, £14 ; valuation £9, 17382. A couple of 
 pounds reduction would be of great use, 17386. 
 Could not save the rent imless they went to Eng- 
 land to earn it, 17386. 
 
 O'Donnell, Michael, Co. Mayo, Tenant Farmer. — 
 Castlebar. 
 Rent, £11 10s. ; valuation, £8. 
 
 Saunders, James, Co. Mayo, Tenant Farmer. — 
 
 Castlebar. 
 
 Tills three acres, lets out the rest, 17395-6. Has 
 
 buUt three houses, 17400. Has had to sell the 
 
 sheep, through the distress, 17398-400. Other 
 
 ^ases, 17402-4. 
 
 Flanagan, Mrs. James, Co. Mayo, Tenant Farmer. — 
 Castlebar. 
 Rent, £11; valuation, £7 10s., 17400. Hus- 
 band has been away five years in England, and she 
 is processed for rent, 17407. Has but small assist- 
 ance, 17409. 
 
 Philbin, John, Coursepark, Co. Mayo, Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Casttebar. 
 Rent, £16 16s.; valuation, £13 10s., 17414. 
 Has to go to England to earn the rent, 17415. The 
 work there is falling ofi, 17418-23. 
 
 Philhin, Peter, GarryduiF, Co. Mayo, Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Castlebar. 
 Rents seven acres of Lord Lucan, a sort of town- 
 park, at £22 16s. M., 17428. Cannot make the 
 rent now, 17435. 
 
 Doyle, Michael, Coursepark, Co. Mayo, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Rent too high, 1 7435. Farm taken by his father 
 for self and sons, as a matter of swap, 17439. 
 
 Gorman, Patrick, Manulla, Co. Mayo, and others; 
 Tenant Farmers. — Castlebar. 
 Tenant to Mr. Ormsby; rent, £10 10s. ; valuation, 
 £5 13s., 17469. P. Walsh, a tenant and also a 
 servant to agent, for going to races, was evicted about 
 fifteen years ago ; Eleanor Carroll because she would 
 not consult landlord about a husband for her daughter, 
 who was to remain with her mother ; Richard 
 Barrett without cause ; Pat Gorman because he had 
 too many children (his rent was paid), 17446-17460. 
 Rents were raised about six years ago, ,17470. 
 Agent is Mr. F. O'Donnell ; he took some of these 
 holdings himself, 17458-62. 
 
 Kennedy, James, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — Castle- 
 bar. 
 Is in landlord's service at 8d. a-day. Asked 
 leave to reap his crop and was refused. Cut it at 
 night after been forbidden to do so by landland. 
 Was fined 5s. once by his master when annoyed. 
 Got three bags of champions, but they are all eaten. 
 Rent, £6 ; valuation, £2 10s., 17476-80. 
 
 Flynn, Martin, Catford, Co. Mayo; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Castlebar. 
 His brother Pat holds five or six acres from Mrs. 
 F. Kenny, at rent of £9. All her tenants work in 
 England, 17481-92. 
 
 HoroM, Henry, Clogher Lynch, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Another tenant to Mrs. Kenny. Rent twenty- 
 seven years ago, £18 ; about twenty -six years ago 
 (not at dropping of a lease) rent raised to £30 ; 
 about twenty-four years ago rent raised to £48 ; 
 no change since ; five or six cottiers are liable for 
 this rent, 17492-17504. 
 
 Malley, Anthony, Carrajames, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Tenant to Messrs. Ormsby and Miller. Pro- 
 duced list of rent and valuation of holdings, and 
 considers rent too high. Present rents fixed four- 
 teen years' ago, 17505-27. 
 
 Egan, John, Knockbawn, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer- 
 — Castlebar. 
 He and Mr. M. Walsh tenants of General Cox 
 at Knockbawn, valuation £8, rent, £11 2s. 9c?., 
 17534; fixed eighteen years ago; land used to be 
 15s. an acre, raised to 25s. twenty-two years ago, 
 17531 ; sale of interest is allowed, knew of only one 
 case, 17542-3. 
 
 V/alsli, Edward, Knockbawn, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 General Cox raised his rent £4, 17547. 
 
 Gannon, James, Co. Mayo ; Tenant Farmer. — Castle- 
 bar. 
 J. Gannon's father is tenant to Colonel Cuffe for 
 ten acres, at £13 10s. ; too high ; same for twenty- 
 four years, 17550-1. People cannot now pay the 
 rent they used to pay. English wages worse. 
 Crops very bad now. Land has got worse, 1 7552-62. 
 His father has reclaimed and improved somewhat, 
 17567. 
 
 O'Domiell, Francis, Esq., Castlebar, Counties Mayo 
 and Sligo ; Land Agent. — Castlebar. 
 Tenant farmer and land agent to Sir R. Palmer 
 iu Sligo and Mayo ; holds land under Lord Lucan, 
 Sir. R. Palmer, Mr. Ormsby, and Mr. Miller ; pay- 
 ing about £800 a year rent, 17577-81, 17597. On 
 Sir R. Palmer's estate, when leases fell in it used to 
 be the custom, about twenty years ago, to have the 
 land surveyed, revalued, and striped, when the 
 occupying tenants used to pay so much to the tenant 
 sent away ; now landlord takes place of occupying 
 tenants, 17583. Does not believe that D. Duffy was 
 treated so ya 1869 ; he, may have lost a little in the 
 stri]ung; some lose, some gain, 17582-7. As re- 
 gards tines, W. Flanagan never was fined for not 
 paying his rent in time, he may have had to pay 
 legal costs, 17588. If tenants did not whitewash 
 their houses once a year they were liable to a fine of 
 5s.; out of 1,650 tenants five or six may have been 
 fined; does not remember a case for the last ten years, 
 17592. No fines for cutting turf; if on a townland 
 where turf was running short, a man cut more than a 
 certain amount he had to pay for the excess, 17593. 
 Quite imtrue that he compelled tenants to save hay 
 for him ; any arrangement was made in open mar- 
 ket without pressure, 17595. On Ormsby and 
 Miller's estate most .positively denies that W. 
 Foster was evicted for refusing to work at 8d. a 
 day, it was for non-payment of rent ; also that P. 
 Walsh was evicted for going to races ; forgets why he. 
 was, 17597. Eleanor Carroll may have been, because- 
 she married her daughter without consent to a man 
 who was to reside in the house— this to prevent, 
 subdivision ; there had been a grown up man in the- 
 house. The rule is that one person may be married 
 and come into the house, 17604. Nonsense that 
 P. Gannon was evicted because he had a large family 
 17609. Does not remember Vhy J. Kennedv cr 
 J. David were evicted, 17613. Has soree land 
 
 h 
 
l.vviii 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 OLDonnell, Francis — continued. 
 
 that was in possession of Burke, Walsh, and Carroll, 
 and was wasted by them, 17618. Believes all 
 these evictions were for non-payment of rent, 17619. 
 Eightpence a day was the common rate of wages at 
 the time before referred to, 17621. All these 
 tenants were labourers, and thought they were ruined 
 when former employer died, 17621. Did not come 
 prepared to answer particular questions about any 
 but Palmer's estate, 17623. Land is light limestone 
 running into bog ; tenants have made any existing 
 reclamation, 17627. Bents in cases where men 
 used to make money by labour may now be too 
 high, 17626. Palmer's Mayo estate let at 18J 
 per cent., unleased agricultural lands at 12 per 
 cent., grass land and mountain at 30 per cent, over 
 valuation. Mayo estate 86,578 acres ; leased lands 
 14,793; number of tenants 1,637; 366 pay over £1Q 
 rent. Sligo estate 21,191 acres, 17623-30, 17630. 
 Number of evictions for ten years ending 1869 — 
 thirty-one for non-payment, and eight on the titles 
 of the eight real evictions only three tenant 
 resided on the estate. For ten years ending 1879, 
 two for non-payment and six on the title, but five 
 were to have grazings ; in two cases tenants' interest 
 sold by sheriff, and in three the farms sublet, 
 17630-1. £7,078 borrowed under Land Improve- 
 ment Acts (four-fifths for Mayo estate); £2,397 under 
 Arterial Drainage Act, and £4,302 spent in build- 
 ing, fencing, draining, etc., partly in building upon 
 squaring farms. Landlord contributes £5 towards 
 building cottages, 17631. A general fixing of 
 rents was in 1854; none since then, 17631. 
 Last two years hard on tenants, 17632. Gives 
 instances of demands made for abatements ; none 
 granted. It has been put into the people's head 
 that rent ought not to be more than the valuation. 
 Bad times have cleared the people out ; cannot won- 
 der at their being unreasonable, 17633-52. There 
 is waste land which would be an unprofitable gift ; 
 not much reclaimed by tenants, 17653. Money 
 has been spent in drainage for tenants. Rents not 
 raised for improvements, 17665. Loan from Board 
 of Works repaid by Sir E. Palmer, 17666. Tenants 
 "nT.ll not keep drains clear ; say it will not drain 
 past their neighbotir, 17667-68. 
 
 Daly, Mr. James, Castlebar, Co. Mayo; Newspaper 
 Editor and Tenant Farmer. — Castlebar. 
 Farmer and Newspaper Editor, made statement 
 giving both valuation and rents on some holdings 
 of Mr. 0. Blake, Col. Seymour, Mr. Lambert, Miss 
 Martin, Mr. Lynskey, Mr. M. M'Donnell, Sir R. 
 Palmer, Miss Lynch, and Mrs. F. Kenny, Sir E. 
 L. Blosse, Mrs. Acton, Marquess of Sligo. Col. Logan, 
 Anthony Ormsby, and others, 176b9-86. Can 
 .speak from knowledge of fifty estates in the county, 
 17671. Thinks Mr. Ormsby Blake increased his 
 rents in 1868, 17671. Colonel Seymour's rack- 
 rents caused a meeting at Milltown, 17 071. Mr. 
 Lambert raised rents on the tenants' industry, 
 17673. Men who were comfortable tenants on 
 Mr. M'Donnell's estate, when he bought it, eighteen 
 years ago, are now insolvent, 17673. Sir Roger 
 Palmer refuses abatements; his new lettings are 
 over-rented, 17673. There was a middleman, a 
 member of the Palmer family before ; the rents 
 were raised from £45 to £101, 17674. Distress on 
 Clogher Lynch and Catford estate, 17676-8. Pro- 
 cesses served on Sir R. L. Blosse's estate, 17678. 
 Arbitrary rent-raising on ditto, 17678. Mrs. Acton's 
 estate; rents too high, 17678. Marquess of Sligo's, 
 the people are rackrented, j^iaupers, andstar^ong, even 
 in plentiful years, 17678. Colonel Logan's rackrents, 
 17678. Anthony Ormsby's rules excessive and ob- 
 jectionable ; the Land League farm at Ballintafiy ; a 
 house built in a sandpit, tenant having a more suitable 
 one already ; then ejected, and £5 compensation 
 awarded, ] 7678. William Meade, Swinford, pawn- 
 broker, rents increased, people pauperized, 17678. 
 Statement ofrentsinClaremorris union, 17678. Lord 
 
 Oranmore got his tenants out, and now lets the 
 lands annually by auction, 17678. W. M. Bourke, 
 cases of rent-raising, 17678. Estate of the late Geo. 
 Clive, M.P., reclaimed lands ; rent much above the 
 valuation, 17678. Estate of Captain Twinford, the 
 same, 17678. Estates of C. M. Coyne and Arthur 
 Bingham, the same; duty work exacted, 17678. 
 Thomas Billington, the same ; T. C. Walsh, cases 
 of ejectment for non-payment of high rents ; the 
 land dear at the valuation, 17678. Bernard Coyne, 
 rent-raising, 17678. F. L. Comyn, ejectments served 
 for non-payment of rackrents, 17678. Sir Compton 
 Domvile, prohibition of marriage, 17678. Mr. 
 Pratt, rents doubled, 17678. Lord Lucan has ab- 
 sorbed the good land, and driven out the tenants, 
 17678. James Faulkner, Mrs. Ruane, John 
 Coyne, cases of high rent, 17678. Tenants 
 in town to-day to give evidence are being served 
 with processes for rent, 17685. Good fattening 
 lands are worth tenement valuation, or perhaps 
 more ; poor land is too high at it ; taken all in all 
 tenement valuation is a fair valuation, 17688. 
 Waste lands ought to be purchased by Government, 
 let in parcels of 20 or 30 acres to tenants in over- 
 crowded districts, who should be started with 
 capital to be repaid, with purchase-money, in 35 
 years, by instalments. Farmers in Mayo would like 
 this. 155,000 waste acres in Erris, and 100,000 in 
 Tyrawley barony, 17689-91. Amplifies suggestion, 
 17692-6. Land League encouraged payment of 
 rents to Colonel Oufie, a good landlord, 17697. 
 Absenteeism the curse of the country ; oaght to be 
 taxed, 17698. An Act giving perfect security, 
 arranging valuation between landlord and tenant, 
 allowing tenant to sell his interest absolutely, with 
 provisions for creation of peasant proprietors, would 
 meet the present case. Is a Land Leaguer, but 
 would fight against revolution ; the people are misre- 
 presented ; was himself foolishly arrested lately, 
 17699, 17700. Question will never be settled unless 
 a tribunal has power to settle rents between land- 
 lord and tenant, 17701. Cases above referred to 
 are returned as representing the general rate of 
 rents u^jon the named ^states, 17702-8. Case on 
 Bernard Coyne's estate, 17711. 
 
 Stephens, Rev. John, C.C. — Castlebar. 
 
 A mistake to send people out of the country ; 
 enough of reclaimable land in it ; 5,500,000 is not 
 overpopulation for Ireland, 17709-11. Old land- 
 lords frequently forget their duties, but never their 
 rights ; still, are a thousand times better than pur- 
 chasers in Land Courts, 17711. Tenants ought to 
 be purchasers by means of loans repayable in 35 
 years, 17711. 
 
 Fox, Patrick, senior, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — 
 Roscommon. 
 Tenant of Rev. R. P. Jackson, Castlemiues, agent, 
 C. Allen, esq., 17712-5. Complains of rise of rent, 
 twenty-two years ago, 17716-9. Farms 36a, 3k. of 
 rocky land, very poor, 17720-1. Had to enter into 
 a written agreement, unwillingly, 17722. The rent 
 was raised from £33 6s. to £60 ; the valuation is 
 £23 10s., 17716-9, 17732-4. The holding is sub- 
 divided, but is held as one, 17730-1, 17734. 
 
 Fox, William, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — Roscom- 
 mon. 
 Valuation, £11 ; rent, £60, 17734. 
 
 Garrihan, Patrick, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — Ros- 
 common. 
 Rent, £14 10s. ; valuation, £8 5s., 17735. It is 
 a subdivided holding, 17736-41. The rent for the 
 three is £36 ; raised from £20 ; the valuation 
 £21 10s., 17742-5. Farms twenty-one and half acres, 
 not good land, all in grass, 17746-9. Does not liye 
 on it, 17749-51. Has another holdingfrom Captain 
 Gofi'; the rent is unreasonable enoiigh, £12 10s., 
 30s. higher than the valuation, 17751-5. It was 
 raised three years ago, £3 12s. 6c?., 17756. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixix 
 
 Garrihan, James senior, Castlemines, Tenant Parmer. 
 — Roscommon. 
 Holds jointly at £36 ; raised from £20 10s., 
 17757-9. Valuation, £19 5s., 17760. The rise 
 twenty-two years ago, 17761. Lives on Cajitain 
 Goff's estate; pays £16; valuation, £12 15s., 
 17763-5. A rise was made fourteen years ago, 
 17766-70. 
 
 Garrihafi, James, junior, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Roscommon. 
 Lives on the land ; has spent £70 on a house ; 
 is not allowed to break up an acre of meadow ; has 
 th ree acres of tillage ,17771. Hasnotbeen allowed 
 any reduction, 17 776. 
 Hanly, Thomas, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — Ros- 
 common. 
 Pays £4 rent; vahiation, £2 15s., 11111. Has 
 two acres, one heathy moor, not worth 15s., 17779. 
 The rise was from 36s., 17783. 
 
 Gannon, Thomas, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — Ros- 
 com/mon. 
 Rent, £25 ; valuation, £15 5s., 17734-5. Has 
 nursed the land five years, never breaking a sod, and, 
 if he never eats a bit, it is not able to pay the rent, 
 ■17786. All in grass but two acres; not worth 
 more than 14s. an acre, 17787. Was going to be 
 evicted for non-payment of rent, but settled it, 
 17787-98. Came from America, married the widow 
 of the tenant, and settled down in it, having a few 
 pounds which are gone, 17788-9, 17797. 
 Sliea, James, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — Roscom- 
 mon. 
 Holds four acres ; ' rent, £5 ; valuation, 30s., 
 17799-801. The rise was from 30s. twenty-two 
 years ago ; we had reclaimed all but one acre, and 
 we never reclaimed that since, 17802-4. 
 M'Ga/rry, John, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — Ros- 
 common. 
 Pays £37 for twenty-seven acres ; valuation, 
 £27, 17805-7. Rent paid up to the last year or so, 
 17813. Produces return of rents, valuation, former 
 rent up to 1859, and number of acres of thirteen 
 tenants, 17817. 
 M'Donnell, Mr. John, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — ■ 
 Roscommon. 
 Holds 300 acres of bog, worth nothing, 17818. 
 Has seventy-five acres of grass-land, 17819-21. 
 Pays £130 to Mr. Jackson, 17822-5. Father took 
 a lease twenty-six years ago for twenty years, and 
 on expiration £40 additional was put on, 17826-8. 
 The bog could be reclaimed, if the landlord laid out 
 anything on drainage, 17830-2. Cannot reclaim, 
 from the "way the rent is raised, 17833-4. 
 MiXrphy, Thomas, Holly well, Co. Roscommon ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscom,m,on. 
 Mr. T. Murphy and thirteen tenants individually 
 examined as to Colligue estate (G. Goodall, Esq., 
 owner; Crawford Allen, Esq., agent), 17836. Land 
 rocky and boggy. Rents too high ; raised in 1867, 
 17841. A deposit of more than a year's rent taken 
 by landlord at begiimuig of each tenancy ; no . re- 
 ceipt given for it, nor interest paid, 17851. All 
 buildings, improvements, and reclamations done by 
 tenants or their predecessors, 17862. Turbary ls.6c^. 
 a perch. Land planted or taken from tenants, and 
 in some cases no reduction in rent ; raised in one 
 case. Puts in schedule of names of twenty-five 
 tenants, present tent, former rent, valuation, and 
 amount of " deposit," 17862. 
 Hunt, Thomas, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 : Pays £66 ; raised from £47 8s. in 1867, 17862 ; 
 has improved, 17866. 
 Monaghan, Patrick, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Has reclaimed land ; all red bog, 17870. 
 Banahan, WilHam, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Lost four acres of his best land ; rent reduced, 
 
 but not enough, 17872. The deposit was to secure 
 the landlord ; he raised the rents so high he thought 
 the tenants would fail, 17875 ; are running in debt 
 for it, 17876. 
 Cowry, Patrick, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Holds twenty-seven acres at £47, 17878. Tenants 
 pay for bog, 17885. 
 
 M'DermoU, Thomas, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. —Roscommon. 
 Rent £20, valuation £10 18s.; paid the deposit, 
 17887 ; went in last November, 17894. 
 
 O^Mally, John, Castlemines, Tenant Farmer. — Ros- 
 common. 
 Consented that some spots on his farm should be 
 planted by landlord ; afterwards asked for compen- 
 sation ; got notice to quit, and rent was raised £4 
 about eighteen months ago, 17907. Got notices to 
 quit ; if he had known he was entitled to compen- 
 sation for improvement, would have refused to pay 
 increased rent ; thought that only small tenants re- 
 siding on farms had such a right, 17919; he Hves 
 offhis holding, 17922. 
 
 Wa-rcl, John, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer . — Roscomm,on. 
 TSvo acres of five have been taken away, and rent 
 raised, 17923 ; lias paid it twenty-three years, 
 17927. 
 Madden, Patrick, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Rent raised from 17s. Qd. an acre to £1 12s., 
 17927. 
 Farrell, John, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Rent raised twenty-four years ago, 17937-9. 
 Farrell, Patiick, Colligue, Go. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Rent raised nineteen years ago, 17930. Father- 
 in-law built a house, and made improvements, 
 17932. Mrs. Farrell was worn down with debt, 
 and the neighbours afraid to take her in, 17952. 
 
 Farrell, Mrs. Edward, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Roscommo'n. 
 Was put out for non-payment of rent last April, 
 17935. Owed £21 ; had a deposit of £10 in the 
 landlord's hands, which recovered, 17940. Hus- 
 band in England, 17969. Was put into gaol thi'ee 
 times for returning to the house, 17951. 
 
 Brennan, Mrs., Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant.' — ■ 
 Roscommon. 
 Is about to be turned out ; owes two years' rent,, 
 17957. The landlord has £3 in his pocket, 17960. . 
 
 Kelly, Patrick, Colligue, Co. Roscommon, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Was forced to build a barn and piggery ; has - 
 built and repaired house, and not been raised ; Mr._ 
 Smith, the agent, treated him well, 17965. 
 
 Kilroe, Mr. James, Castlecoote, Co. Roscommon; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant on Mr. Lecky's estate, near Castlecoote, 
 along the river Suck. Agent, Mr. Hugh Smith, 
 and landlord both live in Coleraiae, 17966. Handed 
 in schedule of particulars, showing complaints of 
 tenants, 17969. Rent used to be £27 18s. M. ; raised 
 in 1856 to £42 7s. M.—15 per cent, over Grifiith's 
 valuation, 17979. £10 3s. M. has lately been 
 taken off. Went to Coleraine and saw Mr. Lecky 
 17975. Other tenants allowed only 12-1- per cent.' 
 17983. Estate in Lecky family about seventy years • 
 formerly Mitchell estate, 17966-86. George Smith' 
 aged eighty-two, uncle of witness, is a yearly tenant; 
 reclaimed 10 acres of furze; built premises costing' 
 £500 ; dwelling-house two stories high, barn, straw 
 house, carhouse, shed for forty head of cattle, and 
 cowhouse for ten, all slated. This done before 1856, 
 and was valued for rent, witness believes, 17987' 
 William, son of George Clarke, used to hold 34 acres' 
 valuation £43, rent £83. Died, leaving four children' 
 
 k 2 
 
Ixx 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSIOK, 1^80. 
 
 Kilroe, James — continued. 
 
 aged eight to fourteen. Now, practically, holdings 
 of George and William are one. So much money 
 sunk where the children will not be able to live out 
 of the land, 17990. Lost land for the river Suck 
 drainage, 18004. A year's rent is due on all the 
 estate, 18009. Complaints of Mr. 0'E,orke as land- 
 lord, 18010. Dangerous to have a landlord like 
 Mr. Lecky alongside of Sir C. Goote, with whom all 
 satisfied, 18014. Mr. Holmes will get all rents for 
 Captain Gofi', Lord Crofton, and Mr. Caulfield, 
 18016. 
 Downey, Mr. Joseph, Kilruskey, Co. Roscommon ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant, four miles from Roscommon, to Mrs. 
 Digby. ISTone of her tenants are dissatisfied with 
 her. Free sale allowed to the tenants, 18019-24. 
 Knows Mr. Goodall's, Cooltigue; valuation £268 
 14s.; old rent in Mr. Blackeney's time £308 12s. 
 When Mr. Goodall bought about fifteen or sixteen 
 years, rents raised to £431 10& Tenants in state 
 of beggary ; got relief from Committee during 
 last twelve months ; caused by bad times and high 
 rents. £408 belonging to tenants deposited with 
 landlord. High rents enforced under threats of 
 eviction, 18024-37. Fairmount was rented at £300 
 odd by Mrs. Lyster six or seven years ago ; it now 
 belongs to Mr. Hudson, who receives £600 odd ; 
 tenant's beggared; including waste land, must be 
 £1 86". an acre; holdings average 12 to 14 acres; 
 crops were bad this year. Three evictions, but none 
 carried out, as indignation meeting held, 18038-77. 
 An anonymous case of raising I'ent unfairly. Tenants 
 not able to pay rent, nor to pay for what they eat ; 
 witness knows it, as he is in business ; there were 
 ejectments, but no evictions. Father O'Connor in- 
 terfered ; case appeared in newspapers. Four shil- 
 lings in the pound was given as an abatement, 
 18079-96. 
 O'Brien, Mr. Denis, Eockfield, Co. Eoscommon; 
 Tenant-farmer, Roscommon. 
 Tenant to Mr. Dunne, at Rockfield, three miles 
 from Roscommon, holds forty-seven acres under 
 lease made sixteen or eighteen years ago, for twenty- 
 one or a life, 18097. His son's still living. With 
 regard to previous lease at rent of £12 2s. 4(^., dis- 
 putes as to survival of life in lease, landlord insisted 
 on rent of £.50, still unpaid, 18101. Sank at least 
 £200 in machinery and kilns instead of old works 
 of a mill, on holding. Mill not paying now, 18102. 
 M''as shifted about arbitrarily from another holding, 
 and moved to a holding from which a tenant had 
 been turned out, 18112. Landlord promised he 
 would make his ])lace worth the rent overcharged, 
 but never did, 18114. , 
 
 Doorley, John, Rockfield, Co. Roscommon ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Holds land next to O'Brien's at £1 an aci-e; too 
 much. He made all improvements himself. Has 
 always paid rent when demanded, 18121-38. 
 Glancy, James, Esq., Enfield, Castlerea, Co. Roscom- 
 mon ; Tenant Farmer and Landowner. — Ros- 
 common. 
 Is connected with 2,500 acres ; 500 acres let to 
 tenants, the rest in his own hands, partly his own, 
 ])artly rented, 18139-43. Tenants in his district 
 have the right of selling their interest. Has paid 
 •outgoing tenants four years' purchase ; rent not 
 affected by custom of sale ; purchased land in 1862, 
 and did not alter rents since; raising of rent not 
 general latterly, 18144-55. Most large grass farms 
 held on lease for thirty-one years usually ; restrictive 
 covenants unusual; fines sometimes paid; witness 
 fined down rent of lease from Lord Crofton for 
 Duke of Connaught's life; since Land Act tenants 
 not anxious to get leases, before it they were, 
 18156-64. Tenement valuation not uniform, in 
 some places sufficient, in others not enough for 
 rent; gave an instance. Excluding grass farms, 
 rents on large estates about equal to tenement 
 ^'aluation, in new lettings 20 or 25 per cent. 
 
 more is charged ; the rent I pay not changed 
 since 1862, by Lady Johnston, it is same as 
 tenement valuation; it is grass land of good 
 quality, 18165-76. Landlords generally execute 
 arterial drainage, and sometimes thorough drains 
 and road making ; spent £1,000 (Board of Works 
 loan), chiefly on land in his own hands ;. tenants are 
 in the houses he found them in, no new building. 
 Land Act has certainly checked landlords' improve- 
 ments ; in some cases works in progress were 
 stopped. Tenants have not improved more since 
 Land Act, 18177-84. Lai-ge, but not small, 
 tenants have purchased; his brother bought by 
 private sale ; wanted loan from Board of Works, but 
 refused, except on Land Court title; was obliged to 
 do without loan rather than face expense and delay. 
 Tenants cannot afford to withdraw their working 
 capital in order to purchase, even when Government 
 advances part ; men who have saved money could 
 buy, 18184-91. Not any reclaimable land in dis- 
 trict ; plenty of bogs, but irreclaimable until cut 
 away, then very valuable ; large reclamation failed 
 on Mr. Pollock's property, clay sank through light 
 soil, 18192-6. Owners of large pasture farms ought 
 to be entitled to compensationfor planting, for shelter, 
 and for fencing and dividing land; 100 acres un- 
 divided do not feed as much stockasforty acres divided 
 by hedges, the improvement should be actual and per- 
 manent ; would give no compensation to such farmers 
 for disturbance. No tillage in district, crops won't 
 ripen ; sheep pay small farmers better, 181 96-18211. 
 
 M'Donnell, Farrell, Esq., Co. Roscommon ; Land- 
 owner, Merchant and Trader. — Roscommon. 
 Landowner, rental £1,300, aiso farms 300 acres, 
 and is a merchant and trader in Roscommon, 18212. 
 Wishes to speak generally of protection for improve- 
 ments in houses in towns as well as on farms ; lost 
 £280 by improving a house in town, 18215. A 
 landlord who has not contributed towards improve- 
 ments has no right to charge additional rent for 
 improved value ; landlord ought to be placed on 
 same footing as other creditors, with exception of 
 one year's rent, 18215. Landlord can now evict 
 for two years' rent, he ought not to have power 
 to eject for more than a year's rent, 18129. If a 
 landlord ejected for two or three years' rent, he 
 should realize value of- tenant's interest, keep a 
 year's rent, and rank with other creditors against 
 balance of value of interest, 1S224. 
 
 A.B. — Roscommon. 
 
 Tenant five miles from Roscommon ; land bad ; 
 liable to floods; valuation £3 5s., 18228. Rent 
 raised to £8 twenty-five year's ago, too high, not 
 able to pay it now, a struggle in good times, 18232. 
 Does not go to England; works about 140 days a 
 year with landlord. Is. Qd. a day last sttmmer; has 
 paid last year's rent in labour, 18238. Would be 
 glad to go if landlord would give something, 18242. 
 The holding would not support him rent free, 18249. 
 
 Mullaley, James, Lisagallin, Co. Roscommon ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant three miles from Roscommon, to J. P. 
 Conry, a middleman, who bought in 1874, 18250. 
 Valuation of land, 18s. an acre; of land and three 
 houses, £4 15s. ; old rent, £5 3s.; rent since 1874, 
 £6 8s., 18154. Is a carpenter, lives by his trade, 
 loses by land, 18255. 
 
 Mills, Michael, Lisagallin, Co. Roscommon ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscom/mon. 
 Tenant to J. P. Conry ; handed in schedule of 
 tenants' names and particulars ; not a head land- 
 lord, but middleman ; that does harm, 18258. Mr. 
 Conry bought for £3,300, and of it borrowed £1,700 
 from Board of Works, 18263-71. Landlord does 
 not improve holdings, 18274. 
 
 Kilroe, Laurence, Aughagower, Co. Roscommon ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant to Mr. Pakenham Mahon at Augha- 
 gower, 18276. Tenement valuation too high; old 
 rent, £16 ; raised to £25 in 1859, 18277. Was 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixxi 
 
 Kilroe, Laurence — contiimed. 
 
 offered lease at £16 ; regrets having refused it, 
 18285. Spent £100 in improvements, 18284. 
 Large farmers on estate comfortable ; small have 
 been getting relief, 18294. Mr. Mahon lets land 
 at Strokestown low, 18299. Witness lives by 
 exporting eggs and butter, 18302. 
 
 Kelli/, Michael, Lisanedin, Co. Roscommon; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant to Mr. O'Rorke at Lisanedin. Valuation, 
 £10 13s. U., rent, £16, 18303. Twelve years ago, 
 when Mr. O'Rorke succeeded, rent raised for two 
 years ; reverted to old rent, 18308. No tenants 
 have sold interest or left estate, 18325. Refused 
 to pay May rent without reduction, 18334. 
 
 Kilmartin, Thomas, Cloonenbawn, Co. Roscommon ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant at Dunne's Cloonenbawn estate in Chan- 
 cery, 18335. Rent raised to £2 nine years ago ; £1 
 was the first rent he paid ; it used to be 5s., 18339. 
 Cut-away bog reclaimed by tenant, 18340. Some- 
 times works for Is. a day, with food occasionally, 
 18350. 
 
 Doran, Andrew, Cloonenbawn, Co. Roscommon ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant on Dunne's estate ; no complaint except 
 want of passage refused by neighbours, which 
 prevents him from making the rent, 18357-70. 
 
 WaJdron, Martin J., Athleague, Co. Roscommon ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Tenant to Messrs. Jameson^ and West for nine 
 acres of Athleague. Valuation £7, rent £10 3s. Aid. 
 for thirty years before 1873, when on account of 
 lands being affected by old unheard of lease (Taaffe 
 to West) witness was processed for rent of £16, 
 which was recovered; lease expired in .1874, 
 18371-84. 
 
 Doorley, Mr. J. C, Roscommon, Merchant and Tenant 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 Draper in Roscommon, and tenant-farmer ; for- 
 merly a pupil at Albert model firm, 18385. Took 
 eight acres from Mr. M. Nolan ; paid fine of £3 an 
 acre ; valuation £7, rent £16 16s. ; spent much in 
 drainage, 18387. Fears that because he does not 
 live on farm he could have no claim for compensa- 
 tion for improvements if evicted for non-payment 
 of rent, 18389. Landlords raise the rent if tenants 
 improve land, 18391. 
 
 Kelly, John, Co. Roscommon ; Tenant Farmer. — Roa- 
 com/mon. 
 Holds under Mr. Nolan; valuation £6 10s., rent 
 £20 ; evicted for non-payment of a year's rent, 
 18392-6. 
 
 Flynn, Peter and John, Derry Carberry, Co. Ros- 
 common ; Tenant Farmers. — Roscommon. 
 Tenants to Mr. P. Mahon. Landlord proposed in 
 1851 to pay half for certain buildings ; levelled old 
 buildings then, but unable to rebuild until 1870 ; 
 spent £400 ; landlord refused to contribute ; rent 
 raised £5 in 1859 to £19 15s. for seventeen acres ; 
 this raising after striping, 18397-18404. 
 
 Morris, Patrick, Co. Roscommon ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Roscomm,on. 
 Tenant to Mr. Waitman. Rents raised four or 
 five years ago ; too high ; improved and built without 
 aid of landlord, 18405-34. 
 
 Kennedy, John, and others. County Roscommon; 
 Contractor and Tenant Farmers. — Roscommon. 
 
 Rent raised four or five years ago, £17, 18426. 
 Too high, 18427. Landlord stopped drainage 
 works by Lord Crofton, 18428. Others confirm, 
 18428. 
 
 Kelly, Edward, County Roscommon, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Roscormnon, 
 Tenant of Mr. Waitman, 18430. Rent raised 
 on improvements, 18432. Others confirm, 18433. . 
 
 Naughten, Patrick, Feeragh, Co. Roscommon ; Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Roscommon. 
 
 Tenant to Mr. Fawcett. Rents in excess of 
 
 valuation ; last raised about ten years ago ; tenants 
 
 have built and improved at their own expense, 
 
 18455-62. 
 
 Kelly, William, County Roscommon ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Roscom,mon. 
 Rent raised in the famine time, not since, 18445. 
 
 Brannon, Michael, County Roscommon; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Ro8CO'mm,on. 
 Rent raised three times, last ten years ago, 18450. 
 
 Kdly, Bernard and others. County Roscommon ; 
 
 Tenant Farmers. — Roscom/mon. 
 
 Rent raised from £6 to £9, 18455. Has done 
 
 great improvements, built houses, 18458. Cases of 
 
 others, 18458-18460. All the tenants would have 
 
 come, if they knew of this inquiry, 18461. 
 
 Boycott, Charles C, Esq., Ballinrobe, Co. Mayo ; 
 Land Agent, and Tenant Farmer. — Galway. 
 For seven years agent to Lord Erne's Mayo estate 
 of 1,600 acres, 18463-5. Rental on Erne estate £30 
 over tenement valuation. Instructed to allow 10 
 per cent, on November rents of 1879. Tenants, ex- 
 cept two, refused to pay unless allowed 25 jier cent. 
 Lord Erne offered 20 per cent. Letters written ac- 
 cordingly, asking for payment. Tenants refused. 
 Ejectment processes attempted to be served on 22nd 
 September, 1880. Service successful in only three 
 cases on Lough Mask propert}', near Ballinrobe. 
 These undefended, and decrees given at Qu.arter 
 Sessions, 18466-71. Processes not attempted to be 
 served since, as that the latest day for last Sessions, 
 next in January, for which processes could not be 
 served without a large force of police. Believes 
 ejectment decrees would not have to be carried out, 
 for tenants are very well able to pay. If evicted 
 nobody would take land ; tenants would be rein- 
 stated, and kept there by armed force. Expects 
 tenants will not go on to decrees, but will pay, 
 18472-3. Witness is subjected to most malicious in- 
 juries ; attributes this to the Rev. J. O'Malley, P.P. 
 Edict published that witness must be banished for 
 not having cause of Land League at heart. On 
 24th September all in his employment ordered off. 
 by mob ; only one servant remains. Has no help 
 in farming but his nephew. Herd holds house to 
 prevent accommodation of another. Laundress 
 ordered not to work, and dares not disobey. Cannot 
 get his crops saved. Is four miles from Ballini'obe. 
 Letters have now to be brought by police ; former 
 messengers threatened. Ten policemen live in his 
 house ; an escort wherever he goes, 18474-83. First 
 trouble with tenants in June, 1879, when threaten- 
 ing notice posted on his gate for reduction of rents 
 by 20 or 25 per cent. ; this before it was known 
 that 1879 would be a bad year. Tenants injured 
 by fall in the price of cattle, and immediate un- 
 warned stopping of credit by local tradesmen. Exe- 
 cutions by tradesmen. English labourers, too, made 
 very little, but Lord Erne's tenantry unaffected 
 thereby. They are middling well off now. Believe 
 nonpayment not caused by inability, 18483-94. 
 Lord Erne, extremely liberal with tenants, allows 
 half-cost of buildings, and gives timber. Made no 
 change at passing of Land Act, but within last two 
 months has withdrawn from practice, 18495-8. Be- 
 lieves Lord Erne first landlord that gave abatement ; 
 gave 10 per cent.; a cause of ill-feeling. Lord 
 Kilmaine gave 15 per cent., Lord Ardilaun 30 per 
 cent., and meal ; Captain Knox no abatement, his 
 agent, Mr. Darley, guarded by police. Fifteen or 
 sixteen persons in the barony guarded by police, 
 18498, 18505. Lord Erne's low- lying, very good, 
 limestone land ; rents in bulk, not by acre. 10 per 
 cent, brings them under tenement valuation, 18505- 
 13. Has been picked out as a victim, to show power 
 of Land League. Lives on, and farms, 300 acres ; 
 and has an off-farm of 1,000 acres. Has farmed in 
 
Ixxii 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Boycott, Charles 0. — continued,. 
 
 Mayo for twenty-five years, since lie left tlie army ; 
 at Lougli Mask for seven years. Predecessor on 
 farm of 300 acres was a Mr. Eutledge, a sub-sterifF, 
 who was not evicted. No ill-feeling on part of people 
 towards witness except as agent. If legal actions 
 given up, all would go on smoothly, 18523-41. 
 Labourers turned away by mob on 24th September ; 
 not tenants of Lord Erne. They were afraid, as 
 is every man in the country. There are marked 
 men in the country who are the source of all this, 
 18542-9. Land League seems to direct payment of 
 tenement valuation. Lord Erne's tenants offer below 
 it. They have not offered it. Witness, if his own 
 case, would not reduce these rents below 10 per 
 cent. Lord Erne's tenants are comfortable, 18553- 
 67. Witness believes his life to be in hourly danger. 
 Is told so by friends who heard it from those who 
 know. The whole country practically intimidated 
 by Land League. A reign of terror. A Scotchman, 
 named Brown, received a threatening letter a fort- 
 night ago. A blacksmith threatened. Witness has 
 not been threatened pei-sonally, or by letter, since 
 June, 1879, 18568-80. No change in law would 
 be a remedy on Erne estate for rents below valua- 
 tion ; a revaluation for fixing rents, excepting perma- 
 nent buildings and reclamation done within twenty 
 years before passing of Act, would be compelling 
 purchasers in Court' to pay t'^vice over for houses 
 and improvements. The rents of some tenants would 
 be raised; these woiild be dissatisfied, 18581-90. 
 Tenants have made most of the improvements on 
 land, as a rule, the exception for landlords to do 
 anything but receive the rent. Lord Erne allows 
 for buildings, fences, and roads. He being very old, 
 has not been on the estate for ten years. Amount 
 allowed by Lord Erne during the last seven years 
 £80 to £100. Not per annum, but in all, 18591-8. 
 The rental is £1,000 a year, of which he, 
 as tenant, pays £500. Would not leave while 
 things are in trouble. When quiet will ask 
 Lord Erne to take up agency, 18599, 18600. Lord 
 Kilmaine's tenants agreed to pay at abatement 
 of 15 per cent. Afterwards they fired shots over 
 heads of Lord Kilmaine and his brother, saying they 
 had as much right to the land as he, 18601-2. Is 
 an Englishman. Not objected to by people on that 
 account, or for any reason except that he does his 
 duty to his employer. People would assist him only 
 they are terrorized, 18603-7. No evictions during 
 seven years' agency, 18608. Rev. J. O'Mally on 
 good terms with him. Present conduct merely to 
 show power of Land League. Country people, not 
 town people, make resistance. Labourers very well 
 off, 18608-25. Agency not worth more than £50 
 a year, 18631-2. 
 
 Eohh, Rev. J. Gardiner, Clogher, Co. Tyrone ; Presby- 
 terian Minister.- — Galway. 
 Used to live in county Tyrone, 18633. To show 
 failure of Land Act to stop arbitrary evictions, 
 mentions case of John Smith, of Cavanakirk, on a 
 large farm much improved by him, 18636. Tenants 
 not allowed enough to deter landlords from evicting 
 and making a profit, 18658. People ought to be 
 satisfied if tenant-right secui-ed by rent not being 
 raised, and if evictions were done away with except 
 for non-payment or misconduct, 18673. 
 
 Blake, J. H., Esq., Eathville, Athenry, Co. Galway ; 
 Land Agent. — Galioay. 
 Marquess Clanricarde's agent j deputed by several 
 owners and agents, 18690-4. Tenant-right does 
 not exist on these estates. Lord Clanricarde's are 
 yearly tenants under written agreements. Land- 
 lord used to pay county cess; does not now, 18695- 
 18708. Made no abatements last year. No diffi - 
 culty in getting rent last year; diflculty now, 
 owing to agitation, 18709. Rents about 5 per cent, 
 over tenement valuation ; 15 per cent, over would 
 be a fair rent, 18717. Tenants have improved very 
 little. Used to get slates or timber for building before 
 
 Land Act ; not now. Tenants have not improved 
 more since, 18723-9. People got into difficulties 
 with shopkeepers on account of extravagance. 
 Women do not weave or make clothes ; buy in 
 shops; causes idle habits, 18730-7. Cut-away bog 
 set at Is. an acre, to be increased gradually in 15 
 years to 15s. an acre. Very little done on bogs let 
 10 years ago, 18738-45. Ill-feeling exists towards 
 landlords and agents on part of younger, people ; 
 elders more respectful, 18746-8. As to legislation, 
 emigration would be good on account of over-popu- 
 lation in some districts where tenants could not* live 
 rent free, 18749. Parmer, to be independent of 
 other support, ought to have 25 or 30 acres,' 18753. 
 Does not approve of transplanting people for re- 
 claiming land, 18753." Government ought not to 
 advance money to help farmers to purchase. Gives 
 example, 18756. Labourers in a pretty fau" con- 
 dition, 18764-66. Griffith's the only criterion for 
 rent, but not a correct valuation. Lord Clanricarde's 
 rents about 5 per cent, over it, 18768. Rent not 
 raised for tenant's improvements, 18774. £20,000 
 has passed through witness for draining, fencing, 
 road making, and arterial drainage on Clanricarde 
 estate. Thinks Land Act has checked such, 18776. 
 Very few actual evictions. Ejectment not brought 
 for under three years' rent, 18779. Tenants well 
 off, 18791. Cannot say, but presumes tenants 
 originally built houses, 18804. Clanricarde tenants 
 substantially have fixity of tenure at fair rents, 
 18816. When adjusting rents at expiration of leases 
 agent stated amount and tenant accepted, 18816. 
 No general revaluation of yearly tenancies, 18820. 
 Outgoing tenant probably gets something from in- 
 coming tenant ; sometimes incomer pays aiTears of 
 rent, 18822. The small amount charged for turf is 
 spent on keeping bog' roads in order, 18825-9. 
 Clanricarde estate would be scarcely affected by law 
 giving fixity of tenure at rent to be fairly fixed, 
 18830-2. Tenants will not clear drams ; think they 
 would be doing their neighbours' work, 18833-5. 
 
 Fersse, Burton, Esq., Moyode Castle, Athenry, Co. 
 Galway ; Landowner. — Galway. 
 Has managed his property for 20 years; 6769 Irish 
 acres; rental, £7,791, 18836. One eviction during 
 20 years, 18842. No difiiculty in collecting rents till 
 latterly. Not raised for some time before the 20 years, 
 18839-45. Labour bill averages from £1,000 to 
 £1,500 for twenty years. Tenants of 5 to 10 acres 
 supply labour; a man would require 15 or 20 acres 
 to live by farming alone, 18846-53. Neither yearly 
 tenants nor lessees make much improvements, 
 18854-9. Griffith's much too low.; nearer the 
 value on grazing farms ; | to J below rents on his 
 estate, 18860-8. Formation 'of peasant proprietors 
 the worst thing that could happen ; would mortgage 
 and get into shopkeepers' hands ; would cause more 
 idleness, 18869. A tendency to improve after 
 Land Act, but it ceased, 18878. Land worn out by 
 bad cultivation; guano bad, also much seaweed, 
 18881-7. Land Act did not check his improve- 
 ments, 18888-92. Most of property near 
 Portumna ; some near Ereshford, County Kilkenny. 
 Larger holdings on latter. A leasehold the only 
 bad farm there. Bishop of Kerry is a middle- 
 man of it, 18893-18903. In Galway farms much 
 smaller, 18906. Did not give general abatement of 
 rent, but gave as individual losses deserved, 18908. 
 Details of only land case on estate, 18912. Tenants 
 allowed for some improvements, 18923. Would 
 be glad of an impartial tribunal to settle disputes 
 as to rent, 18932. His tenants practically have 
 fixity of tenure, 18935. Some tenants of his in 
 Roscommon and King's County holding at and 
 under tenement valuation, are his worst tenants, 
 19127-31. Has during last 12 years spent £800 in 
 houses for small tenants, practically labourers, 
 19178-9. 
 
 Ricliardson, N. J., Esq., Tyaquin, Co. Galway; Land- 
 owner and Agent. — Galway. 
 Would not object to impartial tribunal to settle 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixxiii 
 
 MclMrdson, N. J. — continued. 
 
 differences ; he has had none, 18940-2. Makes all 
 improvements on gi'ass farms ; scours the drains ; 
 gives assistance to farming tenants. Acts on Eng- 
 lish system. Pays all rates and taxes, 18944. 
 Land Act made him not so anxious to improve, 
 18950. Last November rents all paid ; sixty per 
 cent, over tenement valuation ; never had a case of 
 non-payment; no complaints till lately, 18955. 
 Tenants' improvements not taken into account for 
 rents, 18962. Rents fixed twenty-five years ago; 
 improvements since, 18962. Is agent for property 
 in Roscommon. Rents twenty-five per cent, over 
 tenement valuation, 18963. No difficulty about 
 rents till lately, 18963. Tenant-right allowed, 
 18971. Half county cess paid on new tenancies, 
 18978. Cultivation and manuring wretchedly 
 done, 18979-94. Two cases of ejectment on title ; 
 none for non-payment, 18995. Tenants practically 
 have fixity of tenure, 19001. "Would try to buy 
 outgoing tenant's interest, 19003. Scheme for 
 peasant proprietors would be injurious, 19012. 
 Many landlords would like to sell, 19012. Knows 
 a lessee with twenty-one years to run, rent below 
 tenement valuation, and he is worse off than his 
 neighbour ; having land too cheap makes tenants 
 lazy, 19016. 
 
 J)ali/, "William, Esq., Dunsandle, Co. Gal way ; Agent. 
 — Galway. 
 Agent for sixteen years to Lord Dunsandle over 
 34,000 statute acres, 19021-5. Sale of holdings not 
 customary, 19026. Landlord has made most of 
 improvements. About £18,000 spent ia arterial 
 drainage, and road making in last twenty years, for 
 which tenants not charged ; they do not keep drains 
 clean, 19026. Improvements rather checked by 
 Land Act, 19044. Peasant proprietary on large 
 scale decidedly injurious ; possibly useful in a small 
 way. "Would not like an estate cut up by purchases 
 here and there, 19050-6. Rents not raised for 
 considerable time before present agency ; no 
 complaints till lately, 19057. One eviction during 
 last sixteen years ; tenant during last six months 
 owed one and a half year's rent and was ruining 
 farm ; no crops. Indignation meeting ; fences 
 thrown down; farm idle, 19063-77. 
 
 French, Acheson, Esq., Co. Galway ; Land Agent. — 
 Galway. 
 Agent to brother, Robert P. French ; 5,500 acres ; 
 tenement valuation, £3,458 ;. rental a little over 
 £4,000, 19087. . Improvements checked now ; 
 landlord used to spend about £200 a year ; helped in 
 buUdiag, 19092. Tenants improve very little, 
 19096. As to county cess, no alteration since 
 the Land Act, 19101. No change of tenancies 
 since Land Act, 19102. All the labourers have more 
 or less land, 19106. Tenant-right not customary, 
 but practically winked at, 1 9 1 1 5. Practically fixity 
 of tenure exists, 19122. 
 
 Jackson, James E., Esq., KUlagnell, Oughterard, Co. 
 Galway ;, Owner and Farmer. — Galway. 
 Forty or fifty per cent, over tenement valuation 
 a reasonable' rent, 19133. Tenants cannot live off 
 their holdings, 19135. Sale of interest not allowed, 
 but it sometimes takes place, 19142. Gives instance 
 of tenants breaking engagement about drainage, 
 19147. Some holdings too small to support one rent 
 free, 19158. No demand for labourers in England 
 or Scotland last year, 19160. Tenants are lazy, not 
 as industrious as in Ulster, 19173. Freeholders 
 not better off, 19174. 
 
 MalUy, "William, Dangan, County Galway; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galvsay. 
 Holds under Mr. Mullens and Mr. Persse, 19181. 
 Messrs. Mullins and Kyne raised the rent on buying 
 the property, forty years ago, 19194. Rise from 
 £4 10s. to £9, 19197. Improved the property by 
 canying stones and fencing, and was doubled, 19198. 
 
 Valuation £6 10s., 19200. On the other farm, rise 
 from £30 to £45, 19206. Gave a year's rent for 
 the interest in the farm, 19216. 
 
 Malley, Patrick, Dangan, County Galway ; Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 
 Holds under Mullins and Kyne, 19231. Rise of 
 
 rent from £4 10s. to £12 10s., 19234. Last rise, nine 
 
 years ago, 19235. Has improved, 19241. Pays 
 
 town rates, 19244. 
 
 Molloney, Peter, Rahoon, Go. Galway, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Came back from (Jalifornia eight years ago with 
 £400 ; bought holding for £140 ; seventeen acres ; 
 rent £25 ; too dear, 19254. Had losses in cattle ; 
 was processed for a year's rent last April ; had to 
 sell sheep and borrowed money to settle, 19292. 
 Had no abatement, 19298. Did not understand 
 the value of land, 19316. Thought his £400 would 
 never be spent, 19322. 
 
 'Gooley, Thomas, Newcastle, County Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer, — Galway. 
 Holds under Mr. Algernon Persse, father tenant, 
 19329. Rise of rent twenty-eight years ago^ 
 £2 18s. id., an acre to £4, 19335. Have improved 
 much, by removal of stones, 19338. Pays borough 
 rates, 19340. Landlord disapproved of clearings, 
 19343. Griffith's valuation was fixed too high, 
 19349. Got no abatement, being behindhand with 
 rent, 19354. "Wants only a just rent to be fixed, 
 19356. Case of Mr. Mulchinoch's tenants, 19361. 
 Of- the Bishop of Gal way's, 19362. Tenants' debts, 
 19364. Artificial manures bad for the land, 19370. 
 Better not to look for compensation, than go to 
 law with a landlord, 19371. Domestic spinning 
 and weaving absurd, 19374. The rates the great 
 burden, 19376. 
 
 O'Flaherty, M. F., Esq., Tuam, Landowner. — Galway. 
 Has 1,705 acres near Galway; 276 acres near 
 Tuam, 19381. Difficulty about getting rents for 
 last two years, owing to agitation, 19385. Rents 
 about twenty-five per cent, over tenement valuation ; 
 was offered the valuation^ 19389. Case of process 
 last year, 19400. Never evicted or destrained, 
 19405. Bought estate twenty-five years ago in 
 Landed Estates Court, valuation being £810 then, 
 now £820 ; rents fixed at time of purchase unchanged 
 since, 1 9409 ; the land is cheap ; tenants have practi- 
 cally fixity of tenure as long as they pay fair rents, 
 19408. Tenants haye fixity of tenure, 19412. 
 What improvements are made are by tenant, 19414. 
 Sale of goodwill allowed, subject to landlord's appro- 
 val of incoming tenant ; about two years' rent is got, 
 19415-8. Hasan insuperable objection to having 
 rents fixed by tribunal ; interference with market 
 value causes depreciation ; uncertainty how far inter- 
 ference may go, 19419-20. Knows in three neigh- 
 bouring country parishes 620 who, if they got their 
 holdings rent free, could not make a livelihood out 
 of them even in best years ; too many people in 
 that part of the country — ought to be removed, 
 either for reclamation or emigration, 19421-30. 
 Believes the Land League will be a permanent in- 
 stitution ; a fixed desire on part of tenants to become 
 owners ; no Act of Parliament will satisfy them 
 except temporarily, 19431-8. Peasant proprietary 
 on sufficiently large holdings, advantageous in the 
 case of an educated, . intelligent, thrifty people if 
 not financially impossible, 19439-48. If his own 
 estate were sold would continiieto live in the country, 
 the more happily ; no social status attached to land 
 now, 19442. People ignorant of agriculture here, 
 not like France or Belgium ; the province of Govern- 
 ment to educate them by training schools through- 
 out coimtry, 19445-7. Tenants who got leases ten 
 or twelve years ago are more prosperous than their 
 neighbours, 19457. Fair rent and fixity would 
 leave the question unsettled, 19459. 
 
Ix: 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 O'llara, Colonel James, Lenaboy, Co. Galway; 
 Landowner. — Galway. 
 Owns 3,700 acres ; very few small tenants, 19463- 
 8. Right of sale not recognised but not objected to ; 
 two or three years purchase have been given, 19469- 
 70. Rents changed in a few cases, but not generally 
 within recollection, 19471. Holdings of large farm- 
 ing class one-third over tenement valuation ; several 
 small farms under valuation ; grass farms much 
 above valuation ; tenement valuation no fair test of 
 value, 19473-5. Any improvements done by land- 
 lord — walls, drains, and houses, without charging 
 for them, 19476. Land Act has checked landlord's 
 improvements, and not stimulated tenants, 19480. 
 Has led tenants to borrow money on the security, 
 and made them improvident, 19481. Has spent 
 £1,500, 19479. Rents last year well paid by large 
 tenants ; has not called on small ojies yet, 19482. 
 Farmers paying town rates not unjust, 19485. In 
 disputes as to amount of rent should like to see arbi- 
 tration more resorted to, 19493. Has very few dis- 
 putes ; only one ejectment since Land Act; a case 
 of accommodation land, 19494. Fixity of tenure as 
 long as his tenants pay their rents, 19197. Tenants 
 do not improve, 19500. Rents have been' raised in 
 district by purchasers in Landed Estates Court, 
 19503. 
 
 Lambert, Thomas C, Esq., Cos. Galway and Mayo, 
 Landowner. — Galway. 
 Owns about 4,000 acres in Galwav and Mayo, 
 19508. Holdings generally small, "19512. No 
 difficulty about rents till lately, 19514. Rents 
 about one-third^ over tenement valuation, 19515. 
 On one part of his estate, about ten years, ago, 
 unasked, reduced the rents one-third under tene- 
 ment valuation, 19515. Very few changes of 
 tenants ; sort of modified tenant-right exists, sub- 
 ject to a veto, 19516-20. Tenants have not made 
 many improvements ; does not know who made 
 houses and fences, 19521-4. Never had an eject- 
 ment; practically fixity of tenure, 19525. Tenement 
 valuation not a fair test for rent, 19527. Would not 
 advocate a peasant proprietary ; holdings would 
 soon be sold to more industrious neighbo\u-s, and a 
 large number of holdings would soon disappear, 
 19529. Does not think it would be advantageous 
 to remove landlords out of the country ; personally 
 sick of country, and would be glad to go ; would 
 not stay if a mere rent-charger, if control over 
 estates taken away, 19543. Woiild have no 
 objection to a general periodical revaluation for 
 rents, 19557. Believes there will be another 
 agitation if the three F's are conceded, 19558. 
 People perfectly satisfied till two years ago ; Michael 
 Davitt began it, 19559. 
 
 Halliday,'W\\\iaxa H., Esq., Bushy Park, Co. Galway; 
 Land Agent. — Oalway. 
 Also owns land ; was formerly Inspector of Land 
 Improvements under Board of Works ; agent for 
 Colonel Charles Tottenham's estate, near Easky, 
 county Sligo, 19560. Tenant-right not allowed 
 there, but landlord purchases interest and improve- 
 ments of out-going tenants, who were thoroughly 
 satisfied, 19566. Only one ejectment, and tenant still 
 living there, and will resume holding, 19571-80. 
 Thinks a tenant ought to have a claim for disturbance 
 in case of eviction for non-payment of rent ; more 
 should not be forfeited to landlord than amount of 
 rent due ; tenant unable to pay his rent should be 
 treated like ordinary bankrupt, 19588-92. Land 
 Act has tempted tenants to borrow, 19598. Lease- 
 holders do not cultivate their farms diflferently 
 to tenants at will ; people, creatures of habit, 
 19600-1. About twenty -seven years ago Colonel 
 Tottenham made main drains, fences, and improve- 
 ments ; for improvements of holdings he charged 4 
 per cent., for general improvements no addition 
 to rent ; has built houses, &c., for which 5, 4|, 
 or 4 per cent, interest was charged. Between 
 £7,000 and £8,000 were spent; improvements 
 mainly done by landlord ; tenants have buiU, most 
 
 of houses ; are always paid when leaving ; Land 
 Act has made no change in Colonel Tottenham's deal- 
 ings, 19602-10. Peasant proprietary would be use- 
 ful where tenant has saved money for part payment ; 
 a general formation of peasant proprietors would be 
 foolish ; Government ought not to advance entire 
 purchase-money ; repayments would be more than 
 present rent, which, if it can be believed, is ruining 
 tenants at present, 19622-6. Believes nine-tenths 
 of landlords act fairly with the property that is in ■ 
 trusted to them wtih greater justice than other 
 capitalists ; but laws are against rogues, not honest 
 men, and so far there may be necessity for legis- 
 lation, 19629-30. Security in holdings ought to 
 be secured to all at rent fixed by impartial tribunal, 
 19631-2. This would satisfy people. If .Land 
 League proposal for wholesale peasant proprietary 
 were carried out, numbers would soon disappear ; 
 there would be no labour in this country for small 
 tenants ; agitators ask for more than they expect to 
 get, and are willing to take, 19633-9. Is in favour 
 of fair rents and free sale, but fixity of tenure would 
 make landlords annuitants, without rights of owner- 
 ship, 19640. Would give tenant security in holding ; 
 leases renewable upon adjustment of rent, parlia- 
 mentary leases, and if turned out for non-payment 
 of rent, tenants should not forfeit value of interest, 
 19642." Ulster tenant in such case allowed to sell 
 and pay landlord out of proceeds ; ought to be so 
 in all Ireland, 19650. Terrible ignorance of Irish 
 as to agriculture a great difficulty ; schools of 
 agriculture useless ; farmers ought to get loans for 
 improvements, expenditure of which to be subject 
 to supervision of local officials, say county surveyors, 
 not expensive officials of Board of Works ; this 
 would improve the farm, the farmer's knowledge, 
 and would be a model ; would not be afraid that 
 tenants would mis-apply the money, 19652-19680. 
 
 Burke, George E., Esq., Danesfield, MoycuUen, Co. 
 Galway; landowner. — Galway. 
 Holds property in county Limerick in fee-farm 
 from Lord Southwell, 19681-3. Details of circum- 
 stances which led to his name being posted on chapel 
 gate as an exterminator ; large farm lying idle on 
 his hands ; afraid to put cattle on it, 19684-19729. 
 Has property in Galway ; most tenants paid rent last 
 year with abatement of 20 per cent. , 1 9730-2. Two 
 evictions ; one thirty years ago, a quarrelsome man ; 
 the other let a grass farm in conacre, 19733-6. 
 Iiatter made claim under Land Act ; awarded full 
 amount for disturbance from which deduction made 
 for rent due, and damage done to farm ; net award' 
 £24 ; rent, £11 10s. per annum, 19737-43. Would 
 approve of valuation for rent independent of land- 
 lord or tenant, 19749. 
 
 Gill, Mr. John, Salthill, Co. Galway, Hotel Keeper 
 and Tenant Farmer. — Galway. 
 Is tenant to Secretary for War. His rent raised 
 from £20 to £80 ; excessive ; pays all taxes, 19750- 
 89. Also tenant to Lord Clanrioarde since 1850; 
 former rent, 10s. an acre; raised to 30s. ten or 15 
 years ago owing to drainage ; land now worth £5 
 or £6 an acre ; Lord Clanricarde's rents most 
 reasonable, 19790-19804. Rents unduly raised by 
 Land Court purchasers, friends of witness, 19805-7. 
 Also tenant to Captain Blake Foster ; no complaints 
 against him, 19808-9. 
 
 Daly, Colonel John Archer, Raford, Loughrea, Co. 
 Galway ; landowner. — Galway. 
 Owns 12,000 acres; tenement valuation, £3,700 ; 
 rental, £5,000, 19812-5. Had difficulty with 
 tenants last year ; made no abatement ; tenants 
 refused to pay at all ; served ejectments ; no actual 
 eviction ; rents paid ; thinks many tenants glad 
 at being made to pay, 19816-7, 19821-9. Estate 
 rules against sale of holdmgs ; occasion for enforcing 
 has not arisen, 19819, 20. Hanging half gale 
 exists, 19830. Some large farms from 100 to 200 
 acres ; not many small holdings ; rent averages £1 
 an acre, 19831-5. Good deal of reclaimed moun- 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 IXXT 
 
 Daly, Colonel — continued. 
 
 tain land. Tenants not rented for it except in one 
 case of 10s. an acre ; is thinking of putting small 
 rent on to keep up right, 19835-40. Assisted 
 tenants with timber, &c., in building, 19841. 
 Labourers comfortable, 19842-53. Only one evic- 
 tion during twenty-nine years, quarrelsome man ; 
 son put in as tenant ; £120 awarded under Land 
 Act ; tenants practically have fixity of tenure ; 
 rents not raised ; old holdings not altered, 19857- 
 66. Sale of interest not recognised ; few tenants 
 leave, 19867, 8. Rents raised of some tenants 
 who voted the wrong way ; done after, would not 
 say because of, voting, 19869-75. Has in twenty- 
 five years spent £8,946 in improvements, exclusive 
 of demesne, <tc. , includes labourers' cottages, drainage, 
 <fcc. Labour bill besides varies from £500 to 
 £900 a year on land in occupation, 19876-9. 
 Believes tenants built houses with help of 
 father; rent not therefore increased, 19879-81. 
 Land Act has not diminished his improvements, but 
 he will not continue them, 19882. Does not want to 
 sell as long as he can meet his charges, 19883. 
 Would approve of peasant proprietary if tenants 
 solvent, occupying at least twenty-five acres of fair 
 tillage land, subdivision to be forbidden. General 
 scheme would be bad ; small purchasers could not 
 carry on ; emigration best remedy, 19885-19900. 
 Leaseholders with long term to run at low rents, 
 in worse condition than tenants-at-will, 19901, 2. 
 When a tenant dies, the son recognised by father 
 is continued as tenant, 199T)4-7. 
 
 Bart, Mr. Martin Raphael, Clifden, Co. Galway ; 
 Innkeeper and Land Agent. — Galviay. 
 Has been agent and Chancery receiver over estates 
 in Galway and Mayo, 19908-15. Tenant-right not 
 recognised on these estates, 19916-20. Landlords, 
 now and before Land Act, have only made trifling 
 improvements ; everthing done by tenants, 19921-4. 
 Instance of appropriation of tenant's improvements 
 by landlord, 19925-7. Landlords not much de- 
 terred from evicting by having to pay compensation 
 for disturbance; many since Land Act by Law Life 
 Society ; insufficient compensation in some cases, 
 19928-48. Fear of rent-raising and eviction deters 
 tenants from making substantial improvements, 
 19948—9. A new valuation ought to be made, and, 
 except in case of graziers (19979), fee-farm grants 
 made thereon ; no disturbance but for non-payment, 
 19950-1. Believes agitation would not follow 
 against payment of any rent at all, 19959. Some 
 partioiilars about the Portacarron lease, 19968-72. 
 Absentee landlords ought to be taxed, 19973-4. 
 Waste lands valued low by Griffith ; in many cases 
 have become valuable for grazing ; taxation chiefly 
 borne by highly-rented tenant of arable land ; much 
 waste land might be reclaimed, 19975-82. Instance 
 given of rent paid by grazier, £50 (tenement valua- 
 tion, £7 10s.), not rack-renting, for valuation en- 
 tirely under real value, 19991-3. Corporations 
 ought not to be landlords ; Government ought to 
 buy up their land and become landlords, 20031-33. 
 
 Joyce, Michael, Rahoon, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer 
 — Galway. 
 Holds two acres within the borough of Galway 
 at rent of £8 (tenement valuation, £4 5s.), under 
 Miss Julia Daly ; rent raised from £4 fourteen years 
 ago by Father Peter Daly, when he purchased, 
 20038-62. Land very bad ; makes his living as a 
 mason, 20077-84. Received no abatement, 20092. 
 
 M^Grath, Michael, Upper Dangan, Co. Galway, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Galway. 
 Has held for twenty-three years over two 
 acres, about one and a half miles from Galway, 
 at rent of £5, from Mr. Kearns, 20100-12. Rent 
 excessive — supports himself as a mason, 20113-20. 
 Would gladly pay more than £5 for thirty-five 
 years to become owner, 20149. 
 
 Kervm, Mark, Letragh, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Galway. 
 Holds four acres, about a mile from Galway, at 
 rent of £6 5s. lOcf. ; land very bad ; unmarried ; 
 lives entiiely by and on his holding, 20151-94. 
 Bailey, Mr. Abner, Enniston, Castle Hackett, Co. 
 Galway ; Tenant Fai-mer. — Galway. 
 A Scotchman, 20223. Holds, by twenty-one 
 years' lease, 200 acres from Mrs. Kirwan ; has 
 nothing to say about his own holding, 20195-8, 
 20255. Rents of grazing farms raised by competi- 
 tion ; unchanged for thirty years in case of tillage, 
 20201. Good lands too highly valued and rented, 
 20205. Valuation not a fair test of rent ; grazing 
 land not valued highly enough, 20210-2. For 
 fixing of rents would like free competition ; arbitra- 
 tion might be useful ; desirable that a practical 
 valuator should fix rent, and that tenant should not 
 be disturbed while paying rent ; would encourage 
 improvements, 20214-5, 20226-7. External walls 
 built by landlord, field fences by tenants, 20232-5. 
 People far better off than when he came to the 
 country thirty-five years ago, 20236-40. Agricul- 
 ture bad, but people quick in learning, 20241-5. 
 Rents not raised by Kirwan for thirty-five years ; 
 small purchasers in Land Courts raise rents, and 
 discontent spreads like a disease from such estates 
 to good estates, 20246-52. Very little tenant-right 
 exists ; few changes in tenancies ; succession from 
 father to son, practically fixity of tenure, 20263-71. 
 Gaifdner, John, Esq., Lissbeg, Eyrecourt, Co. Galway ; 
 Land Agent and Tenant Farmer. — Galway. 
 Agent for twenty years to Mr, PoUok for 
 30,000 acres; farms 2,000 acres, 20272-6. No 
 tenant-right on estate, 20277. Mr. Pollok, a 
 Scotclunan, purchased in Court more than twenty 
 years ago ; thought he would get absolute possession 
 of whole estate; paid £250,000 for fee-simple; 
 buying out tenants for amalgamation of farms, and 
 improvements at starting cost £350,000 additional ; 
 portion of estate divided into tax-ms from £200 to 
 £2,000 a year rent; portion of estate, £1,800 a 
 year, still held by 200 small tenants ; large tenants 
 hold by lease; small at will, 20278-91. Large 
 rents not increased lately ; small reduced ten years 
 ago, 20292-4. No evictions or claims under Land 
 Act, 20295-6. Small tenants do not make im- 
 provements ; houses presumably built by themselves ; 
 Mr. Pollok now helps in building, 20297-20300, 
 20341-2. Mr. Pollok does all improvements on 
 large farms ; lessee covenants to keep in repair, 
 20301-3. Present destitution largely caused by 
 dearth of work in England ; some of Mr. Pollok's 
 small tenants go ; holdings too small for scile support; 
 not enough of work on estate for all, 20304-7. 
 Many owe two or three years' rent ; no money 
 abatement, lest publican should get it ; seed com 
 and potatoes given proportionally to every tenant 
 on estate, 20310-4. Good deal of bog ; reclamation 
 not remunerative ; some done gradually ; rent not 
 raised, 20315-7. Landlord pays half cess on 
 large holdings ; small tenants pay all, 20318-20. 
 No alteration in law could improve small and des- 
 titute tenants on small holdings, 2032.H. Would 
 be paupers in two years if made proprietors, 20323. 
 Mr. Pollok gets a fair return on outlay, but not 
 what he expected, 20329-31. Large tenants most 
 satisfactory, but graziers most seriously affected by 
 late depression, 20332-4. Labourers have good 
 wages, house free, (fee, 20348. Subdivision greatest 
 difficulty about small holdings, 20368-9. Would 
 be fatal to peasant proprietary, unless preventible 
 20374. Emigration the only cure, 20377. 
 Kyne, Messrs. Timothy and John, Knockranny, Moy- 
 cullen, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmers. — Galway. 
 They and two others hold undivided fourths, 1,700 
 acres of watery moor, by lease, made in 1821;' for 
 three lives (two still surviving), and thirty-one 
 years at rent of £101 10s. Present landlord, 
 Surgeon-Major K.ilkelly, agent, Mr. Stapleton' 
 20379-96, 20416. Timothy Kynt applied for £150 
 
 I 
 
Ixxvi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION 1880. 
 
 Eyive., Timothy and John — continued. 
 
 to Board of Works, refused because all lessees did 
 not join ; landlord could have got loan if he wished ; 
 reclaimed land relapsing, 20397-20417. Rent 
 raised in 1803, from £60 to £110 Irish, 20418. 
 In March, 1870, both as yearly tenants took another 
 farm of ninety acres from Mrs. Brown, at rent of 
 £65, tenement valuation £42, 20431-6. Stubbing 
 of land by tenants forbidden, landlord offering with- 
 out meaning to do so, 20439-20504. Would im- 
 prove more with security of tenure at fair rent ; 
 present rents too high, 20506-11. 
 
 Flynn, Patrick, Rahoon, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Galway. 
 Holds from Miss Julia Daly 2a. 2r. 34p. at £9 
 10., raised by Father Daly from £4 5s. ; rent too 
 high, 20516-24. Supports himself as a mason, 
 20525-6. Within the borough of Galway rates 
 high, 20528. No abatement given, 20529. 
 Barrett, Patrick, Claybane, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds twelve acres two miles from Galway at £7 
 a year. Valuation £6. Rent raised twenty years 
 ago fi-om £5. To high, 20530-49. 
 
 Hussey, Margaret, Rahoon, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 
 Holds forty aci-es from Mr. John Brown of Moy- 
 
 cuUen. Expended £200 in road-making, fqr which 
 
 promised allowance by landlord who now refuses to 
 
 pay, 20550-8. 
 
 Carey, Patrick, Drum, Rahoon, Co. Galway; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds from Mr. F. Comyn nineteen acres at £13 
 9s. Qd. ; tenement valuation, £4. Rent too high ; 
 was £6 6s. twenty-five years ago. Was obliged to 
 exchange some good for bad land. On complaining 
 of high rent was threatened by landlord, 20559-78. 
 Gwrran, Darby, Turbough, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds from Colonel Daly nine acres of bad land 
 at £9. Rent too high. Woujd give it up, but 
 has only workhouse to look to, 20579-92. 
 Oriffm, John, Lettruck, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Galway. 
 Holds from Mr. A. Persse seven acres within 
 borough of Galway at £9 10s. Tenement valuation, 
 £5 10s., 20593-8. Has made improvements with- 
 out assistance from landlord, 20599, 20600. Rent 
 too high, 20608. 
 
 Flaherty, John, Drum, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Qalway. 
 Holds from Mr. F. Comyn about twenty acres of 
 mountain land at £13. Tenement valuation, £4. 
 Reduction promised but not given. Rent too high, 
 20611-23. Tilled a plot of ground and had to pay 
 15s. additional. Landlord denies it was part of 
 holding, 20623-5. Tenants have to work at lOii. 
 or Is. when strangers get 15d;. ; tenants get only 
 2s. 6(i. for use of horse and cart when strangers get 
 4s., 20627. 
 
 0' Sullivan, Michael, Rahoon, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds land from Mr. Aide, Mr. Kelly, Mr. V. 
 Fitzgerald, Mr. D. Persse, within borough of Galway, 
 20631-6. Rents too high. Offered to surrender 
 to Mr. Persse a lease ending in 1881 and give him 
 £20; refused, 20637-8. Has to hold some land 
 at a loss as he keeps 250 cattle and sheep and horses 
 20645-7. 
 
 OFlyn, Thomas, Clifden, Lodge, Upper Dangan, Co. 
 Galway ; Tenant Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds from Mullins and Kyne seventeen acres 
 at £50. Tenement valuation, £27, 20648-51. Is 
 m bu.siness, could not have supported himself by 
 land ; rent too high, 20653. Has made many 
 improvements— landlord none, 20661-2. 
 Seymour, Colonel Thomas, Ballymore Castle, Cos. 
 Galway and Mayo ; Landowner.— (Sa^wa^/. 
 Bought 2,000 acres in Incumbered Estate Court 
 
 in 1852. Shortly after was offered twice his money. 
 Petitioned by tenants to remain ; with their consent 
 raised rents and remained, 20668-74. Rents with- 
 held more from conspiracy than poverty ; never 
 refused before, tenant who paid not allowed to sell 
 in Milltown market. Another paid privately 
 through cheque of third person ; defaulting tenant 
 seen by witness' son changing English notes in Bank, 
 20669-77. Had only one eviction, twenty years 
 ago, 20675. Fever distrained for rent, 20680. Num- 
 bers well off, got relief from distress funds, 20684. 
 
 Rohinson, George J., Esq., Rounstown, Cos. Galway 
 and Mayo ; Land Agent. — Galway. 
 Agent for estate of Mr. Berridge, formerly 
 owned by the Law Life Society, and for other 
 estates, 20690-2. Tenant-right allowed on Mrs. 
 Blake's estate ; not on others, 20693-6, 20701. 
 Mrs. Blake's tenants very poor. They used to 
 make money by kelp trade, 20697—700. Law 
 Life Society between 1855 and 1870 spent £40,000 
 in improvetoents, drainage, roads, buildings, (fee. Mr. 
 Beriidge spent £4,000 in road-making in last three 
 months, 20705, 20711. Rental on paper £13,000 
 or £14,000. No rents paid by small tenants 
 owing to agitation ; large tenants suffered most by 
 season; processes cannot be executed owing to lawless 
 state of country, 20708-27. People resist county cess 
 collectors ; agent declines to pay county cess for them 
 as previously, because rents were not paid, 20730—3. 
 People used to pay until Land League agitation ; 
 were demoralized by relief funds, 20738-42. Would 
 approve of a peasant proprietary in case of a thrifty 
 industrious class of large farmers ; a general scheme 
 would never do ; small owners would not succeed, 
 but would Kve as well if owners as tenants, 20748- 
 55. Had a good many evictions for purpose of 
 abolishing rundale, but nearly all restored to 
 possession ; the figures of the evictions not actually 
 carried out made the foundation of attack on Law 
 Life Society, 2075G. 
 
 Noon, Patrick, Mounteigh, Co. Galway; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds along with thirty-nine others from Lord 
 Claremorris 18 acres ; forty houses on property ; 
 about 200 people in all; rent £3 18s. 60?., more 
 than the valuation, 20759. Forty acres taken from 
 them thirty years ago and given to a farmer, 20766. 
 Support themselves by turf cutting and by labour- 
 ing, 20780. Land now flooded, 20783. 
 
 Godyra, Peter, Rahoon, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 
 — Galway. 
 
 Holds from Miss Julia Daly, 3 acres within 
 
 borough of Galway, at £8 ; raised from £1 by 
 
 Father Daly ; valuation, £3 ; rent too high, 20785- 
 
 98. 
 
 Heffernan, Michael, near Galway, Tenant Farmer.-^ 
 
 Galwai/. 
 
 Holds from Mullins and Kyne less than 20 acres, 
 
 at £27 10s. ; old rent £21. Improved and I'e- 
 
 claimed five acres without help of landlord, 20799- 
 
 20810. 
 
 Toole, Martin, Obans Well, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds five or six acres on Comyn's estate, four 
 miles from Galway, at £6 10s. ; valuation £3 10s. 
 Land would be dear at £3. Built house and stable, 
 and made drains, &c., without help of landlord, 
 20811-21. 
 
 Toole, Edward, Killina, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Galway. 
 Holds from Mr. Martin, of Killina, at rent of 
 £13 ; valuation £9 10s. ; old rent £9. Rent too 
 high ; no abatement. Improved his holding with- 
 out help, 20828-36. 
 
 Harmy, Mr. Joseph, Dartfield, Loughrea, Co. Galway; 
 
 Tenant Farmer. — Galway. 
 
 Holds about 6,000 acres, some in King's County, 
 
 20837-42. Has no grievances of his own, 20844. 
 
 Ulster custom ought to be defined by legislature, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE 
 
 Ixxvii 
 
 Harvey, Jose] ib^cotithiufd. 
 and extended over all Ireland, so as to secure to 
 tenants value of their own improvements, 20846- 
 50. Tenants shrink from improving from feeling 
 of want of security, 20851-4. Rents ought to 
 be fixed by agreement, Arbitration dangerous except 
 independent or made by Government, 20855-7. 
 The landlord should have powerto select; an incoming 
 tenant, 20859. But the tenant should have the right 
 of sale, 20860. Estimatingthe value of the farm by 
 the rent obtainable, and by people bidding high to 
 get possession, has in great measure caused the 
 difficulty about the rents, 20861-4. Evictions have 
 only taken place for non-payment of rent, not to 
 obtain liigher rent, 20865. The present Mgitation 
 is the cause of the non-payment of rent, 20866. 
 Abatements are fair, 20867 ; and have been 
 made by landlords generally in his neighbourhood, 
 20868. His tenants are not badly off, and but for 
 the agitation would have had no difficulty about 
 payingrent, 20869-71. Used formerly to pay their 
 rents, and live tolerably comfortable, biit they have 
 paid no rents for the last three years, 20872. They 
 lived extravagantly in good seasons, 20873 ; and 
 found it difficult to return to former habits. They 
 neglected the cultivation of the land, and took to 
 grazing which did not pay, 20874-6. They ex- 
 hausted the land by using artificial manures, 20877- 
 8. Farms 6,000 acres, 20881. None of which he 
 sublets ; 5,600 acres in Galway, and 400 acres in 
 King's County. It is mostly arable, 20882-7. 
 In the majority of places he has no leases. Has 
 five landlords, and lives on a property of 800 acres, 
 20888-9. Employs a large number of labourers 
 all the year round at wages of about 8s. a week, 
 20890-2. Provides cottages rent free for some, 
 the rest find accommodation in the neighbourhood, 
 which he thinks they do not pay rent for, 20893-6. 
 They are fairly well off, 20898. A.s a rule labour is 
 easy to get, 20899-20900 ; and the people do not seem 
 discontented, 20901. Knows of no agitation on 
 the part of the labourers, 20902. His rent is above 
 the valuation, 20903. In no case equal to or below 
 it, 20904. Approves of the tenani>right of the 
 North, 20905 ; but it requires improvement, 20906. 
 If land were let at fair rent, and tenant left in 
 possession if he paid his rent, and did not sublet, 
 it would meet all objections, 20907. A Govern- 
 ment valuator might be called in to settle differences 
 as to rent if the parties concerned could not agree, 
 20908—11. Does not consider the Chairman a 
 satisfactory tribunal for the valuation of rent, 20912. 
 For if power be placed in the hands of a man he 
 should be a thoroughly practical man, and well 
 acquainted with all details of landlord and tenant, 
 in connection with letting of land, 20913. The 
 fairest way to settle rent is for men to settle it 
 amongst themselves, 20915-18. No peasant pro- 
 prietors about his neighbourhood, 20919. Approves 
 of State assistance to enable a man to purchase his 
 holding, 20920 ; but it could not be done through- 
 out Ireland, 20921 ; because it would take too much 
 of the capital necessary lor a man to work his farm 
 with. Capital, skill, and industry, are requisite for 
 the improvement of land, 20924. Railways are 
 wanted throughout the country. He is twelve miles 
 from a station, and there is great difficulty in getting 
 rid of produce, 20925. Has been farming since 
 1837, beginning in a small way, aild increasing since 
 1846 up to present time, 20928. Has been success- 
 ful until three years ago — the climate principally 
 affected the sheep farming, causing great loss. With- 
 out sheep farming and breeding they could not pay 
 such rents, 20930. An improvement has taken 
 place this year, 20931-3. Lost £7,000 in wool 
 alone. It is difficult to get a railway, for though 
 much wanted and wished for, there is not much 
 money forthcoming, 20934. 
 
 Kilmartiii, Mr. James, Sralea, Co. Roscommon j 
 Tenant Farmer. — Galway. 
 Is a member of the local council of the Land 
 
 League, 20937. Formerly the Tenants' Defence 
 Association, 20938. Gives evidence as an inrlivi- 
 dual, not as a membei- of the League, 20940. Has 
 had much experience in the working of the La,nd 
 Act, 1870, 20941. It has worked ill. At first it 
 stimulated industry and improvement, but the 
 power given to landlords to raise rent remo^•ed 
 security, checked improvements, and created dis- 
 content. In many cases the landlord has raispd 
 the rent, and thus confiscated the property of the 
 the tenant, 20942. It is an inducement to land- 
 lords to raise rents, 20943. And has been done in 
 his neighbourhood. In one case a tenant being 
 promised a renewal of his lease, made vast improve- 
 ments, and then found it was raised, 20944-20947. 
 Grazing covenants should be rendered null and 
 void, as they do an immense amount of harm, 
 20948-9. Tenants on large farms in recent years were 
 very hard pushed, 20951. Disapproves of pasture 
 in toto, as contrasted with tillage, 20952. It 
 tends to consolidate fanns. Land to let isgenei-ally 
 let as grass. It shoiild be sufficient protection to the 
 landlord not to allow the tenant to do anything to de- 
 teriorate the land, 20953. He might subdivide to 
 the extent of thirty or forty acres, 20954-209099 
 and, as a rule, it would be unfair to prevent " con- 
 acre," 20955. He should not become a small land- 
 lord on his own account, 20956 ; but after his 
 death his son might hold it, 20957. Peasant pro- 
 prietorship desirable, biit expropriation not pos- 
 sible, 20958. Buying out all the landlords 
 would be beneficial, but not practical ile, 20960. 
 Peasant jiroprietorship basis of fair settlement, 
 20961. Facilities for purchasing should be 
 afforded to industrious tenants, 20962 ; and so in 
 time it would become a national institution, 20963. 
 Not fair to turn out landlords without their 
 consent ; the purchase money would be their com- 
 pensation, 20964-6 ; and tenant should pay fair 
 rent, 20968. Tenant paying fair rent not to be 
 turned out while doing so, and with liberty to sell his 
 holding would be fair — (see also 20907) — Ulster 
 custom defined and extended over Ireland would 
 settle the land question. Tenants are comfortable 
 on an estate where this prevails, 20968 ; and dissatis- 
 fied on an adjoining one, 20969. Differences 
 between landlord and tenant as to rent shoiild be 
 settled by arbitration. The letting value of the land 
 should be considered, but not the tenant's improve- 
 ments. The value of the tenant's improvements and 
 value of his tenant-right should be considered in 
 settling rent by arbitration, 20972-4 ; laifc outside 
 the Laud Court, 20976. Approves of Government 
 arbitration, 20977. Griflith's valuation well done, 
 20980. Likes fixity of tenure and free sale, 
 20981 ; but it cannot be carried out, 20982. 
 The people would fall back on the old scheme, 
 when they have seen the merits of the different 
 schemes, and will prefer it, 20983. Gives pre- 
 ference to peasant proprietary, if obtainable, 
 20984. The people do not understand the question, 
 and would not like it if they did, 20985. No one 
 asks for the land for nothing ; they distinguish be- 
 tween rightand wrong, and desire whatis fair, 20988. 
 Peasant jjroprietary preferable to perpetuity leases, 
 20990. The Irish peasants to gain it would make 
 some sacrifice, 20992. There would be no loss to 
 the country if the Government gave tenants the 
 same facilities to improve their estates as landlords 
 at present get, 20993. The work to be carried on 
 by Government, and the cost apportioned to each 
 tenant, 20994-6. Arterial drainage necessary, and 
 a compulsory rate charged, 20997. Might subdi- 
 vide to his son (see also 20954), but not less than 
 twenty acres, 20954; 21000. And would allow 
 him to erect buildings, 21001. Farms under twenty 
 acres led to great poverty, 2 1 002. Witness holds his 
 farm (of 112 acres— 20998) on lease for twenty-one 
 years, 21003. The rent was raised when new lease 
 was granted, and it was his own case he cited, 
 (20944) 21006. Customary to grant twenty-one 
 
 li 
 
xxvm 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880/ 
 
 Kilmartin, James — continued. 
 
 years' leases on the estate of his landlord, 
 21007-9. Security to residential tenants not to be 
 extended to tenants holding outlying farms ; leases 
 prohibiting tillage should be null and void, 21010. 
 Grazing tenants to be left to the law as it is, 21012. 
 People would be satisfied then ; graziers he regaras 
 as the curse of the country, 21013. Rents were 
 raised on Lord Ashbrook's estate since 1870, and 
 leases granted on Mr. Potts' estate four years ago, 
 21014. Is a good landlord; his tenants erected 
 houses and walls ; witness advised the tenants not 
 to accept leases with clauses prohibiting claims under 
 the Land Act, and they were struck out. There are 
 still objectionable clauses in the leases, viz., forbid- 
 ding erecting buildings without landlord's consent, 
 Jind reclamation of bogs, 21015. Leases were 
 given to small tenants, 21016. They cannot con- 
 tract themselves out of permanent improvements, 
 
 21019. Does not know six tenants who could 
 jirovide one-third or one-fourth of the pxirchase 
 mciney of their holdings, for they are much reduced 
 in cirt' imstances. Preventing tenants from selling 
 is a hardship. Lord Olancarty does not allow it 
 lest it.sliould become a custom, and refused to allow 
 a woman to sell. This rule is injurious to tenants, 
 
 21020. When in arrear for rent can only claim for 
 improvements, not for disturbance ; she would 
 get £100, if permitted to sell, instead of £18 
 allowed by Lord Clancarty, 21021. Landlord 
 would get arrears out of proceeds. Custom of 
 selling on one estate and not on another is unfair. 
 If Ulster custom was extended it should be pro- 
 perly defined, 21022. Tenants on Mrs. O'Brien's 
 estate made great improvements ; eleven were 
 served with notice of ejectment, demanding the 
 increased rent, or otherwise double the existing rent, 
 
 21026. This took place about three years ago, 
 
 21027. Attempts made to raise rent, but in conse- 
 quence of public opinion she desisted, 21028-21031 ; 
 and left them the land at the old rent, 21033. Small 
 landlords are, as a rule, worse on their tenants than 
 the old landlords, 21035. 
 
 Joyce, Mr. Thomas F., Mount Tyrone House, near 
 Lennane, Co. Gal way ; Grazing Farmer. — 
 Galv)a7j. 
 He and his father farm nearly 9,000 acres of 
 mountain land in Oonnemara, 21037. In what is 
 called the Joyce country, 21039. The right of 
 tenants to sell hardly exists there, 21040. Has two 
 landlords, 21041. One of whom recognises the 
 right to sell, 2104'i!. Sales are decreasing, 21044. 
 A tenant surrenders the lands to his landlord. It 
 is advertised for sale and goes to the highest bidder. 
 Rents not raised, 21045. Holds 21 yeai'S leases 
 since 1 847, and on expiration cannot claim compen- 
 sation. Should be placed on some footing as yearly 
 tenants, 21040. People not satisfied with tribunal 
 of Chairman, 21050. Expensive and leaves much 
 to the chairman. His father claimed compen- 
 sation for improvements, but had to relinquish his 
 claim and pay costs ; and dilapidations, though none 
 existed, 21052. Complains of covenants in leases, 
 21053. Objects to grass farm covenant, 21055. 
 Land already dear enough without paying county 
 cess, 21058. Fraud on Act for landlord to pay half 
 county cess and put it on rent, 210.^9. Not men- 
 tioned when agreeing to pay the rent, but intro- 
 duced into lease afterwards, 21060-1. Pays £500 per 
 cent, over Government valuation; others £300, some 
 £200, 21063. Rent of grass farms exceeds valua- 
 tion more than otherfarms, 21064. Many landlords 
 have increased their rents since passing of Land Act 
 in Connemara and Mayo, 21065. Rents are gene- 
 rally raised by new landlords — " landjobbers " — 
 they are the curse of the country, 21068. A. large 
 amount of improvements made by tenants, not by 
 landlords ; Sir A. Guinness is building houses for 
 his tenants, 21070. The Land Act checks improve- 
 ments of, 21071. Landlords object to them, and 
 
 tenants are afraid their rents will be increased ; a 
 tenant wanted to build on to his house, but was 
 warned he would be evicted if he made the im- 
 provements ; his family are now herding' with the 
 cattle, 21072-3. Not many cases of tenants claim- 
 ing and obtaining compensation, 21074 ; but many 
 evictions, 21075, and they can claim compensation, 
 21076-7. On the estates of Lord Sligo and others, 
 
 21078. Several have been evicted by Lord Sligo, 
 
 21079. Within the last six months, 21080. 
 Tenants cannot purchase holdings in that district 
 because lands are held in common ; the whole village 
 might be in one lot, 2 1081-2. This is where there 
 is a great extent of mountain land, 21083. Ex- 
 tension of purchasing clauses of the Land Act 
 would be a good remedy but tenants are now too 
 poor to buy, 21084. Government should enable 
 them to buy by advancing entire on holdings up to 
 £10 valuation, 21085. Landlords should be com- 
 pelled to give them a twenty years' purchase on the 
 valuation, 21087, and Government compelled to 
 make rent at Government valuation, 210S8. But 
 if tenants hold at a fair rent and pay it they should 
 not be obliged to turn out, and should have 
 a right to sell — it would be an equitable settlement, 
 21089. It would satisfy the people, but the Bright 
 clauses should at same time be extended, 21090. If 
 they had the land they could live on it, and pay a fair 
 rent fixed by an honest man, 21091-3. Rents not 
 paid in Connemara through inability, and because 
 they are too high, 21094-6. Not true that they 
 can, but will not paj"-. Potatoes failing and land 
 too bad to grow corn, (fee, 21097-8. Cause of pota- 
 toes rotting unknown, 21100. In some places land 
 exhausted by artificial manure, in others it is 
 hungry, 21102. Guano is used, 21103. People 
 very industrious, 21105—6, and improving the hold- 
 ings, 21107. No doubt, as to industry of people, 
 21108. Lands held under lease, at end of lease new 
 bargain is made by open competition, 21109. Case 
 where house had been built and other improvements 
 made, and rent raised from £50 to £100 on 
 his own improvements, 21111. A tenant must 
 give higher rent to retain his holding, 21112; lu3 
 improvements not taken into account at all, 21113. 
 These leases are now falling in, 21114. 
 
 Palmer, Mr. Thomas, Galway, Merchant. — Galway. 
 Is a merchant, and holder of land near the town, 
 21115-7. Rent is exorbitant, and lease is full of 
 clauses, 21118. Rents eleven or twelve acres at 
 £64 a year, 21119. Lease contains clause baring 
 all compensation, 21123-4. Was a yearly tenant 
 before taking a lease, but, wanting the land, land- 
 lord had it all his own way, 21126-28. No re- 
 sidence on it, 21130. The land has " increased 
 value" above the ordinary letting value, 21133. 
 Agriculture is in a low state owing to the ignorance 
 of the tenantry and apathy of landlords to im- 
 prove, 21134-21137. This refers to the country 
 round about, 21135. Hence it is difficult to pay 
 rent, 21136. Different state of things in the north 
 (Hillsborough),* 21138. Losses incurred by shed- 
 ding of the crops, 21140. Nine-tenths of the evils 
 of the country caused by absenteeism, 21141. Fair 
 rent and no disturbance while rent is paid would be 
 a help, 2 1 1 42. Advocates Government reclamation 
 of lands then to be let out in plots of 200 or 300 
 acres, 21143. Reclamation on large scale could not 
 be done by the tenants individually, 21145-6. 
 
 Mahon, John Ross, Esq., Messrs. Guinness and Mahon, 
 Dublin ; Cos. Galway and Roscommon, Land 
 Agent. — Galway. 
 Is a land agent of the firm of Guinness and 
 Mahon, 21147-8. And is agent over counties of 
 Galway and Roscommon, 21149. Tenants on the 
 estates are not allowed the right of disposing of 
 then- agricultural holdings, 21151-3. When leav- 
 ing, owing to bad circumstances, small sums have 
 been given to tenants, 21154. A tenant can dispose 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixxix 
 
 Mahoii, John Ross — continued. 
 
 of his holding by will, but it is unusual to do so, 
 21156. No ej eotments have been brought for a long 
 time, 21157. Then only for non-payment of rent, 
 21158. Limits ofcompensation are unreason- 
 able as regards landlwds, 21159. They must pay 
 for useless cottier houses, 21160. Claii]i in the 
 
 , Land Court for compensation once only, and tenant 
 got no more than agent offered, 21161-8. Not 
 many leases on the property. Land Act made no 
 difference in number. Granted generally to large 
 
 - farmers for term of years or lives, 211 69-7 L Small 
 tenants decline leases, thinking the landlord would 
 
 ' be more liberal to a yearly tenant, 21172. Grass 
 lands let much above the Ordnance value, 21173. 
 Land Act of 1870 has made no difference as to 
 raising rent, 21174. Before the passing of 
 
 • the Land Act rents were raised (15 or 20 
 years ago) on the Pakenham estate, 21175-8. 
 Very large sums spent by the landlords on 
 the estates under his management in land im- 
 provements and arterial drainage, 21179. Most 
 of it on the tenants' land, 21181-4. Similar 
 outlays on other estates, 21186. In drainage, 21190. 
 And road-making, 21191. Tenants' fields drained, 
 21194. And addition made to rent, 21195. In- 
 terest on the outlay only charged, 21197. The 
 tenants reclaim bog land, 21198. There is con- 
 siderable profit on first two years' crops, 21200. 
 But reclamations on a large scale cannot be profit- 
 ably carried on, 21201. This he has had experience 
 • of on Lord Clonbrock's estate, 21202. Describes 
 the improvement of waste land as a struggle for 
 life ; more would be spent in reclaiming than the 
 value of the fee-simple, 21207 ; i.e., the value 
 in its improved state, 21209. Rents on his estates 
 are reasonable, 21210. Small tenants on Lord Clon- 
 brock's estate pay 1 2| per cent, less than the Ord- 
 nance value ; grass tenants 20 per cent, more than 
 the Ordnance value, 21211. Part of a townland 
 taken up in 1848, and ploughed. No one was 
 ejected. All got plots, 21212. Tithes paid by land- 
 lords and no addition made to rents, 21213. 
 Rent of Sir W. Mahon's estate at Aghagower 
 not exorbitant, 21215. As a rule lands are 
 poor, and where that is the case tenants are" very 
 poor. Roads have been mended, and much money 
 expended on it by the landlord, 21219. The hold- 
 ings are small, and the land very poor, 21221. At 
 Derrycarberry the Ordnance value is £80, the 
 rental £90, 21222. The rents have not been raised 
 lately on these twotownlands, 21223.. The people are 
 comfortable, and pay their rent with great regularity, 
 21224. Receives £50,000 a year of rents, 21225-6. 
 Practically there are no evictions or notices to quit, 
 21226. And practically fixity of tenure. In 1847 
 the Strokestown estate was covered with paupers ; 
 each tenant had an average of 3J acres, and almost 
 every man had an under-tenant, 21228. They were 
 starving, and lived on conacre, but paid their rent 
 till the potatoes failed, 21229. On taking the 
 agency in that year he stipulated for a large outlay 
 in emigration, drains, and improvements. Major 
 Mahon paid the first instalment ; his successor, 
 Mr. P. Mahon, was very liberal, and the farms 
 were got up, relet, and the estate is doing well for 
 an Irish estate, 21230. It has much improved of 
 late, and the condition of the tenants also, 21231-2. 
 As an instance of subdivision four families lived 
 in hou.se with one door, 21233-4. No means of 
 checking'it, and it is more common than subletting, 
 21235-7. The landlord is able to prevent subletting, 
 21238. Knows nothing about tenants purchasing 
 their holdings, nor about Ulster tenant-right, 21239. 
 Subdi"\-ision or subletting would bring tenants back 
 to their former state, 21241. The Crown finding 
 they could not manage their lands in Roscommon 
 a,nd Galway sold them, as they did not wish to 
 bring the _ Government into collision with the 
 people. 
 
 M'Donnell, Martin, Esq., Dunmore, Tuam, Co. 
 Galway ; Merchant. — Galway. 
 Is a merchant in Galway and a landed proprietor 
 of 14,000 to 16,000 acres in Galway, Roscommon, 
 and Mayo, 21244-6. Rents vary — high in some 
 places, fair in others, 21247. Res-valuation desirable, 
 owing to improvements, 21248. Partly done by 
 landloi'ds, principally by tenants, 21249. A re- valua- 
 tion would set the difficulty at rest, 21250, and be 
 an improvement, 21252. Should te for letting, 
 taxation, and all purposes, 21253. Tenants should 
 hold at a fair rent, and not be disturbed so long as 
 he pays, 21256-8. Approves of selling to increase 
 another holding, but not of division, 21259. Bought 
 his lands in 1853, and it was wretchedly poor — let 
 it for less than it was six years previously, made no 
 change in rental for 21 years, 21260-5. Has waste 
 land which he is reclaiming, 21266, and means to 
 add it to tenants' holdings, 21268-9. Has im- 
 proved property by draining, 21270, and charges 
 interest, 21274-6. Rents not paid for two and a 
 half years, 21277. Offered considerable abatements, 
 but got no money from some, 21279. Cited cases 
 of extravagant rents not fairly selected, 21280-2. 
 Owing to ignorance in making valuation it is no 
 test of fair rent, 21284. Would like an indepen- 
 dent valuation, 21287, and it is essential to the 
 intei'ests of the country 21288 and important to 
 proprietors, 21289. Has allowed tenants to sell 
 but it is not a custom, 21291-3. 
 
 Graham,, Mr. John, Miltown, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Farms 20 acres at a rent of £28 from Dr. Mac- 
 Hale, the Archbishop, 21294-8, Country is in a 
 bad state, 21300, and land is let too high, 21301. 
 On one estate rents are double the valuation, and 
 it is impossible for tenants to pay, 21303. New 
 valuation necessary both for landlords and tenants, 
 
 21306. Labourersare in a bad condition. Theyshould 
 have not less than ten acres if they have families, 
 
 21307. If employed by large farmers to till the land 
 they would be better off, 21308. Over 10,000 acres 
 near witness which, if reclaimed, would be worth 
 four times its present value, 21310-3. Recom- 
 mends the passing of a Bill to securee fair rents fixed 
 by independent ai'bitrators, 21317. No eviction while 
 rent is paid, 21318, and tenant should have 
 right to sell his interest, and the landlord 
 a veto on incoming tenant. 21319. This 
 would satisfy the people, 21320. People want 
 that encouragement to do better, 21322, and 
 and .landlords would get their rents, 21323. Eject- 
 ments have been issued by Colonel Seymour, 21324. 
 Houses are very bad, 21325. Labourers cannot 
 live on less than ten acres unless they get work 
 from outside, 21326. Absenteeism is an evil, 
 21327. Neither landlords nor tenants feel secure 
 now, 21328. Fixity of tenure and fair rent would 
 satisfy the tenants, 21330-1. 
 
 Hanley, Mr. Patrick, Moycullen, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Holds about sixteen acres and a tract of moun- 
 tain pasture paying over £14 for it, 21333-8. It 
 is more than twice the valuation, 21339. About 
 sixteen people rent the mountain in common, 2 1 340. 
 Had never been let on lease, 21343. Each can put 
 as much stock on it as he is able, some of it beinf 
 good for pasture, 21345. Part of his holding has 
 been reclaimed by his father, 21347. The agent is 
 harsh on the tenants, 21351-3. Rent not been 
 raised, but an attempt was made to take away the 
 pasture, leaving the rent the same, failing that 
 notice to quit was served, 21354. Ejectment decrees 
 granted, some accepted terms offered. 21356-59 
 Others claimed compensation for houses, reclamation 
 and disturbance, but the cases are not yet settled 
 21360-64. Rents are too high, but if matters 
 stood as they did two years ago they would not 
 complain, 21354. 
 
Ixxx 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Davorm, Tliomas, Moycnllen, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Oalway. 
 Lives in MoycuUen, 21367. Holds over fourteen 
 acres, and some mountain land, 21368. Faying 
 over £11, 21370. More than twice the Govern- 
 ment valuation, 21371. Has been ejected and case 
 is coming on, 21373-5. Rent (rf reclaimed land 
 gone up'; improvements done by tenants, 21376-9. 
 Fair rent, fixity of tenure, and free sale would be a 
 satisfactory settlement. 21382; and would like it, 
 21383-4. But it would be a struggle to live, 
 21385. Prefers peasant proprietary, 21386. Com- 
 plains of the agent's treatment, 21 389-93. 
 
 Tarpey, Darby, Rahoon, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Galway. 
 Lives at Rahoon, and is a tenant of Miss Daly, 
 renting two acres at over £6, 21394-j6. Raised 
 twenty-two years ago, 21397. But not since, 
 21398-21401. It is lea land, 21402. Lives by it, 
 but not on it, 21403. Rents other lands from the 
 nuns, 21405. Against whom he has no complaint, 
 but has been ejected from another holding under 
 Mr. Kearns, 21407. It was a town park, 21419. 
 Miss Daly would not lower her rent, 21408. StOl 
 keeps it, 21410 ; there is a house on it, 21411. 
 His father held it before him, 21413. 
 
 Bolton, Mrs., Blackbur, Co. Galway ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Galway. 
 Lives at Blackbur, near Galway, 21420 ; but not 
 in the borough, 21422. By her lease has one 
 hundred and forty acres, but only eighty really — 
 the rest is under water, 21423. Holds the land 
 SLQce her husband's death from the Alliance Com- 
 pany, 21425. Rent formerly £100, then raised to 
 £140; and she had to pay £10 more to get the 
 lease, 21427. Rent far too high, 214.30. Her 
 husband improved it, but did not erect any build- 
 ings, 21431. Seaweed formerly of value for 
 manure, 21433. No use now as they cannot sell it, 
 there being no demand, 21435. Agent allowed a 
 reduction last year to all tenants, 21442. Applied 
 to have rent reduced, 21444 ; but the Company re- 
 fused, 21445. The lease is out, 21446 ; but con- 
 tinued by arrangement for one more year (see 
 21461), 21448. Valuation about £120, with sea^ 
 weed (£15 for that), 21452-5 ; but not worth more 
 than £100, 21455. Farm is unprotected, 21459. 
 No walls, 21460. Reduction of rent refused unless 
 the agreement (referred to in 21448) was signed, 
 21461. 
 
 Nolan, Mathew, Gloonban, Shale, Co. Mayo ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Lives at Cloonban, Shale, county Mayo, 21461. 
 Has about four to four and a half acres at a rent 
 of £8 3s., 21462-3; which is too much, 21464. 
 Estate twenty-five years ago bought for £1,700, 
 and ten years after sold for £4,500, 21464. Pays 
 for five acres, but has only about four acres ; 
 could not pay rent for last three gales ; served with 
 a process in consequence, 21466-70. Has to go 
 five miles for turf, 21471. Has no right of tvirbary, 
 21472; and has to pay for the turf; no roads on 
 the estate, and there are fourteen other tenants 
 besides on the land, 21473. Mr. Hackett, the land- 
 lord, has raised all the rents. , In addition to the 
 farm, employed in clearing the river. Offered to 
 pay rent if a reduction were made, 21474-5. 
 
 Leonard, Francis, Anglohim, Co. Galway ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Galway. 
 Lives at Anglohim, rent £16, holds eighteen 
 acres, 21475-7. Rent fixed by T. Joyce forty-two 
 years ago, 21478-9. Present landlord purchased 
 the estate a few years ago for £3,200, 21480. 
 Land was raised, and he put the drainage on wit- 
 ness above all the tenants, 21481. Pays more than 
 the other tenants per acre, 21 482. Does not know if 
 he ought to pay more than the valuation, 21483. 
 Told not to pay more, and would be afraid to, lest 
 
 the country people might injure him, though he 
 has not been threatened, 21484-9. Has not been 
 advised not to pay, 21490-1. Is not able to pay 
 the debts, cess, rents, &c., 21492. Would pay a 
 fair rent, 21493; but it is bad land, 21494. Has 
 not been served with notice as he only owes half 
 year's rent, 21495. 
 
 Hunt, Bdmond Langley, Esq., Curraghbridge, Adare, 
 Cos. Limerick, Carlow, Clare and Tipperary ; 
 Land Agent. — Limerick. 
 Is a landowner, agent, and tenant-farmer in Cos. 
 Clare, Limerick, Tipperary, and Carlow, 21499- 
 500. Rental of his property in Carlo-v^ about 
 £600 a year, 21501. Is agent over from 2000 to 
 3000 acres. Manages 800 acres and rents 200 
 acres Irish, 21502. Lease expires in about two 
 years, and, having made great improvements, rent 
 will then be raised considerably, 21505. It con- 
 sists of tillage, some grass land, and some meadow, 
 21507. Has made vast outlay on the house and 
 gardens, 21508. Had twenty-one years' lease, 
 21509-10. No covenants as to improvements, 
 21511. But did them for his pleasure. It is an 
 example of what is very often done, 21512. The 
 house was almost uninhabitable, but landlord gave 
 about £300, which much improved it, 21513. AU 
 improvements were known to landlord and his 
 agent, 21514. Land is let high enough, 21516. 
 Increased rent, said the agent, would be in conse- 
 quence of improvement in the times, not on im- 
 provements made. This is fallacious, 21517. Times 
 have not improved, 21518. Agent considers wit- 
 ness's place as demesne lands, but it should not be 
 so classed, 21519-21. Has not seen the judgment 
 on what are demesne lands, 21522. They should 
 not be exempted from laws passed applicable to 
 agricultural tenancies, but they should be properly 
 defined. If . let for a term of years for f arming^ 
 purposes, or where the owner has not resided for a 
 term of years, they should not be treated as de- 
 mesne lands, 21525. Rent was nearly doubled on 
 taking it, and it would not have paid for farming 
 purposes only, 21526. Land Act is not advan- 
 tageous to tenants, for clauses have been put into 
 leases debarring claims when the Act was only 
 contemplated, 21529-30. Hopes tenant-right,. 
 such as holds in the North, will be extended all 
 over Ireland, 21531. Allows sales by tenants on 
 the propert}' he is agent for, but it seldom happens- 
 unless through faikire of a tenant, 21532. Causes 
 security and happiness when allowed on estates. 
 Mentions the Earl of Devon's as an instance, 21533> 
 The anxiety for land so great, that worn-out land 
 realizes large sums, 21534. Hopes free sale will he 
 allowed in the future, 21535. With a reasonable 
 veto of course, 21536. Thinkspeasant proprietorship 
 would be beneficial to Ireland, though he has had 
 no experience of it, 21537-9. Government should 
 purchase land and sell it to tenants whenever suit- 
 able land was found. It would increase the value 
 of Irish property, 21540-4. Has largely employed 
 labourers. They are the worst ofi^ people in the 
 country. Endeavours should be made to prevent 
 their joining in the present agitation by giving 
 them employment during the winter. They rent 
 small plots at exorbitant rents from the small 
 farmers ; they hate the small farmers, who do not 
 employ them, 21546-50. They live in villages, and 
 not on thefarms, where they work, 21552-3. Farmers 
 will not employ them, 21554. Land is good and 
 cheap, but the people most wretched, never improv- 
 ing, 21555-7. Labourers are on the side of the 
 landlords, 21559. Small tenants on inferior land 
 feel inseciire as to making improvements, and 
 never build houses now. . Act of 1870 discouraged 
 landlords giving assistance. Want of security 
 is the great evil, 21560-3. They do not 
 care for leases, 21564-6. Always agitating 
 for something new^ 21568. But the well- 
 to-do tenants are loyal, 21569. Taking every- 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixxxi 
 
 Himt, Ediiiond Langley — continued. 
 
 thing together, the people are not badly off nor dis- 
 satisfied, but join in agitation in hopes of gaining 
 something, 21570-2. Unless some action be taken 
 there will be rebellioii,21573. The threeF.'s wouldbe 
 a good settlement if it could be cairied out, 21574-80. 
 Tenant-right could be carried out by the Legislature, 
 21581-4. Fair rents and security could be obtained 
 by arbitration, and arbitrators should be thoroughly 
 practical men, 21585-6. There should be a new 
 valuation for Ireland, especially if tenant-right be 
 -extended, 21587-9. It would not do to leave the 
 landlords and tenants to agree as to valuation, for, 
 though safe in some instances, in others it would 
 not be safe, 21590-1. Competition has always 
 existed at the expiration of a lease, at least rents 
 are always raised in a secret sort of way before the 
 lease expires, 21592-3. If the landlord, agent, and 
 tenant had the power to settle the rent, litigation 
 would be avoided to a great extent ; but a general 
 revaluation must be made before many years are 
 over, 21595-6. The idea of GrifSth's valua- 
 tion as a fair rent will be difiicult to eradi- 
 cate, as people now are refusing to pay rents 
 altogether, and have refused to pay witness unless 
 he took Griffith's vakiation. In one instance they 
 refused to pay anything, and at a public meeting a 
 proposal was made to get rid of landlords and agents 
 by one of his own tenants, 21597-21600. Rents 
 .are well paid in Limerick, but not in the mountain 
 districts of Tipperary, 21601-2. They are better 
 off in those districts, and pay bulk rents, 21603-4. 
 Tenants should has^e facilities to purchase their 
 holdings with Grovernment help, 21605-8. Better 
 to postpone payment in bad times than to 
 forgive any of the interest, 21611. Purchase 
 of land by Government would raise the value 
 of property, 21612. If waste land was bought for 
 the purpose of reclamation by Government it would 
 keep the people enaployed and quiet during the 
 winter, 21613 ; or loans might be made to landlords 
 for this purpose, 21614. Much good was done last 
 year by means of the Government aid, 21615. Is 
 employing people to drain the estates of Lord Fer- 
 moy, Mr. Maunsell, and Lord Guillamore. In some 
 instances no charge is made to the tenants ; Lord 
 Guillamore has forgiven the whole charge, 21616-8. 
 Would not object to subdivision of land, but would 
 not allow sub-letting, 21619. The size of sub- 
 divisions should be limited or else the good of 
 having respectable peasant proprietors would be 
 -done away with, 21620-2. Would not forbid the 
 assignment of the whole holding, which is not 
 allowed at present where a Government loan has 
 been made, 21623 ; but would object to sub- 
 lettings of the entire holding if it got rid of the 
 tenant proprietorship, 21624. There are thousands 
 of acres of land everywhere capable of reclamation, 
 a great deal of which is in the hands of large pro- 
 prietors. There are large tracts flooded between 
 Athy and Kildare. 21625-8. Government should 
 take up the sinking of the big rivers, and so give 
 landlords and tenants the advantage of an outfall, 
 21629. As a rule local boards can do work cheaper 
 than the Government; but the local boards do not 
 ■care to take up extensive works, 21629-33, nor do 
 landed proprietors, 21634. Does not advocate com- 
 pulsion by Government in this matter, 21636 ; but 
 they should buy the waste lands and let them out, 
 21638. This would pay, 21639. Gives an instance 
 of the value of land thus improved on Lord Fer- 
 moy's estate at Eock Barton, 21640-2. If the land 
 to be benefitted is in the hands of tenants it should 
 be jjurchased from the landlords and then re-allotted 
 on the peasant-proprietorship system, 21645-6. The 
 peasants would be able to pay for the drainage, and 
 the money laid out would not be lost, 21647—9. 
 The rents have not been raised on the estates he is 
 connected with, 21650-3. There is a change of 
 rents when the tenancy changes, 21654. Gives an 
 instance, 21655-6. Is agent and has the manage- 
 
 ment altogether of over 3,500 acres, 21657 ; but is 
 not Lord Fermoy's agent, who has considerable pro- 
 perty in Limerick, 21658-60. 
 
 Bolster, Mr. William, Kilmallock, Co. Limerick ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Was formerly President of the Limericls, Clare, 
 and Tipperary Farmers' Club for twelve years. The 
 •club is merged into a branch of the Land League ; 
 is now a member of it, 21661-70. Holds 200 
 Irish acres under Lord Emly, about four miles from 
 Limerick. Isonlyatenant-farmer,21671-3. There 
 has been an increase in rent of late years in the 
 county Limerick, 21674, with a tendency all along 
 to increase rent and force leases, 21675. The 
 increase, in many cases, takes place privately, the 
 tenant being afraid to admit it, and is not confined 
 
 ■ to a change of tenancy, 21676-80. The tenant is 
 not a free agent, but must accejit the rise or go away, 
 21681-3. It is very general and is on the increase, 
 21684—5. There have been abatements during the 
 last three years in consequence of bad times, but 
 they never compensate a farmer for his losses, 21686. 
 As a rale improvements are made by the tenants, 
 houses built, and fences made. Landlords seldom 
 do anything but arterial drainage, and that only 
 by Government loans. Gives instance, 21687-90. 
 Interest for these works is paid by the tenant, and, 
 as a rule, the rent is increased, 21691. Landlords 
 make neither fences nor roads. Instance of bad 
 roads, 21692-3. Leases for a term of years are 
 forced on tenants to debar them from the benefits of 
 the Land Act, 21695-6. Tenants should be pre- 
 vented from doing this, and tenants over £50 a year 
 require as much protection as small ones, 21697—99. 
 There is a great want of security, 21700. The 
 Land Act has conferred a benefit on very small 
 holders who are ejected, but they seldom get much 
 out of the compensation awarded, as a landlord 
 generally trumps up a case of dilapidation which has 
 to be paid out of the award, 21701. Tenants would 
 be better off' without the Land Act, for it has broken 
 the confidence between Landlord and Tenant, and 
 the former have discontinued giving assistance, 
 21702-3. This relates to the South only, of the . 
 North he knows nothing, 21704-5. The three F's 
 would be one of the greatest blessings ever extended 
 to Ireland, but nothing short of it will , ever settle 
 the question, 21706-7. Fair rents could in many 
 cases be settled by landlords and tenants, failing 
 that, by thoroughly practical arbitrators, and finally, 
 on appeal to a County Court Judge, 21708-12. An 
 umpire would be reasonable and cheaper, 21713. 
 There should be periodical valuations as occasion 
 required, when rents might be raised or lowered, 
 21715-6. Fixity of tenure would be an induce- 
 ment to a tenant to improve his holding, 21717. 
 Sub-division and sub-letting he would allow to large 
 farmers — say 400 or 500 acres ; but he would not 
 go below 30 or 40 acres. The consent of the landlord 
 should not be necessary, and a tenant should have the 
 right to sell his interest on leaving, subject to a 
 reasonable veto, 21718-22. It would give security 
 to the tenant, and would satisfy reasonable people 
 21723-4. The Bright clauses should be extended 
 for the creation of a peasant proprietorship, and 
 lands should be purchased when for sale, with 
 aid from Government to pay for them, money so 
 borrowed to be repaid in a term of years. The 
 sales should not be forced, nor the land taken 
 against their will from the landlords, 21 725-5 a. 
 Mr. Butt believed the three F's would be bene- 
 ficial, 21729. The expropriation of landlords 
 would be unreasonable, 21726a. He has no prac- 
 tical knowledge of the purchase of holdings by 
 tenants under the Church Act, 21727. It would 
 Ije advantageous if the Government took up some 
 of the waste lands and placed the "squatters" in 
 Connemara on them rent free. The creation of 
 peasant proprietors on these lands would be very 
 good, 21728-9. Owners of waste lands, unable to 
 
Ixxxii 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Bolster, William — continued. 
 
 reclaim them, should be compelled to sell, 21729. 
 The labourers' question should be settled. They are 
 in a ■wretched state. Instance, 21730-1. Rates 
 of wages and poverty of the people. Milk not to 
 be obtained, though the district is a dairy district, 
 21732A-6. Farmers should provide cottages and 
 necessary articles for their labourers at a fair rent, 
 21736-45-56. Labourers only employed during 
 part of the year, owing to " want of security " as to 
 improvements, 21746-8. Sanitary arrangements of 
 labourers' cottages very bad, 21749-55. Labourers 
 provided with houses by farmers employing them 
 cannot always remain there ; they must be disturbed 
 in course of time, 21756-60. Instance of hardship 
 to farmers if labourers independent of them, 21761. 
 Men should give labour to farmers on whose 
 land they live, and farmers should employ them at 
 fair wages, 21762—3. Strangers often brought in 
 at lower wages than resident labourers, 21764. The 
 feeling of insecurity between landlord and tenant as 
 to improvements should be put an end to, and a 
 j oint interest created, 21765-71. In cases of appeals 
 against decisions, the county court is the cheapest 
 method ; but legislation could make it less costly 
 still, 21772-76. Present expense keeps many 
 tenants from going into Court, and they fear the 
 landlords, 21777-8, or the agent, 21779-80. In- 
 stances of forced leases and increased rents, 21783-91. 
 Penal clauses inserted in these leases, 21792-4. 
 On all the estates round about the tendency is to 
 raise rents except on the Devon estate, 21795-802. 
 This stops all impi'ovements, 21803-5. Witness 
 holds a lease at a lower rent than his father held 
 the land, 21806-16. Mr. Monsell always in favour 
 of tenants, 21817 ; and it is his practice on the 
 estate, 21»18. Farmers about Bruff charge £10 to 
 £12 for potato land (con-acre) to outside men, but 
 indulgent to their own labourers as a rule, 2181 9-23. 
 The rich land is almost all grass, and labourers there 
 are very badly off. Lunacy is on the increase, which 
 is partly attributable to the poverty-stricken state 
 of the people, 21824-28. Thinks the three F's wUl 
 settle the question, but opinions and requirements 
 have advanced during the last 16 years, and to 
 satisfy the people the State should settle the ques- 
 tion at once, 21829-36. Landlords are absentees, 
 and this is another cause of complaint, 21981-3. 
 
 0' Flaherty, Mr. Mathew, Donoman Castle, Croom, Co. 
 Limerick ; Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Is a tenant farmer. President of the Limerick 
 Farmers' Club, and has something to do with the 
 management of property, 21837-40. Holds land 
 from a middleman, who has raised rents recently 
 on the expiration of leases, 21842-6. The rents 
 were high formerly, but now are exorbitant, though 
 
 . this practice is not general, 21847-51. It causes 
 ill-feeling, 21852—3. Rents have been raised on 
 Lord Kenmare's property within the last few years, 
 which has produced an ill effect in the country, 
 21855-7. The three F's. the only cure, 21858-61. 
 Tenants have bought their holdings. Gives instance 
 of an advantageous sale of tenant-right, 21862-6. 
 Tenant-right exists on Lord Dunraven's property ; 
 knows of no case of tenants purchasing perpetuities, 
 .21867-72. Right of selling not the recognised rule 
 in his country, 21873. Grass farming is done in a 
 negligent, slovenly manner. No improvements are 
 made owing to the system of land tenure, 21876— 
 82. Holds his farm on lease, and spends nothing 
 on it unnecessarily, but yet has had to spend large 
 sums on improvements ; but rent will be raised on 
 expiry of lease, which now he will not give, and he 
 can only claim a small sum for compensation, 
 21883-91. Leases not general, nor improvements, 
 21892-3. On the Dunraven property the landlord 
 and tenant combine in improvements, there is secu- 
 rity for the tenant, and no eviction except for non- 
 payment, 21894-8. Rents have not been raised 
 since the present lord's time, 21899-901. He and 
 
 many others would like to purchase, 21902-5.. 
 Subdivision fair with large holders, but not in small 
 farms, 21906-8. His farm is not worth so much 
 rent in consequence of change in value of farm 
 produce, 21909-13. Griffith's valuation unreliable, 
 21914-5. Fall in prices of produce, 21916-23. 
 Valuation improperly made, 21924-5. Wages of 
 labourers on his farm, 21927-32. Account of the 
 purchase of Lord Dunraven's property, 21933-6. 
 Resident landlords, 21937-8. 
 
 Casey, Mr. Joseph, Rathkeale, Co. Limerick ; Auc- 
 tioneer. — Limerich. 
 Holds about thirty acres of townlands ; gave up 
 large farms as rents were tou dear, 21938-41. Has 
 never sold under a sheriff's order, 21945. Tenant- 
 right allowed on the Devon and sun-ounding 
 estates, also on Lord Annally's property, 21946-8. 
 Complains of the high prices paid for possession 
 over the real value, 21950. For the last three 
 years hardly any property can be sold owing to 
 depression, 21951—3. Instance of depreciation of 
 agricultural produce, 21954-5. Want of security 
 has effected the value of holdings for six or seven 
 years past, 21956—58. Increased since the Land 
 Act, 21959 ; and rents have been raised oftener, 
 21960. Better feelings existed also between land- 
 lord and tenants, 21961 ; but now improvements^ 
 are checked, sales almost stopped, and money is 
 scarce, 21962-65. Rents never changed on the 
 estates of Lord Devon, Lord Mounteagle, and Mr.. 
 Pigott, and the tenants are very different to those 
 on other properties, 21966-69. Have received 
 about two hundred persons in the workhouse who 
 have been evicted for non-payment of rent, or given 
 out-door relief to those with families, 21970-74. 
 Some of these were farmers, some cottagers holding 
 small townfields, 21975-77. The three F's. would 
 remove all the trouble and distress in Ireland ; but 
 the people do not want to sell if they have fixity, 
 21978-80. Has never been in the North, 21981. 
 
 Barry, James G., Esq., Sandville Grange, Cos. 
 Limerick, Clare, and Tipperary ; Land Agent,, 
 liandowner and Farmer. — Idmerick. 
 Is connected with over 20,000 acres in the- 
 counties of Limerick, Clare, and Tipperary, is agent 
 for Lord Emly, L^-dy Louisa Fitzgibbon and others, 
 and i^ays rent for the farm he holds, 21984-9. 
 Tenant-right is permitted with the landlord's veto,, 
 and incoming tenants are generally contracted out 
 of claiming under the Land Act, 21990-2. Only 
 one lease granted on these terms, and the tenant 
 agreed not to make claims on the landlord for the 
 money he paid to come in, 21993, 22000. That 
 clause should be repealed, 22001-7. Leases for 
 thirty-one years granted on these estates, 22008-9. 
 Rents rather increased by the Land Act, throughout 
 the country, and covenants barring compensation in- 
 serted generally in leases, 22009-12. Leases have 
 to be pressed' upon tenants, 22013-4. Except in 
 the case of grazing farms, 22015. Tenants would 
 rather have leases if no restrictive clauses were in- 
 serted, 22016-7. Rents are about 25 percent, over 
 Griffith's valuation. Griffith's valuation is not a 
 fair test for settling rent ; it is not uniform, 
 22018-20. Increase of rents depends on landlords, 
 but no increase has taken place on the properties 
 he is agent for, and Lord Emly's tenants have not 
 asked for an abatement, 22021-2. On Lady L. 
 FitzGibbon's estate rents were equalized about ten 
 yearsago, 22023-8. Revaluation generally on coming 
 in of tenant in tail, 22029. Improvements used to 
 be made by landlords, and tenants had to pay both 
 principal and interest. During the bad times some 
 instalments were paid by Lord Emly, 22030-5. 
 Has had no evictions, 22036-7. About fifty 
 small freeholders on the property, practically 
 they are only labourers. Obtained their title 
 by squatting, 220.S8-43. Does not suggest any 
 alteralion in the Bright clauses, but all re- 
 strictiouK on sale and transfer of land should 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixxxiu 
 
 Barry, James G. — continued. 
 
 be abolislied, 22046-49. The laws of entail should - 
 be altered, 22051. Plan for the settlement of the 
 land question, 22052-3. The principal of which is 
 to give perpetuties to tenants at their present rentals, 
 and the landlord to be repaid by a fine for any 
 prospective increase of rent, 22043. The amount 
 to be settled by arbitrators, 22044-52. Pro- 
 poses cottages with an allotment of land to each 
 cottage for labourers on all residential farms over 
 thirty acres, at rents not exceeding the farnier's 
 rent. Mortgages to be bought up by means of land 
 debentures, and rents to be fined down by means of 
 payments, but not entirely abolished, 22053-62. 
 The law might enforce fixity of tenure, if landlord's 
 rights are not invaded, 22063-5. Eents should be 
 fixed definitely and never altered, and the prospective 
 increase paid for by a sum of money down, this to be 
 raised by debentures on the tenants' interest, 22066- 
 75. This would be a modification of the Bright 
 clauses, but subdivision should .be prohibited, 
 22076-83. The rent of his land, which has been in 
 the family for eight generations, has been doubled 
 twice in the last fifty years, but has been rediiced 
 permanently by his present landlord, 22084-88. 
 He contracted himself out of his improvements. 
 The law shoukl be amended on this point, 22089-93, 
 
 Townsend, William Uniacke, Esq., Spa Hill, Kilfi- 
 nane, Co. Limerick ; Land Agent. — Limerick. 
 Is agent over twenty estates, producing £40,000 
 a year, 22094-6. The number of years purchase 
 of tenant-right should be limited. When unlimited 
 it is detrimental to both landlord and tenant, 
 22098-22102. Instance, 22103-7. When unli- 
 mited on his estates strangers are not allowed to, 
 buy. Proceedings taken to turn out a stranger, 
 22108-10. Purchase does not result in greater 
 comfort, but produces satisfaction, 2211 1-5. Refusal 
 of right prevents amalgamation of farms, 22116. 
 Evictions only for non-payment of rent, 22117-20. 
 Disinclination to take leases now, 22121-5. Cove- 
 nants always inserted in leases against clauses of 
 Act, 22129-35, but never under £50, 22136. Im- 
 provements by both parties decreased under the Act, 
 22137-8. But now they are coming round, 
 22139-4^. Purchase of holdings uncommon, 
 22142-4. Reduction of rent preferable to peasant 
 proprietorship. Approves of Mr. Barry's plan to 
 a certain extent, 22145-52. The privilege of buy- 
 ing should be confined to large farmers, 22153-55. 
 Tenants practically have fixity of tenure on his 
 properties, 22158. The Act should be amended as 
 regards temporary lettings, owing to the difficulty 
 of getting the land back again, 22159-65. Tenants 
 not sufficiently aware of their rights, 22166. 
 Sales of tenants interests should be carried out 
 under some Court, 22166-70. Griffith's valua- 
 tion correct estimate as a rule, but not for particular 
 cases, 22171. Gives example, 22172-4. Is agent 
 for the Ashtown property! General rise of rents in 
 1856. A small increase takes place on the death of 
 a tenant, 22175-7, but only if the case admits of 
 it. Rents are not high. Good lands are lower 
 than on adjoining property, 22178-80. Gives an 
 example, 22181-2. About £1,200 a year expended 
 on the whole of the estates by the landlord, 22183-5. 
 Proper accommodation should be provided for 
 labourers, who should be independent of the farmers, 
 22189-92. Rent should not be charged, butiet 
 houses be part of wages, 22193-4. The purchase 
 of perpetuities is a good plan, so long as it is not a 
 fee, 22195-7. The labourers should be more com- 
 fortably housed, 22198. 
 
 Froate, Mr. John, Clonmoney, Bunratty, Co. Clare ; 
 Coroner and Tenant Parmer'. — Limerich. 
 Is a tenant farmer, and also an owner of land pur- 
 chased in the Landed Estates Court, 21299. Farms 
 200 statute acres, and lives on a holding of sixty plan- 
 tation acres. Is much over-rented, 22200-1. Land- 
 
 lord is Mr. J. M. Westropp. On getting an increase 
 of land his rent per acre was doubled, and he pur 
 chased the interest of eight or nine acres. The rent ' 
 of that plot being the same as his other land, no change 
 was made, 22203-9. Has improved and enlarged 
 the residence, built offices, and also improved the 
 land. Hasnoleaseof it,22210-4. It is a convenient 
 distance from Ennis and Limerick, 22215-7. Paid 
 £125 for the interest ol the nine acres, 22218-9. In 
 1878 application to reduce the rent refused, 22220-3. 
 Times being bad made him apply, though formerly 
 the land was worth the rent, 22223-7. Resides on 
 it, but other lands do not adjoin it, 22230-1. 
 The nine acres were of use to him, so the price 
 was not too high, 22232-4. Rent of the farm 
 higher than that of other lands in the neigh- 
 bourhood belonging to Mr. Westropp, 22237-9. 
 Pays less than Griffith's valuation for fai-m rented 
 from Mr. Stafford O'Brien, 22242. There are no 
 tenants on the plantation holding, 22243—5. Has 
 tenants on his inherited estate, but has never 
 raised their rents. Last alteration took place in 
 1855, 22246-8. That land abuts on bog land, 
 rent being eighty-four acres for £211, 22249-50. 
 Vakiation is no test as to real value of land. He 
 pays under, and tenants pay over, and they are 
 not over rented. Explains why, 22251-3. Sale 
 of another holding on the estate, 22254-9. 
 
 Fitzgerald, Foster Vesey, Esq., Moyrisk, Quin, Co. 
 Clare; Landowner. — Limerich. 
 Is a Justice of the Peace, Vice-Chairman of the 
 Ennis Union, and a landowner of 1 , 200 statute acres, 
 22260-2. Manages the family estates in Clare (6,000 
 acres), Louth (450 acres), and Kerry (2,400 acres). 
 Is tenant of the remainder (1 2,000 altogether), 22263. 
 Tenant-right not> allowed, 22264-5. Pays outgoing 
 tenants himself; in fact, it is pre-emption, but it 
 seldom occurs, 22266-9. Prefers the absence of tenant- 
 right, 22270. Only grazing farms without houses, 
 22271-2. The Land Act has worked fairly well, both 
 for landlord and tenant ; but the former would rather 
 not have it, and would contract himself out of it when 
 possible, 22273-6. The scale of compensation works 
 unequally, but it is not altogether unreasonable, 
 22277-9. At present the payment of rent is at a 
 dead lock, 22280. Rents foi-merly were fairly paid, 
 but the tenants claimed this year a similar abate- 
 ment to last year, which was refused ; and now they 
 will not pay more than Griffith's valuation, 22281-5. 
 Rents on his estates are much above Griflith's va- 
 luations, 22286. The omission of wool from Grif- 
 fith's valuation causes high rents in Galway, and 
 should be taken into consideration when there is a 
 revaluation, 22287. Tenants prefer that valua- 
 tion, because it is greatly below their rents, not 
 because they think it fair, 22288-9. There should 
 be a revaluation. Tillage lands are, when poor, not 
 worth more than the Griffith's valuation, but grass 
 lands are, 22290-1. As a rule the tenants do not 
 make improvements. Houses may be slightly' 
 better, but there is little change in the aspect of 
 the land for thirty years, 22292-3. Evictions on 
 expiration of leases in Clare, 22294-9 New tenants 
 paid what outgoing tenants refused, 22300-3. 
 Threatening notice, 22304-5. In Kerry tenants 
 holding leases have made improvements, 22306-7. 
 Landlords have not helped since the Land Act, except 
 last year, and the rents have been paid, 22308-10. 
 On the Conyngham estates tenants purchased hpld- 
 ings by means of borrowed money, 22311-2. Le- 
 gislation is necessary on the question of rundale, 
 and where the system exists it is advisable not to 
 carry_ out peasant jDroprietary. Great difl^culty 
 exists" in putting a stop to it, 22313-22. Purchase 
 of farms at low rents better than complete pui'chase 
 22323. Government help desirable, but expenses 
 should be lessened, 22324-5. Waste land, such as 
 cut-away bog, &c., is worth reclaiming ; but waste 
 land proper, such as moorlands, not fit for pasture, 
 is not worth it, 22326-39. Leases should be 
 
 m 
 
Ixxxiv 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Fitzgerald, Foster Vesey. — continued. 
 
 granted, and yearly tenancies abolished ; rent should 
 not be raised, but a fine paid instead, 22340-44. 
 History of the property in Kerry, 22345-8. Land 
 should be valued by a public officer. Arbitration 
 would not be satisfactory, 22349-54. There is, 
 practically, fixity of tenure on his property. B,ight 
 of sale should be withheld from those who pay no- 
 thing on taking up a holding, 22357-66. Would 
 like to have leases in Ireland as in England, with 
 proper clause as to re-entry, and no such thing as 
 eviction or yearly tenancy ; objects to the power 
 of redemption, and would give a period prior to 
 eviction instead of after it, 223G8-73. Hag never 
 distrained, but the right of distress should be main- 
 tained, 22374. 
 
 Lane, Mr. Michael, Ardnacrusha, Limerick, Co. Clare ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Holds thirty-eight Irish acres from Colonel 
 M'Adam at £102 a year; valuation £38 lOs. ; it 
 is partly tillage and ])artly pasture ; previous rent 
 £80 ; it was raised fourteen years ago, 22375-7. 
 His father paid £1 an acre, 22378-9. The rent is 
 very dear, and he cannot pay it ; has had to borrow 
 money to pay it, 22380-L Is a yearly tenant, 
 22382. Application for a reduction refused by 
 the agent, 22383-6. Landlord promised to rebuild 
 the house and drain fourteen acres when rent was 
 raised, 22387-8, but has done neither, and the 
 tenant has paid for the house, which had been 
 blown down, with the rent raised, 22389-97. Was 
 not able to drain the land, and those fourteen acres 
 are practically useless, 22401-4. Got a reduction 
 one year, 22405-6. The landlord is not resident, 
 22407. The agent (his cousin) who lives in Tip- 
 perary, collects the rent, 22408-11. Mrs. O'Grady, 
 who lives on Captain Maunsell's estate, pays too 
 high a rent, and so do all the tenants about there, 
 22415—9. Rents have increased considerably the 
 last twelve years, 22420-1. In good times he could 
 not pay the rent, and has raised the money on bills 
 which must be paid, 22422-8. Mrs. O'Grady, who 
 is going to be ejected for non-payment, has not had 
 her rent raised since she came into possession, 
 22429-33. 
 
 Kane, Mr. Patrick, Ardnacrusha, Co. Clare ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Limerick. 
 ■ Holds twenty-one and a half acres from Colonel 
 M'Adam, and was ejected last August for non-pay- 
 ment of rent, 22434. He took the place from his 
 brother, but the rent was not paid, 22435-7. It is 
 bad land, and the former tenant ran away without 
 paying the rent, 22438-41. 
 
 Kane, Mr. Michael, Ardnacrusha, Co. Clare ; Tenant 
 Farmei'. — Limerick. 
 Is a tenant on Col. M' Adam's estate, and holds 
 twenty Irish acres at £53 Is. 6rf., 22442-4. The 
 rent has not been raised since he took it, but it is 
 too high ; the valuation is only £18, 22445-6. It 
 would not pay half the rent, but is helped by his 
 fathei-, 22447-8. One-fourth of it is good land, 
 22449. 
 
 Grady, Mr. Patrick, Ardnacrvisha, Co. Clare ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Holds twenty-eight acres on the same property at 
 £70 7s. 2d., the valuation being £22 ; the rent has 
 not been raised, but it is too high, and he owes one 
 year, 22451-4. Had an abatement in bad times, 
 22455-6. Cannot live on it and pay the rent, and 
 could only drain part of it, 22457. Held it six 
 years, 22458. Took the place by proposal from the 
 agent, who fixed the rent at the same as the pre- 
 ceding tenant, who, however, never paid it, 22460 
 -63. 
 
 Hartigan,:SlY. John, Co. Clare; Tenant Farmer.— 
 Limerick. 
 Holds twenty-two acres from Mr. White, at 
 
 £77 10s. ; the valuation, which is £48 5s., is higher 
 than any other portion of the district ; the rent was 
 lowered, 22464-6. Six other tenants live ,on the 
 estate, which is all their landlord owns ; it is in 
 county Clare ; it is valued higher than any other 
 place, and his holding is the highest of the lot, 
 22467-9. The house is good, and the land may be 
 a trifle better than the rest, but the rent is too dear, 
 22470-72. No abatements made since the death of 
 Mr. White, and could get on before the bad times,, 
 only through industry, 22473. 
 
 Howard, Mr. William, Ardnacrusha, Co. Clare ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. , 
 Holds ten acres from Colonel M''Adam at a rent 
 of £43, and valuation of £17 5s., 22475-7. Eent is 
 too high, and but for his private business could not 
 pay the rent. The land is fair, 22478-82. Is ask- 
 ing for a permanent reduction, 22483. Has built 
 two houses and improved the holding, and tenants 
 do their best to improve, 22484-5. In a most Op- 
 pressed state, '22486. Has held it ten years, and 
 £150 was given for the holdings at the present 
 rents, 22486-^. Lives on the farm, 22490. 
 
 Scott, John W., Esq., Eocklevin, Ennis, Cos. Clare 
 and Limerick ; Land Agent. — Limerick. 
 Is land agent to Lord Leconfield, who makes all 
 improvements himself as far as possible on the 
 English system, and charges a per-centage, 22491-3. 
 Has done this for about 30 years, and during 25 
 years has laid out £65,000 on his Clare and Lime- 
 rick property, 22494-7. Interest has generally 
 been charged on drainage only, and not on build- 
 ings, which have been for " small" people, 22498-9. 
 Refusal to pay more than Griffith's valuation, 
 22500—1. Land Act has made no difference, 
 22502. There has been no exceptional distress, 
 and refusal to pay is not through inability, 
 22503-7. No ejectments, 22508. Lord Lecon- 
 field pays a tenant compensation when leaving. 
 As a rule they have no hona fide claim for 
 improvements, 22509—12. Distraint never put in 
 force ; but the power is useful to secure rent 
 when needful, 22513-5. Arbitration for valua- 
 tions would not be satisfactory, 22516-19. A 
 public officer would be better, 22520-3. There 
 should be a new Government "^'aluatiou, as the 
 present system is not a fair basis for rent ; Clare is 
 very unequally valued in relation to other coun- 
 ties, 22524-6. Tenants prefer paying county cess 
 instead of having an addition to rent, 22527. 
 Roads are considered in fixing rent, 22528-9. 
 Sub-division is prohibited, but it is almost im- 
 possible to prevent it ; gives instances, 22530-1. 
 Turf lands are let at rates fi^ed, and when cut 
 away, the adjoining tenants to whom they then 
 belong let them to tenants, who reclaim them ; this 
 the first named tenants claim compensation for, 
 22532-4. But little land on Lord Leconfield's 
 estate fit for reclamation, except the red bog. On 
 Lord Middleton's estate, in Cork, great improve- 
 ments were made, and a per-centage charged ; there 
 was no power of sale there. No charge was made 
 for improvements on Dr. Scott's estate in county 
 Meath, 22536-40. Only one hostile eviction on 
 Lord Middleton's property in eighteen years, 
 22541-3. And only one case in the Land Court, 
 22544. Rents adjusted on a charge of tenancy, 
 and there has been no considerable increase during 
 his agency, 22545-51. Those tenants unable to pay 
 are always treated tenderly, 22552-3. 
 
 Starkey, Mr. James, Askeaton and Newcastle, Co. 
 Limerick ; Farmer and Land Agent. — Limerick. 
 Holds 150 acres at Askeaton and 100 acres at 
 Newcastle, from two landlords. Mr. Murphy is 
 not a bad landlord, and gives leases for 31 years, 
 and tenants' lives concurrent ; and the rents were 
 fixed in 1851, 22554-61. Before that the land was 
 let to middlemen, and when taken cut of their 
 hands the land was re-let to tenants, at same rents, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixxxv 
 
 Starhey, Mr. James — continued. 
 
 nearly as were paid to the middlemen, 22562. Dis- 
 satisfied now, 22560-6. Value of land varies ; some 
 is worth more than Griffith's valuation, and some 
 would be dear at the price, 22507-70. Holds 
 under Mr. Trench, formerly on a seven years' lease, 
 now yearly. Does not improve the land, but 
 would if a long lease were granted. Mr. Trench 
 refuses to do anything, and will not give a lease for 
 more than seven years, 22571-81. Leases gene- 
 rally granted in the district for 21 years, and 
 tenants contracted out of the Act. Most are over 
 £50 a year, and large tenants, 22582-C. Eent of 
 his farm moderate, one-fourth more than the 
 G overnment valuation. On other properties rents 
 are higher, and tenants are hardly able to pay, 
 22588-94. Tenants would improve the land if 
 they had security ; but landlords refuse to sanction 
 improvements, and all the forms of leases in use 
 contract the tenants out of all claims, 22595- 
 601. Ejections and rent-raising I'are, 22602-3. 
 Purchase of holdings iinder Bright clauses 
 has worked successfully, and the land is being 
 improved 22604-12. The three F's should 
 satisfy the people, with power of purchase in- 
 cluded, 22613-7. Withdrawal of help by land- 
 
 ■ lords for improvements, except his own landlord, 
 22618-20. Much land requires drainage, but 
 
 • tenants will not do it, 22621-3. Wages of 
 labourers ; their poverty, 22624-30. Abatements 
 granted last year, but rents withheld now, in con- 
 sequence of the agitation, which is becoming 
 serious, and complete legislation is necessary, 
 22C31-6. Peasant proprietorship could be carried 
 
 . out in moderation, but at present the question is 
 not understood by the poor, 22637-41. Grazing 
 farms are affected injuriously by the Land Act, for 
 tenants will not improve without the chance of - 
 getting compensation. Non-residential farms are 
 an evil of the grazing system, and if they were 
 allowed to build, the country would become niore 
 prosperous, 22G42-51. Instance of this evil, 
 22652. 
 
 Ferry, Michael, near Limerick, Go. Clare ; Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Limerick. 
 
 Holds five acres on Captain Maunsell's estate at 
 
 ' £,iQ a year; valuation, £7, 22653-8. Rent raised 
 
 from £8 about fifteen years ago, when the lease was 
 
 granted, 22660-2. Has other land, or he could not 
 
 pay the rent of this piece, 22663. The rent of the 
 
 other land lowered (by abatement) to Government 
 
 valuation, 22664. Received an abatement on the 
 
 £20 rent in bad times, 22665. 
 
 Hamilton, Martin, Tenant Farmer. — Limerich. 
 
 Holds twelve acres at £35 8s. 'id. renj; ; valua- 
 
 . tion, £9 15s. ; of reclaimed land, 22667-70. Rent 
 
 fixed fifteen years go, but cannot pay it ; keeps four 
 
 cows and lives on the land, but has always had a 
 
 difficulty about paying the rent, 22671-6. 
 
 Dinidas, Andrew, Tenant Farmer. — Limericle. 
 
 Has thirteen acres at £40 rent ; valuation, 
 £17 10s., which is too dear, 22677-79. Rent was 
 fijxed fifteen years ago and cannot get it reduced, 
 though an abatement was granted last year, 
 22680-2. 
 
 Keerjan, Mrs., Tenant Farmer. — Livierick. 
 
 Pays £7 10s. for two and a half acres ; the valu- 
 ation is £3 5s. ; has held it since her husband died, 
 six years ago ; there is a cottage on the land, 
 22683-7. 
 
 Madden, James, Tenant Fai-mer. — Limerick. 
 
 Has twenty acres from Mrs. Gore, for which he 
 pays £60, or twice the valuation ; held it on lease 
 . for twenty years ; reclaimed the land, but it is only 
 worth £2 an acre, 22688-22702. 
 
 Sullivan, Maurice, Ardnacrusha, Co. Clare ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Is a tenant of Colonel M'Adam's and pays 
 £15 4s. \Qd. (or £2 an acre), the valuation being 
 
 £6 15s. Has paid this for twenty years. Before 
 Colonel M'Adam had the property the rent was 
 £1 10s. an acre, 22703-10. Reduction refused, 
 22711. The land is very bad; it was formerly a 
 bog, 22712-5. Forty years ago the rent was £2, 
 but was then reduced, 22716-7. 
 
 llalinn, Mr. William, Newmarket-on-Fergus, Co. 
 Clare ; Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Holds 500 acres in five places, under different 
 landlords, 22718-22. Is contented under all, save 
 one, Mr. Burton, who has appoiirted seven agents 
 since he held the farm, and the rent has been in- 
 creased each time from £40 in 1853 to £75 in 
 1877. He then paid £200, as he wished to be left 
 in possession, 22723-31. The other tenants have 
 been raised, and there are a good many, 22732-7. 
 The land is stony, 22738. One landlord, Mr. 
 Studdert, reduced his rent and gave him a lease, 
 22741. Cases of demesne lands, 22742. Raising 
 of rents in the district general, 22743-5. Has 
 other business than farming, 22746. Has security 
 on hif) farm, and has built and improved it greatly, 
 22747 ; but woidd not improve Mr. Burton's, 
 
 ■ 22748. 
 
 Tuthill, John, Drummin, Co. Clare ; Tenant Farmer. 
 
 — Limerick. 
 
 Is a tenant on Captain O'Callaghan's estate, and 
 
 the rent has been raised from £6, twenty-five years 
 
 ago, to £9 13s. 3a^. now. It is much over the 
 
 valuation (£7), 22753-6. 
 
 Kane, James, Co. Clare ; Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Is a tenant of Lord Quinn's and pays £9 a year, 
 valuation £10. Rent was 29s. 6c/. an acre, before 
 it was reclaimed, and for the last sixteen years he 
 has held it, paying £2 an acre. Would like to 
 hold it for less rent. 
 
 Herbert, Mr. Maurice, Ballandane, Kilmallock, Co. 
 Limerick ; Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Formerly a tenant under Colonel Watson on a 
 lease granted to his wife's mother, but left to his 
 
 ■ wife on death of the mother. Six months after 
 lease expired he received notice to quit, in spite of 
 promise of agent that he . should remain as tenant. 
 Ejectment followed, and right of sale refused, except 
 
 . to one person. The land was very fine, 22762-71. 
 Incoming tenant paid the agent for possession, but 
 
 . nothing paid to witness, 22772-5. Subsequently 
 received £100 instead of £650, 22776-7. Land- 
 lord declined to interfere, 22778-81. Rent was 
 £2 13s. 9(/. an Irish acre, and he would not have 
 sold out for £2,000, 22782-86. . Wished to remain 
 on the farm, but the agent arranged for another 
 tenant to have it, and so was turned out, 22787- 
 801. 
 
 Jfee/jaw, the Rev. Patrick, P.P., St. Patrick's, Moher- 
 
 lin, Co. Limerick. — Limerick. 
 
 Calls attention to the sad condition of the people 
 
 in his parish, who pay rents double the valuation, 
 
 and some more than that. Unable for some time 
 
 to pay. Gives list 6f acreage, rental, and valuation 
 
 of property of the Rev. Mr. Moore, now dead, with 
 
 names of tenants, 22802. Rents raised, within the 
 
 . last five or six years, 30s. additional, 22903-4. 
 
 Some of the holdings are market gardens. Tenants 
 
 cannot live by the holdings they are so rack-rented, 
 
 22805-7. On one holding there is a house, but not 
 
 erected by the landlord, 22808-11. Of late years 
 
 . nothing would grow, either too dry or, too wet 
 
 22812. Processes served if rents are not paid on 
 
 the day they are due, 22813-4. Land for which 
 
 tenant pays £8 an acre, when given up to landlord 
 
 only fetches £2 an acre, 22815. Tenants make up 
 
 ■ ^r'' ""fr* l^' f ^"^yi^S «°al«> &c- List of tenants on 
 Mr. Mahons property, with acreage, rent and 
 valuation, 2281 7-8. Similar lists of tenants of Mr 
 Edward Harold, Mr. Frederick Henry, Mr. Hamil- 
 
 771 •! 
 
Ixxxvi 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Meehan, the Eev. Patrick — continued. 
 
 ton, and Mr. Batton, 22819-20. Rents are very 
 high all ronnd the town, and the holdings are not 
 townparks, 22821-2. The houses are occupied by 
 the tenants and their cattle, no sheds or out-build- 
 ings, 22823. Landlords do nothing. No leases for 
 these holdings, and the people live on the land, 
 22824-5. 
 
 Lawlor, Mr. Patrick, Limerick ; Tenant Farmer. — ■ 
 Lvnierick. 
 Rents 16 acres, at £93 a year. Cannot make 
 anything out of it. The land is often under water, 
 and the crops are poor, and do not pay for the 
 labour. House is bad and only one room, 42852. 
 Pays rates and taxes, and from the farm cannot 
 make up the rent, or anything like it. Five acres 
 given up to landlord realized £\ an acre, for which 
 he pays considerably more, 22826-22847. Land- 
 lord not repaired the house in the witness's time, 
 22849. Process served if rent be not paid punc- 
 tually ; sometimes served twice for the same rent, 
 22853. Still owes £18, which he cannot pay, and 
 has nothing to sell ; gives instance of raising of rent 
 when tenant gives up part of his holding, 22854-56. 
 Is a yearly tenant on the late Rev. R. Moore's 
 estate, which is worth £800 a year, and contains 
 100 acres, 22857-60. 
 
 Colleran, Mr. Thomas, Limerick ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Limerick. 
 Is a tenant on Mr. R. Henry's property. Holds 
 7|- acres at £39 a year. Valuation £21 10s. Rent 
 too high, and cannot get an abatement. Told he 
 may leave if the rent is too high, 22861-6. Rent 
 applied for before it is due, 22867. All the land 
 is high rented, 22869. Some of the tenants likely 
 to be turned out to make way for cattle grazing, as 
 has been already done, 22870. 
 
 Moloney, Mr. John, Knocklong, Co. Limerick ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Limerich. 
 , Holds land from Lady Cooper. Pays higher than 
 anyone else. On expiry of lease wished to have 
 the rent fixed by arbitration. Pays £3 an acre, 
 22871-3. Rent the same since took the land ; but 
 other tenants pay less, .22874-7. Land no better 
 than the rest, 22878. Instance of high rental on 
 another large farm over valuation. Rent doubled 
 in fifteen years, and tenant, on remonstrating, 
 threatened with deprivation of land ; all rights de- 
 barred imder lease, 22879-22890. Very difficult 
 to make high rents out of land, even though the 
 land be prime. On one property rents raised at 
 every possible opportunity, e.g., marriage of a 
 tenant, or a tenant's son, and permission to be 
 married, has to. be obtained from the agent, 
 22891-99. Another instance of high rent ; tenant 
 has given up the farm and taken to grazing 
 cattle elsewhere, 22900-3. Purchase of extension 
 of lease broken by landlord, 22904-7. Farmers 
 ruined by excessive rents and bad times, 22908-11. 
 Fine land no use with excessive rents, 22912-3. 
 Difficulty of finding capital to stock large farms, 
 22914; and possibly tenants for them, 22915-22. 
 Nearly all grass land in the district, mixed farms — 
 i.e., dairy and fattening, 22923-6. No evictions 
 lately, 22927. All leases, and there are many now, 
 contain clauses against the Land Act. Act gives 
 him great protection as to compensation for build- 
 ings erected by him, 22928-31. Tenants may, 
 with the agent's consent, sell their rights to 
 tenants already on the property, 22932-4. Public 
 sales not allowed, but would be advantageous, 
 22935-7. Arbitration should be used to settle dis- 
 putes as to rent, 22938-41. Tenants will not make 
 ™942!.T*^''*^ without security, even on good estates, 
 
 VaMr, The Rev. James, P.P., Kilmurry, Ibrickane, 
 Co. Clare. — Limerich. 
 
 09?A''*' T ^c- ^?S^' ^^'''^ ^^■'^ frequently raised, 
 -2945. Case of intimidating a landlord, Mr. Stud 
 
 dert, from taking possession of holdings of tenants 
 who refused to payfurther increase of rent, 22946-50. 
 Another landlord, Mr. Griffiths, served a process 
 for non-pa;yment of increased rent, 22953-4. People 
 obliged to borrow money to pay their rents, 22957. 
 Rents charged in lump sums, not by the acre, 
 22958. Disposition to raise rents general, though 
 lands of Mr. Griffiths are said to be let lower than 
 a recent valuation by Lord Lecnnfield's engineer, 
 22959-62. Times have been bad, and the land is 
 less productive than formerly through wet and bad 
 seasons, 22963,. Some of the potato crops have 
 failed, 22964. The three F's would satisfy the 
 people, 22965-69. Bog land ig reclaimed for 
 potatoes, 22973-4. Principal landowners are Lord 
 Leconfield, Mr. Griffith, and Major Kelly. The 
 former improves the land very much, employing a 
 staff of men on drainage works, 22975-80. Land 
 not worth more than the valuation, and thei'e is 
 great difierence between the valuation and the 
 rents, except on Lord Leconfield's and Mr. Griffiths' 
 estate, varying from 50 to 100 per cent, over the 
 valuation, 22981-3. Restrictions as to cutting and 
 selling turf, 22984-90. 
 
 Hewsmi, John B., Esq., Castle Hewson, Askeaton, 
 Co. Limerick ; Landowner and Land Agent. — ■ 
 Limerich. 
 Owns 1,500 acres, and is agent for 8,000 acres. 
 Has about 400 tenants, 22991-2. Compares the 
 rents charged about 100 years ago with those of 
 the present day, and finds an increase of about 
 25 to 30 per cent. The prices of cattle have, 
 however, largely increased. Grain is about the 
 same. Not compared with Griffith's valuation, 
 save in two cases which were very nearly the 
 same, 22991-23004. Present mode of rating 
 is an inducement to let lands high, 23005. 
 Profit in former days probably as great as 
 now, 23006-11. Difficulties caused by tenants 
 in connexion with main di'ainage when reclaiming 
 land. Inability to make tenants pay interest on 
 money borrowed for improvements, in consequence 
 of theii- having mortgaged their farms, 23012-4. 
 Tenants may borrow if landlord will not, 23015-7. 
 Extensive drainage carried on in western Limerick, 
 especially lately, generally by the landlord, 23018. 
 Curious distinction between a tenant with lease for 
 years, and a tenant with lease for lives, 23019-20. 
 Legislation wanted to facilitate loans and drainage 
 works upon leased lands, 23021-3. Improvements 
 made by landlord. Reduction of rent for tenant's 
 improvements (which before the Land Act would 
 become landlord's property), 23024-7. The same 
 system pursued on properties he is agent for as on 
 his own. But little spent in improvements ; on one 
 property new leases granted on same terms as those 
 falling in. Land can be easily reclaimed, but not 
 practicable owing to difficulties referred to above, 
 23014. Been drained this year. Rents under 
 Griffith's valuation. Property is at Largehall, 
 belonging to Miss Royce. Mountain land, 23028- 
 39. Practice of reclaiming land, and how carried 
 out, 23040-44. Improvements by landlords almost 
 ceased, 23045-7. Creditors and claims for distur- 
 bance, 23048-50. Farmers in the hands of usurers 
 virtually become labourers to the usurers, who, as 
 a rule, are shopkeepers keeping public-houses as well, 
 23051-5. Proposed withdrawal of licence, 23056- 
 60. Proposed alteration of date of period for re- 
 demption after decree of ejectment, 23061-64, with 
 leave for the landlord, under particular circum- 
 stances, to execute the decree, 23065-72. Labourers' 
 dwellings more comfortable where landlords are re- 
 sident, 23073-5. Employmentof labourersuncertain, 
 especially in the winter. They then go to the work- 
 house, 23076-7. Facilities for letting houses to 
 labourers should be increased. Extension of the 
 Small Tenants Act to the country, and modification 
 of its clauses, 23078-80. Difficulty of getting rid 
 of cottiers when there is a difi"erence as to wages 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ixxxvii 
 
 Eewson, Jolin B., Esq. — continued. 
 
 and work, 23081-3. Expenses of ejectment too 
 great. Proposal by a Poor Law Guardian to improve 
 the state of Ireland by revaluation of land and tte 
 establishment of the three F's (Mr. P. Cahill), 
 23084-6. Application from one evicted tenant only 
 for admission to the workhouse. Cause of application 
 always given, 23087-92. No actual ejectments^ 
 though several ejectments served on his property, 
 23093-98. Ejected tenants generally left in as 
 caretakers, 23099. All for non-payment of rent for 
 one and a half to two years. ^Time allowed if part 
 of rent is paid, 23100-1. 
 
 Wlnte, Edward, Esq., Cos. Clare and Limerick; Land- 
 owner, Land Agent, and Tenant Farmer. — • 
 Limerick. 
 Owns 900 acres, farms 800 acres, and is agent 
 over 6,000 acres. Makes allowances for improve- 
 ments on his own property, and so does one land- 
 lord for whom he is agent, 23102-12, Tenants on 
 the properties not allowed to sell, but his own 
 tenants may, with veto as to incomer, 22113-4. 
 Leases granted when wanted, and encouragement 
 given to take leases, but they are not much sought 
 for, 23115-18. Land Act is a check on bad land- 
 lords, 23119. No actual ejectments, 23120-2. 
 Tenants comfortable, except Small cottiers, who will 
 not leave. But for work given them, they would 
 have starved, 23123-5. Facilities shoiild be given 
 to landowners to carry out works of reclamation; 
 tenants do not perform the work honestly or well 
 if money is entrusted to them. Example on his 
 own land, 23126—29. Complaints as to high rents 
 have just commenced owing to meetings being held, 
 23130—2. Tenement valuation fair rent for tillage 
 farms. If tillage is not connected with grazing, 
 the produce \yould only be enough to keepa family, 
 but not to pay the rent, 23133-7, 23141. Eents 
 of these farms should be brought nearly to Griffith's 
 valuation, 23138. Knows the country to Adare, 
 23139. Increased rents due to productiveness of 
 land, and more prosperous state of the people. 
 Large fines paid for farms, the money for which was 
 advanced by banks, when they became vacant, 
 23142-8. Revaluation of the land has its draw- 
 backs, but to let the grass lands at the Government 
 valuation would be confiscation, 23150-5. Tenants 
 have no confidence in County Court decisions on 
 ■ claims for compensation for improvements, and the 
 costs are high, 23156-65. The Bright clauses have 
 been practically inoperative, 23166. No facilities 
 given by the Judges for the selling of portions of 
 land, unlessthe whole of the land was sold, 23167-71. 
 More advantageous to sell in small lots, at 
 twenty-five years' purchase, 23172-3. Is not san- 
 guine as to the success of peasant proprietary, they 
 cripple themselves on going in, 23174-80. In- 
 stances of purchases, 23181-5. Want of success, 
 23186-99. Landlords should be compelled to 
 improve lands by drainage. Method of doing it. 
 Fear lest rent should be raised, prevents tenants 
 from improving, 23202-8, 23217-8. The three F's 
 desirable, 23209-10. Arbitration in case of dispute 
 as to rent, but not by a public officer, unless the 
 landlord could get his land back again, 23211-16. 
 Description of demesne lands insufficient. Demesne 
 lands, excepting town lands, should get the benefit 
 of the Act, 23222-8. Eight of free sale should 
 always be granted, subject to revaluation by the 
 landlord on expiry of lease. 23229-35. Tenants 
 should receive back their outlay for improvements 
 irrespective of the time they have e-njoyed them, 
 23236. Registers of improvements kept by land- 
 lords should be more perfect, and they should be 
 permitted to make a declaration, if necessary, 
 before the Clerk of the Peace on the subject, 
 23237-40. This could be done cheaply, and the 
 case could be heard in Court, if the tenant desired 
 it, 23241-3. Tenants should first ask landlords to 
 make improvements, and if they refused, they could 
 then make them themselves, 23244-5. 
 
 Frost, Mr. Solomon, Feenagh, Sixmileljridge, Co. Clare; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Holds 450 acres as tenant, and 257 acres in fee, 
 23246-9. Farms part of it, and has tenants on his 
 property. His landlords are Mr. C. W. Smith, Mr. 
 T. Frost, and Mr. E. J. Armstrong, 23250-3. Case 
 of grievance arising out of high rent, 23254-9. 
 Landlord (JVlr. Smith) refused to reduce the rent, 
 and offered to take back the farm. It is quite im- 
 possible to live by it, 23262-71. The farm has 
 been much improved by his father and himself, but 
 he cannot get compensation, 23272-81. Improve- 
 ments made by a former landlord were paid for by 
 his father, 23282-3. Details the circumstances 
 under which he had to give up possession, unjustly, of 
 a farm required by a landlord, Mr. H. V". D'Esterre, 
 23284-94. Tenants deprived of portion of their 
 land through non-jDayment of high rents, 23295-9. 
 No reduction of rent per acre made after this, 23300. 
 Instance of rent raised through the seeming pros- 
 perity of a tenant in county Clare, 23303-5. Rents 
 raised on account of difference in politics, 23306-11. 
 Tenants should get full amount of compensation for 
 improvements irrespective of time. This applies to 
 drainage, but not to manures, 23313-7. 
 
 Reeves, Robert William Carey, Esq., Killimer, Co. 
 Clare ; Landowner. — Limerich. 
 Owns 3,000 acres. Has rescued some of his 
 tenants from the hands of usurers, who were going 
 to sell them up, 23318-26. Most of them- are se- 
 curity either for themselves or some other tenant, 
 23327-8. Very few evictions on his own property, 
 or on Colonel Vandeleur's, during the last twenty 
 years. The only case he had was a tenant who 
 could make nothing out of the place, having no 
 stock on it. Is now employed by witness as a 
 labourer, 23329-31. In some cases has made allow- 
 ance for improvements. Has made no charge for 
 dra,inage, and given assistance to his tenants as they 
 required it, 23332—4. Two-fifths of the property 
 is now leased. In some cases rents are less than . 
 the Government valuation, 23335-7. Farms are 
 revalued on the expiration of a lease; very little 
 change ever made, and rents are paid well with very 
 few exceptions, 23338-41. Has no hanging gale, 
 23342-3. Leases are, some of them, . rinderlet, 
 23344. Middlemen obtain double the rent they 
 pay, 23347-8. General scale of rents about 25 per 
 cent, over the Government valuation. Colonel Van- 
 deleur is the same, and pays half the county cess 
 and half the poor rates. Reclaimed bog let at 10s. 
 an acre, and he has offered leases on that arrange- 
 ment, 23349-53. Rents have been generally in- 
 creased throughout the country, 23354. Sale of' 
 holdings not openly recognized by landlords, 23356_ . 
 The Land Act has encouraged tenants' improve- 
 ments, and checked landlords, and a great deal of 
 drainage has been done by them, 23357-9. Bog- 
 land let to labourers fetches from 10s. to 15s. an 
 acre, but if it is sublet the labourers get a good deal 
 more. They, not the farmers, reclaim it, but the- 
 drainage is not" done well, 23360-66. Assistance is.' 
 given for building in the shape of timber and slates,, 
 1 23367-8. An assessment tribunal in diff'erences as 
 to rent would be beneficial, 23369. Suppression of 
 small shopkeepers as landlords, 23370. Seven years' 
 notice to quit instead of one year's would be better, 
 and if leases were encouragecl with some security of 
 tenure the difficulty would be solved, leaving land- 
 lords and tenants to settle the rent if possible, 
 23371-3. Leases should be simple, omitting unne- 
 cessary clauses, 23374-6. Distressed condition of 
 tenants through the usurious practices of monev- 
 lenders, 23377-83. '^ 
 
 O'SJiaughnessy, Mr. Patrick, Bruff, Cos. Clare and ' 
 Limerick; Draper, P. L.G.—Zmew/c. 
 Holds, in addition to his business, seven or eiwht 
 acres; draws attention to the miserable condition 
 of the labouring classes ; they are unable to support 
 
Ixxxviii 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 O'Shaitghiessy, Patrick — conthnied. 
 
 themselves and their families on the work they get, 
 and two or three families live together in a small 
 lodging-house ; their work is intermittent, and they 
 are very badly off. The permanent labourers are 
 in no better state, and have no dwellings, 
 23386-402. Landlords are non-resident, and con- 
 sequently there is less work for the labourers, 
 23403-10. Description of their habitations, 
 23411-4. The labourers should be located on 
 farms, having a plot of ground and a' house, for 
 which they should pay rent ; they should be inde- 
 
 ■ p)endent of the farmers, working where they get 
 best wages, 23421. Government might pay for the 
 erection of houses by farmers, and charge a per- 
 petual rent for them, 23415-7. Prospective legis- 
 lative i)rivileges might be denied to farmers unless 
 they built labourers' houses, or landlords might be 
 made responsible, 23418-23. One cottage for every 
 £,W valuation should be kept by the farmers, 
 2342.5-7 Wages at present are Is. a day all the 
 year and a house; no fuel given, 23428-31. 
 Labourers should be scattered through the country 
 and not live in towns, 23432-4. No mamifacturers 
 in Bruff to employ men, only farming, 23435-9. 
 Milk is dear and scarce ; coal is used as fuel, there 
 being no turf left, and it is difficult for poor people 
 to get fuel at all, 23442-4. Rent of a house and 
 plot of ground less than rents in towns, 23445-7. 
 Case of eviction for non-payment of rent, 23449-60. 
 Sites for dwellings should be in healthy positions, 
 and selected, if the scheme were carried out, by 
 
 ' parochial officials, 23461-3. 
 
 Delmege, John C, Esq., High Sheriff, Co. Limerick ; 
 Landowner. — Limerick. 
 Griffith's valuation fallacious as a scale for fixing 
 
 o 
 
 rents, it was only intended for taxation purposes, 
 and any other notion should be got rid of, 23464-7. 
 A new valuation, if framed according to present 
 prices, would be very advisable, 23468-71. Would 
 object to it as a standard for rent, as he objects to 
 any interference with freedom of contract ; would 
 have the three F's. to a limited extent, viz. : tenure 
 limited to sixty-one or sixty-three years' leases, and 
 limited free sale, 23472-74. Fair rents would be 
 fixed by freedom of contract between landlord and 
 tenant, 2347-3-83. With a tenant already on the 
 land the difference as to rent between landlord and 
 tenant could be settled by an appeal to a tribunal 
 of competent men, provided always they were not 
 tenant-farmers, 23484-8. Objects to perpetuity ; 
 the sixty-one years' tenure is working satisfactorily 
 on his own property, 23489-91. This scheme 
 sliould apply to arable land only ; grass land and 
 , town lands should be left to competition, 23492-5. 
 
 ■ O'uhhlns, The Rev. William, Knocklong, county 
 Limerick. — Limerick. 
 Lives on his property, and farms, as a tenant, 
 about eighty acres ; has four tenants, and the rent 
 they pay is over Griffith's valuation ; the last two 
 years' abatements have reduced it to that level, 
 23406-502. Case of unjust eviction, 23504. Ar- 
 bitrary increase of rent on improvements, and also 
 ■case of ejectment, 23505-8. The three P's. would 
 end the agitation, 23509-10 ; 23517-8. Differences 
 as to rent to be settled by arbitration ; grass lands 
 are worth more than Griffith's valuation, 23511-5. 
 Injustice of agents towards tenants causes this agi- 
 tation, and gives instances, 23516. Case of a man 
 who got a tenant evicted to enable him to get 
 possession of a farm he wanted for himself, joining 
 the Land League, 23519-21. 
 
 Madden ilr. WUliam, Hospital, County Limerick ; 
 
 -Lenant Sa.vmer. —Limerick. 
 
 Holds forty-nine and a half acres, under the Earl 
 
 of Kenmare new lease pressed on witness by the 
 
 agent, at a higher rent, 23520-4. Paid £1 000 
 
 six years before for the goodwill, and in spite of 
 that the rent has been more than doubled, and is 
 higher than the average rent of the property, 
 23525-31. Rents were raised all round, but the 
 times being bad, he is helping them out, 23532-4. 
 But for another farm he could not live ou the first, 
 23535-6. In addition to the payment for the good- 
 will, he has built during the last two years, and 
 received no help, 23537-44. On refusing to pay 
 rent unless a reduction -^vas made to bring it on a 
 level with the rest, he was served with a writ, 
 23545. Other lands are as good as his, no abate- 
 ment has been granted him, 23546-9. Wants fair 
 play, 23553. 
 
 Sto)i,ey, Sadlier, Esq.j Ballycoppall House, County 
 Limerick, Landowner. — Limerick. 
 
 Owns 1,000 acres, of which he lets 700. Right 
 of sale not allowed without consent, which is 
 always given, save to a bad character, 23555-60. 
 Reduced his rentals on purchasing the property, 
 and gave long leases, which has produced most 
 satisfactory results, 23561-5. Arbitration on 
 account of rent not desirable, but rent should be 
 regulated by either the tenement valuation oi' the 
 Poor Law valuation. This would, generally speaking, 
 give a fair rent, 235G6-9. In disputes an appeal 
 might be made to some court or tribunal, 23570-2. 
 Has given slate and timber when wanted, but im- 
 provements as a rule not required. Tenants do 
 nothing, not even drain, or reclaim, land, 23573-6. 
 Purchase of holdings, a most desirable thing. 
 Tenants should have the same privileges as land- 
 lords. Creation of land debenture stock, but land- 
 lords should not be compelled to sell, 23577-8. No 
 rack-rents should be allowed, 23579. Rates at 
 which land should be sold, and fixity of tenure 
 given, 23580-5. Difficulties arising out of the 
 working of the Bright clauses. Subletting should 
 be permitted, 23586-7. Purchase of holdings by 
 tenants crippled them at first — since recovered, aid 
 they are contented, 23588-92. Ejectment for non- 
 payment of rent and distress should both be 
 abolished, and landlords should recover like other 
 creditors by sale, and in ejectment cases, sherifis, 
 bailiffs, and proceBS servers ought to be abolished, 
 23593-7. Processes, ifcc, to be served and executed 
 by the constabulary, 23598. Demesne lands to be 
 exempted from the Land Act, and all tenements 
 under £4 a year valuation. Gives reason for this 
 latter clause, 23599-602. Landlo)-ds ought not to 
 be compelled to build houses for labourers or give 
 them land. Labourers will not work for the value, 
 and claim compensation if evicted, 23603-6. Land 
 Act has not checked e-\'iotions nor increase of rents, 
 23607-8. No evictions on his property within the 
 last year. Case of eviction which was considered 
 harsh, but in reality was not, 23609-10. When 
 possible tenants contract themselves out of the Act, 
 23611. No recent change made by him in rents, 
 as they have leases, 23614-6. Postponement of 
 payment of rent by tenants under the Act of 1851. 
 Origin of hanging gale, 23617-19. 
 
 Connell, Mr. Daniel, Co. Clare ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Limerick. 
 Purchased the good will of his holding three 
 years ago, with the consent of his landlord. Rent 
 raised six months after. Refused to take a lease, 
 23620-32. Built a new house; the landlord al- 
 lowing him £20 for it, last year, signing an agree- 
 ment, 23633-43. Some of the land is good, but it 
 is very dear rented all round. Part is under water, 
 and requires draining. That would not satisfy him. 
 Would like the rent reduced to the valuation, 
 23644-56. Was foolish not to take a lease, 23657. 
 In good times would have got on fairly on the 
 land, but gets very small crops now. Has paid his 
 rent, 23660-6. No other tenants pay as high as he 
 does, 23667-8. ° 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE 
 
 Ixxxix 
 
 Stackpoole, Eichard, Esq., Elm Vale, Ennis ; Cos. 
 Clave and Carlow ; Land .A gent, Tenant Earmer 
 and Proprietor.- —Limerick. 
 Is agent over 22,000 acres in Clare and Carlow, 
 23669-71. Sales of holdings forbidden. Leiises 
 are granted, bnt tenants may not sell them without 
 permission, 23G72-8. Tenants have borrowed fi'om 
 banks, more than under the Act, greatly to their 
 disadvantage, 23679-85. Rents on the estates are 
 generally reasonable, save one })roperty. Recom- 
 mends abatements when necessary, 2.3686-7. Go- 
 vernment valuation uneven, 23688-9. Approves of 
 arbitration, 23690-91. Gj-eat improvements have 
 been made by his landlords on the land ; and, in one 
 case, after large buildings had been erected for a 
 tenant, he surrendered the farm, 23692-9. Arterial 
 drainage carried on, landlords paying the interest of 
 outlay, 23701. Tenants make no permanent or 
 lasting improvements, 23704-6. There has been 
 considerable improvement going on throughout the 
 country in various places by both landlords and 
 tenants, 23707-10. Case of tenant evicted being 
 forcibly reinstated by a mob, 23711-20. No other 
 evictions. Tenants have refused to pay their rents 
 unless they get an abatement. Leaseholders and 
 yeai-ly tenants both, 23721-24. Threatened vio- 
 lence to tenants willing to pay rent, 23725. Rents 
 are generally high, but if too high are always re- 
 duced, 23726-8. Rents not advanced except on a 
 new lease or a change of tenancy. Tenants get im- 
 provident if rents are too low, and will not work on 
 the farm at task work to make roads and reclaim 
 land, 23729-33. Right of cutting and selling turf 
 stopped. Tenants can buy, at low rates, plenty of 
 turf from the landlord, 23734-6. Claim for com- 
 pensation for reclamation of land by a tenant, who 
 had set it in con-acre to labourers at a -high rent, 
 23737-9. 
 
 Hogan, Mr. Michael, Riverston, Corofin, Co. Clare; 
 P.L.G., Tenant Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Is tenant of 800 acres, and represents the Poor 
 Law Guardians of Corofin, who are unable to pay 
 the rents fixed on the estates they hold. The rents 
 . have been raised by the owner from time to time, 
 23741-55. This landlord evicted tenants before 
 - the Land Act, and robbed them of all their im- 
 « provements. Other proprietors are charging equally 
 ' high rents. The land is good, and the tenants 
 gave fines for possession, 23756—68. Tenants 
 forced to contract themselves out of the Land 
 Act, or give up their land. Rents raised, 23709-78. 
 Tenants are inclined to improve under long leases, 
 but in this district leases are not popular, 23779-83. 
 The three E's would be a fair arrangement, but the 
 fixing of rents should not be left entirely to land- 
 lords, 23784-7. Arbitration not the custom in the 
 district. Cases of giievance arising from high rents, 
 23788-94. No evictions taken place lately, 23795-7. 
 The tenement valuation would be just between 
 landlord and tenant, 23798. Fattening land scarce 
 here, 23799-23801. Tenants are purchasing hold- 
 ings on Lord Conyngham's estate, 23802-7. Ex- 
 tension of the Bright clauses, and Government ad- 
 vances of the whole sum to purchase requisite, 
 23808-11; and expenses of sales should be lessened, 
 23812. Much land has been reclaimed in the dis- 
 , trict by tenants, and let on lease to them, in some 
 instances at increased rentals, 23816-9. Inability 
 of tenants to borrow money from Government with- 
 out the landlord's cooperation is a grievance, 
 23820^-5. New Government valuation necessary to 
 settle the question of rents. Nothing else satisfac- 
 tory, and unless some steps be taken, the tenants 
 will be ruined. Ai-bitration may be useful as a 
 temporary measure, 23826-33. Desperate condi- 
 tion of the people through bad seasons ; though 
 anxious to pay their rents, are unable to do so. 
 Relief given by the public to these people only went 
 to help to piy their rents, 23836-43. Instances of 
 
 hardship. People having paid rents would have 
 starved if relief had not been given them, 23844-53. 
 Labourers live mostly in the towns, and sometimes 
 have a bit of land, con-acre, but they have been too 
 poor the last few years to sow it, 23854-6. 
 
 Corbett, Mr. Thomas, Ballagh, Quin, Co. Clare; 
 Tenant Farmer. — J, i me rick. 
 Holds laud under Mr. Creagh, Lord Inchiquin, 
 and Lord Dunboyne. Is also a poor-rate collector, 
 23856-60. After building a house, out-buildings, 
 ami making other improvements, his landlord raised 
 his rent. It was raised again on the landlord's death, 
 and his lease was broken by the successor. Fresh 
 lease given ; but had he known how insecure his posi- 
 tion was, he would never have made all the improve- 
 ments, 23861-73. Much land in the TuUow Union 
 let at Government valuation. Tenants are satisfied, 
 and there has been no change for thirty years, and no 
 evictions, 23864-7. Other tenants in the district piay 
 nearly three times the valuation, 23878. Tenants 
 with lands at Government valuation improve their 
 properties. Lord Tjcconfield the only exception, and 
 he charge^ small interest for tliem, 23879-82. 
 Tenants are satisfied to make improvements when 
 they feel secure, but have great difficulty in paying 
 their rents. They are mostly small tillage farmers, 
 and cattle they have to sell are kept for the rent, 
 23883-5. Tenants contracted out of the Land Act, 
 and obliged to enter intoagr'eements to become eleven 
 months' tenants. In these cases rents have been 
 raised. Tenants pay the county cess, and have no 
 power to settle rents, 23886—91. Ordnance valua- 
 tion fair; it is difficult. to make much. It is a 
 struggle to get on, as, owing to the distance from the 
 markets, produce cannot • be turned to account, 
 23892-4. 
 
 Mmce, Francis, Esq., Springfield, Bunratty, County 
 Clare, Land Owner and Agent. — Limerick. 
 Owns land of the value of £3,000 a-year, and 
 farms 2,500 acres, partly his own and partly the pro- 
 perty of others, for whom he is agent, in Clare, Lime- 
 rick, and Tipperary, 23896-902. Right of sale not 
 recognised ; but on a change of tenancy the land- 
 birds have paid the out-going tenants, 23903-4. Only 
 three evictions in twenty years, two for non-payment 
 and one for over-holding, 23905-8. Only two cases 
 in the Land Courts. Tenants unsuccessful, 23909-14. 
 Rents raised on the falling in of a lease or transfer of 
 tenants. Never from father to son, 23915-7. Sales 
 sometimes permitted with landlord's consent, 
 23918-20. Land Act works very fairly, as a rule,and 
 gives a feeling of security to the tenant. Leases not 
 common, for landlords ask to excludo compensation,, 
 and without leases tenants can claim in the Land 
 Courts. Existing tenants never interfered with, only 
 new tenants have to agree to terms, 23921-7. Yearly 
 tenants, as a rule, are better off than leaseholders, 
 23928. Landlords have contributed largely towards 
 improvements until six months ago. The Land Act 
 has not stopped them. On one property, which is all 
 leased, the tenants have not improved at all. On 
 another the landlord laid out £1,500 last year — not 
 borrowed money — for which he charges 5 per cent, 
 or allows half, 23929-40. Rents on the estates vary 
 from 20 to 40 per cent, over Griffith's valuation, bat. 
 many farms are let below it. It dej^ends on the 
 quality of the land, 23941-4. The valuation is no. 
 test of the value of the land, 23945. Some: 
 lands are let as high as two and a half times the- 
 valuation. It is wintering lands, 23946-9. No 
 general raising of rents, since 1870, not- in fact since 
 1852, save in cases of new tenancies or a transfer 
 23950-1. Rents are generally fixed by competent 
 valuators, who are employed by the landlords. In 
 cases of dispute, it would be wise to settle tliem by 
 arbitration which is fair for both parties, 23932-62, 
 Advocates free trade in land — no compulsion by 
 law, 23963-5. Tenants' improvements are couMned 
 
xc 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION. 1880. 
 
 M or ice, Francis — continuM. 
 
 principally to house buildings ; draining and fencing 
 seldom done well. Much bog reclaimed by them in 
 Clare. About £1 a year charged per acre for 
 reclaimed land in some cases ; in others none. 
 Where let for £{, tenants often get £i an acre for 
 it in con-acre, 23966-70. Turbary given to all 
 tenants, 2.3971. Tenants have fixity of tenure, but 
 ar.b not allow to subdivide. If attempted, they 
 receive notice to quit, but it has never been carried 
 into effect, nor would they do it, 23972-6. ' Does 
 not approve of peasant proprietorship, because they 
 have to borrow to purchase. If thrifty men, and 
 industrious, they might succeed, but they do not 
 improve the land with a lease or withovit it. If 
 men had a fee, in ten years it would be cut up and 
 given to the children, or as soon as they had paid 
 for the farm, 23977-80, and by-and-by a new race 
 of proprietors will spring up, 23987-8. Good 
 tenants should be helped to purchase, 23989. Not 
 much land capable of reclamation, 23996—7. 
 Tenants pay the county-cess. Landlords pay for 
 roads and waste, 23998-24001. Land Act works 
 most favourably, and the people will prosper if left 
 alone, 24002-4. No distress or inaJbility to pay 
 rent in the neighbourhood. If potatoes are good, 
 people can live during the winter, 24005—14. One 
 good year will not make up for two or three bad 
 ones. People all in debt, 24014-5. No special 
 distress in the Corofin Union, relief works all 
 thrown out by magistrates, 24018-23. Mr. 
 Fitzgerald's rents all paid, but abatements given, 
 24024—5. Instances of tenants in receipt of 
 wages, and paying their rents in receipt of 
 out-door relief last year, 24026-40. It ' was 
 under long leases tlxat tenants did not improve, 
 24041-5. The labourers are better off in the 
 neighbourhood, owing to resident proprietors who 
 employ them. The farmers never employ them in 
 the winter. Houses they occupy from ■ the land- 
 lords as a rule. Some people build labourers' 
 houses on speculation. Not overcrowded generally, 
 24047-53. 
 
 Frost, Mr. James, Ballymorris, Cratloe, Co. Clare ; Land- 
 owner, Land Agent, and Tenant. — Limerick. 
 Farmers in Corofin with stock and a bit of 
 ground in receipt of relief, 24038. Farms four hun- 
 dred acres, half of which is his own, the other 
 half he holds from year to year ; rents not 
 raltered since 1850, 24054-61. The properties 
 are situated in Clare, Limerick, and Tippe- 
 rary, 24062. Ulster tenant-right does not exist, 
 and landlords do not consent to sell, but pay the 
 tenants compensation on leaving, 24063-7. Amounts 
 paid to tenants ; case of ejectment for nonpayment, 
 H,nd compensation given, 24068-75. Tena,nts are 
 comfortable on their holdings ; they are large grass 
 farms, 24076-9. Landlords on the properties he 
 manages do all the improvements, and £20,000 has 
 been laid out on one ; rents are moderate, and no 
 rise except on falling in of a lease, when about 
 seven per cent, is added to the rent, 24080-4. 
 ■Compensation should be given to tenants over £100 
 -a year and holders of grass lands also, 24085-8. 
 Tenants disinclined to take leases, and so sign them- 
 selves out of the Act ; they pay the county cess on 
 a nevv' letting, 24089-93. Ulster custom should be 
 established, and the three F's., with arbitration. 
 Griifith's valuation most unsatisfactory, and gives 
 instances of difference between rent and valuation. 
 They \ary from five per cent, to forty per cent, 
 over the valuation. The land of course varies, 
 24004-107. The diffei-ence is greater on the rich 
 f ittening land. It was known before the valuation 
 was made. It is not tillage land. In' buying land 
 Griffith's valuation is no guide ; forty- five years' 
 purchase is given. It is high enough on mountains 
 and poor lands, 24108-13. Instance of valuation 
 and liigh rents— one valued at £50 let at £105 ; 
 
 the other £100 valuation, and rent £1,000, 24114- 
 8. In favour of Ulster custom and a general re- 
 valuation, right of sale, and peasant proprietary. 
 The latter would be advantageous to the country. 
 It acts well in Germany and would suit Ireland, 
 24119-27. Appointment of a Board for the pur- 
 chase and sale of estates, as in the case of the tithe- 
 rent charge, which would be cheap and simple, 
 • 24128-32. About one eighth of the income of 
 Clare belongs to non-resident landlords, 24133-4. 
 
 Barry, Mr. Daniel, Derrygreen, County Tipperary, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Limerich. 
 Is a tenant on Sir Edward Waller's property, 
 holding about 120 acres under a lease granted in 
 1870. Mountain land reclaimed by his uncle, who 
 built houses also. Received no assistance from the 
 landlord, 24139-61. Rent reduced by purchase of 
 rentcharge by his uncle, and some of the land taken 
 away, 241 72-8, the rent remaining the same. Took 
 possession eight years ago, and when a life was 
 dropped, the rent was £32 18s. 6//., then £35 16s. 
 was added on, which he pays now, without the meadow. 
 Gave his uncle £350 in cash, £200 worth of cattle, 
 and is bound to pay his uncle £33 a year. This 
 was forced on him. Valuation £27 15s., 24169-82. 
 
 Ryan, Mr. Daniel, Ballyneen, Oula, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Limerich. 
 Holds twelve Irish acres, and paid £36 7s. 3cf. a 
 year until two years ago. Has paid no rent for 
 two years (Mr. Duggan, of Tipperary, is the present 
 owner), because he asked for a reduction owing to 
 bad times and high rent. Ekes out a living by 
 road contracts. Has no other land to live on, 
 24183-98. Is considerably in debt. Asked lis 
 landlord to come and value the farm, but he has not 
 been, 24199-201. Has no water on the land, and 
 it has no surface, 24202. Former landlord allowed 
 right of sale, but not permitted now, 24203. 
 Instance of rent exceeding produce of a liolding, 
 24204-7. Fair rents should be from £10 to £15 
 per cent, over valuation for pasture land, rather less 
 for tillage, 24208-10. Land surrendered for non- 
 payment of rent instead of distraining, 24211-15. 
 Landlords as a rule do not give assistance 
 for building, 24217-8. Case of insufficient com- 
 pensation by agreement for improvements, 24220-3, 
 Tenants who have purchased holdings not suc« 
 ceeding ; yearly tenants better off than lease- 
 holders. This is owing to failure of crops, 
 and incurring fresh liabilities to pay the pur- 
 chase money. They are more secure, but are not 
 better off, 24224^9. Sub-division might be allowed 
 to a certain extent to industrious and thrifty people, 
 subject to the landlord's consent. Nothing lower 
 than fifteen Irish acres shouldbe permitted, 24230-5. 
 Labourers are, on an average, fair working people, 
 but their children are reared to idleness, owing to 
 their living in villages. They join the army or 
 the militia i-ather than work, 24236-8. Farmers 
 cannot afford to employ labourers all the year. 
 Produce much reduced, and climate changed. Ex- 
 penses of raising potatoes not worth the trouble, 
 24239-44. Proposes arbitrators should be appointed 
 to represent the State, the landlord, and the tenant. " 
 Improvements made by landlord or tenant should be 
 taken into consideration in settling the rent, and the 
 award binding on both, 24246-50. The three F's. 
 with reasonable veto by landlord proper and fair, 
 24251-3. His own case for non-payment is coming 
 on in the Dublin Courts in November, but hopes to 
 get a settlement from the landlord, 24254-8. Case 
 of hardship in consequence of increased rent, and 
 deprivation of land, 24259-60. 
 
 Fitzgerald, Mr. Michael, Kilfergus, Co. Limerick ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Limerich. 
 Holds about from 300 to 400 acres under Lord 
 Monteagle, Lady Louisa Fitzgibbon, ' and Mr. E. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xci 
 
 Fitzgerald, Michael — continued. 
 
 Hunt. Pays £310 a year to Mr. Hunt, valuation 
 X170, which is exorbitant. Has not made that 
 amount for two years, but has had to pay it, 
 24261-76. Part flooded by a river, but landlord 
 refused to assist him or enable him to get Govern- 
 ment help. If drained could not get a living out of 
 it, 24277-9. Cannot borrow money when rent is 
 so much above the valuation, 24280-4. Kents 
 enforced on otheu properties he holds, but have 
 not been raised, 24285-7. Landlords sometimes 
 allow tenants to sell, 24288. Gives details of the 
 rising of rents on Mr. Sayere' property. Tenants 
 much aggrieved, 24289-90. Compensation for 
 improvements on ejectment obtained, 24291-4. 
 Success of a tenant who purchased his holding, and 
 there is a general desire on the part of others to 
 do the same, 24295-9. The three F's would be 
 a fair solution of the land question, 24300. 
 
 Meehan, Mr. Michael, Holycross, Kilmallock, Co. Lime- 
 rick ; Poor Law Guardian and Tenant Farmer. 
 — Limerick. 
 Holds 200 acres in different farms under Captain 
 Glovioester. Rents were raised on adjoining pro- 
 perties, and on his holding, and fines imposed, when 
 lands were sold, on the existing tenants. They 
 were compelled to agree to the rise for fear of eject- 
 ment, 24301-20. These were small holdings on 
 townlands, and tenants were resident and living 
 by them, 24321-4. On another property a fine 
 imposed and a lease forced on a tenant who wished 
 to break up parts of his farm. On expiration of 
 lease rent remained the same for five years, when 
 a further rise took place, 24325-8. Landlord re- 
 fused to return money spent on the land, 24329. 
 His own case is the same. No freedom of con- 
 tract allowed. The value cannot be made out of 
 the land, 24320-40. Another instance of unjust 
 raising of rents, 24342-50. 
 
 Stritch, Mr. Michael, Clonlara, near Limerick, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Limerick. 
 Holds 90 acres from Mr. E. Joynt. When pur- 
 chased the rents were doubled. Since then £20 
 taken ofi" and rent remains at £160. Unable to 
 pay it now. Marsh land added to the farm on dou- 
 bling the rents, of no use, and cattle died on it. 
 A batement allowed in bad times, but rates were first 
 deducted out of abatement, 24351-64. One man 
 ejected recently, and himself are the only tenants 
 on the estate when purchased by present landlord, 
 24365-69. The eviction was for non-payment of 
 rent for two yeai-s,' and the house was pulled down, 
 24370—4. The farm is now vacant, and the 
 ejected man will not be able to redeem, 24375-80. 
 
 Limerick, The Earl of^ Co. Limerick ; Landowner. — 
 Limsrich. 
 The Act hardly goes far enough as regards cer- 
 tainty of tenure. Always grants leases, and the 
 greater part of his property is leased. Has about 
 2,500 acres in Limerick, near BrufF, and thinks 31 
 years a reasonable period for leases. Since the Act 
 tenants have been less disposed to take leases, 
 though that is the most satisfactory system of 
 holding, 24381-3. Difficult to say how to encour- 
 age leases. The question of leases should have been 
 brought more forward in the Act, and if a simple 
 statutable lease, not fettered by two many conditions, 
 could have been established, it would have been 
 advantageous to both landlord and tenant, 24384-7. 
 Would consent to leasesfor life at fair rents, 24388-9. 
 Does not approve of public arbitrators as it inter- 
 feres with freedom of contract. It is a difiicult 
 question, and he is not prepared to say what would 
 be desirable, 24390-6. Practically his tenants have 
 fixity of tenure, and- unless they leave have full 
 value for their improvements, 24397-8. The neces- 
 sity of a re-valuation is an open question. The 
 
 present valuation is useless as a test of rent. If 
 the rent exceeded a certain percentage over a State 
 valuation, then, perhaps, a tenant, if evicted for 
 non-payment, might make a claim for disturbance, 
 24399-400. Approves of protection to tenants for 
 improvements. Case of hardship arising out of a 
 tenant dying intestate. Clause as to landlords 
 erecting cottages for labourers not employed by them 
 requires amendment, 24401-3. Cottages held in 
 this way should be exempted from the Land Act, 
 24404-8. Tenants have been assisted in making 
 improvements, and their rents have not been in- 
 creased. Has endeavoured to abolish the system of 
 middlemen, and rents of farms have been lowered 
 when re-let on a middleman's holding becoming 
 vacant, 24409-11. Most of his land is leased ; and 
 but little since the Land Act, if any, has fallen in. 
 Has never increased rents for main drainage, and is 
 in favour of air extension of the system of leases, 
 24412-15. 
 
 Spaight, William, Esq., Derrycastle, Co. Tipperary, 
 Landowner, Agent, and Tenant.— Zimeric^. 
 Owns 4,000 acres, and is a tenant of two holdings. 
 Right of sale is allowed to tenants, with no limit as 
 to the amount he can get. Should object to a bad 
 tenant. No interference otherwise. Only two 
 tenants objected to, 24416-26. Practice of selling 
 holdings not increasing. Leases not increasing, and 
 rents are not raised on the falling in of a lease, 
 24427—33. One tenant ejected owing to family 
 quarrels, and he gave this man £70, which he never 
 received back in any shape, 24434-40. Yearly 
 tenants pay their rents quite as well as leaseholders 
 and improve their lands equallj'. Other landlords 
 are not paid so promptly, 24441-6. None of his 
 tenants required relief last year. Would never 
 eject an old tenant who paid his rent. Rents on 
 the estate were fixed in bad times, and in 1862 some 
 were reduced, none ever raised. The tenants have 
 the three F's on his property, 24447-54. Tenant 
 ejected for private matters, but paid compensation, 
 24455. Tenants building mirch on the increasej 
 though not on his estate. All that done by himself 
 without cost to the tenants. All his labourers re- 
 housed; and so are Mr. Parker's. With these 
 exceptions other proprietors do nothing, 24456-63, 
 Labourers' cabins are old and bad, 24464-6. 
 
 O'Connor, Rev. M., P.P., Ballybunnion, Co. Kerry.— 
 Killarney. 
 Acquainted for fifteen years with the district; 
 comprising estates of Lords Ormathwaite and 
 Listowel, Messrs. Gunn, Hewson, Blacker, and 
 others, 24467-70. Tenantry are greatly indebted 
 to banks and shopkeepers ; cause of this ; excessive 
 rents — rents have always been high ; they average 
 double the Government valuation, 24471-73. 
 Tenants don't sell, or go, unless they are ruined. 
 Knows cases of rent being four times the valua- 
 tion ; one case where it is fourteen times, though 
 the land was improved by tenant, 24474-76. 
 Tenants' interests are unsaleable at present, 24477. 
 Tenants are deterred from improvements by feeling 
 of insecurity ; the moment they improve, rents go 
 up ; amendment of Land Act would be useless : 
 what is needed, is certainty for the tenants, re- 
 duction of rents, and some mode of arriving at a 
 fair rent, 24478-81. Perpetuity of tenure at a 
 fair fixed rent, as in case of Trinity College estates 
 would change the circumstances of the tenantry. 
 The estates of Trinity College are let to middle- 
 men on a perpetiral tenure ; the College may raise 
 the rent if prices warrant it, but the lessees can 
 not claim a reduction. The Portacarron lease is 
 similar, but with a right to claim reduction re- 
 vision of rent depending on the condition of the 
 soil will be useless, because of the difficulty of 
 proving its amelioration by the tenant, 24482-84. 
 Improvements in district are made wholly by the 
 
 n 
 
-XCll 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 0^ Connor, Rev. 51. — cofiiinued. 
 
 tenant, except on estates of Lord Ormath waite, Messrs. 
 Hewson and Crosbie, who allow one-tMrd cost of 
 drainage and reclamation, 24485. Few leases in dis- 
 trict ; tenants would refuse them because rents are so 
 high. Section of Land Act giving compensation 
 for incoming payments . has no application, be- 
 cause there are no sales ; section for giving com- 
 pensation for disturbance has increased evictions 
 owing to irritation of landlords at the Act, 24489- 
 90. Forty or fifty evictions on title have been 
 carried out since 1870, with scarcely any compen- 
 pensation paid. In the Moybella case, where 
 tenant was forcibly re-instated, £100 was awarded, 
 but was nearly all lost at law ; results of claims 
 for. compensation are so uncertain,' 24491-97. 
 Expense and uncertainty deter tenants from going 
 to law with landlords. Appeal to Ho;ise of Lords 
 in Harenc case cost £1,200, 24498-99. Nine or 
 ten tenants on property of Mahony of Kilmorna- 
 morna, an absentee, were evicted to amalgamate 
 farms in 1872, and made no claim for compensa- 
 tion, 24500-06. Three evictions took place this 
 year on Lord Listowel's property for nonpayment ; 
 two of the three tenants were allowed to go back on 
 paying the rent, which in one case was sent from 
 America ; the rent was not accepted from the 
 third. The inclement seasons were the cause of 
 the tenants' default, 24507-10. The Kerry tenants 
 have up to the present been remarkably peace- 
 ful and law-abiding ; north Kerry is now exceed- 
 ingly disturbed ; serioiis outrages have taken place ; 
 the law does not protect the people, and they have 
 taken the matter into their own hands. The 
 combination among them is astounding and ir- 
 resistible ; as an illustration, a small proprietor 
 having evicted some tenants was unable to make 
 any use of the land, and eventually made terms 
 with the tenants, 24512. Has known cases of 
 great hardship ; Hewson evicted three tenants, the 
 lent being four times the valuation. ' He now 
 occupies the farms himself, 24513-17. Refers to 
 a libel case, during which evidence was given that 
 a tenant was evicted because his wife refused the 
 criminal solicitations of the agent, 24518-21. On 
 ■ expiration of leases within last two years Blacker 
 I'aised his rents twenty per cent., to nearly twice 
 the valuation ; the land had been improved by the 
 tenants, 24522-26. Mahony nearly doubled rents 
 on expiration of leases ; £500 having been ex- 
 pended in one case by tenant ; leaseholders are no 
 better off than yearly tenants ; in instances re- 
 ferred to, the leases had been for twenty years, 
 and landlord had not laid out anything on the 
 lauds, 24527-33. Wilson Gunn, of Rattoo, raised 
 the rents in some cases more than 100 per cent, 
 over his whole; estate, which had been largely 
 reclaimed by the tenants ; he turned into his 
 jiooket the fruit of the life-long toil of those in- 
 dustrious people. Most of the proprietors have 
 raised the rents since 1870 ; the present rents 
 cannot be maintained ; prices are falling ; labour 
 is becoming more scarce ; land reverting to its 
 original state ; the young and strong have emi- 
 gi-iited, 24534-36. Improvements almost always 
 made by the tenants ; the allowances made by Lord 
 Ormathwaite and Mr. Mahony are but trifling, 
 2453S-45. Gives instance of rent being repeatedly 
 raised on farms wholly reclaimed by tenant ; on 
 another estate a tenant was evicted after having ex- 
 pended money with landlord's sanction, 24548-49. 
 Describes the case of the Harenc estate ; tenants 
 were served in November, 1877, with notices to 
 ofi'er for their farms, pursuant to Bright clauses j 
 they attended at court in Dublin, and were informed 
 that the estate liad been sold for £65,000 to the 
 agent ; this sale was annulled on the tenants offering 
 ^7.0,000, and the judge ordered the estate to be 
 dnided into lots for auction; those tenants who 
 were able then bid £64,000, leaving a valuable part 
 
 of the estate for which the tenants made no bid. 
 S. M. Hussey then offered £80,500 for the whole, 
 and Messrs. Lombard and Murphy, as trustees for 
 tenants, bid £81,000, which was accepted by the 
 judge ; against this decision Hussey and trustee of 
 estate appealed ; the court reversed the judge's 
 order ; the tenants' appeal to House of Lords was 
 dismissed on technical grounds. The estate, pre- 
 viously most peaceful, is now a scene of disorder and 
 riot. The Bright clauses proved a snare to the 
 tenants. An occupying proprietary is the proper 
 solution the land question ; rents once fixed might 
 be varied with prices ; the tenant who improves the 
 land naturally looks upon it as his own ; but at 
 present enjoys no security; he would do far more if 
 the land were really his own. As proprietors tenants 
 would enjoy an independence which they cannot 
 under the rule and interference of landlords, agents, 
 bailiffs, and gamekeepers. Hussey has resold most 
 of the Harenc estate, but none of it to working 
 farmers, and made nooflfer to do so, unless the tenants 
 appointed trustees for purchase, which was impracti- 
 cable. Messrs. Lombard and Murphy were to 
 have paid the whole amount, and engaged to resell 
 to the tenants ; is unaware that the miscarriage of 
 this sale was not due to the Bright clauses ; and 
 that the case would have been heard on its merits by 
 the House of Lords if Lombard and Murphy had ap- 
 pealed — th e estate is now depreciated in value, and the 
 tenants are not in the position they were j at time 
 of sale they had money in the bank ; their rents 
 were moderate ; Hussey has the poorest tenautrj'' 
 on bis hands, 24551-24572. Waste lands are 
 those which are unproductive. Half this district 
 has been reclaimed within memory of living men; 
 utterly useless land has been brought into cultivar 
 tion by superhuman energy and perseverance of 
 tenant. On Lord Ormathwaite's property a tenant 
 died from excessive labour and hardship at sudi 
 work ; his wife and children were evicted twelve 
 years ago, 24573-74. His district is not over- 
 populated ; the inhabitants have been banished 
 from the fertile plains to the bogs and hillsides. 
 The industry and energy of the Irish farmers are 
 such that, if proprietors, the productiveness of the 
 land would be doubled ; deplores the outrages' 
 which are due to the oppression wliich has been 
 practised — ' give the people just laws, enable them 
 to live and labour in peace, to reap where they sow ; 
 then crime would cease ; tyranny could not be 
 practised, the nation would enter on a career of 
 prosperity,' 24573-75. Is ai tenant 'unfortunately' 
 to George Hewson ; he and another tenant who 
 co-operated with him in Harenc case have re- 
 received notices to quit. Hewson's property is let 
 very high ; one townland at four times the valua- 
 tion ; this land has been improved by Hewson. 
 The tenants surrendered their farms, and were put 
 back as caretakers ; the land was then improved 
 and divided ; the stock and chattels of a tenant 
 paying £105 rent were sold under a Dublin writ. 
 The occupiers cultivating the land are only care- 
 takers ; land manured by one of them was cropped 
 with corn next year by Hewson ; they are now 
 tenants at enormous rents ; no such case of rack- 
 renting as this in his first parishes, 24576-88. 
 rents have been raised without outlay by land- 
 lords ; the tenants have made all improvements ; 
 the}, are most industrious, but have become excited 
 and disconteated. Many farmers decline to give 
 evidence through fear of the agents ; the land- 
 lords are nearly all absentees. .Lord Ormq-thwaite 
 has not been in Ireland for twenty-five years ; 
 Mahony lives abroad, 24589-95. Security and fair 
 rents are essential ; Griffiths valuation is generally 
 a fair rent; and if not increased, except as prices 
 warranted, it would satisfy the tenants. A judi- 
 cious peasant proprietary scheme would be prefer- 
 able, 24597-600. The disturbance in 1848, and of 
 the Fenians was insignificant compai'ed to the 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XCIU 
 
 O'Connor, Rev. ^i.~ -continued. 
 
 ' present, 24601. Farms vary mucli in size ; the 
 district is well farmed, 24602-Oi. Subdivision 
 should be prevented, but there is no tendency to it ; 
 there would be a large emigration but for want of 
 means ; education has changed the people ; rents 
 are often paid by remittances from friends in 
 America and Australia, 24605-08. The labourers' 
 dwellings are indiscribably bad ; their whole state 
 very poor ; during the distress 4,000 persons were 
 on the relief list ; some of them tenants of Lord 
 Listowel — who otherwise would have starved — 
 (children were naked ; one sick man relieved had 
 been living on turnips, 24609-11. 
 
 Moyiiihan, Eev. Arthur, Listowel, county Kerry, 
 
 Roman Catholic Administrator. — Killarney. 
 
 Hands in particulars of the valuation, I'ents, stock, 
 
 and other details of the holdings of tenants on the 
 
 estates of Lord Ormathwaite, Lord Listowel, Mr. 
 
 . CoUis, The Eev. Mr. Browne, Mr. Bateman, Mr. 
 Kitson, Mr. Supple, Archdeacon Bland, The Knight 
 of Kerry, Mr. Mahony, IMr. W. Harnet, and Mr. 
 M. Loughnane, 24612-21. On all these estates but- 
 ter is the principal product, 24612. Rents have been 
 raised throughout on various occasions, especially on a 
 marriage taking place, 24614-5. On Lord Ormath- 
 v^aite's property rents are about three times the valua 
 tion, 24612-3; on Lord Listowel's about fifty per 
 cent, above, 24616; onMr.Collis's, nearly three times, 
 with enormous fines in some instances, 24617-9 ; 
 on Mr. Browne's property they vary from two and 
 a half times the valuation up to, in one instance, 
 thirteen times the valuation. In this case a 
 fine of i£200 was imposed, in addition to an increased 
 rent of £20, under pain of ejectment. The increased 
 value is all the fruit of the tenant's industry, 24619. 
 Mr. Bateman's rents are about twice the valuation, 
 
 24619. Mr. Kitson's rents are two and a half and 
 three times the valuation. He, however, this year 
 gave an abatement of 33 per cent, owing to tenants 
 not being able to pay, 24619. Mr. Supple's rents 
 are higher, varying from thrice to nearly seven times 
 Griflttth's. Two tenants on this property have broken 
 down ; one got compensation on ejectment. The 
 tenants 'are very poor on this townland, 24619-20. 
 Archdeacon Bland's tenants pay about three times 
 Griffith's, 24620. The Knight of Kerry remodelled 
 his farms two years ago, and his tenants pay two to 
 three times higher, 24620. Mr. Mahoney, of Kil- 
 mooner, charges the same. One tenant broken down, 
 
 24620. On Mr. Harnett's land two tenants are 
 broken down, three have been dispossessed, and lets 
 cut-away bog to a number of cottiers at £1 the Eng- 
 lish acre, 24620. The rents on Mr. Loughnane's 
 land are three and four times more. In one case a 
 fine of £300 was added to £21 increase of i-ent, and 
 a lease forced on the tenant, 24620-2. There is one 
 peasant proprietor in the parish, 24623-4. North 
 Kerry is i-ack-rented, and 50 percent, above Grifiith's 
 valuation would be an ordinary rent. The landlords 
 are non-resident, and, as a rule, non-improving, and 
 they seize every opportunity by fines and increased 
 rents to confiscate the improvements of the tenantry. 
 The establishment of peasant proprietary is the 
 remedy, and the reclamation of the waste lands 
 would increase the wealth of the country. A fair 
 price should be given to landlords to induce them to 
 sell, 24625-8. The three Fs would be the next best 
 means of settling the question, 24620-32. Does 
 not wish to expropriate all the landlords, 24633. 
 Proposes that tenants should be able to borrow 
 money from Government for improvements, and 
 absentee landlords should be taxed, 24634. Hiring 
 out cows is not the practice, 24634-5. A cow, if 
 let out, would be worth about £4 a year, 24636-8. 
 
 C Connor, "- Mr. Thomas, Ballymaquin, Co. Kerry ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Holds about seventy-seven acres under Lord Lis- 
 towel since the death of his father in 1862, at a rent 
 of £164. It was raised from £122 four years ago. 
 
 The land was not re-valued ; but was told by the 
 agent he meant to raise it, as the land was worth 
 more. Declined a lease, 24642-62. His father 
 and he have much improved the land, but the land- 
 lord has done nothing, 24663-70. Objected to pay 
 the increase, but was served with notice to quit, 
 and he accepted the higher rent, 24671-8. Only 
 owes six months' rent, and has never received any 
 abatement, 24679-82. Yaluatiou ,£99 10s., which 
 is fair, 24683-6. Has twenty-four cows ; prices 
 ' this year are good for butter, but there is no corn, 
 24686-9. Pays half the county ccss and half the 
 poor rate, 24690-2. Is eight or nine miles from a 
 market town, 24693-7. Griffith's valuation would 
 be a fair rent for his farm, but would be dear in 
 some places, 24698-9. Case of high rent with 
 heavy fine imposed on a tenant whose husband died. 
 The rent thus raised is nearly three times the valu- 
 ation, and a good deal of the land is marsh, 24700-1 2. 
 
 Ryall, Mr. Edmond, Kilmoily, Co. Kerry ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Holds about 100 acres from Mrs. Quill, at £133 
 10s, rent; valuation £48 10s. The rent was raised 
 in 1860 ; and he has to give in addition to the rent 
 poundage and turf every year of the value of £7 10s., 
 as well as the county cess, 24713-24. Agreed to 
 pay high rent under notice to quit ; but it was a 
 struggle to pay it in good times. Now it is impos- 
 sible. Owes six months' rent, but his landlady re- 
 fused to allow him an abatement, though she got 
 50 pier cent, off from her landlord, 24725-43. 
 
 Carroll, Mr. Pat, Co. Kerry ; Tenant Farmer. — Kil- 
 larney. 
 Holds about thirty-five acres of land from Mrs. 
 Quill ; paying £60 rent, and one hundred weight of 
 pork and four rails of turf, equal to £4, besides, 
 24744-7. Eighteen acres of the land are waste, 
 and is under water. Has been in possession seven 
 years, but the rent has not been raised since 1860. 
 it is more now than he can afibrd to pay, 24748-53. 
 Griffith's valuation, which is £25, would be a. fair 
 rent, 24754-7. Agreed to pay high rent under 
 notice to quit, and so did the other tenants, 24758- 
 60. Application for an abatement refused by the 
 landlady, 24761-8. Tenants not allowed to sell 
 their holdings, 24771-3. Rent before 1860 was 
 £38, 24775-7. Hands in a list of the tenants on 
 the townlands of Kilmoily and Ballykealy, showing 
 the valuation and rent of each and the amount of 
 poundage and turbary, 24778-8. 
 
 Carroll, Mr. Thomas, Ballinorig, Co. Kei-ry ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Has thirty-five acres from Mr. Leahy, and pays 
 £48 for it. It was raised in 1877, on the expiry 
 of his lease. Objected to a rise, and has had no 
 reduction, 24780-99. Last rent he paid was the 
 Government valuation, and owes a year's rent, 
 24800-10. Hands in a paper rel.ting to the town- 
 lands of Bally macandrew and Ballinorig, and the 
 rents of them, 24811-6. His rent has been raised 
 three times since he had the land, 24817-20. John 
 O'Connell, the brother of the " Liberator," owned 
 the land before Mr. Leahy, 24821. 
 
 Allman, Mr. Thomas, Rathoneen, Co. Kerry ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Holds forty-eight acres under Mr. J. Leahy. 
 Rent raised in 1876 from £45 to £60, on the 
 expiry of his lease, 24822-33. Rent was £30 
 when Mr. Leahy purchased the land in 1857, and 
 he raised the rent to £45, 24834-9. Was served 
 with a notice to quit on objecting to rise in 1876 
 24840-3. Has made all improvements, his land- 
 lord nothing, 24844-7. The rent is double. the 
 valuation, and is too high, and he cannot make a 
 livmg ofi" it, and some of the tenants have not paid 
 any rent for two years, 24848-51. Has just had 
 a wnt served on him for non-payment, and had t.. 
 pay the rent without aliy reduction. Fifteen per 
 cent, abatement was allowed last March, 24852-8 
 Drained the land for two years, but was discouraged 
 
 71 2 
 
XCIV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Allman, Tliomas — continued. 
 
 by a case in court, the costs eating up the compen- 
 sation. The tenant holds a similar holding to him- 
 self, and her case is exactly similar to his own, 
 24859-64. No improvements made by the land- 
 lord, and the tenants have the utmost difficulty to 
 pay the rents, often have to sell stock, 24865. Had 
 to pay a fine of £50 in 1876, on a lease being 
 granted for thirty-one yeai-s. He was obliged to 
 take it. Pays all the county cess. Produces his 
 lease which contracts him out of the Act. The 
 fine is not recoverable (and he had to borrow the 
 
 • money), and is in addition to his rent, 24866-70. 
 The land is barely worth half the rent, but he had 
 no alternative, 24871-74. 
 
 O'SuUivan, Mr. Florence, Ballybroman, Ardfert, 
 Co. Kerry ; Tenant Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Holds about 306 acres from Mr. W. T. Crosbie, 
 Mr. E,. S. Oliver, and Lord Listowel. They are all 
 over-rented, and he has leases from the first two 
 landlords for 21 and 31 years respectively. One 
 has been in the family for five generations, and he 
 succeeded to it. Pays half the county cess on this 
 farm at an increased rent of £3, 24876-92. The 
 other farm on lease (Mr. Crosbie's) on which he 
 lives is too high rented, 24893-900, Lord Listowel's 
 farm is only about 1 6 acres, and is over-rented also. 
 Rent was raised when he took it in succession to 
 his grandfather, 24901—6. Has much exiierience in 
 land, and lives by it. The great part of his land is 
 grass, 24907—9. Tenants are not allowed to sell 
 their holdings, but Mr. Crosbie makes allowances 
 to outgoing tenants, 24910—12. Rents are always 
 raised at a change of tenancy, and the practice is on 
 the increase, 24913-6. Land can be willed by one 
 member of a family to another, 24917. Improve- 
 ments are made by tenants as a rule, with one ex- 
 ception, Mr. Crosbie, and he charges five per cent, 
 on the rent, 24918-22. The Land Act has had the 
 tendency to deprive tenants of compensation for dis- 
 turbance by the clause which disqualifies them for 
 non-payment, 24923. Leases contracting tenants 
 out of the Act have been forced on them, and the 
 costs of litigation generally eat up the compensation 
 which they might gain in court, and so they are de- 
 terred from making claims, 24924-8. The Legisla- 
 ture should fix a scale of compensation, so that 
 tenants need not go into court at all, 24929—35. 
 There have been contracting clauses in all leases 
 lately fallen in. Terms of leases are for 3 1 years 
 under £50, and 21 years over £50. Smce 1870 
 rents have always been raised, and sometimes a fine 
 imposed on granting a lease. Tenants object to 
 these leases aiid their clauses, and leaseholders are 
 generally worse off than other tenants, 24936-42. 
 A fair rent is that which leaves a legitimate and rea- 
 sonable interest on the capital invested, after defray- 
 ing all working expenses. A tenement valuation 
 is nearly a fair rent, 24944. Land should be revalued 
 according to prices, not according to tenants' im- 
 provements, as would be the case if the land were 
 examined, 24945-8. No arbitration in the district, 
 but it would be a good thing if done fairly. The 
 three F's would more than satisfy the people, 24949— 
 5G. Distress for rent never put in force. Instance 
 of a tenant working day and night to pay his rent, 
 24957. The raising of rents checked tenants' im- 
 ])rovements after 1S70, but a feeling of security 
 would restore it, 24958-60. Thinks it would be 
 well if there was no recourse to county courts, 
 24961-2. Tenants should have the right of pre- 
 emption, and Government should advance f3ur-fifths 
 instead of two-thirds of the purchase money, the in- 
 terest to extend over a long period, and a board es- 
 tablished to buy the residue if any ; the lands of 
 corporate bodies to be sold also, 24964 and 24972- 
 73. Does not object to sub-division, 24974. The 
 question as to Government valuation being a fair 
 rent should be more fully examined. He believes it 
 is in spite of contrary evidence, ■<!4976, 24965-71. 
 
 Never offered twice and a half the valuation of a 
 farm. He valued it over Griffith's valuation, be- 
 cause he knew he could not get it for a fair rent, 
 and he had to give up his holding at that time for 
 landlord's requirements. He was paid full value 
 for his outlay by Mr. Crosbie. His lease contains 
 a covenant that the rent should fluctuate according 
 to the price of butter, 24984-90, 24977-8-<i, 24991, 
 25000. The cost of production has increased more 
 than the rise in prices, more particularly in wages. 
 His rent was reduced in 1879 on this plan, 25001- 
 9. No reason why this plan should not become 
 general when once a fair rent was ascertained. 
 Rents could be adjusted every seventh or tenth year, 
 25010-1. His present rent is £320, including 
 £25 per centage on buildings, and he holds 160 
 acres. Valuation about £150. Rent in lease is 
 £400. He accepted it but did not propose it. Has 
 every reason to be thankful to his landlord, Mr. 
 Crosbie, 25012-21. Evictions are always for non- 
 payment, but knows of none in the district, 25022- 
 3. 
 
 0^ Donoghue, The Rev. Denis, Ardfert and Kilmoiley, 
 county Kerry ; Parish Priest. — Killarney. 
 Calls attention to the case of Mrs. O'Connor, of 
 Kilcooley, whose rent was raised in 1874 to £233, 
 and who had to p&y a fine of £800 when the lease 
 was granted, the said fine being irrecoverable. By 
 the lease (produced) the whole of the county cess 
 was put on her, and she was contracted out of 
 making any claim whatever under the Land Act. 
 The landlord is Mr. Stack, an attorney at Tralee, 
 25024-29. Then, in the case of the Sheelians, on 
 the lapse of the lease in 1878 a large increase of 
 rent was demanded by Mr. J. R. Leahy, but they 
 could not pay it, and they only obtained £204 com- 
 pensation, and the farm was let for £294 to another 
 tenant, the increase of rent being over £100, with- 
 out a lease, 25030-4. The rents charged by the 
 Messrs. Donovan are excessively high at Tuhrid. 
 The land is worth about 10s. an acre, and the rents, 
 of which he gives instances, are genei-ally two to 
 three times the valuation, sometimes more, 25035-8. 
 Details of the rents, with rises, of some tenants on 
 Lord Listowel's estate, 25038. All these rents are 
 too high, and the Poor Law valuation on that town- 
 land and the adjoining townland is a perfect rack- 
 rent, 25039. With the exception of Mr. S. Oliver, 
 whose rents are fair, every other landlord's property 
 is rackrented. The tenants are very hard-working 
 and industrious, but, in spite of that, they are in 
 gerat distress, especially Lord Listowel's tenants, 
 25040. Gives instances of the failure of the Land 
 Act to prevent capricious evictions, and of the com- 
 pensations obtained in Court being eaten up by the 
 costs. The incoming tenants paid increased rents, 
 and, in some cases, large fines, 25042-4. Decrease 
 of houses and population on Mr. Crosbie's estate at 
 Ardfert between 1841 and 1871 b}- consolidation, 
 25045-8. Tenants ejected if they made legal 
 defence to ejectments or claim compensation, 25049. 
 Cases of compensation for capricious evictions, 
 25050-1. Difficulty, tenants' experience, in 
 getting presentable witnesses to give evidence before 
 the Courts on compensation cases. To settle the 
 question of rents the Poor Law valuation, which has 
 been decided was a fair rent once, should be taken. 
 (Sir R. Griffith declared it to be a " live and let 
 live" rent.) A grsat change has taken place since 
 then, the price of living, clothing, education, &c., 
 has gone up ; and, if anything, the rents should be 
 reduced. Establish the three F's, remove the power 
 raising and settling rents from the hands of the 
 landlords, give them an allowance for any improve- 
 ments they have effected, and so remove from the 
 country what may Ijs termed its curse— rack- 
 renting, 25051-4. The peasant proprietors on the 
 commons of Ardfert rarely apply for relief; they 
 are well-conducted, moral, and law-abiding; their 
 land is better manured and cultivated than any in 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 XCY 
 
 O'Donoghue, The Rev. Denis — continued. 
 
 the parish, and they send their children to school. 
 This confutes an article in the Nineteenth Century 
 on the subject, written by the late Knight of Kerry, 
 25055-9. 
 
 O'Rourke, Mr. Thomas, Tralee, county Kerry ; 
 Merchant. — Killarney. 
 Wishes to call attention to the state of certain 
 tenants in Kerry under landlords who charge high 
 rents, 25060-4. On Mr. Brennan's property, rents 
 vary from two to two and a half times the valuation. 
 They pay the county cess besides. The rents have 
 not been raised, but they have paid these high rents 
 a long time, 25065-8. The operation of the Land 
 Act has been neutralized in every way. Leases 
 facilitate this by preventing tenants from claiming 
 compensation. Case of eviction for non-payment. 
 Tenants borrow on leases, and generally end by 
 being sold up and evicted. Instance of this, and 
 and confiscation of improvements, 25069-70. Dis- 
 inclination of tenimts to take leases, 25071-2. 
 Improvements nearly all made by tenants ; arbitra- 
 tion not known, 25073-4. Reference to the 
 " Harenc " estate, 25075. Further instances of 
 excessive rents, on Mr. B. Browne's estate, 25076- 
 7. Tenants not allowed to sell their holdings. Case 
 of costs exceeding compensation, 25079. Proposes 
 a land bill establishing the three F's ; including the 
 Bright clauses ; purchase of lands by Government 
 to be sold to peasants ; labourers' cottages to be 
 built on the same principle. Prefers fixing tenants 
 on the soil altogether. The landlords should be 
 treated justly. If rents were fixed on Griffith's or 
 some other reasonable valuation, these pi'oposals 
 would satisfy the people, 25080-2, 25088. The 
 purchase of waste lands would be most beneficial. 
 Tenant-right might be added to towns and cities, 
 25083. There have been many evictions, and the 
 tenants thus evicted have no refuge but the Union, 
 2508i-6. Many evictions take place on the 
 properties over which Mr. Hussey is agent. Com- 
 pensation claims are futile, 25087-93. Cases of 
 tenants debarred from claiming for improvements 
 for non-payment, 25094-9. Instance of a holding 
 purchased by a tenant although the present tenant 
 is still in occupation, 25100. 
 
 Newman, John R. Esq., J.P., Dromore House, Mallow, 
 County Cork ; Landowner. — Killarney. 
 Owns 4,000 acres which he manages himself. 
 Right of sale permitted with veto on iiicoming 
 tenant, 25101-7. If lents are too low a change is 
 made when a new tenant takes the land. Gives 
 leases for thirty-two yeai'K, and contracts out of the 
 Act when he can legally do so. Has never evicted 
 a tenant. Not many leases applied for now. The 
 expense of a lease is objected to. The contracting 
 clauses are only inserted as a protection to himself 
 in case of necessity, 25108-17. Fines are some- 
 times imposed, but rents are seldom raised, on 
 granting a lease, 25118-20. Tenement valuation 
 is not a fair test for rent, and gives examples, 
 25121-4. Sir Richard Grifiith did not consider his 
 valuation uniform or correct, and wished for a new 
 valuation, 25 1 25. Never issues distress to get rent. 
 BuUds houses for his tenants, and lends money to 
 the tenants at 3| per cent, for drainage, 25126-30. 
 The Land Act has checked landlords improvements. 
 Has only had one land case, 25131-7. Case of 
 forcibly reinstating an evicted tenant on the 
 estate of Mr. S. Oliver, 25138-40. Case of sale of 
 lease in perpetuity, and succe.s of the tenant, 
 25141-6. Greater facilities should be oflfered for 
 sale and purchase of lands. Government should 
 advance money to build labourers cottages, 25147-8. 
 Townlands on the property formerly let to two 
 companies, for subdivision, now let to the tenants, 
 who are improving much, 25148-60, 25171-73. 
 Much waste land is capable of reclamation, but 
 
 money should lie advanced to landlords not to 
 tenants to drain the land, 25161-6. The last 
 general increase was at his grandfather's death, 
 twenty years ago, 25169-70. 
 
 M'Sweeny, Mr. Peter, Co. Kerry ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Killarney. 
 
 Holds 147 acres under Lord Kenmare, 50 acres 
 being good land, the rest waste ; rent for twenty 
 years £30, the last two years £40. Valuation £30 
 10s. Has had two abatements since, and received 
 £25 for slating farm offices, 25174-82. Landlord 
 promised to continue the old rent, 25183. Valua- 
 tion irregular, 25184-5. Other tenants have been 
 similarly treated, and he has no complaints to make, 
 25186-94. 
 
 Marsliall, Mr. Thomas, Tralee, Co. Kerry ; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Killarney. 
 
 Has seventy acres from Mr. Blennerhasset, of 
 Ballyseedy. Rent raised on expiry of lease seven- 
 teen years ago, from £4 4s. to £20, 25195-25201. 
 But for improvements made by his father the land 
 would not be worth Grifiith's valuation. Rent is 
 too high, 25202-6. 
 
 O'Connor, Mr. Maurice O'Brennan, Tralee, Co. Kerry ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Killa/rney. 
 Holds twenty-three Irish acres under Lord 
 Ventry, and a similar quantity under Trinity 
 College, 25207-10. Pays £55 to Lord Ventry. 
 Raised in 1875, on death of his father, when prices 
 were high. Received no abatement. Got £200 
 from landlord towards house-building. No interest 
 charged. Memorial for reduction to old rent not 
 acceded to. Pays all the county cess, 25211-21. 
 Other tenants charged interest for allowances, 25222. 
 Rent exceeds tenement valuation slightly, 25223-5. 
 Tenants are much improving land, 25226-8. Holds 
 from Trinity College on lease in perpetuity at 5s. an 
 acre; worth £1 now, 25229-30. About 100 acres 
 on Lord Ventry's estate reclaimable. Held now by 
 a middleman, 25231-3. The three F.'swould be 
 satisfactory, 25234. Impossible to pay rents now, 
 and if landlords pressed for settlement tenants would 
 be broken, as they are all in debt to banks, 25235- 
 6, 25242. Gives rents and valuations of tenants' 
 holdings on Mr. Herbert's property at Killentierna, 
 tenants being afraid to give evidence through fear 
 of eviction, 25237-40, 25243. 
 
 Hussey, Samuel Murray, Esq., Gortalea, Counties 
 Kerry and Cork; Land Agent. — Killarney. 
 Is agent over properties in Kerry of £70,000, 
 and Cork of £130,000 rentals. Number of tenants, 
 800, equally divided, 25244-52. Evictions not 
 numerous, for non-payment only, 25253-9. Leases 
 generally accepted, and are slightly increasing. 
 Contracting-out clauses seldom inserted. Lease- 
 holder's farm worse than others. Improve when 
 served with notice to quit, 25260-75. Tenants dis- 
 inclined to boiTOw for di-ainage, 25276-7, 25292-3. 
 Rents are uniform. In Kerry they vary 'from one 
 and a third to twice the tenement valuation, 25278- 
 82, 25284. Abatement granted, 25283, 25285. 
 Comparison between Scotch and Irish farmino- 
 25286-94, 25336. Case of sale of lease, 25296-?! 
 Revision of leases on change of tenancy ' only. 
 Succession of a son or marriage no change, 25298 
 25302. Impossible to arbitrate on rent. Case of 
 equal circumstances of tenants and unequal success 
 25303-8. Expenditure on improvements by Lord 
 Kenmare in twenty-five years over £71,615. Prin- 
 cipal not chai-ged on either biiildings or drainao-e 
 nor interest or buildings ; on the demesne, includ 
 ing house, £90,000, thus employing large numbers 
 of labourers, 25309-19. On Mr. Herbert, of Muck- 
 ross, £36,000 sj)ent since 1848 in addition to 
 timber, 25320-4. Instances of rents being higher 
 
XCVl 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Hiissey, Samuel M. — conLinued. 
 
 ' in 1840 than now, 25326-7. Eeclamation of waste 
 lands by draining going on, stiU mucli to be done. 
 More remunerative if wet arable land were drained 
 instead, 25328-36. History of the " Harenc " case 
 and purchase of the property. Tenants unable to 
 purchase for want of funds. Government should 
 find four-fifths. Sold one-third of property and 
 protected occupying tenants by leases, 25337-50. 
 Case of Shea, ejected for nonpayment, 25351-5. 
 Rents fairly paid until two weeks ago, 25356-7. 
 Is helped by his sons and an army officer in agency, 
 25358-9. Rents on Ballyseedy estate high. No. 
 increase lately. Abatements being made, 25360-2. 
 
 ' Difficulties of tenants due in great measure to ex- 
 travagant habits, 25363. Is in favour of peasant 
 proprietors. Scheme for the establishment of the 
 system, 25364-7,.25 375-6. Fixity of tenure worst 
 form of selling ]3ro.perty, but peasant proprietary 
 would remove agitation. No compulsion on land- 
 lords to sell, 25360a, 25366a (p. 786). Proposal 
 to buy Sir E. Denny's estate, with six years' rent as 
 fine, and lease for ever, in abeyance. Rents high 
 there, 25367a, 25374. Abolition of law of entail, 
 and limit of right of mortgage would bring land into 
 the market and increase the number of proprietors, 
 and assisted emigration would right matters, 25376- 
 8 6 . Subdivision and subletting should be forbidden , 
 but cannot be prevented. Holdings might be sold, 
 
 - 25387-94. Abolition of right of distress and re- 
 demption. . No eviction for less than nonpayment 
 of two years' rent, if lease has not been offered to a 
 tenant. Holdings of under £4 a year to be ejected 
 at Petty Sessions, on account of costs. Reasons for 
 
 , this, 25396-25401 . North Kerry the most prosper- 
 ous part of the country, though now in a state of 
 agitation due to Mr. Parnell. Prices higher and 
 produce greater. Rents not raised, but people dis- 
 contented, 25402-11. Lord Kenmare's Kerry rents 
 raised in 1875, which were lowered during famine 
 time, but not as high yet as they were, 25412-6, 
 
 25419. Abatements to, former rents common, 
 25417. Limerick and Cork I'ents raised also, 
 
 25420, 25432. Case of Madden misrepresented. 
 Farm is best in Ireland. Fine paid without agent's 
 
 . knowledge, 25421-9. Leases should be simple and 
 minimum fee, 254;j1. Dispute between two joint 
 tenants as to payment of rent, 25433-6. Eviction 
 
 , of tenant by money-lendei', 25437-9. Farm occu- 
 pied by a Nationalist for evicted tenant, 25440-2. 
 Rents not raised on Mr. Blennerhasset's propert}- ; 
 very high. No evictions, 25443-6. Rise on Lord 
 Kenmare's estate not equal to interest of money 
 expended, and only two and a half per cent, 
 charged for drainage being done for yearly tenants, 
 24559. Sir G-. Colthvirst's estate at Ballyvoorney 
 is the most prosperous, and interest at two ami 
 a half per cent, only charged on improvements, 
 24560-1. Rents well paid, and people con- 
 tented, 24562-5. List of proprietors he is agent 
 for, 24568. Case of Thomas Marshall. Is lialf- 
 witted, and does not understand the question 
 24570-1. 
 
 Herhert, Henry, Esq., Muckross, Co. Kerry; Land 
 Agent. — Killarneij. 
 Is agent over the Muckross property. £11,000 
 spept in five years on improvements, and £18,000 
 in thirty years on houses and ofiices. £6,452 in 
 drainage since 1853, besides timber, and in some 
 parts limestone. This is apart from the demesne, 
 25448-51. Rent adjusted in 1866 by adding in- 
 terest on outlay. Some farms let for less rent than 
 sum offered, 25452-3. Tenants decline leases. No 
 actual evictions, 25454-6. Ejectments used to 
 obtain rents, 25457. Rents on witness's estate 
 only exceed valuation by £21. Good land, but 
 very neglected. All tenants have leases. Those 
 with good bargains have neglected the land 
 25458-9. 
 
 TForren, Mr. Samuel, Killarney, Co. Kerry ; Auctioneer, 
 — Killarney. 
 Formerly held a farm, but having gi-eatly im- 
 proved it, was turned out, and got no compensa- 
 tion, the decree gained in court being dismissed be- 
 fore a judge, 25472-86. Held another under Mr. 
 Herbert, of Muckross, which he also improved, 
 built a hovise, buildings, ofiices, (fee, drained and 
 fenced it, spending £1,500 to £1,600 on it. Though 
 owed money by landlord was turned out for non- 
 payment, and subsequently sold up, losing all com- 
 pensation, 25487-96. Eviction for non-payment, 
 and sale of effects, 25498-25504. Ejectment in 
 another case for non-payment, and prevention of 
 sale of crops, 25505-6. Claim for compensation 
 ^ for improvements defeated, and reversion of farm 
 sold over tenant's head. Difficulty in obtaining 
 credit for tenant's improvements, 25507-13. 
 Another case of tenant building a house under 
 promise of being repaid, but owing to change of 
 agent, never got it, and contractor sold his stock, 
 and was ejected for non-payment. Not allowed to 
 redeem iinless rent was paid at once for time he 
 was not in possession. This he did, and was then 
 served with notice to quit. Claimed compensation, 
 but solicitor declined to proceed against Lord Ken- 
 mare. Never was paid a penny, and now is trying 
 to support his family on seven shillings a week, 
 25514-40. Further cases, 25545-61. Was him- 
 self evicted from a farm on Lord Kenmare's pro- 
 perty, . 25562, but regained possession, 25563. 
 Another case on Mr. Hilliard's land, tenant got no 
 compensation, 25564-9. Government valuator 
 would obviate this, 25570. 
 
 Brosnan, The Very Rev. Canon, Cahirciveen, Co. 
 Kerry, Parish Priest. — KUlo/rymy . 
 The principal landlords are six in number. 
 Majority have charged excessive rents, and treated 
 tenants harshly, 25571-4, 25647-9. Trinity Col- 
 lege showed disinclination to improve ; . refused gra- 
 tuitous education to tenant's children in convent 
 schools ; and rents mostly twice the valuation, 
 25575-90. Lord Lansdowne's rents excessive ; re- 
 fused abatements and declined to do improvements. 
 Interest on borrowed money permanent charge on 
 tenants, and but for relief tenants would starve, 
 25591-601. Costs of evictions and actions exces- 
 sive, 25602-12. Poverty stricken state of tenants, 
 houses, and lands, 25613. Rents on Mr. E. M. 
 Bernard's estate oppressive ; about two a^nd a half 
 times valuation, 25616-8. On other estates some 
 as high as four times, 25619. Costs of process for 
 non-payment, 25620-1. Tenants have no freedom 
 of contract, 2.^1625. Charity funds indirectly paid 
 rents, especially Mr. Bernard's tenants, 25626-36. 
 Eviction of tenant of Mr. Bernard's, who had 
 neither cattle or substance, and is starving, 
 25637-41. No kindness or consideration shown to 
 tenants, 25642. Mr. Blennerhassett alone sub- 
 scribed to lelief fund, and is anxious to redress 
 grievances. Reductions granted by some landlords, 
 25644-6. Liiusdowne tenants finable to improve 
 land, 25650-52. Peasant proprietary should be 
 encouraged by voluntary sales, and Government 
 help to purchase. Reclamation of waste lands. by 
 Government if possible, and the three F's- would 
 satisfy the people, 25653-73. All Corporation land- 
 lords should be expropriated, 25674-5. Money 
 borrowed by Lord Lansdowne under the Distress 
 Act for the tenants. Application for two months' 
 indulgence for the people on account of distressed 
 condition refused. Cahirciveen tenants rack-rented 
 and worse off' than any others on the property, 
 25909-10. 
 
 Clifford, jMr. Dan, Cahirciveen, Co. Kerry, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Holds nine acres under Mr. Mahony at £12 a 
 year, 25677-80. His mother holds under Trinity 
 College. Rent raised three times, last time on im- 
 provements ; bog out away, land manured, and rent 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 xcyii 
 
 Clifford, Dan — continued. 
 
 is now too Hgh. Houses built and roofed, and 
 assistance by College has to be repaid, 25681-92. 
 Sister holds under Lord Lansdowne. Rent refused, 
 one day late, and had to pay costs of process, 
 25693-98. Rent raised three years ago, 25700. 
 No improvements by landlords, nor reductions, 
 25701-6. Is sub-agent to Mrs. Mahoney, and has 
 another piece of land at Castle(iuin, rent £12, 
 25707-12. 
 
 Fitzgerald, Mr. Edward, Cahirciveen, Co. Kerry; 
 Tenant Farmer and Hotelkeeper. — Eillarney. 
 Holds under Trinity College and Mr. D. 
 O'Coimell of Derrynane. Rent of first raised when 
 the College became landlord from iS to £15 
 Valuation under £6. Formerly held by middleman, 
 25713-21. Rent on other holding not raised, 
 25722. No landlords' improvements, and rents too 
 high. Land inferior, 25723-4. Called Townpark. 
 Keeps an hotel, and cannot give up land on account 
 of compensation for improvements, 25725-38. 
 
 O' Sullivan, Mr. Daniel, Cahirciveen, County Kerry ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Eillarney. 
 Lives on Mr. O'Connell's land, and has 140 
 acres on one and 81 acres on farm where he lives. 
 * Rents — £8 lO*. and £40 respectively. Barren 
 waste land, 25739-45. Rent of latter high, and 
 raised fourteen years ago on dropping lease. Double 
 the valuation, 25746-57. Right of sale recognised, 
 but no instances known, 25758-63. Neighbours 
 hit^h rented, and Lord Lansdowne's rent raised 
 lately, but no abatements made. Tenants dissatis- 
 fied, 25764r-75. Is directly under his landlord, and 
 not under a bailiff, as others are on Lansdowne 
 estate, ' who misrepresents tenants' prosperity to 
 superior agent or landlord, 25776-86. No cases of 
 tenants purchasiug, but would like to do so, 
 25789-91. New landlords have raised rents ex- 
 cessively ; gives instances ; rents higher than on 
 surrounding properties ; tenants unable to pay, 
 25792-806. If tenants coiild borrow they would 
 soon purchase holdings. Not sufficient facilities for 
 tenants, 25809-20. 
 
 Keating, Mr. Jeremiah, Cahirciveen, County Kerry ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Has sixty acres from Lord Lansdowne at a rental 
 of £18 6s. Land barren, 25826-33. Last rise 
 twenty-five years ago all over estate, 25834-5^ 
 25865-7. Always a running gale of one year's rent 
 on the property, and it is included if an ejectment 
 is served; was perved with one in 1879, though 
 his rent was paid before being served ; had to pay 
 costs in full, 2583G-48. Explanation of running 
 gale — a year's rent due for 100 years, 25849—51. 
 Tenants on the property all badly off. Rents paid 
 with borrowed money ; those not paying ejected, 
 25852—4. Money lent by landlord for draining, 
 (fee, charged for in rent by adding interest ; tenants 
 sign agreements for it,. 25855-7, 25909-10. Rents 
 too high. Land never visited by either landlord or 
 agent, 25858-60, 25868-9. Application for reduc- 
 tion of costs refused by agent, 25861. Rents paid 
 to sub-agent, '26862-4. Right of sale allowed with 
 landlord's restriction as to incomer; many have 
 taken place. Tenants are breaking down, 25870-4. 
 High rate of interest charged to tenants, even if 
 landlord borrows at low rate, 25875-9. 
 
 ■Griffin, Mr. James, Glenheigh, County Kerry; 
 
 Tenant Farmer. — Eillarney. 
 
 Holds fifty acres from Hon. R. Wynne, at £39 ; 
 
 valuation, £16 3s. Rent raised in 1871 through 
 
 mistake in quantity of land, and again on expiry of 
 
 lease in 1875. Has no lease now. Land bad, 
 
 25880-96. Twice been served with ejectments, and 
 
 had to pay costs. There is a running gale on the 
 
 , property, 25897-903. No tenants actually ejected, 
 
 and they are all very badly off. Get no work in 
 
 bad season, 25904-8. 
 
 Mahowy, Riciiard John, E.sq., Dromore, Kenmare, Co. 
 Kerry ; Landowner. — Killarney. 
 
 Owns about 30,000 acres since 1851. No slate 
 houses or drains made by tenants on the property 
 then, though about £1,000 a year had been given in 
 allowances to tenants for thatched houses and 
 fences, 25911-18. Adopted the English and Scotch 
 system of laying out, and spent £20,000 on build- 
 ings, draining, roads, fences, <fec. Roads private, 
 though public now. Tenants much improved. 
 Added to rents in proportion to capacity of tenant 
 to bear it, 25919-26. Opposed to tenant-right and 
 tixity of tenu.re. Hands in statement of the property 
 of the Knight of Kerry (see after witness's evidence), 
 25927-31. Sale of holdings allowed. Only one 
 case of actual eviction, 25932-3. Land let by 
 " cows' grass." Depreciation of land under a tenant. 
 Average produce of cows and profit thereon, 
 25934-7, 25953-4. Practically fixity of tenure 
 exists on the property, 25938-9. Instance of 
 depreciation of land on Kenmare River, and im- 
 provement subsequently by a good tenant, 25941, 
 25945-6, 25959-61. Principle of a landlord buying 
 up a tenant's interest in his holding and paying 
 balance to tenant after deducting rent objected to, 
 25942-4, 25955-6. Gives tenants facilities to im- 
 prove breed of cattle, 25947-8. Griffith's valuation 
 as a test for rent uneven; gives instances; 200 
 per cent, over the valuation too high anywhere in 
 his district, 25949-51. Better condition of tenants 
 on witness's estate than elsewhere, 25957. Resi- 
 dent landloi-ds of advantage to country and tenants, 
 25964-7. Hands in statement of the area, valuation, 
 and number of tenants on the Knight of Kerry's 
 estate, prepared by the late Knight of Kerry ,.25967. 
 Rents about 80 per cent, over valuation; farms never 
 let by competition ; great improvements made by land- 
 lord, none by tenants, 25968-9, 25972-4. Tenant 
 right not recognized, and rents .fixed at present 
 rates between 1851 and 1861, 25970-1. Three 
 evictions for non-payment, and one for sub-lelting. 
 Owing to non-residence of his father, the tenants 
 ceased to reside, and sub-divided their farms ; they 
 gradually became almost destitute, and after the 
 famine they were weeded out and placed on new 
 holdings. Now matters are steadily progressing, 
 25975. 
 
 Walpole, Mr. Jonathan, Ballinorig, Tralee, Co. Kerry ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Holds 200 acres from Mr. Bateman, a lunatic ; 
 agent, James Russell, of Glamuire, county Cork. 
 Rent, £400, raised £100 in 1874 ; the valuation, 
 £273. Tenants' improvements amount to £2,000. 
 Landlords do not make improvements in witness's 
 neighbourhood, 25976-25990. Right of sale not 
 permitted, and leases not granted. All contain,con- 
 tracting out-clauses, 25991-4. Witness declined to 
 sign a' lease, and the Lord Chancellor approved of 
 his action, owing to the clauses, 25995-9. The Act 
 checks evictions in small holdings, but compensa- 
 tions awarded are insufficient. Tenants without 
 leases should receive compensation for disturbance, 
 26000-26006. Employs labourers constantly. 
 Wages one shilling a day, with house, turf, and half 
 acre of land, 26008-12. Other farmers employ less 
 ■ labour, 26015. Emigration owing to poverty of 
 tenants, 26017. Rents raised on properties of Mr. 
 Crosby and Sir M. O'Counell. £5 an acre charged 
 by latter: in one case, 26018-22. Sale of reversion 
 of farms to strangers before expiration of leases. 
 Two instances by Mr. Herbert, of Muckross. Rent 
 raised to new purchaser in addition to fine on 
 tenants' improvements, 26023-39. Cases of rents 
 raised on Mr. Crosbie's estate on tenants' improve- 
 ments, with valuations which include buildiciCTs 
 26040-9,26051-5. Land good arable,26050. Re- 
 valuation made independent of tenants, 26056-9. 
 Costs of getting compensation swamp amounts 
 awarded, 26060-2. Landlord's improvements 
 
XCVlll 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Walpole, Jonathan — continued. 
 checked by Act, 26063-5. Knows nothings of jjur- 
 chase of holdings except on Harenc Estate, 26066. 
 Peasant proprietary hardly desirable ; three F's 
 preferable, 26067-8, 26086. No waste land in the 
 district, but much land capable of improvement. 
 Bog land fetches high rents ; land and bogs let 
 together at lump-rents. Turf cutting charged ex- 
 tra, 26069-72. Witness pays lump-rent, and roads 
 charged for as land, 26073-80. Prefers Griffith's 
 valuation to a new one. Adding a fourth would 
 make rents fair in witness's neighbourhood on all 
 farms, the landlords paying their share of rates and 
 taxes, 26081-3. Leases for not less than sixty 
 years with all clauses expunged, except against sub- 
 letting and sub-division, 26084-5. New landlords 
 disastrous to the country. Extort all they can out 
 of tenants, 26087. 
 
 JCearney, Mr. Maurice, Ballyroe, Tralee, Co. Kerry ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Holds seventy acres, thirty of which recently ac- 
 quired by purchase of lease for X15, without land- 
 lord's consent, who does not recognize witness as 
 tenant of that portion. Sales not frequent ; new 
 tenants selected by landlords, 26088-98. Compen- 
 sation generally reduced on appeal, 26099, 26107- 
 8. Case of small compensation, and land let to new 
 tenant at large fine, 26100-7. Fines required with 
 new leases. Rise of rents on Mr. Crosbie's estate, 
 26108. Fines paid by money borrowed on leases, 
 2611 0-1 . Disinclination of tenants to accept leases. 
 Building by landlords checked by Act, 26112. 
 Improvements on farms cease towards end of lease 
 for fear of rents being raised, 26113-4. Pays 
 dovible the valuation, but land has much depreciated 
 owing to falling in of drains, 26115-6. Stones are 
 plentiful for the purpose, but landlord refuses to 
 lend witness money to drain. Too late to apply to 
 Government. Land would be much improved by 
 draining, 26117-8, 26135-6. Tenants will have to 
 repay landlords for improvements made with State 
 aid, which could be done better and cheaper by 
 them, 26119—27. Peasant proprietors should be 
 established with Government help to extent of two- 
 thirds purchase money, by buying in encumbered 
 Estates Court as in Harenc estate. Tenants would 
 borrow remainder if not possessed of it, and would 
 then improve land, 22618-34. Land in neighliour- 
 hood held from middlemen, and tenants cannot 
 claim compensation when turned out by superior 
 landlord, 26138-9. But little waste land about to 
 reclaim, but plenty of other land available ; could be 
 let to labourers on lease for ever. Case of cjict- 
 ment of a labourer from some cutaway bog he had 
 improved, 26140-5. Eent of witness's farm excet'ds 
 produce by more than 100 per cent. Threateiieil 
 with ejectment for non-payment, 26146-9. 
 
 Murphy, Mr. Maurice, Castleisland, (Jounty Kt'iiy ; 
 H otelkeeper. — Killarney. 
 Hotelkeeper ; and holds about three acres of land 
 at Castleview, with uu interest in over 200 acres at 
 Carrigeen, under Mr. Herbert, of Muckross, 26150- 
 54. On Mr. C'ollis's property rents are over three 
 times the valuation, mountain land let at .£6 to £7 
 for a cow's grass. Tenants are overworked in their 
 struggle to pay rents, and the land will not pay it. 
 Instance ot high rent over valuation. Landlord has 
 given time to tenants now, 26150-63, 26164. On 
 Brosna estate rents are two and a half times the 
 valuation. Landlord has recently given employ 
 ment to the people. Suggested completion of un- 
 finished roads to help the people during last winter by 
 landlords met by a " shower " of processes of eject- 
 ment. Case of tenant evicted for nonpayment, rent 
 subscribed, but landlord refused it unless costs were 
 paid. Farm now let to another man, 26164-5. 
 False report of mutilating a tenant. Landlords to 
 blame for outrages and agitation principally, 26166 
 
 -7. High interest charged for money let to tenants 
 on their farm produce, 26168. Improved prices 
 through action of landlords, 26169. Farmers ruined 
 through bad seasons, 26170. Plenty of land re- 
 claimable. If Government bought lands and made 
 roads, and let plots of about fifty acres to tenants, 
 the country would be much improved, 26172-3. 
 Increased power should be given to magistrates and 
 County Court Judges, and costs reduced, 26174-5. 
 
 Crosbie, William Talbot, Esq., Ardfert Abbey, County 
 Kerry ; Landowner. — Killarney. 
 The Ardfert estate contains 10,000 acres, and has 
 1 40 holdings. Rental 35 per cent, above valuation, 
 with interest on landlord's outlay, 64 per cent,, 
 26176-80. Eight of sale absolutely forbidden, but 
 since 1839 outgoing tenants have always received 
 compensation, 26181-4. Farms go by succession on 
 the estate. If no will made, landlord selects tenant, 
 and they are always satisfied, 26185-6. Capricious 
 evictions are unknown, and reasonable evictions are 
 checked in some instances by the Act. Instances 
 in which it has operated to the prejudice of the 
 landlord, 26189-97, 26219-20. Has no objection 
 to the scale of compensation, if caprice, upon which 
 the section of the Act is based, be clearly defined, 
 26198-9. The section has led tenants to mortgage 
 their holdings as security for money borrowed, 
 26200. Leases are the proper means of regulating 
 rents, where tenants are capable of maintaining the 
 conditions they contain. They are on the increase. 
 Usual terms, twenty-one . or thirty-one years, 
 26201-4. Fines never imposed, nor any change 
 made in rents except on falling in of a lease, or an 
 adjustment is necessary where an outlay has been 
 made, or on a new tenant taking possession. 
 Tenants contracted out when legal to do so, and 
 accept leases willingly on those terms, 26205-8, 
 26216-7. Tenants practically have security, as 
 evictions are almost imknown, 26210-1, 
 Griffith's valuation in witness's neighbourhood ex- 
 ceedingly low, and inade when poundage was very 
 high, 26212-3. Increase of rent not on increase 
 since the Act, 26214-5. Re-valuations should he 
 made every twenty-one years, 26218. Arbitration 
 interferes with free trade. Market value the true 
 value of land, but has not acted on it with his 
 tenants, 26218-21. Statement of costs of improve- 
 ments on the estate since 1840, giving a total of 
 £40,000. Tenants charged five per cent, on it. 
 Tenants' improvements confined to small works. 
 The Act has not discouraged landlord's improve- 
 ments, nor affected the tenants, 26222-5. The 
 agitation has done more to break the relations be- 
 tween landlord and tenant than the Land Act, 
 26226. Tenants have obtained excessive com])en- 
 sation imder Land Act, 26227-28. Favours gradual 
 establishment of peasant proprietary by means of 
 loans through Boards of Guardians, 26229-31. 
 The miserable condition of the Ardfert Commissioners 
 is not a fair example of peasant proprietors, 26232- 
 34. Subdivision is ruinous, 26235. Reclamation 
 is increasing, 26236-37. Roads are included in 
 farm areas, 26238. Makes recommendation for 
 amendment of law between landlord and tenant. A 
 new Land Court should be created. Pasture lands, 
 arable farms, reclaimed land, and very small farms 
 require difierent systems. Landloi-d control is desir- 
 able ; gives history of estate, showing gradual im- 
 provement effected by transjJantation of tenants, 
 enlargement of farms, and expenditure of capital, 
 and preventing tenant-right, 26239-46. His 
 management has been misrepresented unjustly, 
 26247-49. Objects to joint proprietorship between 
 landlord and tenant, 26251. Explains as to letting 
 of farm to Florence O'Sullivan, a witness, at a rent 
 fluctuating with price of butter, 26252-63. Rents 
 have only been raised at expiiation of leases ; recent 
 increases were based on Griflith's valuation, to 
 avoid including improvements made by the lessees. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 XCIX 
 
 Grosbie, William Talbot — continued. 
 
 26264-66. (Particulars of lettings referred to were 
 given and explained by G. F. Trench, agent to 
 witness.) Explains as to removal of subtenants 
 holding under middlemen, the improvement of land 
 taken up, and subsequently reletting as a large 
 farm. It is now in his own hands, 20273-76. He 
 obtains the second highest prices in the United 
 Kingdom for shorthorn bulls bred at Ardfert, 26277. 
 
 O'Connor, Rev. P., p.p., Molaliffe and Aglish, Co. 
 Kerry. — Eillarney. 
 His parish is near Killarney- ; Lord Kenmare is 
 the principal landowner ; some of his property is 
 let to middlemen ; his rents were moderate, but re- 
 cent increases and bad seasons have made the ten- 
 ants discontented with them, 26280-86. Some of 
 the middlemen are very harsh, their rents being 
 three times the valuation, ami notices to quit being 
 served every six months. This practice prevails on 
 estate of Rev. G. Chute. The rents are especially 
 high on the smaller farms. The farms are let by 
 competition, nnd rents are consequently exces- 
 sive — gives instances, 26287-308. Complains of 
 unfair rents, want of security, confiscation of 
 improvements, 26429. Describes case of harsh 
 attempt at eviction on Herbert estate in 1868, 
 which was settled by interference of the clergy 
 and the O'Donohue, 26430-32. Landlords are ready 
 to speak well of each other ; the tyranny of estate bai- 
 liffs is an evil ; excessive rents can be exacted because 
 tenants have no other occupation to turn to, 26433. 
 Has no particular complaint against Mr. Herbert as 
 a landlord ; reasonable rraits, security, and free sale 
 are wanted ; a peasant proprietary would be best if 
 possible ; makes suggestion as to advances by Go- 
 vernment for this purpose by land debentures, and 
 for repayment by tenants ; waste lands might be re- 
 claimed if occupiers had security ; the new landlords 
 are the worst, 26135-36. 
 
 Connor, John, Aglish, Co. Kerry ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 
 Killarney. 
 
 Is a tenant on Hurley estate. On part of self and 
 
 other tenants, complains of excessive rents, harsh 
 
 treatment, and exaction of " duty work," 26313- 
 
 33. 
 
 CBrien, Brien, Aglish, Co. Kerry ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Killarney. 
 Was evicted in 1870 from the Hurley estate be- 
 cause he would not agree to an increase of rent ; 
 the Chairman awarded him £\ 75 compensation ; 
 this was reduced to £100 on appeal ; it took the 
 whole of this to pay expenses incurred in prosecuting 
 claim. The farm was re-let at increased rent and 
 fine of £200 to another person, 26334-53. 
 
 Foley, Denis, Longfield, Co. Kerry; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Killarney. 
 Held thirty-seven acres on Fitzgerald's estate; 
 rent was raised £10 in 1873 ; was evicted for non- 
 payment, and the land set to his neigbour for six 
 months ; occupies house as caretaker ; may redeem 
 up to December, 26354-72. 
 
 Larkin, Michael, Longfield, Co. Kerry; Tenant 
 Farmer. —Killarney. 
 Tenant on Fitzgerald estate ; his father paid a 
 fine for a lease which was never executed ; the estate 
 was in Chancery ; bailifis and others extorted bribes 
 from him and put him to great trouble and costs, 
 26373-26392. 
 
 Eeardon, Michael, Longfield, Co. Kerry; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Tenant on Fitzgerald estate ; makes statement as 
 to exaction of bribes by sub-agent and bailifis, 
 26392-98. 
 
 Mynn, Timothy, Longfield, Co. Kerry; Tenant 
 Farmer. — Killarney. 
 Tenant on Fitzgerald estate ; gives statement 
 
 as to repeated increases of rent and exactions by 
 agent and bailifis, 26395-98. 
 
 Teehan, Timothy, Longfield ; Tenant Farmer. — Kil- 
 lamey. 
 Gives statement of exactions by bailifiB and others, 
 26399-401. 
 
 Leary, Denis, Aglish, Co. Kerry ; Tenant Farmer. — 
 Killarney. 
 Is a tenant on estate of Abraham Murphy ; com- 
 plains of exactions of eggs, fruit, butter, &c., from 
 the tenants ; was evicted, but is now in possession 
 without any definite agreement, 26402-28. 
 
 Lane, Mr. John, Aghada, Cork Harbour, Co. Cork, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 Farms about 120 acres, 26439. Complains of 
 excessive- rent, 26441. Leases largely offered, 
 but not freely accepted since Land Act, 26451-2. 
 Produced leases with clauses contracting tenants out 
 of Land Act; all theleases he has seen have simi- 
 lar clauses, 26453—55. In consequence leases are 
 not accepted, but are forced, by a notice to quit on 
 the tenants to debar them from compensation, 
 26456-60. Case in point, 26461-77. Instance of 
 his own where, on a lease being mortgaged to him, 
 he lost £250 by not having landlord's consent in 
 writing to the assignment; further particulars of case, 
 26478-84. Clause in lease which he takes objection 
 to, 26485 ; also objects to paying all the county 
 sess, 26486. On the Sliannagany property (Mr. 
 Jenn Gaskill's) rents have been raised on falling in 
 of leases, and three evictions have been made foK- 
 . non-payment last twelve years. Rents were raised 
 four shillings an acre, making them seven shillings 
 above valuation, or nearly 50 per cent, over, 26495, 
 26511. l>To reductions made, and rents are excessive. 
 Eight years ago prices were higher, and rents were, 
 therefore, not so excessive, 26512-7. Sale of cattle 
 to meet rent. Case of farmer at Aghada having paid 
 highfine for a farm at increased rent in 1 869, without 
 means now, 26518-22 ; 26525-7. Sales allowed 
 with permission of landlord, but owing to high 
 rents, new leases are worthless, 2G523-4. Lord 
 Fermoy's property is also very highly rented, and 
 farms are let by auction to the highest bidder, 
 26529-33. Farmers in the neighbourhood prefer 
 fixed rents to purchasing their holdings, 26535-7. 
 The valuation is about one-third under rents. In 
 some instances rents exceed by 75 per cent. In 
 present state of the country rents should not exceed 
 Griffith's valuation, 26538-9 ; 26562. Very few 
 labourers in the country, and those are bad. Wages 
 vary from %d. a day with house,' to 4s. a day with 
 partial food and some perquisites, 26540-1 ; 26545- 
 7. No fishing nearer than Kinsale, 26542-4. 
 Witness has house, property at Aghada, 26548-9. 
 Failure of a peasant proprietor for want of means, 
 26550-60. Tenants have no freedom of contract 
 either as regardssaleofholdingorfixingrent, 26563-4. 
 
 O'Mahony, Mr. Patrick, Kildorrery, Co. Cork, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Cork. 
 ilolds 120 Irish acres, and has a mill. Landlords 
 are Lady Kingston, Captain Bowen, Mrs. J. Leader, 
 and Mr. Purcell. Holds leases from Lady Kingston 
 and Mrs. Leader for land, and the mill on lease for 
 ever. Purcliased inl;erest of the farm at Ballynoe 
 for £600, with consent of landlord. Sales not allowed 
 as a rule, 26565-74. Average term of lease 31 
 years, but was refused a lease for place he purchased. 
 Rent 50 per cent, over valuation, 26575-9, 26599. 
 I/eases not common, e.xcept on Mr. Young's estate, 
 who gives them for ever on payment of stamp duty 
 at moderate rents. Sales allowed, and tenants are 
 improvmg and prosperous. Tenants on other pro- 
 perties not improving land, 26580-98. Has a lease 
 of land under Lady Kingston. Rent raised twelve 
 years ago. Tenant-right a.llowpj, but rents are 
 raised on mcomiag tenant, 26600-12. No evictions, 
 and land as a rule fairly let. Tenants comfortable 
 and pay their rents, but want fixed rents, 26613- 
 
 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 O'MaJiony, Patrick — continued. 
 
 20. Sales not allowed on Colonel Stawell's estate, 
 which is let at high rents, and the land is not worth 
 it. Only one tenant actually evicted, and he has 
 since redeemed, 26621-8. Tenants should be allowed 
 to purchase their holdings with State aid at Griffith's 
 valuation. Infinitely preferable to fixity of tenure, 
 but subletting or subdivision must not be allowed. 
 It is not common in the district, 26629-34. Griflith's 
 valuation not an even one. In some places land 
 not worth so much, others worth more, 26636-8. 
 Has had groat experience in land management. 
 People would generally be satisfied by the three 
 F's, and in cases of dispute as to rent Government 
 arbitrator might decide, 26639-45. 
 
 Turney, Mr. Simon Kenny, Sarsfield Court, Rivers- 
 town, Co. Cork, Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 Holds 300 acres under the representatives of the 
 late Mr. Putland, and gives particulars of holdings, 
 viz. : acreage, rent, and valuation, and how held ; total 
 rent£170 \0s. Dri., and valuation, £237 5s., 26646- 
 53. Pre:!ent landlord declines to let him sell his in- 
 terest, and is prevented by covenant in lease from 
 doing so, 2 6 (J 5 3-5. Details the circumstaiices under 
 which he got his leases from the late landlord on 
 such advantageous terms, i6656. Right of cutting 
 timber for the farm taken away ; on death of Mr. 
 Putland he received notice to give up one farm, 
 althoi.gh he had laid out £1,000 on it, unless he 
 paid increased rent, which would be on his own im- 
 provements, 26()o8-64. 
 
 Jtiordan, Mr. Daniel Joseph, RuiFeen, Monkstown, 
 Co. Cork ; Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 Holds 328 acres — 148 acres from Mr. M'Daniel, 
 and 184 acres from a middleman under Mr. R. H. E. 
 White ; rents very high, like all rents in the neigh- 
 bourhood, 26665-70. Mr. M'Daniel, in conjunction 
 with other landlords, refused to drain the land even 
 at the tenants' cost, and the land has remained un- 
 productive at great loss to witness ; this was twenty 
 years ago, and now landlord is willing to have it 
 done ; soil is rich, but being under water there is no 
 food for cattle, 20671-84. Tenants should have 
 facilities for borrowing if landlord refuses to help, 
 26685. Holds his second farm under agreement ; 
 leases generally contain a clause against sale of in- 
 terest ; yearly tenants can sell, but they seldom do 
 unless in arrear for rent ; they seldom make im- 
 provements on account of increased rent, 26687-94 ; 
 26722-3. Rents raised on change of tenancy ; case 
 of tenant having to pay increased rent or leave ; 
 tenants have no freedom of contract, 26695-703. 
 New rent excessive, even when p-ices were bettei, 
 2670 4-8 . On expiry of lease no regular revaluation 
 is made, but tenants are informed they must pay 
 more, 26709-15. Tenants' improvements consist of 
 building dwelling and outhouses, fences, subsoiling, 
 draining, cleaning land, gates, roads, &c., for which 
 landlords gi'-e no assistance ; allowance for slate and 
 timber withdrawn, 26716-9. Cases of rent raised 
 on tenants' improvements when leases fell in, 26724- 
 35. Large area of land capable of reclamation ; some 
 in possession of tenants who would reclaim if they 
 had security, 26741-4. Not much in the locality 
 fit to be reclaimed on a general plan ; private case 
 of attemjited reclamation not successful, 26745-50. 
 Compensation for disturbance should be awarded to 
 tenants over £'.iO ; they should have money advanced 
 for improvements, as landlords have ; rents require 
 revision, and tenants should have a voice in the 
 matter, 2(;751-6'2. The three F's wouldsatisfy the 
 people, and they should be helped to become peasant 
 proprietors, not by compelling landlords to sell, but 
 by helping both ; landlords must not be expro- 
 priated, 26703-74. Compensations awarded fall far 
 short of claims, which are fair and just, 26775-80. 
 
 Jones, William Bence, Esq., Lisselan, 
 
 County Cork, Landowner. Cork. 
 
 Owns 3,900 acres, of which he farms 1,000 acres. 
 
 Clonakilty, 
 
 Is as strongly opposed to tenant-right or sale of 
 holdings, as to system of fines. It is most injurious. 
 Tenants want all their capital to put into the land ; 
 would give free leases to avoid sales. Witness's 
 tenants use artificial manure, and an account is 
 kept of the amount used. They are all in good 
 circumstances except four or five drunkards, 26781- 
 92. Rents all paid up. Instance of payment of 
 rent under threat of e'sdction, 26793-800. Enor- 
 mous crops raised through use of artificial manure, 
 26801-3. Three-fifths of tenants have leases for 
 thirty-one years. New leases granted at increased 
 rent if land is woi-th it. Does all improvements 
 tenants require at 5 per cent, on outlay. Farms 
 put in thorough order before re-letting ; instances. 
 Rent increased slightly to cover outlay, 26804-16. 
 Has not kept separate accounts of his own and 
 tenants' improvements, 26817. Griffith's valua- 
 tion only a test for rates and taxes. Accepts it as 
 a minimum. One tenant pays three times the 
 valuation and is quite content, 26818-22. Value 
 of the land for letting purposes, 26823-6. Land 
 taken at good rents from tenants by dairymen for 
 grazing, paying rent in advance, 26827-32. Evic- 
 tion of drunken tenant for non-payment ; land 
 re-let now. No improvements made by him, and 
 no claim made. His crops were left lying in the 
 fields for several years, too lazy to get them in. 
 Land exhausted, and buildings in ruins, 26833-46. 
 No use to have let him sell in years gone by. The 
 practice is bad. In the North of Ireland the custom 
 is different, 26847-55. Witness's land is better 
 than many other projierties, but it has been uphill 
 work ; others could do the same by not living up 
 to their incomes, 26856-66. The Irish are im- 
 provident, some drunken. Turns out the latter 
 and gives employment to any who will work. 
 Equal improvidence on the part of landlords, 
 26867-76. Very few ejectments except for non- 
 payment, 26880. Case of payment for disturbance 
 to evicted tenant, 26881-5. The County Court 
 Judge is not a good tribunal, and ai'bitration is 
 most unsatisfactory, 26886-96. Witness's labourers 
 receive from 10s. to 12s a week with cottage and 
 garden. Farmers have no consideration for their 
 labourers — most have left the district there being 
 no work for them. Farmers only till what they 
 can manage, leaving the rest in grass, 26897-906. 
 Always shelter on farms for cattle in winter. 
 Breed much improving all round the neigbourhood, 
 26907-8. Many landlords are improving their 
 properties, but do not pay for everything. Tenants 
 generally seem to have stopped. Protects himself 
 in all leases by stating what he has done. All 
 tenants' improvements are entered in a register 
 every year; extracts from the book, 26909-17. 
 Manages his own estate, and others pan do the 
 same if they understand the work. High educa- 
 tion is not necessary, but common sense and 
 business-like habits. His son is being trained in 
 Scotland for farming, having been educated in other 
 subjects, 26918-27. Has given no abatements 
 lately ; there is no distress. People got relief who 
 did not need it, 26931-4. Great distress existed 
 during the famine of 1 848 ; loans for drainage if 
 granted to tenants instead of landlords, would do 
 more good, 26935-6. Thrifty and industrious 
 tenants should be assisted to become peasant pro- 
 prietors. Government miglit purchase propreties 
 and let them to good tenants at a proper valuation 
 on lease for thirty-one years, if unable to buy. 
 La^d is always worth more than it is sold foi, 
 20937-43,26950. Bad tenants will never succeed, 
 the facility for borrowing is the ruin of the disti-ict, 
 26944-7. Wheat cannot be grown in Ireland, in 
 other respects is not afraid of American competi- 
 tion. Proper treatment of cattle efiecting great 
 changes, and producing satisfactory results, 26951-3. 
 The Land Act has proved a mistake, and nothing 
 can be done to amend it. Owners must continue 
 to improve the land (and he has spent £25,000 on 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ci 
 
 Jones, William Bence — continued. 
 the property), and in time will get a return for their 
 outlay. At presei^t witness has got none. The 
 system of charging interest is only just begun, and 
 he only raises rents on a change, having given 
 leases for lives of tenants. Land Act is injurious 
 in many ways to tenants, and gives an instance, 
 26954-64. Good landlords do more for tenants 
 than Acts of Parliament, 26965. The Ulst<'r 
 Tenant-right must ruin the country, and the con- 
 dition of his tenants, as compared with others shows 
 the disadvantage of the system. It absorbs the 
 tenants' capital, and farming is less understood there 
 than elsewhere, 26966-76. 
 
 Johnson, Mr. Philip P., Egmont Arms Hotel, Kanturk, 
 County Cork, Hotel Keeper and Farmer. — 
 Cork. 
 Labourers' cottages on Egmont estate are very 
 bad. None allowed to be built by the late Earl, 
 even at farmer's expense ; and those erected by 
 present Earl are too highly rented to be of any 
 value to labourers, 26979-84, 26986. Farmers are 
 dependent on town labourers, 26985, 26988. 
 Cottages erected by Sir L. Darrell and let at Is. Qd. 
 a week each ai'e inhabited by small tradesmen, and 
 labourers are driven into the town where they pay 
 less rent, but are very much overcrowded, 26992-6. 
 Farmers would employ labourers resident on their 
 lands, and would build cottages if they could borrow 
 money for the purpose. Land is grass, and by lease 
 tenants cannot till it. Formerly it was tillage, 
 26997-27001, 27007, 27013-4. Labourers get 
 wretched wages, and but little food, 27002-4. 
 Many tenants have broken the clause about not 
 tilling, 27008-9. Cottages might be built in clusters 
 under Poor Laws, and subject to sanitary authority, 
 27015. Labourers employed all the year get no rise 
 of wages in busy times. Farmers should be deprived 
 of this power, 27016-20. Low rate of wages in 
 the district due to high rents and bad seasons, 
 27020-2. Lord Egmont has not raised rents on 
 his property, 27023-5, Case of landlord accepting 
 valuation instead of rent, 27026-8. Nearly all 
 tenants in the district are steeped in debt owing to 
 high rents and exhaustion of the soil fi'om artificial 
 manure, 27030-37. Many of the farmers' houses 
 are bad, those built by Sir E. Tierney are better, 
 27038-9. With the three F's the tenants would 
 improve the land, they are industrious and hard- 
 working, 27040—1. Land requires drainage, 27042— 
 3. Farmers obtain advances on butter to be made 
 in the future, and so get into debt, 27044-9. 
 Eviction of four families for non-payment on an 
 adjoining estate. Had to pay costs each year as 
 they were regularly served with notice. Are now 
 back on the holdings, but have lost their crops. 
 Landlord refused the rent without costs, though 
 witness offered to pay it. Landlord wished to get 
 a fine from a new tenant, 27050-70. Evictions for 
 non-payment only. Always arunninggaleonMessrs. 
 Leader's estate. Nothing except the labourers' 
 question against Lord Egmont, 27071-80. Instance 
 of destitution through inability to sell interest in a 
 holding, 27081-91. 
 
 Bolster, Mr. Thomas, Killnahilla, Kanturk, County 
 Cork, Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 Holds two farms, 130 acres from Mr. Longfield 
 and 100 acres from Mr. Leader. Eent of latter 
 farm is nearly double the valuation and has a lease 
 for life. Lives on the other farm. Right of sale 
 not allowed by Mr. Longfield, 27092-27100. In 
 some cases rents are very high iu the district, new 
 landlords raise rents or impose fines. They raise 
 rents every seven years, and tenants are, as a rule, 
 very miserable. Much land is let to middlemen 
 who are extortionate, 27101-7, 27128-9. Most of 
 Mr. Longfield's land is on lease, but it is well 
 managed. Some of his tenants and also of Mr. 
 Aldworth's are paupers through indolence and 
 
 neglect. 27108-11. Drainage loans have been of 
 the greatest service to the country. Large sums 
 have been judiciously laid out on tenants' farmo. 
 Still some to be expended. Some done by farmers' 
 under witness's supervision. Plenty of land reqiiirf.s 
 draining and would become valuable, 27112-23. 
 Not many ejectmeruts, the new landlords are harder 
 on the tenants than the hereditary landowners, 
 27124-26. Much distress in the neighbourhood 
 during the winter, but relief afforded by drainage 
 works and relief fund. Labouiers are idle and will 
 not work if they can get a few shillings from relief 
 funds. They live mostly in villages. Good potato 
 crops this year from seed given to the people, 
 27127-36. Tenants well treated on the Jennery 
 property. Houses built, abatements granted,^ 
 potatoes distributed, and rents not raised. If rents 
 are raised farmers are to blame for competing foi' 
 vacant farms, 27136-7. 
 
 Leahy, Daniel Francis, Esq., Shannakiel House, Cork, 
 Counties Cork and Kerry, Land Agent and 
 Merchant.-^ — Cork. 
 Is agent for Lord Cork, Lord Shannon, and him- 
 self over £30,000 a year. Acreage very exten- 
 sive, 27138-40. Lord Cork allows tenant-right, 
 but reserves the right to select the tenant, 27141-7. 
 Leases are the rule, except on the Kerry estate, for 
 thirty-two years. Contracting clauses inserted. 
 Only one ejection on title. Allowances are made to 
 tenants for building, draining, limekilns, <fec., and 
 are registered, but not under the Act. If anything 
 more done by Lord Cork than before the Act, 
 27148-55. Rents raised on expiration of lease 
 after revaluation of land, 27156-7. On Gharle- 
 ville estate large sums spent in buildings and 
 drainage, and very little is charged to the tenants. 
 As a rule rents on that estate very slightly exceed 
 the valuation. Very little improvement done by 
 tenants, 27158-63, 27186-7. On Kanturk estate 
 tenants have improved and reclaimed land. Tenants 
 and witness consulted on revaluation, and were per- 
 fectly satisfied, 27164-73. Granted abatements 
 voluntarily in bad times, and tenants refused to- 
 allow agitation meeting on Lord Cork's property. 
 Tenants will improve on this estate, but not on 
 Charleville, 27174-6. Total rise of rents on Charle- 
 ville estate in eleven years is £120, 21777-8. 
 High prices given by tenants for life interest of 
 holdings often hamper them, 21779-85. Tenants 
 generally seldom make any improvements except 
 reclaiming mountain land, 21786. Landlords 
 should not be able to contract tenants out of the 
 benefits of prospective Acts, 27188-9. Personal 
 supervision necessary to the proper management 
 of farms, 27166-27190. Legislation is necessary 
 for the settlement of the land question, and it 
 should take the form of the three F's with the for- 
 mation of a Court of Arbitration. Landlords 
 should, however, not be compelled to take a drunkeft 
 or slovenly man as tenant, nor one of bad character, 
 and a tenant should have capital to work his farm. 
 Landlord should also have right of purchasing a 
 tena,nt's interest and taking possession. Sub- 
 division to be made illegal without landlord's con- 
 sent in writing, and Government aid to be given to 
 assist tenants in purchasing their holdings. The 
 country to be revalued for rating purposes 
 27190-1, 27220-1. ^as always allowed tenants 
 theu' proportion of the county cess, and has not in- 
 creased the rent in proportion since 1870, und it 
 applies to new tenancies only, 27192-3, 27196-9^ 
 The Grand Juiy Laws and injustice of the county 
 cess should be altered, 27194. On the Kanturk 
 estate large sums have been laid out in buildincrs 
 and drainage. In some instances nothing charged 
 On the Duhallow property extensive allowances 
 made to tenants, 27201-2. Increased facilities to 
 be granted to tenants to purchase the fee simple of 
 holdmgs if subdivision could be prevented The 
 only tenants on witness's property who have broken 
 
 o2 
 
CU 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Leahy, Daniel F. — continued. 
 
 down, siibdivided. This fact will not prevent the 
 practice. Middlemen have made money out of it, 
 but members of a family would not, 27203-8. 
 The tendency to subdivide is happily decreasing, 
 2720U-10. The gradual establishmfnt of a peasant 
 proprietary would not eradicate the upper and 
 middle classes, if it be of natural growth, 27211-4. 
 Liability of landlords to pay rates deters them 
 from having labourers' cottages on their estates, 
 this they should be relieved of. Unfair to charge 
 landed interest alone with taxation of various Acts. 
 If levied as income tax is, the burden would be 
 thrown on the proper people, 27215-9. Con- 
 tracted tenants out of the Act as he was acting for 
 others, 27222-7. 
 
 Wright, Thomas E., Esq., Midleton, Co. Cork; Land 
 Agent. — Cork. 
 Is agent for Lord Clinton, Mr. Biggs, and Lord 
 Justice Deasy. Lord. Clinton has 13, -577 acres 
 and 44.5 tenaucs ; and witness, who formerly was 
 a solicitor, ow]is 2,1.J'J acres purchased in the Land 
 Courts, 27228-30. No claims under the Land Act 
 or evijtions, but tenants should get compensation 
 for capricious evictions and improvements. The 
 present agitation is due to the unfair working of 
 the Act, 27231—5. Rents hardly ever raised, and 
 right of sale never allowed, 27236-40. Tenants 
 not contracted ont of Act ; allows freedom of con- 
 tract ; has great confidence in them, and purchased 
 laud on the judgment of one, 27241. Has raised 
 rej its on his property when leases fell in ; invariably 
 gives leases, 27242-52. Leases not usual on 
 Lord Clinton's estate owing to number of small 
 tenants ; periods for forty-one years when granted , 
 large tenants conti-acted out of Laud Act, 27253-5. 
 Improvements mostly" made by landlords in the 
 western part of country — on estates of Duke of 
 Devonshire, Lord Baudon, and Colonel Shuldham ; 
 also on Carberiy estate, and at Durrus, 27256-7. 
 On the Carberry estate £800 or £900 a year has 
 been spent for some years, and no per-centage 
 charged to tenants; on other estates landlords con- 
 tributed lime, slates, and timber to tenants, 27258- 
 61. Exjjerience, as professional man, of claims 
 brought into Court is that they are fictitious and 
 exaggei'ated ; gives an instance of sham .claim, 
 27262-70; and one of exaggerated claim for im- 
 provements and unexhausted manures, 27273-9. 
 Claims generally reduced in Court, 27280. Sub- 
 division a very great evil, and most difficult to 
 prevent. Casu of great oppression to tenants on the 
 late Loi'd Bandon's property by a middleman, 27281- 
 4. Explanation ot a case of ejectment on Miss 
 Hungerford's land, 27285-91. Extension of clause 
 as to subletting or subdividing debamng tenants 
 from claiming compensation ; extravagant habits 
 of tenants brought them into debt and trouble, and 
 get sold up. These men should be debarred from 
 claiming, 27292-8 ; ana yet they have got compen- 
 sation. Instance, 27300-9. Statistics of eijectments 
 in the West iliiling of Cork in 1878 and 1879 for 
 various causes ; costs of ejectments from £3 to £4, 
 27311-3. Cordial feeling between landlord and 
 tenant seldom exists now. Instance of tenants' re- 
 liance on the old families abolished by Land Act, 
 27314-22. The Land Act has done landlords no 
 harm, but a feeling of unrest has been created by 
 the discussion of oases in Court, and it has increased 
 until it reached the present pitch, 27323-6. Thinks 
 the Ulster custom has broken down in Dungannon, 
 but knows nothing about it practically. It takes 
 from the land wliat ought to be spent on it ; extract 
 from a pamphlet on the Ulster tenaut-rio-ht con- 
 demning it, 27330-40. Sale of interest in a lease 
 without landlord's consent, and subsequent action 
 of tenant to recover posse.ssion, 27341-5, 27350. 
 Middle interests sold at high prices, 27346-8. In- 
 
 terest of money bon-owed, if added to rent, would 
 make rents too dear. Tenants on Mr. B. Jones' 
 estate appear more comfoi-table, with higher rents, 
 than Lord Bandon's, which are side bj' side. Mr. 
 Jones is to be imitated as a landlord, 27346-57. 
 Proposes that tenants should be taught bow to cul- 
 tivate the land, that they should have capital, and 
 that no dissolute or idle man should have land — 
 the latter will find their own level, 27359-61, 
 28362-4.* Eeduced rents on Mr. Jones' land 
 would not improve the tenants. Long leases and 
 low rents often get people into difficulties, and then 
 they say land is too dear, 28365-6. Poor Law 
 valuation never brought forward as the value of 
 land until agitation began. It is not uniform, but 
 the value of townlands is nearer to. it than in 
 mountain districts, 28367-75. Arbitration will not 
 be satisfactory ; only one instance under the Act, 
 which, however, proved satisfactory. Solicitors 
 should not be allowed before arbitrators, 28377-80. 
 Eents should be settled by free trade, and tenants 
 treated mildly, firmly, honestly, and justly, 28381. 
 More evictions on the Devonshire estate than on 
 Lord Bandon's, which is double the size, 28382—3. 
 
 Bennett, Mr. Henry, Scarte House, Kinsale, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Cork. 
 Landlords and tenants have discharged their 
 duties to each other fairly. Non-payment of rent 
 due entirely to want of means. Tenants suffer 
 great privations in making up their rents, and their 
 condition could be ameliorated if landlords visited 
 their tenants and became acquainted with their 
 state, 28383-94. Competition for farms has raised 
 rents and caused distres.s, 28395-8. Farms 220 
 acres, under Captain CoUes. Agents, Hussey and 
 Townsend, 28399-402. Enormous agencies pre- 
 vent agents from becoming acquainted with indi- 
 vidual cases, 28404. Rents not been raised to any 
 extent in the district, but they are high in com- 
 parison with the land, 28405-9. Last three harvests 
 were failures, and taxes increased in consequence of 
 bad times. No time allowed for payment as in 
 rent. Witness pays the whole of county cess, and 
 shows how his taxes have increased during forty-five 
 years, 28410-4. Credit given on all sides to farmers 
 has produced all the clamour and complaints, 284 15-. 
 8. Landlords and agents discredit accounts of 
 failure of crops and disease of cattle, as they are the 
 forerunners of applications for abatements of rent. 
 Sympathy between landlord and tenant would do 
 good, 28419-22. Tenants require security of tenure 
 and fair rents, they have no freedom of contract. 
 Rents might be fixed by arbitration, 28423-33, 
 28449, Has no faith in peasant proprietary ; may 
 be advisable here and there, but not as a general 
 measure, 28434-7. Labourers are not badly oS, 
 but are badly housed. Landlords and farmers 
 should improve the cottages, 28438-44. Griffith's 
 valuation not a fair test for rent, value of land 
 varies so much, 28445-8. 
 
 M'Mahon, The Rev. Mathias, Boherbee, County Cork, 
 Parish Priest. — Cork. 
 Is well acquainted with the tenantry of his 
 parish, and farms thirteen acres, 28454-8. Gives a 
 list of landlords in the district, about twelve in 
 number, 28459-60. Farming classes have been in 
 great distress during the winter, but were afraid of 
 losing their credit if known. Their holdings are 
 small and the land inferior. Dug out of moor and 
 swamp, all reclaimed land, 28461-70. All rack- 
 rented, and great difficulty in obtaining lime to 
 fertilize the land. Has to be brought from a 
 distance, 28471-2. Very little been spent on 
 drainage, 28474. Gives history of the land, until 
 taken up by Government in 1832, who reclaimed it 
 and sold it in 1854, at profit to Mr. Scully, who 
 sold it in 1858 to Mr. Dunscombe at much greater 
 
 Hero there is an error of 1 000 in the numbers of the questions. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ciii 
 
 M^ Malum, TJev. Mathias — continued. 
 
 price. Kents meanwhile had been doubled. 
 . Tenants now are struggling for an existence. Other 
 landlords ■^^ho purchased in 1854, have all raised 
 rents, and those lands are mostly swamps, 28475- 
 28500. Tenants would improve if they had 
 security, and especially with State aid, 28500-2. 
 Rents always raised on falling in of a lease. Labour 
 and manure being scarce it is hardly fair, 28503-6. 
 Crops will not mature on the land, only fit for 
 pasturage, 28507-8. To give security Government 
 should buy waste land and let it out, creating 
 peasant proprietary, and expropriate absentees, 
 those in fact who live out of Ireland, 28509-10, 
 28514-5. The three F's might be introduced 
 gradually, and industrious tenants allowed to pur- 
 chase, abolishing the law of entail and primogeni- 
 ture. The ci-eation of a peasant proprietary would 
 be preferable to the three F's, 28520-5. Labourers 
 are very badly off; they get a plot of ground and a 
 hovel, and gives in retu.rn labour to the farniei', on 
 whose land he is located. Gets little aid in addition, 
 28526-33. Labourers should be independent, 
 28535, 28546-7. Laws against subdivision would 
 do no harm, but witness is of opinion that education 
 will do more to prevent it. Some of his parishion- 
 ers' sons are well educated, and leave home sooner 
 than starve there, 28536-41. Tenants near Kerry 
 are teiribly rack-rented, though peaceable and 
 orderly, 28542-45. Considerable outlay on the 
 Kiugwilliamstown property, but indifferently done, 
 both d]-ainage and cottages. Land worth nothing 
 forty years ago considerably improved. While in 
 the hands of the Crown the tenants already there 
 had plots given them, rent for which they paid by 
 their labour, and a model farm was made. It is 
 now broken up, 28548-63. Tenants could have 
 paid for their holdiDgs by annual instalments, 
 28564-7. All improvements on Lord Cork's estate 
 done by tenants, and he has refused to let them 
 have land they have reclaimed. Roads are shock- 
 ing, and on this land manure is worth nothing the 
 second year, 28568-71. Rents were last raised in 
 1874, but no land in the parish is worth more than 
 Griffith's valuation. People satisfied until present 
 depression, 28572-4. Instance of two leases uAder 
 .£50 contracting tenants out of improvements and 
 voiding of lease if tenant becomes bankrupt. All 
 tenants on the estate took leases for thirty- one 
 years. Lord Cork gives slate and timber, tenants 
 do the rest, 28575-91. Roads have not been im- 
 proved for some years, 28592. Tenants much 
 hampered by debt, and land so poor no living can 
 be made out of it, 28593-8. With security and fair 
 rents people would prosper. They were independent 
 until depression came, 28600-1. Landlords hardly 
 do anything for tenants, and rents are raised if 
 tenants improve, 28602-4. On Mr. Lougfield's 
 estate rents are raised every twelve years or so. 
 Instance of increase on tenant's improvements. If 
 he improves he charges 5 per cent. Very few evic- 
 tions, and landlords are kind on the whole, for much 
 rent is due to them, 28605-17. 
 
 Cornwall, J. T., Esq., Cork, County Cork, Land 
 Agent. — Cork 
 Has a great many agencies over small estates, 
 and owns a small property. Gives names of pro- 
 prietors for whom he acts, 28618-20. Right of 
 sale allowed with landlord's consent. Leases are 
 gejieral for thirty- Lhree years ; the Act has had a 
 tendency to induce landlords to give leases, and 
 contracting clauses are inserted ; tenants prefer 
 yearly tenancies, 28621-28. Rents raised only on 
 falling in of leases, 28629-30. Valuation some- 
 times exceeds rent; it is not uniform, 28631-2. 
 Landlords do the buildings, or allow for them, 
 charging 5 per cent. ; the same with drainage. 
 Tenants slow to avail themselves of money advanced 
 by landlords. Tenants' improvements seldom 
 
 efficiently done, especially drains, 28633-9, 28690. 
 Large sums spent last year on drainage on tenants' 
 holdings, from which they will benefit by addition 
 to their holdings, 28640-2. Board of Works allows 
 money to be spent in getting sand and shells for 
 the land, as well as for fencing in from mountains, 
 and putting earth on it ; it will pay. Some land 
 will not pay for reclamation, and not much capable 
 of reclamation in the district, 28643-50. Cutting 
 turf too close takes surface away from the land, 
 28651-3. Peasant proprietors in the district are 
 in want of means. Case of jnirchase prevented by 
 too high price for land, 28654-8, 28661-3. Act 
 has checked landlords and encouraged tenants until 
 last year, 28659-60. Objects to sale of interests 
 and fines, as tenants are crippled by the system, 
 28664-5, 28697-703. Arbitration would be'usefiij , 
 in valuing tenants' improvements, and a public 
 officer should be appointed to act in conjunction 
 with the Comity Court Judge, 28666-72. It would 
 not answer as regards rent, for it would interfere 
 with landlords' rights. If tenants are dissatisfied 
 they can appeal to the Land Courts, 28673-81 
 Evictions for non-payment, but not many cases, 
 28C81-5. Costs in Land Courts should be reduced, 
 28686. Large outlays on Colonel Cooper's and 
 Mr. Glasgoe's properties. In the latter case rents 
 were adjusted and let lower than valuation, 
 28692-6. 
 
 Barry, V/illiam H., Esq., Midleton, County Cork, 
 Landowner ;uid Tenant. — Cork. 
 Has about 1,000 acres, of which he farms 300 
 acres on fee for ever, at a low rent under Griffith's 
 valuation. It is well managed, and the receipts 
 show the non-productive state of land for past three 
 years owing to ba,d seasons. His farm is one of the 
 best, because he and those before him have had fixity 
 of tenure, 28704-16,28778. Other tenants have 
 suffered terribly and are much reduced. Former 
 rents unfair as a permanent scale. About one- 
 third or one-fourth above Griffith's fair valuation in 
 the district, 28717-21. Rents should be fixed by 
 a commission of practical men and the country 
 revalued. Improvements on both sides to be con- 
 sidered, and leases granted for not less than nmety- 
 nine years, without perfect security and no check. 
 Farmers will not develop their lands, 28721-26. 
 Rents too high all round, and have been unduly 
 raised in several instances lately, 28727—31. 
 Tenants deny themselves the necessaries of life to 
 pay rents. Their holdings vary from twenty- 
 five acres to 200 acres ; they are in debt on all 
 sides, and have to sell cattle unfit for the market, 
 28732-9. Witness allows sales of interest, but 
 reserves right of veto. Case of rejecting incoming 
 tenant who was a creditor, 28741-8. " Land- 
 jobbers " do no good to a farm, 28748-50. On 
 some estates the landlords lay out money for farm, 
 buildings, and charged 5 per cent, to tenants. 
 Agricultural improvements clone by tenants. On 
 old estates rents are not raised, but with new 
 landlords they are. Valuation is to rent as twenty- 
 one is to twenty-nine, as a rule, 28751-54. Witness 
 has not raised his rents since 1859, not even at a 
 sale. Sales frequent in Mitchelstown district at 
 about four to five years' purchase, 28755-60. If 
 witness's rent was as high as others he would have 
 never made profit out of his land. Land in 
 Mitchelstown district, where his farm is, is lower 
 than Midleton district, 28761-4, 28780-1. Short 
 leases do not answer in Ireland as in Scotland. 
 Life leases are not fixity of tenure, as life is short 
 and a bad landlord may succeed a good one 
 28765-72. On Lady Kingston's farm rents have 
 been raised and sales realised very hiwh prices 
 28773-5. Witness has made all improvements on 
 his land, and has all new farming plant for savin<^ 
 labour. Average receipts for nine years wonld 
 give fair margin for profit, 28779, 28781-6 Act 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Barry, William H. — continued. 
 
 of 1870 would have been a good one, if people could 
 not contract themselves out or evade the provisions 
 of it. Absence of landlords makes them ignorant 
 of their estates and of the condition of their tenants. 
 Agents, as a rule, are not acquainted with their 
 ' duties, in proof of which witness has been appealed 
 to by agents as to value of farms, and he has 
 reinstated tenants evicted for non-payment, when 
 they have been rented excessively. Witness gives 
 temporary reductions on condition that arrears are 
 paid up by a given time, 28787-8. Can only give 
 twenty-one years' lease.s. Tenants dislike short 
 leases. Witness has not inserted contracting 
 clauses in leS-ses, but tenants pay county cess, 
 28789-94. 
 
 Boche, Lieutenant-General, Middleton ; Landowner. 
 —Cork. 
 Is Chairman of the Midleton Board of Guardians, 
 owns 500 acres,' and leases 100 acres, 28795-6. 
 Farmers complain of high rents, and are much in 
 debt, 28797-801. Eecommended a reduction of 
 rents on Thackwell estates in 1858, to be settled by 
 arbitration. Leases are too short. If fixity of 
 tenure cannot be granted, not less than eighty years 
 should be the period of leases. Tenants should sell 
 their interests if in arrear, with power for landlord 
 and tenant to appeal to the barrister as to dif- 
 ference regarding incoming tenant. Rent to be fixed 
 by arbitration. Agents are not agriculturists, as 
 they ought to be, 28802-3. Not many evictions, 
 and those only for non-payment. Some have- ap- 
 plied for outdoor relief, 28804-5, 28808-10. ' One 
 eviction for breaking clause in lease as to ' assign- 
 ment, 28806-7. Tenants deciding not to apply for 
 reduction, 2881 1-.3. Acreage, rents, and valuations 
 of those tenants, 28814-7. Rents are fair in the 
 district. Objects to peasant proprietary as a general 
 scheme, but not in isolated cases. Knows of only 
 two instances of peasant proprietors, and they have 
 turned out failures. A general scheme would destroy 
 the upper middle classes altogether, and drive land- 
 owners from the country if sales were compulsory, 
 28817-30. The three F's would be acceptable to 
 the people, and paid arbitrators should be appointed 
 to settle the rents, 28831-5. The depression of the 
 last three years is more felt than in former times, 
 28836-7. Mr. Barry and witness represent the 
 views of the majority of the Midleton Guardians. 
 Many people ask for more than they would take, 
 and be glad to get any reasonable settlement of the 
 land question, 28838-45. 
 
 Tower, Mr, Francis H., Roskeen, Co. Cork ; Tenant 
 •farmer. — Co7'k. 
 Holds 114 acres from Mr. Herbert, of Clydaville, 
 for forty-one years, at £285, and paid a fine of 
 £600, which he afterwards found was illegally im- 
 posed. A new lease was granted, for which he paid, 
 but never got back the fine. Has been promised an 
 abatement, but never got it, and twice been served 
 with a writ for non-payment while waiting for an 
 abatement. Considers himself rack-rented and 
 harshly treated, 28846-63. Lives two miles from 
 the farm, 28864. Case of misrepresentation as to 
 acreage of fai'm taken under the Court of Lunacy. 
 Decision — yearly tenant has no grievance, 28865-8. 
 Difierence consisted of a plantation, with which 
 witness had nothing to do. Farm svirrendered, and 
 application for allowance for damaged crops refused. 
 Subsequently let to another tenant at reduced rent 
 28869-76. 
 
 Dorgan, Mr. John K, Cork, County Cork, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Cork. 
 Farms between 400 acres and 500 acres under 
 different landlords. On one farm which was most 
 neglected and exhausted he spent large sums for 
 twenty-eight years. Rent, lis. an acre. Rent 
 raised to £1 on renewal of lease, thus putting a tax 
 
 on labour and skill. Other tenants remain at 
 same rents as when they took the land, 28877-86. 
 Had to rebuild fallen houses on Lord Bandon's pro- 
 perty at his own cost. Rent of this farm not exor- 
 bitant. Complains of the injustice of tenants 
 getting no allowance for imjjrovements and outlay 
 on farms, 28887-91. Made improvements on 
 Colonel Roberts' property, and was threatened with 
 legal proceedings because he forgot to pay his rent 
 punctually. Other tenants got abatements and 
 allowances from Colonel Roberts, but he got none. 
 Tenants should have power to borrow on permanent 
 buildings, 28893-4, 28892. Purchased a farm 
 from Landed Estates Court, and has greater induce- 
 ment to improve than elsewhere, 28896-8, 28890. 
 The Act secures more to the landlord than to the 
 tenant. Gives instances of claims being reduced 
 excessively, 28893-903. Fair rents and fixity of 
 tenure instead of being obliged to go into Court 
 should be the plan, 28904-8. Instance of how- 
 tenants are deprived of compensation for improve- 
 ments on expiry of lease through' delay in applying, 
 and farm taken away, 28909-10. Evictions for non- 
 payment on Mr. Gubbins' land when crops were still 
 in the land, 28911-6. The poor should be treated 
 kindly. Effect of kindness on an idle, slovenly 
 tenant, 28919. 
 
 O'Svllivan, The Rev. Cornelius, The Mines, Castle- 
 town, Berehaven, County Cork, Parish Priest. 
 ■ — Cork. 
 Has lived in the district since 1871 ; the land is 
 very poor and the rents too high ; in some cases the 
 rent is more than double the valuation, in others it 
 is below it, 28920-3, 28933. Details of the rents, 
 valuations, cows, and numbers in families on the 
 estates of the principal landlords, Mr. Puxley, 
 28924-5, 28929, 28932 ; Lord Bantry, 28931 ; Mr. 
 Herbert, 28942-55 ; Mr. Hutchins, 28970, 28984. 
 Each cow gives on an average a firkin of butter, 
 which goes to make up the rent ; no crops grown 
 scarcely, 28926—7. Leases only on Mi-. Herbert's 
 property, 28929. No general rising of rent since 
 1864, 28931. Difficulties in getting produce to 
 market ; valuation unequal and no test, 28934-6. 
 Total amount distributed to relieve distress in the 
 parish last winter £1,178, and £108 spent on emi- 
 gration ; meal and clothing also given away, 28937- 
 8. Many tenants are in debt, and some served-with 
 ejectment notices for non-payment; rent not paid 
 by tenants out of relief fuuds ; fixity of tenure is 
 what is wanted ; fishing carried on for domestic 
 purposes only, 28939-42. Tenants compelled to 
 take leases on Mr. Herbert's estate ; farmer fined 
 for objecting to take a lease ; rents raised in 1875 
 from 12 to 20 per cent. ; peo])le much distressed, 
 and suffer losses from cattle falling over the clifiis, 
 28943—55. Always? a running gale, 28956. Houses 
 are wretched, and are occupied by cattle and humau 
 beings together, 28957-S. Some little employment 
 in the mines, but none given by landlords on im- 
 provements or road-making ; no road to connect 
 parishes, though farmers pay rent for land covered 
 by roads, 28958-60. Landlords refused to give a 
 site for schools or contribute for some time towards 
 one, 2S961-4. Tenants on Mr. Hutchins' estate in 
 most wretched condition, no abatements, except in 
 one case, and right of sale forbidden without con- 
 sent, 28965—9. Evictions served, but no one turned 
 out, 28970. Tenants anxious to become peasant 
 proprietors ; land capable of reclamation and ira- 
 provenieut ; tenants afraid to improve for fear of 
 rents being raised ; this was actually done on one 
 estate ; farmers working on a railway to pay rents, 
 28971-7. No farm labourers — all work in mines ; 
 even farmers are glad to do so, 28977-83. Grifiith's 
 valuation too high ; the land is too poor to produce 
 good crops without extraordinary manuring, and 
 there are no roads to take manure to land ; then, 
 the distance from fairs and markets is too great : 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cv 
 
 C'^'idlivati, Rev. Cornelius — continued. 
 
 farmers would not, complain if they paid the valua- 
 tion ; meat as an article of food is unknown, and 
 they are often without fish, 28987-94. On Dursey 
 Island the island is barren, cattle have to be dragged 
 over to the mainland by men in a boat, and often 
 there is no communication ; Lord Bantry refused to 
 make a landing place, 28995-7. Reentruisk is the 
 wildest place in the district ; school built by a pri- 
 vate family, 28998. 29000. Rents on Lord Bantry's 
 estate lower than other landlords, but all are equally 
 poor, 29002-3. A firkin of butter only realizes 
 about £3, and good cows cost £,1 ; some few people 
 rear calves and pigs, 29006-8. Farmers want fair 
 rents and fixity ; if interest on purchase-money was 
 as high as rents they would not care for peasant 
 proprietary ; arbitration will not settle rents ; would 
 rather have the Government as a landlord, 29009— 
 12. People have nothing left to live on, no decent 
 clothes to wear, and with utmost difficulty keep out 
 of the workhouse ; holdings too small for subdivi- 
 sion, 29013-6. 
 
 Shechan, Mr. Patrick D., Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 
 Was formerly a tenant on Mr. Herbert's estate, 
 but sold his interest, except half an acre .attached 
 to house, which "he retained. Leases were compul- 
 sory. Tenants threatened with eviction, and fines 
 imposed if leases were refused. Rents raised at 
 same time. Tenants cannot bequeath holdings or 
 make improvements without consent of landlord, 
 nor can they claim for what they have done. 
 Bears out Father O'Sullivan's evidence as to dis- 
 tressed condition of tenants and inability to pay, 
 29017-24. 
 
 Quinn, Mr. Thomas, South Culhane, near Mitchels- 
 town, Co. Cork , Tenant Farmer. — Corh. 
 Holds fifty-three acres from Mr C. W. Smyth, 
 who purchased from Lord Kingston. Rents were 
 raised when the late Lord died, witness's rent being 
 put up from £34 to £113 a year. Tenants objec- 
 ted to valuation, and asked for fresh one to be made, 
 which landlord refused. Was ejected for non-pay- 
 ment, and was dissuaded from claiming compensa- 
 tion, trusting to landlord's honour. Subsequently 
 reinstated, but got no reduction, 28025-40, 29042-4. 
 AW tenants in arrear, and unable to ]jay, and are 
 threatened with notice to quit. Many had to apply 
 for relief last year, 29045-6. Houses and buildings 
 in a most delapidated condition. Landlord pro- 
 mised to make buildings and recompense tenants 
 for loss of cattle, 29047. Has about twenty acres 
 dry land ; drainage d(me by landlord, but paid for 
 by tenant. It is cut-away bog, 29048-52. 
 
 Sanders, Thomas, Esq., Sanders Park, Charleville, 
 Counties Cork, Limei-iok, Sligo, Tipperary ; 
 Landowner and Agent. — Cork. 
 Owns 2,000 acres, and manages over 37,000 
 acres for ten or twelve proprietors, 29053-7. Sales 
 not recognized as a general rule, but compensation 
 granted to outgoing tenants. Land Act standard 
 of compensation adopted, 29058-61. Rents raised 
 on change of tenancies. No rise since 1857 on 
 witness's property, 29062-4. Act has checked 
 evictions, but has had no experience personally. 
 Difiiculties through competition for farms, in 
 keeping small holders on properties, 29065-8. Dis- 
 inclination of tenants to take leases now ; land not 
 better cultivated by leaseholdei's. Leases generally 
 contains contracting out clauses, but not always 
 made use of. Instance when they were inserted as 
 a temporary measure, 29069-84. Griffith's valua- 
 tion no test for rents, uneven and unreliabJe. 
 Tenants with rents at the valuation applying for 
 reductions. General adoption of that valuation 
 would cause discontent. Has no difficulty in fixing 
 rents on expiration of leases, 29085-7. Fixes it 
 himself, 29088-92. Mr. M. Dawson in favour of 
 arbitration, 29094-5. Recommends abolition of 
 
 distress, but retain the right of' landlords to claim 
 for a year's rent, 29096-100. Improvements 
 generally made with Board of Works loans for which 
 tenants are charged, 29101-2. The Act has en- 
 couraged tenants' improvements and checked land- 
 lords, 29103-4. The purchase clauses of the Act 
 beneficial to tenants if acted on. Approves of 
 peasant proprietary, but not as a generel measure. 
 Sales should be voluntary, 29105-12. If costs of 
 purchasing were reduced, and process simplified, it 
 would be a great benefit, 29113-7. On Mr. M. 
 Dawson's estate land has been reclaimed Ijy men 
 occupying a plot of land. Some has gone back to 
 waste. Would not pay to reclaim extensively, 
 2'Jl 18-20. Very few labourers in the district, and 
 those very badly ofi", especially as to houses. Far- 
 mers charge very high rents for labourers' cottages. 
 They should be independent of farmers, and hold 
 direct from the landlord. Would hardly answer 
 if taken up by the Board of Guardians. Sanitary 
 laws badly carried out by the latter^ farmers in the 
 majority on the Board, 29121-34. Count} cess 
 added to rent in some cases ; tenants prefer abate- 
 ment and pay cess themselves, 29135-41. Yearly 
 tenancies should be abolished, substituting leases 
 for thirty years, compensation granted with a check 
 on fraudulent claims, and a lease prepared by Act of 
 Parliament, 29142-3. People now want rents at 
 Griffith's valuation, but it would not satisfy them, 
 It is the cry of shopkeepers and agitators rather 
 than farmers. Rents should be fixed by contract 
 by the landlord, with right of appeal to County 
 Court Judge if tenant is in possession, 29144-51, 
 Ejectments for non-payment only, and very few 
 actually turned out, 29152-3. Abatements granted 
 where necessary, but no general reduction except on 
 Mr. B. Massey's estate, and he choose to give ten 
 per cent, off rents. Notice of ejectment served on 
 a tenant in perpetuity for non payment, in the 
 usual course, 29154-60. Improvements by tenants 
 generally allowed for, and interest charged, but 
 since the Land Act allowances of slate and timber 
 withdrawn. On Erasmus Smith's Schools no charge 
 was made, but taken into consideration at end of 
 lease. Tenants should prove, not landlords, what 
 improvements they have done, 29161-7. Rents 
 are from 25 to 50 per cent, over the valuation, and 
 if reduced all profit would be removed fi'om farming, 
 at all events on witness's estate. List of rents, 
 valuations, and prices at sales of farms on estates in 
 neighbourhood, 29168. 
 
 Campion, Richard G., Esq., Lakeview, Midleton, 
 counties Cork and Waterford ; Land Agent and 
 Landowner. — Corh. 
 
 Manages about 17,000 acres, principally in Cork 
 and Waterford, 29169-72. Right of sale not 
 allowed without landlord's consent and his approval 
 of the purchaser, 29173-5. Leases for thirty-one 
 years granted and accepted by tenants, which 
 generally contain contracting out clauses. Rents 
 revised on change of tenancy or when necessary. 
 No fines imposed. Revaluation made on falling in 
 of leases. 'Tenants take no part in arranging rents ; 
 sometimes they do not approve and ejections have 
 been served, but never executed, 29176-92. Rents 
 raised on four townlands in West Cork belonging to 
 the daughters of the .late Captain White. The 
 position of the tenants on the whole is good. One 
 man broke down and his interest sold by the 
 creditors. Another man surrendered his farm and 
 sold his interest. Two farmers comfortably off, 
 29193-213. Coolbruee townland was held by a 
 middleman, and in 1878 the holdings were squared 
 and the tenants took leases. No one turned out of 
 his house. Rents paid are higher than those paid 
 to the middleman, who paid only £49 to the land- 
 lord. Total present rents, £245, valuation £121. 
 Eight tenants in good position, and two in bad 
 position; one of these always behind hand 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Campion, Riohard G. — continued. 
 
 Valuation done by witness alone. Tenants have 
 made any improvements done on the land, which is 
 most of it poor. No sales on this townland, 29214 
 -32. Agitation by a guardian against imaginary 
 oppression to a tenant, 29233-5 (29249-55). 
 Tenants' improvements allowed for on Miss White's 
 land. Rents paid, but tenants warned now not to 
 pay any more, 29236-40. Condition of tenants 
 ascertained personally by witness. Althougb in 
 good condition they obtained relief, 29241-3. In 
 1878 farms squared, leases granted, and rents raised 
 on Mr. Hyland's estate. Reduction granted of 
 twenty per cent. These leases contain same clauses 
 as others in the district, 29244-8. Suggests sale of 
 estates to highest bidder, purchase money in whole 
 or nine-tenths, to be advanced to tenant on certain 
 conditions. An outsider to be advanced one-half 
 only. One year and a half's notice to quit to be 
 given by landlords, and leaseholders not to be con- 
 tracted out of claim for improvements or for Granrl 
 Jury cess. A tenant losing his opportunity to buy 
 to have no further chance. Tenants would liot com- 
 plain of extra rent for greater security, 29256-60. 
 Tenants to have extension of time to remove croj>s 
 under condition legal sale allowed, and compensation 
 for improvements allowing for deterioration, 29261. 
 Townlands or demesne to be regarded as exceptional 
 transactions. Pasture farms require no considera- 
 tion, 29262-3. Is opposed to publfc valuation or 
 court of revision for fixing rents. Present rents 
 reasonable, and gives statistics to prove it. In some 
 cases rents are too low, 29264-71. 
 
 Yetling, Bartholomew, Esq., Newmarket, Mallow ; 
 Go. Cork, Landowner. — Cork. 
 Has the iliaiiagement of 1,600 acres, and owns 
 500 acres, 29272-4. Farmers borrowed money 
 right and left, aid competed for farms, thus raising 
 rents excessively ; insecurity of tenure the cause of 
 all distress, misery, and disturbed state of the coun- 
 try, 21)275-80. Long leases and fair rents would 
 settle the question, and so corlfetitute a peasant pro- 
 prietary ; length of l6ase not le.ss than 250 years, 
 29281-6. Subdivision is the ruin of the country ; 
 long leases should not be over £ 1 20 valuation, and 
 if sublet tenants should not be able to claim more 
 than rent he pays ; tenants should not be allowed 
 to mortgage a lease, money may be borrowed on 
 chattels, 29287-90. Process of ejectment should 
 be simplified for non-payment of a year's rent ; 
 hanging gale to be abolished, 29291-4. Sales to be 
 allowed with landlord's consent, 29295. Rents to 
 be settled by Government revaluation, and landlords 
 would then pay fair taxes, 29296-9. Disputes as 
 to rents might be settled by arbitration, but if rents 
 were put up beyond new valuation landlords might 
 be fined, 29300. Purchasers of holdings had to 
 borrow all the money to pay for their holding.s 
 which were i-ackrented, and one is broken down ; 
 prices were far too high ; bad land will not suit for 
 peasant proprietary system ; thrifty men should be 
 encouraged, and landlords- induced to sell volun- 
 tarily ; they should uot be expropriated, 29301-14. 
 Land of evicted tenants not allowed to be occupied 
 under Land League or'ders, and threatening letters 
 sent to landlords ; to stop all this, the Land (|ues- 
 tion should be settled at once, 29315-9; the three 
 F's is practically what witness advocates, 29322. 
 
 Croain, Mr. Timothy, 22, Church-street, Cork, Co. 
 Cork, Butter Merxjhant. — Cork. 
 Was formerly Secretary of the Land League. 
 His family live on the estate of Mr. Hutchms, 
 near Macroom, 29323-9. Tendency to increase 
 rents general in the district, leases scarce, 29332. 
 'Tenants on half the estate of Mr. Hutchins, of 
 Ardnagashel, prepared to purchase when property 
 sold, but the other half were not able to buy. The 
 land was bought by Mr. Raycroft, who has vir- 
 tually raised rents by disallowing di-ainao-e and 
 
 lime allowances, 29333-8. Great distress amongst 
 
 farmers, some reduced to rape as an article of food, 
 
 29339-40. Rents raised on improvements, and 
 
 many tenants unable to pay at all for last three 
 
 years, 29341-3. Tenant proprietary the solution 
 
 of the land question, the details to be settled by 
 
 Government. Subdivision will be settled by natural 
 
 causes, the present tenants to become proprietors 
 
 no matter ho^v• small their holdings. Security will 
 
 work great changes. Capital now lying idle'mitrht 
 
 be utilized for this purpose, 29344-55. The three 
 
 F's would be an improvement on present system 
 
 but not bette- than proprietorship. Landlords 
 
 need not be abolished or sent out of the country. 
 
 Absenteeism is a great drain on the country. 
 
 Tenants would be satisfied to pay to Government 
 
 higher rents than they pay now to get possession of 
 
 the land. Greater part of the money might remaiu 
 
 as a charge on the land. With no prohibitory 
 
 clauses tenants would be safe under perpetuity 
 
 rents, 29356—78. Knows instances of success of 
 
 peasant proprietors. Legal exjsenses in claiming 
 
 compensation swamp the awards. Gives instance 
 
 29379-86. Position of labourers will never be 
 
 improved until they are able to buy land for them 
 
 selves, 29387. 
 
 Murphy, Mr. Timothy, Midleton, Co. Cork ; Tenant 
 Farmer and Victualler. — Cork. 
 Farms 200 acres from Mr. P. Leahy, sub-tenant 
 to Lord Midleton. Rent £249. But for his busi- 
 ness could not pay his rent. Former tenant broke 
 down. Holds a lease, for three lives, 29388-97. 
 Farmer's all round are in great drsti^ess, and heavily 
 in debt. Bad seasons, unproductiveness of Jand, 
 and high rents the cause of it. Absence of manu- 
 factui'es leaves no other employment open. Evic- 
 tions follow as a natural consequence. Instance of 
 eviction on notice to quit. Tenant got compensar 
 tion, 29398-407. The three F's will produce 
 pt-osperity, and rents might be fixed on a sliding 
 scale as times improved or got worse, 29410. 
 Absentee landlords should pay all the county cess 
 and poor rates, but absent or resident at least they 
 should pay half This is the general view. Griffith'^ 
 valuation a fair standard for rents. It may be too 
 high for poor land, but not for good land, 29411-5. 
 
 Tarr, Mr. Joseph William, Midleton, Co. Cork; 
 Farmer. — Cork 
 Formerly held 417 acres under Lord Midleton, 
 at £450 a year, of which only 300 acres available 
 for cultivation, the rest being timber, 29416-22. 
 Was evicted for non-payment owing to rack-rent. 
 Owed money to the bank, who made him a bank- 
 rupt, and so lost his right to claim compensation for 
 improvements to the value of £800, 29423-37. Is ' 
 a member of the Land League. 
 
 Fitzgerald, Mr. Edmond, Clonmult, Midleton, coimty 
 Cork ; Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 Holds 145 acres from two landlords. Rent of one 
 portion 60 per cent, over valuation. It is too high, 
 aud but for other business could uot pay, 29438-42. 
 Rents generally but little in excess of valuation, 
 but too high. Farmers all broken, and in great 
 state of misery. Children ill-fed and barely clothed. 
 Meat almost unknown from year's end to year's end. 
 Live on Indian meal. This is their state for more 
 than twenty years, 29443-6. Farms consolidated 
 twenty-five years ago by eviction of small farmers 
 n^w neglected and uncultivated, 29446. Farmers 
 all in debt to tradespeople, and land exhausted by 
 artificial manure, 29447-50. Labourers are miser- 
 ably off. Their food is much the same as the 
 fiirmers (29144). Wages, with two meals a day, 
 four shillings a week. House and garden charged 
 for ,£2 a year, 29454-6. Land laws must "be 
 changed and improved ; and tenants and labourers 
 treated with kindness and consideration bv Lm^ 
 lords; 29457. ^ ^^^' 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 evil 
 
 Moore, Mr. John, Midleton, Co. Cork ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — (Jorh. 
 Farms 195 acres under Mr. Myers. Rent, £157 • 
 valuation, £106. Lease of sixty years existincr 
 when rent was fixed. It is too high ; and thouo'h 
 much has been spent on the land, got into debt 
 when bad seasons came, and is, now unable to pav 
 his rent. Was promised a lease for 100 years on 
 condition he spent £200 in building a slated house 
 and offices, but he did not take it, 29458-67. 
 
 Moore, Mr. Patrick, Midleton, Co. Cork ; Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Cork. 
 Holds seventy-eight acres from Mrs. C. Evans ; 
 rent, £52 ; valuation, £44 ; and 110 acres.from Mr. 
 Lambert; rent, £200 ; valuation, £155. Took the 
 last farm in 1874, paying £100 under a lease then 
 existing which had six years to run. Rents too 
 high, and land too dear. Got in aiTear for one year, 
 and was served with ejectment. Compensation for 
 buildings refused. Would be unable to pay the rent 
 even in good seasons, 29468-81. 
 
 Moloney, Mr. Richard, Midleton, Co. Cork ; Tenant Far- 
 mer. — CorJc. 
 Held a farm under Mr. W. S. Coppinger, of 
 Midleton; since surrendered, and forfeited £100 
 deposited for fulfilment of covenants of lease ; 
 another tenant was got for it at a lower rent, and he 
 also deposited £100. Rent high, and Grifiith's 
 valuation not fair, 29482-8. Has an accepted pro- 
 posal for a lease from Mr. Smitli Barry, but new 
 agent declines to carry out his predecessor's 
 promises as to improvements. Ifew landlord has 
 raised rents all rou.nd. Tenants ejected through 
 inability to pay increased rents, but have since ac- 
 cepted leases, 29489-500. Houses wretched, and 
 labourers miserably situated. Wages, one shilling 
 a day, without diet, 29500-5. 
 
 Fitzgerald, R. U. Penrose, esq., Corkbeg Island, White- 
 gate, Co. Cork, Landed Proprietor. — Cork. 
 Owns 5,000 acres ia the Imokilly barony. The 
 distress greater in mountain districts than seaboard, 
 and is owing to bad seasons, 29505-9. His pro- 
 perty was revalued in 1873, and tenants were al- 
 lowed to appoint a valuator to act with witness's, and 
 an arbitrator to decide disputes selected mutually. 
 This was agreed to^ with few exceptions, and leases 
 granted for thirty years. Abatements granted last 
 year, 29510-6, 29548. Improvements with public 
 money charged one and a half per cent, to tenants, 
 not much done on the estate. . Landloi'ds do little 
 since the Land Act, 29517-0. Case of a tenant 
 selling his interest, and on eviction claiming com- 
 pensation, 29520-1, 29549. Sales of leases allowed 
 with landlord's consent, but not sales in yearly 
 tenants, 29522-3. Rents, as a rule, above Griffith's 
 valuation, but it is not a fair test, 29524-7. 
 Waste lands reclaimable on Sir G. Colthurst's pro- 
 perty over which tenants have rights. Board of 
 Works might advance them money to reclaim, but 
 would rather encourage peasant proprietary to 
 thrifty and industrious men, 29529-37. Compul- 
 sory sales not advocated, except in the case of 
 absentee landlords. Absentees, competition for 
 land, and want of capital and skill, the curses of 
 the country, 29538-43. New landlords, having 
 purchased in the Courts, do harm by imposing fines, 
 and raising rents enormously, and lead indirectly to 
 the distress, in conjunction with bad seasons, and 
 absentees, 29544-7. The Land Act has increased 
 the facilities of tenants to borrow, 29550. Fixity 
 and fair rents most desirable, but sales eat up 
 tenant-right, and rack-rent incoming tenants, 
 29551-2. Witness had no hanging gale on his 
 estate. 
 
 Nylvm,, Mr. Daniel, Drumgarrifi", Ballinskary, Co. 
 Cork, Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 Rents on adjoining prop^i-ties too high ; Mr. B. 
 Jones raises rents on succeeding tenants ; if right 
 
 of sale was allowed by him, there would be no pur- 
 chasers, 29553-9,' 29564-6, 29573. Case of tenant 
 being contracted out of benefit of house built, 
 20562-3. Evictions not frequent, except on Mr. 
 B. Jones's estate for non-payment, and tenants 
 forced to borrow money to pay rents, 29568-73. 
 Lord Bandon allows tenants in arrear to sell, and 
 tenants on other properties may sell if they wish to 
 leave ; no fixed period for raising rents, 29574-77. 
 Tenants forced to take lease at increased rents on 
 Messrs. Beamish's property, 29578-9. Peasant 
 proprietary desirable, and sales should be compul- 
 sory on those landlords who increase rcmts ; four- 
 fifths of purchase money to be advanced, and costs 
 of transfer reduced, 2t)580-5. The majority would 
 improve their lands, 29586. In case of disputes 
 between landlord and tenant, a public arbitrator 
 should be appointed to buy out unjvist landlords ; 
 it is only new landlords who act unfairly, 29589- 
 92. Contracting tenants out of benefits of Land 
 Acts to be penal, 29593. Case of raising of rents 
 on falling in of a middleman's lease under notice to 
 quit, and on coming to terms tenants were con- 
 tracted out of improvements^ 29594-5. 
 
 Davis, The Rev. Charles, Baltimore, Rath, Co. Cork, 
 Parish Priest. — Skibbereen. 
 Is trustee of the late Mr. M'C. Downing's pro- 
 perty, and adjacent landlords are Lord Carberry, 
 and Sir H. Becher, 29596-9. Mr. Downing's pro- 
 perty over-rented ; leases, of which there are a 
 few, are fair ; rents never increased, and middle- 
 men's interests purchased in 1851 or 1854. Houses 
 built, slate, timber, and lime given, besides other 
 allowances to tenants ; no charge made for these ; 
 by will leases were to be granted to tenants for ever 
 at rents to be fixed by arbitration, and no change to 
 be made afterwards, but tenants have not availed 
 themselves of these advantages, 29600-14, 29725. 
 Tenants comfortably off as times go, but rents 
 should be reduced permanently ; the estate now in 
 Chancery, but application will be made to re-settle 
 the rents, 29615-20. Number of tenants 150; 
 right of sale permitted, but at present it is doubtful 
 whether purchasers can be found, owing to deprecia- 
 tion of land and want of means through bad seasons, 
 29621-9. No evictions on the property, 29630. 
 Farms smstll ; rents about 25 to 30 per cent, over 
 the valuation; land mostly tillage, 29631-6. On 
 Hare Island and West Carbery Coast the people 
 live by fishing, and hold very small tracts of land, 
 by which alone they could not live ; with proper 
 appliances and capital they could live by fishing, 
 29637-40. Grifiith's tenement valuation the pro- 
 per rent ; land reclaimed by tenants ; no profes- 
 sional fishermen, 29641-3. No labourers allowed 
 to exist on the estates of Sir H. Becher or Lord 
 Carbery ; farmers evicted if they permit it ; labour- 
 ers live at Skibbereen and go daily to and from 
 their work four or five mUes, 29644-7, 29654-5. 
 Subdivision or sublettmg not known since the Land 
 Act ; rule first established by landlords, 29648-53. 
 Farmers, as a rule, do not employ labourers ; wages 
 vary from Is. to Is. 6d. a day, and perhaps a house, 
 29661-9. No provision made by landlords or ten- 
 ants for the comfort, convenience, or employment 
 of labourers — their houses are bad and several 
 families live in one, 29670-1. Tenants on Sir H. 
 Bechei''s and Lord Carbery's estates hold at will and 
 at fair rents ; no leases on either estates ; landlord's 
 improvements have practically ceased since the Land 
 Act ; tenants not allowed to keep dogs on Sir H. 
 Becher's property, 29672-80. The Act checks evic- 
 tion, but landlords get high rents in consequence of 
 competition for land ; expenses of claiming com- 
 pensation too great; case of landlord appealinc^ 
 against decision of judge, and getting double rent 
 and fine from new tenant, 29681-4,29692-99. Ejec- 
 tions few, rents well paid, and landlords indulgent 
 — abatements the exception, 29685-90. Evictions 
 on title and for non-payment on the Becher estate, 
 
 P 
 
CVUl 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 Davis, The Rev. Charles — continued. 
 
 and farms let by auction ; evicted tenants cannot 
 get another farm, 29700-15. Rents would have 
 been raised but for depression, and improvements 
 checked through fear of increase, 29716-9, 29723. 
 Frequent increase of rents in the district ; restrictive 
 covenants in leases granted to tenants, known as 
 " Campion's lease." Rents not raised on change of 
 tenancy on some estates, 29720-2, 29724. Ap- 
 proves of the three F's, but rents should first be 
 fixed by arbitration for fourteen or twenty-one 
 years, at the end of which either party may appeal 
 for a change ; leases, agreements, and covenants to 
 be abolished, and land let verbally, landlords to 
 have no control over incoming tenants on sales, 
 unless insolvent or of bad character. If entitled, by 
 peculiar circumstances, landlords might claim arise 
 in rents on new tenants — the present County Court 
 Judges, with assessors, to form tribunal of appeal, 
 29726-36. Success of tenants purchasing fees of 
 holdings, 29737-8. Is in favour of the gradual 
 establishment of a jseasant proprietary ; many 
 tenants now ready with means to pay a fourth of 
 the purchase-money without infringing on their 
 capital, 29739-41. Much land in the neighbour- 
 hood capable of improvement and reclamation, 
 29742-6. 
 
 0' Donovan, The, Knockbue, Co. Cork ; Landowner. 
 
 — Skibbereen. 
 Has had the management of land for forty years ; 
 never allows the right of sale in any shape or foim ; 
 gives money to tenants broken down by misfortune, 
 29747-55. Has built new houses for nearly all his 
 tenants in this district, and made allowances, &c. , 
 without any charge ; hands in statements of expen- 
 diture on the estate ; rents the same as in 1848 ; 
 valuation has no reference to rents, 29756-63. In 
 1840 small holdings were consolidated, and a house 
 built on each farm, 29764-6. Bad seasons, ex- 
 haustion of soil by use of artificial manure, and the 
 practice of becoming security for borrowed money, 
 are the causes of the present distress, 29767-71, 
 29773. No evictions on his property since he re- 
 sumed the management, 29772. A good deal of 
 rent due to witnes.s, 29774. Case of witness having 
 to pay compensation for so-called capricious eviction 
 after having left a famUy in possession fourteen 
 years after the decree was issued, 29775-84. Land 
 re-let to adjoining tenant, 29785-7. Tenants never 
 disturbed so long as rent is paid, 29790-1. Tenant's 
 improvements should be paid for by the landlord, 
 so as to make his right to the soil clear ; no co- 
 partnership between landlord and tenant ; objects to 
 fixity of tenure at a valuation rent, and to the uni- 
 versal establishment of peasant pro])rietary. The 
 ownership of the land is the cause of all the quar- 
 relling and disputes between members of families, 
 29792-9. Is not in favour of subdivision, and 
 looks on the Land Act as a failure ; landlords and 
 tenants should have written agreements, though his 
 tenants do not care to have them ; objects to have 
 to accept a tenant compulsorily, 29800-9. 
 
 Donovan, Mr. Patrick, Rath, Co. Cork, Tenant Farmer. 
 — Skibbereen. 
 Holds under Mrs. R. Atkins, at rent of £15, va- 
 luation £C. Rent raised twenty years ago from £6 
 to £18, then reduced to £15. Keeps three cows, 
 29810-8, 29825. No abatements given for twenty 
 years ; was proceeded against for nonpayment, and 
 got time from Judge to pay. Landlord allows 10s. 
 for sand, and 10s. for seaweed ; no help otherwise 
 tor improvements. House buUt by witness's father. 
 But for help from relations in America, and a little 
 
 Uve ^9826-35°* ^^^ ""'"' ^ '* '' ^ ^'^* '*™^^^^ *** 
 
 Bonovan,B^t., Rath, County Cork, Tenant Farmer.- 
 oKibbereen. 
 Holds under Mrs. Atkins, at same rent and valua- 
 tion as last witness (P. Donovan, 29812). Ekes 
 
 out rent, which has to be paid punctually, by 
 fishing and help from America. There is no running 
 gale ; can only pay with difficulty, 29836-43. 
 
 Sheehy, James, Rath, County Cork, Tenant Farmer 
 
 Shibhereen. 
 Has two holdings, on one of which his father 
 lives. Rents, £12 and £26 ; valuation, £7 10«. 
 and £14. Rents raised eighteen years ago from 
 £15 for the two farms, 29844-52. Rents paid to 
 the day, and witness had to borrow to do it. R&. 
 ceived £20 from America afewweeks since, 29853. 
 No fish caught this year, as they have small boats 
 only, 29854-5. Case of tenant in arrear selling 
 her interest, and landlord illegally taking a fine 
 of £100, 29856-66. 
 
 Sheehy, Michael, Rath, County Cork ; Tenant Farmer. 
 — Skibbereen. 
 Pays £21 a year, valuation £13 5s., for his hold- 
 ing, to Mr. Spragg, who bought the estate from Mr. 
 Atkins, and then raised rents twenty-five per cent. 
 all round, 29867-76. No change of tenancy for 
 twelve years, 29877-80. Half year's running gale 
 on the estate. Rents jiaid up, 29881-2. Some 
 tenants have made improvements with help, but it 
 is rough mountain land, 29883. 
 
 Sullivan, Mr. John, County Cork, Tenant Farmer.— 
 SJdbhereen, 
 Holds about 130 acres of indifierent land from 
 Mr. T. Whitney, at £70 rent, valuation £26 10«. 
 distant six miles from Skibbereen. Both his father 
 and witness spent large sums on building and im- 
 provements, getting no help from landlord. Allow- 
 ance for sand cut ofi" by agent, 29884-95 ; WOO-l. 
 Rents not been raised on improvements, but bog 
 land taken from witness and let to other tenants. 
 Expense incurred by carts of others breaking his 
 drains, 29896-9. Has no lease ; and land, most of 
 it mountainous boggy land, not worth the rent, 
 29901-3. Money borrowed to pay rent not paid 
 ofi", and agent threatens process if rent due be not 
 paid. Lost £80 worth of cattle last year, 29904-9. 
 Bog land taken from another tenant who has made 
 great improvements also, 29911-2. 
 
 Collins, Donald, County Cork, Tenant Farmer.— 
 Skibbereen. 
 Holds thirty-five acres of barren bad land, eight 
 to ten of which are waste. Landlord, Mr. J. 
 Limerick, rent £17, valuation £9 5s. Rent raised 
 forty years ago, and reduced subsequently to £14, 
 with allowance of £1 for sand. Leases refused and 
 rents put up to £17 with allowance knocked off, 
 29912-9. Keeps twelve cows, by which he loses in 
 winter, 29920. Owes a year's gale, and never re- 
 ceives any abatement. Drains and reclaims at his 
 own cost, 29921-7. 
 
 Crowley, Patrick, County Cork, Tenant Farmer.— 
 Skibbereen. 
 Holds his land under the trustees of the late Mr. 
 Downing. Rent £16 10s., valuation £12. Rent 
 raised to present amount thirty years ago. Had a 
 small addition to land, but allowances were 
 dropped. House built at witness's expense and 
 got no help for it, nor for drainage, 29928-45. 
 Got no lease and could not pay same rent if given 
 lease forever. If rents raised could not be worse 
 ofi", 29946-54. Has twice borrowed money to pay 
 rent, and is unable to pay now. Would like a 
 permanent reduction, 29955-6. 
 
 Sullivan, Michael, County Cork, Tenant, Farmer.-^ 
 Skibbereen. 
 Has a holding on Mr. Downing's estate ; rent 
 £7; valuation, £4 8s. No change in rent foi 
 forty years, 29957-61. Has two cows, and lost 
 nine or ten two years ago, 29962, 29969. Rent 
 too high, but would take a lease for ever at present 
 amount. Has six in family at home, and two 
 away. Could do nothing if turned out 29963-9. ' 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cix 
 
 Daly, Mr. Jeremiah, Coolbue, County Cork, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Skihbereen. 
 Is a Poor Law Guardian and member of the Land 
 League. His farm is seven miles from Skihbereen. 
 On the death of Mr. O'DriscoU, the rent, with 
 arrears, amounting to five half years, was called in, 
 and rents raised, 29970-83. One tenant ejected, 
 29984. No abatements allowed, and no leases 
 granted, 29984—90. All improvements made by 
 tenants, 29991-2. On other estates rents raised, 
 in some instances 150 per cent, over the valuation. 
 Instances of leases broken by landlords and rents 
 raised, 29993-6. Valuations were correct when 
 taken, but inequalities in it now caused by sub- 
 sequent improvements, and in some cases by ex- 
 haustion of soil, 29997-30006. On Mr. Campion's 
 townland rents are such that tenants cannot pay. 
 Rents have been doubled and tenants are virtually 
 paupers, many of whom obtained relief last winter. 
 Gives instances of rack-renting by Mr. Campion, 
 30007-15. Land is poor, and tenants have sold 
 their cows to pay the rent. Some small allowances 
 made for drainage, 30016-22. Leases with objec- 
 tionable clauses evading the Land Act, and barring 
 tenants from benefits, and raising rents to avoid 
 claims for compensations, 30023—31. No sales of 
 interests on Mr. Campion's estates, 30032-4. Case 
 of ejectment for sale without landlord's consent on 
 the Becher property, 30035-8. Capricious eviction 
 of a tenant after being deprived of turbary. Farm 
 since let at treble rent, 30039-40. Evictions 
 generally for non-payment, 30041. Eents raised 
 on a townland after purchase of a middlleman's 
 interest, 30042-5. Rents on Mr. Downing's estate 
 as high as elsewhere. They should not exceed 
 Government valuation, 30046-7. The three F's 
 desirable, and when practicable the principle of 
 peasant proprietary should be adopted. Tenants 
 now have not the means to buy, 30048-50, 
 30057-61. Tenants at will on Captain Beamish's 
 property have succeeded thoroughly, 30052-6. 
 
 Marmion, Henry Richard, Esq., Reneen, Co. Cork, 
 Land Agent. — Skibhereen. 
 Is a land agent, landlord, and tenant farmer. 
 Owns 1,000 acres of poor land, on which he has 
 three tenants holding by lease. Formerly an agent 
 over extensive properties, 30062-8. On the 
 Townsend estate, in 1869, leases were granted for 
 sixty-one years, and building leases for 300 years, 
 without any fine with few exceptions, and with 
 most beneficial results, 30069-79, 30099. Right 
 of assigning or selling not allowed. Rents hardly 
 altered when leases were granted. Fines only 
 taken with the knowledge of the landlord, and 
 rents fixed at the full value ; not underlet ; as a 
 rule about 15 per cent, over Government valuation, 
 30080-98, 30108-10. More improvements made 
 after granting leases than before. Rents well paid 
 even in bad times, and tenants, as a whole, in good 
 circumstances, 30100-5. On giving up agency 
 large sum was due to witness, part remains unpaid, 
 30107. Cases of capricious rules on estates, e.g., 
 purchase of interest of adjoining tenant refused, 
 30112-8. On the Becher estate tenants make all 
 improvements. High rents charged to cover cost 
 of draining, 3011 9-20. Tenants' interest on Town- 
 send property realized more than value of holdings, 
 and purchasers are now bankrupts, 30122-32. 
 Fair rents will not be charged without compulsory 
 valuation, 30133. Rents on Mr. J. Becher's land 
 raised three times since 1853. On other estates 
 but little change made in rents. Allowances made 
 to tenants in famine time. Rents are too high and 
 no one would purchase. Sales of interests the ex- 
 ception now, 3 1 3 4^5 2. Evictions for non-payment 
 only. Gives two instances, 30153-64. Resident 
 landlords are the exception, and very few look after 
 their tenants' comfort, 30165-7. Disputes as to 
 rent to be settled by arbitration, 30168-70. Sale 
 
 of tenant's interest under Bright clauses, 30171-4. 
 Tenants will never be well ofi" until they have the 
 three F's, but right of sale generally swamp the new 
 tenant's capital, and it cannot be prevented, 
 30175-9. Case of rent exceeding valuation by 
 223 per cent, on Coolbine townland, 30179-80. 
 The tenants on that land in wretched condition, 
 and many had been in receipt of relief last year, 
 30181. Lease at increased rent forced on tenant 
 under threats of eviction, 30182-5. Wholesale 
 borrowing to pay rents, 30187. 
 
 Ronayne, Patrick, Drimoleague, Co. Cork, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Skibhereen. 
 Farms 900 acres and owns land, 30189-94. 
 Holds under an old lease, at moderate rent, from 
 Mr. Townsend, of Myrus, and has spent large sums 
 in improvements on the land without any help from 
 the landlord. New lease was to have been granted 
 before expiration of old one, but it fell through on 
 account of illness of landlord, and now has been 
 refused, 30195-9. Now he will be unable to ob- 
 tain compensation for improvements as he is in his 
 landlord's hands. Employed 3,300 men in one year 
 on the improvements of his farm. Gave up land 
 for the railway and got no reduction or compen- 
 sation, 30200-9. Suggests tenants' improvements 
 should be valued before giving up possession, and 
 disputes settled by arbitration. No danger of 
 moderate rents being raised, but it is on large farms 
 the evil exists, 30210-7. Case of rent being raised 
 without tenant's knowledge on a change of land- 
 lords and agents, who refused to carry out their 
 predecessor's plans. Lease with restrictive clauses 
 offered instead, 30218-22. Rents raised generally 
 on the ArdnagashUl property, 30223. Tenants 
 should be able to borrow loans for building and 
 drainage direct, and landlords should sink rivers 
 or boundary streams. In disputes as to the per- 
 formance of public improvements, the Board of 
 Guardians should undertake them, and strike a 
 rate. Instances of stoppages of works, 30224-9. 
 Give security, and tenants wiU improve land, 
 30230-2. Rents mostly paid up. Time always 
 given to those in arrear, 30233—5. Rents are too 
 high all round, 30236-8. Labourers' houses very 
 bad. Money should be provided to build them as 
 in drainage, and farmers pay the rent in the shape 
 of interest on the outlay. The labourer repays the 
 farmer amply as it is by his labour and cheap wages, 
 30239-44. The farm of P. M'Carty excessively 
 rented. Mr. Campion knows nothing of the value 
 of land in Ireland. Rents should all be reduced,. 
 30245-9. 
 
 M'Ca/rty, Florence ; Sullivan, Florence ; Sullivan,. 
 
 Jeremiah ; Evans, James ; Harrington, Tim ; 
 
 Berry, Denis ; M'Carty, Eugene, Colbue, Co. 
 
 Cork, Tenants. — Skibhereen. 
 Tenants on the townland of Colbue. Rents, 
 raised. Give list with valuations of holdings. Last 
 rise 1879 on expiration of middleman's lease. Three 
 rises in fourteen years. E. M'Carty said he had to 
 pay for grazing of his cattle. His land will not 
 feed them, 30250-2. Twelve months' rent due all 
 round. Landlord gave cess and poor-rate last year, 
 and makes an allowance to those who improve if 
 they pay their rents. They have reclaimed their 
 land, 30253-60. 
 
 Hill, The Reverend P., Skibhereen, Co. Cork, Parish 
 Priest. — Skibhereen. 
 Ninety-nine per cent, of farms are over the valua- 
 tion. Except rich meadow land Griffith's valuation 
 is fair rent, 30261-6. Land Act has promoted 
 litigation, and in practice is injurious to tenants 
 30267-70. Farmers are small holders and very 
 poor ; are much in debt and eould not give mar- 
 riage portions to their daughters; stiU less find 
 money to buy their farms, 30271-3. Sale of interest 
 
 p2 
 
ex. 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Bill, The Eeverend P. — continued. 
 
 strictly prohibited, 30274. On some estates the 
 custom of giving a farm to eldest son exists, and 
 landlords like it. It works injuriously, however, 
 to the rest of the family. The father should be able 
 to leave it to whoever he likes. Moderate si-zed 
 farms better for the country than large ones. If 
 sub-division be permitted, a limit as to extent 
 should be fixed. Not less than twenty acres 
 in this district, 30275-82. Labourers' condition 
 wretched. They should have decent houses erected 
 for them, and a plot of land, both rent free, 
 30283-6. Wages, as a rule, 6d. or M. a day with 
 food; lOcZ. or Is. without. Low rate of wages due 
 to poverty of farmers. Labourers not scarce in 
 towns, 3.0287-9. Tenants' inprovements not con- 
 sidered in raising rents. Increase not general, 
 30290-1. Leases, which are the exception, should 
 be for not less than sixty years. Rents increased 
 on expiration of lease. Cess not allowed, but land- 
 lords pay half the poor-rate, 30292-7. Improve- 
 ments done by tenants except on the O'Donovan's 
 estate, 30298-9. The law should be simplified for 
 the benefit of the poor, 30300—2. Cases of hard- 
 ehjip, ejection, rules on estates, deprivation of 
 tjirbary rights, 30303-7. Great desire of farmers 
 to become ])easant proprietors and it would be a 
 benefit to the country. Hands in list showing pro- 
 portion between valuation and rent, 30308-1 1 . No 
 ejectments lately. Low rents and fixity preferable 
 to periodical valuations. Land fit for nothing else, 
 might be planted, 30312-8. Facilities should be 
 given to tenants to purchase. Clergymen might 
 value lands with a public arbitrator in case of dis- 
 putes, litigation should be discouraged, 3031 9-20. 
 
 , VoUhurat, Sir George, Blarney Castle, County Cork, 
 Landowner. — Cork. 
 Owns 35,000 acres in Cork. Land Act has been, 
 to a certain extent, the cause of the late distress, 
 though its jiiinciples are fair, 30321—3. Although 
 tenants haveturned out sub-tenants without compen- 
 sation, has never known a landlord to do so, thov^gh 
 no doubt there are exceptions, 30321-6, 30376. 
 It has checked landlords' improvements, and not 
 encouraged tenants, though before the Act slate 
 and timber were given for building. It induced 
 extravagant habits, and increased the number of 
 money-lenders. It has been injurious to the tenants, 
 30327-8. Right of sale not allowed, though witness 
 permits it as a favour. The only instance of sale 
 on the propei'ty has broken the incomer, 30329-33. 
 Tenants disinclined to take leases ; prefer yearly 
 tenancies under good landlords, 30334-6. Details 
 of landlord's expenditure on the Ballyvowney, Rath- 
 cole, Ardaman, Garrydine, and Blarney estates 
 from 1849 up to the present time, with rentals then 
 and now. Interest at two and a half per cent, 
 charged on portions only to tenants, the landlord 
 paying the rest. No increase of rent for twenty 
 years, 30337-47. Ti.'nants seldom make improve- 
 ments unless landlords help. Instance of tenants 
 at lowest rental not improving land, but letting it 
 out to dairymen, 30348-50. Tenants rarely build 
 good houses, 30351. Griffith's valuation never 
 thought of as a test for rent until present agitation, 
 30354. Instance of value of land in Kerry, 30355. 
 Case of tenant righting himself in five years, when 
 right of sale would have broken him, 30356-60. 
 Tenants ejected f(jr nonpayment, and sent to Ame- 
 rica at landlord's cost, doing well. Fines imposed 
 on new tenants of these farms, in some cases to 
 recoup losses, 30361-74. Notices to quit not neces- 
 sary for the payment of rents, 30375. " Farm row- 
 fences " really means reclamation ; tenants will con- 
 tinue to reclaim ; present outlay is a preparation 
 for further reclamation, 30377-9. Free sale reduces 
 landlords to position of rackrenters. On all the 
 old large estates tenants have practically fixity of 
 tenure. The three F's bring good landlords down 
 
 to the level of bad ones. No Act will prevent ex- 
 cessive rents, 30380—5. If landlords and tenants 
 do not make terms in two years tenants should he 
 turned into leaseholders for thirty one years. They 
 should settle their own rents, with a limit as to the 
 amount a solvent tenant ought to pay. Stamp 
 duties on leases, distress redemption to be abolished ; 
 give a clause as to right of re-entry, and subdivision 
 to make a lease void ; limited right of sale to be 
 allowed, 30386-9. His scheme for peasant pro- 
 prietary is the same as Mr. Hussey's. The three 
 F's would produce the same agitation in ten years 
 as now exists, 30390-6. The greater part of the 
 waste lands will not pay to reclaim them ; suggests 
 Government aid to develope the natural mineral 
 resources of the country ; success of Killarney rail- 
 way consti'ucted on county guarantee, 30397-400. 
 The distress is caused by bad seasons, and partly 
 by extravagance of tenants since the Land Act ; 
 farmers in the hands of money-lenders, 30401-3. 
 On the Blarney estate farms are let on leases, and 
 landlords make all improvements, 30404-5. His 
 tenants do make improvements ; but others, as a 
 rule, do not, unless encouraged and assisted by 
 landlords, 30619-21. Farmers have little agricul- 
 tural knowledge, and a model farm should be estab- 
 lished by Government, with proper instructors to 
 teach the best modes of cultivation, 30622. 
 
 Payne, John Warren, Esq., Land Agent and Landed 
 Proprietor, nearBantry, Co. Cork. — Cork. 
 
 Has the management of over 100,000 acres, and 
 the principal landowners are Lord Bantry, Mr. 
 Puxley, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Peet, 30406-9. Right of 
 sale allowed, with approval of tenant, on Lord 
 Bantry 's estate. Excessive prices objected to. 
 Instances, and eviction of incoming tenant in one 
 case who was subsequently reinstated at increased 
 rent, 30410-8. Change of tenancy unknown on 
 Bantry estate, and with few exceptions rents never 
 raised on any of the estates, 30419—2, 30459. 
 Evictions almost unknovsTi, 30427-9, 30464. Land ^ 
 Act, except as regards compensation, not beneficial 
 to tenants; Improvements by landlords and tenants 
 checked, 30430, 30432. Large sums spent on the 
 Jiantry erftate last year, for which no interest has 
 hitherto been charged, but will be charged for the 
 futiu'e, 30433-5. Capricious raising of rents and 
 evictions confined to small proprietors and new 
 purchasers ; should be stopped at any cost, 
 30436-8, 30448-9. Tenants can make their own 
 bargains, but if rents are raised on tenants in occu- 
 pation, compensation should be awarded on higher 
 rent, 304o'J-42, 30446. High rents can only be 
 adjusted on expiration of leases, 30443-5, 30449-54. 
 Case of experimental letting by auction, 30455-7. 
 Leases the exception, except on Lord Bantry's pro- 
 perty. The only defect is small holdings, 30458. 
 Grifiith's valuation most unequal, and no test ; on 
 bad mountain land it is high, and on good land, 
 low. Instances of the inequality of rents and 
 valuation, 30459-60. Peasant proprietary should 
 be tried as an experiment, but witness does not 
 believe in it. Sub-letting to be absolutely prohibited. 
 Instance of evil effects of sub-letting. Tenants im- 
 provements recognised, 30461-3. Only had two 
 cases in the Land Courts, 30465. 
 
 Barrett, John E., Esq., Carriganass Castle, County 
 Cork, Landowner and Land Agent. — Cork. 
 
 Manages 15,000 acres, 30466-8. Tenants have 
 no right of sale, bu.t has been allowed with veto on 
 incoming tenant, 30469-72. Rents have been ad- 
 justed on the estates of Messrs. Gumbleton and Lady 
 White, with, in some cases, a slight increase. Farms 
 squared to stop disputes ; this was in 1870 or 1871, 
 30473-82. Has only evicted three tenants, and 
 those for non-payment. Leases rare, and dis- 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cxi 
 
 Barrett, JoUn E., Esq. — continued. 
 
 iTiclination greater since Land Act, 30484-8. In 
 1873 revalued L,ord Kenmare's estate and increased 
 rental about one-third over Griliith's valuation on 
 tlie average. Isolated cases of excessive rents on 
 that valuation misrepresented, and gives explana- 
 tion. The land was A'alued by the feed of cows on 
 mountains, and tenants improvements were taken 
 into consideration, 30489-503. No instance of 
 rents being trebled, 3050G. The "Manning" case 
 — land was divided by fatliei- between two sons, one 
 of whom was evicted for non-payment, caused 
 through idleness and dissipation. Farm relet and 
 line imposed on new tenant, 30507-22. Time 
 allowed meanwhile to evicted tenant and house put 
 in charge oi caretakers, who twice deserted it, and 
 is now in occupation of brother of evicted tenant. 
 New tenant has portion of farm now at £70 a year, 
 withoutthe fisheries, which go, with remainder of land, 
 to the brother. New tenant is now under protection 
 of police, 30527-31. Rent raised on a farm through 
 diflerent valuations of agents, 30523-6 . Similar case 
 anddisturbancesby evictedtenants, 30535-41. Large 
 sums laid out on road-making and drainage, and 
 tenants will have to pay for loans from Board of 
 Works, 30543-4. Land Act has checked landlord's 
 improvements as well as tenants. If leases be 
 granted to yearly tenants the wanj of security will 
 be abolished, 30545-53. Tenants to have right of 
 sale, and landlord's conti'ol over selection of incoming 
 tenant, with no appeal, 30554-G. Arbitration to be 
 resorted to in cases of dispute on expiiution of lease, 
 and yearly tenants to have the same right of ajipeal. 
 In fact approves of the three F's, with no distinc- 
 tion as to farms and residental or non-residental 
 tenants, 30557-66. Landlords not to have power 
 to resume possession once a farm is let, save in cases 
 of temporary occupation, 30567-76. Has no faith 
 in the success of peasant proprietorship, but it 
 should have a trial. Prosperous times brought 
 people to the present crisis through extravagance 
 and recklessness, and the system of peasant pror 
 prietors will produce similar results. One-third of 
 the barony of Bantry is in the hands of two men, 
 moneylenders, and this will continue. New land- 
 lords will produce rack-renting, and fixity under old 
 landlords preferable, 30577-96. Sub-letting and 
 sub-dividing to be absolutely prohibited, 30597-8. 
 Moneylenders will buy land if they can, and would 
 find plenty of tenants to purchase interests at high 
 rates, 30599—605. Reclamation on a large scale 
 not profitable. Recommends advances to tenants 
 on cheap terms for drainage and improvements 
 instead of reclaiming, 30606-8. The condition of 
 the laboui'ers wretched, and wages very low. 
 Farmers in the district employ some all the year at 
 Qd. a day, with house and plot of land, 30609-15. 
 They should be comfortably housed and hold from 
 head landlord direct, 30607-8. 
 
 Becher, John Wrixon, Esq., Ballygibbin, Coimties 
 Kerry and Cork, Land Agent. — Cork. 
 Is agent for Lord Listowel and Sir H. W. 
 Becher. Tenant-right not permitted without con- 
 sent of landlord. Owing to depression, numbers of 
 applications to sell have increased, both lease- 
 holders and tenants, 30623-32. Old leasey in ex- 
 istence, new leases rare. Evictions for nonpayment 
 only, and only few number altogether ; tenant of 
 small holding bought out, 30633-9. On Sir H. 
 Becher's estate but little improvements to be made, 
 and rents lower than in famine time, 30640. On 
 Lord Listowel's Kerry estate over £11,000 spent 
 in ten years, principally in drainage ; tenants 
 charged in some instances for the outlay, 30641—6. 
 Revaluation made every twenty -one years, and 
 rents raised in those cases where no change has 
 been made for that period — average rise fifty per 
 cent, over Grifiith's valuation. In one case tenants 
 all applied for leases, which was refused as valua- 
 
 tion was not considered reliable, 30647-56. Land- 
 lords should pay county cess and poor-rates ; 
 periodical valuations, and no rise in interval ; right 
 of sale under certain conditions only ; establishment 
 of peasant proprietary, 30657-62. Labourers not 
 objected to on the Becher estate, nor decent cot- 
 tages, but squatters and mud cabins are, 30663-9. 
 No actual evictions on Lord Listowel's estate, 
 but tenants left for nonpayment ; two eases in 
 Land Courts ; County Courts not good tribunals, 
 30670-7. 
 
 Hegarty, Mr. Jeremiah, Mill street, Co. Cork, Poor 
 Law Guardian. — Corh. 
 • Holds under five landlords ; right of selling re- 
 cognised on the properties ; landlord's veto on cha- 
 racter or solvency of incomer only ; a good many sales 
 taken place at from four to thirty years' purchase ; 
 case of thirty years' puchase being actually given, 
 30677-89. Land Act made no change as regards 
 leases, and rents are not increased when leases are 
 granted, but mostly yearly tenants in the district ; 
 no advances or evictions, 3069,1-4. Proportion 
 rent bears to valuation is 175 or 180 to 100; fair 
 proportion 150 to 100. Witness has oflTered to take 
 a lease for sixty-one years at double the valuation, 
 30695-7. Valuation unfair and unequal. His own 
 holdings are nearly three times the valuation, and 
 cheap at the price. Has laid out large sums on the 
 land— dairy farms chiefly, 30698-703. Si^all 
 tenants could not find money to purchase under 
 Bright clauses, 30704-8. Recommends extension 
 of time for payment of holdings, and Government 
 advance more than two-thirds ; tenants would be 
 able to find one-fifth, 30709-13. Compensation to 
 landlords should be on rents paid, so that good land- 
 lords should not receive less than rack-renters, 
 30714-5. Waste land to be utilised by Govern- 
 ment for peasant proprietors, of which there is 
 plenty. Witness has reclaimed land with profit to 
 himself. Tenants in occupation to have facilities 
 for borrowing for improvements, 30716-22. 
 Stringent rales against subdividing or subletting, 
 and if peasants resold their holdings the same 
 rules should apply, 30723-8. Is a small owner, but 
 his interest goes with farmers against himself. His 
 tenants hold by lease at about 50 per cent, over 
 valuation, 30729-32. Labourers in most miserable 
 condition ; wages very low, and cottages not fit to 
 live in. Government should advance means for re- 
 building to farmers, 30733-40. Absentee land- 
 lords should pay fair proportion of county cess and 
 the poor-rates, 30741-43. Unfair burdens on land- 
 lord and tenant by taxation under Poor Law 
 system for Imperial purposes. Farmers should be 
 more fairly represented as regards taxation at Road 
 Sessions or Grand Juries, 30744-5. Fair rents 
 might be arrived at by Court of Arbitration com- 
 posed of thoroughly practical men, 30746-7. 
 
 Fell, Richard Latham, Esq., Mitchelsfort, Co. Cork, 
 Landowner. — Cork. 
 Holds about 1,100 acres and occupies most of it 
 himself, 30748-52, 30758. Tenant-right not re- 
 cognised, but permitted, and practice is on the in- 
 crease. Leases on the decrease, through fear of 
 increase of rent and loss of compensation for dis- 
 turbance, 30753-7. A few cases of ejectment in 
 the district (but none on witness's property) 
 through inability to pay, 30759-62. Land Act 
 was formed to maintain a small system of farming 
 which is bad. High prices given for land prevent 
 people making a proper living out of it. Rents 
 should not exceed from one-fourth to one-half the 
 produce, according to the condition of the land In 
 1859-61 times were as bad as now, and tenants 
 worked for witness, but now none have applied for 
 work though rents not paid. Their holdings are 
 from £4 to £12 rental, 30763-7. Climate inimical 
 to agriculture generally. Crops lost tbrouali 
 
^xu 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Fell, Richard Latham, Esq. — continued. 
 
 climate. Tenants cannot make the land pay, and 
 have not the means of cultivating properly. Small 
 holding system should be abolished by turning out 
 the tenants as opportunity offered. Case of tenant 
 failing on small holding, succeeding on large farm, 
 30768-76. Case of eviction of a tenant on the 
 passing of the Act who had allowed his farm to get 
 into very bad condition, 30777-8. Tenants' im- 
 provements seldom permanent. Landlords should 
 do all improvements, and tenants pay interest on 
 the outlay, reserving their capital for the cultiva- 
 tion and stocking of the land. Gives an instance 
 of the success of this plan. Waste lands do not 
 pay for reclamation, 30779-84. Has no faith iu 
 peasant proprietary, or that the proprietors would 
 work with greater energy than as tenants, or lay 
 out anything in the land, 30785-7. Land Act 
 has caused much discontent and debt, 30789-90. 
 Perpetuity of tenure will encourage sub-division 
 and sub-letting, for which there is no check. 
 Leases only can stop it. It cannot be discovered 
 until the expiration of a lease, and then if the 
 land has been assigned it comes out. Case of 
 tenant assigning without permission, 30792-807. 
 Arbitration useful in disputes between landlord 
 and tenant, especially as a protection to a tenant 
 who is virtually at the mercy of a bad landlord or 
 rack-renter. In bad times rents should be reduced, 
 and in good times raised, and arbitration might be 
 employed to decide when the rises and falls should 
 take place. Arbitrators should be fair, upright, 
 men. It is a bad case that will not bear arbitra- 
 tion, 30808-11. Fines, if imposed, should extend 
 over the whole term of lease. If a tenant fails 
 through bad times, and is evicted before lease ex- 
 pires, the landlord should refund a proportion of 
 the fine. There should be only two interests in 
 the soil. If more than the landlord and tenant, 
 rack-renting begins, and free sale should not be 
 permitted, for it becomes a question of rack-rent, 
 30812-6. 
 
 Mwrphy, Very Rev. Canon, Youghal, Co. Cork, 
 Parish Priest. — Cork. 
 Hands in a statement proving the existence of 
 rack-renting for a number of years on the estate of 
 Leaders' Minors in Ballynerger, West Youghal. 
 During last eighteen years tenants have been evicted 
 for non-payment, and land re-let at same rents 
 (nearly 100 per cent, over valuation), and some of 
 the new tenants have been evicted for non-payment. 
 They are contracted out of the Land Act, have to 
 pay rates and taxes, and would be utterly unable to 
 pay rents, but for assistance from friends, or other 
 business. Had the lands been let at moderate rents 
 the original tenants would be now in possession, and 
 in a prosperous condition, 30817-21. Witness is in 
 favour of the three F's., with full facilities for 
 tenants to become owners by the purchase of land 
 by the Land Courts, and re-sold to tenants. Rents 
 to be fixed once and for ever. Periodical valuations 
 tend to the deterioration and exhaustion of the soil 
 by tenants to avoid increase of rent, 30822-6. Cases 
 of two tenants rack-rented on estate of Major John 
 owing to competition for land, and who are con- 
 tracted out of the benefits of the Land Act by clauses 
 in the leases, 30827-36. 
 
 Carver, The Rev. John, Kilworth, Co. Cork, Roman 
 Catholic Administrator. — Cork. 
 Tenants, numbering about 150, on the estates in 
 his parish pay fifty per cent, over the valuation. 
 Land middling, only fit for tillage, and rents are not 
 in fair proportion to value. Two-thirds of the rents 
 raised dming last twenty years, and on change of 
 tenancy or falling in of lease rents are raised. On 
 one townland rents raised twenty-five per cent, when 
 others were reducing all round, 30837-48. Old 
 leases that fell in. Distresses issued when objections 
 
 made to increase, 30849-51. Rents higher than ons 
 surrounding land. Case of rents raised on death of a 
 proprietor ; and witness can multiply such instances 
 from other townlands, 30852-5. Tenants make all 
 improvements, landlords none, 30856-7. Evictions 
 not common, and as a rule for non-payment. 
 Tenants will consent to any increase rather than 
 give up their land. Rents paid as a rule with fair- 
 punctuality, 30858-61. There are no peasant pro- 
 prietors. Have no means to buy, and could not find 
 balance of purchase-money if Government advanced 
 two-thirds. Not six tenants who could give 
 marriage portion, 30861-3. Is in favour of fair 
 rents and fixity of tenure. Given that, tenants will 
 pay their way, and improve. Peasant proprietary 
 would be a good measure, but people are not looking" 
 for it, 30864. 
 
 Stokes, Edward B., Esq., Castle Townsend, Co. Cork^ 
 Land Agent and Solicitor. — Cork. 
 Is agent over the Castle Townsend estate, and 
 over part of Lord Ventry's property, 30865, 30906. 
 Long leases exist on the Townsend estate : som^ 
 for sixty, and others for three hundred years — the 
 latter granted on payment of fines, at very low 
 rents, below the valuation. No account given by 
 the late agent of these transactions to witness,. 
 30866-82. Tenants are better ofi" than those on 
 other estates, but their improvements are not con- 
 siderable, 30883-6. They have a right to sublet^ 
 no provision against it in leases ; not allowed to- 
 incumber, mortgage, or borrow, 30892-9. No diffi- 
 culty in collecting rents until a month ago ; received 
 about two-thirds of rent due ; gave no reduction,, 
 and refused Griffith's valuation, 30900-5. On 
 Lord Ventry's estate tenants have fair interest in 
 their holdings, and are able, with permission, to sell 
 their interests. They are comfortable, thrifty, and 
 improving, 30887-91. Lord Ventry has made con- 
 siderable improvements, 30907-9. Introduced a 
 hanging gale on the Townsend estate instead of the 
 system of three months' bills for payment of rent^ 
 30910-12. No evictions on either of the estates 
 he manages, 30915-6, and no cases in the Land 
 Courts, 30914. 
 
 M'Swiney, Very Rev. Canon, Bandon, county Cork^ 
 Parish Priest. — Cork. 
 Has been acquainted with farming affairs all his 
 life. Under the Land Act landlords have a facility 
 for raising rents justly and unjustly, even the- 
 smallest rentals, without considering tenants' im- 
 provements, 30915-24. No matter what the rents 
 may be tenants will stick to their land, and a 
 general valuation should be made, taking G-riffith's- 
 as the basis on which to proceed. Griffith's 
 valuation has its defects, and is both irregular 
 and unequal in some instances. It was never 
 very low, but would do for a starting point. Fixity 
 of tenure should be established. Objections to sales 
 have too much weight attached to them, as with fair 
 rents and fixity they would be rare, 30925. Con- 
 dition of labourers wretched, and their wages 
 trifling, with partial food, and, as a rule, only get 
 work two or three days a week. They should have- 
 a potato garden at same rent as farmers pay, and 
 their labour should be paid for in money, not in 
 kind, 30926-30, 30932. Their perquisites in the 
 shape of grazing, potatoes, manure, sheep, <fec., are 
 uncertain, and may fail. An average of fifty 
 labourers and their families obtained relief from the 
 ReUef Fund, 30931-30933. 
 
 Sherlock, George K., Esq., Bandon, Co. Cork, Land 
 Agent and Solicitor. — Cork. 
 Is agent for Mr. Shaw, the representative of Mr. 
 Bowles, and several small estates in the west of 
 the county, 30933-6. Compensation allowed by 
 the Act for capricious evictions insufficient. Free 
 sales should be allowed with landlord's approval 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXlll 
 
 Sherlock, George K., Esq. — continued. 
 
 of new tenant. Tenants incur losses by not selling 
 tlieir interests, especially when in debt to mer- 
 chants. Case of creditor buying tenant's interest, 
 and served with notice to quit by landlord, 
 30937-42. Refusal of landlord to allow sale of 
 tenant's interest, tenant being in difficulties and 
 wishing to leave, 30943-4. Since re-let by land- 
 lord to another tenant, 30945-6. Free sales 
 allowed on the Devonshire estate, and on Mr. 
 Shaw's, and high prices obtained, 30947-8. Devon- 
 shire property much improved and well managed. 
 No raising of rents, which are very moderate, and 
 leases granted for thirty-one years at nominal in- 
 crease, say £1, 30949-51. i'he Act has checked 
 improvements, except where there are very good 
 landlords, by the clause in which the exhaustion of 
 improvements according to the time they have been 
 made has to be considered in calculating compen- 
 sation. It is regarded by tenants as a means of 
 rack-renting, and it enables landlords to contract 
 tenants out of the benefits of the Act. In new 
 Acts provision should be made for leases to be 
 granted for ninety-nine years, assignment clauses to 
 be omitted ; sub-letting strictly prohibited, and 
 deterioration prevented. Fixity of tenure to be 
 given, and differences as to rents to be referred to a 
 court of arbitration ; both landlord and tenant 
 having the right to appeal against existing rents. 
 Tenant should provide one-sixth of the purchase 
 money under the Bright clauses, and the extension 
 of the clauses to be in a rational way, 30952-63. 
 Confidence is felt in the decisions of the chairman 
 under the Land Act, but its clauses are defective, 
 30964-6. Only evictions in the district have been 
 in consequence of tenants being sold out by credi- 
 tors. If free sales were allowed these executions 
 would cease. Farmers regard their right to the soil 
 as their own, and hand down their farms in succes- 
 sion to their sons every year, 30967-9. 
 
 Murphy, Mr. John, Castleview, Macroom, Co. Cork ; 
 Tenant Farmer. — Cork. 
 Farms land on lease for lives renewable for ever, 
 and owns property. Has two or three tenants. By 
 his own improvements has made a model farm, and 
 has held his position when others failed. Purchased 
 a townland, and owes his success to long lease. 
 Tenants must have perpetuity of tenure to develope 
 the resources of the country, but they cannot fulfil 
 the conditions of leases, though they accept rack- 
 rents to hold land. Habitations for labourers with 
 a piece of land should be provided. Instance of 
 competition for land. Case of tenants being ousted 
 ■from the proposed purchase of land under the 
 Bright clauses, 30970-3. If the three F's were 
 established the people would be satisfied, and 
 improve the land ; competition, fines and raising 
 rents stop them now, 30975-9. Case of new agents 
 raising rents by stopping allowances to tenants and 
 offering leases contracting them out of all benefits 
 and compensation, 30980-5. 
 
 Deane, Benjamin, Esq., Oappoquin, Co. Waterford, 
 Land Agent. — Clonmel. 
 Agent for Mr. John Ussher, Sir Richard 
 Musgrove, and Sir John Keane ; nearly 20,000 
 acres, 30990-91. No sale of tenant's interest 
 allowed, 30992—3. Tenant leaving voluntarily re- 
 ceives a lift of about a year to a year and a half's 
 rent ; this practice was in existence before the Land 
 Act, 30994-5. Few cases, always settled without 
 going into Court, 30996-7. On Mr. Ussher's es- 
 tate great improvements have been made, and given 
 as a gift to the tenants besides lime and manure ; 
 no interest asked, 30998, 31003. On two last gales 
 25 per cent, reduction, 31004. On Sir R. Musgrove's, 
 slates and timber given ; drainage done by landlord 
 before the Act, not since ; no interest asked since ; 
 thorough drainage under the Board of Works in 
 1847, when a few tenants had to pay a per-centage ; 
 
 grants of timber and iron for gates, ifec, 31 005-1 OJ 
 Much the same done on Sir J. Kean's property, 
 31011. Some of the rents not changed for forty 
 years, but sometimes changed on droppiug of lease, 
 or transfer of farm to a different tenant ; no regular 
 increase or revaluation, 31013-16. Few improve- 
 ments by tenants, except reclaiming mountain lands, 
 31017-19. Griffith's valuation a bad criterion of 
 rent, being uncertain, 31020-3. Retrospective 
 clauses of Land Act unfair towards improving land- 
 lords ; instances in point, 31024. Disturbance and 
 compensation clauses injurious to landlord and 
 tenant, 31025-8. Would give every possible facility 
 to tenants to purchase, if left to natural causes, but 
 strongly against compulsory expropriation of land- 
 lords, 31032-34. Would limit purchase to not less 
 than fifty acres ; great fear of subdivision, 31035-6. 
 Few evictions ; have practically fixity of tenure, 
 31037-8. No difficulty in fixing rents, 31040. 
 Not in favour of arbitration ; in case of dispute 
 would make valuation himself, then get a perfectly 
 independent professional man, and his decision 
 would be final ; tenant no voice in matter, but 
 would not press him unfairly, 31041-50. Admits 
 this is not freedom of contract, 31051. Tenants 
 very prosperous, labourers well off, 'except as regards 
 their houses ; should have more land attached, 31052 
 -6. 
 
 Mooney, Reverend Maurice, Cahir, Co. Tipperary, 
 Parish Priest. — Clonmel. 
 Difference between valuation and rentals, 31058. 
 Principal landowners in district — Lady Mary 
 Chartis, Mr. Lowe; on the latter's property, rental 
 25 per cent, over valuation, 310G0. Land so poor 
 no butter can be made ; only kept up by force of 
 manure ; grow wheat and potatoes principally, 
 31062-7. Prices lower now than at time of valua- 
 tion, 31069. A great hardship that tenants are not 
 benefitted by their reclamations, 31070-31078. 
 Case of tenant involving himself for benefit of 
 agent, 31071-7. On the Chartis property 5 per cent, 
 increase is placed on reclaimed lands, 31084. Cases 
 of eviction on Mr. Lowe's estate ; where agreements 
 signed, tenants were put back as caretakers pending 
 redemption, 31 085-89. Condition of tenants' houses, 
 31090-2. Tenants would build if they had fixity 
 of tenure, 31093. Leases for ever preferable to 
 peasant proprietary, instance in point, 31095.- 
 31100. Considers the thi-ee F's would satisfy all 
 the practical farmers ; many people go in for 
 peasant proprietorship who are not farmers at all, 
 31104-5. Instances of where witness mediated 
 between landlord and tenant upon the payment of 
 rent, 31109. Chief complaint is that the fixing of 
 rent is in the landlord's hands, 31123-6. Tenants 
 consider Government valuation the amount they 
 ought to pay, 31127-34. Some independent party 
 ought to fix the rent, 31136. 
 
 Heffeman, Mr. John, Cuckoo Hill, Cahir, Co. Tip- 
 perary, Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Holds under three landlords, also some portion 
 in fee from Church Commissioners, 31141. Land 
 Act has not been a benefit to tenant-farmers, as it 
 has not protected tenant against capricious eviction, 
 21142-6. Case of capricious eviction, 31148-9! 
 A good many rack-rents in his district, 31150. 
 Considers Griffith's valuation, though rather un- 
 equal on the whole, a fair one, 31151-5. Case of 
 rent raising, 31163. Would let landlord and 
 tenant settle the rent, but in case of dispute would 
 bring in a Government valuator, 31166-72. Fixity 
 of tenure so long as rent was paid, 31173. Tenant 
 should have power to sell his interest, landlord to 
 have right of pre-emption, 31174-6. Tenants make 
 the improvements as a rule, 31177. Landlords very 
 little; Lord Donoghmore improves, but charges 
 6 per cent, interest, 31178. The three F's a satis- 
 factory solution, 31 179-81. Against expropriating 
 the landlords, but would give tenants, where prac- 
 
CXIV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Heffeman, John — continued. 
 
 cable, Government aid towards purchasing their 
 holdings, 3 1 182-84. Bought himself under Church 
 Temporalities ; gave twenty-three and a half years' 
 purchase, 31189, 31200. No peasant proprietors 
 under ten acres, 3 1 205. Labourers' condition good ; 
 IQd. a day with house and garden, including their 
 board, 31212-14. Few labourers hold direct from 
 landlord, 31217. Labourers' houses very bad, 
 farmers do not build for them, 31222-2.5. 
 
 Dennis, Mr. Charles Stratford, Lakeview, Waterford, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Holds under lease from middleman, grievance 
 with reference to it, deprived by it of all benefit 
 under Act of 1870, the facts of the case, 31235-8. 
 Pays 110 per cent, over Griffith's, 31251. Fai-m 
 spoilt by under tenant, 31252. Wishes to drain 
 lake, but no help will be given liim, 31256. The 
 system of middlemen the curse of the country, 
 31258-9. Objects to peasant proprietary, 31261. 
 
 Finn, Rev. Thomas, Newcastle and Waterford, Co. 
 Tipperary, Parish Priest. — Clonmel. 
 Parish Priest of Newcastle and Waterford for the 
 last six years, 31270-75. No evictions, but 
 numerous eviction proceedings, 31277-84. Con- 
 siders the rents too high, case in point, 31285—9. 
 Instance of tenant being compelled under threat of 
 eviction, to take a lease at increased rent of land 
 all reclaimed by himself, 31290-1. Several other 
 cases of the same kind, 31294-97. Leases contract- 
 ing tenants out of Land Act, instance of five leases 
 in succession to one man, since 1852, rent raised 
 each time, clauses very stringent, 31299-7. Such 
 treatment stops all improvement, 3 1308-1 0. Would 
 take away fromi lai^dlords the power of fixing rents, 
 and vest it in some tribunal, 31311, 31319. 
 Tenants are not free agents, must submit from fear 
 of eviction, 31312-18. Tenant to have fixity of 
 tenure, and liberty to sell, he would then improve, 
 31320-22. Case of a peasant proprietor thriving on 
 only seyen acres, 31323—4. In favour of peasant 
 proprietors, but would not like to compel landlords 
 to sell, but thinks with Government help properties 
 could be bought at any time, 31325—8. The three 
 F's. would content the people, 31329. • 
 
 Nugent, John, Bamagholeen, Co. Tipperary, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Farms twelve to fifteen acres, 31331. Case of 
 increase of rent, valuation £12 15s., old rent £21 
 (ofi"ered, but refused), new rent £32, 31332-45. 
 
 Mulcahy, Patrick, Ballydonagh, Co. Tipperary, Tenant 
 Farmer. — €lonmel. 
 Corroborated Father Finn's- evidence concerning 
 him, 31346-8. Knows Lord Stradbrook raised the 
 rents every year, 31349. 
 
 Walsh, John, Bawnfawn, Co. Tipperary, Tenant Far- 
 mer. — Clonmel. 
 Truth of Father Finn's evidence, 31350-1. Con- 
 tracted by lease out of Land Act^ obliged to take it 
 or go, 31351-4. 
 
 Maher, John, Crougherskin, Co. Tipperary, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Case mentioned by Father Finn, all he said quite 
 true, 31356. Great hardships during Stra;dbrook's 
 time, property since bought by Lord Ashtown, and 
 rent raised, compelled to take lease, 31357—64. A 
 list of valuations and rents on Lord Ashtown's 
 property, 31370-4. £4 charged for each lease, and 
 30s. more for map, 31372. 
 
 Nugent, Edwin, Ballynaoarberry, Co. Tipperary, Ten- 
 ant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 _ Holds under Lord Ashtown, rent £165, valua- 
 tion, £98. In 1869 took a new lease for sixteen 
 years, longer term not given, former lease was 
 twenty years, has made great improvements, but now 
 finds he cannot live, rent so high, rent increased on 
 
 improvements on taking of new lease, 31377-82, 
 31387-8. Helped with slate and timber towards 
 buUding, 31384-90. Had to give two acres to Lord 
 Stradbrook, and was afterwards served with eject- 
 ment, 31391. 
 
 Ardagh, William Michael, Esq., Cloonea House, Dun- 
 garvan, Co. Waterford, Land Owner, Agent, 
 and Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Agent over 3,000 acres, has two large farms under 
 Lord Waterford and Mr. Palliser, 31393-6. Has 
 evicted for non-payment, never evicted for subletting, 
 31398-43402. Leases are granted, 31404. No 
 changes of rent except on dropping in of old leases, 
 31407-9. No rise of rent except in case of agreement, 
 and no disturbance as long as rent is paid, 31410. 
 Lord Waterford never raises his rents, or disturbs a 
 good tenant, all prosperous, 31410-7. The larger class 
 of farmers are better off than small ones, 31418-20. 
 Considers a tenant shotild not purchase less than 
 100 acres, imless he has some other source of living, 
 31421-4.' Cases of purchase by tenant-farmers ia 
 Landed Estates Court, showing landlords are enabled 
 to press tenants, 31427-29. Suggests fixity of 
 tenure at fair rents, and, to a certain point, free 
 sale, landlord to have a right of veto, 31430-2. In 
 favour of enlarging farms, 31433—4. In case of 
 buildings landlords allow timber and slates, 31439— 
 43. Griffith's valuation was not made for rental, 
 but for valuation purposes, case in point, 31444-6. 
 A revaluation by Government desirable if mountains 
 and demesnes excepted, 31448—51. Is of opinion 
 that a long lease with a moderate rent and certain 
 conditions is better than peasant proprietorship; 
 states reasons, 31452-6. Should be some court of 
 appeal with power to adjust rents, and enforce pay- 
 ment within six months, 31457-9. 
 
 Nolan, Mr. Michael, Ringwille, Ferrybank, Waterford, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Is paying exorbitant rent, 31466. Took a lease 
 for twenty one years, knowing estate was going to 
 be sold, so expected to be able to pay the fee- 
 simple, estate sold, tenant got no opportunity of 
 purchasing, 31467-7. Would have free sale and a 
 Government valuator to prevent the evils of rent 
 raising, which must come down from foreign compe- 
 tition, 31478-41. Thinks the three F's. willin the 
 end lead to proprietorship, 31482-85. Has no 
 opinion of leases, as a tenant is always liable at ex- 
 piration to have rent increased, 31487. Want of 
 security under present law the great gi-ievance, 
 31487-9. 
 
 Hely, John George, Esq., Scartbally, Cappoquin, Co. 
 Waterford, Land Owner and Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Owner of about 600 acres, farms 480 acres, has a 
 few tenants, 31492-7. Bought this property about 
 the passing of the Land Act, had to pay over 
 £18,000 to the tenants who held the lands, 31497- 
 31501. Most extortionate claims lodged in Coimty 
 Court, many of which were settled in Court for 
 amount offered by witness, thinks that the Chairman 
 knew very little about a land claim, in fact in one 
 case was obliged to appeal, which resulted in decree 
 being reduced from £400 to £100,51503-10. From 
 this fact considers assessors of great use, 31511. 
 Value of unexhausted manures, one of the most 
 difficvilt questions under Land Act, 31515-16. The 
 labouring class badly treated by the farmers, some 
 labourers have house and half-ari-acre of land for 15s. 
 a year, wages Is. 6d. a day ; were better oS' last year 
 than many of the farmers, 31518-19. Great emi- 
 gration among the young and active men, 31520. 
 Labourers always build their own houses, of mud 
 and thitch, 31521-2. More discontent among 
 labourers than the farmers. 
 
 Lajfan, Thomas, M.D.,Cashel, Co. Tipperary. — Clonmel. 
 
 Much interested in the labour question, 31526 — 7 
 
 Considers the 10th section failing in relieving or 
 
 improving the condition of the labourer, 31528—29. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cxv 
 
 Laffan, Dr. Thomas — continued. 
 
 Their condition is very wretched, cases where he has 
 tried to better their condition and faUed, 31533. 
 Suggests that the labourer should live at the scene 
 of his work, and be tied to the farmer by cottier 
 relations, and that every occupier who gets fixity of 
 tenure, should give half-an-acre of land at Govern- 
 ment valuation to each labourer employed during 
 the year, 31535. Very little consideration shown 
 them in case of illness or death ; scheme for benefit- 
 ing them, 31535. 
 
 0' Halloran, Mr. John S., Grawn House, Fethard, 
 Co. Tipperary, Tenant Farmer. — Glonmel. 
 No adequate compensation for outlay on improve- 
 ments under Act of 1870, which is a great grievance 
 31538-43. Thinks large tenants should be 
 compensated for disturbance on a better scale, 
 31548-51. Condition of labourers wants improv- 
 ing, 31554. 
 
 <?mr?/, Jerome J., Esq.,Peppardstown, Fethard, County 
 Tipperary, Landowner and Tenant Farmer. — 
 Clonmel. 
 In favour of the Bright Clauses being worked as 
 much as possible and extended, 31556. Would not 
 compel a landlord to break up his propeiijy to sell 
 to a tenant, biit Government should give more 
 facilities in the way of lending money, 31557. 
 Purchased under Church Act, paid one third of tlie 
 money down and the rest in ten instalments, 
 31558-9. Tenant proprietary applicable to all 
 sized farms, 31564-6. Greatly in favour of the three 
 F's, might go on at the same time with the scheme 
 for peasant proprietary, 31667-9. Thinks a rent 
 shifting with prices would be the best plan, as now 
 a man may be bound by lease to pay a rent much 
 too high, but which when lease was made was, per- 
 haps, very moderate, 31570-76. Court of Appeal 
 to decide disputes about rent, 31576-7. 
 
 Burdon, Eev. David, Mitchelstown, County Cork, 
 Parish Priest. — Glonmel. 
 Has lived in Michelstown for the last eight years, 
 31579-82. The relations on five properties be- 
 tween landlords and tenants, the Buckley estate. 
 This estate, formerly portion of the Kingston estate, 
 21587, was purchased by a successful manufacturer 
 for the purpose of making money. Mr Bridge was 
 appointed agent, the property was re-valued by a 
 Mr Walker, and an increase of 50 to 100 per cent, 
 imposed on the tenantry on their own improvements 
 and reclamations, 31583. Great opposition on 
 their part, a table verified by witnesses, of the old 
 and the increased rents, showing that the increases 
 were from 50 to 500 per cent. 31584-85. Nearly 
 300 families on this estate have been receiving 
 relief up to 15th August last, 31585-6. The Kingston 
 estate, now owned by Mr. Webber, is one of the 
 best managed in the country, the tenants have 
 practically the three F's ; in case of selling or sub- 
 letting a small increase with a new lease, not 
 unusual, 21587-8. Great emi^loyment given ; as 
 proof of the three F's being a benefit to the land- 
 lord, there have been no outstanding arrears even 
 after three such bad years. Mr Webber is in favour 
 of legalizing the three F's, 21587-89. The Mont- 
 gomeiy estate. Three farms surrendered from 
 excessive rents demanded, at present, unoccupied. 
 Hent as a rule twice the valuation and in one case 
 three times, penal clauses in the leases. Case of 
 Widow Magrath. Tenants must pay the whole 
 poor rate, 31592-6. Leases of no value, tenants 
 so overwhelmed with debt have to borrow the rent 
 from the bank, 31597. Case in point, 31598-31601. 
 Mrs. Gearn's estate, tenant held under Roper lease, 
 a leace called after an agent ; and by which as they 
 fell in the rents were doubled ; and in one case 
 raised from 10s. M. to £2 an acre, 31602-5. Mr. 
 Henry Young's property. System after purchasing 
 was to fix a fine on each holding and on payment of 
 the fine, to grant a very long lease with increased 
 
 rent, 31607. Case in point, 31609. The above 
 properties were, at one time part of the Kingston 
 estate, 31 611. Suggestions for proposed legislation 
 on the Land Question, a permanent agricultural 
 State department, compensation to landlords of a, 
 certain class, in case of a valuation and decrease of 
 rent, 31611. Vested right to be respected, 
 31615-16. Many hereditary landlords would be 
 unfaii-ly treated if rents were lowered. No difficulty 
 in the case of land jobl)ers, 31617-31618. Not 
 altogether in favour of free sale, as tenants would 
 borrow on the interest thus created, or to buy, and 
 thus get into difficulties, 31624-27. In case of free 
 sale, landlords to have right of veto, sub-letting, 
 and moi'tgaging illegal. No peasant proprietary 
 under 20 acres. All reclamations to be under 
 . control of Minister of Agriculture. In case of com- 
 pulsory sale of absentees, or of the property of 
 companies, instalments to cover principal and in- 
 terest, 31632. Every inducement should be given 
 to create peasant proprietors, 31633. 
 
 Eachett, Mr. Michael, Glenbawn, Co. Tipperary, 
 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 
 Took his farm in 1853, 31639. Several rises of 
 
 rent, 31647-50. At last refused to pay another 
 
 increase, and surrendered, when settlement was 
 
 come to and the rent reduced, 31651. After a short 
 
 time, an assignment was given him and a slight 
 
 increase made, 31^3. Obliged to pay the whole 
 
 poor rate, 31653-4. Kents increased on account 
 
 , of his reclamation, 31655. All the land rack-rented, 
 
 31658. 
 
 Tobin, Mr. "James, Croaghnagree, Co. Tipperary, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Tenant on Lord Ashtown's estate, 31659. Held 
 by lease under Lord Stradbrook, it expired ; Lord 
 Ashtown bought estate, and his rent increased; 
 two increases previous to that ; is now paying more 
 than double Griffith's valuation, 31661-9. Built a 
 house at his own expense," was afterwards served 
 with notice of ejectment, 31670-7. 
 
 Tobin, Mr. Michael, Croaghnagree, Co. Tipperary, 
 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 
 Holds by lease under same landlord, 31678-83. 
 
 Pent excessive, but was obliged to accept lease and 
 
 increased rents, or go, had no alternative, 
 
 31684-88. 
 
 Butler, Mr. Pierce, Patrick's Well, Co. Tipperary, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Holds by lease, 31695. Complains that his rent 
 is too high, 31709-10. £100 deposit on lease 
 which he is unable to get back, 31712-13. 
 
 Nugent, Mr. Patrick, Greenane, Co. Tipperary, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Holds under lease for 31 year's and his own life, 
 31719-20. Considers his rent much too high, 25 
 per cent, over Griffith's valuation, or £178 woiild 
 be a fair rent, is now paying £303 a year, 
 31730-33. Got an abatement of £50 last year, 
 paid in full this, 31740-45. WUling to pay a fair 
 rent, irrespective of the valuation, 31747|-51. No 
 disturbance as long as a fair rent is paid, and liberty 
 to sell would satisfy' most of the people, 31752-4. 
 Would not care to purchase if he had free sale, 
 31756. 
 
 M'Enerney, Mr. Denis, Farm Loder, Clonmel, Co. 
 Tipperary, Tenant Farmer. — Glonmel. 
 Holds under two landlords, 31760. By lease for 
 217 years and own life, from Mr. Watson, and 
 from year to year under Mr. Bagwell, had no 
 freedom of contract in taking lease, had to accept 
 landlord's terms or go, 31763-76. Offered to give 
 uji jjossession and take seven years' compensation, but 
 landlord would not agree, 31779-81. All his land 
 over rented, 31782-86. Land Act stopped evic- 
 tions on title, but does not give them security as 
 landlords can increase rent and then evict for non- 
 payment; case in point, 31791-96. Evictions, save 
 
 9 
 
ex 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 M'Enernei/, Denis — covtimied. 
 
 for non-payment, to be abolished, all land to be let 
 at Griffith's valuation, anything exceeding this will 
 not content the people, 31798-31804. Would allow 
 liberty to sell, 316U7. Tenants have to pay rates, 
 and CO. cess for the roads, which are measured in with 
 their farms, 31808-16. No occupation but the 
 land, 31817-19. Not very familiar with the scheme 
 of peasant proprietary, more in favour of the three 
 F's. 31820-2. Would not compel a landlord to 
 sell, many of them would be willing enough, 
 31822-26. Instance of the valuation of land, 
 31826-28. 
 
 C'DonnaU, Mr. Patrick, Patrick's Well, Co. Tipperary, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Holds under lease from middleman foi' three lives 
 or 31 years, 31832-37. Two acres were taken 
 away by railway company, another man holds six 
 acres of it by lease, and yet witness is obliged to 
 pay rent for the whole or go, 31839-48. Holds 
 another farm under a separate lease, 31850— 55. _ 
 Four years yet to run when he was served with 
 notice to quit, and 2 acres claimed and taken away 
 under a higher title ; is still obliged to pay rent 
 for the whole, 31856-70. £600 or £700 given as 
 fine at commencement of lease, 31871. 
 
 Ilanly, Mr. Michael, Moorestown, Co. Tipperary, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Held under lease from middleman and subject 
 to his interest, 31873. At expiration of lease a 
 new one was granted, as tenant fi'om year to year, 
 determinable by notice to quit, 31875-31887. 
 Made gi-eat improvements, land re- valued, 31876. 
 Was served with notice to quit, which, however, 
 was not proceeded with, but is now in constant 
 dread of his rent being raised, 31877-98, 31902. 
 Wishes some law to prevent this state of things, 
 31903. 
 
 Anthony, Mr. Michael Arthur, Dungarvan, Co. Water- 
 ford, Merchant and Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Holds by lease under Sir Henry W. Barron, 
 31908-10. Rent much too high, double the valua- 
 tion, 31911-12. . Built out-offices, on the under- 
 standing that he was to be allowed for them, but 
 has never been, 31913. Holds from year to year 
 under Mr. Villiers Sluart, M.P. Rent much too 
 high, putting Griffith's valuation out of the ques- 
 tion, 31914-18. If dependent on farming only, 
 could not pay his rent, 31927-8. Rents should be 
 lowered ; in case of disjiutes Government to step in, 
 31936. Considers Griffith's valuation in Co. Water- 
 ford a very fair one, 31929-35. Tenants im]n'ove- 
 ments should not be valued, full security should be 
 given as long as I'ent was paid ; right of sale 
 allowed,' giving landlord a veto on incoming tenant, 
 31936-41. Peasant proprietary should grow gra- 
 dually, would not compel landlords to sell, 31943-5. 
 Mr. Stuart allowrf sale, but retains right of veto, 
 31946. A urcat deal of reclamation going on, 
 31947-50. Few leases, nearly all tenants from 
 year to year, tenants make improvements, landlord 
 only on reclaimed lands, 31951-8. Rent raising 
 and insecurity prevents improvements, instances of, 
 31559-67. Roads included in measurement of 
 farms, 31967-9. Case of distress for rent, 31970. 
 Several evictions by Sir Nugent Domville. Land 
 lying idle, 31971-6. After the families were 
 evicted they died of starvation, several cases in 
 point, 31977-87. 
 
 Croom, Mr. William, Annsfort, Clonmel, Co. Tip- 
 perary, Tenant Farmer. — Clonmel. 
 Holds under lease from Mr. Pennyfather, at a 
 fair rent, 31990-9.5. Has another farm of 20 acres 
 under same landlord, compelled to take a lease at 
 an increased rent under threat of eviction, 31996- 
 32001. Was served with notice to quit, law 
 costs came to £200, 32002. Several others were 
 
 treated in the same way and had to pay increased, 
 rent or go, had no voice in the matter ; this occurred 
 since Land Act; are much over rented, 33005-18. 
 Tenants should have voice in fixing rent, right of 
 sale and security as long as his rent is paid, 
 32019-25. Would encourage tenants to pay and 
 landlords to sell, 32026-9. The excessive amount 
 of his costs was caused by his having to pay land- 
 lord's costs and his own although he took his case in 
 the Land Coiirt rather then give up the laud, 
 32032-39. 
 
 Baldwin, Professor Thomas, Model Farm, Glasnevin, 
 County Dublin. — Dublin. 
 Professor of Agricultui'e at Cirencester College, 
 Superintendent of National Agricultural Education 
 in Ireland, and Assistant Commissioner for the 
 Inquiry of Agricultural Depression, 32043-6. In- 
 spects agricultural schools in Ireland, 31050. 
 Variations of the usages in Ulster — on Lord 
 Downshire's and Sir Richard Wallace's estates, the 
 liberality of the landlords have made the possessary 
 interest of the tenant under the custom fully as 
 large as the fee-simple of the land, entire freedom 
 of sale, and no substantial rise of rent during the 
 present century ; on Lord Liffiard's and Lord Arran's 
 estates, things are very difl'erent, the rent being 
 raised 25 per cent, on every change of tenancy, 
 even if a son succeeds his father, 32052, 32063. 
 Case in point on Lord Arran's propei-ty, 32053-63. 
 Value of tenani^right destroyed by such increases of 
 rent, 32064. All improvements in Ulster such as 
 they are, are made by the tenants, 32065—9. The 
 25 per cent, rule on change of tenancy not rigidly 
 enforced by Lord Liffijrd, 32070. Has been on two 
 estates side by side, with the same clsss of land, 
 where the rent on one was 30s. an acre, and on the 
 other 5( s., 32076—77. Many landlords in Ireland, 
 have not raised their rent-s for a great number of 
 years, 32078, Agriculture in Ulster is decidedly in 
 
 , advance of the rest of Ireland, 32080. Ulster 
 custom more the outcome, than the cause of pro- 
 sperity, 32081-2. Variations in office rules, and 
 in the Ulster custom itself, 32083-4. Difficulty in 
 establishing a connexion between tenure and the 
 state of agriculture, the more liberally an estate in 
 Ulster is managed the better the fai-ming, estates in 
 point, 32086-88. Security of tenure of whatever 
 kind encourages improvements, 32089. Tenants 
 are not unreasonable in their views ; setting the 
 present agitation aside, 32098-9. Moral security 
 is shaken by any slight breach of it, the unjust 
 treatment by one landlord creates a ferment in an 
 entire county, instances of this, 32103—9. Office 
 rules interfere with the feeling of security, 32110-11. 
 Reasons why the Land Act of 1870, did not efiect 
 what it intended, which was the secuiity of all the 
 existing usages in Ulster, 32112-21. In favour of 
 one Act for all Ireland, 32124-6, but not of ex- 
 tending the Ulster custom, 32127. Tenants want 
 protection from one another, as much as from rack- 
 renting landlords, cases in point, 32128-30, 
 32132-6. The chief point in which the Land Act 
 has broken down, is the question of rent, 32136. 
 Would take the administration of any law which 
 may be passed out of the hands of the county 
 court judge, and placed in those of a high class 
 court, a court of equity — a court of appeal, 32137- 
 40. Excessive subdivision, the cause of a good 
 deal of the present agitation, cases in point, 32142- 
 52. Suggests migration to the waste and im- 
 ])rovable lands of Ireland, or emigration in families, 
 32152-3. At the best of times there has been 
 chronic starvation in south-west and west of Ireland, 
 32156-7. Sounded tenants in Kerry, and found 
 80 per cent, would gladly go, they prefer emigration 
 to migration, 32160-3. Would emigrate them in 
 families in charge of their clergymen, 32163-5. If 
 the landlords have to sell out, then the real trouble 
 will commence, 32166. Condition of Lord Dillon's 
 tenantry, 32167-4. Deplorable condition of 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cxvn 
 
 Baldwin, Professor Thomas — continued. 
 
 tenants' houses. Anecdote of a landshark in Cork 
 32176-80. Emigration or migration to be under- 
 taken by the Government, but should be done 
 voluntarily, prefers migration, 32181-4. Pro- 
 position for so doing, 32186-92. Considers there 
 is enough waste land in hands of landlord, quite 
 willing to part with it, to carry out his scheme, 
 without meddling with the tenants, 32193-98. 
 Is of opinion that his plan would be successful 
 financially, 32200. Having migrated these people 
 to waste lands, would make them Crown tenants, 
 guarding against subdivision, 3220^-7. Reclama- 
 tion of waste lands by companies, land will never 
 be reclaimed by capitalists, too great a waste of 
 capital, 32209-13. Would only pay according to 
 results, case in point, reclamations at Donemana, 
 32214-23. Very decent thatched houses can be 
 built for about £14, 32224-28. Case of refusal to 
 pay rent on Sir R. Wallace's estate, tenant having 
 large deposit in Bank, advantage taken of agitation, 
 32241-45. Experiments in reclamation by Mr. 
 Mitchel-Henry, in Galway, and Mr. Mahony, in 
 Kerry, 32249-53. Large farms in Roscommon and 
 Meath might be bought up, and divided into small 
 holdings, and families migrated there, 32260-01. 
 Thinks the Government would do good if they lent 
 money on easy terms to tenants to buy one another 
 out, would give every tenant the power of selling 
 his interest, 35262-64. A great change worked in 
 Connemara by the system of rack-renting and the 
 prevailing distress, 32268-74. Rack-renting con- 
 fined very much to small landlords, instance in 
 point, 32275-80. Rack-renting very common in 
 Ulster, 32280. Rack-renting on Arran Island, 
 32281-5. Referring to his migration scheme, 
 thinks Government shoiild make largo estate 
 roads, and large arterial drains, 32290-1. 
 Failure of the Glenesk Company throiigh mis- 
 management, 32292-3. Discontent and agitation 
 will continue till the power to rack-rent is curbed 
 32294. The present question nothing to do with 
 nationality, 32296-7. The connexion between 
 distress and disafiection, 32298-9. Failure of the 
 Irish Waste Lands Company, Mr. Buckley's case, 
 32300-1. Plan for Government reclamation, 
 32302-14. Irish v. Belgian climate, 32316-19. 
 Want of skill and thrift in Ireland, 32320. A 
 radical change must be effected in farming, 32321. 
 Would hand over agricultxiral department of Public 
 Works, as well as the valuation department to a 
 Commission, 32322-4. Great improvements made 
 in Ireland of late years, nearly altogether by the 
 tenants, 32331-2. After first year of Land Act, 
 there was a great increase in amount of improve- 
 ments, which has nearly ceased from smallness of 
 compensation awards, 22333. Scale of, and awards 
 for, compensation for improvements, too low, cases in 
 point, 32336-42. Length of time an improvement 
 has been enjoyed should not be taken into account, 
 32342. Rents may be increased, but a landlord is 
 not entitled to any increased value that may arise 
 out of tenant's permanent improvements, 32343-6. 
 Would have a self-adjusting machinery ; landlords 
 could appeal to his suggested tribunal, 32347. 
 , In non-permanent improvements length of enjoy- 
 ment should be taken into account ; would 
 respect specific contracts entered into with eyes 
 open, 32350-60. A slight increase of rent might be 
 made for existing improvements, not of a transitory 
 character, 32363-8. The original pi-oducing power 
 of the land should belong to the landlord, the per- 
 manent improvements to the tenant, 32369-70. 
 Fair letting value to be decided by the Commission, 
 32371-2. The definition of rent, 32375-8. The 
 competition rent ; would like to see Ireland bear 
 the effect of that rent, 32379-82. Any increase 
 arising from good times, or good prices, should be 
 the property of the State, 32386-7. Transitory 
 .improvements do not permanently bar a landlord 
 
 from an increase of rent, 32592-6. Disapproves of 
 turning landlords into annuitants, 32397-403, 
 32405. The proportion between GriflSth's valua- 
 tion and a proper rent varies very much, 32411. 
 Inferior lands much nearer the valuation than good 
 lands, 32413. Griffith's valuation the cause of 
 much harm ; Ulster more highly valued than the 
 rest of Ireland, 32415-6. Is no fair criterion of 
 rent, and most injurious in the interests of taxa- 
 tion ; case in point, 32418-21. In favour of 
 unlimited tenant-right, 32422-3. Has found where 
 there was the most liberal tenant-right the improve- 
 ments came very close to it ; instance of, 32424-8. 
 Considers a tenant has a perfect right to sell his 
 holding for the full value of his improvements, and 
 whatever sum he paid in excess of that on goin--' 
 into_ his holding, 32429-31. Found that the in* 
 coming tenant in Ulster, even where tenant-right 
 was very high, got very fair value for his money, 
 32436. Against extending Ulster custom to Ire- 
 land, 32439-41. In favour of the utmost free sale, 
 subject to veto of landlord, 32444. A great deal 
 more selling of goodwill in the South and West 
 than would be expected, 32446. A landlord can 
 ■recoup himself by rent for improvements in case of 
 free sale being extended to Ireland, 32450-55. In 
 the South and West, where the custom of sale of 
 holdings exist, landlords as a rule select purchaser, 
 and limit the sale, 32456-7. Would give landlord 
 right of veto, but allow no capricious reason, 
 32458-61. Undue competition and high prices 
 will right themselves, 32462. One of the grievances 
 of the Ulster tenants under the Land Act, is that 
 at expiration of lease there is no tenant-rio-ht 
 or compensation for improvements, 32464-5. Only 
 ■ knows of two cases arising on section 7 of Land 
 Act, 32469-71. Disinclination to take leases 
 since Land Act, 32472- 1. The Leinster lease, 
 32476 ; both for a year and terms of years, bein<^ 
 common, contracting out of the Land Act as 
 far as tenants can do so, 32476-8. Lease exten- 
 sively in county Cork, barring tenant from compen- 
 sation for any improvements whatever, except tillao-e 
 or manures, 32481-3. Has seen very little <rood * 
 farming resulting from leases ; the day for leases 
 gone by ; would himself prefer a four years' notice 
 to quit to any lease, 324B4-6. The Portsmouth 
 lease, with clause requiring all premises to be given 
 up at expiration of lease, 32487 ; thus more or less 
 •doing away with the tenant-right, which before 
 Land Act he used to allow, 3288-90. The famous 
 Portcarron lease— many of them for ten thousand 
 years, rents to be increased or lowered at end of 
 7oJL ^^r^^'X years-refused by the tenantiy, 
 32491-96. Valuation only what solvent tenant 
 ought to pay ; question of improvements left to land- 
 lord 32497-99. Purchasers who bought inde- 
 pendently of the Bright clauses, or the Church 
 veiy prosperous, 32502-4. Success of purchasers 
 under Bright clauses, mainly due to fact thafthev 
 were picked men, 32505. Great difiicidties in 
 getting money fromBoard of Works' for this purpose, 
 32506-9. In favour of peasant proprietors, but 
 against creating them indiscriminatelv as the Church 
 Commissioners have done, 32510. ' But division 
 must be guarded against, 32511-15. Purchasers 
 under the Church Act, principally in the North ■ 
 result of inquiry into their condition not encourag- 
 ing, 325 6-17 Cases in point at Ballintempll 
 county Armagh, 32517-19. The anxiety of the 
 people IS not to buy but to avoid a bad landlord • 
 case of Mr Sweeny. A number of tenants, who 
 could not buy, came to Mr. Sweeny, and said buy 
 for us in trust. We will give you ten per cent^ 
 for your money while out of it. This was done' 
 Some of them are ruined, for it meant a double rent 
 to begin with, 32520, 32522-24.- Three clases of 
 ■purchasers under the Church-sales direct t„ 
 tenants, sales in trust, sales to the public, 3252] 
 Church Commissioners' require too much of the 
 
 22 
 
CXVIU 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Baldwin, Professor Thomas-— continued. 
 
 money to be paid down, and the people have to 
 borrow at ruinous interest, 32525. If the State 
 wish to create peasant proprietors they must 
 advance the whole of the money, and take the 
 place of the landlords, 32526-7. Would limit 
 size of forms, 32528. "Whenever tenants have had to 
 borrow, iii order to purchase their holdmgs, they 
 are badly off, having to joay a very high interest, 
 32530-36. On the whole considers the condition 
 of the tenants who bought under the Church Act, 
 whether they borrowed or not, worse than those on 
 adjoining lands, 32537-39. Found great difficulty 
 in paying their instalments, 32540-44. The 
 tenantry, generally, are heavily in debt ; instance 
 in point, 32545-48. Great complaints about the 
 taxation, 32549-50. Sees a great change in their 
 condition for the worse since 1877, thousands nearly 
 bankrupt, 32551. Deeply in debt to the banks, 
 who charge ten per cent, interest, 325r)2-3, 32556- 
 62. Money-lenders and the gombeen system ; 
 illustration in point, 32554-55. Interest charged 
 tenants by butter-merchants and shopkeepers, 
 32563-69. Would iix the rent, and give freedom of 
 sale, but sees no necessity for perpetuity of tenure, 
 32571-72. Would leave the landlord the power of 
 evicting a tenant, but giving the tenant the fullest 
 compensation for his possessory right, 32673-4. 
 Fixing of rent, cases of dispute, &c., to be settled by 
 the Commission, 32575-83. Both landlords and 
 tenants agree in thinking the County Court most 
 unsatisfactory ; absurd decisions, 32584-86. Ap- 
 peals from County Judges not numerous, the expense 
 is so ruinous, 32587. J?ew cases of harsh evictions, 
 has met with only ten very hard cases since Aiigust, 
 1879, 32588-93. Would abolish scale of compen- 
 sation for disturbance altogether ; consolidation 
 must be promoted ; would give fullest measure of 
 compensation for improvements, but none for mere 
 disturbance, which, in his opinion, has failed to 
 work, 32594-601. Advocates perfect freedom of 
 prices as regards sales of interest, 32602-7. 
 
 Good, Mr. William John, Irish Farmers' Oazette Office, 
 Finglas House, Finglas, County Dublin. — ■ 
 Dublin. 
 Has been engaged in agriculture since boyhood, 
 32611. Superiutendent in various districts of land 
 improvements, 32614-16. Improvements by Lord 
 Arran. The. old rundale system abolished, 32617. 
 ■ The plan adopted by Lord Arran for so doing, 
 32619-27. Their improved condition since the 
 change, 32628-32. The tenantry imposed on by 
 the agent, 32633-39, and the gamboge men, 32640, 
 or men who supplied the people vdth credit, 
 32641-44. Frieze and linen manufactured by the 
 tenantry, 32645-52. The people take great pride 
 in their manufactures, and are very tasty, 32653. 
 Was for 21 years editor of the Irish Farmers' 
 Gazette, and has been engaged in valuing improve- 
 ments for Qlaims under Land Act, 32653-59. Was 
 engaged in the cases of Thompson v. Merley, 
 Mr. Battersby v. Lord Darnley, and Tracey v. 
 Fitzwilliam Dick, 32660-62. Published a critique 
 on the case of Trye v. the Duke of Leinster, 
 32663. Considers the act deficient from, beginning 
 to end,' 32664. County Court Judges not qualified 
 to assess value of tillage or manures, 32665. Sug- 
 gest a tribunal of respectable farmers and two 
 proprietors, or as in England, professional appraisers 
 might be employed, 32666-8. Unsatisfactory 
 decision of Judge Morris in the case of Battersby v. 
 Lord Darnley, 32609-75. Would not allow a 
 chairman to be a judge without a jury, 32677-78. 
 Tenants are not satisfied with the present tribunal, 
 32679-80. Would give an appeal to the judge of 
 assize, 32681-88. In favour of peasant proprietary 
 if a tenant can purchase by himself, 32691-2. Is 
 afraid, as fa,r as his experience goes, that in the 
 case of Government advances, the tenants would 
 
 repudiate the debt, 32693-95, as they have done 
 in the case of the Shannon improvement loan, 
 32696-32700, 32717-22. Yv^ould not allow a 
 proprietary of less than 50 or 100 acres, being 
 hopeful of any success under that amount, 32701-2. 
 Would not force landlords to sell, but would give 
 facilities to landlords to sell and tenants to purchase, 
 32704-5. Suggests that landlords .should buy up , 
 tenant-right, by purchasing it under the Bright 
 clauses, 32708-11. Larger tenants are purchasing 
 out the smaller ones as quickly as possible, 32715. 
 Thinks there have been no increases of rent on 
 Lord Ai-ran's estate since 1864, 32723-27. 
 
 O'Brien, Murrough, Esq., Church Temporalities Com- 
 missioners' Office, Dublin. — Dublin. 
 Yaluer to Church Commissioners, 32728-30. 
 Farms sold by Church Commissioners were small, 
 highly rented, and were sold at high prices, 
 32731-32, 32995-96. Condition of purchasers 
 generally improved, 32733-32738, 32989'. Con- 
 dition of purchasers of Ardstraw Glebe, 32741-44. 
 Condition of tenants and purchasers on Temple- 
 crone, and amountof interestdue, 32746-7 9. Method 
 of collection of interest by Church Commissioners, 
 32781-84. Condition of purchasers on Ballin- 
 temple Glebe, county Armagh, 32786-32904. 
 Rules of Church Commissioners limiting loans in . 
 case of small purchasers, 32906-909. Church 
 Land nearly all sold, 32912. Explanation as to 
 valuation by Church Commissioners when selling 
 and prices obtained, 32013-22. Purchasers subject 
 to a mortgage to Commissioners can sell if in 
 difficulties, 32923-25. Under Church Act |tli 
 purchase-money lent at 4 per cent. 32926. Cost 
 of conveyances excessive, desirability of avoiding- 
 this, and applying Record of title to small estates, 
 32926-33. Prices obtained by Church Com- 
 missioners lower during past two years, 32934-39. 
 Desire to buy on part of tenants, 32940-42. Con- 
 dition of purchasers in Raymochy, county Donegal, 
 and prices obtained on re-sale of farms, 32943-46. 
 Improvements by purchasers in Derry, 32947-51. 
 Applications for reduction of interest refused by- 
 Church Commisssoners, 32593 — 32992-94. Arrears 
 of interest to Church Commissioners amounted to 
 10 per cent., and rules as to payment of instalments, 
 32954-63. Explanation of accounts of Church 
 Commissioners, 32964-70. Explanation of Parlia- 
 mentary returns made by Church Commissioners, 
 32972-75. Glebe lands generally purchased by the 
 occupiers, 32976-83. A few tenant purchasers 
 have obtained loans under Relief Act of 1879, 
 32984-86. No tendency to injurious subdivision, 
 32989-90, 33001-3. No repudiation of loans by 
 purchasers, 32991. Desirability of facilitating 
 labourers and small farmers becoming owners, 
 32997-33000. Greater facilities for purchase might 
 be given to tenants, processes of law simplified, costs 
 reduced, untechnical explanations given, 33005-8. 
 Sale of purchasers interests should be facilitated, 
 33009-13. Condition of purchasers on sundry 
 Glebes in county Donegal, 33014-29. Purchase of 
 small farms in Limerick, and improvements in pro- 
 gress by labourers returned from America, 33030-37. 
 
 Dvfferin, The Earl of, Clandeboye, County Down, 
 Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Has paid great attention to the subject of Ulster 
 tenant-right, both before and after passing of Land 
 Act, 33038-39. The leasehold system has prevailed 
 on his estate since 1604, with lease for various 
 terms, 33040-43. Gradually the whole estate was 
 held under lease ; generally for lives of the Uoysd 
 Family ; these by degrees fell out, and were not re- 
 newed for some years till, at the expressed wish of 
 the tenantry, a new lease was drawn up, and prov- 
 ing satisfactory was accepted by almost all of them, 
 33044-45. Denies that tenant-right can exist to 
 the end of a lease, unless the custom existed — was 
 so established— before the lease was made, 33050-1. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXIX 
 
 Dtifferin, Tlie Earl of — continued. 
 
 Proves tenant-right did not exist on his estate in 
 1692, 33051-3. All Ms leases, from the very 
 earliest, contained clauses of si^rrender and non- 
 alienation, 33054-6. The contention that the 
 j)lantation of Ulster was the origin of tenant-right 
 entirely vmfounded, 33057-64. liis opinion of its 
 origin, 33065. Recognises tenant-right on those 
 portions of his estates, bought from other i)eople, by 
 whom it was allowed before he purchased, 33068-7 1 . 
 Yearly tenants can assign by deed, 33072. But 
 landlord can serve notice on incoming tenant, 
 33072-3. English law recognised in North of 
 Ireland, 33074. Sales not allowed ; never had a 
 serious dispute with his tenants ; thinks they are 
 satisfied with his management ; allows sale of 
 interest in lease, but not at competition prices, 
 33078. The new lease was granted in 1868 for 21 
 years, 33079-80. ^Vith covenant that if tenant 
 die intestate the property should revert to landlord, 
 33081-83. Allows leaseholders to sell under 
 certain conditions, marked at back of lease, 33088. 
 Does not turn tenant out at end of lease ; should he 
 leave, gives him compensation, 33093-4. Made 'a 
 speech in Parliament twenty -iive years ago, advoca- 
 ting the right of a tenant, whether a lessee or a 
 tenant at will, to compensation for improvements 
 and for disturbance ; illustrations of this on his own 
 estate, 33095-96. On coming of age reduced liis 
 rents by £2,000 a-year ; saw at once that if he 
 allowed it, the tenants would sell that reduction, so 
 that an incoming tenant would probably be paying 
 a third more rent than he Avished him to pay; has 
 expended, either as compensation for improvements 
 or in improvements made by himself, at least 
 j£85,000, including the acciiniulated value of the 
 reduction, 33097-99. Did not charge any interest 
 or raise the rents ; has sometimes made a slight in- 
 crease on an old lease falling in, 33100. In addi- 
 tion to the £85,000, has spent £65,000 on improving 
 land in his own hands, 33101-3. Had case in court, 
 claiming tenant-right ; judge decided there was 
 none, 3310.3—5. In favour of tenant-right where it 
 exists, but against any imposition of tenant-right ; 
 illustration of its injustice, 33107-16. Considers 
 (Jlster would be more prosperous under a system 
 of leasehold tenure than under tenant-right, 
 33118-20. States reasons for not extending Ulster 
 tenant-right to Ireland, and his objections to the 
 three F's for the North, on account of its injustice^ 
 33121-24. Three courses open to the Government 
 — one is to improve in its details the existing Act, 
 and render it effectual wherever it has been found 
 deficient, 33125-7. The second is to extend tenant- 
 right to Ireland, the three F's or some scheme of 
 the kind, 33128-9. The last to create a peasant 
 jjroprietorship ; illustration of its working, 
 33129—36. Injustice of the three F's to landlords, 
 case in point, 33138-39. If the Government could 
 establish an extensive jurisdiction, and if it could 
 be made an ambulatory court, thinks the landlords 
 would be content to Jeave themselves in the hands 
 of that court; further objections to the three F's ; 
 position of landlords after they have been brought 
 into existence, 33139-44. If landlords are con- 
 verted into rent- chargers, the consequence would 
 be an enormous increase of absenteeism, as land- 
 lords would have no interest in or power over their 
 properties, simply receiving their rents, and nothing 
 more, 33158-62. Further illustrations on this 
 point, 33165-66. Is of opinion that the great 
 endeavour should be to try and give a large propor- 
 tion of the property of the country into the hands 
 of its cultivators ; England to advance a large sum 
 of money ; at the same time, would promulgate the 
 three F's, or any scheme considered to be advisable ; 
 would then, with the money advanced by England, 
 buy up the estates of those landlords who did not 
 wish to remain under the three F's ; would appoint 
 a Commission for this purpose ; further details of 
 
 his scheme, which mainly applies to landlords ■who 
 discredit the three F's, and consider it an injustice 
 those he would force to sell, 33168-74. Still 
 further explanation of his scheme, and details jvs to 
 the powers of his proposed Commission, 33177-85. 
 The question of rent the great ditticulty ; considers, 
 however, that if his scheme were carried outj the 
 tenants should continue at the same rent that they 
 had hitherto paid; but has not as yet given this 
 question very much consideration, 33186-91. 
 Would not force the three F's on any landlord, 33 192. 
 If they did not like it, would force them to sell, 
 33192-4. 
 
 Boahfort, William, Esq., Burrin House, Carlow and 
 Dublin, Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 Agent to Lord Howth, under Agent to Lord 
 Landsdowne in the Queen's county, 33195-6. The 
 greater part of Lord Howth's estate is leased, 33202. 
 Yearly tenants have no power to sell, permitted in 
 case of leaseholders, subject to landlord's approval 
 of incoming tenant, with no claim at end of lease 
 for the money that has passed, 33203. Claim for 
 renewal or compensation at fall of lease not admitted, 
 but as a rule tenant gets renewed lease on reasonable 
 terms, in fact gets the preference if there is nothing 
 against him, 33204. Entire county cess paid by 
 tenants, usual lease is for thirty-two years, 33205-6. 
 Large holdings held on long leases by middlemen 
 deriving large profit rents ; Lord Howth is anxious 
 that any improvements made during these leases 
 should be secured to the occupying tenants and not 
 to the middlemen, who have already derived great 
 profit, 33207-12. Most of the improvements have 
 been effected by tenants under lease. Much the 
 ' same must be said of the yearly tenant, labourers' 
 cottages built by landlord, tenants not charged,. 
 33213-15, 33219. Up to passing of Land Act 
 pipes and the tiles Were supplied to tenants for 
 drainage purposes, since then discontinued, but 
 money is borrowed from Board of Works, tenant ■ 
 being charged 3 J percent, 33216. Labourers hold 
 in most cases from the tenants, but in a few instances 
 direct from landlord, cottages given as part of their 
 wages, 33218-21. On property of witness's father, 
 tenancies are half leasehold, half-yearly, sale allowed 
 in both cases, 33222-23. Property situated in 
 Carlow, Queen's county, and Dublin, rent not raised 
 for over forty years, not even in case of sale, 33224. 
 Sale allowed subject to strict right of veto, 33226-28. 
 No question of rent has arisen, rents always were 
 paid, only _one arrear this year in Carlow and 
 Queen's county, 33230-1. Eent on Lord Howth's 
 estate well paid, few attempts at evasion, 33233-3. 
 Tenants appear very willing to take renewals of 
 leases with slight increase, case in point, 33234-36.. 
 Onlyone ejectment on title since 1876, circumstances; 
 of case, 33237-40. But one ejectment for non- 
 payment of rent during same period, 33242.. 
 Considers that a County Court judge is very often 
 not competent to settle the question brought before 
 him, 33243-44.. Infavourof Government arbitration 
 in cases of disputes. Skilled men, who would to a 
 great extent take the place of the County Court 
 judge, 33244-45. Tenants afraid to go into Court, 
 expenses so great ; ihstance showing costs of land 
 claim, 33246-55. Is of opinion that the land Act 
 failed in protecting small holders from liability to 
 pay exacting rents, 33255. Considers large men 
 can protect themselves, 33256. Suggests that it is 
 only in the case of these small holders that the 
 Government should interfere in the question. of rent 
 33278-80. His views on the right of landlords to 
 raise rent on tenants' improvements ; class, of im- 
 provements that might warrant a reasonable increa.se 
 33263-72. Has had no difficulty in regulating 
 rents, always employs a practical farmer, with in- 
 structions not to value on tenants' improvements 
 but to value on the increased prices, and as he found 
 the land naturally good or bad, 33273. Difficulty 
 
cxx 
 
 miSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 EocJifort, William — continued. 
 
 as to what instructions should be given to Govern- 
 ment valuators in case of State interference, 33281— 
 82. Griffith's valuation not being uniform, .would 
 not do as a basis to calculate future rents upon, 
 33283-84. Is against erecting any tribunal to say 
 what a fair rent is ; considers that a fair rent can 
 only be arrived at by mutual agreement between 
 landlord and tenant, when both parties ' are in a 
 position to contract independently, 33286. In 
 favour of tenant purchasing their holdings, no matter 
 liow small, 33287-94. If tliey become insolvent 
 could sell, farms would thus be consolidated, 33295-6. 
 Must be done gradually, 33297. Would select 
 cases, would appoint a Commission to carry this out, 
 sufficient land ready to be offered for sale at a 
 reasonable rate, 33298. Would restrict subletting 
 and subdivision while instalments were owing, but 
 considers this to be a diminishing danger, 33299-304. 
 Government should advance whole purchase-money 
 to prevent tenants borrowing at ruinous rates of 
 interest, 33306-9. Scheme for carrying out peasant 
 proprietorship, 33310-1 1. Would make arbitration 
 compulsory, case in point, 33312, 33316. In oases 
 of combination landlord to have power to recover 
 rent off the barony, 33313-15. . Suggests that the 
 six months allowed to the tenant for redemption 
 might commence \^'ith the date of the decree, and 
 not from the taking of possession, 33316. 
 
 Hamilton, James P., Esq., q.c, Mossville, Glenties, 
 County Donegal", Recorder of Cork. — Dublin. 
 Formerly County Court judge for county Sligo, 
 33317. Definitions of Ulster tenant-right, 33319. 
 Various usages on Ulster estates, 33320-21. No 
 Chairman would admit validity of any usage in- 
 troduced since Land Act, 33322. In Sligo and 
 Cork many landlords permit tenants to sell their 
 interest, 33324. Has made awards under 7th 
 section of Land Act, 33325. Had hardly any land 
 cases on the large estates in county Sligo, 33328. 
 Has had some peculiar cases in Cork, thinks the 
 "hard" cases have all been by landlords, whose 
 own necessities made them press up rents, bad case 
 in point, 33331. Particulars of case in court to 
 register improvements by a tenant on Lord Egmont's 
 property, 33332-39. Would raise scale of com- 
 pensation for disturbance, 33340-43. Has rarely, 
 however, given the maximum, 33344. Has had 
 no cases of capricious evictions, nor of evictions 
 for the purpose of unfair rent raising, 33345. 
 County Court Judges act, in fact, as arbitrators be- 
 tween landlord and tenant, means employed by 
 them for arriving at a fair decision as to rent, 
 ■33347-50. Has in some cases visited the land, 
 gives instance, 33351. What constitutes a capri- 
 cious eviction in his opinion, 35352-54. Is certaia 
 tenants are not deterred from coming into court 
 from fear of expense, if they have any ground for a 
 claim. 33355-59. Finds claims for improvements 
 very extravagant as a rule, especially on the part of 
 the tenants, 33360-62. Two instances of extrava- 
 gant prices being given for tenant-right, 33364-68. 
 Considers that if peasant proprietary were extended 
 generally, it would ruin the country, and ultimately 
 end in injury to the small proprietors themselves, 
 but is in favour of enabling a man who can produce 
 a substantial part of the purchase-money to become 
 a proprietor, 33369-73. But if it was made 
 universal, it would drive the gentry out of the 
 country. Thinks from experience that the tenantry 
 would repudiate the instalments as far as they 
 possibly could, 33374-96. Expense of investigating 
 title stands in way of the full operation of the Bright 
 clauses, if that could be avoided and land valued 
 by Government valuators, there would be many 
 desirable and industrious men of the farming class 
 purchasing, 33397-98. Against compelling land- 
 lords to sell, 33399. Purchase-money to be invested 
 in trustees, 33400-403. Considers it very desirable 
 
 to enable hona fide substantial tenants to become 
 purchasers, 33405. Reclamation on a large scale 
 generally a failure, case in point, 33406-10. An 
 industrious tenant can and does reclaim with profit. 
 Is of opinion that the whole question consists iu 
 some mode of preventing the unfair raising of rents. 
 Suggestions on this point, 33411. Instance of 
 tenant refusing to go back into possession on dispute 
 being settled by judge, preferring to get compensa- 
 tion for disturbance as he could not live under the 
 landlord, 33412. In many cases they accept the 
 rent settled by judge rather than go out, 33413-17. 
 Considers that all the County Court judges lean, if at 
 all, towards the tenants, 33418. Tenants, as a nile, 
 do not complain of too high rents on the large estates, 
 33421. Further suggestions for an amended Land 
 Act, 33424-39. Sees no necessity for fixity of 
 tenure, 33440-41. But would prevent capricious 
 evictions by putting very heavy damages on the 
 landlord, 33442. Very few executions in proportion 
 to the number of decrees for ejectment issued in 
 county Sligo, the same rule applies to county Cork. 
 Considers six months from date of the decree, 
 allows sufficient time for redemption, 33445-50. 
 
 Rolerts, George Collins, Esq., Summerhill, Enniscorthy, 
 County Wexford, Ijand Agent. — Dublin. 
 Agent to Lord Portsmouth in county Wexford, 
 for last thirty-seven years, 33452. Considers the 
 Portsmouth tenant-right is advantageous to both 
 landlord and tenant, especially perhaps to the 
 landlord, 33461. Tenants have free sale of then- 
 interest, both in town and country, 33462. They 
 have also the privilege of selling their interest in 
 townparks, which are held at will, the faims 
 generally on the estate being held by lease, 33463. 
 Statistics of the estate, 33465-94. Farm leases are 
 given for three lives or thirty-one years ; in tie 
 town renewal leases for sixty-one years, and in some 
 cases for good substantial buildings, costing over a 
 certain sum — for ninety-nine years, 33496-502. 
 Right of sale by public auction since 1822, 33503. 
 Sale of interest in these leases allowed, 33504-6. 
 Claim at end of lease and tenant's right to a i-enewal 
 always recognised, 33507-11. In most cases of a 
 change of tenantry a slight increase is made on the 
 rents, 33512-16. Tenants' improvements 'not 
 valued, means of ascertaining rent, 33517-22. In 
 many cases rents have not been increased for fifty 
 years, leases having been continued, 33523-26. 
 Considers Griffith's valuation about one-fourth below 
 the value of the raw material rent adjudged in this 
 scale. Most of the tenants satisfied, 33531-35. 
 Never had a capricious eviction, 33537. Illustration 
 of the considerate way in which the tenants are 
 treated, only three ejectments served and actually 
 executed since 1868, 33543. Details of these three 
 instances, 33543-57. List of prices of farms sold 
 on the estate, 33559-61. System of tenant-right 
 adopted on Lord Portsmouth's property, 33563. 
 This system has worked well, the tenantry being 
 pi'osperous and contented, rents well paid, and with- 
 out any trouble, but gave 10 per cent, reduction. 
 Has been most beneficial to the landlord, as it has 
 done away with middemen, 33566-79. Many land- 
 lords in the district allow right of sale, 33580. Never 
 had a case in the Land Courts, 33581. Believes a 
 custom like Lord Portsmouth's, if established all 
 over the county, would be beneficial, 33586. Sug- 
 gestion for a tribunal to fix rents in favour of 
 appointing assessors to aid County Court judge, 
 33594-604. 
 
 Ganly, Mr. James, Usher's-quay, Dublin, Cattle and 
 Wool Salesman, ifec. — Dublin. 
 Farms seventy-five acres in county Longford 
 under lease from Captain Douglas, 33612-14. Con- 
 siders the Act does not sufficiently protect small 
 holdings, scale of compensation not being high 
 enough, 33623-26. Tenants were anxious enough 
 to take leases until the general depression of the 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXl 
 
 Ganly, Jam^s — continued. 
 
 lust four years, rents under lease being lower than 
 under tenancies from year to year, 33627-30. 
 Rents generally raised on fall of lease, or change of 
 tenancy. 33631—33. Considers the condition of a 
 leaseholder better than that of a tenant from year 
 to year, 33637-38. As a rule tenants make any 
 improvements that are made, 33639-40. The 
 depression of the last four years has stopped rent- 
 raising, vv-hich had increased since the Act, 36641— 
 42. The Land Act encouraged tenants to improve, 
 33648-49. Small tenants have no protection ; com- 
 pensation no equivalent for being evicted, 33650-1. 
 Should have fixity of tenure as long as they pay 
 their rents, 33652-3. Tenants are often forced 
 into taking leases for thirty-one years, contracting 
 themselves out of the Land Act, 33654—55. Bright 
 clauses have not worked well, 33657-59. Too many 
 restrictions and limitations, 33660. Small tenant 
 jiroprietprs would not be able to live, and would 
 divide and subdivide ; peasant proprietary would, in 
 time, end in a new and worse set of landlords than 
 the present ones, 33664-76. Much waste land 
 that might be reclaimed, but does not think these 
 waste lands would be adapted to a small proprie- 
 tary ; illustrates this, 33678-85. Suggests scheme 
 for a Minister of Agriculture, 33685-87. At 
 present tenants are afraid to improve for fear of 
 their rents being raised, 33688. 
 
 Moore, Cecil, Esq., Registrar, Court of Common Pleas, 
 The Four Courts, Dublin, Cos. Tyrone and 
 Armagh. — Dublin. 
 Was for eighteen years Sessional Crown Solicitor 
 for county T5T0ne, 33691. Was also receiver under 
 the Court of Chancery in coimties Tyrone and 
 Armagh, 33693. Was also a tenant farmer, and 
 had, as a Solicitor, a large practice in land cases, 
 . 33693-96. Has acted professionally for both land- 
 lords and tenants in counties Fermanagh, Deny, 
 Armagh, and Down, 33699-701. Gives list of 
 estates he was well acquainted with, 33702-04. 
 Tenant-right at the end of a lease was recognised to 
 a limited extent beforp the Land Act of 1 870, but not 
 as a rule,; was recognised on Lord Belmore's estate in 
 Tyrone, 33706. CaseofitsproofinCourtonDrapers 
 Company's estate in Derry, 33707. Ulster custom 
 extends practically over the whole province, 33708. 
 Suggests that a tenant should be allowed to sell his 
 farm for as much as he could get, unrestricted by 
 office rules, whether tenant-right had hithei-to ex- 
 isted on the estate or not, 33709. Landlord to have 
 the right of purchase at the highest price, and to 
 object to a purchaser as tenant, showing reasonable 
 objection, 33710. Rent-raising may have injured 
 tenant-right on some estates, but has certainly not 
 on any of the large estates he is acquainted with, 
 33711-12. No raising of rents on the class of 
 estates he refers to, 33715. Proposal of Lord 
 Powerscourt to sell his Tyrone estate to the 
 tenantry refused, the tenants on the estate would 
 not take a thirty-one years' lease, considering 
 they were better off as tenants from year t'o year, 
 33716-17. Further details of the sale of Lord 
 Powerscourt's property, 33718-38. Rent was 
 finally settled by arbitrators on what was consi- 
 dered a fair basis, and the estate sold on that basis, 
 33740-46. Great want of a proper tribunal to fix 
 rents, 33747-48. Knows instances of tenants being 
 badly treated ; case in point, 33748-49. Suggests 
 that a valuator should be appointed for every 
 county in Ireland, who should hear cases, and judge 
 what the rent should be ; would give an appeal to 
 the judge of assize if either party objected, 33754. 
 Does not consider the County Court a fit tribunal 
 to value land, 33755-6. Also suggests that each 
 valuator should report to Clerk of the Peace, who 
 should keep a book for the purpose, 33758. Rent 
 so fixed to last at least twenty years, 33759-10. 
 Improvements on either side should be excluded from 
 
 valuation for rent, 33761-62. As a rule tenantsmake 
 the improvements, 33763. Case of a property in 
 ■Tyrone being sold for forty-eight years' purchase, and 
 in consequence the tenants ha^'o been rented on their 
 own improvements, 33769-71. Disputes as to rent 
 frequently settled bythe Chairman, 33772-4. Thinks 
 if disputes as to rent could bo entertained in Court 
 without notice to quit tliere would be a great deal 
 of litigation, 33775. At present they are brought 
 iftto Court by service of notice to quit; numerous 
 cases of notices to (juit aud land claims on Lord 
 Powerscourt's estate iu dispute about rent, 33776-79. 
 Costs in Land Court not very extravagant, valuatms 
 the chief expense, 33782-85. Costs depeud very 
 much on the amount of the claim ; in case of a dismiss, 
 each iiarty generally pays his own costs ; in a claim 
 for £100 the costs would be about £8, 33786-88. In 
 cases of appeal the civil bill scale of costs is used,, 
 33789-91. Not many leases in his district, 33795. 
 Not much change in rents since Land Act, 33797. 
 Sale of tenant-right allows tenant more than the com- 
 pensation; gives cases in point, 33799—806. Similar- 
 instance of high tenant-right on the Drapers' estate, 
 33808-10. A fine very seldom given on taking out 
 lease, exception to' this, 3381-3-15. Very little 
 difierence as regards farming between leaseholders 
 and yearly tenancies, 33816-17. Attributes the 
 superior prosperity of Ulster to tenant-right, 
 33821-25. The whole of Ulster greatly benefitted 
 by the Land Act ; would extend the Ulster custom 
 to all Ireland, 33827-31. Considers free sale the 
 main object, subject to the landlord's right to an in- 
 creased rent at the proper time, 33831—32. If aten- 
 ant were disturbed by imposition of unduly increased 
 rent would give him additional years' compensation 
 for disturbance, 33833-35. Knows of a great many 
 tenants who purchased glebe lands ; so far it has 
 turned out well, but not sure of the future workings 
 thinks as soon as they become owners they will 
 create a tenantry, 33842-48. Too many restric- 
 tions and limitations in case of people borrowing 
 money from Board of Works ; instances in point, 
 33849-51. Against forcing landlords to sell, 
 33853—54. If a landlord was willing to sell, con- 
 siders_ the Board of Works would be quite safe in 
 advancing the whole purchase-money to an indus- 
 trious_ tenant purchasing the fee, 33855-57. In fact . 
 the Board of Works might act much more liberally 
 and be quite safe where Ulster tenant-right exists, 
 33858-60. No legislation required with regard t& 
 wastelands; wasteland is subject to tenancy on 
 estates, 33874-7. Illustration in point, 33875. 
 Does not consider that there could be any improve- 
 ment in the definition of townparks in the Act — 
 the difficulty is what is a town, and what is 
 not, 33887-92. Suggestions for alteration of the 
 existing law, 33898. Does not consider that the 
 establishment of the three F's would injure land- 
 lords' interests in anyway, and that, therefore, they ■ 
 have no claim for compensation on the State. If the 
 legislation is a good one, sees no injustice in forcing 
 landlords to accept it or sell, 33903-08. The ex 
 tension of Ulster custom would be no injustice, as 
 a landlord can protect himself, and generally does- 
 by an increased rent on his own improvements,, 
 33910-15. If a landlord wishes to remove a tenant- 
 he ought to pay a high sum for the compulsory 
 removal, 33923. Would give landlords whose lands 
 were let under the market value the power of 
 appealing to the Court to raise them ; considers it 
 only their right ; mentions several estates where 
 rents might be fairly raised, 33932-37. 
 
 Towns/lend, C. Uniacke, Esq., 15, Molesworth-street, 
 Dublin, Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 Gave evidence previously (1570) as to Griffith's 
 valuation ; further adds — that Sir R. Griffith, in 
 1844, in his "Outline of System of General Valuation 
 of Ireland," states that if one-third bo added to his 
 valuation the result will give nearly the full rjnt 
 
CMXll 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Toionshend^ C. Uniacke- — continued. 
 
 value. Valuations not equable nor reliable, 
 33938-41. Tenant-right varies in value with the 
 times ; instances the estate of the Marquess of Bath 
 in Ulster, wliere in 1851-4 it had ceased to exist, 
 but has since resumed its full force, 33941-50. 
 Shows hard dt'aling on creditors part ; mentions in- 
 stance in Ulster wlien the tenant-right of a farm 
 was sold by a creditor for half the tenant-right it 
 was worth, 33951-8. States opinion that oftce 
 rules existing prior to 1870 were legalized by Land 
 Act of 1870 as portion of the usages. The call for 
 the three F's out of Ulster and the effort to break 
 down office rules in Ulster have all the same object, 
 namely, the effort on the tenant's part to obtain 
 jiossession of the " unearned increment." Objects 
 to free sale where it had not jjreviousely existed, 
 unless coupled with compensation to the landlord. 
 Objects to it also because it would introduce com- 
 petition in its most aggravated form, depriving the 
 incoming tenant of capital and shutting out the 
 poor man, 33953. And because is would originate 
 and perpetuate excessive rents, 33956-58. The 
 proposal of fair rents and free sale means the tying 
 iup of the landlord's hands, and the transferrence of 
 his freedom, and of some of bis property to the 
 tenant, and would be unjust and impolitic. Objects 
 to valuation by the State for rent purposes, 
 33959-64. Objects to interference in fixing fair 
 rents. Existing rents in Ireland are, as a rule, 
 not competition rents. Lands would let at a much 
 higher rent than at present if in owners' hands, 
 333967-83,33986-93. Suggests change as regards 
 County Court Judges, namely, in all land cases 
 the substitution of Provincial for County Court 
 Judges in order to secure uniformity of decision, 
 33984-5. In any future legislation regard should 
 be had in the interests of proprietors to the enor- 
 mous outlay made by them upon improvements, 
 33995-34000. Regarding some difficulties arising 
 in the working of the Land Act. Improvements 
 by landlords checked owing to risk of having to 
 pay over again therefor, and also disturbance com- 
 pensation thereupon, 34001. Difficulty when tenant 
 ■■dies as to who is the legal successor, 34001. Pro- 
 bate or administration seldom taken out by tenants. 
 Considerable consequent loss to the State. Re- 
 presentation should be compulsory, 34009. Then 
 again, the value of an estate, where there are 
 many tenants in occupation, has been depreciated 
 on sale owing to the action of the Land Act. As 
 regards the use of police at e^dctions, has only uppn 
 two occasions in an experience of twenty-nine years 
 had occasion to make use of their services, 34009-10. 
 Regarding recent distress, states poverty is chronic 
 in the West, and that the special cause of extra 
 distress there in 1879-80 was owing to the want of 
 employment for the migratory laboure)-s at the har- 
 vest in England in 1879, coupled with the failure 
 of the potato crop at home. Distress in other dis- 
 tricts greatly exaggerated, 34011-18. Apart from 
 the West, excessive credit previously given by 
 bankers and traders was suddenly withdrawn caus- 
 ing great financial difficulty, 34019-20. Instance 
 .given in Co. Kilkenny of hard treatment of a tenant 
 in sale of his farm by a creditor who purchased up 
 the iiaterest for himself at one fifth of the tenant- 
 right value permitted on the estate, 34021-8. Esti- 
 mated value of farming stock in Ireland increased 
 80 per cent, between 1841 and 1871, or from twenty- 
 one to thirty-seven millions, taking scale of prices 
 in census of 1841. Deposits in Joint Stock Banks 
 increased from six millions in 1841 to thirty mil- 
 lions in 1879, 34035-8. Estimated capital of the 
 country has, according to Dr. ISTeilson Hancock, 
 increased from an average of £12 per head of the 
 population in 1846-52 to £49 per head in 1874-75, 
 34039. The tonnage of the Ports of Dublin, Bel- 
 fast, and Cork has doubled in twenty years from 
 1855-6-7 to 1875-6-7. All these symptoms of 
 
 improvement were to be found notwithstanding 
 the allegation that the landlord system had broken 
 down, 34041-3. Apjn'oves extension, on a well 
 considered basis, of the Bright clauses of the Land 
 Act where thrifty men with some means are found, 
 and where subdivision and subletting are checked, 
 34047-48. Disapproves wholesale acquisition of 
 proprietors by the State, and their efibrt made to 
 sell to the occupiers. Disapproves extension of 
 system corresponding with that carried out by the 
 Temporalities Commissioners. Gives remarkable 
 instance of subdivision and subletting under them. 
 Hands in table from Mr. Shaw Lefevre's Report of 
 Committee of 1S78 showing creation of pauper 
 proprietors by Commissioners. Lauds of Ossory 
 Hill sold at eighteen j'ears' piirchase on Griffith's 
 valuation, and still, although sold so low, an unsold 
 residue left which eventually had to be parted with 
 at ten years' purchase on Griffith's valuation. This 
 " residue " is the difficulty in such transactions, 
 34050-75, again 34087-34097. Improvements, 
 drainage, building, &o., inefficiently executed by 
 small holders as a rule. Reclamations on moun- 
 tain sides carried out by them with excessive labour, 
 frequently very well clone, but as often costing as 
 much as the fee-simple is worth, 34075—81. Gives 
 some details of effort by the State to carry out a 
 system of improvements on ■ the Crown Lands of 
 Kingwilliamstown, county Cork, where deep . bog 
 had been reclaimed with great skill and at gi-eat 
 expense, and has now reverted to its original con- 
 dition. The estate before the improvements had 
 been worth £11,200, an expenditure of £33,000 
 was made upon draining, building, fencing and otier 
 reclamations, making a total of £44,200. After 
 the famine of 1846-7 the tenants failed to paytieir 
 rents and eventually, to get rid of so embarrassing 
 a position, the entire was sold for £14,500, beiiig 
 a loss to the State of some £29,700, 34081-3. 
 Gives instance of effort made in the county West- 
 meath, by Mr. Fetherstonhaugh, to reclaim a large 
 extent of deep red bog, at an expense of about 
 £40 per Irish acre. The land has now resumed its 
 original wild condition and is practically valueless, 
 
 34085. LTpon the subject of rents in Ireland being 
 lower than in Scotland or England Cjuotes evidence 
 of Sir R. Griffith before Committees (2) of the 
 House of Commons in 1844 and 1869, in both of 
 which he states that the rents in the parts of Soot- 
 land and North of England with which he was 
 acquainted were 50 per cent, higher than in Ireland, 
 
 34086. Gives evidence refuting the statement made 
 ■ by Mr. Drew (2740), 34098-34106. 
 M'Gutchan, Rev. George, Kenmare, Co. Kerry, Pro- 
 testant Clergyman. — Dublin. 
 
 Church of Ireland Incumbent of Kenmare for 
 eleven years, 3410S-9. Held house, and fourteen 
 acres of Kenmare townparks from Lord Lansdowne 
 at a rent of £66 odd, not glebe, but usually held by 
 clergyman, 34110-3. Believes that, owing to Par- 
 liamentary election quarrel with agent, Mr. Trench, 
 be received agreement to sign, excluding himself 
 from Land Act ; refused to sign ; evicted ; brought 
 claim under Land Act ; disallowed, 3411 6-36. Dis- 
 tress worse than usual last year amongst Lord 
 Lansdowne's small tenants, 34137-42 ; 34165 ; 
 34169. Agent not on Relief Committee; he con- 
 sidered distress not exceptional, 34143-6 ; 34163. 
 Secretary of Du))lin Committee came down, and 
 reported existence of acute distress in May, 1880, 
 34146-51. Dublin ejectment great grievance with 
 small farmers, misjht as well take the land from 
 them at once, 3419G-8. Poverty is not due to ex- 
 cessive rents, 34202. Fixed rent would be immense 
 advantage to people ; make them feel independent 
 of will of another ; now in abject terror of agent, 
 whom they must consult about every act of their 
 life ; people in a degraded state, 34203-4 ; 34255-7. 
 No fishing now, 34214. Are industrious, but no 
 work to be done in winter : winter work an immense 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXIU 
 
 M^Cutchan, Rev. George — continued. 
 
 boon, but seems impracticable, 34228-9 ; 34211. 
 Kerry roads good, 34231. Land not capable of much 
 greater profitable drainage, 34231-2. Population 
 perhaps too thick, 34236. Poverty partly caused by 
 too small farms, 34237. Debt, too much credit, and 
 s-udden withdrawal of it, 34238 ; 34180. The utter 
 failure of crops, 34238. In good j'sars people a 
 point above starvation ; a point below in bad, 
 34241-3. Disapproves of forced emigration ; would 
 be for welfare of people if one-third of people in 
 families would emigrate, or better still move to 
 rich lands of ■ Limerick and Meath, 34249-51; 
 34186-91. Peasant proprietary scheme not advan- 
 tageous for those in distress ; disapproves of com- 
 pulsory expropriation of landlords ; would, to 
 develope thrift, give tenants facilities of purchasing, 
 34252-5. 
 
 Roche, Mr. John, Cleai-ystown, Go. Wexford, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Deputed by County Wexford Independent Club 
 to give evideuce, 34260, Has ninety-nine years 
 lease ; majority of tenants have some kind of lease ; 
 landlords anxious to give leases since Land Act ; 
 half county cess generally added ; in many cases 
 covenants not to claim under Land Act, 34263-71. 
 Rents too high ; industrious ]nen cannot pay their 
 way ; undertook to pay rent bey> md their means ; 
 competition partly Cause, 34272-6. Not much rent 
 raising in last ten years, 34277. People satisfied 
 with Chairman's decision, but not satisfied to leave 
 their holdings, 34279-82. Over-renting on Westby 
 Nunn Estate, 34283. Captain Harvey a good land- 
 lord, 34290. Irish tenantry would prosper with 
 three F's, 34291. Tenement valuation high enough 
 for rent of most Wexford land ; in case of dispute a 
 third party should decide ; this would satisfy all but 
 extreme persons, 34293-4. Majority of tenants 
 don't want peasant proprietary xmless landlords 
 wish to sell, and facilities for purchasing given. 
 Would be sorry to get all landlords out ot country ; 
 wish to make the bad like the good, 34295-9. 
 Purchasers of Church lands doing well ; not as well 
 off as in good times, but not made worse, 34300-4. 
 Case of confiscation of improvements at expiration 
 of lease on non-agr'icultural holding by landlord, 
 34305-7. Tenants make the improvements ; would 
 do more with security, 34308-10. Landlord ought 
 to have a voice as to subdivision, 34312, and as to 
 incoming tenant on sale of interest the rightof reason- 
 able objection, 34313-6. Most holdings include 
 county roads, 34318. Very little reclaimable land in 
 district that would pay, 34324-7. Cess and taxes 
 are about is. an acre, 34328. Cut away bog at 
 Rochestown, reclaimed by tenants, 34332—7. Not 
 much drainage or Board of Works loans ; not much 
 poverty, 34338-9. Not much fishing, 34344. 
 Labourers better off than many fanners, 34346-53. 
 Crop.s fair this year ; prices not very good, 34354. 
 
 M-Mahon, Mr. John, Ballyroan, Queen's County, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Held as yearly tenant under Mr. Sibthorpe of 
 Dublin, thirty acres, at £60. In 1877, served with 
 notice to quit, unless he took thirty-one years' 
 lease, at rent of £75 ; being embaiTassed obliged to 
 consent. Paid a year's rent for goodwill in 1858, 
 and improved and drained, 34360-4. Covenants 
 in lease against claiming for past or future improve- 
 ments, 34361. Power to landlord to re-enter in 
 case of bankruptcy, 34365. Penalty of £10 an 
 acre for tilling, and fine also for selling hay, 34373. 
 In November 1879, asked for abatement, and was 
 told he might surrender ; offered to do so for some 
 compensation, and was refused, 34732-6. Held 
 since 1847, sixteen acre.s, from Lord Portarlington, 
 at £50 10s. ; tenement valuation, £21 15s. John 
 Edge, purchased in courts in 1857, and raised rent 
 to £47 10s., and again to £48 3s. Witness paid 
 seven or eight years' purchase for goodwill, 34377- 
 
 80. Got an attorney's letter for a half year's 
 rent, December, 1879,- 34382. Got no abatement, 
 34387. Landlord always terrifying tenants by 
 saying he was offered more for land, 34387. Could 
 not have kept on only for private house property ; 
 obliged to sell three years ago, 34394. Archbishop 
 Trench, Lady Norbury, and Lord De Vesoi, 
 generous landlords ; new purchaser, after John 
 Rafter, hai-d ; Rafter bought very dear, 34398. 
 A])j)roves of three F's to encourage improvement 
 and prevent disputes, 34400-1. Public notice of 
 sale of goodwill ought to be given for protection of 
 Jenders on that security, 34401. Position at present 
 of three-fifths of tenants critical if landlords were to 
 use their powers, 34402. 
 
 Bagwell, Richard, esq., Innislonan, Clonmel, Cos. 
 
 Tipperarj' and Waterford, Landlord's son. — 
 
 Dublin. 
 Father owns 3,800 acres, in Tipperary and 
 Waterford. Tenancies at will with option of 
 thirty- one years' leases ; not sought for ; no 
 stringent covenants ; tenants fear rise of rent at 
 end of lease, and prefer trusting landlord in yearly 
 tenancy, 34405-10, Very few rises of rents of 
 yearly tenants for last forty years, 34411. Sale of 
 goodwill allowed, subject to veto, never exercised, 
 by landlord, 34411-2. Land fairly improved by 
 tenants ; houses mostly built by tenants ; timber 
 and slates given by landlord, 34413-6. Land 
 Act has checked not stopped his father's improve- 
 ments ; not same temptation to improve as when 
 one felt it was done to one's own land, 3441 7-8. 
 Not much drainage to be done, 34419. Approves 
 of three F's, 34422-9. Handed in suggestions for 
 Bill on above basis, 34430. To apply to existing 
 and future tenancies with exceptions, 34431-2. 
 Waste by tenants or deterioration not likely to 
 occur with free sale, 34436-8. Succession to 
 tenancy upon death, a matter for lawyers to arrange, 
 but subdivision should be guarded against, 34439-46. 
 
 Dowling, Mr. Thomas, Kildreenan, Co. Wicklow, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds about 120 acres from Lord Fitzwilliam, 
 34452. Fixity of tenure necessary, and ought to 
 be secured by uniform scale of compensation for 
 disturbance or otherwise, except in cases of non- 
 payment of fair rent or subdivision, 34455-63. 
 Knows four or five cases in county Wicklow, where 
 landlords ejected and got more for land, 34470-5. 
 No personal complaint, 34479. Has confidence in 
 Chairman, but in many cases he has not knowledge 
 enough of land to decide, 34480-9. By varying 
 amount of rent landlord can bar claim for improve- 
 ments made before date of variation ; so decided in 
 Bagley •!;. Marquess of Downshire, 34490-1. Does 
 not much approve of interference with right of 
 contract ; security for improvements wanted ; 
 before raising rent landlord ought to prove to a court 
 that his expenditure or some special circumstance, not 
 the work of the tenant, increased value of holding, 
 34492. Not personally aware of any evictions 
 last year, 34496. Thinks that decision in Pratt v. 
 Swectman ought to be upset, by which surface im- 
 provement from artificially fed cattle was excluded 
 from compensation, 34497-34503. Sale of goodvsdll 
 common on dtzwilliam estate thirty-five years ago ; 
 curtailed; abolished by present Lord Fitzwilliam, 
 34504-8. Witness made many statements about 
 general expenditure and management of Fitzwilliam 
 estate, but eventually said he knew very little, 
 except as an outsider, 34509-39. Lord Fitzwilliam 
 has caused dissatisfaction by introduction of English 
 customs, 34540. Forty years ago a family, 
 favoured by office, held forty acres ; now hold 
 thousands, 34540-1. Case of purchaser of good- 
 will not allowed to sell, 34542-8. Tenant's im- 
 provements should continue his while they exist 
 34549. Is in favour of three F's, and thinks they 
 would satisfy the people, 34550-1. 
 
CXXIV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Chichester, Colonel C. Raleigh, Runnamoat, Co. Eos- 
 common, Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 Manages 1,500 acres, 34,556. Sale of interest 
 not recognised in county Roscommon, as far as lie 
 knows, 34555. Land Act has stimulated evictions ; 
 made tenants unreasonable, 33557. Two instances 
 of land claims, 34558-61. Tenants since Land 
 Act unwilling to take less than . sixty-one years' 
 lease, 34562-3. Tenement valuation, no index to 
 value ; not uniform, 34564-7. Land Act has not 
 affected raising of rent, 34568. Disapproves of 
 Land Act ; section three destroys contract, and is 
 cause of present agitation, S4569, 34593-8. 
 Peasant proprietary should not be directly stim- 
 ulated; would approve of cheapening and facili- 
 tating transfer ; not for small occupants ; State 
 ought not to lend money, 34570-5, 34616. Dis- 
 approves of fixing rent ; contract ought to be 
 absolutely free ; any measure to the contrary ought 
 to be only temporary ; denies that present tenants 
 are not free parties ; no parties absolutely un- 
 fettered by external conditions, 34576-7. Describes 
 condition of part of Belgium, and mode by 
 which agitation analogous to present was sup- 
 pressed there before 1850, 34578-92. Would not 
 repeal Land Act, for tenants have acquired rights 
 under it ; section three deemed equivalent to thirty- 
 one years' lease ; would convert all yearly tenancies 
 into such leases, at end of which freedom of contract 
 would exist; would then deal with breaches as 
 offences against State ; rent in leases to be fixed by 
 Chairman ; as means towards freedom of contract 
 would give landlords facilities for purchasing 
 tenants' improvements; where a landlord ("good" 
 i.e., " soft") has not exercised power over estate for 
 fifty years, would deem circumstances of estate 
 permament ; acquired tenant-right should not be 
 confiscated, 34599-34608. Want of capital the 
 great difficulty, 34609-14. Wovild repeal law of 
 primogeniture and entail, 34615. Easy to reclaim 
 land, but not at a profit, 34617. Has spent £7,000 
 on land in own hands, but not sure that profit has 
 been made, 34617—24. 
 
 Garuth, Mr. Alexander, Ballymena, Co. Antrim, 
 Solicitor. — Dublin. 
 Encroachment upon tenant-right exists by limiting 
 amount of purchase-money ; instances, 34627—36, 
 34640-2, 34666. Another encroachment, raising 
 of rent on purchaser, 34637-9, 34643-5, 34674. 
 Leases decreased since Land Act, owing to diffi- 
 culty of establishing existence of tenant-right at end 
 of lease and to feeling that tenant under Land Act is 
 better off, 34646-9. Method of regulating rents in 
 <;ase of dispute necessary ; instance where valuator 
 ai)pointed by county court judge fixed rents to 
 satisfaction of landlord and tenant ; valuator's 
 expenses paid jointly, 34650-65. Tenant-right 
 fetches from £10 to £25 an acre, 34669. Has 
 acted for tenants purchasing under Land Act ; 
 cases were plain, except in a case of subdivision ; 
 would not prevent subdivision, although thinking 
 that holdings under twenty-five acres are undesir- 
 able ; subdivision rectifies itself ; where even very 
 small holdings in fee exist, people are quiet and 
 law-abiding ; would take no precautions against 
 subdivision as regards peasant proprietary ; in 
 Gage's estate, some tenants had agreed to purchase 
 at twenty-six years ; an offer of twenty-nine years 
 made for estate in one lot ; tenants bid twenty-nine 
 for holdings, but estate sold in one lot ; tenants 
 spent in costs £40 for nothing, 34676-34723. 
 
 La Touche, Francis, esq., Dromahaii', Cos. Leitrim, 
 
 Waterford, I'ipperary, and Sligo, Agent. — 
 
 Dublin. 
 
 Agent for George Lane Fox; 19,000 acres; 
 
 rental, £8,440; tenement valuation,'£7,557; number 
 
 of tenants, 785 ; under £10, 498 ; rents not raised 
 
 since 1 845 ; also for Lord Massey, 24,880 acres ; 
 
 rental, £6,662; tenement valuation, £6,270; number 
 
 of tenants, 810; rents not raised for thirty-five 
 years, except on falling in of leases, 24725-9. 
 Much expended by landlords in improvements' 
 details, 34,730-9. Free sale subject to landlords; 
 approval allowed on Lane Fox and Massey, county 
 Leitrim, estates ; scarcely any on Lane Fox, county 
 Waterford, estate. Once refused to sanction sale at 
 fifty-one years' purchase in Tipperary ; rent, 10«. 
 below tenement valuation ; five acres at £4 10«. 
 seller got the money ; purchaser allowed to remain 
 under protest, 34740-5. Very few evictions 
 nearly all for non-payment ; cases, 34752-60, 
 Rents very badly paid this year ; fifteen per cent, 
 abatement given last year ; some offered this year 
 provided rents not reduced thereby below tenement 
 valuation, thirty years' abatement asked by tenants, 
 34761-8. Owns a small property himself near 
 Sligo ; contradicted statements made by his tenant 
 Hart ; details, 34769-89. Properties he is agent 
 for are all owned by absentees ; tenants on the 
 whole well off, 34,793-4. 
 
 Lewin, Frederick Thomas, esq., Cloghans, county 
 Mayo, Landowner. — Dublin, 
 Owns 2,130 acres, between Ballinrobe and Tuam, 
 34795, 34805. Tenants practically have fixity of 
 tenure, owing to Land Act Compensation for Dis- 
 turbance ; would leave landlords some power to 
 remove objectionable tenants, 34795-7. No case 
 of eviction came under his notice since Land Act, 
 34798. Fixing rents very well in theory but im- 
 practicable ; instance ; would not allow landlord to 
 raise rent without proving that increased value was 
 produced otherwise than by tenant ; would leare 
 rent question alone, trusting to Bright clauses acting 
 as safety valve; recurring valuations most injurious, 
 lead to litigation and injustice ; if tenant im- 
 poverishes land is landlord to suffer, 34798, 34803. 
 Not as much difficulty in collecting rents as otiers 
 have had ; lives in disturbed district, but not much, 
 outrage in immediate neighbourhood ; landlords 
 not enforcing their rights ; tenants generally hate 
 the rents, 34804-9. Many Mayo and Galway 
 tenants could not live on holdings rent free ; hither- 
 to have starved, knocked about, and worked in 
 England, 34810-3. Voluntary purchase of good 
 land and transfer of surplus population, together 
 with reclamation plan would relieve pressure; 
 much mountain land could be reclaimed, but bog 
 can only be done profitably by surrounding 
 occupiers, 34815-8, 34826-34840. Rents of 
 grazing farms always higher than agricultural in 
 regard to tenement valuation; it would be injurious 
 to break up such grass lands, 34819-22. Approves 
 of assisted, not forced, emigration ; whole families, 
 &c., 34823-8. Tenement valuation no test of value ; 
 instances, 34840. Conditionally approves of sale 
 ofgoodwm, 34840-1. 
 
 Neligan, John Chute, esq., q.c, Tralee, County Court 
 Judge. — Dublin. 
 County Court Judge for Westmeath, King's 
 County, Longford, and Meath ; sat formerly in 
 Leitrim and Louth since 1870, 34842-4. Three kinds 
 of ejectment, (1) for non-payment, (2) on the title, 
 (3) where different members of same family claim 
 to be tenant ; vast majority are for non-payment ; a 
 great number of kind (3), owing to administration 
 not being taken out at death of tenant ; compara- 
 tively few ejectments on the title ; less of late 
 years ; all at last sessions brought by farmers 
 against overholding labourers, 34845-64. Details 
 of land claim 0ollis v. Ma/rtley, contradicting evi- 
 dence given by Mr. James Everitt [see 2525 et seq.), 
 34866-71. Land Act does not authorize payment 
 to tenant of full expenditure for permanent im- 
 provements without regard to length of enjoyment 
 of them, 34873. Land claims exceptional on large 
 estates, 34874. Suggests repeal of fourth para- 
 graph of third section of Land Act, 34875-7. 
 , Approves of free sale, subject to reasonable veto of 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXT 
 
 Neligcm, John Cliute, q.c. — contimied. 
 
 landlord ; reasonableness to be subject to decision of 
 County Court, 34878. Would allow sale of interest 
 upon notice of ejectment for non-payment, 34878, 
 34907-1 1. Would put no limit on amount of price, 
 34879-81, 34883-5. Six months for redemption 
 ought to be before not after eviction, 34882. In- 
 ferior courts ought to be given summary powers for 
 pimishing forcible reinstating of tenants, 34885-7. 
 Present scale of compensation for disturbance not 
 sufficiently large to bring about fixity of tenure ; 
 suggestions as to increasing scale, 34887-95, 34899- 
 34901. Claims for improvements often extravagant ; 
 costs might be refused, 34896-8. Practice under 1 8th 
 sec. requires full setting forth of grounds relied on, 
 34904-6. Loans under sec. 42 ought to be made 
 on easier terms to landlords, 34915-8. Official 
 staff of County Courts ought to be increased, 
 34921-2. County Court not fit to fix rent, unless 
 ■with aid of practical assessor, 34922-8. 
 
 Orr, Gawin, esq., Ballylesson, Lisburn, Co. Down, 
 Surgeon and Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds 20 acres from C. Dunlop ; tenant-right 
 purchased by father in 1832 ; rent not raised since, 
 34929-40. Rents increased on Mr. Batt's estate 
 in 1878, on Mr. Irvine's estate within five years, 
 and on Mr. Keown Boyd's estate, 34941-52. 
 Tenant-right eaten away by raising of rents, 
 34956. Tenants make most of improvements, 
 34963-6. Case of arbitrary eviction on Sir T. 
 Bateson's estate, 34968. Land Act beneficial to 
 tenants, but grievance remains that landlords can 
 raise rent; tenants not free parties, 34970-9. 
 In fixing rents, would start with year 1800 ; if 
 landlord could show improvements made by him 
 since that, would allow him fair compensation ; in 
 case of dispute, a public officer might decide, 
 34980-9. Mentioned purchasers under Church 
 Act who are doing well, 34990-2. General peasant 
 proprietary impracticable ; Government should buy 
 from laiMilords who wish to sell, and sell to tenants, 
 34993-6. Conflicting statements as to rents of 
 Drumbo, 34997, 35004. In consequence of 
 electioneering and political matters, services of 
 witness as surgeon were discontinued ; other 
 instance of undue political influence, 35005-12. 
 Handed in resolutions of Newtownbreda Tenant- 
 Farmers' Association, 35112-4. 
 
 Anderson, Mr. James, Lissowen, Saintfield, Co. Down, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds by leases 100 acres from J. C. Price, 
 35013-9. Rents not increased on yearly tenants of 
 estate except on sale of good-will ; every shilling on 
 rent reduces tenant-right by £1, 35020-5. Rents 
 sometimes raised too high, 35026-7. Prices 
 of farm produce gone down ; cattle trade good until 
 American competition, 35031-53. There ought to be 
 fair rents and fixity of tenure, 35054-8. Complains 
 of amonnt of local taxes and tithe.s, also of agent's 
 fees and charges for obsolete courts-leet, 35058-79. 
 
 Oswald, Mr. Andrew S., Saintfield, Co. Down, Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Du hlin. 
 
 Case of purchaser under Church Act doing well, 
 
 35080-5. Mentioned case where County Court 
 
 Judge satisfactorily fixed i-ent, 35101. Complains 
 
 of cost of transfer of land, 35102. 
 
 Fewiry, Lord^ Dingle, County Kerry, Landowner. — 
 Dublin. 
 Owns 90,000 acres ; valuation, £9,025 ; rental, 
 £11,117, 35115and35120. Tenants very poor; partly 
 migratory labourers ; building even cheapest kind of 
 cottages would cost fee-simple value of estate, 
 35116-8. Some deep bog improvable, but turbary 
 useful now, 35719-20. Comparison between rent 
 and valuation to show latter no test of former, 
 35120-34. To satisfy those who urge that tenants 
 have not freedom of contract, would institute statu- 
 
 table agreements, 35134. Suggests that Govern- 
 ment should, where landlords are willing, accept 
 land in lieu of purchase-money for merging of quit- 
 rent and tithe-rentcharge, 35135-9. Land Act 
 was misleading and disappointing to tenants, 
 35140-1. Free sale of good-will, with limit of 
 price short of fee-simple value, ought to settle all 
 difficulties ; rents would soon settle themselves ; 
 landlord ovight to have right of i)re-emption, but, if 
 he wish to sell, be obliged to do so without profit, 
 although it seems as injurious to the public that 
 I tenant should make a profit as landlord, 35141-50. 
 There ought to be no interference with rent, except 
 where landlord seeks to raise it ; for free sale gives 
 tenant his remedy, 35151-8. Does not recognise 
 tenant-right on his estate, but has allowed money 
 to pass, incoming tenant contracting himself out of 
 sec. 3, 35159-62. Never had a land case, 35163. 
 Some evictions for non-payment ; hardly any on the 
 title, 35165-8. County Court system not uniform 
 in results ; would be worse but for Court of Appeal, 
 35169-70. Since 1869 has spent in improvements 
 on estate £23,237 in manner detailed, 35171. 
 £4,000 borrowed from Board of Works ; has not 
 yet decided whether tenants shall be charged 
 interest, 35172. Has also spent in rebuildinj,' resi- 
 dence and on home farm £19,000, 35172. 
 
 Mac Dermot, The, q.c, Fitzwilliam-place. Dublin, Cos. 
 Mayo and Sligo, Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Contradicts statements made by a previous 
 witness with reference to treatment of tenants, and 
 also statements of Mr. Daly, of Castlebar, 35174-8. 
 Since 1870 bought land worth £30,000 in Land 
 Court ; never raised rents ; ofifered leases for ever, 
 but tenants did not care for them, 35179-81. 
 Agitation has completely changed tenants ; few pay 
 now, 35183. Is in favour of reform of land laws, 
 35183. 
 
 Browne, George R., esq., Cahirdoon, Listowel, Co. 
 Kerry, Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 Collects an annual rental of about £11,000. 
 35187. Including Wilson, Jun., estate of about 
 8,000 acres, held under Trinity College, 35188-9. 
 Considers more security ought to be given for im- 
 provements ; the tenure a perpetuity lease ; rent 
 regulated by prices ; would like a fixed rent, 35190- 
 
 35200. The three F's a basis for fair settlement, 
 
 35201. Griffith's valuation not a fair test for rent, 
 35201. Would disapprove of any Government 
 valuation as a basis for rent, 35201. Rebuts state- 
 ment of Rev. Mr. Moynilan, p.p., as to John 
 Fahy's case, 35202-28. Value of a "cow's grass" 
 varies as to quality of land, 35229-31. Approves 
 of free sale, subject to reasonable objection of land- 
 lord, 35233. Landlord ought to be compensated 
 where tenant-right is introduced, 35235. Would 
 give limited owners power to make fee-farm grants, 
 35235. Facilities for peasant proprietary ought to 
 be given, with checks against subdivision, 35236. 
 Labourers ought to have lots of ground for them- 
 selves ; has accomplished this on one estate, 35237 
 -8. Corporate bodies ought to be obliged to sell, 
 35244. The case of the property under Trinity 
 College is, rent cannot be raised except according to 
 price?, right of free sale allowed, and a perpetuity 
 exists. Perpetuity at fixed rent wished for by 
 tenant, as giving more inducement for improving. 
 As regards tenants being satisfied with fixity of 
 tenure, free sale, and fair (not fixed) rents, has no 
 great expectation that some tenants will be satisfied 
 at anything, 35246-8. 
 
 Vernon, John E., esq., Wilton-place, Dublin, Land 
 
 Agent. — Dublin. 
 
 Manages estates situate in dififerent parts of 
 
 Ireland, annual rent of which is £90,000, 
 
 35249-52. Diflferent systems exist ; uniformity ' 
 
 desirable, 35252-3. Tenant-right system Avorks 
 
CXX /I 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Yenion, John E., J. p. — continued. 
 fairly well ; districts bettei- with than without 
 it in spite of economical objections ; would take 
 it as a basis, excluding grazing farms, 35254-62, 
 35267, 36294, 35300. Particulars of improvements 
 made on estates where witness is agent, 35263-6. 
 Improvements made by tenants on faith of tenant- 
 right ; on other estates not unless landlord con- 
 tributes ; improvements on tenant-i'ight estates 
 diminished by increases of rent at sale ; such a rule 
 bad ; exists on small, not on large estates, to know- 
 ledge of witness, 35267-73, 35287-91. Particulars 
 of expenditure on several estates, 35274-9. Ex- 
 plains and contradicts evidence of Mr. Meares Kelly, 
 35280-6. Disapproves of limiting amount of pur- 
 chase-money for tenant-right, but would not allow 
 sale by auction, because producing fictitious price?, 
 35292-9, 35317-29. Mr. Cowan's argument as to 
 unrestricted rents and unrestricted sale of tenant- 
 right, 25,300-16. In new legislation lines of Land 
 Act should be followed ; tenant-right should be 
 defined (definition given) and extended ; would 
 be against subdivision or subletting ; would give 
 landlord right of pre-emption, 35330-44. Would 
 abolish right ,of distress, 35344-7. Tenant should 
 be debarred from contracting himself out of past 
 liability to local taxes, 35348-50. As regards 
 question of rent believes a man cannot be prevented 
 from getting what he can get, but extraneous aid 
 can be refused by State for recovei-y ; would amend 
 and apply 9th section to all holdings under £100 a 
 year; woidd substitute word "unreasonable" for 
 "exorbitant"; would add practical assessor to 
 County Court ; right of appeal on law points to 
 assizes, or both law and fact together to a Land 
 Commission, 35350-9. Establishment of a Land 
 Commission necessary; describes nature of it, 35359. 
 "Would vary 12th section by substituting £100 for 
 £50, 35359-63. A new general valuation ought to 
 be made, 35363-8, 35380, 35386-99, 35405-10. 
 Tenant ought to have power to claim from landlord 
 a perpetuity at valuation, paying for it upon a 
 certain scale — a higher estate for a certain price — 
 as in Church Temporalities Act of 1833 ; would 
 have no periodical revaluations, 35368-80, 35463- 
 80. In cases of " unreasonable" rent, if not abolished 
 by amended 9th section, would give Land Commis- 
 sion power to deal with it, 35380-5. For tenants' 
 perpetuity purchases would approve of part loans by 
 State, 35400-4. Interests of reversioners and 
 others to be protected by Land Commission, 35411- 
 4. Local registries ought to be established, 35414. 
 In sales of fee-simple to tenants, tenants ought not 
 to be charged stamp duty where Land Commission 
 bought landlord's estate inLand Court, 35414. Lands 
 iu Conveyances ought to be mapped, 3541 4. Loans to 
 facilitate formation of peasant proprietary ought not 
 to be made from Consolidated Fund, which would 
 be an absentee landlord, but ought to be raised on 
 debentures in Ireland ; £10,000,000 could be raised ; 
 bondholders would be interested in peace of the coun- 
 try, 35422-35. Proposed Land Commission should 
 exercise discretion in purchasing estates ; the ques- 
 tion of residues unsold to occupiers a difficulty that 
 would soon cui'e itself, 35436-8. As annual repay- 
 ments would form a continuing fund not so much 
 capital requisite as at first sight would appear, 
 35439-41. Proposed Commission should not have 
 charge of land improvements, 35442-3. Should not 
 take the place of Land Court ; landlord's title should 
 be cleared in Land Court, conveyed to, and resold 
 to the occupiers by Commission, 35444-7. Amovmt 
 of purchase-money should include all costs, 35448. 
 Repayments should be spread over from thirty-two 
 to forty-five years, 35451-62. On the whole pur- 
 chasers of Church lands are doing well, 35481-2. 
 Facilities for formation of peasant proprietary 
 ought to be given, but the two elements (landlord and 
 tenant) ought still to exist in country ; landlords 
 ought not to be forced to sell, 35483-5. 
 
 Walsh, Very Rev. William J., D.D., President of May- 
 nooth College, Co. Kildare. — Dublin. 
 President of St. Patrick's College. College 
 Trustees held a farm of 134 acres from year to year 
 from Duke of Leinster. Tenancy began in 1849 
 at rent of £295 ; raised in 1867 to £300 ; in 1877 
 £400 demanded after College had built upon and 
 improved farm greatly ; College demurred, and soon 
 after £470 demanded according to a valuation of a 
 " public valuator," a tenant of the Duke, who 
 valued without communicating with or being 
 accompanied by any representative of the College. 
 The Duke offered to take £400 a year provided the 
 Trustees signed " Leinster Lease" ; Trustees refused, 
 as signing such a document would put them in a 
 false position. Ultimate result was eviction, 35486- 
 35501. Further details as to this dispute, 35501-4. 
 Resolution passed by Trustees in 1879, withdrawing 
 their offer, on account of agricultural depression, 
 but were willing to continue as yearly tenants at 
 rent hitherto paid, 35505. Tenants complain of 
 these leases, 35506. Are completely at the Duke's 
 mercy, 35509-13. Tixistees brought a land claim 
 of £1,300 for improvemen^ts ; were adviaad they 
 had no claim for disturbance; case settled out of 
 Court, by Trustees taking £1,000, 35514-18. 
 Objects to principle adopted by the Duke when 
 fixing rent-— taking the actual value of the land 
 without making any allowance for tenants' improve- 
 ments ; considers the tenement valuation no guide 
 to what rent should be, being made in same way, 
 35518-19. Some clauses in Leinster lease most 
 unfair to tenants, viz., right of landlord to re-enter 
 if rent be not paid twenty-one days after due; 
 35522-23. Clause debarring tenant from com- 
 pensation for improvements except made with 
 written consent, 35523. Improvements generally 
 made by the tenants, in some case main drainage 
 and works of that sort by the Duke, in cases where 
 money is Borrowed for this purpose the annuity is 
 treated as an addition to the rent for ever, 35524. 
 Town parks held under lease from year to year, 
 terminable at a month's notice, with strict clauses 
 against breaking up any of the land, 35524-25, 
 35528. No compensation for disturbance in case 
 of town parks, 35527. Unequal valuation of lands, 
 heavy losses on each three years' crops, 35528-32. 
 Tenants should not be allowed to contract themselves 
 out of the Land Act no matter what their valuation 
 may be, 35534-36. Tenants have little freedom 
 of contract, must either accept landlord's terms or go, 
 35536-37. The Trustees were willing to pay the 
 increased rent, but objected to sign the lease on 
 principle, the Act being excluded by it, in every 
 possible way; for instance, tenants must pay entire 
 county cess, 35538-39. Tenants from Maynooth 
 district could give a good deal of evidence, but are 
 too much afraid, 35539. On the Trustees being 
 evicted the farm was given to the principal witness 
 for the Duke at the trial, who has been obliged to 
 sign the Leinster lease, 35540-41. Instance where 
 the Duke interfered to prevent a tenant purchasing 
 under the Chui-ch Act, 35543-45. In one case 
 tenant bought, in spite of the influence used, and 
 is now a proprietor, 35546. This case of the Trustees 
 is the only one in which the signing of the Leinster 
 lease was successfully resisted, 35547. 
 
 (7assi(iy, Anthony, Esq.,Enniskillen, Cos. Fermanagh, 
 and Tyrone, Land Owner, and Tobacco Manu- 
 facturer. — Dublin. 
 Bought a property in Fermanagh about five years 
 ago ; has about thirty tenants, 35550-2. After the 
 purcliase offered all the tenants leases for ever, 
 35553. Tenant-right did not exist, 35554. Tenants 
 seem prosperous, as they more or less worked at 
 the pottery,, 355 5 6. Many of them took leases for 
 999 years to avoid heavy law expenses; others 
 would not take a lease, not caring to pay for them, 
 35557-9. Office rules and restrictions a great 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXVll 
 
 ^assiJy, Anthony — continued. 
 
 grievance, 35560. Free sale ahould be allowed, and 
 BOrue competent tribunal established to fix rents, 
 35561-2. The three Fs would satisfy all, 35563-5. 
 Asked no fine on givin;^ leases ; denial of tenant- 
 right ; and oflice rules have woiked great mischief. 
 No tenant-right iu Fermanagh, except what the 
 agent chooses to allow ; instances in ]>oint. Land- 
 lords, for their own interest, ought to give fixity of 
 tenure, or long leases, withoiit clauses, at fair rents, 
 
 ■ 35566. Is quite satisfied with the result of what 
 he has done, 35567-8. 
 
 Johnston, St. George, esq., Eathcline, I-anesborough, 
 Cos. Leitrim and Longford, Land Agent and 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds 1,132 acres from Lord Annaly, 35570-71. 
 Is agent to his brother's estate of 50,000 acres, 
 35622-24. Recent bad seasons have made farming 
 unprofitable, and in consequence farmers are largely 
 in debt, 35572-74. Explains tenant-right practice 
 existing on estate he manages in Leitrim, 35575- 
 79, 35582-84. Difficulty as to tenant-right in 
 case of intestates, 35580-81. Endeavours to con- 
 solidate farms, 35585-87. Decline and disappear- 
 ance of handloom weaving among small farmers, 
 35588-94. Case of subdivison and sale of their 
 interests by perpetuity leaseholders near Bally- 
 shannon, 35595-61 5. Land Act has failed to 
 protect tenants against excessive rents ; instance of 
 rent-raising and discontent on Lord Annaly's pro- 
 perty, 35616-19. No freedom of contract between 
 landlord and tenant ; tenant should have power to 
 call in public valuator, and have appeal to Court, 
 35620-21. Is a large employer of labour; has 
 increased wages from IfL to Is. dd. a day ; bad 
 economy of low wages ; willingness to work of men 
 who are well paid and well treated,. 35624—31. 
 Labourers are scarce, and better off than formerly, 
 35632. Condition, wages, and position of labourers ; 
 necessity for farmers having them under their 
 control, 35633-36. Injustice of ejectment for non- 
 payment of rent without compensation for improve- 
 ments, 35638-39. Instance of tenant asking to be 
 reinstalled in land which he had lefo in 1854, 
 35640-41, 35643. Inconvenience of rundale, and 
 
 ■ measures taken to abolish it, 35642. Contradicts 
 suj)posed statement of Mr. Bright's as to frequent 
 and vexatious raising of rents by Irish landlords, 
 35643-50. Tendency to subdivision, and necessity 
 for preventing it, and enabling landlord to control 
 the sale and division of farms, 35651-55. 
 
 Irvine, Colonel J. G., Killydeen, County Fermanagh, 
 Land Owner. — Dublin. 
 Owns about 15,000 acres, 12,000 of which are in 
 county Fermanagh, 35657-8. There is no tenant- 
 right on the property. When a tenant is leaving 
 he gets permission to sell, but not as a right, 
 35659-62. Leases very common before the Land 
 Act, not so much since, 35663. No clauses in leases 
 in his district ; contracting tenants out of the Land 
 Act ; no change made in leases since it was passed, 
 but still refused by tenants, who prefer having 
 no leases, 35663-6. On termination of lease, 
 if land is found to be let too low, it is re- 
 valued, and a new rent put on, 35667. Some very 
 old leases on the property, with clauses against 
 subletting, and compelling the tenant to make im- 
 provements, and in some cases allowing 4s. or 5s. 
 an acre off the rent for these improvements, 35668- 
 9. An old lease of seventy-five years expired last 
 year, the increase in rent was about, fifty per cent., 
 35671-72. One case came before County Court 
 judge, who took for granted the house had been 
 built iDy the tenant, although no one could prove it, 
 
 35673. Thinks some imjirovement may have been 
 made in the case of the lease for seventy-five years, 
 
 35674. On one tbwnland, which had been let on 
 very old leases, tenants very unthrifty, not on a 
 new letting being made, changed altogether, thinks 
 the cause of this was being rented so low they 
 
 were not obliged to work, 35676-82, 35685-92. 
 Tenants have no doubt that they will be left in 
 ccupation at end of lease, not know that the rent 
 will be raised, 35683-5. No tenant-right on the 
 property, 35691, 35754-54. Borrowed from Board of 
 Works for improvements, put increase on tenants for 
 drainage and buildings, but not for roads, 35693-6. 
 Minor impi-ovements done by tenants, 35697. Most 
 of the improvements in the district made by tenants 
 with a little ussistance from the landlords, 35698. 
 On revaluing a farm, always discusses the matter 
 with the tenant, has had no difficulty in settling 
 rent, 35699-702. Few evictions, and only for non- 
 payment, 35703-05. In favour of peasant pro- 
 prietary, if subletting prevented, 35706-35713. 
 Some purchasers under Church Act in his district 
 came and asked him to purchase their holdings from 
 them, which he did, and then gave them leases ; 
 thinks they got into difficulties from having borrowed 
 the purchase-money at high rates of interest, 35707- 
 1 1 . Others of them he thinks are getting on fairly 
 well, 35712. In a few cases where there were very 
 long leases permission was given to suV)let among 
 members of families, 35714-15. Conijndsory power 
 should be given to purchase head rents, properties 
 should be freed to a great extent from entail so as 
 ta enable them to come into the market, 35716-18. 
 Would provide for the purchase by a system of 
 debentures, 35719. A tenant should not be 
 disturbed as long as he pays his rent ; in case of any 
 dispute considers the County Court judge can settle 
 it| and the present law in that respect sufficient, 
 35721-29. Illustration, 35730. Against free sale, 
 would give landlord a veto, 35731. In case of 
 leases allows sale of unexhausted improvements, but 
 not interest otherwise, 35732-6. Griffith's valuation 
 an unfair one, speaks from experience, 35737-39, 
 35744-5. Has granted reclaimed bog to the tenants 
 for five years rent free for the purpose of improve- 
 ment, they are glad to take it, 35740-3. Has spent 
 £32,000 in improvements during the last thirty 
 years, 35745-^6. About a dozen cases in Land 
 Court since the Land Act, 35747. Considers 
 County Court Judges Act as fairly as possible, but 
 has heard complaints from both landlords and 
 tenants, 35748-52. Freedom of contract between 
 landlord and tenant ought not to be interfered with, 
 35753. 
 
 Eeane, Marcus, esq., Beechpark, Ennis, Co. Clare, 
 Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 Is an agent managing 100,000 acres in county 
 Clare, on which farms are usually small, 35759-62. 
 Is in favour of perpetual tenures at fixed rents, 
 35763-65, 35792-93. Dangerof peasant proprietors 
 subdividing' and letting their farms, 35766-68, 
 35802. Great tendency to subletting and subdivision, 
 and difficulty of detecting it, 35769-71, 35802-09. 
 Landlords' power has been injuriously interfered 
 with ; distress should be abolished ; law as to 
 execution of ejectments should be amended, 35772- 
 77. Want of security prevents improvements; 
 case of tenants purchasing their farms on Conyngham 
 estate who considered their improvements had in- 
 creased, price paid by them, 35778-89. Instance of 
 outlay by tenants leading to increased rents, 35790- 
 9 1 . Government valuation incorrect ; necessity for 
 revaluation before fixing perpetuity rents ; instances 
 of incorrectness and unevenness of present valuation 
 and difficulty of getting a just valuation, 35794-95^ 
 35798-801. Refusal of tenants to pay rents above 
 the Government valuation, 35796-97. Meadow 
 lands and grazing farms should be excepted from 
 perpetuity scheme, 35810, 35821. Perpebnal 
 tenancies should be registered in office of Clerk of 
 the Peace, and noted on Ordnance Survey Maps, 
 35811. Improvement loans to perpetuity tenants 
 would be badly secured if rent was the full value 
 and would injure landlord s security if interest on 
 them had priority of rent, 35812-18. Term of 
 notices to quit should be three years, and they 
 
cxxvin 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION,- 1880. 
 
 Kecme, Marcus — continued. 
 
 should be subject to £1 stamp, 35819-20. 
 Perpetuity scheme should only apply to residential 
 farms, 35823-24. 
 
 Marwm, Mulhallen, esq., m.p.. Go. Kilkenny. — Dublin. 
 Attended with several others to give evidence as 
 to the relations between landlord and tenant, 
 especially in county Kilkenny, 35845-26. The 
 origin of Ulster tenant-right, 35827-31. Notwith- 
 standing the ijand Act there has been rack-renting 
 and eviction; a case of confiscation, 35831-9, 
 35844-47. Instance of rack-renting, 35839-41. 
 Tenants over £50 obliged to contract themselves out 
 of all claim for compensation under Land Act, 
 35842. Large tenants require protection as well as 
 small ones, 35843. Rack-renting on Mr. Hum- 
 phery's, of Ballybay, estate, and increases of rent 
 imder pain of ejectment ; instances of this ; case of 
 William Tyndall and others, 35847-59. Further 
 instances on Mr. Hely's property ; case of a tenant 
 named Moore, 35861-62. Attempted rent-raising 
 on Mr. Hackett's property ; agent resigned in con- 
 sequence, 35863-65. Rent-raising and evictions on 
 
 ■ Mr. Esmond's estate; farms still untenanted, 35866- 
 67. One tenant named Dwyer had to leave, rent 
 so high, 35868-9. Remarkable case on same estate 
 of a tenant called Price, 35870-72. In all these 
 cases all the improvements were made by the ten- 
 ants, 35873. Great necessity for a disturbance bill ; 
 case in point on Mr. Swan's property, of a jnan 
 named Sherman, 35876-82. Tenants sunk in debt 
 
 . to banks and shopkeepers ; the present ci-isis must 
 have come sooner or later, the bad times only 
 
 ' accelerated it, 35886. Illustrations in point, 35887- 
 88. Hard case of rent-raising and eviction since 
 Land Act, of Malachi Kelly, a tenant on Sir 
 Erasmus Burrowes' estate, he having sunk a good 
 deal of money in improvements; farm now unlet 
 landlord managing it himself, 35892-35905. In- 
 stance of leasehold tenant-right, 35905. Griffith's 
 valuation as a test of rent ; letter of J. Ball Greene, 
 esq.. Commissioner of Valuation, '35906-7. Con- 
 siders Griffith's valuation to be too high all round, 
 
 ■ not in the pound, that it is not the letting value, but 
 having regard to the interest of the tenant in the 
 property. 35907-8. Would apply Griffith's valua- 
 tion generally and make the variation from it the 
 exception, 35916-21. If landlord and tenant can- 
 not agree as to the rent of a particular holding, 
 has no objection to the question being decided by a 
 third party, independent of both, 35924. Draws 
 distinction between valuation of land and valuation 
 of rents, would say valued rents and free Sale, 
 35925-G. Valued rents would not raise the ques- 
 tion of improvements at all, the first valuation 
 would do that, 35926-7. Considers the present 
 rental of Ireland too high, 35928. Difficulty in a 
 re-valuation would be to distinguish between the 
 property and the improvements of the tenant, 
 35933. Valuators should be instructed how to act, 
 revaluation a necessity in order to have the initial 
 rent, would let periodic valuations fluctuate accord- 
 ing to produce, 35937-8. A commission that the 
 people had confidence in, would be of great ad- 
 vantage, 35939-40. The Land Act involved very 
 little litigation, if there was a commission instituted 
 on a proper basis there woxild be an equally small 
 per centage, 35941-2. Free sale beneficial, 35944. 
 Would not force a landlord to sell, but would give 
 assistance to a thrifty man to buy. Money must 
 be advanced at low interest to extend over a great 
 number of years, or nothing can be done, people so 
 much in debt, 35945-53. Money should be ad- 
 vanced in such a way as not to make the annual 
 payment more than the rental, 35954. Landed 
 Estates Court has done harm by giving opportuni- 
 ties to land jobbers, 35955. Case on Lord Mont- 
 garifi^'s estate where rent was raised five shillings 
 an acre on sale of holding ; incoming tenant there- 
 fore got a rebate on the purchase money ; instance 
 
 where tenant was obliged to sign an agreement, a 
 copy of which he did not get ; binding him not to 
 dispose of his holding by will or in any other way 
 to his children or anyone else, 35956. Landlords- 
 forget rent shouldf not be assessed on improvements, 
 and that the tenant has a proprietorial right, 35959. 
 
 O'Halloran, Rev. Daniel, C.C, Olough, Co. Kilkenny. 
 — Dublin. 
 Gives a list of fifty tenants on estate of George- 
 Bryan, formerly M.P., Kilkenny, showing valua- 
 tion, rent, increase added in 1871, and per centage 
 of rent over valuation of each farm, 35960-61. 
 Rents are too high, and were enforced by notice to- 
 quit, 35964-71. Tenants compelled to sign agree- 
 ment not to claim compensation under Land Act. 
 Impossible to make relations satisfactory between 
 bad landlords and tenants ; bad landlords must be 
 expropriated and restraint put on others to prevent 
 unjust treatment of tenants, 35977-80. A bad 
 landlord is one who charges more than twenty-five 
 per cent, over the valuation as rent, 35981. 
 
 Foley, Mr. James, Chatsworth, Co. Kilkenny, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Tenant to George Bryan. On fall of lease rent 
 raised to 22s. Qd. per acre ; tenant being compelled to* 
 sign agreement to pay 30s., 35983-35991. Rent 
 far too high, being sixty-nine per cent, over valua- 
 tion, and value of farm being due to large expendi- 
 ture by tenant, 35993-96, 36003. Abatement of 
 rent refused by owner, 35997—6001. He formody 
 held under middleman who charged moderate rent, 
 36004-07. 
 
 Drennan, Mr. Denis, Kells, Co. Kilkenny, Tenant 
 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 
 Complains that his rent is too high, 36012. That 
 
 fivemen failed on his holding before he took it, 36035, 
 
 Which he did in the good times, when he thought 
 
 it possible to make the rent, paid no fine, 36022-35. 
 
 Howley, Rev. M., C.C, St. Canice's, Kilkenny, Co. 
 
 Kilkenny. — Dublin. 
 
 Increased rents, case of Mrs. Kelly, 36036-42. 
 
 Instance of landlord breaking lease and increasing 
 
 rent 10s. an acre, besides interest for buildings, . 
 
 36042-8. List of cases in his own parish, 36049-51. 
 
 Over-renting on Mr. Robert Stannard's estate. 
 
 Considers the tenants could not pay the valuation 
 
 on this property, 36052-57. List of valuations and 
 
 rents on Mr. Blunden's estate, 36058-60. Several 
 
 other instances of a like kind, in all of which the 
 
 rents are too high, even the valuation itself being, 
 
 too high. Many of the above rents have not been 
 
 altered for years, 36061-67. Considers Griffith's 
 
 valuation too high as a rent for land, 36069-71. 
 
 Taking all things into account, tenants can't live and 
 
 pay even the valuation on tillage farms, 36073-5. 
 
 Would give tenant fixity of t?nure in his holding, 
 
 and if he and landlord differed, an independent 
 
 tribunal to settle the rent, 36075-6. In favour of 
 
 gradual development of peasant proprietors ; 
 
 absentee landlords to be taxed, or their property 
 
 sold, 36077-8. On most of the large properties 
 
 the tenants have practically fixity of tenure, 
 
 36080-81. 
 
 M^Cormach, Mr. James, Steepleview, Johnstown, Co. 
 Kilkenny, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. • 
 Tenant to an absentee. Has no complaint to 
 make for self but on behalf of others, 36086-87. 
 Gives particulars of successive increases of rent 
 made by successive owners, 36088-99. Instance 
 of poor rates not being allowed to tenants, 
 36100-06. Instances of increases of rent, and par- 
 ticulars as to valuation, 36107-25. Difficulty of 
 getting impartial and skilled valuators ; tenant 
 should be represented when there is a revaluation, 
 36126-29. Instance of processes served for re- 
 covery of rent, 36129-38. Need of drainage and 
 desirability of making land improvement loans to 
 tenants, 36218-21. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXIX 
 
 .Fielding, Mr. John, Portnascully, Co. Kilkenny, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 His rent is too liigli, thougli not changed since 
 1850, 36141-55, 36169-70. Improvements and 
 buildings all made by tenant, 36156-59. Land- 
 lords might take offence at his evidence, 36160-68. 
 Half his farm is marsh, and owing to change in 
 system of dairy farming, is not so valuable as for- 
 laerly, 36169-77. Increased cost of labour, 36178. 
 Reduction of rent refused, 36179-81. Can't give 
 up farm, as he has nowhere else to go, 36182. The 
 river embankment is usually kept up by tenants, 
 but assistance was given by landlord, as on occasion 
 of repairing large breach, 36184-87. Rent of slob 
 lands near Waterford, 52s. per acre, 36188. Never 
 lets conacre, 36180. 
 
 /Carroll, Mr. John, Mullinavat, Co. Kilkenny, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Lives in a mountainous district, much of which has 
 been reclaimed by tenants. Improvements made 
 lay tenants are at landlord's mercy, and require pro- 
 tection, 36190. Is in favour of the three F's, but 
 the difficulty of fixing the rent is great, 36191-92. 
 In order to settle the land question and land agita- 
 tion, Grifiith's valuation should be made a legal 
 tender for rent, the landlords being compensated 
 for any loss incurred, 36193-208. Security of 
 tenure woiild have made the country prosperous, 
 36209-36216. Few capricious evictions ; but rais- 
 ing rents or possible increase gives feeling of in- 
 security, 36211-15. Improvements usually made 
 by tenants, and not by landlord, 36217. 
 Murphy, Mr. Peter, Roscat, ■ Co. Carlow, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Complains of increase of rent imposed on self 
 and eleven other tenants on Lord Rathdonnell's 
 estate in 1874, on termination of lease, 36222-42. 
 Land improved by tenant. No expenditure what- 
 ever by landlord, 36243-48. Tenants compelled to 
 take leases against their wishes, containing objec- 
 tionable covenants, contracting them out of Land 
 Act, and depriving them of right to sell, 36249-80. 
 Landlord refused to allow a valuator to act on part 
 of the tenants when raising rent, 36281. 
 Tracey. Mr. Michael, Roosk, Maynooth, Cos. Kildare 
 and Wicklow. — Dublin. 
 Is a tenant on Duke of Leinster's estate, having 
 bought interest in a farm held by Leinster lease, 
 36283-90. Was evicted from farm on Dick's estate, 
 in Wicklow, on which his father had built and im- 
 proved, 36291-96. Got £500 compensation, but 
 £100 went for costs, 36297-99. Particulars of 
 land case, and as to condition of farm and his offer 
 to take it at a fair valuation, 36299-309. Eviction 
 of occupiers under middleman on Dick's estate, 
 36310-14. Anything over Griffith's valuation is a 
 rack-rent at present, 36315-17. Rents should be 
 fixed by arbitration, 36318-20. Description of 
 losses incurred on farm. Rent paid out of capital, 
 and no abatement given, 36321-25. 
 Walsh, Mr. Matthew, Ballincole, Villierstown, Co. 
 Waterford, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Tenant to Thomas Fitzgerald, an absentee, 36326 
 -28. On death of his father the present owner dis- 
 puted promise of lease, and commenced a Chancery 
 suit against tenant; the matter was compromised, 
 tenant paying an advanced rent, and his costs 
 eimounting to £300, 36329-38. Rents strictly en- 
 forced without reduction during distress, 36339-41. 
 Case of illegal distress harshly made by landlord, 
 who had to pay £496 and costs in consequence of 
 action brought by Farmers' Club, 36342-44. Case 
 of eviction and high rents on Fitzgerald's estate, 
 36344-46. Case of middleman harshly enforcing 
 rent, 36347-49. Is in* favour of the three F's, 
 36350. Difficulty of giving credit to tenants for their 
 improvements in fixing rent, 36351-52. Instances 
 of evictions owing to inability of tenants to pay 
 high rents, 36353-56. Cases of evictions on Sir 
 Nugent Humble's estate, 36356-61. Archbishop 
 
 Trench and Mrs, Stewart the only considerate land- 
 lords in district ; they have abated their rents, and 
 Mrs. Stewart has opened reclamation works, 36362 
 -65. Necessity for speedy settlement of land 
 question, and intention of tenants not to pay rente, 
 36365-66. 
 
 Redmond, Mr. Cornelius, Waterford, Co. Waterford, 
 Alderman and Newspaper Proprietor. — Dublim. 
 Member of Waterford Corporation, which owns 
 from £15,000 to £17,000 a year in land and houses, 
 36367-69. Recommends as a settlement of land 
 question ninety-nine years' leases renewable for ever, 
 with rents fixed by arbitration, 36370-76, 36383- 
 84. On the Corporation property system of long 
 leases and arbitration rents prevail, and has led to 
 contentment and good cultivation, 36377-82. In- 
 stance of difiiculty of getting improvements made 
 by lessor, 36385-86. Stamps and costs of leases 
 and transfer should be reduced as low as possible, 
 36387-90. Industry of Irish stimulated in America 
 and Australia by different land laws, 36391. Crea^ 
 tion of peasant proprietary desirable, but should be 
 gradual and by voluntary means, 36392-94. Dis- 
 advantage of subdivision, and need of better houses 
 for labou.rers* 36395. Evils of absenteeism, 36395 
 -99. Tenants of Waterford Corporation contented, 
 and in some cases would not gain by becoming 
 proprietors, 36400-02. Would not Avish to see good 
 resident landowners driven away by expropriation 
 schemes, 36403. Waste lands would be reclaimed 
 largely if tenants had security for their expenditure, 
 36404-12. Loss to country by emigration, 36413— 
 15. 
 
 Lijfford, Viscount, Landowner, Meen Glass, Stranorlar, 
 Co. Donegal, Land Owner. — Dublin. 
 Refutes a statement given in evidence against 
 him, 36416-17. Very little waste land that could be 
 reclaimed on a large enough scale to pay ; illustra- 
 tration, 36419-25. Considers mountain lands 
 better grazing lands, than if reclaimed ; set 6,000 
 acres of mountain to a Scotch tenant, limited him 
 to six years ; he surfaced, drained, and burned the 
 heather; it was wonderful the way the grass beat 
 the heather, 36426-29. Waste lands are usually 
 in the hands of tenants for grazing, 36430. Nothing 
 so unpopular as taking away these lands from one 
 tenant and giving it to another to reclaim ; illustra- 
 tion in point, 36431-4. Thinks from experience 
 tenants would not reclaim waste lands for tBem- 
 selves ; has failed in getting them to do so, although 
 he had 8,00Q acres that could be reclaimed, only 
 thirty-three accepted his offer ; system adopted by 
 him, 36435-41. In favour of the Bright clauses 
 and of extending them ; afraid tenants about him 
 could not buy ; would have to give forty years' pur- 
 chase to become owner ; twenty years' purchase 
 given for tenant-right, 36445-6, which is often 
 above the fee simj)le value of the land ; no restric- 
 tions as to price, but always retains right of veto, 
 36447-8. Difficulty in free sale is, that people 
 reckless as to means will outbid the honest men, 
 36447-51. Would abolish distraint for rent, 
 36452-4. Tenants might take leases for a very 
 long term of years, but are against leases for a short 
 term, 36455-60. Practically fixity of tenure on 
 all large properties ; no measure giving fixity of 
 tenure would improve them, 36461-3. As regards 
 fixing rents, any tribunal would be better for both 
 parties than the present system ; always in favour 
 of giving protection to tenants, 36465-6. Most of 
 the improvements that he has any knowledge of 
 have been done under covenants in leases, 36467-8. 
 
 Nolan, Rev. P. F., Hermitage, TuUow, County 
 Carlow. — Dublin. 
 The present state of the law does not prevent 
 eviction, 36470. Great feeling of insecurity 
 tenants in county CsltIow only vote under protection 
 of Ballot Act; lor fear of eviction, 36470-77. A 
 landlord wishing to have tenants of his own war 
 of thinking, politically and religiously ; especially 
 
cxxx 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Nolan, Rev. P. F. — continued. 
 
 if wealthy ; woiild not be stopped by compensation 
 for disturbance, and if not wealthy could easily get 
 a new set of tenants to pay all arrears, and perhaps 
 a fine ; e^dctions only prevented through humanity 
 of landlords, or public opinion, 36477-78. Pro- 
 perties of corposate bodies and absentee landlords 
 should be bought by Government and sold to 
 tenants, with advances of Government money on 
 the principle of the Bright clauses, any land that 
 offered in Landed Estates Court, should be bought 
 in the same way ; in the case of good resident land- 
 lords, the three F's would be sufficient, would not 
 force them to sell, .36480-1. Against wholesale 
 expropi'iation of landlords, 36482-3. Suggests a 
 court of arbitration for fixing rents, with Giiffith's 
 valuation as a basis on which arbitration might take 
 place, 36482-8.5. Tenants have an objection to 
 valuators and County Court judges, on the ground 
 that they are of the same class as the landlords and 
 have feelings more in common with them than the 
 tenants, 36486. There should be some means of 
 fixing rents, a great temptation to landlords to raise 
 rents, tenants will pay anything rather than go, 
 36487-9. 
 
 Sathhurne, Mr. Henry Talbot, Virginia, Co. Cavan, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Bought a lease of a farm with mill upon it for 
 £2,000, and laid out .£1,700 upon the holding; in 
 consequence of drainage works, water power has 
 been taken away, and in allotting compensation the 
 landlord got an unfair amount, part of which should 
 have been paid to tenant, 36490-513. Case of 
 tillage farm in King's County taken on faith of 
 promise of agent, to continue him as a tenant, but 
 which he was driven to leave on account of treat- 
 ment by agent, who then took farm for himself, 
 36514-24. 
 
 Tener, Edward Shaw, esq., Cos. Cavan and Tyrone, 
 Landowner and Agent. — Dublin. 
 Owns estates in Cavan and Tyrone, agent over 
 Lady Castlestuart's estate in Tyrone, 36525-6. 
 Tenant-right allowed, 36528. Tenants over twenty 
 acres prosperous, small tenants more affected by bad 
 years, 36529-32. Rent not raised since 1826 
 except one townland which was revalued in 1 876 and 
 merits raised, tenants quite satisfied with increase, 
 36533-6, 36542-3. Is also agent to Mr. Gage, and 
 Mr. Underdown in County Tyrone, no increases of 
 rent for many years, 36537. Rent is never raised 
 on death of tenant, or change of tenancy on any of 
 the estates he is agent over, considers such a rule 
 very unfair, 36538-41. In case of sale, adjoining 
 tenant has the preference, 36544. Auctions pro- 
 hibited, 36546. Rule on Lady Castlestuart's 
 estate is that purchaser shall pay ten per cent, to 
 the seller, and the remainder of the purchase-money 
 in the presence of the agent, this was done to protect 
 creditors and secure arrears of rent due, 36547-8. 
 Tenant-right is guarded for the tenant's benefit, and 
 after paying his creditors he gets balance, if any, 
 36550-.51. Few cases of eviction, very rarely proceed 
 unless two years' rent is due, and in every case ten- 
 ants were put in as caretakers, pending redemption ; if 
 unable to do so, tenant-right is sold for their benefit, 
 36552-54. Refuting statement of Bernard Loughlin 
 of rent raising, &o., on Lady Castlestuart's estate, 
 36557-68. Twenty years' purchase given for the 
 tenant-right, 36569-70. Tenants often refuse to 
 allow main or boundary drains to be made or 
 cleared, legislation needed to remedy this, illus- 
 tration.s in point, 36575-8. Knows several instances 
 in County Cavan of yeoman proprietors, holding 
 from 100 to 200 acres, who are doing remarkable 
 well, 36579. Supposed to be Cromwellian grants, 
 36580-1. Have never subdivided, 36582. 
 Have greatly improved their land, 36585. On the 
 other hand knows some very small proprietors who . 
 are living in a very wretched way, having sub- 
 
 divided the original grants, till they have only 
 small patches to live on, 36585-7. Muslin weaving 
 and embroidery has disappeared, 36588-9. Farms 
 are being consolidated, and small farmers who used 
 to be weavers find ib very hard to live, 36592-6. 
 "Would give limited owners power to grant lone 
 leases at settled rents, 36597-601. A great ad- 
 vantage if tenants could borrow direct from 
 Board of Works, 36&04-5. Where tenants, have 
 purchased their farms, and the whole estate has not 
 been sold, equal privileges in the way of borrowing 
 money should be allowed to outsiders • coming iu to 
 purchase remainders, illustration in point, 36606-11. 
 Would do away with clauses against alienation, Ijut 
 retain those against subdivision and subletting, 
 36612-15. Purchasers from Lord Gosford doing 
 fairly well, seem quite satisfied, 36616-18. Would 
 suggest that tenants holding under ten acres should 
 not be encouraged to purchase, 36621-24. Is of 
 opinion that when an owner offers sixty or ninety -nine 
 years' leases at fair rents, and they are refused, in 
 case he evicts there should be no compensation, 
 36628-9. Would compel tenants to take a simple 
 form of lease, with only one clause against sub- 
 letting or subdivision without permission, 36630-32. 
 In case of free sale there should be some safeguard 
 against reckless bidding, 36633-8. 
 
 Patterson, Mr. Hugh Gill, Drumconly, Emyvale, Co, 
 Monaghan, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Represents his district desires a revaluation ; to 
 be at least three valuators, one on behalf of landlord, 
 another on behalf of tenant, and the third on behalf 
 of the Government, this done the borrowing powers 
 of the tenant to be increased under Bright clauses, 
 so as to buy out landlords, but only when they ars 
 disposed to sell ; where old relations remain the 
 same after the revaluation, tenant should be enaUed 
 to borrow direct from Board of Works for improve- 
 ments, 36640-42. Two-fifths of his district 
 could be reclaimed, and would pay, 36646-7. 
 Peasant proprietary the only settlement, 36648-52. 
 Suggests that Government should lend the full 
 purchase-money, gives instance showing would be 
 quite safe in so doing, 36653-56. Is certain 
 tenants would meet instalments ; a great change 
 would be worked if they had seciirity, 36658-65. 
 At present are afraid to make any improvements, 
 for fear of increased rent, 36666-70. His experience 
 is that where you have pure and simple tenant-right 
 improvement is eiioouraged, as you get away from it 
 improvement stops, instance in point, 36671-2. 
 If rent was a fixed quantity, with security against 
 any aftercharge, great improvements would be made, 
 36673. Free sale at a high rent, no advantage, 
 36674-6. Labourers are fairly well off, 36681. 
 Not much permanent employment, farmers help 
 one another, 36682-4. Very few labourers living 
 on the farms, 36685-6. 
 
 Pringle, Mr. Charles, Bolton's Walls, Caledon, Co. 
 Tyrone, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. • 
 Holds under Lord Caledon, 36690. The fullest 
 Ulster custom prevails, no limit to price, auctions 
 not allowed, 36693-6. Right of pre-emption 
 at highest price, 36687. Tenant-right has disap- 
 peared on the Caledon estate, owing to the advances 
 of rent and bad times, 36698-9. Rent increased on 
 change of tenancy or sale, calculates that every 
 shilling added to rent deprives every outgoing 
 tenant of £1, 36701-3. Thirty per cent, added to 
 his rent in 1851, a limited tenant-right allowed at 
 end of lease, 36706-9. Considers there has been an 
 exorbitant increase during the last century, rent all 
 too high, can't be paidf improvements all done by 
 tenants, 36710-16. Numbers of large farms on 
 landlords' hands, 36718-19. Tenant should have 
 voice in fixing rent with some independent person 
 as umpire, the fixing of rent the most important 
 question, 36720-22. Valuation high, being good 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXXl 
 
 Pringle, Charles — continued. 
 
 wheat land, very little wheat grown lately, prices too 
 low, 36723-28. Drainage the only improvement 
 made by landlord, five per cent added permanently, 
 36729-32. Draiaage by Board of Works defective, 
 36733. Increasing competition keeps prices for all 
 produce very low, 36736-44. Considers the pre- 
 sent a good tirae to fix rents, as a continuance of 
 foreign competition may be expected, 36748-51. 
 Tenants not free agents, some impartial tribunal 
 should fix rents ; quite willing to pay fair rents, 
 36752-3. Very few purchasers under Church Act, 
 tenants too poor to buy, one tenant who bought 
 seems to be doing well, 36755-6. In the village of 
 Charlemont a number of tenants held under sixty 
 years' lease from the Crown, Lord Charlemont pur- 
 chased the reversion of lease, 36758. Rent at once • 
 raised, tenants having built the houses during the 
 lease, gives particulars of increases, 36759-70. In- 
 stances of rent raising on the Benburb, Sir John 
 Leslie's, and other estates, 3G770-72. Desire on 
 pai-t of landlords to nullify the Land Act, causes 
 great uncertainty and bad feeling, 36773-4. Looks 
 upon peasant proprietary as the only final settlement, 
 36776. Government to advance the whole purchase- 
 money at low interest, 36777-8. Tenants would 
 have an. object in paying the instalments, knowing 
 it would be their own in the end, 36779. , Considers 
 " the three F's " will not be satisfactory, tenants will 
 look on any such measure passed only as a protective 
 one, until they can be establishedas owners, 36780-2. 
 Suggests scheme for a conimission to aid tenants in 
 becoming proprietors, 35785. Would force London' 
 companies and absentees to sell, 36786-90. Would 
 not compel other landlords to sell, but would give 
 them every facility, 36792-4. Costs of con- 
 veyancing too high, 36795. Considers if present 
 system goes on, tenants will emigrate wholesale, 
 36797-98. 
 
 Smollen, The Rev. Canon, Clpnes, County Monaghan ; 
 Parish Priest. — Dublin. 
 Free sale destroyed on Sir Thomas B. Lennard's 
 estate by office rules and increases of rent, cases 
 have occurred of Protestants getting farms for less 
 than equally solvent Catholics would have given, 
 36806-11. Tenants obliged to sign a stringent 
 agreement, of which they do not even get a copy, 
 . anecdote in point, 36811-14. Had to sign this 
 agreement himself. Purchases must be made 
 through the office, case in point, 36816. ■ Cases of 
 hard^p on Lord RathdonneU's estate, 36817-23. 
 Office rules and restrictions if allowed to prevail will 
 destroy Ulster custom, and prevent any benefit 
 conferred by Land Act, 36826^28. Rent raising 
 on townparks, 36829-31. Rents have been 
 raised on Mr. Madden's estate three times within a 
 few years, 36832-34. Knows of cases in County 
 Fermanagh where tenants are under notice to quit 
 simply for the consolidation of farms, gives instance, 
 36835-38. ISTo tenant-right on Lord Rossmore's 
 estate, outgoing tenant receives £5 per acre whetlier 
 he be a bad or an improving tenant, 36839-40. 
 Case of seven tenants in County Monaghan whose 
 lease expired in 1878, rent under lease 10s. to 14s. 
 per acre ; were offered leases at £2 per acre for 
 twenty-one years above all rates and taxes, taking 
 away from them at the same time the .bog they 
 occupied, 36841-2. Further particulars, 36843- 
 58. Tenants should have fixity of tenure at fair 
 rents, 36860-61, with free sale, landlord to have a 
 reasonable veto, 36862-64. Considers some tribunal 
 should be appointed to settle difierences as to rent 
 between landlord and tenant, 36871-2. Knows a 
 number of purchasers under Church Act, are doing 
 well, and improving their farms, paying their 
 instalments regularly, notwithstanding that they 
 bought too high, 36873-81. If landlords are forced 
 to sell would give them the highest price possible, 
 36883-4. Would not compel landlords to sell, 
 but would assist tenants to buy, if landlord willing 
 
 to sell, 36884-7. Thinks fixity of tenure at fair 
 rents would satisfy the people, security the great 
 object, 36888-90. Rents all over Ireland are, 
 generally speaking, too high, no industry but the 
 land, 36890-4. Absenteeism a great cause of 
 poverty, 36895-8. Scale of compensation for 
 disturbance too restricted, 36902-3. Tenants do 
 not care for leases, too many objectionable clauses, 
 36904-5. Tenement valuation would be a high 
 rent, in purely agricultural districts, 36908. All 
 improvements made by tenants, landlord sometimes 
 gives lime, 36909. Is of opinion that the Land Act 
 does not afford adequate security, 36910-1 1. Town- 
 parks adjoining non-growing towns should not be 
 excepted from Land Act, 36912-15. 
 
 Gartlan, Mr. Thomas M'Evoy, Carrickrnacioss, County 
 Monaghan, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 President Farney Tenants' Defence Association. 
 Farms 300 acres, holds under Marquess of Bath, 
 36917-21. Represents Mr. Shirley's as well as 
 Lord Bath's tenants, 36922-25. The tenant-right 
 on Lord Bath's estate, consists of right of occupation 
 at fair rent, with free sale, limited to £10 per 
 
 ^ acre on the Shirley estate, 36926-29. Leases 
 formerly very common, . now a rare exception, 
 36932. A constant tendency to raise rents, 36933, 
 illustrations of this by facts taken from Shirley's 
 History of the barony of Farney, 36934-5. No 
 outlay or improvements on the part of the proprie- 
 tors during the last fifty years, 36936-40, therefore 
 the improved value of the estate is mainly the crea- 
 tion of the tenants, 36941, who are now paying 
 more or less for their own improvements, 36942-45. 
 The greed for land, as great as ever, no other invest- 
 ment, 36948-52. Considers 'tenement valuation 
 about equal to a fair rent, taking foreign competition 
 and altered mode of living into account, 36953-4. 
 Rent is raised on Shirley estate on change of tenancy 
 or succession, two shillings in pound added on sale of 
 farm, case in point, 36955-6. Land Act encouraged 
 tenants to improve but checked landlords, 36957-58. 
 In favour of the three F's, 36962-3. Difficulty in 
 fixing rents, suggests County Court Judge with a 
 practical assessor to assist him, 36963-5. Purcha- 
 sers under Church Act doing fairly well, 36966-7. 
 In favour of assisting tenants to purchase where 
 estates are in the market, 36969. Would not force 
 landlords to sell, 36970-71. Would give every 
 facility to landlords to sell, and tenants to buy, 
 36972-3. The great want of the tenants is security,, 
 36973. 
 
 A7icketill, William, Esq., Ancketill's Grove, Co. 
 Monaghan, Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Owns about 7,000 acres, a life estate only, 
 36974-7. Tenant-right exists to the fullest extent ; 
 free sale allowed ; no office restrictions, 36978-81. 
 Great feeling of insecurity on neighbouring estates, 
 notwithstanding existence of tenant-right, as there 
 was always the possibility of the rents being raised,. 
 36982-5. A considerable portion of the neighbour- 
 hood very poor ; rents much too high to enable them 
 to live; rent-raising on Mr. W. F. D. Kane's estate, 
 36986-89. Tenants very dissatisfied, 36990. Im- 
 provements retarded, and condition of tenants in- 
 jured by it, 36991-2. Rents should be adjusted by 
 arbitration; has found it work very satisfactorily 
 himself, 36993. Might also be resorted to in case 
 of disagreement, 36994-6. Would give fixity of 
 tenure at fair rents, 36997. Would allow power of 
 alienation, but no subdivision or sublettinc, 
 36998. Free sale, with no restriction as to price, 
 36999-37000. Landlord to have right of veto, if 
 incoming tenant is an objectionable character, 37001. 
 Right of pre-emption at highest price, but only in 
 certain cases, 37002-4. Would allow the landlord 
 to be the highest bidder, should he want the land for 
 himself, 37006-7. Considers that peasant pro- 
 prietary would be most beneficial to the country, 
 but must be done gradually. Would not force land 
 lords to sell, but when an estate was in the market 
 
CXXXll 
 
 miSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Ancketill, William — continued. 
 
 Government should lend tenants tlie full amount of 
 their tenant-right interest to enable them to pur- 
 chase^ 37015. The best means of training people 
 for peasant proprietary "would be the establishment 
 of fixed fair rents for a certain number of years, 
 37016-17. Suggests that tenants should have same 
 facilities for borrowing money for improvements as 
 the landlords, 37018. . State would have good 
 security, tenant-right being nearly equal to the value 
 of the fee-simple, 37019 ; but has gone down consi- 
 derably of late years from foreign competition, 
 which is much felt, 37020-27. Tenants for the last 
 two years have been thrown on their own resources, 
 all credit being stopped. Had charge last winter 
 of 2,500 people almost in a state of starvation. 
 Land does not give half the return it used, 37028. 
 Great want of lime in the neighbourhood, 37029- 
 31. Prices for every kind of produce very low. 
 The only thing that would ameliorate the tenants' 
 condition would be for Government to lend money 
 to make permanent improvements — drainage badly 
 wanted, 37032. Is usual for landlords when they 
 borrow from Board of Works for improvements to 
 charge tenants with the annuities for thirty-five 
 years and afterwards, 37033. Two very hard cases 
 of eviction for non-payment of rent on Mr. Kane's 
 estate, 37033-38. Tenant-right is limited on several 
 estates in his neighbourhood. Is of opinion that 
 rules have been made on estates since the Land Act 
 of 1870 for the purpose of preventing the operation 
 of the different clauses of that Act, 37039. Con- 
 siders that the three F's, together with the gradual 
 formation of a peasant proprietary, would satisfy 
 every one, as it would give security, which is the 
 ^eat want, and which they have not at present, 
 37042-4. Is at present trying to dispose of his pro- 
 perty in the Landed Estates Court. Wishes if 
 possible to create a peasant proprietary upon it, but 
 fears it will be impracticable unless the State pro- 
 vides the whole money, 37045-47. Thinks the 
 State might safely do this, as the tenants would go 
 bail for one another to make the purchase complete, 
 37048-50. Griffith's valuation a fair standard for 
 rent in county Monaghan, 37051-2 ; but rents are 
 from 25 to 95 per cent, over it. Gives instance, 
 37052—3. Has never raised the rents-on his own 
 property, except on falling in of two leases, which 
 even the tenants said he was entitled to. Would 
 willingly give his tenants fee-farm grants for ever at 
 the valuation, 37054. Lord Dartrey sold some 
 townlands in neighbourhood in 1876 or 1877 to 
 Sir John Leslie, and previous to sale rents were 
 raised two shillings iu the pound all round, 37055. 
 
 M'Keogh, Eev. W. J., Ballinahinch, Co. Tijjperary; 
 Parish Priest. — Dublin. 
 Is an occupier of land, and acquainted with con- 
 dition of landholdersinhisdistrict, 37056-59. Raising 
 of rents on the increase since 1870, 37061. Rent has 
 been raised on Lord Dunnally's estate, being the 
 third Lacrease during possession of present owner, 
 the rent being now in many cases 100 per cent, over 
 the valuation, 37062-63, 37066-73. Leases refused 
 by tenants, 37064-65. Instance of raising rent on 
 Lord Bloomfield's estate on change of tenancy, 
 37074-79. Practice on all estates managed by Cap- 
 tain Garvey, Lord Bloomfield's agent, to increase 
 rents on every succession to farm, 37080-82. 
 Case of preference being given to a Protestant on 
 sale of a tenant's interest at a lower price than that 
 offered by a Catholic, 37083-86. Sale of tenancies 
 not allowed except in some rare cases, for the pur- 
 pose of recovering arrears of rent, 37087-91. 
 Agent's permission requii-ed in case of marriage by 
 tenant's children if they intend to remain at home, 
 37092-97. Case of tenant on Lord Bloomfield's 
 estate keeping a goat without leave which was shot 
 by agent's direction, 37098-103. No complaints 
 except as to estates managed by Captain Garvey, 
 37104-110. Thinks tenants would generally be 
 
 able to provide one-fifth of the purchase-money if 
 opportunity ofiered of buying their farms, 37111- 
 13. Is in favour of compulsory expropriation of 
 bad landlords, 37114. Lord Bloomfield never ia- 
 terfered with Captain Garvey's management, 37il4_ 
 20. Large extent of waste lands capable of profit- 
 able reclamation, 37121-28. Waste lands should 
 be taken up by State and reclaimed, 37121. Thinks 
 the Government valuation is high enough for rent 
 37130-31. Instance of land reclaimed by tenants 
 whose rents were then raised from Is. 6d to £1 
 per acre, 37132-35. Comparison of Griffith's 
 valuation with rents, and particulars as to rent and 
 valuation of land in his district, 37135-50. Ee- 
 clamation by cottier tenants, 37151-54. Agents 
 prevent subletting of land by farmers for reclamar 
 tion, 37155-58. Recommends that there should be 
 no power of eviction until three years' rent were due 
 37159-63. Is in favour of the three F's, rents to be 
 fixed by arbitration, 37164-67. Instance of higli 
 rent i)aid by witness for meadow land near Tip- 
 perary, 37168-73. 
 
 Magher, Mr. Michael, Toomevara, Co. Tipperary 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Is Vice-Chairman of Nenagh Board of Guardians, 
 and occupies 200 acres, 37174-77. Complains of 
 restrictive covenants in his lease, but is g&tisfied 
 with rent, 37178-87. G. Massy Dawson, his land- 
 lord, is in favour of tenant-right, but sale of tenants' 
 interest is not usually permitted on his estate, 
 37187-92, 37196. Exceptional cases of sales of 
 tenant's interest, 37193-97. Instance of occupier's 
 rent being increased on fall of middleman's lease, 
 37198-200. Tenants unwilling to take leases, 
 37201-6. Land Act has not checked improTe- 
 ment, 37207. Case of eviction of thirty-eigit 
 families by Garden, of Barnane, their eviction being 
 one of the conditions of sale of an estate purchased 
 by him, and resold at lai-ge profit, 37207-14. In- 
 stance of improvements effected under leases for 
 ever, and for long terms, 37215, 37218. Prosperity 
 of purchasers of glebe lands, 37216-17. Until 
 security of tenure at fair rents is obtained there can 
 be no peace in Ireland ; any measure giving this 
 would make the people loyal and contented, 
 37219-22. 
 
 M' Govern, Mr. Thomas, Bawnboy, County Cavan, 
 Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Tenant-farmer and county cess collector; ac- 
 quainted with relations between landlord and 
 tenant in parts of Cavan, Leitrim, and Fermanagh, 
 37323-27. Tenant-right custom varies, 37228-29. 
 Defect of^ Land Act in not checking raising rent, 
 37230-3 / 240. A landlord paying compensation for 
 eviction can always obtain repayment from incoming 
 tenant, 37231-34. Recommends fixity of tenure ; 
 rents to be fixed by arbitration ; free sale ; limitar 
 tion of right of eviction ; apportionment of rates 
 between landlord and tenant, and taxation of 
 absentees, 37241. Knows 300 cases of rents being 
 doubled within last ten years, 37241-44, 37255. 
 Objects to mention names for fear of giving ofience, 
 3723.5-38, 37246-48. Compensation under Land 
 Act is too small, and is not equally awarded by 
 different judges, 37249. Purchasers of glebe lands 
 prospering, 37250-51. Suggests establishment of a 
 board for purchase and resale of farms to tenants, 
 with powers of compulsory purchase, and manage- 
 ment of waste lands, 37252-53. Much waste land 
 capable of profitable reclamation, 37254-55. 
 
 Phelan, Mr. Thomas, Carrickmacross, Co. Monaghan, 
 Secretary to Tenants' Association, and 
 M erchant. — Dublin. 
 Is a Guardian of the poor, Town Commissioner of 
 Carrickmacross, Secretary to Tenants' Defence 
 Association, and a magistrate, 37260-61. Tenant- 
 right exists in the Union of Carrickmacross, occa- 
 sionally limited on the Bath estate, and limited vo. 
 price to £10 per acre on the Shirley estate, 37262- 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXXIH 
 
 Phelan, Thomas — continued. 
 
 68. Where price of tenant-right is limited, addi- 
 tional money is often paid underhand, 372G9-70. 
 Few leases exist, at their expiration tenant-right 
 used to be recognised, 37271-72. Advocates free 
 sale, unlimited tenant-right, and considers Griffitli's 
 valuation generally a fair rent, 37273-75. Eents 
 on Bath estate, 15 to 20 per cent, over valuation, 
 were fixed thirteen years ago, 37276-80. Rents on 
 Slurley estate are equal to valuation, but are raised 
 10 per cent, on every change of tenancy, 37281-83. 
 Eents higher on other estates, but not recently or 
 unjustly increased, 37283-85. Improvements 
 usually made by tenants ; expenditure by landlords 
 less since Land Act, 37286-88. Increased improve- 
 ments by tenants since Land Act, 37289. In 1874 
 the tenant-right custom on Bath estate was disputed 
 by agent, but established by decision of Land Court; 
 an agreement was then tendered to the tenants, 
 which they considered subversive of the custom, 
 and to protect themselves a Tenants' Defence Asso- 
 ciation was formed ; the agent was removed, but 
 relations between new agent and the tenants are 
 unsatisfactory ; rent payment being more punctually 
 and strictly enforced, 37290-93. Effect of Land 
 Act good; but it is insufficient to prevent rent 
 raising, 37294-96. Pvirchasers under Church Act 
 going on favorably, 37299-301. Increased facilities 
 should be given for tenants becoming proprietors, 
 the entire pui'chase-money being advanced, 37302- 
 5. Opposed to compulsory expropriation, except in 
 case of London Companies and absentees who 
 neglect their jjroperties, 37306-8. Not much waste 
 land in district ; gradual reclamation continually in 
 progress, 37309—10. Opposed to subdivision, except 
 of large grazing farms, 37311. Protection given by 
 Land Act should be extended to town holdings, 
 37313-14. Half county cess seldom paid by land- 
 lords, 37315—16. Absolute security for tenants 
 necessary, 37317-18. Power of landlords to bring 
 actions in superior courts should be limited, 37319. 
 
 Dease, Colonel Gerald, Celbridge Abbey, Cos. Kildare 
 and Monaghan, Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Wishes to give evidence as to estate in Monaghan, 
 and to make general suggestions, 37321. Describes 
 estate of 950 acres in Monaghan, with 102 tenants ; 
 unlimited tenant-right prevails, the landlord having 
 right of pre-emption at highest bid given, 37322- 
 36. Average price of tenant-right twelve to fifteen- 
 years' purchase, 37337. Bad effect of tenant-right 
 in depriving farmer of his capital should be guarded 
 against, 37338-42. Effect of tenant-right sales in 
 promoting consolidation of small farms, 37345. 
 Farms are small and scarcely afford a living, except 
 by tenants engaging in other industries, 37346-53. 
 Makes suggestions for amendment of Land Laws in 
 Ireland, dealing with revaluation and fair adjust- 
 ment of rent, apportionment of rates, facilitating 
 ninety-nine year leases, extension of Bright Clauses, 
 emigration, sanitation, settlement and entail, 37355. 
 Relations between landlord and tenant in West- 
 meath are not complained of, 37356-61. Extension 
 of Ulster custom to rest of Ireland would be un- 
 fair, 37362-67. 
 
 Hely, Gorges, Esq., Johnstown, County Kilkenny, 
 Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Is High Sheriff and owner of 6.000 acres in 
 Kilkenny, which he manages himself, 37368-72. 
 Rental very little above valuation, 37373-74. Un- 
 limited sale of tenant-right interests has always 
 been the practice on his estate, and is permitted on 
 some neighbouring properties,, 37375-84, 37392. 
 Gives leases frequently, and acknowledges tenant- 
 right on their expiration, 37385-88. Demesne lands 
 and townparks should not be subject to Ulster 
 custom, 37389-91. Depreciation of tenant-right 
 recently, 37393-94. Right of free sale adds to 
 value of tenant-right, 37395-97. No evictions on 
 estate, 37398. The Ulster custom is more satis- 
 factory than the section of Land Act giving com- 
 
 pensation for disturbance, 37399-401. Tenant- 
 right represents more than the value of tenants 
 improvements, which are generally very inadequate, 
 and of little value, 37 40 1-2. £30,000 laid out by 
 his father on the estate, but since passing of Land 
 Act witness spends nothing, 37402-4. Tenants 
 mortgage their- holdings, 37405-6. Tenants un- 
 willing to take leases since Land Act, 37407-8. 
 Poor Law valuation generally one fourth below 
 real letting value, 37409-10. Increase of rent in 
 district lately has been small, and not at all in pro- 
 portion to increased price of produce, 37411. Ex- 
 plains as to recent raising of rent on his estate, and 
 as to complaints made to Commission of unusually 
 high rents imposed on tenants against whom he 
 had to take proceedings in consequence of their fol- 
 lowing advice of Tenants' Defence Association, 
 37412-25. Instance of rent left to arbitration, 
 37426-31. Right of distress should be retained, 
 37428. Has deepened river improving his own 
 and tenants farms ; occasionally gives tenants timber 
 and slate, 37432-33. Is in favour of encourage- 
 ment by State of a peasant proprietary, 37434-38. 
 No waste lands in his district suitable for reclama- 
 tion, 37439-41. Is in favour of extension of 
 Ulster custom to all Ireland, and to the facilitating 
 of long leases at low rents, or fixity of tenure, 
 37442-45. Has no knowledge of alleged rent 
 raising on property adjoining his, 37446-48. 
 
 Sayers, Edward Brydges,Esq., Dublin; Co. Limerick, 
 Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Describes reclamation effected on his property in 
 county Limerick by tenants to whom he let some 
 waste land in small farms for thirty-one years' rent, 
 free at first, and then at rents gradually increasing, 
 37450-63 Instance of sale to a man returned 
 from America, 37464-68. Tenants are satisfied, 
 and have since 1868 brought into cultivation all 
 that was reclaimable, and have paid their rents, 
 37466-69. More reclaimable land in district, 
 37470. Two of the tenants on this estate have re- 
 turned from America ; others Came from a distance, 
 and were not previously tenants to witness, 
 37471-72. 
 
 Lansdoume, Marquess of, Cos. Dublin, Meath, Kerry, 
 Limerick, and Queen's County, Landowner. — 
 Dublin. 
 Owner of estates in Dublin, Meath, Queen's 
 County, Kerry, and Limerick, 37473-74. Tenant- 
 right exists only on Kerry estate, and has always 
 existed, 37475, 37489-90. On other estates sales 
 are not permitted; changes of tenancy seldom 
 occur; in the few cases of eviction for non-pay- 
 ment tenants went away owing large sums, 
 37476-80. On Queen's County estate (9,000 acres) 
 there are forty-six leaseholders and fifty six yearly 
 tenants, and no general increase of rent has been 
 made for years, 37484-87. Dublin, Meath, and 
 Queen's County estates more prosperous than 
 Kerry, 37488. Small holdings in Kerry due to 
 subdivision under lax management, and tenant- 
 right to incoming tenant paying arrears of rent, 
 37491-93. Landlord claims right to select tenant 
 on Kerry estate, 37494-95. Large outlay on Kerry 
 estate, 37496. Rent on Dublin and Meath estate 
 are .£8 15s. Qd. per cent, over valuation ; and were 
 fixed thirty-five or forty years ago ; prosperity of 
 these estates dueto richer land and larger farms than 
 in Kerry, 37497-500. Middlemen in Kerry have 
 almost disappeared, 37501-2. Much improvable 
 land in Kerry ; but most of the so-called waste 
 lands are irreclaimable, 37503-4. Difficulty of 
 interfering with tenants' grazing rights, 37505. 
 Reclamation best done by encouraging tenants to 
 do it, 37506. Cultivated portions of Kerry estate 
 not reclaimed, but naturally fertile spots, 37507-10. 
 Kerry estate partly on south and partly on north 
 of Kenmare river, 37511-12. Evictions on his 
 estates only for non-payment, 37513-14. Would 
 
 s2 
 
ex XXIV 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Lansdovme, Marquess of — continued. 
 
 object strongly to establislimeiit of fixty of tenure 
 and free sale as an invasion of landlord's rights, 
 depriving him of control over property, and of a 
 valuable interest, 37515-27. If any such measure 
 were introduced compensation should be made to 
 landlords, 37528. No reason for offering landlords 
 alternative of selling estates, or accepting fixity of 
 tenure, 37529. A yearly tenant may assign his 
 interest without consulting landlord, but assignee 
 may be evicted, and this power should not be taken 
 from landlords, 37530-38. Difficult to estimate 
 va,lue of this power in money, 37539-41. Loss of 
 control would diminish selling value of property, ' 
 37542-46. The fact that tenants are ready to buy 
 perpetuity leases indicates that landlords would sus- 
 tain a money loss if fixity of tenure were established, 
 37547-59. Would object to being compulsorily 
 turned into a rent-charger, 37660-64. Is not 
 aware that Land Act has failed, or that amendment 
 is required, 37565-69. Disturbed condition of 
 country no proof that Land Act is defective, 
 37570. If Land Act has failed sees no objection 
 to amending it so as to carry out its original inten- 
 tion, but objects to giving tenant any further 
 interest, 37571-79. Power of eviction required for 
 beneficial control of property, 37580-8L Is not 
 aware of undue harshness on part of landlords, but 
 Lfthereisitshould be controlled, 37582-83. Thinks 
 it would be more advisable to encourage landlords 
 to take an interest in their property than to turn 
 them into rent-chargers, 37584-87. Tenant-right 
 custom is of no value to landlord, as in 
 times of depression tenants' interests become un- 
 saleable ; it is better for tenant in debt to give up 
 his farm, 37589-91. To permit tenant to. sell an 
 interest not previously recognised would be to give 
 him what did not belong to him, 37592. Payments 
 by incoming tenants are likely to be made a claim 
 against landlords in time of distress, 37593-95. 
 Tenantry are deeply in debt owing to credit given 
 by traders after passing of Land Act ; no visible 
 change in farmers' mode of life, but improvement in 
 that is desirable, 37596-601. Tenant-right no re- 
 medy for distress arisiug from too small farms ; 
 emigration the only remedy, 37602-6. Difficulty 
 of getting families to emigrate, 37607-8. Conver- 
 sion of all farmers into proprietors would tend to 
 consolidation of farms by elimination of those who 
 were unthrifty and fell into debt, 37609. Advan- 
 tage of encouraging well-to-do farmers to purchase 
 freehold of their farms, 37610. Climate of Ireland 
 and existing habits of people are against peasant 
 proprietary scheme, 37611-13. Wretchediiess of 
 tenantry due to small farms ; destitution has been 
 limited to such oases, and those of sickness or acci- 
 dent, 37614. Cahirciveen estate remote, scattered, 
 and inaccessible, 37615. Can't say whether the 
 relief funds enabled tenants to pay their rent ; arrear 
 was not increased last year, 37616-19. Drainage 
 work ofiered to all tenants on their own farms, 
 37620. Explains condition on which Land Im- 
 provement Loans were obtained, and how applied 
 in order to show that he had no intention of making 
 a profit' at expense of his tenants, 37621-28. No 
 able-bodied man should have wanted relief as work 
 was offered to all, 37629-36. Charitable reUef 
 given in some few cases but no general relief fund 
 on estate, 37637-38. Potato seed sold at half-price, 
 37639-40. Does not believe children attending 
 school near his residence would have been naked 
 but for clothes given by Nun of Kenmare ; habitual 
 raggedness of Kerry peasantry owing to neglect 
 and ignorance of sewing, 37641-45. Number of 
 men employed under Clerk of Works at one time 
 920, 37647. Denies that he and his agent are 
 misled by bailiffs and others, 37649-53. Explains 
 representation made that rents in Iveragh have 
 been frequently raised ; they are moderate, being 
 44 per cent, over valuation ; on that ground reduction 
 asked for by, Canon Brosnan was refused, 37654-63. 
 
 The " hanging year" of rent is due to leniency of 
 landlord not enforcing arrear. No complaint has 
 ever been inade of it by the tenants, 37700-2. 
 Great difficulty of estimating a fair rent, inasmuoli 
 as productiveness of farm depends largely on skill 
 and intelligence of tenant, 37921-22. Difiicultyof 
 eliminating value due to tenants' expenditure ia 
 fixing fair rents, 37924-26. Expenditure on Meath 
 estate (12,736 acres), £28,000 in forty years— in- 
 tei-est being charged in some cases at 5 per cent 
 37927-30. Explanation and denial of statements 
 reported to have been made as to excessive rents 
 and harsh treatment of tenants oii Limerick estate, 
 37939. 
 
 'Trench, John Townshend, Esq., Kenmare, Co. Kerry, 
 and Queen's County, Land Agent. — Duhlin. 
 Acquainted with the Lansdowne estates since 
 1863, 37664-67. Proposal made to tenants on 
 Cahirciveen estate in winter, 1878, to spend 
 £10,000 in drainage of farms, 37668-69. Fre- 
 quently visits estate, and is always accessible to 
 tenants, and ready to receive their letters, 37670-73. 
 Increase of rent not made on marriage or succession 
 of tenant to farm, but generally on sale of tenant'.? 
 interest, 37674. Does not interfere with marriages 
 of tenants, but it is frequently necessary when 
 change of tenancy occurs by a son's name being 
 substituted for his father's, to record, and some- 
 times afterwards enforce, the provision made for 
 support of parents ; it is also necessary to prevent 
 attempted subdivision of farms occurring when a 
 second son marries and wishes to stay at home, 
 37675-83. Rental of Cahirciveen estate was raised 
 25 per cent. No general increase on Kenmare 
 estate ; but considerable increase has accrued by 
 fall of middlemen's leases, 37684—86. On fall oi 
 middlemen's leases some subtenants are continued, 
 others are assisted to go away ; subtenants' rents 
 sometimes raised, houses built for them occasionally, 
 37687-88. The " hanging year" of rent is due to 
 an arrear that arose at time of famine, and of wHch 
 payment has not been enforced j it is an advantage 
 to the landlord, enabling him to bring ejectments 
 for non-payment of rent, 37689-700, 37712-15. 
 Ejectment the only process by which rent can be 
 recovered ; explains impracticability of proceeding 
 by distress process for debt, or bankruptcy suit in 
 order to recover rent, 37701-10. Shopkeepers need 
 not give credit, landlords must, 37711. There is 
 no prohibition against tenants burning lijne, but it 
 is produced at the Kenmare kiln for half what it 
 would cost the tenants, and consequently the tenants 
 no longer manufacture it themselves, 37716-23, 
 37740-42. No ejectment ever served on tenants 
 for burning lime, 37724-28. Plan recently adopted 
 of charging one penny additional rent for each 
 barrel of lime taken by tenants, instead of selling 
 it to them, has occasioned such an increased demand 
 that lime had to be bought in addition to that made 
 at ■ Kenmare, 37730-42. Lime sent to different 
 parts of estate cost Lord Lansdowne from 3s.- M. 
 to is. &d. per barrel, 37743-44. Liming a perma- 
 nent improvement, 37745-47. Price paid for piece- 
 work drainage was fixed after consideration and at 
 a liberal figure, the work being effected wherever 
 tenants chose themselves, 37748-53. Improve- 
 ments belong to whoever finds the capital for 
 making them, 37754-55. Instance of intimidation 
 to prevent tenants paying their rent, 37755-57. 
 In outlay under Land Improvement Acts landlord 
 incurs risk, and if well laid the return should be 10 
 per cent, to the tenant, 37558-67. Cases showing 
 worthlessness of tenant-right in bad times; Lord 
 Lansdowne having farms given up to him losing 
 arrears of rent, and paying expenses of emigration of 
 tenants' families, 37768-76, 37781-84. Has no hope 
 ofsettlementofland question by legislation, 3777-79. 
 Case of forcible re-entry on farm by a tenant to 
 whom money had been given for emigration 
 37780. Number of ejectments served last spring 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cxxxv 
 
 Trench, John Townshend — continued. 
 
 and summer, and in most cases rent was paid with 
 costs, 37785, 37861-62. The landlord has nothing 
 to do with costs, and does not interfere with soli- 
 citor, 37786-92, Case of Jeremiah Keating ex- 
 plained, 37793-97. Tenants fined on one occasion 
 for unpunctual payment because of expense incurred 
 in issuing processes, 37798-99, 37808. The solici- ■ 
 tor receives the fuU costs paid in ejectment pro- 
 ceedings ; they are the legal charges, and he cannot 
 be expected to take less, 37800-7. Numbers of 
 caretakers required to retain possession since agita- 
 tion, 37809-10. Case of alleged harsh exposure of 
 .evicted tenant explained, 37811. Instances of 
 ejectment when hanging year was called in for the 
 purpose of getting rid of bad characters, 37811-12. 
 Ejectments not served until three half-years are due, 
 inclusive of hanging gale, 37813-16. Existence of 
 exceptional distress denied because distress had 
 been jDrovided for by offering in winter, 1878, to 
 give employment, though tenants were slow to avail 
 themselves of this, 37817-21, 37821-. Instance of 
 imposition and misapplication of charity, 37822-23. 
 It is untrue that he expressed pleasure at occurrence 
 of distress, 37825. Case of eviction and land claim 
 of Rev. George M'Outchan. Eviction brought to 
 obtain site for labourers' cottages, not on account of 
 M'Cutchan's support of Home Rule movement. 
 The holding was not an agricviltural one, and there- 
 fore a written agreement was required. The pre- 
 mises were offered to and refused by M'Cutchan 
 after dismiss of land claim, and have since been let 
 at rent asked, 37826-53. Cases of ejectments 
 served on tenants who persisted in cutting trees, 
 31854-59. Rents on Lansdowne estate are 
 moderate and low, 37864. Comparison of rental 
 with valuation, showing that owing to outlay on 
 improvement and diminution in poor rates the 
 valuation should now be much higher than rental, 
 37864-71. Griffith's valuation uneven, 37872. 
 Increase of rental on I-^ieragh estate has been misre- 
 presented ; the rents are moderate, and lower than 
 on adjoining properties, 37873-74. £43,000 spent 
 by Lord Lansdowne on improvement and repairs 
 since famine, 37875. Few improvements made by 
 tenants, 37876-77. Establishment of free sale, 
 fair rents, and fixity of tenure would be unjust ; 
 difficulty of defining Ulster custom, 37878-85. 
 Small farms, drink, debt, and dirt are the causes of 
 distress ; remedies — emigration and encouragement 
 of better agriculture by State, by means of instruc- 
 tion, prizes, shows, and appointment of a Minister 
 of Agriculture, 37886. Alterations required in law 
 .of redemption, 37887. Cost of subsistence of 
 family on small farm very large in proportion to 
 rent, 37888-90. No additional security needed for 
 tenants on Lansdowne estate, 37891. If Land Act 
 has failed to protect tenants compensation shoukl 
 be increased, 37892-94. Impossibility of provid- 
 ing proper houses for small farms on account of 
 expense, 37895-901. No great extent of reclaim- 
 able land, and what there is is occupied by tenants 
 who would not surrender it, 37902-4. Disincli- 
 nation of tenants to improve, and folly of proposed 
 reclamation by State, 37905-6. Land Act has 
 worked satisfaetorily ; the land courts and judges 
 are just ; extravagant claims are made by tenants, 
 and they are not deterred from making them by 
 uncertainty or expense of the law, 37907-10. Few 
 labourers who are not small farmers, except under 
 middlemen, when their condition is most miserable, 
 37912. Thinks that after lapse of time landlord 
 should receive rent for improvements rnfide by 
 tenant, 37913-18. Tenant in Cahirciveen refused 
 work for sufficient reasons, 37919-21. Queen's 
 County estate contains 9,000 acres. Farms vary 
 from 10 to 1,000 acres. Expenditure since 1862 
 has been £20,300. In 1879-80 £800 spent on 
 drainage ; tenants usually charged 5 per cent, on 
 landlord's outlay, 37931-33. Has no knowledge of 
 facts alleged \>j Tenants' Defence Association. 
 
 Never favoured a Protestant tenant more than a 
 Catholic, 37934-39. If landlords are deprived of 
 control of their estates, those who built expensive 
 mansions will suffisr an injustice, as their motives 
 for residing in them will be gone, 37940-41. 
 
 M'Caivn, Mr. Harry, Co. Longford ; Landowner and 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Is acquainted with the whole of Longford, and 
 enjoys confidence of tenants, 37945. Instance of a 
 tenant who had laid out £150 on his farm signing 
 an agreement oflFered by agent without understanding 
 it. The agreement was returned by landlord when 
 objected to by tenant, 37946-48. Case of refusal 
 of landlord to renew lease of farm which had 
 been improved by tenant except at excessive rent 
 and on unjust conditions, 37949-50. Case of 
 Jessop's estate (agent, Cuaack). Land lying waste 
 for 17 years. Tenants' rents refused. Insecurity 
 and uncertainty among tenants, 37951-56. In- 
 crease of rent on Lord Annaly's estate ; the hang- 
 ing gale Vas required to be paid up, and no abate- 
 ment of rent given duriag distress, 37957-60. No 
 tenant should be allowed to contract himself out of 
 Land Act, 37961-63. Tenant's claim for compen- 
 sation should not be barred by non-payment of rent, 
 37963-66. Allowing tenants at over £50 to con- 
 tract themselves out of Land Act encourages land- 
 lords to consolidate, 37967-71. No amendment of 
 Land Act will now be satisfactory. Free sale 
 
 . implies some proprietary right to be sold, 37972- 
 73. Is in favour of free sale because it is the 
 demand of the country. Free sale and a peasant 
 proprietary would tend to eliminate the smaller 
 tenants, 37974. No sane person expects any com- 
 pulsory expropriation of landlords, but a large 
 scheme of purchase will be necessary to satisfy 
 moderate men, 37975. Prefers fixity of tenure if ' 
 question of fair rents can be settled, 37976. 
 Tenants should have fixity of tenure as Jong as 
 they paid their rents. The reasonableness of the 
 rent should be settled in case of dispute by the 
 County Court Judge on evidence given to him, and 
 with reference to current prices, 37977-84. Tenants 
 should not have to pay in advance the landlord's 
 proportion of poor rate, 37985-88. Landlords 
 should pay the county cess ; it is not now practically 
 paid by the landlords, because in case . of long- 
 existing tenancies, and where rent has been raised 
 upon tenants who submitted unwillingly, the inci- 
 dence of the rate is on the tenant, 37989-97. 
 
 O'Xeefe, Rev. Richard, c.c, Bennetsbridge, County 
 Kilkenny. — Dublin. 
 Instances of rents considered excessive by wit- 
 ness, of tenants in his parish, compared with the 
 rateable value, 37998-38009, 38017-24. Increase 
 of rent on properties in parish, 38010-16. 
 Has not verified the cases he mentions, but believes 
 what he has been told, 38025-26. High rent 
 alleged to be imposed as a punishment on tenants, 
 38026. Tenant obliged to pay rent for land taken 
 by railway, 38027-28, 38031. Alleged fraud by ' 
 landlord altering amount of bill given by tenant, 
 38029-30. Instance of loan by tenant to landlord 
 being lost, and interest not paid, 38031. At^ 
 tempted increase of rent, and pressure put on ten- 
 ants on Shea's property ; misery and poverty of 
 tenants due to high rents and want of capital, 
 38031. Is in favour of a peasant proprietary 
 scheme, 38032. One occupier in parish has pur- 
 chased fee of his farm, 38033. Tenants would make 
 a great effiDrt to purchase their holdings, but are very 
 poor, and scarcely make a living on farms of forty 
 or fifty acres, the soil being very light, 38034-37. 
 Penalty needed to check rack renting, 38038. 
 
 Bole, Ambrose, Esq., Park-place, Tashinny, Co. 
 
 Longford ; Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 
 Is a Land Agent to King-Harman and others in 
 
 Longford, Armagh, and Tyrone ; is also an owner 
 
 of land and a tenant-farmer, 38038-43, 38046. In 
 
CXXXVl 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Bole, Ambi-ose — continued. 
 
 Armagh and Tj'roiie tenant-right is restricted to 
 £,IQ an acre and ten years' rent; in Longford out- 
 going tenant receives the value of his improvements or 
 is allowed to sell them, but not his goodwill, 33047- 
 54. Armagh tenants objected to restriction on 
 price, 38055. Instance of farm at ,£17 rent sold 
 for £230, 38056-57. Incoming tenant selected by 
 landlord, 38058-59. £40,000 has been spent dur- 
 ing last twenty years on King-Harman's estate, be- 
 sides timber from demesne given to tenants — 
 £18,000 of this was borrowed from Board of Works 
 and interest charged ; no interest on other expen- 
 diture ; but rent of farms has been raised on expira- 
 tion of long leases, 38060-65. Improvement loan of 
 .£9,500 taken out last year and nearly spent, 38066. 
 200 to 300 men, small farmers and labourers, em- 
 ployed on drainage, and paid by piecework — the 
 work will be remunerative, and emisloyment was 
 much needed, 38067-73. Distress not so great as 
 elsewhere, owing to large amount of champion seed 
 given by King-Harman, 38074-76. Tenants in 
 debt to others, but owe no arrears of rent ; rents not 
 so well paid since agitation, 38077-79. Improve- 
 ment loans amounting to £12,000 are being spent on 
 four other estates managed by witness ; no interest 
 as yet charged to tenants, 38079-86. Besides im- 
 provement loans, assistance is given to tenants to- 
 wards improvements on King-Harman's estate, 
 38087-89. Instance of Land Act deterring land- 
 lord from helping tenants to improve, 38090. Few 
 evictions during past ten years, and those princi- 
 pally for non-payment of rent, 38091-92. Case of 
 eviction to get rid of intruder, suspected of writing 
 a threatening letter, 38093-94. One case of Griffith's 
 valuation offered as rent, 38095. Rental is about 
 equal to valuation ; but Griffith's valuation is un- 
 reliable, 38095-98. Imjjrovement outlay chiefly in 
 Longford, and, except in case of one loan, no interest 
 as yet charged to tenants, 38099-100. Sale of tenant's 
 interest permitted, subject to landlord's approval ; 
 this practice not uncommon, 38101-4. Improve- 
 ment loans spent on roads and cut-out bogs, 38105. 
 800 tenants on King-Harman's estate with rental 
 of £20,000; farms generally good sized, 38106-8. 
 Is in favour of fixity of tenure and free sale subject 
 to landlord's selection of tenant, and with limit as 
 to price of tenant's interest, 38110-13. Difficulty 
 of limiting price, 38114-15. Knows purchasers ot 
 glebe-lands ; they are worse off than they were as ten- 
 ants, 38116-18. Caseof Jessop's estate, 38156^59. 
 
 Miller, Mr. George H., Glenamun, Edgeworthstown, 
 Co. Longford, Tenant Farmer and Auctioneer. 
 — Dublin. 
 Is a tenant-farmer and agricultural auctioneer, 
 38119-22. In selling farms has never known price 
 limited by landlord, but landlord reserves right of 
 objecting to purchaser, 38123-25. Farms unsale- 
 able at present, not for want of money, but on ac- 
 count of unsettled state of public opinion, 38126- 
 . 30. Sale of farms allowed by landlords in Longford 
 subject to their approval, 38131. Prices of farms 
 slightly enhanced by Land Act, 38132. Leases 
 sell better than yearly tenancies, 38133-35. Kents 
 have been raised since 1870 ; instance of Lord 
 Annaly's estate where, on death of last owner and 
 change of agent, a general rise of rent was put on 
 and hanging gale called in, causing discontent and 
 embarrassment to farmers, 38136-49. Outlay by 
 landlords not checked by Land Act in Longford, 
 38150-56. Knows purchasers under Church Act ; 
 they are worse off than before, and regret havins 
 purchased, 38160-72. This partly due to bad timeC 
 38173. Few sales for debt, as no one will buy at 
 present, 38174-77. All kinds of business dull, 
 38178. No Land Bill will satisfy expectations of 
 the people, 381 79-80, 38185-87. Distress not due 
 to rentj but to credit given freely, then suddenly 
 withdrawn, and to bad seasons, 38181-83. Recla- 
 mation best efi"ected by employing tenants, on their 
 
 own farms, 38184. Tenants could not pay one- 
 fourth of purchase-money of the fee of their farms 
 38188-90. Expectations entertained by tenants 
 of buying very cheap, 38192. Purchase of their 
 farms wcJuld lead to ruin of all but industrious and 
 thrifty, 38193-94. A fair valuation between land- 
 lord and tenant would allay discontent, 38195. 
 Security would lead to improvement by tenants; 
 when they have adequate motives they show indus- 
 try and thrift, 38196-99. 
 
 Corscadden, Mr. Thomas, Manorhamilton, Co. Leitrim; 
 Landowner and Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Is an owner and occupier of land near Manor- 
 hamilton, 38202-6. Describes his dealings with 
 estate on which there has recently been some dis- 
 turbance owing to Land League interference ; pur- 
 chase of farms from tenants ; ejectment of tenant for 
 the purpose of squaring farm ; land claim for £250, 
 £5 awarded, 38207-17. Purchase of estate by his 
 father, and offer to improve farms refused by tenants, 
 38218-22. Rent raised on one property fifteen 
 years ago ; improvement made on it by landlord ; 
 some of the tenants' interest bought by self ; the 
 farms of others were squared, 38223-34. Tenant 
 sent to workhouse hospital was not a pauper, and 
 his farm is still held by his sister, 38235-36. No 
 increase of rent on 3,500 acres bought recently, 
 38240-42. Ejectment brought against occupier of 
 a house to establish landlord's right, 38243-44. 
 Griffith's valuation made by incompetent men and 
 without sufficient care, 38248-50. Instances of 
 valuation not representing real value of land, 
 38251-56. No tenant-right on Colonel Clements' 
 estate, 38257-59. Griffith's valuation of mountain 
 land too low, and arable land valued much hfgher, 
 38260-62. Rents paid by his tenants very httle 
 over the Government valuation, except some few 
 cases of demesne land let by proposal at double tbe 
 valuation, 38263-65. Labourers employed are 
 chiefly purchasers of glebe lands, 38266-70. Want 
 of industry and good cultivation have caused the 
 distress ; instances of idleness and thrift ; neglect of 
 land held by long leases, and improvement made in 
 condition of tenants by increasing their rents, 
 38271-74. Purchasers of glebe lands no better oif 
 than as tenants, 38275-82. Butter-making and 
 neglect of tillage farming has injured the country, 
 and encouraged idle habits, 38283-88. Small farms 
 not suitable for peasant proprietors, 38289. Sug- 
 gests registration of improvements, and was not aware 
 that the law now enabled tenant to register, 38289- 
 92. Objects to fixity of tenure, 38293-94. Rents 
 should be fixed by arbitration, and land improve- 
 ment loans made to tenants, 38295-96. Right of 
 sale should be limited, and power to give compen- 
 sation in cases of capricious eviction enlarged, 38297 
 -99. Reclamation of waste land might be promoted 
 by improvement loans to tenants, 38300. Local know- 
 ledge necessaryfor valuation of land; theGovernment 
 valuation is very uneven, 38301-2. Farms held to 
 be townparks within meaning of the Land Act, 38302. 
 
 Trench, Hon. Charles T., q.c, Co. Dublin; County 
 Court Judge. — Dublin. 
 Covmty Court Judge for thirty-two years, twenty 
 years in county Dublin, 3y303:,6. Has had 
 twenty-seven land cases, 38397. Case as to away- 
 going crops on Sir Charles Domville's estate, 38308 
 -38310. Claim made under 42nd section of Land 
 Act to obtain certificate for loan of £3,500 from 
 Board of Works refused by witness, who was up- 
 held by judges on appeal, 38311-14. Case as to regis- 
 tration of improvements ; drainage allowed, but un- 
 suitable buildings refused, 38315-17. Instance of 
 witness's award of two and a half years' rent being 
 reduced on appeal, 38317. Case of land at Howth 
 taken for new road, 38317. Maximum compen- 
 sation high for small holdings, except where 
 tenant loses his house, 38317. Case of Hope 
 against Cloncurry involving questions of tmex- 
 hausted manures, tillages, and suitability of im- 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXXVll 
 
 Trench, Hgn. Charles T. — contin ued. 
 
 provements, 38317-21. Difficulty of definino' " un- 
 reasonable conduct " and " capricious eviction " 
 38322. Land Act has worked well, 38323. 
 Opinion as to power of redemption, 38324-25. 
 Answers to qvieries issued by Commissioners, 38325 
 -2G. No experience of exorbitant rents in Dublin 
 38327. Tenants for life should have power to give 
 perpetuity grants or to sell for building purposes, 
 38327-28. Unfair to apply Ulster custom to gi'ass 
 farms, 38328. Few evictions in Dublin ; none by 
 large landlords, 38328. 
 
 Sproule, Mr. Robert, Omagh, County Tyrone, Land- 
 owner and Leaseholder. — Dublin. 
 Considers that leaseholders should be placed in 
 the same position as yearly tenants at the end of 
 their leases, 38333-5. Tenant-right much encroached 
 upon by office rules and resti'ictious, the pi-esent 
 law does not prevent such increasing rent as will 
 do away with the tenant-right altogether, 38337. 
 Tenants submit rather than go, 38338. Has 
 increased since Land Act, 38339. Hent Raised at 
 no fixed period, simply at will of landlord, 38340-2. 
 Case of proprietor raising his rent 50 per cent, over 
 valuation, 38343-45. Increases mostly by small 
 landlords, often pvirchasers in Landed Estates Court 
 38346—7. Office rules and restrictions have been 
 established in most instances since Land Act to 
 prevent sales by public auction, and are a fertile 
 cause of disputes, 38349-50. Should be abolished, 
 and one systeni established throughout the country, 
 38351-3. Landlords to have right of reasonable 
 veto on incomer, 38354-5. The power of raising 
 rent after the improvement of land a great hard- 
 ship, 38356-7. Suggests Government valuators, 
 with appeal to County Court Judge, with whom 
 these valuators should be associated to help him in 
 his decision, 38358-62. States that increased taxes 
 and costs are placed on the land without any pro- 
 portionate capacity in it to meet them ; law costs 
 prevent small tenants from going into court, 
 38363-4. Would do away with law of entail to 
 allow estates to be sold, 38365-6. Tenants should 
 have power of borrowing from Board of Works for 
 improvements. Government to get into their own 
 hands and reclaim waste lands where owners will 
 liot, large quantities of waste land that would repay 
 for so doing, 38367-70. Process of conveyancing 
 very expensive ; great need felt for some simple 
 system for a sale or transfer of holdings,38373-4. 
 On some largte estates there is, in case of tenants at 
 will, a fee to the agent for changing the registry in 
 the books, 38375-9. Government should give 
 every facility to establish peasant proprietors, by 
 advancing three-fourths of the purchase-money, in 
 cases where landlords were willing to sell, 38380. 
 Against forcing landlords to sell, 38381. No 
 peasant proprietors under £10 valuation, con- 
 siders this very hard on the small tenants, but be- 
 lieves there will be famine periodically if holdings 
 can't be enlarged 38382-90. Considers the people 
 would be better as proprietors than as tenants, even 
 with every privilege given them, would struggle 
 more to pay instalments than their rents, even if 
 secure in their holdings, 38393-5. Suggests forty 
 year's as period for repayment of principal and in- 
 terest, 38396-98. Subdivision must be strongly 
 guarded against, 38400-2. The condition of 
 labourers should be considered ; owners of land 
 should be compelled to give each labourer half an 
 acre of land, but only where he lived and worked 
 on the farm, 38402-10. 
 
 Smith, Mr. Joseph, Omagh, County Tyrone, Wholesale 
 Dealer, Chairman of the Town Commis- 
 sioners. — Dublin. 
 Cases of rent raising on Rev. T. L. Stack's pro- 
 perty bought from Lord Belmore in 1852. List 
 of names with present rents showing increases 
 
 since purchased, 38411-16. Some of these increases 
 have taken place since Land Act ; in Lord Bel- 
 more's time, tenants had liberty to cut as much 
 turf as would, when sold, pay the rent, that has 
 ■ been prohibited ; are now compelled to pay £3 per 
 acre for the bog, 38417-1 8. Rents increased under 
 notice to quit ; case did not come to court ; rents 
 arranged by agent, 38422-24. In 1852 eighteen 
 families were turned out by Lord Belmore, with 
 hardly any compensation to make room for a sub- 
 agent, 38424-31. Middlemen and landlords of his 
 own class are the worst rack-renters, 38431-35. 
 Two valuations within thirty years on Alexander 
 M'CaiTsland's property, and rent raised on the 
 tenants' improvements, 38435-36. A few examples 
 of the increases, 38437-38. Case of Robert Munn, 
 tenant on Sir Hervey Bruoe's estate, 38438-42. 
 Several other cases of office restrictions and rent 
 raising on same estate, both before and after it was 
 sold to Mr. John Martin ; tenants afraid to im- 
 prove for fear of increased rent, 38443-47. Sir 
 Hervey Bruce raised the rents twice before he sold 
 the property, and they have been since raised by 
 the new owner, 38448-50. No Act of any use 
 that will not abolish office rules, 38450-1. Most 
 of the purchasers under the Church Commissioners 
 in his district are doing well, many of them 
 borrowed from him, and have paid him back in full, 
 three-fourths of the purchase-money was advanced 
 by the Commissioners j considers they paid too 
 highly ; a few of them are broken down, and have 
 sold, getting leases for ninety-nine years ; case in 
 point, 38454-59. 
 
 M'Crea, Mr. John, Grange, Strabane, County Tyrone, 
 Tenant-farmer and Valuator. — Dublin. 
 Tenant and land valuator, 3846. Agrees 
 with preceding witnesses. Considers there could 
 be no worse tribunal than the County Court 
 Judges, 38461. Have no knowledge of land, 
 and no means of arriving at a proper conclusion, 
 38462. The Government valuation no fair standard 
 for taxation or rent purposes, always much too 
 Mgh on bad land, badly circumstanced, too low on 
 good land, well circumstanced, and near towns, 
 38463-4. Suggests a minister of agriculture to re- 
 side in Ireland with central office in Dublin, to 
 finally settle disputes between landlord and tenant, 
 38466. Has met many cases of changes 
 of rent under notice to quit, but tenants are 
 afraid of giving their names, one instance in point, 
 38467-72. Considers a tenant if he had security of 
 tenure and protection against arbitrary rise of rent 
 better ofi" than as a proprietor, as he would have 
 more capital to work his farm, 38474-77. Where 
 estates were in the market would give facilities for 
 purchase, but would not force either party, 38478-79. 
 
 M^Sorley, Mr. Owen, Roscavery, near Omagh, County 
 'Tyrone, Tenant-farmer. — Dublin. 
 , Holds under Mr. J. A. Galbraith, immediately 
 after passing of Land Act, rent was increased 
 generally, in his own case was raised from £9 to 
 £10 10s., 38482-83. Tenants accepted increase, 
 being afraid of proceedings being taken against 
 them, 38484-90. In 1877 were served with a 
 written notice for a further increase, his own rent 
 being raised to £12 10s., 38491-3. In the follow- 
 ing year a further increase was made, he himself 
 being forced to pay £1 3 18s. id., being served with 
 notice to quit before he would do so, 38494-98. 
 Case of John Owenson, same property, 38499. 
 In his own case the notice to quit was followed up 
 by ejectment suit, which cost him about £20, 
 38500. Filed a land claim, landlord refused to take 
 any rent or pay any compensation, but ofi"ered to 
 let County Court Judge fix the rent, 38501-2. 
 Was not willing to do this, as the judge could never 
 have any fair idea of the particulats of the case, 
 38503-38506. An independent arbitrator or arbi- 
 trators would have satisfied them, 38504-5. States 
 
CXXXVIU 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 M'Sorley, Owen — continued. 
 
 reasons for saying his landlord was a man of arbi- 
 trary power, 38507-8. Tenants on small estates 
 are rack-rented now, if they have to -wait for legis- 
 lation till a new valuation lias been made, many 
 of them will have to leave the country, 38510-11. 
 Gives names of several good landlords, but who 
 spoil all by ofEoe i-ules and restrictions, complains 
 that lands of the Church Temporalities have been 
 disposed of at rates so high that purchaser's annual 
 payments are now greater than their former rents, 
 38511-13. Against limiting peasant proprietorship 
 to tenants over a certain valuation, thinks clauses 
 against subletting and subdivision unnecessary, as 
 also any clause compelling farmers to give land to 
 their labourers, 38514. 
 
 Clarke, Mr. James, Sixmilecross, County Tyrone ; 
 Tenant-farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds under Sir William Verner, 38517. Sixty- 
 four acres of mountain farm, original rent, £14 10s. 
 "Was induced to build a house, for which he was 
 allowed £20, was shortly afterwards served with 
 notice to quit, and his rent raised to £22 Qs. lOrf., 
 38520-23. At same time part of his land was 
 taken away, and he was comj^ellcd to sign an agree- 
 ment or go, thinks increase was made in case he 
 should obtain any benefit from Land Act, 38523- 
 25. Was given 15 per cent, off last half year's 
 rent, 38526. Cases of grievance through office 
 rules, 38529-31. Suggests that mountain lands 
 should be reclaimed, and that Government should 
 advance money to tenants to purchase their hold- 
 ings, 38533-34. 
 
 Eutledge, Mr. John, Trillick, County Tyrone ; 
 Tenant-farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds under Captain Mervyn Archdale, complains 
 that his rent was more than doubled, after he and 
 his family had for a number of years laboured hard 
 to reclaim and improve it, 38535-6. First rise took 
 place about eighty yeai's ago, at fall of lease, rent 
 then doubled, 38537-38. - Rent again increased 
 1870, when the next lease ran out, 385.39-42. Asked 
 for a renewal, but was refused, 38543. A further 
 instance of rent raising on another farm on same 
 estate, 38544-48. Of late years office rules and 
 restrictions have come in practice on this estate, 
 where formerly there were none, 38549. A tenant 
 has no security against rent raising on his own 
 improvements, 38550. Hard case in point of Mrs. 
 M'Quaide, but which occurred before Land Act, 
 38551-54. Case of rent raising since Land Act on 
 ■ Captain Stoney's estate, income tax being added to 
 rent within last two years, 38557-59. His great 
 complaint is the power of rent raising on tenants' 
 own improvements, 38561. 
 
 O'NeiU, Mr. Hugh, Dungannon Royal School Lands, 
 County Tyrone ; Tenant-farmer. — Dublin. 
 Complains that previous to Land Act, rent was 
 raised on his impirovements, 38564-68. No increase 
 since, but complains of office rules established since 
 passing of Land Act, 38569-71. Rent raising 
 stops all improvements, 38572. Would improve 
 if they only had security, 38573. Their gi-eatest 
 wish is, however, to become owners, and would be 
 willing to pay more than they are now doing to get 
 possession, 38574-6. Would compel Commissioners 
 of Education to sell, 38577. 
 
 Johnstone, Mr. James, Coalisland, near Dungannon, 
 County Tyrone ; Tenant-farmer.' — Dublin. 
 Holds under Commissioners of Education, 38578. 
 Complains that his rent was raised on his own 
 improvements, 38583-87. Rent much too high 
 on the whole estate, his own rent so high he cannot 
 Uve on it, 38600. 
 
 Clements, Mr. Robert S., KiUadroy, Beragh, Omagh, 
 County Tyrone ; Tenant-farmer.— JOmS^ot. 
 Has been a guardian of Omagh Union for eight 
 
 or nine years, 38605. The Land Act does not 
 give sufficient security by giving compensation for 
 disturbance and improvements, 38608. Impossible 
 for County Court Judge to arrive at a just conclu- 
 sion, evidence so contradictory, 38609-10. Instance 
 in point, 38611-18. If there was free sale, land 
 could be got at market value like any other com- 
 modity, 38619. All restrictions on free sale should 
 be guarded against, 38621. The fairest way would 
 be to let a tenant sell the best way he can, as he 
 would his cattle or other goods, 38625. The rise 
 of rent that frequently takes place on the sale of 
 holdings, cuts down the value of the tenant-right 
 case in point of Eobert Munn, 38626-27. A great 
 many purdiases under Chiirch Commissioners are 
 doing well, although they bought under circum- 
 stances that made it nearly impossible for them to 
 do well, the rents being much too high, and the 
 tenants bought on the actual rentSj 38633-34. 
 Those that had not to borrow are doing uncommonly 
 well, others got friends to buy for them, anecdote 
 in point, 38636-37, 38640. Suggests fixity of 
 tenure at fair rents ; the abolition of all obnoxious 
 office rules ; free sale ; the rent in no case to exceed 
 Griffith's valuation, 38644. Suggests independent 
 Government valuators, if fixing the rent at Griffith's 
 valuation is not carried out, 38653. 
 
 McCarthy, Rev. Callaghan, M.A., Dingle, County 
 Kerry ; Protestant Clergyman. — Dublin. 
 A personal grievance, took a farm in 1869, he- 
 longing to the Diagle Mission, the trustees being 
 Lord Ventry and Judge Warren, who would not 
 grant longer lease than three years, 38654-58. 
 Took the farm as a tenant, it having failed as a 
 mission first ; laid out £5,000 in ten years in im- 
 provements, 38660-65. Often asked for a long^ 
 lease, but they would not grant it, 38674-78. Was 
 evicted for non-payment of rent, which he thinks 
 he was justified in n<)t paying, as he had spent so 
 much on the mission, 38682-6. Considers that, as 
 the farm is not going to the Dingle Mission, it should 
 come to him as the tenant, 38686. Another per- 
 sonal case' of great hardship under Mr. Eobert 
 Bowen, in County Tipperary, 38688-90. 
 
 Brady, Rev. James, CO., Glencolen, Doura, County 
 Cavan. — Dublin. 
 Evidence as to a number of cases in which 
 tenants' rents have been much increased, 38691. 
 Case of Hugh M'Caffrey, 38692-3. Case of Thomaa 
 Smith ; his farm was lately sold ; in transfer he 
 lost his bog ; rental therefore higher, 38694. Gives 
 details of several similar cases of harsh treatment 
 andraisingofrents,38695-732. Competition for land 
 decreasing from want of capital, 38737-41. In- 
 stance of landlord, who purchased in 1875, forcing 
 all the tenants to pay a doubled rent, 38742. 
 Tenants on Lord Annesley's estate deprived of 
 rights of commonage held for ages, and harshly 
 treated, but are afraid to complain ; completely m 
 the hands of bailiffs, 38743-52. Who take and de- 
 mand bribes from the tenants ; anecdote of ths, 
 38752-55. Further instances of rack-renting and 
 harsh treatment of tenants by their landlords, 
 showing that tenants arc much too dependent, and 
 that some means of giving them security is much 
 wanted, their rents being raised the moment they 
 make any improvements, 38758-60. 
 
 Pringle, Mr. Henry, ('lonby House, Clones, Co. 
 Monaghan ; Merchant.- — Dublin. 
 Agreement in use on Lord Dartrey's estate; 
 tenant served with notice to quit, to compel ac- 
 ceptance of it, 38763-4. It assumes everything 
 belongs to the landlord ; tenant to keep everything 
 in repair, and hand it over on six months' notice ; 
 if rent twenty days in arrear, landlord has power to 
 enter and take possession of everything ; tenant to 
 pay full county cess, and in case of becoming bank- 
 rupt, everything reverts back to the landlord, 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 CXXXIX 
 
 Pringle, Henry — continued. 
 
 38766-8. No freedom of contract with reo-ard to 
 fixing rent ; a tenant is often compelled to pay an 
 unfair rent under threat of notice to quit, 387611-70. 
 Security of tenure mucli wanted, 38774. Tenants 
 should not be evicted so long as they perform their 
 lawful obligations to the landlord, 38775-6. They 
 also want security against unfair rent-raising, 
 38777-8. Tenants should have power of free sale, 
 to induce them to improve, 38779-80. Tenants 
 afraid to improve for fear of rent being raised ; anec- 
 dote of this, 38780. Landlord to have right of pre- 
 emption at full setting value of the tenancy ; a 
 specimen of the use made by a landlord of the 
 power to raise rent, 38783-4. 
 
 Femey, Mr. Henry, Ballycanoo, Co. Wexford, Tenant 
 Farmer.- — Dublin. 
 Holds under Lord Courtown and Captain George, 
 38785. Took his farm in 1851 from Lord Cour- 
 town ; land much exhausted by constant cropping, 
 38787. Has made great improvements, besides 
 buildinQ- a house, 38788-89. Now complains that 
 Lord Courtown won't give a lease, ex-cept with 
 clauses he could not accept, and that having made 
 all the improvements, he is paying 25 per cent. 
 above the rent he took the farm at, 38789-94. 
 The lease offered to him barred him fiom compensa- 
 tion for all improvements made, or to be made, 
 38795-97. Protection from capricious evictions 
 and capricious raising of rents much wanted ; con- 
 siders it a hardship that if he built a house, he 
 would have to pay increased rates ; thinks the land 
 should be assessed for these things, 38799. Laud- 
 lords give no assistance, but knows instances of 
 their borrowing from Board of Works, and charg- 
 ing the tenants 5 per cent, when they only paid 
 3i, 38799. Was allowed £200 by Captain George 
 upon the building of a new house and ofiice — the 
 only assistance he ever got ; case of raising rent on 
 tenant's own improvements, 38800-1. 
 
 Dwyer, Mr. William, Raheen, King's County, fenant 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds under Mr. John Mon-issey, 38806. Com- 
 plains that twelve acres of his farm is continually 
 under water ; has often asked for a reduction on 
 account of this, but has always been refused, 
 38807-n. 
 
 Gibson, Mr. William, Ballywalter, Co. Down, Tenant 
 Farmer. — Dublin. 
 A tenant on the Meade estate, Co. Down, 38815- 
 16. Held under lease of 1782, at 10s. an acre, on 
 fall of lease in 1860, rent was raised to 30s. an acre 
 38821-24. The rise was based xipon his own and 
 his father's improvements, 38828. Land was 
 valued by landlord's surveyor, had no voice in the 
 matter, was obliged to pay increase or go, 38829-32. 
 In every case in the neighbourhood on lease ex- 
 piring the rent is raised, and tenant must pay it or 
 leave, 38833. Kent raising on change of tenancy 
 or sale, and office rules destroy tenant-right, 
 38836-40. A great point if fair rents could be 
 established by some independent means, 38842. 
 Tenant not to be evicted save for non-payment or 
 bad conduct, 38843. Free sale should be allowed, 
 38844. Considers landlords would lose nothing 
 by granting fixity of tenure and free sale, 38845-47. 
 Suggests that rent .should be calculated on average 
 produce of farm and acreage prices for ten years, 
 38848-50. All improvements are made entirely 
 by tenants, 38851-2. On the Meade estate, free 
 sale is allowed, but no money allowance for im- 
 provements, 38853. 
 
 Bead, Mr. Samuel, Tenant Farmer, Dundonald, Co. 
 Down. — Dublin. 
 Holds under Mr. Birch, 38856. Agrees with 
 evidence of last witness, 38857. The three F's 
 
 would encourage farmers, who would make great 
 improvements if they only had security, 38858. 
 His landlord raises rent on dropping of lease, but 
 not on change of tenancy, 38859. 
 
 Darcy, Major John Talbot, Castlepark, County Ros- 
 common, Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Well acquainted with condition of farmers in 
 Comity Koscommon, 38862. Eight of sale is not 
 allowed, 38864-5. Leases veiy rare, 38867. 
 People do not care for them since Land Act, 
 38868. Thinks Griffith's valuation for arable lands 
 a vary fair criterion of rent, but not at all so for 
 grass lands, 38870, 38874. Cases in point, 
 38871-73. No improvements made by landlords 
 since Land Act, 38875-6. Plenty of land that 
 wants improving, and plenty of labour to do 
 it, but for want of security, tenants will not 
 improve, 38878-80. Won't allow that any evicted 
 tenant ever gets sufficient compensation, illustrates 
 this, 38881-2. Case of late Mr. Nolan, sons 
 evicted for subdivision, 38883-4. In favour of 
 making a holding real property and doing away 
 with eviction, would have a system that any poor 
 man could make a will and register it in County 
 Court to save expense, 38886. Against primo- 
 geniture in holdings, 38887-89. In favour of 
 peasant-proprietary, but it must be done very 
 gradually, would not force it, if estate were in the 
 market, would give tenant-right of pre-emption, and 
 assist him in every way, but would not make sale 
 compulsory except in case of London Companies, 
 38892-94. Few tenants would be able to buy at 
 present, are in a very poor condition, 38895. 
 Much waste land that might be reclaimed with 
 profit, 38896-900. Case in point, 38901-4. The 
 Land A ct has had a tendency to stop rent-raising, 
 38905. Suggestions for improving Land Act, 
 would do away with eviction as well as distress, 
 landlord to give notice when rent is due, and then 
 sell after a certain time, the Sheriff to give 
 possession, and divide the assets, paying the land- 
 lord a fair rent, 38906-14. In favour of fixity of 
 tenure and free sale, with a court to decide a fair 
 rent, 38917-18. 
 
 Pyne, Rev. John, C.C, Athlone, County Roscommon. 
 — Dublin. 
 Curate of St. Peter's Parish, Athlone, 38919. 
 Agrees with Major Darcy as to the right of sale 
 not being recognized, except by special favour of 
 landlord, 38920-22. Case of increased valuation 
 and consequent rent-raising on Lady Johnson's 
 property, bailiffs of the estate going round with 
 valuator and helping him in the valuation, 38924- 
 35. Two other similar cases on same property, 
 38936-40. Believes these cases were simply ex- 
 periments to see could they succeed on the property 
 generally, tenants fought very hard, the clergy 
 made a compromise and gave a slight increase of 
 rent, 38941. Estate badly situated having no roads, 
 38944. Instance of hardship on the O'Sullivan 
 estate, 38944. Rent-raising on Long Island in the 
 Shannon, 38945-53.. Details of increase in rent 
 on Mr. Hussey Walshe's propprty, 38954-57. 
 Landlords have not made any improvements in 
 these cases, 38958. Would do away with eviction, 
 38962-63. In favour of rent being fixed by a 
 high-class court, with power of appeal in special 
 cases, 38964. Tenants to have free sale, 38965. 
 Except in certain cases against subdivision, 
 38966-7. Thinks Government might safely ad- 
 vance the whole purchase-money in order to bring 
 about peasant-proprietary, in any case should ad- 
 vance, three-fourths, 38971. Tenants would make 
 up the remainder, are most anxious to buy, 38972-4. 
 Agi-ees with Major Darcy's views about reclaimable 
 land, 38977-79. Case of considerable hardship, 
 through re-arrangement of holdings, 38980-87. 
 Advocates abolition of entail, or that power should 
 
 t 
 
cxl 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Pyne, Rev. John, C.C. — continued. 
 
 be given to limited owners to sell portions of their 
 estates to pay off mortgages, 38987-88. Would 
 compel absentee corporations to sell, gives reasons, 
 38988-90, but would not force individual landlords 
 to sell, 38992. 
 
 Naughton, Mr. William, near Athlone, County Ros- 
 common, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds under Mr. Cruise, 38994. Rent raised 
 about sixteen years ago, from £34 to £^'2 10s., 
 38996, 39000. Lease being given for twenty-one 
 years, 39006-4. All improvements made by his 
 father and himself, no aid from landlord, 39005-6. 
 Several cases of rent raising in same proportion in 
 neighbourhood, tenants being ofiered, but would not 
 take leases, 39012-15. Got abatement of 5s. in the 
 pound on last rent, 39017. Considers rent much 
 too high, would be willing to have his farm re- 
 valued, 39019. 
 
 King, Mr. Christopher, Mounthussey, County Roscom- 
 mon, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds under lease from Mr. Hussey Walsh, 
 39025. Lease for three lives and thirty-one years, 
 39048. Complains that his rent is too high, owing 
 to agricultural depression, 39033-37. Paid £720 
 for interest in lease of a portion of his farm ; thinks 
 he could not get anything for his interest now, 
 39038-39. No inducement to improve ; rent too 
 high; lease not long enough, 39046-53. Would 
 not care to purchase his holding if he had fair rent 
 and fixity of tenure, 39057-58. 
 
 Ha/rvey, Mr. Daniel, Crannamore, A-thlone, County 
 Roscommon, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Holds under Mr. Birmingham, 39065. Com- 
 plains that his rent is too high, and a good deal 
 over the valuation, 39067-69 ; but has not been 
 altered for nearly forty years, 39070-71. Is paying 
 £\ 5s. an acre for bog land, but is allowed to sell 
 turf off it, 39072-76. In bad times finds it hard to 
 get on, 39079. No changes of tenancy or evictions 
 on the estate for some years, 39085—6. 
 
 Egan, Mr. Patrick, Clooncunny, Elphin, County 
 Roscommon, Tenant Farmer. — Dublin. 
 Tenant on Colonel Simpson's estate, 39089. 
 'Rent raised lately from £14 3s. M., to £23 lOs. 2d. 
 yearly, 39094. Asked to have charge for arterial 
 drainage taken off, ha\-ing expired ; was served in 
 March last with a writ for his rent, on the grounds 
 that he would not pay more than Grifiith's valua- 
 tion, 39095-97. He and his brother hold jointly 
 and get one receipt, 39099, 39101. Fourteen other 
 tenants were served with writs, having refused to 
 pay, except Griffith's valuation, 39108-9. Did 
 not say he would only pay Griffith's valuation ; 
 only wanted drainage charge taken off, as it had 
 expired ; was obliged to pay rent in full and 
 £2 10s. costs, 39110-39120. 
 
 Halahan, Rev. James, C.C, Ballycallan, County Kil- 
 kenny. — Dublin. 
 Has been eight years in Ballycallan, and is well 
 acquainted with the condition of the people and 
 their relations with their landlords, 39122-24. Ar- 
 bitrary rent raising on tenants' improvements, and 
 harsh treatment of tenants by their landlords, gives 
 list and full particulars of thirty-two cases in point, 
 39125, 39202. These cases prove that the rent is 
 much over the valuation, 39203. That on several 
 of these estates rent has been quite lately increased, 
 and the tenants' improvements confiscated in con- 
 sequence, 39204. The people are very poor owing 
 to rack-rents, and naturally very poor land, much of 
 which might be reclaimed, and would afford a good 
 return for the outlay, 39204-5. 
 
 Thomas Lefroy, Esq., q.c, Ardmore, Bray ; /. Calvert 
 Stronge,'E,sq^., Hackley, County Armagh ; William 
 Kirk, Esq., Gorey, and Mr. Alfred M'Dermott, 
 
 solicitor, Dublin, examined together as representa- 
 tives of Trinity College tenants. 
 
 Ze/ro2/,Thomas, Esq., Q.c, Ardmore, Bray,CountyCourt 
 Judge for County Down, Co. Armagh. — DubUn. 
 Does not give evidence as County Court Judge 
 but simply as representing Trinity College tenants' 
 who are middlemen, 39208, in different parts of 
 Ireland, 39209. The college property is held at 
 present under private Act of 1851, by which they 
 were given power of giving long leases and per- 
 petuity grants. The tenants complain that the 
 standard prices by which the rent was to be varied 
 every ten years, were not the actual prices of the 
 day on which the grant was made, but were very 
 far below them, 39210. ,Were so situated then 
 that they covild do nothing; explains this, 39213- 
 1 6. The system used for the prices that regulate 
 the valuation of rents being complicated and un- 
 fair — at first revision rent was raised 35 per cent 
 
 was fought by Lord Leitrim, one of the tenants 
 under the Arbitration Act, he considered the 
 demand so unjust, 39217-22. Case was compro- 
 mised at 25 per cent., 39223. Some of the under 
 tenants have totiesquoties leases, and some are yearly. 
 The projjerty is held by the immediate tenants 
 subject to the decemiial variation and power given 
 them of requiring a proportionate contribution, from 
 the under tenants in case of a rise, but which they 
 find it impossible to make them do, without pro- 
 ceedings, 39224-27. So that in many cases the 
 immediate tenants have to bear the whole loss, they 
 being in reality the landlords, who are all willuig 
 to buy their property from the College, and give 
 them a full and fair price, even on the last revision, 
 but they refuse to sell, 39228-31. Illustration of 
 the working of the decennial variation on Mr. Kirk's 
 and Sir James Stronge's estates, 39232-35. They 
 also consider a decennial period a most unjust one 
 in which to vary the rent, in fact complain of the 
 systgm altogether ; therefore suggest that a power 
 should be given to the tenant to buy up the rents 
 and perpetuity grants, that the College should be 
 compelled to sell, and that there should be a simple 
 mode of ascertaining what the under tenants' con- 
 tribution should be, 39235-37. Instances showing 
 the inconvenience that arises from not being able to 
 free any part of the land, 39238. 
 
 Fowler, Robert, Esq., Rahinstown, Enfield, County 
 Meath ; Land Owner. — Dublin. 
 Owner of land in county Meath, 39239. 
 Thoroughly acquainted with all the circumstances 
 of the people on his estate, 39243. A great many 
 of the holdings very small, 39244. Others on the 
 contrary very large, 39245. Rents about eight per 
 cent, over the valuation, 39246. Rents have not 
 been changed since 1832, two-thirds of the estate is 
 held under lease for thirty-one years, reut only raised 
 on lease being taken out, or a new tenant commg 
 into the estate, 39247. Very few changes of 
 tenancy, the rule of the estate has always been to 
 pay the tenants for all their improvements, details 
 of plan adopted for valuing improvements, 39248- 
 52. Has granted ten leases since Land Act, a re- 
 valuation made by himself and agent, in no instance 
 did the tenant object, inequality of Griffith's valua- 
 tion, cases in point, 39254-55. Has only had one 
 eviction since 1846, 39256. Tenant became bank- 
 rupt, and tried to sell, facts of the case, 39257. 
 Tenants have practically fi_xity of tenure, 39528. 
 Considers if fixity of tenure and free sale were 
 established it would be a great injustice to landlords, 
 39259-62. Suggests that if a landlord is forced to 
 part with his right in favour of the occupier, that he 
 be compensated for it, 39262, 39267-69. Considers 
 tenants would be willing to buy with proper facilities 
 on most moderately rented estates, 39262-63. 
 Strongly objects to rents being fixed by arbitration, 
 i.e., other persons fixing the vahie a landlord may 
 put on his property, 39272-73. Should this be 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cxli 
 
 Fowler, Roliert. — contimied. 
 
 made law landlords will only be too willing to sell 
 39:i76. In that case considers the only and best 
 remedy is peasant proprietary, 39278. Totally dis- 
 sents from section three of Land Act, which gives 
 tenant a possessory right, and would not consent to 
 an}' compensation for free sale, 39279-87. If any 
 such legislation is put in force, the landlord should 
 be offered the choice of selling, and should be given 
 a fair price for his property, 39295-98, 39306-08. 
 Suggests that in a tenancy from year to year there 
 should be no alteration in the amount of rent to be 
 paid during the lifetime of the tenant, 39298-302. 
 Government should not become landlords except to 
 sell again to tenants ; suggests State reclamations of 
 the waste lands, 39309. Plan for Government 
 rmrcliase of estates, 39311-26. Considers landlords, 
 if given Government debentures in lieu of their 
 estates, would be willing to take off a margin to pre- 
 vent the State being at a loss, 39328-32. Has 
 spent large sums of money in draining and improve- 
 ing his estate, borrowing money from Board of Works 
 for this piu'pose, the tenants only in one instance 
 paying interest for the loans, 39333-35. Has only 
 a reversionary control over the tenants who hold 
 under lease, 39339-40. 
 
 ■Curling, Charles, Esq., Newcastle West, Co. Limerick, 
 Land Agent. — Dablin. 
 Agent to Lords Devon and Dunraven, 39342-3. 
 Gave evidence regarding the Devon estate, 39343. 
 Tenant-right exists, 39344. Butter the chief pro- 
 duce ; not a tillage farm on the estate, 39345-47. 
 . Sale by auction not allowed; no interference with 
 price, 39349. Tenants allowed to smrender leases 
 and take out new ones for thirty-one years at 
 slightly increased rents ; tenants quite satisfied, 
 39350-52, 39354-57. Rental of estate about nine 
 per cent, over the valuation, 39361. Tables of 
 estimated produce of a butter farm of eighty-one 
 Irish acres, butter at 80«. per cwt., 39362. Table of 
 prices of butter, 39363. Half cost of all improve- 
 ments borne by landlord, who has spent large sums 
 in improving the estate ; tenants merely charged 
 interest on the money expended on the drainage of 
 their farms, 39365. Tenants also made great im- 
 provements up to the last three or four years, 
 39366. Tenants very prosperous and give large 
 eums for the interest in their lands ; case in point, 
 39372—73. Purchase money always lodged with 
 agent to pay all the debts, 39375. Tenants get too 
 much credit on the Devon estate ; give enormous 
 fortunes to their children and so get involved ; in- 
 stance in point, 39376-81. Considers the three 
 F.'s would increase Lord Devon's interest, as would 
 a re-valuation, 39382-84. Approves of settling 
 rents by arbitration, of fair rents, and fixity of 
 tenure, 39385-87'. Rents to be re-valued every ten 
 or twenty years, or paid for at one time, 39390-91. 
 If evicted, save for non-payment, would give tenant 
 a number of years' purchase, 39393-95. Against 
 unlimited free sale ; states reason for this, 39396- 
 404. In case of a new valuation Government valua- 
 tor should have a local man to help him ; instance 
 f ■ proving this to be necessary, 39405-09. New 
 , valuation should be completed in twelve months, 
 ■ 39412. Lord Dunraven has not allowed tenant- 
 , rio-ht up to this ; seems now inclined to do so, 
 39417. Leases not common on his estate ; tenants 
 do not care for them, 39418. A great many 
 labourers on the Devon estate, all of whom hold 
 direct from Lord Devon, 39422-23. Labour with 
 the farmers as they choose ; wages about 2s. a day, 
 39424-26. Labourers have a house and bit of land 
 from Lord Devon for 2s. or 3s.— just sufficient to 
 cover the rates, 39429. 
 
 Douglas, Richard Magennis, Esq., Portballinatray, 
 Coleraine, Cos. Derry, ^.ntrim, and Armagh, 
 Land Agent. — Dublin. 
 Agent over estates in counties Antrim, Derry, 
 
 and Armagh, 39430-31. Free sale at a fair rent 
 exists on all the estates, with one exception; in 
 that case the landlord retains the right of veto, 
 39436-40. On the other estates there are no limits 
 or restrictions of any kind ; the landlord's remedy 
 is buying the holding at the up-shot price, if he 
 obiects to the proposed purchaser, 39441-2. Re- 
 valuations every twenty years on Sir Francis 
 Macnaghten's estate ; tenants given leases for 
 twenty-one years and Duke of Connaught's life, 
 with clause of surrender on six months' notice, 
 39443. On the other estates re-valuation at fall of 
 lease, 39444. Tenants' improvements deducted, 
 39445-6. Rent not increased on sales ; exceptional 
 cases of this, 39447. Tenantry thrifty and well off, 
 39448. Few sales, 39450-52. Difficulties and 
 restrictions in borrowing money prevent people 
 buying under Bright clauses ; Government should 
 give greater facility for borrowing money, 39453- 
 56. Suggests assessors to aid Coimty Court Judges, 
 39459-61. Few improvements on part of landlords 
 since Land Act, 39462-64. Ulster custom has 
 worked well, 39466. In favour of Government 
 valuations at stated periods as a basis for fixing 
 rents, 39467-71. Thinks it advisable that there 
 should be some court to fix rents in case of dispute, 
 39472. 
 
 Little, Simon, Esq., Cullentra, ,0o. Wexford, Land- 
 owner and Agent. — Dublin. 
 Connected with estates in counties Wexford, 
 Waterford, Kilkenny, Carlow, Kerry, Limerick, 
 West Cork, King's County, Meath, Westmeath, 
 and KUdare, 49476. On some of these estates un- 
 limited tenant-right is permitted by the landlord, 
 subject to landlord's approval of the incoming 
 tenant, 39477-80. Is not in favour of free sale at 
 all, as regards tenants ; states reasons, 39482-86. 
 If made compulsory would not injure landlords, 
 39487-88. , Rents on estates he manages about 
 fifteen per cent, over Griffith's valuation ; mostly 
 tillage farms, 49489-91. Does not consider ii at 
 all a uniform valuation, 39493-95. Considers the 
 scale of compensation for disturbance quite sufficient, 
 30498-99. Has had no evictions on title and few 
 for non-payment of rent, 39500-501. Has no ob- 
 jection to making fixity of tenure legal ; practically 
 it exists on all good landlords' estates ; ought not 
 to be considered a capricious eviction if a landlord 
 evicts a man who ■ is running o\it his land ; is in 
 favour of establishing a court to fix rent, and so 
 check any tendency to rack-renting, 39507-11. 
 People in Kerry very poor, but not so poor as the 
 appearance of their houses would lead one to sup- 
 pose ; are, however, much poorer than in Carlow or 
 Wexford ; would not approve of fixity of tenure for 
 these people, 39516-24. Bad condition of squatters 
 holding the fee simple on Crown lands in county 
 Wexford, are in great poverty and in winter work 
 as labourers ; average about ten statute acres each ; 
 are continually obliged to sell the fee of the hold- 
 ings, 39525-31. Out of a number of perpetuity 
 holdings in county Wexford does not know a case 
 where the present occupier is a descendant of the 
 original lessee, there has been so much subletting 
 and subdivision, 36533-36. Does not believe in 
 the scheme for peasant proprietorship ; considers 
 perpetuity holdings at a moderate rent a much 
 better plan, 39539-41. On large estates landlords 
 make half the improvements ; on small estates the 
 tenants make most of the improvements ; thorough 
 drainage nearly always done by the landlords, 
 39542-49. Considers Board of Works' rule against 
 alienation an injustice ; case in point, 39552-55. 
 Tenants sunk in debt in many parts, especially in 
 Kerry, owiag to the banks discounting bills too 
 readily, 39556-58. Is not able to instance any 
 grievance the Irish tenants are suffering from ; is in 
 favour of fixity of tenure on certain conditions and 
 fair rents ; but opposed to free sale, 39565. A new 
 
 t 2 
 
cxlii 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Little, Simon — continued. 
 
 Government valuation and a valuator of Court to 
 fix rents desirable, 39570-71. .Knows the system 
 of management on the Portsmouth estate ; does not 
 think it a good one ; explains this, 39576-80. 
 Instance of a peasant proprietor proposing to sell, 
 and become a tenant, taking a lease for ever from 
 purchaser, 39580-81. 
 
 Adamson, George H., Esq., Auburn, Glasson, Athlone, 
 Cos. Westmeath and Roscommon, Landowner. 
 — Dublin. 
 Allows free sale to the fullest extent on liis estate 
 since the Land Act, 39587-88. Does not limit 
 price, or interfere with the selection of the tenant, 
 39589. Has not altered his rents since the Land 
 Act, 39591. Tenants disinclined to take leases 
 since Land Act ; consider they are better off as 
 yearly tenants ; instance of this, 39693-4. Tene- 
 ment valuation no standard for rent ; case in point, 
 39596-97. Considers that middlemen generally 
 have reclaimed land, and made great improvements ; 
 gives instance of this, 39597-609. Large improve- 
 ments, such as arterial drainage, made l)y landlords, 
 minor improvements effected by tenants, 39610. 
 Considers the compensation given under the Land 
 Act quite sufficient, 39615. Has never had a case 
 in the Land Court, 39617. Thinks landlord and 
 tenant should make their own bargains — as a matter 
 of policy, 39626-31. Suggests that landloi'ds should 
 Lave a royalty in the reclamations effected by 
 tenants, 39640-41. Thinks ejectments should be 
 abolished ; has a strong feeling against the disturb- 
 ance clause of the Act, as wrong in its principle and 
 working ; would suggest the machinery of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Court to meet the whole business, 39645- 
 46. Details of its working, 39647-49, 39653-59. 
 Considers there should be a Land Commission, with 
 a competent valuator of their own, to satisfy the 
 people, and have a certain uniformity of letting, 
 39652-53. Thinks a tax should be put on the 
 improvements of the country — where the Govern- 
 ment supplies the money, 39660-61. Refers to an 
 anomaly connected with the sale of farms for debt, 
 39661-68. Peasant proprietors who hold in fee 
 along the islands of the Shannon, the poorest and 
 most wretched people in the country, have all their 
 lands mortgaged for more than it is worth, 39675- 
 81. Case in point, 39682. Is of opinion that the 
 Banks are ruining the country ; illustrations in 
 point, 39687-95. 
 
 Blake, Patrick Joseph, Esq., q.c. County Court Judge 
 for the County of Fermanagh. — Dublin. 
 Has acted as Chairman for Fermanagh for 
 twenty- one years, 39699. Is a tenan1>right county, 
 but the tenant-right is being gradually "nibbled " 
 away by the landlords; gives instance, 39701-02. 
 Is allowed on some large properties, but the result 
 of his experience is, that tenant-right at one time 
 existed in Fermanagh, but has within the last 
 thirty years been gradually diminishing, 39703-5. 
 Has granted .£5,780 as compensation since 1870, 
 compensation in the great majority of cases being 
 given outside the Ulster custom, 39707-10. Adju- 
 dicated upon 150 cases, with thirty-four appeals, 
 39711-13; with result, that three were reversed, 
 two were varied by amounts awarded being in- 
 creased, and two by being diminished, 39714-16. 
 Suggests that the rights of both landlord and tenant 
 should be secured, that a tenant should have 
 tenant -right, and should not be disturbed as long as 
 he was a good and proper tenant, and on condition 
 that he paid the rent punctually ; would allow rents 
 to be revised every twenty years, 39716-17. 
 Hands in lease, which he considers very vmfaii-, 
 39720, 39737-39. Would give the right to all 
 existing tenants to claim a revision of rent, 39722. 
 Doubts if a better tribunal for this purpose could 
 be found than the County Court. Lord Leitrim's 
 opinion on the County Court, 39723-24. Scheme 
 
 for revision of rents, 39725-26. Objects to pro- 
 fessional assessors — prefers local aid from men he 
 can trust, 39727-30. Considers scale of compen- 
 sation in Act misleading, 39731. Extravagant 
 claims diminishing, people becoming more sensible 
 39732-33. In favour of free sale ; landlord may 
 object to purchaser on reasonable grounds, but must 
 not limit price, 39735. Objects to peasant pro- 
 prietorship, except a man can buy of himself 
 without Government aid, 39740-41. Has' had 
 many troublesome and nasty cases arising oiit of 
 sales of land under the Church Commissioners ; the 
 way conveyances were made has led to great litigit- 
 tion ; illustrations of this, 39742-45. In case of 
 any creation of peasant proprietors, their rights 
 must be carefully defined beforehand, or there will 
 be great litigation, 39746. Considers that peasant 
 proprietors, as a class, are not prosperous, 39747. 
 Give list of landowners in Fermanagh who deny the 
 Ulster custom, 39747. In favour of transplanting 
 the smaller farmers, or emigrating them, 39749. 
 Tenant rented over £150 he would allow to contract 
 himself as he liked, 39750-51. Would not allow 
 ejectments till one and a-half year's rent was due ; 
 would then give no time for redemption beyond 
 what the Chairman thought fit, 39752-56. Statistics 
 of land claims over Ireland ; a return of cases tried 
 before him in county Fermanagh from 1871 to 
 1880. Savings' Banks' returns, 39756. Anecdote 
 showing antiquity of tenant-right, 39757-59. 
 
 Longfidd, The Right Hon. Mountifort, 47, Fitzwilliam- 
 square, Dublin, late Landed Estates Court 
 Judge. — Dublin. 
 Has framed a scheme as a substitution for yearly 
 tenancy, but prefers long leases and fair rents. The 
 latter to be settled by contract in cases of leases. 
 Tenant-right by contract to be established, and 
 either party to have the right to alter the rent at 
 reasonable intervals, 39760-70. If difficulty arises 
 as to settlement of rent, the matter to be referred 
 to a court for decision, 39771. Ulster tenant-right 
 objectionable. All parts of Ireland to be placed on 
 the same definite footing, and the tenant would get 
 fair market value for his holding, 39774-80. A 
 Court of Tenures to be established to arrange the 
 values, not the County Court Judge. Arbitratorsto 
 go on circuit and examine witnesses, and re))ert 
 result to the court, 39780-9, 39813-5, 39871-3. 
 Present system unsatisfactory, and in some respects 
 unjust, 39790-3. When precedents were made the 
 court would have little to do, and tenants could make 
 their own contracts, 39794. Definition of tenant- 
 right, 39796. Tenants-at-will have right to assign 
 or convey by deed their rights, 39797-801. 
 Tenants have no common interests, and so cannot 
 combine to make landlords pay tenant right for dis- 
 turbance, 39795, 39802-4. Northern tenants would 
 have equally good positions under the scheme as the 
 tenants in the So\ith, and rents should not be altered 
 oftener than every ten years, 39805-7. Improve- 
 ments by landlord or tenant to be taken into con- 
 sideration when settling the rent, 39810. If arbi- 
 tration is declined, then recourse to be had to Court ' 
 of Tenures, 39816. Fair play has been given to tenant 
 purchasers in Landed Estates Courts, but it is diffi- 
 cult to alter the lots without prejudice to owners, 
 39818-21. The purchase of an estate by commis- 
 sion to establish peasant proprietary would be ox- 
 pensive, as the best p^ieces would be bought up and 
 the refuse left on the hands of the Government, 
 39822-4. Landlord should not be compelled to 
 sell unless a debtor, 39825-6. Public companies 
 and absentee landlords should be compelled to sell, 
 and thrifty tenants should receive facilities to pur- 
 chase their holdings, the amount of the advance to 
 be left to the discretion of the court, 39827-33. 
 The Treasury to control the total to be spent, but not 
 to control the Board of Words, 39834-6. Fixity of 
 tenure and free sale as a general measure would be 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cxliii 
 
 Longifield, The Right Hon. M. — continued. 
 
 uniusl to landlords. Might be given iu a modified 
 form to yearly tenants (but not to leaseholders), on 
 condition that they paid their rents and did not sub- 
 divide or sublet. This would give satisfaction, 
 39837-51. Improvements to be registered and 
 • separate accounts kept ; a time to be fixed for the 
 exhaustion, and allowance made for them if not 
 exhausted. Depreciation of land by tenants to be 
 claimed on the contract. Tenants interests to be 
 sold by auction, and the balance after paying land- 
 lord's claim to go to tenant, 39852-9, 39862. If 
 landlord wants possession of the land, he can serve 
 the purchaser with notice to quit, 39860. Auc- 
 tions, no doubt, cause competition for land, and high 
 prices are given, but men know what they are about 
 and what they can give, 39862-5. The scheme has 
 been in operation on one estate for a short 
 time, but not long enough to test its working, 
 39866-8. It would not apply in case of a lease be- 
 yond thirty-one years, 39866-70. Small holders 
 to have same rights as large tenants to purchase 
 their holdings, and if unable to purchase, perpetuity 
 leases to be granted, the land can then be sold by 
 the court subject to these leases, 39874-6. 
 
 Rochfort-Boyd, George Augustus, Esq., Co. West- 
 meath ; Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Manages his own property of 16,931 acres. Rental 
 is £9,730, and valuation £10,249. There are 
 large leases which are slightly above the valuation, 
 but some tenants pay less .than the valuation, 
 39877, 39881-2. A combination exists in West- 
 meath, though not on witness's property, not to pay 
 more than Grifiith's valuation, and this the Act of 
 1870 is unable to meet, 39878-80, 39883-6. Has 
 spent enormous sums on the drainage and improve- 
 ment of the estate, charging the tenants nothing for 
 the outlay. Would consider a measure giving his 
 tenants right of free sale an injustice to himself; but 
 if a tenant wishes to sell has always given permis- 
 sion, 39887—90. No general objection to the ex- 
 tension of the Ulster tenant-right to Westmeath, 
 39891. Witness's tenants have fixity of tenure, 
 and he has only ejected one or two men for forcibly 
 holding land, 39892. Tenants in the county make 
 no lasting improvements, and landlords give as- 
 sistance for building houses, 39893-8. Witness's 
 farms are mostly large, but not many leases. 
 Tenants refuse them. As a rule, there is a con- 
 fidence felt in landlords in the cou^nty, 39899-904. 
 Peasant proprietary very desirable if it could be 
 carried out with effect, and were lasting ; but in a 
 short time the big men would buy up small holdings, 
 and the present state of affairs would be the result 
 again. Strong provision should be made against 
 subdivision or subletting, 39905-9. Ejectments are 
 rare in the county, except for nonpayment of rent. 
 Has only had one case in the Land Court (see 
 39892), 39910-2. The County Court is a satisfac- 
 tory tribunal if the Judge has a knowledge of the 
 working of land. An assessor to assist would 
 not give satisfaction, 39913-7. Bas given reduc- 
 tions to all his tenants, and rents have not been 
 raised in the neighbourhood, 39918-20. Landlords' 
 power of raising rent cannot be limited, but there 
 should be a tribunal to settle disputes as to rents, 
 39921-2, 39927-8. Con-acre will reduce the value 
 of a farm, and that should be considered in claims 
 for a reduction of rent. Rents are not paid out of 
 capital in the county. If punctually paid fcr long 
 time, no complaint can be made as to being too high, 
 39923-6. Griffith's valuation no standard for rent, 
 nor intended as a test. Until last year never men- 
 tioned in the county. Advantage of squaring 
 farms, 39929-34. 
 
 Greer, James, Esq., Omagh, Co. Tyrone ; Solicitor and 
 Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Connected with 4,000 acres, and occupies 300 acres. 
 
 Landlord, Captain Cregan, non-resident, 39935-9. 
 Purchased most of his property, 39940-4. Ten- 
 ant-right prevails on the estate without limit, as 
 well as on adjoining estates. Sales by auction per- 
 mitted, with landlord's veto on incomer. The system 
 works well, and tenants get from ten to twenty or 
 twenty -two yearri' purchase, 39945-53. Price some- 
 what i-educed of late owing to bad times, 39954-6. 
 Emigration and business have reduced the competi- 
 tion for land, but there is no regular industry in 
 the countiy, save land, 39957-60. Has only 
 had two cases in the Land Courts, and is in har- 
 mony with all the tenants on the estates he is con- 
 nected with, 39963-6. Value of tenant-right in 
 Ulster not affected generally by demands for in- 
 creased rent. Gives instances of estate, under the 
 valuation, where new valuation is made on a sale, 
 39967-71. Confidence in landlord keeps up the 
 value, 39972-5. Knows no instance of unju.st 
 raising of rents, though there may be cases, 39976- 
 81. Witness's rents were raised on revaluation, 
 in 1865, about eight or ten per cent., 39982-3. 
 Land Act worked well in the locality ; very few land 
 cases ; tenants undisturbed, with but one or two 
 exceptions on townpai'ks, and no notices to quit, 
 39984-90. Tenants' improvements checked since 
 the Act passed, 39991. On the Castlederg estate 
 tenants make the improvements, Mr. Spellar giving 
 slates and timber sometimes, and not increasing 
 rent. There is distress amongst the small 
 holders, but they have not received relief. Seeds 
 distributed in the Omagh Union, 39992-8. 
 At Gortiu relief given from the relief funds, 
 but none on witness's property, 39999-40002. 
 Many tenants purchased from the Church Tem- 
 poralities Commissioners, paying one-fourth. Others 
 sold their interests to shopkeepers and attorneys in 
 and about Omagh, who purchased, and gave tenants 
 long leases. The large holders have turned out 
 well, but not the small tenants, who are always on 
 the verge of starvation, 40003-17. In some parts of 
 the country the holdings are so small that a tenant 
 cannot support a family in decency and comfort 
 from the produce. These should be induced to 
 emigrate, voluntarily, and assistance given to enable 
 them to go, 40018-26. Increased facilities necessary 
 for intending purchasers under Bright clauses, and 
 expenses should be borne by the State. Tenant- 
 right should be considered, and discretion allowed 
 as to amount to be advanced. Instance of purchase 
 falling through in consequence of disagreement as to 
 purchase money to be found by tenants, 40027-32, 
 40040-3. Plenty of estates for sale, and with suf- 
 ficient inducement landlords would sell; 40033-7. 
 The scheme should be scattered about the country, 
 not localized. It should be gradual, 40038-9. A 
 difference as to rent to be settled by a competent 
 tribunal, or a commission composed of experienced 
 practical men, 40044-9. If bought out of his land, 
 witness would not live in the country as a rent- 
 charger, 40050-4. Instance of high price being paid 
 for tenant's interest of small holding, 40055-62. 
 Tenants who purchased from Church Commissioners 
 are now, many of them, in a bad way, having bor- 
 rowed to pay their share of the money. Would be 
 better off as tenants under old landlords than 
 stripped of their ready money, 40063-8. 
 
 Doherty, The Reverend John, Donegal, Co. Donegal, 
 Parish Priest. — Dublin. 
 Protests against the existing state of land tenure 
 as it takes and does away with the improvements of 
 tenants, and even interferes with the contract of 
 marriage. Instance of interference by a landlord 
 with a family, and their ejectment for not accedino- 
 to his wishes, 40069-72. A change is necessary iS 
 the laws, and until the land question is settled the 
 condition of the people cannot be improved 40073- 
 74. On Lord Lifford's estate, a few years ao-o a 
 large number of tenants were evicted because °they 
 would not consent to increase of rent. To avoid 
 
vliv 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Doherti/, The Rev. John — continued. 
 
 paying compensation he allowed them to return on 
 easier terms. They have to pay £\ 10s. a year for 
 forty perches of bog land, and are deprived of 
 adjacent turbary banks. Fines charged on rent if 
 not paid punctually, and rents raised on a change 
 of tenancy in every case. Sales not allowed unless 
 newcomer consents to increased rent, and tenants 
 have no freedom of contract. Land on that estate 
 has been reclaimed and brought to its present state 
 by the people living on it, whose descendants now 
 occupy it. Rents raised as much as 100 per cent., 
 and a townland worth £4 4s. in the memory of a 
 living man, now realizes £32. Tenants have no 
 security under this system, 40075-86. Rents 
 raised three times on the Fintra estate of Mrs. 
 Hamilton in twenty years, 40087-90. Mr. Stewart 
 Murray, in squaring his lands, gave 30s. to those 
 families who were moved, and raised rents to a 
 total of £1,000 on all, fourteen years ago, 40091-2. 
 Land Act has not checked this raising of rents, and 
 tenants are unwilling to enter into a contest with 
 their landlords. Gives instance, 40093-7. With- 
 out fixity of tenure and protection tenants -vrill not 
 go to law, 40098-100. Nor would they appeal to 
 the tribunal to settle rents through fear of eviction, 
 40101-4. Middlemen are a source of complaint, 
 and the grievance should be done away with by 
 charging the tenant not more than a fair rent, 
 40105-13. The extension of the Ulster custom 
 over Ireland would be useless, as it is objected to 
 even in Ulster, 40114-5. Witness is in favour of 
 the principles of the three F's. Fair rents could 
 be settled by a commission composed of thoroughly 
 practical men, but " local " arbitration is preferable. 
 Landlord and tenant may, of course, agree as to 
 rent withdut having recourse to either of these 
 methods, 40116-22. . Improvements by either land- 
 lord or tenant to be taken into account in comput- 
 ing the rent, and landlords should be able to prove 
 what they have done. A commission should carry 
 out these principles, but they should have them 
 plainly stated for their guidance, the limit as to 
 date to be forty years. Tenants to have equal 
 advantage with the landlord, 40123-32. Calls 
 attention to the system prevalent in many parts 
 of the United States of getting rents, by which the 
 farmer is assisted by his landlord with improve- 
 ments, stock, &o., — the rent is paid in kind, accord- 
 ing to the means of the tenant ; does not suggest the 
 principle for Ireland, 40299-303. Fair rents might 
 be settled by a G-overnment Commission or a local 
 court of arliitration, 40304. Is in favour of fixity 
 of rents, fixity of tenure, and absolute free sale ; no 
 veto by landlords, whatever may be the character 
 of the new tenant, 40305-9. Has no objection to 
 subdivision where it does not go below twenty-five 
 acres, 40310. Regarding peasant proprietary, is in 
 favour of the expropriation of absentee landlords, 
 public companies, and corporate bodies; there should, 
 however, be no compulsory sales unless the tenants 
 themselves get the land, for absentee landlords are 
 preferable to new landlords, 40311-4. Government 
 should advance four-fifths of the purchase money, 
 but the difficulty in Donegal is the enormous num- 
 ber of families having holdings under fifteen acres ; 
 impossible to live on fi^'e acres, even rent free ; 
 houses contain only one chamber ; if better houses 
 are built rents are increased ; for all these small 
 tenants witness advocates, emigration, migration, or 
 reclamation of waste lands ; emigration should be 
 voluntary and assisted, with means of living for a 
 time ; instance of sad results of compulsory emigra- 
 tion, 40315-9. By reclaiming waste lands in Done- 
 gal and Galway, and allotting twenty-five acres to 
 each family, many would be provided for ; instance 
 of holdings being so small that houses could only be 
 built gable-wise, 40320-1. Communal rights on 
 mountains might be added to these holdings, and 
 the expense of reclaiming should be borne by the 
 
 Government alone, the tejiants doing the work and 
 getting paid for it ; harbours and railways should 
 be made and fisheries developed ; these improve- 
 ments would open up civilization and make the 
 people steady, industrious and loyal ; Griffith's va- 
 luation would, for the present, be a fair basis for 
 rents, 40322-3. 
 
 Dei>utation from the Land Committee, consisting of 
 the following gentlemen : — Henry Bruen, Esq., 
 Colonel C. G. Tottenham, Colonel E. H. King- 
 Harman, Hon. Secretaries ; Hon. F. A. J. 
 Chichester, C. U. Townsend, J. S. Kincaid, T. 
 R. Ga/rvey, R. U. F. Tovmsend, G. C. B. 
 White, and S. F. Adair, Esqrs. 
 
 Bruen, Henry, Esq., Co. Carlow, Landowner. — Dublin. 
 Handed in statistics compiled from authentic bat 
 private sources as to the management of agricultural 
 estates in Ireland, showing (1) the number and area . 
 of certain estates. Poor-law valuation, and number 
 of tenants thereon ; (2) the percentage over or un- 
 der the valuation at which lands are let ; (3) tlie 
 amount of landlords' improvements for forty years ; 
 
 (4) the dates at which present rates were fixed ; and 
 
 (5) the number of evictions during the last tea 
 years ; and the deputation ofier their views on tie 
 difficulties in which landlords are placed in their 
 dealings with tenants, especially as to recovery of 
 rents under the existing laws. Tenants holding on 
 perpetuity or unexpired term of 100 years. Town- 
 holdings, townparks, grazing lettings for one 
 year or less, and landlords' estates under £500 
 a year valuation are not included in these statis' 
 tics. The estates of Lords Fitzwilliam, Inchi- 
 quin, Ardilaun, and the Marquess of Downshire, 
 with about twenty-five other large owners, are 
 not included in the returns, 40136-49, 40296. 
 Money borrowed from Board of Works has not been 
 separated from amount paid direct by landlords for 
 improvements, 40150-57. Instance of combination 
 of tenants not to pay rent unless reduction of 20 
 per cent, was granted, though their rents were mostly 
 at or below Griffith's valution. Proceedings by dis- 
 tress or ejectment are powerless at present, 40158- 
 (io. F'urther instance of combination to withhold 
 rent, and prevent landlords from selling produce, 
 40164-74. Requests that the Committee may be 
 allowed to give further evidence at a future date on 
 the refusal of tenants to pay rent (also 40298). Pro- 
 tests against Griffith's valuation being taken as a 
 standard for fixing rents, as it is very uneven. Hands 
 in a paper on the subject. His opinions are those 
 of the committee he represents, the object of it 
 being to collect information on the true state of the 
 relations between landlord and tenant in Ireland 
 for the benefit of the public. Information as to 
 rack-renting not forthcoming, 40268-74. 
 
 Adair, Samuel Frederick, Esq., Co. Kildare, Land- 
 owner. — Dublin. 
 Gives an instance of tenants withholding their 
 rents through fear of Land League, 40174-8, 
 40181-3. Tenant giving £1,500 for interest of a 
 a farm refusing to pay more than Griffith's valua- 
 tion, 40179-80. Has no doubt a system of terrorism 
 has sprung up which deters tenants from paying 
 their rents, and if they were made bankrupts, all 
 friendly relations between landlord and tenant would 
 be destroyed, and the country would become m a 
 state of rebellion. Bills of sale given to shopkeepers 
 by tenants have produced a great amoimt of troiible 
 upon the people, 40184-93. Suggests that Judges 
 of the Land Courts should ascertain fair value of 
 lands to be sold, and require tenants to pay propor- 
 tion of purchase money on that rental, granting a 
 short statutable lease. Many landlords and tenants 
 anxious to know what fair rents are, and latter 
 willing to pay them, 40263. 
 
DIGEST OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 cxlv 
 
 King-IIarman, Colonel E. E., Cos. Eosooinmon and 
 SligOj Landowner. — Dublin. 
 States that a complete change has come over the 
 country within the past few weeks. After relieving 
 his tenants in Queen's County of the oppressive rent 
 charged by middlemen, and they had expressed their 
 gratitude and satisfaction, they three months after 
 refused to pay more than Griffith's valuation, and 
 he threatened legal proceedings, 40194-6. Gi\'es 
 instances of the powerless state of the law to carry 
 out sales for non-payment of rent, 40197-201. 
 
 Chichester, The Hon. "F. A. J., Co. Wexford,- Land 
 
 Agent. — Dublin. 
 
 States that Lord Templemore's tenants declined 
 
 to pay moi-e than Griffith's valuation, owing to the 
 
 fear of the Land League. Biat for its existence he 
 
 feels sure rents would have been cheerfiilly paid. 
 
 At present the law, as regards the recovery of rents, 
 
 is useless. Any one attempting to enforce it would 
 
 be shot. If they could get the land for next to 
 
 nothing they might recognise a new law, 40201-3. 
 
 Some of the tenants on the estate owe three and 
 
 four years rent, and have not been evicted owing to 
 
 existing state of things. Part of the land is let at 
 
 or about Griffith's valuation, and the tenants have 
 
 privately expressed themselves satisfied, 40204-6. 
 
 They are led astray by the Land Leaguerswho dictate 
 
 to them what they are to do, 40207-9. Tenants under 
 
 Griffith's valuation have not oflered to pay their 
 
 rents ; and on another estate those under the valuation 
 
 have refused to pay unless twenty per cent, is taken 
 
 off, 40210-12. 
 
 Townsemd, Charles Uniacke, Esq., Land Agent. — 
 Dvblin. 
 Up to a month ago rents were paid freely, but 
 now the combination has extended to Tipperary, 
 Kilkenny, and Wexford. A tenant made bankrupt 
 on her own petition had her cattle and stock with- 
 drawn by her friends to avoid seizure. One proprietor 
 remarks the landlords are "boycotted," 40213. 
 
 Kincaid, James Stewart, Esq., Land Agent. 
 
 Says it is impossible to collect rents. It is not 
 the law that is inoperative, but the means of 
 executing it. In the case of a tenant succeeding 
 another it is difficult often to ascertain who the real 
 tenant is, as no agi-eement or contract is signed on 
 a change, and consequently there is a difficulty as 
 to taking proceedings, 40214-40223. Considers the 
 landlord the proper person to fix the rent, and not 
 a Court of arbitration. Is in favour of freedom of 
 contract, and thinks it exists now. A court might 
 be referred to in a disptite as to rent to say what a 
 fair rent was, but not to fix the rent, and compel 
 the landlords to accept it, 40224—36. Eixity of 
 tenure may be established if paid for, though prac- 
 tically it exists on all large estates. The tenants are 
 as good as any in the world, but at present are 
 misled. During the last three weeks there has been 
 almostan entirecessationof payment of rents through 
 the system of terrorism now existing, 40237-40. 
 
 Govrvey, Toler E., Esq, Co. Tipperary and King's 
 County, Land Agent — Dvhlin. 
 Says that on the estates he manages, which are 
 included in the return given by the Land Committee, 
 there have been no general increases of rents, and the 
 evictions during last ten years only seventeen out of 
 1,600 tenants. Rents are from ten to twenty-five 
 per cent, over Griffith's valuation. This refutes the 
 charge of rack-renting and numerous evictions, 
 40240-5. The practice of holding farms in rundale 
 should be discontinued, and no legislation will be 
 complete -unless this system were stopped. Gives 
 an example of the system in King's County, 40245-7. 
 Denies the statement that a goat kept for a sick 
 child had been shot. Goats in quantities are objected 
 to on a farm owing to their destructive habits, 
 40248-56. 
 
 Towii,seml, Robert Uniauke Fitzgerald, Esij., Co. 
 Cork, Land Agent. 
 Combination exists not to pay rents on the 
 estates he is connected with. The tenants have the 
 money, but are <leterred through fear of the League. 
 Bankruptcy would be the most effectual way to get 
 rents, but other proceedings are useless, 40258-60. 
 Gi'eater facilities rcquireil to make men bankrupt. 
 Cioraplaints in writing referred to proprietors, 
 40261-2. On Sir G. (Jolthurst's property rents 
 are in soni(! cases higher than Government valua- 
 tion, but large sums have been expended (.£2,000) 
 for slates and timber, 40263. 
 
 White, C. C. B., Esq., Co. Leitrim ; Land Agent. 
 
 Tenants refuse to pay rents now. Where I'ent is 
 above valuation it is owing to dictation ; where 
 rent is at Griffith's valuation it is owing to combi- 
 nation amongist the tenants themselves. Gives in- 
 stances on his own estate. On other estates where 
 rents were at Griffith's valuation the tenants refused 
 to pay unless they received an abatement of 25 
 per cent. On another estate 30 per cent, was 
 demanded, 402(34-7. 
 
 Tottenham, Colonel C. G., Co. Wicklow ; Landowner. 
 Gives instances of the valuation, rent, and prices 
 obtained for tenants' interests of holdings in 
 Wicklow, in one case 28 years' purchase. Another 
 case where landlord refused to allow a tenant to 
 sell. Two farmers who arbitrated on the value 
 fixed it at £4 and £,i Ids. an acre ; valuation, £2. 
 Subsequently let for j£3, and interest bought by 
 landlord, 40275-6. Case of tenant refusing to give 
 up a piece of land for a residence for ithe priest 
 unless X40 an acre were paid, and 25 years' pur- 
 chase at that rate. Valuation, £2 ; rent, £3 an 
 acre, 40277. Is opposed to free sale, but not to 
 fixity of tenure, 40278-9. Arbitration to settle 
 rents whether landlord wished it or no would be 
 unfair. He should be untrammelled, but there 
 should be a recognized standard of rent by general 
 valuation, 40280-6. By legalizing fixity of tenure 
 landlords would lose a valuable right, which, how- 
 ever, they ought to be prepared to sacrifice for the 
 good of the country. By free sale landlords would 
 lose all control over their estates. The value of 
 that right could be appraised and landlords com- 
 pensated for their loss if legalized by the State, 
 40287-96. Witness's evidence relates to his own 
 opinions and not the opinion of Land Committee, 
 40297. The deputation then withdrew. 
 
 King, Michael, Esq., Strangemore, Derry, Co. Derry, 
 Land Agent and Solicitor. — Dublin. 
 Has prepared a scheme for the creation of a peas- 
 ant proprietary, particulars of which he gives, 
 40324-5. With reference to the complaints made 
 by tenants on the estates of Mr. M'Causland and 
 Major Scott (see Mr. Brown's evidence), compen- 
 sation was awarded, in some instances in full, in 
 others according to the terms of " Cardwell's Act," 
 allowance beingmadefor unexhaustedimprovements ; 
 some tenants obtained what they had paid for the 
 interest of the f3,rm, having made no improvements 
 during their tenancy ; and in the case of James 
 Loughrey, he paid less than five years' purchase, 
 and received back that amount on leaving ; the sur- 
 plus paid by the new comer being expended ort a 
 house for his (the new tenant's) occupation ; in all 
 the cases witness produces the accounts in support 
 of his statements, and disputes the ^ testimony of 
 those who say they were deprived of their just 
 compensation, 40326-42. Case of a purchaser pri- 
 vately paying over the regulation price for interest . 
 of a farm • on leaving he obtained the regulation 
 (or five years' purchase) amount; he was then 
 bankrupt, 40343-6. Four evictions in witness's 
 time, all for non-payment of rent ; and Mr. M'Caus- 
 
cxlvi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 King, Michael — continued. 
 
 land gave two of them presents. On Major Scott's 
 estate there is no instance of tenant-right existing. 
 On the adjoining estates, and those in witness's 
 charge, various rules exist to regulate the sums 
 paid to out-going tenants ; in one case the landlord 
 pays for tenants' improvements three years' rent, 
 seed, &c. ; another case — payment confined to five 
 years' rent ; on a third, tenant-right with landlord's 
 permission, allowed ; on a fourth estate, no custom 
 exists and no sales have taken place ; does not ap- 
 prove of rents being fixed by arbitration, but con- 
 
 siders freedom of contract should not be interfered 
 with; existing tenants should be protected from 
 grasping landlords, but present law sufficient for 
 that purpose ; landlord and tenant to have equal 
 facilities for raising or lowering rents ; anewvalua 
 tion desirable, as present one is obsolete and un- 
 even; the seventh section of the Act, should be 
 amended ; the date for notices to quit altered • the 
 prohibition against contracts void, making land, 
 lord liable for disturbance not to apply to new 
 lettings, &c. ; gives instance of case of his own 
 40346. ' 
 
EOYAL COMMISSION 
 
 O? ENQUIRY INTO THE 
 
 WORKING OF THE LiNDLOUD AND TEMNT (IPiEMND) ACT, 1870, 
 
 AND THE ACTS AMENDING THE SAME. 
 
 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 FIEST DAY— WEDNESDAY, 1st SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 Present:— The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborough, Chairman, The Right Hon. Baron 
 Dowse, The O'Conor Don, Arthur MagMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., William Shaw, 
 Esq., M.P. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1880.' 
 
 1. The Chaieman. — You are County Court Judge 
 for Kilkenny ? — Yes. 
 
 2. How long have you liekl that position? — For 
 nineteen years, and before that I was for one year 
 Chairman of the County of Cork, East Riding. 
 
 3. I presume you are aware of the subject of the 
 inquiry of this Commission "i — Yes. 
 
 4. Do you know exactly the terms of the reference? 
 • — Not exactly. {Tlie Secretary read extract defining 
 the scope of the Inquiry), I am sure the Commissioners 
 will understand the objection I originally made to 
 pronouncing any opinion as to the amendment or 
 alteration of the Act, for this reason that being one of 
 those persons engaged in its administration, I think it 
 inexpedient for me to express, though po-ssibly T may 
 entei'tain views upon the subject. 
 
 5. In the course of your duties as County Court 
 Judge, you must have had a good deal of experience 
 of the working of the Land Act ? — Hardly as muoli as 
 the Judges in other counties. The number of land 
 cases in the County Kilkenny has been very few, 
 1 think probably only fifteen or sixteen since the 
 Act was passed ; I am speaking from memory 
 and cannot be very accurate. Perhaps I may be 
 allowed to observe that I think the small number of 
 cases that have occurred in my county is the bust 
 tribute that could be paid, both to the Land Act 
 itself, and to the county over which I preside. 
 The ftxct of its having acted as a discouragement 
 to cases of eviction, is probably the object which the 
 framers of the Act would have entertained. 
 
 6. Now in looking at the Land Act the first subject 
 that comes up for consideration is the Ulster tenant- 
 right custom with which of course you have not so 
 much to do in your disti-ict ? — We have nothing to 
 say to it in Kilkenny. 
 
 7. The only question would be whether there is 
 anything that could be called a usage corresponding 
 with that of Ulster tenant-right on certain estates 
 in your district ? — None that I am aware of. Assuming 
 that the Ulster tenant-right usages imply a general 
 power of sale under conditions which I need not enter 
 into more particularly, I am not aware that they 
 prevail upon any properties in that county. 
 
 8. The cases that have come before you, I suppose, 
 related principally to compensation for disturbance 
 or improvements? — Yes, and in two or three cases 
 for registration of improvements under a particular 
 
 Thomas De Moleyss, q.c, examined. 
 
 section of the Act, I think the 6th, relating to 
 registration of improvements. 
 
 9. I believe it would be the best way if I were to 
 ask you if you would state generally the result of your 
 experience on these points, taking them separately; 
 first say as to disturbance ? — If I am asked merely as 
 to the working of the Land Act I cannot say that I 
 see anything to find fault with in its working ; 
 I guard mj'Self at present from expressing any 
 opinion as to whether it should be extended or 
 its operation diminished, but as to the mere work- 
 ing of the Act I cannot say that I see an)'- 
 thing to find fault with. The Act itself (though 
 of course a very complicated one from the number 
 of amendments introduced into it from time to time 
 during its passing) always appeared to me to work 
 extremely well. There is a separate Land Sessions 
 provided at each Quarter Sessions the date of which 
 is fixed beforehand, and the rules I think point out 
 very particularly what course is to be adopted. The 
 expense is not great, and I have no doiibt wherever 
 thei-e is a case of eviction that would be a proper 
 subject of claim for disturbance, that such cases are 
 ahvays brought forward, and therefore it is a satis- 
 factory testimony as to the county itself that T should 
 have had so few cases before me. 
 
 10. Have you had any case before you in which 
 the question of a claim through 'predecessors arose 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 11. Have you found any difficulty in defining the 
 meaning of the word predecessors ? — I think not. I 
 think the Act pretty clearly defines who shall be a 
 predecessor and who shall be a successor. Of course 
 incidentiilly a difficulty may arise as to whether im- 
 provements were made by a predecessor, or as to the 
 manner in which they came through difTerent persons, 
 but J think when once you arrive at the matters of 
 fact in a case there is no difficulty about the meaning 
 of the words. 
 
 12. Do you consider then that the most difficult 
 point is as to the value of improvements ? — I think so. 
 
 13. How to estimate them?- — I think so. I may 
 perhaps add that I felt verj' early the difficulty of 
 deciding cases of this description upon the mere 
 evidence of maps, the evidence of surveyors, or the 
 evidence of skilled persons who — in that as in all 
 other departments where skill is supposed to be the 
 foundation of the evidence — always differ. There- 
 fore — I don't know whether I ought to mention it or 
 not — but I have found it so satisfactory to visit the 
 
 Thomas De 
 Moleyns, Q.c. 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 ■Seiit. 1, 1880. 
 
 Thomas De 
 Moleyns, q.c. 
 
 spot that I may say in almost every instance I 
 have gone to see the place myself before hearing the 
 case — that is in any instance where it -was reasonably 
 practicable, where the land lies within, say from 
 ten to twelve miles of the town in which I sit, 
 and certainly, as far as my experience goes, that 
 course has been very satisfactory to myself as enabling 
 me to decide the case with more ease and I hope 
 also satisfactory to the persons concerned. It is very 
 difficult in the conflicting evidence that prevails in 
 these cases to estimate the value of improvements and 
 decide on them without seeing the place itself. 
 
 1 4. Have you found the tenants generally pleased 
 at your going, and willing to point out to you all that 
 you wanted to see ? — As far as I could ascertain, most 
 certainly so. All parties are pleased at a personal in- 
 spection. I don't see how they could be otherwise, 
 because litigants naturally like to have their place in- 
 spected by those who have to decide their case, and 
 every facility has been given to me both by landlords 
 and tenants. 
 
 15. Do you consider that the compensation for dis- 
 turbance given by the Land Act has operated to p)re- 
 vent evictions, and, therefore, to render cases of hard- 
 ship less frequent 1 — That of course coidd be only a 
 matter of opinion, but I do think so, and as I have 
 already said, I think it is the best tribute that could 
 be paid to the Land Act that it does operate as a 
 silent discouragement, if I may say so, to causeless 
 evictions. Naturally a person Avill hesitate without 
 very strong reason before he involves himself in certain 
 litigation, and having possibly a lai'ge amount to pay. 
 I don't know that I ought to say that without adding 
 that the infrequency of these cases is a very great 
 tribute also to the landlords of the county. I have 
 not found that there has been anything on their part 
 with the exception, perhaps, of one or two instances 
 that I could call harsh evictions, in which cases oi 
 course compensation was given for disturbance. 
 
 16. As to the scale of compensation you have the . 
 option under the Land Act ot increasing or diminish- 
 ing it ? — Within certain limits. 
 
 17. Do you consider that the scale of compensation, 
 •as laid down by the Act, is a fair and reasonable one, 
 • and gives you the power in that way of dealing fairly 
 with those parties 1 — "Well, there I ain afraid I am 
 verging on a matter of opinion. No matter what the 
 opinion you give may be it pledges you to a certain 
 extent and may afterwards be prejudicial when you 
 conre to decide matters of the kind in court. It 
 may be naturally said, " Oh! the County Court judge 
 has already formed his opinion on the matter." 
 
 18. Baron Dowse.. — But you must administer the 
 law as it is, whatever the law is 1 — But this is a ques- 
 tion as to whether the law is to be altered. I am qu.ite 
 ready to administer the law as it is, or to administer 
 the law as it is to be if it is altered. I don't know 
 whether you see my objection, but this is not an ordin- 
 ary matter of opinion. 
 
 19. Chairman. — Would you have any objection to 
 say whether or not you have felt that under the pre- 
 sent Act you are imable to do justice to the extent to 
 which you would wish to do it ? — I have never met 
 with a case where I have given the full amount that I 
 had the privilege of giving. At the same time I will 
 add, that in very strong cases, cases that have no 
 extenuating circumstances, viewing the matter from 
 the tenant's point of view, I think the full amount of 
 the present scale of compensation would hardly repay 
 him for the loss of his home and his fami. Looking 
 at it from the tenant's point of view, I myself, for 
 instance, should not have been satisfied in his place, 
 but then, again, there is the landlord point of view 
 to be considered. I give that opinion subject to the 
 difficulty I have already stated. 
 
 20. Then on the subject of improvements, again, 
 you say there is the difficulty of estimating the value 
 of improvements, and from your manner of going to the 
 holdingitself — you probably havingpracticalexperience 
 of famring — you are a better judge yourself which 
 
 view of opposing evidence you ought to take J— Eve 
 without any practical experience in farming I ^ 
 there is a great advantage in looking at things on tli 
 spot. For instance, where flourishing crops are di 
 scribed, and where it may turn out to be all barret 
 it is satisfactory to find what the fact really is. j- 
 I should add as to any difficulty there is mtli reoaii 
 to evidence of improvements, this conflict of evidenc 
 is only natural — we have to encounter it everv- 4- 
 in all other matters that come before a court— an| 
 we have only to arrive as best we can at what may no 
 be, perhaps, the exact justice, but wUl be the ronji 
 justice of the case. Otherwise of course there wouk 
 , be no necessity for judges of facts. 
 
 21. There is a power in the Act under wticli « 
 disturbance is to be given in any ca;Se where the land 
 lord has oiFered the tenant to remain in possession oi 
 reasonable terms ; have yoii ever had a case under thai 
 clause coming before you? — I thini, if I recollect 
 rightly, there was a case of that sort, in -which the 
 landlord demanded an increase of rent, wtich hs 
 asserted was a reasonable rent under the circuni. 
 stances, and, in that way incidentally the qnestioii 
 arose, whether the offer he made to the tenant was 
 or was not a reasonable one. I thought it was not 
 and gave compensation for disturbance aooordinglj; 
 the question being an increase of rent. 
 
 22. Now have you had any questions before you 
 arising out of the subject of the reclamation of waste 
 lands ? — Yes, that question has arisen incidentallj 
 among improvements. 
 
 23. Wliat is in your view the interpretation of tie 
 term " waste lands " 1 — Well, it is very hard, to ji™ 
 an exact definition beforehand, but for instance, fte 
 barren side of a mountain, if reclaimed so m to 
 grow crops, even though they may not be yejy flour- 
 ishing ones, I think would be reclamation of waste 
 land. In fact, wherever crops are made to grow 
 where they did not exist before, owing to the barren- 
 ness of the soil, I should say that woidd be reclama,tion 
 of waste land. 
 
 24. There is a great deal of land that was cultiTated 
 before the famine of 1846, and was afterwards tbrown 
 up and furze grew over it ; do you consider that bring- 
 ing such land back again into cultivation comes under 
 the category of reclamation of waste lands ? — I sbould 
 think that if for a number of years the land bad so 
 relapsed that it was in the state your lordship has 
 described, making it again, to grow crops \yould he 
 reclamation of waste lands. 
 
 25. And that would be the fail- and reasonable in- 
 terpretation of the term'? — Subject, of course, to ones 
 own inspection and the evidence given. 
 
 26. Do you consider that any words additional arf 
 necessary, so that that point should not be a matterd 
 doubt? Any words in addition to " reclamation oi 
 waste lands"? — I am afraid the more words yoi 
 introduce the more you limit matters, and probablj 
 the more difficulty there will be. I think it is bettei 
 to trust the persons administering the law to discoTc; 
 its meaning. 
 
 27. I should trust them wdlingly, but I amthinkini 
 of its meaning in the eyes of the tenants ; I MV 
 rather an idea that tenants have often thought tha 
 under the interpretation of that clause, if they set t 
 work at the sort of thing I have referred to, it -^'oiu 
 not be considered as reclamation ? — It is a most u 
 portant part of the Act, because in every section pe 
 manent improvements, reclamation of waste land 
 tillages, &c., stand out prominently. They maintai 
 a pre-eminence over every other improvement. ^ 
 your lordship would suggest to me any alteratic 
 in the direction you refer to I would give my opuu' 
 as to whether I think it could be advantageous 
 introduced. 
 
 28. Baron Dowse. — It is generally looked np( 
 that reclamation of waste lands means making lai 
 to some extent good that was perfectly useless befoP 
 —I shoi-ild think that was the usual interpretato 
 and for that reason I should hardly like to limit it I 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 additional words ; I tMnk that to make crops grow 
 where none grew before, by the labour and industry 
 of the tenant is what is generally understood. Whether 
 the tenants are under any misappreltension on the 
 subject I am not aware. 
 
 29. Chairman. — The sort of land I mean is used 
 as grazing land 1 — -Has been n.sed as grazing land. 
 
 30. And is still, but is so overrun with furze that 
 tenants have to work in between the furze if they want 
 to make any good of it, and it is an expensive business 
 reclaiming it ? — It is very expensive. With regard to 
 land overrun with furze it may be either well reclaimed 
 or badly reclaimed. If the work is not thoroughly 
 well done, it is apt to grow again. I have had that 
 case before me, in which part of the reclamation of 
 waste lands consisted of fields on which furze had 
 grown, and which were stated to have been re- 
 claimed. 
 
 31. Then your opinion is, that by means of your 
 own personal visit to the place, you would be able to 
 come to a fair conclusion as 'to the meaning of that 
 clause? — To a more satisfactory conclusion, certainly, 
 than by trusting to the conflicting evidence which is 
 given in every land case. I don't mean to say that 
 it is practicable or possible under all circumstances 
 in the present state of things, for a Chairman to visit 
 every holding in respect of which a claim is made, I 
 only state that wherever it has been practicable, I 
 have been only too glad to do so for my own 
 satisfaction. 
 
 32. In clause 5 of the Act, presumptions in respect 
 of improvements, have you found that there is any 
 difficulty at all in arriving at proper evidence on either 
 side from the tenant or landlord whether he assisted 
 in improvements 1 — I don't think a case of the kind 
 ever arose before me. I am aware of the number of 
 exceptions there are as to presumptions, and the many 
 other exceptions that are grafted upon almost every 
 section of this Act, but a case of that kind has never 
 practically arisen before me. 
 
 33. That leads me to ask whether you think that 
 the fact of the sections being grafted with exceptions 
 make a difficulty in many cases in interpreting the 
 Act 1—1 tliink the Act is a very difficult one to inter- 
 pret, and a very complicated one, which I attribute 
 to the number of different views that were entertained 
 on the subject while it was passing through the 
 House of Commons, and the number of exceptions 
 that were made from time to time to meet those views, 
 and grafted on the different sections. In many cases, 
 I think, jow will find that a particular section refers 
 to a subsequent section, as containing a limitation of 
 its meaning. 
 
 34. Without going into the subject now, would 
 you feel any objection to making some suggestions on 
 paper to the Commissioners afterwards, as to any 
 amendments that you- think serviceable in that res- 
 pect ; — I am not aware that I could without remodel- 
 ling to a great extent the Act, which is always, 
 objectionable. Even though in some respects an Act 
 may be obscure and complicated, yet if you wish to 
 remodel it merely for that reason, it may become 
 even still more objectionable. 
 
 35. You would not have anytliing to do with per- 
 missive registration of improvements in yovu* court — 
 registration of improvements by tenants or landlords 1 
 — Yes, certainly. 
 
 36. Oh, that comes before you? — I have had 
 two cases of it. They are very often most diffi- 
 cult and complicated cases. That is under the 7th 
 section. 
 
 37. Baron Dowse. — The 6th is the registration of 
 improvements clause?- — The 6th. It is a divided 
 juisdiction, if I may say so, between the Landed 
 Estates Court and the Civil Bill Court. The land- 
 lord or tenant, : as it may. be, determines upon 
 filing a schedule in the Landed Estates Court, of his 
 improvements, and preliminary to that the matter 
 
 is referred then,- after two months' notice, to the ^p^.^isao. 
 
 chairman, and it becomes what is called technically Thomas De 
 
 a dispute, before him, like any other dispute. But Moleyus, q.c. 
 
 the duty of the chairman is limited. He has merely 
 
 to inquire whether they are improvements suitable to 
 
 the holding, and by whom they were effected. He 
 
 has nothing to do with the cost, and, therefore, when 
 
 he has decided what are the improvements effected 
 
 by eitliev party, and no objection is taken, the decree 
 
 or award that he makes is sent to the Landed Estates 
 
 Court, and is there filed as a record in that court. 
 
 The question has to be determined afterwards, at the 
 
 determination of the tenancy, what amount should be 
 
 granted in respect of these improvements. It is merely 
 
 prima facia evidence that the improvements were 
 
 effected by the person whom the decree states to have 
 
 effected them. 
 
 38. Chaikman. — In your opinion this clause is 
 satisfactory 1 — I think so. I had one case that took 
 a great deal of time, from ten o'clock in the morning 
 to six o'clock in the evening. An appeal was taken, 
 and I think it took two days before the going Judge 
 of Assize, but it was finally settled. Of course I 
 went to the land, there were such a number of 
 improvements claimed — fifty or sixty of them. 
 
 39. Then, clause 7 relates to compensation in re- 
 spect of payment to the incoming tenant, had you any 
 cases of that description before you ? — I don't think I 
 had any. It is where the tenant has paid, with the 
 knowledge express or implied of the landlord, a 
 sum of money, or money's worth, to the incoming- 
 tenant. 
 
 40. Then, you have no particular observation to- 
 make upon that clause? — I have not. I think it 
 has been included in a claim before me, now that I 
 recollect, but they did not insist upon it. Generally, 
 it is merely an alternative to section 3 for disturb- 
 ance. Though it was introduced into the claim, yet 
 it was not proceeded with, inasmuch as the disturb- 
 ance clause was the one they went on. 
 
 41. Then, section 9 is as to limitations as to dis- 
 turbance in holding, relating to ejectment for non- 
 payment cif rent, or for breach of conditions ? — Yes ; 
 that is a clause limiting disturbance, and excluding 
 the particular cases mentioned there — <;ases of eject- 
 ment for non-payment of rent, breach of conditions, 
 assigning, or subletting. 
 
 42. Afterwards there is a clause respecting an ex- 
 orbitant rent ; have you had any case arising before 
 you of the kind in which there was a claim made for 
 disturbance, although on ejectment for non-payment 
 of rent ?— That is where the rent does not exceed £15, 
 and where the Chairman thinks that the non-payment 
 of rent was caused by its being exorbitant. I am not 
 aware that I have had any case of the kind. Certainly 
 I have not acted upon it, for it has never been brought 
 before me. 
 
 43. Now, the clause we have been just reading 
 says, with the " express or implied consent of the 
 lancllord ;" when you come to the 1 1th clause, it 
 says : — 
 
 "For the purposes of this Act, the tenant shall be deemed 
 to.have derived his holding from the preceding tenant if 
 he has paid to such preceding tenant any mone_y, or given 
 to him any moneys' -worth in respect of liis holding, or has 
 taken such holding by assignment, or the operation of law 
 from the preceding tenant, or where a succession of tenants 
 have derived title each from the other, and the earlier in 
 such succession shall be deemed to be the predecessor of the 
 latter, and the latter in succession shall be deemed to be 
 the successor of the earlier." 
 
 Tnat does not mention " with or without the consent 
 of the landlord"? — I take it, not having the Act before 
 me, that the 7th section uses those words for the pur- 
 pose of fixing the landlord with a possible claim for 
 the amount so paid. The 11th section, I think 
 is confined to what I may call the inheritance of the 
 improvements, as between the tenants themselves I 
 
 B2 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1880. 
 
 Thomas De 
 Moleyns, q.c. 
 
 tliink that is the meaning of it — who should be 
 successor to the improvements, because the tenant may 
 claim not only for his own improvements but for all 
 those that his predecessors in title have effected. 
 
 44. Then, in that case, any person, a stranger, giving 
 a man a sum of money for a holdiug would, without 
 the landlord's knov/ledge, become entitled to compen- 
 sation for the improvements 1 — I take it to be so. The 
 improvements remain, that is always subject to the 
 question of the tenancy not having been determined. 
 If the tenancy is continuous, the chain of title then 
 goes from man to man as predecessor and successor, 
 and, within the limits of the Act, the person who 
 comes in is entitled to these improvements which 
 remain in the land and from which the landlord is 
 supposed to have benefited, no matter by whom they 
 were eiieoted, whether by the purchaser or by his 
 vendor. 
 
 45. His penalty would be the loss of his disturbance 
 money, but he would get his improvements? — He 
 would get his improvements, and subject to certain 
 limitations — disturbance money- 
 
 46. Just a question as to the exemption of certain 
 lands in clause 15, I don't know whether there is any- 
 thing in the other clauses that you would notice in the 
 first instance 1 — I think they are generally under- 
 stood. They have been acted on now for a numljer 
 of years. The 15th clause relates to the exemption 
 of certain lands, demesne lands, townparks, and pasture 
 lands. 
 
 47. The qiiestion 1 wanted to ask you is what mean- 
 ing you have given to the terms " demesne lands " and 
 townparks? — Cases have arisen before me, both 
 as to demesne lands and as to townparks. They liave 
 been the subject of several decisions, and I think they 
 are pretty well understood. As to townparks they 
 must be not only fields adjoining a town, but they 
 must also bear an increased value by reason of their 
 being so adjoining, and be used by persons resident 
 within the town for that purpose. I think that is 
 the interpretation generally given. 
 
 48. Baron Dowse. — The meaning of it is not left 
 open to doubt? — Ko. With regard to demesne 
 lands that question has been also decided in two or three 
 cases upon appeal by the judges. The question, I 
 think, generally speaking may be said to be this, 
 Avhether they have always maintained their character 
 of pure demesne, or whether the landlord has been in 
 the habit of letting them for the purpose of grazing. 
 If ho has been doing so for a continuous number of 
 years they may be probably said then to have lost 
 their character of demesne lands, and to come within 
 the general description ; but there again the question 
 wonkl be one of fact ; the words could hardly have 
 been, it appears to me, plainer than they are. 
 
 4D. CliAiMiAN.— Has there been a general interpre- 
 tation throughout Ireland on that subject? — No; I 
 think not. From time to time questions have 
 arisen both as to townparks and demesne lands, and 
 they have been decided on appeal, by the judges. 
 So far as they have been decided of course there 
 is an end to the question, and all that has to be 
 done is to conform to the decisions. In fact the law 
 is settled, and the facts of each case are alone 
 to be considered. For instance, with regard to de- 
 mesne lands, the question \'.'ould be what has been the 
 habit of the proprietor in letting them. If he has only 
 let them for one year you could hardly say then that 
 demesne land would lose its character, but if he let 
 them from year to year for a number of years, it might 
 probably be considered otherwise. I had a case in 
 Kilkenny of that sort before me where I held that 
 the lands had lost their character as demesne lands, 
 and an appeal was taken before the judfe. 
 
 50. Then the distance from the town must be of 
 course a matter for the judge?— The distance from 
 the town relates only to townparks, but demesne 
 lands is a different question. There are several 
 decisions reported upon both these subjects. 
 
 51. Baron Dowse. — The law upon that subject 
 stated here in Nolan and Kane, page 206 (yaofec!)!. 
 You cannot keep up the character of demesne lands 
 they are let for forty or fifty years as common lettin 
 land. 
 
 52. It is altogether a question of fact? — Exactly 
 
 53. Chairman. — Let me ask you with respect t 
 section 18, that is a very large power indeed ?— It is , 
 very large power. It is always an unpleasant thinoti 
 substitute what I may call discretion for law bu 
 under the particular circumstances it is a choice o: 
 evils to intrust it to persons who, at all events an 
 supposed to do their best conscientiously. 
 
 54. Have you found it, upon the whole, a great 
 assistance in the working of the Act ? — I think so, 
 It is always to be recollected that our discretion— 
 I speak for the body — is subject to review by the 
 highest authority — the Judges of Assize and the 
 Judges of the Court for Land Cases Reserved. 
 
 55. Baron Dowse. — You stated I think, Mr, De 
 Moleyns, that you had had fifteen or sixteen cases 
 before you, speaking generally ; is yours a first-class 
 county ? — A first-class county, but it is to be merged, 
 I may say, with another county on my resignation or 
 death. 
 
 56. Yours is a first-class cotmty at all events k 
 It is. 
 
 57. Have you any idea, from your position as 
 County Court Judge, whether there were many cases 
 settled out ot Court that never came before yon it 
 
 "all? — Eeally I cannot say, but if I were eilfel 
 upon to say I should think not. I should certainly 
 know all the cases that were entered or listed, 
 because they must be served a month before tLe land 
 day. 
 
 58. I do not refer to a case that comes into Court, 
 or cases settled after they came into Court; but, 
 suppose a landlord wants to evict a tenant, it is quite 
 possible for them to agree between themselves as to 
 the amount of disturbance without coming into Court 
 at all ? — Certaialy. 
 
 59. Independently of what you see as a Judge, 
 have you any idea whether there have been cases 
 settled that never came into Court at all?— That 1 
 cannot say. 
 
 60. You are aware that the Land Act contem- 
 plates legalizing customs that are essentially the same 
 as the Ulster tenant-right custom no matter in what 
 part of the country they may prevail ; I understood 
 you to tell the Earl of Bessborough that you are not 
 aware within your jurisdiction of any estates on 
 which such a custom exists ? — I hever heard of any- 
 thing of the sort ; that is assuming that there is 3 
 right to the tenant to sell to a bona fide purchaser at 
 the existing rent or at such reasonable increase ol 
 rent as the circumstances may warrant, giving a 
 reasonable veto to the landlord as to the character anil 
 solvency of the tenant. 
 
 61. That is an exact definition of _ the Ulster 
 tenant-right custom, no doubt about it?— That is 
 what strikes me as its meaning. 
 
 62. Then you are not aware of any such custom m 
 Kilkenny?— I am not aAvare of any there that you 
 could call a compulsory usage. . 
 
 63. A usage prevailing to such an extent that tlie 
 law legalizes it afterwards ?— No, I am not aware ol 
 any. ., 
 
 64. This is a question that you need not answer i 
 you do not like, but it strikes me as one that ' 
 would be well to have your opinion on ; do you thuUj 
 it an advantage or otherwise to have different Ian 
 laws prevailing in different pai-ts of Ireland?— vVcii, 
 I should say not, assuming that you could get, as aj 
 as human institutions will aUow, a perfect WW 
 law, I will not say, satisfactory — for that is 
 possible— but that would be not unsatisfactory « 
 both parties. It would be naturally an advantage J 
 have a general law throughout the country- ^ . ' 
 1 will add further, have I ever been able to ascertain 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 — now I am speaking individually — that there is 
 any great advantage on the part of the landlord — and 
 I am a landlord to some extent myself — in refusing 
 leases to tenants or relying upon yearly tenancies I 
 think the system of yearly tenancy is open to serious 
 drawbacks as regards the landlord. At an early 
 period of my life I gave, of my own accord, very long 
 leases to my tenants, looking only to get fair rents, 
 and I never had reason to regret it since, even 
 during the famine years. I am now speaking only 
 personally, and perhaps it may be egotistical on my 
 part, but I have a very strong opinion of the impolicy 
 of tenancies from year to year. 
 
 65. I have seen it somewhere stated that this 
 Land Act has been a failure ; is that your opinion 1 
 — My opinion is that it is not a failure. Allow 
 me to state why 1 think so. I think a very fair 
 testimony to bear to the efficiency of the Act is 
 the small number of cases that have arisen in a 
 county like Kilkenny. Either it must speak favourably 
 for the landlords who have e^dcted in so few cases 
 causelessly, or the Act must have operated as what I 
 have termed a silent discouragement, which I. think 
 is most beneficial. 
 
 66. Chairsian. — It also speaks well for the tenants ] 
 — Let me add, for the tenants also. 
 
 67. Earon DowSE. — Then it is your opinion that 
 the eftect of the Act has been to discourage evictions 1 
 — I should say so, from the small number of cases 
 tliat came before me. I can only judge from the few 
 claims that have been made for disturbance. 
 
 C8. Are you able to state, according to your judg- 
 ment, whether or not there have been any increases of 
 rent of late years in Kilkenny 1 — In some cases — not 
 lately — that came before me some years back, 
 ejectments were brought, I believe, principally, for 
 an increase of rent. In all these cases, I endeavoured, 
 as far as I could — this was before the late state of 
 things had aiiseu — to settle matters between landlord 
 and tenant, to prevent evictions ; and in almost all 
 cases, I succeeded. I found all the parties reasonable. 
 Probably there was a small increase of a few pounds 
 upon a substantial rent — not, as I considered, 
 unfair. 
 
 69. We all know here, but perhaps it may not be 
 so well known elsewhere, that Kilkenny, with the 
 exception of some collieries, and some small matters, 
 is not what is called a manufacturing county 1^ 
 No. 
 
 70. It is agricultural as much as any other county 
 in Ireland? — I might say so. 
 
 70a. To what do you attribute the small number of 
 land cases you have had before you in Kilkenny 1 is 
 there anything in the nature of Kilkenny itself that 
 would account for it ? — It may be a very unpopular 
 doctrine with some parties, but I attribute it to what 
 I believe to be the good relations that exist between 
 landlord and tenant in Kilkenny. I have borne 
 testimony to it often from the bench, and I am very 
 glad to bear testimony to it here now. I don't know 
 what other testimony I cou.ld bear, or other answer 
 give. 
 
 71. You need not answer this if you don't like ; 
 but do you think the character of the county-court 
 judge has had anything to do with it? —No. I can 
 answer that immediately. Decidedly not. 
 
 72. With regard to the character of Kilkenny in 
 respect of crime, 1 wisii this to appear on the notes as 
 it will show the capacity in which you act. As 
 County Court Judge, you officiate in the Civil Bill 
 Court, and deal with the land i-ases 1 — Yes. 
 
 73. And as Chairman of Quarter Sessions you are 
 a Criminal Judged— Yes. 
 
 74. And deal with the criminal cases bi'ought before 
 you in the same way as a Judge of Assize in the 
 Criminal Court, except where particular cases arise 3 — 
 Yes. 
 
 75. Therefore you have experience of the criminal Sept: i, isso. 
 as well as the civil side — in fact I may say experience Tijo^TTDe 
 in every possible way ? — ^I should say so. Moleyns, q.c. 
 
 76. And you also have the licenses? — Yes. 
 
 77. Therefore there is no person in a better position 
 to form an opinion of the county judicially than j'ou 
 are. Am I right in saying Kilkenny is not a coiinty 
 in which there is much of what you would call agrarian 
 crime ?— I don't think there is any agrarian crime. 
 Speaking from my experience of ten years, I don't 
 think there is any agrarian crime. 
 
 78. Chaikman. — This last was in the county Kil- 
 kenny ? — It was, but it happened I think in connexion 
 with Wexford ; and was not connected with anything 
 in the county Kilkenny. The principal cases in Kil- 
 kenny are assaults. 
 
 79. Baron Dowse. — And there used to be some 
 ecclesiastical cases ? — There used — assaults arising 
 often out of disputes about land, but I don't call these 
 agrarian. Agrarian casos I consider to be cases arising 
 out of the relations of landlord and tenant. 
 
 80. With respect to these cases that have been 
 before j'ou, are you aware whether there were appeals 
 in any of them ? — I think there were appeals in four 
 or five perhaps. 
 
 81. I have heard it said I don't know whether it is 
 true or not, that the effect was to leave matters much 
 as they were? — It is not for me to say. 
 
 82. But as a matter of fact ? — As a matter of fact 
 it is so. I am not aware that there has been any 
 reversal, speaking from memory. 
 
 83. You say you have gone out yourself occasionally 
 to see the land where there has been contradictory 
 evidence ? — When a case is listed, I inqiiire how far 
 the land is from Kilkenny, and I then as far as 
 possible make arrangements with the Clerk of the 
 Peace, to go out before and inspect the place. 
 
 84. Would it be any advantage to the County Court 
 Judge generally, to be able to depute some pevson to 
 investigate matters of fact of that kind, and to report 
 to the Judge upon them ? — I am not certain as to that ; 
 practically speaking, you delegate then your jurisdic- 
 tion to another person. 
 
 8-j. In the Act as originally introduced, there were 
 assessors, do you consider it any advantage or the 
 contrary that being struck out of the bill ? — I should 
 not wish it to be introduced • again, as far as my 
 experience goes. 
 
 86. You would rather have the matter decided by 
 you upon the evidence before yourself in court, and as 
 far as possible to make yourself a view jury so to 
 speak ? — Yes, and I think generally speaking the 
 country people themselves would be better pleased to 
 have the old familiar person entrusted with the case. 
 
 87. With respect to these townparks, the result of 
 your answers to Lord Bessborough is that you know 
 of no practical difficulty arising as to the definition of 
 townparks. You do not tLink it could be bettered at 
 all by any clause in the Act of Parliament 1 — No I 
 don't think it could having regard to the decisions made 
 on the subject ; I think too many limitations as to the 
 meanings of a term often lead to contradictory 
 decisions. 
 
 88. And you think there would be great difficulty 
 in putting any other definition on waste lands other 
 than waste lands ? — I think so, but at the same time 
 I should be glad to receive any good definition to be 
 given by those familiar with agricultural matters. 
 
 89. Don't you think if any definition was put in the 
 natural effect would be to limit the words? — I think 
 so. 
 
 90. It could not be to extend the application of 
 them? — No, unless there was a mandatory condition, 
 it should be compulsory. 
 
 91. If the Act is complicated, isn't the subject a 
 complicated and very difficult one ? — Very, and I think 
 it is astonishing if I might be allowed to say it, that it 
 has worked so well. 
 
6 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1880. 
 
 Thomas De 
 Moleyns, Q.c. 
 
 92. And jou know tlie difficulty there is — the very 
 great difficulty, in passing an Act of Parliament— 
 everybody putting in things here and there, it is 
 difficult to get them iuto shape 1 — As long as it keeps 
 its present shape — substituting for the permanent 
 holding of the land damages for being evicted from- it, 
 I am not aware that any Act in the main could be 
 better than the governing Act on the subject. Of 
 course that does not meet the views of those who 
 wish to remaia permanently in occupation of tlio 
 land. That is my opinion taking fair views as far as 
 I can between both parties. - 
 
 93. Are you aware, or have any cases come before 
 you where you found the landlord was endeavouring 
 to get the tenant to bargain himself out of the land 
 Act ?— No. 
 
 9i. To enter into an agreement that he should not 
 claim under the land Act 1 — No, nothing of the sort 
 ever came before me. 
 
 95. As a rule, according to your experience of 
 Kilkenny, who make tlie improvements on the land 
 when they are made — is it the tenant or the landlord 1 
 — The tenant except, perhaps, on particular estates — 
 those of the larger landed proprietors. 
 
 96. But these are conspicuous examples] — Yes. 
 
 97. And isn't it the practice that the tenant makes 
 the improvements ? — Yes ; and especially where land 
 is reclaimed. 
 
 98. That is if anything is done at all in the shape of 
 improvements ? — I wish to add, that I except from that 
 general statement the properties of the large landed 
 proprietors — the Clifton estate, Colonel Tigiie's estate, 
 the Piltown estate, and other similar properties, but 
 I think the general rule would be that the tenant 
 makes the improvements, and even on these to some 
 extent as respects reclamation of land. 
 
 99. There are two leading features in the Land Act, 
 one is compensation for eviction, and the other is 
 allowing the tenant for his improvements within limits ; 
 they are two distinct and different things ? — Quite. 
 
 100. When you say the Land Act has not been a 
 failure, do you apply your observation to both of these 
 features 1 — Yes, generally speaking. 
 
 101. To the whole Act?— I should say so. That 
 is, assuming that those who administer the Act 
 administer it properly and fairly. Of course I need 
 not say that the best Acts may be vitiated by being 
 badly administered. Far be it from me to say any- 
 thing of the sort. I think the Act gives full scope, 
 on this assumption. 
 
 102. Do you think the Land Act has stimulated the 
 making of improvements on the p)art of the tenant 1- — 
 As a matter of fact, I could hardly say, but I think 
 that is tlie tendency. At all events, the small tenant 
 who makes improvements knows perfectly well he has 
 that claim hereafter. 
 
 103. He has a feeling of security that he would not 
 otherwise have 1 — -1 should say so, naturally. 
 
 104. Chairman. — Do you think it has had any ten- 
 dency to deter landlords from contributing towards 
 those improvements 1 — I could hardly say. 
 
 105. Baron Dowse. — It would depend very much 
 on whether each improvement could be ear-marked, so 
 to speak, that the landlord could show what was his 
 own 1 — I think it would be very unwise in landlords in 
 the present state of the law not to take care to specify- 
 in each case his own improvements, and then the 
 registration of improvements applies and perpetuates 
 the discrimination, which will afterwards be made 
 available when the proper time arises. 
 
 106. Do you think there is any improvement in the 
 houses of the tenants from what there was before 
 the Land Act? — I cannot say. There may be; I 
 will not say there is not. I cannot speak with 
 accuracy upon that, except as to one coiispicuous 
 exception, that is Pilltown and its vicinity. ■ I- sit 
 there twice a year, and I must say that is one of those 
 model villages which are hardly to be found in Ire- 
 land, and m very few cases even in England. • 
 
 In that case I suppose the improvements wer 
 y the landlord 1 — I take it to be so for ti,-* 
 
 107. 
 made by tne lancuora i — i taJie it to be so for Vh' 
 reason I exempted from my general statement tl 
 large properties of the county. There maybeothp' 
 exceptions. It is quite impossible the tenants of tt 
 Piltown estate could have brought their holdinos and 
 houses into the state they are in without the contribu 
 tion of the landlord, if not without his exclusive aid 
 
 108. Do you think leases are iiicreasinw ?— I L 
 afraid not. 
 
 109. There are several matters that I would like to 
 ask you about, but they may be trenching upon that 
 part that you say you would not like to give an 
 opinion upon 1 — You understand my ditnculty on tiis 
 subject. 
 
 110. But you said, a short time ago, that you were 
 not partial to tenancies from year to year 1 — Certainlv 
 not. 
 
 111. What objection have you to tenancies from 
 year to year 1 — In the first place, from the tenant's 
 point of view, they are objectionable ; and from tlie 
 landlord's point of view, I don't see what advantaee 
 arises frora them. Any advantage with regar'd to 
 elections, the Ballot Act has put an end to. In the 
 next place, you have the difficulty of the notice to 
 quit, the perpetually changing law, and the perpetnal 
 defeats the landlords are subject to when they do 
 think it necessary to eject a tenant; whereas under a 
 lease you eject without any difficulty, if a tenant acts 
 improperly by breaking his covenants, or doesn't pa^ 
 the rent. I therefore cannot see what advantages 
 tenancy from year to year is for the landlord, exapt, 
 l)ossibly, the idea of being able hereafter to increase 
 the rent. 
 
 112. In that view of the case, looking to the in- 
 crease of rent, do you think that is a weakness aj-isino' 
 froin this tenancy from year to year 1 — I tiiiuk that 
 must be one of the reasons ; I can see no other good 
 reason. 
 
 113. Oire of the intentions of the Land Act was to 
 make evictions difficult 1 — So I take it ; that is, cause- 
 less evictions. 
 
 114. Capricious, as they are sometimes called?— 
 Yes. 
 
 115. Do you think it would be an advantage or 
 otherwise to jjrevent them at all, except in cases of 
 non-payment of rent — if the landlord gets his rent, 
 what more does he want? — Personally speaking, I 
 may say that I have always felt that, provided you 
 get your rent punctually, the landlord should be satis- 
 fied with it ; but it is rather, j)erhaps too much to 
 say there ought to be no evictions, because circum- 
 stances may arise rendering evictions necessary. 
 
 116. That is in exceptional cases ; but, as a general 
 rule, if the landlord gets his rent, clon't you think he 
 should be satisfied 1 — As a general rule, certainly. 
 
 1 ] 7. There may be cases where the tenant will sub- 
 divide contrary to the wish of the landlord ; there 
 may be cases where the tenant will sublet contrary to 
 the wishes of the landlord ; or there may be cases 
 where the tenant uses bad husbandry, or is a noto- 
 rious evil liver, and a bad example to the wholo 
 neighbourhood ; but if he is an industrious tenant, 
 endeavouring to discfiarge all his obligations to the 
 best of his ability, what more does the landlord want 
 than his renti — Assuming these latter conchtionsin 
 the tenant's favour, I would agree with you that he 
 should wish nothing more; but the Act itself poiutedly 
 specifies a great many of the reasons you allege as 
 justifying the landlord, and taking such cases out ot 
 the category of causeless and unreasonable evictions 
 
 118. But are there not cases in which the tenant 
 would rather stay on the land than take any amount 
 of money as compensation 1 — Certainly. These are the 
 cases I i-eferred to ; and, if I were in the tenants 
 place, I should prefer to do so myself. ■ I would rather 
 be allowed to stay on, than to receive the alloted com- 
 pensation. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 119. And practically that, as a general rule, is 
 -what the good landlords do ? — Certainly, as far as my 
 experience goes. 
 
 120. And the landlords on the large estates? I 
 
 should say the landlords on the large estates almost 
 invariably do • I think the object of the Land Act 
 was to compel landlords of a particular class to do by 
 law what landlords of the better class have always 
 done. 
 
 121. And the only question is whether it has gone 
 far enough in that direction or not 1 — -That trenches on 
 the class of opinions which I wish to avoid. 
 
 122. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you tliink, as the law 
 stands at present, the tenant is sufficiently protected 
 against the injustice, we will say, of a grasping land- 
 lord in attempting to confiscate the tenant's improve- 
 ments by raising his rent. I might explain what I 
 mean by saying that it has been very generally 
 alleged by certain parties that this is the weak point 
 in the Act ; that the landlord, by raising the rent, can 
 •confiscate the tenant's improvements ; that is, that he 
 can raise the rent so as to include the value of the 
 improvements, and the tenants are so fond of their 
 land that they would rather submit to this injustice 
 than run the risk of losing the land 1 — It is quite pos- 
 sible that formerly they might have done so, but 
 within the last year or two I shoiild think rarely. 
 
 123. However there is always the possibility that 
 the landlord, by raLsing the rent, may deprive the 
 tenant of the improvements 1 — First of all, he must 
 either compel or induce the tenant, to pay the in- 
 creased rent, or he must proceed by eviction. 
 
 124. Am I not right that if the tenant refuses to 
 pay this increased rent the landlord must proceed by 
 eviction 1 — He must proceed by eviction against a 
 yearly tenant. 
 
 125. And then it comes to be a case of disturbance 
 under clause 3, for which the landlord very properly, 
 I think, would be fined by the County Court Judge, 
 l)y giving compensation to the tenant for disturbance, 
 and also by giving the tenant compensation for those 
 very improvements which the landlord wished to con- 
 fiscate? — And then comes in aid section 18, as to 
 reasonable or unreasonable conduct. 
 
 126. Taking both parts together — the equity sec- 
 tions and the others — this would be one of the cases 
 which, would go to justify the Chairman in giving 
 the full sum as compensation for disturbance, do you 
 think that is sufficient to prevent the landlord so 
 raising the rent 1 — That depends on whether the 
 limit of compensation for disturbance is sufficient, or 
 whether it ought to be extended, whether, in fact, 
 greater discretionary power within larger limits ought 
 to be given to the Chairman. That is that three or 
 four years rental might not be found sufficient even 
 with the improvements to compensate a tenant who 
 may have been a proper tenant for the grasping 
 conduct of the landlord. We are only speaking of 
 imaginary cases. 
 
 127. I quite agree with you ; you could not impose 
 too heavy a penalty in such a case. Do you think the 
 law at present gives the tenant sufficient defence 
 against his landlord? — That involves the question 
 whether the limit for disturbance might not be larger. 
 
 128. There might be many cures? — I think myself, 
 as mj' personal opinion, that the limit might be en- 
 larged to meet such a possible case as you suggest. 
 
 129. Would it not be a better way, perhaps, if the 
 County Court Judge was given power not to grant the 
 eviction, but put the tenant back ? That would en- 
 able the Chairman or County Court Judge to do strict 
 justice according to his views ? — Of course that in- 
 volves the objection that so large a discretion should 
 not be entrusted to to a person in the position of a 
 judge. Assuming that such a case was to arise before 
 me^ if the law was so, I should have no objection to 
 exercise it ; but without giving any opinion whether 
 the law ought to be so or not, I think more justice 
 would be done to the tenant in such a strong case as 
 
 you put by enabling the County Court not to reinstate 
 the tenant, for he is not put out, but to keep the 
 tenant in possession. 
 
 130. Do you not think where the animus or object 
 of the landlord was so apparently bad such a course 
 would be warranted ? — I think it would be warranted 
 if the facts clearly showed what you describe. How- 
 ever, that would be giving a very wide discretion to 
 the Chairman. He has a great deal of discretion 
 already. 
 
 131. In answer to Baron Dowse you said in every 
 case of harshness the tenant would come into court 
 and would not be inclined to patch it up out of court ? 
 — I do not think I stated that exactly. I think, 
 wherever a tenant was put out or was served with a 
 notice to quit, assuming the case to be an unjust or 
 harsh one, he would naturally come into court and 
 claim compensation. I do not think he would submit 
 quietly where he has this remedy : an easy remedy, 
 and rapid. 
 
 132. You said you would be in favour of making 
 the law the same all over Ireland. Would you make 
 leases compulsory, or was it with regard to tenant- 
 right you spoke ? — I think the purport of the question 
 was assuming that something like the Ulster tenant- 
 right was to be applied to the whole of Ireland ; if 
 that was not objectionable, whether it would not be 
 desirable to have uniformity of law extended all over 
 Ireland. It had nothing to do with compulsory 
 leases nor should I suggest such a thing. 
 
 133. Did I understand you to suggest that the 
 Ulster tenant-right should be made compulsory all 
 over Ireland ? — I did not go that length, merely for 
 this reason, that I would not like to take it upon my- 
 self; it would be out of my province. I merely said 
 my personal feeling was that it would be very desirable. 
 
 134. You think it would be desirable ? — In my own 
 person I would not object to it. 
 
 135. Baron Dowse. — You mean as a landlord? — • 
 Yes. 
 
 136. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you think the Ulster 
 tenant-right custom is an unmixed benefit? — I am 
 not familiar with the north under the head of the 
 Ulster tenant-right custom, but taking the ingredients 
 of it to be those I have already stated, which Baron 
 Dowse thinks a correct statement, I think it a fair 
 arrangement between landlord and tenant, reserving 
 to the landlord reasonable vetoes. I do not see why 
 the tenant should not have a right to sell to a solvent 
 tenant of good character. 
 
 137. Don't you think it a rather heavy log round 
 the tenants of the future, who, in order to become 
 tenants of land, cannot do so without paying enormous 
 fines ? — That is a matter between the parties them- 
 selves. 
 
 138. Would it not have that elfoot if tenant-right 
 was extended all over Ireland, the tenants of the 
 future, those who have no land now and wanted to 
 get land would be mulcted in the payment of fines 
 for good-will, and would be deprived of money which 
 should be employed in cultivating their farms 1 — How, 
 practically speaking, has that operated in the north of 
 Ireland. It has been long in iise there, and I do not 
 think it has produced any injurious effects to land- 
 lords or tenants. 
 
 139. But the Ulster custom originated in what is 
 termed the Plantation of Ulster ; it was a different 
 settlement ? — Yes. 
 
 140. In your opinion, do the same circumstances 
 extend similarly to the rest of Ireland 1 — I do not say 
 that. 
 
 141. Baron Dowse.— I do not think it should be 
 taken for granted it originated with the Plantation ? — 
 It is said so. I really would wish this part of my 
 evidence, which I have been more or less drawn into, 
 to be taken with this qualification that I do not con- 
 sider myself a judge. I think there are many persons 
 better qualified to speak than I am of that part of 
 Ireland, and I give my opinion with extreme reluctance. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1880. 
 
 Thomas De 
 Moleyns, Q.c. 
 
8 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 1,1880. 
 
 Thomas De 
 Moleyns, Q.c. 
 
 142. Mr. Kavanagh. — The matter lias been so 
 much talked about that everyone turns their attention 
 to it. If you let me put a supposititious case. Suppose 
 I give a farm to a man to-morrow, with all the im- 
 provements and everj'thing on it, and charge him 
 nothing for it, do you think next day he should have 
 the right to sell what he i)aid nothing for ? — That is a 
 very strong case, and I suppose it is like any other 
 gift yoxi present to a man. If I present a horse to a 
 man he is at liberty to sell it next day to the best 
 advantage he can. 
 
 143. That is if I give him a present of the farm, ' 
 but I only give him the use of it. The honorable 
 member (Mr. Shaw) says it is not a case that occurs, 
 but in my opinion, and I know it, it occurs every day ? 
 — Baron Dowse is very familiar with the north of 
 Ireland. Would not this be the case ; if you purchase 
 up land free ol the Ulster tenant- right, and if 3'ou 
 assume such an extreme case as that you get posses- 
 sion of the land and retain it for some time, and then 
 put in a new tenant with the improvements of the 
 description you mention, whatever the usage may 
 have previously been, would it not thenceforwaixl be 
 at an end ? 
 
 144. Baron Dowse. — And the question is do you 
 put a rent on the tenant to co^'er the improvements] 
 — If the landlord is so generous that he puts no rent 
 on commensurate with the improvements, he can 
 hardly blame any but himself, if he is what most 
 people are occasionally v/ronged. Tenancies from year 
 to year have existed for centuries, descending from 
 father to son. 
 
 145. Mr. Kavaij-agh. — Now, upon anothei subject, 
 can there be evictions not at the suit of the land- 
 lord 1 — Yes. The tenant himself may upder par- 
 ticular circumstances, or any person claiming under 
 the tenant, may bring an ejectment against any other 
 person who has got into possession. That is supposing 
 the tenant dies and a person who has no legal right 
 gets into possession, the executor or administrator 
 may bring an ejectment to recover possession, and 
 nothing the landlord can do gets rid of the tenancy 
 until he brings an ejectmeiLt or execiites an Jiahere. 
 The tenancy from j^ear to year is just as much a term 
 as a regular lease. 
 
 146. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose you may consider your 
 county as a model county in some respects, the land- 
 lords are especially good and considerate 1 — I have al- 
 ways considered it to be so. 
 
 147. And it is remarkably well farmed by the 
 tenants ? — It is chiefly or to a great extent at least a 
 tillage county, much more tillage than grazing. 
 
 148. The greater part of it owned by large land- 
 owners ? — There are some very large landowners in it. 
 
 149. And I suppose the practice on their estates is 
 really contmuing the tenants from generation to gener- 
 ation ] — Certainly. 
 
 150. And there is very little of raising of rents ? — 
 Certainly, and as to ejectments for non-payment 
 of rent it has struck me how seldom they are brought 
 except where there are very large ari-ears of rent, and 
 I have been informed and I believe the fact to be 
 so, that where decrees are given the tenants are 
 nearly always reinstated. 
 
 151. I think you said there were vei-y few cases of 
 hardship brought before you]— I think I mentioned 
 one or two cases. 
 
 152. These were ejectments on the title I suppose ] 
 — Yes, notices to quit ; one of the cases I allude to 
 was where there was an attempt to increase the rent. 
 I thought the increase unjust, and I gave compensa- 
 tion for disturbance. 
 
 153. That power in the hands of the landlord to 
 evict without cause is a very strong element in pre- 
 venting improvements on the farm and outlay on the 
 buildings]— I suppose it could hardly be otherwise, 
 I think it would operate with any of us. 
 
 154. Of course on those large estates it has settle' 
 down into a custom, and the tenants feel themselv 
 secure ] — I think practically they do ; that is m' 
 experience. ' ^ 
 
 155. But on small estates with new men the fcelin^ 
 is very different? — I think so. " 
 
 156. You said there was nothing in Kilkennv f 
 the Ulster tenant-right custom] — Not to my know 
 ledge. 
 
 157. Is there not a coinmon practice of a/llowiii,r 
 the tenant to sell his interest with the permission of 
 the landlord, taking some sum for the good-will of his 
 holding ] — I cannot say that there is. I think generaJIv 
 speaking — I do not know what the reason is -there 
 is an objection on the part of landlords to allow tenants 
 however good they may be to sell. ' 
 
 158. Then if a tenant wishes to leave what is he to 
 do ; would he have to give up his farm ] — I would not 
 say that ; if there is a good case, the landlords mioht 
 consent, but as a general practice they would object. 
 
 159. And there is no right, nor no general custom 
 like the Ulster custom ] — No. 
 
 160. But the practice is generally allowed where 
 there is a case ? — That I cannot answer from my on 
 knowledge. 
 
 161. Your own property is not in Kilkenny ?— No, 
 
 162. Baron Dowse. —A tenancy from year to year 
 as long as it exists, is as good as a tenancy for a 
 number of years, and may be sold, but generally a 
 man is prevented from buying it by the knowledw 
 that the landlord may turn him out. In Ulster tie 
 custom of men selling their interest is so usual tiat 
 men do it as a matter of course ] — Yes. 
 
 163. Mr. Shaw. — In parts of the south there vas 
 a custom very much the same ; the practice was very 
 common 1 — I am not aware whether it is so or not; 
 I should be sony to say it was a general practice. 
 I have no means of knowing, for I only pay periodic 
 visits. 
 
 164. I thought you were a resident in Kilkenny 1— 
 No, [ think it is very objectionable that tlie County 
 Court Judge should be a resident in the county. 
 
 165. You are distinctly of opinion the scale here is not 
 high enough to compensate the tenant in this conntry, 
 where a man has nothing but the land to look to !— 
 You are putting it rather strongly ; what I said was, 
 I was not certain whether in particular cases the 
 tenant might not very much prefer to be left in his 
 holding, to having even the extreme limit of com- 
 pensation awarded him for disturbance. 
 
 166. It is only in particular cases we are talkiog 
 of ? — Yes, in a few cases. 
 
 107. Then if the County Court Judge had an option, 
 and was not bound to a scale in such cases, but had « 
 general option he could give in such cases, what he 
 would consider fair compensation ] — I think it would 
 be still desirable to have a scale. 
 
 168. What is the advantage of a scale] — I think to 
 substitute discretion for law is as far as possible to be 
 avoided. 
 
 169. In jowr own case you are a judge of land!— I 
 I cannot say that 1 am. 
 
 170. Well, you are a landlord ] — I am happy to say 
 not a large one. 
 
 171. But a great many of the County Court Judges 
 are not at all connected with land, and do you not 
 think it would be an advantage in their cases to have 
 an assessor ] — That is a very moot question. As Baron 
 Dowse says, it was originally brought into the Land 
 Act, but I think the old story was the difficulty by the 
 Treasury as to payment of the assessors, and whether 
 you were to have gentlemen paid by the day or by to 
 job. 
 
 172. Baron Dowse. — There would have been n" 
 objection to assessors if they could have been got for 
 nothing ] — Let me modify my former statement to this 
 extent, also that if you could get competent persons in 
 that position of independence that wouldraisethetnabove 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 all possible impeacliment. I think it would be a 
 considerable assistance to have asse.-sor.s, for they 
 ■would be in the same position as the County Court 
 Judge, acting on their own responsibility, and with 
 no feeling one way or other, biit there was no 
 intention of giving them the powers of the County 
 Court Ju-dge, they were merely to advise upon 
 particvilar points, to act in fact as assessors. 
 
 173. Mr. SiiAW. — Would there be any difiicvilty in 
 this — the landlord selecting a man and the tenant 
 selecting a nian, you hearing these men when they 
 come back from the holding and deciding the case, each 
 of them should of course appoint a man of experience 1 
 — You would then, practically speaking, have what 
 occurs at present for there are skilled witnesses on one 
 side and the other, they go to the place and give their 
 evidence in court afterwards. 
 
 174. Except of course that in that case you have a 
 great many of these witnesses, and you are puzzled 
 between them, the other would be practically an arbi- 
 tration by the judge between the two parties 1 — Well, 
 that I think is the case at present, the witnesses are 
 
 ' heard, and then the judge decides to the best of his 
 judgment between them. 
 
 175. Have there been any cases of arbitration in 
 ' your county under the 25th section 1 — I don't believe 
 
 there has been a single case. 
 
 176. Then when you said the Land Act generally 
 was not a failure you did not refer to the purchase 
 clause? — No. 
 
 177. Your opinion did not extend to that ? — No. 
 
 178. Have there been any cases in your court of- 
 charging orders 1 — No, I do not think there have 
 
 ^ been any charging orders, the bulk of that law is 
 ■^ under the Landed Estates Court, and some part of it 
 '" is given to the Civil Bill Court, but I have no experi- 
 ' ■' ence in reference to it. 
 
 179. In administering the assets in cases where ad- 
 . ministration became necessary by the death of the 
 
 " tenant, have you had any trouble lately 1 — Yes. 
 
 180. Any trouble in arranging about tenancies '? — 
 Tliat is under the equitable jurisdiction, which is only 
 
 -"' coming into operation now. I have had several cases 
 ^- before me. In the administration of assets there is 
 •^ power given to the Chairman to divide or apportion 
 '• as may be equitable. 
 
 "''• 181. In the registration of improvements is there 
 ''any object in coming to the Landed Estates Court 
 -■'except that it is in the clause? — It is in the clause. 
 '' 182. You do not see any other reason? — No, I do 
 '=' not. 
 
 183. Could that not all be done in your Court? — 
 •''' I think so. The only object is to secure evidence 
 -* hereafter, but if after investigation the Chairman 
 -* could have the schedule filed by the Clerk of the 
 -'' Peace, and preserved, it would, I think, have the same 
 
 effect. 
 -i*' 184. Are the improvements generally carried out in 
 .•'^Kilkenny by the tenants — improvements in the way 
 of fencing and draining ? — I have no practical know- 
 ,- led,"e, but I have no doubt that the ordinary im- 
 provements — reclaiming of fields and so on — are done 
 IS' by the tenants. 
 
 185. There is no waste land in the county to any 
 Sifextent ? — No. 
 
 ■'* 186. Chaikman. — Mr. Kavanagh asked you whether 
 '■.the tenant-right ciistom would have a tendency to tie 
 
 '^land up 
 
 ^*i Mr. Kavanagh. — Would it be a fine on the man 
 ' iwho wanted land? 
 
 ill' Chairman. — Would it have a gi-eater tendency_ to 
 tie up land than tenancies under a yearly holding 
 :j^. where the landlord does not allow assignment of the 
 f.,;<holding, and that applies to the general run of tenancies 
 "^in the south?— I think Mr. Kavanagh's object was to 
 '■.(show that the sums to be paid might practically 
 
 ^ 
 
 exhaust the means of the incoming tenant. That is Sept. i^sso. 
 one branch of it. Thomas De 
 
 187. Mr. Shaw. — It does not do so in the north ? — jtoljjns, q.c. 
 That is the answer, I think, I gave to the question. 
 
 before ; that we have had the experience of the north, 
 where it had not Lad that effect. Of coui'se, if the 
 incoming tenant gives a large fine, l:o is to that 
 extent a poorer man, and so far as it goes he is unable 
 to expend capital subsequently in the management 
 of the farm. 
 
 188. Chairman. — Have you from yoxxr knowledge 
 of the people, and particularly from having this juris- 
 diction, known that they do keep money for the 
 pui'pose of settling their farriilies, and giving portions 
 to their daughters who marry to enable them to get 
 farms ? — I think they do, certainly. 
 
 189. That is, they reserve money for the very 
 purpose of what in Ulster is the purchase of tenant- 
 right, and what is here the settlement of their families, 
 either in marriage or giving them money to emigrate ? 
 — A common rule, or at least liot an uncommon rule, is 
 that a considerable sum is paid by the farmer with his 
 daughter on her marriage to the son of some other 
 farmer. That sum is paid over to the father of the 
 son-in-law, and then the son and daughter-in-law 
 usually go to live on the farm of the father-in-law, 
 and there is a rough settlement drawn of a very 
 peculiar nature by which the old people are to be 
 maintained, and get so much allowance of tea and 
 sugar, and so on. The natural consequences ensue. 
 The female portion of the family quarrel ; the mother- 
 in-law and the daughter-in-law fall out, and they enlist 
 the men in their respective feuds, and sometimes I find 
 them on the criminal side of the court, and always 
 on the civil side in processes brought for the recovery 
 of sums of money, and alleged breaches of the settle- 
 ments. 
 
 190. In fact there comes to be something like a 
 jointure settled on the farm although the holding is a 
 yearly tenancy ?^It is usually a personal covenant 
 to pay so much. That, is, the old man gets a certain 
 sum of money and he gives the farm over to his son, 
 and the son then covenants to pay a jointure or allow- 
 ance to his father and mother during their lives, and 
 they are to be kept in the house. 
 
 191. Mr. Shaw. — Is there a deed ? — Always some 
 rough document. 
 
 192. Chairman. — I am speaking of where the 
 actual tenant marries and gets a fortune, is there not 
 a settlement in the same way though the land may be 
 held on yearly tenancy ; the dowry is a charge on the 
 farm ? — Yes. These yearly tenancies are just as much 
 the su.bjects of settlement as any lease could be. 
 
 193. Therefore, in the eyes of the tenant they are 
 a property ? — Certainly, they are. 
 
 194. Is the interest in the holding not treated as 
 part of the assets in a yearly tenancy 1 — Yes, that is 
 for the purpose of administration. A certain value 
 is put upon it for fiscal purposes. At the same 
 time it is extremely difii.ciilt to assess anything like 
 an approximate value of a tenancy that might be put 
 an end to at any moment by notice to quit and eject- 
 ment. 
 
 195. Baron Dowse. — In the north they do it by 
 saying what is the tenant-right worth ? — The same 
 thing is practically attempted to be done in the south 
 by saying what is the "disturbance" worth. 
 
 196. Chairman. — Is the property divided amongst 
 the family on the death of the tenant ? — If there is no 
 will it follows with the rest of the property ; if there 
 is a will it goes in the fii'st instance to the executor, 
 and if there is no will it goes to the administrator, if 
 administration is taken out, and then when the pro- 
 perty is administered it will be distributed according 
 to the statute amongst the family as personal estate. 
 
 197. Suppose there was a case of ejectment for non- 
 payment of rent that value is lost to them ? — Yes. 
 
 198. And those who have gone out first have got 
 their share, and those left behind suffer ? — Yes. 
 
 c 
 
10 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. u isso. 
 
 Thomas De 
 3Io!eyi:s, q.c. 
 
 199. Baron Dowse. — V/ith reference to what Mr. 
 Kavanagli has asked you, I want to put a question. 
 Take Down on one side and Kilkenny on the other. 
 In Down tenant-right exists ; in Kilkenny it does 
 not ; in Down every farm has an owner, and in Kil- 
 kenny every farm has an owner, but a man wants to 
 get a farm in Down who has none ; in Down he 
 proceeds at once by buying the tenant-right of some 
 man, and paying his money for it ; the landlord 
 nearly always assents and the man gets the farm 1 — 
 And you got an enterprising tenant at all events. 
 
 200. Tell me how the man is to get a farm in Kil- 
 kenny if the tenant cannot sell to him 1 — He cannot 
 get a farm on that assumption. 
 
 201. Then it would appear that the custom in the 
 north is the better way? — The only way he could. get- 
 a far:n would be by putting a sort of premium on 
 eviction. 
 
 202. To ,i;o behind-hand to the landlord and per- 
 suade the landlord to turn the men in pos.session out 
 of the farm, and then to let it to the other man at a 
 higher ii-ui'c? — I think that is one of the blots. As 
 long as liind is in the ascendant if I may say so, you 
 will find plenty of eager competitors ; when the land 
 is in a state of depression, of course there will not 
 be the same amount of competition. 
 
 203. Mr. Kavasagh. — Did you ever hear o 
 landlord taking a bribe to put a tenant out 1—1 ^j 
 heard of an instance of it. I have heard it said t 
 where the landlord for other reasons has evicted 
 tenant, the common experience is that there areot 
 persons who will come forward to pay to the landl 
 the sums awarded for disturbance. 
 
 204. Is it not a fact that if the landlord accept 
 sum of money from the incoming tenant to meet ; 
 claim as compensation for disturbance, that establisi 
 the tenant-right custom ?— No ; by one instance \ 
 cannot establish a custom. The law gives the tern 
 a claim for disturbance, but if the incomia" ten- 
 gives to the outgoing tenant a certain sum with t 
 consent of the landlord, the provisions of tlie I 
 section would apply. 
 
 205. Baron Dowse. — I do not think you con 
 establish a custom by one instance on one fan 
 Custom must be established by a number of i 
 stances 1 — Just so. 
 
 206. Mr. Kavanagh. — But in justice suppose 
 bought a farm from you, I would consider mysi 
 badly treated if I did not get back what I gave !— ] 
 justice, yes ; the money should be paid back but tl 
 point is whether once accepting it would pennauentl 
 establish a tenant-right custom. I think not. 
 
 Eobcrt 
 
 Ferguson, Esq., 
 <j.c. 
 
 Egbert Feeguson, Esq., q.c, examined. 
 
 207. Chaie:jai,t, — Jdr. Ferguson, I believe you are 
 the County Court Judge of the southern division of 
 Cork %- Yes, West Riding. 
 
 208. Can you state to us the number of land cases 
 that have been before you 1 — No ; the return can be 
 got, but I could not be accurate as to the number. 
 
 209. Have they been numerous'? — The average 
 would be, I should say, about ten in the session, each 
 session. 
 
 210. Mr. Shaw. — How niany sessions do you have ? 
 — Foiir in the year. 
 
 211. That would be forty each year? — I should say 
 tliat would be it, but I cannot be at all sure, they are 
 so viirying, sometimes no land cases will arise. 
 
 212. Chairman. — An avcm.gc of forty in the year? 
 —1 should think it could be easily ascertained, the 
 record is kept. 
 
 213. J,[r. yiiAw. — That is neo.r the number from 
 what I see in the j lapers occasionally ? — Yes; I think 
 tiiat i ; near the point as fur as I can go. 
 
 214. OiiAiKJiAM. — Can you tell us at all the general 
 natui'e of the cases that came before you, of the greatest 
 nuinlxT of the cases, on what points they arose 1 — The 
 cases 'A'cvo cases of notices to quit. 
 
 215. "Witli claim for ciistu.rbance ? — Notices to quit 
 aiul eiectiTieiitK, with' a view of I'aisinr' rents or ffottingr 
 possession, the landlord getting possjKsion himself, and 
 the land claim v.as then a consequence of- the ejectment 
 being pcisevcred in. If an ejectment v.'as settled 
 tlierc wa.5 no hind claim, if an ejectment ^\•as persevered 
 in the land claim was consequent, alwa3's con- 
 seciucrit on the judgment being given against the 
 tenant in the ejectment case, although to wait for 
 that, under the Act was not essentia], but a land claim 
 was sekl<jui, if ever l)rought until after the decree for 
 possession had been made in the ejectment case. . 
 
 216. Can you say at all the number in v/hioh dis- 
 tiv.biiiie'j money was claimed, and the number only for 
 inqirovoments, you are speaking now of notices to 
 quit? — 1-iotices to quit. In all those cases there was 
 a claiui for compensation for disturbance and also 
 for improvements. 
 
 217. 'vVere those cases generally decided in favour 
 of tlic claim of the tenants fo'r compensation? — The 
 great majciity in favour of the tenant". 
 
 218. Can you specify any particular points that 
 arose before you under the Act, perhaps on looking 
 
 through the clauses you might come to points m 
 vfould wish to call special attention to I — As to Sit 
 efi'ect of the Act, I can state its deficiencies, as to its 
 effect generally I know that it has been most beneficial 
 that it has been productive of very admirable results, 
 that it has deterred to a large extent, tlie landlords 
 from harsh proceedings, and it has prevented to a 
 large extent agrarian outrages. 
 
 219. Consequent on ejectments?— --Consequent ol 
 ej ectments. In fact, it turned the minds of the tenantry 
 to a legal redress for their wrongs instead of leaving 
 them as before to seek their own remedy. As far as 
 my experience has gone it has had a wonderful effect 
 in that direction. 
 
 220. Are you awareof the number of actual eviction 
 which followed those cases, and the compensation ii 
 consequence paid ? — In most cases that came to tk 
 stsige of a claim for compensation, the actual evictioK 
 are not at all in piroportion to the number of claims 
 and lor this reason, it not unfrequently occurred tb 
 p^encling the controversy for compensation a locus « 
 given to me to settle the dispjute between the parties, 
 and prevent the final eviction taking place ; that tit 
 power of giving compensation had frequently a veij 
 admira.ble effect in that line. 
 
 221. That was a Comis outside the Land Act, K 
 an application to you to lajr down a principle tliai 
 would settle the case? — V/hen it came to arranged 
 compromise, the actual eviction had not taken plM^i 
 and the landlord frequently, on fair terms being pro- 
 posed, was better pleased to leave the tenant as te 
 was, and to abandon his decree, and, of couree,* 
 tenant abandoned his compensation. An amica* 
 settlement was very frequently the result of * 
 l)owers possessed by me of giving substantial conpsB; 
 sation for disturbance, and if the powers tliat - 
 had were double what I had, I think it would 1m« 
 been preventive in almost every case. I think, y'-' 
 sufficient power to inflict a penal compensation vm 
 the case was unjust, I could have prevented every j* 
 just eviction; but my powers were short handed al'"" 
 gcther. Of course the compensation for disturbance 
 a penal character to a certain extent, but it ougu' 
 have been double. ■ My power to make it really effect" 
 should ha^-e been double what it is, because in tliecas 
 where men were really anxious to get ^ posses' 
 the compensation for disturbances was insuuicie 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 11 
 
 They were cases wliore the landlord was very much 
 of the class of the tenantry, and was prepared, at any 
 peril, to get up his land for the purpose of possessing 
 it himself, or giving it to some tenant who would 
 pay him more than any compensation I could give, 
 and I have had very strong cases to that effect. One 
 ■of them is worthy of note, but the landlord there was 
 a man of position, a gentleman resident out of the 
 •countr}', and he deliberately brought two evictions of 
 a very distressing character, with a full knowledge 
 that I would give every penny of compensation I 
 could give, but, with the perfect knowledge also that 
 he could get, on the same estate, a larger sum for the 
 tenancy than anything I could give. He put out one 
 man and paid the compensation, receiving a larger 
 sum from another tenant whom he subsequently 
 ejected from another farm, receiving a large tine for 
 this farm also. 
 
 2 2 2. That was two evictions on the same estate? 
 — On the same estate ; by each of which he put into 
 liis pocket a considerable sum, more than I compelled 
 him to pay ; the case is well known, ]\Ir. Shaw knows 
 it. 
 
 22.3. That is the sanie holding evicted twice? — 
 ITo, but two evictions on the same estate. One 
 tenant covetous of the farm of another said to the 
 landlord, " If yon put that man out I will pay you 
 ao much," he put him out, I gave compensation, but 
 he gained considerably by the eviction. When he 
 vv^ent to deal with the man whom he had put out he 
 said to him, " You need not have done that to me, I 
 would have paid you as much perhaps ; besides that 
 man has two farms, the one he has himself is as 
 valuable as the one he has taken from me." " Do 
 you say so," he s:iid, " Would you pay the same 
 for it ] " He agreed to do .so, and proceedings were 
 immediately taken by the landlord to get possession 
 of this iiivxa also. 
 
 224. Baron Dowse. — When you say a penal sum 
 ■do I understand you to mean such a sum as it woiild 
 not be woi'th a landlord's while to pay for the putting 
 the man out] — I do, but of course that power no 
 judge would exercise except in very strong cases. 
 Other cases I could mention where I had not sufficient 
 powers. 
 
 22-3. Chairjiax. — In the statistics we should not 
 leam anything of the cases you have mentioned 1 — 
 They were land cases. 
 
 226. We should not have any report of those cases 
 I suppose 1- — No, the report would be merely the 
 decree, the circumstances of the case, the hard- 
 ships of the case would only appear in the report 
 given in the newspapers of the day. 
 
 227. Mr. Shaw. — There were some cases in the 
 extreme west some years ago, Mr. Ferguson, that 
 you made some -vevj plain remarks about, perhaps 
 you would mention them to the Chairmp.nl — Yes, 
 cases of ejectment. The cases I now mention were 
 ejectments and land claims both, but there were 
 cases of ejectments, capricious eviction, by the 
 o\vners, vdiO were ladies, living out of the countiy, 
 and, of course, were not influenced by the feelings 
 that might exist in the locality, and a whole district 
 was served with notices to quit of a very grievous 
 character. The rent had been raised from lime to 
 time iintil it amounted to a rent that they could not 
 possibly pay, as far as the evidence before ma went, 
 i\nd then notices to quit had been served from time 
 to time, and they submitted each time. At length 
 they resisted, and the cases came befoi'e me. Efforts 
 were made at compromises but ineffectually, and 
 iinally I had to give decrees for possessioji in each 
 case; in fact I allowed all technical difficulties to 
 delay the proceedings in the hope that they might 
 be arranged before they came before the Judge of 
 Appeal, but the tenants had to submit, and I 
 understand that the results have been, that with 
 the fall in the times since occurring, those ten- 
 ants have been swept away altogethei'. I am told 
 that has been the result. Those cases, however, did 
 
 not come to a land claim, they were cases merely of Sept. i, isso. 
 eviction which I had no power over, but, the tenants p^jj^,j,.t 
 having submitted to an increased rent, the cases never ii"er;5uson,Esfi., 
 came to a land claim, except one of them, and that q.c. 
 was settled. 
 
 228. Chairman. — But they claimed for the dis- 
 turbance I suppose ? — They never claimed for dis- 
 turbance. 
 
 229. Mr. Shaw. — Why did they not claim for dis- 
 turbance Mr. Ferguson? — They were j)Oor men, they 
 submitted to an increase of rent being put upon them, 
 remained in possession and struggled to pay, and I 
 believe struggled in vain as far as I could learn. 
 
 230. Chaikman. — Are you aware whether thoy 
 were compensated in any way ? — No way whatever, 
 those were cases outside the Land Act. 
 
 231. Mr. Shaw. — They were all dispossessed I 
 believe? — All except one, one man had th« courage to 
 remain on, he is there still. 
 
 232. Chaikmak. — Then without notice to quit, or 
 if they had notice to quit without coming to court 
 they gave up their holdings 1 — They came to court, 
 but decrees having been pronounced, they 'agreed to 
 pay the advanced rent and remained in possession, 
 and made no claim for disturbance. 
 
 233. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that advanced 
 rent was too high a rent ?— It was too high, a rent as 
 far as I could ascertain, it was a rent I would have 
 abated if I had the power. 
 
 234. Chairman. — Are they stDl in possession? — I 
 am told the times became so bad, they have all dis- 
 appeared except one, I only know it from rumour. 
 
 235. I was going to ask whether you could in any 
 of these cases you have mentioned as being peculiar 
 cases, give us the name of the case? — I have no 
 difficulty, in the case, I thought so hard, the owners 
 were ladies of the name of White, living in England. 
 
 236. And the previous case that you mentioned ? — 
 The landlord was a member of our own profession who 
 has been away for a long time, Mr. 3 olin Deane. 
 
 237. Mr. Shaw.— Near Macroom I think? — Near 
 Macroom. 
 
 238. CiiAiRMAiT. — You have the namesof the tenants 
 as well I suppose ? — The names of the tenants would 
 appear in the Clerk of the Peace's books, there are 
 records in every case preserved, it was a sensational 
 case at the time. 
 
 239. How many years ago were they ? — It is about 
 three years ago. 
 
 240. Have you any more cases of the same nature 
 that you mentioned ? — Ciisos . of that class are rare, 
 they are exceptional, and don't arise as a rule on the 
 lai'ge estates. 
 
 241. Mr. Shaw. — Some of them are proceeded 
 against now in the Superior Courts very much, are 
 they not, don't come before you? — My own opinion 
 is that no ejectments ought to be brought, that is 
 no ejectmciits lor non-payment of rent, ought to be 
 brought in the Superior Courts if it can be avoided, 
 because it deprives the County Judge of all chance of 
 settling between the parties. A very strong insta.ncc 
 of that has occurred within the late Ti-inity Sessions, 
 and the result has been rather unfortunate. In nearly 
 all the cases of ejectment ibr non-payment of rent 
 that came before me during the Trinity Sessions — the 
 last Trinity Sessions — they were not as numerous as 
 I expected, but still they were numerous enough, but 
 in those cases by the limited powers which I had, 
 I was able in every case to arrange between the land- 
 lord and tenant, so as to send them satisfied out of 
 court, and prevent any unpleasant consequences^ 
 There were from three gales to two j'ears due, the 
 tenants when the ejectments were brought had made 
 offers of a portion and promised to pay the remainder 
 of the arrear, when the cases came before me they 
 brought into court in some cases money, in some case 
 returned checpies and post office orders, and what had 
 been revised out of court was accepted in court, and 
 I was able to exercise my powers of giving time, and 
 extending over the entire harvest the payment of 
 
 02 
 
12 
 
 HUSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1880. 
 
 Robert 
 
 Ferguson, Esq., 
 o.c. 
 
 the balance of the arrears due for tne rent, and 
 with this all were satisfied, except, I believe, myself, 
 for I felt it was still hard. In not one single one of 
 them was there a penny of reduction made, and I had 
 no power to make the reduction, I had no power even 
 to refuse costs, at least I considered I had not, and in 
 one case only could I get a consent to remit the costs 
 of the eieotment, that was a peculiar case, it was a case 
 where the children had to go up to the Duchess of 
 Marlborough and get part of the rent, and being sensa- 
 tional, and the children being in court in the dresses 
 they received, there was some exception made. _ In 
 that case the money was paid that was offered, time 
 given for the rest, and the case compromised to the 
 satisfaction of all. 
 
 242. Chairman. — Was that done by your giving 
 a decree and postponing execution 1 — Yes ; but I felt, 
 and do feel, that I should have had the power in that 
 case of ejectment for non-payment of rent of compel- 
 ling by giving compensation for disturbance if they re- 
 fused — that I should have had the power of compelling 
 a reasonable reduction of those arrears, for I feel that 
 even now a good harvest vail be scarcely sufficient to 
 meet the accumulation of the past year coming on it, 
 and if I had discretion I would have made in most of 
 those cases a reasonable remission. In my opinion in 
 cases of ejectment for non-payment of rent we ought 
 to have the power of giving compensation for dis- 
 turbance if fair terms were rejected. That of course 
 would be new legislation and not v.-ithin the terms of 
 the pi-esent Act. 
 
 243. How long have you power to postpone the 
 execution of the decree ?^One year. I think that is 
 the limit, but we never do give that iinless it is a 
 very hard case ; but my power was questioned 
 altogether and argued against by counsel in those cases, 
 and an immediate decree in some of them was sought 
 for. 
 
 244. Baron Dowse. — Whose power? — My power 
 to give a stay in ejectment ciises was questioned and 
 argued against. 
 
 245. But you exercised the power, did you not ? — 
 I exercised tlae power to a reasonable extent. 
 
 246. The O'Coxoa Don. — Were there many cases 
 settled in this way ? — Nearly all the ejectment cases 
 for non-payment of rent. 
 
 247. Mr. SiiAW. — In the last sessions? — I do not 
 now recollect an exception in the last sessions. 
 
 248. The O'Conor Don. — You could not give us 
 the number of them from memory 1 — No ; you can 
 get them from the Clerk of the Peace's books, but I 
 feel that with sufficient power the County Court Judge 
 can do a great deal to prevent them. 
 
 249. CHAIR.1IAX. — As a friendly arbitrator ? — An 
 arbitrator to carry it out would be absolutely essential 
 if any legislation were to be Ijrought in in that line ; 
 the aid of an independent ailjitrator would be essen- 
 tial for the guidance and assistance of the County 
 Court Judge, and with that assistance I do believe he 
 could remedy nearly evei}' case ; in fact I think that 
 with assistance in that way and with ad\-anced legis- 
 lation, on same principle as the Act of 1870, a tenant- 
 right can be effected that would be satisfactory to the 
 tenants and not unjust to the landlords. I can 
 tell you shortly the plan that suggests itself to me by 
 which that can be done. In every case where an 
 ejectment was about to be brought or a claim made 
 for rent and refused by the tenant on the ground that 
 the rent was too high the defence should be admitted 
 of rent being not exorbitant but unfairly high above 
 the value ; and that defence, if entertained by a 
 County Court Judge, would prevent many cases being- 
 brought before him; but to do justice in that case he 
 should have the assistance of an indo]iendent valuator 
 as to what was the fair rent to be .assessed. Then if 
 that fair rent was refused by the landlord, the question 
 woidd arise what was to bo done. If tlie County 
 Court Judge were at li!)erty to dismiss the claim tlia't 
 may be considered as destructive of the ownership 
 
 landlord, and I dare say would be. But if his 
 
 of till 
 
 power were limited then to allowing the claim anl 
 giving the decree, but with the consequence of com 
 pensation for disturbance, I think it would hav 
 the sanre effect and not destroy the ownership for ], 
 may still have his land by paying the penalty of en- 
 forcing too large a rent. That of course would be 
 new legislation ; and it would be better stUl if vaka 
 tors — they should be district valuators — were resorted 
 to by the landlords and tenants in the case of a daim 
 for rent and before action brought it would be better 
 and that the action being brought should be tlie con! 
 sequence of the disagreement between the parties after 
 the case had come before the valuator. If the valuator 
 had failed in settling the disputes as to value and rent 
 then the case to proceed in the usual legal way the 
 County Court Judge having the assistance of the valua- 
 tor and the power of giving compensation for disturb- 
 ance. 
 
 250. Then that would, in fact be, that on a notics 
 to quit the tenant should have the power to call for 
 this valuation ? — The notice to quit would not reqiiin 
 it. I am now speaking strictly of ejectments foi 
 rent. 
 
 2.51. On notice of ejectment for non-payment of 
 rent the tenant would have power to call in i 
 valuator 1 — Yes ; in the first instance. 
 
 252. Then, if the landlord objects to the valuator or 
 declines to accept the valuation made, then it comes 
 before a judge who, in that case, if the landlord sffl 
 declines would have power to give compensation fo 
 disturbance, the same as is now allowed in ceiiam 
 cases of exorbitant rent 1 — Yes ; and in cases of evic- 
 tion for capricious disttrrbance. 
 
 253. Baron Dowse. — In point of fact, your idea 
 would be in cases where rent is unfairly high to bring 
 them within the 3rd clause of the Act? — To bring 
 them within the 3rd clause of the Act. 
 
 254. Subject to the observations you have made as 
 to the scale in that 3rd clause which, in some cases, 
 you think is insufScient ? — It should be increased, 
 giving much larger powers. Then the compensation 
 for improvements clause is also defective. 
 
 255. Then, before you leave clause 3, you thinkthe 
 scale as to its maximum is not high enough? — Not 
 high enough. 
 
 256. In every one of its branches? — In every 
 branch. 
 
 257. Chaihjian. — Then you were going on astothe 
 question of improvements? — As to the question of 
 improvements the Act is more perfect, but still detec- 
 tive. I have felt hampered by the state of the law 
 where new lettings were made between the tenant and 
 the landlord, such as a new lease or a new tenancy 
 created, the result of which was, perhaps, without tlie 
 attention of either party being called to it, the 
 destruction of all his claim for improvements. That 
 should be remedied by an enactment that no new 
 tenancy created between the same parties should 
 destroy the right of the tenant to compensation for his 
 improvements in the absence of an express contract 
 between them to that effect. Very hard cases bare 
 occurred where unconsciously the new tenancy was 
 created, and I have had to refuse compensation for 
 improvements made before the new tenancy. 
 
 258. Baron Dowse. — In point of fact what you 
 mean is that the landlord should, in some way, acquire 
 the improvements as he acquires the tenant-rights- 
 He should acquire it by purchase, or the result of the 
 absence of agreement should be different from its pre- 
 sent legal effect; it should leave the tenant the 
 improvements. 
 
 259. Chairman. — The agreement should provide 
 that the former improvements should be excluded m 
 order to have that effect, or else they should belong tc 
 the tenant ? — Yes, and I have felt, in the last cascS; 
 unable to do justice from that state of the law. 
 
 2G0. Baron Dowse. — In some cases tlie cpipstinr 
 arises as to whether wdicn the notice to quit is scryw 
 and the man is allowed to remain in possession attci 
 expires, there is not a new tenancy ? — Tliiit qiicstior 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 13 
 
 arose, but I did not follow the English decision of 
 Baron Bramwell. In one case it was argued before 
 me, and in the case referred to whether it was right 
 or not I did not follow the decision. Where new 
 leases are made in some of the best regulated estates 
 in the country, the effect is to give up to the landlord 
 improvements to an enormous extent. Thousands of 
 
 ■ pounds I have known given, up that way. 
 
 261. CiTAiRJiAN. — The supposition of the parties at 
 the time being, I suppose, that the claim of the tenant 
 continued 1 — Yes. 
 
 ; 262. I presume, however, that in many cases both 
 
 •the parties are aware of the law and make the new 
 
 bargain accordingly? — No doubt that is so, but I have 
 
 known cases where the parties did not think oi it. 
 
 ; 263. Baron Dowse. — Such a circumstance is much 
 
 more likely to arise in tenancies from year to year 
 
 , than in other cases ! — ]Much more likely. 
 
 " 264. Chairman. — Are there any other special cases 
 
 -, which have come to your knowledge, even where they 
 
 vvere settled afterwards, which in the commencement 
 
 xppeared to you to be cases of hardship'? — Cases of 
 
 'aardship are not numerous considering the extent of 
 
 _~:he county. Instances of that sort rarely occur on 
 
 arge estates ; they are almost always settled out of 
 
 ■" iourt. Large landlords, and their agents, seldom come 
 
 ' -mto court with those cases ; they occur more frequently 
 
 ~ -^ipon the small estates — estates where the landlord 
 
 • s very much of the same class as the tenant. But 
 " shough the cases are rare ; they are sufficiently numerous 
 
 - ;o make the tenantry feel the want of security. 
 
 -- 265. Many of those landlord are, I suppose, persons 
 
 ,vho reside at a distance 1 — Some are ; but the non- 
 
 :;-esident landlords — the great absentee proprietors — 
 
 — ire not the men upon wliose estates those cases most 
 _: _ requently occur. 
 
 i: 266. I did not mean that; I presume many of those 
 
 ^- larsh cases occur upon estates which have been sold 
 
 :^_n small lots and purchased by men carrying on 
 
 . business in the towns, and living at a distance 1 — 
 
 - . ieveral. 
 
 ;Z 266a. Baron Dowse. — Is it not the fact that they 
 
 !. nost frequently occur on estates where a man buys 
 
 "V.-'or the purpose of investment ] — Yes. 
 
 "" 267. They occur more frequently upon such estates 
 han upon the old properties where kindly relations 
 
 " lave for years existed between tenant and landlord ? — 
 Inch more frequently. On the subject of ejectments 
 
 -'■-)r non-payment of rent, I may mention a case which 
 ' ocurred the other day, it was a case that occurred in 
 
 ■ ' ly district, but was brought in the Superior Courts, 
 
 ' nd it led to a very mischievous tenant-right meeting 
 
 '-2. Clonakilty. Mr. Shaw knows of that case. It was 
 
 -pon the estate of Mrs. Hungerford, the tenant was 
 
 -:, 'victed under an ejectment in the Superior Courts. 
 
 • ■/ 268. Mr. Shaw. — Was there a case in Dunmanway 
 ;f the same character? — Yes; and the observation of 
 
 -.;;ne of the speakers at the meeting was that it the case 
 
 -. ;;;ad been brought in the County Court it would have 
 .>een compromised like the others. 
 
 .'r:- 269. In the County Court there is no judgment by 
 
 ;'-,;efault?— There is. 
 
 ,', 270. Baron Dowse. — But even if no defence be 
 
 ' ;xken by the tenant, still the case comes before you in 
 
 ..'.'pen court and is adjudicated upon? — Yes. 
 
 %■ 271. But in the Superior Courts, if there is no 
 .'efence; the matter is disposed of in the office and 
 '. ever comes before the court at all? — That is so. 
 ." 272. In addition to involving more costs ? — Yes. 
 ',, 273. Chairman.— Those two cases which you have 
 ' .lentioned — one near Dunmanway, and the other on 
 
 • be estate of Mrs. Hungerford— were they the only 
 ases of actual eviction for non-payment of rent?— 
 'hose were the only cases. 
 
 J ' 274. All the other cases were withdrawn or settled ? 
 ^-Yes. 
 
 " 275. Baron Dowse. — Those cases of actions for 
 •-'ion-payment of rent are within your ordinary juris- 
 
 ■ liction; they are not land cases at all ? — Yes. 
 
 276. Chairman. — In those cases there is the usual 
 # 
 
 Robert 
 
 Ferguson, Esq., 
 Q.c. 
 
 six months' time for redemption?— Yes, and of course Sept. i, isso. 
 if by any legislative enactment, compensation v/ere to 
 be given lor disturbance in cases of ejectment for non- 
 payment of rent, it would not be just to allow the sum 
 given to be a legal tender to the 'landlord for thu pur- 
 pose of redeeming the property. That should bo care- 
 fully avoided, because it is only upon his being finally 
 put out, and the land given up, that the right to cLiiui 
 compensation shoirld arise. 
 
 277. The cavise for gi^■ing him compensation was 
 his inability to pay the rent i — Yes. 
 
 278. And if he tenders the rent he proves his aljility 
 to pay it? — Yes; but besides that, the compensation 
 he receives may, perhaps, be larger than tlie amount 
 of rent due. Cases of that sort may arise, and it 
 woiild be matter for consideration whether he should 
 be a,llowed, after receiving compensation, to go and 
 tender the rent to the landlord, and require to be 
 restored to possession. It was apprehended that such 
 might be the result of the Disturbance Bill which was 
 brought in during the present session. 
 
 279. Baron Dowse. — But a clause was introduced 
 to guard against it ? — Yes. 
 
 280. Mr. Shaw.— In those two cases of eviction for 
 non-payment of rent that you have mentioned the 
 rents were complained of as excessive? — Yes. 
 
 281. In one case it was 37s. per acre? — Yes. 
 
 282. Chairman. — Do you think there would be any 
 advantage in diminishing the period for redemption, 
 and extending by a corresponding period the time for 
 which the notice of eviction must be given ? — I do not 
 see that any substantial advantage would be gained by 
 that. 
 
 283. Don't you think that by six months' time being 
 given for redemption the bitter feeling is kept up until 
 the period has expired 1 — I think the longer the time 
 given the better is the position of the tenant, for the 
 greater is his chance of being able to effect a settlement. 
 
 284. What appears to me to be the effect of it is 
 that it is like two evictions ; the tenant is first of all 
 put out under the decree, he may or may not be put 
 in as caretaker, but he is not finally evicted until six 
 months after that ? — I should state that, in my exper- 
 ience, redemption is very rare indeed, except by the 
 action of the mortgagee, very rare. I do not think it 
 would be woi'th legislating on. I do not think any 
 advantage would follow from a change. I never knew 
 any inconvenience to aiise in that respect. The usual 
 course is after the decree, if the tenants are put out 
 and the landlord enters .into possession he is bound 
 to account for the proceeds during the six months as 
 part of the sum to be paid for redemption, if the 
 tenant redeems. 
 
 285. Is that not an awkward arrangement ? — Yes, 
 and to avoid it the landlord frequently puts the tenant 
 back as caretaker, and makes him answerable for the 
 produce of the land during the six months. 
 
 286. But during the six months is not there a sort 
 of doubt v/hether he is to be finally put out or not ? — 
 Well, it is a doubt in the tenant's favour. He has all 
 that time to rally his resources. I think the period 
 is long enough, but I certainly would not be the party 
 to shorten it. 
 
 287. The O'Conor Don.— Would it not be better 
 to give him the time before he was evicted than after, 
 and leave him in actual possession of the land until 
 the time he finally leaves it ? — It may be. 
 
 288. Would not you think it advisable that facilities 
 should be given to both the landlord and tenant for 
 leaving the tenant in possession during the six months 
 without endangering the landlord's right to get th? 
 land ? — I think it would be better to leave that to 
 themselves, and not touch it by legislation. 
 
 289. Is not the present six months right of re- 
 demption a troublesome thing both for landlord and 
 tenant ? — It is troublesome ; and it may, perhaps, be 
 better to do what you suggest. 
 
 290. That is, to leave the tenant in occupation till 
 the six months had expired ? — Yes. Under the present 
 
14 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 1, 18S0. 
 
 Robert 
 
 Ferguson, Esq., 
 <j.c. 
 
 law the landlord in many cases v/on't put Lim out 
 until the time has elapsed— he does not wish to put 
 himself in the position of having to account for the 
 proceeds. 
 
 291. Baron DowSE.-T-I generally find that if there 
 is any chance of the tenant paying they don't turn 
 him out, but leave him in for the six months ? — Yes, 
 that is generally done. 
 
 2.92. Chairman. — You mentioned that cases of re- 
 demption are very rare, and that when they occur they 
 are generally the act of a mortgagee ] — Yes. 
 
 293. The" mortgagee stands in the place of the 
 tenant and avails of the tenant's right of redemption? 
 — ^Yes, and if he redeems he sets up the old tenancy. 
 By the redemption he displaces the eviction, and is 
 put in possession in the name of the tenant. 
 
 294. Baron Dowse. — Unless he is a mortgagee by 
 deed, and in that case he is the assignee of the term, 
 and becomes in law the tenant himself? — Yes. 
 
 295. Chairman. — Then on aproperty where the land- 
 lord does not allow assignment he might not accept 
 the mortgagee as his tenant? — Yes, but the mortgagee 
 avoids that by redeeming in the name of the tejiant, 
 but for his own security. 
 
 296. Eeferring to section 4 of the Land Act, do 
 the cases of exception, iii your opinion work well? — I 
 consider the exceptions are too numerous. I think 
 the briefer legislation is upon such subjects the better. 
 For instance the exception of tenants holding under 
 leases made before the passing of the Act is I think 
 unadvisable. I think a tenant holding under a lease 
 made before the Act ought to be in the same position 
 as one who holds under a lease made after the Act. I 
 think the right to compensation for disturbance ought 
 to go further, and that it ought to exist independently 
 of the length of the term — suliject of course to the 
 discretion of the Judge. I do not see why if, at the 
 termination of a thirty-one years' lease compensation 
 is to be given for disturbance, it should not be given 
 at the termination of a lease for a longer period. The 
 same harshness would arise in the one case as in the 
 other. I do not see v/hy the Judge should be deprived 
 of the power of giving compensation in a case requiring 
 it in point of justice. 1 think the limitations and 
 exceptions are too numerous and without sufficient cause. 
 
 297. The reason for excepting the holder under a 
 lease for so long a number of years, was, of course, 
 that it was presumed he would have been sufficiently 
 compensated during his long occupation for any im- 
 provements ho had made 1 — Well, those are theories 
 v/hich I never iind justified in practice. I think the 
 only justice in those cases v^ould be the discretion of 
 the judge. I think these are troublesome limitations 
 and too much in the landlord's interest. 
 
 298. Mr. Kavanagh. — They are intended as a 
 premium for long leases, of course ? — Yes — that the 
 landlord should have an interest in giving long leases 
 in order to pi-event the claim. 
 
 299. Chairman. — What are called the " Equity 
 Clauses" of the Act, are those which you regard ms 
 most V: Juable — giving the Chairman of the Court tlie 
 power to settle cases? — Yes; in my opinion thuso 
 clauses are very valuable, and if our powers to com- 
 pensate were larger, under those sections, we could 
 settle nearly every case that came before us. 
 
 300. Baron Dowse. — It has been said that despot- 
 ism is the best form of government, if you got a good 
 despot ' — Yes. 
 
 301. And discretion is a good thing to be given to 
 a judge, if you are sure he will always exercise it 
 wisely 1 — Well, it is the last thing I would wish to 
 have, but 1 make the observation merely because of 
 the intense difficulty of suggesting any tribunal to 
 settle sucli cases. 
 
 302. You are aware it is the opinion in -some 
 quarters, that the Chairmen liave too much pov/er 
 under the Act ? — Well, it is a power of which they 
 would be glad to be relieved. I dare say the . sugges- 
 tion I made for its extension v^ill give dissatisfaction 
 to my brethren to some extent, though I know very 
 
 well they would willingly undertake any jurisdldir 
 that would settle the difficulties now existing Tl 
 reason I made the suggestion was, that I do not W 
 of any other tribunal which commands to the san 
 extent the confidence of the people, or whose decisioi 
 would be more likely to settle disputes vdthoiit »i 
 curring any odium. It was merely to meet tl 
 difficulty of sriggesting any other tribnual. 1 1^, 
 looked about and considered what other tiibimal wod 
 give satisfaction in the arrangement of those dispute 
 and I do not know of any. 
 
 303. Did you ever turn your attention to the settle 
 ment of this land question without turning. out th 
 tenant at all 1 — Yes. That would be my own view 
 My view would be to give perpetuity of tenure s 
 that the tenant might know that he could not'bi 
 turned out, so long as he did what was just and riglt 
 I fear legislation to that effect would he met bytiii 
 formidable objection, that you were thereby depri™ 
 the 1 andlord of his o wnerslup of the land. The kndlon] 
 is the owner, after all, and if he, having once given tii 
 land out of his possession, is never by any chance to 
 resume it, there is a loss of ownership. He is no loajer 
 the owner of the land. He is the owner of a rent- 
 charge or annuity — possibly better off than he was 
 before— still he is not the owner of the land. Pot 
 myself, I would nevertheless have no diificultjiii 
 doing it, but I am aware the objections to it wouldle 
 very formidable, and I do not suggest it, because I 
 fear it would meet with so much opposition. 
 
 30-1. You think it could never pass into a law!-I4 
 
 305. But independent of the opposition- it wild 
 meet vvutli, would such a law be just, in youropinionV- 
 I think it would be perfectly just. I do not se«Tjiy 
 the man v.dio tills and labours on the soil, wio.se in- 
 dustry and skill makes that soil valuable, and wio is 
 really the person who sustains all other classes o£ 
 society by his labour and his capital should not receive 
 the greatest possible consideration. That principle is 
 perfectly consistent, not, perhai^Sj vath the idea of 
 ownership, but with that of justice to the landlord, 
 and that justice would, I think, be quite as substantial 
 in the shape of a fee-farm rent or an annuity, as 
 giving him the ideal ownership of the land, with oftea 
 disagreeable consequences. 
 
 3l>G. How would you reg-ulate the rent to be paid! 
 — I would i-egulate it very much as it is in the noril 
 of Ireland, as I understand it, except this, thattlie 
 ■valuation in tlic south of Ireland should be made by 
 some one perfectly independent both of the lanijlonl 
 and the tenant. There should be a Government valo* 
 tor vrho, in cases of disp)ute could be appealed to, 
 either by landlord or tenant, and his valuation shojU 
 be the measure of the rent, subject to such rightot 
 appeal as should be given by the Act. Thus, the reii 
 shoTild not be at the discretion of the landlord, but at 
 the discretion of a valuator. The exceptional chtJuii- 
 stances of this country, in my opinion, require legis- 
 lation to that effect, and for this reason, the conipfii- 
 tion for land is so great, that the landlord in very 
 many cases- cannot be just. Few landlords can resist 
 — independent large minded men may do it— but tie 
 great bulk of tlie liuullords of the country canhai-dlj 
 resist the temptation of a high rent being offered bya 
 solvent tenant, although that rent is in truth moit 
 than he can pay, but v/hich he has promised to gm 
 because he has no other mode of existence. IthiM 
 much of the difficulty has arisen from that. Iii*J 
 opinion, if the lands were rented according to a sjst«^ 
 of valuation, the whole cause of the mischief would « 
 removed ; the rent being fixed not by the int«resfe 
 or necessities of either party, but ascertained as w 
 fail' value by a competent and trusted tribunal, w' 
 only difficulty is to get the tribunal, and that certaiiuj 
 is an immense difficulty. 
 
 307. Chairman. — Supposing you did get the tfl 
 bunal, would you fix the rent for any period? — I ^^'"^' 
 fix it either periodically or only when the pa**^ 
 disagree as to the existing rent. 
 
 308. Baron Dowse.— iCJnless tliey disagreed as « 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 15 
 
 tlie existing rent you -wotild take the existing rent 
 and act on it 1 — Quite so. 
 
 309. But suppose tliey did disagree^ and tliat the 
 rent was fixed by the valuator in the way you pro- 
 pose, for how long should the rent continue at that 
 figure 1 Would either party be at liberty to get it 
 revalued at any time, or should it remain unaltered 
 for a certain number of years '] — I think a certain 
 period of years would be necessary. That, of course, 
 would be a matter of detail. I know the opinion of 
 some parties is, that the rent should vary according to 
 the times, but such a regulation, I think, would lead 
 to continual turmoil and dissatisfaction. 
 
 310. If the rent was to remain unaltered for a 
 certain time— say seven, ten, or twenty years — the 
 tenant wou.ld know, what position he was placed in 1 — 
 Yes, and he would take the land for better or worse 
 during that time. 
 
 311. In the case of a rent fixed in that manner, 
 should the tenant be evicted in the event of non-pay- 
 ment of rent? — Certainly. I would not ha^'e the 
 slightest sympathy with a man who did not pay that 
 rent, but under the present system tenants offer rents 
 they cannot pay, and that leads to a great deal of 
 mischief. 
 
 312. Do you know of cases where tenants bargained 
 themselves out of the Land Act ? — There have been 
 several cases. I think bargaining of that description 
 is too readily allowed by modern legislation. It is 
 idle to give protection to a tenant and then leave him 
 at the mercy of a landlord who may require him to con- 
 tract himself oiit of it. Take the case of the county 
 cess, which the recent Act divides between the land- 
 lord and the tenant. In almost every case where a 
 landlord since the passing of that Act comes to deal 
 with a tenant the tenant is got to bargain himseli o^^t 
 of that statute. 
 
 313. Would you make such bargains illegal? — I 
 would' make them illegal on the ground of public 
 policy. 
 
 314. "VVou.ld you make it compulsory that there 
 should be a division of the county cess ? — I would. 
 Where the Legislature have considered it right to 
 divide it there should be no power on the pait of a 
 tenant to bai-gain himself out of it. 
 
 315. As a general rule, who makes the improve- 
 ments in your district — the landlord or the tenant 1 — 
 The invariable rule through Ireland is that the im- 
 provements are made by the tenant. In some cases 
 allowances are made, by good landlords, to assist 
 improvements, but improvements are seldom made 
 Avholly at the expense of the landlord. 
 
 316. Are leases increasing in your pai-t of the 
 country 1 — I think they are, under the very suggestion 
 made by The O'Conor Don — that is, to avoid claims 
 under the Land Act. But leases made in that way 
 become of little value v^hen the times change. 
 
 317. Mr. De Moleyns told u.s to day that he is in 
 the habit in land cases oi going himself personally and 
 viewing the place, whenever practicable 1 — Yes ; we 
 invariably do that whenever we can, and it is most 
 satisfactory. If the j^lace is at all within reach I 
 always do it, because the evidence is generally so con- 
 tradictory that if we depended on it we never could 
 come to a satisfactory conclusion. 
 
 318. You are aware that in the bill as originally 
 framed an assessor was intended 1 — Yes. 
 
 319. Do you consider that it would be of use to 
 have a person v;hom you could yourself appoint for 
 the purpose of giving you practical assistance in those 
 cases 1 — Well, I always meet with such assistance mj^- 
 self. There are always some persons willing and 
 able to assist me, and by the aid they afford, 
 and from the inspection of the place, and from hearing 
 the evidence tendered by the parties, I think we 
 generally arrive at a fair conclusion. At all events I 
 do not think it would be worth while, with our present 
 jui'isdiction, to go to the expense of appointing a paid 
 of&cer for the purpose. Of course he should be a high 
 class of person and well paid. 
 
 320. Did you ever turn your attention to the &jrf. 1,-1880. 
 subject of a peasant proprietary? — I do not think ■^^^^~^ 
 
 it would be a remedy for the existing state of things. Ferguson, Esii^ 
 
 321. Supposing what are called the Bright Clauses q.c. ■'" 
 of the Act were taken up, and that something was 
 
 done on the lines of these clauses, and that men of 
 thrift and possessed of^ means, who vxtc able to 
 provide a portion of the purchase-money themselves, 
 were afToidcd facilities for borrowing the remainder, 
 and that the legal expenses were to a certain extent 
 reduced, might it not in that case, on a small scale, be 
 tried with advantage? — On a small scale I think it 
 would be of immense advantage, but to resort to it as 
 a general remedy I think would be an impossibility. 
 I understand the suggestion to be this, that to a large 
 extent the Government would take up the land from 
 the landlords (many of them I have no doubt would be 
 glad to get rid of it), parcel it out to the tenants, 
 they paying rent in the shape of annuities to the 
 Government. If thrifty industrious persons possessed 
 of some means, were aided to a large extent — say four- 
 fifths of the purchase-money — I think legislation of 
 that character would be of incalculable advantage. 
 In some cases where the tenants were not able to pay 
 even a portion of the advance, the landlords getting 
 fotu--fifths of the value through the tenants v/ould 
 readily agree with them to take the remaining one- 
 fifth by a mortgage of the tenant's interest. I think 
 such a scheme as that would be of immense advantage 
 to landlords of a certain class and to their tenants, and 
 I believe many landlords would avail themselves of it. 
 The difficulty is who is to be the collector and res- 
 ponsible for the rent. 
 
 322. In the case of the tenant paying four-fifths and 
 letting the remaining fifth remain outstanding with 
 the landlord, would you make the landlord liable for 
 the collection of the annuity ? — No ; because he is 
 nterely the owner ol one-fiioh of the property, and it 
 would not be worth his while to undertake the duty 
 01 collecting it for that. 
 
 323. Suppose the tenant has a substantial sum in 
 his hand, and able to pay his share, and obtains a 
 loan of the balance, his own share and the loan 
 constituting the purchase-money, and the loan being 
 repayable by an annuity, and to be paid off at the 
 end of so many years, would you think that a useful 
 thing ? — I think in such cases it would be of great 
 advantage. 
 
 32-1. But 3'ou entertain doubts as to its feasibility 
 for settling the ■'vhole question 1 — Yes. 
 
 325. It would take more than £200,000,000 to 
 purchase all the landlords out? — Yes— it would be 
 an impossibility. 
 
 326. Is the land in West Cork, generally speaking, 
 good land ? — Not good land, generally speaking, but 
 the portions of it that are good are very good. There 
 are many patches of good land, with large tracts not 
 good. 
 
 327. Is there land in the county Cork of such a 
 character that, even if the tenant had it for nothing, 
 he could not live on it? — There are portions of 
 land near the city, also near Eandon, Macroom, and 
 other places, of the very best quality. Nothing 
 could exceed the quality of the land upon portions of 
 the Duke of Devonshire's estate. Lord Bantry's, 
 Lord Bandon's, and many others. But if you go to 
 the Bantry district, and near tlie sea, j'ou will 
 find a large tract of land on v/hioh a tenant 
 could not exist in a bad season even if he had it for 
 nothing. I have seen a large tract near Castletown, 
 thickly inhabited, where the land is of this des- 
 cription, and yet the tenants are most comfortable on 
 it. It surprised me very much, but it is accounted 
 for by the fact that they did not depend on the land. 
 They paid their rents partly by collecting sand and 
 partly by going to England to labour "during tlie 
 harvest season, and some by fishing. Thus "they 
 
 .have several sorts of industry; they "are not wholly 
 dependent on the land. 
 
 '328. In your opinion was much of the distress 
 
16 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1880. 
 
 Robert 
 Ferguson, Esq., 
 
 Q.C. 
 
 in Ireland, wliioli lias brought tlie land question so 
 prominently to the front, in parts of tlie country 
 ■\yliere, if the tenants had the land for nothing, 
 they could not get a living out of it 1 — That is my 
 opinion. 
 
 329. And the distress v^as occasioned by the failure 
 of the cropSj such as they are, and the failure of their 
 other means of subsistence 1 — Yes. 
 
 330. In point of fact any alteration of the land 
 lavs can only be of benefit to those people who, by 
 their thrift and industry, and owing to the quality of 
 their land, can live on the land itself, and for such 
 persons legislation to the effect you propose v/ould 
 be sufficient, and sufficient to meet and satisfy the 
 wants of the country 1 — Yes. 
 
 331. Whatever the law can do the laV should do, 
 but what the law cannot do must be done, if it can be 
 done at all, in some other way? — Yes. In my 
 opinion it would be sufficient if we had a good 
 measure of tenant-right over all Ireland. 
 
 332. The same in all parts of Ireland, and not 
 different in one part of the country from another? — 
 Yes. 
 
 333. I suppose you would prevent tenants from 
 subletting and subdividing? — Decidedly. 
 
 334. You would give no encouragement to bad 
 farming ? — Certainly not. There is a special necessity 
 for preventing subdivision and subletting in the case 
 of a peasant proprietary. If lie were not paying an 
 annuity or something of that sort, he would be at 
 liberty to subdivide as he liked, but when a man has 
 to pay an annuity to the Government, he should be 
 put under i-estrictions for his own benefit. I think 
 good landlordism, and a good measure of tenant-right, 
 will be always more beiieficial than peasant jJroprietor- 
 ship. It occurs to me also that a difficulty might be 
 created in the case of such a proprietorship, if a man 
 wanted to buy a farm, he should have as much money 
 as would purchase the fee-simple, instead of merely 
 having to compensate the outgoing tenant. Peasant 
 proprietorship could never go beyond a limited extent. 
 It should be encouraged as much as possible, but it 
 never could be a remedy for the wants of the country, 
 or go beyond a small limit. 
 
 335. The O'Conob Don. — Is not the value of the 
 outgoing tenant's interest frequently equal to or even 
 greater than the value of the fee? — Yes. 
 
 336. Then would not there be the same dilEculty in 
 acquiring one as the other? — Perhaps so. 
 
 337. Baron Dowse. — What we have to deal with is 
 the condition of the people who are already in possess- 
 ion, not with that of those who are not in possession, 
 but who may be desirous of becoming so in the future ? 
 — Yes, and to deal with them strongly for their own 
 good, to prevent their disposing of their land in a 
 mischievous manner. 
 
 338. Do you think that if the holders of land were 
 given that tenant-right, it would have such an effect 
 upon the whole country, that even the other classes of 
 the population of whom we have been speaking, would 
 more or less participate in the advantage? — Certainly, 
 they would participate in several ways — they would 
 be employed as labourers^ they would receive better 
 wages, for they would have a more solvent peasantry 
 to employ them, and to help them, and to give them 
 assistance in any difficulty which might arise j you 
 would not have the whole country availing itself by 
 pretended distress of the real distress which may exist 
 in portions of it ; it is that evil which we want to 
 meet by legislation — the evil of false claims for relief, 
 false sympathy excited, because of the actual distress 
 in certain localities, and it never can be met until there 
 is legislation of so advanced a character — I would not 
 call it heroic legislation — but it must be legislation of 
 as advanced a character as it will be possible to carry 
 consistently with justice, anything less than that will 
 be no use, but if that can be carried, I think we might 
 look forward to a contented and prosperous country, 
 "-- I believe the tenants are not only well disposed, 
 
 for 
 
 but most anxious to settle down on good terms w'tl 
 their landlords. 
 
 339. Have you ever had any occasion to conside 
 the labourer's question?— The labourer at present is t' 
 a great extent independent of the farmer for he is 
 necessity and he probably is the best paid indiridual 
 in the country just now. A prosperous tenantiTM-il] 
 always employ labour. To deal with the labouring clasi 
 would require different considerations altogether ■ «t 
 present the labourer is better off in many oases tkn 
 
 thesmall tenant-farmer andfarmoreindependeritltlinV 
 the time has not yet arrived when we are called UMn 
 to legislate for the labourer ; I think if the Teat ten- 
 ant question were settled other matters would rigM 
 themselves, or that to legislate for them will be a 
 matter of no great trouble or difficulty. 
 
 340. There is a provision in the Land Act for m- 
 ing them houses to live in and small plots of landf- 
 Yes ; that can be simply provided for, the tenants 
 would do that as a necessity. Every tenant in good 
 circumstances must have his labourers living either in 
 his house or on his land ; their number is generally 
 small because they work with machinery but on the 
 other hand the work is constant. A very beneficial 
 change has taken jDlace in that respect of late years at 
 least where the tenant-farmer is well off, of course 
 where he is himself a pauper the labourers suffer like- 
 wise ; but take the case where the tenant-farmer is 
 well off and prosperous he always keeps his labourers con- 
 stantly employed, if he did not he would not lave 
 them to work for him when he wanted them. Infact 
 the only matter wanted is a good land law, alltlercjl 
 will follow. 
 
 341. You have several large landed proprietors ii 
 Cork, Lord Middleton, the Duke of Devonshire, and 
 Lord Bandon ? — Yes. 
 
 342. You say that cases of hardship are of rare 
 occurrence upon such properties? — Very rare. 
 
 343. Then these men act in the manner in -wlucli 
 you say all landlords should be compelled by law to 
 act towards their tenantry, so that legislation would 
 not affect them in the slightest degree ? — ^Yes, and it is 
 on that account that I am surprised that they are object- 
 ing to it, but they do object strongly to the legislation 
 on sentimental grounds. Some of the best landlords 
 that I know are the men most o]Dposed to any legis- 
 lation of the sort, I know that it is from the feeling 
 that they would prefer doing justice to the tenantry 
 themselves and having the credit of it rather than 
 being compelled by law to do it. 
 
 344. " They are a law unto themselves"?— Yes, 
 their position, means, and character secure their doing 
 justice to the tenant ; but the smaller landlords, many 
 of whom may be and no doubt are just as well disposed 
 to act fairly by their tenants, are unable to do so in 
 consequence of the charges and mortgages which they 
 have to meet upon their properties, and these are the 
 persons who, unfortunately, requu-e to be restrained, 
 not in many cases from the want of good dispositions 
 but from the want of means, as they are unable to 
 act with the same independence. How can a landlord 
 who has to meet annuities and interest on mortgages 
 refuse a high rent when offered to him, even when be 
 knows that it is more than the tenant could afford to 
 pay ; or how can he, even in times of distress, make 
 any abatement? I have known estates where an 
 abatement of one-fourth of the rent during the past 
 year would have required the owners to pay a large 
 sum in addition to the remaining three-fourths in order 
 to pay the charges upon them. 
 
 345. Not only is that the case but it is clear, accord- 
 ing to legal decisions, that the position of the landloi;il 
 who has mortgaged his estates is often such that he is 
 not the landlord at all ; he is powerless, without the 
 consent of the mortgagee, to make an abatement, an 
 
 O O ' • 1 rt rlP 
 
 the mortgagee will often not agree to it because u 
 may be asked then to reduce his interest ? — That is so, 
 and these are the cases where legislation is most * 
 quired; and these estates, unfortunately, are too 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 17 
 
 numerous. I have known cases where the landlords 
 have offered the mortgagees to take up the estates and 
 work them, and take all they could get out of them, 
 but the iJiortgagee refused, and told the landlord, "No, 
 you will have to provide the interest for us." A laud- 
 lord told me that he offered the entire estate to the 
 incumbrancers but they would not take it, and so 
 arrears must accumulate, and the result be perliajjs 
 that the landlord wUl come to the wall. 
 
 346. Mr. Kavanagh. — You say that the large 
 landed proprietors — the Duke of Devonshire, Lord 
 Bandon, and others objected to recent legislation, and 
 you express surprise at it. Do you think it is odd that 
 they should object to have their property virtually 
 taken from them and handed over to the tenants 1 — 
 What I said was, that they object to be compelled to 
 do by law what they are wilHng of themselves to do 
 voluntarily ; they say, " We do not want to be legis- 
 lated for, we have given our tenants no cause of com- 
 plaint." 
 
 347. Baron Dowse. — I did not understand you to 
 name those noblemen as the actual individuals who 
 objected. I understood you to name them as types of 
 the class, for we have no reason to think that the Duke 
 of Devonshire would object to it in the slightest degree 1 
 — Certainly ; I spoke of the class, not of the individuals. 
 What I say is, that these persons oppose legislation not 
 with a view of oppressing the tenants but from a senti- 
 mental grievance, as I regard it ; they object to be 
 compelled to do what they are willing to do volun- 
 tarily. 
 
 348. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you call it mere senti- 
 ment to object to the ownership of your property 
 being taken away from you 1 — ISTo ; I think loss of 
 ownership would be in many cases a grievance, but in 
 the case that I refer to, it is to a large extent a senti- 
 mental grievance, for the landlords never get more 
 than the rent of their lands, so their circumstances 
 would not be altered in the slightest degree ; in fact 
 they would be better off by knowing the amount they 
 would be safe to get ; they could regulate their ex- 
 penses, instead of being left to the chances and risks 
 of a tenant who could pay them in one year, but would 
 leave them deficient in another. 
 
 349. That is looking at the qtiestion from a money 
 point of view merely 1 — Undoubtedly, and beyond the 
 money question I call it simply sentimental. 
 
 350. ]Mi-. SHA^\^ — How long have you been Chair- 
 man of the West Riding of Ci^rk l — Since the year 
 1872. 
 
 331. You therefore have had a long time to study 
 the working of the Land Act? — I have. 
 
 o~)2. The cases of hardship which you have men- 
 tioned, occurred in four different places in the county 1 
 — Yes. 
 
 353. And the occurrence of those cases naturally 
 affected the opinion of the people in that jsart of the 
 country 1 — Very much, one strong case would affect 
 the whole district. 
 
 354. Do you think they have created a feeling of 
 uncertainty and insecurity ? — Yes, there has been a 
 very gi-eat deal of mischief occasioned by these cases. 
 
 355. Has it created a feeling even in the minds of 
 tenants of the best landlords ?— Yes, for they do not 
 know what may occur at any time — a new agent may 
 be appointed, or the death of the owner may put them 
 in the ])o\vev of a person who would act in a similar 
 way, they are liable to it even with the best of land- 
 lords ; a bad agent may do infinite mischief 
 
 356. Do you know much as to the rent of land in 
 the West of Cork 1 — No, the rent does not much come 
 before me, except in cases of land claims, I have no 
 opportunity of knowing it. 
 
 357. Have you any knowledge whether the rents 
 are high in that part of the country?— My opinion is 
 that as a rule where the acreage is English as in Cork, 
 the rent is higlier than where the measurement is by 
 the Irish acre. An acre is an acre, but when you come 
 to pay your rent for fifty acres English, it may look 
 very reasonable, but if this were converted into Irish 
 
 acres, then that I'ent m.-iy look high when you consider Sept. i, laso. 
 that the Irish acio is nearly equal to two English. Robert 
 
 oo8. What is the acreage which generally prevails Ferguson, Esq. 
 m Cork 1 — The English acre in every part of Cork, q.c. 
 but in Limerick and Clare it is by the Irish acre, and 
 the landlords in consequence lose by this considerably, 
 because people don't calculate accurately on the 
 difference in measurement. 
 
 oi'i'J. Do you know whether the practice of selling 
 the good will of farms is pretty general in your district, 
 with the permission of the landlords of course ? — Well, 
 latterly it has not been general, I may almost say it 
 has not occurred at all, because latterly the people have 
 not had money to purchase. 
 
 360. TJjat is during the last two years I suppose ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 361. Before that was it a common thing? — Well, I 
 have no opportunity of knowing how far it existed. 
 
 362. With respect to the purchase of land by tenants, 
 of course 3^011 have heard the suggestion that there 
 should be a Commission appiointed by which the opera- 
 tion should be performed ! — Yes. 
 
 363. In that way thei'e would be a medium for 
 collecting the money from the tenants afterwards ? — 
 Ves ; no doubt that would meet many difficulties, and 
 if it could be carried out the effects of a peasant pro- 
 pi'ietorship would be of immense advantage to the 
 country ; you would create a valuable class of men 
 whose industry would be stimulated by the most 
 powerful motives of interest, and having a permanent 
 stake in the country the creation of such a class would 
 be of incalculable benefit, and wdren I objected to it as 
 a remedy for the present state of things it was only 
 because I was persuaded of the utter impossibility of 
 carrying it out. 
 
 364. You objected to it as I understand as the sole 
 remedy, but as part of the plan for the amelioration of 
 the country you would approve of it? — I would ap- 
 prove of it as part of the plan if it could be carried 
 out ; it would be of advantage, as most of the remedies 
 whicJi have been suggested would be. 
 
 365. You would get rid of those estates, many of 
 which are incumbered to the extent of three-fourths of 
 their value, and also get rid of the evils of entails and 
 settlement? — Yes, whenever it could be done it ought 
 to be done, and I think you would get many landlords 
 who would be quite warding to sell. 
 
 366. Would it be an advantage in your opinion to 
 give them facilities for selling their 23roperties, and 
 getting over the difficulties of entails and settlements ? 
 — The greatest jjossible advantage. The landlords are 
 now in many cases in a most unenviable position, 
 endeavoui'ing to collect their rents from people who 
 cannot pay, and they are deterred from attempting a 
 sale by the apprehension that their estates would not 
 fetch anything like their value, but if they had an 
 opportunity of getting anything near then- value from 
 the Government or otherwise, they would go into the 
 market at once. 
 
 3C7. In your long experience of the tenantry of the 
 county Cork, do you find any difficulty on their part 
 to making a fair and reasonable settlement with their 
 landlords ? — I find them as a rule singularly reasonable ; 
 so long as they could borrow or obtain from any source 
 the means of paying their rents they never objected to 
 p)aythem; never objected until all resources failed, 
 until the banks, the money lenders, and every other 
 source stopped ; as long as they could obtain money 
 from any quarter-, or get the means of payment they 
 did so ; there was not the slightest indisposition to pay 
 their rents, nor is there now amongst the tenantry of 
 Ireland the slightest indisposition in my opinion to 
 pay as a rule. 
 
 368. In point of fact is it not the case, right or 
 wrong, that the tenant from year to year wishes in 
 most cases to live and die on the land ? — He does ; 
 that is the general feeling, and he will pay his rent as 
 long as he can and promises to pay frequently more 
 than he is able, and in that he wants protection. 
 
 369. Are you aware whether any reduction was 
 
IS 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1S80. 
 
 BoUert 
 
 Ferguson, Esq.) 
 <j.c. 
 
 had to give de- 
 
 inade, as a rule, in the rents in the west of your 
 country 1 — No reduction at all ; not even in these 
 extreme cases that came before me ; I 
 crees for the whole rent. 
 
 370. You mentioned, I think, that the labourers 
 were well off in Cork. I take it that refers to 
 labourers in the neighbourhood of towns? — Yes. 
 
 371. You are not acquainted with the country dis- 
 tricts of the county '?^-"VVell, no. 
 
 372. ' You don't know the parts of the country above 
 Dunmanway 1 — I do not. 
 
 373. Are you aware that a labourer there only re- 
 ceives about 3s. per week ? — I am aware that the 
 labourer is paid something very low, something like 
 &d. per day ; wages have been miserably low in that 
 part of the country. 
 
 374. And are- you aware that the suffering there 
 last winter was very great ? — Yes ; the labourer has 
 suffered greatly, but not so much during last winter 
 for to a large extent they were employed on the public 
 works and the landlords were very active and prompt, 
 in getting up works which gave employment so that I 
 don't think there has been exceptional suffering on 
 that account but up to the time that the public works 
 were commenced there was distress. I was told that 
 every labourer in the vicinity of Bantry was in full 
 employment early in Janiiary last. 
 
 375. I gather that your opinion is that the Land 
 Act as it stands does not afford sufficient protection 
 to the tenant ? — I am fully convinced that it does not. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — Are not you also convinced that 
 it has nevertheless done a great deal of good ? — I am 
 convinced that as far as it has gone it has done 
 immense good : it has caused the tenantry to look f(>r 
 legal redress for their wrongs and prevented to a great 
 extent agrarian disturbance. I don't know any Act, 
 in my opinion, which has conferred so much good upon 
 the country as the Land Act has done, but of course 
 it is only natural that its shortcomings should be com- 
 mented upon while its advantages are to a certain 
 extent forgotten. 
 
 376. Mr. Shaw.— Do you know whether the land- 
 lords lay out as much money as they oxight to do in 
 improvements on their land since the passing of the 
 Land Act ? — Well, I know their theory is that they 
 have not the same inducements now to lay out money 
 as they had formerly, but that is, perhaps, more a 
 theory of theirs than anything else, because I find that 
 improving landlords are improving still. They, no 
 doubt, say that since the passing of the Act it is the 
 tenant's interest to improve rather than the landlord's, 
 but I don't think that that theory has had any prac- 
 tical effect. 
 
 377. The O'Conob Don. — Has there been more or 
 less a tendency to increase the rents since the passing 
 of the Land Act ?— I think rents were not increased 
 so much since the passing of the Act as they were 
 since the years 18.53-54, and up to 1870. 
 
 378. Do you think that the Land Act had any ten- 
 dency one way or the other to induce the landlords to 
 raise the rents ?— I don't think it had any effect at all 
 to induce them to raise the rents. 'I think the Act 
 has had the effect of giving the tenant a facility for bor- 
 rowing money. The tenant's interest is looked upon as 
 more secure, and he can get into debt with more facility. 
 
 379. Has the Land Act any tendency to prevent 
 landlords raising their rents ?— I should say that it has 
 a deterring effect. I think it has had a considerable 
 effect in that way. 
 
 380. You said in the commencement of your evidence 
 that many cases of ejectment that came befor 
 
 382. Then you don't think that the Land Act li^ 
 any tendency in that direction to induce landlnr^l. ^ 
 
 consolidate holdings'*— We' 1 '■<- - ^^ 
 
 that it had any such effect. 
 
 Well, it never occurred to^me 
 
 )re you 
 
 cases of 
 were cases in which the landlord wanted to raige the 
 rent or to resume possession of the land— which of 
 these classes of cases would you consider the more 
 numerous LI think the cases in which he wanted to 
 get the land into his own possession. 
 - ^^}: ^^^^'° y°^^ found any cases since the Land Act 
 m winch the landlords were anxious to consolidate 
 iiokangs?— I have had cases of the sort, but it did not 
 occur to me that they proceeded from the Land Act. 
 
 383. Do you, as a rule, give the tenant the maximiin, 
 comi^ensation that can be given under the dii&f^ 
 clauses of the Act 1—1 do. I regard the maximnm! 
 the compensation, subject to be reduced by cii'c 
 stances. If there is notliing to justify an evictioii"if 
 there is no conduct on the part of the tenant to jusg 
 the eviction, I consider myself bound, and in fact I mf 
 liQgly give the maximum, for I don't thuik it is too 
 much. ' - " 
 
 384. And you consider the msLximum prim kek 
 what you are to give unless there are chcnmstanees 
 
 which should induce you to diminish it 1 Ceriaialt ■ 
 
 because the maximum at present is small wlieretlie 
 eviction is capricious and unjustifiable. 
 
 385. You mentioned one or two cases in iphicli 
 landlords turned out tenants and j)aid them tlie com- 
 pensation you awarded, and then got larger sums from 
 other tenants for the same farms ?— Ye.5. 
 
 386. How many instances of that sort have come 
 before you 1 — Not many. 
 
 387. Have there been hdf a do^en ?^l g^oyy jj^ 
 half a dozen or more. I shotild Inention that wlat 
 they got from the other tenants' was a matter of 
 surmise. The cases 1 mentioned just now were cases 
 in which I had mj'self ' an opportunity of knoiviii« 
 what they paid. ■ " 
 
 388. Do you think that was the case in nianjcasss 
 of eviction that came before' youi — Well, tky aB 
 occurred I think for the purpose of putting in tk 
 tenant at an increased rent or to get tie land wbere 
 the landlord was of the same class and wanted it for 
 his own family. 
 
 389. Do you think that in many cases the landlords 
 v/ho so acted got a larger sum from the incoming 
 tenant than you gave as compensation?—! am sure 
 they did in the majority of cases. 
 
 390. CiiAiEMAX. — When you sjaeak of converting j 
 ten.ancy from year to year into a perpetuity that oi 
 course would be taking away the property from tie 
 landlord? — It would take away the ownership. 
 
 391. Would you propose that the landlord shoii 
 receive any compensation for the loss of that property! 
 — Well, I myself would not venture on such legislation 
 because I believe the objection to it would be so gi'eat 
 as to prevent the passing of any Act howcTer 
 beneficial which had that element in it, therefore I , 
 shape uiy evidence with the view of preserving the ' 
 ownership of land in the landlord in every case; I 
 believe it would be impossible to carry any legislatiou 
 which would take it away; though 1 regard it as I 
 said merely as a sentimental grievance I know tki*. 
 will not be the opinion entertained when the matter 
 comes to be considered. I would therefore propose 
 legislation which would preserve the ownership, anil 
 yet substantially give security to the tenant, and I 
 think that can be accomplished by making the attempt 
 on the part of the landlord to deal unjustly so seriously 
 expensive as that very few would venture upon it h 
 I thouglit it would be possible to carry it out I would 
 prefer the other legislation iov I have myself no regard 
 whatever for that sentimental feeling where tie 
 interests of the country and the rights of the tenantry 
 are concerned because I believe that no substantial 
 grievance is suffered where the landlord gets his renf* 
 but has not the power of changing his tenant. Of 
 course if the annuity were not paid the ownership 
 returns; it is an ownership suspended merely while 
 the rent is paid, but I think any attempt to carry such 
 an Act would be hopeless. Tenant-right would be the 
 nearest approach to it, and I think such a tenant-right 
 would satisfy the people.' 
 
 392. But would you"propose that tenant-iigW 
 should be imiform over the country, and not vary in 
 different places, and would you make it compidsoT,- 
 —I would make it compulsory, and the law of the 
 land. I would ascertain the best description of tenant- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 19 
 
 right, and I would make it compulsory all over the 
 land. 
 
 393. You are aware that there are in your district, 
 and all over Ireland, landlords who, by their care and 
 the mode in which they deal with their properties, 
 have improved the condition of their tenants very 
 much 1 — Certainly. ■ 
 
 394. Do you think that these landlords would bo 
 iible to continue the same system in the way of im- 
 provements, if the Ulster Tenant-right were adopted I 
 — ]My opinion is that they could. 
 
 C95. That would be done, I presume, by mutual 
 agreement as to increasing the rent in proportion to 
 the improvement 1 — Yes. 1 think the adoption of the 
 Ulster Tenant-right would have no effect in alienating 
 the landlord from his tenantry ; on the contrar}', I 
 would say it would make the landlord and tenant more 
 united, and improve and consolidate the relationship 
 between them, and make the link of connexion more, 
 binding. It is the discontent of the tenant alienates 
 the landlord. If you once adopt a good system of 
 tenure, satisfactory to the tenants, the landlords will 
 have more satisfaction, more pleasure in their estates, 
 more profit, whether from sale or otherwise, and he 
 will benefit fully to the same extent as the tenant, 
 and, I believe, to a larger extent. 
 
 396. In mentioning the peasant proprietory ques- 
 tion, I understood you to speak against very small 
 holdings 1 — Yes. Very small holdings, I thought, 
 would be soon absorbed ; however, I don't think it 
 would be necessary to limit them by legislation. I 
 think peasant proprietorship should be given to the 
 fullest extent, and I don't think small holders should 
 be discouraged. There is an apprehension that the 
 very small holders would be improvident. That may 
 or mav not be the result ; but I don't think it would 
 
 be fair to proceed on the apprehension that every man Sept. i, isso. 
 who purchased ten or fifteen acres of his holding would j, ^ Z 
 lose it again. I think it would be better to let every Ferguson.Esq., 
 man who wished to purchase his farm, large or small ; q c. 
 they should all receive the same encouragement. 
 
 397. You think that small farmers should be en- 
 couraged to become proprietors ? — Yes. I think that 
 to give them anything that would give the tenant an 
 interest in the country would be of immense value. I 
 
 don't care how small— if it were only a house, it would ■ • 
 
 be of use. 
 
 398. You would let such persons become proprie- 
 tors, and let the members of the family labour for 
 other farmers, and by such means assist in their sup- 
 port t — Yes. 
 
 399. Do you think that there are many labouring 
 men who have means by which they could purchase 
 very small holdings 1 — Yes ; I know that is the case. 
 It did not occur to me until now to mention it ; but 
 there are many. labourers, I am aware, in the country 
 who are industrious, and who could purchase. I know 
 an insta,nce,. in my own district, of a labourer paying 
 £105 for a plot of eight acres. 
 
 400. Mr. Shaw. — That is, for the tenant-right of 
 it 1 — Yes. He paid £105, which he earned as a herds- 
 man on the same estate ; and that, I shoiild say, would, 
 be one of many cases. He gave it for the tenant- 
 right; and, if he could have got the fee, it would, of 
 course, be much more valuable to him. I am sure 
 there are a great many cases in which labourers would 
 be able to purchase small holdings, and I therefore say 
 it would be unsafe to limit the peasant proprietor3^ I 
 would extend it to all holders, large and small, even 
 to the purchaser of one acre. 
 
 [The Commission was adjourned to the follo'v^dug 
 morning.] 
 
20 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 S(^t. 2, 18S0, 
 
 Eight Hon. 
 
 Henry 
 
 Ormsby. 
 
 SECOND DAY— THUESDAY, 2nd SEPTEMBEE, 1880. 
 
 Present:— The Right Hon. the Eael of BessboroUGH, Chairman; Right Hon. Baeon 
 The O'CoNOR Don, Arthur MacMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., William Shaw, Esq,,M.p. ■ 
 
 Right Hon. Henry Ormsby, Judge in the Land Court, examined. 
 
 I believe it is part of your A very generous landlord might perhaps enteitaia 
 
 a case of that kind favourably if he had fiuids int 
 we are not generally in that position. 
 
 414. The very meaning of a receiver being appointed 
 over an estate is, in fact, from the inability of tie 
 inheritor to be able to pay the demands upon it— is not 
 that so ? — Except in minor cases. 
 
 415. Do you require notice of these applications to 
 be served on the inheritor and on the incumbrancers) 
 — Oh, yes, a summons is issued. It is done by a 
 summons, both to the owner and the moumbrancers 
 or a certain class of them, for I might mention that 
 whenever I appoint a receiver I direct the peKon 
 having carriage of the proceedings to inform me 
 who he considers it right should be served with notice 
 in those matters, so as not to have the estate onerated 
 with the expense of serving a great number of persons 
 unnecessarily. These are the persons that are 
 served, and the owner is always served. We endeavom- 
 to have the estate sufficiently represented, botli as to 
 owners and incumbrancers. 
 
 416. Have you any idea of what by the yearwuM 
 represent in round numbers the estates tliat come before 
 you t — I have got a circular or return on the siibjectpie- 
 pared, thinking that you would like to be informed of 
 these things. I have here the number of receivers 
 appointed by the Land Judges during 1879, 62; and 
 then there is a note, " Up to 1st September, 18S0, 
 04." That calls attention to the very great increase 
 that there is in the number of receivers during tbis 
 year. It was 62 for the whole of last year, and up to 
 the 1st of September, 1880, it was 94. 
 
 417. That document is made up to yesterday ? — Yes. 
 
 418. What rental would that represent ?— Then I 
 have to mention, if you will permit me, that there are 
 other receivers appointed by some of the other Judges, 
 because under the Judicature Act all the Judges of 
 the Chancery Division can appoint receivers if they 
 think proper. They have the alternative either to 
 appoint a receiver and to keep the accounting and the 
 whole control of the receiver if they think proper. If 
 they do they must make an order to that effect. 
 They have also the power, which they generally 
 exercise, of sending it on to me, and even if they 
 appoint a receiver themselves — the Vioe-Chancellor 
 more frequently than any of the others appoints a 
 receiver — the matter does not stop with him unless lie 
 makes an order keeping it there. The Lord Chan- 
 cellor has been in the habit in exceptional cases oi 
 appointing a receiver. I call, a case an exceptional 
 one in this sense — that if there has been an agent of 
 an estate for many years, aud the owner of the pro- 
 perty dies, and the minor is made a ward of the 
 court, the Lord Chancellor is very anxious that the 
 estate should be disturbed as little as possible, and 
 does not send the thing for competition before me at 
 all. But that, I think, is the exception. The Maiiter 
 of the Rolls, as far as I know, has never yet appointed 
 a receiver. He seems to consider that the duty 
 should devolve on me, and he has never, I thmlt, 
 appointed a receiver himself. Judge Flanagan, 
 think, always sends them to me. The Vice-Clian- 
 cellor appoints some, but not all. For that reason 
 I thought it necessary to explain we are not able 
 to tell you how many receivers were appointed by 
 the other- Judges of the Chancery Division. Then the 
 next piece of information is — the receivers previously 
 appointed, and still under the Land Judges, are W- 
 We have an increase, but those whom we found there, 
 
 401. Baron Dowse. 
 duty, as Jndge of the Land Court, at the present 
 time, to discharge the busiu2SS that was formerly 
 done by Master Fitzgibbon, with reference to 
 receivers ? — It is, that is, with reference to receivers, 
 but there is other business of his which 1 have not, 
 as to local accounts and other things. 
 
 402. Who does these? — It is done by the Local 
 Government auditor 1 think. 
 
 403. At all events you do nob do iti — No, it is the 
 Local Government Board. 
 
 404. Do you entirely look after the receiver 
 business or does Judge Flanagan do any part of it 1 — 
 ISTo, he does none of it. The enactment of the 
 statute is that, while there are two Land Judges, 
 the junior for the time being shall have that duty, and 
 the other business is distributed accordingly. 
 
 405. But the duty so discharged by you is dis- 
 charged quite distinct and apart from your ordinary 
 duties as Land Judge 1 — Oh, quite distinct. It is, I 
 should say, more as a Judge of the Chancery Divi- 
 sion. 
 
 40G. Have all the receivers that are appointed by 
 the Judges of the Chancery Division, to. pass their 
 accounts before you t — They have before my ex- 
 aminer. 
 
 407. Subject to any question that may arise for 
 yourself? — If any question arises it is referred to me. 
 
 408. Any application that is made for a reduction 
 of rent is made to you, in the first instance? — It 
 is made to me in the first instance, v.'ith the ex- 
 ception of lunacy cases, where the Lord Chancellor 
 disposes of these applications himself, but they are 
 comparatively few ; but in other cases the memorials 
 are addressed to me. Some used to be sent to Lord 
 Chancellor Ball, and his opinion was that, I being a 
 judge, not an officer of the Court, they should not go 
 to him to be sent forward, but that they should be 
 addressed to me, and he frequently sent back memo- 
 rials directing the people to address the memorials to 
 me and not to him. 
 
 409. "^^h-it about minor matters? — I have them 
 and all ordinary causes. 
 
 410. When a receiver is appointed in an ordinary 
 cause or action does the matter come' before you in 
 reference to him? — I have in fact the control of 
 the receivers and the management of the estates. 
 
 411. I observe by the newspapers (for that is really 
 the only means of information I have on the subject) 
 that a great number of applications have been made 
 to you recently for abatements of rent ? — Oh, very 
 many. They were very numerous indeed. 
 
 4i2. And you have entertained a great number of 
 these applications favourably? — I think in a very 
 great majority of cases. In fact, if you allow me to 
 say so, the cases which I did not entertain f ivourably 
 were cases where I thought that, although losses had 
 been sustained by the complaining tenants, they were 
 still well able to pay the rents. I think they have 
 nearly discontinued these applications, because I put 
 it on this gi-ound, that the more I felt constrained to 
 yield to the applications of the poorer tenants for an 
 abatement the less scope there would be for generosity 
 in the case of rich ones. 
 
 413. I observed that in one remarkable case of a 
 gentleman who applied for an abatement, and I 
 believe proved that he had lost by the farm, but had 
 perfectly good means of paying the rent from other 
 sources, you did not entertain that application ? — No. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 21 
 
 and wlio are there still, are enumerated liere. The 
 total nvimber of receivers under the Land Judges 
 at the end of 1879 was 481. That takes in the whole 
 number. Some of the others had ceased to act and 
 others been added, but we have considerably more than 
 we beo'an with. This return then states the number of 
 lettings, which I take it you do not mean to inquire 
 into now ; and the next item is as to the question 
 which Baron Dowse put to me. The gross rental of 
 estates in -charge of receivers when the accounts were 
 passed in 1879 was £438,249. Of course it would be 
 a good deal more this year, for I can tell you that 
 there is a considerable increase since. 
 
 419. Then, am I to take it that, in round numbers. 
 Judge Ormsby, you entertain applications with i-espect 
 to remissions of rent and other things for very nearly 
 half a million per annum 1 — Well, the lunacy cases 
 being deducted, it would not be so much. 
 
 420. At all events, it would be upwards of 
 £400,000 1 — I should think it would be as much as 
 that. 
 
 421. Could you say how many applications you had 
 for abatements of rent within the last twelve months ? 
 —Indeed I covild not do that. But I sit twice a week, 
 and T think I would say, as a general proposition, that 
 I never sit without having some axJplication of the 
 kind. They are continually before me. 
 
 422. Then, the principle you act upon, I suppose, in 
 granting a reduction of rent is after hearing all the 
 parties, when you are satisfied that a party is, in fact, 
 imable to pay and has no other resources 1 — Yes. 
 
 423. Then, you take into consideration whether you 
 ought not to make an abatement 1 — It is right to men- 
 tion what my powers are upon the subject. In minor 
 matters I have complete power to do what I think 
 proper, there being no competent person to take care 
 of it except the court. 
 
 424. You act, in fact, as the landlord would? — As 
 I think a considerate landlord ought to act. The Lord 
 Chancellor does the same in lunatic matters. But in 
 the case of other estates, as where a receiver is ap- 
 pointed in an administration suit, or any case of the 
 kind, the Court has always disclaimed the right to wipe 
 away arrears or make abatements without the consent 
 of the persons interested. It was Sir Maziere Brady 
 who laid down the rule that all the Court could do in 
 such a. case was, that if they thought the owners or 
 the incumbrancers were unreasonable, they would not 
 make their own officer responsible for collecting a 
 greater quantity of rent than ought to be reasonably 
 required ; so that we have in that way some control. 
 But, speaking of that, it is right to mention that I 
 have found the greatest, I will say, generosity on the 
 part of the owners and incumbrancers of estates. I 
 think it was only once or twice I found some difficulty 
 ■with them — scarcely more than that — but, generally 
 speaking, if they saw that I considered that there ought 
 to be an abatement, they said, " We will leave it 
 altogether in the hands of the Court." I have even 
 known instances where the abatement was made 
 actually out of the pocket of a particular incumbrancer, 
 and he said, " Well, I won't object if you' think it 
 ought to be done." But, of course, one puts it to 
 them reasonably that, perhaps after all, it is a matter 
 of prudence. I think we got in a great deal of money 
 by making the abatements. The people were in many 
 places in extreme distress, and I think if we had gone 
 to the harshest measures against them we would not 
 have got so much money. 
 
 425. These estates, I imagine, are in every part of 
 Ireland? — The receivers are appointed everywhere. 
 
 426. Are they more numerous in the south and west 
 of Ireland than in the north and midland counties 1— 
 Well, I should say they are. 
 
 427. Are you able to say whether you have had 
 many applications from the north of Ireland with 
 reference to abatements of rent ?— I had some, biit I 
 think comparatively few. In fact, the Northerns would 
 not make out a case. They could not describe them- 
 
 selves as in a state of destitution, except in one Sept. 2, 1880. 
 
 °°'-i",*/- , Eight"i^ri. 
 
 428. I suppose the county Donegal 1 — The county Henry 
 Donegal. That is rather an exception. Ormsby 
 
 429. I suppose the principal number of applications 
 for abatement came from Munster and Oonnaught 1 — 
 Oh, I should say so ; certainly. 
 
 430. Do you find as a rvile that the rents are reason- 
 able or the contrary, I mean the rent a tenant has 
 undertaken to pay 1 — Well, if you take the only test 
 you can have, and it is hardly a very satisfactory one 
 — that is the tenement valuation — they are certainly 
 sometimes very much in excess of that, but I have 
 often found them pretty close to it, aud even some- 
 times a trifle under it, but as a general rule the rents 
 are certainly higher than the tenement valuation. 
 
 431. The majority of those who make applications 
 to you for abatements, I suppose, base their a]5plioa^ 
 tions on the bad harvests and failure of crops 1 — Three 
 successive bad seasons, and particularly the failure of 
 the last harvest. 
 
 432. Do they make any case as a rule upon the 
 ground that the rent is excessive or too high, indepen- 
 dent bad of seasons t — Tiiey very frequently make that 
 point. They show me the Poor Law valuation and 
 what their own rent is, aud of course it does enter into 
 my consideration if the rent appears to me to be too 
 high. 
 
 433. If it appears too high in comparison with the 
 valuation it is an element iu your decision of course ? — 
 Of course. 
 
 434. Now are these applications more numerous 
 lately than they were, or are they falling off in point 
 of numbers 1 — I think they are fewer lately, but that 
 probably arises from this, that this is not exactly the 
 time for paying rents. 
 
 435. It is May and November, or March and Sep- 
 tember I suppose? — Yes. 
 
 436. I suppose applications to you now for abate- 
 ments, in respect of the March and May rents, would 
 be made about June or July ? — Generally the rule is 
 that Ti^e allow them until the fifth month. 
 
 437. Do you know what the hanging half-year is 1 — - 
 Yes. 
 
 438. They have a term in the north of Ireland — I 
 don't know whether you know it, you know a good 
 deal about the north — or whether it prevails much 
 before you — they call a man an English tenant that 
 pays up to the last gale day 1 — Yes. 
 
 439. He is called an English tenant, but generally 
 speaking, even in the north there is what is commonly 
 called a hanging half-year, the effect of which is, that 
 as soon as one half-year's rent falls due in addition to 
 the hanging gale, the landlord is always in a position 
 to bring an ejectment for a year's arrears? — Oh, yes. 
 
 440. Do you find that many of the tenants that 
 come before you owe this hanging half-year's rent ? — 
 Oh, I find that generally speaking they owe more 
 than a year's rent. 
 
 441. When they make their applications to you? — 
 When my attention is called to them they generally 
 owe more. The receivers cannot bring an ejectment 
 without my permission, and I don't hear of cases with 
 the view of ejectment until there is at least a year's 
 rent due. 
 
 442. Practically then everyone that comes before 
 you for an abatement never comes until there is a 
 year's rent due ? — Unless there is a year's rent due in 
 future, because the harvest may enable them to pay it, 
 I think, generally speaking, these applications come 
 to me when the receiver, according to his duty, is try- 
 ing to get in the rents, these men memorial him and 
 he sends the memorial up to me, or they memorial me 
 directly, with a view to the amount of rent in fact that 
 the receiver is to insist upon or proceed for. 
 
 443. You have told us your experience of the 
 amount of rent with reference to the valuation ; 
 are you able to form any opinion whether rents have 
 been increased de anno in annum for a number of 
 
22 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Sept. 2, 18 SO. 
 
 Eish£ Hon. 
 
 Henry 
 
 Ormsby. 
 
 years, as w]ietlier tliere lias been a substantial in. 
 crease of rents on the estates that came before you 1 
 — In some cases they call my attention to that. 
 The o-\\'ners of an estate say that they have not 
 i-aised the rents for a long time, but there are a great 
 many cases where they have raised them. I must 
 say that where leases made under the Court have 
 been made at high rents it was 'because the times 
 were so very good a few years ago, that there was 
 great competition for land, and people were quite 
 willing to make high offers. 
 
 444. But you would not necessarily when it came 
 before you as a question of competition give it to the 
 highest bidder? You would consider what would be a 
 fair rent in itself, also the capacity of the man to pay 
 it? — I would direct the receiver to take proposals. 
 He sends me in the i^roposals and always gives 
 me a note of his own opinion which : of them he 
 thinks most , desirable, and sometimes it is not the 
 highest. 
 
 4-io. Then there is a discretion exercised as to the 
 person as well as, to the amount of rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 . 446. As far as you are aware has any rent been 
 ever raised capricioxisly by the receivers ? — They have 
 no power to do that. 
 
 447. They must bring it before you ? — Yes. 
 
 448. The receiver must take the rental as he has 
 got it, a.nd if he means to increase the rent on any man 
 he must lay before you a statement that he thinks 
 such and such a man ought to pay an increased rent 
 to induce you to come to the conclusion that an addi- 
 tional rent should be charged? — It is really a thing 
 that scarcely ever occurs. Sometimes when there are 
 proposals for a vacant farm, and the same person pro- 
 poses to take it again, the receiver might say the 
 thing is worth more than he was paying, but thei-e 
 is really no system of raising rents at all. 
 
 449. You never direct the ejectment of a tenant 
 except for non-payment of rent ? — -1 think in a few 
 cases there have been ejectments on the title. 
 
 450. For breaches of covenant or things of that 
 kind ? — No ; the receivers sometimes serve notices to 
 quit without my leave. But there have been no cases 
 befoi'e me at all where a question has arisen as to com- 
 pensation under the Land Act. 
 
 451. That is the point I was coming to? — So that 
 I fancy they are generally settled, but the cases that 
 they generally bring before me are for non-pa3'ment of 
 rent. 
 
 45 i!. In fact if a receiver served a notice to quit so 
 as to constitute a disturbance under the 3rd section, 
 and proceeded with it, he would have to use the name 
 of the inheritor or owner of the legal estate — oouldhedo 
 that without your permission ? — He must ask me for 
 leave to bring an ejectment of any kind. He cannot 
 bring an ejectment without my leave. 
 
 453. If he did and the question of compensation 
 arose ? — It would come before me. 
 
 454. JSTecessarily, because you would have to know 
 somethiirg about the fund out of whicli the coiapensa- 
 tion wovild have to be paid ? — Yes. 
 
 455. You never had a case of the kind? — No. 
 
 45 G. Then you are not able to say anything from 
 your own experience as to the v/orking of that com- 
 jjensation clause ?^I really have not had to deal with 
 it. It is not the practice of the receivers to pro- 
 ceed against a man e?:oept for non-jiayment of rent, 
 and then they bring a great many of the small cases 
 for non-payment of rent in the inferior Courts. 
 
 457. But would they serve notices to quit withoiit 
 your leave 1 Does not that seem to be a power that 
 they ought not to have on their own account without 
 consulting the judge? — They have a right to serve 
 notices to quit, as agents — but there is a prelimi- 
 nary course. They ought not to take any proceeding 
 without bringing the matter before me on a state- 
 ment. 
 
 458. I know, not a proceeding in court, but if a 
 
 receiver serves a notice to quit ? — I take it that tip 
 have sometimes served notice to quit without m 
 leave, but generally speaking, and I have told tliem 
 so, they ought to bring the matter before me Ijefom 
 they attempt to dispossess a man. i. , 
 
 459. Still a notice to quit to a tenant, is a very 
 formidable thing, it might frighten him well, and mak« 
 him do a number of things that you would never-heac 
 of at all ? — I think it is quite possible that anythiBo 
 like a process of law would have, a considerable, efient 
 on a tenant, I dare say it is done with the behef that 
 it would make them bring. in the, rents. 
 
 460. I believe it is the jpractice, as much as possible; 
 in your courts, to have what is called district receivers f 
 —No. That was a plan formerly in use. I have not 
 acted on it. 
 
 461. Then, in fact, you would not .consider tkta 
 man had any better claim, to be -appointed rei ' 
 
 because he was actually the receiver of a neiglibourinj 
 estate ?— I think I would take that into consideration 
 if we found him a satisfactory man already en^affed in 
 the neighbourhood in the same way. -/We would tkink 
 that an advantage. 
 
 462. I think there is sometimes a competitioD 
 before you as to who should be receiver over an estate! 
 — A veiy brisk competition. : i 
 
 463. What per-centage are receivers allowed ?- 
 Pive per cent. 
 
 464. Then it is their interest, of course, to get in 
 the arrears as much as possible? — Clearly. 
 
 465. Sometimes the receivers themselves support 
 the claim of tenants for abatements of rent, don't tier! 
 — I call upon them to give me a report as to the 
 claims. 
 
 466. I think T remember seeing in the news- 
 papers, that you rather discouraged (and if you will 
 allow me to say so I think you were q^uite riglit) 
 the receiver himself making application for abate- 
 ments for tenants, did that ever occur? — Yes; it does, 
 but it is under our rules because we found those 
 claims v.rere becoming so very numerous. We must 
 have some statement about them, and so the Lord 
 Chancellor in lunacy matters, and I in minor matteB 
 and causes, directed the receiver to report upon it and 
 to bring in a statement of the facts, with his 
 opinion upon the case, or upon the series of cases. 
 The receiver sometimes got a memorial himself and 
 then he would bring the matter before me. Thea 
 there is a third case where a single individual writes 
 me a petition, or a letter, or something of the kind. 
 If I think, from the nature of the' case, that it is 
 a fair thing to do, I direct him to make the ap- 
 plication, but in the case of a poor man I gene- 
 rally send the application to the receiver and beg 
 that he wiU look into it and let me know liis 
 opinion. 
 
 407. That saves the poor man the expense of a 
 motion ? — Because, if I said you must make the appli- 
 cation to the court, he probably would not be able to 
 go to the expense of doing so. 
 
 468. To be siu-e ; the expense might be as much as 
 the half-year's rent ? — But if I find a good many of 
 them together, joining in a memorial, I think it is a 
 reasonable thing then to say, you must make your 
 application to the court. 
 
 469. Do you ever get applications at all to sanction 
 a sale or change of tenancy? — Yes, such a thing has 
 been done. 
 
 470. Is it the receiver, generally speaking, tlw' 
 would, bring that matter before you? — I think so; 
 yes, when he is making a statement about other 
 things. 
 
 471. You ask him his opinion, do yon, as to the 
 character of the incoming man and his solvency ^-; 
 Yes. He knows that is part of the information 1 
 require. 
 
 472. As a general rule, if you are satisfied of &^ 
 character and solvency of the incoming man, yon ^^'O"''' 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 23 
 
 proper 
 
 liave no objection to let the tenant transfer his interest 
 to him 1 — No, I don't think T ever made a difficultj' ■ 
 'about it, if I thought the incoming man a 
 person to be the tenant. 
 
 473. Is it any business of yours if the rent is paid 
 to inquire how much he gives the outgoing tenant 1 — 
 Generally, as you are aware, on a great number of 
 estates in the north of Ireland, the applications for 
 liberty to sell, mention the price that has been paid, 
 but I have not thought it my duty to inquii-e, because 
 it is pretty well regulated by the custom of the 
 place. 
 
 474. In point of fact, if the incoming tenant is a 
 solvent man, you do not throw any obstacle in the 
 way of the transfer] — I don't think I ever objected to 
 a transfer. There are frequently other cases where 
 a man wishes his son or his ne])hew to be substituted 
 for himself, and if the receiver thinks it a proper thing 
 to do I always allow it to be done. 
 
 475. Mr. Shaw. — They come from all parts of 
 Ireland, I suppose, these applications 1 — Yes. 
 
 476. Baron Dowse. — That was just what I was 
 going to ask ; you do not see any difference in that 
 way between noi-th and south ; j^ou find these 
 applications coming generally from every pai't of the 
 country ? — Certainly. I have had them from the 
 north, and the tenant-right, and the amount discussed, 
 and all that sort of thing. I remember in one case a 
 contest between the receiver and the tenant. He had 
 named one person for a farm, and the tenant who wished 
 to sell his interest named another, and they had a 
 discussion as to which should be taken. I recollect a 
 case of that kind. 
 
 477. Baron Dowse. — You have had some experience 
 as to the working of what are called the Bright 
 Clauses? — Yes. 
 
 478. Had you the Harenc estate, that was one 
 estate that was before you 1 — Yes. 
 
 479. "Was there any other estate before you in 
 which there were applications made to sell to tenants 1 
 — Yes, I took a note of some cases being pretty sure 
 you would wish to be informed about it. 
 
 480. If you would be good enough to read that, 
 Judge, just take your owu way of putting it? — In 
 this Harenc estate it is reported in the Law Eeports 
 Ireland, first volume, pages 242 and 428, the second 
 was where thei-e was an appeal from me. My note of 
 it is this. In this case seventy- three tenants had 
 made proposals for their holdings amounting to 
 £51,027, which the owner deemed adequate, twenty- 
 one tenants sent in offers which the owner deemed 
 inadequate and fifty-five tenants did not offer. Thia 
 was done in the Examiner's oflice in pursuance of 
 notices to the tenants if they wished to purchase to 
 come up, that was the result. After this the owner 
 entered into an agreement with Mr. Hussey subject to 
 the sanction of the Court to sell the entire estate to 
 him for £80,500, if the Court should accept the offer, ' 
 or if the Court should not accept the offer and should 
 dismiss the petition to give the same sum. First he 
 offered to give it with my sanction, but if I did not 
 sanction it that then they should apply to dismiss the 
 petition, and he would give the same sum out of 
 Court. 
 
 481. Mr. Shaw. — Do yon remember the gross sum 
 that the twenty-one offered which was considered in- 
 adequate? — I haven't that; I am not sure the infor- 
 mation was before me, but simply that they were not 
 accepted, that they were not approved of. "Well when 
 this offer was being brought before me two gentlemen, 
 Messrs. Lombard and Murphy put in a proposal for 
 the entii-e estate at £81,000 (£500 more than Mr. 
 Hussey's), in which they undertook to sell to each 
 -tenant whose offer was deemed adequate, his holding 
 for the sum he had offered, these were the men who 
 had offered between them £51,627. Lombard and 
 Murphy proposed to let them have it at that, and to 
 sell to each of the others vdiose offer was inadequate 
 at a price to be settled by arbitration. 
 
 482. "Was there not a Mr. Gentlein.in, who Tiad Sept. 2, isso. 
 interposed in some of these stages, did he come before jjj j^j. jj^^ 
 you? — He wag very early in it, but I just took a note Henry ' ■ ' 
 of what my judgment was in the particular case, you Ormsbj", ' 
 are quite right to ask about him. This proposal of 
 Lombard and Murphy however excepted out of it 
 
 three or four tenants who had lai-go interests in their 
 holdings and with whom Hussey had agreed, one of 
 them was this Goouman Gentleman. 
 
 483. They were middlemen, I suppose, to some 
 extent ? — Yes, they were middlemen in that sense, but 
 men of considerable standing, Mr. Goodman Gentle- 
 man, himself, and Mr. Hewson, I think. That offer 
 having come before me in that form, I required from 
 Lombard and Murphy a simple proposal in the ordinary 
 form, in order that they might be held liable to pay the 
 purchase money. I thought, perhaps, it might be 
 supposed their offer was conditional on dealing with 
 the tenants, and I said " No, j'ou must make me a 
 direct offer." But in my judgment I declared that I 
 accepted Messrs. Lombard and Murphy's ofler, being 
 of opinion that it was moi'e favourable to the tenants, 
 and I recited on niy oixler their original proposal, so 
 as to make it plain that I sold to them, having regard 
 to their undertaking to deal with the tenaDts in that 
 way. The owner and ten cestui que trusts, who 
 were adults, had agreed to aecept Mr. Hussey's 
 offer, that is, they had -accepted the offer before 
 the other was heard of, and it is creditable to them 
 that they said they wished to abide by that offer. 
 But, however, my view was that a trustee for sale, 
 there being three infants, would not be justified in 
 taking a less sum than he could get. And I also 
 considered that these tenants Avho had been up before 
 me in great numbers upon questions of rights of 
 of way, recreation grounds, passages to the sea for 
 bathing, and those sort of things which occupied 
 several days, and caused great expense, had established 
 certain rights, becaxise it was too late to appeal from 
 my decision. And under all the circumstances, having 
 regard to the language of Mr. Bright' s Clauses, the 
 46th section particularly, and the rights, acquired 
 by the tenants, I considered that I ought to regard the 
 interests of the tenants, and when they in very large 
 numbers supported Lombard and Murphy,' who offered 
 the larger sum, I certainly considered that it was my 
 duty to accept it. 
 
 484. Baron Dowse. — You were benefiting both the 
 tenants and the inheritors? — :I thought so. If you 
 will take the trouble of reading the judgment on 
 appeal you will find that a great many points were made 
 against my decision. £20,000 was lodged within a few 
 days by Lombard and Murphy, but it was suggested I 
 had no grounds for knowing they would pay the sixty- 
 one thousand. My opinion certainly was unchanged 
 about that, because if they did not pay the £61,000, 
 they left £20,000, and I would have made an order 
 to sell the estate at their risk and expense. Again 
 it was said thex-e were certain interlineations made at 
 the time of the offer. I believe the late Mr. Butt 
 made them. 
 
 485. For whom was he ? — For Lombai'd and 
 Murphy, I think. When some one made an observa- 
 tion that Mr. Hussey's offer was also subject to tithe- 
 rentcharge, that it had not been inserted in Lombard 
 and Murphy's proposal, thereupon, the interlineation 
 was made ; but in fact it was an immaterial thing, 
 because our conveyances are declared by the statute 
 not to affect the tithe rentcharge, and if a man 
 hnjs an estate, he buys it subject to tithe- rent- 
 charge. However, there was something made about 
 that and other reasons, and they reversed my judg- 
 ment. 
 
 486. Chaieman. — That was the Court of Appeal ?-^- 
 The Court of Appeal, who declared Mr. Hussey to be 
 the purchaser. 
 
 487. Baron DowsE.--Mr. Hussey had no agree- 
 ments with the tenants at all 1 — Oh, yes, he had. He 
 had agreements with some of the tenants ; but, is you 
 
24 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sep*. 2, 1880. 
 
 Eight Hon. 
 
 Henry 
 
 Ormsby. 
 
 will see, I considered, and I don't tHnk it is possible to 
 question it, that Lombard and Murphy's agreements 
 with the tenants were far moi-e beneficial and exten- 
 sive. Their agreements covered about £2,100 a year, 
 and the other, £700 or £800 a year 
 
 488. Mr. Kavanacii. — Am I right in supposing 
 Lombard and Murphy were appearing for the tenants ? 
 — They appeared for the tenants in this sense, that 
 they agreed to sell to the large majority of them at the 
 price the tenants had offered £51,000 odd, and they 
 agreed to sell to others, who had made inadequate 
 offers at a price to be fixed by arbitration. 
 
 489. Baron Dowse. — You think Lombard and 
 Murphy came forward to buy to benefit the tenants 1 
 — I think so. 
 
 490. Mr. Shaw. — They had no private interests 1 — 
 If they carried out the agreement, as I thought they 
 would have done, they would have scarcely left them- 
 selves anything. There was an appeal taken by the 
 tenants. Lombard and Murphy came to me, and said : 
 " We don't want our £20,000 to be lying here. Will 
 you give it back to iis." I said I would, and they 
 washed their hands of the case. The tenants made an 
 appeal to the House of Lords, and it was held they 
 had no locus standi, as the purchasers had not ap- 
 pealed. But the late Lord Chancellor made these ob- 
 servations, that " He should be sorry if any coun- 
 tenance were given to the idea that, upon suchasubject 
 as the question of what sum should be offered, or from 
 what person, as the purchase-money for an estate to 1)0 
 sold in the Landed Estates Court, an appeal could in 
 any case be brought before the House." 
 
 49 L Implies that you were absolute in facf! — I 
 took it that, if there was not an appeal to be brought 
 to the House, it could not be brought to the Court of 
 Appeal here. 
 
 492. Baron Dowse. — In point of fact, that is as 
 much as to say if Lombard and Mur2Dhy had appealed 
 they might succeed 1 — I should be very glad that you 
 read the judgment. 
 
 493. What do you think was the principle the 
 Court of Appeal acted on ; because now arises the 
 great question whether any amendment of the law is 
 necessary ? — I think it was that the owner of a solvent 
 estate, as this was — there was only £15,000 or 
 £16,000 on it, had the right ti; withdraw the case 
 from sale. I recognised that to a great extent, and, 
 in fact, Judge Flanagan, from wliom I would be very 
 sorry to differ, so held in Domville's estate. He states 
 the practice to be that if we think an ownerunrea.sonable 
 in refusing a price, we won't force the sale against his 
 will, but dismiss the petition. I have quite recognised 
 that, and say to owners at sales : " [ think the money 
 is enough. You have brought bidders from all parts 
 of the counti'y here, and they go awaj^ disappointed, 
 and I shall not allow it to be set up again." And on 
 an intimation of that kind they have sometimes allowed 
 the sale to go on. The doctrine they went on was 
 that he had a right to dismiss his petition ; but that 
 was not my view, under the circumstances of the 
 case. 
 
 494. Did they lay down that he would have a right 
 to dismiss his petition if the incumbrancers objected ? 
 — No ; the incumbrancers would not have objected. 
 
 495. You thought that having the caption of the 
 estate in your hands you had a right to deal with it ? 
 — I thought that any man that comes into the court 
 should submit to it, and I thought that the tenants 
 having acquired rights by my decision it was late to 
 ask me to dismiss the petition. 
 
 496. You thought the position of the parties had 
 been altered and he was estopped 1 — But I think the 
 Court of Appeal were disposed to say that was what 
 he was entitled to, but there was no use in dismissing 
 ihc petition, because he could come in under the 
 Vendor and Vendee Act, and go to more expense. 
 
 497. Do you think any amendment of tlae Bright 
 clauses would enable you to do, notwithstanding the 
 Court of Appeal, what you did, in a similar case 1 — 
 
 My opinion is that that sort of case will very likeh 
 not occur again. I think Lord Cairns' opioion would 
 seem to indicate that it was too questionable a tliino 
 to entertain. *" 
 
 498. Suppose the same thing came before you aoain 
 you would be bound by the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal? — Every case stands so much on its oivi 
 merits I could not say j of course to the extent that it 
 decided any principle. I think if the question camp 
 to me about withdrawing the case from couit, I pro 
 bably would think myself bound if a man wished to 
 dismiss his own petition. 
 
 499. The failure here then did not arise from any 
 defective machinery in the purchase clauses 'i—l don't 
 think it did, and some of the Lords make the obser- 
 vations that the tenants have rights under those 
 clauses, and when the proper time and oppnrtimitv 
 comes, it must be decided what those rights are, 
 
 500. Does it occur to you that those clauses require 
 •luiendment in any way 1 — Those particular clauses- 
 no. I think the charging order part of it might be 
 amended. I think the dealing of the Board of Works 
 might be amended. 
 
 50L How would the charging order be amended! 
 — At present the Board of Works are not able to lend 
 except as a first charge, subject to rent or some public 
 charge ; but I have iound considerable difficulty in 
 some cases, by reason of rentcharges or jointures being 
 on the estate. I don't see that they could lend so as 
 to allow these to keep their priority. This is a difficult/ 
 we found in many cases. 
 
 502. The Board of Works consider they are mt 
 possessed of discretion on that point? — I amsui'ethej 
 have not. 
 
 503. But supposing you gave the Board of Woris 
 a discretion, always taking care that they did not 
 allow charges to have priority that would -weaken 
 their security ? — Yes, that is the test as long as the 
 security is good. 
 
 504. As long as the security is good, that they 
 should not be pedantic, if I may use the term, 
 as to prior incumbrances? — Yes. In one case, I 
 know, there was £20 left for charity to be dis- 
 pensed by the owners of the estate; and there 
 seemed to be no one before me who could give a con- 
 sent ; and I thought the thing was so small that I 
 might venture not to let that stop the proceedings. 
 But there were two cases before me, I know, by 
 jointresses. One was Mrs. Southwell, on the Sontl- 
 well estate ; and .she was an old lady, and she W 1 
 frightened and alai-med very much when her solicitor 
 advised her she might consent to the loan. She was 
 so much alarmed about it, that I really thought it 
 would be an injustice to her. 
 
 505. That was asking her to consent to waive ber 
 priority ? — Yes ; and I declined to do it. 
 
 506. But if the Board of Works were allowed » 
 discretion, first to look to the rental of the estate, and 
 the probable rent payable for some years to come, 
 looking to all contingencies of bad harvests, and so on, 
 that tiie prior charges would not exceed the whole ot 
 that fund ; and that there would be a reasonable ex- 
 pectation of this sum being repaid ; don't you tmn^ 
 they ought to be allowed to lend the nioirey ?— I tM'" 
 they ought. 
 
 507. There is a good deal of expense, is tliere not, 
 in negotiating this matter through the Board ofWorB, 
 and delay— does it occur to you at all?— In proportion 
 to a small estate the expense may be considerable. 
 
 508. Don't you think the expense could be ImiitWj 
 —I don't think, as far as I have seen, tire Board « 
 Works puts them to unnecessary expense. 
 
 509. Bitt you know legal expenses ai'e heavy- 
 They must pay their own expenses. . ^ 
 
 510. But the Board of Works' solicitor is Jf^ 
 M'Clintock, and he is paid £1,500 a year;, I thuiE- 
 Bat the tenants must pay their own solicitor. 
 
 511. Generally speaking, if there was to be a con- 
 
ailNUTES OF liVIDENCE. 
 
 siderable muuliur of piTrcIiases, they would employ 
 one solicitor for a number of tenants 1 — Yes. 
 
 512. Could there be any way of lessening the ex- 
 penses by lessening the number of stamps 1 — The stamp 
 duty is really very small. , 
 
 513. I don't like to be saying anything about legal 
 expenses, but anybody that has had anything to do 
 with a deed is surprised at what he has to pay for it. 
 I think that is a general fact t — Yes. I think evidence 
 was given by witnesses who were competent to give it 
 that if the tenant came in and offered on the first 
 occasion when summoned, so that they had not to 
 resettle the i-ental, I think the whole expense was 
 il2. But the resettlement of the rental, consequent 
 on a trustee buying a large portion of the estate with 
 a view of dividing it among the tenants and letting 
 the rights of way be settled, that made on an average 
 about £8 each. 
 
 514. You have found that the law as it now stands, 
 compelling the Board of "Works to have a first charge, 
 has to a certain extent limited the operations of 
 those purchase clauses? — It certainly has. 
 
 515. Do you think it would be an advantage further 
 to enable the tenants to purchase their own holdings 1 
 — That is by larger advances '! 
 
 516. No, but that the policy is a good one? — I 
 think the policy is a very good one. If an industi-ious 
 man has been able to discharge his obligations, and 
 has the price of his tarm, I think it is desirable, but I 
 doubt very much if it is desirable to have a man who 
 has to borrow the whole of the money. 
 
 517. If you found an industrious and thrifty tenant 
 who has an adequate holding, 15 or 20 acres, and who 
 at the same time is able to pay what is required to be 
 paid in the first instance, do you think it would be a 
 right thing to give him facilities to purchase 1 — I think 
 it would ; and the dealing of the Board of Works is 
 decidedly an advantageous dealing, an annuity of 35 
 years at 5 per cent. 
 
 518. I take it that you say you don't think any 
 legislation could have enabled the Harenc estate to be 
 differently dealt with from the manner the Court of 
 Appeal dealt with it. It would be rather legislation 
 applying to the Landed Estates Court than to the 
 purchase clauses ; their principle was that the owner 
 was entitled to withdraw ? — Yes. I thought that 
 under the particular circumstances he ought not. It 
 had gone too far. 
 
 519. If they thought you were right in holding the 
 owner was not entitled to withdraw they would not 
 have reversed your order 1 — I tliink not. 
 
 520. Then it was upon that the decision went ? — ■ 
 I think so. That was what they laid down as the 
 actual right of the owner. 
 
 521. That depends very much upon the proportion 
 the incumbrances wo^lld bear to the value of the estate ? 
 — Yes, the incumbrancers not objecting. 
 
 522. They have an interest, no matter how small "i — 
 Clearly. 
 
 523. Chaieman. — They would withdraw it from 
 the court altogether in that case 1 — Yes. 
 
 524. Therefore no legislation could remedy it ex- 
 cept to say that a person coming into the court would 
 have no right to withdraw, and that would be a strong 
 measure ? — Yes. 
 
 525. Mr. Kavanagh. — You said that there had 
 been a great increase of receivers lately? — Yes, sir. 
 
 52G. What do you attribvite that to — what cause 1 
 
 Well, I should think it is very much attributable to 
 
 our sales not going on as they did, because prices have 
 been so very small compared with what they used to 
 be, that we have not thought it right to sacrifice 
 estates, and persons who came into the court wanted 
 to get their interest, and applied for receivers. 
 
 527. Then you have other receivers than what are 
 placed over minois' property? — Yes. Judge Flanagan 
 and I are authorized by the Judicature Act, being now 
 Judges of the Chancery Division, to appoint receivers 
 
 in our own matters. Formerly that used to be rather a Sept. 2, 1880. 
 troublesome thing to get, for the old practice was, when uigju'^n 
 an order for sale was made in the Landed Estates Court, Henry 
 the^ person who wanted a receiver was obliged to file Ormsby. 
 a bill .in Chancery, and that was botli dilatory and ex- 
 pensive, and unless it was a pressing case it was a 
 thing not generally done. But now it is almost the 
 rule, that a man applies for a receiver after we have 
 made the order for sale, and I think we generally 
 make the appointment. 
 
 528. Does not the fact prove that a greater number 
 of landlords have got into difficulties than formerly, 
 or does it ? — If T account for it properly, the same 
 number of cases may produce a greater number of 
 receivers. 
 
 529. Baron Dowse. — What I understand you to 
 say is this, some few years ago, when there was a de- 
 mand for land, when a petition was brought into the 
 Landed Estates Court, the land was sold without any 
 necessity for a receiver at all, and that was the object 
 of the Court. But lately, owing to certain cases there 
 is not the same demand for land, and sales have to be 
 postponed, and rents have to be paid, and thereupon 
 you appoint a receiver ? — Yes ; but I think the facility 
 of getting a receiver tends very much to it. 
 
 530. Mr. Kavanagh. — What prices about do estates 
 fetch now, you say there is less demand? — I have 
 sold very little land lately. I have sold house 
 property which has certainly improved in price. 
 
 531. Baron Dowse. — Where? — ^Well, in this city 
 we have got considerably more years piirchase for 
 property, not in good parts either, than we should have 
 got some years ago. I try to account for it this way, 
 that people have money to invest in property, and 
 they don't much like investing in laud, and therefore 
 turn more to house property. It certainly is the fact. 
 I got last year higher prices for houses than I did 
 before. 
 
 532. Mr. Kavanagh. — The land is, in fact, un- 
 saleable, because there is no demand? — People would 
 be very glad to buy it if we sold it to them at their 
 own price, but we think it better to wait. Generally 
 speaking, both the owners and incumbrancers concur 
 in this. If the incumbrancers pressed for their money 
 it would put us in some difficulty ; but I generally 
 find the adjournments are on the application of one 
 backed up by the other. 
 
 533. Baron Dowse.— You don't take the same 
 heroic measures as in 1849, when land was sold for 
 what it would fetch ? — No ; but things were very 
 much worse then than they are now, and estates were 
 very much incumbered then. 
 
 534. Do you think 23 or 24 years purchase a 
 good price for land ? — Yes ; that is very good ; but 
 I have got in exceptional cases much more. One 
 of the little sales I had lately was property either in 
 Londonderry or Tyrone ; it was most of it in the pos- 
 session of the owner — a very small thing — it brought 
 37 years' purchase or thereabouts. 
 
 535. Do you find land sells better in Ulster than it 
 does in other parts of Ireland ? — Certainly ; I lately got 
 about 24 years purchase lor land in Down. 
 
 536. The O'Conoe Don. — Do you find land in the 
 occupation of the owner sell better than land in the 
 occupation of tenants ? — Certainly. 
 
 537. There has been no falling off in the value of 
 that?— No. 
 
 538. Mr. Kavanagh. — You mean land that you 
 can give the possession of as well as the fee-simjile ? — ■ 
 That is what we can get the price for. 
 
 539. Baron Dowse. — The great contest in this 
 country is for the possession of land ? — Yes ; but I 
 must add as to the Down estate, it was a considerable 
 one. 
 
 540. Whose estate was it ; was it Ker's ? — No ; it 
 was not so large. I cannot i-ecollect the name of 
 it. We got 24 years' purchase, but there were 
 tenants. I don't think tenants make such an obstacle 
 
 E 
 
26 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 3, ISSO 
 
 Eight Hon. 
 
 Henry 
 
 Ormsb)'. 
 
 in the North as in otlicr places, because tliey have 
 their own system of tenant-right. 
 
 541. Do you attribute the land in the North bring- 
 ing a higher price to the existence of tenant-right 
 there ? — I should say it very much contribu.tes to it. 
 
 542. Mr. Kavanagh. — You mentioned that in 
 arriving at what you thought a proper rent on an 
 estate, that you took the poor law valuation into cou- 
 sideiution, can you say what proportion the poor law 
 valuation should bear to the fair rent 1 — I think that 
 proportion is just one of the most difficult thiugs. I 
 have heard it said, as a general thiug, that about one- 
 fourth, should be added, but I believe that the poor 
 law valuation is really so very different in different 
 places that it would be quite unsafe to sa}', it would 
 be impossible to say. 
 
 543. Is it not a fact that in the northern provinces 
 it is very much nearer the real value of the land than 
 in the south or west? — I believe that is so. 
 
 , 544. Baron Dowse. — I have heard tho late Lord 
 Chancellor when in the House of Commons in a dis- 
 cussion on the Land Act continually say that it was 
 taken for granted in Ireland that if you added one- 
 fovirth to Griffith's valuation you would get the fair 
 rent. I never heard v/hat foundation he had lor it ? 
 — It does not apply universally. 
 
 545. Mr. Kavanagh. — But it would not be just to 
 add one-foui"th in the north. My impression is that 
 the valuation in the north is nearer the real value of 
 the land? — T should say it must, because I have not 
 seen the enormous difference between the poor law 
 valuation and the rent that I found in other parts of 
 the country. I have seen, very frequently too, the 
 rent more than double the poor law valuation. 
 
 546. Baron Dowse. — When you see in the north of 
 Ireland rent and the poor law valuation agreeing, and 
 you see in other parts of Ireland the rent being double 
 the poor law valuation, that does not prove the valua- 
 tion in the north is higher than in the south, it 
 proves that the people in the south are fond of higher 
 rents than in the north, is not that so? — Yes, I think 
 so. 
 
 547. Mr. Kavanagh. — About peasant proprietary, 
 do you think if it could be genei-ally established there 
 would be any, danger of their 'subdividing their 
 holdings ? — -A-t present they are not allowed to do it. 
 
 548. No, but when the obligation loan is paid off 
 the fee-simple of the land would pass into the pur- 
 chaser's hands, he could then do anything he liked 
 with it ? — Oh, of course. 
 
 549. Do you think there would be any danger of 
 that happening as soon as the loan was paid off? — 
 There would be danger of it happening in many 
 instances, no doubt. 
 
 550. Baron Dowse. — The only way you could argue 
 on that is by analogy, what was done in the past would 
 probably be done in the future if there was nobody to 
 prevent it ? — I recollect bemg asked what I thought 
 of this peasant proprietary plan, and my answer was 
 that I thought that it would be a very good thing for 
 the preseart generation, but I would not be sure of it 
 for the next. 
 
 551. Mr. Kavanagh. — You don't approve of it as 
 a general universal scheme that the land of Ireland 
 is to be handed over from the owners to the occupiers 
 on the spot ? — No ; I would keep it for exceptionally 
 industrious tenants, and I am quite sure resident pro- 
 prietors are a great benefit with their large demesnes, 
 and I would be sorry to see the whole country cut up 
 for peasant proj)rietors. 
 
 552. Mr. SiL'iW, — Can you say what proportion of 
 the rental that is in your court is the rental of minors 
 or lunatics, and what of incumbered owners ? — No, 
 sir, tho return to me is simply the rental. 
 
 553. Are tho incumbered estates in process of sale 
 in your court, is that how they come into your court ? — 
 Matters are brought into our court only for the pur- 
 poses of sale. 
 
 •554. Are all those incumbered estates in your court. 
 
 for sale, over which receivers are appomted^—Yes 
 our jurisdiction is to sell. ' 
 
 555. Baron Dowse. — The fact is that you W 
 transferred to you the receiver business as well as 
 the land business ? — Yes. 
 
 556. And in the land business you have also receiver 
 business ? — Yes. 
 
 657. And if a man had only a life estate witliouta 
 power of sale, and got a receiver over it, you would 
 look after that 1 — Unless the judge who appointed tim 
 chose to keep it. 
 
 558. Mr. Shaw. — There is a good deal of this ren- 
 tal that is not for sale at all ?-^A great deal of it ij 
 not before us for sale. 
 
 559. Chairman. — Did you not mention the total 
 amount and then said about £400,000 ? — The grosj 
 rental of estates in charge of receivers when the 
 accounts were passed in 1879, was £433,249, butasi 
 have said ive have more receivers now, and I have no 
 doubt the rental is not inconsiderably increased now. 
 
 560. Baron Dowse. — It is brought up in round num 
 bers to half a million ?^-I don't suppose it is as muci 
 as that, but you will observe the difference betweeo 
 62 in the whole year, and 94 in little more than 
 two-thirds. 
 
 501, Chaieman. — Do you give the proportion of 
 it that is for sale ? — That is not at all before me. 
 
 562. Mr. Shaw. — You would not say half oftkt 
 belongs to owners and half to incumbrancer's, who are 
 seeking to sell and cannot^ sell, owing to entail aiii 
 settlements ? — I think as to the majority of the am 
 that are brought under receivers, except miior 
 matters the sale is the winding up of them.' Sot 
 instance, administration suits wind up with an order 
 for sale of the real estate, that comes into our court. 
 Then, of course, in mortgage causes the object is a sale, i 
 
 563. Do you think there is any advantage in keep- 
 ing large estates, largely incumbered, 'would you be 
 in favour of giving facilities for breaking tliem up and 
 selling them? — I think it is very desirable for modern 
 proprietors to sell portions of their incumbered estates 
 and clear the rest. 
 
 564. They are prevented, I suppose, by entails and 
 settlements ? — For charges paramount to the lite in- 
 terest of . the owner, he can sell not'withstanding tk 
 entail. 
 
 56-!; . Would that not be a means of br-inginga good 
 deal of land into the market, and increasmg the num- 
 ber of landed proprietors in the country? — ^es, andl 
 think a great deal of that is going on. Indeed,! 
 think we have as freqirently the tenant for life of an ' 
 estate put as the ovmer of it as the actual owner in fee. 
 
 560. Then the incumliraneer who has what 1 call 
 this paramount charge, does not mind the entail liiit 
 makes the tenant for life the owner. There, is an 
 absolute right to sell by these parties, not-svithstandinj 
 entail or settlement ? — That is so, if the charges aw 
 prior to the settlement. 
 
 567. Have many cases come into your court under 
 part two of the Act, that is, agreements for sale out- 
 side the court, and brought in for confirmation t- 
 Yes, we have had them. 
 
 568. The expenses of those cases I suppose would 
 be very heavy ?— They are a good deal heavier than 
 others. 
 
 569. Would you suggest any means of lessenag 
 expenses in that way, any means of facilitatiug such 
 a course ?— Well, I really don't see that I could, 
 because already the expense we put persons to is con- 
 siderably less than would be incurred between private 
 persons. For instance, the searches are a great cause 
 of expense. We don't direct searches at all to the 
 extent that there would be in the case of private 
 persons. , 
 
 570- Would he not have to make out title to the 
 property in a certain sense ? — Yes, but in the Landed 
 Estates Court we don't care about the legal estate, 
 because we can give a legal estate, and we don't seajc 
 against a great class of persons, who outside of t 
 court are searched against. We don't search agains 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 27 
 
 mortgagees, we don't searcli against official assignees, 
 -we don't seareli against trustees for sale, so ' that our 
 searches are very much less. 
 
 571. By the 46th section I see that your court is 
 directed to fix the rental in such a way as will suit 
 tenants, has that been done extensively 1—1 think it 
 is done with a great deal of care and anxiety in my 
 court by Mr. JM'Donnell, and I am sure it is also so 
 in the other. The course of doing it is that notice of 
 a survey is given to the tenants, and then there is 'a 
 notice given them by a particular d_ay if they wish to 
 purchase their holdings to come tip. They do come in 
 great numbers, and I believe there is every anxiety 
 ton the part of Mr. M'Donnell ; he has the owner 
 represented before him to try to get a fair price agreed 
 upon, and I think it is going on to a considerable 
 extent. 
 
 572. Is there not a difficulty about cutting uj) 
 patches of the estate that may be the best part, and 
 leaving the inferior parts 1 — That is the great difliculty, 
 but we always Consider that we are not at liberty 
 Hinder that section to damage the rest of the estate. 
 
 "573. So that in cases where you fear that would be 
 the result you are not justified in going on mth the 
 sale 1 — Not vdth the separate sale. Sometimes that is 
 got rid of by a trustee buying a considerable portion, 
 and he then makes his subdivisions with their consetit. 
 But if a little lot were taken out of the estate you 
 mifht Ejet a huge price for that and damage the rest of 
 the estate. 
 
 574. You have seen the suggestion of Mr. Vernon 
 as to a Commission to purchase large estates and sub- 
 divide them, do you think that would be advisable 1^ 
 I confess it does not commend itself to my judgment, 
 but I have, perhaps, not considered it enough. I 
 think the thing, with a little increase of facilities, is 
 working very well. 
 
 575. It would get over the difficulty of your Court ; 
 you would not have to decide as to the relative impor- 
 tance of different parts of the estate 1 — It would save 
 us considerable trouble. 
 
 576. That was what was done substantially in the 
 Kerry case, by Lombard and Murphy '?^Yes, one was 
 to buy. That may be advantageously done, and it has 
 been done in some cases, a person buying for others 
 came in afterwards and asked to hare the rental 
 resettled. 
 
 577. CilAiu5iAX. — Can such purchasers be bound to 
 carry out what they alleged to be their object, to hand 
 ovoL- the o-stnte to tenants at fixed prices? — That would 
 be a matter of contract between themselves, but i 
 never heard of any breach of faith. 
 
 578. You vrould not at present be empowered to 
 make the order for sale on such a condition? — No, he 
 merely piTrchases. 
 
 579. May it not be advisable to have such powers? 
 
 The difficulty has not arisen. They probably select 
 
 a trustworthy person, and in the next place this 
 person v/ould be asked to bring iu the whole purchase- 
 money, and be responsible to us. 
 
 580. Baron DoWSB. — Vou hold him as your man 
 bound to you ? — Yes. 
 
 581. The O'CoNOR Don. — Have you known many 
 instances of that combination, of one man buying to 
 divide subsequently ?— 1 have not at all unfrequently 
 known it that one person buys, and i suppose they 
 have settled the whole thing among themselves belore- 
 
 hand. 
 
 582. "Would it be possible togiveus a return ot the 
 number of cases in which this happened. Would the 
 records of your Court show it, of a man buying in trust 
 to sell among the occupying tenants?— I: dare say it 
 would be possible to do it, it would be troublesome. ■ 
 
 583. Baron Dowse. — Supposing a man bought that 
 way with agreements to the tenants, you would convey 
 to him absolutely, or would you take notice of the 
 ai;-reeui.snts with the tenants ?— Then the course is, 
 they bring the matter before us, and apply to have the 
 rent;'.l resettled. 
 
 Eight Hon 
 
 Henry 
 
 Ormsby 
 
 584. Would you then make separate conveyances to Sept. i, 1880. 
 each tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 585. The O'Gonoe Don.— Would it not then be 
 easy to ascertain how often that has been done? — I 
 would make a separate, conveyances to tenants as if I 
 sold to them separately. 
 
 586. Would it not be easy to ascertain all the cases 
 in which one man was declared the purchaser on the 
 sale, and subsequently, the conveyances were made out 
 to a number of persons ? — Well I will take a note of it. 
 
 587. Mr. Kavanagii. — That question reminds me 
 of what I saw in the Nineteentlb Century, for August, 
 Mr. J. H. Tuke in a paper there, said tenants 
 purchasing glebe-lands were taken in by a money 
 lender, who proposed to advance money at 4 per cent, 
 and as soon as the sale was completed, charged them 
 10 per cent. 
 
 588. Baron Dowse. — That did not pass through 
 vour ooTlit at all — it was an outside transaction ? — - 
 Yes. 
 
 589. Mr. Shaw. — Would you be in favour of dis- 
 trict registries in which, in case small proprietors be- 
 came general, properties could be registered in centres, 
 the ownership registered 1 — I should say really the 
 facilities now are so great for doing those things that 
 I don't see why there should. We have a very good 
 registry here, and I hope we will soon see it better in 
 some respects. 
 
 590. Baron Dowse. — The registry in your court 
 that Mr. Urlin used to be over, what do you call that ? 
 —The Eecord of Title. 
 
 ,591. Is that working at all? — Well, not much. 
 There have been between 600 and 700 cases. I think 
 it was said to be not quite an eighth. 
 
 592. Mr. Shaw. — It is not supposed to confer a 
 particular advantage ? — It is not certainly liked by 
 the profession. I don't mean to say that in a sense that 
 it is for their own sakes, but I think they have deliber- 
 ately disapproved of it, for there is so much left to the 
 otEoers, and there have been some mistakes discovered, 
 and probably there may be some that were not dis- 
 covered. In fact unless the officer is exceedingly com- 
 petent, and a very active man, I think it is likely mis- 
 takes would occur. 
 
 593. Baron Dowse. — May it not be taken now. 
 Judge, that it is practically a failure ? — I think so. 
 
 594. Chairman. — It must be a long time in many 
 cases before they can bring matters to a point ? — ■ 
 There are only between 600 and 700 cases, and I be- 
 lie^-e they would have been a great deal fewer except 
 for a clause in the Act of Pa)'liament which almost 
 trapped people into it, in which it said it should be 
 recorded unless the purchaser, within seven days, gave 
 notice he did not wish it. It frequently happens that 
 the purchaser was not aware of this, or the solicitor 
 either. I remember a case coming before me to decide 
 whether i would require an estate to be recorded. The 
 man sent a telegram, he was travelling on the Conti- 
 nent, and the solicitor communicated with him, 
 and the question before me was whether I should con- 
 sider that notice by telegraph a notice under the sta- 
 tute. I took upon myself to say I did consider it so. 
 
 595. The O'Conor Don. — Is it not the case that no 
 estate can be recorded except one that has been sold 
 in the Landed Estates.Court ? — Yes, that is the case. 
 
 596. Therefore there is no difficulty with regard to 
 inquiring into title when placing it on record? — Ko. 
 
 597. Chairman. — I thought it was a general inquiry 
 as to title ? — N o ; it is not done outside the court.' 
 
 598. Mr.SHAV,'. — There is no public registry of the 
 transactions of your court, if I buy an estate I am not 
 registered as the owner of that estate except on your 
 books?— You go ap then to H:enrietta-street and 
 legister there. 
 
 ' 599. The O'Conor Don.— If a purchaser buys an 
 estate in your court and does not make a request that 
 it shall not be recorded within seven days, then it will 
 be recorded? — Yes. 
 
 600 ■ And e\-ery transaction that subsequently takes 
 
 E2 
 
28 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. i, 1830. 
 
 Right Hon. 
 
 Henry 
 
 Ormsby. 
 
 place with regard to tLat estate will be entered on the 
 record 1 — Just so. 
 
 GOl. So that anyone going to the book and having 
 a right to look at it will see at a glance how it stands 1 
 — That is how it ought to be, but men frequently deal 
 with a recorded estate as if it was not recorded. 
 
 602. But any transaction placed on the record will 
 take precedence of anything not recorded 1 — ^Yes. 
 
 603. So that any person coming up there to deal 
 with an estate and looking at the record will be quite 
 safe 1. — He may be quite safe for himself, but he would 
 be doing injustice to others. 
 
 604. Have many cases of injustice arisen 1 — ^There 
 were two cases before me in which parties were a,ble 
 to remedy the injustice. 
 
 605. In point of fact, is there one single instance in 
 which anyone has suffered loss by any error on the 
 record 1 — I am not aware of it, but I can give you an 
 instance, where, if it had not been for the honesty of 
 an owner, there would have been great loss. 
 
 606. You are a member of the Eegistry of Deeds 
 Commission, and that question was gone into very 
 closely, and are you not aware that it was proved by 
 the recording officer, that since the institution of the 
 Record of Title there was not a single instance of loss 
 occurring'? — Yes, but he gave us three instances where 
 loss might have occurred. 
 
 607. Mr. Shaw. — Does this supersede the general 
 registry of mortgages 1 — The general registry has no 
 application to the registry of title. 
 
 608. Baron Dowse. — This record of title does not 
 assist the tenants 1 — I have inquired into that, and 
 there is scarcely an instance of a tenant recording. 
 
 609. Mr. Shaw. — If I mortgage my property, that 
 is registered in the general registry of mortgages, does 
 it, as a matter of necessity, go on your registry too % 
 — You mean if the title is once recorded. No notice 
 should be'taken of it anywhere else except on the record. 
 
 610. What I was anxious to get your opinion on 
 was — if estates wei-e broken up, and sold in small lots, 
 would it not be a great advantage to have, in different 
 centres in Ireland, something similar to your registry 
 of titre — a registry of ownerships, that local people 
 buying could see at once, or local people lending could 
 see at once, as to the ownership of these properties ? — 
 If you had a set of competent people (and they must 
 be pretty well paid for it), I don't say it would not be 
 an advantage ; but I know we find it very hard. We 
 have succeeded in getting a veiy comi)etent man ; but 
 I think we are fortunate in doing it. It is a very 
 onerous duty — a man must be a good lawyer, and a 
 very active man. 
 
 611. The O'CoNOE Don. — Don't you think it would 
 lead to a great deal of confusion to have those local 
 registries, in consequence of property being held by 
 the same owner in different counties, and property in 
 different counties being under the one mortgage i — 
 Yes. 
 
 612. It would have to be recorded in the different 
 places, and add considerably to the expense of searches 1 
 — I think it would be advantageous to have them all 
 in one place. 
 
 613. Mr. SiiAW. — Are you aware that in America 
 they have a very perfect system of registration 1 — I 
 have heard of such a thing ; but what the extent of 
 the district is, I am not aware. 
 
 614. Chairman. — Just return for a moment to the 
 buyers in trust for tenants — do I understand you 
 that no change is required in the Land Act to enable 
 the court to secure the carrying out of the principle 
 in favour of sales to the tenants ? — I do not see a 
 difficulty, tor this reason — the man's own affair is to 
 get in the purchase-money, and complete the transac- 
 tion. 
 
 615. But would you make it a binding condition 
 on him to carry out these trusts for sale to the ten- 
 ants '! — Generally speaking, that does not come before 
 us, because we look upon him as the purchaser, and 
 make him responsible for the purchase-money ; and 
 
 within fourteen days, if we require it, he must lodoe 
 the purchase-money ; and that he cannot do ; he m^t 
 get the money from the tenants. I have not heard of 
 an instance of breach of faith. 
 
 616. Just on the question of abatements I did not 
 quite understand whether, in the applications for abate- 
 ments, you said they were confined, generally, to dis- 
 tricts where tenant-right does not exist? — I think tie 
 great majority of them were. 
 
 617. Then, again, in cases of a sale of holdings 
 which you say you allow on reports of receivers is 
 that allowed generally in all cases, or only where it 
 was the custom, of the estate when it came under the 
 court 1 — I have never been asked to do it contrary (» 
 the custom, but a great many of those cases are where 
 there is no custom at all. 
 
 618. You don't, then, introduce the custom upon 
 an estate that does not possess it ? — No ; and, ia fact 
 they are not frequent. 
 
 619. Baron Dowse. — If the receiver brought the 
 matter before you, and all the parties were agreeable 
 you would not consider whether it had been doie on 
 that estate before, you would only consider whether it 
 was a proper case ? — Unless the owner can.e ia and 
 objected. We would not do that in a case where 
 there was a lease with a covenant against ahenation, 
 
 620. Chaieman. — I understand you to say that 
 in this question of abatements you would act in such 
 a way as you think a reasonable landlord ought to 
 act subject to getting the consent of the mm- 
 brancers on the entire ? — Yes ; except m miaor mat- 
 ters, where I think myself at liberty. 
 
 621. Baron Dowse. — Supposing the owner andlhe 
 incumbi-ancers objected you would have tie power 
 then of not holding the receiver responsible for the 
 arrears, and that is the way you would remedy any 
 inconvenience ? — Yes. 
 
 622. Chaieman. — During the last six months have 
 you had applications for postponement of rent for a 
 time, in order to get the harvest in ? — Yes ; a great 
 many, and I think, I almost always yielded to them. 
 
 623. According to the circumstances? — Yes; butl 
 have done it in a great number of oases, and told the 
 receiver not to take proceedings imtil after the 
 harvest. 
 
 624. Then as to the peasant proprietary, do you 
 consider that there should be maintained the provision 
 against subdivision or subletting 1 — As to subdivision 
 or subletting, but I cannot say I see an objection to 
 alienation to the same extent. 
 
 625. Mr. Shaw. — Do you see any reason why 
 tenants buying their properties should be prevented 
 from borrowing money on those properties outside 
 the Government ; at present they lose their whole 
 interest in case they borrow 1 — The Land Act makes 
 it a forfeiture, but tlien there came the Act of 18(3, 
 which enabled the Board of Works to sell, notivith- 
 standing the forfeiture, and I believe that is practi- 
 cally what they do. 
 
 626. Baron Dowse. — But suppose the Board of 
 Works' security is not interfered with, do you see any 
 reason why they should object to his borrowing money 
 on it ■? — On a second mortgage it has been said it may 
 take a little from their own security if suits are insti- 
 tuted, but I don't think it is very material 
 
 627. Mr. Shaw. — In those cases where you have 
 made an allowance in the last year have you reduced 
 the interest of mortgagees ? — We could not do that. 
 
 628. It has all come out of the estate?— It bas all 
 come o\it of the estate, and the incumbrancers, 
 although they might be temporarily inconvenienced 
 by it, thought it desirable. 
 
 629. They lost nothing ^They had theii- payments 
 postponed by it. 
 
 630. Earon Dowse.— You have no power to inter- 
 fere with the interest of mortgagees 1 — No. 
 
 631. And you have no power to interfere with the 
 rents of the tenants except that if the parties dont 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 29 
 
 yield you would not hold the receiver responsible for 
 the arrears, that is the real power 1 — Yes. 
 
 632. And that is acting on the decision of Lord 
 Chancellor Brady, which is now the settled law of the 
 court 1 — It is. 
 
 633. Chaieman. — Then, looking at parts 2 and 3, 
 with which you would be probably conversant, is 
 there any other observation you would like to make 1 — 
 No, thank you ; there is nothing that occurs to me to 
 say. With regard to that wliich Mr. Shaw was ask- 
 ing he might, perhaps, like to be informed. I have 
 had, I think, three cases, certainly two, where there 
 was an application at the suit of a judgment 
 mortgagee, to sell one of these estates where the 
 
 buyer had borrowed from the Board of "Works, and Seat 2, isso. 
 the course I took was to say, " I cannot make an T,j„,jt'^n 
 order for sale without the consent of the Board." Hwiry 
 
 634. Mr. Shaw. — Was the application by the Ormsby 
 Board of Works 1 — No ; by a third person, a judgment 
 mortgagee. He had not mortgaged the estate, but 
 
 had allowed a judgment to go against him which was 
 registered as a mortgage, and those proceedings were 
 taken for a sale. I said, " I cannot do this without 
 the consent of the Board of Works," and they gave 
 the consent. 
 
 635. And they have got their money 1 — It has not 
 been sold yet. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 John Ball Greene, 
 
 636. Chairman. — I believe you are Commissioner 
 of Valuation throughout Ireland ? — Yes. 
 
 637. The first valuation of land was in 1826 1 — Yes. 
 The first Act of Parliament passed in 1826. 
 
 638. That was on a scale of prices then laid down? 
 — Then laid down in the Act. 
 
 639. To govern all Ireland] — To govern all Ire- 
 land. 
 
 640. An uniform scale? — Yes. 
 
 641. The O'ConorDon. — That was called the town- 
 land valuation? — That was the townland valuation. 
 
 642. Chairman. — The next general valuation was 
 in 1852'?— In 1852. 
 
 643. Had there been some intermediate legislation 1 
 — There was in 1846. After the introduction of 
 the Poor Laws into this country it was deemed 
 advisable to make a tenement valuation. The original 
 towiJand valuation was commenced in 1830, and was 
 merely for the regulation of county rates. 
 
 644. The valuation of 1826'? — Yes; commenced 
 in 1830. The Act passed in 1826, and they were 
 waiting for the Ordnance Survey to proceed, and they 
 deferred it until 1830, and then in 1846. 
 
 645. That was after the passing of the Poor Law ? 
 — Yes, after the passing of the Poor Law, and that 
 was to make a tenement valuation for the purposes of 
 the Poor Law, and to contiaue the unfinished pro- 
 vince of Munster according to the old Act — the 
 Townland Act — so it was contemplated there were 
 to be two valuations ; one for county rate and the 
 other for poor rate. There was a difference in prin- 
 ciple. The priuciple of the original Townland Act 
 was that the valuation was based on a scale of agri- 
 cultural prices, and the Act of 1846 contained a 
 clause that the valuation shoiild be according to the 
 rent — based upon the rent, and no scale of prices was 
 introduced into that Act. 
 
 646. Was that on the letting value ? — -Yes. 
 
 647. Mr. Shaw. — Not the rent paid? — No, but on 
 an estimate of the rent. 
 
 648. Chairjian. — That would be the fair letting 
 value 1 — The fair rent. 
 
 649. The O'Conor Don.— Deducting all the taxes?— 
 Deducting landlord's rates, repairs, and any other 
 expenditure of that nature. 
 
 650. Chairman.— That was the 9th & 10th Vic, 
 cap. 110? — Yes; after a while it was considered 
 advisable to have one valuation instead of two — one 
 for county rate and the other for poor rate, and the 
 Act of 1852 was passed. That enacted a scale of 
 prices, and directed that the valuations made under 
 the 9th and 10th Vic, cap. 110, should be reduced to 
 the scale of the Act of 1852, and made uniform for 
 the purpose of all public and local rates and taxes. 
 
 651. That was with the view of having a corres- 
 ponding value for all purposes of taxation 1 — Quite so. 
 
 652. Is the Act of 1846 called Griffith's Act?— 
 No, the Act of 1852. It was made by Sir Richard 
 Griffitii; the Act of 1846 was repealed, and never 
 came into force. 
 
 653. That is called Griffith's Act, and that is the 
 
 Esq., C.B., examined. 
 
 valuation of 1852 1 — Yes, that is the existing valua- 
 tion. 
 
 654. There is no county published under the Act 
 of 1846?— No. 
 
 655. Baron Dowse.- — The Act was so called be- 
 cause Sir Richard Griffith held the place you hold ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 656. Chairman. — Was that on a scale of prices 
 then laid down? — Yes. 
 
 657. In your opinion that valuation, being for the 
 purpose of taxation, need not be taken as the valu- 
 ation for the purpose of showing the letting value ? — - 
 No, T do not think it was ever contemplated at all. 
 It was supposed that it would take a very con- 
 siderable time, which it really did, to make the 
 valuation, and the scale of prices was introduced, so 
 that made at different and distant periods the valuation 
 might be relative, and had no reference whatever, 
 and never was intended, as far as I could learn, to 
 form any basis for rent. 
 
 658. And if a valuation was to be framed for tho 
 purposes of rent, can you say how the scale of prices 
 would run now as against the scale at that time ? — 
 Yes. I have got a table here that gives the scale of 
 prices for a great number of years. The scale of 
 prices in the Act of 1852, on which the valuation is 
 based, was — wheat 7s. Gd. per cwt. 
 
 659. Would you say the general prices now would 
 be in excess ? — I have them made out as Lord Harting- 
 ton directed some time ago up to 1876, and I have 
 them later than that, up to 1878. The Registrar- 
 General was directed from 1874-5 to ascertain, by 
 sending a form to twenty-four of the market to'mis 
 in Ireland to the market clerks, and these prices I got 
 from the Registrar-General. The prices in the Act 
 of 1852 are :— Wheat, 7s. 6d. per cwt. of 112 lbs. ; 
 oats, 4s. lOd. ; barley, 5s. 6d. (potatoes were not in 
 that Act at all) ; butter, 65s. 4i. ; beef, 3Ss. 6d. ; 
 mutton, 41s. ; and pork, 32s. 
 
 660. Mr. Shaw. — Were these prices taken from 
 public records at the time ? — They were taken on an 
 average of the three years previous to 1852. 
 
 661. Taken from the public records ? — Yes, by Sir 
 Richard Griffith. 
 
 662. The O'Conor Don. — And they were embodied 
 in the Act of Parliament ? — Yes. 
 
 663. Mr. Shaw. — That was in fact the years 1848, 
 1849, and 1850, immediately after the famine? — Yes, 
 immediately after the famine. 
 
 664. Chairman. — Would you take the highest 
 within the last few years, and give us the prices ? — I 
 can give you 1877 and 1878. In the year 1878 oats 
 were 9s. id., barley 7s. Id., potatoes 4s. 6d. (we 
 ascertained potatoes at that time), butter 110s. 8d., 
 beef 77s. 5d., miitton 80s. 6d., and pork 47s. 3d. 
 
 665. Which is the first year in which you have 
 potatoes? — We have potatoes in 1826. They were 
 Is. 7d. per cwt. then. 
 
 666. You said they were not included in 1852? — 
 No. In 1859 they were 2s. lid. They increased 
 from 2s. Ud. then to 4s. 6d. in 1877. 
 
 John Ball 
 
 Greene, Esq., 
 
 C.B. 
 
30 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2,'lS8ft. 
 
 John Ball 
 Greene, Esq., 
 
 C.B. 
 
 667. Was the' increase pretty gradual ?—N"o, it wus 
 irregular. In 1859, whicli I have just read out, tliey 
 were 2s. lid., in 1860 they were 4«. Id., in 1861 4s., 
 in 1862 4s. U., and in 1863 they fell to 2s. 9d. 
 
 668. These were three very 'bad years for potatoes 1 
 —Yes. In 1863 they were 2s. M., in 1864 2s. 9d., 
 and in 1873 they again rose to 4s. a cwt. ; and in 
 1874 they were 3s. 6^, in 1875 and 1876 the same, 
 only a farthing difference. 
 
 669. The O'Oonoe Don. — How were these prices ascer- 
 tained ? — They were ascertaiued from newspaper re- 
 ports. We sent to the proprietors, and got the 
 newspapers of the different towns — twenty-four 'market 
 towns — and they were abstracted from the news- 
 papers. 
 
 670. The average prices 1 — They were carefully 
 averaged. 
 
 671. Baron Dowse. — They are taken from the 
 market notes of the newspapers'? — Yes, the market 
 notes of the newspapers. 
 
 672. Chaieman. — Can you give the prices for the 
 hist two years 1 — The last prices I have got are those 
 for the period ending October, 1879. Wheat was 
 then 8s. 9d. ; oats, 7s. 6c?. ; barley, 8s. ; butter, 95s. ; 
 beef, 60s. ; mutton, 65s. ; pork, 48s. 
 
 6'73. Mr. Shaw. — What were potatoes ? — We have 
 not got potatoes. Flax was 56s. 
 
 674. In 1879 ■!— Yes, in 1879. 
 
 675. Chairman. — Do you know whether there was 
 any distinction in the valuation between the north 
 and the south and the west of Ireland % — Yes ; a 
 portion of Ulster was made on a higher scale than 
 the south and west of Ireland. 
 
 676. On a higher scale of prices ?^ — No; it was 
 based on the same prices, but it was made at a much 
 later period, and the cultivation of the soil is so much 
 better there, and the production of flax, which was 
 not in the other provinces, caused the valuation to be 
 different, and, in fact, we found things so much 
 better, and so much improved, we took into account 
 the improved state of things in the north of Ireland. 
 
 677. Baron DowsE. — Had you any idea that the 
 Northerns were better able to pay % — Oh, no. 
 
 678. Chaieman. — It was taken later ^ — Yes, it was 
 taken later — the last portion of Ireland that was 
 valued. 
 
 678a. You mentioned that the valuation could not 
 be taken as a standard for letting where tenant-right 
 exists ?-^-No, I think not. If a man fines down a 
 house — say a house that is worth £100 a year — he 
 gives £1,000 fine, and so fines down the rent to £50, 
 it would not be exactly fair to take that as the rent of 
 the house. On the same principle with tenant-right — 
 if a m.an gives ten or twelve years purchase for getting 
 into possession the interest ought to be added to the 
 rent. 
 
 679. Baron Dowse. — The land is worth so much 
 m.n-e % — It is worth so much more. At the same time 
 I do not think it would be possible if there was a re- 
 valuation where tenant-right exists that we could take 
 it into account. 
 
 680. Chaieman". — That is payment for possession ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 680a. It don't follow that the man actually reckons 
 that he will be able to make so much more out of it, 
 but that he is more anxious to get it, with the in- 
 tention of making what he can out of it ? — Yes, he is 
 more anxious to get it. 
 
 681. He is satisfied with less interest for his 
 money % — Yes. 
 
 682. There has been a great diminution in the 
 population since the 1852 valuation? — Yes, since that 
 valuation was made. 
 
 683. Does that apply to the north as much as to the 
 south % — I think it does — to some parts more so. 
 
 684. There has been a decrease of 40 per cent., 
 and in consequence a great deal of land has gone out 
 of tillage'? — A great deal. 
 
 685. Baron DowsE.^-^Iri what parts of IrelandU 
 Particularly in the west and the south and wesb auj 
 also in some of the counties in Leinster. 
 
 686. When you say gone out of tillage do yomneim 
 it has gone into pasture % — Yes, gone into pasture 
 You will see that by the large increase- of stoek— of 
 cattle and sheep. ■ , , 
 
 687; That arose, I suppose, from the great inwease 
 in the price of meat \ — To some extent that, no doubt 
 was caused by the great increase in the price of butter 
 beef, and mutton, whUe cereal prices have not in! 
 creased in the same proportion. 
 
 688. What is the present rateable valuation of 
 ' Ireland 1— £13,619,766. 
 
 689. Have you got there the rateable valuation of 
 1852'? — This, I may say, is the valuation revised up 
 to the present time. This is the '52 valuation. 
 
 690. There is no variation in that valuation ?—Jfot 
 in the land. Since 1852 there have -been- numerous 
 buildings and improved houses, but the Act proliibited 
 us from altering the valuation of land. We can-re- 
 distribute the value, but can make no new valuatioE 
 of the land. 
 
 691. Do you add for the valuation of new built 
 farm-houses % — We do. 
 
 692. And baiildings ? — There is a clause intbisAct 
 which says that farm buildings are not to be revalued 
 for seven years after their erection, and also, seven 
 years for the reclamation of land, so that practically 
 the value caused by improved farm buildings orb? tie 
 reclamation and improvement of land is not consifad 
 until the expiration of that periotj. 
 
 693. Do you suppose that, on the whole, yoi get 
 notice of the inlprovements of dwellings and buildii^ 
 and the erection of new ones '? — The Act requires tkt 
 the poor rate collectors shall give in a retiua: " In 
 the course of their collection of the rates' it is supposed | 
 they ■svill see any changes, and they are required by j 
 the Act under a penalty to send us in those returns. 
 
 694. And then comes the annual revision 1—Tben 
 comes the aimual revision. 
 
 695. Baron Dowse. — Would that fifteen millions 
 include land and everything rateable in Ireland !— 
 Everything rateable in Ireland. The land, as land is 
 valued at £9,101,328 and the remainder is for build- 
 ings, £4,518,368. 
 
 696. But, sujppose there was a farm and a farm- 
 house on it, would all go together \ — No ; it would 
 not. 
 
 697. Mr. Kavanagh. — The farm-houses would-be 
 in the £4,000,000 off ?— Yes, I have it in anotherplace; 
 There is a million of difference. It includes the farm- 
 houses on those farms, and it would make it 'come to 
 over ten millions. 
 
 698. Baron Dowse. — I have heard it said bypeople 
 who speak popularly on the subject, that the fannsu 
 Ireland are valued at about £10,000,000 ?— Just so. 
 
 699. Chairman. — You have the area of the'ajjri- 
 cultural statistics of 1880. What is the quantity 
 of statute acres of arable land ? — There are 15,357,85o 
 statute acres. 
 
 700. Well, woods and plantations ?— 390,849 a«res; 
 rivers and lakes, 627,761 acres ; bogs, mountains,and 
 waste land, 4,497,024 acres. 
 
 701. What comes under the head of waste \m 
 when bog and mountain are mentioned % — Well, as tor 
 waste land, I am afraid I am unable to give an exact 
 definition of it. 
 
 702. Baron Dowse.— Would it include KilliM.T 
 HiU with the ground for villa sites ?— That worild not 
 be waste land, 
 
 703. Would it be valued at alii— It would be 
 valued. It would come undfer the denomination ot 
 building ground, although we have no right under the 
 Act to value it beyond its agricultural value. Tbe« 
 is no such thing as waste land, which you would cal 
 waste land. 
 
 704. I suppose you put in waste landasvbatis 
 not included iu anything else ?— Yes, just so. 
 
 There 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 31 
 
 i a classification of tlicse wliicli is another thing. Of 
 hat fovir millions, 1,300,000 acres are deep red bog 
 a. the lo-w country. 
 
 705. Chairman. — At what rate does that sort of 
 md stand 1 — I suppose about 3c/. an acre. There 
 re a million of acres of that supposed waste land that 
 ies at an elevation from 1,000 to 3,000 feet, and 
 ncapable of imjirovement. 
 
 706. In consequence of its elevation ? — From its 
 elevation and the nature of it, consisting of wild and 
 ■emote rocks and tops of mountain ranging from 
 1,000 to 3,000 feet high. 
 
 707. That must deduct a million? — Yes ; you must 
 leduct a million from the four millions. 
 
 70S. Can you give the amount of bog] — 1,300,000 
 j.cres of deep red flat bog in Ireland. 
 
 709. On which the turf would be cut away and 
 bhen it would be made reclaimablc ? — Some of that is 
 forty feet deep. The only thing that probably could 
 be done with that would be that if the Barrow, and 
 the Shannon and Suck, were lowered the bog land could 
 be drained and made more valuable for fuel. 
 
 710. Baron Dov.se. — Is it not a fact that a great 
 deal of that cut away bog, in consequence of its low 
 elevation never could be reclaimed] — It never could 
 be made land that would pay — bitterly impossible. 
 There are skirts of these great bogs that people have 
 taken in and tilled — portions cvit out along the margin 
 of these great bogs. 
 
 711. CiiAiRMAls'. — Now what of the mountain land 
 is the valuation given 1 Is it according to the 
 elevation solely ? — The Waterford mountains : the 
 Purple mountains in Ken-y, and the Donegal mount- 
 ains have been valued at something like a halipenny 
 an acre. They are used for grazing sheep and 
 goats. 
 
 712. Then it runs a change of valuation according 
 to the change of value in the soil 1 — Yes. 
 
 713. Baron Dowse. — Did you ever take into 
 account when the mountains are valued the use 
 made of them for shooting purposes 1 — No, there is 
 nothing in the Act of Parliament to allow us to do so. 
 
 714. But a moi-intain might be of very considerable 
 valiic for that pm-pose? — Yes, I know some mountains 
 value for £300, and the valuation may be only aIO. 
 
 715. But you cannot touch them? — No, we cannot 
 value them as shootings. 
 
 716. CHAIE,yA:^^". — The Parliamentai-y return rshows 
 the agricultural tenancies in 1870. Yfastliataretui-n 
 for the purposes of the Land Act" — That was a 
 Parliamentary return in 1870. I think it must have 
 been in connexion ■with the Land Act. 
 
 717. Can 5'ou give any later statement than that? 
 — No, we have nothing later. 
 
 718. The O'CoNoa Don.— Was that return made 
 out of your office l — No. It was prepared by the 
 Local Government Board. 
 
 719. You cannot vouch for the accuracy of that? — 
 I cannot. 
 
 720. Baron Dowse. — There is a return from which 
 people quote to show that there are 600,000 occupants 
 of land in Ireland 1 — That return was made out in our 
 office. 
 
 721. In what year was that? — It was made out 
 in 1867. 
 
 722. The O'Conor Don. — The return in Thorn's 
 Almanac or Directory is not from your office? — 
 No. 
 
 723. CiiAiRJiAN. — Did you give the Eegisti-ai-- 
 General's return for 1878? — The Pvegistrar-General's 
 return shows 41 0,435 holdings, or 72 per cent, of the 
 entire number of agricultural holdings under thirty 
 acres, which would make the average twelve 
 statute, or eight Irish acres. 
 
 724. Baron Dowse. — Now at page 752 of "Thorn" 
 there is a table : — " Propriators of land in Ireland in 
 1870 — a statement founded on a return presented to 
 the House of Commons, on the 23rd April, 1872, of 
 
 the number of landed proprietors in eacli province that 
 hold in perpetuity or long leases." Long leaseholders 
 are put down as owners of the land. Is that so ?— Yes, 
 it is. 
 
 725. Chairman. — Now what have you to say as to 
 the area under crops in 1859? — In 1859 there were 
 4,425,494 acres under crops, in meadow and 
 clover, 1,437,111 acres, and in grass, 9,490,922 
 acres. 
 
 726. Was not 1859 abovit the close of a series of 
 prosperous years?— Yes, but there have been pros- 
 perous years since that. Immediately after 1852 an 
 improvement took jJace. 
 
 727. And then after 1859 there was a depression? 
 —Yes. 
 
 728. The O'Conor Don. — Were those figures made 
 out at your office ? — They were taken from the 
 Registrar-General's retiirns. 
 
 729. Those are collected by the constabulary ? — - 
 They are .collected by the constabulary. 
 
 730. Chairman. — In 1880, what were the figures? 
 • — In 1880, under crops, 3,171,317 acres, under meadow 
 and clover, 1,109,907 acres; grass, 10,161,266 acres ; 
 That shows a decrease under crops, between 1859 and 
 1880, of 1,254,177 acres, or 28 per cent. 
 
 731. Under meadow and clover, what were they ? — 
 Under meadow and clover an increase of -^72,796 
 acres, or 32 percent., and under grass, an increase of 
 770,344 acres, being 8 per cent. 
 
 732. That excludes the mountain and bog? — Yes, 
 that makes up the fifteen millions of acres. 
 
 733. Baron Dowse. — Have you any idea where this 
 entry in page 681 of the present edition of Thom came 
 from : — " The number and classification of holdings in 
 each province in the years 1878 and 1879." The result is 
 that in Ireland in 1878, the total is 579,399 holdings ? 
 — It was compiled by the llegistrar-General. 
 
 734. From the agricultural statistics? — From the 
 agricultural statistics. 
 
 735. The O'Conor Don. — Could you give, from the 
 office, a return of the number of holdings in Ireland — 
 rated occupiers, in fact, in Ireland ? — We could.- 
 Would you confine that to agricultural holdings? 
 
 736. Yesj outside cities and tov^ns ? — Yes; we 
 could. 
 
 737. Could you give that in years, each year 
 separately, since 1870? — It would be a heavy under- 
 taking. We might do it for pei'haps two years. 
 
 738. Well, could you take the first year and the 
 last?— Yes. 
 
 739. Could you give the agi-icultural holdings before 
 in legard to the extent ? — Yes. 
 
 74<i. The agricultural statistics are selected by the 
 police from the information they get in the country 1 
 — Yes ; from their visits. 
 
 741. And that cannot be depended on? — The 
 return comes from every district in Ireland. 
 
 742. You form your statistics for charging the rate ? 
 — Yes. We would have some little difficulty in having 
 extreme accuracy for sometimes a man holds one or 
 two or more holdings, and we must make some de- 
 duction on that accoiint. For instance, it very often 
 occurs that a man holds two or three or four holdings, 
 and then it is only by the name we can have him 
 identified. 
 
 743. But that is a comparative statement, and com- 
 paring one year with another it would be the same ? — • 
 Yes. 
 
 744. Baron Dowse. — I have heard the statement 
 that if you add 25 per cent, to Griffith's valuation you 
 would have a fair idea of the letting value of land in 
 Ireland?— In 1876, 1 made an estimate according to 
 the best judgment I could give, and it turned out to 
 be 33 per cent. 
 
 745. Was that done to ascertain the rent that 
 should be paid 1 — No ; but the estimate of a new vahi- 
 
 Scpl. 2, 1880. 
 
 John Ball 
 Greene, Esq. 
 
 O.E. 
 
S-2 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2, 1880. 
 
 John Ball 
 Greene, Ksq., 
 
 C.B. 
 
 ation — that it -would be 33 per cent, on the valuation. 
 It rested on a scale of prices we have here. 
 
 746. That is, if there was a new valuation in Ireland 
 now there would be one-third additional ? — Yes ; from 
 £13,619,766 to £18,200,000. 
 
 747. Then it does not follow that because the rent 
 is above GrLfStli's valuation it is an unfair rent 1 — No. 
 It ought to be above it. 
 
 748. Chairman. — If there was a new valuation it 
 would necessarily increase the amount of taxation ?- — 
 It would not increase the amount of local taxation. 
 
 749. But everybody would be taxed 1 — Yes ; the 
 income tax would be increased. 
 
 750. Baron Dowse. — For imperial purposes they 
 would "i — ^Yes. 
 
 751. Chairman. — A new valuation would take a 
 considerable time to make of the whole of Ire- 
 land 1 — I think I made an estimate some years ago 
 that it would take from three to five years to com- 
 plete it. 
 
 752. Baron Dowse. — ^Are there many parts of 
 Ireland in which the land is not worth more than it is 
 valued for 1 — Not many places. There are some poor 
 places, where the people are really very poor, and I 
 doubt that they are able to pay the rent at all. That 
 is from smallness of their holdings and the poverty of 
 the people. 
 
 753. Is it a fact that there are parts of Donegal and 
 Kerry, and the west coast of Ireland in which, if the 
 people had the land for nothing they could not live 
 on if? — I don't think they could in some places if 
 they had it for nothing, in some of the holdings down 
 in Donegal, and in the extreme west of Ireland. I 
 know of one place in Donegal, where the unfortunate 
 accident occurred — Gweedore — where there are 400 
 tenants, and the highest rent that any of them pays 
 is £i 10s. 
 
 754. Chairman. — How do they pay it? — Only thej' 
 have other means they could not exist. 
 
 755. Is that place you speak of on the sea 1 — Yes, 
 on the sea near Gweedore. The other means they 
 have of living is by fishing and making socks, and their 
 families go out to work. 
 
 756. Baron Dowse. — I think that one of the causes 
 which led to the recent great distress was that there 
 was no demand in the previoiis year in England ior 
 labour from, this country 1 — Yes. 
 
 757. Is this bad land you spoke of generally coast 
 land or mountain landl — Yes, pure mountain land, 
 and a little tillage through the rooks. 
 
 758. Chairman. — Do you know how it originated 
 that these poor people settled down on the land ? — I 
 don't know. 
 
 759. I beliafce you have made some valuations for 
 the Board of Works in cases of arrangements lor the 
 purchase of small holdings 1 — Yes. That originated 
 in this way. After the passing of the Land Act in 
 1870, an application was made by a Clergyman 
 in Tyrone. He wished to purchase his holding, 
 and the Board of Works refused to give more tli.an 
 a certain proportion of Grifiith's valuation. He 
 was not satisfied with the amount, two-thirds of tlie 
 valuation, that was offered him, and he wrote direct to 
 Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Gladstone took the case in 
 hands, and I was communicated with, and desired to 
 send down and value this farm at its then letting 
 value, I did so, and I had to put a considerable increase 
 on the valuation, and he got the two-thirds, and 
 was satisfied with that, and he bought the land. 
 After that I was desired when the Board of Works 
 appHed in similar cases to get a special valuation 
 made, and I have on several occasions sent down some 
 of our best men to various parts of Ireland to make 
 valuations, but that has been to some extent, discon- 
 tinued, for the Board of Works now advance thirty 
 years' purchase on our valuation, and that generally 
 seems to satisfy the people, and latterly I have not had 
 any work of that kind to do. 
 
 ex- 
 
 760. Mr. Shaw. — Is it thirty years on GriffitJi' 
 valuation 1 — Yes. 
 
 761. The O'CoNOR Don. — Provided it does not 
 ceed two-thirds of the purchase-money 1 — Yes, 
 
 762. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that change tag 
 got rid of any difficulty 1 — I think it has, for I have had 
 no application for more than a year, perhaps two 
 years. 
 
 763. Suppose the Board of Works insist on goin» 
 on Griffith's valuation, and the tenant is satisfied 
 would you value the land for him without an order to 
 that effect 1 — ^The Board of Works could take Griffitt's 
 valuation. They are authorized by tlie Treasuiy to 
 take thirty years on it. 
 
 764. That is to bring it up as near as possible to 
 the present valuation 1 — Yes. 
 
 765. Chairman. — Was this valuation made at tie 
 expense of the tenant? — The tenant had to 
 the amount with the Board of Works before we 
 down. I think it was something very trifling. 
 
 766. Did that bring under your notice clauses in 
 the Land Act, relating to a peasant proprietary t- 
 Yes, it did. 
 
 767. Are you able to give any information on th 
 subject, so far as it came under yotu' notice?— Do yoii 
 mean as to the working. 
 
 768. Well, you may call it so ; but as to tLe reason 
 of the failure ? — I am afraid I am not able to give 
 any accurate information on that subject. 
 
 769. Did you ever make any vahiations for tie 
 Church Commissioners ? — We did. 
 
 770. By their instructions ? — By their instriittions, 
 and by the aiithority of the Treasury. 
 
 771. Was that in cases where the tenants thougM 
 that the prices demanded were too high ?— 1 really 
 fo)-get what was the principal object of it. If it is 
 desirable to know the facts, I could ascertain tiem. 1 
 quite forget if it was not for the jjurchase of tlie per- 
 petuity by the owners. 
 
 772. I was asking it more with reference to the ex- 
 pense of valuations of that sort, if this means of 
 purchase by tenants shall be extended 1 — The yaluet 
 was allowed 15s. for every night he was out, and tie 
 rate of pay that he got at the valuation ofiioe, 
 
 773. And it was paid by the Treasury ?— That was 
 piaid by the Church Commissioners, and his tint 
 deducted from the service. 
 
 774. Then they charged the tenant ?— I don'thow, 
 
 775. Baron Dowse. — Have you ever turned yon 
 attention to this question of what is called peasant j 
 proprietary, further than you were compelled by tb : 
 duties of your office 1 — I can only give an opimon, 
 
 776. Do you think it would be advantageous to tit 
 country to help to increase the number of peasm' 
 proprietors in the country ? — I do not, in a ■wholes* 
 way. I think if there was a limitation to sometMnj 
 like twenty acres, or so, it might ; but I do nott» 
 it would be a beneficial thing to the country if all * 
 people we have here— 400,000 of them— with » 
 average of eight or twelve acres, if they were pi"- 
 prietors. I don't see that that would be a benefit, 
 
 777. Supposing that farms were taken from twntj 
 acres or thereabouts? — Yes; twenty acres or there- 
 abouts. 
 
 778. You would have some regard to the character 
 of the farmer, I suppose, as to his thrift and industry • 
 — I don't know. 
 
 779. Would you consider it requisite that W 
 should be able to pay his part of the pMohase-monej 
 and not be obliged to borrow?— I don't think tins 
 system could be adopted without considerable adrancffl 
 being made to the tenants, and I think they woul« 
 be embarrassed. If you take the average rente « 
 half the agricultural holdings in Ireland, » 
 £10. If an advance of two-thirds is made to 
 man, and he has to borrow one-third to buy the m 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 33 
 
 ing, tlie man rented at £10 would, in thirty-five years, 
 pay it off; but he would be paying £12 10s. for thirty! 
 five years. You would increase his rent for thirty-five 
 years. — (See Table in Apjiendix.) 
 
 780. Would he not pay more to a usurer if he was 
 to get an advance from him 1 — He would. 
 
 781. Your idea on the subject is that it might be 
 nseful, or that it might be tried with holdings of con- 
 siderable size, and with tenants who had the money 1 
 —Yes, certainly. I think that would be a very de- 
 sirable thing. 
 
 782. Mr. Kavaxagh. — To adopt it as a general rule 
 throughout the entire country would bo nothing but 
 transferring the payment of rents to London ? — Yes. 
 Of course, if the Government advance a man two- 
 thirds, they must become for thirty-five ye;ii s the land- 
 lords. 
 
 783. The O'Coxor Don. — Could you tell us when the 
 valuation of the first county was published under tlie 
 Valuation Act 1 — I can, but I have not got it here. 
 
 781-. Am I correct in stating that it was in 1833 '? 
 — Yes ; I think so. 
 
 785. And the last one in 1865"? — Yes ; Armagh. 
 
 786. So that it is twenty-seven years ago since the 
 first county was valued, and fifteen since the last 1 — 
 Well, not vakied ; because, as I stated before, there 
 are a great many of the valuations in that return. 
 There are a number of counties that were valued in 
 1853 and 1854. These must have been several years 
 in progress ; in fact, you may say they were in pro- 
 gress from 1814, when the first tenement valuation 
 commenced. 
 
 787. Some of the southern counties were valued 
 from 1844 to 1846 1— They were. 
 
 788. What took place after the passing of the new 
 Act in 1852 was simply to reduce them to the scale of 
 the new Act ? — Precisely. 
 
 789. Well, since the last county was valued have 
 there not been several proposals for a revaluation of 
 Ireland 1 — There were several bills brought in — three, 
 I think. Some were read a second time. 
 
 790. Did you not furnish to the Government and 
 to the Committee of the House of Commons the rate 
 of increase that you thought ought to be added in each 
 county? — I did. 
 
 791. Would you put in that return to us ? — Yes ; but 
 that return would not give the increase to bring it up 
 to the present letting value. 
 
 792. You think that increase would still be under 
 the letting value'? — it would — that is to bring it to 
 the same standard as Ulster. 
 
 793. In order to bring the whole of Ireland to the 
 present standard of Ulster, you calculated that in a 
 considerable number of counties there should be an 
 increase of 5s. in the pound in some cases, in others 
 4s., and others 3s. 4d. 1 — Yes. 
 
 794. Merely to bring it up to the standard of Ulster 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 795. Which standard of Ulster you consider is be- 
 low the letting value 1 — Yes ; I do. 
 
 796. The standard of Ulster being based |heoreti- 
 cally upon a scale of prices considerably below the pre- 
 sent scale ? — Considerably. 
 
 797. Now did you not actually revalue one coiinty 
 in anticipation that the bill would pass? — We re- 
 valued Dublin. 
 
 798. What increase did you put on it? — In the 
 county of Dubliir we put on some places 50 per cent. 
 
 799. Mr. Shaw.— That was on buildings princi- 
 pally 1 — A good deal. It was on the land too. 
 
 800. That 50 per cent, included buildings ?— Yes ; 
 it did. 
 
 801. TheO'CoxoR Don. — As a matter of fact is not 
 the increased yalue of buildings put on in tlie whole 
 of Ireland 1 — Yes ; on improvements. 
 
 802. Did you not value the land in the county of 
 Dublin separately 1 — Yes ; separately from the build- 
 ings. 
 
 803. And you increased its value very considerably ? 
 — Very considerably. 
 
 804. I think you stated in the House of Commons Sejit. 2, laso, 
 that you increased it £120,000?— I thought it was , , ^'iZ, 
 more than that. r ,^ „ 
 
 BUO. Well, that valuation has never been acted 
 upon 1 — It has never been acted upon. 
 
 806. Baron Dowse.— The county of Dublin would 
 be the one you could put the most on, for its situation 
 and from the number of villas?— I don't know about 
 that. There is v.-ry good land. To value land is 
 different from buildings. 
 
 807. Did that valuation include the villas 1— It in- 
 cluded the \ihole county. 
 
 808. Tlie O'CoNOR Don.— But that did not include 
 the buildings ? — No. 
 
 809. Exclusive of buildings it was a valuation of 
 the land? — It was a valuatiou of the land. 
 
 810. Baron Dowse. — Supposing there was a field of 
 four acres — a mere agricultural field — in 1852, and 
 supposing that afterwards there was a villa in tiie 
 corner of the field, and that the field was turned into 
 a pleasure-ground and garden, you would leave out the 
 house, but would include the pleasure-ground and gar- 
 den? — Yes; the pleasure-ground and garden. We 
 value them as villa land. 
 
 811. Mr. Shaw. — Not agricultural land 1 — Not agri- 
 cultural land. 
 
 812. The O'CoNOii Don. — Now did not the valu- 
 ators judge very much on the old scale in making tlio 
 tenement valuation ? — I would not like to say that 
 because if you saw the instructions that wore issucd'by 
 Sir Eiohard Grifiith, you would see that the land w;is 
 divided into qualities, and it was not necessary to go 
 into calculations. Land that would produce ten or 
 twelve barrels of grain an acre would be valued at 
 a certain rate, and land that produced more would be 
 valued at so much, and grass land to feed a beast or- 
 three or four sheep at so much. The valuers had to 
 exercise their judgment. As to making any valuation 
 perfect it is out of the question. 
 
 813. Mr. SiiAw. — Have you that schedule of in- 
 structions ? — I have. 
 
 814. Have you a copy of the instructions which were 
 issued to the valuators by Sii' E,. Griffith ? — I did not 
 bring it with me but it can be had in the office. 
 
 815. Chaikmax. — Is it the general rule that the 
 valuation of inferior land is nearer the actual value 
 than that of the better class of land ? — At present it is. 
 It was not so when there was a larger population in the 
 country and the demand for land was great. The cir- 
 cumstances of the country have changed since, and that' 
 class of land is not of the same value now that it was: 
 then. 
 
 817. Agreatdeal of land has gone out of cultivation? 
 — Yes. At present the inferior land is value:! rela- 
 tively too high as compared with the good land. 
 
 818. Baron Dowse. — When you say a good de;il of 
 land has gone out of cultivation, do you mean ihat 
 arable land has been converted into pasture ? — That 
 has been the case to a great extent, the demand for 
 land was greater when there was a denser population, 
 and more was used for tillage ; it is not now of the same 
 vahie. 
 
 819. The O'ConorDox.— Is the scale of prices in 
 the Act of 1852 higher or lower than the scale in 
 the Townland Valuation Act ? — I think it is lower. 
 Some things are higher and some lower. For instance 
 beef is higher in the Act of 1852. Perhaps I may as 
 well read the prices in the schedule attached to the 
 Townland Valuation Act, they were — wheat, 10s. per 
 cwt. ; oats, 6s. ; barley, 7s. ; potatoes. Is. Id. ; butter, 
 69s. ; beef, 33s. ; mutton, 34s. 6d. ; i^ork, 25s. 6d ; 
 wheat, oats, and barley, are lower in the Act of 1852. 
 
 820. And meat higher ? — Meat is higher. 
 
 821. On the whole, would you say the valuation 
 made under the Act of 1852 was lower than that made 
 under the Act of 1826 ?— I would say that the valua- 
 tion under the Act of 1852 was higher tlian tlie town- 
 land valuation. 
 
 822. Would you say that was so with regard to the 
 Province of Muuster, that was done first ? — The valua- 
 
 F 
 
S4> 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2, 1880. 
 
 John Ball 
 Greene, Esq. 
 
 tiou of Munster was never done under the original 
 Townland Act. 
 
 823. It was done under the Act of 1846 1 — ISTo. 
 There was a portion of it done under the Act of 
 1846, and then reduced to the standard of the subse- 
 quent Act, but there never was a townland valuation 
 made vmder the Act of 1826 in Munster. 
 
 824. Do yoii think there is much consolidation of 
 farms going on in Ireland 1 — I have been looking into 
 that, and from some iigures that I had in the office, I 
 found that, from the year 1872 down to 1876 or 1877 
 — I am not sure which — there were about 20,000 
 farms consolidated. 
 
 825. Chaibman. — 20,000?— Yes; it was only 
 an approximate paper which I made out for my own 
 information. 
 
 826. The O'Conor Don.— Do you tliink that in 
 those cases the farms were absorbed into adjoining 
 farms 1 — They were absorbed, I think, in this way — a 
 portion would be added to one adjoining farm, and a 
 portion to another ; not that the entire was added to 
 any one farm. 
 
 827. You think the general rule is to subdivide the 
 absorbed farm amongst the adjoining occupiers? — I 
 think so. 
 
 828. Mr. Shaw. — Were you engaged in the 1852 
 valuation yourself, Mr. Greene? — Yes; I joined the 
 Valuation Department in 1850. 
 
 829. What class of persons were engaged in that 
 valuation generally — were they persons sent from 
 Dublin ? — They were generally respectable men of the 
 farming class that Sir R. Griffith jjicked up here and 
 there when going about the country, and employed 
 them, finding that they were skilful men. A great 
 many of them he got from finding them giving evidence 
 against his own valuation on appeals in the Appeal 
 Court. 
 
 830. You did it coimty after county ? — County after 
 county. 
 
 831. You did one county and finished it, and then 
 went to another ? — No ; we went on with a great many 
 counties at the same time. 
 
 832. The O'Conor Don. — I presume you were never 
 a valuator yourself ? — I was. I have valued; but I 
 
 ' was more a director of others than a valuator myself. 
 
 833. Mr. Shaw — I suppose you know the course 
 they adopted. Did they visit each farm 1 — Yes ; they 
 visited each farm separately, dug it up, inspected tlie 
 soil and the subsoil, saw the crops, and having the 
 area of the farm, and the scale of prices, took the re- 
 sults down in their books. 
 
 834. Do you think the scale of prices is a sufficient 
 basis to go upon when valuing a farm — is it a guide 
 that you can always act on ? — I do not see how, if you 
 take the principle of valuation to be that you are to 
 value the farm on the estimate of what rent it would 
 fetch, one year with another — I do not see how the 
 valuator could do that without Icnowing the prices of 
 agricultural produce at the time he is valuin<^. 
 
 835. But the price is not enough ; because we may 
 have low prices this year, and high prices in other 
 years, and yet the farmer may be much better able 
 this year to pay his rent than when he had higher 
 prices. You must take other things into estimation 
 as well as prices?— Of course, you must take into 
 account the cost of labour, and rates and taxes. 
 
 836. And the average of years, good harvests and 
 bad ? — Of course ; if you wanted to make a valuation 
 now, to be completed say in five years, in my 
 opinion it ought to be based on a scale of prices show- 
 ing the average of the last three years. 
 
 837. Otherwise it would be very misleading; the 
 prices for one or two years might be very misleading ? 
 — They might ; but you must go upon some average 
 of prices. I do not see how you could do it other- 
 wise. 
 
 838. It is one of the elements in arrivin" at the 
 value ? — Yes. 
 
 839. Must vou not also take as an element the in- 
 
 creased cost of labour and the burden of local ta vat; 
 on the farm ?— Yes. ^^ 
 
 840. And the increased cost of living ?_ Certain] 
 of course aU those things should be considered. 
 
 841. You might find on calculating all these ek 
 ments, that although the prices of agricultural produce 
 were higher, you could not raise the rent in auythia» 
 like that proportion 1—1 may observe that althoiil 
 the cost of labour, that is, the wages of labourers ham 
 doubled since 1850, I do not think that that would 
 have to be taken into account in anything like that 
 proportion, because although the wages of labouren 
 have increased, the amount of labour done on the fam 
 has been lessened very much by the employment of 
 machinery — reaping machines, mowing machines and 
 machines for almost every kind of farming operation 
 are now extensively used, and that has tended to lessen 
 the cost of labour very much. Of course the poorer 
 class of tenants cg-miot derive much benefit from that 
 but then they do the greater part of the work them- 
 selves. 
 
 842. Baron Dowse. — Do you take into account at 
 all the probability of occasional bad harvests J— No. 
 
 843. Mr. Shaw. — Don't you think you ought to 'do 
 so ? — Do you mean when making a valuation! 
 
 843a. Yes ; don't you think that there beiogalm 
 a certain average of bad harvests you ought to taketkt 
 into account, and make a deduction from the valuation 
 to meet it ? — I think the prices would regulate that. 
 
 844. The prices would probably be very high m tie 
 worst harvests 1 — I don't know about that ; I tiuit, 
 looking at the quantity of American produce, tiere 
 would be no violent fluctuation. 
 
 845. Baron Dowse. — There might not be much 
 fluctuation in prices, but what difierence would that 
 make, or what satisfaction would a farmer have by i 
 higher prices prevailing for produce, if he has not I 
 anything to sell ? But I suppose in. estimatmg the 
 value of a farm, you take the weather into account, 
 one year with another 1 — Yes. 
 
 846. Chairman. — We have now had three successive 
 years of bad harvests ? — Yes. 
 
 847. Mr. Shaw. — You take the price and the pro- 
 bable amount the farm will produce into estimation 
 when valuing? — Yes. 
 
 848. The prices alone would not be enough?— Cer- 
 tainly not ; they are only one of the elements. I may 
 mention witli regard to that that the j-eason wemade 
 the valuation higher in Ulster relatively to the other 
 provinces was that we found that in Ulster they got 
 a lai-ger amount of produce from the land than the 
 same quantity and quality of land yielded in Munfc 
 and Connaught. 
 
 849. They were better farmers ? — Yes. 
 
 850. Baron Dowse. — So that the DIster farmerhad 
 to pay higher rates because he was more industrious! 
 —Yes. 
 
 851. Mr. Shaw. — Are you practically acquaiatei 
 with the poorer districts of Munster ?-— I am prti J 
 well acquainted with Ireland generally. 
 
 852. Do you know the county Cork ? — I do. 
 
 853. I wish to call your attention to the district 
 from Crookstown to Bantry 1 — Yes, I know that 
 idace. 
 
 854. You know the high land there? — Yes. 
 
 855. My opinion as a practical man, and the opinion 
 of others, is that the valuation there is higher than 
 the letting value of the land ? — I have already stated 
 that I think the valuation of inferior and bad land is, 
 for the reason I have mentioned, at present relatively 
 higher than that of land of a better quality. 
 
 856. I would not call it bad land so much as light 
 land. The opinion of practical men in the south of 
 Ii-eland is, that upon such land your valuation is qiiit* 
 equal, and in some cases in excess of the actual lettmg 
 value 1 — That would no doubt be the case in some 
 places, at the same time it is not general through the 
 country. 
 
 857. Did you issue any insti-uctions to the valua- 
 tors when valuing Dublin lately ?— Nothing new. - 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 oa 
 
 858. Did they take with them the old code of in- 
 structions and the old scale of prices ? — No ; they 
 went on the actual letting value. I may mention we 
 were authorized to go on with that valuation on the 
 assumption that an Act would be passed ; the Govern- 
 ment said, " We will bring in a bUl next year to pro- 
 ceed with the valuation of Ireland — in the meantime 
 go on with the county of Dublin " 1 — The bill was 
 brought in but it was not passed, and we therefore 
 <liscontinued the work. 
 
 859. Chairman. — You. say that was a valuation 
 jiot based on a scale of prices 1 — Not on a scale of 
 prices. 
 
 860. It was based on what you estimated the rent 
 should be 1 — Yes, the fair amiual rent. 
 
 861. Baron Dowse. — After deductions for out- 
 goings 1 — Yes. 
 
 862. CiiAiEMAN. — You don't mean what the land 
 would let for if put up to competition, but the fair 
 rent — what you would call the fail- letting value ? — 
 Yes. I think the valuation should be based on what 
 the rent ought to be, not what it is. If we took the 
 actual rent as the value for rating purposes, it would 
 in many cases be very unjust. 
 
 863. Baron Dowse. — Supposing legislation went in 
 this direction, that there sho\ild be some mode of re- 
 gulating rents otherwise than at present, some person 
 appointed to act as an arbitrator and fix the rent in 
 case of difference between tenant and landlord, do you 
 think your office could furnish competent men for 
 settling the rental in disputed cases? — It could be 
 done, of course, but it would be a serious matter, and 
 whether it could be done with our present staff would 
 depend on the amount of work to be done. 
 
 864. Your office could furnish the materials for 
 doing it 1 — Yes. I am satisfied it could be done, and 
 I think with satisfaction, probably to both parties. T 
 think they would rather have a valuation made by an 
 independent aiithority than one made by persons ap- 
 pointed by either side. 
 
 865. Mr. SiiAW. — Do you think it would be pos- 
 sible for a central body in Dublin to value for letting 
 purposes, all the land throughout Ireland t — "Well, I 
 have said it wovild be a serious undertakiag if there 
 were a very large amount of work to be done. 
 
 866. Baron Dowse. — I am only referring to cases 
 of disagreement between landlord and tenant, as to 
 the amount of rent, and what I asked was, if your 
 office could furnish men who whould be competent in 
 such cases to settle the matter satisfactorily to both 
 praties 1—1 think so. 
 
 867. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think a person not a 
 practical farmer or acquainted with land could do it ? 
 — (,'ertainly not; but we would send our best valuators 
 who have had practical experience and knowledge, 
 being practically acquainted with farming. 
 
 868. You have a staff of that kind ? — Yes ; but not 
 sufficiently large for an extensive work of that kind. 
 
 869. In case of landlord and tenant not agreeing as 
 to the amount of rent in any part of the country, you 
 could send a man of that class, who could examme the 
 land and arbitrate between them, fixing the value, and 
 giving his reason for his decision 1 — Quite so ; and let 
 the parties have an appeal as under the present Valua- 
 tion Act. I think the thing could be done. We have 
 
 made such valuation already for the Board of Works 
 and for the Church Commissioners. 
 
 870. We have heard it stated there are 500,000 
 agricultural holdings iu Ireland— is liot that very 
 much more than the actual number of farms — does it 
 not include town lots, land attached to buildings not 
 of an agricultural character, and small lots connected 
 with villas near towns I—It does ; but all the towns 
 and villages are excluded from it. Actual towns and 
 villages are excluded, but townparks outside the limits 
 of the town are included. 
 
 871. And villas with four or five acres are included? 
 — Yes. 
 
 872. What is your estimate of the actual number of 
 
 agricultural holdings, have you airy record of it 1 
 
 No. I think the O'Conor Don suggested we should 
 make out a return of that, kind, but we could not. I 
 should state, however, that the villa residences are 
 principally confined to a few large cities, such as Cork, 
 Dublin, and Belfast, and a few about Limerick. 
 
 873. You see no difficulty in persons living in the 
 neighbourhood of towns, buying their five or six acres 
 of land — there is no reason why they should not 1 — 
 Certainly not, if they have the money. 
 
 874. Is there any reason why the occupier of five 
 or six acres in a country district, should not do it and 
 become a peasant proprietor 1 — I see none, if he has 
 the money to do it. 
 
 875. Is there any reason why they should not be 
 helped to do it ? — Well I think that persons living near 
 a town have greater facilities for adding to their 
 income, than people living in remote country places. 
 I am not in favour of an extensive system of peasant 
 proprietorship of such small class of holdings. 
 
 876. Chairman. — Unless in localities in which the 
 parties would have other means of subsistence 1 — Yes. 
 I think it would only end in collapse, and that in a 
 few years more would be bought up by their next door 
 neighbours, and that the condition of the poorer classes 
 would not be improved. 
 
 877. What harm would it do the country if their 
 next door neighbours did buy them up ! — No harm, 
 except that the man would not remain in the position he 
 was previously in, he would cease to be a proprietor, 
 I am only giving my opinion. I could show you 
 a calculation of the effect of it — if that would be of 
 any use, I worked it out for my O'^vn information — • 
 taking the case of a man whose rent was £10, and 
 buying his land at twenty-five years purchase, he 
 would have to pay an increased rent of 25 per cent, 
 for thirty-five years ; and if he bought at twenty-six 
 or twenty-seven years purchase, his rent instead of 
 £10 would be increased to £13 or £14 a year, for 
 thirty-five years. 
 
 878. That is if he borrowed the whole money 1 — 
 Yes, assuming that he borrowed only the portion of 
 the purchase money allowed to be advanced by the 
 Board, and that he had the remaining one-third liira- 
 self, the repayment would be £8 6s. 8d. yearly, for 
 thirty-five yeai'S. 
 
 879. Baron Dowse. — That would he remedied if 
 Government would lend on cheaper terms than at 
 present 1 — Yes. 
 
 880. Mr. Shaw. — Or extend the period of repay- 
 ment 1 — Yes, of course that might be done. 
 
 Adjourned to the following morning. 
 
 Sept. 2, 1880. 
 
 John Ball 
 Greene, Esq. 
 
3G 
 
 HUSH LAND ACT COMMISSION. 1880. 
 
 Sfpt. 8, 1880. 
 
 John 
 
 la Touche, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 THIRD DAY— FRIDAY, 3ed SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 Present :— The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessboroug 
 
 The b'CoNOR Don, Arthur MacMorrough 
 
 BOROUGH, Chairman; Eight Hon. Baron Dowse 
 Kavanagh, Esq., D.L., William Shaw, Esq., m,p. ' 
 
 John La Touche, Esq., examined. 
 
 88L CHAiRiiA>\— You live at Harristown, Mr. 
 La Touche "J— Yes. 
 
 882. You are an owner of property there ?--I am 
 an owner of three estates in Kildare, an estate in the 
 county Leitrim and another in the county Dublin, and 
 I have had experience of estates in Tipperary ' and iir 
 Limerick also. For the last thirty-three years I have 
 had the management of property in these several 
 counties. 
 
 8S:]. I suppose in the course of your management 
 of these properties you have had some experience of 
 the working of the Land Act?— AVell, I never had a 
 case myself that exactly came under the provisions of 
 the Land Act to deal with. I understand the work- 
 ing of it pretty well, but practically I never had a 
 case under the Land Act to deal with myself. 
 
 884-. Have you any knowledge of cases that arose 
 on neighbouring properties? — Oh, yes; I have had 
 knowledge of oases that arose in neighbouring counties. 
 
 885. Are there any special points in the Act as to 
 wliioh you are prepared to give some information to 
 the Commissioners with a view to improve the relation 
 between landlord and tenant in Ireland 1 — As far as 
 my knowledge goes it works extremely well, but I 
 should be myself inclined to extend the provisions of 
 the Act so as to apply not only to -tenants-at-will but 
 to tenants having leases, ancl I should provide full 
 compensation to tenants for the improvements they 
 have made on their farms on leaving their holdings, 
 whether voluntarily or not. 
 
 886. The O'Conor Don. — Is not that the present 
 law '? — I rather think not. 
 
 8o7. Are not tenants entitled to compensation for 
 iurprovements no matter how they leave their farms 1 
 — Not all tenants. Tenants holding up to a certain 
 valuation are — not tenants holding mider a long lease. 
 I would extend to all tenants the advantages and 
 privileges of the provisions of that Act. T know some 
 cases myself where if the landlord had not been very 
 kind indeed improvements made by the tenants would 
 certainly have been sacrificed. 
 
 888. That is probably in the case of leases made 
 before the passing of the Land Act ? — It is. 
 
 8S0. CiiAiBJiAN. — These are cases that are excepted 
 in the Act? — These are cases that are excepted. 
 
 890. Bai-on Dowse. — One of the exceptions is the 
 clause dealing with improvements made before the 
 Act, and twenty years before the claim. Originally 
 the Bill v/as different, but it was afterwards altered 
 in the House of Lords, and I understand that you 
 would make it general and apply it to all tenants ? — I 
 would make it general. 
 
 891. Chairman. — In all cases, whether leases were 
 made before the Act or after it? — Certainly, and I 
 would prohibit any clause being inserted by the land- 
 lord or any covenant which would deijri\ e the tenant 
 of his advantages and privileges under tlie Act. At 
 the present time it is within the power of the landlord 
 or tenant to contract out of it. 
 
 892. That is tenants over a certain valuation 1 — The 
 landlord can put such a covenant in his lease as would 
 deprive the tenant of any advantage whatever under 
 the Land Act at present. 
 
 893. He cannot contract himself out of his claim 
 for improvements, I think, or compensation for distur- 
 bance unless he is over a certain valuation?— I would 
 do away with the limit of valuation. 
 
 89-1. Baron Dowse.— Do I understand you to say 
 that m all cases no matter what the valuation may be 
 so long as tlie relation of landlord and tenant exists' 
 
 the tenant should not be allowed to contract Imsit 
 out of the benefit of the Act ? — Exactly. 
 
 895. Chairman. — Are you aware of any caseswhere 
 the Act has worked harshly for the tenant in coubb. 
 quence of the contracting clauses ? — Not that I could 
 state the details of, but I know as regards a tenantof 
 my own, who paid me £300 a year rent, and whodied 
 leaving a widow. Immediately after his death the 
 widow tendered to me the lease, and wished to give 
 up the holding. If I had been pleased to take uptJie 
 farm at that time, the widow and her family touM 
 have been at considerable loss. Her husband Lad 
 made improvements in the land, and the farm had 
 , been set at a very moderate rent, I advised her to 
 consider the matter for a few days, and after some 
 consideration she determined not to give it up, but I 
 could have taken advantage of her proposal to give it 
 up. I have since let the farm for the advantage of the 
 children at about £100 a year more than the original 
 rent in the lease to the tenant who died. 
 
 89G. You have let it as trustee for the children'- 
 Yes. 
 
 897. Baron Dowse. — And if you had availed yom- 
 self of your legal rights, at the end of the lease yoii 
 might have put that £100 a year into your own 
 pocket 1 — I could, and also the value of any improve- 
 ments that were made. 
 
 898. Chairman. — Could you have taken the leas'e 
 from that woman against her will 1 — She proposed to 
 give it up voluntarily. 
 
 899. But if she wished to keep it you could not 
 have taken it from her ? — Oh, I would not have 
 taken it. 
 
 900. Baron Dowse. — The term of the lease was not 
 expired ? — No, there were thirty years of the term 
 still in existence. 
 
 901. The O'CoNOR Don. — How could you have 
 broken the lease if the woman had not wished to 
 give it up ? — I would not have attempted it. 
 
 902. In what way would it have been in your power 
 to have deprived this poor woman of the £100 a year 
 interest she had in. the land if she had not chosen to 
 have given it up ? — I could not have done it, and I 
 would not have attempited to do it, but it was lier own 
 free propiosal. She pressed me to take the farm off 
 her hands, she had several young children, and said 
 she could not manage it. 
 
 903. Baron Dowse. — But if the lease had expired 
 then you could have got all the value of the tenant's 
 improvements, and it is to prevent things like that, 
 you think the provisions of the Land Act should be 
 extended 1 — Exactly to prevent the tenant's improve- 
 ments from being taken. I could have taken the lease , 
 and the woman would have given me a receipt then 
 and there, and would have been very much obliged to 
 me, but I saw that she was doing a foolish thing for 
 her own interest. 
 
 901:. Mr. Kavanagh.— In fact you wish to altertlie 
 law in order to protect the tenant from her own folly, 
 because it would have been folly, would it not, in to 
 case ? — It was foolish. The poor woman was » 
 distress, having just lost her husband, and she told mo 
 she was unable to manage a large farm like that herself, 
 and she said it would be a great kindness if I ^o"'''' 
 take it up from her. 
 
 90.5. Chairman. — I suppose it may not be an un- 
 usual thing to happen in (^ases where a widow with 
 a young family, particularly in the case of a large farm, 
 would find herself quite unable to carry on the fai'iD' 
 ing business herself? — I don't think it is unusual. 
 
 906. And in such cases, though very desirous to rw 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 herself of tlie liabilities of farming, slie might be 
 denuded of all compensation for her husband's interest 
 in the lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 907. Baron Dowse. — Was there a power of sale in 
 that lease — was there a clause against alienation 1 — 
 There was. 
 
 908. Then she could not have sold her interest 
 without your assent 1 — Without my assent she could 
 not have sold it. Afterwards when she had taken the 
 advice of her friends, she asked me to allow her to sell 
 it but that I would not do. 
 
 909. Baron Dowse. — Bvit I understand the gist of 
 your evidence to be that on the expiration of the lease, 
 ho matter how long the term of the lease was or what the 
 rent was, you would so alter the law that a man who 
 made unexhausted improvements on that farm should 
 not be deprived of the advantages of the Act, as in a 
 certain class of cases as the law at present stands, he 
 is 1 — Certainly. 
 
 910. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are there not leases made 
 that are given at a low rent to tenants upon con- 
 dition that they are to make certain improvements 't — • 
 Yes, I have given such leases myself. 
 
 911. At the end of that leass would you think it 
 right that you should be obliged to compensate the 
 tenant for improvements that he made upon the condi- 
 tion that he should have the farm at a low rent 1 — I 
 should not. That would be stated in the lease. 
 
 912. Baron Dowse. — The improvements would ba 
 yours then, the rent having been fixed at a low rate in 
 consideration of their being made ? — Exactly, at a low 
 rate. I have made such leases. Upon that point I 
 think it would be advisable if there was an oiKce for 
 the registration of improvements. 
 
 913. Chaiemax. — There is a power of registration 
 xinder the Land Act 1 — I think it might be simplified 
 -by having it done at the Petty Sessions Courts. Ten- 
 
 " ants will not take a great deal of trouble in those 
 matters. 
 
 914. And it becomes expensive to them 1 — Too ex- 
 pensive, I think it would avoid disputes if there was 
 n, register of improvements kept. I have thoiight that 
 t .e Petty Sessions Clerk of a Petty Sessions district 
 -could easily keep it upon the tenant first giving notice 
 to the landlord that he intended to make such improve- 
 naents. 
 
 915. Such notice as he is bound to give now if he 
 goes in to have them registered according to the clause 
 ■of the Land Act 1 — Yes. 
 
 916. The O'CoxoR Don. — Do you think that many 
 tenants would take advantage of such a provision 1 — 
 I don't think a great many would, but I think it is 
 just that they should have that power of making im- 
 provements if the landlord declines to do so, and then 
 that on giving up their farms from any cause they 
 should be compensated for the full value of their im- 
 provements. 
 
 917. But every tenant who makes improvements 
 ,under a letting since the Land Act or under a tenancy 
 from year to year, would be comi:)ensated under the 
 existing law, so that your answer only applies to leases 
 that were made before the passing of the Act ; is not 
 that so ? — To thirty -one years leases. 
 
 918. You would do away with that provision with 
 xegard to thirty-one years leases 1 — I would. 
 
 • 919. But under the clause in the Land Act with 
 reo'ard to thii-ty-one years leases is not the tenant en- 
 ■titled to compensation for improvements although he is 
 not entitled to compensation for disturbance ? — Yes, he 
 is. I am not sui-e in the event of his voluntarily giving 
 up his farm or wishing to remove whether he could 
 claim for improvements. 
 
 920. Baron Dowse. — If I understand what Mr. 
 LaTouche saidhisideaonthe subject is, he would abolish 
 these restrictions and exemptions in the Land Act and 
 make it applicable to every kind of tenancy, whether 
 the lettmg was made before or after the passing of the 
 Land Act, as far as the unexhausted improvements 
 that the tenant has made are concernedj unless he made 
 
 them under a contract with the landlord and got the 6<p«. 3, isso. 
 land at a reduced rent in consequence 1 — Yes. j , 
 
 921. Chairman. — Have you yearly tenants as well LaTouche, 
 as tenants under lease ? — Oh, yes. lisi. 
 
 922. In the cases of yearly tenants do you recognise 
 a tenant-right or goodwill in the tenant? — No, I do 
 not. 
 
 923. Baron Dowse. — You do not allow him to sell ? 
 —No. 
 
 924. Even with your assent 1 — No ; I do not recog- 
 nise that on my estate. 
 
 925. A tenancy from year to year is a term 
 that any man is entitled to sell, whatever may be the 
 value of it, whethei' the landlord assents or not, but 
 the landlord on the other hani.l has his power of inter- 
 fci'mg by serving a notice to quit ; do you lecognise 
 the tenant's right to sell the interest, such as it is, of 
 his tenancy from j'car to year 1 — I do not. I do 
 not admit that the yearly tenant has any interest in 
 his farm farther than the extent of the improvements 
 he has made. 
 
 926. Mr. Shaw. — Have you allowed them to sell 
 in practice 1 — No. 
 
 927. Baron Dowse. — Surely, the tenant has his 
 tenancy from year to year, at all events 1 — I never 
 allow him to sell. 
 
 928. Chairman. — Tha.t is, you would consider it a 
 ground for a notice-to-quit if a man did sell 1 — Well, 
 it has been always the rule on my estate to prevent it, 
 and as soon as we hear that anything of the kind is 
 likely to take place, we j)rtt a stop to it. My agent 
 was ofi'ered £80, on my estate in Leitrim, for a farm 
 of six acres — more than the fee-simple of the land — 
 there was no lease — a tenant-at-will, and a small 
 holding. One tenant ofi'ered another £80 for it. Of 
 course, we stopped that. I heard it was to be done, 
 and I would not allow it. 
 
 929. What means did you take to stop it? — My 
 bailiff got information of it, and wrote up to my agent, 
 and my agent went down there, and forbad this 
 tenant (my tenant) to make over this farm to the 
 tenant who wished to have it. That tenant ofi'ered 
 my agent £80 to get possession of the farm; but I 
 would not allow it. 
 
 930. Have you ever considered the question of the 
 genera] introduction of tenant-right throughout Ire- 
 land ? — I have considered that question. I am very 
 strongly opposed to it. I think it is unjust to the 
 landlords, and I think it would be most disadvan- 
 tageous to the tenants. I think it would be unjust to 
 the landlord in this way because I think that the 
 difference between the rent that a tenant pays for his 
 farm — the rent that the landlord lets it to him at — 
 and the higher rent that he could obtain from another 
 tenant — that projoerty, I consider, belongs to the land- 
 lord, and not to the tenant. I have let a farm of — 
 say 50 acres — at £1 an acre. That farm is worth 305. 
 an acre. Many tenants would be willing to pay that 
 rent for it. I would not allow the tenant to sell the 
 difference between £1 an acre and the 30«. an acre 
 that another tenant would willingly give for it. I 
 consider that that property is the property of the land- 
 lord. 
 
 931. Baron Dowse. — But suppose it was the tenant 
 that made the land worth ten shillings an acre more 
 by his own industry, or by the industry of those who 
 went before him, whose property would you consider 
 it to be then 1 — The improvements would be his. 
 
 931a. But suppose they are not improvements, unless 
 you give a very flexible meaning to the term " im- 
 provements" 1 — I do give a flexible meaning to it. 
 
 932. That is, you mean by improvement any per- 
 manent addition that the tenant has made to the land 
 by his industry 1 — I do. Any kind of improvement 
 of the soil, building, road-making, levelling of fences, 
 and every other kind of improvement. 
 
 933. Or if he got a wild mountain side, and turned 
 it into tillage land ? — Certainly. 
 
 934. Or a cut-out bog, and made tillage of it; you 
 
38 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 3, 1880. 
 
 John 
 
 La Touche, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 look upon all these things as improvements, and to 
 that extent you think that th( tenant ought to be com- 
 pensated for what he has done % — I do. 
 
 935. Suppose he could not get that compensation 
 in any other way excejit by the Hale of his rights to 
 another man, would it be right, do you think, to pre- 
 vent him from selling 1 — It would, for where could 
 the line be drawn between the landlord who can 
 compensate and the one who cannot % 
 
 936. There is a province in Ireland called Ulster 
 where the line has been drawn pretty successially 1 — 
 But, then, it has been purchased there ; but it is 
 another thing to hand over the rental of my estate, 
 which may be very moderately let, and which I might 
 have let a great deal higher — surely, the difference 
 between the present rent and what it might have been 
 let for is my property. 
 
 937. Your view is that the unearned increment 
 in the land belongs to the landlord; but what the 
 tenant has earned by his own industry you would 
 allow him to have ?— Certainly. 
 
 938. Chairman. — Do you think that that is not 
 secured to the tenant under the present Land Act ? — 
 I do not. 
 
 939. The value of such improvements as reclama- 
 tion of mountain or bog, you would have that secured 
 to the tenant? — I would have that secured, and I 
 don't think the Land Act goes far enough in that 
 :lirection. 
 
 940. You gave us as an instance the case of the 
 lease of a widow who felt herself unable to carry on 
 the farm, and wished to go out ; you say that she ought 
 to be compensated 1 — Certainly. 
 
 941. Suppose in the case of a yearly tenancy, there 
 is a widow who wishes to go out, would the remedy 
 you propose be to give her security for the improve- 
 ments, instead of giving her the value of them by 
 allowing her to sell? — I would give her the fidl value 
 of any improvements made by her husband. 
 
 942. Then this being a voluntary surrender, suppose 
 the landlord has not the means, or is unwilling to pay 
 for these improvements, what remedy would you give 
 then to the widow 1 — I should think she would have 
 a legal claim then upon the landlord by action. 
 
 943. Baron Dowse. — Suppose the landlord had no- 
 thing to pay, which is not an incredible supposition 1 
 — I think that is the only way she could enforce her 
 remedy, by action at law. 
 
 944. Chairman. — Do you think in such a case, if 
 the landlord was unwilling to take it off her hands 
 she then ought to have the power of sale ? — No. 
 
 945. You would not allow a sale under any circum- 
 stances 1 — I would not under any circumstances. 
 
 946. Have you any reason to thiuk that the power 
 of sale in the north of Ireland works badly ? — Yes, I 
 have. T think it has run up land quite beyond its 
 legitimate value, there is such a demand for it. The 
 tenants have purchased the holdings where the Ulster 
 tenant-right custom is in force, and have paid large 
 sums and borrowed the money, and they have been 
 crippled and hampered so as not to be able to farm the 
 land as it ought to be firmed. 
 
 947. Does not that arise principally from the num- 
 ber of persons who wish to hold land? — It arises 
 very much from the great demand there is for land 
 certainly. 
 
 948. Demand increases the price of all sorts of 
 articles in any market 1 — Yes. 
 
 949. Take railway shares. They go up to an extra- 
 ordinary price in proportion to their return when 
 there are a number of persons wishing to get hold of 
 them? — Yes. 
 
 950. Do you think that land should not be dealt 
 with in the same way ? — No. 
 
 951. Baron Dowse. —Do I understand Mr. La Touche 
 to deny that the tenant has any estate in the land 
 at all except his claim for improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 952. You do not give him anv estate in it at all ? — 
 No, I do not. 
 
 953. And you will not allow him to sell because he 
 
 has nothing to sell ?— Nothing to sell. I think the 
 difference between what a landlord has let his land 
 at and what he might have obtained for his land from 
 another tenant, ought to be the landlord's, and I don't 
 think that landlords in general have their land let at 
 the highest rent they could obtain for it. I was 
 offered double the rent a few months ago for a farm 
 that I let at exactly one-half the rent I was offered for 
 it. Suppose the tenant I let it to for half its market 
 value, suppose he chose to sell what, under the Ulster 
 tenant-right custom, would be his interest, then, be- 
 cause I was kind and indulgent, and let my land not 
 at the highest rent I could obtain for it, but at a 
 moderate rent, the tenant takes advantage of that to 
 make the difference his property. 
 
 954. Why did you do that ? In that particular case 
 was it because you thought the tenant you were letting 
 the farm to was a better man than the other? — No. 
 
 955. Then why 1 Was it because you thoughtthat 
 the other man offered too much? — Well, he did not offer 
 too much, but that was not altogether the reason. One 
 of them was a person that I had known for some years, 
 and I would rather have those that I have known 
 holding farms about me than a stranger coming in. 
 
 956. ilr. Shaw. — Had he been on the farm before, 
 this person that you let it to ? — No, he had not been. 
 
 957. It was a farm that you had on your hands V-~ 
 It was given up to me ; at least I was obliged to get 
 up possession of it, indeed. There were a great many 
 persons offering to take the farm. I was offered a 
 gTcat many different rents for it, among the rest ex- 
 actly double the rent I let it at. 
 
 958. The O'Conoe Don. — Was that during the pre- 
 sent year? — It was within twelve months. 
 
 959. In what part of Ireland was it ? — In Kildare. 
 
 960. Mr. Shaw. — Did you consider the man wlio 
 offered you double the rent had capital enough to work 
 the place ? — Oh, he had. 
 
 961. It was a grazing farm I suppose? — Well, it is 
 not a large farm, yes, it was all in grass except a 
 potato garden. 
 
 962. What size is the farm ? — Oh, it was only a few 
 acres. 
 
 963. That is hardly a test? — No, I don't say it is atest. 
 
 964. You. would not let a farm of 300 acres, I sup- 
 pose, on the same terms ? — I could quote many in- 
 stances on my own estate where I could have obtained 
 a ^-el■y much higher rent than what I let my land at. 
 Certainly if the Ulster tenant-right custom was in 
 force there, I think the effect of it would be that the 
 landlord would let his land at the very highest possible 
 rent he could get. 
 
 965. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that that is the 
 case as a rule in Ulster ? — Well, perhaps, I am. not 
 competent to give an opinion exactly upon that, but 
 it strikes me that it would be so. i am sure in my 
 own case, I can only say that if the tenant who has 
 got that farm had the power to sell I certainly would 
 have taken the higher rent. 
 
 966. That higher rent would have been in your 
 judgment too much ?— I think it would be. 
 
 967. Then you would leave him nothing to sell? — 
 That would be a matter of opinion, I think it was too 
 high, but I suppose the person who offered the rent 
 did not consider it was too high. When I say that I 
 think the power of sale would be unjust to the land- 
 lords, I say also I think it would be most disadvan- 
 tageous for the tenant for that very reason, that I con- 
 sider landlords would then let farms at the very high- 
 est rents they could get. 
 
 968. The Ulster tenant-right custom is not that. The 
 Ulster tenant-right custom as legalized by law is that a 
 man is to hold the land at a fair and reasonable rent, and 
 is entitled tocontinue hisoccupation at a fair and reason- 
 able rent, with permission to sell to any eligible tenant 
 against wliom the landlord can urge no fair reason ; so 
 that the landlord could not do as you suggest. The 
 instant he claimed an excessive or unreasonable rent 
 from the tenant, the tenant would refuse .to pay it and 
 would retire, and the landlord would have to pay him 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 39 
 
 tlie value of the tenant-i-ight by decree'! — But the 
 tenants are willing, I find, to pay more than the 
 value. 
 
 969. And it is there they want protection according 
 to your other statement about covenants as to their 
 improvements, to protect them against themselves ? — 
 Yes ; decidedly. 
 
 970. Mr. Kavaxagh. — I take it that your general 
 view of the Land Act is somewhat this, you would ex- 
 tend the provisions for securing the tenant in his im- 
 provements further than the Land Act goes now, but 
 yovi would regard the general extension of the Ulster 
 tenant-right custom to the whole oi Ireland as an in- 
 jixstice in the way of transferring to the tenant part of 
 the property oi the landlord '? — 1 would. 
 
 971. Baron Dowse. — In addition to that, in addi- 
 tion to securing the value of the tenant's improvements 
 you would make the term improvements include more 
 matters than are enumerated in the Act 'i — Oh, cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 972. Anything that the tenant put into the land by 
 his industry, and that was not exhausted by time 1 — I 
 would, certainly. 
 
 973. Chairiian. — In reference to the case of quit- 
 ting a holding voluntarily, sub-section 4, of section 4, 
 says : — 
 
 " The tenant of a holding -who is quitting the same volun- 
 tarily shall not be entitled to any compensation in respect of 
 any improvement when it appears to the court that such 
 tenant has been given permission by his landlord to dispose 
 of his interest in his improvements to an incoming tenant 
 upon such terms as the court may deem reasonable and the 
 tenant has refused or neglected to avail himself of such per- 
 mission." 
 
 You think that that sub-section is one that works 
 badly ? — That is the case of a landlord giving the tenant 
 power to sell 1 That power I would not allow. 
 
 974-. You would not allow the landlord to give 
 the tenant that power in order to free himself from 
 liability for payment for the tenant's improvements 1 
 — I would not legalize the power. 
 
 975. ]Mr. Shaw. — Yoii would not prevent him, 
 I suppose, by law, from doing as he pleased ? — No, I 
 would not. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — The effect of that sub-section is 
 this, that in the class of holdings within that section 
 when a man is voluntarily quitting a holding he is 
 entitled to compensation for his improvements, but 
 this sub-section provides for a case where the land- 
 lord may allow the tenant to sell instead of paying 
 him compensation, and, in that case, the landlord is 
 not obliged to pay anything if he has allowed the 
 tenant the option of selling his interest. 
 
 976. C'llAiEMAN. — You think that that is a wrong 
 provision to be in the Act 1 — I would not have the 
 
 977. Don't you think it would be very much in 
 the interest of the landlord to have the option 1 — I 
 cannot see that. 
 
 978. Baron Dowse. — I shoidd think your own 
 principle would work that out. You would make 
 the provisions as to tenant's improvements wider 
 than they are, and would give the value of them to 
 the tenant at the end of his tenancy. You would 
 not allow him to sell his interest but you would give 
 him a claim upon the landlord which you would 
 allow to be carried out by an action at law. As 
 soon as the action is broiight, if the landlord had not 
 the money, or was not in a position to pay it, would 
 you not allow him the option, if he choose, of allow- 
 ing the tenant to sell his interest instead? — No, I 
 would not legalize it, but I would leave it open to 
 him. 
 
 979. How would you propose that the tenant 
 should get the value of his imjjrovements in a case 
 where the landlord had no money and would not 
 give his consent to a sale of the tenant's interest ] — 
 No answer. 
 
 980. Mr. Kavanagh. — If the landlord was a 
 pauper, for instance, and had nothing to recoup the 
 
 tenant for his improvements? Surely you must &^«. 3, 1880. 
 
 give a right of sale then to make the tenant's claim j^j^^^ 
 
 be worth anything? — If it could not be recovered bylaw. La Touche, 
 
 981. Baron Dowse. — The answer to that, according Esq. 
 to M r. La Touche's view, is obvious enough. What 
 you say is that if the tenant gets his judgment, and 
 
 if the landlord is not able to pay him, he would 
 become an incumbrancer on the land for the amount of 
 his claim, and could sell the land itself, so that the 
 thing would work itself out in that way? — Yes, and a 
 very good way. 
 
 982. Chairman. — Well then, Mr. La Touche, you 
 mentioned, I think, in your letter that you could give 
 some information with reference to what are called 
 the Bright clauses ? — Yes. 
 
 983. Have you visited any holdings that have been 
 purchased under the Bright clauses " — No, I have 
 not. 
 
 984. Or under the Church Act? — No, I have not; 
 but when I came into my Leitrim estate thirty-three 
 years ago there were some very long leases indeed given, 
 lease for ever, and the persons who held the leases got 
 into difficulties and unable to pay their rents, and the 
 lands were given up to me. They were so subdivided 
 and cut up that it was necessary for me to lay out 
 large sums of money in providing for the people, some 
 of them by emigration, and some of them by giving 
 them farms elsewhere, and I consider that the exten- 
 sion of what are called the Bright clauses would in 
 the end be just the same. 
 
 985. Are you aware there are provisions against 
 subdivision or subletting attached to the sale to 
 tenants of their holdings ? — Yes. 
 
 986. Baron Dowse. — But that does not extend 
 •farther than the number of years for which the 
 annuity is payable. What I understand from you is ' 
 that when they are free they would subdivide and 
 cut it up 1 — Yes. I have seen in tlie county Leitrim, 
 where originally the farms must have been large, 
 and very good houses and farm oifices, when I came 
 into that jiroperty one farm house and offices were 
 turned into villages, and they were called villages, the 
 land was so cut up and so subdivided. Those were, 
 I think, leases for ever, which are tantamount to fee- 
 
 ■ simple prirchases of land. 
 
 987. What would you do if a farmer had twelve 
 children, and in the next generation they had twelve 
 children more each, and they did not emigrate, what 
 would you. do with them, would they subdivide ? — They 
 would subdivide, and subdivide, and subdivide, until 
 these holdings became villages. 
 
 988. What are you to do with them is the question ? 
 — I spent a great deal of money in emigration, they 
 were most willing to go to America, and I remodelled 
 the farms. 
 
 989. Chairman. — In the cases you mentioned were 
 they iindertenants ? — They were undertenants, these 
 had been very old leases indeed. 
 
 990. And they probably were bi-ought in originally 
 as labouring men and then were given small holdings 1 
 — No ; the holdings had been originally rather large, 
 and were divided among their own descendants. 
 
 991. Yes, originally rather large holdings, and then 
 the holders under the head landlord probably brought 
 in persons as labourers and to pay for their labour 
 gave them small holdings. That is very common 
 in the case of undeii;enants t — That was the case 
 with some, it was not the case on a large farm in 
 Kildare near my own residence. There there was a 
 very long lease, made I suppose before my father pur- 
 chased the property, but in 1847 or 1848 the tenant 
 was unable to pay the rent, and the farm came into my 
 hands. There were no less than seventy families on 
 it, it was all cut up and subdivided. 
 
 992. On this point then theeffect of your evidence 
 would be that the extension of peasant proprietary 
 would not be desirable ? — I would just leave it as it is. 
 
 993. That is, in fact, not working effectively? — 
 Except as far as I would try and endeavour to cheapen 
 the transfer of land and simplify it. I should be very 
 
40 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 3, 18S0. 
 
 John 
 
 La Touche, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 glad to sell some of my farms to my tenants but the 
 expense would be so great. 
 
 994. Baron Dowse.— How is that, Mr. La Touche; 
 how would the expense be so great ; is it because your 
 title is complicated, or what ?— No, not particularly 
 complicated. 
 
 995. Because, if I am owner in fee-simple of an 
 estate, it appears to me it is very easy for me to con- 
 vey by deed aiiy part of it to anybody who is willing 
 to pay for it, and of course you have to pay the costs 
 of the professional man who prepares the deed 1 — Then 
 you have to prepare releases, and alter the quit rent 
 and so on. 
 
 996. But can you not sell it relieved from these 
 charges ? — I have sold property so to my tenants in 
 Leitrim. 
 
 997. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose iu Mr. LaTouche'scase 
 they would have to make title to the whole estate if 
 they sell two or three farms 1 — Yes. 
 
 998. Baron Dowse. — I quite agree with you if the 
 tenant borrows from the Cfovernment through the 
 Board of Works ; then the question of investigation 
 comes in, and properly so, because it is public money 
 that is spent ; but if the tenant has money himself, 
 might he not as well buy your interest trusting to 
 your own honour, as in the north of Ireland they buy 
 property trusting to the tenant-right 'i — T am afraid the 
 tenant would not be satisfied with the title, nor would 
 he have the whole of the purchase money. 
 
 999. Mr. Kavanagh. — J understand from you that 
 the great objection to this peasant proprietary is the 
 danger of subdivision? — The danger of subdivision. 
 
 1000. I believe that is acknowledged by most ]Deople 
 who have had experience of these long leases to be the 
 case 1 — I think so. 
 
 1001. If any means could be de'S'ised of preventing 
 this, do you think it would be a benefit to the country 
 to have a class of substantial yeomen proprietorij 
 scattered over it 1 — I think so. 
 
 1002. It would enlist so many on the side of law 
 and order? — Yes. 
 
 1003. Could not some such scheme as this be devised 
 that they should hold their farms from the Crown or 
 the State with a perpetuity rent of Is. an acre, and 
 with a condition attached that they should not sub- 
 divide. That would give tliem a sort of copyhold, and 
 would prevent subdivision 1 — I think it would have an 
 excellent effect. I should be in favour of that certainly, 
 but I do not believe it could be carried out by legis- 
 lation. 
 
 1004. Baron Dowse. — Then that would do away 
 entirely with the objection as to what is to happen at 
 the end of thirty- five years, and it would be part of the 
 original contract that neither he nor his heirs should 
 subdivide 1 — Yes. 
 
 1005. Mr. Kavanagh. — You would give him the 
 right to sell the holding as long as be sold it whole ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 1006. The business of the State merely beiug to 
 deal with the thing as a whole ? — Yes, I think that 
 would be usefal. 
 
 1007. Baron Dowse. — It might be said that that 
 was an interference with the rights of property on the 
 part of the tenant, but after all it would be an inter- 
 ference in the direction of public policy ? — Yes. 
 At present I think the tenant can purchase. He can 
 borrow two-thirds. 
 
 1008. Mr. Shaw. — Is there as great a tendency 
 now, do you think, as used to be towards subdi\'ision 
 of farms amongthe farmers? — I am afraid it would be so. 
 
 1009. You speak from vour own experience in 
 Kildare? 
 
 1010. Baron Dowse. — Not so much in Kildare as 
 in Leitrim, I suppose, Mr. La Touche? — I don't 
 allow it. 
 
 1011. But if you did allow it, it would not be as 
 likely to take place in Kildare as in Leitrim ? — No. 
 
 1012. The 6'CoNOH Don.— Do you find any diffi- 
 culty in preventing it ? — Yes, I do in Leitrim. 
 
 1013. When were those old leases you speak of 
 
 given.up to you 1 — They were thirty years ago. It was 
 just after the famine. 
 
 1014. That was before there was much emigration 
 from Ireland? — There was not much emigration at 
 that time. I think I was myself the first that pro- 
 moted it down at Leitrim, immediately after the famme. 
 
 1015. But before that period the people had no 
 resource but to subdivide the land 1 — They had nothina 
 but to subdivide the lands. 
 
 1016. But a great deal of voluntary emigration is 
 going on now ?— There is. 
 
 1017. And don't you think that would have a ten- 
 dency in the opposite direction — that numbers of the 
 younger members of families would go away and not 
 subdivide ? — I can speak from my own knowledge and 
 experience, and say it is most desirable they should "o 
 both ior themselves and those who remain at home 
 and for the good of the landlord too. I may say that 
 my Leitrim estate was worth over £2,000 a year at 
 that time. Of course the land is bad, and it is let at 
 an average of 10s. an acre. 
 
 1018. Baron Dowse. — An English acre? — An Irish 
 acre. And the second and third year, and the fourtli 
 year after these people had gone to America the 
 greater portion of the £2,000 a year was paid by 
 American orders. I went down to collect it myself. 
 
 1019. The O'CoxoE Dox.— Then the fact that 
 people thirty j-ears ago or forty years ago, before 
 emigi-ation was general, subdivided their lands would 
 not be an argument to show that if they got perpetuity 
 leases or proprietorship now they would do the same ? 
 — I am afraid they would do the same amongst their 
 families. The son marries and he gets a portion of 
 the farm, and the daughter marries and gets a portion 
 of the farm. 
 
 1020. Baron Dowse. — And they mortgage it — what 
 they call mortgages — curious specimens of conveyanc- 
 ing I have seen in that way ? — Yes ; it is not so much 
 letting it to strangers as among iheir own families, 
 
 1021. The O'CoxoR Don.— But at all events what 
 I want to get out is that what you refer to took place 
 when there was \ery little emigration, and the people 
 had no other means of providing for then families, 
 except by subdividing their lands 1 — Yes. 
 
 1022. Baron Do^'se. — The tendency is not so great 
 as in former years ? — No. 
 
 1023. But still you think it exists ? — Yes. 
 
 1024. And you think what Mr. Kavanagh suggests 
 with regard to peasant proprietors would be a good 
 way of obviating it ? — Yes. 
 
 1025. The O'Ooxor Don. — Have you many tenants? 
 — Indeed I have a great number in Leitrim, but their 
 farms are all separate now, no companies. I think 
 there is onh' about one holding held by a company on 
 the whole estate. 
 
 1026. Mr. SiiAW. — I suppose the farmers in Kildare 
 are large farmers generally ? — Yes they are large 
 farmers generall\'. 
 
 1027. And what is your idea of the size of a farm 
 below which a farm should not be divided ? — Well we 
 would call in Leitrim, fifteen acres a large farm, but 
 I would call that rather a small farm in Kildare. 
 
 1028. You find on a farm of that size they are able 
 to make a comfortable li\ing ? — Yes they are. 
 
 1029. But below that you think it is difficult?-! 
 think it is difficult. 
 
 1030. On poor land, but on good land they could 
 do it with smallerfarms? — They could live comfortably. 
 
 1031. Are you acquainted with the north of Ireland 
 personally ? — Only passing through it. 
 
 1032. Are you aware in Tyrone, Armagh, and 
 Down, the farms arc small ? — I am aware of that. 
 
 1033. Baron Dowse. — But it should not be lost 
 sight of that in that part of Ireland there are manu- 
 factures going on ? — Yes, and the land is better. 
 
 1034. The land is better than Leitrim land, but I 
 don't suppose it is better than Kildare land ?— No it 
 is not so good as Kildare land. 
 
 1035. Mr. Shaw. — [n selling your property of 
 course if you were able to sell your whole estate to a 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 41 
 
 trustee and make title to the -vi^liole, then the pro- 
 cess of reselling -would be simplified very much 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 1036. Are you aware of a suggestion of that kind 
 having been made that a body should be constituted 
 to purchase from landlords -willing to sell and resell, 
 that "would simplify the thing 1 — It would. 
 
 1037. And cheapen the transfer very much? — It 
 would. 
 
 1038. And what reason can there be for preventing 
 men after they had paid for their land from dividing 
 it if they wish 1 — You mean proprietors. 
 
 1039. Yes, suppose a man in your county bought 
 a farm of 100 acres and another of 20 acres, why 
 should you prevent them after they had paid for it 
 from doing as they please with it i—1 am afraid we 
 would fall into the state of things I have described in 
 Leitrim. 
 
 1040. Baron Dowse. — Might there not be this 
 objection that they may reduce the quantity each 
 family would? have beyond what they could live on ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 1041. Mr. Shaw.— Would not that cure itself?— 
 It would, but I am afraid the cure would be very bad, 
 it would be starvation. 
 
 1042. It would be cured, I think, before they 
 reached starvation. Are you acquainted with the 
 country parts of France 1 — Yes, I am. 
 
 1043. Are you aware that holdings are very small 
 thei-e ? — Yes, I am. 
 
 1044. And in Belgium they are very small 1 — Yes. 
 
 1045. And the people make a very good living? — 
 Yes. 
 
 1046. Baron Dowse. — They have a different climate 
 there 1 — Yes, and a different soil, it is like a garden. 
 
 1047. Mr. Shaw. — Is the climate so difierent in 
 Belgium from what it is here ? — I have not travelled 
 much in Belgium. 
 
 1048. Don't you think in course of time the 
 ownership of land would induce habits of thrift, just 
 as much as in Belgium and France? — I am rather afraid 
 of it. 
 
 1049. Are you not aware that in this country we 
 have peculiar advantages for gi-owing crops that they 
 cannot grow so well in Belgium and France, for in- 
 stance, root crops and clover, and if we cultivated those 
 and had our farms clear, on small patches of farm a 
 great deal more cattle could bo kept ? — I am afraid 
 they would depend on the potato crop again, as they 
 did in years gone by. 
 
 1050. They don't do that in the north of Ireland ; 
 are jou aware that there they grow those crops for 
 house-feeding very extensivelj'' on the small farms, and 
 house-feed the cattle very much ? — Still the habits of 
 the people are difierent from the French. 
 
 1051. Don't you think the habits of the people 
 change 1 — By degrees, yes. 
 
 1052. And we ought to aim at that in legislation as 
 much as possible — I think so. 
 
 1053. To give perfect security to the tenant for all 
 Iiis interest in his holding ? — Certainly. 
 
 1054. And if possible make him an owner if we 
 can do so justly? — And prevent the subdivision. 
 
 1055. Don't you think it as diflicult to prevent sub- 
 division of land as anything else, that it is regulated 
 by a law that no Act of Parliament can master 1 — I 
 am afraid you would require to make a law against it, 
 if this country is to prosper. I am afraid we would 
 go back to the same state of things. 
 
 1056. "Would you limit the power of mortgaging at 
 all ?— No, I think not. 
 
 1057. On the small holdings? — I think not. 
 
 1058. Would you think it a wise thing to limit the 
 power of mortgaging for large owners ?— ISTo, I would 
 leave that without any restriction. 
 
 1059. You would not compel them to sell in case 
 they were pushed beyond a certain amount? — No I 
 would not. 
 
 1060. Don't you think it is a very great injury to 
 themselves and the country to have large estates 
 mortgaged to an immense extent? — I do certainly, 
 but I think it is a serious matter to compel a sale. 
 
 1061. Is it not a ^■c^y serious matter to have the 
 progress of the whole country-side affected by such a 
 thing as that, the wealth of the coTintry and the com- 
 fort and happiness of the people stopped by the inability 
 of the landlord though he may be a very good man ?— - 
 I should think a landlord would feel it his interest to 
 sell if he could. But if he were forced to sell it might 
 be a serious loss to him, he might sell at a time when 
 the price of land was very low. 
 
 1062. Mr. Shaw. — He is prevented at present by 
 the laws of entail and settlement, would you do any- 
 thing to simplify that ? 
 
 1063. Baron Dowse. — He is not prevented by the 
 law of entail from selling, if the sale is comjmlsory 
 against him by some incumbi-ancer who overrides 
 the entail. 
 
 1064. Mr. Shaw. — You state that this practice of 
 tenant-right would absorb capital to such an extent as 
 to prevent the proper cultivation of land ? — I think it 
 would. 
 
 1065. You don't say that from your experience? — 
 No, because I don't allow it. 
 
 1066. But are you not aware that in the north it 
 has not had that effect that in fact the cultivation of 
 the land is carried on much more perfectly there than 
 in any other part of Ireland although they pay large 
 sums for tenant-right. ? 
 
 1067. Baron Dowse. — IMr. Greene, the head of the 
 Valuation Office, informed us yesterday that the north 
 of Ireland is valued higher than the south not because 
 the land is better but because there is more produced 
 out of it 1 — I have spoken to those who are well 
 acquainted with it and I have read the opinions of 
 those who have a knowledge of it, I know Lord Dufferin 
 is very much against that system for that reason. 
 
 1068. Mr. Shaw. — But you are strongly of opinion 
 that it would be for the public advantage to increase 
 the ov/ners of land? — Yes. 
 
 1069. And you would give aU possible facilities to 
 carry out siicli a scheme as that ? — I w'ould. 
 
 1070. The O'CoNOR Don". — Would you put any 
 limit to this prohibition to subdivide holdings ? — I 
 would not ; but I believe subdivision cannot justly be 
 pi-evented by legislation. 
 
 1071. No matter what the size of the holding was? — 
 No. 
 
 1072. Suppose the occupier of 100 acres purchased 
 his holding and another man of 20 acres purchased his 
 you would not allow the man of 100 acres to divide 
 his property any more than the man of 20 ? — No. 
 
 1073. Mr. Shaw. — But of course if government had 
 acharge on the land you v/ould not prevent Government 
 from allowing them to subdivide ? — No. 
 
 1074. Baron Dowse. — But I understand you to 
 have adopted Mr. Kavanagh's suggestion with refer- 
 ence to subdivision at the end of 35 years, you confine 
 yourself to what we call peasant projDrietary which 
 means a holding abou.t as large as would enable a man 
 and his family to live comfortably on it ? — Yes. 
 
 1075. Supposing a man by any possibility bought 
 150 acres of land, whether you call him a peasant 
 proprietor or not, do you think it woidd be reason- 
 able of the Government to impose upon him a con- 
 dition that he should not subdivide after he had 
 paid for the farm ? — I consider that it would be un- 
 wise and unreasonable. 
 
 1076. The O'Conob Dojj. — You would prohibit 
 that man just as much as a small occupier ? — I think 
 so. From what I know myself of subdivision, 1 think 
 it would be necessary to prohibit it. 
 
 1077. Mr. Kavanagh. — You foresee if such was 
 not done in the course of a generation or two — if the 
 world lasts so long — you would have all those places 
 
 G 
 
 Sept. 3, 1880. 
 
 John 
 
 La Touche, 
 
 Esq. 
 
42 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept.-a, 1880. 
 
 JoTin 
 
 La Tcuche, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 let to small holders, and you would Lave the worst 
 type of landlords and the worst grievances of tenants 
 repeated again ? — Ecpeated again. 
 
 1078. Baron Dowse.— You apply that to sub- 
 
 letting as well as subdividing, you would prevent him 
 subletting- as well as subdividing 1 — Yes. 
 
 The vvitness then withdrev/. 
 
 Jolin 
 
 Sweetman, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 JoiCT SwEETMAN, Esq., examined. 
 
 1079. Chaiejian. - - You live at Drumbarragh, 
 Kells 1— Yes. 
 
 1080. You are an owner of property there 1 — Yes, 
 small. 
 
 1081. How many acres ^ — I have 200 Irish acres in 
 my own hands and 80 let to tenants. 
 
 1082. What are the size of the farms of the three 
 tenants ? — Two of them have about seven acres each, 
 and the third has seventy, that makes the -wrhole of it 
 about eighty-four. 
 
 1083. You mention in these notes that one of 
 them has made consideraljle improvements, that is, I 
 suppose the hxv^io tenant? — No, a small one, and, 
 when I bought the property eleven years ago, the 
 large tenant h:v(l a long lease, three lives, the three 
 eldest sons of Her Majesty ; the two smaller tenants 
 had no leases, tenants from year to year, and I gave 
 them a lease for 999 years. In one case the tenant 
 has built himself a large two-storied house, with a 
 kitchen and a room off it, and two bedrooms above. 
 He has built himself two little out-offices, a barn, and 
 cow-shed, which he has not slated, but put a felt roof 
 on. There was also between two fields, a large 
 county RIeath double fence, he haf; filled up the 
 two gripes and taken half the bank away, and left it 
 a small fence. He has put drains where tlie open 
 gripe was. Last winter he thorough drained, him- 
 self about very nearly an acre of land, drained it 
 3 feet G inches deep by 24 feet apart, and collected 
 the stones, and did all the work himself. 1, as I 
 happened to have a hobby for drainage pipes made 
 him a present of drainage p)ipes to p\it at the 
 bottom, but that was entirely unnecessary because 
 stones do just as well. Also, where the road mears it, 
 there was a piece of waste ground and a disagreeable 
 hole. He built a loose stone wall along the road, 
 took away the fence, added a piece to his ovv^n land, 
 and took away a dangerous hole from the side of the 
 road without any expense to the county. I consider 
 that the security for my rent has been raised by 
 the improvements. There was no diffLoulty in pay- 
 ing the rent, he did not ask me for a deduction or 
 anything. I mention particularly this one man's 
 case. The other small tenant, was an old man, and 
 he, from the circumstance of his sons not working 
 with him, was not able to do very much, but I think 
 his farming was improved. 
 
 1084. He also had a perpetuity lease ? — Yes. At 
 one time he was talking of building a house, and he 
 told me he had a little money put by, but one of his 
 daughters was more or less a cripple, and he wanted 
 to keep the money for her. I told him I thought he 
 was quite right. 
 
 1085. What was the date of this lease 1 — Either at 
 the end of 1869 or the beginning of 1870. 
 
 1086. Were you led to give them those leases from 
 your knowledge of the character of the men 1 — No. 
 From a priori reasoning I have been always of opinion 
 that the reason the Irish people v.'crc so unthrifty was 
 from want ot security; and, when I had bought a little 
 land, I thought I would niaivo tlio experiment myself 
 There was another tiling I would like to bring before 
 the Commissioners, and that is the great expense — 
 legal expense — tliei-o is in making a lease. The large 
 tenant asked me two years ago, although he had a long 
 lease, to give him a Icuso for ever. 
 
 1087. What was tlio length of lease of the large 
 tenant 'J—Three lives— the iihree eldest sons of Her 
 Majesty. But I gave, two years ago, a lease for 
 ever, and the expenses — th.e legal expenses — were 
 .£32 Os. Ud. There vras £12 Os. lid additional on 
 account of its being on the record of title. I had 
 
 recorded my title, and when the lease was made 
 out, and it was brought before the Record Court, 
 the examiner, I think he is called, said that some 
 searches must be made. There was an old lease 
 which the tenant had' to give up to me, this lease had 
 been made to his father ; they had to go into his title, 
 in fact, and this cost £12 additional. I said to my 
 solicitor I did not wish he should pay that. I paid 
 it because it was my hobby to have my title re- 
 corded. 
 
 1088. Baron Dowse. — And the rest was the solici- 
 tor's biin — Yes; £32 Os. lie?, altogether, including 
 the £1 2 : £20 was what my tenant paid. There was 
 some little expense, I suppose, owing to his father 
 having died, having made over his property to his 
 widow, and his widow having made it over to her 
 son. But the tax I noticed was very high — tho 
 stamp duty. 
 
 1089. The stamp duty is not the most exjjensive 
 part t — No ; it was not the most expensive part ; kit 
 still it was expensive. This was a lease of 70 Irish 
 acres at £2 an acre, so that the rent was only £140. 
 
 lOO.'J. The O'CoNOK Doir. — Was the rent altered 
 v/hen the lease was made? — No. 
 
 1091. Baron Dowse. — Did the tenant pay that ex- 
 cept the record of title part 1 — Yes. I understood be 
 paid it ; I have not got certain information; my 
 solicitor -s^'as away. I asked to-day if he paid, and 
 the clerk said he thought he had. 
 
 1092. Mr. Kayaxagh. — In this lease do youpr.t 
 in any clause against subdivision or subletting 1—1 
 put in a clause against letting in conacre, but not 
 against subdivision. 
 
 1093. Then he might cut up this 70 acres into seven 
 holdings 1 — He might. 
 
 1094. Baron Dowse. — And you expressed conacre 
 in terms ? — In the two small farms. I am not quite 
 certain whether I did in the large farm. 
 
 1093. Because it has been decided in point of law 
 that conacre is neither subdividing or subletting? — 
 Yes. I expressed it in terms in the two first leases, 
 but that was the only reservation I made except tlie. 
 rents. 
 
 1096. I don't see how the law could deal with these 
 expenses it was the attorney's bill of costs ? — It struck 
 me the stamp duty was very high. 
 
 1097. As far as the attorney is concerned it would 
 be a very easj thing to ask him v/ould he take so 
 much for doing this, but if you leave him to his own 
 iLnaided devices yon will have no reason to complain 
 of the bill of costs. 
 
 1098. Chairmax. — But yon say this arose from tlie 
 title of the former tenant ? — I think that added to the 
 expense. 
 
 1099. Was it the case that the former tenant died 
 without a will? — No, the exact case was the former 
 tenant died leaving it all to his widow for her life and 
 to her son after her death. The widow after several 
 years made it over to the son by deed. 
 
 1100. Did this bill include probate of the wiU? — 
 No. 
 
 1101. That had to be proved before? — Yes. 
 
 1102. The O'CosoE DoN.^This lease I presume, 
 tlie old lease, was recorded? — The old lease was 
 recorded. 
 
 1103. And therefore when you were making a new 
 lease they had to inquire into the interests of the 
 persons in the old lease ? — Just so. 
 
 1104. And that was what caused the additional 
 expense ? — Yes. 
 
 1105. Chairman. — Then in your opinion this view 
 which you took of giving to small tenants perpetuity 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 43 
 
 leases nas answered well ?-— Very well, I have not tlia 
 slightest doubt upon tliat point. 
 
 1106. That the feeling of security has encouraged 
 them to make improvements 1 — Yes. 
 
 1107. Baron Dowse. — There is no power I suppose 
 of altering the rental during the whole 999 years?— 
 ISTo. 
 
 1108. The O'CoNOK Don. — When was the original 
 lease made to the old tenant ■? — The lease to the large 
 tenant was made in 1856. 
 
 1109. Was there any clause against subdivision in 
 it? — Oh yes, every conceivable clause you could 
 imagine. 
 
 1110. Chairman. — WTiat were the general covenants 
 in your lease, any particular clause as to cultivations 1 
 — No, none, the only covenants were to pay me the 
 rent and against conacre and reserving the rights of 
 shooting. The rights of shooting were not worth 
 talking about. They told me to keep the shooting. 
 There was another clau.se in the lease to the large 
 tenant, there was some drainage on my land which goes 
 into his land and I had a very strict clause pu.t in that 
 he was not to interfere with that. 
 
 1111. Baron Dowse. — Are you able to tell whether 
 thelease was settled by counsel? — Iknow nothing about 
 that. The tenant came to me and told me he thought 
 the costs were very high, and I said I thought so too. 
 He asked me should he get it taxed, and I told him I 
 did not like to give advice on the subject. 
 
 1112. The O'CoNOR Don.- — The tenants have been 
 perfectly satisfied with this arrangement 1 — Perfectly. 
 
 1113. And they have paid their rent punctually 
 since without any reduction ? — They did not ask any 
 reduction. I gave them one in ISTovember last, not as 
 a landlord, but I told them as a friend. It was a 
 hard year and I gave them something back. This 
 year the large tenant asked me for a reduction, I told 
 him I could not give the reduction, but I gave him 
 tin:ie. It was £Q he owed me, and I did hot want 
 Mm to sell his sheep when they were not fat. 
 
 1114. Baron Dowse. — Is this near a town ? — Within 
 two miles of Kells. 
 
 1115. Mr. Shaw. — Two pounds an acre is not high 
 for land there ? — It is about the price land goes for. I 
 must say it is fully rented as times go. 
 
 1116. Baron Dowse. — You did not let below the 
 current rate lands were going at ?— No. 
 
 1117. You let it at the rent it was before ? — Yes. 
 
 1118. Did you take any fine from them 1 — No. 
 
 1119. Then you gave them a perpetuity for nothing ? 
 — I considered I was repaid for it by the greater 
 Security I had for my rent from their improvements. 
 Land is worth from twenty to twenty-five years' pur- 
 chase, whereas a fixed interest like in the funds is 
 worth thirty-three years. 
 
 1120. Then you could have no objection to the 
 legislature doing for the tenantry of the. country what 
 you did for those tenants ? — No, I was very anxious 
 for it for the country at large. 
 
 1121. Chairman. — Do those tenants carry on any 
 other business ? — No, except jobbing in cattle. 
 
 1122. Baron Dowse. — Could they live on the farms 
 themselves ? — One of them, the large tenant, had a 
 bakery, biit he hasn't it now, and there was a public 
 house there, but it was closed shortly after I bought 
 the property, and the bakery was closed some years 
 ago. I suppose they do live on the farms. 
 
 1123. Chairman. — The man who is a good hand at 
 buying and selling cattle with a small holding has as 
 good a business as a man could have in Ireland, I 
 believe ? — Yes, one of them does that in a small way. 
 
 1124. Baron Dowse. — But supposing they did not 
 buy cattle at all, and lived as agricultural tenants, 
 could they reasonably live on these lands ? — They do 
 so, one of their sons gets work as a labourer. 
 
 1125. Then they are not difi'erentfrom other tenants? 
 
 —No. 
 
 1126. Was your attention ever called to the clauses 
 of the Land Act, with reference to compensation for 
 disturbance on quitting a holding? — Yes. 
 
 1127. Do you think the sums there are too large Sept. 8, I88O. 
 or too small ? — I think they are too small, because I jpjj^ 
 think in the case of a man being turned out of his farm Sweetman, 
 no compensation can compensate him for what he loses Esq. 
 unless he is given a farm, under the same circumstances 
 somewhere else. 
 
 1128. Baron Dowse. — Then you would think instead 
 of giving him compensation for disturbance the remedy 
 woTild be not to disturb him at all 1 — ^'Yes. 
 
 1129. To let him remain as long as he paid his 
 rent ? — Yes. I don't think you can compensate the 
 small tenant in Ireland. 
 
 1130. Unless he emigrates ? — Unless he emigrates, 
 and they have a strong dislike to forced emigration. 
 
 1131. Has there within your period been any con- 
 solidation of farms at all ? — There has been immense 
 consolidation adjoining me by Mr. Nicholson. Most 
 of it was done before I went down to the country 
 eleven years ago. A portion of this property I bought 
 the late Mr. Nicholson bought, and turned nearly all the 
 tenants out : in fact it was said he bought it specially 
 for the purpose of turning them out. 
 
 1132. That was before the Land Act? — It was bought 
 before the Land Act in 1869, but some of them were, 
 I think, turned out after the Land Act. 
 
 1133. For the purpose of making what use of 
 the land ? — For the purpose of grazing. He has about 
 3,000 acres of grass land now. 
 
 1134. Have you any idea what became of those 
 tenants 1 — One of those tenants that was turned out 
 is the m,an that buUt the house on my land ; he mar- 
 I'ied a daughter of my tenant.' AJaother of those 
 tenants was a workman with me. Formerly I believe 
 they all went to America. 
 
 1135. Mr. Shaw. — They were not turned out for 
 nonpayment of rent ? — No. 
 
 1136. Turned out on the title to get possession ? — 
 To get possession. 
 
 1137. Baron Dowse. — Has that worked well in that 
 part of the world ? — It has created a fearful state of 
 ill-feeling against the landlords. I was perfectly 
 shocked at the feeling very good old women exhibited 
 upon it. They seemed to think the late Mr. Nicholson 
 was the devil himself. 
 
 1138. That was the good old women did? — Yes. 
 
 1139. That was from their idea of its being an injus- 
 tice? — Of its being an injustice — of being turned out 
 when they paid their rent. 
 
 1140. They never objected to paying their rent ? — 
 No. 
 
 1141. Nor objected to be turned out for nonpayment 
 of rent ?— No. 
 
 1142. But what they objected to was being turned 
 out when they paid their rent ? — Yes. 
 
 1143. That was the feeling in that part of the 
 world ? — Yes, that was the feeling up to lately. 
 
 1144. Do you think if a tenant was allowed to re- 
 main in his land, and only ejected for nonpayment of 
 rent, that would give him a sense of security in his 
 land ? — I have no doubt of it. 
 
 1145. And that was the principle on which you 
 acted when you gave the leases to endeavour to remedy 
 what you considered a shortcoming of the law ? — Yes, 
 and to secure my own rent at the same time ; it was 
 more as an experiment. Some people might say if I 
 turned out these men and let it for grazing in the good 
 year I would have got more money, meanwhile I 
 might not be here to give evidence. 
 
 1146. Mr. Shaw. — The improvements, I suppose, 
 commenced immediately after you gave these leases ; 
 you can trace distinctly the great improvements to the 
 giving of long leases? — Not the following year. It 
 has been going on the last few years. 
 
 1147. Baron Dov/se. — Now, are these tenants per- 
 fectly satisfied with the condition they are in at present ? 
 — The two smaller tenants are periectly satisfied. The 
 larger tenant told me this year that I ought to bring 
 down my rent to the Ordnance valuation, but I told 
 him I could not see that at all. 
 
 1148. Having given him a 999 years lease ? — Yes. 
 
 G2 
 
44 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 8, IfSO. 
 
 John 
 Sweetman, 
 
 I think lie thought on account of the strong views I 
 took I might 
 
 1149. You might yield to pressure? — I might yield 
 to pressure. I may mention that this man is not a 
 Catholic. 
 
 1150. The majority of the population about there 
 are Catholics? — Yes. 
 
 1151. Did you ever turnover in your mind this 
 question of peasant proprietary ? — Oh, yes ; I have 
 paid great attention to it. 
 
 1152. Do you think it would work well if applied 
 in this country 1 — I have no doubt it would work well, 
 from what 1 have seen of it in foreign countries. 
 
 1153. When you say it would work well, do you 
 mean if applied as a general rule or in individual 
 instances ? — I think it would work well, as a general 
 rule. 
 
 1154. Would you pay any regard to the thrift and 
 industry of the tenant, and his capacity for working 
 the land, or would you apply it generally? — I think 
 it would encourage thrift, and if they had a per; ict 
 right to sell, and were lazy thriftless tenants, they 
 would very soon find they would have to sell, and by 
 natural causes the land would get into the hands of the 
 men best qualified to work it. 
 
 1 155. I understand from your evidence and the evi- 
 dence of the witnesses that have been examined that the 
 want of thrift arises from want of security ? — To a 
 great extent it does. 
 
 1156. Yo\i think that if the tenant had security he 
 would be able to realize the fruits of his own labour 
 more, and be more inclined, therefore, to labour 1 — 
 Yes, and I believe that it'oni a long course of want of 
 security in Ireland that want of thrift has entered 
 into the national character, and it cannot be got rid 
 of ofl hand. It will require several generations even 
 with security to get out oi it. 
 
 1157. Suppose you applied this peasant proprietary 
 scheme to the whole oi Ireland, have you ever consi- 
 dered what it would cost ? — I do not believe it is prac- 
 ticable at present, and I do not believe it would be 
 statesmanlike lor the State to purchase the whole of 
 the land of Ireland, and to resell it to the tenants on ter- 
 minable annuities on account oi the Nationalist Fenian 
 spirit prevailing. I am a.^-aid if it was done wholesale 
 the argument would bebrought before the farmers that if 
 they were only to join this movement they would get 
 off paying all rent, and on that account I am of opinion 
 we cannot have what would be theoretically the best, 
 except by degrees. 
 
 1158. Your idea would be to try it by degrees 
 in individual instances, as it were? — I think so. I 
 believe that would be the only practicable thing 
 to do, but at the same time something, must be 
 done to give security to the great majority of the 
 tenants. 
 
 1159. Sup])ose you gave the great majority of the 
 tenants in Ireland security that they would not be 
 turned out as long as they paid their rent — the rent 
 being a lair one— would that be sufficient ?— I think it 
 would. 
 
 1160. You think it would satisfy them? — It 
 would. 
 
 1160a. Chairman. — Have you considered the ques- 
 tion of tenant-right ?— Yes. As far as I understand it, 
 it IS the right to sell, which is most important, because 
 the thrifty people would get the land, and tlie lazy 
 would go to the wall. 
 
 1161. Is there some case with the particulars of 
 vdiich you are acquainted— do you know the case of 
 Mr. Elcock, of Dowth ?— Yes ; that was a case that 
 came before me as a member of the Tenaaits' Defence 
 Association in Meath. 
 
 1162. That was not a tenant-right question ? Yes 
 
 it was a tenant-right question. The landlords in that 
 
 case were three trustees ; they ejected Mr. Elcock who 
 
 had invested several thousand pounds in buildings. 
 
 iioa. Baron Dowse.— That is the Dowth case ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 1164. I tried the case myself in Meath, and then 
 
 a question arose aftorv/airds before the chaimaaii as to 
 compensation, and on an appeal Mr. Elcock died ?— 
 Yes, and the chairman in that case gave the highest 
 compensation under the Act. 
 
 1165. And it was not considered sufiicient ? — He 
 could not give the whole of what was claimed for 
 buildings, because a great part of the buildings were 
 wool stores, not suited to the holding. 
 
 1166. And not for agricultural purposes ? — No. One 
 of the trustees, the late Malachi Hussey, told me that 
 he thouo-ht it a very hard case, and that it was a trump 
 card for people like me, who wanted a change in the 
 land lav/. 
 
 1167. Mr. Shaw. — Was the case not settled in 
 some way 1 — No ; it was carried out to the end. 
 
 1168. The O'CoNOK Don. — Was there not some 
 attempt at settlement ? — There was an attempt, but 
 it iell through. 
 
 11G9. Chairman. — Did it fall throughfrom inability 
 of the trustees, to go beyond the strict limit of the 
 law 1 — No, I don't think that was it. It fell through, 
 I think, because the trustees and Elcock did not come 
 to terms. 
 
 1170. Baron Dowse. — The trustees were not in- 
 clined to give what Elcock demanded ? — The whole 
 dispute was that Elcock had interfered with a mound 
 — one oi the old raths, and Mr. Gradwell was evicting 
 him because he interfered with this rath. He agi-eed 
 not to interfere with it in the future. He had taken 
 some of the stones for some out-offices (many others 
 had done the same), but he agreed not to do so ui 
 future, still it seems Mr. Gradwell says he went on 
 doing it. The evidence brought before us at tlie 
 Tenants' Defence Association by Mr. Elcock was, 
 that a couple of days before he was able to stop 
 it {he was away), his horses drew a few more stones. 
 
 1171. Mr. Shavv'. — That was the real cause of the 
 eviction ? — That was the ostensible cause. 
 
 1172. Baron Dowse. — Who has the land now ^ — 
 I think it is in the hands of the trustees, I thiak it is 
 grazed by Mr. Gradwell, but I cannot say for cer- 
 tain. 
 
 1173. Is Mr. Gradwell himself not a highly res- 
 pectable gentleman ? — Yes. 
 
 1174. Was he not Mayor of Drogheda ? — I thought 
 he was far too high to be mayor of Drogheda. 
 
 1175. He is an English gentleman and a Catholic? 
 —Yes. 
 
 1176. Chairman. — The lands were let to Mr. 
 Elcock ? — Yes ; they had been let to him for a long time. 
 He made these improvements without any lease, and 
 thereby proved that he was a fool, for he lost several 
 thousand jjounds. 
 
 1177. Baron Dowse. — That is an idiomatic way of 
 expressing the necessity for a lease. Do you mean 
 that at present, as things stand, the man who makes 
 inqirovements without a lease, is a fool? — Yes. I 
 have spent a great deal of money on my farm, and I 
 would consider myself a fool to do so, if I was a 
 tenant vvithout a lease. 
 
 1178. And that is one of the reasons that lead you 
 to think the legislature should give security to the 
 tenant? — Yes, I judge others by myself and my own 
 case. 
 
 1179. Chairman. — You think the Land Act did 
 not gi^'e sufficient security? — I think it failed 
 altogether with regard to the raising of rents, because 
 I find that a tenant will agree to any rent sooner than 
 be evicted. 
 
 1180. Baron Dowse. — You think the tenant ought 
 to be protected against his own weakness in that ?— I 
 do not consider he is a free agent, and able, therefore, 
 to make a contract with his landlord. 
 
 1 ISl. How would you guard against excessive rent. 
 Supposing the landlord asks too much, and the tenant ' 
 is willing to give it rather than be turned out — he has 
 no remedy- how would you suggest a remedy?— I 
 think the only remedy is, that if they do not agree 
 they should appeal to arbitrators. At the same time, 
 I think it is a very bad system for the country that 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDEI^CE. 
 
 :hc land is owned by one man and cultivated by another, 
 md anything which tends to create law between 
 landlord and tenant is vciy bad for both, and good 
 Dnly for the lawyers. 
 
 1182. Suppose the tenant says, my rent is too high, 
 ind the landlord says, I won't lower it, then you 
 j'jggest that such party should appoint an arbitrator 
 to settle the rent 'i — I think so. 
 
 1183. And then that they should select an umpire? 
 —Yes. 
 
 1181. And would that umpirebe an umj)ire selected 
 by the parties, or be a gentlemen named by any 
 public institution, or by the Government 1 — I have 
 not studied the subject enough to give an opinion off- 
 hand on a legislative matter like that. 
 
 1185. But you think there should be some person 
 to settle the rent when a dispute arises? — I think it 
 is a bad system, but I think it is necessary. 
 
 1186. Accordmg to your scheme how long should 
 this rent remain unchanged ; would you be shifting- 
 it aboiit from j^ear to year, or would you mention 
 any term of years during which it should remain 1 — I 
 should be sorry to give an opinion ofl-hand upon that 
 point, for 1 have not considered it sufliciently, but I 
 think something is required. 
 
 1187. Something is required to settle the rent? — 
 When there are disputes, yes, but I do not think there 
 would be much dispute if there was security. There 
 certainly would not a few years ago. I don't know 
 whether there would be now. 
 
 11 88. Suppose there was no dispute, what you think 
 would be right would be that the landlord should not 
 "i>e able to raise the rent at his own mere option? — 
 Certainly. 
 
 1189. And that the tenant should have some sense 
 of security, that if he paid his rent he would not be 
 Uirned out ? — Certainly. 
 
 1190. Chairman. — Do yoii think compensation lor 
 eviction under notice to quit would not be sufficient to 
 compensate the tenant — you say the fear of losing the 
 farm would lead him to pay any rent ? — I do. 
 
 1191. So as to avoid eviction under notice to quit ? 
 . — Yes. A few years purchase as compensation when 
 a tenant is evicted is of no use to him, what can he do. 
 
 1192. Baron Dowse. — Where is he to go? — He has 
 nothing to do unless he goes to America, and in most 
 cases they have a strong objection to be forced to do so, 
 and particularly strong in cases where their forefathers 
 have lived for several generations on the same farm. 
 
 1193. In your part of the world are the improve- 
 ments made by the tenant or the landlord ? — Of course, 
 in general, the tenant does everything that way. 
 There is one exception near me, Mr. Wade of Clon- 
 braney. 
 
 1194. But, as a general rule, the tenants do make 
 the improvements ? — Yes, as a general rule. 
 
 1 1 95. Do you think the tenants entertain a kind of 
 opinion considering the number of years they have 
 been on a farm that they have an interest in the land ? 
 — I do. They consider it is their property as long as 
 they pay a fair rent. 
 
 1196. They do not object to the landlord getting 
 3. reasonable rent ? — N"o, never that I heard of. 
 
 1197. Chaikman. — You see no other means except 
 arbitration by which you could arrive at the settlement 
 Df a fair rent in cases of differences ? — No ; in cases of 
 lifference, either arbitration by each of the parties 
 ippointing one arbitrator, and they appointing a third, 
 3r else by the decision of a Government official. 
 
 1198. Do you think increased compensation in cases 
 3f eviction, if the court thought the landlord was de- 
 nanding an unreasonable rent, would have the same 
 jfleot?— No; I do not think anything which only 
 ;omes into force when the tenant is evicted will be of 
 my use. 
 
 1199. Baron Dowse. — Would a change in the Land' 
 Laws, which would give the tenant this sense of 
 security, so long as he paid a reasonable rent, have a 
 lublic opinion on which it could rest, and which would 
 oe satisfied Ijv it ? — Yes ; I think so. 
 
 1200. Because we hear of a great many other Sept. 3, isso. 
 
 remedies besides that ? — That has sprang up recently, , ^ 
 
 and how far it has struck into the bones of the people Sweetman 
 
 I do not know. I do not think ; : has in my neigh- Esq. 
 bourhood, I don't know about the west. 
 
 1201. You say you area member of the Tenants' 
 Defence Association? — In Meath. 
 
 1202. There is an association of that kind there ? 
 
 Whether it could be said to exist at present, or not, I 
 cannot say. It has not had a mcctiiiLC for some time. 
 
 1203. Mr. Shaw. — \Vas it a local ai^sociation or tlio 
 Dublin Association ? — The county Meath. 
 
 120-1. Because there was such an association in 
 Dublin? — There was also in Dublin. 
 
 1205. Baron Dowse. — Being a member of this 
 association gave you means of ascertaining the \iev.'s 
 of other people as well as your own direct experience ? 
 — Oh, yes. 
 
 1206. The O'Conor Dg^t.— Did many cases that 
 you considered cases of hardship come before the 
 association? — Very seldom. During the time I was a 
 member vexy few cases came to us. One case was the 
 case of a man who had a small farn.' within about ten 
 miles of where I live. The property was bought by a 
 gentleman ; he gave the man notice to quit ; he was 
 paying a very high rent (£3 an Irish acre), but he was 
 quite willing to go on paying the rent. The landlord, 
 however, would not be satistied, he turned him out, he 
 wanted the piece of land to join to liis own, and there 
 was very bitter feeling on the point. 
 
 1207. Mr. Shaw. — Wei-e there land claims in Mr. 
 Nicholson's case ? — Yes ; one of them went up to the 
 House of Lords ; but, of course, they had not the 
 ghost of a chance. 
 
 1208. Did they get mach compensation ? — No ; one 
 of them appealed for all; they got nothing, I think, 
 but I cannot say for certain. 
 
 1209. The O'CoNOu Don.— Did they all appeal?— 
 No ; it was one tenant who appealed ; but it was made 
 for all. 
 
 1210. Was the tenant who appealed a large man — 
 a man of substance ? — No ; he was a small man In- 
 dividually, I believe he had nothing to say to it, but it 
 was made a test case. 
 
 1211. Mr. Shaw. — Did they appeal against the 
 amount of the award in the local court ? — No ; it was 
 an appeal against the eviction ; it was purely a tech- 
 nical matter, and they had not the ghost of a chance. 
 
 1212. Baron Dowse. — It was not an appeal on the 
 land claim, but upon a point of law that arose ? — Yes. 
 
 1213. Mr. Shaw. — You have taken no precautions 
 against subdividing these small tenancies of wJiich yon 
 have told us ? — No ; my theory was, that if left to 
 free trade, whatever suits the country best, will be 
 adopted. 
 
 1214. And you don't think there is any danger of 
 subdividing farms going too far in your district — do 
 you see any tendency m that direction? — ISo; 1 do 
 not see any tendency. 
 
 1215. Baron Dowse. — Why do you prevent con- 
 acreing ? — Because it exhausts the soil. 
 
 1216. Mr. Shaw. — What does conacreing mean in 
 your country ? — Letting the land tor a crop of oats, 
 say ; setting the land, in fact, for a corn crop, and that 
 is very bad. 
 
 1217. Baron Dowse. — It means, in fact, corn acre, 
 and the man takes as much as ever he can out of the 
 land, and puts as little as ever lie can into it? — Just 
 so. I put that in, not from my own experience, but 
 knowing it from otiiei- leases, and, thinking it a very 
 sensible thing. 
 
 1218. Mr. Shaw. — You have studied the question 
 of small owiinrsliips ou tbc continent ? — I have. 
 
 1219. And you have seen the system working 
 yourself? — I have seen it v/orking in four countries, 
 and working successfully. I bave .seen it in tlie .soutb 
 of France. 
 
 1220. And in Belgium ?— Yes, in Belgium. 
 
 1221. And in Germany ?— No; I don't know much 
 
46 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 3,1880. 
 
 John 
 
 Sweetman, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 about Germany. I have seen it in Switzerland, and 
 in Italy, where they have the Metayer system. 
 
 1222. They have another system of dividing a 
 farm in these countries 1 — I could not tell you from 
 experience. 
 
 1223. But the lots are small 1 — They are small. 
 
 1224. And you do not see any difficulty in intro- 
 ducing the same system into this country 1 — E'o ; but 
 not to the same extent. 
 
 1225. You think it would have a healthy effect on 
 the people 1 — Yes. 
 
 1226. And on their habits? — Yes. 
 
 1227. Improve their farming and their self-respect? 
 ' — Yes, and I believe keep up a love for law and order, 
 and the rights of property. 
 
 1228. I suppose one of the great difi&culties here is 
 the fewness of landowners ? — I think so. 
 
 1229. And every policy that would encourage the 
 niimber would be a good policy 1 — It would. 
 
 1230. You think the machiiiery for the introduction 
 of that system would be easily erected 1 — I do not say 
 very easily, I think there are great difSculties in the 
 way, but I thiaak there is a necessity something should 
 be done. 
 
 1231. Are there many small farmers in your dis- 
 trict? — There are in the adjoining county of Cavan. 
 There are a good many small iarmers in that direction. 
 
 1232. They are tillage iarms?— Yes. 
 
 1233. And they manage to live very well on these 
 small farms? — They do live very comfortably; they 
 are farms of about tv/enty acres. 
 
 1234. That would be considered a fair average farm ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 1235. And they do not attempt to divide them into 
 smaller farms ? — I could not tell you that. 
 
 1236. You do not know that?— No. 
 
 1237. Baron Dowse. — The landlords exercise some 
 control I suppose ? — I should say so. Mr. Naper is 
 the landlord adjoining me and Lord Headfort. 
 
 1238. Mr. Shaw. — Is there not tenant-right. : 
 Cavan 1 — To a great extent in Cavan, I believe, hi 
 imm.ediately adjoining me there is not. 
 
 1239. Has there been any attempt, in your neig! 
 bourhood, to raise the rents on large estates recentlj 
 —Some years ago I was inquiring from some of tl 
 farmers near Mr. ISTaper's property, I was saying M: 
 Naper is a good landlord ; he never raises the ren 
 and they said no, sir, except when a man dies. The 
 the rent is sometunes raised, and I noticed there wa 
 ill-feeling on the subject. 
 
 1240. It is raised on a change of tenancy? — Yes. 
 
 1241. Are they allowed to sell their interest ii 
 their holdings there ? — I don't know that. 
 
 1242. Baron Dowse. — In Meath, generally, ar^ 
 they allowed to sell ? — I think not. 
 
 1243. Mr. Shaw. — How do they manage when thq 
 want to leave. Has the tenant to give up any interes 
 h.3 has when leaving? — I cannot say from my owi 
 knowledge. 
 
 1244. But you are perfectly satisfied with your owii 
 experiment? — Perfectly; of course it is a very small 
 one. 
 
 1245. Baron Dowse. — You see no reason why it 
 should not be tried on a larger scale and prove success- 
 fill ? — No. I think any landlord, thinking of his owe 
 interest would have done it ten years ago. 
 
 1246. Is there any practical destinction that you 
 see between a lease for 999 years and the tenant being 
 allowed to remain in occupation of the land as long as 
 he pays the rent provided the rent is amicably settled 
 between the landlord and tenant — is there any 
 practical destinction 1 — I do not see any. 
 
 1247. Except the one may last for ever and tie 
 other must end in 999 years ^— The object of the 999 
 years, I was told by a solicitor, was the same as the 
 other. 
 
 1 248. It leaves the reversion in you ? — ^I don't know 
 the practical difference. 
 
 Eev. Samuel 
 Patterson. 
 
 Rev. Samuel Patterson of Ballygoran, Maynooth, County Kildare, examined. 
 Are you a retired minister ?- 
 
 1249. Chairman. 
 Yes. 
 
 1250. Of the Wesleyan Methodist Church ?— Yes. 
 
 1251. Have you some practical knowledge of farm- 
 ing? — I have. 
 
 1252. And with the different kinds of tenure that 
 exist in Ireland ? — Yes. 
 
 1253. Are you acquainted at all with the general 
 working of the Land Act ? — I have had considerable 
 acquaintance with it. 
 
 1254. Are you at present occupying a farm ? — I am. 
 
 1255. At Ballygoran?— Yes. 
 
 1256. What is the size of it? — 120 Irish acres, about. 
 1256a. At what rent? — £2 5s. an acre. 
 
 1257. Mr. Shaw. — Per Irish acre? — Yes. 
 
 1258. Is that the same farm you had formerly — 
 that the lawsiiit was about ? — The very same farm. 
 
 1259. Chairman. — Under whom do 3'ou hold? — - 
 His Grace the Duke of Leinster. 
 
 1260. At what date did you enter into it ? — In 1869. 
 
 1261. War? that under lease ? — No ; it was under a 
 temporary agreement. I succeeded my wife's father 
 on the farm, and I had a promisfe of a lease from the 
 late Duke. That lease was to have been given at the 
 decease of my father-in-law, but that promise has never 
 been fulfilled. By the direction of His Grace the Duke 
 of Leinster I paid my predecessor's liabilities and sup- 
 ported him for the remainder of his life, giving him 
 thereby in money and mone3'''s worth about £2,000. 
 
 1262. Did you make any joayment on going into the 
 farm ? — I immediately had to pay the arrears of rent 
 to His Grace, £535. Pather-in-law had got into bad 
 health and difficulties, and the late Duke was very 
 friendly in his disposition towards him, and wished he 
 should be taken care of. Of course we endeavom'ed 
 to do our best in that respect. 
 
 1263. How was it you never had the lease that you 
 say was agreed to ? — "The Land A ct came immediately 
 afterwards, in 1870, and, I think, had some efiect in 
 changing the disposition of the Duke. He was still 
 inclined to give the lease, but it was delayed, and, un- 
 iortunately, he died before the thing was ever carried 
 out. The present Duke does not recognise my claim 
 or that settlement at all. 
 
 1264. Was there any agTeement in writing? — Yes; 
 I have an agreement in writing. 
 
 1265. Baron Dowse. — Does the present Duke allege 
 that the late Duke had no power to make an agree- 
 ment binding on him ? — I think that appears a littlf 
 late in the day. It was not'originally stated. 
 
 1266. But it is now stated ?— I think it is ; I kno^( 
 in a recent argument that was advanced. 
 
 1267. Because ii you had a binding agreement yoi 
 could carry it out in a court of law : — They relied 01 
 the agreement to some extent, for they did not stam] 
 it at the time it was made ; it was only regarded as ; 
 merely temporary thing and I was to have a lease, bu 
 when that little difference between theDuke and mysel 
 cropped up they valued the document so much as t 
 spend £10 in stamping it. 
 
 1268. That is to use it in evidence ?— Yes. If, m 
 lords and gentlemen, you wish any of these documeni 
 in evidence I can furnish copies. 
 
 1269. Chairman. — You went in under an 
 ment 1 — Yes ; I went in under that agreement, 
 a copy of the lease that was presented to me. 
 dtices copy of lease?) 
 
 1270. Have you been offered any lease in substiti 
 tion oi it % — Yes, the present Duke presented me whi 
 is called a yearly lease to sign, which I remonstrate 
 against, very respectfully, and we had considerah 
 controversy about it. It was sent to me twice and 
 
 agr#( 
 Iha\ 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 47 
 
 living there ? 
 
 refused to sign it, because I thereby considered I would 
 confiscate my little saving — my life sa^ang — which I 
 had for my family, and -which I had put into that 
 investment. 
 
 1271. Baron Dowse. — Are you still 
 —Yes. 
 
 1272. And you pay rent to the Duke? — At pre- 
 sent he does not take it. He does not acknowledge 
 me as tenant now. The affair of my son shooting a 
 rabbit came in and rather mixed the whole aflair. 
 
 1273. That was the case I tried? — It was, my lord, 
 and the very day we got the order of the Common 
 Pleas Division to the magistrates at Celbridge to quash 
 their conviction of my son. His Grace sent me notice to 
 quit by the hands of the common process server of the 
 neighbourhood, not by one of his own agents or baUifis. 
 I was very ill at the time in bed with an attack of 
 broncliitis. It was on the 27th of January, 1879, 
 which was a very severe winter, as you may remember. 
 He called me out of bed at seven o'clock in the 
 momiug. I had to see the fellow ; he would not 
 go away without handing the notice iuto my own hand. 
 Under very painful circumstances and insult it was 
 given to me ; of course I had to bear it. 
 
 1274. Chairman. — That case is still pending? — It 
 is still pending. We maintain their notice is bad. 
 There was a peculiarity in the agreement. I put my 
 wife's life into it at the time. I was in delicate health 
 myself, and we considered her life the better of the two. 
 
 1275. Baron Dowse. — Did these difierences arise 
 in any way as to the terms or the rent upon which the 
 land was to be held ? — No, there was never a word 
 directly about rent ; we considered the rent high. I 
 was spoken to concerning a large advance in rent by 
 a person reputed to be in the Duke's confidence. 
 
 1276. Do you think any change in the law would 
 alter your position in any way in reference to these 
 matters ?— Why, if the law was changed before the 
 case came into court — before the case now pending 
 was determined — it would benefit us very materially. 
 
 1277. In what way? — For instance, if it was en- 
 acted that there should be a right of free sale. 
 
 1278. What would you sell ? — I could sell my in- 
 terest in the farm. 
 
 1279. The Duke says you have none? — But the 
 law would determine otherwise. 
 
 1280. Ml-. Shaw. — You mean that if the tenant- 
 right of the north was given on the estate you could 
 sell your interest ? — Yes. 
 
 1281. Baron Dowse. — Did the Duke ever ask you 
 to sign this yearly lease ? — Yes. 
 
 1282. In addition to its being a yearly lease had 
 you any objection to the terms of it ? — Oh, yes ; I had 
 to contract myself out of the Land Act. It completely 
 put contempt on the Land Act of 1870, insisting on 
 my contracting myself out of it. It has other faults. 
 
 1283. Chairman. — Are there any clauses for com- 
 pensation in it in place of the Land Act clauses ? — 
 Nothing whatever worth consideration. 
 
 128-1. Mr. Shaw. — Is that the usual lease on the 
 estate ? — It is the Leinster lease. 
 
 1285. It was not made for you especially ? — No, it 
 is in print. It varies in periods ; one period is for 
 thirty-one years, another for twenty-one years, and the 
 next is the yearly lease. 
 
 1286. Baron Dowse. — But the conditions are the 
 same. The lease as you have given it to me, is 
 printed, and it contains the following clause : — 
 "Provided always, and it is hereby expressly agreed, 
 that the said lessee, his executors, administrators, 
 or assigns, or any of them, shall not make any 
 claim for compensation in respect of disturbance 
 or improvements (except improvements made with 
 the written consent of the lessor, liis heirs or 
 assigns), or for "compensation in any other respect 
 under any of the clauses or provisions of the Landlord 
 and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870^ save and except that 
 portion of building set out in the schedule hereto 
 annexed, which has been erected by the lessee." That 
 is the clause you object to ? — Yes. 
 
 1287. Chairman. — The fattire improvements are to 
 be by agreement between the landlord and tenant ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 1288. And if agreed to, you are to have compensa- 
 tion 1 — Yes. 
 
 1289. Baron Dowse. — But you are not to claim any 
 compensation for disturbance? — None that would 
 ignore the money I paid by the direction of the lal e 
 Duke. I paid that in good faith. 
 
 1290. Mr. Shaw. — With his knowledge? — By his 
 direction. He arranged it all himself, and the late 
 Mr. Hanjilton. 
 
 1291. He was agent? — Yes; he died lately. The 
 Duke even took the trouble to come to the houes, very 
 kindly, and looked into the whole matter himself. I 
 do not believe he ever would have taken the course 
 the present Duke has taken. 
 
 1292. Baron Dowse. — Under that lease the Duke 
 barred you for everything you had except what is in 
 the schedule. Now, according to your opinion, do you 
 consider that reasonable? — I consider it highly un- 
 reasonable, and injurious to the tenantry. Not only 
 injurious to the tenantry, but to the whole of the 
 country most disturbing and unsettling. For this 
 lease has been extensively copied. 
 
 1293. Is that the usual clause in the leases on the 
 estate ?- — It is, and it is also presented to small holders 
 under £50 valuation, which is in contravention of the 
 law. 
 
 1294. The O'Conor Don. — It would be of no force 
 there 1 — Yes ; but of course it is not every poor man 
 who could undertake a trial ; there are curious things 
 done. A trial is a very arduous undertaking ; there 
 are a great many difficulties thrown in the way of the 
 tenant, and I am sorry to say browbeating and 
 financial difficulties, and persecutions petty and large. 
 
 1295. Baron Dowse. — The law gave you compensa- 
 tion for the trees the Duke cut down ? — It did, indeed, 
 my lord ; it was a very fairly tried case, and gave very 
 great satisfaction throughout the country. 
 
 1296. Chairman. — Do you think it would be injuri- 
 ous to the tenants generally that improvements should 
 be agreed upon before being executed between land- 
 lord and tenant, so as to avoid future litigation, and 
 have them registered ? — That would depend very much, 
 my lord, on what would be the fviture tenure of land 
 in this country. If the present system is to go on it 
 would appear to me, of course, not an unreasonable 
 thing that there should be a fair understanding about 
 improvements 'where the landlord assisted. 
 
 1297. Baron Dowse. — Do you believe it would 
 better the tenant if before he was to make anything 
 called an improvement he was to get the consent of 
 his landlord ? — I do not think it would, for in very 
 few cases he would get it. 
 
 1298. Mr. Shaw.— You mean that you think he 
 would not get it ? — Yes. 
 
 1299. And that that would prevent his making any 
 efiort to get it ? — Yes. 
 
 1300. Baron Dowse.— Am I right in saying that 
 in that case the Duke stubbed a hedge that you did 
 not want stubbed at all. Literally he cut it. There 
 is a technical difierence in " stubbing "?— Yes ; it 
 made the road dry and took away the shelter. 
 
 1301. The hedge was along your fi-eld?— Yes; it 
 was on the way he used when going up to the obelisk. 
 
 1302. And it enabled cattle to get into your land ? 
 
 Yes ; and they destroyed new meadow and wheat. 
 
 1303. Mr. Shaw. —That was the result of the land- 
 lord's improvement?— Yes. He also cut do\vn trees ; 
 very few of the tenants will undertake to look for 
 legal remedy. I would not have been fool enough to 
 do so only I was put in so tight a corner by His Grace. 
 When a man has got his back to the wall he must 
 fight, I was going to be thrown out without anythin"- 
 after all the harm done me, and I think it was time 
 to turn round and see what the law could do for me. 
 
 1 304. Chairman. — Is there any arrangement on the 
 property by which the landlord joins in improvements 
 if agreed upon, that is does- he make any allowance 
 
 Sept 3, 1880. 
 
 Eev. Samuel 
 Patterson. 
 
48 
 
 IRISH LA.ND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Sept. 3, 1S8C'. 
 
 Eev. Samuel 
 Patterson. 
 
 towards them? — He has been borrowing some money 
 for the last two or three years, and is doing some 
 drainage. 
 
 1305. That is on his own account "? — Well, the 
 Board of Works give the money, ho makes the tenants 
 pay for it. There are many tenants who would rather 
 be let alone on that score, for while His Grace gets the 
 loan for thirty-five years it remains a perpetual charge 
 on the tenants, and eventually a considerable part of 
 the improvement goes into His Grace's pocket or will 
 go into the pocket of his successors. 
 
 1306. But I mean as to building is it a work to 
 Avhioh any assistance is given by the present Duke? 
 — He has not done much th^t way, the late Duke did. 
 
 1307. Baron Dowse. — In the neighbourhood of 
 Athy there is a large cut that appears to be made for 
 drainage purposes, and I ahvays understood that the 
 Duke contributed towards that or did some of the 
 work 1 — I am not aware of that work at all. I have 
 been very seldom in Athy. 
 
 1308. He has property there ? — Yes. 
 
 1309. Chairman. — You say there is no general 
 custom of allowing assistance towards improvements 
 approved of? — I may say there is no general custom. 
 Individuals have been treated with, but it has been 
 done in an uneven way. There have been a few 
 cottages built and some allowance made to a few 
 individuals, and some perhaps, I should say, more 
 favoured than others. Baron Dowse will remember 
 perhaps a man that was brought up on the Duke's 
 ])art to give evidence against me on the trial. I do 
 not like to reflect on his evidence, but he knew more 
 about the matter than he would tell. He has since 
 got a farm from which the Trustees of the College of 
 St. Patrick have been evicted at Maynooth. The 
 trustees would not sign this lease, and they were 
 turned out in the person of their representative last 
 January, on a cold day in the rain. 
 
 1310. Mr. Shaw. — Had the tnistees made many 
 improvements ? — Yes ; they had brought the land into 
 a high state of cultivation. 
 
 1311. Did they claim anything under the Land 
 Act? — They did, but I think the case was settled 
 quietly. I heard that the Duke gave them £1,000. 
 The}' did not consider that near enough for what they 
 had done, but they preferred peace and quietness and 
 they accepted it. 
 
 1.IU2. But they refused to take the lease ?— They 
 refui;eil decidedly to take the lease. 
 
 1313. Chairman. — Have you general knowledge of 
 that, or is it from rumour or newspaper rej)orts 1 — I 
 have it from conversations with persons connected 
 with the college. It is a well known matter of fact 
 in the neighbourhood. A person in my employment 
 saw the eviction carried out. 
 
 1314. Mr. Shaw. — Has the lease been refused by 
 •other tenants on the property to any extent ? — By very 
 few. 
 
 1315. Baron Dowse. — Do you know youi-self, and 
 are you able to say that many tenants hold under 
 similar leases? — It has been with hardly an exception 
 made to circulate throughout the whole property. 
 Ever since the end of 1872 that lease has been put in 
 force, some have been made to sign it, jjerhaps you 
 -svill allow me to say, in a very arbitrary way. It 
 struck me as arbitrary ; any remarks I have to make 
 I make them, as far as possible, apart from all personal 
 feeling, as fairly as I can as a spectator. A few men 
 hold under agreements similar to that under which I 
 hold at present, or say I hold, and these men could 
 not even get a copy of the agreement from the office. 
 Wlien the Duke fell out with me I did not know 
 precisely how I stood, I had a vague idea, and I 
 had to make a motion in the Common Pleas for the 
 documents, and got them. That is the way I actually 
 found out how I stood by the agreement. 
 
 1316. Chaimian. — Have you any observation to 
 make on the present land laws of Ireland which you 
 wish to put before the Commission ?— -Vy'dl I may say 
 
 my lords and gentlemen that I am very much pleased 
 that this Commission has been appointed, and I hope 
 its labours will lead to great good. I think this is the 
 great qtiesfcion now for this countrj^. 
 
 1317. Baron Dowse. — About the question of rent 
 do you think there ought to be any change made in 
 reference to the manner in which the landlord and 
 tenant, either by agreement or other\\ Lse, fix the rent 
 of the property ? — Most decidedly. 
 
 1318. In what way, and why? — Of course I am 
 acquainted v.'itli the different methods proposed. I 
 should think some method of arbitration would be a 
 fair way. Whether it v.-as to go before a legal tribunal, 
 or whether it was to be the re.sult of a conference 
 between arbitrators appointed by each side, I think 
 the I'ent should be determined somewhat in that way. 
 
 1319. Do you think it would be advantageous to 
 the countiy generally, that as long as a man paid a 
 fair rent, ascertained in that or some other fair way, 
 he should not be liable to be evicted ? — I consider that 
 principle of the utmost importance. I believe it would 
 make a tranquil and prosperous country of Ireland if 
 carried out. 
 
 1320. Chairman. — You have some knowledge oi 
 other parts of Ireland besides Kildare ? — Yes. 
 
 1321. You have been stationed as Wesleyan clergy- 
 man in other parts ? — Yes, and I am the descendant of 
 a race of men who farmed this land of Ireland for cen- 
 turies. 
 
 1322. Where have you been stationed yourself? — 
 I have been stationed north and south. 
 
 1323. Have you ever been in the west? — Xot 
 stationed, but I ha've lived there. My father was 
 there for some time. 
 
 1324. Have you turned your attention to the con- 
 dition of the farming cla-s in all these various jrarts 
 where you have been livirjz I — Oh, yes, everywhere 
 for the last 20 years. 
 
 1325. And your evide-ee is not confined to Kildare? 
 — Not at all. Tily father — a.s a county Down man 
 himself; but I was born in the South, and I was 
 reared there. 
 
 1326. You have a general knowledge of the whole 
 state of the country ; and. in your opinion, if tenants 
 held land at a reasonable rent and paid it, they should 
 hold it without the landlord having the power to evict 
 them ? — Certainly. I Jjelieve it would be a blessing 
 to the country and to tlie landlords and tenants. 
 
 1327. But there are other ideas prevailing besides 
 that ? — Well, there are snme other advanced theories. 
 I cannot say I rank myself amongst the mostadvanccl ; 
 but I certainly think the man occiipying the land and 
 working it can take the most out of it, and he shoidd 
 be encouraged to Ijecome a proprietor if pi'acticable. 
 
 1328. Baron Dowse. — Do you know the North? — 
 I do. 
 
 1329. Do you think-the custom of tenant-right has 
 proved advantap;cous there ? — I think it has proved of 
 the greatest advantage. I was talking, two years' 
 ago, to a Northern farmer. He does not hold as nuicii 
 in his, entire farm as there is in one of my fields, but 
 he strutted about there a far more independent man. 
 He said — " I pity you down there. You are oiil" 
 objects of pity. I can sell this farm in square yards 
 if I like." 1 said — '■ And would yon be fool enough 
 to do it ?" " No," he said, " but I can sell my farm a? 
 I please, and I can take more out of it than you 
 could." And he said the truth. I know myself I 
 could take double or more than double out of the pre- 
 sent farm ; but it would recpiire expenditure. 
 
 1330. There is a good deal of observation about the 
 Irish being thriftless, and not being given to frugality, 
 and having no industrious habits. Do you think that, 
 if they had an inducement to look upon improvements 
 in the land as their own, and that they knew they 
 could not be turned out vrnless they refused to pay 
 the rent, would it make any improvement in them ? — 
 I am sure it would. I believe there is no more 
 generoiis, frugal, or industrious race under heaven if 
 they I'ad sufficient motive given them ; but no man on 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 49 
 
 earth, who has any common sense, will work without 
 a motive. You cannot expect slaves to work. 
 
 1331. Has there been any increase of rent to your 
 knowledge made 1 — Oh, yes. 
 
 1332. Have the tenants agreed to thaf! — Oh, they 
 have. 
 
 1333. Why did they agree to it, if it was not fair 1 
 — They would not agree to it in the North ; but there 
 is no cohesion generally amongst the tenants through 
 Leinster, and least so in Kildare. 
 
 1334. Then, you think they should be protected 
 from themselves 'i — I think they should be saved from 
 this, or from what Colonel Colthurst called laud hunger. 
 It operates in the most invidious way, and urges 
 men to great intrigue. They go into the landlord's 
 office, and offer him impossible things, in order 
 to get the land over each other's heads. I do 
 not join in all the outcry against landlords. I 
 believe there are some very good landlords ; but 
 they must see some of the most despicable phases 
 of human nature when they hear privately in their 
 offices some of these men coming in al^d trying secretly 
 to undermine other men lor the land. 
 
 1335. As a general rule do you find large landlords 
 — gentlemen of position and so on — deal more equitably 
 with their tenants than small landlords — I am putting 
 this personal case of your own in the back ground 
 altogether^ — Yes, my knowledge of the transactions 
 of many of the large landlords is pleasurable, I believe 
 many of them have acted fairly — not only fairly but 
 generously, and there are very pleasing exceptions in 
 different parts of Ireland which have come under my 
 knowledge to that which is generally complained of, 
 but it strikes me that the terms good landlord and 
 bad landlord should not be a possibility. A good 
 landlord is in the present state of Ireland a very good 
 person and a noble person because he has great power 
 to act in a different way, but it seems to me part of the 
 system of serfdom if St. Clare may be succeeded 
 by Legree. That should not be possible I think 
 there should be a fair and equitable settlement of the 
 land qiiestion so that one man s hould not be so much 
 at the mercy of another. 
 
 1336. That it should not depend on the good wUl 
 of any man, but if they have a claim, it should be a 
 legal claim? — That they should be treated as men let 
 the tenant stand up on his legs as a free man. 
 
 1337. Have you ever considered the schedule or 
 clause of the Land Act allotting compensation in case 
 of disturbance as to whether the various sums are too 
 much or to little 1 — I have perused the Land Act from 
 b3ginnuig to end with very great pleasure I was 
 delighted with it when it was brought in in 1870, 
 until that unfortunate power of contracting out of it 
 was interpolated into it. I saw that that made a hole 
 in it the very first morning I read it in the newspaper. 
 
 1337a. Don't you think the Land Act has conferred 
 very great benefits 1 — Very great and I think it is an 
 extraordinary and a wonderful Act considering the 
 time it was passed. I consider it was framed with 
 the greatest skill, and that it has been carried out on 
 the whole with considerable judgment and fairness. 
 Of course very large discretion has been allowed to 
 County Court Judges, and they do not all see eye to 
 eye as to the allowances they make and the decisions 
 they give, but on the whole it has worked hitherto 
 fairly though it does not go far enough. 
 
 1338. And the result of your evidence as well as of 
 the evidence of others is that you prefer a man should 
 not be turned out at all to being turned out and 
 getting compensation 1 — Decidedly, and I am sure all 
 Ireland would be with one on that point even to the 
 poor little holdings in Mayo. The men there to my 
 own knowledge supplement the family industry on 
 the little plots of land by working elsewhere — going 
 to England to work. I have seen them in England 
 working and earning hard what paid their rent. 
 
 1339. Don't you think, however, that there are 
 some parts of Mayo where they could not live on the 
 
 land if they had no rent at all?— At present they Sept. 3, 188(). 
 could not. Bov. Samuel 
 
 1340. And no Land Act would do them any good, Patterson, 
 except it would do good to the country generally, and 
 that that good would react on them 1 — Precisely ; and 
 it would give them a footing, and a sense of independ- 
 ence that would evoke the springs of industry more 
 and more out of them. Then they would go and labour, 
 and improve their little holdings. 
 
 1311. Mr. Shaw. — Or they could go and sell their 
 small holdings, and go work elsewhere 1 — They could ; 
 and these small holdings, which are not sufficient, per- 
 haps, to live on, could be consolidated, if that were 
 better. ^ 
 
 1342. Chairman. — Do you consider that if tenant- 
 right like the Ulster custom was introduced into these 
 places, and the people had the right to sell, it would 
 lead to a consolidation of holdings where they are too 
 small for people to live upon t — I could not say ; for 
 I have been over very small holdings in the North, 
 and I have been amazed how the people lived on them, 
 and how respectably they turned out, especially on 
 Sundays — respectably dressed men and women. 
 
 1343. Baron Dowse. — Have you ever been in west- 
 ern Donegal, or western Mayo 1 — No ; not Donegal ; 
 but I have been in Mavi). 
 
 1344. Suppose the piece of land is too small for a 
 man to live on, and, if tenant-right was given, he 
 would probably sell it to a neighbouring proprietor — 
 if I may use the expression — until some man would 
 have enough to live on ; do you think that would 
 happen 1 — I think it would in some instances. 
 
 1345. To that extent, then, would not tenant-right 
 increase consolidation of holdings beneficially 1 — Yes, 
 beneficially. 
 
 1346. Mr. Shaw. — At present they cannot be in- ' 
 creased, and, if a man goes out, he generally goes to 
 the workhouse? — Yes. 
 
 1347. Chairman. — Are you aware of any case of 
 tenants evicted going into the workhouse 1 — Not in 
 my immediate neighbourhood. There was a tenant 
 evicted by the Duke last autumn, and there was no 
 resource for him but the workhouse ; but there was 
 such a row — if I may use the expression — all round 
 about the neighbours, and such an expression of 
 opinion, that he was put back as caretaker. The 
 Duke did not lose a farthing — he got his rent. 
 
 1348. Baron Dowse. — :A man put back as care- 
 taker is a mere temporary thing ? — Yes ; he made him 
 sign some paper that he can chuck him out at any 
 moment. He is there at present. The Duke got all 
 the arrears of rent, for he sold all the tenant's crops. 
 
 1349. The O'Conob Don. — Was he evicted for non- 
 payment of rent ? — Yes, for non-payment. 
 
 1350. Baron Dowse. — How many acres had he? — 
 I think about fifty acres. I am not quite certain ; 
 but he had not more than that. 
 
 1351. Do you think a man who does not pay his 
 rent has any answer to an ejectment at all, according 
 to your judgment ? — I think if he had been in fail- 
 circumstances, and his rent not an unreasonable rent, 
 and if he was a thriftless man, or that the difficulty 
 arose from his own want of industry or skill, he should 
 go out with leave to sell. 
 
 1352. But if it arose from other causes over which 
 he had no control ; like the act of God, a bad season 
 and a bad harvest, what then ? — I don't consider any 
 man ought to go out under such circumstances. 
 
 1353. Mr. Shaw. — But you would allow lum, in 
 any case, to sell his holding ? — Yes, besides there is 
 many a man who, if he got time, would recover him- 
 self even after a bad season. 
 
 1354. Baron Dowse. — I understand you to say that 
 if there was a scheme that a man should be allowed 
 to hold his land at a fair rent, and only turned out for 
 non-payment of rent, and with power of sellino- his 
 holding, that, even after he was about to be turned 
 out for non-payment, that would be no reason why he 
 should not exercise his right of sale notwithstanding ? 
 — That is quite fair " 
 
 H 
 
50 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 3, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Samuel 
 Pattersiin. 
 
 1355. Chairman. — You said your principal objec-- 
 tion to the Land Act was the power given to contract 
 out of it ? — Yes ; at least we all know where the shoe 
 pinches most. It came hardest on me there. 
 
 1356. That applies only to tenants over a certain 
 valuation 'i— Yes, and that is the very pressure that is 
 being brought against me. 
 
 1357. Baron Dowse. — Your case is that there should 
 be no limitation on the sum that prohibits people bar- 
 gaining themselves out of the Act 1 — I do not consider 
 there should be any such provision in the Act at all. 
 
 1358. The idea was that the larger the tenant the 
 more free he was, and the better able to take care of 
 himself ?— That is very fallacious, and I know there is 
 at the present hour more distress amongst large tenants 
 than small, ones. There is more behind the scenes in 
 respectable families of suffering than any one here has 
 any conception of but myself. They have not joined 
 in these popular demonstrations, although they have 
 sympathised with them, especially in my immediate 
 neighbourhood, and quite a number of my neighbours 
 have become bankrupt lately, and several of them, men 
 who held influential places, are going out of their 
 holdings this very week, and there is no help for it. 
 
 1359. Mr. Shaw. — What is the reason of that? — 
 The bad seasons, and foreign competition. Many of 
 them have to pay lar'ge rents, and have, for several 
 successive years, bought store cattle, and sold them, 
 many of them, for the price only that they gave for 
 
 them, a,nd many even less after having theni half a 
 year on the land. 
 
 1360. The rents you say are high, are they grazing 
 
 lands 1 Yes. T know a farm in Meath that used to 
 
 be let for the season at the -rate of £6 an acre, and the 
 owner of it could not get £2 10s. for it last summer.^ 
 You may judge from that what a change there was. 
 
 1361. This year has been better? — Yes; because 
 there is a change between the price of store cattle and 
 the selling price of beef. I think letting lands in 
 Meath which were put up to auction generally have 
 found their own level, because being only taken for a tem- 
 porary period men would not bid for them. There has 
 been a vast amount of land meadowed which would have 
 been obviated if it had been otherwise, and that has 
 injured the country for there is no process more inju- 
 rious than meadowing without top-dressing. 
 
 1362. The O'Conoe Don. — There has been a large 
 increase in meadow this year ? — I am not aware of this 
 year, but there was a vast increase last year. 
 
 1363. Mr. Shaw. — Have allowances been made to 
 any extent owing to the bad season ? — The Duke pro- 
 mised to make an allowance last Christmas. That 
 was the only one I knew of, .but it was framed in such 
 a way that very few got the benefit of it. It was so 
 trammelled that few persons -gpt; .the abatement last 
 Christmas. He put the limit very low. 
 
 1364. Mr. Kavanagh. — You say you know several 
 instances of increase of rent, would you give us the 
 names ? — I will furnish them afterwards. 
 
 Thomas 
 
 Robertson, 
 
 Esft. 
 
 Thomas Hdbertson, Esq., of Narraghmore, Athy, examined. 
 
 1365. Chairman. — You have been for a long time 
 engaged in agricultural pursuits ? — About thirty-four 
 years in Ireland. 
 
 1366. Previously where? — In Scotland. 
 
 1367. On coming to Ireland did you make yourself 
 acquainted with the general laws in respect to land ? 
 — Not immediately after, coming, but latterly I paid 
 more attention to these. 
 
 1368. Did you come lo Ireland for the purpose of 
 taking a farm ? — I came over as an extensive land- 
 steward in the first instance. I was ten years as such, 
 and for about twenty-four years I have been farming 
 on my own account, seven years in the county of Louth 
 and seventeen in the county Kildare. 
 
 1369. "Were either of those held on lease or as yearly 
 tenements? — In the county Louth I had the promise 
 of a lease, but did not get it. In the county Kildare 
 I hold a life interest. I hold a lease for my Hfe. 
 
 1370. What was the cause of your not having a 
 lease according to the agreement in the county Louth ? 
 —There was some difficulty about the buildings. The 
 landlord promised to erect buildings, and he did not 
 fulfil his promise, and we parted in consequence. Then 
 I had the offer of this farm in the county Kildare, and 
 I accepted it and gave up possession of the other. 
 
 1371- Can you give lis the result of your experience 
 of the working of the land, system previous to the pass- 
 ing of the Land Act. in Ireland. Had you -much.cause 
 for dissatisfaction with the working of the .systern, 
 previous to ^ the passing of the Land Act? — I cannot 
 say that I had personally. 
 
 1372. You are aware that th( ire was dissatisfaction ? 
 — Yes, but I farmed under a certain contract, and I 
 did my best to fulfil tlie terms of the contract. 
 
 1373. So far as you are concerned it worked satis- 
 factorily?— Not altogether, beoausein making improve- 
 ments I had no prospect of being able to realize the 
 value of them for myself afterwards. 
 
 1374. Then holding as you do for your own life you 
 have no experience at present personally, but taking 
 the country throughout, what is your experience of the 
 working of the system since the Land Act? — Does 
 your lordship refer to the general state of the country ? 
 
 1375. Yes ?— Well, I think the great difficulty ui the 
 way of the improvement of the country is the in- 
 security of the tenant ? 
 
 1376. Do you think the Land Act has increased 
 the security? — The Land' Act has failed, I think, 
 altogether. It has failed by being permissive iti the 
 first instance, and I think it has failed in its procedure, 
 or in the course of its procedure, and I think it has 
 failed because of the jurisdiction given under it, and 
 clearly it has failed to protect the tenant from arbi- 
 trary increases of rent, or from eviction. 
 
 1377. It has failed in jui-isdiction you say. Do 
 you mean the court to which the cases are referred ? — 
 Yes, and the absolute power of the judge. I think in 
 all cases when a dispute arises between landlord and 
 tenant it should be settled by arbitration or by a judge 
 and jury. 
 
 1379. Do you know of any case in which dissatis- 
 faction has arisen from decisions of the County Court 
 judges ? — In every case I have known there has been 
 dissatisfaction on this very point. 
 
 1380. Could you give us a lew instances? — There 
 have not been a great many cases in the County KU- 
 dare, but there have been several cases on the Leinster 
 property. The first case was that of Mr. Trye an 
 English tenant on the Duke of Leinstfer's estate. 
 He had a farm from the Duke, and he went into 
 possession under a verbal promise of a renewal of his 
 lease, provided he gave satisfaction in the manner of 
 his farming. The agent who made him the promise 
 died in the meantime, and a new agent came over the 
 property, and he refused to fulfil the agreement. The 
 tenant in the meantime had farmed to the best of his 
 ability. He had grown turnips, and had them eaten on 
 the land by sheep. • He bought large quantities of oil 
 cake and consumed it on the farm, and he brought the 
 farm altogether into as high a condition as he possibly 
 could. When the lease expired, instead of getting a 
 renewal of it at the old rent, it was intimated to 
 him that lie , shou.ld, pay ten shillings an aoe more. 
 He refused, and sooner than agree to it he gave up 
 possession. The case came before the County Court 
 Jvidge who awarded the tenant, I think, about 
 £260 for his improvements in the face of evidence 
 that those improvements were worth three times the 
 amount. The tenant appealed to the Court of Assize, 
 and the judge, the late Judge Whiteside, confirmed the 
 award of the County Court judge, and fined the ten- 
 ant £10 for the impropriety, as we understood it, of 
 
MIJNUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 making an appeal. Then the farm was let at the 
 advanced rate, and is held at present at the advanced 
 rent, that is ten shillings an acre more. And suppos- 
 ing that ten shillings to be capitalized at twenty years 
 purchase it showed that the County Court judge and 
 the judge of Assize had proceeded on vei'y inconsiderate 
 grounds in coming to the conclusion as to what the 
 tenant was entitled to. 
 
 1381. If it was tried by a judge and jury as you say, 
 who would you have on the jitry 1 — A jury from the 
 list in the usual way. 
 
 1382. Is it not a fact that the general run of jurors 
 are tenant-farmers 1 — I don't know whether they are 
 tenant-farmers or not, just as it happens. 
 
 1383. Do you think if it was a jury of tenant- 
 farmers in a case of that sort that that would be a fair 
 tribunal to go to ? — They would be on oath, and they 
 would be practical men. They would be the very best 
 men to form an estimate of the vaKie of improvements 
 on land. 
 
 1384. Then is it in that respect you think the Land 
 Act is a failure that there is a wrong ti'ibunal to go to 
 from the want of there being a ju.ry 1 — Yes ; I think so. 
 From the different decisions given by the County Chair- 
 men the tenants have lost confidence iia their decisions. 
 One County Chairman gives one decision, and another 
 County Chairman another. 
 
 1385. Baron Dowse. — Don't you think that one 
 jury would give one decision and another a different 
 one 1 — I don't know. It would be a legal and equit- 
 able tribunal. 
 
 1386. Mr. Sha"VY. — Was the improvement created 
 principally by the high farming of this tenant ? — 
 Yes ; I may tell you that the farm in question was 
 let to one tenant at .£1 an acre, and. he remained 
 about eleven years on it when he became bankrupt. 
 The interest of it was then sold with all the crops 
 to a second tenant with the concurrence of the agent, 
 and he became bankrupt in three years. Then this 
 Mr. Trye cam.e in with the concurrence of the agent 
 into an exhausted farm. There were only six years 
 of the lease to run, and he was promised by the 
 agent that in the event of his farming it properly, 
 and making improvements he would get a renewal 
 at the old rent.' 
 
 1387. He took it at the existing rent? — Yes; at 
 the existing rent. In the meantime the agent died, 
 and the new agent refused to give the renewal. 
 
 1388. Baron Dowse. — Wliy was the agreement not 
 carried out 1 — Because there was only a verbal agree- 
 ment. 
 
 1389. The O'Conor Don.— Whac, was the date of 
 the old lease ■? — I could not give the date. It is six 
 years, I think, since the lease tex-minated, and it was 
 originally for twenty-one years. ;; 
 
 1390. Mr. Shaw. — Then it is £i,bout twenty-seven 
 years ago 1 — Yes. 
 
 1391. It was let at a fair rent at the time when 
 the lease was made 1 — Yes ; Mr. Trye has left the 
 country, and I could not get at the poor law valua- 
 tion. 
 
 1392. The O'CoNOR Don. — The lease was made at 
 the time of the famine years 1 — Subsequently to the 
 famine years. 
 
 1393. Chairman.— Now, I want to ask you about 
 this £260 award?— I cannot recollect whether it was 
 £250 or £260, but it was one or the other. 
 
 1394. Was it for improvement of land or build- 
 ings ? — It was for land improvement. 
 
 1395. Was the whole of the £260 for, tillage 1-t 
 For unexhausted improvements. 
 
 1396. Of the land 1 — Yes ; he had no claim for dis- 
 turbance under the lease. 
 
 1397. Mr. Kavanagh. — Did he claini for perma- 
 nent improvements such as buildings ?— No, 
 
 1398. Baron Dowse. — The opinion of] the , Chair-, 
 man went on this, that he considered that enough 
 to compensate him, and, that he had got some ad- 
 vantage out of the manures himself? — There was a 
 
 large claim made by the tenant of something over Sept. s.iB'io. 
 £1,000, and there was a rebutting claim by the land- ThomaiT" 
 lord. , Both claims were exaggerated, but the evidence Kobertson, 
 showed the tenant to be entitled to more than he got. Esq 
 
 1399. Mr. SiiAw.— What was the claim of the 
 landlord 1 — I cannot remember. 
 
 1400. Was it for buildings? — For some neglect of 
 the house, and things of that kind. 
 
 1401. Baron Dowse. — Who was. the chairman ?^ 
 Mr. Lefroy. It was the first case tried in Kildare 
 aftej the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 1402. Chairman. — I suppose the question about 
 tillage is about the most difficult one ? — Yes, there a 
 practical jury is required. 
 
 1403. Do you not think that the power of calling in 
 a valuator or assessor to assist the County Court Judge 
 would answer the purpose 1 — I think it might be a 
 good arrangement, but there is no opening in the Land 
 Act for such a thing. The Land Act gives no authority 
 to do anything like that. I have two or three other cases 
 of the same purport, but the tenants, I may tell you, 
 gave me them under a promise that no names should be 
 mentioned. They are dreadfully afraid of their names 
 being published. 
 
 1403a. Give us the cases without the names? — 
 I had to give the promise that I would not tell 
 the names. No. 1. Had 13J- Irish acres; Poor 
 Law valuation, £138 10s. ; past rent, £122 ; increased 
 rent on the tenant's improvements, £202. The man 
 protested against the increased rent, and was served 
 with a notice to quit. The value of his tenant-right 
 confiscated by the lease that he is now sitting under 
 he estimates at £1,500. 
 
 1404. Baron Dowse. — He had no alternative except 
 to pay the increased rent"^No, he had not. 
 
 1405. He would have been tui-ned out if he did not 1 
 — He would have been turned out. I knew the farm 
 thirty-three years ago let at 10s. an acre, and at the 
 beginning of the famine the tenant had to give it up. 
 It was let then to a county Cqrk man at 1 3s. an acre, 
 and he remained three years when he became a 
 bankrupt. It then fell into the Duke's hands for a 
 time, and the Duke claimed exemption from poor 
 rate on account of its being waste. It formed a por- 
 tion of about 500 acres that were lying waste on his 
 hands that nobody would take. When times became 
 better, a Scotch tenant came and took the land at 
 18s. an acre on a twenty-one years lease. He farmed 
 it for about half the time of his lease, when he became 
 bankrupt. The present tenant then came in, and he 
 gave him £730 for his interest and the stock and crop 
 of the farm ; he had about £400 worth in all, in the 
 stock and crop, and he was £330 out of pocket. He 
 had a wir capital. The f ann was not very far from 
 the canal, and he brought down from thirteen to four- 
 teen boat-loads of manure from Dublin annually. He 
 used artificial manure, and farmed in the highest 
 manner under promise that on the expiration of the 
 lease he would have it renewed When the lease 
 expired the new agent refused, as in the other case, 
 to renew the lease at the old rent. The agent went 
 over the farm with the tenant, and he tarned on 
 the tenant when he had surveyed it all and said, 
 " Sir, you have been robbing the Duke. This farm 
 is worth 12s. an acre more than you have been giving 
 for it." The man explained and protested. He was 
 put under a rent of 31s. an acre. He refused to agree 
 to it, he was served with a notice to quit, and he 
 had no alternative but to agree or to leave the farm, 
 and he thought better not to leave all his improve- 
 ments behind him, and he is now sitting imder the 
 increased rent. 
 
 1406. Baron Dowse. — In fact lie is paying a rent 
 on his own improvements? — He is. That rent has 
 been raised now from its original rent of 10s. to 31s. 
 an acre. 
 
 1407. Mr. Shaw.— This man seems to have been 
 
 the only one who made any good of the farm ? Yes 
 
 he had capital. He is a Scotch tenant, and that is 
 
 H2 
 
o-i 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Thomas 
 
 Kobertson 
 
 Esq. 
 
 Sept. 3, 18S0. the treatment that one of the Duke's imported Scotch 
 tenants has received from the Duke in return for the 
 example shown in the way of good farming. 
 
 1408. What is the extent of the farm ?— 131 Irish 
 acres. He estimates the value of the tenant-right 
 confiscated by the present lease, at £1,500. There is 
 another farm on the same estate of 1(54 acres; poor 
 law valuation, £126; past rent, £140; increased rent 
 £238; value of tenant-right consficated, £1,800. 
 
 1409. Baron DowtE. — Now in that case was the 
 tenant obliged to agree the same as the other man 'i — 
 Yes. 
 
 1410. Or to go out ?— Yes. 
 
 1411. Mr. Shaw. — He had made improvements in 
 the same way ? — Yes. 
 
 1412. Mr. Kavanagh. — This second case is not 
 that of the promise of a lease not being carried out 1 — 
 No there was not a promise in this case. 
 
 1413. It was merely the compulsory adoption of a 
 certain form of lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 1414. How were the improvements confiscated ? — 
 Was his rent raised 1 — The tenant estimates it in this 
 way. He takes the difference between the past rent, 
 £140, and the present rent, £238, and he capitalizes 
 the amount. 
 
 1415. His rent was raised then? — It was from 
 £140 to £238. 
 
 1416. Baron Dowse. — The rent was raised on his 
 own improvements % — Yes, upon his own improve- 
 ments. The third instance is that of a tenant of a 
 fai-m of 150 Irish acres ; poor law valuation, £110; 
 past rent, £116 13s. ; increased rent, £145 ; estimated 
 confiscation of tenant-right, £2,000. This man and 
 his father, and grandfather had lived on and built 
 evei'y house on the farm, had put up iron gates, fenced 
 the farm, drained ifc, and had done all its improve- 
 ments. 
 
 1417. Are all these leases what are called the 
 Leinster lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 1418. And you say the man is paying the increased 
 I'ent on his own improvements 1 — He is. 
 
 1419. And he had no alternative but to pay or go 
 ouf? — No, he had not. 
 
 1420. The O'Conor Don. — Do you know when the 
 original lease was given ? — I rather think this man 
 had no lease previously. 
 
 1421. You do not know when the original lease 
 was fixed ? — ^No. 
 
 1422. Baron Dowse. — All the leases have a clause, 
 which in this document is number 18, "Ousting 
 \ tenant from under a claim under the Land Act." 
 Then there is another observation — " That the lessee, 
 his heirs, executors, and assigns, shall pay the whole 
 of the Grand Ju.ry cess " 'i^Yes. 
 
 1423. "And be at liberty to kill rabbits, but not 
 to shoot them " 1 — Yes. The commentary of the 
 Freeman's Journal at the time is given. In the case 
 of the College of Maynooth a farm of 232 acres 
 had been taken by the trustees in 1849, at the 
 suggestion of the late Duke of Leinster, on the 
 terms proposed by His Grace; rent £295 2s. There 
 Were 3a. 1r. 32p. added in 1867, and the rent was 
 then raised to £300, and, depending on the faith of 
 the landlord, the College trustees expended large 
 sums of money in building, drainage, fencing, and 
 liberal manuring. In June, 1877, the present Duke 
 desired a new arrangement, and sent his valuator 
 over the farm as a preliminary. Subsequently an 
 increase of rent was intimated, in round numbers, of 
 £106 per annum, the trustees to hold under the 
 Leinster lease. The lease was refused by the 
 trustees, and they were served with a notice to quit 
 to compel them to submit to the new arrangement 
 contracting them out of the Land Act, or to surrender 
 the farm. The trustees refused, and proceedings 
 were then taken in the Queen's Bench, a decree for 
 possession was obtained, and the tenant formally 
 evicted by the sheriff. 
 
 1424. Was there anything given for improve- 
 
 ments? — T believe that sooner than go into the 
 Court with the trustees the Duke gave £1,000. 
 
 1424a. Chaieman. — I believe you advocate fixity ot 
 tenure, valuation of rent, and right of free sale of 
 interest and improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 1425. Would you say how you define fixity of 
 tenure, and in what way you would bring it about ? — 
 I think virtually the tenants over Ireland have fixity 
 of tenure now. 
 
 1426. Baron Dowse. — But it is not secured bylaw? 
 — It is not secured by law. The ground of my advocacy 
 of these three points is simply this, that the tenants 
 have as much capital invested in the land as has the 
 landlords. 
 
 1427. And that they have a proprietary interest in 
 the land on that account? — I think flie Land Act 
 gives a proprietaiy interest, but independent of that 
 I think they have as much capital invested if all were 
 counted. I think the Land Act while declaring land- 
 lord property sacred omits to declare the rights of 
 occupiers in the soil as also sacred. 
 
 1428. Chairman. — You don't think the Compensa- 
 tion Clause is sufficient to repay the tenant? — No 
 seeing that the landlord and tenant in Ireland are 
 virtually partners. 
 
 1429. Baron Dowse. — Instead of compensating a 
 man you would not turn him out ? — I would not. 
 
 1430. And you would give him free sale ? — T would 
 give him free sale. The great difficulty is the valua- 
 tion of the rent. I stated my views in a letter I 
 addressed some time ago to the Freeman's Journal, 
 and perhaps you will allow me to read a portion of it. 
 I said : 
 
 " The Irish landlord has never had the absolute posses- 
 sion of the land he claims as his, nor has he ever been able 
 to introduce tenures among his occupiers of a determinable 
 nature. Even any proposal of his to increase rent arbitrarily 
 has almost always had to be made in opposition to his 
 tenants, and if carried into execution, carried in face oi 
 their protest against it as a landlord tax upon tenant im- 
 provement. Again, the Irish landlord has never performed 
 on his estate the duties pertaining to landed property, as 
 understood and practised on the British side of the Channel 
 Whilst claiming the right to exact rent, statedly he has 
 never expended any of the revenue so derived in the im- 
 provement of his estates. Fairly speaking, therefore, the 
 bare land only is his. All the houses, fences, and surface 
 Improvements of his farms were made by, and are, therefore, 
 the property of his tenants. Moreover the farmers of the 
 community own the highways, the bridges, the gaols, county 
 courthouses, county infirmaries, and other public and neces- 
 sary adjuncts to the administration of justice, and to the 
 
 promotion of the civilization of the country ^that is if 
 
 paying for the sites of them, making and building them, and 
 their subsecpient maintenance from tenant taxation alone, 
 be sufficient to constitute a right to property. An indirect 
 argument, but nevertheless in my opinion one of no 
 ordinary force and cogency may be also here used as a. 
 strengthener to the above claim to property and position 
 of the tenants, namely, that the highways, bridges, 
 giiols, &o., by the fucilities of traxHc, and the maintenance 
 of order they contribute to, enhance the selling and letting 
 value of the land of the landlord by from 30 to 40 
 per cent, to his advantage. Now, these conditions of 
 land ownership, and of land tenancy have no pavallcl in 
 Britain, and hence the difficulty Enghshmen have in under- 
 standing Irish claims of tenant-right. They are conditions, 
 nevertheless, which must be understood before the Irish 
 tenant demand for fixity of tenure. Government valuation 
 of rent, and the right to a free sale of tenant-interest and 
 goodwill in the farm is understood. The fact is there are 
 in Ireland already two separate and distinct estates in the 
 land — the landlord's in his land, and the tenant's in his 
 houses, fences, and other property and investments enume- 
 rated above._ By the law as it stands, the landlord's share 
 of property is carefully rendered secure and made sacred to 
 him, while the share of the tenant is liable to be rack-rented 
 on, to be evicted from, and to be confiscated out of his pos- 
 session, as may seem right in the eye of his all-powerful 
 landlord copartner. 1 say copartner advisedly, because 
 of this there can be no doubt, namely, that when all the 
 above enumerated property and interests of the tenant in 
 the land and in the community are added together, nnd the 
 further considerations are weighed, that he pays one-half 
 the_ poors- rate, and stocks and cultivates the land, the 
 capital mvesleil by tenant and landlord is as much in the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 53 
 
 one case as m the other. The Land Act (1870) m a great 
 measure, in fact, points to the propriety of this view. It 
 actually enunciates the principles of fixity of tenm-e, State 
 valuation of rent, and the right of the tenant to the value 
 of his farm improvements. Where it fails is in not making 
 principles it admits to be just, compulsory and inviolable. 
 By the refusal of the omission to declare occupier's and 
 owner's investments of capital in the land alike sacred in the 
 eye of the law, the Land Act opens the door wide and inde- 
 fensibly to that ruinous litigation between the respective 
 owners (landlord and tenant), which from the day it came 
 into operation to the present, the said Act has stimulated to 
 and promoted." 
 
 143L Chairman. — Do you tliink the Land Act 
 does not carry out the objects 1 — Yes. 
 
 143:]. You say that the Land Act enunciates the 
 principles that you advocate 1 — Permissively. 
 
 1433. But it does not sufficiently carry them out 1 
 — The permissiveness of the Act allows a landlord 
 under the terror of the notice to quit to contract a 
 tenant out of it altogether. 
 
 1434. Baron Dowse. — In tenancies under fifty 
 pounds valuation contracts in certain cases are void 
 altogether t. — Tenancies under £50 a year are put 
 under yearly leases. 
 
 1435. With a clause in them about the Land Act? 
 —Yes. 
 
 1436. Chairman. — The clause in the agreement 
 v^ould not debar him from his compensation if he 
 were evicted 1 — That is no barrier at all events, for 
 in small holdings if the landlord has to pay a sum to 
 the outgoing tenant, he is sure to get it back from the 
 incoming tenant. There is no barrier to the eviction 
 of a tenant on that ground. 
 
 1437. The landlord gets it back either in a sum 
 paid down or by an increase of rent ? — Either ways. 
 
 1438. IMr. Kavanagh. — Except these cases you 
 have mentioned can you give any other cases 1 — I have 
 just one other case here, the case of a tenant who came 
 under a landlord who bought the property in the 
 Encumbered Estates Court thirteen years ago. 
 
 1439. What is the landlord's name?— Mr. W— — 
 
 1440. What county ?—Kildare. 
 
 1441. Do you prefer not to give the name of the 
 
 tenant 1 — Yes. Mr. W ■ bought the property, and 
 
 he immediately raised all the rents of the tenants, and 
 comjJelled them to accept of leases. 
 
 1 442. Chairman. — Was it for a term or a year ? — 
 I don't know the term. He compelled them to accept 
 of leases. This man protested against the rent, and 
 consequently refused to sign a lease. His father 
 and grandfather had lived on the farm, and had 
 built all the houses on it, made all the fences and 
 every improvement and for a small farm of sixty 
 acres it has been, perhaps, as long as I remember, as 
 neatly kept and as well farmed as any could possibly 
 
 be. Until Mr. W came in, the rent was about 
 
 .£50 a year, and the poor law valuation about the 
 
 same. Mr. W raised it to £85. When the rent 
 
 was raised the tenant had £300 in bank, owed no 
 rent, and he had the farm well stocked. By 
 paying the increased rent for about twelve 3-ears, his 
 £300 was gradually absorbed, and he found himself 
 latterly owing two years' arrears of rent. The land- 
 lord last spring obtained a decree in the superior 
 court against him, for, as is well-known, no country 
 farmer will venture into Dublin to defend himself 
 in a case of that kind. 
 
 1443. In the Superior Courts? — In the Superior 
 Courts, 
 
 1444. Is it from the expense? — And the inex- 
 perience. A countryman is so inexperienced that the 
 idea of going to Dublin, and employing a Dublin 
 solicitor is enough for him. The landlord in this case 
 got the decree, made the seizure, and auctioned every- 
 thing for the tenant's two years' rent, down to the 
 bed and bedding of the family. Many of the neigh- 
 bours refused to bid for the property, and the auctioneer 
 ■who was appointed by the court, knocked down a 
 great deal of the property to a man he keeps as a bill- 
 sticker, and in that way forced a sale. The land- 
 lord got his two years' rent in one way or other ; and 
 
 as soon as he got it he served the man with a notice 5ep«. 3, I88O. 
 to quit, and he is now under notice. Thomas 
 
 1445. Is it a yearly tenancy? — Yes. The man Robertson, 
 refused the lease. Esq. 
 
 1446. Mr. Shaw. — Were the other tenants' rents 
 raised? — All raised. The other tenants held mostly 
 grass land, better enabling them to pay the high rents. 
 
 1447. Chairman. — You said in that letter of yours 
 that landlords in Ireland did nothing in the way of 
 contribution for improvements. You don't mean that 
 to be taken as a positive and general rule ? — There 
 may be exceptions ; but I think it is generally the 
 rule. There ai-e exceptions, I know, but, as a rule, 
 they do not expend any money on their property in 
 improvements. 
 
 1448. In your opinion the exceptions are very rare? 
 — They are very rare so far as I know. 
 
 1449. Baron Dowse. — Does the Duke make any 
 improvements? — He does with Government money, 
 and he makes the tenant repay. 
 
 1450. Mr. Shaw. — You don't call that making im- 
 provements by the landlord ? — No. 
 
 1451. Chairman. — In that case the landlord finds 
 the security ? — He finds the security only. 
 
 1452. I should have thought there were numerous 
 ' cases of landlords effecting improvements ? — I know 
 
 there have been cases, but as a rule improvements in 
 Ireland are done by the tenants. 
 
 1453. He is not in the same condition as the 
 tenant in England'? — No. I think it would take 
 twenty years rental of Ireland to bring the con- 
 dition of the land, as to soil, buildings, and other 
 matters, to the same condition as in England or Scot 
 land. 
 
 1454. That is, taking the condition of the whole 
 country, I S'appose ? — Yes, taking the whole country. 
 I have formed my opinion a good deal upon the state- 
 ments of a Scotch agriculturist, Mr. Hope, who took 
 a farm on a nineteen years lease, and though he 
 farmed on the best system, using artificial manures, 
 artificial feeding stufi", and also brought in Edinburgh 
 manure and put it on the farm, he states he could not 
 make a penny profit on his first nineteen years ; it 
 was only when he got a second lease for nineteen 
 years that his improvements began to pay. 
 
 1455. Mr. Shaw. — At the commencement it was an 
 ordinary farm, I suppose ? — It was. 
 
 1456. Not run down, not out of condition 1 — No, 
 but it had not been improved. 
 
 1457. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that the 
 scheme you have pointed out would be satisfactory to 
 the people ? — I think it would, generally. 
 
 1458. At all events, in your opinion, it ought to 
 satisfy them ? — I think it would do so. I think it 
 would settle the land question. I may add that but 
 for the landlords' interfering with the working of the 
 Land Act, it would have settled the question, in a 
 measure. 
 
 1459. H'^w did the landlords interfere? — By con- 
 tracting their tenants out of it in every direction. 
 
 1460. Mr. Shaw. — It gave them the power of rais- 
 ing rents ? — Yes, and they have been taking advantage 
 of that. 
 
 1461. Baron Dowse I take it you consider the 
 
 defect in the Land Act is that the compensation for 
 disturbance is not what the country requires ; what 
 it requires is that the tenant shall not be disturbed at 
 all ? — A principal defect of the Land Act is its permis- 
 siveness ; it is a piece of sham legislation. Any Act 
 which is not compulsory is a sham. 
 
 1462. Would you call the Land Act permissive? — 
 I would, because it allows the landlord to contract 
 the tenant out of it. 
 
 1463. That, you know, does not apply to tenants 
 under £50 a year ?— Yes, but the large farmers who 
 have property to lose are the very men the landlord 
 can get at most easily. 
 
 1464. It was su^oposed when the Act was passed 
 that those were a class of people who were able to 
 protect themselves? — I do not see how a man can 
 protect himself when he is subject to eviction. 
 
54 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 3, 1880. 
 
 Thomas 
 
 Eotertson, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 1465. He Has no choice excepi; to.pay tlie increaBed 
 rent or go out 1 — ^^He has .not.. , I also think the pro- 
 cedure under the Act is a failure. For instance, a tenant 
 is evicted and he makes his claun. , He, has to go to 
 law with his landlord, and if his landlord employs a • 
 large bar he has to do the same. He goes before the 
 County Court Judge, who may perhaps give him a 
 sum which is wholly inadequate. Then he has to 
 appeal, or possibly the landlord may appeal, and he 
 has to go to the Assize Court, and employ a second 
 bar, and incur all the expense over again, and even 
 after that the landlord has the power of bringing the 
 case to the Court for Land Cases Reserved, with again 
 more fexpense, until at last the man is ruined. 
 ■ 1466. What remedy would you propose 1 — I think 
 the whole thing could be settled by a Jury and the 
 County Court Judge. 
 
 1467. Mr. Shaw. — Or by arbitration '2 — Yes. 
 
 1468. Baron Dowse. — You object to the manner in 
 which the amount of compensation is ascertained, be- 
 cause there is no jury 1 — Yes, and I also object to the 
 delay. 
 
 1469. But if your scheme (which I am not saying 
 has not a great deal in it) was carried into law there 
 would be no occasion for a jury or anything else, 
 because there would be no evictions ■? — Certainly ; but 
 I am stating my objections to the Land Act. There 
 is too much law in it, and too little justice. 
 
 1470. Chairman. — That is, that it is too com- 
 plicated 1 — Yes, it leads to litigation. There has been 
 no end of litigation between landlord and tenant ever 
 since it came into operation. 
 
 1471. Baron Dowse. — Is this the effect of your 
 evidence, that you think the country would be better 
 without the Land" Act 1 — I think the country is none 
 the better of it, but the reverse. I think the Land 
 Act has failed in every i:)articular. 
 
 1472. I can understand the Land Act being a 
 failure because of its machinery being defective, but 
 do you say it has done no good at all % — I think it has 
 done very little, and on the other hand I think that, 
 but for the Land Act we should not have the rises 
 of rent we have had over the whole countrj'. 
 
 1473. What do you say as to the Ulster custom? 
 --I am not acquainted with Ulster. 
 
 1474. Then the defects you speak of in the Land 
 Act don't touch Ulster 1 — I cannot give an opinion as 
 to that. 
 
 1475. Chairman. — You spoke of the valuation of 
 rents as a difficult matter ; what would be your 
 suggestion % — Arbitration. If the landlord and tenant 
 could not agree 1 would let the landlord ajDpoint one 
 man, and the tenant another, with power to them to 
 appoint an umpire and decide the rent in the usual 
 way oi arbitrations. 
 
 1476. You would not propose a new general 
 valuation 1 — I think it must come to that provided 
 the tenant's improvements are kept out. The great 
 mistake about the Griffith valuation was that it in- 
 cluded the tenant's improvements at the time. 
 
 1477. Griffith's valuation as you of course know 
 was for the piirpose of rates, not for the purpose of 
 settling rents between landlord and tenant 1 — I know ; 
 but it has been converted into a standard of rents. 
 
 1478. It has been converted into a standard of 
 rents by tenants rather than by the ' landlords ?— I 
 think by both. The landlord appeals to Griffith's 
 valuation as being 25 per cent, under the letting Value ; 
 the tenant alleges tliat it is quite enough — at present, 
 at all events. I may observe that the Land Act 
 recognises the principle, in certain cases, of the State 
 interfering with rents. By the last clause of the 5th 
 subsection of the 4tli section of the Act the Court is 
 empowered to take into consideration also the rent at 
 which such holding has been held. 
 
 1479. Head the Glau.se you refer to? 
 
 " Where a tenant has made any improvements before the 
 passing pf this Act on a holding held by him under a ten- 
 ancy existing at the time of th& passing thereof, the Court; 
 wawanding compensation to such tenant in respect of suoU 
 
 impxjpvements shall, in reduction of the claini of the tenant, 
 take into consideration the time durhig which such tenant 
 may liave enjoyed the advantage - of such improvements, 
 also the rent at which such holding has been held, and any 
 benefits which such tenant may have received from his land- 
 lord in consideration, expressly or imj>hedly, of the improve- 
 ments so made." 
 
 There is jurisdiction conferred by that clause to in- 
 terfere with rent. 
 
 1480. Baron Dowse. -^The object of that is, that if 
 the rent is low, the Court may take that fact into con- 
 sideration ? — ^Yes ; but in the Act the principle is ad- 
 mitted of the Court interfering with rents. 
 
 1481. To inquire into the rent, not to interfere with 
 it. There is nothing in the Act to warrant the idea 
 that rent is to be altered ? — I thought there was. 
 
 1482. Eead any clause that you think does that? 
 — If the landlord tenders a thirty-one years' lease to 
 the tenant in discharge of all claims, and if the 
 tenant objects to the rent named in the lease, and 
 thinks the rent too high, he has the power to appeal 
 to the Chairman. 
 
 1483. I doubt that, but go on?— Well, I thmk 
 that establishes the principle, and by the latter part of 
 the 9th section of the Act, an eviction for non-pay- 
 ment of rent, in the case of a holding held at Jtn 
 annual rent not exceeding ,£15, is to be treated as 
 a disturbance, " if the Court shall certify that the 
 non-payment of rent causing the eviction has arisen 
 from the rent being an exorbitant rent." I think 
 that also establishes the principle. Again, by the 
 18th section, " In any case in which compensation 
 shall be claimed under section 3 of this Act, if it shall 
 appear to the Court that the landlord has been and 
 is willing to permit the tenant to continue in thu 
 occupation of his holding upon just and reasonable 
 terms, and that such terms have been and are unrea- 
 sonably refvised by the tenant the claim of the tenant 
 to such compensation shall be disallowed." By that 
 clause the rent is again made the subject of jtidi- 
 cial inquiry and determination. The effect of the 
 clause is to permit the landlord to force, by the 
 alternative of eviction, without compensation, for dis- 
 turbance, a new arrangement upon the tenant, pro- 
 vided the Civil Bill Judge, or the Judge of Assize, in 
 the event of appeal, considers the term of said ar- 
 rangement — including the amount of rent — such as 
 might be justly and rensonably proposed. What I 
 wish to point out is, that by all these clauses tht 
 principle of State valuation of rent is admitted by 
 the Act. I may be wrong, but that is my view of it. 
 
 1484. Would you have those valuations for tin 
 purpose of rents made at periodical times ? — No 
 I would have a valuation at the instance of eithe) 
 party. 
 
 1485. How long would you propose that shoul' 
 last ? — As long as both parties are satisfied with it. . 
 think it would be highly unjust to fix a term ; fo 
 instance, suppose a valuation had taken. place five o 
 six years ago, the tenant would be in a most disac 
 vantageous position now, in consequence of the Amt 
 rican importations. 
 
 1486. You don't think having a valuation ever 
 five years would be a good plan ? — I think not. 
 think a new valuation should take phice at any tim 
 at the instance oi either of the parties. 
 
 1487. Would not that introduce an element of ui 
 certainty ? — I don't think so. The principle woiil 
 gradually become recognised throughout the coiintr' 
 and I think the result would be that, generally speal 
 ing, neither landlord nor tenant would appeal to arb 
 tration — they would be likely to come to terms wil 
 each other. 
 
 1488. What you propose would appear to work : 
 this way — The present rent would be taken to be tl 
 proper rent until either party wished to have it r 
 vised, and then it would be revised in the way yi 
 propose ?^Yes. 
 
 1489. And that revision would last as long as t! 
 paa-ties wished it to remaiir ?.— Yes. I think-the Lai 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 55 
 
 question. §]iouM pe looked at from this aspect that 
 
 the landlord and tenant are in one boat ; that it is the 
 interest of one and the other to come to an under- 
 standing, and not to stand aloof from eacli other, as at 
 present. The land agent, acting between the two at 
 present, is a source of mischief It is his interest to 
 keep landlord and tenant apart ; and he does so effec- 
 tually. As a rule, where there is an agent, the tenant 
 is afraid to go to the landlord — he is airaid of displeas- 
 ing the agent, and the landlord does not know the mis- 
 chief tlie agent is doing until it has gone too ftir. 
 
 ,1490. What would you do witliout the api nt ? — If 
 the tenant had fixity of tenure an agent would not })e 
 wanted at all ; and they see that plainly enough. 
 
 1491. In point of fact, the landlord would be a rent 
 charger'? — Well, not exactly a rent charger. I thinli 
 the landlord would have more influence on his eistate 
 than he has at present. 
 
 1492. How could he exercise his influence ? — For 
 the good of the tenant, and his own good. 
 
 1493. Of course, you -would allow a power of sale of 
 the interest a tenant would have in his holding 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 1494. Suppose the landlord wanted to get the land 
 into his own hands, would you have any machinery 
 by which that could be brought •about? — None, unless 
 he bought the interest of the tenant. 
 
 1495. Like anybody else, in the open market 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 1496. If the tenant did not want to sell what would 
 happen 1 — Tn that case the landlord would have to do 
 without it. 
 
 1497. Would you give the tenant a power of sale in 
 the open market for any sum the highest bidder might 
 give 1 — ^Yes, but I would give the landlord a veto pro- 
 vided the purchaser were insolvent or a man of dis- 
 reputable character. 
 
 1498. Suppose there was a dispute — suppose the 
 tenant insisted on selling to that man 1 — Well, I think 
 it would be unreasonable to force a bad character on 
 the landlord. 
 
 1499. In that case, would you allow the landlord 
 power to serve a notice to quit on the purchaser? — 
 No> I would give the landlord the right of making the 
 last bid. Suppose a purchaser offered £1,000, 1 would 
 allow the landlord the right to give £1 more. 
 
 1500. Chairiia:n". — Might it not happen that a 
 friend of the seller would run up the price, knowing 
 that the landlord wished to have it 'I — I think evidence 
 would in such a case be found as to the circumstances 
 of the ofi'er. 
 
 , 1501. Would it not be the interest of the tenant to 
 get the worst, character he could to bid for the land, 
 and to, bid high lor it, so as to force the landlord to 
 give a higher price 1 — It wou.ld not. I was going to 
 say that if the tenant had fixity oi tenure, valuation of 
 rent, and right of free sale, there would he no need for 
 contracts or leases at all. 
 
 1502. Baron Dowse. — Every tenant would have a 
 statutable lease 1 — Exactly. 
 
 150?. Chaikman. — Would you give the iand- 
 loi'd the jjower, if he saw that the tenant was injuring 
 the farm, or was a disreputable character, of removing 
 him ? — I would not, unless by an action. 
 
 1504. Don't many of the advocates of fixity of 
 tenure take care, to provide not only that the tenant 
 shall be liable to eviction for nonpayment of rent, but 
 also if he turns out a disreputable character, or if he 
 deteriorates the land, or subdivides or sublets ? — Yes. 
 
 1505. Would you adopt such a principle ? — I would 
 evict him for the willful and persistent deterioration 
 of his farm. 
 
 1506. But not for subdividing or subletting 1 — No. 
 I. would leave these things to the tenant's own sense of 
 self-interest. You call vip the strongest motive of 
 human nature when you give a man an interest in his 
 holding to do nothing that will injure it. 
 
 . 1507. Baron Dowse.— Is it not a strong motive of 
 luiman nature if a man has eleven childreu to divide 
 
 his farm between the eleven of them ? — ^Well, on the Sept. s, isso. 
 Continent it does not operate in that way. Of course Thomar" 
 no human scheme can be devised that is absolutely Robertson,,.,, 
 perfect. I think the connexion between landlord and Esq. 
 tenant at the present moment is not at all perfect or 
 satisi;actory, and I have no doubt there will be defects 
 and imperfections in any new scheme that may be de- 
 vised ; still I believe that to give the tenant an interest 
 in improviag his farm would meet a great deal of the 
 difficulty of the present situation. 
 
 1008. The leading features of your scheme would 
 be that the rent should be fixed by arbitration, and 
 that the tenant should not be disturbed so long as he 
 jiaid that rent ? — Certainly. 
 
 1509. Chairman.^ — Do you think it would have 
 a good effect on the tenant if there was a chance or 
 probability of his losing his holding in certain events, 
 such as bad conduct — for instance, if he were convicted 
 ol stealing 1 Would you allow that man tp remain 
 in occupation of his holding ? — That is an extreme 
 case. I don't think a reform of this kind should be 
 tested by such extreme cases. 
 
 1510. Don't you think there should be a power in 
 such a case as that to determine the tenancy? — I 
 would have no objection personally to that man being 
 evicted by his landlord. 
 
 1311. Mr. Shaw. — Might it not happen that that 
 man had a family, and that to evict him would be a 
 great injustice to them? — It might. I think the 
 great ai-gument for fixity of tenure, valuation, and 
 free sale, lies in the greater improvement of the land, 
 which prevails in Ulster, under a somewhat similar 
 custom. The main ground for giving security to the 
 tenant, is that he has really as much a property in the 
 land as the landlord, they are co-partners ; and it is 
 unfair, if the landlord has his rights defined and 
 secured by law, that the tenant should hold hi"S 
 property subject to the caprice or injustice of his co- 
 partner. 
 
 1512. If a landlord was sentenced to penal ser- 
 \itude for five years for felony, the tenant would Jiave 
 no light to break his bargain ? — No. Furthermore, I 
 maintain that by the law as it has hitherto stood, the 
 landlord has been appropriating his tenant's property. 
 The improvements effected on the estate by the 
 'industry of the tenant were the property of the tenant, 
 notwithstanding when the landlord sold the estate, he 
 sold his tenant's property, and has been receiving rent 
 on the tenant's property. At the present moment the 
 tenant farmers of Ireland are, in fact, paying rent 
 upon their own improvements to a large extent, and 
 the knowledge the tenants, have, by experience, that 
 the landlords can increase their rents arbitrarily, 
 stands directly in the way of the improvement of the 
 land, and the prosperity of the country. It is always 
 the first objection you hear from the tenant when 
 asked to improve. " Why should I improve ? My 
 rent will be increased if I do." 
 
 1513. Did you ever hear the story of the tenant 
 who refused to make a road to his house, because If 
 he did, the agent would drive up to him and raise his 
 rent?— No; but I can tell you a fact that came within 
 my own experience when I was steward on the estate 
 of Mr. La Touche of Harristown. I offered to drain 
 a field which lay before the door of one of the tenants 
 — the tenant refused his consent, because if I did his 
 rent would be raised ; and that field remains undrained 
 to the present day. 
 
 1514. Mr. Kavanagii.— Would it not be a fair 
 thing to raise the rent, if the holding had been improved 
 at the expense of the landlord ?— Perfectly fair, pro- 
 vided the increase was fairly proportionate to the value 
 of the improvement ; but the man feared that the rent 
 of the whole farm would be raised. 
 
 1515. Mr. Shaw— Does that feeling on the part of 
 the tenantry discourage and retard the improvement 
 of the country ?— Of course it does. I have no doubt 
 whatever that Ireland bould produce three times the 
 
56 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 3, 1880. 
 
 Thomas 
 
 Robertson, 
 
 Esq 
 
 amount of food and wealth it does, provided the 
 tenants had the security they demand. 
 
 1516. Have you ever considered the question of 
 peasant proprietary'! — I have. I thiak that also 
 should be a part of the land reform, but I would 
 extend it to all classes of tenants. At present it is 
 next to impossible under the Land Act. When an 
 estate is for sale, it is put up ia blocks and, the tenants 
 either cannot all agree, or are deterred in some way or 
 other from bidding, and the result is the estate gets 
 into the hands of land jobbers, who raise the rent on 
 the tenants as soon as they get possession. 
 
 1517. Would you give it to large tenants as well as 
 small ? — I would. 
 
 1518. Would it be a remedy in your opinion for the 
 evUs the country complains of ? — I think preliminary 
 to everything we must have free trade in land. The 
 laws of entail, primogeniture, settlement and distraint 
 must be repealed as a preliminary to everything in the 
 way of land reform. 
 
 1519. Baron Dowse. — Supposing all those things 
 were done do you thiak this peasant proprietary would 
 settle the land question of itself! — I do not think it 
 would. I think all tenants, yeomen as well as 
 peasants, should have the chance of buying their 
 farms provided the estate were in the market. 
 
 1520. Where is the money to come from ? — Govern- 
 ment ought to advance the money. 
 
 1521. Where are they to get if! — Where the 
 Prussian Government got it. After all, I do not think 
 30 much money would be required — I would have the 
 process a gradual one. 
 
 1522. That is the very thing I want to come to : in 
 your opinion it should be gradual ? — Certainly. I 
 would force no landlord to sell his property but if an 
 estate came into the market I think the tenants should 
 have the right of pre-emption. 
 
 1523. You would not buy out the landlord nolens 
 volens, whether he liked it or noti — Certainly not, 
 unless perhaps in instances of corporate estates, as held 
 by London companies in the north of Ireland. But 
 when an estate comes into the market the tenants 
 should have the preference. And in my opinion the 
 estate should, be sold in holdings — each holding jiut up 
 for sale separately, and I think the landlord would get 
 a larger price if that were done. 
 
 1524. Mr. Kavanagh. — If the landlord thought he 
 would secure a better price for his property by selling 
 it in holdings, would he not do so 1 — 1 he Land Court 
 seems opposed to putting up property for sale in that way. 
 
 ^ 1525. I think the Court would do it, if the owner 
 consented 1 — I don't think it would j in my opinion 
 the obstacle is in the rules of the Land Court. Another 
 matter is the very serious legal expense involved by a 
 sale in the court. If a landlord wishes to sell his 
 property, the tenants, each of them, should be able to 
 come to terms with him. 
 
 1526. Chairman. — Out of court ■! — Yes. 
 
 1527. Mr. Kavanagh. — Would the tenant be satis- 
 fied to do it in that way 1 — I think he would. 
 
 1528. Baron Dowse. — That might answer, provided 
 the tenant was able to give the entire purchase-money 
 himself 1 — I think the Government should advance the 
 money if necessary. 
 
 1529. Mr. Kavanagh. — In your opinion ought they 
 to advance the whole of the money? — Every shilling 
 of it, if the tenant wanted it. I think he should be 
 allowed to expend his own money in the cultivation and 
 improvement of the land. 
 
 1530. Unless the Government lent the money upon 
 very reasonable terms. I think you would find that 
 by advancing the whole of it, the result would be that 
 for a number of years the tenant vs>-ould have to pay 
 more in the way of interest than the amount he had 
 been previously paying in the shape of rent? — No; 
 not as a rule, 1 thiiik. Take my own case. If I pur- 
 chased my farm at twenty years purchase upon my 
 rental, and had to borrow the entire of the money from 
 Government at five per cent, to be repaid in thirty-five 
 years, I would have exactly the same amount of rent to 
 
 pay that I am now paying to my landlord ; with th 
 difference that after thirty -five years it would be a 
 paid off, and the farm be then bought out. 
 
 1531. Do you contemplate that the Govemmei 
 should advance the money without inquiring into ti 
 title? — I would give the farm as security for ti 
 advance of the money. 
 
 1532. But if the man had no title of what valu 
 would that security be ? — Oh, I would let the landlor 
 establish his title before he offered the farm for sale. 
 
 1533. Then the expense of proving title would hav 
 to be incurred still ? — Let the landlord pay that es 
 pense. 
 
 1534. Would not that be a great bar to the thi3i( 
 being done ? — I don't think it would. I tliink if th( 
 tenants were allowed to purchase, the Govemmeni 
 lending the money, in a few years nearly one-third ol 
 Ireland would be in the hands of tenant proprietors, 
 I would have nothing to do vidth the Land Court at all, 
 If a landlord has property to sell, let him establish his 
 title, bring it into the market, and dispose of it out of 
 court. 
 
 1535. Baron Dowse. — The difficulty would be this ; 
 that the seller could not establish his title. If he sells 
 thi'ough the court he gives the purchaser a parha- 
 mentary title, but if he sells by private contract then 
 if in the investigation of the title any body made a 
 mistake, the title may be bad, and the whole trans- 
 action fall through ? — What I want to convey is that 
 the purchaser should not be put to any legal expense 
 in the matter, beyond a simple conveyance — such as 
 they have in America. 
 
 1536. Mr. Shaw. — If the landlord has agreed with 
 his tenants to sell the property to them, and merely 
 comes into the Court for the puipose of making title. 
 Are you aware that the expense is very little ? — The 
 present expense is what I have an objection to. 
 
 1537. It would be very little in a case in which the 
 terms of the sale had been arranged beforehand with the 
 tenants and the estate, merely brought into the Court 
 for the purpose of giving title ? — If the heavy legal 
 expenses are avoided I see no objection to it. My 
 objection to the Court is the expense. 
 
 1538. Baron Dowse. — In the North of Ireland if a 
 man wanted to buy the fee-simple of a farm, he would 
 not complete the transaction unless the vendor estab- 
 lished his title. For that fee-simple he might give 
 perhaps twenty-two or twenty-three years purchase. 
 That same man will be content to purchase the tenant- 
 right of that farm, and give, may be, thirty years 
 purchase for that tenant-right, without inquiring into 
 the title at all ? — Yes, but he gets possession and is 
 rarely if ever disturbed. In my opinion when Sir 
 Bobert Peel passed the Incumbered Estates Act he 
 ought to have gone farther, and added provisions 
 enabling the tenants to purchase. The result of not 
 doing that was that, in many cases, the estates got 
 into the hands of land jobbers — persons who bought 
 merely as an investment — who raised rents all over the 
 country, and have been instrumental in a great 
 measure in bringing matters to their present pass. If 
 the tenants had been enabled to come in as purchasers, 
 the landlords' property would not have been sacrificed 
 as it was. They would have given fair value for 
 their farms, but because there was no way of the 
 tenants purchasing, the land fell in value 50 per 
 cent, in numerous instances. 
 
 1539. Have there been any sales to tenants in your 
 county under the Act ? — No, not in. KUdare, that 
 I recollect just now. 
 
 1540. Is there not some land in KUdare held by 
 peasant proprietors ? — Yes, there is a portion of whaf 
 was once a common. The case was referred to in the 
 House of Commons some time siace. It is not far 
 from my farm. I recollect that land myself 
 greatly covered with water, but during the famine 
 years, a neighbouring proprietor brought a head 
 drain up to the verge of it in the improvement of his 
 own property. The small holders took advantage ol 
 this head drain, and since that they have been able to 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 57 
 
 improve and fence in their little holdings, and it is 
 astonishing the improvement they liave made on the 
 whole common -within the last twenty-fi\-c years. 
 
 1541. It is a good specimen of a peasant proprietary 1 
 — Yes. They hold each of them, I suppose from one 
 to iowT or five acres. They all have their little holdin o .^ 
 nicely fenced in — they cultivate them partly with the 
 spade — and they have improved their houses within 
 the last few years — instead of thatched roofs they ai'e 
 now beginning to slate their houses. 
 
 1542. Do their families go out and work as labourers 
 for farmers in the neighbourhood 1 — Yes, and some of 
 them have a little business — some liave shops, and 
 others deal in country commodities. One or two of 
 them started as cattle dealers some years ago, and have 
 been able to purchase the interest in large farms by 
 their industry. It is quite marked, the improvement 
 they have effected. 
 
 1543. How did they get the land originally t— It 
 was a common. I presume they were squatters 
 originally. 
 
 1544. Baron Dowse. — Where is that place — in what 
 part of Kildare 1 — It is near KUcuUen, six or seven 
 miles from Newbridge. I may observe that some of 
 the neighbouring proprietors are anxious to get pos- 
 session of these holdings, and have been tempting the 
 people to sell them within the last two or three years. 
 
 1545. Have any of them been sold "i — Several of 
 them have. 
 
 1546. The O'CoNOE Don. — You mentioned the law 
 of distraint as one of the things that shoiUd be 
 abolished — according to your experience, is the law of 
 distraint much put in force by landlords 1 — Well, not 
 as a rule, unless in the case of decrees from the superior 
 courts. 
 
 1547. Baron Dowse. — That is not distraint — those 
 are Ji. fas. What The O'Conor Don refers to 
 is distress for rent 1 — There has not been miich of it 
 in my neighbourhood. I think the other course is 
 generally preferred ; but, in the absence of power of 
 getting the rent by the decree of the superior court, i 
 think the power of distraint would be put in operation. 
 I consider it hardly fair to give the landlord a power 
 of that kind where the merchant or ordinary creditor 
 has no such power. 
 
 1548. The O'Conoe Don. — But practically you say 
 it is not much acted on by landlords 1 — No, but the 
 jjower is there. It is part and parcel of the old feudal 
 system. 
 
 1549. Baron Dowse. — As much may be said against 
 it as against hypothec in Scotland? — Just the same. 
 
 1550. Mr. Shaw. — Is there mu.ch selling of land 
 by tenants in your district — do the landlords give per- 
 mission to the tenants to sell their interest 1 — Latterly 
 the Duke of Leinster allows a sale, provided he is 
 satisfied with the purchaser. 
 
 1551. Are those yearly tenancies ■? — I think in all 
 cases he insists on the acceptance of the Leinster 
 lease. 
 
 1552. Before he allows them to sell? — Yes. He 
 gives the lease, and then gives them power to sell. 
 
 1553. Do any other landlords do so in Kildare 1 — 
 No ; I do not know of any other. 
 
 1554. I suppose the land is principally grass ? — It 
 is. There are districts in which there is a good deal 
 of tillage, but the greater jjart is grass. 
 
 1 555. The O'Conok Don. — You are not a tenant of 
 the Duke of Leinster ? — No ; my farm adjoins his 
 
 1556. How many acres do you farm? — 211, Irish. 
 
 1557. Is it grass or tillage ?— Mixed. 
 
 S'-pt. 3, 1880. 
 
 1558. Mr. Shaw. — In the county Louth did the Robertson, 
 practice exist when you were living there of tenants Esq. 
 being allowed to sell their interest ?— Not in the neigh- 
 bourhood where I v, as. In the northern part of Loutl 
 
 it is the pi-actice to sell. 
 
 1559. I suppose the practice existed to some exteni 
 there ? — It did. On certain estates it was allov/ed. 
 )-)ut not on others. 
 
 1500. You employ a considerable number of la- 
 bourers, I presume 1 — Six or eight. 
 
 1561. Do they reside on your farm? — Well, 
 latterly I have had houses built for them. Before 
 that I had to feed them in my house, but in conse- 
 quence of the annoyance of feeding them in the house 
 I gave up tillage a good deal for some time. Latterly 
 I have increased my tillage again, and I have had a 
 couple of houses built for them, with Government 
 money, borrowed by my landlord. 
 
 1562. Have the labourers any land? — No, nothing 
 but a garden. I think the system does not work well 
 of giving labourers land. 
 
 1563. You think it better not to give them land? 
 —I do. 
 
 1564. Has there been any increase of late years in 
 the wages of labour in your district ? — No ; wages 
 have rather come down within the last two or three 
 years. 
 
 1565. That is from the distress, I suppose? — Yes. 
 Many labourers who wei'e formerly in the habit of 
 going to England in the harvest season are not doing 
 so latterly. They try now to go to America if they go 
 anywhere. 
 
 1566. Are your own labourers bound to work for 
 you every day ? — They are bound to work every day 
 as long as they remain in the house. They are at 
 liberty to leave me on a week's notice, and I am 
 at liberty to dispense with their services. I do not 
 confine them, and I do not confine myself. 
 
 1567. What wages do you give them when em- 
 ployed for you ? — 9s. per week. 
 
 1568. As a general rule, do they earn 9s. a week 
 the whole year round ? — Yes. I should mention that 
 the house is part of their wages. They get 9s. a 
 week, wet and dry, as it is called. I find that plan 
 to answer very well, and when I have a vacancy I 
 have plenty of applicants always. At the same time 
 I find it saves me a good deal of money, as compared 
 with the plan of feeding them in the house, and it is 
 much more convenient. Some of the neighbouring 
 farmers give them 6s. or 7s. a week and their board 
 besides, which I consider costs more than my plan ; 
 and, on the other hand, the men are more contented 
 with my plan of giving them wages, and living in 
 houses of their own. I have one family of three 
 working men — a father and two sons. They earn 27s. 
 a week between them, and live in one house, paying 
 no rent, so that they live very comfortably. 
 
 1569. Baron Dowse. — They have a house and 
 garden? — Yes. And besides I give to each house 
 1,000 running yards of potato drill after harvest and 
 let them take their chance of the crop. I find that this 
 arrangement satisfies both parties — it satisfies me and 
 it satisfies them, and answers much better than the 
 plan of feeding them in the house. 
 
 Adjourned till next morning. 
 
68 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Sipt 4, 1860, 
 
 Charles U. 
 
 Townshend, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 FOUETH DAY— SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 4th, ISSO. 
 
 Present:— The Right Hon. the Earl of Bersborough, Chairman.; Right Hon. Baron Dowse, 
 The O'CoNOR Don, Arthur MagMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., William Shaw, Esq., m.p.' 
 
 Charles LTniackk Townshend, esq., examined. 
 
 1570. Mr. Kavanagh.— What is your' profession ? 
 . — I am a land agent. 
 
 ■ 1571; What length of experience have you had 1 — 
 About thirty years. 
 
 1572. Would you tell the Cominissiori in what 
 eounties you have the management of estates ?— -Well; 
 in Ulster— in Antrim, Down, Tyrone, Monaighani and' 
 Cavaii ; and but of Ulster, in M'eath, Dublin, Kildare, 
 Wexford, Kilkenny, Tipperary, and Waterford. 
 
 1573; Then I may say your experience extends 
 pretty' generally over the country 1^ — Yes; my ex- 
 pei'ience extends outside of these 'counties also. 
 
 1574. I' believe you are prepared to Offer evidence 
 as' regards the practical Working of 'the system: of 
 Government valuation of land ; andperhapS the better' 
 way for me would be to'leave'you'tci yourself to' make 
 
 1576. Baron Dowse.— That is the onenowin force?. 
 ■ — That is the Act now in force. 'It had a scale cf 
 prices different from the jire-vdous scales. There was 
 a power given in that Act to the Commissioner to 
 adjust the preceding valuation to the scale of the Act 
 of 1852, 'which was aceordingly done. The Act 
 passed in 1852, tod, in ^ the following year they- 
 published several of the' valuations by counties.' It 
 is not to be supposed that these were valued within 
 that time, they were Inerely corrected withiu that 
 time. In the following year, 1854, the valuation of 
 Dublin City was published, in 1855 some counties 
 were jpublished, and so on up to 1864. In Sir 
 Ilichard Griffith's evidence he refers -to a,' mistake 
 that was niade in 'tlie-- Act of 185-2. He uses the 
 ■\Vords, "'The Act Wa;s wrong-" He refers there' to a 
 
 your statement ? — I have made use of the Governm>ent- - direction that all' rates and taxes should be deducted 
 
 valuation'-'-Oriffitli's valuation as it is eommonly 
 called-i-since the time of its publication. Before that 
 I had made'iTSe of the townland Valuation, so that I 
 am practically conversant with the working of both. 
 Wheii commencing life I praotiised as an engineer, so 
 that I have a facility for working with'maps. When 
 I am appointed Sigent bver a property, the first thing 
 I'do is' to'gct'the Ordnance ma'p, fl.nd the Government 
 valuation, and I have frequently accompanied' pro- 
 prietors over their estates; especially 'English pro- 
 prietors, coming to the country, and have been able, 
 from the accurate information supplied fr6m ' that 
 sorirce, to tell them more of their properties than they 
 had known themselves. ' I fiiild the valuation of great 
 value, more particularly as regards the"mS,ps. ' I 
 brought 'one or tWo of them withme with their re- 
 ferences (produced). I get these at the Valuation 
 GfEce, giving the names of the toWnlands, and all the 
 detai'le'd inforiUiition in reference to this map' is given. 
 Each holding marked with a red boundary is a lot 
 l)clongi'ng to a tenant, and here is the reference, giving 
 the townland, the occupier, the inimediate' lessor; the 
 nature of the px'emises, the 'area of the jwemises, the 
 valuation of the land, and of the houses and: the 
 total 6f the two. This is wonderfully accurate aS' 
 a map, but as a measure of value, at the present 
 moment, it does not pretend to be correct. It was 
 originally made as a basis for taxation, and I would 
 be glad to 'be permitted to refer to some of' the earlier 
 Acts of ' Parliament, • bearing upon ^ the' valuation 
 q'li'estion, if the Commission would permit me. 'The 
 first Act, that I am aware of in 'this ^ country, WaS' 
 the Aet of 182C. The object of that Act was to iorm 
 a uniform bfisis for the assessment of county cess and 
 Grand Jury charges, there being no poor rate at the 
 time. It bore date 1826, and from Sir Richard 
 Griffith's evidence in 1844, it appears that the valua- 
 tion under it did not commence mitil 1830. There 
 was a' Scale 'of prices laid do-wn in that Act, of which 
 I have the particulars to give the Commission. '' ' 
 
 1575. The O'Conor Don. --I think we have had these 
 figures in evidence before us from' Mr. Ball Greene, as 
 to the scale of prices 1 — That being so, I may mention 
 that in 1826, 1836, and 1846, there were bills brought 
 in and passed in which the scales of prices were all 
 similar. The valuation of 1826 and 1836 referred to 
 county cess apportionment solely. In 1846, the poor 
 law having been established, a bill was brought in in 
 which there was a dual valuation directed, one to 
 complete the townland valuation, which at that time 
 was not perfected, and the other in these same 
 counties and towns to make a tenement valuation for 
 the purposes of the poor rate, a dual system. That 
 was found cumbrous in working, and the Tenement 
 Valuation Act of 1852 was adopted. 
 
 from the valuation before publication. That includes. ' 
 the: projDortion that 'the ' landlord should bear as well 
 8jS the portion that the tenant should bear, and so far 
 the Act was wrong. I can reier to Sir Richard 
 Griffith's authority ior'th-atstatement. The valuation 
 of all these counties was madfe about the famine time, 
 when the poor rates were excessively high, amounting- 
 in one year to two millions,'' ■ He states, that it was 
 during that period he 'made a valuation of these 
 counties, and he was directed to deduct the full poor 
 rate from his valuation to arrive at the valuation 
 supposed to be made under the scale of the 'Act; > 
 So far as that poor rate exceeds the poor rate for the 
 last five or ten years so far the deduction then made 
 is in excess of the ■ deduction that should now be 
 made, or that lie would' make if he were again called 
 upon to make a valuation. That is an element of 
 distortion in the valuation. ■ 
 ' 1577. Do you think that the present Government 
 valuation is any assistance at all to a person in 
 fixing the rent of a farm 1 — I think the valuation is 
 of use to a person' knowing the value of land. If 
 you go down upon the land you can ascertain how 
 much per cent, you may add upon a farm, and you will 
 find that, in that and the'^heighbouringtownlands, you 
 may add probably a similar per-centage. That would 
 be possibly a district that one man had vinderhim 
 when the valuation was made. But it is not fair to 
 say that in one' • place you may add 25 per 
 cent, to Griffith's valuation, and the same in another 
 place, fifty miles off. Speaking broadly for . the ' 
 whole of Ireland I would say that in mixed araHe 
 and pasture land somewhere about 25 or 30 per cent. 
 should be added. 
 
 ■1578. To come up to the fair letting value? — To 
 bring the fair letting" value. In pasture hvmla I 
 know- land let at 100 per cent, over Griffith, and 
 cheaply let. I know land let at- twice that -over 
 Griffith, and -not dear. In mountain districts land 
 is let at 500 per cent, -over Griffith's valuation. 
 
 1579. For what pu.rpose^"—Momitain grazing. This 
 was caused by the want of experience on the part of 
 the valuator of what 'such lands werei'eally vi^orth. T 
 speak now as to parts of Kerry. 
 
 1580. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is it not the fact that the 
 immense demand there was some time ago for store 
 cattle in England raised the value of mountain 
 grazing 1 — Increased the value of all lands upon which 
 these cattle were raised, whether wild mountain lands 
 or pasture lands. The prices of meat and butter 
 practically doubled between 1852 and the present 
 period. Of course, assuming Sir Richard Griffith's 
 valuation to have been relatively fair when it was 
 made (which I will show the Commission it was not), 
 it could not pretend to be fair now, prices having 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 59 
 
 'altered considerably and altered unequally. As 
 ■ regards its not being relatively fair at the time it was 
 published, it was commenced in the south of Ireland 
 at a time of depression. With the poor rates amounting 
 in one year, the woi'st year, to two millions. ; They 
 then proceeded gradually northwards, and,- although it 
 would be supposed that valuing upon the same scale of 
 prices, the valuation • would be relatively the same in 
 the north as in the soiith, the fact is otherwise. Sir 
 Eiohard Griffith admits that; and Mr. Ball Greene. 
 As they passed northward,' the valuation being only 
 completed ra 1864, the times had improved, the 
 poor rates were reduced in poundage rate, and the 
 valuation is nearer to the fair value in the north than 
 it is in the south. The Commission will find, upon 
 their tour, that, in. the north, lands are let for from 
 10 to 15 or 20 per cent, over Griffith. In the south 
 they will sometimes find them let at as much as 100 
 percent, over Griffith. According to my judgment 
 the Commission should not infer that the landlords of 
 the south charge more for their land than the landlords 
 of the north. It is a question of value all through and 
 ■ Griffith's valuation, is not fair as a test between north 
 and south. 
 
 1581. Baron Dowse. — What you want to point out 
 to the Commissioiaers is that because they find a farm 
 in the north let at 25 per cent, over Griffith's valua- 
 tion, and a farm in the south let at 75 per cent, over 
 it, there is no reason to say that one man is over 
 rented rather than the other 1 — Precisely. 
 
 1582. That is wliat Mr. Ball Greene said? — I was 
 anxious to maintain, it from a different standpoint — 
 from that of one conversant with land for thirty years, 
 and making use of that valuation, and who, if I would 
 undertake it, would have been employed as a yaluator 
 of land. I did not undertake it ; I declined it ; but T 
 speak with knowledge on the svibjeot. 
 
 1583. How many thousands a year of rent do you 
 collect in round numbers 1 — Somewhere, towards 
 .£100,000 a year, I believe. My knowledge extends 
 from North to South. 
 
 1584. Then from practical experience you have come 
 ' to the conclusion you have mentioned, comparing the 
 
 North with the South 1— Undoubtedly. 
 
 1585. Mr. John Ball Greene said the other day that 
 in the North, in addition to the valuation being later 
 in point of time, there was more taken out of the 
 land by the tenant there than by a tenant in the South 
 — is that your experience 1 — My experience is that the 
 people of Ulster, excluding Donegal 
 
 1586. Excluding what I used to call " Ultramon- 
 tane Donegal," that is, Donegal beyond the mountains ; 
 but you would not exclude the barony of Raphoe ? — • 
 Just so; excluding the mountains of Donegal, that 
 they are a different race of people almost. In Ulster 
 you have thrift — Scotch thrift ■ 
 
 1587. And some English thrift 1 — Not far from 
 Belfast the country looks like an English county. 
 
 1588. You have a good deal of English people in 
 Tyrone too 1 — Yes. You have in Ulster the flax culture, 
 which, when judiciously carried on, is a mast paying 
 crop ; £50 an acre I have known to be made from flax. 
 You. have there the flax manipulation for the young 
 hands. You have the after treatment of flax. — 
 all tending to giving employment, and to thrift. There 
 is an amount produced out of the soil there that, in 
 my judgment, is not produced in the South. There is 
 more tillage, I would say, in Ulster than in the other 
 provinces. 
 
 1589. Does that account, then, for the valuation 
 there bein" higher to some extent 1 — To some extent. 
 
 1590. Don't y(m think that if it is higher to some 
 extent, that a man in the North is valued on his own 
 improvements and his own industry, as compared with 
 his Southern brother ? — I think it is unjust to the State 
 the position the valuation is in ; for in the South the 
 propiietors escape the income-tax which is jiaid by 
 proprietors in the North. 
 
 1591. They escape paying the same amount of- Sept. irisso. 
 income-tax, is that what you mean? — They do not Oja^les u! 
 pay the same proportion relatively to their income. iVwftsheticV 
 
 1592. .Because it is valued low ?^-Because ■ it is Esq. "'' 
 valued low. The compensation for disturbance clause 
 
 in the Land Act compensates the tenant according to 
 his valuation. Now, if it be fair in the North to have 
 the valuation nearer to the rent, it isunjrTst in the 
 South to have the valuation so much below, the rent : 
 /because the tenant g-ets ■ more when he is icompen- 
 sated on the valuation than the man in the North 
 v;-ould get ; whereas if it be fair to have the valuation 
 so low in the South, it is vuifair to have it high in the 
 North. 
 
 1593. Chairman. — The valuation is taken as the 
 basis of compensation ?— The basis on which the uum- 
 
 ' ber of years oompensa,tion the tenant is to get is assessed 
 is taken upon the scale of his poor-law valuation. 
 Thus, if a tenant in Limerick be valued at £10 a year, 
 his rent might be £25. He is' entitled, if the chair- 
 man sees fit to give it to him, to seven times the £25, 
 
 • beside his improvements. 
 
 1594. Baron DowsEj^That is in assessing the com- 
 pensation for disturbance ? — Yes. 
 
 1595. Chairman. — Do you mean that compensation 
 for disturbance is based on the rent, not on the valua- 
 tion ? — It is based on the valuation 'to measure the 
 tenant's position in the scale, but he gets so many 
 years of the rent he pays into his pocket, when 
 his position in the scale is fixed; whereas in Ulster, 
 where the valuation is nearly the full value, the posi- 
 tion of the tenant woiild not be so good on the scale. 
 You have in the South, owing to' wKatT"have"men- 
 tioned, rents of £25 paid when men are only valued 
 
 at £10. , 
 
 1596. Mr. Shaw.— Would it not occur to you that 
 the rent might be too high in the south in proportion 
 to the. north 1 — It does not follow that the rent in the 
 south is a fair rent. My impression of the rents that 
 I speak of is that the rents in the south ai-e as fair 'as 
 rents in the north at 15 per cent, over the valuation. 
 
 1597. That is the very point; that is your opinion ? 
 —I am giving my opinion. 
 
 1598. The O'Conoe Don.— What you mean to say 
 is that the tenant in the south, if he be evicted by the 
 landlord, and awarded compensation for disturbance, 
 gets seven times the rent which he is paying, and whicli 
 may be 50 or 100 per cent, over the valuation ?. Yes. 
 
 1599. Mr. Shaw.— And may be un exorbitant rent ? 
 . — 3fay be an exorbitant rent. 
 
 1600. The O'CoNOR Don.— But that the man in the 
 north would only get four or five times his rent in 
 consequence of his valuation, being nearer to the rent? 
 — That was it. The working of the valuation as it 
 stands is, that under that scale a tenant in the south 
 gets more compensation than a tenant in the north. 
 
 1601. Mr. Shaw. — But he has been paying more ? 
 —If he was not paying more he would not get more, 
 but his paying more pounds per year does not prove 
 that it is more than the value of what lie has in return. 
 Another way in which it works is this. All the poor 
 rates are paid by the proprietor on holdings rated at 
 or under £4, and under the Act of 1870, in the case 
 of new tenancies similarly valued, all the county cess 
 too. The valuation being very low in the south, the 
 tenants in the south escape better than tenants in the 
 north. I wish to bring out the discrepancy, -us 1 may 
 call it in the working of the valuation as it exists. 
 
 1602. Chairman.— But as they are' all paid on the 
 same scale in the north and south, they are not relti- 
 tively injured by the difference of valuation?— They 
 are, because the man in the south is valued much 
 lower, and the lower you are valued on the scale the 
 more you will get. 
 
 1603. You mean in comparison between the north 
 and the south; then your opinion is that they are 
 
 valued unfairly as between the one and the other ? 
 
 Not relatively fairly. 
 
 1604. Baron Dowse— Does not all this go to show 
 that there ought to be a new valuation, and that is 
 
 12 
 
60 
 
 IRISK LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 4, ISSO. 
 
 Charles U. 
 
 Townshend, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 only pertinent to our inquiry so far as it goes to sliow 
 tliat the scale in the Land Act works improperly in 
 consequence of the absence of a true valuation, and 
 also that this valuation is not to be taken as a test of 
 rent, without understandiag the facts of the case ? — I 
 felt anxious that the Commission should have on 
 record, before their journey to the country, what I 
 believe to be the facts as regards the present position 
 of Griffith's valuation, because an opinion is held by 
 many that land should be let at Griffith's valuation, 
 and that that would be a fair rent. I know cases 
 where Griffith's valuation is a fair rent, and I know 
 oases where 500 per cent, over Griffith's valuation is a 
 fair rent. You would do an injustice if you said 
 Griffith is to be taken as a standard. ' A great many 
 tenants that would be entitled to votes also in the 
 south have not got them, because their valuation is so 
 low. 
 
 1605. Mr. Kavanagh. — In fact a re- valuation would 
 be like lowering the franchise I — It would. It would 
 enfranchise a good many people that have not now the 
 parliamentary franchise. I prepared this table 
 (produced) as regards value of produce from the valu- 
 ation of 1852 to 1877, showing the increase in the 
 prices of agricultural produce : — 
 
 Table showing the Scale of Prices of Agricultural 
 Produce set forth in the Act of 1852, Mr. J. Ball 
 Greene's Evidence before the Parliamentary Com- 
 mittee in 1869, and the Bill of 1877, respectively, 
 and the increase per cent, in the value of each 
 species of produce between 1852 and 1877. 
 
 Act of 
 
 185-2. 
 
 Price per 
 
 cwt. 
 
 "Wheat, 
 
 Oats, 
 
 Barley, 
 
 Flax, 
 
 Butter, 
 
 Beef, 
 
 Mutton, 
 
 Poi-k, 
 
 s. 
 
 a. 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 f. 
 
 49 
 
 
 
 6,5 
 
 4 
 
 3a 
 
 () 
 
 41 
 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 Mr. J. Ball 
 
 Bill of 
 
 Greene's 
 
 1877. 
 
 Evidence 
 
 I'riec per 
 
 in 1869. 
 
 cwt. 
 
 .». d. 
 
 s. d. 
 
 !) 
 
 10 
 
 5 7 
 
 7 8 
 
 7 
 
 8 4 
 
 71 
 
 60 
 
 103 2 
 
 121 4 
 
 53 10 
 
 70 
 
 (13 
 
 74 8 
 
 42 2 
 
 51 4 
 
 Increa.se 
 per cent, 
 in scale of 
 I'ricc3 
 between 
 1S52 and 
 1677. 
 
 33 3 
 
 5S-G 
 51-5 
 22 '4 
 85-7 
 97-2 
 82-1 
 60-4 
 
 This shows the gradual increase of prices from iS52 to 
 1877, the per-centage of increase of each article 
 of produce is shown in the last column, amounting to 
 97 per cent, in the case of beef, 85 per cent, in butter, 
 in mutton 82 per cent, and in poi'k GO per cent. 
 
 1606. Mr. Shaw. — That would not be correct in 
 1879 1 — The variations in 1879, to my surprise, is not 
 so great as might have been supposed. 
 
 1607. You do not bring store cattle into account 
 nor sheep ; you only bring in mutton and beef 1 — Well, 
 you always deal with the article that is sent into the 
 market for final sale. I give you the official 
 evidence upon the question. 
 
 1608. But store cattle, pigs, and sheep are sent into 
 the market for sale 1 — I take them as beef and mutton. 
 
 1609. Would it not make a very great difference if 
 you could estimate the prices of these for the last two 
 or three years, store cattle, sheep, and pigs ^ — Yes; 
 but they are very high again now. Prices fluctuate. 
 Store cattle did fall fifty shillings a head last year. 
 
 1610. And since 1877 they fell considerably 1 
 
 They are up again to very nearly wliat they were. 
 
 1611. But last year they were very different? 
 
 Last year they were practically unsaleable for a time. 
 
 1612. In fact they were raised at a loss 1 — Last year 
 was a falling year, and a falling year is always a losing 
 
 year. There is a change now, and I am aware, froii 
 my own experience, that in the market recently th 
 demand has increased and prices are not very far fron 
 what they were the year before last. 
 
 1613. Would it not be fairer to take an average o 
 the years 1 — Undoubtedly, a five years average. 
 
 1614. Don't you think in looking at the case fairlj 
 you ought to bring in cattle, sheep, and pigs, and al 
 kinds of live stock ? — Pill agricultural produce. 
 
 1615. Mr. Kavanagh. — I understand Mr. Towns- 
 hend's argument to be, you don'tjgo into the prices o1 
 articles until they are brought into the market for final 
 sale, that is, for killing, and you don't care to follow out 
 the other stages of dealing in them ? — These are the 
 intermediate profits of the people who deal with store 
 cattle, but the test as taken by the State is the ultimate 
 price in the market. 
 
 1616. Chaieman. — But that does not afiect the large 
 class who never go to the extent of fattening cattle for 
 sale as beef and mutton ? — It affects them to this ex- 
 tent, that the prices given for the store cattle raised by 
 these people were so enormous, that the profit to 
 the man finishing the cattle was comparatively small. 
 Now it is nearer to a sound system, and reduced as the 
 prices for store cattle now are, they are far beyond what 
 they vrere twenty years ago, and far beyond the scale 
 laid down in Griffith — eighty per cent, beyond. 
 
 1617. Mr. Shaw. — Is it not the fact that the trade 
 in store cattle is a very large trade in Ireland ? — Yes. 
 
 1618. And that the rent paying power of the tenant 
 in the south and west depends a good deal on the jjrices 
 for store cattle ? — Yes ; a good deal. 
 
 1619. Therefore, in estimatingthe rent-paying power 
 of a tenant 3'ou must estimate that as an element in the 
 calculation 1 — Undoubtedly so. 
 
 1620. And so with sheep? — So with sheep. 
 
 1621. And so with store pigs ? — All kinds of agricul- 
 tural produce. 
 
 1622. Because the trade between Ireland and Eng- 
 land unfortunately is not worth the finished artide to 
 anything like the extent it is carried on in the imma- 
 ture article? — There is a large amount of trade in 
 finished cattle. 
 
 1623. There is from Dublin, but not from Cork or 
 Waterford, or Limerick, is not that so ? — Yes. We 
 consumers know unpleasantly for our pockets that 
 prices remain what a seller would call, very good still. 
 
 1621-. Chairman.-— The butchers do not vary the 
 prices very much according to the price of beasts? — 
 No, my lord, only with time. I have here a return of 
 the prices of Irish agricultural i^roduce from 1830 tc 
 1879, compiled s])ecially for iha Irish Farmers^ Gazette. 
 by the editor, and it deals with all kinds of produce. 
 
 1625. Mr. Shaw. — Is that by the year or in ave- 
 rages of five years?— Every year from 1830 to 1879 
 of course, in any valuation that ever is made, the State 
 takes an a\'erage of five years, or perhaps more. Ii 
 would be unfair to take 1874, which was one of the 
 dearest years we ever had, and it would be equallj 
 unfair to take 1879 which was a falling year. Thi 
 average, of course, must be taken in all these cases. 
 
 1026. Chairmax.— Is that return taken out o 
 Thorn's Directory ? — It is taken from the Farmers 
 Gazette for fifty years prices. 
 
 1627. The O'Conor Don.— Would it be well t. 
 have it put in as part of your evidence ? Have yoi 
 any means of stating that you consider it a reliable re 
 turn ? Yon don't know what these prices are takei 
 from 1 — I do not, further than the information sii!: 
 gested in the heading to the table. The Farmer: 
 Gazette is generally pretty accurate in these things. 
 
 {The Jollowiiig reiarn was handed in.) 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 61 
 
 PRICES OF IRISH AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE-1830 to 1879. 
 CoMPiLEB SPECIALLY FOR THE " Irish Farmers' Gazette," by the Editor. 
 
 The following Tables show the range of prices of Agricultural Produce in the Irish Markets, from 1830 to 1879, 
 hoth years mcluded These prices have been taken chiefly from the market reports published m the Farmeri Gazette. 
 For the prices m 1830 and 1840 we are indebted to the files of Saunders' News-Letter 
 
 The prices of Gram are those of the Dublin Market. Where only one quotation is given for a year it has been 
 taken trom the Dublin G-azette, or other olEcial source of information. 
 
 The prices of Flax are taken from reports of markets in Ulster, chiefly Armagh and Belfast. 
 
 The prices of Beef, Mutton, Pork, Potatoes, Wool, Hay, and Straw, are Dubfin prices. 
 
 Eggs— The prices given are the wholesale rates current during the summer months in the Dublin market. 
 
 The prices of Milch Cows, two-year-old and one-year-old Cattle, have been taken from the reports of country fairs, 
 held during the months of May and June ia each year, and published in the Fanners' Gazette. The prices of Lambs 
 are those current during May and June in the Dublin market. 
 
 The prices of Butter given were taken from reports of Cork and other leading butter markets in Munster, and also 
 the Dublin market. 
 
 
 1830. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1845. 
 
 1846. 
 
 1847. 
 
 1848. 
 
 1840. 
 
 1850. 
 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 5. d. s, d. 
 
 s. «!. s, d. 
 
 5. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s, d. 
 
 Wheat, per 112 lbs. . 
 
 13 U 8 
 
 10 14 6 
 
 11 13 
 
 16 
 
 12 
 
 10 « 
 
 8 1 
 
 8 10 
 
 Oats, 
 
 6 8 8 
 
 5 8 6 10 
 
 7 7 9 
 
 11 8 
 
 6 1! 
 
 6 
 
 6 2 
 
 5 ID 6 10 
 
 Barley, 
 
 7 9 9 3 
 
 6 7 9 
 
 7 6 8 9 
 
 12 
 
 8 
 
 6 10?i 
 
 6 10 
 
 5 3 6 9 
 
 Flax, 
 
 _ 
 
 _ 
 
 41 48 
 
 37 4R 
 
 36 44.0 
 
 32 52 
 
 40 65 
 
 40 70 
 
 Butter, „ 
 
 80 90 
 
 80 90 
 
 72 84 
 
 86 52 
 
 80 88 
 
 68 80 
 
 60 66 
 
 52 74 
 
 Beef, „ 
 
 — 
 
 40 56 
 
 46 52 6 
 
 45 55 
 
 45 56 
 
 60 56 
 
 30 46 
 
 30 48 
 
 Mutton, „ 
 
 
 
 37 4 56 
 
 51 4 60 8 
 
 51 4 60 8 
 
 55 60 8 
 
 51 4 60 8 
 
 46 8 51 4 
 
 37 4 56 
 
 Pork, 
 
 
 
 36 42 
 
 36 
 
 46 
 
 56 60 
 
 40 50 
 
 33 36 
 
 30 12 
 
 Potatoes, „ 
 
 2 3 6 
 
 14 3 
 
 14 2 6 
 
 6 8 
 
 5 6 
 
 4 8 8 
 
 4 5 4 
 
 4 6 5 
 
 Wool, per lb. . 
 
 — 
 
 10 11.^ 
 
 1112 
 
 1 
 
 10 11 
 
 8i 
 
 9 
 
 10 1 1.^ 
 
 Hay, per 11-2 lbs. . 
 
 3 4 
 
 4 
 
 3 8 
 
 2 6 3 
 
 3 3 6 
 
 2 2 6 
 
 18 2 2 
 
 2 2 10 
 
 Straw, 
 
 16 2 
 
 18 2 
 
 10 1 10 
 
 14 18 
 
 10 12 
 
 8 13 
 
 6 16 
 
 8 14 
 
 Eg^s, per 120, 
 
 4 5 
 
 4 5 
 
 4 4 
 
 4 5 
 
 5 6 5 8 
 
 4 6 5 
 
 4 5 
 
 4 6 4 8 
 
 Milch Cows, 
 
 — 
 
 £8 il2^ 
 
 £6 £13 
 
 £9 £12 
 
 £5 £12 
 
 £6 £12 
 
 £6 £10 10s, 
 
 £6 £12 
 
 Two-year old Cattle, 
 
 — 
 
 _ 
 
 £4 £6 
 
 £7 £10 
 
 £9 ilO 
 
 £8 £10 
 
 £6 £9 
 
 £4 £9 
 
 One-year old „ 
 
 
 
 — * 
 
 £2 10s. £4 10s. 
 
 £3 £6 
 
 £5 £6 
 
 £4 £6 
 
 £2 5s. £4 10s, 
 
 £1 5s. £5 
 
 Lambs, 
 
 — 
 
 
 17 22 6 
 
 18 22 
 
 18 24 
 
 15 25 
 
 14 24 
 
 14 23 
 
 
 1851. 
 
 1852. 
 
 1853. 
 
 1S54. 
 
 1855. 
 
 1856. 1857. 
 
 1858. 
 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 *■. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 Wheat, per 112 lbs. . 
 
 8 O.i 
 
 7 6^ 
 
 •" 
 
 13 17 6 
 
 12 18 
 
 18 
 
 12 13 
 
 10 11 
 
 8 9 
 
 Oats, 
 
 5 6| 
 
 4 10 
 
 
 7 2 8 
 
 8 10 
 
 10 4 
 
 6 6 7 6 
 
 6 7 6 
 
 6 6 6 
 
 Barley, 
 
 5 10 
 
 5 6 
 
 ii 
 
 8 8 9 11 
 
 7 9 10 
 
 12 4 
 
 8 12 6 
 
 8 9 6 
 
 5 6 8 6 
 
 Flax, 
 
 40 60 
 
 49 
 
 ^sl 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 56 93 
 
 56 96 
 
 56 80 
 
 72 112 
 
 Butter, „ 
 
 70 9J 
 
 65 4 
 
 'Z. § 
 
 74 93 
 
 84 98 
 
 84 96 
 
 94 108 
 
 84 115 
 
 98 104 
 
 Beef, 
 
 41 2i 
 
 35 6 
 
 
 46 (1 60 
 
 50 65 
 
 SO 58 
 
 50 60 
 
 60 63 
 
 56 60 
 
 Mutton, „ 
 
 48 S.-i 
 
 41 
 
 56 63 
 
 56 65 
 
 56 60 8 
 
 56 66 
 
 56 68 
 
 56 60 8 
 
 Pork, 
 
 36 7" 
 
 32 
 
 a 
 
 45 SO 
 
 47 50 
 
 49 52 
 
 64 
 
 65 
 
 40 44 
 
 Potatoes, ,, 
 
 3 9i 
 
 3 6 6 6 
 
 4 5 8 
 
 5 8 
 
 4 5 4 
 
 2 6 4 
 
 5 6 
 
 2 4 4 
 
 Wool, per lb. . 
 
 103 1 
 
 10 12 
 
 1 3 1 4.', 
 
 11 11 
 
 10 11 
 
 1 3 
 
 1 6 
 
 1 3 
 
 Hay, per 112 lbs. . 
 
 18 2 4 
 
 16 2 2 
 
 4 4 6' 
 
 4 6 5 6 
 
 3 4 10 
 
 2 6 3 6 
 
 3 3 10 
 
 3 3 10 
 
 Straw, 
 
 9 11 
 
 10 10 
 
 16 2 6 
 
 18 2 6 
 
 18 2 4 
 
 13 18 
 
 10 1 10 
 
 14 2 
 
 Eggs, per 120, . 
 
 4 4 6 
 
 4 3 4 4 
 
 5 
 
 4 6 
 
 4 10 5 
 
 5 6 
 
 6 3 6 4 
 
 5 5 10 
 
 Milch Cows, 
 
 SI SXI 
 
 £8 £14 
 
 £8 £13 
 
 £9 £15 
 
 £12 £16 
 
 £12 £17 
 
 £12 £20 
 
 £12 £20 
 
 Two-year old Cattle, 
 
 £^ £7 10s. 
 
 £1 i8 10s. 
 
 £4 £7 
 
 £6 £10 
 
 £6 £11 
 
 £7 £11 
 
 £7 £12 
 
 £8 £10 
 
 One-year old ,, 
 
 £-2 £5 
 
 £2 10s. £5 10s. 
 
 £2 £5 
 
 £2 10s. £5 
 
 £4 £7 
 
 £4 £8 
 
 £3 £4 
 
 £6 £7 
 
 Lambs, . 
 
 16 24 
 
 18 26 
 
 19 22 
 
 21 27 
 
 18 25 
 
 18 25 
 
 20 31 
 
 20 32 
 
 
 1859. 
 
 1830. 
 
 1861. 
 
 1862. 
 
 1863. 
 
 1864. 
 
 1865. 
 
 1866. 
 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 A', d. s, d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 ». d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 Wheat, per 112 lbs. . 
 
 9 6 11 6 
 
 11 13 4 
 
 10 13 3 
 
 8 10 
 
 7 6 9 6 
 
 7 6 8 3 
 
 10 8 14 
 
 11 15 4 
 
 Oats, „ 
 
 7 7 6 
 
 8 9 4 
 
 6 3 7 9 
 
 SO 7 6 
 
 5 7 6 
 
 6 3 6 3 
 
 7 8 
 
 8 9 6 
 
 Barley, „ 
 
 8 8 6 
 
 8 10 6 
 
 6 6 9 6 
 
 6 3 8 9 
 
 6 8 3 
 
 6 3 7 8 
 
 7 3 8 6 
 
 9 6 12 
 
 Flax, „ 
 
 35 91 
 
 42 91 
 
 36 72 
 
 56 84 
 
 60 88 
 
 44 84 
 
 80 132 
 
 64 124 
 
 Butter, „ 
 
 102 114 
 
 74 1113 
 
 105 108 
 
 83 93 
 
 90 102 
 
 96 114 
 
 118 120 
 
 110 122 
 
 Beef, „ 
 
 50 62 
 
 45 63 
 
 58 63 
 
 54 60 
 
 56 60 
 
 60 65 
 
 63 67 6 
 
 68 75 
 
 Mutton, „ . 
 
 61 4 59 6 
 
 56 70 
 
 60 Ii 67 4 
 
 60 8 70 
 
 56 65 4 
 
 67 8 70 
 
 72 4 77 
 
 67 8 79 4 
 
 Pork, „ 
 
 46 50 
 
 50 58 
 
 50 53 
 
 44 48 
 
 44 48 
 
 47 51 
 
 55 58 
 
 55 58 6 
 
 Potatoes, „ 
 
 2 4 5 4 
 
 4 7 6 
 
 4 4 5 6 
 
 3 6 4 4 
 
 2 2 3 4 
 
 2 4 3 4 
 
 3 3 4 
 
 3 4 6 
 
 Wool, per lb. . 
 
 15 16 
 
 17 18 
 
 1 
 
 16 19 
 
 16 2 
 
 2 -2 U, 
 
 16 2 
 
 16 1 10 
 
 Hay, per 112 lbs. . 
 Straw, „ 
 
 4 6 5 8 
 
 3 4 2 
 
 3 3 8 
 
 3 4 
 
 3 3 8 
 
 3 4 4 
 
 2 10 3 6 
 
 3 4 3 10 
 
 3 3 6 
 
 18 2 4 
 
 12 2 2 
 
 18 2 4 
 
 16 2 i 
 
 14 2 
 
 18 2 6 
 
 16 2 
 
 Et'gs, per 120, . 
 
 5 6 
 
 5 6 2 
 
 5 10 6 6 
 
 5 6 6 4 
 
 5 6 6 8 
 
 5 6 7 
 
 6 7 
 
 6 9 6 
 
 jrilch Cows, . 
 
 £12 ^18 
 
 £11 £20 
 
 £12 £20 
 
 £10 £18 
 
 £15 £20 
 
 £12 £18 
 
 £14 £20 
 
 £12 £18 
 
 'J'wo-year old Cattle, 
 
 £7 ±'1H 
 
 £8 £12 
 
 £7 £10 
 
 £8 £12 
 
 £9 £12 
 
 £9 £16 
 
 £8 £12 
 
 £8 £11 
 
 One-year old „ 
 
 £3 10s. £7 
 
 £4 £7 
 
 £3 10s. £7 
 
 £5 Ids. £7 10s. 
 
 £3 15s. £7 
 
 £5 10s. £7 
 
 £4 £9 
 
 £4 10s. £8 
 
 Lambs, 
 
 20 28 
 
 25 (I 35 
 
 24 32 
 
 22 33 
 
 20 33 
 
 16 38 
 
 20 1) 40 
 
 30 38 
 
 
 1867. 
 
 1803. 
 
 1869. 
 
 1870. 
 
 1871. 
 
 1872. 
 
 1873. 
 
 1874. 
 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 5. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 s. d. s. d. 
 
 Wheat, per 112 lbs. . 
 Oats, „ 
 
 14 8 16 
 
 14 4 
 
 12 
 
 10 4 
 
 12 6 
 
 12 8 
 
 12 
 
 9 4 
 
 9 4 11 2 
 
 9 8 
 
 8 6 
 
 7 llj 
 
 8 Oi 
 
 7 8 
 
 6 10 
 
 9 
 
 Barley, „ 
 Flax, „ 
 
 10 10 6 
 
 10 8.i 
 
 10 If 
 
 8 n 
 
 8 10.^ 
 
 9 H 
 
 6 6 
 
 9 1 
 
 52 104 
 
 64 0" 120 
 
 56 96 
 
 44 76 
 
 64 0" 112 
 
 60 0' 70 
 
 66 7 
 
 66 76 
 
 Batter, „ 
 
 80 105 
 
 120 l:iO 
 
 108 113 
 
 110 130 
 
 114 118 
 
 100 126 
 
 110 140 
 
 110 150 
 
 Beof, „ 
 
 65 70 
 
 60 72 6 
 
 65 80 
 
 70 72 6 
 
 70 80 
 
 70 85 
 
 70 95 
 
 70 85 
 
 IMutton, „ 
 
 46 8 65 4 
 
 56 79 4 
 
 56 79 4 
 
 74 8 77 
 
 74 8 84 
 
 74 8 88 8 
 
 74 88 74 8 88 8 
 
 Pork, „ 
 
 40 44 
 
 55 57 
 
 60 63 
 
 52 60 
 
 40 42 
 
 48 50 
 
 50 60 
 
 55 60 
 
 Potatoes, „ 
 
 4 4 8 
 
 3 4 8 
 
 2 4 4 4 
 
 3 4 4 8 
 
 3 9 4 9 
 
 5 8 6 
 
 3 8 6 
 
 2 8 3 6 
 
 Wool, per lb. . 
 Hay, per 112 lbs. . 
 Straw, „ 
 Eggs, per 120, . 
 Milch Cows, 
 
 12 16 
 
 14 16 
 
 12 14 
 
 10 14 
 
 1 10 2 1 
 
 1 10 2 
 
 15 2 
 
 13 1 9i. 
 
 4 4 10 
 
 4 5 4 
 
 3 4 4 
 
 4 4 10 
 
 3 6 4 6 
 
 3 4 
 
 5 7 
 
 4 8 6 O' 
 
 1 10 2 8 
 
 16 2 8 
 
 18 2 8 
 
 1 10 2 6 
 
 2 2 2 3 
 
 2 3 
 
 2 6 4 4 
 
 2 6 3 6 
 
 5 8 6 8 
 
 5 9 6 8 
 
 5 8 6 9 
 
 6 7 6 
 
 6 7 
 
 6 6 70 
 
 6 3 8 4 
 
 7 9 
 
 £15 £22 10s, 
 
 £15 £20 
 
 £13 £24 
 
 £16 £23 
 
 £17 £21 
 
 £13 £21 
 
 £15 £25 
 
 £18 £28 
 
 Two-year old Cattle, 
 One-year old „ 
 Lambs, . 
 
 £6 £9 
 
 £9 £11 
 
 £8 £11 
 
 £9 £11 
 
 £10 £13 10s. 
 
 £13 £14 10s. 
 
 £9 £14 
 
 £12 £16 
 
 £3 10s. £5 
 
 £4 £6 
 
 £4 £6 10s. 
 
 £3 10s. £7IOs. 
 
 £6 £9 
 
 ±7 £3 8s. 
 
 £5 £11 
 
 £6 £9 
 
 36 40 
 
 25 32 
 
 22 37 
 
 35 38 
 
 26 36 
 
 25 40 
 
 30 50 
 
 30 45 
 
 [continued on next naoe. 
 
62 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Prices of Irish Agricultural Produce — contimicd. 
 
 
 1875. 
 
 1876. 
 
 1877. 
 
 18/ 
 
 3. 
 
 1879. ' 
 
 REMiRKSj PaiCES IN 1879. 
 
 
 s. d. 
 
 s. d. 
 
 ,s. d. 
 
 s.' d. 
 
 s. d. s, d. 
 
 s. "rf. 
 
 s. d. 
 
 s. 'd. '«/ d. 
 
 ■ . ■ . 
 
 Wheat/perll21bs. . 
 
 9 5 
 
 
 9 8^ 
 
 
 10 8- ■ 
 
 8 3 
 
 ■ 9 6 
 
 10 U 12 
 
 j-Cropl879. ■:.,,.■ 
 
 Oats, 
 
 8 2 
 
 
 7 &i 
 
 
 8 Oi 
 
 8 
 
 1 :9i 0. 
 
 6 8 10, 6 
 
 Barley, 
 
 8 8 
 
 
 8 -4| 
 
 
 9 
 
 7 0, 
 
 : 9 9 
 
 .70 93 
 
 Flax, „ . 
 
 60 
 
 88 
 
 52 
 
 74 
 
 66 '82 
 
 52 
 
 72' 
 
 56 80 
 
 Butter, „ 
 
 115 
 
 140 
 
 110 
 
 154 
 
 89 126 0' 
 
 ■ 90 
 
 lis 
 
 61 131 • 
 
 ' At Cork 1 st- quality was- quoted 
 low as 76i. and 77s. in July 
 August. 
 
 Beef, 
 
 70 
 
 ,87 6, 
 
 70 
 
 85 
 
 GO ' '84 
 
 65 
 
 84 
 
 SO 80 
 
 The lowest top price quoted, 6 
 was in October. 
 
 Mutton, „ 
 
 65 4 
 
 84 
 
 76 
 
 98 
 
 74 8 102 8 
 
 74 8 
 
 98 
 
 56 93 4 
 
 Top price in October, ^}jd. per 1 
 79s. 4(/. per cwt. 
 
 Pork, 
 
 58 
 
 60 
 
 51 9f 
 
 
 51 60 
 
 46 
 
 GO 
 
 46 0' 57 
 
 
 Potatoes, „ 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 3 6, 
 
 
 5 7 
 
 3 6 
 
 5 6 
 
 5 7 4 
 
 Crop 1879. 
 
 Wool, per lb. . 
 
 15 
 
 1 8 
 
 1 2 
 
 -1 4i 
 
 1 ]f--.-1.4- 
 
 to 
 
 1 4J 
 
 - ,.9J-, \\% 
 
 Trade very dull through the seasoi 
 
 Haj-, per 112 lbs. 
 
 5 6 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 6 6 
 
 3 10 4 8 
 
 3 
 
 4' 
 
 4 5 
 
 |Crop 1879. 
 
 Straw, „ 
 
 2 6 
 
 4 
 
 2 4 
 
 4 4 
 
 2 3 6 
 
 1 2 
 
 2! 8 
 
 16 2 4 
 
 Eggs, per 120, . 
 
 7 3 
 
 9 
 
 6 4 
 
 11 
 
 .5 10 7 6 
 
 5 
 
 9.' 9 
 
 7 6; 9 
 
 
 Milch Co-ws, 
 
 £16 
 
 £24 
 
 ■£14 . 
 
 £24 
 
 £16 £26 
 
 £15 
 
 424 
 
 £14 £23, 
 
 
 Two-year old Cattle, 
 
 £10 
 
 £\1 
 
 £10 
 
 £16 
 
 £10 i-15 
 
 £10 
 
 £15 
 
 £9 £!4 
 
 
 One-year old „ .' 
 
 £7 
 
 £9 
 
 £5 
 
 £12 
 
 £5 £10 
 
 £6 
 
 £11 
 
 £b ■ £10 
 
 
 Lambs, ' , 
 
 25 
 
 42 
 
 26 
 
 SO 
 
 30 45 
 
 30 
 
 48 
 
 22 , 50 
 
 
 Sept. 4, 1880. 
 
 Chailes U. 
 
 Townshend, 
 
 Esq. 
 
 1626a. Are there any other points that you wish to - 
 mention ? — I was prepared to give some further evi- 
 dence about the valuation, but Mr. Greene I Tinder- 
 stand has been examined and he seems to have given 
 the Commission his views on the subject pretty fully. 
 I may mention, I don't know whether .the book of 
 instructions given by Sir Eichard Griffith to his valua- 
 tors-have been laid before the Commission, it is one of 
 the most interesting books of the kind I have ever 
 read. The fullest information is given as to what is to 
 guide the valuator. 
 
 1627a. Baron Dowse. — That must be v/hat Mr. Ball 
 Greene referred to as having in his office and he said 
 he would furnish us with a copy % — There are two. 
 This is the one for 1839, and this is the one for 
 1852. 
 
 1628. Mr. Shaw. — ^Which do you consider the most 
 valuable of the two % — The recent one connected with 
 the valuation of 1852. (Copy furnished to the Com- 
 mission.) 
 
 1629. Mr. Kavanagh. — You mention in the precis 
 of your evidence that you would like to refer to some 
 points in the Act of 1852 in reference to showing how 
 the valuation has been made '! — I have referi-ed to that 
 already, that is the question of the deduction of poor- 
 rate. 
 
 1630. The O'CoifOR Dos. — You had no experience 
 of the valuation while it was going on, as to how it 
 was carried on % — No. 
 
 1631. You do not know how far these instructions 
 were acted on in the actual valuation ? — I assume. 
 
 1632. You assume that they were? — I have no 
 ground for thinking otherwise. 
 
 1633. Mr. SiiAW.— You stated I think that the valu- 
 ation in the south was 100 per cent under the rent as 
 compared with the north ? — In districts. 
 
 1634. Would you mention any o:^ these districts ? — 
 The lich pasture lands. 
 
 1635. Of Limerick? — Of Limerick and parts of; 
 Cork, Meath, Westmeath, &c. ' - ' 
 
 1636. A hundred per cent. ?— And in Clare in an 
 excessive degree. I think Clare is the most extreme 
 in the loWness of its valuation of any county that I 
 know in Ireland. 
 
 1637. Don't you think that that arises very much 
 ■ from the great competition that there has been for 
 
 grazing land owing to the high prices of cattle for some ^ 
 years before 1878 1 — I think it is owing to the enor- 
 mous profits that the farmers were able to make. 
 
 1638. And the great competition for farms 1—1 
 don't think the competition is so great in these dis- 
 tricts where the farms are large. I think the great 
 competition for land is where the people are, what in 
 my judgment is too crowded and the holdincrs too small 
 
 for a ■ decent existence. I refer to Eoscommon and 
 Sligo more particularly, with which I am also ac- 
 quainted. 
 
 1639. That would not apply though to the south, to 
 Clare for instance % — No, and there there is not the 
 same competition for land. Farms very seldooi change 
 hands. Within a period of twenty years when I think 
 back upon it, it is marvellous how few farms have 
 changed hands in my experience. 
 
 1640. But the rents must have been raised con- 
 siderably within the period since the valuation ? — 
 Eents in my experience have been very little raised. 
 
 1641. On these farms'! — And as far as my ex- 
 Ijerience extends, through the counties that I am con- 
 versant with, I believe that where rents have been 
 raised is in districts where the holdings are very small. 
 I believe that in the case of large fai-ros the rents are 
 low, and I think the tendency is to show that it is so, 
 because the tenants are asking that the Ulster tenant- 
 right custoin should be extended to the soiith. Now the 
 Ulster tenant-right custom means some kind of sale- 
 able interest which they would not possess if a farm 
 was not worth more than they are paying for it. 
 
 1642. Baron Dowse, — But does not the Ul-ster ten- 
 ant-right custom, mean a saleable interest in land, held 
 at a fair and reasonable rent % — Yes, 
 
 1643. Mr. Shaw. — If they are paying 100 per cent, 
 over the Poor Law Valuation don't you think it is 
 rather the presumption that they are paying too high 
 a rent \ — Certainly not. 
 
 1G44. As an ordinary mode of living for farmer's, 
 not as a speculation for cattle raising % — Certainly not. 
 There is precisely the deception that there is upon the 
 minds of those tliat do not understand the working of 
 the thing. Griffith's valuation is utterly fallacious, 
 ;ind while thirty-three per cent, is about what it is 
 thought would be added to the valuation of Ireland 
 if there was a new valuation, I know districts where 
 they VTOuld not add five per cent., and I knov,r districts 
 where if they did justice they would add 100 per cent. 
 It is a question of produce and what the land yields. 
 
 1G45. Chairman. — When you say that , Griffith's 
 valuation is fallacious, you mean as a basis of valuation 
 pf rent % — "^es ; or of Imperial taxation. 
 
 1646. Baron Dowse. — In consequence qf the way it 
 vras originaJly undertaken, beginning in bad times in 
 the south and going on to the north, and deducting a 
 jjoor rate which was higher than it ia now? — Yes, and 
 another element is that the valuation occupied about 
 twenty-flve years, from 1840 to 1865. I hope that if 
 the Govermnent should at any time see fit to bring in 
 -a bill for the revaluation of Ireland, that they -ivill 
 say divide it into provinces and let the valuation go on 
 simultaneously in them. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 63 
 
 1647. It ought to be done contemporaneously through 
 the country? — And it ought to be done within a 
 couple or three years. It will cost no more to employ 
 twice as many hands to do it within a reasonable time 
 than if it were to drag on for years. 
 
 1648. In fact if you go on making the valuation for 
 twenty-five years, it is the difference between a man 
 insuriug his life at twenty-five and insuring it at fifty ? 
 — It is utterly absurd to occupy twenty years in making 
 a valuation of the kind. It ought to be comjileted 
 within a couple of years. The Acts of Parliament that 
 I have referred to were dated 1826, 1836, 1846, and 
 1852. Since 1852 there has been no change made in 
 the valuation of land in Ireland: I might call the 
 attention of the Commission to this, that that valuation 
 was made at a time of depression, and that the valua- 
 tors were bound to exclude from their consideration all 
 improvements made within the seven years pi-eceding 
 the date on which they were on the ground. That 
 valuation was published from 1853 to 1864. Since that 
 date millions of money have been laid out on the land 
 by the landlords or by the tenants, and the valuation 
 has never been altered. Another element of distortion. 
 The valuation of land has not been altered, the valua- 
 tion of houses is altered year by year. If a house is 
 built the reviser, as he is called, goes out the next year 
 on getting notice and raises the valuation, or fixes the 
 valuation of the house. If a house be levelled he 
 strikes it out. If land be dou.bled in value by im- 
 provements he has no power to raise the value of that 
 land one shilling.' The valuation of land at this 
 moment is the same as it was made in 1853. There 
 ought to be in my judgment some fixed date for the re- 
 valuation of land. Fourteen years was the time that 
 was named in the Act of 1853. 
 
 1649. Baron Dowse. — If the valuation were 
 revised or a new valuation made, as you suggest, 
 that would be of great use, if it was done on proper 
 principles, great use as a guide to rent, would it or 
 would it not ?^I see elements of difficulty as regards 
 that question at the present time if it were taken as a 
 rentvahie,becauseitisheld that the tenanthas improved 
 the land largely, and the valuator is bound to put a 
 value on the place as he finds it, including the improve- 
 ments by the landlord and the improvements by the 
 tenant, if there be any by either, and if he were called 
 upon to make a rent value, as far as I can at present 
 see, there should be two valuations. 
 
 1650. I did not suggest he should make a rent 
 value, because it occurred to me in that way, and 
 Mr. Ball Greene mentioned it also, there is the 
 tenant's interest in the land represented by his im- 
 provements, and the landlord's, and of course the 
 valuator would value the whole as he is valuing for 
 the purpose of taxation, imperial or local. Tliat would 
 represent the then value of land without severing the 
 landlord's interest from the tenant's, but woiild it not 
 be a help for any person who was called upon subse- 
 quently by either landlord or tenant to ascertain what 
 the landlord is to get 1 — It would be a great help for 
 all jDurposes to have a new valuation. 
 
 1651. Even for rent purposes?— Even for rent pur- 
 poses, it would also get , rid of a great deal of heart- 
 biu-nings. That question put by the honorable mem- 
 ber to the Chairman's left, who says, that because 
 rent is 100 per cent, over Griffith's that jorobably it is 
 an exorbitant rent j if a valuator goes on the land it 
 will probably be found that it is not an exorbitant rent. 
 
 1652. It would be a help at all events ?^It would 
 be a help, and it would be fair to test the question 
 from a disinterested quarter whether the complaint 
 of the tenant is right or not. 
 
 1653. Mr. SnAW.^But in the North there is no 
 such thing as raising the rent? — The complaint in 
 the North is that the effort is to raise the rents 
 and so eat away with the Ulster custom 
 
 1654. But under the Ulster custom the raising Syit. 4, i860, 
 of rent is a very unusual thing. Do you think prices claries U. 
 
 alone are a test for raising rents, that that is 
 chief element ? — Certainly not. 
 
 1655. Therefore yOu would not, because prices now 
 are higher than prices ten years ago, you would not 
 therefore raise the rents 1 — I should take into con- 
 sideration the various elements that one ought to 
 consider, locality, market, elevation, nueans of com- 
 munication. For instance, since the valuation of 
 1853 was made I' don't know how many millions of 
 money have been exjJcnded in opening up the country 
 with railwajrs that has tended to raise the value of 
 distant lands, just as our improved shipping has 
 brought the produce of America to our shores, and 
 raised the value of lands in America, and equalized 
 prices in that way. 
 
 1656. And the habits of the people; the people 
 have to pay more now for labour ; have you considered 
 that ? — I have considered that question very anxiously. 
 They have to pay more for labour, but there are two 
 elements that miist be taken into consideration when 
 that question is considered, one is the improved 
 maohinerj' that is now in use, labour saving machinery^ 
 
 1657. Not for small farmers? — Not for the small 
 people in the west that I have spoken of, but through-, 
 out Ireland. We have as large holdings as there are: 
 in England. We have a large middle class of medium 
 holdings where they do not possess those implements 
 and machines,' but a man in a district buys one and 
 hires it out. 
 
 1658. The farmer then has to pay largely for it 1 — - 
 The farmer pays for it, but he gets his corn, cut in a 
 day when it is fine, he can thresh it and sell it at once, 
 and on the whole transaction he saves considerably, 
 and it is because he saves he does it. 
 
 1659. Because he cannot get labour as he used ? — 
 Because he cannot get labour, and because he would also 
 rather use the machinery. Another consideration in 
 my judgment is, Ireland contains about twenty millions, 
 of acres in round numbers, of which five millions are 
 mountain, moor, or water, v/aste in one way or another, 
 leaving the fifteen millions arable and pastu.re, and of 
 that about eleven and a half millions are pasture. 
 Since (Griffith's valuation was made, one and a half 
 millions of land in, round numbers, that was then in 
 tillage has been converted into pasture, saving labour 
 to a very large extent, cattle eat and fatten, and there; 
 are no labour bills to pay, and on that one and a half 
 millions, the labour is enormously lessened, in fact' 
 practioall)^ disappeared. 
 
 1660. But would you not take into account all the 
 habits of the people, that their food costs them much 
 more than it used, they have given up the use of 
 potatoes as a common food, and now buy a great deal 
 of their food ?— I am happy to say the condition of 
 the_ people has improved enormously in the country, 
 their food is better, their clothing— I am sure sir that 
 you going through the country know how that is im, 
 proved, and another element is the means of con- 
 veyance, they used to walk to market, now they driven 
 
 1661. As to thrift in the north, don't you think 
 there is a great deal of thrift in the south among the 
 Celts?— I don't think there is as much thrift- as in the 
 north. 
 
 1662; I will now only refer you to ono estate^ do 
 you know the estate of the Duke of Devonshire iiv 
 Waterford and Cork ? — I just know it. 
 
 1663. Don't you think there is thrift and habits of 
 savmg there as much as in any district in the north ? 
 — I think such estates as the Duke of Devonshire's and 
 the Fitzwilliam estate, and many others are patterns 
 
 1664. The people are all Celts there ?— Don't under- 
 stand me as saying a word against those in the south 
 I am a Southerner myself 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Townshend, 
 
 Esq. 
 
64 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COJimiiSSION. 1880. 
 
 Sept. i.lSSO. 
 
 William L. 
 Bernard, Esq. 
 
 William Leigh Bernaed, Esq., Erivrister-at-La-'.v^ Cliii 
 
 in Ireland 
 
 1665. Baron Dowse. — Mr. Bernard, I wish to ask 
 you a few questions upon a matter tliat you seemed 
 to have turned .your attention to very much. You 
 are acquainted with the working of the clauses of the 
 Church Act, for selling the interest of the Church 
 Commissioners to the tenants t — I am. 
 
 1666. And also to a certain extent I believe with 
 the working of the Bright clauses, as they are called, 
 of the Land Act 1 — Yes. 
 
 1667. Now the clauses in the Church Act of course 
 were passed the year before the Land Act ?^They 
 were. 
 
 1668. Do you say there is a difference between the 
 clauses of the Church Act and the clauses of the Land 
 Act 1 — Yes, as regards the mortgages. 
 
 1669. Would you just be good enough to state to 
 Loi'd Bessborough and the other Commissioners what 
 is the difference 1 — In the case of the Irish Church 
 Act, the tenant who purchases his holding may bor- 
 row, from any source he pleases, on the security of his 
 holding, the proportion of purchase-money required to 
 be paid in cash if he has not got it himself. In the 
 case of the Land Act he is jjrohibited from doing so, 
 and must himself be the possessor of the required 
 proportion, as any subsequent mortgage would be 
 deemed an alienation of his holding. 
 
 1670. Do you consider that this is a reasonable dis- 
 tinction 1 — I think it has prevented the Bright clauses 
 of the Land Act from working harmoniously. I feel 
 fortified in that opinion from knowing that the sales 
 under the Church Act would not have been anything 
 like as successful as they were, only for the iact that 
 there were such facilities for getting money elsewhere. 
 
 1671. Was there any reason suggested why there 
 should be that distinction made 1 — The only reason I 
 have heard is that the Treasury did not consider it 
 desirable to lend money to a tenant-purchaser except 
 he had himself the required proportion of the purchase- 
 money. 
 
 1672. But did the Treasury not lend the mont^y 
 under the Church Act? — Not directly to assist the 
 tenants, but as a loan to the Church Commissioners on 
 the security of the Church property at large. I never 
 could understand why there should have bee i such a 
 distinction between the mortgage procedure under the 
 two Acts. I explained in a pamphlet, under the title 
 of " Suggestions for the extended establishment of a 
 Peasant Proprietary in Ireland," how the Bright 
 Clauses of both Acts had worked. 
 
 1673. I am bound to say, until I came across your 
 pamphlet — though I was in Parliament when the 
 Church Act was passed, and had a good deal to do 
 wdth the Land Act in office — I never saw the dis- 
 tinction before, but if that were remedied, it would 
 greatly facilitate the progress of loans under the 
 Bright clauses'!— No doubt it would. 
 
 1674. Are there any other amendments that you 
 think are required in the purchase or Bright clauses. 
 Are you aware that the Treasury don't lend vuiless it 
 is a first charge t — I am. 
 
 1675. Is that so under the Church Act 1 — It is the 
 fee-simple the Commissioners sell, but a glebe vested 
 in the Commissioners, subject to a rent, was sold in 
 the same way as a lee-simple estate. 
 
 1676. Chairman. — They would sell the entire inte- 
 rest in fact 1 — Yes ; they would deal with the pur- 
 chase-money in exactly the same manner, as in the 
 case of a fee-simple estate. I may mention that the 
 report of Mr. Shaw Lefevre's committee recommended 
 that the alienation clauses of the Land Act should be 
 repealed. 
 
 1677. Baron Dowse. — Do you think it would be 
 an advantage if they were t — I do. 
 
 1678. I gather from this very valuable pamphlet 
 of yours that the working of the clauses in the Irish 
 Church Act, the purchase clauses, has been successful 
 rather 1 — Very successful. 
 
 :f Clerk to the Commissioners of Church TemporaKt 
 , examined. 
 
 1679. You say that in the report jiresented to P: 
 liament in 1879, the Commissioners state — " "We cc 
 tinue to receive reports of improvements effected 
 their lands by the new owners, and another yea 
 experience confirms the opinion which we ha 
 already recorded as to the beneficial results of the pi 
 visions in the Irish Church Act for creating a bo( 
 of small projjrietors." Now, your own expcricn 
 leads you to agi'ee with that ? — It does. 
 
 1680. I believe it is also a fact that notwithstan 
 ing the agricultural depression in Ireland the arrea 
 of terminable annuities at the 31st December, 187 
 amounted only to £3,300 out of a revenue of £35,800 
 Is that so? — Yes. 
 
 1681. And a large portion of such arrears on! 
 become payable on the previous 1st October? — Yes. 
 
 1682. So that there has been a remarkable pun 
 tuality in the payment of the annuities 1 — Yes. 
 
 1683. If, then, the alterations were made in tl 
 clauses of the Land Act with reierence ■ to alienatioi 
 and also with reference to the manner in which tfc 
 Treasury is inclined to lend the money, do you thin 
 it would be likely to extend the utility of thot 
 clauses ? — I am sure it would. I may mention wit 
 regard to the arrears that since the j)ublication of m 
 pjamplilet there was a Parliamentary paper publishec 
 which gave the entire arrears due to both the Boar 
 of Works, and the Chtu'ch TemporaHties Conimif 
 sioners. 
 
 1684. What you say is that since the publicatioi 
 of your pamphlet a return to the House of Commons 
 dated 7th June, 1880, gives valuable statistics on tht 
 matter ? — Yes. 
 
 1685. Do you think it would be useful or advan- 
 tageous as a rule to create a body of peasant pro- 
 prietary in Ireland ? — I do. I think it would teudt( 
 make jjeople more loyal in countiy places. When i 
 man becomes the owner of a little plot of land of hi: 
 own he looks with different eyes on current events. 
 
 1686. The possession of property makes him wisl 
 to have no disturbance in the country, and to have m 
 change in property — violent change in property 1— 
 Yes. 
 
 1687. Butdo youthinkthat that is feasible as a genera 
 scheme over the whol6 country, or would you preie 
 the creation of a peasant proprietary by giadua 
 means? — I think it would be better by gradua 
 means. 
 
 1688. For instance, by an enlargement and develop 
 ment of the Bright Clauses of the Land Act, rathe 
 than lor the Governmeiit to take and hand over al 
 the fee-simple estates in the country ? — I would b 
 against any wholesale purchase. 
 
 1689. I suppose you consider that those peasan 
 proprietors, in addition to being made more loya 
 themselves, and being contented with a reasonalile ani 
 iau" settlement of property, would be a good exampl 
 to their neighbours? — I think they would. I ma; 
 say with regard to lending on mortgage I would g 
 farther even than the Irish Church Act has gone, 
 would be in favour of a discretion being given to whal 
 ever Board had the administration of affairs to allo\ 
 the whole money to I'emain out on mortgage. 
 
 1690. The O'Conoe Don. — The whole purchast 
 money 1 — The whole purchase-money 
 
 1691. And the whole of it to be given by the Gc 
 vornment ? — Yes, on the same principle that the tithe 
 rentoharge has been sold to owners entirely on credii 
 converted into an annuity spreading over fifty-tw 
 years under the Irish Churcli Act. 
 
 1692. Baron Dowse. — You have some suggestion 
 on page 14 of your pamphlet as to how the capit? 
 is to be obtained for the purpose. You have a schem 
 by which you think the purchase of those small holding 
 can be facilitated ? — -Yes. 
 
 1693. Would you just state to the Commissionei 
 particularly the outlines of that scheme, withou 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 65 
 
 entering too mucli into detail? — I think tliat tlieip 
 are many landed proprietors, svich as proprietors who 
 have bought estates since the Incumbered Estates 
 Act passed, who, having no family associations with 
 their properties, are in a measure thoroughly dis- 
 appointed with their purchases. 
 
 1694. You believe there are some in that position'? 
 — I do, and I think that such parties would be very 
 glad to get a fair value for their estates from a 
 public Board, and be very willing to take State deben- 
 tures in place of purchase-money for them, and I think 
 in that way those estates might be purchased without 
 the Government being embarrassed by having to raise 
 money through the National Debt Commissioners, 
 which they would have to do under ordinary circum- 
 stances. 
 
 1695. Then what do you mean by saying " How is 
 the capital to be obtained for the purposes of the pro- 
 perly constituted body, which is to purchase the es- 
 tates to be sold to the tenantry." This would be some 
 body appointed by the Government 1 — Yes ; some such 
 properly constituted body as that recommended to be 
 appointed in the Report of IMr. Shaw-Lefevre's Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 1696. And then you point out the means by which 
 you think they can get the capital 1 — Yes. 
 
 1697. And you think that that capital can be got 
 by these state debentures 1 — I think if they were 
 guaranteed by the Treasiu-y there would be no doubt. 
 
 1698. But you don't point that out as a mode of ob- 
 taiaing property generally through the country, but 
 particular individual estates that the owners were wil- 
 ling to sell ? — Yes. 
 
 1699. You would not force any proprietor to sell 
 Ills estate 1 — No. 
 
 1700. Do you think the stamp duty and legal ex- 
 1 lenses of conveyance and matters of that kind form 
 an impediment to the spread of peasant proprietors 1 — 
 I think they do, taken in connexion with solicitors 
 bills of costs. 
 
 1701. That is an important item? — It is. 
 
 1702. Is there any way that you suggest by which 
 that could be got rid of? — I think that the Commis- 
 sioners appointed to deal with the tenants might add 
 some small per-centage to the purchase-money, and 
 give the tenants a conveyance without any further 
 charge. A precedent for that will be found in the ac- 
 t ion of the Board of Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues. 
 If you go to redeem a quit or crown rent payable to 
 that Board the purchase-money includes a conveyance 
 wliioh is given to you without any extra charge and no 
 trouble with the solicitor. 
 
 1703. With reference to your own body, the Church 
 Commissioners, when any man bought from you his 
 iiolding, how was that managed ? — At the earlier stages 
 when Mr. Ball was solicitor to the Commissioners, the 
 tenant liad the option of employing either him or his 
 own solicitor ; and there was a low scale of fees for 
 conveyances adopted by the Commissioners, and they 
 did not allow Mr. Ball to charge anything more than 
 those fees. That was intended by the Commissioners 
 more for an advantage to the tenants, so that if they 
 chose to employ their own solicitors they could say to 
 them "We can get the conveyance prepared and 
 completed by the Commissioners' solicitor for us for 
 so much, and we won't pay you any more." I believe, 
 as a matter of fact, this arrangement gave Mr. Ball a 
 monopoly of business, so much so, that when the Com- 
 missioners had an oj)portunity, in 1876, of making a 
 change in their solicitor's department, they prohibited 
 their solicitor from preparing these conveyances alto- 
 gether. It was the action of the Incorporated Law 
 Society, in objecting to the Commissioners' solicitor 
 preparing the conveyances that led the Commissioners 
 to some extent to arrive at that decision. 
 
 1704. Suppose a man was tenant to a See and had 
 twenty acres of land, and that afterwards when the 
 disestablishment of the Church took place and the 
 reversion expectant on his tenancy was vested in the 
 Church Commissioners and they sold it to him under 
 the Church Act, how much would it cost that man, in 
 
 addition to the purchase money proper, for legal ex- Sept- -t, 1880. 
 penses, if the Commissioners' idea had been carried -9(r;iii,.ini L. 
 out ? — The costs would vary according to the amount Bernard, Esq. 
 of the purchase money. The Commissioners at that time 
 notified to each purchaser "that Mr. Ball, their solicitor, 
 was bound to prepare and register each conveyance (if 
 desired by the tenant) and each deed of mortgage at 
 the following fixed charges including everything but 
 stamp duties and ofiice fees ; namely, \\hen the pur- 
 chase-money (lo(« not exceed £200, two guineas, when 
 it exceeds £200 but does not exceed £500, three 
 guineas. The purchaser can however employ his own 
 solicitor to prepare his con\'eyance, should he think 
 proper to do so, in which case there will be no approval 
 fee payable to the solicitor of the Commissioners ; and 
 it was furtlier notified that the mortgage must be pre- 
 pared by the Commissioners' solicitor in every case." 
 
 1705. Now the Church Commissioners, consisting 
 as we know of tlie gentlemen whose names are familiar 
 to us all, thought that was a reasonable pi'oposal ? — 
 They did. 
 
 1700. Do you think it would be a reasonable pro- 
 posal ? — Yes. If it had been carried out in the way 
 they proposed. 
 
 1707. Is there anything to prevent its being carried 
 out now if that properly constituted body had charge 
 of it ? — The woi'k might be done cheaper. 
 
 1708. Mr. Shaw. — The solicitor objected to that 
 scale of charges ? — No ; he did not object to it, but 
 when the. Commissioners framed that scale, particularly 
 with regard to mortgages, they intended that the scale 
 of fees was to be regulated by the amount to be secured 
 by each mortgage, and the way Mr. Ball interpreted it 
 was, that the scale referred to the amount of purchase- 
 money, and that no master what sum a man paid in cash, 
 on account of the price of his holding, the fees for the mort- 
 gage were to be assessed on the total purchase-money. 
 
 1709. Baron Dowse. — I believe that was one of 
 the matters that led to the dispute between the solicitor 
 and the Commissioners 1 — I think it was ; but there 
 was no litigation on that point. 
 
 1710. The O'CoNOE Don. — Did the Incorporated 
 Law Society take any action to induce the Commis- 
 sioners to change their course of proceedings ? — They 
 sent a communication to the Commissioners asking 
 them to prevent their solicitor from doing business for 
 the tenants. 
 
 171 1. Chairman. — That was to prevent his acting in 
 a public capacity, and also in a private capacity ? — Yes. 
 
 1712. Baron Dowse. — But the Commissioners 
 offered to the man who purchased, the option of Mr. 
 Ball being his solicitor ?-— Yes. 
 
 1713. Was the action of the Law Society to pre- 
 vent Mr. Ball doing a thing even if the client was 
 anxious to have it done ? — Yes. The way they put it 
 was that Mr. Ball was taking an advantage of his 
 position to monopolize this class of business. 
 
 1714. The O'CoNOR Don. — Did the Commissioners 
 change the course of proceeding in consequence of this 
 representation from the Law Society ? — They did not 
 for some time until they made a change in their soli- 
 citor's department. Since 1876 the Commissioners' 
 solicitor has not prepared conveyances in any case. 
 
 1715. But you cannot give us a reason why 
 they did make that change? — I think the principal 
 reason was that it gave such dissatisfaction to the legal 
 profession. 
 
 1716. But there was no reason for supposing that 
 course had broken down with regard to the clients ? — 
 No. 
 
 1717. Mr. Shaw. —And the tenants now have only 
 
 to make their own bargain with their own solicitor 1 
 
 Yes. 
 
 1718. The O'CoNOE Don. — You are aware the 
 
 Incorporated Law Society have a scale of charges ? I 
 
 amnot aware of the existence of such a scale, but I 
 believe there is a scale in force for the use 'of the 
 taxing-masters. 
 
 1719. Baron Dowse.— It is sufficient to say that, 
 according to your judgment, the Commissioners' scheme 
 operated beneficially to the tenant ? — It did. 
 
 K 
 
G6 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 4, 1880. 
 
 William L. 
 Bernard, Esq. 
 
 1720. With referencs to the London Companies, I 
 see that yon state that the London Companies and 
 trustees of charities a,nd other lay corporations in Ire- 
 land have altogether more land than the Church Com- 
 missioners 1 — Yes. 
 
 1721. And j'ou see no reason — in point of fact you 
 .are of opinion that these parties should be enabled, or 
 to a certain extent obliged, to sell the land to the 
 tenants ; is not that so 1 — Yes. 
 
 1722. With reference to the question of capital 
 that you told us has to be raised, you suggest the 
 creation of this land stock for that in the way you 
 have already mentioned ? — Yes. 
 
 1723. Mr. SiiAw. — You would requii-e the State's 
 guarantee for that, or would you think the property 
 
 " itself would be sufficient security 1 — I think the p)ro- 
 perty itself ought, perhaps, to be sufficient. 
 
 1724. The O'Conor Don. — And who would collect 
 the annual payments from the person who had pur- 
 chased % — The newly constituted Commission would be 
 the collectors. 
 
 1725. Baron Dowse. — And is this your opinion, 
 " to facilitate the tenants on the estates of the London 
 
 Companies and other lay corporations becoming the 
 proprietors of their holdings, you would suggest that 
 these corporations be required by statute to convey 
 their lands to the administrative body you have 
 referred to % — Yes. 
 
 1726. Upon such terms as might be decided by some 
 impartial tribunal, and be paid the purchase-money of 
 such lands in the stock proposed to be created? — Yes. 
 
 1727. Then with respect to the tenants on other 
 ' estates, you suggest permissive legislation to enable 
 
 owners of land to sell their property direct to the 
 administrative body, in cases where they are willing to 
 ■ receive payment of the value thereof in stock, making 
 due provision for owners under disability ? — Yes. 
 
 1728. Those disabilities would comprise minority 
 and lunacy, and I suppose you would also make pro- 
 vision for owners who are only limited owners as 
 compared with owners in fee 1 — I would. 
 
 1729. You think on the whole that would work 
 well ?— Yes, and I think if the Settled Estates Bill 
 at present before Parliament (Lord Cairns' Bill), or 
 some measure of that kind were passed, a number of 
 difficulties would be removed. 
 
 1730. But in the case of a Corporation there are 
 no difficulties of that kind, nor in the case of owners, 
 who are practically owners in fee if they are willing to 
 sell, there is no difficulty 1 — No. 
 
 1731. The effect of that would be to create a health y 
 body of peasant proprietors throughout the country, 
 that would be advantageous to the proprietors them- 
 selves, and set a good example to their neighbours 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 1732. You give a summary in this very valuable 
 pamjDhlet of yours of your suggestions, you suggest the 
 creation of 3i per cent, land stock 1 — Yes. 
 
 1733. And you'think that would without encroachins; 
 - on the ordinary resources of the nation, provide the 
 
 capital required ? — Yes. 
 
 1734. Then you would suggest charging orders 
 in place of ordinary conveyances and mortgages in the 
 case of sales to tenants, and you would exempt those 
 
 from the ordinary stamp duty as conveyances 1 Yes. 
 
 A simple form of charging order to be printed in each 
 case, like an ordinary Landed Estates Court convey- 
 ance, and executed in duplicate, such form to be 
 framed so as to operate both as a conveyance and a 
 mortgage. 
 
 1735. And you would extend to purchasers the 
 exemption that is allowed to borrowers from buildino- 
 societies? — I would. 
 
 1736. And'the privileges allowed to such borrowers 
 as to re-conveyances on the purchase money secured 
 by mortgage, being paid 1 — I would. 
 
 1737. As to the London Companies, you are aware 
 their land is entirely in the county Londonderry 1 — 
 Yes ; almost entirely so. 
 
 1738. And they are the proprietors of the larger 
 part of that county ? — They are 
 
 1739. Are you aware that some London Compari 
 have lately sold their estates in bulk to individuals ' 
 I am not. 
 
 1740. Are you aware they refused to sell them 
 tenants ? — I never heard that. 
 
 1741. 1 don't know how it is myself, it is onl] 
 rumour, have you ever heard that they refused 
 divide it so as to enable the tenants to get it 1 — I ne'^ 
 heard it. 
 
 1742. But you are aware that one or two Compan: 
 have sold land to a proprietor ? — No. 
 
 1743. Did youhear that Sir Hervey Bruce purchas 
 the Clothworkers' 1 — No. 
 
 1744. Are you aware that lately in the Rolls Con 
 a suit has been instituted for partition between sor 
 Companies as to land they hold jouitly? — I am not. 
 
 1745. As I said already these London Compani 
 are absentees ? — They are. 
 
 1746. But numbers of them are very liberal 
 schools and institutions 1 — They are. 
 
 1747. The Irish Society is one of those Companies yc 
 are aware that owns ppactically the soil of Derry? — Ye 
 
 1748. They spend a great deal of their income in tl 
 locality ? — Yes. 
 
 1749. Did you ever hear that they are not liber 
 in granting leases 1 — I am not acquainted with tl 
 transactions of the Irish Society. 
 
 1750. The ordinary lease that a man would like i 
 build upon in Derry is somewhat different from wht 
 a man would build a house on in the west-end of Loi 
 don ? — Yes. 
 
 1751. And don't you thuik it is not a verypruden 
 thing to introduce London rules into Deny ? — I thin! 
 not. 
 
 1752. Then you are of opinion that these partie.' 
 ought to be obliged whether they like it or not to sell 
 to the tenants? — Yes, I think there are as good 
 reasons for taking the land from those bodies as there 
 were for taking the lands of the bishops and clergy. 
 
 1753. But it is quite a different thing with a privat( 
 landlord who had ancestors and associations connecte( 
 with the locality, you would not force him to sell unles 
 he liked ? — I would not. 
 
 1754. How did you agree with the tenants unde 
 the Church Act as to the sum to be paid ? — The IrisJ 
 Church Act threw the onus on the Commissioners t 
 fix the price of each holding. They sent then- vakif 
 tors to inspect the land and report to the Commi; 
 sioners their opinion as to the value, and the Commii 
 sioners after considering that valuation iixed a pric 
 on each holding, and sent a formal offer by post i 
 each tenant offering him his land at a fixed price, an 
 giving him three months to consider the offer made 
 They also sent him a form of reply to fill up statin 
 that he accepted their offer, which required him'l 
 specify whether he was prepared to pay the whole ( 
 the purchase money in cash or any particular pre 
 portion, and in cases where he proposed to secure 
 part by mortgage the number of instalments he pri 
 posed to extinguish that mortgage by was alwaj 
 required to be stated. 
 
 1755. Then supposing he offered a less price? — TL 
 Commissioners, as a I'ule, would not consider any sue 
 communication. 
 
 1756. They considered that they had fixed a fai 
 price themselves ? — ^Yes. 
 
 1757. Did you find ultimately any great difficult 
 in disposing of the property to the tenants upon th 
 terms suggested ? — No ; when they had the means ( 
 paying for it. At the beginning a great many tenant 
 did not accept the offers of the Commissioners, I believi 
 because they did not understand them, and when tlj 
 Commissioners got through offering all the lands \ 
 the tenants, they, before commencing to sell to ti 
 public, offered a second time to all the tenants who ha 
 been offered their lands in the early stages, with tl 
 result that a large number of them came in and pu 
 chased. 
 
 1 758. And those that did not come in and purchas( 
 — Such lands were sold to the public either by auctio: 
 or by advertising for tenders. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 67 
 
 1759. The Commissioners are bound by Act of 
 Parliament to give a right of pre-emption to the 
 tenants 1 — Yes. 
 
 1760. And you found that worked smoothly enough 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 1761. Your experience then extends over tlie whole 
 of Ireland ■?— Yes. 
 
 ■1762. Because it was See lands and church lands 1 — 
 It was principally glebe lands that had been in the 
 occupation of the clergy that were sold to occupiers. 
 The tenants of see lands chiefly held in perpetuity. 
 
 1762a. That was in every county in Ireland*! — It 
 was of course more in Ulster than any other county. 
 
 1763. Those were what were called the Ulster glebes 
 that the great discussion was abovit in the House of 
 Commons ^ — Yes. 
 
 1764. The O'Conoe Don. — Was not the vast ma- 
 jority in Ulster'? — It was. 
 
 1765. Baron Dowse. — But there were some in 
 other parts of Ireland"! — They were scattered all over 
 the country. 
 
 1766. Did you find the Ulster tenants more willing, 
 to deal than the others ] — I think they were all willing 
 to deal. 
 
 1767. Did you take into account at all, when you 
 were making the ofier to the Ulster tenants, that any 
 of them were entitled to any interest in the land under 
 the tenant-right custom] — I cannot answerthatqiiestion. 
 
 1768. After all what you were selling to them was 
 your interest, and that was subject to whatever right 
 of tenancy they had themselves 1 — Yes. As regards 
 perpetuity tenures under the Ecclesiastical laws, I 
 am desirous of calling attention to the difference that 
 exists as regards "apportionments " between that class 
 of tenure and fee-farm grant tenures. In the case of a 
 perpetuity tenant having a holding sublet to under- 
 tenants, he might sell his interest to the respective 
 occupiers subject to a pro rata proportion of the per- 
 petuity rent, and there was no difficulty in his rent 
 being so apportioned. If I hold an estate in fee-farm, 
 and I want to sell to my tenants, I cannot apportion 
 the fee-farm rent payable, and it always seemed to 
 me very strange that a perpetual tenancy under an 
 ecclesiastical landlord should be treated differently as 
 regards " apportionments," in case of division or sale, 
 from a fee-farm tenancy held under a lay landlord, 
 pursuant to Renewable Leasehold Conversion Act. 
 
 1769. CiiAiEMAN. — Under the ecclesiastical law, do 
 you mean under the Act 1 — A see estate in perpetuity 
 under Act of William IV. 
 
 1770. Baron Dowse. — What do you mean by per- 
 petuity, do you mean having bought the fee from the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners 'i — Having boiight the 
 fee but holding subject to a perpetual rent under the 
 Church Temporalities Act. 
 
 1771. And that can be apportioned t — That rent can 
 be apportioned. 
 
 1772. Thatisby statute?— Yes. 
 
 1 773. But a fee-farm rent cannot be apportioned ? — 
 It cannot. Under some special circumstances it can be 
 apportioned where land is sold in the Landed Estates 
 Court ; but as a rule it is not practicable to apportion 
 ijuch a rent unless the estate is sold in the Land 
 Court. 
 
 1774. ChaieHan. — You think that distinction ought 
 to be abolished 1 — I think so. There are such a large 
 number of middlemen holding land in Ireland that if 
 you come to carry out a peasant jjroprietary scheme 
 you will find yourself blocked in many cases by fee- 
 farm grants and it is most desirable that these fee-farm 
 rents should be apportionable as an absolute right and 
 that a man holding in fee-farm and having two or more 
 tenants under him should be able to sell to these ten- 
 ants subject to the fee-farm rent divided ^ro rato over 
 their holdings. . ' '■ 
 
 1775. Baron Dowse. — Under the old Ecclesiastical 
 Commissioners when there was a sale of the perpetuity 
 there was power to sell a part and apportion the rest 
 and then the Ecclesiastical Commissioners got two 
 payments instead of one 1 — Two or more. 
 
 1776. But that was done fcy the statute of Wiffiaan 
 
 and the Renewable Leasehold Conveisiuu Act did not Sejit. 4, iseo. 
 contemplate that case 1 — No. William L. 
 
 1777. And when they sell in the Landed Estates Beraaid, Esa. 
 Court they sometimes sell indemnified against the 
 
 charge ? — Yes ; but I believe that lias been a serious 
 obstacle to the tenants purchasing. 
 
 1778. May not that distinction have arisen from 
 the differeij-t nature of the properties with which the 
 parties were diialing? — It may, but in selling them 
 there oughtj to be some way of compuLsorily dividing 
 fee-farm rents. 
 
 1779. Under the old system before the Church was 
 disestablished when a man was tenant under a lease, 
 to a Bishop, for 21 years, it strictly speaking in 
 point of law it was only a 21 years' lease, but the Bishop 
 generally speaking let it at a low I'ate and renewed it 
 every year getting a fine sometimes equal to the rent, 
 but he might if he chose run his own life against the 
 lease, the effect of which would be that if it drojjped 
 he would get the land at the end of 21 years. But 
 they recognized a sort of property in the lessee the 
 effect of which was that it enabled him to acquire 
 the fee by dealing with the Commissioners direct and to 
 divide the rent if he sold it to another party ? — Yes. 
 
 1780. But dealing with the property of the leasee 
 of lives renewable for ever, a private uidividual if 
 the parties choose is entitled by proceeding in the 
 Court of Chancery to acquire a fee-iarni grant, and he 
 has to give the landlord compensation for the loss of 
 his reversion and he has also to give him some com- 
 pensation for other matters, and he is not allowed to 
 apportion that rent, is that the distinction ? — It is. 
 
 1779a. The O'Conor Don. — Do you propose that it 
 should be apportioned, or that it should be placed upon 
 one lot, and the others indemnified ? — Whatever 
 course would be most convenient ; but I would like to 
 have it in a way that an owner, in fee-farm, of land 
 may deal with his property without going into the 
 Landed Estates Court. 
 
 1780a. Baron Dowse. — There is no doubt about 
 this — if I held 100 acres under a fee-farm grant, 
 subject to a rent of £50 a year, I, might sell it to 50 
 people ; but any one of the 50 would be liable for the 
 whole rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 1781. Are these matters at present what many say 
 they are : a barrier 1 — Yes. 
 
 1782. A barrier to the creation of a peasant pro- 
 prietary on the fee-farm grant estates 1 — Yes ; and 
 there is such a large proportion of the land in Ireland 
 held that way that it is a subject cannot be left aside. 
 
 1783. It is a common tenure in Ireland? — Yes; 
 and I don't think the subject has ever been con- 
 sidered before any Parliamentary Committee. 
 
 1784. The O'Conok Don. — Doesn't the rent in 
 these fee-farm cases generally amount to a small por- 
 tion of the fee-farm estate 1 — Yes. , 
 
 1785. Do you think it would Fe fait' to the owner 
 of the head rent to make it divisible amongst this 
 number of persons ? — I do not see why he should be 
 placed in a different position from the owner of a 
 Church estate. If it was considered right by the Legis- 
 lature to put one class into that position, I do not see 
 why the same should not be done in the case of the 
 other larger class. 
 
 _ 178G. Baron Dowse. — One is dealing with ecclesias- 
 tical estates where the rent is higher than in the 
 other t — Yes. 
 
 1787. Mr. Shaw.— If the rent is small there would 
 be no difficulty in putting it into one lot — it is only 
 in case it is large you divide it 1- Yes ; but if I have 
 an estate and sell it to some tenants, making one of 
 them responsible for the' wJiole of the rent, the owner 
 may not be pleased; he may ^o to any part of the 
 land he likes, to demand the entire rent. 
 
 1788. Baron Dowse.— It would appear that, instead ■ 
 
 of dividing it, it could be thrown; on one portion 1 In 
 
 the vast majority of cases it could jiot be thrown on 
 one portion. It would have been much easier to have 
 thrown it on one portion in Church easee than in any 
 other cases. 
 
 1789. Mr. Shaw.- 
 
 -Bo you think the fee-farm reats 
 K 2 
 
GS 
 
 ir.LSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. i, IS80. 
 
 William L. 
 Bernard, Esq. 
 
 are, as a rule, iiny thing nns,: Ihe value of the holding ■! — 
 I think, talving them all round, they would probably be 
 something like from one-third to two-thirds of the Poor 
 Law valuation. 
 
 1790. I would not think so at alH — In the county 
 Dublin, at any rate, they are. At the same time, I 
 should say in explanation that it is very hard to es- 
 timate what they are, there are so many different 
 classes of fee-farm tenures. 
 
 1791. You cannot lay down any general rule 1 — No. 
 
 1792. Was there any effort made on the part of the 
 Churcli body in cases tenants did not agree to the 
 price to arrange it by arbitration 1 — No. 
 
 1793. I suppose there was some principle on which 
 they valued these holdings ; did they send valuers 1 — 
 They sent valuers to visit the lands and to report upon 
 them. 
 
 1793a. And where the lands were valued, were the 
 tenants' improvements excluded from the valuation 1 — 
 I could not answer that question. 
 
 1794. What proportion of these lands were sold by 
 auction 1 — About one-third were sold by aaction or by 
 public tender. 
 
 1796. And there was no effort whatever to arrange 
 the price by arbitration? — No, the Act did not require it. 
 
 1796. In cases where the tenants applied for infor- 
 mation as to the grounds of the valuation, were 
 there any answers given, or were facilities afforded 1 — 
 As a rule there was not. 
 
 1797. I know in one case I applied m3'self in a case I 
 knew to be one of great hardship, and I got a very 
 curt answer from the Commissioners. They would 
 not give me the slightest information, and the whole 
 property of the tenant, to the extent of thousands, was 
 sacrificed ? — It was impossible for the Commissioners 
 to re-investigate the details of every case, and the 
 tenants had do right of appeal to arbitration. The 
 Church Commissioners, as a rule, did not apj)i-ove of 
 the arbiti'ation clauses, having regard to the way they 
 liad worked in connection v.'itli the compensation 
 sections of the Church Act. In i'aet those clauses 
 almost invariably worked contraiy to the iutei-esfs 
 of the Church Surplus Fund. 
 
 1798. But do you not think they might have made 
 some effoit to satisfy the natural objections the tenant 
 would make to a valuation? — I must say this, lliat 
 whenever a statement was made showing to their 
 satisfaction that the valuation was excessive the Com- 
 misioners always reconsidei :d the \'aluatiou and in 
 many cases they did reduce the price. 
 
 1799. In this case the tenant had built a valuable 
 house ; had made all the improvements on the farm, 
 and had his farm in first rate order, and this farm 
 with all its improvements was put up for sale against 
 the 'tenant by public auction, and he could get no satis- 
 faction or explanation as to the grounds of the valua- 
 tion put upon it 1. — I am not familiar with the precise 
 particulars of the case referred to. 
 
 1 800. Baron Dowse. — This must be admitted that 
 the Church Commissioners represent the surplus fund 
 — the landlord formerly — and therefore they had his 
 interest to look after, but the new body — these 
 Church Commissioners will soon be dead and when 
 dead, I supjjnse their duties are at an end — but 
 the new body that you contemplate would not re- 
 present the landlord more than the tenant, and it 
 \\'(juld be their duty to do what is fair to the tenant, 
 and they would not be looking to any surplus fund 1 — 
 I think they would have an easier duty to perform. 
 
 1801. If an estate was vested in them and they 
 were called upon to sell out the property they would 
 iiave no interest in adding in the improvements ? — No. 
 
 1802. Chaieman. — Your suggestion is one Com- 
 mission to manage the whole systeili of sales to the 
 peasantry 1 — Yes. 
 
 1803. That Commission following the Church Com- 
 mission system as far as it has been successful and 
 possessing their powers as much as possible ? — Yes. 
 
 1 804. With such amendments as you have suggested 
 or with any other suggestions that might be made to 
 make them still more practicable ?-- 1 think it would 
 
 be important that when a holding is offered to 
 tenant such Commission should be in a position to se 
 we don't want any money at all from you. 
 
 1805. Giving the tenant the option? — Yes, so thi 
 the Commission might say, we will take any mone 
 you can give, or if you cannot give any of the pu 
 chase-money we will convert the whole into a te 
 minable annuity — into any number of years yo 
 choose not exceeding forty-one years. 
 
 1806. Not exceeding forty-one years? — The reaso 
 I say forty-one is that I am in favour of the adoptio 
 of a 4 per cent, table, with a view to create a sufficien 
 margin between the interest payable on the debenture 
 and that piayable on the charging orders, to pay th 
 working expenses of the Administrative Body, am 
 provide for contingencies. 
 
 1807. Would it be with the view of keeping th 
 payments down to the present rent? — As near a 
 possible to the present rent 
 
 1808. The O'Conor Don.— Would that not depem 
 on the amount of purchase-money given? — I have pu 
 the matter in this way in my pamphlet : — 
 
 " I would suggest forty-one years as the exh-eme limit foi 
 terminable annuities. An annuityfor that period would be ex 
 actly equal to the gross rent where the purchase-money wai 
 twenty years purchase, and would be advanced in amount bj 
 one-t-wcntieth part for every additional year's purchase or in 
 other words be 5 per cent, on the purciiase money." 
 
 1809. You say you would in cases allow the whole 
 of the purchase-money to be advanced by the Treasury ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 1810. These would be selected cases jierhapsi — 
 Well I think there might be some limit made where 
 such a course would not be adopted. 
 
 1811. Mr. Shaw. — You would leave it to the 
 judgment of the Commissioners? — Yes, to the judg- 
 ment of the Conmdssioners. 
 
 1812. Chaik:man. — According to the character and 
 the circumstances of the person ap[>lying ] — Yes. 
 
 1813. With respect to what are called the Bright 
 Clauses, in the evidence before Mr. Lefevre's Com- 
 mittee there are several cases mentioned of failure — 
 do you happen to know whether these difficulties have 
 been ob\'iated since that time? — Xo, I am not aware 
 of any of them having been obviated since. 
 
 1814. Not as to the question of the priority oi 
 charges — are they still compelled to give priority tc 
 every charge that exists? — Yes. There has been no 
 legislation whatever on the report of Mr. Shaw 
 Lefevre's Committee. 
 
 181-5. Nor has there been any order of the Treasury ' 
 — No ; I am not aware of any change having been made, 
 
 1816. How are the payments collected for the 
 Church Commissioners? — By means of receivable 
 orders through the Bank of Ireland or its branches ; ir 
 the case of the towns in which there is no branch oi 
 the Bank of Ireland, the Bank of Ireland has ar 
 arrangement with whatever bank is in that town tc 
 leceive the money. 
 
 1817. Then there is no collection on the spot ? — Nc 
 collection on the spot. 
 
 1818. Are there e\ei' visits by persons employed h) 
 the Commissioners to go down to see the estates- 
 inspectors ? — There are inspectors, but they are no 
 specially employed for the purpose of inspecting lands 
 that have been sold — sometimes when inspectini 
 unsold holdings they have visited holdings adjoining 
 that A\ere sold by the Commissioners previously, 
 
 1819. Then there is no arrangement for any reporl 
 if there is deterioration? — No, there are no specia 
 arrangements. 
 
 1820. Do you think if it was more general it wouh 
 answer to have something of the sort 1 — Yes. 
 
 1821. Mr. Shaw. — Are the payments made regu 
 larly? — They are very punctually made. There ii 
 one othei- matter T wished to call attention to — abou. 
 valuatioji.;. In case you are dealing with owners o 
 property «'bo wish to sell their estates, i think then 
 would be a great difficulty in fixing the value of theii 
 respective properties. The tenement valuation is noi 
 reliable in many places, and under the Act of 18.5' 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 69 
 
 improvements not seven years execnted are not taken 
 into account therein. 
 
 1822. Baron Dowse. — Wouldn't tliat have to be a 
 matter of agreement. If he is one of those men who 
 sell at their own accord you would have to agree with 
 him as to the price, but in reference to forced sales 
 you would have some means of fixing it 1 — Yes, and 
 whether the Arbitration Board would be the best or 
 not I do not know. 
 
 1823. The O'Conoe Don. — You have no particular 
 scheme on that points — No, except that I think the 
 ordinary arbitration tribunals would not be good 
 tribunals. 
 
 1824. Baron Dowse. — That is the one appointed 
 under the Lands Clauses Act "i — Yes. 
 
 1825. When public works are being executed 1 — Yes. 
 
 1826. When there would arise a question under the 
 Lands Clauses Act it is principally whether they should 
 give him something extra for eompvilsory sale 1 — Yes. 
 
 1827. Would you give these Cu]-porations anything 
 extra for compulsory sale ? — No. 
 
 1828. You think they should be compelled to sell 
 to private persons as a question of public policy, and 
 as a question of public good 1 — Yes. 
 
 1829. And if they had an opportunity oi investing 
 their money they wovild be as well off as if they kept 
 the land ?— Yes. 
 
 1830. And better in some respects than if they kept 
 it '?_Yes. 
 
 1831. But if they disagreed there should be some Sept. 4, i&so. 
 means of arranging the price 1 — Yes ; and I would -yyaii^^L. 
 suppose that an impartial tribunal, constituted some- Bernard, Esq. 
 thing like the Court in a land travei'se case would be 
 
 much better than the ordinary arbitration tribunal. 
 
 1832. The land traverse case is only part of the 
 ordinary arbitration. When a public company want to 
 take land for public purposes such as for water works 
 they serve notice, and afterwards it comes before the 
 Government arbitrator ; the parties are examined and 
 their witnesses, and then if either party is dissatisfied 
 they can go before the judge with a land travei.se, and 
 have it tried by the jirdge and a juryl — Yes. 
 
 1833. Chairman. — As to expenses, do you think 
 it advisulile that all the expenses should be included in 
 the pui'cliase money 1 — I do, and I think the charging 
 order in each case should be piinted like an ordinary 
 Landed Estates Coui't conveyance. 
 
 183-1 . Baion Dowse. — So that all you would require 
 to put in would be the acres, the number and the 
 price ■? — If the type was up there would be no diffi- 
 culty in having those particulars also printed. 
 
 1835. Chaikman. — You think it should be so ar- 
 ranged that the price would not be increased con- 
 sideiably where the title to the property sold was more 
 involved than in another case 1 — I think a very trifling 
 per-C'ciitage on the purchase-money would keep the 
 Commission quite safe for the expenses of con- 
 veyancing. 
 
 Mr. Samuel Joseph 
 
 1836. The O'CoNOR Don. — You were an income-tax 
 surveyor 1 — Yes. 
 
 1837. What parts of Ireland have you discharged 
 your duties in 1 — In the counties of Gal way. Mayo, 
 parts of Eosoommon, Tyrone, Fermanagh, Leitrim, 
 Donegal, a small portion of Monaghan and a large 
 portion of the county Cavan. 
 
 1838. What were your duties as such ?— A portion 
 of the duties were to obtain copies of the rate-books 
 from the clerks of the unions containing the ratings in 
 each union. The income-tax is assessed upon that 
 valuation. 
 
 1839. And do you obtain any returns from the 
 landlords 1- -Yes ; the landlords furnish returns in 
 order to have the taxes reduced in all cases v/here the 
 rent is under the valuation. 
 
 1840. Would your duties in connexion with this 
 matter give you an opportunity to ascertain in a rough 
 way the per-centage of the rent over the valuation 1 — 
 Certainly, sir, because in ever}' case of a tenant 
 farmer who claimed to be exempt from income-tax I 
 had to obtain the rent and the valuation, because if 
 the rent were over the valuation his income would be 
 only assumed to be one-thu-d the valuation ; if the 
 rent were under the valuation, his income would be 
 one-third of the valuation and also the ownership 
 between the valuation and the rent. 
 
 1841. Would that not only apply to the larger class 
 of tenants who are liable to income-tax 1 — Yes. Still 
 from being in communication with the poor-rate col- 
 lectors, who are in many cases income-tax collectors 
 also, and who are usually small farmers, say up to 
 £100 valuation, and being in constant intercourse with 
 them on business, and from going to every part of the 
 country, I had an oppcrtunity of knowing the rent 
 and valuation of small farmers. 
 
 1842. And what would you say is the result of your 
 experience as to the proportion of rent over valuation ? 
 — I found, especially in the union of Loughrea, that 
 very frequently the rent was double the valuation. 
 
 1843. Mr. Shaw. — Do you mean 200 per cent. 1 — 
 Double ; that is, a farm valued at £100 would let at a 
 rent of ^200. I have seen cases in Clifden, Oughterard, 
 union where it was four times the valuation ; but that 
 was the case of a mountain farm, where the mountain 
 would only, perhaps, be valued at £12 or £14 in 
 Griffith's valuation, and might be let for grazing at 
 £35 or £40 ; but I found in the union of Loughrea, 
 
 Allen examined. Mr. Samuel 
 
 in fact, in all the Gal way unions, that the rent varies "^"^^P- ™* 
 so much that the valuation is no guide whatever. 
 
 1844. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think that the 
 rent in these unions is, relatively to the value of the 
 land, much higher than in other parts of Ireland 1 — 
 Decidedly. For in the North — in the counties of 
 Tyrone, Fermanagh, and parts of Donegal that came 
 into the Ulster settlement, and portion of Monaghan 
 — the general rule is that the rent is about equal to 
 the valuation; and, in my district, I had 11,000 cases 
 of the rent being under the valuation in these counties. 
 
 1845. In the North of Ireland ?— Yes. 
 
 1846. But I am asking you, not in connexion with 
 the valuation, but in connexion with the real value 
 of the land, whether the land in Galway and the West 
 generally is much higher let than the land of the North 
 of Ireland t — I would not say in a great many cases it 
 is higher let ; but what I principally point out is that 
 the valuation, as it stands in the West of Ireland 
 especially, is really no guide to the letting value. 
 
 1847. The valuation in the West of Ireland, as con- 
 trasted with the real letting value, is much lower than 
 the valuation in the North?- — Yes. 
 
 1848. ]Mr. Shaw. — Does that refer to poor lands, or 
 did you find it the same with the rich lands 1 — T found 
 it apply to vei-y first-class land about Ballinasloe. For 
 instance, at Loughrea, Ballinasloe, Mountbellcw, Por- 
 tumna, and Tuam there is land as good as in the North 
 of Ireland. 
 
 1849. And the valuation is out of proportion ? — Yes. 
 
 1850. It is valued higher in the North? — Yes. 
 
 1851. Is it graziD2 l:.zi1 — A great proportion of 
 it grazing ; but in /he unions of Tuam and Clare- 
 morri^s there is a 'x.' -c-'erable amount of tillage. 
 
 1852. The difference is the same there ? — Yes. 
 
 1853. The O'Coxor Don.— Do you think mountain 
 land was valued very low also ?— Decidedly. The valua- 
 tion of mountain land is low, as when it was valued, I 
 believe, the mountains extending from Westport to 
 Galway Bay, were comparatively valueless ; but after 
 that the price of cattle increased so much that these 
 mountain farms became very valuable. 
 
 1854. Chairman. — These are mountain grazings in 
 connexion with enclosures in the land below ?— No 
 sir ; what they usually do with these mountains is 
 principally to feed cattle and sheep upon them until 
 they are fit to bring to market, and they are purchased 
 and taken into better parts of Ireland to fatten. 
 
70 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 4, ISSO, 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 Joseph Allen. 
 
 1S55. And are they cliarged so much an acre for 
 grazing, and they have land below to bring the cattle 
 down to in winter-time 1 — No ; in these cases, with 
 the hardy cattle, they keep them on the mountains all 
 the year round. 
 
 1856. Baron Dowse. — Are these mountain grazings 
 connected with arable land below? — No, quite sepa- 
 rate. There are several men who have become rather 
 rich men in that line of the west. They took a whole 
 mountain — the Twelve Pins of Connemara and others 
 — one man will graze a whole mountain, and will have 
 a herd at the foot of the mountain, with a few acres 
 of arable land, and the occupier has no land whatever 
 except what is grazing this stock. 
 
 1857. From whom do they take these mountains — 
 from farmers or landlords ? — The Law Life Company 
 own nearly thewholeof the mountain district, extending 
 from Galway Bay until it reaches Clifden, and in the 
 interior the Law Life Company own the Twelve Pins. 
 There is no other very extensive owner of mountains 
 until you come to the mountains of the Marquis of 
 Sligo, and they run from that to Westport. 
 
 1858. Have these proprietors kept these in their own 
 hands and notletthem to tenants except for the purpose 
 of grazing 1 — Entirely. 
 
 1859. Li Donegal, I think, you will find these 
 mountains are usually appurtenances to the low -lying 
 grounds and the tenants have the right of grazing in 
 common over them 1 — I found a case in Donegal, in the 
 Union of Ballyshannon, where a large tract of land was 
 held under an old lease; there was one case in particular 
 where there were twenty-two tenants having some kind 
 of interest under an old lease, and having the mountain 
 in common, that is twenty-two holdings scattered about 
 and each of them had a right of grazing on the moun- , 
 tain ; but from the Marquis of Sligo's to the Law Life 
 property, the whole property is held direct from the 
 owner. 
 
 1860. The O'Cos-oK Don. — By various tenants? — 
 Generally by grazing farmers. 
 
 1861. Baron Dowse. — Do you know whether these 
 landlords got it by eviction or was it never the property 
 of these, tenants ? — A great deal of Lord Lucan's and 
 the Mai-quis of Sligo's was got by eviction. I believe 
 there is one tract of mountain there held by Captain 
 Hoiiston, I should say roughly he has from 20,000 to 
 30,000 acres of these mountains. On these mountains 
 and on the whole of the Eriff valley, by the Eriif river, 
 along from Westport to Leenane, yon come upon 
 extensive traces of evictions along the river bank. 
 These tenants had extensive mountain grazing, and 
 these were evicted. 
 
 1862. And then the land was let in large holdings 1 — 
 Captain Houston's, I should think, you could go, with- 
 out exaggeration, twelve miles from where you meet 
 the first mountain, to where his grazing ends ; when 
 you are at Eriff mountains on the left hand, I am told 
 that from Erifi' bridge you could go twelve or fourteen 
 Irish miles, and all that grazing is managed by about 
 fourteen or sixteen herds. 
 
 186.3. The O'Conor Don.— Has there been much 
 tendency to consolidate farms in the west of Ireland 
 since you became officially connected with it ? — Since 
 I have known it in 1869, there has been a tendency, 
 but not on a large scale. I saw where that was an iii- 
 evitable tendency. 
 
 1864. But before 1869, and immediately after the 
 famine? — The famine was in 1846 or 1847, but there 
 is that inevitable tendency. Take any of the Unions 
 of Galway. For some reason or other, if an owner 
 gets a farm into his hands, through any cause, 
 and there was competition for it, he naturally 
 would prefer to let it to a large grazing farmer, 
 where his rent would be paid by cheque, than to 
 let it to a man who intended to farm and work it. So 
 much so, that there is one case, without mentioning 
 names, of a gentleman near Loughrea, who was on 
 relief works in 1846, and now, I should think, he 
 grazes up to 2,500 acres of good land. 
 
 1865. Mr. Shaw.— "W'ha-tdo you mean by his 'being 
 on the relief works ; do you mean labouring?— Working 
 
 as a labouring man. There was another man ; h€ 
 a small public house and fai-m in a village near Ba 
 sloe, that man by taking farm after farm is now ] 
 in the Mansion House, farming — 'he told me hims 
 about 1,000 acres of grazing. 
 
 1866. Of grazing ?— Yes ; he tills about t went: 
 acres for oats and potatoes, entirely for his ovnx x' 
 the grazing. 
 
 1867. Baron Dowse. — The farms these men oc 
 were formerly held by tenants? — Yes. 
 
 1868. Where are they gone? — The great .bul 
 them have disappeared either by emigi'ation or 
 flocked to the larger towns. 
 
 1869. Or were pushed into the mountains 
 do not think that they were, because when evici 
 and distress came, in these times, on men in ■ 
 good farms in Eoscommon or Galway they never w 
 think of going to the mountains, for the distress in 
 mountain districts was absolutely worse. 
 
 1870. Mr. Shaw. — This is in the last few yean 
 I am speaking of 1869. 
 
 1871. The O'Conor Don.— Do I understand ■ 
 these gentlemen got possession of the farms, and i 
 the eviction of the previous tenants took place s 
 1870?— No prior to 1870. 
 
 1872. But since 1870 has it come within y 
 knowledge that there has been any very great num 
 of farms consolidated? — Well, the number has. 
 been great, but I found it invariably the rule t 
 whenever a farm was in the market, if it was a a, 
 grazing farm, it was sure to be obtained by a w 
 to-do grazier, who had other land. 
 
 1873. What is your opinion as to the tendency 
 the Land Act, has it had a tendency to consoJidati 
 or otherwise or no particular tendency one way or t 
 other?— I do not think the Land Act has a te 
 dency to consolidation, except so far as it had 
 tendency in this way, that where a holding of 50 
 80 acres in one small farm is to let you would pre! 
 to let it to a man who was an extensive grazier, a 
 would keep it as grazing land rather than to a man \v 
 might lay out money on it, and from whom it mis 
 be troublesome to get it again. You would be satist 
 the grazier would not improve it. 
 
 1874. You are not able to say whether consolidat 
 has gone on more since 1870 than between 1860 i 
 18v0? — The consolidation between 1860 and li 
 was far greater than since. 
 
 1875. Bai-on Dowse.— What do you attribute t 
 *o ^ — I think myself evictions were not so numerc 
 
 1876. Do you think the Land Act by compensat 
 the party for e-^dctions in moneys numbered had : 
 tendency to check evictions ? — Most decidedly. 
 
 1877. It had a tendency to check evictions?— M 
 decidedly. There are a great many proprietors in 
 west, excluding large ones, and even including Is 
 ones, who would not .wish to have to pay any mo 
 down. 
 
 1878. One would think once or twice, or e 
 thrice, before they brought the tenant and the fi 
 into the market?— Yes. Many of them are not ^ 
 off; they have many responsibilities ; there 
 mortgages and bm-dens upon the land. It has I 
 alleged that the Land Act led to consolidation beca 
 men preferred one large tenant to anumber of small o: 
 
 1879. But he should have to pay the small one 
 get rid of them, before he could have the large tena 
 —Yes ; but what I wish to be understood as saj 
 IS this : that where for any reason a small farm co. 
 into the landlord's hands, he is more likely, irresijec 
 of the Land Act, to take a large, weJUo-do ten 
 than a small one. 
 
 1880. The O'Conor Dox.-And he was so be 
 the passing of the Act?-I take it, his own intei 
 ^.1thout any Land Act, would impel him to do so. 
 
 1881. Baron Dowse.— But if he could get ric 
 the small tenant before, and take a large one is o 
 pensationto the small tenant not a groat check ^-"^ 
 it is, no doubt, a gi-eat check 
 
 1682. The O'e0N0ED.N. -Have von tad any 
 perience of tenamts who purchased their holdini-s 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 71 
 
 I was in the north at the time of the sale by the 
 Church Commissioners, and every one of these 
 cases came under my notice ; I had to procure a list 
 of every sale for my own purpose from the Church 
 Commissioners in Dublia showing the annual instal- 
 ments, because in the Church Act there was a schedule 
 attached showing the portion of the income-tax to be 
 deducted . according to the number of instalments, 
 twenty or thirty or forty years, and, therefore, I had 
 to get a complete list. 
 
 - 1883. Did you find any anxiety amongst the 
 occupiers to become purchasers'! — The greatest anxiety. 
 
 1884. Can you give any evidence of how they 
 turned out since they became owners 1 — I was meeting 
 them almost every day, and in the majority of cases 
 either themselves or relatives had sufficient money 
 saved up to advance the necessary proportion to the 
 Commissioners, and any of them who did not purchase 
 failed to do so through some inability which they 
 greatly regretted. In fact, there was one case, I think 
 there were two townlands, where the tenants 
 petitioned Mr. J. G. V. Porter, of Belleisle, and 
 they were so anxious that he purchased holdings for 
 them, and gave them leases at the same terms as if 
 they had purchased from the Commissioners. 
 
 1885. Was that in Fermanagh? — Yes, ia Fer- 
 managh. There was no part of Ireland more numerous 
 in sales than the part I was in. 
 
 1886. And have you been down there since they 
 became owners? — Yes, I was there for years afterwards. 
 
 1887. Did you see any difierence in the condition of 
 the land — is the general face of the oouniry im- 
 proved 1 — Generally speakiug, that part of the country, 
 in fact, all the Church lands in the north of Ireland 
 were very well farmed, with good, comfortable houses, 
 according to the extent of the farm; but I must 
 say there seemed to be the greatest willingness and 
 wish on the part of the tenants to work hard .and live 
 frugally in order to pay back. 
 
 1888. And no desire to repudiate the annual pay- 
 ment ■? — Dealing with hiindreds of them, I never heard 
 such a thing thought of. 
 
 1889. Baron Dowse. — They are satisfied with being 
 proprietors t — Very much satisfied. 
 
 1890. Chairman. — Looking forward to the time 
 when they won't have any further payments to make? 
 — Most anxious to comply with every condition. 
 
 1891. The O'CoxoB Don.^ — I see in the notes you 
 sent in that in Tyrone there was always a large num- 
 ber of perpetuity owners — to whom do you refer 1 — 
 There are in Tyrone a considerable number of small 
 proprietors. 
 
 1892. Who existed there before ? — Yes. 
 
 1893. Baron Dowse. — Holding under leases for lives 
 renewable for ever 1 — Yes, and freehold. 
 
 1894. The O'Conoe Don. — Who are the actual 
 tillers of the soil ? — In most cases the proprietors, and 
 that is what makes the north and the west different — 
 the man iu the north works his farm. 
 
 1895. And have these men power to subdivide their 
 holduio-s 1 — Except ia one or two cases I never looked 
 at the fee-farm grants, but I believe they have. 
 
 1896. And has subdivision gone on there, as a 
 matter of fact, to any great extent, or more than in 
 any other parts of Ireland ? — I do not believe sub- 
 division is common in the north, becaiise the sons 
 usually take on to shopkeeping, or many of them 
 emigi-ate or go to Belfast and other large centres. 
 
 1897. And where these perpetuity owners exist you 
 did not find a tendency to divide the land amongst the 
 family ? — No. 
 
 1898. Baron Dowse.— They generally endeavoured 
 to give theii- sons an education, and then they go to 
 push their fortunes for themselves — isn't that so? — Yes. 
 
 1899. The O'Conoe Don. — According to your ex- 
 perience, are there many leases given in the parts of 
 Ireland with which you are connected ? — The leases 
 throughout Gal way and Mayo are very few ; I had the 
 best opportunity of judging of that, for I took stock of 
 rtamps annually in the'hands of the Head Distributor 
 .n the county, and therefore I was able to judge of the 
 
 number of -stamps sold, and I have gone over the same S^pt.*, isso.. 
 lists^quarter after quarter. _ Mr.,sl^«cl 
 
 lyuu. And the number of leases is very small ? — Joseph Allen. 
 Very trifling. 
 
 1901. Do yoa think they have increased or di- 
 minished since the passing of the Land Act ? — I think 
 since the passing of the Act very few have been 
 granted, but I do not think before that there was any 
 great desire on the part of the landlord to give leases,- 
 
 1902. Does the tenant care to take it? — I think he 
 would if he got it at what he would consider a fair rent. 
 All throughout the west there is the greatest anxiety 
 to have an agreement or something that would give 
 more than a half-yearly tenancy. 
 
 1903. You think in the west they would prefer a 
 lease, although not of long duration, than a tenancy 
 from year to year? — Yes, even if it was only three 
 years ; I never met a tenant-farmer, in the north or 
 west, who would not desire a lease. 
 
 1904. Do you attribute the fact that they are not 
 numerous to the unwillingness of landlords to grant 
 them ? — Yes. 
 
 1904a. Do your remarks with regard to leases 
 apply to the Ulster counties with which you are 
 connected as well as those in Connaught ? — I would 
 say there is no farmer, large or small, I have ever 
 met, who would not greatly desire a lease. 
 
 1905. Baron Dowse. — In Ulster would he give up 
 his tenant-right for a lease ? — I am not prepared to 
 go so far as that. As far as I see, especially taking 
 the county Fermanagh, there is Lord Enniskillen, 
 Sir Victor Brooke, Lord Erne^ and the Archdalls, 
 and, practically, they own the whole county. 
 
 1906. And are they good landlords? — Yes. The 
 tenants are very comfortable, and 1 never heard of any 
 dissatisfaction, but the reason the tenants would not 
 look for or apply for a lease is that they are not 
 offered it, and no tenant would wish to ask the agent 
 or landlord for what he thought was not the custom 
 on the estate. 
 
 1907. Doesn't tenant-right exist on all these 
 estates ? — Yes, practically in all these properties in 
 the north. There is no fear of any evictions. 
 
 1908. The O'Conoe, Don.— But both in the north 
 and west leases are quite uncommon ? — Yes, any leases 
 that exist are usually old leases, either renewable for 
 evei-, or, a few of them, thirty-one years or three lives. 
 
 1909. You think leaseholders are better off than 
 yearly tenants under the existing law ? — Decidedly. 
 
 1910. In what way? — Inasmuch as leaseholders 
 have security. 
 
 1911. Security for the duration of his lease? — Yes. 
 
 1912. And suppose the lease is not a very long 
 one ? — Then he knows exactly what to do during the 
 time of his lease. 
 
 1913. Baron Dowse. — Where there is no tenant- 
 right existing he is better ofi' you think with a lease ? 
 — Yes, decidedly. 
 
 1914. The O'Conor Don. — But where tenant-right 
 exists? — Practically where tenant-right exists on well 
 managed estates the tenant is in the position really of 
 a leaseholder, but, at the same time, I believe that, 
 even where the Ulster custom prevails, every one 
 would be gratified if he got a lease. 
 
 1915. Baron Dowse. — Provided it did not sacrifice 
 his tenant-right to get it ? — Decidedly. 
 
 1916. The O'CoNOR Don. — You are acquainted with 
 the covmty Donegal 1 — Only so far as it extends from 
 the town of Donegal, fourteen mUes into Bally- 
 shannon ; from the borders of Fermanagh right up to 
 Donegal is very good land. 
 
 1917. You are not acquainted intimately with the 
 western part of Donegal 1 — No, not with the western 
 part. What I meant to convey was that that 
 portion of Donegal is like part of Tyrone — part of 
 King J ames's settlement. 
 
 1918. Baron Dowse. — What part of Tyrone are 
 you principally acquainted with? — The union of 
 Clogher and the union of Omagh. Irvinestown ip 
 partly in Tyrone and partly in Fermanagh. 
 
 1919. The O'Conor Don. — Have you at all 
 
72 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 S,pt. 4, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 Joseph Allen. 
 
 considered -why the late distress in Mayo produced 
 disturbance while tlie distress in Donegal apparently 
 has not? — I think it takes very little to agitate _Mayb 
 people, in consequence of evictions and the passionate 
 attachment with which they regard the land in their 
 occupation. 
 
 1920. It is not due in any way to difference of 
 treatment between them and their landlords 1 — There 
 never existed amongst any of the northern plantation 
 — ^when I say plantation I mean counties under the 
 old Ulster settlement— there never is that kind of 
 chronic poverty that exists in Mayo. 
 
 1921. You do not beUeve it existed in Western 
 Donegal?— Take the country from Westport, go from 
 Ballyhaunis, Claremorris, and right up to "Westport, 
 there is a large class of people who are in a per- 
 petual state of poverty. 
 
 1922. In fact, if they had no rent to pay they could 
 hardly live on their holdings ?— There are holdings 
 where they could not live solely by the land. 
 
 1923. Chairman. — Does that arise from the bad- 
 ness of the soil 1 — Yes, and the small quantity. 
 
 1924. The O'Coi^or Don. — The subdivision has 
 gone on to such an extent ? — The great difficulty is that 
 the land is so unevenly divided, you will find one part 
 where the farms are large and the country good, and 
 other places where it is over-populated, and the land bad. 
 
 1925. You know the country about Swiuford ? — I 
 was only at Swinford once, but Claremorris Union I 
 know. Of course the condition of a great deal of 
 the west is greatly regulated by a dry hot year. If 
 there is a year like this there could be no distress, for 
 if they have plenty of turf and potatoes there, there is 
 never any distress. 
 
 1926. Baron Dowse. — Isn't it a fact that in that part 
 of the world they consider very good weather what would 
 be thought very little of elsewhere 1 — Yes. I have seen 
 them in the market place standing under the rain, as if 
 it was quite dry ; they did not seem to mind it. 
 
 1927. It is generally very wet there? — Yes, as a 
 general ru.le. 
 
 1928. That is generally the rule ; isn't there more 
 rain in the west than in the other parts of Ireland ? — 
 Yes. The great rain line runs from Cumberland, and 
 I think by Manchester and Liverpool, and then across 
 to Kerry, round by Clare and the west coast into the 
 County Galway. Oftentimes I have seen incessant 
 rain, even in harvest. 
 
 1929. Chairman. — Do you say these are people that 
 ownership of the land would benefit in no way ? — I 
 would not apply that generally, because I think a 
 great many of the men who have been in distress this 
 year have been so from exceptionally bad years. Thei-e 
 is no reason why in Mayo, with the land even as it 
 is, the twenty aci'e man Kliould be in distress. 
 
 1930. I should have thought that when they are pro- 
 prietors, whether they are successful or not will depend 
 on the goodness of the soil 1 — Decidedly ; because on 
 any farm, whether it is ownership or tenant, you must 
 have sufficient produce on the average to afford not 
 only subsistance but a mai'gin for bad seasons. 
 
 1931. Bai-on Dowse. — Legislation would not make 
 the case of any people of that descri})tion better, but it 
 could not make them worse t — It could not make them 
 worse off. 
 
 1932. And it might make their neighbours better ? 
 — No doubt security would better their condition, bad 
 as it is. 
 
 1933. Mr. Shaw.— Had the tenant-right of Done- 
 gal not something to do with the quietness of the 
 people ? — Decidedly. 
 
 1934. And the want of security in Mayo has the 
 opposite effect, and accounts for the difference ? — I 
 consider the want of security to be the difference — at 
 least it would constitute the difference in the main be- 
 tween the north and south. 
 
 1935. Baron Dowse. — Isn'tit a fact that that part of 
 Donegal you refer to — take from Bundoran up — was 
 the property of the late Mr. Thomas Connolly ?— Yes. 
 
 1936. And it was let very low ? — ^Yes. 
 
 1937. And the people were very well satisfied with 
 
 the security they had for their investment in the soil ? 
 
 —Yes. 
 
 1938. And they had tenant-right to the full extent 
 it was recognised ?— Yes, in a great many parts of 
 Galway and Mayo I have found the great tendency 
 amongst every class of farmers was to save money, if 
 they could, and lodge it in bank, so that in case any- 
 thin" occurred, either eviction or raising the rent, they 
 would have something to fall back upon ; but there 
 was no anxiety to improve the condition of the land. 
 
 1939. Suppose they had their land at a fair and rea- 
 sonable rent, with a sense that they would be safe while 
 they paid that rent, would they be more inclined to put 
 that money into the land than into the bank? — I 
 believe they would put every pound of it into the land. 
 I saw a remarkable case of the effect of security near 
 Ballinrobe, on Mr. Tighe's property ; when he got it it 
 was in a very bad condition, he put the houses into very 
 fair repair, and settled the land, and built walls, and I 
 was quite surprised ; it is just as if portion of the 
 north was taken and put near Ballinrobe. I found 
 from the tenants that the improved condition was due : 
 first to the landlord's efforts, and secondly to the 
 security the people had. They considered that no 
 matter what they did to their land in improving it 
 they would not be evicted. 
 
 1940. Mr. Shaw. — That is in Mayo ? — Yes. 
 
 1941. Have they leases? — I cannot say, but to all 
 intents and purposes they looked upon themselves as 
 leaseholders. 
 
 1912. Baron Dowse. — Had that a beneficial effect 
 on the peace of that part of the country ? I never 
 heard of a single case of outrage or disturbance of any 
 kmd, but on the adjoining property, the old Kii'wan 
 property of Shrule, which belongs to the Marchioness 
 de Clifford, if you hear of an outrage it is sure to be in 
 or near that property. 
 
 1943.' Chairman. — Did you notice, going about, 
 whether improvements by tenants have increased since 
 the Land Act 1 — I have seen a very great deal_ of im- 
 provement within the last ten years. I was in that 
 part of the country before the passing of the Act, and 
 I have seen men get out of the bog-hole with their 
 spades to inquu-e what progress the bUl was making 
 in Parliament ; and after it passed there was, undoubt- 
 edly, a great tendency to improve on a moderate scale. 
 
 1 943a. Do you know, as a rule, in some parts of the 
 country do the landlords contribute towards the im- 
 provements, or iu-e they done by the tenants ?— The 
 tenants alone ; the landlords contribute in very few 
 cases. I should say men like Lord Clancaity and Lord 
 Clonbrook have done a good deal for their tenants. 
 
 1944. Are these properties on which tenant-right 
 exists ? — There is no tenant-rifjht in Galway or Mayo. 
 
 1945. Baron Dowse. — Is a man allowed to sell his 
 holding?— He is not allowed, but it may be done in 
 this way, it is entirely optional with the agent if a 
 tenant gives up, whether he will accept the tenant to 
 whom the old tenant sells his interest. 
 
 1946. His judgment is to be exercised in every m- 
 dividual case?— Yes ; and I found a decided tendency 
 in agents or landlords to look upon any improvements 
 as their own, and if a farm was to be given up the 
 first thought was what increased rental they could get. 
 
 1947. And that was to be estimated on the actual 
 state of the farm, including the tenant's improvements 
 and everything ? — Yes. 
 
 1948. Chairman.— That is by paying conpensation 
 tor disturbance? — That is if they wish to disturb 
 him, but if he goes without disturbance it is only 
 a model landlord who would give him compensation. 
 
 1 948a. But he would get compensation for improve- 
 ments even if he left voluntarily 1 — I did not know that 
 
 1949. Baron Dowse. — Did you ever hear of a case 
 of unexhausted manures in Connemara ? — No ; it is 
 pretty nearly exhausted before the land is surrendered ; 
 I do not know much about unexhausted manures. 
 
 1950. Do you think there is much increase of rent 
 in the country as a rule ? — I don't think there has 
 been any general increase. There have been a few 
 cases. I have always found that land sold in the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 to 
 
 courts were worse for tlie tenants, for it would some- 
 times be bought by a grocer or speculator or someone 
 of that kind, and the first look he takes after his pro- 
 perty is to see would it gi-s-e 5 per cent. Findmg it 
 does ; he does not see why it should not give six, and 
 then he says the man who pays £10 can pay £2 more ; 
 the man who pays £12 can pay £15, and so on, and 
 then if he comes to sell it again, and anyone purchases 
 it on the rental, he is a considerable gainer. 
 
 1951. Is the tenant able to resist that demand? — 
 Practically no. 
 
 1952. And it would be an advantage he should? — 
 Yes. 
 
 1953. You know the Ulster tenant-right custom? — 
 Yes. 
 
 1954. You know what it is ; the land at a fair rent ; 
 without fear of disturbance ; the right of free sale 
 with a reasonable veto on the part of the landlord 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 1955. Do you think it would be well to extend that 
 to the rest of Ireland 1 — I must qualify it as to the graz- 
 ing farms. 
 
 1956. I am referring to land within the Land Act. 
 Do you think it would be beneficial ? — Yes. 
 
 1957. Do you think the country would be better 
 off under a regime of that sort 1 — Decidedly. 
 
 1958. Do you think that that would discountenance 
 schemes that have no validity in them and Avould 
 satisfy the tenant? — I believe it would. I do not 
 beUeve the men in Mayo, who are speaking and raising 
 the present agitation, believe in half what they say. 
 I am quite certain they do not, and I am quite sure 
 their audiences believe less, but they do it on the 
 principle that some beneficial measure may be 
 passed. 
 
 1959. On the principle that the louder they shout 
 the more likely is assistance to come? — There is a 
 general belief throughout the west that " a dumb priest 
 gets no parish " ; and they believe without making their 
 wants known nothing will come of it. 
 
 1960. CHAiEMAjr. — Do you think, on such properties 
 as Lord Clancarty's, Lord Clonbrock's, and other land- 
 lords who assist in the improvements, the tenants 
 would like to be compulsorily brought under the 
 tenant-right system, when the landlord's assistance 
 would probably cease ? — Decidedly ; because although 
 
 the present proprietor may be the best of men and one Sept. 4. isso. 
 ui)on whom they can rely, they don't know who his jj-^_ Samuel 
 successor may be. Joseph Allen. 
 
 1961. Baron Dowse. — And if a landlord makes 
 improvements on his estate for the benefit of his tenant 
 the landlord can be compensated by increased rent? — 
 
 1962. And wouldn't it be reasonable that the tenant 
 should give some increased rent to compensate the 
 landlord for his impi'ovements ? — Yes. 
 
 1963. Chairman. — Supj)ose the tenant had security 
 tliat if at any time the system of landlord improve- 
 ments ceased, he might then claim his tenant-right? 
 — I take it that anything tliat will prevent litigation 
 in the shape of enforcing these legal claims should be 
 encouraged. In fact in the case of a small holder 
 they put him to great expense, and in the meantime 
 his interest in looking after the land is .neglected. 
 I think anything in the shape of a lease, defining 
 exactly the relations between landlord and tenant 
 is far better. I believe the lease is the best remedy. 
 
 1 964. Bai'on Dowse. — How would you arrange the 
 question of fair rent — would you have a valuation or 
 arbitration ? — It is the only way, there must be some 
 independent arbitration. 
 
 1965. If the tenant is to get the land at afair rent, 
 and if there is any dispute as to the fair rent, that is 
 to be settled by arbitration, and if when it is settled, 
 the tenant is bound to pay it, and is allowed to sell 
 his interest in the land, giving a reasonable veto to 
 the landlord ; the tenant only to be evicted for non- 
 payment, or the breach of some condition it is right 
 to enforce, isn't that practically a lease ? — Yes. 
 
 1966. And, if an Act is passed, isn't it a lease by 
 Act of Parliament?— Yes. 
 
 1967. And would not that answer all the purposes 
 of a lease? — Yes, but of course there exists the 
 necessity of having an independent valuation, Grifflth's 
 valuation is practically useless for rent purposes ; it is 
 equally useless for income-tax purposes or local tax 
 purposes, because it does not bear a fair proportion ; 
 the demesnes and mansions of the principal proprietors 
 are valued ridiculously low ; even for ordinary local 
 taxation purposes it has served its day, and is done 
 for. No man in his senses in the west of Ireland 
 would buy a farm, taking Griffith's valuation as a 
 basis, nor would he sell it or let it on it. 
 
 Egbert Edward Peeves, Esq., examined. 
 
 1968. The O'Conor Dost. — You are a land agent, 
 Mr. Reeves ? — I am. 
 
 1969. In what county ? — In Limerick and in the 
 Queen's County ; and in Tipperary I am a tenant 
 farmer. 
 
 1970. Do you reside in Tipperary? — No, I reside 
 in the Queen's County. I am a landlord in Limerick, 
 Tipperary, and Kilkenny. 
 
 1971. In what part of Limerick are the estates of 
 which you have the management situated ? — Croom, 
 Piathkeale, and Ballingarry, adjoining Lord Devon's 
 estate. 
 
 1972. Is that mixed land ? — Well, the whole of the 
 land near Ballingarry is, I may say, grazing. 
 
 1973. Dairy farms ?— Principally dairy farms. 
 
 1 974. The farms are pretty large, I suppose ? — Yes, 
 from 50 to 150 acres. In the neighbourhood of 
 Croom the land is mixed, tillage and dairy, and 
 towards Rathkeale it is almost altogether tillage. 
 
 1975. How does the valuation go in that district, 
 is it lower or higher than the rent ? — I think nearly 
 all the old tillage farms are let at about the valuation, 
 bnt, -svith regard to gi-ass farms, they are let at about 
 20 per cent, over the valuation. 
 
 1976. That, I suppose, is owing to the high price 
 of cattle ?— Yes, and the consequent competition for 
 grass land. I think the people consider the grass 
 land better value at 20 i)er cent, above the valuation 
 than they do the tillage land at the valuation. 
 
 1977. How long have you been a land agent in 
 that county ? — Nineteen years. 
 
 1978. Has there been any raising of rents durino- 
 that period to any serious extent? — No, we have 
 rather reduced them. 
 
 1979. Within the last couple of years, I suppose? 
 —No, I have been reducing the rents of tillage lands 
 since 1 868, particularly the lands about Croom, which 
 were let very dear. I have reduced them to about 
 the poor law valuation. 
 
 1980. Do you find that the tenants are able to live 
 pretty well upon that arrangement? — I think they 
 ought; if they exercised proper industry they ought 
 to be able to live very well. 
 
 1981. Have there been ejectments or changes of 
 tenancy to any extent on the property ? — I have never 
 evicted a tenant. When a tenant is completely ruined 
 and cannot get on, I allow him to sell his interest ; 
 whatever rent he owes I deduct out of the purchase- 
 money, and hand him over the balance. 
 
 1982. That is very much like the Ulster tenant- 
 right, in fact ? — It is. 
 
 1983. You get your rent and you get a better ten- 
 ant sometimes ? — I don't always get a better tenant. 
 
 1984. At all events you expect to get a better 
 tenant ? — I do. I expect it. I don't always get it. 
 
 1985. Have you had a consolidation of farms to 
 any extent in your district 1 — Not to any extent. I 
 have thrown in a few farms to larger men, in cas 's 
 
 L 
 
 Robert Edward 
 Eeeves, Ksq, 
 
74 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 4, 188,0. -where the smaller tenants wished it and wanted to go 
 
 „ , ~r: , away. But there has not been consolidation to any 
 
 Eobert Edward ^•> , 
 
 Beeves, Esq. extent. „ ., , 
 
 1986. Are leases common ? — I make every tenant 
 take out a lease. , 
 
 1987. For what term generally ? — Thirty-five years. 
 The system I adopt in granting leases is this : I have 
 only a single covenant, that the land shall be tilled in 
 a proper and liusbandlike manner. I require the 
 tenant to keep the houses and offices in repair, and I 
 do not allow subletting, conacreing, or burning of 
 land, which I think is most injurious. 
 
 1988. Yon say you give leases for thirty-five years. 
 Have you adopted that principle for the whole nineteen 
 yearsyou have been in the management of estatesin that 
 district, or is it only recently that you have done so ? — 
 I have done it for some years. I think it is more for 
 the advantage of landlord and tenant to have it let on 
 a fixed contract. In fact, I am very mitch in favour 
 of the abolition of tenancies from year to year. 
 
 1989. Does not the thirty five years' lease get rid 
 of the compensation under the Land Act ? — It does. 
 
 1990. Is that your object — I suppose it has an in- 
 fluence in leading you to do it t— Well, it has an in- 
 fluence ; for I wish to keep out of law as much as I 
 can, both for mj^self and my employer. 
 
 1991. Do you think the claims of the tenant are 
 sufficiently met by allowing him to sell, in case he 
 wishes to leave his holding t. — Certainly. 
 
 1992. What sum do they get for their holdings 
 when they are sold — two or three years' purchase 1 
 — Two or three ! They get fourteen or fifteen years' 
 purchase. 
 
 1993. For the good will'!— Yes. In 1875, a farm 
 near Groom, containing seventy acres, belonging to a 
 Mrs. Smyth, who asked my leave to sell it, was put up for 
 sale ; it was subject to a rent of £71 a-year. She got 
 £1,000 for it. 
 
 1994. Mr. Shaw. — Seventy Irish acres, I suppose? 
 — Irish acres. 
 
 1995. The O'CoNOE Don.— Had she a lease ?— She 
 had. 
 
 1996. For thirty-five years? — ^Yes. 
 
 1997. Mr. Shaw. — Do you re-value the lands at 
 the end of the thirty-five years ? — My time has not 
 come for that yet ; I hope it may. 
 
 1998. The O'Gonob Don". — Is there a covenant in 
 the lease against selling ? — There is a covenant in the 
 lease against selling, without consent. 
 
 1999. Mr. Shaw. — I luiderstand you do not refuse 
 your consent ? — If the incoming ten?int is a respectable 
 man, certainly not ; but if he is an objectionable man 
 — if he is taking the land on chance, or if he is work- 
 ing a lot of other farms, I would object. 
 
 2000. Does the principle of permission to sell exist 
 in Tipperary and Queen's County ? — Well, it is not so 
 general in Tipperary ; and in Queen's county, I have 
 had very little experience of it. Up to the year 1875 
 all our tenants stuck to us. Since 1 875 they have 
 generally asked for leave to sell. This year five asked 
 leave to sell. 
 
 2001. The O'CoNOE Don. — Were those tenants 
 holding under, leases ? — They were not; they were 
 mountain tenants on poor land ; their rents varied 
 from £6 to £1 8 a-year. They got seven years' purchase. 
 
 2002. Mr. Shaw.— You allowed them to sell ?— I 
 did. 
 
 2003. Were those holdings bought by tenants on 
 the estate ? — A tenant on the estate bought the four 
 holdings. 
 
 2004. And threw them all into one farm ? — Yes. I 
 assisted tlie tenant, as an industrious man, to buy 
 those holdings. 
 
 2005. Chairman. — Was it by a loan? — By a 
 loan. 
 
 2006. The O'CoNOii Don. — Did you make him take 
 out a lease 1 — He will take out a lease. The purchase 
 was only completed last March. 
 
 2007. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think it would be 
 desirable to cxtenil that principle of giving tenants 
 
 liberty to sell their holdings ? — I think it would be 
 most important — especially at the present time. The 
 only valid objection is this ; the better the landlord, 
 of course the cheaper he lets his land, and. therefore, 
 the tenant, when he does sell, gets a great deal more 
 money. In some cases, on the other hand, I think 
 the tenant-right is wOrth nothing, because the land is 
 not worth the rent that is paid for it. 
 
 2008. On Lord Devon's property is permission to 
 sell given? — Yes; permission to sell is recognized by, 
 Lord Devon, and I may add that the l^nd is let at 
 very reasonable rents. 
 
 2009. You have never had an ejectment, properly 
 speaking, on your estates ? — Never. I ejected one 
 man, a tenant of the Queen's County estate, but he 
 was in Maryborough jail at the time, for stealuig an 
 ass and cart. 
 
 2010. You did not eject him from the jail ? — JSTo, I 
 let him stop there. I may add I was very glad he 
 was there. 
 
 2011. Have you considered the question of assisting 
 tenants to purchase their holdings ? — Yes, I have 
 studied the question of what is called " a peasant 
 proprietory " a good deal. I have been very frequently 
 in Switzerland, and, as you are aware, more than half 
 the peopile of that country are peasant proprietors. 
 
 2012. You know Switzerland? — I know it very 
 well. 
 
 2013. Do you think favourably of the project, not 
 of a wholesale purchase, but a gradual purchase by the 
 tenants ? — No, sir, I am against it. The objection is 
 this. For the first few years it does very well ; but 
 then comes the division, or the borrowing of money 
 to get rid of children, and after all it makes very 
 little difference whethei^ you go to a Jew or a Christian 
 to borrow money. Nearly half the farms in Switzer- 
 land are pledged, either to the banks or the Jews — 
 that I know to be the fact. 
 
 2014. Baron Dowse. — Does that apply to the 
 Canton of Berne ? — It does, especially. I know it 
 very well. 
 
 2015. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know France ? — I know 
 parts of France. I know the wine country. 
 
 2016. A great number of small proprietors there ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 2017. Do you know that they are a thrifty and 
 industrious people, saving money, and that there is no 
 borrowj-ng to any great extent ? — The French are in 
 my opinion, the most thrifty nation in Eurojse. Yet I 
 knoTiT that in the wine country this year, they have 
 been fu.lly as badly off as the Irish — quite as much 
 poverty there as in the west — the whole vfine crop 
 failed. 
 
 2018. Do you think that as peasant proprietors 
 the 25eople would be more liable to get into the hands 
 of the nroney lenders, than they are as tenants 1 — I am 
 afraid they would. 
 
 2019. BvTt it is only a supposition? — It is only a 
 supposition. 
 
 2020. If the thing could be carried out, do you 
 think a multiplication of the number of landowners, 
 would be an advantage to the country '] — I think land- 
 owners of a certain extent — say 100 or 150 acres — 
 might be an advantage! 
 
 2021. Near towns, don't you think, you could go 
 lower than that — could not a man make a good living 
 out of a thirty acre farm ? — Yes. I think men con- 
 nected with business in the towns would be a valuable 
 class of proprietors. 
 
 2022. Do you know the north of Ireland? — I do, 
 but not very, intimately. 
 
 2023. Are you aware the farms in Armagh and 
 Down are small farms ? — They are, but as far as I 
 could see, the farmers there supplement the profits of 
 their farms by other industry. "They are manufacturers 
 as well as farmers. 
 
 2024. They cultivate flax, and sell it, but they are 
 not manufacturers ? — They work flax with yarn, and 
 weave it at home. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 75 
 
 2025. Those are the smaller class of farmers "? Tliey 
 
 are. •^ 
 
 2026. I was speaking of a class rather larger than 
 that — ^holders of 30 acres or thereabouts — ^a man of 
 30 acres does not weave — he lives by his farm, and 
 lives well 1 — He does ; and as far as I can see the rent 
 of land, in proportion to its quality, is higher in the 
 north of Ireland than in the south. 
 
 2027. Is land dearer there than in Limerick 1 — It is 
 I think Limerick, take it for all in all, is perhaps the 
 cheapest let county in Ireland. 
 
 2028. Baron Dowse. — Does tliat apply to the poor 
 land, as well as to the better class of land % — It does. 
 
 2029. Mr. Shaw. — Tipperary is moderately let, is 
 not it ? — Those portions of it which are in the hands 
 of the old proprietors are moderately let ; but the 
 parts of it which are in the hands of English proprietors 
 are let beyond their value. 
 
 2030. What do you mean by English proprietors ? 
 — Some of the English manufacturing class who have 
 purchased in the Incumbered Estates Court as an 
 investment. 
 
 2031. Do you know any of those estates'! — I do. 
 
 2032. Have the rents of the tenants upon them been 
 raised 1 — A great deal. 
 
 2033. Causing, I presume, great dissatisfaction 1 — 
 Very great dissatisfaction and danger. At this 
 moment the rents in parts of Tipperary are greatly 
 beyond the value. I must say for the Tipperary 
 people that they are very industrious, and till their 
 land remarkably well — far and away superior to 
 Limerick and Queen's County. From Parsonstown 
 to liTenagh is about as well cultivated a part of Ireland 
 as there is. 
 
 2034. "Would you be in favour of an extension of the 
 tenant-right system of the north to the rest of Ireland, 
 by which the power of raising rents would be 
 moderated to some extent 1 — I think with regard to 
 raising rents if the landlord lays out no money on the 
 farm, ajid that it was let at the fair value, it ought to 
 be put out of his power to raise the rent, or that the 
 land should be set up to auction. One of the dangers 
 to Ireland is, the system of putting farms up to auction 
 or competition, for such is the demand for land that it 
 will go up to anything — men will offer more than they 
 can possibly pay, and will borrow money to go into it. 
 
 2035. They want land ; because they have no other 
 resource ? — No other. At the same time I must say 
 that if the landlord, at the wish of the tenant, has 
 expended a considerable sum of money in improving 
 he ought, at the expiration of the lease, to get the 
 benefit of that. 
 
 2036. Does not he generally get a benefit for iti — 
 On Mr. R. Pigot's estate large svims have been expended 
 in improvements, and the tenants have never been 
 charged a halfpemiy. 
 
 2037. Ought not the landlord to get a return for 
 such expenditure, in the shape of an increase of rent ? 
 — I think he ought ; but if he has let the land at a fair 
 rent, and if he la5fs out no money upon it in improve- 
 ments, I don't think he ought to have the power of 
 raising the rent at the expiration of his lease, otherwise 
 he keeps the tenant in this position, that he will be 
 deterred from expending any money on the improve- 
 ment of his farm, as the landlord might raise his rent 
 when his lease expired. The tenant will naturally 
 say, " I won't do a single thing to my land, I v.ron't 
 improve, for if I do I may have to pay an increased 
 rent when my lease expires." 
 
 2038. If the landlord expends money on the farm, 
 suppose he puts gates, erects buildings, or drains, or 
 fences, you think he ought to get a return for his ex- 
 penditure 1 — Certainly, he ought to get a fair retm-n 
 for his money. 
 
 2039. He ought to get an increase of rent 1 — Yes ; 
 a moderate increase. 
 
 2040. Are you aware that in the south and west of 
 Ireland the landlords do not, as a rule, lay out money 
 on their ]>roperties 1 — I think in the county Limericls: 
 a good deal of money has been laid out. 
 
 2041. Borrowed from the Board of Works ?— Yes. Sept. 4. 1880. 
 On the Earl of Dunraven's property, and on several jjobertEdward 
 other estates a good deal of money has been laid out. Reeves, Esq. 
 
 2042. Don't they charge the interest to the tenant 
 for those improvements t — I can hardly tell you that. 
 
 2043. In the case of a difference arising between 
 landlord and tenant as to increase of rent, do you 
 think it would be possible to establish some tribunal to 
 which both could appeal. Could it be done by arbi- 
 tration 1 — That would be the only course, I think. 
 
 2044. That woiild only be resorted to in case of 
 difference 1 — Only in case of difl'crence. 
 
 2045. Do you think there would be many cases of 
 dill'erenoel — Well, there are so many classes of land- 
 lords and tenants in Ireland that it is hard to answer 
 that question. I don't think there would be many 
 cases of difference between the old hereditary landlords 
 of the country and their tenants, but the strangers, the 
 purchasers in the court, who " don't know Joseph," they 
 want to get as much as they can for their investments. 
 
 2046. Especially if they live in England, and can 
 only be dealt with by proxy? — Yes. 
 
 2047. You know the celebrated property on the 
 Galfcees— Mr. Buckley's ?— Yes. 
 
 2048. Do you know the mountainy part of it 1 — I 
 do — I know the locality. 
 
 2049. Were the old rents as much as the tenants could 
 aflord topay '! — Well, mountain land is very uncertain in 
 value. In the Queen's County, for example, all beyond 
 the Slievebloom range, untU this year, they have not 
 had a good harvest for the last three or four years — the 
 springs were cold, the autumns fell quickly, and the 
 people last year had neither potatoes nor corn. 
 
 2050. Plow is it this year? — Oh, this year the crops 
 are the finest I ever saw. I have not seen such a har- 
 vest siuce the year of the Crimean war. 
 
 2051. Did the tenants improve that land very much ? 
 — They did. The principal thing to use in improv- 
 ing mo^^ntain land is lime, and there was a great deal 
 of lime used. 
 
 2052. Are you aware of any other cases of improve- 
 ment of mountain land, or waste land, in that part of 
 the country 1 — No ; all our land except the Slievebloom 
 range is good land. 
 
 2053. Would that land pay for improvement? — It 
 would, very well. I have myself improved a portion 
 of the land rumfing up to the mountain, it is very 
 easy to improve it by drains. 
 
 2054. In what condition are the tenants there 
 generally ? — Well, there are eighty-seven tenants on 
 the estate ; the whole rent they pay is about £800 a 
 year, and there are only about forty of them really 
 solvent and able to go on. 
 
 . 2055. The land is not poor? — jSTot very poor, but 
 uncertain in produce. 
 
 2056. Yet they find it very hard to make a living? 
 — Very hard. I don't think they made anything these 
 last two years. 
 
 2057. Do you think it would be wiser to expend 
 money upon it in reclaiming it on a large scale, rather 
 than by the tenants v/orking on it themselves in the 
 way of reclamation ? — I can hardly catch the meaning 
 of your question. 
 
 2058. If the mountain was waste land, capable of 
 being reclaimed, would it in your opinion be wiser to 
 allot it to tenants, giving each of them an interest in 
 the reclamation of his portion, or to do it on a large 
 scale? — I do not think the tenants would be in a 
 position to reclaim their own lands, but I think it 
 would be a great accommodation to the tenantry to 
 employ them as labourers in doing it. 
 
 2059. If they got long leases at moderate rents 
 don't you think they could do it ? — The rents are very 
 low on that mountain. We have never raised them. 
 They have really fixity of tenure as long as they pay 
 their rents. They never are disturbed. 
 
 2060. The O'Conoe Don. — Are you agent for more 
 than one proprietor in Limerick 1 — I am. I am agent 
 for the Misses Gore in the county Limerick also. 
 
 2061. Do the same rules ap^ily on their estate as to 
 
 L2 
 
78 
 
 miSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880 
 
 Srpt. e, 1880. 
 
 Key. Thomas 
 her, p.p. 
 
 FIFTH DAY— MONDAY, 6th SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 Present:— The Eight Hon. the Eael of Bessboeough, Chairman; Eight Hon. Baeon Dowse 
 The O'CoNOK Don, Aethue MacMoeeough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., William Shaw, Esq., m.p, 
 
 Eev. Thomas Meaghek, P.P., Newport, county Tipperary, examined. 
 
 2112. Chairman. — I believe you liave been for 
 many years giving a great deal of attention to the sub- 
 ject of the relations between landlord and tenant in 
 Ireland 1 — Yes ; a good deal, privately. 
 
 2113. Could you give us your views as to the 
 different state of those relations before the passing of 
 the Land Act and since t — I would almost say that 
 the condition of the tenants is not materially improved 
 by the Land Act, and I thhik the great blot upon the 
 workhig of that Act was the absence of a jury in all 
 cases of litigation between landlord and tenant. 
 
 2114. Baron Dowse. — Instead of giving a case under 
 the Land Act to a county chairman to decide, you 
 think that there ought to be a jury to try it? — Oh, 
 decidedly. I am quite of that opinion. I think it 
 was absurd to give the decision of very irritating cases 
 to any gentleman, no matter what his prejudices might 
 be. I am decidedly of opinion that there ought to be 
 a jury to decide all cases between landlord and tenant, 
 and, if you wish, assessors also. 
 
 2115. Mr. Shaw. — Arbitration, I suppose, would 
 suit your views as well? — If it could be arrived at 
 fairly. 
 
 2116. Baron Dowse. — What I understand you to 
 suggest is that the cases now decided by the Chairman 
 ought to be decided by a jury ? — Exactly so. That 
 has been a decided blot since the Land Act came into 
 ojjeration ; because I tell you, candidly, that the ge- 
 nerality of the small tenants are wholly unwilling to 
 go before the Chairman to leave their cases to him. 
 There is no confidence in such cases in chairmen, and 
 I must say I saw the prej^ldice of a chaii-man shown 
 and very decidedly expressed in these land cases. 
 
 2117. Chairman. — The tenants had no confidence 
 ui the chairman, you say ; they thought they would 
 not get justice from him 1 — Just so ; because as a rule 
 the chairmen are either landlords themselves, or the chil- 
 dren of landlords, or persons of landlord associations, and 
 they cannot help sometimes giving way to landlord pre- 
 judice in cases of this kind. I have seen it myself. 
 
 2118. Could you give the Commission any eases 
 in which the law worked to the prejudice of the tenants 
 in this respect ? — I am not prepared to give personal 
 cases. 1 do not v.rant to go into any personal matters 
 at all ; but from my reading of cases decided before 
 the chairman, I found that that was the fatal blot 
 upon the working of the Land Act, and that the chair- 
 man did not as a rule give what a fair tribunal would 
 have given. 1 foimd that where the tenant had a claim 
 for past improvements, the landlord would put in a 
 claim for dilapidation, or somethmg of the kind, takino- 
 credit according to the price of labour and materials 
 at the moment for whatever would be necessary in re- 
 ference to these improvements becommg dilapidated to 
 some extent, and it was rather a common thing for the 
 tenant to get credit for his improvements only at the 
 cost at which he made them, while the dilapidation 
 ■was chai'ged against him at the present cost of labour 
 and materials, the consequence being that the charges 
 for dilapidation sometimes actually absorbed the e;it1re 
 cost of the improvements. That is the reason why I 
 think the absence of a jury is a fatal blot on the Land 
 Act. 
 
 2119. That you give as an instance of the hardship 
 there would be in leaving a tenant's claim for improve- 
 ments to the barrister who, you say, estimates the 
 value of those improvements on an incorrect footing t 
 —Yes ; I don't want to go into personal matters, but 
 i want you to see that I am not going iipon mere ge- 
 neral pnnciples at all in my opinion of the Land Act. 
 
 v/as a mere change of rent 1 — 'A 
 
 I am prepared to state its defects as they have been 
 actually shown. 
 
 2120. Could you give other instances in -whicli 
 you thmk the system of referring cases to the chair- 
 man works badly ?— There is, I believe, a provision 
 in the Land Act which says, that a tenant is en- 
 titled to compensation for improvements done by 
 himself or by his predecessors in title. Now, I knew a 
 case, it happened in a certain part of Munster, some 
 years ago, where "predecessors in title" were defined 
 by the chairman to be predecessors holding on the 
 same terms as the present claimant. The result -was 
 that shortly before the termination of the tenancy 
 notice was served by the landlord cunningly acrreeinff 
 to reduce the tenant's rent, or give him a lono-er title 
 or something that would put him on a different fool> 
 ing, and then the tenant's title to improvements made 
 by his predecessors or himself before that cLanoe of 
 terms, was entirely gone. 
 
 2121. Baron Dowse. — Who ignored it? Was it 
 the Chairman ? — It was, decidedly. I would not like 
 to give the name, but that happened in Clonmel 
 
 2122. Chairman. — Do I understand you to say that 
 that was the chau-man's interpretation of the word 
 predecessor in the Act 1 — The word predecessors hi 
 title. I took it to mean predecessors in occupancy, 
 which probably the framers of the Act intended it to 
 mean, but there was another, view of it taken by the 
 chairman, and he said he would allow compensaijion 
 for no improvements except those that took place since 
 the last conditions of tenancy were settled. 
 
 2123. The change 
 change of rent, or some new condition. 
 
 2124. Baron Dowse. — The chairman was of opinion 
 that the change of rent had severed the chain of suc- 
 cession entirely 1 — That is just it. 
 
 2125. Chairman. — You thmk that is a poiat in 
 which the Land Act needs amendment 1 — ^If there 
 was a jury sitting in the case tliis thing would not have 
 occurred. 
 
 2126. Baron Dowse. — But that was a question of 
 law ; how would a jury decide that 1 — You would get 
 very eminent Queen's counsel that would differ on a 
 question of law. 
 
 2127. But upon that particular question, it behig a 
 question of law, he should direct the jury in a parti- 
 cular way 1 — I think he would hardly have the face to 
 direct a jury that wa}^ 
 
 2128. Did the parties not appeal in that easel- 
 How could the poor man appeal ? An appeal would 
 cost him £40 or £50, and he was not worth probably 
 £5 at the time. 
 
 2129. Chairman. — Do you think that a jury might 
 be made judges of the law, as well as of matters of 
 fact in these cases 1 — Certainly, I would give them 
 full discretion, the same as they have on criminal 
 trials. 
 
 2130. Mr. Shaw. — You would make them arbitra- 
 tors between landlord and tenant ? — I would. 
 
 2131. Would it not be better, do you think, to refer 
 cases to a court of arbitration ?-^I am only speaking of 
 what I suggest as a better system than the pre- 
 sent one, but if you appoint proper arbitrators, I have 
 no objection whatever to that plan. What we want 
 is some system of estimating the value of the tenant's 
 claims diflerent from the present, and I think it would 
 be decidedly better if there was a jury. 
 
 2132. And not leave it to the chairman entirely 1— 
 Decidedly not. 
 
 2133. Baron DowsE.^-That last instance is not the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 79 
 
 aalt of tlic landlord ; it may be the fault of the law or 
 if the chairman according to your view ?■ — That only 
 )roves my point, that tlieve should be a jury to take 
 t out of the hands of the chairman. 
 
 2134. You mean the decision of the question about 
 }he meaning of predecessors in title ? How would you 
 lettle thati — Could they not piit in the words " pre- 
 lecessors in occupancy," instead. It shows the neces- 
 sity of having some person to help in the decision 
 oesides the chairman. 
 
 2135. The O'Conor Don. — In this particular case 
 was it a mere change in the rent that had taken 
 place? — I cannot b&j exactly. It was some small 
 shange not worth talking aboiit. 
 
 2136. Baron Dowse. — Possibly that was one of 
 the cases Mr. Ferguson referred to the other day 
 where the English law as to change of tenancy was 
 contended for? — One thing is certain, you must give 
 up the notion of assimilating the cases of tenants in 
 Ireland and England altogether, because, in the case 
 of the English tenants, it is the landlord that makes 
 all the improvements, and in our own case it is the 
 tenants that make them. 
 
 2137. Chairman. — Then this would be a matter in 
 the Land Act that you would wish to have made 
 clearer ?^Yes. 
 
 2138. Are there any other points on which you 
 have some observations to offer ? — Well, the first and 
 second clauses legalize tlia tenant-right custom in the 
 North of Ireland, and also protects any similar cus- 
 toms that may be found in the south. Certainly, in 
 the north, they fought better to maintain their rights, 
 and the tenant-right custom is pretty general there. 
 In the south it is not so general. "What I would sug- 
 gest is, instead of having one system for the north, 
 and another for the south, to have, for all Ireland, 
 perpetuity of tenure at fail- rents. 
 
 2139. Baron Dcv.'se. — Would this satisfy your 
 idea, that a man, as long as he paid a fair and reason- 
 able rent, should continue to hold and not be turned 
 out 1 — Decidedly. 
 
 2140. And should have the power of free sale? — 
 Oh, certainly ; and power to subdivide between his 
 children also. 
 
 2141. Would you not give the landlord some sort 
 of veto as to the person that would be purchaser ? — No. 
 
 2142. Suppose the person a tenant was going to 
 sell to was an improper character ? — Has he not the 
 law of the land to protect him ? 
 
 2143. Then you would allow the landlord no veto 
 whatever? — No veto whatever. 
 
 2144. How would you propose to settle what would 
 be a fair rent? — I would take Griflith's valuation first 
 as a basis for the value of the land, taking away the 
 value of the improvements. 
 
 2145. Mr. Shaw. — If the landlord and tenant dis- 
 agreed as to what v/ould be a fair rent, would you 
 have any objection to have it referred to arbitrators 
 to fix the rent? — What I would wish would be to 
 have two arbitrators appointed by the Government 
 in each county, because I don't at all like people 
 coin'' to law with their landlords, and I would like 
 to have somebody to appeal to to settle between them. 
 
 2146. Baron Dowse. — Tlien you would thiiik that 
 this would be a fair settlement of the question, that 
 the tenant should have the land at a fair and reason- 
 able rent with power of free sale? — Oh, decidedly, 
 free sale in whole or in part. 
 
 2147. And that he should not be disturbed as long 
 as he paid his rent, and should have the power of 
 dividing his land among his children ? — Certainly. 
 
 2148. And if any dispute arose between landlord 
 and tenant you would have it referred to a Govern- 
 ment officer to decide it? — I beg your pardon, I would 
 not leave it so obscure as that. I would have some- 
 thin'' first as a fair basis for rent, and I would 
 take Griffith's valuation, mimis the value of the im- 
 provements. 
 
 2149. Somebody would have to decide that?— Let 
 us be content with that as a basis, and then if either 
 
 party wishes to appeal, let him ; but I would like to Sent. 6, isso. 
 have something to begin with-— let them divest Grif- ^^^, '^^j^as 
 fith's valuation of the improvements, and then you Meagher, p.p. 
 have something to go upon — it gives so much for the 
 house, so much for the land and so on. 
 
 2150. You would just take off the value of the im- 
 provements? — I would divest Griffith's valuation of 
 the improvemen.ts over the soil, because they don't 
 mind improvements under the soil. 
 
 2151. Then who would be the ultimate court of 
 appeal ? — I would leave it to two arbitrators and an 
 umpire, appointed by the Government. Of coui-se if they 
 were men of as high character as the late Sir Richard 
 Griffith, they could very well give satisfaction, for I 
 must say, as a rvile, in every part of Ireland where I 
 have been (and I am among the tenants as a clergy- 
 man for the last 39 years), I have found general satis- 
 faction expressed with Sir Richard Griffith's valuation, 
 although the improvements are containedin it. But,cer- 
 tainly, the best way to make it anything like a basis 
 for rent would be to divest it of improvements except 
 where the landlord is proved to have made the im- 
 provements. 
 
 2152. Chairman. — We had evidence here that 
 Griffith's valuation is under the mark with regard to 
 the better class of land ? — What class of land is that ? 
 
 2153. That the better class of land — pasture land 
 for instanca — is value 1 low in Griffith's vahiation ? — I 
 must say I would not disagree with that, as to the 
 valuation of the high pasture lands. I admit that 
 that is somewhat lov/, for this reason^ that the scale 
 of prices for butter and for beef is now far arid av/ay 
 beyond what it was the time he went to make his 
 valuation, but as regards tillage farms and the poor 
 land, although the scale of prices for produce is 
 somev,diat over the scale Sir Richard Griffith went' 
 on, I think the increased expense of cultivation 
 almost neutralizes that, so that I think Griffith's 
 valuation might be fair enougli foi- the inferior class of 
 land, but I must say that f&r the high class of pasture 
 lands it is somewhat low. Of cr.urse, in the case of 
 pasture lands the valuation does not take in im- 
 provements, because, as a rule, there is very little 
 improvement upon a grass farm, except perhaps a 
 house built on it for a herdsman. I will admit 
 certainly that on what you call lands of high quality, 
 high pasture lands, Griffith's valuation does not go 
 up to the mark. I would add one-fourth to it. 
 
 2154. Would you give the landlord or the tenant 
 the option at any time of asking for a new valuation ? 
 — That is a case where the lan.„lord might please him- 
 self 
 
 2155. Would you e:;olude the landlord from seeking 
 a new valuation ? — In that case I would not. That 
 is the case of high pasture. 
 
 2156. A new valuation to be decided by arbitrators 
 with a Government umpire'! — Just so, men of high 
 character, I would have none other, because as to local 
 valuators they are more or less influenced by either 
 side. I would have a judicial official as firm and 
 strong in mind as the late Sir Richard Griffith. I 
 am entirely against preventing subdivision. I say if 
 you wish to know the cause of the feeling of disaffec- 
 tion that exists, it is that the younger sons of the 
 farmers are cut out from any share of the inheritance, 
 and you make idlers and rebels of them. They go 
 to America and inculcate revolutionary ideas, and 
 often bring them home with them. I certainly protest 
 against a man being prevented from subdividing up to 
 a certain point among his children. Up to that point 
 I would allow no landlord to interfere with subdivision, 
 and I would allow the tenant the right to sell the 
 whole or a part of his farm. If the landlord wishes to 
 buy any part of the farm he can do so, by giving as 
 much as any other purchaser would give, but I would 
 give him. no right of preference. 
 
 2157. The O'Conoe Don. — What is the limit which 
 you would place to subdivision ? — That is a point of 
 very material consideration ; it is a question for dis- 
 cussion. I would say twenty statute acres. 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept 4. ISSO. 
 
 Robert Edward 
 Reeves, Esq. 
 
 giving tliiiiy-five year leases 1 — Not up to the present, 
 bxit I am putting it before the English solicitors, and 
 pointing out the great benefit it would be. 
 
 2062. When you say you are acquainted -with 
 Switzerland, do you from your own knowledge say 
 that Switzerland is in a backward condition as regards 
 agriculture? — I think not. I think the industry of 
 the people of Switzerland marvellous. The canton of 
 Berne especially is well cultivated land. The industry 
 of the people is remarkable. I may say that in Berne 
 there are a great many men who are gentlemen them- 
 selves — ^they farm their own land — they are the repre- 
 sentatives of some of the best and oldest families in 
 the country. 
 
 •2063. Baron Dowse. — The aristocracy of the can- 
 ton I—Yes. 
 
 2064. The O'Conor Don. — The land itself is not 
 naT,'n-ally fertile? — The valley land along the Aar is 
 very good indeed, but Lausanne and Lucerne are poor, 
 and Fribourg is poor. Fribourg is one of the poorest 
 cantons in Switterland. 
 
 2065. Comparing the Swiss peasantry with the 
 Irish which do you say are the most prosperous 1 — The 
 Swiss are the best clothed people ; they have their houses 
 in better order, and they have some taste in gardens 
 and such matters, but I think with regard to the 
 feeding of the Swiss people it is very poor indeed. 
 
 2066. Is it poorer than the Irish? — It is as poor. 
 
 2067. But on the whole you think the Swiss are 
 more comfortable ? — They are better clothed. Fuel is 
 scarce, and food not so good. 
 
 2068. Baron Dowse. — Is not a good deal of money 
 expended in Switzerland by tourists ? — Yes ; only for 
 that I don't think the Swiss could exist. 
 
 2069. The hotel-keepers are the best men there? — 
 They are the greatest men in the country. They are '■ the 
 Lords and Commons." 
 
 2070. You say if the landlord makes no improve- 
 ments, and if the tenant makes all the improvements, 
 and if the landlord gets a fair rent, that at the end of 
 the lease the tenant ought not to be liable to have his 
 rent raised ? — Certainly. 
 
 2071. Supposing the landlord does make the im- 
 provements you say he ought to get an increase of 
 rent to compensate him ibr those improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 2072. Either by arrangement between the landlord 
 and the tenant, or some third party arranging the 
 amount for them ? — Yes. 
 
 2073. And if the landlord got a fair addition to his 
 rent he would be very well off, and the tenant would 
 be fairly treated ? — Certainly, because the tenant gets 
 the advantage of improvements which otherwise he 
 woiild have to do himself. 
 
 2074. If the landlord makes no improvements he 
 gets no additional rent — if he does make improvements 
 he gets a proportionate increase, and that, you consider, 
 would be fair? — I do. I would be glad to see the 
 tenant getting power to borrow money to make 
 improvements himself, if under a landlord who will 
 not assist him to do so. A great deal of the bad 
 farming in Ireland is the result of bad houses, bad 
 fences, and undrained land. In the lower portion of 
 the Queen's County between me and Mountmellick 
 the land is totally unfit for cropping, and in a wet 
 season the crops all fail. The bottom part of the land 
 is saturated with wet. 
 
 2075. Mr. Shaw. — "Would you allow the tenant to 
 borrow money and charge it on the land ? — ^Yes. I 
 would have the improvements done under the super- 
 intendence of the Board of Works. I would not do 
 them under the superintendence of the tenant for many 
 reasons. I think it would be false policy to leave it to 
 the tenant. I asked a tenant the other day who was 
 borrowing money for improvements what he wanted 
 it for, and I knew his land did not want draining, and 
 Be told me he wanted to buy stock. 
 
 2076. Do you regard a system of leases such as you 
 describe as amounting practically to fixity of tenure ? 
 — Yes. 
 
 2077. Do you consider it an advantage ? — I think it 
 
 is an advantage in every way. I think it is a 
 security to both parties. 
 
 2078. The tenant is secured, and so is the land- 
 lord?— Yes. 
 
 2079. If the landlord gets a fair rent he is satisfied ? 
 — He ought to be. I may observe that the tenants in 
 the county Limerick, under us, have been very reason- 
 able, the most part of them. Of course, you will meet 
 very unreasonable men in every class, but, on the 
 whole, the great mass of them pay their rents fairly 
 and well Some black sheep, of course, there will 
 always be. 
 
 2080. According to your experience, I understand, 
 those landlords who have an interest in the country, 
 who belong to the old families, and have their good 
 name to look to, are, generally speaking, fair and 
 indulgent landlords'? — Yes. 
 
 2081. And their tenants, as a rule, are satisfied? — 
 They are, as a rule. I never untU. this year heard a 
 word against them. 
 
 2082. But men who buy for investment — the In- 
 cumbered Estates Court men — are difierent? — Yes. 
 These men have been a great harm to the country. 
 You see on the margin of the rentals, " On the falling 
 in of these leases a considerable rise of rent will take 
 jjlace." That, of course, is a suggestion to them to 
 increase the rents. 
 
 2083. Chaihman. — On the margin of the rentals? 
 — Yes. I mean on the rentals which are made out 
 for the purpose of the sale in the Landed Estates 
 Court. When a purchaser sees these words they are 
 a temptation to increase the rents which many of 
 them cannot resist. 
 
 2084. Have you mentioned the acreage of the pr'> 
 perties of which you are owner and agent? — Taken 
 altogether, it would be about 14,000 acres. 
 
 2085. On that question of the introduction of 
 tenant-right, would you consider there should be 
 periodical revisions of rent, or that the rent that was 
 fixed at the time the tenant-right was introduced 
 should be the permanent rent 1 — I must answer that 
 question in this way. Before the American cattle 
 trade I would have liked to have revisions periodically, 
 but since that tr:>.(le commenced I think rents are 
 going down, and not going up. 
 
 2086. Therefore, speaking as a landlord, you would 
 like to keep them as they are? — I would. 
 
 2087. But spsaking as a tenant, I suppose you would 
 like to have them revised? — Yes. I should say I 
 think there is a good deal of land that will not come 
 down in value. I do not think the good grass land 
 will ever come down ; but as to the shallow, poor land 
 I do not think it can increase — in fact, I think it 
 must fall. 
 
 2088. Do you think it would be fair- to both parties 
 that there should be a periodical revision of rent, if 
 either landlord or tenant desired it ? — Yes, I think it 
 would be fair. 
 
 2089. Mr. Shaw. — You would give that power ti> 
 either party ? — I would. The difficulty is who would 
 be competent to ascertain the rent. 
 
 2090. Chairman. — There should be some means of 
 arriving at an independent valuation ? — Yes. 
 
 2091. You nefer to the case of a good landlord who 
 had let his land at a lower rent, and would suffer in 
 comparison with a landlord who had got ar higher rent 
 if tenant-right were made compulsory ? — Yes. 
 
 2092. Do you think that on the introduction of 
 compulsory tenant-right there ought to be a new 
 vahiation ? — I think it would be very fair. I may 
 mention that I am not a believer in Griffith's valuation, 
 at least I have not it on the brain. 
 
 2093. Baron Dowse. — Suppose you introduce 
 tenant-right, if- one landlord has let his land at a low 
 rent and another at a high rent, would not the man 
 who had let it at a low rent be entitled to call for a 
 revision? — Certainly, otherwise I think that if the 
 landlord, who had let his land at a low rent, was com- 
 pelled to let it permanently at that, he ought to be 
 recouped in some way or other. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 77 
 
 2094. Take tlie case of two estates; here is a man 
 who lets his land at a reasonable rent. There is 
 another man who is a rackrenter ; you must enable the 
 man who has let his land at a low rent, say that he is 
 entitled to more, and you think the tenant would not 
 object to give him more if he were entitled to it? — I 
 think the tenant would not like to give more if he 
 could help it. 
 
 2095. Chaieman. — He would be willing to give it 
 for the sake of getting a perpetuity ? — Yes. 
 
 2096. Baron Dowse. — Do you think he would 
 sooner have an increase of rent with tenant-right, or 
 let matters remain as they are 1 — I think he would 
 rather have matters remain as they are, for I fp.ncy 
 that they do not think as a general rule that they will 
 be disturbed. 
 
 2097. Mr. Shaw. — But there is always a danger of 
 it? — There is. A landlord to-day may be a good man, 
 but his son may be a very different one, or he may be 
 in good circumstances now, and may in a few years 
 get into dif&cultieE. For instance on one part of an 
 estate, that of Mr. R. Pigot, we have land at 27s. Qd. 
 per acre, fine dairy land. Outside the ditch, upon an 
 adjoining estate, the very same class of land is let at 
 54s. an acre. I think it would bs very unfair to com- 
 pel him to take that low rent in perpetuity. 
 
 2098. Baron Dowse. — If a system was introduced 
 by which the tenants should hold at a fair rent, and 
 as long as they pay that rent should not be disturbed ; 
 do you think in such a case Mr. Pigot would be en- 
 titled to say that the rent was too little 1 — Certainly. 
 
 2099. Mr. Shaw. — The result of that arrangement 
 would be that everything would find its level 1 — Yes, 
 but the difficulty is that in this country people ofier 
 too much for land. I had a small farm near Ballingarry 
 to let a short time since. It was twenty-eight acres, 
 and I was ofiered four guineas an acre for it. You 
 must be a prudent man in order to deal with such 
 tenants, for even a business man will often be led astray 
 by them, for he will fancy that the tenants would not 
 make such ofiers unless they knew that the land was 
 worth it, and that they would make a good thing by 
 it. I was offered £4 4s. an acre for the farm, but I 
 knew that that was not its value, and that that rent 
 could not be paid, and as a matter of fact I have let 
 it for £2 5s. an acre. 
 
 2100. You said that many of the properties which 
 were bought in the Incumbered Estates Court were 
 purchased by Englishmen? — Yes, English manufac- 
 turers. 
 
 2101. I suppose those men as a rule knew nothing 
 of the country, and only purchas^ as an investment 
 for their money ? — Yes. 
 
 2102. Don't you think it would be an advantage at 
 that time, or if anything of the same kind occurred 
 again, of properties been brought into the markets, 
 that the tenants should have an opportunity of pur- 
 chasing their holdings themselves before it came into 
 the hands of that sort of people?— I do. I think it 
 would be an advantage. I think anything would be 
 of an advantage to the tenant that kept him from the 
 hands of a griping landlord. I do not see how if a 
 man gets into the hands of such a landlord he could 
 ever hold up his head. I know instances in Tipperary 
 where they had to pay the full value of their rents in 
 1879, and never got a" halfpenny reduction, and I may 
 add, in connexion with those estates, that the land 
 is let far beyond its fair value. 
 
 2103. Baron Dowse. — In fact if nothing is better 
 than a good landlord, there is nothing worse than a 
 
 bad one ? — Just so ; and on the other hand if we have a Sept. i, isso. 
 bad landlord in the coiintry we have also got some Kg^ert Edward 
 very bad tenants, drunkards and roughs. Reeves, Esq. 
 
 2104. Chairman. — The principal difficulty in the 
 case of tenants having the pre-emption, would be to 
 fix the price at which they were to have the right of 
 purchase 1 — It would be a difficult thing. Of course if 
 the land was let at near the full value — take, suppose, 
 the case of tillage land worth £1 an acre, and let at 
 that price, of course about twenty years purchase would 
 be the value. If on the other hand it was let at 16s. 
 an acre, of course the tenant should give more, he 
 should give 25 years purchase for it. 
 
 2105. In case ofdifficulty I suppose some experienced 
 valuator should be called in ? — Yes. I think there is 
 another bad thing in a great many leases ; that is, the 
 tenants contracting themselves out ci" the statute law. 
 I think that is a bad system, and that it ought to be 
 prevented. On some estates the tenant pays the 
 whole of the taxes^poor rate and county cess. The 
 poor rate is a divisible tax, by law it should be paid 
 equally by landlord and tenant, and I don't think it is 
 for the benefit of the community that the landlord 
 should not bear his share of the taxation. I do not 
 think it is desirable that a tenant should be allowed to 
 contract himself out of the law of the country. 
 
 2106. Is it not illegal to make such contracts with 
 regard to poor rate 1 — It is, but it is done. 
 
 2107. Baron Dowse. — There was a statute passed 
 some years since, rendering it illegal for a tenant to 
 contract to pay the whole poor rate, but Mr. Donnell 
 informs me that it was repealed by 12 & 13 Vic, 
 c. 104, and that as the law now stands a tenant valued 
 over £4 can contract to pay the whole poor rate ? — I 
 was not aware of that. 
 
 2108. Your idea is that that should not be allowed ? 
 — Yes. I think it is a bad principle to allow parties 
 to contract themselves out of the statute law of the 
 country. When you allow a tenant to do that he 
 ceases to have a respect for the law. Nor do I see 
 what advantage there is in allowing the tenant to 
 contract himself out of the Land Act, I may observe 
 however that I myself have never had anything to do 
 with the Land Act, except in settling disputes of 
 tenants on other estates. 
 
 2108a. The O'Conor Don. — On the estates with 
 which you are connected, have you allowed the tenants 
 to borrow money for improvements? — Not till this 
 year. We always did the improvements ourselves, 
 but this year Mr. R. Pigot owing to the land agitation, 
 said he did not like to go on, but we have assisted the 
 tenants to do it. 
 
 2109. Have they borrowed? — Yes. We have assis- 
 ted them to borrow — that is, the large men, the men 
 holding forty or fiftj acres or upwards, they have 
 borrowed for building offices and draining. 
 
 2110. Chairman. — In general throughout the dis- 
 trict you are acquainted with, do the landlords 
 contribute towards improvements, or do improvements 
 themselves ? — I think they contribute very largel}-. 
 I think some who hold under head rent from us have 
 contributed. I know Mr. Power, an extensive farmer 
 and agent, contributes very largely to the improvement 
 of his tenants' holdings, for example by giving slate and 
 timber, and I know they give slate and timber on the 
 Devon Estates. 
 
 2111. Mr. Shaw. — Do they still do so — notwith- 
 standing the passing of the Land Act ? — They do. 
 
 The Commissioners then adjourned till Monday 
 following at Eleven o'clock. 
 
78 
 
 miSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880 
 
 Sryt. 6, 1880. 
 
 Key. Thomas 
 Meagher, p.p. 
 
 FIFTH DAY— MONDAY, 6th SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 Present :— The Right Hon. the Eael of Bessborough, Chairman ; Right Hon. Baeon Dowse 
 The O'CoNOR Don, Arthur MacMoreotjgh Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., William Shaw, Esq;, m.p, 
 
 Eev. Thomas Meaghee, P.P., Newport, county Tipperary, examined. 
 
 2112. Chairman. — I believe you have been for 
 many years giving a great deal of attention to the sub- 
 ject of the relations between landlord and tenant in 
 Ireland 1 — Yes ; a good deal, privately. 
 
 2113. Could you give us your views as to the 
 diiferent state of those relations before the passing of 
 the Land Act and since 1 — I would almost say that 
 the condition of the tenants is not materially improved 
 by the Land Act, and I think the great blot upon the 
 working of that Act was the absence of a jury in all 
 cases of litigation between landlord and tenant. 
 
 211-1-. Baron Dowse. — Instcadof giving a case under 
 the Land Act to a county chairman to decide, you 
 think that there ought to be a jury to try it 1 — Oh, 
 dc!oidedly. 1 am quite of that opinion. I think it 
 was absurd to give the decision of very irritatmg cases 
 to any gentleman, no matter what his prejudices might 
 be. I am decidedly of opinion that there ought to be 
 a jury to decide all cases between landlord and tenant, 
 and, if you wish, assessors also. 
 
 2115. Mr. Shaw. — Arbitration, I suppose, would 
 suit your views as well ? — If it could be arrived at 
 fairly. 
 
 2il6. Baron Dowse. — What I understand you to 
 suggest is that the cases now decided by the Chairman 
 ought to be decided by a jury? — Exactly so. That 
 has been a decided blot since the Land Act came into 
 operation ; because I tell you, candidly, that the ge- 
 nerality of the small tenants are wholly unwilling to 
 go before the Chairman to leave then' cases to him. 
 There is no confidence in sixch cases in chairmen, and 
 I must say I saw the prejudice of a chaii-man shown 
 and very decidedly expressed in these land cases. 
 
 2117. Chairman. — The tenants had no confidence 
 in the chairman, you say ; they thought they would 
 not get justice from him 1 — Just so ; becs.use as a rule 
 the chairmen are either landlords themselves, or the chil- 
 dren of landlords, or persons of landlord associations, and 
 they cannot help sometimes givmg way to landlord pre- 
 judice in cases of this kind. I have seen it myself. 
 
 2118. Could you give the Commission any cases 
 m which the law worked to the jprejudice of the tenants 
 in this respect ? — I am not prepared to give personal 
 cases. 1 do not v/ant to go into any personal matters 
 at all ; but from my readmg of cases decided before 
 the chairman, I found that that was the fatal blot 
 upon the working of the Land Act, and that the chair- 
 man did not as a rule give what a fair tribunal woxild 
 have given. 1 found that where the tenant had a claim 
 for past improvements, the landlord would put in a 
 claim for dilapidation, or somethmg of the kind, taking 
 credit according to the price of labour and materials 
 at the moment for whatever would be necessary m re- 
 ference to these improvements Ijccoming dilapidated to 
 some extent, and it was rather a common thing for the 
 tenant to get credit for his improvements only at the 
 cost at which he made them, while the dilapidation 
 "was charged against him at the present cost of labour 
 and matei-ials, the consequence being that the charges 
 for dilapidation sometimes actually absorbed the entire 
 cost of the improvements. That is the reason why I 
 think the absence of a jury is a fatal blot on the Land 
 Act. 
 
 2119. That you give as an instance of the hardship 
 there would be in leaving a tenant's claim for improve- 
 ments to the barrister who, you say, estimates the 
 value of those improvements on an incorrect footing 1 
 — Yes ; I don't want to go into personal matters, but 
 1 want you to see that I am not going upon mere ge- 
 neral principles at all in yay opinion of the Land Act. 
 
 I am prepared to state its defects as they have been 
 actually shown. 
 
 2120. Could you give other instances in which 
 you think the system of referring cases to the chair- 
 man works badly ? — There is, I believe, a provision 
 in the Land Act which says, that a tenant is en- 
 titled to compensation for improvements done by 
 himself or by his predecessors in title. ISTow, I knew a 
 case, it happened in a certain part of Munster, some 
 years ago, where "predecessors in title " were defined 
 by the chairman to be predecessors holding on the 
 same terms as the present claimant. The result was 
 that shortly befoi-e the termination of the tenancy, 
 notice was served by the landlord cunningly agreeing 
 to reduce the tenant's rent, or give him a longer title, 
 or something that would put him on a different foot- 
 ing, and then the tenant's title to improvements made 
 by his predecessors or himself before that change of 
 terms, was entirely gone. 
 
 2121. Baron DovraE. — VTho ignored it? "Was it 
 the Chairman ? — It was, decidedly. I would not like 
 to give the name, but that happened in Clonmel. 
 
 2122. Chairman. — Do I understand you to say that 
 that was the chairman's interpretation of the word 
 predecessor in the Act ? — The word predecessors in 
 title. I took it to mean predecessors in occupancy, 
 which probably the framers of the Act mtended it to 
 mean, but there was another, view of it taken by the 
 chau'man, and he said he would allow compensation 
 for no improvements except those that took place since 
 the last conditions of tenancy were settled. 
 
 2123. The change v/as a mere change of rent ? — A 
 change of rent, or some new condition. 
 
 2124. Baron Dowse. — The chairman was of opinion 
 that the change of rent had severed the chain of suc- 
 cession entirely 1 — That is just it. 
 
 2125. Chairmax. — You think that is a pouit in 
 which the Land Act needs amendment? — If there 
 was a jury sitting in the case this thing would not have 
 occurred. 
 
 2126. Baron Dowse. — But that was a question of 
 law ; how would a jury decide that? — You would get 
 very eminent Queen's counsel that would differ on a 
 question of law. 
 
 2127. But upon that particular question, it being a 
 question of law, he should direct the jury in a parti- 
 cular way ? — I tliink he would hardly have the face to 
 direct a jury that way. 
 
 2128. Did the parties not appeal in that case?-^ 
 How could the poor man appeal ? An appeal would 
 cost him £40 or £50, and he was not worth probably 
 £5 at the time. 
 
 2129. Chairman. — Do you think that a jury might 
 be made judges of the law, as well as of matters of 
 fact in these cases? — Certainly, I wovild give them 
 full discretion, the same as they have on criminal 
 trials. 
 
 2130. Mr. Shaw. — You would make them arbitra- 
 tors between landlord and tenant ? — I would. 
 
 2131. Would it not be better, do you think, to refer 
 cases to a court of arbitration?^! am only speaking of 
 what I suggest as a better system thaii the pre- 
 sent one, but if yovi appomt proper arbitrators, I have 
 no objection whatever to that plan. What we want 
 is some system of estimating the value of the tenant's 
 claims different from the present, and I think it would 
 be decidedly better if there was a jury. 
 
 2132. And not leave it to the chairman entirely ?— 
 Decidedly not. 
 
 2133. Baron DowsE.^-That last instance is not the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 79 
 
 ault of the landlord ; it may be the fault of the law or 
 )f the chairman according to your view 1 — That only 
 jroves my point, that tliero should be a jury to take 
 t out of the hands of the chairman. 
 
 2134. You moan the decision of the question about 
 Jie meaning of predecessors in title t How would you 
 settle that? — Could they not put in the words " pre- 
 iecessors in occupancy," instead. It shows the neces- 
 sity of having some person to help in the decision 
 besides the chairman. 
 
 2135. The O'Oonoe Don. — In this particular case 
 was it a mere change in the rent that had taken 
 place? — I cannot say exactly. It was some small 
 3hange not worth talking about. 
 
 2136. Baron Dowse. — Possibly that was one of 
 bhe cases Mr. Ferguson referred to the other day 
 where the English law as to change of tenancy was 
 sontended for 1 — One thing is certain, you must give 
 up the notion of assimilating the cases of tenants in 
 Ireland and England altogether, because, in the case 
 of the English tenants, it is the landlord that makes 
 ill the improvements, and in our own case it is the 
 tenants that make them. 
 
 2137. Chairman. — Then this would be a matter in 
 the Land Act that you would wish to have made 
 clearer ?— Yes. 
 
 2138. Are there any other points on which you 
 have some observations to offer 1 — ^Ve^, the first and 
 second clauses legalize the tenant-right custom in the 
 North of Ireland, and also protects any similar cus- 
 toms that may be found in the south. Certainly, in 
 the north, they fought better to maintain their rights, 
 and the tenant-right custom is pretty general there. 
 In the south it is not so general. "What I would sug- 
 gest is, instead of havmg one system for the north, 
 and another for the south, to have, for all Ireland, 
 perpetuity of tenure at fair rents. 
 
 2139. Baron Dov.'se. — Would this satisfy your 
 idea, that a man, as long as he paid a fair and reason- 
 able rent, should continue to hold and not be turned 
 Dut ? — Decidedly. 
 
 2140. And should have the power of free sale? — 
 3h, certainly ; and power to subdivide between his 
 children also. 
 
 2141. Would you not give the landlord some sort 
 Df veto as to the person that would be purchaser ? — No. 
 
 2142. Suppose the person a tenant was going to 
 sell to was an improper character ? — Has he not the 
 aw of the land to protect him ? 
 
 2143. Then you would allow the landlord no veto 
 whatever? — No veto whatever. 
 
 2144. How would you propose to settle what would 
 be a fair rent ? — I would take Griffith's valuation first 
 as a basis for the value of the land, taking away the 
 value of the improvements. 
 
 2145. Mr. Shaw. — If the landlord and tenant dis- 
 agreed as to what would be a fair rent, would you 
 nave any objection to have it referred to arbitrators 
 to fix the rent? — What I would wish would be to 
 iare two arbitrators appointed by the Govemnaent 
 11 each county, because I don't at all like people 
 'oin'f to law with their landlords, and I would like 
 x> have somebody to appeal to to settle between them. 
 
 2146. Baron Dowse. — Then you would think that 
 ihis would be a fair settlement of the question, that 
 ;he tenant should have the land at a fair and reason- 
 ible rent with power of free sale? — Oh, decidedly, 
 ree sale in v/hole or in part. 
 
 2147. And that he should not be disturbed as long 
 is he paid his rent, and should have the power of 
 lividing his land among his cliildren ? — Certainly. 
 
 2148. And if any dispute arose between landlord 
 md tenant you would have it referred to a Govern- 
 nent officer to decide it? — I beg your pardon, I would 
 Lot leave it so obscure as that. I would have some- 
 hing first as a fair basis for rent, and I would 
 ake Griffith's valuation, mimis the value of the im- 
 )rovements. 
 
 2149. Somebody would have to decide that?— -Let 
 IS be content with that as a basis, and then if either 
 
 party wishes to appeal, let him ; but I would like to Sent. 6, isso. 
 have something to begin with — let them cUvest Grif- ^^^, '^^aas 
 fith's valuation of the improvements, and then you Meagher, p.p. 
 have something to go upon — it gives so much for the 
 house, so much for the land and so on. 
 
 2150. You would just take off the value of the im- 
 provements?— I would divest Griffith's valuation of 
 the improvements over the soil, because they don't 
 mind improvements under the soil. 
 
 2151. Then who would be the ultimate court of 
 appeal ?— I would leave it to two arbitrators and an 
 umpire, appomted by the Government. Of course if they 
 were men of as high character as the late Sir Kichard 
 Griffith, they could very well give satisfaction, for I 
 must say, as a rule, in every part of Ireland where I 
 have been (and I am among the tenants as a clergy- 
 man for the last 39 years), I have found general satis- 
 faction expressed with Sir Richard Griffith's valuation, 
 although the improvements are containedin it. But,cer- 
 tainly, the best way to make it anything like a basis 
 for rent would be to divest it of improvements except 
 where the landlord is proved to have made the im- 
 provements. 
 
 2152. Chaitijian. — We had evidejico here that 
 Griffith's valuation is under the mark with regard to 
 the better class of land ? — What class of land is that ? 
 
 2153. That the better class of land — pasture land 
 for instance — is valued low in Griffith's valuation ? — I 
 must say I would noS disagree with that, as to the 
 vakiation of the high pasture lands. I admit that 
 that is somewhat lov.', for this reason, that the scale 
 of prices for butter and for beef is now far and av/ay 
 beyond what it was the time he went to make his 
 valuation, but as regards tillage farms and the poor 
 land, although the scale of prices for produce is 
 somewhat o-\'er the scale Sir Richard Griffith went 
 on, I think the increased expense of cultivation 
 almost neutralizes that, so that I think Griffith's 
 valuation might be fair enough for the inferior class of 
 land, but I must say that £t>r the high class of pasture 
 lands it is somewhat low. Of c.urse, in the case of 
 pasture lands the valuation does not take in im- 
 provements, because, as a rule, there is very little 
 improvement upon a grass farm, except perhaps a 
 house built on it for a herdsman. I will admit 
 certainly that on what you call lands of high quality, 
 high pasture lands, Griffith's valuation does not go 
 up to the mark. I would add one-fourth to it. 
 
 2154. Would you. give the landlord or the tenant 
 the option at any time of asking for a new valuatirn? 
 — That is a case where the Ian,,. lord might please him- 
 self 
 
 2155. Would you e:;olude the landlord from seeking 
 a new valuation ? — In that case I wou.ld not. That 
 is the case of high pasture. 
 
 2156. A new valuation to be decided by arbitrators 
 with a Government umpire? — Just so, men of high 
 character, I would have none other, because as to local 
 valuators they are more or less influenced by either 
 side. I would have a judicial official as firm and 
 strong in mind as the late Sir Richard Griffith. I 
 am entirely against preventing subdivision. I nay if 
 you wish to know the cause of the feeling of disaffec- 
 tion that exists,' it is that the younger sons of the 
 farmers are cut out from any share of the inheritr.nce, 
 and you make idlers and rebels of them. They go 
 to America and inculcate revolutionary ideas, and 
 often bring them home with them. I certainly protest 
 against a man bemg prevented from subdividing up to 
 a certain point among his children. Up to that point 
 I woxild allow no landlord to interfere with subdivision, 
 and I would allow the tenant the right to sell the 
 whole or a part of his farm. If the landlord wishes to 
 buy any part of the farm he can do so, by giving as 
 much as any other purchaser would give, but I would 
 give him no right of preference. 
 
 2157. The O'CoNOR Don. — What is the limit which 
 you would place to subdivision ? — That is a point of 
 very material consideration ; it is a question for dis- 
 cussion. I would say twenty statute acres. 
 
80 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 5ep«. e, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Thomas 
 Meagher, p.p. 
 
 2158. Mr. Shaw. — It would differ on different 
 lands of course ? — Yes. 
 
 2159. On poor lands it would be larger'? — I think 
 it is a matter that two men might reason upon very 
 well. J only throw out that opinion^ I do not give it 
 as infallible, but it was my own experience among the 
 people during the last winter. I had a great deal to 
 do endeavouring to provide relief for 200 families in 
 my parish, and I found, as a rule, that any persons that 
 had any portion of land were not in want ; of course 
 there was a great deal of distress among them, and 
 some very bad cases, but as a general rule nothing like 
 the distress of the others. 
 
 21 GO. Were there any cases of distress ' among any 
 other class of people 1 — Those who had no land were 
 all starving, all the people that were driven into the 
 village by evictions. 
 
 2161. Mr. SiiAW. — There was no employment ■? — 
 No emiiloyment, the villages overcrowded with labour. 
 There were in my parish, about the year 1846 or 1844, 
 1,200 iiiniilies ; there are only 678 families there now. 
 I lost about 500 iamilies. People may think that all 
 these people disappear. They do not disappear. They 
 run into the villages where there is no work for them. 
 
 2162. That happened in your own memory 1 — No, 
 I am only there five years. 
 
 2163. But you can trace it? — I saw the record of 
 it in the parish bool'. It was about 1,200 families. 
 
 2 1 64. Chaieman. — That was since the great famine ? 
 —Since 1844. 
 
 2165. The O'CoNOE Don. — Are these people now 
 all labourers 1 — They have no other place to go to but 
 to crowd into the villages. 
 
 2166. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose a great number of 
 them have gone to America? — Some of them, but 
 there are plenty of iamilies remaining at home, and 
 there is no provision for them. 
 
 2107. And they have a very bitter feeling, I sup- 
 pose 1 — Of course, and a bitter feeling against the 
 priest among others if he does not denounce this or 
 that from the altar. 
 
 2168. Chairman. — The want of employment last 
 winter, I suppose, was in consequence of the bad cir- 
 cumstances of the farmers owing to the bad crops 1 — 
 The want of employment may be partly due to that, 
 but I think at any time there is not sufficient work 
 for the labourers. As a rule the farmer does not give 
 much employment. I think you might say that no 
 labourer has to count upon more than three months' 
 employment during the year, owing to the use of 
 machinery for saving the harvest and the great pre- 
 valence of pasture. 
 
 2169. The O'CoNOE Don.— What is the rate of 
 wages in your parish? — I know a gentleman could 
 get :i man any day at a shilling a day for the year. 
 
 2170. Mr. Shaw. — That is a shilling a day all the 
 the year round ? — All the year round. 
 
 2171. Do they get breakfa.st or any perquisites in 
 addition? — Not as far as I see. No farmer will have 
 a labourer's house on his farm, because he would have 
 to pay poor-rate on the house. That was the cause of 
 the eviction of the small holders, the circumstance that 
 the pooi-rate fell upon the landlord for every house 
 valued at or under £4. 
 
 2172. The O'Conoe Don. — These labourers then 
 live in the villages ? — They are living there because 
 they have nowhere else to go to. 
 
 2173. The rate of wages then lias increased very 
 little? — Scarcely. I think it is true to say for all 
 Munster that you could get a man all through the 
 year for a 1 s. or Is. 2d. a day — six or seven shillings 
 a week. 
 
 2174. Then in what way has the cost of production 
 increased? You said a while ago the cost of pro- 
 duction had increased ? — Of course during the season 
 those that have not constant work wou.ld charge the 
 farmer high wages. You might get a man charging 
 2s. 6c/. a day during the season that would be glad to 
 get a shilling a day constantly if he was sure of it. 
 
 2175. Mr. Shaw. — Is yours to a large extent a 
 
 grazing district ? — It is, more than I would wish it 
 to be — not so much as othel' places. 
 
 2176. Chairman. — Do the labourers go to England 
 in search of employment 1 — They do not go to England. 
 
 2177. In some parts of Ii'eland they go away a great 
 deal to England ? — I do not admire that, I must confess. 
 
 2178. I don't mean pernsanently, but for employ- 
 ment during the harvest season ? — It is a system 1 
 don't like. 
 
 2179. Baron Dowse. — At all events they don't do 
 it in Tipperary ? — No, not so much. 
 
 2180. Chaieman. — Would you go to any other 
 point in the Land Act that you take exception to? — 
 I am entirely against charging any poor-rate for hold- 
 ings under £4 valuation. As long as poor-rate is 
 charged for their houses you will have no labourers 
 in the country. Secondly, I would be for making the 
 provision about the erection of labourers' cottages 
 compulsory. 
 
 2181. You would bind the lamllord to erect them ? — 
 Bind the landlord under penalty of forfeiture of rent 
 and the tenant under forfeiture of his tenant-right. I 
 believe that the Land Act suggests in the 10th 
 section that the landlord can take up the one-twenty- 
 fifth part of a farm without being obliged to pay 
 compensation for disturbance for the purpose of 
 erecting a labourer's cottage. That is all very fine, 
 but I think that for the last ten years there were 
 not three instances where that permission was acted 
 upon. 
 
 2182. Mr. Kavanagh. — You would make it com- 
 pulsory on the landlord ? — Decidedly, and on the tenant. 
 
 2183. Baron Dowse. — By not allowing the landlord 
 to recover his rent, or the tenant to get compensation, 
 if he neglects it ? — He should forfeit his fixity of tenure 
 unless he was prepared to give a labourer one-twenty- 
 fifth of his holding. 
 
 2184. The O'CoNOK Don. — Upon what conditions 
 would 3'ou give the house to the labourer ? — To hold 
 upon the same terms from the landlord as the tenant 
 would hold from the landlord, and again to have no 
 poor rate charged upon the house to any person. 
 
 2185. Would the occupier be bound to employ that 
 person ? — I leave that to the law of supply and demand. 
 I would not have him bound. 
 
 2 186. Chaieman. — How would you regulate the 
 number of such houses ? — Well, I think the 10th sec- 
 tion of the Act has something to say to that. 
 (Section quoted.) • I would have that to apply to 
 leasehold tenants and to yearly tenants alike. But 
 that section is merely permissive. I want to make it 
 compulsory. Permissive legislation will never do in 
 Ireland. 
 
 2187. Baron Dowse. — Hovvwould you make it com- 
 pulsory ? Would you compel the landlord to take up 
 the land ? — Certainly I would. 
 
 2188. Mr. Shaw. — If there was a labourer on the 
 land you would compel the landlord to have a proper 
 residence erected for him ? — Not only that, but I 
 insist that if you want to remedy the grievances of the 
 labourers that are crowding into the villages, and are 
 the source of all the misery, you must give them a plot 
 of land and a house, and distribute them among the 
 farmers. 
 
 2189. If farmers don't want them? — I don't care 
 about that. 
 
 2190. How are they to live if they get no employ- 
 ment ? — Suppose he gets an acre and a half of land or 
 two acres. ' 
 
 2191. He could not live upon that? — That is his 
 own a flair. His pretension in the way of diet is very 
 small. If a labourer cannot manage to live upon an 
 acre and a half of land, how does he live upon no land 
 at all at pi-esent ? But certainly I hold that some land 
 should be given up compulsorily to the labourer. 
 
 2192. The O'Conoe Don. — If a man can live upon 
 an acre and a half of land why should you prevent 
 subdivision below the figure you named ?— I would not 
 want them all to become men of the labourin" class. 
 I would have the labouring class and the forming 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 81 
 
 class living together in the country. I never like to 
 have the idea of labour detached from the position of 
 a farmer. 
 
 2193. Baron Dowse. — You would recognise that 
 his first position is that of labourer, and you would 
 give him the land as an adjunct to that 1 — Just so. 
 
 2194. Mr. Shaw. — You would not prohibit the 
 
 farmer from subdividing up to a certain point ■! I 
 
 would not ; I would rather encourage it. 
 
 2195. Baron Dowse. — You would not have them 
 subdivide below a limit of twenty acres ? — That is my 
 own opinion, but I would like to be conciliatory. I would 
 go to the extent of twelve acres statute, seven and a 
 half Irish acres. I would go as far as that, and I 
 would exempt all holdings under £15 annual value 
 from poor rate, and throw it all on the outlying grass 
 farms. 
 
 2196. Mr. Shaw. — That is farms where a man does 
 not reside or give any employment — what you would 
 call idle farms ? — Exactly ; farms that give no employ- 
 ment. 
 
 2197. Baron Dowse. — In many cases don't they 
 only take the place for nine months of the year ? — 
 That is what makes it worse. I would have a pro- 
 vision compelling them to assign to small occupiers 
 under certain terms. My ideas are entirely in favour 
 of residential occupation. 
 
 2198. Mr. Shaw. — In fact you want to break up 
 that sort of land into small holdings ? — I do. I think 
 it a rather sad state of things that 8,000,000 acres 
 should only support 35,000 farmers in Ireland, while 
 the same quantity of land in Belgium supports 
 5,000,000 people. 
 
 2199. Baron Dowse. — I think there is a great deal 
 in your view, that a mere settlement of the tenant 
 question would be incomplete if it left the labourer 
 question unsettled? — I take in every phase of the 
 question. I don't see the meaning of making a pro- 
 vision iu an Act of Parliament for labourers, unless it 
 is made compulsory. I don't suppose there were ten 
 cases since the Land Act where that permission was 
 availed of. 
 
 2200. Would you contemplate placing the labourer 
 under the tenant ? — If I gave land to the labourer I 
 would like to have him independent ; I would allow 
 no slavery if I could. 
 
 2201. Mr. Shaw. — "Would you have the labourer 
 under the landlord and not under the tenant 1 — De- 
 cidedly. 
 
 2202. Chairman. — Do you propose also that the 
 tenant should build labourer's cottages 1 — I don't know 
 that, that is a matter for after-consideration, suppose 
 some of the Church Surplus money was given for the 
 purpose. To that there is no objection, but it should 
 bs done in some way: It could be done by the poor 
 rata, for if you diminish those who are in want you 
 diminish the strain u.pon the rate. 
 
 2203. Mr. Shaw. — These people pay rent at pre- 
 sent ? — They pay enormous rents. I know instances 
 in my parish of that. 
 
 2204. Chairman. — In your scheme of peasant pro- 
 pjietary you would include both the holders of lands 
 and the holders of cottage gardens 1 — Yes, but I would 
 include no outlying holding where the tenant did not 
 iv.side. 
 
 2205. The O'Conor Don. — By outlying holding, do 
 you mean grass lands 1 — Yes, grass lands ; I would not 
 include them. 
 
 2206. You would not include any farm where the 
 tenant is not resident? — No, and I would not go 
 beyond £100 annual value. 
 
 2207. Baron Dowse. — Your object is to save the 
 people by keeping the land for them instead of 
 making room for cattle ? — I want to prevent cattle, if 
 possible, from excluding the people. 
 
 2208. And to save the people 1 — Yes, I think it is 
 an unfortunate circumstance that we have suffered the 
 jjeople to be diminished to such an extent as one- 
 fifth of a million upon land as good and as much, as 
 that which gives sustenance to five millions of people 
 
 in a country like Belgium. I think myself that the Sept.j^sso. 
 arreax-s of rent which entitle the landlord to evict Rev. Thomas 
 are too limited ; there should be two years' rent due Meagher, r.p. 
 at all events. 
 
 2209. The law now is a year, and you would say 
 two ?— Yes ; two years going upon the Eoman law — 
 that is the Roman law. 
 
 2210. Mr. Si-iAW.— Was that the Eoman law ?— It 
 was three years in cases analogous to tenancies in 
 Ireland, and two years in cases analogous to tenancies 
 in England. 
 
 2211. Chairman.— Would that cause greater diffi- 
 culty in evicting? — Yes. If peoplegave a fairrent they 
 should not complain, if they gave say four-fifths of 
 Griffith's valuation, and had two years before eviction. 
 
 2212. Baron Dowse. — In your part of the country 
 is it the rule to have a hanging gale, that is to say 
 there is half a year's rent due always 1 — Yes, but that 
 is going out of use — that system. 
 
 2213. In that case where half a year's rent remains 
 due always the eviction is practically for half a year's 
 rent 1 — Yes, of course and that is bad. Of course you 
 have the principle of perpetuity of tenure fixirly in the 
 Land Act, for the 28th section authorizes landlords 
 with limited interests to give leases of thirty-five years, 
 and the question is whether you should make the clause 
 compiilsory. 
 
 2214. Compulsory perpetuity? — Yes, that is the 
 principle of the 28th section. I have put my ideas on 
 paper, for the subject is very complicated, and here is 
 what I said on that subject. " To do that " that is to 
 give fixity of tenure at fair rents, " all we require is to 
 extend the principle contained in the 28th section of 
 the Land Act." 
 
 2215. That is dealing with limited owners, and as 
 to people who are not limited owners, it leaves them 
 to give what they please ? — I understand that, but I 
 am only saying the principle of the thing is contained 
 in that section, and it could be worked out. 
 
 2216. You say, and I believe there is very little 
 doubt about it ; that the legislature having given the 
 limited owner that power, is an index to their 
 opinion, that it was thought the man who was not 
 a limited owner should give the same thing ? — Yes. 
 
 2217. Don't you think it would be better to avoid 
 all leases if you could, and to hold for ever ? — Yes, 
 but how for ever ? 
 
 2218. Don't you think it would be better to have 
 one land system for Ireland instead of two 1 — What do 
 you mean by that ? 
 
 2219. I mean to have one system instead of the 
 Ulster system, and that prevailing in other parts of the 
 country ? — Yes, I believe the important principle for 
 the whole of Ireland is that, instead of the Ulster 
 system with all its drawbacks, there should be leases 
 for ever. 
 
 2220. Mr. Shaw. — You don't ca^-e much which way 
 it is done, provided the tenant gets security? — No, 
 give the tenant a fixed interest. According to my 
 principle the condition of the tenancy should make 
 the law. Where the tenant makes all the iinju-ove- 
 ments as in the Roman law, he should have perpetuity 
 of tenure, iu fact as I say in the Roman law, the con- 
 dition of the tenancy makes the law. In the Roman 
 law there is only a lease for nineteen years, where the 
 landlord is bound to keep the improvements in repair, 
 and do the improvements as in English farms. 
 
 2221. That is what are called English farms ?— Yes, 
 but of course where the tenant is evicted for non- 
 payment of rent, he should still have the right of sale. 
 I would abolish as illegal and as penal punishable by 
 law, everything in the way of office rules, for I don't 
 see any meaning in it. 
 
 2222. Baron Dowse.— And you would prevent any 
 tenant contracting himself out of the benefit that any 
 Act of Parliament gave him ? — Decidedly. 
 
 2223. Whether a large or small tenant ? — Decidedly. 
 That is my notion now, but I might qualify it by-and- 
 
 by. I would give the occupiers of residential holdino's 
 
 holdings upon which men resided— security up to £100 
 
 M 
 
82 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. e, 1880. value, bnt not beyond that. I would not-give security 
 Eev. Thomas "^ ^^^^ '''^^^ °^^''-' ^^^^ Poor Law valuation. 
 
 er, p.p. 
 
 2224 We had a gentleman from Kildare the other 
 day a large farmer who gave it as his opinion that the 
 largf- 'armers should be protected as much as the small 
 ones as tliey required it at least as much? — Oh no, not 
 at all I would not protect them ; they don't want it. 
 
 2225. Mr. Shaw. — Hemeant as to tillage farms? — 
 There are no such things at all in Ireland as large 
 tillage farms. 
 
 2226. There are in Kildare? — I will tell you 
 candidly I do not like to give any of these rights 
 except to residential holders. 
 
 2227. Baron Dowse. — But this man was living 
 there and he had as many as 200 acres of land which 
 he was tillingl — I don't like to encourage large farms 
 at all. 
 
 2228. Chairman. — You think it would be better to 
 have them all split up 1 — Yes, 1 don't want Englishmen 
 here at all ; we have enough of ourselves for the land 
 in Ireland. I would give fixity of tenure up to £100 
 value for the residential holder, and if he wants to 
 hold more let him hold it by contract or agreement. 
 
 2229. But don't you think that the large tenant 
 who tills a lot of land gives a great deal of employment 
 and benefits those around him ? — Yes, of course I 
 would have no objection to give liim the same protection 
 bvit I would limit it to residential holders. 
 
 2230. -Mr. Shaw. — But in some cases where they 
 build houses and made all the improvements you 
 would not exclude these men ? — These are special cases, 
 but I am only speaking of the general run of farmers 
 in Ireland. Of course if the landlord makes improve- 
 ments on the estate as majay an Englishman has done, 
 I will allow him to charge it to his tenants, but where 
 the tenant makes the improvements I would give him 
 the benefit of them. 
 
 2231. You would give the landlord the option of 
 the system he should adopt 1 — Yes ; either the English 
 system ; for I don't know that the English system 
 goes contrary to the Eoman law ; except as to payment 
 of rates and valuation when necessary. 
 
 2232. Baron Dowse. — If a landlord makes all the 
 improvements on a farm — drains it ; fences it and 
 keeps the dwelling-house in repair the same as ordinary 
 people do in towns, and the same as is said to be done 
 in England, and lets such a farm at a rent do you 
 think that that tenant should abide by his contract 
 and have no privileges of fixity of tenure or otherwise 1 
 — Quite so. 
 
 2233. Are there many instances of that kind in 
 your i^art of the country ? — No, not many, but there 
 are instances on Lord Derby's estate. 
 
 2234. But he has sold it? — Yes. I would not allow 
 any landlord the right of converting a residential non- 
 improved farm into a residential improved farm. 
 
 2235. Your evidence is only limited to cases where 
 the landlord has done the improvements already ? — ■ 
 Yes, and let him get the benefit of these improvements. 
 
 2236. But you would not allow him to turn round 
 on the tenant and say this has been a non-improved 
 farm, but now it Avill be an improved one, and let as 
 such ? — No. 
 
 2237. Suppose a landlord has made all the improve- 
 ments on a farm, and he lets it to a tenant of course 
 doesn't he take into account all the improvements in 
 the land and charges them to the tenant ? — He does. 
 
 2238. "When he does that, would not the tenant be 
 at liberty to make improvements if he chooses, and 
 get compensation for them under the Land Act ? — Yes. 
 
 2239. But you would not give fixity of tenure 1 — 
 No. I would not in cases analogous to English 
 tenancies. Let them hold by twenty-one years' leases. 
 I would not allow a landlord who had allowed the land 
 improvements to lapse into the hands of the tenant to 
 convert it into an improved farm. 
 
 2240. Mr. Shaw. — Then you would have two sys- 
 tems ? — Yes. One for conditions of tenancy analogous 
 to English cases, and the other for conditions of ten- 
 ancy analogous to Irish cases. 
 
 2241. And would not the tendency of the landlord 
 be to change from one into the other ? — I would not 
 allow that. 
 
 2342. Chairman. — But where the English system 
 exists you would allow it to continue ? — Yes, but I 
 would not allow any change. 
 
 2243. Baron Dowse. — You would not like a hard- 
 and-fast line to be drawia to the prejudice of anybody, 
 including the landlords who make the improvements 
 themselves ? — No. 
 
 2244. I know something about that county too. 
 Except as to that estate of Lord Derby's ; are there many 
 landlords who do that sort of thing? — There is Smith- 
 Barry's estate in Tipperaiy also. 
 
 2245. What is the town you are near ? — I am neai- 
 Limerick ; I am in North Tipperary, but Nenagh is 
 the priucipal town in the North Riding. 
 
 2246. Is that the rule about Nenagh — that the 
 landlords make the improvements ? — In very few cases. 
 They are like angel's visits, few and- far between. 
 There is a great custom in the country, in case of a 
 valuable farm being likely to be evicted or sold by the 
 t«3nant, the landlord reserves to himself the right of 
 fixing the new tenant, and very often one tenant is 
 put out and another tenant of a different persuasion 
 put in. I mean different religious persuasion. 
 
 2247. The O'Conoe Dox.— But they do allow a 
 limited sale ? — I have seen instances of it. 
 
 2248. Is this limited sale an ordinary practice % — 
 Yes, as far as I know. I have seen one or two in- 
 stances of it not far from myself. 
 
 2249. Chairman. — Would you allow a valuation 
 of the tenant's interest or v.-hat may be called his 
 tenant-right by an independent arbitrator in. the same 
 way as you speak of in respect of compensation ?— No. 
 That is a sale, the other is a letting. 
 
 2250. You think there is no risk of fictitious value ? 
 — No ; not in what I call a free and open sale. 
 
 2251. Baron Dowse. — Let it find its own level in 
 the public market ? — Yes, because this mock sale com- 
 pelling you to give to a certain party, and for not half 
 perhaps what you would get from another, I look upon 
 as a great hardship. 
 
 2252. Chairman. — I think in the defijiition of 
 tenant-right which Baron Dowse put to you, he said 
 he would allow a reasonable objection to the purchaser 
 on the part of the landlord ? — I would not. I would 
 give him the law of the land; if you lay down a 
 principle you don't know where it may stop. 
 
 2253. Baron Dowse. — You tliink if any man is fit 
 to be a citizen, he is fit to be the tenant of land ? — I 
 would say if the man is able to get a character from the 
 priest or some one else, I would not allow the landlord 
 to interfere at all. 
 
 2254. Suppose the landlord said, I would not like 
 this tenant, and I have objections to him in every v,-ay, 
 and I'll give you as much for the land as he will give 
 you, would you give the landlord the right of pre- 
 emption ? — I give the right of pre-emption where the 
 tenant gets as much as the land would carry in the 
 open market, provided the landlord wanted it for 
 personal use, but he might want it for another tenant. 
 
 2255. Mr. Shaw. — You allow it if he gives the full 
 price ? — Yes. 
 
 2256. Baron Dowse. — You would not allow the 
 landlord to get it for the mere purpose of absorbing it 
 into another farm ? — No. Provided the landlord wants 
 to build a house, say to live on the estate, and there is 
 a bona fide desire to get possession of the land for some 
 ]personal purpose I would allow the landlord the right. 
 
 2257. But you don't want to lessen the number of 
 tenants i^No I would rather increase them. If you 
 do not do something of that kind the landlord might 
 by raising unreasonable objections prevent the sale. 
 I would give the right for no other reason than for 
 personal occupation ; if the landlord does not want 
 the land for that purpose, I would not give him any 
 choice at all. There is another question my mind is 
 very strong upon, and that is the poor-rate. I believe 
 in the Irish Poor Law Act, the deduction by the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 83 
 
 tenant was to be the same in the highest as in the lowest 
 rented tenancy, and the deduction must never exceed 
 half the poor-rate. At present there is no check upon 
 the landlord, for by doubling the rent in small holdin"'s 
 he can cause the tenant to pay the whole of the poot-- 
 rate. The poor law valuation of a farm is, say £10 ■ 
 and the rent is £20 which is rather a common thini^ 
 enough ; the poor-rate is Is. in the pound, and the 
 tenant pays 10s. According to tlie present law the 
 tenant can only deduct 5s. of that, but I would allow 
 him to deduct half the rate on the £20, which would 
 leave nothing to be paid by the tenant in the end. I 
 do not think it is right to allow the tenant who is 
 working the farm at a loss to be charged the same as the 
 landlord who has the fee simple. That was how it 
 was in the original Poor Law Act, but it has been 
 changed since 1852. 
 
 2257a. Mr. Kav.\nagh. — You say the common rent 
 is double the poor law valuation 1 — It is not the gene- 
 ral rule, but there are properties where it is so. 
 
 2258. From your general knowledge of joxxr dis- 
 trict, have joxx known of any hard actions on the part 
 of landlords 1 — I think a great instance is what I have 
 just mentioned, iixing the succession to a holding at a 
 smaller fine than any other person would pay. 
 
 2259. Wasn't that rather the fault of the chairman, 
 or county court judge 1 — I am only speaking of the 
 fact of the landlord interfering -^^itli the tenant getting 
 the best price he can for the farm. The landlord very 
 often reserves to himself the right of finding a tenant. 
 
 2260. Have yon known any instances of landlords 
 mijustly raising their rents 1 — I don't know the mo- 
 tives, but I know the rents were raised. There was a 
 poor man in my parish under notice of eviction, but it 
 was settled. His rent was raised. 
 
 2261. But raising the rent is not the habit? — I 
 would not say it is. There are two properties where 
 the rent has been considerably raised, although all the 
 improvements were done by the tenants. 
 
 2262. On whose property is that L-I don't think 
 it is fair to ask me ; but there is the property of Mr. 
 Henry, and another property belonging to Mr. 
 Hamilton, in my parish. I heard it from people 
 whose house I was at at the station, that the rent 
 had been raised in the former case from 17s. to 35s. an 
 acre. 
 
 2263. Baron Dowse. — Isn't it the fact the landlord 
 can raise it if he chooses 1 — Yes. 
 
 2264. The tenant is bound to accept it, or go out? 
 - — -Or go to law. My principle is to prevent the pos- 
 sibility of law between the landlord and the tenant. 
 
 2265. Mr. Shaw.— And to give the tenant perfect 
 security t — ^Yes ; and my notion of fixity of tenure 
 is — you shan't be touched until you do -wrong to the 
 landlord. 
 
 2266. Baron Dowse. — Did you ever turn your 
 attention to the question of a peasant propiietary ? — 
 I did. 
 
 2267. Do you think the purchase clauses in the 
 Land Act helped to create a peasant proprietary?— I 
 don't think they did much. I put my ideas on paper, 
 and if you will allow me, as the subject is a difiicult 
 one, 1 will read them^ — 
 
 " Fkee Trade in Land as in Fbance and Peussia." 
 " To fully develope in Ireland the qualities of the soil, and 
 render it capable of supporting proportionably as large a 
 population as land of much inferior quality on the 
 continent, the density of population in Belgium is 425, to 
 the square mile (5 Irish acres to a family), iu Ireland 
 2U0. We must have small holdings, no rents or small 
 fixed rents, with perpetuity of (enure. To bring about 
 this state of things by constitutional means, that is without 
 shocking the prejudices of the most fastidious, that is the 
 question for consideration. Baron O'Hagan sometime 
 smoe said, that by localising sales, making_ every land 
 court one for the disposal of all property within the circle 
 of its jurisdiction, much might be done, through the work- 
 ing of the Bright Clauses to effect this most deshable con- 
 summation. This, I believe, is to some extent correct, 
 but that the Bright clauses so improved will, by them- 
 selves rapidly create a peasant proprietary, is to my mind 
 the merest delusion. The grounds on which this state- 
 
 ment rests ;ire, that solicitors in charge of the sale of Sept. 8, 1880. 
 property in the Landed Estates Court may or may not _ Thomas 
 give tenants the benefit of these clauses just as they choose jjgagher p.P 
 and, as a rule, they are unwilling to sell properties in less i • • 
 
 quantities than single townlands, and they are so unwilling 
 because purchasers distinct from occupiers are indisposed 
 where they can buy less than that quantity, but won't buy 
 townlr.nds whore rent paying tenants, after sale, became 
 intermingled with occupying peasant proprietors or 
 tenants who pay no rent. They don't like them to inter- 
 mingle." 
 
 22G8. Sir. 8nAW. — It would cause jealousy ? — Yes, 
 and this v/ould be the case if tenants without ex- 
 ception on properties for sale were offered the benefits 
 of the Bright Clauses, because, as a rule, there is 
 scarcely a townland w'here tenants won't be found 
 unable to buy, because of their poverty, no matter 
 what aid they receive. The only practical corrective 
 of these clauses is to compel Court to fine down the 
 rent to a certain figure, say half the Poor Law valu- 
 ation, according to the sum advanced by each tenant, 
 with lease in perpetuity, and, this being done, lands 
 might be sold in single or more townlands, according 
 to the taste of solicitor and purchasers, because, in 
 that case, they would be all rent paying tenants, but 
 their rents would be very low. 
 
 2269. They would have perpetuities? — Yes; be- 
 cause, under such an arrangement, the continuity of 
 rent paying tenancies could still be kept up, but even 
 so corrected, the Bright Clauses, taking into account 
 the smallness of territory (an average rental of 
 £50,000) ammally sold in the Landed Estates Court, 
 will have rather a slow effect in creating a peasant 
 proprietary in Ireland. The only way to obviate this 
 unpleasantness is, if possible, to bring about such a 
 state of things as will compel the rapid sale of land 
 in very small parcels, say five or six acres each. To 
 realize such a consummation I see nothing propounded 
 by any person that can approach in thoroughness, and 
 completeness the plan laid down by the late Mr. 
 Scully, in his Transfer of Land Bill Session of 1853. 
 
 ■His idea was a simplification of title,, a simplification 
 of incumbrances, a registration of both in the Local 
 Land Court, and transfer by simple entry. By sim- 
 plification of title he meant that every proprietor in 
 possession of an estate should hold by fee-simple, so 
 that for the discharge of incumbrances, accordicg as a 
 decree issued, it might be sold for ever. As regards 
 incumbrances he would estimate all claims or interests 
 of any kind attaching to land, say mortgages, annuities, 
 life interests, reversionary claims, &c., at their value 
 in cash, as is done every day in insurance offices, and 
 so estimated (I want to transfer all the obligations from 
 land to money), he v.'ould con^-ert them into limited 
 land debentures of uniform value, say £100, each 
 charged on the I'cspective townlands composing the 
 property. A bill embracing these objects was laid by 
 him on the table of the House of Commons in June, 
 1853. It consisted of three parts, first, the establish- 
 ment of a land tribunal in Dublin, with branches in 
 the central town of each Poor Law Union in Ireland, 
 for the declaration and registration of title, and regis- 
 tration of incumbrances attaching to all properties 
 within their respective jurisdiction. Second, it autho- 
 rizes every owner whose title was so declared and 
 registered to incumber his land to an amount equal 
 to ten times Griffith's present, or revised valuation, 
 by a system of land debentures. Third, the transfer 
 of property for the discharge of these debentures 
 according as they fell due, principal or interest was to 
 be by simple entry and in the local office. Mr. Brooke, 
 late Master in Chancery, speaking on this subject 
 says : — 
 
 "I have considered the Prussian system of transferable 
 land debentures, and always with an earnest wish for its 
 adoption in these islands. I wish to see all judgments, 
 mortgages, and equitable charges abolished, and land deben- 
 tures for not exceeding £100 each, to the extent of a moiety 
 of the estimated value of the estate to be the only permitted 
 means of incumbering lands." 
 
 2270. Baron Dowse. — Where did he say that? — X 
 
 M2 
 
84 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT (COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 6, 1S80. got it from Mr. Scully's book. It is hard to get for I 
 
 ZT" think the book is out of print at present. 
 
 Rev. Thomas '- '■ 
 
 er, p.p. " Lender and borrower would be saved from endless liti- 
 
 gation, and the public would gain a most valuable invest- 
 ment in small sums of money, constituting a sort of circu- 
 lating^ medium of tlie most perfect security bearing interest, 
 and as easy of transfer as Bank of England notes.'' 
 
 I think if I remember well there was a registration of 
 title inquiry in England some years ago, and I think 
 he was examined before the Commission. The Landed 
 Estates Court, which as a permanent institution in 
 law for some years, might serve all the purposes con- 
 templated by Mr. Scully for his plan of land tribunal. 
 To this he would give the power of declaring and cer- 
 tifying title to property unincumbered, as well as in- 
 cumbered, for sale, as well as not for sale, Mr. Scully, 
 as I said, further proposed the establishment of dis- 
 trict officers in the central town of each poor law 
 union, where should lie registered the various proper- 
 ties within its jurisdiction for which title may have 
 been declared in Dublin. The title is now established. 
 The court does not compel the owner of the registered 
 property to sell. He has notwithstanding incum- 
 brances attaching to the estate, say mortgages, annui- 
 ties, perpetual and temporary life interests, crown 
 recognizances, reversionary interests, &.C., all were 
 estimated in cash by the Commissioners in the manner 
 already described, and changed into a system of land 
 debentures to be necessarily of a uniform value, 
 say £100 each. Where the incumbrance as above 
 stated did not amount to a sum equal to ten times 
 Griffith's valuation of the property additional ones 
 might be created to reach that amount. The deben- 
 tures representing the debts were the property of 
 those to whom the claims were due. The additional 
 ones if such there be belonged to the owner himself, 
 which he might give out as security for cash borrowed. 
 The debentures would be in reality like our bank notes 
 transferable by simple delivery, that is without in- 
 dorsement, with this difference, however, that whUe 
 the latter enjoy as security for their repayment in gold 
 only the personal integrity of the shareholders com- 
 posing the bank of issue, the debentures would have 
 the best possible security, the fee of the unincumbered 
 estate, nor could there be any danger of failure in re- 
 payment, because being a prior charge amounting in 
 all to half the selling value of the property affected by 
 them, there was scarcely a possible danger of the pro- 
 perty being ever so much depreciated in value, and 
 consequently of the security failing. The object of the 
 uniformity in value of the debentures was that the 
 owner of each might judge by its number how much 
 money was charged on the property subject to it before 
 his claim came on, and consequently whether his 
 security was good. To make matters as simple as 
 possible, the debentures were confined to single town- 
 lands. The Ordnance valuation of the townlands, with a 
 map thereof indicating its locality was given on the back 
 of the debenture, and all prior charges on the townland 
 were, as a matter of course, stated in detail thereon. The 
 debentures had all equal priority, that is, payment for a 
 late one might be enforced before an earlier one would be 
 discharged ; nor could any inconvenience arise from this 
 to a prior claimant, the property being, in all cases, 
 adequate security for all the debentures charged on it. 
 The interest on these debentures, which were all regis- 
 tered in the local offices, were payable twice a year, in 
 January and July. The principal in ten years, or it 
 may be longer period, from the date of issue. If a 
 failure occurred in the payment of the principal or 
 interest at the time fixed, an order might be got at 
 once for the sale of as much of the property as would, 
 in both cases, be adequate to the discharge of i^rincipal 
 and interest dtie. But you must observe, payment 
 was always for the present demand ; and if the deben- 
 ture due was £100, £100 worth of land in fee, that is, 
 rent free for ever, was the amount to be sold, and no 
 more ; and thus the sale of two or three or ten acre 
 estate would be a matter of daily occurrence. The 
 interest and principal at time required should be 
 
 always paid by owner at the local court, and the 
 owner of the debentures had nothing to do witli the 
 party on whose property the debenture was charged. 
 The local court had, as agent of the land tiibunal in 
 Dublin, all power to compel payment, and was the 
 party responsible to the owner of the de'jenture, just 
 as the Bank of Ireland, wherever it has a branch, acts 
 as agent between Government and those who have 
 claims on Government funds. I said, if registered 
 property were unincumbered, or incumbered to a 
 figure less than ten times Griffith's valuation, the 
 debts were to be changed into debentui~es, and could 
 . never exceed that amount. What if property were 
 incumbered, at time of registration, to an amount 
 equal to twenty-five times that valuation 1 In that 
 case there is certain to be a priority of charge on the 
 part of the early incumbrances. These claims, as far 
 as ten times Griffith's valuation, are to be first-class 
 debentures, all of equal priority with each other, and 
 the entire property pledged to their repayment as a 
 first charge. The remaining debts, amounting to 
 fifteen times Griffith's valuation, Mr. Scully charac- 
 terizes as second-class debentures, whose claim on the 
 property came in only after payment of first-class de- 
 bentiires, principal and interest. Between second-class 
 debentures there should be a right of priority one before 
 the other, and the reason is because of the clanger that, 
 after the discharge of first-class debentures, the pro- 
 perty may be inadequate to the liquidation of the entire. 
 If the proprietor were able, from personal resources, 
 without any draw on the property to pay off all 
 second class debentures, then they never could be re- 
 vived, and the only charges to remain would be those 
 of first class. The reason of the introduction of second 
 class debentures at all, is to protect the debts due on the 
 property before the introduction of the new system of 
 charge. While the first class debentures, because of the 
 indefeasibility of security, were transferable and might 
 pass from hand to hand by mere delivery, without in- 
 dorsement like bank notes. The second class deben- 
 tures, for an opposite reason, that is the absence, if 
 such security were not transferable, but should remain 
 in the local office until all were discharged. The great 
 advantage of first class debentures to landlord is that 
 by them he is enabled to pay off his debts one by one, 
 and never under a necessity to selling the entire pro- 
 perty, to meet the demands of all the debenture holders 
 whUe only one is pressing for his claims, as is the 
 case under the Landed Estates Act. With the pre- 
 sent system of charges — The advantage of second class 
 debentures beyond ordinary mortgages is, that they 
 could be paid off one by one, from personal resources, 
 leaving the estate untouched, for the protection of all 
 first class debentures, and all second class ones undis- 
 charged. But certainly, if a second class debenture 
 fell due, principal or interest, and there were no per- 
 sonal resources to meet it, the real estate should go, 
 not alone for the payment of the particular debenture, 
 but also for that of all first class debentures, and second 
 class ones having a right of prior payment. It was 
 further provided in Mr. Scully's bill that when first 
 the land was bought under the influence of the land tri- 
 bunal, no interest could be created in it less than fee- 
 simple. That is if owner desired to devise or assign 
 it he should do so in fee, that is give his successor 
 complete power to dispose of it for ever, and this, in 
 order to preserve simplicity and entirety of title. With 
 a view to future transfer', should he wish to charge 
 it with life interests, mortgages, remainderships, etc., 
 these were to be by debentures. Transfer hy simple 
 entry — We must remember when property was origi- 
 nally registered in the local office, the owner got a cer- 
 tificate first of its amount in acres, second of its value 
 according to Griffith, third a map from the Ordnance 
 office, with a view to identification. The various fields 
 composing the various townlands comprised in it, 
 were numbered as in the Ordnance maps, to pi event 
 possibility of mistake. We will say two debentures 
 value £200, fall due on the pi-operty. There are no means 
 of repayment by owner. The local court, after proper 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 authorization from the land tribunal or Landed Estates 
 Court, sells say ten acres of the land to meet the de- 
 mand. The townland out of which the above ten 
 acres are sold to pay off the debentures is three 
 hundred acres. The original certificate containing the 
 three hundred acres is given up by owner ; he gets 
 a new one for two hundred and ninety acres, pur- 
 chases another for ten acres. The old certificate 
 given back to the ofiice is destroyed. The only trouble 
 attending the sale or transfer is each party afSxing his 
 signature with proper attestation as owner of the por- 
 tion in his possession after sale. I must add any 
 o^vne^ was not obliged by Mr. Scully's bill to bring his 
 land under the influence of the land tribunal, but only 
 if he thought it his interest to do, and the induce- 
 ments the bill held out to owners to act under it were 
 these — first, simplicity of title ; second, quick and 
 inexpensive manner of borrowing money on the pro- 
 perty by means of land debentures ; third, simplicity 
 of transfer. Mr. Scully fancied these inducements 
 were sufficient to stimulate any owner to bring his 
 estate under its operation, but in this he erred, for a 
 bUl substantially the same with it became through his 
 untiring exertions law in the year 1865. It is called 
 the Debentures Act, and is to this moment practically 
 a dead letter. If it should be asked why is this, 
 simply because of the opposition of the lawyers whose 
 fees, derived from land litigation, questions of title, 
 mortgages, &c., would, as is clear to any person, be 
 terribly reduced. A Permissive Registration of Title 
 Act was passed, I thiak, in the year 1868, at the 
 instance of Lord Emly, and for the identical reason 
 that operated against the Debentures Act — that is, the 
 opposition of the lawyers because of an apprehension 
 of reduced fees— nothing or next to nothing is done 
 under it. The only thing required to make both per- 
 fect measures is by direct or indirect means to render 
 their operation compulsory. Mr. Scully himself would 
 have done this had he been permitted to retain his posi- 
 tion as an M.P. for a few years longer, but he was not, 
 for in the year 1 865 he ceased to represent the county of 
 Cork or any other place, and hence the failure of his most 
 
 beneficent project of land reform. Under our present ^ep>- c. isso, 
 system of transfer we have only one place of sale for jjgy_ Thomas 
 all Ireland — to wit, Dublin. The quantity of land Meagher, p.p 
 annually sold is £50,000 rental, expense of sale some 
 .£360,000, and the Lastances where farmers can manage 
 to buy their own holdings are very few. Under Mr. 
 Scully's system we would have one hundred and sixty- 
 three places of sale (the number of our poor law unions). 
 The quantity of land annually sold would most likely 
 reach as a rental of some £500,000, the expense in 
 each transaction a few shillings. If the farmers did 
 not, in every instance, buy their own holdings, it would 
 be their own fault, as the quantity of land sold in each 
 would seldom exceed one tenancy, and, if they had not 
 the entire of the purchase money, they could, in every 
 instance, avail themselves of the Bright clauses. This 
 system of registration and transfer is the order of the 
 day throughout the Continent. In the United States 
 and every one of the British Colonies, and why it 
 should be refused to Ireland, every one of whose in- 
 habitants is dependent on the land for their support, is 
 beyond my comprehension. Ireland at present under 
 a system of large and small farms, precarious tenures, 
 and ever-increasing rents, supports in miserable depen- 
 dence some five and a half millions. Sir Robert 
 Kane, in his work entitled " Industrial Resources of 
 Ireland," adopts the opinion of the late Mr. Blacker, 
 that under a system of exclusively small farms, 
 moderate rents, fixity of tenure, it is capable of support- 
 ing some 34,000,000. Under the plan of Mr. Scully, 
 as here explained, which, in a few years, would be 
 sure to eventuate in a system of small farms, no rents, 
 and leases for ever. That is peasant proprietorship, 
 pure and simple. I am sure it woiild be faix to assxime 
 that it would support in a position of comfort and in- 
 dependence, a population of 40,0u0,000. 
 
 2271. Chairman. — Are these cases which you have 
 mentioned of Mr. Henry and Mr. Hamilton cases long 
 past % — Yes. 
 
 2272. Then there is nothing very special within 
 your parish as to raising rents since the Land Act 
 passed 1 — No, nothing. 
 
 Mr. Beenakd Coleman examined. 
 
 Mr. Bernard 
 Colemaa. 
 
 2273. Chairman. — -I believe you are a Justice of 
 the Peace for the County of Louth ? — Yes. 
 
 2274. And you reside at Ballybarrack, Dundalk I — 
 Yes. 
 
 2275. You farm, and occupy your own farm ? — Yes. 
 
 2276. Have you any tenants? — Well, I have a few 
 tenants. 
 
 2277. What is the extent of your property ? — Well, 
 I have the townland of Ballybarrack, 428 statute acres ; 
 107 acres in Balregan, and 28 in MounthamUton. 
 That is the whole extent of the land, and there are 
 forty acres in Ballybarrack held by six tenants. 
 
 2278. How many tenants have you 1 — Six. 
 
 2279. Six altogether 1— Yes. 
 
 2280. Do you own these in fee? — Half of Bally- 
 barrack, Mount Hamilton, and Ballyregan are in fee. 
 It was purchased in the Landed Estates Court. Half 
 of Ballybarrack is held in fee, and the other half I hold 
 as tenant-at-will. 
 
 2281. Under whom ? — There are a number of land- 
 lords — Madame de Paul, Mrs. Grantham, and Mr. 
 Holme. Mr. Blaokley, of Belfast, is the agent. 
 
 2281a. Then first, as to the portion that you bought 
 in the Landed Estates Court 1 — That is at Ballybar- 
 rack. I purchased half of there. 
 
 2282. Is that part of Lord Roden's estate ? — No, 
 Mount Hamilton is on Lord Roden's estate. Bally- 
 barrack is part of the purchased property of Richard 
 Mayne, of Newbliss, in the Landed Estates Court. The 
 other part was the property of the late Lord Clermont 
 who willed it to his three sisters, and one of them willed 
 it to the other, and had occupied it since. Richard 
 
 Mayne sold it in the Landed Estates Court, and I pur- 
 chased it. It was undivided up to that time. The other 
 half remains in the hands of three parties — Madame de 
 Paul, Mrs. Grantham, and Mr. Holme. 
 
 2283. Perhaps you could tell the particulars of the 
 purchase of Ballybarrack? — -Yes. Mr. Richard Mayne, 
 of Newbliss, was the landlord to whom I paid rent. 
 The lease was for a life, and it was running out. In 
 1840 he got £2,000, and agreed to give a lease 
 renewable for ever at £200 a year rent for his 
 undivided half. I purchased this half from the 
 Landed Estates Court on the 16th day of Decem- 
 ber, 1878. The other half was a tenancy-at-will. 
 This lease for lives expired in 1852. Then I 
 had from that six years before the purchase, and 
 the other half which I still continued in as tenant-at- 
 will, but at the same rent of £213 a year. In 1858 
 there was a division by the Landed Estates Court, 
 Mr. Armstrong being sent down by the Court for the 
 purpose. It was divided on the map, but you wou.ld 
 not see where the division was if you were to go on 
 the land. I then was served with notice by the other 
 parties that they were to increase my rent, to which I 
 objected, and they asked me to give a proposal, and 
 I offered £250. They said they would take £300, and 
 I would not give it, and I was served with a notice to 
 quit, although my father was occupying the place for 
 fifty-one years. 
 
 2284. And you lost that portion ? — No, I have it 
 still. I had it for six years as tenant-at-will, and I got 
 this notice to quit of 16th April, 1858, because I would 
 not give the £300 a year rent. It was coming near 
 November, and I was getting uneasy again, for a man 
 
86 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 6, 1880, 
 
 Blr. Bernard 
 Coleman. 
 
 in farming would be interfered with in his whole 
 system if he lost portion of his land. I received this 
 letter from Mr. Travers Blackley, from Ashtown 
 Lodge, dated 14th September, 1858 : — 
 
 " Dear Sib, — I acknowledge receipt of yours of yes- 
 terday, and regret you have not come up to the rent I 
 mentioned. When I named it 1 was not depending on my 
 own judgment alone, but on that of well-qualified persons 
 acquainted with the locality, and as between all parties I 
 should fairly recommend that the offer be accepted, and the 
 business thus settled. From your character and business 
 habits, and long residence, I freely confess I would prefer 
 you to any other tenant ; and as you would have the power 
 of throwing it up at the end of five years, or renewing it, as 
 you would think desirable, 
 
 [That is meaning that they were going to divide the 
 
 portion, and they woitld give me five years of a 
 
 lease.] 
 
 " if I were in your place I think I would hesitate before I 
 
 would do anything to let it slip from me. I do not presume 
 
 to give advice, for every person, as I think, ought to,be the 
 
 best judge of what suits himself." 
 
 That gave me a start, and I did give the £300, as I 
 could not get over it. Then I received this letter of the 
 25th September, 1858 :— 
 
 " De.vk Sik, — I received your proposal of £300 a year 
 rent of Ballybarrack, and I communicated it to Madame de 
 Paul and Mrs. Grantham's solicitors, with a strong recom- 
 mendation that it will be accepted, and I have no reason to 
 think it will not. My object as agent is in getting a good 
 tenant, and in having such a man as you, who has been so 
 many years a satisfaotoiy tenant." 
 
 2285. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres were there in 
 that? — 218 statute acres. The property contains 428 
 acres. When it was divided there were 210 acres put 
 
 -in one half and 218 for the other. I have the Ord- 
 nance map here. The notice to quit shows 218 acres. 
 
 2286. Why was it not equally divided? — Because 
 there is a house and residence in one half. The 
 landlord never expended a shilling there. What I 
 may complain of is not only that I lost the eight acres 
 then, but I must pay the i-ent for it all my life. 
 
 2287. You are paying rent for it now ? — T paid my- 
 self £4:, 600 and £2,000 for the property, altogether 
 £6,620. 
 
 2288. C'liAiKMAN. — Do you pay rent on the 210 
 acres as if there were eight acres more 1 — I pay now 
 for the eight acres. 
 
 2289. The increase of rent was forced on you by 
 the notice to quit? — Yes. 
 
 , 2290. The O'Oonor Don.— That was before the 
 passing of the Land Act? — Yes in 1858, long before, 
 but that would be a grievance to me still. If it was 
 done tomorrow it would be the same thing. I would 
 have nothing for disturbance, but I might for improve- 
 ments. 
 
 2290a. Baron Dowse.— What is your rent?— £300 
 a year. 
 
 2291. Then you are not, except as to a limited ex- 
 tent within the third section for compensation for dis- 
 turbance ? — No. 
 
 2292. But you would for inqsrovements ? — Yes, I 
 would. 
 
 2293. You want to keep it at a fair rent and not 
 to be turned out 1 — Precisely. I am giving more ]iow 
 than what is a fair rent. I have never seen my land- 
 lord at all. Madame de Paul vras never in the county 
 at all in her life I believe. Now that settles Ballybarrack. 
 Then there is another part of the case I wish to mention, 
 that the disturbance clause, in my ojiinion, should not be 
 limited to a valuation of £100 a year. I had a conversa- 
 tion with Mr. "Foi-tescue," now Lord Carlingford, in the 
 lobby of the House of Commons on this subject, and 
 stated my own case in Ballybarrrck, and he said " Oh, 
 we think that a farmer valued at £100 a year can take 
 care of himself, and we cannot approach it further." 
 I said that that was a mistake — that the man with 100 
 acres had a position to hold — he would not quarrel 
 with his landlord, and he did not like to lose his posi- 
 tion. He might not easily get a farm of the same size, 
 whereas it was different with a man who had ten or 
 
 fifteen acres had a kind of protection, for there was a 
 kind of terror prevailing by which no man would take 
 the land. There is a farm that I know on Lord Cler- 
 mont's estate that is lying idle this two years, and the 
 tenant in that case was put out for non-payment of 
 rent. The land was uncropped the year before. 
 
 2294. Why is it lying idle? — It is a fourteen acre 
 farm. The tenant was put out for non-payment of 
 rent, but allowed to take with him his stocks and 
 goods, and had leave to sell his good will in the farm. 
 
 2295. Why would not anybody -take it since?-— 
 Through not getting the good will of the man put out. 
 
 2296. Chairman. — What is the man's name?— 
 Thomas Duffy is the man's name. I would have taken 
 it, only that I found I could not get his consent. 
 
 2297. Baron Dowse. — It is said that a man in your 
 position ought to be too independent to give a rent for 
 a place that is not worth it ? — Well, as I had the farm 
 in my own occupation, and farmed about 200 acres, if 
 I had to lose 100 acres, it would change my whole 
 system of farming. If I adopt the five crops rotation 
 on a farm of 200 acres, and lose 100 acres, I v,-ould 
 have to change the size of my fields and alter the whole 
 system. 
 
 2298. You are placed in such a position that you 
 are obliged to give more than the land is really worth ? 
 — In this case I give more. I believe it would not 
 set for it to-morrow in the open market. It would 
 have interfered with my business and occupation so 
 much if there had been a change, that I was obliged 
 to give the increase. They got 218 acres, 8 acres 
 were allowed in consequence of the improvements of 
 the house and offices^ and the landlord never saw the 
 place. 
 
 2299. CuAiEMAN.^Who improved- the. house and 
 offices ? — I did all. Since I got the place I built the 
 house and offices on the land, and that cost, £2,D00. 
 
 2300. Now what is the other place you mentioned? 
 — Bah'egan. 
 
 2301. Mr. Shaw. — Is that in the county. Louth ?^ 
 Yes, within two miles of Dundalk. 
 
 2302. Chaieman". — Is it near the other farm?— ^It 
 is within three miles of where I live. I live within 
 one mile of Dundalk on the south side, and its farm 
 is about three miles from me, and tv.^o on the other 
 side of Dundalk. It is a farm of about 65 Irish 
 acres, or 107 statute acres. My father commenced 
 life working that farm and he had a lease of it. 
 That expired before my time, although I am farm- 
 ing it this forty years, and farming it to the very 
 best advantage. 1 was a tenant at will. I asked for a 
 lease and could not get it. I was under the impression 
 I would not be disturbed. We had many a little battle 
 about the rent. 
 
 2303. Who is the landlord ?— Lord Roden. I paid 
 the rent from 1850 to 1858, £72 10s. half-yearly, or 
 £145 a year. From 1858, when the late Major 
 Joceljai was agent, to 1874 I continued to pay an 
 increased rent of £85 lOs. half-yearly, or £171 12*'. 
 yearly. In 1874 there -was another notice from the 
 agent again, and this is a hard case, and I told the 
 agent so ; and I never regretted anything more tlian 
 this, after farming the place for 40 years in the best 
 possible manner. It was increased to £97 10s. half- 
 yearly, or £195 yearly. 
 
 2304. How much additional in the year? — £23 8s.- 
 on sixty-five acres or 10s. an acre on all my holdings. 
 It was over rented at the time. The Poor Law valuation 
 is £110, but there are two labourers' cottages valued at- 
 30s. each which makes it £113. That is a hard case. 
 From 1874 to 1879 I had to pay the £97 lOs; In 1874 
 there was a meeting of the tenants on the estate in 
 regard to the inci-ease of rent, but I had no occasion to 
 take part. 
 
 2305. Mr. SnAW.^There was a general rise in the 
 rent of th« property then ? — Yes. They met in the 
 town, and passed resolutions, but they made nothing 
 of it. I did not attend the meeting, and I knew I 
 could not make any battle as I could be evicted at 
 once. In 1876, a notice was served by Lord Eoden 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 87 
 
 to sell the estate in the I.anded Estates Court, and in 
 Jlarch, 1879 it actually Avas sold, and I bought this 
 land, bvTt I was compelled to buy it. I gave £4,600 
 for it. The rent was £3 an acre. There were private 
 offers taken. 
 
 2306. Baron Doavse. — "Was there any bidder but 
 yourself 1 — Not one. 
 
 2307. j\Ir. SiiAW. — Did you buy it by private sale? 
 — No, by public sale. I bid £4,000 for a private 
 sale. There were ten private offers accepted. We were 
 told we must give twenty-five years' purchase, and I 
 thought it too much, and I offered twenty-two and a 
 half years' purchase, and there were ten who gave the 
 twenty-five years' purchase to the penny. Mr. Alex. 
 Shackleton, the Great Northern Railway Company, 
 and Mr. Miu-ray, did pay twenty-five years' purchase, 
 but they were tenants at head-rents and not tenants 
 at will. I refused to give the twenty-five years' 
 purchase, and the property was put up in the Landed 
 Estates Court. For the first lot put wp in the Landed 
 Estates Court there were no bidders. The judge 
 asked was there not a bidder for the lot. It seemed 
 that there were reserved prices for every lot. I bid 
 £4,000 for my own lot, No. 15, Balregan. There 
 was no other offer. Judge Flanagan asked was there 
 any person to give £4,600 for the lot, and I saw from 
 experience, that if T did not offer £4,600, the lot 
 would be turned aside, and I did not know that I 
 might have been told on the following morning, after 
 I went home, that some other person had offered the 
 money for it, and that it was taken over me. I, 
 therefore, took it for the £4,600. There is no doubt 
 it is good land, but I gave the £4,600, although I 
 believe, and I feel that I threw in that £600, it was 
 for the purpose of keeping any other person from 
 getting it. I had the land in tip-top condition. I 
 turned it into a farm for the feeding of sheep, and I 
 fed them also largely for several years on oil cake. 
 The sheep-feeding enriches the land very much. 
 
 2308. Baron Dowse. — Were you. keeping it for 
 pasture 1 — Yes. The sheep were paying double the 
 rent. This is the best year I ever knew for sheep 
 rearing. I had to give the £4,600, because the thing 
 was kept over my head. I did not know that some 
 person might have taken the place, and that they 
 would evict me. I knew I would get nothing for 
 disturbance, and for improvements there was nothing. 
 It was all grass land. I was compelled to give a 
 great increase of rent in 1874, more than the land 
 was worth, because I was necessitated to do it or to 
 surrender. Then I was compelled to purchase at their 
 price. I think there were not twenty lots sold, and I 
 think there were thirty sold since. 
 
 2309. By private contract'! — Yes, by private con- 
 tract. I think about the half is unsold. 
 
 2310. Did you consider, when you were buying, 
 that you bought your own improvements 1 — Yes, 
 decidedly. I paid £4,600 altogether. I say that 
 there should be no limitation to the disturbance clause. 
 We lose our position. We have a certain system to 
 keep up. We keep a herd for our sheep, and if I pay 
 him £30 a year on the 200 acres, and if I lose 100 
 acres, I must pay the £30 a year still. I till every 
 acre I have except this farm. 
 
 2311. In no case could you get compensation for 
 a holding over £250 1 — For disturbance I could get 
 nothing. 
 
 2312. This was not a tillage farm? — Yes, it was 
 pasture now. 
 
 2313. Why could you not get compensation under 
 the Land Act 1—1 was told that by a lawyer that I 
 could not. 
 
 2314. Is it because you were a pasture farmer? — I 
 presume so. The opinion was taken by Messrs. 
 Smith and Dalton. They told me I was entitled to 
 nothing. 
 
 2315. Did you contract yourself out of it? — No, I 
 was a tenant at will. 
 
 2316. Why were you not entitled under the Land 
 Act ? — I don't know. 
 
 2317. Chairman.— Were you tilling it up to that Sept. e, 1880. 
 time ? — Yes, ixp to last year. I found it very unsatis- ^^_ Bernard 
 factory to be working with labourers on the farm, Coleman. 
 and it was more easy to keep it in pasturage. Some 
 
 of it is only a year in grass, and some for seven years. 
 
 2318. At the time of the sale was it all in pasture ? — 
 All but fourteen acres. 
 
 2319. Baron Dowse. — You were advised that you 
 would get no compensation 1 — None at all. They said 
 I would get no compensation, because the valuation 
 was over £100 a year. 
 
 2320. Chairman. — Were you advised that although 
 you drained and fenced the fourteen or fifteen acres 
 and fattened sheep from oil cake, that you would get 
 no compensation ? — Yes. I expended nothing myself 
 for draining and fencing, and I could get nothing for 
 improvements. 
 
 2321. That is since the commencement of the 
 tenancy ? — Yes. 
 
 2322. Yours was a tenancy existing at the time of 
 the passing of the Act ? — Yes. It was raised from ' 
 1874. 
 
 2323. Your rent was raised by consent? — Yes. 
 
 2324. Tint the raising of the rent does not create a 
 new tenancy ? — No. 
 
 2325. That is, a tenant remaining in possession after 
 the increase of rent does not create a new tenancy ? — 
 If I had resisted in 1 374 it would have been better 
 for me. That is my case about disturbance, and I 
 wish to show how I suffered in Ballybarrack, where 
 there was a division of the land. 
 
 2325a. What was the rateable value of that land ? — 
 £113 a year. 
 
 2326. One of your recommendations is to do away 
 with the limitation clause in regard to disturbance ? — 
 It is that the tenant should be paid for disturbance. 
 I think that a tenant at will, paying rent for the land, 
 if he is evicted for any cause, should have compensa- 
 tion for disturbance, no matter vv'hat the rent is. If 
 it is a year's rent — the man payir.g £100 or £500 or 
 more, depends on the landlord — he is as much entitled 
 to compensation as the man paying only £20 or £30 
 a year. There would be no sympathy for the man 
 paying the high rent if he -was disturbed, because: 
 people would say " Oh ! he has plenty more." I knew 
 I was giving more for tliis land than its value, and I 
 felt the grievance at the time, but I felt that if any 
 person had come in and given the sum mentioned I 
 might be evicted at once. I had been farming all my 
 life, and I farmed this place \\ ell, and I have a letter 
 from Major Jocelyn, the former agent, in terms similar 
 to those of Mr. Blackley, stating that I was an im- 
 proving tenant. 
 
 2327. Would you have been allowed to sell by the 
 landlord if you had wished to do so ? — Not as a right. 
 Possibly I might get the leave, but I don't know that 
 I would. 
 
 2328. Baron Dowse. — Is it the custom? — It is not, 
 Ijut I know tenants that have got leave, and I know 
 others that were refused. 
 
 2329. The landlord can do it, varying the letting? 
 — Quite so ; but it is not the custom. 
 
 2330. Now as to that property you bought in the 
 Landed Estates Court for £4,600 — Ballybarrack, I 
 think it is — did you pay that yourself 1 — Yes. That 
 was in 1858. There was no Land Act then. 
 
 2331. I am speaking of Lord Roden's property? — 
 Yes ; I am coming to that, for it is the greatest 
 grievance I have. 
 
 2332. Was the £4,600, for which you bought some 
 property. Lord Roden's ? — Yes ; it was. That is 
 Balregan. 
 
 2333. Did you borrow money to pay for that? — 
 Yes. 
 
 2334. Now state how you borrowed that money ? — 
 It was from the Board of Works, and I knew we 
 would have to get a consent to make a will before 
 borrowing. I am not a married man, but I have a 
 fanuly to look, to their support, the families of my 
 
88 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. e, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Bernard 
 Coleman. 
 
 brother and sister. After I paid the first instalment 
 I went then to look about making a will. 
 
 23.3.5. How much did you borrow from the Board 
 of Works? — £2,140 on one property — on the lands of 
 Balregan, and I had to pay £2,460. The Board of 
 Works would only give £2,140. I applied for two- 
 thirds of the purchase-money and they would not 
 give it. 
 
 2336. What reason did the Board of Works give 
 for not advancing more 1 — -They gave no reason. 
 
 2337. Did they say you paid too much for the land ? 
 —They did not. 
 
 2338. The O'Conor Don. — is it not a fact that the 
 Board of Works base the amount that they advance 
 on a certain number of years on Griffith's valuation 1 
 — I was not aware of that until afterwards, but it 
 made no difference. I wanted to put some charge on 
 it to the person I intended it for. I paid £3,200 for 
 Mount Hamilton ; for that they would only advance 
 on what was in my own occupation, and they would 
 only give me £850. That was not one-third of the 
 value of the portion I held. 
 
 2339. They gave the purchase-money on what you 
 held yourself? — Yes. I don't complain of that, but 
 it might be a matter of complaint for a man depending 
 on getting two thirds. I did expect they would give 
 it, and I asked for it. I thought there would be an 
 advantage in borrowing the money, but I see other- 
 wise now. However, I did borrow the money, and I 
 receive notices from them every haif year when I pay 
 the instalments. I now think I was very wrong to 
 borrow a shilling from them. I get a notice from the 
 Board of Works every half year to the following 
 effect — 
 
 " No purchaser or person deriving title through him of 
 any holding to whom any advance has been made shaH, 
 without the consent of the Commissioners of Public Works 
 alienate,* assign, subdivide, or sublet his holding during 
 such time as any part of the annuity charged on such hold- 
 ing remains unpaid, and any part of such holding alienated, 
 assigned, subdivided, or sublet, in contravention of the Act, 
 shall be forfeited to the Commissioners to be held by 
 them for public purposes, or to be sold by them by public 
 auction." 
 
 There is an asterisk after the word " alienate," and 
 the following is the note : — 
 
 " The Board has been advised that the word 'alienate' 
 includes a devise by Will, within the meaning of sections 44 
 and 45 of the Irish Land Act of 1870, whether the devise 
 is in favour of one or more persons. The consent of the 
 Commissioners of Public Works must be obtained in the 
 Devisor's (Testator's) lifetime." 
 
 I wrote myself to the Board of Works on the 5th of 
 December last, as follows : — 
 
 " To the Commissioners of Public Works, Dublin. 
 
 " Gentlemen — I see by notice on back of receipt for pay- 
 ment for instalments on loans No. 1,387 and No. 1,388 that 
 I must have the consent of the Commissioners to will it. 
 Unjust and unreasonable as this is, I must only comply, and 
 now ask for consent to will both properties to my nephew, 
 Bernard Coleman, aged six years, and should he die before 
 the ago of twenty-one years, both properties then to go to 
 my nephew, Thomas Joseph Byrne, aged sixteen years, and 
 should he die before attaining the property, it then to go to 
 my nieces, share and share alike, they first paying off the 
 loan obtained from the Board of Works on it." 
 
 On the margin I see written liere under date " 11th 
 December, 1879," "Mr Coleman requested to fur- 
 nish draft of will." Then I received this letter from 
 the Board of Works, dated 11th December. 
 
 " Sir— Referring to your letter of the 5th instant, I am 
 directed to re(juest you will be good enough to forward a 
 draft of the will which you propose to make, to enable the 
 Board to submit your application to the Lords Commission- 
 ers of her Majesty's Treasury." 
 
 I forwarded a draft of the will, and I thought that 
 would be sufficient, but I had a reply to that on the 
 5th Januai-y. 
 
 " \Yith reference to previous correspondence in this case, 
 I am directed to request you will state whether it is the 
 intention of the trustees of the will to let the land in 
 question," 
 
 I replied to that thus ; — 
 
 " Gentlemen — In reply to your letter received this day, 
 I cannot say how my executors may manage the land. 
 Should I die before my nephew comes of an age to manage, 
 I presume they will let it for a crop yearly until be is fit to 
 manage. If the Board has any rule on the matter please 
 let me know, and I will carry it out. Clearly no executors 
 could take upon themselves the management of a farm. 
 May I ask, if I will the farm without your consent, can the 
 person I will it to take the property by payinp; off the loan 
 to the Board of Works. It would be hard if they could 
 not." 
 
 To that letter I got no reply. 
 
 2340. Baron Dowse. — Did you never get any reply 
 to that letter 1 — T did not, although I asked for it. 
 That was on the 6th January and on the 26th January, 
 I received the following : — 
 
 " Sir, — Referring to previous correspondence, I am 
 directed by the Board to call your attention to section 51 
 of the Land Act of lfc70, and to infurm you that the Lords 
 of the Treasury consider that your proposed involves such 
 a subletting as is not reconcilable with the object of the 
 Act." 
 
 That letter was signed by Mr. Hornsby, Secretary, 
 and I replied to it, but I never received any reply to 
 my letter. I spoke to Mr. Stack, the Solicitor to the 
 Boai-d, about it when I was getting copies of these 
 documents. I made my will, and if I was to die now 
 or to-morrow, before I had time to change it, my 
 property was confiscated to the Government. I will 
 read the draft of the part of the will I sent — 
 
 " In the name of God, Amen— T, Bernard Coleman, of 
 Ballybarrack, in county of Louth, do hereby make this my 
 last will and testament, hereby revoking all other wills 
 heretofore made by me. I will and bequeath to my cousirs, 
 Thomas Keenan Coleman, of Baltrasna, and Phillip Callan, 
 Dowdstown, Ardee, all my freehold and chattel property I 
 may die possessed of, in trust for my nephew, Bernard 
 ("oleman, now about seven years of age, only son of my 
 late brother Patrick ; all my freehold property in Bally- 
 barrack, ]\Iount Hamilton, and Belregan ; but in case he 
 should die before attiiining the age twenty-one years, then 
 I will and bequeath it to my nephew, Thomas Joseph Byrne, 
 now about sixteen ye.irs of age, only son of my sister, 
 Judith Byrne, widow, and in case he should die before 
 attaining the property then, I will and bequeath it in trust 
 to my nieces, Catharine Judith and Elizabeth, daughters of 
 my sister Judith Byrne, and to my niece Mary Coleman, 
 only daughter of my late brother Patrick, share and share 
 alike, first paying off" the loan obtained from the Commis- 
 sioners of Public Works, on purchasing the lands of Bal- 
 regan and Mount Hamilton ; and I will and bequeath my 
 chattel property to be disposed of as hereinafter directed." 
 
 2341. This land was in fee-simple 1 — Yes. 
 
 2342. If there were no will, it would go to the 
 heir-at-law 1 — Yes. 
 
 2343. You have made 'a will you say? — Yes, I 
 have, in contravention of the Act. No prudent man 
 should do so in this way. The two trustees are my 
 cousins, and they are practical farmers, but they would 
 not manage the farm for a lad of seven years of age. 
 They would put it out in grass. They never would 
 let it out of their hands. 
 
 2344. Chairsjan. — The question was whether the 
 executors would be at liberty to pay off the charge, 
 and there was no reply to that 1 — No. 
 
 2345. Baron Dowse. — There is this in your favour 
 — the 2nd section of the Act of 1872, but your opmioii 
 is that in point of law your estate is forfeited ?-— Yes. 
 
 2346. But the Treasury may sell it, and pay the 
 debt, and give it over to the person entitled by law to 
 receive it? — I complain that when I boiTowed this 
 money from the Board of Works I lost the control of 
 the entire property, including my own money. You 
 have no control over the property, and you forfeit it to 
 the Government until you pay them off. I would do 
 so unless I would leave a charge on it. 
 
 2347. Chairman.— You think that the clause 
 against alienation ought to be omitted from the Act 1 
 — Decidedly. I quite approve of not sublettinc, or 
 assigning, or divicli'..g. I think that would be an 
 erroneous system. 
 
 2348. Baron Dowse.— I quite agree with you in 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 89 
 
 that. The Board of Works are well advised that 
 " alienation " does include a will, but I think that 
 the fraraers of the Act did not think of such a thino- as 
 including the making of a will ?— I think when they 
 have a first charge upon the land it is very good for 
 them, but their object was to prevent the holder 
 selling during his lifetime until the annuities had been 
 jiaid off. 
 
 234!.). So that, in fact, although your interest is 
 worth twice as much as the Board lent you, you can- 
 not charge it with a shilling ? — No. Well, I cannot 
 complain of that. To me it will be no hardship, but 
 the " willmg " of it is a hardship. 
 
 2350. CHAiEiiAjr. — Do you wish to make any obser- 
 vation as to the non-allowance of income tax 1 — I do. I 
 complain bitterly of it. 1 have to pay 5 per cent, upon 
 that money, and I am allowed no income tax on the 
 interest paid. A. Dublin solicitor, would have lent 
 me money at 4 per cent., but I wanted to get an ex- 
 tension of twenty years, during which time it should 
 not be called in. If I had borrowed the money from 
 Mr. Todd I would have been allowed income tax upon 
 the interest. 
 
 2351. Baron Dowse. — In fact you think there is no 
 lienefit in borrowing from the Board of Works'! — No. 
 That Bright's clause in the Land Act is as O'Connell 
 "used to say, " a delusion, a mockery, and a snare." 
 
 2352. You lose all control over your property — you 
 cannot sub-let it— -you cannot charge it — you cannot 
 do anything with it, and you are not allowed income 
 taxi— No. 
 
 2353. What interest do you pay for the loan to the 
 Board of Works 1 — Five per cent. 
 
 2354. That includes the repayment of the principal 1 
 -Yes. 
 
 2355. What is the actual interest charged 1 — I am 
 told it is 3 J per cent. I never calculated it. I don't 
 know what rate of interest it is. 
 
 2356. Baron Dowse. — Is it a fd,ct that this land of 
 yours is worth double what is lent upon it by the 
 Board of Works 1 — I think it would let well. It is 
 worth double. I paj-- more than double for it. 
 
 2357. There is a very substantial mai'gin for the 
 Board of Works, even if you were to deal with the pro- 
 perty in the way you propose ? — Yes, there is. 
 
 2358. Mr. Shaw. —They could not lose a shilling 
 under any circumstances ? — No. I think the Judge of 
 the Landed Estates Court should not be a party to hold 
 a threat over a man. At the sale there was a sum 
 mentioned in every case. The Judge asked in regard 
 to Mount Hamilton — " Is there any bidder here who 
 will give £3,200"1— I had ofi'ered £3,000, and the lot 
 was actually withdrawn, but, by the interference of 
 Mr. Smith afterwards, I got it at the increased price. 
 These were meadows and townparks. 
 
 2359. Baron Dowse. — Do you consider that that 
 isystem puts an rmdue pressure on the tenant 1 — Yes. 
 I did not know but that next morning somebody else 
 might have come in after me and given the price set 
 down, and have turned me out. The rent was raised 
 two years before by 10s. an acre. I regret that at the 
 time I did not stand stiff against the increase, for if I 
 did I would have had something for disturbance. The 
 Bright Clauses in the Land Act are a great humbug. 
 
 2360. Why ? — In the first place, there is no control 
 over it. I can borrow money at 4 or 4 J per cent,, and 
 be allowed income tax, and the mortgagee does not 
 care what I charge the land with. 
 
 2361. Chairman. — You could not borrow from 
 another person on the terms that the charge was to be 
 terminated in a certain number of years? — He would 
 consent not to call on me to pay for a certain number 
 of years. 
 
 2362. Baron Dowse. — Would you not have to pay 
 the interest so long as you kept his money 1 — Yes, no 
 doubt. 
 
 2362a. Would not the Board of Works be bound to 
 terminate it at the end of thirty-five years ?— Yes. 
 
 2363. Do you mean to say that you would be as 
 well off' by borrowing in the open market as from the 
 
 Board of Works 1 — Yes, in consequence of the restric- 
 tions. There should be income tax allowed on the 
 interest paid. It affects our incomes. 
 
 23(i4. With respect to the county Louth, I know it 
 is well cultivated and that it is a peaceable county 1 — 
 Yes, there was no agitation about the land at all. 
 
 2365. At the last assizes, where I was the Crimiiaal 
 Judge, I had literally nothing to do?— Yes, that is the 
 fact. 
 
 2366. Are the people satisfied with the present mode 
 in which tenancies at will are arranged 1 — They 
 would like a better proof in Ireland of their security. 
 
 2367. Do you think the present condition of tlie law 
 leads to any idea of insecurity on their part 1 — Yes ; I 
 do think it. li there was better security there would 
 be more impro\'ements, and the land would be better 
 cultivated and better secured if there v.-as paj'meut for 
 disturbance. 
 
 2368. Of course a man would rather not be turned 
 out at all if he pays his rent 1 — Yes, he would. 
 
 2369. If he pays rent, and does not subdivide, or 
 sublet, or does not allow the land to run to waste by 
 bad husbandry, you think he should be allowed tq re- 
 main'? — It might be compulsory, but a man is not 
 secure who is liable to be disturbed. 
 
 2370. You know the county Armai^h ? — Yes, a por- 
 tion of it. 
 
 2371. You know that there is a portion of it that 
 runs further south than part of Louth ? — Yes. We 
 have a part ol Armagh in our union. 
 
 2372. Do you know that tenant-right jorevails in 
 Armagh? — I heard that it did, but I don't know 
 anything about tenant-right. 
 
 2373. Do you think it would be of advantage to 
 introduce it into county Louth 1 — I think it would be 
 ol great advantage. Whatever would be just for one 
 county or town would be just for another, and it does 
 the landlord no harm. He gets his rent more secure 
 than ever, for where a man gives £500 for good will 
 of a farm that ensures that he will pay his rent. 
 
 2374. Would you yourself have liked, in that case 
 in which you complained of being over rented, that 
 there was some means of settling the rent between 
 you and the landlord by some indifferent person 1 — 
 Well, I don't think that is practicable. We should 
 settle the rent. The rent had been settled up to 
 1 874, and if he evicted me then I could not claim com- 
 pensation ijr disturbance; if I could, I would not 
 consent to the increase of rent. I go upon the question 
 of compensation for disturbance, and I think every 
 farmer who is evicted ought to get it, no matter what 
 the value of t 's farm may be. When a farmer is 
 disturbed he is at a loss that is not easily to be seen. 
 
 2375. But a great number of the farmers think 
 that nothing would compensate for being turned out 
 of their farms 1 — That is the feeling they have. 
 
 2376. If you were turned out yourself you would 
 have plenty to live upon ? — Yes. 
 
 2377. Is it not possible that men have been turned 
 out who had nothing at all left to live upon, and had 
 no other means of subsistence? — Yes. I was in 
 that position once that I was liable to lose every acre 
 I had. 
 
 2378. Would you not rather be left on your land 
 than be turned out, even with compensation ? — Yes. 
 Another thing is that I think that the compensation 
 for disturbance should not be less than a year's rent 
 in any case. I think that a person paying £500 
 should get £500 at least if evicted. I don't see how 
 any man could judge the value so well as the 
 tenant. 
 
 2379. You have tenants yourself? — Yes, and that 
 is against myself. 
 
 2380. Suppose the tenants paid a fair rent you 
 would not be inclined to turn them out ? — No. 
 
 2381. Do you still like to keep the power of turn- 
 ing them out ? — I think the landlord should have a 
 power. I begged of my landlord to take those 
 tenants off my hands^ more than once. 
 
 N 
 
 &J)«. 0, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Berrarl 
 Coleman. 
 
90 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. e, 1830. 
 
 Mr. Bernard 
 Coleman. 
 
 2391. Is there any real or substantial complaint 
 in the county Louth that the Legislature could 
 remedy, in your opinion, further than what you have 
 told? — The feeling among the greater number of 
 farmers is that there should be fixity of tenure, at a 
 valued rent. I don't think it practicable, however. 
 
 2392. Do you think it would be just? — It would 
 be just if it could be carried out. 
 
 2393. Your difficulty is that you think it is not 
 practicable to value the rent? — I think it is not 
 practicable to settle the rent between landlord and 
 tenant. 
 
 2394. Suppose it was practicable do you think the 
 tenant should be allowed to sell his interest 1 — Yes, I 
 think so. I think that the tenant should have the 
 right to sell his interest in every case. 
 
 2395. And should the landlord have a veto on it ? 
 — No. The man gets something, and the landlord has 
 a better security from the man coming in, who may 
 be a more intelligent farmer than the other. 
 
 2396. And if the landlord does not like him you 
 would let him put him out paying compensation ? — 
 Yes. I think there is very little capricious eviction 
 in the County Louth. I think there should be com- 
 pensation for disturbance in all cases. 
 
 2397. Would you give a man compensation for his 
 improvements too ? — Certainly, but the improvements 
 are visible. What is not visible is the disturbance. 
 Jn my case I was obliged to increase my rent from 
 £213 to £300. Lord Clermont's tenants are all 
 around me, and none are paying that amount of 
 rent. 
 
 2398. Now, we hear a good deal about the fixity of 
 tenure. Does that mean that a man should not be 
 turned out so long as he pays his rent or do you 
 agree with that ? — The value of land may change, and 
 how is a landlord to get an increase or how is a tenant 
 to get a reduction. 
 
 2399. Mr. Kavanagh. — I thought I heard you say 
 you did not think fixity of tenure would be practicable, 
 but that it wotild be just ? — I think the valuation of 
 rents is part and parcel of the fixity of tenure — the 
 two must go together. It is the valuation of rents 
 that in my opinion is not practicable. I don't think 
 any one is so competent to value rents as the farmer 
 himself; and if he differs with his landlord, there 
 should be a penalty put itpon the landlord if he evicts 
 him. 
 
 2400. With respect to fixity of tenure you said you 
 thought the principle of it was just ? — Yes. 
 
 2401. Do jou think it is just to deprive a landlord 
 
 of the power of getting possession of his own land ui 
 all cases 1 — No. I think the landlord should have the 
 power of getting possession of his land in every case. 
 
 2402. How would that be compatible with fixity of 
 tenure — you said fixity of tenure was just ? — I think 
 it would be a just thing if it could be carried but. 
 
 2403. How would it be just to the landlord ? — The 
 valuation of rents would be just. 
 
 2404. I am speaking of fixity of tenure — not 
 valuation of rents 1 — I regard it that you cannot have 
 fixity of tenure without valuation of rents in con- 
 junction with it. Fixity of tenure would not be just 
 at all if you took away from it the" valuation of rents. 
 
 2405. Even if you had valuation of rents, is it 
 right in your opinion to deprive the landlord of the 
 power of ever gettmg — even for his own use — ^possession 
 of his own property? — No. I never advocated the 
 adoption of fixity of tenure and valuation of rents, for 
 I believe neither of them would be practicable. 
 
 2406. Baron Dowse. — If a man is not to be turned 
 out as long as he pays a fair rent, of course, there must 
 be some means of determining what is a fair rent ? — 
 Yes. Rents differ according to various circumstances. 
 I know I would not undertake to value a farm even in 
 Louth, although I know the county well. 
 
 2407. Then I suppose we may put your evidence 
 on the subject of compensation for disturbance shortly 
 thus : you think there should be an enlarged scale of 
 compensation, and that tenants should be dealt with 
 in a more liberal spirit ? — Yes. 
 
 2408. Chairman. — And that the right to compen- 
 sation should be given in the case of holdings above 
 the vakiation mentioned in the Act ? — Yes. The limit 
 of compensation given in the Act is entirely too 
 narrow. I am among the very worst used class of 
 tenant. For if turned out, the Act gives no compen- 
 sation. There is no sympathy for me. If a smaller 
 tenant is turned out he gets compensation, and for 
 him there is not merely sympathy, but terror. When 
 the tenant I alluded to just now was evicted for non- 
 payment of rent, I was going to take the farm, but 
 when I found he had not consented, I would have 
 nothing to do v/ith it, nor would 1 take a present of it 
 to-morrow without the tenant's consent ; and that farm 
 is lying idle for two years. That is the protection that 
 the small farmer has, which the large farmer has not. 
 
 2409. Chairman. — What protection has he ? — 
 Nobody will take his farm ; but if I was turned out 
 to-morrow, there would be twenty willing to take it ; 
 and there would not be even sympathy for me ; they 
 would say I had enough without it. 
 
 Mr. Andrew 
 Derham. 
 
 Mr. Andrew Deeham, 
 
 2410. Chairman. — ^You are a tenant farmer, I 
 believe ? — I am ; and I also hold some land in fee, 
 about 191 acres. 
 
 2411. Under whom do you. hold the land as tenant ? 
 — Under Mr. Ion T. Hamilton, m.p., Mr. James A. 
 Hamilton, of Mountjoy-square, and Mr. Shew. 
 
 2412. What quantity of land do you hold as tenant ? 
 — I hold 440 acres, the rent is £880, and the valuation 
 £667. There are three holdings. 
 
 2413. Mr. Shaw. — Are those Irish acres? — No, 
 they are statute acres. 
 
 2414. Chairman. — Are the throe holdings included 
 in the 440 acres ? — Yes. Two oi those holdings are 
 in the barony of Castleknock, and one in that of Bal- 
 rothery East. 
 
 2415. How much land do you hold in fee ? — I hold 
 191 acres in fee, the valuation of which is £157. 
 
 2416. Where is it situated? — Balrothery East, in 
 the parish of Lusk and Finglas, Castleknock Barony. 
 
 2417. When did your tenancy of the three holdings 
 begin ; did they all begin at the same time ?— No, last 
 year my tenancy commenced on one farm from Mr. 
 Hamilton. I hold on lease from him for thirty-one 
 years and three lives, and with liberty to let, sell, or 
 use in any manner I wish, a farm, sold in the Landed 
 Estates Court, for which I paid £1,400. I hold some 
 
 of Skerries, examined. 
 
 land on lease from Mr. Ion Hamilton, and there the 
 Ulster custom prevailed up to the passing of the Land 
 Act in 1870 ; and for fifty acres on his estate I paid 
 the outgoing tenant £1,650. 
 
 2418. Do you say that up to 1870 the Ulster custom 
 prevailed ? — Yes, and since. But I think there is a 
 movement now to break down the custom. 
 
 2419. Baron Dowse. — How much did yoii pay for 
 that holding ? — I paid £1,650 for fifty acres. 
 
 2420. Mr. Shaw.— For the goodwill of it?— Yes. 
 I should mention that it was cropped at the time. 
 
 2421. But the crops, I suppose, were not of much 
 value ? — No, ten acres of potatoes were the most valu- 
 able part of it, the rest was oats and barley, the land 
 had not been very well treated ; it was in the hands of a 
 man who knew little or nothing about farming. 
 
 2422. What was the rent of it? — The rent of one 
 field of twenty acres was £5 per acre, another £3, and 
 there was one part of it at lOs. an acre. 
 
 2423. How much of it was for 10s. an acre? — 
 Eight Irish acres. 
 
 2424. Chairman. — Where was this land ?— At 
 Holmpatrick, along the line of railway ; it is almost 
 equal in value to the land at Dublin, being within 
 reach of the Dublin markets. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 91 
 
 2425. Mr. Shaw.— You say tliis land hitherto has 
 been under something corresponding to the Ulster 
 custom 1 — Yes. 
 
 2426. At present there is a movement to vary it, I 
 think you said 1 — Yes. 
 
 2427. On whose part is that ? — On the part of the 
 a,gent, not, I am sure, on the part of the landlord, 
 because he is above that kind of thing ; I was asked 
 last winter to give up two islands which I hold oif the 
 coast. They are valuable ; one of them is very good 
 grazing land, and the rent oi one is only about ten shil- 
 lings an acre, of the other thirty shillings an acre. Of 
 course there is a considerable interest in it, but it was 
 made so by the tenant. The agent asked me to give 
 it up to him. I went to Abbotstown, where Mr. 
 Hamilton resides, I spoke to him on the subject, and 
 I have heard nothing more about it siirce. 
 
 2428. Do you know of any case of a poorer tenant 
 being compelled to give np his holding or of his hold- 
 ing being taken from him 1 — I know of one man ; his 
 holding was not exactly taken from him, for he was 
 ■anxious to sell it, and at first consent was given him 
 to sell, but the agent afterwards said the price was too 
 high, and kept him on the land till he was not able to 
 pay liis rent, and then he evicted him. However, he 
 gave him a stipend during his lifetime, and a house to 
 live in. 
 
 2 429. Chairiias. — That man was not badly treated, 
 was he ■? — No, he was not. 
 
 2430. Mr. Shaw. — If he had been allowed to sell 
 when he wanted to do so would he have been better 
 off I — I tliink he would ; it was breaking down the 
 custom in a left-handed sort of way. 
 
 2431. Baron Dowse. — Would you be allowed to sell 
 if you wanted to do so 1 — I don't know that. 
 
 2432. Chairman". — Was there a custom always on 
 the estate of the approval of the price being with the 
 landlord 1 — Never the approval of the price ; the ap- 
 proval of the tenant was. 
 
 2433. The landJ^rd had no control over the price 1 
 — Never over the piice until that occasion. There 
 never was an objection made on the ground of price 
 except in that case. 
 
 2434. What v.'as the name of the tenant who was 
 put out and got the compensation 'i — His name was 
 Martin ; he died two or three months ago. 
 
 2435. Baron Dovi^se. — How many acres did he 
 hold 1 — Twenty acres, Irish. 
 
 2436. What was the stipend he got 1 — Fifteen shil- 
 lings a week, and a house. 
 
 2437. What sum v/as he getting for his farm at the 
 time he wanted to sell it 1 — A brother of mine had 
 offered him between £300 and £400, but I think that 
 included two farm horses and some ploughing. 
 
 2438. Are there any observations you wish to make 
 in reference to the failure of the Bright Clauses of 
 the Land Act 1 — ^Yes. I wrote down a few things 
 with regard to the Land Act, expressing my views on 
 the subject, I will read it if you have no objection. 
 
 2439. You may read them? — The Act of 1870 has 
 failed to give confidence to tenants able and willing to 
 improve their farms, owing to the manner in which 
 the chairmen of counties are in the habit of dealing 
 with cases in their courts. First, with regard to 
 thorough drainage. When this is done on tillage land 
 it must be followed by manuring at a cost of £20 to 
 £25 per Irish acre. I am speaking of tillage land 
 these things are never taken into account in mea- 
 suring compensation for improvements. They merely 
 <rf.ve him the sum — £9 or £10 an acre, the drain- 
 age cost— which was only the beginning of the im- 
 provement of the land. This is followed by subsoil 
 ploughing in a year or two, as it may be found con- 
 venient, at a cost, in horse labour alone, of £5 per 
 acre, if the soil be very stiff and strong. Good land 
 Avill yield double the quantity of crops, and will 
 be much easier tilled for a generation after ; and, in 
 my opinion, will be improving for centuries after those 
 operations are performed in a proper manner. The 
 increase in value should be the property of the tenant. 
 
 when the money is spent by him. He should not be told 
 that his use of the land for a term of years was sufficient 
 to recoup him in his expenditure. That is my view 
 with regard to the drainage part of it, and I think that 
 is the real groundwork of improvement in land ; of 
 course there are farm buildings and other matters which 
 should be compensated for, but I think the Land Act 
 fails miserably with regard to the improvements in 
 thorough drainage of land ; it only gives him a few years 
 use of the land as sufficient compensation, which is a very- 
 great injustice. Next, with regard to tenure. Tenants 
 should hold the land in perpetuity with the right to sell 
 when the land was no longer of use to them, as by old age, 
 want of family, death, or otherwise. This would intro- 
 duce the best men to c^iltivate the land, and not keep 
 it in the hands of young females, widows, old men, 
 and others unable and unwilling to till it or develop 
 its resources. In a great many leases at present there 
 are clauses to prevent the tenant from selling without 
 the landlord's consent — a most pernicious custom, as 
 those people when prevented from selling, let the land 
 in conacre year after year, and destroy the fertile pro- 
 perties of the soil, that took years of labour by the 
 tenant to build up. I will mention a case. I pur- 
 chased a farm from a man in high position whose two 
 sons had gone to Australia. The father died and the 
 farm was left in the hands of two young girls. I 
 offered £2,500 for it, but the agent would not allow it 
 to be sold, he would not allow me to have it, though 
 ready to give a large sum for it. The father had 
 effected considerable improvements, he had put up 
 buildings and fenced and improved the property highly, 
 so much so that where £141 a year was the rent of 
 the farm, myself and two others well acquainted with 
 the locality valued it at £3 an acre, or over £300 a 
 year. All this increase in value was owing to the 
 tenant's expenditure. 
 
 2440. Was the tenancy from year to year 1 — No, it 
 was held on lease. I am speaking now about the 
 clause in leases preventing a sale of the land, which I 
 consider a very injurious clause. It was a lease for 
 three lives or thirty-one years. One of the lives was 
 dead the two others had gone to Australia and there 
 were only seven or eight years of the term in the lease 
 to run. The landlord would not allow the transfer to 
 take place, though with full knowledge of the circum- 
 stances, and that those two young girls could not man- 
 age the fai-m, he would not allow it and I was obliged to 
 take it Irom them in conacre for a year, and at the end 
 of that time I bought the fee. 
 
 2441. Baron Dowse. — How would you settle the 
 question of rent, suppose there was a dispute between 
 landlord and tenant as to the amount 1 — I would leave 
 it to the regulation of some court or some person appoin- 
 ted by Government who would be able to deal with it. 
 I may observe that Griffith's valuation is not a correct 
 test of the value of land at present. 
 
 2442. You think there should be some indepen- 
 dent authority to settle rents in cases of difference ? — 
 Yes, there should be some tribunal, oi course the persons 
 composing it should be acquainted with the value of 
 land, ior local circumstances may have arisen since 
 Griffith's valuation was made that may have altered 
 the value of the land, so that Griffith's valuation would 
 be a fallacious test to go upon. I wish to make a 
 remark with regard to landlords. There are in my 
 opinion three kinds of landlords that injure the country 
 — one is the absentee. The other is the man who 
 while young and in his lather's lifetime has spent his 
 inheritance, by borrowing money to keep up his prodigal 
 expenditure. For the absentee, I would sell the estates 
 to his tenants at a fair price, the State paying three- 
 fourths or more of the cost. 
 
 2443. Mr. Kavanagh. — You mean advancing it to 
 the tenants 1 — ^Yes. 
 
 2444. Mr. Shaw. — That is, in the case of estates 
 held by absentees 1 — Yes. In the case of the prodigal, 
 the father should have the power to leave the property 
 by wUl to any of his children capable of taking care of it, 
 and not in the hands of a man bankrupt in every way, 
 
 N2 
 
 sqii. e, 1880 
 
 Mr. Andrew 
 Derham. 
 
92 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. e. 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Andrew 
 Derham. 
 
 wlio to fill liis purse will raise the rents on his unfor- 
 tunate tenants to a pitch that after strainu^g every 
 nerve to pay for a few years, will, when times get bad, 
 leave the land exhausted and tmcropped. So that 
 sometimes good land worth a high rent near a good 
 market is left by this means barren and unproductive, 
 yielding no rent for either landlord or creditor. I know 
 a fine piece of land of 200 acres Irish within four miles 
 of Dublin, land that if set fairly would bring a rent of 
 £4: or £5 per acre, and yet tlie tillage part of that land 
 is lying idle, producing nothing but weeds. 
 
 2445. Chairman. — Why 1 — Because the tenant got 
 into difficulties and had to abandon it. 
 
 2440. Is it idle now 1 — It is ; it is covered with 
 weeds at this moment, except the portion in grass, 
 which is used as meadow. 
 
 2447. Have they tried to get a tenant for it ^ — 
 "Well, it is in the Court of Bankruptcy, and it has not 
 been let. 
 
 2448. Baron Dowse. — 1 suppose you mean Sir 
 Conipton Domville's estate 1 — Yes. Mr. Nelson, a good 
 farmer, and a Scotchman, who knew the value of it as 
 well as any man, had it for a while, but was forced to 
 leave it. Another thing, all the large companies, such 
 as the London Companies and Insurance Companies 
 that have estates in Ireland, should be compelled to 
 sell them. That would be no hardship upon any one. 
 It would be a great benefit to the country, because 
 these companies prevent any one who holds land 
 under them from ever improving it owing to the 
 uncertainty of being fairly dealt with, at the termination 
 of his lease. It is not the same thing as dealing with 
 a landlord. A man dealing with a landloi-d who has 
 family ties and who wishes to go on amicably with his 
 tenants is more easily dealt with — and in my opinion 
 if the landlords only went about more amongst their 
 tenants, and nob be always attended with a body 
 guard of agents, and su.b-agents, it would be better lor 
 them and the country. They never go on their 
 estates without being surrounded with a number of 
 agents and sub-agents, and deputy sub-agents, all 
 of them are officers — there is none of them that you 
 could call a bailiff or bull driver — but if the landlords 
 would only go amongst their tenants and speak to them 
 personally, without all that interference, there would 
 be a better feeling than what there is at the present time. 
 
 2449. Is not he the member for the county 1 — He 
 is. I wish to say that I am only speaking of him as an ^ 
 illustration ; and I suppose when that happens with 
 him what must it be with landlords in other parts of 
 the country, where perhaps they would be afraid of 
 getting a pistol fired at them, or something like that. 
 There is no danger of anything of that sort in our 
 county, thank G-od. And I don't think there would be 
 half as much bad feeling as there is, if the landlords 
 went about among their tenants and spoke to them 
 more than they do. Another matter I wished to refer 
 to was that of advances to tenants by the Board of 
 Works. At present the Board of Works, in making 
 advances to tenants, go by a rule of valuation. By 
 this means the sum advanced to the tenant is very 
 inadequate. For instance where land has been very 
 much improved by farm buildings, drainage and 
 fencing and so forth, the tenant's interest in his holding, 
 if his lease is a long one, is sometimes almost equal to 
 the value of the fee. In such a case the Board of 
 Works should send a valuator to the land, in order to 
 be in a position to increase the purchase money for 
 such tenant, as it is a matter of great importance that 
 his (the tenant's) means should not be crippled at the 
 outset of his ownership. 
 
 2450. Chairman. — You mean the amount the 
 Board advance towards the purchase 1 — Yes. In my 
 own case all I was entitled to borrow, according to the 
 valuation of the land, was £2,400 ; and I had to pay 
 between £7,000 and £8,000 altogether for the land. 
 The owner wanted me to take a title direct from 
 himself, the root of that title would have been a 
 mortgage dated in 1842. I objected to that title, and 
 said I wished a title from the Landed Estates Court, 
 
 as it would enable me to borrow from the Board of 
 Works. I paid between £7,000 and £8,000 altogether, 
 and out of that I paid off the mortgage, but the 
 Board of Works would advance no more than what 
 was due, so that if it was the case of a man that ivas 
 very hard up for the cash he could not have purchased 
 at all': The sum was small, £1,700 — but in any case 
 they would only lend on the property £2,400, the 
 valuation being only £130. 
 
 2451. Chairman. — Was that partly because the 
 money was not paid direct to them, but to a mort- 
 gagee 1 — I paid it to the mortgagee. They could not 
 tell whether it was with my own money, or somebody 
 else's money that I paid the mortgagee. 
 
 2452. Mr. Shaw. — As I understand you, the chief 
 reason why the Board would not advance a larger 
 sum was because of the lowness of the valuation 1 — 
 That was the reason. 
 
 2453. Baron Dowse. — You think that ought to be 
 altered, and a man sent on the land to value it 1 — 
 Yes. The former tenant on that place spent £2,500 
 in buildings alone. It has the best lot of offices of 
 any farm in the county of Dublin. 
 
 2454. Mr. Shaw. — None of those things were taken 
 into account in the valuation 1 — Not a single one. 
 The Board of Works does not see whether the propei'ty 
 is valued correctly or not, or whether there is anything 
 on it worth the money. There is another matter — 
 the county cess, ought to be divided equally between 
 landlord and tenant in the future. In almost every 
 case the landlords contract themselves out of their 
 liabilities under the Land Act of 1870, with regard to 
 county cess. In all new leases, the landlord insists 
 on a clause binding the tenant to pay all the county 
 cess. I think this is another cause for complaint. I 
 paid this year, £65 county cess in one barony, and 
 £25 in another. 
 
 2455. Chairman. — In speaking of the custom of 
 landlords contracting that their tenant shall pay 
 the county cess, do you apply yoijr observations to 
 your own district alone, or to the country generally — 
 is it the custom of other landlords, so far as you are 
 aware? — It is. They all contract themselves out ot 
 it. There may be an odd case, here and there, where 
 the landlord does not do so. Now, I think when an 
 Act of Parliament is passed, the landlords have a 
 right to carry out the law themselves, as well as to 
 ask a poor man to carry it out. I think, if I were 
 letting land, I would obey the Act of Parliament, no 
 matter what it was. I have to pay that county cess 
 — £G5 in one and £25 in another — and I have no 
 voice how the money is expended, I know young 
 men, who don't pay a shilling of rates, and who ha\ e 
 the power to vote and I'egulate this expenditure. 
 
 2456. Baron Dowse. — We have no power to enter 
 into that question, it is outside the scope of our 
 inquiry "i — I only want to call attention to the fact of 
 the landlord contracting himself out of the Act. 
 
 2457. Are you of opinion that he ought not to be 
 allowed to contract himself out of the Act of Par- 
 liament 1 — I don't think he should. I think ho has a 
 right to pay whatever the law says he should pay, and 
 has no right to evade the Act of Parliament ; when 
 it becomes a law, and when it is signed by him in the 
 House of Commons, or the House of Lords, or by Her 
 Majesty, he has a right, as a landlord, a magistrate, 
 and a Member of Parliament, to submit to the law, 
 as well as the poor man has to submit to an Act of 
 coercion or anything else against him. 
 
 2458. If tenants from year to year were allowed to 
 remain in their holdings, and not to be disturbed unless 
 for non-payment of rent, and that the rent was fixed 
 by some indej)endent aiithority in case of dispute, do 
 you think that would be generally satisfactory to the 
 country 1 — I think it would. I think there is nothing 
 after all so simple as the Ulster custom ; but of course 
 if the landlord has power to increase the rent that puts 
 an end to it at once. 
 
 2459. If the Ulster custom was improved in this 
 way, that the tenant should not be liable to have his 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 93 
 
 custom rendered valueless to him by the landlord in- 
 creasing his rent, do you think it would answer the 
 requirements of the country 1 — I do. For an examjile 
 of it, I would point to Mr. Ion Trant Hamilton's pro- 
 perty. We have it in Skerries, and there is not a 
 more contented tenantry or a better paid rental in 
 Ireland than on his estate in Skerries. 
 
 2460. It is well situated land^ — It is ; but tliere is 
 plenty of as good land in Ireland as what it is, and 
 from my OAvn rent you can see well that it is not let 
 too low, and yet I am never called upon to pay my 
 rent, for when the day comes I make it a point to pay 
 without its being demanded from me, and it is the 
 case with almost all the tenants on the estate. Of 
 course as long as the world lasts there will l)e some 
 people not able to pay, there will be land held by 
 young females, or by other persons not able to work it, 
 and any law that prevents those people from selling I 
 think is doing an injury to the country. 
 
 2461. Chairman. — Do you think there should be a 
 periodical revaluation of land 1 — i think it would do if 
 there was one every twenty years. 
 
 2462. Baron Dowse. — Suppose a tenant in posses- 
 sion of a farm, at a fair rent, not to be disturbed so 
 long as he paid his rent, and to bo allowed, if he liked, 
 to sell his interest to an incoming tenant, the rent to 
 remain as it was, unless either landlord or tenant com- 
 plained of it, and if they could not agree, to get some 
 person to settle it between them, would that be a good 
 arrangement 1 — It would, except in this, that if the 
 tenant made the improvements, then that has a right 
 to be taken into account. But if the improvements 
 were made by the landlord, of course the landlord 
 should get the benefit of that in the rent. 
 
 24G3. You think that those circumstances should 
 be taken into account in fixing the rent 1 — I do. 
 
 2464. Would that satisfy the country? — I think it 
 would satisfy reasonable men. It might not satisfy 
 every one. I would be satisfied with it, but you will 
 never get people to be all of one mind. 
 
 2465. Some persons, you know, say there shoiild be 
 no landlords at alii — Well, that might be a good 
 arrangement, too, either by purchasing up the estates 
 or letting them in perpetuity to the tenants ; but, of 
 course, those who own property have a right to be paid 
 for it one way or other. 
 
 2466. Do you think a peasant proprietary would be 
 a remedy for the state of Ireland 1 — If you mean by a 
 peasant proprietary to bring us all down to the point 
 of ha^Tng ten or twenty acres of land, I think it would 
 be a very bad thing for the country ; but I think it 
 would be a good thing to have a certain number of 
 small holders, and give them perpetuities. I don't 
 think the present way of buying it, either in the way 
 it is done under the Church Act or under the Board 
 of Works, would do. If you purchase land at a rea- 
 sonable price from a landlord, divide it into holdings, 
 and put a burden on the occupier to make him pay it 
 off in thirty-five years, I think in this generation they 
 will be greater beggars, although nominally pro- 
 prietors, than they would be as tenants. 
 
 2467. How is that 1 — If you make them pay at the 
 rate of five per cent., the burden would be so heavy 
 that they will be poorer than they were before. 
 
 2468. That is, the present generation would be 
 poorer 1- — Yes. 
 
 2469. Baron Dowse. — Don't you think some con- 
 sideration ought to be extended to the present genera- 
 tion in those arrangements, and not to sacrifice our- 
 selves for the sake of posterity 1—1 do. I think we 
 have no right to be asked to starve ourselves for the 
 benefit of those who will come after us. I would ex- 
 tend the period of time over which to spread the an- 
 nuities — make them say fifty years instead of thirty- 
 five — ^five per cent, annuity is, I think, too much. 
 
 2470. You say the result of the present arrange- 
 ment is, that for thirty-five years a man would have 
 considerably more to pay in the shape of annuity than 
 he has to pay in the shape of rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 2471. Mr. Shaw. — Don't you think a great many 
 
 people would be willing to do that for the sake of Sep', e, isso. 
 getting the ownership 1 — I think a great many would, ,j^ Andrew 
 and for those who could pay the money, or a large part lei'-h nu. 
 of it, themselves, it would, of course, be better, because 
 they would be more inclined to improve. You cannot 
 expect to get the land improved without making them 
 owners, or by putting them under the Ulster custom, 
 and making them secure in their holdings. 
 
 2472. Which is the best, do you think, the Ulster 
 custom or the peasant proprietary scheme 1 — I think 
 the Ulster custom would give the greatest amount of 
 employment and prosperity to the country at the pre- 
 sent time, and I woidd recommend also that, where- 
 ever an estate was to be sold, that if any of tlni 
 tenants, no matter if it was only one man, wished to 
 purchase, he should have the privilege of doing so. 
 
 2473. Mr. Kavanagh. — Would you force the land- 
 lord to sell his estate, whether ho liked it or not ? — I 
 would not ; I would force no resident landlord to sell 
 his property. There is enough of land in the country 
 to begin with outside that. Begin with the lai-ge com- 
 panies and absentees, and the other landlords would 
 have time to consider whether they would sell or not. 
 
 2474. Mr. SiiAW. — Don't you think, where a man 
 has a farm of fifty or sixty acres, and paj's a rent for 
 it, that if he got the ownership of it, he would be 
 willing to pay something more for a series of 3'ears, in 
 order to secure the ownership of it thenceforward 1 — 
 If you ]3ut that question to me a few years ago, I 
 would have said " Ves ;" biit at the present time, 
 things are so uncertain — it is so hard to say what the 
 prices will be, or to know what people will be able to 
 pay at the end of a few years, that I cannot take it 
 on me to give an answer. This year, for example, it 
 is said will be a prosperous year ; but it will, in my 
 opinion, be a very indifferent yea,r for corn, and the 
 prices will be low. 
 
 2475. Are not the potatoes good t — Very good ; 
 but there is a very indifferent crop of barley and 
 wheat on the rich well-tilled land. We had too 
 much rain in July. Oats on lea land, and turnips, 
 are good crops. Altogether, prospects, better than 
 last year. 
 
 2476. Do you think it would be desirable that there 
 should be an opportunity given to a tenant who wished 
 to purchase his holding, either to agree to pay off the 
 purchase-money in say thirty-five years, or to have the 
 option of spreading it over a longer period, so as to 
 reduce the amount of the annual payments 1—J think 
 so. If it could be managed so that he should pay four 
 per cent., it would be better. There is another objec- 
 tionable thing in the dealings of the Board of Works. 
 I ]Daid between £7,000 and £8,000 for my land. The 
 Board only advanced £1,700 of that money. Not- 
 withstanding that, every time I get a receipt for my 
 half yearly payments, tliere is a notice given to me 
 that I have no control over my propertj- — I coiild not 
 assign it — I could not even will it to any one. I don't 
 think it is fair that a man should be deprived of the 
 power of making his will, and leaving his iiroperty to 
 some of his children, who helped him, perhaps, to pur- 
 chase it. 
 
 2477. Would you say there also should be an oppor- 
 tunity afforded to a tenant of purchasing his holding 
 in i^erpetuity 1 — Yes. Anything that would give him 
 an ownership — either in fee, or the Ulster custom, 
 or in perpetuity — would be good. Anything else 
 would be of no use that won't give the tenant perfect 
 security. 
 
 2478. And those three variations of ownership, you 
 think, would suit different classes of tenants. Those 
 who were able to pay a large sum would take an estate 
 in fee, and make it their own ; those who could not 
 pay so much would take a perpetuity, perhaps ; and 
 others would be satisfied with the Ulster tenant-right 1 
 — Yes ; but, taking the country in general, I imagine 
 the greater part of the purchase-money would have to 
 be got from the Board of Works ; and, in that case, 
 thirty-five years is too short a time, and the interest 
 too high. 
 
94 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 6, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Andrew 
 Derham. 
 
 2479. Some people, in your opinion, would prefer 
 the Ulster custom, with fair rents 1 — Yes. 
 
 2480. And the other systems — either of purchasing 
 the fee or perpetuities — would suit other persons ? — • 
 Yes. 
 
 2481. Chairman. — I understand you to say that, in 
 case of the introduction of the Ulster custom, a valua- 
 tion of rent might take place, at the option of the land- 
 lord, at the commencement of the arrangement 1 — Yes ; 
 or at the desire of the tenant, if he thought the rent 
 was too high, 
 settle the question of the rent, 
 
 2482. The tenant, if he could show that he was 
 paying a rent ujDon his own improvements, ought to 
 get a reduction ? — Yes. 
 
 2483. But if there had been no rise of rent since he 
 went into the iarm, and if it were going to be turned 
 into a farm under the tenant-right custom, he would 
 not be paying rent for his improvements, he would 
 have them stUl 1 — 01 course. 
 
 2484. Then the valuation should be of the landlord's 
 interest in the property, and the tenant's separately 1 — 
 
 There ought to be some tribunal to 
 
 Of course. Any hon&fide improvements that the ten- 
 ant made should be excluded. In cases where the 
 landlord made improvements — if he built a farm-house, 
 or cottages, or out-offices — he is entitled to be recom- 
 pensed for that expenditure. 
 
 2485. As a matter of fact, have the improvement,? 
 been chiefly made by the tenant? — In almost every 
 case, except where the landlord borrowed from the 
 Board of Works for purposes of drainage. 
 
 2486. In those cases, don't they generally charge 
 the interest to the tenant ? — I don't know ; but my 
 own landlord, Mr. James Hamilton, borrowed £400 
 on my application last year for drainage at Castle- 
 knock ; and the arrangement is that I am to pay one- 
 half of the interest, and that he is to pay the other 
 half. 
 
 2487. How much interest do you pay % — Six and a 
 quarter per cent. 
 
 2488. You were not in a distressed district 1 — No. 
 I could not induce our board of guardians to " go in " 
 for that. 
 
 Adjourned until next morning. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1880. 
 
 SIXTH DAY— TUESDAY, 7th SEPTEMBEK, 1880. 
 
 Present : — The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborough, Chairman ; 
 The O'CoNOR Don, Arthur MacMorrodgh Kavanagh, Esq., d.l. ; 
 
 Right Hon. Baron Dowse, 
 William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 James 
 
 Kveritt, Esq., 
 P.L.G., and 
 Mr James E. 
 Drew. 
 
 James Eveeitt, Esq., p.l.g., and Mr. James E,. Deew, examined. 
 
 2489. Chairman (To Mr. Everitt). — I believe you are 
 deputed by your board of guardians to give evidence 
 before this Commission 1 — Yes. What I will give evi- 
 dence on is my own personal experience of the working 
 oftheLand Act — what occurred absolutely to myself, I 
 may say. The first thing that occurred to me was the 
 great hardship and expense inflicted upon poor tenants 
 in getting witnesses to prove their claims for compen- 
 sation. In the first place the great difiiculty of getting 
 witnesses to give evidence — I find that one of the most 
 difficult things at all in proving a land claim. I will 
 give you a case that occurred to myself. I held a farm 
 opposite my house from a person that I suspected would 
 take it from me or raise the rent if I improved it. 
 When the Land Act was passed in 1870 I got my 
 attorney to consult Mr. Palles, the present Chief Baron, 
 as to whether I would be safe in doing anything to it 
 when the Land Act was passed. The Chief Baron told 
 me to treat it as if I had a lease for ever of the land, 
 and on that opinion I thorough drained, manured it, and 
 laid it down. When I had these improvements done 
 and my money spent, I was served with notice to quit 
 by this person. When I began to prepare my claim for 
 compensation I found the greatest possible difficulty in 
 getting persons to come forward to prove that I made 
 these improvements, though they saw me making them 
 themselves, and knew what I was doing to the place. 
 They were so much afraid of the influence of the person 
 I had the land from that they would not come to give 
 evidence, though they knew all about it. There were 
 three gentlemen in the neighbourhood — Captain Smith, 
 Mr. Charles Osborne, and a son of Colonel Kelly — ■ 
 who used to shoot over the land, and I went to them 
 and said: — "I cannot get any person to come and 
 prove what I did for this farm. You saw yourselves 
 what was done there ;" and these three gentlemen 
 instantly said: — "We saw the improvements you 
 made there, and we will swear to them when your 
 claim is heard." These are three magistrates resident 
 ill the neighbourhood, estated men. They gave a tone 
 to the whole thing, and when the people of the country 
 saw that these three gentlemen were willing to come 
 forward and give their evidence, they all backed me up 
 then. 
 
 2490. Chairman. — What is the name of the land- 
 lord 1 — Saurin is the name of the landlord. I suppose 
 this thing will be all published — ^the names and every- 
 thing. 
 
 2491. Baron Dowse. — ^You need not have his name 
 if you don't wish ? — I don't care. Better mention the 
 names and everything. I will run the responsibility. 
 
 2492. Chairman. — What was the result of your 
 claim ? — The claim was to be heard at the land sessions 
 in Trim. I have already shown you the difficulty I 
 had in getting witnesses to give evidence. I now want 
 to show you the expense poor tenants will incur in 
 getting their claims for compensation disposed of. 
 After I had my claim prepared and everything ready, 
 the case was to be heard first in Trim, but when we 
 went there, myself and my witnesses, it was said the 
 claim was informal. There was some technical point 
 in it wrong, and the landlord's attorney got up and 
 said : — " Oh, this is all wrong ; that won't do at all ; 
 the claim is informal ;" and it was adjourned to the 
 June sessions in Duleek. At the same time the land- 
 lord demanded that he should get possession at once, 
 as he said the time in the notice to quit was up ; 
 but everyone in court stood up and said until my claim 
 for compensation was heard possession would not be 
 given. jMr. Molyneux — a first-class man indeed — ■ 
 got up at once, and agreed that possession would not 
 be given until my claim was heard. 
 
 2493. Who is Mr. Molyneux? — Mr. Molyneux was 
 the county chairman. I wish we had more like him. 
 I had to bring my case to Trim, and it was made 
 out to be informal, so then, of course, there could 
 be nothing done vnitil the Duleek Sessions. That was 
 nearly £20 expense to me. I had to bring my 
 witnesses thirteen miles on outside cars. When the 
 Duleek Sessions came I attended agam, but the Bar- 
 rister telegraphed that he was ill and could not attend 
 at the Sessions. I had my witnesses there also and 
 everything i-eady. See the expense I incurred there! 
 If I v/as a poor man how could I stand it at all, or 
 what would become of my claim. The whole thing 
 was only seventeen acres of land. From the Duleek 
 Sessions it was then adjourned to Kells. I had to 
 bring all my witnesses to Kells. When the case was 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 95 
 
 fully gone into— at least it was gone on witli for 
 a length of time — the Barrister said "the only 
 thing I cannot decide is about the manures; I cannot 
 say at present whether the manures are worth so 
 much, and on that account I will have to adjourn the 
 case to the October Sessions." So it was adjovirned 
 again, and then at last the barrister granted me at 
 the October Sessions £340. Upon that £340 being 
 lodged in Court by the landlord (which is the greatest 
 grievance of all, I think), I was ordered to give up 
 possession. I had to give up possession of the land to 
 the landlord without getting my money, upon which 
 the landlord appealed, and I had to wait for the 
 Assizes and go to more expense without getting a 
 farthing. Suppose I lived by that bit of land, there T 
 was obliged to give up possession, this £340 was 
 lodged in court, I could not get a haKpenny of it 
 and I would have nothing in the world to pay my 
 expenses or to carry on the claim any further. 
 
 2494. Baron Dowse. You had given up possession 
 before you got the money 1 — Certainly. I had to do 
 it. 
 
 2495. Chairman. — ^Was the money lodged in court 1 
 — The money was lodged in court, and as soon as the 
 landlord lodged it he appealed. Instead of coming on 
 at the Spring Assizes the appeal did not come on until 
 the Summer Assizes. 
 
 2496. Baron Dowse. — Why was that? — I don't 
 know. He put in some plea or something of the 
 kind, but at any rate he did not bring it on till the 
 Summer Assizes. It was Judge O'Brien who tried the 
 case at the Summer Assizes. To support his appeal 
 the landlord had engineers up from Kerry. He sent 
 down to Kerry. He holds land under the Marquess 
 of Lansdowne, and he got an engineer up from 
 his lordship's estate in Kerry, to give evidence on my 
 claim — a man that knew no more about the sort of 
 improvements that would be necessary in the county 
 Meath than the man up in the moon wou.ld. He got 
 another mtness down from Armagh. He got Scotch 
 seed merchants to prove the quality oi the grass seeds 
 I put into the land. He denied that I put in the tdes 
 I claimed for, and brought over a Scotch seed merchant 
 to back him up, and only that he could not say it was 
 so I would not have got a penny ior my seeds. He 
 broiTght men that were only passiag along the road to 
 swear that they saw my men shovelling in the tiles 
 instead oi putting them in properly. He brought 
 other witnesses who condemned the system oi iarming 
 pursued on the land. Axoer all Judge O'Brien affirmed 
 the decision of the barrister, and granted me a 
 decree ior the £340. Aioer going beiore the courts 
 five different times, what remained :.or me but £340 
 to pay for all the money I had spent. Though I was 
 allowed my expenses, I had to pay Mr. Forde — that 
 was my attorney — £50 10s. 6d., as between attorney 
 and client. There is one case ior you. Is not that 
 a very hard case under the Land Act 1 Now, if you 
 like to ask me any questions about that case I would 
 like to answer them at once, before I go on to any- 
 thing else. 
 
 2497 What would be your remedy for that? — I 
 will give you that in the latter end, but if you have 
 any question to ask me on the case now I am ready to 
 answer it. 
 
 2498. You certaialy seem to have got a good deal 
 
 of law? I was £100 out of pocket at first for law 
 
 expenses, and I had to give the £50 of course to my 
 attorney. 
 
 2499. Chaiemajj. — You would rather have kept 
 out of court altogether if jossible, I suppose?— I will 
 just furnish my evidence as to other cases before I go 
 into that. 
 
 2500. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have you not read the 5th 
 clause in the Land Act 1—1 don't know the 5th nor 
 the 6th, I am not up in the laws, but I just tell you 
 what occurred to myself. 
 
 2501. You complain of the difficulty of gettmg 
 witnesses to prove improvements ; the 5th clause of 
 the Act says that all improvements on a holding shall 
 
 be deemed to have been made by the tenant unless Sept. :, 1880. 
 the landlord can prove the contrary 1 — Exactly, but I j^^^g 
 was bound to prove what their character was, and Everitt, Esq., 
 what they were worth. t.l.g., and 
 
 2502. Baron Dowse.— The presumption of law is ^r. James E. 
 that the improvements have been made by the tenant, 
 
 but if a man wants money for them he must prove 
 what they are ? — Certainly ; and if you subpoena a 
 man that is afraid to give evidence and make him 
 come forward you will have him a hostile witness. 
 Only these gentlemen came with me to give 
 evidence I would not get two pence. 
 
 2503. The O'Conor Don. — Were you able to show 
 by your accounts and bills how much money you had 
 spent on those improvements 1 — When I went to pre- 
 pare my claim at first I claimed £623, I claimed for 
 the state the land was in when I got it — it was in a 
 wild and wretched state. The consequence was Mr. 
 Constantine Molloy, who prepared my claim, came to 
 look at what I put down at first ; he said " This won't 
 do ; you cannot swear to these things ; put nothing in 
 that you cannot swear to every shilling of." I said, 
 " very well then, we will cut it down and leave out all 
 that I cannot swear to myself, but I can swear to 
 every shilling of £400." 
 
 2504. You had spent £400 on improvements? — I 
 had, but I claimed £623 at first. That was my own 
 idea, takmg into consideration the way the land was 
 in when I took it. Then Mr. Molloy came and said 
 beginning to laugh ; " It won't do if you go on with 
 this. Just put in what you can swear to every item 
 of yourself and it will be all right ; " and then and 
 there I reduced the claim to what I could swear to. 
 
 2505. Chairman. — I don't know whether it is 
 material but what was the cause of your eviction ? — 
 To raise the rent or take the land from me. He is a 
 landshark. He has about 1,500 acres in liis own 
 possession. Nothing would do him but to have all the 
 country to himself. 
 
 2506. Mr. Shaw. — At any rate it was not for non- 
 payment of rent ? — Not at all. I got five years' rent 
 as compensation for capricious eviction. 
 
 2507. He has the land in his own possession ? — He 
 has the land there still, himself or his son. It was 
 just to seize the land he did it. He saw that I had 
 expended a lot of money in improving it, and that the 
 land was in prime order for him to make money out 
 of it, and the very instant I had spent the money he 
 slipped at me. It was on Mr. Palles' opinion I went, 
 that I might go on and make the improvements just 
 as if I had a lease for ever. 
 
 2508. Mr. Kavanagh. — It was in fact an effort to 
 confiscate your improvements ? — Nothing else in the 
 world. 
 
 2509. Did you consider the compensation sufficient ? 
 — Not half enough. I would not take £1,000 for the 
 place. It was just opposite my hall-door, it was 
 17 acres of the grandest run for sheep after I drained 
 it that you could see. I used to keep three or four 
 hundred ewes there every winter. Upon my word 
 I think that was the reason he took the land, because 
 he thought it would inconvenience me so much. 
 
 2510. Chairman. — How much compensation did 
 you get f jr disturbance and how much for improve- 
 ments 1 — I got £340 altogether. I cannot say how 
 much I had for the improvements, but that was what 
 I got for expense and everything. 
 
 2511. Mr. Shaw. — Was that for disturbance and 
 improvements? — Disturbance, improvements and ex- 
 penses. The expenses cost me £150. 
 
 2512. What did you get for disturbance? — Five 
 years rent. £22 10s. a year I was paying for it, and 
 I got five years rent. 
 
 2513. The O'Conor Don. — I suppose these trials 
 must have cost the landlord a great deal of money 
 also ? — That case cost him, with the Kerry man and 
 everything else, I don't know how much money, but 
 he thought he would oust me altogether and that I 
 would get nothing. 
 
 2514. I suppose his expenses must have been as 
 
9G 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1880. 
 
 James 
 
 Kvevitt, Esq., 
 p.Ij g., anil 
 Mr. James E. 
 Drew. 
 
 niiich as the fee-simple was worth 1 — I would not give 
 £340 this moment for the fee-simple of it as it was 
 when I got it. It is a heavy, coarse wheat soil, but 
 when you properly improve and dram it there is no 
 better feeding land. 
 
 2515. Chairman. — So that he would be better off 
 if he had never disturbed you 1 — I suppose he had the 
 satisfaction of getting possession of the farm. 
 
 2516. The O'Conoe Don. — He did not offer to leave 
 you in possession upon any terms? — No terms. He 
 knew the convenience of the place to me, and that I 
 would not leave it on any terms. 
 
 2517. Mr. Kayanagh. — If he did not offer to leave 
 you in possession upon any terms, how can you say 
 that he wanted to raise the rent ? — 1 don't know 
 whether it was to raise the rent or not. It is evident 
 it was the farm he wanted, after seeing the money 
 I spent upon it, and not to raise the rent. He never 
 said a word about raising the rent. 
 
 2518. I understood you at first to say that the 
 object was to raise the rent ? — I suspected at first 
 that it was to raise the rent he took the farm. 
 
 2519. Chairman. — That he wanted to raise the rent 
 whether you had it or somebody else 1 — He wanted to 
 get it into his own hands to make money out of it, 
 because he saw that I had it properly \mproved. 
 
 2520. Baron Dowse. — And your cause of complaint 
 is that after laying out your money on improvements, 
 upon the faith of your being secured the enjoyment 
 of them, the farm was taken away from you, and you 
 lost your money ? — Certainly ; and remember also the 
 great inconvenience I was j)ut to, and the great 
 hardship that was entailed on me in getting persons 
 to come to prove my claim. Really, only that these 
 three gentlemen came forward 1 would hardly get a 
 single man that would not be afraid to give evidence. 
 Another case to show you the difliculty of getting 
 witnesses : I was served with a notice to quit on 
 another farm in 1877, under the Marquess 
 Conyngham, I held 142 acres from him. The poor 
 young Marquess, I think, did not know much about 
 it, the old man was dead, and his agent served a 
 notice to quit on me. 1 prepared my claim for com- 
 pensation. I went around to twenty or thirty of the 
 neighbouring tenants, and I could not get a man of 
 them to give evidence, though they saw the improve- 
 ments made — you would swear I wanted to ruiii 
 them. 
 
 2521. What were they aix'aid of ? — Agents, bailifis, 
 bumbailifi's, and everybody about the estate. Yoii 
 would think they were all going to be hanged, the way 
 they were afraid of their lives. 
 
 2522. No legislation, I suppose, could make men 
 bi'ave 1 — No, indeed. The next point is that tenants can 
 be deprived of their holdings and kept out of compensa- 
 tion for years. If I had been living by that bit of 
 land that I told you about, would it not be too bad 
 that 1 should have to give that land up without 
 being paid for my improvements ? Would it not be a 
 nice thing with £340 of mine lying in court, if I had 
 only that seventeen acres of land to live upon, to be 
 kept out of it for a year, and, perhaps, not have a 
 penny in the world ? 
 
 2523. So far as that is concerned, that is discre- 
 tionary with the chairman. The Act does not compel 
 a man to give up the land without getting his money. 
 The chairman could have allowed you to remain in 
 possession until your claim was decided 1 — I pressed 
 him to allow me to remain in possession, and it was no 
 use. 
 
 2524. If you were a poor man you would have to 
 go out and lie in the ditch, or go into the workhouse 1 
 — Of course I would. The chairman said, " Let him 
 lodge the money in court," and when he lodged the 
 money I had to give up possession. Here is another 
 hardship — that assistant barristers who know little or 
 nothingabout the improvement of land should decide in a 
 court of justice that any tenant who would be in peace- 
 able enjoyment of his improvements for nine or ten 
 years would be recouped for his outlay, and would be 
 
 allowed nothing for his improvements. Now I think 
 that is as hard a case as I know. 
 
 2525. The O'Conor Don. — Have you known in- 
 stances of that ? — Yes, I saw it. I was present at the 
 time. It was the case of Collis v. Hartley. I will 
 afterwards exemplify it by a case of my own. Collis 
 had a large farm from Martley. He expended 
 £5,000 or £6,000 in improvements — making drains, 
 building ditches, making roads, and matters like that. 
 Martley served a notice to quit, and required to get up 
 thefarm. Collis gave up possession, and served his claim 
 for compensation for the £5,000 or £6,000 he had ex- 
 pended. It was nine 3-ears previous to that he made 
 the improvements. Mr. Neligan (the assistant bar- 
 rister) got up in court and said that if all the farmers 
 in Louth and Meath and Monaghan came forward and 
 swore that Collis was not recouped for his expenditure 
 on the land he would not believe them, and he gave 
 him not one penny for his improvements. Now, I say 
 the land would not be in a thoroughly good condition 
 after these improvements for nine years. 
 
 2526. Baron Dowse. — Was there an appeal in 
 that case ? — The unfortunate man got so alarmed about 
 it, he committed suicide. 
 
 2527. Is that long since? — About two years ago, I 
 was present myself when the case was heard. The man 
 went into England, not knowing what he was to do, 
 and when he came home he went into a hotel in 
 Drogheda and killed himself. 
 
 2528. The land is in Meath, I suppose ?— Yes. I 
 will tell you now what happened in my own case. In 
 the year 1850, I gave a person £500 for his interest 
 in a farm. During that year, and 1851, I made 
 nothing of it, the land was in so bad a state. About 
 this period the Drogheda Board of Guardians appointed 
 Mr. Joseph M'Loghlen, of Dunmore, to value the 
 union. In walking over my farm with me he told 
 me " Such land as this is not worth having ; if it is 
 not drained and otherwise improved, it will break 
 you." I was a young man at the time. He was a 
 particular friend of mine, and he held 500 acres of 
 land himself. "What I would advise you to do," 
 said he, " would be to take two crops out of it and 
 give it up to the landlord, for it will take any amount 
 of money to improve it. It was from the late Duke 
 of Bedford I held the farm, T saw the agent shortly 
 afterwards, and I told him what Mr. M'Loghlen ad- 
 vised me to do. He just said ; " we don't want to take 
 any advantage of you. I will send a person to value 
 the land, and if he says it is too dear we will give it 
 to you at its value." He did so, and gave me a con- 
 siderable abatement in the rent, so much so that 
 Grifiith's valuation being £12C, the man that walked 
 over the land aiid examined it gave it to me at £114, 
 that is £6 less than Griffith's valuation, because I was 
 going to give up the land at the rent I was paying. 
 
 2529. Mr. Shaw. — AVliat rent were you paying for 
 it previously? — The rent was three half gumeas an 
 acre. 
 
 2530. How much would that be altogether ? — £140, 
 and it was reduced to £114. He did that, and gave 
 me this considerable abatement. AJter this I thorough- 
 drained seventy acres of it, and ploughed it up, and 
 laid it down in a proper mamrer. Why it is only 
 within the last few j^ears it is able to fatten cattle. 
 But, if I were dealing with a rackrenting landlord, do 
 you think 1 would have it in that condition ? — Now, 
 suppose this property was sold to-morrow in the Landed 
 Estates Court and purchased by a landshark, if my 
 lease were out, and if I were bi-ought into the county 
 court to claim compensation for my improvements, 
 accordmg to Mr. Neligan, I would be entitled to 
 nothing because I enjoyed my improvements for nme 
 or ten years. 
 
 2531. Baron Dowse.— What kind of improvements 
 do you say, Mr. Neligan held were exhausted in nine 
 or ten years ?— Drains and manures, and everything a 
 man could do in the way of improvement. 
 
 2532. What kind of drainage ?— Draining the land, 
 knocking down ditches, and such things. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 97 
 
 '2533. Do you mean pipe drains 1 — Pipe drains. 
 
 2534. Mr. Shaw. — Were there not buildings too? 
 — He made improvements in the way of buildings too. 
 rhere is what Mr. Neligan held. 
 
 2535. Chairman. — Are you quite clear that he 
 Dientioned drainage 1 — All improvements. He' w dd 
 allow him nothing for anything. He said he was 
 recouped for everything after eight or nine years. 
 Now I say this much — that land that I got then at 
 24s. or '25s. an acre, I drained it all ; when I drained 
 it, it cost me from £8 to ,£10 an acre. I thorough 
 drained every inch of it, and pvit up gates and piers 
 for it. T covered it all vip and laid it down in the 
 best possible way, and top-dressed it with lime and 
 manure, and with every sort of stuff that would im- 
 prove it, and if that land is now worth 50s. an acre 
 I maintain that I have as good a right to the 25s. an 
 acre I have added to its value as the landlord has to* 
 the other 25s., unless I take the value out of it. It 
 will be improving every year, and in time to come 
 that land will be worth four times as much an acre 
 as when I got it, through my improvements and 
 industry. 
 
 2536. Baron Dowse. — The Land Act intended to 
 give you all your improvements ; the shortcomings, 
 if there are any, must be in the administration of it ; 
 I don't know how any Act of Parliament could make 
 Mr. Neligan more liberal t — There is what lie lays 
 down at all events. Again some county court judges 
 say that tenants are not entitled to compensation for 
 improvements for pasture lands. Now that would 
 be the result of their decision in such a case as this — 
 that tenants five or six years before their leases expired 
 would break up their farms to recoup themselves for 
 their expenditure, and would leave the land in such a 
 state that they would not be in the same condition 
 again for the next thirty years. Every man that is a 
 practical farmer knows that if you spend your money 
 feeding with oil- cake and hay and everything in the 
 winter, and if you make land that was as barren as 
 a wilderness a splendid rich farm that will fatten 
 cattle eight cwt. or ten c-wt. it would be simply 
 
 • burning the candle at both ends if you were to get 
 nothing for your expenditiire, and it would be better 
 for you to destroy that land again. 
 
 2537. Chaieman-. — Do you apply that to pasture 
 farms only with no tillage on them 1 — Certainly ; he 
 will allow for no pasture lands at all. 
 
 253S. Mr. Shaw. — It is you who have made that 
 land what it is, and you say it took twenty years to 
 make it good fattening land 'J—Twenty years, at least. 
 
 2539. With a large expenditure of money 1 — Yes. . 
 
 2540. Baron Dowse. — Does he lay that down as a 
 principle of law'? — What is the poor unfortimate 
 tenant to do. 
 
 2541. He can appeal ? — The poor tenant cannot ap- 
 })eal. Where is he to get the money 1 
 
 2542. Mr. Shaw. — ^I am afraid it has often been 
 decided in the same way, that nine or ten years' enjoy- 
 ment exhausts the tenant's improvements ? — Surely 
 you never heard such a thing. It is enough to set 
 every man in the country cracked. The consequence 
 is, all improvements are stopped, the tenants do 
 nothing in the world in the way of improvement unless 
 they can't help it — they are afraid of their lives to 
 do anything. Neither would I only for the man 1 
 have to deal with. You may talk of absentees ; it_ is 
 the greatest comfort in the world to be deahng with 
 such a man as the late Duke of Bedford. The pro- 
 perty belongs to the tmstees of the late Earl Rus- 
 sell's son. 
 
 2543. Baron Dowse.— And are they easy to- deal 
 with 1 — Very easy. 
 
 2544. Is it your experience that it is the noblemen 
 and the old proprietors of large estates that deal most 
 considerately with theii- tenants ?— They are the men 
 —the old proprietors. I would not have them parted 
 with at all-; but the men that buy in the Landed 
 Estates Court, I would hunt them out of the country. 
 
 2545. A man might buy in the Land Court and be Sept. 7, isso. 
 a pretty good man, is not that so ? — Well, there are j^^^^l 
 some of them very good. Everitt, Esq., 
 
 2546. Mr. Shaw. — Then you would not hunt them plg., and 
 all out '{—Well, nearly. They scarcely have the land Mr. James 
 iir their possession six months until they cast about to '^^^' 
 re-value it, and make money out of it. 
 
 2547. Baron Dowse. — Suppose a gentleman pur- 
 chased an estate in the Land Court in a part of Ire- 
 land where a tenant-right custom was never known 
 before, and said " You are all to have the Ulster 
 tenant-right custom amongst you," what would you 
 think of that man 1 — Oh ! that is a good man. That 
 would be all right. 
 
 2548. Mr. Shaw. — You did not tell us about Lord 
 Conyngham's lease 1 — I am coming to that. I have 
 reason to think of the whole of it. I pay £1,000 a 
 year. I hold 462 acres of land, and I did not make 
 within £778 of what I made last year. It is all 
 very well, but I have to pay my rent and bear the 
 loss. I can show you day and date for every penny 
 I received and expended. It takes £5,000 or £6,000 
 to stock and work it the way I do, and it is hard 
 enough not to have any interest for all that money, 
 but instead of that to lose £788, The fourth injustice 
 inflicted on tenants who are valued at £50 per annum 
 and upwards is, that they are not entitled to compensa- 
 tion for disturbance, and can contract themselves out 
 of their improvements. Besides, this clause is only an 
 encouragement to landlords to consolidate, as they 
 would have nothing to pay for disturbance out of the 
 large holdings. I will give you a case now to show 
 the hardship it is that a tenant is not allowed compen- 
 sation for disturbance on large holdings. In the year 
 lb64 there was a widow named Mrs. Mills ejected out 
 of her farm at Slane. on the Marquis of Conyngham's 
 estate. A friend of her's came to me and begged of 
 me to redeem it. The ejectment was for nonpayment 
 of rent, and it was subject to redemption for six 
 months. I went the next day and saw the farm, and 
 made a bargain with Mrs. Mills subject to the approval 
 of the Marquis of Conyngham. The agent lived at 
 Mountcharles, and I went to see him. 
 
 2549. Baron Dowse. — Mountcharles is in Donegal ? 
 — Exactly. 
 
 2550. You went I may say from one side of the 
 country to the other to see him 1 — I did. I went to 
 see him, and when I told him what I had done, he told 
 me that the .farm was promised to another, and that it 
 could not be given to me. I then told him that it 
 was not every day that a person got the chance of 
 getting a ia,rm. under the Marquis of Conyngham, and 
 for that reason when I would go home that I would 
 go to Lord Athlumney, who lived beside me, and get 
 him to use his influence with the Marquis. I did so, 
 and that day Lord Athlumney saw the Marquis of 
 Conyngham, who told him that he would accept of me 
 as a tenant. Lord Athlumney used his influence with 
 him, and told him that I would make a good tenant, 
 and the Marquis of Conyngham then and there agreed 
 to take on with me as a tenant. There never was a 
 word about anything till she died, when I was served 
 with a notice to quit. 
 
 2551. Mr. Shaw. — It was a yearly tenancy, I 
 suppose? — There was a letter promising a lease to 
 her. I thought it was a good lease, but when 
 they served me with a notice to quit, I laid the thing 
 before Mr. MoUoy, as he stood to me so well on the 
 former occasion, and he said it would not stand in 
 court, that I could not insist on specific performance, 
 because the exact number of acres, and the exact rent 
 was not mentioned. 
 
 2552. When did she die. Lately ?— In 1877. I 
 wrote to the agent to know the cause of my receiving 
 the notice to quit. He did not answer my lettei. 
 Shortly afterwards I wrote to the young Marquis— 
 the old Marquis having died — telling him that I wrote 
 to Mr. Russell, to know why T was served with a 
 notice to quit, and also saying that I bought the 
 
 
 
98 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 1, 1330. 
 
 James 
 
 Kveritt, Esq., 
 p i,.G.,ancl 
 Mr. James E. 
 Drew. 
 
 interest in the place with Lis father's approval — that' 
 I paid my rent regularly, and made' a great deal of 
 improvements on the land. The young Marquis at 
 once wrote back, saying that he would inquire into 
 the matter, and if he found it to be correct as I stated, 
 that there would be no more about the notice to quit. 
 That notice to quit was then let droj), because he 
 found that what I said was correct. When I was 
 paying the next rent, the agent told me that the 
 object of serving the notice to quit was to raise the 
 rent. " If that be all " says I, " send a competent 
 man to value the place, and I will take a lease 
 of it at the rent that he says it is worth." Well, 
 now this gentleman that he sent — and I would 
 not wish his name to be mentioned — this man put a 
 value on it of 2s. Qd. Before he sent the report to the 
 agent he told me. " Now," said he, " I was sent to 
 value the farm " — he was a very respectable man — " I 
 was sent to value the farm, and 1 have put 2s. Qd. an 
 acre more on it than you pay, and will you pay that," 
 "I think it very dear," I said, "considering all it has 
 cost me, but sooner than have a dispute T will pay the 
 2*. Qd." What was the consequence, the agent wrote 
 to this man saying "it was not worth his while send- 
 ing him to value the land, that he should have put 5s. 
 an acre on it," and there and then a lease was drawn 
 up for me to sign putting on 5s. an acre increase, and 
 I had to contract myself out of all the clauses of the 
 Land Act. Before I signed the lease I told the pre- 
 sent agent Mr. Osborne — the old man got bronchitis 
 or something, and was not able to act, and there was a 
 new agent appointed, and this was the gentleman that 
 brought it to me to sign. Before I signed it Itold the pre- 
 sent agent, Mr. Osborne, he lives near Slane, that I ex- 
 pended £2,000 on improvements and tine, and if they 
 would give me that I would give them up their farm, 
 that I did not want any law at all. The reason I tell you 
 that story is to show you the great disadvantage there 
 is i:i persons like me not to have power to claim for 
 dikt irbanoe. Here is my argument. If I could claim 
 fi-se years rent for disturbance, and £2,000 for im- 
 pioyements do you think I would stand 5s. per acre 
 adv,ince, and contract myself out of the Land Act 1 
 Do you think I would do it 1 5s. an acre advance 
 left ms £35 a year more rent, and I am almost giving 
 him £2,000 fine for a lease of thirty-one years. Do 
 you think I would do that if I could claim five years 
 rent, which would be £1,500, and £2,000 for improve- 
 ments, do you think I would not go into court ? I get 
 nothing because I am in the occupation of it for nine , 
 years, and had I any alternative only to- contract my- 
 self out of the Land Act. 
 
 2.553. Mr. Kavanagh. — That is assuming that Mr. 
 Neligan's decision is law ? — But when it is done there 
 is no more about it. 
 
 2554. Mr. Shaw. — He is your County Court judge 
 at all events 1 — Yes. If we had poor old Molyneux we 
 would have nothing like that at all, he was the fairest 
 man I ever saw, really I never saw so painstaking a 
 man. Fifth, the gross neglect of which some land- 
 lords are guilty in giving the whole management of 
 their estates to solicitors. Now, the greatest curse that 
 can be inflicted on a community is that the landlord 
 does not look about his own property, only gives it to 
 a man from Dublin who only looks to getting the 
 highest rent he can so as to get his own percentage. 
 
 2555. Is that common 1 — Very common. There are 
 about 20,000 acres in our part of the county, and there 
 is not a resident landlord there, the agent does every- 
 thing. Some few years ago Lord Gormanstown died, 
 and his life being in a number of leases four or five 
 hundred acres went out of lease. The rent on 
 every tenant on the land was increased from 60 to 100 
 per cent., from which advance, with the bad harvest, 
 there is not one tenant on the land able to pay his 
 rent this month, not a single tenant on the land, so 
 much so that some of them wanted to buy a cow or a 
 horse and they came to me. 
 
 255G. They are small holdings, I suppose? — Good 
 
 large holdings, some of them up to a hundred acres or 
 more. 
 
 2557. Mr. Kavanagh. — Whose propeiiiy do you say 
 that was ? 
 
 2558. Mr. Shaw. — Lord Gormanstown I — No, his 
 was the life. It was a man named M'Dermott's. 
 
 2559. Chairman. — What was the name of the 
 owner of this property ? — M'Dermott. 
 
 2560. Baron Dowse. — Where does he live? — In 
 Dublin, out at Sandymount. Although the land is in 
 the most wretched state of any in the country, when 
 we got the Clerk of the Union to write to the land- 
 lord that he could get money at 1 per cent, to improve 
 it, he declined. There are hundreds of men idle in the 
 district, we could get the iniion scheduled, the Board of 
 Guardians got the clerk to write to thirty-eight land- 
 lords, all absentees, to know would they take any . 
 money to improve their properties, only two out of 
 the thirty-eight wrote down that they would like to 
 pay a penny. 
 
 2561. Mr. Shaw. — All absentees 1 — All absentees.. 
 I must say there was one gentleman wrote before, the 
 late Attorney-General, Mr. Gibson,' a first rate man, 
 and his father before him, could not be matched ; all 
 the tenants on his property had leases for ever, and 
 he wrote that the tenants themselves were bound to 
 do it. I want to show you how ignorant these land- 
 lords are. Although he lives near Dublin ■ 
 
 2562. Mr. Kavanagh.— Who is this ?— iSI'Demiott. 
 He wrote back saying he did not require it as he con- 
 sidered there were no improvements to be made ; and 
 the land, I declare to goodness, the way it was after 
 the flood, unless a few houses built on it and a few 
 ditches, the whole land all covered with heather and 
 requiring to be drained, I would not give 10s. an acre 
 for it, and he charges £2 for some of it. 
 
 2563. Mr. Shaw. — Is it good land?— It is good 
 land, but the man that had it at £1 was raised to £2, 
 and the man that had it at 15s. he raised to 30s. 
 
 2564. Chairman, — Had he been owner of the pro- 
 perty for many years? — I think so. This will give 
 you an idea of what some Icr.dlords know about thi^ 
 state of their properties. Sixth, the great reduction 
 there would be in the rental of lands if the improve- 
 ments were made by the landlords and not hj the ten- 
 ants. I will just give you a case of my own. I hold 
 a farm from a gentleman for which I was paying 
 £5 per acre ; you would think that an enormous 
 rent. 
 
 2565. Baron Dowse. — Is it an English acre ? — No, 
 an Irish acre. But this gentleman and his father held 
 the land in their own hands for years and put it into 
 the highest possible condition. As last year was a 
 bad one, I went to him on the 1st of Octolier and told 
 him unless he gave me a considerable reduction I 
 would give up the land to him. Sooner than take it 
 ofli" my hands he gave me an abatement of £90 a year ; 
 there is only seventy-four acres in the farm. Do you 
 think if it were my capital and my industry that had 
 increased the value of this land, which naturally was 
 not worth £2 an acre, but which by their petting and 
 care and attention they made worth £5, what would 
 the landlord tell me if I went up to demand an abate- 
 ment ? Would he not tell me to give up the land ? But 
 because his money was invested in it he soon.gave the 
 abatement. 
 
 2566. Mr. Shaw. — Are you bovuid to keep it in 
 grass ? — No, I am not bound ,to keep it in anything. 
 From my experience of the working of the Act I am 
 of opinion that the tenants would submit to any 
 terms short of being evicted before they would go to 
 law, and on that account I would say the Act of 187<l 
 should be repealed, and a law enacting security of 
 tenure at fair rents with a right of sale should be 
 passed ; that is my doctrine, and notliing else will do. 
 It is all nonsense bringing tenants into court, because 
 they won't go until compelled. 
 
 2567. They would submit to an increase of rent 
 on any terms ? — Wait till I give you a case. In the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 90 
 
 year 1869, a gentleman bought a property in the 
 Landed Estates Court, the rent was £190 a year, and 
 : it was all paid by one tenant. When the lease ex- 
 pired in 1872 — mind you the Land Act was in force 
 then — he advanced the rent to £325. 
 
 2568. On the same tenant t — On the same tenant. 
 Although the tenant knew he would not be able to 
 pay it,, nevertheless, he took on sooner than go to law. 
 What was the result, after selling everything he had 
 available to pay this rent, he broke down, at last, and 
 he and his family had to get out-door relief, and I am 
 the man who got it for them. The man was not able 
 to be removed in, he would have to go to liosi)ital 
 himself and his family if he could be removed, but he 
 got so prostrate that he could not be removed. 
 
 2569. The rent was very excessive'? — Terrible, en- 
 tirely ; it broke him down. 
 
 2570. Chaii^man. — Have you any objection to give 
 the name of the landlord and tenant ? — Walsh is the 
 tenant, Booker is the landlord. 
 
 2571. Baron Dowse. — Near what town 1 — Dvileek. 
 
 2572. Mr. Kavaxagii. — Where does the landlord 
 live 1 — He lives in the comity Meath, he is one of 
 those landsharks, biiys a farm anywhere he can and 
 turns out the tenant. 
 
 2573. Baron Dowse. — What do you call a land- 
 shark. I have heard of seasharks 1 — I will tell you. 
 
 ■ The landshark will be travelling over the country, and 
 see a nice bit of land with one and a nice bit of land 
 with another. This property will come into the Landed 
 Estates Court, he will gather up £2,000 or £3,000 and 
 buys it, and he A^dll serve a notice to quit to take it 
 off them, or raise the rent so that they will be swamped 
 in a few years ; and there are hundreds of those in the 
 county Meath. The man has the farm now in his own 
 hands. 
 
 2574. He has not made much of that? — He has 
 ruined the poor man. Well, then, I say security of 
 tenure at fair rents. 
 
 2575. How would you manage the rents 1 — I have 
 that here. Now, I coilsider Griffith's valuation would 
 be a fair rent, and I will give you the reason why, 
 because in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred where 
 the land is worth more it was the tenant's capital that 
 did it — don't you understand, the tenant's capital and 
 industry that did it. I recollect the time Griffith's 
 men were valuing our district, I spent many days with 
 them. It was not the condition of the land they 
 valued, but its quality. They would go into a field 
 there, no matter how rich the field was, they would 
 not care a button about that, because they knew it 
 could be exhausted in a tew years. They would dig 
 down to the subsoil and look to the different kind of 
 clay. They would say there is flint in this or sand in 
 this, or loam in this, and then they went into another 
 field and said this is ten shillings better land be- 
 cause it has such and such in it. I will give an in- 
 stance, I had a field under the Duke of Bedford at 
 twenty-five shillings an acre, it was in a very ex- 
 hausted state, worn out with wheat, oats, and barley 
 being taken out of it. He walked in and dug down to the 
 subsoil, " This is only poor ; this is a good soU." He 
 walked into the field that I am paying £5 an acre for, 
 he dug down to the subsoil, "Now," said he, "your 
 land inside that is so poor and wretched now, is better 
 land than this." " Oh, nonsense, I would give £2 an 
 acre more for this land." " You would," said he, " on 
 account of the condition, but what would it cost you 
 to put that land into the same condition as this land 
 is in, it will cost you any amount of money." " How 
 do you prove that?" said I; "Because yours is a 
 deeper soil, this would be burned up in a few. years." 
 I have that land inside now improved. 
 
 2576. What is that land you have from the Duke 
 of Bedford at 25s. per acre, and the land you have at 
 £5 an acre valued at ?— The Duke's land is valued at 
 29«. an acre, and. the other at about 32s. an acre. 
 
 2577. Mr. Shaw. — What is the difference in quality, 
 has the Duke's land overtaken it 1 — No, it has not, 
 the other land is keeping its distance well before it, 
 
 P.L.G., and 
 Wr. James K. 
 Drew. 
 
 so much so, I have the two faims now, I fatten gep^. 7, 1880. 
 eighty or ninety beasts on the outside farm ; 1 tiirn jamcs 
 the cattle from the Duke's farm out there, and when Everitt, Esq., 
 the dealers come in to buy the cattle, actually from the 
 sleekness of their hair and their general ajipearanoe, 
 they would pick out the cattle I have turned out from 
 the other. I saw a report from the landlords saying 
 that thirty -three pei- cont. over Griffith's valuation was 
 a iair letting value, he was quite right, but the tenant 
 made it 33 per cent, over what it was originally. I 
 admit there is a great mcrease in the price of agricul- 
 tural produce within the last thirty years, but in my 
 opinion not equal to the advance in labour. Now, 
 for example, thirty years ago you would get farm 
 labourers to reap at I*, a day, at present the wages 
 are 4s. (JJ., and the men not half as good, all the 
 yoimg and able men having gone to America. We 
 will just take an acre of wheat, it takes eight men to 
 make up an acre, thirty years ago you would get that 
 acre of wheat made up for 8s. 
 
 2578. Baron Dowse. — Wliat do you mean by mak- 
 ing it vip ?— Reaping, binding, and stocking. At present 
 it would cost you 36s. ; does not that leave 28s. differ- 
 ence in the making up of wheat alone 1 Thirty years 
 ago a man was satisfied with the run of a cow and calf, 
 now a herd won't take less than £30 or £40 a 
 year. Labourers of every class are 2s. and 2s. 
 <od. a day. It takes eight men to make up ah 
 acre, and you will see from this that in wages alone 
 there is a difference of the fair rent for wheat 
 land. I agree there is also a large increase in the 
 price of beef and mutton, wool and butter, but 
 let me ask you, how is the wheat-gTowing farmer to 
 produce them on his worn-out land, if he were after 
 expending £30 per acre on it, and petting and nursing 
 it for tvi^enty or thirty years^ he might think of making 
 it produce, but, without that outlay, I maintain such 
 land is not worth half Griffith's valuation. ^ I know a 
 farm of that class, the grass of which was let by auction. 
 This man had 170 acres of ground, he turned all the 
 land into grass, the wheat did not pay at all — fine, 
 strong land, but well worn out — he tiirned the land 
 into grass. It has been in grass for the last twenty 
 years, and he had a lot of young cattle on it. The man 
 died and the family got embarrassed, and there was an 
 auction there last spring. Griffith's valuation is 21s. 
 an aci-e ; some of the land sold at 7s. 6d. an acre, and 
 the rest at 15s. In the present state of the law, where 
 would you get a man to expend £30 per acre on such 
 a farm ? Is not that the way to go at it ? Give the 
 tenant security of tenure, at fair rents, and for the 
 huiadred that would be anxious to buy under the Bright 
 Clauses, at present you would hardly get one, and for 
 this reason, that all the capital the farmers hold is not 
 enough to buy stock to stock their lands, improve them, 
 and provide for their families. TheBright Clauseswould 
 be all very well, but if you would have to pay one-third, 
 and work the land and settle your families, it would 
 not do at all. If they could extend the payment over 
 sixty years it would be just equal to the present rent, 
 but if you have to get £5, or £20, or £100 from a 
 farmer he would not think of the Bright Clauses at all. 
 All the men that bought under the Bright Clauses in 
 our country are the greatest paupers I know — they are 
 in the hands of bankers, and usurers, and money 
 lenders, and so on. In 1848 I bought a farm, where 
 I live, for £1,000. 
 
 2579. Tenancy from year to year ? — No, a lease 
 for ever. I took and thorough-drained fifty acres of 
 ground ; I limed it and manured it, and laid it down 
 in the best possible condition. Well, a son of George 
 Hoyte, that lived up here in Sackville-street, wanted 
 a hunting lodge, and a friend of his named Warren, 
 that lived in the neighbourhood, came to me in 1872 
 or 1873, and what do you think he offered me for the 
 farm with all its improvements. He offered £4,000 
 and I would not take it, it cost me more to put it into 
 that state, I wrote to him, saying I could not take it, 
 that I would not gain a penny piece. There are other 
 remedies which I consider would be the greatest pos- 
 
 2 
 
100 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Siyt. 7, isso. sible benefit to the coimtry. First, the repeal of the 
 , laws of primogeniture and entail ; and next, that all 
 
 •J ftlTlGS JL o ■' ^ ' 
 
 Everitt, Esq. proprietors who have lands in want of improvements 
 P.I, G., and should be called upon to improve or sell them. In case 
 Mr. James E. *^j;ig Government would not think of doing either, the 
 ''^^' least they should do would be to insist upon the land- 
 
 lords allowing the tenants to raise money from the 
 Board of Works for permanent improvements. 
 
 2580. CiiAiE.MAX. — In case the Government did not 1 
 — You know the landlords won't allow the tenants. 
 
 2581. You mean if the law should not force 
 
 2582. Baron Dowse. — I think he means in case the 
 legislature does not pass a law 1 — Yes. 
 
 2583. Mr. Shaw. — Then you would give the tenant 
 power to borrow 1 — Yes, and not have the land in that 
 state. Wait till you hear how they get on with the 
 law of entail. Judge Dowse, you know well the law 
 of entail. I was on a jury in Trim before you one 
 time, a poor man that gave a fine for a farm, the very 
 moment the landlord died, his wife comes into court 
 to evict the tenant. I asked the same day what was 
 Griffith's valuation of the land, " Griffith is not here 
 to give evidence,'' said you. Mind you, he got a lease 
 of it for more than Griffith's valuation, but still we 
 had to sign the document in court to turn the man 
 out. If we were inside, we would not sign the docu- 
 ment for you, but you made us sign it outside. 
 
 2584. Baron Dowse. — The law could not help it? 
 ■ — No, perhaps not. I consider the laws of primo- 
 geniture and entail the principal causes of distress in 
 the country, the landlord is not willing to spend one 
 shilling on his property, but to keep all for the younger 
 children. The tenant will make no improvements 
 whatever, being aware that if he will his rent will be 
 raised on the first opportunity, besides this it is a 
 great embarrassment on 'farmers, shopkeepers, and 
 tradespeople. A gentleman bought property in the 
 Incumbered Estates Coart, in my neighbourhood, he 
 entailed the estate so as to come to his eldest son, and 
 then to his second eldest son. The eldest son was not 
 in possession three months, he had no money, he went 
 to shopkeepers in Drogheda, and got furniture from 
 this man, and goods from this other man, and died in 
 three months. The second son came in and cracked 
 his fingers, and said, " The property is entailed, I wiU 
 not pay you anything." 
 
 2585. I supj)ose he had no property to pay his 
 debts 1 — Not a shilling. 
 
 2586. Mr. Shaw.— They thought he had 1—Re had, 
 if he lived. 
 
 2587. Baron Dowse. — Would you make every 
 landlord owner in fee ? — I would let the law of primo- 
 geniture be abolished. 
 
 2588. You would let him own the whole estate? — 
 Certainly. 
 
 2589. Mr. Shaw.— Able to sell it ?— Certainly. 
 
 2590. You would not tie him up by any legal 
 means 'i 
 be a settlement on his wife. 
 
 2591. Baron Dowse. — If a man said he was only 
 tenant for life in a horse, and as soon as he died it 
 went down to his remainder-man in tail 1 — Oh, that 
 is a very different thing, a horse might die of the 
 bellyache in twenty-four hours. 
 
 2592. Mr. Kavanagh. — You would think it a right 
 thing to have fixity of tenure, fair rents, and free sale ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 2593. All over the entire country ? — No, where a 
 gentleman would improve his own estate, I would not 
 interfere at all, and what is more, any landlord that 
 advanced money I would give him 5 per cent. 
 
 2594. You would not claim from Mr. Smith the 
 right to sell that land 1 — No, walk up to him any day 
 I am tired of it, and give it up to him. 
 
 2595. Mr. Shaw. — You have nothing to sell, you 
 pay the full letting value 1 — Yes. 
 
 2596. Mr. Kavanagh. — In fact, if I understand 
 you right, your plan would extend to those lands 
 m the greater part of Ireland where tenants' improve- 
 
 -If he was going to be married there should 
 
 ments have brought the land to tJie present value ? 
 
 Certainly. 
 
 2597. Baron Dowse. — But supposing the landlord 
 did make the improvements himself is he not paid for 
 them in the rent, or ought he not to be paid for them 
 in the rent he charges ? — Certainly, pay him for it in 
 the rent. 
 
 2598. And if he is paid by the rent ought he not 
 to be satisfied with that, and let the tenant remain 
 in 1 — I would give him according to the price in the 
 market. 
 
 2599. If a landlord gives a farm to a tenant in the 
 same way that a gentleman in town gives a house to 
 a tenant, it is fit for him to live in it without laying 
 out money, he can charge all he can get 1 — Charge all 
 he can get. 
 
 2600. Mr. Shaw. — Would you not give him some- 
 thing like security of tenure, he must be doing some- 
 thing in the farm after all 1 — If the landlord made all 
 the improvements, and built the house, if it was a 
 tenancy from year to year, I would have the English 
 system there. I would give him power to have his 
 property when he required it. 
 
 2601. Is it possible for a tenant to Hve in a farm 
 of that kind without expending labour and capital on 
 it, and improving it 1 — I cannot improve that land I 
 have, I could destroy it if I liked. 
 
 2602. Baron Dowse. — I suppose you mean if a 
 landlord lets land to a tenant, on a distinct under- 
 standing and obligation between himself and the 
 tenant, that he (the landlord) is to make all the 
 agricultural improvements, and that the tenant is 
 entitled to call upon the landlord to make these agri- 
 cultural improvements, then you would not interfere 
 with the landlord's right to turn that man out ? — 
 No. 
 
 2603. But supposing the landlord has made all the 
 improvements on the farm, has it in his own hands, 
 and then lets it to a tenant, and puts a rent upon it 
 to compensate him not only for the lands but the 
 improvements, and then lets it to the tenant to deal 
 with it in a husbandlike manner, would not the 
 tenant think it a hard thing to be turned out without 
 compensation 1 
 
 2604. Mr. Shaw. — Or to be turned out at all ?— I 
 think it would be a hard thing, but I would cut off 
 my hand before I would ask to interfere with Captain 
 Smith. 
 
 2605. But you are not living on the farm, it is a 
 mere accommodation farm 1 — Yes. 
 
 2606. Baron Dowse. — Have you any tenants 
 yourself 1 — ^No. 
 
 2607. Are you aware of how many cases of that 
 description there are? — There is not a case in the 
 parish of a landlord improving his own land, not a 
 case in the parish. 
 
 2608. Mr. Shaw.— But this Captain Smith is a 
 tenant himself? — No, he is a fee-simple owner, and I 
 would say give back the land in that case. • 
 
 2609. Chairman. — You would get compensation 
 for your manures and tillages under the Land Act 1 — 
 He would not allow me to plough it at all. 
 
 2610. Baron DowsE. — I don't understand Mr. 
 Everitt to say, in the case of a landlord making all 
 his improvements, that the tenant would get more than 
 compensation. You would not deprive the tenant of a 
 claim for unexhausted manures 1 — No, if he could im- 
 prove it. 
 
 2611. Mr. Shaw.— Then, if he only paid .£49 a 
 year rent, he would have a claim under the Land Act 
 for disturbance? — Yes, he would have three years 
 compensation at £50 rent. 
 
 2612. Mr. Kavanagh. — Supposing a landlord had 
 laid out £30,000 or £40,000 on the improvement of 
 different farms under him and did not raise the rent, 
 would ycu not secure to the landlord the amount of 
 money he spent 1 — Certainly ; — I would give him five 
 per cent. 
 
 2613. Baron Dowse. — Don't you think you could 
 give him some compensation for that by increased rent 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 101 
 
 on a revaluation 1 — That is what I mean. I don't mean 
 to give him the moneyj but increased rent. 
 
 2614. Mr. Kavanagh. — I don't mean to parti- 
 cularize the means, I only mean to say you would re- 
 gard his claim as a j\ist one 1 — Certainly. 
 
 2615. You said Griffith's valuation was a fair rent 
 for the land 'i — Exactly. 
 
 2616. And you admit that the valuation was made 
 on a scale of prices existing at the time of the valua- 
 tion, vakiing the quality of the land on that scale of 
 prices 1 — Yes, and not the condition. 
 
 2617. "Well, the prices have increased very much 
 smce 1 — Not in the same ratio at all as the price of 
 labour. 
 
 2618. But you were talking, I take it, of pasture 
 land 1 — I will come to pasture land if you like. Take 
 the pastvire land in the state it was in originally, it 
 was not fit to fatten anything at all ; the tenant took 
 the land, improved it, tilled it and limed it, and 
 brought it from Griffith's valuation up to the present 
 rate. Anyone that did not do that, it is not worth 
 Griffith's valuation ; anyone that did, it is worth 
 more. There are 10,000 acres in my parish that are 
 not worth Griffith's valuation, and it was the best 
 wheat land, worth two guineas an acre. 
 
 2619. Baron Dowse. — How has that gone down ■! 
 — They took all the vegetable matter out of the land, 
 they turned it into grass, and that grass has no fatten- 
 ing properties in it. It is the tenant that made the 
 land what it is worth, and, as far as the price of beef 
 is concerned, unless you lay out £20 or £'30 an acre 
 on land, you will be able to make neither beef nor 
 mutton. 
 
 2620. Mr. Kavaxagh. — As far as pasture land is 
 concerned, the improved price of labour has nothing to 
 do with it 1 — It will take £30 an acre to make land 
 fit for cattle. 
 
 2621. But all the land in Ireland is not in the same 
 position 1 — Nearly all the land in Ireland, fit to fatten 
 cattle, is like that. There is no land in Ireland fit to 
 fatten cattle except Meath. 
 
 2622. Baron Dowse. — What about Eoscommon, 
 and the plains of Boyle 1 — I have been there, and if 
 you brought the cattle over to Meath, the hair would 
 be standing on them. I have got some good cattle 
 from a man named M'Dermott, near Castlerea. 
 
 2623. Mr. Kavanagh. — You said about peasant 
 proprietors, that is under the Bright clauses of the 
 Land Act, you said that if fixity of tenure was given 
 you consider the tenants would be better off with that 
 than purchasing 1 — Under the present system" of the 
 Bright clauses I do. 
 
 2624. Just let me finish my question. Because the 
 most of that capital that ought to be employed in 
 farming would be exhausted in the purchase, would 
 not that objection extend to allowing a free sale to 
 tenants in the future 1 No tenant could get a farm 
 without paying a large sum of money for only the good 
 will ?_Well, that is his own look out. No man is 
 such a fool as to buy a farm unless he had money to 
 buy it and work it, because there is no more abject 
 creature than a man who buys a farm without money 
 to work it. 
 
 2625. Baron Dowse. — In the one case he is a free 
 agent, and in the other the law makes him '?— Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 2626. Mr. Kavanagh.— The effect of extendmg free 
 sale all over Ireland is practically limiting the farms 
 to men who had money. I don't say that is any harm 
 or not, I merely say it is a fact ?— No man can farm 
 without money. 
 
 2627. Baron Dowse.— You say fixity of tenure, 
 free sale, and fair rents, and you think Griffith's 
 valuation would be a fair standard, supposing there 
 were circumstances under which the tenant might 
 reasonably say, and the landlord might reasonably say, 
 that Griffith's valuation was not to be taken to be the, 
 standard, then would it not be fair to settle by arbi- 
 tration what the rent should be ^Certainly, if the 
 landlord and tenant would agree upon it. 
 
 2628. If that is done, and the tenant holds the land 
 and is allowed to sell it, and cannot be turned out as 
 
 long as he pays the rent, you think 1 — That would 
 
 settle Ireland, there would be no more about anything. 
 It will settle the whole country. I suppose I spoke to 
 a hundred tenants since I was speaking to Mr. Donnell, 
 every man said they would be satisfied with that. 
 
 2G2'J, What do you think of buying landlords out 
 and out with three hundred millions of money 1 — Oh, 
 nonsense. I would be sorry they would leave the 
 country. In the first place those three gentlemen I have 
 mentioned, they give a tone to society in the country. 
 
 2630. And there would be no body left to grumble 
 at if the times were bad 1 — Exactly. I could not get 
 a man to give evidence for me only three resident 
 landlords. I could not get any tenant farmer to come 
 forward like a man until these gentlemen came 
 forward. 
 
 2631. The O'Conor Don. — Are the rents in your 
 part of the country much over Griffith's valuation 1 — 
 Not a great deal ; in some cases they are. Ours is a 
 wheat country. I used to have forty acres of wheat 
 and seventy acres of oats. Now I have not one grain 
 of corn in the world, I gave it up. 
 
 2632. Baron Dowse. — Is the harvest cut in your 
 par t of the world 1 — It is, practically, all cut. 
 
 2633. Chairman. — We had a witness yesterday 
 who objected very much to the conversion of tillage 
 farms into pasture, on the ground of its leaving no 
 room for the employment of labour 1 — That is a fact ; 
 but the landlords in our country could drain and 
 improve the lands. There are farms in our country 
 that 100 men cotild be employed on for the next ten 
 years. 
 
 2634. Baron Dowse. — What do you pay your 
 labourers ? — On permanent wages, about 2s. a day. 
 
 2635. We had a gentleman here from Kildare who 
 said his standard of wages was 9s. a week all the year 
 round, a cottage and garden, and 1,000 feet of a ridge 
 of potatoes 1. — That is fair pay. What I give is Qs. a 
 week, the grass of a cow and calf, a garden of potatoes, 
 free house, and fire. 
 
 2636. Mr. Shaw. — That is for herds, I suppose ?— 
 For herds. 
 
 2637. They are skilled men to a certain extent 1 — 
 They are skilled men. 
 
 2638. They are not common labourers ? — Whenever 
 you want a common labourer in the winter you will 
 get him at 9s. a week. 
 
 2639. Baron Dowse. — It is said there are about 
 600,000 tenants in Ireland, and that they ought to be 
 placed on the soil in a more secure position ; and I am 
 not saying that they ought not ; but there are a 
 number of people have no land at all ; there are small 
 artisans and shopkeepers in towns, and the labouring 
 classes ; and I apprehend they are the people of Ire- 
 land as well as the farmers — do you think there ought 
 to be any facility given to those people to acquire 
 land ? — Certainly, as far as the people in towns are 
 concerned, I would let the dead bury their dead, that 
 is, look after themselves ; but, as far as the labouring 
 classes in the country are concerned, they are very 
 ill-used. 
 
 2640. There was a reverend gentleman here yester- 
 day who thought that clause about building labourers' 
 cottages should be made compulsory 1 — Certainly. 
 
 2641. You know you will not settle the whole mis- 
 fortunes of Ireland by dealing with one class 1 — Quite 
 right. 
 
 2642. But, at the same time, if you give security to 
 the tenant, the condition of the labourer must be ad- 
 vanced 1 — Yes. 
 
 2643. Chairman. — You said, in the event of the 
 landlord refusing to improve his property 1 — He should 
 be called upon to sell it. 
 
 2644. Or else for the tenant to be allowed to bor- 
 j-Q-^r — what security would a tenant be able to give 
 the Board of Works for the loan 1 — The land. 
 
 2645. You would propose that they should give the 
 landlord's property in the land as security for the 
 
 Sepl. 7, 18S0. 
 
 James 
 
 Everitt, Esq., 
 P.L.G., and 
 Mr. James E. 
 Drew. 
 
102 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1880. 
 
 James 
 
 Evcritt, Esq., 
 . p.i,.G., and 
 Mr. James K. 
 Drew. 
 
 loan? — The money would ^e invested in the land 
 under proper supervision. The county Meath, iT it 
 ■was properly drained and improved, vi^ould feed all 
 Ireland. You can walk miles and miles on the roads 
 this minute, and, if you wanted to know the way, you 
 could not get a human being to tell you which way to 
 turn — no people in it. 
 
 2646. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think that is a proper 
 state of things 1 — No. 
 
 2647. Are there many sniall tenants in Meath 1 — 
 Very few. 
 
 2648. Are you aware there are a great number of 
 small tenants in Mayo and Galway 1 — Yes. 
 
 2648. Have you heard that it has been suggested 
 they should be taken and planted in Meath 1 — I think 
 it woul^l be very well done. There is a farm in my 
 neighbourhood of two thousand acres of land held by 
 a minor, and all stocked with cattle and sheep. It is 
 true there is no better family. I suppose they keejj a 
 hundred people employed on the farm just for pure 
 charity ; they might not keep ten. 
 
 2650. You referred to some purchasers in Meath 
 under the Bright clauses ; were there many you know 
 of t — Very few ; the people that bought under it 
 burned their fingers. 
 
 2651. They bo^lght too dear 1 — In the first place at 
 the present moment all they could get was £4,000. 
 Supposing you gave £9,000 as the price, you would 
 have to make out £5,000, no matter where it came 
 from. Supposing you had only £3,000 of your own, 
 there would be the £4,000 you get from Government, 
 where would you get the other £2,000 ? You would 
 have to go to a usurer who claims ten per Cent., and 
 
 that man could have you any time he liked ; he would 
 go about the country saying you were in his debt. 
 
 2652. He could confiscate your property 1 — He 
 could. 
 
 2653. Because if the Board of Works know you 
 have been borrowing this way they can make the whole 
 thing nuli and void 1 — Yes, I know several such cases. 
 They are talking now of the Church lands. The 
 Church lands were all let low, and what they bought the 
 Church lands at was 22-|- years' purchase on GrifiS.th's 
 valuation. This was all right, but I think the people 
 now T(vould be sooner without them. Security of 
 tenure, fair rents, and free sale, if the Irish people are 
 not satisfied with that they never will be. 
 
 2654. Whether they are satisfied or not, do you 
 think they ought to be ? — They ought. Another thing 
 I have to say The Irish people would be almost 
 satisfied with the Land Act only for the conduct of the 
 landlords and the advantages they took of it. There 
 was not a single flaw that was wrong in it from begin- 
 ning to end they did not take advantage of. There 
 was not a clause in it they did not pick some hole in, 
 and the consequence was the^' turned the whole people 
 into revolt. If they took a proper view of it the people 
 would work on quietly. That was the whole cause of 
 the ructions about the Land Act. I say if an Act of Par- 
 liament passed now giving security of tenure, fair 
 rents, and a right to sell, if the landlords took that in 
 a fair spirit, and not try to drive a coach and six 
 through it, the way they did with the Land Act, it 
 would be all right, but if they do not, then I say let 
 the country be agitated all over to buy them out. 
 
 Mr, James Kichaed Deew examined. 
 
 2655. I don't know anything about the Land Act 
 as Mr. Everitt does, but I had a case that was entirely 
 outside the Land Act. 
 
 2656. The O'Conor Don. — Would you state what 
 you are, Mr. Drew ? — A farmer, and I hold about 80 
 acres of land under the Earl of Sheffield. 
 
 2657. Mr. Shaw.— In Meath ?^In Meath, and I 
 hold 48 acres of land under Judge Little ; it is Capt. 
 Caldwell's estate ; he bought it and has a middle inte- 
 rest in hi. 
 
 2658. You have a lease of it I suppose ? — I have a 
 lease of the last. I am a yearly tenant on the first, 
 under the Earl of Shefiield. I am also connected with 
 two or three other small farms in my mother's 
 name, one is under a Mr. Cox, and Mr. Richard 
 Gradwell is the head landlord. 
 
 2659. Are they all grazing farms'? — No tillage 
 farms. 
 
 2660. Mixed, I suppose? — Yes; some of them 
 grazing. 
 
 2661. Ohaieman. — Will you tell us what your case 
 is that you wish to bring before us 1 — In this place 
 where my mother lives there is a mill built by my 
 father and grandfather. The place was taken for mill- 
 inc purposes, and the mill was built at a cost of about 
 £2,000, and they agreed to pay £135 a year. 
 
 2662. Eor the mill and farm together ? — They took 
 a lease at that rent. That was about the year 1840. 
 The first time I heard of it was from part of a letter 
 written by my father to the landlord in 1858, com- 
 plaining of the high rent he had to pay. In 1865 or 
 1866, father having died in 1860, I began to manage 
 the place for my mother, and I found it was impossible 
 to pay this rent. All the improvements were made, 
 and the buildings erected, and the milll fitted up by 
 the tenant. The miU trade failed, and I found it im- 
 possible to pay the rent. After repeated applications 
 the landlord gave a reduction of £7 10s. half-yearly. 
 The rent was £135, and he said he would make it 
 £120. This was paid until 1873. I had got the 
 other farms in the meantime. There were 22 Irish 
 acres with the mill. In 1873 the rents had to be 
 left in. arrear. There was a year and a half's rent 
 
 due. The agent, Mr. James Scott, of Courtown, 
 Gorey, county Wexford, sent an attorney's letter 
 to my mother. Acting on advice I went to a soli- 
 citor who took the case in hands, and he wrote to 
 the agent, saying unless there was a reasonable 
 reduction made my mother would be obliged to assign 
 the lands to a pauper. My father held them under an 
 assignment from my grandfather, and consequently 
 he also could assign. The consequence was that the 
 rent was reduced by £50. That was about £4 10s. 
 an acre. This land was subject to systematic floods 
 durmg the winter months. They would come foui 
 or five times, and sweep down into the very house where 
 we were living. In January, 1878, the present owner 
 of the lands came home. The old man died and left it 
 to his second eldest son. This son came home and saw 
 the place, and said he m\ist have an increased rent. 
 I said it was impossible to pay more as it was not 
 worth it at all. He looked about the place for a 
 short time and went away saying he would have to get 
 more. A few days afterwards he wrote. I have some 
 of his letters here. I had a whole lot. He wrote to 
 say he considered he should get in place of the £85 we 
 were paying at the time lOO guineas a year. My 
 mother wrote that we could not at all pay that, and 
 after some time the agent wrote, saying he would 
 take £100 a year, £85 was the rent we were paying 
 before that. ' 
 
 2663. Mr. Shaw. — The mill was useless •? — Useless. 
 
 2664. The land was the whole holding ? — Yes. 
 
 2665. The O'Conoe Don.— How much would ,£100 
 a year be per acre ? — If you leave out waste, there are 
 about 21 Irish acres of land. 
 
 2666. That would be. aboiit £5 per acre ? — Yes. 
 
 2667. Was it very good land ?-^Yes ; except for the 
 flooding of it during the winter months. It was only 
 suitable for grazing. In fact, latterly, during the 
 summer months it was flooded in Jvme and July. , 
 
 2668.. Is the mill not working at all 1 — No ; there 
 is no trade for it. That is the case with a great 
 many mills in the neighbourhood. 
 
 2669. Chaieman. — When the rent was fixed it was 
 in connexion with the mUl 1 — Yes, and the water- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 103 
 
 power, and that left it outside the Land Act There 
 was some correspondence with the owner ; he wrote to 
 the head landlord asking him to purchase his interest 
 out ot the place. He is a middleman. The head 
 landlord thought no one would purchase but the tenant 
 m possession, and he asked £1,000 for his interest in 
 the land. He is paying the poor law valuation on the 
 land himself. 
 
 2670. The O'Conor Don.— How much was that ■?— 
 The poor law valuation was £47 for the lands and 
 £23 for the mills. 
 
 2671. That would be £70 ?— Seventy-two pounds it 
 came to. 
 
 2672. And his interest would be the difference be- 
 tween £72 and £100 L_Yes. 
 
 2673. Mr.^ Shaw.— He offered it to you for £1,000 1 
 — Yes, and finally to cut it short a bargain was made 
 for £600. He was offered that after sometime. 
 
 2674. The O'Conor Don. — By you 1 — Yes, and by 
 my mother to purchase his interest. Then as soon as 
 the bargain was made, there had to be a solicitor em- 
 ployed, and he had to go and .make inquiries and search 
 about the titles to see as to his right to sell. There 
 was nearly a year spent at this, and the attorney could 
 not act himself, he had to get counsel's opinion, and 
 counsel's opinion was adverse to the title, but if some- 
 thing was done by the Court of Chancery the title 
 could be made good and the sale completed. Then by 
 consent of both parties the matter went before the 
 Master of the Rolls to try to have something done 
 under the A'endors and Purchasers Act — some new 
 Act — to make the title good, but the Master of the 
 RoUs said the man had no title at all, the most he 
 had was a life interest. The whole matter was ended 
 then, and the agent wrote again to know what would 
 be done. We were after having a solicitor employed, 
 and I had to pay him £13 10s. for law expenses. 
 
 2675. Mr. Shaw. — How did it end 1 — It ended by 
 mother asking to have a new letting, a new tenancy 
 created, and doing away with the old lease. The receipt 
 was always given for £135, with a temporary allowance 
 of £5 yearly , but he had power at any tim e to go back upon 
 that. I said there should be a new tenancy created, and a 
 proper valuation made. I got Mr. Daly, of Drogheda, 
 to value the holding for the purchase of the interest.. 
 He valued it at £3 an acre. I offered for my mother 
 £3 an acre, but they refused that offer. We refused 
 to pay rent, expecting every day he would seize any 
 crop or any cattle that were put upon the land, con- 
 sequently no money could be made of it. This was 
 last year, not the present season. There were about 
 eight acres of hay on it, and we did not know what 
 to do with it when saved, but'the flood came sweeping 
 down and destroyed one hall oi it. The cocks were 
 half way immersed in water. I was thinking of 
 having a valuation of damage made to send to the 
 landlord, but I considered it was only useless ; last 
 Jime my mother was served with a notice to appear 
 in the Queen's Bench on claim for two years rent ; 
 there were two years rent due at the time, £270. 
 We took no defence. He got an habere, or something 
 it is called that way — an order to take possession ; 
 served notice on the Drogheda Board of Guardians, 
 and we were awaiting the final part of it — he, had to 
 send the sheriff. I said I would have no more to do 
 with it, that he might do as he liked, that I was 
 trying to support my mother by this land, but that I 
 coidd not be spending every halfpenny I made on the 
 other farms ; that he might have it, and we deter- 
 mined then to leave it all to him. All through yfe 
 only asked him to leave the matter to arbitration, or 
 whatever the valuation of a competent valuator was, 
 but he refused, and finally, I think, he left this 
 country for New Zealand, or somewhere. After 
 paying the whole law expenses it cost me nearly £100 
 to fit up a place on another farm to bring my mother 
 and sisters and all our furniture out of the way before 
 the sheriff should come. The land was in hay. I 
 wrot« to the attorney that if he could pay my ex- 
 
 penses I would save the crop, and from tliis we came Sept. 7, isso. 
 to terms after some time, and it is settled now, and I j „ I 
 pay him so much. He took considerably less at the Everitt, Esq., 
 very last moment than I was offering him for the p.i..g., and 
 two years. I was offering him £3 an acre, that was ^- James E. 
 £63 a year, and in the end he took £48 7s. 6d. per ^^^' 
 annum for the two years due. I had to pay law costs 
 and the crop was lost, and I could not work the farm 
 dreading a seizure every day. 
 
 2676. Chairman. — Your complaint is that this does 
 not come within the Land Act t — Yes. 
 
 2677- And you had no claim for compensation'! — 
 No ; and I complain of the Land Act in this 
 respect, that when the £600 was agreed to be paid 
 there should be some place, some registry, where I 
 could see his title at once, instead of being obliged to 
 go to sea, you may say, without a helm or compass. 
 
 2678. The O'Conor Don. — I cannot exactly follow 
 your figures. You say you had to pay the head rent 
 £72 to the head landlord l—'No, £48 7s. Qd. 
 
 2679. And £43, you said ^— That is the mill valua- 
 tion. The mill is there, but it is useless. It was built 
 by the tenant. 
 
 2680. £47 was the total for the mill, and all to the 
 head landlord ?— £48 7s. 6d. 
 
 2681. And do you mean you offered £600 to this 
 middleman for the difference between £48 and what 
 you valued at £60 1 — Yes. Tenants will do that, and 
 that is the reason why, as Mr. Bveritt says, men who 
 bought under the Bright clauses are broken now. 
 They gave more than the value of the land. If the 
 purchase had been completed I don't know what would 
 have become of me. 
 
 2682. Then you were rather benefited by the fact 
 that the man had no title to sell 1 — Benefited no 
 doubt. 
 
 2683. Mr. Shaw. — Would you have been satisfied 
 if you had had the means of settling the rent by arbi- 
 tration 'i — Yes. The rent is paid up to the 1st May 
 last, and my mother is tenant but at what rent ? There 
 is no rent fixed. I asked to have the appointment of 
 one man as arbitrator, and that the middleman should 
 appoint another, but I could not get that done at all. 
 So the rent is to be whatever a valuer sent down 
 by the solicitor chooses to put upon it. 
 
 2684. The O'Conor Don.— How did this middle- 
 man come into possession of the interest ? — He pur- 
 chased it in the Landed Estates Court. 
 
 2685. Evidently he has lost his money altogether ? 
 — Yes ; it was a question which of the two was to 
 lose. 
 
 2686. And you think it right that the legislature 
 should step in between the man who has made -che 
 purchase in the Landed Estates Court and the tenant, 
 and practically do away with the interest he had pur- 
 chased ?- — Certainly, when necessity required it. 
 
 2687. Mr. Shaw. — He saw what he was purchas- 
 ing 1 — Yes ; if he purchased a ship and it went down. 
 
 2688. He purchased the mill which was iiseless 1 — 
 Yes. . 
 
 2689. What did he pay for the interest ? — About 
 £1,600, I am told, but it was long before my time. 
 
 2690. The O'Conor Don. — In this case he would 
 not only loose the interest in the mill which arose 
 through the milling interest becoming valueless, but 
 also the rent of £85, which you were paying at the 
 time he made the purchase ?— Yes. 
 
 2691. Mr. Shaw. — But you say it was not worth the 
 rental 1 — No ; and the question, should there not be 
 some proper court we could go before to have the rent 
 settled instead ol going into the law courts. 
 
 2692. Chairman. — That Ls the rent to be fixed by 
 arbitration 1 — ^Yes, if I coidd see that it would be done 
 properly. I think rather it shoidd be a Government 
 commission to fix rents. The farmers are not intelli- 
 gent enough ; and they are not above beii;ig influenced 
 or bribed. 
 
 2693. What might be called an independent arbi- 
 
104 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1880. tration, and you think the best arbitration would be a 
 
 Government vahiator '! — I don't say that. 
 
 Everitt, Esq., 2694. Baron Dowse.— Suppose the tenant and land- 
 
 P.L.G., and lord disagree as to the amount of the rent, the tenant 
 Mr. James B. }ias intelligence enough to disagree ? — Not in the 
 Drew. majority of cases. 
 
 2695. But if he is protected enough and knows he 
 is not compelled to pay the rent, he can say the rent 
 is too high, and if the landlord says it is not; if there 
 was some third party appointed by the Government 
 who could settle the rent between them ? — Yes ; but 
 if that man comes down into the neighbourhood to be 
 valued, and is feted and Ijrought amongst the land- 
 lords, will he be a proper man in whom the tenants 
 can put confidence. 
 
 2696. A.t all events this may be said, if the tenant 
 and landlord disagree, the rent could be settled by 
 some independent man 1 — Yes. 
 
 2697. Mr. Shaw. — Or some independent outside 
 tribunal, you don't say what it is ? — Yes, some outside 
 tribunal, but I would not have the county court judges, 
 they do not know anything about it, they are not 
 practical men in such matters. 
 
 2698. Baron Dowse. — There was a gentleman exa- 
 mined here who said that a jury should always be in- 
 troduced to help the chairman 1 — You may take "it 
 from the chairman altogether, the tenants would not 
 come to him. 
 
 2699. The O'Conor Don.— What would your pro- 
 posal be ? — That the Government should step in and 
 purchase the land and give it to the tenants. Let 
 them get security for the land. 
 
 2700. Baron Dowse. — Have you ever thought where 
 is the money to come from ■? — The landlords don't want 
 money at all. All they want is security for payment. 
 
 2701. The O'Conoe Don.— Don't you know the 
 Government have no money except what they give 
 security ior or raise by taxes 1 — They could do it if 
 the thing was settled right, the landlords don't want 
 the purchase money. It they got the Government 
 security they would be as well off'. 
 
 2702. You think if they had Government security 
 for the payment they would be satisfied with that 
 without getting any of the capital into their own 
 hands ? — Yes ; you could have it something like con- 
 sols, but J am not able to go into this. 
 
 2703. You don't think fixity of tenure at fair 
 rents would satisfy the people of the country, fixity 
 of tenure at fair rents as described by Baron Dowse 1 
 — I cannot see any means of fixing fair rents. How 
 then will they be settled. 
 
 2704. Mr. Shaw. — It is done in the north practi- 
 cally ^ — I have no experience of that. 
 
 2705. The O'Conor Don. — You don't see your way 
 to fixing rents by valuation 1 — I cannot. If there was 
 1,000 acres on an estate, and that there is to be a valua- 
 tion, if the owner sends down a man, say his aTent, 
 the tenants will not agree on their side to any one man 
 to represent them. 
 
 2706. You do not think the present rents should be 
 taken as a standard to go upon? — Certainly not. 
 
 2707. You think in many cases they should be re- 
 duced'? — And in some cases increased. That i«, of 
 course, if the improvements were made by the land- 
 lord. 
 
 2708. Mr. Shaw. — How would you fix the price 
 for selling to the Government in the first instance — 
 isn't the difficulty of si^lling the land as great as the 
 letting of it, at least '( — I think you should have a 
 department that should value these lands. 
 
 2709. Still you would ha-\'o some way of makino- 
 the buyer and seller agree ? — They should have some 
 kind of compulsory power. 
 
 2710. Baron Dowse. — Did it ever strike you that 
 in our time no such law would pass the House of 
 Commons ? — No, I think it is useless talking of it. I 
 think it would bo impracticable. 
 
 2711. You think fixity of tenure, with fair rent 
 and free sale, would be of no use 1—1 think it would 
 be as the Land Act is at present. 
 
 -ilL. ^li-. Evetitt. — Jjivt supposing it was carried 
 
 out to the letter, we want nothmg better 1 — I cannot 
 say that, for I want something more. If you allow 
 every man to be owner at a fair price, he can every 
 day increase the productiveness of the soil. 
 
 2713. Mr. Shaw. — How can the man in Galway, 
 with his five acres of poor mountain land, improve 
 his holding 1 — I cannot say that. 
 
 2714. The O'Conor Don. — Would that man's con- 
 dition be improved more by having free sale, than if 
 he was made the owner 1 — He would, indirectly, for 
 he woidd have employment in his neighbourhood as 
 well ; there would be more employment given, for 
 o\ery man would be improving his land. 
 
 2715. Would he not be just as well off as if he was 
 proprietor'? — Yes, he would have far more work. 
 There would be a better price for labour, if you had 
 not this dread of every day being turned out. 
 
 2716. Baron Dowse. — You think there is no 
 remedy except making a man owner of the soil ?— 
 No. 
 
 2717. I think the English taxpayer should have 
 something to say to that — he would have to give the 
 money 1 — No. I think, it they left us our taxes here, 
 we would be able to pay it oixrselves. 
 
 2718. Do you think a barrister would have any 
 right to complain that he had not clients enough, and 
 ask the Government lor compensation \ — They are 
 not the same. 
 
 2719. Or a doctor, that he had not patients 
 enough 1 — They are not the same at all. If the land 
 does not produce the rent you have to pay, what are 
 you to do. Last year, I had about £500 rent to pay 
 altogether, and I did not make half of the money. 1 
 paid £1 60 in labour expenses. I wrote to my land- 
 lord, who was the largest landlord I had. Lord 
 Sheffield, asking him to make some improvements on 
 the place. His agent told me to write a statement, 
 and he would send it beiore him, of what I wanted in 
 the place, and I did so. I wrote, fully explaining 
 what would place me almost in the position of an 
 English tenant, as I understood it. There was a very 
 bad dwelling-house. I did not want that fixed, but 
 there were only old thatched houses attached that were 
 useless. I wanted about two or three offices or sheds 
 erected, and about twenty acres drained altogether, 
 an expenditure oi .£800 or £900. I asked him to 
 have the land drained at" once, that the men would 
 starve, if 1 disemployed them during the winter, and 
 that if he could have the drainage carried out they 
 would be all right. A month or two afterwards 
 the agent wrote, asking me to meet him in Drogheda 
 He was with the Board of Works, and the principal 
 difficulty in borrowing money ^\'as to prove the owner's 
 title. He said 1 should pay the whole interest. I 
 was paying one-fourth o\cv Griffith's valuation, and I 
 was to pay the intere.st of this money all at once, so 
 that the remedy I ^^■as to get for the bad .times was 
 to have £40 or £50 more added to my rent. 
 
 2720. Mr. Shaw.-- Would it have paid you? — 
 
 2721. The O'OoxoR Don. — Would it have paid 
 the landlord 1 — Certainly. 
 
 2722. How \vo\ild it pay him and not you? — It 
 would have left me in a position to work his farm 
 and if I meet a few years lilce last j^ear 1 cannot do it. 
 
 2723. Blr. Shaw. — Was there any allowance by 
 the landlords in your district 1 — I don't know about 
 other cases. 
 
 2724. But in your own? — There was not; I did 
 not ask it. There arc 1,000 acres in this, and the 
 landlord is an absentee ; he drains the rent out of it 
 every year, and takes it away. We had a very good 
 agent, but he died. The greater part of the land is 
 bad, and the tenants lose their independence if they 
 imjjrove it. 
 
 2725. The O'Conor Don.— Would it not pay the 
 tenants if the landlord bon-owed money and they paid 
 the interest on it— would not the improved value of 
 the land be equal to the increased jiayment they 
 would have to make ?— Yes, I always thouo-ht that 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 105 
 
 2726. Mr. Shaw.— But they would be afraid of 
 the rents being raised 1 — Yes, there is no lease at all. 
 The agent Mr. Burton Brabazon told me that the 
 fact was Lord Sheffield wrote saying to raise the 
 rents, but that he wrote back saying the times were 
 turning so it was not right to do so. 
 
 2727. You think the drainage would result in a 
 raising of the rent 1 — Yes, and if you did not pay it 
 you would only have made the land more productive 
 for some one else to work it. 
 
 2728. The O'Conor Don.— What is your idea of 
 the rate of wages in your district 1 — I pay what we 
 call single men 9s. a week. Last week in Slane there 
 was one day 4s. &d. was given for a few men. I had 
 fourteen or fifteen men reaping and I paid them the 
 first week 3s. a day the week before last 3s. Qid., and 
 last week I had twenty-seven reapers cutting some 
 corn that we could not machine, and I was paying them 
 2s. 6d., and I finished yesterday evening giving them 2s. 
 
 2729. But 4s. 6d. is a very vmusual rate t — Yes, that 
 is only for a few one day for harvest, and although 4s. 
 6(Z. was paid thei-e were not half the people employed. 
 
 2730. Mr. Shaw. — To your constant men you give 
 a house on the farm 1 — Yes. 
 
 2731. And a garden? — Yes, some have gardens. 
 
 2732. The O'Conor Don.— You say although 4s. 6c?. 
 is given half the people are not employed ; how is that 1 
 — No they were not employed this time because on 
 yesterday fortnight I had twenty reapers employed, 
 and there came nine or ten more to the gate looking 
 for me and they were not employed all day and at 
 night they came to me to employ them for the next 
 day. They were from CuUen — a later district. 
 
 2733. Would they not have worked for lower 
 wages than that 1 — Yes, if some gentlemen's servants 
 did not go in and start these wages for a few and then 
 the others did not like to go for less. 
 
 2734. But you preferred giving the higher wages to 
 the men you had than to employing the others at the 
 lower wages 1 — Certainly, because I would not turn 
 them out. 
 
 2735. You had engaged them for a given time 1 — 
 Yes, for the week, provided the weather held fine. 
 
 2736. Is there much machinery used in agricultural 
 work 1 — Yes, by all the farmers in the neighbourhood 
 to cut the corn. 
 
 2737. Hasn't that tended very much to diminish 
 the cost of getting in harvest ? — Most materially. 
 One field I had to reap cost me three times as much 
 as the others did. 
 
 2738. Which cost you most 1 The manual labour 1 
 — Certainly ; of coui-se it was past being done with 
 machinery. 
 
 2739. Mr. Shaw.— It was laid, I suppose 1 — Yes, 
 and turned and twisted about. Of course if I could 
 I would have machined it and saved the expense. 
 There is another small case, it is only a very small one 
 that I wish to bring before you. In 1868 ihis farm I hold 
 under Judge Little ; it was then he became purchaser. 
 
 2740. The O'Conor Don. — Youheldthatunderlease 
 I think you said 1 — Under lease, and in this lease there 
 is a corner containing 1a. 1r. 9 p. that included two 
 sides of a road. The immediate lessor, under whom 
 it was held had but a life interest in this corner, 
 and it was separated when sold by theLanded Estates 
 Court, and the value put iipon this corner was 
 £2 14s. 2d. That sum was taken from the rent of 
 the whole farm as being the proportion for it. 
 Captain Caldwell who claimed this corner, and got it 
 separated, then wrote to my mother, and she met his 
 agent in Drogheda, and he raised the rent for it to 
 
 Jame-i 
 
 Everitt, Esq., 
 p.L.G, and 
 Mr. James K. 
 Lrcw. 
 
 .£5 ; and that she could have a lease of it at that. Sept. 7, isso 
 
 I told her when she came back it was not worth 
 
 it. The poor law valuation was £2. The rent was 
 
 paid until I spoke to Mr. Cust who was agent for 
 
 Captain Caldwell, and he told me if I put them to 
 
 all the expense and trouble of ascertaining what the 
 
 Landed Estates Court had done, and if he took up the 
 
 land I would not get it again. I did not like that. 
 
 Then Mr. Cust died^ and the present agent, Mr. C, U. 
 
 Townshend, of Molesworth-street, was appointed. I 
 
 wrote, explaining how I came into possession and the 
 
 grievance I had in the rent being doubled. He said 
 
 he would lay the matter before Captain Caldwell, and 
 
 the reply I got was, that he was not disposed to make 
 
 any change in his rents. I paid it then, that was last 
 
 year, but this year I determined I would not pay 
 
 it. I believe under the 9th section of the Land Act 
 
 there was something might deter him from taking it, 
 
 and so he wrote for the rent, saying lie would bo in 
 
 Drogheda some time in April. Ho ignored me after 
 
 I wrote to him several times explaining all. These 
 
 are his letters. (Produces letters.) He wrote — 
 
 "Madam, — As you did not attend yesterday at Drogheda 
 to pay the above rent, we wilte to request a remittance by 
 post." 
 
 That is the first letter. I replied that I had written 
 explaining the whole matter, and said I could not 
 pay the rent any more until I got a fair valuation. I 
 asked to let anyone who wasaj udge of land value the place. 
 
 2741. How many years were you paying this rent 1 
 —Since 1868 or 1869. 
 
 2742. Before the passing of the Land Act you had 
 been paying iti — Yes, since 1869 or 1868 — I am not 
 sure which. He wi-ote again — 
 
 " I request an immediate settlement, as we should be 
 sorry you should not pay what is due without causing us 
 trouble." 
 
 He completely ignored all I had written, and threatened 
 if I did not pay belore a certain date the matter would 
 be placed in the solicitor's hands. He wrote, — 
 
 "4th May, 1880. 
 
 " Sir, — AVe regret the year's rent due by Mrs. Drew on 
 1st November last has not been paid. Wc a<rain beg to 
 apply for a remittance of £5, and shall be sorry if non-pay- 
 ment results in the matter being taken from our hands, and 
 being placed in the solicitor's. \Ye are at a loss to know 
 on what you base your statement that we now adopt a plan 
 of threatening." 
 
 I wished him to place the whole matter before Captain 
 Caldwell, believing that if he understood what I 
 wanted, to pay the full value of the land, lie would 
 give it. He replied it was a great convenience to the 
 farm, and that I was not accurate. I asked him to 
 let the whole matter wait until they would come and 
 see the place and value it themselves, that I was not 
 afraid of any valuator, and that I was willing to pay 
 what was fair. 
 
 2743. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose Mr. Townshend did 
 not see the place at all 1 — He was there this morn- 
 ing. I got a letter, and I wrote saying I had to 
 attend here. I adopted an independent course. I 
 will pay a fair rent or I will pay none at all. Of 
 course he can serve me with notice to quit. 
 
 2744. But you. have received nothing but the 
 letters 1 — Nothing but the letters. 
 
 2745. The O'Conor Don.— That is the only portion 
 you held from Captain Caldwell 1 — Yes, I am indepen- 
 dent of him but for that. If it were otherwise I could 
 not mention his name. I have had letters seven or 
 eight times saying that the rent should be paid. " If 
 you don't pay before the 4th," " If you don't pay 
 against the 14th," and so on. 
 
 Mr. Everitt re-examined. 
 
 Mt. Everitt. 
 
 2746. Chairman. — I asked you at the beginning of 
 your examination were you appointed by the Board of 
 Ouardians 1 — Yes. 
 
 2747. Was it a large meeting of the gitardians 1 — 
 Yes, a large monthly meeting. 
 
 2748. BaronDowsE.— By a resolution of the Board 
 of Guardians 1 — Yes. 
 
 2749. Was there another gentleman appointed 1^- 
 Yes, Mr. Woods, and there is no man had a better 
 case if he came to tell it. He bought a farm, I think 
 
 P 
 
IOC 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1880 
 Mr. Everitt. 
 
 aboitt 1854 or 1855, wMcli was all tillage farm then, 
 very good land, and he gave a very good price for it. 
 He put it into tte highest possible condition, and 
 thoitght he was not to be disturbed at all. He turned 
 the land into grass, and it remained there in grass 
 until the lease was out, and then his landlord vralked 
 u]3 and told him unless he gave him £4 10s. he would 
 take it all from him. 
 
 2750. Mr. Kavanagh. — Who was his landlord 1 — 
 Mr. Smith, I think. 
 
 2751. What was his rent before? — Fifty shillings. 
 
 I am not up in the question, but when the matter was 
 going to be settled he asked me to act as arbitrator, 
 but he gave up the farm. He was a nervous man, and 
 he v/ould not go to law. 
 
 2752. Mr. Shaw. — He would not pay the increased 
 rent 1 — ISTo, he could not pay it, and it is let since at 
 £3 per acre. That man's improvements are all gone. 
 
 2753. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is this Mr. Smith your Mr. 
 Smith 1 — ISTo, he is the son of Mr. Henry Smith, who 
 was married to Lord Dorchester's daughter. I am 
 not up in the qu.estion. I cannot vouch for it at all. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Murphy. 
 
 James Muephy examined. 
 
 2754. Baron Dowse. — You live in the county 
 Louth ?— I do. 
 
 2755. And youare a farmer and acorn dealer 1 — Yes. 
 
 2756. What town do you live near 1 — Dundalk. 
 
 2757. How far from Dundalk 1 — Three miles. 
 
 2758. South of Dundalk?— Yes. 
 
 2759. How many acres of land have you ? — I hold 
 about eighty-five acres. 
 
 2760. Irish acres ? — Yes, Irish. 
 
 2761. I believe in the year 1855 you purchased the 
 tenant-right of forty acres 1 — Yes, I did. 
 
 2762. It was held under Lord Clermont 1 — Yes. 
 
 2763. How much an acre did you pay for it ? — It 
 cost me upwards of £20 an acre. 
 
 2764. It was the tenant-right you purchased at £20 
 an acre t — Yes. 
 
 2765. What was the rent 1 — £2 an acre. 
 
 2766. You purchased the tenant-right of forty acres 
 at £20 an acre, subject to a rent of £2 an acre under 
 Lord Clermont ? — Yes. 
 
 2767. Is tenant-right recognised on Lord Clermont's 
 estate 1 — Yes. I hold my land under two landlords — 
 Lord Clermont and Sir Cavendish Forster. 
 
 2768. Was the land in good condition v/hen you got 
 it ? — No, it was in a most wretched condition — 
 covered with rushes and water. 
 
 2769. I believe you built a dwellinghoxise 1 — Yes ; 
 it cost me over £1,000. 
 
 2770. Did you get a lease ? — I got a lease for ninety- 
 nine years of the house and three acres. Lord Clermont 
 could not give more than twenty-one years for the farms. 
 
 2771. Then having purchased originally the ten- 
 ancy from year to year, you got a lease for ninety-nine 
 years for the house and three acres, and for the balance 
 a lease for twenty-one years 1 — Yes. 
 
 2772. His power was limited t — Yes, it was. 
 
 2773. He would have given you more if he could I sup- 
 pose? — He would have given me 1,000 years if he could. 
 
 2774. Did you build offices too ? — Yes. 
 
 2775. And made ditches and drained the 'land? — ■ 
 YeSj I hold aboiit eighty-five acres of land altogether. 
 I purchased the tenant-right of every acre ox that 
 except two and a half acres, the place where I was 
 born, and which I inherited after my father's death. 
 
 2776. You bought another portion of land under 
 Lord Clermont ? — Yes, the year before last. 
 
 2777. How much did you pay for that ? — £20 
 an acre. I gave £600 to the tenants. The tenants 
 were ejected for non-payment of rent, and although 
 they had no claim upon me in the world, I had ofi'ered 
 them £600 a few years before that. They held 
 on, and were ejected for the non-payment of rent, and 
 after being expelled from the farm I gave themo€600. 
 
 2778. Have you expended any money on that farm ? 
 — I have. Every acre of land I have with the ex- 
 ception of the two and a half acres I was born on cost 
 me over £100 an acre, and every penny of that vras 
 taken out of my ofiice or place of business. 
 
 2779. And put into the land ? — Yes, and i^ut into 
 the land. Every penny was taken oiit of the office and 
 expended on the land. I have the nicest farm now per- 
 haps in Ireland. 
 
 2780. Are the thirty- two acres near the forty acres ? 
 — Yes. 
 
 2781. Have you a lease of that ? — No, I have not. 
 
 2782. You are a tenant from year to year ? — Yes. 
 If I had an offer of a lease for twenty-one years, I 
 would not take it. 
 
 2783. Would you be allowed to sell the tenant- 
 right of that ? — Yes, Lord Clermont would allow me. 
 
 2784. Is it the same tenant-right as there is in 
 Ulster 1 — yes. Allow me to express my opinion. I 
 think the law between landlord and tenant in Ireland,, 
 is the most unjxist that could be passed. 
 
 2785. Come to your own particulars first, because I 
 am examining you from information supplied by youi-- 
 self. In . 1860 you bought some land under Sir 
 Cavendish Foster ? — Yes. 
 
 2786. How m uch did you j)ay for that ? — £20 an acre. 
 
 2787. Is that a tenancy, from year to year ? — It is, 
 and he is a good landlord. 
 
 2788. Does he recognise tenant-right ? — He does. 
 A tenant is never disturbed on the jaroperty. Except 
 myself in theneighbourhood there is no person there able 
 to buy the land, for the people inthe country are broken. 
 
 2789. Would the compensation afforded by the 
 Land Act satisfy you 1 — It would not. 
 
 2790. You say you have good landlords ? — They are 
 the two best landlords in Ireland without any excej^tion. 
 
 2791. You said something about the land laws of 
 Ireland being bad 1 — Yes. 
 
 2792. In what respect ? — Either of my landlords 
 could turn me out at six months notice after expend- 
 ing £10,000 in buildmg, draining, and fencing. 
 
 2793. Would you not get compensation for that? — ■ 
 It is hardly worth talking of. 
 
 2794. Why? — Even yourself, Baron Dowse, would 
 not give what would be one-quarter compensation, 
 nor would any of the barristers. I would not get one- 
 fourth compensation for what I have expended. 
 
 2795. I would give what I thought the law allowed 
 me ? — But the law is luxjust as between landlord and 
 tenant in Ireland — the most unjust ever framed. 
 
 2796. How would you frame it then? — We want 
 fixity of tenure, fair rents, and free sales. Tha,t is 
 what we want, and we must get it. 
 
 2797. By constitiitional means? — Yes, and I think 
 you will have a rebellion if we don't get it. I will 
 tell you what keeps that back. We are depending on 
 the j)resent Government, thinking the}'' will do some- 
 thing in the next session of Parliament, but wait till 
 after that. There never was so much pride, poverty 
 and debt in Ireland as at the present moment. I 
 ventiu-e to say that there is not a man in Ireland or 
 out of it has done more for the tenant farmers in 
 Louth than I did. 
 
 2798. You would not turn a man out, so long as he 
 pays his rent ? — I would not. 
 
 2799. Howwould you get the rent settled 1 — I would 
 have two arbitrators, and they could select an umpire. 
 
 2800. How long would you let the rent remain at 
 the figure they agreed upon ? — I would let the tenant 
 sink or swim at that rent. When you have changes 
 there is always litigation. 
 
 2801. You would let him sell the land for what it 
 would reasonably bring, and not turn him out so long 
 as he pays the rent ? — No. 
 
 2802. Would you let him subdivide ?— No, I 
 would not. 
 
 2803. Or sublet?— No, I would not. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 107 
 
 2804. You would take care tliat lie would use his 
 land in a husbandmanlike manner 1 — I would let him 
 use it as ho thinks proper. 
 
 2805. Suppose a man let the land rvm so low that 
 he would not be able to pay the rent out of it, would 
 you not give the landlord a control over it? — The 
 landlord will get Ms rent, and if the tenant is not able 
 to pay, somebody else Avill. 
 
 2806. "Would you give the landlord a veto on the 
 sale 1 — Lord Clermont has the choice of a tenant. In 
 last season there was a beautiful farm of seventy -four 
 acres sold in the County Louth, under a good land- 
 lord — Colonel Fortescue — in my neighbotirhood. The 
 tenant got £700 for that farm. An outsider would 
 liave given £1,200 for it, but Colonel Fortescue would 
 not have him. 
 
 2807. Was this a tenancy from year to year? — It 
 was a tenancy from year to year. 
 
 2808. Then Colonel Fortescue exercised the right of 
 appointing the party to purchase 1 — He gave it to a 
 tenant in preference to the outsider. 
 
 2809. Did Colonel Fortescue think he was giving 
 too much for it 1 — ISTo, I think not. 
 
 2810. Now, suppose we leave Louth, and take it in 
 connexion with the rest of Ireland, if you were 
 planning a general law for the whole of Ireland would 
 you give the landlord the power of choosing the party 
 to whom the land was to be given ? — No, I would let 
 it be free for the tenant, 
 
 2811. You would let the tenant hold at a valued 
 rent, and if the landlord and tenant disagreed, you 
 woiUd let the tenant remain as long as he liked, and 
 have a free sale ? — Yes, just so. 
 
 2812. Would that settle the land question of 
 Ireland 1 — Yes. I am' not for a peasant proprietor- 
 ship, except a man is able to purchase. It woiild be 
 wrong for the Government to make the landlords sell. 
 It would do an injury. 
 
 2813. Would you extend it to any man who had 
 the money ? — If a man can buy it himself, or had even 
 a portion of the money, and he got the rest from the 
 Government under Bright's clauses, I would extend it 
 to him. 
 
 2814. You think he should be afforded facilities 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 2815. Would you approve of a general scheme of 
 peasant proprietorship ? — No, I think it would ruin 
 the country. 
 
 2816. Some people say that it would satisfy the 
 ■country 1 — I would not have it. 
 
 2817. Do jou think it would prevent the rebellion 
 you speak of 1 — I don't tliink it would do. We have 
 great faith in the present Government, and great hopes 
 in Mr. Gladstone's Ministry. So long as we had 
 Jemmy Lowther and Lord Beaconsfield, we had a 
 curse in the country. 
 
 2818. The O'Conor Don. — How would a peasant 
 proprietary ruin the country 1 — I say it would be 
 unjust to the landlords. 
 
 2819. Baron Dov/se. — You don't say that a peasant 
 proprietary has ruined the country? — No. 
 
 2820. The O'Conor Don. — He said it would ruin 
 -the country ? — No, it would ruin the landlords. I 
 would sooner have ten acres of land, and manage it 
 well, than have 100 that would master me. 
 
 2821. Baron Dowse. — In your part of the world, 
 are the rents high ? — No, they are not high at all. 
 Louth, I think, is the best cultivated county in Ireland. 
 The fact is — to give you an idea of the poverty of the 
 country — I might say that if I had all the money that 
 is due to me in the country, I could fill a bushel with 
 gold guineas on their edges. That was for seed corn 
 I was giving out, and for putting my name on bills. 
 
 2822. Are the improvements made by the landlord 
 , or the tenant in you county ? — Don't you know all 
 
 the improvements are made by the tenants in Ireland. 
 Lord Clermont used to give the tenants slates and 
 timber, tmtil the time his brother was put out of the 
 representation of Louth. 
 
 2823. Who builds the labourers' cottages ? — Lord 
 Clermont does. 
 
 2824. Do the tenants build them? — No, Lord Sept. 7, isso. 
 Clermont builds them. They had to provide stone j^^ jlJ^g 
 and mortar for them. Murphy. 
 
 2825. Has he built many of them ? — He has about 
 twenty. 
 
 28iJG. Does he make improvements on the estate 
 or does he allow the tenants to make them?— He 
 gave them slates and timber up to the time his 
 brother was put out for Louth, and since that he did 
 not give any. 
 
 2827. Chairman. — What was the date of that? — 
 1874. 
 
 2828. Did he go on giving them after the Land 
 Act passed? — He did indeed, until 1874. 
 
 2829. It was not in connexion with the Land Act 
 that he ceased to give the slates ? — No, it was not. 
 
 2830. Baron Dowse. — I believe Lord Clermont 
 had a new valuation of the property made ? — He 
 had. 
 
 2831. That is about twenty-eight years ago? — Yes. 
 
 2832. Did he pay attention to the tenants' im- 
 provements on it? — No. He got two northern 
 gentlemen, and they were told to value the land as 
 they got it. They came to my farm, and, after 
 expending thousands of poimds in improving it, they 
 valued it at a certain sum, and then they v/ent to a 
 neighbour's, a poor man, with five acres of land, who 
 had never made any improvements, and they valued 
 it at 15s. an acre less than mine. I said to Lord 
 Clermont that I would not pay more rent, and he 
 said that I would not be asked to pay more. ' 
 
 2833. Then that 15 s. an acre was put on your 
 own improvements ? — It was. 
 
 2834. Cpiaieman. — You have not had to pay it? 
 — No, I would go out on the road this moment 
 before I v/ould submit to any landlord raising the 
 rent on me. After paying £8,000 or £10,000 I 
 would not submit to paying that additional rent. 
 
 2835. Baron Dowse. — Every man is not so in- 
 dependent as you are? — I don't care. I would go 
 out on the road first. 
 
 2836. Mr. Kavanagh. — Lord Clermont did not 
 ask you to pay an increased rent ? — No. I have no 
 complaint against the landlords, but what brought 
 me here is to speak against the land laws. 
 
 2837. Baron Dowse. — You say you have good 
 landlords ? — Yes. 
 
 2838. But you don't know how long you may have 
 them ? — I don't know. 
 
 2839. You don't complain of the landlords? — No. 
 What we want is fixity of tenure, fair rents, and 
 free sale. That is what we want, and what we 
 must get in the end. The country is on the verge 
 of bankruptcy, and when the farmers of Louth are 
 badly off the farmers elsev/here are worse ofi'. 
 There is not a better cultivated county in Ireland. 
 
 2840. And still the farmers are badly ofi'? — Yes, 
 they are as bad as could be. Some of the largest farmers 
 in Louth and Meath, if their debts were paid, could not 
 havea hoof or horn on their land. ThereisamaninMeath 
 I know — the largest grazier and the best feeder in it. A 
 few years ago a firm in Liverpool iised to stock his land 
 for him. The banks and salesmasters have also stocked 
 the lands in Meath for years. This man found that he 
 was not getting justice from the people in Liverpool, in 
 the sale of the cattle, and he sent some cattle to Dublin to 
 be sold. What was the result ? A few days afterwards 
 there was an execution for £20,000 put in against him. 
 
 2841. How did he owe that? — He owed that to 
 the firm in Liverpool. 
 
 2842. That is for advances against cattle ? — Yes. 
 
 2843. And there was a balance in their favour to that 
 amount? — ^Yes. The moment that tliey found he had sent 
 cattle to a Dublin salesmaster they sent the execution, 
 Gi'azing in Meath has been broken this ten years. 
 
 2844. It was not the Land Act that did that? — 
 No, it was nothing but the bad times. The price 
 of oats this year will be from 6d. to 9i:Z. The 
 Americans will ruin us. 
 
 2845. If I were going to pay for feeding oats I 
 would pav double that ? — I could send you up some 
 
 P2 
 
108 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 18S0. 
 
 ]\lr. James 
 Murphy. 
 
 at 15s. a barrel. That is old oats. 6cZ. to 9d. will be 
 the average price this year. 
 
 2846. Haven't you got a very good harvest ? — Yes, 
 thank God, since we got Mr. Gladstone and his party 
 we have got good weather. 
 
 2847. The O'Conoe Dox.— Does that account for 
 the lowness of the price of oats ■?— Yes, Providence is 
 pleased with the change I hope. 
 
 2848. Chairman. — Have you anything else to say's 
 — No. I am sorry to say the potatoes are going 
 very fast indeed. I have ten acres of potatoes. Our 
 
 jirospocts are not at all so good as people thought. 
 JUven the " Champions " are not doing well. I got 
 the seed of them from Scotland last year. 
 
 2849. The O'Conor Don. — Are the tubers going 
 too? — Yes, the stalks are like sticks. They are 
 nothing like what we expected. As for the "Flounders" 
 three-fourths of them are gone. I have nothing more 
 to say, but I cannot impress upon you too much the 
 poverty of the country and the injustice of the law 
 between landlord and tenant. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 JJowling. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Dowling examined. 
 
 2850. The O'Conor Don. — You were formerly a land 
 agent 1 — Yes. 
 
 2851. And are now a landed proprietor ? — Yes. 
 
 2852. And as land agent you sold some land to 
 tenants under the Bright's clauses 1 — Yes. 
 
 2853. Would you give the Commissioners the result 
 of your experience in respect to those clauses of the 
 Land Acf! — The sales that I made were the first 
 made under the amended Land Act. I endeavoured 
 to afi'dct them under the Land Act as it stood, but I 
 found the difficulties too great. 
 
 2854. Would you explain the difi'erencel — In the 
 original state of the Land Act you were obliged to go 
 to the Landed Estates Court. Under the amended 
 Land Act the power of entering into a contract existed 
 outside the Court under the Bright clauses. 
 
 2855. These sales you made were not made through 
 the Landed Estates Court 1 — No, outside the Court. 
 
 2856. You are one of the very few who eftected 
 sales outside the Court ? — I was the first in Ireland 
 who did so. In fact I was told the difficulties were 
 insurmountable, but I did not find them so. I found 
 that with the will to do it that the clauses were very 
 favourable ior the creation of proprietors. There were 
 twenty tenants who purchased their holdings to the 
 extent of £11,426 in the case I alkide to. 
 
 2857. Where was the property situate 1 — In the 
 county 01 Tipperary. 
 
 2858. Who was the landlord 1 — Mr. Thomas Beale 
 Brown. He is a relative of Sir Michael Hicks Beach. 
 In fact Sir Michael Hicks Beach was one of the 
 trustees ot the property. 
 
 2859. In that case was the whole of the estate sold 
 to the tenants'! — The entire estate was not sold. 
 There was a proviso in the Act which I endeavoured 
 to avail myself of, enabling an outsider, where the 
 tenants purchased four-fifths, to come in and purchase 
 remaining one-fifth, and to receive from the Board half 
 the purchase-money at the same rate. A purchaser came 
 forward to buy one-fifth, but the present Chief Justice 
 May, who was at that time counsel for the Board of 
 AVorks, advised that it could not be done as the sale 
 to the outsider was not made simultaneous!}^ with the 
 sale to the tenant. He argued that the words of the 
 Act were that where a proprietor was imwilling to 
 sell a part, but was willing to sell the entire, that in 
 that case one-fifth might be sold to an outsider, pro- 
 vi'.lL'd the tenants agreed to buy four-fifths of the estate 
 but that in this instance the proprietor did not show any 
 unwillingness to sell part, for that he had completed 
 th 3 contractsfor sale with the tenants before the outsider 
 cameir.. and accordingly the Board refused to complete 
 the sale to the outsider. A good deal oi correspondence 
 took place, but the result was that that sale to the 
 outsider fell through. 
 
 2860. Did the outsider then give up the bargain 1 — 
 Ino. 
 
 2861. Did he purchase without getting a loanl — 
 Yes, a purchase was made then. In lact I became 
 the pux-chaser myself. To enable the tenants to pur- 
 chase I purchased myself outside the clause altogether. 
 
 2862. This portion that you purchased in that way, 
 was it mixed up or quite disconnected from the hold- 
 ings sold to the tenants 1 —Several of the holdings of 
 the tenants were annexed, but some were not. The 
 
 sale was so efiiected that if I had not a very great 
 interest in closing the matter it would leave the residue 
 of the estate in a very undesirable state for purchase. 
 
 2863. Don't you think that that is one of the great 
 difficulties in the way of carrying out these Bright's 
 clauses '? — There is no doubt that there is difficulty of a 
 serious nature. 
 
 2864. Where all the tenants are not willing to 
 jjurchase 1 — When all the tenants are not willing to 
 purchase no landlord will be willing to sell a piece of 
 land in the middle of the property. 
 
 2865. What remedy would you suggest for that?— 
 Well, I don't think that you could with justice to the 
 landlord, and taking altogether the interests of the 
 country, I don'tthink they would be advanced byisolated 
 sales to tenants. 
 
 2866. You think there ought to be a general pur- 
 chase by the tenants 1 — Well, not exactly an isolated 
 purchase. If three or four tenants bought, I think 
 the landlord might find it his interest to sell. I may 
 tell you that I was personally aware that when Lord 
 Derby was selling his estate in this country, a very 
 large number of the tenants proposed to purchase, and 
 I svippose on principle. Lord Derby did not accede to 
 their proposal, but he might have realized far more 
 money by sales to the tenants than what he did by his 
 sale to an individual. 
 
 2867. Would he, then, have got a purchaser for the 
 residue 1 — Well, even if he sold to the tenants who 
 were willing to buy, I believe he would have realized 
 more money than he realized by the single sale. 
 
 2868. Do you think the Board of Works, from 
 public funds, should advance money to outsiders to 
 purchase under such circumstances as that estate waa 
 in when you became the purchaser '? — I do thmk it 
 would be very desirable — that is, assuming that the pro- 
 tion of the estate to be sold was not in the occupation 
 of tenants. 
 
 2869. But, if it were in the occupation of tenants, 
 what would you do with it when the tenants were un- 
 able to purchase 1 — I would be most un'v^'illing to have 
 an outsider como in, because I don't think that 
 would be improving the circumstances of the country. 
 Without pointing a remedy, I would object to that 
 altogether. In liict, it would be assisting to create a 
 smaller class of proprietors than that we now have, 
 which is undesirable. 
 
 2870. You think that the outsider should purchase 
 the whole estate, without any of the tenants getting 
 an opportunity of purchasing 1 — No. You asked me 
 as regards a particular portion. 
 
 2871. I ask, supposing a considerable number 
 of the tenants, as in this case, were willing to pur- 
 chase, and a certain number of others were not will- 
 ing to purchase, or were unable to purchase — would 
 you approve of an advance being made to an outsider 
 to purchase the portion of which the tenants were not 
 able to become the owners, in order to facilitate the 
 sale to the others 1 — I certainly would approve of that, 
 provided the sale to the outsider had conditions im- 
 posed upon it — such conditions as would give security 
 oi teniire to those remaining tenants. 
 
 2872. What conditions Mould you impose upon the 
 person so assisted to purchase 1 — If there was a rea- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 toy 
 
 sonably fair rent paid by tlioso tennnts, I would o-ivo 
 themjery long leases before completion of such safe. 
 
 2873. You say here in the paper you handed in 
 that you propose sixty years leases ?— I take sixty 
 years as the lowest limit. A great many landlords I 
 am aware of would not object, with a fair rent, to "iye 
 a longer period to their tenants. 
 
 •2874. How would you fix the rent — how would you 
 determine whether it was a fair rent or not 1 — I would 
 in the first instance, try to have a mutual arrangement 
 made between the landlord and the tenant. If they 
 disagreed, I apprehend there would be very great diffi- 
 culties to be overcome at the outset ; but I would 
 allow a controlling power for arbitration on the part of 
 the County Chairman, and have his decision final ; 
 or, if not final, that a periodical sitting would be 
 held of two or three covuity chairmen, who v/ould 
 form a court of appeal, and thus limit expense, and 
 determine the matter once and for all. In rent 
 arrangements, I do not look at the tenant and the 
 landlord as entering on equal terras. I have observed 
 those dealings in various parts of Ireland very closely 
 as between landlord and tenant, and I say that the 
 tendency is for tenants to profier greater rents than 
 they would be justitied in doing under more favour- 
 able circumstances ; and the result is that many pru- 
 dent landlords are obliged to refuse them, and to take 
 better men at lower rents. 
 
 2875. As to this proposal about the County Chair- 
 men settling the rents, would you apply that to all 
 tenancies in Ireland, whether they were purchasing 
 imder the Bright clauses or not "i — I take the tenor of 
 the question to apply to tenants whom I would give 
 security to under any form of lease. 
 
 2876. Would you. confine this to tenants under a 
 person who had been assisted by the State to 
 become purchasers 1 — My answer will apply generally 
 to all tenancies in Ireland at present if mutual arrange- 
 ment fails. 
 
 2877. You would apply the same rule to all tenan- 
 cies 1 — I would. 
 
 2878. Do you think the Coimty Court judges would 
 be very competent persons to form a light opinion as 
 to the letting value of any land in any part of Ireland 1 
 — ^Well, the County Court judges are generally pro- 
 moted, being lawyers of great experience, and their 
 duties bring them into land dealings every day. 
 I think that is the best available resource for the ar- 
 bitration of rents. I don't see that you could ever 
 have a solution of the difficulty by a jury of land- 
 owners, or by a jury of tenants, or a combination of 
 both. 
 
 2879. Would you have any revaluation of those 
 rents when once fixed 1 — I object to periodical valua- 
 tion of rents, for the very strong reason that j^ at the 
 end often years the tenant anticipates a re-5 aluation, 
 for his own protection as to the iature — the tendency 
 might be for the tenant to run down the land. By run- 
 ning it down I mean not to treat the land in a husband- 
 manlike manner, because the state of the land at the 
 time of the valuation would in a measure determine 
 the rents — at least in the first instance it would have 
 its effects. 
 
 2880. Once the rent is fixed you would say it should 
 be fixed for ever 1 — I don't see how, looking at the Irish 
 land laws and their efi'ects, you could do better than 
 fix it once for all. 
 
 2881. And convert the landlord into being the owirer 
 of a mere rentcharge 1-^1 would go farther. As regards 
 the rent' certainly it would be a rentcharge, but I pro- 
 pose to give more control to owners than the mere 
 receipt of rents. 
 
 2882. What control would you give 1— The control 
 as to the fair working of the estate. I think it desirable 
 that the landlords should exercise some control as re- 
 gards the management of farms, because a very idle 
 tenant might depreciate the absolute value of the 
 land very quickly, but I would give the landlord control 
 over that. An idle tenant might also produce cir- 
 cumstances from his own improvidence so as to oblige 
 him to give up the land, or to luin his family, ihen 
 
 I would give the landlord a control as to that to a cer- Sept. 7, 1880. 
 tain extent. , , zr~ 
 
 ^bUd. And you would not allow subdivision ?-T Dowling. 
 would limit it to such subdivision as a farmer might 
 live on with his family in safety and comfort. 
 
 2884. What number of acres would you say? — i 
 think that a man could live on a farm of twenty Irish 
 acres at present at a fair rent. 
 
 2885. What do you think of Griffith's valuation as 
 a standard lor letting ?— I don't think Griffith's valua- 
 tion is a fair standard to go by. At the present time, 
 all persons dealing in land assume that Griffith's 
 valuation is the standard to measure by, and the 
 common habit in this country is to add twenty-five per 
 cent, to Griffith's valuation. Well, my experience 
 leads me to the conclusion that, though the directions 
 may have been given clearly and distinctly to the valua- 
 tors going to various parts of the country, the applica- 
 tion of these iormula depended on the capacity of the 
 men who were examining the nature of the soil, and 
 the various things taken into account when settling the 
 valuation. I need not tell you that the soil is exa- 
 mined as to its suitabilitjr for tillage or grazing — its 
 contiguity to towns, and market towns particularly, 
 is taken into account. They examine into its then 
 state of tillage, or the condition in which the tenant 
 has it, and I believe that those men representing 
 Griffith were in no small degree influenced by the 
 amount of rent paid. It is a question, I know myself 
 irom experience, that is always asked as regards the 
 rent. I will show you a case — perhaps an important 
 case — elucidatmg what I mean in regard to Griffith's 
 valuation. I think it was in 1852 that Griffith's 
 valuation was made. In citing this case, I do so from 
 its peculiarity, and not with the view of showing that 
 Griffith's valuation is, in general, so uncertain a guide, 
 as from various causes in some cases it is a tolerably 
 fair standard ; whilst in others it is considered exces- 
 sive, and such is my experience. For these and other 
 reasons I believe a new valuation of Ireland is indis- 
 pensable. 
 
 2886. The Act was passed in 1852 ?— Well, I call 
 it the valuation of 1852. Now, I take a small fee- 
 simple estate, which was then valued by Grifiith. 
 The extent of it was about 600 acres, roughly. It was 
 then valued at X80 a year. A few years after — per- 
 haps two years after being valued — it was sold through 
 the Landed Estates Court lor £600. Three years after, 
 that same land having been materially improved — 
 vastly improved by the then proprietor — it sold for 
 £3,000. The second proprietor improved it by a very 
 large outlay, erecting farm buildings and other things 
 — so that the land is now paying £250 a year, and , 
 was bought by present owner for £4,500. It is 
 in the possession of three tenants, who seven years 
 ago, Tpsdd £1,850 for the possession to a former 
 tenant paying the same rent. It is paying, as I 
 said, £250 a year, and its valuation for Poor Law 
 purposes continues at £80. They naturally noV point 
 to that when agitation is rife, and they say, " Look 
 at the contrast between our rent and our valuation," 
 ignoring the fact that that increased value was en- 
 tirely put on it by the outlay of the landlord. 
 
 2887. But you speak of farm buildings being 
 erected. Are they not added to the valuation ?— 
 ISTothing has been added since the first valuation. 
 
 2888. We have been informed by the Commis- 
 sioner of Valuation, and it is the law, that all build- 
 ings are valued every year, and if new buildings be 
 erected, or any old ones improved, that an alteration 
 of the valuation will take place in consequence of 
 that 1 — Well, 1 cannot see for the life of me that any 
 change was ever made as regards the valuation here. 
 But I come to the point as regards the value. These 
 three tenants agreed to buy their holdings under the 
 Bright clauses. They signed contracts for purchasing 
 at twenty years of the present rent — twenty times 
 £250 a year. The Board of Vv'orks, having the appli- 
 cation before them, took up the valuation and said : — 
 '' Here is a sale made of a piece of land measuring so 
 much, but its valuation is but £80 a year. We there- 
 
110 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1S80. 
 
 JSIr. Thomas 
 Dowling. 
 
 fore decline to make an advance as empoivered by the 
 Act." Tliat rule was applied in other cases, but not 
 ■with such a large discrepancy between the rent and 
 the valuation. Mr. Ball Greene was empowered to 
 rsvalue the lands for the purposes of the sale, and his 
 value in 1873 or 1874— about the end of 1873— of 
 that same land was £231 a year. 
 
 2889. Where is that land situated 'i — In the county 
 Tipperary, within seven miles of the Limerick Junc- 
 tion. In that case you see here GriiSth's valuation 
 standing at £80 a year. The rent stands at £250 a 
 year, and the recent valuation made by Mr. Ball 
 Greene is £231 a year. 
 
 2890. That shows the great' discrepancy between 
 the valuation made so many years ago and the present 
 letting value 1 — Yes, in this particular case. 
 
 2891. Is tenant-right then allowed on that pro- 
 perty 1 — Well, when we speak of tenant-right, I know 
 in the south of Ireland it is rather confounding. 
 There was a lease held by the previous tenant, and for 
 the residue of the interest in the lease — which is some- 
 what equivalent to the Ulster tenant-right — for the re- 
 sidue of the lease thesemenpaid£l,850 to former tenant. 
 
 2892. Was the lease a long one 1 — For two lives. 
 One I think has expired since, and one is in existence. 
 Well, to show the fairness of the value made by 
 ilr. Ball Greene, the Board of Works oflered to lend 
 two-tliirds ol twenty years purchase of the valuation, 
 which was almost identical with the two-thirds of the 
 purchase-money. 
 
 2893. So the tenants in that case were able to get 
 the advance and to purchase their holdings ? — But 
 they did not do so. Having security iii their holdings, 
 they came to a resolution to continue as tenants, and 
 not to exhaust their capital, and I must say I have 
 not found a very general desire on the part of tenants 
 to become proprietors even at fair prices for their hold- 
 ings, especially where the rent is reasonable and the 
 landlord just. The way that the other sale was car- 
 ried out was this. When I came to deal with the 
 £11,426 worth of property, very few of the tenants 
 had money to make up the one-third of the purchase 
 money. I applied to the directors of the Bank of 
 Ireland, and showed that these tenants being made 
 proprietors, each year made them better security, and 
 if the Bank advanced them a portion of the one-third 
 that the repayment would be certain. The directors 
 a.t'reed to advance the money to those I recommended. 
 They advanced a large portion of the one-third, and I 
 find that the majority of the tenants have been punc- 
 tually discharging their liability to the Bank, and also 
 paying their charges to the Board of Works. 
 
 2394. But they were unable, I presume, to give the 
 bank any security upon the land? — There was no 
 security upon the land — it was personal security. 
 
 2895. Do you think that that is a great drawback 
 in the present Act — that they cannot give security on 
 the land ? — 1 think not ; for, as a matter of fact, 
 securities are taken on the land, to my own knowledge, 
 behind the charge of the Board of Works, and not- 
 withstanding the Board of Works' conveyance debar- 
 ring it. 
 
 2896. How is that done 1 — Like any ordinary charge, 
 
 2897. But would not that, according to the Board 
 of Works' riile, confiscate the land to the Board of 
 Works 1 — It the strict letter of the conveyance was 
 followed it would confiscate it, but, as a matter of fact, 
 it has not been, whether it has come to the knowledge of 
 the Board of Works I don't know, except perhaps in 
 an isolated case. 
 
 2898. Do jow think it desirable to keep up a system 
 which, as you show now, is defeated underhand — do 
 you think it desirable to keep up that rule, that no 
 charge shall be made on the lancl subordinate to the 
 Board of Works' charge 1 — I think it would be unjust 
 to the tenants to debar them from assisting themselves, 
 for this reason, that while each year decreases thoir 
 liability to the Board of Works, so in proportion is in- 
 creased the value of the security they liold. If the Board 
 of Works lend £100, and that they had full security for 
 £100, in two years' time, when there is but £90 due, 
 
 they have a first charge on the land for £100, and so 
 on till it runs down to £10. Well, it would be very 
 hard to debar a tenant from assisting himself even in 
 adverse times for thirty-five years. 
 
 2899. When the Board of Works' charge is a first 
 charge, you think the Board of Works has no right to 
 look further, and to prevent the tenant from borrowing 
 money on a secondary charge 1 — ^WeU, I believe it was 
 the desire and the intention of the framers of the A?t 
 to raise the tenants into a position of independence, 
 and the Board of Works should be very slow, I think, 
 to encourage that kind of thing. It is very undesirable, 
 unless in rare cases. 
 
 2900. You have shown, that it cannot be prevented, 
 and that it is still being done in spite of the warning 
 of the Board of Works ? — I am aware of two cases 
 which are now in the Landed Estates Court out of the 
 number of sales I have before me. The tenants who 
 availed themselves of the Bright Clauses were twenty 
 in number. In two cases I found that where the men 
 had got extra loans, the persons who made the loans to 
 them had tripped them up. A very famous money-lender 
 in Dublin, who charges 20 to 40 per cent., has got hold 
 of one of them, and his holding is being plunged into the 
 market under adverse circumstances, notwithstanding 
 the conveyance of the Board ot Works. The second 
 case is similarly operated upon by a building society, 
 which, with their eyes 023en, lent the money under cir- 
 cumstances, I think, most unfavourable to the tenant. 
 
 2901. You don't know what action the Board of 
 Vv^'orks will take with regard to it ? — I do. For some 
 years I have been watching the operation of the land 
 sales in other places as well as this one. I went to 
 a solicitor recently to find how this man got into 
 difficulties. I found that the purchaser actually lodged 
 the deed that he held from the Board of Works as 
 collateral security, and as soon as the bills that the 
 deed was given to secure came to maturity, and were 
 dishonoured, so soon did the holder of the deed turn 
 round, serve a writ, and mark judgment, and there 
 are proceedings pending to sell the estate at present in 
 the Lauded Estates Court. An intimation was given 
 to the Board ol Works, as I myself saw a letter from 
 the Board oi Works sanctioning the sale of that tenant's 
 holding to get in their arrears and loan. 
 
 2902. Mr. Shaw. — They did not try to confiscate 
 the holding 1 — No, certainly not. 
 
 2903. Baron Dowse. — "Forfeit" is the word in 
 the Act. " Confiscate" is a strong word? — Yes. 
 
 2904. Are you aware that there is an Act of Par- 
 liament passed since that enabling the Board of Works 
 instead of forfeiting the land to sell it ? — I am quite 
 aware of that. I think the occasions for putting such 
 powers in force will be very few, for my exi^erience 
 leads me to the conclusion that unless imder very lui- 
 fortunate circumstances, and not occasioned in any way 
 by his purchase, every tenant who has purchased 
 has improved in his condition. Every holding I ever 
 saw belonging to a purchaser has been materially and 
 substantially improved. 
 
 2905. Chaieman. — What are the sizes of the hold- 
 ings you speak of? — The smallest holding in the lot 
 was one of six Irish acres. This is an exceptional 
 case. The poor man who occupied it said to me 
 " Will you assist me, an humble man, with a large 
 industrioTis family, to be what bigger men have a mind 
 to be." I said I had not the slightest objection. The 
 largest holding is 160 acres. This man with the six 
 acres was made a proprietor by me. 
 
 290C. The O'CosoE Dox.— Has he made any im- 
 provements 1 — He has indeed. He has built a house, 
 and has drained his land and fenced it. He has chil- 
 dren National school teachers. I never saw such a 
 change in any man in my life. 
 
 2907. Chairmak. — You said that you would confine 
 the size of the holdings to twenty acres ? — I said that 
 if I allowed subdivisions of the tenants' holduigs, not 
 under the Bright clauses, I would say twenty'^acres. 
 I was asked whether I would confine the landlord to 
 being a mere chargeant upon the lands. I say I would 
 not make him merely a chargeant in the receipt of 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Ill 
 
 rents, bvit I would give Mm control for the benefit of 
 tlie State. 
 
 2908. The O'Conor Dojf. — So far as your ex- 
 perience of the Bright clauses is concerned, would you 
 suggest any amendment in them, or are they workino- 
 well as it is ? — I don't think they are working as well 
 as they ought. 1 know there is a very strong ieeling 
 amongst the tenant class, and amongst the community 
 generally, that in consequence of the annual reditction 
 of the charge of the Board of "Work increasing their 
 security, a larger portion of the purchase-money might 
 with safety be advanced — say to the extent of three- 
 fourths. In this view I fully concur — I consider at 
 least three-foiirths might be safely advanced where the 
 price of holding is not excessive. 
 
 2909. Would you advance three-fourths of the pur- 
 chase-money — no matter what the purchase-money was? 
 — As I understand the Board of Works have fixed a 
 rule of their own, that they will not advance two- 
 thirds ia every case unless the security be adequate. 
 
 2910. They make the full advance of two-thirds of 
 the vakiation 1 — They do not make a valuation unless 
 requested to do so, because if I remember rightly the 
 Act says, they shall be at liberty to advance not more 
 than two-thirds of the price, if satisfied with the 
 security. 
 
 2911. They take as a rule Griffith's valiiation, do 
 they not 1 — Generally, unless in a special case like 
 that which I already cited. 
 
 2912. Where Griffith's valuation is obviously very 
 much under the value, as in that case they make a 
 special valuation by an officer of the Valuation Office 
 — and give the advance upon that sum, calculating a 
 certain number of years' purchase ? — Yes ; though 
 making it, they make the owners pay for the valuation. 
 
 2913. What I wanted to ask was — do you approve 
 of that system, or would you siiggest that they ought 
 in all cases to give two-thirds or three-fourths of the 
 actual amount of money paid for the purchase ? — I 
 would be slow to adopt anything of that kind, 
 because there might, through a needy seller or dis- 
 honest buyer, be collusion, and I would not leave the 
 case open, although it is a thing that naight never occur. 
 
 2914. Are you aware of any shortcomings in the 
 working of the Land Act that you would like to place 
 before the Commissioners 1 — Yes. The Land Act 
 appeared to me to be framed with the view of drawing 
 closer kindly feelings between landlords and tenants ; 
 but I think very much of that has been frustrated 
 in dealings since the Land Act was passed, and I 
 have no earthly doubt that it partly arises from the 
 fact that many so lawyers in Ireland have become 
 agents. I cannot say lawyers, but solicitors, who 
 have exercised their brains to frame leases, and they 
 have framed leases that are almost a nullity as regards 
 protection to the tenants. 
 
 2915. Do you think that the Land x\ct has led to 
 the making of leases more generally than before 1 — 
 ISTo doubt of it, but in many cases the tenants owing to 
 the difficulties created by covenants in the leases, 
 prefer to live with' total insecurity, than to have a 
 partial security, or worse than a partial security under 
 such leases. I never scarcely knew a thirty-one years' 
 lease framed or executed, that this covenant does not 
 come in — that the tenant at the end of his tenancy 
 shall not be at liberty to make any claim of any kind 
 whatever for compensation or otherv/ise, under any 
 clause of the Land Act, nor shall he be at liberty ,to 
 make any deduction whatever for roads measured on 
 his holding, nor for any part of the county-cess. I 
 never knew a case since the passing of the Land Act, 
 where half the county-cess has been allowed under any 
 new lease. It is usual in the holdings in Ireland, to 
 measure the county-roads on the farms, and they con- 
 tinue to be measured on the farms, and the way that 
 is got over is this. Instead of taking the aoreable 
 extent of the farm, or an aoreable rent, it is very 
 commonly set out, so many acres at so much rent. 
 
 2916. If a tenant is coming into new occupation of 
 land does he not know that is the case 1 — He does, but 
 he has no option whatever. Owing to the grea,t com- 
 
 petition for land in the country a man brings all the Sept. 7, isso 
 influence he can to bear on the landlord to get a farm. jj^. Thomas 
 If he fails in getting a piece of land he may be half his Bowling, 
 life after that without getting another opportunity to 
 do BO, and he is willing to enter into a bargain, even 
 against his own interests, through the necessities of 
 the case. 
 
 2917. Suppose the roads were excluded, would it 
 not be in the power of the landlord or agent to add 
 more to the rent t — Of course it might be. 
 
 2918. So that the exclusion or inchision of the roads, 
 where a man is entering into new occupation, is of very 
 little consequence as regards the rent he will have to 
 pay ? — Y on are quite right in that. Well, then, I 
 propose to get over that in another form as regards 
 these lease contracts. 
 
 2919. You propose that there should be a statutable 
 form of lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 2920. And legalized ?— Yes. I think that >-hile the 
 construction of leases at present depends on the caprice 
 or the necessities of landlords, the tenants cannot be 
 said to hold fairly. I hold 1,670 acres, and what I 
 ask others to do I would be much inclined to do 
 myself for my own interest. I think there would be 
 no difficulty, no more than in shaping a promissory 
 note, in the matter, the Government could legalize 
 a simple form of lease, with very few covenants, 
 simply binding the tenant to pay rent at stated times, 
 to farm his holding in a husbandlike manner, and not 
 to subdivide it below a certain extent, which, I say, 
 at the least should be twenty acres. I would, 
 reserve to the landlord the timber, unless that which 
 the tenant planted himself, and should reserve 
 minerals, limestone, and such things for the general 
 use of the estate, and perhaps game. 
 
 2921. Baron Dowse. — Would you have a non- 
 alienation clause in it 1 — Well, if I allowed a tenant 
 the right of free sale, which I propose, I don't think you 
 could well introduce that. That would put an end to 
 the alienation clause. 
 
 2922. Would you make a form of lease of that kind 
 compulsory ? — -I would compel it to be adopted. My 
 notion is that leases should be granted to all tenants 
 in Ireland who either cannot, or don't desire to become 
 proprietors. 
 
 2923. Would you make that form of lease compul- 
 sory 1 — Certainly, that is my idea. Of course there 
 are some small changes which might be made to suit 
 local circumstances, but certainly the object I would 
 have in view is that of improving the position of the 
 tenant classes with the least injury to owners. 
 
 2924. Wouldn't it be as easy to pass an Act of Par- 
 liament that the tenure of land would be so and so, 
 and make it a Parliamentary lease 1 — ^Yes, that is 
 exactly what I aim at — but the difficulty is in fixing 
 the rent. 
 
 2925. To say a man should hold the land at a fair 
 rent, and he shall not be disturbed, and have the 
 power of free sale ? — That is what I am coming to in 
 a somewhat similar way. 
 
 2926. V/ould that not make a lease to everybody if 
 there was such a clause in the Act of Parliament 1 — ■ 
 No doubt it would, for everybody who cares to have a 
 lease. 
 
 2927. It would be for everybody if that is the way 
 land is to be held ? — Yes, it would. 
 
 2928. The O'CosroR Don.— If that was done would 
 you prohibit the letting of land hereafter for a certain 
 term 1 Suppose I had land in my own occuj)ation 
 would you prevent nie letting it unless for ever or for 
 sixty years ? — I would compel you in the interests of 
 the country and of the State in letting it, to adopt the 
 same line of conduct as your predecessor or neighbour. 
 
 2929. You would say to hold it in your own 
 occupation, or let it for ever 1- — No, I do not say for 
 ever, but you may extend it for ever if you choose. 
 Sixty years is a long time. I want to get an end to 
 periodical agitations, and heartburnings, and discon- 
 tent. I think I ought here to mention, as regards the 
 Bright clauses, that when I went to deal with the Act 
 I found the officials of the Board of Works most wU- 
 
112 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0, 
 
 Sept. 7, ISSO. 
 
 Wr. Thomas 
 Dowling. 
 
 ling to give ms every assistance, and I believe tliat 
 many of the difliculties are created by tlie ap- 
 plioanis themselves, and not by the officials of the 
 Board of Works. The only matter I had to complain of 
 was delay through the interference of Treasury officials. 
 
 2930. How are the difficulties created by the appli- 
 cants themselves ? — Not knowing what to do, and de- 
 pending on the Board of Works to suggest everything. 
 The Board have simplified and cheajsened conveyances 
 piassing through their office very much. They have 
 adopted a form exactly similar in simplicity to that 
 which I propose, as regards the lease, containing a 
 covenant in the conveyance from the landlord to the 
 tenant in which both combine to give a charge to the 
 Board of Works, to cover the advance. If A conveys 
 to B, both join in the deed to the Board of Works, 
 so one deed and one registration is only required. 
 The cost in these cases I speak of has not amounted to 
 more on an average than £15 each, stamp duty in- 
 clusive on the tenant purchasers. 
 
 2'J31. That is for each deed ? — Yes, for each deed, 
 stamp duty and all. 
 
 2932. You have no reason to complain of the cost 
 of the transaction ? — Certainly not. The owners as 
 usual have to pay, as regards title. I forgot to mention 
 tliat a conveyance through the Board of Works is not 
 of as much value as it ought to be. If the Board of 
 Works, adopting the course in part followed by the 
 Landed Estates Court, by advertisements and otherwise, 
 had the power to give an indeieasible title, it would be 
 of great service, for unless a tenant now buys under 
 the Landed Estates CJourt, his title is not so good. The 
 Board of Works give a title for what it is worth. 
 
 2933. The Board of Works only deal with what the 
 landlord has the power of giving 1 — Yes ; and so long 
 as it covers their advance they have no further inter- 
 est — I have noticed in some leases in Ireland, instead 
 of following the ordinary course of half-yearly pay- 
 ments they followed what I believe is an English 
 model, and although not enforcing it they make the 
 rents payable quarterly. That is the case on Mr. 
 Smith-Barry's estate in Tipperary to a certain extent 
 
 2934. Mr. Shaw. — Is that in an agricultural dis- 
 trict 1 — Yes. The gale days are four times in the year. 
 
 2935. Baron Dowse. — Are there two harvests in 
 the year there 1 — No, I should think not. There are a 
 number of covenants such as, that when a man becomes 
 bankrupt or insolvent from commercial causes, or 
 otherwise, the lease is at an end. 
 
 2936. Mr. Shaw. — In practice do they collect the 
 rents, or is it only in the lease that they shoiild be 
 paid quarterly? — I am aware they only collect the 
 rents half-yearly. 
 
 2937. Baron Dowse. — What advantage is there in 
 having it put down that they are to be paid quarterly 1 
 — It is some old custom. Where a breach of cove- 
 nant arises, instead of waiting for the ordinary time 
 the landlord can step in and evict. 
 
 2938. Then it is to have that power the clause is in 
 the lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 2939. Though it is scarcely ever exercised ? — I never 
 knew a case, but I know the controlling power has 
 been exercised. On that estate I know that tenants 
 have paid up their rents to former agents, and that 
 they have been hurled out without any cause. 
 
 2940. Mr. Kavanagh. — On what estate ?— On the 
 Smith-Barry estate. 
 
 2941. Mr. Shaw. — ^Was that on town lots or farms 1 
 — Farms. 
 
 2942. And there was no reason for it, as they had 
 paid their rents 1 — Yes ; they had paid their rents, and 
 farmed in a proper way. 
 
 2943. I heard of town lots being dispossessed, but not 
 of farms'! — There is the case of a clergyman whose 
 father had treated the land well, and had it in first 
 class condition. The agent said that a priest had no 
 right to have land. 
 
 2944. What is the agent's name ? — Now Mr. 
 Townsend, of the firm of Hussey and Townsend — it 
 was his predecessor. 
 
 2945. The O'Conor Don.— Did the tenants who 
 
 were ejected make any claims under the Land Act? — 
 I think not. I think they were debarred in a con- 
 tract that provided against it, and they could not. 
 
 2946. Why was that? — That was done in the com- 
 mencement of the tenancy. 
 
 2947. Then they must have been tenants whose 
 tenancies commenced since the Land Act was passed ? 
 — They might have been previously created. 
 
 2948. How could they enter into a contract like 
 that before the Land Act ? — You might enter into any 
 contract before it. 
 
 2949. Nobody knew what the Land Act would be? 
 — You mean as regards compensation. 
 
 2950. How are the tenants debarred from making 
 claims under the Land Act ? — I could not give indi- 
 vidual cases — I now remember this was a farm let for 
 grazing purposes upon which the tenant did not reside, 
 and so formed one of the cases specially debarred 
 •from compensation under the Land Act of 1870. 
 
 2951. Chairman. — Did they receive any compen- 
 sation ? — No. 
 
 2952. The O'Conoe Don. — You say there can be 
 no settlement of the land question without labourers' 
 dwellings being provided on every holding 1 — Yes. 
 I think that would be most desirable, to a limited 
 extent at all events. Some few years ago when the 
 small holdings of the labourers were valued on the 
 farms, the farmers desired to get rid of them in order 
 to escape the chargeability v.'hen they became sick or 
 a burden on the rates. 
 
 2953. Would you make it comjiulsory that on every 
 holding there should be labourers' dwellings erected 
 in proportion to its extent? — Indeed I would, generally. 
 
 2954. Chairman. — Would you make those labourers 
 tenants to the farmers? — Certainly, and protect them. 
 
 2955. Don't you think great difficulty woxild arise 
 in the case of the illness of a labourer, would not the 
 farmer be desirous of having some labourer who could 
 work, an inmate of the cottage instead of a man who 
 was ill and unable to work ? — Perhaps so ; but he 
 would have to follow the ordinary course in order to 
 get possession. But there is a greater tendency now 
 than has existed for some time to have labourers con- 
 tiguous to farms. 
 
 2956. Baron Dowse. — They are desirous of having 
 labourers, but directly the labourer dies or becomes 
 disabled, they are desirous of getting rid of the labour- 
 er's family, is not that so ? — 1 dare say it is ; but I 
 often find farmers are verj' considerate. A very ma- 
 terial thing affecting this matter of labourers' holdmgs 
 is the question of poor law rating. Suppose a tenant 
 agrees to pay £1 an acre for his land, he knows the 
 ordinary rates to which that land is subject ; but if 
 adverse times come upon his district, his rent will 
 be very much increased by the extra charges put 
 \ipon it. He becomes lialale for more charges upon 
 his land than he could anticipate under favourable 
 circumstances. To counteract that I would place 
 every agricultural holding within a union upon a 
 common rating. Then the desire would no longer 
 exist on the part of the landlord or the farmer to 
 oust the sick labourer. At present the desire is to 
 keep the labourers as near as possible to the estates 
 when in health, but not to have them chargeable on 
 them in sickness, and the result is labourers' cot- 
 tages are not increasing as they ought — I have been 
 told by tenants in one part of the country, not far 
 from New Pallas that if they are called upon by 
 the agent to pay their rents on a particular day 
 and do not attend, they are obliged to pay fines of 
 five shillings or ten shillings according to the extent 
 of their holdings. 
 
 2957. For not attending on that day ? — Yes. 
 
 2958. How can these fines be enforced % — I know 
 the tenants ought not to pay them ; but in some parts 
 of the country, such is the condition of the people, 
 that the agent can enforce anything almost. I would 
 add that I find that in Kerry the rents are far 
 higher in proportion to the value of the land than in 
 the best parts of Munster, and yet are fairly paid. 
 
 2959. Chairman.— If the statutory lease you speak 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 113 
 
 of, either for a long term of years, or a perpetuity, 
 were adopted, would you not be taking away from 
 the landlord, his prospective increase of value in the 
 land "i — I think, myself, that the certainty he would 
 have of his rent being paid, would be more than an 
 equivalent for anything he lost. 
 
 2960. The certainty of payment of rent regularly ? 
 — ^Yes. As the tenant improves in circumstances, my 
 idea is that any possible loss the landlord might 
 suffer, is more than made up to him by the almost 
 certainty of the punctual payment of his rents, and 
 the improvements of the holdings. 
 
 2961. Baron Dowse. — How long would you propose 
 that the statutory lease should last 1—1 would give it 
 at least for sixty years. 
 
 29G2. Chairman. — In fixing the rent at the com- 
 mencement of the lease, would you take that into 
 consideration by increasing the rent in proportion to 
 the length of the term 1 — I don't think so. 
 
 2963. Baron Dowse. — Would you have no altera- 
 tion of the rent during the sixty years ? — I don't think 
 I would. I believe that would lead to endless dis- 
 cussions. If I had ten thousand acres of land, I 
 would sooner at once get rid of all present and 
 prospective annoyances, by at once dealing with the 
 standard value before me. 
 
 2964. Chairman. — Would you propose that the 
 valuator, who was to settle the rent, should have any 
 special instructions as to the manner in which to 
 value 1 — "Yes ; most decidedly. 
 
 2965. The O'Conor Don. — I understood you to 
 say you would leave the valuation to the County 
 Court Judges 1 — No ; I referred to cases of arbitra- 
 tion where tenant and landlord could not agree as to 
 a fair rent on particular holdings, if there was a re- 
 valuation of the lands of the country. 
 
 2U66. Chairman. — A general re- valuation'? — Yes, a 
 re-valuation as a guide lor rents. I propose, in fixing 
 the rents, to take the prices of produce on the average of 
 five previous years. Amongst other things if the land 
 were increased in value by the tenant, he ought not 
 to be liable to a proportionate increase of rent, unless 
 the original letting was made so as to enable the tenant, 
 within a given period, to recoup himself for his outlay. 
 
 2967. If the original lease contained a covenant, 
 binding the tenant to make certain improvements, 
 would you consider that those improvements ought to 
 be placed to his credit in making the new valuation 1 
 — No, I think that would be equivalent to an im- 
 provement of the property by the landlord. 
 
 2968. You would not propose, in any way, to com- 
 pensate the landlord for what he might lose in other 
 
 respects by having a compulsory statutory lease forced 
 upon him 1 — No ; because I regard that as being done 
 in the interests of the State and for tlic material pros- 
 perity of the nation. 
 
 2969. Is it not usual, when things are done for the 
 benefit of the State at the cost of individuals, to 
 compensate them 1 — I camiot, for the life of me, see 
 that it would bo any injmy whatsoever to the landlord 
 to grant such security to the tenant. 
 
 2970. That is a difl'erent question. I put the case, 
 supposing there is a loss to the landlord, in some re- 
 spects, from such a lease being forced upon him, do 
 you think he ought to be compensated in some way ? 
 — If, in dealing with the matter on a large scale, I saw 
 that thero were individual cases of loss, I certainly 
 think the State might recoup those persons to a limited 
 extent. 
 
 2971. The O'Coxor Don.— Do you think that an 
 estate, subject to such leases, if sold in the Landed 
 Estates Court, would sell for as much as an estate 
 where there were no such leases 1 — My experience 
 leads me to Ijelieve that where an estate is to be .sold 
 upon which the tenants hold under lair leases, the sale 
 is more profitable to the owner than where there are 
 no leases. 
 
 2972. Even where the leases are of long duration? 
 — Yes ; even when they are of long duration. The 
 difiiculty, when the estate is occupied by tenants-at- 
 will, is how you are to deal with them. If there are 
 defined contracts, I think it is mvich more desirable 
 for a purchaser. 
 
 2973. Chairman. — Would you propose conditions 
 in the statutory lease, to prevent the deterioration of 
 land by the tenant or neglect of the buildings ? — Yes ; 
 my idea is that a simple form of lease should be 
 legalized by Parliament to be adopted in all contracts 
 for agricultvLral holdings embodying but few covenants, 
 which ought to be neither oppressive to the tenant, nor 
 antagonistic to the interests of the country — those 
 would be, covenants to pay rent, to prevent waste, 
 to prevent subdivision below twenty acres, and reserv- 
 ing timber, minerals, and game. 
 
 2974. I was referring to an answer you gave Baron 
 Dowse with respect to the statutory lease. You did 
 not mention any condition with respect to waste or 
 deterioration ; but you say you would include such a 
 covenant '?— Certainly. I intended to mention that 
 as one oi the conditions. I think it most desirable to 
 have such a covenant, otherwise an indolent, good- 
 for-nothing man might inflict injury on the landlord, 
 on himself, and on the country. 
 
 Sept. r, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Dowling. 
 
 Mr. John O'Connell, Laherne House, Boherbuoy, county Cork, examined. 
 
 2975. Mr. EIavanagh. — You are a resident of the 
 county Cork 1 — ^Yes. 
 
 2976. What part of the county ? — Boherbuoy, near 
 Kanturk. 
 
 2977. You are a purchaser under the Bright Clauses 
 of the Land Act 1 — I am. 
 
 2978. I understand you wish to make to the Com- 
 mission some remarks on the working of those clauses ? 
 
 Yes, sir. I purchased under those clauses, and I 
 
 wish there were a great many others like me in the 
 country. 
 
 2979. What is the extent of the holding which you 
 jiurchased 1 — Close upon 300 acres. 
 
 2980. What price did you pay for it?— £2,200. 
 
 2981. Was that the total price?— Yes. 
 
 2982. How much did you pay in cash out of that? 
 — I paid one-third. 
 
 2983. The rest you got from the Board of Works 
 under the Bright Clauses ? — Yes. 
 
 2984. Have you any remarks to make upon the 
 working of those clauses ?— -I have. There were two 
 other parties living on the same townland that I live 
 
 on. These two persons were also anxious to become 
 purchasers, and they were declared purchasers at the 
 same time as I was, but they failed in getting the loan 
 ii'om the Board of Works because there were a few 
 small houses, I believe twelve or thirteen, upon their 
 portion of the lands. The Board" of Works refused 
 to make them a grant, and they had, after going to an 
 immense expense to re-sell their portion, and are pay- 
 ing now considerably higher than I am. They had 
 to sell to a gentleman who paid the purchase-money 
 and the costs, and also the interest accruing on the 
 jmrchase-monc}" for I believe about nine months, from 
 the time they were declared until the purchase-money 
 was paid uji. I should say that in any scheme for 
 facilitating such purchaser in future it should be made 
 movo easy to become purchasers in these cases. 
 
 2985. That is, you think it is a pity that the Board 
 of Works were obliged^as I believe they were — to 
 object to make the grant to those persons? — Yes. 
 
 2986. There were some houses upon this jjart of 
 the land ? — Yes. 
 
 29S7. And that was the reason the matter broke 
 down ? — That was the reason. 
 
 Q 
 
 Mr, John 
 O'Connell. 
 
lU 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. John 
 O'Connell. 
 
 2988. Mr. Shaw. — Were the occujsiers of tliose houses 
 labourers 1 — They were. 
 
 2989. Baron Dowse. — Do you say that the Board 
 of Works are compelled by the Land Act to refuse to 
 advance money in such cases, or is it merely from some 
 rule of their own ? — 1 do not know how it is, whether 
 they are obliged by the Land Act, or whether it is by 
 a rale of their own, but I know they refused to advance 
 the money. 
 
 2990. The O'Conob Don. — There were labourers in 
 -occupation of a portion of the land, and therefore the 
 
 parties who wished to become purchasers where not in 
 occupation of the entire 1 — I wish to say there were 
 labourers also on my land occupying houses. 
 
 2991. Mr. Kavanagh. — Then those other farms 
 were in the same position as yours are ? — Yes, sir ; 
 but the labourers on the other iarms were free to work 
 wherever they pleased, they were not bound to work 
 on these farms : whereas the men on my farm held their 
 houses directly under myself, and were obliged to 
 work for me, and no one else. 
 
 2992. You got no rent for those houses % — No, sir ; 
 the labourers occupied them in consideration of work- 
 ing on the farm. 
 
 2993. Then, the difference was, that in one case 
 they were in occupation of the houses, paying rent for 
 them, and in the other case they were mere perquisites 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 2994. Now, you say you would suggest a remedy 
 for that 1 — Yes, sir. I would suggest to do away with 
 objections of that kind. Whether it is caused by the 
 Act oi Parliament or by; the Board of Works, I do not 
 know, but I certainly would make it easier for the 
 tenant to become the owner, i know theSe men lost 
 a very considerable amount of money trying to get over 
 that objection. I brought my bill of costs with me, to 
 let you see the expense that is involved in carrying these 
 matters through. While those two men and myself 
 kept together, before this difficulty in their case turned 
 up, my costs were £21 6s. Id. Aicer that we separated, 
 and I went on by mysell, and ceased to be connected 
 with them, and I had to pay my own costs from that 
 time; £70 14s. 3|«!. 
 
 2995. Mr.' Shaw. — Was that in addition to your 
 proportion oi the £20 1—The £21 6s. Id. was my pro- 
 portion of the first bill of costs. Aicer that I had to 
 pay £70 14s. 3^d. ; and in addition I was charged . 
 £30 for stamps. 
 
 2996. Baron Dowse. ^How much costs had you to " 
 pay altogether 1 — Over £90 for costs, besides £30 ior 
 stamps. 
 
 2997. Was that to your own attorney? — Yes, sir. 
 Of course I had to employ an attonaey. 
 
 2998. Mr. Kavanagh. — Were these lands bought 
 in the Landed Estates Court 1 — Yes. 
 
 2999. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know how much the 
 costs of the other parties were 1 — I don't know how 
 much they were after they separated from me, but I 
 think they exceeded mine. I remember I aioerwai-ds 
 witnessed the lease that is now in existence between 
 them and their present landlord. 
 
 3000. I understand that he only charged them the 
 rent they were previously paying 1 — No. He paid the 
 purchase-money and the law costs, and the interest 
 that was due on the purchase-money, and he charged 
 them tlie interest on that. 
 
 3001. He charged them 5 per cent, on the whole 
 thing '•■— Yes. 
 
 3002. And gave them a lease at that rent for thirty- 
 years ? — Yes. ■• 
 
 3003. Is that higher than the rent they were paying 
 before]— I think it is. " It is considerably higher than 
 what I am paying now. 
 
 3004. The O'Oonoe Don.— Is the holding you pur- 
 chased as large as the others t — It is larger. 
 
 3005. And they, upon smaller lots, are paying more 
 lb an you are paying on the large one ? — Yes. 
 
 3000. How many years ago is it smce you pur- 
 chased it?— It was in 1876. 
 
 3007. Mr. Kavanagh. — ^Are there any other 
 remarks that you would like .to make 1—1 would like 
 to refer to a clause in a lease, that came under my 
 notice a short time since. It was made by a noble- 
 man — an absentee. This lease has become a general 
 instrument all through his estate since 1870. 
 
 3008. Baron Dowse.— What is the clause? — It is 
 a clause depriving the tenants of their rights under the 
 Land Act. 
 
 3009. You had better read it? — The reservations 
 in the lease are the usual ones — manorial rights, 
 royalties, and all that ; but there is one provision I 
 wish to call attention to. You must remember that 
 in our county, and I believe the case is unfortunately 
 the same in the greater part of Ireland, the improve- 
 ments are all made by the tenant. All the fences on 
 the estate, all buildings, oui>offices, dwelling-houses, 
 and everything in the shape of improvement, are 
 done at the expense of the tenant ; and yet in this 
 lease the lessee is ■ bound during the tei-m to keep in 
 repair " all houses, buildings, ditches, drains, walls, 
 fences, hedges, and all improvements now made or to 
 be made during the term." 
 
 3010. And deliver them up in good order, repair, 
 and condition to the landlord at the end of the term ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 3011. Mr. Shaw. — Have the tenants laid oiit an 
 immensity of money on that estate? — Yes; every- 
 thing that was done on the estates was done by the 
 tenants. There is an old man living near me who 
 recollects when for miles it was a perfect waste. 
 
 3012. Baron Dowse. — That clause in itself would 
 not bust a man from his claim under the Laud 
 Act 1 — But there is another clause in the lease that 
 does. 
 
 3013. Read it? — (The witness reads claiise) : — 
 
 " It is hereby stipulated and agreed that the said lessee, 
 his executors, administrators, or assigns, shall not be 
 entitled to claim compensation from or upon the lessor, his . 
 heirs, or assigns, in respect of the said holding so hereby 
 granted or demised, or of the said tenancy created hereby, 
 or in respect of his being disturbed in the occupation or 
 enjoyment thereof, or in respect of improvements made 
 therein by virtue of any of the provisions of the '•Land- 
 lord and Tenant, Ireland, A-Ot, 1870," and that none of the 
 provisions of the said Act shall, so far as the said lessee, 
 his executors, administrators, or licensed assigns, arc com- 
 petent or entitled to contract, be " applicable to the same; 
 but that all claims to be made in respect th^jreof shall be 
 made, regulated, and governed, exclusively and entirely by . 
 the terms of this demise, or by any arrangement or agree- 
 ment in writing in pursuance thereof, and signed as afore- 
 said, it being the true intent and meaning of these presents, 
 and oi the said parties hereto, that this demise and the 
 tenancy of the said lessee, his executors, administrators, 
 and licensed assigns thereunder, shall be wholly and 
 entirely, or as far as it can be made, free and independent 
 of, and unaffected by, the provisions of the sjiid Act of 
 Parliament, or of such of said provisions as the said lessee, , 
 his executors,. administrators, or licensed assigns, may be 
 competent or entitled to contract and agree, shall not be 
 applicable to the tenancy hereby created; and the said 
 lessor, his heirs, and assigns, and the said lessee, his 
 executors, administrators, and licensed assigns, do mutually 
 contract and agrfee that he and they reispectiVelyshall not 
 and will not set up or make any claim under the provisions 
 of the said recited Act or any other Act which may here- 
 after be passed in relation thereto, but will rely solely on 
 this demise, and the arrangement, if any, entered into in 
 writing :' i pursuance thereof^ whereby the compensation for 
 improvements and other matters connected with the ter- 
 mination of this demise are or shall be satisfied and agreed 
 on as afiiresLiid. Provided always, and these presents are 
 upon th's express condition, that if and whenever the said 
 hereby reserved rent or any part thereof shall be in arrear 
 for twenty-one days, whether the same shall have been 
 demanded or not, or if and whenever the said lessee, his 
 executors, administrators, or licensed assigns, or any of 
 them shall, during the said term, build or erect any hou.se or 
 building whatever without such license as aforesaid, or sell, 
 assign, alien, sub-let, or otherwise dispose of, or let in con- 
 acre the said lands and premises, or any part thereof, or in 
 any manner part with the possession of same, or any part 
 thereof, or bequeath the same by will to more than one 
 child or other person, or in any manner divide same among 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 115 
 
 his children or next-of-kin or other persons without such 
 license as aforesaid, or be adjudged a bankrupt, or become 
 an insolvent debtor within the meaning of any Act of Par- 
 liament whereby his interest in said lands might become the 
 property of a third party, or if the interest in said premises 
 shall be taken in execution, or any proceedings shall be in- 
 stituted to sell the same, or any part thereof, by any creditor 
 of the said . lessee his executors, administrators, or 
 licensed assigns, or if and whenever there shall be a breach 
 of covenants, provisions, stipulations, or agreements here- 
 inbefore contained by the said lessee, his heirs and assigns, 
 then this present demise and the estate or term hereby gran- 
 ted shall absolutely cease and determine, and it shall be 
 lawful for the said lessor, his heirs and assigns, into the 
 said demised premises, or any part thereof in the name of 
 the whole, to re-enter, and the same to have again, re- 
 possess, and enjoy, as in his or their former estate, as if 
 this present demise had not been made, and further that no 
 licenses or licensees' consent or consents given or made by 
 the said lessor, his heirs or assigns, or his or their agents, 
 in relation to any matter aforesaid, and no waiver or omis- 
 sion to take proceedings in respect of any breach or 
 breaches of any of the covenants, conditions, or agreements 
 herein contained shall be construed or taken to be a gene- 
 ral abandonment or waiver of all or any of the said cove- 
 nants, conditions, or agreements, and such license, consent, 
 waiver, or omission, if any, shall not affect or prejudice the 
 fights or powers of the said lessor, his heirs or assigns, or 
 his or their agents, beyond what shall be shown by the actual 
 production of the document or documents to have been ex- 
 pressed in writing and signed by him or them ; provided 
 further, and it is hereby declared and agreed, that the de- . 
 mise hereinbefore expressed to be hereby made is subject to 
 the covenant3,-conditions, and agreements herein contained, 
 and to no other covenant." 
 
 3014. T]xcept the covenant by wHch the tenant 
 contracts himself out of the Land Act, those are the 
 iisual clauses which are inserted in strict leases 1 — 
 Perhaps so. 
 
 3015. On whose estate did you find this lease used 1 
 — On the estate of the Earl of Cork. 
 
 3016. Mr. Shaw. — -Were the entire of the improve- 
 ments upon that estate done by the tenants 1 — Every- 
 thing. Buildings, fences, drains, everything, were 
 done by the tenants. I may tell you this part of the 
 Earl's property is in the parish I live in. Many of the 
 tenants of the Earl of Cork on this very property 
 where those leases are used, I know to my certain know- 
 ledge were sxipported during the present year upon 
 private charity distributed by the parish priest, the 
 Rev. Mr. MacMahon. They were absolutely starving, 
 and would have perished were it not for the assistance 
 
 ' he afforded them. They would not come before the 
 Land Committee, but Father 'MacMahon had charge 
 of a fund given him by the bishop of the diocese, and 
 out of it he relieved these people privately. I have 
 brought here a list of the poor rates charged on that 
 division, and three others. 
 
 3017. Is the land too highly rented 1 — Certainly. 
 
 3018. More than the tenants are able to pay ?— Far 
 more. 
 
 301 9. The poor rates are an addition to that burden 1 
 — Certainly. In the division of Kilmeen the poor 
 rates are lis. 2d. in the pound. It is principally in 
 that division the Earl of Cork's property is ; he has 
 some in other divisions in the union, but the greater 
 part is in Kilmeen. 
 
 3020. What town is it near 1 — Kanturk. 
 
 3021. How much do you say the poor rate was?— 
 1 Is. 2d. in the pound. 
 
 3022. Was that for one year?— For one year. 
 
 3023. What is the rent per acre ? — It varies. In 
 most cases it is double Griffith's valuation. This 
 land was originally a wild barren mountain. I have 
 an old man working with me who recollects it an open 
 commonage. Plots were cut out of it, and distributed 
 to tenants, perhaps at trifling rents in the commence- 
 ment. According as they improved the land, their 
 interest increased hand over hand at every change of 
 tenancy the rent was increased. 
 
 3024. Were they made pay rent on their own im- 
 provements 1 — Entirely. The land! ord never expended 
 jne shilling. The rates on the electoral division of 
 
 Meens were 7s. Id. in the pound. That belongs Sept. 7, isso. 
 entirely to the Earl of Cork and Mr. Longfield. On j^,. j^ 
 the electoral division of Boherbuoy the rates were o'Connell. 
 6s. 5d. in the pound. 
 
 3025. Mr. Kavanagii.— To whom does that belong '! 
 — Principally I believe to Mr. Downing. Half of the 
 village of Boherbuoy is in the Mill-street Union. 
 
 3026. Whom does the other part belong to? — To 
 Mr. Downing also. It all belongs to himself and his 
 son. 
 
 3027. Is that over-rented ? — I think it is. 
 
 3028. You complain of the rents on those properties 
 being too high ? — I do. 
 
 3029. You have mentioned three proprietors ? — Yes, 
 the Earl of Cork, Mr. Longfield, and Mr. Downing. 
 
 3030. What Longfield is that?— Mr. Longfield of 
 Longiieville. 
 
 3031. The O'Conoe Don. — Have the rents been 
 raised lately on those properties? — They are always 
 raised when there is a change of tenancy ; but I must 
 say, injustice to Mr. Longfield, that there is no clause 
 against the Land Act on his estate. 
 
 3032. Mr. Shaw. — Does he give leases? — He does. 
 Leases have become general in his estate since 1870. 
 
 3033. What term are the leases for? — Thirty-one 
 years. 
 
 3034. And on Lord Cork's property almost all the 
 tenants have leases, I suppose 1 — Yes. 
 
 3035. Do they charge much for those leases which 
 you have read out the clauses of? — I heard that they 
 charge £5, but I believe it is much more. 
 
 3036. They are also thirty-one year leases? — Yes. 
 
 3037. Are there any leases given for a less term 
 than that I—No. 
 
 3038. Does he, as a matter of practice, allow his 
 tenants to sell their interests? — No, they cannot 
 do it without his approval. 
 
 3039. They rnxxst give up if they become uiiable to 
 pay ? — Yes. I know a case where a tenant of his 
 broke down ; if he had been allowed to sell his holding- 
 he would have been able to pay the persons he owed 
 money to, and whom he was anxious to pay if he could ; 
 but he was not allowed to do so. 
 
 3040. Have the tenants on the property got any 
 allowances off their rents this year? — I understand 
 yes, 20 per cent. 
 
 3041. Have there been many evictions? — ISTo. 
 
 3042. He has given them time, I suppose ? — Yes 
 sir. He has given them time to pay. 
 
 3043. Do you know anything of the evictions upon 
 Archdeacon Bland's property? — -I have heard of them. 
 
 3044. Is that in your neighbourhood ? — No sir, it 
 is beyond my place. 
 
 3045. Have you improved your own holding much 
 since you got it ? — I have given more employment on 
 my farm than all the landlords in the parish gave in 
 the past winter. I got a loan of £500 from the 
 Board of Works, but before I got a shilling of the 
 money, I had expended a considerable amount myself, 
 draining and improving. 
 
 3046. That is because it is your own property ?— - 
 Quite so. 
 
 3047. Has the Earl of Cork, expended money on 
 drainage? — Yes, a little on one or two farms during 
 the summer. In our parish. Father MacMahon stated 
 sometime since in a public letter, that there was 
 more work given on my farm alone, than was given 
 by all the landlords of the place put together, although 
 it is one of the most extensive parishes in Ireland. 
 
 3048. Are you near the Earl of Egmont's property! ? 
 —Quite near it. 
 
 3049. Do they give leases iipon that estate ?— No 
 sir, they give no leases there. 
 
 3050. Are they yearly tenancies on Ijord Egmont's 
 property ? — Yes. 
 
 3051. Does he allow his tenants to sell if they wish 
 to leave ? — No. I must say that the lands on Lord 
 Egmont's. estate are very reasonably Jet, but the agent 
 increases the rent upon a change of tenancy. I may 
 tell you that one of his tenants, an independent man, 
 
 Q2 
 
116 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 7, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 O'Connell. 
 
 who has two or three other farms, wanted about three 
 years since to get his daughter married. He intended 
 to give her the farm he held under Lord Egmont, but 
 Lord Egmont would not give his consent, without 
 adding a very large sum to the rent. The tenant re- 
 fused to pay the increase. 
 
 3052. There was no lease "i — No lease. 
 
 3053. What was the consequence 1 — The whole 
 thing fell through. 
 
 3054. And the daughter did not get it ? — No. There 
 is one matter I would like to refer to as showing the 
 great wrongs that are carried out on properties where 
 the owner is not " to the fore," and cannot be appealed 
 to. Just adjoining my place one of Lord Egmont's 
 tenants died some years back. His son, who lived in 
 Charleville, and had a business there, took possession 
 of the farm on his father's death. The lather, during 
 his lifetime, had built a veiy extensive range of out- 
 offices, but was unable to slate them. The walls were 
 very good masonry, but lie could not slate them — he 
 only thatched the houses. On the iathei-'s death, 
 when the son took up the lands, he had some money, 
 not being dependent on the profits of the land. He 
 threw off the old covering and slated the rooid. He 
 also limed the entire iarm, and made several other 
 improvements. On the land there is a considerable 
 wood, and Mr. Trench, who manages Lord Egmont's 
 property, got the wood cut down, and ordered his men 
 to cart the timber through one oi this tenant's fields. 
 There was a passage into the wood iroui the public 
 road which could have been used ior the purpose, but 
 this passage was not in good repair and Mr. Trench 
 insisted that the tenant should allow the timber to bs 
 carted through his land. The tenant objected — he 
 said, " You have another passage ; there is no nece£'- 
 sity for you to bring your timber through my land, 
 cutting up and spoiling the best of my land," and he 
 refused to allow it. The result was that at the next 
 opportunity he was served with a notice to quit. He 
 went to the Protestant and Roman Catholic clergymen, 
 both of whom knew him, got letters from them, went 
 to England, saw Lord Egmont, and told him the cir- 
 cumstances, and the consequence was that nothing 
 more was said about the notice to quit. But it that 
 had occurred to another tenant, who could not have, 
 gone over to see Lord Egmont about it, there is no doubt 
 about it he would have had to pay an increase oi rent. 
 I dare say he would not have been ejected, but I have 
 not the slightest doubt he would have had to pay an 
 increased rent. 
 
 3055. The agent would have gone on with it 1 — 
 Not a doubt of it. 
 
 3056. Mr. Kavanagh. — "What was the tenant's 
 name 1 — Twomey. 
 
 3057. You think it was going to the landlord direct, 
 and putting the case before him, that saved him 1 — I 
 have no doubt of it. 
 
 3058. Are there any other cases of tenants purchas- 
 ing their holdings, that you are aware ot, in your dis- 
 triob 't—No. 
 
 3059. "5^ ou are strongly in favour ol greater iacilities 
 being given for tenants to become purchasers 1 — I am. 
 1 would be in favour, wherever an estate came into 
 the market, of giving the tenants a pre-emption, and 
 lending them the greater portion ox the purchase- 
 money at a reasonable rate. I am also in iavour of 
 compulsory sale of the estates of absentees and of 
 corporate bodies. 
 
 3060. The O'Conor Don.' — ^You think a larger por- 
 tion should be advanced than two-thirds 1 — I do, four- 
 fifths. 
 
 3001. And you think it would be safe to advance 
 
 more ? — Quite safe. I am satisfied that, if a consider- 
 able number of tenants became owners of their hold- 
 ings, you would before twenty years see a change in 
 the condition of the country that no person could 
 imagine. 
 
 3062. Baron Dowse — Some persons have recom- 
 mended this — that we should have fixity of tenure, 
 fair rents, and free sale. Would that " be a useful 
 thing in your estimation ? — There is no doubt that 
 there is no greater want in Ireland than security of 
 tenure ; the present insecurity is at the root of all the 
 evil. I believe the iasecurity of tenure is the root of 
 the evils of the land system. I believe continuous 
 occupancy, a right of free sale with valued rents, and 
 the increased opportunities I have mentioned for in- 
 creasing the number of owners of their farms, would 
 settle this vexed question. 
 
 3063. Mr. Shaw. — You think tenants would im- 
 prove hear'cily and thoroughly if they had security 1 
 — Certainly, How could they improve at present? 
 It a man improves his holding, his rent is imme- 
 diately raised by his landlord. Of course there 
 are exceptions, but that is the rule. 
 
 3064. They have the power, and in some cases 
 they exercise it ? — Yes ; and if it is done, even in one 
 case, it disheartens the whole country around. 
 
 3065. The land where you live was originally a 
 boggy mountainy district ] — Yes. 
 
 3066. Part of it has been improved by the tenants ? 
 — -Yes, sir. I have a man and three sons working 
 for me who had to give up a farm last Eebruary. He 
 owed six months' rent, and as there would be twelve 
 months due in March, and he knew he could not 
 pay, he gave up the land in February. 
 
 3067. I suppose he had no capital 1 — He had none. 
 He clung on to the land — on which he expended every 
 shilling he had ever made, tintil he became a pauper. 
 I Avish to say I do not adopt the idea that the State 
 should compel all the landlords to sell — I don't be- 
 lieve in that. I only wish ■« e had a greater number 
 of resident gentry in the country ; and I would re- 
 tain any resident landlord, if I could. But I would 
 put it out of the power of amy man to raise his 
 tenants' rent arbitrarily. I would have the rents 
 fixed by some independent tribunal. 
 
 3068. CiiAiRMAX. — Is there any other matter you 
 wish to bring beiore us ? — I wish to mention a cir- 
 cumstance that occurred on the estate some time 
 since. There is an under-agent on the estate; whose 
 daughter got married. On the occasion of the mar- 
 riage some iriends of the under agent, shopkeepers and 
 tradesmen in the town, got up circulars, and went round 
 to all the tenants, requesting them to contribute some- 
 thing in compliment to the lady's marriage. The day 
 fixed lor the collection was the very same day on which 
 the rents were to be paid, and the tenant, before paying 
 his rent, bad first to call in with his contribution in com- 
 pliment to the lady. In one case a man came to me and 
 handed me a copy of the circular which had been sent 
 to him. I knew that man to be in great distress, 
 having, in fact, assisted him pecuniarily on some occa- 
 sions, and I am aware he had to sell a cow to meet his 
 rent. The poor man brought me the circular and asked 
 me what he was to do. I advised him not to give any- 
 thing to the contribution for the lady's marriage. 
 He thanked me for my advice, but I cannot say 
 whether he took it or not. 
 
 3069. Mr. Shaw. — Of course the landlord knew 
 nothing about it 1 — I am sure he was not aware of it. I 
 kept a copy of the circular for some time, intending to 
 send it to the landlord, but I did not know his address. 
 
 Adjourned t^U next day. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 117 
 
 SEVENTH DAY-WEDNESDA.Y, 8th SEPTEMBEE, 1880. 
 
 ^'1?Tt';;;'^M*nS^^* Hon the Earl of Bessboeodqh, Chairman; Right Hon. Baron Dowse, 
 Arthur MacMorrough Kavanagh. Esq., d.l. ; The O'Conor Don, William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Robert Geokge Hill, Brookmount, Lisburn, examined. 
 3070. Chairman. — You are a tenant-farmer ?— Yes, were indii cud I believe I 
 
 Sej)l. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 Gcor,'!' Hill. 
 
 3071. On Sir Eichard Wallace's property? — Yes. 
 3u72. What is the size of your holding? — About 
 75 acres. 
 
 3073. A portion of it, according to your notes, is 
 held under a lease for lives \ — I have several leases. It 
 is all held for leases for lives, unless about five acres. 
 
 3074. And the five acres are held % — At will. 
 
 3075. What is the rent per acre ? — It is about 
 twenty-one shilUngs an acre ; poor rate off that makes 
 it that I pay about a pound. 
 
 3076. Mr. Shaw. — How much an acre? — A pound 
 an acre. 
 
 3077. A Cunningham acre ? — No ; a statute acre. 
 
 3078. Chairman. — What is the Government valua- 
 tion of your holding ? — £X 1 0. 
 
 3079. Does that include the buildmgs? — Yes. 
 
 3080. Were the buildings on the farm erected by 
 you or by the landlord % — By myself, or by my father % 
 There are pretty extensive buildings. 
 
 3081. The O'CoxoR Don.— What is the valuation 
 of the buildings as distinguished from the land, do 
 you know? — I cannot tell. 
 
 3082. Mr. Shaw. — Are they all farm buildings, or 
 are there any of them used for business purposes ?— 
 They are all farm buildings, a good dwelling-house, 
 and a large system of outolfices. 
 
 3083. Near Lisburn, I suppose? — Three miles from 
 Lisburn. 
 
 3084. Chairman. — Have you paid some attention 
 to the working of the Land Act ? — Yes ; I have, as 
 much as I was capable of doing, since it was passed. 
 
 3085. From your own experience what is your opi- 
 nion respecting the working of it ? — Veiy favourable, 
 indeed. It has made us very much more indepen- 
 dent than we were, and, in a great many points, it 
 was very satisfactory. 
 
 3086. Can you name any points in which you do not 
 consider it satisfactory ? — Yes ; a very vital point — 
 the question of rent. 
 
 3087. In what respect as to the question of rent? 
 — Do you mean as to the power of the landlord to 
 raise the rent ? — Certainly. 
 
 3088. Do you consider that the landlord ought to 
 have the power to raise rent under any circum- 
 stances ? — IJnder some circumstancers, perhaps, he 
 might, but in my case the buildings are very costly. 
 They were put up by myself or by my father, every 
 stone of them, and he and I together have brought 
 the land from a state that it would produce little or 
 nothing, to a state of great iertility. I consider that 
 the la7idlord should not have the power of reaping 
 any benefit from our outlay on the houses or in the 
 improvement of the soil. 
 
 3089. During the continuance of your lease you are 
 free from that risk ?— Yes. 
 
 3090. What are the ages of the lives in your 
 lease? — I am one of them myself, 50, that is the 
 lease of the main farm on which the buildings are 
 erected. My sister is another, about 45, and one of 
 the Royal Family is the third. 
 
 3091. The O'Conor Don. — How long ago was the 
 lease made? — It is dated 1845. It was not issued 
 till long after that. 
 
 3092. Mr. Shaw. — Was there any increase of rent 
 made when you got the lease 1 — There was a fine. I 
 suppose I may say that, unfortunately, it was the 
 custom in Sir Richiird Wallace's predecessors' time to 
 inaugurate a system of fining down the rent. The i-ent 
 crept up gi-adually by degrees, and then the tenants 
 
 may say, it was insisted 
 upon — to fine down their holdings to a lower rent. 
 
 3093. You paid the landlord a fine ? — Yes, paid the 
 landlord a fine. 
 
 3094. How much did you pay, do you remember % 
 — About £5 an acre. 
 
 30'.)5. And how much reduction in the rent was 
 made ? — Nearly five shillings. 
 
 3096. You did not get fully 5 per cent, for your 
 money ? — Between 4 and 5. 
 
 3097. Chairman. — You say in your notes you 
 think that there should be a process, whereby over- 
 rented tenants may obtain a reduction of rent to suit 
 altered circumstances ? — I do, if it could be possibly 
 attained. 
 
 30!)8. Do you apply that to your own case under a 
 lease ? — I do, because I labour with ample capital, I 
 use the best machinery that can be bought, I am 
 constantly on the spot, and still I cannot make ends 
 meet. I must draw on other resources for a living. 
 
 3099. Mr. Shaw.— You mean for the last year or 
 two ? — I mean for the last six years, with one ex- 
 ception. There was on6 year in the middle of these 
 six that I did hold my own, but in the rest of the six 
 I did not. 
 
 3100. It is a tillage farm chiefly, I suppose ? — It is 
 altogether a tillage farm — five years' rotation. 
 
 3101. Chairman. — Then you think that you ought 
 to be let out of your lease, and commence again on a 
 new valuation ? — I don't say that, sir. The lease is a 
 certain protection against advances of rent. 
 
 3102. Mr. Shaw. — And you have paid for it ? — 
 We have paid for it, and built a large amount of 
 buildings on the faith of the lease, and of continued 
 occupancy. My father and myself have laid out a 
 large amount on building, pretty well up to £1,500 
 or £2,000. 
 
 3103. Chairman. — Have you made any application 
 for a reduction of rent ? — None. 
 
 3104. ]Mr. Shaw. — About reduction of rent — in 
 your own case you would not consider that you had 
 any right to a reduction with a lease ? — I am afraid it 
 is out of the question to expect it. 
 
 3105. Do you grow flax ? — No. 
 
 3106. It is the most profltable crop, is it not, in the 
 north ? — Well, I see a little of it, but it is very 
 short. 
 
 3107. The O'Conor Don. — It is very exhausting to 
 the land, is it not ? — I am afraid it is very exhausting. 
 
 3108. ilr. Shaw. — It has not exhausted the coimty 
 Down, where it is grown very extensively, nor the 
 county Armagh ? — I don't know about that. 
 
 3109. Baron Dowse. — What I suppose you mean 
 is, that if it is sown too often it exhausts particular 
 fields ? — I believe it exhausts the land in the end. 
 
 3110. But one year with another, may not a farmer 
 safely grow flax on his farm, always provided he makes 
 a proper rotation, and does not always sow it in the 
 same fields ? — I would say that he should not grow 
 fiax in a field oftener than every ten years. 
 
 3111. That is in the same field ? — Yes. 
 
 3112. Wheat could not be grown much oftener? — 
 It used to be grown every five years. Of late years, 
 it does not grow so well. 
 
 3113. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose you would have to 
 manure after any grain crop that ripens ? — Yes. 
 
 3114. Chairman. — Are there any special rules on 
 Sir Richard Wallace's estate affecting what is generally 
 called the Ulster tenant-right custom ? — I am afraid 
 that there is. Lately they don't wish to let the 
 occupier have a free right of sale — that is, entirely 
 
118 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 George Hill. 
 
 free. If a neighbour wants it they wish it to be left 
 to arbitration. 
 
 3115. Mr. Shaw. — The price ? — The price is to be 
 left to arbitration, if a neighbour wants the holding. 
 
 3116. Chairman. — You say that there have been 
 some office rules introduced upon the property % — It 
 appears to be introduced to this extent, that I think 
 before it used to be understood' that a neighbour got 
 the preference if a place was for sale, but the neigh- 
 bour had to give the price the highest bidder offered. 
 Now, if a neighbour wants to get a farm they wish 
 the price to be leifc to arbitration. That appears to 
 me to interfere a little with the iree right oi sale o± a 
 man's property, which I thing he ought to have. 
 
 3117. Mr. Shaw.— The efiect oi that would be to 
 increase the size oi the larms ?— Yes, but it takes a 
 little off the price lor the seller. It interferes with 
 the price of the interest a little. 
 
 3118. (Chairman. — Is there any custom of raising 
 the rent when a tenant is selling ? — I know of none. 
 I have heard of some, but I know of none. 
 
 3119. Baron Dowse. — How much land have you 
 yourself ? — About seventy-five acres. 
 
 3120. Chairman. — Then you think their is a ten- 
 dency towards the alteration of the Ulster custom ? — 
 I believe there is. 
 
 3121. Has this tendency towards an alteration of 
 ■ the Ulster custom come in since the passing of the 
 
 Land Act 1 — Yes ; I think it has come in within the last 
 year. I have not heard of it till within the last year. 
 
 3122. Baron Dowse. — What do you understand by 
 the Ulster tenant-right custom ? — Free sale, a fair 
 rent, and continued occupancy. 
 
 3123. How would you suggest working out the 
 question of a fair rent 1 — I cannot suggest it. I have 
 thought over it, and I cannot settle on any fair 
 suggestion that would be fiir to both the occupier and 
 the landlord. 
 
 3124. Suppose they agree themselves to a fair rent, 
 there is no difficulty there 1 — ^No difficulty. 
 
 3125. Supposing they do not agree, would you have 
 an arbitration to determine what a fair rent would 
 be1 — -There is a difficulty even about an arbitration. 
 My experience of arbitrations is that there are two 
 arbitrators appointed — one on each side — and in case 
 they differ, as they generally do, they have to call in 
 a third, whose decision must be final. The third one 
 generally, what we roughly call, "splits the dif- 
 ference," and the result is not in all cases satis- 
 factory. 
 
 3126. In some cases he does ; but what would you 
 think, for instance, of the county court judge as an 
 arbitrator ? Would you go before him 1 — That is just 
 the point, as you have mentioned it. The county court 
 judge in one county often gives double what the 
 county court judge in another county gives as com- 
 pensation for disturbance. 
 
 3127. On the same state of facts? — On the same 
 state of f^cts, as far as I could gather. I have known 
 it in a northern county. 
 
 3128. Are you in Antrim? — I am. 
 
 3129. Mr. Otway is you.r county court judge. Is 
 he the gentleman that gives double what is given 
 elsewhere? — Yovi are coming to names now. Well, 
 I think Mr. Otway did not take as favourable a view 
 of the farmers' side of the q\iestion as some of the 
 chairmen in neighbouring counties. 
 
 3130. As Mr. Johnston did in Down, for instance? 
 — I think not, nor near so favourable a view. 
 
 3131. It would depend, then, according to your 
 idea, upon who the county court judge was before you 
 would like to 
 would, a good deal. 
 
 3132. How do you manage at present in Ulster? 
 How is the question worked out as to what is a fair 
 rent ? The custom has been legalised in your part of 
 the world ; how i.s it worked out at the present time ? 
 — We have no barrier against a rise of rent at present. 
 
 3133. You have none? — None whatever. 
 
 3134. Therefore, unless some barrier is erected by 
 
 so before him as an arbitrator? — It 
 
 the law, you are afraid that the Ulster tenant-right 
 custom may be eaten away altogether ? — It is being 
 eaten away already. 
 
 3135. By a rise of rent ? — By a gradual rise of rent. 
 
 3136. Because, of course, the value of the tenant's 
 interest in the land would depend very much on the 
 rent he pays for it ? — Depend entirely. A shilling 
 increase in the rent would lose a pound an acre. 
 
 3137. Is the tenant often compelled to give more 
 rent than he ought for the land ? — We all have to 
 give double the rent we should give for it at present. 
 
 3138. Why have you? — I have because I have a 
 lease. 
 
 3139. But the man that has no lease ? — The greater 
 part of the estate, I think, is held by leases given at 
 the time of this fining-down that I told you about. 
 
 3140. Is the present rent too high ? — It is too high 
 for the American competition now-;— very much too 
 high. 
 
 3141. But suppose the leases did not exist, and 
 they had only a tenancy from .year to year, is the rent 
 too high 1 — The rent is too high in any case. 
 
 3142. Why does the tenant give it? — He cannot 
 help giving it. I cannot help giving it. If I had not 
 a lease I could not help giving it, unless by leaving the 
 land. 
 
 3143. And rather than leave they would even give 
 a higher rent than the land would be worth ? — They 
 are obliged to give it. They are not fit for any other 
 occupation, and a great many of them ai-e too old to 
 emigrate. 
 
 3144. Suppose there was a law introduced provid- 
 ing a means of settling a fair rent between landlord 
 and tenant, would it be advantageous or not to the 
 landlord and the tenant, to both or either ? — It would 
 be very advantageous if it was settled with a due 
 sense that the improvements both in the land and on 
 the land were made entirely by the tenant — ^that every 
 gate and pillar and stone was put in by the tenant, 
 and not by the landlord. 
 
 3145. What you would be afraid of is that in every 
 increase of rent your improvements would be valued 
 against you? — And they are. 
 
 3146. Suppose that that was guarded against in 
 some way ? — That is just what we want — to have it 
 guarded against. 
 
 3147. If a fair rent was put on a farm in some way, 
 so as to satisi/ justice, and if care was taken that the 
 landlord should only get rent for what belonged to 
 himself, and that the tenant's improvements should 
 not be valued in on him, and if the tenant was allowed 
 to remain in occupation provided he paid the rent, 
 with free power of selling what is his, do you think 
 that that would satisfy the tenant ? — Would you please 
 put that question again ? 
 
 3148. Supposing that the land was held by the 
 tenant at a fair rent to be ascertained by some tribu- 
 nal, some person or other that would fix the rent faii'ly 
 in justice to landlord and tenant? — Some impartial 
 tribunal it should be. 
 
 3149. Of course an impartial tribunal; we always 
 infer that when we speak of a tribunal — some tribu- 
 nal that would fix the rent fairly between landlord 
 and tenant ; if the tenant was allowed the power of 
 free s^^.le, and cdiild not be turned out as long as he 
 paid that fair rent ; and if in fixing that rent the land- 
 lord's and tenant's interests were both regarded, do 
 you think that that ought to satisfy the tenants 1 — 
 Decidedly. I am sure it would. 
 
 3150. Do you think that anything less would satisfy 
 them ? — I am afraid they will have to be satisfied with 
 less. 
 
 3151. What is the less they will have to be satisfied 
 with? — The question of the rent is the difficulty. 
 
 3152. Is it that a fair rent could not be fixed? — I 
 am afraid it would not be fixed at a scale that we can 
 compete with the United States and Canada. 
 
 3153. You think that the tribunal would not fix 
 the rent low enough? — I do, I would be afraid of 
 that. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 119 
 
 3154. Would you give the landlord any option, or 
 veto, as to -vvho the incoming tenant should be in the 
 case of a sale 'i — Certainly. 
 
 3155. A reasonable -wio ? — I believe 1 don't know 
 anyone that would not allow him to refuse an im- 
 proper tenant — say an insolvent tenant, or a bad 
 character. 
 
 3156. Who would decide that point 1 Would it 
 not have to be decided by somebody or other 1 — The 
 landlord should be obliged, I think, to show that he 
 was not a proper character to be a tenant. If he could 
 show that he was an improper character, then, I think, 
 the tenant should have the power of reierring to the 
 farmers of the neighbourhood. 
 
 3157. Mr. Shaw. — Such characters are generally 
 pretty well known in a neighbourhood, and there would 
 be no great difBcv.lty in ascertaining the facti — I 
 think not. 
 
 3158. Baron Dowse. — Suppose the tenant was not 
 satisfied, would you have :\ny other way of settling 
 the thing between them 'i Might Lt be settled by the 
 present Land Court, by the County Court Judge? — 
 My experience in County Courts is not very satis- 
 factory. The tenant if he raises a quarrel at all at 
 present is obliged to leave. Of course he gets more or 
 less money, still he is obliged to leave the place he 
 lived all his lifetime, and spent all his money in. 
 
 3159. If he has to leave, it is the law d6es that, 
 the County Court Judge cannot help it; but, suppose 
 the landlord is not to get the land as long as the 
 tenant pays the rent, and suppose the , only question 
 is as to whether the objection to a certain purchaser is 
 a reasonable objection, would the ,-County Court 
 Judge be a good man to ascertain whether the land- 
 lord is reasonable or unreasonable in his objection? 
 — Generally speaking I do not see why he should 
 not. 
 
 3160. Kor do I either ; if he is fit for anything he 
 ought to be able to do that. Is there any limit put 
 upon the price that you might ask for your tenant- 
 right if you were selling it, on Sir Richard Wallace's 
 estate 1—1 think not a bit. 
 
 3161. Has there been any general rise of rents 
 upon his estate l-^-No. 
 
 3162. He is a very liberal landlord I believe? — 
 He is a very charitable and good landlord, and has a 
 first-class agent. 
 
 3163. Mr. Shaw. — ^Are the rents high enough as 
 a general rule 1 — I think I remem.ber Mr. Stannus, 
 who was agent of the estate before the present man, 
 swore in the Four Courts that the average of the 
 rents was about 21s. an acre. 
 
 3164. An English acre? — Yes; I believe the rent 
 on the Downshire estates is 15s. per acre — the aver- 
 age rent. That is a neighbouring estate^quite as 
 good land as ours — most people would say it is 
 better. 
 
 3165. You are better circumstanced for markets I 
 suppose 1 — No. 
 
 3166. Baron Dowse.— What is your market town ? 
 — Belfast is within twelve milesi of us, Lisburn is 
 nearer. 
 
 3167. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do I understand your 
 complaint to be that your rent is too high ? — My 
 complaint is that no matter what we do we cannot 
 make ends meet. The produce' is low, wages are 
 high, labour in every way. is dear;, taxes are multi- 
 plied these last ten years, county cess especially is 
 ruinously high. I believe I pay 4s. id., an acre for 
 county cess. Everything is very much higher than 
 it was ten years since, and the pi-oduce is very much 
 less. 
 
 3168. That is, it has been in the last three years ; 
 they were acknotvledged as bad ' Seasons, were they 
 not 1 — The last ' six years in my neighbourhood have 
 been, with one exception, unprofitable seasons. The 
 most we could expect to do is to make the loss as 
 little as possible. •■ 
 
 3169. I don't know whether I understand you 
 
 rightly in one of your answers to say that your rent Sept.s.im. 
 was double what it ought to be ? — Yes. ^^ Robert 
 
 3170. Do you mean that your farm, without George HilL 
 valuing your improvements, is not worth 10s. &d. an 
 
 acre ? — I believe that would be quite sufficient for it, 
 and I think we would have hard work to live out of 
 it at 10s. td. a acre. 
 
 3171. I think you object to any interference on 
 the part oi the landlord with the sale of the tenant- 
 right ? — I do. I say if we have any property at all 
 (which I believe the law says we have) we should 
 have a right to take that out to the market and sell 
 it the same as we would sell a cargo, of wheat or a 
 horse or a sheep or a cow or anything else we had 
 to sell. If it is ours we should have the right to 
 sell it. 
 
 3172. What do you consider the property of the 
 tenant to be in the land ? — Everything unless the 
 bare untOled uncultivated soil — everything that has 
 been put there by the tenants. 
 
 3173. That is if it has been put there by the 
 tenants ? — On our estate it all has — ^every stone and 
 every bit of manm-e has been put on the land by the 
 tenants. 
 
 3174. How long is it since your family got that 
 farm?— In 1839.' 
 
 3175. Do you know anything about its history 
 before that ? — I know something of it, but not very 
 much — I was very young at that time — I only know 
 it from tradition. 
 
 3176. Was there anything paid for it when you 
 got it ? — -Yes. 
 
 3177. A fine or tenant-right? — The farm that I 
 hold is four farms consolidated, and bought at 
 different times as the tenants sold , their interest or 
 died. 
 
 3178. That is your ancestors bought it from, the 
 different persons who occupied it ?^ Yes, that is so. 
 
 3179. Then you would consider your property in 
 the farm, the amounts that you paid them for coming 
 in, and the value of whatever improvements you 
 put upon the land since ? — Quite so. 
 
 3180. I have heard, I don't' know what others' ex- 
 perience may be, but I have heard that in some sales of 
 tenant-right the most fabulous prices are given ; I 
 heard that on Lord Waterford's estate the tenant-right 
 went so far as forty years' purchase on the rent? 
 Lord Waterford's estate in the north, I don't know 
 where. That would be £40 an acre, would it not ?— 
 Yes. It would take very near that to pay us for 
 our outlay. 
 
 3181. Do you think that the fee simple of the land 
 is worth that ? — It might be worth pretty near that. 
 I think the tenant-right of my farm would sell for 
 more in the open market than the fee simple. 
 
 3182. According to that the landlord would have 
 nothing ? — The landlord would have about half, if the 
 fee simple is worth forty years' purchase, and the 
 tenant-right worth forty more. 
 
 3183. The fee simple is hardly worth forty years' 
 purchase, is it ? — I don't know. 
 
 3184. Twenty years' purchase is what is generally 
 taken to be nearer the mark ? — That would be 5 per 
 cent. I think land in Ireland generally pays 2| per 
 cent., seldom more than 3. 
 
 3185. Mr. Shaw. — You mean in the north? — ^In 
 Ulster. 
 
 3186. Mr. Kavanagh. — Don't you think it is a 
 very heavy burden on the incoming tenant to have to 
 pay a very large price of that sort to begin with 1 — It 
 is a heavy burden, unquestionably it is a heavy burden ; 
 but, nevertheless, it is the property of the tenant, and 
 if he had not some confidence in his property he would 
 cease to manure and labour altogether. In fact I 
 know of cfises in whidi tlie tenant is afraid to pu.t a 
 large quantity of manure, in the land, for. fear of beino- 
 obliged to pay for. his improvements. 
 
 3187. I quite agree with you that the tenant should 
 be secure in every half-penny of the improvements he 
 can show tliat he made ; but I want to know, if yon 
 
120 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 George Hill. 
 
 were going to take a farm yourself, and the tenant ■who 
 was leaving it asked for a large sum of money over 
 and above what he showed he had expended in im- 
 proving the land, don't you think that the siirplixs over 
 and above that, that is, so much as you paid over and 
 above what was just for the improvements, would be 
 unjust to you coming in to the farm? — But the price 
 seldom does pay what the improvements cost. Even 
 what they do get from a tenant, when coming in, 
 seldom pays them for their outlay. The outlay for 
 reclamation and buildings on a firm is enormous. It 
 costs more than the whole land is worth. 
 
 3188. But still, did such a case as I have supposed 
 exist, you would consider yourself unjustly used ? — I 
 ■don't know of any case where the seller got what it 
 cost him for the land. 
 
 3189. I am asking you, supposing it were so? — Of 
 course it is a heavy tax on the incoming tenant. But 
 in my experience I don't know of a single case in 
 which a purchaser gave the seller as much as it cost 
 the seller. In all cases it was a losing job for the 
 seller, so far as I know. 
 
 3190. Now suppose another case, that the improve- 
 ments have been all made by the landlord ; don't you 
 think that if you were taking a farm, with the improve- 
 ments on it all made by the landlord, that you would 
 be rather put upon by being asked to pay tenant-right 
 for that, as of course the landlord would charge his 
 rent on those improvements 1 — I know of no case of 
 that sort. 
 
 3191. I am asking, if such a case occured? — He ■ 
 has no right, if the landlord builds everything and 
 improves everything, and makes it in tenable order 
 and in a productive state, the purchaser has no right to 
 pay for the improvements to the occupiers 1 — Certainly 
 not. If the improvements are the landlord's let them 
 be the landlord's, and if the improvements are the 
 tenant's let them be the tenant's. 
 
 3192. Baron Dowse. — As a general rule in your 
 part of the world the tenant makes all the improve- 
 ments 1 — Always. It is not only generally, but it is 
 invariably. 
 
 3193. He looks upon it, whether he is right or 
 ■wrong, that he has got an interest and estate in the 
 land ? — He looks on it I hope rightly. He looks on 
 it as his o^wn as long as he pays its rent. 
 
 3194. And that he has an interest in the land 
 different and distinct from the landlord's? — He looks 
 upon everything above the ground as his. 
 
 3195. And that he has an interest in it different 
 and. distinct li'om the landlord's ? — Certainly. 
 
 3196. The landlord may do what he likes with his 
 O'wn, and you think that the tenant too ought to be 
 able to do what he likes with his own ? — I think they 
 are partners in trade, and that either of them shovild 
 be able to dispose of his share in the business. 
 
 3197. They could not exactly be partners according 
 to your idea, because one partner cannot act with- 
 out the consent of the other ; but at any rate the 
 tenant's idea is that they have different and distinct 
 interests in the same matter, that the tenant has the 
 tenant-right and the landlord has the reversion; is 
 that so ? — Exactly. 
 
 3198. Mr. Kavanagh. — Does Sir Pdchard Wallace 
 not spend any money on improvements on the pro- 
 perty ? — I have not known it on the farming property. 
 He has laid out a deal of money on Lisburn, the 
 capital of his estate. 
 
 3199. But not among the farmer's? — None, as far 
 as I know. 
 
 3200. The O'Conor Don. — Did I understand you 
 to say that the valuation of your holding was £100, 
 and the rent only £75 ? — I believe the valuation of 
 my holding is £110 and my rent is £75, but with 
 the allowance for poor rate I cannot exactly tell you. 
 The rent is about 21s. an acre, but then the landlord 
 should refund the half of the poor rate. I never get 
 the halt of what I pay but it brings it down to about 
 20s. an acre. 
 
 3201. Then it would appear that the valuation there 
 
 must be excessive ? — Yes ; but then I don't know about 
 that. There is a great deal of houses on it, and it is 
 near to a railway station, a good dwelling-house and 
 offices, suitable for carrying on the business properly 
 and conducting it well. 
 
 3202. Are they all farm buildings? — They are all 
 farm buildings, except the dwelling-house. 
 
 3203. And there is only one dwelUng-house, your 
 ©■vm ? — Only one dwelling-house. 
 
 3204. I think you stated that if you were selling 
 your tenant-right you would expect to get £40 an 
 acre 1 — No ; I think I said I did not think that would 
 pay me for the outlay. 
 
 3205. But suppose you were selling it what would 
 you get ? — I think I would have got £30 a few years 
 ago, before this crash came. There were two forms 
 offered lately in my o^wn neighbourhood, and there 
 was not a single bidder for either. One of them was 
 as good as my farm. 
 
 3206. On the same estate 1 — Yes, and one the next 
 neighbour. And, I believe^ there was only £5 offered 
 by a,uction for a third farm about a few weeks ago, I 
 was not at it, but I have no doubt what I say is cor- 
 rect, that there was £5 an acre offered for the tenant- 
 right. 
 
 3207. Were those farms in equally favourable con- 
 dition with yours ? — No ; mine is very well situated, 
 there is a railway station at the foot of the garden, and 
 a post office close beside it. 
 
 3208. You think you would get £30 an acre if you 
 were allowed and wished to sell it t — Not now. 
 
 3209. Well, how much do you think you would get 
 now, considering the depression of the times ? — I thmk 
 I could not sell it at all. 
 
 3210. Notwithstanding its situation 1 — I don't think 
 I could sell it to a farmer at all. If a business man 
 took a fancy to it I might sell it, otherwise I could 
 not. 
 
 3211. Chairman. — Disinclination to enter on farm- 
 ing ? — Yes, strong disinclination, and not without 
 reason. 
 
 3212. The O'Conor Don. — This system of fining 
 down leases is a peculiarity on Sir Richard Wallace's 
 estate ? — Not in his time, but in the Marquis of Hert- 
 i jrd's time. The people that they thought had money 
 they found means to get them to fine do-wn. 
 
 3213. Did not the people voluntarily take advan- 
 tage of it 1 — Not as far as I know, they objected very 
 strongly to it. 
 
 3214. It appears that Mr. Stannus, who was the 
 agent of the Marquis of Hertford, gave evidence before 
 the Devon Commission, in which he stated that every 
 tenant who had money took advantage of this of his 
 own accord ? — I would not agree -with that. 
 
 3215. Mr. Shaw. — Was it not since that you paid 
 this £5 an acre ? — Our lease is 1845. 
 
 3216. Mr. Kavanagh. — That was it the Marquis's 
 time, was it not 1 — I think it was ia. the late Marquis's 
 father's time. 
 
 3217. I mean it was not in Sir Richard's time ? — No, 
 Sir Richard got it in 1872. 
 
 3218. The O'Conor Don. — The rent was fined do-wn, 
 I believe, to about one-fourth, was not the principle 
 adopted % — I think it was fined do-wn about 5s. an acre. 
 In some cases the rent was lower than others ; in some 
 cases 20s., in some 26s., and in others more than that It 
 was fined down about 5s. an acre, irrespective of the 
 price of the rent. 
 
 3219. Now you say there is a great deal of raising 
 of rent in your part of the country, that of course, does 
 not apply to Sir Eichard Wallace's estate 1 — Certainly 
 not. 
 
 3220. There has been no raising of rent on his 
 estate 1 — No, I think I said so already. 
 
 3221. Mr. Kavanagh. — But on that point did you 
 not rather imply there had been a raising of rent, and 
 that the tenant-right was being gradually " eaten up," 
 I think, that was the expression 1 — Before the fining 
 down. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 121 
 
 3222. No, by the raising of rent. I vinderstood you 
 to make that answer to Baron Dowse? — On Sir Richard 
 Wallace's estate 1 
 
 3223. I don't know that you applied it particularly 
 to his estate'?— In Ulster generally, I believe the 
 tenant-right is being gradually eaten away, if times 
 would admit of it, by a raisingrent. 
 
 3224. Baron Dowse. — And the thing to do is to 
 put a stop to that 1 — Certainly, and to set it back a 
 bit. 
 
 3225. The O'Conok Don.— And do you know 
 instances of that that you can name? — I could not 
 give you the tenant's names, but I could find them out 
 for you. The chief district I heard of its being done 
 in was in Ballyclare and Castlewellan. 
 
 3226. Baron Dowse. — But whether the rents are 
 raised or not has not the landlord the power to raise 
 them ? — Certainly, when the land goes out of lease, 
 and my rent could be raised too. 
 
 3227. Do you consider that objectionable? — 
 Certainly I do. 
 
 3228. You would not like to go to Minnesota now 
 or some other place and leave your farm? — I would 
 be little use for that. 
 
 3229. The O'Conor Don. — No landlord on estates 
 in Ulster can raise the rent without giving the tenant 
 the tenant-right if the tenant objected to pay it? — 
 Yes they can, they can raise the rent, and I believe 
 the law is they would have to go into court and 
 abide the decision of the Chairman ; and if the Chairman 
 thought the rent was not exorbitant it would go 
 against the tenant. 
 
 3230. Baron Dowse. — And in any event they 
 would have to leave their farm, and you want them to 
 stay ? — I would like them to stay ; that is one of the 
 worst things ; if a tenant goes into court he will have to 
 leave. 
 
 3231. Certainly it is because he is leaving he goes 
 into court 'i — They are obliged to leave. 
 
 3232. The O'Conor Don. — What I meant to ask 
 you was this, where the Ulster custom exists if the 
 landlord asks an exorbitant rent would not the tenant 
 have the right to refuse to pay it, and then if served 
 with a notice to quit he w'ould be entitled to receive 
 the Ulster tenant-right ■" — He would be entitled to go 
 into court and get what the Chairman awarded. 
 
 3233. Baron Dowse. — But he would not be allowed 
 to stay in the land ? — No, he must leave it there and 
 then. 
 
 3234. Is it not the principal complaint in Ulster 
 that you don't go into the court unless you are 
 leaving the place? — No; if you fight with the landlord 
 you must go. 
 
 3235. If the judge decided in your favour and could 
 leave you in the land it would be a different thing, 
 but if the judge decides in your favour he only gives 
 you compensation in money ? — Yes. 
 
 3236. The O'Conor Don. — But must not that com- 
 pensation in money be of such an amount as to more 
 than counterbalance the increased rent the landlord 
 could hope to get ? — I only know one case and that 
 was in Lame where the Court awarded a sum equal 
 to the tenant-right, that was shortly after the passing 
 of the Land Act. It was tried at the Antrim Assizes 
 and the tenant there got within a few pounds of what 
 itwouldsellinthemarketfor. Since thatthe Chairman's 
 awards have been very far short of what a purchaser 
 would have given. 
 
 3237. You complain then that generally the 
 Chairmen do not give the same amount as compen- 
 sation as the property would sell for in the open 
 market 1 — This is the only case I know that the judge 
 gave the price that it would be sold for in the 
 market. 
 
 3238. And do you know many cases in which they 
 gave less? — I have heard of a great many, but I could 
 not enumerate them now. There is this leasehold 
 business if I might mention it. 
 
 3239. Which leasehold business ?— The Ulster 
 custom not existing at the expiration of a lease. That 
 
 is a very serious matter for us, for I look upon it that &;;< ■ 8, 1 88( 
 on our estate we were more or less — I can scarcely jyj^ Robert 
 use the word obliged, but it it is very closely verg- George Hill, 
 ing on it — to take the lease, and then if the tenant- 
 right dropped and was valueless at the end of the 
 lease it would be ruinous in our part of the coinitry. 
 The difficulty would be to prove that it was the custom 
 of the locality. 
 
 3240. You consider it a very great grievance that at 
 the expiration of the lease the tenant-right would not 
 be given to you ? — 1 do indeed, because, as I say, I be- 
 lieve that these leases were more or less given for that 
 tine. I think on our estate they were very nearly 
 altogether given as compensation for that fine, and if 
 they were forced, or if they were given without the 
 free will of the tenant, it is too bad that at the expira- 
 tion of that the tenant will not have as good a hold on 
 his place as he had before it. 
 
 3241. In fact he would be worse ofi' in that respect 
 than a tenant from year to year ? — Yes, if his lease 
 dropped under the present law. It would be different 
 if he could prove the custom existed. 
 
 3242. Chairman. — Would not the fine be propor- 
 tioned to the length of the lease ? — The leases on our 
 estate are generally given for three lives or thirty-one 
 years, or three lives and thirty-one years in some 
 cases. 
 
 3243. And the landlord in granting a lease of that 
 duration would consider the fine as part remuneration 
 to him for parting with the control of the property for 
 so long ? — I have an idea, and I think I am right, that 
 the rent was gradually crept up before that fine. 
 
 3244. Mr. Shaw. — It was not your proposal, it was 
 the proposal of the landlord, this thing of fine and 
 leasing? — I believe it was, generally speaking, against 
 the tenants' will that they paid it. 
 
 3245. The O'Conor Dox. — Were the lives in all 
 these leases the same, the same individuals 1 — Oh ! not 
 at all. 
 
 324G. Have any of those leases dropped out, come 
 to an end? — They have in some cases. 
 
 3247. And what has been done where they have 
 fallen out ; has there been a new lease granted, or are 
 the tenants now tenants from year to year ? — The 
 tenants are tenants from year to year, and I don't 
 think the rent on our estate has been much raised, 
 unless it was at a very low rent. 
 
 3248. After the lease dropped out the landlord did 
 not raise the rent ? — Unless it was very low, I think 
 not. 
 
 3249. Mr. Shaw. — Have there been any attempts 
 to purchase up tenant-right on the estate at all by the 
 landlord ? — Not a bit. 
 
 3250. Nor on the neighbouring estates ? — No. 
 
 3251. Would you be anxious to buy yovir own rent 
 now in case you could do so easily and simply ? — Do 
 you mean buy the fee-simple ? 
 
 3252. Yes ?— No. Sir Richard Wallace some five 
 or six years ago — he did not make an ofler, but he 
 let it be understood that if a considerable portion of the 
 tenantry on his estate wished to buy the fee-simple he 
 would receive offers for it. There were only three 
 gave in offers, and I was not one. I calculated closely, 
 and found that unless one had only one child it would 
 not be suitable, for the entire propei-ty would be in the 
 one place. 
 
 3253. And you could not arrange that as a general 
 rule? — No, and, in addition, the money could be laid 
 out better otherwise. 
 
 3254. If you had perfect tenant-right you would 
 not be ambitious to be owners in fee ? — No. 
 
 3255. At what price? — There was no offer made, 
 no price was intimated. It was understood that if 
 there was a considerable proportion, perhaps a half or 
 more, that he would accept offers, and I believe there 
 was only three came in. 
 
 3256. But how could you calculate so closely except 
 you knew the price he was going to sell it at. I 
 suppose you would have had the option of borrowing 
 two-thirds of the money under the Land Act ? — We 
 
 R 
 
122 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 George Hill. 
 
 understood there was a difficulty in getting that, two- 
 thirds. 
 
 3257. The OConoe Don.- — Ymi did not inquire into 
 it particularly ? — We did not, because we found that 
 the money that we might reasonably expect Sir Pdchard 
 Wallace would ask for his property would exceed 
 what we were able in some cases and willing in others 
 to give. 
 
 3258. Mr. Shaw.- — And you consider you have 
 perfect security under the tenani>right for your outlay 
 and the interest in the f arro. 1 — Those that have leases 
 I believe have as, long as the lease lasts, but we 
 are very much alarmed that this Leasehold Tenant 
 Right Bill has not passed. 
 
 3259. If the law was amended according to your 
 idea you would consider you would have perfect 
 security? — If the Ulster custom was established in 
 its integrity as it did exist, we would have perfect 
 security. 
 
 3260. And the question of purchase would not be 
 of much importance to you unless you had money to 
 spare 1 — I am afraid the country is tc j poor. 
 
 3261. If it cost you £1,500 and you can borrow 
 £1,000 of that at a low rate don't you think it would 
 be a fair speculation ? — II we could borrow it so that 
 it wpuld pay itself in oo years, I think that is it. I 
 don't think it would be much availed of in our part >. ? 
 the country. 
 
 3262. Baron Dowse. — What would make it not 
 work in your part of the country is the great value of 
 the tenant-right p,s compared with the landlord's 
 interest. If the landlord was selling the property 
 would he want to be paid for your interest as well as 
 his own ? — He would sell it the best way he could. 
 
 3263. Mr. Siiaw. — Sir Richard Wallace could only 
 sell the rent to you with the tenant-right existing on 
 it. Twenty-five years purchase I suppose would be 
 his figured — If I paid £1 that would be £25. We 
 anticipated he would look for far more than that. We 
 thought he would look for £40 or £50. 
 
 3264. Do you know what Lord Waterford's estate 
 sold for in Derry where there was great competition ? 
 — I do not. 
 
 3265. A great deal of it sold for 28 years purchase, 
 it was considered a good price at the time and in good 
 times. If your land was in the market with all the 
 improvements on it I suppose it would let for £2 an 
 acre ?— It wou.ld have let lor more than that, but I 
 don't think it would let lor that now, it would in good 
 times, the houses on it are worth more than £2 an 
 acre. 
 
 3266. You ar? in business I suppose, outside the 
 farm? — No. 
 
 3267. Baron Dowse. — Is there any manufactory in 
 your neighbourhood 1 — 'None nearer than Lisburn. 
 
 3268. Do you take any part in the linen trade ? — 
 Nothing whatever. 
 
 3209. Mr. Shaw. — It gives you a good market, does 
 it not, for all your produce ? — We have a first class 
 market, none better. 
 
 3270. Everything you can produce on the farm 1 
 
 Everything we can produce, we have a first class 
 
 market. 
 
 3271. When you say it does not pay you, I sujipose 
 you mean it does not pay the interest on your outlay 1 
 
 No, I do not. I give my entire time and my wii'e 
 
 gives her entire time looking after the dairy, and all 
 we can do we cannot make it pay its expenses. 
 
 3272. That is within the last couple of years'! — 
 Within the last six years. 
 
 3273. How do you account for that 1 — The land has 
 not produced the amount of cro] )s it should do, prices 
 are low and cxpcusi^s are high. 
 
 3274. Are j-oii manuring it Well ? — Yes, it is one 
 of the best manured farms in tlic country. 
 
 3275. Baron Dowse. — If a farmer cannot make his 
 farm pay how does he live 1 — I Uve in a kind of way 
 on an income derived from other sources. 
 
 3276. Mr. Shaw.^Is that the general state of things 
 iu your neighbourhood 1 — -Yes, my neighbour who 
 has offered his farm for sale is living on income de- 
 rived from houses. 
 
 3277. And is his rent as low as youi-s 1 — Yes^ but he 
 has a mill on it which is exceptionally highly rented. 
 
 3278. Baron Dowse. — Were there times when you 
 made anything on your farm 1—-1 made a little, it was 
 partly owing to the season and partly owing to the 
 crops. 
 
 3279. Mr. Shaw. — Is yours a grass farm 1 — There 
 are fifteen or sixteen acres in meadow. 
 
 3280. Do you keep many milch cows 1 — ^Half a 
 dozen. 
 
 3281. Could you not feed more than that during the 
 winter 1 — No. 
 
 3282. Do you grow root crops ? — We do, and we 
 keep twenty young cattle. 
 
 3283. The O'Conor Dosr. — Have you any tenants 
 in your neighbourhood who purchased out their hold- 
 ings 1 — None. 
 
 3284. Mr. Shaw. — There was no oj)portunity I ex- 
 pect ? — None except that one, and sufficient did not 
 come forward. 
 
 3285. Baron Dowse. — Do you from your knowledge 
 of the country come to^the conclusion, that as a general 
 rule tJie tenants would desire to have the tenant-right 
 legalised instead of buying their farms '' — I do. 
 
 32S(;. Mr. Shaw. — They would be able to use 
 the money as they jileased, without putting it into 
 the land, and settle their children 1 — That is another 
 question, one cannot leave their farm to whom they 
 wish ; in the leases on our estate they are obliged 
 to leave it either to one child or one grandchild. 
 
 3287. That is to prevent you from svibdividing 1 
 I would not object to that, but in some cases it does 
 not work well. 
 
 3288. Chairman. — You vvould not object to a clause 
 against subdivision ? — I could not reasonably object 
 to it. 
 
 3289. Mr. Shaw. — How does it work injuriously ii' 
 you don't ol^ject to subdividing ? — I have heard ui 
 some cases in which it did, but I caimot go into that 
 matter. 
 
 3290. Baron Dowse. — Under your lease, can you 
 sell the property to whom you like. Are you not 
 restrained from alienation without the landlord's 
 consent '? — T can sell it to no one without his con- 
 sent in writing. 
 
 3291. Mr. Shaw. — Is there much planting on your 
 l^lace 1 — Very little. 
 
 3292. All done by yom'self, I suppose? — No; it is 
 not. The timber chiefly was planted before my time 
 or my icither's time. 
 
 3293. Baron Dowse. — Have you .any registered 
 trees ? — Yes ; a few young ones that I planted 
 myself. 
 
 3294. You are in the county Down 1 — county 
 Antrim. 
 
 3295. 
 
 3296. 
 's there 
 think not. 
 
 3297. JLr. Siiaw. — It is not usual 
 fines for leases ? — No : it was thirtv 
 
 What is the nearest town to you ! — Lisbum. 
 CliAiRMAJf. — In case of a fine for a lease, 
 a. uniform sum on taking out a lease ? — I 
 
 now to give 
 or forty years 
 since. 
 
 3298. Chairman. — You don't know whether, at that 
 time, there was a uniform sum paid, or varying in pro- 
 portion to the length of the lease or the amount of th(^ 
 rent? — It may have varied according to thn amount 
 of the rent, but not according to the length of the 
 lease. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 123 
 
 Mr. William Simpson, examined 
 
 3300. Mr. Shaw.— You live in tlie county Avmao-li 
 I believe, Mr. Simpson ?— Yos. ° ' 
 
 3301. What part of Armagli ?— Con\ enient to 
 Armagh, a mile and a half from it. 
 
 3302. And you hold land under Lord Oharlemont, 
 I believe? — Yes; about thirty acres, under Lord 
 Oharlemont, and a large farm imder Lord Gosford. 
 
 3303. And you iarm land you hold yourself in fee ? 
 Yes. 
 
 3304. How much land altogether do you farm 1 — 
 About 150 acres. 
 
 3305. Bid you purchase this land you hold in fee 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 3306. Since the jDassing of the Land Act 1 — No ; 
 before it. My father bought it. 
 
 3307. Does tenant-right exist on both the proper- 
 ties you are a tenant on ? — Yes ; to the fullest extent 
 on Lord Gosford's property, not on Lord Oharlemont's. 
 On the sale of any property, under Lord Oharlemont, 
 as soon as it is sold he generally raises the rent 
 in all cases I have known for some time back. 
 
 3308. In every case of change of tenancy? — Yes. 
 
 3309. Does he settle the rent before the sale ? — 
 No, after the sale. 
 
 3310. So that the buyer has to go in with his 
 €yes shut about the rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 3311. And do they do that nowl — Generally they 
 come in together after the farm is sold, and there is so 
 much an acre put on, 2s. or 4s. I heard of one case 
 in which 4s. IQd. an acre was put on. 
 
 3312. That you think a bad system? — Yes; the 
 tenant that purchased the other day would not take 
 the lands unless he would be allowed for the rise of 
 rent put on. 
 
 3313. But of the purchase-money? — Yes. 
 
 3314. And there is no attempt on the estate other- 
 wise to interfere with the tenant-right, there is free 
 right of sale ? — There have been a good many instances 
 that it has been re-valued and raised within the last 
 two or three years. 
 
 3315. Without change of tenancy? — Without change 
 of tenancy. 
 
 3316. But not a re-valuation of the whole estate ? 
 —No. 
 
 3317. Was there anything exceptional in those 
 cases, was the rent low ? — No, I think the rent was 
 high enough at the time. 
 
 3318. Was it the faUing in of a lease 1 — No. 
 
 3319. But just the capricious will of the landlord 
 or agent ? — Yes. 
 
 3320. Did the tenants make any objection 1 — They 
 did. 
 
 3321. But they stayed on the farms? — They did. 
 
 3322. They had no other resource? — They had no 
 other resource. 
 
 3323. If they objected they could have gone into 
 the coiui; and got damages? — Yes, but they would 
 have rather remained on the farm. 
 
 3324. And in most cases I suppose tenants would 1 
 — Yes, where they have been originally, and their 
 fathers before them. 
 
 3325. Is there much fall in the value of tenant- 
 right lately in that district ? — Well, yes it has not 
 been selling near so well. 
 
 3326. Owing to the bad times ?— Yes. 
 
 3327. Are there any fartas given up to the land- 
 lord ? — No, I cannot say there are. 
 
 3328. What would you say constituted tenant-right ? 
 — Well, I should say that a j^erson should get leave to 
 have free sale, and that there should be no office rules. 
 
 3329. Ajid what about the rent, how woiild you 
 fix the rent? — Well, I think rent should be fixed 
 according to the times, if crops of com and cattle 
 deteriorate in value, I think rents should be lowered. 
 
 3330. But would you have any tribunal to interfere, 
 between the landlord and tenant, in case they did not 
 agree ? — Yes, I think they should. 
 
 3331. Do you think in most cases they would agree ? 
 I cannot say that. 
 
 3332. But in case tliej^ did not agree, you think a 
 tribunal — an arbitration 1 — I think an arbitration 
 would be the best way of settling it. 
 
 3333. With an umpire appointed by some Govern- 
 ment department, you think that would be satis- 
 factory ?^-Yes, I think it would. 
 
 3334. Then you think ii the system of tenant-right 
 as you defined it were established generally, it would 
 gi^-e satisfaction to the tenants ? — I think it would, I 
 think the tenants are afraid to expend money, afraid 
 of getting their land raised. If a peson goes and 
 builds a good house and improves his land, and his 
 next door neighbour does not improve at all, as soon 
 as the land is brought into a high state of cultivation 
 and the houses built uf)on it, in many cases the land- 
 lord raises the rent, where on the other side of the 
 ditch the person who has not improved the land is 
 left at the old rent. 
 
 3335. And that where tenant-right exists ? — Yes. 
 
 3336. WJiat is the general price now of tenant-right 
 in your district ? — From £15 to ,£23 an acre in many 
 instances. 
 
 3337. The farms are pretty small, I believe? — The 
 farms are small, and you can get more for a small farm- 
 than you can for a large farm. 
 
 3338. But the people are employed in some other 
 business or industry, generally ? — Yes ; there is a good 
 deal of manufacturing about that part of the country. 
 
 3339. And you have very good markets about there ? 
 — Yes, very good. 
 
 3340. Mr. Shaw. — You have several instances on 
 Lord Oharlemont's estate on which rents were raised ? 
 — Yes, and by Mr. M'Geough. 
 
 3341. That is some time ago 1 — Some time ago. 
 
 3342. Was that since the Land Act passed 1 — I 
 think it was. I think he bought some property, and 
 he raised the rent — served them with notice to quit, 
 and raised the rent. At last it was left to arbitration 
 — the tenants went to law with him, and it was then 
 left to arbitration. 
 
 3343. Between him and the tenants? — Yes. Mr. 
 Handcock, I think, and Mr. Quinn, a tenant farmer 
 in the county, were the arbitrators ; and they raised 
 the rent from 2s. or 3s. an acre ; and it had no call to 
 be raised at all — it was quite high enough. 
 
 3344. Was that near Armagh ?~ Within two or 
 three miles of Armagh. 
 
 3345. Near his own residence 1 — No ; it is not. 
 
 3346. But it was much less than the rent he tried 
 to put on ? — -Yes ; he -vfanted to put on a higher rent. 
 Since that arbitration, some parties wanted to sell, 
 and he said he wovild raise the rent again. 
 
 3347. In case they sold ? — Yes ; after the arbitral 
 tion ; the arbitration was not binding on him. 
 
 3348. Does he [>i-oless to have tenant-right estab- 
 lished on his estate? — There is a tenant-right. , I am 
 sure he will allow you to sell ; but it is very injurious 
 to it. 
 
 3349. That is no \ise, you think, unless there is 
 some way of regulating the rents ? — Yes. 
 
 3350. If they have a power of raising the rents, it 
 destroys your tenant-right ? — Yes. 
 
 3351. Is that feeling common among the tenants ? 
 —It is. 
 
 3352. It prevents them laying out money ; and you 
 yourself would hesitate in laying out money on build- 
 ings where this doubt existed ? — I would not be afraid 
 under Lord Gosford ; he has allowed tenant-right to 
 the fullest extent, never interferes, and allows the 
 tenant to sell to the highe.st bidder. 
 
 3353. Baron Dowse. — Then it depends very much 
 on the kind of landlord you have ? — Certainly it does. 
 
 3354. Mr. Shaw. — He has still the power of inter- 
 fering ; and, if another Lord Gosford came in, or a 
 bad .agent, you might find the thing changed ? — Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 R2 
 
 Sept. 8, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Simpson. 
 
12-1 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Sept. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Simpson. 
 
 3 3 ■">.''). Have j'ou any othev instances now, on Lord 
 Charlemont's estate, of raising of rents 1, — I have two 
 or tliree. I know a person of the name of Barrett 
 sold some land, I think about a year ago, and his rent 
 was raised too. 
 
 33.56. After the sale ■?— Yes. 
 
 3357. And any other case? — Yes. There was a 
 Mi's. Dobbin sold some land two or three years ago, 
 and there wa". a rise of rent put on. 
 
 3358. It was submitted to, I suppose i— Yes, it was. 
 
 3359. Was it a high rent, do you think, do you 
 knoAV the case yourself? — I do. I know the rent was 
 high enough before, and did not require more to be 
 put on. 
 
 3360. And I suppose the tenants before had made 
 every improvement on the land 1 — They had. 
 
 3361. Buildings, and everything else? — Yes; and 
 drained the land. 
 
 3362. So that you consider they ought not to have 
 been subjected to any rise of rent ? — I think not. 
 
 3363. In case you had this tenant-right established, 
 would you give a fair and periodical rise of rent or 
 valuation of rents, to either party, the tenant or land- 
 lord, in case they desired it ? or would you fix it at 
 once and for ever ? — Well, I think I would fix it at 
 once, if it could be done. 
 
 3364. How would you fix it, because you must take 
 into account the growth of the prosperity of the country 
 generally, the landlord claims, I believe, generally 
 something for that ? — The way that things are paying 
 at the present time I think the land in general is rather 
 high let. 
 
 3365. With the competition? — Yes, from America. 
 I know twenty years ago it would be easier to make 
 £b than it would be to make £,\ now. 
 
 3366. In farming, you mean? — Yes. 
 
 3367. And is that owing to low prices altogether? 
 ■ — I think it is a good deal owing to the low prices. 
 
 3368. Do you think the land produces as much as 
 it used to do ? — I think it does, with the exception of 
 last year, which was a very bad year. 
 
 3369. And you grow flax, I suppose, a good deal 
 there ? — A good deal. 
 
 3370. And that is generally a paying crop ? — It 
 generally pays pretty well. 
 
 3371. You think if this tenant-right, as you have 
 described it, were established, and the landlord's power 
 defined, that that would satisfy the tenant? — I do. 
 
 3372. Would you be disposed to purchase your 
 ownfarnis if you had facilities to doso ? — I would,indeed. 
 
 3375. And borrowing two-thirds of the money — I 
 don't mean that in your case, you know what I mean 
 — if tliat facility were granted, it would be an advan- 
 tage to the tenants ? — It would,be a very great advan- 
 tage, and give them security in their farms. 
 
 3.374. Do you think in your part of the country the 
 tenants would avail themselves of it largely ? — I do 
 believe they would. 
 
 3375. Small and large ? — I am certain of it. 
 
 3376. Have there been any cases in your county of 
 purchases by tenants of their holdings under the Land 
 Act ? — There has, Mr. Brown has. 
 
 3377. Is that near Armagh ? — It is. 
 
 3378. Who is his landlord ? — It was church land. 
 
 3379. You think if facilities were given, a fair 
 amount of money advanced at a low rate of interest, 
 that the tenants even under the tenant-right custom 
 would avail themselves of it extensively? — I believe 
 they would. 
 
 3380. They would feel more iudependent every way, 
 and the slight advance they would have to pay for the 
 money they would not feel so much ? — I think not. I 
 think they would be very glad to avail themselves of 
 the oppoi'tunity to purchase. 
 
 3381. On the whole in your county do you think 
 rents are high enough ? — I think they are. 
 
 3382. They could not bear any advance under any 
 legislation to let the tenants live ? — I think not. 
 
 3383. Are there many small owners in Armagh, 
 proprietors ? — I think not. 
 
 3384. Yoix have some very large ones, liOrd Gosford, 
 and Lord Charlemont ? — Yes, and Mr. M' Geough is a 
 large proprietor. 
 
 3385. Have there been any estates purchased in the 
 Landed Estates Court in your district within the last 
 few years ? — Mr. M'Geough's was purchased there. 
 
 3386. But outside that ? — I cannot recollect. 
 
 3387. But you don't know any cases on the part of 
 landlords besides what you have mentioned of interfer- 
 ence with the tenant-right ? — No, I cannot say that I do. 
 
 3389. Chairman. — You say that on Lord Charle- 
 mont's property there is a change of rent on a change of 
 tenancy. Is there a change of rent at any other time ? — 
 Yes, I have known instances where the land was re- 
 valued and the rent raised. 
 
 3390. How long has this custom exittsd of changing 
 the rent on a change of tenancy, or any other times? 
 — I think since the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 3391. Mr. Shaw. — Are leases common in your part 
 of the country ? — Yes. 
 
 3392. And for what term generally ? — On Lord 
 Gosfort's property they gave you a lease for thirty-one 
 years. 
 
 3393. Has that time been adopted since the passing 
 of the land Act? — No, before it. 
 
 3394. It has not been adopted with the view of 
 getting rid of the Act ? — No. 
 
 3395. Do they recognize tenant-right at the end of 
 the lease ? — I have never known on Lord Gosfort's pro- 
 j)erty where they did not. 
 
 3396. Do you know whether they do on the other 
 estate ? — I have heard that they do not. 
 
 3397. Chairman. — You say rent ought to vary 
 according to prices, but don't you think that that would 
 cause great uncertainty ? — It might. 
 
 3398. Prices vary very much, and it might cause 
 very frequent revaluations? — No doubt. 
 
 3399. Would it not be better to make it for a period 
 of years ? — I suppose it would be as well. 
 
 3540. When a man buys tenant-right what do you 
 consider he buys under the name of tenant-right ; is it 
 the good will of the holding ? — The good wiU of the 
 holding. 
 
 3541. The interest in the improvements upon it ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 3542. Whether made by himself or the landlord ? — 
 I think that whatever he buys, he buys the interest 
 on the whole property. 
 
 3543. And if there is any interest of the landlord 
 in the shape of improvements, ought that to be paid 
 by the incoming tenant? — I think it should. 
 
 3543a. Ought any portion of the purchase-money or 
 anything instead of the purchase-money go to the 
 landlord ? — I think not. I think it should go to the 
 tenants themselves. 
 
 3544. You think the landlord ought not to get it 
 either in the shape of increased rent or portion of the 
 purchase-money? — I think not. I think he is not 
 entitled to it at all. 
 
 3545. Mr. Shaw. — The landlord has done nothing 
 on the land ? — No. But Lord Bessborough is taking 
 a difierent case ? If he has buildings I expect he will 
 be paid for them. 
 
 3546. Chairman. — Or suppose he has drained or 
 assisted in drainage ? — If he has paid for the drainage 
 I think he should be allowed for it, but if the tenant 
 drained the land himself, the landlord should not get 
 anything for it I think. 
 
 3547. I have asked you should the landlord be 
 compensated for the loss he may sustain by reason of 
 his making over the entire tenant-right to the tenant 
 for the improvements he has made upon the property, 
 and you say yes ? — Yes, I say so. 
 
 3548.' Should he be compensated for the loss he has 
 sustained by not having the selection of the tenant ? — 
 I think ho should. 
 
 3549. You think that that is a matter which should 
 be taken into consideration ? — Yes, I think so. 
 
 3550. Should the landlord be compensated for the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 125 
 
 prospect! \e increase in the value of the property 'i 
 
 Yes, I think so. >■ >■ J 
 
 3551. And you think that might be done by perio- 
 dical revaluation 1 — I think so. 
 
 3552. Would you have that at the option of the 
 landlord or tenant, upon giving notice, to raise or 
 diminish the rent ?--I think the tenant if the rent is 
 too high should have the option of giving notice. 
 
 3553. At certain intervals ? — Yes. 
 
 3554. The landlord on calling for a rise if it would 
 bear a rise, and the tenant on calling for a reduction 
 if it would bear it ? — Yes. 
 
 3555. Suppose the landlord has made improvements 
 on a large scale, such as making or contributing to the 
 making of a railway to the property, or has made a 
 large drainage work that enables tenants to carry out 
 their own drainage on their own holdings more effec- 
 tively, ought that to be considered 1 — I think if the 
 landlord opens a way for the tenants to get their land 
 drained, I think he should be allowed for that. 
 
 3556. You think that in a revaluation all the cir- 
 cumstances of the case should be taken in consideration 
 whether in favour of the landlord or tenant? — I 
 think so. 
 
 3557. Baron Dowse. — Supposing the Ulster tenant- 
 right custom as it exists at present fair rent, free sale, 
 and -continuous occupation were legalized, which to a 
 certaiu extent it is, suppose that there was some 
 ti-ibimal to settle the question of rent between the 
 landlord and the tenant if they differed, and then that 
 the tenant should continue to occupy the land at that 
 rent so long as he paid it, do you think that that 
 would be satisfactory 1 — I think it would be satisfactory. 
 
 3558. In your part of the world are the improve- 
 ments generally made by the tenant t — ^Yes. 
 
 3559. Suppose there was a case in which the land- 
 lord made the improvements, wouldn't it be right to 
 take these improvements into considei-ation when 
 fixing the rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 3560. And wouldn't that be enough for him ? — 
 Quite enough. 
 
 3561. And if he drained the land or carried out any 
 other improvements which increased the tenant's in- 
 terest in it, he might say the land was not let at 
 sufficient value, and then when the revaluation came to 
 be made these improvements could be considered in 
 fixing the fair rent if the landlord and tenant did not 
 agree as to the rent. Would that meet the difficulty 1 
 — I think it would. 
 
 3561a. And that being done, the tenant might sell 
 his interest subject to a fair and reasonable objection 
 on the part of the landlord which would enable the 
 landlord's improvements to be considered, if he had 
 made any, to the highest bidder ? — Yes. 
 
 3562. Would you give the landlord a veto on the 
 purchaser, or allow him to make a reasonable objection 
 to the purchaser 1 — I think the landlord should be able 
 to make a reasonable objection. 
 
 3563. , If the tenant was not a man of good character 
 or had the name of being a bad tenant 1 — I think the 
 landlord has no right to accept a bad tenant. I don't 
 think a bad tenant has a right to be pushed in upon 
 the landlord. 
 
 3564. You spoke of a Mr. M'Geough. Is that Mr. 
 R. J. M'Geough?— Yes ; I think so. 
 
 3565. I have a very valuable book before me of 
 Mr. Donnell's, and in that there is a case reported of 
 Loughem v. M'Geough, tried at the Armagh spring 
 assizes in 1873. Mr. M'Geough contended that the 
 tenant-right shpuld be limited to ,£5 an acre, but the 
 judge decided against him, and the judge held that in 
 determining what is the usage on an estate regard 
 should be had not merely to the transactions of recent 
 years but to the whole series of tenant-right trans- 
 actions that is disclosed in the evidence, and he de- 
 cided there that the custom on that estate was to sell 
 to the highest and best bidder, so that Mr. M'Geough 
 was defeated there 1 — Before he bought the estate you 
 could sell to whom you liked, but since 1873 
 
 3566. He was defeated then, but since 1873 has he 
 
 been still endeavouring to limit the tenant-right 1— 
 There has been an arbitration, too, and since that 
 any person who offered to sell got an intimation 
 that there would be a rise of rent. 
 
 3567. The eflFect of that on the best tenant-right in 
 the country would be to depreciate its value ? — Of 
 course. 
 
 3568. If you have a farm of 30s. an acre which pro- 
 duces a large sum in the market, and the landlord 
 puts 10s. more on the rent, that takes something off 
 the value of it ? — Every shilling he puts on it is a 
 pound off the price. 
 
 3569. That is what you want to prevent 1 — Yes. 
 
 3570. And if that was done yovi Avould consider it 
 Kutisfaptory 1 — Yes. 
 
 3.371. Woiild that satisfy the people or would 
 they rather buy under the Bright clauses of the Land 
 Act ? — It would. 
 
 3572. They would be satisfied with tenant-right in 
 that way? — They would, I think, be satisfiad with 
 tenant-right in that way. 
 
 3573. Giving them security for their interest — that 
 whatever they put into the soil they could take out of 
 it ?— Yes. 
 
 3574. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do I understand you are 
 in favour of an entirely unlimited tenant-right? — 
 Yes ; the tenant should have the right to sell to the 
 highest and best bidder. 
 
 3575. And for the best price he could get ? — Yes. 
 
 3576. Have you heard of cases where the tenant- 
 right went up to .£75 an acre ? — I have. 
 
 3577. Do you consider that fair to the incoming 
 tenant who was the buyer ? — I think it fair enough 
 for a tenant to get leave to sell to the highest bidder. 
 I have heard of £130 an acre being given in the county 
 Down. 
 
 3578. Mr. Shaw. — The buyer was a free agent ; he 
 need not buy unless he liked ? — He was. 
 
 3579. Where was the £130 given? — It was near 
 Donaghmore, on the road to Newry, near Banbridge. 
 
 3580. Baron Dowse. — ^Was there anyihing peculiar 
 on the farm ? — No. The farm was held for only about 
 10s. an Irish acre. 
 
 3581. What he gave for that was only 130 ten 
 shillings ? — No; he gave £loO an acre. 
 
 3582. Mr. Shaw. — Was that a large farm ? — About 
 fifteen or twenty Irish acres. 
 
 3583. Whatas it supposed to grow? — It is splendid 
 land. 
 
 3584. And a comfortable house on it? — And there 
 was a good deal of competition between two or three 
 parties. 
 
 3585. Mr. Kavanagh. — If it was very good land, 
 and was let at 10s. an aci'e, there was a 
 terest in it? — Yes. 
 
 3586. Would you consider it worth more than 
 10s. an acre, if it was yours ? — Yes, no doubt. 
 
 3587. That shows there was a considerable interest 
 to be bought in it ? — Yes, 10s. an Irish acre is low. 
 
 3r;88. That is rather an exceptional case. The 
 case I want to put is this — suppose you are buying a 
 farm, and the outgoing man asked you — say £35 an 
 acre, and you did not consider the improvements 
 he had done came to more than £20 — would you not 
 consider yourself wronged by the exti-a £15 ? — I don't 
 know. 
 
 3589. If you pay more — say £15 an acre more — - 
 than you get value for, don't you think that that £15 
 an acre would be much more advantageously em- 
 ployed by you in stocking your farm ? — I believe it 
 would. 
 
 3590. And in so far as that view goeSj you would 
 be wronged if you were fool enough to give it ? — 
 Yes, if I was fool enough to give it ; but I think, 
 when a tenant sells, he is entitled to get all he can 
 for his holding. 
 
 3591. As to this =£130 an acre land that you say 
 was held at 10s. &n acre, what would you consider a 
 fair rent for it ? — I would say an Irish acre would have 
 
 Sept. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Simpson. 
 
 very good in- 
 
126 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William , 
 Simpson. 
 
 The soil was good 
 
 l)een wortli £'2 or £2 5s. per acre. The land was 
 very good. 
 
 3592. Very good in the actual soil? — Yes. 
 
 3593. Not from any drainage, or manuring, or any- 
 thing that had been done to it % 
 itself. 
 
 3594. Then the difference between 10s. and its real 
 value was a sort of gift, yon may say, that the land- 
 lord had given to the previous tenant. If I had a 
 farm worth £2 an acre, and I were to let it to you 
 -at 10s. an acre, I would be really making you a present 
 of the diflfei-ence f — No doubt, you would. 
 
 359.J. Baron Dowse.— Is that likely often -to 
 happen ? — I have never known an instance of it, for 
 landlords don't generally do that. 
 
 3596. Mr. Kavanagh. — Did it happen in this case,! 
 — I cannot tell you ; it was held for ever, 
 
 3597. Baron Dowse. — Was it a tenancy from year 
 to year 1 — Not at all ; it was land held for ever. 
 
 3598. Mr. Kavanagh. — Then he was buying the 
 fee-simple, merely leaving the head-rent on it ?— .Yes. 
 Round about Banbridge it is common to sell from 
 £50 to £60 an acre, but it is held in fee at a nominal 
 rent. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Knipe. 
 
 Thomas Knipe examined. 
 
 3599. Mr. Shaw. — You live in the county Armagh 1 . 
 —I do. 
 
 3600. In the neighbourhood of Armagh ? — It is in 
 the opposite direction oi Armagh from Mi'. Simpson. 
 
 ■^(iOi. What side is it on'? — Towards Killyleagh. 
 
 3602. You hold land from Lord Charlemont f — No, 
 it is under Mr. Noble at present. It is in the Landed 
 Estates Court at present — where I live on. 
 
 3003. Your own land as well? — Yes. 
 
 3604. Do you farm your own land t — Yes, 
 
 3605. Did you purchase it in the Landed Estates 
 Court ? — I purchased part of it, part was lef c to me 
 by my father. 
 
 3606. You purchased part in the Landed Estates 
 Court 1 — No, I purchased it from the tenant — the fee- 
 simple. 
 
 3607. You don't know anything of the Landed 
 Estates Court mode of purchasing land ? — I have not 
 bought any myself, but I have known some landlords 
 who have. 
 
 3608. You mean some of the landlords who have 
 sold 1 — Yes, and who have bought in the Landed 
 Estates Court.. 
 
 3609. Do yoii know of any tenants having pur- 
 chased their holdings 1 — Not except tenants under the 
 Church Act. 
 
 3610. Do you know any of them in your neigh- 
 bourhood 1 — Yes. 
 
 3611. What size were the farms ? — This is up to 
 ninety acres. 
 
 3612. Aiad have these tenants been doing well since 
 they purchased ^^Exceedingly well. 
 
 3613. And they are perfectly satisfied with their 
 position and purchase ? — Very well satisfied. 
 
 3614. Do you notice any change in the style of 
 husbandry, or in the general appearance of their 
 holdings 1 — Yes. There is observable a change in the 
 appearance of the place, even as you go past, ior they 
 have added new buildings, feeling that they are 
 owners of the place themselves, and having no fear of 
 the rent being raised afterwards. 
 
 3615. Ninety acres is a very large farm 1 — Yes ; it 
 formerly belonged to a man named Oliver. 
 
 3616. Do you agree with Mr. Sim))son in your 
 definition of tenant-right ? — I cannot agree with him 
 in all he said. 
 
 3617. Tell us some of the points upon which you 
 do not agree with him 1 — It has been said landlords 
 made some improvements, but I never knew an 
 instance when the landlord shored the land, and did 
 not put on Ik. or 26-. per acre as interest on the money 
 expended. 
 
 3618. I don't think Mr. Simpson said the landlords 
 made the improvements, but he was asked a question 'i 
 
 Mr. Sim23son. — No. 
 
 3619. Baron Dowse. — What I suggested to him 
 was that if the landlord made improvements he could 
 be paid by additional rent? 
 
 Mr. SimiKon. — ^Yes. 
 
 Examination of Thomas- Knipe resumed. 
 
 3620. Mr. Shaw.— You mentioned that where im- 
 provements were made, or about to be made, b}'- the 
 landlord ho puts an additional rent on the tenant, and 
 
 if the tenant sells he sells subject to that rent, so that 
 the landlord is paid for everything he does on the 
 land? — Yes. Not only that, but some places they 
 agree with the tenant that he is to pay a certain sum 
 annually for a certain number of years to pay off the 
 sum, but it is never wiped out ; it becomes a charge 
 ever afterwards on the land. 
 
 3621. Do you know a case of that sort? — Yes. I 
 had a brother-in-law of my own under Lord Caledon. 
 He was charged for a number of years for an improve- 
 ment, and they expected it would be taken off when 
 the sum was paid, but it was not, and they don't 
 expect it ever -will be taken off. That is a case T know 
 of myself. 
 
 3G22. As a general rule, landlords in your county 
 make no improvem.ents except this way? — I don't 
 know a case where they have been asked, and if they 
 were they would not do it. 
 
 3623. The improvements have been made by the 
 tenants in the whole county with their own money — 
 that is your experience ? — Yes. I have laid out £1,000 
 and over it myself before I got a lease of the farm I am 
 living on. 
 
 3624. That is under the protection of tenant-right 
 you expended that money ? — Yes. 
 
 3625. And would you consider yonr rights would 
 be confiscated if the landlord had power to put on 
 rent without some controlling influence ? — Certainly. 
 We have repeated proofs of it almost every week. 
 
 3626. Can you mention any case within your own 
 knowledge where the tenant's improvements have been 
 confiscated in that way ? — Yes ; on Sir James Stronge's 
 estate I knew a tenant, a gentleman named William 
 Clarke, who held a faim of land. He died, and he 
 appointed two executors. Sir James would not allow 
 the property to be sold by public auction, but allowed 
 them to advertise and take private proposals for it. 
 A purchaser was got ; he had offered a sum of £300 
 for the place. Sir James had no objection to the 
 tenant, but he said that the rent would be raised in 
 accordance with the rules of the office. This gentleman 
 reiusod to complete the bargain at the price he gave, 
 and the result was the farm lay on for a year or more 
 idle. There was no purchaser turned up with the rent 
 that was threatened to be put o,n it. Sir James then 
 took it into his own hands, and paid these executors 
 £100 less than they were offered. 
 
 3627. Of course the rent you consider stopped the 
 bidding ? — Yes. He increased the rent, and that was 
 the cause. 
 
 3628. The O'Conor Don. — Do you know what the 
 amount oi the inci'ease was in that case ? — Sir James 
 took it into his own hands, and let it afterwards to a 
 tenant. » 
 
 3629. Mr. Shaw.— At what rent?— 27s., I think. 
 
 3630. What was the former rent? — I think it was 
 £1 an acre, but I could get ail the particu.lars and let 
 you have them if you cared for them. 
 
 3631. But tenant right is allowed on the estate ? — 
 Yes, but subject to office rides. 
 
 3632. That is as to fixing the price? — Yes. 
 
 3633. Is there a price fixed beyond which the 
 tenant-right is not to sell % — Not on Sir James'.s pro- 
 perty, ..but there is on the Nappagh property. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 127 
 
 3634; Is tliat near tlie other'?- -It is adjoiniii"- it. 
 
 3635. What is the priie iixed there beyond which 
 the tenant cannot sell t — Ten pounds an acre. I 
 was called in to draw iig an agreement botwocii 
 two tenants ; I think it was about a twenty acre 
 farm, and the tenant had sold it at £15 an acre. 
 The bailiff on the jjroperty had heard about the sales, 
 lie wrote to the agent, and a letter came down 
 warning the tenant what the rules of the oiSce were, 
 and that they would not allow him to get more than 
 i£10 an acre, and if the man gave more than £10 
 an acre he would loose it, for if he wag going to 
 part with it afterwards he would not be allowed to get 
 more than £10 an acre. The man who was leaving 
 thought it a great grievance, for he had made all the 
 improvements, he had planted an orchard and built a 
 house, and done other things, and it looked very 
 hard. 
 
 3636. Did that stop the sale or did it go on, with 
 £10 an acre? — Yes, it went on, but the man was de- 
 prived of the money. 
 
 3637. Do you know does any money pass outside 
 without the knowledge of the landlord ? — It is not sup- 
 posed to pass. 
 
 3638. I suppose the farming in that district is of a 
 very good description 1 — Yes ; but if the people had 
 security they would farm a great deal better. 
 
 3639. There is a great deal of room yet for improve- 
 ment you think ? — Yes, and generally where there is 
 an industrious man who has made improvements the 
 rent has generally been raised. 
 
 3640. Notwithstanding tenant-right ? — Yes. 
 
 3641. And that has a great efi'ect on the public 
 opinion of the tenants 'L^ A gi-eat effect. A great many 
 of them would labour better if they had more security 
 and if the power was taken oat of the landlords' hands, 
 that they could not raise the rents unduly. 
 
 3642. Has this system of increasing the rent upon 
 a change of tenancy increased since the passing of 
 the Land Act 1 — I believe the landlords take advan- 
 tage of the defects of the Land Act. 
 
 3643. The system of purchase, you think, ought 
 to be made simpler, if possible, and facilities afforded 
 to the tenants to enable them to purchase t — Yes. 
 
 3644. Would that power be availed of extensively 1 
 — I believe the greater part of the tenants in the 
 locality in which I live would be very glad to have 
 an opportunity of purchasing their own land. 
 
 3645. Purchasing from the Government? — Pro- 
 vided they could get a little a-ssistance. I think it 
 would have the effect of making them more industrious, 
 more prosperous and loyal, than at present. 
 
 3646. And if they had a perfect system of tenant- 
 right they would not requii-e it so much ? — It would 
 improve their circumstances very much. They would 
 have perfect security for their outlay, and interest in the 
 land. There is a gentleman named Colonel Cross, 
 who bought a property in the Landed Estates Court a 
 few years ago, it belonged to 3Iai<jr WhiJliker pre- 
 viously ; the tenants were very industrious, and 
 they felt very safe under the former landlord; but 
 after Colonel Cross bouglit it he served notices to 
 quit, accompanied by ejectment processes. 
 
 3647. On all the tenants ? — Yes, and one of them 
 resisted and threatened to refuse to pay the rent, and 
 when the sheriff went there to put him out, he said it 
 was as well for him to go home and that the best thing 
 Colonel Cross could do was to come himself and put 
 him out. The result was, that the landlord made an 
 arrangement and charged him a mere nominal sum. 
 
 3648. But the landlord raised the others ?— Yes. 
 
 3649. To what extent 1 — In one case of a fifteen acre 
 farm he raised it £4. I got the receipts brought in 
 and shown to Mr. Doimell when he wasin Armagh. 
 The increase was a little over £4 on a holding of fifteen 
 acres. It would probably be 4s. an acre or a little 
 over 4s. an acre increase. 
 
 3650. Was that the average on the whole property ? 
 — I think there was some of it less ; Mrs. Houston's 
 rent was raised the same way. 
 
 3651. Is slie a tenant of his ? — Yes. 
 
 3652. How much was her rent raised ?— About 
 2s. (jrf. an acre. 
 
 3653. Was tenant-right existing on that property 
 before 1 — Always. 
 
 3654. So that in fact tenant-right as you have it in 
 the north does not prevent the raising of rents 1 — Oh 
 no, it does not. 
 
 3655. And you complain of that ?-;— Certainly. 
 
 3656. And you want some way of preventing the 
 landlord unreasonably raising the rents'! — Certainly 
 they may refuse to comply with the landlord when he 
 increases the rent, but they have no alternative except 
 to go before the chairman of quarter sessions, very 
 generally the landlord has a set off for dilapidation 
 and bad labour, and you get a very small trifle at the 
 hands of the chairman compared to what you would 
 get if you had free sale. 
 
 3657. Are there any cases within your knowledge 
 in which the tenant-right has been interfered with in 
 that way 1 — On Lord Charlemont's property I have 
 known five or six cases this year where there was a 
 change of tenancy, and in every one the rent was raised. 
 
 3658. Do you know of any case where without a 
 change in the tenancy the rent was raised? — Yes, 
 always when a lease falls out. 
 
 3659. Are leases general on the property? — Not 
 general, but there are a good many on the property. 
 About Moy and Charlemont there are several instances 
 where leases fell out, and in every case the rent was 
 raised considerably. 
 
 3660. This creates a feeling of uncertainty amongst 
 the people ? — It does. 
 
 3661. And interferes with the outlay of capital on 
 the land ? — It does. I believe they would labour a 
 great deal better and be much more industrious if they 
 had greater security about the rent. 
 
 3662. Do you think on the whole as to these fifteen 
 or twenty acre farms that a family can make a living 
 on one of them ? — I think the rent is a great deal too 
 high at present. I am taking everything into consider- 
 ation. 
 
 3663. The people have for generations been doing 
 pretty well on these farms ? — They have, but if they 
 were they were in the habit of living by weaving and 
 other means besides the land. 
 
 3663a. Land in your district is cultivated very much 
 by spade husbandry 1 — A good deal. 
 
 3664. You do not think big farms are necessary to 
 the prosperity of the country? — Well, I would say 
 forty or fifty acres would be enou.gh. 
 
 3665. Don't these small men get as much out of 
 their land as the large men? — In some cases they 
 make more out of it ; where they are industrious and 
 feel they can sell their improvements. They can get 
 a large price if they are under a good landlord, but 
 when they fall into the hands of middlemen the 
 tenants don't care to do too much in the way of im- 
 provement. 
 
 3666. But if you had perfect tenant-right you would 
 not care for middlemen or whether you had a good 
 landlord, a bad landlord, or no landlord at all 'i — ^Yes ; 
 but I still think if we had the privilege of buying out 
 our holdings, assisted in some way by the Government, 
 it would be of great advantage to the country ; it would 
 make the people more contented and prosperous, and 
 do av/ay with the agitation. 
 
 3667. The O'Gonor Don.— Do you think the 
 Government might safely advance a larger proportion 
 than two-thirds of the purchase-money ? — I think the 
 tenants could find the rest. 
 
 3667a. You don't think it would be necessary to 
 make a larger advance than that ? — If the Government 
 advanced two-thirds it would be quite sufficient. 
 
 3668. Do you believe Lord Charlemont's rents, as 
 a rule, are higher or as high as the rents on other 
 properties in the district ? — Rents vary a good deal 
 according to the man you have as landlord ; and if it 
 has changed hands it is generally higher. If the land 
 is recently bought and gets into the hands of middle- 
 
 Sejyt. 8, 1880 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 KnipD. 
 
128 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Knipe. 
 
 SeiH. 8, 1880. men they generally put a little additional on what it 
 has been formerly held at. 
 
 3669. Lord Charlemont's rents then would be lower 
 than the rents on those lands of recent purchase % — 
 But they always take advantage of it. If Lord 
 Charlemont was going to sell the first thing those who 
 buy would do would be to raise the rent. 
 
 3670. But what I want to see is whether this 
 increase of rent, on Lord Charlemont's estate, when 
 there was a change of occupancy, was not due to the 
 fact that the rent was lower than the general rent in 
 the district 1 — No ; except where there is a lease ; I 
 don't believe they are lower than the surrounding 
 landlord's rents. It is an average from 22s. to SCs. 
 an acre. 
 
 3671. The English acre ?— Yes. 
 
 3672. You don't know what proportion they bear 
 to the Government valuation? — They are all pretty 
 near the Government valuation. 
 
 3673. About the same as the Government valua- 
 tion 1 — About the same. 
 
 3674. And you think the Government valuation in 
 Armagh is high 1 — I think it is far too high looking 
 at the American produce and the present state of 
 affairs. Some years ago I would much rather have 
 paid £1 an acre more for my land than to have it for 
 nothing now; I could have made more money then 
 than if I had my land for nothing now. 
 
 3675. Mr. Shaw. — How do you say that? — The 
 profit was much higher, cattle were a great deal 
 higher. 
 
 3676. Cattle are as high now as ever they were ? — 
 Last year they grazed in my own family about 1,500 
 acres, and I could safely say we lost over £1,000. 
 
 3677. The last couple of years were bad enough we 
 all know 1 — Yes. 
 
 3678. Chairman. — In the last two years the i:)rice 
 for stores was high, and you got a low price for fat 
 cattle 1 — Yes ; and flax was at a very low price, and 
 everything costs more — implements and labour are 
 dearer. It is a very slow way to get rich farming in 
 the north. 
 
 3679. Mr. Shaw.— But you live better ?— Well, we 
 do ; but I think we have a right to go with the times. 
 
 3680. You have a right to live better? — We work 
 very hard in the north, and try to cultivate our land 
 very well, and we think it very hard when we don't 
 
 get leave to sell our improvements, and when there is 
 additional rent put on it takes the money out of our 
 pockets, 
 
 3681. Chairman. — Does your opinion, in favour of 
 the purchase of tenants, apply only to estates where 
 landlords are willing to sell ? — I don't think it could 
 be hurtful to a landlord to consent to sell. 
 
 3681a. But would you make it compulsory on the 
 landlord if the tenant wished it ?■ — I think it would be 
 hard to make it compulsory. I think it would be 
 hardly fair. I would not like to be forced to sell my 
 own farm if I did not wish to do it ; but if the land 
 was in the Landed Estates Court, and they made a 
 rule that the tenant should get the option to buy it at 
 so many years purchase. I believe they would em- 
 brace it and it would be no injury to the landlord. 
 
 3682. That would be in cases in the Landed Estates 
 Court, or where the landlord might wish to sell by pri- 
 vate contract ? — Yes ; in the Landed Estates Court, or 
 where the landlord wished it ; but I think it would be 
 a hard thing to compel him to sell. 1 apply it to 
 myself, and I would not like to be compelled to sell 
 where I did not wish to sell. 
 
 3683. Do you, in general, agree with the other 
 witness (Mr. Simpson), in the views he expressed ? — I 
 do, partly. 1 agree with the greater part of what he 
 said. 
 
 3684. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think it a fair 
 thing to say to the landlord you must either sell or 
 allow your rents to be fixed by valuation ? — I think it 
 would be quite fair towards the landlord and tenant 
 to have a court of arbitration, say that there would be 
 one arbitrator appointed by the tenant and another by 
 the landlord, and a third, probably, by Government, or 
 whoever it may be, and the rent fixed in that way. I 
 think it would be a fair way, but a^ long as the 
 landlord has the power of fixing the rent it will be 
 high. 
 
 3G85. Mr. Shaw. — You think the interest of land- 
 lord and tenant are so mixed up that they would not 
 be fair judges? — No; they are joint occupiers, 
 you may say, and looking at the Land Bill it gives me 
 greater privileges than I had before. 
 
 3686. It is an improvement on the former state of 
 things ? — Yes ; but there are a good many defects which 
 require to be remedied. 
 
 Edmund 
 
 Meares Kelly, 
 Esq. 
 
 Edmund Meakes Kelly, Esq., examined. 
 The O'CoNOR Don. — You are a barrister ?- 
 
 Eesiding near Dublin ? — Residing near 
 
 3687. 
 I am. 
 
 3688 
 Dublin. 
 
 3689. Have you any landed property? — The place 
 which I hold has five acres nineteen perches imder the 
 Earl of Pembroke. 
 
 3690. And it is all in your own occupation?— All 
 in my own occupation. 
 
 3691. I understand you have some suggestions as 
 to alterations and amendments in the Land Act ? — 
 Yes, and, with the permissiou of his Lordship and 
 the other members of the Commission, I feel satisfied 
 that, if I am allowed to fill up the outline of what I 
 furnished as my evidence, it will economise your 
 valuable time very much. In my letter to the Com- 
 mission I stated that it was my intention to point 
 out how the Land Act of 1870 can be altered and 
 amended in the intei'est not only of tenants but 
 of the common weal, and that, as I believe without pre- 
 judice to the interests or reasonable rights of land- 
 lords. That is the first thing I propose to do. My 
 first suggestion would be that tenant-right, in its 
 most liberal form, should be extended to the whole of 
 Ireland, and that, in respect of both towns and 
 counties. The elements of tenant-right, in point of 
 fact, are fixity of tenure, fair rents, and a free right of 
 sale, subject to the qualifications which I shall now 
 call the attention of the Commission to. The 
 
 qualifications upon fixity of tenure are punctual pay- 
 ment of the rent, secured by all the proceedings at 
 present known to the law — discarding all the notions 
 about landlords having no right to their rents — and the 
 tonvire not to be determined save by ejectment for 
 non-payment of rent, or voluntary surrender by the 
 tenant. The next element of tenant-right is fair 
 rents, the rents at present payable under leases as 
 defined by the Land Act, 1870, which includes agree- 
 ments for leases, to be deemed such fair rent for the 
 term in the lease mentioned. In tenancies from year 
 to year the rent at present payable to be deemed such 
 fair rent until revaluation and consequent change be 
 required by either landlord or tenant. At the termi- 
 luition of the lease, and as regards tenancies from 
 year to year, at any time after the passing of the Act, 
 the revaluation to be made either by courts of arbitra- 
 tion, constituted as in the Land Act mentioned or 
 by special tribunals to be constituted as in the pro- 
 posed legislation. The qualifications upon these fair 
 rents are exactly — the Act should provide by specific 
 enactment that in no case should such revaluation be 
 increased by the letting value attached to the land by 
 any improvements made by the tenant, unless such 
 improvements have been made in pursuance of an ex- 
 press contract with his landlord, and then, upon making 
 such revaluation, the rent should be increased. I 
 will assume that there is a contract with the land- 
 lord to expend £200 in substantial and permanent 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 129 
 
 improvements, wlien a revaluation takes place the 
 landlord should get credit for that sum, the annual 
 sum of 2 J per cent, say upon that £200, while, if 
 £1,600 is spent instead of £200, that is £1,400 by 
 the tenant over the £200, the increased value of the 
 whole £1,600 should he taken by capitalization of it, 
 and then the landlord's £200 would be one-eighth of 
 the whole sum expended. In that way the result 
 could be arrived at. I give an example to illustrate 
 this. I put it in this way — rent £50, covenant 
 by the lessee to expend £200 in permanent im- 
 provements, the lessee expends £1,600 on such 
 improvements suitable to the holding, and which 
 proportionately increase its letting value ; term fifty 
 years. On expiration of that term the rent to be 
 increased by say 2^ per cent, on the £200, that is £5 
 per aimumj assuming the tenant to continue in 
 possession. The only other element is the free right 
 of sale, and the qualifications which I propose upon 
 that are : That the landlord shall have the right to 
 object on the grounds either of the insolvency or 
 bad character of the purchaser, as where he has been 
 convictod of crime or the like, and perhaps also 
 the light of pre-emption. Upon the head of im- 
 provements I desire to adopt the language used 
 by a writer of considerable ability, a modern writer, 
 who has taken pains to consider this subject, which 
 I think deserve at least as much attention as 
 they have received at the hands of the pviblic — that 
 is Mr. Donnell's Land Reports, at j^age 103, he says, 
 in encountering the argument against tenant-right, 
 that it is an abstraction or withdrawal of the land- 
 lord's interest to the extent of the claim for tenant- 
 right — 
 
 "So far as the improvements enter into the value of 
 tenant-right they are an addition to, and not an abstraction 
 from, the landlord's estate, unless indeed we are to accept 
 as Divine authority the maxim of the Roman law muti- 
 lated" (Twill presently call attention to a valuable foot 
 note as to the meaning of the word " mutihited '^) "to 
 serve as a support for felonious landlordism. Quidquid 
 plantatur solo, solo cedit, or as Mr. Justice Shee translated 
 it, ' tenants' impi-ovemt-nts are landlords' perquisites.'" 
 And as to the word " mutilated" there is a most import- 
 ant note, evidencing the great care taken by the author 
 in ascertaining the basis or root of this maxim of 
 " Quidquid plantatur solo, solo cedit." "The Roman 
 law added that the maxim applied, but su.bjeot to com- 
 pensation," and now in inverted commas comes a pass- 
 age from Mr. Finlayson's History of Land Tenures,page 
 31, to this eifect — "The owner, should he dispute the 
 right to compensation, and seek to retain the improve- 
 ments without paying for them, was deemed fraudulent, 
 and made subject to an action." Mr. Finlayson adds, 
 at page 4 of the same book, " When a distinguished 
 statesman declared landlords felonious who robbed 
 their tenants of the value of their improvements he 
 had high authority." I desire also to adopt a passage 
 from Mr. Fronde's last paper on Ireland in the Nine- 
 teenth Century. He says : — 
 
 " The purchaser of land is entitled to his money's worth. 
 If for political reasons the State interferes to prevent him 
 from collecting his rents, the State must compensate him. 
 He is not entitled to more. If he desires toe.xpel solvent 
 tenants who disagree with him in views or opinions, or wishes 
 to improve his estate, or to enhirge his park or shooting 
 "■rounds, he in his turn must compensate them, and so far 
 there is no fault to be found with the famous Land Act of 
 1870. It was a. fair corollary from the existing conditions of 
 Irish social institutions, tlie tenant's solvency icas the test of 
 his right to remain. If he could not or would not meet his 
 engagements the landlord has a right to what belonged to 
 him,1ind might appoint a fitter person m his place. In this, 
 therefore, the Act was a just one." 
 
 And to this I will add a passage ftom Mr. Arthur 
 Young, in which he says, " If you give a tenant a rock 
 in perpetuity he will make it a garden before long, if 
 you give him a garden for a limited term it will be- 
 come awUderness." Now, heretofore, I have applied my- 
 self generally to what I call radical changes in the Land 
 Act, 1870 — radical changes — a repeal of the Act in 
 fact, and to supplant it by fixity of tenure, fair rents, 
 
 and free right of sale. These, I say, are the ele- Sept. s, iBin. 
 ments which constitute Ulster tenant-right in its most gj^ard" 
 liberal shape. And failing the power to make such a Muares Kellj-, 
 change, failing the power to carry such legislation, I Esq. 
 have to suggest several amendments to the Land Act, 
 1870, that are called for, I may say, by what I venture 
 to think, with great respect for the judges, have been 
 misinterpretations of the Act. First, I would take 
 the 4th section of the Act, it is a very important one. 
 1'he 4th section provides that the tenant who does 
 not claim for disturbance under any of the ante- 
 cedent sections shall have a right to compensa- 
 tion, to be paid by the landlord in respect of all im- 
 provements on his holding made by him or his prede- 
 cessor in title, and it then goes on to provide at an 
 ulterior stage that when the Chairman of the county — - 
 the tribunal to which it is referred — came to consider 
 what should be the sum allowed for improvements, he 
 was to take into consideration a variety of things in 
 the reduction of the claim of the tenant, amongst 
 others he was to take into consideration the time dur- 
 ing which such tenant had enjoyed the advantage of 
 such improvements, also the rent, &c. I propose that 
 that clause should be taken altogether out of the enact- 
 ment, and my proposal is this that a declaratory statute 
 should be passed declaring that the 4th section was in- 
 tended to apply to all cases in which the land, whether 
 with or without a house, has been let before the 
 passing of the Act, in respect of permanent build- 
 ings. 
 
 3692. Does that apply to towns as well as to the 
 country? — To towns as well as the country, subject of 
 course to this qualification — that wherever the im- 
 provements were the subject matter of contract for 
 valuable consideration that that would displace it. 
 Building contracts and the like would be exceptions 
 from it, because they would be in pursiiance of a 
 contract that would provide either that a certain sum 
 of money — say a hundred or a thousand pounds — 
 should-be expended on these improvements, or that a 
 house of certain dimensions should be built. In that 
 case we know — especially with reference to the estate 
 that I am connected with — that for building leases 
 terms of 150 years are given. Then there is the 
 provision that a house of certain dimensions is co be 
 built, or a cei-tain sum of money is to be expended 
 on buildings. These are exceptional cases, but with 
 the exception of these, I would suggest that the Act 
 should be made applicable not only to lands in 
 counties, but to towns, and the section should be 
 amended by striking out of it that clause which 
 provides that, when the improvements come to be 
 estimated, the time the tenant enjoyed them should 
 be taken into consideration. I suggest that, for this 
 reason. Who has put them there 1 Whose capital 
 has put them there? The tenant's capital. Why 
 should he be charged with any interest on that, for 
 any benefit derived from it? I confess I fail to 
 understand why that should be done. To put an 
 example — either of two things would occur upon the 
 determination of a lease. Supposing there was an 
 agreement between the landlord and the tenant in 
 which any improvement to be made was stipulated 
 for by special contract by the landlord either in 
 amount or value, I would give him the benefit of 
 that of course, in the shape of an addition to the 
 annual rent to be imposed at the termination of the 
 lease. But if in addition to these improvements so 
 stipulated for, a large further sum was expended by 
 the tenant I would say that he ought to get the 
 benefit of it. Now I have put the case of his remain- 
 ing, but if he is disturbed what I would do in this. 
 I would capitalize the whole amount expended on 
 improvements, and I give an example to illustrate 
 this. Supjiose a farm was let at £50 a year rent, and 
 suppose the lease contained a covenant that the 
 tenant should expend £200 on substantial and per- 
 manent improvements, and that he expended £1,600, 
 and if the landlord meant to increase the rent what 
 I would say is this. The whole £1,600 ought to be 
 
 S 
 
130 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 8, IS^Ok 
 
 Edward 
 Meares Kell)-, 
 Esq. 
 
 Capitalized at say eighteen years- piirchase. That is 
 not uiifau-. Then what would turn out according to 
 my calculation would be this. Assuming that £70 a 
 year was addedto the letting value — that is, the letting 
 value which was £50 when the lease was made had 
 become £120 a year by reason of the improve- 
 ments. I would say then that £70 a year at 
 eighteen years purchase would make £1^260. Out 
 of that I would deduct one-eighth '^f £1,600, which 
 represents the £200 expended- ia pursuance of 
 the contract. That would leave the tenant 
 entitled to £1,102 10s. on quitting his holding. Now 
 the 6th section should be amended by enabling the 
 person seeking to i-egister improvements thereunder, 
 to file a schedule in the Land Court, specifying such 
 improvements, and claiming the same as made by 
 himself or his predecessors in title, and also if he shall 
 think fit, specifying the amount of money which shall 
 have been expended on such improvements. Now 
 the 4th, 5th, and 6th sections combined, for they all 
 relate to the permanent improvements, should be 
 amended so as to make their provisions apjily to all 
 cases wherein the land, in respect of which the claim 
 for compensation is made, is in the possession of the 
 pei'son by whom, or by whose ancestor, devisor, or 
 testator, such permanent buildings shall have been 
 erected, although such land may at the time when 
 such claim is made, be held under a lease executed 
 after such improvements have been made, unless such 
 lease shall expressly exclude the right to make such 
 claim. There is a case that bears in this point that I 
 had the honour of arguing before the Court of Appeal, 
 the case of " Holt v. Harherton." The case was 
 shortly this : Mr. Holt, my client, succeeded his father. 
 His father, at a certain period of the lease he held of 
 several hundred acres of land under Lord Harberton, 
 was in the process of making large and handsome 
 improvements, when Lord Harberton's agent called 
 and saw them. He said, " We must give you a new 
 lease in consideration of the improvements ypu are 
 making," and accordingly he gave a new lease, not 
 only of that ground but he added some adjoining 
 ground, making altogether somewhere about 500 acres 
 of ground. But the improvements made were of a 
 very valuable and lasting character, and when this 
 Act was passed, the legal advisers of Mr. Holt's son 
 thought he was entitled to get the benefit of the im- 
 provements; but on the narrow ground that it was 
 not exactly the same title, although he was occupy- 
 ing the same land and more, the court (and I 
 don't mean to say the court was wrong in this), 
 imder the particular words of the Act of Pa.i-liament, 
 held themselves boiuid to reject the claim, and some 
 of the observations made by the learned judges upon 
 the occasion of arguing that case I think form the 
 foundation for a change in the law. The Lord Chan- 
 cellor and the late respected Chief Baron Pigott, in 
 observing upon this case, showed that the language of 
 the Act was of so doubtful a character in this respect 
 that there was room for argument at all events. I 
 propose then that that should be removed by amended 
 legislation. Now there are several other cases as well 
 as that case, founded on " Holt anJ Harberton" but 
 I need not trouble you with them. They are all 
 contained in that book of Mr. Donnell's. But, 
 coupled with this 6th section, it is necessary for me to 
 call the attention of the Commission to a section 
 that, of all others in this Act, has given rise to the 
 most unhappy litigation — and, in mj^ humble opinion, 
 it contains terms very unjust to occupying tenants — 
 and that is the seventy-first section of the Act. It 
 provides that the Act shall not ajiply to any holding 
 which is not agricultural or pastoral in its character, 
 or partly agricultural and jjartly pastoral. Now, some 
 very remarkable decisions have taken place upon this 
 section of the Act, and in i-espect also to the sixty-fifth 
 section, to which I will now call the attention of the 
 Commissioners. I may tell them, shortly, that it 
 provides that whenever a lease is made, or a letting 
 after the , pasaiag of tlie"^ct, the tenant shall 
 
 have the right of deducting one-half of the county 
 cess. Now, let me call the attention of the Commis- 
 sioners to what, I think, is a very remarkable decision 
 indeed, made by the court of which Baron Dowse is 
 one of the judges. I may tell the Commissioners, 
 shortly, what the case was. The present Alderman 
 Campbell took a lease of nearly forty statute acres of 
 land ■ 
 
 3693. Baron Dowse. — We are not sitting here to 
 review the decisions of the Court of Exchequer? — 1 
 don't propose to argue the question at all, but to state 
 the facts. 
 
 3694. Do you propose to show that the decision 
 was wrong ? — No ; I will not do that. I merely 
 wanted to show that the Act ought to be amended. 
 I do not arraign or argue the decision here. 
 
 3695. Oh Ai EM AN. — You take it that that is the 
 law ? — Certainly, I am assuming that that is the law. 
 The sixty-fifth section of the Act provides that when- 
 ever there is a letting, after the passing of the Act, 
 the tenant shall have the right of deducting one-half 
 the county cess. 
 
 3696. The O'Oonoe Don. — Unless there was an 
 agreement to the contrary % — Yes, certainly. Alder- 
 man Campbell took a lease after the passing of the 
 Act. There were forty statute acres of land in it, and 
 for a year he was allowed to deduct the county cess ; 
 but, 1 suppose, being advised by his counsel, that was 
 afterwards resisted by the landlord, and it came to the 
 Court of Exchequer, which court decided that it was 
 neither agricultural nor pastoral. It was not both, 
 and it was not either. 
 
 3697. Baron Dowse. — The Court of Exchequer de- 
 cided that it was a villa, and not within the Act of 
 Parliament % — The court decided that the forty acres 
 of land was neither agi'icultural nor pastoral. That is 
 one of the amendments I would seek. I say, take 
 these words out of the Act altogether, and provide that 
 whenever the annual letting value of the land is in- 
 creased by improvements which are not unsuitable to 
 the holding, that they should be deemed to be such 
 improvements as should entitle the tenant to compen- 
 sation. Now, there is another even more remarkable 
 decision. 
 
 3698. In point of fact, you would extend the word 
 " holding " in the Land Act to include cases that it 
 does not now % — Quite so. I don't mean at all to 
 attempt to discuss the propriety of the decision. 
 
 3699. What was held in this case was that Mr, 
 Campbell's holding Avas a villa, and not a holding 
 within the meaning of the Land Act? — Yes. 
 
 3700. It was not a farm with a house on it. I 
 understand you to think that the Land Act should be 
 widened so that the word " holding" shovild embrace a 
 case like that ? — My opinion is whatever value there 
 is in it — that there is no logical distinction between 
 the improvements made in a town and improvements 
 made in the country. I would remove all sympathy 
 between the lawless and the law abiding. I belong to 
 a class who are law-abiding, and I hope that the prin- 
 ciples of legislation are never made applicable only to 
 those who are lawless. There is yet another more re 
 markablc decision made on the both section of the Act, 
 but still, having a distinct bearing upon that section, and 
 that is the case of Lord Powerscourt and Mitchell. 'That 
 was a case that went to the last and highest tribunal 
 in this country — the Court of Appeal. It was this. 
 Lord Powerscourt was the owner of an estate in the 
 county Tyrone — Benburb, I think — and believing that 
 his tenants were paying too low rents, and being desi- 
 rous to increase them, proceeded in this way. He 
 served them all with notices to quit. They were 
 tenants from year to year. He served a large 
 number of them, if not all, with notices to quit, but 
 aontemporaneously with that he served them with a 
 notice that it was not his intention to disturb the 
 occupying tenants. Accordingly a number of those 
 tenants, among others Mr. Mitchell, signed this agree- 
 ment. The result was, that negotiations were en- 
 tered into between the landlord and these tenants 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 131 
 
 which resulted in an arbitration and an award. By 
 that award the tenants were declared to be eptitled to 
 bold under a thirty-one years lease, but all of thetn at 
 increased rents, and the whole of this took place after 
 the passing of the Land A.ct of 1870. In fact it was 
 in the year 1874, or 1875 or 1876. It was contended 
 by Mr. Mitchell that, as his letting was after the 
 passing of the Land Act of 1870, under the Gr)th sec- 
 tion of that Act, he was entitled to deduct the county 
 cess, but the court held that he was not entitled, and 
 upon what appears to me to be a narrow construction. 
 It is in this respect that I suggest an amendment of 
 the Act. " Any person who, undei' any tenancy 
 whatever, after the passing of this Act becomes the 
 occupier of any premises liable to grand jury cess, and 
 who is liable to pay rent in respect of the same, may 
 deduct from such rent for each £\ of the rent he is 
 liable to pay one-half of the sum he has paid as grand 
 jury cess." The ground on whioh the court rejected 
 the claim here was that the occupation was not begun 
 under a new tenure. 
 
 3701. I believe what they decided was that there 
 should be not otily a new tenancy, but a change of 
 occupation 1 — Yes, a change of occupation. 
 
 3702. A new tenant as well as a new tenancy 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 3703. I think that that was not the intention of 
 the framers of the clause ^^So I think, too, and I 
 suggest an amendment in that respect. 
 
 3704. Mr. Donnell has made a note that the Court of 
 Appeal by a majority has decided in the case of 
 Powerscourt v. Mitchell, that under the section of the 
 Land Act as to county cess there must be not only a 
 new tenancy, but a new occupation. What would you 
 suggest for that ? — I would suggest that wherever 
 there was a new letting of any kind after the passing 
 of the Act, and the same person remains occupier, he 
 should be entitled to the deduction. 
 
 3705. What would remedy the matter would be to 
 say, " any person who occupies premises liable to 
 county cess " 1 — Yes. I have been slow to bring xmder 
 the notice of the Commissioners my own case, but I 
 think it is a very strong one. I became tenant to the 
 late Lord Herbert of Lea of the premises I now hold. 
 
 3706. Chaieman. — ^Is it an agricultural or pastoral 
 holding ? — That is the point I am on. In providing 
 for compensation for improvements my proposition — 
 whether it is likely to be carried is another ques- 
 tion — is that, wherever the letting value of the land 
 is palpably and materially increased by the expenditure 
 of the money of the tenant, unless it is a contract for 
 valuable consideration, that he ought to get the benefit 
 of it. In the year 1855 I became tenant to the late Lord 
 Herbert of Lea, of 5a. Oe. 19p., and they were let to 
 me as land, with the house and premises thereupon, 
 and the lease contained a covenant that I was to expend 
 not less than £200 in substantial and permanent 
 improvements. I confess that I read between the 
 lines of the lease that I was expected to expend 
 more. The terms were that I was to pay £70 a 
 year for a term of fifty years if I expended no- 
 thing ; but if I expended the £200 at least, to 
 the satisfaction of the landlord or his surveyor, I was 
 to have the place at £50 a year rent. Accordingly I 
 found when I examined the premises, and went to look 
 for an estimate, that to put them into anything like 
 decent condition, I should spend £500, and I did 
 spend £500. I went on then, and on the next estimate 
 I spent £400 more, and finally, but not until I had a 
 conversation with the landlord's agent, to which I shall 
 call attention presently, I spent upwards of £600 more, 
 making on the whole an expenditure of £1,600 on the 
 premises. 
 
 3707. The O'Conor Don. — What was the term of 
 the lease ?— Fifty years. Now the building leases on 
 Lord Pembroke's estate are for 150 years. I had a 
 conversation with Mr. Vernon, Lord Pembroke's 
 agent before Lord Pembroke attained his majority. 
 I called on Mr. Vernon when paying my rent and 
 after I haci spent £900 on the place. I said that I had 
 spent more than I had intended, and that I would 
 
 expect an extension of my term. " Well, Mr. Kelly," *«><.8, isso. 
 he said (Lord Herbert of Lea was dead at this ej^,^^" 
 time), " I may tell you that if the trustees had the stsorss Kt41y 
 power they would not exercise it at this stage of Eaq. 
 the minority. Let me know the improvements you 
 make and I will recommend you at the proper time." 
 When Lord Pembroke attained his age in 1871, I 
 met Mr. Vernon casually at the railway station. 
 Lord Peittbroke it was thought was coming over to 
 Ireland at the time, and I said to Mr. Vernon, "I 
 suppose <• this is the time to apply for an extension of 
 my term;" " I don't know what you mean," said 
 Mr. Vernon. I said, " I don't suppose you forget the 
 conversation we liad some time ago on the subject." 
 He said, " You ought to be too much a man of busi- 
 ness to think that a conversation of that kind could 
 afi'ect the relations between landlord and tenant. If 
 you wish to have any further communication with me 
 about this matter it must be in writing. Accordingly 
 by that night's post I wrote to him, laying my claim 
 for the extension before Lord Pembroke through him, 
 and adding that he was aware of the ' circumstances 
 under which the claim was made, but if he would 
 want any further information I would communicate 
 it. A correspondence ensued between me and Mr. 
 Vernon, the result of which was I had the whole 
 thing reduced to jirint. I will give each of the Com- 
 missioners a copy of the correspondence, both sides 
 being fairly put between Mr. Vernon and me. The re- 
 sult of the correspondence was that he wrote "Our 
 views are so divergent that I must refer you to Lord 
 Pembroke." Accordingly I wrote to Lord Pembroke, 
 after waiting for some time, expecting him year after 
 year to come to visit his Irish estates. I waited till 
 the year 1874, when I wrote to Lord Pembroke, as 
 he did not come over in the interval. I called his 
 attention to the cori-espondence between me and his 
 agent as putting the rights of the pai-ties fairly from, 
 each point of view, and I asked his lordship to give 
 me sixty years' term of my own improvements. That 
 is all I asked for, and at the same rent. His lord- 
 ship's first letter contained the passage, " I have in- 
 quired into the circumstances of the case. It is not 
 one for an extension of the term at the same rent." 
 He, however, it was plain, had never read the corres- 
 pondence between me and his agent, to which I had 
 invited his attention, and, above all, to a declaration 
 made by me before a magistrate, in which I detailed 
 the conversation with his agent, Mr. Vernon, and I 
 stated 'that on the faith of that I had spent the last 
 £600 on those improvements. I said, " However, 
 though J may have reason to complain of this I pass 
 that by, and I now ask your lordship what extension 
 I would ^et, and for what increased rent." The cor- 
 respondence covered some years, and I never got an 
 answer until this year, when I addressed him another 
 letter summarizing the transaction, and you will see 
 the curt letter I got in reply, which is at the last of 
 the printed correspondence. Now I consider, whether 
 lightly or wrongly, that that is a case of very great 
 hardship, even if the fact were not as it is that the 
 £600 for impi'ovements was spent on the faith of the 
 conversation with the agent. ' 
 
 3708. Baron Dowse. — Independent of that I sup- 
 pose the imj;irovements were suitable to the place? — 
 Yes, perfectly. They have added largely to the let- 
 ting value, and that is not contravened by the agent 
 or the landlord. 
 
 3709. A man might be improved out of the estate, 
 but these improvements did not amount to that 'h — 
 No, certainly riot. There is not an attempt to com- 
 bat it, for it is put prominently, that the improvements 
 are suitable to the character of the holding. Within 
 the 7Gth' 'section of the Land Act I could not seek 
 compensation for I am excluded. I would have 
 applied long since but for the decisions I adverted to 
 under the section, to register my improvements, as 
 being, suitable to the character of the holding. I hare 
 been hoping that an inquiry vrould be held into the 
 working of the Land Law, such as the present Com- 
 mission, has been appointed to hold. I think that I 
 
 S2 
 
l:i- 
 
 [RISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Si:.t. S, 13S0. 
 
 ICihvard 
 Mf.'iies 
 Esq. 
 
 Kellv, 
 
 have now jivett}' nearly exhausted tliat portion of my 
 outline, and J would now ask attention to the second 
 point in it. Indeed I think I have exhausted both 
 numbers one and two, and I have next to call the 
 attention of the Commission to what I look tipon as a 
 very important feature for their consideration, the 
 wrongs done to tenants by modern legislation. I have 
 selected a few remarkable instances of this. The first 
 is in regard to the Poor Law Act. It wil] surprise 
 
 some of the Commissioners to find 
 
 3710. Chaikman. — Is this in conncxiou with, this 
 inquiry '] — I would say it is. It is in direct bearing 
 on the case at all events as to liability in respect 
 to poor rates. 
 
 3711. We have a great deal to inquire into, and a 
 short time to do it in. We are confined to the woi'k- 
 ing of the Land Act in relation to landlord and tenant. 
 What you refer to is rather a matter outside our 
 inquiry ? — You will not find me attempting untowardly 
 to press any thing, but what I have to say is very 
 short indeed, and it has a most important bearing on 
 the relation between landlord and tenant. 
 
 3712. Baron Dowse. — What is it? — One point is 
 this, the occupying tenant is at this moment paying 
 income tax on his landlord's poor rate. 
 
 (The Commissioners ruled that they could not re- 
 ceive the evidence.) 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Fenlon, 
 
 Edward Fenlon, examined. 
 
 3713. Mr. Kavanagh. — What part of the country 
 do you come from 1 — The County Kildare. 
 
 3714. Do you wish to give any evidence to the 
 Commissioners about the inadequacy of the Land Act, 
 as to preventing undue raising of rents or evictions? — 
 Yes. I have given Sir George Young some of the heads. 
 
 3715. Would you state what you have to say about 
 that ? Have you some cases to refer to 1 — I have. 
 As to the inadequacy of the Land Act, so far as tliat 
 particular point goes, I have had considerable ■ know- 
 ledge of different pcrtions of the County Kildare. 
 I reside in the centre of Kildare, and as I said in my 
 statement, I hold three farms of land — one soxitherly 
 and the other two in the centre, I will now mention 
 three cases that occurred in my own immediate 
 neighbourhood, without giving the names excejDt the 
 Commissioners require thein. 
 
 37 IG. We can Ixavo the names but not necessarily 
 for publication? — TheSrstisNo. 1 ; IknowtJiisproperty 
 myself perfectly well, and all the surrounding circum- 
 stances of the position of the tenant. The rent was 
 £17 a year up to 1878. There was a valuator sent 
 upon the property in 1878, or about 1878, and he put 
 a rent of £33 lis. on it instead of £1 7. 
 
 3717. Mi\ Shaw. — Nearly double v/hat it was ? — 
 Nearly 100 per cent. In the meantime the valuation 
 of this farm was £26 5s., a vali;ation including that 
 of the farm-houses for two other holdings from other 
 landlords and the tenant, believing it was a little bit 
 cheap said — " I will give £25 a year for it." The 
 answer v/as — " I will hear of no bid whatever from 
 you. You must take it at the valuation I put on it, 
 and have no question about it." I know the li\nd, 
 and I know it would be dear enough at £25. '" You 
 knuM'," lie said to the landlord — " that there is a hill 
 there, and that it takes me four journeys to cart a 
 load of dung up to it." " Make a railway up it," was 
 the reply. 
 
 3718. The O'Conor Don. — In what county is the 
 land situate ? — Kildare. 
 
 3719. Mr. Shaw. — Had there been a lease up to 
 that? — There i-,3.d.been a lease up to 1878, for twenty- 
 one years. 
 
 3720. Then it was on the falling of the lease this 
 occurred?- — Yes, on the falling of the lease in 1878. 
 In the case of No. 2, the tenant held forty-seven and 
 a half acres at a rent of =£57 lOs.^that is about 25s. 
 an acre. I will not be accurate as to the rent. Now 
 the rent of the forty-seven acres odd is £83. 
 
 3721. The O'Conor Don.— What was thevaluation ? 
 —£56. 
 
 3722. Mr. Kavanagh.— What was the old rent ?— 
 .£51. The tenant went to the landlord or rather a 
 deputation of three went, but lie would hear of no 
 offer from them but they were to take the land at 
 his rent. I know the land well, and I would not take 
 any quantity of it at the rent, and I am v.'orking bad 
 land since I was a boy. He said they must take it at 
 £83. He said to this man — " I never put out a man 
 
 but one, but I think you will go if you do not pay the 
 rent." No. 3 is a man who holds thirty-eight acres 
 of land and I think this is the worst case of all. 
 
 3723. Is this the same property ? — Yes, the same. 
 These thirty-eight acres were held at a rent of £50 18«. 
 9d. The new rent is £78. I said to the tenant " Did 
 you make an offer to the landlord when he asked this 
 exorbitant rent." He said — " He would hear nothing 
 from me. He jumped round me when I spoke to 
 Lim." The valuation of that farm was £56 10s. All 
 the tenants held under twenty-one years leases which 
 fell in 1878. There is one remarkable thing connected 
 with this projDerty I wish to mention. There was a 
 number four ' tenant, but he anticipated that there 
 would be something of this kind when the leases 
 expired ; and he prepared himself for it, and 
 he took his crops off and took something off the 
 farm before the valuator came. The result was that 
 his rent was only increased by a few shillings. It shows 
 that the improving tenant, and the man who works 
 hard will have to pay for his own improvements. We 
 know that and feel it, and I am an exponent myself for 
 some amendment of the law. Those are four cases that 
 I have to bring before you. They are the only four 
 tenants that were mulcted. There was an ,emornious 
 increase put on three of them. 
 
 3724. Mr. Shaw. — The man that ran down his land 
 got off well ? — He did. The increase of rent in the 
 first case was nearly 100 per cent. 
 
 3725. Were there new leases given 1 — New leases 
 were forced on them. 
 
 3726. For how many years ? — I think twenty-one, 
 but they have not yet taken them up. The landlord 
 has demanded £3 15s. Gd. for the expenses of each. 
 One man told me that he had not paid it, and he said 
 he was not sure that he would. It is only twenty-one 
 years ago since the previous agreement was entered in- 
 to, which shows it was not an old take. There is a 
 large property in the county that was valued some time 
 ago by a valuator sent down by the landlord. That 
 valuator himself became a bankrupt after getting 
 a farm at his own valuation. That shows what he 
 was as a farmer. Several of the tenants on the pro- 
 perty have made personal complaints to me, as they 
 know I represented the feelings of the tenantry. I 
 have nc^ver stood on any public platform, and I do not 
 belong to any society or club, but at the same time my 
 sympathies go with my own class. They have com- 
 plained to me of the enormous increase of the rents 
 j)ut upon them merely because of their own industry. 
 A schoolfellow of my own said to me — •' I ljeg£;-cd of 
 the valuator iLot to put too much rent upon me." I 
 know his farm perfectly well. The words of the valu- 
 ator were — "I am not putting as much upon you as I 
 was desirtcl to do." 
 
 3727. Mr. Shaw. — And the increase was carried 
 out?— The increase of £50 on 130 acres of land was 
 carried out. All the man said was — " I must tak»-> 
 the land at the valuation. There is no alternati\ c 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 13? 
 
 but I will try and get, if I can, a thirty-one years' 
 lease." He was getting a shorter term. 
 
 3728. The O'Conor Don. — Are increases of rent 
 common on that estate t — With regard to that there 
 were very few leases on the estate, but a friend of 
 mine, who had spent a considerable sum of money in 
 building a dwelling-house and out-oiEces, had a lease, 
 and there were eight or ten years of it to run. He 
 sacrificed that foolishly from a suggestion made to 
 him by the agent, and he has to give an increased 
 rent now for twenty-one years, simply because he 
 was afraid to let the eight years run out. I said to 
 him that he was a fool. 
 
 3729. Mr. Shaw. — How long is that since "i — Two 
 or three years ago. It was at the time of the furore 
 against the landlord, and the way he was acting. 
 Having said that much about outsiders, I have no 
 hesitation in speaking with regard to mysell, and at 
 the same time I will not come down heavy on my 
 landlords. I was born on one of my three iarms, but 
 I left it and went to live on another, although I am 
 farming the first the same as I was vdien 1 was a boy. 
 I came from it here yesterday. The rent of it formerly 
 was 27s. 6rf. an acre. It is middling iair land, and it 
 required great working. I have an old lease for lives, 
 but I came to terms with my landlord, and I gave 
 him a considerable increase. The times were good 
 then. We covild get £1 a barrel ior barley, and the 
 prices for all produce were good. 
 
 3732. Mr. Shaw. — Was that increase upon the 
 present lease? — The old one is in existence still. 
 I made a fool of myself in the matter. I made 
 an increase, which amounts to 66^ per cent, over 
 Griffith's valuation for thirty-one years' lease, 
 and I was satisfied then that I could pay that, 
 and I could have paid it easier in 1874, when 
 I took it, than I could pay 30s. now. The rent now 
 is 35s. They reiased to take the increase of 60^ per 
 cent in the first instance, and I said I would give no 
 more, but in order to test whether Mr. Thomas was 
 willing to renew my lease I would submit the matter 
 to arbitration. I said, " I wiU name on the spot a 
 gentleman who is not alone a farmer but a landlord as 
 well, and let Captain Thomas name another, and if 
 those two gentleman put more rent on me than I think 
 I am able to pay I will hand up the farm, and let him 
 pay me for improvements." In six months afterwards 
 I was told I might have the farm. I understood then 
 that I would have half the county rates, but I was told I 
 would have to give an increased rent or pay the county 
 cess. I had no alternative. There was no writing on 
 the matter at the time. The agent said it was a 
 matter of form, and that the amount was only about 
 £3 a year. I said, " If I must do it I might as well 
 do it at once gracefully." To my great surprise, when 
 the lease was drafted and sent to me, I read it attentively, 
 I found this, and objected to it — that any farmyard 
 manure or straw on the land at the expiration of the 
 lease should belong to the landlord. As the landlord 
 was not there, I told the agent that he could have 
 notliLng to do with those things that had been produced 
 by me. 'SVhen the lease was tendered to me afterwards 
 I found that I would be shut out from the benefit of 
 any improvements, buildings or otherwise. 
 
 3733. Baron Dowse.— What was the length of the 
 lease 1 — Thirtj^-one years. By it I was to claim nothing 
 under the Land Act of 1870 for any improvements I 
 had made, was making, or intended to make. I called 
 the landlord's attention as to what I intended to do. 
 Formerly the dwelling-house was slated and the out- 
 offices thatched, and I improved them, and the land 
 required to be drained and put in proper condition. 
 I was after buUding a house, fifty feet long, that cost 
 me £100. It was a barn and stable. I had an inter- 
 view with the landlord before he went to India. I 
 told him I had no notion of signing the lease, and I 
 refused to sign it. However, it was registered, 
 although I point blank refused it, and have not signed 
 it. He said, quite coolly, "You have got the Land 
 Act, and I don't see what interest I have in it." I 
 
 told him that you have put a clause in the lease that Sept. 8, isso. 
 shuts me out from the Land Act. I put him in a ^^^ Edward 
 comer there. Fenlon. 
 
 3734. What did he say to that ?— Not a word. He 
 had not a word to reply. I pitied him. I said to him, 
 " You have seen the house I have built already. I am 
 going to build another. Go down and look at what 
 is built, and go and look at what I am going to do. Say 
 are these required, and if you do not approve of them 
 let me know by post." He never replied to me, and 
 I never heard from him. 
 
 3735. The O'Conor Don. — Are you paying rent 
 under the old lease 1 — No. 
 
 3736. Baron Dowse. — Did you take a lease from 
 him ? — I did not sign it nor would not take it. 
 
 3737. You need not sign it, except ior the covenants. 
 Have you got it 1 — No, I left it in the agent's office. 
 
 3738. Then you are a tenant fi'om year to year t — 
 But my old lease is in existence, and unfortunately I 
 am paying £15 a year of an increased rent. I got a 
 fox cover in, and I ofiered £7 a year for it. It 
 was offered to others, but as it is in the centre of my 
 farm, I took it sooner than have trespassers running 
 on my land. I said I would give £7 a year for it the 
 same as I was giving for the rest of the land at that 
 time. It is not worth anything. 
 
 3739. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose it is a waste piece of 
 ground 1 — It is growing furze ever since I got it. It was 
 planted forty years ago out of a fox cover. There are 
 four acres in it. So long as the trees remain young, 
 it is not so bad, but when they grow up the furze 
 appears, and it is hard to keep it down. This is all 
 on the one property. I am sorry to be obliged to 
 bring my own case before the Commissioners, but this 
 is a glaring case, and I have remonstrated with the 
 agent about it, and said that I would not give the 
 increased rent that he was demanding of 100 per cent, 
 over the valuation. I am paying nearly that. He 
 demanded £2 an acre for what I had for 27s. 6d. 
 
 3740. The O'Conor Don. — What was the duration 
 of the old lease 1 — Three lives or thirty-one years. 
 One life is still in existence. 
 
 3741. Has the term of years expired? — Long since. 
 I am in the dilemma that I am improving the property, 
 and as Baron Dowse says, I may be only a tenant 
 from year to year. 
 
 3742. Baron Dowse. — If you have accepted the 
 new lease it would amount to a surrender of the old 
 one 1 — I did give a Avritten surrender to the attorney's 
 clei'k. 
 
 3743. That was on condition of your getting your 
 new lease. Your position is not a pleasant one, and 
 it wovild be a question for a jury whether you had not 
 accepted the new lease. At all events, you are a 
 tenant imder th« increased rent? — I may tell 
 you that a gentleman in the milling trade for amuse- 
 ment, I suppose, went and gave entirely too much 
 for a farm adjoining mine, and I said to myself 
 that I will be served in this way, that I will have to 
 give a higher rent. I came to the conclusion that if 
 I did not give the full value, without leaving me any 
 interest in it, in fact, I would not got it. Only for 
 the fact of destroying peoples' interests in that way 
 by inserting the clauses in the leases, I could make 
 the land pay better by highly manuring it. I carry 
 out the gi'een crop system on my farm, and I feed 
 from £300 to £400 worth of cattle and sheep annually 
 upon the land, and I apply all the manure I can collect 
 on the land. I buy hay and straw, for I have not 
 enough myself. Some people say that it is only the 
 cottiers that cry out against the present system, but 
 that is not the case. I myself can manage 160 acres 
 out of my own pocket, without troubling the banks, 
 but I think it is a hard case that we have to pay at 
 the end of twenty-one years or thirty-one years, the 
 increased value of the land, that we ourselves have 
 accumulated there by hard work and industry. 
 
 3744. Is raising of rents common in that part of 
 the country 1—1 will illustrate it by saying that the 
 
13-I- 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sq^t. 8, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Fenlon. 
 
 •wljole of the rents in the north, and south of Kildare, 
 were raised on one property, and there was another 
 gentleman in my neighbourhood who raised them, but 
 he gave fifty-one years' leases. He put the increase on 
 the tenants five or six years ago, but he gave the 
 equivalent. 
 
 3745. Some people say a tenant need not give the 
 increased rent unless he likes. Has he any option ? 
 — Is it to give the increase. 
 
 3746. Yes? — None whatever, if there is no lease. 
 If the valuator is sent on the land there is no op- 
 tion. There was no option in the cases I pointed out. 
 
 3747. Why is there no option ? — Of course he may 
 walk out of the land, but what is he to do then. 
 
 3748. Mr. Shaw. — You would be in favour of 
 arbitration in the fixing of rents? — That is what I 
 offered to my own landlord ; and if there was a 
 court of arbitration established there would not be 
 so many disputes and contentions in the country, 
 for this reason, that landlords would not look for too 
 much, and an obstinate tenant would not get the land 
 at too low a rent. I would go in as far as possible 
 to leaving the matter between the landlord and tenant 
 themselves to be settled, where they are reasonable 
 and rational, but where there is an obstinate land- 
 lord or an obstinate tenant, I would leave them to 
 a court of arbitration. 
 
 3749. Baron Dowse. — If the landlord and tenant 
 agreed there would be no need for arbitration ? — No ; 
 when a valuator is sent on a property, in the first in- 
 stance, he may not be a judge of the land, and in the 
 next place he may be told to do a certain thing, and 
 he will put a rent on the tenants that they cannot 
 pay. The result will be, that they will be for ever 
 beggars, and will never be worth £100. 
 
 3750. Mr. Shaw. — That is owing to the increase of 
 rent ? — Yes ; and the way they are disheartened. 
 
 3751. Baron Dowse. — Did you ever hear of a case 
 where a valuator was sent on an estate, the landlord 
 having given him directions to put a certain price on 
 the land, because I have heard of a case of that kind ? 
 — I have mentioned a case here where the valuator 
 said, " I have not put as much on as I was told to do." 
 
 3752. Did you ever hear of the northern tenant- 
 right ? — I did, from time to time. 
 
 3753. Now, supposing whether it is northern tenant- 
 right, or southern tenant-right, or whatever name you 
 call it — if a tenant is allowed to hold his land at a fair 
 rent, and to sell it with a power of free sale, giving 
 thelandlordareasonable objection to anyperson to whom 
 it is sold, and to hold the land as long as he chooses, and 
 not to lose it tinless he refuses to pay his rent, would 
 that be a fair settlement ? — I will answer by giving 
 my views in this way. I have never hesitated in the 
 presence of nearly all the landlords of Kildare, to tell 
 them that I would remove from them the arbitrary 
 power they are possessed of of evicting a tenant or in- 
 creasing the rent at their will and pleasure. Then, as 
 I said before, if any difficulty arises between them, I 
 would have the matter settled by arbitration; but so long 
 as the tenant paid the fair letting value, I would say the 
 " Live and let live " value, and I would take the power 
 out of the hands of the landlord of putting liim out 
 except lor good and valid reasons. I would give the 
 landlords discretion not to allow the laud to be in- 
 jured by the tenant ; but where a good, willing, and 
 industrious tenant is in possession, himself and fore- 
 fathers, perhaps, for generations, I would not have 
 him disturbed, and you will never see the country 
 contented until we are secured in our homes, with- 
 out being subject to any capricious evictions hanging 
 over our heads. I will never be content, for my part, 
 and I am about as moderate a man as any body else. 
 
 3754. Mr. Shaw. — You speak your own feelings 
 and from experience? — I do ; and I never spoke from 
 a public platform in my life. 
 
 3755. Baron Dowse. — Do you speak for many 
 others ? — I represent the feelings of the vast majority 
 of the farmers of Kildare, Wicklow, Carlow, and 
 Queen's County, holding from 25 to 500 acres. The 
 
 feeling has extended to Scotchmen, too. One who 
 farms land in three counties told me lately the tenant 
 had the same right to sell his farm as anything else 
 he possessed ; but, the other day, he said — " Pay your 
 rent, and when the lease is out, walk out." I pay 
 £250 a year rent for 156 acres of land. I would be 
 satisfied to pay my rent if I got permanent security 
 that, so long as I or my successor — my child — and, to 
 go further on, his children after him — paid the rent, 
 and if I was sure that it would be left in that state 
 thatj if any dispute should arise between the landlord 
 and tenant, it would be settled by arbitrators, if they 
 could not settle themselves. 
 
 3755a. Does the tenant make the improvements in 
 Kildare ? — All ; one landlord built some out-ofiices 
 and drained, charging per-centage. 
 
 3756. If the landlord made the improvements, do you 
 think he should get compensation ? — Yes, undoubtedly. 
 
 3757. Would that be by giving a higher rent? — 
 Yes ; that would be fair. 
 
 3758. And, so long as the tenant made the improve- 
 ments, you say he should be allowed to remain in pos- 
 session? — Certainly. There are a good many farm- 
 houses built with money borrowed under the Board of 
 Works, at 5 per cent. I cannot see why, after tLa,t 
 being paid off by the tenant, he should have to pay an 
 increased rent for his improvement. I borrowed £300 
 irom the Board of Works for the erection of a dwelling- 
 house ; but the house cost me £600. I am paying 
 £15 a year to the Board, separately altogether from 
 my rent, and will pay it off' in thirty-five years ; and 
 I don't see what right the landlord should have, at 
 any time, to have what I expended and paid the in- 
 terest on. 
 
 3759. Mr. Shaw. — This want of security, to your 
 knowledge, causes dissatisfaction 1 — That is the secret 
 of it. 
 
 3760. And it has the effect of preventing improve- 
 ments? — Yes. There is another case on the same 
 property, on which I live, that I might mention. 
 These people are already grown old after spending a 
 life in bard work upon the farm. There was 10s. 
 an acre put upon them, some time ago, beyond the 
 old rent, and it is 10s. too much. 
 
 3761. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is that on the property of 
 which you were speaking before ? — It is. 
 
 3762. Mr. Shaw. — And they had no option but to 
 pay it ? — They had no option. 
 
 3763. Would you be disposed to purchase yovu- own 
 land, under the Land Clauses, if it was in the market ? 
 — I hold 100 acres of land, portion of an estate 
 which was sold some years ago. The owner put 
 one of my farms, along with another farm, as a 
 lot, and I called on him, at his request, at his agent's 
 office, in Dawson-street. He asked me would I tender 
 for iny farms. The times were better then than thej^ 
 have been since, and I had something to spare then 
 that has gone away since. I tendered 23 years' pur- 
 chase for my two farms, and I was then most 
 anxious to become my own landlord, and would be so 
 still — that is, as a sort of security for my tenure. The 
 estate was sold in bulk at 22g years' purchase. 
 
 3764. That security would satisfy you " — Permanent 
 security would thoroughly satisfy me on the lines I 
 laid down that the landlord would not have the power 
 of raising the rent unduly, or of evicting me. ,1 
 offered twenty-three years' purchase for my holding, 
 but the whole property was sold together, for twenty- 
 two and a half years' purchase, which I do not complain 
 of, as no doubt if my farm was taken out of the 
 estate it might be unpleasant for . the parties. I did 
 not complain of that at the time, although I certaurly 
 was treated badly by the buildings of my own being 
 registered on the farm schedule. J was informed th3t 
 I could have knocked up the thing at the time, but I 
 did not do so. 
 
 3765. What i-ent do you pay upon the land ypu 
 hold from that landlord ? — Thirty-five shillings . an 
 acre, it is 66-^- per cent, over Griffith's valuatioji, ar^d 
 from my experience of other properties I say tl^e remits 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 135 
 
 on tliat estate are far in excess of any land I know. 
 Griffith's valuation would be quite a sufficient rent for 
 the land on that property, but he wanted to put 100 
 per cent, upon me over Griffith's valuation. I am 
 paying 66^, and I got an old fox covert in it, for 
 which I have to pay as miich as I am paying for the 
 best land I have. 
 
 3766. You are not living on the property yorr spoke 
 of first ? — I am happy to say I am not. I would not live 
 on the property of any man that would tyrannise over 
 me. I wish to mention that after I got married, some 
 years ago, the agent came to congratulate me and 
 told me he would give me a new lease, but when he 
 tendered it to me he wanted to increase the rent. I 
 refused to pay it. I told him " You are aware of the 
 money I have expended on that land, and I won't pay 
 a shilling increase — sooner than do it I will hand yovi 
 up your land." The rent was £147 a year for 100 acres. 
 I gave him £3 more to make it the even number, 
 £150, and I gave him £70 in cash, which I now regret. 
 
 3767. Did he agree to the terms you proposed? — 
 Certainly — he gave me a new lease for fifteen years, but 
 against that fifteen, I had six years at the time still to 
 run of the old lease. 
 
 3768. You are now working on the fifteen years 
 lease 1 — Yes, I have only four years of it now unex- 
 pired. He told me he would give me twice as long if 
 he had the power. But I would not give any landlord 
 the power of increasing rents in that way. As I said 
 before, I am in the halilt, from time to time, of meeting 
 numbers of gentlemen, and nearly every landlord in 
 Kildare, and I never hesitated to tell them my views. I 
 seldom found them to dissent much from them, but the 
 reply would be "Did you ever know of a landlord 
 wishing to get rid of a good tenant ? " That is only 
 glossing over the matter, for at the same time the 
 landlord will exercise the power of saddling the good 
 tenant with an increased rent if he can. 
 
 3769. That after all is only human nature ? — I want 
 to correct it if I can. 
 
 3770. You want to improve human nature a little 1 
 — Yes. I may mention a matter by way of illustra- 
 tion. I have grown very good crops from time to time ; 
 in fact no man worked harder than I did in my youth. 
 I was on one occasion standing at the inside of a ditch, 
 and a lady and gentleman, both of whom were landlords, 
 passed the place where I was standing. There was a 
 fine hedge between us, so that they could not see me ; 
 in tact 1 was in the nature of an eavesdropper. One 
 of those persons was my own landlady. I had been 
 after erecting thirty-six feet of a fine shed, which 
 could be seen from the road. The gentleman pointed to 
 the shed and said to her " That is a fine shed ; these are 
 very good tenants of yours here. Go where I will I 
 don't see better farming than in this neighbourhood." 
 " Oh," she replied " the land is very good." She put 
 it all down to the land being good ; the fact being 
 that the land originally was poor land, and whatever 
 goodness it has is due to the industry of the tenant. 
 I remember a gentleman, he has since that time gone 
 out of existence, so that I am not sure whether it 
 would be right to mention his name, who was buying 
 an acre of turnips from a neighbour of mine. The man 
 asked him .£20 for the acre of turnips. "I wonder" 
 said the gentleman "if the farmer can get £20 for the 
 crop of one acre how much ought I to charge for the 
 rent of the land 'i If you get £20 for the produce of 
 an acre you ought to give your landlord a quarter of 
 it in the shape of rent." That was his notion; but 
 that land was dear enough at £3 an acre. 1 have had 
 to pay £21 myself for an acre of turnips ; and it does 
 not follow, as is supposed by some landlords, that where 
 one gets so much for a crop of turnips, corn^ or other 
 produce, that that is due to the land. It is no such 
 thing. 1 always expend from £2 to £3 an acre in 
 artificial manure upon the land, besides farm yard 
 manure, when I want to raise green crops from it, and 
 sometimes after all they may fail on me. The cost of 
 solid stable or cow manure would be £12 to £14 an 
 acre in' addition to working expenses. 
 
 3771. Chairman. — You use both artificial and farm- 
 
 yard manures 1 — Yes. I always put from £2 to £3 Sept. s, 1880; 
 worth of bone manure or superphosphate, besides farm- j.j-^. ^Z^ard 
 yard manure, and I never sell a load of turnips, nor a Peiilon. 
 load of hay or straw. I use it all on the farm. Now I 
 say that men of my class, working hard, up early and 
 late, expending our money, and giving employment in 
 the country, it is very hard to be told by our landlord 
 at the end of twenty-one years hard toil — your land 
 is improved in value — you must be saddled with an 
 increased rent or leave it. That is very liard, for I 
 may tell you gentlemen, that, as a rule, we have very 
 little confidence in the working of the Land Courts. 
 
 3772. Do you think that the fact of the tenant 
 having to give up his farm or pay an increased rent 
 at the' close of his lease has a tendency to induce him 
 to let his land run down towards the end of his term 1 
 ■ — That would be his natural disposition, but it would 
 not be wise for him to do it. What a tenant mostly 
 does is to seek for a renewal previous to his lease ex- 
 piring. But the great object the tenants have is to 
 have security that at the expiration of their term their 
 improvements won't be saddled with an increase of 
 rent. 
 
 3773. Do you think the valuation of what we called 
 "tillage" in the Land Act, and unexhausted manures 
 is not sufficiently definite to give the tenant security 1 
 I am incapable of giving an opinion upon that. I never 
 studied the Act, but from the reports I have seen of 
 decisions in the County Courts I am of opinion it is 
 seldom that the tenant gets what is a fair compensation 
 for improvements. 
 
 3774. Is it a difiicnlt thing for any valuator to get 
 a fair value uj)on tillages and artificial manures ? — 
 It is a difficult thing, for it is just the same as a 
 valuator that did not know anything about the quality 
 of land coming in to value land. 1 say the valuator 
 should have a knowledge of the land, for some land 
 will have a good appearance, but on testing it after- 
 wards you will be sadly disappointed. There was a 
 grazier near me — he was too extensive a man to call 
 himself a farmer, he called himself a grazier — he had 
 a splendid farm of land but on his death his widow 
 could not manage it, and his executors adopted the 
 very objectionable course of letting it by auction. 
 People took it at a fabulous rent, and the result was 
 they lost their money, and that land is let now at 
 half what it was let for four years ago. It was let 
 four years ago at £6 an acre, it is let now at £3 5s. 
 That land is in Kildare. 
 
 3775. Baron Dowse. — I had a land claim before 
 me as judge at the assizes, where I found that the 
 tenant before he died made a will in which he 
 directed his executors to rack the land and take as 
 much out of it as they could, for the purpose of injur- 
 ing the landlord. Yoa woidd not think that a fair 
 thing to do 1 — No ; that was not right. 
 
 3776. Do you think the judge who tried that case 
 was right in taking that into account when estimating 
 the compeusation he gave 1 — Certainly. 
 
 3776a. It was proved in that case that sever white 
 crops were taken out of the land in succession i — That 
 was bad farming ; but tenants of the class I represent 
 don't go in for that sort of thing. 
 
 3777. There are bad tenants as well as bad landlords ! 
 — Certainly. I said before the Board of Guardians 
 that I was no advocate for the idle, the lazy, or the 
 sluggard, but that I spoke on behalf of the hard 
 working and industrious tenant. I know well what 
 the feeling of the people is ; what they want is security ; 
 they don't want anything unfair ; they want only to 
 get the land at its fair value. Wherever an old lease 
 would fall in, and that the land was evidently cheap, 
 there would be no hesitation on the part of the tenant 
 to pay an additional rent. 
 
 3778; You say the general desire of the people is 
 to act honestly and fairly 1 — Undoubtedly; I may 
 observe that though of course it is absolutely necessary 
 that the tenant should have a right of free sale, that 
 is a right that would very rarely be exercised, for the 
 tenants^ as a rule, want to live upon their holdings 
 
136 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 SepUi, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Fenlon. 
 
 and not to sell them. It is only in exceptional cases 
 they -would want to part witli their holdings. 
 
 3779. "Would you think it right that the landlord 
 should have the power to call upon a tenant to sell and 
 go away, in the case where the tenant was a bad one ? 
 — Well, there might be a question whether the land- 
 lord had a prejudice against the man. But if the 
 tenant was insolvent or negligent, deteriorating his 
 farm, I would certainly say in that case that he ought 
 to be obliged to sell to some one who would manage 
 it properly. 
 
 3780. Or if he was a bad man, setting a bad exam- 
 ple to the neighbourhood by his character 1 — I would 
 have no objection to see such persons emigrating. But 
 I am afraid that to give such a power would create a 
 strong feeling that it was only landlordism under a mask. 
 Iknowa casewhere a small farmerwho had eight acresof 
 land — he had two sons who were in my employment — 
 it was poor land, and the man was very poor and not 
 able to pay his rent. The landlord got a decree for, 
 possession, and the sheriff come to execute it. The 
 sheriff was more humane than the landlord, as he 
 asked the man, " Have you no way of jjaying the 
 rent ? " " Oh," said the landlord, " I want to get the 
 place." " Excuse me," said the sheriff, and turning to 
 the man, he said, " Have not you two fields of barley V 
 
 " Yes," said the man, " but they are not cut." " Have 
 you no neighbour," said the sheriff, " who would buy 
 them and give you the money to pay the rent ? " The 
 result of the sheriff's suggestion was, that the man 
 whom he was after vilifying and slandering came for- 
 ward, enabled the man to pay his rent, and took the 
 produce in lieu of it. 
 
 3781. Mr. Kavanaoh. — I gather from your evi- 
 dence that you don't object to a landlord raising his 
 rent where an old lease falls out 1 — No ; if the circum- 
 stances justified it. 
 
 3782. In the case you first mentioned, was that 
 the case of an old lease 1 — No ; it is a twenty-one 
 years' lease, and the times were better then than now, 
 
 3783. I observe that in all the cases you have men- 
 tioned, the rents were below Griffith's valuation? — 
 Yes, in two of the cases. But T should observe that 
 the tenants had made all the improvements in the way 
 of buildings ; in one case, to mj own knowledge, the 
 tenant had erected a good sized feeding house mthia 
 the last four years, and in the vahiation of those 
 farms the buildings which the tenants had put up 
 increased the valuation. 
 
 [The Commissioners adjourned till the following 
 morning.] 
 
 sept.,,xm. EIGHTH DAY— THURSDAY, 9th SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 Present: — The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborough, Chairman; Right Hon. BAROJ>f Dowse, 
 The O' Conor Don, Arthur MacMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l. ; William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Alexander Kirkpatrick, Coolmine House, Clonsilla, examined. 
 
 Mr. Alexander 
 Kirkpatrick. 
 
 3784. Chairman. — I have not any notes as to your 
 evidence ; perhaps you would be kind enough to 
 mention any points that you desire to call atten- 
 tion to % — I am agent to Lord Portarlington, and 
 he wished that T should call here. That is the reason 
 I am here. 
 
 3785. How long have you been land agent 1 — It 
 is thirty-one years since I commenced to be agent. 
 
 3786. To Lord Portarliiagton 1 — No. I was thirteen 
 years with Stewarts and Kincaid. I am just eighteen 
 years with Lord Portarlington. 
 
 3787. Do you hold any other agencies besides his 1 
 — Yes, I am agent to Mrs. Fletcher, an English lady, 
 for about five years, and to Mr. Barlow, the Fellow 
 of College, for about fifteen years. 
 
 3788. In what counties are Lord Portarlmgton's 
 estates? — In Queen's Count}- and Tipperary. 
 
 3789. And the other two properties ? — In Kildare, 
 Tipperary, and King's Count}'. 
 
 3790. These agencies have led you no doubt into a 
 good deal of consideration of the Land Act? — Yes. 
 The principal thing I have to say is, that during the. 
 thirty-one years since I commenced up to the present 
 moinent, I have only been present at, or in fact, this 
 moment I could say known of, only t'v\-o evictions so 
 called. The first was in 1850 or 1N51. It was simply 
 a friendly sort of thing, whereby some houses 
 out at Raheny were " tumbled " as it is called ; 
 but they were tumbled by the occupiers of the 
 houses themselves, quite cheerfully and pleasantly. 
 They were paid for throwing them down, and there 
 was no bad feeling about it whatever. I only carried 
 out one eviction on Lord Bortarlington's property in 
 eighteen years, and that was not to eject a tenant. 
 The tenant died, and the goodwill of the place was 
 being sold. His brother lived in the house ; he had 
 him there as a sort of visitor, and he said, " I won't 
 be tenant, but I will stay here." Of course he had to 
 be ejected. That could hardly be called an eviction. 
 
 3791. It was an eviction for the sake of the family ? 
 — Well indeed it was, for the family got money from 
 another person for their goodwill, and they went to 
 America. This man was only a visitor in his 
 
 brother's house. I really think he ate uji his substance, 
 and the poor old man died in poverty. Lord Portar- 
 lington allowed his family to sell their- good-will. 
 This man was neither willing to go nor stay, an idle 
 good-for-nothing sort of man. The sheriff and police 
 had to be brought. He was not present, but his things 
 were laid outside. 
 
 3792. Baron Dowse. — He was not a tenant at all ? 
 — He was not a tenant at all. 
 
 3793. Chairman. — Is a sale of the goodwill allowed 
 as a general rule upon Lord Portarlington's estate ? — It 
 is allov/cil now as a general rule, It has crept in in 
 the south, and in other places. Landlords did not 
 know of its existence, as far as I am aware, perhaps ten 
 years ago, but now Lord Portarlington is quite willing 
 to grant tenant-right, or sale of the goodwill. He 
 never hindered it, but it was I told him first that it 
 e.-iisted, for he did not think it existed ten years ago. 
 
 3794. These sales wei-e carried on between the 
 tenants themselves, -without the knowledge of the land- 
 lord ? — Well scarcely. Perhaps they were before I 
 became agent. I don't think he knew anything 
 about theui, 
 
 3795. Do you think they were winked at by the 
 bailiffs ? — ''I'liey were certainly winked at by the bailiffs. 
 
 379G, So that in fact there was an indirect allow- 
 ance of such sales ? — There was. I told Lord Portar- 
 lington about it. He made the remark, perhaps ten 
 years ago. " There is no tenant-right on my property," 
 and I said, "There is whether you heard of it or 
 not. Undoubtedly it has been going on, and it is 
 very greatly for your advantage. A bad tenant who 
 would be a burden to you gets something from a good 
 tenant for going. In every case these bad tenants have 
 been replaced by excellent tenants, the outgoing people 
 are no burden to you, everybody is satisfied, and 
 your property is greatly benefited." 
 
 3797. Is that a sale of the goodwill such as corres- 
 ponds to the Ulster tenant-right custom, or are there any 
 restrictions ? — There are restrictions. The first time 
 I heard of it, which was immediately after I came, I 
 said, " Any tenant on the property must get the pre- 
 iei-ence, and I must know who it is that is coming 
 in." It has never been allowed indiscriminately 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ia7 
 
 without my being informed as agent who was going 
 to purchase, but in a great many cases people who 
 were not tenants before became purchasers with my 
 sanction. And it always worked very well. 
 
 3798. At what time was that system of allowing 
 the sale of tenant-right introduced? — -I never hindered 
 it from the time when I became agent in 1862. There 
 was a case immediately after my coming in in January, 
 1863, whereby I got rid of a worthless man and got 
 an excellent man on the property. 
 
 3799. Then it was not specially introduced in con- 
 sequence of the Land Act 1 — No. 
 
 3800. Do you think that the fact of that system 
 having existed prevented any great number of cases 
 arising under the Land Act on any of its clauses 1 — 
 Well, as a matter of fact I have not heard the Land Act 
 mentioned on the property in any way since I went 
 there. 
 
 3801. Do you think that it may have prevented 
 cases aiising t — There was no case under the Land 
 Act at sessions or at thi^ assizes. The Land Act has 
 has not been mentioned reall}'. It prevented, no 
 doubt, cases arising. 
 
 3802. Do you think that it prevents differences 
 with landlords and conseqvient litigation 1 — Un- 
 doubtedly it does. 
 
 3803. And has a good effect upon tho relations of 
 landlord and tenant? — Why the relation between 
 landlord and tenant could not possibly be better. And 
 also, which I suppose is the main point, during all that 
 time, I have scarcely been cognisant of any money — 
 anything worth while — being lost to the landlord and 
 the landlord has always had good tenants instead of 
 bad ones. Every chan:;t' was for the better. 
 
 3801. Did Lord Foitarlington make improvements 
 or contribute towards them? — He contributes towards 
 them. 
 
 3805. Does ho chaige intei'est on the money 
 
 No, except where he borrows it fi-om the Board of 
 Works, he borrowed money from the Board of Works 
 and built a whole farm-house and offices in one case. 
 The tenant asked him to do it, and he agreed to pay 
 the interest, and it was added to his rent in his lease. 
 But he has done so of his own free will, charging the 
 tenant I think only quarter of the interest which he 
 voluntarily incurred with the Board of Works. 
 
 3806. Baron Dowse. — Whatever he did charge was 
 added to the rent ? — Generally, but there have been 
 cases — there is a case in which he did not add it to 
 the rent. 
 
 3807. But whenever there is any sum paid to him 
 at all it is added to the rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 3808. Chairman. — It is not paid as interest upon 
 an advance 1- — No, there was a new . lease made for 
 thirty-live years, and the interest was embodied in 
 the rent. 
 
 3809. Mr. Kavanagii. — Does he charge to the ten- 
 ant the whole amount that the Board of Works charges 
 him ? Do you understand my question 1 — 1 do. 
 
 3810. The Board of Works charges so much annu- 
 ally, which is made up of a sinking fund and interest ?' 
 — In the case of one tenant he had a lease. He was 
 a large tenant, the largest on the property. He paid 
 .£200 a year or something over. The tenant said, " I 
 have no house or farm building. Will you borrow 
 the money from the Board of Works, and 1 will pay 
 the interest added to the rent ? " — In that case he did. 
 
 3811. The interest ; but did he charge the sinking 
 fimd as well — He did, he charged 5 per cent.; the 
 tenant asked him to do it. 
 
 3812. At the end of the time, when the Board of 
 Works claim dropped, that amount would drop from 
 the tenant, too, would cease — would it not? — The 
 tenant's lease will cease then. The lease made at that 
 time, when the interest was added, was made about 
 ten years ago, so that it will not drop for twenty-five 
 years to come. I cannot tell what will happen then. 
 
 3813. Chaiehan. — The tenant' will, in tact, have 
 paid the capital by that time 1 — He will have paid all. 
 
 3814. In the way of increase of rent? — Yes. 
 
 3815. Then to a certain extent the improvements 
 will have been made by the tenant ? — The improve- 
 ments will be made entirely by the tenant. It was 
 the tenant that chose the plan. He was an elderly 
 man, a man who made a great deal by farming, a 
 justice of the peace, and he got everything done as he 
 pleased. He said, " I understand stall-feeding better 
 tlian you do, and I understand what I want." Pie was 
 old enough to be my father, and I only said, "I 
 suppose you do." I don't think he did in the latter 
 end. 
 
 381G. Do you consider that in any case of readjust- 
 ment of rent the tenant ought to have credit for the 
 improvements effected under that loan 1 — Nothing can 
 happen under that lease for twenty-five years to come. 
 The tenant will have paid every farthing of the loan 
 then. 
 
 3817. I only want to know is it your view that when 
 a new rent is settled, when the amount of the loan, the 
 capital of the loan, has been paid off, that the fact of 
 the tenants having found the capital ought to be taken 
 into consideration in fixing the new rent ? — Well, the 
 actual rent that the tenant paid at that time, ten years 
 ago, had been settled many years before, when prices 
 weve less than they were ten years ago. His rent was 
 not incre.ised except by what he voluntarily wished — 
 the money that was lent by the Board of Works. I 
 cannot tell what the scale of prices will be in twenty- 
 five years to come. 
 
 3818. I mean in any valuation thatmay be founded 
 on the scale of prices at that time, or upon a new 
 general valuation of Ireland, in fixing the rent do ynu 
 think that the tenant ought to get credit for these 
 improvements us his own ; and supposing you were 
 dealing with the ease yourself would you consider that 
 the tenant whose money made the improvements was 
 entitled to credit for them ? — If I li\ed when this lease 
 expired I would consider that the tenant ought not to 
 lie chai-ged with tliese improvements. I cannot say 
 that 1 have ever cliai-gcd a man with his impro"\-e- 
 ments. 
 
 3819. Mr. Kavanagh. — That is, if at the end of the 
 twenty-fiv(! years you were living, and had to deal with 
 the case, you would not consider yourself justified in 
 raising the rent in respect of the improvements, 
 although on other conditions you might ? — According 
 to my present opinion I would not, for the increase has 
 been consideralile. He is paying upwards of j£50 
 increase. 
 
 3820. Mr. Shaw.— Is it a large farm?— It is a 
 large farm. He pays now, I think, about £250 a 
 year. 
 
 3821. He can afford to do that from the improve- 
 ments he has made ? — Oh, he can. 
 
 3822. Mr. Kavanagh. — Would you mind saying 
 what amount of rent do you collect in the year, in or 
 about ? — Well, the shortest way I could say it is, I 
 made a return for income tax on £600 a year. 
 
 3823. That is income tax on what you collected? — 
 That is income tax on my commission. I remember 
 that because I sent it in lately, but I could not tell 
 you this moment what I collect. 
 
 3824. You said that in your experience you had 
 only known of two evictions ? — That is all. 
 
 3825. Baron Dowse. — And neither of them wove 
 really evictions at all ? — Neither of them. 
 
 3826. Mr. Kavanagh. — Then your evidence is that 
 within your experience you don't know of any e\iction ? 
 — Not practically. Mr. Kincaid sent me out to see 
 the thing done with the bailiff' — to get rid of some 
 cabins in Eaheny. The people went out quite 
 peaceably and cheerfully. That was the second time 
 I was ever on the ground with a sheriff'. 
 
 3827. You, doubtless, watched all the reports in the 
 uew.spapers during the last summei- of what Uappened 
 in the House of Commons, and the tiemeudous ULimber 
 of evictions that >vere stated to have taken place in 
 Ireland? — I tlid not watch tliem, but I. heard of 
 theni. 
 
 T 
 
 Sepi. 9, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Alexander 
 Kirkpatrick. 
 
138 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 8, 1880. 
 
 Mr- Alexander 
 Kirkpatrick. 
 
 3828. Is it not tlie fact tliat many of those evictions 
 so-called on tlie part of the landlords, might have taken 
 place at the suit of other creditors 1 — I think so. 
 
 3829. Baron Dowse. — Ejectments might take place 
 to recover possession of a tenancy from year to year, 
 not brought by the landlord at all ; is not that so 1— 
 Yes. 
 
 3830. For instance, any ordinary creditor might ob- 
 tain a judgment in the superior courts for his debt 
 against the tenant; he then might issue -aJi. fa. to the 
 sheriff, who would sell the tenant's interest in the 
 tenancy from year to year, and then the man who was 
 the sherift's assignee, might bring an ejectment to re- 
 cover possession of the tenancy from year to year ; 
 is not that so '?— Yes. People talk about ejectment 
 and eviction — eviction is only a new word, 1 seldom 
 heard of it ; but I heard of a person having plenty of 
 ejectments — four or five ejectments for the assizes ; 
 but then would never proceed to eviction. 
 
 3831. The sheriff can only sell a tenancy from year 
 to year, he cannot sell a freehold ? — But cannot he sell 
 a lease. * 
 
 3832. If it is a chattel lease he can, a lease for 
 years ? — There was a case two years ago, where one 
 of Lord Portarlington's tenants was sold up in that 
 way. 
 
 3833. Mr. Kavanagh. — The object of my question 
 was to show, as to these returns presented to Parlir.- 
 ment stating that many evictions took place in Ire- 
 land, that they were not necessarily all at the suit of 
 the landlords ? — No, my idea was that they were simply 
 the number of ejectments before the barrister, but 
 nine-tenths of these ejectments are ordinarily settled. 
 I have had ejectments, but they did not come to evic- 
 tions. If you don't serve people with notices sometimes 
 they will do nothing. 
 
 3834. Baron Dowse. — In ordinary language the 
 word ejectment is used to represent the preliminary 
 proceedings in court, and the word eviction to denote 
 the act of taking possession 1 — Yes, precisely. 
 
 3835. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have yon many large 
 graziers on the properties which you manage — grazing 
 farms'? — No. Q^he Queen's county is not a grazing 
 .county. In Tipperary the farms are not large. 
 
 3836. Do you thiiak, in the cases of large grazing 
 farms, purely let for grazing, that it would be just to 
 extend tenant-right to those farms, I should say, upon 
 which a man does not live 1 — I am not good at theory. 
 I have devoted myself entirely to my own business, and 
 I have not thought of other ' people's business. I have 
 only one large grazing tenant, and he has impi-oved his 
 place very well. He ought to get every consideration 
 that he could get. 
 
 3837. Is he resident? — He does not reside on the 
 farm. 
 
 3838. Baron Dowse. — Do you think it would be 
 fair to take the farm from him without giving him 
 some consideration 1 — I do think it would be very un- 
 fair. 
 
 3839. Because he has improved it 1 — ^es. 
 
 3840. Mr. Kavanagh. — What do you call his im- 
 provements 1 — He has tilled a portion of it, and it is 
 manifestly better than the land all about it. 
 
 3841. Baron Dowse. — Did he put any soil on it ? — 
 He has put manure into it. 
 
 3842. Mr. Shaw. — And has made it a richer farm 
 every year by his money ? — Yes ; he has a lease now. 
 His lease would have run out by this time, and he 
 asked for a new lease ; he feared an inci'ease of rent, 
 I advised his landlord to agree to it. The landlord 
 rather unwillingly assented. If he had delayed till 
 now 1 don't think he would have got any increase. 
 He got X80 increase. 
 
 3843. Mr. Kavanagh. — Over all the properties do 
 you find any want of confidence on the part of the 
 tenants, or any dread that their rents will be 
 raised on account of the improvements they have 
 made 1 — I have not found any dread. I have urged 
 upon a tenant to take a lease ; I said, " Life is short 
 and you know your landlord has no son. You have 
 
 improved your place. If a stranger was to come in 
 he v/ould very likely say, ' you are paying twenty 
 guineas for this land ; you ought to pay £30.' There- 
 fore, you ought to take a lease." He rejected the 
 lease at the time, but he accepted it in two or three 
 years afterwards. 
 
 3844. Baron Dowse. — ^Therefore you think that 
 unless he had a lease he might reasonably think he 
 would not be so secure as he otherwise would be if he 
 had a lease 1 — Certainly. 
 
 3845. If he had a tenancy from year to year, and 
 things would remain as they are, you would consider 
 that he was all right 1 — Yes. 
 
 3846. But it was to provide against future con- 
 tingencies 1 — If the property was sold anybody who 
 came in might say " your place is too cheap." It was 
 very tidy and well minded, far better than any around 
 it, and there was nothing to prevent his rent being 
 raised, and his improvements charged against himself. 
 
 3847. Chairman. — After reconsideration he came 
 and asked for the lease? — After reconsideration he 
 came and asked for the lease. He was paying 20 
 guineas then, and I said " that rent was fixed a long 
 time ago. You are not paying the full valuation. 
 Will you have a lease for thirty-one years at £24 a 
 year " ? — " Yes, I will ; thank you," he said. He took 
 the lease at £24. I am bound to say that in a very 
 short time he began to fret and said " I am fetting 
 about that lease." I represented it to his landlord, 
 and his landlord was so good as to say " don't have 
 the poor man fretting. By all means let him pay 
 only his twenty guineas. Why should that fret him? 
 Let him have the land at what he paid before." 
 
 3848. Was that at a time of bad seasons and bad 
 farming prospects ? — Yes. It was last year. 
 
 3849. Baron Dowse. — Lord Portarlington is a con- 
 siderate and kind landlord, I believe ? — Very — I was 
 going to say I never met his equal. 
 
 3850. And I was going to add, but I won't ask 
 you to answer it, he has a very good agent ? — I don't 
 know that. 
 
 3851. You know the north of Ireland? — I was 
 thei'e once and the impression it made upon me was 
 that I would never like to go there again. 
 
 3852. How was that? — I don't know. I was deal- 
 ing with tenants in the county Armagh and I wished 
 myself out of it. 
 
 3853. Was it that they were too independent? — 
 They had an entirely different way of talking from the 
 southerns. 
 
 3854. They mean what they say, I believe, generally? 
 — Then you don't know much about the system of 
 tenant-right prevailing there ? — No. 
 
 3855. I suppose the system of tenant-right prevail- 
 ing on Lord Portarlington's estates is very like it ? — 
 It is getting very like it. 
 
 3856 To be secure as long as they pay a reasonable 
 rent, and to have the right of selling their tenant- 
 right ? — But I must say that when I went there first 
 I remember in the first instance in which they were 
 carrying on a sale, I said "no you won't buy and 
 sell Lord Portarlington's property in his own office. 
 Go out on the road and make your bargain and when 
 you have made it come in and tell me." 
 
 3857. You find it works well to let the tenant sell 
 his interest ? — Indeed I do find it works well. I have 
 heard of people and have known them who were 
 most anxious to prevent the slightest degree of tenant- 
 right creeping in on their property, and I think they 
 were very wrong. 
 
 3858. Chairman. — Have you had any ejectments 
 for non-payment of rent?— Oh, I have had ejectments 
 lor non-payment of rent — that is, I have sent notice 
 to the solicitor to serve ejectments for non-payment 
 of rent but then they would be all settled. 
 
 3859. Within these last three years have you had 
 any? — I had. My practice was that I gave the 
 people up to the 1st of December to pay the March 
 rents, there having been always a hanging half-year 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 139 
 
 on the property. Tlicn if they did not pay them by 
 the first Friday in December, I wouki send their 
 names to the solicitor to serve ejectment pi-ocesses 
 for the January sessions. 
 
 3860. Mr. ,Shaw. — That is, except they oame in, I 
 suppose, and gave you good reasons ? — In every case 
 they came in and gave me good reasons, and paid up, 
 and in no case did it proceed to going with- the sheriff. 
 
 3861. Did that put costs on them?- — It did put 
 costs on them. It vrould put 8s. or 10s. costs on 
 them. 
 
 3862. Did you. serve them with any notice to pay 
 before you served the ejectments'! — It was only be- 
 cause I was sick of doing so that I had the eject- 
 ments served. 
 
 3863. You did not jiistservethem with the ejectments 
 slap off without notice? — No. I put up notices, and I 
 attended every Friday almost in the year^ — certainly 
 every Friday from October to December. 
 
 3864. Baron DowSE.-^If a man was so depressed in 
 his circumstances that he could not pay that rent, you 
 would have no objection to allow him sell to an in-com- 
 ing tenant 1 — Certainly not. 
 
 3865. The other paying 5'ou the rent, and giving the 
 tenant the balance ? — Certainly. . - , 
 
 3866. Chairman. -^The consequence is you have 
 cover been obliged to proceed with ejectments for non- 
 payment of rent to eviction? — Never to the bitter, 
 end. - 
 
 3867. And you have got your rent ? — Yes, better 
 than, anybody else in fact. I have made allowances. 
 Last year I wiped off little corners, and made things, 
 smooth, but I did not give a general abatement. I 
 have given a general abatement on some properties, 
 but I did not on others. 
 
 2868. The O'Conoe Don. — Are leases, usual on 
 Lord Portarlington's estate ? — Anybody whp asked for 
 a lease_ would get. it. There were leases made about 
 seventeen or eighteen years ago which are about run- 
 ning out now. 
 
 3869. Looking at the whole property, are there 
 more holding leases than without them, or the con- 
 trary ? — I would say there is more land held by lease 
 than otherwise, because all the large farms nearly are 
 held by lease. 
 
 3870. Are the leases generally, for years or for 
 lives ? — Generally for years. There are old leases that 
 have been existing for a long time that there were 
 lives in. 
 
 3871. In these leases is there any covenant against 
 selling without the landlord's consent? — There is such a 
 covenant. There were printed leases, the form of 
 which was made many years ago, and there was the 
 usual covenant against subletting or assigning without 
 the landlord's consent in writing. 
 
 3872. In these cases where you say sales have taken 
 place on Lord Portarlington's estate and the others 
 that you manage, were they usually cases of leases or 
 of tenancies from year to year 1 — The sales ? 
 
 3873. Yes ? — There were more from year to year, 
 but there have been leases sold. 
 
 3874. Chairman. — Do you require paynieijt of ar- 
 rears of rent on the sale of a holding being permitted 1 
 — In every case, I think, that a sale has taken place 
 there has been no loss to the landlord. 
 
 3875. Baron Dowse. — I understood you to say 
 that if a man was in distressed circumstances, and 
 could not pay the rent, the rent was paid out of the 
 purchase-money for his tenant-right, and the balance, 
 given to. him ? — Yes. 
 
 3876. Chairman. — That is done in the office is it, or 
 do you trust to him oncoming in that he will pay ? — ^It is 
 not done in the office, because the custom has only been 
 creeping in. In the North it is, done in the office. 
 Once, I believe, part of the money was entrusted, to 
 me when a man was going to, emigrate^part of the 
 money was entrusted to me that was to be given, to two 
 sisters ; but otherwise I don't think I ever handled it. 
 
 3877. Baron Dowse. — But, you got the rent at all 
 events ? — I got the .rent., . , ,- . 
 
 pay 
 
 ?— I 
 
 Mr. Alexandeft 
 Kirkpatrick. ' 
 
 3878. Mr. Shaw.— And you knew all about the Sept. 9, 188». 
 case ? — I knew who was coming in. 
 
 3879. And what money he was going to 
 cannot say that I always di,d. ■ 
 
 3880. Yovi don't inquire particularly what the price 
 is ? — I don't inquire particular^. ■ If the custom was 
 legitimised probably it would go on more secundum 
 arteTn, bu.t:it has only been creeping in. 
 
 388-1. i It has not got on its feet yet?-^But it has 
 been getting on its feet very strongly. 
 
 3882.- wAlPe. the tenancies large or small on Lord 
 Portarlington's property? — There are a great many 
 small ones. 
 
 3883. Have they improved their lands much in your 
 time ?-r— Certainly the new people that I have intro- 
 duced have improved their lands very much They • 
 have improved their places very much, niore so than the 
 old tenants,- but, indeed, they are all industrious enough. 
 
 38,84. A .good deal of that is due, I suppose, to>, 
 the feeling, of: security they have, owing to the rule 
 on -the, estate ?-^Wdl, I, hope it is., I don't know., 
 I never tried to please them in any way. I must 
 say I never tried to please any of them. 
 
 3885. Baron Dowse. — You never did anything 
 that you believed to be unjust towards them ? — No ; 
 nor I would not. I believe if you try to please them 
 they will only consider you a, fool. 
 
 .3886. But if you do whatis right ? — If you do what 
 is right, my idea is, if you did ordinary justice to Irish- 
 men, and if they were let alone by people, they would 
 be the most contented people on the face of the earth. 
 , 3887. Mr. Shaw. — Are there any cases of tenants 
 buying their own holdings in your part of the country I 
 -^Well, I heard that one man, when Lord Portarling- 
 ton's estate was sold (the estate was sold in the In- 
 cumbered Estates Court, and Lord Portarlington 
 bought it , again— he bought his uncle's property) — I 
 heard that one man bought his holding. That is the 
 only case I ever heard of. 
 
 3888. That was before the Land Act, I suppose ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 3889. How has it turned out with him 1 Has he 
 been very successful ? — He did not live on the hold- 
 ing. He happened to be a well-to-do man, and 
 bought a little holding — he paid £8 a year for it. 
 
 3890. You would be in favour of giving tenants 
 perfect security in their holdings ? — I would, indeed. 
 
 3891. You would not turn them out except for 
 just cause, except, say, for non-payment of rent or 
 dilapidating their holdings in some way ? — No. 
 
 3892. You would allow them to sell freely?— I do. 
 
 3893. And you think that wo\ild be in favour of the 
 landlord in the long run ? — I do. I have not known, 
 but I have heard of what happened long before my 
 time : that in former times to show that the landlord 
 had full power over his tenants he woiild shift them 
 about like pieces on a chess-board for his own whim, to 
 show them that he had them in his power. I think 
 that could not possibly be done now. 
 
 3894. You think there could not be a worse thing 
 done, I suppose, except turning them out entirely ? — 
 There could not. They hated it. 
 
 3895. Whereas the contrary system leads to the 
 very best feeling between landlord ^nd tenant ?— The 
 very best. 
 
 3896. ."Would you, suggest any way of arranging 
 rents ? We might not . always find a landlord so con- 
 siderate as Lord Portarlington ; , another man might 
 have kept on the £4 and put on a few pounds more ; 
 does any way occur toyoft of settling what would be 
 a fair rent 1 Would arloitration bp a fair .way in cases 
 of dispute, only in cases oi^ dispute? — I don't know. 
 There we are going into theory. I have attended 
 so entirely to, practical business from day to day, I 
 have never ha,d tiipe to think of that. I have kept en- 
 tirely to my business, and seldom loojk,ed up for the last 
 thirty-one years, Now, I have cqme into a property 
 myself. . I remember it all my life — my father's — ; 
 there never , was an.eyiction on it but once, and, all the 
 people,,! may, say, adore,d my fathei-. 
 
 T2 , 
 
140 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Seiit. 9, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Alexander 
 Kirkpa trick. 
 
 3897. Is that in tlie Queen's County ? — No, close to 
 Dublin. 
 
 3898. Baron Dowse. — Where you live yourself? — 
 Where I live myself now. But I may say this, that 
 the Government valuation is no guide whatever now. 
 I find the tenants are trying to work the rents down 
 to the Government valuation, that is no criterion what- 
 ever. I do think that a new valuation would be fair. 
 
 - 3899. Chairman. — A new independent valuation ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 3900. Mr. Shaw. — Not a general valuation, I 
 suppose, but a valuation of estates 1 — No, a Govern- 
 ment valuation. The tenants are trying to work 
 down now to Griffith's valuation. 
 
 3901. Would not that be with the view of fixing 
 the rent ? You would hardly go that far 1 — Well, it 
 could not fix the rents, because the people who have 
 leases could not be altei-ed, but there should be some 
 criterion. Last year I have met tenants who said they 
 paid too much rent, and they talked about Grifiith's 
 valuation. My own tenants pay infinitely more than 
 
 Griffith's valuation here in the county Dublin, and it 
 would be ridiculous, they would never think of 
 paying Griffith's valuation. 
 
 3902. The county Dublin, though, is not a guide for 
 the rest of the country ? — One of the very best rents 
 that have ever been paid to me — I am not agent over 
 it — it is paid to me as a trustee. The valuation of the 
 place is £32 15s. and the rent is £70 a year, which 
 lias been paid most cheerfully without, I may say, 
 ever having been asked for. 
 
 3903. By a working farmer 1 — He was not a working 
 farmer, I don't know exactly what he was. It was Mr. 
 Clibborn of Moate. He was as good a man as there 
 could be in England, Ireland, or Scotland. I think he 
 had farms. 
 
 3904. Baron Dowse. — Where was that farm ? — It 
 was within five miles of Moate, in the King's County. 
 
 3905. Mr. Shaw. — He had a residence there, I 
 suppose 1 — He had not indeed. It was a grass farm. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Edward W. 
 O'Brien, Esq. 
 
 Edward William O'Brien, esq., d.l., examined. 
 
 3906. Baron Dowse.— I believe, Mr. O'Brien, you 
 live at Oahermoyle, county Limerick ? — Yes. 
 
 3907. You have property there ? — Yes. 
 
 3908. And do you not also receive rents 1 — I do not. 
 
 3909. It is your own property ? — My own property. 
 
 3910. You have turned your attention for a long 
 time, I believe, to this question between landlord and 
 tenant in Ireland 1 — Yes, for at least twelve years past. 
 
 3911. How long have you been in possession of the 
 property — since your father's death, I suppose"! — 
 Eighteen years. 
 
 3912. Have you considered what would be a satis- 
 factory as well as a final settlement of this land ques- 
 tion 1 — Yes. I have come to a decided opinion on the 
 subject. 
 
 3913. And what do you consider a satisfactory and 
 a final settlement of this land question to be 1 — I think 
 that virtually the tenants ought to be made indepen- 
 dent of the landlords to a very great extent ; as much 
 as is possible consistently with the pecuniary interests 
 of the landlords. 
 
 3914. Do you think that the tenants should be 
 practically or virtually the owners of the land they 
 occupy ? — Yes. 
 
 3915. Subject to the landlords rights and claims for 
 rent 1 — Yes. I should, perhajis, explain that my re- 
 marks are grounded chiefly on my own experience, 
 and there are certain portions of the country with re- 
 gard to which I should not like to express an opinion. 
 For instance, the extreme west, Galway and Maj^o ; 
 that part of the country I am not acquainted with. 
 
 3916. Mr. Shaw. — Limerickyou know best ? — Yes. 
 
 3917. And your remarks chiefly apply to the state 
 of things there ? — Yes, because I am intimately ac- 
 quainted with them, not only as a magistrate, and a 
 grand juror, but as chairman of a board of guar- 
 dians. 
 
 3918. Baron Dowse. — You think the thing that 
 would satisfy the tenants would be fixity of tenure, 
 free sale, and letting at fair rents 1 — Yes. 
 
 3919. Do you think the efiect of that would be to pro- 
 mote loyalty and peaceable conduct among the Queen's 
 subjects in Ireland, 1 — I have not the slightest doubt 
 abovit it. 
 
 3920. The system at jDresent prevailing you don't 
 think is satisfactory ? — No. I think it is the cause, in 
 great measure, of the backward condition of Ireland, 
 both material and moral. 
 
 3921. Do you think a satisfactory settlement would 
 give a stimulus to industry, and sobriety among the 
 people ?— Undoubtedly. 
 
 3922. And the efi"ect of that would be in some 
 time to raise Ireland from its depressed condition, and 
 place it on a level with some of the best, if not the 
 best, countries in Europe ?— Yes. I think the ten- 
 
 dency would be in that direction, but it would be slow 
 because Ireland is very much behind the countries of 
 the west of the Continent in education, practical edu- 
 cation, I mean, but I think the tendency would be 
 strongly in that direction. 
 
 3923. Do you think the improvement in Ireland 
 for the last thirty years is less than it ought to have 
 been 1 — Very much less indeed. 
 
 3924. What do you think are the causes of that ? — 
 I think the causes are these. The landlords, on the 
 one hand, have not the power to improve their land 
 to the extent that would be required to bring the 
 country into the condition in which it ought to be. To 
 do so they would be obliged, in many instances, to 
 make considerable changes in tenancies, which, as a 
 general rule, it is out of their power to do. The 
 tenants, on the other hand, have not sufficient security 
 to warrant the very large outlay that would be needed 
 on their part if the improveinent of the country were 
 to be carried out chiefly by them. They have always 
 the fear of a rise of rent impending over them. 
 
 3926. Is the present condition of the tenantry in 
 that respect a discouragement to the introduction of 
 capital into the country 1 — I think it is. 
 
 3927.. And is it a discouragement to the tenant 
 using the money he has himself? — Undoubtedly. 
 
 3928. He prefers to hoard it rather than put it into 
 the land ? — I think so. Frequently, however, I think 
 the tenants put money into the land which, on strict 
 business principles, they would not be justified in put- 
 ting into the land. 
 
 3929. At present they have not an interest that 
 they can sell in their farms, according to the law 
 as it stands in the part of the country you are 
 acquainted with % — No ; I cannot say that they have, 
 as a general rule, a sufficient interest. I believe, in 
 the part of Ireland with which I am acquainted, 
 most of them really have under the Land Act the 
 power to sell ; but I think they are not acquainted 
 with the extent of the right they have. 
 
 3930. But if they were allowed to hold at fair rents, 
 and undisturbed, with free power of sale — the eflfect of 
 that would be to give them a saleable interest in the 
 land ?— Yes. 
 
 3931. Do you thmk that would discourage idleness, 
 and encourage industry and thrift 1 — I think it would, 
 because a great number of the worst class of tenants 
 would be got rid of by a peaceable process ; they would 
 be gradually bought out by better men. 
 
 3932. And the effect of the present system is that 
 the tenants that ought to have been got rid of are re- 
 tained ? — Yes ; a great many of them. The landlord, 
 in my part of the country practically cannot turn out 
 a tenant merely because he is a bad fanner, nor can he 
 in any part of Ireland with which I am acquainted. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 141 
 
 3933. And if that man was allowed to sell his in- 
 terest in the land, he would go away peaceably, and 
 introduce a better man in his place'? — In ordinary 
 circumstances he would. I don't know that he would 
 at this present time. 
 
 3934. But it would have the effect gradually of 
 doing that 1 — Yes ; that has been my experience. 
 
 3935. Do improvements now, under the present 
 system, pay as well as if the land was really vested in 
 the tenant in the way you describe ? — No j I don't 
 think they do ; for this reason, that in order that an 
 improvement may be thoroughly good, it is almost 
 necessary that subsequent processes should be carried 
 out which cannot, practically, be carried out by the 
 landlord. For instance, if you take the case of drain- 
 ing ; draining is the first improvement that should be 
 made on land. In my part of the country, at. all 
 events, draining is a thing that will pay very well, as 
 a rule, if other processes are carried out afterwards. 
 In some cases it is necessary only to till the land, so 
 as to level it, and eradicate the grasses and rushes, 
 which grow in wet land ; in other cases it is neces- 
 sary to lime it and till it, and so on. Well, if 
 the landlord could do all these things the improvement 
 would probably pay him very well if he had the lands 
 in his own hands, but he cannot practically do it, because 
 he cannot get up the land from the tenant to do it, 
 and if he happens to have an idle or ignorant tenant, 
 the money which he lays out on his drainage may be 
 to a certain extent unfruitful. 
 
 3936. The upshot of what you say is that giving 
 the tenant security would give him an interest in 
 these improvements t — Yes, and in making for him- 
 self improvements now made by the landlord. 
 
 3937. In your part of the country does the land- 
 lord make the improvements as a rule 1 — I should say 
 from my observation that the landlords in my part of 
 the country do to a considerable extent make the 
 larger improvements, such as large drainages, roads, 
 and so on, but that the tenants do to a large extent 
 the minor improvements, clearing the land of stones, 
 draining not comprised in the large drainage systems, 
 and, to a consiberable extent, building — the latter 
 often with some assistance from the landlord. In 
 my neighbourhood there is a large tract of country 
 consisting of moor, a great portion of which belongs 
 to the Earl of Devon, and there the tenants do a 
 great deal of reclamation. They are encouraged to it 
 by a very good system adopted by Lord Devon, and 
 they have done an immense deal of reclamation in 
 that country. 
 
 3938. Assximing, according to your opinion, the 
 time has come for converting the present interest of 
 tenants into a virtual ownership, have you contem- 
 plated the manner in which that should be carried out ! 
 — Yes ; I think there should be an attempt made to 
 deal with the question from several different sides at 
 once. J think that the Bright clauses of the Land Act 
 were a step in the right direction ; and I think that the 
 principle of the Bright clauses might be applied in the 
 way of encouraging the giving of long leases, or perpe- 
 tuities, such as were given last century or at the begin- 
 ning of this century ; and I think further, that a good 
 deal might be done in extending the custom of sale 
 (which is virtually the Ulster custom) throughout Ire- 
 land. I look upon it that the tenant who holds under 
 a liberal Ulster custom is more nearly the owner of 
 the land than the landlord, and he has every induce- 
 ment to lay out his money, and I understand, as a 
 matter of fact, he does lay out his money on the secu- 
 rity afforded by it. 
 
 3939. Do you suggest any improvements in what 
 are called the Bright clauses of the Land Act, for the 
 purpose of can-ying out what you say, are there any 
 legal difficulties" that you thiuk can be removed?— I 
 believe that there are great legal difficulties in the land- 
 lord's way when he wishes to sell, difficulties in making 
 out title, and dealing with the interests of remainder- 
 men, and so on. I believe those difficulties have been 
 discussed very fully before Mr. Shaw Lefevre's Com- 
 
 mittee. I have not much practical acquaintance with Srjit. n, isso. 
 them myself. _ KdvvaTj'w. 
 
 3940. Does it occur to you that the amount of the O'Brien, Esq. 
 annuity charged by the Board of Works is too large, 
 might the interest be reduced or the time for the pay- 
 ment extended or anything of that kind ? — I should be 
 extremely sorry on general grovmds to see the interest 
 reduced below what the State can lend the money at, 
 and therefore I should be most distinctly against any- 
 thing of that sort. As to the extension of the time, I 
 believe the money is now repayable in thirty-five years ; 
 I don't think it would be necessary to extend it. 
 
 5941. Mr. Shaw. — There may be special cases'! — 
 There may be special cases. I don't see any objection 
 to extending it, but I do see the greatest objection to 
 allowing the tenants to have the money at a lower 
 ] irice than it costs the Government. 
 
 3942. Baron Dowse. — Do you think a greater 
 portion of the money might be advanced by the State 1 
 — I think so, I think four-fifths might be advanced 
 %\dth safety in ordinary times ; in the present condition 
 of the counti-y, I should not care to see so much ad- 
 vanced. I would not advance a single penny that the 
 State would not be quite safe to recover. 
 
 3943. Do you think peasant proprietary, as we may 
 call it for shortness, as a general rule would be of ad- 
 vantage to the country, or would you only introduce 
 it gradually and not extend it over the whole country 
 at once 1 — I think the sooner it could be introduced 
 generally the better for the coimtry. 
 
 3944. Do you think it is possible to purchase the 
 whole fee-simple against the will of the landlords ? — 
 Certainly not, if you mean the whole fee-simple of 
 Ireland. 
 
 3945. Woiild you force any landlord to sell unless 
 he was inclined 1 — Yes ; I would. I think speaking 
 generally a tenant should be entitled to claim the right 
 of purchasing his own holding, if it could be shown the, 
 landlord's interest was not prejudiced thereby. 
 
 3946. Suppose every tenant claimed a right to pur- 
 chase his holding that would go at once to purchase 
 the whole fee-simple of the country 1 — Yes ; but I would 
 not go as far as to say the Government should then 
 advance the whole four-fifths. 
 
 3947. Mr. Shaw. — In that case you would not 
 apply the rule where the tenant claimed to purchase 1 
 — No ; he should find the whole purchase money. 
 
 3948. Baron Dowse. — You would not be disinclined 
 to see every tenant able to purchase the fee-simple of 
 his own property but would not compel the State to 
 advance all the money for that purpose 1 — I think it 
 would be much too large a financial operation, much 
 too dangerous. 
 
 3649. In point of fact, would it not involve the 
 taxing of other people than the tenants 1 — Probably. 
 It would be about two hundred millions. 
 
 3950. Mr. Shaw. — That would be only in the event 
 of a loss, if there was no loss there would be no tax '! 
 — I don't know that the credit of the State would not 
 be affected by raising such a lai'ge svim of money and 
 investing it in Irish land. 
 
 3951. The O' Conor Don.— ^Have you made any cal- 
 culation when you say it would come to such a large 
 sum '? -^I think the value of the landed property of 
 Ireland is between three and iour hundred millions, 
 and therefore two hundred millions would be required 
 to enable the tenants to purchase the whole. You 
 would have to give a much larger sum of money than 
 twenty years' purchase to buy the landlords out com- 
 pulsorily. 
 
 3952. Does not that include all the land of Ireland, 
 the land in the occupation of the o^vners at the present 
 time as well as in the occupation of tenants 1 — I don't 
 know, I suppose it does. 
 
 3953. And does it not include all the cities and 
 towns t — I suppose it does. 
 
 3954. Have you deducted that — would not a very 
 large deduction have to be made from the total if you 
 deduct all the property in cities and towns, and all 
 the demesne lands in the actual occupation of the 
 
142 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 ^gji. 9,1880. 
 
 Edward "W. 
 O^Brien, Esq. 
 
 owners at present ?— You would have to deduct a 
 large amount, but on the other hand if you take the 
 gross amount of the rental of Ireland, and multiply it 
 by twenty-five years purchase, you would get a sum 
 nearer four hundred millions. So that I think if you 
 wish to extend the Bright clauses compulsorily over 
 the whole country, and buy the landlord out at 
 twenty-five years' purchase or thereabouts, you would' 
 require a sum not much under two hundred millions. 
 
 3955. Mr. Shaw. — But thirteen millions as stated 
 by Mr. Ball Greene, is Griffith's valuation, the rental 
 of Ireland is a good deal more than that, the thing 
 which the tenant would have to buy, so that probably 
 the agricultural rental to be purchased would be over 
 ten millions 1 — I don't know, I think so. 
 
 3956. Baron Dowse. — At all events you are not 
 binding yourself to the sum ? — No, I merely men- 
 tioned it as a hypothetical sum. 
 
 3957. It would be at all events a very large finan- 
 cial operation? — Enormous. 
 
 3958. Do you think it is likely to take place with- 
 in a reasonable time ? — No. 
 
 3959. Chairman. — "Would you allow two or three 
 tenants on a property to have power to claim to pur- 
 chase 1 — If they could show the landlord's interest was 
 not injured I don't see why they should not. 
 
 3960. Mr. Shaw. — You would make them pay in 
 proportion to what they got, that is they would pay 
 higher cutting out patches in a property than for other 
 portions 1 — Yes. 
 
 3961. Baron Dowse. — And you would wish they 
 should possess themoney themselves in that case 1 — Yes. 
 
 3962. In all the cases in which the State would 
 advance money under the Bright clauses, do you think 
 the restrictions in the Act are. unnecessary,. the restric- 
 tions on alienation, mortgaging, and subdivision im- 
 posed on the tenant 1 — I think that they are. 
 
 3963. That they ought to be removed? — I don't 
 see that the State has anything to do except to see 
 that its interest is perfectly secured. I think it has a 
 right to prevent subdivision for that purpose, as sub- 
 division would probably make it more difficult for the 
 State to recover its instalments, but T don't see why 
 it should prevent mortgaging. The best tenants would 
 mortgage, and frequently do, and mortgage perhaps 
 not for the purpose of providing for their younger 
 children, or paying debts, bxit for the purpose of 
 borrowing money to work their farms to advantage. 
 I say the power of mortgaging in that case is an ad- 
 vantage to the tenant, and an additional security to 
 the State, and as to the power of alienation I cannot 
 see why the tenant should not possess it, 
 
 3964. Provided he parts with the whole of if? — 
 Provided he parts with the whole of it. 
 
 3965. The person who gets it will be in the same 
 position he was in, and subject to the same incum- 
 brances ? — Yes. 
 
 3966. Do you think there should be a system of 
 cheap and simple registration of title 1 — I think so 
 undoubtedly, it would be the greatest convenience to 
 the country. 
 
 3967. Mr. Shaw. — In local courts? — I have not 
 considered the details of the subject. 
 
 3968. Baron Dowse. — Do you think — I gather that 
 you are rather of that opinion-;^ that it is not at all im- 
 probable that a peasant proprietary would create a 
 consolidation of farms ultimately 1 — I think very, pro- 
 bably. 
 
 3969. And a new set of landlords ? — I think in some 
 cases that would be the result. 
 
 3970. Do yo\i think that would be any advantage? 
 — I think it would be better to have a large number 
 of people interested in maintaining peace and order 
 in the country than a small number, such as at present. 
 I think too the smaller landlords that would be intro- 
 duced would be probably very strict in enforcing their 
 rights, and so far from regarding that as an injury to 
 the coimtry I think it would have a wholesome effect. 
 
 3971. With reference to these peasant proprietors 
 
 would you interfere with their power of willing ; the 
 property, making a bequest by will ? — I think not. - 
 
 3972. In the case of a];i intestacy would you leE),ve 
 the law as it , is ? — I should like to see a division 
 according to the ordiuary laws of distribution of, per- 
 gonal property. ■ , 
 
 3973. You see no distinction between a freehold 
 estate and a chattel interest for 999 years? — No; I 
 think they ought to be ;trea,ted in the same way. ', , . 
 
 3974. In the case of the chattel interest the Statute 
 of Distributions divides it equally, and in the freehold 
 it goes to the elder son, and there is no practical 
 difierence you think ? — No. 
 
 3975. Chairman. — But he has power to will, a 
 chattel interest ? — I would not take away the power., 
 
 3976. Baron Dowse. — You would guard agai46t 
 fictitious sales as far as possible ? — I would ; I belie^-p 
 such have taken place in recent instances. ; , yi, 
 
 3977. The O'Conoe Don. — Has any instance of 
 that come under your own knowledge ? — Well, I my- 
 self bought an estate which was offered for sale to the 
 tenant and bought by him. He found he could not 
 keep it, and asked me to buy it. I really don't know 
 the details of the ti-ansaotion between myself and 
 the Commissioners, it was a perfectly open and public 
 transaction, but the result of it was that I paid a cer- 
 tain amount down, and got the rest on mortgage from 
 the Commissioners, and I pay the Commissioners 
 interest on the , mortgage ; but I cannot say whether 
 this transaction appears on the records of the Commis- 
 sioners as a sale to the tenant. 
 
 3978. You are referring to sales imder the Churcji 
 Act ?— Yes. 
 
 3979. But have any instances of the kind occurred 
 under the Bright clauses ? — I am not aware. 
 
 3980. Could it occur under that Act ? — I don't know. 
 
 3981. Now have you considered what proportion 
 of tenants in this country could loiia fide purchase 
 their holdings under the Bright clauses, finding one- 
 fourth of the p\irchase-money ? — I made some inquiries 
 on that subject when Mr. Shaw Lefevre's Committee- 
 was sitting, and in my part of the country, which I 
 take as fairly typical of an average county in Ireland,! 
 should think that probably on an average about 10 
 per cent, could. 
 
 3982. That is without involving themselves in 
 debt, and borrowing money? — They might ha\e to 
 borrow money. 
 
 3983. That is without taking upon themselves 
 greater liabilities than they would be able to meet ? — : 
 That is what I mean. 
 
 3984. Baron Dowse. — If that is so in no case can 
 the Bright clauses solve the whole Irish land question ? 
 — Certainly not. 
 
 3985. And you don't think it is calculated to solve 
 the whole Irish question, the Bright clauses, no 
 matter how reasonably they are developed ? — No. 
 
 39,86. But they would be an important factor in 
 the settlement of the question ? — Yery important. 
 
 3987. Mr. Shaw.- — Are there 10 per cent, who 
 can purchase with their own money in your district, 
 is that what you mean? — I think 10 per cent., pro- 
 bably more, could purchase with money they could 
 find themselves out of their own resources or borrow 
 from their neighbours without involving themselves 
 in difficulties. . , 
 
 3988. Do you mean the third or the whole of the 
 purchase-money ?— The one-third. 
 
 3989. Baron Dowse. — Have you ever considered 
 the question about enabling tenants to purchase an 
 interest less than perpetuity, less than the fee? — -I 
 have. 
 
 3990. Do you mean a very long lease ? — I should 
 like to see tenants empowered to purchase perpetuities 
 on the same pi^inciple, as has been carried out in 
 former times very extensively in Limerick and Clare 
 and other parts of the country, by the payment qf a 
 fine. 
 
 3991. I believe your attention was called to this 
 by an article in the Edinburgh Seview, m 1870 ? — 
 
MINUTES OF EA'IDENCE. 
 
 143 
 
 "No, I -wrote a pamphlet myself in 1870, and tliat was 
 reviewed amongst a number of others in the Editv- 
 hurgh Revieic. 
 
 • 3992. And you fotind out afterwards who the 
 author was, and had a conversation with him on the 
 subject? — Yes.. 
 
 3993. Would you be good enough to "tell the Com- 
 missioners shortly what that scheme was ? — My idea 
 was that the tenants ought, with certain exceptions, 
 and subject always to appeal as to the terms, to be 
 entitled to claim a lease for ever on payment of a 
 certain sum down to the landlord, to compensate him 
 for his chances of an improvement in the future, and 
 further, that in case the tenants were not able to pay 
 sufficient to compensate the landlords for giving 
 them a perpetuity, they might claim a shorter term, 
 perhaps sixty years, on payment of a lesser sum, and 
 henceforward they should hold the land on a rent 
 settled once for all. 
 
 3994. You would prohibit subdivision 1 — I would 
 prohibit subdivision until the rent should be reduced 
 to a certain proportion, say two-thirds of the original 
 rent. I would give the tenant further power to re- 
 deem the rent by payment of £100 for every £i of 
 rent he bought up, so that the landlord would be 
 able to reinvest his money at 4 per cent, without loss. 
 
 3995. You state here that that was something like 
 the pi~actice that prevailed in other parts of Ireland, 
 leases for lives renewable for ever 1 — Yes. 
 
 3996. I have heard an account given of the origin 
 of that practice, I don't know whether it is a correct 
 one or not, a man would buy an estate and get a 
 portion of the purchase-money from the tenant, and- 
 keep a portion in his own hands, and make a lease of 
 lives renewable for ever to the tenant for another 
 portion. That system of tenure you remember was 
 afterwards to a certain extent altered by the privilege 
 of obtaining fee-farm grants, but that kind of tenure 
 exists very largely over Ireland 1 — Very largely ; part 
 of my estate is held on those terms. 
 
 3997. Am I right in thinking that is not a kind of 
 tenure that is held by people who actually cultivate 
 the land? — The people who hold in this way are, I 
 believe, practically for the most part, the resident 
 gentry of the country. 
 
 3998. Must your system not eventually lead to that, 
 namely, that the people who would be lessees under 
 these long leases would eventually themselves become 
 landlords t — Quite possibly, but I don't see that is any 
 objection. Supposing you can imagine, which is not 
 probable, that my system was carried out simulta- 
 neously all over Ireland, you would have 400,000 or 
 500,000 people virtually owners of the land; and 
 supposing there was a tendency to consolidation and a 
 recurrence to the former state of things, it would take 
 an enormous time before that would lead to a new set 
 of landlords. 
 
 3999. It may eventually lead to a new race of mid- 
 dlemen 1 — Yes, but that is guarded against by the 
 landlord reserving power to object to subdivision until 
 the rent has been reduced to a cei-tain jiroportion of 
 the original rent. 
 
 4000. Yoit don't recommend this plan as a panacea, 
 you think it can be cariled out concurrentlj' with other 
 plans 1. — Yes ; I think the object to be aimed at is, to 
 interest as many people as possible in the maintenance 
 of order in the country by giving them the largest 
 possible interest in the land. 
 
 4001. Do you think fixity of tenure with free sale 
 re^jresents the real desire of the farmer 1 — Certainly. 
 
 4002. And you think it would be advantageous 1 — 
 I think it would be advantageous, although there are 
 serious objections to it. 
 
 4003. Would you suggest any of those objections ? 
 ~I should think the chief objection is the difficulty of 
 asceitaining a fair rent. 
 
 4004. Supposing the tenant and landlord agreed to 
 hold at the rent now paid, if the landlord afterwards 
 demanded a higher rent and the tenant could not 
 agree, do you not think some system of arbitration 
 could be adopted ? — I think so. 
 
 4005. There' is no use in blinlcing the question, we Sept. o, iss6. 
 may as well approach that which appears to be a serious jj^^^r^ -w^ 
 objection to that proposal — do you think that is an O'Brien, Esq. 
 interierence' with the rights of property, as generally 
 understood, that stepping in between the landlord and 
 
 tenant to fix the rents 1 — I don't think it would be an 
 interidrence with the rights of property, as property is 
 enjoyed in this country, and is practically likely to 
 be enjoyed lor an indefinite time. As it is practically 
 impossible ior a landlord to deal with his estate as an 
 English landlord would do, it is not an undue inter- 
 ference with property. 
 
 4006. The English landlord practically makes the 
 improvements himself, and lets a farm as a landlord in 
 a town would let a house t — Yes. 
 
 4007. In this country does not the tenant make the 
 improvements 1 — Roughly speaking, he does. 
 
 4008. Supposingthelandlordmadetheimprovements, 
 and thus put more into the soil than the land naturally 
 possesses, do you think the landlord would be sufficiently 
 compensated by a rent for, these improvements to be 
 paid by the tenant t — I do not think he would. 
 
 4009. How do you think he would be compensated ? 
 — I suppose in a case of that sort that the value pro- 
 duced by these improvements, whenever there came to 
 be a question of revaluing the farm, would have to 
 be taken into account by the arbitrator. But I should 
 perhaps explain that I think it would be extremely 
 undesirable to step in between the landlord and the 
 tenant, except as a last resort when they could not 
 agree. I believe the fair rent is the rent which two 
 parties, independent of one anothei', ai-e able to agree 
 upon, that is really the fair rent, the contract 'rent. 
 But where the parties are not able to agree 
 
 4010. Mr. Shaw. — And not independent of each 
 other 1 — And where one party is dependent on the 
 other as the tenant is in Ireland, then you must take 
 some other course. 
 
 401 1. Baron Dowse. — As a rule is the tenant a free 
 agent ? — I don't think he is. 
 
 4012. Now supposing the landlord had made some 
 improvements on "one farm, and on another farm the 
 tenant had made all the improvements, would there 
 be any difficulty in fixing the rent on the farms, having 
 regard to the person that made the improvements on 
 each of them, giving the landlord more rent on the 
 tarm he had made the improvements on than on the 
 the other? — Not the slightest. 
 
 4013. Chairman. — Do you think the man that had 
 the higher rent would be ever satisfied ? — I think he 
 would. I have drained and improved land largely 
 under the Board of Works, and I have had no difficulty 
 in charging the tenants whatever I thought proper for 
 the improvements, although the result has been just' 
 what Baron Dowse stated, there have been farms 
 side by side, one of which is higher rented than the 
 other owing to the improvements. 
 
 4014. Baron Dowse. — Do you know the Ulster 
 tenant-right ? — Yes. 
 
 4016. Do you find in your part of the world that 
 there are any tenants holding under customs analogous 
 to the Ulster custom ? — I should say from inquiries 
 I have made, and conversations with landlords, agents, 
 and tenants, that as a rule, in my part of the country, 
 the tenants are allowed to sell, under various conditions. 
 Sometimes they sell under rather stringent restrictions; 
 sometimes they are allowed to put their farms up in 
 the open market and sell them by auction. I should 
 say the right ot sale is generally recognised in our 
 part of the country in one form or another. I am 
 aware there are some estates on which it is totally 
 prohibited, but that is the exception. 
 
 4016. Does the landlord exerci.se any veto in the 
 choice of the incoming tenant ?^I think the general 
 rule is that the tenant has not an absolute right of 
 sale, but he may get the highest price he can, provided 
 the landlord does not raise any reasonable objection to 
 the incoming tenant. 
 
 '4017. Is there any right of pre-emption given to 
 the tenants on the estate? — I hear in some cases 
 there is. 
 
144 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 9, 1880. 
 
 Edward W. 
 O'Brien, Esq. 
 
 4018. Do you find that system where it prevails 
 advantageous to the landlord in securing him liis rent ? 
 — Undoubtedly. 
 
 4019. Because, where a tenant sells, if there are any 
 arrears of rent, it is paid out of the 2:)urchase-money 1 
 — Yes, and I think landlords have been driven to 
 adopt it by a regard to their own interests. 
 
 4020. Chairman. — In arrears of rent do you include 
 the back half-year ? — I should say so. 
 
 4021. Then the back half-year system, if it had 
 existed previously, ought to cease. "Would yow allow 
 the system to continue in the new tenancy, or would 
 you say that the rent should be paid under the English 
 system ? — I should think it would be desirable, 
 where practicable, to extinguish the hanging gale, and 
 have each half year's rent paid before the next becomes 
 due. 
 
 4022. Baron Dowse. — Is it more than a custom on 
 some properties to have a hanging gale. Does it pre- 
 vail over the whole country 1 — By no means ; my own 
 estate for instance has never had the hanging gale 
 on it. 
 
 4023. I have had occasion to mention to other wit- 
 nesses that the making a man pay up to the day is 
 called making him an English tenant. Don't you 
 think the hanging gale a bad system ; because, the 
 instant another half-year is due, the landlord can bring 
 an ejectment '! — A very bad system. 
 
 4024. If the rent were always paid up to the last 
 gale day, would it not be much more advantageous to 
 all parties ? — Much more advantageous. 
 
 4025. The O'Conoe Don.— Do you think that pro- 
 posal would be very popular amongst the tenants 1 — I 
 don't think it would be practicable to compel the 
 tenants generally to pay up the hanging gale, and I 
 don't think it would be just. 
 
 4026. Baron Dowse. — Have you heard of landlords 
 wiping it oif altogether 'i — Yes ; I have heard of such 
 cases. When I came into the management of my pro- 
 perty all the rents were paid up to the gale day, ex- 
 cept two or three tenants, and I said to them — " If 
 yoa will pay me up half this, I will wipe off the re- 
 mainder ;" and they did. 
 
 4027. Have you ever seen any inconvenience arising 
 from this hanging gale, as I have — the landlord dies, 
 and the remainder man comes in ; the executors of 
 the deceased landlord will call in that half-year's rent, 
 and, by that means, oppress the tenant and hamper the 
 incoming mani — I suppose they are legally able to do so. 
 
 4028. And would riot that be very inconvenient 'i 
 — Very inconvenient. 
 
 4029. You would be for giving, as )'ou stated, the 
 landlord a veto, in case of a reasonable objection to the 
 tenant 1 — I think that would most nourly represent 
 the practice of the country ; my own prn otice is to allow 
 the tenant to put his land up to the highest bidder. Ijut 
 1 think the other would more nearly rejiresent the usual 
 pi'actice of the country — namely, that the tenant should 
 get the best price that he can, suliject to the landlord's 
 approval of the incoming tenant. 
 
 4030. But you would throw on the landlord tlic 
 onus of not only asserting but establishing his olijoe- 
 tion'? — Yes. 
 
 4031. Would you see any objection, then, if the 
 landlord and tenant differed as to the incoming pur- 
 chasei-, to leave that to be settled by the Land Court, 
 for instanced — No ; I don't see any objection to that. 
 I think, myself,, that the power which the landlord re- 
 servos to object to the tenant is of very little use to 
 him. 
 
 4032. Your idea, as I take it, would be — Mr. 
 O'Brien to make some general law applicable to the 
 whole of Ireland? — As far as possible. 
 
 4033. That the North should not have one law, aud 
 the South and West another ? — No. I think the dis- 
 tinction between the North and South, which already 
 exists, a very mischievous one, which gives people in 
 other parts of Ireland the idea that Ulster is treated on 
 a different system. 
 
 4034. Would you allow them to have a different 
 
 law on various estates by office rules and regulations ? 
 — As far as jjossible, I would make it uniform. 
 
 4035. Now the objection I have frequently heard 
 to the Ulster tenant-right as it stands, is the power 
 the landlord has of raising the rents which eats away 
 the tenants' interest, that would be got rid of by your 
 suggestion to have a fixed rentl — Yes ; if you mean a 
 rent fixed once for all under a perpetuity. 
 
 4036. Would you see any objection to the Land 
 Court fixing the rent in case the parties did not agree ? 
 — I don't see what other party could fix it but the 
 Land Court. 
 
 4037. If there was a public institution, such as the 
 Valuation Ofiice, to have a man go down on the land ? 
 — I think there should be some court presided over by 
 a lawyer who had practical experience of the country, 
 because a valuator may give a totally wrong im- 
 pression of the rent that ought to be paid, he would 
 find it extremely difficult to value the tenant's 
 improvements. 
 
 4038. C'liAiRMAX. — Then a lawyer should ascertain 
 the facts as to the interest in the improvements and 
 the interest in the farm, and the valuator act on his 
 instructions ?— I think a valuator should go before him 
 and give evidence as to the actual value of the land, 
 and the character and value of the improvements that 
 are apparent on the face of it, that the lawyer — and I 
 mean such men as the County Court Jvidges who 
 have great practical experience of this question — 
 should take into consideration all the circumstances 
 of the case, and attach such value to the evidence 
 as he thinks proper ; and I think between the lawyer 
 and the valuator you would get a pretty fair estimate. 
 But I anr not at all blind to the enormous difficulties 
 of this question, and I hare a great objection to any 
 interference betwcjen landlord and tenant on the 
 question of rent ; but these are difficulties that must 
 be faced. 
 
 4039. Baron Dowse. — You point out in this paper 
 some difficulties yourself. The rent must be fixed 
 once for all 1 — I think that would be much the best 
 plan if it can be done. 
 
 4040. In that case you suggest some compensation 
 to the landlord for the loss of his rights, such as they 
 were 1 — Yes, I think everybody would think the 
 landlord ought not to be bound to a fixed rent for ever, 
 without receiving some compensation. 
 
 4041. You are aware of the Kenewable Leasehold 
 Conversion Acf? — Yes. 
 
 4042. Are you aware, when a man applies to the 
 Court of Chancery for a fee-farm rent, that an inquiry 
 is had, not only as to the rent paid, but the possible 
 rent that would be paid, and that is all capitalized, 
 aud rent made out of it 1 — Yes, it is added to the rent. 
 I think that principle is a good one, but it cannot be 
 applied to the general mass of tenants, because the 
 one thing you nmst avoid at present is increasing the 
 rent. I vould much rather give the lavidlord his 
 compensation in a lump sum, and not in the form of a 
 raised rent. 
 
 4043. You think it would be practicable to give 
 the landlord his compensation by having a share of 
 the money arising from a sale of the holding in case 
 of a sale ? — Yes. 
 
 4044. And that a landlord should be satisfied to 
 take a share of thi; purchase-money in case of a sale ? 
 
 -I think, on introducing such a system as the Ulster 
 custom, you might compensate the landlord in that way. 
 
 4045. How would you compensate the landlord in 
 case the tenant did not sell 1 — You could not com- 
 pensate him ; but until a sale takes place, a claim for 
 compensation would not arise. 
 
 4046. And supposing the tenant did not want to sell? 
 — When I suggest giving compensation in this form 
 (in introducing'' the Ulster tenant-right, it is because 
 under the Ulster custom the rent is not a fixed one. 
 If you bind the landlord down to a rent fixed for ever 
 lie would be in a different position from a landlord 
 under the Ulster tenant-right, under which, it is true, 
 he parts mth the ownership of his land for ever, but 
 is not bound down to a fixed rent. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 145 
 
 4047. There is another thing you suggest havin" 
 the rent dependent on the periodical prices of produce ? 
 — Yes ; but I don't like that system. 
 
 4048. The other one you suggest is having an 
 arbitration between the parties? — Yes; there are 
 many objections to that, but, I believe, on the 
 whole it is the only practicable plan. 
 
 4049. I find a great number of witnesses here 
 say they have a great objection to go into the 
 Land Court, and they think any way of settling the 
 question outside law would be better. Do you think 
 that is a natural feeling on their part 1 — Very natural 
 indeed. 
 
 4050. Do you think it should be in any way con- 
 sidered when dealing with the qiiestion from their 
 point of view, that it is as important as anything else 
 to give the tenants confidence in the law and the 
 administration of it 1 — Certainly. 
 
 4051. And is it not advisable as far as it is con- 
 venient and consistent with justice to satisfy them 
 that their case has been iairly dealt with 1 — Certainly. 
 
 4052. Do you see any objection to the clauses of 
 the Land Act at present as far as their working is 
 concerned independent of the Bright clauses. What 
 do you think of the scale of compensation 1 — I think it 
 is inadeqiiate and unnecessary. I would leave that to 
 the discretion of a strong court, and I believe the 
 decisions of a good strong court composed of honest 
 
 ■and capable men, such as there are plenty of in 
 Ireland, would give general satisfaction and would 
 really do more justice to landlord and tenant than can 
 be done under the scale at present. 
 
 4053. I find some large tenants here say they require 
 as much protection as small ones, and are dissatisfied 
 with the valuation in their case and say there should 
 be no limitation, it should be left quite open 1 — I 
 really see no reason for limiting. Of course in the 
 case of a large tenant, any court composed of equitable 
 and sensible men would take into consideration whether 
 the tenant was likely, from his circumstances, to be 
 a free agent. If they considered him a free agent they 
 would naturally hold him to his contract ; if not they 
 would give him as much protection as they might 
 think proper. 
 
 4054. Would you allow any tenant to contract him- 
 self out of the Land Act that was passed for the 
 benefit of aU the tenants no matter whether they were 
 large or small ? — I have not considered that point, but 
 it might be absurd to prevent a man who is paying 
 two or three hundred a year from contracting himself 
 out of it. But I don't see where you can draw the 
 line. 
 
 4055. A tenant told us the other day that the large 
 tenants sometimes are more hampered and are less free 
 agents than tenants with a few acres ? — That might be 
 the case. 
 
 4056. Do you know that sometimes tenants are made 
 to contract to pay the county cess 1 — I know it is the 
 case. I do not approve of the practice. 1 don't say 
 that the landlord should not make any bai'gain he 
 pleases with his tenants, but I think it is impolitic 
 on the part of the landlord, and I think, as a general 
 rule, it is not well to evade an Act of Parliament. 
 
 4057. Do you think it is a bad practice ? — I think 
 it is. 
 
 4058. We have heard a gi-eat deal about driving 
 coache.=!-and-six through Acts of Parliament, and, I 
 suppose, driving a gig through them is just as bad 1 — 
 Indeed it is. 
 
 4059. A tenant told us the other day his landlord 
 made him contract to pay all the county cess, but he 
 had no voice in the spending of it ; the landlord kept 
 all that voice to himself, and paid none of the cess — 
 was that right 1 — I think that is very unsatisfactory ; 
 and the landlords have dealt a severe blow to the system 
 of county government by grand juries by not working 
 more cordially with the Land Act in this matter. 
 They have given a great deal of strength to the demand 
 for a change in the Grand Jury system. ' 
 
 4060. Have you turned your attention to the ques- 
 
 tion as to whether teuauLs should be allowed to borrow 
 from the Board of Works? — Yes, I think they ought, 
 where the landlord will not improve the land himself. 
 
 4061. Your opinion is that neither landlord or 
 temnt should be allowed to obstruct improvements 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 40(52. And you think the tenants should be allowed 
 to_ borrow from the Board of Works where the landlords 
 will not make the improvements t — Yes. 
 
 406 3. Will that be for the purpose of making 
 general improvements on the farm or making recla- 
 mations of what are called waste lands ? — I should 
 limit that power to cases in which the improvement 
 would undoubtedly pay. I don't consider building 
 would undoubtedly pay ; therefore, it would be hard 
 to pledge the landlord's estate for loans for that 
 purpose. 
 
 4064. Do you think the planting of trees would 
 pay 1 — I dare say it would pay in some cases, but I 
 should not allow the tenants to borrow money for 
 that purpose. I think they ought to be allowed to 
 borrow money for draining or grubbing if they can 
 satisfy the Board of Works' Inspector that it would 
 pay. A minimum of 10 per cent., I think, is reason- 
 able. 
 
 4065. Chairman. — If there were a tenant-right 
 system available the security to the Board of Works 
 would be the tenant's interest 1 — The tenant's interest 
 would be the first security, and after that the land- 
 lord's estate should be liable, but, of course, it would 
 be the duty of the Board c . Works' Inspector and 
 the interest of the landlord to see that the money was 
 laid out in such a way as to produce a minimum im- 
 provement of 10 per cent. ; and, therefore, this 
 liability would not be a hardship to the landlord. 
 
 4066. Then the consent of the landlord would be 
 required to the tenants getting the advance 1 — The 
 landlord ought not to have power to prevent the 
 tenant from getting the advance, but he might repre- 
 sent to the Board of Works' Inspector that the 
 improvement would not be worth 10 per cent., or 
 otherwise satisfy the Board that the loan ought to be 
 reiased. 
 
 4067. And the Board of Works would be the arbi- 
 trator 1 — Yes. 
 
 4068. Mr. Shaw. — Could you not make a particular 
 holding liable for the advance 1 — I have not considered 
 that. 
 
 4069. In case the farm was sold afterwards would 
 that be convenient ? — Yes ; that might be a fair ar- 
 rangement if there was no legal difficulty in the way. 
 
 4070. The O'CoNOR Don. — Would you make this 
 a first-charge on the land t — The first charge on the 
 landlord's estate, after the tenant-right is exhausted. 
 
 4071. Taking priority of the rent, would you 
 put it in the same position as loans advanced to the 
 landlord of the estate 1 — I would make it a first charge 
 in the same way as landlords' loans are, but I would 
 not allow the Board of Works to come down upon 
 the landlord until the tenant's interest was sold up to 
 satisfy the debt. 
 
 4072. Mr. Shaw. — It is merely a security for 
 capital 1 — Yes. There would be some difficulty in put- 
 ting it upon special holdings. , 
 
 4073. Baron Dowse. — Have you ever considered 
 the board called the Board of Works 1 — I have had a 
 good many transactions with them. I have bor- 
 rowed a good deal of mo.iey from time to time from 
 them. 
 
 4074. Did you find everything worked smoothly 1 — 
 Except that they are rather dilatory I have had no 
 difficulty with them until last spring. 
 
 4075. Theyare more active now 1 — They broke down 
 completely during last spring. 
 
 4076. You don't look upon emigration as any sort 
 of remedy for the relations of landlord and tenant in 
 thi.s country ?— I think emigration is a very wholesome 
 thing. 
 
 U 
 
 Sepl. 0, 1880. 
 
 Eiwurd W. 
 O'Brien, Esq. 
 
U6 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO 
 
 Sept. 9, 1S80. 
 O'Brien, Esq. 
 
 4077. Do 3'ou metto State emigraticin f — No ; I think 
 that is a very daflgeroUfi thing. 
 
 4078. If you leave emigrtttion to natural causes 
 you v.'Ciukl not throw any obstacle in the way of it 1 — 
 No. 
 
 4079. Eut you would not help people hy • State 
 ■money to emigrate from Ireland? — I have seen no 
 
 reason for doing so. from what I know of the country. 
 
 4080. Isn't there one defect in any scheme of State 
 emigration that it takes the best people away;, the 
 young and healthy, and leaves the worst behind, the 
 old and decrepid %^-Yes ; any system, of State' emi- 
 gration would have that effect. It would be impos- 
 sible to get rid of the people you 'want to get rid- of 
 — the old people and the worthless. The experiment 
 has been tried by the boardss of guardians, and it has^ 
 failed. I know what has happened in the union of 
 
 . which I am chairman,' Newcastle West. People have 
 been sent away, and they- have become chargeable 
 again on the rates. 
 
 4081. Mr. Shaw. — Have families been sent, or is it 
 merely individual members? — I cannot mention any 
 ■particular case. 
 
 4082. They were paupers ? — ^Yes. 
 
 4083. Baron Dowse. — It is unfair to the country 
 to denude it of its active young men and women ? — 
 I think it wo'uld be an injury to do it by any arti- 
 licial means. '■'■ • !.. 
 
 4084. Do you think it woiild be fair to the other 
 country to send them your lame, halt, and blind ? — 
 No ; I think it would be unfair. 
 
 408.5. These things, you think, must be left to the 
 ordinary natural laws ? — Yes ; so far as my experience 
 goes. 
 
 4086. You have given us a resume of your evidence 
 ■which I would like' to have on the notes. You say 
 .you sum up your suggestions in this. You rocom- 
 , mend that the tenant be entitled to purchase the fee or 
 
 !i leasehold interest?— -That is only a suggestion, for I 
 don't suppose Parliament would go.as far as that. , For 
 practical purposes, we may assume that all that could 
 ■ be done is that limited owners should be empowered 
 to sell or give perpetuities to the tenants. 
 
 4087. Suppose every limited owner to sell and his 
 tenants to purchase their holdings ? — Yes. 
 
 4088. To purchase whether ii;^, be the fee or long 
 leases ? — Yes. 
 
 4089. And that steps should be taken to ensure 
 that, wherever there was .a sale the land should be 
 easily triinsferable ? — Yes. 
 
 40QO. Andto prevent accumulation, of incumbrances 
 on the title ? — Yes. 
 
 4091. You said that one of your recommendations 
 would be to make the Ulster custom a' reality and 
 extend it to all parts of Ireland where it can be in- 
 
 ' troduced without palpable iojustice ?— I am informed 
 in Ulster it is frequently not a reality at present. I 
 am not personally acquainted with the fiict, but I 
 have no doubt my information is correct. ' ' ' 
 
 4092. You say — to put the matter in a, nutshell 
 ■ — according to yOUr opinion tenants, not willing 
 or not able to purchase the interest in their holdings 
 and not coming under the Ulster custom should 
 be placed under the protection of ^' court armed 
 with full powers to administei- equity. What do 
 you mean by that?-— The powers 1 mean are' those of 
 giving compensation. 
 
 4093. That is on the lines of the Land Act ?— Yes, 
 I would take the Land Act in these cases as far as it 
 goes, and simply empower the courts to deal more 
 liberally than at present. 
 
 4094 That is only a matter for secondary consider- 
 tion in view of the extension to the whole of Ireland 
 of the real Ulster tenant-right system ? — Yea.- 
 
 409.5. And failing thatyou would widen and extend 
 the po\\-ers under the present Act ? — Yes. , 
 
 4096. And you have given u3 your view as to the 
 power of borrowing ? — Yes. 
 
 4097. And in your opinion nothing short of -per- 
 petual ownership will or ought to satisfy the tenant? 
 
 — I do not think it would ; ten years ago less might 
 have satisfied them, but now it wiU not. 
 
 4098. And this is your opinion, ' ' That if the Govern- 
 ment think they can effect a- final settlement of the 
 land question without going as far as, this, they are 
 deceiving themselves, and sowing the secdsfor a fresh 
 crop of agitation and • disloyalty " ?-^Tha't is my 
 023inion. 
 
 4099. Mr.- SiiAw.— The e.xtension of tlie Ulster 
 custom to the whole of Ireland, you think- would cover 
 all that ? — I think so, practically. I am not sm-e, 
 however, it may not- be too late to settle .the question 
 that way now j a couple of years or so ago it would 
 not have been so. . . 
 
 '4100. Baron Dowse. — "And short of that a large 
 and libeiral-extension of the Land Act for the whole 
 of Ireland, and the law, fairly administered"? — Yes, 
 and the law firmly administered. 
 
 4101. In all its branches? — Yes, in all its branches. 
 
 4102. The O'Coxor Don.— -You say to make the 
 . Ulster custom a reality ; what do you mean by that? 
 
 — -I mean that the value of the tenant-right should 
 not be eaten away by either office rules or unfair m- 
 crease of the rent. 
 
 4103. Mr. SiiAw.— As in Ulster ?— Yes. 
 
 4104. At present?— Yes. 
 
 - 4105. The O'CoNOR Don. — Would you propose to 
 have the rent settled-by some indejsendent tribunal? — 
 Yes, if the parties could not agree; but I should bo 
 exceedingly sorry to stepi in between landlord and ten- 
 ant to fix the rent ; I would merely interfere if they 
 failed to settle it in any other way. 
 
 4106. Do you propose to make the custom universal 
 all over Ireland whether the- o\viier wished it estab- 
 lished on his estate or not? — I should like to see it 
 done. I would not go so far as to say I p)ropose to do 
 it in every case, for ther* may be parts of the country 
 with which I am not acquainted in which it would bo a 
 hardship. There are parts of the country in which it 
 would be impolitic to give the tenant as he stands 
 at present perpetual occupancy of his holding. 
 For instance, I will take the case of the mountain 
 lands in Kerry with which I am acquainted; it 
 would be impolitic to give the tenants who now have 
 the right of grazing over these lands — hundreds of 
 acres, perhaps — an interest that they could hold for 
 ever against the landlord. It would not be in the public 
 interest to do so, it might be very much to the detri- 
 ment of the public. 
 
 4107. As a general rule, however, you would give 
 the right ? — As a general rule. 
 
 4108. And would you. give that right to the occu- 
 pier without any payment on his part ? — No ; 
 not where the custom does not prevail ; but where it 
 already prevails I Would recognise it, and in a liberal 
 form. I would give it to persons who hold on 
 estates where the right to sell prevails, but does not 
 prevail to the full extent of the most liberal form of 
 Ulster custom, as far bOuld be doAe with justice. 
 
 4109. Put wher^'it does not prevail you would re- 
 quire that the occupier should pay soitiething for acquir- 
 ing this right ? — That would depend on the circum- 
 stances. 
 
 4110. Mr. Shaw. — A good deal would depend on 
 the rent paid ? — No. 
 
 '4111. The O'CoNOK Don. — You would not give the 
 tenant on an estate let at a low rent the' right to 
 hold at that rent, and free sale, without paying some- 
 thing for it ? — Of course not. . Where a man held his 
 land at a low rent, if he Was given the right to sell, not 
 having possessed it before, he should pay in propor- 
 tion. ■ ~ ■ ' 
 
 4112. As a rule are the rents high in your part of 
 the country ?— I could scarcely give an answer as to 
 that, they vary so much ; but I should think, on the 
 whole, the rents are reasonable enough, that is to say, 
 that the tenant can live fairly well. 
 
 4113. But suppose there was to be readjustment of 
 rent by any fair tribunal, which do you think would 
 that lead to a lowering or raising of rents as a rule ? 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 147 
 
 Tliat would depend a good deal on the principles the 
 tribunal went upon. If tenants' improvements are 
 excluded I question whether there would be any great 
 increase. I speak from my own estate in Limerick. 
 It is mostly grazing land, and, therefore, the land that 
 has been most valuable of late years. I believe it was 
 rented as high forty or fifty yea,rs ago as it is now. 
 I have given several leases lately, and I had, therefore, 
 reason to go into the valuation, and I have not seen 
 fit in mQst cases to raise the rents. I think the tefl-ants 
 were paying as much as they could fairly be expected 
 to pay. , . : . . . . 
 
 4114. Are there any lands in your neighbourhood 
 rented higher ,^There are, and others lower. ,, 
 
 4115. Do you think these should be lowered imder 
 such an arbitration or any tribunal appointed? — I 
 think any tribunal appointed would be very slow to 
 lower rents that have been paid for a considerable 
 time, and ought to be very slow to do so. 
 
 4116. Then you think that the result of the tribunal 
 would be that it practically wovdd leave rents very 
 mucli where they are^that where they are low tliey 
 would be fixed perpetuallj' at that, and that where they 
 are high they would be left' so V — I understand that one 
 «ssential featixre about the Ulster custom is, that the 
 rent Shall not , be fixed but variable, and therefore if 
 the tribunal decided that the rent was to be fixed at a 
 certain figure at a certain time, it would not follow 
 that that was to be maintained for all time. 
 
 4117. Baron Dowse.- — The Ulster custom does not 
 lay down any rale except that the rent shall be fair for 
 the' time being f — That is what I understand. 
 
 4118. The O'OoNOE Don. — Your idea is that with 
 the custom the rent should be settled by arbitration ? — 
 By the arbitration of a Land Court where the parties 
 cannot agree. , ' 
 
 4119. Mr. Shaw.— The perpetuity you speak of is 
 another thing altogether- for which purchase money 
 woidd be paid ? — Yes, and there the rent would be fixed 
 once for all. In whatever system is adopted for fixing 
 rents you must encounter great difficulties, and it is a 
 thing to be done only under extreme pressure, and in 
 cases of absolute necessity. 
 
 4120. The O'CoNoa Dox — Do you allow free sale 
 on your own estate 1—1 don't allow the sale of holdings 
 from year to y-ear, but, if a tenant wishes to sell, 
 I give him a lease and let him sell it for whatever he 
 can get for it. > 
 
 4121. "VVliat is the general length, of the lease? — 
 Thiity or thirty-one years. . : 
 
 4122. Is that since the passing of the Land Act or 
 before it ? — 1 introduced the system a year or two 
 before the Land Act was. passed, and I have seen no 
 reason for changing the form or term of the lease. I 
 think it has worked satisfactorily. 
 
 4123., Are you the owner in fee? — 'No, the tenant 
 for life. 
 
 4124. Then you are bound down by settlement and 
 cannot do as you wish ? — No. 
 
 4125. Andiyoiiwish that the powers of such limited 
 owners as yourself should be increased ? — Yes, if I had 
 the power,. I would try^ the experiment of giving my 
 tenants leases for ever, witji a moderate fine. 
 
 4126. Mr. Shaw. — You cannot at present ? — No. 
 
 ' 4127. And you think a good many tenants would 
 avail themselves of such a prop)osal "h — ^I cannot saythat 
 of my> own estate, for I believe they are satisfied I afn a 
 good landlord,' and that they. have nothing to fear from 
 me, but I think there areagood many who would avail 
 •themselves of it if they had any idea I was going to sell 
 the estate. ..... 
 
 4128. The O'Conor DoN;^If this system of giving 
 the occupiers of the land pei-petuity at a fair rent, 'and 
 free sale were established, would you apply it to future 
 lettings, as well as existing ones ?-^No. 
 
 4129. You woidd have it done once for all, and then 
 leave future transactions free 1 — Yes. 
 
 4130. You said you would advocate that the State 
 
 should make advances for the tenants to purchase in all Sept. a, isso. 
 cases ? — Not in all cases, individual cases. KdwartI w 
 
 4131. What distinctions should be made by the O'iJrien, ]",s;. 
 State? — I tliink where the landlord voluntarily sells the 
 fee, the State might advance a certain proportion of the 
 money, as it is empowered 'to do under the Bright 
 Clauses, but supposing a scheme were adopted under 
 which the tenants were allowed to compel landlords to 
 sell, I think it would be a very dangerous thing to 
 involve the State in Such large transactions as would 
 follow such a' scheme. 
 
 ■ 4132. That is the distinction you would make? — 
 Yes. ' ' ' 
 
 4133. That is that you would not have the State 
 advance the money where the landlord was compelled 
 to sell ?— Yes. ■ ; ' 
 
 4134. Would you tliink it a fair alternative to oSer 
 to the landlords, either that they should grant this 
 perpetuity to their tenants at rents to be fixed by a 
 court or by arbitration or to sell their e.states ? — I 
 think it would in niost cases ;' it would be a.:tolerably 
 fair alternative. I do not think landlords would suft'er 
 if they granted perpetuities and got a fine j'.they would 
 be in abetter position in most respects than at present. 
 
 4135. Could yon apply a rule like that all over the 
 country ?^There would, no doubt, be many cases and 
 classes of cases iil which exceptions ought to be made 
 to any general rule, and such cases ought to be dealt 
 with, each on its own merits by some competent court. 
 In reference to these perpetuities there are' certain 
 cases in which the tenant might fairly be considered 
 entitled to ' perpetuity, without payment at all. For 
 instance, I am 'sure there are a good many cases, 
 especially in the north (where the people are extremely 
 industrious), in which the tenant or Ms forefathers 
 have gone on improving mountain and barren land, 
 and in these cases at present the landlord is actually 
 enjoying a rent founded not so much on the original 
 value of the land^ which was perhaps Is. or 2s. 6d. 
 an acre or less, as upon the improved value of the 
 land, an improved value which has been created by 
 the tena,nts ; I think in cases like that if the landlord 
 has been for a considerable time in receipt of a rent 
 founded on the tenants' impi'ovements, I would say to 
 him, " You shan't for the future go on raising your 
 rent in consequence of the tenants'. improvements, you 
 shall give the tenaij.t perpetuity at the present rent." 
 
 4136. Take a case like this, suppose the lands have 
 been sold in jthe Landed Estates Court, and bought by 
 a, new , purchaser, who paid the , foruier owner the 
 purchase money for these improvements, w;ould you 
 taring such a pxirchaser under the same rule ? — ^That is 
 a very (iiflicult case. On the whole, the purchaser 
 must have been taken to have bought the estate with 
 all i-ts liabilities. 
 
 4137., Mr. Shaw. — And with a rent on it? — Yes. 
 
 4138. The O'Conoe Don. — Suppose the former 
 owner had raised the rents before the purchaser 
 bought the property, and that the raised rental 
 was due to the tenants' improvements, which the 
 purchaser had paid for, would you consider that in 
 any readjustment of rent the tenant would have a right 
 to claim a reduction of , rent because he had made the 
 improvements himself ? — I do not think it is possible 
 to settle this land question without doing injustice 
 here and there to: some parties, and wbat you have to 
 consider is how you will do the greatest justice on the 
 whole. It will be necessary in some cases to deal hardly 
 with thepurchasersinthe Landed Estates.Co'urt,in order 
 to deal fairly with the tenant. If you can compensate 
 them it should be done, but if you cannot, the interests 
 of the tenants are' paraniount, they are the mass,,Gt 
 the people of the country,, and it depends on the tenantc 
 good' will, and the tenants'' disposition ' to, support the 
 law, whether it-is to be a civUized, country, or what it 
 is at present, a barbarous country. Therefore, i;he 
 tenant is to be first considered. Compensate tlie 
 landlord if you possibly can. Let the j)arty who pur- 
 
 U2 
 
148 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 9,1880. cliases the benefit compensate Lim if possible; if not 
 "Tw compensate liim out of Imperial funds. 
 
 O'Brien Epq 4139. But you tbink such a landlord would have a 
 
 just claim for compensation 1 — I cannot say I have con- 
 sidered that point, and I should rather not express an 
 opiaiou on it in a hurry. 
 
 4140. Mr. Shaw. — It is hard to say who should 
 compensate him — whether the former owner who get 
 the money, or who 1 — Yes. 
 
 4141. Chairman. — ^You think if it is done in the 
 interests of the State ; that is arising from what may be 
 called a State department like the Landed Estates 
 Court ; the State ought to make compensation I — I 
 should rather not express an opinion on that point for 
 I have not considered it fairly. 
 
 4141a. Mr. Shaw; — Have yon seen the suggestion 
 as to the establishment of a Commission to carry out 
 these sales under the Bright clauses in future to the 
 tenants as an intermediary between the landlords and 
 tenants f — I have to a certain extent considered the 
 suggestion. I think it would encounter serious diffi- 
 culty, but I do not think the Bright clauses can ever 
 be brought to operate properly without something of 
 the kind. The landlord and tenant cannot deal together. 
 
 4142. This Commission would be a good means of 
 considering those equity matters that crop up on those 
 estates constantly 1 — 1 confess I should rather not see 
 any attempt to carry out a system of brokerage in 
 that way between landlord and tenant by commissioners. 
 I should ■ prefer it should be entrusted to some very 
 small body of men like land agents and not to a 
 Government department. 
 
 4143. It is not supposed to be a Government 
 department, but a Commission of such men as you 
 suggest t — I don't think I would invest them with any 
 sort of legal powers, except the power to purchase 
 estates and sell them in detail to the tenants. 
 
 4144. No but merely empower them to make terms 
 with the landlord for his estate in the first instance, 
 and then to break it up into small lots for sale to the 
 tenants'? — The way in which the scheme could be 
 worked satisfactorily I think is this — if you had a 
 small number of men, say a valuator and an agent, or 
 a couple of valuators and agents. 
 
 4145. And a lawyer? — Yes, and a lawyer. Then 
 the valuator should go down and inspect the estates 
 for sale in the Landed Estates Court, and rejiort to 
 the Commission his opinion of their value, and there- 
 upon the Commission should buy the estate when there 
 was a favourable opportunity of doing so, and where 
 they could buy in for the State without being imposed 
 on. It would of course require judgment to be 
 exercised. 
 
 4146. Chairman. — Do you think they should also 
 undertake the questions of valuation between the land- 
 lord and tenant 1 — No, 1 think they would have enough 
 to do in their own department without undertaking that 
 work. They should be simply brokers in the way I 
 have mentioned. 
 
 4147. Mr. Shaw. — They should have a large staff 
 to appoint as arbitrators between the landlord and 
 tenant 1 — They might have a number of skilled men to 
 act as arbitrators, but I don't think they would require 
 to have a large stafi for the purposes of the Bright 
 clauses. I think one man would be sufficient to carry 
 out the purchases under the Bright clauses. 
 
 4148. There would not be many disputes, you think 1 
 — I think we are travelling from the point started as 
 to the Commission. I do not think a Commission ap- 
 pointed to act as brokers between the landlord and 
 tenant, should travel outside its o^vn department, but I 
 think the Land Court might advantageously call upon 
 the valuators attached to this Commission, and use them 
 for their own purposes if they had time to spare, for 
 they would naturally acquire considerable experience 
 of the value of land, and the estates in the country. 
 
 4149. You think it would be an advantage to 
 multiply the number of owners of land? — Un- 
 doubtedly. 
 
 4150. And to get as many farmers as possible to 
 become owners of their own land 1 — Yes. 
 
 4151. How low would you put the limit on that? — 
 I see no reason to put a limit to it, for judging from my 
 experience I think some of the best farmers would be 
 found amongst those who hold an acre or an acre and 
 a half at present. I speak from experience of them in 
 my own county. 
 
 4152. Your recommendations are the result of study 
 and observation 1 — Yes. 
 
 4153. And you make them as a landlord yourself, 
 without any fear of their interfering unduly with 
 you or injuring you 1 — As much in the interests of 
 the landlord as the tenant. 
 
 4154. And you have no doubt what you suggest 
 would materially aid in the improvement of the 
 country ? — No doubt, whatever. 
 
 4155. And lead to the satisfaction of the people's 
 minds as a general rule? — I have no doubt about it 
 whatever. 
 
 4156. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have you known of many 
 evictions having taken place in your neighbourhood ? 
 — You mean evictions otherwise than for non-payment 
 of rent ? 
 
 4157. Evictions by the landlord? — I have knowa 
 of a good many for non-payment of rent, but I don't 
 think evictions for other causes common. I have 
 had occasion myself to evict for non-payment of rent 
 or to compel tenants to sell. 
 
 4158. You have not known many other cases? — 
 No, I think not, in my part of the country. 
 
 4159. If so why would you suggest an increase in 
 the penal clauses of the Land Act ? — For this reason I 
 think although the tenant is practically throughout the 
 greater part of Ireland with which I am acquainted, in 
 a position of considerable security as regards eviction 
 if he pays his rent, he has not the same security as to 
 his rent, and I think an improving tenant is liable (in 
 fact I am perfectly certain it is done) to have his im- 
 provements taken from him, wholly or in part, by 
 having the rent raised. I do not think the power 
 conferred on the court by the Land Act is sufficient 
 to prevent what all good landlords admit is an un- 
 just thing. 
 
 4160. We had a gentleman examined here the 
 other day, himself a chairman, Mr. De Moleyns, who 
 rather agreed that if the chairman had power not 
 merely to give the tenant compensation, but to pre- 
 vent his being put out, to order that he should remain 
 on the land, it would be better ? — I think that would 
 probably meet the difficulty; but my objection to that 
 is that it would be travelling outside the principles of 
 the Land Act, and therefore it would be difficult to 
 pass in Parliament. 
 
 4161. Baron Dowse. — If it could be passed, you 
 would think it riglit to do it ?— I think so. 
 
 4162. Mr. Kavanagh. — You don't object to the 
 interference with the rights of contract? — I do object 
 to interference with cent] 'act, but I think in some 
 cases, in the actual condition of Ireland, it is necessary. 
 I regard it as a most unfortunate necessity. 
 
 4163. Do you think it is necessary in the case of 
 these wealthy large men to whom the clause gives the 
 power of contracting themselves out of the Act? — I 
 think in some cases it may be necessary. I think 
 there is no sufficient reason why what you may call 
 large tenants — I don't mean very large capitalists, but 
 tenants say up to £100 a year or over £100 — £300 or 
 £400 a year — should be discouraged from improving 
 their farms. I think it would be a great hardship if 
 they were not protected by the law. As long as the 
 landlords possess the power of raising the rent in- 
 definitely — practically they possess that power — the 
 tenant's improvements are not safe. 
 
 4164. I never have contracted myself with any 
 tenant that he was to put him.self outside the Act, but 
 it appears to me where you have a wealthy man in an 
 independent position, it is rather, I may say, a slur on 
 his intelligence to say he is not capable of making an 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 149 
 
 arrangement witli liis landlord 1 — I do not see, as I have 
 already said to Baron Dowse, what harm you could do 
 by bringing that man under the Act, and allowing him 
 to take advantage of it if he likes, because any coiirt 
 will take into consideration the fact that a man is in 
 an independent position when it comes to deal with 
 him. 
 
 4165. But it is not to enable him to take advantage 
 of the Act if he likes that you propose, but to make it 
 compulsory on him to take advantage of it ? — I think 
 it is better a man should not be allowed to contract 
 himself out of the Act as a general rule. There may 
 be exceptions to it. 
 
 4166. I am speaking of the class of large tenants 
 generally 1 — I am sure £50 is much too low. 
 
 4167. That is a question of degree, but you do not 
 on the general principle object to the interference with 
 the rights of contract 1 — Having regard to the circum- 
 stances of the country, I do not see that interference 
 would work any harm. 
 
 4168. Baron Dowse. — You think desperate dis- 
 eases require desperate remedies 1 — Yes, I look upon 
 the state of Ireland as almost desperate. 
 
 41G9. ?,Ir. Kavanagh. — You hardly look upon that 
 state of disease as existing amongst those wealthy 
 men 1 — I am by no means certain of that. If you 
 look to the constitution of farmers' clubs and the class 
 of men at present engaged in the agitation you will 
 find a considerable number are men in that position, 
 and 1 don't thiuk it is desirable to encourage these 
 persons to continue in a course of agitation, and I am 
 quite sure a great number of persons, paying over 
 .£100 a year, are as much in a position of dependence 
 as others, and many of these are inclined to improve 
 their farms. But as to where j"ou should draw the 
 limit, that is a question on which I give no opinion. 
 
 4170. As to the general extension of real Ulster 
 tenant-right you v/ould be in favour of that where it 
 could be done without palpable injustice ? — Yes. 
 
 4171. What are the cases you consider cases of 
 palpable injustice's — I can give you an instance. 
 Take an estate on which the Ulster custom has 
 been prohibited for generations past. There are 
 such estates, and they are often very well managed, 
 but this rule has been enforced, and money has 
 not passed between the outgoing aird the incoming 
 tenant with the knowledge of the landlord ; I think .it 
 would be an injustice to saddle that estate with such 
 a custom without some sort of compensation to the 
 landlord, but I don't think it would be an injusticS to 
 saddle it with the custom on the assumption that you 
 can make the landlord compensation. 
 
 4172. Baron DqWse. — Could you not give him that 
 compensation by an increased rent ?■ — Yes, in some 
 cases where the land could bear it. 
 
 4173. And in some cases you could not 1 — In some 
 cases you could not ; for suppose a case where the 
 estate is let at its full value, and we must assume 
 that as a rule estates are so let, if this rule were applied 
 in a case like that, the landlord would naturally say, 
 "No, thank you, I do not like your compensation, it 
 is no compehsation at all." Here is a tenant who 
 pays £100 a year, and you say to the landlord, " Get 
 £110 a year from that man by way of compensation " 
 for introducing this system which he believes would 
 injure him. I believe it would be a great hardship to 
 force the landlord to take the compensation in that 
 form. He may be able to get his £100 a year, but 
 he may not be able to get his £110. 
 
 4174. It would be placing him in an invidious 
 position '' — Yes, I think so. 
 
 4175. The tenants on these estates when the 
 custom does not exist have a feeling of uncertainty, 
 and what remedy would you give them? — If you 
 find you cannot with justice introduce the system you 
 
 must only put the tenant under the protection of a Sept. o, isso. 
 
 ^O'^^'i- _ _ Edward W. 
 
 4176. Improving the scale? — Yes, and giving more O'Brien, Esq. 
 power to deal with such cases ; but I think it would 
 
 be much better (if it could be done without real 
 injustice to the landlord) to put them under the 
 Ulster custom ; and, when I say injustice, I mean 
 jjecuniary injustice, for yoti cannot put a value on 
 landlords' feelings. 
 
 4177. Mr. Kavanagh. — lam afraid it is past that 
 now 1 — Yes. 
 
 4178. Chairman. — Yott think the result would be 
 that it would become very general from the examples 
 you have seen of how it worked 1 — I think it would. 
 I think the landlords who prohibit sales on their 
 estates do so very frequently, not because they believe 
 it is their interest to do so, but because they believe 
 it is a bad thing to introduce, and, in prohibiting sales 
 of farms, tliey act on the highest principles. I 
 know that is the case with several landlords with 
 whom I am acquainted — if they do not allow it, it is 
 because they believe it is injurious to the country, and 
 not because it is injurious to themselves. I know that 
 many landlords have a great objection, and, I have no 
 doubt, an objection, to some extent well-founded, tn the 
 Ulster custom. I believe there are many objections to 
 it, and that you will be told so in Ulster when you 
 go there. 
 
 4179. Mr. Kavanagh. — Don't you think there are 
 parts of the West and North that are over-populated? 
 — The Western coast and the Northern coast are very 
 much over-populated, having regard to the nature of 
 the soil and the means of living. 
 
 4180. Would it be desirable to relieve the popula- 
 tion in some way ? — It might be desirable to consoli- 
 date the holdings ; but I cannot see how that could 
 be done by any scheme of emigration. I am inclined 
 to think, if you could introduce a system, by a change 
 of law or otherwise, by which there would be plenty 
 of employment given generally throughout Ireland, 
 you would find that these poor people, who are con- 
 gregated there in a state of absolute poverty, would 
 find employment in other parts, and they would move 
 backward and forward to earn money, just as they do 
 at present by going over to England. I think in that 
 way they would be able to support themselves very well. 
 
 4181. How would yoit start to do tliat ? — By settling 
 the Land question. 
 
 4182. Do you think that that would give employ- 
 ment 1 — I do, largely ; for I believe, if you could esta- 
 blish a sound system of land tenure, the result would 
 be so large an improvement in the country that the 
 other questions would solve themselves. The ques- 
 tions concerning condition of the labourers and the 
 state of their dwellings and emigration would before, 
 long solve themselves. 
 
 4183. The O'Conoe Don. — Isn't it something in 
 that way these people support themselves already — ■ 
 by going away to England and elsewhere to work ?— 
 No doubt. 
 
 4184. They go to England every year to work? — 
 Yes. 
 
 4185. Baron Dowse. — And is it not a fact that one 
 of the great causes of distress in the West was the 
 want of labour demand in England? — No doubt, that 
 contributed largely to the distress of last year, but a 
 gi-eat part of the permanent distress is due to igno- 
 rance and apathy. A great many of the people who 
 live in apathy and idleness and dirt in those parts 
 might get employment if they were sufficiently enter- 
 prising and educated to do so. 
 
 4186. Chairman. — They have no idea of any world 
 except their own homes 1 — A great many of them, 
 1 am sure, have not. 
 
150 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 9, 18S0. 
 
 Arthur 
 Hamill, Esq., 
 ij.c. 
 
 Arthur Hamill, esq., q.c, examined. 
 
 4187. The O'Conor Don You are the County 
 
 Court judge for the- counties of Ex)seGmmon and 
 Sligo ?— -I am. 
 
 4188. And before that you "were Chairman of some 
 other counties 1 — I "was fof the West Riding of Cork. 
 I was appointed Chairman of the West Riding' of 
 Cork in July, 18G&, Iwas transferred in February, 1872, 
 to Roscommon, and under the County Cotirt Act, 1877, 
 I was, in June, 1879, appointed to the union of Sligo 
 with Roscommon. 
 
 4189. You are not Chairman then for the whole 
 QQunty of Sligo, ? — Yes. 
 
 4190. I thought you said the Union of Sligo ?^The 
 vmion of county Sligo with Roscommon. 
 
 4191. Do you mean the union of the two counties? 
 —Yes, under the Act of Parliament Sligo and Ros- 
 common are bracketted together. I have no memo- 
 randa of the cases heard by me under the Land Act 
 in the West Riding of Cork. I have a recollection 
 that there were a considerable number, and I don't 
 believe that any were appealed irom except one — : 
 that is that in the decisions I arrived at no ajjpeals 
 were taken except in one case. 
 
 4191a. What has been about the average number of 
 cases in the county Roscommon where you were longest? 
 — I wrote to my deputy clerk of the peace to give me 
 a list, and I find that from 1872 till the present year I 
 heard and made rulings in 190 cases. 
 
 4192. Baron Dowse. — For how long? — From 1872 
 tUl the present year, 1880. I have endeavoured to 
 summarise ,these as well as I can, and I wUl state 
 the result. Of those cases thirteen were appealed, two 
 were struck out before the Judge at the Assizes, the 
 parties haying entered into an agreement to exchange 
 land. 
 
 , 4193. Mr. Shaw. — Was this all in Roscommon ? — 
 I am speaking only of Roscommon at present. 
 
 4194. And not of Sligo? — No, I will speak of it ina few 
 moments. Four of my decrees were reduced in amount. 
 Three of the sums were small, and I will refer to one of 
 them by-and-by which was reduced considerably in 
 amount. One was increased in amount — not very 
 largely. Two were affirmed altogether, and tour were 
 withdrawn beiore the hearing came on before the Judge. 
 The case that I referred to in which the amount was 
 decreased considerably was one which has made me iorm 
 an opinion that, to make the Land Act more usetul it 
 might be improved in one or other ot two ways. I 
 had in the case I refer to awarded — after deducting 
 the rent that was due and other things — a sum alto- 
 gether of £495 17s. id., and u])on the hearing, itvras 
 reduced to £312 17s. 2cZ., making,' a difierenco I think 
 of about £183. The learned Judge who tried the 
 aj)peal did not take the same view that I had tnkeu 
 with regard to improvements that had been made by 
 the tenant. The tenant's evidence before me was to 
 this efiect — that many years back the predecessor iu 
 title of his then landlord had thirteen tenants iipon 
 what he, the tenant, had made into one farm — that 
 it had been in, twenty-six fields — ^^that he had removed 
 ditches and home-steadings^rrthat he had purchased the 
 tenants out for £364, and, lie h.ad brought all ithis 
 land into cultivation in five fields — that he had fenced 
 it well, and had made substantial improvements in 
 that way. I allowed htm £364 lO*'. 6rf. — the sum he 
 had paid the, outgoing tenants with the sanction. of 
 the then landlord, and the learned , Judge . who . tried 
 the appeal confirmed that. I allowed several sums 
 for improvements for what I thought were perma- 
 
 nent improvemeate, and • reclamation of waste land, 
 for the ditches were removed and the little hovels 
 and the little streets round about — all were taken 
 away, and the plough made, to run through the ground, 
 and albbroiTght into ■- cultivation. The 'teamed Judge 
 did. not. concur with me, and my decree- was reduced 
 by £183. . It does occur to me that if that principle 
 of Ulster tenant-right, free sale to an unobjectionable 
 tenant could be introduced into other parts of Ireland, 
 it would be a very important element in satisfying 
 the public mind, and it would have satisfied this 
 tenant, for I am sure. that any incoming tenant would 
 have given £600 for his holdings I refer to that case 
 with that object, and I also refer to two cases that 
 occurred in bligo. 
 
 4195. Mr, Shaw .^ Was the other case an ejectment 
 for non-payment of rent? — None of them werefoi? 
 non-payment of rent. 
 
 4196. Baron Dowse. — It was on notice to quit? 
 — On notice to quit. 
 
 4197. Mr. Shaw. — And was the man turned out? 
 — The man was turned out, and his landlord is in 
 possession. The two cases that I refer in Sligo to were 
 of this character. Two men who were farmers were 
 served with notice to quit, then with the ordinary 
 ejectment, and then came on the land claim. lii 
 those two cases I remember that I allowed the 
 fullest amount I could give for disturbance. I allowed 
 them a fair amount for buildings and lastrngimprove-i 
 nieiits, and if I could have gone beyond the seven 
 years, in these two instances, "I would have donJe so. 
 Before me were put two pass-books, one for each of 
 the tenants. The receipts for rent were marked from 
 half-year to half-year, in the pass-books, reguMrly 
 showing for Several years, perhaps for eight or -nine 
 years, the payments made by them of I'ent continuously, 
 and they appeared to me to be the best paying tenants I 
 ever saw. No one half-year was permitted to overtake 
 the second — before November the May rent was jjaid, 
 and before May the November rent was paid. I am 
 of opinion if the third clause, which is the disturbance 
 clause, could be enlarged, it might be done beneficially. 
 I have taken the liberty of putting my view of this 
 clause on paper. I think if the comjsensation for 
 disturbance was increased to the extent of ten years of 
 the annual rent, instead of the seven years, it might be 
 beneficial. 
 
 4198. The O'Conor Doj^. — You would propose a 
 new scale ? — Yes, an increased scale. 
 
 4190. In these cases you have alluded to, were the 
 landlords purchasers under the Landed Estates Court, 
 new purchasers ? — The first case I spoke of was. 
 
 4200. In that case was the landlord a tenant-farmer 
 himself ? — He or liis father had purchased the fee. 
 
 4201. He was in the class of life of a tenant-farmer ? 
 — He was a man who worked his own farm. Ho 
 would not be called .^ tenant-fai-mer, but a gentleman- 
 f a,rmer of his own land. I should mention .that in 
 this and another case dual clauns were put before me, 
 one on the Ulster tenant-right, and the other, 
 assuming that to fail, iipon the statutable right given 
 .by the Act of Parliament. After hearing the first 
 case for a whole day, I was of opinion that the claim 
 under the IJlster tenant-right had failed. The jjarties 
 rested satisfied with my decision, and did not take it 
 further, although I suggested an appeal. ' 
 
 . ,, 4202. Have there been any cases in Roscommon or 
 Sligo in which a claim analogous to the Ulster custom 
 has been established ? — Not before me ; only what I 
 have stated. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 151 
 
 4203. Has a claim been put in under the custom in 
 manyeasf'K? — Intlie two cases I liave referred to, and 
 tliey were against the same landlord. They both 
 failed, as I have stated, the evidence not supporting 
 them. 
 
 4204. Are you referring tb cases in" Eosoommon or 
 Sligo? — In Eosoommon. A great many of the cases 
 that came before me in Eoscommon were by landlords 
 seeking to raise rents; 126 of- the cases I have men- 
 tioned were to raise rents. I was tolcl that from the 
 year 1S73 oia there had been a great deal of prosperity 
 among the farming classes in Eoscommon, Tvhich is 
 principally a grazing county. ■ Farmers got large 
 prices for their cattle, and landlords thought they got 
 too little rent for their land. When those cases ciime 
 before me I saw that the tenants were not willing to 
 leave their lands but wanted to have an adjustment 
 of the rent. I had no power to do that One party 
 would make a proposition that he would take so much, 
 and the other would say he would give so much, and 
 they finally said they would refer it to me, and I at 
 their request heard what they had to say, and assisted 
 to settle the matter as an arbitrator, not as 
 Chairman. I drew out a memorandum, putting 
 down the tenant's name, the Poor Law valuation, the 
 actual rent, then tlie rent claimed by the landlord, 
 the rent the tenant offered to give, and I took the 
 evidence of the valuators on both sides, as to what 
 
 Would be a fair adjustment. ■ ' 
 
 4205. In that way were you able in many instances 
 to settle the matter amicably bfetween the j)arties 1 — 
 I believe in those' 126 cases the parties left the court 
 satisfied, and I have not heard of any dissatisfaction 
 having been expressed. I strove, if I possibly could, 
 as I believed it to be mthm the policy of the Act, to 
 fix the people in the soil, and I made it a condition, 
 as far as I could, before I interfered, that the landlord 
 should give a lease, so as not to halve the tenant 
 harassed from time to time with notices to quit, and 
 as the result of that I find that eiglity-four leases v/ere 
 given by the landlords to the tenants. One for 
 fourteen years ; seventy-five for thirty-one years ; 
 two for forty-one years, and six for sixty-one years. 
 They were not all granted upon an increase of rent. 
 Some were without any increase. I remember on one 
 gentleman's estate, on which I think therQ were at 
 least thirty leases. I made no increase of the rent for 
 the land for which the tenant paid rent. But there 
 was a quantity of bog on the estate, and bog though 
 valuable in some places, is not so valuable in that 
 part of the county, and seeing the wish of the people 
 to remain on their farms, I made it a condition tliat 
 each tenant might take a portion, say from two to 
 eight acres of the bog, paying at the rate of 7s. 6d. an 
 acre for it. He would have the grass that grew on 
 it, and the right to cut turf, and when he came to the 
 
 , sole of the ground could turn it into agricultural land. 
 . 4206. Which they could reclaim 1 — ^And which they 
 
 did, and that increased the bounds of their farms. I 
 
 found all the people re9,dy to accept those terms. 
 
 There was no increase in the rent of the land they 
 . held previously, but if a man took two acres of bog, 
 
 he saddled himself with 15s., that is 7s. 6d. an acre in 
 
 addition to his rent, but he got it included in his 
 .lease, and he might not take it if he did not like. 
 
 I believe that worked satisfactorily. I have heard no 
 
 complaints about it. 
 
 4207. Could you give the name of the landlord in 
 that case ?— Mr. W 
 
 4208. You made the arrangement with the full eon- 
 sent of the kndlord ?— Yes, with the full consent of 
 the agent, who was his brother ; with the full consent 
 of the professional gentlemen, arid the full consent of 
 the tenants, and they -allsigned the book in which 
 I entered the consent. Knowing that the giving of the 
 lease was a subject of expense to the tenant, as 
 the landlord's solicitor usually draws the lease, or if 
 
 the tenant does it he is obliged to give a fee of two Sept. a, mo. 
 guineas to the landlord for approval, I made this Arthn~ 
 stipulation, that a common form of lease should be Haraill, Eaq., 
 settled, and that the solicitor on the other side, was q.c. 
 to get a certain sum for the approval of the different 
 leases, and, in order to avoid what I found very pre- 
 valent in the western counties, disputes as to bound- 
 aries, I required a map to be put on each lease. 
 
 4209. Baron Dowse. — You gave yourself an enor- 
 mous amount of trouble in the matter 1 — I thought it 
 my duty as the cbxtAty Chairraata to make the people 
 content if I could.' In these cases there was ' an 
 increase of rent in about sixty-one of them, and no 
 increase in about sixty-five, exempt as' to the' thirty 
 about the bog that I have alluded to. It struck' me 
 that there ought to be a tribunal to fix and adjust 
 fair rents. The 28th section of the Act refers to 
 owners under disabilities who have only a leasing 
 power of thirty-five yeaTs, 1 think that that teriii'is 
 too short. I would make it ninety-nine years. 1 
 would also say tiiat if a landlord brought his tenant into 
 court for the 'purpose of raising his rent, the Judge 
 should have the power to for6e the landlord to give 
 a ninety-nine years lease, so that the tenant would 
 not be annoyed with notices to quit, or claims of 
 any kind. 
 
 4210. The O'Conoe Don. — As a general rule haye 
 you found the landlords and tenants ready to accept 
 yotir arbitration in the manner you say? — Yes. I 
 think they exliaust themselves out of Court, and 
 when they come to Court they listen to terms that 
 they would not do outside. 
 
 4211. Baron Dowse. ^ — Each of them is anxious to 
 get some one to make a proposition, and when they 
 come to court they say — "Here is the Judge " ?-— 
 Yes. I have found the professional gentlemen in 
 Eoscommon always inclined to assist me. I have 
 found much trouble settling little easements about 
 rights of way and water. • 
 
 4212. Chaieman. — Eights of water ? — Yes. 
 
 4213. Baron Dowse. — And boundaries between 
 farms — ^the frontiers 1 — Yes. 
 
 4214. The O'Conoe Don. — In what proportion 
 have you av/arded the maximum of the existing scale ■? 
 Do ji-ou mean on the disturbance clause 1 — Yes, 
 I could not tell you. I think I 'have awarded the 
 maximum scale in six or seven cases or more, and 
 then less when I have found the tenant unreasonable, 
 and it is something in that way, that gives to a 
 Judge a certain power to make arrangements. 
 
 4215. Baron Dowse. — ^Your successor in the West 
 Eiding of Cork, Mr. Ferguson, was examined here 
 and he said he would like to have the power of i)utting 
 on a penal sum by way of com2Densa,tion, in order not 
 to make it worth a landlords while to evict ?— That is 
 enlarging the disturbance clause, but expressing in 
 a difi'erent way from what I do. | 
 
 4216. You would like it so settled that 
 practically deal with the question 1 — ^Yes. 
 contains my idea. 
 
 The witness handed in the following extract 
 
 you could 
 This scale 
 
 33 & 34 
 
 Holdings valued at 
 
 10 years rent. 
 Above £!0 and not 
 
 years rent. 
 Above £30 and nbt 
 
 years rent. 
 A'bove £50 and not 
 
 years rent. 
 Above £75 and not 
 
 years rent. 
 Above £100 and not 
 
 wv.r, rent. 
 
 Vic, 0.46(1870), Clauses. . .; 
 £10 and under, a sum not exceeding 
 
 exceeding £30, a sum not exceeding 7 
 
 exceeding £50, a sum not exceeding 5 
 
 exceeding £75, a sum not exceeding 4 
 
 exceeding £100, a sum not exceeding 3 
 
 exceeding £150, a sum not exceeding 2 
 
152 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSEON, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 9, 1880. 
 
 Arthur 
 Hamill, Esq., 
 Q.o. 
 
 Compensation under this claiisu not to exceed £350. 
 
 Provided that no tenant of a holding valued at a yearly 
 sum exceeding £30 and claiming more than 5 years rent ; 
 and no tenant of a holding valued at a yearly sum not ex- 
 ceeding £30 and claiming- more than 6 years rent shall be 
 entitled to make a separate or additional claim for improve- 
 ments other than permanent buildings and reclamation of 
 waste land. 
 
 No ejectment for non-payment of rent to be entitled to 
 compensation. 
 
 4217. Mr. Ferguson told us of a case where a 
 landlord disregarded any sum that could be awarded 
 against Mm for compensation, and turned the man out 
 because he knew ho was going to get a larger sum 
 from the incoming man ? — But did he. 
 
 4218. He did, and he turned that man out too, for 
 he was going to get a larger sum fi-om tenant No. 3. 
 Have you come across anything like that? — No. 
 There was a case in which I gave, and I thought pro- 
 perly, a very large amount for buildings and dis- 
 tui'bance on a three acre farm. It startled some 
 people at the time who did not know the circum- 
 stances. The farm had originally consisted of six 
 or seven acres, but the railway to Sligo ran through it, 
 leaving three acres on one side to which the tenant had 
 no access. The landlord got that into his own hands, 
 and the tenant held the other part with the house on 
 it, and that house was unsuitable for a three acre farm, 
 but I considered the biiilding was not unsuitable con- 
 sidering the original position of the tenant, and I gave 
 the full amount of compensation. The people com- 
 mented upon my decision. The landlord T was 
 told said, " I can get that amount from another." 
 I thought he had got a new tenant, but at my 
 last sessions I was told " The landlord could not 
 get the other man to buy, and the old tenant 
 remained." 
 
 4219. The O'CoNOE Don. — Do you know of any 
 case of a tenant of a higher class seeking com- 
 pensation in a lower? — No. That has not come 
 before me. 
 
 4220. What do you understand by predecessor in 
 title. Had you any difficulty as to that? — No, I had 
 no trouble in regard to that. I had some cases of 
 predecessors in title before me. 
 
 4221. Baron Dowse. — It is plain enough in the Act 
 of Parliament ? — I think so. He is to get the benefit 
 •of the work of the man who preceded him in the place. 
 
 4222. The O'Conor Don. — I think you interpreted 
 the term " waste land," in one way, and the judge on 
 appeal in another? — I think it is only fair to give the 
 judge's own words. I wrote to the Deputy Clerk of the 
 Peace to get the particulars. The learned judge omits 
 it in the items he gives compensation for. He states : 
 " And that the other amounts be reversed, sufficient 
 evidence not being given as to their being permanent 
 improvements, and being done over and above twenty 
 years." 
 
 4223. Have any cases arisen before you under which 
 the 9th section of the Act has come into operation as 
 to exorbitant rents ? — No. 
 
 4224. Andnoclaim was ever made underthatsection ? 
 — No claim has been made by a tenant before me to 
 reduce rents. The actions have been by landlords 
 to increase the rents. 
 
 4225. Do you think the existence of that section 
 in the Land Act has had any efi'eet with regard to 
 rents 1 — I can only speak from my own experience. 
 Other gentlemen may have had experience to that 
 effect. 
 
 4225a. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that the Land 
 Act as a whole has discouraged evictions? — I think it 
 has. I think it has been of great benefit. From 
 what I have been pointing out, it has struck me 
 that with the amendments it would be a greater 
 benefit. 
 
 4226. Was it not a benefit to give him compen- 
 sation foj- impro\ements ?— Certainly. 
 
 4227. Doesn't it give a man a benefit that by law 
 before he could not get 1 — Yes, and the landlord having 
 to pay for disturbing a man discourages him from 
 evicting even in prosperous years. It would have 
 been done more frequently but for the Act. I 
 understand that in the prospierous years, com- 
 mencing about, perhaps, 1873, and ending in 1877, 
 the man who bought a bullock or heifer at £10 or £12, 
 by feeding his cattle on the grass, would sell them for 
 £18 or £20, and sometimes more, without any labour 
 or any outlay or expenditure, except the keeping of 
 them on the grass. Of course for the last two 
 years it was the very reverse. Last year they bought 
 in April or May, and after feeding the cattle they 
 sold them at the same price. 
 
 4228. How do you account for that ; because you 
 and I pay as much for beef as ever we did '! — I look 
 iipon the failure of the potatoes as the last straw that 
 brought on, as it were, the famine of this country in the 
 west. I believe that for two years the people in the west 
 have been suffering in this way, that farming business 
 in England had failed. There iised to be a large 
 influx into England of labourers from Mayo and 
 Galway and Roscommon, and parts of Sligo, in the 
 previous years before 1878. In 1878 they went over 
 to England, and they came home, not making their 
 expenses, and sometimes at a loss. In 1879 I 
 don't think they went at all. It was out of the 
 earnings they used to make by themselves and their 
 children that they brought home formeiiy what 
 generally paid rent for their rough land. They 
 had potatoes then to feed their families, and they 
 generally had a few pounds left. I think the failure 
 here was mainly caused by the circumstances in 
 England. 
 
 4229. How is it that the cattle did not bring the 
 same price here as before ? — Because there was not the 
 same demand. 
 
 4230. I am not aware that the prices fell at all 1 — 
 You refer to butcher's meat. You should S]>eak of 
 what it is in the English market — the wholesale price. 
 
 4231. Chairman. — Was there not a good deal of 
 American importation into the country ? — Yes ; that 
 affected it a great deal too. 
 
 4232. Baron Dowse. — Is it a fact that the bad 
 weather interfered with the cattle being in flesh ? — 
 Yes. We are told that the grass was not so nutri- 
 tious, and that it required heat, such as we have now. 
 
 4233. Tfie O'Conor Don. — From your knowledge 
 of the county Boscommon would you say that the 
 rents are high over the whole county ?— I cannot 
 say about that. I can only speak of cases that 
 came before me. I can say this fairly, that I only 
 know of one or two cases of evictions, at the outside, 
 from the large estates. 
 
 4234. And nearly all the cases were those of small 
 proprietors ? — Yes. 
 
 4235. And generally, I suppose, the cases of persons 
 who had purchased in the Landed Estates Court ? — I 
 don't know that. 
 
 4236. BaronDowsE. — Werenotmany of them people 
 who looked on the land as a commercial transaction, and 
 who bought in the cheapest, and sold in the dearest mar- 
 ket ? — Yes ; 1 don't think that anything of that kind has 
 occurred on The O'Conor Don's estate, nor on the estate 
 of Mr. Sandford, nor Colonel King-Harman's, nor Mr. 
 Pakenham Mahon's, nor on other of the large estates 
 in the county. I remember one case, on Colonel King- 
 Harman's estate, and although I decided against him, 
 the circumstances were to his credit. The circum- 
 stances were these : — A father died, leaving his Avife, 
 and son and daughter, and he had got a promise 
 from Colonel Kiag-Harman to give the farm to his 
 son, and in carrying out that promise Colonel King- 
 Harman gave it to the son. The widow, for some 
 reason or other, was dissatisfied, and she made 
 a claim under the Land Act, and I was obliged 
 to award her compensation under the Land Act, "for 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 153 
 
 although the arrangement was honourable to the 
 Office (as it is called), I could not regard it. 
 
 4237. There was nothing, however, discreditable to 
 Colonel King-Harman in the transaction 1 — No ; quite 
 the contrary. He gave the land to the son, a member 
 of the family, according to promise to the father, and 
 then he paid the compensation afterwards. 
 
 4238. The O'Conor Don. — Had you many cases 
 during the last year for ejectments for non-payment 
 of rents 1 — A great many. I did not ask the Clerk of 
 the Peace to give a return of the number, for I did 
 not think it was within the scope of the inquiry, biit 
 I could get it. I only asked him to give a copy of 
 the different ejectments that came before me from 
 1872, on notices to quit or title. Here is the re- 
 turn. (The following return was handed in by the 
 witness) : — 
 
 County op Roscommon. 
 Number of Ejectments brought lor Overholding and 
 on Title, and heard at Qitarter Sessions held in this 
 County, and how disposed for the years following. 
 
 Hamill, Esq., 
 Q.C. 
 
 Tear. 
 
 Heard, 
 
 Decreed. 
 
 Dismissed. 
 
 NiUed. 
 
 Adjourned. 
 
 1872 
 
 13 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 1873 
 
 42 
 
 33 
 
 7 
 
 2 
 
 _ 
 
 1874 
 
 40 
 
 35 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 _ 
 
 1875 
 
 52 
 
 42 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 _ 
 
 1876 
 
 48 
 
 32 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 1877 
 
 60 
 
 45 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1878 
 
 79 
 
 46 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 24 
 
 1879 
 
 20 
 
 17 
 
 2 
 
 _ 
 
 1 
 
 1880 
 
 13 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 - 
 
 — 
 
 4239. Baron Dowse. — Is that altogether for Ros- 
 common 1 — Yes. 
 
 4240. In every case in which you gave a decree 
 were they land claims always 1 — Yes, always. The 
 Judges made a rule, and a very beneficial and proper 
 rule, to the effect that the moment a notice to quit was 
 served, it was a point of disturbance upon which you 
 might file a land claim. At first the people thought 
 that a notice to quit would not be acted upon, and 
 they held back ; then the ejectmbut came : and when 
 I found that the land claim was not filed, I used to 
 postpone execution until the following November, in 
 order that the tenant might take up his crop and file 
 a land claim. 
 
 4241. Do yovi think it right to turn a man out 
 before he gets his money on his own improvements 1 — 
 No ; I think the Act of Parliament contemplates his 
 being paid before being turned out. 
 
 4242. There was a case mentioned here in which 
 the tenant was turned out, and the landlord was 
 obliged to lodge the money in court t — I believe that 
 if he appeals, or there is a dispute in the matter^ that 
 is what he is to do. 
 
 4243. Chairman. — Don't you think that the exe- 
 cution should be suspended until the appeal has 
 been heard? — T would do so; and E have done it 
 myself. 
 
 4244. How would you do so in that case 1 — I have 
 always suspended the execution. I have found more 
 difficulty in determining the value of the crops on the 
 ground, and items under the head of manure and tillage, 
 than anything else ; and I have said I will put this all 
 at rest, and told .the tenant — " You say this crop is of 
 such a value," and the landlord says it is of no value. 
 The proper course is for you to keep and take it all 
 away ; and I wUl not issue the execution until 
 November, when you should have it away. 
 
 4245. Baron Dowse. — If something of that kind is 
 not done, a man might be turned out on the world 
 without a penny in his pocket, or a place on which to 
 lay his head 1 — Yes. There may be an appeal, and if 
 the execution issues, a man may be turned out, and 
 although the money awarded may be his, he cannot 
 bouch it. 
 
 4246. And if the appeal succeeded the money might Sept. ». isso. 
 go back to the pocket of the man who lodged it 1 — Arthm 
 Yes. 
 
 4247. The O'Conor Don. — Are there any cases in 
 the county Sligo that you would wish to mention 1 — 
 No ; only the two cases of the pass-books, where I think 
 the rents were entered up for the last nine or ten 
 years. I never saw such punctual payments made 
 before in any case. 
 
 4248. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is the name of the 
 landlord ? — He was a small owner. I don't know who 
 he was. 
 
 4249. Was he a middleman'! — I don't know. 
 
 4250. They are all small landlords who purchase in 
 the Landed Estates Court 1 — I could not say that. I 
 remember that the landlord I have referred to was 
 twitted by the gentleman acting for the tenants, and 
 asked whether he had not attended this land meeting 
 and that land meeting, he would not answer the 
 question. I thought when the statement was made, 
 and not contradicted, that it was so. 
 
 4251. The O'Conoe Don. — In cases of ejectment 
 for non-payment of rent, is there more than one year's 
 rent usually due 1 — 1 have known of a good many cases 
 where there was not more than a year's rent due. I 
 think that where it is a tenancy from year to year the 
 legislature should say that until two years' rent are 
 due there should be no ejectment for non-payment. I 
 find that a great many of the ejectments were for one 
 year's rent, 
 
 4252. Baron Dowse. — Are you aware that some 
 legislation took place some years ago when you and I 
 were working at the Bar, under the name of being 
 beneficial, which was quite the reverse? Do you 
 remember Deasy's Act 1 — Yes. 
 
 4253. Did that facilitate ejectments'! — Yes. I think 
 it was the 14th and 15th Victoria first gave power to 
 eject in the Civil Bill Court, where there was no lease. 
 Then the 23rd and 24th Victoria, ch. 154, came into 
 operation. I would say, if it were made that two , 
 years' rent should be due where there was no lease, it 
 would prevent what I have felt very much, at June 
 Sessions, decreeing men for a year's rent due in May — 
 the May immediately preceding — when any gentle- 
 man who knows what land is, knows that of all 
 periods of the year when the tenants are least able to 
 pay, are the months of May and June. It is the time 
 of the going out of the old season, and they are looking 
 for the new potato in July. Something of that kind 
 might be very beneficial. If one reverted back to 
 the old system before the 14th and 15th Victoria, 
 chap. 57, there was no right in the landlord to 
 evict for non-payment of rent, unless by lease or 
 note in writing, landlords might be willing to give 
 leases. 
 
 4254. Before the 14th and 15th Victoria, an action 
 :'jr ejectment could not be brought unless there was a 
 minute, note, or memorandum in writing. The 14th 
 and 15th Victoria facilitated the landlord, by enabling 
 ejectments to be brought in the Civil Bill Court upon 
 a parole letting. That was extended then by the 
 tenant's friends by the 23rd and 24th Victoria, chap. 
 154, to the superior courts. That was called Deasy's 
 Act, or Cardwell's Act, and these are the things that 
 Mr. Russell mentioned in the House of Commons that 
 people did not generally know. In England at present 
 an action of ejectment for non-payment of rent cannot 
 be broiight unless there is a minute or note in writing? 
 — Up to the passing of the 14th and 15th Victoria the 
 law in both countries was the same, and the exceptional 
 law for Ireland at first confined actions to the Civil 
 Bill Court, and the amount to £100. Then came the 
 23rd and 24th Victoria. 
 
 4255. Then it is said that the Land A.ct shifts the 
 balance, and gives the tenant more benefit than he 
 has in England 1 — Yes. 
 
 4256. The O'Conor Don. — Is there any other point 
 you would wish to mention ? — Nothing, except this, 
 which I think is beyond the scope of the Land Act 
 
 X 
 
154 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 9, 1880. 
 
 Arthur 
 Hamill, Esq., 
 «l.o. 
 
 entirely. I have thought that something should be 
 done with absentee landlords, and the very lowest 
 thing that could be done with them might be this — 
 to impose on the absentee landloi-ds the liability of 
 paying all county cess, all poor rate, all income tax 
 that the tenant paid. It would be a very small tax 
 upon him, but something to his tenants. 
 
 4257. Baron Dov/se. — Are you acquainted with 
 Ulster 1 — 1 know something about the north-east. 
 
 4258. And you are an Ulster man yourself? — I 
 
 4259. You know something of the Ulster tenant- 
 right custom t — I know it, but not judicially. 
 
 4260. Assuming the Ulster tenant-right to be a 
 right of occupation at a iair rent, a man not to be 
 turned out so long as he pays his rent, and with power 
 of free sale, do you think it would be beneficial to 
 amend that by some means of ascertaining the rent 
 between landlord and tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 4261. So as not to have the custom eaten up by 
 increase of rent 1 — Yes ; tlie custom was here and 
 there diflerent, and generally upon a transfer there was 
 a claim made to raise the rent upon the incoming 
 tenant. That was at the arbitrary will of the landlord, 
 but I think there ought to be some tribiinal to settle it. 
 
 4262. Do you think a tribunal such as you have 
 pointed out in your own instance v/ould work well ? — 
 I think it would. There is always in a court like 
 the Chairman's the invaluable right of appeal. Where 
 the best evidence, and the best legal and professional 
 aid could be got before the Judge of Appeal. 
 
 4263 Supposing the Ulster tenant-right was amend- 
 ed by having that done, do you think it would be 
 beneficial to extend it to the whole of Ireland 1 — I 
 think so. 
 
 4:26 i. Do you think it would be an improvement on 
 the Land Act 1 — I think it would. I think it ought. 
 I think if there were the means of adjusting the rent, 
 that, then, with the right ot iree sale and iair rent the 
 tenant ought to be satisfied. 
 
 4265. Now the tenant as a rule does not want to be 
 put out, but would rather stay in his holding ? — My 
 experience is he does not want to be put out. 
 
 4266. In your experience as a barrister and as a 
 judge, can you say who makes the improvements in 
 Ireland ? — As a rule the tenant does. 
 
 4267. Suppose the landlord makes the improvements 
 would it be a hardship to extend the Ulster custom 
 to his case, provided you take the improvements into 
 consideration, and give the rent accordingly. Suppos- 
 ing there is an estate A on which the landlord makes 
 all the improvements, and there is an estate B on wliich 
 the tenant makes all the improvements, aiid there was 
 a dispute on both as to the rent, do you think that the 
 landlord who makes the improvements should get 
 a higher rent ? — I think so. If a landlord builds 
 a dwelling-house and outhouses, he should surely be 
 allowed it in the rent ; and if the tenant does these 
 things, he should be allowed for them in the settlement 
 of the rent. 
 
 4268. In the generality of cases in your experience 
 as a judge, did you find that the large landlords who 
 had a good name to lose, were generally liberal to their 
 tenants 1 — Yes. 
 
 4209. And as a rule not putting the tenants out at 
 all t — Yes. If they do put a tenant out they will give 
 a very good reason. When I was Chairman of West 
 Cork I do not remember any case of eviction on Lord 
 Bandon's estate. I remember one or two cases 
 between middlemen v/ho held under him and their 
 sub-tenants. From Lord Bantry's estate only one case 
 came before ine, and his lordship paid the amount I 
 awardv'i.l. I remember liaving heard he was told to 
 appeal, and he said " No ; I think the Chairman has 
 acted rightly ;" and he paid the amount. That is the 
 only case I lemeuiber on the two estates, and they 
 cover 80,000 or 90,000 acres, or more. 
 
 4270. Mr. Siiaw. — It is mitch more ? — I don't re- 
 member any other lar';i! landed proprietor bringing 
 any action of ejectment before me tlierc. 
 
 4271. CiiAiKMAN. — I believe there was a consider- 
 able decrease in the number of ejectments on the title 
 in 1879 and 1880?— There was. 
 
 4272. AVas there a corresponding increase in the 
 number of ejectments for non-payment of rent? — I 
 have not got the return, but I will get it. My im- 
 pression is that there was. If you wish to have the 
 number of ejectments in Sligo for the last year, — for I 
 have only been a year there — for non-payment of rent 
 I can get it for the Commission. I know that there 
 were upon one occasion a great many in SKgo, and we 
 had a long day's sitting, and I believe the result was 
 that the parties left Court, as I understood afterwards, 
 having come upon terms of arrangement something 
 like what was suggested to them in Court. 
 
 4273. Have you postponed execution for two years ? 
 — I will not say two years. I have only exercised it 
 up till November or perhaps a little longer. 
 
 4274. Now have you anything to say as to cases.of 
 eviction for non-payment of rent, and the question of 
 compensation to the tenant of any kind beyond his 
 improvements 1 — Well, I declare if the rent is a fair 
 rent, and you give the man the power of free sale you 
 would not require to consider that question at all. 
 Suppose he does go out for non-payment of rent, and 
 does make improvements, he would be entitled to the 
 improvements minus the rent. His failure to pay 
 the rent arises not from the fact of the quality of the 
 land, but from some personal defect of himself, or of 
 those who work his land. 
 
 4275. Baron Dowse. — Suppose that by the act of 
 God, a bad harvest, or the like, the tenant had no 
 return out of the land, would you take that into con- 
 sideration if the landlord was evicting ? — I would. 
 Until this last year I would not. I have named two 
 years' rent for the purpose of providing for a bad season; 
 that is partly my object. I remember the distress 
 in 1848, but I was not in the way of considering it in 
 the position of either landlord or tenant. I did not 
 understand much of these things at that time, but 
 since 1848 to the present time I never knew a season 
 like the last. 
 
 4276. Y'^ou would give the tenant, even if he owed 
 two years' rent, if he made improvements on the land, 
 you would give him the value ? — Yes ; I would give 
 him the value of a house if he built it, mriius the 
 rent. 
 
 4277. 2Jinus a proper deduction? — Yes. 
 
 4278. Chairman. — Has not a tenant from year to 
 year a more or less valuable interest in his holding ? 
 — I think he has more or less, according as he tills the 
 land and puts manure into it, and makes it suitable 
 for farming occupation. 
 
 4279. Over and above the question of tillage and 
 improvements ? — In Ulster they have what they term 
 a tenant-right, which means the privilege of selling 
 their place. 
 
 4280. Baron Dowse. — That is, the good- will of the 
 place ? — Yes. 
 
 428 L. CliAlRMAS. — If he loses that should he not 
 have to put it against the rent ? — Yes ; it is to be 
 valued. That would come into consideration on the 
 question as to what it was wcnth. 
 
 4282. It would not be under the head of im- 
 provements 1 — No ; it would be like a trader who 
 had a shop selling the good-will of the trade of the 
 shop. 
 
 4283. But if evicted for non-payment of rent he is 
 not entitled to this interest ? — If he does not paj^ the 
 rent, he appears to me not to place value on his good 
 will. He has no good will in the place, and no desire 
 or wish to have it. 
 
 4284. But in a case where a man lias not the means 
 to pay what would you say ? — You put a question 
 which involves what caused want of means. Was it 
 caused by a defect in the soil, or want of skill or 
 industry in the tenant? That is a most difFicult 
 problem. Take a small farm. If you give that farm 
 to a tenant at the smallest rent, he will often have 
 nothing to pay rent with, his family is so large. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 155 
 
 The family will absorb everything the land will 
 prodvice. The land is to be valued at something, 
 and if you take it by that test that he had no 
 meajjs to pay, it is because all that the land 
 produced, whether for the benefit of the landlord 
 or the tenant, was consumed by the tenant him- 
 self. 
 
 4285. You think that the postponement for tv,-o 
 years would assist in preventing that ? — Yes. I don't 
 think we have ever known two very bad years coming 
 together. If a man cannot be pvit out until two years' 
 rent is due, and he pays part of that, he gives some 
 security that he is disposed to pay. 
 
 4286. Baron Dowse. — In addition to being chair- 
 man of two counties, you have land of your own, and 
 you are a landlord ? — To a certain extent. 
 
 4287. You have knowledge as a landlord 1 — I have 
 some land. 
 
 4288. Then yon can speak in botJi capacities 1 — I 
 am speaking fairly. I would give 89 years' leases; or 
 do anything that was fair. 
 
 4289. Chaiemajt. — Have the legal expenses of 
 coming into Court been the cause of deterring ten;:jits 
 from fighting the qiiestion of a rise of rent? — 
 About that I should say the present system is a cause 
 of deterring — becaiise, it can only be by a notice to 
 quit, followed by an ejectment, or when a notice to 
 quit is served, followed by a notice of claim for dis- 
 turbance and for improvements, to be answered by a 
 counter claim by the landlord, that the case can come 
 forward. All that is legal machinery which should 
 be paid for by the tenant on his part, and by the land- 
 lord on his. I would recommend tliat there would be 
 some simpler and cheaper method of biinging a case 
 before the Court, and that that should be simply by 
 notices signed by thetenants, and counter notices signed 
 by the landlord, and a day fixed or named for the jsurpose 
 of hearing the case. That would make the machinery 
 very much cheaper. In speaking now of leases, if a lease 
 were given, I think a settled form of lease might be 
 adopted, and the cost of that lease and the stamp duty 
 might be minimised to the \-ery lowest, in case the 
 lease was adopted and approved. 
 
 4290. Could you suggest any way of diminishing 
 the cost of appeal cases 1 — I'I'o ; the cost chiefly con- 
 sists in the fees given to counsel. 
 
 4291. The cost might not be large to one tenant, 
 but to a small tenant it would be large, and it might 
 be an impossibility for a small tenant to fight a case 
 in the Appeal Court 1 — I don't know that. Do you 
 speak of an appeal on a land claim ? 
 
 4292. Yes, on a land claim? — Well, the expenses 
 there is not great. The expenses are professional ex- 
 penses. I do not limit them to legal expenses, but to 
 the employment of valuators andothers,and the making 
 of maps. 
 
 4293. Is not the tenant obliged to bring them in to 
 answer the skilled witnesses on the other side 1 — No 
 doubt he is. I would suggest this, that if a tribimal 
 was formed (I don't mean the chairman's tribunal), but I 
 mention it as it is an existing institution from which 
 there is an appeal, the judge, or whoeverpresides, should 
 have the power of calling in at the Government expense 
 . — not at the expense of the tenant or the landlord — 
 skilled valuators, say from Mr. Ball Greene's ofiice, to 
 assist him in settling the rent. I find that the principal 
 cost is not for the legal gentlemen, but for the valua- 
 tors. Inop.e case where £595 was my award less the 
 rent due, the costs of obtaining the decree were £6 
 3s., but the witnesses expenses were £10 7s. Gd., 
 and this was a case in which a claim was made for 
 £1,893. 
 
 4294. Baron Dowse. — Those are taxed costs ; but 
 what would it be to bring a case forward where you 
 add the costs between attorney and client 1 — It would 
 be mvich more ; but that is an arrangement between 
 the client and his professional adviser. 
 
 4295. The O'Oonoe Don. — In the case you mention 
 were there professional witnesses Li'ouglat from fiir 
 parts of Ireland to give evidence 1 — I cannot tell the 
 names now, although I looktd at my note-book before 
 coming here. 
 
 4296. Baron Dowse. — If they brought a man from 
 Kerry to Eoscommon, the Clerk of the Peace would 
 only give the ordinary fee, as if he was residing in 
 Roscommon 1 — If the most eminent valuators, Messrs. 
 Brassington and Geale, were brought down, one would 
 give them three guineas a day, but I find that the local 
 man expects the same. T think the latter ought not 
 to be entitled to so much. 
 
 4297. Ohaieman. — As to compensation for disturb- 
 ance, in the cases of tenants valued at £10 and under, 
 there is a certain amount for which they are allowed 
 to claim which includes the improvements. They 
 are allowed co claim for seven years, but can make no 
 claim for improvements 1 — Not so. There is a s\ib- 
 clause that if a tenant claims beyond five years' rent 
 he can only claim for what is called substantial im- 
 provements. He loses the benefit of tillages and 
 manures. 
 
 4298. Would it be an unreasonable thing, in your 
 opinion, if it were enacted that a tenant under eviction 
 for non-payment of rent should get something in lieu 
 of making a claim at all — that if he wished to make a 
 claim for improvements, he should have a right to do 
 so, but that he might waive altogether his claim for 
 improvements, and get a sum down as compensation 
 for the loss of the holding 1 — I have endeavoured to 
 come at that, by making it requisite that two years' 
 arrear of rent shall be due in order to entitle tlie land- 
 lord to bring an ejectment ; because if a man permits 
 his rent to fall two years into arrear, I do not think he 
 should be entitled to anything for the good-will of the 
 place, for his neglect to pay the rent shows that he sets 
 no value upon it. 
 
 4299. Baron Dowse. — If you give the right of free 
 sale, you do away witli any necessity for compensation, 
 for a tenant who owed rent could sell, and pay the rent 
 out of the purchase-money 1 — Yes, he could come to 
 his landlord and say, " Here is A. B., a respectable 
 man, who is willing to give me so much for my interest 
 in the holding." Then, unless the landlord objects to 
 the man, he can sell the holding, and the landlord 
 will get his rent out of the purchase-money; or 
 if the landlord makes an improper objection, let 
 him stand in the shoes of A. B., and give the 
 tenant the sum that A.B. would have given, less the 
 amount of rent due. 
 
 4300. That is the charm the Ulster Tenant Right 
 has for a number of landlords 1 — Yes ; my own idea is 
 that landlords who don't permit free sale, subject 
 to an honest and fair right of approval, are doing them- 
 selves harm, for by permitting it, you get a tenant 
 who comes in with fresh hopes and ideas of improving 
 the land and making his living upon it, your arrear rent 
 is paid out of what he pays for the good-will, and you 
 generally substitute a good tenant in place of a bad one. 
 That is my impression of the way in which the system 
 works in Ulster. Of course there may be a case now and 
 then of a new tenant not turning out so well ; but on 
 the whole I never could see any reason why a landlord 
 should object to a respectable man coming in and pur- 
 chasing the interest of a tenant who was unable to 
 remain. 
 
 Sept. 9, 1880. 
 
 Arthur 
 Hamill, Esq., 
 Q.C. 
 
 X2 
 
156 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 9, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 F. Butler. 
 
 Mr. Patbick p. Butler, examined. 
 
 4301. Mr. Kavanagh. — You wish to make some 
 statements to the Commission in reference to the con- 
 dition of the labourers'? — Yes, your honor. 
 
 4-302. first, as regards their dwellings, is that what 
 yon would like to begin with? — Yes, my lord. 
 
 43C>3. Are you a labourer yourself? — I was, sir, a 
 labourer for twenty years. 
 
 4304:. You are not a labourer now? — No, sir. 
 
 4305. Do you consider the labourers' dvi""ings at 
 present existing in Ireland to be unsuitable i^^ human 
 habitation? — Indeed I do, sir. They are in a very 
 bad state. 
 
 4306. They are badly lighted? — They are. 
 
 4307. Badly ventilated? — They are, sir. 
 
 4308. Unhealthy, owing to dung pits and stagnant 
 pools in front of the doors ? — Yes. 
 
 4309. And also having no out-oiEces for fowls or 
 pigs, is that so? — Yes, sir, in most cases. 
 
 4310. Another fault you find with them is their 
 not being provided with gardens to supply the families 
 with vegetables? — Yes, sir; that is a thing that is 
 most necessary. 
 
 4311. You also complain that the rent which the 
 labourei'S have to pay for those houses, such as they are, 
 is very high? — It is, sir; it is 100 per cent, over 
 the valuation of what they hold. In certain parts of 
 the country they are .£3, £4, or £,o a year, and no 
 gardens and no liaggart. 
 
 4312. They have to pay from £3 to £5 a year for 
 houses of that sort, unprovided with gardens — is that 
 so ? — It is, sir, in difierent parts of the country. 
 
 4313. In what county? — In Kilkenny. There is 
 a part of Kilkenny county very well placed in regard 
 to that. 
 
 4314. Where is that? — On the Bessborough estate ; 
 they are well done for on that estate. 
 
 431.5. Now with regard to the wages of labourers 
 what have you got to say about that ? — The wages are 
 from 5s. to 6s. a week. 
 
 4316. Where — in what part of the country is that 
 the rate of wages ? — All round the locality of the 
 Walsh mountains. 
 
 4317. Chairjian. — You mean the mountainy dis- 
 trict betv.reen Waterford and Kilkenny ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 4318. Mr, Shaw. — Do the labourers get the house, 
 as well as 5s. or 6s. a week? — No, sir. 
 
 4319. Mr. Kavanagh. — In Ballyhale and Thomas- 
 town is that the case ? — Yes, sir, that is the wages 
 there, too. 
 
 4320. The O'Gonob, Don. — Are they fed in the 
 farmers' houses ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 4321. Mr. Shaw. — They are fed, in addition to 
 their wages ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 4322. Do they get a bit of garden for potatoes? — 
 No, sir ; no garden. That is all the family have to 
 live upon. 
 
 4323. The labourer's family are not fed, only the 
 man himself? — Yes, sir. I am not talking of the 
 man's food at all, but of the poor family that have to 
 live iqjon the profit of his labour. 
 
 4324. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is it not the case that for the 
 last few years labour has become rather scarce in your 
 county ? — The laboiirer is not employed the whole 
 year round, sir, only in busy times. 
 
 4325. Is it not scarce now ? — Well, sir, the work 
 is not carried out as it was to my recollection ten 
 years ago. 
 
 4326. How much do you get in harvest time? — In 
 harvest time labourer's wages go up to 2s. Qd. or 3s. 
 a day ; they get that for about eight or ten days. 
 
 4327. For that short time ?— Yes. 
 
 4328. And during the rest of the year it is some- 
 times hard to get employment ? — It is very hard to 
 get employment for the rest of the year. It brings 
 him so that on the whole he does not get 5s. or 6s. a 
 week the whole year round. 
 
 4329. Do you consider that this poverty and hard- 
 
 ship among the labouring class spreads discontent 
 among them 1 — It does, sir. 
 
 4330. Do you think that if they were provided 
 with clean and comfortable dwellings, and suitable 
 gardens, at moderate rents, they would become better 
 disposed to fulfil their duties in their station of life ? — 
 They would, sir. 
 
 4331. Would it be an advantage, do you think, if 
 the education of their children were attended to ? — 
 It would, sir ; nothing would be more necessary, be- 
 cause why, their clothing is bad very often, and often- 
 times the mother of young children has no way to 
 get their breakfast ready in time for the ordinary 
 school hour, for she has to walk three or four miles 
 for Indian meal for their breakfast, and to get that 
 ready for them, and sugar and water. 
 
 4332. Now, in what way would you suggest that 
 that should be remedied ? — The only thing is, sir, to 
 give him a bit of a garden to grow potatoes in, if 
 they had that it would be a great matter. 
 
 4333. Mr. Shaw. — To give him a garden with the 
 liouse? — Yes, sir. 
 
 4334. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you think that by pro- 
 moting drainage and reclamation of waste lands in Ire- 
 land a good deal of employment would be afforded 
 to labourers ? — Yes, sir, in the dull seasons of the year, 
 when the farmers had no employment to give. 
 
 4335. You think that would be a means of improv- 
 ing the country, and checking the tide of emigration? 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 4336. How would you suggest that the wages of 
 labourers should be improved, for, you know, we can- 
 not force the farmer to pay more than he can get the 
 labour for ? — The labourer would be satisfied, sir, if he 
 was placed in the position I mentioned, with a house 
 and a bit of garden, to work for even less wages, and 
 he would be better able to suppori his family than 
 he is now, and to have a little common decency in 
 regard to his dwelling and garden. 
 
 4337. How would you propose to carry out that ? — 
 I have talked to many men on the same subject for the 
 last four or five years, and I find they would be all 
 satisfied, any of them, that could claim relief from the 
 union, to give up that claim, if they only had the little 
 thing I propose. The money could be borrowed from 
 the Church surjJus, because it is really belonging to 
 the poor. 
 
 4338. For what? for building houses for them do 
 you mean? — Yes; and it could be paid back by a 
 yearly rent on a profit, if it was required. 
 
 4339. Mr. Shaw. — You say they would give iip 
 their claim to poor-i-ate relief if they got those things 
 that you mention — a house and garden? — Yes, sir; 
 I often asked them wo\ild they be satisfied to do 
 that, and they said they would. 
 
 4340. And you think that would make a fund on 
 the security of which Government could lend the 
 money ? — Yes, sir, and it would be a saving to the 
 union, and there would not be so much dislike among 
 farmers to see poor men upon their property. 
 
 4341. Baron Dowse. — Have you land yourself ? — I 
 have conacre. 
 
 4342. What do you pay for the conacre ? — The dung 
 I manure the land. 
 
 4343. Do you carry on any trade ? — I do ; I sell 
 meal, flour, tea, sugar, and tobacco. 
 
 4344. You have a shop ? — I have. 
 
 4345. Where is it situated ? — On the road side, half 
 way between Ballyhale and Mullinavat, and I meet 
 and am thoroughly acquainted with numbers of 
 labouring men, and I have often talked to them about 
 these things. 
 
 4346. And you represent their views as well as 
 your own ? — Yes, sir. I have been speaking to a 
 great many of them. I have been in the workhouse, 
 for some that were thrown in there when they fell 
 sick, because their habitation was down, they had 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 157 
 
 no means to keep them, and tliey were thrown on 
 the workhouse. I went in to bury them. 
 
 4347. Mr. Shaw. — They find it hard to get houses? 
 . — Very hard sir. 
 
 4348. Baron Dowse. — We had a gentleman here 
 the other day, a farmer from Kildare, who told us that 
 the wages he gave to his labourers were a house, and 
 9s. a week, the whole year round, and 1,000 yards of 
 potatoes every year 1 — Such wages as that are not to be 
 found in our locality, sir. I wish to say T went to 
 his worship's place that spoke to me first, and I found 
 the poor man well cared for there. 
 
 4349. The O'Conoe, Don. — Are they large or small 
 farms in your neighbourhood 1 — There is a mixture, 
 but I think every farm containing forty acres shoiild 
 have those things that w3 look for. 
 
 4350. Mr. Shaw. — Have they not houses on those 
 farms for their own labourers 1 — No, sir ; there is a 
 dislike to them on accoimt of the rates, and they hate 
 to have them on their place at all. 
 
 3551. The farmers manage by having a few servant 
 boys in the house 1 — ^Yes. 
 
 4352. And they don't employ labourers, or employ 
 them very little 1 — Yes, sir ; the labourers' employ- 
 ment is very small, and their houses are gone. If you go 
 into the village near me you will find a livery that some 
 person pvit up half a century ago — that is now the home 
 of some of those poor labouring boys, and the sweep- 
 ings and refuse of the house are piled up in front of it 
 until it makes a load of manure, and then it is carted 
 away for the rent. If those poor men had a bit of 
 garden to turn that on they would have some comfort, 
 and there would be some satisfaction and contentment 
 in the country. 
 
 4353. Who are the landlords about that part of the 
 world 1 — There are different landlords. 
 
 4354. Do they not look after the condition of the 
 labourers at all ? — No, sir ; they are left without any 
 help, no more than the crows upon the mountains, 
 there is no one to raise a voice on their behalf. In 
 the house where I was reared the roof was so bad that 
 the bed had often to be I'emoved four times during 
 the night to get shelter from the rain that came pour- 
 ing down upon it. There is no help for the poor 
 labouring man. No one cares about him. 
 
 4355. Mr. Kavanagh. — How would you suggest 
 that any improvement could be made, for you know 
 that we cannot make a law to force farmers to employ 
 labourers? — I am not able to suggest anything, sir, 
 but what I said already about the Church surplus. I 
 hope I have said nothing displeasing to any gentleman 
 in it. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 F. Butler. 
 
 4356. Baron Dowse. — You say the money could bo Se/it. 9, isso. 
 borrowed from the Church surplus, for the purpose of 
 providing labourers' cottages and gardens, and that it 
 could be paid back by a yearly rent 1 — Yes, sir ; that 
 is what I suggest. Let any otaer man make a better. 
 
 4357. I gather from your evidence that even if the 
 farmers got all they wanted, the labourers would have 
 to be satisfied befoi'e the condition of the country 
 would be what it ought to be, is that so 1 — That is so, 
 sir. ^ There -s\-as a boy of mine enlisted as a soldier, 
 and is gone to ludia with his regiment — the best boy 
 that was ever reared on the mountains, and as good a 
 son us man ever had. He wrote to me from India, he 
 said he was satisfied to be a soldier, but that often, 
 v,'li(;ii iin duty, ho would think of the days and hours 
 l(jng agi3, and that if he only knew that we were in a 
 state of comfort at home he would have twice the 
 courage to fight for Her Majesty. 
 
 4358.' The O'Conor Don. — Has machinery been 
 much introduced by the farmers in your part of the 
 country 1 — Not in all cases. 
 
 4359. Baron Dowse. — Do the labourers live in the 
 towns rather than in the country 1 — There is a good 
 many of them live in the towns. 
 
 4360. And those that don't live in the towns, and 
 have houses — they have them from the farmers — have 
 they ?— Yes. 
 
 43G1. You think that the farmer, who claims to be 
 left in possession of his farm without being disturbed, 
 ought to do something for the labourer, by giving him 
 a garden? — Yes, sir. I may mention, when poor 
 rates have to be paid, they are often the cause of a 
 farmer being broke, because when the rent is paid, 
 and may be all the substance that he has gone, then 
 the poor rate collector comes round and makes a 
 seizure ; the debt becomes known, and every creditor 
 comes in for his own, and the man is broke. Anything 
 that would keep dovm the rates ; but all is thrown 
 upon the poor labourer. 
 
 4362. Are the labourers generally married men 
 with families ? — They are, sir. 
 
 4363. Chairman. — Have the families been in many 
 cases driven out of the country into the towns ? — Yes. 
 sir; occasionally that occurs. 
 
 4364. That removes them further away from their 
 work ? — It does. 
 
 4365. I believe the labourer would, generally 
 speaking, prefer to live in the country, and not in the 
 towns ? — Yes, sir, on account of the children. I have 
 no more to say, gentlemen. I wish you success in 
 your attempts for the benefit of the country, and for 
 the improvement of the state of the people, and I hope 
 you will not forget the poor labourer. 
 
 Mr. Robert H. Battersby, Lakefield, Crossakeel, examined. 
 
 4366. Mr. Shaw. — You held some land under 
 Lord Damley, I believe? — Yes. 
 
 4367. What is it called ?— Pickettstown. 
 
 4368. I understand that it was taken a long time 
 ago ? — I had a lease for twenty-one years, which ended 
 in 1875. 
 
 4369. Commencing in 1854? — Yes. I had some of 
 it before that ; in 1839, when my father died, he had 
 taken one field of forty acres, and I succeeded him 
 in occupation of it. After that I got other portions 
 of it by degrees, and then a lease was made to me in 
 1854, of all that I then had; and Lord Damley 
 arranged that 1 should take the whole of Pickettstown, 
 including the farm of a tenant, whose affairs were, at 
 the time, in a bad way. I got his farm, and they 
 made me take the whole. 
 
 4370. I believe it contains 143 acres altogether? — 
 Yes, but there was a portion of it in the occupation of 
 five tenants, and I had to take them as my tenants. 
 
 437 L In addition to what you had in your own 
 hands, you got a further portion which was in the 
 occupation of tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 4372. Did you layout much money upon it? — I 
 did, a large sum of money. 
 
 4373. In improvements? — Yes. The maps here 
 will show it. 
 
 4374. Did you try to purchase it from the landlord 
 before the end of your lease ? — I cannot say that I did 
 try to buy it, but he offered it to me, and it was in the 
 market for some years. 
 
 4375. Is it in the county Meath ? — It is. 
 
 4376. How did he come to evict you? — I lived 
 about eight miles from where the agent lived, but 
 when it came to near the termination of my lease — 
 for about three years before it expired I showed con- 
 tinually to the agent what I was doing, and the 
 systematic manner in which I was improving the land, 
 after the ditches and everything were levelled. I 
 asked what they would do with me when my lease ran 
 out, but I never got any answer. Then it was 
 offered to me for £5,000, which I would not give. 
 
 4377. When your lease expired what occurred ? — 
 When the lease expired I said to the agent — " The 
 lease is out, and something must be done." His 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 H. Battersby. 
 
loS 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 9, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Eobert 
 H. Battei-sby. 
 
 a aEiwer to me was that if I woiildpay £35 a year increase 
 of rent, I ■would be accepted as a tenant, provided I 
 would sign the agreement his lordship required his 
 tenants to sign. I went to the office to see the agree- 
 ment, it was a printed form. 
 
 4378. State what it contained 1 — The first clause 
 was one fixing the amount of the rent — an increase of 
 £3.5 on what I was paying previously. I had been 
 paying one-third more than the valuation of the land, 
 and he put on £3.5 additional ; however, there was no 
 question between us as to the increase. 
 
 4379. You thought it was worth it '—Well, I 
 thought that unless he gave me a long lease it would 
 be unfair to put so much increase .upon me. 
 
 4380. What other clauses were in the agreement 1 
 — I was to be subject to Ije put out on six months 
 notice at the end of any six months. 
 
 4381. In any year? — In any year. And at the 
 same time he was goin.';;' to sell his interest — so that 
 I would be at the mercy completely of whoever pur- 
 chased it. Everybody, told me I would be mad to 
 sign that document. He then wrote to m.e trying to 
 induce me to sign it, and he said he would blot out one 
 clause, that was the clause which bound the tenants 
 not to seek for compensation for improvements iinder 
 the Land Act. I said, no, I would not sign it. The 
 correspondence went on. I should say that it took a 
 long time, because Lord Darnlcy was in England and 
 his agent was in this country, and each letter had to 
 go first to the agent, and then it had to be forwarded 
 to the landlord, who sometimes was away from home, 
 and consequently there was great delay. The affair 
 went on until the month of May. In the meantime 
 I had put certain other portions of the land into 
 tillage, and made arrangements for cultivating the 
 rest, but I said I would not sign the agreement. He 
 said then that I must go out. I said " Yery well, but 
 you must put me out legally, and don't let me lose my 
 position to seek for compensation." He gave me 
 notice and evicted me. 
 
 4382. To make your claim for compensation ? — I 
 took defence ; but at the same time I gave him a 
 notice that I would give a consent for judgment if he 
 would agree not to put me out till November. Lord 
 Darnley said, " No ; you must go out." Then it went 
 on through the regular process of ejectment, a trial at 
 the assizes, and all that sort of thing. There was a 
 question raised as to whether there was a new tenancy 
 created, and tliat question was left to the jury. The 
 jury said they did not consider there was, but they re- 
 commended that I should be left there until Novem- 
 ber, considering the time of year. The judge quite 
 concurred in that suggestion, and he turned to Mr. 
 Dames, Lord Darnley's counsel, and asked him, " What 
 do you say to that." Mr. Dames said he had no au- 
 thority to answer that at all, that it must be referred 
 to his lordship. " Yery well then," said the judge, 
 " let it be referred to his lordship ;" but he added very 
 significantly, " If he does not do so, I know what 1 
 will do " — the judge having the power to let me re- 
 main until November. Lord Darnley's answer was 
 that he would let me stay till November, but I must 
 pay the increased rent £35. I remained till No- 
 vember, and then went out. I was told after the 
 ejectment proceedings were over I should file my claim 
 for compensation, and get the most I could. I made 
 my claim accordingly. 
 
 4383. What did you get for compensation? — I got 
 £525. The barrister gave £360 more, but Ijord Darn- 
 ley appealed, and there was sonie law point the judge 
 said was against me, and struck off £300. I got only 
 £525, and out of that I had to pay legal expenses. 
 
 4384. The £525 did not compensate you ? — Nothing 
 like it. 
 
 4385. Was it good land 1 — It was of no use when I 
 got it. 
 
 4386. You made it good land? — I did not — I could 
 not — but I made as much as could be made of it, and 
 if the land had been good land I woixld have got far 
 more value for my outlay. After paying the costs of 
 
 eviction, claim for compensation, and law proceedings 
 about my registered trees and personal expenses, and 
 my witnesses, I did not obtain anything ; but such is 
 the Act of Parliament. 
 
 4387. Now, Lakefield is your next case? — Yes. 
 
 4388. You hold that from Mr. Naper ?— I do. 
 
 4389. Mr. Kavanagh.— Is that Mr. Naper, of 
 Loughcrew ? — Yes. 
 
 4390. M.I-. Shaw. — How much land does that con- 
 tain ? — 135 acres. 
 
 4391. You are still in occupation of that? — Yes, I 
 live there. 
 
 4392. Then you have no grievance as yet about 
 that 1 — No, except this. I began the improvements 
 on that in 1839, before the Government valuation was 
 made, and the Government valuation was of course 
 raised by my father's and my own expensive system of 
 land improvement for fifteen years. The rent was 
 raised from time to time. Originally it was £78 12«. 
 In 1848 the rent was raised from £92 to £200 per 
 annum besides taking my trees. 
 
 4393. Do you hold it still ?— I do. I have it for 
 my life. 
 
 4393a. Your life is in the lease?— It is. The 
 hardship in that case was this : there were a large 
 number of valuable trees on the farm. There was an 
 agreement for a lease, and by the agreement the rent 
 was fixed at £200, and the trees were not to be taken 
 from. me. 
 
 4394. Who planted the trees ?— My father. The 
 late Charles Hamilton was the agent, and he broke the 
 management of the lease, and puB in a clause that the 
 trees were to belong to the landlord for £128. I took 
 the opinion of the present Judge Fitzgerald as to my 
 right to the trees, for they were registered, and he said 
 they were my j^roperty. However, I did not wish to 
 go to law. Then the house was condemned as being 
 unsuitable, and the late Mr. Naper said to me, 
 " Whatever is to be done about the house (I won't take 
 it into account) because it must be remodelled ; and if 
 you do it of course I will pay, and if I do it you must 
 pay." I decided to do it myself. I found I could get 
 the money from the Board of Works on loan, to be 
 repaid in thirty-five years, and I applied for a loan on 
 these terms ; but behind my back they altered the 
 arrangement and made it twenty-two years, so that I 
 had to pay the whole capital and interest in twenty- 
 two years instead of thirty-five. 
 
 4395. I understand they got no valuation of the trees, 
 but simply put their own value upon them? — There was 
 a sort of valuation made in this way : Mr. Hamilton 
 knew the trees were not to be taken from me, but said 
 to me, in a casual sort of w-aj^, " I will just send 
 somebody to seewhat these trees might be worth." He 
 put me off my guard, for I never dreamed the arrange- 
 ment was to be altered, and then he told me that was 
 the value, and that I must take it. I took Judge 
 Fitzgerald's opinion upon it, and he told me that the 
 trees were as much mine as when the lease had ended. 
 
 4396. Now the third farm,, Diamor, which you 
 had from Mr. Wade ; are you still in possession 
 of that ? — I am. 
 
 4397. Do you hold that on. lease? — Yes; one old 
 life. 
 
 4398. Have you improved it very much ? — Yes ; I 
 laid out lots of money on it. It is very hilly and cost 
 me more to reclaim than any land I had. I went to 
 the landlord and asked him what he would do as my 
 lease was an old life, &c. I said " You cannot be 
 surprised at my asking you the question, after the 
 treatment I received from Lord Darnley — he has not 
 only robbed me, but has destroyed my credit and 
 knocked me down." His answer was, that he would 
 put my life in place of that in the lease, but I v/as not 
 to till, or meadow, and not to look for compensation for 
 disturbance or imiarovements. I was payin"' 47s. id. ■ 
 an acre for the land, which is 5s. id. more than any 
 one in the townland. 
 
 4399. Did he propose to reduce the rent or to give 
 it to you at the same rent ? — The same. He offered 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENC;;:. 
 
 159 
 
 me a lease for my own. life, on condition that I wcaild 
 not till a meadow, and that I woiild not claim any 
 compensation. 
 
 4400. You refused those terms 1 — I did. The land 
 adjoining it was set at 41.9. Qd., whereas I was paying 
 47s. id. 
 
 4401. You think it too, high a rent? — I do. The 
 land next it, that had heen set at 41s. 6(/., was set last 
 winter for 356'. per aci'e, and had been thirty years in 
 grass. I could show, by public Taiuations, that it was 
 then better than my land. 
 
 4402. Now, as to the fourth place, Hei-bertstown, 
 you hold that in perpetuity 1 — I do ; 1 hold it on lease 
 for lives renewable for ever. 
 
 4403. How many acres are in it? — 105 acres. I 
 am paying £92 6s. 2(/. for itj and there is land along- 
 side of it that was let since at 12s. Gd. per acre. 
 
 4404. You ]i old it on lease — you can't help thaf! 
 — No. I merely want to show the principle that runs 
 
 through the matter. This man served me with a writ 
 for half a year's rent, due last May. He demanded it 
 the day it was due. I showed him I had always paid 
 the rent yeaiiy in December. His answer was, " It 
 is a head rent — you must pay." I replied, " Vv'"hat do 
 you call a head rent? When that land was taken, it 
 was taken at the full rent of the day, the former tenant 
 having been broken. The property was improved by 
 my father and brother, who drained it, under the Board 
 of Works, and by systematic cultivation, building offices 
 and labourers' houses, improved the value of it, an<l 
 because they did that you call it a head rent." It was 
 all no use, he demanded the rent the day it was due. 
 
 4405. Baron Dowse. — I am afraid that case is out- 
 side the scope of our inquiry ; we cannot interfere 
 with a man taking proceedings to recover his rent ? — 
 Perhaps not, sir ; I merely wished to show the manner 
 in which I have been treated by my landlords. 
 
 [The Commissioners adjourned till the 21st instant.] 
 
 Sept. 9, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 H. Battevsby. 
 
 NINTH DAY— TUESDAY, 21st SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners met in the Imperial Hotel, Belfast, at 12 o'Clock. 
 Present : The Earl of Bessborough, Chairman ; B.iron Dowse, The O'CoNOR DoK, Arthur 
 
 MACilORROUGH KAVANAGH, D.L., and WiLLIAM ShAW, M.P. 
 
 Messrs. S. C. M'Elroy, Thomas M'Elderry, Samuel Blach, John Megaic, and William Stewart, attended 
 
 as a Deputation. 
 
 Mr. Samuel C. M'Elrost examined. 
 
 4405a. Chairman. — I believe you are the represen- 
 tative of the County Antrim Central Tenants' Right 
 Association 1 — Yes, and also of the Route Tenants' 
 Defence Association. 
 
 4406. You mention here that you represent six 
 local associations ? — Yes. 
 
 4407. It seems that you represent Route, Bally- 
 mena, Ballyclare, Crumlin, Ballycastle and Lisburn t 
 — Yes. 
 
 4408. The deputation consists of yourself and 
 Thomas M'Elderry, President of the Route Association 
 and Chairman of the Ballymoney Board of Guardians ; 
 Mr. .John ilegaw, a tenant farmer, and Mr. William 
 Stewart 1 — Yes. Mr. Stewai-t is a tenant farmer, too. 
 
 4409. Your name is S. C. M'Elroy ? — Yes, that is 
 my name. 
 
 4410. The evidence I believe you want to give is 
 on the subject of the Ulster tenant-right custom ? — Yes. 
 
 4411. I will begin by asking you a leading ques- 
 tion. Hov7 do you define the Ulster tenant-right 
 custom? — My lord, if you would be kind enough 
 to allow me to define the Ulster custom in my 
 own way it would, I think, be more satisfactory. 
 It may take a few moments time, but I crave the 
 indulgence of the Commissioners. At the Tenant- 
 right Conference, held in Ballymoney, in April, 1870, 
 a list of resolutions was submitted by the late Dr. 
 Macknight, the editor of the Londonderry Humdard. 
 We regarded Dr. Macknight as the flither of tlio 
 Ulster "tenant-right movement, and anything from 
 his pen was entitled to and received the fullest 
 consideration. That being so, perhaps, my lord, 
 you will allow me to read a list of resolutions that 
 was submitted to that conference bearing on the 
 Land Bill as then submitted to Parliament, and also 
 in regard to the amendments that were proposed on 
 the Land Bill. ■ The first resolution was as follows : — 
 
 " PtESOLVED—That the Pught Hon. W. E. Gladstone, 
 Her Majesty's Prime Minister, in his admirable speech de- 
 livered in the House of Commons on the 15th day of Feb- 
 ruary last, stated the intention of H:er Majesty's Government 
 to le"-alize the Ulster tenant-right custom—as the people of 
 Ulster universally understood and believed—in the sense m 
 which this expression has been commonly employed both 
 in Parliameni and throughout the province of Ulster, 
 namely, that Her JMajesty's Government intend to legalize 
 the genuine prescriptive usage of Ulster, as contradis- 
 tinguished from all attempts "on the part of landlords to 
 « impair ' or ' destroy ' this custom upon their own estates 
 
 by means of enforced usage established in opposition to iLe 
 authoritative tradition of the province." 
 
 The second resolution is as follows : — 
 " That the Ulster clause of the Irish Land Bill, when 
 printed, did not correspond with public expectation, and 
 the Right Hon. Mr. Fortescue, Chief Secretary for Ireland, 
 put on the Order Book of the House oi Commons an amend- 
 ment which, if carried, would have rectified the previous 
 error, but before his amendment was moved the Govern- 
 ment had agreed to change the words ' Ulster usage ' into 
 'Ulster usages,' for the purpose of Iea;alizing restrictions 
 and infringements of the custom that had been established 
 by landlords upon their estates, as acknowledged in 
 Parliament by the Chief Secretary himself. That since 
 all these estate regulations are invasions of tenant-right 
 property which never belonged to Ulster landlords, it appears 
 to this confei-ence that if the change made in the Ulster 
 claMnc shall have the effect publicly stated in the House of 
 Commons, its enactment in this form will be contrary to 
 sound policy, to public justice, and to the constitutional 
 sacrcdness of all proprietary rights, whether vested in land- 
 loi'ds or in tenants." 
 
 The third resolution is to this effect : — 
 
 " That the Bill, as it stands, instead of Isgalizing the 
 Ulster custom of free sale by an outgoing to an incoming 
 tenant, requires the former to serve a compensation notice 
 upon his landlord, bringing landlord and tenant at once into 
 legal collision, necessitating the employment of attorneys, 
 lawyers, and other piofessional functionaries, thus swal- 
 lowing up a large amount of the tenant's compensation 
 money in unnecessary law expenses. That this provision, 
 instead of legiilizing the old, establishes an entirely new 
 custom hitherto unknown in Ulster, and one that, in the 
 opinion of this conference, is likely to generate fee.ings of 
 class hostility between landlords and tenants." 
 
 I think I might tell the Commissioners here that the 
 late Dr. Macknight, in drawing up these resolutions, 
 was guided by a prophetic spirit. 
 
 4412. You think that in his prognostications he has 
 been verified by results ? — Yes, he has been verified. 
 I hope I shall not take up too much time of the 
 Commissioners, but there are three other resolutions 
 that I should like to read. 
 
 4413. Baron Dowse. — Better read them out? — The 
 fourth resolution is this — 
 
 " That the legalization of the Ulster custom necessarily 
 implies the enactment of legal remedies for all wrono-s in 
 violation of that custom, and arbitrary rack-rentin"' and 
 compulsory eviction have hitherto been the main instru- 
 ments employed by landlords for confiscating tenant-right 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 G. M'Eboy. 
 
160 
 
 IRISH LAInD act commission.', ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
 interests in the soil. That the Land Bill, in its present 
 shape, affords no legal remedy against these standing griev- 
 ances ; and that by' way of protection, in the case of tenants 
 holding under the Ulster custom, when increased rents, 
 tending to depreciate the value of tenant-right, are de- 
 manded, every such tenant ought to have a right of appeal 
 to the land court before the landlord can proceed to evict ; 
 and the court should be invested with a discretionary power 
 of granting or withholding an eviction decree, according to 
 the justice and reasonableness of the case, as established in 
 evidence." 
 
 My lord, I think I will only read one of the other 
 resolutions. It is this — 
 
 " That both in and out of Piirliament, a combination of 
 English, Irish, and Scotch landlords has been formed, for 
 the avowed purposeof obstructing and defeating the Govern- 
 ment Land Bill, and every other measure of legislative 
 justice to the tenants of Ireland; that the audacious asser- 
 tion of this Commission is, that Irish claims must be decided 
 neither in accordance with the local wants of Ireland." 
 
 The history of these resolutions is simply this : — 
 At that conference some of our friends thought that 
 the resolutions were too strong, and if tliey had 
 been unanimously adopted, it was imagined that 
 they would rather hamper the action of the Govern- 
 ment in passing the Land Bill, and in consequence 
 of the ideas of these judicious friends — (and I 
 don't question their right)— this list was not adopted, 
 and more moderate resolutions were adopted, and 
 the point of them was to this effect — that the 
 Land Bill was defective in some particulars, but 
 these particulars were not specified so clearly as 
 Dr. Macknight did. I will submit these resolutions 
 now, showing that in 1870 Dr. Macknight and other 
 friends in the north did see the weak points in the 
 Land Bill, and pointed them out. The next matter 
 I wish to bring before the Commission is with re- 
 ference to two resolutions which were passed on the 
 28th of February, 1870. These resolutions were 
 passed by the Route Tenants' Defence Association, 
 and embodied in an amendment to the first clause of 
 the Land Bill by Mr. William Johnston, then M.P. for 
 Belfast. I might say here, to clear up a misapprehen- 
 sion with some persons who were not familiar with the 
 history of the Ulster custom, that their opinions in 
 regard to the movement were not altogether right. 
 They thought that Mr. Johnston's amendment was 
 rat'ner inconsistent with the fundamental principles of 
 the Ulster custom, but those opinions were founded, 
 not on knowledge, but on ignorance, for Mr. Johnston's 
 amendment was based on Mr. Sharman Crawford's 
 Bill for Ulster tenant-right, and the resolution was to 
 this effect : — 
 
 "That tlie first clause of thf Government Land Bid, 
 should contain the following principles, as set forth in the 
 Bill of Mr. Sharman Crawford, 1850: — That a custom 
 having been established in Ulster, according to which a right 
 of continued occupation is eiijiiyed by the tenant in posses- 
 sion, subject to the payment of the rent to which the pre- 
 mises are liable, or sucli change of rent as shall be afterwards 
 settled from time to time by fair valuation, with a right to 
 sell his occupation either by public or private sale, to any 
 solvent tenant to whom the landlord shall not make reason- 
 able objection; and that such tenant sliall not be evicted by 
 the landlord without being permitted to sell his interest, 
 and also being paid by the landlord the value thereof, as if 
 sold to a solvent tenant ; and that such custom be declared 
 a legal custom, and shall be uriiibrmly enforced throughout 
 the province of Ulster." 
 
 We were in favour of that custom being ecjbodied 
 in Mr. Gladstone's Bill of 1870, and we regret it was 
 not passed. 
 
 4414. Was that from Mr. Sharman Crawford's 
 Land Bill that yon have just read 1 — It is. 
 
 4415. Mr. Shaw. — Will you bo kind enough to 
 read it again — slowly? — [Witness read the clause.] 
 Perhaps I may have altered the phraseology slightly, 
 but it is the substance of Sharman Crawford's Bill of 
 1850. 
 
 4416. Do you give that as a definition of tenant- 
 right 1 — I have a further definition if you allow me. 
 In 1874 the National Land Conference was held in 
 
 was 
 
 Belfast; and that ISTational Laud Conference 
 really National in the proper sense of the teiTa. 
 
 4417. Chairman. — Was it in consequence of any- 
 thing that took place in regard to tenant-right in the 
 meantime that led to that meeting in 1874'? — It was. 
 The Land Bill was not working satisfactorily. 
 
 4418. In case of eviction the compensation given 
 to a tenant for land improvenient is, you think not 
 sufficient? — No. 
 
 4419. Baron Dowse. — As I understand the Ulster 
 tenant does not want to be turned out ? — They do not. 
 The importance of these resolutions consists in this 
 that they were unanimously adopted at the National 
 Land Conference held ta 1874. 
 
 4420. Where was it held? — In Belfast. 
 
 4421. Chairman. —Could you say what bodies were 
 represented ? — The southern tenant-right Associa- 
 tions were largely represented, and the northern 
 tenant right Associations, and the conference was 
 also largely attended by Members of Parliament. 
 
 4422. Was the conference largely attended? — It was 
 the most successful conference ever held in Ireland, 
 taking into consideration its representative character. 
 
 4423. Are the southern associations called tenant- 
 right a.ssociations? — No ; they are called farmers' 
 clubs, I think generally. In connexion with the 
 adoption ^f these resolutions here is the definition 
 that I submitted to the Conference : — 
 
 " That the first clause of the Land Act having failed to 
 legalize the Ulster tenant-right custom in a uniform manner 
 throughout the whole province, according to which custom 
 the tenant enjoyed the right of continued occupation, sub- 
 ject to the paynjent of a fair rent, with a right to sell his 
 interest to any solvent tenant, to whom the landlord should 
 not malce any reasonable objection, whether the holdings 
 were under lease, or held from year to year, tenants on 
 those estates where such rights have been curtailed have a 
 just cause of complaint agamst the legislature for framing 
 a clause, the practical operation of which is 3iiore beneficial 
 to those tenants wlio possessed the custom in all its vitality 
 tlian to tenants from whom it had been either wholly or 
 partially talccn away. That from the proprietary interest 
 established under the Plantation grants, these conditions 
 become inseparable from the Ulster custom: — Firstly — A 
 fairly assessed rent, irrespective of the tenant's improvements, 
 and at intervals of not less than thirty-one years. Secondly 
 — Free sale in recognition of the tenant's good-will and in- 
 \'L\steil capital. Thirdly — Continued occupation so long as 
 thi- tenant paid the rent, and otherwise fulfilled his equitable 
 obligations to the landlord.' 
 
 That is the definition adopted in 1874. I need not 
 read the i-emainder of the resolutions. 
 
 4424. Mr. Shaw. — Do you still adjiere to that? — 
 Yes, th;it is my definition. 
 
 4425. Baron Dowse. — If a tenant was allowed, 
 irrespective of the Ulster custom, or any other custom, 
 the privilege of holding the land at a fair rent, with the 
 power of free sale, giving the landlord a reasonable 
 veto to the incoming man if he was not of good 
 character, and that the tenant should hold the land 
 as long as he tilled it in a liusbandlike manner and 
 paid the rent, would that be reasonable ? — It would be 
 reasonable and wise. 
 
 4420. Would it satisfy the tenants? — It might not 
 satisfy all parties. 
 
 4427. Ought it to satisfy them? — It would give 
 large satisfaction, or general satisfaction, I think. 
 
 Mr. Samuel Black. — My lord, if the tenants had 
 ownership in the soil they would be raised above the 
 position in which they are at present. If that were 
 so I believe there would be no necessity for introducing 
 any clause against subdivision, for a satisfactory con- 
 clusion would soon be arri^-ed at in a far better way 
 than any inquiry could w^ork it out, and I believe it 
 would be injudicious in the natural system of land 
 occupation in this country to put any measure forward 
 preventing stibdivision or subletting. 
 
 4428. Mr. Suaw.— Do you consider that tenant- 
 right gives o\vnership ? — Partial ownership. 
 
 4429. And you think that would secure tenant- 
 right?— I think it would be an important measure for 
 the removal of the ills of land occupation in Ireland — 
 iukI that is the removal of the obstructions upon the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 161 
 
 free sale of land. I ttink that on account of tlie 
 existence of these obstrvictions upon the free sale of 
 land has arisen all the ills that exist connected with 
 the land question. 
 
 4430. Chairman. — Do you mean the free sale of 
 land by landlords? — By every person; by landlords 
 and owners of land. 
 
 4431. By a custom of entail ? — Entail, and primo- 
 geniture, and settlement. 
 
 4432. Mr. M'Elroy. — I will read the resolution of 
 the Land Conference in Dublin in 1875. I wish to 
 show that there was a unanimity between the fanners' 
 clubs of the south, and the farmers' clubs in the north, 
 with regard to the demands of the Irish tenant farmers. 
 This resolution was adopted at a conference held in 
 Dublin in January, 1875. The resolution is : — 
 
 " That we hereby, as the foundation of our proceedhigs, 
 declare our contuiued and unaltered adherence to the 
 principles of tlie resolutions adopted at the conference held 
 in Dublin, on tlie 18th April, lb73, and that held at Belfast 
 on the 20th January, 1874." 
 
 I wish to show identity of action up to this date, but 
 it would be more regular for me to give the resolutions 
 of 1873. 
 
 " First That from our e.-cperience and observation of the 
 
 operation and effect of the Land Act of 1870, we feel 
 compelled to declare that it has failed in attaininjj; the 
 objects which its framers proposed to accomplish. It has 
 not given to the Irish tenant the sense of security in his 
 tenure, or in the enjoyment of the fruits of his industry, and 
 it has failed to redress the admitted evils of our land 
 syotem." 
 
 The seventh resolution is : — 
 
 '' That the experience of the failure of the Land Act has 
 confirmed and deepened our conviction that no adequate 
 remedy can be devised for the evils of the Irish system of 
 land tenure, whici will not give to every Irish tenant the 
 same rights as thofe which the Ulster custom, when 
 observed in its integrity secures to the tenantry of that 
 province — that is the right to continue in undisturbed 
 possession of his farm, at a fair rent, fixed from time to 
 time by a valuation from which the value of the tenant's 
 improvements would be excluded, with the power to 
 transmit the right to his children, or to sell it for the highest 
 price he can obtain, aiid that we, are willing to adopt the 
 definition of U Ister tenant-right furnished by the Dungannon 
 Association, viz.: — (a.) That tenant right is not a right to 
 compensation for disturbance merely, but it is the distinct 
 right of the tenant to remain, in occupation and enjoyment 
 of the improvements which he or his predecessors have made 
 by his or their own labour or industry, and at his or their 
 own risk, subject to his paying a fair rent ; and should he 
 desire to give up occupation of the land, his right to sell it 
 to the highest bidder, who may be a solvent and respectable 
 man. (t.) That the fair rent to which the landlord is 
 entitled in accordance with the Ulster custom, is a rent to 
 be adjusted only at intervals, and looking to the fact that 
 the Ulster leases were formerly all for lengthened periods, 
 generally sixty-one years, an interval of thirty-one years 
 would appear to be the minimum term which would now do 
 justice to all parties, (c.) That a fair rent always excludes 
 from valuation the interests and improvements of the tenant, 
 whether made, purchased, or inherited." 
 
 I consider that an important point of the resolutions. 
 The next is : — 
 
 " id.) That these claims are based upon the ancient and 
 historic tenant-right of Ulster, under which at the close of 
 a lease, the rent was fairly revalued, and the occupier 
 continued in occupation for another lengthened term, 
 M-hilst during its duration he was allowed freely to sell his 
 lease, and that under this system, both landlordandtenant 
 prospered, and the northern province with an inferior soil 
 and cUniate, became the most flourishing portion of Ireland. 
 
 4433. Baron Dowse. — 1 want to ask you a question 
 on this sitbject as I had frequent discussions my- 
 self about it. Do you attribute the prosperity of 
 Ulster, as it is a prosperous part of the country, to the 
 tenant-right alone ? — Not alone. 
 
 4434. What else 1 — There is the linen trade in some 
 districts of Ulster, but not throughout Ulster gener- 
 ally. 
 
 4435. But it is particularly in the part of the world 
 of which this is the centre ? — Yes. 
 
 4436. Do you attribute the prosperity in any way Sept. 21, isso. 
 to the thrift; of the tenantry ? — Yes. There are various jj,. g^,el 
 causes operating in favour of the tenantry. C. M'Elroy. 
 
 4437. You consider that the Ulster custom gives 
 a sense of security 1 —Yes. 
 
 4438. And this security is the basis of the whole 
 prosperity ? — Yes. 
 
 4439. Mr. Siiaw. — Resolutions quite similar to 
 those you have read were adopted in Mallow 1 — Yes. 
 We approved of the Mallow resolutions at a meeting 
 held in Ballymoney. 
 
 4440. There is a general agreement between the 
 farmers in the south and those in the north ? — Well, 
 not altogether. I think there is a section of the 
 farmers' associations in the south of Ireland that 
 hardly agree with us in the north. Their ideas, I 
 think, are more advanced. 
 
 4441. Do you speak of the Land League? — Yes. 
 
 4442. Baron Dowse. — They have more heroic ideas 
 in some parts of Ireland than you have 1 — Yes. The 
 last resolution I will trouble you with was passed at 
 a public meeting held in Ballymoney on January 23rd, 
 1880, and it was as follows : — 
 
 " That as according to the genuine tenant-right custom 
 of Ulster the tenant is entitled to the undisturbed possession 
 of his holding (unless made void by non-payment of rent), 
 to exemption, by virtue of his invested capital, from the im- 
 position of a rack-rent, and to sell his interest to a solvent 
 purchaser without being hampered by arbitrary office rules ; 
 and as these fundamental elements of the custom are 
 equitable in principle, beneficial whore allowed to operate, 
 and applicable to all Ireland, we renew, with increased 
 emphasis, our appeal to Parliament to confirm them by 
 legislative enactment, so as to ensure to every farmer in the 
 country the blessings of a firm tenure ; protection against fre- 
 quent and unjust claims for an increase of rent, and legiti- 
 mate freedom in the disposal of his property ; and thus 
 complete the legislation inaugurated by Mr. Gladstone in 
 1870." 
 
 The next resolution is to this effect : — 
 " That while it is imperative to provide for the well-being 
 of tenants who hold by ordinary tenure, we disire to express 
 our belief that the gradual establishment of peasant pro- 
 prietorship would be fraught with unspeakable . advantages 
 to the country and the State, this system being pre-eminently 
 fitted to enable the agriculturists whether of Ireland, 
 Scotland, or England to compete with foreign producers, 
 and elevate the social condition of the farming class. We 
 therefore urge the removal of restrictions on the working of 
 Bright's clauses of the Land Act, and the granting of 
 facilities to landlords to give perpetuity leases at fair rents." 
 
 Those are all the resolutions that I have to submit, and 
 I could not give a better definition than what is given 
 is those resolutions. Perhaps yon would allow me 
 now to give an idea of the value of tenant-right in the 
 northern district of county Antrim. I may say that 
 I possess special facilities for giving a correct idea of 
 the value of tenant-right, because as I happen to be an 
 auctioneer, I am very familiar with sales of tenant- 
 right. 
 
 4443. Chaieman. — Does your valuation apply to 
 the present time, or before the passing of the Land 
 Act 1 — I am submitting a list of my sales of tenant- 
 right since 1865, giving the number of acres, how many 
 years purchase, and the nature of the tenancy, whether 
 by lease or otherwise. 
 
 4444. Baron Dowse. — That should be a most 
 interesting document ? — "V es, it is. I was very anxious 
 to promote this inquiry. I have begun at the time I 
 commenced to act as an auctioneer. 
 
 4445. The O'Conor Don. — Are all these lands on 
 the same property ? — No, they are not. 
 
 4446. Mr. Shaw. — Are they all in the same dis- 
 trict 1 — Yes, all from eight to ten miles round Bally- 
 money. 
 
 (Mr. M'Elroy then read the following list) : — 
 
 [Sales op Farms. 
 Y 
 
1G2 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Sept. 21, ISSO. 
 
 Blr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
 Mr. S. C. M'Elkoy's Sales of Faems. 
 
 13 
 
 acres 
 
 20 
 
 acres 
 
 12 
 
 acres 
 
 C!) 
 
 acres 
 
 Hi 
 
 acres 
 
 V4 
 
 acres 
 
 iii) 
 
 acres 
 
 yi; 
 
 acres 
 
 35 
 
 acres 
 
 18C5. 
 155 acres at £8 an acre, or IC years purchase, 
 
 1SC6. 
 
 16 acres at £-t an acre, or 4 years purchase, 
 33 acres at £8 an acre, or 1 5 years purchase, 
 13i acres at £5 an acre, or 25 years purchase, 
 
 1867. 
 30 acres at £13 an acre, or 16 years purchase, 
 6'I acres at £9 an acre, or 13 j'ears purchase 
 32 acres at £10 an acre, or 26 years purchase, 
 
 1868. 
 106 acres at £i an acre, or 6 years purchase, 
 10 acres at £9 an acre, or 8 years purchase, 
 
 10 acres at £6 an acre, or 7 years purchase, 
 
 1869. 
 15 acres at £10 an acre, or 7 years purchase, 
 
 11 acres at £16 an acre, or 15 years purchase, 
 It acres at £12 an acre, or 35 years purchase, 
 30 acres at £13 an acre, or 11 years purchase, 
 
 1870. 
 2'i acres at £10 an acre, or 10 years purchase, 
 14- acres at £15 an acre, or 10 3'cars purchase, 
 59 acres at £10 an acre, or 14 years purchase, 
 
 20 acres at £10 an acre, or 11 years purchase, 
 02 acres at £9 an acre, or 7 years purchase, 
 
 1871. 
 15 acres at £25 an acre, or 19 years purchase, 
 
 30 acres at £13 an acre, or 11 years purchase, 
 
 21 acres at £0 an acre, or 10 years purchase, 
 
 12 acres at £10 an acre, or 30 years purchase, 
 88 acres at £10 an acre, or 12 years purchase, 
 
 1872. 
 
 at £12 an acre, or 15 years purchase, 
 
 at £12 an acre, or 10 years purchase, 
 
 at £17 an acre, or 10 j'ears purchase, 
 
 at £9 an acre, or 9 years purchase, 
 
 at £12 an acre, or 8 years purchase, 
 
 at £11 an acre, or S years purchase, 
 
 at £19 an acre, or 14 years purchase, 
 
 at £9 an acre, or 11 years purchase, 
 
 at £12 an acre, or 15 years purchase, 
 
 1873. 
 
 17 acres at £14 an acre, or 12 years purchase, 
 
 20 acres at £10 an acre, or 10 years purchase, 
 25 acres at £12 an acre, or 9 years purchase, 
 lij7 acres at £9 an acre, or 21 years purchase, 
 
 2 1 acres at £8 an acre, or 9 years purchase, 
 29 acres at £14 an acre, or 15 years purchase, 
 7 acres at £12 an acre, or 24 years purchase, 
 
 1874. 
 
 22 acres at £11 an acre, or, 10 years purchase, 
 
 13 acres at £19 an acre, or 18 years purchase, 
 
 31 acres at £2.! an acre, or 21 years purchase, 
 15 arrcs at £25 an acre, or 24 years purchase, 
 22 acres at £5 an acre, or 5 years purchase, 
 
 1875. 
 29 acres at £9 an acre, or 13 years purchase, 
 21 acres at £9 an acre, or 21 years purchase, 
 10 acres ai £11 an acre, or 19 years purchase, 
 
 10 acres at £15 an acre, or 10 years purchase, 
 3G acres at £12 an acre, or 26 years purchase, 
 15 acres at £1." au acre, or 17 j-ears purchase, 
 05 acres at £8 an acre, or 8 years purchase, 
 
 40 acres at £20 an acre, or 18 years purchase, 
 
 19 acres at £16 an acre, or 16 years purchase, 
 
 1876. 
 
 4 1 acres at £8 an acre, or 1 6 j'oars purchase, 
 7 acres at £25 an acre, or 32 years purchase, 
 
 11 acres at £19 an acre, or 36 years purchase, 
 
 1877. 
 29 acres at £10 an acre, or 14 years purchase, 
 7 acres at £1 1 an acre, or 13 years purchase, 
 17 acres at £8 an acre, or 11 years purchase, 
 
 20 acics at £25 an acre, or 31 years purchase, 
 00 acres at £15 an acre, or 12 years purchase, 
 35 acres at £12 au acre, or 16 j-ears purchase, 
 
 1878. 
 
 21 acres at £14 an acre, or 18 years purchase, 
 
 09 acres at £23 an acre, or 35 years purchase, 
 41 acres at £28 an acre, or 24 years purchase, 
 20 acres at £10 an acre, or 10 years purchase, 
 1 7 acres at £ 7 an acre, or 10 years purchase, 
 
 10 acres at £18 an acre, or 15 j'ears purcha.se, 
 
 14 acres at £14 an acre, or 20 years purchase, 
 10 acres at £11 an acre, or 11 years purchase. 
 
 Lease. 
 
 Lease. 
 Do. 
 Do. 
 
 Lease. 
 
 Tearly tenancy. 
 Do. 
 
 Lease. 
 
 yearly tenancy. 
 Do. 
 
 Tearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 Do. 
 
 Lease. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 Do. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Lease. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Lease. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 
 Do. 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 Lease. 
 , Do. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 Lease. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Yearly tenancj-. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 Do. 
 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 Lease. 
 
 Do. 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Lease. 
 Yearly tenancy. 
 
 1879. 
 21 acres at £17 an acre, or 15 years purchase, 
 30 acres at £6 an acre, or 5 years purchase, 
 38 acres at £16 an acre, or 20 years purchase, 
 14 acres at £12 an acre, or 16 years inu-chaso, 
 27 acres at £20 an acre, or 16 years purchase, 
 8 acres at £23 an acre, or 22 years purchase, 
 14 acres at £13 an acre, or 23 years purchase, 
 
 42 acres at £10 an acre, or 18 years purchase, 
 10 acres at £25 an acre, or 27 years purchase, 
 
 15 acres at £16 an acre, or 15 years purchase, 
 19 acres at £9 an acre, or 12 years purchase, 
 
 16 acres at £13 au acre, or 10 years pfirchase, 
 
 1880. 
 53 acres at £9 an acre, or 14 years purchase, 
 14 acres at £9 an acre, or 18 years purchase. 
 
 Total Proceeds or Sales. 
 
 . T.pa-ie. 
 
 . Yearly tenancy. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 . Lease for eycr. 
 . Tenancy at will. 
 . Tenancy at will 
 at expiration 
 of old lea^e. 
 . Yearly tenancy. 
 . I.e.ise. 
 . Do. 
 . Yearly tenancj'. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Lease. 
 
 Yearly tenancy.. 
 
 1SG5, 
 1866, 
 1867, 
 1868, 
 1869, 
 1870, 
 1871, 
 1872, 
 1873, 
 1874, 
 1875, 
 1876, 
 1877, 
 1878, 
 1879, 
 1880, 
 
 1,200 
 1,060 
 1,319 
 
 590 
 
 795 
 2,5;i6 
 2,040 
 2,666 
 2,983 
 2,280 
 3,295 
 
 950 
 2,290 
 3,742 
 3,057 
 
 625 
 
 Total, 
 
 £31,493 
 
 (Mr. M'Elroy explained that this total included a 
 fe-w sales. The exact particulars as to acreage he had 
 not been able to obtain.) 
 
 4447. Baron Dowse. — For what length of time were 
 theleasesnsual'? — Generallyforthirty-oneyears, or lives. 
 
 4448. Mr. Shaw. — "Were all those sold by public 
 sale 1 — The vast majority of them. T had charge of 
 the sales, and sold either privately or by public auction. 
 
 4449. The O'Conob, Don. — There was no limit on 
 the prices 1 — No. 
 
 4450. Mr. Shaw. — There were no office rules to be 
 observed f — No. 
 
 4451. Baron Dowse. — Where was that land — seven 
 acres that sold for £25 an acre, or thirty-two years'' 
 purchase 1 — It was at Roseyards, three miles from 
 Eallymoncy. 
 
 4452. Was there anything peculiar in the situation 
 of the place ? — No. 
 
 4453. Mr. Shaw. — Was it a townpark? — No, it 
 was a farm. It was particularly good land, and was 
 what is called in the country, a desirable holding. 
 
 4454. Mr. Kavanagh. — Would the fee-simple of it 
 have fetched as much if it were put up 1 — It would 
 bring more. Where tenant-right is recognised 
 will have a prosperous tenantry. 
 
 4455. Baron Dowse. — And there willbewell secured 
 rents 1 — Yes, well secured rents. My experience is that 
 the fee-simple will sell better where there is tenant-right. 
 
 4456. Mr. Shaw. — If the properties were put up in 
 small lots they would bring higher money? — Yes. 
 
 4457. Could the occupier be a bidder 1 — Yes. 
 
 4458. Mr. M'Elderry. — I know of a case where two 
 farmers bid against each other to a considerably larger 
 extent than usual. 
 
 4459. Mr. Shaw. — Did they want to add to their 
 farms ^ — Yes. 
 
 4460. And one of them got the additional land ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 4461. Mr. Kavanagh (to Mr. M'Elroy). Do yoiv 
 
 mean that if the fee-simple and the tenant-rio-ht were 
 put up for sale together, that a person would oive sixty- 
 four years' purchase for them'? — The question is peculiar, 
 because the two interests are never put up too-ether. 
 
 4462. Are there not cases where farmers would not 
 bid? — I remember one case, but it is not exactly 
 parallel. The landlord had bought the tenant-right of 
 a farm. I sold the tenant-right of that farm, on behalf 
 
 you 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 1G3 
 
 of tlie landlord, and I sold it at a very Mgh. rate of pur- 
 cliase — I believe twenty or twenty-four years' purchase. 
 He had the fee-simple remaining still, and it would 
 have brought its own price ; the tenant-right brought 
 its own price, and, if the fee-simple had been sold, it 
 would have brought its price too. 
 
 4463. Baron Dowse. — Under diiferent circum- 
 stances the fee-simple might bring a good price, but it 
 does not follow that if a man has- a farm in fee, he would 
 get the two prices 1 — No. The tenant-right interest 
 would enhance the fee-simple. 
 
 4464. It means right of possession ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Black. — If sold separately T think they would 
 bring a good price. I believe if we had free sale in land, 
 that the value would rise very much in the market. 
 
 4465. Chairman. — Is it considered that tenant-right 
 exists at the end of a lease 1 — ^Unqviestionably. I have 
 sold leases within a few years of their Expiration, and 
 the tenant-right as well. 
 
 4466. Is that a recognized principle by landlords as 
 well as tenants ?— Yes. 
 
 4467. Who are the principal landlords in your dis- 
 trict 1 — Mr. Leslie, of Leslie Hill ; Mr. Rowan, of 
 Mount Davis ; Mr. Hutchinson, of Stranocum ; Mr. 
 O'Hara, of Harabrook ; Mr. Moore, of Moorefort ; 
 Lord Antrim is proprietor of Ballymoney. He owns 
 the townparks to which I will refer by-and-by, Mr. 
 Beers and Colonel Magennis are also landlords. 
 
 4468. Mr. Shaw. — The London companies do not 
 hold land in Antrim % — No. They are landlords in 
 Derry, but most of the landlords in Antrim recognize 
 the IJlster Tenant Custom. 
 
 4469. Baron Dowse. — Where you do not mention 
 leases in your list, are they yearly tenancies 1 — Yes. 
 Thirty-iive years' ptu-chase is the highest price given. 
 The sale of a tenancy-at-will at the close of a lease is an 
 unusual and extraordinary thing, but I have sold a 
 tenancy-at-'will immediately after the expiration of a 
 lease. 
 
 4470. What do you mean by tenant-at-will ? — A 
 yearly tenant. 
 
 4471. Mr. Shaw. — Did the landlord object to his 
 ■ selling 1 — No. 
 
 4-172. Is the man now in occupation 1 — Yes. 
 
 4473. The O'Cosoe Dox. — Has there been a new 
 lease 1 — No. 
 
 4474. Baron Dowse. — Was there a new letting 1 — 
 There was to the incoming tenant. 
 
 4475. Mr. Shaw. — The landlord has accepted him 
 AS tenant ?— Yes. 
 
 4476. Then the old tenant has no right ? — No. 
 
 4477. It is a tenancy now from year to year ? — Yes. 
 
 4478. Baron Dowse. — In point of law, and it is in 
 this way only I speak on this subject, at the end 
 of a lease, if the landlord has received no rent, there 
 is no estate to be recognized by the law at all ? — Equity 
 in this instance did recognize the estate, although the 
 law did not recognize i t. 
 
 Mr. Blach. — We consider that the lease is only an 
 incident of the custom, because in a great many cases 
 of farms there have been leases and tenancies-at-will 
 from time immemorial. 
 
 4479. Baron Dowse. — You claim that when a lease 
 expires the tenant should have the right to hold on 
 at a fair rent as the continuous occupant? — (Mr. 
 IPElroy). — Quite so. We look for the good-will as 
 the fundamental principle of the custom. 
 
 4480. Ciiaiemajt. — Do you find that the average 
 selling price of holdings has been smaller during the 
 last ten years 1 — No, not smaller. 
 
 4481. Or even during the latter part of the past ten 
 years'?— No, the prices are nothing smaller. Tenant- 
 right has increased in value for the past fifteen years. 
 It is p-iven in evidence that since the Devon Commis- 
 sion in 1845, there has been an increase in rents. 
 
 4482. Do you think that the hopes entertained, and 
 which have not been realized, have operated on tenants 
 purchasing? — No, I think not. I have only sold two 
 lots in the present yeai-. I may say that I have 
 generally had a number of farms for sale, but I could 
 
 not get them sold. Tiie total proceeds of the sales 
 since 1865 was £31,493. I think that will give you 
 an adequate idea of the value of tenant-right in our 
 district; and all these transactions were conducted by 
 myself. 
 
 4483. Mr. Shaw. — Have you more farms for sale 
 now? — No, I have not. I have no large farms for 
 sale. Men are not disposed to put them in the mar- 
 ket as there is not proper competition at present. 
 
 4484. Baron Dowse. — Were these sales made undor 
 fi. fas that is sheriff's sales, or were they made volun- 
 tarily ? — I don't think I had any sale under a fi. fa. 
 I had some sales under what is called local pressure. 
 
 4485. But you had not any sheriff's sales ? — No. 
 
 4486. Mr. Shaw. — A good many were changincf 
 occupations ? — Yes. 
 
 4487. Baron Dowse. — Would you say that since 
 the Land Act has passed the land has produced more ? 
 — Yes, it has. 
 
 4488. And the tenant feels an additional sense of 
 security ?^Yes ; I have no doubt of that. 
 
 4489. You don't look upon the Act as a failure 1 — 
 No, I do not. 
 
 Mr. Black. — It has done more for Ulster than for 
 the rest of Ireland. 
 
 Mr. M'Elroy. — Putting on one side the amount 
 of rents raised on account of the misapprehension 
 created in some landlords' minds by the Land Act, 
 with the advantages gained by the tenant on the other 
 side, through compensation in the Land Court, I 
 believe the tenants have lost more by increased rents 
 than they have gained by the compensation given in 
 the Land Court. 
 
 4490. Mr. Shaw. — Does that apply to all Ireland 
 or merely to Ulster ? — I would be inclined to make it 
 confined to Ulster. 
 
 4491. Baron Dowse. — You confine it to the place 
 you are acquainted with ? — Yes. 
 
 4492. Chairman. — Had the farmers experienced bad 
 times in late years? — In 1868 there were bad crops 
 owing to the drought. 
 
 Mr. M'-Elroy. — There was a local cause. In 1868 
 there was an uncertainty in the public mind as to the 
 position a tenant-right property might acquire under 
 the Land Bill. , There was a great deal of uncertainty 
 about it. In 1868 and 1869 the people did not know 
 or could not see the position that tenant-right property 
 would hold under the Land Bill. 
 
 Mr. Black. — There was a special uncertainty intro- 
 duced after the passing of the Land Act in the case 
 of leasehold tenant-right ; because various conflicting 
 decisions had been given in the Courts of Law. That 
 may have affected, and I have no doubt did affect, the 
 value of tenant-right in some districts to a certain extent. 
 
 4493. Baron DowsE.^Supposing a man is a tenant 
 from year to year in a tenant-right district, and if a 
 lease is made to him for thirty-one years, at the ex- 
 piration of that thirty-one years you hold that he has 
 not lost the tenant-right he had antecedent to that 
 period? — Yes. 
 
 4494. And that he is just in the same position at 
 the expiration of the thirty-one years? — Yes; and 
 that he has the same tenant-right that his neighbour 
 has. That is the custom. 
 
 Mr.. Black. — I may say that the general impression 
 upon the minds of the people of Ulster with regard to 
 some of the decisions of the judges in regard to this 
 matter of leasehold tenant-right is, that the judges, 
 although with the best intentions in the v^orld, have 
 made mistakes. Judge Barry decided in M'-Keown v. 
 Beauclerc, that there was no tenant-right at the ex- 
 piration of a lease, and there was no decision that 
 did more injury than that one. 
 
 4495. Mr. Shaw. — Was that on a tenant-right pro- 
 perty ? — Yes. 
 
 4496. (To Mr. M'Elroy).—!^ not the price affected 
 by the cii-cumstances of each case ? — Yes ; by ^-arious 
 local circumstances — the eciuality of the soil, fair rent 
 general accommodation, proximity to a market town 
 and reputation of landlord. 
 
 Y 2 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M-Elroy. 
 
164 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
 4497. Baron Dowse. — You would hold, if the dis- 
 trict is a tenant-right district, and the lease is made 
 to a man in that district, you have no occasion to give 
 instances of tenant-right being allowed at the end of 
 leases t — No. 
 
 4498. The district being a tenant-right district is 
 sufficient 1 — Yes. 
 
 4499. That is a question of fact, and if there is to 
 be legislation following upon this Commission, what 
 you want to do is to have the difficulties removed by 
 Act of Parliament. Is that so 1 — Yes, that is so. The 
 Ulster custom had been violated, and it was in con- 
 sequence of its violation that we were obliged to bring 
 forward our cause. 
 
 4500. Would this definition be sufficient for you — 
 that a man in possession of land should hold it as con- 
 tinuous occupant, only* to be evicted for non-payment 
 of rent, and to have the right of free sale. Would 
 that get rid of all your difficulties 1 — Subject to a fair 
 rent, it would get rid of oiir chief difficulties. 
 
 4501. The O'Conor Don. — We must all recognize 
 this fact, that tenant-right in its inception was a con- 
 flict with the ordinary law, and the only question is, 
 has it become law now? — Mr. Black. — I might remark 
 this, that in a year like that through which we are 
 passing, a year of great difficulty (or the cultivators of 
 the land, and in which the value of the land decreases, 
 that in Ulster, where the tenant-right prevails, the first 
 brunt, so to speak, of the difficulty falls not upon the 
 landlord, but upon the fee-simple, but upon the tenant. 
 The tenant-right declines in the first place, because it 
 is a guarantee to the landlord for his rent, and while 
 tlie fee-simple remains very much intact, I don't say 
 altogether intact, but very much, the value of the tei> 
 ant-right very often decreases much, indeed. 
 
 4502. Baron Dowse. — You would come to the con- 
 clusion that before the fee-simple could be touched at 
 all the whole tenant-right may be destroj^ed ? — Yes ; 
 very often. 
 
 4503. CiiAiEMAN. — The tenant-right is the benefi- 
 cial interest which the tenant has over and above the 
 fair rent of the land 1 — Yes ; and the value of his im- 
 provements. 
 
 4504. The 0'Cos"oe Don. — Do you have more sales 
 in a bad or a good year? — Mr. M'Elroy. — In a good year. 
 
 4505. Would you not find that in a bad year the 
 benant got into difficulty, and was obliged to sell ? — 
 But we cannot sell then. I had only two sales in 
 1880, although I had the usual number of orders. 
 
 ■(•506. What occurs in a case of that sort 1 — The 
 parties are obliged to hold on. 
 
 4507. Mr. Shaw. — They get time from their cre- 
 ditors ? — They do. 
 
 4508. Baron Dowse. — And the landlord won't press 
 them in a good tenant-right district, as the tenant- 
 right is security for the rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 4509. Chairman. — Would the tenant in that case 
 be able to give notice to quit and to call upon the 
 landlord to pay him the value of his interest? — That 
 is not usual. Mr. Black. — The landlord gives him the 
 right of selling his interest, and when he does that he 
 is clear of all claim. 
 
 4510. The sales, of course, which you conduct must 
 take place at various periods of the tenancy. Do you 
 find much difference when the term is near the con- 
 clusion and when there is a long term ? — Mr. M'-Elroy. 
 — No, very little difference. I have sold almost as 
 well when the lease was near its conclusion. The 
 transaction is based on confidence in the landlord. 
 
 4511. That shows the strong dependence upon the 
 custom ? — The transaction is based upon the custom. 
 
 4512. The O'Conor Don. — Is it usual to increase 
 the rent at the end of the lease 1 — It is usual. 
 
 4513. Baron Dowse. — The tenant does not object 
 to the increase if it is a fair rent ? — No. 
 
 Mr. Blach. — That is a great difficulty between land- 
 lord and tenant in the north of Ireland, the rent 
 question, because the tenant being now constituted 
 partner with his landlord, he says he ought to have 
 a voice in determining what a fair rent is ; he says that 
 
 that would only be fair and just, because if the land- 
 lord has undisputed powers to determine the rent, the 
 tenant-right may be eaten up by the landlord putting 
 on an extra rent, and diminishing the tenant-right 
 value of the farm. 
 
 4514. Chaieman. — Do the landlords in the district 
 you represent do anything in the way of improvements 
 themselves on the holdings that are under tenant-right. 
 Do the landlords ever advance any capital? — Mr. 
 M'Elroy. — I know of one case where the landlord 
 advanced £25 towards the improvement of the houses, 
 and 5 per cent, interest was charged, and that was 
 added to the rent. I explained that at the sale, and 
 the farm sold very well and the public seemed to be 
 very well satisfied. Mr. Black.— 1 think I remember 
 one case on Lord O'Neill's property, in which his lord- 
 ship advanced money to make improvements, and he 
 charged either 4 or 5 per cent, on it, and that was 
 added to the rent. 
 
 4515. Baron Dowse. — Supposing the landlord does 
 make the improvement, if he adds the cost to the rent 
 he is fully indemnified ? — Mr. Black — Quite so. 
 
 4516. He gets a better investment for his money 
 than he would anywhere. If he puts it in the funds 
 he would only get some 3 per cent. ? — Mr. M'Elroy.— 
 Here is a firm of thirty-three acres, held for the un- 
 expired term of seven years, and it sold for £400. 
 
 4517. Mr. Shaw. — The rent was moderate ? — Yes. 
 
 4518. And the land fairly good I suppose? — Yes, 
 a light sandy loam. 
 
 4519. A tenant-right property? — A tenant-right 
 property. 
 
 4520. We would get as much as that for a farm 
 in the south of the same kind ? — When giving a list 
 of the landlords under whom tenants are entitled to 
 sell I forgot the Londonderry famUy. It has always 
 realised a very high figure there, and there is no 
 family under whom tlie tenantry are more contented 
 than under the Londonderry family. 
 
 4521. Baron Dowse. — And I always understood 
 that that extended to the Downshire estates too ? — To 
 the Downshire too. 
 
 4522. They have been very liberal? — (Mr. Black). 
 — Very much evil has arisen with regard to the 
 raising of rents at the change of tenancies. I believe 
 in some measure it extended to the Downshire \>ro- 
 perty. I have heard tenants again and again com- 
 plain of what they called, whether in fact or not, the 
 unjustifiable rise of rent at the change of tenancies on 
 the Downshire estate. The same principle holds 
 good over the greater number of properties in the 
 north of Ireland, and creates a great deal of bad feeling. 
 
 4523. The Chairman. — And do you say that was 
 not part of the original custom? — (Mr. Black). — We 
 say the tenant has a right to hold his property at a 
 fair rent, to be determined from time to time ; then 
 what we have to consider is how the rent is to be 
 fairly determined, how a fair rent is to be obtained. 
 
 4524. Mr. Kavanagh. — And what mode would 
 you suggest, because that seems to be the crucial test 
 of the whole thing ? — (Mr. Black). — I agree with you, 
 Mr. Kavanagh, and the way in which it has been 
 suggested to have it solved is this — that the tenant 
 should appoint one man and the landlord another, 
 and that these two, before they came to consider the 
 question of rent, should appoint an umpire, and then 
 go to the arbitration of what a fair rent ought to be, 
 and giving the right of appeal — that, if either the 
 one party or the other felt they had not been fairly 
 treated by the arbitration, they had the right of 
 appeal to the Land Court. 
 
 4525. Chairman. — We are told by some witnesses 
 that in arbitrations of that description there should 
 be an independent umpire, it has been mentioned 
 very often, one appointed by the Government ? — (]Mr. 
 Black). — My lord, that is just a question for con- 
 sideration. In my neighbourhood the feeling is that 
 the landlord should appoint one man and the tenant 
 another, and that there should be an umj)ire. 
 
 4526. The common form of arbitration? (Mr. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 16.5 
 
 M'Elroy). — But that the common form of arbitration 
 should be made compulsory. 
 
 4527. Baron Dowse. — Is it not possible that in a 
 great variety of cases this would cover the country 
 with litigation ; whUe in a great number of cases there 
 would be no movement either to raise rent or lower 
 it on the part of the landlord 1 — -(Mr. Black). — I do ; 
 but even if it increased the litigation that litigation 
 would be much less hardship than that which exists. 
 
 4528. Do you not think that in a great number of 
 cases there would be nothing to discuss at all 1 — (Mr. 
 M'Elroy). — I want all these disputes settled amicably. 
 I believe this matter of rent is not a, proper matter 
 for the ordinary Civil Court to consider at all, 
 and I would like to see the relation of landlord and 
 tenant placed on such a basis that there would be 
 no recourse to the ordinary law Court. And if you 
 make ordinary arbitration compulsory 
 
 4529. It would meet the very case suggested. I 
 can understand a person appointing A and another 
 ajjpointing B, but if they did not agree as to the 
 umpire % — T would call in the Government arbitrator. 
 
 4530. Mr. Kavanaoii.- -The county courts — No. 
 
 4531. Sir. Shaw. — You would have a skilled man? 
 — Tes. The last Land Act provided for a state of 
 conflict between landlord and tenant. I say the new 
 Land Bill should provide for a state of amity, and to 
 establish that state of amity, I believe compalsory 
 arbitration is one of the best modes. 
 
 4532. Baron Dowse. — If you make people be 
 friends, whether they like it or not, I fear that would 
 be called Irish amity 1 — Mr. M'-Elderry. — I have never 
 been called upon to arbitrate with.regard to rent — but 
 I have with regard to compensation, and I found no 
 difficulty in selecting the tliiid man. 
 
 4533. BIr. Shaw. — ^The landlord was party to it as 
 well as the tenant? — Yes. 
 
 4534. The O'Conoe Dot. — In that case it was 
 voluntary on both sides, and either party could with- 
 draw from it ? — Not after they agreed to it. 
 
 4535. In your case, Mr. M'Elroy, it would be com- 
 pulsory ? — It would. 
 
 4536. Would that not raise a difficulty as to the 
 third party. If he agrees to this arbitration and does 
 not agree to the selection of the third party, the arbi- 
 tration will fall through, and each party has a certain 
 feeling upon his own mind to be reasonable, but if 
 compulsory, the tenant or the landlord might stand 
 out and say, " We won't agree upon this." 
 
 4537. Baron Dowse. — I understand Mr. M'Elroy's 
 plan to be this : — Unless there is something to be 
 decided, the question of arbitration does not arise at 
 all. If the parties are willing to go on at the rent 
 asked for, the question does not arise, but if the land- 
 lord says, "I want more," and if the tenant agrees 
 well and good ; if the tenant says, " I want a reduc- 
 tion," and the landlord agrees, well and good, but if 
 the tenant wants to pay less than the landlord will 
 accept, you would have each to appoint a person as 
 valuator, and with them an umpire, and if they agree, 
 to the umpire, their decision should be final, but if 
 they do not agree as to the umpire, there would arise 
 a case for the Government man to come in ? — (Mi; 
 M'Elroy) — That is my scheme. 
 
 4538. There are some landlords in Ireland who 
 would not appoint an umpire. There is a question 
 I want to ask, would you in any measure lay down 
 a principle by which rent shoidd be valued? — I would 
 take up in the first instance the Government valuation. 
 (Mr. Blacli) — With regard to this question of rent, I 
 see that Mr. La Touche, in a letter published in the 
 Freeman's Journal, makes objection to the Ulster 
 Tenant-Right Custom being unsuited to the rest of 
 Ireland, and indeed generally to the Ulster custom, 
 on this ground, that where "the landlord has let his 
 ground at a low rent, tlie tenant-right sells all the 
 higher, and that what the tenant gets for his farm, 
 over and above what he would get if the rent 
 were higher, is the landlord's property, and that 
 should not be so sold by the tenant. I think this 
 
 suggestion of the arbitration of the rent would entirely &ept. 21, I88O. 
 do away with that objection, because when the rent is jj^. g^J^el 
 arbitrated it could not be held in those circumstances c. M'Elroy. 
 that the rent was less than fair. 
 
 4539. Mr. Kavanagh. — Does not Mr. La Touche 
 give the landlord the right of letting a farm to a 
 friend. Then you would not prevent him letting a 
 farm to a friend at less than its value 1 — If you make 
 a present to a friend, the friend has every right to 
 enjoy that present. 
 
 4540. Mr. LaTouche says what he did was this : he 
 let the fai-m at a low rent to a friend intending that 
 he should enjoy it at the low rent as long as he chose 
 to occvtpy it himself, but not to give him permission 
 to sell it to another person ? — That may have been so ; 
 but there should, I think, have been a clear uuder- 
 standing come to. He should have jJut the matter 
 beyond all mistake when giving it to his friend. 
 
 4541. Baron Dowse. — The answer I gave Mr. 
 LaTouche when he stated that in his evidence was, 
 that if that was what he intended he should have 
 made terms with his tenant when he let the farm to 
 him? — 'Mr. M'Elroy. — Certainly. I wish now to call 
 the attention of the Commissioners to a few cases that 
 occurred in my district, and the first on my list is 
 the case of Mrs. M'Peake. This was the first case 
 that occurred in our district after the passing of the 
 Land Act. Mrs. M'Peake held two fai'jns near 
 Ballycastle, under Mr. Alexander Stewart. She sold 
 the iarms by public auction to a respectable solvent 
 purchaser without the permission of the landlord, 
 and he reiased to accept the purchaser as tenant. 
 An aclion was brought to establish the right of the 
 tenant to sell her property under the Ulster custom. 
 The iarms were sold at £540, and this sum Mrs. 
 IM'Peake claimed from the landlord. 
 
 4542. Mr. Shaw. — Had she a lease? — No; she 
 was a tenant-at-will. Mr. Otway held tliat the cus- 
 tom to sell by private sale existed on the estate ; 
 but not the custom of sale by auction. He said if 
 he was allowing the claim he would give £252, not 
 £540. The farms sold at £540, but Mr. Otway 
 said he would give only £252. The claim was dis- 
 missed on two grounds — that auction was contrary to 
 the custom on the estate, and that no notice to quit 
 had been served by the landlord. I was present and 
 heard one of the old men examined for Mrs. M'Peake' 
 explain that the reason there v/ere no auctions on the 
 estate in old times was because auctioneeiing was 
 not so profitable then as now, and there were no auc- 
 tioneers in the country ; that the way they settled 
 these matters then was by putting the paper on the 
 table and each man putting down his name. 
 
 4543. Baron Dowse. — In that case was the land- 
 lord allowed a veto upon the purchaser ? — He would 
 not accept the purchaser. 
 
 4544. Chairman. — Was this case in the Land 
 Court for compensation ?-— Yes ; a case for compen- 
 sation. 
 
 4545. Baron Dowse. — As there was no notice 
 to quit, there was no case under the Land Act. 
 (Mr. Black) — We want the right of free sale when 
 the tenant considers it necessary. The right of 
 free sale was there withheld; as no notice to 
 quit had been given, the Land Act did not apply. 
 Mr. M'Elroy. — Here is another case, that of Robert 
 Crawford, of Mullaghdufi". In 1872 I ofi'ered for sale 
 by auction a farm at Mullaghdufi', near Armoy, 
 consisting of 99 acres, at £70 rent, held under 
 Mr. Alexander Montgomery. The agent's clerk at- 
 tended at the sale and objected to an auction of the 
 farm. I consented to abide by whatever usage pre- 
 vailed on the estate, and invited intending purchasers 
 inside the house to give their private proposals in ac- 
 cordance with the alleged custom of the estate. The 
 farm was sold to a Mr.Dinsmore at £712, but the 
 agent refused to accept him as tenant, although he was 
 highly respectable and solvent, having made a consi- 
 derable amount of money in Australia. In the spring 
 of 1879 the farm was again advertised for sale, this 
 
IRISH LAND iVCT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
 time by private sale. Only one or two persons were 
 present, and no bid was offered. Alter wards the 
 farm was sold to Mr. Thomas Wilson for £400, the 
 tenant having lost £312 by the agent's objection to 
 the purchaser in 1872. Mr. Wilson's offer was consi- 
 dered handsome on his part, taking into account the 
 difficulty of selling farms last year. 
 
 4546. Baron Dowse. — Would you not give the 
 landlord a i-easonable veto upon the purchaser? — Most 
 unquestionablJ^ 
 
 4546a. And suppose the landlord differed from the 
 other party, whom would you appoint to settle the ques- 
 tion ; the Land Court I suppose ? — That is a matter for 
 consideration. 
 
 4547. I am on the question as to the landlonl's ob- 
 jection to the purchaser. Would you give the landlord 
 a reasonable objection, supposing the man was a bad 
 character; and that there were various i-easons for ob- 
 jecting, that he had, for instance, rained or worked out 
 a farm, in another place, and supposing there was a 
 difference of opinion as to the tribunal you would 
 select, would there be any objection to the Land Judge 
 deciding 1 — I suppose there would be no objection. 
 
 Mr. Blach. — I think the Laud Judge would be the 
 best tribunal. 
 
 4547a. Chairman.- — Supposing the landlord wished 
 to take it up, how would you regulate the [irice 1 — T 
 believe the landlord should give the market value. I 
 believe, in this case, the man having been offered -£712 
 in 1872, that the landlord should have given the 
 tenant £712. Mr Black.-^'But in this case the tenant 
 wanted to sell ; and the landlord, not having disturbed 
 him, I believe the Court held that no claim coxild be 
 made against the landlord. Mr. M'Elderrij. — I know 
 that man, Dinsmore, very well, and there was no 
 shadow of reason why he should not be taken as tenant. 
 
 4548. Baron Dowse. — But do you think Dins- 
 more's price was an excessive one ? — I do not. T had 
 about half a dozen competitors at the sale. This 
 man, Crawford, was an old man, and he was anxious 
 to get rid of the farm and retii'e, and yet that man was 
 obliged to hold it at a personal loss in every respect. 
 He had become unfit to manage the farm, and lost this 
 £312. 
 
 4549. Did the landlord give any reason for objecting 
 to Dinsmore? — The agent said there was an under- 
 standing that Crawford should spend £100 in the 
 iniprovement of the buildings. I may say that Crawford 
 denied such an understanding. 
 
 4550. Mr. Shaio. — Was that point raised publicly? 
 — No ; it was told to me by Crawford himself. 
 
 4551. Baron Dowse. — Do you consider that a viola- 
 tion of the Ulster custom ? — Most certainly. And as 
 the law then stood and now stands, a violation for 
 which no redi'ess could bo obtained, because the tenant 
 could get nothing. The landlord did not put him out, 
 and the landlord therefore need not pay him anything. 
 [ regret I have to refer to the Chairman of county 
 Antrim as I do in some of these cases. I bcliove he 
 is an upright judge, but his idea on land matters is 
 not such as is held by many of the fai'murM, Porsun- 
 ally, I have the liighest opinion of Mr. Otwav. The 
 next cusi's to which I will refer are cases of increased 
 vent, and they are known in our district as " the Bally- 
 willan cases." The leases of (jive tenants on the pro- 
 perty of Mr. W. G. Lawrence, at Ballywillan, ucav 
 Portrush, expired in 1874 or 1875, and a dispute 
 arose about the new rent — as to what the new i-ent 
 should be. They were as follows : — J. Dunlop, 2-1 a. 
 2r. 6p. ; Government valuation, ,£29 5,s', ; \i\\\\& of 
 houses, £4 ; total, £33 5s. A. Rankin, 2:3a. ; Govern- 
 ment valuation, £28 10s.; value of houses, £2 10s.; 
 total, £31. H. Rankin, 25a. la. 28p. ; Government 
 valuation, £33, value of houses, £3 ; total, £36. S. 
 A. Dunlop, 81a. 1r. ; Government valuation, £92 5s. ; 
 value of houses, £6 5s.; total £98 10s. H. Reid, 
 39a. Or. 5p. ; Government valuation, £40 ; value of 
 houses, £3 15s.; total, £43 15s. Now I will give 
 you the rent demanded, the rent offered, and the rent 
 agreed upon before Mr. Otway. J. Dunlop, rent 
 
 demanded, £06 9s. id. ; rent offered, £43 13s. Id. 
 rent agreed upon. £55 Is. 2d. A. Rankin, reni 
 demanded, £64 16s. 2d. ; rent offered, £44 8s. lOi. 
 rent agreed upon, £54 12s. M. H. Rankin, reni 
 demanded, £80 8s. M. ; rent offered, £.j3 8s. lid. 
 rent agreed upon, £00 16s. Zd. S. A. Dunlop, ren< 
 demanded, £235 6s. 6d ; rent offered, £163 12s. 6d : 
 rent agreed upon, £198 19s. U. H. Reid, rent de- 
 manded, £112 8s.; rent offered, £77 Os. 4d ; rent 
 agrec?d upon, £94 14s. 2d. The Government valuation 
 of that last farm was £43 15g. Now the tenants 
 agreed to these high rents rather than be evicted from 
 their lioldings. They apprehended that the decision 
 on the leasehold point would be against them, and 
 they agreed to pay those enormous rents rather than 
 leave their farms. I was speaking to one of them 
 lately, as to how he was getting on, and he told me 
 that "for a short time he got on fairly under this rent, 
 but that since 1875 he went further and further to 
 the bad, and were it not for the sale of milk and 
 butter in Portrush, they could not hold their farms at 
 all as agricultural holdings. Mr. Holmes attended in 
 court on behalf of the tenants, and Mr. M'LaugMin 
 on behalf of Mr. Lawrence. It was a matter of 
 arrangement between them and Mr. Holmes, and Mr. 
 Holnies cime into court and announced this arrange- 
 ment which the tenants had agreed to. 
 
 4552. Chair.man. — We had witnesses in Dublin 
 who objected to arbitrators, because they always split 
 the difference ? — This was not a case of splitting the 
 difference ; the rent agreed to did not represent split- 
 ting the diiference between the old rent and a rack rent. 
 
 4553. Baron Dowse. — Is it not a very dear rent 
 for land in that neighbourhood ? — It is a i-ack-rent. 
 
 IMr. Black. — It altogether arises out of the adverse 
 decisions on the question of leasehold tenant-right. 
 
 4554. The O'Conor Don. — What do you think the 
 tenivnt-right of these holdings would sell for? — Mr. 
 IPElroy. — At present ? 
 
 40,55. Yes? — ^You could not get anything for them 
 at iiresciit. 
 
 45 "'0. That is the case which illustrates what you 
 have said that the increase of rent has done away with 
 the tenant-i'ight ? — Yes. 
 
 4557. Mr.'KAVANAGH. — Do you know anything as 
 to v/hat was paid for the tenant-right before they got 
 them? — No, I think there is one of these farms 
 sold. There is the case of John Adams, who held a 
 farm consisting of about thirty-seven acres, at the yearly 
 rent of £17 10s. 9(i., at Ballywillan, near Portrush. 
 
 4555. Baron Dowse. — He held it under lease? — ^Yes. 
 4559. For what time ? — Por thirty-one years. Mr. 
 
 Adams recently purchased a larger holding in county 
 Dcrry. I will read yon notes of the case : " Mr. John 
 Adams occupied a farm consisting of about 37 acres, 
 at the yearly rent of £17 16s. 9cZ., at Ballywillan, 
 near Portrush. His grandfather obtained a lease m 
 1791, from the then owners, the Messrs. Bristow, for 
 tliirty-one years and three lives, and the present sur- 
 viving life is John Oromio, Esq., Cromore. The lease 
 is a good Ulster Custom lease, and contains no clause 
 against the tenant exercising his right of sale. The 
 property is an admirable illustratioir of the encourage- 
 ment which such leases gave to the tenant to make 
 permanent improvements, these having been effected 
 upon it wihh skill and industry. Mr. Adams recently 
 purchased a larger holding in county Deny, and he 
 accordingly offered the Ballj^willan farm for sale by 
 pul ilio auction. The present landlord, W. G. Lawrence, 
 Esq., belli! ving that the Ulster Custom does not exist 
 on the estate, served a notice on Mr. Adams, the 
 principal portion of which is as follows : — ' Now take 
 notice that the said farm is held by the said John 
 Adams, for the life of John Cromie, of Cromore, Esq., 
 now aged 87 years or thereabouts, being the last sur- 
 viving life in the lease of the said farm, dated 30tl 
 April, 1791, or thereabouts, by which the said farm 
 was demised fnr the three lives therein named andth( 
 survivor of them, or thirty-one years, which shoulc 
 longest continue, and for no other estate or interesi 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ]G7 
 
 whatever. And I, Wil!i:un Gregory Lawrence, of 
 Coleraine, in the county of Londonderry, in whom all 
 the estate and reversion of the lessors expectant upon 
 the expiration or termination of the lease is now vested, 
 do hereby give notice to all concerned, that the said 
 fiirm is not subject to any Ulster Custom or usage 
 wli.itsoever, and none such will be recognized at the 
 expiration or termination of the said lease. And I 
 warn all intending purchasers that the purchaser of 
 said farm will be entitled to no estate or interest 
 thereon, or lien thereon, save only the unexpired residue 
 of the ' said lease, which is all that the said John Adams 
 Ls now entitled to. And that at the expiration or termi- 
 nation of said lease I shall take such proceedings as I 
 may be advised, without in any way regarding or re- 
 cognizing any alleged custom or usage to which the said 
 premises or any part thereof may be alleged to be sub- 
 ject, or any right or interest whatsoever in the purchase 
 at this sale after the expiration or termination of said 
 lease.' " That was the notice. Besides that notice being 
 served Mr. Lawrence sent his bailiff to read it to the 
 parties at the sale. 
 
 4560. Baron Dowse. — Was the property sold? — 
 Not that day. The highest bid was £500, but Mr, 
 Adams did not see his way to accept it. However, 
 he afterwards accepted the £500. It was afterwards 
 purchased by one of those tenants, Mr. S. A. Dunlop. 
 
 456L And was the ejectment brought at the ter- 
 mination of that lease. When Cromie died was the 
 ejectment brought ? — Yes. 
 
 45G2. Was it not on the expiration of that lease 
 that the ejectment was brought? — Unquestionably. 
 
 4563. And the land claim was then made by the 
 tenant under the Ulster Custom ? — Yes. 
 
 4564. There was an ejectment, perhaps, brought at 
 the expiration of that lease, relying on the title ending 
 with Cromie's life, and the tenant put in a claim under 
 the Ulster Custom at the expiration of the lease, but, 
 recognizing the difficulty he would have in establishing 
 the custom, entered into this compromise with the 
 consent of his counsel ? — Yes. That was a case cf 
 rack-renting. 
 
 4563a. The O'Conoe Don. — If the tenant-right in 
 the holding had been sold fo'ur or five years ago^ when 
 he agreed to the increase of rent, would it be worth 
 nothiag at that time 1 — Very little ; not very 
 much. 
 
 4564a. Would it have been worth what he paid for 
 it before 1 — No. 
 
 4565. Baron Dowse. — Have you any other cases 
 which you wish to mention to us ? — There is a case of 
 inadequate compensation in the Land Court. The Rev. 
 Mr. Field held a farm, consisting of fifty-nine acres, at 
 £G8 rent, under Mr. S. Allen, Knockanboy, Dervook, 
 Mr. Allen sent a \ valuator to value the farm in 1875, 
 and the valuation was £94 12s. 6d. This rent Mr. 
 Pield oflfered to pay, but the landlord demanded £100. 
 Bather than leave the place Mr. Field agreed to pay 
 £100, but, owing to various circumstances, Mr. Allen 
 proceeded to eject him. The case was hea,rd at Bally- 
 mena Land Sessions, in October, 1876, and competent 
 witnesses deposed that the farm was worth from 
 £1,000 to £1,500. Mr. Otway awarded £885. That 
 farm was referred to as a model farm ; the cultiva^tion 
 was splendid, and the houses were very neat and superior 
 in every respect. If there is any farm in that neigli- 
 hood that deserves a high price, it was Mr. Field's 
 farm. All Mr. Field got as compensation was £15 an 
 acre, and he certainly should have got from £20 to 
 £22'. 
 
 4566. Chaikman. — That would have been on account 
 of his own improvements 1 — On account of his own im- 
 provements, and what he had invested. 
 
 4567. Mr. Shaw. — It would have brought a great 
 deal more, I should say, at the sale S — It would have 
 brought, at the very least, £1,500 at a sale. The 
 claim was £1,750, which was a fair value. 
 
 Mr. Black. — And Mr. Field felt very much grieved 
 that the Chairman gave him less than the lov/est sum 
 proved by the witnesses before the Court. £1,000 
 
 was the lowest sum proved, and all the Chairman gave 
 him was £900. 
 
 4568. Baron Dowse. — Did ho give him less than 
 the sum the opposing party proved? — ;Mr. M'Elderry. 
 ■ — Evidence was given by witnesses for the tenant, and 
 it was not contradicted by the landlord's witnesses. 
 
 4569. The O'Conoe Dost. — Was there any appeal in 
 that case ? — Mr. Stewart. — As a minister, he said he 
 would not like to go into a law court again. (Mr. 
 M'-Elroy).—WQ have a case here of Mr. James Kirkpa- 
 ti'-'.ck, of Ballynagashel, who bought a farm three years 
 ago at Carnoullagh, on the Macartney estate, at about 
 £500. The agent offeredhim alease consisting of nineteen 
 pages, for thirty-one years, towards the end of which it 
 is provided that the tenant shall not have or make any 
 claim for compensation under the 7th section of the 
 Irish Land Act in respect of any money or money's 
 worth paid or given, or coming into possession, nor for 
 improvements. It is also provided that no covenant 
 whatsoever other than the express covenants in the 
 lease shall be implied therein. That amounts to a for- 
 feiture of the entire tenant-right interest, and Mr. 
 Kirkpatriok refused to accept the lease. 
 
 4570. Mr. Shaw. — Does he remain as a tenant from 
 year to year? — He does. 
 
 4571. Chairman. — Was the £500 permitted by the 
 landlord to be paid by Mr. Kirkpairick, without pro- 
 test? — (Mr. M-Klderry) I understand it was not — 
 that Mr. Kirkpatrick, in giving the £500, gave more 
 than the office rules permitted, but it was done outside 
 the office. 
 
 4572. Mr. Shaw. — Does that sort of thing often 
 happen ? — It does occur, but it is not known — the 
 transastion is not mentioned. 
 
 4573. Chaieman (to Mr. M'Elroy) — Have you any 
 other cases which you wish to bring under our atten-' 
 tion?— Yes. On the 18th August, 1879, I offered by 
 private sale a farm on the estate of Lord Robert 
 Montagu, at Heagles, in the occupation of Miss Ander- 
 son, containing 10 acres statute, and held by lease for 
 an unexpired term of 27 years, at £9 6s. 4:d. There 
 were several proposals, and the proposal of Robert 
 M'Donnell, of £250, was accepted. Before he was 
 accepted however, as tenant, he was required by the 
 agent to agree to the follo\ving clause being inserted 
 in the assignment : — 
 
 " That he, Robert M'Donnell, will not, at the expiration 
 of the lease, claim any compensation from the Eight Hon. 
 Kobort Montagu, his heirs, executors, administrators, and 
 assigns, for money paid or money's worth given by him as 
 incoming tenant, under any section of the Landlord and 
 Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, or any Act of Parliament 
 amending or altei'ing same." 
 
 The purchaser is now in possession of the holding. 
 The agreement has not been signed, but he got into 
 possession on the understanding that he would £Lgn 
 the agreement. 
 
 4574. That agreement appropriates the tenant-right 
 which you say exists after the expiration of the lease ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 4575. Baron Dowse. — And it also provides against 
 future legislation? — Yes; it is a far-reaching cove- 
 nant. 
 
 4576. Mr. Shaw. — Tenant-right exists on that es- 
 tate, I suppose ? — It does j tenant-right exists in the 
 form of private sale. 
 
 4577. Baron Dowse. — Would you be in favour of 
 the tenant being prohibited from contracting himself 
 out of the Act of Parliament? — I would. 
 
 4578. You would extend that prohibition to large as 
 well as small tenants ? — Yes. Some of the greatest 
 grievances I know have been in the case of large far- 
 mers. {M.\\ Blach) — We hold that the Ulster custom 
 is a beneficial one — beneficial for the landlord for the 
 tenant, and for the country, and therefore it should 
 be preserved against the encroachments of the land- 
 lords. 
 
 4579. You say the public have an interest in its pre- 
 servation as well as the landlord and the tenant 1 — 
 Precisely. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
1G8 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elioy. 
 
 )f Kent 
 
 on 
 
 TOWSLAND of M 
 
 -, 1876. 
 
 Governiueiit 
 Valuation. 
 
 Old Rent. 
 
 New Rent. 
 
 £ .!. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 48 
 
 
 
 54 10 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 7 5 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 U 10 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 27 6 
 
 6 
 
 30 
 
 55 5 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 
 
 68 0* 
 
 7 5 
 
 
 
 8 10 
 
 
 
 10 10 
 
 18 15 
 
 
 
 14 10 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 20 5 
 
 
 
 22 17 
 
 6 
 
 2G 
 
 7 5 
 
 
 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 4580. Baron Dowse. — You say tlie puLlic have 
 an interest in the cultivation of the soil, as well as the 
 landlord and tenant t — Precisely. There is another 
 case I wish to bring under your attention. It arose 
 upon a certain townland, I don't wish to give the name 
 of the landlord, nor do I wish to give the names 
 of the tenants, but with your permission I will 
 read 
 
 4581. Chairman. — Have you any objection to the 
 landlord having notice as to matters not arising from 
 any complaints of the tenant ? — I have no objection. 
 This information comes direct from the tenants ; I 
 may say we wish to go through all these matters 
 with as much delicacy of feeling as possible. We 
 don't want to bring harsh accusations against any one 
 at all. (Witness reading.) 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 A, . 
 
 B, . 
 
 C, . 
 
 D, . 
 
 E, . 
 
 F, • 
 
 G, . 
 H, . 
 
 X of holds 74 acres, statute, containing a good deal 
 
 of rough ground, the Government valuation of which 
 is £44 5s. During the last t\^•enty-five years the rent 
 has been increased three times. In 1 87 6 he was paying 
 £49 10s. rent, and he was required to pay £57 or 
 leave, being nearly double the Government valuation. 
 Mr. Stewart. — The rent has been increased five 
 times since the year 1865, and now the rent is more 
 than double what it then was. 
 
 4582. Baron Dowse.— Do you think, Mr. M'Elroy, 
 that a Government valuation is any guide to the rent 
 at all ? — I have gone into this matter of the Govern- 
 ment valuation as carefully as I possibly could, and 
 when I snj as carefally as I possibly could, I wish to 
 imply that I am not a skilled valuator. I wish to give 
 my opinion as a man who has had pretty large trans- 
 actions in the sale of land, and I have found that the 
 Government valuation on heavy clayey soils is quite 
 too high. 
 
 4583. Even for a letting rent t — Even for a letting 
 rent. But for what we call light sandy loams I don't 
 think it is too high. I would be inclined to think it 
 is aboiit fair. 
 
 Mr. Black. — Or light warm lands generally. 
 
 Mr. M-Elroy. — Or light warm lands generally. And 
 as a proof of my statement that the Governm.ent 
 valuation is too high on heavy clay soils, last year 
 I was not able to sell heavy clay farms. They are 
 what is called a drug in the market — could not sell 
 them at any jirice. 
 
 4584. Baron Dowse. — Are these heavy clay soils 
 low-lying land or high ? — Low-lying lands. 
 
 4585. Mr. Shaw.— All tillage lands ?— All tillage 
 lands. What I mean by " low-lying lands " is a flat 
 soil as contradistinguished from a hilly ground. I never 
 find heavy soil on hills. 
 
 4586. Baron Dowse. — Do you know what they call 
 in Scotland " carse " land ; that is, alluvial land lying 
 on the banks of rivers ? — That is a different kind of 
 soil. I would not call these heavy clays, alluvial soil. 
 These heavy wet clays are really very bad, and in wet 
 weather don't produce crops at all. 
 
 4587. Tenacious soils : they keep the damp 1 — Yes, 
 tenacious soils that keep the damp. I sold last year 
 a crop of oats on a field of that description at £2 1 Os. 
 an acre, and the man who bought it told me that he lost 
 by it. I have sold potatoes on this heavy clayey soil 
 at 30s. an acre 
 
 4588. On the foot? — On the foot, and the man told 
 me that they were not worth digging. To give an 
 interesting illustration of what I am saying. I was 
 speaking to a man not long ago about this very matter. 
 He said, " There is one field iu my farm, it is a stiff 
 
 clayey soil, and last year I would have given t] 
 potatoes in it to a man for the digging of them. The 
 is another farm lying a short distance from mine, tl 
 Government valuation of it is the same ; and there 
 a field in it about the same size, and the owner gi 
 £40 for the potatoes in that field." In the one ca: 
 there was the heavy clayey soil, and in the other tl 
 farmer realized £40 an acre in the sale of the crop. 
 
 Mr. Black. — The crops of last year upon heavy lane 
 were almost a failure. 
 
 Mr. M'Elroy.— A. total failure. 
 
 4589. Mr. Shaw. — A different quality and one we 
 as cheap as the other ? — Yes. 
 
 4590. Baron Dowse. — Mr. Ball Greene, who ws 
 examined, told us that these valuations were not mad 
 for the purpose of letting land at all, but at the sam 
 time it would occur to me that a valuation of land fo 
 the purposes of taxation should have some proportio: 
 to what a man could make out of it. Mr. Black. — I 
 was always considered to have a relative proportion. 
 
 4591. I may state, though I don't know whethe 
 it would be satisfactory to Northerners to know i\ 
 that the valuation of land here is higher than in th 
 South and West ? — We are aware of that. 
 
 Mr. M'Elroy. — I have two extracts of Sir Eichan 
 Griffith's evidence before the Devon Commission as t 
 his valuations. He adopted a higher scale in th 
 second than he did in the first valuation. 
 
 4592. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think any valuatioi 
 could be really useful when made by a professiona 
 valuator who did not know the land ? — Certainly not 
 I believe no useful valuation could be made unless b] 
 a skilled valuator. 
 
 4593. Knowing what he was doing? — Yes ; know- 
 ing what he was doing. 
 
 4594. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that avaluatior 
 of the whole of Ireland, for the purposes of revenue 
 could be made a satisfactory basis for the settlemeni 
 of rent " — I believe it could. 
 
 4595. Mr. Shaw, — It would depend upon who 
 makes it 1 — Yes. 
 
 4596. Baron Dowse. — They should take very good 
 care in making it that the tenants' improvements were 
 separated from the value of the land? — Most un- 
 questionably. I believe there should be a general 
 revision of the Government valuation of Ireland — that 
 in that revision proper instructions should be given to 
 the valuators. I need not define what the instructions 
 shovild be, but if such instructions were given, such a 
 valuation would ensue as would form a fair basis for 
 the settlement of the rent. 
 
 4597. It would be some use, at all events ? — There 
 is another case of enormous rent ( Witness reading). 
 
 The Y family, at , held a farm consisting of 54a., 
 
 Cunningham measure. Down to last year it was held 
 under a lease for three lives, at the yearly rent of 
 £80. The landlord demanded £130 as the new rent, 
 and the tenant consented to pay it rather than enter 
 the land courts under the present law. The Govern- 
 ment valuation of the farm is only £78, and £250 had 
 been recently spent on improvements by the tenant. 
 A portion of the land was reclaimed during the lease. 
 At a fair rent the farm would sell at £1,000. At 
 the present rent it would not sell at any price ; that is 
 to say, the tenant-right in it has been destroyed. 
 
 4598. Mr. Shaw. — Is it near a town? — It is 
 within five mUes of the market town of Ballymoney. 
 
 4599. Chairman. — The raising of the rent is within 
 the terms of the tenant-right custom ? — Yes, if it is a 
 fair rent. 
 
 4G00. Baron Dowse. — If there was legislation 
 now that a man could hold his land in continuous 
 occupation and at a fair rent, that man could, 
 provide for the future? — Yes. We want to enable 
 him to claim for revision. The next case I shall 
 refer to is one of a limitation of the tenant-right. 
 
 A man named , who had for a long time hold 
 
 a farm on the estate, offered it for sale a few 
 
 * (3ld lease. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 169 
 
 years ago. It was in a good state of culti\-ation. 
 Believing that he had the right of sale he sold it to 
 
 for £240. The purchaser was solvent, had 
 
 money in bank, and was in every respect an aocejsta- 
 ble tenant. The agent refused to accept him, and 
 insisted on another man getting it at the reduced sum 
 of £200, or ten years' rent, to which the agent limited 
 the input. 
 
 4601. Mr. Shaw. — Was the other man a neighbour- 
 ing tenant 1 — I think so. 
 
 4602. Baron Dowse. — Would it be possible that 
 some of the agents — because, like the Land Act, they 
 might have a word said for them — think that a man 
 might be getting more than was reasonable 1 — Quite 
 possible. They say that. I am disposed to argue 
 that by-and-by. 
 
 4G03. That a man might cramp himself so as to 
 prevent him adequately using his resources on the 
 farm. That might be possible] — Yes, it might be 
 possible. But I have found that the best conditioned 
 estates are those upon which tenant-right sells highest, 
 and that the farmers who live upon those estates are 
 the most comfortable and the most prosperous. 
 
 4604. And that the agent has no right to prevent a 
 man letting his farm go into the market to bring its 
 price ] — ^Yes ; the agent should have no such right. 
 I know the farmers of Ulster to be shrewd men who 
 know the value of tenant-right, and know the value of 
 a cow or a horse. I find that they are careful of their 
 bids and I know that they are careful of their money. 
 I bring this forward to their credit, and that they are 
 not at all disposed to give a fancy price for tenant- 
 right or any other interest. 
 
 4605. Chairman. — You say that the landlord 
 should have the option of considering whether the 
 proposed purchaser would be a solvent tenant ; would 
 you say that that should be, that after paying the 
 purchase-money he should have sufficient capital to 
 stock the farm 1 — No. I shall explain. For instance, 
 I sell a farm for £500, and the purchaser of that 
 farm has to get a loan of £200. I should say that 
 taking that loan with a farm bought at £500 would 
 rather tend to strengthen his position in working his 
 farm. That is not unusual, and it does not work 
 badly, it rather works to the advantage of both the 
 tenant and landlord. But it is quite possible that a 
 man may buy a farm at too high a tenant-right 
 price, and if he borrows all the money to pay for 
 that farm, and has none to buy stock, that would be a 
 bad case. 
 
 4606. Baron Dowse. — What Lord Bessborough 
 asks is whether in such a case yoti would give a veto 
 to the landlord"! — Not at all. 
 
 Mr. Black. — Not at all. We think that just be- 
 cause a tenant would go into a holding under such 
 .circumstances he would not be able to hold it, he 
 would pass away in a few years, and the farm would 
 go into the hands of another. The thing rights itself. 
 It might as well be said that the inquiry should be 
 made as to whether the proprietor when acquiring the 
 estate is in fair circumstances to manage it for the 
 benefit of the parties concerned. We hold that no 
 such inquisition should be held, and equally do we hold 
 that it would be superfluous in the case of the tenant. 
 
 4607. Baron Dowse. — You say if a tenant is to be 
 supervised in that way therefore the landlord should 
 be in the same way 'i 
 
 4608. Chairman — I don't see how a man could 
 be a solvent tenant if he begins by going in with 
 nothing to pro%dde stock 1 — (Mr. Black). — I would not 
 presume to say that every tenant is solvent. It is 
 not the duty of the landlord, so far as the protection 
 of his own interests is concerned, to ascertain if the 
 tenant is solvent. It would be as much a matter for 
 the interest of the community to ascertain that 
 solvency, but equally so to ascertain the solvency of 
 the landlord. 
 
 4609. I imderstood at the beginning that yon said 
 the landlords should have a reasonable objection as 
 to solvency 'i — With regard to character, not solvency, 
 
 that works itself out in the end, it can do no injury, 
 a far greater injury would be done if the landlord 
 were to still have the veto. 
 
 4610. Baron Do\ysE. — You say if a man is able to 
 l^ay, and has a character as a respectable man, you 
 object to the landlord making any inquisition into his 
 means ? — Yes. 
 
 4611. And if it turn out that he is not able to pay 
 his rent he will be obliged to sell, and some one else 
 will come into his place ? — Yes, the thing rights itself. 
 
 4612. Mr. Kavanagii. — But hesire he left the farm 
 might not it sufier"! Might he not be able to run it 
 out ? — That is true the farm might suffer, but equally 
 so the estate might suflfer if the proprietor wei'e in- 
 solvent. Far less ixijury would be done by letting a 
 farm in the solitary instance in which that would 
 occur, and it would be only a solitary one indeed, by 
 establishing what I suggest than by estal^lishiiig the 
 right of inquisition into the solvency of the tenant. 
 
 4613. Baron Dowse. — I understand some of the 
 witnesses advocating fixity of tenure to have granted 
 the privilege to the landlord of proceeding to evict a 
 man who wasted the land or who was letting it fall 
 into a bad "w^ay ; would you do that? — Mr. M'Elroy. 
 — I would not do that. 
 
 4614. Chairman. — For dilapidation 1 — I would not, 
 even for dilapidation, where the interest of the land- 
 lord could not be touched. 
 
 4615. Baron Dowse. — Suppose a man buys a farm 
 under the Ulster custom, paying a good round sum 
 for it, whether he has the money or has had to 
 borrow it you would not allow any inquiry, but might 
 he not, by several years bad husbandry, run the land so 
 low as to injure the landlord's security for the rent ] 
 — Mr. Black. — I think not. 
 
 4616. You have said that the tenant-right might 
 be eaten into and entirely destroyed, and might not 
 the tenant, on the other hand, eat into the rent and 
 destroy the landlord's security for it 1 — I should per- 
 haps have qualified. 
 
 4617. I only want your opinion. Supposing a farm 
 of land at 30s. an acre, and that the tenant-right is 
 worth £250, is not it possible the landlord might eat 
 away the whole of that £250 by raising the rent from 
 30s. to £2 10s., and is not it equally clear that the 
 tenant might by bad cultivation not only destroy his 
 own interest but also injure the landlord's security ? — 
 There might be some solitary instances, but if the land 
 was at a fair rent it coiild hardly ever occur. And I 
 believe it would be better to let it occur in some 
 isolated case or two, than to establish an inquisitorial 
 investigation into the position and circumstances of 
 individvials. 
 
 4618. You would say this, that if the tenant did 
 not pay rent he should be evicted for non-payment 1 — 
 Yes ; for non-payment of rent, certainly. 
 
 Mr. M'Elroij. — I would be disposed to give the 
 landlord a veto within reasonable limits. 
 
 4619. Mr. Shaw. — As far as solvency is concerned? 
 — Yes. 
 
 4620. Where a man paying £500 borrows £200, 
 that would not be a proof of solvency 1 — It certainly 
 would not be a proof of insolvency. 
 
 4621. Mr. Kavanagh. — I thought you said, in 
 answer to a question, that you did not mean solvency ] 
 
 Mr. Black. — I said character. 
 
 Mr. M'Elroy. — I would make solvency also a matter 
 for the landlord's consideration. I think it has a right 
 to be taken into consideration along with the character 
 of the tenant. (Witness gave another instance). 
 Tenant held a farm which he sold to a solvent tenant 
 adjoining, for £400, in 1879. The purchaser was 
 alccepted as the incoming tenant, but subsequently he 
 was served with a notice by the agent that the rent 
 in future would be £35 instead of £23 10s. The 
 purchaser refused to pay the increase, and the seller 
 was obliged to give him back £40 of his purchase- 
 money to indiice him to keep the farm. 
 
 4622. Chairman.— In these cases of increase of 
 rent, are they made at times when according to the 
 
 Z 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
170 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21,1880. 
 
 Sir. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy 
 
 custom there would have been a revision ?— No. I 
 hold that these increases of rent are infringements on 
 the Ulster custom. 
 
 4623. Baron Dowse. — Ton would not object to an 
 increase of rent, provided it did not go beyond a fair 
 i-ent? — We object to all increases of rent on the eve of 
 a sale. We say if the landlord is entitled to an increase 
 of rent it should be apart from the mere matter of sale. 
 
 4624. Because it might have the effect of preventing 
 the sale '1 — Yes. 
 
 4G25. Mr. SiiAW. — It should be done periodically "2 
 — ^Yes ; periodically. 
 
 4626. Is it done now after the sale or before. In 
 this case it was clone before 1 — Generally before the 
 sale. (Witness instanced two estates on which, in 
 1872, the tenants were informed that they would be 
 only allowed ten years purchase, and since that time 
 no land was allowed to be sold at a higher figure than 
 ten years purchase. We hold that to be an infringe- 
 ment of the principle of free sale.) 
 
 4627. The O'Conor Don. — What would the hold- 
 ings have gone at if there had been no limit 1 — From 
 ten to fifteen years' purchase. 
 
 4628. Do you think tliat the man who pur- 
 chased at ten years should be entitled to receive fif- 
 teen 1 — He would. 
 
 4629. YoR think they havea just claim to get more 
 than what they paid 1 — Yes. Now, my lord, it might 
 be a proper time to draw attention to infringements 
 of the right of free sale in county Down. This 
 advertisement appeared in the NortJiern Whig, on 
 30th August, 1880 :— 
 
 " Euthgael farm, Bangor, CO. Down, in the occupation 
 of the representatives of the late Mr. Alexander M'Cullough. 
 To be sold by public auction at the mart of Mr. Hugh 
 Hamilton, 35, Ann-street, Belfast, on Frida)', the 10th 
 of September, 1880, at the hour of one o'clock, p.m., the 
 following valuable properties in and near the town of Ban- 
 gor, county Bov.n, Lotl. That desirable farm of land 
 with dwelling-house, and offices thereon, known as Kathgael, 
 situate on the main road from Bangor to Newtownards, and 
 within twenty minutes walk of the Bangor railway station, 
 containing in all about 105 acres, of which 28 acres are held 
 in perpetuity free of rent, and subject only to the tithe- 
 rentoharge ; and the remaining seventy -seven acres are held 
 from vear to year under Lord Bangor at the annual rent of 
 £146 "9s. The Hon. Some)-set Ward, agent to Lord Bangor, 
 will recommend Ms lordship to accept as tenant at the 
 present rent any solvent and respectahJe person viho may become 
 the purchaser at the rate oj £5 ptr statute acre." 
 
 That is the most absurd advertisement I ever saw. 
 It appeared on the 30th August, 1880. 
 
 4630. ilr. Shaw. — From the county Down 1 — From 
 the county Down. 
 
 4631. Are there any other cases of the operation of 
 the Land Act to which you wish to call attention ? — 
 Yes. The next matter to which I wish to call atten- 
 tion is the abolition of the Ulster custom upon tov/n- 
 parks. As I undei'stand it, the effect of the Land Act 
 is to abolish the Ulster custom on townparks. 
 
 4632. Baron Dowse. — I think the intention of the 
 Act was, I won't say to abolish, but not to legalize 
 the Ulster custom in the case of townparks — in fact to 
 leave the custom as regards townpaiks in the same 
 position as it was before the Act was passed 1 — Mr. 
 Otway, in a case of which I have the report here, con- 
 sidered that the Land Act abolished the Ulster custom 
 in the case of townparks. 
 
 Mr. Ulach. — The Judges made the 15th section of 
 the Act overrule the first section. 
 
 Mr. M'Elroij — I'o show how this section works I 
 shall read iva o:ctract from Griffith's tenement valuation 
 for the parish of Ballymoncy in which the following 
 holdings arc entered under the denomination of town- 
 parks, and being so described in Griffith's Yaluation, 
 the 10th section of the Act applies to them : — Eliza 
 Orr, house, offices, and land, 15a. 3e. 25p. John 
 and Patrick Quiiin, offices, houses, and land, 58a. 3r. 
 20p. Thomas Stewart, 7a. 2e. 30p. William Kennedy, 
 14a. 2r. IOp. Thomas Bogle, 55a. 2e. Alexander 
 M'Elmoyle, 8a. 2r. 33p. These are all agricultural hold- 
 
 ings, to all intents and purposes, but being described 
 in the valuation book as " townparks," the effect of the 
 Land Act of 1870 is that the Ulster custom which had 
 existed previously upon those holdings is now abolished 
 with regard to them, which we hold is a wrong, inas- 
 much as they are really agricultural holdings. 
 
 4633. It comes to the same thing ; but I think the 
 more accurate way to state it is that the Ulster cus- 
 tom was not legalized upon such holdings as are 
 described in the valuation as-townparks 1 — Mr. Black 
 Yes ; and the result of the Act making the excep- 
 tion with regard to townparks is, that after the pass- 
 ing of the statute the landlords, as a rule, ceased to ^ 
 allow tenant-right with regard to them. I think the 
 way it is generally understood is, that the Act abol- 
 ished the Ulster custom upon such holdings, at least 
 the Judges on appeal did. 
 
 4634. The Ulster custom, prior to the Land Act, 
 was only morally binding upon the landlords ; the 
 effect of the Land Act was to render it a legal obliga- 
 tion in certain cases of a.gricultural holdings. The 
 result was, that the landlord being com.pelled by law 
 to do that which was previously only a moral obliga- 
 tion, he felt justified in dispensing himself from any 
 objection in the cases excepted from the Act? — Mr. 
 'WElroy — Just so ; and I have given you an illus- 
 tration of the wrong done to the holders of what are 
 called townparks. The old custom in Ballymoney, 
 before the passing of the Land Act, was that the 
 tenants were permitted to sell their interests in those 
 townparks freely and openly under the Ulster, cus- 
 tom, and considerable sums of money passed in that 
 way -svith the sanction of "the office.'' But about 
 the year 1865 the custom was infringed upon, and 
 since 1870 no sale of a- townpark has been allowed 
 at all. There is a misapprehension as to what con- 
 stitutes a townpark. A large proportion of the land 
 about Ballymoney, which is valued under the name 
 of townparks, is really worked for agricultural pur- 
 poses, and not held for pasturage at all ; and, there- 
 fore, we are disposed to put forward a claim for the 
 revival of the Ulster custom upon all townparks, 
 whether held by town occupiers or farmers. 
 
 4635. I understand that you claim that every kind 
 of holding, whether townpark or not, should be 
 under the Ulster custom % — Yes. 
 
 4636. Mr. Shaw. — Especially where the custom 
 existed before, and was destroyed by the Act % — Yes ; 
 the exception, in our opinion, is not founded in reason, 
 and ought to be abolished. 
 
 4637. Baron Dowse. — Ai-e you aware that the 
 XTlster custom formerly existed in certain towns and 
 villages in Ulster for liouses ? — Yes ; and we are 
 anxious to bring forward that question. 
 
 4038. I merely mention it, as you refer to old 
 Ulster customs. Of course it is outside the scope of 
 our inquiry % — I apprehend it is ; but we were 
 anxious to bring tho question forv/ard. if we were 
 allowed to do so. There is unquestionably a strong 
 leeling in many places in f;>.vour of what is called 
 " village tenant-right." 
 
 4631). In your opinion the exception created by the 
 15th section, by which townparks are deprived of the 
 benefit of the Land Act, should be struck put ? — Yes ; 
 it should be struck out altogether. 
 
 4640. How would you deal with pasture land % — 
 You observe the 15th section excepts '"any holding let 
 to be used either wholly or mainly for the pui'pose 
 of pasture, and valued under the Acts relating to 
 the valuation of property in. Ireland at an annual 
 value of not less than £50." What would you do 
 with that? — I would abolish that exception also, and 
 apply the Ulster custom to pasture lands as v/ell as 
 agricultural holdings. 
 
 4641. The O'Conor Don. — What woidd you do 
 with the big graziers % — I would gi^'e them the pro- 
 tection of the Act also. I would apply the Ulster 
 custom to all holdings in Ireland. 
 
 4642. Baron Dov.'SE. — Wehad a reverend ceutlenian 
 
 from the soutli examined baforc us the otl: 
 
 ler 'lav 
 
 \vho 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 171 
 
 would not extend any favour at all to the graziers 
 as lie considered that it encouraged the consolidation 
 of farms ? — I do not agree in that. I think the 
 grazier should get protection as well as the farmer. 
 They all have, to a certain extent, an interest in 
 the cultivation of the soil, and that interest should be 
 protected. 
 
 4643. There is another exception in this 15th 
 section — " Any holding let to be used wholly or 
 mainly for the purposes of pasture the tenant of 
 which does not actually reside on_ the same, unless 
 such holding adjoins, or is ordinarily used with the 
 holding on which such tenant actually resides. 
 How would you deal with that ] — I would strike out 
 that exception also. I think the Ulster custom should 
 apply to those holdings. Tenants using land for pas- 
 tiire have a right to the protection of the custom as 
 well as those who use it for tillage. 
 
 4644. It is said that in order to keep land in good 
 condition for pasture, there must be money and labour 
 expended on it occasionally? — There must. (Mr. 
 Black.) — And graziers say that in many cases they are 
 obliged by landlords to continue grazing their land — 
 that they will not be allowed to break it up or apply 
 it to any other purpose but that of pasture. 
 
 4645. Chairmak I understand that you gave 
 
 evidence with respect to the question of peasant pro- 
 prietors before Mr. Shaw Lefevre's Commission ? — No, 
 but I think you could not get more valuable evidence 
 upon that subject than was given before that Commis- 
 sion. It was very good evidence. 
 
 4646. Baron Dowse — ^Do you think that the scheme 
 of establishing a body of peasant proprietors all over 
 Ireland wou]d be a good way of settling the land 
 question 1 — I may say at once that I do not believe in 
 the expropriation of the landlords at all. I believe 
 the country wants the landlords, but they should be 
 under proper regTilations. 
 
 4647. You think they have their uses ? — They have 
 their uses. I would regard the expropriation of the 
 landlords as a national calamity. I would settle the 
 relations between landlord and tenant on such a 
 basis that they would, for a long time to come, live 
 on terms of amity, and on terms mutually conducive 
 to the good of both, and the prosperity of the country. 
 If you ask me how I propose to secure what is called, 
 under the Ulster custom, continuous occupancy, I 
 answer, I would secure it in some such way as this — 
 possibly, as you intimated before, your ideas are more 
 advanced than mine. 
 
 4648. I assure you I have no " ideas " at all — I only 
 threw out suggestions for the purpose of eliciting your 
 ideas upon them? — Well, the suggestions you have 
 thrown out encourage me to state what I may venture 
 to call my plan. I believe that in case of eviction 
 (as we must contemplate the case of eviction), any 
 tenant in any pai-t of Ireland should, in the first place, 
 be entitled to the full tenant-right market value of 
 his holding. Secondly, that in each case of eviction 
 there should be a penal sum added of not less than 
 one-third. If a man desires to sell his farm he is 
 entitled only to the market value of that fai-m ; but 
 if the landlord desires to get possession of the farm, 
 and turns out the tenant, that tenant is disturbed^ 
 and I hold that there should be a penalty put upon 
 the landlord for that- disturbance, over and above the 
 full market value of his holding. 
 
 4649. That is on the supposition that the right of 
 eviction remains as it is ; but supposing the law were 
 altered so that the tenant should not. be evicted at 
 all, as long as he paid his rent, then i;io question of 
 compensation could arise ? — Of course not ; and my 
 plan is inferior to that : I would fain hope that what 
 you have mentioned will be the law. 
 
 4650. That is the reason you say " my ideas " are 
 more advanced than yours ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Black. — Perhaps you will allow me to say this 
 on the subject of peasant proprietary : I would not 
 expropi-iate the landlords by any Act of Parliament, 
 that is to say, I would not compel them to sell their 
 
 property, but I would remove the obstructions that Sept. 21, 188O. 
 now exist to the free sale of estates, and pennit such „ — 
 
 a natural distribution of the land as would take place c M'ElJoy! 
 under those circumstances, and I believe were those 
 obstructions icmovcd there would be before, a century 
 had elapsed a considerable proportion of the land of 
 this country in the hands of the occupiers ; but in the 
 meantime I think it necessary that the ocoujiiers 
 should have some kind of security of tenure at fair 
 rents :ind the right of free sale of their holdings, in 
 order to do away with the evils which we find con- 
 nected with the tenure of land in this country. I do 
 not know whether Mr. M'Elroy differs from me when 
 he says he would not expropriate the landlords. I 
 would not expropriate them against their will, but I 
 would remove all obstructions to the free transfer and 
 distribution of land. 
 
 4651. Baron Dowse. — In short, you would not 
 object to the natural creation and extension of a 
 peasant proprietary in Ireland 1 — Precisely. 
 
 4652. But you would object to any artificial or 
 compulsory scheme for doing it ? — Yes ; I am not 
 now speaking of the Bright Clauses, which I believe 
 to be beneficial. I would remove the obstructions 
 which at present exist, and which I believe have been 
 the fotmdation of the whole of the present imbroglio. 
 
 4653. Chaieman. — Is there any other matter which 
 you wish to add to the evidence you have already 
 given? — Mr. M'Elroy. — I would wish to call your atten- 
 to tlie statement which I now produce, and which in 
 raj judgment is the most valuable statement that has 
 ever appeared upon the subject of the Ulster custom. 
 It was written by the late Dr. James Maoknight, who 
 had devoted great attention to the subject, and knew 
 more about it than most men in the country.' It is 
 clear, logical, and argumentative, and not lengthy. I 
 think the Commissioners would do the public a great 
 service by allowing it to be embodied in their report. 
 
 4654. Baron Dowse. — Do you concur with Dr. 
 Macknight in his statement ? — I do ; and I would ask 
 to be allowed to hand it in as part of my evidence. 
 
 [Witness hands in the following statement.] 
 
 Having been requested to prepare a paper on the " Ten- 
 ant-liight Custom of Ulster," for the purpose of bringing 
 the subject before this Conference, it is, I confess, with 
 some reluctance that I have undertaken the task. During 
 nearly thirty years of my public life, I have been incessantly 
 engaged in discussions on this subject, and in taking it up 
 on the present occasion, I feel not a little of the irksome- 
 ness belonging necessarily to self-repetition, accoinpaniud 
 ■with a tacit consciousness of reproducing only facts and 
 arguments with which the great majority of this assembly 
 are already famiUar. The object, however, as I understand 
 it, is not so much to impart any new information on a 
 "threshed out" topic — an achievement to which, at the 
 present day, I can make no pretence — but to present the 
 question in a systematic, though condensed form, by way 
 of an outline-text for regulated deUberation. With this 
 view, it appeiirs to me that a few consecutive observations 
 on the '■ origin, essence, and legrdized development, of 
 the Ulster Tenant-Iiight Custom," will bring before the 
 Conference all the leading points necessary to be considered 
 with a view to practical legislation hereafter. 
 
 My own theory from the first has been that the " Orders 
 and Conditions of Plantation," issued by the British Crown 
 in the beginning of the 1 7th century, by making the 
 "Undertakers," or original landlords of Crown lands m 
 Ulster, to be a species of public trustees for the State, in 
 direct and publicly declared contrast to all feudal and 
 irresponsible ownership of the soil, had the effect of creating, 
 on behalf of Plantation tenants as such, an ipso facto interest 
 in the soil proportioned to the difference between Plantation 
 ownership and feudal ownership, as legally constituted. 
 Every " Undertaker," or original Plantation landlord, was 
 compelled to sign a. stringent formula binding himself to a 
 faithful, undeviating observance of the Plantation coven- 
 ants laid down by the Crown, before the Royal Seal could 
 be affixed to his " Letters Patent :" and a legal confis- 
 cation of these title-deeds was the penalty universally 
 declared in case of disobedience, I may here premise that 
 the law of territorial forfeiture had placed the absolute 
 ownership of si.'c whole counties of Ulster in the hands of 
 the Crown ; and the , Sovereign, for the time being, might 
 have retained in his own possession this immense territory 
 
 Z 2 
 
172 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
 converting it into a source of revenue for his own royal 
 benefit, and leaving it as a rich inheritance to his family 
 successors in after ages. James I., did not adopt this per- 
 sonal policy, and in the preface to his " Conditions of Plan- 
 tation," he boasts of his own royal disinterestedness, and 
 puts it forward as the gTound and reason of the restrictions 
 which lie had decreed in i-eference to Plantation landlordism. 
 The King's words are — " His Majesty, of his princely 
 bounty, not respecting his own profit, but the public peace and 
 welfare, * * is graciously pleased to distribute the said 
 lands to such of his subjects, as well of Great Britain as of 
 Ireland, as being of merit and ability, shall seek the same, 
 with a mind not only to benefit themselves, but to do service 
 to the Crown and the commonwealth. 
 
 In the very next paragraph, the King gives this signifi- 
 cant warning, that — ''Forasmuch as many persons, being 
 ignorant of the conditions whereupon his Majesty is pleased 
 to grant the said lands, are importunate Suitors for greater 
 portions than they are able to plant, intending their private 
 profit only, and not the advancement of the puhlic service, it is 
 thought convenient to declare and pulalish to all his Majesty's 
 subjects * * * the Estates, the Rents, the Tenures, with 
 other articles to be observed, as well on his Majesty's behalf, 
 as on the behalf of the undertakers, in manner and form 
 following," &c. (Walter Harris's " Hibernica," Vol. I. 
 page 63, Dublin, 1747.) 
 
 Exclusiveness and intolerance were amongst the dominant 
 vices of the ago in which the Plantation settlement was 
 effected, and all parties at that era were more or less tainted 
 with these infirmities whenever they had their adversaries in 
 their power, wliile the unhappy civil wars, by which Ireland 
 had been previously desolated, made one-sidedness to be a 
 political necessity of the first Plantation arrangements. 
 The liberal legislation of subsequent ages has, by the 
 establishment of civil and religious equality before the law, 
 entitled all tenants, resident within Plantation boundaries, 
 to the equiil enjoyment of Plantation rights and immunities, 
 without regard to differences either of race or of religion. 
 With this explanatory remark, I may mention that the 
 undertakers were divided into three classes, first, English and 
 Scottish Servitors who could let lands only to their own 
 countrymen ; secondly. Servitors in Ireland, who could let 
 lands to native Irish as well as to other tenants; and 
 thirdly, aboriginal Irish who were to be made Freeholders. 
 The Crown rents charged to English and Scottish under- 
 takers were fixed at six shillings and eight pence for every 
 three score English acres, or a fraction less than three half 
 pence per acre. The Irish Servitors were to pay at the rate 
 often shillings per sixty English acres, or two pence per 
 acre, but if they took none but British tenants, they were to 
 have the benefit of reduction to six and eight pence, as in 
 the first class, while the Irish Freeholders were to pay 
 thirteen shillings and four pence for every sixty acres, or 
 double the Crovm rents charged to British Planters This 
 was monstrous partiality, but still it involves a principle of 
 fundamental value in regard to the status of Plantation 
 landlords, and Plantation tenants respectively, in the 
 apportionment of rents, as we shall see presently. 
 
 Every estate, or " proportion," as it was then called, 
 demised by the Crown to primary landlords, or " under- 
 takers," consisted of land fit for agricultural occupancy, and 
 for this class of lands alone were Crown rents charged, 
 bogs, barren lands, and grounds covered with woods or 
 forests in the surrounding neighbourhood, being marked off 
 and thrown into each " proportion " by way of gratuity, 
 without any Crown charge whatsoever, and till the present 
 day the owners of Plantation estates in Ulster pay Crown 
 rent only for the number of acres specified in the Letters 
 Patent that were issued to the original "undertakers," 
 unless perhaps in some very exceptional instances in which 
 new patents may have been taken out at subsequent periods. 
 The original landlords were mere adventurers who expended 
 not a shdling upon the reclamation or improvement of the 
 soil ; every work of this description was executed exclusively 
 by the occupying tenants themselves at their own sole costs 
 and charges. In consequence of these tenant labours, con- 
 tinued through successive ages, the original estates have 
 been augmented, not simply four or five-fold, but actually 
 ten-fold m many cases, and modern proprietors are drawing 
 enormous revenues from reclaimed estates created exclu- 
 sively by tenant capital, and tenant labour, and for which 
 estates the now recognized owners pay not one farthing of 
 rent to the Crown. A single example will illustrate the 
 extent to which this process of estate- enlargement has been 
 carried on through the province. At the time of the plan- 
 tation, the great wood of Glenconkein, in county Derry, 
 extended from Dungiven down to the banks of the Foyle 
 on one side, and to the vicinity of NewtownUmavady on the 
 other, while so dense was this forest that Hugh O'Neill and 
 his whole army took refuge in it from the forces of Queen 
 Elizabeth, not many years before the plantation era, and 
 
 the Tyrone chieftain could not have been dislodged from 
 this impenetrable fastness, had he not been betrayed by the 
 O'Kane. At the present day, the only visible remnant of 
 the gigantic forest in question is a stripe of comparatively 
 stunted undergrowth popularly known as the wood of Bally- 
 kelly, the intermediate .«pace between the latter and Dun- 
 given having been cleared, broken up, and brought into its 
 present cultivated condition, by the predecessors of its 
 existing occupants, with tlie possible exception of a few 
 isolated tracts of no great magnitude or importance. For 
 the re-building of Deny City by the London Companies, 
 the Crown allowed £50,000 worth of magnificent oak 
 timber, or about half a milhon's worth in our present cur- 
 runcy, to be cut down in Glenconkein, and from this 
 circumstance alone, the clearance work effected by the 
 plantation settlers in county Derry may be readily conjec- 
 tured. 
 
 The Crown reserved to itself the special guardianship of 
 the Plantation, including the right of sending Commis- 
 sioners to inquire into the conduct of Plantation landlords, 
 to ascertain whether they gave proper tenures to their ten- 
 ants, all tenancies at will having been stringently prohibited 
 in the Plantation " Conditions " ; and particularly to dis- 
 cover whether in regard to the rents charged, the " under- 
 takers had consulted "their own profit," instead of the 
 " public service," as they were bound to do, and in con- 
 sequence of one of these Commissions, commonly known as 
 " Pynnar's Survey," James I. — the very monarch who had 
 established the Plantation — instituted equity proceedings 
 which, in the reign of his successor, Charles I., ended in a 
 wholesale confiscation of all the estates held by the Lon- 
 don Companies in county Derry. Amongst other breaches 
 of Plantation engagements, it was proved that the 
 delinquents had let lands at the rack-rents paid by the 
 tenants of native "Irish freeholders" who, as already 
 stated, were charged by the Crown double the head- 
 rent required from English and Scotch undertakers, 
 and who were consequently at liberty to charge propor- 
 tionate rents to their own sub-tenants. The allegation 
 filed in court, on behalf of the Crown, was that its own 
 intention had been that Plantation landlords should give 
 to Plantation tenants the "full benefit" of the Crown's 
 generosity towards themselves. This legal plea was sus- 
 tained, and its result is, that according to the original in- 
 tention of the Crown, a Plantation rent ought never to 
 exceed one half the absolute rack-rent value of the holding 
 demised, while no such thing as mere tenancy at will was 
 legally allowed to exist within Plantation boundaries. 
 
 In a celebrated appeal case decided by the House of 
 Lords in 1846, the fact came out that legally the Crown is 
 still the guardian of the Plantation, and possesses an 
 abstract right of calling Plantation landlords to account 
 for their administration. The difficulty in the way is, that 
 the Court through which, in the 17th century, the Crown 
 had been accustomed to act was abolished by the Long 
 Parliament, and no substitute tribunal was named in its 
 room. The Koyal prerogative in this respect has conse- 
 quently lain in abeyance ever since, and our present Courts 
 of Equity would decline the responsibility of its revival. 
 Had this oversight, on the part of the Long Parliament 
 been avoided, Ulster landlordism, at the present day, would 
 have been, in law, neither more nor less than a responsible 
 public trusteeship. 
 
 As bog-battles between noble lords and their tenants 
 have been lately becoming one of our modern institutions, 
 it may be remarked in passing, that bogs have been added 
 to estates without any Crown charge, the self-evident 
 intention of this gratuity was, that the tenant people 
 resident upon those estates should be supplied with fuel 
 free of all charge. -Amongst the populace even at the 
 beginning of the present century, bogs were commonly 
 designated as ^'■royalties,'" for which landlords had no right 
 to make any charge, and at the time mentioned, landlord 
 interference with bogs was certainly unknown in county 
 Down. I remember perfectly well the commencement of 
 this interference, and the sensation it produced ; but un- 
 happily, in those days, there were no "Tenant Defence 
 Associations," and original usurpation has since become 
 sanctified by " effluxion of time." 
 
 The original " Undertakers," or Ulster landlords, were 
 peremptorily bound to let one-third of their proportions 
 in absolute perpetuity, and the remainder on secured titles 
 for " years, for life, in taile, or in fee-simple," no such thing 
 as tenancy at will being permitted, while, as we have seen, 
 the rents to be charged must be strictly in proportion to the 
 crown-rents paid by Plantation landlords themselves ; that 
 is, as already shown, these rents must not exceed half the 
 rack-rent value of the soil. This arrangement clearly cstab- 
 hshed, on behalf of Plantation tenants as such, a beneficial 
 interest in the soil to the extent described, be the same more 
 or less, and, in addition to this primary claim, the settlers 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 173 
 
 possessed all the cumulative interest arising from buildings, 
 reclamation, drainage, fencing, and converting unproductive 
 T/astes into fruitful lands, and green pastures, the proprie- 
 tary orders having never expended a shilling of their own 
 money upon the improvement of the land. The Royal guar- 
 dianship having fallen into desuetude, as already stated, the 
 Ulster tenantry, with the perfect knowledge and assent of 
 the landlords, established amongst themselves a regulated 
 system of dealing, known from the earliest period as the 
 " tenant-right custom," whenever a plantation occupant 
 wished to leave his holding, this custom, in its simplest and 
 most elementary form, being neither more nor less than the 
 RIGHT of SELLING his '■'■ ffood jtj'H," meaning his total interest 
 of every description, to the highest and best bidder, either at 
 a private sale or a public auction. Humanity was precious 
 in those early days ; the population was sparse, tenants were 
 not quite so " plenty as blackberries," and the Ulster land- 
 lords, provided their rents were paid, never troubled them- 
 selves about individual purchases. One tenant sold out, 
 another party bought him out, and if this party, when gale 
 day came round, punctually came forward with his rent, 
 neither landlord nor agent ever made any further inquiry 
 about the transaction. This was literally the " Ulster 
 custom " in its primitive form, and in this form it continued 
 till after the first quarter of the present century had elapsed. 
 A. desperate attempt had been made m county Antrim, 
 about the middle of the previous century, to destroy the 
 3ustom, which attempt provoked the reactionary insurrec- 
 tion so well known as the " Hearts of Steel," and landlords 
 were chary about indulging in any new experimental aggres- 
 sion. From this historic era till the period already indicated, 
 the current impression both amongst Ulster landlords and 
 Ulster tenants was, that the tenant-right custom had, 
 through uninteiTupted usage become self-legalized at common 
 law after the example of parallel customs in England, the 
 common law of both countries being confessedly one and the 
 same. About the year 1830, orprobably a year or twolater^ 
 I cannot at this moment fix the date precisely — a landed pro- 
 prietor in county Armagh, a predecessor, I believe, of the 
 Duke of Manchester, disputed a tenant's claim to the custom, 
 and the case was tried at the Armagh assizes, when, to the 
 jurprise of the landed gentry, and the alarm of the tenant 
 population, the judge's decision was in pointed opposition 
 to the legality of the "custom." A second case, if my recol- 
 lection is correct, was soon afterwards tried with a parallel 
 result, and landlords forthwith commenced a widely spread 
 movement for restricting the provincial usage, with a view 
 to its final abolition, and also to an enforced assimilation of 
 Ulster tenures to those of England. This attempted usur- 
 pation gave immediate rise to a formidable organization 
 known as the " Tommy Downshire Boys," whose exploits 
 are within the range of stdl living memories. These were 
 the circumstances which, in 1835, induced Mr. Sharman 
 Crawford, in conjunction with the late John IM'Cance, 
 then member for Belfast borough, to bring his first tenant- 
 right BiU to the Imperial House of Commons. In the fol- 
 lowing year Mr. Crawford was joined by Richard Lalor 
 Shiel, then in the height of his oratorial celebrity, and Mr. 
 Shiel's name, in association with that of Mr- Crawford, is 
 endorsed on the back of this first tentative charter of Irish 
 tenant-right security. The history of the question from 
 that era to the present needs no recital. 
 
 The Devon Commission, appointed on the 20th of Novem- 
 ber, 1843, and which presented its Report to Parliament in 
 February, 1845, was a Commission entirely in the interests 
 of Irish Landlordism. The evidence collected by this body 
 was, and still is, extremely valuable ; but the Report which 
 the Commission drew up is intensely hostile to the Ulster 
 Custom, stigmatizing the latter as dangerous to the "just 
 rights of property," recommending Ulster Landlords to 
 destroy it by sapping and mining, instead of open warfare, 
 and all this while recognising " Tenant-right " as the found- 
 ation of Ulster's prosperity I Ulster Landlords have, in 
 fact, acted upon the advice of the Devon Commission, and 
 most of the restrictions and usurpations, embodied in what 
 are now called " Estate Rules," owe their origin entirely 
 to the counsels of this one-sided Commission. 
 
 The testimony of a declared enemy, when favourable to 
 his antagonist, is invaluable, because above all suspicion ; 
 and the testimony of the Devon Commission in regard to the 
 genuine Custom of Ulster, as a matter of fact established by 
 their own inquiries, is consequently inappreciable. In page 
 1 4 of their Report, the Commission acknowledge that the 
 usage " dates frora a very early ■period " — that it is " neither 
 extraordinary nor unreasonable that a tenant on quitting his 
 farm," in the earlystateof society in Ulster, " should obtain 
 from his successor a sum of money, partly in remuneration 
 of his expenditure, and partly as a price paid for the posses- 
 sion of land, which the new tenant would have no means of 
 acquiring." Having premised this explanatory statement, 
 the Commissioners, in the next paragraph, go on to say : — 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Elroy. 
 
 " From this state of things, a feeling of PBOPurEToRsmp Sept. 21, isso, 
 appears to have grown up in the tenant, which lontinues in 
 a great degree to the present day ; and the ex!ant to which 
 it prevails may be seen by reference to various parts of the 
 evidence taken in the Province of Ulster." 
 
 " Under the influence of this custom," the Commissioners 
 go on to say, "the tenant claims, and genebally E3ij:RcrsES , 
 A BIGHT TO DISPOSE OP HIS HOLDING for a Valuable consider- 
 ation, although he may himself be a tenant-at-will, and al- 
 though ho may have expended nothing in permanent improve- 
 ments." This was the tenant-right claim in 1845, and 
 notwithstanding the determined inroads attempted during 
 the previous ten or fifteen years, all that the Devon Com- 
 mission could say in that year was — that " Proprietors gener- 
 all)' have been enabled to place a restriction upon this tenant- 
 right, so far at least as to secure a power of selection with 
 respect to the tenant, and to place some limit upon the, amount 
 to be paid." The evidence taken by the Commission shows 
 that very little progress indeed had been made in the limi- 
 tation of prices by Estate Regulations. 
 
 This Landlord Commission, then, has established the fact 
 that the essence of the Ulster custom consists in a tenant's 
 " claim " of a proprietary right, or interest in the soil, which 
 .right or interest, this same tenant further asserts it to be his 
 hereditary prerogative, sanctioned by immemorial usage, to 
 SELL to the highest and best bona fide purchaser, either by 
 private agreement, or at an open, fair competitive sale. 
 From this simple principle of subsisting tenant-interest, and 
 a right to sell it, the collateral equities of the custom follow 
 by direct logical necessity. It follows, for example, that no 
 increase of rent, levied upon the tenant's interest in the soil, 
 can be legitimately demanded, since; this would not be mo- 
 rally different from highway practice : — It also follows that, 
 since no man can be turned out of his property without 
 having first hQ&n paidits full value, ''■continued occupancy," 
 at a rent fairly proportioned to the landlord's share, is a 
 necessary corollary of the custom, and consequently that, 
 under this tenant-right custom there can legally be no such 
 thing as Arbitrary Eviction. 
 
 This brings us to the question — "What is it that the Irish 
 Land Act has really done by legalizing the Ulster Custom ? 
 The Devon description of Ulster tenant-right has now been 
 twenty-eight years before Her Majesty the Queen, before 
 Parliament, before successive administrations, and before 
 the Imperial public, so that all parties must have known per- 
 fectly well the nature of the legislative change intended. 
 The Land Act, then, has declared Ulster tenant-right to 
 be, in law, a proprietary interest in the soil, and subject, of 
 course, to all the collateral equities belonging to individual 
 property in general, namely, that no stranger can arbit- 
 rarily confiscate it, or drive out its owner, without first 
 paying to him its full marhetahle value as property, nor can 
 the said supposed stranger legitimately compel a sale at all, 
 if the owner is desirous of retaining his possession. Com- 
 pulsory sales are admissible only when required for the 
 benefit of the public at large ; and since, by the Land Act, 
 the owner of the fee simple, and the occupier of the soil are 
 recognised as coproprietors of distinct, though concurrent 
 interests, equally inherent in the soil, it follows that neither 
 of them can summarily evict the other, in accordance witli 
 the established moralities by which property of every other 
 description is protected. 
 
 The introduction into the Ulster Clause of the Land Act 
 of the words — " Usages which are known as, and in this 
 Act intended to be included under, the denomination of 
 the Ulster tenant-right custom, are hereby declared to be 
 legal " — were, no doubt, meant by the landlord party in 
 the House of Commons to legalize estate regulations^ 
 which had been introduced in violation of the genuine 
 custom, and in this sense they have been repeatedly in- 
 terpreted by Land Sessions Judges. This, however, can- 
 not possibly be their legal construction for the following 
 reasons — 
 
 1. Because, if the Land Act has legalized anything 
 whatever in or about the Ulster custom,' it has legalized 
 the right of sale, which is the Ulster custom pure and 
 simple, and a right of sale is necessarily a recognised right 
 of legal property. 
 
 2. Estate rules have never been known, or acknowledced 
 in Ulster, as the Provincial tenant-right custom, or as any 
 part, portion, or adjunct of that custom, but solely as 
 arbitrary attempts to restrict and curtail it. 
 
 3. The "usages" known and recognised as the Ulster 
 custom are — the right of free sale, on the part of an out- 
 going tenant, and continued occupancy at a fair rent, to be 
 calculated on data independent of the tenant's interest in 
 the soil, so long as he chooses to remain in possession. 
 
 4. The assumption lying at the basis of the Land Act is, 
 that previously to its passing, Irish tenants wore not free 
 agents, and could not make independent bargains for them- 
 selves; and accordingly in section 3, it is provided that 
 
174 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Jilroy. 
 
 certain leasehold contracts of this class shall be "void 
 both at law and in equity." Estate rules, restricting the 
 tenant-right custom, have been universally made and 
 enforced during this period of tenant vassalage, when it 
 is publicly confessed that the people had no power to help 
 themselves. Mr. Gladstone, in his celebrated speech on 
 the second reading of the Irish Land Bill in the House of 
 Commons, emphatically proclaimed their condition of 
 servile inability, and he warned Irish tenants against 
 entering into disabling contracts in future, after the Law 
 had made them free agents. The legalization of estate 
 rules, in violation of the Ulster custom would, therefore, 
 be an anomaly in palpable contradiction both to the 
 principle and to the whole spirit of the Land Act. In the 
 speech referred to, Mr. Gladstone pointedly declared that 
 breaches of a custom could never, by mere lapse of time, 
 become transformed into legalized usages. 
 
 5. The Judicial legalization of Estate Rules is contrary 
 to the law of land customs and usages, as authoritatively 
 laid down, and declared, by the Court of Queen's Bench in 
 Dublin, in the year 1608, being the identical year in which 
 the " Orders and Conditions " of th&Ulster Plantation were 
 first promulgated. Sir John Davis was then the Attorney- 
 General for Ireland ; he also acted as Principal Commis- 
 sioner for the Crown in settling plantation affairs, and the 
 case which gave rise to the judgment of the court was 
 speciidly reported by himself, and published in a volume 
 of Law Iicports, to which a character of authority has 
 alwa)'s been attached in legal circles. This judgment of 
 what was then the supreme court in Ireland related ex- 
 pressly to Irish land customs ; and the substance of it was, 
 that neither by " the King's grant, nor by Act of Parlia- 
 ment," could any such custom be established. This 
 Common Law Custom, it is added, must be — " A ;ms non 
 scnptum, and made by the people only of such place where 
 the custom runs;" seeing that "no law Wracis the people 
 only that which is made by consent of the people ; " and 
 " that which is expressed by several and continued acts of 
 the same hind is a custom ; and so, briefly — custom is a 
 reasonable act, reiterated, multiplied, and continued by the 
 people time out of mind. And this is the definition of 
 C'tislom, which hath the virtue and jorce of law." The 
 court farther laid it down that every custom of this kind 
 must " have four inseparable qualities — first, it ought to 
 have a reasonable commencement ; secondly, it ought to be 
 oertain and n'>t atubir/uous ; thirdly, it ought to have an 
 uninterrupted continuance time out of mind; and fourthly, 
 it ought to be subordinate to the prerogative of the King, 
 and not exalted above it." 
 
 This was the Common Law of land customs in Ireland 
 at the time of the ■ Ulster Plantation, as declared by the 
 highest court of legal jurisdiction then existing, and 
 officially reported by the King's Attorney-General, who 
 himself, as I have already stated, was the Chief Commissioner 
 for the SL'ttlement of the plantation. Apparently, by way 
 of removing all possible ambiguity, the court have laid 
 down, in a duplicate form, the definition above quoted, 
 viz., poxitivehj and negatively — the positive affirmation 
 being, that every such custom must emanate from the 
 people thems<<.lves, and must be the result of their oivn 
 free, voluntary " co7zsc';j<; " while its negative aspect is, 
 that no extern authority, whether called Parliamentary 
 Omnipoteace, or Royal prerogative, can create any such 
 custom by an arbitrary mandate. It follows a fortiori, 
 *hat what the supreme authorities of the State ary consti- 
 tnticnally disabled from doing cannot possibly be done 
 legally by any suburdiimtc. power, and least of all by the 
 sovereignty of a landlord's rent-office, embodyino- its 
 arbitrary decrees in the shape of an estate mandate, in 
 opposition to a popular usage immemorially carried out. It 
 IS the '' Custom of Ulster" alone which the Land Act has 
 legalized, and on the ground above officially declared, 
 1 hold that no landlord infringement of this "custom" 
 can ever become a selfrlegalized usage under the Land 
 Act, however long this infrintjement may hivve lasted, 
 seeing that the enforced usage supposed has been vitiated 
 by gross illegality in its very origin, and has been conse- 
 quently null and void from first to last. 
 
 I knov7 it may be argued that estate regulations, though 
 illegal in the first instance, may have been in operation 
 during so long a period as to raise a judicial presumption 
 that the original defect has been condoned by popular 
 consent in the interim. My answer is, that every such 
 judicial presumption is in direct opposition to the legal 
 presumption embodied in the Land Act itself, namely, that 
 before its enactment, Irish tenants were 7iot free agents. 
 Hence leases executed before the passing of the Act, con- 
 taining clauses adverse to the new rights created under 
 it on behalf of tenants, are not to be rigidly interpreted, 
 though similar leases accepted after the date mentioned 
 will inevitably work tenant forftiitures. Men, whp were 
 
 7iot free to reject confiscating leases, could not possibly h 
 free to reject estate regulations of a similar character, and 
 it would, indeed, be a vast amount of " presumption," in 
 a non-legal sense, to pretend that the merely passive en- 
 durance of a serf community under arbitary injustice, in- 
 volving the daily spoliation of that community's customary 
 rights, could ever be rationally construed into free popu- 
 lar assent to a system of bondage, as well as of practical 
 robbery in no very oblique form. 
 
 There is another point of immense importance, as it ap- 
 pears to me, and the point in question is this — the custom 
 legalized by the Land Act is a provincial, not a merely 
 district usage, and the "presumption of law," in con- 
 nexion with it, ought accordingly to be that, prima, fade, 
 every tenant holding within the boundaries of Ulster 
 should be regarded as assumably subject to the Ulster 
 custom, unless the contrary shall be proved in evideijce. 
 This simple provision I strongly urged during the passage 
 of the Land Bill thi-ough the House of Commons, and had 
 it been accepted, it would have prevented a goodly number 
 of anomalous decisions. At present every tenant, who ap- 
 pears before a land court is obliged to prove that his own 
 individual holding is subject to the tenant-right custom—,, 
 a task which, in hundreds of instances, is simply impossible 
 in the form of technically legal testimony, though no 
 human being who is acquainted with the case and its sur- 
 roundings, may have any moral doubt on the subject. The 
 onus of proof ought, in every instance, to devolve upon land- 
 lords, who can never have any difficulty in showing either 
 the non-existence of the custom upon their own estates, 
 or the mode in which, in the event of its " acquisitionj' 
 as recognised in the Ulster clause, the tenant-right interest 
 has become absorbed in the landlord's fee-simple. 
 
 This brings me to what I may call the policy of the Land 
 Act, which policy ought to have been the unalterable con- 
 firmation of secured tenures wherever they exist, and the 
 progressive extinction of insecurity of tenure everywhere 
 throughout the Kingdom. Q'his policy, no doubt, is vir- 
 tually affirmed in the Act, particularly in the department 
 known as "Brlght's Clauses," while in the Ulster depart- 
 ments, landlords are enabled to " acquire " the Ulster 
 custom, and to re-establish, in an intensified as well as in 
 a perpetuated form, the old economy of rack renting, of 
 eviction, and of feudal serfdom, with all its accompaniments 
 of agrarian violence and of danger to the State itself. The 
 Ulster custom, if legalized in its integrity, is " continued 
 occupancy at a fair rent " — in other words, it is a conditional 
 perpetuity, and the landlord power of summary eviction 
 ought to be entirely abolished. If in any case a landlord 
 may " acquire " the " custom," he should be legally required 
 to transfer it to the next succeeding tenant occupier, as a 
 descending incident attached to the tenancy. If some such 
 arrangement as this is not permanently adopted, then all the 
 evils of the old system will be reproduced periodically, and 
 Imperial statesmen will hereafter find themselves compelled 
 to bring in Irish Land Bills from generation to generation, 
 until they take courage to deal with the subject in a spirit 
 of unshrinking resolution, as well as of patriotic enlighten- 
 ment. A public law which makes provision for a continued 
 resurrection of the identical mischiefs which it has been 
 intended to extinguish is a suicidal anomalj-. 
 
 Another observation here occurs to me, and I venture to 
 introduce it, thoughbelongingproperlytoatopic previously 
 iioticed-^It is this : every land custom, according to the 
 legal definition already quoted, must be " reasonable," in the 
 sense of a jiisl, equitable, and rational usage, based upon 
 common .«ense, as well as upon common equity between man 
 and man. It must also be a usage created exclusively by 
 the peo2^le themselves, and tenant-right is precisely a custom 
 of this identical description. Tenant-right is not a custom 
 between landlord and tenant; it is a mode of dealing estabr 
 n.-ihed. by the people amongst tenants themselves, namely, 
 between outgoing and incoming tenants, and it is, moreover, 
 a custom by which the landlord's, tee simple interest can 
 necer bo injuriously 'dSected. On the , contraiy, , the hig/iqr 
 the market value of the tenant's interest . m the soil is, the 
 gi-eater and more indefeasible is the landlord's security, the 
 payment of all arrears of rent being, in terms of the cus- 
 tom itself, a first charge upon all tenant-right sales. Upon 
 tenant-right estates, landlords are, therefore, in a position 
 of security enjoyed by no other glass amongst her IMajesty's 
 subjects, nor even by ner Majesty herself, so far. as the col- 
 lection of her revenue is concerned — that is, the, landlords 
 in question can never lose a farthing in consequence of /jo^ 
 debts, seeing, that if tenants make any " moonlio-ht flit- 
 ting.s," they cannot avoid leaving behind them a. good 
 marketable value by way of a landlord indemnity fund. On 
 the ground of proprietary interest, then, landlords have no'- 
 even the shadow of a "reasonable" pretext for interfering 
 with the custon; in the way, of restriction,, but the direct 
 contrary, as we have just now seen. . 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 l7o 
 
 If the Land Act has done anything whatever, it has 
 declared the Ulster tenant's interest in the soil to be leg-ally 
 recognized /iroperi'j/, and subject, of course, to all the pro- 
 tective conditions, legal and equitable, by which the 
 sacredness of every other description of property in the 
 State is guarded. If it would be deemed monstrous, on 
 the part of tenants, to attempt any enforced 7-estriction 
 upon the sum to be paid for a landlord's fee-simple pro- 
 perty when brought to sale, it is still more unreasonable 
 and more monstrous for landlords to depreciate the property 
 of tenants by arbitrary m.andates called " estate rules." In 
 fact, there v.-ould be something like reason in tenant inter- 
 ference with landlord sales, seeing that when the owner of 
 an estate sells the latter, he virtually sells the occupying 
 population along with it, and the higher the price, the 
 greater is the danger Of attempted rack-renting on the side 
 of the new proprietor. The conclusions I draw from these 
 premises are the following: — 
 
 1. It is contrary to all the laws of proprietary security, 
 legislative and moral, that any individual, who cannot 
 show that his own interests are in vital danger, should be 
 permitted to put an arbitrary value, possibly not one-fourth 
 of its price as a saleable commodity, upon the propoity of 
 another individual, however humble may be the rank of the 
 latter. No Bill directly embodying such a principle as 
 that now alluded to could possibly pass through the Imperial 
 Legislature, since it would be a measure of barefaced con- 
 fiscation. 
 
 2. Any usage giving to landlords a discretionary power 
 of compelling tenants to accept for their legalized property 
 a sum beloiD its actual value as a saleable article, is an 
 " unreasonable" usage, in contradiction to the fundamental 
 requirements of common law, as well as destructive to the 
 rights of property in general, and can never become a 
 legalized custom, either by effluxion of time, or otherwise, 
 being null, void, and inherently illegal from the beginning. 
 Hence I argue that '■ estate rides," restricting the money 
 value of tenant-right, cannot possibly be legalized under 
 the Land Act, because from their 'very nature they can 
 never possess the supreme characteristics required by the 
 common law, namely, origination, froni the people them- 
 selves, free popular consent, andintrinsio "Reasokabi.eness." 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 C. M'Eh-07 
 
 There is just one other point to which I must briefly refer Sept. 21, 1880. 
 in conclusion, and it is the following, viz, : — The necessity 
 and expediency of enlarging the jurisdiction of the ordinary 
 Land Courts, so as to enable them to adjudicate in all cases 
 of important differences between landlords and tenants. At 
 present it is only in the form of " Notices to Quit," and of 
 Ejectment Decrees, that disputes of this class can be brought 
 into Court, and, in very many instances, questions of in- 
 creased rent, and similar matters have been equitably ad- 
 justed. The form in which these incidents come forward . 
 is confessedly awkward and prejudicial, and no good reason, 
 I think, can be shown why the Court should not have 
 power to take them up directly on an application from either 
 of the parties concerned. If a new landlord, for example, 
 when coming into possession of an estate, attempts to inter- 
 fere with the legalized custom, existing at the time of his 
 succession, it would be a great advantage not only to the 
 tenants, but possibly also in the end to the landlord himself, 
 were theparty orparties aggrieved legally enabled to bringthe 
 matter formally and at once into the Court on its own merits. 
 The custom existing upon an estate could thus be judicially 
 settled at the outset, and an immensity of vexatious litiga- 
 tion would be avoided in the future, while to every landlord 
 who, as Mrs. Malaprop would express it, has not a ' ^puncheon''' 
 for living in hot water, (he extended jurisdiction suggested 
 must prove a serious relief. I have only one concluding hint; 
 more to throw out, and it i.s this — tliat the landlord power 
 of distraint should be aholished, and since fuedal lordship 
 has now died a natural death, and landlords have merged 
 into the rank of dealers or traders in land, that they ought 
 to be placed on the sam(> level with all other trading and 
 commercial interests in society, so far as the legal recovery 
 of debts is concerned. In a word, landlords ought to be 
 obliged to recover rent arrears in the Civil Courts by the 
 ordinary law process made and provided in relation to other 
 classes of debts, instead of being enabled, by an exception- 
 ally unfair law, to cheat all other outstanding creditors out 
 of their common share of any assets which an insolvent 
 tenant debtor may possess for the discharge of his collective 
 liabilities. 
 
 Mr. James Morton examined. 
 
 4655. Chaiemajt. — You are a solicitor? — I am. 
 
 4656. You reside in Belfast ] — Yes. 
 
 4657. Previously you resided in the co. Wicklow 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 4658. You liave a general knowledge of the Ulster 
 tenant-right custom 1 — I liave. 
 
 4659. Could you give us your idea of what it con- 
 sists of! — I conceive that it consists of the right of 
 the tenant to sell subject to the approval of the land- 
 lord. I also consider' that it consists of an implied 
 contract that the tenant is not to be rack-rented, and 
 not to be disturbed as long as he i:>ays a fair rent. I 
 conceive the origin of it to have been the equity of 
 certain landlords, knowing that those men were planted 
 there for a particular purpose — I think it arose in that 
 way. I have read a great deal on the subject, and I 
 never regarded it as having any other origin. 
 
 4660. You think it arose in that way originally, and 
 that it afterwards became extended to other persons 
 and other places ? — Yes. I think it first arose with 
 the servitors. I think it first arose in that way, and 
 I am confirmed in that opinion from my knowledge of 
 the circumstances attending the plantation of the 
 barony of ShUlelagh, where it does not obtain. 
 
 4660a. What is your opinion as to the working of 
 the Ulster custom, do you regard it as satisfactory 1 — ■ 
 I think it at present very unsatisfactory. I regard 
 the custom as involving, if it is worth anything, fixity 
 of tenure at a fair rent. It is either that or it is 
 nothing. I regard it as unsatisfactory, inasmuch as 
 there is no means of ascertaining what that fair rent is 
 or ought to be. 
 
 4661. In what way would you arrive at a conclusion 
 as to a fair rent ? — The way I would arrive at a con- 
 clusion as to what constituted a fair rent would be this, 
 I would value the farm minus the value of the tenant's 
 permanent improvements. That is quite a different 
 thing from estimating the cost of the improvements, 
 
 capitalizing it, and deducting the interest from the 
 rent, because if that were done, in many cases that I 
 am aware of, the result would be that the landlord 
 would receive no rent at all. Even in Leinster I know 
 of cases in which tenants have expended on the land 
 more than would buy the fee-simple. The way I 
 would take it is this, the land was worth some rent 
 when the tenant took it, and tlnit is the rent I would 
 put down for it. 
 
 4662. "Would that be a perjjetual rent? — It wovikl 
 be a perpetual rent with an exception which I shall 
 state presently, which is the uiificulty of the case in 
 my mind, and which I am sure Baron Dowse is aware 
 of. 
 
 4663. "What is the difficulty ?— The diiEculty is that 
 innocent purchasers of the land must be protected. 
 That I think is clear, and therefore I would not go 
 behind the last sale. 
 
 4664. At what period do you say that the rent 
 should be fixed? — I would take the rent at the present 
 time. 
 
 4665. And would you declare that rent to Ije per- 
 petual ? — Yes, I would declare it to be perpetual. 
 
 4666. No matter whether it was high or low? — There 
 is the difficulty about making it perpetual — that it 
 might be unfair to either party — as the value of the 
 land may change, and therefore it is that many persons 
 are for having the rents subject to alteration at stated 
 periods ; that perhaps would be fair. 
 
 4667. "Would yon have any tribunal for that pur- 
 pose? — yes. I would in the first instance leave it to 
 arbitration, and failing agreement for arbitration I 
 would leave it to the Coimty Court Judge, and let it 
 be determined by him upon hearing skilled evidence. 
 I should state here the reason why I have come to 
 the conclusion I have stated about fixity of tenure 
 my opinion is that as a rule the estates of resident 
 landlords in Ireland are wisely and liberally maiiao-ed 
 
 Mr. James 
 Morton. 
 
176 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Morton. 
 
 but there is no doubt there are other estates -where 
 a different system prevails. It is the old question 
 of the choice between despotism and constitutional 
 government. 
 
 4:668. Baron Dowse. — The difficulty is to get a wise 
 despot 1 — Precisely. I have had great hesitation in 
 coming to the conclusion I have mentioned. I have 
 been working at the problem since I was twelve years 
 old, but since the Act of 1870 was passed I thiak fixity 
 of tenure has been only a question of time. The Act 
 of 1870 converted the equity of some landlords in 
 Ulster into a legal obligation, and let the others go 
 free. I see no good reason for that. In the first 
 place Ulster is not the only place in Ireland that 
 has been planted. I think I shall be able to show 
 that before I have concluded my evidence. In the 
 next place, many others besides Ulster planters have 
 improved the land greatly. I know many such cases 
 in Wicklow, Caiiow, and elsewhere. We must take 
 n all and not confine it to Ulster. We have no right 
 to make flesh of one and fish of another. 
 
 4609. You think that one land law should prevail 
 over the whole of Ireland 1 — I do, although I think 
 there are some parts of Ireland that are scarcely fit for 
 it yet, where there are poor small holdings, holdings 
 on which there can never be anything but misery. 
 
 4670. Places where if they had the land for nothing 
 they could barely live upon it 1 — Precisely. 
 
 4671. A change in the law could not make those 
 tenants any worse than they are 1 — I think the 
 effect of establishing fixity of tenure in such cases 
 would be that by degrees the strong and thrifty tenants 
 would purchase out the weak and unthrifty ; in other 
 words the weaker would go to the wall. I don't say 
 that that would be a consequence altogether to be 
 deplored, but I think that would be one of the results. 
 
 4672. The survival of the fittest, in fact ? — Yes, I 
 think that would be the result. At the time the Act 
 of 1870 was passed. I wrote to the Daily News and 
 Freeman's Journal explaining my views and pointing 
 out the defect in its principle — it was a most unscientific 
 thing, and could only be temporary. 
 
 4673. In what respect do you regard it as defective 1 
 — In the respects I have stated ; in the first place it 
 was unfair, for it converts the equity that prevailed on 
 the estates of good landlords into a legal obligation, and 
 compels them to do by law that which they had done 
 before from equity and good conscience towards their 
 tenants ; while, on the other hand^ it lets other land- 
 lords go free. 
 
 4674. You mean that upon estates on which the 
 landlords considerately allowed the custom of tenant- 
 right to grow up, a legal obligation was imposed upon 
 them in consequence of tlieir fairness and equitable 
 conduct ; while other landlords, who had shown no 
 such fair dealing, were allowed to escape, and had no 
 such legal obligation imposed upon them ? — Precisely. 
 If you legalize tenant-right on the estates of some 
 landlords who allowed it to grow up on their estates 
 from fairness and equity towards their tenants, it 
 strikes me to be not only inconsistent, bvit very unjust, 
 to allow other landlords to continue to work their 
 wicked will, simply because they had done so before. 
 
 4675. Then , if I understand you aright, you would 
 not have simply legalized the tenant-right custom on 
 estates where it existed at the time of the passing of 
 the Act, but you would have enacted a well defined 
 law, which would have bound all landlords in all parts 
 of Ireland, establishing fixity of tenure? — Precisely. 
 I stated my views at the time in the papers I have 
 mentioned, reasoning a priori from the principles I 
 have stated, and also from my own special knowledge 
 of the way in which certain great improvements were 
 carried out upon farms in Leinster. I have seen great 
 improvements effected in Ulster, but I saw commenced, 
 carried out, and completed, under my own eyes greater 
 improvements in Leinster than I ever noticed in Ulster, 
 and by men whose tenant-right was not worth sixpence. 
 
 4676. Upon estates on which there was no custom? 
 — No custom. 
 
 4677. Simply tenancies from year to year? — ^Y( 
 or very short leases which are no better. 
 
 4678. The tenants did it, I suppose, trusting th 
 they would be fairly treated by their landlords ? — We 
 sometimes people do odd things, without fully co 
 sidering the consequences. I intend before I am do] 
 to give you an illustration of the extent to which son 
 people will go in that way. I may mention one mo 
 remarkable case, inasmuch as it occurred under n 
 own eyes. About forty years ago, a person nam* 
 Collier got possession of a small farm upon Loi 
 Fitzwilliam's estate, which was in many parts a ma; 
 of granite boulders, either on or immediately under tl 
 surface. He commenced working at it and improvin 
 it, and worked at it I think for about thirty years 
 removing the boulders, cleaving some, blasting other 
 and burying others. At the time he got the land it w{ 
 worth about ten shillings an acre. It was good landi 
 other respects — wherever the l-oulders did not tone 
 it was covered with trefoil and shamrock. Now, wei 
 I patting a rent upon that farm, I would not estimai 
 the cost of that man's improvements, because if I di 
 that I should put a price upon it perhaps greater tha 
 the value of the fee-simple ; but I would say " if th 
 farm was worth ten shillings an acre when that ma 
 got it, it should be worth ten shillings an acre now : 
 it were in the same state," and I would give him 
 lease of the farm in perpetuity at that rent. 
 
 4679. That is ten shillings an acre ? — Yes ; it is no- 
 worth thirty shillings. I don't know whether th 
 rent of that farm has been raised. It is a mos 
 beautiful farm, well fenced and well drained — 
 charming bit of land, but I think, in my own mine 
 that the equity of that man's case would be to give hit 
 a grant in perpetuity at ten shillings an acre. 
 
 4680. Chairman. — Do you know anything of th 
 family 1 — I know the Colliers very well. 
 
 4681. Do you know there was some dispute ? — Yes 
 I knew Collier was put out, and he became stewan 
 to my mother. 
 
 4682. Do you know whether he received an annuit 
 fromLord Fitzwilliam? — I heard that he got an annuity 
 
 4683. And that the family continued in occuisatioi 
 of the holding and are there still ? — Yes, I know that 
 
 4684. Baron Dowse. — The case you have men tionei 
 raises a serious question. Suppose a landlord has upoi 
 his estate a bare mountain side, worth, in its unre 
 claimed state, very little, and that he lets it to a tenan 
 who improves it by an immense expenditure of tim^ 
 and labour, so much so that if you were to calculat' 
 the value of his improvements they would be wortl 
 more than the fee, so that he raised the value of th^ 
 land to thirty shillings an acre, would you say tha 
 the whole value of that improvement should be ih 
 property of the tenant ? — Certainly. 
 
 4685. Would you give nothing to the landlord fa 
 the inherent quality of the soil ? — I would not allov 
 him for the tenant's adventure. 
 
 4686. Would you give no consideration to the fac 
 that after all the landlord was the owner of the land 
 and that it was the latent quality of the soil, and it 
 capacity for imj)rovement, that enabled the tenant ti 
 make it something worth ? — I would not. I am clea: 
 that in Collier's case, he could not have effected thi 
 improvements he did for less than the value of the fee 
 simple, and I am at a loss to see why the landlorc 
 should get more than the land was worth before th( 
 improvements were made. 
 
 4687. Of course you know there are pieces of lane 
 in many parts of Ireland, conventionally known by tli( 
 name of " land," but of such poor quality as woulc 
 never pay for improvement 1 — Many. 
 
 4688. But if given to a tenant who has a little monej 
 and a good deal of spare time, he might by labouring or 
 that land, putting soil on it, and improving it, ultimately 
 make it something worth ; in a case of that description 1 
 can well understand that the landlord should get nothin| 
 beyond what the land was worth originally ; but sup 
 posing it was another sort of land, improvable land 
 land which would easily repay expenditure, so that s 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 177 
 
 tenant by expending time and money on it might, in a 
 few years, repay himself to a great extent ; in such a 
 case as that would you give the tenant the entire value 
 of the improvement, and no part of it to the landlord ? 
 — "Well, I confess, I have not met a case like that. 
 
 4689. The O'Co^^oii Don. — You have never met a 
 case of land that could be improved by a small expen- 
 diture so as to be doubled in value'? — I don't think I 
 have. 
 
 4690. Are you aware land is very much impro\'ed 
 by drainage ?— I am. 
 
 4691. So that by an expenditure of £5 or £6 an acre' 
 in drainage, you may increase the ^alue of some land 
 ten shillings oi- fifteen shillings an acre t — I would 
 have no difiiculty about such h. case as that. I would 
 in that case say " what was this land worth without 
 being drained f I would take it in that way. 
 
 4692. You would not give the landlord any share 
 in the improved value ^ — I would not be disposed to do 
 so, because it was not he that made the improvement. 
 
 4692a. Chairman. — Suppose there was a piece of 
 land worth very little in consequence of being a swamp 
 — suppose the landlord lets it to a tenant at 5s. an acre, 
 that the tenant expends .£5 or £6 an acre in draining 
 it and makes it worth something, and that he con- 
 tinues to hold it at the low rent for a certain number 
 of years, is it not possible that the tenant might during 
 that time recoup himself for his expenditure? — He 
 might, if he got it at such a low rent, and that his 
 expenditure was not very large. 
 
 4693. He might repay himself^ — He might. 
 
 4694. And leave a surplus 1 — Possibly, but I confess 
 I never met a case of the kind. 
 
 4695. If 3'ou did meet a case of the kind, do you 
 thinkthe landlord should get a portion of the value from 
 the improvements ? — I find a difiiculty in dealing with 
 such a case. But I would allow credit to the landlord 
 if he had let the land at first at a rent manifestly less 
 than its then fair letting value, 
 
 4696. Do you know the profit which Mr. Collier 
 made by the granite that he got out of that land 1 — I 
 do not ; I know he made gate posts of a good deal of it. 
 
 4697. Do you know that he sent it round the coun- 
 try to considerable distances, it was so much prized ? — 
 I do not think he sent much of it at all. I lived very 
 near him, and I knew he placed it along the road for 
 anyone that wanted gate posts, but I never heard that 
 he made anything considerable by it. 
 
 4698. But are you aware that lie was put out of the 
 farmby an arrangement with his own family 1 — I am not 
 going into that part of the case at all. I have nothing 
 to do with that. He may have been fully compensated 
 by Lord Fitzwilliam, for anything I know. I merely 
 mention the case as it ocouri-ed under my own observa- 
 tion, and in which the tenant, I have not the slightest 
 doubt, expended more than the fee-simple of the land 
 was worth. 
 
 4699. "What is your opinion of leases 1 — I have not 
 a very high opinion of them. Unless the lease is a 
 very long one a man might as well not have a lease at 
 all. I have seen people expend a gi-eat deal of money 
 upon short leases, but the general feeling is very much 
 against them now. Most tenants would just as soon 
 have no lease as a short one. 
 
 4700. A tenant under a lease has it only till the 
 end of his term ; but a tenant from year to year may 
 remain in occupation for ever, practically 1 — Yes ; and 
 if he is under a good and equitaljle landlord a tenancy 
 from year to year is equivalent to a lease for ever. 
 
 4701. Baron Dowse. — Have you known instances 
 in "Ulster of the tenant-right custom being eaten into 
 or damaged in value by raising of rents 1 — I have heard 
 of it. Some landlords have been constantly raising 
 rents. I have a strong opinion on that gubject — in 
 my opinion the rents of the original servitors, whoever 
 they were, should never have been raised one shilling. 
 I feel that very strongly, considering the circumstances 
 under which they got their holdings. I will illustrate 
 that better when I give my statement of the facts con- 
 nected with the settlement of the barony of Shillelagh. 
 
 4702. It is very difficult now to bring the origin of Sept 21, I88O. 
 tenant-right, arising out of the plantation of Ulster, ,, j~^3 
 into the region of practical politics t — Ko doubt. We Morton, 
 must take things as they are, and for that reason I have 
 
 said that in adjusting the question of rent and tenant- 
 right I would not go behind the time of the last pui-- 
 chase for value. "Whether you are going to put on a 
 fixed rent or to lea\'e it su.bject to a periodical re- 
 vision, you must take the fair rent as being what a 
 solvent tenant could afford to pay for the land as under 
 a tenancy from year to year, minus the tenant's im- 
 provciments effected since the date of the last sale 
 anterior to 1870. 
 
 4703. Chairman. — ^Would you give the tenant a 
 compulsory power to purchase his holding 1 — I would 
 give thg,t to every tenant, but I would limit it in this 
 way ; it would be very inconvenient to have every 
 small tenant dragging up his landlord at every moment ; 
 but I would give it to a tenant whose holding was 
 value for £50 a year, or to the tenants upon any one 
 townland, or in any one district, so as not to make 
 the thing too small and inconvenient. 
 
 4704. You would give the tenants that power for 
 the purpose of enabling them to acquire estates in fee ? 
 — Precisely. 
 
 4705. Baron Dowse. — Peasant proprietors? — Yes, 
 or rather farm proprietors. The expression " peasant 
 proprietors " might be supposed to mean proprietors 
 of very small holdings. I would extend it to the very 
 largest holding. 
 
 4706. "What we generall}^ understand by " fixity or 
 tenure " is, tenancy under a landlord ; but the effect 
 of the scheme you advocate would be, to get rid of the 
 landlord '! — That would depend on the extent to which 
 
 it was availed of. • 
 
 4707. Would you set on foot a scheme for purchasing - 
 out the landlords of Ireland at one swoop? — I would 
 not ; because the result of that would be that I don't 
 think half of them would pay the instalments, and 
 the State would have to resell. 
 
 4708. What I understand yovi to suggest is that 
 when a tenant has some money he ought to have 
 power to purchase his holding 1 — Yes. 
 
 4709. How much do you think he ought to have? 
 One-third. 
 
 4710. You would facilitate him in borrowing the 
 remainder ? — Yes. 
 
 4711. That would have the effect of naturally 
 creating a class of fee-simple proprietors ? — Yes, but 
 there is one difiiculty which presented itself to my 
 mind as a solicitor (having been concerned in taking 
 land for a railway), namely, the costs of making out 
 title, and of the application of the purchase-money. 
 These costs ought not to be thrown upon a compelled' 
 vendor; they would have to be borne by the purchaser,, 
 and in many cases they would be quite too heavy for 
 a small tenant to bear, and must be jjaid by the^ 
 State. 
 
 4712. As you have mentioned railways, of course 
 you are aware that where a man's property is taken 
 from him against his will for the purposes of a railway, 
 he gets something extra for compulsory purchase 1 — I 
 know that is talked of, but really what it means is 
 this — that he is- to get the fullest price. The landlord, 
 if compelled to sell, is entitled to the fullest price — to 
 such a price as would, if invested on the best security 
 recoup him the income he has lost. 
 
 4713. According to your experience do you think 
 the power of purchase would be largely availed of by 
 the tenants if they had it? — I think it would iia 
 Ulster very much, and I think in Leinster also. 
 
 4714. Would you work it out by a modification 
 of the Bright Clauses of the Land Act ? — I would 
 work it through the County Court Judges ; I would 
 give them the jurisdiction. I would move the Countv 
 Court Judge by a short petition, and give him power 
 to call for title deeds, and do all necessary acts the 
 same as the Land Court has at present. 
 
 4715. Would not that be very expensive? — It would 
 involve some expense. 
 
 2 A 
 
178 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Morton, 
 
 4716. Is that the expense which you contemplate 
 throwing on the State 1 — Yes. 
 
 4717. Throwing it on the State means throwing it 
 on the taxpayers? — Yes, I would throw it on a 
 particular class of taxpayers. 
 
 4718. Who would they be? — I think you would 
 yourself come in for a portion of it. I would throw it 
 on every income of over £1,000 a year in the United 
 Kingdom arising out of land or invested personalty. 
 I would do it on this principle — ^that it is placing the 
 tax on the shoulders of those best able to bear it, 
 which I think is the turn the taxation of the future will 
 take ; and also for this farther reason — England owes 
 Ireland immense compensation for the legislation 
 which hindered her trade and crushed her manufac- 
 tures in the past. 
 
 4719. It would be rather hard to make the present 
 generation pay for that 1 — I think not. The present 
 generation oi English traders have, owing to the legis- 
 lation to which I reier, now a walk over in Ireland. 
 
 4720. Chairman. — You mention, in the notes 
 which you furnished to us, that you are of opinion 
 arterial drainage works should be undertaken by the 
 State ? — I do ; through the Board of Works. 
 
 4721. Through what means is the State to be re- 
 comjDensed for the expenditure? — That is another 
 question. I don't see how the work could be done, 
 except by some such imperial taxation as I propose. 
 The country has been left without manufactures ; it is 
 very poor, and I don't think Ireland could, of itself, 
 bear the tax. 
 
 4722. Baron Dowse. — How would you settle the 
 fair rent, suppose there was a difierence between land- 
 lord and tenant as to the amount ? — By arbitration, if 
 they would agree to reier it to arbitration ; if not, 
 then let them come belore the County Court Judge. 
 
 4723. Do, you think that tribunal would give satis- 
 faction ? — I think it should. I would give an appeal 
 if either party wished it. 
 
 4724. An appeal to the Judge of Assize ? — Yes. I 
 see it might give rise to a good deal of litigation, but 
 it can hardly be helped. 
 
 4725. Are there any other points in the Land Act 
 requiring amendment in your opinion ?— Yes ; section 
 4, proviso 1, sub-section A, which excepts improve- 
 ments made before the passing of the Act, and twenty 
 years before the claim ot such compensation shall 
 have been made. I see no reason for that exception. 
 
 47 2 G. You would not limit it to twenty years? — I 
 would not. I see no reason why it should be limited. 
 I was concerned in a case of great hardship myself of 
 that kind. 
 
 4727. Don't you recollect that at the time this Act 
 was passed it was considered by some a gi'eat hardship 
 thatitshoulddeal retrospectively at all? — Iknow it was. 
 
 4728. And it was thought reasonable to put some 
 limit on its retrospective operation, and that was the 
 reason of the twenty years' limitation because the 
 Act altered rights, is not that so ? — Yes ; it did alter 
 rights. 
 
 4729. It made a man liable to pay in respect of a 
 thing past and gone, and over which he had no con- 
 trol ? — Yes ; but I see no reason for making the excep- 
 tion at all, once the retrospective jirinciple is admitted. 
 I know of a case of great hardship near Belfast 
 — Torrens v. Johnson — it was with reldrenoe to a 
 farm of twenty acres near Bellast. All the improve- 
 ments, fences, houses, offices, everything had been 
 done by the tenant or her jjredecessor . The lease expired 
 and an ejectment was brovight. She made a claim in the 
 alternative, claiming compensation for improvements, 
 and alsofor the Ulster tenant-right. She proved thatthe 
 custom of tenant-right existed on the adj oiuing estate of 
 the Marquis of Downshii'e. She proved that the im- 
 jirovements had all been effected by herself or her pre- 
 decessor. The rents she bad been paying was a full 
 occupation rent, but she did not get a farthing. 
 
 4730. Do you object also to exceptions 3 and 4 ? — I 
 do. I object to every limitation — I consider there 
 should be no exception — that the court ought to have 
 
 power to award compensation in every case where the 
 oircumstanceg were such as to entitle the party to 
 get it. 
 
 4731. You would compensate a tenant for his im- 
 provements no matter when made ? — I would, provided 
 they were unexhausted. I would give him their 
 value at the time he quitted his holding — the only 
 exception being where he got the lease, or became the 
 tenant on the express terms of making the improve- 
 ments. There is another matter I wish to mention, 
 that the rents are much more moderate in Ulster than 
 in any part of Leinster I am acquainted with. 
 
 4732. For the same class of land? — Yes, and I 
 attribute it to the Ulster custom. 
 
 4733. The O'Conoe Don.— You think the Ulster 
 custom has a tendency to keep down the rent ? — 1 
 think so. 
 
 4734. Baron Dowse. — The landlords in Ulster did 
 not charge so much rent for land as the landlords in 
 the south did, because they admitted the rights of the 
 tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 4735. Complaints have been made to us, both in 
 Dublin and here, that a contrary practice has prevailed 
 here lately ? — So I have heard. 
 
 4736. And that the landlords are destroying the 
 tenant-right by gradually raising the rents ? — Yes. 
 
 4737. Has, that system of raising the rents prevailed 
 only since the custom has been legalised by Act of 
 Parliament or beiore it? — Before it — I have heard of 
 many cases both before and after the Land Act became 
 law. I was told of one case in which the rent was 
 raised 130 per cent. 
 
 4738. Might it not have originated in this — that 
 for some years latterly the tenants were well off, they 
 got good prices and good harvests, and the landlords 
 thought they had a right to share in that prosperity ? — . 
 Yes, but it took jjlace in times long anterior to those 
 — it took place in 1850. 
 
 4739. Baron Dowse.— -I have heard landlords say 
 that the rents have been the same for the last thirty 
 years, but that though the tenant got better and higher 
 prices for every kind of farm produce his land'ord got 
 none of those advantages — have you heard of cases of 
 that sort? — Frequently landlords have told me so. 
 
 4740. Have you any land yourself? — I have not. 
 
 4741. Is there any other point to which you wish to 
 call our attention ? — I wish to make a statement of 
 facts in relation to the settlement of the barony of 
 Shillelagh. In the commencement of the last century 
 the barony was one ol the wildest of wild places — it 
 was the last resort of the wolf in Ireland. The roads 
 were mere tracks, and I don't believe there was a bridge 
 in the whole district. The Marquis of Rockingham in 
 the first half oi the century planted it with a numerous 
 yeomanry and with some families of a different class — 
 men of means. Frank Morton came there from the 
 Queen's County. He settled at Tinnahely, where 
 there were then, as I am informed, but two small 
 cabins. He built a house. There was at that time 
 no market and no trade in the locality. He built a 
 corn mill, a distillery, a malt house, a brewery, and a 
 tanyard, and carried on all those trades himself 
 Before he died he had a market town there, with a 
 market house in the centre of it. He died leaving four 
 sons ; the youngest remained in possession of his own 
 house and farm, a large one. Some years afterwards the 
 rebellion of 1798 broke out. His eldest son, Harry 
 Hatton Morton, a wellknown magistrate of the quonnn 
 in three counties, went through the Roman Catholic 
 peasantry and farmers, and urged them to remain at 
 home, and they followed his advice — conduct for which 
 it always struck me that HaiTy Hatton Morton deserved 
 a civic crown — for they remained steadfast and peace- 
 able during the whole period of the rebellion, cultivat- 
 ing their own fai-ms and also the farm of his brother, 
 J ames Morton, who was a yeomanry officer, constantly 
 iinder arms, and marching to repel invasions. There 
 were repeated invasions, but six corps of yoemanry 
 repelled them and held the barony for the King and 
 the absentee landlord. In the course of time James 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 179 
 
 Morton died, and witli Urn expired the lease. He had 
 an only son, Frank Morton, who had a number of 
 little boys. He was living on a very large but poor 
 farm, one of the very worst on the estate ; his father's 
 was one of the best. He thought that though the 
 lease of his father's farm had expired on his death, that 
 his claim as son would be recognized, and that he 
 would get the farm ; but no, he was informed that the 
 farm was required to be cut up into townparks and 
 that he would not get it. The agent took possession 
 of the feirm, the old farmstead oi Prank Morton, also 
 the malt-house and other buildings including some 
 houses in the town, and the only compensation 
 allowed was a gratuity of £10 a year to the 
 daughter of Captain James Morton. I am not now 
 casting any blame either on Earl Fitzwilliam or his 
 agent. I am merely showing what the system is, and 
 what can be done under it. 
 
 4742. The O'Conoe Don.— "When did James 
 Morton die ? — I think it was in 1833. I was twelve 
 years old at the time. 
 
 4743. That was long before the Land Act? — Yes. 
 I am merely stating these facts to show the results of 
 the insecurity ot tenure. That land was not worth 
 more than 5s. an acre on the day Frank Morton came 
 to Tinnahely. It was Frank Morton that created the 
 town, there is no doubt about that, unless tradition is 
 altogether in error on the matter. It was his industry 
 that created the town, and that had indirectly given 
 to that land the value it subsequently acquired as a 
 site for townparks. 
 
 4744. What was the result of the conduct pursued ? 
 — Frank Morton the younger from that time forward 
 spoke of nothing but emigration, and the same feeling 
 took possession of his sons. His second son, George 
 D. Morton, emigrated to Canada, and is now a director 
 and one of the principal proprietors of the St. Lawrence 
 Bank. His third son, William Morton, went to Mel- 
 bourne, and has been successful there. The youngest 
 son also went to Canada and is now a physician there 
 and said to be in large practice. Not one of those 
 tliree men would have thought of leaving Ireland had 
 it not been for the discouraging conduct pursued. 
 That I can certify from my own knowledge. 
 
 4744a. Baron Dowse. — Whatdoyou say should have 
 been done by the landlord when the lease expired 1 — 
 What I say is that the son of James Morton should 
 have been given the . .xm in perpetuity at 5s. an acre, 
 that being the value of it when Frank Morton got it. 
 Whatever additional value it afterwards acquired was 
 the result of the industry and energy of Frank Morton. 
 That farm was worth £2,000 at the least when the 
 lamily of the Mortons were deprived of it. I am not 
 blaming Earl Fitzwilliam, nor his agent, I merely 
 mention the case to show the efiect upon those men 
 oi what they considered injustice. 
 
 4745. But according to what you have stated it 
 appears they are all tar better off now than if they 
 
 had remained in Tinnahely ? — Undoubtedly. But that Sept. 2i, 1880. 
 is not the point. No doubt what occurred turned out „ . " 
 all the better for them ; but the point is, the effect Morton, 
 such conduct has on the industry and prosperity of this 
 country. That case had the efiect of drawing my 
 attention to the subject of the Plantation of Ulster, 
 and the Ulster custom. I have endeavoured to lock 
 at it in the most equitable way I could, and I think 
 what I have said would have been the equitable way 
 of dealing with the case. I do not say the same prin- 
 ciple would apply to every case, but it certainly would 
 have applied to that case, because Frank Morton 
 was the man who had created the town, and given to 
 the land whatever additional value it possessed. 
 
 4746. Chairman. — If the law had been then what 
 you say it ought to be now — fixity of tenure at a fair 
 rent — he could not have been turned out as he was 
 without compensation ? — Certainly. 
 
 4747. And that compensation should have been esti- 
 mated having regard to the original value of the land 
 and the improvements made upon it by the tenants ? — 
 Certainly. I may conclude by mentioning that the 
 fourth son of James Morton's son remained for some 
 years in occupation oi the other — which I have called the 
 poor icirm. He struggled on, but it was land of such 
 poor quality that he never could profitably cultivate 
 it. I saw there was no use in his continuing there, 
 he worked away and improved the land as much as it 
 could be improved, I advised him to leave, and he has 
 gone to America, to take possession, as a present from 
 one of his brothers, of a iarnished house and 200 acres 
 in the splendid county of York, Ontario. 
 
 4748. I can say irom my personal knowledge, as I 
 knew him myself, that he was one of the most indus- 
 trious men I ever saw? — Indeed he was. I have 
 given you an outline of my views and of facts which 
 came within my own knowledge — I have no prejudice 
 in the matter. My sympathies are as much on the 
 side of the landlord as of the tenant, but I see no 
 remedy for the existing state of things but fixity of 
 tenure, although I foresee that inconveniences will 
 arise out of it. I wish to add that I often visit that 
 part of the country, and I admire greatly the improve- 
 ments which the late agent of that estate, Mr. 
 Ponsonby, has made — improvements which could not 
 have been carried out if fixity of tenure had been in 
 existence there — by squaring farms, I'emoving tenants 
 out ot unsuitable places, and fix;ing them in places that 
 are suitable. I am quite free to confess that the estate 
 is more 3;eady to receive fixity of tenure now than it 
 was when I was twelve years old. I wish to give both 
 aspects of the case fairly. Another thing I have 
 noticed in going through the county is the absence of 
 the middle classes of the people. There is hardly an 
 educated man to speak to., The country people 
 (whether hypocritically or not), deplore to me that the 
 class of gentlemen are gone that used to supply their 
 magistrates and professional men. 
 
 Mr. James Ferguson, Silversprings, Co. Antrim, , examined. 
 
 4749. Chairman. — Yciu are a member of the An- 
 trim Central Tenant-Eight Association ?^ Yes. I am 
 ■A member of the Bally clare Association, and a member 
 oi the Conimittee of the Antrim Central Association. 
 
 475,0. Do you attend as a representative ot those 
 associations 1 — 1 do not. 1 came Jiere for the purpose 
 ot stating a few facts which won't detain you long. I 
 ear. show you hov; matters stand in our neighbour- 
 hood, and how at the end of our leases we lose our 
 tenant-right. 
 
 4751. Who is your landlord ? — Mr. Langtry. 
 
 4752. 1 understand that you purchased the tenant- 
 right in a lease which expired in 1870 ? — Yes. 
 
 4753. What was the rent 1— £173. 
 
 4754. On the expiration of the lease was an in- 
 creased rent demanded? — Yes; £255. 
 
 4755. Ho-w many acres wei-e in the holding? — It 
 contained 82a. Ik. 15p., Irish. 
 
 4756. what is the valuation ? — Griffith's valuation 
 is £177 15s. 
 
 4757. When was the lease made ? — Thirty-one years 
 j)revious to 1870. 
 
 4758. The term was thirty-one years ? — Yes. • 
 
 4759. Upon what tenure do you hold now ? — On a 
 new lease for thirty-one years. 
 
 4760. Mr. Shaw.— You took a new lease ? — I did, 
 at the increased rent. 
 
 4761. You could not help it, I suppose? — I could 
 not help it. I had nothing else for it. I should either 
 take the new lease or go, and under it I am debarred 
 from any claim under the Land Act. 
 
 4762. Has your landlord any other property in the 
 district ? — He has, and on the whole property there is 
 tenant-right. There is only one farm held by lease 
 besides mine. 
 
 2 A 2 
 
 Mr. James 
 Ferguson. 
 
180 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Ferguson. 
 
 4763. Are there otliers small tenants? — Yes, holding 
 under yearly tenancies. 
 
 4764. Are they better off tlian the men that have 
 leases 1 — Much better off. 
 
 476-5. Have their rents been raised? — Not a farthing 
 since he came in for the property. 
 
 4766. I understand that you bought your farm from 
 the man who had the lease originally ? — Yes. 
 
 4767. You bought the old lease, and now you have 
 a renewal % — Yes, at an increased rent. 
 
 4768. Are all claims under the Land Act barred by 
 the new lease? — Yes. 
 
 ' 4769. Including compensation for permanent im- 
 provements ? — No. If I can establish a claim for per- 
 manent improvements, such as buildings or tillage, I 
 would get it. 
 
 4770. What sum did you give for the lease? — I 
 gave £1,200. 
 
 4771. How long was that before its expiration? — 
 Eour years. I paid that money with the knowledge 
 and consent of the agent of the property. 
 
 4772. Did you do that in the expectation that 
 tenant-right would exist at the determination of the 
 lease ? — Of course I did. Otherwise I would not have 
 paid the money. 
 
 4773. Had that been the practice upon the estate 
 as far as you knew ? — It was. I never knew any other 
 practice to prevail until the year 1870. And it is 
 still the custom in other oases. Small farms have 
 been since that time sold repeatedly by public auction. 
 
 4774. And no increase of rent ? — No increase. 
 
 4775. Why did^they make an exception in your case? 
 — They took the benefit of the Land Act, and said that 
 I had no claim at the end of the lease. 
 
 4776. And they put a rent on your own improve- 
 ments ? — Yes. They put a rent on my purchase-monej' 
 and improvements. The land is much better now than 
 when I got it, 
 
 4777. Chairman. — You did not bring the case into 
 court ? — No. I thought it better not to do so, but to 
 hold on the farm. Counsel advised me that I had no 
 claim under the Land Act. 
 
 4778. You could only have a claim in case of evic- 
 tion ? — Only in case of eviction. 
 
 4779. You might have refused to pay the increased 
 rent, and then, if they evicted you, you could have 
 brought your claim for compensation, and you would 
 have had to run your chance of being able to substan- 
 tiate it ? — Yes ; and I was advised not to do so, as 
 other persons under similar circumstances had failed in 
 getting compensation. 
 
 4780. You hold another portion of land under a 
 difi'erent landlord?— Yes, 14a. Or. 38p. Irish. 
 
 4781. Under whom do you hold that ? — Lord Done- 
 gall. The old I'ent was £21 : the present rent is 
 £.52 lOs. 
 
 4782. When was that increase made ? — Five years 
 ago. 
 
 4783. Is that building ground, or anything special? 
 — No. I have a scutch mill and corn mill which I 
 built on it myself I spent £1,500 in building on 
 that poi-tion of my farm, and £200 in improving the 
 
 ' land. 
 
 4784. The land aloneis not worth the rent, I suppose? 
 — It is not. It was on my own improvements the rent 
 was raised. 
 
 4785. Did you hold it on lease ? — Yes, on lease for 
 sixty-one years. After the lease ran out they in- 
 creased the rent to £52 10s. They gave me a lease of 
 it tor thirty-one years at that rent, and under the 
 lease I am debarred from making any claim under the 
 Land Act, except for building and manure. 
 
 4786. What is the valuation? — £65 ; but the greater 
 part of the value is on my own buildings. 
 
 4787. You built a scutch mill on the land ? — I did. 
 
 4788. And a corn mill? — I did. 
 
 4789. Was it a condition of the original lease that 
 you should put up those mills ? — No. There was no- 
 thing of the sort. 
 
 4790. The water power was there and you built the 
 
 mills ? — Yes. There had been an old mill there pre 
 viously. I should mention that at the time the leasi 
 was made, people took them for sixty-one years in pre 
 ferenoe to taking them for lives renewable ; becausi 
 those leases for years were always renewed without ani 
 difficulty, and were more convenient. 
 
 4791. Was there a fine payable on renewal ? — ^Veri 
 little. There was something, but scarcely anything 
 I have another part of my farm that cost me aboui 
 £1,300, but, under the present law, I expect in a fevi 
 years, that in place of paying £13 9s. Id., I shall b( 
 paying £60 a year for it. 
 
 4792. Do you hold that also under lease? — Yes. 
 
 4793. Is it land only, or are there any buildings or 
 it ? — Land alone. There is only one house on it. Il 
 contains 24a. 3e. Irish. 
 
 4794. Why do you apprehend that you will have tc 
 pa^ so much for it ? — Because it is improved in value, 
 
 4795. Whereisit? — About twelvemilesfrom Belfast, 
 
 4796. Would you be willing to pay a reasonable rise 
 of rent at the termination of the lease ? — I would, ii 
 the time was such as to afford it. 
 
 4797. You would not object to a reasonable in- 
 crease ? — I would not. 
 
 4798. You look on the increases that have been 
 made as unreasonable ? — I do ; I consider them very 
 unreasonable. 
 
 4799. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is the Poor Law 
 valuation of the last portion you have mentioned ? — 
 £55 10s. 
 
 4800. How much are you paying for it? — £13 9s. Id. 
 under the old lease. That rent has been j)aid for it 
 from time immemorial. 
 
 4801. You did all the imjjrovements ? — Everything. 
 Everything that was done was done by the tenant. 
 I never saw the landlord or agent's face on the pro- 
 perty. 
 
 4802. Baron Dowse. — Except when he wanted his 
 rent, I suppose ? — No, not even then. I always paid 
 the rent without putting him to the trouble of calling. 
 
 4803. Chairman. — You say there is one house on 
 that portion ? — Yes, an old dwelling house. 
 
 4804. Is it of much value? — No, not more than 
 about £4 a year. 
 
 4805. What improvements have you done on those 
 24 acres ? — It was very rough land, covered with furze, 
 ditches, crooked fences, large stones, and a large 
 number of gravel pits in it. I had to grub it, to level 
 it, to fill the holes. I have it levelled now so that you 
 could run a machine over it. There were eight square 
 perches of it that cost me over £60 to level. I did 
 not think at that time that our tenant-right was going 
 to be cut down. 
 
 4806. You say that is on Lord Donegall's pro- 
 perty ? — Yes. I wish it to be understood that I am 
 not faulting Lord Donegall or anybody else. I only 
 complain of the law. 
 
 4807. Is that raising of rent a common practice in 
 your part of the country ? — Perfectly common. I wish 
 to produce to the Commissioners a copy of a lease from 
 Lord Cairns to a tenant some years ago, in which he 
 debars him of everything. [Witness handed in copy 
 lease.] 
 
 4808. Mr. Shaw.— This is a lease for 31 years?— 
 Yes. 
 
 4808a. Debarring the lessee of all tenant right ? — ■ 
 Yes. The man that took that farm paid £150 for it. 
 It was a mountain farm, and the land unreclaimed 
 when the tenant originally got it. You will see by the 
 lease that there is only part of it reclaimed as it is. 
 
 4809. Everything had been done on that farm by 
 the tenant ? — Yes, everything. 
 
 4810. Baron Dowse. — You say you don't blame 
 the landlord for increasing the rent, but that you 
 blame the law ? — Yes. 
 
 4811. How woidd you remedy it? — I would give 
 leasehold tenant-right, and I would have a valuation 
 of land by arbitration. 
 
 4812. Some people have suggested fixity of tenure 
 as the remedy, and that the tenant should hold the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 181 
 
 land as long as he pays his rent, and not be turned 
 •out ^unless he fails to pay it 1 — I don't know that I 
 ■would go so far as that. It would scarcely be fair, I 
 think, to prevent the landlord from ever getting back 
 liis land, if he was willing to compensate the tenant 
 for it. 
 
 4813. By paying him for his tenant-right ■? — Yes, 
 and in addition for any inconvenience to which he 
 may be f\\t. 
 
 4814. The O'CoNOR Dox. — Was it not always the 
 custom oia the dropping in of leases to increase the 
 rent 1 — Never. I never knew the rent to be increased 
 on Lord Donegall's property, till lately. 
 
 4815. Baron Dowse. — Would this meet your views 
 — fixity of tenure at fair rents, the tenant not to be dis- 
 turbed as long as he paid the rent, but that if the land- 
 lord wanted the land for himself, or for any fair or 
 legitimate purpose, he should be entitled to get it by 
 compensating the tenant 1 — ^Yes. I think that would 
 not be unfair, I don't think anybody in the north would 
 •object to that. 
 
 4816. Mr. Shaw. — This meddling with tenant-right 
 "vvhich you say has been practised on some estates, by 
 increasing rents, has I suppose caused great dissatis- 
 faction? — It has almost set the people wild. They 
 have no security, and are afraid to improve or expend 
 their money on the land. Many of them are leaving 
 the country. There are a couple of farms to be sold 
 near me at present ; one of the best men in the neigh- 
 bourhood is going away, he says he will stay in the 
 country no longer. 
 
 4817. Owing to the increase of rents'? — Yes, and 
 the frequent interference with sales. 
 
 4818. The landlords interfere with sales? — Yes, 
 bo Ma by increasing the rent on the incoming tenant, 
 and in some cases they insist on having the selection. 
 
 4819. Do they in some cases limit the price to be 
 paid ? — They do. One man sold a farm in my neigh- 
 bourhood a few years ago, wliich he had held since 
 1824. He had built the houses, and made all the 
 improvements ; but being old and no longer able to 
 work it, he tried to sell it. The landlord said he must 
 get part of the purchase money, or else he would raise 
 the rent. 
 
 4820. He insisted on part of the purchase money 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 4821. As a premium? — Yes. 
 
 4822. Not as rent due ? — No ; there was no rent 
 due. Pie sold the farm for £500, of which he had to 
 give .£200 to the landlord. That man told me this 
 morning that on four acres of that land, he had ex- 
 pended more than £50 an acre. He had worked at it 
 for years, drained and improved it. Mr. Adair, of 
 Loughinmore, had told him, he was expending more 
 on it than the land was worth. He never received 
 any assistance from, the landlord, from the time he 
 first became tenant, but one £5. It was as snug a 
 farm as you could see in the district at the time he 
 left it. 
 
 4823. Are there any other cases that you wish to 
 mention ? — There are some landlords who have com- 
 pelled the tenants to take leases and pay fines. 
 
 4823a. At an increased rent ? — Yes. 
 
 4824. Had those parties held jjreviously as tenants 
 from year to year 1 — Some from year to year, and some 
 for leases which expired. 
 
 4825. They are obliged to take leases at an increased 
 rent ? — Yes, and to pay fines. 
 
 4S26. Did any of the leases exclude the tenants 
 from the benefits of the Land Act 1 — I could not say 
 as to that, but I know on the late Mr. Samuel G. 
 Getty's property, the tenants were obliged to take 
 leases and to pay fines also. The fine was a year's 
 Tent for every ten years in the lease. 
 
 4827. They had an option I supposed — They had 
 no option. One man refused, and was served with 
 notice to quit and lelt. 
 
 4828. Did he claim compensation ? — No, it was 
 before 1870. 
 
 4829. The O'Conor Don.— Was this before the 
 Land Act ? — It was. 
 
 4830. Chairman. — Has it been done since the pas- 
 sing of the Land Act 1 — Yes, it has, and far more fre- 
 quently than before. It was only in some cases it was 
 done previously. ■ 
 
 48-31. But now it is getting general ? — Yes. There 
 is a neighbour of mine — as large a farmer as there is 
 in my district — and a man very well off, who had 
 built two sides of a farm-yard, good barns, stables, 
 and sheds, and who had the foundations cut for the 
 remainder ; that man told me within the last two 
 months that he would make no more improvements, 
 that there was no use in his laying out his money, 
 for at the termination of his lease the landlord could 
 appropriate the whole of it. Another neighbour of 
 mine who intended bailding a new house, and who 
 consulted me as to his plans', told me that he would 
 never build until there was some change. 
 
 4831a. On whose property is that farm? — Mr. Young, 
 of Galgorm Castle, a very good landlord. But no 
 matter how good a landlord may be, he has the power 
 to do it, and there is consequently a feeling of inse- 
 curity. 
 
 4832. It is not that Mr. Young would be likely to 
 do it more than any other landlord, but that he would 
 have the power to do it ? — Exactly. 
 
 4833. And you say it is becoming a practice to in- 
 crease rents, and thus diminish the tenant-right ? — It ' 
 is. 
 
 4834. Baron Dowse. — Inyouropinionoughttenants 
 to be prevented from contracting themselves out of the 
 Land Act ? — I wish I had been prevented. 
 
 4835. Some people say that the large substantial 
 farmers don't want jjrotection, that they are able to 
 protect themselves — is that so, according to your ex- 
 perience ? — Not at all ; the very reverse. It is those 
 who have something to lose that require protection. 
 
 4836. There is no use in pecking at a bare person? — 
 None. If you have nothing, 5rou require jio jjrotection. 
 It is the substantial farmer that requires protection. 
 They have already taken £2,500 of my money. 
 
 4837. By increasing yoiir rent? — By increasing my 
 rent. 
 
 4838. Beyond what you call the fair rent ? — Beyond 
 the fair rent. 
 
 4839. By the expression " fair rent," I rmderstand 
 you to mean the fair letting value minus your own im- 
 provements — you are not willing to pay a rent on 
 your own improvements ? — That is what I mean, 
 and what everybody else means. 
 
 4840. Supposing the farmers had the opportunity 
 of buying their land, and becoming the owners of 
 it, do you think they would improve more than at 
 present ? — I do. 
 
 4841. Do you think tenants would be anxious to 
 buy if they got the opportunity ? — I do ; if they had 
 facilities, I think numbers of them would do so. 
 Lord Cairns, sometime ago, took a notion to sell his pro- 
 perty, and the tenants petitioned to be allowed to buy. 
 
 4842. Did they do so ?— Yes. 
 
 4843. And did they pay the price of their holdings 1 
 They did, each and every one. 
 
 4844. Without taking advantage of the Bright 
 clauses ? — Yes. 
 
 4845. They bought with their own money? — They 
 did, and I produce a list of the prices they paid. 
 
 [Witness hands in following list.] 
 
 Sept. 21, 1S80. 
 
 J[r. James 
 Fi;i;,'usor. 
 
 [Table. 
 
182 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 S^t. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Ferguson 
 
 List. 
 
 Tenants' Names. 
 
 Quantity, 
 Statute 
 Measure. 
 
 Yearly Kent. 
 
 Proportion of 
 Head Rent. 
 
 Proportion of 
 Xitho. 
 
 Purchase- 
 money. 
 
 
 A. B. P. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ S. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 John and James O'Neill, 
 
 29 3 
 
 12 17 
 
 
 
 3 7 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 10 
 
 202 6 
 
 Green O'Neill, 
 
 51 1 10 
 
 22 3 
 
 6 
 
 5 16 
 
 6 
 
 1 10 
 
 10 
 
 348 14 
 
 William and David Gawn, 
 
 42 2 
 
 17 10 
 
 
 
 4 12 
 
 2 
 
 1 4 
 
 4 
 
 275 
 
 Thomas Gawn, 
 
 24 35 
 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 2 15 
 
 4 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 
 164 18 
 
 John Gawn, .... 
 
 34 1 
 
 19 8 
 
 6 
 
 5 4 
 
 3 
 
 1 7 
 
 7 
 
 302 12 
 
 Robert Murdoek, 
 
 38 2 
 
 13 10 
 
 
 
 3 11 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 8 
 
 212 8 
 
 Robert A. Murdoek, 
 
 35 20 
 
 13 10 
 
 
 
 3 11 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 8 
 
 212 8 
 
 Samuel Ferguson, . , 
 
 45 25 
 
 16 17 
 
 6 
 
 4 8 
 
 9 
 
 1 3 
 
 4 
 
 265 10 
 
 Samuel Todd 
 
 .54 1 32 
 
 35 5 
 
 
 
 9 5 
 
 4 
 
 2 9 
 
 
 
 554 4 
 
 Robert Crawford, . ; 
 
 60 1 30 
 
 34 18 
 
 10 
 
 9 4 
 
 5 
 
 2 8 
 
 6 
 
 548 18 
 
 Malcolm Craw.'':rd, . 
 
 14 3 22 
 
 6 10 
 
 
 
 1 14 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 102 10 
 
 Total, . 
 
 430 16 
 
 203 
 
 4 
 
 53 10 
 
 2 
 
 14 2 
 
 4 
 
 3,189 8 Oi 
 
 4846. How long ^go is that ? — About a year ago. 
 
 4847. Why didn't they take advantage of the Bright 
 clauses 1 — There is so much difficulty in. getting the 
 money from the Board of Works, and it is ham- 
 pered by so many conditions that they preferred to 
 get what money they wanted elsewhere. 
 
 4848. Had they all the money themselves ? — They 
 had not. 
 
 4849. Did they borrowit?—Thosethatrequireditdid. 
 
 4850. They considered it better to borrow the monoy 
 from private parties rather than through ,the Board 
 of Works 1 — Yes, because there are so many restrictions 
 and embarrassing regulations when borrowing from 
 the Board. 
 
 4851; Baron Dowse. — Those sales were carried out 
 by voluntary arrangetnent between Lord Cairns and 
 the tenants 't — Yes. 
 
 4852. And are they satisfied with their bargains? 
 ■ — Perfectly ; all are perfectly satisfied. 
 
 4853. You have a large quantity of land yourself? 
 • — I have ; about 336 acres. 
 
 4854. When did you purchase that ? — I purchased 
 the fee-simple of the farm I live in, eighty-six acres 
 Irish, in 1859. The rest, imder lease, &c., I acquired 
 at various times. 
 
 4855. Before the passing of the Land Act 1 — Yes. 
 
 4856. You did iiot purchase the fee simple of any 
 farm but the one ? — Nothing but the one; I got no 
 chance of purchasing the others. 
 
 4857. Mr. Shaw. — Would yoir be anxious to have 
 a chance of purchasing the others ?— Of course I would. 
 
 4858. Would the tenants in the north of Ireland 
 generally be glad to have a chance of purchasing the 
 fee of their holdings ? — They would. 
 
 4859. Would they, as a rule, be prepared to give 
 one-third of the purchase-money themselves if they 
 could borrow the remaining two-thirds ? — I think many 
 of them would, but it would be too much to ask them 
 all to do it. 
 
 4860. You think, as a rule, they ought not to be 
 asked to contribute so large a proportion cf the 
 purchase-money as one-third ? — I think so ; and there 
 would be no danger in advancing them more th^iU 
 two-thirds, for there would be ample security, and, 
 besides, the land would be improving in value every 
 year, for the tenants would not be afraid to expend 
 money and labour upon it as they are jiow. They 
 are always apprehensive now that if they do any- 
 thing to improve their farms, a valuator may be 
 sent round at the end of four or five years and 10s, 
 or 15s. an acre increased rent clapped on them. 
 
 4861. The O'Conor Don.: — Are you acquainted 
 with the circumstances of the tenants who purchased 
 their holdings from Lord Cairns 1 — I am. 
 
 4862. Could you state what proportion of the pur- 
 chase-money they had to borrow ? — Yeiy few of them 
 had to borrow any. They are all quiet living people, 
 and anything they can get they keep. 
 
 4863. Baron Dowsis. — And vou say they are sa- 
 tisfied with their purchase ?— Perfectly ; they are 
 
 exulting over it. Another little townland was sold 
 three or four years ago belongiag to Mr. Eobert 
 Agnew, of Cairncastle. It was sold by public sale at 
 Ballyclare. In that case the tenants appointed one 
 of themselves to go and purchase. They appointed 
 two valuators to go over the property and decide what 
 proportion of the purchase-money each man should 
 pay, and each tenant paid his share and also pays his 
 proportion of the head rent. 
 
 4864. That was not done through the Bright 
 clauses 1 — No, it was not. 
 
 4865. Are those tenants doing well? — They are. 
 Every one of them doing well. Some of them had to 
 borrow in order to pay their purchase-money. Those 
 that had the money without borrowing paid it down. 
 
 4866. Were they paying high rents 1 — No ; the 
 land was let at fair rents. Mr. Agnew was a reason- 
 able man. 
 
 4867. Mr. Katanagh. — In that case I understand 
 they did not purchase a fee simple ? — No. There is a 
 small head rent ; but it is a perpetuity. 
 
 4868. The 0'Co;noe Don. — Have there been any 
 other cases that you know of in which tenants purchased 
 their holdings ? — No ; those two were the only cases 
 in my district. They did not get any other chance to 
 purchase. 
 
 4869. Baron DowsE. — Do you think it a reasonable 
 regulation on the part of the Board of Works that 
 when they advance money under the Bright clauses, 
 it shall be on condition of the borrower not alienating, 
 subdividing, or subletting? — I do not. 
 
 4870. We had a case before us the other day in 
 which a man was prevented even from making his 
 will ?— Yes. 
 
 4871. You think the Board ought to be satisfied so 
 long as they have secuiity for their money 1 — I do. 
 They have ample security — for where there is tenant- 
 right on a farm, and the tenant purchases the fee from 
 the landlord, the Board has a double security — there 
 is the fee, and there is the tenant-right also. 
 
 4872. They have both the landlord's and tenant's 
 interests as security for their advance ? — Yes. 
 
 4873. Has Lord Cairns any property in Antrim, at 
 all now ? — I think not. 
 
 4874. That was a voluntary sale on his part? — It was. 
 4875., Other landlords might not be willing to sell 
 
 their Irish estates ? — They might not, and I don't think 
 they should be compelled to do so ; but if a property 
 comes into the market, I think the tenantry should 
 . get facilities to purchase, and the Government should 
 assist them to become the owners of their holdings. 
 If I owned my farm I would do far more to it than 
 if I held it under any landlord, no matter how good a 
 landlord he may be. The tenantry should get a right 
 to purchase their holdings if the estate comes into the 
 market, and the Government should assist them, and 
 then we would have peace. 
 
 4876. You would not compel a landlord to sell ? — 
 I would not. 
 
 4877. A gentleman -who was examined said that 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 183 
 
 the tenants should have a right to compel their 
 landlord to sell whether he liked it or not"? — That 
 was nonsense. 
 
 4878. You think the law should clear away all 
 difficulties if the tenants wished to buy 1 — I do, and 
 they should encouragethe tenant to purchase. There are 
 buildings andimprovenientswliichcostme£2,r)00on the 
 land I own in fee-simple ; but on my leasehold I am 
 afraid to do anything except just enough to keep it 
 going. Another thing, when it comes near the close 
 of a lease, the tenant becomes uneasy, he does not 
 know what his landlord intends to do ; he is afraid to 
 do anything or go to any expense, and he is forced to 
 run his farm down. That injures him if he gets a 
 new lease, for his farm is in poor condition, and it 
 injures the coujitry besides. 
 
 4879. Mr. Shaw. — It takes years to get it into 
 condition again ■? — It does. The farm I got was never 
 in good working order till now, for I did not know 
 how things would go on, and I let it run down, and 
 then I had to pull it up again at a heavy expense. 
 That keeps back the improvement of the country. 
 
 4880. You would be in favour of having rents fixed 
 by arbitration 1 — Certainly. 
 
 4881. And not allow the landlord to put on what 
 rent he pleases] — All I asked from the landlord 
 was to appoint a valuator and let him value it but 
 they would not do any such thing. 
 
 4882. The landlord put his own rent on 1 — Yes ; 
 and that is the way it is almost always done. On 
 some estates — Lord Donegall's for instance — the agent 
 sends a valuator who values the farm but other 
 proprietors won't do that. 
 
 4883. Of course the valuator values the farm as he 
 sees it, irrespective of whether the improvements were 
 done by the tenant or the landlord? — Yes, and the 
 rents are gradually going up. 
 
 4884. Is the land improving ? — The land is improv- 
 ing at the tenant's expense. Landlords seldom expend 
 anything. Lord Templetown has drained largely, but 
 he has done it with money borrowed from the Board 
 of Works, and he charges the expense to the tenant 
 in the rent. If he builds a house he does the same. 
 The largest farmer on the estate got a bog drained, but 
 sooner than have to pay the additional rent paid the 
 expense himself. 
 
 4885. You think the enforcing of estate rules has 
 increased since the passing of the Land Act 1 — Yes ; 
 very much. 
 
 4886. In respect of new valuations for rent ? — Yes. 
 
 4887. And restrictions on the right of sale? — yes, 
 ■and interference even at sales. 
 
 4888. Mr. Shaw. — Are the rents raised before the 
 sales? — Yes. The parties are told that the rent will 
 be increased, and then when the farm is bought they 
 add something to the rent. 
 
 4889. The rents are creeping up ? — Creeping up by 
 degrees. 
 
 4890. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you opposed altogether 
 to any restriction of the tenan-^right — I mean to any 
 limit as to price 1 — Of course I am ; why should you 
 limit the price of a man's improvements? 
 
 4891. Is it not the case that tenants are sometimes 
 apt to be reckless and ofier too much?— That is their 
 own fault and will be their own loss. 
 
 4892. Mr. Shaw. — You can't protect a fool by any 
 Act of Parliament 1 — N-o. 
 
 4893. Baron Dowse. — With reference to the ques- 
 tion asked by Mr. Kavanagh, you admit I suppose 
 that the landlord has some interest in his estate ? — 
 Undoubtedly, a large interest. 
 
 4894. And an interest in getting a good tenant for 
 it?— Yes. 
 
 4895. Would you give him no control over the sum 
 which the incoming tenant pays for the outgoing 
 tenant's interest ? — I would not give him any control. 
 It does no good, for if a man has improved his farm 
 and made it ready for another man to go into, if 
 the sale is restricted they only pass the money behind 
 
 Mr. James 
 Ferguson. 
 
 backs, so that the restriction does no gooa. It only Sejot. 21, leso 
 leads to dishonesty. 
 
 4896. Are there cases in Ulster in which the office 
 rules limit the value of tenant-right, and notwith- 
 standing the rule the money is paid underhand 1— 
 Plenty of cases. ' I am sure plenty of men could prove it. 
 
 4897. Mr. Kavanagh. — Suppose the projjer tenant- 
 right value of a farm was £10 per acre, but that by the 
 competition at the auction it went up to £25 per acre, 
 don't you think the landlord ought to have some right 
 in restricting that, for the protection of the man that 
 is coming in ? — I don't believe in it. I think a farmer 
 is like any other man, and knows the value of what he 
 is buying. It is true that in Ireland some years ago 
 it was very hard to get land, and there was great com- 
 petition for it, but it is less now. 
 
 4898. Then in your opinion is it not true that 
 farmers will recklessly bid extravagant prices for farms ? 
 — Not at all. 
 
 4899. And that sometimes they will bid for it with- 
 out having the money, and then go and borrow the 
 price ? — -I never knew a man to buy a farm that had 
 not some of the money to pay for it-^it would be very 
 hard to borrow the ^hole of it. 
 
 4900. Have you heard of their borrowing a consider- 
 able portion of it 1 — ^Yes ; and I have heard of their 
 paying off the loans too. 
 
 4901. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think it would be easy 
 for a man to borrow money if he gave thirty years 
 purchase for a farm that was only worth fifteen ? — I 
 don't think he could, for I know the banks won't lend 
 money unless they see there is value for it, nor money 
 lenders either. They take good care to have a margin. 
 
 4902. You say you find rents are often raised either 
 on a revaluation of the estate, on sales of estates, on 
 the termination of leases, or when the landlord gets into 
 difficulties ? — Jiast so, as often then as at any other 
 time. I know farmers now who for the first time in 
 their lives are not a,ble to pay their rents, although these 
 very rents were attempted to be raised ten years ago. 
 
 4903. Owing to the rise ? — ^Yes, and the bad times. 
 
 4904. This is a good year I suppose and things will 
 get better ? — I don't believe it is as good as people say. 
 
 4905. Is flax grown in your neighbourhood much ? — 
 It i-s. 
 
 4906. Chaieman. — In the case of purchases by ten- 
 ants you do not approve of their being allowed to. sub- 
 divide 1 — I do not. I do not approve of very small 
 holdings. I think Mr. Owens, a gentleman residing 
 in our neighbourhood, made a great mistake lately. 
 A small farm on his estate was sold to a neighbouring 
 farmer at £360, but he would not accept him as a 
 tenant because he would not come and live on ten and 
 a half acres of land, but he would have made a first 
 rate tenant, and would have farmed well. 
 
 4907. Mr. Kavanagh. — Did the purchaser live on 
 the estate ? — He did not ; and that was the reason he 
 was not accepted, but I think it was a mistake. 
 
 4908. Mr. Shaw. -^ You don't consider it a good 
 reason ? — I do not. 
 
 4909. Mr. Kavanagh. — What in your opinion is 
 the smallest farm a man and his family could well 
 '■ '.ve on ? — That is very difficult to answer. There is 
 so much difference in the quality of land, and so 
 much depends upon the man himself, and still more 
 upon his wife. 
 
 4910. But assuming them to be the average what 
 would you say should be the smallest size of farm ? — 
 I think the very lowest should be twenty acres where 
 a man has to pay a rent. 
 
 4911. Mr, Shaw. — If under twenty acres, would 
 you give him a much smaller quantity, say two or three 
 acres, upon which he could employ himself occasionally 
 and also support himself partly by working as a la- 
 bourer ? — Yes. 1 think it would be very useful that 
 labourers should have a small piece of ground which 
 they could cultivate, but the generality of landlords are 
 against it. 
 
 4912. What wages do you give your labourers ? — 
 I give them permanent employment at 10s. and lis. 
 
184 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 21, 1880 
 
 Mr. James 
 Ferguson. 
 
 a week, witli a house and garden. I also give tliem 
 potato land and plant it for them at my own expense. 
 I give one man 1 4s. 
 
 4913. Chairman. — Are tlie cottiers in your neigh- 
 bourhood allowed to keep poultry 1 — They are, gener- 
 ally speaking. 
 
 4914. Baron Dowse. — If you give the tenant the 
 right of selling his interest would you allow the land- 
 lord any veto as to the purchaser ? — I would, of course, 
 allow him a right to olbject on reasonable grounds. 
 
 4915. Would it be a reasonable ground of objection, 
 in you.r opinion, if the person was not solvent? — It 
 would, of course. 
 
 4916. Suppose a tenant had paid away all h is money 
 in purchasing the farm and had not enough left to 
 enable him to cultivate it j>roperly, what would you 
 say ? — That would not be an insolvent man. An in- 
 solvent man would be a man who had a load of debt 
 upon him. If a man had enough money to purchase 
 the tenant-right of his farm, he would have no diffi- 
 culty in getting capital to work it. 
 
 4917. Mr. Shaw. — He would have credit enough 
 to procure capital ? — Certainly. 
 
 4918. Even business men and merchants, do the 
 same thing soihetimes 1 — They do, of course. 
 
 Mr. W. 
 
 Sinclair Boyd. 
 
 Mr. W. Sinclair Boyd, of Belfast, examined. 
 
 4919. Chairman. — I belie s-e you can give the Com- 
 mission a case arising within your own knowledge of 
 the working of the Land Act ? — Yes ; it is a case in 
 which I was interested myself. 
 
 4920. Kindly mention to the Commission what you 
 are 1 — I am a merchant and an underwriter. I also own 
 some land, and I hold land as a" tenant, and farm 
 it myself. 
 
 4921. What was the case to which you refer? — It 
 was the case of the lands of Bloomfield, in the county 
 Down. My father took a lease of it under the Court 
 of Chancery in the year 1845. 
 
 4922. Who was the landlord ?— The Court of Chan- 
 cery acting, for the present Mr. John Cleland, who was a 
 minor at the time. 
 
 4923. What was the length of the lease ? — It was a 
 seven years lease. My father continued in possession 
 as tenant from year to year until Mr. Cleland attained 
 his majority, and for some two or three years after the 
 majority, pending new arrangements. During that 
 time he laid out £7,000 in draining, reclaiming, and 
 building, with the knowledge of, and encouraged by, 
 the guardian of the minor and receiver over the jjro- 
 perty, who led my lather to expect that his tonant- 
 right in it would be i-ecogiiized. It was in the full belief 
 that it would be recognized that he laid out his money. 
 
 4924. The O'Conor Don.— Was this before the 
 passing of the Land Act? — Yes; it was in 1845 he 
 commenced occupation on a lease for seven years. 
 After that he remained in occupation two or three 
 years, awaiting Mr. Oleland's majority, and after the 
 majority he continued for a couple of years more, wait- 
 ing new arrangements, whicli brought it down to 
 1856. In that year valuators came round re- valuing 
 the property. My father asked them what instructions 
 they had received^ did they require him to point out 
 his outlay and expenditure on the land. They said 
 no, that they were merely to estimate the value of the 
 land as it stood, and that the matter of the tenant's 
 outlay was outside their department and would be 
 dealt with otherwise. The original rent of the entire 
 holding was £500 ; the holding embraced 230 acres. 
 It had not originally, at the time it -was first taken, 
 embraced so mucli, but my father added to it by pur- 
 chasing some adjoining holdings. The rent put on by 
 the valuators was £750, and my iather received his 
 choice, either to surrender the iarm or take a lease at 
 that rent, which was an increase of fifty per cent. 
 
 4925. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres were in it 1 — - 
 230 statute acres. My father considered £750 the 
 full rent — the full letting value without any considera- 
 tion for his outlay of £7,000 — buthe took it rather than 
 leave the money that he had expended behind him. 
 
 4926. Chairman. — What was the term of the lease ? 
 — Twenty-one years. 
 
 4927. Mr. Shaw. — Was it near the town of Bel' 
 fast ? — Yes ; it was immediately outside the borough 
 boundary. At that time Belfast was a small place 
 compared to what it is now. Not many years after 
 the lease was taken out Belfast raj)idly increased, and 
 the ground became valuable for building purposes, 
 which it was not at the time I speak of. 
 
 4928. The lease expired in 1877 ?— In 1879, Ithink. 
 
 4929. I thought you said it was for twenty-one 
 years, commencing in 1856 ? — ISTo. I think the nego- 
 tiations went on a considerable time, and the lease 
 was not taken out until 1858, owing to the tenant's 
 reluctance to submit to the advanced rent. The land 
 became valuable for building purposes. My father had 
 a lease for twenty-one years, and the result was that 
 neither the landlord nor he could avail themselves of 
 the increased value of the land for building. I was 
 then of an age to take an active part in the arrange- 
 me nt, and my fatlier, being an old man, I conduced 
 the negotiation with the landlord myself. I proposed 
 an arrangement to enable the increased value for 
 building purposes to be availed of, that we would sell 
 our interest in the lease to the landlord, or come to 
 any other arrangement that he might think right to 
 enter into. He declined, giving as his reason that by 
 holding on for ten or fifteen years, until the expira- 
 tion of the lease, the increased value would probably 
 continue, and he would be compensated. So matters 
 went on, until the Land Act was passed. I then re- 
 newed the negotiation, and I pointed out that we were 
 now in an altered position — that when the lease termi- 
 nated we would have a claim of some description which 
 could not be ignored. The landlord admitted, quite 
 frankly, that we were not now in the same position as 
 before, and we entered into negotiations in which 
 powers were given to us to give leases for 10,000 
 years. 
 
 4930. At an increased rent 1 — Yes. We were 
 allowed a certain number of years in which we could 
 call upon the landlord to gi-ant leases to us or our 
 nominees, for portions of the land at a fixed rent of 
 £12 per acre, so that anything we could make over 
 and above that would be our profit. In some cases 
 we got considerably more, and, in consideration of get- 
 ting that power, we undertook to give up the residue 
 at the termination of our agricultural lease, and not to 
 make any claim under the Land Act. 
 
 4931. Mr. Si-iAW.^Then, in fact, the Land Act was 
 a benefit to you ? — It was a great benefit to us, for, 
 pending our lease, the Land Act came in, and gave an 
 interest to us which had previously been ignored. 
 
 4932. Had your right to compensation for improve- 
 ments been barred by the lease ? — There was consider- 
 able doubt on that question as to the lease barring the 
 improvements. It was at a very early stage after the 
 Act had passed, and there were legal opinions on both 
 sides, but at all events the Act gave us sufficient stand 
 point to enable us to make the compromise. 
 
 4933. Chairman. — On the whole you were satisfied 
 with the compromise ? — Yes, owing to the way in 
 which Belfast had increased, and the land having be- 
 come valuable for building, we had an opportunity of 
 recouping ourselves, and we are at no loss now. 
 
 4934. Do you consider that there would have been 
 tenant-right under the lease? — That is a very doubt- 
 ful question. The tenant-right was ignored in 1858, 
 and, on the whole, I did not see how we could establish 
 that it was subject to tenant-right in the face of the 
 fact that it was ignored in our own case, our case being 
 the largest on the estate, and the one on which almost 
 the whole outlay on the estate was made. We looked 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 185 
 
 upon it that -what occurred in 1858 would go a long 
 way against us. 
 
 .4935. The acceptance of the lease would have been 
 a fact against you 1 — Yes ; it would be evidence that 
 there was no custom of tenant-right on the estate, in- 
 asmuch as we ourselves had not got the benefit of it in 
 1858. In my own opinion tenant-right did exist on 
 the estate formerly, in a rnore or less recognized form, 
 but it was destroyed on the majority of the present 
 landlord. 
 
 4936. You were only tenants pending his minority'! 
 — Yes. The fact of the large outlay, £7,000, being 
 made on the faith of tenant-right, shows that it must 
 have existed to some extent. 
 
 4937. Is it your opinion that the Bright clauses of 
 the Act ought to be extended to all residential owneis 
 of land 1 — Yes ; the only difficulty I have about it 
 is the matter of subdivision. I think that if the 
 Bright clauses were extended, and largely availed of, 
 we would need some means of checking subdivision, 
 otherwise I fear in some parts of the country subdivi- 
 sion would proceed to a very undesirable extent. 
 
 4938. Mr. Shaw.— There weuld be no fear of that 
 in the north I suppose ? — I fear that in the north even 
 there would be subdivision of agricultural holdings, as 
 distinguished from other descriptions of property. ■ 
 
 4939. Farms are small already in the north 1 — They 
 are, but there has always been on the part of landlords 
 a strong opposition to subdivision, and I am greatly 
 afraid that if tenants owned the land themselves, and 
 could subdivide as much as tliey liked, it would go on 
 to an injiirious extent. At present, owing to the oppo- 
 sition against it, the younger sons generally emigrate, 
 or seek some other employment, and farms are not 
 subdivided, but if a father could subdivide as much as 
 he pleased, I fear every son would get a share. 
 
 4940. Chairman. — In the notes which you furnished 
 to us, you mention the Bright clauses as applicable to 
 residential owners of town properties. I wished to 
 ask you whether you think the Bright clauses ought 
 to be extended to them " — I think it would be desir- 
 able to encourage a different class of people from any 
 now usually owning house property, as well as other 
 classes of property in this countiy. If you could get 
 small clerks, tradesmen, and the better class of 
 labourers to become the owners of the houses they live 
 in it would be desirable. 
 
 4941. Do you mean houses actually in a town, or 
 in the neighbourhood of towns? — I speak more parti- 
 cularly of houses in the neighbourhood of towns. 
 
 4942. Mr. Shaw. — Do not building societies effect 
 that object to a great extent, of enabling persons to be- 
 come owners of the houses they live in 1 — They do in 
 England and Scotland, but not so much in Ireland. In 
 this country I fear building societies have had a rather 
 prejudicial effect, in some cases, on the community, by 
 enabling a class of builders called " Jerry builders " to 
 erect a poor class of houses, built merely to sell. 
 
 4943. Chair.man. — You do not confine your obser- 
 vations to villas in the neighbourhood of towns 1 — No. 
 I think it would have a good' effect in this country if we 
 could get this class of people whether in or out of a town 
 to become owners of the houses they live in. There is a 
 kindred Act of Parliament in that respect to the Bright 
 clauses of the Land Act — " The Labourers' Dwellings 
 and Lodgings Act " — which does give facilities for the 
 erection of houses for labourers. I think if something 
 in that direction was done for a class not exactly 
 labourers it would be beneficial. 
 
 4944. Do you think it is necessary for that purpose 
 that tenants for life and other limited owners should 
 have power to grant perpetuity leases 1 — I do not see 
 liow it could be done otherwise. At present they often 
 are without those powers, or have them in such a form 
 as to make it impracticable. I am aware of a case 
 where a tenant for life held under a settlement which 
 obliged him if he granted leases to grant them " at the 
 highest rent." It did not merely oblige him not to 
 accept of fines, but he was bound to insist on the 
 "highest rent," and thus there would always beaques- 
 
 Mr. William 
 Sinclair Boyd. 
 
 tion afterwards wliether he in fact got " the highest Sept. 21, I88O, 
 rent " or not, and there would be a doubt on the title 
 for all time afterwards. 
 
 4945. Would you think it right that there should 
 be a compulsory power for tenants to purchase their 
 holdings from the landlord, or would you only enable 
 them to purchase when an estate came into the mar- 
 ket 1 — I would not be prepared to go the length of 
 saying there should be compulsory power for tenants 
 to purchase their holdings. I can scarcely see the 
 justice of that. 
 
 4946. Would you confine it to cases where land- 
 lords were willing to sell 1 — Yes. I would confine it 
 to cases whore the estate was already in the market. 
 
 4947. And in such cases you would give every 
 facility for tenants to purchase their holdings? — 
 Precisely. 
 
 4948. Do you know of any difficulties at present in 
 the working of the Bright clauses of the Land Act 
 which prevent their being taken advantage of as 
 extensively as they otherwise would be 1 — There are 
 certain rules of the Board of Works. I do not think 
 they are rendered compulsory by the Act itself, but 
 the Board of Works' rules are very stringent against 
 alienation, subdivision, and assignment ; the money is 
 advanced on very stringent and severe terms in that 
 respect, and the conditions last during the entire term 
 of the loan. 
 
 4949. Baron Dowse. — Those conditions were not 
 imposed by the Board of Works, they a,re in the Aet 
 itself 1 — I looked at the Act, but I find the Board o: 
 Woi-ks' rules are even more stringent than the Act. 
 
 4950. The Act says :— 
 
 "No purchaser, or person deriving title through him, of 
 any holding to whom any advance has been made under this 
 section shall, without the consent of tlic Board, alienate, 
 assign, sub-divide, or sub-let his holding during such time 
 as any part of the annuity charged on such holding remains 
 unpaid." 
 
 The Act says they shall not subdivide, assign, or 
 sub-let without the consent of the Board ? — Yes, and 
 the Board of Works say they never will consent, so 
 that the Board are really more stringent than the 
 Act. It appears absurd to adhere to such conditions 
 for the entire period of the loan, even to the thirty- 
 ninth or fortieth year. 
 
 4951. Especially as the Board has a first charge? — 
 Yes ; unless it was an unduly liberal advance in the 
 first instance, the Board ought to be perfectly safe at 
 the end of the first five years, for the security is im- 
 proving every year. Yet the Board positively refuse 
 to enter into an arrangement, fixing a time at 
 which they will allow it. In a case of my own. I 
 asked them the question for my own information, and 
 they absolutely refused to name anytime whatever 
 at which they would relax their rules, but thst for the 
 entire forty years the conditions should remain in 
 force. 
 
 4952. The O'Conoe Don Was that a case in 
 
 which you were yourself becoming a purchaser ? — It 
 was. I may mention that I did not purchase ; but 
 even when I saw that the negotiation was not likely 
 to be carried out, I went on with my inquiries for my 
 own information. 
 
 ^ 4953. Chairman.— Would you put a limit on the 
 size of the holdings that might be purchased in this 
 manner by State advances? — If it could be done I 
 
 would rather limit the subdivision of holdings not 
 
 the size at which they might be purchased, but the 
 extent to which they might be subdivided afterwards. 
 
 4954. You thiirk there should be a clause against 
 subdivision, below a certain amount ? — I am not sure 
 how it could be best worked out, for the subdivision 
 that would do harm would not be immediate sub- 
 division, but perhaps in forty years hereafter. If there 
 could be any plan devised that would check subdivision 
 in the future, I think it would be desirable. 
 
 4955. Baron Dowse.— The Act of Parliament only 
 prohibits subdivision during the continuance of the 
 loan ? — That is all, but I think there might be 
 
 some 
 
 2 B 
 
186 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 31, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Sinclair Boyd. 
 
 condition annexed to the title imposing a check on 
 subdivision. 
 
 4956. It was suggested the other day, by Mr. 
 Kavanagh, that it might be done by making it part of 
 the original contract that the tenant should hold in 
 perpetuity, paying a rent say of Is. a year, with a 
 clause against subdivision ? — I suppose it might be 
 worked out in that way. I suppose there is no diffi- 
 culty of that kind that might not by ingenuity be got 
 over in one way or other. 
 
 4957. But, after all, when a farm becomes a man's 
 property, is there any reason why he should not, in 
 a case of this kind, be allowed to do as he likes with it ? 
 —I fear that unless there was some check the tendency 
 in this country would be to carry subdivision beyond 
 the point at which it would be desirable. 
 
 4958. Mr. Kayanagh. — You would object to see a 
 
 whole county cut up into little bits and inhabited by 
 a starving population ? — I would. I think the land- 
 lords in Ireland have been useful in checking sub- 
 division ; they perhaps have not checked it sufficiently 
 in every part of the country, but in the north of 
 Ireland, as a rule, they have kept a tight hand upon 
 subdivision, 
 
 4059. Baron Dowse. — You are of opinion that a 
 peasant proprietary would not be advantageous if the 
 I'esult was to cut up the country into little patches to 
 such an extent that no family could live on them 1 — I 
 am. I think perhaps it would be all right for the pre- 
 sent, but that we would be laying up trouble for future 
 generations. 
 
 [The Commissioners acfjourned till the following 
 morning.] 
 
 Sept, 22, 1880.' 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 
 Shillington, 
 jutir. 
 
 TENTH DAY— WEDNESDAY, 22nd SEPTEMBEK, 1S80. 
 
 The Commissioners resumed the Inquiry at the Imperial Hotel, Belfast. 
 
 Present : — The Eight Hon. the Earl of Bessboeough, Chairman ; Right Hon. Baron Dowse, 
 The O'CoNOR Don, Arthur MacMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., Willia.m Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Shillington, junr. 
 
 4960. Chairjian. — What is your profession? — A 
 linen manufacturer. 
 
 4961. Are you a farmer also? — Not now. T have 
 been a farmer. 
 
 4962. You are a member of the county Armagh 
 Tenant Farmers' Association 1 — Yes, I am Chairman 
 of it. 
 
 4963. Please state your ■views with reference to the 
 present position of the tenant-right question ? — The 
 relations of landlord and tenant as they exist in the 
 north of Ireland are strained and unsatisfactory as far 
 as the tenants are concerned. The tenant under the 
 present law is so entirely under the control of his 
 landlord, that he cannot bargain with him freely and 
 fairly as to his rent or the condition of his holding. 
 The tenant as a i-ule has made all the improvements 
 that have rendered the land available for 
 purposes. The landlord contributes towards 
 
 letting 
 the 
 
 cultivation oi the soil only liberty to cultivate it. It 
 has come about in connexion with the Ulster custom, 
 and the settlement of Ulster, that whether right or 
 wrong, the tenants think they have an interest in the 
 improvements they have made, and also in their good 
 will of the holding, which they consider to be two 
 separate interests. 
 
 4964. These two interests constitute tenant-right? 
 — Yes. The good will they consider consists in the 
 terms on which Ulster was settled originally, whereby 
 the tenant was placed there for the purpose of culti- 
 vating the soil, and holding the country. 
 
 4964a. Were the tenants placed there oii-iiially as 
 tenants from year to year or under leases ? — Not under 
 leases, nor as tenants from year to year. They were 
 settlers ; they were brought to this country chiefly to 
 settle the country, consequently that is inconsistent 
 with a from year-to-year tenancy. The rent at which 
 the land was originally let, and continued to be held, 
 was below its marketable value if the land had been 
 culti-\'ated and settled. Under these circumstances 
 there has grown up what is considered the good will 
 of the Ulster tenant-right custom. 
 
 4965. Represented by the diflPerence between a 
 moderate rent and the full value ? — Yes. 
 
 4966. That constitutes the good will, and was not 
 secured at all before the Land Act? — It was not 
 secured at all before the Land Act. Since the Land 
 Act it has been secured partially, but the operation of 
 the Land Act has not prevented the adv-ance of rents, 
 which has reduced the value of the good will in the 
 market. 
 
 4967. The Land Act gave a certain number of years' 
 rent for disturbance, and gave the tenant the value of 
 
 of Altavilla, Portadown, examined. 
 
 the improvements ? — That was under the general 
 clauses of the Land Act, but if he claimed under the 
 Ulster custom he could get merely the selling value of 
 the tenant-right. If he claimed iinder the disturbance 
 clauses of the Act, it is a certain number of years' rent, 
 or the valuation of his improvements. 
 
 4968. In what manner was the value of tenant- 
 right iinder the Ulster custom ascertained ? — By open 
 sale, generally held on the holding. 
 
 4969. Suppose a landlord did not allow an open sale, 
 how was it ascertained? — By gomg into the Land 
 Court and having the vakie assessed. 
 
 4970. By the evidence of valuators and other 
 persons ? — ^Yes. 
 
 4971. I see in the mmute of your evidence you 
 state that the tenant is entitled to treat as his own 
 all the increased letting value of the land from its 
 original letting value, minus such increase as results 
 from any difference in the prices of produce ? — 
 Pi-ecisely. 
 
 4972. Do you consider that should be a permanent 
 rent in perpetuity, or that tliere should be variations 
 in the rent ? — There should be variations according to 
 the difference in the prices of produce. 
 
 4973. Would you have that done at pieriodical 
 times ? — Yes ; at fixed periods. 
 
 4974. Your next observation is upon cases that 
 ariso under different landlords, some being more 
 lenient than others ? — Yes. There is a great variety 
 in the rents charged for the same description of land, 
 at least, in the county Armagh. I can give some 
 illustrations of it. On one estate in the neighbour- 
 hood of Portadown the rent is from 18s. to 21s. the 
 statute acre, and on that estate tenant-right is unre- 
 stricted, sale and disposal of the tenant's interest is 
 acknowledged and allowed, not only so, but the land- 
 lady contributes towards permanent buildings all the 
 materials. If a farmer wants his offices rebuilt she 
 supplies slates, stone, and lime, and he does the re- 
 mainder. On another estate in the neighbourhood 
 of the town there are no contributions made by the 
 landlord towards improvements, but the rent is mo- 
 derate — from 19s. to 34«. the English acre. On that 
 estate, however, the lents have been lately raised. 
 On another estate of precisely similar land, and imme- 
 diately adjoining the last, the rents are from 26s. to 
 60s. the English acre ; and on another adjacent to that 
 from 24s. to 40s. This is all for land similarly 
 situated, and all supposed to be subject to the Ulster 
 custom. 
 
 4975. I suppose- that on these various estates with 
 tliese variations of rent, the price of the tenant- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 1S7 
 
 right varies accordingly 1 — It varies proportionally to 
 tlie rent ; and according to the character and opinion 
 which the farmers have of the agent and of the land- 
 lord, which materially affects the price. This uiicer- 
 tainty of rent and the power of the landlord to raise 
 it we consider contribute veiy largely to the impov- 
 erishing of the land, and preventing its further 
 development. 
 
 4976. Referring to the case you mention, where 
 timber, slates, and lime were given by the landlord, 
 how is that recouped to the landlord 1 Is the rent 
 increased 1 — There is no increase in the rent ; that 
 appears to be a condition of the tenancy. 
 
 4977. But I suppose there would be an increase 
 on a revaluation 1 — There have been no revaluations 
 on that estate for a long time, and there is none pro- 
 posed as far as we can learn. 
 
 4978. Yfould you think it reasonable, supposing 
 there were a revaluation of rent, that that should be 
 taken into account ? — Yes ; I consider it reasonable 
 that any improvements which the landlord can prove 
 to hg,ve been made by him should be taken as' the 
 basis of an additional rent to what is a fair and easy 
 rent. I believe some means should be taken to re- 
 gister such improvements so as to prevent disputes 
 about them. 
 
 4979. Do j-QU observe in cases where the landlords 
 seem inclined to enforce their rights, there is greater 
 difficulty in the improvement of the land by the 
 tenants ? — I do. The condition of those four estates 
 which I have mentioned is an illustration of it. Any 
 one driving through them could easily understand the 
 different conditions under which the tenants hold the 
 land. In one case the farms are neat, trim, and well 
 cultivated. In the other slovenly and neglected ; and 
 I know the condition of the tenants varies in the 
 same way. 
 
 4980. Cou.ld you mention where those four proper- 
 ties are situated ] — In the neighbourhood of Poita- 
 down. One is the estate of Mrs. Bacon, of Bichhill, 
 the secpnd is Major Blacker's, the third is the Duke 
 of Manchester's, and the last is Lord Lurgan's. 
 
 4981. I think Major Blacker has in some cases 
 charged more than the highest figure you have men- 
 tioned t — Yes ; I have left out of consideration all 
 lands that could fairly be called townparks, as I do 
 not consider they come under the denomination of 
 agricultural holdings. As an illustration of the un- 
 certainty under which tenants hold their lands, I may 
 mention the Duke of Manchester some years ago put 
 a notice on his rent receipts as follows : — " No tenant 
 to make permanent improvements, but if necessaiy the 
 office will do so and charge the tenant five per cent, 
 on the outlay in addition to his rent." As a matter 
 of fact, I do not think there have been three cases in 
 a period of twenty years in which improvements have 
 been made by the Duke of Manchester. I know two 
 cases in which applications were made for improve- 
 ments which evidently were necessary, and they were 
 not made. I produce one of the receipts to the tenants, 
 showing the memorandum on the back. That rule is 
 many years in existence. 
 
 4982. It was before the Land Act 1 — Long before 
 tlie Land Act. 
 
 4983. And no change was made after the Land 
 Act ] — None. On one of those estates the agent made 
 a rule that land should not be sold above £5 an acre. 
 He varied that in some cases to £10, and then reduced 
 it to £5 again. I was personally interested in one 
 case, in v-^hich a small farm for wliich £13 an acre had 
 been given for a lease, the rent in which was 31s. or 
 32s. On the fall of the lease the rent was raised to 
 £3, and it remains at £3. It was sold about four or 
 five . yeai's ago, but the agent refused permission to 
 sell except through the office, and at £5 per acre. 
 
 4984. What is the name of that property ? — It is 
 the Duke of Manchester's. In that case the outgoing 
 and incoming tenant agreed between themselves to 
 give £120 for fifteen acres, £5 of which was paid 
 through the office, and the remainder passed privately. 
 
 4985. Privately? — Yes; that is an ordinary prac- 
 tice on estates where such a rule exists. ■ As an illus- 
 tration of the exorbitant rents we are charged, a 
 portion of that land and some others was lately sold 
 by auction by the Duke of Manchester for non-payment 
 of rent. It sold for 30s. 5d. per English acre on foot 
 in the month of August. It was sold in 23 small 
 lots, and the average price it produced was 30s. 5c?. 
 per acre. The farmer ad joining is still paying £3 
 per English acre. Another great difficulty farmers 
 have is apprehension and uncertainty as to the 
 character of their future landlord in case of a 
 change of landlords. So much depends on the land- 
 lord's chai'acter, and the sort of man he is, that 
 I believe operates seriously to the injury of the 
 farmer and of the country. 
 
 4986. Is it your opinion that the Land Act has had 
 a beneficial effect? — I believe the Land Act has been 
 beneficial as far as it has legalised the Ulster custom, 
 and secured to the tenant the value of his improve- 
 ments and good will. It has stimulated the outlay of 
 capital, and I believe it has also conduced to a more 
 careful cultivation of the soil. 
 
 4987. Do you think it has checked unfair variation 
 of rent f — I do not. I think it does not operate to 
 prevent unfair advance of rent. There are sevei'al 
 circumstances taken advantage of by landlords to 
 advance rents. On one of the estates I have named 
 it is an invariable custom, on a change of tenaAcy, to 
 increase the rent. 
 
 4988. Say which estate, if you have no objection I — 
 I do not like to mention so many names, but it is Lord 
 Lurgan's estate I allude to. On that estate it is an 
 invariable practice on a change of tenancy to advance 
 the rent. If a man dies, and his son comes in to get 
 his name put in the book, there is a small advance 
 made in the rent. If a man wants to sell, the rent is 
 raised. The result is, the purchaser not unfrequently 
 refuses to complete the bargain. There are thirty 
 tenants on one townland, the great majority of whose 
 rents have been raised on the change of tenancy, and 
 even on the mere passing of a farm from a father to 
 son, or from husband to widow. 
 
 4989. "Withiu what jseriod of time 1 — Some as far, 
 back as twelve or fourteen years, but principally since 
 the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 4990. Then the custom existed before the Land 
 Act ? — I do not know that the custom existed until 
 the agitation took place in reference to the Land Act. 
 I think about 1869 is the first instance I have. 
 
 4991. You consider it was in connexion with the 
 Land Act or the proceedings before the Land Act 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 4992. You consider that revaluation of rent when 
 made should be at fixed periods rather than at uncer- 
 tain periods or changes of tenancy? — Yes. I have 
 already given lists of the different rents charged for 
 the same class of holdings. My observation and ex- 
 perience lead me to the conclusion that at the present 
 i-ents the farmers cannot make a livelihood. I speak 
 of the average rents in Armagh. 
 
 4993. Do you speak in reference to tho average 
 prices and the average produce of the last few years ? 
 — I speak of the produce of the last ten years, and the 
 average price of labour and taxes. I am quite sure 
 the land is becoming impoverished and yielding less 
 produce, because the tenant cannot afford the outlay 
 sufficient for its proper cultivation. 
 
 4994. Do you think that arises from the tenants 
 being impoverished or from what you referred to 
 before — the feeling of insecurity? — From both. In, 
 former years they laid out more in cultivating the 
 land than they are doing now. As an illustration' of 
 it, in Portadown we have an immense hay and straw- 
 market for exportation for the last few years. This 
 was nearly all consumed on the land previously, but 
 now every penny's worth the farmer can raise off his 
 land he turns into money — he is forced to do so. 
 
 4995. Do you think a period of ten years would be a 
 
 2 B 2 
 
 Sept. 22, Wao. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Sliillington, 
 junr. 
 
188 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 22,1880. fair basis of prices on which to found a new valua- 
 jj. ~ tion t — Well, though we have said ten years in the 
 
 Shillinffton memorandum we furnished to you, I am not prepared 
 iunr. to say that ten years should exactly be the period ; 
 
 all we say is a periodical revision shoiild take place. 
 
 4996. You have offered some recommendations as 
 to alterations you think required in the land laws? — 
 Yes. From many inquiries I have made amongst the 
 farmers, I think it will be found on a fair computation 
 of the tenants' expenses that two-thirds or three- 
 fourths of the present tenement valuation is as much 
 as he can afford to pay unless he' pays a rent on his 
 own industry and capital. 
 
 4997. I believe the tenement valuation is not con- 
 sidered here any more than in other parts of Ireland 
 a real criterion of letting value 1 — I do not consider 
 the tenement valuation a criterion, because it is a 
 valuation made on the condition of the land as it then 
 existed, which included the improvements made by 
 the tenant, and therefore it is not a fair standard upon 
 which to base the rent and was not intended for that 
 purpose. I might, perhaps, state some of the amend- 
 ments which we suggest. We suggest that the 
 power of settlement and entail should be abolished 
 and land subjected to the same laws with reference 
 to its disposal as jiersonal property. We recommend 
 that some provision should be made for its cheap 
 and easy transfer. We think provision should be 
 made for bringing the Bright clauses of the Act 
 into more general operation by entrusting their, ad- 
 ministration to a Commission whose business it should 
 be to make it easy for the tenant to purchase. 
 
 4998. Have jou any experience of sales to ten- 
 ants under the Church Commission 1 — Not personally, 
 but I know many oases of such sales in which the 
 tenants are doing well and which have turned out 
 satisfactory. There have been only four or five sales 
 in the neighbourhood of Portadown. I would make 
 compulsory the sale of estates the property of Corpo- 
 rations, siich as the London Companies, and so alter 
 the law as to make it the interest of non-resident 
 landlords to sell to their tenants. 
 
 4999. What legislation would you suggest with that 
 object ? — I am not prepared to say. 
 
 ■ 5000. You only throw it out as a suggestion? — 
 Yes. I would also define the Ulster custom and call 
 it " custom," not " customs," substitute the singular 
 for the plural. The definition which is accepted 
 amongst us is in the shortest language — " continued 
 occupancy at an easy rent and unrestricted right of 
 disposal." 
 
 5001. You recommend that being established by a 
 new statutory enactment, not a continuance of the 
 present system, but under a statutory holding 1 — Yes, 
 to have it established under a new law. 
 
 5002. Making it a continued occupancy under the 
 conditions you have mentioned 1 — Precisely. 1 would 
 also provide a cheap and ready method for testing, 
 through arbitrators, and on the basis of a new tene- 
 ment valuation, what is the easy and fair rent of any 
 holding. 
 
 5003. You have said already, I think, that you 
 would in your new valuation take into consideration 
 what may be called the special circumstances con- 
 nected with the holding as regards the interest of the 
 landlord and tenant t — Certainly. As a matter of 
 fact in Ulster the improvements have been invariably 
 with very few exceptions made by the tenant. I 
 would give the landlord power to register any improve- 
 ments he can prove to have been made at his expense. 
 Of course for all such a fair return in the shape of rent 
 should be made to him. 
 
 5004. And also you say there should be a change in 
 rent on account of alteration of prices ? — Yes. I will 
 come to that in a moment. I would in this valuation 
 take into account access to markets, means of transit, 
 and any other circumstances affecting the letting value 
 of the land generally. I would make a valuation of 
 three distinct matters and set them otit in three dis- 
 tinct columns, 
 
 5005. Baron DowsE.^You are speaking of the 
 general valuation? — Yes; this is our proposal for a 
 new tenement valuation. The first column should set 
 out the letting value of the soil, taking into account 
 the sub-soil and sub-stratum, including natural drain- 
 age, elevation, and aspect, but excluding all letting 
 value arising under column two. In the second 
 column I would set the lettmg value of fences, drain- 
 age (artificial), and all permanent agricultural improve- 
 ments, but not including unexhausted manures. In 
 the third column I would set out the letting value of 
 buildings and farm roads, all county-roads being exclu- 
 ded. In the fourth column I would set out a propor- 
 tion of the sum of columns 1, 2 and 3 for the purposes 
 of taxation. I would have a periodical revision made 
 of columns 1 and 2 on the basis of the corn averages 
 of the previous (so many) years as now ascertained 
 under authority of Parliament, and an annual revision 
 of columns 3 and 4. Column 1 to be the basis of the 
 calculation of a fair and easy rent. Column 2 to be 
 the basis on which compensation should be assessed on 
 disturbance. Column 4 to be the basis of taxation. 
 Pteferring to registration of improvements by land- 
 lord, I think it would be fair that the presumption 
 should be in the absence of such registration that all 
 improvements belonged to the tenant. 
 
 5006. On the ground that it would be more easy 
 for the landlord to effect registration than the tenant ? 
 — Yes — on the ground that the landlord keeps books, 
 and the tenant as a I'ule does not, and the landlord 
 can prove facts and the tenant cannot. 
 
 5007. Do you propose that the registration should 
 be in the court ? — Yes ; in the Land Court. 
 
 5008. Baron Dowse. — Such is the presumption now 
 under the Land Act, except in certain cases ? — Yes ; 
 it is the presumption theoretically, but not in practice. 
 There is another part to which I wish to refer. I 
 would abolish all exceptional powers for recovery of 
 rent, and make the rent a debt to be recovered by 
 law, the same as any other debt. 
 
 5009. Chairman. — You mean you would abolish 
 the right of recovery of rent by ejectment and distress t 
 — Yes, I would make rent simply a debt, recoverable 
 like any other debt by ordinary process of law. 
 
 5010. Baron Dowse. — You would abolish all ex- 
 ceptional powers, and put the landlord in the same 
 position as any other creditor ? — Yes. 
 
 5011. Would you not allow him the remedy of 
 ejectment in case of non-payment of rent 1 — I would. 
 
 5012. That is you would allow him an ejectment to 
 get possession of the land ? — To get possession of the 
 land, certainly. 
 
 5013. But with regard to recovery of rent you 
 would not put him in a better position than any other 
 creditor ? — I would not. 
 
 5014. You are aware that according to the law at 
 present in an action of ejectment, a landlord may 
 include a claim for rent as a debt — ^yon would not 
 allow him to do that ? — I would not give him any 
 special advantage — I would let him sue for it like any 
 other creditor. 
 
 5015. And you would abolish the power of distress ? 
 — I would. 
 
 5016. Is the power of distress much used in this 
 country ? — Not much in Ulster. 
 
 5017. I believe there are so many technicalities 
 connected with the service of notices, and other 
 matters that have to be observed, that it is seldom 
 resorted to ? — Yes ; it is not much used. But still 
 the power of distress hangs over the head of the tenant, 
 and that is what he objects to. Some peojple may 
 perhaps regard it as a sentimental grievance, but I 
 believe it>to be a real one. 
 
 5018. Distress you are aware is limited to a year's 
 rent 1 — It is. 
 
 5019. You would abolish it altogether as the law 
 of hypothec has been abolished in Scotland ? — I would. 
 
 5020. Now with reference to the Ulster custom, 
 you say it originated with the Plantation ? — Yes, that 
 is my opinion. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 189 
 
 5021. That is the Plantation of Ulster ?— Yes. 
 
 5022. Are you aware that at the time of the Plan- 
 tation it was a condition in many of the grants that 
 the owners should bring over a certain number of 
 settlers ? — Yes. 
 
 5023. And that it was intended that those persons 
 should get an estate in their holdings, and not be 
 turned out?- — Yes. That was I believe the origin of 
 the custom. They were to have a good will separate 
 from and independent of any claim they might have 
 for improvements to the land ; from the fact of having 
 been placed there, they and their successors were enti- 
 tled to the good will. 
 
 5024. Did yovi ever see a little book published on 
 this subject by Mr. M'Nevin 1 — I have seen several 
 books on the subject— I don't remember having seen 
 M'Nevin's. 
 
 5025. It is a valuable book on the subject of the 
 Plantation of Ulster, published in " the Library of 
 Ireland/' by Duffy and Son, of Dublin. But passing 
 that by, you say you are of opinion that it ought to 
 be a continued occupancy, at an easy or fair rent, 
 with unrestricted right of disposal; and you think 
 that would give satisfaction 1 — ^Yes. 
 
 5026. "Would you give a veto to the landlord in 
 regard to accepting the incoming tenant t — I would 
 personally. Speaking for myself I would do so, but I 
 am bound to say that the Tenants' Defence Association 
 would not go with me in that. 
 
 5027. Would you think it a fair thing that the 
 landlord should have the right to object to a man who ' 
 was of bad character and broken down, or hopelessly 
 insolvent ? — Personally, I would be in favour of giving 
 the landlord a right of reasonable objection. 
 
 5028. How would you settle that, supposing there 
 was a difference of opinion as to the reasonableness of 
 the objection? — ^It should be settled by a court of law. 
 
 5029. By the Land Court 1 — I will not say the 
 Land Court. 
 
 5030. You do not seem to be fond of the Land 
 Court 1 — I allege nothing against the Land Court, but' 
 I would like the Land Court amended. . I would like 
 a jury of experts to decide questions of fact. For all 
 questions of fact I would give liberty to either land- 
 lord or tenant to call in a jury. 
 
 5031. Would you leave the question of reasonable 
 objection to a jury 1 — I would leave it to a jury to de- 
 cide what was reasonable or unreasonable. 
 
 5032. Chaieman. — A jury of experts, you say? — 
 When I said a jury of experts I referred to rent and 
 that class of questions. 
 
 5033. This matter of reasonable objection you say 
 you would refer to an ordinary jury ? — I would refer it 
 to a jury. 
 
 5034. Baron Dowse. — I believe the great objection 
 to the Land Act is that what the tenant wants is, 
 that he shall not be turned out at all, as long as he 
 contiaues to pay his rent ? — Precisely. 
 
 5035. It is considered by some people that the fault 
 of the Land Act is that it never contemplates, and 
 never recognizes, in money at all events, the position of 
 the tenant with respect to tenant-right, except when 
 he is actually quitting his holding ? — Yes. 
 
 5036. The remedy given by the Act only arises 
 .when the landlord serves a notice to quit? — Yes. 
 The objection I have to the Land Act is that it only 
 deals with quarrels when they arise. 
 
 5037. You would prefer that the tenant should re- 
 main in occupation without being turned out as long 
 as he pays a fair rent ? — Exactly. 
 
 5038. With reference to the question of fair rent, 
 ■ you have recommended that there should be a new 
 
 tenement valuation for Ireland 1 — Yes. 
 
 5039. Some gentlemen who have been examined 
 have stated that in case of any difference between 
 landlord and tenant as to the fair rent arbitrators 
 might be appointed by each party, with an umpire in 
 case the arbitrators did not agree. Do you. think that 
 would meet the case, without a general valuation ? — I 
 think we should have both. The rent would not be 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Shillington, 
 jiitir 
 
 decided by the valuation. The rent would be decided Sept. 22, I88O. 
 by arbitrators, but the basis on which their decision 
 would be founded would be the new tenement valuation. 
 
 5040. It would be an element in their decision ?- 
 Yes. 
 
 5041. Supposing landlord and tenant agreed to leave 
 it to arbitrators and an umpire, of course there would 
 be no difficulty ; but supposing they did not agree to 
 that, do you think there should be a Court to settle 
 it ?— There should be a right of appeal in case of 
 disagreement. 
 
 5042. A right of appeal to some tribunal ? — Yes. 
 
 5043. Do you think in any legislation on the sub- 
 ject there should be any principles laid down to guide 
 the persons who are to decide as to what is a fair rent ? 
 r — Yes. I think the principles I have suggested would 
 be a guide to them. 
 
 5044. I have seen it stated somewhere that the land- 
 lord should get some consideration for what is called 
 the latent power of the land, or the inherent quality of 
 the land — that irrespective of the expenditure by the 
 tenant on improvements, the fact that the land possesses 
 a latent power or inherent quality should be taken 
 into account. Do you concur in that ? — Yes ; I say 
 so. The elevation, aspect, natural drainage, sub- 
 stratum, and sub-soil, ought to be taken into account. 
 
 5045. That is the latent power of the land, or its 
 inherent quality ? — Yes ; that, compared with the corn 
 average for a term of years, should constitute the 
 basis of what the value should be. < 
 
 5046. That should be taken into account on behalf 
 of the landlord ? — Yes. 
 
 5047. You say you take the corn averages as a basis 
 of valuation ; would you not also take the value' of live 
 stock into consideration ? — Of course. The reason I 
 said " com averages " was because they are an existing 
 thing — they are regularly kept in England, and are 
 used for tithe and other purposes, and can be referred 
 to ; but ot course the value of every description of 
 farm produce would be a more complete standard. 
 
 5048. Including both vegetable and animal produce ? 
 — Yes ; but the prices should be ascertained by autho- 
 rity of Parliament. 
 
 5049. When you talk of rents being raised on 
 changes of tenancy, do yovi mean to convey that a man 
 has been made pay rent on his own improvements 1 — ■ 
 Ida 
 
 5050. You have no doubt it has been done frequently 
 in Ulster ? — No doubt whatever. 
 
 5051. I have seen it stated that such a thing never 
 happens in Ireland at all ; do you concur in that 1 — I 
 do not. I am sure it has often hapj)ened. 
 
 5052. In the case to which you referred just now,, 
 where the rent was raised on the fall of the lease from 
 31s. to £3 per acre, was that increase made on the 
 tenant's improvements ? — It was, to a great extent. 
 
 5053. That was before the Laud Act ?— It was. If 
 the Land Act had been in existence , then I do not 
 think it could have been done. 
 
 5054. Whether before or since the Land Act the- 
 increase of rent was upon the tenant's improvements 
 to some extent ? — Yes. 
 
 5055. .And the only way in which the Land Act 
 could have been availed of would be, that when the 
 landlord increased the rent the tenant could refuse to 
 pay it. the landlord then could bring an ejectment. 
 and the tenant then could claim comj)ensation ? — Yes. 
 I can give you another illustration of the way rents 
 are increased. A small farm of about four acres, the 
 rent of which was £4 8s. The tenant wished to sell. 
 The agent told him he would require an advance of 
 rent, and raised it to 30s. an acre, making the rent of 
 the farm £6 a year instead of £4 8s. . The price 
 realized by the tenant was £8 per acre less than he 
 would have got had he been able to sell his interest in. 
 the farm at the old rent. 
 
 5056. In that case was the increased rent imposed- 
 on the tenants' own improvements ? — Certainly. 
 
 5057. Mr. Shaw. — The rent was increased to thirty 
 shillings an acre ? — Yes. 
 
190 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mc Thomas 
 ShillingtL'U, 
 junr. 
 
 5058. Was that the English acre?— Yes. 
 
 5059. Baron Dowse. — Have you known instances 
 since the Land Act of rents being raised on the 
 tenants' improvements ? — That case I mention was 
 since the Land Act. 
 
 50G0. Have you known any other instances ■? — Yes^ 
 a. farm of three acres, the rent 25s. an acre — at 
 the sale it was raised to 30s. 
 
 5061. On whose estate was that? — I do not like 
 mentioning names — it was in the neighbourhood of 
 Portadown. 
 
 5062. Do you know anything of the rents paid in 
 Leinster ? — No. 
 
 5063. A witness stated yesterday, that rents in the 
 north of Ireland are less than in the west or south, for 
 the same description of land? — I should not be 
 svirprised to hear it, because the tenants in the south 
 and west of Ireland have not tenant-right. 
 
 5064. Has the Land Act of 1870, tended to raise or 
 lower the rent in the north of Ireland, according to 
 your experience? — Since the Land Act a general 
 effort has been made by the landlords to raise the 
 rents. Whether that is the operation of the Act or 
 not I cannot sa}'', but a general effort has been made 
 to raise rents. 
 
 5065. Wherever that effort has been successful, has 
 it lessened the value of tenant-right ? — It has lessened 
 the tenant-right proportionally. 
 
 5066. Before the Land Act, were the rents higher 
 or lower in the north than in the south ? — I have not 
 sufficient information to be able to answer that'question. 
 
 5067. Before the Laud Act, was the tendency of 
 the Ulster custom to keep the rents low in Ulster or 
 to raise them ? — Its tendency was to keep the rents low 
 before the Act. 
 
 5068. Since the Act you say the tendency has been 
 on the part of the landlords to raise rents ? — Yes. 
 
 5069. In consequence of that, the value of the 
 tenant-right has declined 1 — Yes. 
 
 5070. You mentioned. the names of four landlords — 
 the Duke of Manchester, Lord Lurgan, Mrs. Bacon, 
 and Major Blacker, and you said that in driving- 
 through those properties you could see at a glance the 
 different conditions under which the tenants held the 
 land — that in one case the farms were well cultivated 
 and in the other case not — have you any objection to 
 mention upon which of the estates you observed that 1 
 — Upon the estate of Mrs. Bacon of Rich-hill, the 
 farms are particularly well kept, well farmed, neat 
 and well cultivated, and the tenantry are comfortable, 
 prosperous, and contented. 
 
 5071. Is the condition the same upon the estate of 
 the Duke of Manchester? — No. 
 
 507'-'. Or upon Lord LiTrgan's? — No. 
 
 5073. Have you ever heard the expression that "if 
 tenant-right was abolished in the north, you would 
 make a Tipperary of Down " ? — I have. 
 
 5074. You think the effect of raising rents in the 
 north has been more or less to interfere with the 
 tenant-i-ight 1 — The effect has been to reduce the value 
 of the tenant-right, and it has interfered with the 
 comfort and contentment of the farmers, and made 
 them discontented, and produced a great deal of 
 agitation and discontent with the existing state of 
 things. 
 
 5075. Has it affected the sense of security they feel 
 for their interest in the land ? — Very greatly. It has 
 produced a very general uneasiness and sense of in- 
 security — the' gradual raising of rents. 
 
 5076. Am I right in thinking that it would be 
 possible, by increasing the rent on every farm in that 
 way, to do away with tenant-right altogether ? — 
 Quite so. It is a question of time whether the Ulster 
 tenant-right, on many estates, will not disappear alto- 
 gether, under the existing law. The facts of the past 
 ten years prove that it is merely a qviestion of time. 
 As proof of that, I may mention that the Duke of 
 Manchester made a rule on part of his estates, £5 an 
 acre, and on another part £10 an acre, to any tenant 
 who wanted to snn-endor his farm, but so many 
 
 The acreage of the townland is 257a. 
 
 the rents 
 
 tenants surrendered, and he got so many farms on his 
 hands, that the rule was discontinued, and now he 
 will not give anything. 
 
 6077. If the rent was raised to a high figure in the 
 way you mention the result would.be, that the tenant's 
 interest in the land, subject to that rent, would be 
 nothing, and that would amount to a destruction of 
 the tenant-right ? — Yes. 
 
 5078. And the destruction of the tenant-right was 
 the destruction of the tenant's property in his holding 
 — the property which had been created by the labour 
 and expenditure of the tenant, and of his predecessors ? 
 — Well, not exactly the destruction of it, I would 
 rather say it was the confiscation of it — it amounted 
 to a confiscation of the property of the tenant. 
 
 5079. Confiscated by being transferred from the 
 pocket of one man, into that of another? — Yes; it was 
 taken out of the pocket of the tenant, and put into 
 the pocket of the landlord. That is what I call con- 
 fiscation. As an illustration of the high rents charged 
 on some estates, I may give an instance of the rent 
 charged on one townland, on an estate which I have 
 not named yet, 
 
 3e., the tenement valuation is £235 4s. 
 amount to £328 8s. 9d. 
 
 5079a. Mr. Shaw. — Are these tenancies from year 
 to year ? — Yes ; under the Ulster custom. 
 
 5080. Not leases? — Not leases, except in one or 
 two exce2jtional cases. 
 
 5081. Is that, in your opinion, too high a rent, 
 having regard to the quality and circumstances of the 
 land ? — It is too high a rent. 
 
 5082. Chairiian. — Have you any objection to 
 mention the name of that estate ? — I have. 
 
 5083. Have these rents been lately raised? — There 
 has been no general advance of rents. Rents have 
 been raised from time to time within the last few 
 years, as occasion arose. There has been no general 
 advance of rents, in the sense of the landlord saying 
 to all his tenants, " I must have an increase of half-a- 
 crown or five shillings an acre." That has not been 
 the way it was done ; but whenever an opportunity 
 offers the rent is advanced. 
 
 5084. Mr. Kavaxagh. — You mentioned about straw 
 being sold — straw which used formerly to be used on 
 the farms — and you say that now there is a demand 
 for that straw in the market ? — What I said was, that 
 there is a great supply of it sent to the market. 
 
 5085. Is there a demand for it ? — Yes, it is all sold. 
 
 5086. Where does it go to ? — It goes to Belfast, 
 and some of it is shipped to England and Scotland. 
 
 5087. Is it sold at a low price ?— It is. 
 
 5088. You attribute the sale of that straw, instead 
 of as formerly using it on the farms, to a desire on 
 the part of tenants to make all the money that they 
 can ? — To the necessity rather. 
 
 5089. Baron Dowse. — You have said you would 
 compel the London Corporation to sell their land, and 
 I therefore infer that you would not make the ordinary 
 proprietor sell his estate if he did not like ? — I would 
 not, but I would make such an alteration of the law 
 as woidd give the tenant security. 
 
 5090. You say you would abolish entails and settle- ■ 
 ments ? — I would abolish the power to entail property, 
 and tie it up, I think such a power works injuriously 
 to the interests of the country and checks improvement. 
 
 5091. Suppose that while preserving, entails- and 
 settlements the legislature passed a law- enabling the 
 owner for the time being, notwithstanding the entail, 
 to sell or dispose of it (and the money to be invested 
 on the trusts of the settlement), would that get rid 
 of your objection ?— Yes, if that could be done I 
 would have no objection. My objection to settle- 
 ments and entails is mei-ely as to their effect on the 
 agricultural interests of the country. 
 
 5092. You have heard of the idea that has been 
 started by some persons, of buying up all the land- 
 lords of Ireland, and turning the whole tenantry of 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 191 
 
 the country into a peasant proprietary — would such a 
 scheme have your approval ^ — I do not approve of it. 
 
 6093. Have you ever turned attention to the subject 
 of where the money was to come from to carry out 
 such a scheme 1 — No ; I do not approve of it, and 
 therefore have not turned my attention to the point. 
 
 5094. But you see no objection to facilitating and 
 assisting a tenant to buy his holding, if the estate was 
 in the market or if his landlord wished to sell it to 
 him 1. — On the contrary 1 see a great deal in its favour. 
 If an industrious and thrifty tenant, who had saved 
 some money, was anxious to become the owner of his 
 farm, 1 would give him assistance to carry out that 
 object. 
 
 5095. In short you would approve of the creation 
 of peasant proprietors by natural means 1 — Exactly. 
 
 5096. I understand you to say that as a rule the 
 landlords do not make improvements in the north of 
 Ireland 1 — They do not. 
 
 5097. Some people say that from the American 
 competition, and from, the bad harvests and bad 
 seasons which we have had, and which of course we 
 must expect a recurrence of from, time to time — that 
 agriculture in Ireland will be a bad business, no 
 matter what legislation may do for the tenant — is 
 that your opinion t — No. I have no fears for agri- 
 culture in Ireland, if the occupiers were enabled to 
 cultivate the land under favourable conditions and if 
 the laws were such as to encoui-age and stimulate them 
 to exertion and secure them in the value of their im- 
 provements. 
 
 5098. You mentioned, in reply to a question from 
 the Chairman, that a considerable number of the 
 fai'mers in your district were impoverished ? — Yes. 
 
 5099. Did you attribute that impoverishment en- 
 tirely to the want of security i^Partly to that, and 
 the excessive rents they have to pay, and partly to the 
 bad seasons. 
 
 •!ilOO. You think that if allowed to hold his land at 
 a fair rent, and secured in the value of his improve- 
 ments, that, notwithstanding the American competi- 
 tion, the tenant-farmer in Ireland could still " hold 
 his own," as the saying is 1 — Yes ; I think so. Give 
 us good land laws, and I shall have no fear for the 
 future agric^iltural condition of Ireland. 
 
 5101. The O'CoNOR Don. — You consider the rents 
 at present in your district too high 1 — Yes. 
 
 5102. If the rents were fixed on the basis you pro- 
 pose, I presume it would tend to a genei-al lowei'ing of 
 rents over the country 1 — It would. I could adduce 
 faot.s to show that the rents must be lowered. A 
 tenant was ejected last year from a small holding after 
 her husband died. He had paid £3 an acre for it. 
 The widow, after his death, was ejected for non-pay- 
 ment of rent, and the landlord cropped the land and 
 proceeded to sell it. He was offered £ an acre for 
 the produce of it, and that the buyer should save the 
 crop. About the month of June or July it was re- 
 fused on the ground that they could not reduce the 
 rent ; and the office is now tilling the farm and selling 
 the produce by piecemeal. That has been done in 
 several instances, to my knowledge, because the rent 
 could not be got out of the land, and the landlord 
 can't afford to be the first to reduce it. 
 
 5103. The O'Conoe Don. — Are there not cases in 
 which the rent could be got out of the land, and in 
 which, still, if your plan were adopted the rent 
 would have to be lowered, because the rent could be 
 only got out of the land in consequence of the tenant's 
 improvements 1 — Certainly, I think my scheme would 
 lead to a general reduction of rents. 
 
 5104r. Have there been many sales in the Landed 
 Estates Court in your district ? — Not m%ny. 
 
 5105. There have been some, I suppose ?-^ Very 
 few in my immediate district ; none in which the 
 tenants purchased. 
 
 5106. You propose a scheme for the whole of Ire- 
 land, not for a particular district^ and you know 
 there have been sales throughout Ireland, the pur- 
 
 chasers buying in the Landed Estates Court under Sept. 22, isso. 
 the existing law and at the existing rents ? — ^Yes. jjj. xhomas 
 
 5107. Would you consider it fair that, the rents of Shillington, 
 those so purchasing should be reduced, although the junr. 
 land was full value to pay the rent on the tenant's 
 improvements 1 — Yes ; I would consider the law which 
 
 gave the landlord power to confiscate the tenant's 
 improvements by charging the rent on the tenant's 
 capital and industry, an tmfair law. I am not pre- 
 pared to say that some compensation should not be 
 paid to the landlord who keeps within the law, al- 
 though an unfair law. But I would consider the 
 interests of the whole community — the interests of the 
 agricultural classes — before the interests of a not very 
 numerous class. 
 
 5108. Then would you say that these people, 
 whom you admit would be entitled to compensation, 
 should get it or not get it — would you confiscate 
 the additional money that they had paid under the 
 security of the existing law 1 — I would deal with each 
 individual case on its own merits. All legislation in 
 this country has recognised what are called vested 
 rights — rights given by the law — at the same time, 
 that which cannot be compensated for is the falling of 
 the market. A great fall on rents resulted from the 
 falling of the markets, and that fall is the result of the 
 produce of the land being much less value than what it 
 was when these pui-chases were made ; consequently^ 
 the landlord as well as the cultivator should suffer. 
 
 5109. You think that every one interested in the 
 land should share in the loss consequent on the falling 
 of the market 1 — Yes. 
 
 5110. Do you think that the landlords shoiild suffer 
 for the change in the law which you propose, transfer- 
 ring the right to the tenant which he did not possess 
 before, although the land was full value for the rent 1 
 — I would deal with each case on its merits, and in 
 cases in which there are vested interests that suffer, 
 I would compensate. 
 
 5111. You think that every vested interest should 
 be compensated for? — Yes, what is really a vested 
 interest ; not merely something existing previously, 
 but what is known under the circumstances to be a 
 vested interest. 
 
 5112. Can you give us any idea of the prices paid 
 for tenant-right in your district t — The prices paid vary 
 from £8 to £20. 
 
 .5113. What would that be calculated by the years' 
 purchase? — Rents are so various it is impossible to 
 make such a calculation ; I have known the rents to 
 vary so much that it would be merely guess work. 
 
 5114:. Have prices of tenant-right increased or de- 
 creased since the passing of the Land Act? — At first 
 they increased ; but they have decreased of late years ; 
 in consequence of the advance in rents, and the un- 
 certainty that exists with regard to the rent that may 
 be charged — they have decreased somewhat. 
 
 5115. In the case you mention, when the crop was 
 being sold by the landlord at 30s., although the rent 
 as you said was £3, was that land in a worn-out con- 
 dition when given up? — I think not. 
 
 5116. And do you think it was well cultivated? — 
 It was fairly cultivated. All land has suffered from 
 last year, especially as to grass. 
 
 5117. Are not prices of stock very high now? — 
 Yes ; but they are not so high as they were years ago. 
 
 5118. Are we to understand that this was meadow 
 land — you spoke of it as grass land ? — Not meadow 
 land ; it is used for grazing, a good deal of it. 
 
 5119. And was the grazing sold for 30s. an acre ? — 
 It had been usedfor grazing. It was sold as grass on foot. 
 
 5120. It had been used during the existing year for 
 grazing ? — Oh, no. 
 
 5121. Well, then previously ?— Yes. 
 
 5122. Then, being grass on foot, I presume you 
 would call it meadow 1 — Yes ; it may be. It was not 
 what you would call permanent meadow. 
 
 5123. Yes, but taking it in regard to this particular 
 year is it meadow ? — Yes. 
 
 5124. And do you think the full value was given 
 
19: 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMiSSION, 1680. 
 
 Sept. 22, 1880. 
 
 Jfr. Thomas 
 
 Shillington, 
 
 junr. 
 
 for it, that it was not wortli more than 30s. l—l do. 
 It was a sale by public auction, and it was sold in all 
 those different "lots, and the sale was largely attended. 
 
 5125. Mr. Shaw. — It *as not fit for meadow land? 
 
 —No. 
 
 Hi'. Hamilton Rohb. — It is many a time done m our 
 neighbourhood ; lay grazing down for a certain year 
 when the tenant expects a fair return. 
 
 5126. The O'Gonor Don. — Do you attribute the 
 right of the tenant to what is called occupancy riglit, 
 distinct from a right arising out of improvements, to 
 the settlement of Ulster ? — I attribute it to what we 
 call the good will arising out of the conditions upon 
 which our predecessors were settled in Ulster, and 
 which have continued the terms of occupancy since. 
 
 : 5127. Do you think the tenants in the other parts 
 of Ireland would have a just claim to the same right, or 
 would you restrain their right to the improvements 
 they had made ^— Well, probably it ought to be re- 
 stricted to the improvements. It is exceedingly diffi- 
 cult to separate the good will from the impi'ovements, 
 because an element in the marketable commodity 
 offered for sale, is the character of the landlord, which 
 is exceedingly difficult to estimate. 
 
 5128. With regard to the purchases under the 
 Bright clauses, assuming that the principle of those 
 claiises was extended, do you think that most of the 
 tenants in Ulster would be able to pay one-third or 
 one-fourth of the purchase-money ? — I think a very 
 great many of them would be able to pay one fourth. 
 
 3129. And you believe, therefore, that if the 
 Government advanced three-lourths, in almost every 
 case the tenant would be able to pui-chase 1 — I think 
 in the great majority of oases he would. The tenants 
 have become exceedingly impoverished in the last 
 three years. If you hnd asked me the question three 
 years ago I would have said " yes," without any hesi- 
 tation. Within my experience the condition of the 
 tenantry has been changed in the last three years. 
 
 5130. And do you. think that all those who have 
 money to pay the one-fourth would be anxious to pur- 
 chase ? — The great majority of them would. Those 
 who have pui-chased are very much improved. 
 
 5131. Would you consider it a fair thing to say to 
 a landlord " you must either give this tenant-right, or 
 perpetuity of tenure, or sell to your tenants " ? — I 
 would. 
 
 5132. In such a case he would have no reaion to 
 complain when the alternative would be offered? — 
 None ; when the alternative would be offered. 
 
 5133. Mr. SuAW. — You spoke of £3 as the rent of 
 land near a town ? — Yes, a mile from Portadown. 
 
 5134. That would be high rent for an ordinary 
 farm of land 1 — There is a great deal of land about 
 Portadown at high rent lor farming purposes. It is 
 not treated as townparks ; in that case there would be 
 no tenant-right. 
 
 5135. It is a high rent owing to the position? — 
 Precisely. In a valuation I would take into account 
 the access to the markets. 
 
 51 3G. I suj>pose it is a habit to sell the oats, straw, 
 and hay standing 1. — Very much lately owing to the 
 bad times. It has very much increased within the 
 last three years. 
 
 5137. The farms in the county Armagh are gene- 
 rally small I believe ? — Very small ; the smallest in 
 Ulster. 
 
 5 1 38. Do they buy artificial manures , as a general 
 rule? — Not to any extent. 
 
 5139. So that the land must be deteiiorating ? — 
 Yes ; greatly impoverislied. As a proof of that^ the 
 neighbourhood of Portadown is largely a wheat-grow- 
 ing country, and the farmers used a great deal of lime, 
 but that has almost fallen into disuse entirely. The 
 farmers cannot afford to buy lime, and they cannot 
 grow good wheat now. They are growing an inferior 
 kind of wheat. 
 
 5140. Now, when you speak of thirty shillings an 
 le of tlie cases you have quoted, is that land 
 
 acre in smne 
 
 situated near a town, or is it .in the ordinary country 
 districts ? — It is quite in the couutry districts. 
 
 5141. Is that a high rent for it ?— In some locali- 
 ties it is. On Mrs. Bacon's estate there is no land let 
 so high, nor from within two miles of Portadown to 
 near Richhill. 
 
 5142. The other rent is a common rent ? — The other 
 rent is a common rent. 
 
 5143. It must represent a great deal of the 
 tenant's improvements 1 — That is a rent charged on 
 the tenant's improvements. 
 
 5144. It is a great deal more than the net value of 
 the land ? — A great deal. 
 
 5145. Is it extraordinarily rich land ?— A great 
 deal of it is very poor land. 
 
 5146. A great deal of it reclaimed ?— A great deal 
 of it is old reclaimed bog. 
 
 5147. And all the improvements made by the 
 tenant?— Yes. I should say that in the neighbour- 
 hood of Lough Neagh, when the drainage took place, 
 lowering the lough, there was a considerable amount 
 ot land brought into cultivation in consequence of the 
 water being lowered ; and the landlords insisted on 
 the adjoining tenants having this cultivated, and they 
 charged them about £2 an acre. They had no option, 
 although the cost of the drainage and the annual as- 
 sessment was, in a great many instances, put on the 
 tenants. 
 
 5148. And not paid by the landlords ? — It was, in 
 the first instance, paid by them, but they added it to 
 the rent, and it was a common thing to see on the rent 
 receipts so much for drainage. 
 
 5149. An annual payment made by the tenant ? — 
 And in addition to that they had to pay a rent for tlie 
 land at .£2 an acre. In several instances. Of course, 
 no tenant-right attached. 
 
 5150. Is it a common thing to raise rent at the 
 expiration of a lease? — Usually it is raised. \'''- have 
 very few leases. As a rule farmers don't ca;' fcr 
 them now. 
 
 5151. The O'CoNOR Don. — Is it a fact that tenaut- 
 right is not attached to a holding which a man gets 
 without having to pay anything ? — It is a fact. 
 
 5152. You don't think it should attach to it! — 
 No. 
 
 Mr. Rohb. — That is, if he does nothing to improve 
 the land after he gets it. It all depends on what he 
 does to it. 
 
 5153. Baron Dowse. — Is not there a good will in 
 every tenancy from year to year ? — Practically. 
 
 5154. It is a term of years which may La assigned 
 by deed ? — Yes. 
 
 5155. Mr. Shaw. — If a man remains a certain num- 
 ber of yeai'S he must create a good will. He could 
 not be in it without creating a great deal more than 
 the impro\ements you see on the surface, and in that 
 way he produces a tenant-riglit. Is not that your 
 view ? — Yes. T\Iy idea is that he is forced to lay out 
 a great deal of money in improving this laud, and the 
 landlord does not Jay out any money whatev'cr, so that 
 the increased "value of the land belongs piopej ly, as 
 arising out of the improvements, to the tenant. 
 
 5156. What is the a^"erage size of the farms in the 
 district of the County Armagh with wliicli you aio 
 acquainted 1 — They vary from five to fifty acres. 
 
 5157. Do the farmers have no other industry? — 
 The small farmers have weaving, but there are not so 
 many of them at it now. 
 
 5158. Do you think that if they had to live on ten 
 acres of land at 30s. an acre they could live on it ? — 
 They could not live on it. 
 
 5159. Without some other industry? — Without 
 some other industry, at the present prices of produce. 
 
 5160. Supposing that produce came back to the 
 ordinary price, and that business improved,>vould the 
 farmers become weavers again ? — -Weaving is passing 
 out of the hands of the country people into the factoriefl 
 in towns. ' ' - 
 
 ^5161. But line weaving is still in the country ?-- 
 Yes. » ' 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 193 
 
 516-2. Mr. Kavanagii. — Mr. Shillington, is not it a 
 fact that Liird Dufterin piiroliased the tenant right on 
 his estate 1 — I have seen it so stated. 
 
 5163. If he did, would it be right tliat those tenants 
 should have a right to it again after being paid for it t — 
 Nothing that the landlord has paid for should be 
 given over to the tenant. I would give the landlord 
 power to register whate^■er belongs to him, whatever 
 improvements he may have purchased or made, and 
 that should be taken as a ground of addibional rent. 
 
 5164. Mr. Ka^'ANAGIi. — Suppose jou had a farm, 
 and the landlord bought up from you the tenant-right, 
 you would not consider that the tenant-right was left 
 still to you to sell 1 — No. 
 
 5165. Mr. Shaw. — He could put a rent on the 
 incoming tenant to cover this purchase money 1 — He 
 could, of course. 
 
 5166. In the case you referred to — that of the Duke 
 of Manchester's estate — whei-e the landlord took the 
 land for £5 per acre, what was the object of that 1 
 Was it to purchase the tenant-right? — The object was 
 rather to re-let it. The farms have been cultivated 
 since by him. 
 
 5167. He has had them in his own hands ?— Yes. 
 
 5168. And he could have got an immense number 
 of farms in that way, if he could have taken them t — 
 Yes he could have got a good many. 
 
 5169. Tliis £5 an acre is a low price? — It is the 
 oi3fice rule made to restrict tenant-right. 
 
 5170. It seems a low pirice for tenant right ?^Yes, 
 but the rent was high. 
 
 5171. The O'CoNOE Don. — "What was the rent per 
 acre? — From 25s. to 30*. 
 
 5172. Mr. SiiAW. — Is that prime land? — No ; poor 
 land. 
 
 5173. And improved by the tenants themselves? — 
 Yes, improved by the tenants. 
 
 5174. Have the rents been raised within the last 
 ten years ? — There has been no general raising of the 
 rents, but wherever there was an opportunity — when 
 the tenancy was changed — it was raised. 
 
 5175. You consider that an infringement on tenant- 
 right ? — I consider that rent, taken out of the tenant's 
 improvements. 
 
 5176. You would not object to a general valuation 
 of the estate provided the tenants had some voice in 
 the valuation ? — No ; and provided the tenants' im- 
 provements were valued as well as the letting value 
 of the soil. 
 
 5177. Baron Dowse. — ^You say that you would 
 allow the land to be held at a fair rent. It is not at 
 allimprobablethatthat rent might be raised? — Possibly. 
 
 5178. And it is only an observation you throw out. 
 In the present condition of afi'airs you think your 
 scheme would lead to a lowering of the rent? — Precisely. 
 
 5179. It might if times got better lead to a raising 
 of it? — Yes; I would adjust' the rent according to 
 the price of produce. 
 
 5180. Do you think if a man buys an estate in the 
 I^anded Estates Court or any other Court, or in any 
 other way, with a certain rental, that he has a vested 
 interest in maintaining that rental even if economic 
 laws make it impossible for tenants to pay it? — 
 Certainly not. 
 
 5181. If a man buys an estate in the Landed 
 Estates Court at a certain rental he has no vested 
 interest if the tenants are unable to pay it? — Certainly 
 not. 
 
 5182. He has no right to call on the State to make 
 it up to him ? — No. If owing to the action of the 
 State the price of produce has advanced to a high 
 price, and the tenant wanted a reduction of rent ; I 
 would say take into consideration the present price 
 of produce and I would take into consideration the high 
 price or the low price and have a periodical valuation. 
 
 5183. The rents might be raised or lowered according 
 to the value of the land in the market? — Yes. 
 
 5184. O'CoxOR Dox. — You don't propose to settle 
 the rent according to the value, of the land in the 
 market, but according to the value of the land in the 
 
 market minus any value added to it by the tenant's Sept.22,isio. 
 improvements ? — I consider , the value of the land a ^^ Thomas 
 thing which cannot be separated from it ; it must be Shillington, 
 taken as an element to estimate or fix the landlord's junr 
 interest. 
 
 5185. You think the landlord's interest should not 
 be the letting value in the open market, but the 
 letting value minus the part added by the tenant's im- 
 provements ? — The letting value minus what belongs 
 to the tenant. 
 
 5186. Supposing that a person had purchased an 
 estate in the Landed Estates Court, and that he had 
 not I'aised the rent since he purchased, do you consider 
 that he woirld be entitled to any compensation for 
 having those rents lowered compulsorily, because they 
 had been originally placed on the tenants' improve- 
 ments? If the State consider it desirable that the 
 tenant's improvements should be taken out of the rent 1 
 — The Government value of the rent, minus the 
 tenant's improvements, is the question. 
 
 5187. Baron Dowse. — Do you consider it an im- 
 moral thing for a man to charge rent on a tenant's im- 
 provements? — I do. 
 
 5188. Do you think the legislature should give him 
 compensation for the loss of that right ? — I don't think 
 it should. 
 
 5189. Mr. Shaw. — The Land Act gives the tenant 
 a right to the improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 5190. Baron Dowse. — You were asked as to the 
 origin of the Ulster tenant-right, and whether you 
 consider it should be extended to the whole of Ireland 
 in consequence of the way it originated in Ulster. 
 Is not it a moot question what the origin of the 
 custom was ; whether it originated in the Plantation 
 or not ? — I am not clear about that. 
 
 5191. Do you know anyone that is? — No, but I 
 give the prevalent view, the consensus of opinion 
 as far as I can gather amongst the people of the North 
 of Ireland; but I am not aware that it is based on any 
 proper historical foundation. 
 
 5192. I want to ask you a question that I did not 
 want to go into at all, but it is necessary to go into it 
 now. You think it originated in the settlers coming- 
 over on certain terms, and when the settlers came over 
 did not they find a large native Irish Catholic popula- 
 tion in the place ? — Yes, in some places. 
 
 5193. Does not the Ulster tenant-right extend to 
 them as well as to the Protestants 1 — Yes. 
 
 5194. And simply because it grew over the whole 
 province ? — Yes. 
 
 5195. Is there any reason why it should not extend 
 when amended over the whole of Ireland ? — I don't 
 see any. 
 
 5196. Chairman— At that time the. object of the 
 Plantation, supposing it to have been the origin of the 
 custom, was to bring respectable and responsible 
 tenants into the country. 'Then if the power of sale, 
 which is now called free sale, arose, do you not think 
 there must still have been a restriction, as to the 
 places being filled with respectable and responsible 
 tenants? — In the settlement of Ulster there were very 
 few changes of tenancy. 1" have traced families for 
 generations without any changes. Th e question seldom 
 arose. I am not prepared to say if that power in early 
 times was ever used or if it existed in abeyance. 
 
 5197. It struck me as a most probable idea of 
 those who gave the land, that there should be con- 
 tinuous occupation by these families, or, if parted with, 
 by equally respectable and responsible tenants?— 
 Against that we have the fact that it has spread to 
 the whole of the population of Ulster as well as 
 to the settlers. 
 
 5198. It has grown with time ?— Yes, with time. 
 
 5199. Baron Dowse. — Some people say it originated 
 in this way. I have seen grants, offering so" many 
 acres of land to certain people, on condition that they 
 would erect a great stone bawn, and bring in one hun- 
 dred and twenty Protestants fromEngland, with various 
 intentions in reference to the nati^-es. These people were 
 to get estates, but never got them. They got tenancies 
 
 2C 
 
194 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept 22, 1880 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Shillington, 
 juur. 
 
 from year to year, and tliey made as miicli as tliey 
 coidd of them. That was said to be the origin of the 
 Ulster tenant-right 1 — Tandragee Castle was built by 
 a predecessor of the present projirietor, on condition 
 that he held it as a pass and stronghold. At present 
 
 there are tenancies existing held by the successors of 
 the origiual settlers, and they cannot be disturbed ; 
 they held little patches in the town .and they were 
 obliged to render militaiy service, and their successors 
 are there still. 
 
 Mr. Hamilton 
 Kobb. 
 
 Mr. Hamilton Robb, Edenderry, Portadown, examined. 
 
 5200. Chaieman. — You have heard the evidence 
 given by Mr. Shillington. Are there any points on 
 which you wish to say anything 1 — I can add so 
 little to Mr. Shillington's evidence, that I do not feel 
 free to occupy the time of the Commissioners. Yon 
 were asking as to what power of veto a landlord should 
 have as to the incoming tenant. I wish to say -a word 
 upon that point. My anxiety is, if we wish to sell, to 
 get full value, and, if the landlord lets us get full value, 
 lie may buy if he pleases. 
 
 5201. Then would you have the full value ascer- 
 tained by valuation?: — By free sale and free offer, if it 
 could be fairly ascertained, and the seller is satisfied that 
 he gets the full value, the full market value, of his good 
 will, the landlord might buy himself. Some of the 
 Duke of Manchester's land was raised to £3 an acre, 
 close to Portadown. Till lately the Duke's agent gave 
 them a certain sum for tenant-right on surrender, but 
 he discontinued that, and these men are losing money, 
 and they are grumbling because they can't pay ,£3. 
 
 6202. Is that the reason, or is it bad seasons ? — Well, 
 it has been intensified by that, but it was not possible 
 to make money on the holding at £3 an acre, even in 
 good years. 
 
 5203. Then you say they wish to sell or surrender ? 
 — They wish to sell. 
 
 5204. They cannot find jiurchasers ? — It is not easy 
 to find purchasers. 
 
 5205. Chaieman. — They would be only able to give 
 a notice to quit and go voluntarily after losing the pay- 
 ment made lor the tenant-right. 
 
 5206. Baron Dowse. — You saj' you would be satis- 
 fied to sell if the landlord gave you the full value. 
 Would you be satisfied to be turned out, whether you 
 liked to go or not, if you got full value 1—1 have never 
 been able to say for myself, that I would not allow the 
 landlord to purchase, if he were so disposed, having 
 given me the full value. 
 
 5207. Can yon imagine it possible that he would 
 give you the full value if he turned yon out 1 — I don't 
 know. 
 
 5208. Would not you rather have a voice in the mat- 
 ter, and not go if you did not like 1 — Most assuredly. 
 
 5209. You would like to go with yoiir own consent 1 
 — My private wish and the settlement of the land laws 
 are two different things. My own private wish might 
 be different from what I could saj- would be a fair 
 settlement on public grounds. 
 
 5210. Take it then on public grounds, would it be a 
 fair settlement that the tenant should be obliged to go, 
 
 unless willing to go, as long as he paid his rent ? — I 
 think it would seldom come up. Others might differ 
 from me, but I never wish to infringe the slightest on 
 the landlord's rights. 
 
 5211. Then, according to your opinion, your private 
 opiiiion at all events, you would let the landlord have 
 the land if he gave the full value. Is not that so ? — I 
 would, but I don't know how that could be done. We 
 go in for continuous occupancy. 
 
 5212. I am perfectly sure you would never be satis- 
 fied without the full value. I understand you to say 
 that you wovild give it willingly if he gave you the full 
 value ? — I don't say willingly, but if I wished to sell. 
 
 5213. You would like to have a voice in it your- 
 self? — The question is whether it would be right on 
 public grounds that the landlord could in any case re- 
 sume possession of a farm. That is the qxiestion, but 
 I could not right off give an answer to it. It is a large 
 question, 
 
 5214. There may be cases, you think, in which it 
 would be fair if the landlord wanted the land for the 
 piu'pose of adding to his park. In any event he should 
 not get it without giving the full value. You and he 
 would be sure to differ about that 1 — Not if we had 
 this new valuation. 
 
 5215. How would you have the full value asccrtaLaed. 
 You would put it into the market and let it bring what- 
 ever price it could bring 1 — That would be one way. 
 
 5216. Supposing the people knew that the landlord 
 wanted to bu.y it, do you think you v/ould get a tenant 
 on the estate to offer for it ? — Well, there is the qiies- 
 tion of good will. If a landlord wishes to disturb a 
 man in isossession he would be entitled to some com^ 
 pensation in the same way as when one gives up land 
 for a railway. 
 
 5217. In other words, something should be added 
 for compulsory purchase? — That's it. 
 
 5218. By that means you would strive to get all out 
 of the landlord you could, and then you would be 
 willing to part with it ? — Precisely. 
 
 5219. Why did these people pay £3 ?— They never 
 agreed ; it was raised. 
 
 5220. They must have agreed ? — They got a notice 
 saying, you must pay the £3, and they protested. 
 
 5221. Then, in fact, they were not free agents? — 
 Certainly not ; that is the whole sting. If you give 
 us fair laws like the Ulster tenant-right custom, or 
 give us fair laws, and give us the system of the English 
 or Scotch, and we will thrive and prosper. We have 
 no system except what the landlord pleases. 
 
 Mr. i^elaon 
 Ruddell. 
 
 Mr. Nelson Euddell, Aughacommou, Lurgan, another member of the deputation, examined. 
 
 5222. CiiATEMAN. — You have heard the evidence 
 which was given by Mr. Shillington ? — Yes. 
 
 5223. Have yon any particular observations -that 
 you would wish to make with regard to that evidence, 
 or do you generally concur with what he said ? — I con- 
 cur generally with what Mr. Shillington has told you. 
 You asked a question with regard to certain glebe 
 lands which I purchased. I shall be glad to give you 
 any information with, reference to that. 
 
 5224. CiiAiKMAN. — V/ould you tell us what took 
 place on the Commissioners wishing to sell the hold- 
 ings ?— The tenants all got notice, and were offered the 
 purcliarie of the different holdings, and I purchased 
 my iiortion. 
 
 52l'5. They sent ym notice, I believe, of the price 
 and of the conditions ? — Yes. 
 
 5226. Did you borrow any money for the purpose 
 of the purchase? — I did ]iot. 
 
 5227. Did you find any difficulty in having the sale 
 completed 1 — Not the sliglitest. 
 
 5228. Nor in arranging the j)rice ? — Well, I thought 
 that the pi-ice asked was very high, and I did my best 
 to get it i-educed, but could not. 
 
 5229. The Commissioners named a price and that 
 was their final decision ? — It was. 
 
 5230. Was there any statement made as to what 
 
 would be done, provided you did not accept ic? Yes ; 
 
 a statement that it would be disposed of in the market. 
 The tenairts got two or three offers at two or three 
 times. The first offer T accepted, and I think the lasf 
 offer was much cheaper ; it was a reduced price. How- 
 e^■c•r, I had purchased previously. 
 
MIISUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 .195 
 
 5231. You accei>ted before the otliers, and by tlieir 
 hanging back they got the holdings at reduced prices ? 
 — Yes J but they did not purchase, at least not many 
 of them ; I think, another and myself. 
 
 5232. And were tliey sold^ — A number of them 
 afterwards became tenants to one individual. 
 
 5233. And they hold under that individual now as 
 tenants? — They do. 
 
 5234. Are you satisfied with your purchase now? 
 — Owing to the depression in trade and the foreign 
 competition, I think I paid high for it, and I would 
 not be disposed to buy it now at that price. 
 
 5235. But in other respects are you satisfied with 
 being an owner, in preference to holding under a land- 
 lord ? — Yes ; I very much prefer it, and I have greatly 
 improved the land since, whereas, on an adjoining 
 farm, which I hold as a tenancy from year to year, I 
 am very tardy of doing anything like that, owing to 
 the fact that whenever a change of tenancy takes 
 place, the rent may be raised. I find that owing to 
 the habit of raisiag the rents, whenever a change of 
 tenancy takes place, the tenant considers it his interest 
 to do as little as he can in the way of improvement. 
 
 5236. What is the condition now of the portion of 
 Church property, which was bought by the individual 
 under whom the remaining tenants hold now? — It 
 is much the same as it was before the purchase. It 
 was not purchased until a very few years ago, and, 
 owing to the low prices of farm produce, foreign com- 
 petition and many other things, the landlord did not 
 see his way to raise the rent ; in fact it was high enough 
 at the time — it was 32s. 6d. 
 
 5237. Was there any lease? — There was no lease. . 
 
 5238. Do you consider that on that property now 
 the Ulster Custom exists? — Yes. 
 
 5239. They had it before under the Church Com- 
 missioners ? — Yes ; you had liberty to sell to the highest 
 and best bidder by private or public sale. 
 
 • 5240. Do you think the tenants of that property 
 have been improved at all ? — No ; I think not. The 
 i-ents are too high and the people could not improve it. 
 
 5241. Is there anyi;hing else you would like to 
 notice ? — I don't think there is anything else, my lord. 
 
 5242. Baron Dowse. — Where is the land? — In the 
 parish oi Seagoe. 
 
 5243. Near Portadown ? — Between Portadovra. and 
 Lurgan. 
 
 5244. That is a good part of the country ? — Yes, 
 the land is good in that part of the country. This 
 land belonged to the late Archdeacon Saurin. 
 
 524.'). How many acres are in the portion you pur- 
 chased 1 — Fourteen and a half. 
 
 524R. And what rent did you give the Archdeacon ? 
 —28s. an acre. 
 
 5247. I suppose you consider you had tenant-right? 
 — Yes, certainly. 
 
 5248. Did you buy it or inherit it ? — My father 
 bought it. 
 
 5249. And what did he pay? — He paid from £12 
 to £14: an acre. 
 
 5250. At the same rent 1 — The rent was afterwards 
 raised by the Archdeacon, and then an attempt was 
 made to raise it again, but my father said he would 
 pay no higher rent for the farm. 
 
 5251. What did jou pay the Commissioners? — I 
 think it was twenty-two and a half years' purchase. 
 
 5252. And for that you got the whole estate ? — Yes. 
 
 5253. No rent whatever ? — No. 
 
 5254. And you paid the cash yourself? — Yes. 
 
 5255. Twenty-two and a half years' purchase, and 
 28s. an acre ? — Yes. 
 
 5255. Do you consider, having regard to the con- 
 dition of agricultural produce, that that amount was 
 rather high ? — I do think it too high. 
 
 5257. Do you reside on that farm? — No. 
 
 5258. Is it near the farm on which you reside ? — It 
 is. 
 
 5259. But there is a house on it? — Yes, there is. 
 
 5260. And you live in the house on the other 
 
 holding, for which you are tenant from year to year ? Sept. 22, 1880. 
 
 Yes. 
 
 ISl^r* NgIsou 
 
 5261. Where is it that you are tenant from year to Ruddell. 
 year ? — Nearer Lurgan. 
 
 5262. Is it the same sort of land? — Some of it is 
 wretched, and some of it good. 
 
 5203. And what do you pay for that? — 27s. an 
 acre. 
 
 5264. And have you tenant-right upon that farm ? 
 — I have. 
 
 5265. Has the rent been raised at any time 1 — Yes, 
 at the expiration of thiee leases the rent was raised, I 
 believe, from 7s. Gd., 12s. 6d., and 15s. to the present 
 rent. 
 
 5266. Seven and sixpence was a low rent you know ? 
 — Well, one of my neighbours in a townland near to 
 me says he remembers the time when there was no 
 rent above 10s. an acre in that part of the country. 
 
 5266a. Who makes the improvements? — I do, and. 
 my father did before me. 
 
 5267. Does that system extend to the whole district 
 around ? — Generally. 
 
 5268. Lord Liirgan then does not act on the prin- 
 ciple of making the improvements ? — No, in some 
 cases, leading drains are cleared out occasionally. 
 
 5269. And does he charge for that? — I think not. 
 
 5270. Is not Mr. Hancock his agent? — Yes. 
 
 5271. And are they not both well-disposed fair 
 gentlemen ? — Yes, but they are both disposed to raise 
 the rents, and the tenant has no option in the matter. 
 
 5272. They must either pay it or else fight the 
 question in the Land Court ? — Well, Lord Lurgan has 
 no cases in the Land Courts. 
 
 5273. How many acres have you under Lord 
 Lurgan? — I have about 180. 
 
 5274. Supposing you had those 180 acres in the 
 same way that you have the Church land you would 
 feel very comfortable ? — Oh, certainly. I would make 
 no comparison whatever. 
 
 5275. So that there is a feeling of security in the 
 Church land even, though you think you paid more 
 for it than you ought ? — Yes, I would rather have it, 
 even though I paid more. I would rather pay more 
 than its value in order to have the security, and I 
 would work the farm to better advantage if I had that 
 security. I will give you an instance, adjoining this 
 land which I purchased, there is a large field which 
 had been drained with shallow drains some time ago, but 
 had got choked up, consequently was wet, and rushes 
 growing on it, and I had lost considerably by sheep 
 taking liver disease in consequence of the wet. I was 
 determined to drain it, but seeing that my neighbours' 
 rents for their farms were being raised whenever 
 changes of tenancy took place, I pondered over the 
 matter, and thought it was rathei risky, as my rent 
 might be raised should I make the improvement. 
 
 5276. If you had that farm you hold from Lord 
 Lurgan, given you by law at a fair rent between 
 landlord and tenant, between man and man and with 
 regard to the rights of both, with unrestricted and 
 free sale, and continued occupancy as long as you pay 
 the rent, would that give you a sense of security ? — It 
 would certainly. 
 
 5277. You would like it that way? — Very much. 
 
 5278. Do you think it would improve the country ? 
 — I do. It would be better for both landlord and 
 tenant. 
 
 5279. The landlord would be secure of his rent? 
 
 Yes. _ 
 
 , 5280. And the tenant would be sure that anything 
 he put into the soil he would be sure to get out of it ? 
 — Yes. A-t present the tenant is afraid to put any- 
 thing into the soil ; he has no heart to do it. 
 
 5281. And it would be better for the landlord to do 
 this rather than have any continued contention on the 
 subject? — Yes. 
 
 5282. Mr. Kavanagh.— What would the tenant- 
 right of the Church property sell for? — From £Vl to 
 £1'! the Jinglish acre. 
 
 2 2 
 
19G 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. '22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Robinson. 
 
 Mr. John Eobinson, Druminally, Portadown, another of the deputation. 
 
 5283. Chairman. — Yon did not hear the whole of 
 the examination of the previous witnesses, but I 
 suppose you can gather from what you have heard, 
 the sort of evidence that was given 1 — Well partly. 
 
 5284. Well can younowgive us anything in addition, 
 anything that you would like to put before the Com- 
 missioners?— I did not hear all of Mr. Shillington's 
 evidence. 
 
 5285. He touched upon the question of the increase 
 of rent, especially the grievance of raising the rent at 
 the time of the change of tenancies by sale to a new 
 tenant or at the tenant's death, he spoke of the 
 disadvantages of office rules as being a restriction 
 on the value of tenant-right, and also the restriction 
 on the number of persons who could compete at sales. 
 He gave evidence as to disadvantages from these 
 reistrictions and also the increase of rents. He also 
 gave some evidence onthe Bright clauses. — Witness. — •' 
 with reference to leases, did he give any evidence as to 
 that, because I have suffered myself greatly in that 
 matter 1 
 
 5286. Is that on the dropping of a lease? — Yes, on 
 the expiration of a lease. 
 
 5287. On the expiration of the lease, was the tenant- 
 right revived 1 — Taken up altogether. My grand- 
 father purchased a farm near Richhill. It was 
 formerly held under the Clarices, but Jacob Orr was 
 the owner when the lease expired. My grandfather 
 purchased this farm, and took out a lease, and mj 
 father who was the only son was the life of the lease. 
 He improved the farm, he sewered it, he levelled ditches 
 and made large fields, planted ground, set hedges, filled 
 up "shoughs" and put bars and iron gates on every 
 field, and at the expiration of that lease the landlord 
 asked me was I prepared to pay £2 an acre. 
 
 5288. How long was the lease for? — I think 31 
 years, or three lives. 
 
 5289. And when did it expire? — It expired some 
 time before the passing of the Land Act of 1870. 
 1 think about two years before it. 
 
 5290. What was the rent under the lease? — 
 Twenty-seven shillings an acre. 
 
 5291. Statute acre?— Yes; statute acre. 
 
 5292. What happened when the lease dropped ? — 
 He asked me was I prepared to pay £2 an acre, 
 and I said I was not. 
 
 5293. Baron Dowse. — Who asked it, the landlord ? 
 — Jacob Orr, who professed to be a tenant-right man; 
 I told him that I could not take a thing that would 
 not pay me ; that I could not take it. 
 
 5294. Chairman. — What kind of land is it?— 
 The land is not the best ; it is nice light land, not 
 heavy cropping land. At the same time that he was 
 asking the £2 an acre he had set it to another 
 tenant, who took the farm from him, and I asked 
 him would he allow me anything for my improve- 
 ments, and he said not a shilling. I never recov- 
 ered the price of even an iron gate, and he took 
 the farm. 
 
 5295. Did he accept any rent from you after 
 the lease dropped ?— He did that year after my father 
 died. 
 
 5296. Did you pay rent after the death of your 
 father ? — For none but the one year. 
 
 5297. Baron Dowse. — Under the Emblements Act, 
 which enables a tenant to hold to the end of the year 
 without creating a new tenancy ? — Yes ; that was thfl 
 way it was done. 
 
 5298. There was no new tenancy created ? — No ; 
 no new tenancy created. 
 
 5299. Chairman.-— Well then did he eject you? — 
 He did. 
 
 5300. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres were there? — 
 Something about thirty. 
 
 5301. Chairman. — Did you get no allowance? — 
 
 No, not a shilling. He told me' I 
 ]']'icr- of even an iron "ate. 
 
 would not get the 
 
 6302. Mr. Shaw. — Was tenant-right allowed on 
 the estate ? — No ; not that I know of. 
 
 5303. Baron Dowse. —Did tenant-right not exist 
 on that property ? — I think not. It was a small pro- 
 perty, Jacob Orr's. I was reared on Mrs. Bacon's, 
 which is a large estate, and well managed, and the 
 farmers are all generally thriving on it. 
 
 5304. Who is the agent for Mrs. Bacon? — Mr. 
 Brush, and his father was -agent before him. My 
 father and grandfather lived on the same estate. My 
 father held a large farm on it. 
 
 5305. That property of Jacob Orr's, did he buy it 
 himself? — His father-in-law, George Henry, bought 
 it, and gave it over to Jacob Orr. 
 
 5305a. Are you able to state the rent that Orr got 
 for that farm that he took from you? — 37s. Qd. 
 
 5306. And he had it let for 37s. Gd. when he 
 asked you £2 for it? — He had. That was not the 
 farm 1 lived on ; I lived on Mrs. Bacon's property. 
 
 5307. You did not take it at £2 ?— No ; I did not 
 consider it worth it. My father lived on Mrs. Bacon's 
 property at £1 an acre. 
 
 5308. Did your father make all the improvements? 
 — My father and grandfather did. 
 
 5309. Did the landlord make any improvements? 
 — Oh, none at all. I never got a sixpence for mak- 
 ing a sewer. On Mrs. Bacon's estate they allow for 
 sewers. When sewers were made they got so much a 
 perch, and the tenants had nothing to do but to fill 
 them. 
 
 6310. But did she charge the tenants for that? — 
 No, nothing. 
 
 5311. Then whoever has that property now at 37s. 
 6d. has got the value of your own improvements, and 
 also of your father's and grandfather's ? — Exactly. 
 
 5312. How much land do you hold yourself at pre- 
 sent ? — I have close upon 200 acres. 
 
 5313. Is that all on Mrs. Bacon's ?— None of it. 
 My father bought me a farm on another property, the 
 property of Mrs. Cope ; but I do not live on it ; I live 
 on Charles Wakefield's estate. He is a very good 
 landlord. 
 
 6314. Are you a tenant from year to year ? — 1 have 
 a lease for three lives, two of which are in being. 
 6314a. The lease is still in existence? — It is. 
 
 5315. Does that apply to the whole of the 200 
 acres ? — It does not. 
 
 5316. Have you any from year to year? — Yes. 
 
 5317. And on whose estate is that? — T have an 
 outside farm of sixty acres under a brother of Mr. 
 Wakefield. 
 
 5318. Is it from year to year ? — It is. 
 
 6319. Is that included in the 200 acres ?— It is. I 
 have some land in trust for other people. 
 
 5320. Does tenant-right prevail on that estate ? — 
 It does. 
 
 5321. Are you aware of any increase of rent in your 
 neighbourhood ? — Yes, for a great many years. 
 
 6322. Does that arise at a change of tenancy ? — 
 Yes, or a death. If a son goes to get his name put 
 on the rent book, he is charged additional rent on the 
 gi'ound of disturbance. 
 
 6323. Disturbance of whom ? — When a man goes 
 to get his name put on the rent book, his rent is 
 raised. 
 
 5324. It is not a disturbance to the landlord, and it 
 is a change ? — Well, they make it an excuse to raise 
 the rent. A man applied to sell a small holding, the 
 agent gave him leave, but he did not dispose of it, and 
 when he went back to the office he was told he would 
 have to pay an increased rent of 2s. per acre. 
 
 6325. And did he agree to pay it? — He did. He 
 had either to pay it or go out. 
 
 5326. He made the improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 5327. That was a rise of 2s. an acre on his own 
 improvements ? — Yes. That was John Robinson, of 
 Derrylettiff, on Lord Lurgan's property. I purchased 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 197 
 
 tlie property of a widow woman, a Mrs. Ruddell, and 
 when I went back slie said I would have to pay 
 a rise of rent of £10. I asked her was she pre- 
 pared to take £200 less fOr the farm, as for every 
 shilling the landlord raised it, it was worth a pound a 
 year less to me ; that was at 5 per cent. I told her 
 to go back and to give it to Mr. Hancock. She died 
 since, and the son went in to get his name on the rent 
 book, and it was raised £15 on the son, who paid it 
 under protest. 
 
 5328. How many acres are there ? — I think abovit 
 eighty seven. 
 
 5329. And he paid the £15 imder protest 1 — Yes. 
 
 5330. So that was £15 put on the tenant's improve- 
 ments in the farm 'I — Yes. I believe his father built 
 the dwelling-house. The out-houses are all slated ex- 
 cept one, and are all well enclosed. 
 
 5331. Had Lord Lurgan made any improvements 1 
 — None that I know of. 
 
 5332. And Mr. Hancock none 1 — None. 
 
 5333. Is that the Mr. Hancock examined on the 
 Devon Commission 1 — Yes, the same. 
 
 5334. Who said that if tenant-right was distui-bed 
 in Ulster, Down would become a Tipperary 1 — Yes. 
 
 5335. You know this question as to the rent being 
 raised ? — Yes. I went to purchase another farm cm 
 the same estate. I did not close the bargain for 
 £1,700, as I was told it was the custom to make the 
 tenant, at the expiration of a lease, pay close upon £2 
 an acre for the shoreland: Finding that I would have 
 to pay for the shoreland, I would not purchase the 
 farm. 
 
 5336. That is the land formerly under water?— - 
 Yes. 
 
 5337. And that has been reclaimed by the drainage 
 of Lough Neagh 1 — Yes. 
 
 5338. Has the effect of the whole cf that system 
 of raising the rent been to lessen the value of the 
 tenant-right ? — There is no doubt of it. I will give 
 you another case. I purchased another farm fj'oni a 
 man of the name of John Wilson, beside Dungannon. 
 I went into the office to be accepted as tenant. I was 
 asked to sign an agreement. The agent then said — 
 " Do you know that this is a holding sold under a special 
 agreement?' Isaid not, and I askedwhat was the nature 
 of the agreement. He said the holding was near the 
 demesne, and that I must sign an agreement not to 
 Annoy the game, and not to complain no matter what 
 harm I got from the gamoi 
 
 5339. What did they mean by game? — Pheasants 
 and the like. Says I " Supposing the pheasants 
 would increase and eat all my corn, do you expect me 
 to come and give you £85 of rent at November?" 
 And he said, " Of course." 
 
 5340. Who was that agent 1 — He. has died since. 
 
 5341. But it was the agent? — Yes. I said, "Do 
 you know this, before I would do that I would take 
 a spade on my back, and go to the backwoods of 
 America." He then said to the tenant, " Have you 
 not £100 of this man's money?" "I have," £aid 
 Wilson. " Then," said the agent, " I will allow you 
 to keep it and let this man go, for he is an ignorant 
 man," 
 
 5342. What did you say 1—" Well," says I, " it's 
 ignorant men you want in here. I never rubbed my 
 back against a college wall, but the men you want 
 here are men who will sign anything you want." 
 They dare not go into Court, and I got my £100. 
 
 5343. Who was the landlord 1 — Lord Eanfurly. 
 
 5344. The O'Conor Don. — Was that since the pass- 
 ing of the Land Act? — Yes; and there is another 
 agent there now just doing the same thing. I bought 
 a farm from a man named John M'Laughlin, now in 
 Tippei-ary, for £1,400. He laid main drains, he built 
 houses and slated them, he made a draw well, and had 
 
 every accommodation on the farm. I gave him £20 Sept. 22, isso. 
 
 an acre for the farm, and I went to the office to the ,,, j~. 
 
 new agent, and he said, " The tenant-right on this is Eobinson. 
 
 £10 an acre, and you must sign an agreement that if, 
 
 at any time, we require it we will get it, and all you 
 
 wiU receive is £10 an acre. I said, "That is like 
 
 giving a man a half sovereign, and making him believe it 
 
 is a sovereign you are giving him. I will not do that." 
 
 The result was the man had to go to Tipperary, and 
 
 the farm is unsold to this day. 
 
 5345. Baron Dowse. — Is that near Dungannon? 
 — It is between Dungannon and Moy. That land is 
 quite barren land. This man was an industrious man, 
 and that was the way he was encouraged. 
 
 5346. Is not the effect of that to prevent people 
 putting their money in the land, and doesn't it dis- 
 courage them ? — Decidedly, and I think the landlord 
 who does it is very foolish. I know a man who has 
 thousands of pounds in the bank, and he said he would 
 tic a cow to a tree in an orchard before he would put 
 on a slate for a landlord. He never slated a house 
 although he has 200 acres of land. 
 
 5347. And what has become of the houses without 
 slates ? — He thatched them. Many a good man lived 
 in a house without slates. 
 
 5348. You think that if free sale was given to a 
 man for his interest in the land at a fair rent and 
 continued occupancy as long as he paid his lent, that 
 it would be a remedy for that ? — There is no doubt of 
 it. 
 
 5349. Do you think it should satisfy them? — Yes. 
 I think any honest reasonable man would pay his 
 landlord a fair rent. I know some men who bought 
 under the Church Temporalities Commissioners, and 
 those men were drinking men before they bought, but 
 since it those men are more industrious and, I believe, 
 they are more loyal. They have security now. 
 
 5350. They have now their own land? — Yes, the 
 land is their own. 
 
 5351. You think that succeeded ? — It did. 
 
 5352. And do you think it would succeed by amend- 
 ing Bright's clauses of the Land Act ? — Well, the 
 farmers in general are noi; able at present. 
 
 5353. Times are depressed? — But if a man got a 
 chance of buying his farm he would borrow the money 
 and have the farm soon. 
 
 5354. He would then be sure that he had no rent 
 to pay, and that everything he put in the land could 
 be taken out of it ? — Certainly. I hold under an ex- 
 cellent landlord, Mr. Wakefield, who never dispos- 
 sessed a tenant who paid his rent, and who sets his 
 land at a fair rent. 
 
 5355. And what is the condition of his tenantry? 
 — Very contented, and he is beloved by everybody. 
 
 5356. Is that near Eichhill ? — No ; it is near Porta- 
 down. He gives the bog free, and Lord Lurgan and 
 the adjoining landlord charge £3 to each tenant. He 
 gives it free to each tenant. That is, of course, a 
 small thing; but it is a great thing to make tenants 
 happy and contented. 
 
 5357. Stm, at the same time, I suppose the tenants 
 under him would prefer to have legal security to hav- 
 ing security by goodnature ? — There is no doubt of it, 
 for the landlord is an old man. I have spent a good 
 deal of money on the place myself, built a byre for 
 fifteen head of cattle, thorough-drained the greater 
 part of the farm, &c., and I don't know who is to get 
 the estate next year, for my landlord has no family. 
 A man may come in and say, " You have a fine farm 
 of land here," and increase my rent, and I would not 
 like if any of you gentlemen would get it, and the 
 agent were to come in and say, " You must pay £2 
 an acre for this." I would count it a hardship. Even 
 under my present landlord I would like security. 
 
198 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880 
 
 Sept. 22, 1S80. 
 
 Mr John 
 ■\Valker. 
 
 Mr. John Walker, Seagoe Villa, Portadown, examined. 
 
 5358. CHAiEsrAN.— You have heard the evidence 
 already given?— I heard Mr. Shillington, and I quite 
 agree with all he said. I know what he said, and have 
 read the heads of it all over. 
 
 5359. You are a purchaser under the Church 
 Temporalities 1 — Yes. 
 
 5360. Is it on the same estate as Mr. Ruddell's?— 
 Yes ; I live at Seagoe close to Portadown. 
 
 5361. Are you satisfied with your purchase after 
 having made it? — Yes; but there is one thing I ob- 
 jected to. They charged me full purchase on the 
 drainage; they should only have charged me eight 
 years, and they charged me twenty-two or twenty-two 
 and a half. 
 
 5362. Mr. Shaw.— What do you mean by that?— 
 Tlie drainage is what they lowered off the Bann. 
 
 5363. Baron Dowse. — Are you in the Lough 
 Neagh Drainage District? — Yes. 
 
 5364. Chairman. — And that is a sort of rate on the 
 district?- Yes. 
 
 5365. Can you account for it how it was that your's 
 was not a fair amount ? — No one can account for that. 
 I objected to them charging me twenty-two years' 
 purchase on what was paid in eight years. I spent 
 about £1,000 on this property, and tliey would not 
 allow me the drainage. They told me if I did not like 
 to do it I might let it alone. 
 
 5366. Did you expend that on the faith of tenant- 
 right ? — Yes ; I had the lease from the Archdeacon 
 during his day. 
 
 5367. And there would be tenant-right allowed at 
 the end of the lease? — Yes ; but I got a 99 years lease 
 from the Church Temporalities. 
 
 5368. Was it only for the Archdeacon's life that 
 you had got the lease ? — That was all. 
 
 5369. Mr. Shaw.— What is the size of the holding ? 
 — Thirteen acres. 
 
 5370. Near the town? — Yes. 
 
 5371. Baron Dowse. — I suppose you are a mile 
 from Portadown ? — Scarcely a mile. 
 
 5372. Chairman. — But with respect to the buying 
 of your own farm you are satisfied. Had you any 
 lands near it ? — Yes, a farm my father formerly held. 
 
 5373. Who is your landlord ?— Mr. Moore of Kil- 
 keel. 
 
 5374. Do you feel any doubt as to making im- 
 provements on those holdings ? — I am making improve- 
 ments and taking chance. 
 
 5375. Trusting to your landlord ? — Yes. 
 
 537G. Would it be better in your opinion to trust to 
 the law ? — Certainly ; it would be a great benefit to the 
 country if the security you suggested was given to the 
 farmer, The last four years have been so bad that a 
 great many farmers in my district have been unable to 
 pay their rent and maintain their families, and the 
 
 greater part of them if all they had were sold it would 
 not be sufficient to pay their debts. 
 
 5377. Were there anjr abatements in your district? 
 — In some places fifteen per cent, and in some places 
 not more than two. 
 
 5378. Baron Dowse. — You read Mr. Shillington'g 
 evidence and heard it fully again, and you quite agree 
 with him ? — T have read it all over and I quite agree 
 with him. 
 
 5379. Do you believe that what was proposed 
 would give a sense of security to the country?— J 
 believe it would. 
 
 5380. And do you believe it would do the land 
 lords any harm ? — I believe it would do good. 
 
 5381. Has there been any rising of rent since the 
 Land Act ? — Always at a change of tenancy. 
 
 5382. I'he rent has been raised ? — Yes. 
 
 5383. Did you ever know a landlord to lower tk 
 rent ? — Never. 
 
 5384. But is it only at a change of tenancy that the 
 rise takes place? — Generally at a change of tenancy 
 
 5385. After the tenant sells his tenant-right to tlif 
 incoming man? — When he goes to sell the agent oi 
 bailifi" sends in to say : " This rent is to be raised sr 
 much." 
 
 5386. And that has the effect of reducing the ten 
 ant -right ? — Yes. 
 
 5387. If that were to go on it would put an end tr 
 the tenant-right ? — That, 1 think, is what they wan' 
 to do. 
 
 5388. And what would the efiect of that be on thf 
 people in your part of the country ? Would it makf 
 them more loyal ? — Well they would not feel so well 
 I believe if they got free sale that the country in a fen 
 j'^ears would be in a different position from what i* 
 is in. 
 
 5389. And the landlord would get his rent ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 5390. And the country would be improved?— 
 Yes. 
 
 5391. If the land were let at a fair rent the teuan< 
 could still live ? — Yes. 
 
 5392. And this would give him security ? — Yes 
 security. 
 
 5393. The O'Conor Don. — Is this a new systeir 
 since the Land Act ?— It is more general since thf 
 Land Act. 
 
 5394. Was it not a custom before the Land Act?— 
 Scarcely ever thought of. 
 
 5395. Before the Land Act they allowed the sale! 
 to take place without raising the rent ? — No. Thf 
 Duke, I remember the time when they would not takf 
 a lease under him they put so much dependence ir 
 him. 
 
 5396. Has there been any sales in your district 
 during the last year ? — None. The Duke won't &\\o\s 
 them to sell. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Shillitigton. 
 
 ]Mr. Thomas Shillington recalled. 
 
 5397. Chaiem.\n. — I want to ask you, Mr. Shil- 
 lington, can you give us any evidence as to the state 
 of the labourers, whether they hold under farmers or 
 from the landlords direct ? — The labourers generally 
 live in cottier houses on the farms. A farmer of, say, 
 twenty acres will have a house or two and a labourer 
 or two. They hold generally under farmers. Wages 
 have advanced perhaps fifteen per cent, during the last 
 ten years, and in some cases more. The wages of 
 farm labourei'S are very low in the district, and 
 labourers are not very well off'. The farmers cannot 
 afford to pay them. 
 
 5398. Mr. Shaw. — What is the general average of 
 their wages ? — It varies during special seasons, but I 
 should say Ijoard wages have gone out of use altogether, 
 that 9y. or 10s. a week for continuous work is about 
 tii? a^'c^,lg^i. There are a gi-oat many luid'-r thut. 
 
 5399. Do they get houses free? — Yes, generally 
 They have lower wages than that if they get a free 
 house; there are wages as low as 8s., without the 
 house. 
 
 5400. Are there gardens? — Not generally. 
 
 5401. Chairman. — Whether do yoii think it would 
 bo better for the labourers to hold under farmers, oi 
 better for them to be so far independent that they 
 Avould work and get their wages without holding 
 directly under them ?— I don't think it makes them 
 more dependent on the farmers their having houses ; 
 if they held ground possibly it might, but that does not 
 prevail to any extent. 
 
 5401a. If they have a house does any difficulty arise 
 in case of the death or illness of the labouring man as 
 to the removal of his family ?— Well difficulties arise 
 sometimes, but not in our neighbourhood, as wo have 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 199 
 
 manufactures thai, aLsorb the meniLeis oi the family. 
 The drug in the market is the labouring man, as there 
 is plenty of labour for women and children. 
 
 5402. Would it generally be the view of the farmer 
 that if the laboui-er became unable to work or died, 
 that his family should go and make room for some 
 one who would be able to work on the farms 1 — Yvs^. 
 certainly. I may mention a habit has prevailed in 
 some districts of pulling down labourers' cottages, for 
 the purpose of keeping down the poor rates, and when 
 a farm is sold, it is often sold on the conditions that 
 some of these houses should be taken down. 
 
 5i03. Mr. Pwbb. — I hold a farm under Lord Lurgan 
 where an adjoining town land was sold. The landlord 
 wished to sell thai townland to the tenants. It was 
 sold through the cimit, and the tenants had no difficulty 
 in getting the stipulated advance, and I believe every- 
 thing works pleasantly. 
 
 5404. The O'Conoe Don. — Were they small 
 tenants % — Yes. 
 
 5405. What would be about the average rent t — The 
 rent was very moderate : I think about 2ls. an acre. 
 
 5406. And the size of the farms'! — From ten to 
 thirty acres. 
 
 5407. Baron Dowse And are they able to live on 
 
 those farms 1 — If you take away the hand-loom weaving, 
 that is rapidly leaving the comrtry, the farmer cannot 
 live on ten acres, and where the farms are smaller it is 
 miserable in the extreme. With regard to farm 
 labourers, their condition is deserving of very great 
 attention. 
 
 5408. Is it power-loom weaving coming in that is Sept. 2i,isso. 
 taking away the hand-loom weaving ? — Yes. 
 
 5409. Because I know in that part of the world 
 tliere is some sort of loom that adds to the income of 
 the family ? — Yes, and there were houses for looms 
 there, that high rents were paid for cheerfully. 
 
 5410. I know it used to be said that they could not 
 make more than Gs. a week, by working at the 
 weaving ? — It varies a great deal, and the wages are 
 very low just at present. Twelve months ago they 
 were considerably higher. 
 
 5411. Then the small iarmer had his farm, and a 
 place to carry on his trade ? — Yes, and it therefore 
 occurs sometimet that they manage to be able to biiy 
 an addition to theii .arms, 1 ''nay say, I have heard 
 this as an ohjection on the part of the tenants — where 
 the county court judge holds his court, he is somatimes 
 the guest oi a neighboux'ing pi'oprietor, and cases come 
 up and are decided, and the tenants do not consider it 
 veiy satisfactory. 
 
 5412. And that has also been put forward as an 
 argument against the county court judge, living in the 
 county 1 — I never heard that. 
 
 5413. The O'Conor Don. — What number of years 
 purchase did these tenants pay for the land ? — I think 
 twenty-eight. They paid a high price, although the 
 good-will of the landlord was in their favour. He 
 wished them to purchase, yet they gave him a fine 
 price. 
 
 Mr. FREnERicK Wrench, Land Agent, of Brookborough, in the county Fermanagh, examined. 
 
 Mr. Frederick 
 Wrench. 
 
 5414. Baron Dov.se. — You are a land agent ? — I am. 
 
 5415. You are agent on the estate of Sir Victor 
 Brooke 1 — Yes, and also on the estates of Lord 
 Rathdonnell, Lord Lanesborough, Sir Thomas B. 
 Lennard, and four other smaller estates. 
 
 ' 5416. About how much rent do you collect al- 
 tog-'ther ?— About £40,000 a year. 
 
 5417. How long have you been engaged as a land 
 agent? — About eleven years. 
 
 5418. And j'ou have had a good deal of experience 
 as land agent?— Yes. I was agent for two years on 
 the estate of Mrs. Hope, Castleblayney, and before I 
 became agent I was in the office of Mr. Vei'non, land 
 agent, Dublm. 
 
 5419. Then you have had expeiience in managijjg 
 estates before you became an agent on your own 
 account? — Yes. I had experience in the management 
 of estates in Cavau, Westmeath, antl in Coik, and on 
 Lord Pembroke's (;'::tate in Dublin. 
 
 5420. Does the custom ot tenant-right prevail on all 
 these estates ol whicli you are agent or onlj' on some 
 of them ? — It exists on all, with the exception of tlic 
 Colebrooke estate, whore a particular custom exists. 
 
 5421. Does the custom ot tenant-right prevail on 
 Sir Thomas B. Lcnnard's estate ? — It does. 
 
 5422. And on Lord Lanesborough's estate ? — Yes. 
 
 5423. And where is Lord iiathdonnell's property 
 there? — It is betv/een ^ewtownbutler and Belturbet. 
 Part oi it consists ot islands in Lough Erne. 
 
 5424. All these properties forwtiicli you are agent, 
 are they in "Ulster? — They are, with the exception of 
 one in Lonth, and that is a very small one, the estate 
 ot Mr. Lonsdale, near L^roghecla. 
 
 5425. And does the Lister custom prevrdl on all 
 these estates ?— Yes, it does, and all through that dis- 
 trict. 
 
 5426. Does it jirevail in the same lorm on all tiiese 
 estates 1 — No ; it does not. 
 
 5427. Take the estate of Sir Victor Bi-ooke, in what 
 lorm does it prevail there?— On Sir Victor Brooke's 
 estate, in the county b'ermanagh, ih.c. custom that has 
 been in existence foi some torty years is. that when a 
 tenant wishes to leave his holding the landlord .shall 
 select the new tenant. The outgoing tenant names 
 one arbitrator, the incoming tenant anothei', and the 
 
 landlord appoincs an umpire acceptable to both. These 
 three men visit the holding, and value the improve- 
 ments made by his tenant or predecessors, the decision 
 of any two of them being final. The umpire is in- 
 variably a tenant on the estate, but the tenant is not 
 restricted in the choice of an arbitrator. 
 
 5428. Who selects the umpire? — The landlord. 
 Generally the seller and buyer are both present, and 
 the umpire is named, and they are asked whether they 
 have any objections. 
 
 5429. Yon have sent in here a form called change 
 of tenant. Is that the form to which yon allude as 
 signed by the parties? — It is. 
 
 5430. That form is headed " Colebrooke Estate. 
 Change ot tenant. Arbitration on improvements in 
 accordance with the custom of the estate." And then 
 it states that Sir Victor Brooke, having accepted j\Ir. 
 
 as tenant, in lieu of Mr. , the present tenant, 
 
 the iindernamed have been ap|)ointed to view and fix 
 the value to bo paid by the accepted tenant for the 
 improvements on the holding. 
 
 5431. Improvements on the holding — is that the 
 only matter that is valued? Is there nothing for 
 the goodwill ! — That was established many yeai-s ago. 
 
 5432. What do you say about the goodwill? — That 
 custom of improvements was established many years 
 ago, beioi-e there was any question of tenant-right; and 
 v.-hat is supposed to be valued is the value of the 
 buildings, the drainage, or whatever improvements 
 have been made by the tenants. 
 
 5-13:5. Ln other words, what you call the tenant's in- 
 terest in the land ? — The tenant's interest in the im- 
 provements. 
 
 5434. But if there are no improvements the tenant 
 would get nothing? — No, he would not. 
 
 5435. It is only the improvements to bo valued 1 — 
 Exactly. 
 
 5436. Could you give us any idea of the sums paid 
 under these circumstances ? — It depends greatly on the 
 improvements made. There was a case lately of a 
 small holding ot sixteen Irish acres, and the tenant had 
 improved it ^-ery much, and had it in excellent order, 
 and he got £285 for it. That was an exceptionally 
 large sum, but of course he had made great imiirove- 
 ments. In other cases perhaps a man ^^'ould not "< t 
 
200 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION', 1S80. 
 
 &/)e.22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Frederick 
 Wrench. 
 
 nearly as much, but I should think the average all 
 round would be about £8 or £9 the Irish acre. 
 
 5437. Has there been any increase of rent on Sir 
 Victor Brooke's estate ■?— There has been no general, 
 increase. If a lease expires it is revalued at the end 
 of the lease, and on the change of a tenancy if the rent 
 is admittedly low there is an increase put on sometimes, 
 but it is not as a rule. It dei)ends on the rent. 
 
 5438. Is that rent ever so arranged that it is put on 
 the tenants' improvements? — Certainly not. At the 
 expiration of a lease wlieie a man has improved his 
 farm he would be more leniently dealt with than a man 
 who had run it to waste. 
 
 5439. Supposing a man's land is in a bad condition 
 and he puts it into a good condition, it would not be 
 the practice on that estate to make him pay for his 
 own improvements? — It never has been so. Very 
 often a tenant making substantial improvements, such 
 as biiilding improvements, has been given a lease. 
 
 5440. Except in that way the Ulster custom does 
 not exist on Sir Victor Brooke's estate 1 — It does not. 
 
 5441. Is that called tenant-right? — It is not. It is 
 called the custom of arbitration. 
 
 5442. Is that found satisfactory with the tenants ? — 
 I have never seen any custom on an estate which 
 AYorks so well, or where there is such universal good 
 feeling. There is never a dispute. 
 
 5443. That is in Fermanagh, that estate ? — Yes. It 
 lies around Brookborough. 
 
 5444. On Sir Thomas B. Lennard's estate, which I 
 believe is in the county Monaghan, Clones is on that 
 estate ? — Yes. 
 
 5445. Does the custom of Ulster Tenant-right prevail 
 there? — The usual custom — this is as to all the other 
 estates — is, that when a tenant wishes to sell he comes 
 to the office and asks me for permission, and he is given 
 permission to sell by private contract to a solvent 
 tenant, who shall previously be approved of by the 
 landlord. The. adjoining teiiant, or a tenant on the 
 estate, has the preference, provided he is williag to give 
 the fair value of the tenant-right. The price is not 
 restricted, but is left to be arranged between the jsarties 
 themselves. 
 
 5446. Does not that custom exist on all the estates 
 you represent except Sir Victor Brooke's ? — Yes. 
 
 5447. OiiAiKMAN. — And on those estates it is called 
 tenant-right ?— Yes. 
 
 5448. Baron Dowse. — I believe Sir Thomas B. 
 Lennard has no residenee on that property ? — He has 
 not. 
 
 5449. And does he ever come to visit it at all ? — Xo. 
 
 5450. He is completely an absentee ? — Yes. 
 
 5451. Lord Lancsborough, he lives in Ireland? — 
 He has a residence on Lough Erne. 
 
 5452. And Lord Eathdonnell, we know lives in 
 Ireland, also 3 he has estates in Louth as well. And 
 yoR are dealing with the I'crmanagh estate? — Yes. 
 
 5453. Do you find the custom work well on these 
 estates? — Yes, I think ver}- well. Generally if there 
 is any dispute as to the price, I am asked, by both par- 
 ties to settle it between them. 
 
 5454. You p\it no restriction on the prico ? — Not as 
 long as the incoming tenant is approved of by me on 
 the landlord's behalf, and is a solvent and respectable 
 tenant, and is willing to abide by the custom of the 
 estate, and that he will not sell again without leave. 
 
 5155. I suppose the tenants are not disturbed on 
 these estates, so long as they pay the rent ? — I have 
 never heard of it. Practically for all i)urposes tiiey 
 hold at fair rent by fixed teniu'c. 
 
 5456. They have powers to sell, and with a veto on 
 the part of the landlord ; is that so ? — Yes. 
 
 5457. It works well?— It does, excellently. Tliero 
 is a very good feeling on these estates. 
 
 54.j8. Is there any rise of rent on tlicsc estates? — 
 If when a tenant sells, the i-ent is below the value, I 
 have, in some instances, put on an increase of rent, 
 but on Sir Thomas Lennard's and Lord Eathdonncll's 
 estates, the lands are fairly let. In very few cases is 
 
 On those estates is the tenant-right sold at 
 
 there a change of rent. It entirely depends on what 
 the rent is. 
 
 5459. You would not consider it just to increase the 
 rent on a man's own improvements? — Certainly not ; 
 but at the same time I think the landlord has the 
 right to the fair value of the land. 
 
 5460. Yes, the landlord ; to begin with, the estate 
 is his, and there is an inherent power in the soil, and 
 you recognise that in the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5461. And you would not in any way make a man 
 jiay the increased valuation, owing to his own im- 
 provements 1 — Certainly not. 
 
 5462. " ■ ■ 
 all by auction ? — Never. 
 
 5463. You object to that ?— I do. 
 
 £464. And do you object to that on the gi-ound that 
 it takes away the power to put a veto on the purchaser 
 on behalf of the landlord 1 — It makes it more difficult 
 for him to put a veto on the purchaser, and also at 
 auctions there are men called " sweeteners" come in, 
 who raise the value unfairly. 
 
 5465. Is it not also the fact that an auction by com- 
 petition is apt to make men give more than they 
 ought to give for the land 1 — Certainly. 
 
 5466. Then a sale by auction is not allowed on these 
 properties 1 — No. 
 
 5467. Are the I'ents on these estates you mention 
 reasonable rents as a whole ? — ^Yes, they are. 
 
 5468. And do they bear any proportion to the 
 Government valuation? What is the Government 
 valuation ?— -The Colebrooke estate is lower than most 
 of the other estates. The tenants and the landlords 
 are on good terms, and the landlords never wish to 
 raise them up to the Government valuation. I think 
 probably the rents would be about eight and a half per 
 cent, under the Government valuation. In settling 
 the rents tlie buildings are not taken into account. It 
 is the Government valuation of the land and not of 
 the buildings, unless the buildings have been made by 
 the landlords. ^j 
 
 5469. On Sir Victor Brooke's estate is it the cus- 
 tom for the improvements to be made by the land- 
 lord 1 — Previous to the passing of the Land Act the 
 landlord used to grant timber and slates. 
 
 5470. Did he increase the rent in proportion ? — Not 
 previous to passing the Land Act. 
 
 5471. What has been the custom since? — The land- 
 lord's imjn-o-\ements have ceased since. 
 
 5472. And practically, on that estate, does the 
 tenant make the improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 5473. And does the same rule ]3revail with the 
 other properties ? — It does, since the passing of the 
 Land Act, at Clones, and on other estates I know 
 of lime is allowed to the tenants at half price. 
 
 5474. But sul)stantially now all the improvements 
 arc made by the tenants ? — Yes ; there are small 
 imi)rovements, such as draining, which the landlord 
 assists in. 
 
 5475. You don't know anything about the surround- 
 ing estates excepit in a general way ? Are they ma- 
 naged much about the same way ? — I know the estates 
 adjoining my employer's estates. 
 
 5476. The Castleblayney estate formerly belonged 
 to Lord Blayney. Di.ies tenant-right prevail on it ? — 
 It does. 
 
 5477. The same way as Sir Tliomas B. Lennard's? 
 — It does. 
 
 5478. And the other properties you mention ? — Yes. 
 
 5479. And I suppose your evidence applies to 
 these as well as the ones you are presently agent 
 over?-- Yes. But, of course, I know the estates in 
 the neiglibourhood of Clones, as many of the tenants 
 liokling there also hold on the estate I manage. 
 
 5480. Have t!::ey other fiirms ?— Some of them 
 have. 
 
 5481. You are not in favour of an uncontrolled free 
 sale ?— Certainly not. I think the landlord should 
 always have the selection of the tenant, and the ad- 
 joining tenant shcnld haye the i<referei)ce proyidcd he 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 201 
 
 is willing to give a fair price. I tliink that is most 
 important. 
 
 5482. Do the tenants themselves admit it is fair'? — 
 Yes ; they all admit it is fair. 
 
 5483. You find the tenants approve of that ? — Yes. 
 
 5484. Provided he is willing to give a fair price? 
 — Decided!}'. 
 
 5485. Ha\e you any knowledge of the manage- 
 ment of estates out of Ulster before you became 
 an agent yourself — in the days when you had an op- 
 portunity of becoming acquainted with estates out 
 of Ulster 1 — Yes ; but I should prefer giving my evi- 
 dence as to what I really understand. 
 
 5486. But, on the whole, you think this principle 
 carried out on the estates you have mentioned works 
 well?— Yes. 
 
 5487. The dealing with the tenants on Sir Victor 
 Brooke's estate, at first blush, does not appear so 
 liberal as others. It is only the improvements that 
 he grants compensation for "i — It is only the improve- 
 ments ; but it is practically the same thing, and the 
 tenants like to have arbitrators of their own class. 
 
 5488. Bxit it is called improvem.ents on Sir Victor 
 Brooke's estate and tenant-right on the others 1 — Yes. 
 
 5489. Is your evidence that it is practically the 
 same ? — It is always recognised and called improve- 
 ments, and we try to confine it to that, but I don't 
 know that tenani^right is different from improvements. 
 
 5490. On the other estates is thei'e more years' 
 purchase paid for a farm of the same kind, as 
 Sir Victor Brooke's, ■ for instance 1 — Yes, at Clones, 
 but the land on the Clones estate is so much better, 
 it is very hard to get at the different customs. On 
 adjoining estates the prices are often not the same. 
 I have known the price of tenant-right vary consider- 
 ably. In Mi-s. Hope's estate for instance, and Lord 
 Bath's, they are both let at about the same rate, and 
 on Mrs. Hope's estate there was a revaluation some 
 years ago. The tenant-right is very high there, and 
 I have known £30 an acre paid on Mrs. Hope's, and 
 on Lord Bath's not more than £10 to £12. 
 
 5491. And what is the cause of that? — It is very 
 hard to define why it should be so. It is the custom 
 of the estate. The causes that affect the price are the 
 quality of the land, the competition existing, the situa- 
 tion of the farm, the roads and markets &c. , the 
 character of the landlord, the rent and the character 
 of the neighbouring tenants on the estate. I especially 
 allude to that as I know on some properties, it is 
 very hard to get any one to take a farm. The state 
 of the houses and the farm buildings also affect the 
 state of the tenant-right and the accommodation as to 
 boggy land. The tenants are very fond of boggy land 
 being attached to holdings. 
 
 5492. Do you mean turf bogs? — No, I mean 
 reclaimed turf bog. It is very good for raising potatoes. 
 But according to the custom of the estate, the price 
 varies very much. 
 
 5493. You don't see much substantial difference 
 between what exists on Sir Victor Brooke's estate and 
 the other estates. Is not Sir Victor Brooke's the less 
 liberal way of dealing with the tenants. It may be 
 better or it may be worse, but it does not appear so 
 liberal to the tenant as Sir Thomas B. Lennard's way. 
 I will put the question in another way. Are not the 
 ai-bitrators prevented fixing the value of anything 
 except the improvements on Sii- Victor Brooke's 
 ostate ? — Those are their instructions, but in the case 
 where a tenant has really improved, he gets a great 
 deal more than the man who has not improved. 
 
 5494. His farm is worth more? — Yes. 
 
 5495. And it is worth more than the mere improve- 
 mentsthemselves 1 — Yes. There is great competition to 
 get on Sir Victor Brooke's estate. 
 
 5496. But at all events on that estate, it is called 
 improvements, and on the others tenant-right ? — It is. 
 
 5497. And you find this system of arbitrators and 
 umpires working well ? — Very well. 
 
 5498. ,How did you cany out the sales on the other 
 «states where you have not a form like this ? — I have 
 
 a minute book for each estate, and the tenant who 
 wishes to dispose of his holding comes in and asks my 
 permission to sell. I give him leave according to the 
 custom of the estate. He then has to look about for a 
 purchaser, and my bailifi" does the same to see if any 
 adjoining tenant or any one on the estate is wishing to 
 buy, and, when a suitable tenant is found, he mentions 
 the man, and he is proposed to me, and when I can 
 approve of him I say so ; and, as to the question of the 
 price, they generally come into my office, and the pur- 
 chaser makes a bid, and they talk it over before me, 
 and ask me to settle the price between them. 
 
 5499. And you don't interfere when the price is too 
 large or too small. You ask them to deal with them- 
 selves 1 — As long as they carry out my terms, I don't 
 mind what price they give. 
 
 5500. You don't feel called on to say men are 
 giving more than the place is worth, you leave the 
 parties to do as they like ? — I do. 
 
 5501. If he pays too much so much the worse for 
 himself? — Yes. 
 
 5502. Any arrears of rent due are deducted fropa the 
 purchase which is paid ? — Yes. 
 
 5503. And you find that working well on the estate ? 
 — Very well. 
 
 5504. I believe Sir Thomas B. Lennard's estate is 
 better land than the Fermanagh property ? — It is very 
 good land. 
 
 5505. Have you had any cases in the Land Courts 
 on these estates ? — I have had one. 
 
 5506. During eleven years 1 — Yes. 
 
 6507. Before whom was that? — It was before Mr. 
 Barron, in Monaghan. 
 
 5508. That was a claim under the Land Act ? — Yes, 
 a townpark. 
 
 5509. You were turning out the tenant? — The 
 tenant died, and left his interest, whatever it was, to a 
 brother, who lived at Ballyshannon, off the estate alto- 
 gether. This man then sold the townpark without 
 coming near me or any permission. Then I cautioned 
 him not to do so. He sold to an auctioneer in Clonea. 
 There had been no fine paid for it. It had been on 
 the death of the late agent, let without any tines of 
 which I had ample proof. 
 
 5510. And there had been some improvements made 
 on it ? — I offered to compensate the tenant fairly for 
 the improvements and to take up the townjiark, and he 
 would not do that, but sold to the auctioneer, and I 
 brought a notice to quit. 
 
 5511. He had a land claim? — He had. 
 
 5512. I suppose he failed ? — Yes. 
 
 5513. That is the only case you have had? — Yes. 
 
 5514. During how many years? — Eleven. 
 
 5515. In the management of all these properties 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 5516. Are there many evictions on the estate at all ? 
 — "VVe never bring an eviction except for non-pay- 
 ment of rent. 
 
 5517. And have you many of these ? — No. I think 
 we have had eight or nine in that time. 
 
 5518. Where the tenants were absolutely removed 
 from the land ? — No, only two. 
 
 5519. I suppose they settled the others before the 
 final eviction ? — Yes, or let them back as caretakers 
 whenever the six months for redemption expired, and 
 during that time they generally sold the interest, paid 
 the rent, and handed the balance back to the tenant. 
 
 5520. And did you do that in cases you evicted for 
 non-payment of rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5521. So, in fact, you evicted the tenant and put 
 him in as the caretaker, and as if he had an interest in 
 the land you sold and gave him the balance ? — Yes. 
 
 5522. Did you ever distraio. ? — Never. These are 
 all estates in which the landlord, has a good interest. 
 
 5523. You said there were some small estates. Lord 
 Eathdonnell's and others ? — Yes, there is an estate in 
 Monaghan and an estate in Fermanagh near Maguire's- 
 bridge, and others between these. 
 
 5524. And your evidence in reference to distress 
 and ejectments extends to the whole of them ? Yes. 
 
 2 D 
 
 Sei>f. 22, 188«. 
 
 Mr. Frederick 
 Wrench. 
 
202 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Frederick 
 Wrench. 
 
 .5524a. The only distinctions you make between Sir 
 Victor Brooke's and the others is as to the point v.ith 
 regard to arbitration ? — Yes. 
 
 5525. And yon never had a land claim in the land 
 courts of Fermanagh ? — No, except evictions for non- 
 payment. 
 
 5526. Are the tenants pretty well off on these pro- 
 perties ? — They are very well off on the Colebrook and 
 Clones estates. 
 
 '5527. Do they complain the lands are too high 1 — 
 Only in an isolated case they do. 
 
 5528. Do they think they are reasonable? — Tliey 
 have admitted they are reasonable. 
 
 5529. And they are reasonable ? — Certainly. 
 
 5530. Have you known of any properties where the 
 tenants purchased out-and-out under the Church 
 Temporalities 1 — I have known a few cases. 
 
 5531. In what county?— In the neighbourhood of 
 Clones. 
 
 5532. In the parish of Clones belonging to the 
 glebe there '.' — Yes. I have known a few cases. 
 
 5538. Have they been successes or otherwise ? — 
 They have not been successes. They have been unable 
 to pay the instalments and been obliged to sell to others. 
 
 5534. Have tliey sold to others ? — They have. 
 
 5535. And have the others been substituted in their 
 places ? — They have. 
 
 5536. Are they well off? — The men who were able 
 to pay were well of. 
 
 5537. And what became of the people who sold out ? 
 Did they emigrate ? — They had other trades besides. 
 One man has gone to the bad, and another is in the 
 same position. , 
 
 5538. But when they found they were not able to 
 pay they were compelled to sell ? — Yes. 
 
 5538a. And the men who paid are well off and are 
 enjoying the land now ? — Yes. "Where they have all 
 generally two or. three, and it comes back into the 
 hands of one man. 
 
 5539. And so tu.rnLng to consolidation ? — Yes. 
 
 5540. Do you think the system of peasant pro- 
 prietary would be good for the country ? — I think if 
 it were compulsorily carried out it would be a frightful 
 country to live in. At the same time I think it would 
 be advantageous to give tenants greater facilities to 
 purchase their holdings in the Landed Estates Court 
 or elsewhere, provided the amount of the loan is not 
 too large. I think if any man buys his holding he 
 ought to have one-third of the purchase-money. "When 
 dealing I would give greater facilities in the transfer 
 of land, and make it more sim.ple and less expensive. 
 
 5541. Do you think it a reasonable thing to prevent 
 a man making a will in regard to an estate? — No. 
 
 5542. At present there is a provision that \\-ithout 
 the assent of the Board of Works a man who borrows 
 money can neither alienate, subdivide, or even sell the 
 property; is that a reasonable thing — would you 
 prevent him alienating the property when he sold thi.^ 
 whole of it ? — I would not. 
 
 5543. You are only referring to a man who purchases 
 his holding. I am referring to what are called the 
 Bright clauses of the Land Act. 
 
 5544. Then I take it you would be in favour of the 
 creation of a peasant proprietary of this description 
 provided it were the result of natural causes'? — 
 Provided it was not forced and the man was able to 
 pay. I believe it would be a very good thing. 
 
 5545. And it would be useful to have such men 
 scattered through the country? — Decidedly. The 
 diiSculty is to get the right men who can pay. There are 
 some such cases in Fermanagh where men have 
 purchased their own land, but in many cases the buyers 
 had to take a mortgage on the lands and borrow the 
 money. 
 
 5346. I take it ybu would not force a landlord to 
 sell ? — Certainly not. 
 
 5547. "Were any applications made to you for a 
 reduction of rent in consequence of the unfavourableness 
 of the season? — There were no applications ■ made 
 except on Lord Bathdonnell's estate where there was 
 
 some serious flooding,' but allowances were given on 
 the other estates without application being made to 
 me. 
 
 5548. To what extent? — It depended on the rent, 
 and if a man was very much below the Government 
 valuation and on easy terms he did not get it, but 
 ordinarily they got 15 and 20 per cent, on the half 
 year, 
 
 5549. Did you find much distresson these properties? 
 —A few isolated cases were relieved privately. 
 
 5550. I take it that the people living on these 
 properties you allude to live by agriculture ? — They do. 
 
 5551. There are no manufactures ? — None. 
 
 5552. No manufactories on the Colebrook estate ? — 
 None. 
 
 5553. Nor on the Clones estate ? — None. 
 
 ■ 5554. Theyare all piu-ely agricultural estates? — Yes. 
 
 5555. And whatever way the tenant has to live it 
 must be by the land ? — Yes. 
 
 5556. And they do live there comfortably?- — Yes. 
 
 5557. And they are generally as a rule well affected 
 to the State, and do not disagree with the landlords ? 
 — No, except a few in the islands of Lough Erne who 
 are rather wild. 
 
 5558. Chaieman. — Are there any estates in your 
 neighbourhood where the full Ulster tenant-right 
 exists ? — Do you mean right of sale without permission. 
 
 5559. Yes, sale without any restriction? — No, 1 
 don't know any estate where there is the right of sale 
 without anj' restriction. There are estates where sales 
 are allowed — but the price of the tenant-right is res- 
 tricted to so much i^er acre. 
 
 5560. Do you find that tenants in your district have 
 been more inclined since the passing of the Land Act 
 to do improvements ? — I have not noticed any change. 
 
 5561. Are they in the habit of making improve- 
 ments ? — The better class of tenants &re ; they buUd 
 houses and ofiices, and construct daains and fences when 
 necessary, but as a rule with the small tenants the im- 
 provements are very slight. 
 
 5562. You say the landlords have ceased to improve? 
 — Yes ; they have ceased to supplj' timber, slates, and 
 materials, as they did formerly. 
 
 5563. Is that because they would be merged in 
 the tenants' improvements? — I presume so. They 
 have ceased extending that assistance to their tenants, 
 since the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 5564. Sir. Shaw. — Is there not a process of re- 
 gistering improvements ? — Yes, but it is so compli- 
 cated and troublesome that it has not been availed 
 of. In some cases I have offered to make improve- 
 ments for the tenants, charging them a per-centage, 
 but they would rather niake the improvements them- 
 selves than pay the per-centage. 
 
 5565. The per-centage you would have added to the 
 rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5566. Do you think that tenants would prefer to 
 purchase their holdings, or to be under good landlords 
 at a fair rent ? — -I think the small tenants would prefer 
 to be under good landlords at a fair rent. I don't know 
 who they would be able to apply to, in case of disputes 
 or of any misfortune or distress, if they had not the 
 landlord or his agent to have recourse to. On well 
 managed estates there is generally a great deal of good 
 feeling and acts of kindness between the landlord and 
 tenant. On the Colebrook estates that is very much , 
 the case. 
 
 5567. "What is the, custom as to labourers on those 
 estates, do theyhold from the farmers or direct from the 
 landlord ? — They hold from the farmers. 
 
 5568. Does that Work well as far as the labourer is 
 concerned ? — Yes, I think so. The farmers, I think 
 as a, rule, treat the labourers fairly, and pay them 
 fairly ; and latterly I notice that they have built better, 
 labourers' cottages ; but if they let them any land they 
 let it at a great deal higher rent than they pay for it 
 themselves. 
 
 5569. A small quantity of land, I suppose? — A 
 small quantity of land. 
 
 .5,570. Have they to ask permission to let the land 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDEKCE. 
 
 203 
 
 to labourers 1 — Not in tlie otiso of letting a, cottage 
 and small garden. 
 
 5571. Would tliey be allowed to let the labourer 
 a larger amount of land in place of wages 1 —No. 
 
 5572. Is tbere any restriction as to the number 
 of labourers on any farm 1 — No j no restriction. 
 
 5573. Would you allow a tenant-farmer to put up 
 as many labourers' cott.iges as he pleased? — No, he 
 must ask leave if he wishes to put up a fresh labourer's 
 cottage. There has been no rule as to the number, 
 but if he -wishes to put up an extra building he must 
 ask leave. 
 
 ■ ■ 5574. Are the labourers in that part of the country 
 satisfied with being under the farmers'? — I think all 
 the labouring class have been more or less agitated 
 lately by the meetings and discussions in the press. 
 
 5575. Do yovi think the feeling of dissatisfaction is 
 greater among the labouring class than among the 
 farmers 1 — T do. 
 
 5576. Their tenure is very insecure 1 — Yes, it de- 
 pends upon their behaviour. 
 
 5577. And being able to work 1 — ^Yes. 
 
 5578. Is .there generally a rent paid by the labourers 
 for their holdings, or are they allowed to occupy as 
 part of their wages 1 — Generally as part of their wages. 
 
 5579. In that case the labourer's tenancy may be 
 said to be at an end when he becomes unfit to labour ? 
 — ^I think since the Land Act the farmers have been 
 more carefu.1 to let in conacre. 
 
 5580. Do you mean for a green crop or grain crop 1 
 — A green crop. 
 
 ' 5581. What is the rate of labourers' wages in your 
 district I — Ten or twelve shillings a week in summer ; 
 and eight or nine shillings in winter. 
 
 5582. And a cottage and garden? — No ; when the 
 cottage and garden are given it would be hardly so 
 much. 
 
 5583. The O'Conor Don. — Are leases the rule on 
 the estates with which you are connected, or the con- 
 trary ? — There are a good many leases existing, but I 
 have never been asked for a lease on an agricultural 
 holding since the passing of the Land Act. Leases 
 were given previouslj', and some still exist. 
 
 5584. In cases where leases existed, and have 
 dropped, do you recognise tenant-right ? — There was 
 no difierenoe made as to tenant-right between a 
 yearly tenancy and a leasehold ; but at the expiration 
 of the lease the rent was adjusted ; but the tenant con- 
 tinued on. He did not go out ; he contintied at the 
 new rate. 
 
 5585. You had no difiiculty in determining what 
 the rent should be 1 — None whatever. 
 
 5586. In cases where the landlord and tenant differed 
 as to the rent, would you object to having it fixed by a 
 tribunal independent of laoth? — I would prefer a 
 Government valuation. I think it would be hard to 
 get a tribunal that would act as fairly. I object 
 entirely to county court judges as arbiters of rent. 
 Of course they must act on the evidence before them, 
 and the evidence is often not true. I think there 
 should be a Government valuation to refer to in cases 
 of dispute. 
 
 5587. Do you mean a general valuation ?— I do. 
 
 5588. As a sort of basis to act upon 1 — Exactly. 
 
 5589. Do you generally alter rents upon a change 
 of tenancy ?— It entirely depends upon the rent, 
 
 Mr. Frederick 
 Wren^Ji. 
 
 If 
 
 the rent is a fair one, and in accordance with the rents 
 on the rest of the estate, it is not altered. If the 
 rent for any reason is low, it is altered, but not neces- 
 sarily. 
 
 5590. With regard to the cases to which you have 
 alluded, of purchasers under the Church Commis- 
 sioners, you said that in some cases with which you 
 are acquainted the purchasers have not turned out 
 well ?— Yes. 
 
 5591. How many of those purchasers had to sell 
 out and give up their purchases ? — In one case there 
 were three ; in another case there were, I think, origi- 
 nally six, but there are only two left now. There is 
 another case near Newtownbutler. 
 
 5592. Are these the only cases you are acquainted 
 
 with ?— Yes ; tlie only cases that have come under ■%;'<■ 2% Lsao 
 my personal observation. 
 
 5593. What do you mean by saying that it would 
 be a frightful country to live in if peasant proprietary 
 were established? — Because if it were fairly estab- 
 lished I suppose no landlord would be left in the 
 country, and the people who took the place of the 
 landlords would be persons who had been tenants 
 themselves ; and as I have invariably seen tliat w'nen 
 
 . ever a riaan of that class gets into a position which 
 gives him any power over other men, he oppresses 
 them. .1 :Should be very sorry to live amongst them. 
 
 5594. > You think it would be the substitution of one 
 class of landlords for another, with tliis difference, that 
 it would be a lower and more griping class ? — Ex- 
 actly. 
 
 5595. I suppose you think also that the result would 
 be that some of the so-called peasant proprietors would 
 afterwards purchase iip the holdings of others, and 
 ultimately sublet them, and then become landloids 
 themselves 1 — Yes. 
 
 5596. Supposing they were prohibited fiom doing 
 that, how could the state of things you apprehend 
 
 . arise ? — You could never prohibit tlie peasant proprie- 
 tors from selling their holdings. In fact, you would 
 create a number of small proprietors, some of whom 
 would not cultivate their land themselves, but woqld 
 underlet it. 
 
 5597. I am assuming that the pi-ohibition which ex- 
 ists at present, by which tenants who purchase under 
 the Bright clauses of the Land Act are prevented from 
 subletting. I am assuming that that prohibition was 
 continued in any new Act to be passed on the stibj ect ? 
 — Well, if the prohibition was continued after tjie 
 land had been fully paid for, I do not think you 
 would, get men to buy on those terms. I think that 
 when a man's land is his own, he ought to be allowed 
 to do what he, likes with it. lam quite sure people 
 would not purchase, unless they had that idea. 
 
 55P8. Mr. Shaw. — Yon think there would be some 
 men possessed of a little capital, who would purchase 
 up some of these small holdings from the peasant pro- 
 prietors and let them again to tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 5599. You think that no law could prevent theiu 
 from doing that 1 — That is my opinion. . 
 
 5600. Baron Dowse. — That is what you think would 
 be the result of the universal panacea that has been 
 proposed, of a peasant proprietary ? — Yes ; I think the 
 system of fair and valued rents would be much better. 
 If there was a Government valuation made, the 
 valuation might stand, I think, for a period of twenty- 
 one or perhaps thirty-one years. 
 
 5601. That is, a valuation for purposes of rent? — 
 Yes. I cannot see how it is to be better arranged 
 than by a Government valuation being made, such 
 valuation to stand for a fixed period of say twenty-one 
 or thirty-one years, which would give the tenant a 
 reeling of security. And I think it would be right and 
 just to extend a defined Ulster custom all over 
 Ireland, giving tlie landlord a right of selecting his 
 tenant, or a right of pre-emption at the price offered, 
 bond fide, by a solvent tenant, and reserving to the 
 landlord, in districts where the Ulster custom has iiot 
 previously been in force, £i right to be paid out of the 
 purchase-money the fair value of any impi'ovements 
 made by him and in existence at the time of the sale, 
 or the right to put a per-centage on the amount of the 
 value of the improvements in the shape of an increased 
 rent when the custom is introduced on the estate. 
 
 5602. You see no reason why that should not extend 
 to the whole of Ireland ? — No, and I believe the land- 
 lord would find it advantageous as well as the tenant. 
 
 5603. Mr. Kavanagh. — What do you call the 
 " purchase-money " — you say you would reserve to the 
 landlord a right to be compensated for his improve- 
 ments out of the purchase-money ?^The purchase- 
 money of the teiiant-right. 
 
 5604. Then, the purchase-money would not be 
 realized until a sale or a disposition of the letting took 
 place ? — Certainly. While the tenant is iii occiipai;ioa 
 of course the landlord derives no benefit from the im- 
 
 2D2 
 
204 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 &p(. 82, I860. 
 
 Mr. Frederick 
 Wrench. 
 
 provements, but if the farm is to be sold for the 
 tenant's advantage, the landlord oiight to get the value 
 of what has been expended by him. 
 
 .5605. He -would not realize that until a change of 
 tenancy took place 1 — He would not. I suggest, as an 
 alternative, that if the custom was introduced on an 
 estate, it would be fair for the landlord, as a quid jwo 
 quo, to get a per-centage on the value of the improve- 
 ments. 
 
 5606. Baron Dowse. — In the shape of an increased 
 rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5607. Chairman. — After that, the improvements 
 wovild become the property of the tenant ? — Yes ; if 
 there was a permanent increase of rent to the extent 
 of the per-centage on the value. 
 
 5608. Mr. Kavanagh. — We have had a great deal 
 of evidence as to the custom on estates in this part of 
 the country, and the evidence has gone to show that 
 the habit is to raise rents, and so, practically, to eat 
 into and destroy the tenant-right — do you know, 
 according to your experience, whether that is the 
 custom? — Well, certainly in the counties of Fer- 
 managh and Monaghan, the portions of Ulster with 
 which I am acquainted, such is not the custom at all. 
 The rent is not raised, so far as my experience enables 
 me to say, unless there is a fair and legitimate reason 
 for doing it. I know that on the Colebrook estate 
 that has been the custom. If I go to value a farm, and 
 find that the tenant has cultivated it well and made 
 improvements, I should be inclined to encoiirage that 
 man by giving him his farm at a lower rent than his 
 neighbours. 
 
 5609. Then that would not be a correct description 
 of the circumstances of the case, generally speaking ? — 
 Certainly not, as far as my experience goes. 
 
 5610. Mr. Shaw. — It might happen on some estates? 
 — It might. 
 
 5611. Baron Dowse. — It does not on the estates 
 that you represent ? — No. 
 
 5612. Mr. Kavanagh. — The evidence before us 
 went to show that in consequence of this feeling of 
 insecurity the tenants were prevented from making 
 any improvements — one man said he would rather tie 
 a cow to a tree, than build a shed for her, for that the 
 landlord, if he built one, would, or might, increase hi^ 
 rent. That of course was an extreme case, but it shows 
 the direction in which the evidence went? — I would 
 not consider that a fair statement of the feeling of the 
 tenant farmers of the country. 
 
 5613. Do you know of any cases of leases being 
 forced upon tenants with clauses barring them from 
 claims under the Land Act ? — Not of my own know- 
 ledge. There have been no leases on the property I 
 have been connected with, except in one or two isolated 
 cases, since the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 5614. I think I heard you say that it was your 
 habit to regard tenant-right as existing at the end of 
 a lease the same as in the case of a yearly tenancy 1 — 
 Yes — subject to the fair increase of rent according to 
 the circumstance of the farm. There never has been 
 any difference made. If a man wishes to sell his 
 lease, he sells his interest in the same way that a 
 yearly tenant would do. 
 
 5615. You admit the tenant-right after the lease 
 expii-es ? — Yes ; it has been admitted before I became 
 manager of the estates. 
 
 5616. And it is the custom ? — It is the custom. 
 
 5617. An argument which has been urged by many 
 witnesses is this, that they were forced to take leases, 
 and that the tenant-right has been denied at the end 
 of the lease, and consequently by taking a lease they 
 lost everything ? — That is not the case in our district. 
 I remember hearing Lord Erne give evidence in a land 
 case, soon after I first went to Fermanagh, in which 
 he stated he never made any difference between lessees 
 and yearly tenants. 
 
 5618. Another matter stated was, that at eveiy 
 change of tenancy the rent was raised— and that if a 
 man died and his son succeeded him, that would be 
 looked upon as a change of tenancy and a reason for 
 raismg the rent^-has such been yoiir experience?—! 
 
 have known cases of it. I know for instance a case 
 in which a man died the other day at Clones — he left 
 his farms to two sons — one farm had been let cheap, 
 and there was a slight increase of rent made. It has 
 generally been the feeling that as long as a man 
 lives, especially if he is an old tenant, although the 
 rent may be under the value, he is allowed to hold it at 
 the same rent, but when an opportunity comes, either 
 on the man's death, or upon a change of tenancy from 
 any other cause, it is considered right that the land- 
 lord should have the value of the land. But to say 
 that it is a rule to raise rents upon the occasion of a 
 fann passing from father to son, is not correct — it i» 
 exceptional. 
 
 5619. Then your view is that even when you do 
 raise the rent you do not raise it unfairly ? — Certainly. 
 
 5620. Baron Dowse. — It is only right to state that 
 none of the witnesses to whom Mr. Kavanagh refers, 
 alluded to the estates under your management ? — I am 
 very glad to hear that. , 
 
 5621. You have no knowledge of estates in Antrim 
 or Down ? — No — not practically. 
 
 5622. You cannot speak for those coiinties ? — No. 
 
 5623. All you say is, that those statements would 
 not apply to your district 1 — They would not. 
 
 5624. Mr. Shaw. — I think you stated some period 
 at which the full Ulster tenant-right was introduced 
 upon the estate of Sir Victor Brooke ? — Yes, some 40 
 years ago. 
 
 5625. How was it introduced ? —By Sir Arthur 
 Brooke. I found old papers in his handwriting in 
 which he made out the form which I have stated to day 
 as that in which it still exists on the property. 
 
 5626. Ordinary tenant-right, I suppose, existed on 
 the estate before % — I could not say. 
 
 5627. Does it exist on all the properties in Fermanagh? 
 - — I don't think it does. On some properties in Fer- 
 managh there has been a custom of giving so 
 many years purchase for the tenant-right. I don't 
 think it applies to all the properties in the county. 
 
 5628. Yon do not know the circumstances under 
 which it was introduced ? — No. 
 
 5629. In your opinion tenant-right includes the good- 
 will as well as the improvements ? — Well, we are not 
 very strict as to that. Wlien a tenant leaves a farm, 
 the improvements are taken into account, but it is 
 quite possilile that the good-will is taken into account 
 also, and something added for it. 
 
 5630. How do you find out what the improvements 
 are ? — There is a record of the landlord's improve- 
 ments kept, and if any improvements have been made 
 by the tenant he points them out. 
 
 5631. How do you ascertain them if a man has 
 been in occupation thirty or forty years ? — We take 
 the present value of the house and farm offices, and the 
 condition of tlie land, and compare that with the rent 
 he is paying. 
 
 5632. You have no record of what the condition of 
 the farm was when he came ? — No ; merely the pre- 
 sent value. 
 
 5633. Do you take into account what he paid for 
 the place ? — No. 
 
 5634. If a man paid a large sum of money for a farm, 
 don't you take into account what he paid for it ? — No ; if 
 he improved it he would get more. If he deteriorated 
 it ho would get less. 
 
 5635. Do you find the system of arbitration act 
 well in determining the value of tenant-right ? — Very 
 well. 
 
 5636. Don't you think it would act well in fixing 
 rent? — Well ; the arbitrators of the tenant's improve- 
 ments art- generally tenant-farmers, and the landlord, 
 I think, has something to say to the rent as well 
 as the tenant. 1 think it would be very hard to 
 find arbitrators who would arbitrate upon rent in a 
 satisfactory manner. 
 
 5637. If there was an arbitration, each party hav- 
 ing one arbitrator, with a Government umpire, would 
 that, in your opinion, give satisf letion ?— 1 think a 
 Government valuation made by really competent men 
 who could not be misled or bribed, would be more 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 205 
 
 satisfactory, and have more weiglit, and be more satis- 
 factory than any arbitration even -with a Government 
 umpire. I would also give a right of appeal. 
 
 5638. An appeal to whom — to the County Court 1 
 — No ; to the Judge of Assize. 
 
 5639. What are the average rents of land in the 
 county Fermanagh 1 — It would hardly be fair to give 
 you the average, because there is a lot of mountain 
 land which, of course, is let at a very low rent. The 
 highest general rent on the Colebrook estate is 27s. Gd. 
 per Irish acre. 
 
 5640. Is that the highest rent? — Yes; I do not 
 include townparks. I mean ordinary land. 
 
 5641. Can you mention any cases upon the other 
 estates under your management in which rents have 
 been advanced 1 — There have been several cases where 
 an increase of £2 or £3 has been made to the rent of 
 a farm on the occasion of a change of tenancy, or where 
 a, lease expires. On the falling-in of a lease, if a good 
 deal of cut-away bog has been reclaimed during the 
 term, that is generally valued at the expiration of the 
 lease, thrown into the farm, and the value added to 
 the rent. 
 
 5642. Do you put a similar acreage rent on that as 
 on the other land? — No, because we allow for the 
 tenants' improvements ; £1 or £2 additional to the 
 rent for a piece of reclaimed bog is a very common 
 thing. 
 
 5643. The tenant has no voice in the matter, has 
 he t — He has this voice in the matter : I say to him, 
 " Here is the rent that I propose to put on you — what 
 do you tliink of iti" The tenant tells me what he 
 thinks of it, and after hearing what he has to say, I 
 fix what I consider a fair sum. I had the other day to 
 fix the rent of a farm occupied by two joint tenants. I 
 saw them and asked them to tell me what they con- 
 sidered would be a fair rent. They told me what they 
 considered they would be able to pay. I fixed the 
 .rent at their own valuation, and they were quite 
 satisfied, and I was quite satisfied, for I thought they 
 acted very fairly. 
 
 5644. Chairman. — Do you find that as a general 
 rul(! if tenants are fairly dealt with they are disposed 
 to act reasonably and fairly ? — Yes, if you are deter- 
 mined, and only do what is just and fair. 
 
 5645. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is your opinion of 
 the present Government valuation as a basis for rent 1 
 I do not think it is generally considered to represent 
 the fair letting value — there is generally in my dis- 
 trict about fifteen per cent, difitirence between it and 
 the value of the land ; but in many cases the valuation 
 is not even relatively accurate. In Fermanagh especi- 
 ally, I know some cases in which the rent is a great 
 deal over the valuation. One cause of this is that 
 the valuators who were employed to make the valu- 
 ation used to put a value of a shilling an acre on 
 rough waste land. Since that time a good deal of 
 such land has been reclaimed, and the rent conse- 
 quently is now a good deal higher than the valuation 
 in such cases. 
 
 5646. Then I gather that your opinion is that 
 Griffith's valuation is not a satisfactory guide to the 
 rent ? — No. In some cases it is, but not in all cases. 
 The farms are not equally valvied. I have heard 
 farmers say that when the valuator carne to value 
 their land they showed him the bad fields, and did not 
 show him the good ones. 
 
 5647. Baron Dowse. — I understood you to say that 
 your idea was to have a valuation made to serve as a 
 basis for fixing rents, but not to rely upon it exclusively 
 in determining the rent 1 — Certainly. 
 
 5648. I believe you never had any case on the Cole- 
 brook estate under the Land Act? — There was one 
 case, before Mr. Blake, in Fermanagh. It was before I 
 was agent. It was a case in which the tenant got 
 into difficulties, and his creditors seized and sold his 
 farm. I think the case is reported in Mr. Donnell's 
 book on the Land Act. That was the only case I 
 know of on any of the estates of which I have the 
 manaa-ement. 
 
 Sept. 22, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Frederick 
 AV'rench. 
 
 The Rev. Charles Quin, p.p., Lower Killevy, Camlough, Co. Armagh; Michael Sarry, p.l.g., The Cross, Cam- 
 lough ; Patrich O'Callaghan, Lisrevagh, Caml.aigh ; and The Rev. Patrick M'Geany, c.c, Armagh, attended 
 as a deputation from the " Camlough Tenant-right Association." 
 
 Rev. Charles Quin was first examined. 
 You are President of estates in Dlster? — Yes. 
 
 5649. The O'Conor Don. 
 the Camlough Tenant-right Association? — I am. 
 
 5650. You also farm some land in your own occupa- 
 tion ? — Yes. 
 
 5651. How many acres ? — About seventeen acres at 
 (Jamlough. I also occupy some in the cos. Tyrone and 
 Derry. 
 
 5652. How many acres in Tyrone ? — About 200 
 acres of mountain land on the borders of Tyrone and 
 Derry. 
 
 5653. Have yoix any complaint to make with regard 
 to the conduct of your landlords in connexion with the 
 rent ?=— I have. 
 
 5654. I suppose tenant-right exists in the district ? 
 — Yes. My evidence will refer generally to the moun- 
 tainous land, and with regard to land that has been 
 reclaimed in the counties of Armagh and Tyrone. 
 Tenant-right exists in these districts generally — uni- 
 versally, I may say. 
 
 6655. Does that tenant-right comprise free sale ? — 
 The Ulster custom has not been well defined as yet. 
 I have not seen, so far as I have read in the newspapers, 
 any definition, and from knowing something about 
 the question, for in 1870 I wrote upon the question 
 myself, before the passing of the Land Act, and was 
 one of the first that drew attention to the fact that 
 there was no uniform defined custom in Ulster — 
 that there were so many variations upon difibrent 
 estates, that they amounted in point of fact to difterent 
 customs. 
 
 5656. Your evidence is that before the Land Act 
 there were difterent customs and usages on difterent 
 
 During the last forty years 
 there were inroads made upon tenant-right upon some 
 estates. Some landlords were good, and made no in- 
 roads upon the rights of their tenants ; others were 
 moderate, and made little inroads ; but the bad land- 
 lords as a general rule confiscated either in the whole 
 or ia part the rights of the tenants, especially in moun- 
 tain lands. The Ulster custom in its integrity has 
 not been defined in the Land Act, and I lia\-e nevei- 
 seen a definition of it yet. 
 
 5657. How would yo\i define it? — It is the right 
 from time immemorial of Ulster tenants to their farms 
 and improvements thereon, subject to the projarietary 
 •rights of the landlords. 
 
 5658. What do you consider the proprietary rights 
 of the landlords ? — Their first right is the fee- simple 
 rental of the estate, but besides the fee-simple rental 
 of the estate they have maiiy other rights, such as 
 quarries, mines, and minerals, &c. In a definition, 
 of course, you cannot ' introduce the word which 
 is to be defined ; the Ulster custom is a thing 
 distinct from all other things, and if you could arrive 
 at a definition that will distinguish that thing from all 
 other things in the world, you would then have a 
 logical definition of it. That is what I have endeavoured 
 to give. I find from this definition of the Ulster 
 custom — namely, " the right, from time immemorial, 
 of Ulster tenants to their farms and improvements 
 thereon, subject to the proprietary rights of the land- 
 lords," that there are two concurrent rights recognised 
 by the Ulster custom. That idea — two concurrent 
 rights — is always recognised in, and is the foundation 
 of the Ulster custom. There is on the one hand the 
 
 Eev. Charles 
 Quin, 
 
206 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880. 
 
 Eev. Charles 
 Quiri. 
 
 right of the' tenaiit to th-e occiipaiioif ' of the farm and 
 to the improvements effected thereon. I do not call 
 that at all a proprietary right, liecause it is not. It is 
 his right to the occupation of his' farm, and to the im-' 
 provements thereon— a right that he could dispose of 
 or sell at any time by free sale, still subject to 
 the proprietary rights, whatever they may be. Even 
 though he had made no improvements whatever, 
 he still had a right to the occupation, that is, to the 
 goodwill of the farm. That is the usage prevailing 
 over all Ulster. I have been now living in Ulster forty- 
 six years, and that right is universal over the pro- 
 vince. They have the right to the goodwill, abstracted 
 altogether from the impi-ovements. They also have a 
 right to the improvements on the farm, where there are 
 improvements ; but they are a variable quantity. The 
 right to the farm, or the goodwill of the farm, is, I 
 may say, a constant quantity ; the improvements 
 are variable. If there were no improvements, of course 
 the value of the farm would not lie so great ; but if 
 there have In'cu improvements eflfected, of course they 
 advance the price of the farm. 
 
 5659. Chairman. — The improvements being made 
 by the tenant 1 — Of course. Now I come to the 
 second part of the definition — the tenant-right is sub- 
 ject to the projnietary rights of the landloi-d ; that is 
 always cevtiiin ; tliei'e is no question of that at all. 
 Thus I say there are two concurrent rights in Ulster, 
 and, if one right never invaded tlie other, I think 
 upon some estates the tenant-right would be of greater 
 value than the fee. Upon other estates it may be 
 the proprietary rights would be of greater value ; but, 
 I think, taking all in all, there is a nearly equal part- 
 nership as regards value between the tenant and the 
 landlord. 
 
 5660. Have you found that rents have been in- 
 creased vipon changes of tenancy i — Almost invariably, 
 and increased ou the tenant's improvements. 
 
 5661. For how many years has that system been in 
 operation 1 — It lias been in ojieration for the last forty 
 years. 
 
 5662. Plave you remarked any alteration since the 
 passing of the Land Act with regard to it ? — Yes. As 
 a general rule the good landlords since the passing of 
 the Act have invaded the rights of the tenant very 
 much. 
 
 5663. Do you mean the bad landlords'! — No, the 
 good landlords. The good landlords have invaded 
 the rights of the tenants both in Armagh and Tyrone. 
 I may as an instance mention the Earl of Castlestuart, 
 who has property near Cookstown. I foi'merly alluded 
 to him as one of the best landlords in the country. I 
 
 ■ now consider him to be one of the very worst. I 
 would mention also Sir John ■ Stewart, in the county 
 Tyrone ; Mr. Henry, of Castledawson, whose pro- 
 perty is in the parish of Kildress, county Tyrone; 
 Mr. R. Bonil IiIacGeougli, of Armagh ; Mr. J. Quinn, 
 of Newry, and Mr. J. G. Richardson, of Bessbrook. 
 I .might name others. 
 
 5664-. "What has been done on the estates of those 
 landlords? — Oji the Earl of Castlestuart's estate near 
 Cookstown the rental has been laised exorbitantly 
 last year, confiscating the rights of the tenants, 
 including all the improvements effected by their skill, 
 labour, and money. 
 
 5665. Was that upon the falling in of old leases? — 
 No, a general valuation and inci'ease of rent was made 
 upon the estate. 
 
 5666. You saythat was done last year? — Yes ; the 
 old Earls of Castlestuart were about the best landlords 
 in Ireland, but I regret to say the present noblemf.n, 
 who is a man not of so strong mind as the old ear], fjid 
 who probably is very much under the control of agents, 
 has raised the rents of mountain plots 500 per cent., 
 and he has made that enormous increase entirely upon 
 the improvements effected by the tenants. 
 
 5667. Baron Dowse. — Five hundred per cent, in- 
 crease? — Yes, 500 per cent, on some, 300 on others, 
 and 200 on others. I will give you cases of it, 
 and there have been cases many times worse than 
 those I shall bring before you. His estate is eleven 
 
 miles long by about four iniles wide. He has, in fact, 
 two estates ; he has the old family estate' of Castle 
 stuai-t, and he is connected by marriage with, ^hp 
 family of the Bradys. He married the late Majoi 
 Brady's daughter, by whom he has succeeded to the 
 Manorhamilton estates. On both estates the rents 
 last year were raised. Twice the rents have been 
 raised, within the last forty years, on Brady's, estate, 
 solely on the improvements effected by the tenant^s,ifor 
 they never expended one sixpence either upon buUdipg, 
 fencing, draining, or any other improvement whatever. 
 I have the particulars of two cases here which I will 
 state, and I may mention they are not pickedor selected 
 cases ; they are fairly representative cases of the deal- 
 ings of his lordship with his tenantry. I may first 
 mention that Mr. Richardson's sub-agent, Mr. Davis, 
 travelled the greater part of Ireland recently, for .tte 
 purpose of gaining information on the land question. 
 He happened to be in my neighbourliood when I was 
 on a visit with some friends, and he requested me, to 
 accompany him from Cookstown on the Earl of Castle- 
 stuart's estate. I may observe that the tenants on the 
 high mountainy lands are almost exclusively Catholics, 
 while those on the low lands are almost entirely Pro- 
 testants, from Cookstown towards the Deny, side, of 
 the estate. Mr. Davis requested me to accompany 
 him to a certain house, and I went with him. There 
 were four of us, Mr. Davis, Mr. James Mullen, the 
 hotel keeper, myself, and a foui-th party. Mr. Davis 
 wished to ascertain the rents the Earl of Castlestuart 
 put on his tenants, and we visited several tenants, both 
 Catholic and Protestant, for the ijurpose of procuring 
 the information. ' The first man we visited was Michael 
 Quinn, a namesake of my own, and Mr. Davis put a 
 number of questions to him. One of the questions 
 was, was there a valuation last year. He replied yes, 
 naming the valuator, a Mr. Wilson, I think. It was 
 a wild mountain district which, thirty years ago, was 
 let at a shilling an acre. Since the day God created 
 that land until to-day, had the tenant not laboured on 
 it, reclaimed and improved it, it would not have been 
 worth more than a shilling per acre, and probably 
 until the day of judgment, had the tenant not im- 
 proved it. 'The latent power of the land woidd have 
 lain dormant. There were thirty acres in this man's 
 holding ; the rental was originally 30s. a year, the full 
 value of the land as it stood originally. Thirty years 
 ago the tenant built a small cabin, a miserable dwelling, 
 and, immediately after the building of the cabin, the. 
 rent was raised from Is. to Is. lOd. per acre. The 
 man went on, he laboured at the land, and reclaimed 
 it ; his rent has been raised again last year to 
 £6 14s. 5d. It is right to say that last year, in 
 consequence of the bad times and the tenant being 
 unable to pay this rent, an abatement of £4 2s. M. 
 was made. 
 
 5668. They allowed the tenant the increase of rent 
 as an abatement for the year 1 — Yes. I produce the 
 last year's receipt in confirmation of my statement. 
 
 5669. Baron Dowse. — This receipt is dated 28th 
 February, 1879, and it says : — " Received from 
 Michael Quinn, £6 14s. 5d., being one year's rent due 
 to the Right Hon. the Earl of Castlestuart, due 1st 
 November, 1878," and it appears there was an abate- 
 ment allowed of £4 2s. M. ?— Yes. 
 
 5670. The present rent would be a little over 4s. 
 an acre ? — Yes. 
 
 5671. That is an addition of 300 per cent, to the 
 original rent 1 — Yes, and you will see by the receipt 
 that there is bog rent charged besides, amounting to 
 15 s. a year, and ten acres of bog taken off' and charged 
 one pound per acre to others. — So much for that case. 
 There was a house and farm adjoining on the very 
 march, and Mr. Davis next turned his attention to 
 that — he inquired was there a similar increase on that 
 farm — he was told not, there was no increase on that 
 farm whatever, not a farthing. It was still let at the 
 old rental — and why? Because there were no im- 
 provements made, and therefore there was no increase 
 of rent. Those were the questions put in the pre- 
 sence of Mr. Davis. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 207 
 
 5672. Chairman. — Was the second holding still 
 mountain waste 1 — It was still mountain waste. It 
 has been unreclaimed — and so would the other were it 
 not for the skill and industry of the tenant. The 
 next case I wish to draw your attention to is a lease- 
 hold farm on the same estate — the lease of which 
 expired in 1870. 
 
 5673. Before or after the passing of the Land Act? 
 — Before ; the Bill was in committee at the time. 
 
 5674. The O'Conor DoN.^State the circumstances? 
 — A man named Edward Monahan, was lessee for 
 life of 150 acres of this mountain land — as Mr. Davis 
 said it would not be worth more than sixpence an acre 
 for grouse shooting in Scotland. He had four sons, 
 Edward, Patrick, John, and Peter. He subdivided 
 his farm among them. The original rent was about a 
 shilling an acre, £8 8s. a year, but at the expiration 
 of the lease in 1870, it was raised by Mr. Lytle, the 
 agent, who was a solicitor in Stewartstown, to 
 £39 Gs., namely, Edward Monahan's portion, £10 8s.; 
 Patrick's, £9 ; John's, £9 10s. ; and Peter's, £10 8s.— 
 total, £39 6s. I have reason to believe that upon this 
 case being represented to the present Earl of Castle- 
 stuart, the rent was reduced to £33 10s. 6c?., inde- 
 pendent of the bog rent. 
 
 ■'5675. How long had the previous lease been in 
 existence? — I think about sixty years. The houses 
 on that land were built by this man's sons — it was a 
 poor mountain farm, heathy, stony, whinny land — the 
 adjoining farm was set at Is. 6d., per acre, and so poor 
 was the land that the tenant was unable to pay it. 
 I know myself the labour Edward Monahan, had in 
 reclaiming that land, it was full of stones and boulders, 
 which he Iiad to dig out — I know myself that he lost 
 three sons through the reclamation of that farm. 
 
 5676. By hard work ? — By hard work. Mr. Davis, 
 met this man accidentally on the road, and inquired 
 these facts of him. There are hundreds of other cases 
 upon the same estate, much more grievous that what 
 I have detailed to you. I met the man myself — he 
 wiis all in raj's and tatters, his family miserably clad. 
 The^ were pretty well off as long as they had the 
 farih for eight guineas a year, but when it was raised 
 to £39, they lost all confidence in reclaiming the land 
 or improving it any further, they gave up the idea, 
 got into poverty and debt, and are in poverty and debt 
 at the present time. 
 
 ' 5677. Chaieman. — Irrespective of the fact that the 
 improvements were made by the tenant, wotild you 
 consider the rent too high? — Quite too high. But the 
 advance of rent was entirely on the tenant's improve- 
 ments. 
 
 5678. Assuming the landlord had made the im- 
 provements himself, is the land worth the rent ? — Not 
 at all — it is more' than 50 per cent, too high. 
 
 5679. Then, not only is it a rent put on the tenant's 
 improvements, but it is too high a rent even in pro- 
 portion to the present value of the land ? — Certainly. 
 Mountain land cannot bear a rent the same as low 
 land. 
 
 5680. Do you consider that the landlord ' would 
 never be entitled to get any rent for that land, except 
 the value of it in its original condition ? — I would not 
 go that far. I think that where there is a capacity for 
 improvement in land, the landlord should be allowed a 
 certain amount for that capacity, and the latent power 
 in the land, of being improved. But that power was 
 latent since the time the land was created, and it would 
 have remained undeveloped till the day of judgment, 
 only for the tenants. 
 
 5681. In readjusting the rent you think the latent 
 power of the Isind, and its capacity for improvement, 
 should be taken into consideration ?— I think it should 
 fairly. I am not at all against the proprietary rights 
 of the landlord. I think there should be fair dealing 
 on both sides, for I think there are fair rights on both 
 sides, and the landlord's rights should be taken into 
 consideration. 
 
 5682. You think they have been taken too much 
 ii\to consideration in this case? — I think so. They 
 
 have, in fact, absorbed the whole value of the land, and 
 left notlmrg for the tenants. 
 
 5083. Are there any other cases you wish to bring 
 under our notice ? — I have a great number of other 
 cases, but to go through the whole of them would take 
 too much time. I may mention that this estate was re- 
 A'alued last year, and every person had to sign a receipt, 
 which gave him notice of the intended increase of rent. 
 
 5684. The tenants had to take a receipt which in- 
 formed them there would be an increase? — Theyhadto 
 sign a receiptwhich gave notice of the intended increase. 
 
 5685. Have the rents on the low lands been in- 
 creased as well as the high ? — The low lands have been 
 increased, but not in the same proportion, because, while 
 the low lands have been raised 2s. or 3s. an acre, the 
 mountain landshavebeen raised from 200 to 500percent. 
 
 5686. The cases which you have mentioned you give 
 as types of a class of cases of which there are a great 
 many ? — Yes. Upon that estate, including the estates 
 of the old Earls and Major Brady's there were eighty 
 ejectment processes in the court, to frighten the poor 
 jjcople into paying this enormous increase of rent. 
 
 5687. The O'Conor Don. — Ejectments for non-pay- 
 ment of rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5688. Were those ejectments proceeded with ?— They 
 were, and the people were put out, but they were rein- 
 stated as caretaker's. 
 
 5689. They are now in the position of caretakers 1 — 
 They are. 
 
 5690. Chairman. — Who is the agent of the pro- 
 perty ? — Mr. Tener on the Manorhamilton estate and 
 B. Stewart on the family estate. 
 
 5691. The O'Conor Don. — Have you any cases to 
 state with regard to the other estates which you men- 
 tioned ? — Yes. I will take the estate of Sir John 
 Stewart. In my own time, within the last thirty 
 years, the rents on that estate have been raised entirely 
 on the improvements made by the tenants. 
 
 .5692. Is this mountain land also ? — All mountain land, 
 pure and simple. The mountain land was let originally 
 at a shilling an acre, and would never have been worth 
 more than a shilling an acre if it were not reclaimed. 
 The land immediately adjoining it is not worth more 
 than Is. 6d. per acre at the present time. He has 
 raised the rental on those townlands £1,800. 
 
 5693. What was the previous rent? — That was the 
 increase of rent. 
 
 5694. What was the original rent upon which that 
 was an increase ? — I cannot tell you, but I will get in- 
 formation upon that point. 
 
 5695. When was that? — In the year 1852, or there- 
 abouts. 
 
 5696. Was there any increase in the rent lately ? — 
 There was a demand made for a second increase eight 
 or nine years ago, but the people resisted it, and it was 
 abandoned. Still it hangs over them. I may observe 
 that not one sixpence was expended by Sir John 
 Stewart on the property in any way. He sent his 
 valuator and raised the rents to the extent of £1,800 
 a^year, entirely on the improvements effected by the 
 tenants. That £1,800 a year, if capitalized at 4 per 
 cent, interest, would amount to something like £45,000 
 which has been transferred from the pockets of the 
 tenants into the pocket of Sir J. Stewart. He wanted 
 to pocket a second £45,000 of the tenants' property, 
 but it was resisted. 
 
 5697. Have the tenants been paying the increased 
 rent ever since ?— They have ; and they have become 
 very poor. You will find that money had to be sent 
 from some of the charitable boards this spring to relieve 
 those people and their families. 
 
 5698. Were they at any time comfortably off? — 
 They were. It is questionable whether the tenantry 
 upon any mountain land in Ireland were more com- 
 fortably off than those people were before the rents 
 were raised. 
 
 5699. Baron Dowse. — Where does the land lie? 
 
 It lies from Termon station northward towards Derry, 
 and all along there. 
 
 5700. I think yon said Lord Castlestnart was a 
 
 Sejit. 22, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Charles 
 Quin. 
 
208 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 22, 1880. good landlord 1 — Formerly he was. I would not call 
 
 „ TT" him a good landlord now ; he is now one of the worst. 
 
 q^;q_ 5701. Chairman. — Have you any other cases'? — 
 
 Yes ; on an estate in Tyrone — Mr. Henry's. I was 
 
 bred and born on that estate, and within my own 
 
 memory the rent has been raised twice. 
 
 5702. At what intervals? — The first rise was about 
 the year 1849, I think. The second was five or six 
 years ago. 
 
 5703. Since the Land Act? — Since the Land Act. 
 
 5704. Was the increase considerable? — It was very 
 large ; from 200 to 500 per cent. 
 
 5705. Was that mountain land ? — Yes. Mr. Henry 
 purchased the estate from Captain Walslie, and after 
 he got it he altered the boundaries of a number of the 
 farms, made straight marches, got a valuation made, 
 and raised the rental from 200 to 500 per cent. The 
 people had been allowed to go on for a certain time 
 reclaiming the land, but the landlord's son entei-ed the 
 army, and not being overcautious or careful, he got 
 into debt, the estate was put into Chancery, and there 
 was another valuation made, and a second increase of 
 rent. The tenants had been very comfortable prior 
 to that increase, and some of them had money in Ijank; 
 but now they are all in poverty and debt, and many 
 of them had to borrow money last year to pay their 
 i-ents. 
 
 5706. Who has the estate now? — Captain Henry's 
 son, Mr. Henry. He lives in London. The people 
 upon the estate are very poor. There are only two or 
 three of them that did not avail themselves of the 
 distribution of seed last season. 
 
 5707. Are the tenants upon that estate allowed to 
 sell their interests 1 — They are. 
 
 5708. Would they get anything for their interests ? 
 — They would have got something some time ago, be- 
 fore the valuation was made, on account of the reclaimed 
 land, and the prospect of reclaiming other land. In 
 those mountain farms there is always on the march, 
 adjoining the reclaimed land, u quantity of land unre- 
 claimed, but which might by industry and labour be 
 brought under cultivation ; and what is done is — a 
 certain sum per acre is given for the reclaimed land, 
 with a bulk sum added for the land that is unreclaimed. 
 Tenant-right used to go pretty high formerly. I think 
 from £10 to c£20 per acre for the reclaimed land, with a 
 lump sum for the unreclaimed, but now they could 
 not get a purchaser for it at all, almost at any price. The 
 tenant-right interest is gone down so far, that it is a 
 question if they would get £5, or even £3 an acre for it 
 at the present time. 
 
 5709. Is that in consequence of the increased rent I 
 — Not entirely on account of the rent, but principally 
 ■so, partly in consequence of the bad times, and 
 the American competition ; because on those moun- 
 tain farms they have a sort of grazing land fit for 
 grazing coarse young stock. That has been greatly 
 interfered with by the American competition, and so 
 the tenants are impoverished in uvevy way, and you 
 would get very little for the tenant-right of those 
 farms now. 
 
 5710. Was there much tenant-right j^ivon for those 
 mountain farms formerly '] — Ye.s ; the highest tenant- 
 right probably — in proportion to the rental — of any 
 part of Ulster. I should, perhaps, tell you upon all 
 those mountain farms there ai'e two qualities of land — 
 reclaimed and unreclaimed land — and if a tenant was 
 selling a farm he sold both. The purchaser took, of 
 course, both into consideration. Foi' the reclaimed 
 land he would give from £10 to £20 per acre, 
 according to the circumstance.s of the farm, and a lump 
 sum for the unreclaimed, taking his chances of being 
 able to reclaim some of it, and bring it into cultivation. 
 But on account of the increased rents — particularly 
 when such an increase was made as to £1,800 upon 
 eighteen townlands — 200 to 500 per cent, on the rents 
 — the result is that the proprietary right has absorbed 
 and swallowed up the tenant-right, and there are 
 scarcely two concurrent rights now in that land at all. 
 
 5710a. The landlord, you say, has absorbed the whole 
 
 thing himself, by the process of raising the rent 1 
 
 Practically so. Of course if the tenants go on, and 
 expend money on their farms in reclaiming more of 
 the unreclaimed land, and bringing it into cultivation 
 a new tenant-right would be created in some years 
 again ; but if the present law is continued, and the 
 landlord allowed to raise the rents at his option, he 
 can possess himself of that also in twenty or thirty 
 years, or whenever he pleases. 
 
 5711. The O'CoNOR Don. — You stated in the notes 
 which you sent in to the Secretary that upon some 
 estates this revision of rents takes place every ten or 
 twelve years 1 — Yes ; that varies considerably. Some 
 landlords allow the rents to remain twenty, thirty, 
 forty, or even sixty years ; others will raise their rents 
 every ten years. 
 
 5712. Can you mention any estate on which it has 
 been done every ten years ] — I cannot ; but it has been 
 done once and threatened a second time vipon the 
 estate of Sir John Stewart within the last thirty 
 years. 
 
 5713. Baron Dowse. — Was the present Sir John 
 Stewart the landlord of that estate in 1852 1 — I think 
 he was. I think he came of age in 1852. 
 
 5714. Are there any other cases which you would 
 wish to bring before the Commissioners 1 — Yes ; the 
 next case is in the county Armagh. I must, however, 
 give fair play to the landlord in this case, who has 
 certainly done a great deal for the country, gives a 
 large amount of employment, and is one of the best 
 landlords, on the whole, that are to be found in 
 Ireland. 
 
 5715. Who is he?— Mr. J. G. Richardson, of 
 Bessbrook. In tliat village there is not a single 
 policeman, nor a single public-house, though there is 
 5,000 of population. When I speak of Mr. Richardson 
 I speak with great respect for the benefits he has 
 conferredupon the district, and I desire that to be noted. 
 
 5716. Have you any complaint to make in reference 
 to his management of his tenants ? — I have, cer- 
 tainly. I complain not only of the oflice rules on 
 his estate, but of an attempt to raise the rental during 
 the last two years. He threatened by letter to raise 
 it 25 per cent, upon the whole estate, stating that it 
 would still be 20 per cent, under the letting value. 
 
 5717. Was his land let so much under Grifiith's 
 valuation as he states? — It was not. Griffith's valua- 
 tion, if I understand it aright, means two things. 
 There is a tenement valuation, and a valuation of the 
 land without the buildings. There is, if I do not 
 mistake, a column first giving the acreage of a holding; 
 then a second column giving the valuation of the land 
 alone ; a third column giving the valuation of the 
 buUdings; and the two are added together in the 
 fourth column. The rents on Mr. Richardson's pro- 
 perty are above the valuation of the land alone, but 
 not if the two are taken together. 
 
 5718. Baron Dowse. — Would the people on the 
 estate like to have more public-houses, and less rent ? 
 — No ; they like to have no public-houses, and less 
 rent. As to that, I have a letter here which was 
 addressed by Mr. Ricliardson to his tenantry, on the 
 occasion of giving them an abatement of rent- 
 excusing himself for making so small an abatement as 
 10 per cent. 
 
 _ 5719. When was that letter written ? — About this 
 time twelve months. 
 
 '' You will observe," he says, " that my rents are twenty 
 per cent, below Griffith's Poor Law valuation ; while the 
 valuation is, according to Griffith's own statement, twenty- 
 five per cent, below the ordinary letting value. I was ad- 
 vised, at the time I purchased the estate^ that I could fairly 
 raise the rental twent\-five per cent., and it was my inten- 
 tion to have had the estate revalued, without which I have 
 not a reasonable return for my outlay, but the poor harvests 
 of the past few years have induced me to delay domg so." 
 The tenants considered that that letter amounted to a 
 threat on the part of Mr. Richardson, that he would 
 raise the rents whenever he had a favourable opportu- 
 nity for doing so, and, under that apprehension, they 
 came to me as a deputation— hence the ori^nn of our 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 209 
 
 association, wliicli tas for its object to defend and pre- 
 serve the rights legalized for the tenant by Mr. Glad- 
 stone's Act of Parliament. 
 
 5720. Mr. Shaw. — Did you urge this upon the 
 tenant-right member for your county, Mr. Richardson 1 
 — He was not the member then ; but this letter was 
 placarded in every part of the county. 
 
 5721. It didn't do him much damage? — Well, I 
 must say he altered the office rules, and a number of 
 other things which were objected to ; and, with regard 
 to the raising of the rent, he saw it could not be car- 
 ried out, and the tenantry and he are now on better 
 terms. 
 
 5722. The O'Conor Don. — Has he actually raised 
 the rents in any case 1 — There has been no general 
 raising of rent ; but on the occasion of sales and change 
 of tenancy he always raises the rental. 
 
 5723. He has not raised the rental generally over 
 the estate 1 — ISo, not since he became the proprietor. 
 I think Mr,. Richardson is' a fair man. He is now pre- 
 pared to leave the rental to a fair valuation, and to live 
 and let live. 
 
 5724. Baron Dowse. — He was looking on it in too 
 mercantile a point of view, you think, originally 1 — 
 Yes. I have taken some trouble in calculating the 
 valuation of the houses and buildings on the twelve 
 townlands, and I find, excluding the village of Bess- 
 brook, which was built by Mr. Richardson, the valua- 
 tion of the houses and buildings alone amounts to 
 £985 12s. a year. 
 
 5725. Built by the tenants ? — Built by the tenants. 
 The former proprietor, Lord Charlemont, never ex- 
 pended one farthing on the building of houses or oiHces 
 on the estate. The tenants built good substantial 
 slated houses. Lord Charlemont didn't expend any- 
 thiag either on biiildings, fences, hedges, nor anything, 
 so that what Mr. Richardson's claim amounted to this, 
 that this .£985 12s. a year, which represented the 
 tenants' improvements on houses, should be the basis 
 of an additional rent, which, if he had carried out 
 would be putting £985 12s. a year of his tenants' pro- 
 perty into his pocket, or capitalizing it at four per 
 cent., it, would be equivalent to transferring nearly 
 £25,000 from the pockets of the teilants into his own. 
 
 5726. Chairman. — When did Mr. Richard.son pur- 
 chase the property? — In 1865. 
 
 5727. Do you know how much he paid for it? — 
 £93,000. 
 
 5728. What is the amount of the rental ? — I think 
 about £4,000 a year. That is what he alludes to ia 
 his letter when he says he is not getting a reasonable 
 return for his outlay. Of course, if you go into court 
 and make up your mind to give a high price with the 
 view of afterwards recouping yourself by raising the 
 rents, and thus securing a return for your outlay by 
 infringing on the rights of your tenants, yoti will be 
 able to outbid respectable decent j)urchasers who would 
 not do so. 
 
 5729. But Mr. Richardson has not done so 1 — No, 
 sir, he has not ; and I hope and trust he never will. 
 
 5730. Baron Dowse. — You think it would be better 
 not to give him the power ? — Far better. You will 
 understand that I am not making any charge against 
 Mr. Richardson, quite the reverse. He has done much 
 for the locality, gives a great deal of employment, and 
 built a. fine place .; but I would wish to define the 
 rights of landlord and tenant in such a way that 
 one could not interfere with the other. 
 
 5731. The O'Conor Don.— Has he office rules? — 
 He has. One of them is that there is an increase of 
 rent on the occasion of a sale, and another is that the 
 purchase-money of a holding must be paid through the 
 office, also that sales must be limited to adjoining 
 tenants. 
 
 5732. Has herestricted sales to theadjoiningtenants? 
 — He has ; no person can purchase save and except 
 the adjoining teaants. 
 
 5733. Did tenant-right prevail on that estate before 
 the Land Act? — It did ; on the Earl of CharJemont's 
 
 property tenant-right prevailed in its purity— no land Sept. 22, 18S0. 
 
 ^°^Knl^. ^^r^r- . . ■ ., , , Rev. Oilrles 
 
 0734. Inen lormerly tenant-right prevailed on the Quin. 
 
 estate to its fullest extent ? — Yes. 
 
 5735. He has now restricted it by office rules? — 
 Yes, limiting the sale to adjoining tenants. 
 
 67.TG. Is there any limitation on the sum paid? — ■ 
 The us been to £15 an acre, but since Mr. Richard- 
 son Leo.uno a member of Parliament I think that has 
 been withdrawn. I purchased my holding six years 
 ago from my predecessor, the former parish priest ; 
 at that time the agent was Mr. J. B. Doyle — there are 
 two Mr. Doyles — father and son, and there is as imicii. 
 difference between the two men as between night and 
 day. The father, Mr. J. B. Doyle, J.P., is a good 
 agent ; his son, Mr. J. J. Doyle, is not a good agent 
 at all. I think, if Mr. Richardson was properly in- 
 structed by his agent, and not mis-instructed, would 
 be a first-class landlord. I am not here to say anything 
 to the contrary. 
 
 5737. Baron Dowse. — Who is to instruct him ? — 
 Mr. Doyle, j.p.,told me he had awritten agreement from 
 Mr. Richardson to manage the estate as he wished. 
 I purchased seventeen acres. There were thirty-three 
 acres in ths whole farm, but I only purchased half, 
 the other half was purchased by a tenant adjoining me. 
 I gave £20 an acre for the tenant-right ; the rent was 
 ten shillings an acre, but it is rocky land, there are 
 four or five acres of rock in it. The other portion of 
 the farm was sold at £16 5s. per acre. I havs the 
 agreement here under which we made the puroliase. 
 [Witness read the agreement, which recited a consent 
 on the part of Mr. Richardson to the sale of the interest 
 of the Rev. Michael M'Kevitt (the former tenant), one 
 moiety to the Rev. Charles Quin, at the rate of £20 
 per statute acre, and the other moiety to Neili M'Shane, 
 at the sum of £16 5s. per acre, being an adjoining 
 tenant.] 
 
 5738. What office rules do you complain of? — We 
 ee-^plain of the rule under which the rent is increased 
 on the occasion of a sale, which increase always inter- 
 feres with the rights of the outgoing tenant, and is no 
 advantage whatever to the incoming tenant, but on 
 the contrary a disadvantage. 
 
 5739. Are there rules against subdivision? — Yes; 
 except with the consent of the office. In some cases 
 it is allowed, in others it is refused. 
 
 5740. Is there any other matter which you wish 
 to bring forward? — I am not a lawyer, but in my 
 humble judgment I look on these office rules as simply 
 illegal, because the customs that prevailed from time 
 immemorial on Lord Charlemont's estate, as I under- 
 stand the Land Act, are the customs that are legalized 
 by the Act, and are the law of the land, therefore 
 those office rules, in so far as they are inconsistent 
 with those customs, are illegal. 
 
 5741. But the tenants, as I understand yronr evi- 
 dence, have no alternative but to submit? — Yes ; they 
 must either submit to the rules of the office, or go 
 out and take a lump sum ol money which, to most of 
 them would be a very inadequate compensation. 
 
 5742. The O'Conor Don. — Yonr complaint is that 
 the office rules are an innovation upon the former 
 custom of the estate ? — Yes. 
 
 5743. And that they interfere, with the price paid 
 for tenant-right ? — Certainly. 
 
 5744. Has the value of tenant-right, on estates 
 where those office rules have been introduced, dimin- 
 ished since 1870? — Of course it has. Even if the 
 office rules were not in existence at all, the value of 
 tenant-right would be diminished in consequence of 
 the bad times. 
 
 5745. But, as a fact, you say the office rules have 
 also diminished it ? — Yes. 
 
 5746. Baron Dowse. — And that, you believe, is 
 the intention witn which the rules are framed, 
 namely, "to increase the landlord's interest ? — Yes ; and 
 to diminish the interest of the tenant. 
 
 5747. The O'Conor Don.— What other cases do 
 you wish to mention? — ^There is the case of Mr. 
 
 2E 
 
210 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Eev. Charles 
 Quin. 
 
 Sept. 22, 1880 Johu Qiiinn, of Newry. His fatlier, Edward Quin, 
 bought a property in 1852 in the Incumbered Estates 
 Court. He has another townland that was bought 
 in the Incumbered Estates Court. He has two town- 
 lands under lease — Armacane and Lisslea. 
 
 5748. Are those lands tinder lease at present? — 
 Yes ; those two townlands ; but not the third. 
 
 5749. Whenever a sale takes place there is an in- 
 crease 1 — Yes, upon the yearly tenancies. 
 
 5750. Chairman. — Has that been the case long? — 
 Yes j ever since he purchased it. 
 
 5751. Was it the custom before the Land Act ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 5752. There has been no alteration since 1870? — ■ 
 No ; but it Avas an infringement of the Ulster custom. 
 
 5753. Are rents high or low upon his estate ? — The 
 rents are high — what I would call rack-rents. 
 
 5754. I assume the increase of rents were not put 
 on the leased lands ? — No ; of course not while the 
 leases were in existence ; but on the leases falling in 
 he raised the rents ; and upon the yearly tenancies 
 there was an increase on every change of tenancy. 
 
 5755. In the cases where the increased rents were 
 put on, were the previoiis rents high or low ? — They 
 were high. Some of them were rack-rents, and the 
 tenants are unable to pay them. 
 
 5756. "Wha-c is the usual price of tenant-right on that 
 estate ?— It was very variable, It has gone sometimes 
 as high as £2.5 per acre, and sometimes down to £12 
 per acre. For the last few years it has gone down very 
 much. There is also the case of Mr. Robert Bond 
 M'Geough. The more you know about him, and his 
 dealings with his tenantry, the better ; for it is Sir. 
 Robert Bond M'Geough and the like of him that have 
 brought the country to the state in which it is. I have 
 got a number of faots illustrating this gentleman's 
 mode of dealing with his tenants, and can give you an 
 outline of them. He is within a stone's-throw of my 
 parish. On every change of tenancy there is an in- 
 crease of rent, whether on the occasion of a sale or on 
 the death of a tenant — even if a wife succeeds her 
 husband, or if a son succeeds his father — in every case 
 there is som.ething added to the rent. 
 
 5757. "Was that a new system, or did it exist for- 
 merly 1 — It was a new system. It never was done upon 
 that estate till Mr. Bond M'Geough got it. 
 
 5758. Baron Dowse. — Whom did he get it from? — 
 He succeeded his father, Mr. Walter Bond M'Geough. 
 
 5759. Chairman. — Are the rents high on that 
 estate 1 — They are high, considoj-ing that it is mountain 
 land, but he has raised the rents 300 per cent, on the 
 improvements done by the tenants. 
 
 5760. Do you know what the value of tenant-right 
 is on the estate ? — He tries to limit it to £5 an acre. 
 Of course they have resisted that, and, to a certain ex- 
 tent, successfully. In many cases they liave got in 
 good times as much as £20 per acre — that is, on the 
 reclaimed land, not on the mountain land, because there 
 is boggy and whinny land on almost every farm on 
 the estate. I have a list here of ten or twelve families 
 whom he evicted. [The "witness read the list.'] 
 
 5761. When did tliose evictions take place ? — Nine- 
 teen years ago. 
 
 5762. Long prior to the Land Act? — Yes. There 
 was a widow named Mrs. Catherine Hunt — her rent 
 was increased from £19 to £23 19s. After the in- 
 crease she wished to sell her farm, and a respectable, 
 solvent tenant offered to purchase it at £13 per acre, 
 but Mr. Robert Bond M'Geough refused to accept the 
 tenant unless he agreed to pay £27 rent. The tenant 
 declined to purchase at the increased rent, and the 
 result was that the widow could not sell, and was' 
 obliged to retain the farm until she became embar- 
 i-assed, and she was evicted by Mr. Robert Bond 
 M'Geough in June, 1880, and got no compensation 
 whatever. 
 
 5763. Do you know that case of your own know- 
 ledge ? — I do. She was evicted this very year. 
 
 5764. Baron Dowse. — Did she make a land claim? 
 — Yes, but she got nolhinQ-. 
 
 5765. Was it for non-payment of rent she was 
 evicted ? — Yes ; the cause was that Mr. Bond would 
 not allow her to sell and she became embarrassed and 
 could not pay the rent. 
 
 5766. He would not allow her to sell without in- 
 creasing the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5767. She was obliged to hold on, as the purchaser 
 did not wish to take the farm burdened with the in- 
 creased rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5768. The result was she got embarrassed, and was 
 evicted for non-payment of rent ? — Yes. She is put 
 out of the farm now, and has lost everything. What 
 I wish to point out is, that the increase of rent which 
 Mr. Bond M'Geough insisted upon was an increase 
 made upon the tenant's improvements, and not upon 
 the intrinsic value of the land as such. 
 
 5769. The O'Conor Don. — Are you in favour of 
 the Bright clauses of the Land Act ? — I am. I think 
 the principle is a sound one. I am in favour of a 
 peasant proprietary. At the same time I wish it to 
 be understood that I do not ^vish to interfere vfith the 
 just rights of landlords. 
 
 5770. Have you had any experience of the working 
 of purchases by tenants of their holdings. I have. In 
 my own parish several have purchased under the 
 Church Act. 
 
 5771. Are those who purchased getting on well ?^ — 
 Yes. I hold that it is a sound jsrinciple — that of 
 enabling an occupier to become the proprietor of his 
 holding — good for the occupier, good for the landlord, 
 supposing he gets a fair price, and good for the 
 country. 
 
 5772. You believe that if landlords get a fair 
 price the best thing for the country would be that the 
 occupier should be the owner ? — Yes ; I think it is a 
 sound principle — good for the occupier, for it 
 stimulates and encourages them to improve and make 
 the most of the land — good for the country, for it 
 increases production ; and good for the landlords, 
 especially such of them as are embarrassed with 
 mortgages and soforth. 
 
 5773. Do you think the tenants, as a rule, would 
 be able to contribute a fair portion of the' piirchase- 
 nioney? — I think the great majority could. 
 
 5774. Could they contribute one-fourth? — I think 
 one-fourth would be too high. The Church Act re- 
 quired them to contribute one-fourth, but that was too 
 much, and drove a great number into borrowing froni 
 money-lenders and loan funds at 10 per cent., and 
 other extravagant rates. of interest. I think it is not 
 desirable to oblige the tenants to resort to such means 
 of obtaining money. My opinion is that a good many of 
 them couldgiveone-thii-d, others one-fourth, or one-sixth, 
 itc, itc. ; and I think Government should assist them, 
 by advancing the remainder, on the security of the land. 
 I am completely in harmony with John Bright as to the 
 peasant proprietary. I think it would do no harm to 
 the landlords, and would be good for the tenants, good 
 for the State, and good for society. If tenants became 
 proprietors of their holdings, they mil have an interest 
 in improving them ; they will expend their labour and 
 their money — firstly in improving the land, secondly 
 in improving their houses, and thirdly, if they realize 
 money, they will invest it either in the improvement 
 of their land or in the banks, and not expend it in 
 idleness in London, or on the continent, as many land- 
 lords do, away from Ireland, and draining the resources 
 of the country. 
 
 577;'!. Baron Dowse. — Have you any suggestion to 
 make as to improving the principle of the Bright clauses, 
 
 or any improvement in the details of their operation ? 
 
 I think an experiment might well be made upon a large 
 scale in Tjlster — I am not speaking for the rest of 
 Ireland— of lending tenants a larger amount of the 
 purchase-money, to enable them to buy their hoLlin2,s. 
 The Government would have ample security, for they 
 would have the security both of the tenant right and 
 the proprietary-right on the farm, so that tlioy would 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 211 
 
 have double security for their money ; in "Ulster tlie 
 security would be better than that in the sovith and 
 west of Ireland. 
 
 577G. They would have both the landlord's and the 
 tenant's interest? — Yes; they would have both. I 
 think the London Companies who have estates in 
 Ireland should be required to sell, and the tenants 
 should be facilitated and encouraged to purchase ; and 
 whenever an estate came into the market the tenants 
 should 1)6 encouraged to pxir chase ; I think that would 
 tend greatly to allay the terrible feeling that now 
 prevails in Ireland. 
 
 5777. What improvement would you suggest in the 
 machinery for assisting tenants to purchase 1 — I think 
 Government could raise a fund by means of bonds, or 
 some siich securities — I have read some articles in the 
 newspapers suggesting the issue of such bonds — I 
 think if the interest on them was g-uaranteed by the 
 StatOj people would invest freely in them, and the 
 money thus raised could be applied in assisting tenants 
 to purchase, beginning gradually, and allowing the 
 scheme to develop itself by degrees. There was one 
 case in my own parish where a tenant became the 
 purchaser of his holding — Henry Harris of Lisnalee — 
 he purchased twenty-four acres, under the Church Act, 
 at £480, eqviivalent to twenty years' purchase. He 
 paid £160, borrowing the remainder. The rental he 
 was previously paying was £1 per acre — that is,. £2i 
 yearly for the twenty-four acres. He borrowed £320 
 for which he ^\all have to pay 5 per cent, for a period 
 of thirty-five years, which amounts to £12 16s. yearly. 
 Now, that man is in this position — the landlord (or 
 the Church Commission) has got twenty years' pur- 
 chase to begin with, and is perfectly satisfied. On 
 the other hand, the tenant was paying a rent of £24 
 a year, he is now paying £12 16s. annuity on the 
 advance, leaving him £11 4s. for his interest on the 
 £160. From the time that he purchased it he has 
 been his own landlord, and is as happy as the day is 
 long ; he is working away, improving his farm, drain- 
 ing, fencing, reclaiming, and he could not go to one of 
 your land leagu.e meetings if you were to give him 
 any money — he has nothing to do with them. 
 
 5778. The O'Conoe Don. — Do you remark an 
 improvement in the lands which have been sold to 
 tenants? — I do, a marked improvement. There is 
 another case — that of Edward Boyle of Lisnalee, 
 he purchased fourteen acres. His case is the same 
 as that of Harris. 
 
 5778a. He is getting on well ? — He is ; in every case 
 where a tenant purchased it is the same — all are getting 
 on well. 
 
 5779. You do not know any case in which they 
 have failed to pay the instalments 1 — Not a single case, 
 of course every one knows this has been a bad year and 
 there may be a case where a man had to borrow under 
 unfavourable circumstances. Everybody has to do that 
 occasionally. But in my district it has succeeded, as 
 far as I am aware, in every case, on the mountain lands 
 as well as on the low lands, and in my opinion if it was 
 extended all over Ireland, you would make the people 
 comfortable and contented, and you would have no 
 such men as Parnell, nor any of those land agitators. 
 
 5779a. lunderstandyoudo not advocate acompulsory 
 sale by landlords? — By no means. My idea may be 
 expressed in g, few words ; that there are two conciuTent 
 rights in every farm — the right of the landlord, and 
 that of the tenant ; these two rights should be defined 
 and made sacred ; the one should not be allowed to 
 absorb the other. For the last forty years the lajid- 
 lord's right has been constantlyinfringing on the tenant- 
 right and absorbing it, and in many cases the landlord 
 has entirely confiscated it, but on 'the other hand I 
 never knew a case where the tenant tried to interfere 
 wth the just proprietary rights of the landlord — not 
 a single case. 
 
 5780. Chaieivian. — I. tmderstand that you would 
 like that system — of securing to landlord and tenant 
 their well defined rights — to continue, unless in cases 
 of sales of property, and in such cases you think the 
 
 tenant should be assisted to purchase ?-^Certainly. I' Sept. 2i,isi0i 
 would give them every encouragement to do so. • gg^_ Charles 
 
 5781. The O'Conok Don. — What encouragement, Quin. 
 beyond that already proposed, would you think neces- 
 sary to be given ? — I would advance more money to 
 
 the tenants for purchasing. Let the Government 
 borrow a large sum for the purpose, and advance it to 
 them; it would be all paid buck. I do not think 
 Government would lose a farthing by it. 
 
 5782. You do not think the sum at present advanced 
 by Government to tenants for the purpose of purchas- 
 ing their holdings is sufiioiL'ut 1 — I do not. 
 
 5783. Mr. Shaw. — Wotild you like to see more 
 land brought into the market? — I would. 
 
 . 5784. And sold to the tenants 1 — I would. . . 
 
 5785. You would not force the landlords to sell it to 
 them, but you would give every facility to the tenants 
 to purchase ? — I would not force them to sell, but if 
 an estate came into the market, I would facilitate and 
 encourfige tenants to buy. It would be an advantage 
 to the owner of the estate, for the more bidders the 
 better for him. If a man has a cow to sell by auction, 
 the more bidders he has for it the better ; and in the 
 same way it is an advantage to the landlords to have 
 bidders, and the tenant's bid would be as good, and his 
 money as good, as any other persons. 
 
 5786. With regard to the Ulster Tenant-right, do 
 you think it would be an advantage to define it by 
 hxw, and extend it over the whole of Ireland ?^I think 
 that would require sen explanation, as to what the 
 Ulster Tenant-right is. 
 
 5787. Do you think the Ulster Tenant-right, as 
 generally understood, means that the tenant should 
 hold the land at a fair rent, with a power of sale, and 
 that he should not be disturbed as long as he paid that 
 rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5788. The great difficulty appears to be that the 
 landlord, by raising the rent, renders the tenant-right 
 of little value. Supposing there was a law of this kijid 
 — that all tenants from year to year in Ireland should 
 hold their land at a fair and reasonable rent, and should 
 not be evicted unless for non-payment of rent, and that 
 they should have the power of free sale to any person, 
 giving the landlord a , reasonable veto in case the pur- . 
 chaser was a man of objectionable character — do you 
 think that would be a satisfactory settlement of the 
 question ? — I think it would, if the rent were defined. 
 
 5789. In determining what would be the fair rent 
 of a holding, you think, I suppose, that some principle 
 should be followed that would be fair to both the land- 
 lord and the tenant ? — Yes, certainly. 
 
 5790. Care shoiild be taken that in assessing the 
 fair rent the tenant's improvements and expenditure 
 on the land should be taken into consideration on 
 his behalf ?— Yes. . 
 
 5791. Do you think that what we may call the 
 capacity of the land, its innate power, and capability 
 of being improved,- should be taken into consideration 
 on the landlord's behalf ? — I do. 
 
 5792. Having due regard to those principles, do, 
 you think the fair rent could be justly and equitably 
 fixed as between landlord and tenant ?-^I think so. 
 The land question would have been settled long ago if 
 that had been done. If the fair rent was fixed by 
 some impartial tribunal or by arbitration, on those 
 principles, if that were done it would satisfy every man 
 in Ulster, and every man in Ireland, and the man 
 whom it did not satisfy would be an tmreasonable -. 
 pei'son. There is another case I wish to mention — that 
 of Mr. Whaley. He was landlord of five townlands, 
 and he coerced Hs tenants to accept leases in, order 
 that the agent might get £5 or £2 10s. for each lease. 
 That was from the years 1828 to 1836, and a veryhi"h 
 rental was exacted considering the quality of the land. 
 It was mountain land. It was afterwards sold. 
 
 5793. Chairman. — Is it in possession of the same 
 landlord, or managed by the same agent, .now ? 
 — No. It was sold in the Incumbered Estates' Court - 
 in 1852. Mr. Quin purchased two townlands, Mr. 
 Littledale purchased one, and Mr. Nicholson piu-chased 
 
 2 E2 ■ 
 
212 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 22, 1880. 
 
 Eev. Charles 
 Quin. 
 
 two and re-sold one to Mi'. Richardson. There is not 
 a single man, as far as I know, on those townlands 
 that has a sixpence in the bank, and they are all in 
 debt. Not one ; although they are the most hard- 
 working and indnstrioiis creatures I know. They work 
 early and late — work on the slopes, and work on the 
 rocks, but on account of the excessively high rents 
 that are put upon them, they never will be able to 
 rise from a condition of poverty. 
 
 5794. What rent do they pay? — The rent varies 
 from 16s. to 26s. per Irish acre ; all under lease. 
 
 5795. What is the length of thelease ?— The Queen's 
 life. 
 
 5796. Have the interests in any of those leases been 
 sold since? — They have in somecases — ^inthe good times. 
 
 6797. Can you tell how much was paid ? — I cannot. 
 
 A good many ot the tenants go to England in the 
 summer and earn some money. 
 
 5798. Would there be a tenant-right at the close of 
 the lease '?^0f course there would, if the interest was 
 worth anything, but the rents are so high that it is 
 questionable if any person would purchase. Mr. 
 Kichardson, M. P., went over the townland, of which 
 his father is the proprietor, and it is right to say he 
 expended a good deal of money in distributing clothing 
 and food amongst the poorest and most necessitous of 
 the tenants. Were it not for him and myself I 
 believe a number of them would have died last year of 
 starvation. I know that for his kindness and gener- 
 osity the people felt so grateful that he was returned 
 to the House of Commons at the head of the poll for 
 the Conservative county of Armagh. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 O'Callaghan. 
 
 Patrick O'Callaghan, Lisseragh, Castleblayney, examined. 
 
 5799. Chairman. — You are a tenant farmer? — I 
 am. 
 
 5800. Who is your landlord ? — Mr. Eichardson of 
 Bessbrook. 
 
 5801. You are a member of the Camlough Farmers' 
 Club ?— I am. 
 
 5802. What is the size of yourfarm ? — Fifteen acres, 
 two roods, and some perches. 
 
 5803. Have you any comjilaint to make as to your 
 position ? — The greatest complaint I have is that the 
 present law as it stands is a clog upon industry. I 
 laboured with my family to improve my land. My 
 lease expired, but we still kept on improving it year 
 after year, until this threat came out. A portion of 
 my land was rather a swamp, and I laboured with my 
 family to drain it. 
 
 5804. When did the lease drop ? — More than ten 
 years ago. 
 
 5805. Since that time you have been afraid to go 
 on with improvements ? — Yes, since his letter, threat- 
 ening an increase of rent, I am afraid to go on. 
 
 5806. What are you afraid of ? — For fear the 
 valuator would come and raise the rents. I wanted 
 the valuator to go past before I would improve. 
 
 5807. You wanted the valuation to be made before 
 you effected the improvements? — Yes. 
 
 5808. And you would like to be safe for a good 
 many years against any increase of rent ? — Yes. 
 
 5809. Do you speak for a good many of the farmers 
 in your district as well as for yourself? — I do, I 
 speak on behalf of a number ot them. 
 
 5810. Do you think that there are many tenants on 
 the property who would improve their holdings if they 
 had security against increased rents being put on 
 them 1 — Certainl}'. I know several that would do 
 so. There is Patrick Byrne, and John Hayes, and 
 Peter Hayes. 
 
 5811. I see you object to the practice on the estates 
 of some landlords of restricting tenant-right by office 
 rules 1 — Yes. 
 
 5812. Is one of the office rules that there shall bo 
 an increase of rent at stated times ? —Just as they 
 take the whim. 
 
 5813. You say the increase is not at stated times, 
 but casually? — Yes, just as the landlord or his agent 
 take the whim into their heads. 
 
 5814. Is there a competition got up among adjoin- 
 ing tenants when a farm is vacant 1 — There is, when- 
 ever a farm is for sale that there is any money to be 
 made out of ; but the buyer and seller must go to the 
 office to have the buyer entered in the books as the 
 tenant, and the agent won't accept the buyer until he 
 sends the bailiff round and scours the county to see 
 who will give the highest amount of rent, and the 
 man that will give the most rent is the man lie will 
 prefer for tenant. 
 
 5815. You do not think it ought to go to the 
 highest bidder ? — The tenant who will give the most 
 rent is the man the agent choses. He screws up the 
 rent as high as he can. 
 
 5816. Does that diminish the tenant-right? — Of 
 course it does — it diminishes the money that the out- 
 going tenant gets. 
 
 5817.* Mr. Kavanagh. — Is it Mr. Richardson that 
 does this ? — It is done on his estate to a certain 
 extent — at the same time I think it right to say Mr. 
 Richardson is one of the best landlords in Ireland. 
 
 5818. Does he give any allowance towards improve- 
 ments if made by the tenants ? — Not a penny. 
 
 5819. Does he make improvements himself? — He 
 makes no improvements for the tenants — he does not 
 assist them in any one way. 
 
 5820. Baron Dowse. — Then how is he one of the 
 best landlords in Ireland ? — Because there are fai-ms 
 on his estate out of lease, and he don't raise the rent 
 on the tenant, wherein other landlords do. There is 
 Lord Gosford, he actually raises the rent before the 
 lease falls in, if the lives in the lease are gone to 
 America he will require the tenant to prove that 
 they are alive. 
 
 5821. Is that estate in your neighbourhood? — It is 
 — another thing, Mr. Richardson gives a great deal of 
 employment. 
 
 5822. That is in the Bessbrook miUs ? — Yes, there 
 are 4,000 employed there — they could not live only 
 for the employment he gives. 
 
 5823. Mr. Shaw. — He is a good employer of labour ? 
 — He is. 
 
 5824. Chaikjian. — Is there any other point you 
 want to bring before us? — There are a number of 
 farms on Lord Gosford's estate principally composed 
 of rough land. A man named M'Veigh bought a 
 farm some twenty years ago — the rent was £6. It 
 was mountain land and barren. He began to reclaim 
 it, and it is now three times the value it was when he 
 got it. The rent has been raised — it is now £16 a 
 year. Part of that land was flooded with water, he 
 drained it, and improved it in everyway ; but as soon 
 as he got it in good condition the bailiff sent word to 
 the agent, and the agent sent a valuator, and an 
 additional rent is charged for the man's own improve 
 ments. 
 
 5825. Was this on Lord Gosford's estate ?— Yes, 
 that is the way he treats his mountain tenants. He 
 may be a good landlord to some — about Market-hill, 
 and on the good land — but on the waste and mountainy 
 land he is a bad one. He has valued the reclaimed 
 land three times within eight years — the tenant is a 
 man named M'Bride. 
 
 5826. Have you any other cases to mention ? — There 
 is the case of a man named Doyle, under Mr. Quin. 
 Doyle purchased (or his father did) a farm of land 
 under Mr. Quin of Newry, twelve or thirteen years 
 ago. He bought it for £100 from Peter Costello. 
 Costello had taken it after another man had been 
 evicted from it — he was paying 18s. an acre — the land 
 would not afford to pay that rent and he was evicted. 
 Costello got it, but the rent was raised' to £1 an acre 
 on him, and he too found it impossible to pay the 
 rent, and had to give it up. Doyle took it, but lie 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 213 
 
 ■was told he would not be accepted as tenant under 
 22s. an acre. He -would not pay the 22s., and he 
 came to complain to the landlord. The landlord said he 
 would make it all right—" Pay the 22s. an acre, and 
 I will return you 2*., and you shall have it at the 
 same rent as Costello." The next year the man died, 
 and his son would only allow him Is. an acre, not 2s., 
 as he had promised, and the year after that he would 
 return him nothing, so that for several years he has 
 been paying 22s. an acre, but the land won't afford 
 that rent, and when the bad seasons came he could 
 not pay it, and he was evicted last spring for three 
 years' arrears of rent. He didn't sue for compensation, 
 he was poor and had no means. 
 
 5827. How much was the renf? — £7 a year for 
 six acres and some perches, but there are only five 
 acres of it that are capable of teiag tilled. There is 
 about an acre of it still covered with water. 
 
 5828. What was the rent before it was raised 1 — 
 At first it was 18s. an acre, then when Costello got it 
 he had to pay £1 an acre, and when Byrne took it 
 the agent asked 22s. 
 
 5829. Mr. Shaw.— What rent is it fairly worth 1— 
 It is not worth in fairness more than 10s. an acre. 
 
 5830. Why did Doyle give .£100 for it? — His 
 brother had earned money in America, and wanted 
 the place. 
 
 5831. CHAiKMAif. — Is there any other matter you 
 wish to state 1 — ^Another thing I wish to state is that 
 there are great complaints in consequence of landlords 
 not allowing more than a certain number of labourers 
 on their estates. 
 
 5832. What is the cause of that I—The landlords Sept. 22,i88Q. 
 don't like having labourers' cottages on their estates j^^.^ Patrick 
 because in the bad times the labourers may have to oCallaghan. 
 resort to the poorhouse, and increase the rates. 
 
 5833. Mr. Shaw. — What wages do labourers get in 
 your district? — They get 2s. dd. a day with board and 
 lodging, but often you won't get a good man for that, 
 labourers are very scarce. 
 
 5834. Is it in the long time they get those wages 1 — 
 Yes ; and, perhaps, you won't get a man for that. 
 
 6835. How much would a man get if he were em- 
 ployed all the year round? — A shilling a day and 
 board and lodging, but it is hard to get a man for it. 
 
 5836. Do you give him a house?— No ; I have no 
 houses for them. 
 
 5837. Where do they live? — They live some dis- 
 tance away, up the mountain, generally. They are 
 boys from they mountain. 
 
 5838. Do those persons find employment all the 
 year round ?— They do, and the want ot farm labourers 
 is a great hardship very often. Another thing they are 
 crying out for in our district is for a peasant proprie- 
 tary. 
 
 5839. What do you think of that yourself?— I 
 think it would be a very good thing, provided the 
 money could be got, and that they had not to give too 
 much for the land. The people are very anxious for 
 it. Some tenants bought their holdings, and are quite 
 independent, and the others are a little jealous of them, 
 and they would be anxious to do the same if they could, 
 I think they would beg the money at the church gate 
 if they could get it no other way. 
 
 Mr. Michael Baery, of The Or 
 
 5840. Chaiemajt. — You are a tenant farmer ? — I 
 am. 
 
 5841. You attend with the witnesses who have been 
 examined previously, do you agree generally with the 
 evidence they have given ? — I do. 
 
 6842. Have you any matter to mention to us in 
 addition to what they have stated ? — My lather held 
 the farm I occupy, and the rent has been increased. 
 
 5843. When was that ?— In 1863 or 1864. 
 
 5845. Has it been raised since 1 — No. 
 
 5846. How many acres have you ? — Eight acres two 
 roods. It is mountainy land. My father and I re- 
 claimed it, and improved it. 
 
 5847. Was the increase of rent put upon your im- 
 provements? — It was, -sir. 
 
 5848. How much was it increased? — £3 10s. was 
 the old rent, and it was raised to £6 10s. 
 
 5849. There has been no increase since the Land 
 
 OSS, Camlough, P.L.G., examined. 
 
 Act ? — No, sir, not since Mr. Richardson bought it ; 
 but if I make any more improvements it might be 
 raised. They spoke of raising it last year, but it was 
 not done. 
 
 5850. Baron Dowse. — Would you like to hold the 
 land at a fair rent, not to be turned oiit as long as you 
 paid it, and liberty to sell it to whomsoever you liked if 
 you wished to leave 1 — I would, sir, of course. 
 
 5851. Would you be satisfied with that? — I would, 
 sir, and to have the rent fixed by arbitration. 
 
 5852. A fair rent, to be fixed by arbitration between 
 landlord and tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 5853. Liberty to sell your interest to any respecta- 
 ble tenant who was willing to buy ? — Certainly. 
 
 5854. And not to be turned out as long as you paid 
 your rent ? — Yes. I think that would satisfy the 
 country. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Barry. 
 
 The Rev. Patrick M'Geaney, e.c.c, Armagh^ examined. 
 
 5855. Chairman. — You attend also on behalf of the 
 Camlough Association '? — I do. I agree substantially 
 with what has been stated by the Rev. Mr. Quuin. I 
 wish to mention one case which occurred within the 
 last two years on the estate of the Earl of Charlemont. 
 A tenant named Finn ; jld his farm^ and he went with 
 the purchaser to the agjnt, Mr. Boyle, and mentioned 
 the terms of the purchase. Mr. Boyle said that there 
 
 should be an advance of rent of three shillings an acre 
 or he would not accept the incoming tenant. The 
 purchaser then said that he would not give Finn the 
 price he had agreed upon, but would deduct £1 per 
 acre off the purchase-money for each shilling per acre 
 increase of rent. This shows how insecure the tenant- 
 right is, for the landlord can at any time raise the 
 rent, and diminish the tenant-ria;ht. 
 
 The Rev. 
 Patrick 
 M'Geaney, 
 n.c.c. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Quinn recalled, and further examined. 
 
 5856. Baron Dowse. — You wish to add something' 
 to your evidence ? — Yes ; a number of tenants wish to 
 bring under your notice the subject of county cess. 
 
 5857. Are there many cases in which the landlord 
 makes the tenant pay the whole county cess ? — Yes ; 
 it is done in every case in our district, without ex- 
 ception. The tenants, for a considerable time after 
 the Act was passed, were not aware of the change in 
 the law. I asked a great many of them, and they did 
 not understand it. The only exception was the 
 Presbyterian minister — he understood the law, and he 
 claimed the right of deducting the part of the cess, 
 
 but the agent said, " If you do then you must pay a 
 shilling an acre additional rent." Another grievance 
 is, that the roads are all measured in along with the 
 farms. There is a man I know who has a farm of ten 
 acres — his farm lies between two roads, and he has 
 more than an acre of roads on his farm — they have to 
 pay for them, and they think that is a great grievance. 
 I may state that the Land Act is useless, as far as the 
 county cess is concerned — there is not a single case in 
 which the tenants have not to pay ; and they have re- 
 quested me to notify that to the Commission. 
 
 The inquiry was adjourned till the following morning. 
 
 The Kev. Mr. 
 Quinn. 
 
214 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Scjt.23,lSS0, 
 
 John Young, 
 Esq., D.L. 
 
 ELEVENTH DAY— THUESDAY, 23rd SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat at 11 o'clock in the Imperial Hotel, Belfast. 
 Present :— The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborotjgh, Chairman ; William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 John Young, Esq., d.l., Galgorm Castle, Ballymena, and Mr. Edmond M'Neill, Craigdim, Ballymena. 
 
 Mr. John Young examined. 
 
 5858. Chairjian. — You live at Ballymena, and are 
 an owner of an estate in that neighbourhood ? — Yes. I 
 am the owner of a small estate of 1,800 acres. 
 
 5859. Are you well acquainted with the neigh- 
 bourhood generally 1 — Oh, yes, I have lived there all 
 my life. 
 
 5660. And therefore had experience of the tenant- 
 right custom of Ulster 1 — I am quite familiar with 
 the dealings between landlord and tenant. 
 
 5861. Now we have heard a great deal about 
 tenant-right for the last few days, and perhaps I 
 might usk you whether a definition which I believe is 
 generally given is your understanding of it, con- 
 tinuous occupancy of his holding by a tenant on 
 payment of a fair rent with power of free sale ? — No ; 
 that is not my definition of tenant-right. 
 
 5862. You say that is not the definition? — That 
 is not my definition. 
 
 5863. Would you tell me your definition'' — The 
 word 1 would take exception to in that definition 
 would be the right of continuous occupation. I 
 think that right has never either been claimed by 
 the tenant, or acknowledged by the landlord. 
 
 5864. Mr. Shaw. — But has it not been admitted as 
 a fact 1 — I would put it exactly in the reverse way. 
 I think the right of the tenant to receive compensa- 
 tion for his interest in his farm if removed by. his 
 landlord or ejected, has been acknowledged. 
 
 5865. Chairman. — But is not that a right which 
 has been introduced by the Land Act 1 — As I under- 
 stand the Land Act, it has merely rendered legal the 
 customs that were formerly observed and permitted by 
 the landlords freely. 
 
 5866. Mr. Shaw. — He had no claim before thoiigh 
 if he was evicted, he had no legal claim 1 — He had no 
 legal claim. 
 
 5867. It legalized that which existed before 1 — Ac- 
 cording to my experience of 'the dealings between ' 
 landlord and tenant, I never knew an instance of a 
 tenant being turned out of his farm and getting no- 
 thing. In fact, even if he were ejected for non-pay- 
 ment of rent I have known iastances where he was 
 allowed to sell to the incoming tenant. 
 
 5868. Have you known cases of their being evicted 
 except for non-payment of rent 1 — I never knew a case 
 in my life. 
 
 5869. That exactly, accounts for the fact of con- 
 tinuous occupancy ? — Continuous occupation would 
 deprive the landlord of the right of ever resuming his 
 land. 
 
 5870. Oh, no? — As long as he got his rent. 
 
 5871. I don't think that is the meaning put on it ? — - 
 It is by the tenant-right party. 
 
 5872. Chairman. — I think their meaning is con- 
 tinuous occupation provided the tenant pays his rent 
 and in any other case of eviction he is to be paid the 
 full tenant-right price, that is, the utmost he can get' 
 by auction 1 — The right of sale by auction is not per- 
 mitted upon all estates, it is only on a few. There 
 are other modes of fixing the value of tenant-right 
 than by auction and other modes that are considered 
 much more satisfactory by the landlords certainly, 
 and in some cases considered quite as satisfactory by 
 the tenant, those are by arbitration. 
 
 5873. What I proposed was the outside view that 
 had been put before us of the Ulster tenant custom 
 in its purity, and then it is represented that there are 
 
 very general restrictions which are called ofiice rules. 
 I don't know whether you think that is a fair repre- 
 sentation of the custom 1 — I think a fair representa- 
 tion of the tenant-right as it exists in our district of 
 the country, would be that as long as the landlord is 
 jDaid his rent, such rent as he considers reasonable and 
 fair, and that rent, mind you, is a changing figure (it 
 is the custom on most estates that after a period of 
 years, say thirty years or twenty-one years, I never 
 knew an instance of revaluation at a shorter period 
 than twenty-one years), and upon a fair rent being paid, 
 revalued at certain intervals that . the tenant is not 
 disturbed unless tlie land is wanted by his landlord for 
 some purpose, such as building, a town may arise in 
 the neiglibourhood, and the ground be wanted for 
 townparks at a higher rent ; then it is conceded the 
 tenant should give up the land and be paid for his 
 tenant-right. 
 
 5874. I think that is very much understood by all 
 those who have been hei-e, those are the modifications 
 of the tenant-right of which some of them complain ? 
 — I am quite aware that the claim of the tenant-right 
 ])arty consists of unbroken and continuous occupation, 
 with no right on the part of the landlord, except to 
 demand his rent. 
 
 5875. Mr. Shaw. — We . have had an immense 
 number of tenant farmers, and they~ have not gone 
 that length at all 1 — Then they have modified their 
 views considerably by the test of being put under an 
 examination. 
 
 5876. Chairman. — They acknowledge the right of 
 the landlord to give a notice to quit t — That is by law. 
 
 5877. And that then they ought to be entitled not 
 to a mere compensation, sv.ch as they can get in a court 
 by proving improvements, if they have any to prove, 
 but also for the highest price they can get at a sale of 
 their holding 1 — Under the Land Bill as it stands at 
 present in the case of a dispute between the landlord 
 and tenant, the landlord ejecting and wishing to 
 resume possession, evidence is received by the court as 
 to the selling value of the tenant-right, both on the 
 landlord's and tenant's side, and the court draws what 
 they consider a fair line,,a]id gives that value, not the 
 value of the improvements. Where tenant-right is 
 acknowledged the improvements don't enter into the > 
 question at all. If tenant-right is thrown aside, and 
 the tenant proceeds for his improvements, then that 
 value is gone into, not otherwise. 
 
 5878. Mr. Shaw. — But where a landlord ejects a 
 tenant, don't you think he has a fair right to the 
 tenant-right and improvements 1 — I do not. 
 
 5879. The landlord is putting him out for his own 
 reasons, and the tenant is inconvenienced? — That 
 would be paying him twice for the same thing. There 
 is a great fallacy with regard to tenant-right — I am 
 old enough to remember that tenant-right meant 
 nothing but the outlay of the tenant upon the soil in ^ 
 building, fencing, draining, &c. 
 
 5880. How long ago is that ? — Thirty^five years 
 ago. 
 
 5881. In your district ?— Yes. That has been en- 
 larged into the market value of the tenant's interest, 
 the tenants being allowed to buy and sell of cotu-se, 
 they put a value on these improvements, such as they 
 would get for them, that another man would "ive ; 
 that involves another element which also has a marlcet . 
 value, that is the right of occupation, the facilitv of 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 215 
 
 entering into a place to make a livelihood ; that sells 
 for a figure -which the tenant now pockets, and which 
 formerly he never claimed. 
 
 5882. It makes the landlord's rent perfectly safe ? 
 — I am of opinioii it is an advantage to the landlord. 
 The higher value the tenant-right rises to the better 
 for the landlords, except in one particular case, and 
 it is this where the tenant is induced by competition 
 to give fai' more than the value of the tenant-right, 
 and impoverishes himself by doing so, the landlord 
 gets an impoverished tenant, instead of a man who 
 has capital and ability to work the farm., 
 
 5883. Chairman. — Then you think the landlord 
 ought to have a choice of the tenant who should 
 purchase ] — He always has it. 
 
 5884. Mr. Shaw. — A veto? — More than a veto. 
 
 5885. Chairjian. — In general that has been repre- 
 sented as a power of veto for any reasonable objection? 
 — The landlord has exercised, and has now, and I 
 think he ought to have a veto without giving any 
 reason, because there are many reasons that would 
 be perfectly valid to his mind, and the mind of any 
 sensible man in the management of his estate that 
 it would be impossible to give publicly. 
 
 5886. Might not that be met by the landlord as on 
 some estates, having a right of pre-emption at the 
 usual selling rates ? — That involves the landlord being 
 a man of cash, able to buy, I don't think the onus 
 should be thrown upon him. 
 
 5S86a. Mr. Shaw. — Suppose he has another tenant 
 ready of his own selection ? — I'ractically that evil does 
 not arise, if one tenant is objected to, the competition 
 is so great, there are plenty ready to take it. 
 
 5887. It is not a thing that occurs in practical life 1 
 — I don't think it is. 
 
 5888. And the fact of the tenant giving an exorbi- 
 tant price I suppose is rare 1 — No, very common. 
 
 5889. Wtat is the result then? — If he is a man of 
 industry and energy, and the times are good, he over- 
 rides all difficulties and pays his debts, and in case the 
 times are adverse to him, he is sold out -again. 
 
 5890. And- some better man comes in ? — Yes. 
 
 5891. It does not hurt the landlord?— Well I don't 
 think it does, but still the landlord does not like to 
 see a man coming in who will not work the place. 
 
 5892. Chairman. — Do you think in the interest of 
 either tenant or landlord the holding being put up to 
 public auction is a good system ? — The only objection 
 in my mind to a j)ublic auction is the great difficulty 
 that it throws in the way of the landlord objecting to 
 the highest bidder. It is a very invidious thing for 
 the landlord to come forward lifter a place has been 
 knocked down to the highest bidder and say " I will 
 not have you.'' The only other objection I have 
 heard to a public auction is that it raises the price 
 injuriously on the bidder ; I don't think it does. I 
 have known instances of arbitration and private sales 
 reaching as high a price as any auction. 
 
 5893. You cannot limit that ? — No, and if you do 
 limit it, practically the higher sum passes behind 
 backs. 
 
 5891. Can you give any instances of tenants ruined 
 by the overprice they gave for the tenant-right ? — I 
 think I could if I had time to remember. I can give 
 you several instances of men who have overbought 
 themselves and been obliged to sell out again. 
 
 5895. You might perhaps put it down and send it 
 to the secretary ? — I will endeavour to do so. 
 
 5896. Mr. Shaw. — It would be very hard to say 
 what was the cause of their breaking down? — Yes^ 
 there is the difficulty. I can give 'you instances of 
 men who had bought and then sold out in two or 
 three years, and it was my opinion they had overpaid. 
 
 6897. Chairman. — On your own property tenant- 
 right exists I suppose ? — Yes always, as my father 
 purchased a portion of Lord Mountcashell's estate in 
 1851, on that estate very large and liberal tenant- 
 right was always allowed, and he cari'ied out on his 
 portion the same jiractiee and it has been done by me 
 since. 
 
 5898. You say "large and liberal," we did not Sept.2a,isso. 
 quite take it as the same understanding of tenant- jg],^ y^ikj 
 right as has been given by other witnesses 1 — By large -gsq., d.l. 
 and liberal I mean that the price paid was unrestricted, 
 
 that there was no objection on tlie part of the office 
 or of the owner to a sale at any ti-me, and in fact no 
 inquiry into the transaction except as to the character 
 of the incojning party. 
 
 5899. Mr. Shaw. — Have the rents been raised 
 within your time on the property] — Yes in 1874. 
 
 5900. A general advance ? — The property was leased 
 in 1844 or 1845, I am not sure which, for thirty 
 years. 
 
 5901. -Before you iiurchased? — Before we purchased, ' 
 about hall of it, the other half was at will. The rents 
 v.'ere the same on the two halves, and in 1874 it was 
 all revalued and relet. 
 
 5902. The leases had fallen in in the meantime? — 
 The thirty years leases fell in in November, 1874. 
 
 5903. Chairman. — Then on the revaluation or in 
 the rents you fixed after the revaluation did you take 
 into account the tenant's improvements? — The tenant's 
 improvements as a rule, in fact as an instruction to 
 any valuator I have ever known, the instruction by 
 the landlord is, not to put any price on the tenant's 
 improvements. 
 
 5904. Mr. Shaw. — Can you state what the advance 
 was? — Yes, the advance was about 16or 17 per cent. 
 
 5905. How did you ascertain the vah-ie ? — By a 
 valuator. 
 
 5906. You appointed a valuator? — I appointed a 
 valuator. 
 
 5907. The tenant had no voice in the matter except 
 to accept or reject? — Yes. 
 
 5908. Did they all accept without a complaint ? — 
 Yes, perhaps I should not say all, one or two objected, 
 those two men were advanced politicians on the 
 tenant-right question and largish holders, independent 
 men in fact. 
 
 6909. Chairman. — Then they objected to any advance? 
 — They would have objected to any advance. 
 
 6910. You say the only inquiry is as to the 
 character of the purchaser, that includes solvency ? — 
 Solvency. 
 
 6911. Do you consider a man solvent who borrows 
 money to buy the holding 1 — Not it he borrowed the 
 whole, a man who paid two or three hundred pounds, 
 and borrowed 20 per cent. I would consider very 
 solvent. 
 
 5912. Would you expect him to have capital to 
 stock his farm afterwards? — As a rule the purchaser 
 comes from a smaller farm, and brings his stock with 
 him. 
 
 6913. That represents capital? — That represents 
 capital. 
 
 5914. Mr. Shaw. — And he can manage to stock his 
 farm that way 1 — Yes, it would be", perhaps, well for 
 you to understand that in our district the farms are 
 small, and the farmer requires less capital in propor- 
 tion to the acreage, because the labour is all supplied 
 by himself. 
 
 6915. And it is tillage land 1 — Tillage land. 
 
 5916. What are the sizes of the-farms? — On my 
 estate of 1,700 or 1,800 acres thei'e are ninety tenants, 
 so that the farms cannot be large. 
 
 5917. Chairman. — Have they other means of 
 making money 1 — Some of them have linen weaving, 
 but, as a rule, I think those who don't follow the 
 wea"ving are better off". 
 
 5918. Mr. Shaw. — They weave in their own hou.ses ? 
 — Yes. Suppose a man with eight or ten acres would 
 have two or three sons perhaps, and two or three 
 daughters, they may have two or three looms at work 
 in the house, and" cultivate the land to supply them 
 with necessaries, food, and milk and butter. 
 
 5919. And work at odd times on the land, and odd 
 times at the looms ? — Yes, and as a rule, those farms 
 are badly cultivated, the money comes out of the 
 loom. 
 
 5920. How do they live on fifteen acres, if they 
 
216 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, It 80. 
 
 S^t. 23, 1880. 
 
 Tohn Young, 
 Esq., D.L. 
 
 haven't the loom 1 — There was a tenant of mine, who 
 had nine Irish acres, about fifteen statute. The man 
 died, leaving three daughters and one son. He 
 left the son the farm with five or six hundred 
 pounds, and gave each of his daughters £100, an^ that 
 was all made off the land. 
 
 5921. Chairman. — An industrious man who had 
 capital enough? — An industrious man. The only outside 
 thing he had was that on Ms farm there was a quarry 
 that he sold stones out of. 
 
 .59:! 2. Not a road contractor 1 — No, he was not. 
 
 5923. What do you consider the general caiises that 
 influence the selling price of holdings in the country 1 
 ■ — I think the purchasers, as a rule, are pretty shrr-wd, 
 they look into tliat. The first is the rent, if h is 
 moderate, the character of the landlord, if he is likeJy 
 to continue that moderate rent, and the condition of 
 the land, buildings, fences, roads, and state of the farm 
 generally. 
 
 5924. Do you think that there is a feeling of inse- 
 curity even on properties where there is a landlord 
 with ^\hom they are quite satisfied and confident, but 
 from not knowing into whose hands it may afterwards 
 come 1 — I think, as a matter of practical experience, 
 there is no feeling of insecurity at all, unless where it 
 is raised by political agitators. 
 
 592.5. Nothing that deters them from making 
 improvements, for fear their improvements, as they 
 say, should be eaten up by an increase of rent 1 — No. 
 I think in good times the improvements go On as long 
 as they are able to carry them out. 
 
 5926. Mr. Shaw. — It is natural to think if the 
 power is there it may have an effect on some people, 
 the landlord has the power 1 — One can only judge from 
 what one sees. I have never seen anything to make 
 me think the tenants are influenced by a fear of the 
 rents Ijeing raised. There are, perhaps, instances of 
 small estates where the confidence would not be as 
 great as among the larger men, but if you take the 
 large estates, take the county generally, there is no 
 rising of rents. 
 
 5927. On the falling- in of a lease is there not? — 
 Always on the revaluation. 
 
 5928. And change of tenancy on a large holding ? — 
 Where there is a revaluation on the change of tenancy, 
 that is the only time there is a revaluation. 
 
 5929. Chairman. — It has been represented .that 
 that is an unfavourable time to make the change, and 
 that a periodical revaluation would be preferred by 
 the tenant 1 — You will see at once what a boon it is 
 to the resident tenants who remain on the estate if 
 their rents are never to be changed. The estate next 
 to me, Lord Wavency's— there are instances there of 
 people who have held for centuries, and are only 
 charged I Os. an acre, while theii Eeighbours are paying 
 the present value. The one tenant has remained on, 
 and his neighbours Lave changed frequently. 
 
 59,30. We understood under the head of change of 
 tenancy was inchided the succession of a son to a 
 iathei ? — I think not. 
 
 5931. That seems to have been introduced in some 
 parts of the country ? — I never knew an instance of 
 that. 
 
 5932. Do you think that would be an unfair and im- 
 proper system ?— I think a much fairer system, in a 
 businesslike point of view, is a revaluation every 
 twenty or thirty years, 
 
 5933. Mr. Shaw. — Over the whole property 1 Yes 
 
 because these inequalities raise discontent. 
 
 5934. Chairman. — Giving full consideration to the 
 tenants' improvements ? — I never knew an instance, in 
 my experience, where a value was put on the tenants' 
 improvements. 
 
 ■ 5935. Mr. Shaw.— Where it was raised so that he 
 can got nothing for his tenant-right or free-will lately ? 
 — I don't believe such an instance exists. 
 
 5936. Do you suggest any alterations in or amend- 
 ments of the existing law as it aflfects holdings under 
 the Ulster custom ?— There is just the one point that 
 has been largely discussed in our county, and, as far 
 
 as I know the landlords' oijinion, there is every wijli 
 it should be conceded, and that is, that a tenant attha 
 falling-in of the lease should have protection. That is 
 that a landlord should not have the power at tlie end 
 of a lease of turning him out and giving him nothiiK.- 
 that is, on an estate where tenant-right exists. For 
 instance, under those very '74 leases of Lord 2\louut- 
 cashell, those tenants were in the enjoyment of tenant- 
 right. They took the leases in 1844, and such leases 
 are looked upon by the tenants, no matter wliat clauses 
 are put into them — they are. looked upon by the 
 tenants simply as an engagement on the part of the 
 landlord that the rent would not be raised for thirty 
 years. In those leases, which were evidently drawn 
 from some English model, were all the usual covenants 
 of giving up the land at the end of the term with all 
 the improvements and buildings in good and tenantable 
 order. That understanding is not taken out of them 
 by the tenants at all, and I would look upon it as sim- 
 ple confiscation to turn them out at the end of tiie 
 lease and resume possession. 
 
 5937. Or to raise the rent unduly? — I thiak it 
 should be raised to the same as the general prices 
 around. 
 
 5938. Chairman. — And there ought to be no riglit 
 in the lease to bar the tenant-right ? — I think there 
 should not. 
 
 5939. Sir. Shaw. — And the good landlords, as a 
 geneial rule in Ulster, don't object to that ? — I never 
 knew an instance, except one, where the landlord at 
 the fall of the lease interfered with the tenant's en- 
 joyment of the farm. 
 
 5940. Chairman. — Do you know are there persons 
 in this part of the country that correspond v.'ith what 
 in the south are known as " land-sharks "? — I think it 
 is a genus almost entirely unknown here. 
 
 5941. Since the Land Act has there been any dif- 
 ference in the custom of landlords towards making the 
 improvements or allowing towards improvements on 
 the holdings ? — I think the result of the Land Act has 
 been materially to check landlord's liberality towards 
 improvements. > 
 
 5942. They are afraid of their improvements sinkino- 
 into the tenants' improvements ? — Naturally they 
 would, you know. You will easily understand, in 
 former times a landlord was in perfect accord with bis 
 tenants, he considered that his interest and tlii! 
 tenant's interest was identical in the improvement ot 
 the land, and he knew that after the lapse of a num- 
 ber of years lie could, in fact, share in the enjoyment 
 ot tiie improvement by an increased value ; now any 
 increased rent is got under great difiiculties and inter- 
 ference on the part of the law. 
 
 594.''.. The presumption in the Land Act is a;'ainst 
 the landlord '] — it is against the landlord. 
 
 5944. But still there IS a power ot reniKtration !— 
 Weil that is troublesome. 
 
 5945. Without even going to tijo corrt for k'^}" 
 tration, cannot it be clone by an otiice re:;istry witc ilu' 
 tenant's knowleda-e ot what is entered 'l^i ^.^'ippiwe n 
 can, but certainly the result is that the landlords are 
 most unwilling now to co-operate in improvements, 
 
 5946. The insecurity begins to be felt bv the land- 
 lords instead of the tenants?— Exactly. I think all 
 the agitation that has been going on with regard to 
 landlords' rights, and the way in which they exercise 
 their rights on their own property, by the public prints 
 and agitators, has itself had a great tendency to check 
 their interference. 
 
 5947. In the new leases given at present, is the 
 tenant-right acknowledged to the tenant at the drop- 
 ping of the lease ? — I can only answer for myself. In 
 granting new leases which was done in 1874, I inserted 
 a clause guaranteeing to the tenant his tenant-right 
 as it then existed. 
 
 5948. Do yon think generally the tenants would 
 expect that covenant?— My tenants would not have 
 taken the lease without it. 
 
 5949. Mr. Shaw— Thirty-one years lease I suppose I 
 — ihirty-one years lease. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 217 
 
 5950. Chairman. — As a general rule tenants prefer 
 
 now tlieir holding under tenant-right to a lease ? I 
 
 think they do. There is an idea among the tenants 
 that a thirty-one years lease bars the tenant-right, and 
 at its end that a landlord has a right to resume pos- 
 session, that explains the unwillingness to take a lease. 
 I think they are very willing to take leases when there 
 is a claiTso put in. 
 
 5951. Mr. Shaw. — That it destroys their tenant- 
 right 1 — In fact they look upon it as a thirty-one years 
 assurance of no rise of rent. 
 
 5952. Chairman. — What is your opinion of the rents 
 generally through your part of the country 1 — I think 
 they are very moderate. 
 
 5953. Mr. Shaw. — What is the average acreage 
 rental in your district ? — The average acreage rental 
 ■on my own property is u.nder £1. 
 
 5954. The English acre I suppose? — The English 
 acre. 
 
 5955. You are not far from the town 1 — A mile and 
 a half. 
 
 5956. Is Ballymena a good town? — Ten thousand 
 inhabitants, a good flourishing town. I am speaking 
 ■entirely of agricultural land. 
 
 5957. Chairman. — Are there any cases of middle- 
 m.en and tenants who hold under them in your neigh- 
 bourhood 1 — I don't think there are very many, but 
 there are some, the under-tenants are in a wretched 
 •condition. 
 
 5958. What rent do the imder-tenants generally 
 pay in such cases, in comparison with the rent paid 
 by the head-tenant 1 — At least double, in some cases 
 treble. 
 
 5959. Mr. Shaw. — The ordinary rent in the dis- 
 trict 1 — Yes, there is no greater tyrant than the tenant- 
 farmer when he becomes a landlord himself. 
 
 5960. These are old holdings I suppose, they are not 
 a recent creation, these middlemen ? — ISTo, there is one 
 case where a whole townland is held in that way at a 
 ■small head-rent, the tenants are very poor, the holdings 
 very small, and the rents very high. 
 
 5961. Chairman. — What is the custom with respect 
 to labourers 1 — The labour in my district, immediately 
 about me, is principally supplied by a weaving popula- 
 tion, who botli weave and labour, and they hold 
 cottiers' houses under the farmers, for which they pay 
 Is. or 2s. a week with a right to plant a few ridges of 
 potatoes. 
 
 5962. Then some of their families work in the linen 
 trade ? — Some of their families weave, and the able- 
 bodied men supply the agricultural labour of the 
 district. 
 
 5963. Does it work satisfactorily 1 — Except for the 
 wretchedness of the hovels they live in, and bad 
 sanitary arrangements of every sort, I think it does. 
 1 think they are better off' than purely agricultural 
 labourers would be. 
 
 5964. Mr. Shaw. — It is a thickly populated district, 
 I suppose, owing to the linen trade ? — Yes. 
 
 5965. Chairman. — A farmer naturally wants the 
 man to be a constant labourer. In case of the illness or 
 the death of the chief working man^ is it the custom 
 to put them out ? — Yes. 
 
 5966. Then in your district there must be some 
 difficulty in finding a place to live in, and earn what 
 they can by weaving ? — In those cases, where instances 
 of that kind would occur, they are driven into the 
 town. 
 
 5967. That is a difficulty, as regards the labourers 
 being actually under the farmers ; it is a difficult thing 
 to know how to avoid it? — I don't see how you can avoid 
 it, certainly not in that district, without a complete 
 revolution. The farms are small and the labour is 
 principally supplied by the farmer's own family, then 
 he lets one or two cottages on his land to this weaving 
 population, who are bound to supply one or two days' 
 labour in spring and harvest. 
 
 5968. That is to cut down the price of labour at 
 busy times 1 — Yes. 
 
 5969. Then they don't engage them for the whole 
 year 1 — No. 
 
 5970. Do you think it would be a better system if 
 such holdings were only allowed where the farmer 
 pwts the labourer in as his labourer, ajid gives him a 
 garden 1 — In some cases the agent interferes, and will 
 not allow more than so many cabins on the land, and 
 regulates the labour in that way. 
 
 5971. Is there no rule against subletting for 
 cottages 1 — On many estates there is, Ijut I think as a 
 rule in the country they are not interfered with. 
 The cottages are mere hovels, in which the weaving 
 population live. The farmer takes the rent from 
 them in work, in spring and autumn, and the rest of 
 the year they must support themselves as best they 
 can. 
 
 5972. Mr. Shaw. — This is near Ballymena I sup- 
 pose ? — Yes. 
 
 5973. Chairman. — Are there any cases that you 
 know of, of the purchase of their holdings by tenants 
 from the Chui'ch or the Board of Works ? — Personally, 
 I am not acquainted with a single one, in fact I don't 
 think the people about us want to buy. In the case 
 of Ahoghill glebe, a very lai'ge one, 250 acres, some 
 of the tenants were able to Ijuy, others v/ere not. I 
 suppose it could have been financed by them, but 
 they went in a body to Shane's Castle and memorialed 
 Lord O'Neill to buy the townland, and expressed the 
 opinion that they would be much better off under a 
 good landlord like him, than as owners of their OAvn 
 farms. 
 
 5974. Iilr. Shaw.— Did he buy ?— No. 
 
 5975. And who bought 1 — It was bought by some- 
 one, I can't tell you. 
 
 5976. They were small tenants ? — Yes, tenants of 
 ten or twelve acres. 
 
 5977. Then you are fully in favour of tenant-right, 
 I suppose, as it exists in the north 1 — I am entirely in 
 favour of tenant-right with what I consider the prt per 
 restrictions, and those restrictions I confine to an 
 absolute right on the part of the landlord to select his 
 own tenant, and an absolute right to resume possession 
 of his own property v/hen it suits his purpose on pay- 
 ing a fair compensation to the tenant. 
 
 5978. You would give him his rights without injur- 
 ing the rights of the tenant 1 — I would. 
 
 5979. How would you ascertain that, would you 
 leave it to arbitration, because we are assuming a case 
 where the landlord is acting 1 — I think arbitration 
 would be a very fair way. I have a good deal of ex- 
 perience personally in taking up land from tenants, 
 and have never had any difficulty in arranging the 
 price between ourselves. 
 
 5980. And you think in fixing even rents, there 
 would be no practical difficulty between landlord and 
 tenant 1 — I don't think there would be. 
 
 5981. There is not at present on good estates?— 
 None. 
 
 5982. In case there was any difference, arbitration 
 would be a fair way of settling it ?— I don't think it 
 would. Ai'bitration means the tenant appointing an 
 arbitrator ; that arbitrator would undoubtedly be from 
 the tenant's class, and the feeling that exists in Ireland 
 at present is so strong against rents, and any movement 
 of rents over than at present exist, that it would intro- 
 duce a difficulty that could not be got over. 
 
 5983. The landlord would appoint a man of his own 
 that he had confidence in ? — Yes. 
 
 5984. And we might have such a system as that a 
 Government office should appoint an umpire — a skilled 
 man ? — I don't think the landlord should be interfered 
 with at all in the fixing of his rent. I think the land- 
 lord has a right to fix the price that is to be put upon 
 what he has got to give. If the tenant cannot agree to 
 pay the rent the landlord puts upon it, then I think he 
 is entitled to be paid a fair amomit for his interest in the 
 farm, and that amount I would have no objection to 
 have fixed by arbitration. 
 
 5985. But don't you think it would be better for 
 
 2 F 
 
 Sept. M,IS80. 
 
 John Younf^ 
 esq., D.u 
 
218 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept.iS,W80. 
 
 John Young, 
 est}., D.L. 
 
 tte landlord, in tlie long run, to have sucli a system 
 as that; it Avould look as if he were anxious to act 
 fairly towards the tenant? — I don't think it would. 
 It would produce a quarreling between landlord and 
 tenant that wojild be endless. 
 
 5986. It would only come up on rare occasions, 
 because, as a rule, landlords are not looking for an 
 increase of rent ? — Landlords are not, as a rule, but I 
 think the tenants would be taught, and are taught, 
 that the landlords are looking for more than the 
 value. 
 
 5987. But there may be cases where the lands are 
 very highly rented^ and the tenant has laid out a good 
 deal of money and cannot make a living out of it, 
 don't you think the tenant there has a right to have 
 the rent adjusted? — I think not, he should get his 
 tenant-right. 
 
 5988. He would have no tenant-right in that ca,se? 
 — Oh, yes ; suppose the rent to be unduly high, a man 
 knowing the circumstances of the neighbourhood would 
 fix the value of his tenant-right irrespective of that 
 high rent. 
 
 6989. But the rent is on the farm? — It was not on 
 it until the dispute occurred. 
 
 5990. But in the case of his selling out to another 
 person ? — There is no difficulty in a court settling the 
 tenant-right; 
 
 5991. Would you have any objection to leave it to 
 some tribunal for a tenant who is staying in his land? 
 — I don't think the landlord should be subjected to 
 the regulation of a court as to the price he should take 
 for his own land. I think if there is a dispute about 
 land, he does all that is required of him if ho pays a 
 tenant the value of his tenant-right. 
 
 5993. And let him go out ?— Yes. 
 
 5993. Do you think any money he could get in that 
 way would compensate a tenant for the loss of his 
 home ? — But what right has he to stay there if he will 
 not pay the landlord's rent. 
 
 5994. But the rent may be unreasonable, there are 
 unreasonable landlords ? — I think the fact of having 
 to pay for the tenant-right would bring him to his 
 reason. 
 
 5995. There may be landsliarks waiting to take up 
 the land 1 — What do you mean by landsharks. 
 
 5996. Well, another tenant ? — If there is another 
 tenant wUliug to take it at the rent the landlord offers 
 why should he not get it. 
 
 6997. And turn the tenant out who has made it 
 what it is ? — On paying him for his improve- 
 ments. 
 
 5998. But the new tenant pays for that, the dis- 
 possessed tenant's loss is not covered by it % — It may 
 bo contended that if a man gets full price for his 
 tenant-right, which is the only marketable article he 
 has, what right has he to complain. 
 
 5999. Do you think it wise for landlords to stand 
 on their legal rights ?^0h, that is another question. 
 I don't see any half way between what your question 
 drives at and fixity of tenure. 
 
 6000. But your Ulster custom is half way to- 
 wards fixity of tenure. It is contended now that 
 it is being eaten up by the landlords raising rents ?— 
 In my own district I would give that a most emphatic 
 denial. 
 
 6001. Still, if it occurs in Armagh and Tyrone, it is 
 wonderful in these days how that kind of thing 
 spreads among a people, and causes dissatisfaction ? — 
 I don't see any half way between the principle you are 
 laying down and fixity of tenure upon Government 
 valuation, and that I think would be taking from the 
 landlord his rights altogether. 
 
 6002. His rights of raising rent unreasonably ? — I 
 think he has a right to raise his rent four timeS the 
 value if he can get it, if he pays the existing tenant the 
 value of his tenant-right. I will put a case to you. 
 Supposing a landlord finds his land holds an accidental 
 value on account of its proximity to a town, or a mill 
 is built in the neighbourhood, and ho sees he can let 
 
 what is let at £1 an acre for £4 or £5 an acre for 
 building cottages. 
 
 6003. That is an exception, that ought to be ex- 
 cepted? — Somebody may build a house within a short 
 distance of him, and may want land for his accommo- 
 dation, the landlord finds he can get £4 or £5 an 
 acre for what he is only getting £1 for, and that £20 
 an acre will pay the tenant the full value of Ms 
 tenant-right, why should he not have power to give the 
 tenant ,£20 an acre and let him go ? An.ytliing else 
 would be confiscation of his rights. I go as far as 
 any one in compensating the tenant, but I don't think 
 that shoidd be done at the landlord's expense. 
 
 6004. But don't you think there should be some 
 tribunal to decide as to the reasonableness of the 
 landlords' claim to resume the land? — That is to 
 say, you want me to say that there should be a court 
 to decide how far the landlord is to exercise his own 
 rights. 
 
 6005. Don't you think his rights are all conditional, 
 and bounded by the welfare of the State and of the 
 community ? — That is a general principle, you know. 
 I don't think his exercising his rights in the way 
 indicated by me would be an interference with the 
 public good at all. 
 
 6006. Would it not be better for him if he had some 
 third party that would come and say whether that was 
 right or not if called upon 1 — I think the obligation 
 upon him of paying full tenant-right price is a 
 sufficient check upon him from exercising his powers- 
 capriciously. 
 
 6007. Landlords are not wiser than other men, and 
 may do an unjust thing, and don't you think that it 
 would be better for them on the whole, as a class, as 
 Avell as for the community, if there was some indepen- 
 dent tribunal? — I do not. J. think the obligation 
 of paying the full tenant-right is a sufficient check 
 upon any capricious action of the landlord, and a 
 thorough protection to the tenant. 
 
 6008. You think the landlord has a right to any 
 rent he can get out of the land, paying the existing 
 tenant the tenant-right ? — I think so. 
 
 6009. Chaieman. — Though he made all the im- 
 provements? — The tenant-right includes improvements. 
 The tenant-right is the market value of the tenant's 
 interest in the place, which includes, of course, all his 
 improvements. The landlord having paid that, or 
 expressed his willingness to pay that, in my mind 
 is entitled to everything else that is there. 
 
 6010. If you were in a part of the country where 
 there is nothing like these manufactories going on, 
 what resort would there be for a tenant evicted for 
 not paying what he considered a high rent except the 
 v/orkhouse? — If the tenant is in enjoyment of the 
 tenant-right, supposing he has fifteen acres, he has 
 £300 in his pocket to go where he pleases. 
 
 6011. Do you think that would get rid of the heart- 
 burnings and unpopularity of the act ? — My answer 
 is : I think it is better for the country at large that 
 it shoiild be so than that there should be fixity of 
 tenure. 
 
 6012. Mr. Shaw. — ^Fixity of tenure is a misleading 
 expression. It looks as if it meant absolute fixity of 
 tenure. That is a thing that has not been claimed yet 
 by the tenant-farmers ? — I cannot see any way out of 
 your principle except fixity of tenure. 
 
 6013. We give the landlord a right to resumption 
 if he has a reasonable cause to show ? — I don't under- 
 stand any more reasonable cause than that he can 
 make more out of his land than by letting it to the 
 tenant. I start from the principle, and I cannot start 
 from any other, according to my views of property, 
 that the property belongs to the landlord. In my 
 case my father bought the property, and paid for it. 
 
 6014. Don't you think that if you can get 5 per 
 cent, on the purchase money that would be enough ? 
 — I don't know. 
 
 6015. You have heard of political economists, and 
 of John Stuart Mill ?— I have. 
 
 6016. And his opinion is that anything over 5 per 
 
MIMUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 219 
 
 cent, belongs to tlie State ? — I don't think John Stuart 
 Mill put it exactly in that way. 
 
 6017. Yes, he did. I can find the passage for you. 
 So, you. see, great thinkers have taken different views 1 
 -^You see, I don't agree with John Stuart lyjill. I 
 think the tenant is entitled to full and thorough pro- 
 tection for all that he does, for all that he has laid out 
 upon the soil, and having been paid for that the 
 balance is the landlord's. 
 
 6018. Would it not be better to arrive at some 
 good honest principle even if the landlords give up 
 some little of their rights in order to have peace and 
 contentment in the country 1 — I think that would be 
 a good honest understanding if the tenants knew that 
 on a dispute about rent they would get the fall value 
 of the tenant-right. What influences the tenants at 
 present is that they have to go to the court and 
 take an ejectment and go before a judge who knows 
 nothing about land whatever. 
 
 6019. There is the risk oi having to go out, that is 
 the thing that frightens every tenant farmer we have 
 met 1 — That comes to fixity of tenure. 
 
 6020. The thing itself is not very much diiierent 
 from what you have, the theory is different? — The 
 difference is this : the landlord has the power of re- 
 sum.ption oi possession of his own will, in case of the 
 tenant and himseli not agreeing as to the value put 
 on the land, the tenant being compensated for what 
 he has laid out. 
 
 6021. But in all the good estates we have heard of 
 such a thing is not known as a landlord resuming 
 possession. What is the reason of that 1 — I don't 
 know a single large estate that is not let at from 
 15 to 20 percent, under its value, and as long as that 
 is the case the tenants will not complain of the rents. 
 
 6022. Yes, but if we have cases before us where 
 the rents have been raised and the tenants complained, 
 and this complaint has caused public discontent, don't 
 you think it is the duty of the State to step in 1 — I 
 don't think those cases have existed in the North. 
 
 6023. We have had it in the North and districts 
 which have been tenant-right districts for generations 1 
 — It has not come within my knowledge. 
 
 6024. And that is a serious thing for every land- 
 lord in the province, the good landlord will sufier just 
 as the other 1 — Yes ; still I cannot but look upon the 
 scheme which you propose as being a very undue and 
 improper interference with the rights oi property. 
 
 6025. I am not proposing it here, I am only asking 
 you your opinion 1 — Well, that is my opinion.. I 
 woidd be inclined to concede, and every right-minded 
 man in the north of Ireland would be inclined to con- 
 cede, any fair system under which the tenant-right 
 would be preserved inviolate to the tenant or the value 
 of it, but in any case of dispute about rent the ultima- 
 tum ought to be the power of the landlord to resume 
 possession on paying for the tenant rent. 
 
 6026. But the tenant-right as you have defined it 
 as existing on your own property is good for the ten- 
 ant and good for the landlord? — ^Yes. 
 
 6027. Secures the rent for the landlord and gives 
 the tenant a downright interest in his holding 1 — The 
 landlord's rent is absolutely secure under the custom, 
 because the number of years of arrears of rent that 
 become due to the landlord from an ill-doing tenant 
 are always paid as a first charge out of the purchase- 
 
 money ; in fact it is a means taken on some estates of 
 getting rid of a bad tenant to let him go into arrears. 
 
 6028. Don't you think it would be a wise thing 
 to extend such a healthy good principle in all 
 other parts of Ireland 1 — I don't feel very competent to 
 answer such a question, because an equity has arisen 
 here from the practice that has been permitf.ed on all 
 estates of buying and selling, and where tenants have 
 from all generations bought and sold they must bo 
 allowed to buy and sell ; but in other portions of the 
 country where they have not, and tlio tenant has not 
 his money in it, I think it would be an injustice to 
 allow them to sell. 
 
 0029. Do you think there is any district in the 
 south or west of Ireland where the tenant has not his 
 money in the land ? — Have you read Mr. Brice Jones ? 
 
 6030. Indeed I have, I know him well ? — In the 
 country that I have experience of, I believe if there 
 was any system of rent valuation such as you indicate 
 that the rents \vould be materially increased. 
 
 6031. Then you ought not to object to it? — Yes, 
 but now I think I am giving evidence on principle, 
 and I think the principle you propose would be a 
 very fallacious one. 
 
 6032. In some cases they would be reduced through 
 Ireland you think? — If I were to take the whole 
 county Antrim that comes under my knowledge, I 
 don't think there would be one case in one hundred 
 that would be reduced. 
 
 6033. But do you think excluding tenant-right and 
 the tenants' improvements they would be increased ? 
 
 ^ep*. 23, 1880. 
 
 John Young, 
 esq., D.L. 
 
 present prices ? — I do. Take the 
 
 —I do. 
 
 6034. With 
 Government valuation. We know the prices at which 
 it was fixed. We know that those prices are 25 or 
 30 per cent., in some cases 50 per cent, lower than 
 the prices which exist even now after the last three 
 bad .. years, and we know that, taking the whole 
 county Antrim, at least I know from the portions I 
 am familiar with that the rents at present existing are 
 not more than 10 or 12 per cent, over, and in some 
 cases they are under the Government valuation. 
 
 6035. But you would not say prices were the only 
 things to look to in the valuation of rents ? — I think 
 prices are the only standard. 
 
 6036. Don't you think the price of labour should be 
 considered? — The price of labour has not increased at 
 all in proportion to the piice of produce. 
 
 6037. ]3ut the price of living generally, and the 
 standard of living ? — The price of living has decreased, 
 that is to say, linen and wool,, and everything used in 
 the house is cheaper, tea and sugar, and bacon. 
 
 6038. Farmers dress, and live much better than they 
 used? — They may dress better, bxit they get it for less 
 monej'. 
 
 6039. You think labour is not higher? — Where the 
 small farmers exist, labour does not come in as an 
 element, of course in theory the f;brmer is entitled to 
 be paid for his own labour, but as a fact the farmers 
 make more out of their farms than they did thirty 
 years ago. 
 
 6040. You think the small farmers as a rule live 
 pretty well in your neighbourhood, a man can make a 
 living out of fifteen or twenty acres? — They live 
 poorly, but they are thrifty and get along very well. 
 
 Mr. Edmond M'Neill, Crais'-dun, examined. 
 
 6041. Chairman. — You live at Craig-dun, county 
 Antrim ? — Yes. 
 
 6042. You are a land owner and also an agent ? — I 
 am. 
 
 6043. And also farm land yourself under another 
 person ? — Under a landlord. 
 
 6044. What is the acreage of the estates of which 
 fon are agent? — ^Between 54,000 and 55,000 acres. 
 
 6045. You mention in these notes "exclusive of 
 
 perjjetuity holdings," are those holdings near towns? — 
 No, I cannot say that any of the estates I am connected 
 with are close to any town, I think four miles from 
 Ballymena is about the nearest to what you would call 
 a town, there is one near Coleraine. 
 
 6046. What are the perpetuity holdings? — A con- 
 siderable number of tenants have what we call leases 
 for ever. 
 
 6047. Leases for lives rerewable for ever? — No, 
 
 2F2 
 
 Mr. Edmond 
 M'Neill. 
 
220 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COIvailSSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 Mr. ICilmond 
 
 leases for ever, and some of them leases for lives 
 renewable for ever. 
 
 6048. Mr. Shaw. — On your own property ? — No, on 
 my own property they are all tenants at will ; but on 
 some of the sixteen properties under my care, in the 
 county Antrim. 
 
 6049. Chairman". — You have heard our conversation 
 on the subject of tenant-right, have you any observa- 
 tions to make ? — Genei-ally I agree with Mr. Young, 
 as to the origin of tenant-right. On the estates I 
 allude to, with the exception of three of them which 
 came into my own management, the other estates have 
 been managed by my uncle before me and my grand- 
 father before him, and the custom there never was to 
 allow free sale. The custom of those estates invariably 
 was if the tenant wished to sell his holding he came 
 and applied for permission, and if any tenant on the 
 same estate was willing to purchase, that tenant had a 
 right to demand an arbitration value oi the tenant-right 
 and there was no restriction as to prices, farther than 
 that, ir the outgoing tenant could agree with his 
 neighbour privately they were perfectly at liberty to 
 make any bargain, liut if they could not agree, the 
 tenant of the same landlord had a right to say " I will 
 have an arbitration." 
 
 6050. Then, had the adjoining tenant first call? — 
 The adjoining tenant had first right. 
 
 6051. Then, it no tenant bought? — Practically, 
 we let them sell to any person the landlord approved 
 of 
 
 6052. Has, it been a custom of yours, in the case of 
 the death of a tenant and a successor coming in, to 
 make some arrangement for the family of their prede- 
 cessor 1 — It the tenant, as was very often the case, 
 expressed his wish to me, they had no legal power 
 then of making wills ; but very often they spoke to 
 me and mentioned whom they wished to succeed — 
 sometimes it would be the eldest son, and sometimes 
 not, and invariably, as far as I could, I carried out 
 the tenant's arrangement. There was one thing I 
 always insisted upon — that, if he left a widow, there 
 should be some provision made for her, 
 
 6053. You say there was no power of making a 
 will ; you mean the tenant-right would not permit it ? 
 —No. 
 
 6054. Since the Land Act they have had the power 1 
 — ^Yes, and it has been the cause of the greatest worry 
 and dispute between the tenants. 
 
 6055. In case of no will it became the property of 
 the whole family ? — Yes, and I have known instances 
 where some of the family, who were in America, 
 claimed part of the tenant-right, and it was forced into 
 the market and sold, and a family that had been there 
 for generations had to leave in consequence. 
 
 6056. Is it the case that, unless some member of 
 the family had means to provide capital to work the 
 tenancy, it had to be sold for the benefit of the whole 1 
 — Yes ; there have been several cases within my own 
 knowledge on these estates where that has occurred. 
 
 6057. Have there been any evictions under notices 
 to quit on the properties you are acquainted with ? — 
 I don't think there has been an eviction under notice 
 to quit for the last twenty-five years. 
 
 6058. Have there been any evictions ijr non-pay- 
 ment of rent ? — Yes ; that is, there has been a notice 
 of eviction for nonpayment of rent, but it has generally 
 ended in the tenant selling. I don't think I have 
 actually evicted a tenant and put him out for non- 
 payment of rent, although I have had to take the 
 initiatory step, serving a notice. 
 
 6059. Never came into court? — I have come into 
 court too ; but I 'cannot recollect ever having put the 
 matter into the Sherifi's hands until these last three 
 or four years. I don't think the Sheriff, put out a 
 tenant fi'om 1850 to the passing of the Land Act. 
 Since that I have been obliged to do so. The reason 
 was because outside people, who have lent money upon 
 the security of the tenant-right, have foreclosed, and 
 I have been obliged to go in, sometimes actually to 
 protect the man himself against his creditors. 
 
 6060. Do jou know of any cases in which the 
 tena,iits, since they have had this property under the 
 Land Act, have borrowed money on the security of 
 the holding t — Yes, many. 
 
 6061. To an extent that has been injurious to them 1 
 — So injririous that decrees have been obtained against 
 them in the court, and their tenant-right sold by the 
 persons who lent them the money. In such cases, as 
 I said, I went in because it is a thing we never allow, 
 and the Land Act does not give that authority. 
 
 6062. Does not give the authority to sell 1 — Does 
 not give the authority, either to mortgage or sell, 
 without tlie landlord's permission. 
 
 606-3. But, in any case, if a creditor got judgment, 
 he would be able to proceed to sell 1 — He would be 
 free to sell ; but it would not be a case of disturbance 
 by the landlord if I evict Ms purchaser by a notice to 
 quit. 
 
 6064. Have you had any case in which it has been 
 forced to a sheriff's sale 1 — In which the tenant has 
 been sold out — several. 
 
 6065. Do you give any notice at the time of the 
 sale 1 — Wt^enever it comes to my knowledge, I do ; 
 but very often I don't hear of it until it is too late. 
 And frequently tenants have come to me for permis- 
 sion to mortgage their farms, because it is pretty well 
 known, by most of these moneydenders, it is against 
 the estate rules to mortgage their farms, and they 
 only lend with my permission. 
 
 6066. What course did you take with the pur- 
 chasers where it was sold in this way? — I would 
 serve him "with notice to quit. 
 
 6067. Did you aiterwar-ds allow him to remain in? 
 — No ; the case has not occurred, because in no case 
 that I interfered was the man able to get a purchaser. 
 By-the-by I am wrong, there was one case shortly 
 after the passing of the Land Act where it did occur, 
 and I served the man with a notice to quit and put 
 him out, and sold the farm, and gave the tenant the 
 proceeds of the tenant-right. 
 
 6068. Did you give a notice to the auctioneer? — I 
 did, and to the man that I would not permit the sale. 
 He bought with his eyes open, and I evicted him and 
 sold the tenant-right under the custom of the estate, 
 and gave the money to the man, or rather to his 
 creditors. 
 
 6069. Mr. Shaw. — What objection had you to the 
 purchaser 1 — Simply that he v^as breaking the rules. 
 
 6070. Did he lose much by the transaction ? — I 
 think he lost some small deposit that he paid in. 
 
 6071. Have you many leases existing ? — Not many 
 now. When I first became manager of these proper- 
 ties there were a great manjr old leases that had been 
 granted for thirty-one years and three lives, and they 
 have almost all expired now. 
 
 6072. When those leases expired did you have a 
 new valuation ? — Certainly ; I valued them myself. 
 
 6073. And in valuing them did you take into con- 
 sideration the tenants' improvements 1 — Certainly 
 not. 
 
 6074. When you fixed a new rent were the tenants 
 satisfied? — I never, in any case but one, where I did 
 not give a tenant the opportunity of holding the 
 farm. I never had a dispute with a tenant at all. 
 In the- case I allude to where I did not allow it 
 the person representing the lease had sublet it to 
 several individuals. I think it was a farm of some- 
 where under fifty statute acres, and there were 
 twenty families living on it when the lease fell, and 
 the tenant was living on another estate, and they were 
 a set of paupers and robbers. 
 
 6075. What did you do with it ?— To any of them 
 that had a moderately good cliaracter I gave a few 
 pounds to remove them. 
 
 6076. And took up the whole of the farm? — ■ 
 And took up the farm. I have the farm in the 
 landlord's hands still. I had to pull down every 
 erection— you could hardly call them houses. 
 
 6077. When was that? — That was about fourteen 
 years ago. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 221 
 
 6078. Chairman. — Do yon acquiesce in Mr. 
 Young's view that the landlord should have the entire 
 power of fixing the rent and of putting the tenant out, 
 but giving him full compensation for his tenant-right 
 
 , if he agreed to it 1 — I think Mr. Young is quite right 
 in matter of principle, but I am not sure that tak- 
 ing that gentleman's (Mr. Shaw's), view in the state 
 of feeling now, ii we could arrive at some moderate 
 compromise, it would not be better, I would be glad 
 to do it. 
 
 6079. Do you think the compromise would be 
 based upon some arbitration? — Do you mean as re- 
 gards rent. 
 
 6080. As regards rent 1 — No ; I think the prin- 
 ciple of arbitration for rent would be a bad one. I 
 must , say, that in this matter my sympathies are 
 with the tenants, anything that makes them better off 
 makes my business easier as an agent. My expe- 
 rience of arbitration is, that one person names one 
 man, and another another, and the iTmpire comes in 
 between, and unless you get very intelligent and 
 very skilled men, I don't believe that arbitration is, 
 as a rule, under any circumstances the best way to 
 arrive at the value of anything. If you could always 
 secure skilled men and independent men who would 
 give their judgment according to their skill and know- 
 ledge, it would be all very well, but if you go to an 
 arbitration of rent the tenant will name his friend 
 whether he is a skilled man or not, and that man 
 will go as low as he can. The landlord will be at 
 some disadvantage because he must appoint a .skilled 
 man, a professional man, who will Jiave his character 
 to sustain, and he will not be in a position to put 
 on a pi'oportionately high rent to meet the other 
 and the umpire comes in and splits the difference, and 
 the balance is in favour of the tenant. 
 
 6081. Would you think a general revaluation of 
 Ireland would be desirable 1 — I have had a good 
 deal of experience of land in these estates, which are 
 situated in every barony of the county except two, and 
 I would say that as a basis as between landlord and 
 tenant the present Government valuation is not a 
 reliable basis. In comparing the Government valua- 
 tion with my own, which is done field by field, I 
 have found the Government valuation, in some in- 
 stances, too high, and in some instances very much too 
 low. Seventeen years ago I valued one of the estates 
 Delonging to Mr. Montgomery, he was a personal 
 friend of Sir Richard Grifiith, and after he had got 
 my valuation sent in he wrote to Sir Richard Grif- 
 fith on the subject, for he was very anxious his new 
 valuation should not be too high, and Sir Richard 
 Grifiith wrote in reply a letter in which he said — 
 " If your agent has not valued your property more 
 than 25 per cent, above mine, it will be a fair 
 valuation." 
 
 6082. Do you think it is time there should be 
 a general revaluation? — If it was done really skilfully 
 and well, and not a.s the last one was done, I think 
 it would be very desirable. 
 
 6083. If instead of a general revaluation there were 
 persons of a good class sent as valuators who would 
 act as. arbitrators in cases '^f disputes of rent? — I 
 should be satisfied wita something of this kind, that if 
 the landlord and tenant uould notagree, if astarting point 
 on this or some other plan could be arranged, rents for 
 the future might rise or fall with the markets. We will 
 take an estate. for instance which the landlord and 
 tenant are perfectly satisfied with the rents as at 
 present existing, if there were certain articles taken 
 as standards of . agricultural value, and that the 
 average of these standards of value were taken for 
 a certain number of years, I would have the rent rise 
 or fall in proportion as those standards of value rose or 
 fell in the market. Having once fixed a starting point 
 I would then have a standard of value under which the 
 land never would come to be revalued against the 
 tenant, all his improvements put into, and extra yield 
 from good husbandry, would always remain attached 
 to the tenant-right. Of course it would require modifi- 
 
 cation on property in proximity to towns and on 
 building lands, or where the intrinsic value has been 
 increased by railways or other such circumstances. 
 
 6084. That would lie something like the corn rents 
 in Scotland 1 — I would not take the whole produce, 
 but take certain things as the princii^al produce of the 
 county you know. 
 
 6085. Mr. Shaw. — That would be coming very 
 near the arbitration, because the arbitrator must have 
 a standard to go on ? — Exactly, and if the landlord 
 and tenant can agree to the starting point well and 
 good, if they cannot I shoukl be glad for the sake of 
 peace that there should be some arrangement by 
 which we may both start together. 
 
 6086. They may be anxious to keep together, 
 there may be a good tenant and a good landlord, and 
 tliere may be a great difference of opinion between 
 them? — Yes, I have often liad a difference with a 
 man about the valuation of his land, because it is a 
 very haphazard thing, and I have sometimes gone 
 back and heard his reasons and yielded to them. 
 
 6087. It is not the landlord's interest to adopt data 
 that would be looked upon as unfair t — Certainly not, 
 and I am proud to say my instructions from my 
 landlords are that they don't want a high rent. For 
 the sake of this inquiry I went into the valuation of 
 the property as a whole, the whole 55,000 acres, and 
 the average is only 1 Is. 
 
 6088. Is it all of it workable arable land ?— No. 
 
 6089. Some of it mountaiuy? — There is. 
 
 6090. A fourth of it?— No, not 10 per cent. The 
 average rent is lis., and it is 11 per cent, higher than 
 Griffith's valuation, the whole thing. 
 
 6091. Chairman. — Is it your opinion that improve- 
 ments have been checked since the Land Act ? — 
 De.idedly, on the part of both landlord and tenant. 
 For this reason on the part of the tenant, my ex- 
 perience is the tenants, as a rule, have not the means 
 and capital to improve by themselves, and tlie habit 
 in my office has been, wherever the farm is of a 
 moderate size, we gave the timber and slates and 
 everything that was money out of pocket, and the 
 tenant did the labour, drew the stones, and the like. 
 
 6092. Mr. Shaw. — Did you charge a per-centage? 
 — No, in general as a free gift, sometimes we gave it 
 as a loan if it was to a substantial well-to-do tenant, 
 and he paid it back. 
 
 6093. And that has stopped very much? — Entirely. 
 You were saying that there was the power of regis- 
 tration. It is quite true there is, but the landlords 
 very fairly say, " Why should we go to all this 
 ti"ouble and bother for a thing we have now no inte- 
 rest in. It was never for our benefit to help on 
 these improvements. Since the passing of the Land 
 Act everything of that sort becomes the tenants', and, 
 if we were going to raise the rent eveiy four or five 
 j'ears, it would be a different thing." 
 
 , 6094. Chairman.- Do you think that under the 
 Land Act the improvements made by the landlord 
 would be clearly his, but it would be difficult to realize 
 them practically 1 — I will give you an instance on an 
 estate of which I am agent, where every single thing 
 was done by the landlord ; he built, drained, and made 
 roads, and borrowed money from the Board of Works 
 to do it. The tenant, who was a bachelor, died without 
 direct heirs, his sister succeeded him, and died without 
 direct heirs, and a nephew, who was in America, came 
 home and claimed the farm. I said, " You may have 
 the farm if you will undertake to pay the debts your 
 uncle and aunt left, but if you don't do that, the 
 balance between the ascertained tenant-right of the 
 place and the debts y^a shall have." He wrote to me 
 to say he would take the money and go back to 
 America. I then let the farm to another person upon 
 the same conditions, paying the debts, and the balance 
 was to go to this young man. He changed his mind, 
 and thought he would be better in the farm. I said, 
 "No, it is too late now, I have let it to another 
 person." He was living in the farm and held posses- 
 sion, and I had to put him out by eviction. The case > 
 
 Seyt. 23,1880, 
 
 I\fr. Kdmond 
 M'Neil). 
 
•'>-?-2 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23,1880, 
 
 Mr. Edmoncl 
 M'Neill. 
 
 was tried before the barrister in tlie first instance, 
 and the barrister, upon the statement I am making to 
 you, dismissed his claim. He appealed to the higher 
 court, and it was tried before the assizes at Belfast, 
 and everything was proved before the judge as was 
 proved in the court below. My instructions to 
 the valuator was to ascertain the present value of 
 the improvements in the farm, and there was 
 practically no difference between the value we put 
 upon them, and the tenant admitted. That sum 
 was almost as large as the whole tenant-right of 
 the farm, and the judge held 'that the landlord had 
 no right to that, and of the whole sum he gave the 
 tenant two-thirds, and the, landlord only one-third, 
 although every single thing that was done, not only 
 on that farm but the whole estate, was done by the 
 landlord. In the face of that landlords don't like 
 giving money for improvements. This was long before 
 the passing of the Land A ct. 
 
 Mr. Young. — The case was heard after the passing 
 of the Land Act, but the circumstances took place 
 before. 
 
 6095. Chairman. — On the subject of purchase by 
 tenants of their holdings, you mention an estate that 
 was once under your care that was sold by the court 
 to the tenants — would you state your opinion as to 
 the results ? — I have not seen much of them since, bu.t I 
 have spoken ' to one or two on the subject, and they 
 don't seem to think much of their purchase. 
 
 6096. Where is this '!— It is in the north of \ 
 county, near Ballyoastle. 
 
 6097. "Who Avas the former owner? — Mr. M'Oalmo 
 he sold the property in the court, and the tena 
 purchased it. 
 
 6098. Did they get any money from the Gove 
 ment 1 — I think they did. 
 
 6099. You don't know the particulars 1 — I do 
 know the particulars, it was all clone through \ 
 solicitor. 
 
 6100. Mr. Shaw. — "Was it a large property? — 1 
 small. 
 
 6101. Aaid small tenants I suppose? — No, thi 
 were one or two large tenants on the pi-operty, and 
 think it was principally at their instigation it -n 
 done, they were anxious to buy their holdings, t 
 smaller tenants, I think, were not. 
 
 6102. Is there any desire on the part of the tenai 
 to biiy where tenant-right is fully acknowledged ?- 
 don't think so. 
 
 6103. Chaikjian. — You think they would rather 
 under a fair landlord ? — I don't know whether th 
 would rather be under a landlord than have it i 
 their own, but I know there is no great desire on thi 
 part, where tenant-right exists and the rents a 
 reasonable, to become their own owners. 
 
 The witnesses then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Swann. 
 
 Mr. William Gray, Laganbrae, Lisburn; Mr. Thomas SwannjlAshwmx; and ^.i?., a tenant farmer, Lisburn, 
 
 were examined together. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Swann examined. 
 
 6104. Chairman. — You live near Lisburn ? — I do, 
 sir. 
 
 6105. On whose property? — On the Earl of Yar- 
 mouth's. 
 
 6106. You are a tenant on that estate? — Yes. 
 
 6107. How many acres do you hold ? — Between 
 sixty and seventy. 
 
 6108. Do you know any other property there ? — ■ 
 Several other properties. 
 
 6109. You don't hold under Sir Richard Wallace? 
 — I don't hold under him, but I know his estate. 
 
 6110. Tenant-right exists, I suppose in all that dis- 
 trict ? — Yes ; it is acknowledged in all that district, 
 although there is a slight divergence. The Earl of 
 Yarmouth came into a portion of the Hertford estate 
 abovit 1871, since then there has been some divergence 
 in the usage in the two estates. 
 
 6111. Although they were formerly one ? — Yes. 
 
 6112. What are the differences or divergences? — 
 Well, on the Hertford estate, that is on the large 
 estate, an attempt has been made to place a limit iipon 
 the sale of tenant-right, and upon the Earl of Yar- 
 mouth's no such limit has been placed, that is since 
 the Land Act passed. 
 
 6113. Now, speaking from your owir feeling and 
 the knowledge you have of the tenantry. Do they 
 generally object to the limit being placed on the sale ? 
 — Oh, yes. The objection is very great indeed, it has 
 produced a very strong current of feeling all through 
 the disti'ict affected by such a proposed change. 
 
 Mr. Gray. — If you would allow me I would give 
 an illustration, Mr. GUI, convenient to Gleneavy, pro- 
 posed to sell a farm, the office told him that he would 
 be under the necessity of giving notice to the adjoining 
 tenant, and that whoever of them wished to purchase 
 would have the preference, and that the price would 
 be settled by arbitration. Mr. Gill, knowing that 
 that was an innovation upon the custom and practice 
 of the estate, refused to submit and successfully re- 
 sisted, he sold the place by auction and the buyer of 
 the farm was accepted as the tenant. 
 
 6114. Mr. Shaw. — So that the attempt of the office 
 really broke down ? — Mr. Gray. — In that case. In an- 
 other case I have in my pocket it has succeeded. 
 
 6115. Then are there any other office rules that ha 
 been attempted 1 — Mr. Swann. — I don't at present i 
 collect any. I believe that on the Hertford proper! 
 a very excellent illustration of the tenant-right custoi 
 of Ulster existed until perhaps within a recent periot 
 although I believe that the custom was not at all fre 
 from violation. I believe the arbitrary will of th 
 agent very often overrode what we would understan 
 by the Ulster custom, but, upon the whole, the Her 
 ford property may be taken as a good illustration ( 
 the Ulster custom in Ulster. 
 
 6116.' What is the name of the agent? — The agei 
 is Mr. Walter Trevor Stannus. 
 
 6117. Who is Sir Bichard Wallace's agent ?—M 
 Frederick Lucas Capron. 
 
 6118. What price does the tenant-right bring o 
 these estates ?— -Xlntil the recent collapse in agriculturi 
 industry consequent upon the immense depreciatio 
 of corn and cattle following American comipetition, th 
 tenant-right ranged comparatively high, but the whol 
 question of tenant-right, the question as to the valu 
 of it is, in fact, in a state of confusion, for people d 
 not know how far it is safe to invest at the presen 
 time, and very few sales have occurred recently. 
 
 6119. Is that owing to bad times? — Owing to ba 
 times. 
 
 6120. Or owing to interference by the landlerd ?- 
 On the whole, I think interference by the office wouli 
 not prevent sales taking place. 
 
 Mr. Gray.- — It has a collateral influence, the presen 
 unsettled state of the law, not giving full security t 
 the tenant farmers. Earmers think that under th 
 present laws they have enough land. 
 
 6121. Are there leases on these properties generally 
 • — Mr. Swann. — There have been a great number c 
 leases, but many of them have expired. 
 
 6122. Tenant-right acknowledged at the expiratio: 
 of the lease?— It has not been disputed. 
 
 Mr. Gray. — I don't think there is a single case o; 
 the Hertford estate in which it was disputed at th 
 expiration of the lease. 
 
 6123. Are rents always raised at the expiration c 
 the lease ? — Mi-. Swann. — Invariably so. 
 
 6124. To what extent? Have you any case th? 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 223 
 
 you can give us 1 — I can give a case of my own. It 
 was not very large, but it was an outlying portion of 
 my farm, it was exceedingly inferior bog land, on 
 wbicb any reclamation tliat was ever done 1 did it. It 
 was entirely inferior land, and when tlie lease dropped 
 there was a rise of at least 3s. Of course that vise 
 was not a very large rise per acre, but still, when the 
 very inferior quality of the land is taken into account 
 it was considerable. 
 
 6125. What did you pay for the land before ? — The 
 land was not drained, it was clay originally almost to 
 the surface, and almost unsuitable for the purpose of 
 tillage. I paid 15s. an acre. 
 
 6126. Including this bog land? — On the bog land 
 alone it was raised to 1 8s. at the termination of the 
 lease. 
 
 6127. Did you think that an unreasonable advance? 
 — ^We are so invariably accustomed to the rise of rent, 
 that when the rise is not very much, although we don't 
 acquiesce in the justice of it, at the same time we just 
 think we might be worse. 
 
 6128. But it is creeping up? — It is creeping up 
 invariably. 
 
 6129. And in that way, indirectly, confiscating 
 your tenant-right ? — Undoubtedly so. If you would 
 allow me to state my own case, I will give a better 
 illustration. On the farm and the place in which T 
 live, my forefathers have lived the greater part of 
 200 years. I have rent receipts of the house for 170 
 years. I have my farmstead and premises insured 
 for £850, that does not iaclude all my farm premises, 
 bvit one block of holdings I have insured at £600 ; 
 every stone, every beam of timber, and everything 
 else belonging to the buildings was placed there either 
 by myself or my father, without any assistance or 
 direction, or interference whatever by the landlord. 
 These buildings have been put up, and in addition to 
 that on the farm I hold, every improvement, every 
 ditch, every sewer, every drain, everything since the 
 land was in a state of absolute nature has been per- 
 formed, either by myself orbymy ancestors. In 1832 
 my father took out a lease for part of the farm, it was 
 a fined-down lease, and jDaid £92 6s. on that lease. 
 
 6130. What rent did he pay then? — I pay on an 
 average for my whole farm, about 22s., but the fined- 
 down rent as far as I can recollect, is 18s. 
 
 6131. At that time it was fined down to 18s. ? — ■ 
 Yes. In 1839, another lease was fined down, and a 
 fine of £83 16s. paid upon it for another portion of 
 the same farm. My contention is, my father paid 
 these fines to allow him to remain in the enjoyment 
 of his own improvements, because the rent of the farm 
 in a state of nature in my estimation should not run 
 so high. 
 
 6132. Has it been raised since? — The leases have 
 not dropped since. 
 
 6133. They are on the eve of dropping I suppose? 
 — They are not exactly on the eve of dropping, they 
 are materially good yet. 
 
 6134. Chairman. — Were there any covenants to 
 buUd or make these improvements in the lease ? — ■ 
 None whatever ; rather in the contrary direction, 
 because these improvements were nearly all made, 
 with the exception of what I have made, previous 
 to the leases being taken out. 
 
 6135. Mr. Shaw. — Would you give the landlord no 
 increase of rent owing to the improvement of general 
 business or the growth of a town in your neighbour- 
 hood? — My farm is not influenced by locality, that is 
 Ijy nearness to a town, and I would say the course of 
 agriculture has been downward not U23ward. 
 
 6136. You are in favour of having arbitration in 
 cases of disputes about rent? — Decidedly, I think that 
 would be the first step towards any settlement of the 
 question that is possible. 
 
 6137. Each party appointing an arbitrator ? — Each 
 party appointing an arbitrator. 
 
 6i38. And a Government official perhajjs as umpire, 
 a skilled man at all events ? — He ought to be a skilled 
 man under limitations, for instance the land cases that 
 
 come into the law courts in the north of Ireland come -Sep*' ss^tso. 
 
 before men who have not in many instances a technical iyjp_ Tliomas 
 
 knowledge of the Ulster custom, in other cases they Swann. 
 
 are the sons or relatives of landed proprietors, and we 
 
 may talk as we like, but class feelings and prejudices 
 
 permeate society in Ireland, and it is impossible, 
 
 humanly constituted as we are, that such should not 
 
 be the case, and in many instances we believe that 
 
 the chairmen of Quarter Sessions are influenced by 
 
 the class prejudices existing in the society to which 
 
 they belong, because the decisions in these coui-ts 
 
 have been marked by very great unevenness, even 
 
 in counties touching upon each other, so that as 
 
 another limitation upon the judgment of the G-overn- 
 
 ment oflloial we contend — and I think it is a reasonable 
 
 contention from the case I have just placed before you — ■ 
 
 thatthe landlord's interestand thetenant'sinterestinthe 
 
 improvements are two distinct iirterests that ought to 
 
 be separated as far as possible in decisions. Now, for 
 
 instance, the mass of improvements that I have made, 
 
 in assessing a rent I should not be assessed for those 
 
 improvements, the money going into the landlord's 
 
 pocket. We are most anxious that an understanding 
 
 should be come to upon the whole question of the land, 
 
 that the tenant's improvements and the landlord's 
 
 interest should be kept separate, that rent should not 
 
 be assessed upon the tenant for the piroceeds of his 
 
 own industry or improvements, and more than that, a 
 
 deep feeling of tmrest and dissatisfaction prevails even 
 
 in Ulster, and I believe will never be quieted until 
 
 there is some brake placed upon the renting power 
 
 of the landlords. 
 
 6139. And you think arbitration would be the most 
 simple ? — Would be the most simple means. I believe 
 that the Earl of Yarmouth cannot be surpassed in the 
 north of Ireland for an excellent landlord, but at the 
 same time I look upon his holding the property on 
 which I live as a favourable incident in connexion 
 with that property, but the system is the thiirg to 
 which we object ; certainly he isa^j excellent landlord, 
 and has shown himself a very humane and considerate 
 man. 
 
 6140. If the land question was settled would you 
 be in favour of a general valuation of Ireland, or 
 would you only have a valuation of tenements where 
 disputes arose? — Well, I think, of tenements where 
 disputes arose. But in those cases if the landlord or 
 tenant saw they were greatly advantaged by them, a 
 very gve&t number of cases would be created because 
 a feeling of dissatisfaction would take jslace either on 
 the landlord's or tenant's side. 
 
 6141. Then things might be worse then they are ? — 
 They might be worse than they are in this respect, 
 that if the tenant's property or interest in his buildings 
 and improvements is not separated from the landlord's 
 interest in the fee-simple, I think matters are certam 
 to go on from bad to worse, and that agriculture as an 
 industry will be nearly ruined in the north of Ireland. 
 
 6142. We have had very sensible and skilled men 
 before us who know the north of Ireland, at least 
 districts of it, and they say if rents be settled by 
 arbitration, thoroughly separating the interests yoii 
 speak of, that rents would be raised generally in 
 tJlster and it would be worse for the tenant ; has that 
 point occm-red to you ? — It has occurred, and we think 
 that very much the contrary would be the case ; we 
 believe notwithstanding the rent the landlord receives 
 for say the fee-simjale of his soil, and such advantages 
 as he may gain perhaps from some other circumstances, 
 that the rents must be lowered, in fact agriculture 
 demands it. 
 
 6143. And that even if such a law were made as 
 you have p)roposed that rents must greatly decline ; is 
 that your opinion ?— Mr. Gray. — Yes. 
 
 6144. But you know we are now passing through a 
 serious ordeal in agriculture ; the low prices and bad 
 
 'years have afiected agriculture very much, and it is not 
 fair to take these years as a specimen. If you lowered 
 rents yon would give the power of raising rents after- 
 wards ? — Mr. Graij. — Under a system of arbitration 
 
2^4 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Tlioin.".s 
 Swann. 
 
 if a landlord thouglit he was getting too low a rent I 
 ■woiild give him the option of asking for an arbitra- 
 tion. 
 
 6145. That land of yours that was worth so little 
 when your ancestors took it, if it were in the same 
 state to-day as when they took it would it be worth 
 luoi-e rent? — Mr. Swann. — It would not be worth 10s. 
 an acre. 
 
 Mr. Gray. — It would not be taken at all now. 
 
 Gl-iG. Mr. Shaw. — You are only speaking from 
 genei-al ideas now 1 — Mr. Swann. — 1 am speaking from 
 experience of the soil. 
 
 6147. And what you have heard 1 — Yes. 
 
 6148. Is that the case generally in your district ? — 
 It is possible there are pasture lands that would be 
 worth more, but the land I have come in contact with 
 and have been obliged to farm, would not be worth 
 10s. an acre at the present time. 
 
 6149. Chairman. — Is yours high land? — It is 
 rather low in the valley of the Lagan. 
 
 6150. Is it wet land? — It had all to be drained by 
 myself or by my father, and it was all covered with 
 brushwood. In old leases there are covenants with 
 i-ogard to the eradication of the brushwood, so that it 
 was very much in a state of nature a couple of hundred 
 years ago. 
 
 61 .51. Mr. Shaw. — You farm more land than that? 
 — No, I do not. I am engaged in fruit farming as 
 well as ordinary agriculture. 
 
 6162. Then you would not be at all afraid of fixing 
 rents by arbitration, and you think it would not affect 
 injuriously the tenants of the north of Ireland ? — I 
 think arbitration is die only opening at present, as far 
 as I can see, and it is the only opening to which I have 
 turned my attention. 
 
 6153. Have there been any cases of tenants pur- 
 chasing their holdings in your neighbourhood ? — None 
 have become proprietors under the Bright clauses. 
 
 6154. Would yow think they would be desirous if 
 facilities were given by Government ? — There would 
 have to be very large facilities, for at present the far- 
 mers have not the capital, they coitld not generally 
 pay one-third. 
 
 Mr. Gray. — In some cases they could. 
 
 6155. Mr. Shaw. — But if tenant-right was defined 
 as you say, do you think they would care much about 
 purchasing ? — Mr. Swann. — They would care less, in- 
 deed. Of course I am not badly ofi", being surrounded 
 by leases, but I have the feeling of dissatisfaction that all 
 this property may be lost to my descendants and be en- 
 ci'oached on by higher rents, because if the present 
 state of things is continued the increased rent will be 
 a great leap when the leases fall out. 
 
 6156. You are living on one of the best estates in 
 the north ? — I am, and I believe the landlord is un- 
 surpassable in his public and private capacity. I am 
 completely enthusiastic about him. 
 
 6157. Yet you have that feeling of unrest ? — I have. 
 
 6158. The farms are generally small, I suppose, in 
 your neighbourhood ? — They are small compared with 
 farms in the south or in England. They are tillage 
 
 farms, in which the tillage is closely looked after, an 
 a rotation closely pursued ; in fact on some of on 
 small farms as much produce is raised and sent to th 
 market as on a farm much larger in other jiarts of th 
 country. 
 
 6159. Thoroughly well farmed? — Yes, thoroughl 
 well farmed ; in fact the best features of northern 
 industry are exemplified in those localities to which . 
 refer. 
 
 6160. How are you off' for labourers ; have you tlien 
 by the year ? — We can have them by the j'ear or week 
 We are well off for labourers in the localities to whicl 
 I refer, and in which I am situated. In former time 
 cotton and linen were manufactured by hand-loom ii 
 the cottages, but that trade has very much de 
 creased of late. The cotton has almost deserted th( 
 country owing to the fact that it has been put int( 
 power looms in C-lasgow and Paisley ; linen is stil 
 affording a pui-suit to cottagers in the country. Th( 
 children that are not acting as weavers are alwayf 
 ready to come and act as farm servants, and labour i; 
 always plentiful. 
 
 6161. Have you always fixed labourers on youi 
 farms ? — Always fixed labourers. 
 
 6162. And how much do you jjay per week ? — 10s. 
 or 12s. 
 
 6163. Do you give them a cottage? — The cottage is 
 nearly always free. 
 
 6164. And a garden? — Always a garden, and in 
 addition to that we give them potato ground. Foi 
 instance, on my farm there is an acre and a half oi 
 two acres of potato crop, on which all the manure they 
 can sweep off the roads or collect about their cottages 
 is placed. I have a good many cottages in which 
 weaving is carried on, and they will raise as many pota- 
 toes off' my farm yearly as, if sold, would pay the rent of 
 the cottages for a year. 
 
 6165. And you get your land manured 1 — I get iny 
 land manured. I have no legal hold but in honour. I 
 expect that those people will help me in the harvest 
 and when I am pressed for labour, and I find it is so, 
 but I pay them good wages. 
 
 6166. Chaieman. — Is there a good state of feeling 
 between the farmers and the labourers on that system ? 
 Oh, yes, very good. The fact that the farmer, without 
 any defined obligation, gives them land free for seeding 
 potatoes on his farm, creates a good state of feeling. 
 
 6167. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know any cases on other 
 estates where rents have been raised on the falling in 
 of leases or a change of tenancy 1 — Oh, yes ; it is the 
 general custom. On the Downsliire estate, which may 
 be taken as a model estate, the thing is universal. 
 
 6168. Chairman. — Wovild you prefer a fixed period 
 for a change of rent, if it was to take place, say every 
 twenty years over the whole of the estate ? — I thuik 
 that if such a period occurred now, it would be a 
 period of lowering of rents. I think a person in all 
 fairness can hardly object to a re-valuation, but cer- 
 tainly a tenant should not be assessed for his own 
 improvements, for that and the gradual raising of rents 
 is the great grievance with us all. 
 
 Mr. 'William 
 Gray. 
 
 Mr. William Gray examined. 
 
 6169. If you will allow me I will give the Com- 
 missioners an instance of raising of rents in my own 
 locality, on Sir Thomas Bateson's estate near Moira. 
 A farmer named Gilliland died in the spring, he held 
 seventy-six acres at £96 a year. His family, after his 
 death, off'eredthe farm for sale, the rent was raised to 
 .£114, and the consequence was there was no one to 
 take it. 
 
 6169a. Mr. Shaw. — When did that occur? — Last 
 winter. 
 
 6170.^ Chairman. — That is, that on the proposed 
 sale notice was given that the rent would be advanced ? 
 Yes, in fact the rent is raised, the Gillilands had to 
 hold on. I know a young man, a cousin of mine, that 
 
 if the rent had not been raised would have been a 
 buyer. 
 
 6171. Mr. Shaw. — They had made aU the improve- 
 ments, I believe ? — They had. 
 
 6172. The landlord had done nothing? — He had 
 done nothing. 
 
 6173. Chairman. — And you say it has been raised 
 on them without the sale taking place ? — Yes. That 
 farm was sold eleven years ago by a Mr. M'Aleevy for 
 £1,100, a man of the name of Millis bought it and 
 sold it again to GUliland. 
 
 6174. Mr. Shaw.— What did Gilliland pay for it? 
 —I cannot give that. A very good illustration of the 
 fear some farmers have throughout the country, is the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 223 
 
 staie of things I am speaking of. The farmer that 
 knew these facts, I asked him to come down here and 
 state these facts ; he said he would not, he dare not on 
 account of the office. I said if he woiild allow me to 
 go over to his place some evening, he could give me 
 the facts. He said, he would rather I would not go 
 to his place, and he met me at a mutual friend's after 
 dark and gave me the facts. 
 
 6175. It was not the tenant who gave it to you 1 — 
 No, it was a tenant on Sir Thomas Bateson's estate, 
 the tenant dare not. This raising of rent on Sir Thomas 
 Bateson's estate is an innovation since the passing of 
 the Land Act. My father sold a holding on that estate 
 to the highest and best bidder, and my uncle also 
 purchased a farm, and there vras no restriction what- 
 ever, and no rise of rent. Another case occured in 
 which a Mr. Woods, in 1864, bought a farm by private 
 salOj and was accepted by the landlord without any 
 objection. This Mr. Woods died a few years after, 
 his widow kept the place until 1874, and then 
 ofiered the farm for sale, and Mr. Heron proposed to 
 become the purchaser, but when they went into the 
 office Sir Thomas Bateson's agent would not accept 
 him as a tenant, upon the ground that the rule of the 
 office was, that there should be only £10 an acre paid. 
 That rule was unknown until after the passing of the 
 Land Act. 
 
 6176. Chairman. — What was the name of the 
 agents — Dowie; he also said that he would raise the rent 
 5s. an acre. Heron refused to take it. Shortly after 
 the agent went to him, and gave it to him for three 
 years at the old rent, but at i'70 less than he offered, 
 so that the widow got £70 les.s, but at the end of three 
 years it was raised 5s. an acre. 
 
 6177. You liold a farm? — I do, under Sir Richard 
 Wallace, in the same locality as Mr. Swama, his farm 
 and mine adjoin. 
 
 6178. what is the size of the farm? — 68 acres. 
 
 6179. Have you anythingin your own case especially 
 that you wish to mention ? — Nothing in my own case^ 
 I hold under a lease. 
 
 6180. You mentioned a case under the Land Act? 
 ■ — A case has occurred of a modern innovation upon 
 Sir Eictard Wallace's estate, which was successful. 
 The Rev. Mr Hastings, a Presbyterian minister, 
 offered £120 to Edward Hare, for a place that Hare 
 was offering for sale ; the office interfered, and Hare 
 had to accept £90 from a Mr. Flanagan, by arbitration. 
 
 6181. You are clear the custom was changed since 
 the Land Act 1 — Since the Land Act, and I would 
 wish to give further cases before the passing of the 
 Land Act, when the late Dean Stannus and his son 
 Walter were managing the estate for the late Marquis 
 
 of Hertford, to prove that this is a modern innovation. *p<- 2'. "so 
 About three years ago a farm was sold in Ballinderry jj^ ■vynii'am 
 by Mr. Hope to Mr. Jebb, of 150 acres, no notice Gr.iy. 
 was given to the landlord or agent of the sale at 
 all, and Mr. Jebb was with Mr. Hope purchasing 
 the farm when a clerk out of the office passed and 
 asked them what they were doing, and said they ought 
 to have given notice. They went on with the sale, 
 and then went into the office, and he was accepted at 
 once. I want to show it has existed since tJie passing 
 of the Land Act, and it is only lately that it has been ' 
 
 objected to. Dean Stannus, the agent purchased land. 
 I know a piece of exceedingly bad land, fit only for 
 making bricks, tlie tenant of it had to leave and it 
 went into the hands of the office, who sold it to a 
 neighbour of mme. Another case was Mr. Money's, 
 who purchased the tenant-right of another farm 
 almost adjoining mine, from Dean Stannus, and 
 Dean Stannus, in a public speech at an agricultural 
 dinner in Lisburn, stated himself, that the tenant- 
 right which we had upon the Hertford estate, and 
 what was known as the Ulster tenant-right, was the 
 very best security a landlord could have for his rent, 
 and he believed the greater input the farmer liad in 
 his land, the landlord had so much the more security 
 for his rent. 
 
 6182. You say there are other cases of that descrip- 
 tion, but you give this as an example of the class you 
 complain of? — Yes. I have ju.st one thing to sa}' in 
 reference to arbitration of rents, ■^^'hat I propose is tliat 
 a registration office be established in each pettj' sessions 
 district. If a landlord thinks he is getting too low a 
 rent for a farm he gives notice to the registrar in this 
 office, the registrar give.s notice to the farmer, the two 
 meet, each appoint an ai'bitrator, the arbitrators select 
 an umjDire, the rent is settled by those three, and this 
 settlement is binding upon both landlord and tenant, 
 neither of them would have the right of appeal to any 
 court — make that the law of the land. 
 
 6183. For how long? — Fourteen years. 
 
 6184. That VTOuld be too short, we would have 
 endless arbitration ? — I think I would leave that to 
 the wisdom of the Legislature, and if the tenant 
 thought he was paying too high a rent let him pursue 
 the same course as the landlord. 
 
 6185. Would there not be the danger of a tenant 
 who had let his farm run down getting an arbitration 
 when the land looked worth nothing ? — I don't think 
 that is the tendency in the north of Ireland, for if a 
 farmer can keep his land in good condition it is so 
 much to his monetary profit to do so. We don't know 
 much of the Scotch custom. 
 
 A B- 
 
 a tenant-farmer, examined. 
 
 A E. 
 
 I hold 150 acres, I reclaimed it. 
 
 6186. Mr. Shaw. — What part of the country? — 
 Stoneford, four miles from Lisburn. 
 
 6187. Chairman. — On whose property ? — Sir 
 Richard Wallace's. There was a thirty acre farm that 
 they could not get the rent out of, the land was bad 
 and they never got rent that they had not to process 
 the tenants for. The office took the land from the 
 parties and kept it for a year or two and sold it to me ; 
 the rent before they got it was 4s. an acre and when 
 I got it they would not give it at less than lis. I gave 
 them a fine, and tilled and manured and made it 
 arable, then they revalued it and made it 1 5s. 
 
 6188. Mr. Sh^w. — How long is that ago ? — About 
 eight years ago. It is twelve years ago since I took it. 
 
 6189. Chair.man. — You cannot complain of the 
 original price, because you took it of your own choice ? 
 
 —Certainly, I agreed to that. 
 
 6190. Within three years the rent was raised? — 
 It was, in four. 
 
 6191. Mr. Shaw, — Is it worth it? — It is worth it 
 now with what I have laid out on it. 
 
 6192. Otherwise it would not be worth it? — It was 
 not worth the lis. hardly. 
 
 6193. Do you live on it ? — I do. 
 
 6194. Did you reclaim much of the mountain farm ? 
 — I di-ained it all. 
 
 6195. What do )'ou pay for it? — Some of it £1, 
 some of it fined down lease. 
 
 6196. Do you hold that on lease ? — This part is not 
 leased, but a great deal of the land is leased. My 
 father fined down a great deal of it, the lease is for 
 lives, and I am one of them myself. When we got it, 
 I remember the time the fine was paid, it was covered 
 a great deal with oat-tails. The first year we got it 
 we were near mowing the heads off the water hens. 
 That land is reclaimed and when the lease is done I 
 don't know what they will do with it. 
 
 6197. You consider the tenant-right will exist at 
 the end of the lease ? — I do. 
 
 6198. That is the custom of the country and the 
 custom of the property 1 — Yes. 
 
 0199. But the rent is uncertain ? — The rent 
 certain. 
 
 6200. And you don't know how much of your rent 
 
 2G 
 
 IS nn- 
 
226 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880, 
 A B 
 
 will be confiscated ?— Exactly, if I don't pay what 
 they like, they will put me out of it. 
 
 6201. That is what you complaui of? — Yes. 
 
 6202. Chaieman. — T)o you think some fair means 
 of arbitration is the best way to arrive at the rent ? — 
 I do. 
 
 Mr. GrctT/. — Our complaint is not of the landlords, 
 it is of the land law, it is in an unsettled state, and it 
 gives to one man the power of appropriating to himself 
 in one way or another our property. No subject 
 under the British crown can have his property appro- 
 priated by another man but the tenant farmer. 
 
 6203. Chairman. — At the time the Land Act 
 passed was there an impression that the tenant-right 
 as it existed at that time was made legal 1 — Mr. Gra^. 
 — There was, but we found that the word "usages" 
 inserted in the Act, gave the landlord an opportunity 
 of inventing these office rules which were unknown in 
 our locality before it. 
 
 620-1-. But they cannot legally make fresh rules. 
 Is not the difficulty that the Land Act did not provide 
 a sufficient remedy 1 — Mr. Gray. — Yes. 
 
 6205. Because the words of the Land Act are 
 that the " usages " are declared legal, and they are 
 to be enforced by the provisions of the Land Act. 
 Well, you have found that those jjrovisions are not 
 sufficient to prevent these restrictions on the original 
 custom? — Mr. Gray. — We found that they took advan- 
 
 tage of that to say that their office rules are part and 
 parcel of the Ulster custom, which we know were not 
 enforced on the estate before the Land Act. 
 
 6206. Mr. Shaw. — But the power of raising rent, 
 you think, should not be put into the hands of any 
 man ? — Mr. Swann. — That is the maddening part of 
 it. I had a brother-in-law, who lived under a land- 
 lord in Ulster, a very good sort of a man iu his own 
 way, and yet the ideas of right and wrong in that man's 
 mind were so confused that he called upon his tenants 
 to pay, each a share of his income tax to the Govern- 
 ment — a share of his income tax, derived from the land 
 he rented to the tenants. 
 
 6207. And they paid it, I suppose? — Mtc. .Swarm. 
 — In a few instances they did, but my brother-in-law 
 refused . 
 
 A. D. — I will give you another instance ; a valuator 
 on a farm of a friend of mine was going out to revalue 
 the farm, and he asked me to go with him, and I declined. 
 " Why," said he, " will you iiot go ? He is a friend of 
 yours, and I wish to do as well as I can for him." 
 I went with him, and the first or second word he 
 asked the tenant was, what money he had. He said, 
 "Yery little." Then he said you must give me £5, 
 and he went and borrowed £5, and the result was 
 the valuator put so much rent on him he could not 
 live. 
 
 [The Witnesses then withdrew.] 
 
 Jr. Joseph 
 Peny. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Perry, Do wnpatrick ; Mr. Edward, Gardner, ll.b., Downpatrick; Mr. William James Moore,, 
 Belfast ; Mr. Patrick Murray, Castlewellan ; Mr. James M'Aleenan, Oastlewellan ; Mr. JoJm M'N'ah, Castle 
 wellan ; and Mr. Joseph Smylie, Castlewellan, were examined together. 
 
 Mr, Joseph Perry, formerly Secretary of the Down Tenant Farmers' Association, examined. 
 
 0208. Chairman. — You live at Grovehill, Down- 
 patrick 1 — Yes. 
 
 6209. A tenant farmer ?— Yes. 
 
 C210. And Secretary to the County Down Farmers' 
 Association ? — I was tor four years. 
 
 6211. What is the size of your farm? — I^early one 
 hundred and thirty acres English. 
 
 6212. You act also in collecting rents? — Yes, I 
 collect rents from seven small tenants. 
 
 6213. Are you acquainted with the estates, and cir- 
 cumstances connected with tliem generally in Down- 
 patrick and the neighbourhood? — Yes, my lord. 
 
 6214. Well, now, I think we have heard a great 
 deal about the, actual meaning of tenant-right, accord- 
 ing to the Ulster custom, which has been explained 
 to us as being continuous occupation of a farm by the 
 tenant on payment of a fair rent, with a right of free 
 sale ? — Yes, my lord. 
 
 6215. You take that to be the Ulster custom, pure 
 and simple 1 — I do, my lord — continuous occupation, 
 free sale, and fair rents. 
 
 6216. You wish to give evidence on the subject of 
 restrictions that have been put upon that ? — There are 
 several large estates within a few miles of where I live. 
 When I was a boy — say fifty years ago — the same 
 custom of free sale existed, on all. 
 
 6217. Mr. Shaw.— Without restriction ?— Without 
 restriction. The first that I knew to limit it was the 
 late John Waring Maxwell. He limited the price to 
 £10 an acre for some years. Ho then denied the 
 custom altogether, and gave his tenants what he 
 pleased, if they were unable to hold their farms, to 
 take them to America. 
 
 6218. Chairman. — What time was that? — About 
 the year 1834 or 1835. I remember a farm in the 
 parish of Inch on his estate sold at £20 the Irish acre 
 by a grandaunt of my own, 
 
 6219. With the knowledge of the landlord ?— With 
 the knowledge and consent of the landlord, and he 
 accepted the tenant. Mr. Gardner has a list of sales 
 made on the property. For several years Colonel 
 Forde appointed his own valuator to fix the price for 
 the tenant's property in his farm. 
 
 6220. Mr. Shaw. — On sales ? — On a change of 
 tenancy, he would select the man who was to receive 
 it, and appoint his own valuator, to say what the price 
 should be. 
 
 6221. Chaiemajt. — At that time? — Yes, my lord, 
 at that time. 
 
 6222. Mr. Shaw. — When was that? — He originated 
 this abo\it the famine years. 
 
 6223. Does that continue still on his property ? — 
 Within the last twelve months the matter has been 
 brought out in the papers, and he is allowing arbi- 
 tration. 
 
 6224. Chairman. — Then yon say that on the faitli 
 of the custom, the tenants made a great deal of im 
 provements ? — No question of that. I believe the 
 tenants did the whole of the improvements except in a 
 rare instance. The landlord might give slates for a 
 house, and Mr. Maxwell after he denied the custom 
 paid a small sum per perch for drainage — somethiug to 
 encourage his people to goon, because they had lost heart 
 altogether. On Lord Bangor's property, a plan existed 
 of limiting prices to X5 an acre— at least be makes the 
 purchaser sign an agreement that he is only giving £5, 
 and will be satisfied to give up his farm lor X5 an 
 acre if he wishes to leave it again, but the purchasers 
 tell me the agent knew perfectly well they were 
 paying far more. I have a number of cases in which 
 large amounts were paid outside that. 
 
 6225. Mr. Shaw.— That was, the tenant fixed the 
 price for himself? — The tenant fixed the price for 
 himself. My own idea was that as soon as he had it 
 in operation for a number of years he would allow 
 nothing but the £5. 
 
 6226. Does it continue to the present day that re- 
 striction ? — I don't wish to impute motives, but during 
 the contest for the county the last election, the agent 
 gathered his tenants together, and told them he would 
 adopt the plan of Colonel Forde, and allow arbitration. 
 However,. Colonel Forde's plan is not a proper arbi- 
 tration, because the two arbitrators, one appointed by. 
 the buyer, and the other by the seller, have not, as far 
 as I understand, the appointment of the umpire. 
 Colonel Forde appoints the umpire, and they must be 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 227 
 
 tenants on tlie property -who are appointed as 
 arbitrators. 
 
 6227. CHAIEALA.N. — And a tenant on the property 
 appointed as umpire 1 — The Colonel reserves the power 
 to appoint the umpire, but as yet the two arbitrators 
 have agreed. There have been very few cases as yet, 
 it has not been so long in operation. 
 
 6228. I understood you to say that on Lord Bangor's 
 estate they were confined to £5 an acre as the purchase 
 money, but that larger sums were given, and that 
 larger sums were given was known to the office ? — It 
 was within the knowledge of the office that larger 
 sums were being paid. It is the statute acre, of 
 course, that I am talking about. Well, my lord, there 
 is one thing, that where tenant-right cannot be 
 denied, in several cases since the Land Act came 
 in, where they cannot prevent free sale they have 
 adopted the plan of raising rent at the time of the 
 transfer of a farm. 
 
 6229. Mr. Shaw.— On all these estates '!— No, I 
 don't know on all these estates, but on the Downshire 
 it is done, and on Downpatrick we have free sale given 
 
 , us, but they destroy it by raising the rent. 
 
 6230. Chairman. — Hecently introduced ? — Yes, re- 
 cently I since the Land Act. 
 
 6231. WUl you mention some estates where the 
 custom has been restricted by a general raising of 
 rents since the Land Act 1 — Yes, my lord, the Annes- 
 ley estate. 
 
 6232. Mr. Shaw. — Rents raised at the termina- 
 tion of a lease or on change of tenancy 1 — Yes ; it is 
 on change of tenancy we complain of, and it is not'on 
 the termination of the lease — that we think is natural. 
 "VVe don't object to it. 
 
 6233. Chairman". — Has any question arisen on the 
 subject of tenant-right continuing after the termination 
 of the lease 1 — Yes, my lord, we had a very celebrated 
 case in our county in 1872, where, on the estate of 
 Mr. Eeauclerc, tenant-right was denied to Mr. Men own 
 for a farm of seventy-two acres which he had reclaimed 
 the principal part of, and brought it to be what is 
 called a model farm, and when the life died, they 
 refused to renew the lease to Mr. Menown at all, and 
 noticed him to quit. The matter was defended before 
 the Land Court ; the chairman held that there was 
 tenant-right at the end of the lease, and awarded Mr. 
 Menown £1,400. Mr. Menown did not object to 
 the revaluation of his farm, and a fair rent being put 
 on it. The landlord appealed, and brought the case to 
 the Assizes, befoi-e Judge Barry. After hearing the 
 evidence. Judge Barry took three months to consider 
 the question, and then decided that it was not proved 
 to his satisfaction, that tenant-right existed on the 
 estate at the end of the lease, and remitted the matter 
 to the chairman to compensate the tenant for his im- 
 provements. Mr. Menown was then awarded £530 
 6s. 6d. After the matter was decided, Mr. Menown 
 had very little for his own pocket, after the law costs. 
 That raised a storm in our county, and my friend, Mr. 
 Moore, asked me to assist him in forming the Down 
 Farmers' Association to defend our rights. We did 
 so, and returned Mr. James Sliarman Crawford to Par- 
 liament, which caused those who forced on the Menown 
 case to repent, and they have been bringing in Bills 
 ever since to remedy the matter. 
 
 6234. Mr. Shaw. — It is allowed on all the good 
 estates, I suppose 1 — I never heard it denied before 
 that case ; in fact, I had it on the very best authority 
 that the agent in that case was put forward by the 
 landlords of the County Down to test the question 
 whether tenant-right existed at the end of a lease or 
 not, according to the Land Act. 
 
 6235. Chairman. — Your evidence is, then, that the 
 tenants, feeling insecure as to whether the rents may 
 be raised upon them for their own improvements, 
 hesitate to embark on improvements ? — 'No question 
 of it, my lord. There are few properties in the county 
 on which they are not afraid to improve. Of late 
 this rise of rent at the time of the sale^, has acted most 
 injuriously on the improvement of the country. 
 
 _ 6236. Would your view be that there should be no gej.<t. 23. isso. 
 rise of rent at anytime? — No, my lord, I don't object Mr. Joseph 
 at all, if times were imjjroved and the circumstances Perry, 
 of the country warranted a revision of rents. I have 
 not the slightest objection to a revaluation of rents, if 
 landlords are entitled to the increase of rent from 
 other causes than the tenants' improvements. I think 
 they are perfectly entitled to it. 
 
 0237. Which do you think would be the best time, 
 on sales or at some fixed period ? — The general mlo 
 has been for the landlord to have a revaluation of his 
 property at any time he chooses, and at the fall of a 
 lease the rent was certain to be increased. 
 
 6238. Are there any leases, on the properties you are 
 speaking of, existing f — Not that I am aware of ; on 
 the Downshii'e property I think there are. 
 
 6239. But, speaking of it as a person holding as a 
 tenant from year to year under tenant-right, would you 
 say the better time for a revaluation would be at a 
 fixed period 1 — Yes, I should say so. 
 
 6240. Or at the time of a sale t — At a regular fixed 
 period, I would rather have it, than at the time of a 
 sale, because it destroys the confidence of parties. 
 
 6241. In case of a sale now on these properties, or 
 some of them, is it the custom to give notice at the 
 time of the sale v^hat the rent will be afterwards ? — I 
 believe it is, my lord. If the tenant wishes to sell, he 
 goes to the office. He is told he is welcome to do so, 
 and the rent will be so much. 
 
 6242. I see you say that the great evil at present 
 in Ireland is want of confidence that the tenants will 
 enjoy the fruits of their labour? — Yes, my lord. I 
 was on the property of the late David Stewart Iver. 
 I knew he was embarrassed, and I was afraid the 
 estate would pass to the hands of a gentleman 
 who denied tenant-right altogether, and I a.sked for a 
 lease. I got a lease of a portion of the place, and 
 since then I have expended at least £1,500 on that 
 security. 
 
 6243. Mr. Shaw. — A long lease I suppose? — 
 Ninety-nine years. 
 
 6244. Chairman. — Do you believe the Ulster cus- 
 tom would be advantageous to every holding in 
 Ireland, both to landlords and tenants? — I do, my 
 lord, I am firmly of opinion it would be of advantage, 
 both to landlord and tenant, if every property was 
 managed like the Londonderry or Sharman Crawford 
 properties, where the tenants are certain no advan- 
 tage will be taken of their investments. 
 
 6245. I see you speak of cases where there is a re- 
 valuation, you say that in all cases the rent should 
 be a fair rent, aiid should be decided before instead 
 of after an eviction taking place for a dispute about 
 rent? — Yes, my loi-d. If my landlord tells me I must 
 pay £25 of an increase, and I think it is too much, my 
 only remedy is to refuse to pay it, get evicted, and then 
 cMm compensation for the value of my tenant-right or 
 improvements. It requires a man with great courage 
 to run the risk of losing nearly everything he has, 
 and go through the law courts. He will submit to 
 very great injustice before he will go to law with liis 
 landlord, and I think there should be some better 
 mode of ascertaining a fair rent before they go to ex- 
 pense and law. 
 
 6246. At present it is only by the decision of the 
 landlord himself? — At present the landlord merely 
 says the rent is to be so much, and the tenant has no 
 appeal except to refuse to pay. 
 
 6247. Are you aware of cases where it has gone to 
 arbitration ? — I am not aware. A just landlord may 
 say he will arbitrate, and see what the fair rent is, 
 but, as a mle, landlords insist on having what they 
 think themselves is fair. 
 
 6248. And you think arbitration would be a fair 
 mode of settling differences 1 — Yes, my lord, I cannot 
 see what woiild be fairer. 
 
 6249. Yon think the landlord should name one 
 arbitrator 1 — I do, and the tenant another. 
 
 6250. And there should be an impartial umpire 1 
 — Yes, selected by the two they appoint. 
 
 2 G 2 
 
228 
 
 IBISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. T.',, isso. C251. Have you any evidence to give on the 
 
 „ ■ , subject of leases 1 — No, not much. 
 
 Pem"^*^ 6252. They arc not very much sought for? — We 
 
 would rather do without tliem. 
 
 62.5.3. riuve the landlords been in the habit of con- 
 tributing towards improvements on the holdings 
 either Ijefore the Land Aot_ or since the Land 
 Act? — Very little. Some of them did give a small 
 sum per perch for drainage, and, in a few isolated 
 cases, they might give slates or timber for a dwelling- 
 house or barn. I have known, on Colonel Forde's 
 estate, slates or timber or perhaps both given, and, 
 if the farm was sold, the price was the first money 
 deducted from the purchase-money. 
 
 G2.54 Was that before or since the Land Act? — 
 Before the Land Act. 
 
 62-55. Has it ceased since the Land Act ? — I think 
 there has been little done since the Land Act by 
 the landlords. 
 
 0256. Then it has checked improvements both by 
 the landlord and tenant 1 — Oh, no, I don't think it 
 has by the tenant. 
 
 0257. We have been told it has checked the im- 
 provements of the tenants from a feeling cf in- 
 security 1 — There is a feeling of insecurity, but it 
 was not the Land Act, it was the rise of rent at 
 the time of sale, that was not practised previously, 
 that has checked the improvements. 
 
 6258. Then, was the rise of rent under these new 
 rules the result of the Land Act ? — Yes, I suppose 
 that was the fact. 
 
 6259. I see you say that in your opinion the 
 Land Act has been fairly interpreted in your neigh- 
 bourhood as elsewhere ? — Yes, I think in the county 
 Down it has been as fairly interpreted as elsewhere 
 by the County Court Judge, but as I say we did 
 not like Judge Barry's interpretation of it. I believe 
 a great many Judges, as a matter oi (act, are deciding 
 what they know nothing about. 
 
 G260. Mr. Shaw. — Mr. Johnston is your chairman ? 
 — Mr. Johnston was, and he is an IJlsterman, and 
 understands the custom. 
 
 G26L Chairman". — Can you give us any informa- 
 tion about the purchase by tenants of their hoklings 1 
 ■ — Very little, my friend, 'Mr. Gardner, can give it 
 to you, he has been employed by some tenants in 
 the purchase of their hoklings. 
 
 6262. Can you give any information on the S'llijoct 
 of the reclamation of waste lands ? — There has been 
 reclamation of land going on in a great many farms in 
 the neighbourhood, where there was a portion of the 
 farm waste. If a man had a piece of swamp or rook, 
 he would quarry the rocks and drain the swamp, and I 
 can point to hundreds of acres that are worth ten times 
 what they were within my memory, but it has not 
 been carried out to a large extent. 
 
 6263. Has it decreased in consequence of the in ■ 
 creased price of labour ? — I think so. 
 
 6264. How do you stand v,'ith regard to the labourers 
 in your country ? — Labour has increased in value, 
 labourers are better paid than they were some years 
 ago, but within the last two years it has not been so 
 dear as it was. 
 
 6265. Do they usually hold from the farmers or 
 from the landlords direct 1 — The labourers hold from 
 the farmers, and have cottier houses, but a great many 
 small farmers work with the neighlaouring farmers as 
 labourers. 
 
 6266. You say that the Land Act does not give to 
 the tenants in other parts of Ireland all they have a 
 right to expect by giving compensation for disturbance, 
 and compensation for their improvements, but that the 
 tenant who wishes to change his residence should also 
 be at liberty to sell his right of occupation and improve- 
 ments to any person to whom tho landlord cannot show 
 a reasonable objection ? — I believe lie should. 
 
 62G7. That would not apply to the question of dis- 
 turbance, where a tenant v.'as wishing to clianse his 
 residence, disturbance woidd not be given tlicn ? — The. 
 
 tenant camrot claim anything if he wishes to change his 
 residence, but the Act says, if the tenant is disturbed 
 by his landlord he should be paid for it. Now, that 
 shows he has a property in the farm, and he should be 
 at liberty to sell it to any solvent man, and the tenant 
 ha-? a light all over Ireland to be paid for improvements 
 and disturbance. Therefore the Land Act has made 
 legal a property for him in the soil, and it would be a 
 very small measure to give him power to sell that pro- 
 perty. 
 
 6268. You think he ought to have it under the head 
 of his goodwill in the holding ? — I think so. 
 
 6269. As to the landlord having the power to dis- 
 possess a tenant who pays a fair rent, what do you 
 think of that? — I don't think he should have the 
 power. My own family and myself have been on one 
 -•■arm for perhaps 200 years ; ^vithul my own memory 
 the estate has had three owners, every field and fence 
 in that farm some memory or association is fastened 
 in my mind, something happened there, or there was 
 some stoiy about it, and I think it would be a far 
 harder thing for me to be turned out of it, than for the 
 landlord, and I think, morally speaking, my right to 
 remain there is as good as a landlord who is a stranger 
 to the farm. 
 
 6270. You think imder no circumstances should a 
 landlord resume possession making full compensation ? 
 . — I would not say that under some circumstances he 
 might not. A man might be disturbed for public 
 purposes. 
 
 6271. Mr. Shaw. — The county Down I suppose is 
 thoroughly well farmed ? — As a general rule the greater 
 part is. 
 
 6272. Are the farms large? — Not large. 
 
 6273. And all the outlay, as a general rule, has 
 been made by the tenants ? — A very large proportion 
 of the families in Down are descendants of English 
 and Scotch colonists, who came there two hundred 
 years ago; since that — and in faith of enjoying the vested 
 interest which was promised as an inducement to our 
 forefathers to settle in and colonize the country, and 
 they also had to protect and defend those who obtained 
 the confiscated estates — since that every dv/-elliag- 
 house, office, bridge, and county buUding, has been ' 
 built, every road, drain, and fence, has been made by 
 the money and labour of the tenants. 
 
 6274. And all this is the result of tenant-right? — 
 All this is the result of tenant-right. 
 
 6275. And you think the result of a gradual in- 
 crease of rent would be a great calamity to the 
 country ? — No question of it, in the world. 
 
 6276. It would unsettle the minds of the people? — 
 Yes ; and if matters had gone on for a short time as 
 they were with us, at the time of the Menown case, 
 we would have been worse than they are in the south 
 of Ireland. 
 
 6277. And thei-e have been cases with you where 
 rents are raised on a change of tenancy ? — Yes. 
 
 6278. Are they raised to any great extent? — As a 
 rule they are not raised very high on the good estates. 
 
 6279. Are there many changes of tenancy on those 
 estates ? — Not a great many, but some ; after last year 
 there wUl be several. I know at the present moment 
 two or three farms that would be sold, they are in the 
 hands of very poor people at jjresent, and they are 
 afraid to propose a sale for the rise of rent that would 
 be put on, and were it not for the rise of rent, those 
 farms would be transferred to men who are better able 
 to work them. 
 
 6280. I suppose you think this tenant-right would 
 be good for all parts of Ireland? — I am perfectly 
 satisfied of it, and if it were enjoyed all over Ireland 
 the country would be much more prosperous and con • 
 tented. 
 
 6281. Are rents high in Down? — I would not say 
 the landlords had been harsh in that way ; there are 
 a few small men who do charge exorbitant rents. 
 
 6282. Supposing this land question was settled, and 
 the right of settling rents by arbitration were given, 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 229 
 
 do you think tliat would be against tlie tenants 
 generally or for those in Ulster 1 — I think it would be 
 an advantage to the tenants that they had a right to 
 arbitration upon it. 
 
 6283. The landlord, of course, could say, " My land 
 is let too cheap," and would have a right equally with 
 the tenant to ask for a revaluation ? — Yes. 
 
 6284. Would there not be a danger of rent being 
 raised 1 — On some estates there would, but I think a 
 just good landlord could as easily raise them now as 
 then. 
 
 6285. You think they would not meddle with itl 
 — I think they would not. 
 
 6286. But the passing of the Land Act has made 
 them meddle with things they did not meddle with 
 before? — It has, this rising of rent and some other 
 little matters. 
 
 6287. And if they had this power of arbitration the 
 good landlords might say they might as well have 
 these two or three thousand pounds extra? — Yes, they 
 might. 
 
 6288. We have had evidence that the land is let 
 for less than its value excluding the tenants' improve- 
 ments 1 — I believe if it were possible to hand the land 
 back to the landlords of the county Down in the state 
 in which the predecessors of the tenants received it, 
 it would not be worth one third of the rent now 
 received, notwithstanding the improved times and the 
 growth of towns. 
 
 6289. Now supposing the question were taken up 
 ri this -way that you would say to the landlord — • 
 " Well you have this right of raising rent, and under 
 
 the new bill we propose to give you the right of Sept. ^s,ikko. 
 
 increasing rent by arbitration ; what will you tiike for jj^^ .i^apW 
 
 this right and be done with it, and give us a perpetxiity Peny. 
 
 at fixed rents?" Would that be availedof by the tenants? 
 
 We have had evidence of estates where rents were 
 
 fined down, and fixed for long leases on the giving of 
 
 fines, would that be availed of to a great extent by 
 
 tenants? — A good many tenants would and other 
 
 men would not see the advantage of it. 
 
 6290. They would not have the money? — Yes. 
 
 6291. But you think if they had the money they 
 would do it ? — YcK, anything to get security. 
 
 6292. Well Government miglit say "You don't 
 want to get the fee-simple of that land or banish 
 landlords; you ^^'antto keep them; tlieyare ornamental 
 in the country and we will give you the money to 
 pay for this perpetuity " ? — If we could get perpetuity 
 leases that the rent should not be raised it would be 
 a splendid thing for Ireland, not for the tenants alone, 
 but for the whole community. I'o my mind it would 
 be much better than peasant proprietorship. I would 
 far rather have it. 
 
 6293. And better than a sliding scale or valuations 
 every seven or twenty years ? — It would be decidedly 
 the best solution for the land question. I think the 
 tenants are nothing the worse for having a certain 
 amount of rent to pay, it makes them industrious and 
 work, and if that could be arranged it would be the 
 best soluti-on of the question. 
 
 6294. It would save a great deal of trouble in the 
 future 1-- — A great deal. 
 
 ]Mr. Edwaed Gardnee, il.b., examined. 
 
 6295. CnAiKMAN.— What 
 and also rent agent for a 
 
 are you ? — A solicitor 
 small jireperty in the 
 neighbourhood of Downpatrick belonging to Colonel 
 Craig and Mr. Craig-Laurie, two brothers. 
 
 6296. Any other properties? — No, my lord. 
 
 6297. What is the extent oi those properties?— 
 There are about a dozen tenants. 
 
 6298. Now yo\i have heard the evidence Mr. Perry 
 has given, I think I had better ask you if you would 
 ipake any observation upon ii or give your own views 
 upon the subject? — I agree with what Mr. Peny has 
 stated in relerence to the Ulster custom, but perhaps 
 I may be permitted to add that the occupancy right 
 has its force mainly owing to the fact the tenants in 
 Ulster improved their farms, and the improvements in 
 the course oi time became so merged in the holding that 
 they ceased to be distinguishable. That would naturally 
 happen, for the farms being improved side by side they 
 could not be compared, in coiirse of time, one farm 
 with another. 
 
 6299. Then you don't divide it into good-will and 
 improvements, but as arising altogether from improve- 
 ments ? — I don't attempt to say what the origin of the 
 custom was, but I say that it has its main force in 
 that fact. 
 
 6300. Mr. Shaw. — They are both there, the good- 
 will and the improvements? — That is what is now 
 called the good-will, the improvement element is the 
 improvements which can be distinguished and pointed 
 out. 
 
 6301. Chairman. — Then do you agree Avith him 
 generally on the subject of the insecurity felt from 
 restrictions upon the Ulster custom having been intro- 
 duced ? — I do, my lord. On Lord De Eos' estate the 
 restriction is £10 an acre. On Mr. Ward's estate the 
 restriction was to £5 a statute acre, the same as Lord 
 Bangor's, and, as Mr. Perry has stated. Lord Bangor's 
 has been changed by having what was adopted by 
 Colonel Forde upon the Seaforde estate, an arbitration. 
 Colonel Forde himself, in a speech he delivered some 
 few years ago, after the Land Act, at Ballinahinch, 
 stated he had himself changed the custom upon his 
 estate by having two arbitrators appointed, one by the 
 outgoing tenant, and one by the incoming tenant, and he 
 
 appointed the umpire, and in the course of a short 
 ,tune he changed that practice to appointing one 
 valuator himself alone to settle the amount. Upon 
 the DoAvnpatrick estate there has been no attempt to 
 limit the price, and the amount of the tenant-right has 
 varied from t:'me to time ; sometimes large sums paid 
 upon that estate, but the plan of increasing the rent 
 on occasions of transfers ha'j been adopted upon that 
 estate. There would be no objection to have had 
 regular valuations made at proper intervals, and to 
 have adopted that valuation, but the course resorted 
 to was the opportunity of transfer. That, of course, 
 caused a great deal of discomfort amongst the teiiants, 
 and made them feel leather insecure about their tenant- 
 right. The late Mr. Crawford was very strong upon 
 that point ; he set forth the argument very strongly 
 in a correspondence he had ^vith Mr. Brush, the agent 
 for a considerable number of properties in the county 
 Down. It was since the Land Act that planv/as adopted. 
 Now, there is the case of Mrs. IiI'Kee, Quoile, in the 
 neighbourhood of Downpatrick : she had sold in Mr. 
 Ker's time to David M'Glennon, and the rent was 
 raised lis., it appeared to have been for the pur- 
 pose of making the rent an even sum of £30, and some 
 short time after that M'Glennon sold the same farm 
 to William Lascelles, and at that time an increase of 
 £5 was put to the rent, making it £35, and he sold a 
 short time after that to a man called M'MuUen, and 
 there was an increase then made of 1 Os. to the rent. 
 
 6303. The objection is to the rising of the rent at 
 all at the time of the sale ? — At the time of transfers. 
 
 6303. And that custom has crept in since the Land 
 Act ? — Since the Land Act. This is upon the Down 
 estate. 
 
 6304. You don't mean that there is any special 
 hard case as to the amount of rent being put on, if 
 there is, give it, otherwise the fact the general rule is 
 enotigh for us to take clown. The objection is to 
 the general rule? — The hardship was very great in 
 some cases. 
 
 6305. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any case where the 
 advance of rent practically eat away the tenant-right ? 
 ■ — Encroached materially upon it, I cannot say it eat 
 it away entirely. There is the case of Mrs. Stitt — she 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Gardner, LUB. 
 
230 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Gardner, LL.B. 
 
 was married again to a gentleman called Gardner at 
 this time ; that was a farm that contained about 
 seventy-three Irish acres, and it was held at a rent of 
 £114 7s. lid. It was put up for sale, and £2,900 
 was bid for it. It happened at that time that 
 the Down estate — Mr. Ker's — was in the Landed 
 Estates Court, and a receiver was in charge ; so 
 that the matter had to come before the Eeceiver- 
 Master in the Court of Chancery, and he interfered 
 very considerably with, the operation of the customs 
 that had been practised on Mr. Ker's estate, and 
 insisted on proposals being sent in, and set aside the 
 sale that had been made, and increased the rent to 
 £158. The sale after.that realized £2,000. 
 
 6306. A loss of £900? — That second sale included 
 a threshing machine and a boiler, and some manure 
 that was on the premises. I sujspose about £50 would 
 be the measure for that. 
 
 6307. That was under the Court of Chancery % — 
 Yes, upwards of £900 was lost in that way. In the 
 present landlord's time there was a farm belonging to 
 Moses Porter, containing sixty-one Irish acres, held at 
 a rent of £108, and that rent on a sale was increased 
 to £135. He considered that he lost by that change, a 
 sum of £300. So that the hardship appears in this 
 particular case, arising just out of the particular time 
 when the change takes place. 
 
 6308. Chairman. — Have you any other specimen 
 case? — There was a case occurred on the Ardglass 
 estate recently, of a man called Grogan j there was 
 15s. an acre added in that case. 
 
 Mr. Perry. — That was an old lease. 
 
 6309. Mr. Shaw. — How much was the rent before ? 
 " — Mr. Gardner. — The purchaser refused to take it 
 even at a reduced price. 
 
 6310. Chairman. — Was it a fair time for a valu- 
 ation ? — Mr. Perry. — It was. 
 
 6311. Mr. Shaw. — Was not that a high increase ? — • 
 Mr. Perry — ^Well, it was. I made inquiries from some 
 of his neighbours, and they told me what I tell you. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. — There are some cases here on the 
 Castleward estate, where the agreement was signed 
 admitting the purchase-money was £5 an acre ; that 
 is Lord Bangor's property. I have not a copy of the 
 £5 agreement, but they signed it that the' .sale was for 
 £5 an acre. 
 
 6312. Chairman. — In that case was the payment 
 really more than £5 ? — Oh yes, my lord, in all cases. 
 
 [Mr. Perry produced a copy of lease]. 
 
 6313. Chairman". — This is what the new purchaser 
 had to sign ? — Yes. On the Finnebrogue estate 
 tenant-right formerly existed. Mr. Perry referred to 
 that estate. 
 
 6314. Who is the landlord ?— Mr. Maxwell. We 
 have instances in 1823 of a sale, at £12 per acre. 
 James Cochrane, purchased from William Wilson, at 
 that price, twenty-eight acres, and there is a letter of 
 the then Mr. Maxwell, uncle of the present owner, to a 
 tenant in which he says, " you must be prepared to 
 give as much as another for the land." The tenant 
 was then applying for three acres adjoining him, which 
 were then to be sold. 
 
 6315. Has there been any interference with the 
 right? — Yes, my lord. That continued up to 1836, 
 as far as I have been able to learn. There are several 
 other instances. The case of Morrison's purchasing, 
 John JSTapier's purchasing, John Jennings purchas- 
 ing, Ilobin Bassett purchasing from Mrs. W. Robin- 
 son, all free cases. After that period there was a re- 
 striction of £10 imposed, and in 1838, a man called 
 John Cavan, was limited to the payment of £10 in his 
 purchase. Shortly after a man called John Gray was 
 also limited to £10, to purchase twenty-two acres. 
 Sometime after that there was a limit to £5. 
 
 6316. What was the date of the £5 limit do you 
 know ? — T suppose it lasted till— 
 
 Mr. Perry. — It only lasted for a year or two, two or 
 three farms changed at £5, and then it was only 
 what he chose himself. 
 
 6317. On the whole there have been several re- 
 
 strictions on the tenantry ? — It was before the Land 
 Act this £5 was abolished. 
 
 6318. Then since the Land Act? — He disallowed 
 the practice altogether. Part of this farm that John 
 Gray purchased in 1838, it was twenty-two acres, he 
 had increased it, and it passed under his will to a man 
 called Gilchriest, he was offered when giving it up and 
 going abroad, by a Mr. Allen, £1,350, and he was 
 only allowed to give £900 in the shape of improve- 
 ments. 
 
 6319. What was the date oi that? — Since the Land 
 Act. I would say within the last six years. There 
 was an attempt in Ballybrannagh, with Adam 
 Cavan, he was selling the tenant-right in about ten 
 acres, there was £200 offered for that, but Mr. 
 Maxwell, would not allow the sale at all. 
 
 6320. What was the date of that ?— Mr. Gardmr 
 — About four years ago, it was one of his best tenants 
 who proposed to buy. 
 
 6321. Then you say he has taken away the tenant- 
 right altogether? — Mr. Perry — He has, my lord. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. — I don't say that as a matter of law, 
 my lord; but that has been the practice on his 
 estate. 
 
 6322. You mean as a matter of law he may not he 
 able to do so ? — Mr. Gardner — He may not be able 
 to sustain it. 
 
 Mr. Perry. — Every tenant on his estate is afraid 
 to go to law with him on the subject. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. — I might mention the case of a 
 tenant called Bingham on the Pinnebrogue estate. 
 He purchased from a Mrs. Robinson in 1854, and 
 his deed of purchase expressed her tenant-right in 
 it as being sold. The rent was at £60, and the 
 farm was of such a nature and such condition that 
 Mrs. Robinson was not able to maintain herself and 
 pay the rent, had it not been that she had a small 
 independence she would not have been able to live 
 upon the farm at all. She parted with it, as I have 
 said, to Mr. Bingham in 1854, and shortly after that 
 he was noticed for an increase of rent to £63 \Qs., 
 v.'hioh was to date from the November of 1854. It 
 contained 120 statute acres, and he describes it as hav- 
 ing been only arable in spots at this time, a great part 
 of it consisted of rocks and whins, and he could not 
 say that more than half of it was arable, and that not 
 in continuous parts. 
 
 6323. You see when we go as far back as 1894 
 people would say tilings have bettered since then, 
 and the same thing would not be done now, and the 
 great thing is to come up to the present time ? — I 
 am coming up to the proposal that was made to him 
 in the present time. In. 1863 there was 16 acres of 
 unreclaimed lajid added with an increased rent of £7 
 10s. added, and in 1864 there was an agreement with 
 a map for a lease for sixty-one years, the only con- 
 dition being the building of a dwelling-house. Since 
 that Mr. Bingham built the dwelling-house and 
 extensive farm buildings. He also reclaimed this 
 land. The full estimated value, as a rent, had been 
 something like 5s. He has expended upon that an 
 average ot between £40 for some of it, to £20 for 
 other parts of it, actual expenditure in reclaiming that 
 land. He has reclaimed a great portion of it now. 
 There is still some of it to be done. But in reference 
 to all these improvements he had some conversations 
 with Major Maxwell about an extension of the time 
 
 of the lease, and he proposed, in 1876, to give him an / 
 extension for 61 years from that date. That lay over , 
 until 1879, when aproposalwasmade to grantthelease 
 for the extended time. Well, this was the form of lease 
 that was proposed to be given to him after all these 
 im])roveinents, which he estimated at something like 
 £3,000, actual expenditure. " In consideration of ' 
 the rent and the term of years granted, the whole im- 
 provements to become the property of the landlord at 
 the expiration of the lease without any compensation 
 being paid therefor, anything contained in the Land 
 Act of 1870, or any other Act oi Parliament now or 
 hereafter to be made, to the contrary, notwithstand- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 231 
 
 ing." The rent was £70 that he liad been paying, 
 which he considered a very full rent indeed, so that 
 he had no advantage as far as the rent was con- 
 cerned, and after all those improvements that he had 
 made upon the place, which certainly could not have 
 been exhausted after any length of time at all, unless 
 the cultivation of the farm had been neglected alto- 
 gether, they were to become the propeity of the 
 landlord. [Copy of proposal handed in.] 
 
 G324. In consideration of the sixty-one years' 
 lease 1 — Yes, my lord. He proposed to suspend 
 his power of confiscation for that period of sixty-one 
 years. Then it contained provisions against assignment, 
 sub-^letting, and also reserving game, rabbits, and 
 hares to the landlord. There was a case upon the 
 Kilmorey estates, in the barony of Mourne, possessing 
 some interest as it was brought principally for the pur- 
 pose of establishing tenant-right, of showing the exist- 
 ence of tenant-right upon these estates. There had been 
 a case previously heard, the tenant was Thompson, in 
 which they succeeded in showing there was no tenant- 
 right upon the KUmorey estates. There was nothing 
 but im.provements allowed for ; however, the case to 
 which 1 wish to refer was brought by the executors 
 of a woman named Mary O'Neill who died without 
 leaving any family or near relatives. She had a small 
 farm of about ten acres on the mountain ' side, not 
 very valuable. But in that case the Farmers' Associa- 
 tion gave assistance for the discovery of evidence. A 
 greaA mass of evidence was adduced, and the tenant- 
 right was filly established in evidence, the agent 
 of the 25roperty, nevertheless, gave evidence to the 
 contrary, and he tried to show that the allovi^ance 
 bad been entirely for improvements, and that there 
 was no such thing as good will. However, the 
 Chairman who heard the case came to the conclu- 
 sion upon all the evidence that there was tenant- 
 right. The agent also stated that in the case of a 
 tenant dying without leaving any family, son or 
 daxighter, succeeding him, that the pro^Jerty reverted 
 to the landlord. 
 
 C325. The improvements and all ? — Yes, my lord ; 
 the whole. 
 
 6326. Mr. Shaw. — Was there an appeal in that 
 case ? — Mr. Perry. — No ; they acquiesced in the de- 
 cision of the Barrister. 
 
 6326a. Mr. Oardn,m\ — There was a proposal about 
 the amount of compensation that should be awarded, 
 and the solicitor for the landlord offered a sum of 
 money which we considered very much below the real 
 value, but as we had established the principle we were 
 willing to accept the money as there would be no 
 appeal, and the decision stands law and regulates the 
 practice of the estate. I should mention that on the 
 Londonderry and Crawford estates the practice has 
 been quite free with the tenants. There was an 
 effort to have a form of lease for yearly tenancies. 
 
 Some came out just immediately before the passing of Saj^t. 23, i880. 
 the Land Act and they were used afterwards. 5jp_ Edward 
 
 6327. On whose property was this? — 'Mx. Gardner. — Gardner, ll-b. 
 This was one upon the Ardglass property. [Copy 
 
 handed in], Mr. Lyle was the agent, and it contains 
 the provisions that not only should the tenancy be 
 determined by six months' notice, but — 
 
 " Shall also determhie upon my death, ■without any notice 
 whatever," the death of the tenant, " and it is expressly 
 understood that when giving up possession of said farm and 
 premises upon the determination of my tenancy by notice 
 from either party or upon my death , I am not, or my rep- 
 resentatives, in case of my decease, are not to be entitled to 
 any compensation or allowance for what is usually known 
 as tenant-right or for improvements, save and except such 
 permanent improvements as shall be made by me under 
 special written agreements hereafter made between us." 
 And there was a reservation of game also in that 
 agreement. 
 
 6328. I suppose that is very much the usual form 
 of yearly agreements % — Oh, no ; this was a new thing. 
 They had no writings at all before the Land Act. 
 This was an agreement (^roiiticed:) upon Lord Bangor's 
 property that was presented to the tenant. 
 
 6329. In that lease is there a bar to the claim for 
 compensation? — The form contains the following clause : 
 
 " It is expressly understood that the said farm and premises 
 are not subject to any custom or usage known or called the 
 Ulster tenant-right custom, and that upon any determina- 
 tion of the tenancy hereby created, I shall not be entitled to 
 makp any claim in respect of any such custom." 
 
 [Copy handed in]. 
 
 6330. Were they used on changes of tenancy only 
 or were they forced on the tenants throughout the 
 estate ? — This was a regular form to be adopted on all 
 changes of tenancies. I might mention, perhaps, that 
 Major Crawford was proposing a lease for his tenants 
 of a very liberal charactei-, in which there is an express 
 declaration that the tenant-right shall be preserved. 
 [Copy handed in]. The Dufferin lease was a very 
 stringent one, and it provided that on the death of a 
 tenant intestate the property should revert to the 
 landlord. 
 
 6331. Is there anything else — anything in reference 
 to what the practice has been since the Land Act ? — 
 There was Mrs. Hughes's case, which occurred in 1874. 
 She had died, and there was a nephew who was en- 
 titled to receive the farm ; he was a child, I believe ; 
 his brother-in-law administered to the effects, and 
 Captain John Magee offered £800 for the farm, but 
 the agent. Captain Ward, would not accept him as a 
 tenant, and a man called Orr got the farm. After 
 much bargaining Orr consented to give £575 ; the 
 loss in that case was £225. 
 
 6332. Do you agree with Mi-. Perry it would be a 
 desirable thing to establish a security of tenure with 
 fair rents throughout Ireland % — ^I do, my lord. 
 
 6333. Do you know much of other parts of Ireland 
 beside the north % — Practically I do not. 
 
 Mr. William James Moore examined. 
 
 6334. Chaieman. — Where do you live 1 — I live in 
 39, Cromwell-road, Belfast, at present. I was formerly 
 living in Downpatrick. 
 
 6335. And in what profession ?— No profession, I 
 am living privately, I formerly belonged to this part 
 of the country, and went out to America, and returned 
 owing to bad health. I was acting at the time of Mrs. 
 Hughes's sale as honorary secretary of the Down 
 Farmers' Association. The executors came to me 
 when Mr. Ward refused them liberty to sell to Mr. 
 Magee, and they asked me what they should do. I 
 told them to write to Captain Ward, stating that they 
 had called with me as secretary of the association, and 
 that as they were members of it, the association was 
 bound to take up their case and fight it out. They 
 did so, Mr. Ward gave them no reply. They called 
 on me about two weeks after, and told me they had 
 received no answer from him. I was then sufferin"- 
 
 Mr. William 
 
 from my eyes, so I asked them to sit down and write J^™^^ Moore, 
 a letter, that I dictated to Mr. Ward, and sign my 
 name, stating that they had called upon me as the 
 secretary of the association, and they being members, 
 I would be obliged to take action against him, and I 
 would advise him to settle it if possible, and not go 
 to law, and that if they did not come to terms, we would 
 fight it out. After receiving that letter, they came tome 
 four days afterwards askurg me what they should do, 
 I advised them to try and come to terms if they possibly 
 could, and not go to law imless they were obliged to. 
 Mr. Ward, -wTote asking them to meet him and Mr. Orr. 
 They went to the place, and Mr. Ward, after some conver- 
 sation, took them out, and pointed to the h eap of manure 
 and also to the threshing machine, and said to Orr " I 
 don't care if you give them £200 for that, if you sign 
 that you bought according to the office rule, £5 an 
 acre," and he left them there, and the sale was con- 
 
232 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 James Moore. 
 
 eluded. The full amount was £575, although they 
 Avere offered £800 in the first place. I have this from 
 Captain Magee, and the executors, and when the 
 executors came back and told me what was done, to 
 save law, I advised them acquiesce. The next case I 
 wish to refer to is John Menown's. He held under a 
 lease, some short time before the life of the lease died 
 Mr. Beauclerc sent his bailiff to Mr. GUchriest, an 
 adjoining farmer, to ask him to meet Mr. Bt.auclerc and 
 an Englishman on the farm that day. He went with 
 him, and they walked about the farm, and saw Mr. 
 Menown, and before he left the Englishman offered 
 him £1,000, and asked him would he sell. There had 
 been no talk of sale by Menown. Menown said he 
 would not, that he had lived on the farm., and his 
 forefathers before him, and he was the last of his name, 
 and he would wish to die on it. This Englishman was in- 
 sisting on his taking £1,000. Mi'nown walked away 
 and left them. Two days after the bailiff was 
 sent back to say they would give him £1,500 for 
 the farm. He refused to sell. Thomas Gilchriest, 
 the man that was with him, called njion a cousin of 
 Menown, when he heard this, and asked him was 
 Menown going to sell. He said he had not heard it. 
 He asked him to go and offer £1,500 for it, if he 
 would sell it. Menown said he would not. When 
 the lease dropped his brother-in-law and cousin went 
 to Mr. Lyle, the agent, and told him the life had 
 dropped, and asked him to put on a fair rent. Mr. 
 Lyle's reply was that he would not put any rent on, 
 that Mr. Beauclerc wanted the farm himself, and he 
 would mention no rent. After that again, they called 
 upon the agent BJr. Lyle, and asked him to put some 
 rent upon it, that he could either sell or remain. He 
 declined again, and asked him what he would take for the 
 place. His brother-in-law said they would take £1,000, 
 rather than go to law with the landlord. Lyle refused, 
 and asked them to make their proposal in writing. 
 They refused that. Then they asked what would they 
 give him, and he said, a small annuity and the game- 
 keeper's liouse I happened to call upon ?.Ienown a few 
 days afterwards, and heard this conversation, I asked him 
 what they were going to do about it. Mr. Corry was 
 an old man, and Menown was in lia<l health, and 
 they said they supposed they would have to take what 
 was offered, and not go to law. I said that would 
 never do. After that, Mr. Lyle served them with an 
 ejectment, a notice to quit, and before the Quarter 
 Sessions, I called upon him again, and they told 
 me of this. I said I would fight the case for them. 
 I then started to get up evidence, and got up all the 
 evidence I possibly could, had it brought laefore the 
 barrister^ and he gave an award of £1,400. When 
 it came before him. this Gik-hriest s\^ore he would 
 pay £1,400, down for it. After that they appealed, 
 then Judge Barry took a long time to decide upon 
 it, and finally said no tenant-right was proved in 
 that case. It was then sent back to the Chairman 
 of Quarter Sessions, to give an award for improve- 
 ments, and his award was £530 6s. Of?., although 
 I know well, and everyone else it ^^'as near £2,000. 
 
 6336. Wei-e the law proceedings very exjiensive? — • 
 The lawyers' bill and witnesses v.as £352 16s. 6d., so 
 that leftMiuown £177 9«. lid, for his whole property. 
 I wish to say about the trouble of getting up evidence 
 in the case, in summoning witnesses, I had to summon 
 some of them myself when in their beds, the officer of 
 the Court, could not get them. Two of them offered 
 £25each not to summon them, one offered £20, two of 
 them offered £15, and one of them said lie would pay any 
 fine rather than go to give evidence against his landlord. 
 
 6337. Do you think the expense of proceedings in 
 court deters, particularly tlie poor tenants from 
 contesting any question"? — Most decidedly. Well, 
 there is another case I wish to state on the same 
 estates, that is Samuel Swale's, he held a small farm 
 under a lease from Mr. Beauclerc at a rent of a 
 guinea an acre, he purcha:;ed another farm adjoining 
 that as a yearly tenant. 
 
 6338. What was tlic date of this case ?— Some time 
 
 before 1860. The man died, and I could not get atthe 
 papers, but my brother was one of the executors. 
 
 6339. You see before the Land Act, tenants had no 
 remedy 1- — No, my lord. 
 
 6340. Therefore this case does not so much apply as 
 cases since the Land Act, our inquiry is whether the 
 Land Act is sufficient to protect tenants, the intention 
 of the Land Act was it should 1 — In this case when 
 Mr. Lyle came in to be agent, he raised the rent of the 
 tenancy at wUl, so that it brought both farms up to 
 two guineas an acre. That seemed a veiy hard case, 
 but there was no remedy foi- it. The next case is on 
 the same estate that I wish to mention, that is the case 
 of Hugh Christian. 
 
 6341. What is the date of that case? — His father 
 held under lease, and was the life in the lease, and he 
 died in 1841, they paid 15s. an acre rent. In 1841 at 
 the death of the father, the rent was raised to £2 10s. 
 an acre, hi 1840, the rent reduced to 30s. an acre and it 
 remained so for two years. In 1848, he raised it to 
 £2, and Griffith's valuation of that farm is 30s. an acre. 
 
 6342. Well, then on that projierty the custom has 
 been for the landlord to vary the rent whenever he 
 chose 1 — Yes. 
 
 6343. And they have continued that since the Land 
 Act, have they 1 — Yes, my lord. This man was 
 obliged to sell, found he could not hold it, and spoke to 
 the agent about selling, the agent wished to give it to 
 the next neighbour and sjjoke about leaving it to 
 arbitration. He was willing to do that, and they 
 appointed the arbiti'ators. They awarded £477 9s. for 
 the land, and there was wheat land and seed, and all 
 that they gave £27 for. After he had auctioned 
 everything and sold all, Mr. Lylo tells him " I will not 
 give you the arbitration," after he had accepted his 
 own arbitration. This man could not retake the place 
 because he had nothing to start with, everything was 
 sold, therefore he lost this and he lost £130 which Mr. 
 Llye deducted from him. Thej-e is a case of my 
 brother's on Mr. Ward's estate, he purchased in 1878, 
 twenty-six acres from a cousin, the rent was £2 an acre, 
 he gave £15 an aci-e for the land, and Mr. Lylo was 
 agent and raised the rent 4s. a Conyngham acre after 
 the sale, although the part he purchased was held under 
 a joint receipt with the other land at £2, the other 
 remains still at £2 and this, that was sold is now 
 
 Mr. SilAW. — When did that take place?— 
 
 £2 4s. 
 
 6344, 
 1878. 
 
 6345. Chairman — You see all these cases establish 
 the principle that tenant-right has been infringed if at 
 all long before the Land Act ? — And they have been 
 infringing it since. In this case when my brother pur- 
 chased from my cousin, his own brother refused to buy 
 it at any price, but this man owed my brother some 
 money, and he wanted to get his money out of it. 
 There is another case on Count Russell's property. 
 
 6346. Is thi_s a later easel— The last sale of the 
 farm was in 1878. I will give you the dates and the 
 rents since 1851. The owner of it, John Starkie, 
 brother of the Rev. Mr. Starkie, in 1851 held twenty- 
 four acres at 27s. Gel. an acre. In 1852 the Rev. Mr. 
 Starkie purchased for his brother twenty acres more, 
 the rent was then raised to 30s. over all. In 1860 the 
 rent was raised to 33s. lOcL, and in 1878 it was raised 
 to £2 2s. 6d. Griffith's valuation of the whole was 
 £67, and the present rent amounts to £93 10s. 
 
 0347. And has the tenant done a great deal of im- 
 provements himself in the meantime 1 — I don't tliiuk 
 there is a farm of its size has better improvements. I 
 have not seen it much myself, but I was at the auction, 
 and I heard parties about buying say that they never 
 saw a farm of f.he size with better buildino-s. 
 
 6348. And the increased rent was put on the tenant's 
 improvements'! — Yes. The Rev. Mr. Stiirkie made 
 most of the improvements. It used to be an old saying 
 " If you have a priest in the family you are sure to be 
 rich," but here the family was made poor. On the 
 same property George Russell of Clogher, wished 
 to sell a small property of seven acres, valuation £14, 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 223 
 
 stale of things I am speaking of. The farmer that 
 knew these facts, I asked him to come down here and 
 state these facts ; he said he would not, he dare not on 
 account of the office. I said if he would allow me to 
 wo oyer to his place some evening, he could give me 
 the facts. He said, he would rather I would not go 
 to his place, and he met me at a mutual friend's after 
 dark and gave me the facts. 
 
 6175. It was not the tenant who gave it to you 1 — 
 No, it was a tenant on Sir Thomas Bateson's estate, 
 the tenant dare not. This raising of rent on S i r Thomas 
 Bateson's estate is an innovation since the passing of 
 the Land Act. JMy father sold a holding on that estate 
 to the highest and best bidder, and my uncle also 
 purchased a farm, and there was no restriction what- 
 ever, and no rise of rent. Another case occured in 
 which a Mr. Woods, iu 1864, bought a farm by private 
 sale, and was accepted by the landlord withoiit any 
 objection. This Mr. Woods died a few years after, 
 his widow kept the place until 187i, and then 
 ofiered the farm for sale, and Mr. Heron proposed to 
 become the purchaser, but when they went into the 
 office Sir Thomas Bateson's agent would not accept 
 him as a tenant, upon the ground that the rule of the 
 office was, that there should be only £10 an acre paid. 
 That rule was unknown until after the passing of the 
 Land Act. 
 
 6176. Chairman. — What was the name of the 
 agent? — Dowie ; he also said that he would raise the rent 
 5s. an acre. Heron refused to take it. Shortly after 
 the agent went to him, and gave it to him for thi'oe 
 years at the old rent, but at £70 less than he offered, 
 so that the widow got £70 less, but at the end of three 
 years it was raised 5s. an acre. 
 
 6177. You hold a farm? — I do, under Sir Eichard 
 Wallace, in the same locality as Mr. Swann, his farm 
 and mine adjoin. 
 
 6178. What is the size of the farm? — 68 acres. 
 
 6179. Have you anything in your own case especially 
 that you wish to mention ? — Nothing in my own case^ 
 I hold under a lease. 
 
 6180. You mentioned a case under the Land Act? 
 ■ — A case has occurred of a modern innovation upon 
 Sir Eichard Wallace's estate, which was successful 
 The Eev. Mr Hastings, a Presbyterian minister, 
 offered £120 to Edward Hare, for a place that Hare 
 ■was offering for sale ; the office interfered, and Hare 
 had to accept £90 from a Jlr. Flanagan, by arbitration. 
 
 6181. You are clear the custom was changed since 
 the Land Act ? — Since the Land Act, and I would 
 wish to give further cases before the passing of the 
 Land Act, when the late Dean Stannus and his son 
 Walter were managing the estate for the late Marquis 
 
 of Hertford, to prove that this is a modern innovation. Sept. 23, isso. 
 About three years ago a farm was sold in Ballinderry ^^^_ 'VYilliani 
 by Mr. Hope to Mr. Jebb, of 150 acres, no notice Gray, 
 was given to the landlord or agent of the sale at 
 all, and Mr. Jebb was with Mr. Hope purchasing 
 the farm when a clerk out of the office passed and 
 asked them what they were doing, and said they ought 
 to have given notice. They went on with the sale, 
 and then went into the office, and he was accepted at 
 once. I want to show it has existed since the passing 
 of the Land Act, and it is only lately that it has been 
 objected to. Dean Stannus, the agent purchased land. 
 1 know a picsce of exceedingly bad land, fit only for 
 making bricks, the tenant of it had to leave and it 
 went into the hands of the office, who sold it to a 
 neighbour of mine. Another case was Mr. Money's, 
 who purchased the tenant-right of another farm 
 almost adjoinmg mine, from Dean Stannus, and 
 Dean Stannus, in a public speech at an agricultural 
 dinner in Lisburn, stated himself, that the tenant- 
 right which we had upon the Hertford estate, and 
 what was known as the Ulster tenant-right, was the 
 very best security a landlord coiild have for his rent, 
 and he believed the greater input the farmer Lad in 
 his land, the landlord had so much the more security 
 for his rent. 
 
 6182. You say there are other cases of that descrip- 
 tion, but you give this as an example of the class jon- 
 complain of? — Yes. I have just one thing to say in 
 reference to arbitration of rents, wliat I propose is that 
 a registration office be established in each petty sessions 
 district. If a landlord thinks he is getting too low a 
 rent for a farm he gives notice to the registrar in this 
 office, the registrar gives notice to the farmer, the twO' 
 meet, each appoint an arbitrator, the arbitrators select 
 an umpire, the rent is settled by those three, and this 
 settlement is binding upon both landlord and tenant, 
 neither of them would have the right of appeal to any 
 court — make that the law of the land. 
 
 6183. For liow long? — Fourteen years. 
 
 6184. That vi^ould be too short, we wou^ld have 
 endless arbitration ? — I think I would leave that to 
 the wisdom of the Legislature, and if the tenant 
 thought he was paying too high a rent let him pursue 
 the same course as the landlord. 
 
 6185. Would there not be the danger of a tenant 
 who had let his farm run down getting an arbiti-ation 
 when the land looked worth nothing 1 — I don't think 
 that is the tendency in the north of Ireland, for if a . 
 farmer can keep his land in good condition it is so 
 much to his monetary profit to do so. We don't know 
 much of the Scotch custom. 
 
 A B- 
 
 a tenant-farmer, examined. 
 
 A B. 
 
 I hold 150 acres, I reclaimed it. 
 
 6186. Mr. SiiAw. — What part of the country? — 
 Stoneford, four miles from Lisburn. 
 
 6187. Chairman. — On whose property ? — Sir 
 Eichard Wallace's. There was a thirty acre farm that 
 they could not get the rent out of, the land was bad 
 and they never got rent that they had not to process 
 the tenants for. The office took the land from the 
 parties and kept it for a year or two and sold it to me ; 
 the rent before they got it was is. an acre and when 
 I got it they would not give it at less than lis. I gave 
 them a fine, and tilled and manured and made it 
 arable, then they revalued it and made it 15s. 
 
 6188. Mr. Shaw. — How long is that ago ? — About 
 eight years ago. It is twelve years ago since I took it. 
 
 6189. Chairman. — You cannot complain of the 
 oiiginal price, because you took it of your own choice 1 
 
 —Certainly, I agreed to that. 
 
 6190. Within three years the rent was raised ? — • 
 It was, in four. 
 
 6191. Mr. Shaw. — Is it worth it? — It is worth it 
 now with what I have laid out on it. 
 
 6192. Otherwise it would not be worth it? — It was 
 not worth the lis. hardly. 
 
 6193. Do you live on it ? — I do. 
 
 G194. Did you reclaim much of the mountain farm ? 
 — I drained it all. 
 
 6195. What do you pay for it? — Some of it £1, 
 some of it fined down lease. 
 
 6196. Do you hold that on lease ? — This part is not 
 leased, but a great deal of the land is leased. My 
 father fined down a great deal of it, the lease is for 
 lives, and I am one of them myself. When we o'ot it 
 I remember the time the fine was paid, it was covered 
 a great deal with cat-tails. The first year we "'ot it 
 we were near mowing the heads off the water hens. 
 That land is reclaimed and when the lease is done I 
 don't know what they will do with it. 
 
 6197. You consider the tenant-right will exist at 
 the end of the lease ? — I do. 
 
 6198. That is the custom of the country and the 
 custom of the property 1 — Yes. 
 
 0199. But the rent is uncertain ?— The rent is un- 
 certain. 
 
 6200. And you don't know how much of your rent 
 
 2G 
 
226 
 
 IRISH LA.ND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880, 
 A B 
 
 will be confiscated?— Exactly, if I don't pay what 
 they like, they will put me out of it. 
 
 6201. That is what you complain of? — Yes. 
 
 6202. Chairman. — T)o you think some fair means 
 of arbitration is the best way to arrive at the rent 1 — 
 I do. 
 
 Mr. Gray. — Our complaint is not of the landlords, 
 it is of the land law, it is in an unsettled state, and it 
 gives to one man the power of appropriating to himself 
 in one way or another our jjroperty. No subject 
 under the British crown can have his property apjtro- 
 priated by another man but the tenant farmer. 
 
 6203. Chairman. — At the time the Land Act 
 passed was there an impression that the tenant-right 
 as it existed at that time was made legal t — Mr. Grmj. 
 — There was, but we found that the word " usages " 
 inserted in the Act, gave the landlord an opportunity 
 of inventing these office rules which were unknown in 
 our locality before it. 
 
 6204. But they cannot legally make fresh rules. 
 Is not the dilficulty that the Land Act did not provide 
 a sufficient remedy ? — Mr. Gray. — Yes. 
 
 6205. Because the words of the Land Act are 
 that the " usages " are declared legal, and they are 
 to be enforced by the provisions of the Land Act. 
 "Well, you have found that those provisions are not 
 sufficient to prevent these restrictions on the original 
 custom? — Mr. Gray. — We found that they took advan- 
 
 tage of that to say that their office rules are part and 
 parcel of the Ulster custom, which we know were not 
 enforced on the estate before the Land Act. 
 
 6206. Mr. Shaw. — But the power of raising rent, 
 you think, should not be put into the hands of any 
 man ? — Mr. Swann. — That is the maddening part of 
 it. I had a brother-in-law, who lived under a land- 
 lord in Ulster, a very good sort of a man in his own 
 way,and yet the ideas of right and wrong in that man's 
 mind were so confused that he called upon his tenants 
 to pay, each a share of his income tax to the Govern- 
 ment — a share of his income tax, derived from the land 
 he rented to the tenants. 
 
 6207. And they paid it, I suppose? — Mr. .S'wawm. 
 — In a few instances they did, but my brother-in-law 
 refused . 
 
 A. B. — I will give you another instance ; a valuator 
 on a farm of a friend of mine was going out to revalue 
 the farm, andheaskedmeto go with him, and I declined. 
 " Why," said he, " will you not go ? He is a friend of 
 yours, and I wish to do as well as I can for him." 
 I went with him, and the first or second word he 
 asked the tenant was, what money he had. He said, 
 "Very little." Then he said you must give me £5, 
 and he Vv'ent and borrowed .£5, and the result was 
 the valuator put so much rent on him he could not 
 live. 
 
 [The Witnesses then withdrew.] 
 
 Jr. Joseph 
 Peny. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Ferry, Downpatrick ; Mr. Edward Gardner, ll.b., Downpatrick ; Mr. William James Moore, 
 Belfast; Mr. Patrick Murray, Castle^rellan ; Mr. James M'Aleenan,G&s,il&wel\si-n. ; Mr. John M'Nali, Castle 
 wellan ; and Mr. Joseph Smylie, Castlewellan, were examined together. 
 
 Ml-, Joseph Perky, formerly Secretary of the Down Tenant Farmers' Association, examined. 
 
 6208. Chairman. — You live at Grovehill, Down- 
 patrick ? — Yes. 
 
 G209. A tenant farmer ? — Yes. 
 
 C210. And Secretary to the County Down Farmers' 
 Association ? — I was lor four years. 
 
 6211. What is the size of your farm? — Nearly one 
 hundred and thirty acres English. 
 
 G212. You act also in collecting rents? — Yes, I 
 collect rents from seven small tenants. 
 
 6213. Are you acquainted with the estates, and cir- 
 cumstances connected with t]iem generally in Down- 
 patrick and the neighbourhood ? — Yes, my lord, 
 
 0214. Well, now, I think we have heard a great 
 deal about the actual meaning of tenant-right, accord- 
 ing to the Ulster custom, which has been explained 
 to us as being continuous occupation of a farm by the 
 tenant on payment of a fair rent, with a right of free 
 sale ? — ^Yes, my lord. 
 
 6215. You take that to be the Ulster custom, pure 
 and simple ? — I do, my lord — continuous occupation, 
 free sale, and fair rents. 
 
 6216. You wish to give evidence on the subject of 
 restrictions that have been put upon that ? — There are 
 several large estates within a few miles of where I live. 
 When I was a boy — say fifty years ago — the same 
 custom of free sale existed, on all. 
 
 6217. Mr. Shaw.— Without restriction ?— Without 
 restriction. The first that I knew to limit it was the 
 late John Waring Maxwell. He limited the price to 
 £10 an acre for some years. He then denied the 
 custom altogether, and gave his tenants what he 
 pleased, if they were unable to hold their farms, to 
 take them to America. 
 
 6218. Chairman. — What time was that? — About 
 the year 1834 or 1835. I remember a farm in the 
 parish of Inch on his estate sold at £20 the Irish acre 
 by a grandaunt of my own. 
 
 6219. With the knowledge of the landlord ?— With 
 the knowledge and consent of the landlord, and he 
 accepted the tenant. Mr. Gardner has a list of sales 
 made on the property. For several years Colonel 
 Forde appointed his o-wn valuator to fix the price for 
 the tenant's property in his farm. 
 
 6220. Mr. Shaw. — On sales ? — On a change of 
 tenancy, he would select the man who was to receive 
 it, and appoint his own valuator, to say what the price 
 should be. 
 
 6221. Chairman. — At that time? — Yes, my lord, 
 at that time. 
 
 6222. Mr. Shaw. — When was that? — He originated 
 this about the famine years. 
 
 6223. Does that continue stUl on his property? — 
 Within the last twelve months the matter has been 
 brought out in the papers, and he is allowing arbi- 
 tration. 
 
 6224. Chairman. — Tlien you say that on the faith 
 of the custom the tenants made a great deal of im 
 provemeirts ? — No question of that. I believe the 
 tenants did the whole of the improvements except in a 
 rare instance. The landlord might give slates for a 
 house, and Mr. Maxwell after he denied the custom 
 paid a small sum per perch for drainage — something to 
 encourage his people to go on, because they had lost heart 
 altogether. On Lord Bangor's property, a plan existed 
 of limiting prices to £5 an acre — at least he makes the 
 purchaser sign an agreement that he is only giving £5, 
 and will be satisfied to give up his farm tor £5 an 
 acre if he wishes to leave it again, but the purchasers 
 tell me the agent knew perfectly well they were 
 paying far more. I have a number of cases in which 
 large amounts were paid outside that. 
 
 6225. Mr. Shaw.— That was, the tenant fixed the 
 price for himself? — The tenant fixed the price for 
 himself. My own idea was that as soon as he had it 
 in operation for a number of years he would allow 
 nothing but the £5. 
 
 6226. Does it continue to the present day that re- 
 striction 1 — I don't wish to impute motives, but during 
 the contest for the county the last election, the agent 
 gathered his tenants together, and told them he would 
 adopt the plan of Colonel Forde, and allow arbitration. 
 However, Colonel Forde's plan is not a proper arbi- 
 tration, because the two arbitrators, one appointed by 
 the buyer, and the other by the seller, have not, as far 
 as I understand, the appointment of the umpire. 
 Colonel Forde appoints the umpire, and they must be 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 227 
 
 tenants on the property who are appointed as 
 arbitrators. 
 
 6227. Chairman. — And a tenant on the property 
 appointed as umpire 1 — The Colonel reserves the power 
 to appoint the umpire, but as yet the two arbitrators 
 have agreed. There have been very few cases as yet, 
 it has not been so long in operation. 
 
 6228. I understood you to say that on Lord Bangor's 
 estate they were confined to £5 an acre as the purchase 
 money, but that larger sums were given, and that 
 larger sums were given was known to the ofiice 1 — It 
 was within the knowledge of the office that larger 
 sums were being paid. It is the statute acre, of 
 course, that I am talking about. Well, my lord, there 
 is one thing, that where tenant-right cannot be 
 denied, in several cases since the Land Act came 
 in, where they cannot prevent free sale they have 
 adopted the plan of raising rent at the time of the 
 transfer of a farm. 
 
 6229. Mr. Shaw.— On all these estates '!— No, I 
 don't know on all these estates, but on the Downshire 
 it is done, and on Downpatriok we have free sale given 
 ITS, but they destroy it by raising the rent. 
 
 6230. Chairman. — Recently introduced ? — Yes, re- 
 cently ; since the Land Act. 
 
 6231. Will you mention some estates where the 
 custom has been restricted by a general raising of 
 rents since the Land Act 1 — Yes, my lord, the Annes- 
 ley estate. 
 
 6232. Mr. Shaw. — Rents raised at the termina- 
 tion of a lease or on change of tenancy ? — Yes ; it is 
 on change of tenancy we complain of, and it is not'on 
 the termination of the lease — that we thinl:; is natural. 
 We don't object to it. 
 
 6233. Chairman. — Has any question arisen on the 
 subject of tenant-right continuing after the termination 
 of the lease 1 — Yes, my lord, we had a very celebrated 
 case in our county in 1872, where, on the estate of 
 Mr. Beauclerc, tenant-right was denied to Mr. Menown 
 for a farm of seventy-two acres which he had reclaimed 
 the principal part of, and brought it to be what is 
 called a model farm, and when the life died, they 
 refused to renew the lease to Mr. Menown at all, and 
 noticed him to quit. The matter was defended before 
 the Land Court ; the chairman held that there was 
 tenant-right at the end of the lease, and awarded Mr. 
 Menown £1,400. Mr. Menown did not object to 
 the revaluation of his farm, and a fair rent being put 
 on it. The landlord appealed, and brought the case to 
 the Assizes, before Judge Barry. After hearing the 
 evidence, Judge Barry took three months to consider 
 the question, and then decided that it was not proved 
 to his satisfaction, that tenant-right existed on the 
 estate at the end of the lease, and remitted the matter 
 to the chairman to compensate the tenant for his im- 
 provements. Mr. Menown was then awarded £530 
 6s. 6d. After the matter was decided, Mr. Menown 
 had very little for his own pocket, after the law costs. 
 That raised a storm in our county, and my friend, Mr. 
 3Ioore, asked me to assist him in forming the Down 
 Farmers' Association to defend our rights. We did 
 so, and retui'ned Mr. James Sharman Crawford to Par- 
 liament, which caused those who forced on the Menown 
 case to repent, and they have been bringing in Bills 
 ever since to remedy the matter. 
 
 6234. Mr. Shaw. — It is allowed on all tlie good 
 estates, I suppose ? — I never heard it denied before 
 that case ; in fact, I had it on the very best authority 
 that the agent in that case was put forward by the 
 landlords of the County Down to test the question 
 whether tenant-right existed at the end of a lease or 
 not, according to the Land Act. 
 
 6235. Chairman. — Your evidence is, then, that the 
 tenants, feeling insecure as to whether the rents may 
 be raised upon them for their own improvements, 
 hesitate to embark on improvements 1 — No question 
 of it, my lord. There are few properties in the county 
 on which they are not afraid to improve. Of late 
 this rise of rent at the time of the sale, has acted most 
 injuriously on the improvement of the country. 
 
 623G. Would your view be that there should be no 'j«iJ«-23^i880. 
 rise of rent at any time ? — No, my lord, I don't object jfj. .Joseph 
 at all, if times were improved and the circumstances Perry, 
 of the country warranted a revision of rents. I have 
 not the slightest objection to a revaluation of rents, if 
 landlords are entitled to the increase of rent from 
 other causes than, the tenants' improvements. I think 
 they are perfectly entitled to it. 
 
 6237. Which do you think would be the best time, 
 on sales or at some fixed period 1 — The general rule 
 has been for the landlord to have a revaluation of his 
 property at any time he chooses, and at the fall of a 
 leaSB the rent was certain to be increased. 
 
 6238. Are there any leases, on the properties you are 
 speaking of, existing i — Not that I am aware of ; on 
 the Downshire pioperty I think there are. 
 
 6239. But, speaking of it as a person holding as a 
 tenant from year to year under tenant-right, would you 
 say the better time for a revaluation would be at a 
 fixed period 1 — Yes, I should say so. 
 
 6240. Or at the time of a sale 1 — At a regular fixed 
 period, I would rather have it, than at the time of a 
 sale, because it destroys the confidence of parties. 
 
 6241. In case of a sale now on these projDerties, or 
 some of them, is it the custom to give notice at the 
 time of the sale what the rent will be afterwards 1 — I 
 believe it is, my lord. If the tenant wishes to sell, he 
 goes to the ofiice. He is told he is welcome to do so, 
 and the rent will be so much. 
 
 6242. I see you say that the great evil at present 
 in Ireland is want of confidence that the tenants will 
 enjoy the fruits of their labour? — Yes, my lord. I 
 was on the property of the late David Stewart Ker. 
 I knew he was embarrassed, and I was afraid the 
 estate would pass to the hands of a gentleman 
 who denied tenant-right altogether, and I asked for a 
 lease. I got a lease of a portion of the place, and 
 since then I have expended at least £1,500 on that 
 security. 
 
 6243. Mr. Shaw.— A long lease I suppose? — 
 Ninety-nine years. 
 
 6244. Chairman. — Do you believe the Ulster cus- 
 tom would ^ be advantageous to every holding in 
 Ireland, both to landlords and tenants? — I do, my 
 lord, I am firmly of opinion it would be of advantage, 
 both to landlord and tenant, if every property was 
 managed like the Londonderry or Sharman Crawford 
 properties, where the tenants are certain no advan- 
 tage will be taken of their investments. 
 
 6245. I see you speak of cases where there is a re- 
 valuation, you say that in all cases the rent should 
 be a fair rent, and should be decided before instead 
 of after an eviction taking place for a dispute about 
 rent? — ^Yes, my lord. If my landlord tells me I must 
 pay £25 of an increase, and I think it is too much, my 
 only remedy is to refuse to pay it, get evicted, and then 
 claim compensation for the value of my tenant-right or 
 improvements. It requires a man with great courage 
 to run the risk of losing nearly everything he has, 
 and go through the law courts. He will submit to 
 very great injustice before he will go to law with his 
 landlord, and I think there should be some better 
 mode of ascertaining a fair rent before they go to ex- 
 pense and law. 
 
 6246. At present it is only by the decision of the 
 landlord himself? — At present the landlord merely 
 says the rent is to be so much, and the tenant has no 
 appeal except to refuse to pay. 
 
 6247. Are you aware of cases where it has gone to 
 arbitration ? — I am not aware. A just landlord may 
 say he will arbitrate, and see what the fair rent is, 
 but, as a rule, landlords insist on having what they 
 think themselves is fair. 
 
 6248. And you think arbitration would be a fair 
 mode of settling differences ? — Yes, my lord, I cannot 
 see what would be fairer. 
 
 6249. You think the landlord should name one 
 arbitrator ? — I do, and the tenant another. 
 
 6250. And there should be an impartial umpire ? 
 — Yes, selected by the two they appoint. 
 
 2 G 2 
 
228 
 
 lEJSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Perry. 
 
 &^)«. 23, 1S80. 0-51,. Hiive jovl any evidence to give on the 
 ,. , subject of leases 1 — No, not muoli. 
 
 r. osepi 6252. They are not very much sought for? — We 
 
 would rather do without them. 
 
 G253. Have the landlords been in the habit of con- 
 tributing towards improvements on the holdings 
 either before the Land Act or since the Land 
 Acti — Very little. Some of them did give a small 
 sum per perch for drainage, and, in a few isolated 
 cases, they might give slates or timber for a dwelling- 
 house or Ijarn. I have known, on Colonel Forde's 
 estate, slates or timber or perhaps both given, and, 
 if t]ie farm was sold, the price was the first money 
 deducted from the purchase-money. 
 
 G254. Was that before or since the Land Act? — 
 Before the Land Act. 
 
 C255. Has it ceased since the Land Act ?-— I think 
 there has been little done since the Land A.ct by 
 the landlords. 
 
 6256. Then it has checked improvements both by 
 the landlord and tenant 1 — Oh, no, I don't think it 
 has by the tenant. 
 
 6257. We have been told it has checked the im- 
 provements of the tenants from a feeling cf in- 
 security ? — There is a feeling of insecurity, brrt it 
 was not the Land Act, it was the rise of rent at 
 the time oi sale, that was not practised previously, 
 that has checked the improvements. 
 
 6258. Then, was the rise of rent under these new 
 rules the result of the Land Act ? — Yes, I suppose 
 that was the fact. 
 
 6259. I see you say that in your opinion the 
 Land Act has been fairly interisreted in your neigli- 
 boxirhood as elsewhere 1 — Yes, I think in the county 
 Down it has been as fairly interpreted as elsewhere 
 by the County Court Judge, bat as I say we did 
 not like Judge Barry's interpretation of it. I believe 
 a great many Judges, as a matter of fact, are deciding 
 what they know nothing about. 
 
 62G0. Mr. Shaw. — Mr. Johnston is your chairman ? 
 — Mr. Johnston was, and he is an IJlsterman, and 
 understands the custom. 
 
 G261. Chairman. — Can you give us any infonna- 
 tion about the purchase by tenants of their holdings? 
 — Very little, my friend, Mr. Gardner, can give it 
 to you, he has been employed by some tenants in 
 the purchase of their holdings. 
 
 62 02. Can you give any infomration on the suljjcct 
 of the reclamation of waste lands ? — There has been 
 reclamation of land going on in a great many fai'ms in 
 the neighbourhood, where there was a portion of the 
 farm waste. If a man had a piece of swamp or rock, 
 he would quarry the rocks and drain the swamp, and I 
 can point to hundreds of acres that are worth ten times 
 what they were within my memory, but it has not 
 been carried out to a large extent. 
 
 026.3. Has it decreased in consequence of the in 
 creased price of labour 1 — I think so. 
 
 6264. How do you stand with regard to the labourers 
 in your country 1 — Labour has incn-ased in value, 
 labourers are better paid than they were some years 
 ago, but within the last two years it has not been so 
 dear as it was. 
 
 6265. Do they usually hold from the farmers or 
 from the landlords direct 1 — The labourers hold from 
 the farmci-s, and have cottier houses, but a great many 
 small farmers work with the neighbouring farmers as 
 labourei's. 
 
 6266. You say that the Land Act does not give to 
 the tenants in other parts of Ireland all they have a 
 right to expect by giving compensation for disturbance, 
 and compensation for tlieir improvements, but that the 
 tenant who wishes to change his residence should also 
 be at liberty to sell his right of occupation and improve- 
 ments to any person to whom the landlord cannot show 
 a reasonable objection ? — I believe he should. 
 
 6267. That would not apply to tlio question of dis- 
 turbance, where a tenant was wishing to change Jiis 
 residence, disturbance would not bo gi^en then 1 — The 
 
 tenant cannot claim anything if he wishes to change his 
 residence, but the Act says, if the tenant is disturbed 
 by his landlord he should be paid for it. Now, that 
 shows he has a property in the farm, and he should be 
 at liberty to sell it to any solvent man, and the tenant 
 ha-? a right all over Ireland to be paid for improvements 
 and disturbance. Therefore the Land Act has made 
 legal a property for him in the soil, and it would be a 
 very small measure to give him power to sell that pro- 
 perty. 
 
 6268. You think he ought to have it under the head 
 of his goodwill in the holding 1 — I think so. 
 
 6269. As to the landlord having the power to dis- 
 possess a tenant who pays a fair rent, what do you 
 think of that? — I don't think he should have the 
 power. My own family and myself have been on one 
 &rm for perhaps 200 years ; within my own memory 
 the estate has had three owners, every field and fence 
 in that farm some memory or association is fastened 
 in my mind, something happened there, or there was 
 some story about it, and I think it would be a far 
 harder thing for me to be turned out of it, than for the 
 landlord, and I think, morally speaking, my right to 
 remain there is as good as a landlord who is a stranger 
 to the farm. 
 
 6270. You think under no circumstances should a 
 landlord resume possession making full compensation 1 
 — I would not say that under some circumstances he 
 might not. A man might be disturbed for public 
 purposes. 
 
 6271. Mr. Shaw. — The county Down I sujipose is 
 thoroughly well farmed ? — As a general rule the greater 
 part is. 
 
 6272. Are the farms large ? — jSTot large. 
 
 6273. And all the outlay, as a general rule, has 
 been made by the tenants ? — A very large proportion 
 of the families in Down are descendants of English 
 and Scotch colonists, who came there two hundred 
 years ago ; since that — and in faith of enj oying the vested 
 interest which was promised as an inducement to onr 
 forefathers to settle in and colonize the country, and 
 they also had to protect and defend those who obtained 
 the confiscated estates — since that everj' dwelling- 
 house, office, bridge, and county building, has been 
 built, every road, drain, and fence, has been made by 
 the money and labour of the tenants. 
 
 0274. And all this is the result of tenant-right? — 
 All this is the result of tenant-right. 
 
 6275. And you think the result of a gradual in- 
 crease of rent would be a great calamity to the 
 country ? — No question of it, in the world. 
 
 6276. .It would unsettle the minds of the people? — 
 Yes ; and if matters had gone on for a short time as 
 they were with us, at the time of the Menown case, 
 we would have been worse than they are in the south 
 of Ireland. 
 
 6277. And there have been cases with you where 
 rents are raised on a change of tenancy ? — Yes. 
 
 6278. Are they raised to any great extent? — As a 
 rule they are not raised very high on the good estates. 
 
 6270. Are there many changes of tenancy on those 
 estates? — Not a great many, but some; after last year 
 there wUl be several. I know at the present moment 
 two or three farms that would be sold, they are in the 
 hands of very poor people at present, and they are 
 afraid to propose a sale for the rise of rent that would 
 be put on, and were it not for the rise of rent, those 
 farms would be transferred to men who are better able 
 to work them. 
 
 6280. I suppose you think this tenant-right would 
 be good for all parts of Ireland? — I am perfectly 
 satisfied of it, and if it were enjoyed all over Ireland 
 the country would be much more prosperous and con ■ 
 tented. 
 
 6281. Are rents high in Down? — I would not say 
 the landlords had been harsh in that way ; there are 
 a few small men who do charge exorbitant rents. 
 
 6282. Supposing this land question was settled, and 
 the right of settling rents by arbitration were given, 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 229 
 
 do you tlimk that would be against the tenants 
 generally or for those in Ulster ? — I think it would be 
 an advantage to the tenants that they had a right to 
 arbitration lapon it. 
 
 6283. The landlord, of course, could say, " My land 
 is let too cheap," and would have a right equally with 
 the tenant to ask for a revaluation 1 — Yes. 
 
 6284. Would there not be a danger of rent being 
 raised I — On some estates there would, but I think a 
 just good landlord could as easily raise them now as 
 then. 
 
 6285. You think they would not meddle with it? 
 — I think they would not. 
 
 6286. But the passing of the Land Act has made 
 them meddle with things they did not meddle with 
 before? — It has, this rising of rent and some other 
 little matters. 
 
 6287. And if they had this power of arbitration the 
 good landlords might say they might as well have 
 these two or three thousand pounds extra? — Yes, they 
 might. 
 
 6288. We have had evidence that the land is let 
 for less than its value excliTding the tenants' improve- 
 ments 1 — I believe if it were possible to hand the land 
 back to the landlords of the county Down in the state 
 in which the predecessors of the tenants received it. 
 It would not be worth one third of the rent now 
 received, notwithstanding the improved times and the 
 growth of towns. 
 
 6289. Kow supposing the question were taken up 
 (-1 this way that you would say to the landlord — 
 " Well you have this right of raising rent, and under 
 
 the new bill we propose to give you the right of Sept. 23, is; 
 increasing rent by arbitration ; what will you take for j,jj._ Joseph 
 this right and be done with it, and give us a perpetuity Perry, 
 at iixed rents?" Would that be availedof by the tenants? 
 We have had evidence of estates where rents were 
 fined down, and fixed for long leases on the giving of 
 fines, would that be availed of to a great extent, by 
 tenants? — A good many tenants would and other 
 men would not see the*advantage of it. 
 
 6290. They would not have the money? — Yes, 
 
 6291. But yi)u think if they had the money they 
 would do it ? — Yes, anything to get security. 
 
 6292. Well Government might say "You don't 
 want to get the fee-simple of that land or banish 
 landlords; you want to keep them; theyare ornamental 
 in the country and we will give you the money to 
 pay for this perpetuity " ? — If we could get perpetuity 
 leases that the rent should not be raised it would be 
 a splendid thing for Ireland, not for the tenants alone, 
 but for the whole community. I'o my mind it would 
 be much better than peasant proprietorship. I would 
 far i-ather have it. 
 
 6293. And better than a sliding scale or valuations 
 every seven or twenty years ? — It would be decidedly 
 the best solution for the land question. I think the 
 tenants are nothing the worse for having a certain 
 amount of rent to pay, it makes them industrious and 
 work, and if that could be arranged it would be the 
 best solution of the question. 
 
 6294. It would save a great deal of trouble in the 
 future ?; — A areat deal. 
 
 Mr. Edward Gardnee, il.b., examined. 
 
 6295. CHAiEMAs-.^What are you? — A solicitor 
 and also rent agent for a small jiroperfcy in the 
 neighbourhood of Downpatrick belonging to Colonel 
 Craig and Mr. Craig-Laurie, two brothers, 
 
 6296. Any other properties? — No, my lord. 
 
 6297. What is the extent oi those properties ? — 
 There are about a dozen tenants. 
 
 6298. Now you have heard the evidence Mr. Perry 
 has given, I think I had better ask you if you would 
 make any observation upon it or give your own views 
 upon the subject? — I agree with what Mr. Periy has 
 stated in reierence to the Ulster custom, but perhaps 
 I may be permitted to add that the occupancy rio-ht 
 has its force mainly owing to the fact the tenants in 
 Ulster improved their farms, and the improvements in 
 the course oi time became so merged in the holding that 
 they ceased to be distinguishable. That would naturally 
 happen, for the iarms being improved side by side they 
 could not be compared, in course of time, one farm 
 with another. 
 
 6299. Then you don't divide it into good-will and 
 improvements, but as arising altogether from improve- 
 ments ? — I don't attempt to say what the origin of the 
 custom was, but I say that it has its main force in 
 that fact. 
 
 6300. Mr. Shaw. — ^They are both there, the good- 
 will and the improvements? — That is what is now 
 called the good-will, the improvement element is the 
 improvements which can be distinguished and pointed 
 out. 
 
 6301. Chairman. — Then do you agree with him 
 generally on the subject of the insecurity felt from 
 restrictions upon the Ulster cu,stom having been intro- 
 duced ? — I do, my lord. On Lord De Ros' estate the 
 restriction is £10 an acre. On Mr. Ward's estate the 
 restriction was to £5 a statute acre, the same as Lord 
 Bangor's, and, as Mr. Perry has stated. Lord Bangor's 
 has been changed by having what was adopted by 
 Colonel Forde upon the Seaforde estate, an arbitration. 
 Colonel Forde himself, in a speech he delivered some 
 few years ago, after the Land Act, at Ballinahinch, 
 ■stated he had himself changed the custom upon his 
 estate by having two arbitrators appointed, one by the 
 outgoing tenant, and one by the incoming ienant, and he 
 
 appointed the umpire, and in the course of a sliort 
 time he changed that practice to appointing one 
 valuator himself alone to settle the amount. U pon 
 the Downpatrick estate there has been no attempt to 
 limit the price, and the amount of the tenant-right has 
 varied from t:'me to time ; sometimes large sums paid 
 upon that estate, but the plan of increasing the rent 
 on occasions of transfers has been adopted upon that 
 estate. There would be no ol^jection to have had 
 regular valuations made at proper intervals, and to 
 have adopted that valuation, but the course resorted 
 to was the opportunity of transfer. That, of course, 
 caused a great deal of discomfort amongst the tenants, 
 and made them feel rather insecure about their tenant- 
 right. The late Mr. Crawford was very strong upon 
 that point ; he set forth the argument very strongly 
 in a correspondence he had with Mr. Brush, the agent 
 for a considerable number of properties in the county 
 Down. It was since the Land Act that plan was adopted. 
 Now, there is the case of Mrs. M'Kee, Quelle, iu the 
 neighbourhood of Downpatrick : she had sold in Mr. 
 Ker's time to David M'Glonnon, and the rent was 
 raised lis., it appeared to have been for the pur- 
 pose of making the rent an even sum of £30, and some 
 short time after that M'Glennon sold the same farm 
 to William Lascelles, and at that time an increase of 
 £5 was put to the rent, making it £35, and he sold a 
 fhort time after that to a man called M'MuUen, and 
 there was an increase then made of 1 0.9. to the rent. 
 
 6302. The objection is to the rising of the rent at 
 all at the time of the sale ? — At the time of transfers. 
 
 6303. And that custom has crept in since the Land 
 Act 1 — Since the Land Act. This is upon the Down 
 estate. 
 
 6304. You don't mean that there is any special 
 hard case as to the amount of rent being put on, if 
 there iSj give it, otherwise the fact the general rule is 
 enough for us to take down. The objection is to 
 the general rule? — The hardship was very great in 
 some cases. 
 
 6305. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any case where the 
 advance of rent practically eat away the tenant-right ? 
 — Encroached materially upon it, I cannot say it eat 
 it away entirely. There is the case of Mrs. Stitt — she 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Gardner, ll.u. 
 
230 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Gardner, LL.B. 
 
 was married again to a gentleman called Gardner at 
 this time ; that was a farm that contained about 
 seventy-three Irish acres, and it was held at a rent of 
 £114 7s. llc^. It was put up for sale, and £2,900 
 was bid for it. It happened at that time that 
 the Down, estate — Mr. Ker's — was in the Landed 
 Estates Court, and a receiver was in charge; so 
 that the matter had to come before the Eeceiver- 
 Master in the Court of Chancery, and he interfered 
 very considerably with the operation of the customs 
 that had been practised on Mr. Ker's estate, and 
 insisted on proposals being sent in, and set aside the 
 sale that had been made, and increased the rent to 
 £158. The sale after that realized £2,000. 
 
 6306. A loss of £900? — That second sale included 
 a threshing machine and a boiler, and some manure 
 that was on the premises, I suppose about £50 would 
 be the measure for that. 
 
 6307. That was under the Court of Chancery ? — 
 Yes, upwards of £900 was lost in that way. In the 
 present landlord's time there was a farm belonging to 
 Moses Porter, containing sixty-one Irish acres, held at 
 a rent of £108, and that rent on a sale was increased 
 to £1 35. He considered that he lost by that change, a 
 sum of £300. So that the hardship appears in this 
 particular case, arising just ou.t, of the particular time 
 when the change takes place. 
 
 6308. Chairman. — Have you any other specimen 
 case? — There was a case occurred on the Ardglass 
 estate recently, of a man called Grogan ; there was 
 15s. an acre added in that case. 
 
 Mr. Perry. — That was an old lease. 
 
 6309. Mr. Shaw. — How much was the rent before ? 
 ■. — Mr. Gardner. — The purchaser refused to take it 
 even at a redu.oed price. 
 
 6310. Chairman. — Was it a fair time for a valu- 
 ation % — Mr. Ferry. — It was. 
 
 6311. Mr. Shaw. — Was not that ahigh increase ? — 
 Mr. Perry — ^Well, it was. I made inquiries from some 
 of his neighbours, and they told me what I tell you. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. — There are some cases here on the 
 Castleward estate, where the agreement was signed 
 admitting the purchase-money was £5 an acre ; that 
 is Lord Bangor's propeity. I have not a copy of the 
 £5 agreement, but they signed it that the sale was for 
 £5 an acre. 
 
 6312. Chairman. — In that case was the payment 
 really more than £5 % — Oh yes, my lord, in all cases. 
 
 [Mr. Perry produced a copy of lease]. 
 
 6313. Chairman. — This is what the new purchaser 
 had to sign ] — Yes. On the Finnebrogue estate 
 tenant-right formerly existed. Mr. Perry x-eferred to 
 that estate. 
 
 6314. Who is the landlord ?— Mr. Maxwell. We 
 have instances in 1823 of a sale, at £12 per acre. 
 James Cochrane, purchased from William Wilson, at 
 that price, twenty-eight acres, and there is a letter of 
 the then Mr. Maxwell, uncle of the present owner, to a 
 tenant in which he says, " you must be prepared to 
 give as much as another for the land." The tenant 
 was then applying for three acres adjoining him, which 
 were then to be sold. 
 
 6315. Has there been any interference with the 
 right? — Yes, my lord. That continued up to 1836, 
 as far as I have been able to learn. There are several 
 other instances. The case of Morrison's purchasing, 
 John Napier's purchasing, John Jennings purchas- 
 ing, Piobin Bassett purchasing from Mrs. W. Robin- 
 son, all free cases. After that period there was a re- 
 striction of £10 imposed, and in 1838, a man called 
 John Cavan, was limited to the payment of £10 in his 
 purchase. Shortly after a man called John Gray was 
 also limited to £10, to purchase twenty-two acres. 
 Sometime after that there was a limit to £5. 
 
 6316. What was the date of the £5 limit do you 
 know ? — T suppose it lasted till— 
 
 Mr. Pfrry. — It only lasted for a year or two, two or 
 three farms changed at £5, and then it was only 
 what he chose himself. 
 
 6317. On the whole there have been several re- 
 
 strictions on the tenantry 1 — It was before the Land 
 Act this £5 was abolished. 
 
 6318. Then since the Land Act? — He disallowed 
 the practice altogether. Part of this farm that John 
 Gi'ay purchased in 1838, it was twenty-two acres, he 
 had increased it, and it passed under his will to a man 
 called Gilchriest, he was offered when giving it up and 
 going abroad, by a Mr. Allen, £1,350, and he was 
 only allowed to give £900 in the shape of improve- 
 ments. 
 
 6319. What was the date ol that? — Since the Land 
 Act. I would say within the last six years. There 
 was an attempt in Ballybrannagh, with Adam 
 Cavan, he was selling the tenant-right in about ten 
 acres, there was £200 offered for that, but Mr. 
 Maxwell, would not allow the sale at all. 
 
 6320. What was the date of that ?— Mr. Gardner 
 — About four years ago, it was one of his best tenants 
 who proposed to buy. 
 
 6321. Then you say he has taken away the tenant- 
 right altogether ? — Mr. Perry — He has, my lord. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. — I don't say that as a matter of law, 
 my lord; but that has been the practice on his 
 estate. 
 
 6322. You mean as a matter of law he may not be 
 able to do so ? — Mr. Gardner — He may not be able 
 to sustain it. 
 
 Mr. Perry. — Every tenant on his estate is afraid 
 to go to law with him on the subject. 
 
 Mr. Gardner. — I might mention the case of a 
 tenant called Bingham on the Einnebrogue estate. 
 He purchased from a Mrs. Robinson in 1854, and 
 his deed of purchase expressed her tenant-right in 
 it as being sold. The rent was at £60, and the 
 farm was of such a nature and such condition that 
 Mrs. Robinson was not able to maintain herself and 
 pay the rent, had it not been that she had a small 
 independence she would not have been able to live 
 upon the farm at all. She parted with it, as I have 
 said, to Mr. Bingham in 1854, and shortly after that 
 he was noticed for an increase of rent to £62 Ws., 
 which was to date from the November of 1854. It 
 contained 120 statute acres, and he describes it as hav- 
 ing been only ai-able in spots at this time, a great part 
 of it consisted of rocks and whins, and he could not 
 say that more than half of it w-as arable, and that not 
 in continuous parts; 
 
 6323. You see when we go as far back as 1854 
 people would say things have bettered since then, 
 and the same thing would not be done now, and the 
 great thing is to come up to the present time ? — I 
 am coming up to the proposal that was made to hun 
 in the present time. In 1863 there was 16 acres of 
 unreclaimed la,nd added with an increased rent of £7 
 10s. added, and in 1864 there was an agreement with 
 a map for a lease for sixty-one years, the only con- 
 ditioa being the building of a dwelling-house. Siace 
 that Mr. Bingham built the dwelling-house and 
 extensive farm buildings. He also reclaimed this 
 land. The full estimated value, as a rent, had been 
 something like 5s. He has expended vipon that an 
 average ot between £40 for some of it, to £20 for 
 other parts of it, actual expenditure in reclaiming that 
 land. He has reclaimed a great portion of it now. 
 There is still some of it to be done. But in reference 
 to all these improvements he had some conversations 
 with Major Maxwell about an extension of the time 
 of the lease, and he proposed, in 1876, to give him an 
 extension for 61 years from that date. That lay over 
 until 1879, when a proposal was made to grant the lease 
 for the extended time. Well, this was the form of lease 
 that was proposed to be given to him after all these 
 improvements, which he estimated at something like 
 £3,000, actual expenditure. " In consideration of 
 the rent and the term of years granted, the whole im- 
 provements to become the property of the landlord at 
 the expiration of the lease without any compensation 
 being paid therefor, anything contained in the Land 
 Act of 1870, or any other Act oi Parliament now or 
 hereafter to be made, to the contrary, notwithstand- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 231 
 
 ing." The rent was £70 that he liad been paying, 
 •which he considered a very full rent indeed, so that 
 he had no advantage as far as the rent was con- 
 cerned, and after all those improvements that he had 
 made upon the place, which certainly could not have 
 been exhausted after any length of time at all, unless 
 the cultivation of the farm had been neglected alto- 
 gether, they were to become the property of the 
 landlord. [Copy of proposal handed in.] 
 
 6324. In consideration of the sixty-one years' 
 lease 1 — Yes, my lord. He proposed to suspend 
 his power of confiscation for that period of sixty-one 
 years. Then it contained provisions against assignment, 
 sub-letting, and also reserving game, rabbits, and 
 hares to the landlord. There was a case upon the 
 Kilmorey estates, in the barony of Mourne, possessing 
 some interest as it was brought principally for the pur- 
 pose of establishing tenant-right, of sho\ving the exist- 
 ence of tenant-right upon these estates. There had been 
 a case previously heard, the tenant was Thompson, in 
 which they succeeded in showing there was no tenant- 
 right upon the Killnorey estates. There was nothing 
 but improvements allowed for ; however, the case to 
 which I wish to refer was brought by the executors 
 of a woman named Mary O'Neill who died without 
 leaving any family or near relatives. She had a small 
 farm of about ten acres on the mountain side, not 
 very valuable. But in that case the Farmers' Associar 
 tion gave assistan.ce for the discovery of evidence. A 
 groat mass of evidence was adduced, and the tenant- 
 right was fially established in evidence, the agent 
 of the property, nevertheless, gave evidence to the 
 contrary, and he tried to show that the allowance 
 had been entirely for improvements, and that there 
 was no such thing as good will. However, the 
 Chairman who heard the case came to the conclu- 
 sion upon all the evidence that there was tenant- 
 right. The agent also stated that in the case of a 
 tenant dying without leaving any family, son or 
 daughter, succeeding him, that the projierty reverted 
 to the landlord. 
 
 6325. The improvements and all 1 — Yes, my lord ; 
 the whole. 
 
 6326. Mr. Shaw. — Was there an appeal in that 
 case ? — Mr. Perry. — No ; they acquiesced in the de- 
 cision of the Barrister. 
 
 6326a. Mr. Gardner. — There was a proposal about 
 the amount of compensation that should be awarded, 
 and the solicitor for the landlord offered a sum of 
 money which we considered very much below the real 
 value, but as we had established the principle we were 
 willing to accept the money as there would be no 
 appeal, and the decision stands law and regulates the 
 practice of the estate. I should mention that on the 
 Londonderry and Crawford estates the practice has 
 been quite free with the tenants. There was an 
 effort to have a form of lea.?e for yearly tenancies. 
 
 Some came out just immediately before the passing of 
 the Land Act and they were xised afterwards. 
 
 6327. On whose property was this? — Mr. Gardner. — 
 This was one upon the Ardglass property. [Copy 
 handed in]. Mr. Lyle was the agent, and it contains 
 the provisions that not only should the tenancy be 
 determined by six months' notice, but — 
 
 " Shall also determine iipon my death, without any notice 
 whatever," the death of the tenimt, " and it is expressly 
 understood that when giving up possession of said farm and 
 premises upon the determination of my tenancy by notice 
 from either party or upon my death, I am not, or my rep- 
 resentatives, incase of my decease, are not to be entitled to 
 an,y compensation or allowance for wliat is usually known 
 as tenant-right or for improvements, save and except such 
 pcrmaMent improvements as shall be made by me under 
 special written agreements hereafter made between us." 
 And there was a reservation of game also in that 
 agreement. 
 
 0328. I suppose that is very much the usual form 
 of yeai'ly agreements 1 — Oh, no ; this was a new thing. 
 They had no writings at all before the Land Act. 
 This was an agreement {produced) upon Lord Bangor's 
 property that was presented to the tenant. 
 
 6329. In that lease is there a bar to the claim for 
 compensation? — The form contains the following clause : 
 
 '' It is expressly understood that the said farm and premises 
 ai-e not subject to any custom or usage known or called the 
 Ulster tenant-right custom, and that upon any determina- 
 tion of the tenancy hereby created, I shall not be entitled to 
 make any claim in respect of any such custom." 
 
 [Copy handed in]. 
 
 6330. Were they used on changes of tenancy only 
 or were they forced on the tenants throughout the 
 estate ? — This was a regular form to be adopted on all 
 changes of tenancies. I might mention, perhaps, that 
 Major Crawford was proposing a lease for his tenants 
 of a veiy liberal character, in which there is an express 
 declaration that the tenant-right shall be preserved. 
 [Copy handed in]. The Dufferin lease was a very 
 stringent one, and it provided that on the death of a 
 tenant intestate the proj)erty should revert to the 
 landlord. 
 
 6331. Is there anything else — anything in reference 
 to what the practice has been since the Land Act 1 — 
 There was Mrs. Hughes's case, which occurred in 1874. 
 She had died, and there was a nephew who was en- 
 titled to receive the farm ; ho was a child, I believe ; 
 his brother-in-law administered to the effects, and 
 Captain John Magee offered £800 for the farm, but 
 the agent. Captain Ward, would not accept him as a 
 tenant, and a man called Orr got the farm. After 
 much bargaining Orr consented to give £575 ; the 
 loss in that case was £225. 
 
 6332. Do you agree with Mr. Perry it would be a 
 desirable thing to establish a security of tenure with 
 fair rents throughout Ireland 1 — I do, my lord. 
 
 6333. Do you know much of other parts of Ireland 
 beside the north 1 — Practically I do not. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Gardner, I-L.B. 
 
 6334. Chairman. — Where do you live ? — I live in 
 39, Cromwell-road, Belfast, at present. I was formerly 
 living in Downpatrick. 
 
 6335. And in what profession? — No profession, I 
 am living privately, I formerly belonged to this part 
 of the country, and went out to America, and returned 
 owing to bad health. I was acting at the time of Mrs. 
 Hughes's sale as honorary secretary of the Down 
 Farmers' Association. The executors came to me 
 when Mr. Ward refused them liberty to sell to Mr. 
 Magee, and they asked me what they should do. I 
 told them to write to Captain Ward, stating that they 
 had called with me as secretary of the association, and 
 that as they were members of it, the association was 
 bound to take up their case and fight it out. They 
 did so, Mr. Ward gave them no reply. They called 
 on m'e about two weeks after, and told me they had 
 received no answer froin him. I was then sufferina; 
 
 Mr. William James Moore examined. 
 
 Mr. William 
 
 from my eyes, so I asked them to sit down and Avrite ■^^™^^ Moore. 
 a lettei-, that I dictated to Mr. Ward, and sign my 
 name, stating that they had called upon me as the 
 secretary of the association, and they being members, 
 I would be obliged to take action against him, and 1 
 would advise him to settle it if possible, and not go 
 to laAVj and that if they did not come to terms, we would 
 fight it oitt. After receiving that letter, they came tome 
 four days afterwards asking me what they should do, 
 I advised them to try and come to terms if they possibly 
 could, and not go to law unless they were obliged to. 
 Mr. Ward, -wTote asking them to meet him and Mr. Orr. 
 They went to the place,and Mr.Ward,aftersome conver- 
 sation, took them out, and pointed to the h cap of manure, 
 and also to the threshing machine, and said to Orr " I 
 don't care if you give them £200 for that, if you sion 
 that you bought according to the ofiice rule, £5 an 
 acre," and he left them there, and the sale was con- 
 
232 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sep*. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 James Moore. 
 
 eluded. The full amount was £575, although they 
 were offered £800 in the first place. I have this from 
 Captain Magee, and the executors, and when the 
 executors came back and told me what was done, to 
 save law, I advised them acquiesce. The next case I 
 wish to refer to is John Menown's. He held under a 
 lease, some short time before the life of the lease died 
 Mr. Beauclerc sent his bailiff to Mr. Gilchriest, an 
 adjoining farmer, to ask hini to meet Mr. Beauclerc and 
 an Englishman on the farm that day. He went with 
 him, and they walked about the farm, and saw ilr. 
 Menown, and before he left the Englishman offered 
 him £1,000, and asked him would he sell. There had 
 been no talk of sale by Meno'vvn. Menown said lie 
 would not, that he had lived on the farm, and his 
 forefathers before him, and he was the last of his name, 
 and he would wish to die on it. This Englishman was in- 
 sisting on his taking £1,000. Menown walked away 
 and left them. Two clays after the bailiff was 
 sent back to say they would give him £1,500 for 
 the farm. He refused to sell. Thomas Gilchriest, 
 the man that was vnth him, called upon a cousin of 
 Menown, when he heard this, and asked him was 
 Menown going to sell. He said he had not heard it. 
 He asked him to go and offer £1,500 for it, if he 
 would sell it. Menown said he would not. When 
 the lease dropped his brother-in-law and cousin went 
 to Mr. Lyle, the agent, and told him the life had 
 dropped, and asked him to put on a fair rent. Mr. 
 Lyle's reply was that he would not put any rent on, 
 that Mr. Beauclerc wanted the farm himself, and he 
 would mention no rent. After that again, they called 
 upon the agent Mr. Lyle, and asked him to put some 
 rent upon it, that he could either sell or remain. He 
 declined again, and asked hini what he would take for the 
 place. His brother-in-law said they would take £1,000, 
 rather than go to law with the landlord. Lyle refused, 
 and asked them to make their proposal in writing. 
 They refused that. Then tliey asked what would they 
 give him, and he said, a small annuity and the game- 
 keeper's house I happened to call upoai Meno'W'n a few 
 days afterwards, and heard this conversation, I asked him 
 what they were going to do about it. Jlr. Corry was 
 an old man, and Menown was in bad health, and 
 they said they supposed they would have to take what 
 was offered, and not go to law. I said that would 
 never do. After that, Mr. Lyle served them with an 
 ejectment, a notice to quit, and before the Quarter 
 Sessions, I called upon him again, and they told 
 me of this. I said I woxild fight the case for them. 
 I then started to get up evidence, and got up all the 
 evidence I possibly could, had it brought before the 
 barrister, and he gave an award of £1,400. "When 
 it came before him, this Giichriest swore he would 
 pay £1,400, down for it. After that they appealed, 
 then Judge Barry took a long time to decide tipon 
 it, and finally said no tenant-riglit was proved in 
 that case. It was then sent back to the Chairman 
 of Quarter Sessions, to givi.^ an award for improve- 
 ments, and his award was £530 6s. 6d., although 
 I know well, and everyone else it v.-as near £2,000. 
 
 (3336. Were the law proceedings very exjiensive? — 
 The lawyers' bill and witnesses was £352 16s. 6d., so 
 that leftMinown£177 9s. lit/., for his wliole property. 
 I wish to say about the trouble of getting up evidence 
 in the case, in summoning witnesses, I had to summon 
 some of them myself when in their beds, the ofiiccr of 
 the Court could not get them. Two of them offered 
 £25each not to summon them, one ofi'ered £20, two of 
 them offered £15, and one of them said he would pay any 
 fine rather than go to give evidence against his landlord. 
 G337. Do you think the expense ot proceedings in 
 coiirt deters, particularly the poor tenants from 
 contesting any question? — Most decidedly. Well, 
 there is another case I wish to state on the same 
 estates, that is Samuel Swale's, he held a small farm 
 luidor a lease from IMr. Beauclerc at a rent of a 
 guinea an acre, he pui-chased anotlier farm adjoining 
 that as a yearly tenant. 
 
 0338. What was tlic date of this case ?— Some time 
 
 before 1860. The man died, and I could not get at the 
 papers, but my brother was one of the executors. 
 
 6339. You see before the Land Act, tenants had no 
 remedy t — ISTo, my lord. 
 
 6340. Therefore this ease does not so much apply as 
 cases since the Land Act, our inquiry is whether the 
 Land Act is sufficient to protect tenants, the intention 
 of the Land Act was it should 1 — In this case when 
 Mr. Lyle came in to be agent, he raised the rent of the 
 tenancy at wUl, so that it brought both farms up to 
 two guineas an acre. That seemed a very hard case, 
 but there was no remedy for it. The next case is on 
 the same estate that I wish to mention, that is the case 
 of Hugh Christian. 
 
 6341. What is the date of that case? — His father 
 held under lease, and was the life in the lease, and he 
 died in 1841, they paid 15s. an acre rent. In 1841 at 
 the death of the father, the rent was raised to £2 10s. 
 an acre, in 1846, the rent reduced to 30s. an acre and it 
 remained so for two years. In 1848, he raised it to 
 £2, and Griffith's valuatioii of that farm is 30s. an acre. 
 
 6342. Well, then on that property the custom has 
 been for the landlord to vary the rent whenever lie 
 chose? — Yes. 
 
 6343. And they have continued that since the Land 
 Act, have they '! — Yes, my lord. Tliis man was 
 obliged to sell, found he could not hold it, and spoke to 
 the agent about selling, the agent wished to give it to 
 the next neighbour and spoke about leaving it to 
 arbitration. He was willing to do that, and they 
 appointed the arbiti-ators. They awarded £477 9s. for 
 the land, and there was \\'lieat land and seed, and all 
 that they gave £27 for. After he had auctioned 
 everything and sold all, Mr. Lyle tells Liui " I will not 
 give you the arbitration," after he had accepted his 
 o^Ti arbitration. This man could not retake the place 
 because he had nothing to start with, everything was 
 sold, therefore he lost this and he lost £130 which Mr. 
 Llye deducted from him. There is a case of my 
 brother's on Mr. Ward's estate, he purchased in IS78, 
 twenty-six acres from a cousin, the rent was £2 an acre, 
 he gave £15 an acre for the land, and j\Ir. Ljde was 
 agent and raised the rent 4s. a Conyngham acre after 
 the sale, although the part he purchased was held under 
 a joint receipt with the other land at £2, the other 
 remains still at £2 and this, that was sold is now 
 £2 4s. 
 
 6344. Mr. Sii.w.— When did that take place?— 
 1878. 
 
 6345. CiiAiEWAX — You see all these cases establisli 
 the piinciple that tenant-right has been infringed if at 
 all long before the Land Act ? — And they have been 
 infringing it since. In this case when my brother pur- 
 chased from my cousin, his own brother refused to buy 
 it at any price, but this man owed my brother some 
 monej'-, and he wanted to get his money out of it 
 There is another case on Count Russell's property. 
 
 6346. Is this a later case? — The last sale of the 
 farm was in 1878. I will give j-ou the dates and the 
 rents since 1851. The owner of it, John Starkie, 
 brother of the Rev. Mr. Sfcarkie, in 1851 held twenty- 
 four acres at 27s. Gd. an acre. In 1852 the Rev. Mr. 
 Starkie purchased for his brother twenty acres more, 
 the rent was then raised to 30s. over all. In 18G0 the 
 i-ent was raised to 33s. lOd., and in 1878 it was raised 
 to £2 2s. 6d. Griffith's valuation of the whole was 
 £67, and the present rent amounts to £93 10s. 
 
 6347. And has the tenant done a great deal of im- 
 pi-ovements himself in the meantime ? — I don't think 
 there is a farm of its size has better improvement.s. I 
 have not seen it much myself, but I was at the auction, 
 and I heard piarties about buying say that they never 
 saw a farm of the size with' better buildings. 
 
 6348. And the increased rent was put on the tenant's 
 improvements ? — Yes. The Rev. Mr. Starkie made 
 most of the improvements. It used to be an old saying 
 " If you have a priest in the family you are sure to 1h^ 
 rich," but here the family was made poor, ( )n the 
 same property George Russell of Clogher, wished 
 to sell a small property of seven acres, valuation £14, 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 233 
 
 yearly rent £15 is., lie sold it at £175. The ai^eut 
 -would not accept the tenant at the old rent, but 
 increased the rent by £2 5s. lOd. on account of the 
 change of tenancy, and the tenant was obliged 
 to throw off £50 to induce the purchaser to take the 
 holding. I would wish to say a word about Mr. 
 MulhoUand's property on the Down estate. When 
 Mr. Mulholland had purchased this property, before 
 he got possession in 1873, Mrs. Hunter wished to 
 sell and had bills out to sell her farm. Mr. Lisle, the 
 agent, served her with notice that Mr. Mulholland 
 would not allow sales on his property. He was 
 buying Mr. Ker's estate. Her son showed me tlie 
 notice. I told him that there was always free sale 
 on ilr. Ker's property, and that Mr. Mulholland had 
 not got possession yet, so that he could not legally 
 serve her. Mr. Lisle then got Mr. Mulholland to 
 serve her with a notice out of the Court of Chancery 
 prohibiting the sale. I met the badiff first and he 
 asked me what was I going to do in the case. I told him 
 there was always free sale on that estate, and we woidd 
 insist upon it, and I would fight the case. I also told Jilr. 
 Lisle that the associationwould take up the case that he 
 could not prevent the sale of the property. He then 
 allowed the sale rather than go to law, because he knew 
 he had no grounds. The property was sold to Mr. 
 Chambers for £725, he was accepted as tenant, and when 
 he went in to sign they told him they would raise the 
 rent. He then declined to accept the sale, and she had 
 to submit to a private sale to Mr. Hutton, and there 
 were private papers I could not get hold of. 
 
 6349. Mr. Shaw. — And what increase of rent was 
 I^ut on 1 — I don't know. I never could get at it, it was 
 done with private papers. There was another case on 
 the Castleward estate I would like to mention. Mr. 
 Arthur Atkinson, of KUlough, died in 1873, leaving 
 a will that his property was to be sold and divided 
 among his children. "When they spoke to Mr. Ward 
 about liberty to sell, he refused, saying they were town- 
 parks. They went to Mr. Wamock, their lawyer, and 
 he spoke to Mr. Ward, but he still refvised. One 
 of the executors came to me, and I told him, as in 
 Lightbody's case, that I had plenty of evidence to show 
 
 there was no restriction on sale on the property, and, 
 as he was also a member of the association we would 
 have to tight the case for him. I saw the executor 
 some days after, and he told me that he had informed 
 Mr. Ward that the association would take up the 
 case. After that there was a letter came to one of 
 the executors stating they would allow them to sell by 
 the tenant signing that restriction, and finally they 
 agreed to allow the sale at £10 an acre, instead of £5, 
 but at first he tried all ht- could, and had it not been 
 for the association I don't think he would have allowed 
 any sale. There is one thing I want to say about this 
 arbitration. I think they should be gentlemen ap- 
 pointed in the neighbourhood of the sale who know 
 something about the land. I don't like these profes- 
 sional men. In IMinown's case, they brought down 
 Mr. Gale, of Brassington and Gale, who has a great 
 name. I got a man to watch him ; he came into one of 
 the fields, and stopped there, as he admitted, not more 
 than a quarter of an hour, and that was all the valua- 
 tion. When I got the lawyers to mention this he came 
 back a second time to revalue the lands, and he walked 
 down one part of the farm and up the other, and he 
 admitted on oath at the trial he was not over three 
 quarters of an hour on the farm, and there were three 
 fields he never was in. I think if there are to be arbi- 
 trators they ought to be men who know the place, know 
 the soil, and the quality of the soil, who live in the 
 neighbourhood, and they should be sworn. 
 
 6350. Chairman. — But a man that is vised to land 
 knows the quality if he goes upon it, and tries the 
 quality of the soil ? — I don't agree with you. 
 
 6351. We were told to-day the arbitration is all in 
 favour of the tenant, for the tenant appoints a man 
 who is partial to himself and the landlord appoints a 
 man whose character is to give a real fair rent, and 
 the umpire then comes and splits the difference 
 between them 1 — I think there is no man who knows 
 the quality of the soil as well as a farmer, and where 
 there is an estate for sale that the tenants should get 
 the px-eference, and that the Government should 
 advance four-fifths of the purchase-money, at three 
 and a half per cent, interest. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 James lloore. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Murray, 
 
 6352. Mr. Shaw. — ^There is an attempt made now, 
 I believe, to raise the rent all through the property 1 
 — Oh, yes, to my cost. 
 
 6353. Chairman. — Is it a new custom? — Oh,yes,my 
 lord, on the change of tenancies. In the deceased Lord 
 Annesley's time wehad very little to complain of in that. 
 
 6354. Mr. Shaw. — But now there is a proposal to 
 revalue the whole property, is there not? — Oh, yes. 
 
 6355. Chairman. — Will you just tell us what cases 
 you wish to mention 1 — I will give you a sample of a 
 few, I took a few from each townland : — Tullaree — ■ 
 James Devlin, rent in 1878, £5 2s. ; present rate, 
 £12 5s. ; Government valuation, £5 10s. John Morgan, 
 old rent, £7 4s. ; new rent, £16 ; Government valua- 
 tion on land £9 10s., on houses £2 10s. Daniel O'Hare, 
 old rent, £6 13s. 9d. ; new rent, £11 10s. ; Govern- 
 ment valuation on land £6 15s., on houses, £3 10s. 
 On Lord Annesley's estate, as a, general thing, there 
 are very fine houses. Donald Devlin, old rent, 
 £4 18s. IM. ; new, £11; Government valuation, 
 £5 6s. Slievinisky — Daniel Smith, rent in 1860, 
 £5 5s. ; there was a lease up to j^'iis, it was then raised 
 to £8 14s. ; present rent demanded, £13. Benran — 
 Alexander Edgar, old rent, £3 5s. ; new rent, £6 ; 
 Government valuation, £2 10s. Backaderry — Thomas 
 Shilliday, old rent, £8 10s. ; new rent, £16. I am not 
 able to give his valuation, although I was in the office 
 when the man refused to pay this rent ; he has been 
 served vfith a notice to quit as well as niyself. 
 
 63)6. ilr. Shaw. — Have they all been served with 
 notices to quit 1 — Jtfo, it was at last November this took 
 place. It was marked in the receipt the advance it 
 was going to be. 
 
 6357. Chairman. — What was the reason of the 
 notices to quit — because you declined to pay 1 — Yes. 
 
 6358. Mr. SiiAW. — You insisted on getting your 
 old receipt 1 — Yes ; I insisted on getting my old receipt. 
 
 Castlewellan, examined. 
 
 6359. Did you purchase your holding yourself? — 
 No, I succeeded my father. 
 
 6360. You were therefor generations? — I believe 
 we were there for 100 years ; my grandfather had a 
 lease of 556 acres on the mountain of Slieve Croob, it 
 was portioned off among five sons, and he fenced it and 
 built houses. We reclaimed as far as we could go up 
 the mountain; £100 was the rent he took it at, the 
 rent that is on it now, with the new increase, will 
 amount to about £300. 
 
 6361. On this mountain land? — Yes. 
 
 6362. That you have reclaimed? — I hold ten acres 
 of it, and I paid £2 for those ten acres up to 
 the lease dropping. I made very good improvements on 
 it. When the lease dropped my rent was raised to £9 4s. 
 
 6363. Chairman. — When did the lease drop? — ■ 
 About twenty years ago. A valuator put £10 then 
 on it. I went into the office upon the 8th of Decem- 
 ber to ask them if they could tell what the new 
 valuation was. The clerk in the office told me that 
 mine was £10, and that I had not much to say, he 
 said. " I have paid one very hard rise," said I, " in 
 my day, and 1 think I will not pay any more." That 
 was on the 8th, and on the 10th I got a letter from 
 Mr. Shaw, the agent, dated the 10th, telling me that 
 the future rent of my holding at Slieviniskcy would 
 be £11. I went in to pay my rent and tendered 
 my old rent, and told them to give me a receipt 
 as usual that I would not submit to the rise. I 
 first laid down the letter and said " Mr. Shaw is 
 that letter for me?" Yes," he said, "it is for you." 
 T said " I thought it wi,s for the other Patrick Murray," 
 who has more land tnan I have. I said, ' ' ily rent 
 was £10 on Monday, how does it occur it is £11 on 
 Thursday ?" He said, " That is the rent you must pay 
 Lord Amiesley." " Well," said I, " that is the rent I 
 
 2H 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Murray. 
 
234 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sfj:i.p-^, 1S8: 
 
 Tilr I'iitritk 
 Murray. 
 
 won't pay Lord Aiuiosley." I left the money lying 
 tliere and asked him was he going to give me a receipt 
 in the usual form. He said, " You must comply with 
 the rules of the estate," " I am paying you, Mr. Shaw, 
 all I promised," said I, " and if you don't give me a 
 receipt in the usual form I v^ill take my money back 
 and buy Champions with it, that may pay two years 
 rent next year." "You are not willing then," said 
 he, " to pay a fair and just rent." " I am willing, 
 Tilr. Shaw," said I, "to pay a fair and just rent, and 
 believes I am already paying it. Is that the rent, 
 Mr. Waters," said I, (he was the valuator), " is that 
 the rent he puts on me." " That is the rent I ask 
 you to pay and you must pay." It was a £10 note 
 and he said, " I will hold the money, Patrick, v/hen I 
 have it." I said, " You will give me a receipt in the 
 ■usual form, I will promise no more than I am able to 
 jiivf." He done so, and threatened a great deal. On 
 the 2nd oi February he sent the bailifi' to me who told 
 me Mr, Shaw wished me over to the office to settle 
 about the rent. I said, " I have my rent paid." I 
 went over, and this very man Shilliday and his fathe:: • 
 in-law v.'ere in the office trying to arrange about their 
 rent. I heurd him telling them " If you don't pay it 
 I will serve you with a process, of ejectment before 
 three months and put you out." Shilliday complained 
 hard it was not fair, and that he would, not pay it. 
 He has got a notice to quit. However, '' Murraj^," 
 said he, "I am glad to see you." "Thank your 
 honour." " I was just going to let you knov/ I 
 am going to return you.r name for eviction." " You 
 might have better news for m.e," said I. '■' You are 
 not prepared to pay a fair and just rent, and I am 
 going tp return you for eviction." " You need not 
 return that with it," said I, " I believe I am paying a 
 fair and just rent. The valuator put only £10 on me, 
 ijnd you put £11." "What is your valuation," said 
 he. " I know," said I, " what my valuation is for 
 house and alL" " I shall see," said he, "your valua- 
 tion exclusive of house is £9 lOs., well, £9 10s. and 
 one-third added would make £13, that is a fair rent. 
 " Well," said I, " that is a strange way of making a 
 fair rent." " Well, that is a fair rent," said he, " will 
 you pay that " " I will not," said I, " Mr. Shaw." 
 I still insisted on him to show me, because I went to 
 Waters and got the valuation from him. Said I " Is 
 that Waters' valuation." "We are not going," said 
 lie, " by Waters' valuation." " Well, why did you 
 employ him," said I. " We did not employ him." 
 " Well, I am sin-e the tenants did not employ him, 
 that was not what Lord Annesley told us when we 
 went on a deputation to the castle to him." He said 
 then, " I ha-ve employed Waters and given him certain 
 instructions." Ho just Ciuno from behind his desk and 
 opened the door. I said, " I am going, Mr. Shaw, I 
 ■\vould not ha\o been here only on your invitation." 
 He said, " You arc a ruffian, sir, and an agitator." " I 
 am neither, Sir. Shaw," said I. "At one time," said 
 he. "I had a very high opinion of you." "Sorry you 
 have not the same still," said I. " Quite the contrary," 
 said he. " I fancy," said I, "if I gave you £13 for 
 that bit of land you \yould have the same opinion still." 
 "I suppose if I asked to take it off you, you w-ould 
 not give it at £16," said he. " You are quite right, I 
 would not give £500 worth for £3 a year." " I have 
 been ofi'ered £50 per acre by a solvent tenant," said I. 
 " You may take it." Agent said, " I'll be glad to put you 
 out and bo shut of you." " Thanks to Gladstone and his 
 Act you. cannot put me out without payment." So he 
 and I parted, and I have my notice to quit to give up in 
 November. There was a large number from each 
 townland met Lord Annesley in a deputation in June 
 at the castle. He gave us a very fine dinner, and 
 took us to his drawing-room and discussed the matter, 
 and the tenants would not give in to an increase. 
 Tlioy pleaded they were not able to pay more, and it 
 ^vi\:i true ; pleaded it was a queer time to raise rents. 
 He said liladstone's Act had robbed the landlords of 
 Ireland of thirty millions of money, and it was very 
 natural they would recoup themselves in some manner, 
 and gave as much as that as a reason for an increased 
 
 rent. He tllf>n Imnrl^^rl rMi-f. m 
 
 a rvvnam an 
 
 f ftii- lie +r. c 
 
 6331. Mr. Shaw.— Did Lord Annesley mention 
 Waters as the valuator ?^-0h, surolj'. "Waters had 
 his valuation completed at this ■ time. It was after 
 the tenants refused and refused to sign that agreement 
 which, I believe, would. coiafiscate all our right.s. 
 
 6365. How many tenants agreed to the new rents? 
 — A great many, I believe. The tenants are poor 
 and afraid oi getting into litigation. 
 
 63G6. I suppose the advance has not been on the 
 whole estate in the same proportion as those you have 
 mentioned?- — It is generally on the improving tenants. 
 As a rule it is a very rough estate, not one-half of it 
 is laboured ;, it is mountainy land. 
 
 6367. Ci-IAIEMAN. — I see there is a clause in this 
 agreement which saves the tenant-right for the tenant ? 
 — You must go to the landlord and get his consent in 
 writing, and if a man becomes insolvent or a sheriff 
 sei:ies on the place he loses it. A man that signed that 
 agreement would not get a barrel of flax seed to put into 
 his land because there is no security. 
 
 6368. This is a rather common form of agreement, 
 copied from the English agreement ? — There is a clause 
 there if a man becomes a bankrupt. 
 
 6369. Mr. Shaw.— That is in all the leases ?— It 
 never was in this country. That would leave us no 
 tenant-right at all. The tenant-right in general sells 
 for £50 or upwards on Lord Annesley's estate. 
 Leithrim, Robert Dalzel, old rent, £17 ; new, £21 ; 
 G vernment valuation £19. This tenant has a very pretty 
 place. I never knew Lord Annesley to do any build- 
 ing except for one man that he turned out of his place 
 into another holding, and he repaired an old house for 
 him and charged £3 10s., five per cent, interest on the 
 money laid out on the house. Here is a case : John 
 Ward, Upper Murlough, four acres of his land dropped 
 out of lease, he was paying £1 per acrennder th* 
 lease, he is now paying £2 17s. 6d. per acre. 
 
 6370. Chairman. — Were there much improvements 
 made by him that caused that greatly increased value ? 
 — Either by him or his predecessor. 
 
 6371. Was there anything in the lease that bound 
 him to do it 1 — I never saw the lease. 
 
 6372. Sometimes there are covenants to make im- 
 provements ? — Yes ; and there are some leases on the 
 estate that the people never had to pay up for yet. 
 Invariably where a lease expired the rent was very 
 largely raised if it was anything of a moderate rent. 
 Thomas Walsh, old rent, £3 12s,; new rent, £6. 
 A.rthur Brannon, old rent, £5 16s. ; new £7 10s., 
 Government valuation, £4 10s., Clanvarraghan. This 
 is under another landlord ; it has been sold in 
 portions. Lord Annesley bought a portion, but the 
 rents are terrible. John Mulligan, Government valu- 
 ation, £4 5s. ; rent, £8 7s. Daniel Murray whose 
 valuation is iinder £4, he does not appear in the rate- 
 book, his rent is £8 16s. 
 
 6373. Mr. Shaw.— What was the old rent ?— This 
 townland belonged to a gentleman named Scott. He 
 took all he could get in his day. This man then bought 
 it and added about £1 an acre to that, and in the short. 
 Space of five j-^ears after he purchased there was not 
 a single original tenant remaining on it, only two that 
 happened, to have leases. Hugh Kelly, he does not 
 appear in therate-book, rent, £9 16s. ; Widow Murphy, 
 Government valuation, £7 10s. ; rent, £17. Hugh 
 Murphy, Government valuation, £6 5s.; rent, £13 16s. 
 I wish to make a remark on Widow Murphy's case ; 
 it was tried at Newfcownards. Really in that case he 
 asked £24 rent for 8a. 1r. 7p., and went into Court 
 to look for it. The case was fought, and the Chairman 
 would not allow a shilling of an increase, but gave her 
 £40 ail acre of a decree. It was mountainy land, and it 
 was proven by several witnesses that there was an acre 
 out of these eight acres unreclaimed and unreclaimable. 
 
 6374. CHAiRJiAiV. — What is the name of the land- 
 lord in this case 1 — Thompson. She had houses, as 
 was proved by valuators brought from Belfast and at 
 home, she had houses on it worth £400. She was 
 unfortunately situated, and the way the townland was 
 cut up to sell had left her but eight acres where her 
 iin,v.f.<.fo.ifi iirno tIto i-nof of ]^Qy. favm -^yas uudcr 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 another landlord. She had no alternative only to tiy 
 tc settle before she. would leave her house. He -svould 
 Tiot pay the money, and her old rent was £15 7s. Id., 
 and it was him and me settled it in court at £17. 
 William Bell, Goveramtsnt valuation, £19. ■ His rent 
 when Thompson bought it was £25 15s. 7d. The rent 
 now is: £38 5iV William Bell's farm at the time 
 Thompson boiight it, or if it was under any man who 
 had the name of being a goodlandlord it would have gone 
 for. £500. He was obliged then in a few years to sell 
 out, and he just realized £100. A portion of the 
 townland that was bought })y another landlord, of no 
 better land, something similar to Bell's in quality, 
 with no house only one small one, twenty feW by 
 fourteen feet, sold for £60 an acre in, the same season. 
 It i shows >that where they believe they have security 
 under a good. landlord they will risk anything in pur- 
 chase money. . On the "Downshire estate^ — I know 
 little of the working of the estate-^on that property 
 the rent- is 'always raised at the conclusion of a 
 tenancy. ' A brother-in-law of mine sold a farm lately, 
 and. when he applied the rent was increased from £1 2 
 12s. to £17. Well, this increase upon farmers causes 
 a very great hardship to the tenants on both sides. It 
 ruins the poor man going out, and saddles the man 
 coming in for life. 
 
 6375. Mr. Shaw. — Had there been a lease in that 
 
 case ? — iNo ; only a mere change of tenancy. I knew Srpt. n, isso. 
 £17 put on one farm on a change of tenancy. M] Mr Patrick 
 father-in-law, when he died, his farm was raised froii MuD-ay. 
 £12 to £20 at the expiration of the lease on the Down- 
 shire property. ' 
 
 C376. Chairman. — On the death of a tenant they 
 raise the rent ?-— When the lease expires. • "' 
 
 6377. They don't raise the rent, do they, if a tenant 
 dies and is succeeded by his son 1—1 cannot say they 
 do, but I have known them to go and value portions 
 of townlands, and not make a general valuation. 
 There are two girls, Bridget and Mary M'Bhcrry, 
 holding two and a half acres each, and the rent is £7 
 14.S. I believe worse land, only that it is near the sea, 
 you could scarcely get. I agree with this gentleman 
 about the valuation of land. If a man has his land 
 nicely cultivated, and nice fences' on it, those valuators 
 when they come out increase largely^I stood with this 
 Waters when he val tied the land; he called me to 
 him to sho-vY the bounds of some places, and I stood on 
 the top of a hill where, I believe he Valued some three 
 or four hundred acres. He just stood on the top of 
 the hill and looked at it. 'Well, the best of' it was in 
 front of him, and he would wa,lk from one hill to 
 another, never examining- the soil at all. ' There is no 
 man so fit, tO' value the land as a man in the neigh- 
 bourhood, who knows what the land is fit to produce. 
 
 Mr. Jasies MAleena, 
 
 6378. Chaieiian-.— You live where ? — Castlewellan. 
 
 6379. Do you know the system of purchase on the 
 Downshire estate 1 — I do, my lord. The rule adopted 
 in the event of a tenant going to transfer the holding 
 is : An application is made in writing to the agent ; 
 the agent writes back in reply that the application has 
 been put on the transfer book, and in the course of 
 eight days an answer will be given, and in the mean- 
 time the valuer is to come and .view the premises. 
 
 6 3 SO. Is that a nev,^ or an old regulation'? — Since 
 1870 I have knowledge, but these four or five years in 
 no case have I known a transfer but the rent has been 
 considerably increased, and the rule also is that if an 
 adjoining tenant — it does not matter what outsider 
 may put in a tender — if an adjoining tenant gives 
 the same figure the property is given to him. I will 
 refer to the farm of the iate William Waters, in the 
 ■townland of Magherasaul, about three years ago ; rent, 
 £13 15s. llfZ., previous to the transfer, and the in- 
 creased rent Was £21 ; Government valuation, £19 
 5s., including houses and all. There is another case. 
 Thomas Shilliday, of BackadeiTy, bought ten and a 
 half acres of land from a man named Chambers two 
 years since. The agent put on 4s. Qd. peraore advanced 
 rent at the transfer of the tenancy. The same farm 
 was bought some five years previously by Chambers, 
 and the agent raised it 5s. sn acre, so that in reality 
 this farm has been t'wioe sold and twice raised since 
 the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 6381. Tou know that of your own knowledge?^! 
 give it on Mr. Gardner's authority, I have no doubt of 
 it. In the ca.so of Edward Lemon, that Mr. Muiray 
 referred to, I made the application for a transfer myself 
 two years 1-a.st spring, the old rent was £12 12s., the 
 revised rent before permission was granted to dispose 
 of it was £17; acreage, 12a. la. I may. state that 
 when an increased rent takes place, they pay one-half 
 of the county cess. 
 
 6382. Mr. Shaw. — The landlord does? — On the 
 Downshii'e estate. 
 
 6383. Have yon any other cases 1 — No, not very 
 many, transfers took place. Mr. Carr holds as c^vner 
 of the townland of Gloughran, a farmer residing there 
 named Thompson applied for permission to sell, that 
 pemiission vfas granted, and the rent increased from 
 £21 to £30, tho purchaser failed to complete his pur- 
 chase, and the farm still remains in Thom.pson's hands, 
 and he is obliged,, although not out of possession, and 
 not having sold the land, to pay the increased rent. 
 
 6384. It has destroyed his tenant-right? — Yes. 
 
 auctioneer, examined. 
 
 There is another peculiar grievance I heard of from 
 the tenants of Mr. Gartlan on the townland of Mag- 
 herasaul (?). This townland before 1847 belonged tp 
 Mr. M'MuUen, Mr. Gartlan got married to his 
 daughter, and received as a dowry this townland, and 
 another townland. The tenants were very poor then, 
 and Mr. M'MuUen forgave the tenants all arrears of 
 rent afcer the famiiie years. Mr. Gartlan, some two 
 years ago, in the event of a son succeeding to his 
 father's pi'Operty, Mr. Gartlan has compelled that son 
 to pay, before he would allow his name to be put in 
 the otfice book, all aiTears due before the time of 1847. 
 The custom on Lord Roden's estate is, that when a 
 tenant is disposed to leave, they give that tenant what- 
 soever consideration the'y please. 
 
 6385. Don't they allow him to sell?— They don't 
 allow him to sell. They give him some consideration 
 themselves, or send for som.e tenant who makes an 
 arrangement in the office with him ; they don't allow 
 any public sales, or the land to be sublet. 
 
 6386. There is no tenant-right then ? — Well, the 
 party going out gets a consideration, whatever the 
 landlord may allow. 
 
 6387. Is that bounding Lord Annesley's estate?— - 
 No, it is convenient. Up to the passing of the Land 
 Act of 1870, Lord Annesley did permit the ten3nt- 
 righton his property to be disposed of by auction, or 
 otherwise, but since that time he has given no such 
 permission. 
 
 6388. There was no such permission on Lord 
 Roden's estate ? — Oh, no. 
 
 6389. Chairman. — Then, was Lord Roden never 
 under tenant-right ? — I think not. I can get a number 
 of parties who were turned out of their places and got 
 just merely a paltry consideration. 
 
 6390. They would have come under the geneial 
 clauses of the Land Act ? — This was before the Land 
 Act. These are the particular things that we wish to 
 refer to. 
 
 6391. Have you found the sales have been much less 
 frequent these lagt few years ? — The tenants are getting 
 into really a bad state, they are in great poverty. 
 
 6.392. Many would like to sell? — A great many. ' . 
 
 6393. But you camiot complete many sales? — -It is 
 
 managed this way, a tenant going to sell comes into the 
 
 olfice, and the tenant wishing to buy goes with him 
 
 , and they arrange the matter there, and there are a 
 
 great many private sales this way. 
 
 Messrs. John M'Nah and Joseph Smylie, Castle- 
 wellan, concurred in the evidence. , 
 
 2H2 
 
 Mr. James 
 M'Aleena. 
 
236 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 S'-pt 23 ISaO. 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 Quinn, 
 Mr. R. C. 
 Brush, and 
 Mr. John G. 
 Winden. 
 
 Present : — The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborouoh, Chairman ; the Right Hon. Baron Dowse, 
 The O'CoNOR Don, Arthur MagMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l. ; William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Peter Quinn, " the Agency," Ne wry ; Mr. K C. Bedsh, Armagh; and Mr. John G. Winden, 
 
 Armao;li : were examined. 
 
 6394. Chairman (to Mr. Quinn). — Where do you 
 reside ? — Mr. Quinn. — Near Newry. 
 
 6395. You are a land agent ? — I am. 
 
 6396. Does the evidence which you wish to give 
 relate principally to tenant-right ? — It does. 
 
 6397. Be so good as to give me your definition of 
 tenant-right 1 — The power of the outgoing tenant to dis- 
 pose of his interest in his farm, subject to the rule of 
 the office, 
 
 6398. Is that your definition of Ulster tenant-right 
 in its original form or in a restricted sense — limited 
 by office rules ^ — It is my definition of it as it exists on 
 the estates with which I am connected for the last 
 forty years. 
 
 6399. Could you give a definition of Ulster tenant- 
 right as it is accepted generally through Ulster ? — I 
 think it is precisely the same, except that on some 
 estates the office rules don't apply. 
 
 6400. For what reason ?-— I do not know. Some 
 landlords I suppose don't think it is desirable to have 
 office rules. 
 
 6401. We had a definition of Ulster tenant-right as 
 fixed occupation by the tenant on payment of a fair 
 rent, with right of free sale of his interest in his hold- 
 ing 1 — Of course the continuance is precisely the same 
 in the case to which I refer ; there is no disturbance. 
 
 6402. Your definition implies continuous occupation 
 jjrovided the rent is paid 1 — Certainly. 
 
 6403. The difference from "■ free sale " being, limits 
 being set as to the selection of the tenant, and the price 1 
 — Qiiite so. 
 
 6404. Do you consider that tenant-right as you 
 have defined it, has worked satisfactorily upon the 
 estates of which you have the management ? — It has 
 done so hitherto, in my opinion. 
 
 6405. Has there been any change latterly on the 
 part of either landlords or tenants upon the subject ? — 
 I cannot say there has been any actual change, but 
 undoubtedly at the last election in the count}' Armagh 
 the question was raised, not by tenants on tlie estate, 
 but by persons outside, that there should be no restric- 
 tion on the part of the landlord in the case of > sale. 
 
 6406. What are the office rules to which you allude 
 when you say they must comply with oflice rules 1 — 
 On the estates with which I am connected, there is a 
 limit as to the price to be given for tenant-right — the 
 limit is £15 per acre. 
 
 6407. That is the maximum ? — That is the maxi- 
 mum ; and there is also a rule that the tenant must be 
 approved by the landlord. 
 
 6408. What are the estates which you represent? 
 — I represent the property of Mr. Close — the Acton 
 and Drumbanaghro estates — the estate of Mr. Hall, 
 in the counties of Down and Armagh, also the New- 
 townhamilton estate, and the Forkhill estate in the 
 county Armagh, also some property in Tipperary and 
 Tyrone. 
 
 6409. Covild you state the acreage and rental of 
 those estates on the whole — specifying those which 
 are under the tenant-right system 1, — They are all 
 loader the tenant-right system, except those in Tipper- 
 ary. The entire would contain about 38,000 acres. 
 
 6410. Baron Dowse. — Deducting Tipperary, what 
 would be the entire acreage 1 — About 36,000 acres. 
 
 6411. The O'CoNOR Don. — Ai-e you an owner of 
 property as well as agent 1 — Very little. 
 
 6412. Chairman. — Do you think on the whole that 
 thelimitof price, to £15 per acre ; and the approval of 
 the tenant by the landlord, is of advantage to the 
 landlord, and no disadvantage to the tenant ? — I do. 
 I may state that when I was appointed agent I liad a 
 meeting of a number of the tenants on Mr. Ciose's 
 estate, and they themselves fixed £15 as what they con- 
 sidered a fair and proper maximum. 
 
 6413. Would not the amount depend upon the im- 
 provements the tenant has made 1, — Unfortunately my 
 experience is that the improvements have very little 
 to say to the price given by an incoming tenant. They 
 buy whether the land is improved or disimproved. 
 
 6414. They buy for the sake of possession 1 — Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 6415. But that must be with the view of makiag a 
 livelihood out of it ? — Undoubtedly. 
 
 6416. Do you think the approval of the tenant by 
 the landlord is an advantage ? — I think it is. 
 
 0417. State why? — In the first place, unless there 
 was some interference by the landlord it would be im- 
 possible to give a preference to adjoining tenants. 
 
 6418. Is there a rule that tenants on the estate shall 
 have the first offer when a farm is for sale 1 — That is 
 invariably the case ; the adjoining tenant is supposed 
 to get the preference ; failing him, then the other 
 tenants ; and failing them, outsiders. 
 
 6419. Bai'on Dowse. — You say yon have been an 
 agent upwards of forty years ? — Yes. 
 
 6420. On Mr. Close's estate you say the tenants 
 themselves fixed the £15 an acre limit? — Yes. 
 
 6421. Why did they do that ? — They considered it 
 was unfair and unreasonable that if farms adjoining 
 their own, when being disposed of, there should be an 
 open competition, a sale by auction in fact, the truth 
 and correctness of the bids at which they had no means 
 of ascertaining. 
 
 6422. Was it for the purpose of giving adjoining 
 tenants an opportunity' of buying that they fixed the 
 limit of £15 per acre? — Yes ; and also because they 
 considered it a fair and reasonuble jDrice. 
 
 6423. That was the maximum ? — Yes. 
 
 6424. AYas there any minimum? — None. 
 
 6425. The outgoing tenant may get as mu.ch as he 
 can for his interest, but not to exceed £15 per acre? 
 — Precisely. 
 
 6426. Sometimes, I suppose, it would be less? — 
 Yes. Sometimes it would go down to £10 or £12 per 
 acre. I have never known any to be sold under that. 
 Before my time the arrangement Mr. Blacker had was 
 £10 per acre as the maximum, but there was constant 
 disputes and fights in consequence of parties nominally 
 giving £10 per acre, but under the rose giving a larger 
 sum, and to prevent that I asked the tenants to meet 
 together and say what they really thought would be 
 fair and reasonable themselves, and they selected £15 
 per acre as the maximum. 
 
 6427. That is, that if there was to be a limit, they 
 considered £15 per acre would be a fair amount? — 
 Yes. They did not seem to make any point about 
 having any objection to a limit. 
 
 6428. Would they prefer to have the right of free 
 sale without any limit ? — I do not know. 
 
 6429. Have you any reason to suspect that there 
 were any sums given underhand for purchase of farms 
 that the office was not aware of? — I do not think there 
 have been any cases of it since the limit was fixed at 
 £15 per acre. I am quite aware there were cases of it 
 when the limit was £lO per acre, because as seneschal 
 several disputes came before me shortly after my ap- 
 pointment. 
 
 6430. You were Seneschal of the Manor Court? — 
 Yes. 
 
 6431. And actions, I suppose, came before you aris- 
 ing out of these bargains ? — Yes ; arising out of i)ro- 
 mises that had not been fulfilled, but under the present 
 system the money is paid into the ofiice. 
 
 6432. Is it only on Mr. Close's estate that the limit 
 exists ?— It also exists on Major Hall's estate in the 
 counties of Down and Armagh. 
 
 6433. Does it also exist on the Forkhill estate?— 
 It does. 
 
illNUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 237 
 
 C434. Docs it exi,;t on 11 the estates in XTlster of 
 wliicli you liavc t!ie in:iii;igcment ? — It exists on the 
 estates in Down and AiiiiLigh ; in Tyrone it does not 
 exist to the same extent. 
 
 0436. What est^'.te have you the management of in 
 Tyrone ? — It was formerly part of Sir Harvey Bruce's 
 estate. It now belongs to the representatives of John 
 Martin, deceased. It is within three miles of Omagh. 
 
 6436. Does tenant-right exist on that estate 1 — It 
 does, to the extent of £8 per acre. That was the usage 
 prior to the purchase of the estate by Mr. Martia. 
 
 6437. No change has been made since 1 — No. 
 
 6438. There is then a restriction of prices vipon all 
 the estates of which you have the management 1 — Yes. 
 
 6439. Subject to that restriction and the approval of 
 the tenant by the landlord, tenant-right exists ; that 
 is to say, continuous occupation, and no disturbance 
 if the rent is paid t — Yes ; there is never any disturb- 
 ance. I never knew a case of it except for non-pay- 
 ment. 
 
 6440. Has there been any increase of rent of late 1 
 — There has been no increase on Mr. Close's or Mr. 
 Hall's estate whatever. 
 
 6411. Has there been any on the others? — Not in 
 my time ; not on the Tyrone estate in my time, nor on 
 the Forkhill estate there has been no increase. 
 
 6143. How long have you been agent on those 
 estates 1 — With the exception of the Tyrone estate, I 
 have been agent tventy-tive years. 
 
 0443. How long on the Tyrone estate? — Only since 
 1S72. 
 
 6444. That was not very long aftei the passing of 
 the Land Act t — No. 
 
 6445. Am I right in saying then that there has 
 been no increase of rent upon the estates you have to 
 deal with since the passing of the Land Act ? — None 
 whatever ; there has been no raising of rents. Vou 
 ■will not misunderstand me — if a lease expires, and that 
 there is a new letting, then if we consider the rent is 
 too low, a slight increase is made. 
 
 6446. There has been no general raising of rents 
 tipon the estates? — None. 
 
 6447. But if a lease expires, then on the new letting 
 there may be some increase ? — Quite so. 
 
 6448. Do you recognize leasehold tenant-right on 
 the estate of which yoii. are agent? — Always. I have 
 never known any ditierence made, the tenant continues 
 in occupation aft(;r the lease expires. I have never 
 known a tenant offering to sell his land on the expira- 
 tion of a lease. 
 
 6419. But he continues in occupation, and is entitled 
 to the same tenant-right as his neighbours? — Pre- 
 cisely. 
 
 6450. You do not disturb him in any way ? — No. 
 
 645L Have you had any cases under the Land Act ? 
 — There was one case. 
 
 6452. A claim for compensation? — Yes. 
 
 0453. Was that a case of eviction upon notice to 
 quit? — yes. It was the case of a man who claimed 
 to succeed his aunt. He was living on Mr. Close's 
 estate, her farm was on that of Mr. Hall. The farm 
 contained only four acres. He insisted that he was 
 entitled to succeed to the farm after the death of bis 
 aunt. We would not take him as a tenant, he not 
 being a tenant on the same estate. We were perfectly 
 willing to allow him to get his full tenant-right for it if 
 he was entitled to it under his aunt's will, but that the 
 adjoining tenants must get the preference. He dis- 
 puted that, and brought a land claim. 
 
 6454. You served him with a notice to quit? — 
 Yes. 
 
 6455. In point of fact he never was a tenant at all ? 
 — Never. 
 
 6456. What became of the land claim ? — He got 
 precisely the sum I had offered him before the case 
 was heard at all. 
 
 6457. Was that the only land case you have had ? 
 — That was the only case. 
 
 6458. Do you think the Land Act has been a bene- 
 ficial measure? — I don't know. As far as our OAvn 
 
 estate goes there has not been the slightest d'nTerenco Sept. k, isso. 
 from what it was before the Land Act. j^^. ^^^ 
 
 6459. You were always in the habit of giving the c,iuinti, 
 tenants the advantage of the custom, whether they Mr. K. C. 
 were entitled to it by law or not ? — Always. ?,''"^'''.*°i 
 
 6460. And consequently you have made no differ- wj^den" ' 
 ence since the passing of the Land Act? — Not the 
 slightest. 
 
 6461. The Land Act, therefore, has done no harm 
 to you, nor the owners of the estates under your man- 
 agement ? — Well, the only harm has been in one or 
 two trifling cases. Where a man has become largely 
 indebted over the country, he sometimes won't submit 
 to the former arrangement, of allowing the money to 
 be paid into the office, and a fair arrangement made 
 with his creditors, but claims that the full amount 
 shall be paid to himself, he thus defeats his creditors, 
 and robs them and leaves the country. 
 
 6462. How does the Land Act enable him to do 
 that ? — He simply lodges a claim, and the money of 
 course must then be paid to himself Under the for- 
 mer arrangement, the money would have been paid 
 into the office. 
 
 0463. Could not the money be paid into court? — 
 Yes ; but then, the man could get it out in spite of us. 
 
 0404. The creditors might get a charging order on 
 it? — Probably they might, but they did not do so. The 
 creditors are sometimes for small sums — old servants 
 and others — for £5 or £10, and do not want to in- 
 cur the expense. 
 
 6465. According to the former practice on the 
 estate you say the purchase-money was paid by the 
 incoming tenant into the office — the arrears of rent, if 
 any, were retained out of it — and any debts paid, and 
 the balance handed to the otitgoing man ? — Precisely. 
 If the claims were very large, so large that the purchase- 
 money was insufficient to meet them in full — the 
 creditors were informed that they should get only so 
 much in the pound on their claims — each creditor was 
 then paid his proportioli, and was thankful to get it. 
 
 0466. Have you had many evictions for non-payment 
 of rent ? — We have had some decrees^ but we very 
 seldom have executed them. 
 
 6467. You have brought ejectment processes, and 
 when armed with authority to evict, you were enabled 
 to deal with the tenants without turning them out ? — 
 Quite so. 
 
 6468. Are the tenants, as a rule, pretty well off on 
 the estates of which you have the management ? — I 
 think they are. The mountain property, extending 
 to the southern part of Armagh, is not as good as the 
 others. The Fork Hill estate is a peculiarly circum- 
 stanced property. The number of tenants upon it is 
 very large. There are upwards of 500 tenants, and 
 many of the holdings are extremely small. 
 
 6469. Do they make improvements ? — -Very few. 
 They don't hold on the average more than three or 
 four acres each. 
 
 6470. As a rule are the improvements, if any, 
 made by the tenant or by the landlord 1 — Generally 
 by the tenant— almost always. 
 
 6471. Have you ever had occasion to distrain any 
 tenants on those estates ? — I do not think that during 
 the forty years I have been an agent, I distrained five 
 times. 
 
 6472. It is not a remedy that is had recourse to 
 much ? — No. 
 
 6473. Are the people, as a rule, satisfied with the 
 arrangements you have described as to tenant-right 1 
 — I think so. 
 
 6474. We have heard a good deal since we came to 
 Belfast about " Office Rules " upon estates ; and I must 
 say that the rules upon some properties appear to be 
 very different from yours, and more stringent. Your 
 rules are, a fixed maximum for tenant-right of £15 
 per acre, and the approval of the tenant by the land- 
 lord ? — Quite so. 
 
 0475. Do you think it is an advantage to have 
 the restriction on the price ? I am not referring to 
 your own estates, but I want your opinion as it affects 
 
2SS 
 
 IRI3K LAND ACT COMillSSlO:^, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 Quinn, 
 Mr. R. C. 
 Brush, and 
 Mr. John G. 
 Winden. 
 
 Sept 23, isso. the country generally — ^you are awa,re there arc many 
 
 estates in Ulster upon -which there is no restriction 1 — 
 
 I am aware of that. I don't think it is any material 
 benefit to the landlord. 
 
 6476. You think the restriction is no material 
 benefit 1 — I don't think it is, except indirectly ; the 
 only way in which it can be a benefit to him is that 
 it gives him an additional power as to the selection. 
 That is all. 
 
 6477. If he had iull power as to selection, would 
 it do any liarm to have the price .unrestricted? — If 
 you could ascertain what was. the real price the man 
 was giving for the tenant-right it would be usefirl ; 
 but that is the real diliioulty. They often give too 
 high a price. ' 
 
 6478. The desire for land, you think, often induces 
 a man to give more for a farm than it is worth 1 — 
 Yes. Another thing is, sometimes a tenant lalls 
 oiit with the adjoining man, and does not wish him 
 to get the farm, if he is leaving it. Then if there 
 is no restriction as to the price, he will pretend 
 that another man is giving him a higher pi'ice than 
 the adjoining tenant can afford to give — in that way 
 he prevents the adjoining tenant from getting it, 
 and secures a preference to the man he is in favour of. 
 
 6479. You look on the restriction as benefici;J in 
 that way, as enabling the landlord more or less to 
 select the tenant? — Yes; there is no other object 
 gained by it in my opinion, as far as the landlord is 
 concerned. 
 
 6480. You mentioned that you manage property in 
 Tipperary 1 — Yes. 
 
 6481. Wbat is the extent of it?— About 2,000 acres. 
 
 6482. Where is it? — It is near Templemoro. 
 
 6483. That is in a good part ot the county? — It 
 is. There are only four tenants upon it. One of 
 them has a large grazing farm for which he pays 
 ,£2,000 a year. He has a lease taken out under the 
 Act subject to certain restrictions. 
 
 6484. Have the other tenants leases ? — Tbree of 
 them have leases, there is only one tenant at will. 
 
 6485. How many acres does the tenant at wiJl hold ? 
 — Only fifteen or sixteen, and it is very bad land. It 
 lies towards the mountains. 
 
 6486. Towards the Devil's Bit? — Yes, immediately 
 below the Devil's Bit. 
 
 6487. Did you ever tarn your attention to the 
 question of tenants purchasing their holdings from 
 the landlords ? — I have thought of it. 
 
 6488. Have you known any persons who purchased 
 their holdings under the Church Commission? — Yes. 
 
 6489. How has that turned out ? — I can give one 
 instance in v/hich a tena.nt purchased from the Chui'ch 
 Commissioners, but he got so involved that he liad to 
 sell it again, and Mr. Hall the owner of the adjoining 
 estate purchased it, and he now holds it. That man 
 holds another farm from Mr. Hall as tenant. 
 
 6490. Had he bought the land too dcnv in your 
 opinion? — No, I think not. In fact, Mr. Hall g.ive 
 him a large sum for it, but he had not enoup;]! c;i.j)ital 
 to enable him to stock and cnltivato it after ho 
 purchased it. 
 
 6491. If a man had a nucleus of cajiital to start 
 with, and that ho coixld borrow the remainder on 
 reasonable terms would it be desirable in j-our opinion 
 for him to become the purchaser of his holding ? — It 
 would in my opinion if he was able to purchase on 
 favourable terms. 
 
 6402. And if he wore an industrious thrifty man ? — 
 Quite so. 
 
 649-3. But I gather from your answers that you 
 would not recommend a wholesnh- scher^K' of peasant 
 proprietorship as a remedy for the illsof the country ? — 
 Indeed I would not. I think it would be most injurious. 
 
 6494. Yon would not force the landlords to sell ? — 
 Certainly not. There is one great difliculty in the 
 question, and I take the liberty of mentioning it. A 
 property in Armagh was sold in tlie Court some years 
 ago. A friend of mine was anxious to purchase. I 
 went on the land for him and exai"ined it, and valued 
 
 it at £5,000, which my friend was quite prepared to 
 give, but before I left tlie ph.ce I askod one of the 
 tenants whom I knev*' whether the tenants upon the 
 property were going to bid. He said they v.'cre— that 
 they were anxious to purchase their holdings. I said 
 i" Then in that case I am sure my friend will have 
 nothing to say to it." The property was put up for 
 sale — we did not bid — and it sold for less than 
 £4,000. No person would bid when it was found 
 that the tenants were anxious to buy. 
 
 6495. Did they get it?- They did. 
 
 649G. Where is that property ?— It is ■ within five 
 or six miles of Newry. 
 
 6497. Have these tenants turned out well?— I 
 understand they are not very well. Some of them 
 have done well; others, I fancy have not. 
 
 6498. Are they better or worse off than if they had 
 remained tenants? — I think the majority- of • them 
 would be better off as tenants. They were obliged to 
 borrow the money. But I think the owner of the 
 property was a serious loser by the transaction, because 
 no person would bid against the tenants. 
 
 6499. Did they borrow the money from the Board 
 of Works ?— I don't think they did. The truth is, 
 one tenant became the purchaser, nominally for the 
 benefit of the whole ; but law suits arose out of it. 
 He wanted to hold the property himself, and to be 
 the landlord of the others. The tenants took legal 
 prooeediugs, and comjielled him to carry out his ori- 
 ginal bargain. 
 
 6500. The O'Gonok Don.— When did the sale take 
 place ? — I should think eight or ten years ago. 
 
 6501. Was it before the passing of the Land Act? 
 —Yes. 
 
 G.502. Bo,roA Dowse. — Then the Bright Clauses of 
 the Land Act could have nothing to do with it l-rr 
 No. 
 
 6503. Have you ever looked at those clauses of the 
 Act with the object of forming an opinion upon them ? 
 — I have read them, but I have not gone deeply into 
 them. 
 
 6504. Some people say there are too many restric- 
 tions — the restriction against alienation for instance 1 
 — I think it might be desirable to abolish that restric- 
 tion, but not tbe restriction against subdivision. 
 
 6505. Do you think it would be desnable to retain 
 the restrictions against subdivision and subletting 1 — 
 I do. 
 
 6506. But do you see any objection to allowing a 
 man to sell the entire of his purchase, subject, of course, 
 to the nnnuity charged upon it? — Not the slightest. 
 
 6507. Mr. Kavanagh. — Your objection is to sid> 
 division and subletting ? — Yes. 
 
 6508. Do you consider that if a scheme of peasant 
 pi'oprietorr.hip was largely cariied out it would be ne- 
 cessary to guard against that in the future ? — I think 
 so, decidedlj'-. The only criterion I have to judge by 
 is pai-t of the Newtownhamilton estate. These leases 
 were granted one hundred years agO; at four or five 
 shillings an acre for ever ; and stibdivision has gone 
 on to an amazing extent on that estate. 
 
 0509. I suppose not many of the original leases are 
 there now ? — Scarcely any. 
 
 0510. Chaieiiax. — Is that the case on the Fork- 
 hill e.ntato, wli. ere you say there are > so -many small 
 tenants ? — No. They are tenants at will, they do not 
 hold under lease. 
 
 6511. Mr. Kavanagh. — We have had a good deal 
 of evidence about different matters in the north, and 
 it appears that the prevailing feeling of the tenantry 
 is, want of security. The dread is that the landlord 
 will raise their rents, and thus eat np.and destroy the 
 tenant-right that exists— can you tell us whether in 
 your experience such is the fact ? — There in no ground 
 for it in my experience. 
 
 6512. Baron Dowse. — You have never raised the 
 rents at all?— Never. In fact Mr. Hall's and JSIr. 
 Close's properties were valued by the late Mr. Rich- 
 mond, who was considered a moderate valuer, and in 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 239 
 
 neither case are tlio rents up to his valuation, which 
 was made in 1830. 
 
 6513. Mr. Kavanagh. — When a lease drops yovi 
 generally raise the rents 1 — Yes. 
 
 6514. Do you i-aise them on the tenants' improve- 
 ments ? — Certainly not. We raise them to the same 
 rents that the adjoining tenants-at-will are paying. If 
 the adjoining tenants' average rent is twenty or twenty- 
 one shillings per acre, we put it down at twenty or 
 twenty-one shillings. 
 
 6515. Do you raise the rent always on a change of 
 tenancy? — Certainly not. 
 
 6516. You wouldn't consider the fact of a man's 
 dying, and his son or his widow succeeding,'was a proper 
 oeoasion for raising the rent t — We don't raise it in 
 that case. I don't say it hasn't occurred. A few cases 
 have occurred where the incoming tenant has been 
 a'aised sixpence or a shilling, but the cases are extremely 
 few. 
 
 6517. According to your experience that is not a 
 general c\xstom 1 — Certainly not in the county Armagh 
 or the county Down. 
 
 6518. You said you didn't consider the restriction 
 of the price of tenant-right would be any advantage 
 to the landlord 1 — No, except as regards selection of 
 the tenant. It assists in that. 
 
 , 6519. Assuming that on the estates you manage 
 there was no restriction, if you knew that a tenant 
 was buying at a price more than he ought to give, 
 and had to enter into occupation of the land in an 
 insolvent state, wouldn't the right to restrict the 
 price there be a great advantage 1 — I think it wordd, 
 but with tenant-right the landlord is sure to get his 
 rent. 
 
 6520. Might not such a tenant run down the land 
 and reduce its value to nothing, so that there would 
 be no tenant-right left, and in fact no security for the 
 rent either 1 — Such a thing is possible, but I shouldn't 
 think it is likely to occur. 
 
 6521. You don't think a restriction of price neces 
 sary to gTiard against want of prudence on the part 
 of the incoming tenant or for the purpose of protect- 
 ing him? — I think it is possible it would be an 
 advantage to the incoming tenant. 
 
 6522. Baron Dowse. — The less a man pays the 
 better for himself? — Of course. 
 
 6523. That does not apply to tie seller? — Of 
 course not. 
 
 6524. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have you experience of 
 the south as well as of the north ? — Yes, in Tipperary. 
 
 6525. How would you. regard the arbitrary exten- 
 sion of Ulster tenant-right to the south ? — I do not 
 know. According to the lease those parties have 
 signed they are bound n.ot to claim any tenant-right, 
 and I don't know how they could justly do so, be- 
 cause the improvements were made by the landlord. 
 In one case I know the landlord expended £500 on 
 improvements, and that is embodied in his lease. 
 
 6526. Chaikman. — Is that in Tipperary ? — Yes. 
 
 6527. Mr. Kavanagh. — Even supposing there was 
 no lease, do you tliink in such a case as that it would 
 be just, if the improvements were made by the land- 
 lord, to allow the tenant to sell 1 — No ; if the improve- 
 ments were made by the landlord it would be unfair 
 to take them from him. 
 
 6528. Baron Dowse. — If the tenant paid the land- 
 lord an additional rent on account of the improve- 
 ments would not that make a difference ? — You might 
 make it a just procedure in that way. 
 
 6529. Mr. Kavanagh. — Even taking it in that 
 way, do you not think that taking the good will of a 
 farm, which the tenant had paid nothing for, and 
 allowing him to sell that good will, and put the 
 money in his pocket, would be handing over to the 
 tenant that which was the property of his landlord ? 
 —No doubt it would. We have had that, I think, in 
 Ulster in some cases. 
 
 but not giving it to the tenants, 
 
 6530. You Say you would recoup the landlord for Sept.' 23, liso 
 the transfer of his property by an increase of rent ? Mr. peter 
 — Yes, I think he ought to be recouped in sdm6 Qumn, 
 way. Ml"- K. C. 
 
 . _ Brush, and 
 
 oodl. Do yon thmk that would be a satisfactory Mr. John (J, 
 way to all landlords, looking at the agitation that is Wmdeii. 
 going on in the west and south against any rent ?— I 
 don't think it would at all. 
 
 6532. It would force him to sell his property 
 with a very doubtful prospect of being paid?^ — Cer- 
 tainly, it would. 
 
 6533. Isn't it a fact that the Ulster' custom grew 
 up out of the original plantation of Ulster, by which, 
 as I ;indei .it:ind, a part of the property- was given to 
 the tenants and a part to the landlords at the time 
 of the settlement ? — I can't quite agree in. that idea. 
 
 6534. You don't agree in that ?— -I do not. 
 
 6535. You haven't heard of the Ulster Plantation? 
 • — Yes, I have. 
 
 6536. What do you understand by it ? — My under- 
 standing was not that part of the property in the 
 land was given to the tenant, but that it was given 
 to the landlord, binding him to have a certain number 
 of tenants on the land 
 as far as my knowledge goes. 
 
 6537. Did it not give the tenants possession of a 
 certain interest in the lands? — I think not. 
 
 6533. Baron Dowse. — I think you are right in 
 that, according to my reading ? — I think the landlord 
 got the land on condition that he was to provide a 
 certain number of men, and he was to see that they 
 had a certain number of houses, and so forth. 
 
 6539. Mr. Kavanagh. — But not giving the tenant 
 any interest ? — No. 
 
 6540. Then the origin of tenant-right in Ulster is 
 merely a custom that has grown up by the good nature 
 of the landlord ? — I think so. 
 
 6541. Assuming that to be the case, would it be 
 fair to extend it to the south of Ireland, where it hasn't 
 grown up ? — I do not know. If you ask me in fair- 
 ness, I don't think it would. At the same time I 
 think, possibly, it would be the easiest way in which 
 the southern landlords could get the question settled. 
 
 G542. Chairman. — Yoir think it might be made 
 fair to the landlord by some sort of recompense ?■ — 
 I tliink the injustice of it might be materially miti- 
 gated. 
 
 6543. Baron Dowse. — If people ate able to live in 
 the noith under it they could live in the south? — 
 Yes. 
 
 G544. And the north is the best part of Ireland? 
 —It is. 
 
 6545. Chairman. — You mentioned in the notes 
 which you sent to the Commission that you think 
 the landlord might be compensated by payment of 
 money on the occasion of a new tenancy, and that 
 tenants might get advances from Govei'nment to make 
 that payment, to be repaid to the Government in the 
 same way as the purchase-money of actual holdings? 
 — That might be, but I think the Government 
 would have a bad security. However, that is their 
 look out. 
 
 6546. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have you anything to do 
 with the Richardson property ? — Nothing whatever ; 
 but I manage property adjoining it. 
 
 6547. The O'Conor Don. — Are leases given on 
 the estates you manage 1 — No ; with, the exception of 
 the Newtownhamilton property. , 
 
 6548. Since the passing of the Land Act have 
 leases increased or decreased? — I don't think there has 
 been any alteration. I believe I have never been 
 asked for a lease before or since the Land Act more 
 than once or twice. 
 
 Go 19. When you say that improvements are gene- 
 rally made by the tenants on the estate with which 
 you are connected, is it a fact that the landlords have 
 
240 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 Quinn, 
 jrr. E. C. 
 Brush, and 
 Mr. John 
 G. Wiuden 
 
 not made any improvements ? — Prior to tlie Land Act 
 on the estates of wliich I am speaking — Mr. Close's 
 and Mr. Hall's — the landlord, generally speaking, 
 gave slates, and sometimes timber, to tenants when 
 building houses, and gave allowance on field draining 
 and new fences. Since the passing of the Land Act 
 that has ceased. 
 
 6550. The Land Act has had the effect of making 
 the landlords refuse to give what they gave before? 
 . — Quite so. « 
 
 6551. Did the limit of £15 on tenant-right exist 
 before the passing of the Land Act 1 — Yes. 
 
 6552. "What proportion does the rent bear to the 
 valuation ? — On Mr. Close's it is about five per cent, 
 under the poor law valuation, and on Mr. Hall's about 
 the same. On the Forkhill estate it is nearly twenty 
 per cent, vuider the poor law valuation, and on sonjie 
 other estates the valuation and rent are about equal 
 — 2-i per cent, under, and 2^ per cent, over in one 
 townland. In Tipperary the jjoor law valuation is 
 extremely low. 
 
 6553. Do you think the poor law valuation is 
 much higher in the north than in the south in propor- 
 tion to the value of the land? — Very much. The 
 poor law valuation of the large grazing farm to which 
 I referred a while ago is only about half the rent which 
 the tenant pays, and at which he took a lease for 21 
 years. 
 
 6554. Do you thiuk the rents in the north of Ire- 
 land are lower than those in the south, considering 
 the value of the land ? — My experience of the south 
 is confined to Tipperary, where it is principally grass 
 land, and we have little grass land here. 
 
 6555. A statement was made yesterday with 
 regard to a tenant named Doyle, who was evicted 
 by a Mr. Quinn, Are you the gentleman ? — I am 
 the agent. 
 
 6550. On what estate did this occur ? — It was on the 
 representative of the late Edward Quinn's estate. 
 
 6557. It was stated that in this case the rent 
 had been considerably raised, that the tenant was 
 promised it should be 20s. an acre, and it had 
 been raised to 22s., that he was unable to pay, and 
 was evicted. It was further alleged that althougli 
 he had given £100 for the holding he would get 
 nothing. Is that a true representation of the facts ? — 
 It is not a true representation. Unfortunately I have 
 no i^apers connected with the property here, and cannot 
 go into details about it, but I know the case perfectly 
 well. 
 
 6558. You couldn't furnish us with the details? 
 — Not at present ; but I will be prepared to do so 
 
 6559. Chaieman. — Will you please send a state- 
 ment of the facts to the secretary 1 — I will. 
 
 The witness subsequently sent in the following 
 statement : — 
 
 '■ John Doyle's farm contains 6a. 2h. 20p. ; present rent, 
 £7 a year; prior to 1856 was held by a man named John 
 Doyle, who died in 1865, when a Mrs. Cosgrove got it, said 
 Doyle owing her a large .sum of money ; her rent was £6 10s. 
 a year. Slie sold to John Doyle who, prior to being 
 accepted as a tenant, was told the rent would be £7 a year, 
 which rent he agreed to pay and did pay for about ten 
 years. He was served with an ejectment process for non- 
 payment of rent in June, 1879, then owing two and a half 
 yuars' rent, and although the ejectment was then taken out, 
 it was not given to the Sheriff for execution until June, 
 1880. There are three years' rent due up to November, 
 1879. John Doyle never lived upon this farm, having a 
 farm of 8a. Or. 35p. in TuUyawe. He is not a poor man, 
 and I believe if so disposed could sell his interest in the 
 Drumilly farm." 
 
 6562. Supposing a tenant on any of your estates 
 had a farm subject to this tenant-right custom, and 
 ran into arrear of rent, wouldn't you allow him to sell ? 
 — Certainly. 
 
 6563. Paying you the rent out of the proceeds?— 
 Yes. 
 
 6564. Isn't 'that one of the advantages of tenant- 
 right, you have a fund out of which you arc sure of the 
 rent ? — Yes. 
 
 6565. The O'Conok Don.— Isn't it a fact that this 
 man Doyle has been evicted ? — Yes, for non-payment 
 of rent. 
 
 6566. And has lost the farm and the amount of 
 money he paid on going into it ? — He has lost tlie farm, 
 but we are quite willing he should hold on or sell it, if 
 he can get any one to buy it. 
 
 6567. Can he get anyone to buy it? — That 1 \-eally 
 don't know. The ejectment has been allowed to stand 
 over for twelve months to give him every facility for 
 paying or making some arrangement. 
 
 6568. Baron Dowse. — He has not been turned out? 
 — I rather think he has now, because the term of the 
 ejectment has expired. I had several interviews with 
 the man, and offered to take security — with regard to 
 the rent, there is no objection to lower his rent if it 
 was unreasonably high, but on that tov.-uland and 
 others they all insisted, they would not ])ay any rent 
 at all, and ujd to the last month they have not paid a 
 single shilling. In the other two townlands they all 
 hold under leases. 
 
 6569. The O'Conor Don. — Have they paid? — 
 Some of them paid, getting abatements of 3s. or 4s. in 
 the pound, but they remained till a month ago before 
 they would pay sixpence. 
 
 6570. Baron Dowse. — Had they the money ?— 
 Numbers of them had. 
 
 6571. Is this in Armagh ? — It is within three miles 
 of Newry. 
 
 6572. I didn't think those doctrines went so far 
 north ? — Indeed they do. 
 
 6573. The O'Conor Don. — Has this man Doyle 
 money to pay? — Yes, he has a farm on an adjoining 
 estate, and he could pay if he chose. 
 
 6574. Mr. Shaw. — With regard to the cases of 
 tenants purchasing their holdings you mentioned a 
 case of a purchaser who had subsequentlv to sell ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 6575. Were there many purchasers on that pro- 
 perty ? — As far as I know there were six or seven. I 
 think one or two others have been also obliged to sell. 
 Personally I do not know that ; but this case I do 
 know. 
 
 6576. Is the townland adjoining near the property 
 you manage ? — It is in the centre of it. 
 
 6577. What is the size of that farm that was sold I 
 — Forty acres. 
 
 6578. Was the tenant resident on it'? — No; he had 
 been resident and built a very good house on it, but he 
 got a farm from Mr. Hall, not so good a farm, but lie 
 preferred living on it, and he left the glebe land prior to 
 the purchase and was living on Mr. Hall's estate. 
 
 6579. Before the purchase? — Before the purchase. 
 
 6580. What has been done with the glebe farm since 
 Mr. Hall purchased ? — It is chiefly in Mr. Hall's own 
 hands at present. 
 
 6581. Was it chiefly in grass? — Only a portion of 
 it— only one-half of it. The other half is under 
 tillage. 
 
 6582. Do you know whether the other purchasers 
 who have not had to sell are doing well ? — I think so. 
 I think the majority of them are fairly prosperous. 
 
 6583. Had this man who was obliged to sell to borrow 
 the money in order to purchase ? — He had to borrow 
 nearly the whole of the money. He told me he had to 
 borrow £1,400 or £1,500. 
 
 6584. I suppose he had to pay a large interest ?— I 
 think five per cent, he had to jiay. 
 
 6585. When he sold it I suppose the Church Com- 
 missioners were paid off? — He had paid the v-hole. 
 He borrowed the money and paid them. 
 
 6586. He didn't take the money from the Church 
 Commissioners? — No, he borrowed from a private 
 party. 
 
 6587. Do you know why he paid five per cent, when 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 241 
 
 be could have got it at a lower rate from the Church 
 Commissioners 1 — I don't know. 
 
 6588. You are not aware whether they would have 
 advanced the money 1 — I am not aware. I never heard 
 there was any difficu.lty about it. 
 
 6589. Mr. Shaw.— Is the farm near Mr. Hall's 
 residence 1 — Not very. 
 
 6590. Is it a convenience to him to have it 1 — No. 
 
 6591. He did not purchase it for the sake of keeping 
 it I^No, but it is in the centre of his estate. 
 
 6.592. Did he give any extra price ? — Yes, to the 
 extent of £100 or £200. The tenant made that pro- 
 fit on the transaction. 
 
 6593. That was an inducement of the sale^ — Yes, 
 but he was obliged to sell. 
 
 6594. If he had borrowed the money at three and 
 a half per cent, he could have done better ? — I suppose 
 he could. 
 
 6595. When you spoke of those rents not being 
 paid you mean, I suppose, the May rents? — No, I 
 mean the year's rent up to last November. 
 
 6596. Is it very poor land ? — Yes, it is poor land. 
 
 6597. And small holdings 1 — Yes. 
 
 6598. The people don't live on the land alone? — 
 Yes, they do. 
 
 6599. Have not they other means of living, such as 
 weaving? — No, I don't think they have on that estate ; 
 on the Forkhill estate they do a good deal in that 
 way. 
 
 6600.' Can they live on those small patches of 
 land ? — Very poorly. That is one of the great evils 
 of the tenant-right system — you perpetuate small 
 holdings. 
 
 6601. Tenor twelve acres is the largest, I suppose? 
 — Quite so ; some much smaller. 
 
 Brush, and 
 Mr. John G. 
 Winden. 
 
 6602. Is it near any town? — It is within about .^fj''- =3, is'.o. 
 ^H^ii^s of Newry. _ jj^ j— 
 
 odU3. i suppose with the years we have had they Quinn, 
 had very little to depend on to pay the rent ? — Very Mr. li. C, 
 little except young cattle. 
 
 6604. They had a bad potato crop 1 — Yes. 
 
 6605. Oats is the principal grain crop? — Yes, it 
 was better in that district than on lower lands. 
 
 6606. Still for the three years before tliis it was 
 hard then to pay the rent ? — Very hard. No question 
 about it. 
 
 6607. And the landlords were indulgent, I suppose ? 
 — Certainly. 
 
 6608. So they possibly hadn't much money to pay 
 the rent, ii we could get at the facts t — It is extremely 
 difficult to know whether they have money or not, 
 because in many cases they have credit in shops, and 
 it is very hard to say. 
 
 6609. In fixing rents how do you proceed — do you 
 get a valuation made? — We look at the valuation 
 which was made in 1832 and we then ascertain what the 
 adjoining tenants are paying, and in nine cases out of 
 ten the rent is the same as that paid by adjoining 
 tenants. 
 
 6610. Are they satisfied? — Quite satisfied. We 
 have never had a case in which there was a dispute. 
 
 6611. What are the rents on Mr. Close's property ? — 
 The average on the estate is 2 Os. to 2 1 s. per English acre. 
 
 6612. It is very good land ? — Very good land. 
 
 6613. You think on the whole this Ulster system 
 might be adopted by the Southerns and Westerns with 
 some comfort to the landlords ? — I think if it was a 
 settlement of the question, possibly it would be. 
 
 6614. You think they would show sense in accepting 
 it ? — I think so. 
 
 6615. It has not worked badly here ? — I think not. 
 
 Present : 
 
 -The Eight Honorable BiRON Dowse; The O'CoNOR DoN; and Arthur 
 MacMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l. 
 
 Mr. EicHAED C. 
 
 6616. Baron Dowse. — ^You are a land agent? — I 
 am. 
 
 6617. What estates are you agent over? — In the 
 county Armagh I am agent of the Kichhiil eE-tate, 
 and in Tyrone over Lord Belmore's. 
 
 6618. What is the acreage of those properties? — 
 The Armagh estate is about 7,000 acre ; the other is 
 above 14,000. 
 
 6619. What is the rental? — The rental cf the 
 Armagh estate is about £6,400 not including the 
 demesne land. The Goverment valuation is about 
 £7,680 for the land, without the tenements. 
 
 6620. What is the rental of Lord Belmore's estate ? 
 — The acreage is 14,000 ; the rental nearly £8,000. 
 There is a good deal of bog land on it. The Govern- 
 ment valuation does not come quite up to the rent. 
 
 6621. Does the tenant-right custom prevail upon 
 those estates ? — It does. 
 
 6622. In both Armagh and Tyrone? — Both. The 
 incoming tenant purchases from the outgoing tenant. 
 
 6G23. Is there any restriction on the amount to be 
 
 paid? There is not. I always have thought there 
 
 was no use in putting a restriction, because it would 
 be evaded ; and I am certain it would. 
 
 6624. On those estates the tenant has continuous 
 occupation as long as he pays the rent, with the power 
 of free sale ? — Yes, continuous occupancy as long as 
 he pays the rent, and the power of free sale, provided 
 he selects a tenant who is on the estate, and does not 
 sell by auction. 
 
 6625. He has continuous occupancy, with a power 
 to sell to some person approved of by the landlord ? 
 — Exactly. 
 
 '6626. And no limit on the price? — No limit on 
 the price. 
 
 6627. No sale by auction is allowed? — No. 
 
 6628. How does the landlord exercise his veto? — 
 The outgoing tenant generally selects his purchaser, 
 and brings whoever he selects for approval. If the 
 
 Brush examined. 
 
 man is a tenant on the estate of course I approve of 
 him. 
 
 6629. Is there a right of pre-emption ? — There is 
 none exercised. 
 
 6630. The landlord has a voice in the selection? — 
 He has a voice in the selection, but does not exercise 
 pre-emption. 
 
 6631. He does not exercise his power of veto 
 unreasonably, I have no doubt ? — He does not. 
 
 6632. Do you find that system works well? — I do 
 — very well. 
 
 6633. Do you find that it secures the landlord in his 
 rent ? — There is no doubt of it ; it gives the outgoing 
 tenant something to pay his deists, and go away. 
 
 6634. Is the purchase money paid through the office? 
 — It is not. At one time that was the system on the 
 Tyrone estate, but it was discontinued, and now no 
 money is paid into the office, except the rents. 
 
 6635. Then the way the custom stands on those 
 estates is this : the tenant remains in occupation as 
 long as he pays the rent ; he has power to sell, not 
 by auction; there is no_restriotion on the price; the 
 purchaser must be approved by the landlord ; the 
 money is paid outside the office, and the only thing 
 the office has to do is to see that the rent is paid 
 before the purchaser is put into possession? — Quite so. 
 
 6636. You find that system works well? — Eemark- 
 ably well. 
 
 6637. You think it contributes to the peace and 
 well-being of the community ? — I do. 
 
 6638. And to the prosperity of the estate? — Yes. 
 
 6639. Have you any idea whether the same rule 
 prevails on the surrounding estates? — As far as ] 
 know it does, generally. 
 
 6640. What is the nearest town on the Tyrone 
 estate? — There are two — Beragh and Sixmilecross. 
 They are both near Omagh. 
 
 6641. .What town is the Armagh property near? — 
 The village is Eichhill — it is five miles from Armagh. 
 
 2 I 
 
 Mr. Eichard C- 
 Erasli. 
 
■2 1-2 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 JMv. Ricli: 
 Brash. 
 
 , ISSO. 
 
 "i-a c. 
 
 GG12. There is a good market tlicre for produce 1— 
 Tliere is— in Armagh and Portado'.vn. 
 
 G8-i.3. Is there a pretty fair market for the Tyrone 
 estate ' — Yes ; Omagh is a good market, and there is 
 a good market at Si>:milecross. 
 
 GG44. Do you find the tenants well able to pay their 
 rents 1 — I do. 
 
 GG-1-5. Not much in arrear? — Last year of course 
 they were. I was on the estate yesterday, and I got 
 a collection of the March rents at wliich I was sur- 
 prised. I had not the slightest idea of getting near 
 one-half of what I got. 
 
 G64:6. You were agreeably surprised ? — -Very much 
 so, indeed. 
 
 G6-t7. There is no hanging gale on the estate? — Yes. 
 I do not collect the IMarch rents until October. 
 
 GG4-8. The rents which you collected the other day, 
 when did they fall due? — The greater part of them were 
 due on 25th March, 1880. 
 
 604!). That is not Yfhat I mean by a " hanging gale." 
 What I mean by that is, one half year's rent not paid 
 till another half year is due ? — Well, that is literally 
 a hanging gale, because I do not collect the IMarch rent 
 till October ; and I don't collect the September rent 
 till the end of JIarch or beginning of April. 
 
 G6.50. How long have you been agent over those 
 estates? — Since 1B63. 
 
 60.51. You were agent before the Land Act? — I 
 was. 
 
 6G52. Do you find that the Land Act has made any 
 diifereuce as regards the dealings between landlord and 
 tenant ? — It has on the Tyrone estate ; it has stopped 
 any gratuity to the tenant for imijrovements. That is 
 the only effect of it. 
 
 GG53. Any contribution which the landlord used to 
 make to the tenants for improvements has been stopped 
 by the Laud Act ? — Yes, on tlie Tyrone estate. 
 
 6654. Has it had the same result upon the Armagh 
 estate %. — No, it has not. On the Armagh estate it 
 has been continued. 
 
 6G55. Who makes the improvements as a rule on 
 both thos2 properties? — The tenant makes them. The 
 landlord on the Tyrone estate used to allow timber and 
 slates. 
 
 6G5G. Was he allowed anything for that? — Never ; 
 it was a gratuity ; also for drains ; and on the Armagh 
 estate the same thing, occurred. 
 
 6657. Has there been any increase of rent at all on 
 those estates ? — None ; except on the expiration of 
 leases. 
 
 6658. On, the expiration of a lease there is a re- 
 vision of the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 6659. On such occasions do you do what Mr. Quin 
 says — m:\ke the tenant pay the same as his neigh- 
 bours ? — I do. I bring the rent as near as I can to 
 the rents jiaid by adjoining tenants. 
 
 66G0. Do you make the tenant pay rent on his own 
 improvements ? — I do not. If I am getting the land 
 valued the directions I gi^'e would be to take it field 
 by field, looking at the sub-soil, the aspect, the gradients, 
 nearness to public roads, and contiguity to markets — 
 to take all these circumstances into consideration. 
 
 GG61. Axe there any arrangements on those estates 
 to throw the payment of county cess upon the tenant ? 
 — It is all paid by the tenant. That has never been 
 altered. 
 
 G6G2. No change has been made? — No change has 
 been made except on the Tyrone estate. A lease ex- 
 pired on tliat estate, and the tenant claimed the benefit 
 of the Act, and I gave it to her. 
 
 6GG3. In other cases it remains as it was? — Yes; 
 there haA-e been no new lettings to other than tenant 
 in possession 
 
 6664. Are the roads measured in the holdings? — 
 No, as a rule. 
 
 6665. We had a case mentioned yesterday where, 
 in a farm of eight acres, there was more than an acre 
 of roasts ? — County roads are not measured ; farm 
 roa.ds majr be. 
 
 66GG. You have no mountainous land on the estates 
 under }'our management? — In Tyrone I have some 
 
 hilly land ; I don't call it mountainous land. There 
 is one townland that is high, and they call it moua- 
 tain ; but it is not mountain laud — it is high land. 
 
 GG67. Is there any land on those estates let at a 
 nominal rent for the pui-pose of being improved ]— 
 None. 
 
 6668. It is all practically ai-able land ? — It is, 
 except the bogs. 
 
 6669. Do you give the bog in, or do you charge a 
 rent for it ? — For cutting purposes, I charge a shilling 
 a rood, merely to keep the lettings in a system. 
 
 6670. I suppose you keep the legal ownership of 
 the bog in your own hands, giving the tenants the 
 turbary of it ? — I do ; and I make them take out a 
 ticket paying a shilling for each rood. 
 
 6671. For the right of turbary ? — Yes. 
 
 6672. The O'Conok Don. — What do you do with 
 the cut-away bog ? — It is added, ultimately, to the ad- 
 joining farm, and when there is a revision of the rents 
 it will be taken in and charged for. 
 
 6673. Baron Dowse. — Until a revision of the rents, ' 
 would it be charged for ? — It would not. 
 
 0674. Are the tenants satisfied with that arrange- 
 ment ? — Perfectly. 
 
 G675. Do you tliink, on the whole, that the tenant 
 right system is a good one ? — I think so,' decidedly. I 
 think it is the best system that could be. I wish we 
 had it in the South and West twenty years ago. 
 
 6676. Do j^ou see any objection to extending it to 
 the whole country ? — I do not. • 
 
 6677. Would it secure the landlord his rent? — 1 
 think it would, and that it would secure peace in the 
 country. 
 
 6678. Do you know any cases of purchase of the fee 
 by tenants ? — I have not had an instajice of it, that 
 came under my notice. 
 
 6679. I think there were some tenants who pur- 
 chased in your part of the world ? — They v/ere in the 
 other ]jart of the county — not in my neighbourhood. 
 
 6680. How do you think it would work in youi 
 part of the world, if Lord Belmore had the power and 
 exercised it, of selling a portion of his property to the 
 tenants ? — I think they would be as well satisfied to 
 remain as they are. Moreover, I think it would do 
 every one of them an injury. 
 
 GG81. Give your reasons for that? — I think legis- 
 lation has gone far enough on that point j those tenants 
 that wish can avail themselves of the means offered to 
 purchase as occasion aflbrds. I do not know that a 
 more erroneous system could be demised for the injury 
 of tenant-farmers generally than the ptirchase of their 
 farms in fee. First, the farmers would be steeped in 
 debt, both as to purchase-money and credit. Next, 
 there would be subdivisions, till they would become 
 mere gardens, or wretched squatters, so that the 
 country would be filled, after some years, with a poor 
 class of squattere unable to support themselves oft' the 
 land. The tendency in Ireland is to subdivide, and 
 gi-\-e each member of the household a patch of land, 
 and, as a consequence, all capital would leave the 
 country, and every chance Ireland ha^ would be re- 
 moved of arriving at any prosperity. 
 
 6682. You think the expropriation of the landlords 
 would be of no advantage ? — It would lead to the 
 exodus of every one with money. 
 
 6683. And the genesis of squatters? — Exactly. 
 6G84. With reference to evictions, arc there many 
 
 evictions on your property? — There are not. There 
 has been only one actual eviction on the Tyrone estate 
 during the last ten or twelve years. 
 
 6685. Have you had many cases under the Land 
 Act ? — Nevei' — not a single one. 
 
 6686. Have you Jiad claims under the Land Act 
 that were settled out of court ? — Not one that I re- 
 collect. 
 
 6687. Substantially, you do not evict your tenants 
 at all? — We do not. Lf I have to serve an ejectment 
 for non-payment of rent I always give the tenant a 
 reasonable time to redeem. 
 
 6688. Do you find service of an ejectment useful 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 243 
 
 occasionally, in mating defaulting tenants pay up 1 — ■ 
 Ida 
 
 6689. Even tHougli there may be no actual intention 
 to disturb tbem, it stimulates tbem to pay the arrears ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 6690. Do you ever distrain? — Never. I do not 
 recollect an instance of it. 
 
 G691. It has been aboUsbed recently in Scotland, 
 wbere it was called by tlie name of hypothec — do you 
 think it Avoidd be any harm if it were abolished here 1 
 ■ — Not the slightest— it is never acted upon. 
 
 6692. In towns it is acted upon ? — ^Yes ; in towns 
 it is. 
 
 6693. In rural districts it is not?— It never is, as 
 a rule. 
 
 6694. The O'Conor Don.— Do you tliink any 
 alteration in the law is required as regards the tenants 
 of Ulster? — In order to do strict justice where rack- 
 renting is practised — which is chiefly by the small 
 landlords who purchased recently in the Landed 
 Estates Court, there should be a general scientific 
 valuation of each holding in Ireland made by com- 
 petent hands on the groimd, with a field to field valua- 
 tion of the subsoil, the aspect, the gradients, con- 
 venience to markets and roads, &c., taking the average 
 prices of produce for say seven years, and all other 
 circumstances into consideration — such valuation to 
 be the bondjlde and fair basis for rents, and a standard 
 for the courts. My idea was — but some do not agree 
 with me in this — that if the rent is above that, some 
 reason should be shown, some 'special reason or special 
 circumstances, before a competent tribunal, why such 
 rent should be charged. I do not think the county 
 court is a proper and competent tribunal for that. I 
 was going to suggest that two judges should be ap- 
 pointed — to sit either at the assizes or in Dublin. 
 
 6695. Then you would admit the principle of ad- 
 justnlent of rent outside the landlord's interference? — 
 I do. I think there should be a general valuation of 
 Ireland to settle the whole matter as. to fair rents, and 
 then, with the Ulster custom, the tenants have fixity 
 of tenure. These are the two things they want, and 
 hence I would have a regular scientific valuation of 
 Ireland, and of every holding in it, as the basis of 
 rent. 
 
 6696. Do you think such a valuation would be 
 possible ? — I do indeed. 
 
 6697. Wlio would you employ to carry it out? — I 
 think it should be some person selected by Govern- 
 ment, and qualified to do it. 
 
 6698. Do you think a stranger coming to a district 
 could know the- value of land as well as people in the 
 locality ? — I think if he has any knowledge of land he 
 can — that is, if he is a practical man knowing any- 
 thing about land. He could examine the subsoil, the 
 gradients, the aspect, and all those things which tell 
 upon the value of a farm. 
 
 6699. Do you consider the present Government 
 valuation at all uniform. I don't mean all over Ire- 
 land, but is it uniform over a county ? — It is tolerably 
 .so, but I do not think it is reliable in any case. It is 
 high, relatively, in Armagh, and rather low in Tyrone. 
 
 6700. Was not Grifiith's valuation carried out very 
 much upon the j)rinciples you suggest— examination 
 of soil, and calculation how much the farm would pro- 
 duce ? — Yes. I believe Grifiith's valuation was only' 
 intended as a basis for taxation. I believe some per- 
 centage was taken off the value ; but it was made en- 
 tirely for taxation and not for rents, and it is not a 
 fair criterion for rents at the present day. 
 
 6701. Do you consider that it is feirly made for 
 purposes of taxation ? — It is more or less uniform for 
 taxation. It is below the letting value of the land at 
 the present day in most cases. In Tyrone it is nearly 
 twenty-five, and in Armagh fully ten per cent, below 
 the just letting value. 
 
 6702. On the estates with which you are connected 
 are the rents much above the valuation? — On the 
 Armagh estate the rent is five per cent, below the 
 valuation at the present time. That rent has not been 
 
 Mr. Richard C. 
 Brush. 
 
 revised these forty or fifty years. On the Tyrone estate Sept. 28, isso. 
 the rent is about one and a half per cent, above the 
 valuation. 
 
 6703. Has that not been revised lately? — It has 
 not been revised since 1858. 
 
 6704. Are leases general or otherwise on the estates 
 you manage ?— Not general. They are not asked for 
 in any case now. 
 
 6705. Do you recognize tenant-right on the expira- 
 tion of a lease ? — Certainly. 
 
 6706. Just the same as in tenancies from year to 
 year ? — Yes. 
 
 6707. Mr. Kavanagh. — With regard to a Govern- 
 ment valuation, supposing it could be managed, don't 
 you think it would be open to this objection, tliatupon 
 the occasion of every contested election we would have 
 candidates coming forward and saying they would go 
 for a new valuation in order to lower rents. Don't 
 you think it would bring the question of rent into the 
 political atmosphere. You understand what I mean ? 
 — I quite understand, but I fear that would occur no 
 matter in what way it was done. The same thing 
 will hold good, I think, in all elections, but I would 
 not place any value on it. 
 
 6708. It strikes me that to make the Government 
 responsible for a valuation which was to determine 
 rent would be holding out a very great ja-emium to 
 political agitators to attack the Government with the 
 view of mnking them bring in a bill each year to have 
 another valuation and lower the rent ? — It might have 
 that efiect, but the Government ought to reject any 
 force put on them of that nature. I don't think it 
 would influence the matter. I do not see how joxi 
 could get a valuation made, except by some authorized 
 persons, such as the officers who made the Poor Law 
 valuation. If that had been made for purposes of 
 rent we woidd have abided by it, but it was not. 
 
 6709. You don't think it would be better managed 
 by local arbitratoi'S and umpires ? — I think the court 
 of appeal we should have should be better than the 
 Assizes or Quarter Sessions. It should be some easily 
 accessible and practical court, to which both tenant and 
 landlord could resort cheaply and convenientjy. I 
 think if arbitrators were appointed by Government, 
 independent of any person, for each district or county, 
 as the case niight be, and let these men be bound to 
 meet whenever required, and to hear the case on both 
 sides, I think it would be more satisfactory, and it 
 would relieve the courts. 
 
 6710. From what you said about rack renting, I 
 think yori implied that upon small estates, some such 
 thing does go on ? — I think it does, . undoubtedly — ■ 
 especially in the case of landlords who have purchased 
 recently in the Landed Estates Court. 1 think in 
 some cases high renting does go on. 
 
 6711. In your opinion, then, some of the complaints 
 we have heard about excessive rents are based on a 
 true foundation ?^I think they are bondjlde as regards 
 small estates, but they have no application to the 
 largo property held under the old landlords. 
 
 6712. There were some large estates mentioned to 
 us on which excessive rents &re alleged to be charged ? 
 Lord Lurgan's estate, the Duke of Manchester's, and 
 Lord Castlestuart's Do you know anything about 
 Lord Castlestuart's property? — I know v.^here it is, 
 and I know his agent very well. 
 
 6713. Who is his agent? — Major Stuart, of Omagh. 
 I never heard a word of complaint as to the manage- 
 ment of that estate, although I live in the neighbour- 
 hood. 
 
 6714. Tlie general line of complarat with regard to 
 those estates is, that tenants are forced to take leases, 
 barring them from all advantage under the Land 
 Act, that at the expiration of a lease, tenant-right is 
 denied, and consequently giving the tenant a lease 
 
 of that kind, shuts him out from any benefit? It 
 
 does, and the tenants would not take such leases unless 
 forced to do so. 
 
 6715. Do you believe they are forced? — I do not 
 think they are, as a rule. 
 
 2 12 
 
244 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMii 
 
 Sept D:i, ISSO. 
 
 JMr. Richard C. 
 Brush. 
 
 G716. Baron Dowse. — What do you mean by 
 " forced"? — Mr. Kavanagh used the word — I merely 
 followed him. 
 
 6717. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you think they take 
 leases when they would rather not take them 1 — I do 
 not think they do — How they are forced I cannot 
 imagine. I could not force a man to take a lease. 
 
 6718. There was a statement made here, that on 
 Lord Eanfurley's estate, a tenant was forced to sign 
 a confiscatory lease. I take it, no such case has come 
 imder your experience \ — Not one. 
 
 6719. You believe that on some of the small estates 
 rack renting has prevailed 1 — I think high renting 
 has prevailed on some of the small properties which 
 were bought in the Landed Estates Court. 
 
 6720. Baron Dowse. — By men who purchased as 
 an investment? — Exactly, money lenders and land 
 jobbers. 
 
 6721. Mr. Kavanagh. — We were told that upon 
 some estates, on every change of tenancy, the rent 
 was increased, that a son inheriting from his father, 
 and a widow succeeding to a farm after the death of 
 her husband, was considered a change of tenancy, and 
 that on all those occasions the rent was raised 1 — That 
 may be done on some estates that I am not aware of, 
 but it is not done on any estate I have anything to 
 do with, and I can also speak for a large property in 
 the county of Down, which my brother manages. 
 
 6722. Do you know anything of Mr. Eichardson's 
 property? — I do not. 
 
 6723. Your object to the scheme of peasant pro- 
 prietary ? — I do. 
 
 6724. Don't you think it would be an advantage to 
 the community to have some tenant proprietors 
 scattered here and there over the country ? — I do not 
 think it would be well to got the thin end of the 
 wedge in at all — nor would it in my opinion do any 
 good even to themselves. 
 
 672.5. If a man had money enough to buy his hold- 
 ing, don't you think he would be better off? — He 
 might for a short time — but only a short time. He 
 would subdi^'ide it until he cut it up into potato 
 gardens. 
 
 6726. I am assuming that a proper barrier is put to 
 subdivision. Of course I woidd permit a man to assign 
 it as a whole, but not to subdivide it. Don't you think 
 it would make him more loyal — that he would have a 
 
 stake in the country ? — It would depend very much on 
 the character of the man. I do not think it would, 
 generally speaking, have much effect in that way, and 
 I think it would encourage debts and mortgages. 
 
 6727. The O'Conor Don.— Would not that cure 
 itself — the thriftless man would be sold out, and an 
 industrious, thrifty man would come in his place 1 — 
 No doubt that would be so, but the system would be 
 injurious — money lenders and usurers would by 
 degrees become owners of the farms, and would set, 
 them to the tenants. 
 
 6728. Baron Dowse. — You think ib would create a 
 new generation of landlords ? — Yes ; and a worse 
 description of landlords by a great deal than any that 
 have hitherto existed. 
 
 G729. The O'Conor Don. — You say that is your 
 opinion theoretically — you have no facts to guide you ? 
 — No ; of course it is only my opinion. 
 
 6730. In the actual cases where tenants have become 
 purchasers of their holdings the result you anticipate 
 has not taken place to any great extent ? — I am not 
 aware of any cases. There has been scarcely time yet 
 to judge how the system has worked. 
 
 6731. Baron Dowse. — Would you see any objection 
 to this : where you have a tenant who has shown himself 
 to be a thriftjr, industrious man, and who has a sub- 
 stantial sum of money of his own to begin with, and 
 if that man's landlord is willing to sell him his farm, 
 can you see any reason why facilities should not be 
 afforded for such an arrangement, not by way of a 
 general scheme for the creation of a body of peasant 
 proprietors, but by a sort of pjrocess of natural selection, 
 enabling the thriftv, industrious tenant to become pro- 
 jirietor of his holding — do you see any objection to 
 that? — I do not see any objection to it in a case of 
 that kind — if such a case can be found. 
 
 6732. You see no objection to that ? — No. 
 
 6733. But you do see an objection to the scheme 
 applied wholesale to the entire country ? — I do. I 
 think it would be ruinous to Ireland. 
 
 6734. But in such a case as I have pointed out you 
 think it would be unobjectionable ? — Yes, if such a 
 case arises. 
 
 6735. The O'Conor Don. — You would approve of 
 the State assisting such a man? — I see no objection 
 to it. 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 Qain. 
 
 Mr. Peter Quin recalled, and further examined. 
 
 6736. Baron Dowse. — I wish to ask you a question 
 with reference to a ijiatter in which you were arbi- , 
 trator. Do you recollect acting as arbitrator with 
 reference to some property of Mr. Bond's ? — I do, 
 perfectly. 
 
 6737. Is that Mr. R. J. M'Geough Bond?— Yes; 
 he lives at Silver Bridge. 
 
 6738. Is that near Ai'magh ? — It is. The property 
 lies between Armagh and Market Hill. 
 
 6739. He had some disputes with his tenants? — • 
 He had. 
 
 6740. He made demands of increased rent? — Yes. 
 
 6741. I believe lie had a considerable number of 
 tenants ? — He had. 
 
 6742. He served a number of notices to quit and 
 ejectments? — He did. 
 
 6743. And I believe there were land claims? — 
 Yes. 
 
 6744. He wanted to limit the tenant-right to a 
 certain number of years' purchase, I believe ? — That I 
 do not know. 
 
 6745. Were jow called in as arbitrator ? — As umpire. 
 There were two gentlemen appointed as arbitrators 
 I was appointed as umpire. 
 
 6746. Was the arbitration carried out ?^It was. 
 
 6747. With reference to how many cases? — It 
 applied to the whole estate. 
 
 6748. Did you lower the rent? — We lowered the 
 rent which he demanded. We fixed the rents at a 
 less sum than Mr. M 'Geough Bond wanted to fix them 
 at. 
 
 6749. And larger than what the tenants offered? — 
 Yes. We went over the lands ourselves, and inspected 
 every inch of the property. 
 
 6750. Was that reference to arbitration by consent 
 of the landlord and tenant ? — Yes ; it wasa land claim 
 in which Mr. Butt was concerned at the assizes — the 
 case came before the judge, and it was suggested that 
 it should be left to arbitration. 
 
 6751. Have the tenants been holding at tliese rents 
 since ? — As far as I know they have. 
 
 6752. In that case there was unquestionably an 
 attempt to raise the rents ? — Undoubtedly. Mr. Bond 
 purchased the property in the Landed Estates Court. 
 
 6753. Who owned the property before? — It was 
 part of the Maxwell estate. 
 
 6754. The effect of raising the rents would be to 
 make the tenant-right of less value ? — That was Yvc. 
 Butt's argument. 
 
 6755. Would it not be your own opinion also? — 
 Certainly, if the rent was unreasonably raised it would 
 diminish the value of the tenant-right. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 245 
 
 Mr. John G. "Winder, j.p., Armagh, examined. 
 
 6756. The O'Conor Don. — You are a land agent 1 
 
 Yes. 
 
 6757. Are you an owner of land yourself? — I am 
 not. 
 
 6758. On what properties are you agent? — On the 
 estates of Sir Capel Molyneux, Mr. Cope, the Ashmore 
 estate, the Aghanample estate, Archdeacon Darby, 
 Miss Olpherts, and several smaller estates. 
 
 6759. In what counties are those estates situated 'I — 
 Sir Capel Molyneux's estate is in five counties, Armagh, 
 Kildare, Dublin, Limerick, and Queen's County. 
 
 6760. Are the other estates of which you have the 
 management situated in Ulster? — They are. The 
 portion of the Molyneux estate which is situated in 
 Armagh includes 5,000 acres. The other estates for 
 which I am agent are all in Armagh. 
 
 6761. "What is the annual value of them all? — 
 About £17,000 a year. 
 
 6762. How much of that is in Ulster? — About 
 £8,000 or £9,000 a year. 
 
 6763. Upon all these estates does tenant-right pre- 
 vail ? — It does. 
 
 6764. To the full extent?— To the full extent. 
 
 6765. There is no limit on sale? — No limit. 
 
 6766. Have you found it to work well? — I have. 
 
 6767. Are you opposed to limiting the money jDaid 
 for tenant-right by an incoming tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 6768. Are there any office rules of any sort upon 
 the estates of which you have the management? — 
 None, except that the adjoining tenant should have 
 the first ofler — ^that is all. 
 
 6769. And if the adjoining tenant is not willing to 
 buy, is it put up to public auction ? — No ; I will not 
 say auction. 
 
 6770. You do not permit sale by auction? — No. 
 
 6771. You impose that restriction? — I do. That 
 was discussed in the case of Hillock v. Cope. 
 
 6772. How far do you carry the restriction as to the 
 mode of sale, do you limit it to the tenants upon the 
 estate, or do you allow outsiders to buy ? — I don't 
 limit it to the tenants upon the estate. The adjoining 
 tenant is to get the first offer, and if he won't buy it 
 does not -matter who gets it. 
 
 6773. Supposing the adjoining tenant is not willing 
 to give the same amount an outsider would give, does 
 the outsider get it ? — Well, the tenant-right generally 
 goes at about the same price all over the district. I 
 have left it to neighbours to settle when there was a 
 dispute, but that hardly ever takes place. 
 
 6774. What is the amount generally given per acre 
 for tenant-right ? — It varies in different localities ac- 
 cording to circumstances ; the character of the land- 
 lord, 1 think, chiefly affects it, or that of his family. 
 
 6775. Are we to understand that there is generally 
 a certain fixed amoimt on the same estate for tenant- 
 right ? — Yes ; it goes generally at about the same 
 amount on each estate. 
 
 6776. Baron Dowse. — You have no sum fixed by 
 the office ? — None at all. 
 
 6777. It fixes itself by the law of supply and de- 
 mand ? — Yes ; they fix it among themselves. 
 
 6778. The O'Conor Don. — Do you allow an out- 
 sider not living on the estate to purchase ? — In case 
 the adjoining tenant won't purchase, I do not care who 
 gets it. I never interfere. 
 
 6779. Does such a case as this ever arise — that an 
 outsider would offer more than you consider the fair 
 selling price of the farm ? — Well, the price may vary 
 a little. I do not think they do. 
 
 6780. Such a case as that has not arisen? — On a good 
 estate there are always plenty of tenants willing to buy, 
 there are not often any farms offered for sale. 
 
 6781. There have been few sales ? — Very few. 
 
 6782. Have the prices varied much since the Land 
 Act ? — No ; not that I know of There was a good 
 farm of about thirty acres on Mr. Cope'.s estate sold 
 last week, the buyer paid about £ 1 2 per acre for it. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 
 6783. Would that have been the price before 1870? wi'ndeJ"!;.?; 
 — It is about the same price all round Armagh. ' 
 
 6784. Are the tenancies usually yearly tenancies, or 
 under lease ? — Nearly all yearly tenancies. 
 
 6785. Do you alter the rents upon the occasion of 
 a sale ? — Never, except one case, almost a townpark, 
 and it was raised to the Government valuation. 
 
 6786. Has there been any raising of rents at all upon 
 the estates with which you are connected ? — On the 
 expiration of a lease there is a new agreement. I have 
 never had any diffculty about rent. 
 
 6787. With the exception of the time a lease expires 
 you have had no alteration of rents ? — About twenty 
 years ago there was a revaluation of part of Arch- 
 deacon Darly's, and Mr. Cope's projierties, more for 
 the sake of adjustment than anj^thing else, the altei'a- 
 tions were very small. I believe the rent of the whole 
 was only increased £15 or £20 a year. 
 
 6788. You have no fixed intervals at which a read- 
 justment of rent takes place? — No. I do not know 
 any estate in Armagh that has that. 
 
 6789. Are improvements on those estates generally 
 made by the tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 6790. The landlords don't contribute anything ? — 
 They may do a little occasionally, but not as a rule. I 
 used to give on one estate so much a perch for making 
 thorough drains, but that is stopped. 
 
 6791. Have the teif^nts laid out much money u23on 
 improvements? — Indeed they have. 
 
 679i. You do not raise the rents in consequence 
 of the tenants' improvements ? — Certainly not. 
 
 6793. Do you agree with the last witness that there 
 ought to be a Government valuation which should be 
 taken as a basis for rents ? — No. I do not. 
 
 6794. Are you aware there ai'e some landlords 
 who have raised the rent upon improvements of 
 tenants ? — I dare say there are plenty. 
 
 6795. It is possible such a thing might happen under 
 the present law ? — It is. 
 
 6796. Would you suggest any alteration of the law, 
 to prevent it? — I am not prepared to suggest any 
 alteration. 
 
 6797. Do you think the present law sufficient for 
 the protection of the tenant? — In my own county, 
 Armagh, I do. 
 
 6798. Baron Dowse. — Would you extend tenant- 
 right to the south and west of Ireland ? — I do not see 
 any harm in doing so. 
 
 6799. Do yoLi think the present law is quite satis- 
 factory, and requires no amendment? — I think the 
 assistant-barristers sometimes settle the rent, they 
 sometimes take it on themselves to do that. In case 
 of a dispute between landlord and tenant, the land- 
 lord has no chance as to evidence, because he can get 
 little or no evidence, whereas the tenant can get all 
 the tenants' testimony, which is the practical evidence. 
 The landlord can only get the evidence of the land- 
 agent, the engineer, and valuator, which is not satis- 
 factory. 
 
 6800. You do not consider that state of things satis- 
 factory ? — I do not. 
 
 6801. How do the County Court Judges undertake 
 to settle the rents ? — I don't know how they do it, but 
 they do it. 
 
 6802. I want to know how it comes before them ? 
 The tenant complains that the rent is too high, or some- 
 thing of that kind ; it is quite a common thing for the 
 barrister to make a suggestion. 
 
 6803. Where there is a dispute between landlord 
 and tenant before the barrister, the tenant sometimes 
 complains that the rent is too high ? — Yes. 
 
 6804. The landlord says it is not, and the matter is 
 left to the barrister by both sides, to say what the 
 fair rent should be ? — "^es. 
 
 6805. The O'Conor Don. — You don't consider that 
 a satisfactory tribunal to settle rents? — I do not. 
 Neither party is satisfied, so far as my experience goes. 
 
246 
 
 IFJSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. John G. 
 Winder, j.p. 
 
 6806. Can you suggest a better tribunal ? — I cannot. 
 I won't suggest anything. 
 
 6807. Would you object to having rents adjusted 
 by some tribunal^ independent of landlord and tenant, 
 in ease of a disagreement as to the amount 1 — If they 
 agreed to refer it to arbitration, I see no objection to 
 it, but I do not see why any one should value my 
 property without my consent. 
 
 6808. You think it would be an unjust interference 
 with the landlords' rights, to have a tribunal of that 
 kind forced iipon them ? — I think it would not be a 
 proper interference. I do not say it would be unjust. 
 Very likely many landlords would be glad to avail 
 themselves of it, if it was a competent tribunal. 
 
 6809. With regard to purchase by tenants, under 
 the Bright clauses, have you any experience 1 — I have 
 not. I knew a man who purchased a farm under the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners. He has sold it again 
 since. 
 
 6812. The O'Conoe Don.— You don't know the 
 case of your own knowledge 1 — I do not, except from 
 hearsay. 
 
 6813. Is there any other point you wish to state to 
 the Commission'! — No. 
 
 6814. With regard to the portions of Ireland out 
 of Ulster in which the estates you have the manage- 
 ment of are situated does tenaiit-right exist Upon 
 them 1 — Yes. I know several people who purchased 
 farms on those estates. They do not give the same 
 amount that the Ulster people do, but they give 
 money, and I always recognize it* 
 
 6815. In those cases were they yearly tenants'? — 
 Nearly all yearly tenants. In Limerick there are a 
 good many leases for lives. 
 
 6816. Has this system of allowing the tenants to 
 sell their interest been long in existence on those 
 estates ? — I think so, but I am only foiirteen years 
 agent in the southern and midland counties. 
 
 6817. You found the system, in existence there 
 when you went 1 — I did, to a certain extent. 
 
 6818. Do the landlords make improvements on the 
 estates out of Ulster ? — They make most of the im- 
 provements as far as buildings are concerned. 
 
 6819. Your experience is that out of Ulster the 
 landlords make a considerable portion of the improve- 
 ments ■] — Yes. 
 
 6820. More than they do in Ulster ?— Yes. 
 
 6821. In Ulster, as a rule, they do not? — They 
 do not. A Sinn of about £6,000 was expended in 
 drainage on the property in Limerick and Ivildare. 
 We gave it to the tenants, and charged nothing 
 for it. 
 
 6822. You charged no additional rent? — No addi- 
 tional rent. 
 
 6823. Are rents lower or higlier in ilunstor than 
 in Ulster 1 — They are lower in Munster. 
 
 6824. What is the proportion of rent as compared 
 with the valuation in Ulster 1 — I think there is very 
 little difference. On the Castledillon property it is 
 very much the same as the valuation. 
 
 6825. In Munster is it the same 1 — The rent is 
 considerably over the valuation in most places in 
 Munster. 
 
 6826. You think the rents in Munster are higher 
 than in Ulster t — Considerably. 
 
 6827. For the same quality of land 1 — Yes. 
 
 6828. Baron Dowse. — Is the Munster land better? 
 — Yes, part of it. 
 
 6829. Have you had many cases in the Land 
 Court?— Three. 
 
 6830. Only three?— That is all. 
 
 6831. Were they all in Ulster? — Two were in 
 Ulster. One arose out of a sale by the sheriff. A 
 creditor got a decree of ,^. /a., and sold the farm, 
 through the sheriff, against my consent. 
 
 6832. That was the case of Hillock v. Cope? — 
 Yes. Nobody would buy it — it was worth a couple 
 of hundred pounds, and the creditor bought it him- 
 self for five. 
 
 6833. What was the result of the land claim ?— His 
 claim vms dismissed by Chief Baron Palles, in Dublin, 
 on ajspeal, with costs. 
 
 6834. That was the thuxl case you had? — No, that 
 was the first. The second case was this — the steward 
 at Dromilly set a house and four and a half acres of 
 land without my knowledge. I kept the man after- 
 wards as tenant, but I always paid the taxes and 
 everything, and he was to give it up whenever it 
 was asked for. It was part of the demesne lands, 
 but when we wanted it he would not give it up. I 
 had to evict him, and he brought a land claim. 
 
 6835. You succeeded in that case I suppose ?— No. 
 He was considered to be a tenant, but he did not 
 get very much. 
 
 6836. You had only three land cases altogether?^ 
 That was all. 
 
 6837. On the whole do you find the tenant-right 
 system working well on the property you are connected 
 with in Ulster ? — Cei-tainly. 
 
 6838. Do you think it conduces to the prosperity 
 of the tenant" and of the cotmtry generally? — I think 
 so. I think it is fair and just as betv.-eon man and 
 man. 
 
 6839. It does the landlord no harm?— No, not the 
 least. 
 
 6840. And it secures the tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 6841. And is good for the agent, and saves him 
 trouble?— Tes. 
 
 6842. In other parts of Ireland you say the same 
 sj'stem is to some extent growing up ? — Yes, on estates 
 of' which I have the management. 
 
 6843. Do you find it works well there? — It has not 
 progressed very much there — it is only occasionallj 
 in operation — but so far as it has gone I see no 
 objection to it at all, quite the contrary. 
 
 6844. Do you see any reason why the tenant-right 
 system should be confined to Ulster ? — None at all, if 
 the tenants created it for themselves. 
 
 6845. In your opinion has the Land Act been 
 beneficial to Ireland or the contrary ? — I do not think 
 it has affected us much — I think the tenants were 
 just as well without it. 
 
 6846; Don't you think that with regard to other 
 estates, differently managed, it may have been an 
 advantage, where there was an inclination on the 
 part of the landlords to extinguish the tenant-right? 
 —Yes. 
 
 6847. Raising rents unduly would extinguish the 
 tenant-right ? — Yes, but as a rule tenants when 
 purchasing a farm think very little about the rent till 
 they come to pay it. 
 
 6848. One of the incidents of tenant-right is a fair 
 rent ? — Yes. 
 
 G849. And not to be evicted except for nonpayment? 
 —Yes. 
 
 6850. That rarely or never happens in Ulster? — I 
 never knew it to occur except once — and in that case 
 the landlord put a tenant out because he beat him in 
 an action. 
 
 G852. Do you ever exercise the power of distress? 
 — I never did, and I do not know anybody that does 
 exercise it in Armagh. 
 
 6853. I believe the Castledillon property is a very 
 ' good estate ? — It is. 
 
 6854. How far is it from Armagh? — About two 
 miles. 
 
 6855. Mr. Kavanagii. — ^You say the tenants in 
 Ulster as a rule make the improvements themselves ? 
 ■ — Almost always. 
 
 6856. Do you notice' any change in that lately? — I 
 do not. I notice no change. I don't think they 
 regard the present agitation as real or bondjide. 
 
 6857. Do you think the feeling of insecurity in 
 their holdings is general ? — From my own kno"\vledge I 
 think as a rule they all feel perfectly secure. I never 
 had a dispxite with tenants. 
 
 6858. Then, what we hear about tliis feeling of in- 
 securitv being so general amongst the tenantry is not 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 247 
 
 tlie fact as far as your knowledge goes 1 — Cerfcainly 
 not, so far as my knowledge goes. 
 
 6859. Still is it not the fact that the landlord of an 
 estate might destroy the tenant-right, if he so desired, 
 by raising the rents'? — No doubt he might. 
 
 6860. There is nothing in the Act to prevent him 1 
 —No. 
 
 6861. There is also this danger, that though the 
 present landlord may be a good one, his successor may 
 not 1 — Certainly. 
 
 6862. Baron Dowse.— And a good agent is not 
 immortal 1 — No. My experience is that the better 
 you behave to your tenants the better they will 
 behave to you. I have always found it so. 
 
 6863. Mr. Kavanagh. — Does not the whole 
 question, in the end, resolve itself into the question 
 of rent '?-^I think it does. 
 
 6864. Therefore it is with regard to rent that any 
 remedy, to be at all practical, should be applied 1 — I 
 really do not feel competent to give any opinion upon 
 that. 
 
 6865. Baron Dowse. — Assuming that there is a 
 feeling of insecurity in the minds of some people, does 
 not that arise from the apprehension of the rent being 
 raised t — ^Yes. 
 
 6866. Mr. Kavanagh. — -It is by raising the rent 
 that the landlord coiild destroy tenant-right ? — Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 6867. Then if you were to apply any remedy it should 
 be some plan which would fix the amount of rent, so 
 that the landlord could not raise it unduly, is it not 
 so ? — Yes. I think if there could be some way devised 
 for fixing rent by arbitration or some other way, in 
 case of disj)ute, it would be desirable, but I wo^ild not 
 like to go farther than that. 
 
 6868. You say you would not see any harm or in- 
 iustice in extending the tenant-right cusbom to the 
 south of Ireland, if the tenants created it for them- 
 selves, what do you mean by that 1 — By making their 
 own improvements. 
 
 6869. Is that all ?— That is all -they did in this 
 part of the country. 
 
 6870. The incoming man has to buy the right of 
 occupation from the outgoing man 1 — Yes. 
 
 6871. Therefore, of course, when he does that he is 
 entitled to sell his tenant-right on going out again 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 6872. Supposing that in the south a man came into 
 
 occupation of a farm, and paid nothing for it, how Sept .2S, 1880. 
 would tenant-right attach to him? — If the landlord jj,. John G. 
 allowed tenant-right on it, and made improvements, Winder, j.p. 
 I suppose he ought to get something for them. 
 
 6873. You mentioned a property where you said a 
 very large sum had been expended in drainage 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 6874. Do you think the tenant should have a right 
 to sell that as if he had done it himself? — Well, the 
 drainage of the estate made it more valuable and in- 
 creased the landlord's security for the rent. 
 
 6875. Do you consider that to beasuflicient return 
 to the landlord for his expenditure t — It was in- 
 tended more as a gift, I think, than as expecting to be 
 remunerated ; by admitting the system of tenant- 
 right, you make it the interest of the tenant to im- 
 prove the land and benefit the landlord b];- securing 
 his rent. 
 
 6870. But if the landlord objected to introdu.ce the 
 system of tenant-right on his estate, or considered that 
 it was an interference with the rights of property, do 
 you think it would not be so ? — I think he would be 
 very foolish to object to it, for I really do not see 
 what harm it could do him. Some of the fai'ms in the 
 south of Ireland are rather large for tenant-right ; but 
 in the case of the small farms I do not see what harm 
 it could do. 
 
 6877. Would you apply the principle of tenant- 
 right generally to large as well as small farms ? — I 
 would. I don't see what harm it could do, but the 
 larger the farm the less in my opinion it would bring 
 for tenant-right. That, however, is only a theory of 
 my own. 
 
 6878. TheO'CoNOR Don.— Do you think that a 
 landlord once he parts with his land, should never 
 have a right to resume possession of it again 1- — I do 
 not. I think he ought to have a right to get it back, 
 but I would make him pay for it if he took it. 
 
 6879. Would you make him pay a tenant in the 
 south, who paid nothing for it when he went in 1 — I 
 would make him pay what the tenant paid for it. 
 
 6880. Suppose a landlord let a farm five or six 
 years ago to a tenant, and charged him nothing for it, 
 and the tenant laid out nothing on improvements 
 since, would you consider it fair that that landlord 
 should be obliged to pay tenant-right for Ihat farm on 
 getting it up from the tenant 1 — 1 would not ; I would 
 consider it very unfair. 
 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Waking, d.l., Waringstown, county Down, examined. 
 
 6881. Baron Dowse.^ — ^You are an owner of land? 
 — ^I am. 
 
 ■ 6882. How many acres does your property contain ? 
 —A little over 4,000. 
 
 6883. Is it all your own property 1 — My ov/n pro- 
 perty. 
 
 6884. How long have you been in possession of 
 that property as owner? — Since my father's death in 
 1866 — fourteen years. 
 
 6885. Does the custom of tenant-right prevail in 
 your district ? — Yes, universally now ; there were 
 exceptions some years ago. 
 
 6886. What do you understand by the Ulster 
 custom? — I understand by it the right of a tenant 
 to sell the good-will in his holding to a person 
 approved of by the landlord as to solvency and char- 
 acter. 
 
 6887. Mr. Kavanagh. — Without limit of price? 
 — Without limit of price. In my district we have 
 never limited the price. 
 
 6888. Baron Dowse.— Is there any rule as to 
 price? — No, no fixed rule now. There is a sort of 
 standard set up by the tenants themselves — unless 
 there are some special reasons for changing it, they 
 have set up in their own minds a sort of rule that 
 £20 per Irish acre is a fair price for tenant-right ; 
 
 but they sometimes go over or vmder that according 
 to circumstances. 
 
 6889. I suppose the character of the landlord has 
 something to do \vith it ? — It has a good deal ; also 
 the situation of the land and its convenience to 
 public mal-kets. Strange to say I have seen cases 
 in which the necessities of the outgoing tenant had 
 an influence on the price. If he wanted to go to 
 America, and required a certain sum for that pur- 
 pose, the incoming man would be pretty sure to come 
 up to that price. 
 
 6890. Are there anyofiice rules or local rogulatidiis 
 in your district aff'eoting tenant-right 1 — Not that I am 
 aware of. 
 
 6891. Do you find that the system of tenant-right 
 works well 1 — Yes ; I find it very satisfactory. 
 
 6892. "It secures the landlord his rent? — Quite so. 
 
 6893. And secures the tenant his improvements ' 
 
 Yes. 
 
 6894. I suppose you look upon it as important that 
 the landlord shall have a voice in the selection of 
 the tenant ? — I do think that is of importance in 
 the interests of the tenants themselves — more so even 
 than in the interests of the landlord, for it is of 
 great_ importance to tlie tenantry upon an estate that 
 an objectionable person shall not be introduced amono-st 
 
 Lieut-Colonel 
 Waring, d.l. 
 
24.S 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 iapt. 23, 1880. 
 
 Lieut-Colonel 
 Waring, d.l. 
 
 them ; it is important to tliem tliat tlie new tenant 
 shall be a man of solvency and character, and a 
 good neighbour. 
 
 6895. Is there any right of pre-emption in the case 
 of a farm being for sale ? — Yes, the adjoining tenants 
 have a iDreference. 
 
 6896. Does your evidence as to the tenant-right 
 custom extend not only to your own estate but to 
 the neighbouring estates of Lord Downshire, Lord 
 Lurgan, and Mr. Stewart of Ards 1 — I am not prepared 
 to say so much as that. I do not know the rules on 
 Lord Lurgan's estate, but I believe the system on all 
 those estates are somewhat similar to what I have 
 described. 
 
 6897. Upon some estates there is a limit to the 
 price of tenant-right \ — Yes. 
 
 6898. Are you aware whether a practice has existed 
 of purchasers giving sums beyond the price named to 
 the landlord — giving large sums underhand 1 — ISTot 
 where the landlord puts no limit on the price. There 
 would be no object in it. 
 
 6899. Bu.t in cases Avhere a maximum was fixed 
 by the rules of the oiEce is it done 1 — I have no doubt 
 it is done occasionally. 
 
 6900. You say the landlord inquires into the 
 character and solvency of the purchaser ? — Yes. 
 
 6901. Suppose the purchaser had paid nearly all 
 the money he had to the outgoing man for the purchase 
 of the farm, so that he had little or nothing left to 
 work it with, would you consider that man a solvent 
 person 1 — Of course I v.'ould prefer a man who had not 
 done so, but I would not refuse a tenant because of that. 
 
 6902. You would not consider him to be in insolvent 
 circumstances simply because he had paid a large sum 
 for t)ie tenant-right, and had to borrow money to cul- 
 tivate his farm ? — No ; I have frequently accepted men 
 whom I knew to have borrowed sums of money. 
 
 6903. We have been told that in some cases the rent 
 has been increased from time to time, and that the effect 
 is to do away with the tenant-right — is that so in your 
 district ? — No. There has been no increase of rent to 
 any material extent within my memory in our district, 
 at least so far as Down is concerned. 
 
 6904. Are there leases on your property 1 — A few 
 old leases which were granted from 1823 to 1828. 
 Occasionally they are dropping in of course. 
 
 6905. For what terms are these leases ? — For three 
 lives and twenty-one years. Occasionally they fall in, 
 and the farms are then revalued according to a scale 
 which was fixed about the year 1859 — in fact, they are 
 put on the same rent as the other tenants-at-will, 
 unless where the land is manifestly inferior. 
 
 6906. I suppose the result is that the rent is in- 
 creased ? — There is usually a little rise on the farms 
 that were let in the period from 1823 to 1828. There 
 were some few leases granted duruag the time of the 
 war, which were lowered when they fell in — in fact, 
 they were lowered before they actually fell in. But 
 in the case of leases which were granted during those 
 years, from 1823 to 1828, there is ahvays a slight rise 
 made when they drop. 
 
 6907. It has been said that tenants have been in 
 some cases discouraged from making improvements in 
 consequence of an appi-ehension that the landlord 
 ■^ould raise the rents — is that a true statement as far 
 as your district is concerned ? — In my district I see 
 no discouragement to improvements — every man who 
 has means improves his farm as much as he can, I 
 believe, and, as far as my knowledge goes, there is no 
 such apprehension in the minds of tenants in my 
 district. 
 
 6908. We liave been told that that feeling prevails 
 extensively in the district of Portadown and Armagh 1 
 — -I except the count;- Armagh from my evidence. I 
 am not in a position to speak of it. I speak of the 
 county Down district, adjoining myself. 
 
 6909. In that district you do not know of any in- 
 crease of rent doing away with tenant-right? — Certainly 
 not. Any increase of rent made on the occasion of the 
 fall of a lease has been only \s. or Ij,'. M. an acre at the 
 
 outside — in some cases only amounting to a fewshillings 
 upon the whole tenancy. 
 
 6910. You have heard of the dispute which has 
 been raised as to leasehold tenp.nt-right ? — Yes. 
 
 6911. Does leasehold tenant-right prevail upon your 
 property ? — It does. 
 
 6912. You make no distinction between such a 
 tenant and one leaving under ordinary circumstances ? 
 — Certainly not. There was only one occasion on which 
 I made any distinction — it was a ^-ery peculiar case — 
 and one of the first cases that arose under the Land 
 Act. It was a lease for twenty-one years which had 
 been granted by my father of a piece of land which was 
 in his own possession at the time of the lease. In that 
 case, as the house was built to a large extent with the 
 landlord's money, we did not consider there was 
 tenant-right. 
 
 6913. That was an exceptional case? — It was. 
 
 6914. Mr. Kavanagh. — I suppose the tenant paid 
 nothing for the lease ? — The original tenant paid 
 .£150, but against that his rent was reduced by £10 a 
 year. I gave the tenant £300 for his improvements 
 after claim for tenant-right dismissed by Judge 
 Ijawson. 
 
 6915. Baron Dowse. — Under ordinary circum- 
 stances you say ' leasehold tenant-right prevails ?— 
 Quite so. In fact the question seldom arises ; the 
 tenant continues on generally after the expiration 
 of the lease, as tenant from year to year. 
 
 69 16. Is there an arrangement come to about the 
 rent? — There almost always is an arrangement about the 
 rent. My practice is that the tenant commences under 
 the newrent in the succeeding j^ear after the lease drops. 
 If the life in the lease died on the 2nd November, 1879, 
 he would not pay the new rent until November 1st, 
 1881. 
 
 6917. When he pays the new rent he becomes ten- 
 ant from year to year with the tenant-right custom 
 extending to his tenancj' the same as any other tenant 
 on the estate 1 — Yes. 
 
 6918. I don't suppose you have many evictions? — ■ 
 I never had one except the formal one in the case I 
 mentioned which was done to raise the law point. 
 
 6919. Do you find the custom of tenant-right ad- 
 vantageous for the purpose of securing the rent? — 
 Yes, I am in favour of it where it does not go mad. 
 
 6920. What do you call going mad ? — ^Vherc two 
 or three men bid against each other for a farm and 
 give two or three times the fee-simple value of the land. 
 I think that may be called going nrad. 
 
 6921. Have you ever known an instance such as this, 
 where a man paid seventy-five years purchase for 
 tenant-right of a farm under Lord Edwin Hill-Trevor! 
 — I have been told by INIr. Brush that it is customary 
 in some places to pa}^ that amount. I remember meet- 
 ing a tenant-farmer on the road last summer, and, our 
 conversation turned on the subject of the great prices 
 given for tenant-right. He said a couple of good crops 
 of flax would pay it all. 
 
 6922. Would it do so, do you think?— No; I do 
 not think it would. 
 
 6923. What would become of such a tenant if he 
 had several bad crops ? — Unless he could get another 
 fool as big as himself to buy from him he would be 
 likely to be in a hobble. 
 
 6924. You do not exercise the right of distress often? 
 — No. I once distrained a cottier tenant who was 
 trying to do a dishonest thing. That was the only 
 case in which I exercised it. I have never distrained 
 for an agricultural holding ; he was a cottier tenant 
 in a village. 
 
 6925. You think the Ulster system of tenant-right 
 is an advantageous system for the country ? — I do 
 think so. 
 
 6926. Have you studied the origin of it? — I 
 think the origin, a^ sometimes described, of it 
 is somewhat apocryphal. I am old enough to 
 remember something about it my.self I remem- 
 ber estates in my county where tenant-right did 
 not exist, and where the landlord made the greater 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 249 
 
 part of the improvements. I allude to estates now in 
 my possession. Shortly after my father coming into 
 possession he introduced the Ulster custom, and the 
 tenants thus became possessed of saleable property 
 amounting to at least £10,000. Those tenants were 
 paying higher rents than on other portions of the estate 
 because improvements had been made by the landlord. 
 
 6927. The farms had been improved by the landlord 
 and the tenants were paying higher rents on that 
 account %■ — Yes. 
 
 6928. Since that time I suppose the tenants have 
 made the improvements themselves 1 — Yes. Any im- 
 provements that have been made have been made by 
 the tenants. 
 
 6929. Is that the custom in your district ? — It is 
 the custom for the tenants to make whatever improve- 
 ments they require, except main drainage or things of 
 that kind — cleaning out drains, or repairing roads ; 
 those are done largely by the landlord. 
 
 6930. Does he charge for them? — I have not done 
 so ; but it is right to say that I have not done any 
 very extensive drainage — nothing that required me to 
 get aid from the Board of Works. Of course, in that 
 case, I should increase the rent. 
 
 6931. With reference to the farmers in your dis- 
 trict, are they well off as a rule at present 1 — I think 
 that up to la^ year they were very well off. Of 
 covirse there has been a temporary depression this year, 
 but I hope our present good harvest wiU go a long way 
 to make it up. 
 
 6932. We have heaxd complaints of the American 
 competition, has it affected farmers in your district 
 much ? — It has to some extent. I think it has put an 
 end to the growing of wheat, which was largely culti- 
 vated in my neighbourhood some years ago. I think 
 the farmers in Ireland had better drop growing wheat. 
 
 6933. Is that in consequence of the facilities for 
 importing wheat from America ?— Yes ; and also I do 
 not think wheat is a suitable crop for this climate. 
 Barley also has been given up in our neighbourhood — 
 I do not know why. 
 
 6934. What are the principal crops that are grown 
 in your district 1 — Oats, flax, potatoes, and a. great deal 
 of rye grass is grown for seed. 
 
 6935. Are there much crops grown 1 — No, except 
 by large farmers. Occupiers of farms of ordinary size 
 do not grow roots to any extent. There is a large 
 industry in the growth of grass seed. 
 
 6936. Do they make any use of the stalks of the 
 grass ? — Yes ; it makes very fair hay, which does ex- 
 tremely well for cow beasts. 
 
 6937. Flax is a crop described as very exhaustive — 
 is that your opinion 1 — I am not sure that it exhausts 
 the ground more than any other white crop — except 
 for itself — you can't grow it again on the same land 
 for some time. 
 
 6938. It cannot be grown successfully more than 
 once in six or seven years ? — Quite so ; it exhausts its 
 own production, but I don't think it exhausts other 
 production. 
 
 6939. We have had farmers examined before us — 
 one of them was a tenant on Sir Eichard Wallace's 
 property — he said that, in his opinion, the farmers could 
 not live at present prices, even if they had the land at 
 a less rent than they are now paying 1 — I am unable 
 to say what a farmer can or cannot do — not being a 
 tenant-farmer myself. 
 
 6940. Do you find any difficulty in getting your 
 rents 1 — Not any. Occasionally I have to give a few 
 months time ; but, as a rule, I have no difficulty in 
 collecting my rents. 
 
 6941. Do you think any alteration in the Land Act 
 should be made for better carrying out the objects which 
 the Act of Parliament professed to have in view 1 — I 
 cannot suggest any change. In the notes which I 
 furnished to the secretary I recommended a system of 
 arbitration. I think that would be useful. 
 
 6942. You say, in your statement, that you think 
 the Ulster custom, as you have defined it, works very 
 well'!— Yes. 
 
 6943. Except where tenant-right reaches the ex- 
 travaga]it figure to which you have referred 1 — I think 
 it is injurious when it goes as far as that. 
 
 6944. Do you consider that the Ulster tenant-right, 
 as you have defined it, is as good an arrangement as 
 you could suggest? — I camaot suggest any improve- 
 ment for a district circumstanced as mine is. 
 
 6945. Is there anything in your district to make it 
 different from any other? — I do not know; perhaps 
 where an estate was let in large dairy or grazing farms 
 it might not answer, where a tenant might require 
 more capital to commence with. 
 
 6946. In the case of estates let in ordinary agri- 
 cultural iarms you think the system might be a good 
 one to apply to other parts of Ireland i — I cannot say. 
 I would not like to give an opinion outside my own dis- 
 trict. I have not information enough. 
 
 6947. You confine yourself, like a wise man, to 
 what you know 1 — I try to do so. 
 
 6948. Do you know anything about the purchase by 
 tenants of their holdings under the Church Commis- 
 sioners 1 — No, except by hearsay. 
 
 6949. What would you think of affording facilities 
 to farmers for purchasing their holdings 1 — I think they 
 would be great fools to do so. 
 
 6950. You think it would be better for them to 
 remain under a landlord ? — I think they would 
 be deliberately throwing their own tenant-right out of 
 the window. Suppose a man pays twenty-two years 
 purchase for the fee of his farm, and that he has given 
 £ 1 4 an acre — or say nine years purchase for the tenant- 
 right — doyouthinkitlikelythathe would get thirty-one 
 years purchase for that farm if he were selling it again 1 
 
 6951. Your view is, there are two properties in the 
 farm — there is the tenant-right and there is the fee — - 
 and if the occupier purchases the fee, the tenanf>right 
 merges in the fee, aiul you think he would have a diffi- 
 culty in getting the two sums if he were to sell the farm 
 again 1 — I do. 
 
 6952. Mr. Kavanagh. — You don't think the man 
 who gave twenty-two years purchase for the fee of a 
 farm, the tenant-right of which was worth nine years 
 purchase, would get thirty-one years purchase if he 
 were selling it afterwards 1 — I am quite certain he 
 would not. 
 
 6953. Baron Dowse. — That objection may no doubt 
 apply to the north of Ireland where tenant-right pre- 
 vails, but take the parts of Irejand where there is no 
 tenant-right — would it be useful there to facilitate the 
 purchase of his holding by the tenant 1 — I think it 
 might be beneficial for a prudent and industrious man. 
 It would give him a sense of property which would 
 induce him to work harder ; but as far as I can judge 
 from the effect of some perpetuity tenures which 
 existed largely upon a property in my neighbourhood, 
 I think the result would not be likely to be beneficial 
 as a general rule. 
 
 6954. Then perpetuity tenures did exist in your 
 district ?— Yes, very largely. The late Sir John 
 M'Gill of Gill Hall, many years ago took up the idea, 
 and let a large tract of country on leases for ever, his 
 example being followed by my ancestor and others. 
 
 , 6955. Did the lessees continue to occupy their hold- 
 ings 1 — No, there is not a single instance remaining at 
 the present time of the original lessee, or his descen- 
 dants, remaining in occupation. In many cases they 
 subdivided very largely. In one instance, on my own 
 estate where the lease was of sixteen acres, the last 
 renewal was made to eight or nine different occupiers. 
 . 6956. Can they live on such small patches of land 1 
 — Very badly, some of them are almost starving. 
 
 6957. Does weaving exist as an industry in your 
 district 1 — Yes. 
 
 6958. That helps them to live I suppose 1 Yes • 
 
 the small tenants earn something in that way. 
 
 6959. We have been informed that weavintr has 
 greatly decreased as an industry of late years ?-^Yes. 
 Power looms are now employed for the coarser kind 
 of work, but for fine cambric and damask, handwork 
 
 2K 
 
 Sept. 2n. 1880. 
 
 Lieut -Coionel 
 Wari-.iK, D.L. 
 
250 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept ?3, '1880. 
 
 ] ictii. -Colonel 
 Warinjr, d.l. 
 
 is still employed, though I have no doubt it will 
 ultimately be superseded by machinery. 
 
 6960. If there was some means devised for prevent- 
 ing subdivision and subletting, do you think that, in 
 the case of a thrifty tenant who had a portion of the 
 purchase-money, it would be an advantage to him to 
 assist him to purchase his holding if he was so inclined 1 
 — I think so. I think such a man during his own life 
 would be benefited by it, but as to what would follow 
 afterwards it would depend upon the character of 
 persons who succeeded him. 
 
 6961. 1 presume you would bo opposed to any 
 artificial creation of a peasant proprietary 1 — I think 
 so — taking the character of the general run of Irish 
 peasants into consideration, I think it would in the 
 great ma-jority of cases be the reverse of beneficial. 
 
 6962. Would you approve of an exodus of land- 
 lords 1 — As far as I am concerned if they paid me I' 
 would not mind. 
 
 6963. Suppose they sent you off without being paid 
 would you like it 1 — No indeed — I suppose I would 
 keep a firm grip of the land as long as I could. 
 
 6964. Do you think it is of any advantage to have 
 landlords in the country 1 — I think it is, I think they 
 do many things which are useful to the community, 
 and perform many public services which others would 
 not have leisure to perform. I knov/ I sat as a 
 magisti-ate for nine or ten hours yesterday in the 
 Court-house at Lurgan, dispensing justice to the best 
 
 . of my ability — and I did not get anything for it — not 
 even my dinner. 
 
 6965. Is there any waste laud in your distiict? — - 
 Yery little. 
 
 6906. Is there any cutaway bog '! — Not much, it 
 is nearly all reclaimed now. 
 
 6907. How do they pay for that? — My practice is 
 to give it to them free for some years, and after that 
 to put them imder a moderate rent. 
 
 69G8. Is that by agreement ? — Yes. 
 
 6969. The tenants approved of that arrangement? 
 ■ — They were satisfied with it — I gave it to them for 
 .seven or ten years free to get it into cultivation. 
 
 6970. I observe you say that in the case of the Grand 
 Jury cess the tenants themselves prefer to pay it ? — 
 Yes, I offered to pay it, if they agreed to pay an increase 
 of a sliilling in the pound on the valuation, that would 
 be about the average — ^but they all preferred to go on 
 paying the cess. 
 
 6971. Are the tenants charged for the public roads 
 when they adjoin their farms, are the roads measui'ed in 
 their holdings ? — There is no measurement — I am not 
 rich enough to keep a surveyor, and I prefer letting a 
 farm at a bulk rent, rather than so much per acre, 
 otherwise I might have discussions and disjnites as to 
 the exact contents of the farm, whether it contained a 
 rood or a perch more or less. I therefore to avoid any 
 questions of that kind, say to the tenant " I don't know 
 exuctly ^\'hat the measurement ot the farm is, but the 
 rent is so much," naming a bulk i-ent. If the tenant 
 asks me how much is that per acre, I tell him " take a 
 pencil and paper and calculate that for yourself." I 
 don't involve myself in any questions of measure- 
 ment. 
 
 0972. With reference to arbitration, have you any- 
 thing to observe ? — Yes. On my estate where the 
 adjoining tenant is selected as purchaser by the land- 
 lord, or if from any cause the purchaser and the out- 
 going tenant cannot agree as to the price of the farm, 
 it is left to the arbitration of two men — one ajipointed 
 by the outgoing tenant, and the other by the 
 purcha&*er ; and if the arbitrators cannot agree, my 
 practice is from a list of the neighbouring farmers 
 to select one man that will please them both as 
 umpire. 
 
 0973. Does that work satisfactorily ? — Yes. I sia- 
 cerely believe the tenant-farmers in this neighboixr- 
 hood and the surrounding districts would be perfectly 
 satisfied if things were lefH; as they are. I cannot sug- 
 gest any alteration which would benefit either party, 
 whatever may be the case elsewhere. 
 
 6974. You think they are satisfied with things as 
 they are at the joresent time ? — Perfectly so — so far as 
 I know the opinions of the tenant-farmers in my neigh- 
 bourhood. 
 
 6975. The O'CONOR Don. — With regard to other es- 
 tates-^I am not sj^eaking of yours — has it come to 
 your knowledge that there have been increases of 
 rent from time to time, which have had the effect of 
 extinguishing the tenant-right? — I don't think there 
 has been any increase of rent to such an extent as to 
 extinguish the tenant-right. There may have been 
 such an increase of rent as to reduce the value of the 
 tenant-right, but not to extinguish it. 
 
 6976. Do you think it would be desirable to have 
 legislation for the purpose of pi'eventing that ? — It is 
 very hard to say. There may be cases where an in- 
 crease of rent is fair and legitimate. 
 
 6977. Would you object to having an independent 
 tribunal, with power to settle the question of rent, in 
 cases where the tenant and landlord disagreed ? — I 
 would not, if a competent and independent tribunal 
 can be found ) but there would be great diiSculty iu 
 finding it. 
 
 6978. Baron Dowse. — Is it not possible, under the 
 present law, for a landlord to raise the rent to such an 
 extent as to diminish, and even destroy, the tenant- 
 right 1 — I think it would be very difiiault. I don't 
 think any resident landlord would think of doing such 
 a thing. 
 
 6979. In your opinion, has nothing of the sort ever 
 occurred? — I do not know of any place where the 
 tenant-right is anything like extinguished. There ax-e 
 places where it has been lowered in value, but they 
 are very few. 
 
 6980. Supposing it were proved in evidence that such 
 a thing was done on some estates, do you think no 
 attempt should be made to check it 1 — I won't answer 
 that. I think the worst enemy to the resident land- 
 lord, who wishes to treat his tenants jiroperly, is the 
 man who acts unfairly towards his tenants — he is the 
 greatest enemy to the landlords of this country. 
 
 6981. The O'Conor Don.— With regard to the old 
 perpetuity leases which you referred to just now, I 
 suppose they were made a long time ago 1 — Yes ; in 
 1739 or 1740. 
 
 6982. The subdivision of the holdings, I suppose, 
 took place many years a,i;o? — I think not until to- 
 wards the close of the war — perhaps about 1810. It 
 was about that time, I believe, the principal subdivision 
 took place. 
 
 6983. At that time there was not much emigration ? 
 — Not much emigration. 
 
 6984. There was no resource but the land for the 
 employment of the people? — I don't think that was 
 the cause of the subdivision. It arose from the large 
 families the people had, and the abundant employment 
 at handloom weaving. A son would marry, aiid get 
 a field or two to live upon. He got along as best 
 he could; then that was repeated in the next genera- 
 tion. 
 
 6985. Do you think it a fair inference that what 
 occurred in those days, when there was no emigration, 
 would be repeated now, when the circumstances of 
 
 • the country are so diflferent? — I don't think subdivision 
 would go on to quite the same extent ; but it would g j 
 on to an injurious extent, I think. 
 
 6986. Do you find there is much tendency among 
 the people at the present time to subdivide ? — Not 
 among the intelligent class, but there are always many 
 who are not intelligent. 
 
 ' 6987. Baron Dowse. — ^Yoursis an exceptional part 
 of the country ? — I believe it is a very comfortable 
 part of the country compared with other parts. 
 
 6988. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are there many small 
 owners about your district ? — No, not many ; except 
 in the case of those perpetuities. I have Several small 
 tenants holding perpetuities, paying a few pounds a 
 year, and who have a large number of subtenants 
 under them. 
 
 6989. Have there been many cases in your neigh- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 251 
 
 'bourhood of properties being bought by land jobbers? 
 — There is one case in my parish. 
 
 6990. Do you know of anything unpleasant havino- 
 oocuiTred there t — ^A very unpleasant thing occurred 
 for him — he was obliged to buy it over again, practi- 
 cally, for there were such damages given against him 
 in the Land Court, that it pra,ctically amounted to a 
 repurchase, for which I must honestly tell you, I 
 think he was properly served. 
 
 6991. Then the Land Act has been effective in 
 preventing the landlord from doing injustice %, — I think 
 so. I am quite certain that gentleman will not try 
 the sam.e game again. 
 
 6992. The O'Conoe Don.— What had that land- 
 lord done'? — He raised. the rents unfairly — the tenants 
 refused to pay, and he proceeded to evict them, and 
 he had to pay a compensation, which amounted nearly 
 to a repurchase of the townland. 
 
 6993. You think that is a sufficient protection to 
 the tenant against an unjust increase of rent t — I think 
 
 Lient.-Colone' 
 ^Varins, D.L. 
 
 SO. I do not think anybody will ever do the same Sepf. 23, isso. 
 again in that county. 
 
 6994. Your evidence is that the love of the tenant 
 for the soil is not so great, that he will agree to pay 
 any rent, no matter how high, rather than go t — No — 
 I don't think the northern fanner would do so — 
 whatever may be the case elsewhevo. 
 
 6995.^ We have been told that such is their anxiety 
 to remain in occupation of tLeii- holdings, that they 
 will put up with any injustice rather than leave? — ■ 
 Such is not my experience ; but of course I am 
 speaking of an exceptional district. The peoi)le in 
 my neighbourhood, are mostly of English and Scotch 
 descent, and they have got a good <lcal of the Scottish 
 shrewdness about them. 
 
 6996. Baron Dowse. — There are some of Iiish 
 descent in your part of the world 1 — A few. 
 
 6997. The O'Conoe Don.— Do you think the Land 
 Act had any effect in increasing or decreasing the 
 price of tenant-right? — I don't think it made the 
 slightest difference in my part of the world. 
 
 Colonel William Beownlow Foede, Seaforde, County Down, examined 
 
 6998. Mr. Kavanagh. — You are the owner of 
 property?— I am. 
 
 6999. What is the extent of land which you own? 
 — Between 19,000 and 20,000 acres statute. 
 
 7000. Is it situated in the north of Ireland 1 — Yes, 
 it is nearly all situated in one barony of the comity 
 Down. 
 
 7001. Is it all subject to tenant-right? — All subject 
 to tenant-right. 
 
 7002. Would you give us your definition of the Ulster 
 custom ? — I consider that it involves compensation ior 
 improvements that the tenant and his predecessors have 
 made, and the good- will ot the outgoing tenant. It 
 varies according to the quality of the land and houses. 
 In some cases it amounts to £15 or perhaps £20 an 
 acre, in other cases it may amount to only £8 an acre, 
 according as the circumstances vary. 
 
 7003. Do you think the tenant has a right to stay 
 on his holding as long as he pays his rent, and this 
 compensation that you mention when he leaves it V— 
 Certainly, as long as he pays a fair rent. 
 
 7004. Does the price vary on your property ? — Yes, 
 according to 'the circumstances of the farm that is to 
 be sold, but when I give you my custom it will show 
 you that it must vary in different cases. 
 
 7005.: Are there any "office rules or local regulations" 
 affecting the Ulster custom in your district 1 — None that 
 I know of. My custom is this, when a tenant wishes to 
 sell his interest in his farm, he first of all gets my per- 
 mission to do so. I then select a tenant to succeed 
 him,igi"\'ing preference to tenants adjoining the farm 
 about to be sold. The outgoing and incoming tenants 
 each nominate a tenant-farmer on the estate to be ap- 
 proved of by me, to fix the amount the incoming 
 tenant shall pay per acre to the outgoing tenant. This 
 includes all houses and improvements upon the li^iin, 
 together with the good- will. In case the two arbitra- 
 tors cannot agree, and that I myself cannot settle the 
 matter between them, I appoint an umpire whose deci- 
 sion is final. 
 
 7006. You do not limit the price to be paid?— 
 No. 
 
 7007. You prescribe the form of ascertaining the 
 amount, but you do not limit the amount ? — No. That 
 remains for the two arbitrators to do, but I consider 
 the tenant conning in has a right to be as well treated 
 and as well looked after as the tenant going out. As 
 Baron Dowse said during Colonel Waring's examin- 
 ation) if he was made to pay more than he was getting 
 •value for, of course he could not live. 
 
 7008. It would impoverish him entirely ? — It 
 would. 
 
 7009. Whether the tenants are good neighbours 
 
 Colonel Win. 
 
 Erownlow 
 
 or not ;■ would that have anything to do in the matter ? Forde. 
 — I don't know that it would. 
 
 7010. When the price of the tenant-right is limited 
 is it common for money to pass beyond the limit 
 fixed? — I cannot say for certain, but they would 
 not let the landlords know whether they did that or 
 not. Under my system they would not do that, because 
 they have the arbitration. 
 
 7011. Was it usual before the Land Act, 1870, 
 for leaseholders to obtain the benefit of the Ulster 
 custom on the expiration of their leases? — ^I have 
 always given the Ulster custom at the expiration of 
 leases. 
 
 7012. Baron Dowse. — Provided the tenant remains 
 in? — No, it is only when he went out that he would 
 get the compensation ; if he remained in he would be a 
 tenant from year to year. 
 
 7013. Would you give him the Ulster custom if he 
 went out at the end of a lease ? — Yes. 
 
 7014. How would you work that out? — Byvaluation 
 in the same way. 
 
 7015. Would you give it yourself? — No; the 
 incoming tenant. He would get the tenantright jvist 
 the same as his neighbour. 
 
 7016. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are tjiere many, or any 
 cases, where from the size of the farm, the length of 
 the lease, the iact of the landlord making the improve- 
 ments or other circumstances, the Ulster custom does not 
 apply ? — Not more than two or three. In some of them 
 I purchased the tenant-right myself, and another was 
 a case as to demesne lands that I farmed myself for a 
 number of years, and on which I laid out a great deal 
 of money. I have let that farm out on lease, for 
 nineteen years ; and as I made the impiovements 
 myself I do not think that the farmer would be entitled 
 to the tenant-light. In another case I bought the 
 tenant-right myself, and gave it to a man, and I do 
 not consider he has a right to it. 
 
 7017. Have you any suggestions to make as to " any 
 alterations in or amendments of the existing law as 
 it affects holding^ under the Ulster custom " 1 — No ; I 
 think the present law is good and it should not be 
 altered, but if altered, I think my custom so good that 
 I would recommend its adoption. It is good for both 
 the outgoing and the incoming tenant. 
 
 7018. Do leases exist in your district ? — Very few 
 on my property. 
 
 7019. Are they increasing or decreasing since the 
 Land Act ? — Decreasing I should say ; they would not 
 thank you for a lease now. 
 
 7020. They do not take them ?— No. 
 
 7021. Are leases generally held at reduced or 
 advanced rates as compared with yearly tenancies ? • 
 
 2 K2 
 
252 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept 23, 1S80. 
 
 Colonel Wm. 
 
 Brownlow 
 
 Forde. 
 
 Tliat depends on the time the lease was granted. I 
 liave some old leases that would be lower than the 
 tenancies at will. 
 
 7022. And on the expiration of those leases you 
 think it would be fair to raise the rent 1 — To be sure. 
 
 7023. Is any fine taken 1 — No, I am prohibited by 
 the settlement under which I hold my estate. 
 
 7024. It is common to revalue the land on the 
 expiration of the lease 1 — Yes. If the land is let 
 lower, having regard to the quality of the soil, than 
 the surrounding farms that are let from year to year, 
 of course it is revalued. 
 
 7025. I presume, in any revaluation of that sort, 
 you would not take into consideration the improve- 
 ments made by the tenant ? — No, I would take into 
 consideration chiefly the rate that his neighbours were 
 paying. I would take that more than anything else, 
 becavise I think it is fair. 
 
 7026. Were the conditions of leases before the Land 
 Act generally the same as of those given by the same 
 landlord at present 'i — The same. An agricultural 
 lease I never gave ; they won't take them out from 
 me. 
 
 7027. Do tenants readily accept leases ? — They are 
 not asked for. I believe tenants would now rather 
 hold from year to year than have a lease, as they are 
 so well protected by the Land Act, not only getting 
 compensation for improvements but also for disturb- 
 ance. 
 
 7028. Is the condition of leaseholders and their 
 farming superior or the , contrary to that of yearly 
 tenants 1 — I agree with Colonel Waring s statement. 
 It is to the effect that the old perpetuity leaseholders 
 at low rents do not cultivate their farms as well as the 
 men holding from year to year. 
 
 7029. Can you say v.'hat proportion the rent on 
 your estate bears to the tenement valuation 1 — I have 
 calculated it in two ways. If I include the value of 
 buildings my rent is about eighteen and a half per 
 cent, under the valuation — if I deduct the value of 
 the buildings my rent is pretty nearly equal to the 
 valuation, but still something under it. 
 
 7030. Do you think the Government valuation is a 
 good test for rent generally ? — I think that perhaps ia 
 some parts of the country the good land is not as highly 
 valued as the bad land in other parts, hnt as far as my 
 knowledge goes, about my district the rents are 
 generally over the Government valuation. 
 
 7031. You know something of the circumstances 
 in the South 1 — Not very much. 
 
 7032. I thought that you knew something about 
 Wexford 1 — I sold a property there ; but so long ago 
 that I do not remember about that. 
 
 7033. I was going to ask you is the valuation in 
 the South and West the same as in the North ?— I 
 could not give an answer to that. 
 
 7034. Is it your experienci that the raising of rent 
 has been on the increase since the Act of 1 870 ? — I 
 should say not, as a rule ; but in a few cases, where 
 it was thought right to do so, it was done. 
 
 7035. But not as a rule ? — Not as a rule. 
 
 7036. You do not adopt the plan of revaluing at 
 stated intervals ? — I have never revalued, nor my 
 father before me. The present rents have been going 
 on since 1837. My uncle died in 1837, and my father 
 succeeded him, and the rents have been the same 
 since. 
 
 7037. Have you any disputes about rents ? — No. 
 
 7038. Baron Dowse. — Or have you had any land 
 cases 1 — Never. 
 
 ■ 7039. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you often use the right 
 of distress 1 — Never. 
 
 7040. As to improvements in your district, are they 
 generally made by the landlords ? — What I call estate 
 improvements are. I will give you that, in answer to 
 No. 3 under " Improvements," as to what is the part 
 usually imdertaken by each. In any extensive improve- 
 ments, such as arterial drainage or reclamation of bog, 
 I borrow money from the Board of Works, and I pro- 
 portion the amount to each tenant. I allot him his 
 
 proportion, and he pays me the interest for the twenty- 
 two years which I borrow it for. I take the re- 
 sponsibility of it ; and at the end of that time, of 
 course, the instalments cease. 
 
 7041. Baron Dowse. — Is that paid by way of ad- 
 dition to the rent 1 — Yes. I have a' separate book for 
 that, and I keep an account, entirely apart from the 
 tenants' rent as to these instalments. 
 
 7042. But it is paid with the rent ? — Yes ; but not 
 added to the rent. 
 
 7043. Because there is a time when it is to cease? 
 —Yes. 
 
 7044. Mr. Kavanagh. — I supjiose that the minor - 
 improvements are made by the tenants 1 — Yes. 
 
 7045. Has there been any difference as to these 
 since the passing of the Act ■? — No. 
 
 7046. Has the Act of 1870 encouraged or checked 
 them ? — I think they have just gone on about the 
 same. 
 
 7047. Your evidence is that the tenants are not 
 prevented in their improvements by any feeling of in- 
 security ■? — I think quite the contrary. 
 
 7048. Now, with regard to landlords, do you know 
 whether it has encouraged or checked their improve- 
 ments ? — It has checked them. Prior to the passing 
 of the Act, I used to allow for slates, timber, lime, 
 (fee, and for drainage, which I do not do now, as the 
 improvements all belong to the tenants. 
 
 7049. Have many or any cases occurred in your 
 district where an outgoing tenant has obtained insuffi- 
 cient compensation ibr his improvements ? — No ; the 
 tenant-right very often exceeds the fee-simple. 
 
 7050. Have you had any cases of purchases under 
 the Bright Clauses of the Land Act ? — Nothing of the 
 kind has taken place in my part of the country, and 
 I know nothing about it. . 
 
 7051. As to waste land — have you any remark to 
 make on that point. What do you understand by it ? 
 — It is difficult to know what is meant by it. I have 
 looked into a dictionary for a definition of it, and it 
 says, " A deserted and barren tract of land ;" but, if 
 you mean by waste land reclaimable land 
 
 7052. Baron DowSE. — Land that at present pro- 
 duces nothing but has capacity for improvement? — 
 Yes. 
 
 7053. Jtlr. Kavanagh. — Has there been any waste 
 land reclaimed? — There is very little waste land in 
 county Down. 
 
 7054. Baron Dowse. — Do you know a case where it 
 has been given to a tenant at a nominal rent for the 
 purpose of reclamation, and that afterwards, when he 
 has expended his bone and sinew on it, the rent has 
 been raised ? — No ; I had two or three bogs, and after 
 arterial draining, in order to bring it into a state of 
 cultivation, the tenants had it for seven years for 
 nothing, after which they came under rent. 
 
 7055. That was by agreement? — Yes. 
 
 7056. Mr. Kavanagh. — They were to hold it for 
 nothing for seven years to compensate themselves ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 7057. Baron Dowse. — You said to them "You 
 merely hold this for seven years for nothing, for your 
 labour in reclaiming it " ? — Yes. 
 
 7058. But that is not giving a man ground at a 
 shilling an acre, and aioer he has improved it charging 
 him five shillings an acre ? — That would not be allowed 
 in Down. 
 
 7059. Mr. Kavanagh. — Has any unfairness resulted 
 in your district i^-om the exception in the Land Act of 
 1870, of demesne lands, townparks, and large pasture 
 farms, from the holdings in respect of which com- 
 pensation may be claimed ? — No ; I may say there 
 are no large pasture farms in county Down. 
 
 7060. Have you any townparks ? — Yes ; I have, 
 but I don't think townparks shouM be subject to the 
 Ulster custom, because they are viroually accommoda- 
 tion for the people living in the town. They are 
 generally grass fo- a cow or something of that sort. J 
 don't think people have any right to get compensation 
 for townparks. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 7061. Are there any of this description of holding 
 you have named to -which you. would consider it 
 
 desirable to extend the benefit of the Act of 1870 1 
 
 I should say not. 
 
 7062. You would not suggest any change in that 
 direction 1 — Certainly not. 
 
 7063. Now as to the section as to the Grand Jury 
 cess ] — According to my custom of arbitration, the 
 land having been origirially set subject to the county 
 cess, and all the arrangements being made for the 
 disposal of the farm u.nder that Jiead, I have made 
 no alteration so far as the cess is concerned. The 
 tenant coming into possession takes the farm on the 
 same terms as the tenant going out, and the arrange- 
 ments are made on the old letting, there being no new 
 tenancy created, he takes the tenancy from his prede- 
 cessor, and he comes in to my agent, and signs the 
 award in the book taking the land over. 
 
 7064. Has the section (68) which excuses the pay- 
 ment of rent for land covered by a public road been 
 effectual to any extent in your district 1 — The answer 
 there would very nearly be the same as in the previoiis 
 question, because the farm was sold subject to the 
 roads being on it, and if any new roads are being made 
 the tenant gets ample compensation from the Grand 
 Jury to pay him for any loss he may sustain by the 
 road going through the farm. 
 
 7065. Baron Dowse. — He sometimes gets more than 
 the landlord l — Yes ; so that there is no hardship in 
 making the tenants pay for the roads. 
 
 7066. A new road might be made and the tenant 
 gets his compensation, and the landlord also gets his 
 compensation for the fee, but supposing there are old 
 roads, roads made twenty years ago, and the propsrty 
 changes hands in the meantime? — That farm was 
 originally let subject to those roads being upon it. 
 
 7067. And then he pays his proportion '^- Yes. 
 
 7068. You mean if on the farm he gets his com- 
 pensation f — Yes. 
 
 7069. And if he buys the farm? — He buys it or the 
 contingency. 
 
 7070. Did you ever get compensation, as a landlord, 
 for a road? — Never. 
 
 7071. But it could be asked for ? — There is no doubt 
 about it. 
 
 7072. There is a class of landlords who ask lor it? 
 —Yes. 
 
 7073. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you suggest any altera- 
 tions in,' or amendments of, the existing law regulating 
 the relations of landlord and tenant ? — I consider the 
 Act of 1870, protects all parties, and no injustice can 
 now be done having i-egard to its provisions. The tenant 
 is perfectly safe, and as to the landlord. Colonel Waring 
 spoke strongly on that subject. If . the landlord 
 sought to put on an exorbitant rent the tenant would 
 be protected in the Land Court. 
 
 7074. Baron Dowse. — That is all very well as to 
 Ulster, and if Ulster were the only part of Ireland 
 we had to deal with the Irish question would be a 
 different one ? — That is so. 
 
 7075. Don't you attribute a good deal in this part 
 of the country to the beneficial results of the Land 
 Act, taken in connexion with the tenant-right that 
 existed ? — Yes. 
 
 7076. One of the benefits, was that it legalized the 
 tenant right ? — Yes. 
 
 7077. 
 pensation ? — Yes. 
 
 7078. But if there are other parts of Ireland where 
 tenant-right does not exist, do you think it would be 
 a good thing to extend to them the same system as 
 
 And if a tenant was turned out he got com- 
 
 exists in Ulster ? — If the tenant never paid anything 
 for coming in I don't think he has a right to get ior 
 more than his improvements. 
 
 7079. Nothing for his good-will? — No, if I have a 
 farm upon which I have made improvements, and I 
 let that to a man, and charge him no teniuit-right 
 for it, I should say that it should never be sdbject 
 to tenant-right, because I made the improvements. 
 
 7080. But there are farms in other parts of Ireland 
 where the tenant gets nothing at all ?— Oh, he should 
 get for his improvements. 
 
 7081. He does that under Act of Parliament, but 
 in Ulster he gets more ; he gets for his good-will ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 7082. And even where the landlord has made no 
 improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 7083. Do you not think that the southern tenant 
 considers his northern brother better off? — I dare say 
 he does, and there is no doubt about it he is better off, 
 but I think it should not be so largely extended. 
 
 7084. Whether it arises from the good nature of 
 the landlord or not they have here felt the benefits of 
 that which other parts of Ireland have not ? — Yes. 
 
 7085. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have all the northern 
 tenants themselves or their predecessors paid for the 
 good -will? — No ; the northern tenant has not always 
 paid for the good-will ? — In bad times, as in 1848 and 
 1849, there was no tenant-right at all except a mere 
 trifle to get a man away. Those who got the land 
 then got the tenant-right. Although they did not 
 originally pay for it, if leaving now they would get the 
 tenant-right. 
 
 7086. Although they did not pay for it nor those 
 before them? — Yes. 
 
 7087. It was granted by the good-will of the land- 
 lord?— Yes. 
 
 7088. And made law by the Act of 1870 ?— Yes. 
 
 7089. Baron Dowse. — And you do not object to 
 that?— No. 
 
 7090. Because you think it secures the landlord his 
 vent ? — Yes. 
 
 7091. Is it not quite possible that by raising the 
 rent the tenant-right might be made of very little 
 value ? — I think the tenants of county Down would 
 be down pretty sharp on the landlord who attempted 
 to do that. 
 
 7092. You think that if the landlords attempted to 
 ask them an unfair rent, they would say that they would 
 not pay it, and that then the only plan for the land- 
 lord would be to serve them with a notice to quit, 
 and that as soon as they got that they would put in a 
 claim for compensation, and the case would come 
 into the Land Court ? — Yes. 
 
 7093. But all the people of Ireland are not as 
 sturdy as the Down people ? — Perhaps not. 
 
 7094. Is it possible that in some parts of Ireland a 
 man rather than fight with his landlord would pay 
 something extra ? — No doubt of it. 
 
 7095. In fact he is not entirely a free agent in the 
 matter ? — Well I would not say that he is not a free 
 agent because he has the Land Act to fall back upon 
 to get compensation for any injustice done to him. 
 
 7096. You are not aware of any gradual increase 
 of rent over the province ? — I do not think there is 
 anything of the sort in the county Down. 
 
 7097. We have heard a good deal of talk about it 
 in county Armagh ? — That is too far away from me. 
 
 7098. You speak from what you know yourself 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 
 Colonel Wm. 
 
 Brownlow 
 
 Forde. 
 
 The Hon. Somerset Ward, j.p., Strangford, County Down, examined 
 
 7099. The O'Conor Don. — You are agent for Lord 
 Bangor ? — I am. 
 
 7100. What is the extent of his property ?— His 
 agricultural estate includes about 7,000 acres. 
 
 The Hon. 
 
 Somerset 
 7101. Have you the management of any other es- Ward, j.p. 
 tates ?— Yes ; the estate of Mr. Ward, about 5,000 
 acres, and Major Nugent, about 700. 
 
254 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 ,1860. 
 
 The Hon. 
 Somerset 
 \yftrd, J,P. 
 
 7102. You have heard the evidence of Colonel 
 Waring and Colonel Forde 1 — I have. 
 
 7103. Do you concur generally in the evidence tliey 
 have given 1 — I do. 
 
 7104. Are there any points on which you differ from 
 them 1 — No. I wish to make some remarks as to office 
 rules. Whenlbecame agentten yearsago on my brother 
 Lord Bangor's property there was an otKce rule limit- 
 ing the tenant-right to £5 per statute acre. That con- 
 tinued for some time after I became agent, b\"it latterly 
 I thought it operated injuriously in discouraging im- 
 provements on the part of the tenant. I suggested an 
 alteration which my brother conceded and which was 
 imanimously approved of by the tenants. I assembled 
 the tenants in two different parts of the estate, and ex- 
 plained to them the alteration I proposed, and also to 
 the tenants of Major Nugent and Mr. Ward. They all 
 agreed that nothing could be fairer ; it is very much 
 the same as the system that is adopted on Colonel 
 Forde's estate. 
 
 7105. A system of arbitration ? — Yes. I proposed 
 that in order to fix the sum to be paid for tenant- 
 right there should be a reference to arbitration — 
 that an arbitrator should be appointed by the out- 
 going tenant, and another by the incoming man, and a 
 referee or umpire appointed by the agent on the part 
 of the landlord — some person approved of by the two 
 arbitrators, to decide any difference of opinion that 
 there might be between them. 
 
 7106. Did you restrict the sale to tenants on the 
 estate, or did you leave it open to outsiders ? — The ten- 
 ant to be selected by the landlord, none of them objected 
 to that. I stated at the time that of cou.i-se the land- 
 lord would naturally give the preference to the next 
 adjoining tenants, and if neither of the' adjoining ten- 
 
 - ants wished to purchase, then to some other tenant on 
 the property. 
 
 , 7 1 07. In those cases is there any increase of rent ? — 
 There is no increase of rentnecessarily. There is verysel- 
 dom any increase of rent upon those estates, it may hap- 
 pen occasionally in the case of some old tenancy where 
 the rent has been low and would bear a little increase ; 
 but it is very seldom that there is any increase of 
 rent. 
 
 7108. Are the rents generally speaking low? — On 
 Lord Bangor's property they ^ are below the Govern- 
 ment valuation. On Mr. Ward's they are generally 
 about equal to the valuation. On Major Nugent's 
 the rents are rather above the valuation, in some in- 
 stances considerably above it, but there is a reason 
 for that. On his estate there is a valuable sea-shore 
 and his tenants have the benefit of the sea- weed 
 which is an immense advantage to them, and they are 
 perfectly satisfied t© pay an increased rent in con- 
 sideration of that. 
 
 7109. I gather from yoiir evidence that you are 
 opposed to allowing free sale of tenant-right to the 
 highest bidder 1 — Very much opposed to it. I think 
 it is against the interests of the tenantry booause it is 
 in fact rack-renting the incoming tenant. If the land- 
 lord charges but a low rent for the land, it makes no 
 difference to the incoming tenant if free sale is per- 
 mitted, because the price exacted for the tenant-right 
 owing to the competition of one man bidding against 
 another, has the effect of rack-renting the incoming 
 man. 
 
 7110. You say iii the notes which you have fur- 
 nished, that in your opinion the principle of free sale 
 would in the end compel the landlord to raise the rent, 
 because under it the landlord, who let his land at a 
 low rent, would find that his iDeneficence was thrown 
 away, in consequence of the excessive prices which 
 would be exacted for the tenant-right t — Yes. I say 
 that if the landlord lets his land for a lower rent than 
 he could legally claim for it, all the benefit conferred 
 on the tenant is done away with, if free sale is per- 
 mitted, because the amount which an incoming tenant 
 has to pay for the tenant-right virtually nins up the 
 rent to a high rent. 
 
 7111. Has the principle of free sale, where it is 
 
 allowed, had any effect upon the landlords of estates 
 with which you are acquainted in discouraging improve- 
 ments '! — Yes. As a matter of fact, the tliree land- 
 lords, whose estates I manage, have declined to make 
 any improvementSj or expend any money on the land, 
 until the question is settled. 
 
 7112. Who makes the improvements, as a rule? 
 — The tenants. The landlords have assisted in 
 cbainage. 
 
 7113. Is there any difficulty about the settlement 
 ■ of the amount of rents 1 — No. 
 
 7114. Would you object to having the question of 
 rent' settled by an independent tribunal in case the 
 landlord and tenant did not agree ? — As far as my 
 experience goes I think they would prefer to settle it 
 themselves — let it be determined between the landlorc| 
 and tenant without any interference. 
 
 7115. That might be the case with such good land- 
 lords as those you manage for, but in other cases, with 
 a different class of landlords and perhaps of tenants, 
 do you think a system of adjusting rent by a competent 
 tribunal would be practicable 1 — I think it might be 
 useful to have an independent tribunal to appeal to in 
 the case of a tenant who was rack-rented. Of course I 
 cannot say what tri'ounal it should be. 
 
 711.6. What do you consider the fair rent of landas 
 compared with the Government valuation? — I thijik 
 1 per cent, above the Government valuation of the 
 land — not including farm buildings — would not be an 
 excessive rent. 
 
 7117. Is that the average rent on the estates you 
 manage ? — No. On Lord Bangor's estate the rent is 
 just about equal to the Government valuation of the 
 land, not including the buildings. 
 
 7118. Are the improvements in the estates you 
 manage usually done by the tenants ? — By the tenants, 
 The landlords have assisted in drainage ; and they have 
 also assisted — not latterly, but a few years ago — by 
 giving timber and slates for oflice houses. 
 
 7118a. You think the Land Act has had the effect 
 of checking the assistance given l>y landlords towards 
 imju'ovements ? — Certainly. 
 
 7119. Is there any other point on which you differ 
 from the evidence given by Colonel Forde and Colonel 
 Waring ? — No. 
 
 7120. Baron Dowse. — Have you any experience of 
 tenants having become purchasers of their holdings I— 
 No. We have had no case at all of it. 
 
 7121. You have not known any cases of tenants 
 purchasing under the Church Commissioners, or under 
 the Bright Clauses of the Land Act? — No. 
 
 7122. Do you think it, would be advantageous to 
 afford opportunities to tenants who were thrifty, and 
 had some of the purchase-money themselves, to become 
 the purchasers of their holdings ? — Yes ; I think in 
 the case of an industrious and thrifty tenant it might 
 be desirable ; but the juajority of tenants find it cUffi- 
 cult enough to pay their rents, and I am certain that 
 tliey would have to borrow the entire of the money — 
 that whatever sum they would have to pay they would 
 require to borrow. As far as I am able to judge 
 from speaking to the tenants, the ordinary class of 
 thirty-acre tenants, have no desire to become pro- 
 prietors. 
 
 7123. If a man had the money to purchase do you 
 think it would be useful to give him the opportunity of 
 doing it ? — Certainly, provided the landlord was will- 
 ing to dispose of his property. 
 
 7124. 'The difficulty I suppose that you see in it is that 
 if he borrowed the purchase-money the annuity he 
 would have to pay would be more than his rent ? — Yes. 
 
 7125. Supposing the money was lent on such favoiu'- 
 able terms by Government that the man woidd not be 
 paying more than his rent, do you think tliat he would 
 lia-^-e an additional sense of security in the knowledge 
 that he was owner in fee, and that it would act as an 
 inducement to him to do his utmost to improve and 
 make the most of his land l^-I do not think that in 
 the case of ordinary tenants it would have that effect. 
 When they have a good landlord they look upon him 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 255 
 
 as a friend to wbom tliey can go in the case of any- 
 trouble or difficulty. They would be dejjrived of that 
 if they were proprietors themselves. 
 
 7126. These observations apply to tenant-right 
 holdings ? — Yes. 
 
 7127. Men who hold at a fair rent, with a power of 
 sale, and not to be disturbed as long as they paid 
 the rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 7128. You say that in case of a difference as to the 
 amount of the purchase-money, you lix it in the 
 same way as in the case of Colonel FOrde's estates- 
 Yes. 
 
 7129. By arbitration?— Yes. 
 
 7130. Would that check excessive prices 1 — My own 
 opinion is that there ought to be a limit to the price 
 of tenant-right. A case occurred the other day in 
 which, one of Lord Bangor's tenants ! purchased tlio 
 tenant-right of a holding — the yearly rent was the 
 Government valuation of the land, not counting the 
 buildings — £74 a year. The price he paid, and which 
 he considered a great deal too high, was £800. I think 
 ten years purchase would be a fair limit for an incoming 
 tenant to give. 
 
 7131. You do not apply that limit on the estates 
 under your management % — No. 
 
 7132. Subject to the approval of the tenant by the 
 landlord, the price may be anything they like ?— 
 Yes ; determined by arbitration. 
 
 7133. The outgoing tenant of course looks at the 
 thing from his own point of view and docs not regard 
 so much, either the landlord or the incoming man? — 
 Of course. 
 
 7134. Those who advocate ft-ee sale from the out- 
 going tenant's point of view, want to get as much as 
 they can for the tenant-right? — Of course. 
 
 7135. But in a public point of view we must look 
 at the result which such a system would have upon 
 the country? — Yes. 
 
 7136. That is the way you look upon it? — Yes, I 
 think it would prevent the landlord from enlarging the 
 farms of industrious tenants. My own opinion is that 
 farming does not pay on very small farms, and to make 
 it pay it is desirable to enlarge the holdings of thrifty 
 industrious tenants. You would prevent this if you 
 allowed free sale — you would have people brought in 
 as purchasers from other localities, and if they were 
 persons to whom you could not allege any legal 
 objection, you would be obliged to accept them. I 
 think such a system would not improve the relations 
 between landlord and tenant, and thart it would be bad 
 in a public point of view. 
 
 7137. Are there any ■ waste lands in your district? 
 —No. 
 
 7138. We have been told h.ere by several tenants on 
 various estates — I aiji bound to say that up to the 
 present time that there has been no case stated upon 
 any of the estates under "the management of the 
 gentlemen who have been examined here to day — that 
 when a tenant makes improvements he is forced to pay 
 an increased rent, which has the effect of creating a 
 feeling of insecurity in his mind, and of lessening 
 the value of the tenant-right. Has anything of that 
 kind came under your experience? — Nothing what- 
 ever. 
 
 7139. We are told that upon every change of tenancy 
 — even on the death of a husband, and the widow 
 being placed on the book as tenant in his place, or of 
 a son being accepted as tenant in place of his father- 
 there is some change made in the rent to the detriment 
 of the tenant. Do you know anything of that ? — No. 
 I will tell you what occurred on Lord Bangor's pro- 
 perty. Some of his old tenants, at the time of the 
 revaluation of his property some years ago, before 
 I became his agent, were allowed to hold at rents 
 considerably below the value of the land, on the 
 understanding that upoii" their death, when their sons 
 
 , succceeded them, the 'reiits were to be increased a 
 little. 
 
 7140. But in no case, I understand, did the rent 
 exceed the fair letting value ? — No. 
 
 7141. In the cases to which I refer which were Sept. is, isso. 
 brought before us, the parties complained that the rents j,^^^ j^ 
 were increased beyond the fair value of the land 1 — I Somerset' 
 never knew of such a case. Ward, j.p. 
 
 7142. Then I am to understand that on the estates 
 joxi manage there has been no decrease of the value 
 of the tenant-right in consequence of interference with 
 the rent t — No. 
 
 7143. I sujjpose of late years tenant-right does not 
 produce as much as it used to do since the bad times 
 set in? — I have only lately become agent on Mr. 
 Ward's property, but on the property of Lord 
 Bangor I have been agent ten years, and I do not 
 think the tenant-right ever exceeded ten years' pur- 
 chase. 
 
 7144. Even on the arbitration system? — Even on 
 the arbitration system. 
 
 7145. When the price was limited to £5 jier acre, 
 was there any underhand dealing ? — I have , no doubt 
 there was, but I did not see it. I have no doubt 
 about it that underhand dealing was resorted to, and 
 that was one of the reasons why I suggested the altera- 
 tion. 
 
 7146. What is the average price of tenant-right with 
 you? — About £10 per acre, statute — our rents are on 
 an average about £1 per acre. 
 
 7147. If there did exist on any estates in Ulster 
 where tenant-right custom prevails a habit of raising 
 rents as far as the tenant was able to bear it, would 
 not that have the effect of lessening the purchase of the 
 tenant-right ?^-Certainly. 
 
 7148. Would it be well, if possible, to prevent that ? 
 — I think the law as it at present stands would pre- 
 vent it. 
 
 7149. That is, the tenant would refuse to pay 
 the increased rent, and appeal to the Land Court 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 .7150. 1 find the law is very unpopular with some 
 people, and they dread going into court — suppose a man 
 didn't want to go into court and said, " I would rather 
 pay a couple of shillings per acre extra rent than 
 have a notice tO quit, an ejectment, and a land claim 
 before the Coxmty Court Judge, for I am not sure what 
 he might do" — are not there many people of that 
 way of thinking ? — There may be. 
 
 7151. Would it be well if some way was found 
 out of settling disputes as to rent honestly between 
 man and man without obliging the parties to resort to 
 ejectments and land claims ? — I dare say it would — if 
 the wisdom, of our legislators could find out some satis- 
 factory way to settle such cases it would probably have 
 a good effect. 
 
 7152. Of course in the case of good landlords, such 
 a thing would not be required, it would do them 
 no harm ; but I dare say you are aware, that there 
 are some landlords, whom it would be desirable to 
 keep in check ? — I dare say there are, especially some 
 of the small proprietors, who purchased in the Landed 
 Estates Court. 
 
 7153. Persons who purchased land as an invest- 
 ment ? — Yes. 
 
 7153a. Who have no hereditary or family connexion 
 with the estate which they have purchased ?-— Yes. , 
 
 7154. And no name to keep up? — No. 
 
 7155. Those are the men whom it would be well 
 to keep in check? — Yes, those are the men who do 
 the mischief. , 
 
 7156. The O'OoNOR Don.— Would you suggest a 
 new valuation of Ireland, as a means of settling rent ? 
 
 If there was an alteration in the law, I think it 
 
 Avould be necessary to have: a new valuS/tion. I do not 
 think the present valuation would be a proper basis for 
 rent. 
 
 7157. Would you be opposed to any change that 
 would put the landlord in the position of ah ordinary 
 creditor ?— I woiild be strongly opposed to it. I think 
 it would be a bad tiling for the tenant, for tVo or three 
 reasons. One reason is that the landlord would be ' 
 oblio-ed to come down on the tenant, as sOon as the 
 rent was due. This year we found that giving time ' 
 
256 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. n, 1S80. 
 
 The Hon. 
 
 Somerset 
 Ward.J.P. 
 
 to the tenants was, in some cases, better for them than 
 an abatement of rent, but if the landlord was in the 
 same pcJsition as another creditor, he -would have to 
 come down on the tenant at once. 
 
 7158. You mean taking away the landlord's power 
 of eviction if a year's rent is due? — I mean taking 
 away the landlord's priority of claim for rent, upon 
 the goods and chattels of the tenant. 
 
 7159. That is by distress 1 — Yes ; and also the land- 
 lord can claim it without actually coming down and 
 seizing the goods himself, because he can claim a year's 
 
 rent, if due, in the case of any ordinary creditor seizing 
 under an execution. 
 
 7160. You would be opposed to abolishing that?— 
 I wouia. There have been cases where tenants would 
 have had everything they had in the world seized 
 under an execution, if I had not put in a claim for a 
 year's rent, men who I knew would be able to pay in 
 a little time. 
 
 7161. Baron Dowse. — You think it is even more 
 the interest of the tenant than of the landlord to pre- 
 serve that ? — I do. 
 
 Mr. J. 
 Blakiston- 
 Houston, D.L. 
 
 Mr. J. Blakiston-Hodston, d.l., 
 
 7162. Baron Dowse. — You are an owner of land ? — • 
 I am. 
 
 7163. What is the extent of your property ? — • 
 Between 7,000 and 8,000 acres in the counties of Down 
 and Armagh. 
 
 7164. You have heard Colonel Forde, Colonel 
 Waring, and Mr. Ward examined ? — I have. 
 
 7165. Do you concur with them substantially? — • 
 I concur with them substantially, but there are one 
 or two points on which I would wish to make an 
 observation. First, as to the Ulster custom. 
 
 7166. What do you understand by the D Ister custom ? 
 — I understand by the. Ulster custom, the right of 
 an outgoing tenant to sell the good-will of his farm, 
 subject to the rules of the estate. 
 
 7177. What are the rules on your estate ? — The 
 farm may be revalued ; it must be sold to a tenant 
 on the estate ; the adjoining tenant to have the 
 preference, provided he gives the outgoing man a fair 
 price. Those rules have existed on my estate for the 
 last forty years, probably longer. Should no tenant 
 on the estate be willing to buy, the farm would have 
 to be sold to an outsider. 
 
 7178. Subject to those rules, the tenant-right is 
 unlimited ? — Yes. 
 
 7179. There is no restriction as to price ? — No. 
 
 7180. Have you had any instances on your estate of 
 increase of rent? — Yes. My rents were very much 
 reduced at the time of the famine in 1846 and 1847. 
 They were re-adjusted in the year 1852, but four 
 townlands were found a few years ago to be very much 
 under-let, compared with the other holdings on the 
 estate, and they were re-valueJ by Mr. Thomas Fitz- 
 Gerald, of Dublin. There was no difficulty about the 
 additional rent — they all paid it, and to show you 
 that the rent was not unduly raised, I may mention 
 that the rents in that union are still 12 per cent, 
 below the poor law valuation. 
 
 7181. Have you had any recent increase of rent 
 upon your estate ? — The re-valuation I speak of was 
 in 1876. 
 
 7182. How much was the increase per cent.? — • 
 From 9 to 12 per cent. 
 
 7183. Had that increase any sensible effect on the 
 tenant-right ? — I don't think there have been any sales 
 since — there was one sale three or four days ago, but 
 I do not know what price was given. I don't think 
 it could have had much effect. 
 
 7184. Did you give Mr. FitzGerakl directions when 
 making his valuation, not to value the improvements 
 of the tenant ? — I had no conversation with him my- 
 self. Mr. Fitzherbert FUgate, who is my agent, and 
 Lord Clermont's agent, told Mr. FitzGerald he was 
 
 Orangefield, Go. Down, examined, 
 to make a valuation on the basis of the fair value of 
 each holding, as between man and man. Mr. Filgate, 
 afterwards revised Mr. FitzGerald's valuation, and 
 in some instances reduced it, because certain things 
 that no valuator could know of had been done by the 
 tenant, and afterwards Mr. Filgate and I went over it 
 again, having had conversations with the tenants, and 
 made some further reductions in the rent. 
 
 7185. Did the tenants agree to the rents as finally 
 adjusted ? — Yes — there was no difficulty, with tie 
 exception of one man, and that was because he had a 
 subtenant, which I was not aware of. 
 
 7186. W ere those tenants from year to year ? — Yes. 
 
 7187. Your estate is still let at lower rents than 
 some of the neighbouriug properties ? — It is. 
 
 7188. Was it let exceptionally low before you had 
 the valuation made in 1872 1 — Those fo.ir townlands 
 were let at exceptionally low rents. 
 
 7189. I suppose that was the reason you had it re- 
 valued ? — Yes. 
 
 7190. Are there many, or any cases of holdings on 
 your estate to which owing to the size of the farm, the 
 length of the lease, the lowness of the rent, the fact of 
 the landlord having made the improvements, or other 
 circumstances, the Ulster tenant-right does not apply ? 
 — There may be some — very few. 
 
 7191. What per-centage would the number of such 
 holdiags bear to the entire ? — I should say, not more 
 than one-half per cent. I may mention as regards 
 leases that there ai-e hardly any leases on my property, 
 except on a small one that I lately purchased from 
 Lord Dufferin. 
 
 7192. The O'Conoe Don.— Does tenant-right exist 
 on that estate? — I only bought it a short time ago — 
 and I do not know precisely what has been the custom 
 upon it. 
 
 7193. Will you admit tenant-right upon it? — I 
 think I shall. I may mention that my father and 
 myself, have expended a very large sum of money 
 upon the improvement of our estates — about £10,000 — 
 but since the passing of the Land Act, I have been 
 obliged to cease doing so. 
 
 7 194. On the improvements which were made 
 before the Act, did you charge a per-centage to the 
 tenant in the shape of increased rent ?— No — no per- 
 centage was charged, except where the ■ man had a 
 lease — which I may say was only in about two cases. 
 
 7195. Do you find the system on your estate works 
 well ?— Perfectly. 
 
 7196. It gives satisfaction to the tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 7197. And secures you the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 7198. Do you recognise leasehold tenant-right? — 
 Yes. 
 
 Mr. Mark 
 Seton 
 Synnot, D.r,. 
 
 Mr. Mark Seton Synnot, d.l., Ballymoyer, Ne-wtownhamilton, and Mr. Joseph Atkinson, d.l., Crow Hill, 
 
 Armagh, were examined together. 
 
 7199. Baron Dowse (to Mr. Synnof). — You are an 
 owner of land ? — Mr. Synnot. — I am. 
 
 7200. How many acres do you possess? — 7,377 acres. 
 
 7201. In what part of Armagh is your property situ- 
 ated? — ^In Barony, Upper Fe ws, southern part of county. 
 
 7202. Is much of it low land or high ? — It is all 
 arable land except a portion of bog. 
 
 7203. Does the tenant-right custom prevail there 
 —Yes. 
 
 7204. On the whole estate ? — On the whole. 
 
 7205. Does it also prevail on the surrounding 
 estates ? — It does, 
 
 7206. What do you understand by the Ulster 
 custom ? — The liberty of the tenant to sell his interest, 
 
MI.XUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 257 
 
 ■according to usage, in a farm, to a purchaser, subject 
 to the approval of the landlord. 
 
 7207. Is there any restriction as to the sum? 
 
 None on my estate. 
 
 7208. Is there any right of pre-emption given to 
 a neighbouring tenant ? — There is no actui.il right, 
 but, as far as possible, our desire is to extend the 
 size of holdings, and we give the preference to the 
 adjoining tenant. 
 
 7209. About what rate does tenant-right sell for 
 in your part of the country 1 — On large holdings 
 (and I must qualify that by saying we reckon small 
 holdings as those which are less than twenty acres) 
 the tenant-right generally sells for about £20 per 
 acre, the rent being from l7s. 6d. to £1 per acre. 
 
 7210. Is that the statute acre'? — ^Yes. 
 
 7211. Is there an increase of rent ever made upon 
 a change of tenancy 1 — A "variation" ol rent would 
 be a more proper term. In some instances upon my 
 estate it has been lessened. 
 
 7212. The rent is changed upon the occasion of 
 a change of tenancy — sometimes it is increased and 
 sometimes decreased 1 — Yes ; generally it is increased. 
 The principle — if I may explain it — is this. It had 
 been the habit of tenants when leaving their farms, 
 to sell the tenant-light with a given rent, but I with 
 other landlords, objected to being dictated to as to 
 what the rent of my land should be, and I therefore 
 claimed the right to vaiy the rent upon a change 
 of tenancy. In many instances, where farms have 
 been sold for £300 or £400, the rent has not been 
 varied 5s. a year, but it is always varied to some 
 
 . extent in order to assert the principle. 
 
 7213. As much to preserve your own rights as 
 for the sake of anything to be made hj it in the 
 shape of increased rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 7214. Then am I to take- it that there has been 
 no substantial increase of rent 1 — There has not. 
 
 7215. We have been told that in some parts of 
 Ulster, and especially in Armagh, rents have been 
 increased so much as to seriously diminish the value 
 of the tenalit-right — is that so ?— Not iipon my estate. 
 I think it right to make this statement : — I succeeded 
 to the estate in 1874, and there has been no revision 
 of rents or valuation since the year 1844. At that 
 period there were about 1,200 acres of bog on the 
 estate which is very valuable property in our country. 
 In 1877 I had the estate revalued, more with the 
 view of measuring and ascertaining hov/ much of that 
 1,200 acres had become arable, than with any other 
 object. Some of it had been reclaimed and was 
 yielding very good crops. I found that of the 1,200 
 a,cres of bog land which existed in 1844, there are 
 not 500 acres of it left now — the balance being 
 absorbed into the different holdings. The habit on the 
 ■estate had always been to allow the tenants to have 
 a portion of the adj oining spent bog at a merely nominal 
 rent for a number of years, until the land became 
 reclaimed, when it was surveyed and valued. 
 
 7216. That was done by agreement with the te- 
 nants? — Yes, by a sort of unwritten agreement — it was 
 the general understanding in the country. 
 
 7217. The tenants knew it? — Certainly; and that 
 was the arrangement always acted on. 
 
 7218. And they took the land on these terms? — 
 Yes. 
 
 7219. There was no practical injustice done ? — None 
 whatever. 
 
 7220. I suppose that, on a sale of the tenant-right in 
 a farm upon your property, or on the surrounding 
 estates, so far as you know, the quality and circum- 
 stances of the land are taken into account ? — Upon 
 my word, I don't believe they are. I think where 
 there is a holding of twenty acres of good land — good 
 fair arable land — the tenant-right would sell for £20 
 an acre ; and, on very indifferent land, not half the 
 value of the other, it would probably fetch £15. I 
 could mention instances of it. 
 
 7221. I wish you would mention them ? — There is 
 a farm containing 54a. 1e. 20p. ; the tenant-right sold 
 
 for £1,070, which is close on £20 per acre. The Sel>t. n. ism. 
 poor law valuation of it was £45 ; the rent £40. It ^^^ ^^~ 
 had been £37 ; but, on the occasion of the sale, it was ggti,„ 
 raised to £40. , Synnot, d.l 
 
 7222. And £1,070 was paid for the tenant-right at 
 the raised rent ? — Yes. The same man sold to an ad- 
 joining tenant a portion of land, containing 13a. Oe. 
 20p., for the enormous sum of £350, being in round 
 numbers £27 per acre. I am unable to state the 
 poor law valuation, or the rent. 
 
 7223. What made the purchaser give such a price 
 as, that? — Insanity, I think. 
 
 7224. The O'Conoe Don. — Perhaps it was con- 
 veniently situated in regard to other land in his occu- 
 pation ? — It was adjoining. 
 
 7225. Baron Dowse. — What did the man do that 
 got the £1,070 ? — He went to the neighbourhood of 
 Armagh, to another farm he had. 
 
 7226. Had he been residing on the farm he sold in 
 your neighbourhood? — He had. 
 
 7227. Did these men ])ay large sums for the land 
 themselves ? — I cannot answer that. If you would 
 like another instance of tenant-right being purchased 
 at a price still more extravagant, I can give it you. 
 
 7228. Please do so? — A person of the name of 
 Simpson, not far from Armagh, sold a farm, con- 
 taining 4a. 3r. 25p. of land, for £140, being over £28 
 per acre. The poor law valuation of that holding is 
 £3 5s. If it is not irrelevant, I may mention that, at 
 the time I said to the purchaser — " My property 
 must be of much greater value than I thought, 
 when you give so large a sum for the tenant-right ; I 
 will charge you £4 a year for this land, and I will 
 make you pay it, for I consider you are giving a price 
 that the fee-simple and tenant-right together are not 
 worth, and it is my habit,," if I am in the office when 
 these transactions take place, to discountenance prices 
 that make incoming tenants paupers, in my opinion. 
 
 7229. Did you charge him £4 rent?^I did. I 
 raised the rent from £3 5s. to £4 a year — about 16s. 
 an acre. 
 
 7230. How does the tenant live upon it. I cannot 
 tell you. Upon those small holdiags I don't know 
 how they live. 
 
 7231. Where do they get the money to pay such 
 sums for tenant-right? — I cannot tell you; but I 
 believe in a great number of cases they borrow money 
 at 5 or 6 per cent, interest, and are in debt and dif- 
 ficulty for years. , * 
 
 7232. I suppose the character of the landlord is a 
 matter of some importance in these transactions — a 
 man would like to get a farm under a good landlord 1 
 — Yes, it is an element, of course. 
 
 7233. And the character of the agent ? — Yes, that 
 is a very important element. 
 
 7234. Do you find the system of tenant-right on 
 the whole — without referring to these individual cases 
 of excessive prices — but taking it on the whole, do 
 you find it work well ? — I do. I don't see how it is 
 possible that any change could be made — the tenants 
 who are in occupation in all probability have paid for 
 their tenant-right, and it would be very hai-d to say 
 that they should not be permitted to sell — but I think 
 it would be much better if the prices were regulated 
 more by reason. 
 
 7235. You would not be in favour of the free sale 
 of tenant-right in the open market ?— On my estate 
 there has been the utmost freedom — except once may 
 be in four or five years a purchaser would be ob- 
 jected to. 
 
 7236. Have you had many ejectments upon your 
 estate? No; I think there has been but one eject- 
 ment carried out for, I suppose, the last thirty years 
 on my estate. 
 
 7237. Have you had any cases under the Land Act ? 
 — Not one. 
 
 7238. Do you ever exercise the right of distress? 
 — It has been twice exercised during the past six 
 years on my estate. 
 
 7239. Do you think it would be advantageous to 
 
 2L 
 
258 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, issw keep tliat power or otherwise 2 — It wotild require 
 r~r • some consideration to answer that question. I think 
 the possession of that power probably prevents in 
 
 Seton 
 Synnot, d.l. 
 
 some cases the necessity of serving a notice to quit. 
 
 7240. Do you think it is sometimes advantageous, 
 in the event of a creditor coming down with an execu- 
 tion on a tenant, tliat the landlord should have the 
 right to claim a year's rent ? — Yes. 
 
 7241. You find that advantageous for the tenant 
 as well as the landlord ? — Yes, certainly. 
 
 7242. Does the custom of tenant-right prevail over 
 the whole of Armagh ? — It does. There are certain 
 limits upon some estates. I am at liberty to mention 
 that upon one large estate adjoining my own the 
 tenantright had formerly been limited to £15 per 
 acre, b\it the agent informed me that it was found 
 that the rule was evaded by sums being given under- 
 hand ; and about twenty-five years ago they rescinded 
 the rule and left the right of sale, without any 
 restrictions on the amount. That was the estate 
 of Mr. Cope. 
 
 7243. Are leases prevalent upon your property ? — 
 No ; I think there are only four leases altogether on 
 the estate. We are never asked for them. The only 
 time, I believe, that a lease was asked for was when 
 
 ' the man wanted to put it into a bank and raise money 
 on it. 
 
 7244. Is there a leasehold tenant-right? — I had only 
 one instance of a lease falling in, and I renewed it at 
 less than the Poor Law valuation, and at the same 
 
 ' rent as the adjoining tenant. 
 
 7245. Suppose at the expiration of a lease the man 
 did not want a renewal, but wanted to become tenant 
 from year to year, would you allow the same tenant- 
 right to him ? — Certainly. In the case of the only 
 lease I have granted since the passing of the Land 
 Act, the gentleman who drew it, asked me to allow 
 him to put a clause in, saving the tenant-right. I said 
 I had not the slightest objection — because if he was 
 leaving, I would not object to it at the end of the 
 lease. 
 
 7246. At the termination of the lease would there 
 be an increase of rent ? — There certainly would be a 
 revision of the rent, and the tenant would be put upon 
 a similar scale to the tenants-at-will adjoining. 
 
 7247. I suppose in no case would you charge a 
 tenant rent on his own improvements ? — That depends 
 upon what you call improvements — do you mean 
 buildings ? 
 
 7248. Any kind of improvements — suppose the 
 tenant had raised the value of the farm, by what he 
 did — would you raise his rent in consequence of the 
 increased value ? — I don't think we would make any 
 difference on that score. 1 never have seen such great 
 improvements by tenants, except they were building 
 houses unnecessary for the size of the land. 
 
 7249. "Who makes the improvements, as a rule? — 
 The tenants, but the landlords have assisted. My 
 father at one time gave so much a perch for drains, 
 and my brother, who died in 1874, gave them half the 
 price of lime— if they paid for 20 barrels he gave them 
 an order for 40. 
 
 7250. Has that ceased since the Land Act? — It has 
 ceased since I came in. 1 had a number of very bad 
 years, and I have not renewed it. 
 
 7251. Have you had any experience as to purchases 
 under the Church Commissioners ? — -Yes. There were 
 two holdings on the glebe, in my neighbourhood — the 
 tenants asked me to buy them, and to become my 
 tenants. I did so. I lost by the transaction ; because 
 I let the land to them at the same rent that the 
 adjoining tenants had it at. 
 
 7252. Why didn't they buy themselves?—! don't 
 think they could. 
 
 7253. Do you think it would be useful to give 
 facilities to tenants who had money and were thrifty, 
 to purchase their holdings? — If they had money and 
 would make the investment, it might; but I don't 
 
 think they would gain any advantage by it. I think 
 my tenants exercised a wise discretion. I let the 
 tenants have the land for less than I paid the Chm-ch 
 Commissioners for it. 
 
 7254. Then you are a loser? — I am. I could not 
 charge it to them. I charged them the same rent the 
 adjoining men were paying. 
 
 7255. Why did you purchase it? — I had to do so, 
 I had no option. I could not let a middleman come 
 on my estate. 
 
 7256. Do you know of any tenants purchasing under 
 the Land Act ? — Not in our part of the country. 
 
 7257. Would it be advisable to give them an 
 opportunity of doing so ? — I don't think they would be 
 better oflp than they are at present — I speak of my own 
 neighbourhood. 
 
 7258. And of your own tenants ? — Yes ; of my own 
 tenants, I can say it positively, they are better ofi' as 
 they are. 
 
 7259. Are there any suggestions that occur to you 
 to make for the amendment of the land law ? — I do 
 not think there are any — in fact I came to answer 
 questions. I don't profess to be an authority. At' 
 the same time I may mention there is with many 
 people a good deal of difficulty in consequence of the 
 different decisions made by the county court judges. 
 They do not all "sing to the same tune," and if any 
 means could be arrived at by which there would be 
 uniformity of action it would be very desirable. 
 
 7260. So much depends upon the facts of each 
 particular case that it would be im230ssible to lay down 
 any hard and fast rule ? — Probably it would. 
 
 7261. Suppose a dispute took place between land- 
 lord and tenant about the amount of rent that ought 
 fairly to be put upon a farm, how would you settle it ? 
 — In our county we have a very wise man, who was 
 examined before you to-day — Mr. Quinn — I never 
 knew a dispute yet that he could not settle. I never 
 knew an instance in which he faUed in making a 
 satisfactory settlement to both parties, because he is 
 an upright, clever, and judicious man. 
 
 7262. If you could find an upright, clever, and 
 judicious man, like Mr. Quinn, in the neighbourhood, 
 would it be a good way of settling any dispute as to 
 amount of rent, to refer it to him ? — Yes, if you could 
 get such a man. 
 
 7263. You do not think the County Court Judge 
 would be a satisfactory person ? — I don't know. I 
 think many of them know nothing about land. 
 
 7264. A manlike Mr. Quinn, if a case were referred 
 to him for settlement, would go and inspect the land 
 himself ? — Of course he would. 
 
 7265. You could hardly impose that duty on the 
 County Court Judge ? — No. 
 
 7266. If you could get a tribunal of practical 
 judicious men, would it not be satisfactory ? — It would 
 be very desirable. 
 
 7267. If the amount of the rent was settled in that 
 way the tenant to be allowed to remain as long as he paid 
 the rent, and to be allowed to sell his interest in the way 
 you mention, do you think it would be satisfactory ?-- 
 Yes, I think it would . Landlords as a rule don't want to 
 evict tenants, except in an extreme case where he 
 owes several years rent or something of that sort. 
 
 7268. The O'Conor Don. — Do you mean that a 
 tenant should have the right of permanent occupancy 
 so long as he paid his rent ? — Practically it is so now 
 — they remain as long as they like, a,nd are never 
 disturbed, as long as they pay the rent. 
 
 7269. Would you consider it advisable that the law 
 should give them a right to remain in occupation, 
 even if the landlord wanted the land for himself? — I 
 think it would be a hard thing if a man wanted his 
 own land, that he should not get it, but he certainly 
 should give the tenant compensation for it. Such 
 cases are unknown, I may tell you, in our part of the 
 countiy. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 259 
 
 Mr. Joseph Atkinson, examined. 
 You are a land owner in 
 
 7270. Baron Dowse. 
 Armagh ? — T am. 
 
 7271. What is the extent of your estate? — About 
 1,000 acres. 
 
 7272. Does tenant-right exist upon your estate? — 
 Yes. 
 
 7273. How do you define the Ulster custom? — The 
 right of the tenant to sell his interest, subject to 
 certain limitations. 
 
 7274. What are the limitations? — The limitations 
 are, first as to the amount — it must not exceed what 
 is an equitable and proper sum for. the man, to pay. 
 Secondly, the adjoining tenant gets the preference. 
 We wish to consolidate farms as we find that a man 
 must have at least 40 acres before he can farm 
 properly. 
 
 7275. You don't approve of the principle of free 
 sale to the highest bidder ? — Certainly not. 
 
 7276. That woiild prevent you consolidating farms 
 so as to make them of the si^e you think they ought 
 to be ?— Yes. 
 
 7277. Do you put any limit on the price ? — Nothing 
 more than would be fair and reasonable. 
 
 7278. Are you the judge of what is fair and rea- 
 sonable 1 — Certainly not. If the tenant has made any 
 improvements we leave it to arbitration to say what 
 is the value of the improvements. 
 
 7279. But with regard to what is called the good- 
 will do you yourself judge the value of it? — I don't 
 judge at all, but we generally make an arrangement 
 so that the amount to be paid shall not swamp the 
 purchaser. 
 
 7280. Do yovi bring in arbitrators to consider the 
 price of the good-will 1 — No. That is generally an 
 acknowledged sum — -it generally runs from £6 to XI 8 
 per acre. 
 
 7281. There is a great variation between those two 
 Slims M to £18 ?— Yes. 
 
 7282. How do you settle the amount? — The out- 
 going man names the sum that he wants ior the iarm. 
 The incoming tenant states the price that he is pre- 
 pared to give. Then, if they cannot agree to a sum 
 between thomselves, they generally leave ittometo name 
 what is fair, and we work it out in that way as well 
 as we can. As a landlord of course I look to the in- 
 terest of the man remaining as well as of the man 
 who is leaving. 
 
 7283. You have mentioned that you prefer a tenant 
 on the estate to be the purchaser ?---Yes. 
 
 7284. Have you many leases on your property ? — 
 There used to be some old leases, but as they fell out 
 no application has been made for new ones. 
 
 7285. Do you allow tenant-right in the case of 
 leaseholds? — We do. 
 
 7286. When a lease drops is there always an increase 
 of rent ? — Sometimes there is not, and sometimes there 
 is, it depends upon what the rent in the lease was. 
 
 7287. Have you had many evictions on your es- 
 tate ? — None at all. 
 
 7288. Have you had any cases in' the Land Court ? 
 — No, we don't know what the Land Court is. 
 
 7289. You say the tenants don't look for leases 
 now? — They do not; in two cases where there was 
 an agreement for a lease, the tenants never came to 
 ask for it. 
 
 7290. What is the general proportion of the rent 
 compared with the valuation ? — They are about the 
 same. 
 
 7291. Has there been any general advance of 
 rents since 1870? — Not for the last fifty years. What 
 I mean by that is this : — Supposing a man had a cheap 
 leasOj say at nine or ten shillings an acre, there would 
 be something added when that lease fell in. 
 
 7292. You are speaking of your own property ? — I 
 am. 
 
 7293. Have you known of increase of rent on 
 the adjoining properties ? — No, I have not heard of 
 any. 
 
 7294. Has the Land Act of 1870 checked the 
 making of improvements by landlords according 
 to your experience? — It has, except you take the 
 case of Mrs. Bacon, who has made great improve- 
 ments. 
 
 7295. As a rule, do the tenants make the improve- 
 ments in your part of the country? — No. The old 
 leases for three lives or thirty-one years contained- 
 provision that the tenant should build the house 
 within a certain time named ; if he did so he had 
 his land at a lower rent, subsequently followed sub- 
 division to the sons after expiry of old lease and 
 building by tenant for said sons much against land- 
 lord's wish. The way we do now is, supposing it is 
 arterial drainage, the landlord pays one-half the 
 expense, and the tenant the other half. In the 
 making of roads near two or three different tenants, 
 the landlord pays half and the tenants join in paying 
 the other half. In the case of houses the landlord' 
 contributes materials. In other cases I joined in 
 furnishing tUes for drainage. 
 
 7296. Did you charge an extra rent for that ? — -Not 
 a farthing. And some of those tenants sold the drains 
 afterwards, that is, they sold the tenant-right. 
 
 7297. And got an increased price in consequence ? 
 — I suspect they did. In one case I was on the field 
 when the man said to the purchaser, " This is drained 
 with tiles." 
 
 7298. Is there any waste land on your estate? — 
 Not a particle. 
 
 7299. Are your tenants large or small? — About 
 fifteen acres, on an average. 
 
 7300. Have there been any purchases by tenants 
 under the Church Commissioners or the Land Act ? — - 
 No, not in my neighbourhood. 
 
 7301. You don't know of any occupiers who puij- 
 chased their o'wn holdings ? — No, except a person who 
 purchased a small property on which he had a small 
 holding. 
 
 7302. Do you think any desire exists among 
 occupiers in your neighbourhood to become owners ? — 
 They seem to me to be perfectly happy, if they were 
 let alone. 
 
 7303. You don't think any change in the law 
 necessary ? — Not a particle. 
 
 7304. You think the present law affords sufficient 
 protection for the tenant ? — I am perfectly contented 
 with it as landlord — and as far as I know the tenants 
 would be perfectly satisfied if they were only let 
 alone. 
 
 7305. Under the present law, cannot the landlord 
 raise the rent so as to confiscate the tenant-right ? — 
 Yes ; but he does not do so. 
 
 7306. Do you think 'it would be desirable for the 
 Legislature to pass a law that he shall not do so ? — I 
 dbn't know why ^he Legislature should interfere. I 
 do not think any landlord would attempt to do so ; but 
 I think that if the Legislature made a law on the 
 subject it would interfere with the good will that has 
 hitherto existed between landlord and tenant. 
 
 7307. It has been stated tha,t on some estates in 
 the neighbourhood of Armagh there have been large 
 increases of rent, which had the eff'ect of practically 
 destroying the tenant-right — you do not know of any 
 such cases ? — I do not. 
 
 7308. Assuming those cases to be true, would it 
 not be advisable to adopt some means to prevent such 
 being clone in future? — Yes. I think if one man is . 
 robbing another there should be some means adopted 
 to prevent it. I would Uke to see my tenants pros- 
 perous and contented, but if I raised his rent beyond 
 a reasonable sum, and thus diminished the tenant- 
 right that he would get if he were going to sell his 
 farm, I would practically be robbing him; and that 
 should be prevented. 
 
 2L2 
 
 ,Sept.2% 1880. 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Atkinson. 
 
260 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Beatty. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Beatty, Keonan^ B. B. Lurgan, examined. 
 
 7309. Mr. Kavanagh. — You are in the occupation 
 of land?— Yes. 
 
 7310. How much land do you occupy? — 85 Irish 
 acres — 137 English. 
 
 7311. You hold all in perpetuity except eighteen 
 acres which you hold at a yearly rent of £25 1 Os. ? — Yes. 
 
 7312. The rent on the remainder is £20 yearly, 
 and £2 3s. <od. tithe?— Quite right. 
 
 7313. You are not connected with any other pro- 
 perty ? — I am not. 
 
 7314. About what district are you prepared to give 
 evidence? — The district in which I live — on the 
 Downshire estate. 
 
 7315. Does the tenant-right custom exist in your 
 district? — It does, universally. 
 
 7316. What do you understand by the Ulster 
 custom? — What we have been receiving as the Ulster 
 custom is the right of sale to a solvent tenant ; and 
 ■we are all anxious that the purchaser of a larm shall 
 be a man of respectable character, that he shall not be 
 a troublesome neighbour. If we find out that he is, 
 we won't allow him to come to the locality. We speak 
 to the landlord, and ask him not to receive that man 
 as a tenant. 
 
 7317. Practically then the landlord has a veto? — 
 He has. 
 
 7318. There is no limit as to the price of tenant- 
 right ? — No limit as to price. 
 
 7319. What is the usual selling rate of tenant 
 right in your district ? — Latterly it has been lower 
 than it was. I suppose from £20 to J25 per Irish 
 acre, would be now about the price. 
 
 7320. What causes tend to influence the price ? — ■ 
 Various causes — sometimes a farm will sell at a high 
 figure, to square or improve the farm adjoining, or 
 where a right ol way in either case exists, which fre- 
 quently does. 
 
 7321. That woiild be an exceptional case ? — Yes. 
 *7322. I suppose the situation ot the farm has a 
 
 good deal to do with the price? — -Yes, and the im- 
 provements made upon it. 
 
 7323. The nature of the soil would also have an 
 influence ? — ^Yes. 
 into consideration. 
 
 7324. Is the character of the landlord an element 
 of importance ? — Very much indeed, and the character 
 of the agent also. 
 
 7325. Has the character of the neighbouring tenants 
 any influence ? — Yes. It is very desirable that neigh- 
 bours should be on good terms. 
 
 7326. Are there any office rules or regulations 
 afiecting the Ulster custom upon any of the estates in 
 your neighbourhood 1 — I do not know of any. 
 
 7327. Have you heard of any complaint on that 
 ground ? — In some cases I have, but I do not know 
 of them. I have heard that in the townland of Lurgan- 
 tamery,two miles fromwherel live,partieswereputout, 
 and can get neither money nor land. That is a hardship. 
 
 7328. How could that take place when the parties' 
 had the Land Act to appeal to ? — It was on the estate 
 of a Mr. Harrison — he attempted to raise the rent 
 to an exorbitant rate, the tenants refused to pay, and 
 he put them out. It appears they were awarded compen- 
 sation, but this compensation they cannot get, whatever 
 way it is managed, and the land is lying waste since. 
 
 7329. Such a thing does not occxir on the property 
 you live on ? — No, there is no such thing on the 
 Downshire estate. 
 
 ■ 7330. Are there any cases where the price is 
 limited by office rules ? — That is only where a farm 
 juts into the neighbouring farms, and squares both — 
 in that case the price is left to arbitration. 
 
 7331. In cases of that sort, does money ever pass 
 privately ? — I have never known it. 
 
 7332. Are there many leaseholds on the Downshire 
 property ? — A few. 
 
 7333. When leases expire, is the tenant-right 
 acknowledged ?— It is. They get tenant-right, just 
 the same as others. 
 
 All the surroundings are take a. 
 
 7334. Are there any cases where from the size of 
 the farms, the length of the lease, the fact of the land- 
 lord having made improvements, or from other cir- 
 cumstances, the tenant-right custom does not apply %~ 
 I am not aware of any. 
 
 7335. Do you understand the drift of my question j 
 supposing a landlord had purchased the tenant-right 
 from the tenant ? — That is never done — it is better to 
 keep to what I know. 
 
 7336. Would you suggest any alterations in, or 
 amendments of the existing law as it aflects holdings 
 under the Ulster custom ? — I cannot suggest anything 
 practical, except an impartial tribunal to settle the 
 rent; there does not seem to be anything wrong, 
 but the difficulty arising from raising the rent 
 too high. That seems to be the only difficulty. 
 The people seem willing enough to work and to pay a 
 fair and reasonable rent, btit there does seem to be a 
 disposition on the part of some landlords to nibble up 
 the rent a wee bit, and in that way to diminish the 
 value of tenant-right. 
 
 7337. The question between landlord and tenant 
 really resolves itself into one of rent ? — Precisely. 
 
 7338. You admit that it is possible for a bad land- 
 lord to destroy the tenant-right on his estate, by raising 
 the rent ? — Certainly. But I think tenants often 
 make great fools of themselves by giving too high a 
 price, and by undertaking to pay a rent they cannot 
 afford to pay. 
 
 7339. Do you think it has a useful eflect that the 
 landlord shall have power to limit the price of tenant- 
 right 1 — No ; I would let it sell for whatever it was 
 worth. I would put no limit on the price. Whatever 
 it sells for, it is just worth that. If I have improved 
 my land I have a right to be paid for it. 
 
 7340. But don't you say that the price given for 
 tenant-right is often a great deal too high ? — Indeed 
 it is. 
 
 7341. Don't you think that the landlord Laving 
 power to impose a limit would be an advantage ? — No ; 
 I think it would be no use, and it certainly would not 
 be a palatable rule to us. 
 
 7342. Would it not be palatable to the incoming 
 man to have such a rule ? — I think it would be no use 
 - — for if they were not allowed to give the price openly 
 and aboveboard, they would do it behind backs. 
 
 7343. You think that if there were a rule imposing 
 a limit upon the price it would be evaded ? — It would. 
 
 7344. The next head of inquiry is as to the actual 
 condition, customs, and circumstances of particular 
 districts or estates — do you know much about that 1 — 
 I cannot sa}' much about that. 
 
 7345. Have there been many evictions in your 
 neighbourhood? — Eviction is, I may say, unknown 
 entirely. There is no such thing as evictions in my 
 district — on the Downshire estate especially. 
 
 7346. Do you know whether tenants have been much 
 given to mortgaging their holdings or borrowing money 
 on them ? — T think not. There have been few sales in 
 the Landed Estates Court, and they are under no neces- 
 sity to borrow in that way. 
 
 7347. Would the tenants in your district, in your 
 opinion, be desirous of purchasing their holdings if 
 facilities for doing so were afflDrded to them ? — I think 
 they would be disposed to purchase their holdings if 
 they could preserve their tenant-right. Supposmg 
 a tenant of thirty acres wishes to purchase his holding 
 in perpetuity, and pa)^s from twenty to thirty years' 
 purchase for it, who is to remunerate him for his 
 tenant-riglit, which would sell perhaps for twenty 
 years' purchase? If they would deduct the value 
 of the tenant-right from the purchase-monej' he would 
 be all right, but where he is to get his tenant-right 
 is the question. 
 
 7348. If he purchases the fee, his tenant-right merges 
 in the fee ? — Quite so. 
 
 7349. Except for that, do you think mafiy tenants 
 would be willing to purchase their holdings ? — I think 
 many would. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 261 
 
 7350. Do you think it would be a good tHng to 
 have a class of men in the country owning their hold- 
 ings 1 — I think it would be a good thing, but how is 
 the money to be raised '! First, there is no one to pay 
 them for their tenant-right. 
 
 7351. Do many leases exist in your district? — A 
 few, but not many. They are not anxious to get leases 
 at the present rents. 
 
 7352. Do you think they would take them at lower 
 rents 1 — I think they would. 
 
 7353. Do you think rents are too high 1 — I think 
 they are generally high, and especially so now that 
 we have to cope with foreign prodvioe. 
 
 7354. What proportion does your rent bear to the 
 valuation of your holding 1 — I hold the largest portion 
 of my land in fee. 
 
 7355. What is the rent of the portion you pay rent 
 for ? — It is not quite 30s. per acre. 
 
 7356. What proportion does it bear to the valuation 1 
 — It is a little under it. 
 
 7357. Do you think the valuation is too high 1 — I 
 think Griffith's valuation in many cases very high. I 
 think the tenants are charged on the appearance of the 
 ground, and not on the real value. 
 
 7358. You say there is a general tendency on the 
 part of landlords to increase the rent 1 — I do. 
 
 7359. To " nibble it up "?— To nibble it up. 
 
 7360. Is that done at stated intervals? — Generally 
 at the fall of a lease or change of tenancy. 
 
 7361 . If a lease was made a long time ago, say forty 
 or fifty years ago, and that the land was let cheap, do 
 you think it would be wrong to raise the rent on the 
 termination of the lease ? — No ; of com-se iu such a case 
 as that it would be light to make a change. 
 
 7362. You say the rent is increased on a change of 
 tenancy 1 — Yes ; if a man wished to sell his farm, and 
 another man wants to buy it, and they go into the office 
 in order to get the purchaser accepted as the tenant, 
 and his name put in the book, his rent is generally 
 increased. 
 
 7363. Is it unjustly increased, in your opinion ? — In 
 very many cases it is ; in some cases it is not. On the 
 Downshire estate I have perhaps known not many 
 cases of injustice. 
 
 7364. You do not know of any cases where the rent 
 has been raised on account of improvements done by the 
 tenant ? — They don't like to put it in that way ; they 
 would rather say it was the increased value of the land. 
 
 7365. But I put the question to you in that way — 
 do you know of any cases where the rent has been 
 raised on account of improvements done by the tenant 1 
 — I think the tenants' improvements are sometimes 
 taken into account ; but I will not say the Downshire 
 tenantry are harshly treated — certainly not, by any 
 means. 
 
 7366. What is the greatest rent you have known 
 upon a change of tenancy 1 — Perhaps 35s. 
 
 7367. Thirty-five shillings an acre? — Yes; I mean 
 from 30s. to 35s. ; 30s. per acre is about the average 
 rent of land in my district on the Downshire estate ; 
 but on some adjoining estates £2 is charged, and a 
 little above, betimes £2 bs. 
 
 7368. And it has been raised from 30s. to 35s. ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 7369. Do the tenants object to it? — I think they 
 would object if they thought they would gain anything. 
 Objecting does not succeed. 
 
 7370. I suppose a case of that sort is never left to 
 arbitration ? — No ; the rent is never left to arbitration. 
 
 7371. Are all the improvements done by the tenants 1 
 — Yes, in every case. 
 
 7372. The landlord does none ? — The improvements 
 are always done by the tenants. That is what we call 
 the tenant-right — it is the labour of the tenant and his 
 predecessors that has created this tenant-right. 
 
 7373. Baron Dowse. — His expenditure of labour 
 and money on the land 1 — Quite so. 
 
 7374. Mr. Kavanagh. — Surely tenant-right must 
 mean more than that, where a man gives for it nearly 
 the fee-simple value of the land ? — To show you what I 
 mean I will read to you an account I have here of what 
 
 an Irish acre of land costs the tenant to improve and Sept. 23, 188». 
 bring it into proper cultivation. 1 am supposing the ^^^ Joseph 
 rent per Irish acre, taking it on an average to be 30s. Beatty. 
 To that you must add the interest on £20 — I am 
 taking the purchase-money at £20 per acre. 
 
 7375. You mean the tenant-right? — Just so; the 
 interest on that at 5 per cent would be £1. That, 
 added to 30s. for the rent, makes £2 10s. a year. 
 Next comes the county cess. That has to be paid 
 twice every year ; and also the poor rate, half of which 
 the tenant must pay — I put that down at 3s. per acre. 
 
 7376. That is for county cess and poor rates 1 — Yes ; 
 then put down for drainage — opening 160 perches of 
 drain to the acre, 8 perches long and 20 broad — 160 
 perches. I have to pay Id. per perch for opening 
 drains by contract — which makes £4 13s. id. I have 
 to put down a load of stones to every perch, for which I 
 have to pay 3d. a load — that makes £2. I must 
 pay 2d. a 16ad for breaking the stones, cleaning out 
 the drains, and putting the stones in — that makes 
 £1 6s. 8d. ; I pay l^d. a, perch for spreading the 
 clay over the ground and filling up the drain — that 
 makes £1, and it takes a horse and cart twenty days 
 to cart what stones does an acre, allowing 3s. a day 
 for that, makes £3. Besides I have to keep the tools 
 in order, and to cover the top of the sewer with a 
 sort of smush from the farm-yard — put down 10s. 
 for that, and the entire expenditure for draining the 
 acre of land is £12 10s. The interest of that sum 
 is at 5 per cent. — 12s. Qd. a year. 
 
 7377. The outlay for draining is £12 10s. per 
 acre — you capitalize that, and charge the interest at 
 5 per cent.? — Yes, that is 12s. Qd. a year. In the 
 next place there is making of fences, and taking down 
 old ones, &c., putting in and manuring thorn quicks, 
 £6 10s. per acre, the interest of which is 6s. 6d. 
 
 7378. Does that one acre of land require to be 
 fenced all round it ? — No ; if you fenced a single acre 
 it would cost more. My fields are five-acre fields. 
 If you add up those figures — rent £1 10s., interest on 
 purchase £1, taxes 3s., drainage 12s. 6d., fencing 
 6s. &d., the total is £3 12s. If I am correct that is 
 what it costs the tenant who occupies it every year of 
 his life for ever if put in proper form and tilth. 
 
 7379. Baron Dowse. — Including the rent? — Yes, 
 including the rent, and interest at 5 per cent upon his 
 purchase and outlay. 
 
 7380. Mr. Kavanaqh. — How much in round 
 numbers do you estimate for the cost of drainage 
 and fencing per acre? — Drainage £12 10s., fencing 
 and levelling old ones, making cattle ponds, and 
 breaking up useless ways, &o., £6 10s. 
 
 7381. That is what you consider is the average 
 cost ? — That is what it costs me, and I have been 
 farming all my life. I got the first prize at the 
 North-east Agricultural Show for the best managed 
 farm in my distiict every time I entered it for com- 
 petition. I mention this to show I have in some 
 measure succeeded in treating the land fairly. 
 
 7382. Baron Dowse. — At that rate the farmer 
 could not bear much increase of rent? — He could 
 not. 
 
 7383. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is your opinion as 
 to Griffith's valuation? — I believe it very often is 
 right, but in many instances it is wrong, because 
 Griffith took the appearance of the land as the test of 
 value. I don't approve of that. I think the innate 
 quality of the land should be taken into consider- 
 ation. In fact to judge of the value of land merely 
 by its appearance is a premium on laziness. My 
 neighbour, who has not laid out 3d. on his land, 
 where I laid out £1, would get a lower valuation 
 than I would, because my land appears fairly cultivated 
 while his is overgrown with thistles and weeds. 
 
 7384. Then I take it you do not consider Griffith's 
 valuation is one to depend on? — It is not to be 
 depended on as a basis for rent, as the tenant would 
 be taxed on the improvements made by himself. 
 
 7385. You have not informed us what the customs 
 of the estates generally are as to tenant-right, you 
 merely said that it existed ; when a tenant dies what 
 
262 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 Sept. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Beatty. 
 
 happens 1 — If he has a son, * a brother, or whoever is 
 the heir, he comes in, and is accepted as the tenant. 
 
 7386. That is not regarded as a change of tenancy 1 
 — No ; sometimes the farm is rtvalued no doubt. 
 
 7387. If a man dies, leaving several members of a 
 family, what is done 1 — If a man dies leaving a family 
 consisting of several members the agent will take any 
 of the family as tenant if they agree amongst them- 
 selves as to which of them shall take it, and if they 
 don't agree then the members of the family, if they 
 wish to buy, are required to leave it to arbitration, 
 and, if not, then to sell it to the highest bidder by 
 private sale, subject to the office 3,pproving of the 
 tenant. 
 
 7388. You say " if the members of the family wish 
 to buy," surely they have not to buy — they come in by 
 succession 1 — Not exactly ; sometimes one member of 
 a family buys the farm and the amoimt he gives for it 
 is divided among the other members. 
 
 7389. In settling the family aflfairS a valuation has 
 to be put upon the farm 1 — Yes. 
 
 7390. A nd that is done by arbitration if they don't 
 agree among themselves ? — Yes. 
 
 7391. If none of the family wishes to become the 
 tenant, and if the adjoining tenant does not wish to buy 
 what then occurs 1 — It is put up for sale and sold to the 
 highest bidder. The money is then paid into the office 
 and the arrears of rent and other charges are paid, and 
 the balance is handed to the personal representative of 
 the deceased tenant. The purchaser prefers that course, 
 because it secures that the rent and chargesshall be paid 
 up to a certain day. 
 
 7392. On the Downshire estate the rent is only raised 
 on the occasion of a change of tenancy, when it is low, 
 and when it is considered that the land will bear it 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 7393. Would you suggest any alteration or change 
 in the custom of the estate 1 — I think it would be de- 
 sirable if there was some mode of arbitration to uegu- 
 late the rent, I don't refer to the Downshire estate, I 
 don't think we have much to complain of there, but 
 upon other estates the rent is too high in many cases, 
 and I think if there was some impartial tribunal to 
 determine what the rent should be, it would be a good 
 thing. 
 
 7394. You think some tribunal to determine the 
 rent would be the most satisfactory way of settling dis- 
 putes 1 — I think so. 
 
 7395. I understand you do not apply that obser- 
 vation to the Do^\^lshire estp.te 1 — I do not, indeed. I 
 have frequently known them act with great generosity. 
 
 7396. When tenants have to give large sums for 
 the purchase of their holdings, have they to borrow 
 money in order to enable them to do so 1 — Frequently 
 they have. 
 
 7397. Is not that a bad thing 1 — It is the bane of our 
 country. They are unable to cultivate the land. ' 
 
 7398. Don't you think that in that view if the land- 
 lord had the right of preventing the tenant-right going 
 too high it would be an advantage 1 — It would be very 
 hard to draw the Jiiae. 
 
 7399. Baron Dowse. — You say that if a. limit 
 was put to the price of tenant-right, money would be 
 paid behind backs t — Yes. It is no use for a land- 
 lord to say anything about the price, the price will be 
 paid in spite of him. 
 
 7400. Whether il has to be borrowed or not 1 — ■ 
 Yes, whether they have to beg, borrow, or starve for it. 
 
 7401. Do you think it a useful thing to have the 
 money paid through the office 1 — Yes, I think it is a 
 satisfactory way of carrying out the transaction. Some- 
 times if you give the purchase-money to one member 
 of a family they don't divide it as they should do. 
 
 7402. Have you known , litigation to arise in that 
 way 1 — I have. 
 
 7403. Have you ever heard of litigation arising 
 when the money was paid into the office 1 — Never. 
 The great thing gaiued by paying the money through 
 the office is, that the purchaser knows that the rent is 
 paid oS. 
 
 7404. If the rent is not settled the title is not 
 good 1 — No, in fact the office won't send the bailiff to 
 give possession to the purchaser, until the rent is paid. 
 
 7405. Have you ever known a case in which the 
 tenant-right has been appropriated by the office to pay 
 debts disputed by the- tenant 1 — Never. 
 
 7406. Do you approve of sales by auction 1 — No. 
 Private sale is, I think, the best, but sometimes it 
 goes by auction. 
 
 7407. I asked you the question because you used 
 the expression " highest bidder " — you said the farm 
 ought to be sold to the highest bidder? — Yes. It 
 practically comes to that. On some estates where 
 sale by auction is not permitted, an auctioneer is 
 employed to conduct the sale— he sets a table out in 
 front of the house, and he puts oii it some paper. 
 Then he addresses the parties present — " Gentlemen, 
 I am not allowed to sell this farm by auction, but any 
 man who wants to buy it may make an offiir — here is 
 pen and ink, and let him write down his name and 
 the amount he js prepared to give." Then each party 
 writes down the sum he proposes to give, and the farm 
 is given to whoever makes the highest offer. 
 
 7408. That amounts very much to the same as a 
 sale by auction 1 — Yes ; I call it cheating the deil in 
 the dark. 
 
 7409. Do you know any custom which bears harshly 
 on the tenant ? — I do not, except what I have stated. 
 
 7410. Have you remarked, or do you know of your 
 own knowledge, any tendency among tenants if they 
 were allowed to do it, to subdivide their holdings ? — 
 Subdivision of land, so far as I am able to judge, is 
 getting into bad odour. There is no man so poor as 
 the man with only a few acres of land. He is unable 
 to keep his team — he has to wait till liis neighbour 
 has done before he can get horses — he is consequently 
 delayed with everything, ploughing, sowing, and 
 harrowing, before he can get his crop in. He is under 
 a disadvantage in every way. 
 
 7411. What, in your opinion, is the smallest holding 
 a man could live on well without any other means of 
 support 1 — He would require to have what would keep 
 a pair of horses at work daily to make it pay. 
 
 7412. How much would you call that? — I would 
 say thirty acres or so. Actording to circumstances. 
 
 7413. You think the power of preventing sub- 
 division is a useful, thing to be exercised 1 — I do. I 
 think subdivision is undesirable. 
 
 7414. Do you think there is a tendency on the part 
 of the tenants to subdivide 1 — Not now ; but I have- 
 known cases where small farmers had pieces of land 
 for ever, which was divided. I knew one family of six 
 — four boys and two girls — hardworking, industrious 
 people ; theygot on very well till one of the sons married, 
 and the old man gave him a field ; then another son 
 married and got a field, and so on — the land is now 
 split up into six portions. I think that is worse than 
 misei'y. 
 
 7415. Would that be the tendency, in your opinion, 
 if the lalid belonged to the tenants, to cut it up into 
 small bits 1 — That would go on to some extent of 
 course ; but it would take some time before it was 
 done ; if this family that I speak of went on subdividing 
 amongst their families it would be so cut up in the 
 next generation that each person wouldn't have the 
 size of a chess-board ; but farmers are not inclined 
 to divide so much as formerly. 
 
 7416. What is the condition of the labourers in 
 your district % — The condition of the labourers is better 
 than ever it was, and they are so independent that 
 they won't work unless you pay what wages they 
 require. 
 
 7417. What rate of wages do you give 1 — Nine 
 shillings a week. I give them a house and garden, 
 and a bit of ground for potatoes, for which they pay a 
 shilling a week, or in some cases, where the house is 
 a small one, sixpence per week. 
 
 7418. Do you consider them well off? — I consider 
 they are mu<;li better off than the poor man I have . 
 been describing, who occupies a few acres of land. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 263 
 
 7419. Have you any difficnlty in getting labourers 1 
 — ^Very great diiEculty. The only, way I can secure 
 labourers when I want them is by keeping a staflf of 
 them all the year round. I must keep them wet and 
 dry, otherwise I could not get them when I wanted 
 them. 
 
 7420. Their condition is not so bad as it used for- 
 merly tp.be 1 — No ; they never were so well off in my 
 lifetime as they are now. 
 
 7421. You say most of the improvements on the 
 land are done by the tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 7422. Do the landlords do anything i— Nothing. 
 I have known some landlords give tiles for drainage, 
 but if the place was sold afterwards they would charge 
 for them. 
 
 7423. Do they never give timber or slates for build- 
 ing ? — Yes ; but if they do they charge for it when 
 the farm is being sold or on a change of tenancy. 
 
 7424. Still while the man was there he enjoyed the 
 advantage of it for nothing? — No doiibt of itj but 
 still he had to pay for it himself. 
 
 7425. That is, ultimately he had to pay for it when 
 he did not want the farm any longer 1 — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Beatty. ' 
 
 7426. Can you suggest any alterations in, or amend- Sept. 23, isso. 
 ments of, the existing law regulating the relation of 
 landlord and tenant,?. — I beg to dx'aw your attention 
 to the 47th Chapter of Genesis, where Pharoah ap- 
 pointed Joseph his agent. At the 18th vei-se and 
 onward we read that the people came to him the second 
 year and made known their distress, the result of 
 which was that Pharoah was to get one-fifth of the 
 increase, and the four parts their own for seed of the 
 field and food for their household and their little ones. 
 And they expressed their satisfaction and gratitude. 
 Taking this as my standard I made a careful calculation 
 of the produce of my home farm for the past seven 
 years and find it realized £408 annually, on sixty- 
 eight acres, Irish, which, divided by five, leaves £81125., 
 or £1 4s. per Irish acre as my rent to Pharoah. I 
 will with pleasure submit my calculation to your 
 honourable Commission. 
 
 7427. Who is your Pharoah 1 — Lord Downshire. 
 
 7428. What rent do you pay? — £1' 10s. per acre 
 for what I have under rent, or thereabouts, and a 
 nominal rent for what I hold in perpetuity. 
 
 Mr. William Sat, Kilmore, county Down, examined. 
 
 7429. The O'Conoe Don.— You area tenant-farmer ? 
 — I am. I hold some land in fee jointly with my 
 brother, and I hold six acres under a landlord. 
 
 7430. You are an ow'ner as well as an occupier of 
 land ?— Yes. 
 
 7431. You are only in occupation of a very small 
 portion of land as tenant ? — Only six acres. 
 
 7432. What is your rent for that 1 — Thirty shillings 
 an acre. 
 
 7433. Do you consider that very high? — No, I do 
 not; because we gave £11 an acre for it. It is ac- 
 commodation land j 30s. an acre is the regular rent on 
 the townland. 
 
 7434. Who is your landlord ? — The representatives 
 of the late James Cleland. 
 
 7435. I understand your rent is about twenty per 
 cent, over the valviation? — Scarcely twenty per cent. 
 
 7436. Do you hold by lease ? — I hold six acres as 
 tenant at will, and the remainder by fee-farm grant. 
 
 7437. How did you get the fee-farm grant ? Did 
 you purchase it ? — I purchased it. I bought it when 
 it was Church property and got it turned into a fee- 
 farm grant afterwards. 
 
 7438. Did joi\ purchase under the Church Act? — 
 No ; not under the Church Act, but it was Church 
 land held by lease with a toties quoties renewal. I 
 purchased it many years before the Church Act was 
 passed, but when the Church Act was passed it be 
 came necessary to get it turned into a fee-farm grant. 
 
 7439. Are you better pleased with being an owner 
 of land than a tenant ? — I am. 
 
 7440. Have you more inducement now than before 
 to improve 1 — Not a bit. 
 
 7441. Did you consider yourself as safe before as 
 you are now 1 — I would consider myself quite as safe 
 to be a tenant-at-will under such a landlord as Colonel 
 Forde or Lord Downshire. 
 
 7442. With tenant-right? — Yes; but I would not 
 consider myself as safe if I was a teiaant under a small 
 proprietor. 
 
 7443. If you were tenant of a holding under a 
 small proprietor you would prefer purchasing, if you 
 could ?^ — I would. 
 
 7444. Are there any particular points that you wish 
 to put before us in reference to the matter of our 
 inquiry ? — I can tell you Mr. Cleland's plan of dealing 
 with his tenants. It is this, when a tenant wants to 
 leave his farm he selects one person — generally a 
 farmer — as arbitrator, and Mr. Cleland selects another. 
 Those two appoint an umpire, and whatever value they 
 put on the farm Mr. Cleland pays, and then gives the 
 land to whoever he likes. 
 
 7445. Do you consider that a good system? — I do. 
 
 7446. He does not allow sale by auction?— No- 
 The price is fixed by arbitration. 
 
 7447. Do you think free sale by auction would be 
 more acceptable ? — I never heard any complaints from 
 the tenants on the estate. ' 
 
 7448. What is usually paid for the tenant-right per 
 acre?— From £10 to £20. 
 
 7449. Has there been any attempt amongst the 
 landlords in your neighbourhood to nibble away the 
 tenant-right by increasing the rent ? — I don't know of 
 any. Mr. Cleland in place of raising reduced the 
 rents; They were high, and he reduced them when 
 he got possession. 
 
 7450. And the people are satisfied ? — They are. 
 
 7451. Have you any tenants yourself? — I have. 
 
 7452. Do you allow them tenant-right? — I give 
 them the same tenant-right as I have myself The 
 rent is just the same. Of course when land is rough 
 it is less. 
 
 7453. Do the tenants hold from year to year?— 
 Some of them have leases, some hold from year to 
 year. 
 
 7454. How many tenants have you ? — About a 
 dozen. 
 
 7455. Then the greater part of your land is held by 
 tenants ? — The greater part of it. I farm between 
 thirty and forty acres of it myself. 
 
 7456. Do you adopt the system of arbitra,tion with 
 your tenants ? — Yes ; the same system. 
 
 7457. Is there any particular point you would like 
 to place before us, beyond what has been already 
 stated ? — I would wish to say a word about the 
 labourers. I think they are pretty well off, their wages 
 are from 9s. to 12s. a week, with house and garden. 
 
 7458. Do you disapprove of su.bdivision ? — I would 
 approve of a certain amount of small occupiers. I 
 think it is an advantage to the farmers to have a 
 certain number of small occupiers in their neighbour- 
 hood. 
 
 7459. Do you think it would be possible wholly to 
 stop subdivision ? — Of course landlords in general don't 
 allow it, but where a tenant has his land for ever, he 
 can do as he thinks proper. The two townlands I 
 live on have been for a long time what the country 
 people call " free land," that is held in perpetuity, 
 the result is that not a single acre in the two town- 
 lands is held by a descendent of the person who occupied 
 it seventy years ago. It has all passed out of their 
 hands. 
 
 Mr. William 
 
 Say 
 
264 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 23, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. William 
 James Watson. 
 
 Mr. William James Watson, Warrenpoint, Anghavilla, examined. 
 
 7460. The O'Conor Don. — You are a land agent ? 
 — I am. 
 
 7461. Managing property in Antrim and Downl — 
 Yes, and Wexford. 
 
 7462. What is the extent of the property over 
 whioh you are agent ?^ About 13,400 acres in Ulster. 
 I am agent over the estates of Mr. Robert N. Batt, 
 Mr. Joseph Mayne, Mr. P. N. Barron, Mr. W. Batt, 
 and Mr. W. 0. Barne. 
 
 7463. What has been the efiect of the Land Act of 
 1870 as far as your experience goes? — 1 only give evi- 
 dence as regards the estates of which I have the manage- 
 ment. The Land Act has not aifected those estates in 
 any way, neither as regards the tenant nor the landlord. 
 
 7464. Does the Ulster custom prevail on those 
 estates ? — ^Yes. 
 
 7465. Are there any office rules restricting free 
 sale ? — None. The custom is that the tenant shall be 
 allowed to sell to the highest purchaser, the landlord 
 reserving to himself the right of approval. 
 
 7466. He simply has a veto, to secure that the pur- 
 chaser shall not be a man of improper character ? — 
 Yes, and that he is a solvent tenant. 
 
 7467. You don't require that he shall be an adjoin- 
 ing tenant? — We prefer to have an adjoining tenant, 
 if he is willing to purchase ; but we never allow the 
 outgoing tenant to lose anything by it. If an adjoin- 
 ing tenant wishes to buy a farm, he must give as much 
 as an outsider. 
 
 7468. What is the value of the tenant-right as a 
 rule ?— It varies. On the Down estate it ranges from 
 £25 an acre, and has gone up to X46. 
 
 7469. £46 an acre for tenant-right 1 — Yes. There 
 was one farm which I wish to give evidence 
 about. It v-^as sold last winter; is a farm of six 
 acres, and had been held under lease at 19s. %d. per 
 acre Irish. 
 
 7470. When was the lease made 1 — It was a very 
 old lease. The former tenant was the life in the lease. 
 
 7471. What was the poor-law valuation ot that 
 farm? — £9 15s., I believe. I was going to mention 
 that on the death of the tenant the widow wanted to 
 sell the farm. At the time of the sale I was ill. I 
 merely gave permission that it should be sold. After- 
 wards I found that the widow had sold it at X46 per 
 acre. I said there must be something wrong or it 
 never could fetch such a sum as that. I looked at 
 the lease, and found the rent was about £6 for 
 six Irish acres. I said, " now that the lease has 
 expired, I shall make the rent the same as what the 
 adjoining tenants are paying." I raised the rent 
 to £9, being 30s. per acre, and I said to the widow, 
 " Now you may sell it. I suppose it will make no 
 difl'erence in the purchase, from my experience of such 
 things." It turned out as I expected, for the same 
 man bought it again for the same money. 
 
 7472. At £46 per acre?— Yes. 
 
 7473. Was there anything peculiarly desirable 
 about this farm, that would account for so large a sum 
 being given ? — No ; it was fair average land ; from six 
 to eight acres is the size of farm most sought after. 
 There is a nice slated house on it, a byre, and a stable. 
 
 7474. Had those buildings been erected by the 
 tenant ? — I am sure they had . On all the estates of 
 which I have the management, the tenants or their 
 predecessors built the houses. I never look \ipon 
 buildings as part of the farm, as far as the landlord is 
 concerned. 
 
 7475. What would you say was the value of the 
 buildings in this case ? — About ,£75 would erect them 
 well. 
 
 7476. And the farm realized £270?— Yes. I in- 
 vested the money for the widow since at five per 
 cent. 
 
 7477. I suppose that was an exceptional case of 
 tenant-right? — No. Another farm was sold some 
 time ago. It contained twelve acres, and the rent was 
 £\b a year. It sold at £34 per acre. Tenant-right Ire 
 
 quently sells at £30 per acre, it very seldom goes so 
 low as £25. 
 
 7477a. Is the rent generally in proportion to the 
 valuation? — It is generally less, and in some cases 
 considerably under the valuation. Mr. Batt's and the 
 Downshire estates are the lowest rented. On the Clon- 
 allen estate the valuation is £1,269 8s., and tlie 
 rent £1,197 5s. 5d. 
 
 7478. Are there leases, generally speaking, upon 
 those estates ? — No ; leases are dying out rapidly. 
 
 7479. On the expiration of a lease, do you increase 
 the rent? — We have had a revaluation in several 
 cases ; but not in my time. In my father's time there 
 was a change of rents — a few were raised, and most 
 were lowered. A fair revaluation and arrangement 
 with the tenants was made. It is about thirty 
 years ago since that occurred. The valuation of 
 one estate in Antrim is £738 16s. ; the rent is 
 £806 3s. 2d. In the year 1850 Mr. Batt had one 
 estate in the County Down revalued, and the rents 
 were lowered instead of being raised. 
 
 7480. The rents were lowered ? — Yes, about seven- 
 teen per cent. 
 
 7481. All round ? — All round. In one or two cases 
 a couple of shillings increase was made ; but on the 
 whole, the rents were lowered. 
 
 7482. What was the cause of their being lowered ? 
 — It was in the bad times — about the year 1850. 
 Those rents have never since been raised. You will 
 find they are still in existence. 
 
 7483. Has tenant-right been allowed on that estate ? 
 — Tenant-right has been allowed on all the estates of 
 which I have the management : the tenants are 
 allowed the right of free sale, but auction is not 
 allowed. 
 
 7484. Mr. KLavanagh. — What proportion do those 
 rents, as they are lowered now, bear to the valuation ? 
 — They are from seventeen to twenty-five per cent, 
 below the valuation. 
 
 7485. Below the poor law valuation ? — Yes. 
 
 7486. The O'Conor Don. — Does that, in your 
 opinion, account for the high price of the tenant- 
 right — the farms are let at such low rents? — Yes ; I 
 think that, and the way in which the tenants get time 
 to pay their rents when they get into difiicitlty. The 
 great desire, on the part of tenants, I know, is to get 
 on the Downshire and Batt estates. 
 
 7487. Have there been many ejectments on those es- 
 tates during the last ten years ? — I think there are about 
 420 tenants altogether, and there are on the average 
 about eleven ejectments a year ; but those are not pro- 
 ceeded with to eviction. 
 
 7488. What are they for? — Nonpayment of rent. 
 They are only intended as a spur to make the tenant 
 pay up. 
 
 7489. How many actual evictions have there been? 
 — I have been agent seven years, and during that time 
 we have had only two evictions ; and in each case the 
 tenant was put back again. In my father's time there 
 ware but five or six evictions during a period of twenty- 
 four years, and in all cases they were allowed to sell. 
 In the case of the two evictions this year, I put the ten- 
 ants in again ; in each case they owed four years' rent. 
 I put them in as caretakers, and they are now engaged 
 saving their crops, and in November they will sell the 
 farms, and then their rent and arrears will be paid. 
 
 7490. If they were able to redeem the land and 
 wished to hold on, would you reinstate them ? — Cer- 
 tainly, I would. In one case I have reinstated a man 
 who got two tenants to go security for him that he 
 would pay up in November. I reinstated him at once. 
 My experience of tenants shows me that, generally 
 speaking, the rents give them no difficulty when times 
 are good — they pay the rent without difficulty. There 
 is no outcry on the part of the tenants in my part of 
 the country such as there is in other places. 
 
 7491. I suppose there is a good feeling between 
 landlord and tenant upon the estates you manage?— 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 2Gd 
 
 Yes, very good. "When a tenant gets into any trouble 
 or difficulty, lie generally comes to me, and if tliey 
 want money I lend it to them. I have now about 
 £700 out on those county Down estates. 
 
 7492. Do you lend the money on behalf of the 
 landlords t — No, for myself. There is a very good 
 feeling between us. I am never on bad terms with the 
 tenants. 
 
 7493. On the expiration of a lease, do you permit 
 the tenant to continue in occupation ? — Always, and 
 recognise his tenant-right. 
 
 7494. If such a tenant were leaving the farm on the 
 expiration of his lease, would you allow him to sell 1 — 
 Yes. The only thing I would ask him would be that 
 before he sold, I should settle what the new rent 
 was to be. In one case, about five miles from here, a 
 man held several farms, one under lease ; the lease 
 expired and the man came to me, and asked me to fix 
 the new rent at once — I asked him what rent would 
 he propose himself — ^he said to make it the same rent 
 per acre as he was paying for the other farms — I con- 
 sidered the proposition a reasonable one and at once 
 acquiesced. 
 
 7495. Do you generally grant new leases on the 
 expiration of old ones 1 — No, the tenants as a rule do 
 not care about leases, they would rather be yearly 
 tenants. The only time a man asks for a lease is when 
 he wants to borrow money — they cannot borrow money 
 except they have leases, 
 
 7496. Is there any other point you wish to mention ? 
 — I wish to mention that on the estate of Clonallen 
 the rents were lowered iu 1 850, about 25 per cent., and 
 have never been since raised. On another estate — the 
 Hilltown estate, the rents have never been raised 
 within my memory. On some of the land the county 
 cess is greater than the rent. Some of the tenants 
 hold their land at a shilling per acre. Three years 
 ago I had it revalued, but the bad times came and I 
 did not act on the valuation — the tenants and I agreed 
 as to the amount of the new rents, but I have never 
 asked for them as yet, on account of the bad times. 
 
 7497. Was this mountain land which tJie tenants 
 had reclaimed ? — ^Yes ; mountain land, reclaimed thirty 
 years ago. 
 
 7498. And the rents never changed since 1 — Never. 
 
 7499. What proportion do the new rents bear to 
 the Poor Law valuation? — They are about 5 per 
 cent, above the valuation. On another property — the 
 Rodysburn estate about five miles from here — there 
 ai-e six townlands. Five of those townlands have not 
 been revalued as far back as I can trace, forty-five 
 years ago. In one townland, Drumbo, which belongs 
 to that property a revaluation was made three years 
 ago — the new rent of it is £1,191 — the Poor law 
 valuation £1,163. 
 
 7500. They are much abovit the same, the rent and 
 the valuation 1 — Yes ; only £30 difference ; but last 
 year having been such an unfavourable year for 
 farmers we gave the tenants an abatement of 10 per 
 cent. 
 
 7501 . Upon the new rent ? — Yes ; but the new rent 
 was about 5 per cent, over the old rent, so that we in 
 fact gave them five per cent, back out of the old rent. 
 In the county of Wexford there are four townlands. 
 
 7502. Belonging to the Batt family 1 — Yes. There, 
 tlie rents have never been altered. Two or three new 
 leases have been given, but the tenants took them at the 
 rents they were previously paying. They had been 
 yearly tenants, and they took out leases at the same 
 rents, they wanted, I think, to borrow money on them. 
 I may observe that leases are more in favour in the south 
 than in the north. 
 
 7503. For what term are the leases 1 — Thirty-one 
 years. 
 
 7504. Tenant-right does not exist there?— Well, it 
 is in its infancy. We have been trying to establish it. 
 
 7505. Trying to establish it ? — Yes. We let every 
 tenant have a right to sell. The difficulty is that we 
 caimot get men in the south to buy tenant-right. I 
 
 look upon real good tenant-right as a good thing for Sept. 23. isso. 
 
 the landlords, who need never be in the least anxious jj^^ ■william 
 
 about their rents if tenant-right is established. The James Watson. 
 
 rent is always safe. It also enables the landlords to 
 
 give the tenant what is commonly called "sperance" — 
 
 time to pay — for, of course, if a mim owes me money, 
 
 and I know he has a valuable property, I won't be in 
 
 such a hurry to make him pay. It gives the landlord 
 
 a good security for his rent, and it encourages the 
 
 tenant to work more cheerfully and industrioasly 
 
 upon his farm, for he knows he will have a return 
 
 for it. 
 
 7506. And for these reasons you have been 
 endeavouring to establish the system of tenant-right 
 in the south 1 — Yes. I have done so. There have 
 been several farms sold during the last twelve months, 
 and in each case the incoming tenant gave the out- 
 going man some consideration for the right of occu- 
 pation. 
 
 7507. You make no increase of rent upon the sale ? 
 —No. 
 
 7508. Where is that property? — In the county 
 Wexford, near Newtownbarry. The poor law valua- 
 tion of the townland is £261 12s. ; the rent, £307 14s. 
 I should mention that the poor law valuation seems to 
 be all wrong, In some cases it is far in excess of the 
 value ; in other cases far below the value. The poor 
 rates appear to be very high in Wexford, but it is not 
 so high when you look at the way the valuation has 
 been made. 
 
 7509. Mr. Kavanagh. — The poundage rate appears 
 high ? — Yes. 
 
 7510. But the sum actually levied is not so much ? 
 — Not so much as at the first glance it v/ould seem 
 to be. 
 
 7511. You don't consider the rents upon the Wex- 
 ford estate higher than in the county of Down? — 
 No ; not in proportion to the quality of the land. 
 
 7512. In proportion to the value of the land, you 
 don't consider the rents higher in Wexford ? — No ; 
 not as far as my experience goes. I may mention that 
 the rents upon the Wexford property have been un- 
 changed for forty or fifty years. 
 
 7513. Have you had any ejectments there? — No. 
 
 7514. Are the rents as well paid in the south as in 
 the north ? — Up to thisyear, yes. When I went down 
 to collect the last half year's rent, the tenants, in con- 
 sequence of the bad season, were unable to meet me, 
 but they arranged to meet me and pay a year's rent 
 next November. One or two said that by that time, 
 perhaps, they would have no rents to pay, but that 
 was only a joke. There is as good a feeling on the 
 part of landlord and tenant in the south as in the 
 north. 
 
 7515. Are any improvements done by the landlord ? 
 — No ; except some arterial drainage during the past 
 year. 
 
 7516. Main drainage? — Yes. 
 
 7517. All local drainage, fencing, and building;i are 
 done by the tenants? — Yes. About twenty-five years ago 
 the landlords used to give the tenants upon the Clon- 
 allen and Hilltown estates timber and slates when 
 they wished to erect buildings ; and many houses 
 upon those properties were roofed at the landlord's 
 expense. 
 
 7518. Has that ceased of late years ? — ^Yes. When 
 a tenant gives £46 per acre for tenant-i-ight, it is 
 equivalent to paying £2 6s. per acre for ever ; and 
 when the landlord gets only 30s., an acre, he looks 
 upon it that the tenant actually has a greater property 
 in the land than he has himself, and that he should 
 roof his own buildings. But whenever a tenant 
 wishes to slate a roof we lend him the money, and 
 he pays it back by instalments. 
 
 7519. Paying interest for it, I suppose, until re- 
 paid ? — No, we do not charge him interest for it, he 
 paying it back within a reasonable time. 
 
 7520. What do you call a reasonable time 1 If a 
 
 man borrowed £10, and paid it back at the rate of 
 
 2 M 
 
266 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sep*. 23, 1880. £2 lOs. a year, we Avould look upon it as reasonable. 
 ^ jrrjT In Hilltown, on one townland, tliey were imable to 
 
 James Watson. P^J ^''^J ^^''^^ ^^^^ season, but they are beginning now 
 to pay. We borrowed £1,800 for relief works, 
 
 7521. For improvements on tlie estate^ — Yes, for 
 building mountain walls, so as to give the people 
 employment. 
 
 7522. Are they small or large tenants? — Small. 
 In that townland there are eighty-seven holdings, and 
 seventy-four of them are under £10 valuation. 
 
 7523. Do you allow sub division 1 — No. 
 
 7524. Then those holdings have been that size a 
 long time ? — ^Yes ; if anything they are larger now than 
 they were twenty years ago, because each tenant, when 
 an adjoining farm is to be sold, generally manages to 
 buy it. 
 
 7525. Is there any other point on which you wish 
 to give evidence 1 — No, I do not think there is. 
 
 7526. Have you heard of complaints by tenants upon 
 other estates in your neighbourhood f — I have heard 
 complaints by tenants on small estates, which were 
 bought in the Landed Estates Court of late years, by 
 shopkeepers and small capitalists, as an investment 
 for money, those are the people the tenants complain of. 
 
 7527. Raising the rents? — Yes; tliey screw them 
 up fearfully. 
 
 7528. Interfering with the tenant-rig]it ? — Yes, they 
 keep the tenant-right down in many cases, limit it to 
 £1 an acre. I believe there is such a thing as tenant- 
 right becoming too high, but that is one of the things 
 that will remedy itself, like all matters of trade, it will 
 remedy itself in a little time. 
 
 7529. Do you think any interference by Parliament, 
 with regard to fixing rent, would be justifiable? — 
 That is one of the most diflScult questiojis I know. I 
 do not think it would be justifiable in the case of 
 large old estates. I think it would be well if some- 
 thing could be done, by which these small land-owners, 
 who raise rents unduly, should be checked. It seems 
 a terrible thing that those small land proprietors, should 
 be able to raise the rents in the way they have done. 
 But if you have any legislation, it might be a hardship 
 to the good landlords, and there is the difficulty. I 
 would go back to the year 1870, and I woidd give 
 tenants, where the rents were increased more than 
 10 per cent., upon property sold in the Landed Estates 
 Court, an arbitration for the purpose of settling the 
 rent. On all property sold in the Landed Estates 
 Court since 1870, and where the tenants complained 
 of an increase of rent, I would give them the option 
 of going before an independent tribunal and getting 
 the rents revised, and whoever was in the wrong, let 
 him pay the costs of the investigation. 
 
 7530. Would you apply that to increases of rent 
 made before the sale. Sujsposing an estate were sold 
 in 1872 or 1873, you would give the tenant a right to 
 object to any increase which, had been made in the 
 rent ?— Yes. 
 
 7531. Supposing an estate were put up for sale in 
 the Landed Estates Court, and that immediately before 
 
 the sale, the owner raised the rent, and sold it on the 
 increased rental, would you allow the tenant to raise 
 an objection in such a case as that, the purchaser having 
 bought the estate on the faith of that as an existing 
 rental ? — Yes ; if the tenant stated that it was an ex- 
 orbitant rent, I think it would be right that there 
 should be an investigation. My object is to protect 
 the tenants on small recently purchased estates from be- 
 ing rack-rented, because I know they are in some cases. 
 I know a case where the rent has been increased to 
 £2 5s. an acre, where the old rent was only £1, and 
 £1 2s. The diflSculty is how to remedy those indi- 
 vidual cases, for if you make the law too general you 
 would have all the tenants in Ireland appealing to Ihis 
 tribunal. 
 
 7532. You want to make a law that would not ap- 
 ply to any of the old proprietors ? — I would like wliere 
 a man really had a hardship that he should have a 
 remedy. 
 
 7533. You would not consider it a hardship that 
 the purchaser, who had bought the property on the 
 faith of the rental, and on the faith of an Act of 
 Parliament which guaranteed him in his purchase, 
 should be interfered with, and his rents reduced? — 
 I know that is a difficulty ; and on consideration I do 
 not think it would be well to go back behinil the 
 sale. 
 
 7534. Youwouldconfine it to rentals which have been 
 raised since the sale ? — I think so ; because if a mai i buys 
 an estate in the Landed Estates Court he has a Parliar 
 mentary title, and, therefore, I don't think it would be 
 right to go behind that. As to the settlement of rents, 
 the best suggestion I can ofl:er would be thii; — if a 
 landlord wishes to raise the rent, and the tenant objects, 
 I think the landlord should be bound to give him time, 
 and the tenant should say what, in his opinion, would 
 be a reasonable rent, and the landlord should have 
 the option of giving him ten years' purchase on that 
 rent as his tenant-right, and let him go ; on tlie other 
 hand, if the tenant is dissatisfied with the rent, and 
 wishes it to be reduced, and that the landlord objects 
 to reduce it, let the landlord say what, in his opinion, 
 would be a reasonable rent, and if the tenant objects to 
 pay it, let the landlord give him ten years' purchase 
 on that rent, and let him go away. 
 
 7535. That is something like Judge Longfield's 
 plan? — ^Yes; only I wo nld make it ten. yeai's instead 
 of seven. 
 
 7536. Judge Longfield proposed that a sliding scale 
 should be adopted ? — I thiiJi ten years would be Ijetter 
 in the north of Ireland. In the south there would be 
 some difficidty, because incoming tenants won't pay 
 for tenant-right there. No matter how anxious I have 
 been in the south to extend the Ulster custom there is 
 this difficulty, that tenants do not understand paying 
 for the tenant-right of a farm, because the man who is 
 leaving it did not pay tenant-right for it. 
 
 The Commissioners adjourned till the following 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 267 
 
 TWELFTH DAY— FRIDAY, 24th SEPTEMBEE, 1880. 
 
 Present :— The Right Hon. the Eaul of Bessborough, Chairman ; Eight Hon. Baeon Dowse, 
 The O'CoNOR Don, Arthur MacMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., and William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. John Lennon examined. 
 
 Sept. 94, 1880, 
 
 7537. Chairman. — Where do you reside 1 — At 
 Tullysaran, near Benburb. 
 
 7538. Are you a tenant ? — ^Yes," a tenant-farmer. 
 
 7539. Under whom — who is your landlord? — He 
 is Captain Lowe, a native of the county of Limerick. 
 
 7540. Tell what is the case you have to complain 
 of 1 — The greatest case of hardship that I have to com- 
 plaiu of is that our rents are raised when we make im- 
 provements. It has been raised in several instances, 
 and we are at present threatened with being raised. 
 
 7541. When was your rent raised ? — My rent was 
 raised in 1873. 
 
 7542. When had there been a previous rise? — I 
 don't know. 
 
 7543. Did you buy? — I bought a little piece of 
 land in 1873, and my rent was raised whenever I 
 bought land. 
 
 7544. Did you buy this holding you are speaking 
 of?_Yes, in 1873. 
 
 7545. What did you give for it ? — ^I gave £9 10s. 
 an acre for it. 
 
 7546. Well, on the purchase was the rent raised ? 
 — Yes, after the purchase. 
 
 7547. Had you notice at the time you were buy- 
 ing that there would be a rise of rent ? — No, not 
 directly notice that there would be a rise of rent, 
 but the agent wrote me saying that all he allowed 
 was for the improvements and the unexhauste'd 
 maniu'es, and if I offered more than that it would show 
 him the land was too cheap, and he would raise the 
 rents, which he did afterwards. 
 
 7548. Had you agreed with the consent of the 
 agent to purchase ? — Yes, he allowed me to purchase 
 and afterwards he told me that if I gave more than 
 the value of the improvements and the unexhausted 
 manures, it would show him that the land was let too 
 cheap, and he was bound to rise the rent. 
 
 7549. That was that he did not consider you 
 ought to give anything for the previous tenant's good- 
 will ? — Just so. 
 
 7550. What was the rent up to that time ? — ^This 
 portion of land I bought was about three acres, and 
 the rent something about £,2 10s. The rent was raised 
 to £3 on me. 
 
 7551. And that rent you paid ? — Yes, that was the 
 rent I paid for that portion of land I bought in 1873. 
 
 7552. We had better keep to that at present. 
 Was it raised again? — No, it has not been raised, 
 but the agent has threatened to raLse it, and I look on 
 these threats being held out from year to year as 
 most injurious to tenants making any improvements. 
 
 7553. The fear of being raised on those who im- 
 prove? — And it is sure to be raised more than on 
 those who don't improve. 
 
 7554. But there was no particular rule on the es- 
 tate as to the period that rents might be raised ? — No, 
 the agent raised them as the circumstances presented 
 themselves, when he could do it without raising 
 a storm among the tenantry. The agent just selects 
 paiticular cases. 
 
 7555. With respect to your holding is that under 
 the same landlord ? — Yes, it is; he did not raise it, 
 although I am threatened now to be raised. 
 
 7556. But you had been holding that some time 
 before ? — Yes. 
 
 7557. Then, the rise of your rent was made at the 
 time of the sale ? — Yes. 
 
 7558. Is it not a very general custom amongst 
 landlords to make a change in the rents on a change 
 in the tenancy ? — Yes ; it is becoming general in our 
 neighbourhood now. 
 
 7559. Do you know whether it had been so on the 
 estate before the Land Act ? — No, it was not. They 
 did not raise it before the Land Act. 
 
 7560. They did not raise it at any time ? — No. On 
 this particular estate it was not raised since 1848 until 
 since the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 7561. Then you have a feeling of insecurity from the 
 idea that if you improved your holding you would have 
 the rent raised again ? — Yes, just so. 
 
 7562. You think that what was done in that case 
 might be done to the whole of your holding 1- — Yes, it 
 would ; at least I am afraid it would be done. 
 
 7563. Do you feel no confidence that it would only 
 be in the event of a sale it would be raised ? — No. I 
 believe if the times had been prosperous it would have 
 been raised before. The landlord and agent have each 
 threatened to raise it. 
 
 7564. Baron Dowse. — Will you say that that has 
 had the effect of lessening the value of your interest in 
 the farm 'i — Yes, certainly. 
 
 7565. Does tenant-right prevail on the property? — - 
 It does, to a limited extent. 
 
 7566.' What is the limit now? — There are a. great 
 many circumstances which limit it. In the first place 
 there is a danger of raising the rent. In one case I 
 know of a purchasing tenant of about fifteen acres of 
 land, and the agent said he would raise it 2s. 6cZ. an 
 acre ; consequently the purchasing tenant took back 
 £43 of the purchase-money and put it in his pocket, and 
 told the outgoing tenant that if he liked the re- 
 mainder of the money he could take it. 
 
 7567. Is that what you mean by saying that tenant- 
 right prevails to a limited extent ? — Yes. 
 
 7568. Supposing that land was let at a fair price 
 would there be any limitation on the tenant-right ? — In 
 some cases they do interfere and say the land should 
 not be purchased behind a certain price. 
 
 7569. But they don't do that universally? — No. 
 
 7570. Who is your landlord ? — Captain Lowe. 
 
 7571. Near Moy, is it? — ^Yes, a mUe and a half 
 from Benburb, near Armagh. 
 
 7572. Is it near Armagh, in the Armagh direction? 
 — -Yes, in the Armagh direction from Benburb. 
 
 7573. How far are you from Armagh? — About 
 four miles. 
 
 7574. You are near Blackwatertown ? — Just about 
 the same distance from Benburb. 
 
 7575. Is his estate a large one there ? — No, only four 
 townlands. 
 
 7576. And how many tenants has he ? — Only 
 r.jurteen or fifteen on each of these townlands, perhaps 
 less. 
 
 7577. Do your observations, so far as your know- 
 ledge goes, extend to the whole of the tenants as well 
 as yourself ? — Yes, for all. He threatened last year 
 to raise the rents, and we had a meeting to ask him 
 to give us a reduction. ' • , ■ 
 
 7578. Where had you the meeting ? — In a school- 
 house, and we appointed a deputation to go and 
 wait upon the agent. They waited upon the agent, 
 and he received them vei-y discourteously, and they 
 then wrote to the landlord. 
 
 7579. Did anything come of the meeting — did he 
 give you an answer ? — No. The agent is Mr. Ker 
 Mahon, of 17, College-green. 
 
 7580. Does he belong to the firm of Guinness and 
 Mahon ? — I think they are bankers in College-green. 
 
 7581. And he has a bailiff down there, I suppose ? 
 — Yes. 
 
 7582. How often does he go down there himself? — 
 Once in the year. 
 
 2M2 
 
 Mr. John 
 Lennon. 
 
268 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 24, 1880 
 
 Mr. John 
 Lennon. 
 
 got it, 
 
 75S2a. How long has lie been agent 1 — He has been 
 agent about three years. 
 
 7583. And who was the agent before himi — Mr. 
 Goodlette, from beyond Moy. 
 
 7584. I know, Salem Lodge 1 — Yes. 
 
 7580. Do you feel any change since you got the new 
 agent ? — Yes ; I feel more insecurity. Mr. Goodlette 
 was a farmer himself and understood farming busi- 
 ness, and besides expenses have been put on last year 
 that we never had before. 
 
 7586. What is your renti — About £1 an acre. 
 
 7587. For how many acres 1 — Twelve acres. 
 
 7588. Did you buy it yourself? — No ; it has gone 
 down by hereditary descent from father to son. 
 
 7589. But you bought three acres 1 — Yes. 
 
 7590. What did you pay?— £9 10s. an acre. 
 
 7591. What would be the limitation as far as the 
 market value ? — The way it was — there was no com- 
 petition for the land, and I offered £9 10s. an acre and 
 
 but the agent raised the land. 
 
 7592. Was it in Goodlette' s time you bought it? — 
 Yes. Here is the letter. (Witness reads from docu- 
 ment) — 
 
 " The tenant-right Is the value of the tenant's improve- 
 ment and unexhausted manures, the value of which is all 
 I can permit to be sold. If I find that the price you 
 offer " 
 
 7593. Baron Dowse. — This appears dated 15th 
 March, 1873, and is from Mr. Goodlette. (His Lord- 
 ship reads) — 
 
 "This is to inform you that I will not permit you, or 
 any other person, to buy any part of Miss Porter's estate 
 from any tenant, without first obtaining my consent as her 
 agent. I will go to look at the place and see whether the 
 part of it is one that I can permit you to purchase the 
 tenant-right of. The tenant-right is the value of the 
 unexhausted manures, the value of which is all that I can 
 permit to be sold. If I find that the price you ofi'er is 
 more than the value of the unexhausted manures, it will 
 show me the rent is too low and I will raise it. " 
 
 — ■ Witness — Yes. 
 
 7594. CiiAiEMAN. — I thought you said it was 
 Captain Lowe's ? — Miss Porter was the landlady then. 
 Another document which was put in force at the 
 time of the passing of the Land Act is this. We 
 had heard that they compelled the tenants to sign 
 what they believed was intended to do away with the 
 Land Act, of which the principal thing was reserving 
 to the landlord the right of taking timber, and gravel, 
 and stones, and everything of that kind, and entering 
 the tenant's lands at any time they like without giving 
 compensation ; at the same time to pay the rent half- 
 yearly, and if the tenant would not pay within twenty- 
 one days of the time mentioned he would be subject to 
 be put out without compensation. 
 
 7595. That was introduced after the Land Act? — 
 Yes. 
 
 7596. Were they compelled to sign it? — Yes. 
 
 7597. Baron Dowse. — Did you sign it ? — I got rid 
 of it by putting the agent off from time to time. 
 Mr. Goodlette insisted on my signing it, and I was 
 putting it off. 
 
 7598. How did you put him off? — Putting him off, 
 that it would be time enough to sign it afterwards. 
 
 7599. And you never signed it? — No. 
 
 7600. Did other men sign it? — Yes, a great many. 
 
 7601. The O'Conok Don. — What was the actual 
 ■\-alue of tenant-right on that estate ? — It went as high 
 as £15 an acre. £12 is looked upon as a fair value. 
 
 7601a. How long ago is that ?— £12 has been given 
 for the land since 1870. It was given in 1875 for the 
 land. 
 
 7602. You say that the rent on that estate has not 
 been changed since 1848 ? — No ; except in special 
 cases. Whenever the land changed hands the agent 
 kept raising the rent. 
 
 7603. CHAiEMAsr. — I understand you to say that 
 there was no change previous to 1870? — No; not 
 before 1870. When it was sold before 1870 the 
 incoming tenant got it at the same rate 
 
 7604. There was no rule on the estate as to any 
 specified time for changing the rent? — Since 1870, 
 whenever the tenant-riglit has been sold, the rent has 
 been raised in some cases 7s. 6d. an acre. 
 
 7605. The O'Conok Don. — In how many cases has 
 the rent been raised ? — In all cases where the land was 
 sold. 
 
 7606. AVe do not knov/ in how many cases the land 
 was sold ? — In about ten instances. 
 
 7607. There are only fourteen tenants? — About 
 fourteen in each townland, and some of them have sold 
 lately pieces. 
 
 7608. Parts of the townland ? — The piece that I 
 bought was part of Mr. Hanson's land. 
 
 7609. Can you give an idea of the total amount of 
 rent increased on these townlands since 1848? — There 
 was no rise in the rent till after the passing of the Land 
 Act. 
 
 7610. Well, since then — that makes it aU the easier 
 to answer — what was the gross increase of rent?~I 
 cannot say ; but in one case I know of, it has been 
 raised 7s. 6d. 
 
 7611. On how many acres? — I think about seven 
 acres. 
 
 7612. Baron Dowse. — Is that about 7s. 6d. an acre! 
 —Yes. 
 
 7613. What is your rent in proportion to the valua- 
 tion ? — The value of the house and land is £13 5s., and 
 the rent is £12. I don't know the value of the house, 
 I should think it is more than £1 5s. The £2 5s. 
 rent is higher than the value — higher than I can pay 
 on account of low prices. 
 
 761'i. Is the rent higher on that estate than on other 
 neighbouring estates ? — Yes ; it is something higher 
 than Lord Charlemont's estate bordering it. 
 , 7615. Mr. Shaw. — Do they send a valuator when 
 they raise the rent ? — The landlord and agent say what 
 increase they will. put on, and send no valua.tor. 
 
 7616. Does the agent go there? — Yes; generally 
 whenever the rent is changed. 
 
 7617. From Dublin? — He comes to Armagh to re 
 ceive the rents, and he just puts on a round sum. 
 
 7618. What he thinks fit ?— Yes. 
 
 7619. Bar-on Dowse. — Does he go out and see the 
 land himself? — Yes; he goes out to see the land 
 himself. 
 
 7620. Mr. Shaw. — How much, adding together the 
 7s. Gd. and the old rent, would it make the rent per 
 acre ? — I believe it would make 35s. 
 
 7621. Is that a high rent there ? — Yes, very high. 
 
 7622. Baron Dowse. — Per English acre? — Yes. 
 These to'wnlands where he put on a great increase are 
 outside Armagh. Navan is the name of the townland. 
 
 7623. Where does Captain Lowe live himself? — At 
 Limerick. 
 
 7624. The O'Conor Don. — Was there anything 
 peculiarly advantageous in the situation of this land on 
 which 7s. 6d. per acre was placed ? — No ; I do not 
 know of anything peculiar about it; the land being 
 nearer Armagh than the other three townlands, but it 
 was nothing better. 
 
 7625. But the situation was better than the others? 
 — The situation is within a mile and a half of Armagh, 
 and that would be more convenient for drawing 
 manures and the conveyance of farm produce, but 
 that is all. 
 
 7626. Chairman. — Is there any back gale or have 
 you to pay to the day ? — No, sir ; we have to pay to 
 the day. 
 
 7627. And how soon after the rent is due is the 
 rent paid? — The rent is due in November, and last 
 year we got notice on 3rd Decenrber to pay on the 6th 
 or 7th. 
 
 7628. So they kept you strictly to the day? — So 
 strictly that when the tenants were not prepared last 
 yeai-, the season being so very bad, the day before he 
 (the agent) left Armagh he returned every man's name 
 to the solicitor, and ] Os. expenses were put on. 
 
 7629. Mr. Shaw. — In December? — Yes. 
 
 7630. For the November rent ?— For the November 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 269 
 
 rent. The tenants refused to pay^ and tte 10s. is lyin^ 
 over. 
 
 7631. Who is the solicitor ?— Mr. Hardy. 
 
 7632. Was the expense for a notice of ejectment ? — 
 YeSj and some were served with ejectments. 
 
 7633. And the expenses are 10s. 1 — Yes. Another 
 thing I could show you is a petition we drew up asking 
 him to give us time to pay. He treated it merely as 
 a sham. This is the petition. 
 
 Witness reads petition, as follows : — 
 
 " At a meeting of the tenants on the estate of Captain 
 Lowe, held on the Sth December, 1879, it was unanimously 
 resolved : — 
 
 "1. That the time from we got notice (4th and 5th 
 December) to the day of paying the rent is too short to allow 
 of us making money of our crops and cattle, and we there- 
 fore, most respectfully, ask you to give us till February, as 
 was always the case heretofore on this estate. 
 
 " 2. That we most respectfully ask a reduction of 20 per 
 cent, on this year's rent. 
 
 " 3. That without this reduction we fear that many of us 
 will be unable to pay this year's rent, owmg to the severe 
 agricultural depression. 
 
 " 4. That we feel very much disappointed that Captain 
 Lowe did not reply to the petition which we forwarded to 
 him in October." 
 
 Witness continues. — They waited on him and urged 
 this, and that was the treatment they received. 
 
 7634. Chairman. — Did you wait on the agent or on Sept. 24, isso. 
 Captain Lowe himself] — On the agent. jjj._ j^^ 
 
 7635. Was the rent paid or did you get an exten- Lennon. 
 sion of time 1 — The rent was not paid at that time. 
 
 7636. Mr. Shaw.— You paid it since?— We had it 
 paid before the January sessions. We were served 
 with notices by Mr. Hardy, the attorney, and 
 threatened to be put out if we did not pay. 
 
 7637. Baron Dowse. — For not paying the Novem- 
 ber rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 7638. CHAiRMAif. — When was it Captain Lowe pur- 
 chased the property 1 — He did not purchase it. He got 
 it by heirship in '76. Another thing I would wish to 
 say is, gentlemen, that it was a custom on our estate 
 and other estates to deprive the tenant of the fran- 
 chise. Wh ene ver they come by heirship into the place 
 the agent will not put their names into the receipt, 
 
 and then these men cannot get their votes returned. 
 It has been looked upon as a great grievance in the 
 neighbourhood. 
 
 7639. Mr. Shaw. — Their names are not put into 
 the rate book 1 — Their names are not put in the receipts, 
 consequently whenever they go to ask the clerk of the 
 union he says he knows nothing about them. 
 
 7640. The old names are kept on ? — Yes. 
 
 7641. Then the old people are on the register ? — 
 Yes ; but they are dead and the votes are lost. 
 
 [The witness then withdrew.] 
 
 Mr. Nathaniel Wilson examined. 
 
 7642. Chairman. — Where do you live? — Beside 
 Benburb, county Tyrone. 
 
 7643. Under the same landlord ? — Mr. Bruce is at 
 present landlord. It used to be Lord Powerscourt. 
 
 7644. What case is it you wish to bring before us? 
 — I have no particular case. I had a case certainly of 
 my own, but that is fiaally settled between the land- 
 lord and me. We had a long battle over it, and I have 
 nothing to grieve over now for myself. 
 
 7645. Mr. Shaw. — Could you not tell us what hap- 
 pened about the battle ? — I could tell a part of it, but 
 my memory is greatly gone. There is Mr. Kane who 
 will be coming in, he is the man that can give you every 
 particular. 
 
 7646. Then it is better for you not to begin it ? — No. 
 It is better I should not begin it. He can give you 
 every particular. 
 
 7647. Chairman. — It was formerly Lord Powers- 
 court's property ? — Yes. 
 
 7648. And it was purchased by Mr. Bruce ?— Yes. 
 
 7649. What was the date of that 1 — I can give some 
 other little reminders of the neighbourhood, on other 
 estates some grievances I could have laid before you, 
 before he had come in, but it is better for me not to 
 enter into it at all. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. NathaBid 
 Wilson. 
 
 Messrs. William John Hamilton; Patrick Connolly; John Cranston ; Thomas Carroll; and Bernard 
 
 Campbell, presented themselves for examination. 
 
 Mr. Bernard Campbell examined. 
 
 7650. Chairman — You live at lower Corr ? — Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 7651. What part of the country is that in ? — County 
 Tyrone, sir. 
 
 7652. Near what town 1 — Dungannon. 
 
 7653. Nowyou wish to bring before us your own case 
 and that of twenty-one other tenants altogether ? — ^Yes. 
 
 7654. On what property ? — Colonel Deane Mann's. 
 
 7655. Will you tell us what the case is? — I will. 
 
 7656. State it ? — It is an increase of rent at the fall 
 of our leases, double what we were payiag previously to 
 the fall of our leases. The last surviving life in our leases, 
 died on the 17th November, 1874, after which we 
 were served with notices of ejectment, and the form 
 of law gone through, and I was dispossessed. I was 
 put in again by signing a paper, and the first thing we 
 knew was that our rent was double what we were pay- 
 ing previously. 
 
 7657. After you signed the paper ? — After we signed 
 the paper. 
 
 7658. Mr. Shaw. — Did you get no notice of the 
 amount before you signed the paper 1 — I was not present 
 at the time. There was no notice. 
 
 7659. Chairman. 
 running 1 — A sixty years' lease, 
 
 7660. And when did it fall out? — On 17th 
 November, 1874. 
 
 7662. Had you and the others made any improve- 
 ments on the holdings in the meantime ? — Yes ; we did. 
 
 How long had the lease been 
 
 7663. At you own cost entirely ? — At our own cost 
 entirely. 
 
 7664. Do you consider that in the addition to the 
 rent, your improvements were not taken into account ? 
 ■ — I consider, sir, that the rent was increased notwith- 
 standing our improvements — that our improvements 
 had nothing to do with the increase in the rent. 
 
 7665. Baron Dowse. — Did you pay rent on your 
 own improvements ? — I beg your pardon 
 
 7666. You improved the land you say ? — We did. 
 
 7667. And the rent was increased ? — At the expir- 
 ation of the lease. 
 
 7668. Did you get credit for your improvements, 
 or had you to pay rent on your own improvements 1 — 
 The increase of rent was the only notice we got. The 
 lease fell in, and the next rent we paid was double what 
 we paid formerly, as will appear from the receipts. 
 
 7669. Mr. Shaw. — Was the land worth the double 
 rent without the improvements ? — No, sir, nor with 
 the improvemunts. 
 
 7670. The Chairman. — Had therebeen any covenant 
 in the lease to effect any of these improvements ? — 
 Nothing, sir, that I am aware of. 
 
 7671.' When this additional rent was put on you, 
 did you take any steps to represent the hardship ? — 
 We did, sir ; we resisted till we were notified that we 
 were defeated with respect to the law, and were obliged 
 to pay or leave — obliged to pay an increase of rent or 
 surrender our holdings. 
 
 Mr. Bernard 
 Campbell. 
 
270 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 24, 1680. 
 
 Mr. Bemarci 
 Campbell. 
 
 7672. First of all, you did not wish to leave your 
 holdings under any circumstances? — JSTo, sii", we were 
 most anxious to retain our holdings, though we knew 
 the rent was exorbitant. 
 
 7673. And, if you did leave your holdings, it would 
 have diminished the price for which you would have 
 sold your tenant-right 1 — "We had no alternative. If 
 we left at the time after ejectments we were excluded 
 from the benefit of sale. 
 
 7674. Mr. SHAW.^Being at the end of the lease ? 
 — At the end of the lease. 
 
 7675. And would you get nothing for your tenant- 
 right of the increased rent ? — At the present time we 
 have liberty of sale, and there have been some small 
 holdings offered and transferred. Since the new agree- 
 ment, three or four tenants have been obliged, from 
 the pressure of the rent, to leave their holdings ; and, 
 at the present time, some of these holdings are waste 
 and unoccupied. 
 
 7676. Chairman. — The rent was so high, it was 
 impossible to find a purchaser ? — Impossible. These 
 are the rent-receipts, showing the valuations, which 
 was the former or old rent, and the rent which is 
 charged now is exactly double — as near as possible — 
 (witne.ss exliibits receipts). 
 
 7677. Will you jvxst read them out ? — Witness 
 reads) : — 
 
 " Pat ConoUy, of Lower Corr. Received from Patrick 
 ConoUy, of Lower Corr, the sum of .£38, being one year's 
 rent due to Lieutenant-Colonel Deane Mann, for his holding 
 in Lower Corr, due and ending 1st November, 1878. 
 Allowed poor-rate, amount 16s. lOd ; received 16th De- 
 cember, 1878 (Signed), 
 
 " Dkane Mann.'' 
 
 Witness continues : — The valuation, which ap- 
 pears from the rate-book in Dungannon, is as 
 follows : — Mr. Patrick Conolly, Dungannon, E Divi- 
 sion, Lower Corr, valuation of the different holdings, 
 including Lower Corr, £19" (even). £19 is the 
 valuation in the rate-book of Dungannon, and the 
 actual rent charged last year and for the last six years 
 is £38, which, your honours will see, is exactly 
 double. 
 
 7678. Mr. Shaw. — What is the old rent ?— It was 
 as near to the valuation as it is possible to bring it — 
 £1 an acre — and the greatest grievance we have to 
 bring before your honour is that forty acres of this 
 land is subject yearly to the flood. It is known as 
 spent bog, and, during the time the land is dry, other 
 tenants have the right established by law to come into 
 the ground and use it as fuel — a right that is denied 
 ourselves according to the covenant in the new agree- 
 ment. 
 
 7679. Wasityour right beforethe new agreement ? — 
 Yes, sir, we had the right to make fuel in the bog. By the 
 new agreement we engage not to do so ; and the other 
 tenants, who are paying nothing at all, and are not 
 tenants of Colonel Deane Mann, have the right to come 
 in and use the ground for fuel that we are paying such 
 an exorbitant rent for, and the rent is so extravagantly 
 high tliat it is utterly impossible for us to live on it. 
 
 7680. Does he sell the bog to any other people or 
 let it ? — No, sir. The land was held in connexion 
 with bj-others, as it were. They divided the land 
 between them — Upper and Lower Corr. I may say 
 this division was made before Deane Mann's day. 
 Upper Corr we have nothing to say to, and the 
 tenants there have the right, which they exercise, of 
 taking away our fuel. 
 
 7681. But he has no right, you think, to exclvide 
 you 1 — No right, as far as we know. We brought an 
 action against the other tenants to dispossess them 
 from taking away the bog. We represented to him 
 that we were grievously oppressed, paying for bogs 
 these men occupied. 
 
 7 6 8 1 a. Did they succeed? — They succeeded by the law. 
 
 7682. Chairman. — And was no alteration then 
 made in the rent ? — No, sir. 
 
 7683. Baron Dowse. — Had you more than a right 
 of turbary in this bog? — We have not even that. 
 
 7684. Does he profess to give you more than a 
 right of turbary ? — Whatever his professions are, he 
 charges £2 an acre for some of it. 
 
 7685. Does he let it out by the acre?— After the 
 expiration of the lease the holding was lumped, so we 
 don't know the acreage— and allotted to us in portions. 
 
 7686. Your case is that after letting the place to 
 you, and you paying rent, other people have used the 
 right of turbary — you paying the same reut as before 1 
 — Yes ; that is one of our grievances, and the other 
 grievance is the exorbitant rent on twenty-one tenants, 
 including Derryboy. I will read Thomas Cardwell's 
 receipt. He resides in Derryboy under the same 
 landlord. 
 
 Witness reads : — 
 
 ''Received the sum of ,£35 \0s. sterling, being one 
 year's relit due to Lieutenant-Colonel Deane JJann, out of 
 his holding in Derryboy, due and ending 1st November, 
 1879. Received this 20th December, 1879.— (Signed), 
 
 "Deane Man.v." 
 
 Witness continues : — And as to his valuation, as 
 will appear from the rate book in Dungannon, his.net 
 annual value is £19 10s. bd„ including his house, 
 your honour. 
 
 7687. Chairman. — Who is the agent? — Colonel 
 Deane Mann collects himself. 
 
 7688. Bavon Dowse. — Is this land of yours high 
 land or low land ? — It is rather low land, your 
 honour. 
 
 7689. He has some mountain land, has he not ? — 
 He doesn't live where we were. Where he lives is 
 higher up. 
 
 7690. He lives abou.t the Nine-mile-house 1 — About 
 the Nine-mile-house. 
 
 7691. How far do you live from him ? — Sixteen or 
 seventeen miles from him. 
 
 7692. What is the nearest town ?— Coal Island 
 is the nearest small town. 
 
 7693. That is a different part of the country from 
 where he lives ? — It is. 
 
 7694. Chairman. — Do you often see him except at 
 rent times? — Never, only then — and then ^ive are 
 obliged to go to him. He sends us notice to go in on 
 a certain day or abide the consequences. 
 
 7695. Mr. Shaw. — He collects the November rents 
 in December? — Yes. Some of us were not able 
 to pay this exorbitant rent, and those men who have 
 paid are here to assure you that if they paid the rent 
 it was not out of the land, but out of a little money 
 they had laid by during the good times. ' 
 
 7696. Chairman. — You said you had to sign an 
 agreement at the' termination of the lease ? — Yes, your 
 honour. 
 
 7697. Have you got a copy of it ? — I have not. He 
 kept the copy himself. 
 
 7698. Was it one agreement signed by you all ?— Yes. 
 
 7699. Mr. Shaw. — Was there tenant-right on the 
 property always ? — It did exist, but this destroys it so 
 much that there has been land offered three or four 
 times for sale and it is still lying waste — no' crop on 
 it, and no one to offer for it. 
 
 7700. The O'Conoe Don. — Has there been any 
 holding sold since the increase of rent ? — There has. 
 It was impossible for the people to live there. 
 
 7701. And how much was got for it? — I cannot tell 
 you. ... 
 
 7702. Chairman. — Had you all supposed there was 
 no tenant-right at the expiration of the lease? — We 
 did your honour. We were notified of the fact by the 
 solicitor that at the expiration of our lease, we were 
 utterly in the power of the landlord. 
 
 7703. Baron Dowse. -^ Who is the solicitor?-^ 
 Gallaher is his name. It may seem strange your 
 honour that I don't answer these questions properly ; 
 it is because I was not at home at the time. 
 
 7704. Have any of the tenants on these lands of 
 Corr any other means of living, except by agricul- 
 ture ? — A few only — myself-— I am one exception. I 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 271 
 
 rleal in little things — selling grocery goods, and only 
 for that, I can swear solemnly it wonld be impossible 
 for me to support a family. 
 
 7705. There has been some coal raised at Ooal- 
 ialand, do any of the tenants of Colonel Deane Mann, 
 do anything in raising coal ? — Not to my knowledge. 
 
 7706. Do they do anything in weaving 1 — None, 
 with one exception. 
 
 7707. Do they do anything in making bricks or 
 tUes from the Stourbridge clay 'i — Coalisland is so far 
 from us, that it wovild be inconvenient to carry on the 
 trade. 
 
 7708. Then the tenants live by agriculture ?^Prac- 
 tically they do — they live by working the soil. 
 
 7709. At the time this increase of rent was 
 demanded, did you refuse to pay it? — We did so, your 
 honour. "We held out as long as we could. 
 
 7710. If he proceeded to eject you, you could serve 
 notice for compensation 1 — These are matters we were 
 ignorant of. 
 
 7711. Could you not have raised the question as to 
 whether there was tenant-right at the end of the lease 1 
 — The question was not submitted to us by our 
 solicitor. 
 
 7712. "Who was your solicitor? — His name was 
 Gallaher. 
 
 7713. Mr. Shaw. — You were afraid of being thrown 
 out I suppose, and would not take the risk? — ^We 
 regretted to leave our holdings though we knew they 
 were extravagantly dear. 
 
 7714. You did not go to law at all? — We went into 
 the court and were dispossessed as it were, for the fact 
 was conveyed to us that our claim was null. The 
 effect of the terms of the lease deprived us of any 
 right in the land after the expiration of the leases. 
 
 7715. Chairmast, — ^When the notices to quit were 
 out ? — The notices were ejectments. 
 
 7716. Mr. Shaw.— If this land was valued by a Sept. M,isiO. 
 public valuator it would not be valued at your rent at jj^. Bernard 
 all I sujspose. There is some of it utterly worthless ? Campbell 
 
 — That is the part siibject to the floods. Wlien we 
 do run the risk of putting a crop in it wo lose it. 
 Last year it was nearly the cause of a poor man going 
 into bankruptcy. He risked a little potatoes and 
 flax in the ground, and the flood came and he lost all. 
 Each of us have a little portion of it, my mother's 
 holding is five and a half acres (query), and two and 
 a half acres of it is spent bog. 
 
 7717. And you are paying a lump sum for the 
 whole? — £7 12s.; valuation, £3 5s. 
 
 7718. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is the largest holding 
 on Colonel Deane Mann's property ? — The largest is 
 William Clements — thirty-two acres. 
 
 7719. And what is the smallest? — M'Kee has one 
 acre. 
 
 7720. Baron Dowse. — What does he do with it? 
 Mr. William John JIamilion. — He isan old man, and 
 
 he sets potatoes and works for other men. • 
 
 7721. Mr. Kavanagh. — The generality of the hold- 
 ings — what is the average of them ? — You have them 
 from thii'ty-two acres down to one acre, and we will 
 say the average of them would be about seven acres, 
 roughly estimating them. 
 
 7722. Mr. Shaw. — English acres ? — Statute acres. 
 
 7723. All the buildings were made by yourselves — 
 houses and everything ?— -They were all made by our- 
 selves. 
 
 7724-. All the improvements? — All the improve- 
 ments. 
 
 7725. Chaieman. — Are the houses slated or 
 thatched ? — All thatched. 
 
 7726. Baron Dowse. — Did he ever spend any 
 money on the property ? — Never to my knowledge. 
 
 Mr. William John Hamilton examined. 
 
 Witness. — At the time we got the ejectments he 
 sent for us, and said he did not want to put us out, 
 as we were good tenants, and that he would leave the 
 rent to Mr. Thomas Mann if we were agreeable. So 
 we all consented and said we were agreeable. So 
 then the " marches " were prepared, and everything 
 was arranged when Mr. Thomas Mann died. Then 
 he decreed us at the sessions. 
 
 7727. Baron Dowse. — Then he fixed the rent? — 
 He fixed it himself, and he said he wanted nothing 
 bxit a fair rent. He brought John Wilson on it, and 
 then he vvould not take John's valuation. 
 
 7728. Mr. Shaw. — Is he a farmer? — Yes. He 
 was a farmer and a surveyor, and when he was 
 brought before the Chairman he would not take it. 
 
 7729. He sent him himself, and afterwards would 
 not take his valuation ? — Yes. 
 
 7730. Baron Dowse. — And fixed it himself? — Yes. 
 
 7731. And it is now too high ? — Yes. 
 
 7732. Can you reasonably live on it at the price ? — 
 We can not. If I had not money by me when I 
 went there I could not live on it. 
 
 7733. Where do you come from? — About seven 
 miles below. 
 
 7734. You had money of your own ? — ^Yes. 
 
 7735. Why did you go there ?— Because I did not 
 think it would be so bad. It was under the old 
 lease. 
 
 773G. Mr. Kavanagh.'— Do you know what any 
 of these holdings fetched that were sold. Mr. 
 Campbell said that one or two were sold. Do you 
 know what they fetched ?— Nearly £7 an acre, I 
 think, some of them went for. 
 
 7737. Baron Dowse.— At the high rent?— Yes, 
 l>ut the times were good then. 
 
 7738. When was that? — About four years ago. 
 
 7739. Was the rent too high then? — It was. 
 
 7740. Who was the man that paid £7 an acre for 
 it ? — He was a man that I believe would not get land 
 under his own landlord, so he just bid on till he 
 got it. 
 
 7741. Is he living there now? — No. 
 
 7742. Where is he now? — He is living on another 
 farm, and has this under grass. 
 
 7743. So that he has two of uis own? — Yes. 
 
 7744. And could he live ou it if he had only this 
 farm to live on ? — Ho could ni it. 
 
 7745. Chairman. — Has he got it now under grass 
 or tillage 1 — Part of each. 
 
 7746. The O'Conor Don. — ^Is it near where he 
 lives ? — It is convenient. 
 
 7747. He lives on a different estate ? — He does. 
 
 7748. How many acres have you ? — 8a. 1e. 23p. 
 
 7749. What rent do you pay? — £15 4s. 
 
 7750. That is too much you say ? — Too much. 
 
 7751. Can you sell the tenant-right of that at this 
 present time do you think ? — I don't know. 
 
 7753. I mean would anybody buy it from you at 
 the present rent ? — There is some land beside it that 
 has been put up three times for sale, and nobody has 
 bid for it. 
 
 7754. Is the farm empty then ? — It is. It belongs 
 to the Portadown Bank for money advanced on it. 
 That was got before. 
 
 7755. They had a mortgage on it for the debt '2 — 
 Yes. 
 
 7756. They own it now, and are making nothing of 
 it ? — ^Not a halfpenny. 
 
 7757. Are they paying rent for it also in addi- 
 tion? — There are two years' rent they have paid. 
 
 Mr. John Cranston. — Iwouldliketo say there is a pro- 
 perty adjoining this, not forty yards from where I live 
 and we are just paying as much more rent for one por- 
 tion of meadow land. "We pay £3 an acre for meadow, 
 
 Mr. William 
 J. Hamilton. 
 
Sept. 24, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 J. Hamilton. 
 
 272 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 It is Mr. Stewart's 
 
 ■while the other is only £1 10s. It is Mr. Stewart's my hay by the flood. They got out of their beds to' 
 
 ■ property. help me, 
 
 Mr. William John ^«m^^to». -Last year only for this (Tl^e ^^itness, Mr. William John Hamilton, and the, 
 
 boy, and the neighbom-ing boys, I would have lost all °^l^/^^^'' P""'"''* '^''™° *^'' examination, then 
 
 Mr. Bernard 
 Henry 
 
 Mr. Beknaed Lleney, of Tyanee, Lislea, Ballymena, examined. 
 
 7758. Chairman. — I believe there is some com- 
 plaiat you wish to make to us as to high rents placed 
 on peat moss '? — Yes. 
 
 7759. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you a tenant-farmer '2 
 — I am a tenant-farmer. 
 
 7760. At Tyanee ?— At Tyanee. 
 
 7761. What is the size of the farm L About forty 
 statute acres. 
 
 7762. Under what landlord 1 — The present landlord 
 is Captain M'Neill, of Cushandun. There is some 
 talk of its being changed lately (but I am not advised 
 of it), to his brother. 
 
 7763. Make any statement you wish to make res- 
 pecting these rents'? — Well, I expected to have to 
 answer questions. I am not well prepared to make a 
 statement. 
 
 7764. Suppose the question was asked you, what 
 complaint have you 1 — I have to complain, in the first 
 instance, that on my own estate we have to pay much 
 too high a rent, not only for the land, but for the peat 
 moss. 
 
 7765. What would you say that the rent is — is it 
 charged separately as rent for the land, and rent for 
 the peat moss 1 — Yes. 
 
 7766. Give the rent of the land?— The rent of the 
 land is =£38 10«. 9c?., there is 10s. of that that would not 
 be in the rent, but for the Bann drainage, an item 
 which, I believe, the landlord should pay himself and 
 not the tenant. 
 
 7767. That was charged on the district? — Yes; 
 some landlords pay it generously enough, and others 
 mulct the tenant. 
 
 7768. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres have you 1 — 
 Under forty. A good deal of this is under peat 
 mosses ; part of it is what we call overout, where 
 the turf has been cut over and reclaimed, and I am 
 paying a pretty smart rent for that. 
 
 7769. Reclaimed by yourself, I suppose? — Yes. 
 
 7770. Chairman. — What, is the rent for the mosses? 
 — The rent I am paying for the mosses, as it is infe- 
 rior quality, is 30s. per annum for the accommodation 
 of the house. I will explain a little furthei-. I ob- 
 tained a portion of this land over fourteen years ago 
 for the purpose of getting a piece of moss which the 
 occupj'ing tenant had held for the , accommodation of 
 his farm. All they demanded for that moss Was 8s., 
 and he never paid, and it has been increased since to 
 30s., which I must pay or fight my landlord about it. 
 
 7771. Chairman. — You did not feel inclined to do 
 that ? — No ; I did not feel inclined to do that. 
 
 7772. Baron Dowse. — Is there tenant-right on 
 your estate? — Tenant-right exists, but I am sorry 
 to say the character of our landlord makes it of little 
 value. 
 
 7773. Chairman. — That is, he is iirclined to make 
 changes ? — That he is an exacting landlord. 
 
 7774. Mr. Shaw. — Have you a lease 1 — No. 
 
 7775. Chairman. — In what respect is he an exacting 
 landlord? — In the first place, the part I purchased 
 and the part I hold is valued by Grifiith at £26 a 
 year, and I am paying up to £38 for it, just about 
 fifty per cent, above the Government valuation. 
 
 7776. Mr. Shaw. — Did you purchase it ? — No, sir. 
 
 7777. The O'Conor Don. — You purchased part, I 
 think you said ? — I purchased part. 
 
 7778. Was the rent raised when you purchased ? — ■ 
 It was not. 
 
 7779. Chairman. — Do you know what the rules 
 are under which tenant-right is held on the property ? 
 — Well, the rules ai'e that he permits the tenant to 
 
 sell, but does not allov.^ public sale nor recognize the 
 the right of public sale. 
 
 7780. Does he select the tenant who is to buy ?-- 
 He does not. He has done so previously, but since the 
 passing of the Land Act, if there is any dispute, lie 
 gives them the right to select, but his rents are so high 
 that it is diificult to find a purchaser, when any man 
 fails and gets unable to pay. And what I wish to 
 state to the Commissioners is that upon this particular 
 estate, the rents have been so high that with the dis- 
 astrous seasons we have had for the last few years, 
 they are only squeezed out. There are only two or 
 three solvent tenants on the whole estate. 
 
 7781. Have any of the tenants been selling? — One 
 of the best farms in the place has been in the market 
 twelve months owing to non-payment of rent, and the 
 seller has endeavoured in vain to sell, but there is 
 scarcely any purchaser ov/ing to the high rent and the 
 unfavourable character of the landlord. 
 
 7782. What is the size of that farm ?— About % 
 acres. 
 
 7783. What is the rent 1—£52. 
 
 7784. Is there any objection to give the name of 
 the tenant ?— None. John Heniy " Crow." " Crow" 
 is a nickname. Heniy is his name. 
 
 7785. The O'Conob Don. — ^What did you pay for 
 the portion you. bought? — I paid some £14 an acre. 
 It was in the heai't of my farm. My farm ran round 
 it here and there. 
 
 7786. Baron Dowse. — What rent was it subject to 
 when you bought it ? — It was subject for five acres to 
 £9. 
 
 7787. Was the rent raised ? — The rent of the land 
 was not raised, but the rent of the mosses was raised 
 since, which is a great grievance owing to the high 
 rent of the land. 
 
 7788. Mr. Shaw. — You bought it for your accom- 
 modation ? — I bought it for accommodation to square 
 my farm. The other farm was too small to enable 
 me to keep a pair of horses or work it to advantage. 
 My father had built a fine house on the farm and lia,d 
 made vast improvements on it, and I did not wish to 
 throw away the improvements, although it would 
 have been better for me now if I had. 
 
 7789. When did these rents become so high ? Were 
 they raised during your memory? — It has not been 
 raised during my time. 
 
 7790. Is the land good ? — The land is valuable, part 
 of it is good, part high land and part bog land, and a 
 good deal of it is heavy clay land, very hard to work, 
 and Captain M'Neill and his predecessors have always 
 maintained higher rents than the people could pay. 
 
 7791. Is it higher than on the neighbouring pro- 
 perties ? — A good deal higher. 
 
 7792. Is it near a town? — It is near Portgleuone. 
 
 7793. The O'Conou Don. — How long have you 
 been in occupation of this land ? — Since my father s 
 death. I assisted my father in working it before his 
 death, and have held it over fourteen or fifteen years. 
 
 7794. And cUiring that time there has been no in- 
 crease put on the farm 1 — No increase. If he had 
 proposed an increase of my rent I would have thrown 
 it up. 
 
 7795. Do you know how long before you got into 
 occupation was the rent raised — how many years has 
 the rent been at the present rate ? — I should say it 
 has been at the present rate for twenty or thirty 
 yeai-s, but prices were high previously and the people 
 did not feel it. It is the competition we have niet 
 with and the deprechition that has come over the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 273 
 
 staple trade of Ulster that has prevented us from 
 paying the rents. 
 
 7796. Why do you say your landlord is an exacting 
 landlord when he did not raise the rents for thirty 
 years 1 — I maintain he is an exacting landlord, when 
 he is charging so much above Griffith's valuation, and 
 so much higher than Lady Garvagh, or the Mercers, 
 on the adjoining estate. 
 
 7797. Mr. Shaw. — Has he always been exacting ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 7798. The O'Conoe Don. — Have there been many 
 sales of tenant-right on the estate 1 — Only one or two. 
 
 7799.1 don't mean lately, but during the last twenty 
 years 1 — There have been very few sales. 
 
 7800. And in those sales that did take place was 
 £14 an acre the usual rate 1 — That was the highest. 
 There was no higher sale oil that estate. 
 
 7801. Could you tell us the lowest that it sold at 1 
 — There have been people on that estate that were 
 unable to get anything for their tenant-right and 
 left it, and others. have been substituted in their place 
 by the landlord. 
 
 7802. The rent then destroys the tenant-right 1 — 
 The rent destroys the tenant-right and discourages 
 improvements. 
 
 7803. Well, how would you deal with that, how 
 would you settle it 1 — I would settle it by Government 
 valuators. I propose it should be estimated by Govern- 
 ment valuation. The Land Bill has been a good 
 thing in itself, but has not made good landlords better, 
 and it has not checked the tendencies of capricious 
 landlords in the least. 
 
 7804. Has it made good landlords worse do you 
 think 1. — It has not directly made them worse ; but 
 good landlords previously had an inclination to assist 
 farmers more in bad times, than what they have had 
 since the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 7805. Baron Dowse. — On your property the rents 
 are high you say, and the Government valuation would 
 probably reduce them ; but there might be an immense 
 amount of property in the province of Ulster, where 
 the rents are low and the Government valuation 
 woiild increase them, would not that spread a great 
 deal of dissatisfaction amongst the tenants 1 — There is 
 no place, taking the present price of agricultural pro- 
 duce in Ulstei-, and the state of the staple trade into 
 account, where the rents could be raised. I don't 
 know of any lands let under the Government valua- 
 tion. 
 
 7806. Would not arbitration be a better way than 
 Government valuation ? — I think not. 
 
 7807. Why not] — It is too hard to get competent 
 men to arbitrate on such points. 
 
 7808. I mean on each case as it arose, not the gene- 
 ral thing, but whenever a dispute arose could you get 
 a farmer and an agent and leave them and let them 
 appoint an umpire "i — I don't think it would work. It 
 is not practicable. 
 
 7809. Mr. Kavanagh. — Your holding consists, I 
 understand, part of this moss land and part of arable 
 land ?— Yes. 
 
 7810. How many acres of arable land? I don't 
 know whether you stated that ■!— Well, between what 
 my father reclaimed and what I reclaimed it is all 
 arable land. If I was on my oath before the Commis- 
 sioners I would not hesitate to prove that the improve- 
 ments and the building and the drainage and the re- 
 clamation that has been done on that farm would buy 
 the fee-simple of a much bigger farm than it. 
 
 7811. But what I want to get from you is the 
 difference between the amount of land you had that 
 was originally tillage land and the amount you call 
 moss 1-^1 would say one-third of my farm would be 
 called good tillage land ; one-third was land reclaimed 
 from a state of nature. It was merely woods and 
 rocks. About one-third may be said to be reclaimed 
 from mosses. 
 
 7812. About one-third of the land was moss ?— 
 About one-third was improved land from over-cut bog ; 
 one-third was reclaimed from a wild state. 
 
 7813. Mr. Shaw. — From woods and rocks ?— Yes. Sept. 24, isso. 
 
 7814. Baron Dowse. — If the times were as good as jj^. 15^3,^ 
 they were four years ago would you say you had any Henry, 
 particular cause of complaint 1 — I still have the cause 
 
 of complaint that the rent is more than on the sur- 
 rounding property. I am not an exception. He is 
 not the only capricious landlord in the district. There 
 is another landlord close by who is as bad, w'no has 
 purchased an estate lately in the Landed Estates 
 Court, and as he could not raise the rent conveniently, 
 he has begun to let those mosses which were for the 
 accommodation of the people, and reserved to them in 
 ancient times by tlie Crown. He has commenced to 
 let them at f2, £3, and £i an acre, and the peojile are 
 left without it, and if there is not sometlnng done to 
 change these landed proprietors, a great portion of the 
 land of Ulster will become uninhabited. 
 
 7815. Mr. Shaw. — Did they pay for it before] — 
 No. 
 
 7816. It was attached to their holdings as a con- 
 venience 1 — Yes. 
 
 7817. Baron Dowse. — Do you say £3 or £i an 
 acre to cut the turf? — Yes. 
 
 7818. Have they the privilege of selling it 1 — I 
 think not. 
 
 7819. Chairman. — It is only for their own use? — 
 Only for their own use and accommodation. We have 
 no railways in this district to get coal or the people 
 might let the landlords keep these mosses. We cannot 
 help ourselves. 
 
 7820. The O'Conor Don.— When you say £3 or 
 £4 an acre do you mean £3 or £4 a year ? — Well, 
 I don't mean £3 or £4 a year for each tenant, but the 
 bog I am using and several others on my own parti- 
 cular estate. We should, if justice was afforded 
 us, be paid for taking it away. The cost of taking 
 fuel from it is greater than what coal would be if we 
 had it at a reasonable di.stance, and besides we are 
 cutting over and making land which is added to the 
 landlord's estates, and what he is charging us is rent 
 on improvements when we have made the improve- 
 ments. 
 
 7821. Baron Dowse. — Are these bogs placed on 
 such a level that when they are cut out tliey are made 
 into arable land 1 — Yes. 
 
 7822. Mr. Shaw. — There was one-third of your farm 
 that had been bog 1 — Yes, practically for it was turf 
 moss, and my father, and now I, am paying rent for 
 it as land. 
 
 7823. Is there much bog in your district 1 — A rather 
 large quantity. 
 
 7824. And it is that the people use for firing 1 — 
 That, they use for fuel ; they have nothing else and 
 until recently we had no railway within ten miles, now 
 it comes within four or five miles. 
 
 7825. Baron Dowse. — Are you near the lough 1 — 
 We are. 
 
 7826 How far are you away 1 — It may be about 
 ten miles from the north end of the lough, to our 
 place. 
 
 7827. Mr. Shaw. — But you have coal now within 
 four miles of you ? — But it has to go a long way round, 
 and we have to pay extra mileage. 
 
 7828. Chairman. — Are your roads bad for drawing ? 
 . — No, the roads are very good. 
 
 7829. Baron Dowse. — In any event' English or 
 Scotch coals landed at Belfast, and drawn by rail to 
 you, would not be as cheap as turf on your own land 1 
 ■ — It would not be if it was good turf. 
 
 7830. Your turf is what is called " fum " "i — It is, 
 and we have to strip a greater depth of stuff on that 
 account. 
 
 7831. Do you cut your turf or make mud turf?— 
 We cut over it. There is about five or six feet of this 
 old brown stuff, and a few feet under that is worth 
 something. 
 
 7832. Chairman. — What is the price of coal since 
 the railway came ? — The price of coal at the nearest 
 railway station to us would be about 22s. Gd. per ton 
 
 2N 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 24, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Bernard 
 Henry. 
 
 foi' Englisli coals, and then we liave to cart them four 
 or five Irish miles, from five to six English miles. 
 
 7833. Mr. Shaw. — Yonr complaint is that in good 
 times you are paying more than enough for your land, 
 and that in had times you are not able for your rent 1 
 — We cannot subsist at all. I am not so bad as my 
 neighbours, because I do a little business ; otherwise I 
 could not support my family on the land, I would have 
 to leave the countiy. 
 
 7834. Are there weavers in your district? — There 
 had been a good deal of weaving in the district, but it 
 has left us. It is dying out. 
 
 7835. They were small farmers, I suppose] — Their 
 farms are generally pretty small. They vary from ten 
 to about forty acres. 
 
 7836. Was there any abatement of the rent made 
 last year ? — Not the slightest. Although we presented 
 a petition to those men in this district there was none, 
 and none in our immediate neighbourhood. Now 
 besides my own case, I was appointed a deputation or 
 a representative from the district of Kilrea to give 
 evidence on behalf of the people, and the meeting 
 at which I was appointed one of the deputation to give 
 evidence before the Land Commission, has not ap- 
 peared in the papers yet, or I should have read the 
 report of the meeting. 
 
 7837. Mr. Shaw.— Have you the facts there?— I 
 have. 
 
 Witness reads the following document : — ■ 
 
 " Lakd Meeting in Kilree. 
 " On Wednesday evening last a meeting of the tenant- 
 farmers of this district was held in the Commercial Hotel, 
 Kilree. Amongst those present we noticed Dr. Hegarty, 
 Messrs. E. Stuart and Joseph Irwin, Kilree ; Alexander 
 and J. Adams, Drumygarner ; Francis Collins, Swatcragh ; 
 O. Hutchinson and M. Kane, Moneygrand ; E. M'Cottor 
 and W. Toghill, Llslee ; Johnson Shaw, Ballinatoj-ne ; 
 Bernard Henry, Tyanee. The chief business before the 
 meeting was the election of representatives to appear be- 
 fore the Land Commission now sitting in Belfast, and give 
 evidence upon the grievances which affect the tenant- 
 farmers in this district. Messrs J. L-\vin and B. Henry 
 were unanimously chosen as representatives. It was con- 
 sidered' by the meeting that the gravest defect in 'the 
 present state of the law is the absence of any means of pre- 
 venting rapacious landlords from obtaining exorbitant rents, 
 not only from the land, but from the peat bogs. The gene- 
 ral custom, in regard to the latter, had been, until a late 
 period, that each farmer held free as much bog as supplied 
 him with domestic fuel, in virtue of an ancient right— inas- 
 much as when the lands were being granted to the ancestors 
 of the present proprietors by the Crown, it had reserved the 
 peat mosses for the use of the people, in a country where 
 wood was scarce and coal almost unknown. Lately, when 
 lands were rented so highly that even the most grasping of 
 landlords could demand no more, the iniquitous means were 
 devised of still further mulcting the tenant by levvin"- lan^e 
 rents on these mosses, the removal of which by the tenant 
 was actually adding land to the landlord's estate.' 
 
 " The meeting was of opinion that no real settlement of 
 the land question could be arrived at until a measure would 
 
 be introduced, having for its leading principles : firstly, 
 
 fair rents, based for the present on Griffith's valuation, until 
 a rent fixed by Government valuators could be struck, 
 which would be estimated upon the present scale of prices 
 of agricultural produce, and be so far retrospective in char- 
 acter, that the present occupiers will not be paj-ing rent in 
 respect of the increased value of their farms brought about 
 by their own improvements. Secondly, fixity of tenure. 
 Thirdly, right of free sale ; and lastly, the gradual intro- 
 duction of peasant proprietorship, by extension of the Bright 
 clauses of the Land Act, to every case of future sale of 
 estates, where the occupying tenants are prepared to buy 
 and give as much as land proprietors or land speculators. 
 
 " It is expected that the two representative's appointed by 
 the meeting will bring before the Commission useful evi- 
 dence and suggestions of a practical nature." 
 
 7838. Baron Dowse. — Was that the opinion of all 
 the gentlemen present 1 — The unanimous opinion. 
 
 7839. Were they farmers ?— All farmers. Some 
 were more strongly in favour of a peasant proprietary 
 than others, and that it should be introduced im- 
 mediately on a large scale. 
 
 7840. What 
 
 IS your own opinion on that? — My 
 
 opinion is, that the three principles laid down— fixity 
 
 of tenure, fair rents, and free sale, are best adapted 
 for the country at present. 
 
 7841. Sir. Shaw. — And would satisfy the people? 
 — The people would be satisfied. I believe all reason- 
 able ]nen would be satisfied. 
 
 7842. Mr. Kavanagh. — You state that these peat 
 mosses were settled by the Crown in some way or 
 other on the people? — We understood that by the 
 Settlement of Ulster the Crown reserved — I don't 
 speak now of the estate, but of the province of Ulster-^ 
 that the bogs were reserved by the Crown for the use 
 and benefit of the people. 
 
 7843. Baron Dowse. — Where is your authority for 
 that except the general idea ? — It is the general idea. 
 
 7844. Mr. Shaw. — You look upon it as an historical 
 tradition ? — It is an historical fact. The matter is a 
 fact recorded in history. I cannot give it to you, but 
 I never heard it disputed. It is natural that the 
 privilege should be reserved to the jieople. It is 
 most just and reasonable that on all estates the mosses 
 should be attached to the holdings and not charged 
 for. It v/as the general practice until a recent period. 
 
 7845. Has that practice been dej)arted from ? — That 
 practice has been departed from slightly within the 
 last quarter of a century, but largely since the intro- 
 duction of the Land Act of 1870. 
 
 7846. By all the landlords? — By nearly all the 
 landlords. The Mercers Company which has a rental 
 of about £14,000 a year first gave these mosses free, 
 but recently, upwards of ten years ago, they charged 
 Is. to make a nominal charge. jS'ow the lowest is 
 5s. to holders by the year, and they have a ticket that 
 you have a right to the mosses, if you are out of the 
 ticket you are deprived of them, you have no right. 
 
 7847. But it is not a holding ; it is an accommoda- 
 tion to the holding ? — -Yes. 
 
 7848. Chairman. — Did anybody ever try the ques- 
 tion Vi^liether this rent could be demanded ? — The very 
 man I purchased this land from resisted the landlord 
 for seven or eight years, and he never could obtain 
 rent from bim by the law court. On an adjoining 
 estate, the estate of Mr. Courtney, there was a tenant 
 that resisted both for land and bog, and he never could 
 show his title, and he lived to be an old man without 
 paying rent for either. His name was M'Nally. 
 
 7849. Did he never pay rent for the land" at 
 all ? — He lived, on the gentleman's estate until 
 he was an old man, and he settled with him at the 
 hinder end, at the last of his days, and his children are 
 now paying the rent. 
 
 7850. You say he resisted paying not only for the 
 mosses but for his holding ? — He resisted for a number 
 of years successfully. 
 
 7851. But on what ground could he resist paying 
 for his holding, if he had ever paid for it ? — But he 
 never paid for anything, and I suppose it was be- 
 cause the landlord had not got a clear title to the 
 land. 
 
 7852. Baron Dowse. — With respect to this histori- 
 cal fact you mentioned, have you heard that in many 
 parts of Ulster until recently the landlord never 
 charged any rent for the bog, but gave it as a liberty 
 to each farmer, is not that so ? — Yes. 
 
 7853. Another thing that may throw light on your 
 historical fact, is, Mr. Donnell informs me, and he 
 is a good authority on the subject, that in the grants 
 on the plantation of Ulstei-, and in Prinner's survey 
 only the acres of arable land are given ? — Yes. 
 
 7854. Mr. Shaw. — Are there any cases of rent 
 raising in your neighbourhood? — There has been a 
 very grievous case of rent raising on the Mercers 
 estate. ■ 
 
 7855. Could you give the particulars? — I cannot 
 give you individual particulars, but the tenants 
 resisted the increase of rent, and forty of their number 
 were brought before the Chairman of the county on 
 ejectment notices, and their cases were so badl> 
 handled by their attorney, the celebrated John Eea of 
 Belfa.st, that the result "was a compromise, which 
 raised it although that notable gentleman of London 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 275 
 
 gave them an. viltimatiiin, vliicli ^vas to be the last, that 
 they were to pay the rent or go. He was a noted man 
 in Mr. Gladstone's previous Government, Lord Sel- 
 burne is the man, I believe. He issued an ultimatum 
 to the tenants of the Mercers' estate that they were to 
 pay all the rise of rent — a very unreasonable rise — 
 but they both yielded, and made a compromise. 
 
 7856. Is that lately 1 — That is within the last 
 three years. On-Lady Garvagh's, the adjoining estate, 
 the holdings are let at moderate rents, and as the leases 
 expire the rents are raised. 
 
 7857. Chairman. — Are they raised to a very large 
 amount ? — Well, they are raised very considerably ; 
 but I must admit that they were low. There was some 
 justification for the rise on her estate compared with 
 the surrounding estates. 
 
 7858. Mr. Shaw. — If on the new lettings the rents 
 are raised naturally, I should say, it is common sense, 
 that is a gradual eating away of your tenant-right 1 — It 
 is gradually eating away the tenant-right ; it is dis- 
 couraging the improvements, and it is causing the 
 young and the strong people of the country to emigrate, 
 lea-sdng none bvit the old men and the children to work 
 the farms. If a man has now forty acres in the district, 
 he can't get his crops lifted. 
 
 7859. Baron Dowse. — How do the labourers get 
 on in your district ? — The laboiirers are not paid high 
 "wages > but taking into account their mode of treatment 
 they come to be very expensive on the farmer. 
 
 7860. Looking at it from the labourer's point of view, 
 what wages does he get?-^The rate of wages in our 
 immediate neighbourhood is about Is. a day with food 
 for the labouring man. 
 
 7861. Mr. Shaw.— With a house ?—]Srot with a 
 house. 
 
 7862. Baron Dov,-iE. — Will they get work the whole Sept. m, isso 
 year round at that 1— They don't. jj. "-~ 
 
 7863. What do they do when they don't get work? Heiiry!" 
 — Some of them leave the country, and go to England 
 
 or Scotland to work at "public works. 
 
 7864. There is a good number cf them in Glasgow 1 
 — Yes ; and at Newcastle-on-Tyne, Durham, and other 
 places. 
 
 7865. They leave their families? — Yes; they send 
 the money back to them, and then they come back 
 themselves in time to save the crop. 
 
 7860. Are they able to get houses pretty easily? — ■ 
 The number that is left is able to get houses now, for 
 the population has become thin in the rural districts. 
 
 7867. Baron Dowse. — I believe you find it difficult 
 to get labourers when there is a pressure? — I had 
 within the last twelve years to lay out my farm in grass 
 on account of not being able to get laljourers to save 
 my crops. 
 
 7868. Chairman. — Have you anything else you 
 wish to mention ? — I don't think there is anything else 
 I wish to mention. There is one thing I would like to 
 impress on the Commissioners before I leave, and that 
 is, although I am now in an humble position of life, I 
 know a great deal about the country, travelling through 
 it, for I am a merchant, and I look very badly on the 
 prospects of this country if some change is not made. 
 It is only, in my opinion, in favourable localities, and 
 on the best of lands that the farmers will be able to live 
 at all and conrpete with American competition, and if 
 the rents in the backward districts are not brought to 
 a proper level, I believe the poprilation will soon be 
 very thin. 
 
 'The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. Henry M'Kean, Benburb, Moy, examined. 
 
 7869. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you a tenant farmer ? — 
 T am a manufacturer and farmer. I am principally a 
 manufacturer. 
 
 7870. Baron Dowse. — Are you a linen manufac- 
 turer ? — Yes, and corn miller. 
 
 7871. Chairman. — -You are a tenant upon what was 
 formerly Lord Powerscourt's property] — Yes. 
 
 7872. That property was purchased by Mr. James 
 Bruce? — Yes. 
 
 7873. In what year ? — About four years since. It is 
 ■only two years since it actually came into his possession. 
 
 7874. Previously to the purchase was any alteration 
 made in the rents? — Yes; a veiy extensive lawsuit 
 took place — two lawsuits infact — betweenLord Powers- 
 court and his tenantry, followed by an arbitration — I 
 might say there were two arbitrations. 
 
 7875. About the rents? — Yes. In fact the first 
 aiTangement is all in black and white. 
 
 7876. Did tenant-right exist on the property? — 
 Always. 
 
 7877. Was it subject to any rules ? — At one time it 
 was subject to rules, biit the rules were allowed to 
 forego to a certain extent by Lord Powerscourt him- 
 self when he came of age. Before he came of age there 
 was a limit on the tenant-right. 
 
 7878. Baron Dowse. — ^After he came of age was 
 free sale allowed ? — Free sale was allowed. Then Lord 
 Powerscourt wanted to sell the estate, and he called a 
 meeting of the tenants. They said they could purchase 
 the most of the estate if the price would suit, and they 
 offered him twenty- five years purchase on the rental. 
 He refused to accept that, he would not take less than 
 thirty-seven. 
 
 7879. On the then rental?— Yes; which would 
 have amounted to £450,000— the rental was £8,100 
 per annum. 
 
 7880. Were the rents moderate?— They were average 
 rents — they, were above the Government valuation. 
 The rental of the estate had been revised by Mr. 
 M'Neiee in 1837— it had been formerly let upon small 
 leases — leases of seven, eight, or ten acres. 
 
 7881. Leases for lives?— Yes; and as the leases 
 
 dropped increased rents — in fact in many cases high 
 rents — were put on by the then agent of the proj^erty. 
 Then after the tenants failed to come to an arrange- 
 ment, and said they could not buy the estate from 
 Lord Powerscourt at thirty-seven years purchase, he 
 sent a valuator and made a valuation of the property — 
 Brassington and Gale made a valuation, and the agent 
 served notices on the tenants to pay on Brassingto.i 
 and Gale's valuation — or upon the rental which Mr. 
 Posnett framed on the basis of that valuation — a rental 
 which was an increase of £2,000 over the former one. 
 The tenants refused to pay the increased rents, and 
 Lord Powerscourt then served them with notices to 
 quit. 
 
 7882. On the whole property ? — Yes; he served 700 
 notices to quit. 
 
 7883. Jn what year was that?— In 1874. The 
 tenants then came to an arrangement with Lord 
 Powerscourt to submit the estate to another valuation. 
 This valuation was to be made by Mr. John Wilson, 
 who was agreed to on both sides. 
 
 7884. Was that before you went into court ? — Yes. 
 Mr. Posnett on behalf of Lord Powerscourt himself, 
 proposed Mr. Wilson as the valuator. The tenants 
 said they were satisfied to leave the case in the hands 
 of Mr. Wilson, on the condition that his valuation 
 should be made a consent of court on the notices to 
 quit. This was all agreed to. The valuation was 
 made, and notices was served on the tenants to come 
 in and pay Mr. Wilson's valuation. 
 
 7885. How mvich was it ?— It amounted to nearly 
 £1,000. 
 
 7886. £1,000 of a rise ?— Yes. 
 
 7887. Midway between the other valuation and the 
 former rental ? — Yes. I may mention that there were 
 only two-thirds of the tenantry who agreed to accept 
 of Mr. Wilson's valuation, and got the consents through 
 the court. As to the remainder of the tenants, Mr. 
 Posnett, before the valuation was made, served them 
 with notices to come in and do the same thing, or else 
 he would proceed before November with the notice to 
 quit. These tenants came in and served notices of 
 
 2N2 
 
 Mr. Henry 
 M'Kean. 
 
276 
 
 IRISH LA.ND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. a. 1S> 
 
 '\Ir. Henry 
 M'Kean. 
 
 assent, and in blie interim the valuation was made. 
 Mr. Posnettthen served notices on the tenants to come 
 in and pay on Mr. Wilson's valuation. That notice 
 was served on 11th December, 187 i, which was a fort- 
 night before he got Mr. Wilson's valuation. As soon 
 as Mr. Posnett got Mr. Wilson's valuation into his 
 hands — he was then in Benburb — he immediately sent 
 out the bailiffs. The ten.ants not knowing about the 
 valuation — in fact we comjjlained bitterly of Lord 
 Powerscourt's solicitor getting the valuation from Mr. 
 Wilson separately, contrary to the rule of the court — 
 Mr. Posnett refused to adopt Mr. Wilson's valuation, 
 sent the tenants home, and would not accept anything. 
 It then came before the barrister at the sessions of 
 1875, to have the consents registered, but Lord Powers- 
 court raised an objection, and the barrister held that 
 he had no jurisdiction, and therefore that the consents 
 must go by the board, and all that had been done was 
 nugatory. 
 
 7888. The O'Conor Don. — On the whole property? 
 — Yes ; he held that he had no jui-isdiction whatever, 
 and sent the whole party adrift. The parties who had 
 been served with notice to come in and subscribe their 
 names to Mr. Wilson's valuation were served — thirty 
 of them — with ejectments. A number of land claims 
 were brought, but ultimately, rather than be put 
 out of their holdings, I may say the whole body of 
 them assented to Mr. Posnett's valuation, althoiigh 
 some of them, I must say, were exorbitant rents. 
 
 7889. Mr. Shaw. — Were they much higher than 
 Mr. Wilson's 1 — Yes ; some of them were 10 or 15 per 
 cent, higher than Mr. Wilson's. Some of the tenants 
 were unable to pay aad had to give up their holdings. 
 In consequence of the increase of rent some of the 
 holdings, the tenant-right of which would be worth 
 £10 or £12 per acre, have been sold for £6 or £7, 
 and some of them as low as £5 per acre. Then, in the 
 following May, Ijord Powerscourt served new notices to 
 quit on the tenants who had paid on Mr. Wilson's 
 valuation, and brought them back into coiu't again at 
 the January sessions. 
 
 7890. How many notices did he serve at that time? 
 — Between 200 and 300 notices to quit, the exact 
 number I do not know. He brought the tenants into 
 covirt again, but an arrangement was come to ; the 
 tenants did not want to leave their holdings. They 
 believed Wilson's valuation to be a fair one, and before 
 the case came on the leading parties were met by 
 Mr. Holmes, who was the counsel representing Lord 
 Powerscourt. Previous to this a memorial was pre- 
 pared and sent to Lord Powerscourt, and on the day 
 that the cases were to come on at the January Sessions 
 of 1876, the tenants received Lord Powerscourt's reply 
 to the memorial. 
 
 7891. Baron Dowse. — Was Mr. Holmes counsel for 
 Lord Powerscourt at the sessions 1 — Yes. The purport 
 of the reply was, that Lord Powerscourt said the state- 
 ment of the memorial was perfectly true, but that 
 thotrgh he had agreed to this, he had never any inten- 
 tiou of standing by it. 
 
 7892. He said that?— Yes. The result was that 
 Mr. Holmes made a proposition that there should be 
 an agreement for leases for thirty-one years, and that, 
 of course, settled the case for that period, the tenants 
 having a right to hold their lands for thirty-one years 
 without any increase of rent. 
 
 7893. Did the tenants agree to that? — Two- thirds 
 of them agreed to it. That increased the rental to 
 £9,100. 
 
 7894. Who were the parties who arbitrated under 
 that arrangement ? — Mr. Holmes, Mr. Falkiner, and 
 Mr. Carson, the three counsel. Mr. Falkiner repre- 
 sented the tenants, Mr. Holmes represented Lord 
 Powerscourt, and Mr. Carson was umpire. They met 
 and made an award. This award was made on a fixed 
 rental, but another lawsuit was engaged in by the 
 tenants on the ground that there was no settlement 
 made by the arbitrators except as to the rent, and Lord 
 Powerscourt refused to pay the half of the countycess. 
 The matter went on, and was brought again into court, 
 
 but the tenants were beaten on the county ces? 
 question, which they considered a great grievance. 
 
 7895. Mr. Shaw. — The tenants, I suppose, thought 
 what had been done amounted to a new letting, and 
 that under the Land Act they were entitled to require 
 the landlord to pay half the county cess ? — Yes ; they 
 were put to very great expense, having had six coim- 
 sel's opinions on the question, all of whom held that 
 they were entitled to it, but they were defeated in the 
 end. 
 
 7896. How much did the law costs come to? — J 
 think very nearly £1,000. 
 
 7897. That rental now, as settled by those gentle- 
 men, is the present rental of the property ? — Yes, so 
 far as the tenants inside the arbitration are concerned, 
 but the balance of the tenants are on Mr. Posnett's valu- 
 ation. Last year, while the average tenant-right was 
 from £12 to £14 per acre, the tenant-right on these 
 holdings was from £6 to £8. 
 
 7898. Was that owing to the rents being excessive? 
 — Yes ; and they having no security. 
 
 7899. Except the tenant-right that exists on the 
 estate ? — Yes ; but the tenants have lost faith in that 
 tenant-right on this consideration — that the landlord 
 may take them into a court of law and put them to 
 litigation, or he may refuse to accept of a tenant ex- 
 cept at an advance of rent. 
 
 7900. Mr. James Bruce then purchased the estate? 
 — Yes, he purchased the estate at £190,000. 
 
 7901. Under Mr. James Bruce is there tenant-right 
 on the property 1 — Yes, the same as had existed before. 
 
 7902. Baron Dowse. — The sum at which he pur- 
 chased is under what the tenants offered? — Yes; if 
 Lord Powerscourt had sold to the tenants he would 
 have got £40,000 more than he did. 
 
 7903. Why didn't he agree to let the tenants pur- 
 chase it? — That is one of the questions I cannot 
 understand. 
 
 7904. The O'CoxoR Don. — You say that he sold the 
 estate for a less sum than the tenants offered to give 
 for it?— Yes. 
 
 7905. Would all the tenants have agreed to buy ? — • 
 Yes. Two-thirds of them came forward and offered, 
 and the others would have done the same. 
 
 7906. Baron Dowse. — I suppose the feeling was 
 such between Lord Powerscourt and the tenants that 
 he preferred to sell it to one individual ? — Yes. 
 
 7907. Chairman. — There is another case, I under 
 stand, which you wish to mention ? — Yes. It occurred 
 on the Earl of Dartrey's property. The party concerned 
 is named Crothers. 
 
 7908. Where is the property ? — At Blackwatertowii , 
 in the county Armagh. The point of that case is, the 
 refusal of the landlord to accept the sou of a deceaseJ 
 tenant except on an increase of rent. 
 
 7909. He increased the rent upon the son succeed 
 ing his father ? — Yes. That is a new rule, which was 
 never known on the property till then. 
 
 7910. Mr. Kavanagh. — What was the name ot 
 this case ? — Earl of Dartrey v. Crothers. 
 
 7911. Chairman. — Can you tell the date of it?— 
 The father died in 1877. This, I think, is about the 
 hardest case that has come under my notice for years. 
 The father died in 1877, and immediately on the son 
 offering himself as tenant, although he was the only 
 son of his father they refused to accept him as tenant 
 without an increase of rent. 
 
 7912. Was it freehold ?— No, it is leasehold; he 
 holds a portion in perpetuity and sixty acres odd, as 
 tenant at will. 
 
 7913. Were those leaseholds in the village? — Yes, 
 it is nothing but houses and gardens. 
 
 7914. Had those houses been built by his prede- 
 cessor ? — No ; he bought them in the Landed Estates 
 Court. 
 
 7915. Baron Dowse. — Has Lord Dartrey much pro 
 perty there ? — Yes, it all belongs to Lord Dartrey. It 
 was only in 1870 that his father had been security foi 
 his uncle, and his uncle had involved his father in a 
 sum of money about thirtj'- years ago. There had beeu 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 277 
 
 no tenant-right, and no one touched the property till 
 the Land Act was passed. Immediately after the 
 passing of the Land Act the parties who held the 
 bonds against the late Mr. Crothers sued him on the 
 bond, and the place was put up for sale, and was 
 bought by me, in trust for the son ; and assented to. 
 That sale was by the trustees under an assignment. 
 The parties were not satisfied with the sale under 
 the assignment, and brought the matter into bank- 
 ruptcy. The landlord allowed the first sale to be pass- 
 ed over, and a second sale to be carried ou.t by 
 the Court without making any arrangement for rent 
 at all. On the occasion of the second sale an arrange- 
 ment was come to between the Judge in the Bank- 
 ruptcy Court, and myself. I held the place for two 
 years until the young man's granduncle died, and left 
 him a legacy. He then redeemed the place, paid me 
 the costs that I had incurred, and I handed it back to 
 him for what I paid for it. It was allowed to continue 
 on in the father's name though it was the son's money 
 bought the tenant-right, till the father died. 
 
 7916. Was this young man anything to the late J. 
 Crothers of Blackwatertown 1 — Nephew. When the 
 father died the agent refused to allow the son's name 
 to be registered as the tenant, and in fact he threatened 
 him with proceedings at law if he did not pay an increased 
 rent. He then served him with notice to quit and 
 brought an ejectment against him. Finally a land 
 claim was brought, which came before the court in 
 Armagh. The Judge held that the Earl of Dartrcy was 
 not demanding anything more than his right, and said 
 that if the young man did not settle with the landlord 
 he would dismiss the case. 
 
 7917. Baron Dowse. — He thought the rent was 
 fair 1 — He said that in his opinon Lord Dartrey had 
 not demanded anything more than he had a right 
 to do. 
 
 7918. Did he dismiss the case? — No, he said he 
 would let them settle it, and he adjoui-ned the hearing ; 
 and the young man was advised to try and settle the 
 tenant-right and get' done with the matter. 
 
 7919. Who was the Chairman? — Mr. Lefroy, Q.c. 
 But though he held that the rent was not too high, the 
 fact is this year's produce of the fifty acres won't pay 
 the increased rent and taxes. 
 
 7920. Chaiejias. — Is there any other case you 
 wish to bring before us 1 — There is another case of a 
 man named Plunkett, who is the tenant of a Miss 
 Magee. She is the landlady in this case. 
 
 7921. And who is the agent? — Mr. Goodlette. 
 
 7922. Baron Dowse.— Is that Mr. Alfred Goodlette? 
 — Yes. This is the case in which " office rules " came 
 in, and in consequence the man had to forego some £72. 
 
 7923. Chairman. — When were those ofiice rules 
 made ? — I never heard of them before, until this case 
 came up in 1878, and I have known the property for 
 a long time. 
 
 7924. Where does the property lie? — Between Moy 
 and Blackwater. The man wanted to leave and go 
 to Australia, and he offered to sell the place. An ad- 
 joining tenant oflTered him £20 an acre, and was quite 
 prepared to pay the money when Mr. Goodlette inter- 
 fered, and would not permit him to sell for more than 
 £14 an acre. The man having all his arrangements 
 made to go away to Australia had to sell for £14 an 
 acre and did not stay on. 
 
 7925. Baron Dowse. — And you knew that property 
 before ' — Yes. 
 
 7926. And was the price restricted before ? — No. 
 
 7927. Not up to this time? — No; I have been in- 
 timately acquainted with all these matters, being both' 
 miller and manufacturer. 
 
 7928. Where is your mill? — In Benburb. I was 
 in the scutching trade and the corn trade, and am 
 intimately acquainted with all these people ; every one 
 of them. 
 
 7929. Chairman. — Is there any other case ? — There 
 is the case of the Earl of Dai-trey and a man named 
 Finn. The Earl of Dartrey was the landlord, and 
 James Finn the tenant. A few years ago Finn bought 
 
 a place and was accepted as tenant by the agent, Mr. Sept.2i^issfi. 
 
 Boyle. Finn wanted last November to sell this place jir. Henry 
 
 as he ^vanted to leave the country. He olfered the M'Kean. 
 
 place for sale, and it was bought by a party, but when 
 
 they went to the office to have the transfer made Mr 
 
 Boyle said he would not accept the incoming tenant 
 
 unless he agreed to pay £2 of an advance in the rent. 
 
 That was on something like ten or twelve acres of 
 
 land. The person who was purchasing said to the 
 
 seller " Very well, if I must pay this advance, I must 
 
 get the place for £40 less." 
 
 7930. Baron Dowse. — That the tenant-right was 
 to go for £40 less ? — Yes. 
 
 7931. The O'CoNOR Don. — What had the tenant 
 paid for the tenant-right before ? — I am not certain ; 
 but I think something like £14 an acre. 
 
 7932. And what did he sell it for?— He did not get 
 the same amount of money. 
 
 7933. That he paid for it ? — No ; of course the farnr 
 had depreciated in value under him, that is so far as 
 the actual value of the land, but if there had been no 
 increase of rent at this time he would have received 
 the £40 additional. 
 
 7934. Baron Dowse. — The man who was purchasing 
 just took a capitalized sum representing £2 a year ? — ■ 
 Exactly. 
 
 7935. The O'Conor Don. — Was the rent low or 
 high before ? — I should say it was a fair rent. About 
 Blackwatertown the rents are all high, for when the • 
 valuation was made, which is now a good many years 
 ago, Blackwatertown was a thriving place ; it was, if 
 
 I might so term it, the seaport of the district, as the 
 river there was navigable by the lighters. 
 
 7936. And it has since deteriorated? — It has. 
 
 7937. Baron Dowse. — Do yovx know anything 
 about Mr. Parnell's property ? — Yes. 
 
 7937a. Were there any cases of rise of rent on it ? — 
 Not since the passing of the Land Act, but previously 
 there were. 
 
 7938. What kind of cases were they ? — The tenants 
 might as well have been in the backwoods or some 
 such place. I think the property was in Chancery 
 for some time. After the present man got possession 
 he sent down an agent from Dublin and the tenants 
 could not do a single thing on the property one way 
 or the other, but they were brought up for it, and the 
 rents were increased, I think, nearly 20 per cent. 
 
 7939. That is a brother of Mr. Charles S. Parnell ?— 
 Yes. That property was very badly handled, and it 
 is only a few years ago since an attempt was made to 
 bring the tenants into court, in order to make them 
 pay a half-yearly gale of rent, instead of a yearly gale. 
 
 7940. Are the rents on that property high ? — Very 
 high, and the people are poor and not able to pay it. 
 He put it into the court and tried to sell, but could 
 not get it done. 
 
 7941. Mr. Shaw. — Did he try to sell to the tenants ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 7942. And what price did he try to get ? — He could 
 get no price I believe in Dublin. 
 
 7943. And how was it that the tenants did not buy ? 
 — Because they were that poor that they could not 
 buy. 
 
 7944. Baron Dowse. — Is that near Blackwater- 
 town? — More between Charlemont and Loughgall, 
 going from Armagh to Charlemont, it lies on your 
 right. 
 
 7945. Mr. Shaw. — Going on the regular road it 
 lies on your right ? —Yes. 
 
 7946. Baron Dowse. — Kinnego is one of the town- 
 lands ? — It is. 
 
 7947. Mr. Shaw.— Is it good land? — Some of it is. 
 
 7948. Baron Dowse. — It lies high? — Yes. There 
 was a good deal of bog, but it has been taken away. 
 
 7949. Reclaimed? — Well, you cannot call it re- 
 claimed. The drainage is deficient, and the ground is 
 generally kept in a state of flood. 
 
 7950. Between Charlemont and Armagh, there are 
 extensive bogs ; and they are full of bog-holes which 
 are all full of water ? — Yes- 
 
278 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 24, 1860. 
 
 Mr. Henry 
 M'Kean. 
 
 7951. The county-road stands higli there, with bogs 
 on both sides ?— The county-road has been in some 
 places cut down on a level with the bogs. The floods 
 in the Blaokwater stopped the outlet for draiuage, and 
 of course the bogs have gone considerably to the bad. 
 There was in that case of Orothers no less than 
 thirteen acres of bog. The late Crothers did his best 
 to reclaim it ; he levelled it, and wrought at it for a 
 long time, and although the valuation was put down 
 at some £5 per annum, the whole produce of that bog 
 this year has been sold for £1. 
 
 7952. These are all tenant-right estates you have 
 mentioned ? — Yes. 
 
 7953. Do you think it would be an improvement 
 to these estates and to the coimtry generally if the 
 tenants had security of tenure and the power of free 
 sale, giving the landlord a reasonable veto on the in- 
 coming tenant 1 — I do, it would improve the tenants 
 considerably. We have evidence of that in the Powers- 
 court cases, where tenants who would not improve 
 their places before, who would not lay out a sixpence, 
 are all improving them. 
 
 7954. Chairman. — Do you think tenants would 
 Like such an Act of Parliament as that at present 
 rents 1 — In some cases they would and in other cases 
 they would not, because the rents in some cases are 
 exoi'bitant. 
 
 7955. Baron Dowse. — But in the majority of cases 
 , tlie rents are fairl — I should say so, in the majority 
 
 of cases. 
 
 7956. Does tenant-right prevail on Lord Caledon's 
 Qstate 1 — Yes. 
 
 7957. Do you know that yourself? — I am perfectly 
 cognizant of that. 
 
 7958. What about the Ranfurley estate ? — On the 
 Ranfmley estate it is limited to £11. 
 
 7959. Formerly it was unlimited 1 — I cannot say, but 
 that has been the case for the last two or three years. 
 
 7960. Was it during the last agent's time ? — Yes. 
 
 7961. He is dead now? — He is. 
 
 7962. Mr. Shaw.— Would it bring more than that 
 if left to competition 1 — I can give you an instance of 
 a man named Wilson, who could have got £13 an 
 acre ; he would not be allowed to sell it for that 
 amount, and he had to accept £11. 
 
 7963. Mr. Bruce's property comes up near to the 
 town of Moy 1 — Yes. 
 
 79G4. Is there tenant-right on Lord Charlemont's 
 estate 1 — Yes. 
 
 7965. Is there any restriction on it? — Ifot that I 
 ever heard of, except in some cases there is an increase 
 of rent. 
 
 7966. Mr. Hugh Boyle is the agent for that estate ? 
 ■ — Yes. The late Lord Oharlemont leased off the 
 greater part of the town of Moy, and it is held in 
 perpetuity. 
 
 7967. Do you know anything about the Verner 
 estate ? — No, it is rather out of my way. 
 
 7968. You know Lord Dartry's estate, and the 
 Benburlj estate, and the estates of Lord Charlemont 
 and Lord Ranfurley 1 — Yes, and some little about Lord 
 Caledon's estate, but not very much. 
 
 7969. Chairman. — There is tenant-right on Lord 
 Caledon's estate ? — Yes. 
 
 7970. Have there been any ofiioe rules made lately ? 
 — Not that I have heard of. 
 
 7971. Baron Dowse. — Before this dispute, if I may 
 tise the expression, between Lord Powerscourt and 
 his tenants, the rents seemed to be considered fair 
 and reasonable ? — Yes. 
 
 7972. And tenant-right prevailed ? — Yes. 
 
 7973. And there was perfect contentment over the 
 property ? — Yes. 
 
 7974. And everything went on vei-y well ? — Yes. 
 
 7975. And what really caused the dispute was the 
 attempt to raise the rent ? — The attempt to raise the 
 rent above the valuation that Mr. Wilson had made. 
 
 7976. The tenant was prepared for a moderate rise 
 of rent ?— Yes. Here is the memorial of the tenants 
 to Lord Powerscourt. It is the memorial of the 
 
 " tenants of the Benburb estate, who, for the second 
 time within the period of two years, have been served 
 with notice to quit." From the memorial I will read 
 the following: — 
 
 " Onreceipt of these notices (referring to the notices to quit) 
 we, your memorialists, with the large majority of the tenants 
 of the Benburb estate, took the same into our consideration, 
 ■with the anxious desire of at once fairly meeting your lord- 
 ship's views, and having the readjustment of our rents settled 
 upon the basis of a valuation made by a partial and expe- ■ 
 ricnced person, to be mutually agreed upon by your Lord- 
 ship and ourselves ; but we did express what we believe to 
 have been our reasonable dissatisfaction that a valuation 
 made without any representation on the tenants' part or 
 without any notice to them, should be imposed upon them, 
 and an attempt made in some instances to enforce them by 
 ejectments which could not be sustained on legal grounds, 
 and were dismissed by the court, when the persons so procee 
 ded against were driven to the necessity of defending 
 proceedings which were not justified either by law or usage 
 Your memorialists and the other tenants therefore learned 
 with satisfaction that yielding to our representations as 
 aforesaid, your lordship's agent addressed to Mr. Galbraitli 
 Wiley, as Secretary for the Tenants Committee, a lettei 
 which is in the words and figures following: — Benburb,lU> 
 April, 1874. 
 
 " To Mr. Galbraith "Wiley, Drumray. 
 
 ' ' Having heard from Mr. John Wilson that the tenantry 
 on the Benburb Estate were desirous of retaining his services 
 as valuator, in consequence of the dissatisfaction arismg 
 from the manner in which Mr Geale's valuation was made, 
 I have to inform you that Lord Powerscourt, anxious sofai 
 as he reasonably can to meet the views of the tenantry in tlif 
 matter, has requested Mr. John Wilson to revalue the estate 
 Being aware that you acted as Secretary to the tenantry 
 during the interviews I had with them on this subject, 
 I send this communication to you. 
 
 "Yours truly, 
 
 " George Poskett." 
 
 7977. Baron DowsE.^By that valuation he after 
 wards refused to abide 1 — Yes. 
 
 7978. Mr. Shaw. — Mr. Wilson is a well knowr 
 arbitrator? — He is. He has a farm of his own, and 
 is a practical and competent man who is well known. 
 
 7979. Baron Dowse. — He is a mosst respeotablr 
 man ? — He is. 
 
 7980. Mr. Shaw. — You think this system of arbi 
 tration would be a fair way of settling any disputf 
 that might arise ? — I do think it would be a fair way 
 of settling the disputes, if competent arbitrators werr 
 provided. 
 
 7981. You are of opinion that the landlord has? 
 right to seek a rise of rent if he thinks the land is toe 
 low? — Yes. 
 
 7982. And the tenant to seek a reduction if he 
 thinks that it is set too high ? — Certainly. 
 
 7983. If that system were established, do you not 
 think there would be in the country a great deal oi 
 excitement and re- valuing? — There might be but I 
 have been working amongst tenant farmers for some 
 years, and have been intimately acquainted with them, 
 and it is only in exceptional cases that I have heard a 
 man say that he would not pay a fair rent. 
 
 7984. If the rents were fair, you think there would 
 be no movement at all ? — Yes, but tenants object to a 
 landlord sending down a man, as Lord Powerscourt 
 sent down Mr. Geale, to take a bird's-eye view of a 
 man's place, and then to raise the rents. I will give you 
 an instance. There is a man who pays £80 a year 
 under Mr. Wilson's valuation, and he was called upon 
 to pay £120 a year under the valuation of Mr. Geale, 
 who never lifted a sod, nor looked into the place in the 
 way a valviator under such circumstances should. 
 
 7985. Baron Dowse. — The tenants own improve- 
 ments were valued? — Yes. Mr. Geale valued the 
 forty-seven townlands in three weeks, and he did not 
 spend more than three or four hours a day at the works. 
 
 7986. Baron Dowse. — He must be a smart man. 
 
 7987. The O'Conor Don.— Was there any abate- 
 ment of rent made lust year in that district ? — Mr. 
 Bruce gave ten per cent., the Earl of Dartry gave no 
 abatement, the Earl of Charlemont gave none, the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 279 
 
 Earl of Caledon, gave ten per cent., and the Earl of 
 Ranfurly gave ten per cent. 
 
 7988. Did Mr. Parnell give any?— He did. In 
 some cases there was a dispute between him and his 
 tenants. They believed they were to get an abate- 
 ment and when they came to Moy and tendered the 
 amount without the abatement it was not accepted. 
 
 7989. Baron Dowse. — Who is the agent? — Well, 
 I do not exactly remember. 
 
 7990. Is it Mr. M'Devmott ?— It is; that's the 
 name. The tenants then sent the amount to Dublin, 
 and it was sent back to them. 
 
 7991. Mr. Shaw. — They sent it less the abatement ? 
 — Yes, and it was sent back ; and then they addressed 
 a memorial to ISlr. Parnell, and at last the rent was 
 accepted, T believe, with the abatement. I know one 
 party who came to me and shov/ed me the notice that 
 he had got from Dublin. The letter to him was to 
 the effect that if he did not pay the full rent, proceed- 
 ings wotild be taken against him. Afterwards the 
 parties went to Dublin and saw Mr. M'Dermott and 
 Mr. Parnell personally, and the abatement was made. 
 
 7992. They are nearly all small tenants? — Yes. 
 
 7993. You admit the right of the landlord to in- 
 crease the rent on certain occasions 1 — Certainly, but 
 I do not admit that the Land Judge is capable of de- 
 ciding what the rent should be. It should be a skilled 
 man. 
 
 7994. Would it be possible in this valuation to 
 estimate the value of the landlord's interest in it, and 
 for the tenant to buy it out in perpetuity '] — In some 
 cases that has wrought remarkably well. I know some 
 tenants who have, done remarkably well under the 
 Church, although they paid high for their farms. 
 
 7995. Baron Dowse. — Was that the Clonfeacle 
 Glebe 1 — ^Yes, and they are doing well since. There 
 was another party who purchased in that way and I 
 think the tenants are nearly all cleared out, as he has 
 been trying to raise the rent. 
 
 7996. He piu'chased from the Church Commissioners 
 with the tenants on the land and has since been trying 
 to raise the rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 7997. As to that Clonfeacle Glebe was tenant-right 
 always allowed on it ? — It was always let at such a 
 high rent that there has never been tenant-right on it. 
 
 7998. Do you remember the late Bishop of Limerick 
 on it 1 — No. 
 
 7999. Do you remember Mr. Stevenson on it'! — • 
 Yes, and when he resided there, there was no such 
 thing as tenant-right on it. 
 
 8000. Mr. Shaw. — They did not leave room for it? 
 —No. 
 
 8001. How did the tenants purchase? — There are 
 some tenants who did not exactly live upon this pro- 
 perty, and they come in and took the farms and have 
 since bought tlaem. 
 
 8002. Would the tenants generally buy the land 
 in your district if they were allowed to purchase under 
 the Land Act and got facilities ? — Yes ; provided it 
 did not cost too much. 
 
 8003. If they got it at a cheap rate and also got 
 money without much expense you think the bulk of 
 them would buy ? — Yes. • 
 
 8004. And if there were also security of tenure and 
 just- rents it would meet your case very much ? — Yes. 
 
 8005. If there was a system of purchasing per- 
 petuities from the landlord how would that do ? — I do 
 not know. There are cases in which it would be an im- 
 provement ; although, of course, there is this in it — 
 that if tenants purchasing from the landlord have to 
 bori-ow at a high rate, they are in a worse position 
 than before. 
 
 800G. Getting help from the Government it might 
 come easy to them ? — Yes ; and there is no doubt that 
 that would be very much taken advantage of in the 
 north. 
 
 8007. The O'CoNOE Don.— Do you think the great 
 majority of the tenants would be able to provide one- 
 third or one-fourth of the purchase-money ? — Well, I 
 think not more than one-half in our neighbourhood. 
 It just varies according to their circu.mstances. 
 
 8008. Mr. Shaw.— And the good times?— Yes. 
 
 8009. And the times' are very depressed now? — 
 Yes ; farming is very depressed. 
 
 8010. Baron Dowse. — You have lived down in 
 that district all youi life? — I have lived twenty-five 
 years there. I believe that I was personally acquainted 
 for four miles round with four-fifths of the inhabitants. 
 A great many of the grievances in the Powerscourt 
 cases were made known to me. I may say that in the 
 most of the cases I was one of the assessors for the 
 tenants. 
 
 8011. And you have a personal knowledge of the 
 whole thing ? — I have. 
 
 SejJt. 24, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Henry 
 MKean. 
 
 Mr. Andke Murkat Kee, Newbliss ; and Mr. W. Marshall Fitzgerald, Clonavilla, near Clones, 
 
 were examined together. 
 
 8012. Chairman.^ What profession are you? — 
 Mr. Ker. — I am a landed proprietor, and have been 
 a land agent. 
 
 8013. State what points you wish to bring under 
 our notice ? — I was requested to attend here by Lord 
 Dartrey and Colonel Clements to give evidence in any 
 matter as to which I might be asked. 
 
 8014. You have been twenty-seven years agent to 
 Lord Dartrey ? — I was. 
 
 8015. You are acquainted with his property? — 
 
 Perfectly. 
 
 8016. When did you quit the agency?— In 1876 I 
 
 resigned. 
 
 8017. On Lord Dartrey's property does tenant-right 
 
 exist? — It does. 
 
 8018. Was there any limit to the tenant-right at 
 the time you were agent? — It was restricted to £10 
 
 per acre. 
 
 801 9. Was there any restriction as to the purchaser ? 
 —Yes. I always had the choice of the tenant. The 
 landlord had a veto. 
 
 8020. Did that always exist on the property ?— It 
 existed as long as I knew the property and long before. 
 
 8021. Did the limit of £10 per acre always exist on 
 the property ?— I should think not always, but I have 
 traced it as far back as 1839. I commenced being 
 agent in 1849, and as far as I could make out among 
 
 the tenants when I got directions from his lordship to 
 carry out that rule, I inquired when it began, and I 
 traced it back ten years, it may have been longer. 
 
 8022. If any special improvements were made by 
 the tenant was anything above £10 an acre allowed? 
 — Certainly, in the case of buildings, or any special 
 improvements. 
 
 8023. They were allowed to get a higher price ?^ 
 They were ; if there were any special reason for it. 
 
 8024. Baron Dowse. — Was there always a limit 
 upon the price ? — No. 
 
 8025. Then, at one time, it was unrestricted ? — 
 Certainly. I have known it go up to hundreds. I 
 have known a farmer sell his tenant-right for £500 on 
 account of a good slated house. 
 
 8026. What would that be per acre ? — That was 
 over and above the £10 per acre. 
 
 8027. Were they tenancies from year to year ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 8028. On your own estate is there any limit of 
 price ? — No ; I never limited the price. 
 
 8029. Upon the other estates you know, and on 
 your own, was there a preference given to a tenant on 
 the property in the purchase ? — ^Yes ; that is nearly 
 universal in Monaghan — if a tenant on the property 
 applies he gets the preference. 
 
 8030. Do you suppose that when there was this 
 
 Mr. Andre 
 M. Ker, and 
 Mr. VV. M. 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
280 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Sipf. i4,isso. limit it -was often exceeded by private arrangement? 
 Mr Ai'dre — '^° donbt it was, very often ; tliey always gave too 
 
 M. Ker, ai d 
 Mr. W. M. 
 Fit?gerakl. 
 
 much. 
 
 8031. Was any inquiry made as to that? — Yes, 
 strictly. Tlie buyer and seller used to come into my 
 office. I had a form in the office for them to sign, 
 agreeing to the price, and they would come in and sign 
 it, and pay the money according to the rule of the 
 estate, but [ knew myself that when they went out the 
 buyer paid something over. 
 
 8032. That was done because, according to the rule 
 of the office, more than £10 per acre would not be 
 allowed 1 — Yes. 
 
 8033. Does that rule prevail still? — Yes. I saw 
 Lord Dartrey yesterday, and he told me everything was 
 exactly the same as before. I know the agent very 
 well, too. 
 
 8034. Who is the agent 1 — Mr. Edward Richardson, 
 he succeeded me. He has the management of the 
 Monaghan property. 
 
 8035. Mr. Boyle is agent for part of the estate 1 — 
 Yes ; for the Armagh property. 
 
 8036. What was the custom as to tenant-right upon 
 a leasehold v/hen the lease dropped 1 — It was allowed. 
 
 8037. It was treated as existing at the end of the 
 lease 1 — It was, just as if the tenant had no lease at 
 all. 
 
 8038. When a lease dropped, were tenants offered 
 a renewal if they wished it ? — They as a rule never 
 asked for it — they were not anxious for leases — ■ 
 scarcely a man applied for one. They generally re- 
 mained in occupation after the lease dropped — without 
 asking for any renewal. If they asked for a renewal 
 they would have got it. 
 
 8039. Were they anxious for leases before the Land 
 Act t — A little more than now. The property I hold 
 at present, part of it was in Chancery, and by direction 
 of Master Brooke, I served a notice on every tenant 
 on the estate to come and take out a lease, but not one of 
 them did so. 
 
 8040. Mr. Shaw.— What was the reason of that 1 — 
 They did not care for leases. 
 
 8041. Baron Dowse.— I suppose the lease they 
 would have got was for seven years pending the cause 1 
 — No —it was given under the will of the late Mr. 
 Ker — two lives and twenty-one years. 
 
 8042. They preferred to remain as they were — 
 tenants from year to year 1 — Yes ; not one of them 
 took out a lease. It was my wish that they should 
 do it, and I often asked them to do it. 
 
 8043. You have that property yourself now ? — I 
 have. I wish to say I am wrong in saying there were 
 no leases — because there were three or four townlands 
 put up for sale and they took leases, for fear of it 
 l>:issing into bands they did not like as well as myself, 
 and I bought those lands, so that they continued 
 tenants. 
 
 8044. On Lord Dartrey's estate, is there any custom 
 of allowances for buildings 1 — Yes, up to the passing 
 of the Land Act, but not since. The Land Act has 
 done a great deal of mischief in our county. 
 
 8045. In consequence of that ceasing, have the 
 tenants ceased to make improvements t — I don't think 
 it affected the tenants much. I do not hear of as 
 much building or improvements, certainly, but I 
 cannot say that the Land Act has kept back the 
 tenants from improving — it certainly has kept back 
 the landlords. 
 
 8046. The class of imjirovements which were made 
 by the tenants with assistance from the landlords — 
 has the Land Act affected theml — Yes, they have 
 stopped altogether ; there is far less drainage done. 
 
 8047. Is it generally the case that since the Land 
 Act the landlords have ceased to make the allowances 
 they did previously 1 — Certainly. 
 
 8048. I gather from your evidence that you have 
 not a good opinion of the working of the Land Act 1 
 — I know nothing about it, except in my own county 
 — it may have made the tenant securer — of course it 
 
 must have done that — but it certainly has separated 
 landlord and tenant very much. 
 
 8049. The landlord formerly admitted tenant-right 
 by favour, but lie is now obliged to do it by law 1 — 
 Yes ; tenant-right is legalized now, certainly. It in 
 that way is certainly an improvement to the tenant. 
 
 8050. How is it an injury to the landlord ? — I do 
 not say it is an injury. 
 
 8051. You said it separated landlord and tenant very 
 much 1 — Yes. 
 
 8052. How? — By the landlord refusing to do for 
 the tenant as much as he used to do. 
 
 8053. Have youhad any experience on the subject of 
 peasant proprietary 1 — No, there has been scarcely a 
 case of it in the county. 
 
 8054. On the subject of waste lands, you say there 
 has been a good deal done by tenants in the way of 
 reclamation? — Yes — on mountain lands. 
 
 8055. And that has been done without the aid of 
 the landloi'd 1 — Very often, I know the landlords 
 assisted in some cases. 
 
 8056. As to the raising of rents, do you consider 
 that the system of raising rents upon a change of ten- 
 ancy existed generally before the Land Act? — It was 
 not always the case, but I have known cases before the 
 Act where there was a change of tenancy, and the 
 opportunity was taken advantage of to raise the rent, 
 where it would not have been raised upon the old 
 tenant. 
 
 8057. Do you know it to have been a general nde 
 that on a change of tenancy thei-e is a revision of 
 rent ? — It is often the case, but I don't think it is a 
 general rule. 
 
 8058. Mr. Shaw. — Is it done oftener now than 
 before the Land Act ? — I should say not. I think 
 on the whole there is less raising of rents now than 
 there used to be. 
 
 8059. Baron Dowse. — You ceased to be agent in 
 1876 ?— Yes. 
 
 8060. In addition to having been a land agent are 
 you an extensi^■e proprietor on your own account ?— I 
 am. 
 
 8061. You have a good deal of land yourself? — 
 Yes. 
 
 8062. Upon your own estate does tenant-right 
 prevail? — It does. 
 
 8063. Is there any restriction on the price ? — No. 
 
 8064. No restriction ? — No. 
 
 8065. Free right of sale ? — Yes, as regards price. 
 
 8066. I suppose you exercise a reasonable veto as 
 regards tenants coming in ? — I give my own tenants 
 the preference. 
 
 8067. But if none of your tenants is willing to buy, 
 do you allow the outgoing man to sell to anyone he 
 likes i — Not exactly. I like to know that the incoming 
 tenant is a proper man. 
 
 8068. Subject to that, can the tenant dispose of his 
 tenant-right to any person he likes ? — Yes. "The adver- 
 tisement they put up is " subject to the approval of 
 the landlord." 
 
 8069. At what price does the tenant right generally 
 sell? — From £8 to £15 per acre; in special cases I 
 have known it to go up to £22. 
 
 8070. Would that be in the neighbourhood of a 
 town ? — Two miles from Ballybay. 
 
 8071. Has there been a fall in the value of tenant- 
 right latterly owing to the bad times ? — Decidedly. 
 
 8072. Has there been any increase of rent of late 
 years on your own estate? — No. 
 
 8073. Some persons have said that on many estates 
 it is usual upon a change of tenancy, when a new name 
 is entered in the book, to raise the rent ? — It is often 
 done. 
 
 8074. The effect of that is more or less to depreciate 
 the tenant-right ? — Yes. 
 
 8075. That is not done upon your estate? — Not as 
 a rule. 
 
 807G. Sometimes it is, I suppose ?— I have done it 
 this very j'ear. A tenant made up his mind to go to 
 
UTES OF EVIDE 
 
 ■2bl 
 
 America, iiuti i raised tlie rent a little on the inoominn- 
 man. 
 
 8077. Had tlie incoming man bouglit at the time 
 you raised it? — No. T gave liim notice before lie 
 bought that the rent would be raised. 
 
 8078. Had it the effect of making him give loss for 
 the tenant-right'? — It had, but he gave an enormous 
 price notwithstanding. 
 
 8079. Sometimes they give unreasonably high prices 
 for tenant-riglit 1 — They do, ridiculous prices. 
 
 8080. liaising the rent would have the effect o; 
 diminishing tenrjit-right 1 — Of course it would. 
 
 8081. Did that prevail to any extent upon Lord 
 Dartrey's estate 1 — No. 
 
 8082. Colonel Clements' property is in Cavan 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 8083. You are agent over that estate? — lam, for 
 the last twenty-seven years. 
 
 8084. You liave still the management of it? — I 
 have. 
 
 8085. Having been agent ijr twenty-seven year.s 
 of course you have a good deal of experience on 
 that property 1 — I have. 
 
 8086. What is the rental of it?— About £::..oOO a 
 year. 
 
 8087. In what part of Cavan is it situated ! — Xcar 
 Cootehill. 
 
 8088. Does tenant-right prevail there ? — Yes. 
 
 8089. Unrestricted ? — Quite unrestricted. 
 
 8090. No limit on the price ? — No. Colonel Clements 
 is the easiest man in Ireland,I suppose with his tenants. 
 
 8091. Is that the gentleman who succeeded to the 
 late Lord Leitrim's estate ? — The very man. I was trus- 
 tee for that propei'ty. 
 
 8092. Who has the Coote estate now? — Mr. Smith. 
 809.3. Do you knov<- anything about that estate ? — - 
 
 I do, my brother was the agent over it for years. 
 
 8094. Does tenant-right prevail there ? — It does. 
 
 8095. Is it restricted in any way ? — I think not. I 
 never heard of any particular rules restricting it, it is 
 not much interfered with, I think, as to price. 
 
 8096. Some witnesses have stated that when there 
 is a restriction put upon the price of tenant-right, it 
 has been defeated by underhand agreements, and one 
 gentleman who is manager of several estates told us 
 that he found that so much the case, that he thought it 
 better to abolish the rule altogether, and leave the 
 parties free as to price ? — Y^s, my experience is that 
 you may as well not have any restriction as to price, 
 because if you have, the money will be paid behind 
 backs. It is a most extraordinary thing to my mind 
 — I never corrld understand it — but the great feeling 
 of the country is for the man who is selling, and al- 
 though the man who is purchasing may be as popular a 
 man as there is in the cotmtry, there is never any 
 sympathy for him. I cannot understand it. 
 
 8097. Don't you think it may be accounted for, by 
 the desii'e to push up the price of tenant-light as high 
 as they can, so that if hereafter they have to become 
 sellers, they may have the same good luck, and get as 
 large a price as possible 1 — Perhaps so. 
 
 8098. On the estate of Colonel Clements has there 
 been any increase of rent ? — No. 
 
 8099. We have been told by several witnesses that 
 on some estates an increase has been made in rent 
 lipon a change of tenancy and at other times, and 
 that such a course has had the effect of diminishing the 
 tenant-right — that is not your experience so far as 
 regards the estates you are concerned with ? — No. 
 
 8101. I suppose there is no doubt that an increase 
 of rent would depreciate the tenant-right of a holding? 
 — No doubt. 
 
 8102. It would be possible by unduly raising the 
 rent to make the tenant-right of no value ? — Of course 
 it would. I have threatened to raise the rent in some 
 cases myseK for that piu-pose, and stopped bargains by 
 doing so. 
 
 8103. You knew it would have that effect ? — Cer- 
 tainly, it was with that object I did it, when I found 
 they were giving £40 an acre for the tenant-right. 
 
 experience 
 have never had the slightest 
 
 8104. Do }'ou think the system of tenant-right works 
 well in your part of Ireland ? — It does, on tlie whole 
 it wo'it'ks well. 
 
 8105. The Land Act you say has had the effect of 
 preventinglandlords from expendingmoney on improve- 
 ments? — Yes, and it makes the tenants have a sort 
 01 independent feeling towards the landlords, their 
 feeling is not what it used to be. I don't mean 
 that tenants should cringe or be servile towards the 
 landlord, but I think the tenants don't regard their 
 landloids in the friendly way they used to do. 
 
 8100. Forniexi)' they had only a moral claim for 
 tenant-light upon the landlord? — Yos. 
 
 8107. Now they have a legal right 1 — Yes. 
 
 8108. And they are more independent? — Perhaps 
 they are. 
 
 8109. They hfuc not the same motive now m 
 gaining the laiidlo rd's favour that they had before the 
 Land Act ? — Certainly, there is not the good feeling 
 there used to be. 
 
 8110. Do they show that in their manner ? — They 
 do some of them. 
 
 8111. Have you observed that the same change of 
 manner is creeping over the country in every rank of 
 Hie? — I do ; there is a grfeat deal of Americanism in 
 tiic country. Still, I think it is not so bad as it was 
 some years ago. 
 
 8112. You think there has been an improvement of 
 late years ? — I do. 
 
 8113. The Ulster tenant-right system, you say, 
 works well ? — Yes, pretty fairly. 
 
 8114. You do not see any necessity for a tribunal 
 to settle rents as between landlord and tenant ? — No. 
 
 8115. According to your experience there 
 difficulty about that ? — I 
 difficulty, and there are no complaints. 
 
 8116. There might be such a thing, you know? — 
 No doubt there might. 
 
 8117. There are some people who ask too much?— 
 Certainly. 
 
 8118. There are some rapacious landlords ? — I am 
 sure there are. 
 
 8119. Would it be well to have some means of 
 keeping them in check ? — Yes, I think it would. 
 
 8120. How would you do it ? — i don't know how it 
 could be done, except by something like what has 
 been proposed. 
 
 8121. Arbitration to settle the rent between them ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 8122. You think that would keep them in check? 
 — Yes ; with a right of appeal to some tribunal. 
 
 8123. You think that would have a good effect? — 
 Yes, if you could get an honest and competent tribunal, 
 but certainly not the county court judges. 
 
 8124. You don't think they would be satisfactory 1 
 — Not the majority of them. Some of them would, 
 for instance in our own county we have a very fair 
 man, Mr. Barron. He has given good judgments in 
 most land cases. 
 
 8125. But as a rule you do not think the county 
 court would be a satisfactory tribunal ?— No ; I 
 have heard of some of the decisions in a way that 
 showed they did not know what they were talking 
 about. 
 
 8126. You think if some competent and honest 
 tribunal could be established for the purpose of settling 
 disputes between landlord and tenant as to rent it 
 would be useful ? — Yes. 
 
 8127. What do you think about the new scheme of 
 peasant proprietary — I believe you have none of them 
 in your part of the world ? — No. 
 
 8128. Would there be any objection, in your opinion, 
 to enabling a landlord to sell his propei'ty to his 
 tenants if they wanted to purchase it ? — If you mean 
 by an advance of public money I would not be in 
 favour of it. I think it is beginning at the wrong 
 end. 
 
 8129. What is the right end to begin at in your 
 opinion ? — If a tenant had saved money and was able 
 to buy. 
 
 20 
 
 Sejd. ii, IdSO. 
 
 Mr. Andre 
 M. Ker and ■ 
 Mr. W. M 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
282 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sepi!. 24. isso. 8130. You thiiik in tliat case lie slionld be at 
 ~~r liberty to piircliase ? — Certainly, if the landlord was 
 
 M.Kcr and willing to sell, but I would not force the landlord to 
 Mr. W. M. sell. 
 
 Fitzgerald. 8131. You would not be ill favour of compulsory 
 
 sales 1 — No. 
 
 8132. But if the landlord wished to sell, and the 
 tenant wished to buy, yoir would facilitate the trans- 
 action 1—1 would. But I would not advance the 
 public money for the purpose. 
 
 8133. You would not object to the tenant bor- 
 rowing a portion of the money from private parties ? 
 — It is a bad system, but that is the man's ov/n look- 
 out. 
 
 8134. You do not approve of Government advancing 
 the money on the terms of being repaid by an annuity 
 spread over a certain number of years 1 — I do not. 
 
 8135. That, in point of fact, would involve an in- 
 crease of rent during those years ? — It would. I 
 know one or two men in my neighbourhood who bor- 
 rowed money and purchased, bat they have made a 
 miserable business of it. They are deeply in 
 arrear. 
 
 8136. Where were the lands which they purchased 
 situated 1 — In the co. Leitrim. It was Church land. 
 I know one of the men well — he is a tenant of Lord 
 Dartrey's — he does not live on the farm he purchased, 
 he resides in Fermanagh. 
 
 8137. As far as your experience goes, the system 
 of tenants purchasing and becoming proprietors has 
 not worked well 1 — It has not. 
 
 8138. Were there any Church lands sold in your 
 own county at all 1 — Yes ; I believe so. 
 
 8139. You do not know any case of tenants buying 
 them?— No. 
 
 8140. According to your evidence you do not 
 approve of tenants purchasing their holdings, unless 
 in the case of a man who had money, and was a thrifty 
 and industrious, man, and willing to buy, and the land- 
 lord willing to selll — That is my general idea. Of 
 course there are some men who could borrow money, and 
 to whom you could safely lend it — steady well-principled 
 men — who would pay the instalments regularly ; but 
 the majority of Irish tenants in my opinion would buy 
 the land and never pay for it. 
 
 8141. Who makes the improvements on the estates 
 in your district 1 — At present the landlords certainly 
 do not. 
 
 8142. Any improvements that are made are done 
 by the tenants 1 — Yes ; but there are very few tenants 
 who make real improvements. They take all they can 
 out of the land. Very few of them either manure, 
 drain, or fence. 
 
 8143. They build houses of some kind, don't they 1 — 
 They do; ' 
 
 8144. In the neighbourhood of Newbliss, and in 
 that district where your estate is situated, doesn't the 
 country look very well 1 — Yes. 
 
 8145. They have tenant-right there ? — They have. 
 
 8146. With full power of sale ? — Yes. I think they 
 are as comfortable as most farmers in the country. 
 
 8147.. You are a resident landlord f — I am. I never 
 leave home. ' ' 
 
 8148. Ai-e you your own agent? — I am. 
 
 8149. You look after the property youi'self ? — I do. 
 I know every tenant on it. 
 
 8150. Are they contented do you think ? — I believe 
 they are. I haVe had no complaints. 
 
 8151. They hold at a lair rent? — I believe the rents 
 are fair and moderate. 
 
 815^. They are not turned out as long as they pay 
 the rent ?^Certainly not. I never-t-urned -a manout. 
 
 8153. And they are allowed to sell 1 — Yes. 
 
 8154. Does that system lead to contentment and 
 security? — I believe so. I think the tenants are as 
 content as any that I know. 
 
 8155. Have you. had any ejectments? — I had one 
 this year for non-payment of rent. 
 
 8150. Have you had any cases under the Land Act ? 
 — Never on my own property. 
 
 8157. None on your own estate ? — None. 
 
 8158. H^ave you had some on Lord Dartrey's? — Yes. 
 
 8159. How many ? — Six or seven, and I won them 
 all but one. 
 
 8160. You succeeded in every one of them? — I did. 
 
 8161. Have you had any on the estate of Colonel 
 Clements 1 — No. 
 
 8162. Do you ever exercise the powers of distress? 
 — Never. 
 
 8163. Do you think it a beneficial thing that the 
 landlord should have po wers beyond any other creditor 1 
 —I do. 
 
 8164. Why do you think so? — If the ordinary 
 creditors could come in before the landlord, the land- 
 lord would be deprived of his rent. Tenants are too 
 fond of doing that as it is. I think where rent is due 
 the landlord should have the first claim. 
 
 8165. Have you found that to work beneficially for 
 the tenant in some cases ? — Yes. Tenants have re- 
 peatedly come to me to save them from their creditors, 
 
 8166. That is, to defeat the creditors? — Yes, but I 
 refused to do it. I thought it would not be fair. 
 
 8167. You know Ulster pretty well, I suppose' 
 
 I do. 
 
 8168. Don't you think the tenant-right system has 
 had a good eflTect in creating prosperity and good- will 
 in Ulster ? — I do. 
 
 8169. It has made the people contented, and en- 
 couraged them to improve their holdings ? — Yes. I 
 have always heard and believe so. 
 
 8170. But if a man was tenant upon an estate, the 
 landlord of which was in the habit of raising the rents, 
 he would be discouraged from making any improve- 
 ments ? — Certainly. I know some estates where that 
 has been done, and it has had the effect of oheckiaof 
 improvements, and ruined the tenants. 
 
 8171. Have you any objection to mention the 
 names of these estates ? — I would prefer not mentioning 
 the names. 
 
 8172. But it has had the efiect of depreciating the 
 tenant-right, checking improvements, and ruuiing the 
 tenants ? — Yes, and injuring the landlords too, in the 
 long run. 
 
 8173. Were these estates on which tenant-right 
 prevailed ? — On one of the estates I refer to, the land- 
 lord was too fond of raising the rent when he saw a 
 tenant improving. I refused to be his agent lor that 
 reason. 
 
 8174. The effect of that course is to injure the 
 tenant ? — Yes, and to injure the landlord too. 
 
 8175. Mr. SHAW.-^Were the rents raised without 
 there being any change of tenancy ? — Yes. There was 
 one very Ijad case some years ago. The man who did 
 it is dead and gone now. He wished to raise some 
 money, and he served notices on his tenants, and 
 made them pay rent for their own improvements. 
 He was fired at and narrowly escaped being shot. I 
 heard him say the bullet went through his coat, but I 
 didn't believe him. 
 
 8176. What county was that in? — Monaghan. 
 
 8177. That is a peaceable county ?^-Generally so. ■ 
 
 8178. I suppose you attribute that outrage upon 
 him, to his conduct towards his tenantry ? — I have no 
 dou.bt of it. I am sure he was fired at, but the story 
 he told about it was ridiculous! 
 
 8179. What proportion do the rents bear to the 
 valuation in your district ? — Lord Dartrey's rents 
 were two shillings in the pound above the government 
 valuation. Latterly he has made them three shillings 
 in the pound above the valuation. 
 
 8180. Has he raised the rents latterly? — Not 
 generally on the estate, but if there was a new letting 
 the rent was advanced a little. He tells me the rent 
 is to be 15 per cent, above the valuation of the land, 
 not including buildings. 
 
 8181. That wll lead to an increase of rent ? — It will 
 slightly. He has been acting on that principle for 
 some years. 
 
 8182. He has not carried it out on the entire of JiiB 
 estate yet ?-— No. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 2S3 
 
 8183. He is aoing it slowly? — Slowlyi 
 
 8184. Does he intend to stop there, or will he have 
 another slide up by-aiid-by 1 — I don't know. But liis 
 land is let cheap. 
 
 81-85. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is your' opinion of 
 Griffith's valuation — is it of any value as a criterion 
 for rent t — It has a certain value, but you cannot 
 depend upon it — it is not uniform. Bad land is 
 generally valued too high, and good landtooJow, in 
 Griffith's valuation. 
 
 8186. In the north of Ireland does the valuation 
 come near what the rent should be ? — Yes ; omitting 
 buildings — but the rent of the land is generally higher 
 than the valuation. 
 
 8187. Do jon think it is justly so? — Yes, in most 
 cases I believe it is fairly so — I would say 15 per cent. 
 over the valuation, excepting buildings, would be a 
 fair rent, and tenants would be satisfied with it if they 
 were let alone. 
 
 8188. You think as a general rule that 15 per cent, 
 over the valuation would be a fair rent? — Yes, I 
 think the majority of the tenants would be satisfied 
 with it. 
 
 8189. The O'Coxor Do^^--Do you think they 
 would have a good tenant-right interest to sell at that 
 rate ? — They would. 
 
 8190. You say that before the Land Act Lord 
 Dartrey was in the habit of doing some of the improve- 
 ments 1 — Several. 
 
 8191. Can you give us any idea of the amount he 
 spent annually in imjjrovements on his property ? — I 
 was allowed to spend some hundreds a year. There 
 never was an exact amount for it. He scarcely ever 
 refused an application I made for an allowance to a 
 tenant. Another thing, they had bog always rent 
 free. 
 
 8192. Did he make any charge to the tenants for 
 advances for roofing houses ? — Never. 
 
 8193. He spent some hundreds a year in improve- 
 ments? — He did, up to 1876. 
 
 8194. Then he continued it after the passing of the 
 Land Act? — He did not give so much after 1870 as 
 he had done previously. 
 
 8195. With regard to the ejectment case which you 
 had this year, have you put the tenant out of possession ? 
 ■ — Not yet. 
 
 8196. It is a mere threat of ejectment ? — Well, I am 
 afraid I must evict him. I have given him every 
 chance I could— he owes me five years rent. 
 
 8197. Mr. Shaw. — Cannot he sell his good-will? — 
 Yes, but the fact is he does not wish to go. 
 
 8198. He wants to remain in occupation without 
 paying the rent? — He would not say that that was 
 his object. 
 
 8199. But it amounts to that 1 — It amounts to that. 
 
 8200. Would you allow him to sell, and pay you 
 the rent out of the produce 1 — Of course I would do 
 that. 
 
 8201. You can't force him to sell ? — No — but if he 
 does not do so I wiU evict him, sell the place myself, 
 retain the rent out of the proceeds, and hand him the 
 balance. 
 
 8202. Nothing could be fairer than that ? — That is 
 what I have always done. 
 
 8203. The O'Conoe Don. — With regard to the 
 purchaser of the Church land in Leitrini, you say it 
 turned out badly ? — Yes, the first I knew of the matter 
 was when the man indii-ectly applied to me to write 
 to the Secretary of the Commissioners, to ask him to 
 give him some additional time for payment of the 
 instalments. The Secretary had been an old school- 
 fellow of mine. Of com'se I did not write — I would 
 not interfere in a case like that. That man nearly 
 doubled the rent on his own tenants. Those small 
 land propiietors are generally the men who chai-ge 
 high rents. 
 
 8204. Baron Dowse. — I suppose he bought as a 
 speculation? — Yes, he had saved some money and got 
 an advance. 
 
 ■8205. As a- rule those people always screw up the Scpt.2i,lS3(). 
 rents as high as possible ? — Yes. , . jj^ Andre 
 
 8206. The O'Oonok Don. — I understand you are M.Ker, and 
 not aware of any case in which the actual occupier of Mr. .W. M. , 
 a holding purchased ? — No. I wish to mention with K'zger.al4- 
 regard to Griffith's valuation. I got a note yesterday 
 
 (from Sir R. Griffith tO: Earl of Dartrey) in which he 
 said that ,iie . valued lands in the county Monaghan 
 2s. 66^. in the pound above the valuation. , 
 
 8207. Above the valuation? — Yes. I saw a letter 
 in the newspapcin in wliioh some gentleman had stated 
 before this Ciommission that he denied that. I can 
 show you a letter which Sir Richard Griffith wrote to 
 Earl of Dartrey -^Lord Dartrey had written to Sir R. 
 Griffith asking him what, in his opinion, would be a 
 fair rent to charge above the valuation. Sir R. 
 G riffith in hi« reply stated that from 2s. 6d. to 3s. in 
 the pound above the valuation would be the fair letting 
 value. 
 
 8208. CjiAiP.iiAN. — You have said that under the 
 tenant-right system the tenant would continue in 
 occupation as long as he paid the rent ? — That is the 
 rule. I never dream of putting a man out as long as 
 he pays his rent. 
 
 8209. Is there any rule if a man has misconducted 
 himself? — Yes. I brought an ejectment some years 
 ago agamst a man who was found guilty of man- 
 slaughter at the Monaghan Assizes, and the barrister 
 said it was a good reason. 
 
 8210. Did yoii sell the tenant-right in that case? — 
 I did, and gave the family the money. 
 
 8211. Even in such a case the man should get the 
 benefit of the tenant-right ?— Yes ; I gave it in that 
 case. 
 
 8212. What sentence had that man got? — Eive 
 years. He sta,bbed a man in the presence of his own 
 parish priest who was standing by. 
 
 8213. Then as long as they pay their rant and don't 
 misconduct themselves you do not disturb them ? — No, 
 as long as they do that they are safe. 
 
 8214. If a man does misconduct himself, and you 
 eject him, you have to run the gauntlet of the Land 
 Court ? — Yes. That man brought me into the Land 
 Court, but I succeeded there. 
 
 8215. Notwithstanding your success there you 
 allowed the tenant-right to his family ? — I did, and it 
 was the barrister divided the money amongst the 
 children. 
 
 8216. Do you think the cessation of allowances for 
 improvements by landlords has been felt by the tenants ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 8217. And may have led to some dissatisfaction ? — ■ 
 No doubt. 
 
 8218. Were any abatements of rent made last year 
 upon Lord Dartrey 's property? — I think not. lam 
 not certain. 
 
 8219. Are the tenants on that property well-to-do, 
 generally? — They are not. On some few townlands 
 they are, but the great ma,jority of Lord Dartrey's 
 tenants "are poor men. 
 
 ■ 8220. The O'Conor Don.— On small holdings ?— 
 Yes — small holdings in a great many cases — thei-e are 
 some large ones, no doubt, but a great many of his 
 tenants ar-e small, and a great many of my own are 
 small. 
 
 8221. Is there any other occupation to turn to in 
 that district except farming? — ^Yery little. 
 
 8222. Mr. Shaw. — There is no weaving 1 — No, none 
 in that part of Ulster. There used to be, but it is gone. 
 
 8223. Has the harvest been good on the whole? — 
 Very good — it is better than the average, and well 
 saved. 
 
 ' 8224. In what condition are the labourers? — My ' 
 
 experience is that the labouring class are bettei; off 
 than the small farmers — they get fair wages. 
 
 8225. What are the average wages of labourers in 
 the district ? — I pay 9s. a week and a house, and turf 
 bog. 
 
 8226. I suppose you give better wages than the 
 farmers generally? — I don't know, but I think that is 
 
 2 2 
 
2S4 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2i, 1S8«. 
 
 Jr. Andre 
 A!. Kerand 
 IJr. W. M. 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
 For instance, very few farmers could give 
 
 a week wages ? — I doubt if 
 
 probable, 
 turf bog. 
 
 8227. Do tbey give 
 tbey do. 
 
 8228. Have tbey houses to give them? — Some few 
 have houses. 
 
 8229. Are the labourers generally under farmers, or 
 under the landlords? — The farmer class have a great 
 number of cottiers under them, as they caU them. 
 They live on the lands in small houses. 
 
 8230. And get potato ground ? — Very often. 
 
 8231. The manure goes on the land of the farmer? 
 —Yes. 
 
 8232. Do you find a good feeling to exist between 
 the labourer and the farmer ? — I would say so. Occa- 
 sionally there are cases at the Petty Sessions — disputes 
 under the Small Tenements Act. That happens very 
 often. 
 
 8233. What is the average rent upon this land per 
 acre? — The average in Monaghan is from 24s. to 26s. 
 per Irish acre. 
 
 8234. It is high and dry land? — Some of it. 
 
 8235. Is a good deal of it mountain? — Not a good 
 deal. 
 
 8236. The tenants have reclaimed any of it that 
 has been reclaimed ? — Yes j the tenant generally got 
 it for ten or twelve years at a nominal rent. 
 
 8237. And I suppose after that time a moderate rent 
 was put on it ? — Yes. I should mention that the rent? 
 on Lord Dartrey's lands are lower than on the majority 
 of estates in the county. 
 
 8238. Do you think the system of tenant-right which 
 has worked well in Ulster, would work well in the 
 souish of Ireland ? — I don't see why it should not. li 
 it is right in Ulster, it should be right in Munster. 
 
 8239. Is it good for the landlord here ? — It is. 
 
 8240. And good for the tenant? — Yes. 
 
 8241. And what is good in the north, for both 
 landlord and tenant ought to be good in the south ?— 
 I think so. 
 
 8242. Chairman. — Is this -the property Lord Dar 
 trey lives on ? — Yes ; he is living there now. 
 
 Mr. WiLLiAAi M . Fitzgerald, 
 
 8243. Chairman. — Are you a tenant-farmer?^ 
 Yes ; on the Clones estate. 
 
 8244. Uponwhoseproperty? — SirThomasLennard's. 
 
 8245. Baron Dowse. — Mr. Wrench is your agent? 
 —Yes. 
 
 8246. Chairman. — How many acres do you farm ? 
 — About 73 acres statute. 
 
 8247. Is there anything that you wish to bring to 
 our notice specially ? — Nothing in particular. 
 
 8248. Nothing as regards your own holding? — 
 Nothing. 
 
 8249. Tenant-right exists on the property ? — It does. 
 
 8250. You can sell when you are leaving? — Yes; 
 you ask permission of the agent to dispose of your 
 farm, if you wish to leave. I am residing on a farm 
 that my great-grandfather lived in, and there has never 
 been any change in it, save and except that on the fall 
 of the lease it was raised from 7s. 6rf. per acre in my 
 grandfather's time. I ato paying between 32s. and 
 33s. per acre. 
 
 8251. When did the lease fall? — My grandfather 
 was a life in the lease, and on his deatli it was raised 
 to 25s. per acre. On the fall of that lease, my uncle, 
 the late William Fitzgerald, took out a new lease, 
 about thirty years ago. The lease was taken at 
 32s. &d. per acre. 
 
 8252. And that lease is still in existence? — It is 
 still in existence — there is one life in it still in being. 
 
 8253. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is the average size 
 of the holdings on the estate on which y>ni live ? — The 
 average is fifteen or sixteen acres, Irish. I thought at 
 first, on a rough calculation, that it was only ten. 
 
 8254. The majority of tenants hold from year to 
 year ? — From year to year. 
 
 8255. What is the average per-centage of rent above 
 the valuation? — I would say omitting the Value of 
 buildings, about 1 5 per cent. 
 
 8256. Have you noticed any great inequalities in 
 the Government valuation in the districts with which 
 you are acquainted? — No. I could not say I have 
 noticed any great inequality. 
 
 8257. You think, on the whole, the valuation is a 
 fair one ? — I think so — having regard to the quality 
 of the land. 
 
 8258. Do you consider it a fair valuation as to the 
 actual value of the land ? — I would not consider it a 
 fair test for the letting vakie of all kinds of land. 
 
 8259. That is really the important thing we want 
 to find out — what sort of land is it fair with in your 
 opinion ? — I consider that land in a bdckward district 
 has been valued as land adjoining a town — which has 
 much more convenience as regards roads and markets 
 — in my opinion when land is a considerable distance 
 removed from a fair or market town, it is not fair to 
 rate it as high. 
 
 8230. Yu;-. don't tliink the advantasies of situation. 
 
 Clonavilla, near Clones, examined. 
 
 and proximity to markets, are taken sufficiently inte 
 consideration? — I do not. 
 
 8261. I suppose tenant-right exists on the property 
 on which you live ? — It does, and on the surrounding 
 properties. 
 
 8262. Can you describe what the custom of tenant- 
 right is ? — The custom of tenant-right is that the man 
 holds undisturbed possession of the farm so long as he 
 pays his rent, and if he wishes to dispose of it, on con- 
 dition that he does not get into arrears, or if he 
 wishes to emigrate or take another farm, he asks 
 permission of the agent, and is generally allowed to 
 sell. There is usually a restriction with regard to 
 auctions, and I think myself it would be better to 
 sell by proposal than to put up to public auction. 
 
 8263. You don't admire'auctions ? — I do not. 
 
 8264. Are there any rules in the office about 
 leases ? — At the expiration of leases, which are a very 
 uncommon thing with us, for very few like to take 
 leases, they are allowed tenant-right. 
 
 8265. Are tenants ever obliged — on taking leases 
 — to sign away their tenant-right ? — I believe there is 
 such a rule on some estates. I am not personally 
 
 ' acquainted with the fact, but speaking from hearsay 1 
 believe it is so. 
 
 8266. Do you know the name of the estate ? — I do 
 certainly. I think Mr. Ker knows it too, but refusetl 
 to name it. 
 
 8267. There can be no harm in your mentioning it 
 to us not for publication unless you wish it ? — On 
 Lord Rossmore's estate I believe there are such' rules. 
 I have always heard it. If every estate in Ireland 
 was managed like the estates over which Mr. Ker 
 and Mr. Wrench have to do, there would be very 
 little reason to complain. 
 
 8268. Do you think there are causes of complaint 
 now in some places ? — Yes. I believe the £5 limit- 
 ation to tenant-right is a very unfair thing. That is 
 one of the rules I believe on Lord Rossmore's estate. 
 
 8269. On the pro])erty you live on I presume the 
 rent is not raised on an incoming tenant ? — It is not 
 usually raised on an incoming tenant. 
 
 8270. Have you known any cases of that being 
 done 1 — I have, but it merely referred to townparks. 
 I knew of one case, upon the Clones estate, where 
 a farm lay close to the town, and the tenant was 
 about to sell his interest, and it was taken up. 
 
 8271. Did the tenant live in the town? — No, sir, 
 but it was afterwards set to tenants in the town, and 
 considerably raised. 
 
 8272. It was turned into townparks? — It was 
 turned into town parks. 
 
 8273. Are there many leases existing on the pro- 
 perty ? — Very few — they are only here and there. 
 
 8274. When they expire is the rent generally 
 
 raised? — I have not hoard of a lease expii-ing 
 
 opt 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 28o 
 
 one, within, the last eight or nine years, upon the 
 Clones estate, and in that case the tenant had put up 
 a new house, and slated it, on the promise of a new 
 lease. There was a great deal of talk about it, but at 
 the end the tenant and I talked the matter over, and 
 he said it was not so bad as the public said, for he 
 had been living in the centre of a nioory soil, where 
 there was cutaway bog, and he had reclaimed seven 
 or eight acres of it, and at the taking out of the lease 
 they gave him the entire of the land at the same rent, 
 and only charged him £\ per aoi-e for the land he had 
 reclaimed. 
 
 8275. Was that the outside value of iti — I don't 
 think it was ; but they did not wish to charge him 
 too much, as he had laid out money in reclaiming seven 
 or eight aci-es of bog. 
 
 8276. Was he satisfied ?— Well, he thought he 
 should have got it at the old rent ; but he said him- 
 self it was not so bad — as he got this reclaimed land 
 for £1 per acre that had never been charged to 
 him in the old lease. I know I had on my own farm 
 some cut-out bog — the turbary was given free — and, 
 when it was cut out, I reclaimed it. It was some- 
 thing like 1.4. 2r. 30p. statute. After I had it re- 
 claimed there was 15s. a year charged to me, which I 
 did not object to, as he gave me near half an acre of 
 other bog in place of it. 
 
 8277. Le;ises are not asked for as a rule? — No; 
 tenants think they are better off without leases. 
 
 8278. You don't approve of any limit being put on 
 the price of tenant-right 1 — I do not. I don't think it 
 is fair. 
 
 8279. You do not think it is any protection to an 
 incoming tenant ? — No. 
 
 8280. You think that a man ought to be left to 
 make the most he can of what he has 1-^Oertainly ; 
 because in the one townland one man's . farm may 
 differ widely from another. 
 
 8281. Is it not the case that a man coming in to 
 purchase a farm has very often to borrow money in 
 order to pay the tenant-i-ight of it t — It has been the 
 case occasionally ; but I could not say that it is very 
 often the Case. 
 
 8282. In any case, where it is so, don't you think 
 that a tenant getting into debt when commencing the 
 occupation of the farm is not advisable ? — Certainly ; it 
 is very unadvisable, and a very unprofitable thing in 
 the end. 
 
 8283. It prevents him from spending what he 
 ought in the cidtivation of the farm 1 — It does. 
 
 8284. Wordd the landlord, having a veto on the 
 price tend to prevent that 1 — It possibly nught. 
 
 8285. What would you think of introducing such a 
 rule — putting a limit on the price — would it lie re- 
 ceived well t — I don't think it would. I think it 
 would not be fail'. Siippose there are two tenants : 
 one man takes care of his farm, improves it as much 
 as he can ; the other is a careless tenant, runs 
 the land out, and exhausts it. Suppose the first man 
 wishes to sell his tenant-right — do you think it would 
 be fair that he, after taking the best care of his land, 
 should get no more than £5 per acre ; while the other 
 man, who has spoiled his land, is to get the same 1 — 
 That is the reason why I don't consider it fair to have a 
 fixed sum per acre for tenant-right. It checks improve- 
 ment ; and it is an encouragement to carelessness. But, 
 T think, at the same time, it is very wrong to exceed 
 what is the fair tenant-right value of the land. 
 
 8286. Do you admit that the landlord should have 
 a right of selection of the tenant? — Certainly, he 
 should have a right of objecting to an unfit man. 
 
 8287. Wherever that right has been exercised, do 
 you think it has been fairly exercised? — I do. T be- 
 lieve it has been fairly exercised. They generally 
 give the preference to a tenant on the estate, and, if 
 a tenant is not willing to buy, they choose the man 
 whom they believe to be the best character. 
 
 8288. Do the landlords assist in making improve- 
 ments? — As far as I know, since 1870 the landlords 
 have ceased giving any assistance for improvements. 
 
 I know that to be the case on an estate adjoiniirg the Sept. u, 1880. 
 one I live on— Mr. Forster's. The late Mr. Forster j,|. ^^^ 
 used to assist his tenants when building or improving ; jj. Ker, and 
 but, after the passing of the Land Act, the tenants (I Mr. W.'.M. 
 have had it from their own lips) never got to the Fitzgerald, 
 value of a farthing. 
 
 8289. Were they dissatisfied 1—1 think so. 
 
 8290. Baron Dowse. — Do you think they would 
 like the Land Act repealed? — No ; I don't think they 
 would. It gives them other advantages in lieu of that. 
 
 8291. The O'CoNOE Don. — Are you aland agent as 
 well as a tenant-farmer ? — I am not. 
 
 82!I2. Baron Dowse. — Don't you think tenant-right 
 has improved the condition of Ulster ? — I believe it has. 
 
 8293. You think security of tenure, a fair rent, not 
 to be turned out as long as you pay your rent, and a 
 power of sale is beneficial ? — I do. 
 
 8291. You think it has done good in Ulster? — I 
 think it has made Ulster what it is. 
 
 8295. Would it be any harm to try it in Munster? 
 — Not a bit. I don't see why it should not be the 
 custom over all Ireland. 
 
 829G. You would not make fish of one and flesh of 
 another ? — Certainly not. 
 
 8297. Mr, Shaw. — Are rents high in your part of 
 the country? — From 28.$. to 30s. the Irish acre. I 
 know a small estate immediately adjoining the Clones 
 estate — belonging to Mr. De Burgh — some of it is set 
 at 42,5. the acre, and part of it is down to 35s., aocord- 
 ingto the quality. Every tenant on his estate hasalease. 
 
 8298. Do you consider those high rents ? — I think 
 not. They are the only improvers in the locality. 
 
 8299. Are they able to live with those rents ? — They 
 have done so up to this. 
 
 8300. If there was a valuation do you think those 
 rents would be reduced ?— No. I think the landlords 
 in our part of the country charge fair rents on the 
 whole. I think the tenants have their holdings at a 
 fair average. 
 
 8301. Baron Dowse. — If there was a law obliging 
 the landlord to give the land at a fair rent, you think 
 there would not be much change made in your locality ? 
 — No. I don't hear much comjjlaint at all. 
 
 8302. Mr. Shaw. — Except having the rent raised 
 when the lease falls in or when there is a change of 
 tenancy ? — Where leases falls in it is only an exception 
 to the general rule ; and when new tenancies are 
 created, the holdings are generally measured to see 
 what ground has been reclaimed, and they are charged 
 for it generally one or two shillings per acre additional, 
 and the new tenant scarcely ever objects to it. 
 
 8303. Chairman. — Is it only on that particular land 
 the increase is made ? — Yes. 
 
 8304. Not on the whole farm ? — No. 
 
 8305. Mr. Shaw. — Who has increased the value of 
 the land ? — The tenant. 
 
 8300. The landlord gets the increased rent? — Yes. 
 He gets £10,000 a year out of the estate', and we never 
 see his face, except perhaps when there is an election. 
 
 8307. He does not reside in the country 1 — No ; he 
 resides in England, and so did his father and grand- 
 father. I believe they scarcely ever had a residence 
 in this country, 
 
 8308. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you know of any cases 
 of farmers buying their land 1 — No ; unless on Church 
 property. 
 
 8309. Do you know any of those oases? — We had 
 some near Clones. The Church lands lay close to the 
 mountain district. Most of the tenants refused to 
 purchase. A gentleman who owns considerable pro- 
 perty there, Mr. Dickson, purchased the greater part 
 of it, and one or two of the tenants were able partly 
 to pay for their holding by borrowing money. I know 
 one of them came to Mr. Dickson and asked him to 
 buy it as he was not able to hold it. I know another 
 case where a man of the name of Graham made money 
 in Scotland, and came and purchased half of two town- 
 lands, but the tenants did not [airchase, and in both 
 cases he raised the rents on them. 
 
280 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2t, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Andra 
 M. Ker, and 
 Mr. W. M. 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
 8310. He raised the rents on the tenants? — He 
 did. 
 
 8311. Was there tenant-right on the Church pro- 
 perty 1 — I believe not. There is tenant-right in the 
 district ; and although they used to have as much turf 
 bog as they wished to cut, he measured it to them, and 
 charged them for it at the rate of £4 an acre. . 
 
 8312. They could sell the turf I suppose % — -Yes. 
 
 8313. The O'CoNOR Don. — He charged them £4 an 
 acre for it ? — Yes ; £4 per Irish acre. 
 
 8314. Baron Dowse. — How was it that there was 
 no tenant-right on the Church property in your neigh- 
 bourhood, was it because it was set too high 1 — I think 
 it was set too high, and it was a very inferior class of 
 land. 
 
 8315. And since it has been purchased irom the 
 Commissioners it has been set higher 1 — Yes. 
 
 8316. Mr. Kavanagh. — I gather from your evi- 
 dence that those who bought their holdings are not in 
 any better position than those who are still under a 
 landlord 1 — No. I know one v^rho has sold his already. 
 
 8317. The O'Oonoe Don. — You only know of two 
 cases 1 — That is all. 
 
 8318 Mr. Shaw. — Did that man live on the hold- 
 ing 1 — He did. 
 
 8319. The O'CoNOR Don.— What is the extent of 
 
 it ? — Twelve or fourteen acres. I don't know what he 
 paid for it ; but after having purchased it he was clad 
 to sell it. 
 
 8320. Had he to borrow 'money besides what was 
 lent to him by the Commissioners? — I believe he 
 had. 
 
 8321. You intimated during part of Mr. Ker's' ex- 
 amination that you dissented from him 1 — Not exactly 
 it was only in reference to drainage on Lord Dartrey's 
 property since the Land Act. I have a cousin who 
 took a farm on Ms estate two or three years ago^ and 
 employed men making drains during the winter, and 
 he told me that the agent, Mr. Richardson, came and 
 measured it, and allowed him for the drains, and also 
 for building a cow-house, a stable, and barn. 
 
 8322. Is he a tenant from year to year? — -No; he 
 has a lease. 
 
 8323. Mr. Shaw. — Is that generally done upon the 
 estate ? — It is not, it was a special case. It is near 
 Lord Dartrey's gate ; in other respects there are no un- 
 provements done by landlords in our locality. 
 
 8324. Has Sir Thomas B. Lennard ever contributed 
 to make improvements for his tenants ? — He never did 
 one penny piece. 
 
 8325. In other respects do you agree with the last 
 witness, Mr. Ker? — I do. 
 
 Mr. Arthur 
 Mulholland. 
 
 Mr. Arthur Mulholland, Pomeroy, county Tyrone, examined. 
 Chairman. — Axe you a tenant farmer? — I 
 
 8326 
 am. 
 
 8327. How do you hold your land? — lam a tenant 
 from year to year. 
 
 8328. How long have you been a tenant farmer ? — 
 Since I was born, I may say. My father was tenant 
 before me. 
 
 8329. Did your father hold under lease? — He did. 
 
 8330. When did the lease expire? — There were 
 several leases, but they all expired. 
 
 8331. Since the expiration of the leases you have 
 held the farm from year to year ? — I have. 
 
 8332. Have you any complaint with reference to 
 your present tenancy ? — The rent has been tremend- 
 ously increased since the dropping of the lease. 
 
 8333. Baron Dowse. — Who is your landlord ? — Mr. 
 Robert William Lowry of Pomeroy. 
 
 8334. Chairman. — Do you hold under a written 
 agreement? — I do. I can show you the form of 
 agreement I was asked to sign. [Witness produces 
 the form.] 
 
 8335. You had better read it? [Witness read as 
 follows] : — 
 
 " This 
 made on day of between Robert William Lowry and 
 whereby the said Eobert "William Lowry lets and 
 the said takes the Farm No. containing "a. ii. p. 
 
 in tlie townland of upon the terms following : Tenant 
 
 to hold fi'oni year to year, to commence on the 1st day of 
 Kovember, A.D, 187 , at the yearly rent of £ payable 
 by two equal gales, on the 1st day of May and 1st day of 
 November in each year, without any deductions whatsoever. 
 Tenant to keep the premises in repair, and not to assign, 
 sublet, or con-acre any portion of the premises without the 
 written consent of the said Eobert AVilliam Lowry; and 
 also the yearly rent of £ for every buihling erected, or 
 any alteration or expenditure made without the written 
 consent of the said Robert William Lowry, and such further 
 rents to be paid half- yearly on the days aforesaid. And the 
 said for himself, his executors, administrators, and 
 
 assigns, agrees with the said Robert William Lowry, his 
 heirs and assigns, that he and his executors, administrators, 
 and assigns, will pay all county cess, charges, and assess- 
 ments, and the tenant's proportion of poor rate, which now 
 are, or hereafter may be charged upon the premises. And 
 the said Robert William Lowry reserves to himself, his 
 heirs, and assigns, all mines, minerals, quarries, the exclusive 
 right of all turbaries, bog. and timber, and a right to enter 
 and search for and cut the same, by himself, his servants, 
 ^"^ ?ssigns,- and the exclusive right to all game, fish, and 
 rabbits, and right for himself, his servants, and assigns, to 
 enter on the said premises to hunt, fish, and fowl, and the 
 
 tenant undertakes that he shall not do so, and that the 
 tenant shall preserve the same, and prosecute any person 
 trespassing in pursuit thereof. Tenant to grind all his oats, 
 whether grown on the premises or purchased, at the Manor 
 mills. And to give three days work of a horse and cart, and 
 three days work of a man in each year. And the tenant admits 
 that he has not given any money, or moneys worth, with 
 the express or implied consent of the landlord, on account 
 of his coming into this holding. For breach of any of tie 
 above conditions, or in the event of the b;inkruptcy or insol- 
 vency of the tenant, the said Robert William Lowry to re- 
 enter, and this tenancy to determine. 
 
 8338. Did you sign one of those forms? — I did not. 
 I signed another agreement, a modified one, I objected 
 to that agreement. 
 
 8337. What were the points in it that you objected 
 to? — The last clause I think was the most objection- 
 able, for it was not true. 
 
 8338. That is the clause " The tenant admits that 
 he has not given any money or moneys worth with the 
 express or implied consent of the landlord on account 
 of his coming into this holding " 1 — Yes, that was not 
 true, for he knew I had given money, and I brought 
 that agreement before Sii- Francis Brady. 
 
 8339. The cliairman of the county ? — Yes. 
 
 8340. What was the result?— I believe it killed 
 that document, for Mr. Lowry never presented one of 
 them to any of his tenants since. 
 
 8341. You say the rent of your holding is high?— 
 Yes. The Government valuation of one piece of it is 
 £2 5s, and the rent is £i, the valuation of another 
 portion is £2 5s, and the rent £4 10s. I took the 
 other portions at the rent I am paying, so that I can 
 raise no objection. 
 
 8342. Do you consider the Government valuation a 
 fair criterion of rent in this country ? — I do not. I 
 don't think it is a proper valuation — some land is 
 valued too low, and some too high. 
 
 8343. Was the land valued by any one for the 
 landlord before you got it ? — No. The system on the 
 Pomeroy estate is that the rent is put on by the agent. 
 He puts it on, sitting in the parlour, and without see- 
 ing the land at all. The first question is '•' You are 
 going to take the land, what rent do you offer"? 
 And whatever you offer — even if you offered £1 for 
 land that was not worth more than 10s., he would 
 insist on something more. 
 
 8344. I suppose there is no tenant-right on the pro 
 perty ? — Thei'e is. 
 
 8345. On the dropping of the lease, is tenant-right 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 287 
 
 admitted ? — No. There is no tenant-right on the ex- 
 piration of a lease. They admit a kind of tenant-rioht, 
 they let you sell, satisfying tbeni in the tenant, and 
 on condition that the tenant -will pay the rent they 
 put on. 
 
 8346. Baron Dowse. — The rent is raised ? — Always. 
 If the farm changed hands every five years, there 
 would still be a little addition made to the rent every 
 time. I know land on the estate that has not been 
 increased these sixty years, but whenever it changes 
 hands it is increased. 
 
 8347. Mr. Shaw. — No matter how often it changes 
 hands it is increased every time ? — Yes. 
 
 8348. Chairman. — Is there anything else that you 
 desu'e to mention 'i — No. I do not think I have any- 
 thing more to say. 
 
 8349. Are the tenants generally pretty well ofi" on 
 the property 1 — No. The tenants are going down, not 
 only on the Pomeroy property, but on Sir John 
 Stewart's estate also, and on the late Master Litton's 
 estate. They are all going down. 
 
 8350. Who has Master Litton's estate now ?■— Mr. 
 Shells has part, and Mr. Robert King has part. The 
 tenants greatly regret the loss of Master Litton. , 
 
 8351. They are not so comfortable now'? — No, 
 indeed. 
 
 8352. Is that owing to the bad seasons'? — Partly 
 owing to that ; but we may add the increase of rent. 
 The rents have been increased. They are always 
 creeping up. 
 
 8353. The O'Conor Dos". — You said you laid this 
 form of agreement before Sir Francis Brady. How 
 did the case come before him — were you served with 
 an ejectment '? — I bought the tenant-right of four acres 
 of land at .£35, and this paper was laid before me to 
 sign. I objected to sign it, and then I was brought 
 before Sir F. Brady. 
 
 8354. Was that by an ejectment ]— No, sir. 
 
 8355. I don't understand in what way the matter 
 came into court, you purchased the tenant-right of this 
 land '!— Yes. 
 
 8356. Did you go into possession of it? — I did. &p«. 24, ;sso. 
 The former tenant was processed for the rent, and I ,. rTT 
 went into court, for, having paid the money to this MulhoIIancl. 
 tenant, I thought I should be made the tenant. I 
 
 went into court, but Sir Francis Brady ruled that I 
 could not go into a tenancy behind the landlord's 
 back. 
 
 8357. And then you said he altered this agreement? 
 — No, I did not say that. I said this document came 
 up in court, and Mr. Lowry never presented it for signa- 
 ture to any of his tenants since. Whether Sir Francis 
 advised him privately to abandon it, I cannot tell. 
 
 _ 8358. Did he allow you to become tenant without 
 signing that or any other document 1 — He did not, but 
 in the course of a few years I paid the rent in the 
 name of the former tenant, and by-and-by Mr. Lowry 
 took me as tenant. 
 
 8359. Without signing any agreement '? — No. I 
 sig-ned another paper, a modified one. I objected to 
 that one. I thought it would make me a gamekeeper, 
 and that I would have to prosecute people if I saw 
 them trespassing. I also thought it very hard that if 
 I grew oats, or purchased any, that I should be forced 
 to take it to the Manor Mills to be ground ; and the 
 last sentence in it was an absurd falsehood, for Mr. 
 Lowry knew well that I had paid money and knew 
 the amount of it. 
 
 8360. Was the object of that clause to defeat your 
 tenant-right 1 — Yes, that is my opinion. 
 
 8361. Baron Dowse. — There is a clause in the Land 
 Act which renders a landlord liable, if it is proved 
 that the tenant gave money, or money's worth, with 
 his knowledge and consent, on coming into the holding 1 
 — Yes ; it was to defeat that. 
 
 8362. And for that purpose you were to put your 
 hand to a lie 1 — Yes. 
 
 8363. When was this ?— It was in 1874— about the 
 time of the election. I took an active part in favour 
 of Mr. Macartney, and there was a good deal of talk 
 about it. 
 
 Mr. William Gault, Ballyclare ; Mr. Joseph Laird, Ballyclare ; and Mr. Hugh Wilson, Larne, 
 Drumahoe, Deputation from Ballyclare Tenants' Association, examined. 
 
 8364. CHAiMiAX. — You are Chaii-man of the Bally- 
 clare Tenants' Association 1 — Mr. Gault. — I am. 
 
 8365. You attend as a deputation from them ? — As 
 part of the deputation. 
 
 8366. You are a tenant farmer ? — Yes. 
 
 8367. Under whom do you hold? — I hold under 
 three landlords ; Mr. James Owens, Mr. Torrens, and 
 Mrs. Simpson. 
 
 8368. How many acres altogether do you hold? — I 
 have about 120, Irish. 
 
 8369. Do they lie near together 1 — No ; what I 
 Jiold under Mr. Owens is at a considerable distance 
 from the other. 
 
 8370. On which of your holdings do you reside? — r 
 On what I hold under Mr. Torrens. ■ 
 
 8371. Is that j)roperty on which tenant-right 
 exists ? — It has been always acknowledged. 
 
 8372. Are there any restrictions on the general 
 custom of tenant-right? — No. There is no restriction 
 whatever on sale ; you have liberty to sell to the 
 highest and best bidder. 
 
 8373. Is there anything you wish to bring under 
 our notice ? — There is one thing I want to state as to 
 the usages or customs on the estate. Our people have 
 been in possession of the farm tliat I reside on for 
 iipwards of a hundred years^ I am sare. At the 
 expiration of every twenty-one years' lease, which was 
 the lease given in those times, the rent was raised. 
 About twenty years ago the property changed owners 
 and came into the hands of Mi'. Gtetty, who was 
 Mayor of Belfast at one time. He sent a valuator 
 and raised the r«nts fr^m 5s. to lO*. an aero all over 
 
 the estate, and' not only so, but charged us three 
 years' rent for a forty-one years' lease. We had 
 either to pay that or leave, the tenants having made 
 all the improvements from the time they got the farm 
 one hundred years ago. 
 
 8374. Mr. Shaw.^You were charged three years' 
 rent for the lease ? — Yes. 
 
 8375. As a fine, I suppose? — Yes. I may add 
 that when the valuator was sent down to value the 
 property my father went out to him. and pointed 
 out the improvements he had made, and also the im- 
 provements our neighbours had made. He said he 
 had nothing to do with that, that he must value 
 the land as he found it. , 
 
 8376. Chairman. — Tliis- was done by a former 
 owner of the estate '( — Yes. 
 
 8377. Not by any one of your present landlords 1 
 — No, it was done by Mr. Getcy . Mr. Torrens is now 
 the owner of the property. 
 
 8378. And that forty-one j^ears' lease is now 
 running ? — Yes. 
 
 8379. The estate was bought by Mr. Torrens, subject 
 to that as an existing lease ? — Yes. 
 
 8380. You could hardly expect him to make a 
 change in the rent? — No; the only change Mr. 
 Torrens made was that there used formerly to be a 
 hanging gale and he made as pa'y it. 
 
 8381. That, if you can manage to do, it, is not 
 altogether a bad thing for a tenant? — Well, no — and 
 nearly all of us are clear, I am happy to say. The 
 only reason 1 bring it before you is this : that if the 
 word "customs," Nvhich is tjio word in the Act of 
 
 Mr. William 
 Gault, Mr. 
 Joseph Laird, 
 and Mr. Hugh 
 Wilson. 
 
288 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Wilson, 
 
 Sept.ii,im. 1870, is retained ia the new Act of Parliament. I 
 ., ^^rrr am afraid it will affect me injuriously— for I have 
 
 Gault Mr!"" expended a great deal of money, and if that word 
 Joseph Laird, " customs " or " usages," is stUl in the Act, I will be 
 and Mr. Hugh compelled when my lease expires, to do the same 
 thing over again. 
 
 8382. You mean, to pay three years' rent ? — Yes, 
 for that was the usage we were compelled to submit 
 to, and if we are obliged to do it again, it would be a 
 serious thing to me to have to pay three years' rent 
 by way of fine. 
 
 8383. What do you propose should be done ?— Put 
 that word out of the Act altogether. 
 
 8384. Baron Dowse.— 1 may tell you as a lawyer, 
 that in my opinion your apprehension is unfounded — 
 the fact of your having paid a fine, twenty years ago, 
 does not make it & usage 1 — ^I thought it made it a 
 usage on that estate. 
 
 8385. Not at all— the words in the Act are, " the 
 usages prevalent in the province of Ulster, which are 
 known as, and in this Act intended to be included 
 under the denomination of, the Ulster tenant-right 
 custom." How could the fact of your having paid a 
 fine twenty years ago, become part of the Ulster 
 custom 1 — I am very glad to hear that. 
 
 8386. Mr. Shaw.— At the same time they might 
 when your lease expires, make you pay five years' 
 rent, as a fine for a new lease — there is nothing to 
 prevent that? — Nothing. I have expended £1,000 
 and more on reclamation, and it would be a serious 
 thing to me to have to pay a fine on renewal of my 
 lease — a very serious matter. 
 
 8387. Chaieman.— What have you to say for your- 
 self and the Association on the subject of the land 
 question ? — I don't think I have much more to say. 
 
 8388. Baron Dowse. — Have rents been increased 
 in your district ? — They have. 
 
 8389. On tenants from year to year ? — Yes. 
 
 8390. Where tenant-right prevails 1 — Yes. 
 
 8391. The effect of that is to injure tenant-right? — 
 No dou'ot. 
 
 8392. Mr. Shaw. — Tenants are alarmed about it ? — 
 They are. 
 
 8393. There is a feeling of unquietness and dis- 
 satisfaction in consequence 1 — Yes. There have been 
 no improvements done since 1 870 ; tenants will not 
 improve, for they apprehend the landlord may raise 
 the rent as soon as the improvement is made. 
 
 8394. Chairjian.— And they want to know first 
 how they will stand as to rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 8395. Do you think it would be well to appoint a 
 tribunal to determine rents 1 — Yes. I think it ought 
 to be left to arbitration. 
 
 8396. Baron Dowse. — Do you think the people 
 would be satisfied if the law wei-e that they should 
 
 hold their land at a fair rent, to be settled by arbi- 
 tration, not to be turned out as long as they paid the 
 rent, with a power of free sale ? — Yes, I think so. I 
 think that would satisfy tenants. I think that ought 
 to satisfy fair and reasonable men ; but unfortunately 
 as the law now stands, unless where a man has a lease, 
 his landlord can demand an increase of rent, and if he 
 does not pay, he must go. 
 
 8397. And they don't want to go 1 — They do not. 
 They submit rather than have to leave. 
 
 8398. They pay more than what they consider the 
 fair rent, rather than be disturbed ? — Yes. 
 
 8399. Mr. Shaw, — No matter what compensation 
 you might get by a land claim you would necessarily 
 leave a great deal behind you 1 — Yes. Another thing, 
 suppose I get a compensation in the shape of money 
 for disturbance, where would I go, or what would I 
 do with it 1 I may be allowed to make this further 
 statement : all the improvements that are done in our 
 county are done by the tenants ; even any improve- 
 ments carried out by the landlord are done at the 
 expense of the tenant. For instance, there is the 
 estate of Lord Templetown. He borrowed money 
 from the Board of Works, and improved his estate, 
 but he got the property revalued, and every man has 
 to pay an increased rent, and those that would not pay 
 got a notice to quit. Another thing I wish to men- 
 tion is the conduct of Mr. Clarke, the Chairman of 
 our Board at Antrim. Before the Act of 1870 was 
 passed, he served ejectments on all his tenants, 
 turned them out, and put them in as caretakers. 
 
 8400. Chairman. — Are they in possession noyrl — 
 They are in possession as caretakers. 
 
 8401. Paying rent? — Yes. He turned them out 
 while the Act was pending, and put them in as care- 
 takers. He put out their fires, and turned every 
 man, woman, and child out of their houses, and then 
 put them in again as caretakers. 
 
 8402. And they have remained in occupation ever 
 since ? — Yes, but as caretakers. 
 
 8403. Have any of them been turned out ? — Not one. 
 
 8404. Have any of them sold their holdings since? 
 — Not one ; those people and their predecessors had 
 done all the improvements, they had built the houses, 
 erected the fences, and reclaimed the land. 
 
 8405. He did this before the Land Act ?— Yes, 
 before the Act -wrs passed. 
 
 8406. Mr. Shaw. — You have gone on iniproving 
 without any help from your landlords ? — Not a shilling. 
 
 8407. You have been cultivating and improving the 
 land year by year ? — Yes ; but I would be very sorry 
 to lay out any money on it at present, until I get some 
 security. The want of security has put an end to im- 
 provement. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Lairb, c f Ballyclare, examined. 
 
 8408. Chairman. — You are a tenant-farmer? — I am. 
 
 8409. How many acres do you hold! — Fifty acres 
 statute measure. 
 
 8410. Under whom do you hold 1 — I hold twenty- 
 two acres under the Marquess of Donegall, in fee-farm, 
 twenty-two from year to year under Mr. Cornwall, of 
 Carrickfergus, and seven by lease under Mr. Ferguson. 
 
 8411. Is there anything that you are not satisfied 
 with as regards your position ? — I believe we ought 
 to have free light of sale in the first place. I know a 
 case where a tenant lost a great deal of money in con- 
 sequence of it being restricted to tenants on the pro- 
 perty. In my opinion, if improvements have been 
 made by the tenant, whatever they will fetch in the 
 market, the tenant should get the benefit of it. I 
 may refer to Holden's case — a tenant on the estate of 
 Mr. Dobbs. A solvent person offered him £800 for 
 the interest in his farm, but the landlord would not 
 let him take it. He was dispossessed, and brought 
 his claim in the Land Court, but the Chairman dis- 
 missed it. It came before the Judge on appeal, and 
 
 the Judge awarded him £450. The landlord gave 
 the farm to another tenant, but he could have given 
 it to Hunter for £800, and have made £350 by it. 
 As long as some landlords make a profit by putting 
 tenants out they certainly will do it. 
 
 8412. Baron Dowse. — You say that in that case 
 the tenant would have got £800 for the farm ? — Yes ; 
 he was offei-ed that sum by a solvent man. 
 
 8413. The landlord would not allow him to sell it 
 to that person ? — No. 
 
 8414. The case came into the Land Court? — Yes. 
 
 8415. And the Judge awarded £450 compensation? 
 — Exactly; the landlord paid that and selected a 
 tenant himself for the farm. 
 
 8416. And got £800 from that tenant?— I do not 
 know. He could have got £800 from Hunter. 
 
 8417. Has it always been the practice on that estate 
 that Mr. Dobbs should have the selection of the pur- 
 chaser 1 — I think that has been the practice since the 
 Jjand Act came into force. I never knew it before. 
 They are all adopting that system now of selecting 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 iSi) 
 
 tenants, and it restricts the value of tenant-riglit very 
 considerably 
 
 8418. Is that rule the only part of the system that 
 you complain of ? — No ; another great hardship is the 
 question of rent. That is the great difficulty. 
 
 8419. Raising rents ? — Yes. 
 
 8420. Is there any fixed rule as to the times when 
 rent may be raised 1 — No fixed rule. Whenever you 
 sell a farm the rent is raised, even if it had been raised 
 two years before. 
 
 8421. There is an increase of rent upon every 
 change of tenancy t — Yes ; and in fixing the rent they 
 never examine the subsoil or anything else ; they 
 just say it is worth so much, and the tenant must sub- 
 mit. I believe the landlord should get the fair value 
 of the farm, deducting the improvements the tenants 
 have made. During the last seven years, upon the 
 twenty-two acres I hold from year to year, I have ex- 
 pended about £500. That farm would let at a higher 
 rent now than I am paying for it, but that is because of 
 
 my improvements, and if my rent was increased it *■;''• -'■'■ i^^^o. 
 would be a rent upon my improvements. ,, -^yjiii^^i^ 
 
 8422. Baron Dowse. — The improvements are your Gaiilt, Mr. 
 propertj' and not the landlord's 1 — Yes, and the tenants Joseph Laird, 
 will never be satisfied until that is the law. As far a°^ ^'^- ^"2'' 
 as I know the landlords never lay out a farthing on ^^ ''^''"" 
 improvements. There is one small portion of land I 
 
 hold near Ballyclare ; there was a good landlord in 
 possession of it six years ago, but he sold it, and a Mr. 
 Lawson bought. I had a lease, fortunately for me, 
 but some of the other tenants were treated very badly. 
 
 8423. "Were the rents raised ? — Yes. (The witness 
 produced a number of receipts in proof of his state 
 ment.) 
 
 8424. You object to the rules by which landlords 
 restrict the tenant-right ? — I do. Likewise, the pre- 
 decessor of Mr. Lawson paid all the taxes, but Mr. 
 Lawson has compelled the tenants to pay all the taxes, 
 save one quarter of the poor rates. 
 
 8425. One quarter of the poor rates ? — Yes, that is 
 all he pays. 
 
 Mr. Hugh Wilson, Drumahoe, Lame, examined. 
 
 8426. Chairman. — You are a tenant farmer '! — I am. 
 
 8427. What is the case you wish to mention ] — 
 It is a great grievance the way land is raised on a 
 change of tenancy. If I was going to sell my farm 
 they would put on 5s. or 10s. an acre additional rent. 
 
 8428. Did that happen to you? — It happened to a 
 neighbour of mine. In my own case they brought a 
 valuator over the estate two years ago — a Mr. Waters 
 of Belfast — but it is a mere sham bringing a valuator, 
 for they will not stand to what the valuator makes it. 
 They put £5 more on me than Mr. Waters put on ; he 
 told me so himself. 
 
 8429. Who is your landlord 1 — Squire Agnew. 
 
 8430. Where does he live 1 — In France. 
 
 8431. Who is his agent 1— Mr. M'Neill of Larne. 
 I object to office rules and the arbitrary rents they put 
 on. I would have been content if even they stood to 
 what their own valuator said — though I had nothing 
 to say to him at all. 
 
 8432. Do you concur in the evidence given by Mr. 
 Laird and Mr. Gault?— I do. 
 
 8433. Yoii referred to the case of a neighbour of 
 yours — what was his rent raised to 1 — It was raised 
 to double. In 1867 his rent was £65 2s. 
 
 8434. HadhealeaseL- No. 
 
 8435. A tenant from year to year? — Yes; in 187.J 
 it was raised to £90 10«. Then when the man died, 
 his -widow proposed to sell, and £20 more was put on, 
 making the rent £110. 
 
 8436. Did she sell it?— She did. 
 
 8437. How much did she get ^-£600. 
 
 8438. For how many acres 1 — Forty-four acres — 
 that was about £14 per acre. 
 
 8439. She would have got a larger sum if the rent 
 had not been raised? — Certainly. The increase of 
 rent took at least £500 out of her pocket. 
 
 8440. What is the rent now?— 110. 
 
 8441. Is that, in your opinion, too much ? — I think 
 it is. The Government valuation is only £60. In 
 fact the farm would be dear at £2 per acre. 
 
 8442. What sort of land is it ? — It is a wet level- 
 
 lying farm, and there is no fall for drainage — you can- 
 not drain it. 
 
 8443. Where is it situated? — Within a mile of 
 Larne. 
 
 8444. Was this on the estate of Mr. Agnew ? — No ; 
 this was part of the estate of Mr. Barclay of Larne — 
 he has bleach-works there. 
 
 8445. Was it he raised the rent ? — It was. He 
 said as much as that he had done away with that 
 tenant-right. 
 
 8446. The effect of raising the rent is to reduce the 
 tenant-right ? — Decidedly. 
 
 8447. The way to prevent that is to secure that 
 the rent shall be a fair rent 1 — Yes ; and fixity of 
 tenure. 
 
 8448. Fixity of tenure, fair rent, and free sale ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 8449. Do you think that would satisfy everybody ? 
 — I think it would. 
 
 8450. And nothing less would satisfy them ? — I 
 think .not. I think that is what the tenants ought to 
 have. A man is not going to lay out his capital on a 
 farm, and then have the agent come and put 10s. an 
 acre additional rent on it. 
 
 8451. According to your experience is it a usual 
 thing to raise the rent on a change of tenancy ? — It is 
 always done. On Lord Antrim's estate there never 
 is a change of tenancy, but there is five or ten shillings 
 an acre put on. 
 
 8452. Is that near Glenarm? — Yes. 
 
 8453. I suppose one of the objects of the Association 
 is to stop that ?— Yes ; if we can. We are willing to pay 
 a fair rent — a rent we can live by ; but, with the way 
 landlords are increasing rents now, it is impossible that 
 a farmer could live. 
 
 8454. If you had the land at a fair rent you could 
 live ? — Yes ; but with the American competition and 
 the rents we have to pay, and taxes of every kind, 
 the farmer will have to live very sparingly or he won't 
 be able to get on. 
 
 The inquiry was adjourned till the following 
 morning. 
 
 ■2 P 
 
290 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 25, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 M'JMnrtiy. 
 
 THIRTEENTH DAY— SATURDAY, 25th SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 The Inquiry was resumed at eleven o'clock. 
 
 Present: — The Eight Hon. the Earl of Bessboeough, Chairman; Right Hon. Baeon Dowse, 
 The O'CoNOE Don, Aethxje MAcMoRROuciH Kavanac;h, Esq., d.l., and William Shaw, Esq., m.p. ' 
 
 Mr. William M'MaRTKYj Eglinton-place, Belfast, examined. 
 
 ■Did you register the trees? 
 
 8455. Chaieman. — What profession or business are 
 you? — I had a farm atone time, and am a mechanic 
 by trade. 
 
 8456. You were a farmer ?— I was, for forty years 
 or more. 
 
 8457. Have you given up farming 1 — Yes ; I am 
 now living with my son, Dr. M'Murlry, in Belfast. 
 
 8458. What led to your giving up your farm'? — 
 My family all having gone away, and my being left 
 alone, was one reason ; but if I might mention mat- 
 ters that took place before 1870, I could give other 
 reasons. 
 
 84.')9. Wliere was the farm 1 — It was at Ballynure. 
 I held it under Mr. Conway R. Dobbs, of Ca.stle Dobbs, 
 near Carrickfergus. I got my farm as part of a mav- 
 riii^e portion with my wife. While my father-in-law 
 lived I paid the rent to him. My name was not in 
 the rent book. When the lease fell I was noticed to 
 give, up possession. I did so. The agent reserved seven 
 acres from the fifteen acres I had held, and allowed 
 me to hold nine acres, the remainder. He charged me 
 £16 10s. for 2 1 acres of it, being .£12 over the original 
 rent. 
 
 8460. Was this land near Belfast 1 — It was twelve 
 statute miles from Belfast. Afterwards I said I 
 would sell the remainder, and the agent told me I was 
 quite at liberty to do so, that all I had to do was to 
 please Mr. Dobbs in the tenant. I asked Mr. Stewart 
 would he give me a letter to that effect. 
 
 8461. Mr. Stewart was the agent 1 — Yes; he said 
 " No, you have Mr. Dobbs' word, and you have my 
 word, and that is enough." That was all very well ; 
 but in the course of a few days I got word that a 
 neighbour was to get the place if I sold it. That 
 neighbour, knowing he was to get the place, would 
 only give me £100, while another purchaser was wil- 
 ling to give me £200. I then said I would hold on. 
 I expected to have got a notice to quit. However, 
 1870 came round and that quieted things down a 
 little. Afterwards 1876 came. My family had left 
 the place, and I was alone, and I came to Belfast to 
 live with my son. I sold the farm to a neighbour 
 for £270, but by the rise of rent to the man I sold it 
 to I lost £20 out of the X270. 
 
 8462. You had to return £20 out of the purchase- 
 money ? — Yes j in consequence of the rise of rent after 
 the sale. 
 
 8463. What was the rise 1 — Five shillings an acre, 
 I think. 
 
 8464. Do you consider that was contrary to the 
 practice of the estate 1 — It is only a late rule to raise 
 rents on a sale ; for I have been on the estate since 
 1819, and know all the usages. I have been under 
 iour different agents— Mr. Park, Mr. Forsyth, Mr. 
 Burleigh, and Mr. Stewart. 
 
 8465. The usage, you say, ujj to that time, had not 
 been to raise rent on a change of tenancy ? — Certainly 
 not. I have been at sales forty years ago — public and 
 advertised sales — and there never was a word about 
 the landlord interfering with the rent because of a 
 change of tenancy. 
 
 8466. Is it the introduction of a restriction on 
 tenant-right that you complain of 1 — Yes ; I complain 
 of the introduction of a new practice which restricts 
 tenant-right. 
 
 8467. Is there any other grievance ? — Yes ; the roads 
 and waters being measured in with the land ; also the 
 restriction on cutting trees — trees that I planted 
 myself, and being hauled up for dressing them or cut- 
 ting them down. 
 
 84G8. Mr. Kavanagh.- 
 — No, sir ; I did not. 
 
 84G9. Chaieman. — I suppose there was no written 
 agreement under which you held ?— None, sir. ■ ' 
 
 8470. You were holding on on the terms of the 
 former lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 8471. Was there a reservation of timber in that 
 lease? — I could not say. My father-in-law had the 
 lease. However, in reference to that, I had two Lro- 
 thers-in-lavf living under the same lease, and they were 
 not annoyed in any way, while I was. 
 
 8472. You mean they were not treated in the same 
 way that j»u were, as to giving up possession, or part 
 of their land being taken from them ? — No, sir. 
 
 8473. Why was portion of your holding taken from 
 you 1 — It is near the village and it was taken for town- 
 piirks. 
 
 8474. For townparks I suppose it would let at a. 
 much higher rate 1 — Of course it would, double. 
 
 8475. Has there been much rising of rent on that 
 estate 'i — It is lising. I know one man whose rent 
 was raised twice, and was tried to be raised a third 
 time in the inside of twenty years. 
 
 8476. Why was the rent raised 1 — It was raised on 
 the improvements. 
 
 8477. Do you mean upon his own improvements? 
 — Certainly, on his own improvements', I never heard 
 of Mr. Dobbs laying out a shilUng on the estate. 
 
 8478. Has there been any increase of rent made on 
 any of the tenants during the past year 1 — Ye.s, there 
 were ten, if not twelve, who were raised from four to 
 seven shillings an acre for the last two gales— when 
 other landlords were reducing their rents from fifteen 
 to twenty-five per cent. 
 
 8479. Had some of those been improving tenants! 
 —Yes, very. 
 
 8480. What had they done?— One of them, Robert 
 M'Nair, held a piece of ground which had formerly 
 been a turf bog ; he improved it, drew soil upon it, 
 and made a meadow of ground that had not produced 
 a blade of grass before. His rent was raised, and when 
 he remonstrated and said the increase was extravagant 
 or exorbitant, I am told Mr. Stewart replied — that he 
 should not have improved the place. I did not hear 
 that conversation, but I am told that was what was 
 said and I believe it to be true. 
 
 8481. You complained that the roads are meas- 
 ured in the holdings? — Yes. 
 
 8482. Has that always been the case on the estate? 
 — As far as I know it has been. 
 
 8483. Then that is not a new rale ? — No, not that 
 I am aware of. 
 
 8464, How riiany tenants are there on the estate 
 altogether? — Between 120 and 130 — there are not 130 
 I am sure. 
 
 8485. As a general rule are they large or small 
 holdings 1 — ^They would not average twenty acres — 
 they might average fifteen acres. 
 
 8486. Are any of them let on leases ? — I believe 
 there are at present four leases on the estate, the lives 
 in them I am told are very old, I know one of them is 
 over eighty years of age. 
 
 8487. Do you know the acreage of the estate 1 — 
 I would say it is about 2,000 Irish acres. 
 
 8488. Do you know the average rent jier acre ? — 
 About thirty shillings. The rent of some of the hold- 
 ings is £2 per acre. I think none of it is set below £1 
 except the four leaseholds. 
 
 8489. Has there been a large rise in the rental 
 of the estate since you first knew it? — Very large. 
 It is doubled, I believe, since I first knew it. I can show 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 291 
 
 you from Hstory that it was about £300 a ycai-, 150 
 years ago — now I believe it is pretty uear £4,000, if 
 not altogether. 
 
 8490. Is it near a market ? — There is no market 
 town on the estate ; there is a fair twice in the year 
 in the village of Ballynure. 
 
 8491. Is it the proximity of Belfast that has in- 
 creased the value of the property 1 — That has helpcil 
 it, I believe. 
 
 8492. How uear is it to Belfiist I— Twelve and three 
 quarter miles statute;. 
 
 8493. What sort were the houses when you first 
 knew the propei'ty, were they thatched generally 1 — I 
 believe there is not one thatched house on the estate 
 now for ten that were upon it forty years ago, there is 
 not one thatched house, except some low cabins. 
 
 8494. Are the houses on the property good now f — 
 Pretty good in general. 
 
 8495. Are they in good order 1 — They are — the 
 property is improved very much since 1847. 
 
 8496. Were they built by the tenants ( — Yes, every 
 stone of them. 
 
 8497. Without any assistance from the landlord? — 
 Without any assistaarce. There were a few tenants 
 that through the means of the Church minister, the ■ 
 Eev. Mr. Falloon, who seemed to have some influence 
 with Mr. Dobbs, went to church for a while and got 
 some slates and timber for their houses — I know three 
 or four that did that, but when the}^ got that done 
 they left the church again. 
 
 8498. Mr. Shaw. — They were Presbyterians I 
 suppose ? — Yes. 
 
 8499. Chairman. — You. said in one part of your 
 evidence that you were only speaking from what you 
 had heard, are we to understand that in the rest of 
 your testimony you are speaking from, your own 
 knowledge 1 — Yes, sir. The part of my evidence that 
 I only heard was as to what passed between the agent 
 and Robert M'Nair. I wish to mention I had four 
 small houses in the village, that I gave £60 for ; the 
 lease fell in, and he would not even give me the chance 
 of refusing them at an increased rent — he would not 
 give them to me at all. I bought another house at 
 £70, which had a five or six years' lease to lam at £5 
 a year rent, and when the lease fell in he raised my 
 rent to ten guineas, a house that did not cost Mr. 
 Dobbs one penny piece. 
 
 8500. Was that a house in the village ? — Yes. 
 
 8501, Not with land? — No. A number of houses Sept 2S,ibs9. 
 in the village are held by farmers, who pay a high rent 
 
 for their land, £2 an acre. 
 
 8502. You had a lease of this house?— I had. 
 
 8503. Baron Dowse. — It was a house in the village 
 of Ballynure, with no land attached to it ? — No land. 
 
 8504. That is not part of the matter of our inquiry, 
 it was essentially a town holding? — I am sorry for it. 
 It is a village of about 300 population. I wrought 
 there as a general mechanic for forty years, and by it 
 I raised my family, not by my farm". 
 
 8505. The O'Conor Don.— You complain that your 
 rent was raised on the occasion of the sale of your 
 holding ? — ^Yes. 
 
 8506. How long before had the rent remained with- 
 out any alteration? — As far as I was concerned it was 
 under no alteration from the time he took the seven 
 acres from me up to the time I sold it. 
 
 '8507. Was there' a rise put on it when the lease 
 dropped? — No, sir, because the part left me was not as 
 well worth 30 shillings an acre, which was the rent 
 put on it, as the part he took from me was worth £2 
 an acre, for the part he left me was partly bog, and 
 the portion he took from me was the best part of the 
 land. 
 
 8508. And did they put on the part they left yqu 
 the same rent as had previously been on the whole ? 
 ^-No, sir, it was less. . 
 
 8509. When had the lease been made — was it ^n 
 old lease ? — I could not exactly say. I know that my 
 father-in-law was living on it before I joined the family 
 in 1827. 
 
 8510. Then the lease was at all events older than 
 1827 ? — Yes. The part the agent took from me was 
 the best, because it was more convenient to the village 
 and better land. 
 
 8511. He left you the land that was not so con- 
 venient to the village, and therefore not of so much 
 value ? — Yes. 
 
 8512. You were left that .portion at a lower rent t 
 — Yes. What I want to convey to the gentlemen 
 present, is that every one of my brothers-in-law were 
 situated in the same way, but were not minded. I 
 might give the reason why I was treated difierently 
 from them — it was because I refused to be driven into 
 the polling booth like a sheep. I '^^oted as I chose. I 
 was told by the bailiff '^you should not have voted 
 against Mr. Dobbs." 
 
 Mr. William 
 M'lluitiy. 
 
 Mr. John Wallace, Alta Hammond, near Carrickfergus, examined. 
 
 8513. Chairman. — Are you a tenant farmer?— I 
 am. 
 
 8514. Who is your landlord ? — Mr. Raphael. 
 
 8515. How much land do you hold? — 116 acres 
 statute. 
 
 ■ 8516. Do you hold land under anybody else besides 
 Mr. Raphael?— No, sir. 
 
 8517. Are there any special rules on the estate 
 which in any way restrict the Ulster tenant-right ? — . 
 Permit me to explain : this estate formerly belonged 
 to the late Mr. Ker, m.p. for Downpatrick. There 
 were no special restrictions under his management. 
 
 8518. Baron Dowse. — Tenant-right prevailed on 
 the estate during his time without restriction ?— Yes. 
 
 8519. Chairman. — When was it sold? — It was sold 
 in the year previous to the passing of the I^and Act. 
 
 8520. Who became the purchaser? — The estate was 
 sold in six difierent portions. 
 
 8521. And bought by six different people ? — Bought 
 by six different people. It was sold in townlands. 
 
 8522. And Mr. Raphael purchased one part? — He 
 purchased two townlands.- 
 
 8623. On this part that you hold, has ^ihcre been 
 any change as to the tenant-right ? — No, sir, there 
 have not been any sales or anything of that kind 
 since. But on some other of the divisions there have. 
 We were served with a notice to quit when he 
 purchased the estate, and an increase of rent took 
 
 Jfr. John 
 
 Wallace. 
 
 place on all the divisions except one. I may mention 
 there were no less than three Churches represented — 
 Church of England, Roman Catholic, and Presbyterian 
 — among the purchasers of the property; and they all 
 raised the rent, except the Roman Catholic; he allowed 
 the tenants to hold for ten years without raising the 
 rent. The others all raised the rents very much, and 
 this last year that gentleman — Mr. Murphy of Lurgan, 
 ' has granted his tenants, without fine, leases in per- 
 petuity at rents fully as low as those at which they 
 held previously from year to year. 
 
 8524. Did he raise the rents when he gave the leases 
 generally speaking ?^He did. 
 
 8525. How much? — I could not say, but I know of 
 one case in which, according to Griffith's valuation, it 
 would be about equal mine, and his rent now is just 
 the same as mine, that is .£2 per acre. 
 
 8526. You do -not know how much the man paid, 
 befdre ? — I could not tell. 
 
 8527. Baron Dowse. — I suppose he was glad to get 
 the perpetuity? — Of course.- I think'previously hewas 
 paying 34s. an acre, and that the rise in consequence 
 of the lease brought it up to 40s. Mr. Bicwer's 
 father purchased a portion, and he and -Mr. Raphael 
 made the greatest rise in the rents. ■ 
 
 8528. Mr. Bigger's father?— Yes, he is now -dead. 
 
 8529. Did they raise the reiits, when they bought, 
 on the tenants then in occupation?^ — Mr. Biwoer did 
 
 2pr 
 
29: 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2'., 1 
 
 Mr. John 
 Wallace. 
 
 not rais'j them for some little time, but I think he 
 raised them for this reason that he told me himself 
 he would not settle what the rent would be till it was 
 known what the issue of the land question would be. 
 Then afterwards he fixed the rent when he knew the 
 new law. The first thing he did was : there was a 
 widow who said it was impossible that she could pay 
 the rent he had put on. He gave her notice of eject- 
 ment. That -was one of the first cases tried in this 
 country. 
 
 85.30. Mr. Shaw.— What was the result of it ?— 
 She obtained £400 on a farm of forty acres. 
 
 8531. And she was piit out? — She was. 
 
 8532. The O'Oonoe Don.— What di-d he do with 
 the land 'i — He got a person to take it at the £400, 
 and raised the rent ; and it is now £2 10s. an acre, I 
 think. 
 
 8533. Is that the English acre? — No, the Irish 
 acre. I was a witness on that trial — I and another 
 neighboiu'. We were asked what we thought the 
 land was worth at a fair rent, and we both agreed 
 that it was worth £2 an acre. 
 
 8534. Has the rent been raised twice since he 
 purchased 1 — I thrak it has, but I am not sure about 
 that. I am informed, on good authority, that the 
 present rent is £2 10s. per acre. 
 
 8535. Who has Mr. Bigger's property now? — He 
 has left that portion to two daughters, and Mr. 
 Joseph Bigger, the member for Cavau, is the agent. 
 
 8536. Does he not do something to get the rent 
 lowered ? — Well, he was very generous this season, 
 and gave them a reduction of twenty per cent, on the 
 half year, and I understand he is going to give them 
 teu per cent, on the present half year, which is to be 
 paid next week. 
 
 S-'iST. They would rather have the rents lowered I 
 suppose ? — Yes, sir. That person I i-eferred to as 
 having been put out has been succeeded now by 
 another widow. The husband of the successor died, 
 and left a widow and family — rather in diificulties 
 too. Another farmer, on the same estate — a young 
 mil II — died this season, and has left a widow and 
 family. She got permission from Mr. Bigger — and I 
 must say, according to the rules of Mr. Ker's estate, 
 he did not comply with them, for he restricted this 
 person. She wished to sell the farm, being a widow, 
 and unable to manage it, and got his permission to 
 sell it by private sale, but he restricted her to £10 
 per acre — anything more that she got (I had it from 
 good authority) was to go to the OYners. However, 
 when the time of sale came, no person came forward, 
 they thought it far too dear, and that no solvent 
 tenant could pay the rent. 
 
 8538. Was that this year?— This year. 
 
 8539. And this was done by Mr. Joseph Bigger, 
 M.p. ? — Yes. The widow is left destitute, for the 
 tenant-i-ight is worth nothing with the increase of 
 rent. 
 
 8540. She cannot work it herself? — No, it would 
 be impossible for her. I think it would be impossible 
 for anyone to work a profit out of it at the rent that 
 has been put on it. 
 
 8541. The rent is too high? — It is. It has been 
 raised on a fLirm of forty-one acres, Irish, upwards of 
 £20. As far as I can calculate there has been an 
 increase in the rental of that estate, comprising about 
 4,000 acres, of nearly £1,000 a year. 
 
 8542. That is on the whole estate? — On the whole 
 estate. 
 
 8543. What per-centage of rise would you say was 
 on it?— I would say about twenty per cent. I was 
 raised twenty per cent myself. 
 
 8544. Mr. SiiAW. — Within ten years? — Yes. 
 When the late Mr. Ker came into j)ossession of the 
 estate he had a revaluation, and what we thought 
 were very sharp rents were put on, but these were in 
 addition to them. I think it a very great rise 
 twenty guineas a year. I have been raised, and am 
 paying it these ten years. 
 
 8.545. What was your previous rent? — £118 15s. 
 
 My present rent is £140 2s. 9d. It is not very easy 
 for people to stand such rents as that, and then what 
 security have we that they won't be raised still higher 
 to-morrow. 
 
 8546. You feel the twenty guineas a pressure, and 
 you think the landlord ought not to have the power 
 of raising the rent any higher ? — I do. 
 
 8547. It is charging you a rent on your own im- 
 provements ? — Yes. There was something special in 
 the case of my farm. It had been held previously by 
 a gentleman who lived at a distance, and some of the 
 persons he had in the management of the farm set fire 
 to the place and the whole concern was burned, and 
 some of his own horses and other property were de- 
 stroyed. It stood there ten or twelve years with 
 these blackened walls, till there was a prospect of a 
 new road being made, and the agent told the tenant 
 that he must either put the place in tenantable order 
 or sell it, for that it was a shame to see it in that con- 
 dition with a new road passing through it. The 
 tenant preferred to sell, and as it was an extension of 
 the farm I then held I bought it and made the im- 
 provements. 
 
 8548. You set the house to rights ? — Yes. I pulled 
 down the old house and built a new one, and here is 
 the consequence of it. And the increase of rent is not 
 the only evil, because the law steps in and increases 
 our taxation, both for poor rates and county cess, if 
 we improve. My valuation has been increased so 
 much that I pay nearly double the county cess now 
 that I did when I came in. 
 
 8549. What was your rent when you got it first ? — 
 35s. an acre. Now I pay nearly double Griffith's 
 valuation, which I think is a fair standard. 
 
 8550. And your rates are nearly double what they 
 were when you commenced ? — Yes. The difference is 
 from £70 to £125 for poor rates and county cess. 
 
 8551. You don't mean to say you paid that much ? — 
 No; but that was Griffith's valuation. I wish to say I 
 think it is unjust to restrict a tenant to a certain sum in 
 selling his tenant-right, if he could get more. I saw 
 a case worthy of notice, where a farm under Lord 
 Bangor was advertised for sale a fortnight ago. It 
 was advertised in the newspapers, and the advertise- 
 ment was to the efiect that the buyer was not to give 
 more than £5 per acre. 
 
 8552. Mr. Kavanagh. — On whose estate was that! 
 — Lord Bangor's. I know the farm very well. 
 
 8553. Mr. Shaw. — You think there should be no 
 restriction 1 — I do. Why should there be any restric- 
 tion ? Why should not the purchaser give the out- 
 going tenant what the tenant-right was worth ? I see 
 no diflference between restricting the price of that and 
 the price of a cow. 
 
 8554. Baron Dowse. — The people in your part of 
 the world make the improvements themselves? — 
 Almost all. On Mr. Ker's estate, in the year of the 
 famine, he, unlike other landlords, refused to make 
 any abatement in his rent, and I believe there was 
 a special reason for it ; but he said that he would give 
 assistance in draining and fencing, and so he did. He 
 gave id. a peich, and a good many of the tenants took 
 advantage of that. The Marquis of Downshire said 
 that he abated £15,000 of his rents that year. 
 
 8555. Chairman. — Are there any small tenants ou 
 this property ? — There are, a good many. Their rents 
 have been raised very much indeed. 
 
 8556. On change of tenancy? — No, sir; on the 
 change of landlords. 
 
 8557. Baron Dowse. — When a new landlord comes 
 in he charges a little extra i-ent ? — Yes. I do not see 
 what claim he had upon us. I am quite sure that I 
 expended £1,000 on my farm in buildings and other 
 improvements of n, pe;rmanent character in twenty years, 
 and I can't see what claim the new landlord had to them. 
 For instance, it was known that Mr. Ker was becoming 
 embarrassed, and there was an eff"ort made to soo if 
 the tenants upon his estate, and his friends, could be- 
 tween them raise as much money as would be sufficient 
 to stave ofi" his most pressing claims at a particular 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 293 
 
 time. This was about a year pievious to the sale of 
 the estate, and they were asked to lend any money 
 they had to spare at four per cent. A good many of 
 them did so. I offered to lend £500. But the en- 
 deavour did not succeed, and the estate had to be sold 
 and Mr. Eaphael takes £500 out of my pocket and 
 puts it into his own ; that is, he takes the interest of it 
 from me, when he increases my rent twenty guineas 
 a year. 
 
 8558. You might as well liave given him yoiu' £500 ? 
 — Just as well, for he takes the interest of it from me 
 every year, and if I was to sell my tenant right to-mor- 
 row I would get £500 less for it. That is not very 
 comfortable. 
 
 8559. The O'Conor Don.— Would you like to have 
 an opportunity of purchasing your holding 1 — I often 
 thought that if we had had the benefit of the Bright 
 clauses we might have bought, and given ten years' 
 purchase more for it, from the rise of rent we have 
 had. 
 
 8560. You could have given a larger figure for it 
 than it was bought for 1 — Yes. 
 
 8561. And wovild you have done it if you had the 
 chance of getting help from Government ?— Yes. Some 
 of them did it with very little help. 
 
 8562. You would be very glad to have bought 
 yours? — I would. 
 
 8563. Is there any other matter you wish to bring 
 before us ? — In reference to the Land Act as it stands, 
 you will observe that except in cases of eviction it is 
 of no use to us, for you see Mr. Bigger raises his rent, 
 and makes such rules as he likes, quite contrary to the 
 practice on Mr. Ker's estate, I was brought up on Lord 
 Londonderry's estate, there the tenant-right maybe sold 
 by public auction, and on Lord O'Neill's estate a farm 
 was lately sold by the sheriff by public auction, and 
 the purchaser made a deposit, and paid the auction 
 fees, £10, but Lord O'Neill would not allow the bar- 
 gain to stand, and the man had to go into court to re- 
 cover his deposit. Now, what good did that do Lord 
 O'Neill "i About the same time there was a sale on Lord 
 Londonderry's estate, and there was no trouble about 
 it. If all the landlords were like Lord Londonderry 
 and Lord Downshire there would be no agitation and 
 no trouble. 
 
 8564. Chaiemax. — Would you be satisfied if you 
 went back to the rules you had under Mr. Ker ? — We 
 would ; that is, if we had any sectirity. 
 
 8565. Baron Dowse. — The fact of the rules being 
 altered shows that there is a want of security 1 — It 
 does. We have no security for a single day. Another 
 point in reference to the Land Act, 1 think when we 
 are brought into court against a landlord we ought to 
 have some other tribunal than a single person. We 
 ought to have either a jury, or an award by disinter- 
 ested and knowing parties. I don't say that any of the 
 Chairmen are partial, but I say they are not acquainted 
 with farming. 
 
 8566. There ought, you think, to be someone sitting 
 alongside with them, some person acquainted with 
 farming, the Chairman to be the judge of law, and the 
 other person the judge of facts 1 — Yes. There is another 
 thing I wish to mention. I have observed that when 
 a Chairman makes a decision, it is upon the state of 
 the farm as it is, and the rent as it is. Now, suppos- 
 ing a person is brought into court on such a rent as 
 Mr. Bigger has put on, don't you gee he would not get 
 a penny for his tenant-right. I think the landlord 
 ought to be compelled to give the tenant fair compen- 
 sation for his tenant-right at a fair rent, not at all 
 calculated at the rack-rents we are paying. I hope 
 you understand what I mean. 
 
 8567. The O'Conok Don.— Would it not be in the 
 power of the tenant on an estate so circumstanced to 
 come in under the ordinary law of the country, and 
 not under the Ulster custom, and claim compensation 
 for disturbance 1 — ISuppose he did, I do not think what 
 he would get would ever compensate him. 
 
 8568. Baron Dowse. — He would not get, in the 
 jhape of compensation for disturbance, even at the 
 
 highest scale allowed by the Act, half what he would Sept. 28, iseo 
 get under the Ulster tenant-right if it was unre- ^j^ jq^^ 
 stricted 1 — Not half. Wallace. 
 
 8569. Por that reason the Ulster tenants when they 
 come into court always prefer to claim under the 
 Ulster custom 1 — Yes. But there is one thing I wish 
 to impress upon you. There is a great outcry by 
 certain landlords, who are taking a prominent part at 
 this time, saying that tenants ruin themselves by 
 giving too much for tenant-right. The fact is, where 
 there are estates like Lord Londonderry's or Lord 
 Downshire's, it is not so much for any great advantage 
 the tenant is likely to get from the landlord, nor even 
 from the low rent, as from the idea of security and 
 j)eace the tenant has when he gets a farm upon those 
 estates ; the knowledge that so long as he pays his 
 rent he won't be disturbed, nor have his rent u.nduly 
 increased — he has that sense of security — that is what 
 the tenants want ; and for the sake of that they often 
 
 - give twice as much as they ought to do for the 
 tenant-right. 
 
 8570. To be under a good landlord ? — Just so. 
 
 8571. Mr. Shaw. — If you could purchase your 
 holding in perpetuity, would you give a good price 
 for it 1 — Yes, sir. I will tell you two instances that 
 illustrate the system of landlord and tenant. About 
 the time the change in the law in reference to tithes 
 took place, even upon Mr. Ker's estate, where we 
 were all upon the best of terms, when I was paying 
 my rent to the agent I said, " I imderstand that under 
 the new law the tenants are not to pay the tithe." 
 His reply was, " Don't you know that where there is 
 no lease there is no law." I said, " I do know that to 
 my cost." 
 
 8572. That was before the Land Act 1— Yes. 
 There was another case I may mention for illustration. 
 I wished to have a road changed, and I asked Mr. 
 Anketell to come and see the place, it was very incon- 
 venient the way I had to get to the main road, and 
 that I would show him a way I had planned for im- 
 proving it. Mr. Anketell came with the sub-agent, 
 and I showed them what I wished to do. I have a 
 neighbour who has his farm in perpetuity, and when 
 I pointed out to Mr. Anketell what I wished, , he 
 observed that my neighbour had a very good road — 
 and he said to the sub-agent, " Here is a very good 
 road — let him come in here." 
 
 8573. Meaning that you should make use of the 
 road your neighbour had 1 — Yes. " Oh," said the sub- 
 agent, "this is a particular man, he would not allow 
 that, he has a deed of his land." " I hate those deeds," 
 said Mr. Anketell, " they make a fellow put his back 
 up." 
 
 8574. The O'Conor Don.— Yoa would like to be 
 able to put your back up 1 — I would. Another thing 
 I think unfair in the Land Act is in reference to the 
 scale of compensation. It is not right that one tenant 
 should have an advantage over another. Why should 
 a small tenant get more compensation for improve- 
 ments than a lai'ge one t 
 
 8575. Baron Dowse. — He does not get more com- 
 pensation for improvements — he may get more for 
 disturbance in proportion than a large tenant 1 — Yes. 
 Why should he get more 1 
 
 8576. The reason of that was, it was assu.med that 
 a large farmer was more independent than a small one 
 and better able to take care of himself? — Well, sir, 
 that is a mistake — it is quite the reverse. 
 
 8577. It is nothing to you, tenant-right people, 
 what compensation is given for disturbance — you go 
 on your Ulster tenant-right 1 — Yes. There is another 
 thing I observe in the Land Act — I see so many ex- 
 ceptions and provisos and reservations in favour of the 
 landlord that there seems to be very little left for the 
 
 tenant. What I wish especially to refer to is this 
 
 that it is to be taken into account, in awarding com- 
 pensation, how long a tenant has enjoyed his own im- 
 provements. I think that is an unfair principle to 
 have in an Act of Parliament. Whv should a land- 
 
294 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 I, Sept. 25, laSO. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Wallace. 
 
 himself of. that which ■ is another 
 
 lord ever possess 
 man's property ? 
 
 8578. Mr. Shaw. — You might reverse the prin- 
 ciple, and say the landlords have had the advantage 
 long enough 1 — That is very often said, sir. Gentle- 
 men, I hope the strictures I see in one of the Bel- 
 fast papers don't apply to you. I read an article 
 in the Morning News to-day. 
 
 8579. What is your opinion. From what you have 
 seen yourself do you believe the statements in that 
 article 1 — ^No, sir, I do not. The paper says you are 
 receiving land agents and landlords with open arms, 
 but that you refuse to hear the tenants. 
 
 8580. Baron Dowse. — "Would j^ou be surprised to 
 hear that since we came to Belfast we have examined 
 forty-five tenant-farmers, six land agents, and eight 
 landlords 1 — I did not know that, sir. I understand 
 there is a tenant on Mr, Dobb's estate waiting to 
 give evidence to-day, and I think the rules of his 
 estate will be laid before you. That they are not 
 
 to build houses without permission, nor to pull down 
 old houses without permission, and he has also made 
 his tenants come to an agreement that they will not 
 ask the landlord to pay the half of the county cess. 
 8581., Is that Mr. Dobbs ?— Yes, sir. - 
 
 8582. He does not allow buildings to be erected 
 without his jDermission being obtained 1-^'Eo, sir. The 
 reason is that when a man builds a house the va- 
 luation of the farm is increased, and that adds to 
 the taxes on the estate. 
 
 8583. The landlord has to i^ay half the poor rate 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 8584. But the tenant of the farm might want 
 badly to build a house? — He might, sir. There is 
 another thing I want to say with regard to office 
 rules — they are a bad principle — for it makes the 
 absolute will of the landlord or agent to be the 
 law, we must submit, and sinless you can protect 
 us from vexatious rules and excessive rents your 
 Act of ]?arliament will be of no use. 
 
 Mr Mamia 
 M'Grogan. 
 
 Mr. Manus M'Grogan, Oastledawson, county Londonderry, examined. 
 
 8585. Chairman. — Are you a tenant-farmer ? — 
 Yes, sii-. 
 
 8586. On whose property 1 — On the Dawson estate. 
 It is under a middleman I live. 
 
 8587. Who is the owner 1 — A Mr. Burrows of Cork. 
 
 8588. He is the middleman ? — Yes. 
 
 8589. He is dead lately, is not he t— Yes ; but 
 his son succeeded him. 
 
 8590. Mr. Dawson is the owner of the estate f. — 
 Yes. 
 
 8591. How many acres do you hold 1 — Twenty 
 acres, statute. 
 
 8592. What rent do you pay ? — £35 a yeai-. 
 
 8593. Does Mr. Burrows reside on the estate ? — No 
 sir, he resides in Cork. 
 
 8594. Do you often see him ?— Once a year. 
 .8595. At rent time, I suppose ? — Yes, sir. 
 8596. What is your complaint 1 — My complaint is 
 
 that the rent is too high. I cannot live on the land and 
 pay it. Griflith's valuation of land and houses is .£22 
 5s., and I am paying £35 rent, and it is an impossibility, 
 owing to the failure of the crops these wet seasons, 
 for tenants to live on the land under the present rents. 
 8507. Do you. think your rent would be a fair one 
 if the seasons were good ? — It is too much even in 
 the best of times. The land is low and wet, and in 
 a wet year, such as last year was, it gives no crop 
 at all. The middleman came down and harassed 
 every man under him. He has only 135 acres of the 
 estate. He harassed every one of his tenants. 
 
 8598. Did he make any aljatement ■? — Not a shilling. 
 He threatened that any man that would not pay liis 
 rent he would serve with a Dublin ejectment that 
 would cost £8, and he gave only two days' time for 
 the whole rent. 
 
 8599. Does he hold under lease? — He does. 
 
 8600. Do you know when his lease began ? — No, 
 sir, it is time out of mind. It belonged to the Stuarts 
 of Coil: before his time. They were honourable deeeut 
 men — the Stuarts. 
 
 SCOl. How long has he been in possession of it 1 — 
 I Kup]iose twenty years. It belonged fora^^hile to 
 Mr. Harris ; he married one of the Stuart ladies — he 
 had no issue — and he left the place to his nephew, 
 this. Boiris. 
 
 8602. What was the 1-ent formerly ?— The rent in 
 my early days was 18s. an acre for some, and the 
 highest was 21s. 
 
 8C03, When was it raised ?-^The last rise it got 
 was in the shape of a tax for the drainage of- Lough 
 Neagli. It was raised to 25s., I think, about twenty 
 3'ears ago. Immediately after Mr. Harris came into 
 possession of it, he came down in the month of June, 
 when thecrops looked extremely well and luxuriant, and 
 in the next November he raised the rent to 25,?. an acre. 
 
 8604. When was the next rise 1 — The next was to 
 
 32s. 6(f., at the time the Income Tax Bill passed. We 
 considered that he did it in order to make us pay his 
 income tax. Then the last rise was the Water cess. 
 
 8605. At the time he made the formei- rise was 
 anything noted on the back of the receipts? — Yes, sir; 
 he noted on the back of the receipts that the rent 
 ■should be so much in future, and I think two or three 
 years after that he put on 5s. additional in the shape 
 of water cess. 
 
 8606. The rent then became 30s. i")er acre % — Yes, 
 sir. The first rent was £.1 Is., then it was increased 
 to £1 2s. %d., then he raised it to £1 5s., and after 
 that he put on the water cess — on some it is 4s. 6</., 
 and on some 5s. 
 
 8607. The water cess is a temporary charge 1 — Yes, 
 sir ; but we are afraid it will not be taken off. He 
 gave evidence, it appears, in JMagherafelt covirt, before 
 the barrister, that he put it on as a rise of rent, and 
 not water cess. 
 
 8608. And you fear that when the water cess ceases 
 he will still keep it on as a part of the I'ent? — Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 8609. Was there any difficulty raised liy some of 
 the tenants about this additional rent ? — Yes. There 
 was a man evicted who held six acres, he owed but 
 two years' rent, but he was evicted and put out. The 
 landlord had to lower the rent before he could get any 
 one to take the farm. 
 
 861 0. When was that ? — I think it was about eiglit 
 yeai's ago. 
 
 8611. What used to be the selling rate per acre for 
 the tenant-right 1 — There w-as some of it sold at £10 
 per acre, some £7, and some £5, according to the 
 cpiality of the land. It varied very much. 
 
 8612. Was that before the raising of the rent? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 8613. What would it sell for now? — It would sell 
 for nothing now — no man would buy it now. 
 
 8614. The tenants are not able to pay the rents ? — 
 They are not. The rents are too high. We had 
 great difiiculty in paying the rent last year. I know 
 one man — and that was myself — that had to take his 
 cow out and sell her" and left a family of seven witLoat 
 milk from March till June in order to makenp the 
 rent. 
 
 8615. I see you say in your notes of evidence that 
 " the landlord being a southerner thinks no rent too 
 weighty"? — There is no mercy in him at all — -lie gives 
 no creature any time. 
 
 8616. Do you know Edwa;rd M'Keever ?— Yes ; he 
 is a tenant on Major Dawson's property. 
 
 8617. Do you know anything of his rent ? — It is a 
 very high rent. I think it is almost £2 per acre. 
 
 8618. You say there are anumberofyourneighbours 
 that would be able to give evidence, but do not like 
 to offer themselves as witnesses, from the difficulty of 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 295 
 
 )no\ii;p; fi-om the locality ?— Yes, and from other reasons 
 ttiix \^'^^ tliought one witness would do. 
 
 8619. Baron Dowse. — I suppose what happened in 
 your i':ise might happen in twenty 'i — Yes, sir • I 
 represent the whole townland. The rent is such that 
 people can't live on the land at all. If there is any 
 Bill passed by the present Government, unless there 
 is some clause in it to prevent landlords from raising 
 rents, ' tlie people won't be able to live. There should 
 bo fair rents, having regard to the tenants' im- 
 provements, the people will make every exertion to 
 pay a fair rent ; but the rents that are charged now 
 on lis are excessive. 
 
 8Ij20. You wouldn't object to pay a fair rent 1 — 
 Certainly not, sir ; but would be very glad to be able 
 to pay it. Every man has a right to his own^ and 
 the landlord is entitled to get a fail' rent. 
 
 8G21. Mr. Kavanagh. — How much would you con- 
 
 -Ch'ithth's valuation, we consider, Sep*. 25, isso 
 
 Mr. Manus . 
 M'Grogan. 
 
 sider a fair rent 1- 
 would be fail-. 
 
 8622. How much is Griffith's valuation ? — £1 per 
 acre. 
 
 8023. What rent does Mr. Borris pay? — Aboiit 
 26-. 6cL per acre, I believe ; something quite small. 
 
 8624. Has he a long lease 1 — A lease for ever, I 
 believe. There is a great portion of the Dawson estate 
 leased the same way. 
 
 8625. Held by middlemen ?— Yes, sir. 
 
 8626. Do they charge higher rents to the tenants 
 than the ordinary landlords do t — There are some cases 
 in which the ordinary landlord is as high as the 
 middleman. One ma]i, who is a tenant under Mr. 
 Dawson himself, told mo this morning that he was 
 paying £2 an acre. 
 
 8626a. Is that land near a town? — It is; but it is 
 not a townpark. It is a small farm. 
 
 Mr. Samuel Stewart, Ballydoran, County Down, examined. 
 Don. — You are a tenant 
 
 8627. The O'Conor 
 farmer ? — ^Yes, sir. 
 
 8628. How much land do you farm 1 — Twenty-three 
 acres Cunningham measure. 
 
 8G29. ^Vho is your landlord? — I have two — I hold 
 six acres under Mr. William Ferguson ; and seventeen 
 under Mr. R. D. Harrison. 
 
 8630. Have you any complaint to make of the 
 treatment you have received ? — T have. Did Sir 
 George Yoking show you a letter I intended for the 
 IVhig newspaper on Wednesday — that emboclies a 
 good deal of my grievance, and is the truth. 
 
 8631. State shortly the grievance of which you 
 complain ? — I will be short, sir. I am not going to 
 make a long story of it-V^though I might make one. 
 In the year 1760, Hans Stuart, who was my grand 
 uncle, got a farm. The rent at that time was lOs. 6d. 
 ])er acre. It was part of the Savage estate. The 
 Savages held it until 1843, but in the June of that 
 yeai-, Jlr. John Hai-rison purchased it^ and his agent 
 lifted the first rent in that year. In 1813 we got a 
 lease of it at £1 13s. id. the Cunningham acre. The 
 lease was a terminable lease, and it exjsired on the 3rd 
 May, 1846. 
 
 8632. And, I suppose, ia 1846 they raised the rent ? 
 —They did. The agent rftised it to £64 10s. 8d., 
 valuation being £49 ; old rent £54 14s. That rent 
 was paid until the bad times came and I could not pay, 
 and now I have lost the farm. Now there was at 
 least £300 of i;eclamation done to that land, that I 
 can prove, and it was taken from me, and I have got 
 nothing. I can prove every word I have stated. 
 
 8633. Your rent was not raised since 1846? — No, 
 sir — there is another thing I wish to mention — the 
 £300 was expended in reclamation between 1813 and 
 1831 — that would be more than twelve years before 
 Mr. Harrison got it. 
 
 8634. What you complain of is, that in consequence 
 of tlie rent being too high, and you having -suffered 
 losses fi'om the bad times, you were unable to pay your 
 ri.'iit aud have lost the farm? — ^Yes, sir. 
 
 8635. Were you ejected, for non-payment of rent ? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 8636. Mr. Shaw. — Did you try to sell your tenant- 
 right ? — I did, sir ; but I didn't get a bid. 
 
 8637. Was that owing to the high rent ? — Owmg to 
 the high rent. Now^ it is not for me to talk to 
 gentlemen like you ; mine is only a small case. Since 
 i came here I have heard men from Tyrone, and from 
 
 this county, and from where I come from, and from 
 other places, telling what they have suffered — and I 
 really don't know whether their cases or mine are 
 the worst. Don't think I am laying clown any law to 
 you ; but I say that that conduct is downright robbery. 
 Had it not been for what the tenants did to the land, 
 the landlord could not have raised the rent ; they knew 
 the tenants were poor, and they extorted the last 
 farthing from them that they could. For my own 
 part, had it not been for the death of my cattle, I could 
 have continued paying the rent — but if I did, I would 
 not have been one penny the richer to day — for had I 
 gone on paying that exorbitant rent I could have saved 
 nothing, and if I became unable to labour and wanted 
 to give up the farm — you see I am not young — I would 
 not have got one penny for my tenant-right — if I had 
 been dying with hunger. , 
 
 8638. In whose possession is the land now ? — It lay 
 waste for some time. A tenant has taken it — I don't 
 know on What terms. He went into possession of it 
 on Wednesday. I believe it will be of no use to him. 
 There is another thing I wish to mention. This man 
 has an office in Corporation-street in Belfast ; I wish 
 he was examined. 
 
 8639. Do you mean Mr. Harrison ? — No. Mr. 0. 
 C. Cordner whose name is at the bottom of the bill. 
 He ejected me contrary to the custom, as I can prove. 
 
 8640. And you get nothing at all either for dis- 
 turbance or improvements? — No. 
 
 8641. Did 3^011 build a house on the farm? — My 
 father did, and there was as much money expended 
 on it in reclamation between 1813 and 1831 as 
 would have built a respectable Irish village. 
 
 8642. You say over £300 was expended ? — Yes. I 
 am sure at the wages of to-day £300 would not 
 do it. 
 
 8643. What I do not understand is, why you did 
 not go before the County Court Judge, Mr. Lefroy, 
 and claim compensation for the improvements? — I 
 think you misunderstand me, sir — the ejectment was 
 for another farm. 
 
 8644. How did you lose the one of which you are 
 speaking ? — For non-payment of rent, sir — because it 
 could not be paid. 
 
 8645. But even in the case of non-payment of rent, 
 you still have a right to claim compensation for 
 improvements ? — I didn't know that at the time, sir, 
 and even the attorney I was in communication with 
 never told me. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 Stewart. 
 
296 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sqft. 26, 1880 
 
 Mr. James 
 MITair. 
 
 Mr. James M'Nair, Ballinure, near Carrickfergus, examined. 
 Chairman. — Are you a tenant farmer'? — I 
 
 8646. 
 am. 
 
 8647. On whose property ? — Mr. Dobbs', of Carrick- 
 fergus. 
 
 8648. How many acres do you hold ? — Twelve acres, 
 Irish. 
 
 8649. What is the rent 1 — The rent was raised last 
 year. 
 
 8650. What rent were you paying ten years ago ? — 
 £1 2s. i\d. per acre. 
 
 8651. What is the rent now? — £A 5s. per acre. 
 
 8652. When was it raised? — Last year. I have 
 only paid two half-yearly gales of the advanced rent. 
 
 8653. What was the reason given for the rise of 
 rent ? — -1 don't know for what reason, only my own 
 improvements. 
 
 8654. Baron Dowse. — Is there tenant-right on the 
 property ? — Yes, it had to be admitted. It was denied 
 on two or three occasions. I suppose you have heard 
 of Holden's case, that case took place on the same 
 estate. 
 
 8655. Chairman. — You say the rent was raised in 
 consequence, as you believe, of your improvements? — 
 Yes. 
 
 8656. They had made the land more valuable ? — 
 Yes, it is twice the value now that it was before. He 
 also served all the tenants with new office rules. 
 
 ,i( Witness produces them). 
 
 8657. When were these rules served on you ? — 
 Last year. 
 
 8658. Read them? — The notice is headed: — 
 
 " Terms of letting from year to year, customary on Mr. 
 Dobbs' estate. First — There is not to be any subletting or 
 division of lands, nor change of occupancy without the land- 
 lord's permission previously obtained. Second — All trees, 
 mines, minerals, quarries, fish and game, are exclusivelv 
 reserved -with liberty for the landlord, and persons authorized 
 by him to enter and take them. Third — Rent is due and 
 payable, half-yearly, at 1st May and 1 st November. Fourth 
 — No new buildings are to be erected, nor old removed, 
 without permission. Fifth — The best customary rotation of 
 crops is to be followed in cultivating the land. Sixth- - 
 Fences, gates, and buildings are to be kept up by the tenant 
 in perfect condition." 
 
 8659. There is no mention of change of rent? — No. 
 
 8660. Nor of any restriction of prices 1 — No. 
 
 8661. Is there any restriction, or is free sale allowed 1 
 — Perhaps sometimes it will be allowed ; at other times 
 it will be restricted one-fourth or one-third. 
 
 8662. Mr. Shaw. — You don't know what may be 
 done ? — No. 
 
 8663. Chairman. — But there are some rules which 
 restrict the tenant-right ? — Yes. It is only a kind of 
 terror that prevents him from carrying them out. He 
 
 don't quite carry out the rules sometimes. There is 
 one of those rules that prohibits buildings ; if a man is 
 building he sometimes is served with notice and stopped. 
 I had a neighbour who was building a bam, and he 
 sent him word that he should not have done it without 
 consulting him. 
 
 8664. Does he make any allowances for improve- 
 ments on the estate ? — No. He made a few drains at 
 one time, but that was all. 
 
 8665. Your complaint is that you do not feel secure 
 as to your holding on at a fair rent ? — Yes ; the rent 
 I believe is raised on account of improvements. 
 
 8666. Mr. Shaw. — Is the rent raised on a change 
 of tenancy ? — It is, generally. If it was valued a short 
 time before, there is no change. 
 
 8667. When your rent was raised was there a 
 general valuation ? — No ; what he does is, he takes a 
 few at a time. There used to be no rise of rents except 
 on the expiration of a lease ; but now he goes on every 
 three or four years, taking ten or twelve at a time. 
 
 8668. Mr. Kavanagh. — Who is the agent?— Mr. 
 Stewart of Carrickfergus. 
 
 8669. How long before had the rents been raised? 
 — On part of the property twice in nineteen years. 
 
 8670. In the particular case you complain of, when 
 had the rent been previously raised 1 — I did not 
 complain of any particular case. 
 
 8671. I understood you to mention a particular case 
 in which you complained of the rent having been 
 raised ? — I mentioned my own case. 
 
 8672. How long before had the rent been raised in 
 your own case ? — I suppose twenty-five or thirty years. 
 
 8673. Is this propei'ty near Cariickfergus ? — It is 
 near Ballyclare, ten miles Irish from Belfast. 
 
 8674. Chairman. — Do you think land in that part 
 of Ireland has been increasing in value within the last 
 twenty years? — I think up to the last two or three 
 years it was. 
 
 8675. Until the bad seasons? — Yes. I wish to 
 mention that we got no reduction, and we thought 
 that very hard. Other landlords gave reductions ; but 
 Mr. Dobbs did not. 
 
 8676. Were there any special reasons that raised 
 the value of land in your neighbourhood? — Thfere 
 was a railway made from Lai-ne to Ballyclare, a 
 narrow gauge railway, but I don't think it was of 
 any advantage to us — it did not come near enough 
 to us. 
 
 8677. Is that raih\-ay worked still on the narrow 
 gauge ? — It is. 
 
 This concluded the evidence taken in Belfast, and 
 the Commission was adjourned until Monday, the 27th 
 September, at Londonderry, 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 297 
 
 FOURTEENTH DAY— MONDAY, 27th SEPTEMBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners met at Jury's Commercial Hotel, Londonderry. 
 
 Present :— The Right Hon. the Eael of Bessborough, Chairman ; Right Hon. Baron Dowse, 
 The O'CONOR Don, Arthur MacMoerough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., and William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Alexander, of Imlick, Londonderry ; Mr. W. J. Hanna, of Whitehouse, Carrigans ; Mr. John 
 Gamble, Londonderry ; Mr. James Lapsley, St. Johnstown, county Donegal, and several other tenant-farmers 
 attended as a deputation from the Donegal Liberal Tenant Farmers' Association, and other associations, for 
 the purpose of giving evidence. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Alexander was first examined. 
 
 Sept. 37, 1880. 
 
 8678. Chaikman. — You are a tenant farmer ? — I am. 
 
 8679. You have two farms 1 — I have, in the barony 
 of Raphoe, county Donegal. 
 
 8680. How do you hold them 1 — I hold' one as 
 tenant under a lease, and the other in perpetuity. 
 
 8681. What is the size of the leasehold farm 1 — One 
 hundred and sixty-nine acres. 
 
 8682. And of the one you hold in perpetuity 1 — 
 Twenty-four acres. 
 
 8683. Do they adjoin one another '! — Yes. I bought 
 the twenty-four acres from the Church Commissioners. 
 I had held it previously as tenant. 
 
 8684. They are in the north half-bai-ony of Raphoe 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 8685. Are you a member of a Tenants' Association? 
 —I am a member of the Donegal Liberal Tenant 
 Farmers' Association. It is merely an association for 
 the purpose of meeting this Commission, that we got 
 up in Deny — a temporary meeting of farmers, of which 
 I was chairman. 
 
 8686. In your evidence today, do you speak for 
 yourself and your own opinions only, or do you also 
 speak for other persons 1 — I speak for myself chiefly 
 but also a little for others. We were informed that 
 the witnesses whom we intended to bring forward 
 were too numerous, and that you would prefer one 
 person to represent all. A neighbour of mine, Mr. 
 Hanna, is in attendance, and also wishes to be ex- 
 amined. 
 
 8687. Are the other gentlemen who attend also 
 members of the association 1 — They are tenant farmers, 
 and members of different associations. 
 
 8688. We have heard a good deal of evidence in 
 I>elfast on the subject of the Ulster custom, and we 
 find the principal point that arises is, the various 
 usages' on different estates 1- -Yes, the Ulster custom 
 is a very undefined matter, and there are various 
 usages, as you say. The subject on which I wish 
 chiefly to give evidence is, that the Land Act of 1870 
 affords no protection to the tenant farmer for his im- 
 provements, as regards rent. 
 
 8689. Mr. Shaw. — You mean it gives no protection 
 against increase of rent 1 — ^None. It gives no protec- 
 tion against increase of rent on improvements. 
 
 8690. Improvements made by the tenant ? — Made 
 exclusively by the tenant. 
 
 8691. Chairman. — Does that arise from there being 
 no fixed time when a new rent may be put on 1 — There 
 is no fixed time — it is at the landlord's option. 
 
 8692. Have you any cases in your district? — I have. 
 First there is my own case. In 1812 my father 
 bought a mountaiD farm, joaying for it a tenant-right 
 of £270. 
 
 8693. Is that the farm you now occupy 1 — No — not 
 the farm I occupy — another. 
 
 8694. How many acres did it consist of? — Fifteen 
 statute acres arable land, ninety acres reclaimable 
 heath, and forty-five acres of rough grazing land imre- 
 claimable — in all 160 acres, at £24 a year rent. 
 
 8695. Was it held by lease ? — No, it was held under 
 the Ulster custom under the Marquis of Abercorn. 
 My father died in 1824, and the family held posses- 
 sion. In 1832 the arable portion had been increased 
 to twenty -seven acres from fifteen, which was -feJie 
 original quantity, and the rent was raised to £32 lis. 
 
 8696. Was the increase in the arable portion the 
 result of the tenant's exertion and expenditure t — Yes. 
 I came into possession of it in 1837. My uncle offered 
 to advance me as much money as would reclaim all 
 the reclaimable land, if a reasonable lease were given 
 to secure the advance. This was refused, not being 
 compatible with the office rules. 
 
 8697. The O'Conor Don. — What would your uncle 
 have considered a reasonable lease 1 — Well, in such a 
 case as that, thirty years. 
 
 8698. Mr. Shaw.— Would that have satisfied him 1 
 — Quite at that timie. 
 
 8699. A lease for thirty years at a fixed rent ? — 
 Yes. He offered to advance the rent in consideration 
 of the opportunity of reclaiming. 
 
 8700. You offered to pay a higher rent 1 — A sHglitly 
 higher rent, but this offer was refused. As I was of 
 an industrious and enterprising disposition, I hated to 
 look daily on this land within my grasp being unpro- 
 ductive ; and at length, wisely or unwisely, I went 
 into outside dealings in cattle, and with the money I 
 made from that source, as well as the savings from my 
 farm, I reclaimed and drained until in about twenty- 
 one years' I made it all arable — 101 acres. 
 
 8701. How many years did that take you ? — Till 
 1857. The rent was then raised to £62 8s. 
 
 8702. Chairman. — What was the date of that rise ? 
 — 1857. I should mention I also built very substan- 
 tial offices ; and the expense of the two — the reclama- 
 tions and the offices — came to between £1,200 and 
 £1,300. A few years after, when Mr. Gladstone's 
 measure of 1870 seemed to be gaining strength in the 
 House of Commons — before it was passed — I was 
 offered a lease at £73 a year. 
 
 8703. The O'Conor DoN.—-What length of lease? 
 — Twenty -five years. Nominally, tliirty-five years, but 
 it was to date back ten years, so that it practically was 
 for twenty-five ; and, I may just add, that I never re- 
 ceived the value of one shilling from my landlord, ex- 
 cept 2,000 of two-year old quicks, value about 10s. 
 
 8704. Mr. Shaw. — You did everything yourself?— 
 Yes, at my own expense, and not -counting my own 
 labour or superintendence, value at least £500. 
 
 8705. Chairman. — This offer of a lease at £73 for 
 thirty-five years was just before the passing of the Land 
 Act ?— Yes. 
 
 8706. Did you accept it ? — No. I thought better 
 things were coming. 
 
 8707. What happened then?— That is all I have to 
 say. I do not mention this as a case of extreme hard- 
 ship, as it was the rule then, and now ; but I give it 
 as a striking illustration of the arbitrary power of 
 raising rents in the hands of the landlord. 
 
 8708. Did you lose the place? — I sold it in 187S. 
 I should say I offered it for sale about 1847 or 1848 
 at £320. I got £1,600 for it in 1878. 
 
 8709. Have you found that, since the Land Act 
 there have been different rules on estates generally in 
 your neighbourhood ? — Yes, when leases are offered 
 there are clauses inserted to extinguish tenant-riTht at 
 end of lease. 
 
 8710. Or when leases fall in?— Yes. 
 
 8711. More so than before the passing of the Act? 
 — Yes, undoubtedly. I have not had the experience ■ 
 but I know a case — a neighbour of mine named 
 
 2Q 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Alexander. 
 
298 
 
 lEISH. LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Sqjf.27, is3a Robert Scott, had a lease wLich expii-ed in 1877 ; liis 
 „ — rent was £42. Under notice to qviit, lie was ordered 
 
 Alexander. ^^ take a new lease at £72. 
 
 8712. Did he get into arrears of rent '? — No. 
 
 8713. But, in order to increase the rent, he was 
 served with a notice to quit f — Yes, and with a notice 
 to take a lease at £72. 
 
 8714. Was it a large farm 1 — Forty-two statute acres. 
 
 8715. Do you think the Land Act had the effect of 
 making landlords look more sharply after their in- 
 terests than they did before 1 — I won't say that, with 
 regard to the large proprietors ; but, with regai'd to 
 small proprietors, it certainly had. Another witness, 
 who will be here by-and-by, will tell you of two cases ; 
 but it is quite within my knowledge that it is so with 
 regard to small proprietors. The large pro[)rietors in 
 my neighbourhood do not. generally make a revaluation 
 or change rents for twenty-one years. In 1857, at the 
 time of Griffith's valuation, they were njostly revalued, 
 that was the time my holding was revalued. They 
 intimated they would revalue them in 1877, 1878, and 
 1879 ; but, owing to the bad seasons and foreign com- 
 petition, they have not done so, though they said they 
 would. On the Abercorn estate they said they would 
 revalue them in 1877 ; but they did not. 
 
 8716. Mr. Shaw. — Was the rent of your farm raised 
 when you sold it? — It was not. 
 
 8717. Chairman. — Taking the tenants' view of the 
 question, do they think the landlord should at any time 
 have a right to raise the rent 1 — They do, when the 
 produce of the farm would rise in price each should share. 
 
 8718. Mr. Shaw. — When prices rise? — When the 
 prices of produce rise or labour goes down — when, in 
 fact, a farmer can bring his produce into mai'ket and 
 realize more profit. 
 
 8719. Chairman. — Then it would vary with the 
 price of produce ? — Certainly, for average of periods. 
 
 8720. Do you think it would be advisable for 
 tenants and landlords that there should be an uncer- 
 tainty within short periods of variation of rents, or 
 would it be better to take it by an average of years ? 
 ^.—1 think every twenty-one years would preserve quiet 
 in the country. 
 
 8721. You think twenty-one years would give a 
 fair average of prices 1 — I think so. There should first 
 be a settlement by arbitration, and any readjustment 
 afterwards should be at intervals of not less than 
 twenty-one years. 
 
 8722. Readjusted by arbitration? — No; according 
 to the prices. 
 
 8723. Who is to fix them? — There should be a record 
 of the prices and cost of labour taken in the first 
 instance, to be compared with prices of produce and cost 
 of labourin theinterim of each twenty-one yearperiod. 
 
 8724. Chairman. — Still that must be taken by 
 arbitration ? — Not by arbitration — I mean not to go 
 on the land to value it after the first settlement of the 
 rent which would be by an arbitration. Of course if 
 there was any difference between landlord and tenant, 
 as to the calculation of the prices, that could be settled 
 by arbitration, but not to go on the land to value it 
 after the first time. 
 
 8725. That is to say not to value the tenant's im- 
 provements ? — Yes. 
 
 8726. Mr. Shaw.— What would be the value of 
 your place now if it were in the condition you found 
 it 1 — It would be as cheap at £73, as it was when I 
 got it at £32 lis., but the difierence lies in my capital 
 spent on improvements. 
 
 8727. What I mean is if it were now in the state 
 that it was in when you began to improve it what 
 rent would it bring at present ?-— Well, other farms 
 that have not been improved have not been raised. 
 
 8728. The rent when you took it first was 
 £32 lis.?— Yes. 
 
 8729. It was raised to £62 8s. ?— Yes. 
 
 8730. The value of the farm was raised by your 
 expenditure on improvements ? — It was. 
 
 ■ 8731. And the landlord never contributed towards 
 that expenditure? — ^Not a shilling. 
 
 8732. Chairman. — Yoii say you would have a 
 record of the prices of agricultural produce taken, and 
 of the prices of labour? — Yes, that could easily be 
 found. Let a record be kept of the prices of produce 
 and the rate of labour, to be referred to for the pre- 
 ceding period whenever either landlord or tenant might 
 call for a readjustment of the rent, periods of not less 
 than twenty-one years I think would be best. 
 
 8733. Mr. Shaw. — Would you take into account 
 the price of cattle also? — Certainly I would record the 
 price of cattle also. 
 
 8734. And sheep? — Yes, every descrii)tion of agxi- 
 cultural produce. 
 
 8735. Supjjose you had a year of very bad produce, 
 Ruch, for example, as last year ? — I would take the 
 jiroduce on the average of twenty-one years. 
 
 8736. Chaiejian. — Still that might not give a fair 
 estimate of the produce of the farm — there might 
 be two or three good 3'ears consecutively or two or 
 three bad years ? — 'W-'ell, twenty-one years would. 
 
 8737. Mr. Shaw. — You would take a sufficient 
 number of years to ensure a fair average on the general 
 run of seasons 1 — Yes. 
 
 8738. After the first adjustment of the rent of a 
 farm the system would be self-acting — the future 
 adjustment would be a matter of calculation ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 8739. Chairman. — Do the landlords in your dis- 
 trict make any improvements ? — No. I may mention 
 that several other tenants made improvements in the 
 same way as I did at their own expense. 
 
 8740. Can you give their names without any 
 objection to their being recorded 1 — Certainly. 
 Archibald , Rolleston, Joseph Gillespie, Samuel 
 Stephenson, Joseph Chambers, Robert Vance, and 
 H. S. Hamilton. 
 
 8741. Are they still in occujsation of their hold- 
 ings ? — They are. 
 
 8742. Have their rents been raised as your's was? 
 — Not so much, as they did not improve as much, . 
 taking the, area of their holding. 
 
 8743. But were they all raised from time to time? 
 —Yes. 
 
 8744. Mr. Kavaxagh.— Had they leases?— No. 
 
 8745. It was not at the expiration of the leases 
 that the rents were raised ? — No, at the usual 
 periodical valuation of the estate. 
 
 8746. Was it customary on the estate to have re- 
 valuations at the end of a certain term? — Yes. 
 
 8747. What was the length of the term ? — About 
 twenty-one years, but it varies. As I have said al- 
 ready for the last three years, in consequence of the 
 bad seasons and foreign competition, they have not 
 bepn raised, although it is now twenty-three years 
 since the last valuation. 
 
 8748. Air. Shaw. — Did they employ an outside 
 valuator to do it? — Mr. Nolan. 
 
 8749. Was he in their own employment? — No. 
 
 8750. He was a land valuator 1 — Yes. 
 
 8751. Did yon know the increase of rent that was 
 going to be put on? — No ; not till I was informed by 
 the ofiice. 
 
 8752. You had nothing to say to the valuation?— 
 Nothing whatever. 
 
 8753. Ci-iaikman. — On the question of improvements 
 by landlords, you say in the notes which you furnished 
 to us, that many years 'ago some landlords took ad- 
 vantage of the Board of Works' advances for drainage ? 
 — Yes. That was in 1847, at the time of the 
 famine, 
 
 8754. Was the interest on the amounts advanced 
 by the Board of Works paid by the tenants? — Yes; 
 up to near the time that the payments were about to 
 expire, and then a valuation of the estate was made, 
 but the additional rent was far higher than the in- 
 tei'est. 
 
 8755. What had been the rate of interest? — six per 
 cent, for twenty-five years. 
 
 8756. That was the amount the landlord was pay- 
 ing? — That was the amount the tenants were paying. 
 
AII.NUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 299 
 
 87-"' 7. I mean tlic amount that the landlord was 
 liable for, and that he chat-geil the tenants? — Yes. 
 
 8758. Therefore, at the end of the twenty-five yi^ars, 
 the improvements became the proj^erty of the tenants 1 
 — Y"es ; but they were valued by the landlords, and 
 the aniount added to the lent. I consider tliat the 
 landlord was, properly siie;iking, merely a broker or 
 factor in the transaction between the tenants and 
 the Board of Works. 
 
 8759. The landlord considered that at the end of 
 the twenty-five years there should be a revaluation, 
 and that if the value of the land was increased to a 
 greater amount than the six per cent, he was entitled 
 to take advantage of it 1 — Yes. 
 
 8760. Do you think that the landlord is entitled to 
 any part of the increased value '? — I cannot see tliat he 
 is — except the value of produce advanced ; and it did 
 advance, no doubt, in the interval, and tho landlords 
 were entitle^ to some increase. 
 
 8761. Would you say that the landlord had a right 
 to any share of the increased value of the land arising 
 from the expenditure of that money 1 — Well, it was 
 the tenant that was at the outlay and expense. 
 
 8762. The tenant has paid for it — and therefoi'e 
 th^y are his improvements ? — Yes ; the tenant paid the 
 m.oney. 
 
 8763. Supposing that the improvement produced a 
 return of twelve per cent, upon the outlay, do you 
 ■consider that the whole of that should belong to the 
 tenant, or is any poi'tion of it due to the landlord 
 whose land it was and who got the loan ? — Well, tlint 
 is something like what Lord Lifford said — That those 
 elements of improvement were in the land, and that 
 the landlord was entitled to share in the value of them 
 when braught out. I cannot see how the landlord has 
 a moral right to it. 
 
 8764. Mr. Shaw. — If there was an increase in the 
 prices of produce you would give the landlord a share 
 of that ? — I would. 
 
 8765. But the increase of produce created by the 
 tenant's outlay you think the landlord has no right to 1 
 ^-Exactly ; I would go farther and say T would give 
 the landlord credit for so far as the land offers a basis 
 of improvement to the' tenant, but then afterwards if the 
 tenant made those improvements and laid out his own 
 money, I do not see how the landlord has a right to it. 
 
 8766. That is very much what we have heard other 
 witnesses say, that the land so far as it is the basis of 
 the improvements, is the intei'est which the landlord 
 has in it, but not in the actual improvements them- 
 selves which have been paid for by the tenant t — 
 Quite so. I think a man having gone through the 
 ordeal I did, finding in the end of his days that his 
 industry was taxed to the last farthing, it sours him 
 so that he will do, as X did— tell jiis sons never to do 
 it. I will tell my sous, and my. sons' sons never to 
 adventure as I did, and I may add the I'esult of such 
 a state of things is that the industrious middle classes 
 are driven to other countries and other occupations, 
 and this country i& deprived of their industry. On the 
 other hand, could I in' my declinirig days look on the 
 reward of my labours as not being taxed in that way, 
 I would advise tluen contra. 
 
 8767i. Mr. Shaw. — You ^ay that tliis state of things 
 has created a» great deal of i dissatisfaction among the 
 farmers' in your part of the country? — Yes, so much 
 so, that if a mail hate intelligent sons he does not 
 allow them to be farmers at all, but if there is a dolt 
 or an iqclolent fellow that he can majke no other use 
 of, he Sjiys, ',' you, shall be a farmer." 
 
 8768., Chairman. — T see you say ,that since the 
 passing*' of the Land Act the, farmers at first made 
 improvements beyond what they did before, but -that 
 for the 'last three years or so, it having become evident 
 that the' landlords still have power to raise the rent, im- 
 provem^ent has been checked? — Yes — it,be,came evident 
 that thp landlord, has power to make, the Act of 1870, 
 inopera,Uve, .so far as regards improvements. . p 
 
 8769.- The Act of 1870, gave the tenant an interest 
 that hetnever had before; legally at least? — Cei-fcyinly. 
 
 8770. And if that Act v/as worked out properly, Sept. 27, 1831) 
 would it be satisfactory ?— According to the intention jj.^ josenh 
 of the Act, it would, largely — I will not say the Act as Alexander, 
 passed, but the Act as it was framed. 
 
 8771. The intention of the Act was to give the 
 tenant security for all his riglits as they existed at the 
 time of tlie passing of the Act ? — Quite so, but these 
 were rather indefinite. 
 
 8772. You think the Act was not sufficient to secure 
 that? — Not sufiicient, because the landlord can raise 
 the rent to any amount he ehoses. Of course the 
 tenant hag three alternatives, he either sits under the 
 increased rent, or he sells as he can and walks out, 
 or he delivci's up the farm to the landlord, and 
 fights him in the law court. 
 
 8773. And they object to fighting?— They do. It 
 is something like the tliree alternatives that were 
 offered to the ancient King of Israel — three months 
 before the sword of the enemy, three years' famine, or 
 three days' pestilence. There have been no land cases 
 iji our county court from my neighbourhood. 
 
 8774. Mr. SH/iw. — The tenants prefer to submit to 
 the increase of rent rather than ,go to law ? — Yes. 
 
 8775. Going to law nleans going out of your farm? 
 — It does ; and it also means going to a place that we 
 don't know what will happen to us — no more then we 
 do of a future state of existence. We never can tell 
 what may be the result of litigation. Witness the 
 case of Mrs. Algeo, to whom the eoiLuty court judge al- 
 lowed £400, but Judge Battersby, cut it down to £ 1 50. 
 
 8776. For her tenant-right? — Yes, and he talked 
 in a way that no other man could ever understand his 
 way of arriving at his conclusions. 
 
 8777. Chaikman". — I understand that there have 
 been no cases in the Land Court from your district ? 
 — No cases from our district. 
 
 8778. And you say that ai'ises from the dislike 
 tenants have of going to law ? — Yes, and the expense 
 and uncertainty of it, and also because it is only a 
 a remedy for eviction. I have seen cases tried in the 
 Land Court, and from having witnessed them, I would 
 think twice before I would go into court. 
 
 8779. Mr. Shaw. — What price does tenant-right 
 usually bring in your neighbourhood ? — From fifteen 
 to thirty years' purchase ; latterly less. There have 
 been very few sales latterly. 
 
 8780. Mr. Kavanagh. — While on that point, can 
 you tell me what is the size farm that fetches the 
 highest rate of tenant-right ? — I would say a medium 
 sized farm. 
 
 8781. A medium sized farm? — Yes. I would say 
 small or medium, such as would be within the grasp of 
 many bidders. A large farm has but few persons able 
 
 to purchase it. • 
 
 8782. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres would you say 
 would be the extent of the farm that would fetch the 
 highest rate of tenant-right 1 — I would say from thirty 
 to eighty acres. 
 
 8783. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is the lai-gest farm 
 you have known tenant-right to be paid for ? — I cannot 
 call to mind many over 100 to 150 acres at jiresent, 
 but there have been sales of larger farms. 
 
 8784. Chairman. — Amongst the improvements that 
 have gone on, has there been much reclamation of 
 waste land in your district ? — Not within the last few 
 years. From 1845, when Mr. Sharmau Crawford's 
 Bill was seen to have a little support in Parliament, 
 i-eclamations began, and it was wonderful how it went 
 on from that to 1860, and afterwards, when the Devon 
 Commission reported favourably, as the tenants 
 thought, to their view, it went on very largely as it 
 was considered that the justice of this claim would 
 force itself on the legislature eventually-. 
 
 8785. What was the sort of land principally that 
 was reclaimed ? — Cut-away turf bog, and heath ground. 
 Heath altogether in my case and that of the neigh- 
 bours whose names I have given, except Hamilton ■ 
 bis was cut-away bog. 
 
 8786. Do you think there is much of that class of 
 
 2 Q 2 
 
300 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880. land still tliat could be reclaimed and rendered fit for 
 Mr josenh Cultivation 1 — Yes. I have personal knowledge of the 
 Alexander. fact, for I was for Some time agent in Donegal, for a 
 Scotch firm in the implement trade, and I have been 
 through neaiiy every farmer's house in county Done- 
 gal, and part of Tyrone, looking for orders, so that 
 I know well the condition of the country, and I 
 would say that the waste land — land capable of recla/- 
 mation — amounts to an area equal to that of the 
 arable land at pi-esent. 
 
 8787. Has there been much reclamation done upon 
 the estate of the Duke of Abercorn ? — Yes. In the 
 notes which I furnished to the Commission I said 
 twenty per cent., as I wished to keep well within the 
 mark ; but if I had said forty per cent., I do not 
 think I would have overstated the extent that has been 
 reclaimed within my recollection. 
 
 8788. Mr. Shaw. — Forty per cent upon the whole 
 of his property is reclaimed? — Yes, of the Donegal 
 estate. 
 
 8789. Chairman. — Have the rents been increased 
 in proportion 1 — Of course. I wish it to be under- 
 stood that I do not put forward the Duke of Abercorn 
 as a harsh landlord, because he is not. He would 
 allow a tenant to hang back two or three years in his 
 rent before he would put him out ; but I must confess 
 that I was sorry to find him serving some notices to 
 quit upon his tenants last April. 
 
 S700. For non-payment of rent^ — No, not for 
 arrears of rent. He served twenty-five notices in the 
 village of St. Johnstown. 
 
 8791. They were houses, I suppose? — Yes. 
 
 8792. Were there farms too? — I cannot say there 
 were farms. There was land attached to the houses, 
 and some of the occupiers of the houses were a very 
 useful class of persons in the county — mechanics, 
 millwrights, and other tradesmen, some of whom had 
 built substantial houses — houses worth from £100 to 
 £200, carpenters, masons, and that class of people, all 
 of whom were noticed to leave. 
 
 8792a. They had bits of land along with their 
 Jiouses? — Yes. I hope and trust his Grace won't put 
 those men out. 
 
 879.'>. Didn't they get leases ? — Not one of them, 
 but they didn't lay a stone except with the sanction 
 and approval of the office. James Lapsley, who is 
 here, is one of them. 
 
 8794. With regard to the mode of fixing the amount 
 of rent, if your plan was adopted, you think there 
 would be plenty of money laid out on the land ? — 
 Certainly. 
 
 8795. The tenants would again begin to improve 
 ^ and cultivate the land, and render it productive ? — 
 
 Certainly — in fact, you would make Ireland valuable 
 to the Empire in every respect. I l\a,\ti mentioned at 
 the end of my notes what in my opinion the effects 
 would be. 
 
 8796. Do you think that what is good in the north 
 might also be tried in the south ? — I am not acqiiainted 
 in the south, but if Mr. Bence Jones is correct, the land- 
 loi-ds in the south do all the improvements and the 
 t<inants do nothing. I wish he was hei-e. T am afraid 
 h(^ has been " ])utting the glass to the blind eye." 
 
 8797. Did you purchase your holding of twenty- 
 four acres from the Church Commissioners ? — I did. 
 
 8798. Did you boiTow part of the purchase money ? 
 —No. 
 
 8799. You paid in full ?— I did. 
 
 8800. Have any of your neighbours purchased ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 8801. Have any of them borrowed part of the 
 money ? — Yes. 
 
 8802. Has it been a successful operation? — Yes, I 
 should say so. 
 
 8803. They are satisfied with the transaction? — 
 They are. Owing to statements having been made 
 that tenant proprietors were generally an indolent 
 pack, and not industrious, I took the trouble to take 
 about eighty cases in the north, half of the barony of 
 
 Raphoe. I went through them all, and with the 
 exception of two the results have been satisfactory, and 
 their circumstances are better now than before they 
 purchased. 
 
 8804. They have been improving ? — Y^es. 
 
 8805. The O'Conob Don. — Have they been all pur- 
 chasers under the Church Act? — No ; they have been 
 tenant proprietors from twenty to fifty years back. I 
 consider it altogether a mistake to say that this class 
 of men — tenant proprietors — are indolent and ne- 
 glectful. They ai-e the most prosperous class of the 
 occupiers of land in Donegal, by far. 
 
 8806. How did they become the owners of their 
 farms ? — I cannot go into that. 
 
 8807. Was it on the occasion of a sale in the Landed 
 Estates Court? — It was before the Landed Estates 
 Court was established. Had I taken cases since the 
 establishment of the Landed Estates Court and the 
 Bright Clauses, I could have obtained plepty of them ; 
 but there has not been as yet sufficient time to judge 
 of the operation of purchase under these clauses. I 
 am merely dealing with the statement that the fact of 
 an occupier being also the owner of his land has the 
 effect of making him indolent and careless. The very 
 contrary is the fact ; they areamong themostprosperouB 
 people in the country. It is quite a burlesque to say 
 that if an occupier became a proprietor of his land he 
 would get into lazy and indolent habits. 
 
 88(.)8. Would the tenants in yoxir district become 
 purchasers of their holdings if they had an oppor- 
 tunity ? — I am sure many of them would, if tLey got 
 a fair amount of assistance. 
 
 8809. Would a loan of two-thirds of the purchase 
 money be sufficient ? — Well, they would prefer three- 
 fourths. 
 
 8810. You think if that assistance were afforded to 
 them they would purchase ? — Very many of them 
 would ; but bear in mind that I am not for a forced 
 tenant proprietorship. 
 
 8811. You would not force the landlords to sell ? — 
 I would not. The thing is not, to my mind, common 
 sense. 
 
 8812. But you think it might be gradually intro- 
 duced ? — I think so ; where the ' landlord was willing 
 to sell and the tenant willing to buy — where, in short, 
 it was practical. Here are the names of a number of 
 tenant proprietors in the northern half of the barony 
 of Raphoe. You will see what their state and circum- 
 stances are. [Witness hands in the following list :— ] 
 
 Tenant Proprietors in Barony of Raphoe. 
 
 Names. 
 
 AVilllam Porter, 
 B. Hamilton, 
 James W'itherow, 
 Samuel Carson, 
 Robert Carson, 
 James Laird, 
 
 M'Cool, . 
 
 Moore, 
 
 Ogilby, , 
 
 Gun, 
 
 Tinney, 
 
 M. AVilson,' 
 
 J. M'Daid, 
 
 Eep. Wm.. IVE'Daid, 
 
 James M'Daid, sen., 
 
 Joseph Roulston, 
 
 M'Gregor, 
 
 D. M'Clintock, 
 Thomas Hamilton, 
 William Hamilton, 
 
 Holmes, 
 
 A. Montgomery, 
 John Colhoun, 
 
 Shuron, 
 
 Galdenagh, 
 
 William Kincaid, 
 Thomas Hamilton, 
 William AVitherow, 
 N. Leuse, 
 
 Porter, 
 
 Porter, 
 
 Residences. 
 
 . Raphoe, 
 
 Circumstances 
 
 Good. 
 
 . Gortaquigley, 
 . Ballybigley, 
 , Kennaghun, 
 
 Ray, 
 
 . Glebe Errity Glebe. 
 , Glebe BaUybor Glebe, 
 
 and Mondowey Glebe, 
 
 Ballyholey, 
 
 Carrickdawson, 
 Sleaback, . 
 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 301 
 
 Tenant Propeietoks in Barony of Rapiioe — con. 
 
 Rofiidences. Circumstances. 
 
 Sleaback, . . . Good. 
 Ballyholey, 
 
 Names. 
 
 Wilson, 
 
 Wray, 
 
 William Allen, . 
 
 Shaw, 
 
 Alexander Black, 
 William Wilson, 
 James Wilson, . 
 Carson Wilson, . 
 SHaw ^^'ilson, . 
 
 Henderson, 
 
 Charles Wilson, 
 
 Tillyvihney, Raphoe, 
 
 Killynure, 
 
 Lops, 
 
 DruminaiTy, 
 Ballyconnelly, under Church Temporalities. 
 
 Names. 
 
 Valuation 
 
 
 Circumstances. 
 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 
 D. Hurkin, . 
 
 28 15 
 
 
 
 Poor. 
 
 James Crearew, 
 
 4 5 
 
 
 
 »1 
 
 James Kennedy, 
 
 6 15 
 
 
 
 )1 
 
 Mary M'ftavanagh, 
 
 3 15 
 
 
 
 T' 
 
 John M'Connell, . 
 
 3 10 
 
 
 
 1J 
 
 Thomas Dobson, . 
 
 40 5 
 
 
 
 Good. 
 
 Joseph Rauy, 
 
 Cr 
 
 12 10 
 EVE Glebe 
 
 
 
 ij 
 
 *D. Leiteh, . 
 
 153 
 
 
 
 Good. 
 
 R. Elliott, 
 
 16 5 
 
 
 
 Middling. 
 
 *Prudence Elliott, . 
 
 18 15 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 *Edward Gallagher, 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 Good. 
 
 Canagh. 
 Very greatly improved, both it and Lurgeybrack, £69. 
 
 Drumnlagh. 
 12 5 
 
 James Baird, 
 James Wllsqn, 
 A. S Ramsey, 
 William Scott, 
 William M'Elhinny. 
 Robert White, 
 John Taylor, 
 WiUiam Runkin, 
 
 34 15 
 14 
 
 17 
 35 
 23 
 19 
 16 
 
 Good. 
 
 William Park, 
 William Peoples, 
 
 ISIrs. M'Clintock, 
 John Lecky, . 
 
 AVilliam King, 
 M. Montgomery, 
 
 Andrew Diamond, 
 R. M'Dermott, 
 
 William Clarke, 
 G. Clarke, sen., 
 Martha Clarke, 
 AVilliam White, 
 r. Duffy, 
 John Duffy, . 
 James Duffy, 
 George Clarke, 
 Manus M'Fadder 
 
 Mary O'Donnell, 
 Dane Doherty, 
 P. M'Daid, . 
 Peter M'Daid, 
 
 Corkivagh. 
 10 
 40 
 
 LURGY. 
 59 
 38 
 
 Tkimna. 
 
 72 10 
 64 
 
 Naghrabuoy. 
 
 74 
 46 5 
 
 Barony of South Pv,aphoe. 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 2 
 9 
 
 10 
 3 
 3 
 5 
 
 30 
 
 10 
 10 
 5 
 15 
 2 
 2 
 5 
 
 
 Barriaok. 
 
 . 12 15 
 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 10 
 10 
 
 Good. 
 
 Good. 
 
 Good. 
 
 Good. 
 
 Good. 
 
 Poor. 
 
 Good. 
 
 Good. 
 Poor. 
 
 8813. The O'Oonor Don. — Are these men owners 
 in fee of their land, or do they hold under perpetuity 
 leases ? — In perpetuity. 
 
 , 8814. There appear to be a great number of them 
 in your district 1 — There are. 
 
 8815. And they are all prospering? — All, except 
 two or three. 
 
 ,8816. There are some here described as in poor 
 circumstances, they appear to be chiefly small occu- 
 piers? — Yes, some of them were impoverished by 
 having to make provision for other members of their 
 families — they mortgaged their farms too largely. 
 
 8817. Are any of these people engaged in other 
 
 business besides farming 1 — -Not one of them that I 
 can recollect. T may also mention that I have not 
 known a cp.se of subdivision. 
 
 8818. Mr. Kavanagh. — You have not known a 
 case of subdivision? — Not a single case. 
 
 8819. Chairman. — In speaking of these holdings 
 do you draw a distinction between subdivision and 
 subletting? — Yes, I do. 
 
 8820. As a matter of fast you say that none of 
 these })roprietors have subdivided? — No, nor any 
 other tenant proprietor in the northern half-barony 
 of Eaphoe, or within my knowledge. I draw 
 a distinction between subletting and subdivision. I 
 would be against subdivision. Suppose thei'e was a 
 Bill introduced into Parliament, providing for tenants 
 becoming proprietors, I would be against subdivision, 
 unless the farm was above 100 acres, so that the 
 sub-divided farm should not be under fifty acres, 
 because I think it would demoralize the holders. As 
 to subletting it is different. I have given in my 
 notes a case which shows the difficulty of introducing 
 a measure to prevent subletting. If I died leaving 
 my wife with a small family of children and a large 
 farm of 169 acres, and that it would revert to the 
 landlord if she attempted to sublet, that would be a 
 very hard case. 
 
 8821. That is if you paid a rent for it? — Yes, the 
 ^rent is £204 10s. In such a case as that, if she were 
 not allowed to sublet, what would become of the 
 farm, and what would become of the children ? 
 
 8822. You are speaking of a farm held under a 
 landlord? — Yes. 
 
 8823. Would the same difficulty arise in the case 
 of a tenant who was proprietor of the land ? — I think 
 so. I think if the Act prohibited subletting it 
 would be evaded in some oases. A man might jjlace 
 a farm in the hands of trustees to manage it if sub- 
 letting was prevented. 
 
 8824. Have you known of any cases where the 
 clause against subletting made a farm fall into the 
 hands of the landlord ? — -Yes, I do. 
 
 8825. Do you approve of clauses against alienation 
 and assignment? — No, I would be totally against such 
 clauses being introduced. 
 
 8826. Mr. Shaw. — You think, I suppose, that the 
 farmer himself is the best judge of what ought to bi 
 done with his own land ? — Yes. 
 
 8827. You don't seem to like going to law ? — I do 
 not. I do not like litigation. 
 
 8828. We want to jirevent it too as much as 
 possible ? — -Well, if you have the law clearly defined, 
 something different from the Act of 1870, I do not 
 think that even the landlords in this country would 
 wish to rush into court. Things would settle down. 
 
 8829. Mr. Kavanagh. — I understand you to be 
 against any clauses preventing a tenant proprietor 
 from subdividing or subletting ? — I would like a 
 clause to be introduced to prevent subletting, but I 
 don't see how it could be enforced invariably. It would, 
 in s6me cases, work very severely ; regarding subdivi- 
 sion I answered previously. 
 
 8830. The object of it would be to prevent a farm 
 being cut up into too small holdings ? — Certainly, and 
 I quite agree in the object, but in a case where the 
 farmer and his wife were cut off or died, and a few 
 small children left, what is to be done ? 
 
 8831. What would you consider the smallest hold- 
 ing a man and his family could live on without any 
 other means of support ? — Well, that would depend to 
 some extent on their extravagance or economy, the 
 quality of land, and convenience to market. 
 
 8832. We wUl assume it to be an average family 
 in those respects? — I would say an average family 
 could exist on a twenty acre farm, Irish, or thirty 
 statute. 
 
 8833. Thirty statute acres or twenty Irish ? — Yes. 
 
 8834. Mr. Shaw. — If your idea of the people 
 in the north turning "the fools of the family" 
 into ffirmers be correct, I am afraid it would take a 
 larger farm than that to support them ? — Well, the 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Alexander. 
 
302 
 
 IRISH LAJ^D ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Alexander. 
 
 Sept. 27, 18S(V most stujjid, indolent, good-for-nothing member of tlie 
 family is generally selected as the farmer — just, as 
 you will recollect, at one time the aristocracy gener- 
 ally sent the fool of the family into Parliament, 
 
 8835. Your opinion as to subdividing and sub- 
 letting is, I see, that there should be no prohibition, 
 but that each case, as it occurred, should be submitted 
 to some court of arbitration ? — Yes. 
 
 8836. And that there is no necessity to introduce any 
 prohibitory clauses into the Act of Parliament ? — No, 
 but that there is a necessity of exercising some sur- 
 veillance over people indulging in it or carrying it 
 to too great an extent. 
 
 8837. You think it might be allowed under special 
 circumstances? — I do. 
 
 8838. The O'Conor Don.— I think I saw in your 
 paper that you complained of legal difficulties in the 
 wav of purchasing under Bright's clauses — is that so? 
 —Yes. 
 
 8 8 .'.'J. What are those legal difficLdties? — 'The 
 charges of lawyers, and delays — red tapism. 
 
 8840. Is there any particular point in which you 
 think the law could be improved? — I think the j^arti- 
 cular point is the expense. 
 
 8841. You think the expense excessive? — I do. 
 Take an illustration. Lord Wioklow's jDroperty in my 
 neighbourhood was disposed of three years ago in the 
 Landed Estates Court, and from 8 to 10 per cent, of 
 costs were, I understand, charged on many of them. 
 If a farm is sold in the Lauded Estate Court at £1,000 
 or £1,200 there are from £60 to £80 or £90 expenses. 
 
 884l'. Were those expenses connected with the soli- 
 citor who carried out the purchase, or were they ex- 
 penses connected with the cari-ying out of the Act 
 itself? — I cannot tell you. I never could understand 
 a lawyer's bill. 
 
 8843. You have had no experience of those matters 
 yourself? — No, sir, I am thankful to say I have not. 
 I bought one small farm from the Church Commis- 
 sioners ; but they did it for £5. 
 
 8844. Mr. Shaw. — Yoa had not to employ a solici- 
 tor yourself? — No. I just submitted the deed to one, 
 that was all. 
 
 8845. The O'Conor Don.— You think that if solici- 
 tors could be dispensed with it would be ah imjjrove- 
 ment? — I am afraid we could not altogether dispense 
 with them. 
 
 884G. Mr. Shaw. — You would . not send all the 
 solicitors out of the country ? — No ; no more than the 
 landlords ; but I would 25lace both solicitors and land- 
 lords under regulations. 
 
 8847. The O'Conob Don. — Your chief complaint is 
 the exjiense of the solicitor's bills ? — Yes. 
 
 8848. Has there been much raising of rent in your 
 district since the passing of the Land Act? — There has 
 on the part of small pioprietors ; but 1 should say that 
 on the part of large proprietors there has not, but they 
 are on the verge of it — they have intimated that thev 
 will. 
 
 8b49. When you sold your interest in the farm 1 
 think you said you got £1,600 1 — I did. 
 
 8850. How many 3'ears' purchase was that ? — 
 Twenty-six, I think. 
 
 8851. You got nearly as much as the landlord would 
 have got if he sold his interest? — Qiiite so ; no question 
 as to that. His Grace could not sell that for £1,600. 
 
 8852. He could not have got £1,600 for his inter- 
 est? — He could not. • But if I may venture to say it, 
 the farm was more mine than his at the time. I brouglit 
 it from a barren waste into a fruitful soil by hard in- 
 dustry. 
 
 8853. Is free sale permitted on the Duke's pro- 
 perty without restriction 1 — -No ; not always. I was 
 permitted to sell, but some of- my. neighbours had to 
 sell under a rise of rent. 
 
 8854. Are they: allowed to sell by public auction ? — 
 Not at all; the sale, is to be by. proposals, and the 
 tenants are under conditions that the landlord is to . 
 choose the incoming tenant. 
 
 8855. The landlord is to; choose. the tenant?— Yes. 
 
 8856. Mr. Shaw. — Is there a maximum price fixed 
 by any rule on the estate ? — No ; the Act prevents that 
 but it was so before the Act. The Act of 1870 pre- 
 vents it, they cannot fix the price. 
 
 8857. They do in some places ? — The Ulster Custom 
 never fixed it. 
 
 8858. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think the 
 tenants in your neighbourhood would be able to pay 
 one-fourth of the purchase money if the State advanced 
 them the other three-fourths ? — Many of them would 
 be able to do it. 
 
 8859. Would the majority beable to do it ? — I think 
 so ; many could do it. 
 
 8860. Do you think those who would have the 
 money would be anxious to do it ? — I do. I believe 
 they would be anxious to pay the one-fourth ; hut I 
 believe they would be much more anxious to get such 
 a settlement as is usually called " the three P.'s"^- 
 fair rents, fixity of tenure, and free sale. That is to 
 say, that there should be a fair adjustment of rents in 
 the first instance, based on a scale of prices ; and then 
 let every other aiTangement of the rent be based on 
 the average of prices in the way I have already stated. 
 I think the tenant fai'mers would value that more than 
 any scheme for making the occupier his own pro])rietor, 
 because the one could be universally adopted, and tie 
 other could be only partial. 
 
 8SG1. Mr. Shaw. — You tkink those three principles 
 — fair rents, fixity of tenure, and free sale — would 
 meet the whole case ? — I do ; they would meet the 
 case effectually. 
 
 8862. The other j^lan could only be a gradual thing, 
 and on a small scale ? — Yes. 
 
 8863. Chairman. — In your answer to a question, 
 you give the total value of the improvements you made 
 upon your farm — you say you laid out £2,500 on it ? — 
 Yes, on the farm I now reside on, on buildings alone, 
 and £700 additional on farm improvements. 
 
 8864. That extended over some years — from some 
 years back to the present time ? — Yes. I went into 
 occupation of it some twenty-eight years ago. 
 
 8865; You removed the old farm buildings? — Yes. 
 
 8866. And the dwellinghouse ? — Yes. 
 
 8867. And most of the labourers' dwellings? — Yes. 
 8868.- What have you built in place of them ?— I 
 
 built a dwellinghouse that my landlord said one of his 
 own sons might live in it — it cost me £1,200. I built 
 very good othces. 
 
 SSCiO. Did you buUd a threshing mUl? — Yes, a' 
 threshing mill supplied with machinery. 
 
 8870. They were all approved by the landlord? — 
 They were. 
 
 8871. 1 believe you also built some labourers' dwell- 
 ings ? — I did. 
 
 8872. What sort are they? — Good cottages— each 
 having a kitchen and room boarded, and a little board- 
 ing upstairs. 
 
 8873. Are they slated cottages ? — Yes. 
 
 8874. How many labourers have you on the holding? 
 — I have eight labourers' cottages ; but there are only 
 six occupied at present. 
 
 8875. What rent do they pay ? — Nothing. 
 
 8876. You put them into the cottages as labourers as 
 part of their wages .? — Yes. 
 
 8877. Have they gardens ? — Yes. 
 
 8878. How much ? — From ten to fifteen perches 
 each. Here is Griifith's valuation of the farm, includ- 
 ing the buildings, in 1858 and the present valuation for 
 1 880 ; and, if you compare them , you will see the valua- 
 tion in 1858 was £163, and the present value-is £190 
 10s., so that my buildings are charged £27 10s. in ad- 
 dition to the buildings existing previously, so -that they 
 must be pretty good. (Witness hands in copy of valua- 
 
 on.) 
 
 8879. The cottages were not slated in 1858 ? — No. 
 
 8880. The O'Conor Don.— The farm of which you 
 are now speaking was not the farm you sold and which 
 you spent the £1,200 to £1,300 on?— No... ■ - ■- 
 
 8881. This is a farm which you hold still ? — Yes. ■ > 
 
 8882. Mr. Kavanagh. — On which of the.t»rjiiS' was 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 303 
 
 it the increase of rent was put? — The farm I sold. 
 I have got a lease of this one. I think the lease had 
 forty-eight years to run \vhen I came in. I hounht it 
 from the previous tenant. 
 
 8§83. Mr. Shaw. — How much money did you lav 
 
 out on the farm yon sold ?— From £1,200 to £1,300 
 \\ith my own hard work — for I did work hard in my 
 time. 
 
 8884. In the estimate of £1,200 to £1,300 do you 
 include your own labour 1 — I do not. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880. 
 
 Mr. J r 1 i jih 
 Alexander. 
 
 Mr. W. J. Hanna, 
 
 Wliitehouse, Carrigans, examined. 
 
 8885. Chairman. — Yon are a tenant holding onefarm 
 under lease and another under fee-farm gi'aut ? — I am. 
 
 8886. What is the size of your farms 1 — The one I 
 hold under fee-farm grant is, I believe, fifty-six acres 
 according to Griifith's survey. The leasehold is twenty- 
 eight or twenty-nine acres. 
 
 8887. The leasehold is portion of the Montgomery 
 estate? — Yes. That is of the portion they SLucceded 
 to as heirs of Sii- Robert Ferguson. 
 
 8888. Who is the present owner 1 — Captain R. J. 
 Montgomery. 
 
 8889. Who is the agent 1— Mr. Waller of London- 
 derry. He is the person to whom I pay the rent. 
 
 8890. You were not in the room during Mr. 
 Alexander's evidence. Perhaps you would mention 
 shortly what alterations you would suggest in the 
 existing law as it aifects holdings under the Ulster 
 custom? — I would just say, as it is well known, and I 
 think generally conceded, oiitside of landlord circles, 
 that the tenant really owns in improvements a very 
 large proportion of the fee-simple value of the land, 
 that there ought to be some arbitration that would 
 define the exact ownership of each party, and that the 
 rent should be in proportion to the interest found as 
 belonoins to each. 
 
 8891. You suggest, first of all, an arbitration to 
 decide the respective interests of landlord and tenant ? 
 — Exactly. 
 
 8892. I suppose there is no doitbt, that if that could 
 be arrived at, there would not be much ditliculty 
 afterwards ? — I think not. 
 
 8893. Providing each had his share protected? — I 
 think so. That is the vital point ; but, of course, as 
 long as rents are raised, and the tenant has no voice 
 whatever in the naming of a new rent, but .that it is 
 forced upon him under pressure of a notice to quit, 
 is just where the trouble lies. 
 
 8894. You think the trouble would be got over if 
 the rent could be fixed permanently or subject to 
 periodical valuations by arbitration ? — Yes ; if the con- 
 stitution of the court of arbitration was such that 
 each party would have a voice. 
 
 8895. The usual mode of arbitration would be, each 
 party to name one arbitrator, with an umpire appointed 
 by both? — Exactly; each party selecting his own 
 arbitrator, and an umpire to be chosen by the arbi- 
 trators. For instance, I do not think it would be 
 necessary, if there were a number of arbitrators on an 
 estate, or on an electoral division, that there- should be 
 a separate umpire for each arbitration ; but that the 
 arbitrators might select one umpire to act in all the 
 cases, and I should think that with fair-minded practical 
 men as arbitrators, there would be many cases in which 
 there would be no necepsity for appealing to the umpire, 
 but that the two arbitrators would be able to agree 
 upon a decision. 
 
 8896. Do you think it would be desirable to have 
 some expei-ienced men apjsointed by Government in 
 various parts of the country, from whom to select an 
 umpire? — I do not. There is a general feeling that 
 the appointees of the Government would be more or 
 less under landlord influence. That is the general 
 feeling throughout the country. 
 
 8897. Mr. Shaw. — Those men would not be ap- 
 pointed by the Government, but some department, to 
 be constituted permanently, would have a staff of 
 skilled men, acquainted with the value of land, from 
 whom an umpire could be selected if the parties wished 
 it ?---That might be well, as far as the ilmpire is con- 
 cerned as a last resort. 
 
 8898. Chairman. — You will obserVe that it would 
 only be in case the arbitrators could not agree upon 
 
 the appointment of an independent person as umpire 
 that they would have to fall back upon this body of 
 men — if they can agree upon an outside man as umpire, 
 let them do so ; but in case they do not agree, then, 
 as Mr. Shaw says, let them select one of those men 
 who would be appointed not by Government but by 
 some permanent department 1 — Well, if it would be a 
 thoroughly disinterested board that had the selection of 
 them it might meet the case ; the important point is, 
 to have them perfectly disinterested persons, and in- 
 de})endent of the landlord or tenant, who would decide 
 the matter equitably on the evidence before them. 
 
 8899. If the arbitrators could agree on a person as 
 umpire you think that would be the best ? — My idea is 
 to have an arbitration that would be really an im- 
 partial one, whatever way it might be come at. 
 
 8900. Mr. Shaw. — You think that if the arbitrators 
 were able to select their own umpire the parties would 
 be more likely to be satisfied ? — I think so, because 
 there is a general feeling throiighout the country that 
 any appointee of the Government would be more or 
 less. under the influence of the landlords. . 
 
 8901. The whole object is to give satisfaction, and 
 have it settled without after- grumbling? — ^Yes. 
 
 8902. Chairman. — Where the two arbitrators differ 
 in their view of the case, and are called upon to agree 
 on the appointment of a person as umpire, sometimes 
 one or the other will not agree to the person, and so 
 keep the whole thing standing over — it was to meet 
 such a case as that that it was suggested to have a 
 staff of skilled persons, acquainted with the value of 
 land, from whom the \impire should be chosen in case 
 the arbitrators could not agree on the appointment of 
 an independent person ? — I quite fall in with your idea 
 that the umpire ought to be a skilled man, and ought 
 to be a man acquainted with the chemical qualities of 
 Koils and all that sort of thing, and possibly an ordinary 
 man ttdten up by the tenants, or an ordinary man from 
 the rank and file of those valuators that are going round 
 now perhaps might not be a judge of that. I know a 
 great many valuations have taken place by looking at 
 a farm from the roadside, the rise of rent being gene- 
 rally determined at the estate office beforehand. 
 
 8903. Suppose two railway companies have a dif- 
 ference they leave it to arbitration, and if the arbitra- 
 tors differ it is left to a person appointed by the Board 
 of Trade, and they are generally well satisfied with his 
 decision ? — As between two railway companies I do 
 not see any reason why they should not be satisfied with 
 the decision of the officer of the Board of Trade, as they 
 come before him on a perfect level as regards their re- 
 spective rights, but I believe there is a very general feel- 
 ing on the part of the tenant-farmers — some of whom of 
 course are more or less ignorant, and others more or less 
 enlightened, that any umpire appointed by Government 
 or by a Government bureau would not be free from 
 pressure on the landlords' side, that is the general 
 feeling. I do not know if I have made myself clear. 
 
 8904. I suppose you think it would be no harm to 
 have such a body of men in case the parties wished to 
 appeal to one of them ? — I do not. 
 
 8905. But you think if they could agree upon some 
 local man it would be better? — Yes. I quite agree 
 with the jDresident that the umpire, and indeed all of 
 them, should be well skilled in the qualities and value 
 of soil — practical men as well as chemists. 
 
 8906. You would have no trouble at all in getting 
 the two arbitrators ?— -I think not. 
 
 8907. The third man is the difSculty ?— I think so. 
 The third would be the man all the trouble would be 
 to get, such as both parties could place confidence in 
 his judgment and impartiality. 
 
 Mr. W. J. 
 
 Hanna. 
 
304 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sepe.27,1830. 
 
 Jlr. W. J. 
 Banna. 
 
 8908. I see by the notes which you fvirnished that 
 you think the scale of compensation in the Land Act is 
 not a sufficient security for the tenant to prevent the 
 raising of rents 1 — I think I said that for the indolent 
 and thriftless tenant the compensation is sufficient. In 
 my view the compensation is oppressive on the land 
 lord in the case of such a tenant. A careless and idle 
 tenant is a nuisance ia the country, while the really 
 hardworking tenant does not get anything like adequate 
 compensation, if his case comes into court — not the 
 half of what he ought to get. 
 
 8909. Is not evidence given to the County Court 
 Judge as to the condition of the farm? — In this 
 part of the country if you go into the Land Court 
 you must go in under the Ulster custom, and as I 
 understand the law, not being a lawyer, you must first 
 give up your farm altogether, and go in for the tender 
 mercies of the law, having bereft yourself of your 
 holding J and the industrious tenant where his im- 
 provements are exceptional and extensive, is not 
 allowed to show in what respects his farm differs 
 from the ordinary holdings around him. The landlord 
 comes in and brings a lot of cases — cases of thrift- 
 less, good-for-nothing, farmers who had to sell of course 
 for a low price. The tenant on the other hand brings 
 forward a lot of extreme oases on the other side, and 
 the Judge, not knowing much about the matter, sjjlits 
 the difference or something of that sort, and that is the 
 way the decisions are made. 
 
 8910. You refer also to the fact of the Judge not 
 having an opportunity of seeing the holdings, and 
 probably having so many cases that he would not be 
 able to do so — he is therefore obliged to trust entirely 
 to the evidence which is given before him'i — Yes, 
 there are a number of witnesses brought up who 
 mention a lot of extreme cases on the one side, and on 
 the other that perhaps have very little, if any bearing 
 on the case. 
 
 8911. Mr. Shaw. — Even if he were to see the place 
 perhaps he would not be able to judge 1 — Very probably 
 he would not — not being a practical farmer; and 
 consequently even with the best intentions it is very 
 hard for him to arrive at a correct decision. 
 
 8912. You think it would be better to avoid coming 
 into court at all 1 — Yes. A friend of mine has just 
 reminded me that under the Land Act as it at present 
 stands, the value of the tenant's claim is liable to be 
 reduced very much by the jiuwer the landlords have of 
 putting on their own rents, and that they generally 
 enforce them under a notice to quit, and of course that 
 makes the tenant's interest a very indefinite quantity. 
 Virtually the tenant has no option whatever as he must 
 submit. 
 
 8913. Chairman.— Is there a fear amongst the 
 tenants in your district, that if they went on improving 
 they might lose the value of the imprnvements, and by 
 
 a rise of rent lose the value of the tenant-right 1 
 
 Exactly. 
 
 8914. Under the Land Act there is compensation 
 secured for improvements if the tenant elects to go 
 upon these clauses of the Act ? — Just so, and in some 
 cases they do, but if you take into consideration that 
 the majority of tenants in this country are persons not 
 accustomed to keep accounts — they work away, pay 
 away their montiy, but keep no account of it -they 
 have a general idea in their head of the value of their 
 improvements, but that is all. For a man to come 
 into court with such evidence as that, where you are 
 kept to a strict rule of evidence, simply piits him out 
 of court. 
 
 8915. Mr. Shaw. — The landlord is able to bring up 
 evidence to support his side of the case 1 — Oh, yes ; 
 the landlord has everything kept in shape. 
 
 8916. It is an unequal fight ? — It is. The tenant 
 is an ignorant, illiterate man ; the landlord has every 
 thing in proper order. His accounts are kept by 
 method, and he is prepared to come in with his evidence 
 the moment the case is called. 
 
 8917. Chairman. — What was the term of your 
 lease ?— My present lease is for thirty -five years, from 
 
 the time it was granted. It will terminate in 1912. 
 I wish to state this case of my own. I never made any 
 money off land in my life. I have been a merchant 
 to the present time, and any money I expended on 
 land has been made from other sources. My father 
 lived as a farmer, and all the money he made off his 
 farm was expended back upon it. I lived in another 
 country, and not being in strong health, I came home 
 to spend the balance of my days here.' I paid my father 
 for his farm; and as I wished to give as much employ, 
 ment as I could I went on with various improvements. 
 Now, observe what they did. In 1875 they sent a 
 valuator and they increased my rent from £17 a year 
 to .£28 2s. lid. This little farm of twenty-nine acres 
 when my father originally took it, was composed of little 
 patches of arable land here and there, mixed with 
 rocks and stones ; it had no fences. My father -went 
 on improving it from the time he got it until 1874, 
 when I bought it. I paid him £300 for his improve- 
 ments. I set to work on the further improvements 
 which I thought necessary in order to make it an 
 arable farm within the meaning of the term in this 
 part of the country — that is, to make it capable of 
 being cultivated with the plough — because to work a 
 farm in the old-fashioned way by spade it is in effect 
 to get back only a shilling for every eighteen pence you 
 expend. This land was full of rough rocks, stones, 
 and whins. I removed them. I built the walls you 
 see on this map. [Witness produced a map of the 
 farm.] You see these walls — they are all built with 
 four feet base, and brought up to fourteen inches at 
 the top, and then coped ; you see, I divided the farm 
 into square fields. I opened a road to reach the 
 fields, putupgates,andimprovedthe labourers' cottages. 
 My labourers have gardens of a rood a piece, and I 
 give them privilege over another rood. 
 
 8918. Chairman. — They pay no rent; it is part of 
 their wages. Such was the state of things in 1875 
 when this valuation was made, raising me from £17 to 
 £28 2s. -llcZ. There is another grievance. I find that 
 when the estate was surveyed there was 29a. Or. IOp. 
 23ut down as the area of my holding by the surveyor, 
 whereas 1 never could find more than twenty-one or 
 twenty-two acres in it. I expended on one field o[ 
 that farm — a field of six acres — a sum of £181. If I 
 have to sell a crop I sell by the Cunningham acre ; 
 but when the rent is put on it is calculated by the 
 statute acre. To give you what that farm cost me to 
 remove the rocks and stones, I kept an account ; one 
 portion, containing 2a. 3r. 22p., cost me £172 lis. 2d. 
 
 8919. Removing rocks and stones? — Yes, and 
 bringing it into cultivation ; and there is nothing 
 charged in that account for my superintendence, 
 although I spent a portion of every day in the Held. 
 
 8920. You spent a great deal of money upon it? 
 — I did, but those fields are now in excellent con- 
 dition, with a top soil upon them of eighteen inches 
 deep, the rocks are all removed. When I got it a 
 great portion of it was full of rooks, whins, and 
 crags, so that a man could not ride a horse on it. 
 It is now all capable of being ploughed. 
 
 8921. You got a lease of it ?— I did. 
 
 8922. For how many years ? — They said they would 
 give a lease for sixty-one years, but when it was 
 drafted and sent to Mr. Montgomery, he was found 
 to be tied up by settlements, so that he could only 
 give thirty-five years. That farm cost me a sum of 
 £782 5s. 3d, including the £300 I gave to my 
 father. According to this survey of the landlord's 
 there are twenty-nine acres in the holding. I have 
 not calculated how much an acre, or how many yeare' 
 purchase my expenditure amounts to, but these are 
 improvements that will last all time, with this ex- 
 ception, that on rocky and whinny land for a certain 
 number of years there is a continual outlay to keep 
 down the rocks. This land was full of rocks ; in 
 some places I had to sink pits nine feet deep, in order 
 to bury the rocks and stones, and cover the surface 
 with clay, brought from my own fai-m of Whitehouse, 
 so that virtually I may say, I made the land, and 
 yet after all this the landlord comes and claims £28 a 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 3U5 
 
 year, and after two years quarrelling witli Mm, or rather 
 with his attorney and agent — for I have never seen 
 himself, he at last granted me a lease for thirty-five 
 years, from 1877, at £25 a year — that is an increase of 
 50 per cent, on the previous rent, which was fully equal 
 to the value of the land at the time I got it. My 
 father expended not only his money, but the energy 
 of his life upon that land, and if it had not been for 
 what he and I did, it would not be worth in. 6d. 
 per acre now. There is a portion alongside of it un- 
 reclaimed, and it is not worth a shilling an acre, it is 
 so full of rocks and whins. Now I ask you, calculate 
 the interest upon my outlay, and add it to my rent, 
 and you will see that I never can recoup myself. 
 I have brought forward my own case, because I 
 have the facts ready in form to lay before you, but I 
 bring it merely as an illustration. There are many 
 other cases of equal hardsliip. I mention this case, 
 because Mr. Bence Jones, and some other people are 
 writing to the papers, and asserting that improve- 
 ments by tenants are only a myth, and that in fact 
 the landlords had done all the improvements. 
 
 8923. Mr. Shaw. — He meant in the south 1— It 
 may be so in the south, but I have never known land- 
 lords to lay out a shilling on improvements in my 
 part of the country, except in one instance where a 
 bog was attempted to be reclaimed, but virtually 
 spoiled. 
 
 8924. Are there any restrictions in. the lease you 
 got 1 — No, I would not take the lease until he inserted 
 a clause that whatever rights the law gave me at the 
 end of the lease should be secured to me. He wanted 
 me to waive my tenant-right, but I refused. 
 
 892-5. He wanted you to do so 1 — Yes. I told him 
 that if he gave me what I paid for it, he might take his 
 farm for I did not want it. 
 
 8926. You will have your tenant-right when the 
 lease expires 1 — Yes, unless he destroys it by raising 
 the rent. 
 
 8927. There are no restrictive clauses? — Yes, 
 this one that I did not understand at the time. 
 I am bound to keep the said demised lands, and all 
 improvements made, and to be made upon them, in 
 good order, repair, and condition, and at the end of 
 the term to deliver up same to the landlord, the said 
 demised lands and all improvements made, and to be 
 made upon them in like good order, repair, and con- 
 dition. I did not notice at the time I got the lease, 
 that that clause was in it regarding improvements. 
 
 8928. Are there many leases in your district? — 
 No, there are few or no leases in my part of the 
 country. 
 
 8929. Therefore there is nothing to prevent the 
 rent being raised 1 — Nothing in the world to prevent 
 him raising the rent to such a figure as would swallow 
 every shilling of the improvements made by the 
 tenant. 
 
 t;930. The question of rent is the gi-eat difficulty 1 
 —It is the gi-eat difficulty. It is the uncertainty with 
 regard to rent that keeps back the prosperity of the 
 country. If the tenant was sure of the outcome of 
 his own industry and outlay — the same as he would 
 in any other class of business — he would work night 
 and day to improve his land, and develop the 
 resources of the country. There would be no call for 
 X>eople to leave the country and go elsewhere in search 
 of wnployment, for there would be plenty of employ- 
 ment at home. 
 
 8931. There is plenty of room for improvements at 
 home? — Plenty; and plenty of capital to do them, and 
 even in case all tenants have not got the capital them- 
 selves, their neighbours have it, and they would like 
 to invest their money in the country if they had 
 security. 
 
 8932. If there was an honest tenant-right?— Yes ; 
 such a tenant-tight as would be a defined and saleable 
 interest. 
 
 8933. Mr. Kavanagh — Do you think that would 
 be as satisfactory as the scheme of a tenant proprietary? 
 — -I think it would disturb society less. More im- 
 
 provements woiild be made upon the land. The Sept 27, isao. 
 
 landlord would be more secure in his rent, and would jy-^. ■yy_ j_ 
 
 get his rent without any trouble, so that it would be Hanna. 
 
 much better than the present state of things, even 
 
 looking at it from a landlord's point of view — instead 
 
 of the State having to borrow a lot of monej^ and 
 
 disturbing the country financially, the landlord would 
 
 be the cajiitalist and the tenant would be paying him 
 
 the 'interest upon his money, which would be a thing 
 
 fixed and defined, and anything that the tenant did — 
 
 in\y improvements he made, would go to increase the 
 
 prosperity of the ten;int, to improve the security the 
 
 landlord had for his rent, and to ad\ ance the resources 
 
 of the country. 
 
 8934. IMv. Shaw. — Insecurity is the great defect in 
 the present state of things ? — Yes ; the insecurity — 
 the fear of the landlord being able at any time to 
 come down upon the tenant and increase the rent to 
 any extent he liked. 
 
 8935. Is there much rent-rising going on in your 
 neighbouihood ? — I know a case on the Duke of 
 Abercorn's estate in my own neighbourhood of a 
 farmer dying, and his sister or sister's husband suc- 
 ceeding him as tenant under a rise of rent from o£103 
 to £120. 
 
 8936. "Was that on the occasion of a lease dropping ? 
 — I don't think there was any lease. 
 
 8937. It was the case of the death of a tenant? — 
 Yes, and his brother-in-law coming into possession. 
 
 8938. Chaieman. — Could you give us the name of 
 that tenant? — Well, I would rather not — I would 
 prefer not to interfere in a case upon the Duke's 
 estate. 
 
 8939. The O'CoNOR Don. — How long ago was the 
 rent of that farm raised before?— In 1857 or 1858. I 
 think the lady told me it was raised at that time from 
 £86 to £103. 
 
 8940. Mr. Shaw. — You would not object I suppose 
 to a fair periodical advance of rents ? — 1 would object 
 to giving the landlord anything that did not belong to 
 him. The landlord's interest ought to be defined, and 
 if the rent is fixed upon the basis of a certain scale of 
 prices of produce, and that the prices afterwards 
 advance, the landlord's fixed rent will not buy as 
 much as before, and of course the rent should be 
 advanced. 
 
 8941. That also is Mr. Alexander's view? — Yes. 
 The landlord should participate in the advance if prices 
 rise ; and, on the other hand, if they fall he should 
 divide the fall with the tenant. They are both part- 
 ners, drawing the same produce from the same soil. 
 
 8942. Do you think the future prices of produce are 
 veiy uncertain ? — I do. 
 
 8943. There are so many circumstances to be tal^en 
 into account? — Yes. But on the whole my opinion is 
 that the prices of produce generally in this country will 
 not materially decline. I do not think beef of first 
 class quality like what we raise here will fall materi- 
 ally in price, because there is no country can raise 
 more than a certain quantity of first class beef. At 
 the same time, second class beef, of course, has its 
 bearing on the market, and America can ship immense 
 quantities of second class beef. 
 
 8944. Chairman. — Have you any knowledge of 
 your own of the state of things in America? — I lived 
 twenty-one years in America. 
 
 8945. Mr. Shaw. — Was that before the recent send- 
 ing across of cattle ? — The exportation of cattle from 
 America to the United Kingdom had not commenced 
 at that time. My business, when in America, was 
 exporting flour and dead meat, pork, lard, and things 
 of that sort, drawing our supplies from the Western 
 States. 
 
 8946. You do not think prices will go much lower? 
 • — I do not think they will. 
 
 8947. Nor much higher 1 — No. I don't think they 
 can advance much. I do not think there should be 
 any revisions of rent inside of twenty-one years, and 
 prices should be averaged between one revision period 
 and the other, and not two or five years averan-e but 
 
 2n ° ' 
 
soo 
 
 miSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880. 
 
 Mr. W J. 
 Hanna. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Gamble. 
 
 of the wliole time, Lecause the farmer, like every other 
 business man, must take the chance of business for a 
 certain x^eriod, and if you permitted them to have the 
 rent revised whenever they asked for it, there are 
 many troublesome people \yho would be continually 
 asking for revisions of rent. We want quietness and 
 security. 
 
 8948. A portion of the land you hold is in fee-farm ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 8949. Your father bought it, I suppose 1 — No. I 
 suppose it belonged to our family for the last 200 years. 
 
 8950. Is there much of timt kind of tenure in yovir 
 country — I mean tenants holding their land in perpe- 
 tuity 1 — A few in our district. I pay a head rent of 
 £0 is. Id. upon this fee-farm grant, which, I suppose, 
 at the time the grant was made, was a fair rent. I 
 think it was at first a lease renewable for ever. 
 
 8951. Ten pounds Irish ?- Yes. The Government 
 valuation of it now is £97. 
 
 8951a. Your residence is on it ? — It is. 
 
 8952. Does it adjoin your other farm? — It imme- 
 diately adjoins it. 
 
 Mr. John Gamble, Londonderay, examined. 
 
 8953. The O'Conoe Don. — You live in London- 
 derry 1 — Yes. 
 
 8954. Are you in business in the town 1 — Yes. I 
 am in the seed trade. 
 
 8955. Do you also hold some townparks? — I hold 
 two farms as executor under a will. 
 
 895G. You call them farms ?— Yes ; but I do not 
 want to give evidence with regard to them. ^ My evi- 
 dence en the tenant question generally is similar to 
 what has been given by Mr. Alexander and Mr. 
 Hanna ; but I wish to mention the special case of the 
 townland of Carndonagh ; it is the market town of the 
 barony of Innishowen. I have been deputed to attend 
 here for that district. 
 
 8957. State what the case is that you wish to bring 
 before us % — This townland, Churchlands, iir which the 
 village of Carndonagh is built comprises 237 acres, 
 
 8958. "Who is the landlord 1 — Mr. Wm. Eankin. 
 
 8959. Chairman. — Is he the landlord of the whole 
 townland '! — He is. 
 
 8960. The O'CoNOB Don. — Where does he reside? 
 — Quite near Carndonagh, at a place called Tearna- 
 league. The village is built on a rock in the centre 
 of the townland. The rook comprises 1 4a. Or. 1p. The 
 village has been built entirely by the inhabitants. 
 
 8961. By the occupying tenants? — By the occupy- 
 ing tenants, and there are no leases. They usually 
 have a house and garden and a field, for which they 
 pay a fair rent. The landlord permitted the erection 
 of the buildings — in fact they were built with his 
 consent, and were encouraged by him. He said he 
 would not interfere with them at all, and in true Irish 
 fashion they spent their earnings in building and im- 
 proving their houses on their trust in Mr. Rankin's 
 word without leases. The total number of houses 
 that have been erected is 153. 
 
 8962. Chairman. — ■ Dwelling-houses ? — Dwelling- 
 houses. The poor law valuation of the townland is 
 £148, and the valuation of the buildings, £738 12s., 
 making a total for land and buildings of £886 12s., as 
 the value of the townland. I am told that 3Ir. Eankin 
 always gives liberty of free sale — that is, one person 
 may sell his interest to another, and have it registered 
 by going to the office and getting the name changed. 
 
 8963. In the case of these houses ? — Yes — by simply 
 ffoins to the rent oiSce and having the name changed. 
 The usual price is about twenty-two years' puroliase 
 on the Government valuation. The total tenant-right 
 of these houses, valued at twenty-two years purchase, 
 would be £19,505 4s., and this entire property is held 
 with three or four exceptions at the will of the land- 
 lord. The old man is now dead ; his son has suc- 
 ceeded him, and there is a possibility of the place 
 being sold. As long as it is in the hands of the 
 present family the tenants have no fear whatever, 
 but they are in terror lest the ownership may change 
 hands, as the entire of their interest in the property 
 — ^represented by a sum of £19,500 — would be at 
 the mercy of whoever might chance to be the buyer. 
 
 8964. Mr. Shaw. — Are these people in business? 
 — ^Yes, they have shops, and carry on a smart 
 business — the village is in the centre of the barony 
 and all descriptions of goods are sold there. Up 
 to the present it has gone on in true Irish fashion. 
 He was a good landlord, and the tenants were his 
 dependents; as far as that is concerned, there is 
 
 no complauit. Their apprehension arises from the 
 fear that the property may change owners. 
 
 8965. The O'Conor Don. — Have they ever asked 
 for leases ? — Within the last few years they a.sked for 
 leases, and leases have been promised. When I was 
 there a day or two ago, I was shown the lease that 
 was offered — it proposes to increase the rent, and it 
 embodies a clause tuat at the termination all the im- 
 provements shall be handed over to the proprietor or 
 his representatives. 
 
 8966. Mr. Shaw. — What is the length of the lease 
 that was offered ? — One hundred years. 
 
 8967. That is not a bad lease ? — Well, in the case 
 of a house built as these are, on the top of a rook, and 
 where the landlord never expended one shilling upon 
 them, they think that if the tenant keeps it in good 
 order for a hundred years he ought to get a property 
 in it. They consider the Land Act of 1870 gives no 
 protection in a case of this kind. 
 
 8968. They consider they have a tenant-right ia 
 these houses, but the Land Act does not cover it ?^ 
 Yes. 
 
 8969. Chairman. — Is that on the ground that they 
 are townparks 1 — Yes ; the tenants have bits of land, 
 but they don't live on them — they live lq the town 
 and cultivate the land. 
 
 8970. The O'Conor Don. — What they want is pro- 
 tection for the houses ? — Yes ; protection for their pro- 
 perty. 
 
 8971. The chief pai-t of the expenditure has been 
 building, I suppose ? — Yes. There is another adjacent 
 village something similar. To show how hard it presses 
 upon the people, and how it checks and petiifies then- 
 enterprise — some of these people live in mere hovels, 
 who, if they had encouragement and security would 
 buUd good houses. I know people myself who are 
 living in miserable hovels, who have money in the bank 
 and if they got encouragement would build at once. 
 
 8972. Mr. Shaw. — Is not a hundred years lease suf- 
 ficient encouragement ? I know houses in large towns 
 whicli have been built on a ninety years' lease? — Yes, 
 but that is in the case of a house- built in a town, not 
 a village. 
 
 8973. Chairman. — Though living in the village, you 
 say many of them are farmers ? — Yes ; they are all in 
 business of some sort or other. A number of them 
 deal in corn and cattle. 
 
 8974. Is the townland held with the town? — Yes. 
 
 8975. And I understand there are no farmers on 
 the townland, except people living in the town? — None ; 
 there may be an exception or two, but that is all. 
 
 8976. Is there a fair held in the village? — Yes, a 
 monthly fair. 
 
 8977. That brings it within the townpark clause? 
 — Yes. I may mention another case of a vUlage a 
 few miles distant, upon the estate of another proprietor. 
 During the last twenty years it has grown simply by 
 this sort of feeling between the tenants and the land- 
 lord until it has become a small town, with a weekly 
 market and a monthly fair. They built the houses 
 without any leases. They got the ground at one shil- 
 ling or one and sixpence a foot, having "confidence in 
 the landlord that they would be leniently dealt with. 
 That is the village of Cross, Clonmany. 
 
 8978. Is it under the same landlord as the other? 
 — No, the landlord is a Mr. John Loughrey, J. P., 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 307 
 
 Binion House, Clonmany. For instance, a house 
 costing abotit £800 was built for a liotel twenty years 
 ago. After the tenant's death, two years since, the 
 executors put iip the place for sale. The rent was 
 originally £2 15s. The landlord said the rent should 
 bo £13 10s. 
 
 8979. It was raised from £2 15s. to £13 10s. ?— Yes. 
 It was sold for £500 — a little over half the cost. The 
 increase was no doubt legal, but there will be no more 
 building in that place under svicli conditions. 
 
 8980. Chairman. — Are there many houses in this 
 Tillage held under middlemen 1 — No ; they are held 
 direct from the landlord. 
 
 8981. Mr. SnAW.^If the first village you men- 
 tioned was sold to some outsider who might, perhaps, 
 not recognise the claims of these persons to tenant- 
 right it would be a serious matter for them t — It woiild 
 indeed — that is the thing of which they are apprehen- 
 sive. 
 
 8982. Chaiemait. — Is it your opinion that the pro- 
 visions of the Land Act should be extended to such 
 holdings 1 — I think the Land Act should be extended to 
 fill cases where the tenants make an outlay upon the 
 holding. Persons carrying on business in villages 
 .should be protected as well as farmers. 
 
 8983. Mr. Shaw. — You would extend it to towns 
 and villages ? — To small country villages I would ; but 
 not to houses in cities. 
 
 8981. You think people who live in towns and 
 cities are generally business persons who can take 
 ■care of themselves? — Yes. But this village, Carn- 
 donagh, has been built on the faith the people had in 
 their landlord, who is one of the best in the whole 
 country — his treatment of his tenantry was indulgent 
 in the extreme — much the same as the former Lord 
 Leitrim who was considered one of the best landlords 
 in the country. 
 
 8985. You mean the father of the Earl who was 
 killed 1 — I do ; he was indulgent, as a landlord, to an 
 extraordinary degree. I might mention one or two 
 other cases of land that came into my possession as an 
 executor, illustrating the hardships occasioned by the 
 power the landlords have of arbitrarily raising rent. 
 
 8986. You had better mention them'? — There is a 
 farm over which I am executor. The man died four 
 years ago. The rent in the old lease was £60 or £61, 
 the farm contained 110 statute acres. The rent was 
 raised to £105. 
 
 8987. Was it on the death of the tenant 1 — No ; on 
 the termination of the lease during the life of the 
 tenant. The Government valuation was £77. The 
 rent put on was £105. This was a year before the 
 passing of the Land Act. The old man said he could 
 not pay the rent ; he got the option of paying it or 
 walking out. 
 
 8988. Was he not allowed to sell?— He did not 
 wish to lose his property. He elected to remain 
 on. I might mention that this man had improved 
 the land wonderfully by digging out rocks and 
 stones — in fact a great deal of the land when he 
 got it was full of rocks and whins and unfit for culti- 
 vation. He spent all his spare money in improving 
 the land, and after all that had been done his rent was 
 
 raised from £60 to £105 a year. A year after the Sept. 27,1880 
 
 Land Act passed a lease was granted; it was dated ji^. john 
 
 back prior to the Land Act, dated as of 1869 — and Gamble. 
 
 the ordinary clauses were inserted binding him to give 
 
 up possession at the end of thirty-one years. Now the 
 
 grievance in this case is, that the rent was raised 
 
 upon the man's own improvements, and to an amount 
 
 that he could not pay — an amount that the land was 
 
 unable to bear. I was obliged to sell the form in 1878 
 
 in order to pay his debts owing to the excessive 
 
 rent. 
 
 8989. Did the tenant-right sell for anything? — It 
 sold for ten years' purchase — but it would have fetched 
 fifteen or twenty years had it not been for the rise of 
 rent. 
 
 8990. Is it near a town 1 — It is within four miles 
 of Londonderry. 
 
 8991. The O'CONOR Don.— How long before had 
 the rent been raised ? — The lease expired in 1866 — it 
 was a lease for lives, and had perhaps lasted for fifty 
 years. 
 
 8992. Then, at tlie expiration of fifty years, a rise 
 was made? — Yes. 
 
 8993. Mr. Shaw. — The improvements had been 
 made by the tenant ? — Every one of them. 
 
 8994. Is that the usual thing in that part of the 
 countrj', or do the landlords make improvements? — 
 No ; the tenants make all the improvements. 
 
 8995. The O'Conor Don.— Who is the landlord?— 
 The present landlord is Colonel Lyle. 
 
 8996. Mr. Shaw. — Is there tenant-right on his 
 estate ? — Yes ; but the tenant-right is being destroyed 
 by the raising of rent. 
 
 8997. Is that a general complaint in your district 
 — the raising of rents ? — Yes ; and that the increase 
 is excessive. The rents are more than the valuation. 
 If a tenant imi^roves his farm, his rent will be raised, 
 and his tenant-right is swamped by the rise of rent. 
 
 8998. Chairman. — In the Land Act there is this 
 description of townparks : — 
 
 " Any holding ordinarily termed ' townparks' adjoining 
 or near to any city or town, which shall bear an increased 
 value as accommodation land over and above the ordinary 
 letting value of land occupied as a farm." 
 
 Therefore if it is occupied as a farm it does not come 
 under the definition of townpark. Has there been 
 any case before the Land Court on the subject? — No j 
 not from our district. 
 
 8999. Were you aware that that is the definition of 
 a townpark ? — I am aware of it, sir ; but I am also 
 aware that there are many cases in which the County 
 Court Judges make difierent decisions. 
 
 9000. Mr. Shaw. — Your opinion is, that the case 
 of the village houses you have mentioned is a peculiar 
 case in itself, and has elements that are not provided 
 for in the Land Act ? — Yes. 
 
 9001. Your contention is, that they build the houses 
 in the faith of tenant-right ? — Yes, sir. The landlord 
 of Carndonagh always allowed them fixity of tenure, 
 fair rents, and free sale. 
 
 9002. But in case the landlord sells the property 
 their right is gone? — Yes, sir; that is what they are 
 aiDprehensive of — a change of landlords. 
 
 Ml'. James Lapsley, St. Johnstown, county Donegal, examined. 
 
 Mr. James 
 
 9003. Chairman. — You live at St. Johnstown 1— 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 9004. Is that near Londonderry ? — It is in the 
 county Donegal, within six miles of Londonderry. 
 
 9005. What case do you wish to mention to us ? — 
 My case is similar to the one which has been stated 
 by Mr. Gamble, with this addition, that we are under 
 notice to quit at the present time. 
 
 9006. Mr. Shaw. — You have no leases? — No leases. 
 Some tenants who built lately have leases ; but a 
 number of the tenants who have been in occupation 
 for years have none. 
 
 9007. How many of them are there ? — I think over 
 twenty. 
 
 9008. Had they formerly leases of their holdings ? ^^P^'^^- 
 —No ; they built the houses without leases on the 
 faith of the Ulster custom. 
 
 9009. Are they small houses 1 — Some of them are 
 pretty large for a village— built at a cost of £100 to 
 £250 each. 
 
 on part of the pro- 
 No house in the vil- 
 
 9010. It is a village?— It is 
 perty of the Duke of Abercorn. 
 lage cost him anything. 
 
 9011. Is there a fair held in it ? — Only one in the 
 year._ The Duke has tried to establish a market in it 
 within the last year — a corn market. 
 
 9012. There is no weekly market? — No. 
 
 2R2 
 
308 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 27, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Lapsley. 
 
 9013. They built upon the faith of a custom that 
 existed on the estate ? — Yes ; a custom under which a 
 tenant, who wished to dispose of his holding, had 
 liberty from the olKce to sell, and the other had liberty 
 to b\iy. Now there are over twenty of us under 
 notice to quit without that privilege. 
 
 9014. Without the power of selling? — Yes. 
 
 9015. Is it for non-payment of rent that the notices 
 were served 1 — No. it is not. I am under notice to 
 quit, and I do not owe anything. 
 
 9016. What is the reason of it?— We thought it 
 was through the unpleasantness that arose out of the 
 result of the last election, or from a desire to increase 
 the rent-roll. 
 
 9017. Have you votes 1 — A number of us have votes. 
 Thirteen out of twenty-five or twenty-six have votes ; 
 and we thought it was for that. However, we have 
 not ascertained as yet what their object is in serving 
 the notices. 
 
 9018. Were you asked for an increase of rent ? — The 
 form of the notices was this — a notice to quit otherwise 
 the rent would be double. That is the wording of the 
 notice. 
 
 9019. Who is the agent?— Mr. T. W. D.Humphreys; 
 the sub-agent is Mr. James M'Farland. 
 
 9020. Does Mr. Humphreys live there? — No; he 
 lives on the Tyrone property. The Duke has property 
 in each county. 
 
 9021. And you say there are over twenty tenants 
 under the same circumstances as you are ? — Yes. 
 
 9022. Do they know you are coming here to-day ? — 
 They do. I represent the village. 
 
 9023. Do they hold land ? — They do ; some of them. 
 Others are tradesmen — blacksmiths and cai-penters, 
 who are a great accommodation to the surrounding 
 people, and some of them are shopkeepers. Some of 
 them have land and some have not; but, of course, 
 even those who have no land, shopkeepers and trades- 
 men, are a great accommodation to the working class 
 of people, and to some of the farmers as well. 
 
 9024-. The O'Conor Don.— Your case is the same as 
 
 that mentioned by the last witness, with this excep- 
 tion, that you are actually under notice to quit ?— -Yes, 
 we are under notice to quit in November, and we have 
 no liberty to sell under the notice, whereas we thought 
 we had under the custom. 
 
 9025. What are the present rents of the houses- 
 are they ground rents or are they in proportion to the 
 value of the houses ? — In proportion to the vahie of the 
 houses, mostly. 
 
 9026. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think it was in order to- 
 raise the rents the notices were served ? — Yes. 
 
 9027. Chairman. — I believe you have two holdings ? 
 — I have. 
 
 9028. Are they both under notice ? — Both under 
 notice — I got two notices. 
 
 9029. The O'Conok Don.— Are they both houses? 
 — A house and land ; I hold about twenty acres of land. 
 
 9030. Have you been put to any costs already in 
 respect of those notices 1 — None. 
 
 9031. The reason I asked the question was, you. 
 mention in your notes two ejectment processes which 
 involved some costs ? — That was my brother's case, not 
 mine. 
 
 9032. Is he here ?— He is not. 
 
 9033. Do you know the particulars of his case ?— 1 
 do. 
 
 9034. Mention shortly what his case is ? — It was 
 with regard to a little farm that he occufiied. The 
 office wanted a portion of it for the purpose of extend- 
 ing the market, and they would not come to terms 
 with him with regard to the value of it. He offered 
 to leave the value to arbitration but they required him 
 to submit to whatever value they would put upon it, 
 without even telling him how much they would give, 
 and he didn't like to agree to that, so they served him 
 with notice to quit on 1st November next. 
 
 9035. They ejected him from the whole ? — Yes, from 
 the whole — house, land, and all. He is sure to get 
 compensation for the land under the Ulster custom, 
 but he has no security for the money that he expended 
 on the house. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 Oaborne and 
 Mr. John 
 Steel. 
 
 Mi: Samuel Osborne, Springtown, Londonderry, and Mr. John Steel, The Park, Londonderry, examined 
 
 ! a tenant-farmer ?- 
 
 9036. Chairman. — You are 
 IMr. Osborne. — I am. 
 
 9037. What land do you hold ?— I hold altogether 
 229a. 3r. 26p., Lq two holdings, one of which 1 hold 
 directly under the Irish Society ; the other is on the 
 property of the Society, but there is a middleman be- 
 tween us. 
 
 9038. Have you any complaint to make as to the 
 mode in which the Irish Society manage their pro- 
 perty? — I think all my complaints are embodied in 
 this paper [produced] of February, 1854, an extract 
 from which I shall ask your permission to read. I 
 do not think there has been any improvement in the 
 Society's management of their estate since that time. 
 The management of the property of the Irish Society 
 and of the other London corporations, who have estates 
 in Ireland was investigated very fully on that occasion 
 before a Eoyal Commission which took evidence in 
 London. 
 
 9039. In 1854 ? — Yes, before a Royal Commission 
 of which the late Right Hon. Henry Labouchere was 
 chairman. There is one special case which is in itself 
 an illustration of the management of the Society — the 
 case of Mr. Babington wliose nephew, I believe, will 
 be here before you to-morrow. He says : — 
 
 "In the year 1832 I got a sixty-one years' lease from the 
 Irish Society, they bound me to Lay out £750, and they 
 gave me seven years to do it. I did it witiiin the time and 
 got a certificate from their agent that I had fully performed 
 my contract. Having a larger farm than I at first intended to 
 hold upon my hands I wished to lay out a much larger sum 
 and I went on laying out a considerable sum of money. I 
 had laid out over £6,000 upon it. I have meraoriahzed the 
 Society at times for an extension of the lease ; they always 
 treated me very civilly when they came over to the country, 
 and approved of my buildings. The last time I applied to 
 
 them I stated the case very strongly, and said as they were 
 trustees for the plantation, as I had laid out so large a sum 
 I would take it as a favour if, having spent so many years 
 in maldng the improvements, they would make up my term to 
 my original grant of sixty-one years. The answer I got 
 from their secretary to one of my memorials was this — ' In 
 reply to your memorial, I beg to inform you that the 
 Honourable the Irish Society have come to the following 
 resolution — That a new lease be granted to you for four- 
 teen years, to commence from the expiration of your pre- 
 sent term at the rent of £162 19s. 2d. ' (I then paid £112 
 1 9s. 2d.) ' upon the distinct understanding that a flauseshwll 
 be inserted for the tenant-right to be waived or given up, 
 and the vihole of the buildings thereon, or to be placed 
 thereon, with all the improvements on the land, &c., are to 
 be the exclusive property of the Irish Society at the expira- 
 tion of the term.' " 
 
 9040. That was Mr. Babing ton's evidence given 
 before the Commission in 1854? — Yes; and my case 
 is similar to it. 
 
 9041. Mr. Kavanagh. — Your case is the same ?— 
 Almost identically the same. When I took my farm 
 originally it contained 152a. 1r. 30p. Forty acres of 
 that are bog. It was given to the tenant who pre- 
 viously held it on the distinct understanding that it 
 was to be drained by the Society, and upon that under- 
 standing the same rent was paid for it as for the land 
 adjoining. That undertaking was never carried out, 
 from the fact that there were mills in the neighbour- 
 hood, and the water would not be allowed to pass 
 under the mills. I then }iurchat,ed the farm, but the 
 moment I attemjjted to drain the forty acres I was 
 served with a notice to quit by the Society. 
 
 9042. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do I understand you to 
 say that it was on account of the mills that you were 
 prevented from draining the forty acres ? — Yes ; but [ 
 secured the good-will of the miller, and also g')t per- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 309 
 
 mission from the Railway Company, but I had to de- 
 sist operations wlien I got a notice to quit from tlie 
 Society. 
 
 9043. Was that notice to quit served upon you in 
 order to prevent you from draining 1 — No ; I think 
 the Society did not understand it. 
 
 9044. What was the object of the notice?— Well, 
 the Society are not favourable to tenant-light ; they do 
 not understand it. They are English gentlemen. 
 
 9045. They did not understand tenant-right"! — Yes. 
 After I purchased the farm, they said they must have 
 a revaluation. I submitted to that, and the farm was 
 raised from £60 to £62 2s. 6cZ. That, you will perhaps 
 say, was not much of a rise, but the draft lease of four- 
 teen years was sent to me with an express covenant to 
 waive my tenant-right — -just what Mr. Babington com- 
 plains of in the passage I have read. Refusing to do that, 
 they asked me to submit to anothei- valuation, which 
 I declined to do, feeling that one valuation in twehe 
 months was quite enough ; but they carried it out, 
 and the result was my rent was increased to £\ 1 3 2s. G(/. 
 
 9046. From £62 2s. U. ]— Yes. 
 
 9047. The O'Conob, Don. — How long ago was this? 
 — In 1S74. I may mention that I had two valuators 
 on my own account — one of whom estimated the value 
 at £72 2s. 6(7. This case raises an important ques- 
 tion about valuators, and illustrates what six of them 
 will do within twelve months. I told you the result 
 of their first valuation was £02 2s. 6d. One of the 
 valuators I employed made it £72 2s. Qd. ; another 
 valuator made it £76, with half the county cess re- 
 turned ; a third valuator made it £85 Is. ll^'i. ; the 
 fourth £113 2s. Gd. ; and the fifth (the Irish Society) 
 £ 103. I went to London and waited on the Society, and 
 explained the circumstances to them, and with what 
 result 1 — They say I may take the farm at a rent of 
 £103 per annum as tenant-at-will — that I should have 
 seven days to consider the acceptance of that offer ; 
 that, failing acceptance within seven days, I should be 
 required to give up possession ; and, failing to give 
 up possession, theii- solicitor would be instnicted to 
 take steps to recover possession" from m.e. I say the 
 Society — who are a fluctuating body of gentlemen, 
 many of whom are unacquainted with the circum- 
 stances of their property — did this in ignorance. 
 
 9048. Mr. Shaw. — Have they an agent here ?^ 
 Yes, and a valuator too ; but I think they were mis- 
 led by their valuator's statement to them. I again say 
 I do not blame the English gentlemen at all. I have 
 always been treated very kindly by them when I went 
 over ; but I say they have been misled. 
 
 9049. Who is their agent?— Mr. Plunkett — a gentle- 
 man who will be here before you to give evidence, and 
 Mr. Hart is the valuator. Now, having got that 
 " squeezer" from the Society in London, and knowing 
 that the Land Courts here are so uncertain, I did 
 not know exactly what to do ; and I instituted a 
 movement through my friend the late Professor Smyth, 
 and Mr. Lewis, who also stood friend to me, and Mr. 
 Law, the member of Parliament for the county. I 
 supplied them with the facts; but we found that 
 on the point of the land tenure, my case was very 
 uncertain ; but onthepointof account-keeping, we might 
 bring them to bay. The land laws in this country are 
 very uncertain, and the Irish Society have plenty of 
 money to fight ; so that very few tenants will venture to 
 go to law with them. I will give you an instance (that 
 of Mr. Gilliland) how they fight a case— they fought the 
 case, first, on the ground that it came under the town- 
 park clause ; secondly, on the ground o± the surrender 
 clause of the lease ; and I think there was a third point 
 on which they also fought it. However, it came before 
 the Chairman of the county. They had the Solicitor- 
 General down — heavy metal for a tenant to have to meet. 
 
 9050. Did they bring the Solicitor-General before 
 the Chairman? — They did. The Chairman awarded 
 under the Ulster custom. The Society appealed from 
 the Chairman's decision, and the Solicitor-General was 
 brought down for tlie appeal before the Judge. 
 
 9051. The O'CoxoE Don.— What was the result of 
 
 the appeal? — The result of the appeal was that the &,-<. 2r, 1380. 
 Ulster custom was substantiated, but a slight reduction jj^. g^j^^i 
 was made in the award. I want to prove to you that it is Osborne and 
 difficult for a tenant to come into court against his Mr. John 
 landlord, owing to the expense of litigation, and the ^''^'^l- 
 uncertainty of what the result may be ; but it is far 
 more difficult and hazardous for a tenant to fight 
 against a powerful corporation lilco the Irish Society, 
 who have large funds at their disposal. 
 
 9052. But the principle of Ulster tenant-right, you 
 say, was establislied by the appeal as existing on the 
 estate ? — Yes ; we were glad of that. 
 
 9053. Mr. Shaw. — How did you fare yourself? — 
 With regard to myself the}' said, " We will ha\-e an 
 independent valuation," and they brought the valuator 
 down. I should state that I offered to leave my case 
 to arbitration. This valuator put 50 per cent, increase 
 of rent upon me. 1 complain that such an increase of 
 rent should be put upon this farm, on the ground that 
 it was an increase made upon the improvements done 
 by the tenant. Every item of the improvements upon 
 that farm was done by the tenant- he built the house, 
 reclaimed the land, built the offices, and altogether 
 something like £900 was expended on the farm by the 
 tenant. 
 
 9054. Was that all within the Company's know- 
 ledge' — Well, I won't say that, because they are a 
 fluctuating body. 
 
 9055. Mr. Shaw. — Don't they come over to this 
 country every year ? — They do. I have been counting 
 up the time they have been in the habit of staying iji 
 Londonderry. I believe it is about three hoiirs each 
 day for three days — that is nine hours every year. At 
 the same time, it is Vjut justice to the members of the 
 Irish Society to say that they are very civil and kind 
 when you go over to them. They will hear most 
 courteously what you have to say, and you will very 
 often get your case altered to your satisfaction by 
 laying the circumstances before them. It is due to 
 them to state that. I should tell you also that the. 
 notices to quit which they send clown — I have three of 
 them — they do not act upon them to the full extent, 
 when you are able to explain your case satisfactorily.. 
 I have to complain, however, that the Society are 
 trenching upcm the Ulster custom ; and the tenants in 
 1875 passed a resolution protesting against the action 
 of the Society in that respect. 
 
 905G. Has that been increasing since the passing of 
 the Land Act? — It has. 
 
 9057. Is your farm far from the city? — It is only a 
 mile from Londonderry. I would be glad if any gen- 
 tleman would come and see it. 
 
 9058. The O'Conor Don. — Does it come under the 
 definition of a townpark ? — I hope not. 
 
 9059. You live on it ?— I do. 
 
 9060. Mr. Kavanagh.— You have mentioned that, 
 the tenants of the Irish Society came to a resolution pro- 
 testing against the action of the Society in trenching on 
 the Ulster custom ? — Yes. On that subject I wish to 
 lay before the Commissioners the following state- 
 ment : — 
 
 " THE IRISH SOCIETY AND THEIR TENANTS. 
 
 " A meeting of the tenants of the Irish Society and 
 other.? interested in a fiatisfactory adjustment of the rela- 
 tions between that honorable body and the citizens was 
 held in the City Hotel on Saturday, the 23rd October, 1875, 
 at half-past two o'clock. Alderman Joseph Ewing Miller,' 
 M.D., J.P., presided. 
 
 "Moved by Mr. John Steel, Parks, seconded bv Mr. 
 John Kerr, and unanimously resolved : 
 
 "_' That we deprecate the conduct of the Hon. the Irish 
 Society in forcing their tenantry to accept leases, with 
 unusual and exceptional clauses, with the concealed inten- 
 tion of destroying our tenant-right, as by law established, 
 and we also view with alarm their unprecedented and o'.en 
 attacks upon tenant-right, by undue interference at the sale 
 of holdings upon their estate, such as occurred at the sale 
 of the farm of the late Joseph Torrens. That we respect- 
 fully submit that our rights are threatened to such an e.\tent 
 as to justify us in making an appeal to our county members 
 and the member for Coleraine, in order to secure their Par- 
 
310 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 Osborne and 
 Mr. John 
 Steel. 
 
 liameiitary co-operation -with Mr. Lewis in carrying into 
 energetic action their promised, anxious, and most serious 
 consideration of the constitution of the Irish Society and 
 the great question of te.nant-right.' 
 
 " Moved by Mr. Francis O'Neill, seconded by Mr. 11. J. 
 Alexander, and unanimously resolved : — 
 
 " ' That a copy of the foregoing resolution be sent to 
 each of the county members, and also to the member for 
 Coleraine, and that the different tenant farmers' clubs 
 throughout the county should also receive a copy of the 
 resolution, and be asked to co-operate with the tenants of 
 the Irish Society in bringing about the desired reform.'" 
 
 9061. With regard to those resolutions about what 
 number of tenants were present at the meeting 1 — A 
 large number of the tenantry. 
 
 9062. Do you give it as your evidence that that is 
 the opruion of the majority of the tenants of the 
 Society? — 1 do. On that subject I wish to lay before 
 the Commissioners a notice which was issued by the 
 Society on the occasion of the sale of a farm by Mr. 
 Steel :— 
 
 " The Hon. the Irish Society's Office, 
 
 "Londonderry, 12th June, 1880. 
 " SiE, — You are hereby required to take notice that the 
 Honorable, the Irish Society, reserve to themselves the 
 right to accept or refuse as tenant the purchaser of the 
 interest of John Steel in the farm occupied by him at 
 Killea, and also the right of revision of the rent of said 
 farm, and you are hereby required to state this at the sale 
 of said farm. 
 
 " (Signed), Ahthuk C. Pi-UNitETT, 
 "General Agent. 
 " To Mr. "Walters, Auctioneer, Londonderry.'' 
 
 9063. Was this document read by the auctioneer at 
 the time of the sale 1 — Mr. iSteel. — No. I would not 
 allow it to be read. I stopped the sale, and woirld not 
 permit it to be read. 
 
 9064. It v.'ould have been better if the notice had 
 stated the amount of rent which they would require 
 the incoming tenant to pay 1 — Much better. 
 
 9065. Mr. Osborne. — I consider my own case is also 
 an example of the action of the Society for the purpose 
 of destroying tenant-right. A revaluation of my farm 
 was made in 1874 immediately on my purchase of it, 
 and that operation of a notice to quit, and the resolu- 
 tion in London requiring me to agree to their terms, 
 of a highly increased rent, within seven days, on pain 
 of giving up possession, is I think a serious invasion 
 of the Ulster custom. My idea of the Ulster custom 
 differs a little from that given by other gentlemen. I 
 believe it is the logical outgrowth of the conditions of 
 the Plantation articles between the English and 
 Scotch settlers who came over here, and the landlords 
 of the estates. Those conditions have not been ob- 
 served by the Society. 
 
 9066. What are the articles you refer to? — One of 
 them is that the Society shall not demise any of their 
 lands to tenants at will, but on lease, fee-simple, or 
 perpetuity. Another is that no uncertain rents shall 
 be reserved, but that same shall be expressly set down. 
 I will send you a copy of those ai-ticles. 
 
 9067. By those articles the tenants were given a 
 distinct interest in the land ? — Quite so. 
 
 9068. Can you tell us when those articles origin- 
 ated ?— In 1613. 
 
 9069. At the time of the grants to the companies 1 
 — At the time the five counties were escheated in 
 Ulster. 
 
 9070. The O'CONOE Don.— Do the Irish Society 
 expend much money in improvements on the estate 1 
 — They were induced at one time by their surveyor to 
 build farm -steadings, and they did so ; but I may say 
 their surveyor robbed them, and after that they never 
 did the same thing again. 
 
 9071. They allowed their tenants to build and im- 
 
 prove 1 — They did ; and then increased the rent upon 
 the tenants' improvements. Myfather'scaseismentioued 
 in the evidence given before the Labouchere Commis- 
 sion. It was mentioned by Sir Robert Ferguson. 
 He was asked ; — 
 
 " Are the affairs of the Irish Society of a very complicated 
 kind ? — Every Irish proprietor's afTau-s are of a complicated 
 kind in dealing with a large tenantry. The questions of 
 tenants' arrangements, and tenants' rights, are more com- 
 plicated than any person without experience can form any 
 idea of. If any person can imagine an Irish property 
 changing its landlord every year, they can form an idea how 
 overwhelmed the Irish Society must be every time a new 
 man goes over, in meeting the applications made to them. 
 
 " Do you believe that the tenants whom the Irish Society 
 have in the town of Londonderry, are worse off in their 
 relation to their landlord than tenants in Belfast?— The 
 tenants of the Irish Society living upon terminable leases 
 in the town of Derry are much worse off than those of any 
 other proprietor, whatever, whose estate I have ever known. 
 They are worse off, not as regards their personal comforts 
 or their expenditure, but they are worse off in the manner 
 in which they are treated, and the uncertainty in which 
 they are as to how they will be treated should anything 
 happen. They cannot form the most distant idea why a 
 thing is granted to one person, and why it is refused to 
 another. A per.son in my own immediate neighbourhood 
 living upon part of their property which at one time was 
 under the Corporation, had been for a long time memorializing 
 them, either to let him build, to give him a lease, or that, 
 they should build, and that he would give them a percentage 
 upon the building. The Irish Society have given up for 
 the last two or three years, the practice of sending over 
 deputations, but they send over what they call visitations. 
 Five or six of their members, as many as their agent's house 
 will hold, come over, go through the estate, examine it and 
 look at everything and talk with everybody. This man 
 came when they were engaged upon this visitation. He 
 thought he had made a favourable impression. When they 
 went back this year, at the first Court held after they went 
 back, he got an answer to say that having considered his 
 memorial, and the proceedings upon it, theyhad come to the 
 resolution to give him a notice to quit. The man was in a 
 great fright at this, and he came over to London to the 
 next Court! When he came to the Court, instead of a 
 notice to quit they made him some arrangement for building 
 his houses and sent him back again." 
 
 For my own part I believe that notice to quit was the 
 work of the agents here and that the Society knew 
 nothing about it, because when I went over and ex- 
 plained the case to them they were friendly enough. 
 Their surveyor misspent the money which he had been 
 entrusted to lay out on the property, but the Society 
 recouped me by giving me £150 in hand, and laying 
 out .£320 on the buildings and making them suitable. 
 
 9072. Mr. Kavanagh. — Then the Irish Society re- 
 couped you fully? — Yes. That settles the former 
 question, but they have not settled the last matter, 
 about preventing my drainage of the portion of the 
 farm I had from them. If it had been a private land- 
 lord he would have assisted instead of thwarting me 
 in the way they did. 
 
 9073. What has become of the notice to quit ? — 
 That last notice has been the means of adding 50 per 
 cent, to my rent. 
 
 9074. Would the tenants purchase their holdings 
 if they got an opportunity 1 — I am sure they would. 
 
 9075. Could they pay one quarter or one-third of 
 the purchase-money, if the remainder were advanced 
 by Government 1 — I think most of them would make 
 an effort to do it. 
 
 9076. The uncertainty you speak of as regards 
 what the rents may be, is I suppose a hindrance to 
 improvement? — Undoubtedly. Like all corporate 
 bodies they don't understand the circumstances. 
 
 9077. Mr. Kavanagh. — Will you send me the 
 articles of the Plantation to which you referred just 
 now ? — I will. 
 
MliNUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 511 
 
 Mr. Steel examined. 
 
 9078. The O'Coxor Do^. — Do you agree generally 
 with the evidence of the last witness ? — I do. 
 
 9079. Have you anything special to add to what 
 Mr. Osborne has stated? — Nothing. I merely wish 
 to send in that notice, which I received from them at 
 the time I wanted to sell. 
 
 9080. How many acres are there in your farm 1 — 
 It is only a small farm I hold under the Society. I 
 occupy upwards of 400 acres altogether, but only 
 thirty-nine of these are held under the Society. I am 
 glad I do not hold any more under them. 
 
 9081. How much were you going to sell 1 — Thirty- 
 nine acres. 
 
 9082. And the notice which has been already read 
 was served on the auctioneer 1 — Yes. 
 
 9083. It prevented the sale being completed 1 — 
 It did. I could not get a bidder, and I withdrew the 
 sale. 
 
 9084. Had you bought that farm yourself! — I had. 
 
 9085. Did you pay money for if? — Certainly. 
 
 . 9086. With the Society's knowledge ?— With the 
 agent's knowledge. 
 
 9087. Has your rent been increased 1 — No, there 
 has been no rise on me. I have no lease, and never 
 had for the last fifteen years. 
 
 9088. How much is the rent of the thirty-nine 
 acres?— The rent is £14 6s. 6(1, Government valua- 
 tion being £12. In 1870, on getting twelve acres of 
 mountain, value 5^., rent was raised to £15 14s. 5d. 
 There is a great deal of rough land on it. It is three 
 miles from the town. 
 
 9089. You have not improved the rough land ? — I 
 have not. I have improved the other part of it. 
 When I bought it it ^\'ould not produce anything, and 
 there was two and a half years' rent due. I now 
 consider it worth double what it was when I got it. 
 
 9090. Was the two and a half years' rent paid to 
 the landlord out of the purchase-money ? — It was. 
 
 9091. Is it one of the advantages of tenant-right 
 that the landlord is always sure of his rent ? — Yes, the 
 tenant-right gives him security for the rent. 
 
 Seilt. 27, 1880. 
 Mr. Steel. 
 
 Mr. James jM'Glinchy, Kindrayhead, county Donegal, examined. 
 
 9092. Chairman. — You are a tenant farmer holding 
 120 acres of land? — Yes. I hold two farms; they 
 both would comprise that number of acres — between 
 sixty and seventy acres each. 
 
 9093. Who are the two landlords under whom you 
 hold? — Mr. James Steel Nicholson — I am happy to 
 say one of the best landlords in the country. I have 
 no grievances to complain of as regards him. 
 
 9094. There is no grievance to complain of in your 
 own case? — No, not as regards the holdings I have 
 at present, but there is a grievance as regards the 
 holding upon which I was reared, which is not in the 
 same barony at all. 
 
 9095. What is the grievance as regards that holding ? 
 • — Increase of rent. 
 
 9096. Who is the landlord ?— Mr. William Young, 
 of Mount Hall. 
 
 9097. Mr. Shaw. — When was the rent increased ? 
 My father took the farm in 1820 — the rent was then 
 about £16. It was a mountain farm. 
 
 9098. What was the date?— 1812 or 1820. I am 
 not sure which. 
 
 9099. Chairman. — It was a rough farm ? — A moun- 
 tain fai'm. 
 
 9100. What was the rent? — £16 a year. It wa.s 
 a pretty large farm. He built a dwelling-house on it 
 and reclaimed it. It had all to be reclaimed from the 
 barren mountain. 
 
 9101. The O'CoNOE Don.— Did he get a lease of 
 it? — He did — for twenty-one years in 1826. 
 
 9102. When that term expired what happened? — 
 I do not think the rent was increased till 1847, when 
 it was increased to £25 in the famine year. 
 
 9103. Was there a renewal of the lease? — No. He 
 went on as tenant-at-will until 1858, when the rent was 
 again increased to £31, but only £30 was asked at the 
 time. Fearing that this system of periodical increase 
 would be continued, a lease was asked for twenty-one 
 years more. It was granted, but the £31 rent was 
 exacted. 
 
 9104. You say £30 only was required? — Thirty 
 pounds would have been taken I suppose if my father 
 had been willing to remain at the £30 without security, 
 but fearing and knowing the character of the landlord 
 for increasing rents, he thought it better to take a lease 
 at £31 for twenty-one years. 
 
 9105. The £1 additional was put on for the lease? 
 — Yes ; that lease is about expiring now. Of course 
 my object in stating this is to show that the increase 
 of rent was the result of my father's improvements — 
 building, reclamation, fencing, and draining. These 
 improvements absorbed not only his own energies and 
 the energies of the members of the family who re- 
 
 mained at home, but also the earnings of such of the 
 members of the family as left home and emigrated, 
 and who contributed all they could in the shape of 
 assistance to keep the old people on the farm. 
 
 9106. The O'Conor Don. —Does tenant-right exist 
 on the estate ? — The landlord did all in his power to 
 extinguish tenant-right. The last year tenant-right 
 was allowed it was by the act of the Land Court — he 
 was defeated in a claim by a tenant, and tenant-right 
 was established by the decision of the Court. 
 
 9107. Has unlimited right of sale to the highest 
 bidder been established as existing on the property ? — 
 Certainh', but the landlord's great object all through 
 was to extinguish the tenant-right. 
 
 9108. And this raising of rent if continued will in 
 the end extinguish it of course? — Certainly. 
 
 9109. Was the landlord in the habit of making 
 improvements? — In 1847 about £10 or £12 was 
 expended on the holding, in drainage opex'ations, at 
 3d. a i^erch. That has been the only expenditure of 
 the landlord that I remember now, and for which he 
 has nearly doubled the rent. Of course the real cause of 
 the increase of rent has been the tenant's improvements. 
 
 9110. Mr. Kavanagh. — That was Mr. Yoimg — not 
 Mr. Nicholson?— Mr. Yoimg. Mr. Nicholson, I am 
 glad to say, is a man of very different character. 
 
 9111. You are quite satisfied with him? — Yes. I 
 am quite satisfied with the conduct of Mr. Nicholson. 
 I don't know any of his tenants have any grievances. 
 He goes on the maxim "Live and let live." 
 
 9112. Is there any raising of rent at any time on 
 his estate? — Most of Mr. Nicholson's property was 
 purchased by his father from Lord Donegall— that is 
 the unexpired term of old leases was purchased. Of 
 course these old leases were, most of them, given at 
 very small rents, and therefore when one of them fell 
 in it could not be said to be more then a chief rent. 
 In 1869 when my old lease fell in I was not paying 
 more than £5 a year. The tenement valuation of the 
 farm was about £18, and we are paying at present 
 somewhere about the tenement valuation. 
 
 9113. Do you consider that on his property there is 
 any specia,l rule for a revaluation or. raising of rents at 
 any future time ? — No special rule. 
 
 9114. Then it would be at his discretion at any 
 time to do it ? — It is entirely at his discretion. 
 
 9115. Your dependanoe is on him personally? — 
 Entirely. Although we have no complaints to make 
 with regard to Mr. Nicholson, there are other landlords 
 in the district who are not such good landlords. On 
 one of the estates in our neighbourhood^ the tenant- 
 right has been almost extinguished. Only five years 
 purchase is allowed. 
 
 Mr. James 
 M'GUnchy. 
 
312 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 27, 15S0. 
 
 Air. JaniGS 
 M-Gliiichv. 
 
 9116. Are the rents beino- raised on that estate 1 — 
 They are j-aised on every change of tenancy. A man 
 purchases a form, he pays five years' purchase for it, 
 he has to submit to pay an increased rent over and 
 above what the out-going tenant was paying. He 
 remains in occupation some years, suppose he drains 
 and improves, puts up buildings, and increases the 
 value of the farm; and that after some years, owing to 
 some circumstances, he is anxious to leave, how will 
 he be situated — He can only get on leaving the same 
 sum that he paid when he went in, although he has in- 
 creased the value of it considerably ; and that additional 
 value is exacted in the shape of an increased rent 
 from the incoming man, the benefit of course goes into 
 the pocket of the landlord, and if a larger sum than 
 five years' purchase is given the difference gi^es into 
 the landlord's pocket also. The estate I refei- to is the 
 only one in our neighbourhood where there is a limit 
 of that kind ; but there are se\-eral other estates upon 
 which the tenant-right is limited by other restrictions 
 and office rules. 
 
 9117. Has that limitation of the price of tenant- 
 right an iujnrious effect in checking improvements? — 
 Of covirse it has, for it puts the industrious and imjjrov- 
 ing tenant on the same level with the idle and un- 
 improving one. If there are two tenants, one of them 
 industrious and energetic and the other not, suppose 
 they both quit their farms, one gets just as much as 
 the other. 
 
 9118. Is there a large extent of waste land in the 
 neighbourhood capable of reclamation and improve- 
 ment % — A very large extent in Tnishowen. 
 
 9119. If the tenants had confidence that they would 
 be secured the value of their improvements would they 
 set to work at it 1 — I am sure they would. 
 
 9120. Have they capital to do so 1 — They have capital 
 in the labour of themselves and their families. I may 
 mention that Inishowen, from which I come, is a dis- 
 trict of very small holdings ; the landlords there have 
 neglected their tenants very much, and jiermitted sub- 
 division to such an extent that during the last few 
 years many of the occupiers ai-e paupers, and dependant 
 for support on public charity. 
 
 9121. Are those waste lands turf bogs 1 — Turf bogs 
 and reclaimable mountain. 
 
 9122. The tenants if they had security for theii' im- 
 provements would reclaim that land and bring it into 
 their holdings ? — Yes, generally speaking, some v.'aste 
 land attaches almost to every holding in the district. 
 The holdiug of each tenant comes down to the side of 
 the bog — Inishowen is a mountainous country and I 
 may add that tenants upon mountainous farms have 
 suffered more from increase of rent than any other class 
 -of tenants, because it was a necessity for them to im- 
 prove. 
 
 9123. Are the waste lands in any way separated by 
 fencing or do the tenants hold them in common?-— 
 Latterly the holding of land in common has disappeared 
 they did hold it in common formerly, but latterly that 
 has been discontinued. 
 
 9124. The O'Conor Don. — Do you consider it the 
 duty of landlords to prevent subdivision 1 — I think it 
 is their duty to prevent it going on to an extent that 
 would not permit a man to live comfortable. 
 
 9125. Mr. Kavanaoh. — What extent do you con- 
 sider that to be 1 — I think a man certainly cannot live 
 comfortably upon less than twenty or twenty five acres, 
 although I am bound to say very few people in Inishowen 
 /v-hether they are living comfortably or not is another 
 <]iiestion) have farms of that extent. 
 
 9126. Mr. Shaw. — Have they any other industry, 
 and if so, from what source 1 — They live, many of 
 them along the sea shore, and of course all along the 
 coast holdings are very small. There is no other 
 industry except little shopkeepers in the small towns. 
 
 9127. The O'Conor Don. — Are the rents high in 
 proportion to the valuation ?— They are. I just took 
 a note of one or two on Mr. Young's property. There 
 is Glenaged— the valuation of the land is £263, of the 
 houses £33, total valuation £297— the rental is £486. 
 
 Of Canthagethe valuation is — land £297, houses £5G; 
 total valuation £353, the rental is £533. 
 
 9128. Have the rents been lately increased to that 
 figure ? — They have been increased from time to time 
 during the last thirty years. This is the estate on 
 which £5 to the £1 rent is allowed for tenant-right. 
 
 9129. Mr. Shaw. — And whenever there is a sale 
 there is an advance of rent I suppose '? Yes. 1 can 
 mention cases if you require them. The first case is 
 that of a man named M'Causland. 
 
 9130. Have you any objection to these names 
 being published ? — I have not. He entered on a farm 
 at Culdafi' and paid £30 coming in. The rent was 
 £6, so that he paid five years' purchase. He was an 
 industrious man — he went on improving — he built a 
 dwelling-house and offices, fenced, drained, and re- 
 claimed, at an expense of £300. His rent was raised 
 from time to time till it amounted to £13. 
 
 9131. Mr. Kavanagh. — What was his ori-nnal 
 rent ? — £6 a year. 
 
 9132. At what time was the rent £6 L-Tiiat 
 probably would have been about the year 1840. 
 
 9133. Mr. Shaw. — It was advanced from time to 
 time since 1 — Yes. The advances went on till it came 
 to £13 a year. He died, and I think his family left 
 the country, at all events his successor had to give up 
 the farm, and all that he got going out was £30, the 
 same that he paid when coming in. 
 
 9134. He was not allowed to get five years' 
 purchase on the increased rent ? — No ; but the in- 
 coming tenant had to pay £14 rent and £70 to the 
 landlord. The landlord carries out the transaction. 
 He puts the rent of £14 on the incoming tenant — he 
 makes him pay £70 — five j'ears' purchase on £14— he 
 gives £30 of that to the outgoing tenant, being the 
 sum the tenant paid originally — and puts the balance 
 into his pocket. 
 
 9135. The O'Conor Don. — When was this trans- 
 action done 1 — It might have been fourteen or fifteen 
 years ago. 
 
 9136. Before the passing of the Land Act 1 — ^Yes. 
 All these transactions were before the Land Aet. 
 
 9137. Mr. Shaw.- Have you any other case?— 
 Two or three others — much the same in their circum- 
 stances. 
 
 9138. The O'Comor Don. — Have you any case 
 since the Land Act 1 — K"o ; I don't think any of them 
 occurred since the Act. 
 
 9139. Mr. Kavanagh. — Before you pass from that 
 case of M'Causland, where you say the landlord 
 charged the incoming tenant £70, paying the outgoing 
 man £30, and putting the balance in his pocket, 
 l)esides adding £1 to the rent, can you tell whether 
 the landlord gave a Ifease?— No; there is no such 
 thing as leases at all on that estate. 
 
 9140. Chairman —Does it strike you that the 
 enumeration of cases of that kind which occurred a 
 long while ago, before the passing of the Land Act, are 
 rather favourable i o the case of the landlord, inasmuch 
 as they tend to establish that unrestricted tenant- 
 right was not the custom on the estate at the time of 
 the passing of the Act?— There is no doubt with 
 regard to the custom on this estate, it has been the 
 custom within living memory to allow free and un- 
 restricted sale of tenant-right ; but it is equally beyond 
 question, that within the last thirty or forty years, 
 the custom was endeavoured to be introduced, and in 
 some cases successfully, of restricting the tenant-right 
 to five years' purchase upon the rent. We as tenants 
 object to that — we object to the landlord having the 
 power of confiscating improvements, and putting the 
 value of them into his pocket in the shape of increased 
 rent. 
 
 9141. Any case that has occurred since the Land 
 Act is a strong case for you ; the Land Act was in- 
 tended to confirm and legalise the custom as it actually 
 existed previous to that time ; but a landlord might 
 come forward and say that the custom was to restrict 
 the tenant-right, and prove his assertion by the oases 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 313 
 
 you mention?— I take it that the Limd Act did not 
 intend to legalise injustice. 
 
 9143. Mr. Shaw. — Your case is that that injustice 
 existed, prior to the Land Act, and that the Land 
 Act did not cure it 1 — It did not. 
 
 9143. Chaimian. — Perhaps these cases were not 
 brovTght u.nder notice at the time of the passing of the 
 Act ■?— -That may be. I certainly did understand that 
 the restriction of £5 for tenant-right to the £1 of 
 rent — that is five years' purchase — was legalised by 
 the Act, because it was the custom of the estate ; but 
 that is precisely what I complain of — thixt that legidised 
 custom gave the landlord the power of pocketing in 
 the case I have mentioned, £40 which lielonged to the 
 tenant. 
 
 9144. It detracts from the value of tenant-right? — 
 Decidedly. We say it is the value of the improve- 
 ments effected by the tenant that enables the land- 
 lord to increase the rent, and if the landlord pockets 
 five yeais' purchase on the increase, he pockets what 
 is not his. 
 
 9145. The O'Conor Don.— Would it not* be in the 
 power of the tenant not to claim under the custom at 
 all, but under the law as to compensation for distui'- 
 banoe as it exists in other parts of Ireland, and also 
 for the value of his improvements ? — I think not. 
 
 9146. The Land Act gives an option to the tenant 
 of claiming either under the Ulstei- custom or under 
 the other clauses of the Act, which would give him 
 the value of his improvements and compensation for 
 disturbance in certain cases 1 — These transactions that 
 I mentioned occurred before the Act. T don't know- 
 that there has been any case since the Act. There 
 have been one or two cases where compensation was 
 given, sooner than risk a land claim. 
 
 9147. Compensation v.-as given by the landlord? — 
 Yes. 
 
 9148. Mr. Sir AW. — Give us the other case? — The 
 other is a case of a similar character, it is the case 
 of a man who entered a farm in 1841, at the valu- 
 ator's value, there was twenty-five per cent, added, 
 which brought the rent up to £17 10s. The tenant 
 fenced the entire farm, which was principally a 
 grazing farm, but a considerable part of it has never 
 been reclaimed. He drained it, and fenced it, and 
 built oflices, at a cost of £345 10s., and the rent was 
 nii.sed from £17 10s. to £29 15s. The improvements 
 made were all pointed out to the agent at the, time of 
 the rise. He pi-omised to do what he could for the 
 tenant. This tenant allowed an arrear of £72 15s. 
 to accrue. He was processed for it at the end of 
 five years, but a special jury brought in a verdict in 
 his favour. That is establishing the principle. I 
 think it was before the passing of the Land Act. 
 He never got anything ; in point of fact he left the 
 
 farm, and never got a penny, except the arrears he 
 allowed to accrue. 
 
 9149. The O'Conor Don.— Was that on Mr. 
 Young's estate ? — It was. 
 
 9149a. What was the tenant's name? — Mr. 
 Fleming. 
 
 9150. Mr. Shaw.— He was not allowed to sell?— 
 No, there is no such thing on this property at all as 
 permission to sell. That farm is now let to another 
 tenant at £35. Tliat was simply £175 put into the 
 landlord's pocket. 
 
 9151. The owner has spent nothing on it? — Not 
 a shilling. I believe that is the worst case in Innish- 
 owen. Of course there are other people who have 
 been raising rents to a considerable extent. Tliere is 
 the case of Mr. Thompson's property where the 
 rental has been raised from £80 in 1812 to £500 in 
 1880 ; it is a mountainy estate, the people mowed 
 the heath off the place, and commenced reclaiming it, 
 and, of course, they have been going on reclaiming 
 for the last forty or fifty years, and the rents were 
 raised from £80 to upwards £500. 
 
 9152. The tenants doing everything? — Yes. 
 
 9153. They are living on the lands I — Yes. 
 
 9154. They biult houses on it and drained and re- 
 claimed it ? — Yes. 
 
 9155. The landlord did nothing?— The landlord 
 did nothing. The last valuation made was in 1873. 
 
 9156. What is the Government valuation of that 
 land ? — The Government valuation I could not say 
 what it was, but I will take one case — the rent in 
 1840 was £1 I8s., the tenement Government valu- 
 ation would be about £3 at present. Sales by 
 auction were foi'merly allowed on this estate, out at 
 present svich are forbidden. The proposals all pass 
 through the agent's hands. Sometimes the agent 
 attends at a sale and announces an increase of rent. 
 
 9157. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you referring still to 
 Mr. Young's estate? — No; to Mr. Thompson's. 
 
 9158. Mr, Shaw. — Is there a price for the tenant- 
 right fixed on that estate ? — No. 
 
 9159. They are allowed to get as miich as they 
 can? — Yes. There is no limit in the barony of Innish- 
 owen except the one estate I have mentioned. 
 
 9160. Are they able to get much for their holdings ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 9161. Notwithstanding the rents they have to 
 pay? — Yes. One or two sales in my own neighbour- 
 hood brought thirty-five years' purchase on the rental, 
 but, after all, under the circumstances, there is no 
 other way by which the people can live except by the 
 land. A farmer has a family getting up about him, 
 a neighbour is willing to sell, the farmer puts all 
 the money of his own, and all he can borrow, into 
 this bit of land. It is the excessive competition for 
 land that is the cause of it. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 M'Gliachy, 
 
 Mr. William Doherty, 
 
 9162. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you a tenant-farmer? 
 — No, sir, I am not. I have some little piece of land, 
 but my principal evidence is from my experience as an 
 auctioneer. I have taken a list of some cases in which 
 I acted, and which I have taken from my own books. 
 
 9163. Mr. Shaw. — Have these cases passed through 
 your own hands ? — Yes ; and I have not selected 
 them. I took them as they occurred. 
 
 9164. Chairman. — And all the statements in this 
 list you can vouch for as being passed through your 
 hands as an auctioneer ?— -Yes ; and I can give you 
 my book to show they are not selected cases. The 
 names are all given, and I have added a summary, 
 giving the average prices obtaiaed from 1874 to 1877, 
 inclusive, which show a falling off in the value of 
 tenant-right in the district. In the four years farms 
 under £10 averaged 28'2 years' purchase, and farms 
 over £10 averaged 12 years' purchase, while in 1878, 
 1879, and 1880, farms under £10 averaged 18-6 
 years' purchase, and farms over £10 ten years' pur- 
 chase, and this fall has arisen partly from want of 
 confidence in the Land Act of 1870. 
 
 Buncrana, examined. *^"'- Waiiam 
 
 Doherty. 
 
 9165. What is the fall in the last three years? — 
 It is from 28 years to 18-6 years purchase, but in 
 many cases there could be no purchaser's fund. 
 
 9166. That is in Donegal chiefly? — In the barony 
 of Inishowen chiefly. 
 
 9167. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is the largest farm 
 you have known sold ? — The largest is about 52 acres 
 at £52 rent, and the price was £780, 15 years' pur- 
 chase. In the barony of Innishowen the principal 
 landowners are absentees, and men who bought on 
 speculation of making money, and they have extracted 
 the full rents — mostly £2 an acre for very inferior land. 
 
 _ 9168. Mr. Shaw. — And they have raised the rent 
 since they purchased 1 — Yes ; and unfortunately some 
 of the rents were very high before. There was a family, 
 Todds they called them, and they raised the rents to an 
 awful degree, sometimes doubling it ; sometimes com- 
 ing in one sweep and doubling it. 
 
 9169. Were they Dublin people ?— No, sir ; they 
 were natives. They left the place and other specu- 
 lators bought it, and they raised the rent until in many 
 cases it was upwards of £2 an acre for inferior land 
 
 2S 
 
3U 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 S(pt. 27, 1880. 
 
 Mr. WiUiam 
 Doherty., 
 
 9170. "VVliat-acre is it?— It is the Ciinningham 
 acre general. This is tlie table I have prepared, 'of 
 saley since 1873, by me : — 
 
 1874. 
 
 Jiinuary 17.— Farm held by Con. M'Laughlin, Clon- 
 teagh, containing about seven acres, mountain arable, and 
 seven acres, mountain pasture, at £5 per annum rent. 
 Sold for a 1 45, or twenty-nine years' purchase. Inconve- 
 niently situated. 
 
 March 17 Farmhold by Henry Doherty, jMagherarnett, 
 
 containing six acres, at £Z I5s. rent. Sold for £100. 
 
 March. — Farm held by Daniel Doherty, Keelogs, con- 
 taininL' thu-teen acres, bad mountain land. Rent, £17 19s. 
 6rf. Highest bid, £2 1 0. Reserved at £240. 
 
 September 2. — Confidence in the Lund Act of 1870 on 
 the decline as proved in this case. Farm held by Mrs. 
 Binns, Knockameney. Highest bid, £620. Reserved at 
 £700, and the same farm sold in 1879 for £420. In 1874 
 tenants entertained the hope that the provisions of the Land 
 Act were in their favour; but recent decisions from the 
 judicial benches convinced them that their position was 
 but little improved. 
 
 1875. 
 
 January 9 ^Farm held by D. M'Kinney, Greencastle, 
 
 containing twenty-eight acres at the annual rent of £28. 
 Sold for £410. Landed Estates Court title. Held for an 
 unexpired term, and the life of Chai'Ics M'Kinny, with 
 letter from landlord guaranteeing tenant-right after expi- 
 ration of lease. Fifteen j-ears' purchase. 
 
 August 1 6 Farm held by Mrs. Keys, Ballymacarry, 
 
 containing six acres, second quality, at the annual rent 
 of £14. Government valuation, £10. Sold for £175. 
 Spirited competition. 
 
 Farm adjoining, similarly situated, and equally high 
 rented, advertised for sale in last month, containing nine 
 acres, at the annual rent of £I9 Ss. 8d. No buyers. 
 Intending purchasers looked upon the rent as double the 
 fair letting value consistent with tenant-right 
 
 November 1 1 Farm held by representatives of John 
 
 M'Avoney, Toobin, Upper Fahan, under representatives of 
 J. Pitt Kennedy, containing (No. I), twenty-four acres at 
 the annual rent of £26. Sold for £305, or nearly twelve 
 years' purchase. Same (No. 2), containing fourteen acres 
 (including about six acres arable), at the rent of £5 4s. lOd. 
 Sold to J. M'Adams at £110. Though an adjoining 
 tenant the agent refused to accept him, but allowed it to 
 another tenant John Doherty who, at the sale, offered 
 £105, and because this Doherty would not get it at £60, 
 which value the agent put upon it, he, the agent, served 
 M'Aveney with an ejectment for the two holdings. By 
 my interference, corresponding with the landlord, the 
 tenant, who did not like to go into court, gave it to J. 
 Doherty at £90. 
 
 1876. 
 
 January 24 — Farm hold by i\Irs. IMossy, containing four 
 acres (two and a half acres arable), at the annual rent of 
 £10. In this case the small cottage was built by the land- 
 lord, hence the high rent. Raised to £13 per annum on 
 getting liberty to sell. Sold at £80. 
 
 March 13 — Farm held by Mrs. Jane Young, containing 
 one and a half acres, held for forty years, at £4 10s. annual 
 rent. Raised to £6 rent on getting leave to sell, thus 
 pocketing the tenant's interest. Yet it sold at £34. 
 
 May 25. — Farm held by Thomas Doherty, containing 
 three and a half acres at £9 rent. Improved by tenant. 
 Liberty to sell at i'l 1 rent. Reserved at £50 ; sold after- 
 wards at £40. Government valuation £2 15s. Purchaser 
 afterwards expended £15 in fencing and draining this field. 
 After the sale the landlord fixed the rent at £10 10s. 
 
 August 17. — Representatives of Cecily Doherty, Green- 
 hill, farm containing about twenty acres inferior mount.iin 
 land, at the annual rent of £23 7/. Sold for .£225. 
 
 November 1 — Rodger Doherty, Glenmakee, Carn- 
 donagh, farm containing six acres, at the annual rent of 
 £4 7s. 4d. Sold for £150, or over thirty-four years purchase. 
 
 1877. 
 
 January 29 — Representatives of .1. Doherty, Keelogs. 
 Farm containing six acres, at the annual rent of £5 10s. 
 Sold for £200, or over thirty-six years purchase. 
 
 February 5 — Daniel Doherty, Aughaweel. Ejected three 
 
 year? previously for non-payment of rent. Nearly £100 of 
 arrears had aec'umidated at time of sale. Sold by agent 
 with former tenant's consent; about eight acres inferior 
 land at the annual rent of £8 15s. Sold for £155. Money 
 divided between former tenant and landlord as peran arbi- 
 tration. The adjoining farm of John Doherty, similar in 
 every respect. Up for sale February, 1878. No buyers ; 
 afterwards sold by private contract, at about £90. 
 
 February 1 2 Farm held by Patrick Quinn,-BaUymagan, 
 
 containing about four acres, at the annual rent of £5. Sold 
 for £l51,°or over thirty years purchase. 
 
 March 20 Farm held by William M'Ginnis, Tervoil, 
 
 Carndonagh, containing about five acres, at the annual rent 
 of i.-3 16s. Sold for £100, or over twenty-six years purchase. 
 
 Auo-ust 20.— Farm containing about sixteen acres (eight 
 arable), at the annual rent of £9 Us. Gd. Sold at £265, 
 or aHout twenty-eight years purchase. 
 
 August 22— Farm held by John Gubbin, Foden, Carn- 
 donagii, containing fifty- two acres, at the annual rent of 
 £52.° Sold for £780, or fifteen years purchase. 
 
 November 12.— Farm held by James Lynch, Meenagoiy, 
 containing thirty acres (about six arable), at the animal 
 rent of £5 6s. Sold for £ 1 43. 
 
 December 6.— Farm held by Thomas M'Daid, containing 
 twelve acres mountain, at the annual rent of £3 7s. 6d 
 Sold for £1-21, or thirty five years purchase. 
 1878. 
 
 March 7. ^^Yilliam Barr, Meenamullaghan Mountain, 
 
 farm held at the annual rent of £5. Sold for £102. In 
 I'ebruary 1879, I sold the same farm for £84. 
 1879. 
 
 March 13. Farm held by James Sweeney, Strabow, 
 
 containing about twelve acres, with flax niill. Rent 
 £23 (!s. 6d. Sold for £330. Former rent was £ 1 9 13s., 
 but the landlord advanced £52 to build the flax mill, for 
 which he added £3 7s. 6rf. to the rent as interest. The 
 property was sold on the condition that the purchaser could 
 reduce the rent to the original, by repaying this £52, which 
 he has since done. In this way the tenants are sometimes 
 assisted by landlords advancing money for which they pay 
 interest, at about 7 per cent., in the shape of additionalrent. 
 
 1880. 
 
 January 5. — Farm held by Thomas Duffy, Muff; con- 
 taining fifteen and a half acres arable, at the annual rent of 
 £14 13s. lOd. Sold for £145 or under ten years' purchase. 
 
 January 29 and 31 — Employed by agent to sell the 
 tenant-right of four farms, in Fahan and Clonmany, from 
 which the tenants had been evicted. A good attendance 
 at some of the sales, but not one offer made at any of them. 
 
 Besides the foregoing I have had several abcji-tive sales 
 within the lasttw6 years. The Value of tenant-righthis fast 
 declining in this district. In the four years froili 1 874 to 
 1877 inclusive. Farms under £10, averaged 28-2 years' 
 purchase. Farms over i;10, averaged 12 years' purchase. 
 
 Again in 1878, 1879, and 1880. Farms under £lO, 
 averaged lS-6 years' purchase. Farms over £10, averaged 
 10 years' purchase. But in the last three years, many 
 sales were withdrawn, there being no buyers. 
 
 The following instances show the rents as compared 
 with the Government valuation, which valuation in- 
 cludes the houses built by the tenants : — 
 
 Tenants' Kames 
 
 Eent. 
 
 Government 
 Valuation. 
 
 S. d. 
 
 Neal il'Laughlln, Ballyma- 
 carry 32 
 
 William Bell, AghiUy, . 11 
 ■ William Doherty, TuUy- 
 
 arvan 10 10 2 15 
 
 Andrew JNI'Glinchy, Tully- 
 
 arvan, . . . . 18 
 
 Owen Doherty, Tullyarvan, 23 
 
 Owen Doherty, Arderavan, 8 17 11 
 
 To avoid the appearance of selection the following 
 is the case of an entii'e townland : — 
 
 16 
 
 7 
 
 4 
 
 12 
 
 3 
 
 Townland. 
 
 Slavery, 
 
 No. o( Tenants. Total Rent. 
 
 10 
 
 £ s. 
 85 17 
 
 Government 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 47 19 
 
 Mr. Connolly 
 T. M'Causland. 
 
 Mr. Connolly Thomas M'Causlanb examined 
 Where do you reside 1 — 
 
 9181. Chairman. 
 Drenagh, Limavady, 
 
 9182. You are a land owner? — Yes. 
 
 9183. What is the size of your property? — About 
 11.000 acres. j i . j 
 
 9184. Does tliat lie all to.gether? — Yes, I may say 
 altogether— a mile perhaps between. 
 
 9185. In this county? — Yes, in Derry. It is the 
 custom on one portion that I wish to speak of. . 
 
 9186. The other property you don't wish to speak 
 
mijnutes of evidence. 
 
 315 
 
 of? — The otlior jiortion was purcliased from Lonl 
 Waterford, and is under tlio Ulster custom as it is called. 
 
 9187. This is under the U later custom 1 — A limited 
 usage of the Ulster custom, and that is what I wish 
 to bring before you. 
 
 9188. Can you say how long this limited usage has 
 been in existence 1 — 1 should saj^, certainly forty years. 
 
 9189. "What is the limit of the Ulster custom ? — 
 Perhaps I had better tell you what the custom is. 
 
 ■ The custom is three years for the good- will ; that is 
 three years' rent for the good- will ; in addition to that 
 the tenant when he leaves his holding, receives £4 
 per acre for manured land, that is land he manrired 
 the previous season, £1 an acre for all seeds sown, 
 and whatever improvements . the tenant may have 
 made he is paid for; improvements in the way of 
 buildings, drainage, and any permanent improvements 
 that can be shown. 
 
 9190. Is it that when he is leaving, he is allowed 
 to sell ? — He is not allowed to sell. That money must 
 be paid into the office ; it does not go between the tenants. 
 
 9191. Mr. Shaw. — Do j'ou allow him to get more 
 than that 1 — No, I don't allow more than three years 
 for the good-will, but for whatever improvements he 
 has made he is allowed. 
 
 9192. Drainage and everything of that sort? — Yes, 
 and everything he does he is allowed for. 
 
 9193. How long has that custom been established 1 
 — It has certainly been in existence for forty years. 
 
 9194. This limit? — Yes; after the passing of the 
 Land Act, a year afterwards I had what may be called 
 an amicable land claim to try the question. It was 
 tried before the County Court Judge, and of course it 
 was naturally a cafee which you would imagine would 
 upset the custom, but Mr. Coffey at once gave it in my 
 favour. 
 
 9195. Chairman. — ^That case established this custom 
 as being in existence on your property ? — Yes. 
 
 9196. Have you found that this custom is satis- 
 factory to the tenants generally ? — Very, and for that 
 very reason I rather wish you to examine one of the 
 tenants, and he would represent exactly the views of 
 the tenantry on the property. 
 
 9197. But that cannot be so satisfactory to them 
 as what is called the Ulster custom in its integrity ? — 
 Very much more so, because if the tenant wants addi- 
 tional land he gets it on this scale. I never allow 
 outsiders to buy any land there, it is always given to the 
 tenants. 
 
 9198. Mr. Shaw. — But if the tenants don't want it 
 it IS given to outsiders? — Yes, according to the rules 
 of the state, but the tenants are only too glad to get it. 
 
 9199. Chairman. — You mean that the remainiag 
 tenants, apart from the man who is going away, are 
 anxious to keep the price down ? — Yes. 
 
 9200. But it is the man who is gelling who feels 
 dissatisfied with the price he is getting 1 — I feel that 
 the well-to-do tenant is first to be considered, it is 
 only those who are not industrious and get into diffi- 
 culties that want to sell. 
 
 9201. Mr. Shaw. — Sometimes people who don't get 
 into diffictilties wish to sell ; people may want to go 
 away? — IsTo, I have not known iin instance of that, in 
 this county at all events ; another very good advan- 
 tage is that the tenant cannot run into debt with the 
 shopkeepers, for they will not advance them money as 
 on estates where the custom exists without limit; 
 knowing there is a limit of three years they will not 
 allow the tenant to run into debt, which I consider is 
 very advantageous for the tenant. 
 
 9202. Chairman.— Have you had many sales re- 
 cently in which the ctistom has been followed ? — 
 During the twenty years which I have had the 
 arrangement of the property I have had sixty or 
 seventy transfers. 
 
 9203. What is the average price on your estate 
 inckiding improvements? — I make all the improve- 
 ments myself aS a rule. I have laid out a large sum 
 oh the property ; I have made a rough estimate of 
 what I have laid out in the twenty years, not in money 
 
 borrowed from the Board of Works, and it comes to- S.pf. I'T.isso. 
 close upon £11,000, spent on buildings and recla- jj. (•„„ .jj , 
 mations. T. M-Ca^land 
 
 920,4. What is the amount ?■ — The rough estimate 
 is £10,500. 
 
 9205. That is on the property for the last twenty 
 years? — Yes. 
 
 9206.,,, The tenant goiag out would get the good 
 will ?— Hp gets three years for the good ,will ; £4 an 
 acre for, j»p.nured land, with the value of crops and what- 
 ever impir-Qvemeuts he has made. 
 
 9207. (Do you put no restriction on the building? — 
 Yes, I like to have that looked at, always. 
 
 9208. Are the tenants well-to-do ? — Very well-to-do. 
 
 9209. Are there large farms as well as small? — 
 They are large for this part of Ireland. There are 
 some over lOO acres, but the average would be about 
 forty acres. In very small mountainous parts they 
 would go down to five acres. 
 
 0210. What state are they in in the mountaiuouis: 
 parts ? — Comfortable ; but, of course, they are not as 
 prosperous as in other parts. 
 
 9211. Do they have the run on the mountain as well 
 as on the enclosure? — Some of the, tenants have. I 
 ought to explain that on the mountain to'ivnlands, 
 which are not in that estimate, I allow five years in- 
 stead of three, or rather I found that custom. This 
 custom was not introduced by myself; they had a 
 custom of five years which I imagine was sujjposed to 
 be better for them in these holdings as they don't make 
 many improvements. 
 
 9212. The O'Conor Don. — The mountain tenants 
 are allowed five years ? — Yes, instead of three ; and if 
 they made any permanent improvements they would 
 be paid for them in addition ; but the five years' i-eut 
 is supposed to be better for them as small tenants. 
 That, however, hardly comes under what I am giving 
 evidence upon, for the three years system includes all 
 but three townlands. 
 
 9213. Chairman. — Your evidence is that this is the 
 Ulster custom ? — It is a phase of the Ulster custom. 
 
 9214. And has worked satisfactorily? — Extremely 
 well. 
 
 9215. And you find that at the present time there 
 is no dissatisfaction or wish to get out of it ? — No 
 doubt, if a man got into difficulties he would like to 
 receive a large sum of money, and then go away ; but 
 I think he is the last man to be considered — the in- 
 dustrious solvent tenant should have the first claim. 
 
 9216. The O'Conor Don. — You find it is no check 
 to the tenant in making improvements ? — No, not the 
 slightest. 
 
 9217. Mr. Shaw. — But they don't seem to make 
 any improvements — you make them all? — I make 
 them all, I may say. 
 
 9218. In that way it is more like an English estate ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 9219. Then that is a settled institution — that you 
 make the improvements as in English estates ? — So 
 far English, that I know before the passing of the Land 
 Act, several gentlemen came through Ireland — Mr. 
 Pell was here and Mr. Reed, and the late Sir Plenry 
 Thompson — they came and expressed approval of the 
 custom ; they thought it the best they had seen in 
 Ireland. 
 
 9220. Chairman. — You have been constantly re- 
 siding there ? — I reside entirely in Ireland. 
 
 9221. And take an interest yourself in the tenants, 
 and see them and know them yourself? — Yes ; I know 
 every tenant, and nothing is done without my sanction. 
 
 9222. Is there any poiut in which you think you or 
 your tenants are not sufficiently protected by the Land 
 Act? — I am quite satisfied if they let me alone. I 
 am sure the tenants would be satisfied also, and I 
 should be pei-fectly so. 
 
 9223. The O'Conor Don.— Satisfied with things as 
 they are? — Yes; I, think my rights are protected by 
 Mr. Coffey's decision. 
 
 9224. Mr.SHAW.—Itestablished that system?— Yes. 
 
 9225. Chairman.- And that was established by 
 
 2 S 2 
 
816 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Connolly 
 T. M'CaiisIancl. 
 
 the Land Act 1— Under tie word "usages" it wonld 
 be. 
 
 9226. And the only thing you say is that you hope 
 it won't be interfered with by any future legislation 1 
 — I am quite satisfied, and I think the tenants are too. 
 Another advantage is that in bad times — in seasons 
 like the last — some tenants find a difficulty in selling 
 under the Ulster custom. I know an instance, only a 
 month ago, on Lord Waterford's property, in which a 
 
 . holding was put up for sale, and there was not a single 
 purchaser. On my estate that could not have hap- 
 pened, for I should have paid the tenant three years' 
 rent at once ; and if he had done anything to improve 
 the holding he would have been recouped for his out- 
 lay, whereas this very man could not sell at all. 
 
 9227. Mr. Shaw. — You charge for interest on the 
 money expended on improvements by you 1 — The im- 
 provements I make are generally done in this way 
 — I don't raise the rent on a single holding, but 
 if can get a townland which I can improve ; if, 
 for instance, through deaths of tenants, any of 
 the farms fall into my hands, I erect whatever 
 buildings ai'e wanted, divide the farms and make 
 fences, and do whatever is required, and then I pvit on an 
 increased rent,so thatthe tenant gets the benefit of that. 
 
 9228. And you have the land re-valued 1 — Yes. The 
 valuator does not know what I have done to the land. 
 He merely takes it as he finds it, and values it in its 
 then condition. 
 
 9229. The same thing happens, I suppose, on the 
 falling in of leases ] — Yes, but there are very few leases. 
 
 9230. Is the land of which you speak situated far 
 from a town ? — It is near Limavady. 
 
 9231. Does it come down to the valley 1 — Yes. 
 
 9232. What are the rents there 1 — The rents on my 
 property ai-e about one-fourth over the Government 
 valuation, and that includes all that has been done. 
 
 9233. ThentherentiscIo.se on 30s. an acre? — No; 
 it is nothing like that. 
 
 9234. Are your rents higher than on the other 
 lands about you, the tenant-right properties ? — ITo. I 
 think they are about the same. I don't think there is 
 airy difi'erence. 
 
 923-5. Would you not save yourself a great deal of 
 trouble if you let the tenants sell 1 — I think they \yould 
 be in a worse state then. 
 
 923G. We will have some of them here? — I was 
 very anxious that you should examine some of them. 
 
 9237. The O'Conor Don.— Have the tenants in 
 these cases ^^'here sales took place had many claims 
 under the head of improvements, where tenants-sold 
 and you allowed them three years and the improve- 
 ments, did thoy get much more than the three j-eai'S '! 
 — Yes, under the head of improvements. The winter 
 before last a farm fell into my hands through the duath 
 of the widow who held it, and the tenant to whorii slie 
 left it did not reside in the coanty, and desired Jto be 
 paid according to the custom of the estate, and he re- 
 ceived a very large sum for improvements. T\w former 
 tenant had built a \-ery good house and offices, all of 
 which were valued by a builder. 
 
 9238. Do you get the valuation of the improvements 
 made, or do the tenants get them made 1 — We ap- 
 prove mutually. We select a builder and there is 
 never any objection. 
 
 9239. I)ut suppose it was not a case of building, but 
 a case of drainage or reclamation of waste land, how 
 would you decide the value of these improvements ? — 
 That is a case that hardly ever occurs ; it would not on 
 my property. 
 
 9240. Have you got no mountainous land ? — Yes; 
 but the tenants there have only little bits of land which 
 are not valued for a number of years. 
 
 9241. Your experience is that the tenants do not 
 make much improvement in the way of reclaiming 
 land under the Ulster custom 1 — I think they do. 
 Now, on Lord Waterford's property, which adjoins 
 mine, and which is largely bounded by mountains 
 they iiave done a good deal in the way of improvement, 
 but then thoy had very long leases. 
 
 9242. But on your estate they do not do it ? — No, 
 
 9243. Mr. Shaw. — You do the improvements, &e., 
 yourself? — Well, I do, but these are small holdings, 
 and they are satisfied with what they have. 
 
 9244. The O'Conor Don. — But is it usual for these 
 small holders of waste land to improve it year by 
 year, adding a little to their farms? — No, they 
 don't do much that way with me. I have only got 
 three townlands in the mountains altogether. 
 
 9245. And you say these tenants on the mountains 
 are not so improving as the others ? — No. 
 
 9246. Chairman. — They are not as well ofi' perhaps » 
 — No, they are small holdings. 
 
 9247. Were they badly oflf last year? — Yes. 
 
 9248. Had you to make any reduction for them?— 
 Yes ; I had considerable. 
 
 9249. The O'Conor Don. — Had you to make it 
 generally or only to the mormtain tenants ? — I made 
 it also on heavy clay lands, but some of them made 
 their fortunes last year — those who happened to have 
 land under potatoes, which brought very large prices. 
 I don't know of any tenantry better oif than those in 
 the neighbourhood of Limavady, or tenantry that have 
 their lands on better terms. It is so with other estates 
 as well. 
 
 9250. What is the proportion of the rents in the 
 mountain districts as compared with the valuation ?— 
 I made some improvements two or three years ago on 
 the jjrincipal mountain townland I have, and the rent 
 was raised exactly to the Government valuation, which 
 it now is. The land had not been valued for forty 
 years before. There are some rents never have been 
 raised by mo, and I don't know whether they ever were. 
 
 02 -51. Have you got land out of Ulster? — Yes, in 
 the county Boscommon. 
 
 9252. In the county Boscommon is such a system 
 known ? — It is not known. 
 
 9253. Do you make any improvements there? — I 
 have made some previous to the Land Act. 
 
 9254. But you have not carried on improvements 
 in your Boscommon estate in the same way as in the 
 North ?— No. 
 
 92.i5. Mr. Shaw. — Does it require improvemen(^- 
 perhaps it is mere grass fai-ms ? — There are some large 
 larms well circumstanced. 
 
 9256. Let on lease 1 — No, there are not many leases. 
 
 9257. The O'Conor Don. — About how much land 
 have you in Boscommon ? — The acreage I could not 
 tell you, but I have about .£3,000 a year. 
 
 9258. Have you not got some small tenants there? 
 — Yes, some. 
 
 9259. Do you think they have been making ira- 
 pro^eiiients ?— I dont think they have done much, 
 Unfortunately the man ^\ ho cannot I'esidc there does 
 not know mucli about it, but I have a very good repre- 
 sentative tii>'/e, Mr. Ross ilahon. 
 
 92CO. I su)jpose yoii had to make reductions there 
 last year? — Yes; l" reduced the rent to the Govern- 
 ment valuation. 
 
 9261. And are the rents in B^oscommon much over 
 the Government valuation 1 — I thmk they are, but on 
 ni)- estate they are very moderate. 
 
 92G2. Do you consider the Government valuation 
 very low in Boscommon as compared with the value 
 of the land ? — I think it is. 
 
 9263. Ish: Shaw. — You only reduced the rent for 
 the year and not permanently ?— Only for the year, 
 they are mostly well-to-do tenants. 
 
 9264. Then what your tenants here get from you 
 is three years' purchase, with payment for manure aud 
 seeds? — Yes ; they must get that. 
 
 9265. Aud as you do the improvements yourself 
 they don't have much to get beyond that? — Yes ; but 
 whatever improvements they make they are allowed for. 
 
 9266. Do they appoint a valuator as well as you? 
 
 No. 1 think they would be perfectly satisfied with 
 
 mine. Ihe man who had this farm that I mentioned 
 was a violent supporter of the Ulster custom, and 
 he was quite satisfied with the value put upon the 
 improvenieijts. 
 
MINCJTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 317 
 
 9267. Was he coming into the land ? — No ; he got 
 a large sum ol money as executor of the late tenant. 
 
 9268. Very often you think they would be just as 
 ■vfell off to get the value of the improvements and a 
 certain number of years' pvirchase 1 — Yes ; sometimes 
 much better. 
 
 9269. It comes to very much the same thing? — The 
 principle is the same, for they always have to borrow 
 money in these large cases. I bought a townland from 
 Lord Waterford at the time of the sale, and there was 
 a very large tenant on it ; he is in arrear, and the land 
 is in a wretched state in consequence of his having 
 borrowed £1,500 to give to the outgoing tenant, but 
 that could not have happened on my estate. 
 
 9270. You found tenant-right existing on that 
 estate? — Yes. 
 
 9271. What is the condition of the tenants there? 
 — They are holding their o^vn. 
 
 9272. As well as they did before?— I thiuk they 
 are, I dare say last year tried them. 
 
 9273. Did they borrow from the Government? — 
 Yes; all of them. 
 
 9274. The O'Conor Don.— Did they pay the full 
 instalment last year -without abatement ? — I think they 
 were obliged to. 
 
 9275. Mr. Kavaxagh. — Have you any regular fixed 
 time for raising your rents, or do you raise them ? — I 
 think it is extremely irregular. There are some rents 
 I don't know when they were raised. I never by any 
 chance raise them under twenty yeai's, aad I prefer 
 doing it after I have laid out something on improve- 
 ments — after I havemade improvements on a townland. 
 
 9276. A great deal of the evidence in the north has 
 been, that it is the habit of landlords to keep con- 
 tinually raising the rents on the tenants' improvements 
 so as to get up tlie tenant-right and extinguish it ? — I 
 don't think that is the case. In this county it could 
 not be so ; on Lord Waterford's property, on wliich the 
 freest right exists, the tenants all held under leases. 
 On the townland I bought there is a lease only expired 
 this month, a lease since 1804; it was a very good 
 life. The Fishmongers' estate is always leased for 
 twenty years, so that tenant-right cannot be extin- 
 guished on the large estates at any rate. I don't know 
 what the small people are doing, but I think it is very 
 unusual to do as you say. 
 
 9277. Chaiemax. — Was not all Lord Waterford's 
 property bought iip by small persons ? — No ; pretty 
 well-to-do people. 
 
 9278. Was not some of it bought by the tenants 
 and by small men ? — Yes ; some of it was, and they 
 revalued it instantly. You could not blame them for 
 that, because it had not been valued for forty years. 
 The leases dropped in just at the time of the sale — 
 which gave a considerable lise to the estate. 
 
 9279. So that the re-valuation would have hajipened 
 in any case when the leases dropped in ? — Yes. 
 
 9280. Mr. Shaw. — And the only thing is that tliese 
 men might have raised the rent a little more than the 
 Marquis of Waterford would have done ? — They em- 
 ployed a valuator, and in one instance the tenants 
 would not allow the valuator to come upon the lands, 
 they drove him off, and then the matter came before 
 Mr. Coffey, and he raised the rent one-fourth above the 
 Government valuation. 
 
 9281. It is usual to do so on the change of tenan- 
 cies 1 — Not always on good estates — on estates of 
 landlords who reside in this county and elsewhere in 
 the north, I don't think there are periodical valuations. 
 I have reduced some. 
 
 9282. The O'OoNOE Don. — Would you object to have 
 this custom extended to your Eoscommon estate ? — 
 I think I should. 
 
 9283. On what grounds? — It takes the entii-e 
 management of the property out of one's hands. It 
 used to bo thrown in our teeth before the Land Act 
 that the Irish landlords did nothing ; well this would 
 leave nothiag for them to do. 
 
 9284. Mr. Shaw. — You don't do much there? — 
 Not since the Land Act, certainly. 
 
 Mr. Connolly 
 T. M'Causland. 
 
 9285. It is well laid out grass land, and you get a Srpt. 27, isso: 
 fair rent for it ? — I might get more. 
 
 9286. It would do you no harm if you get a good 
 amount of money between you and your rent? — I 
 think it would be a very bad thing for the tenant, he 
 certainly would have to borrow money, they always 
 have to borrow it here. The average price of tenant- 
 right is twenty years' purchase, sometimes it goes to 
 fifty, and the fee-simple of the land would not bring 
 twenty in many cases. 
 
 9287. The O'Conor Don. — As a landlord would you 
 consider it an injustice to yourself to have it extended 
 to your Eoscommon property ? — I think it would be an 
 injustice to take the management out of my own hands. 
 
 9288. Mr. Shaw. — But it does not touch the rent? 
 — No, but it takes the entire control of the property 
 out of your hands, and if you want to drain or to make 
 any improvements it is very difficult to do it ; a 
 tenant may say he will sell and go away, and he may 
 sell it at any time without your leave. 
 
 9289. But it would be his interest to have the land 
 drained and improved ? — They don't always see it. 
 
 9290. Mr. Kavanagh. — Woulditnot take something 
 out of your positionbesides the mere management? Sup- 
 pose you had let a farm in Eoscommon to a tenant who 
 had paid nothing upon coming in, and that out of favour 
 you let the land to him at 10s. below the real value, 
 then if tenant-right was extended to that holding, and 
 the tenant sold his interest or good will, the difference 
 between what he held the land at and its real value 
 would go into his pocket ? — It would. 
 
 9291. Mr. Shaw. — It is not supposed you are com- 
 2)elled to leave the land under-let, and if your friend is 
 going away you would get the holding re-valued ? — 
 I should strongly disapprove of it myself, and I don't 
 think you will convince me by any argument. 
 
 9292. The O'Conob Don. — We only want to hear 
 your reasons against it ? — The desire is to get people to 
 reside in the country, and take the management of 
 their estates. Suppose 1 had the Ulster custom instead 
 of what I have, I should have nothing to do, and no 
 interest in my property. 
 
 9293. Mr. Shaw. — We had a case of an estate where 
 in 1812 the rent was £80, and now it is £500 ; that 
 is taking an interest with a vengeance ? — How has he 
 managed that. 
 
 9294. By raising the rents ? — Eaising the rents is 
 the only interest he took. It is good interest certainly. 
 
 9295. You would naturally feel an interest in the 
 people who were giving you your income ? — I don't 
 think they care twopence about you ; they do very 
 much as they like. 
 
 9296. They don't seem to care very much as it is ? 
 — They have to come to me when they want anything. 
 I have no doubt the custom gives the agent and the 
 landlord very little to do if they wish to live else- 
 where. 
 
 9297. It thrives very well in the counties of Down 
 and Antrim ? — I don't look upon that as the result 
 of the Ulster custom at all. 
 
 9298. We have had landlords and agents eulogising 
 it there?— Yes; they get the rents, and that is all 
 they care about it. If a landlord does nothing on an 
 estate where the custom exists, and lives away alto- 
 gether, and if another landlord is prepared to lay out 
 half the income on his property and to live in the 
 country, which do you think is the best system ? 
 
 9299. Chairman. — Suppose the Ulster custom was 
 extended all through Ireland, might there not be an 
 exception reasonably made where the landlord would 
 contract to conduct the property on what you call the 
 English system — the landlord to keep the land in 
 
 substantial repair, and doing all improvements 
 
 having the option whether he would adopt that system 
 or come under the Ulster custom ? — You would say 
 this to me : you must do as they do in England, or 
 else I will give the Ulster custom. I don't think it- 
 would be fair to extend the Ulster custom to a county 
 where they have never had it ; just as it would be 
 unfair to extend it to England and Scotland. 
 
31S 
 
 IRISH LAMD ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1S80 
 
 Mr. Connolly 
 T. M'Causland. 
 
 9300. Mr. Shaw. — Would it be fair to say lie slioiild 
 act in the other way, keeping all the gates-and fences, 
 &c., in repair? — I should like to see hin. do it. 
 
 9301. Chairman. — The system in England tends no 
 doubt to make habitable tenant houses, and to keep the 
 farms in substantial repair j but there is an idea that on an 
 English farm the landlord is necessarily to do every- 
 thing all at once. It is not to be supposed that because 
 a bit of land is undrained he is then and there to find 
 the money to do it, but it is a principle that he is to 
 conduct the estate on the system of doing things within 
 a reasonable time, laying out the money himself instead 
 of the tenant doing it? — Yes. 
 
 9302. Mr. Shaw. — You are aware that dairy farming 
 is very common in the south of Ireland 1 — Yes. 
 
 9303. I imagine there is a rent lost by the bad offices 
 in connexion with almost every farm I know in the 
 south of Ireland ? — That is very unfortunate, but there 
 are estates on wliich the landlords lay out a good deal 
 in the south. 
 
 9304. Chairman. — But some make the tenaiit pay 
 it. Do you think the tenant pays for the entire advan- 
 tage under the system adopted 1 — If he pays all the 
 interest. 
 
 9305. Mr. Shaw. — He pays the interest and pi'inci- 
 pal within thirty-five years ? — Then the landkird i^ays 
 nothing. 
 
 9306. He merely secures the loan in a general way 1 
 — ^The money is received from the Board of Works. 
 
 9307. Chairman. — He gives the security of the land 
 for the loan — the tenant alone wovild not be able to 
 give the security ? — No. 
 
 9308. The O'Conoe Don. — Have you borrowed any 
 money from the Board of Works for improvements 1 — 
 ISTo, except for my own demesne, which would not come 
 under this. 
 
 9309. Chairman. — Do yoii liave the labourers on 
 your farms under the farmers, or are they tenants of 
 your own ? — They are under the tenants. 
 
 9310. And do they give them cottages as part of their 
 wages 1 — They generally charge them for their houses. 
 
 9311. Do you put any limit on what they are t,o 
 chai-ge them 1 — No ; but most of the labourers' work 
 is done by hiring men for the half-year, and they lodge 
 in the hoxise with the tenant. 
 
 9312. There is not a great number of labourers' 
 cottages 1 — A considerable number, but they are not 
 confined to labourers. 
 
 9313. They live on the farms, most of them ? — Yes ; 
 and they are pretty comfortable, as a rule. 
 
 9314. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you know any in- 
 stances of peasant proprietors having grown up — that 
 is, cases of tenants having bought, say, under the 
 Church Act ?— There are a few, but I don't know much 
 about them — I could not speak from my own know- 
 ledge. There are a good many of what we call 
 perpetuities, but they have not flourished. 
 
 931.5. They have not flourished ?— No. 
 
 9316. What is your experience about them? — The 
 tenants have increased so' much that they are in a very 
 bad state, any that are near me. There are some a 
 few miles from me, and I occasionally go over these 
 small properties, on which they pay very small rents. 
 
 9317. Chairman. — They have increased the hold- 
 ings by subdiving them ?— They have, decidedly. 
 
 9318. Mr. Shaw. — Are they weavers besides being 
 farmers 1 — No ; there is nothing of that sort now. 
 
 9319. The O'Conor Don.— Are they under the 
 Church Act?— No; they pay a small rent to a land- 
 lord. 
 
 9320. Mr. Shaw.— Have they purchased their hold- 
 ings? — They are under old leases, renewable. 
 
 9321. Mr. Kavanagh. — They are not prosperous, 
 as a rule 1 — No. 
 
 9322. Mr. Shaw.— Are they very small holdings? 
 — Some of them are very small. 
 
 _ 9323. Mr. Kavanagh. — Where thpy are very small 
 rt is because the large holdings have been cut up ? — 
 That is how it has arisen. 
 
 9324. Do you think it would- be advisable at all to 
 encoTirage the tenants to buy their own holdings under 
 the Blight clauses of the Land Act ? — ^I think if yom oot 
 a man to buy a large good farm yon should restrict 
 him, and not allow Mm to cut it up. 
 
 9325. You think it necessary to prevent' siiB- 
 divisioii 1 — I think so. 
 
 9326. Chairman.— Entire subdivision, or subdivi- 
 sion below a certain acreage ?— Below a certain acreace 
 
 9327. Mr. Kavanagh. — What limit would you'fix 
 for it? — Certainly nothing under 100 acres, but I am 
 not so well up in the Bright clauses as some witnesses 
 you may have before you. 
 
 9328. But the pith of your evidence is that you look 
 upon the limiting of the custom as to price as a rriatter 
 of great importance ? — Very important ; I think it is 
 very advantageous to the tenants themselves. 
 
 9329. Mr. Shaw. — Are your tenants better off than 
 the neighbouring tenants ?— -I think they are. 
 
 9330. You did not invent this system? — No- I 
 found it there, and I continued it. 
 
 9331. You arenotsure whether if you had found the 
 
 other system there you vrould not have kept it! I 
 
 think it is desirable that the landlord should have power 
 to restrict tenant-right, so as to prevent the tenant bor- 
 rowing money. 
 
 9332. Is it any use trying to restrict in theprices.ia 
 buying and selling? — I think for their own sake it is. 
 
 9333. Don't they often pretend to yield, and money 
 j-jasses outside ? — It could not happen in my case, I 
 think. 
 
 9334. The O'Conoe Don. — You pay the outgping 
 tenant and you select the incoming one ? — Yes. They 
 often don't know who is to be the tenant. Wheng, 
 large farm is given up, and the adjoining tenants are 
 not able to take it, I sometimes give it to another man 
 on another part of the estate, and transfer Mm from one 
 townland to another. 
 
 9335. Mr. Shaw. — You always get your money 
 back, and you don't put on any interest?— No. 
 
 9336. You always get your money back from the 
 incoming tenant?— Yes. 
 
 9337. Mr. Kavanagh. — The statements of 
 gricA'ances we have here always work back to the ques. 
 tion of the rent. Now, how would you suggest as a. 
 fair plan of regulating the rent between the landlord 
 and the tenant — it is as to the rent the shoe pinches !— I 
 have never found any difiiculty about it. I think 
 the best way of raising the rents is if you can get the 
 landlord and agent and tenant together and agree to a 
 rent. That is what I have done in many instances. 
 
 9338. I don't say raising the rent, but regulating 
 it ? — I don't see how you can do that except througli a 
 valuator. 
 
 9339. You and the agent and the farmer are arbi- 
 trators ? — Yes ; I would not go further. I would 
 prefer the County Court Judge to arbitration. 
 
 9340. Don't you think all the good landlords would 
 regulate it without arbitration? — I have never anj 
 difficulty. 
 
 9341. It wovdd be only the bad landlords— the 
 grasping men — who would be aflfected. You would 
 have no objection to their being restricted ? — I would 
 rather see the County Court Judge than a Government 
 arbitrator or valuator doing it. 
 
 9342. You would have some skilled man for thfe 
 purpose ?— I would myself employ a skilled man, if 
 necessary, to make a valuation for me. The valu- 
 ators in this county must have made their fortunes 
 latterly, they were in such demand. Thxjy are 
 very good men. 
 
 9343. It is contemplated by the Land Act to 
 have assessors to assist the County Cotirt Judge, 
 not to interfere with good landlords, but with the 
 grasping landlords, and there are some, 1 suppose ' 
 — There are exceptions everywhere. I don't know 
 whether you found it so; but in this part there are 
 not many grasping landlords— certaiulv those who 
 live in this county are not. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 319' 
 
 9344. You don't know Donegal well ?— I Imow 
 some of it ; but there are a great many large pro- 
 prietors there who never live iu the coxuity. 
 
 9345. And very ;poor tenants4-^Yes,'ithere are. Sepi.^!i?,'isso. 
 My evidence is very much confined to what! I consider- ^^ Comrolly ''■ 
 a very good custom. T. Jl'CausIand 
 
 , examined. [This 
 
 9346. Chairman. — You say you have siiffered very 
 severely 1 — I do, iudeed. 
 
 9347. In what manner ? — I was reared under the 
 Duke of Abercorn ; my father lived there, and had 
 three farms. He gave one to a brother of mine, and 
 I was to occupy the other two, and at his death, in 
 1853, he made a will, leaving the farms to me to 
 manage, and to pay oif the brother and two sisters. 
 My brother died, and I wished to change to the farm 
 my brother died on. The first farm was about sixty 
 acreSj and he caused me to take seven and a half 
 years' rent for it. 
 
 93*48. What is the size of the other farm t — Between 
 fifty and sixty acres. 
 
 9349. There is portion of it rough 1 — When I in- 
 clude the rough, I shoiild say sixty acres. 
 
 9350. Mr. Kavanagh. — Both are under the Duke 1 
 —Both. 
 
 9350a. Describe what you complaia oil — One of the 
 farms he would only let me take at the rate of seven 
 and a half years' purchase. 
 
 9351. Mr. Shaw. — Take from your brother? — No; 
 from the incoming tenant, William Oliver. 
 
 9352. Tou were selling it? — Yes; and the next 
 farm he wished me to sell to another tenant named 
 Watson, and to make these farms larger, he would 
 make me give one to one man, and another to 
 another. 
 
 9353. And he would not allow you to get more 
 than seven and a half years' rent ? — He would allow 
 me to take ten years for one, and only seven and a 
 half years for the other ; and the fine upon it did 
 not make the buildings I had upon it. 
 
 9354. When wasthis?— That was in 1857. 
 
 9355. What next ? — I came to the townland of 
 KiUydart. That is under the Duke of Abercorn also. 
 At the time my father was purchasing, the Duke made 
 a swap with some other property, and my father was 
 under a mistake as to the landlord he was coming 
 under; and, at my father's death, I was scarcely able 
 to pay the fortune to my brothers and two sisters from 
 the small fine I got and changing me from one farm, 
 to another. He told me he would put me out of 
 Killydart. I was in it from 1857 to 1862. He 
 put me out, and he told me he would put me out 
 without a farthing, if I did not go freely. 
 
 9356. Were you paying rent? — I was paying rent, 
 but he wished to get the farm into his own cultivation. 
 Then I had to submit, and he gave me this little farm in 
 Swilly, in the county Donegal, above St. Johnston, of 
 fifty acres. I had 103 acies in Killydart. 
 
 9357. How much did he give you ? — He gave me 
 £100 in cash and the farm I now hold, then valued at 
 £400. I would get between £2,000 and £3,000 for 
 the farm he put me out of. It sold this season for 
 £3,300, notwithstanding the depreciation in price of 
 land. 
 
 9358. What is the size of the other fann? — Fifty 
 statute acres. 
 
 9359. Did you build upon it? — Yes, part of the 
 dwelling-house I am in. 
 
 9360. Who was in that farm before? — It was in 
 then- own hands for fourteen or fifteen years, as far as 
 I understand. 
 
 9361. How long ago are these transactions? — lam 
 now eighteen years past living iu Swilly. They had 
 it about fourteeii years before that, and they took it 
 from a neighbour of mine without giving a farthing, 
 they told me ; and I have been living not agreeable to 
 the neighbours for taking the farm from them, but if 
 I did not take that farm I would have nothing at all. 
 
 9362. Did they raise the rent in the last eighteen 
 
 witness's name is not to be given.] 
 
 years ? — It was raised when I came into it. The rent 
 was £40 before, and now I am paying £55 18s. llc^. 
 
 9363. Mr. Kavanagh.— You say the Duke had the ' 
 
 farm on his own hand for fourteen or fifteen years 1 
 
 Yes. 
 
 9364. Did he put any buildings upon it then ? — No ■ 
 sometimes he had one agriculturist on it and sometimes 
 another occasionally managing it. 
 
 9365. What did you pay when you came into it ? — 
 Nothing, for he changed me from one farm into tliis one. 
 The Duke of Abercorn is not well Hked about Barons- 
 coiu't. I could have got £2,000 or £3,000 for the farm 
 I left, and this fifty-acre farm is all I got instead. 
 
 9366. Mr. Shaw. — He put you on a small farm and 
 gave you nothing for the big one % — Yes, and I had the 
 big one well built upon, and I had a threshing mill. Mr. 
 Alexander, the agent for Mr. Gray, of Glasgow, got me- 
 a good threshing machine and a churning machine on 
 this 103 acres, and I was going on with labour well, 
 but that did not please the Duke. 
 
 9367. Did they pay you for the threshing mill ? — I 
 had to take proceedings before I got paid for it. In 
 18641 had to take jn-oceedings. They had signed over 
 this mill and machine to their agriculturist, to whom 
 they gave the farm for management, and they told me 
 in the office to take proceedings against him and not 
 against them, and I did so and recovered it. 
 
 9368. He was working the farm for the Duke ? — He 
 was working it, as far as I understand. 
 
 9369. Mr. Kavanagh. — Your complaint is that by 
 the i-ules on the Duke's estate or the rules he choses to 
 put in force you were deprived of the right of realizing 
 what 5'ou could get for your farm ? — Yes, both farms. 
 When I was living at Baronsoourt before he sent me 
 down to Donegal if my dog would go out he would 
 charge me £1, not giving me the chance of the English, 
 law — " Your dog ha.s been out in the fields annoying 
 the pheasants ; you are fined £1." 
 
 9370. He fined you ?— Yes ; it was put on the rent, 
 and he sent two men and charged me 10s. for cutting a 
 fence in 1861. 
 
 9371. What was wrong with the fence ? — I don't, 
 know what was wrong with it. I called them good 
 enough, and I agreed to cut them myself when I got the 
 flax pulled, bu.t it must be done at the Duke's option. 
 
 9372. He sent a man and made you pay ? — Yes, and 
 that was an overcharge as I think, to pay 1 Os. just when 
 I was paying the rent. 
 
 9373. Mr. Kavanagh. — At the expiration of a lease 
 what took place ? Is tenant-right acknowledged as far 
 as you know ? — I have not known . any case. 
 
 9374. Are there no leases ? — I did not know of any 
 lease. 
 
 9375. Mr. Shaw. — You had no lease yourself? — No. 
 There are some leases where my, wife was reared, 
 but since the leases dropped there is a rise in the rent. 
 
 9376. Mr. Kavanagh. — You say that it was the 
 custom to give the benefit of the Ulster custom at the 
 expiration of a lease, and that you don't know of any 
 change since ? — I know, in a case very convenient to 
 me, a neighbour who in 1875' was getting frail, and 
 not able to occupy his farm and to superini.end the 
 business, and he thought well to sell the farm ; there 
 was an auction ; it is rather the habit to make sale of 
 properties by proposals, and not to let a public sale be 
 held ; £1 ,700 was bid for this large farm of somethinc 
 above 100 acres, but the lowest bidder got the farm at 
 £900 ; the next man bid £1,400, another man bid 
 £1,550, another man bid £1,600, Mr. M'Clure, over 
 the water, bid itp £1,600, aaidMr. Semple £1,550, and 
 Mr. Love, of the Tyrone side of the \Tater, bid up to 
 nearly £1,700, I think ; I could not exactly say. 
 
 Mr. 
 
320 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880. 
 Mr . 
 
 9377. The O'Conoe Don.— When did this bidding 
 take place ? — This was in the year 1875. 
 
 9378. Mr. Shaw. — And the lowest bidder got the 
 farm ? — Yes j Mr. Alexander knows about it very 
 well. 
 
 9379. "Was he a tenant on the estate 1 — He was ; 
 and those others were not. 
 
 9380. Mr. Kavanagh. — Has there been any raising 
 of rent on the Duke's estate 1 — Almost in every 
 case of change of tenancy. When I went to Mr. 
 Humphries to get an order for some timber at Barons- 
 court for cart wheels, he told me he would revalue my 
 farm. 
 
 9381. When was that ^ — In January this year. He 
 told me my farm was to be revalued. They were re- 
 valuing some about St. Johnston, but since you gentle- 
 men were talked about coming he ceased coming over 
 the estate. 
 
 9382. The O'Conor Don.— They have not raised 
 the rents at all this year? — In some instances they 
 have, but my farm was at a lump rent. I have drained 
 my farm, and there were uo fences, and no houses on it 
 in which I could put a single beast, and I had to 
 auction twenty-five head of cows and two horses — com- 
 
 ing to a small farm I had no reason to bring them with 
 me, and having no house for them, it is all one flat. 
 
 9382a. Mr. Kavanagh. — Does the Duke make any 
 impi-ovements on the property ? —I never knew of any. 
 
 9383. And all the improvements are made by the 
 tenants ? — In every case that I know. 
 
 9384. Do you know whether he is borrowing money 
 under the Board of Works for drainage ? — Yes ; in my 
 father's time he did. 
 
 9385. Had the tenants to pay these charges ? — They 
 had to pay them. After my fathei-'s death they were 
 still running on, and I thought them weighty. 
 
 9386. Had you to pay up to the time you left?— 
 The charges were still running on when I left, thei,e 
 parties who got my property still pay on. 
 
 9387. Had the twenty-one years expired? — I could 
 scarcely say whether it had expired, it was near about 
 it. He has been telling me he will revalue my pro- 
 perty. He has not done so at present. Mr. M'Kinley, 
 who had a sawmill at Strabane, he sent round and 
 cut timber ofi' some of the farms. « 
 
 9388. Mr. Shaw. — They had not the timber regis- 
 tered ? — I think not. 
 
 9389. Did it injure the farms taking it away?— 
 Possibly. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Cunningbam: 
 
 John Cunningham, of Milfield, Buncrana, examined 
 
 9390. The O'Conor Don. — You are a com mer- 
 chant of this city ? — ^Yes. 
 
 9391. And agent for an estate, the rent of which is 
 £560 ?— Yes. 
 
 9392. You are also a tenant farmer? — Yes. 
 
 9393. And an owner of property? — I bought a 
 small property, part of Lord Wicklow's estate, since 
 the Land Act passed. The estate was sold in my 
 neighbourhood. 
 
 9394. I suppose tenant-right pi-evails in all the dis- 
 trict with which you are acquainted ? — It does. 
 
 9395. What is the particular point you wish to 
 bring before the Commissioners, that has come parti- 
 cularly before your notice ? — I desire to give evidence 
 as to what I feel is most necessary for the farming 
 classes — greater secui'ity regarding rentj and interfer- 
 ence by the landlord. 
 
 9396. You think under the present laws rents may 
 be raised so as to do away with the tenant-right inter- 
 est ? — Yes. In my neighbourhood the people are very 
 stay-at-home people, they are very unwilling to go into 
 a land court, and they yield whatever is done. 
 
 9397. Your district is Buncrana ? — No; the district 
 I am better acquainted with is Newtowncunningham 
 and Manor Cunningham. 
 
 9398. Mr. Shaw.— That is a better class of pro- 
 perty ? — Yes. 
 
 9399. Have the rents been increasing there ? — Yes ; 
 on three large estates though — the Marquess of London- 
 derry's, the Duke of Aberoorn's, and Lord Wicklow's, 
 the jjractice has been very uniform, and there is not 
 much change lately. 
 
 9400. The O'Conor Don.— You don't know that 
 there is any complaint as to these large estates ? — 
 There is a feeling of soreness about the rents paid. The 
 district was originally nearly all moorland, and nearly 
 all these landlords have been absentees, and have never 
 spent anything in the reclamation or improvement of 
 land, and the tenants are more or less iu debt imtil 
 each harvest. They are discouraged about competition 
 from America, increased cost of labour, &c. 
 
 9401. Outside that have you no particular com- 
 plaint to make of these landlords? — No; they are 
 very good landlords as landlords go. 
 
 9402. All the improvements are made by the ten- 
 ants ? — Yes ; T am not aware of any made by the land- 
 lords in that neighbourhood. 
 
 9403. What do the improvements generally consist 
 of? — I remember for twenty-five or thirty years, and 
 during that period draining and subsoiling to a con- 
 siderable extent, and at hea-sy expense, were effected. 
 
 The fields were much smaller than they are now. 
 Threshing machines have come into operation, and 
 they are building a better class of barns and houses 
 generally. 
 
 9404. Do you know of any case where the tenant's 
 interest in these have been confiscated ? — Yes ; in some 
 cases on small estates where the rent has been raised. 
 In one case a tenant had his rent raised, and was 
 under notice because he refused to pay it. The 
 former rent was £46 6s., and the valuation £38. 
 It has been raised to £00 rent, which he feels oppres- 
 sive, and if he had not another farm he would be 
 ruined. 
 
 9405. When was this ? — Five or six years ago. 
 
 9406. Was that upon the falling out of a lease!— 
 There was no lease. 
 
 9407. Was it a general revaluation or was it only 
 in this particular instance ? — There are only four or 
 five farms on the estate, and the tenants believe there 
 was no valuation, that it was the Lindlord who fixed 
 the lent himself, and st ut a valuator just to keep up 
 appearances. 
 
 9-108. Was the rent of all the tenants raised in the 
 same proportion? — No. I think his case vas the 
 worst. 
 
 9409. They ai-e all raised more or less, but his was 
 raised the worst ? — Yes. 
 
 9410. How long before had the rent been altered?— 
 I think eighteen years before that ; that is his story. 
 
 9411. But you say it is out of proportion now 
 with the other fai-ms in the neighbourhood ? — I Imow 
 the farm very well myself. 
 
 9412. There have been some sales in the Landed 
 Estiites Court in which the tenants in your neighbour- 
 hood purchased their holdings? — There were. In 
 1875 Lord Wicklow sold upwards of £50,000 worth 
 of pi'operty, which was all bought bv the tenants. 
 
 9413. All bought by the tenants"?— Yes. 
 
 9414. Large and small? — They are nearly all large 
 holdings there. It is a good district of covmtry there ? 
 — Yes, very good. 
 
 9415. That was under the Bright clauses? — Yes. 
 
 9416. And they got portion of the purchase-money 
 from the Board of Works? — Yes; 1 got £900 from 
 the Board of Works, and paid £600 myself. 
 
 9417. Have you anything to complain of regarding 
 the expenses attending the pui-chase ? — Yes. We could 
 only manage, although I pressed for the bill of costs four 
 years ago, to get it last month, and the claim made is 
 £38, and Ipaid £22 at the time more than was lodged in 
 court for me. The solicitor who acted for nearly 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 321 
 
 all tlie leiiuiits is dfiul since, and I don't like to say 
 anything, for I think that if he was alive the costs 
 would ha\ e been more reasonable. 
 
 9418. This was a bill from the solicitor? — Yes. It 
 was from the solicitor. 
 
 9419. Not from the Board of Works?— No. 
 
 9420. You have no complaint to make of the 
 Board of Works or as to expenses by them 1 — None 
 that I could substantiate. The solicitor stated 
 that they had a great deal of trouble getting the 
 money from the Board of Works. 
 
 9421. Mr. Shaw. — Was the property bought by 
 trustees, or individually, or separately ? — The estate 
 ■ivas cut into lots. There were thirty-three or thirty- 
 four lots altogether. 
 
 9422. The O'Coxor Don. — And you had one 
 solicitor acting for all 1 — Yes. I think thei'e was 
 scarcely one exception. There was a case of 
 M'Fadden where there were only five acres, and his 
 costs were about .£2-5. 
 
 9423. Mr. Shaw. — That is the costs of your own 
 solicitor were £25 >. — I assisted a man to buy from 
 the Church Commissioners, and his purchase was done 
 for £3 8s., coE.ts. The one was so much simpler and 
 cheaper than the other. 
 
 9424. The O'Conob Don.— The Church Commis- 
 sioners aided the purchasers as regards legal expenses 
 by having a solicitor of their own? — They had 
 forms which were very simple, T was able to fill them 
 up in a moment, and the man made an affidavit, which 
 cost 2s. 6d., and everything was done in a simple way. 
 
 9425. Was there much difficulty about the piices 
 of the lots ? — The prices became very high owing to 
 a rumour that a gentleman, who had a bad name, was 
 about to purchase, and they forced up until Lord 
 Wicklow got a very high number of years' purchase on 
 a high rental. 
 
 9426. Do you think the Board of Works advanced 
 enough of the money for the purchase ? — I think they 
 might advance more. I don't think they would sufl'er 
 any loss. They might omit, however, the restrictions 
 about aKenation, and willing. 
 
 9427. Is it stated that disposition of the property 
 by will will not be allowed ? — Printed notice is given 
 on the back of the receipts for each instalment paid 
 that assignment, devising, (fee, will forfeit the holding. 
 
 9428. Mr. Kavaxagh. — Do you think the re- 
 striction against subdivision is necessary? — -My own 
 opinion is that it is not necessary, but I have 
 lieard of places where they cut it up so small that 
 it might be necessary. They might leave it, however, 
 to the action of the farmers themselves. A good 
 many of them send out their sons to business and to 
 America, and they would not be inclined to cut up 
 too small. 
 
 9429. You would not place much importance on 
 that ?— No. 
 
 9430. Mi-. Shaw. — What is the name of the place ? 
 — The Lagan Valley. 
 
 9431. The O'Conoe Don. — You think a great many 
 of the tenants would be able to provide a considerable 
 portion of the purchase-money themselves? — I am 
 afraid not ; in that case of Lord Wicklow's property 
 Mr. Wilson had to provide a great deal of it, above 
 what the Board of Works provided. 
 
 9432. Do you think the great body of the tenants 
 would not be able to purchase without borrowing ? — 
 Not without borrowing and the interest would be 
 nearly as heavy as what they were paying. 
 
 9433. And if they had fixity of tenure with free 
 disposal at a fair rent, you think that that would be 
 more practicable, and would be sufficient. I think it 
 would for our neighbourhood ; of course I see other 
 people want nothing short of peasant proprietary, but 
 I don't see how it is to be done. The Government should 
 facilitate it wherever it is possible to be done, but it is 
 not practicable in a great many cases. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Cujmingii.am. 
 
 94.S4. Mr. Shaw. — The Government yon think Seirf. 27, 1880. 
 might give more money ? — They might do that with- 
 out loss. 
 
 9435. The O'Coxoe Don.— Have the farms that 
 were purchased been improved since ? — They have. 
 
 943G. And are the people better off and more 
 anxious than their neighbours to improve their farms ? 
 — They are decidedly, and there is a feeling of content- 
 ment and security about them which is showing itself 
 in the class of fences they are making and the style of 
 doing their work altogether. 
 
 9437. Tliere is not much waste land in the district 
 you are acquainted \\ith ? — No ; llieic is a good deal 
 about Buncrana wheie I live. 
 
 9438. Is there any other point you wish to mention ? 
 — A point to wliich I wish to give emphasis is the 
 objection that faii'ly lies against notices to quit in 
 trying disputes about rent. If the tenant disputes 
 the rent, the first thing is a notice to quit. Well 
 in my district the tenant would as soon see a pestilence 
 coming into the house as a notice to quit. 
 
 9439. And you think the fixing of the rent is the 
 chief point? — Yes. The tenant should feel secure 
 that the results of his effijrts could not be taken from 
 him at any future time. 
 
 9440. Increase of rent is the chief hardship ? — Yes. 
 That is the whole hardship in this country ; I have 
 some experience of the value of tenant-right. In 
 1866, I sold a farm for £1,123 lOs. on which tlie rent 
 was £48. That was before the Land Act. Tenant- 
 right has been a commodity of sale on these estates 
 with the knowledge of the landlords for several gene- 
 rations. 
 
 9441. And has that been at all interfered with by 
 the Land Act ? — No. 
 
 9442. Has the price of tenant-right in that district 
 inoi-eased or decreased since the Act passed ? — I don't 
 think in that district it has altered. That farm sold 
 as dear as any that has been sold since. 
 
 9443. You are agent over an estate? — Yes. 
 
 9444. What is the custom on it? — Free sale. If a 
 man says he wishes to sell we prefer a tenant to get 
 it, but if a tenant does not come forward and compete 
 in the open market, and if any other respectable man 
 gives more the tenant will not get any favour from us. 
 
 9445. Have you altered the rent at all? — No; I 
 have not altered the rent. 
 
 9446. What is the proportion of the rent to the 
 valuation? — The rent is about 10 per cent, over the 
 valuation. 
 
 9447. Would you. think that a fair sta.ndard? — I 
 think if those men had security they could pay that 
 well, but as com can now be carried from Baltimore 
 to Derry for 13s. 9d. per ton, while it costs farmers in 
 Donegal as much to send a ton of their oats to Derry, 
 their best market, new and serious conditions affecting 
 our agriculture have arrived. 
 
 9448. It is a mountainous country ? — Hilly rather. 
 
 9449. Mr. Shaw. — -You are in favour of the tenant- 
 right ? — Yes. 
 
 9450. You think it has done an immense deal for 
 Ulster ? — Yes ; I don't know of any better farmed 
 district than that of the Lagan valley, or better or more 
 industrious men anywhere. 
 
 9451. You think it would ruin the tenants if it was 
 attempted to be done away with 1 — Yes ; it would 
 ruin Derry, for we are very dependent on the district. 
 
 9452. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you mean that the 
 whole cost of the corn is 13s. 9d. a ton from America? 
 — No ; but that the cost of bringing a ton from Ame- 
 rica is the same as bringing it from the district in 
 Donegal with which I am acquainted. That is the 
 freight from America is as cheap as the cartage from 
 parts of Donegal. 
 
 9453. Mr. Shaw. — There is no railway to your 
 place 1 — No ; the produce is generally carted by the 
 tenants. 
 
 2T 
 
322 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2r, 18S0. 
 Mr.W.E.Scott. 
 
 Mr. W. E. Scott, d.l., examined. 
 
 9454. The O'Conor Don. — You did not send in 
 any precis of yo\ir evidence 1 — No ; T was one of those 
 selecte<l by a committee to give evidence. 
 
 94.55. You are a landed proprietor 3 — Yes; in the 
 covinty Deny. 
 
 945G. About how many acres have you? — I have two 
 estates perfectly separate. One of about 1,400 acres, 
 which I manage entirely myself, and another of 
 about 1 000 acres, and besides that, some building 
 property. The second property is managed by an agent. 
 One is close to this, and the other is near Limavady. 
 
 9457. Does tenant-right exist on these estates?-— 
 Yes ; on the one I manage myself there is no limit as 
 to the amount of money, but there is as to the mode of 
 selling. In the othei- estate there is a limit as to the 
 number of years' purchase for tenant-right. 
 
 9458. What is the limit as to the mode of selling? 
 — On the estate I manage myself the mode up to 
 the passing of the Act was : the tenant always came 
 to my own house or my office with the purchaser, 
 and talked over the matter and stated the price 
 willing to be paid. If the man was solvent and of 
 good character, and I consideied it was a bona fide 
 bid, I either accepted him as a tenant, or paid the 
 money that was offered, and put in any tenant that 
 I liked who paid me the money that I had given. 
 
 9459. You did not limit it to the tenants on the 
 estate ? — No ; I gave the tenants the preference if they 
 paid the same sum. 
 
 94G0. How could jo-a. test whether it was a hona 
 fide offer or not 1 — You had to use the best of your 
 knowledge of the man and the circumstances, but it 
 was rather difficult, and it is more difficult now. 
 
 04C1. Has there been any change since the pass- 
 ing of the Land Act? — I found it very hard to 
 carry out this custom. The sale was simply an agree- 
 ment, not by auction ; but what they do now is to 
 advertise that proposals will be taken for the farm on 
 a given day, but fixing no limit as to time for receiving 
 them, virtually a public auction. The landlord had 
 no scruple before in objecting to a man, as it was in 
 private ; but now unless a man is well known to be 
 insolvent or of bad character, he docs not like to object 
 to him. 
 
 9462. Then practically since the passing of the 
 Land Act restrictions have been abandoned ? — Yes, 
 except one or two ; I do not acknowledge sheriffs' 
 sales, and right to take farm myself 
 
 9463. Have you had any case brought into the 
 Land Court ? — No ; There was one in the Court of 
 CUiancery. Othei' difficulties are as to tenants suc- 
 ceeding on death vacancies, and tenants dying without 
 wills. In the case of one of no will I took one of the 
 nearest relati\'es who had helped the man who died in 
 the management of his farm, and I accepted him as 
 tenant ; but an uncle came back from Australia, who 
 it was thought was dead, and he broTight the case 
 into the Court of Chancery and nearly ruined the tenant 
 with costs. The fact is I have now to ser^ e notice 
 to quit for two years' rent. He says ho has lost much 
 ]noney in law and it is not decided yet. In the old 
 system our selection would not have been disputed. 
 
 9464. Have the rents been altered on your estate 
 or have you altered them at any periodical date? — On 
 the estate the principal alteration is a reduction. It 
 was all reolairiied by my grandfather and father from 
 bog, and as it was reclaimed, let. The first lettings I 
 have evidence of were in ISOG, and instead of in- 
 creasing the rents the rents were much reduced 
 in 1835. The lands are still above the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 9465. Your father and grandfather did a good deal 
 to improve it ?— Yes ; it was bought about 1G90 and 
 it was nearly all bog, and it w-as bought for the purpose 
 of supplying Dcrry with turf. They reclaimed the land 
 
 and the original letting was (£2 Ii'ish) the Cunmngham 
 acre, and that is more than I could get now. 
 
 9466. Have you spent much yourself in improve- 
 ments ? — No ; I have not spent any. I came in after 
 the Land Act was passed. 
 
 9467. Was there much spent immediately preceding 
 the Land Act — between 1835 and the passing of the 
 Land Act — to assist the tenants? — There was; my 
 father gave the tenants, if they built good houses, 
 timber and slates and sometimes lime, besides re- 
 claiming a considerable quantity of land, which he let 
 to the tenants at 30s. the acre. 
 
 9468. Did the tenants make much improvement? 
 — Not without assistance, the improvements are nearly 
 all houses, and the landlord giving the timber and skies. 
 
 9469. Has that been going on since the Land Act 
 passed? — It has to a small extent. When they 
 wanted money I borrowed from the Board of Works, 
 and lent it at the same interest as I got it, 
 
 9470. For drainage purposes? — No; for building 
 purposes, it is all fairly well drained. 
 
 9471. And you charge them the full rate of interest 
 that you pay to the Board of Works ? — Yes. I am 
 only a very limited owner, having no power to charge 
 the property. 
 
 9472. The other estate you manage through an 
 agent? — Yes; there the custom is limited to five 
 years. It is under the management of Mr. King, who, 
 I am informed, is to be examined before you. I am 
 not so well acquainted with the particulars as he is. 
 
 9473. Why do you apply a different rule to it ?— I 
 found it that way. That was a property that came 
 through marriage to my father, and it was in a very 
 bad state in 1846 and 1847 ; the farms all ran into 
 each other. He made great improvements in levelling, 
 old fences, re-dividing the farms and drainage ; and 
 before doing that he put a limit of five years, and he 
 told me it was above what was usually then paid for 
 tenant-right in the district. It would appear the tenant- 
 right did not go beyond two or three years at that time. 
 
 9474. The five yeai-s covere everj^thiug, whether 
 the tenant has improved or not ? — It does, I believe. 
 
 9475. So that the tenant who has spent a good 
 deal could not get more than the man who does 
 nothing 1 — There seems to be a drawback that way, 
 but it was generally met by giving assistance in 
 building, ito. 
 
 9476. Have you found it practically possible to 
 limit the amount to five years ? Don't they give 
 more under-hand ? — No ; for whenever one of these 
 farms is taken up we hand the tenant the five years' rent. 
 
 9477. You yourself choose the tenant ? Yes; and 
 being small farms they are nearly all always divided 
 amongst the tenants. 
 
 9478. Do you own any land out of Dlster? — None, 
 and none out of the county. 
 
 9479. Is there any other point you wish to state? 
 — The only other point is as to the rent of the land 
 being so much above the Government valuation. 
 
 9480. On which of the estates ?— On the one I 
 manage myself. 
 
 9^81. What is the proportion ?— There is about 800 
 acres let to yearly tenants on one part, and I make it 
 outthatitis 32per cent. abovetheGovernmentval nation. 
 
 9482. How do you account for that ?— That- the 
 Government valuation is not fair, as tried by the test 
 of the tenant-right; ever since 1835 it has improved, 
 and the sales have gone uj) from three and four to 
 fifteen years' jourchase, rent the same. 
 
 9483. Is that per Cunningham acre ? — Yes. 
 
 9484. Is it much higher rent than the rent in the 
 surroundiirg districts, or is it about the average ? — It 
 is rather higher. Next me is one of the Companies 
 estates, and it is much higher than theirs. It is the 
 Grocers' estate, which has just been sold and divided 
 into lots. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 1523 
 
 9485. Was it sold to tlie tenants 1 — It was offered 
 to the tenants, but very few took advantage of it. 
 
 9486. "Was it sold to one proprietor 1 — No, to 
 four or five ; in two or tliree crises the tenants took it, 
 but not a third was taken by the tenants. 
 
 9487. Mr. Shaw. — Have the rents been raised on 
 these estates that were sold 1 — Some of them, but they 
 are under leases. The leases have not dropped, but 
 in a few cases where the tenant has been changed 
 there was a rise. 
 
 9488. It was not sold in the Landed Estates 
 Court 1 — No, by private sale. They get high prices. 
 The property was twice reJivided to suit the tenants, 
 but they, I suppose, thinking they were safe under the 
 Ulster custom, did not buy. 
 
 9489. There is no limit to the price i — No. 
 
 9490. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you know of any case 
 where the tenants have purchased their holdings? — No, 
 I don't know any that I can speak positively of. 
 
 9491. Mr. Shaw. — Don't you know Lord Water- 
 ford's estate 1 — I don't know enough of it. The Grocers' 
 estate, on which this unlimited right exists, parts of 
 it are very much improved, but on the backward 
 parts there is no improvement by landlord or tenant. 
 
 9492. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you of opinion it is 
 necessary to have a restriction on tenant-right ? — Yes, so 
 far as giving the landlord control over the whole 
 estate. 
 
 9493. Do you mean over the prices? — Over the 
 management of the estate. I don't think I would 
 limit it to the price. Even where it was unlimited 
 formerly, the landlord had a dormant power that was 
 well understood by tenants. In the case of unlimited 
 custom it is very difficult to make improvements ; for, if 
 you want to drain, you may meet a troublesome tenant 
 who won't allow it, and then it comes to a deadlock. 
 
 9494. They stand looking at each other ? — Yes. 
 
 9495. You think the present state of things should be 
 brought to an end ? — I think it is nearlv so already. 
 
 9496. The O'Coxok Don.— You think cUfficulties 
 arise by one tenant objecting to draining another 
 tenant's land through his?- -Yes; and then, without 
 notice to quit, you cannot compel him, and he 
 
 may make a land claim and pi-in'e up to twenty or 
 tliirty years' custom. 
 
 9497. The tenant is disaatisfied? — I don't think he 
 is, generally. There are a good number who think it 
 may work out all light yet in time. 
 
 9498. Mr. Kavanagh. — Doyou know of any cases of 
 landlordsrai.singtherent? — Oh,ycs. Ihavcheardof them. 
 
 9498a. The principal complaint we have heardis that 
 the tenant-right is practically eaten up by the increased 
 rent? — The principal -saluations I have known were on 
 the Company's estate, and they have been moderate 
 and at long intervals, and they left it as a rule to a 
 professional valuator. The only other estate I know 
 is the Somerset estate, and it was also revalued by one. 
 
 9499. Mr. Shaw.— When was that?— It was about 
 1856 or 1857. 
 
 9500. Not since the Laud Act? — No; I don't 
 know of any great rise since the Land Act. 
 
 9501. But when a tenancy changes or a lease falls 
 in, it is a rule to rcA'alue the land ? — Not a general 
 I'ule ; but at the end of twentj'-one years — at the end 
 of a fixed period. 
 
 9502. But you think it ought to be periodical ? — 
 Yes ; my father gave me to understand that a jierson 
 purchasing held at that rent foi' twenty-one years, 
 unless he offered to build when he had thirty-one years. 
 
 9503. There was no lease given ? — Yes, and they 
 were hardly ever looked at. 
 
 9504. At the end of twenty-one }'cars, or at the end 
 of thirty-one years, if the tenant had built or made any 
 improvements, would you -s alue these improvements 
 and charge him with them ? — It depends on how long 
 he has had them. If they are merely drainage works, I 
 think thirty-one years would repay him ; but if build- 
 ings, I think it would not repay him ; but I would not 
 like to do that without bringing in an experienced man. 
 
 9505. But at the end of that time, when it was 
 thought these improvements have been exhausted, 
 would the landlord pu-|, on rents to cover them ? — Yes, 
 in many cases, where there have been new buildings, the 
 valuator has been told to exempt them, unless the lajid- 
 lord had built the houses. 
 
 9506. The land is taken at its then value ? — Yes, 
 at its then value. 
 
 Sept. -27, 1880, 
 Mr.W.E.Scott. 
 
 Mr. Benjamin H 
 
 9507. The O'Conoe Don. — Are you a landed pro- 
 prietor ? — No, sir. 
 
 9508. An agent ? — I am a solicitor and agent, and 
 also a tenant-farmer. In connection with both agency 
 and other work, my duties extend all over the country, 
 and are not confined to Limavady. I live in Lima- 
 vady, and the land I occupy is in that neighbour- 
 hood. 
 
 9509. What is the extent of the land over which 
 you act as agent? — I receive between £6,000 and 
 X7,000 a year of rents ; I have been acting for the 
 last fifteen years as solicitor in the management of 
 estates that pay something about .£70,000 a year, to 
 a great extent the estates of the London Companies. 
 
 9510. I understand you are prepared to tell us some- 
 thing as to the relations between tenants and their 
 landlords? — On these estates of the London Com- 
 panies ? 
 
 9511. Which of the London Comjoanies can you 
 speak for? — The Mercers' Company first. Their property 
 is partly in the half barony of Coleraine, and partly 
 in the barony of Loughinshollin. The estate con- 
 tains 21,024a. 2k. 13p., the rental is £11,769 12,-!., 
 and the Government valuation £11,549 3s. The 
 rental and the valuation are very much the same ; 
 about £200 between them. I may say the Mercers' 
 estate has the smallest tenures ; that is there are 
 more tenants on the estate in proportion to the acreage 
 than on any of the other Companies, I believe 
 there are 1,200 tenants upon it, and I believe there 
 are nearly 700 who pay under £10 a year. 
 
 9512. Is it chiefly agricultural land, or are tliere 
 vUlages or towns on it? — There i&tlie village of Kilrea 
 with a few hundred inliabitants. 
 
 , Lane examined. 
 
 9513. Mr. Shaw. — Are they weavers there? — No, 
 there is very little weaving on the estate, very little 
 now ; the Company got possession of their estate in 
 1831. It had been previously let to the Stewart family, 
 they got into possession on the death of one of the 
 Georges in 1831, the rental then was £9,205. The Com- 
 pany reduced it by £1,000 a year, and it so continued up 
 to 1853, when they had it revalued, and the custom 
 they adojoted for valuing their estate was, they liad two 
 valuators and adjusted tlie rents between the two. 
 
 9514. Did they appoint both valuators? — They 
 appointed both. 
 
 9515. They valued separately ?— Yes, then the Com- 
 pany struck the rent between the average valuations. 
 The valuations made for the Company in 1853 was 
 £10,654 and they settled the rental at £10,111 85. 
 
 9516. Did they value the buildings ? — No. buildings 
 are nevervalued. Their custom is, as is the general ]-ule 
 in this county, to have a re vabiation 1 iiade every twenty- 
 one years. The valuation although made in 1853, the 
 rents founded on it did not come into operation until 
 1855, and then, in 1875, they liad a fresh valuation by 
 two valuators again ; one of them valued at £14,363, 
 and the other at £14,418, and the Company fixed the 
 rental at £11,769, being about £3,000 under the 
 average of the valuations. 
 
 9517. Do they spend any money on improvements? 
 —They do. Up to 1873, from the date at which they 
 got the estate in 1831, they received out of the estate 
 for rents £388,658 8s., and they spent in improvements 
 £134,424 Is. 3d., and in the management of the estate 
 paying theii' agent, and their bailiffs, with salaries and 
 donations to clergymen, £80,744 17s. 5d. 
 
 9518. Could you give the proportion of money spent 
 
 2T2 
 
 Mr. Benjamin 
 H. L.'uic. 
 
324. 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 27, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. Benjamin 
 H. Lane. 
 
 on buildings and tlie money spent on the land in the 
 way of drainage?— I have not it here, but I could 
 obtain it. I may say that in dealing Y>-ith the Mercers' 
 Company there has been raised a point that I myself 
 have a very strong opinion upon, and I believe a great 
 many others have the same who are connected with the 
 management of property, and that is as to the present 
 procedure in the raising of rents. In 1875, when the 
 Company came to revalue their estates, having been 
 told they were value for about £14,000 a year, and 
 when they asked a much lower sum than that, the 
 tenants refused — absolutely refused, and a combination 
 arose among them, and they refused to pay any 
 increase, or to make any settlement whatever, 
 which placed the Company in a very awkward 
 position ; they did their best, but the tenants were 
 advised by some parties and they would not come to 
 terms with the exception of a very few. The Company 
 took a selection of cases to have them tried by the 
 County Court Judge, with respect to the rents which 
 they would not pay. 
 
 9519. That is to try the fairness of the rents'? — 
 Yes, and the result was we had to serve notices to 
 quit, which they allowed to proceed to ejectment, and 
 they claimed then, under the Ulster custom, to the 
 amount of .£50,000 odd. In the fifty-three cases we 
 proceeded with, we took the largest tenants on the 
 estate for the purpose of testing the point — to let them 
 see there was no unfair demand made. The cases were 
 dismissed by the Chairman, and the dismiss was sub- 
 sequently confirmed by the Judge on appeal, and it cost 
 the tenants £821. 
 
 9520. On \v,hat grounds were the cases dismissed 1 — 
 On the grounil that the demand was reasonable. 
 
 9521. The tenants remained in ] — Y cs, and they still 
 remain. What I submit is, that the law requires some 
 amendment in respect to the procedure for revision of 
 rents, and what appears to be a reasonable way of arriv- 
 ing at tli-it would be that, if the landlord thinks the time 
 has arrived or desires to raise his rents, and I'ails to 
 ao-ree with the tenants, let him serve notice upon them, 
 requiring them to show cause beiore the Chairman why 
 the rent should not be the sum demanded, and let the 
 question then be determined,instead of goingthrougli the 
 roinid-about procedure of serving notice to quit, which 
 creatss unnecessarily an amount of ill feeling, and which 
 is followed byan ejectmentwith a large amount of cost. 
 
 9522. Mr. Shaw. — You would leave it to the Chair- 
 ro^in to fix the rent? — I think the Chairman with the 
 evidence of both sides before him is a lair jiidge. 
 
 9523. The O'Conob Dox. — Woidd you makgit com- 
 ijulsory on both parties to abide by his decision 1 — 
 Certainly, if the Chairman thought that tlio rent asked 
 by the landlord is reasonable tln.Te is no breacli of the 
 custom, aud the tenant must either liold at that rent 
 or pai't with the land. 
 
 9524. Would you make it compulsory on the land- 
 lord to abide by that ? — I would give an ajipeal. If a 
 landlord wants the laud ho must pay tlic tenant the 
 tenant-right. If they both appealed to this court you 
 would make it compulsory 1 — Not necessarily, I woiild 
 have it compulsory in this way, that if a court thinks 
 the rent is a reasonable and projjer rent and not a breach 
 of the custom, the tenant must either hold at that or 
 sell his tenant-right it he wants to go away, but if, on 
 the other hand, the landlord takes the tenant's land, 
 he must pay him for it. 
 
 9525. Suppose the court says it is unreasonable ? — 
 Then the landlord must allow him to remain at a. 
 reasonable rent, or pay for the tenant-right. 
 
 9526. Having once gone into court do you think that 
 they should be boimd by the court? — No, I would not 
 go so far as that. I say I think that the law requires 
 amendment with re:;pect to the procedure for the adjust- 
 ment of rents. At present if a landlord wishes to revise 
 his rent, or if the usual period for revision has arrived, 
 if he cannot come to terms with his tenants, he has to 
 proceed to serve a notice to quit, which is followed by 
 an ejectment and then a land claim by the tenant. The 
 case goes into court, before the County Covirt Judge as 
 
 land judge, and the landlord ui reply to the tenant's 
 claim says, " I only want my rent revised, and have 
 demanded such a sum as is a fair and reasonable rent 
 and no infringement of the custom ; and, therefore, the 
 tenant's claim should be dismissed. " Obviously, there- 
 fore, the question which the Judge has to determine is 
 
 Is the rent asked by the landlord a rack rent, and 
 
 such as the tenant cannot be reasonably asked to pay. 
 If so there is* a breach of the custom, and the landlord 
 must either agree to what the Judge holds to be a reason- 
 able rent to charge, or he must pay the tenant the value 
 of his tenant-right assessed at such rent. If, on the 
 other hand, the rent demanded by the landlord is 
 reasonable and fair, there is no breach of the custom, 
 the tenant's claim is dismissed, and he can either 
 hold his iarm at the new rent or dispose of his tenant- 
 right subject to such rent. 
 
 9527. Mr. Shaw. — Tenant-right is admitted on the 
 estate 1 — Yes ; except in this respect that there is a 
 custom upon the estate that where a small holding is 
 desired by an adjoining farmer he appoints an arbitra- 
 tor, and the small holder appoints an arbitrator, and 
 whatever they agi'ee upon, the small holder is bound 
 to give the land at that rate. That is where the ad- 
 joining tenant wants to have it ; but if the adjoining 
 tenant is not anxious to ha^e it, the custom is un- 
 limited. 
 
 9528. O'CoNOE Don. — Is there any other Company 
 you Yv'ish to give evidence about 1 — With respect to 
 the Salters' Company the rental is X14,851 1 9s. 2d. The 
 Government valuation £17,718 lOs., and the average 
 19,28lA. Or. 24p. That is the cheapest let estate of 
 the Companies. 
 
 9529. Where is it situated ?— Near Magherafelt. 
 The Company got possession in 1853, the property had 
 formerly belonged to the late Sir Thomas Bateson. 
 There was a revision o± rent then and an agreement 
 come to, to add 10 per cent, to the then existmg rents, 
 and 10 per cent, at the expir-ation of another period, 
 which period was np two years ago ; but owing to the 
 depressed times the company have not added it. They 
 have recently made some inci-ease on townpark lands, 
 but I am talking of agricultural land. 
 
 9530. Is most of their property agricultural land ■ 
 — It is almost all agricultural. The town of Maghera- 
 felt is on it, and with the exception of that it is all 
 arable land. 
 
 9531. And tenant-right is admitted ?— Tenant 
 right by private sale is admitted, but not by public 
 auction. 
 
 9532. They don't restrict the price ?— No. 
 
 9533. They don't limit it to tenants on the estate! 
 — Further than that tenants on the estate have the 
 prelerence. 
 
 9534. Have they spent much money on their estate? 
 — They have spent since they came into possession on 
 improvements £34,770 lis. "tl, and in donations, 
 .-:alaries to ministers, etc., £22,083 12s. 9d. They 
 have built a court-house at a cost of £1,863. They 
 have also guaranteed 5 percent, on £2,000 of shares in 
 a small railway, and have given land free to another rail- 
 way iu the district. The Skinners Company — I believe 
 their agent will attend and arive information himself. 
 I have been advising the Skinners since they came 
 into possession of the estate. The rental is £13,387 
 Is. 8(?., the Government valuation £13,141 12s., and 
 the acreage 44,334 acres. The Ulster custom pre- 
 vails to an unlimited extent except that it is by 
 private sale. There is no limit as to price, and 
 the prices with this limitation go to a very high figure. 
 
 9535. Up to what rate?— Up to thirty years' pur- 
 chase. 
 
 9536. Has there been any increase in the rental? — 
 There has. In 1872 the company got possession on 
 the fall of the leases to the Ogilby family, and they 
 had a revision of the rent, and it was settled at 
 £13,387. 
 
 9537. What was it before?— I could not tell you 
 exactly. The system by which the increase was put 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 32- 
 
 on was, tliat to the agricultural lands 2s. Gd. in the 
 pound was added. There had been no increase for forty 
 years on the estate, and then they added 2s. 6d. to 
 agricultural rents, and 25 per cent, to the town rents, 
 and 20 per cent, townparks. 
 
 9538. What are they doing 1 — They are laying out 
 money in improvements. Since they got possession 
 they have spent £4,730 on improvements ; they pay 
 yearly in salaries about £1,000, and aboiit £1,000 for 
 management, besides guaranteeing 5 per cent, on 
 .£20,000 shares to the railway from Limavady to Dun- 
 given. When they settled the rental in 1872, they 
 did so without any dispute whatever with the tenants. 
 The Fishmongers' Comj^auy — I am a tenant on that 
 property myself. I cannot give exactly the figures 
 in their case. The rental is about £10,000, and the 
 Government valuation between £7,000 and £8,000. 
 It is the best estate in the county, that is, there is on 
 it the best land to be found on any of the London 
 Companies, and they have spent a large sum on im- 
 provements and do annually spend a large sum on 
 schools. 
 
 9539. Is it generally agricultural land 1 — Princi- 
 pally. They give leases for twenty-one years, but 
 since the passing of the Land Act they put into the 
 the leases a covenant which preserves the tenant-right 
 at the expiration of the lease for the tenant. 
 
 9540. For the tenant? — Yes, at the expiration of 
 the lease. It has been the custom to have the lands 
 revalued. 
 
 9540a. The rent is higher than the valuation ? — 
 Yes ; it is very good laud, and I don't believe there 
 is a tenant, except in exceptional cases, that will not 
 tell you the rents are fair. 
 
 9541. What is the rate of the tenant-right 1 — I 
 have known it up to forty years, but it would average 
 twenty-five on the Fishmongers' estate. As to the 
 estate of the Irish Society in Derry, of courcs their 
 rents are published every year. I am the solicitor of 
 the Society, but I have no authority to give any in- 
 formation on behalf of the Society ; but if there is any 
 (juestion you wish to ask I would answer it. 
 
 9542. Their agent is not able to come, not being 
 well ?— Yes. 
 
 9543. We had some complaints to-day about the 
 treatment of tenants on the Society's estate 1 — I think 
 I know every thing done in connexion with their 
 estate. 
 
 9544. Do you know anything of the case of a Mr. 
 Steele who complains of a notice preventing his selling 
 his holding 1 — I do. The custom on the estate is that 
 the tenant, before he sells his tenant-right, should give 
 notice of his intention to do so, and obtain t)ie leave 
 of the landlord. Mr. Steele, in contravention of that 
 custom, declared he would sell, but he was required 
 to make an application first. 
 
 9545. A written notice was handed in here to-day, 
 signed by the agent, directing the auctioneer to inform 
 all persons who bid that the holding would be subject 
 to a revision of rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 9546. And also that the sale must take place sub- 
 ject to the approval of the agent as to the purchaser 1 
 — I was not aware that the notice contained a revision 
 of rent. The rule upon the Irish Society estate, with 
 respect to tenants from year to ytar, is, where the 
 rent has not been raised for, at least, the average 
 twenty-one years, there is, upon a transfer of tenancy, 
 to be a revision of rent. 
 
 9547. Mr. Shaw. — That was not stated in the 
 notice 1 — It is known to be so^that with regard to 
 yearly tenancies upon the Society's estate, in many of 
 which the rent has not been raised for many years — 
 perhaps up to forty years — that where tenant-right is 
 sold, it is sold subject to a revision of rent. 
 
 9548. Then there is no reason for giving the notice 1 
 — The only object is that the purchaser might not be 
 mislead if he was not informed of this. That very 
 case had arisen with this Society, where a purchaser 
 
 Mr. Benjamin 
 H. Lane. 
 
 revised for forty years, and he then said to the Society, Sept. 27, im. 
 " You should have given me notice." 
 
 9549. We had also a statement with regard to 
 another tenant named Osborne. He bought a farm 
 which was essential for the drainage of another farm, 
 and you served him with notice to quit? — I don't 
 think we ever served him with notice to quit. 
 
 9550. Mr. Kavanagh. — He says he went over to 
 the Company, and that they gave him seven days to 
 decide whether he would accept it 1 — I never heard of 
 it at all ; but I will be very happy to get any infor- 
 mation about it. 
 
 9r)51. You are not aware his rent was raised ? — It 
 was raised three or four years ago. One of his fields 
 runs into the city boundary, and his rent was revised 
 three or four years ago. It had not been revised for a 
 very long period ; but I certainly never heard of the 
 statement that a notice to quit was served. 
 
 9552. The O'Conoe Don. — Are we to understand 
 the usual custom on the estate is to revise the rent in 
 twenty-one years ? — With the Irish Society it is longer 
 than that — I am talking entirely of agricultural land. 
 — It was let on leases for the life of the late Lord Lon- 
 donderry. These leases expired five or six years ago, 
 in 1874 or 1875. The Society then offered (and I think 
 it was almost universally accepted by the tenants) to 
 re-let the farms to the tenants on leases for thirty-one 
 years. The other portion of the estate, where it was 
 tenancies from year to year, remains so. 
 
 9553. But tenant-right is acknowledged on the 
 estate ? — With a covenant in the lease reserving the 
 tenant-right at the end of the lease. 
 
 9554. That was unlimited tenant-right? — That is 
 unlimited. 1 never knew of any limit being placed 
 upon it at all. Of course, you are aware that the So- 
 ciety gave £40,000 to the freeing of the bridge. They 
 publish annually their income and expenditure, and 
 show how the money is spent in donations and 
 charities. 
 
 9555. Do they do much in improving the land? — 
 They have done considerable. 
 
 9556. Have you figures on that point? — No. 
 
 9557. Mr. Shaw. — In these other estates, do you 
 think it would be any advantage to sell to the tenants 1 
 — I don't think it woitld ; and they could not buy. I 
 believe I am the second largest farmer on any of the 
 Company's estates in the county, and I consider I 
 would be placed in a very disadvantageous position, 
 considering the interest I have in my farm as a tenant- 
 right interest, if the Company were to sell their estate 
 and I bought my holding. 
 
 9558. If the Companies came to an arrangement to 
 sell to the tenants, would the tenants be able to buy, 
 generally ? — I don't think they would be able without 
 incumbeinng themselves very heavily. A great many 
 on the Fishmongers estate would be, certainly ; but 
 not the others 
 
 9559. They are small tenants, and poor enough? — 
 Yes, poor enough. 
 
 9560. They are not suitable tenancies to make such 
 an experiment on ? — They are as good tenancies as any 
 I know. 
 
 9561. They are small ? — Some of them are small. 
 
 9562. The O'Conob Don. — Do you wish to make 
 any observation about the Bright Clauses 1 — At the 
 sale of Lord Waterford's estate, in 1871, I acted for a 
 good many of the tenants who purchased their farms, 
 and I acted for others since — in court and out of 
 court. 
 
 9563. Have you any suggestion to nrake for the 
 improvement of the procedure ? — I thiuk the procedure 
 at present in the Landed Estates Court with respect 
 to the requirement of surveys, and so on, are unneces- 
 sary. In answer to the question, " Have any diffi- 
 culties been experienced in carrying out such sales 1" 
 I say, Yes, I think the course of j)rocedure is un- 
 necessarily expensive and tedious. Where a petition 
 is presented to the Court for carrying out an agree- 
 
 __ i r — j^^jg ijg^^yggQ a landlord and tenant, under 
 
326 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Benjamin 
 H. I^aiie 
 
 Sept. 27, 18S0. the section of the Act, I think all the Court should do 
 is to inqui]-e into the title, and if that is found good, 
 then convey the holdings to the tenants, subject to all 
 existing rights of way, easements, A'c. This would 
 very much simplify matters. Again, where the sale 
 is on a jietition for sale of an entire estate, and that 
 any portion of it is purchased by the tenants, I think 
 there should be provision made to dispense with the 
 survey of individual farms, and defining each separate 
 holding's easements as at pi'esent. All the Govern- 
 ment should require is a good title to the land on 
 which their money is advanced, and we have a prece- 
 dent for this in conveyances under the Church Act. 
 The Church Commissioners ai'c untrammelled with 
 all these things. 
 
 9564. Ton think inquiry about all those rights of 
 way and easements lead to exjiense ! — Yes, and a 
 great deal of delaj', 
 
 9565. H'jxl they to do that in the case of the Mar- 
 quess of Waterford 1 — It was rather peculiar in that 
 respect. A petition had been presented, and the lots 
 made, in which there were seven, or eight, or ten 
 farms in one lot, and when the tenants pui'chascd fchi-ir 
 holding the Landed Estates Court refused to Jiiake 
 any conveyance to separate tenants except on a sepa 
 rate survey, which resulted in tlie whole estate having 
 to be resurveyed and redi^ided, which was ^-ery 
 tedious and very exjDensive. 
 
 9566. With I'egurd to your experience of these 
 tenants, are they getting on well since they purchased ? 
 — I think where the purchaser has money, he is doing 
 well, and naturally, if he is an industrious man, he 
 will continue to prosper. Some few lia\'e improved 
 their dwelling-houses, but, with that excejrtion, I see 
 no difference between them and yearly tenants on 
 tenant-right estates. 
 
 9567. Do many of them borrow money 1 — Yes, 
 some of them, and they are much worse off, for not 
 only have they to pay interest to the Government, 
 which generally equals their former rent, but large 
 sums of interest to third parties for the money they 
 have borrowed. 
 
 9568. Have many of them had to sell again since 
 they purchased I — A few ; not many. 
 
 9569. Mr. Shaw. — They are good-sized farms? — 
 No, a good many of them are small ; some of them 
 are large, but the majority are small. 
 
 9570. How long is it since that sale ? — It was in 
 1871 and 1872. 
 
 9571. They are working clear of the debt 1 — Some 
 are and some are not. 
 
 9372. The O'Conor Dox. — Do you think anymore 
 than two-thirds of the purchase-money might be safely 
 advanced'!— I don't see any objection if the Govern- 
 ment see it is security for the nn mey. 
 
 957o. Don't you tljink that with the gi-eatcr in- 
 terest the tenant has under tenant-right in the North 
 there would be security for a much luiger proportion 
 than two-thirds? — It all depends on the amount given 
 for the farm. One farm may bo very good security 
 for over t\\'i>thirds, and anothrr faria might not be 
 security for the two-thirds. I'iicli ciise luust depend 
 on its merits. 
 
 9574. A great deal depoufls on the rate of purchase 1 
 — Of course it all depends on that. 
 
 9575. Have you had any instances of the worlving 
 of perpetxiities beside these ^—I have had. In this 
 county there were two large manors, one at Limavady 
 and one at Beleaghy, belonging to the Vintners. The 
 manors had belonged to the Eight Hon. William and 
 Thomas Oonolly, Speakers of the Irisli House. From 
 1700, and during all that century, they were let on 
 perpetuity leases at nominal rents. The result is that 
 these manors (although it should be quite the con- 
 trary) are badly farmed, the holdings small, and the 
 occupiers poor. They call themselves " froeliolders." 
 
 9o76. They have subdivided ?— All this arises 
 trom subdivision. In some cases the land was ori- 
 ginally let to two, three, and four tenants ; now it is 
 under ten or twelve ; and in one case where it was 
 
 let to five tenants originalh-, it is now in the hands 
 fifty, the majority of whom are paupers, and living iv 
 a condition at least 100 years behind their neighbom-N 
 who are paying a fair rent for the land. 
 
 9577. How long has the land been subdivided to 
 that extent ? — For many years. I was looking back at 
 a renewal made in 1833, and there were forty-six 
 tenants then, and at present they are a hundred year.s 
 behind their neighbours over the ditch, who pay a fair 
 rent to the landlord. 
 
 9577a. Mr. Shaw. --How can there be fifty freehol- 
 ders? — They have subdivided the land amongst families 
 and 23ieces have been sold. 
 
 9578. Are they weavers ^^No, common labonvers 
 and agriculturists. 
 
 9579. At the time that subdivision was made there 
 was no resource for these people but emigration ? — No 
 doubt. 
 
 9580. Mr. Kavanagh. — That is the case referred 
 to by Lord Lifford in a letter to the Times. He says 
 " I know of one tenancy, and it is now in possession of 
 seventy freeholders by subdivision"? — That was Mr. 
 Conolly's Donegal estate. The manor of Limavady 
 was sold at the beginning of this century to the La 
 Touches of Dublin, who had got mortgages on aiul 
 had foreclosed, and they sold it to the Ogilbys. 
 
 9581. Mr. Shaw. — The linen trade was extensive in 
 this district at one time 1 — No doubt it was, and on 
 one of these manors, the Vintners, more than the 
 manor of Limavudy. 
 
 9582. And the subdivision was made when tlie 
 trade was flourishing ? — I don't know that. 
 
 9583. Have they been subdividing on Lord Water- 
 ford's property? — They cannot until the money is 
 paid off. 
 
 95S4. Mr. KAVAXiVGH. — Lord Lifford sajs: — 
 
 "I come now to the other portion of the only instance 
 adduced by Viv. Sharman Crawford, viz., theeslatesof the 
 ConoHj' family. It must now be nearly 100 jears since the 
 then Mr. Conolly leased for ever, the ivhole or nearly the 
 whole of his Uerry estate to the tenants at half a crown an 
 acre ; after a Avhile that property became a by-word for 
 bad farminpf, misery and oppression ; the tenants soon 
 underlet their farms at exorbitant rents to undertenants." 
 
 That was your impression as to the state of the easel 
 — That is what I have stated as a fact. 
 
 9585. The O'Conok Dox.— You don't say they 
 underlet their land to other tenants 1 — No, it is sub- 
 diyiding the freehold. 
 
 9586. jNIr. Shaw. — They did not become landlords 
 themselves? — They became freehold occupiers iu fee. 
 The oliject with which I put them forward is thattliis 
 subdivision may be giiarded against, for it does bring 
 the country do^yn. 
 
 9587. The O'Conor Dox. — Is there any other point 
 you desire to mention ? — Except as to the custom. 
 
 9588. I think you ha"ve told us the custom on these 
 different estates ? — Yes. 
 
 9589. Mr. Kavanagii. — Which of the customs do 
 you think the best 1 Do you think that no restriction 
 on the part of the landlord is good? — If you were to 
 begin with the normal condition of things, I would 
 say it is not good to hav^e an unrestricted price, but 
 we have to look at these things as we find theia. 
 
 95 'JO. J\Ir. SiiA\y. — It is unpleasant to ha^-e these 
 different rules — one estate perfectly free, and the other 
 limited ? — Of course they are pretty well known on 
 any estates where they exist. 
 
 9591. Are peojde Icss'anxious to go on the restricted 
 properties than on the others ? — Not a bit I think. 
 
 9592. The demand is so great they would go any 
 where for it ? — I don't know that that exactly does it, 
 but they do do it. 
 
 9593. Mr. Kavanagh. — Whichlias most advantage, 
 the limit as to price, or the limit as to the landlord's 
 selection of a tenant? — I should always leave a veto 
 with the landlord in the choice of a tenant. It comes 
 to the same thing, and I should also say it is essential 
 that tlie 18th section of the Land Act should be 
 incorporated with the Ukter custom. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 327 
 
 9594. That is the equity section? — Yes, for I have 
 known upon tenant-right estates a troublesome tenant 
 would not allow a drain to be run down his ditch, which 
 would improve the whole tract of country above him. 
 If he does not allow this to be done you must proceed 
 against him. It has been always held in this county 
 that where the conduct of the tenant is unreasonable, if 
 it does not deprive him of his tenant-right, it always 
 weighs with the Judge in awarding him compensation. 
 It is very necessary there should be some power 
 that way, to have things arranged, otherwise they 
 very often lead to annoyance and a great deal of injury. 
 
 9595. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think there should beany 
 raising of rents, except periodically ? — No, except 
 periodically, and there should be some method in the 
 way I suggest to simplify the present state of things. 
 No more glaring case arises than that of the Mercers 
 Company, where they did everything they could to get 
 
 the tenants to do what was reasonable, ana they would 
 do nothing, and there they drove us to notices to quit 
 and ejectment. 
 
 9596. The O'Conor Don. — And when some were 
 settled all the rest came in under the same rule 1 — Yes. 
 
 9597. Mr. Shaw. — The rents are reasonable? — Icon- 
 siderthem reasonable. There may be some odd ones not 
 so, buti don't believe there is. I know a good deal about 
 the valuation of land, and I went over their estate myself 
 carefully, and I don't believe there is a rent on the 
 estate that is shown to work unreasonably to the tenant. 
 
 9598. They are very industrious and thrifty t — Yes. 
 'J 5 9 9. And they are poor? — Yes, a great deal of it 
 
 is poor land, but there are as good tenants on it as you 
 would meet. There are also mountain tenants. 
 
 9 600. They are lower in rent ? — They are much lower 
 in rent. 
 
 Commissioners then adjourned until next morning. 
 
 Sept. 27, 1880.. 
 
 Mr. Benjamin 
 H. Lane. 
 
 FIFTEENTH DAY— TUESDAY, 2Sth SEPTEMBEE, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat at Jury's Hotel this morning, and resumed the Inquiry. 
 
 Present -.—The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborough, Chairman; The O'Co^OR Don, Arthur 
 MacMorrotjgh Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., and William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 Mr. James Steel Hanjsta, Carrowkeel, Campsie, examined. 
 
 9601. 
 am. 
 9602. 
 9603. 
 
 Chairman. — Are you. a tenant farmer ? — I 
 
 WLere '] — At Carrowkeel, near Campsie P.O. 
 Under whom do you hold ? — Under W. F. 
 Bigger, esq. 
 
 960i. How many acres?— About 100. 
 
 9605. Is it a tenant-right farm ? — It is. 
 
 9606. Wliat are the rules of tenant-right on the 
 property ? — The rules of tenant-right at the time my 
 father purchased the farm. It was then part of the 
 Grocere' Company's estate. 
 
 9607. What was the date of your father's pur- 
 chase? — December, 1871. 
 
 9608. AVas it then under the Grocers' Company? 
 —Yes. 
 
 9609. Has there been a change of landlords since ? 
 — Yes. ilw W. F. Bigger of Derry, is now the landlord. 
 
 9610. He purchased it ? — Yes ; he purchased part of 
 the Grocers' estate. 
 
 9611. Was there a lease of it iii 1871 ? — Yes, and 
 it is under a lease still. 
 
 9612. The O'Conor Don.— For how long?— It will 
 expire in 1882. 
 
 9613. Has anything unsatisfactory occurred with re- 
 ference to it ? — No, not with reference to that. It is 
 not as to that place I want to give evidence, it is 
 with regard to the farm my father sold in 1872. 
 That farm was on the property of Henry Kyle, esq., 
 of La\u-el Hill — it was in the townland of Warbles- 
 hinny. 
 
 9614. Was it held under lease? — It was not. It 
 had been imder lease till 1857. It was original part 
 of the Goldsmiths' estate ; it afterwards changed hands 
 and became the property of Mr. Leslie Alexander, 
 and subsequently it passed to Mr. Kyle. 
 
 9615. What took place in reference to the sale of 
 that farm ? — On the occasion of the sale my father got 
 the following letter from Mr. Kyle : — 
 
 " Laurel Hill, January 4th, 1872. 
 " Dear Sir. — I see that you have advertised that yon are 
 about to sell the tonant-right of the farm you bold vmder 
 me. I do not desire to deprive you of any right under the 
 late Act to which 3-ou may be entitled, but I write to give 
 you fair notice that the rent to the new tenant (who must 
 be approved by me), will be £64 per annum, which I believe 
 to be a fair and reasonable rent under all the circumstances. 
 " Yours truly, 
 
 •' Henry Kyle." 
 "Mr. Wm. Hanna, Warbleshinny." 
 
 9616. What had the rent been up to that time? 
 — Up to that time the rent had been £56^ and 
 bog rent Tlie bog had been free befoKethat It had 
 
 9617. The O'Conor Don. — The rent was increased 
 in 1858 from £37 lis. 9rf. to £56?— Yes ; and then 
 ill 1872, when my father wished to sell the farm 
 he wrote hiin that letter, increasing the rent to £64. 
 He followed up that letter by sending his bailiff to 
 the place on the day of sale to inform purchasers 
 that the rent would be raised. Of course my father Avas 
 placed then in a peculiar position. He wanted to 
 sell the farm in order to raise money to pay for the farm 
 he had purchased. What was he to do ? He had to put 
 up the farm and sell it at the old rent, and then compro- 
 mise with the landlord. The nature of the compromise 
 was this : — the landlord agreed, if my father paid 
 him down a sum of £80, to allow the rent to remain 
 as it was. My father paid him the £80 ; the rent re- 
 mained at £56, and the landlord put the £80 into his 
 ]-iocket. 
 
 9618. What amount of purchase-money did you.r 
 father receive ? — The total was £960, minus £10 for 
 auction fees. My father had received a bona fide 
 offer of £200 more before this difficulty turned up, 
 but the party declined to carry out the transaction 
 in consequence of the landlord saying he would 
 increase the rent ; so that my father actually lost 
 £280 by the action taken by Mr. Kyle in the matter. 
 
 9619. Chairman. — Has the additional rent been 
 since put upon the purchaser ? — I do not think it has. 
 
 9(120. Did he get a lease ?— I don't think he did. 
 Ho may have. 
 
 9621. Mr. Shaw. — Are leases common upon the 
 property ? — Here and there. 
 
 9Ij22. It is a tenant-right property, I suppose? — It 
 is. He says in this letter that as far as the new 
 Act would allow he would acknowledge it. 
 
 9623. Had it been the practice on the estate prior 
 to the Land Act to raise rent on the occasion of a 
 sale t — I think that was the first sale that had taken 
 place on the estate for many years. 
 
 9621. The O'Conor Don. — It had been raised in 
 1858 on the dropping of the lease? — It had. 
 
 9624a. Do you know whether it was an old lease ? — 
 It was for three lives, I think, and years besides. 
 
 9625. Chairman.— Had your father made improve- 
 ments on the property ?— Yes. He had expended £500 
 if not more on buildings, and he spent, I could not say 
 how much, on the farm. 
 
 9626. What was the poor-law valuation of the land ? 
 — £48. I wish to add that the rental of the holdint^s 
 of E. M'Keown, John Smith, Edward Stevenson, 
 William Elliott, Michael Logue, James Kelly, and 
 Joseph Henderson, in Warbleshinny, have been 
 raised by Mr. Kyle, within the last few years from 
 £1G9 ITs. 3d. to £197 155., the Government valu- 
 
 >■ £136 5s. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James S 
 Hauna. 
 
328 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMillSSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 26, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Flanagan and 
 Mr. John 
 Taylor, jun. 
 
 Mr, John Flanagan, of Castlefimi, and Mr. John Taylor, juu., of same place, attended as a deputation from the 
 
 Castlefinn Tenants' Defence Association. 
 
 9627. Chairman. — I believe you are a tenant-far- 
 mer 1 — Mr. Flanagan. — I am. 
 
 9628. Do you hold under the Ulster custom ? — Yes. 
 
 9629. Where is your farm 1 — At Grahamsland, in 
 the vicinity of Castlefinn. Grahamsland is the name 
 of the townland. 
 
 9630. Are you a member of the Castlefinn Tenants' 
 Defence Association 1 — Yes. 
 
 9631. How many members does it consist of? — The 
 Bub-committee consists of six. I do not exactly know 
 the number of members in the Association. At one 
 time there were three or four hundred. 
 
 9632. Do you speak on behalf of the Association 
 generally 1 — Yes, with my friend, Mr. Taylor. 
 
 9633. Is there any special matter, among those 
 which you have mentioned in the notes of your evi- 
 dence, which you would wish first to bring before us 1 
 — No. I am ready to answer as to any of the points 
 on which you wish to question me. 
 
 9634. Then we v/ill take the grievance you men- 
 tion as to office rules giving the landlord a right to 
 raise the rents ? — "i'es. That is our principal gi-iev- 
 ance. 
 
 9G3-5. We will take your own case first. Will you 
 give us the name of your landlord 1 — The Rev. Robert 
 Delnp. 
 
 90 3 6. Who is the agent 1 — Mr. Montgomery 
 Stewart, J.P., Lifford. 
 
 9637. When did you first go into occupation of your 
 holding 1 — My father occupied it before me. It was 
 some time about 1844 or 1845 that my father came 
 first into possession, and, at my father's death, I took 
 possession. 
 
 9038. Was it under lease 1 — No ; I never held under 
 lease. 
 
 9639. Beginning from the time you succeeded your 
 father, tell lis whether there was any rise of rent, and, 
 if so, how much 1 — There was a rise of rent in 1876 of 
 £2. The Government valuation of my holding at this 
 time was £18 15s. My old rent was £26, the rent 
 my father always paid. The rise of rent in 1876 
 brought it ujj to £28. I considered that an exorbitant 
 rent, inasmuch as the valuation was only £18 15s. 
 
 9640. How many acres did the farm consist of? — 
 Eleven and a half acres Cunningham measure. About 
 fourteen statute. 
 
 9641. V7as that £2 the last rise ''—That was the 
 last rise. 
 
 9042. Had you and your father done the improve- 
 ments? — Yes ; all the improvements. 
 
 9643. Without any assistance from the landlord? — 
 Without any assistance whatever. 
 
 9644. This increase from £26 to £28, was it made 
 at the expiration of any special length of time from 
 a former rise of rent 1 — No, not that I am aware of. 
 
 9645. Mr. Siiaw. — Was there a general valuation 
 of the property then ? — There was a general assess- 
 m.ent on the valuation. We considered it a general 
 assessment. 
 
 9646. On the whole property? — On the whole pro- 
 perty. 
 
 9647. Were they all raised in the same proportion ? 
 — In or about the same. 
 
 9648. Chairman. — Was there any objection raised 
 by the tenants to the increase 1 — A very great objec- 
 tion, so much so that litigation ensued. We were 
 brought to the county court and appealed to the assizes, 
 but there was a decree granted against us for posses- 
 sion. This decree was brought about because \^f 
 would not pay the rise of rent, nor would we sign a 
 document agreeing to pay all the county cess. We 
 were noticed to quit if we did not pay the rise of rent. 
 We objected to the rise of rent inasmuch as we consi- 
 dered it exorbitant. Appended to the notice to quit 
 was another notice saying that if we i)aid a reasonable ' 
 rent we would not be disturbed. This collateral 
 
 notice was not embodied in the rise of rent. In my 
 case the rent was £28, which the landlord had consi- 
 dered a fair and reasonable rent, and if I paid this £28 
 a year I was not to be disturbed. 
 
 9649. Not to be disturbed for how long? — There 
 was no period of time mentioned. In my case [ ten- 
 dered the £28, but it would not be accepted unless I 
 also signed a document agreeing to pay the county 
 cess. 
 
 9650. In addition to the £28 ? — In addition to the 
 £28. I objected to pay the whole county cess. I was 
 satisfied to pay the half. We appealed to the county 
 court, and from that to the assizes. Both courts de- 
 cided against us, saying they had no authority under 
 the present law but to give the landlord his land. We 
 were decreed to give possession unless we signed the 
 document agreeing to pay the county cess as well as 
 the i-ise of rent, which we did sooner than biing the 
 ease to the Court of Appeal, on account of the different 
 desisions the judges were giving in regard to fixing 
 compensation for disturbance and other matters. Ac- 
 cordingly we signed the document through compul- 
 sion, agreeing to pay the cess and to pay the increased 
 rent. 
 
 9051. Chairm.yn. — You could have refused to sign, 
 and gone to the coiut for the value of your tenant- 
 I'i'i-ht 1 — Of course we could have done that, but we 
 ^^'ere afraid, as we considered there were impartial de- 
 cisions given in the courts of law. 
 
 9652. Mr. Shaw,— You say "impartial " decisions 
 — do you mean partial I — Perhaps partial. I mean 
 we were afraid tlie case might be decided against us — 
 we were appi'ehensive that it would not be decided in 
 our favour. 
 
 9653. Chairman. — Previous to the Land Act what 
 was the rule of the estate as to rent '? — The rule was 
 that the landlord was supposed to ha-\-e the power to 
 raise the rent at any time — to do exactly as he pleased 
 without any restriction. The landlord's authority wa,s 
 arbitrary — no tenant could raise any objection to any- 
 thing he said or did. 
 
 9054. Then to a certain extent the Land Act was a 
 help to the tenant 1 — It gave some small help, but 
 very little. It failed to gbce the tenant security ia 
 his holding. It failed to prevent the landlord from 
 raising the rent to any height he pleases — it failed in 
 many instances. Still the tenants exj^ected that the 
 Act was going to do .i great deal more, and laid more 
 stress upon it than actually turned out afterwards, 
 Vieeause the couits of law generally interpret the Land 
 Act to suit themseh'es. 
 
 9655. The intention of the Act was to guard agamst 
 such cases as you mention ? — Yes. 
 
 9656. But the remedy given was not sufficient ? — 
 Just so ; it has not redressed any of our grievances, I 
 might say. 
 
 9057. What do you think could redress it! — 
 Fixity of tenure at n fair rent to be determined by a 
 fair valuation. 
 
 9658. By arbitration ? — Yes. I think that would 
 be a fair way of arriving at it, or Griffith's valuation 
 woiild be a fair thing. I think every one would accept 
 Griflith's valuation as a fair rent, exclnding the 
 tenant's improvements in the way of building. 
 
 9(i59. Griffith's valuation is generally supposed to 
 be Ijelow the letting value, having been made so many 
 years aiio upon a scale of prices diflPerent from the 
 present? — In my opinion inasmuch as the tenant's im- 
 provements in the way of building increased the 
 tenement valuation over and above Griffith's valuation, 
 Government may have a right to tax us for our 
 buildings and improvements, but the landlord has not, 
 and Griffith's valuation would represent the rent that 
 the landlord is more justly entitled to. 
 
 9660. Mr. Shaw.— The prices of produce were as 
 high at the time Griffith's valuation was made in the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 829 
 
 nortli ol Ireland as tliey are now — corn was probably 
 higher? — The prices of produce, no doubt, regulate 
 things to a great extent, but the price of labour, which 
 has a great deal to say to the expense of farming, is 
 very much higher now than it was then. 
 
 9661 . What is the present rate of wages of labourers 
 in your district '! — They vary according to the quality 
 of the sei-vant. Some men are more efficient, and 
 entitled to more wages than others ; but on the whole 
 the wages of labourers at the present time are widely 
 different from what they were at the time of Griffith's 
 valuation. At that time a labourer was well off if he 
 got sixpence a day ; now he gets up to two shillings a 
 day. 
 
 9662. Do the labourers get two shillings a day in 
 your district 1 — They get eighteenpence and two 
 shillings a day. 
 
 9663. How far from Londonderry 1 — About sixteen 
 miles. 
 
 9664. Is there a good opportunity for getting em- 
 ployment elsewhere that causes such high wages ? — 
 No, generally fair hands get those wages; digging 
 potatoes is the work going on now. At special times 
 they get more. 
 
 9665. At special times ■? — Yes. Harvest is a special 
 time, digging potatoes is a special time, and putting 
 in the seed is a special time. In fact the whole year 
 almost is made up of special times, during which you 
 have always to give extra wages to labourers. 
 
 9666. What are the general wages of labourers who 
 are employed all the year round ? — They get £18 to 
 .£20 a year and their board. 
 
 9667. Do you give them cottages'? — A man who is 
 boarded and lives in the house with the farmer gets 
 that. If you give him a cottage his pay is generally 
 8s. a week and a rood of potatoes ready to dig — planted 
 by the farmer. 
 
 Sept 23, ILjO. 
 Mr 
 
 Ji.! 
 
 9668. The farmer gives the seed and manure ] — Yes. 
 
 9669. Chairman. — At the time Griffith's valuation 
 was made there was the same system of paying the Fiana^'aQ and 
 labourers higher upon special occasions, therefore you Mr. Joliri 
 could not fairly say that the wages were sixpence a 'f aylor, jun. 
 day, taking all the year round.? — They were paid 
 
 higher at busy times no doubt, but not so much as at 
 present. The average cost of labour now is four 
 times what it was then. In those days sixpence a 
 ilay and board were considered sufficient wages as far 
 as I recollect. 
 
 9670. The O'Conor Don. —When was Griffith's 
 valuation made in your country? — In 1846, I think. 
 
 9671. Do you mean to say that in 1846 you could 
 get a man for sixpence a day in harvest time 1 — When 
 I speak of wages I have reference to the years 1846, 
 1847, and 1848. About that time wages were at the 
 lowest. 
 
 9672. Griffith's valuation was made in 1856, not 
 1846 — could you give us any comparison of the cost 
 of labour between 1856 and the present time? — I 
 think wages are at present double what they were in 
 1856 ; and four times as high as they were in the 
 decade of years before that. 
 
 9673. Could you get a man in 1856 at four shillings 
 a week all the year round, with the same privileges as 
 they get now? — They got no privileges at all then. 
 If a labourer had four shillings a week and a cottage, 
 he had to sow his own potatoes, and provide the seed 
 and manure. 
 
 9674. Chairman. — Do the labourers in your 
 district hold under the farmers? — Yes 
 
 9675. They don't hold direct from the landlord ?— 
 No ; we must build houses for them, and keep them in 
 repair. With regard to raising of rents, here is a list 
 of tenants on the estate of the Rev. Mr. Delap, whose 
 rents have been raised. 
 
 Return 
 
 OF Rent-raising, 
 
 N"o. I. — Shanvally Estate of Rev. Robert Delap. 
 
 
 
 
 Names of Tenants. 
 
 Tenement 
 Valuation. 
 
 Former Kent. 
 
 Present Rent. 
 
 Names of Tenants. 
 
 Tenement 
 Valuation. 
 
 Former Rent. 
 
 Present Rent. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. d. 
 
 Allison, John, 
 
 53 
 
 10 
 
 56 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 63 
 
 Hegarty, Thomas, 
 
 4 17 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 Black, James, 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 _ 
 
 
 26 
 
 Hepburn, Samuel, 
 
 3 
 
 3 5 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 Coventry, Miss, 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Lawn, Hugh, 
 
 3 15 
 
 4 7 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 Coventry, Mrs., 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 17 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 18 10 
 
 Lawn, William, . 
 
 3 
 
 3 6 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 Crawford, Thomas, 
 
 49 
 
 10 
 
 59 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 63 
 
 Lynch, James, 
 
 7 10 
 
 8 6 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 Crawford, William, 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 14 
 
 8 
 
 6 10 
 
 M'Kinlay, Robert, 
 
 120 15 
 
 
 
 
 134 
 
 12 
 
 (Grahamsland.) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Orr, John George, 
 
 34 10 
 
 34 10 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 
 
 Crawford, William, 
 
 23 
 
 10 
 
 27 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 31 10 
 
 Stewart, Jane, 
 
 11 10 
 
 12 1 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 10 
 
 Crawford, William, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Stewart, Mrs. Wm., 
 
 11 19 
 
 15 2 
 
 4 
 
 16 
 
 10 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 Taylor, John, 
 
 68 
 
 96 
 
 
 
 98 
 
 
 
 (Sessiagh.) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Taylor, Robert, . 
 
 24 
 
 28 10 
 
 
 
 31 
 
 
 
 Donnell, Eleanor, . 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Taylor, Samuel, . 
 
 77 18 
 
 102 15 
 
 10 
 
 111 
 
 
 
 Flanagan, John, 
 
 18 
 
 15 
 
 26 
 
 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 Tedlie, John, 
 
 5 10 
 
 6 7 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 Gallagher, Hugh, . 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Wylie, Hugh, 
 
 18 10 
 
 16 10 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 Same, 
 
 44 
 
 
 
 66 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 70 
 
 Wylie, Joseph, 
 
 34 10 
 
 34 10 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 
 
 Hegarty, Mrs. Wm., 
 
 32 
 
 5 
 
 50 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 52 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Castlefinn Names Extracted feom this List. 
 
 
 G. Valuation. 
 
 Old Rent. 
 
 Present. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 John Flanagan, 
 
 18 15 
 
 26 
 
 28 
 
 Hugh Gallagher, . 
 
 49 5 
 
 72 14 6 
 
 78 
 
 Mrs. William Hegarty, 
 
 32 5 
 
 50 3 10 
 
 52 
 
 Thomas Hegarty, . 
 
 4 17 6 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 John Taylor, 
 
 68 
 
 96 
 
 98 
 
 Total, . 173 12 6 249 18 4 263 
 
 The Poor-law Valuation of County Donegal is 25 per cent, higher th.an the Poor-law Valuation of the rest of Ireland. 
 
 9676. With regard to this list, were all those rents 
 raised in the manner mentioned at the same time that 
 yours was raised ? — Yes. 
 
 9677. Then, may we take it as a correct list of the 
 tenants who were affected by the same increase ? — Yes, 
 sir. We have similar lists here, showing the increase 
 of rents that has taken place on other estates. 
 
 9678. The O'Conoe Don.— At what time had there 
 been a previous revision of rent on that estate 1 — I 
 
 landlord has transgressed any custom that previously 
 existed on the estate, because you say there was no 
 special custom restraining the rise of rent ; but your 
 complaint is that he has raised them too highly ? — Yes • 
 we complain that the rents are exorbitant ; we are not 
 able to pay them at all. Here is a document that I 
 beg to submit for your consideration, which was pressed 
 on the tenants to sign before the rise took place. 
 
 9680. Did they sign it?— Some of them did. That 
 is the cause nf some of US in Castlefiun not submittini» 
 iits at the time we were ovicted. 
 2U' 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMillSSION, 1880. 
 
 ,S;yji;. 3&, IKSO. 
 
 V.v. John 
 riaiiaicaii .ind 
 Mr. Jolin 
 Taylor, jun. 
 
 9GSL. Yoii vroukl n<it sign it ?— No ; it reserves 
 turf — in fact, e^crytLing is excluded, and the tenant 
 is not to assign or sublet without permission. 
 
 yG82, You: thought -you would sign away your 
 tenant-right if you signed that document 1 — Yes, sir, 
 not a doubt of it. 
 
 0083. Did. you get any advice about it? — My own 
 common sense taught me not to sign it. ■ I saw we 
 v.rould have no claim on the land if we signed that do- 
 cument. ' • 
 
 9G84. In case of a tenant's death, his holding was 
 not to he subdivided 1 — -Yes. We would not object 
 much to that. That is a thing, we think, should 
 not be done; 
 
 96S5. The landlord is entitled to enter and view 
 the state of the holding, and make roads, drains, and 
 watercourses 1 — Yes. In fact, he may do what he likes. 
 
 9G8G. But he is to give comiDensation ? — Yes; but 
 that would be no satisfaction to us. 
 
 I 9G87. Mr. Shaw. — He/ would not give you compen- 
 sation fixed by arbitration, but whatever he wished 
 himself 1 — Exactly. 
 
 9688. Chairman. — I see a clause in the document 
 says that it is not to interfere with the tenant's claim 
 to such tenant-right as his holding may be subject to, 
 except so far as such tenant-right is inconsistent with 
 the rules of the estate, or with the regulations con- 
 tained in the deed 1 — Yes, we think that document 
 
 signed away every right we had — ^it gave the landlord 
 everything, and left us nothing. 
 
 9689. Mr: Shaw. — The tenant-right, after that do- 
 cument was signed, woiild not be worth much 1 — No. 
 
 9690. Chairman.- — Was there any limit to the price 
 of the tenant-right? — The landlord claimed the right 
 to choose the tenant. ' 
 
 9691. Was sale by auction allowed ?— No ; sales by 
 auction were not allowed — only by proposals. 
 
 9692. Mr. Shaw. — You don't object, I suppose, ta 
 the landlord having a veto on the tenant 1 — ^No. 
 
 9693. Can you give any ^information, from your owa 
 knowledge, of complaints on other estates? — Yes, sir 
 we can. Let me, however, mention to you the com- 
 plaints we have to make with regard to Mr. Delap's. 
 estate. Our first grievance I have already explained' 
 . — exorbitant rents. Second, we have to jjay for- land 
 occupied by railways, rivers, and roads. Tlairdly, we 
 are compelled to pay the entire of the county cess. 
 Fourthly, asked to sign a deed depriving ourselves of 
 all tenant-right. ' Fifthly, if we want to sell, it must be 
 by proposals only. These are our own particular griev-- 
 ances. I beg now to submit to you lists showing tlie 
 increase of rents and the office rules on six difiereiifc 
 estates in the neighbourhood of Castlefinn. 
 
 9694. Are you sure of the correctness of these 
 statements ? — Positive ; we got the information from 
 the tenants, and believe them to be correct. ' 
 
 Return of E,ent-kaisikg, No. II. 
 Estate of Ebenezer Bustard, Esq., (Rents increased when owned by H. W. Smith, Esq.) 
 
 ^famos of Tenants. 
 
 Tenenaent, 
 Valuation. 
 
 Former Kent. 
 
 Present Rent. 
 
 Names of Tenants. 
 
 Tenement 
 Valuation. 
 
 Former Rent. 
 
 Present Kent. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. d. 
 
 B;m''l, John, 
 
 25 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 11 
 
 3 
 
 JI'Cool, William, . 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 i 10 
 
 Blackburn, Kobcrt, 
 
 9 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 6 
 
 M'Cormick, Wm., 
 
 32 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 
 
 40 
 
 1 7 
 
 Blair, Thomas, 
 
 60 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 68 
 
 
 
 
 
 Marley, Francis, . 
 
 18 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 18 
 
 9 
 
 22 
 
 15 
 
 Bicsland, Henry, . 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 11 
 
 6 
 
 Meaney, Joseph, . 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 3 
 
 Caldwell, John, . 
 
 35 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 36 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 (3 
 
 5 
 
 Meehan, Hugh, 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 39 
 
 i 1 
 
 Donnell, James, 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 
 
 Monteith, Samuel, . 
 
 59 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 69 
 
 5 2 
 
 Dunnion, Edward, . 
 
 21 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 Murray, Jeremy, . 
 
 36 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 47 
 
 1 
 
 ■ Same, 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 31 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 Patter.son, James, . 
 
 39 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 ,0 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 
 
 Elder, Andrew, 
 
 33 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 19 
 
 3 
 
 44 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 Kobb, George, 
 
 28 
 
 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 17 1 
 
 Gallagher, Oanicl, . 
 
 7 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 11 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 Scott, James, 
 
 16 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 0, 
 
 Galla-lier, Hudi, . 
 
 23 
 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Taylor, John, ' . 
 
 20 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 3 3 
 
 Galla<jlier, John, . 
 
 46 
 
 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 57 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 ^Vhite, John, 
 
 18 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 _ ■ 
 
 
 26 
 
 9 9 
 
 Harper, Joseph, 
 
 51 
 
 
 
 
 
 52 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ^Miite, Thomas, . 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 1.3' 
 
 9 
 
 12 
 
 5 3 
 
 Harrai^hy, .John, 
 
 26 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 Same, 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 14 
 
 6 
 
 11 
 
 10 
 
 Hegarty, John, 
 
 If) 
 
 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 Same, • 
 
 12 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 ■ - 
 
 — 
 
 
 18 
 
 1 3 
 
 R,ET]jRN OF Rent-raising, No. III. 
 
 Estate of Joseph Johnston, Esq., Carrick, 
 
 near Castlefin. 
 
 Isamcs of Tenants. 
 
 Ciovernraent 
 Valuation. 
 
 Old Kent. 
 
 , New Rent. 
 
 John Toylor, 
 l\Irs. Keanis, -— ■ . 
 Joseph Hcany, . 
 Charlrs ^I'Laughlin, . 
 
 £ s. d. 
 15 5 
 14 10 
 13 
 31 10 
 
 £ s. 
 
 18 
 14 
 38 14 
 
 d. 
 
 
 
 
 £ .s. d. 
 27 
 21 
 16 
 45 
 
 Samuel Taylor, Drumavish, Woodlands, tenant^ 
 under same landlord, tresated nearly the same 'n'ay as 
 Francis Marley, but in a far more aggravated form. 
 
 Return of Rent-raising, :No. IV. 
 Estate of Sir- Frederick Hetgate. 
 
 Same Landlord, Park, near Balnacor, Killygordan. 
 
 Francis Marley, 
 
 40 
 
 44 
 
 Charles M'Laughlin pays for about one acre of land 
 occupied by Finn Valleys Railway that he never got 
 any compensation for, save £10, after the payment of 
 whicii to hini his rent was permanently raised from 
 £38 14s. IJ'i., to£45 ; thus losing, in one year, nearly 
 all the trifling compensation allowed him. 
 
 John Taylor pays rent for about three roods of 
 ground occupied by same railway. 
 
 Francis Marley held thirty-three acres ; landlord 
 took eighteen acres from him. and kept him paying on 
 same rent as he paid before the eighteen acres were 
 taken from him ; landlord kept possession of abstracted 
 land for seven years, and then sold it back to same 
 tenant for £125, and then increased the rent from £40 
 to .£44 Ds., as above. 
 
 Names of Tenants. 
 
 Government 
 
 Former 
 
 Present 
 
 
 \al nation. 
 
 Rent 
 
 
 Rent. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 .9. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 n. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 .9. d. 
 
 Joseph Gillis, . 
 
 22 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 
 
 Hugh Cooper, . 
 
 25 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 29 
 
 10 
 
 Joseph Crowe, . 
 
 26 
 
 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 
 
 James Thompson, 
 
 39 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 12 
 
 7 
 
 48 
 
 
 
 Patrick Jii'Menamin, 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 5 
 
 senior. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Patrick M'Mcnamin, 
 
 o 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 junior. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Patrick M'Monamin, 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 .5 
 
 17 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 (Hugh). 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mathew Rippey, 
 
 6 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 James Gillis, 
 
 30 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 26 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 Mrs. Brooks, 
 
 26 
 
 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 A\'illiam Cooper, 
 
 45 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 44 
 
 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 
 
 James Gillis, 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 15 
 
 John Blackburn, 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 Mrs. Archibald Kemps, 
 
 7 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 OJice Rules. — Free sale is prohibited ; the tenant 
 must ask liberty to sell by proposals ; the rent is in- 
 creased on change of occupancy, whether occasioned by 
 a tenant selling his holding, or by his death and the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 331 
 
 succession to the holding of his -widow, son, or other 
 member of his family, or next of kin. 
 
 Individual Grievances. — (1.) Daniel Gallagher, of 
 Kaws Upper, died some years ago. The agent would 
 not allow the next of kin to occupy the farm, and took 
 the farm himself After giving an acre of it to another 
 tenant, he sold the remainder of it for £60 to a man 
 named Gillis. The rent in Gallagher's time was .£3 ; 
 it was raised to £3 15s. when Gillis took posses- 
 sion. The next of kin never received any compensa- 
 tion from the landlord. 
 
 (2.) James Gillis, of Eaws Upper, and Mrs. 
 Brooks, of Eaws Upper, hold farms on which there are 
 twenty and twenty-eight acres of bog respectively. 
 They pay rent for the bog as part of their holdings. 
 Other persons from vaiious places cut turf on these 
 persons' lands, and pay the landlord bog rent from Gd. 
 to Is. per perch. The tenants are afraid to reclaim 
 bog, as the rents are always raised on improvements. 
 The tenants must invariably sign a document to pay 
 all the county cess. 
 
 5'e;;«,28,1880. 
 
 :\ri-. John .' 
 
 Mr. Jolin 
 Taylor, jui.. 
 
 
 Eeturn 
 
 OF Eext-eaising, No. V. — Meenglass, E.5tate of Lord Lifford. 
 
 
 
 Tenants' Names. 
 
 Government 
 Valuation. 
 
 Old Rent. 
 
 n « ..* l^cnt cl:iimed 
 
 P"'™' on Notieo 
 
 K™'- to Quit. 
 
 Tenants' Names. 
 
 Government 
 Valuaticn. 
 
 Old Rent. 
 
 Present 
 Rent. 
 
 Rent claimed 
 
 on Ndtico 
 
 to Quit. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. a. 
 
 Thady Qnin, 
 
 11 10 
 
 13 5 
 
 
 
 17 15 
 
 17 15 
 
 Thos. M'Cormick, 
 
 4 10 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 7 6 2 
 
 Patk. M'Menamin, 
 
 7 7 
 
 8 7 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 10 10 
 
 Miehl. Callaghan, 
 
 — 
 
 
 6 10 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 8 10 
 
 
 9 8 
 
 9 15 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 20 
 
 Daniel Boland, . 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 
 1 15 10 
 
 4 
 
 U 
 
 4 1!) 9 
 
 John Coughlin, 
 
 5 10 
 
 6 2 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 — 
 
 James Boland, . 
 
 4 10 
 
 
 
 5 11 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 14 6 
 
 Bartly O'Donaell, 
 
 3 10 
 
 4 3 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 7 10 
 
 Bryan Doherty, . 
 
 3 10 
 
 
 
 1 17 6 
 
 4 10 
 
 
 
 6 18 9 
 
 Hugh Armstrong, 
 
 11 
 
 8 8 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 — 
 
 John Quin, 
 
 6 15 
 
 
 
 8 8 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 14 2 
 
 -\^'idow Armstrong, 
 
 24 10 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 44 9 
 
 — 
 
 Mary Karney, . 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 
 3 6 
 
 5 
 
 u 
 
 6 7 
 
 ■Samuel Armstro n g 
 
 16 10 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 — 
 
 Hugh Callaghan, 
 
 2 10 
 
 
 
 4 3 
 
 5 10 
 
 
 
 8 13 
 
 John Bvrne, 
 
 4 
 
 4 14 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 — 
 
 James Karney, . 
 
 — 
 
 
 1 11 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 Michael Doherty, . 
 
 6 5 
 
 7 8 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 11 1 10 j Peter Quin, 
 
 5 15 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 Neither Lord Lifford nor his predecessor ever 
 erected a perch of fence for the tenants on his estate, 
 or allowed as much as one shilling for this purpose, 
 nor for draining or for building dwelling or ou.t- 
 hoitses, or making lanes or bye-roads to their farms. 
 There are three acres reclaimed now for every One re- 
 claimed sixty yeai-s ago, and the greater portion of that 
 from cut-out bog land. 
 
 There were twenty-eight of Lord LLfford's tenants 
 receiving relief from the Eelief Committee, Killy- 
 gordan, during the recent distress. 
 
 Offi,ce Rule on Estate. — Increase of rent on every 
 change of tenancy. 
 
 Landlord — Mr. William Young, j.p., Motmthall. 
 
 Grievance of John Anderson, Tenant. — Government 
 valuation, £2-5 ; old rent, £28 ; present rent, £32 17s. 
 9c/. On account of expending over £100 on im- 
 provements, his rent was raised to the above exorbi- 
 tant figure. He says : — 
 
 " These last three years I found I could not pay 
 my rent out of the proceeds of my farm, and I had to draw 
 on other funds to meet my landlord. Last year I pleaded 
 hard to be let off with a half-year's rent, on account of my 
 inability to pay. I was threatened with law proceedings, 
 and had to find the rent as best I could. I can assert that 
 my neighbours on the same estate are as badly dealt with 
 as myself." 
 
 Return of Eent-kaising, No. "VI. 
 Estate of Mrs. Thomas Knox, London. 
 
 Grievances. — John Wilson, Clady, county Tyrone. 
 — Griffith's valuation, £8 10s. j new rent, £10 8s. 
 This tenant spent £50 on improvements ; the above 
 rise was the result. 
 
 Names of Tenants. 
 
 Francis iM'Kinny, 
 Kobert Gormly, 
 Do., 
 
 Government 
 Valuation. 
 
 £ 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 11 
 
 s. 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 Old Eent. 
 
 New Rent. 
 
 £ 
 16 
 
 9 
 14 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 2 10 
 10 
 
 Eeturn op Eent-raising, No. VII. 
 Estate of Mr. William M'Georty, Killygordan. 
 
 N.ames of Tenants. 
 
 Government 
 Valuation. 
 
 Old Eent. 
 
 New Eent. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ S. 
 
 d. \ £ s. d. 
 
 John Kearns, . 
 
 16 15 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 24 17 8 
 
 Widow Colhoun, 
 
 16 
 
 — 
 
 
 24 10 
 
 Robert Catterson, 
 
 13 10 
 
 — 
 
 
 31 16 9 
 
 Bernard Dovine, 
 
 20 10 
 
 — 
 
 
 68 0, 
 
 John Hcgarty, . 
 
 75 10 
 
 — 
 
 
 100 
 
 Charles Nelson, 
 
 48 
 
 — 
 
 
 60 8 
 
 Andrew Perry, . 
 
 26 5 
 
 30 6 
 
 7 
 
 35 7 8 
 
 S'lmiwl Pnvrir 
 
 22 a 
 
 28 2 
 
 6 
 
 24 
 
 Eailway ran through Samuel Perry's farm; he 
 objected to pay rent for ground occupied by railway ; 
 litigation ensued ; landlord compelled to reduce rent as 
 above, viz.— from £28 2s. U. to £24. 
 
 Embankments made along river on this estate with Go- 
 vernment money; tenants refundedmoney infive years, 
 principal and interest ; rents were then immediately 
 raised, on account of the Government improvements 
 made on the land. 
 
 Office Rule on Estate. — Else of rent on change of 
 tenancy. 
 
 9694a. Chairman. — Now, take the estate of Mr. 
 Joseph Johnston, can you give any particular case on 
 that estate^ — Yes, there are some special cases men- 
 tioned at the foot of the list. 
 
 Mr. Taylor. — I am a tenant under Mr. Johnston 
 myself, my case is referred to in that document. I 
 have three landlords. 
 
 9695. The O'Conor Don. — Can you account for the 
 great difference between the valuation and the rents in 
 your two cases as compared with the other tenants — ■ 
 I see by the return you have sent in, that the rents 
 of the other tenants are not so much above the valua- 
 tion ? — (Mr. Taylor). — They are not so bad out in the 
 county as near Castlefinn. 
 
 9696. Your holdings are near Castlefinn? — Yes, 
 near the vUlage. 
 
 9697. I suppose an increased value attaches to the 
 land in consequence ot being near Castlefinn 1 — (Mr. 
 Taylor). — The landlords assert so ; we do not admit 
 the justice of it. We consider that land two or three 
 miles away is just as convenient to the nearest market 
 town, as land near Castlefinn. The market town we 
 principally go to is Strabane, which is just as near the 
 other tenants as it is to us. 
 
 9698. But at all events that is the reason assigned 
 for the difference ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Flanagan. — Another reason is that at one time 
 there was a large factory in Castlefinn, where there 
 was an outlay of £200 a week, and it was considered 
 that it made the land contiguous to the village a little 
 more valuable at that time, bitt it has been discon- 
 tinued. 
 
 '9699. Do you reside in the town?— (Mr. Taylor) — 
 Yes; it is not a town properly speaking, only a 
 village. 
 
 9700. Can you say at what time those rents had 
 been previously altered ? — I could not say. 
 
 9701. How long have you been in occupation of 
 that farm 1 — Eight or nine years, it came to me from 
 my father-in-law. My father-in-law was my uncle and 
 ■^ - 'led him in the farm. 
 
 There has been no change in the rent since 
 
 2 U S 
 
332 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 Sept. 'iS,lS80. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Flanagan and 
 Mr. John 
 Taylor, jiin. 
 
 you got it ? — Yes. The way I got tlie farm was this, I 
 went to New Zealand and made some money there, 
 and when I came back I paid my uncle a pretty sharp 
 price for the place, after marrying his daughter. 
 
 9703. Chaieman. — In the case of the farm you hold 
 under Mr. Johnston, at what date did the rise of rent 
 take place 'i — I could not say. I am only there four- 
 teen years, it was not in my time. 
 
 9704-. You have not given any dates in those lists? 
 — Because we did not know them. We give the facts 
 as we know them. We did not like to go into matters 
 that we could not stand to. 
 
 9705. Can you give the date of the case where the 
 landlord took the eighteen acres from Marley 1 — No. 
 I recollect it but I cannot give the proper date. 
 
 9706. The O'Gonor Don. — Was it before the Land 
 Act ? — It was, but the Land Act has not remedied 
 those grievances; the landlord has just as, much power 
 still as he had before. 
 
 9707. Take the case of the estate of Mr. William 
 M'Grorty, do you know the date when these rents 
 were raised? — He succeeded Mr. John Colquhoun. 
 He bought the estate from Mr. Colquhoun some years 
 ago, who raised the rents immediately before he sold it 
 to Mr. M'Grorty ; but I cannot give you the date. 
 
 9708. Mr. Flartagan. — It is I think eight or nine 
 years since Mr. M'Grorty got it. 
 
 Mr. Taylor. — I could not positively state the time, 
 but I think it was before the Land Act. 
 
 9709. Chairman. — Can you remember the railway 
 going through Samuel Perry's farm 1 — I do. The 
 railway ran through all our farms, and we got no 
 reduction in our rents. 
 
 9710. Does that at all bring the date to your recol- 
 lection 1 — No. I went to New Zealand just after the 
 x-ailway started, but I have no recollection of the time. 
 
 9711. What was the date that you went to New 
 Zealand % — Sixteen or seventeen years ago. 
 
 9712. Was the railway made before that ?— The 
 I'ailway was made before that. 
 
 9713. Mr. Shaw. — Did they get compensation for 
 their occupation rents from the Railway Company % — ■ 
 No, sir ; they got no such compensation. Some allow- 
 ance was made by the railway company for trespass, 
 injury to crops, &c., liut nothing else. 
 
 Mr. Flanagan. — They got nothing else. The rents 
 remain the same,and theygot nothing from the landlord. 
 
 Mr. Taylor. — I have two farms that the railway has 
 gene through, and I got nothing for either. One farm 
 in particular — the one I hold lurder Mr. Delap — he 
 sent his agent to my father-in-law and asked him not 
 to interfere with the sale to the Company ; that he 
 could sell it to better advantage if we did not interfere, 
 and that he would make it all right with us after- 
 wards. A.ocordingly my father-in-law did not inter- 
 fere, but he never got one farthing, and never got a 
 shilling abatement in the rent, though the railway took 
 near two acres of land, for which the landlord received 
 compensation. 
 
 9714. Chairman. — On Mr. M'Grorty's estate were 
 there embankments made along the river with a loan 
 of Government money % — Yes. 
 
 9715. Was the full amount of that loan, principal 
 and interest, charged to the tenants % — Yes, sir ; and 
 they paid it. 
 
 9716. When was that done? — I cannot exactly tell 
 the year, but it was some years before the railway. 
 
 9717. The O'Conor Don. — Then it was before the 
 Land Act 1 — Yes. 
 
 9718. Chairman. — On the estate of Mr. M'Grorty, 
 you say, the office rule is to raise the rent upon a 
 change of tenancy % — Yes, sir. The rule is specified in 
 the statement we have handed in. 
 
 9719. Were the increases of rent which are specified 
 in this statement made in accordance with the nde 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 9720. That is to say, they were all made on changes 
 of tenancy? — I could not say that they were all 
 changes of tenancy. They may or they may not have 
 been. We got these facts from the tenants them 
 
 selves, but we did not ask them to specify whether 
 they were changes of tenancy or not. 
 
 9721. Suppose a tenant dies, and his successor comes 
 into occupation, is that considered a change % — It is, 
 
 9722. And the rent is raised?— Yes. Even the son 
 of the tenant, or his nearest friend or relative, cannot 
 get into the farm without paying more rent. 
 
 9723. On what estates is that rule in existence ?— 
 Onthe Rev. Mr. Delap's, on Mr. M'Grorty's, and on 
 Sir P. Heygate's. 
 
 9724. The O'Conor Don. — Has it been always the 
 rule on these estates ? — As far as we could gather from 
 the tenants, it has. They are prepared to come and 
 certify it if required. 
 
 9725. Chairman. — Upon the estate of Mr. William 
 Young, J. P., of Mount Hall, I observe a complaint of 
 John Anderson — "Government valuation, £28; old 
 rent, £28 ; present rent, £32 17s. 9cZ." Do you know 
 the date when that change of rent was made 1 — I do 
 not remember. 
 
 9726. He states he made improvements to the 
 amount of above £100, and that his rent was raised on 
 them ? — Yes, sir ; it is always customarily to raise the 
 rents when improvements are made. 
 
 9727. Improvements made at the cost of the tenant ? 
 ■ — Certainly. It is invariably the case. 
 
 9728. Mr. Shaw. — You mean to say that when the 
 tenant lays out money and improves his land the rent 
 after that is immediately raised ? — Mr. FlaiwMjan.— 
 That is at the option of the landlord. It may not be 
 done immediately, but he can do it at any time. 
 
 Mr. Taylor. — In many cases it is done immediately 
 after the improvements are made. 
 
 9729. Chairman. — On the estate of Mrs. Thomas 
 Knox there is a complaint of John WUson, of Cladj, 
 county Tyrone — " Government valuation, £8 10s. ; 
 new rent, £10 8s." He having spent £50 on improve- 
 ments, the above rise was the result ? — Yes. 
 
 9730. There are some other cases of increase of rent 
 on the same estate — you can certify to them also ? — 
 Mr. Flanagan. — Yes, sir. Those statements were 
 obtained from the tenants, and they are willing to 
 testify to the correctness of these returns. 
 
 9731. On the estate of Sii- Frederick Heygate there 
 is a list of tenants, giving the Government valuation, 
 the former rents, and the present increased rents. 
 They have been given, I sujapose, by the tenants to 
 you ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 9732 And the office rules — free sale is prohibited 
 — the tenant must ask liberty to sell by proposals ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 9733. The rent is increased on change of occupancy ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 9734. Whether occasioned by a tenant selling his 
 holding, or by his death, and the succession to the 
 holding of his widow, son, or other member of his 
 family, or next of kia ? — Yes ; that is considered an 
 opportunity for a rise of rent. 
 
 9735. Do you know the case of Daniel Gallagher? 
 — Mr. Taylor. — We do not know the man, but we can 
 get the parties to certify it if it is required. That was 
 given to us by neighbouring tenants, who at the same 
 time stated that they could be proved on evidence. 
 
 9736. You don't know it of your own knowledge ? 
 — No, sir. 
 
 9737. Do you believe it to be true, as stated?— 
 Yes. We asked the people to give us the facts cor- 
 rectly, and to be careful to state nothing that they could 
 not prove. 
 
 9738. I suppose the same observation applies to the 
 case of James Gilles and Mrs. Brooks? — Yes. 
 
 9739. You give those statements to us as being true, 
 to the best of your belief — having been furnished to 
 you by the tenants themselves ?— Mr. Flanagan. — 
 Yes, sir ; and the tenants are prepared to substantiate 
 them when called upon. 
 
 9740. There is also a list here of rents, increased on 
 the estate of Mr. Ebenezer Bustard? — Mr. Taylor. — 
 Yes ; I can certify that from my own knowledge. 
 He bought that estate from Mr. H. W. Smith lately. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 333 
 
 9741. Mr. Shaw. — In the case of Mr. Delap's 
 estate I understand the advances -were made in 1876 ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 9742. The O'Conor Don. — You don't know when 
 the advances were made on the other estates 1 — No. 
 On Mr. Smith's estate the advances were made two or 
 three years after the railway, and before the passing 
 of the Land Act. (Mr. Taylor)— On Mr. Smith's 
 estate, I objected to pay the increased rent, on account 
 of the railway taking 1a. Oe. 13p. of the farm, which 
 was only a small patch of arable land. I have thirty- 
 four acres statute measure under Mr. Bustard now. 
 I objected to pay the increased rent on account of the 
 land which was taken by the railway, but when all 
 the tenants submitted under pressure, I thought there 
 was no use in my standing out. He said to me one 
 day. " If you come under the rviles, I promise I will 
 never pocket one shilling of the raised rent — I will 
 expend the money in improvements on the estate." — I 
 pointed to a large piece of rocky waste, and I said, 
 " It would take a good deal, Mr. Smith, to improve 
 that land." However, ho said he would never pocket 
 one shilling of the increased rent. He raised it £7. 
 I commenced on the faith of his promise, and I re- 
 claimed eight acres of that rocky waste which cost me 
 over £200, and after I had it done, he turned round 
 and sold the estate to Mr. Bustard, a m,an who never 
 saw the land before I improved it. I had expended 
 money before that time — after I came home from New 
 Zealand I built a mill. 
 
 9743. Mr. Shaw. — A scutch mill I suppose ?■— Yes 
 —it cosb me £600 or £700. 
 
 9744. Without a lease 1 — Without a lease. I have 
 spent in all about £1,000 on that property, and now 
 I am at the mercy of another landlord, who never 
 saw the land before the improvements were done. 
 
 9745. You got no allowance for the improvements? 
 ■ — None. 
 
 9746. No reduction of rent ? — No, but an increase 
 of ren t. 
 
 9747. And you got none of the money the railway 
 company paid 1 — Not a shilling. 
 
 9748. Chairman. — Is there a good deal of waste 
 land stUlreclaimablein your district? — (Mr. Flanagan.) 
 — There is a good deal. 
 
 9749. Has anything been done lately in the way 
 of reclaiming it? — Very little — the tenants are so 
 apprehensive of a rise of rent that they are afraid to 
 do it. 
 
 9750. Is this waste land usually cut away turf 
 bog ? — Some of it is rocky land ; some of it is land 
 that never produced turf, but it could be very well 
 reclaimed, but the tenants are afraid to reclaim it, 
 because if they did, the landlord would most certainly 
 and inevitably raise the rent. 
 
 9751. Is there any waste land in the district of 
 sufficient extent to be taken up as a large scheme to 
 give employment, and then be laid out in separate 
 holdings 1 — No, my lord ; the waste land in oiu" neigh- 
 bourhood is only in small portions — a field or two on 
 each farm. 
 
 9752. Mr. Shaw. — You would reclaim it yourselves 
 if you were secured from your rent being raised ? — 
 We would. (Mr. Taylor.) — Any person travelling 
 from Strabane to Donegal, would see the improve- 
 ments I made. 
 
 9753. Is it on the road from Strabane to Donegal ? 
 — It is, and those who have seen it, think it the 
 greatest wonder that a farmer would attempt to do it. 
 There is a county road running along it. 
 
 9754. The O'Conor Don. — Were any of the Sept. 2s,isso. 
 holdings on Sir. Delap's estate sold since the rise of jj-^. j^^^ 
 rent 1 — No sir, none that I am aware of. Flanagan and 
 
 9755. What is the price of tenant-right in the Mr. Johii 
 district ? — It varies according to circumstances — there ''^ ' '"™' 
 is no stated price. Some people who live convenient, 
 
 and are anxious to get the land, will give more than 
 it is worth. That has often been the case — I have 
 known people to borrow money and give more than 
 the fee-simple of the land, in order to get a holding 
 to live on. 
 
 9756. Have there been any purchasers of the fee 
 by tenants in your district ? — Yes, my uncle bought 
 his holding from the Church Commissioners, it is only 
 lately that the purchase was completed — that is all I 
 know of any sales of holdings in that neighbourhood. 
 
 9757. Do you think a majority of the tenants 
 would be able to pay one-fourth of the purchase-money 
 if the other three-fourths were advanced ? — (Mr. 
 Flanagan.) — A great many would. (Mr. Taylor.) — - 
 Some of them would, but far more could not give a 
 shilling since the bad time of the last three or four 
 years. (Mr. Flanagan.) — The tenant-right paid 
 during the last few years, brought peoj)le into debt 
 and misery — the facility of obtaining money from 
 banks and individuals, induced people to pay a large 
 sum for tenant-right. I know parties who offered to 
 pay large sums, but the bad times came on them, and 
 they were not able. During the American War, 
 prices ran up so high, that people thought they would 
 be able to pay large sums for tenant-right, but after 
 the settlement of atfairs in America, the crash came, 
 and from that time tenant-right has been decreasing 
 in value, and at the present time I do not think any 
 tenant-right would be given for land near Castlefinn. 
 under the present circumstances. 
 
 9758. Chairman. — I suppose the . tenants whose 
 names are mentioned in those lists, have no objection 
 to their cases being published ? — (Mr. Taylor.) — I take 
 it that some of them would not like it, for fear of the 
 landlords. (Mr. Flanagan.) — I don't think they care 
 much. 
 
 9759. Mr. Shaw. — If you give in those lists now 
 they will all be printed in a blue book. 
 
 9760. Mr. Kavanagh. — If you intend to hand in 
 those lists as a statement of what has been done upon 
 the estates of the landlords whose names you have 
 mentioned, we must mention the statements to the 
 parties concerned, and ask them have they any ex- 
 planations to offer? — (Mr. Taylor.) — The tenants from 
 whom we got the information will be prepared to 
 substantiate the statements they have made. (Mr. 
 Flanagan.) — They are statements of facts which we 
 have collected, and which show more fully the existing 
 state of affairs. (Mr. Taylor.) — Land is a necessity in 
 our neighbourhood, for it is the only industry the 
 people have to engage in — we have no trade, no public 
 works or anything of that sort ; and people give twice 
 more for land than it is worth to have a place to live 
 in. (Mr. Flanagan.) — They knowtheyare giving more 
 than its value but they have no other way of living. 
 
 9761. Chairman. — Do you think it would be a good 
 thing to have a rule restricting the amount of the 
 purchase money, and prohibiting an incoming tenant 
 from giving more than a certain siim ? — No ; I think 
 that would be robbing the tenant, because he has done 
 all the improvements — ditches, draining, building, and 
 everything. I do not see anything that would rectify 
 the existing state of affairs, except fixity of tenure at 
 a fair rent. 
 
3.-J4 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1830. 
 
 Rev. Nathaniel 
 M'C. Brown, 
 Mr J. 
 Drennjm, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Eobert 
 Dunn, and 
 Eev. G. W. 
 Hamill. 
 
 The Eev. Nathaniel M'C. Brown, liimavady; Hon. Secretary of the Kennauglit Farmers Association; Mr, 
 J. Dkennan, tenant farmer; Mr. Joseph I. Douglas; Mr. Joseph Douglas, tenant farmer; Mr. Eoeert 
 DuNX, tenant farmer ; and Eev. G. W. Hamill, examined. 
 
 9762. Chairman. — Yon are a Presbyterian Minis- 
 ter? — I am. 
 
 9763. The Presbyterian Minister of Limavndy ? I 
 am one of them. 
 
 9764. I believe you wish to bring under our notice 
 .some of the points that have arisen under the Land 
 Act 1 — Yes, if you. please. 
 
 9765. If you would first take the Ulster tenant-right 
 question, we will be glad to hear what you have to 
 say ? — If you ask me any question I will be happy to 
 answer it. 
 
 9766. I was not sure whether you would wish to be 
 asked for a special case, or on the general question. 
 I thought that upon the general question yo^i might 
 wish to state your views 1 — It is such a large question 
 that I might dilate upon it for an hour, and take up 
 your time. 
 
 9767. Have you any case within your own know- 
 ledge that you could mention to us of any change 
 having taken place in the rules of an estate since the 
 Land Act ? — I am awai-e that before the Land Act the 
 custom was being broken down everywhere around 
 us. 
 
 9768. That was before the Land Act?— Yes; I 
 might go the length of saying that it is my conviction 
 that if the Land Act of 1870 had not been passed we 
 would hardly have by this time a residue of tenant- 
 right in the barony of Kennaught. 
 
 9769. When yoit speak of the Ulster custom do you 
 speak of it as one universal custom over various estates 1 
 —'We have reason to believe that it was formerly one 
 vmiversal custom ; but it has been broken down within 
 the last thirty years on several estates. 
 
 9770. What were the general changes that were 
 made to break it down ? — The custom itself was the 
 privilege of selling to the highest and best bidder at a 
 public sale. Now what they call " office rules '' have 
 crept in on several estates, and the claim of the out- 
 going tenant is limited to three or five years' rent. 
 
 9771. Is that for the good will ? — It covers both the 
 good will and improvements. 
 
 9772. Mr. Shaw. — From three to five years' rent ? — 
 Three years' rent on some estates and five on others." 
 
 9773. It has been reduced to three on some estates? 
 — Yes. 
 
 9774. Including everything ? — Including every- 
 thing. Since the Land Act I understand the tenants 
 are claiming something for improvements. 
 
 9775. Chairman. — In addition to the three and five 
 years' rent? — Yes, and also something for manured land. 
 
 9776. The O'Conor Don. — Can you give its the 
 names of any estates upon which the tenant-right is 
 restricted to three years to cover everything ? — One is 
 that of Mr. M'Causland, whom 3'ou had before jow 
 yesterday. His estate comes close to Limavady. 
 
 9777. Mr. M'Causland informed us yesterday that 
 the three years' purchase for tenant-right was exclusive 
 of tenants' improvements. Are you aware whether 
 that is the ease or not? — I am aware that since the 
 Land Act he is allowing something for improvements, 
 which he did not do ijreviously. 
 
 97 7 P^ Mr. Shaw. — Does he make the improvements 
 himself on the estate ? — No, sir, he does not. 
 
 9779. Is it usual for the tenants to build and drain 
 on the estate to any extent ? — Yes, but he has been 
 advancing money at five per cent, to the tenants to 
 make certain improvements. He does it as an invest- 
 ment. 
 
 978Ci. He gets five per cent, interest on it ? — Yes, 
 from the hour it is advanced. 
 
 9781. He does not wait until there is a change of 
 tenancy ? — No such thing. 
 
 9782. Chairman. — One of the ofiice rules of which 
 you complain is the restriction of the amount of tenant- 
 right on sales ? — Yes. 
 
 9 1 33. Is there any complaint as to increase of rent ? 
 
 — On Mr. M'Causland's estate I understand there is 
 an advance of rent on eveiy change of tenancy. For 
 exatnple, if a tenant wishes to give up^ his fai-m, Mp. 
 M'Causland will pay him three years' rent and some 
 trifle for improvements- -the tenamt gets that money 
 and leases. Mr. M'Causland, or his agent, then looks 
 out for a successor— generally speaking some young 
 man — perhaps the son of one of his' tenants, some person 
 who he thinks has means and ' intelligence — he gives 
 the farm to him upon an| increased rent, and he pays 
 Mr. M'Causland whatever Mr. M'Causland paid to the 
 retiring tenant. 
 
 9784. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know the estate ?— 1 do, 
 right well. 
 
 9785. Is it in your district? — It is just opposite 
 where I live. 
 
 9786. Are the tenants satisfied with the state of 
 things on that estate 1 — I cannot say very much about 
 the opinion of the tenants — at least the publicly ex- 
 pressed opinions. 
 
 9787. I did not ask the publicly expressed opinions 
 — are they as a rule satisfied ■with the way in which 
 the estate is managed ? — I know they are not. You 
 may have one one or two of them before you who -will 
 say they are, b\it I know the general opinion is contrary 
 to that altogether ; and that they are dissatisfied they 
 have not the privilege of selling to the best bidder, as 
 upon the estate of the Marquis of Waterford and 
 others. 
 
 9788. Chairman. — Being in the neighbourhood of 
 estates, on which there is a less restricted tenant-right, 
 you think they wish for that in preference to the loan 
 of money by the landlord ? — Certainly ; what we call 
 tenant-right in its integrity — liberty to .sell to the 
 highest and best bidder — is popular with all tenants, 
 and on all estates. 
 
 9789. They consider it the best for their interests? 
 — You may see that by comparing the South and West 
 with the North. 
 
 9790. Mr. Shaw. — Is there much difference between 
 the Marquis of Waterford's estate and the estate ot 
 Mr. M'Causland, as to the condition of the tenants 1— 
 The Marquis of Waterford has revalued his estate 
 latterly, and I suppose it is nearly as highly rented now 
 as any of the neighbouring estates. Mr. M'Causland's 
 estate is assuming a somewhat improved appearance 
 in the way of houses being built and slated, from the 
 fact that he advances money at five per cent, to the 
 tenants, and sometimes when they are miserably housed 
 or the like of that, they will borrow money and pay five 
 per cent, for it which is added to the rent, and is 
 a permanent investment for his money.' 
 
 9791. Would you consider the tenants under those 
 circumstances were making th^ improvements, when 
 they are paying the interest of the money ? — Yes, he 
 has the interest ; the five per cent, never terminates. 
 
 9792. Chairman. — Still, you don't find all landlords 
 so ready to make advances ? — We have not been in the 
 habit of applying to landlords for advances-, we have 
 generally been in the habit of making improvements 
 ourselves. 
 
 9793. That must only be in the case of tenants who 
 are sufiiciently well olF — who have the money to pay the 
 expense of the improvements ? — S;upposing they have 
 not much money they have strong arms, to drain and 
 fence and make all necessary improvements. 
 
 9794. Do the tenants as a rule erect all the build- 
 ings ? — Yes, with the exception of one or two estates 
 they erect the buildings also, and pa}^ for them out of 
 their own pockets. 
 
 9795. Are not there a certain class of tenants who 
 would not have money at their disposal to lay out on 
 such improvements as require cash ? — If they have not 
 enough money tliis year they will do what they can, 
 and more of it next year as far as they can go, and so 
 on until they get to the pitch they want. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 9796. Mr. SHA^Y. — The only cash down tliey would 
 require would be the wages of such labourers or trades- 
 men as they had to employ, which would not be much ; 
 they could get uiaterials —timber and slates — on credit 
 for a year t — Yes, that is, as a rule, what they do. 
 
 9797. The only cash they would require would be 
 what would pay for the labour 1 — Yes ; and they could 
 furnish a good deal of that themselves. 
 
 9798. Chairman. — "We have not heard many com- 
 plaints made of landlords foradvancingmoney to tenants 
 for improvements ; the complaints were generally the 
 contrary, that they did not do so, but left it to the 
 tenants to do the improvements without any assistance? 
 — It is not the rule for them to advance money. 
 
 9799. Just so ; and I was therefore surprised at it 
 being put forward as an objection 'to a landlord that 
 he advances money to his tenants to enable them to 
 carry out improvements 1 — Yes ; because after they 
 have improved the estate very considerably at their 
 o-wn expense the landlord steps in and lays out perhaps 
 a few pounds for wliich the tenants pay him five per 
 cent., and then the landlord claims that he has made 
 the improvements on the whole. ot it. 
 
 9800. They don't distinguish between the landlord's 
 and the tenants' improvements'? — No ; they do not draw 
 the line ; afterwards the landlord claims to have done 
 the whole although the tenants have paid the interest 
 upon the money themselves. 
 
 9801. Mr. Shaav. — I suppose the tenants are afraid 
 of the landlord's advance of money, lest it may swallow 
 up their own improvements ? — Yes. On many estates 
 there is what they call a managing agent, who is fre- 
 quently a clever attorney. I am sorry to see so many 
 estates with agents belonging to the legal profession. 
 If the landlord has money or if he can borrow it cheaply, 
 the agent puts the case before the tenants, that they 
 ought to be better housed, that they ought to build a 
 house, or effect some other improvement, and that the 
 landlord will advance the money. The end of it is 
 that when the tenants see that the agent is set upon 
 it, and that it is also in accordance with the wishes of 
 the landlord, they agree to borrow the money, although 
 they are sorry to have to pay five per cent, for it. 
 
 9802. Can you give the names of any tenants who 
 have suffered from the alterations in the rules which 
 you have referred to 1 — I could give several, but there 
 are other gentlemen here who could, perhaps, give 
 better information. Mr. Douglas is better acquainted 
 with the details. 
 
 9803. Have there been in your neighbourhood any 
 purchases by tenants of their holdings ? — There have. 
 
 9804. Were those lands in the possession of the 
 Church Commissioners 1 — Yes, some of them were, and 
 some were upon the Marquess of Waterford's estate. 
 
 9805. About what number of purchases 1 — About 
 150 agricultural tenants. I was looking over the 
 schedule and I found the entire number of holdings 
 which were purchased by occupiers was 173, in con- 
 nexion with the sale of the Marquess of Waterford's 
 estate, including those in the towns. 
 
 9806. You say 150 agricultural holdings were pur- 
 chased by the occupiers? — Yes; nearly 150. 
 
 9807. Was that done under the Board of Works ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 9808. Did the tenants take advantage of the 
 Government advance of money ? — They were uncom- 
 monly anxious, all of them, to do it, in fact there was 
 a tender in gloho of twenty-five years' purchase to the 
 Marquess to purchase the estate in the first instance, 
 and then to divide it among the tenants, giving to 
 each man his own holding afterwards. 
 
 9809. Had you anything to do with that 1 — I know 
 all about it. Through me the offer was made. 
 
 9810. Was there any difficulty in connexion with 
 the Board of Works ? — -Very great. It ai-ose in one 
 or two instances which ruled a great many others, 
 through having purchased their farms before they made 
 application to the Board for the money. 
 
 9811. Was that by private agreement ? — Yes. 
 
 9812. And they were afterwtirds refused the ad- 
 
 vance ? — Yes. It seemed to be contrary to the Act, 
 but a supplemental Act was passed iir 1872, which ob- 
 viated that difficulty. 
 
 9813. Was it an expensive process ? — Very expen- 
 sive, I am sure, to the landlord, and also to us. I was 
 one of them. 
 
 9814. Can you give us, in your own case, the rental 
 of your holding, and the cost ? — The number of acres I 
 had was twenty Irish, equal to 31a. 3r. IOp. statute 
 measure, for which I paid £34 19s. rent. 
 
 981 5. How much was the puichase-money 1 — 
 £1,014, out of which I received £620 from the Board 
 of Works. 
 
 9816. That was nearly thirty years' purchase? — 
 Twentj'-nine and a half. I don't agree with those who 
 say the ilarquess's sale was a cheap one. The ]]eople 
 are coming round to my opinion, that it was a high 
 sale. 
 
 9817. Was your holding near the town? — A little 
 more than a mile from the town. 
 
 9818. What were the expenses connected with the 
 purchase ? — The expenses of the conveyance — the at- 
 torney's costs were about £30. 
 
 9819. Was that your own attorney ?-^ Yes. There 
 were other things in addition to that which I need 
 not enumerate, but I thought even that was very 
 high. 
 
 9820. That £30 included everything in connexion 
 with the conveyance ? — It included the conveyance. 
 
 9821. Were there any payments to the Board of 
 Works in the shape of fees ? — I think that was paid by 
 our attorney, and was included in the £30. 
 
 9822. Thirty pounds covered the whole expenses? 
 - — It was something over £30. I was at some personal 
 expense also. I was twice in Dublin. 
 
 9823. You were negotiating the matter for the rest ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 9824. But the £30 covered the legal expenses ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 9825. What is the present condition of the tenants 
 who purchased ? — I am happy to say, though we have 
 had three very trying years, I do not see that they are 
 worse off than the neighbouring tenants. On the con- 
 trary, I think many of them are better off, and yet, as 
 you are aware from the high price paid, every man of 
 them is payiirg a rent and a half — namely, the interest 
 on thirty years' purchase, which is half as much again 
 as the rent. Mine was twenty-nine and a half years, 
 and I was one of the lowest. 
 
 982G. Did they pay the one-third of the purchase- 
 money themselves, or had they to borrow it? — -I think 
 the great majority of them had to borrow it. Some 
 fevf had the one-third, but not many. 
 
 9827. They paid a higher rate of interest for that, of 
 course 1 — They did, five per cent. 
 
 9S28. They are paying a rent and a half, fifty per 
 cent, more than their rent, in the shape of interest on 
 the purchase ? — Yes ; and they are satisfied to do it, 
 and some of them have paid off part of the principal. 
 
 9829. The O'Conoe Don. — Did you give evidence 
 before Mr. Shaw Lefevre's Committee ? — I did. 
 
 9830. I suppose the views you expressed on that oc- 
 casion you see no reason to alter since ? — No. I would 
 go a little further with regard to the " hampering 
 clauses " as we are'in the habit of calling them. 
 
 9831. You said that the clauses prohibiting aliena- 
 tion were a bar ? — Yes, and I say so still. I am under 
 the impression, having thought the whole thing out, 
 that the new Act, when it comes, ought to secure to the 
 Board of Works the purchase-money that they ad- 
 vance, and beyond that I believe there should be no 
 restriction. The advance made by the Board of Works 
 ought to be absolutely secure, but beyond that I think 
 there should be no restriction. 
 
 9832. You think the purchaser ought to have a 
 right to raise money if he can do so upon a second loan 
 which would come after that of the Board of Works ? 
 — I do. The fact of our not being able to do so under 
 the present Act, stood much in our way. 
 
 9833. It forces them into the hands of usurers who 
 
 Sept. 2S,18S0. 
 
 Rev. Nathaniel 
 M'C. Brown 
 Mr. J. 
 Drennaii, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Dunn, and 
 Rev. G.V^. 
 Hamill. 
 
336 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 HamUl. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880. lend money on personal security at exorbitant i-ates ? 
 ~ . Yes, and some of tliem would not borrow on the terms, 
 ira Brown Some money-lenders who knew the Government had a 
 Mr. .1. ' lien on the land, were not willing to lend, because 
 Drounan, they knew they could not push for it afterwards if 
 
 mui"T'- they wanted it. 
 
 Mr. Robert 'J'Soi. You would not be averse to a jft'oposal to 
 
 Dtian, and prohibit subdivision 1 — I have altered my opinion 
 Eev. G. W. since I appeared before Mr. Lefevre's committee. I 
 say that persons who own land should be allowed to 
 deal with it according to the best of their judgment — 
 of course being rendered liable to pay their just debts. 
 I would say the Government ought to take care of 
 that. The money advanced by the Board should be 
 secured ; they should look to that, but beyond that 
 purchasers should be free. 
 
 9835. But beyond that you think there should be 
 no restriction either upon subdivision or alienation ? — I 
 do. I was against alienation some years ago when I 
 appeared before Mr. Lefevre's Committee. I now 
 think we should not interfere witli the liberty of the 
 subject on that score, or any other, after the Govern- 
 ment is secured in its advance. 
 
 9836. Would you allow subletting? — I would allow 
 the man to do the best with his property that he could. 
 
 9837. Don't you think if that were allowed, that he 
 might do what you complain of as regards other land- 
 lords, and put the tenant who took the land from him 
 into the same sort of difficulty ? — I think subdivision 
 and subletting are beyond their height in this country, 
 and that there is no great danger of them being car- 
 ried any farther now. With the education of the 
 people, the facilities for emigi-ation, and the open- 
 ings people now have for finding suitable employ- 
 ment for their sons, such as they had not in former 
 times, when subletting took place, which did create 
 perhaps a crop of paupers, I believe that will never 
 occur in our time again. I cannot imagine that such 
 a thing would be done again. 
 
 9838. Chairman. — You have heard, I suppose, of 
 cases formerly where there were long leases given, and 
 a tenant was able to sublet (say) one-third of his hold- 
 ing, get the rent out of it, and hold the rest himself 
 almost for nothing ? — It is possible. I believe strange 
 things were done in ancient times. 
 
 9839. Mr. Shaw. — Are the farms large in your dis- 
 trict t — No ; about thirty acres. 
 
 9840. There would be no great danger of tenants 
 cutting them into two or three portions and puttiirg 
 •their sons on them 1 — No ; I don't think a man among 
 them has a notion of doing it. 
 
 9841. They put their sons to business, or send them 
 to America, or something of that sort ? — Yes. 
 
 9842. Have any of those who purchased their hold- 
 ings sold them subsequently 1 — Not that I am aware of. 
 
 9843. Are they improving ?— They are ; they are 
 building and draining, and improving in every way 
 they can, for they feel ihat whatever they do is their 
 own. 
 
 9844. Notwithstanding the bad times and the high 
 rate of purchase, they have held their own 1 — Yes, 
 though they have a rent and a half to pay. 
 
 9845. Would you be in favour of the extension of 
 Bright's clauses to cases to which they do not apply 1 
 — I would ; I would be in favour of the whole of the 
 recommendations of Mr. Shaw Lefevre's committee. 
 
 9846. The O'Conoe Don. — Would you compel any 
 landlords— such, for example, as the London companies 
 — to sell their property 1 — I would not compel a private 
 landlord to sell— I believe we are not come to that yet 
 in Ireland, and I would not like ever to see it. But 
 the London companies are peculiarly circumstanced. 
 I thought so when I was examined before M]-. Lefevre's 
 committee, and I think so still. 
 
 9847. Mr. Shaw.— Do you think they should be 
 compelled to sell 1—1 would not go that length. I know 
 there are some good comjtanies amongst them. I don't 
 saythat they are good landlords from the management of 
 then- Irish agents, but I believe they are just men, and 
 
 liberal to their tenants in a variety of ways that a 
 private landlord would not be. 
 
 9848. The O'Conoe Don. — It might be a loss to the 
 tenants to lose them as landlords 1 — Yes. 
 
 9849. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know many of the 
 tenants on those properties 1 — I do. 
 
 9850. Do you think they would, to a large extent 
 be able to provide one-fourth of the purchase-money of 
 their holdings 1 — Well, the tenantry on the Fish- 
 mongers' estate are, as a rule, as well off as those on 
 the estate of the Marquess — some of them I am sure 
 would be able, but others would not. They are men 
 of excellent character, industry, and credit. 
 
 9851. We have had evidence that a great many of 
 them are small tenants and poor 1 — In some of the 
 mountain districts they are poor. 
 
 9852. Would you limit the si2e of holdings which a 
 man should be allowed to purchase 1 — I would hmit no 
 man who was able to purchase. A man who was able 
 to live upon a patch of land under a landlord shoiiid 
 be better able to live upon it when he is his o\ra land- 
 lord. He would not have to pay into any man's till 
 year by year, a sum of money in the shape of rent. I 
 think the sooner rents can be abolished the better, but 
 I would not force any landlord to put his estate into 
 the market. 
 
 9853. Do you think the question of subdividing 
 would soon find its level 1 — I do ; I think it has passed 
 what may be called its lowest point. 
 
 9854. As a general rule, you say a man would not 
 think of dividiug his farm 1 — I belie^-e there is not one 
 of those who purchased on the Marquess of Waterford's 
 estate has the slightest desire to divide or sublet. If 
 he has several sons he will put one of them to a pro- 
 fession, send another to America, and send another to 
 business — he will not make them all farmers. 
 
 9855. If tenant-right was restored to its natural 
 state do you think it would satisfy the tenants ?— I 
 think so. I believe there is a great deal in tlie formida 
 which you have heard of — free sale, fixity of tenure, 
 and fair rents. 
 
 9856. How would you settle therents? Haveyouany 
 notion how it could be done 1 — I would say in the fii-st 
 instance the present mode of settling rents must cease 
 — that is, the landlord having the privilege of raising 
 rents as often as he pleases, because there is no regu- 
 lation in the Act to say that he must wait twenty- 
 five years before he will increase them. Where 
 the landlord has the privilege of bringing on, very 
 frequently, a valuator of his own appointment, and 
 sending him out to lay on new rents, or to revise the 
 old rents, I think that is a system that cannot be 
 tolerated any longer in Ireland, for the tenant in that 
 case has no voice whatever, he is not represented, and 
 every valuator that is brought on the estate by the 
 landlord understands his work right well, and why he 
 was appointed. 
 
 9857. He is paid by the landlord ? — Yes ; he regards 
 himself as the landlord's servant, and serves him accord- 
 ingly. 
 
 9858. Would you settle rents by arbitration 1—1 
 think it must come to that, that the tenant should 
 have a voice in fixing the rent. Two arbitrators and 
 an umpire. 
 
 9859. Would you have the umpire appointed by 
 Government 1 — There is a difference of opinion as to 
 that. Some of the Association say the County Court 
 Judge should be the umpire, others think it would be 
 better to have a Government official. 
 
 9860. But you are all agreed as to the principle of 
 arbitration ? — We are, certainly. 
 
 9861. It must come to that ? — Yes. 
 
 9862. And you think that would satisfy the tenant ? 
 — I think it would. 
 
 9863. Mr. Kavanagh.— Wehave had evidence of a 
 great variety of rents in this country — somevery low and 
 some high— of course you would give tlie landlord as well 
 as the tenant the pri^ilege of calling for a revision of the 
 rent and an arbitration ?— Of cours^e I would. I think if 
 the landlord believes that the land is let too low, and 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 337 
 
 tliat lie is entitled to more rent, he should give notice, 
 and have arbitrators appointed in the usual way. On 
 the other hand, if the tenant believes he is more highly 
 rented than the land will bear, he ought to have the 
 privilege of giving notice in a similar way. 
 
 9864. Do you not think on the whole that the 
 balance might pos.sibly be against the tenants. I don't 
 say on this year or last year, but on an average of years 'i 
 — I do not think so. I think any intelligent and fair 
 arbitrator must necessarily come to the conclusion that 
 Ireland cannot bear the rents that have been placed 
 upon it for the last fifty years. That is the opinion of 
 all the members of our Association. 
 
 9865. Are rents high in your district ? — Some of 
 them are. 
 
 9866. . How much per acre, as a nJe 1 — I have pkid 
 myself 35s. per Irish acre. ' 
 
 9867. That was good land I suppose 1 — Fair land. 
 
 9868. And near a town? — About a mile and a half. 
 
 9869. The O'Oonoe Don. — Is that the average rent 
 in your district? — Some- land I think is still higher. 
 
 9870. What does tenant-right sell for in the district 1 
 — I believe in good tenant-right years, and on good 
 tenant-right estates, it would run from fifteen to forty 
 years purchase. 
 
 987 1 . At present 1 — I think even at present, though 
 I am sorry to say, there have been some cases latterly 
 where f arins were in the m arket and there w as no bidder 
 at all, even on tenant-right estates'. 
 
 9872. Even under good landloi'ds where the rents 
 were modei-ate 1 — Yes. 
 
 9873. Is that on account of thebad years'? — Probably 
 that and also from the prospects of bad prices for cattle, 
 and produce of all kinds. 
 
 9874. Do you mean to say the prices are bad this 
 year? — I do. I mean to say for. example we are 
 selling oats in o\ir market ior 9d. a stone. 
 
 9875. I did not refer to oats— are the prices of 
 cattle and butter bad ?=— Since America has been send- 
 ing cattle as well as grain the prices of both have gone 
 down considerably. 
 
 9876. Is that so this year? — It is. 
 
 9877. Mr. Shaw. — Prices are not as high as they 
 were four years ago? — Certainly not. I would say 
 they are nearly one-third less. One class of stock is 
 selling well — inUchcows. With that exception every- 
 thing is down — particularly beef. 
 
 9878. Butter is not so important an article "of pro- 
 duce here as it is in the South ? — No. 
 
 9879. It is sold here in small quantities? — It is. 
 
 9880. Not made up for exportation ?^It is to some 
 extent! - . 
 
 9881. You say beef is down in price — ^What is 
 the price of it with you at present 1 — From 55s. to 65s. 
 Some top lots' go above that. 
 
 9882. How does it happen that in Dublin it is 
 over 70s. 1 — I suppose the carriage would cover the 
 difference. . . . 
 
 9883. Do you fatten beasts on grass in your district? 
 — Not to a great extent, some people fatten with 
 turnips in the house. 
 
 9884. As a general rule is the beef you produce 
 fattened on tuxnif s, not likfe" what is" selling in Dublin 
 — the produce of grass fed cattle ?-— Not' at all. , 
 
 9885. You admit the' "right of th'e landlord to a 
 periodical advance of rent if 'the land- will "bear it? — 
 I do; but I thilik, the .great nostrum" which "would 
 cure the discontent of the inhabitants of Ireland will 
 be eventually— it 'may, be a'long^ time 'before it is 
 accomplished — but it will b^ th^t the people become the 
 proprietors of their own holdings. 
 
 9886. If they had perpetuities at a fixed rent, 
 would they not practically be proprietors 1- — It would 
 not please me so well, still I 'think' it would be far 
 better than the present mode. .* f ■ •. .. 
 
 9887. If ttey put a vafue on the landlords' pre- 
 scriptive right, and determine the fair pei-petiiity rent 
 would that be a satisfactory mode of settling the 
 question ? — That cei-t'ainly would give the tenant 
 security for all future improvements, and 'put ah end 
 
 to all heart burnings and disputes, still I would 
 prefer a man being his own proprietor, if it could be 
 accomplished. 
 
 9888. How could that — the tenantry being the 
 proprietors in fee-simple of their holdings — be ac- 
 complished all over Ireland ? — Of course it could not 
 be accomplished all over Ireland for a length of 
 time. 
 
 9889. It must be gradual ? — Yes. I would not be 
 for any violent means. I would not cheat the land- 
 lord of a penny. I would allow him when disposing 
 of his estate to get the utmost value for it, and I 
 would insist whenever an advance was made by 
 Government, that it should be so secui-ed as to render 
 it impossible for the tenant to cheat the Government 
 of a penny. Bej'ond that I would leave him free. 
 
 9890. The Government would have ample security 
 in the land itself for whatever money they advanced 1 
 — Ample security. I go the length of saying, that in 
 the north of Ireland from the character of the people, 
 and from the value of the tenant-right, the new Act 
 might safely allow every buyer the privilege of obtain- 
 ing the whole of the purchase-money from the Board 
 of Works. I would go a step farther than was re- 
 commended by Mr. Shaw Lefevre's committee. They 
 recommended that four-fifths might be advanced. I 
 would go farther, and say the whole of the money 
 might be safely advanced, for the property belonging 
 to the tenant would afiord an ample margin to cover 
 all. 
 
 9891. The O'Conob. Don.— The tenant-right would 
 be an ample security? — Yes. 
 
 9892. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose you would leave it 
 an open question how much was to be advanced in 
 each case — if the holding was a good one, and the 
 tenant-right valuable, the purchaser might get an 
 advance of the whole 1 — Yes ; if he wanted it. 
 
 9893. If he did not want it he would not take it ? 
 — Of course not. 
 
 9894. Mr. Kavanagh. — You said you believed 
 there was originally one universal custom in Ulster 
 allowing public sale to the highest bidder ? — Yes. 
 
 9895.. When did that exist? — I think it was estab- 
 lished at the time of the Plantation, and it existed for 
 a number of years subsequent to that, until it was 
 eaten in upon and broken down -gradually. 
 
 9896. But it was established at the time of the 
 Plantation? — Yes. 
 
 9897. Can you give us any particulars as to the 
 Plantation of Ulster — what your idea is — I don't 
 want a long history ? — I could £_'.ve you a few par- 
 r.culars — one an account by myself, and another who 
 was about the best judge of tenant-right of any man 
 in his day^the late Dr. M'Knight, editor of the 
 Londonderry Standard. 
 
 9898r We have had that, it has been given in 
 evidence, already. Is it your opinion that that is a 
 fair statement of the circumstances of the Plantation 
 of Ulster ?— I do. 
 
 9899. And that there was such a thing? — Certainly. 
 The proof that I rely upon that statement is this — I 
 intended to publish it unless Dr. M'Knight did so,' 
 and I was the person who carried it to London in, 
 1870, before the Land Act was introduced on the 15th 
 February, and I put it then into the hands of 500' 
 members of the House of Commons. 
 
 9900. I merely asked you the question in order 
 to ascertain whether you could corroborate Dr. 
 M'Kiiight's statement ? — I can. 
 
 9901. You are aware some people question whether 
 there was such a thing as the Plantation of Ulster? 
 — I supp'ose some people would question the Battle of 
 Waterloo. . , 
 
 9902. You believe this custom, which you have 
 slated was originated by the Plantation of Ulster ? —I 
 do. I think it applied at one time to the wl ole of 
 Ulster. We have trace of it being gradually broken 
 down ir many places till the time the Land Act was 
 passed, and it was going very rapidly just at that 
 period. 
 
 2X 
 
 Sept. 33, 1830. 
 
 Rev. Natliaiiie. 
 M'C Brown, 
 Mr. J. 
 Drenncin, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Kobci t 
 Dunn, and 
 I!ev. G. W. 
 ilainill. 
 
338 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sep- 28, 1880. 
 
 n pv. Nathaniel 
 M'O. Brown, 
 Mr. J. 
 Drennan, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Dunn, and 
 Eev. G. W. 
 Hamill. 
 
 9903. With reference to the estate of Mr. M'Caus- 
 land, you said that, when a tenant had made improve- 
 ments, Mr. M'Cansland would spend a small sum in 
 furthei improvements, charging a per-centage, and 
 then claim the whole %—l don't restrict that to Mr. 
 M'Causland. I think I said many landlords were in 
 the habit of doing it, as well as Mr. SI'Causland. 
 
 9904. That implies that he does it ?— It does. 
 990.5. We had his evidence yesterday, and it was so 
 
 very different from yours, that I must ask you to 
 specify a case. Do you know the name of any case on 
 his estate where that has been done 1 — I know some 
 cases where they had bought holdiDgs, and where they 
 had improved, and were afterwards put out upon the 
 three years' rule, getting just what they had paid, 
 and no more, so that there was a confiscation of the 
 property of the tenant. 
 
 9906. Mr. Shaw. — They got no allowance for their 
 improvements? — None. Nothing except the three 
 years' rent, which they had paid when coming in. 
 
 9907. The O'Conoe Don.— Can you give us the 
 names of any cases t — I could give the names of some ; 
 there is a gentleman here who can give the names of 
 several. 
 
 9908. Mr. Kavaxagii. — Please give the names of 
 any you know of?— The Walk Mill farm. Mr. 
 Douglas knows more about it than I do, though, 
 by pviblic repute, we all know of it. 
 
 9909. Who is the tenant in that case? — A man of 
 the name of Gault; and the case of another tenant 
 named Hamilton Stewart. 
 
 9910. Chairjian. — Give the particulars of that 
 case ? — I know he was put out on the three years' 
 rule. 
 
 9911. Had he purchased the farm? — It had been 
 purchased by one of his predecessors, and he had to 
 go out on the three yeai-s' rent rule. 
 
 9912. Mr. Kavanagh. — Had he made improve- 
 ments ? — He had ; he was an excellent farmer. 
 
 9913. He had made improvements which you con- 
 sider were confiscated by the three years' rule ? — All 
 the money that was paid was confiscated except three 
 years' rent. 
 
 9914. Mr. Shaw. — Had he paid more than the 
 three years ? — He had, of course ; his predecessor had 
 paid tenant-right. 
 
 9915. Was that with Mr. M'Causland's consent ? — 
 Of course; there was nothing done without his con- 
 sent. 
 
 9916. Was it before his time it was purchased ? — It 
 was. I think during his father's time. 
 
 9917. Mr. Kavaxagii.— Mr. M'Causland's evidence 
 was that he did not originate the rule himself, biit found 
 it already in operation on the estate when he got it ? — 
 He was a very active young gentleman at the time the 
 alteration was made ; but his father was the proprietor, 
 of course. 
 
 9918. Mr. Shaw. — It was during his lifetime the 
 change was made ? — Yes. 
 
 9919. He said, I think, that he could trace it back 
 for forty years ? — About thirty ; but I believe he wishes 
 to date it back as far as possible. 
 
 9920. Mr. Kavanagh. — Before that, was there free 
 tenant-right on the property ? — That is the impression 
 everywhere. There Ls another estate, which you, 
 perhaps, would allow me to turn attention to — IMajor 
 Scott's. I think you had him before you yesterday. 
 It is managed by a gentleman whom you also will have 
 before you— Mr. King, a solicitor. There was free sale 
 iTpon that estate at one time ; but, about thirty years 
 ago, it was broken down and limited to five years' rent. 
 
 9921. j\lr. Shaw.— That is the estate he manages 
 by an agent ? — Yes. 
 
 9922. He has another estate that he manages him- 
 self ? — ^^Quite so. This estate is managed by the agent, 
 Mr. King. Some awkward things have been done on 
 that estate. 
 
 9923. Was the limit of five years' purchase a rule 
 of the^estate before he got it?— I think it was in his 
 fathers tmie the change was made— old Major Scott. 
 
 9924. Before that there was no limit? — Never that 
 I heard of. 
 
 9925. Free sale was the fully recognised custom of 
 the estate formerly ? — Yes. 
 
 9926. Chaieman. — Have you any evidence of that? 
 — It is thirty years since the change was made. I 
 believe it was thrust upon the people at that time 
 and they had no alternative. 
 
 9927. You say similar changes have been made on 
 estates all through the province of Ulster ? — Yes ; it 
 has been stopped since 1870, when the Land Act was 
 passed, but they were being made every where up to 
 that time. In fact there were few tenant-right estates 
 on which the custom was not being nibbled away in 
 one form or another. 
 
 9928. Raising of rents on change of tenancy you 
 say is common ? — It is. It is an invariable custom 
 even at the present time. There was an infringement 
 of the custom in the case of the Skinners' Company's 
 estate. At one time free sale was permitted iu any 
 way a man liked — now they won't allow a public 
 sale. 
 
 9929. Public sales used to be permitted? — Yes; 
 now if a man wants to sell his farm, he must dispose 
 of it by receiving proposals, or something of that sort. 
 One case came under my own observation a few days 
 ago, where a tenant wished to sell his farm. He 
 adopted their mode of sale, and advertised that he 
 would take proposals. He got no proposals. Then 
 he took the liberty of advertising that he would sell 
 by public auction ; the auction took place, and the 
 farm was sold at a certain amount, but when the pur- 
 chaser and the seller went to the office to get the 
 change of tenancy entered in the book, the agent said 
 he would not accept the purchaser as tenant, because 
 he had bought at an ojien sale. The end of it was, 
 the poor man having no body else that was w illin g to 
 take the farm, the matter was " boxed up " somewhat 
 in this way ; there had to be a retirement of the 
 parties into privacy — the buyer was to make an offer 
 privately — he did so — he offered £5 less than he had 
 bid at the auction — the seller accepted this private 
 proposal, and then the man was accepted as the 
 tenant. 
 
 9930. Mr. Kavanagh. — He oflfered £5 an acre less 
 than he had bid at the auction ? — No — £5 less alto- 
 gether. 
 
 9931. Mr. Shaw.— In fact it was a "make believe" i 
 — It was a " make believe " — to fall in with the office 
 rule. 
 
 9932. You say this rule w-as made since the Land 
 Act 1 — It was acted ujion since then ; they have only 
 lately come in for the projierty. It was formerly in 
 the hands of the Ogilby family ; it has only lately 
 come into the hands of the Skinners' Company. 
 
 9933. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is it not the fact that if 
 the change was made since the Laud Act, it is illegal ? 
 • — I don't know — they say it is still a public sale, but 
 it is a public sale after their own fashion. 
 
 9934. When the estate was in the hands of the 
 Ogilby family, was sale by auction recognised ? — T 
 believe so. 
 
 9935. Do you know that of your own knowledge! 
 — No, but I believe it. 
 
 9936. Was Mr. Ogilby a middleman ?— Yes, but 1 
 am happy to say he was not so stern and severe as 
 other middlemen. There is another matter to which 
 I may refer in connexion with the Skiuners' Com- 
 pany, and the hardship arises from one of the 
 clauses of the Act of 1870. There was a large grass 
 farm in the district of Glenshane, that the Company 
 thought was not paying enough of rent — they took it 
 on them to raise the rent, and gave notice to that 
 effect — from £75 to ,£100. There were two indi- 
 viduals who were joint tenants of the farm, and they 
 objected to the rent being raised, and they said they 
 would not pay the increase. The end of it was that 
 they made an offer of £84 ; but the Company would 
 not accept that, but insisted on the sum they had 
 laid on it themselves. Eventually they gave up 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 339 
 
 their tenancy and claimed tenant-riglit, under the Act 
 of 1870, but when it came to be heard, they were 
 ruled out of court, on the provisoes of the Act, inas- 
 much as it was a large grazing farm. That was con- 
 sidered a great hardship, for the farm was handed over 
 to another tenant. 
 
 9937. And the other men got nothing? — Not a 
 farthing. 
 
 9938. Had they laid out money on the place? — 
 Well I suppose they had improved it a little, it was a 
 grazing farm ; the tenants regarded it as worth £1,000. 
 
 9939. Had they paid anything for it when they got 
 it 1 — Every man on the estate had paid for his holding. 
 
 991:0. The O'Conor Don. — Is that only your 
 impression, or do jow know it of your own knowledge ? 
 — That was the custom on the estate; tenants talk 
 about it as a bad case. 
 
 9941. Landlords don't do such things as a general 
 rule ? — No, that I think is a bad provision in the Act 
 of 1870, I would not have any of those restrictions at 
 all — with regard to tenants paying £50 rent, grazing 
 farms, demesne lands, and townparks. All those 
 exceptions and reservations I would have cut up by 
 the roots. The people never will be satisfied until they 
 are all eliminated. 
 
 9942. Mr. Kavanagh. — With regard to Major 
 Scott's property, what have you to mention? — With 
 regard to the case on Major Scott's estate, managed by 
 Mr. King, whom you will have before you, there was 
 a tenant 
 
 9943. Give me his name ? — I will. His name was 
 John Loughrey, he was lost some years ago in a river. 
 When he died he left two little boys very young. Mr. 
 King, the agent, administered, I suppose, for the widow, 
 to his effects. She in the course of a few months after 
 that also died. Then the two little boys were abso- 
 lutely orphans. The deceased had a brother, James 
 Loughrey who lived upon the mearing. He being the 
 next of kia took charge of the two boys. He said, I 
 understand, to the agent and the landlord, " If you 
 allow me to manage this place for my broth er's children, 
 I will do so and pay the rent till one of them comes of 
 age." "No" said Mr. King and the landlord, for of 
 course I must associate the landlord with Mr. King. 
 " We cannot allow minors to hold land on our estate ; 
 it must be disposed of in the ordinary way and according 
 to the rules of the office." Very much against the 
 vv'ishes of the uncle, who had the two little boys, he 
 was obliged to fall in with the wishes of Mr. King and 
 the landlord, and with the niles of the estate. Five 
 yeai-s' rent were paid down as a settlement of the case. 
 
 9944. By Mr King? — By Mr. King to James 
 Loughrey. He thought it a great hardship of course 
 to have to give up the place his brother had improved, 
 for the brother had some money, and was able to 
 improve it ; and the uncle also had some money, and 
 would have been glad to do what he proposed for the 
 sake of the children. When the five years' rent was 
 counted on the table — and this I have from the man 
 himself — Mr. King said to him. " That is the money 
 that comes to the boys, count it." He counted it and 
 said this is the five years' rent, certainly. " Now " 
 •said Mr King, " there is a bad house upon the farm, 
 it is not in so good repair as I would like, and I would 
 
 like a good house upon it, I will take £100 of this 
 money, and with it I will build a house upon the place. 
 He took the £100 of the boys' money, and the house 
 was built, atleast the shell of a house ; it stands there 
 upon the road side, but to this hour it has never been 
 inhabited, for when the new tenant came into posses- 
 sion he preferred the old house to the new one ; and 
 therefore he inhabits the old house, and the new one is 
 standing like a monument upon the roadside, imused to 
 this hour. 
 
 994.''i. Mr. Shaw.— £100 of the children's money 
 was taken to build the house? — Quite so. 
 
 9946. Out of their tenant-right ?— Out of the five 
 years' rent. That statement I have from James 
 Loughrey, on being questioned, and to show you that 
 I know something of the family, the man that was 
 drowned, this James Loughrey, the widow, and the 
 two orphans were all members of my congregation. 
 
 9947. Mr. Kavanagii. — When the new tenant came 
 in was he obliged to pay something for the improve- 
 ments on the farm ? — I suppose they acted according 
 to their rule, and made him pay five yeai's' rent at 
 least. 
 
 9948. And the £100 was not refunded to James 
 Loughrey ? — Not a farthing of it. 
 
 9949. The O'Oonob Don.— When did this occur?— 
 It is about a dozen years ago. 
 
 9950 Mr. Shaw. —It was since Mr. King became 
 the agent? — Yes. I understand this case has been 
 referred to frequently. The truth is the fact was so 
 .gross that I have referred to it publicly myself, and 
 it never was contradicted. I have referred to it at 
 jjublic meetings, and Mr. King was of course greatly 
 blamed, and he endeavoured to explain it away. You 
 will have an opportunity of hearing his ex23lanation. 
 
 9951. The O'Conor Don.— What was the total 
 purchase-money in that case? — I do not remember 
 that. It was a medium sized farm. The only thing 
 that would lead me to say that Mx. King had not 
 acted, perhaps, in this case as he does in some others 
 was, that the man had made money, and this uncle 
 that was keeping the two orphans was also a rich 
 man, comparatively speaking, and, therefore, in all 
 likelihood he thought they could spare a little of the 
 money. 
 
 9952. Had the tenant been obliged to keep the 
 house up by any agreement ; — Not at all ; there was 
 no agreement, and it was as good a house as any- of 
 the neighboui'iug houses — a good substantial farm- 
 house. It is as good a house to this hour as the neigh- 
 bouring houses — the tenant is inhabiting it, while the 
 new one is standing idle. 
 
 9953. Why didn't James buy the farm for himself? 
 — I suppose he thoiTght he had enough land already. 
 
 9954. That £100 was a lar-ge sum of money to 
 deprive the children of? — Quite so. The little boys 
 themselves have grown up now, and they are able to 
 think e^nd talk about it, and they have frequently 
 spoken about it to me. 
 
 9955. Such a case as that would make a great im- 
 pression in the district and cause much dissatisfaction ? 
 — No doubt of it. I don't know much about Major 
 Scott's impressions, but I believe Mr. King is very 
 sore about it. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Iewine Douglas, Derrybeg, Limavady, examined. 
 
 9956. The O'Conoe Don. — Are you acquainted 
 with the particulars of the case which has been men- 
 tioned upon Mr. M'Oausland's estate? — I am, from 
 ])ublic report, but by no other means. 
 
 9957. Would you state what the facts are so far as 
 you have heard them?— Old Mr. Gault when a 
 young man bought a farm — tenant-right being the 
 rule on the estate. It continued in his possession 
 while he lived; when he died he left it to his son, who 
 died a young man, leaving thi-ee helpless children who 
 
 . could not do anything for themselves. The guardians 
 of the children thought it advisable to withdraw from 
 the farm altogether, but by the time that took place 
 
 Sept. 28, 18S0. 
 
 Rev. Nathaniel 
 M'C. Brown, 
 Mr. J. 
 Drennan, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Dunn, and 
 Rev. G. W. 
 HamlU, 
 
 Mr. M'Causland's three years' rule was in practice, and 
 that was all the children received, with an allowance 
 for some valuable offices that had been built on the 
 farm. 
 
 9 9 5 8. Then the grandsire did get more than the 
 three years'rent? — -I believe he got something additional 
 in the shape I have said, in consideration of the build- 
 ings. 
 
 9959. Had there been any other improvements 
 made ? — I believe the father and son had drained a good 
 deal of the land. 
 
 9960. Do you know it, or is it only from report 
 you speak? — I heard people talk about it. and 
 
 2X2 
 
340 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 S.'pt. 28, 1830. 
 
 Eev. Nathaniel 
 M'C Brown, 
 Mr. J. 
 Drennan, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Dunn, and 
 Kev. G. W. 
 Hamill. 
 
 bought the 
 I do not know 
 
 that the young man was to get a premium for drainage 
 from the Farming Society. ^ 
 
 9961. Was nothing allowed for the dramage .— i 
 think not. 
 
 9962. Mr. Shaw.— G-ault, I suppose, 
 tenant-right at the usual rate "i — Yes. 
 what he paid for it. 
 
 9963. Do you know when he bought iti — I believe 
 he bought part of it when a young man ; he bought 
 another portion of it in my time. 
 
 9964. But can you say decidedly that he paid more 
 than three years' rent for it 1 — Indeed I can. 
 
 9965. Do you know anything about the case of 
 Hamilton Stewart?— I do. Mrs. Stewart's father, when 
 a young man, bought the farm. She was his only suc- 
 ceswr, and married Mr. Stewart. He was an indus- 
 trious man ; he drained the farm and removed stones 
 out of it. The buildings I do not think he improved 
 much. He unfortunately got into bad odour with the 
 landlord, who turned him out, giving him only three 
 years' rent. In addition to that it is his practice to give 
 £4 an acre for any manured land. 
 
 99GG. Did he give it in this case t — I believe so. 
 
 9967. But nothing for improvements ?- Nothing. 
 
 9968. How long is it since Mr. Stewart bought iti 
 — His father-in-law bought it, and he was evicted 
 within the la.st twenty years. 
 
 9969. Is it more than ten yeai'S ago 1 — It is. 
 
 9970. Then it was before the Land Act 1 — Yes. 
 
 9971. Was Gault's case before the Land Act?— 
 Yes, it was prior to the Land Act. 
 
 9972. Do you know of any other cases on the estate 1 
 — There was a gentleman of the name of Whyte, who 
 had been his agent while I was a young lad. How he 
 came into possession of the farm I cannot tell, but my 
 impression is that the previous tenant ran away, leav- 
 ing some arrears of rent due. However, this man 
 built a complete set of offices on the place. He con- 
 tinued in the agency while he lived, and his son 
 became agent after him, married, and left a number of 
 children at his death, precisely in the same position as 
 the Gaults, too young to do anything. The place had 
 to be given up, but all they got was three years' rent, 
 and some allowance for manui-es. With regard to the 
 three years' rule, I may mention that on the mountain 
 lands he gives five years' rent to the present hour. 
 
 9973. Who was Whyte agent for?— He was Mr. 
 M'Causland's rent receiver until a short time before he 
 died, when he received a stroke of paralysis. 
 
 9974. Chairman. — Mr. M'CauslanJ said the rule 
 was three years' rent on the low lands, and five on the 
 mountain lands, for the good will, with allowance for 
 tenants' improvements and unexhausted manures 1 — I 
 never knew him to make an allowance for improvements 
 except in one case since the passing of the Land Act. 
 In that case the tenant had paid £200 for the farm, 
 aiid he built and improved the offices, and when, after 
 his death a legatee came in and gave up the farm, Mr. 
 M'Causland certainly did give the value an architect 
 put upon the buildings and first cost upon the land. 
 
 9975. Mr. Kavanagh. — What do you mean by first 
 cost upon the land? — I will explain that to you. 
 When the late Mr. M'Causland, the present gentle- 
 man's father, came to the determination of refusing to 
 allow public sales, he sent Mr. Whyte to value the 
 holdings upon the estate. Mr. Whyte put a value 
 according to the condition in which lie found every- 
 thing at the time. If the land was good and the farm 
 well kept, and the buildings in good order, he put on 
 more ; if they were bad he put on less. At the time 
 this farm was changing hands, Mr. Whyte valued 
 it at j£200. That is the explanation of the case. 
 
 9976. Was that more or less than three years' rent? 
 — The rent was no more than £30 up to the year 
 before la,st. 
 
 9977. The O'Coxoe Don. — A.re3^ou a tenant on the 
 estate ? — I am not. 
 
 9978. Canyon say positively from your own know- 
 ledge that before the Land Act Mr. M'Causland never 
 gave anything for improvements? — Never, to my 
 
 knowledge. I never heard any person say he diu, 
 with the single exception of a case where he gave some- 
 thing in consideration of a mill that had been rebuilt, 
 unless you call manured land improvements. 
 
 9979. Do you know any case upon other landlords' 
 property? — The only other case I know of is tbat of 
 Mr. Church, of Oatlands. 
 
 9980. Is that the landlord's name? — Yes. His 
 practice has been, since he came into possession of his 
 property 
 
 9981. When was it he came into possession ?— He 
 came into possession, as well as I remember, in the 
 year 1842. The estate is entailed, and he has only a 
 life interest in it. When a tenant's lease expired, he 
 was in the habit of selling the tenant-right and put- 
 ting the money into his own pocket, and granting the 
 purchaser a new lease. The last case I will mention 
 occurred with his own sister-in-law. I believe he sold 
 her tenant-right, gave the purchaser a new lease, and 
 put a sum of between £500 and £600 into his own 
 pocket. 
 
 9982. What was the name of his sister-in-law?— 
 Mrs. Church, the widow of his brother. 
 
 9983. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any other cases- 
 there may have been some family reason in that ? — He 
 did the same thing in every case he could. 
 
 9984. Sold the tenant-right? — Yes. 
 
 9985. Gave nothing to the person going out ?— No- 
 thintr to the person going out, not even to his own 
 sister-in-law — not one farthing. 
 
 9986. The O'Coxoe Don. — He did not recognise 
 any right io the tenant to tenant-right at the expiration 
 of the lease ? — If he did he put it into his own pocket. 
 
 9987. Mr. Shaw. — Has he many tenants 1 — Not a 
 large number. 
 
 9988. Does he live near Limavady ? — He does. 
 Part of the property is two or three miles from 
 Limavady. 
 
 9989. Was he in the habit of granting new leases? 
 — Yes. I believe he always gave a new lease to the 
 incoming man. 
 
 9990. At the same rent, or did he raise it ? — I could 
 not say. 
 
 9991. The O'Conor Don. — On the expiration of a 
 lease, would the same thing haj^pen? — Yes. I be- 
 lieve so. 
 
 9992. Has anything like this occurred since the Land 
 Act on his estate ? — I have not heard of a lease on his 
 estate expiring since. 
 
 9993. Is he in the habit of giving long leases ? — I 
 think twenty or twenty-one years. 
 
 9994. I suppose a tenant who came in on the under- 
 standing that he was paying only for the lease would 
 have no reason to complain of the arrangement 1 — I 
 cannot tell you. There was a keen competition for 
 land in the district, but what understanding he had I 
 cannot tell you. 
 
 9995. If he said to a tenant, " I will give you a lease 
 for twenty-one years ; what will you pay me for it ? " 
 Would the tenant have any reason to complain that at 
 the end of the lease he should lose the land? — Tbat 
 would depend upon whether that understanding was in 
 existence or not. Whetherit was or was not I cannot say. 
 
 9996. Chairman. — Tenants generally do not seem 
 to have taken care of themselves in their bargains ? — 
 In those cases you would say they did not. 
 
 9997. Are there any other cases you would like to 
 mention ? — Nothing further than with regard to the 
 operation of the law. I will mention one case. I know 
 a certain townland on the Marquis of Waterford's 
 estate, which is held by three tenants. No. 1 held less 
 than one-half of it — he was not a thrifty or energetic 
 man, still I believe he paid his rent, and I never 
 heard of him getting into any of the law courts on 
 ac30unt of it. Tenant No. 2, a remarkably pushuig 
 energetic man, strong in body, and financially very 
 well off, held two-thirds of the remainder. Tenant 
 No. 3 was a man of the same stamp. The lease ex- 
 pired, and the landlord sent his valuator over the place. 
 On farm No. 1, which was the largest farm, and the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 341 
 
 land of the best quality, but the tenant having made 
 no improvements no addition was made to the rent. 
 Farm No/ 2 ; on this farm there was an increase of 
 £7 10s. to the rent. No. 3 : the additional rent was 
 £3 or £3 10s., I do not know which. In the 
 course of a few years after that the townland was sold 
 in the Landed Estates Court ; and those two men had 
 to buy back their own improvements at thirty years 
 purchase, after having made them with their own 
 money. 
 
 9998. Can you give the names oi the tenants ? — 
 James Smith was No. 1. 
 
 9999. Did he buy his holding ? — He did not. 
 
 10000. Se had not energy enough, I supposed — 
 Exactly. 
 
 10001. The good men were fined for their goodness, 
 I suppose 1 — You may call it a fine or not ; you may 
 call it by any name you please. Those men had to buy 
 back their own improvements at thii-ty years purchase, 
 and yet the Marquess of Waterford never was considered 
 a harsh landlord. 
 
 1000:^. How long before the sale had these improve- 
 ments been made 1 — I cannot tell exactly. 
 
 10003. Was it before the Land Act ■!— It was. 
 
 10001. Mr. Kavanagh. — Was the land worth the 
 increased rent without taking the improvements into 
 account — for sometimes in a lease the rent is low, and 
 at its expiration the rise is not so unnatural 1 — It 
 might be explained in this way, that the man that 
 made no improvements had no increase made to his 
 rent. 
 
 10005. Was it the same class of land with the other 
 two farms that were iuoreased ? — -The man who made 
 no improvements had better land than the others. 
 
 10006. These people having to pay for their own 
 improvements they purchased their holdings at the 
 increased rent? — Yes. But if No. 2 buys back 
 £7 10s. a year at thirty years purchase, and that the 
 improvements cost him, say, £150 — the two together 
 make close on £400 that man's improvements have 
 cost him. 
 
 10007. CHAlRMA>f. — Were there any covenants in 
 those men's leases to build houses or make improve- 
 ments'! — I could not say. 
 
 10008. That man was not bound to make those im- 
 provements? — I believe not. 
 
 10009. 'The O'Conoe Don. — -As a fact were not the 
 
 rents on the Marquess of Waterford's estate low rent 
 I would not say that. In some exceptional oases the^ 
 were, in others not. 
 
 10010. Mr. Shaw. — Nothing extraordinary low 
 about them 1 — Nothing. 
 
 10011. Live and let live rents? — Exactly. I am 
 well acquainted with a great number of the tenants, 
 and there are none of them wallowing in wealth. The 
 tenant-right sold as high on the Marquess of Water- 
 ford's estate as anywhere I knew. 
 
 10012. Mr. Kavanagh.— Did tenant No. one's farm 
 sell for thirty years purchase 1 — Yes ; part of it was 
 bought by No. 2, and part by an outsider, but the 
 whole townland was sold in one block ; and No. 2 
 being anxious to buy his own solicited a relative to 
 buy a part and bought another part himself. 
 
 1001 3. The Rev. Mr. Browne. — Allow me to make an 
 addendum to what I said. It is with regard to the 
 practice of some landlords in our neighbourhood with 
 respect to raising of rents. In some instances they 
 go through the form of sending an impartial valuator 
 upon the property. His valuation comes into the 
 office, and very often it is manipulated there, and a 
 considerable per-centage added to it over and above 
 what the valuator has laid on. 
 
 10014. Mr. SiiAW. — Do the tenants know what is 
 sent in by the valuator 1 — Very often it is not shown 
 to them at all. 
 
 10015. The rents are fixed in the office after the 
 valuation has been sent in 1 — Yes ; that has taken place 
 on several estates, even on that of the Fishmongers' 
 Company. There is a gentleman here cognisant of the 
 fact. It is the case also on Mr. M'Causland's property. 
 One of his tenants told me that a valuator was brought 
 and put a valuation upon his farm, but Mr. King added 
 to the rent, and made it even money. He remonstrated 
 against it, but Mr. King said it was low enough. On 
 Sir F. Heygate's estate there have been some changes 
 latterly. At one time they got a certain number of 
 years rent on going out ; but latterly he has thought 
 it wiser to allow the outgoing tenant to go through the 
 form, of a public sale, but in every case he sends his 
 bailiff or agent to the place where the farm is being 
 sold, and announces that the rent is to be advanced, so 
 that the outgoing tenant sufiers in consequence of the 
 rent being raised without any valuation at all, but by 
 the will of the landlord. 
 
 Se^.t. 23, 18S0. 
 
 Rev. Nalhaniel 
 M'C. Blown, 
 Mr. J. 
 Drennau, 
 Mr. Joseph I 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Dunn, and 
 Kev. G. W, 
 Ilamill. . 
 
 Mr. Robert Dunn, Ballykelly, examined. 
 
 10016. Chairman. — Are you a tenant-farmer? — 1 
 am. 
 
 10017. What is the size of your holding? — About 
 130 acres. 
 
 1 00 1 8. Under whom do you hold ?— Under the Fish- 
 mongers' Company of London. 
 
 10019. Is there any case you wish to bring under 
 our notice? — In the year 1872 the estate was out of 
 lease, and Mr. Nolan, a valuator and surveyor was 
 sent over it. He made a valuation, which in a short 
 time afterwards was sent in to the office. The tenants 
 were subsequently requested to sign an agreement for 
 a lease, and the rents were announced. 
 
 10020. What was to be the term of the leases ? — 
 Twenty-one years. The rents were announced; but 
 there was a clause at the ond of the agreement, whereby 
 the tenant agreed to give up his holding at the end of 
 the lease, and abandon all claim that he might have 
 under the Ulster custom for tenant-right. This agree- 
 ment the tenants refused to sign, one and all, and after 
 a deputation from the Company had been over here to 
 see the tenants, a deputation from the tenants waited 
 on the Company in London, and on that occasion the 
 Company agreed to give the tenants Nolan's valuation. 
 
 10021. Chairman. — Had the rents proposed been 
 higher than Nolan's valuation ? — They had. 
 
 10022. That statement applies to several farms as 
 well as your own 1 — Yes, it applies generally. 
 
 10023. The O'Conor Don.— Did they force this 
 lease with the clause in it on you ? — No ; that was 
 resisted, and there was a clause added to the agreement, 
 whereby the tenants are entitled to the Ulster custom 
 at the end of the lease. 
 
 10024. Mr. Shaw. — Tenant-right had existed on 
 the estate before? — Yes. In the recollection of the 
 oldest inhabitant. 
 
 10025. What took place after that?— The Company 
 handed over Mr. Nolan's book to Counsellor Gather, 
 one of the deputation, and the tenants examined 
 Nolan's valuation as shown by the book. I know 
 that in the case of the farm I hold, and the farm ad- 
 joining, the rent announced was £250, whereas Nolan's 
 valuation was only £220 ; consequently, there was an 
 advance of £30 made on the rents of those two farms 
 beyond their own surveyor's valuation. I am told of 
 another large farm where the advance over and above 
 the valuation was nearly ,£50. 
 
 10026. Was Nolan's valuation much above the 
 former rent in those two cases ? — Not greatly. 
 
 10027. Then you would look on it as a fair valua- 
 tion ? — I would look on it, as times go, as being a very 
 full rent. 
 
 10028. They sought to add £30 over and above 
 Nolan's valuation? — They did. 
 
 10029. Did they give way on that upon the re- 
 
842 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Si-pt. 23, ISSO. 
 
 };ev. Xatliauiel 
 3I-C. Bi-o-n-n, 
 Mr. J. 
 Drennan, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Dunn, and 
 Eev. G. W. 
 Hamill. 
 
 mon-strances of the tenants 1— Yes ; they agreed to take 
 Nolan's valuation. 
 
 10030. That was the result of the tenants sending 
 over a deputation to London to meet the Company 1— 
 Yes. 
 
 10031. Can you tell us the name of the agent of 
 the property 1 — Mr. "W. C. Gage is the agent. 
 
 10032. There were no legal steps, you merely 
 remonstrated and sent a deputation 1—No ; there were 
 no legal proceedings. 
 
 10033. The Company gave way when they heard the 
 circumstances of the case 1 — Yes. 
 
 10034. If you had not done that your rents would 
 have been considerably higher than what you think 
 they ought to be 1 — Yes. There was also another case 
 I wish to mention. It was on the Grocers' estate, but 
 that estate has been sold since. There was a farm 
 and store on the estate owned by a man named James 
 Pairly. Fairly died, leaving his brother, who was in 
 America, his legatee. The brother came over to this_ 
 country to wind up the estate, and being anxious to 
 sell he advertised the farm and store for sale. He 
 
 got notice from the agent, Mr. P. Lloyd, of an in- 
 crease of rent. 
 
 10035. Was there a lease? — Not on this fann 
 but he got notice that the rent would be increased from 
 .£60 to ^90. Fairly's brother was anxious to return 
 to America and agreed to an advance of £20, and the 
 place was sold with the advance of £20 I'ent on it, and 
 consequently realized £400 or £500 less than itwould 
 have done had the rent not been raised. 
 
 10036. Fairly raised no objection 1 — No, for he wa? 
 very anxious to sell. 
 
 10037. What is the rule as to sales on that estate' 
 ' — Much the same as the rule on the Fishmonger? 
 
 Company's estate — free sale, but a revaluation at tlif 
 end of a lease. 
 
 10038. Chaieman. — Who was it sold to'? — Mr 
 Davidson was the purchaser from the Grocers Com 
 pany. 
 
 10039. I thought you said he was the agent?— No, 
 Mr. V. P. Lloyd was the agent. 
 
 10040. In consideration of the increase of rent, did 
 he get a new lease ? — I am not sure how that was 
 arranged with the pui'chaser. 
 
 Mr. James Drexxan, Carse Hall, Limavady, examined. 
 
 10041. Chairman. — What is the size of the farm 
 you occupy? — 614 acres. 
 
 10042. Was that purchased by yourself? — Yes. 
 
 10043. Is it a mountain farm ? — No ; it is an arable 
 farm. I wish merely to draw your attention to some 
 defects in the Bright clauses of the Land Act. 
 
 10044. Oil whose estate ? — Mr. Bogle's estate. 
 
 10045. Was that estate sold in the Landed Estates 
 Court ? — Yes. 
 
 1004G. Were you the only purchaser ? — No; there 
 were four other tenants on the property. We pur- 
 chased from the landlord privately, and petitioned the 
 Board for an advance. They refused to give the 
 advance without it passing through the Court, and we 
 were very much disappoijited and astonished at that, 
 for it is an Iiish Society's title, and before the Lefevre 
 committee it was stated they would advance money on 
 the title of the London societies. However, it was 
 refused in our case. 
 
 10047. When did the purchase take jDlace? — In 
 February, 1876, we applied for the loan, and in April 
 they declined to give it except through the Landed 
 Estates Court. 
 
 10048. Had you to p.ay the expense of passing it 
 through the Court 1 — Yes ; that is what I consider to 
 be a defect in the A ct. 
 
 10049. Bather say, a defect in the rules of the Board 
 of Works, for the Board had power to lend the money ? 
 — Well, yes. 
 
 10050. Did you apply to any other authority? — 
 No, the matter was in the hands of a solicitor ; 
 he was ti-ansacting the business, but I was cognisant 
 of it all. 
 
 10051. The Board of Works might perhaps have 
 conceded the point if the matter had been brought 
 under the cognisance of a higher authority ? — I am 
 sorry that was not thought of. The result was that 
 the Board j)ut us to a great deal of expense for nothing. 
 
 10052. How much did it cost? — The expenses were 
 £84 Is. 5<1., including £49 7s. 4(?., the costs of the 
 Board of Works. 
 
 10053. Was that for the whole lot?— The whole 
 lot; there are 1,400 acres in the entire estate. 
 
 10054. The application to the Board of Works came 
 from the parties who were desirous to purchase, not 
 from the seller ?— Yes, we wanted the advance. We 
 had, in fact, bought the property and agreed to the 
 price, and all we wanted was to get the advance from 
 the Board of Works. The thing was not settled until 
 June, 1880. From April, 1876, imtil June, 1880, the 
 case was kept pending in the Landed Estates Court, 
 with surveys and one thing or another, and a most 
 
 singular thing occurred on the occasion of the last sur- 
 vey. The man who came was a Mr. Murphy, and it 
 shows the absurdity of the whole thing — he was sent 
 down to see why the estate was sold so cheap — it \yas 
 the most ridiculous errand man was ever sent upon, 
 for the cheaper the lands were sold so much the better 
 for the Board — their security was better for their 
 mone}''. 
 
 10055. What business was it of theii-s, whether the 
 lands were sold cheap or dear, if they had good security ? 
 — Just so ; we considered that their secmity was 
 better, if the estate was sold cheap. 
 
 10056. The O'CoxoR Don.— Was it sold cheap?-! 
 think so ; but there were peculiar circumstances. 
 There was a head-rent to the Society, and it being a 
 reclamation from the sea, the water requires to be 
 pumped off to allow us to drain the land. 
 
 10057. What were the total expenses of carrying out 
 the purchase? — The total expenses — conveyances and 
 all—were £260. 
 
 10058. Upon your holding ? — No — upon the whole. 
 
 10059. What is the rent payable to the Irish 
 Society? — £300 a year upon the entii-e. 
 
 10060. Upon the 1,400 acres?— Upon the 1,400 
 acres. There are 1,301 aci-es arable, and there is a 
 great deal of broken land along the Isanks useful for 
 grazing ]3urposes, but not for ploughing. That is one 
 matter in which the Act ouoht to be amended, to 
 encourage people to purchase under the Bright clauses, 
 they should have greater facilities for getting money 
 from the Board of Works. The Board, I think, should 
 be obliged to advance the money on a good title being 
 shown; and another matter is their not allowing 
 alienation or assignment, which is surely a great hard- 
 ship. Here I have a farm of 600 acres — I cannot de,il 
 with it in any way for the next thii-ty-five years, 
 although I have £1,400 of my own money sunk in the 
 land, and they have that as security as well as the land 
 itself. 
 
 10060a. How much did you get from them? — 
 £2,800 for myself 
 
 10061. Chairman. — Do you think you ought to he 
 in the position of any other fee-simple owner of land? 
 — Well, of course the Board require to have security 
 for their loan — I think they have it. 
 
 10062. Mr. Shaw. — You think they have peifect 
 security in the land itself? — More than security, for 
 they have the security of the tenant's interest, as well 
 as that of the landlord. 
 
 10063. Chairman.— The difficulty is, to show that 
 it will be for the benefit of the country generally— of 
 course the legislature, in passing those enactments for 
 facilitating the purchase of land by tenants, did it not 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 31-3 
 
 for the advantage of a certain numliei- of tenants, but 
 on the ground that it is for the Lonefit of the country ; 
 the thing is, therefore, to satisfy Parliament that 
 subdivision and subletting would be for the general 
 good, and not merely for the good of the individual 
 -who buys ? — That would apply to a tenant who was 
 subdividing a small farm, but not to a large holding 
 like mine. 
 
 1006i. You think there might be a limit to a sub- 
 division 1 — Yes. I jotted down a certain idea which I 
 wished to submit to you. For instance as to alienation 
 — I think it would be right that a person holding 100 
 acres or upwards, should be permitted to alienate one- 
 half I mean he sho\ild have a right to sell or assign 
 one-half, or alienate it by will or otherwise, and the 
 borrowed money should be apportioned over those 
 assignments. That is the idea I formed. 
 
 10065. You would limit that right to persons 
 occupying at least 100 acres? — Yes; and the sub- 
 division should in no case reduce the holdings below 
 thirty-five acres. 
 
 10066. ]\Ir. Kavanagh. — You would have no hold- 
 ing less than thu'ty-five acres ? — Yes. The reason I 
 form that opinion is that with thii-ty-five acres, a man 
 is able to keep a pair of horses, and with his own 
 famUy to do the work and live comfortably, but if you 
 subdivide below that you annihilate the security and 
 only make a nation of paupers. There should be a 
 limit to subdivision. 
 
 10067. I presume you would only limit it while the 
 Government loan was outstanding, j'ou would not make 
 a law preventing subdivision of land universally 1 — -'No, 
 only whUe the Government loan was due on it. I 
 think it is obvious that there should be a reform of the 
 provisions of the Act as regards purchasing under the 
 Bright clauses, to facilitate tenants who wish to pur- 
 chase their holdings and encourage them to buy. 
 
 10068. Mr. Shaw. — Have the tenants who purchased 
 in your neighbourhood been improving since they 
 pruxhased ] — Generally speaking they are. 
 
 100G9. Mr. Kavanagh. — Even after the Govern- 
 ment money had been paid, I understand you would 
 not approve of subdivision into smaller holdings than 
 thirty-live acres? — 1 would not approve of it. I know 
 my ideas are peculiar in that respect. 
 
 10070. Mr. Shaw. — Would not it depend very 
 much upon the place and the circumstances of the 
 holding — if for instance it were on the side of a moun- 
 tain thirty-five acres would be little enoiigh ; but if it 
 were near a town, and good laud, ten acres might be 
 quite enough to enable a man with his family to live 
 comfortably 1 — I would not like to live on ten acres. 
 
 10071. Mr. Kavanagh. — You think thirty-five 
 acres of average land is about the smallest extent of 
 holding a man should have 1 — That is my idea. 
 
 10072. And you would limit subdivision to that? — 
 I would. 
 
 10073. Would you be in favour of bringing the 
 people from Gahvay and Mayo, and putting them upon 
 land in Meath — cutting up the large grazing farms of 
 Meatli into small portions, and putting the Galway 
 and Mayo people upon them 1 — Indeed I would not. 
 I may observe that my ideas are formed from my 
 knowledge of the district I am living in. I don't 
 know anything about that part of the country. I 
 think I have mentioned all that I wanted to call your 
 attention to particularly. I am of opinion that under 
 the present restrictions the purchase clauses of the 
 Land Act are not taken adva.ntage of, as extensively 
 as they might be if those restrictions were removed. 
 Under the present rules a purchaser is tied up in every 
 way. 
 
 10074. Had the purchasers in your neighbourhood 
 to borrow the other one-third of the purchase-money 1 
 — I cannot tell. I think generally speaking the 
 tenants in the district are yiretty comfortable. Some 
 of them have money in the Bank. 
 
 10075. I dare say some of them have a good deal 
 more money than they would like to tell 1 — No doubt 
 there are cases of that kind. 
 
 Sept. 23. 1880. 
 
 Re ,-. Xathaniel 
 M'C. liroivQ, 
 Mr. J. 
 Drennan, 
 Mr. Joseph I. 
 Douglas, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Dunn, and 
 Rev. G. W. 
 Ilamill. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Douglas, examined. 
 
 10076. Chairman'. — Are you engaged in farming ? 
 — I am. 
 
 10077. What is the name of your landlord ?— I hold 
 in perpetuity. Mr. Ogilvy is my landlord. 
 
 10078. Mr. Kavanagh. — You pay a head rent ? — 
 
 Yes ; I hold fifty -two acres of arable land — the head rent 
 is 2s. 6d. per Cunningham acre, and something in the 
 shape of fines. Since that time it has been turned into 
 a fee-farm grant at the same rent, but there is a small 
 addition made to cover the fijies. 
 
 The Eev. G. W. Hamill examined. 
 
 10079. Chairman. — Do you concur in the evidence which has been given by the witnesses who have been 
 examined? — I do, generally. 
 
 Mr. Edmund Murphy, of Dunfanaghy, examined. 
 
 10080. Chairman. — What is your occupation? — 
 I am a Land Agent, also Arbitrator under the "Railway 
 Clauses Act, I am also Inspector under the Board of 
 Works of Land Improvements and Farm Buildings. 
 
 10081. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is your experience con- 
 fined to the north of Ireland, or have you also experience 
 of the south ? — As a land agent it is confined to the 
 north, but as arbitrator I have considerable experience 
 of the midland counties. My district extends from 
 the Midland Railway to and over the north of Ire- 
 land. 
 
 10082. As a land agent what extent of country in 
 the north do you represent ? — Close on 50,000 acres. 
 
 10083. The O'Conor Don.— As land agent 50,000 
 acres 1 — Yes, in Donegal and Down. 
 
 10084. Mr. Kavanagh. — Does tenant-right prevail 
 on those estates you. manage 1 — It does. 
 
 1 0085. Does it prevail in a single form or in different 
 forms ? — In one form upon the estates I manage. 
 
 10086. What is your definition of tenant-right? — 
 
 The tenant has the right to sell his interest subject to 
 ■the approval of the incoming tenant by the laiullord, the 
 adjoining tenant having the first off"er. That is the 
 only rule we have. 
 
 10087. There is no limit to the price ? — No limit 
 whatsoever since I took charge of the estates. When I 
 took charge of them twenty-five years ago there was 
 a limit of six and a half years purchase. I ascertained 
 that the tenants went outside the oiEce and paid, 
 privately, a larger smn. I said to my employer that 
 it was hardly a fair arrangement to hold the tenants 
 to the office rule under such circumstances. He 
 accordingly withdrew the restriction, and let them get 
 as much as they could, provided that they gave the 
 first offer to the adjoining tenant. 
 
 10088. Who are the landlords of the estates you 
 manage? — Mr. Stewart, of Ards, in Donegal and 
 Down ; Mr. Brook, of Lough Esk, in Donegal; Colonel 
 Stewart, of Eockhill, Letterkenny ; the Honorable 
 Ernest Cochrane, in county of Donegal. 
 
 Mr. Edmund 
 Murphy. 
 
344i 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 28, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Edmund 
 Murphy. 
 
 10089 Is it by auction or by private sale ^— They 
 object to the auction system. When I hear a farm is 
 to be sold I send round to the adjoining tenants, and 
 ask them if they are willing to purchase._ If the 
 adjoining tenants do not want the farm then it may be 
 sold by auction. 
 
 10090. How do you know if the preference is given 
 to an adjoining tenant who wants the farm, what it 
 would realize by auction ? -The rule I have— and 
 which I have endeavoured to establish— has been to 
 settle the price by arbitration between the tenants, and 
 they sometimes come to me as umpire when they can- 
 not agree about the price. 
 
 10091. They settle it by arbitration ^— Yes. 
 
 10092. And if the next tenant refuses to give a fair 
 price for the holding ^vhat takes place 'I — In that case 
 the outgoing tenant may sell to any other respectable 
 tenant he likes. 
 
 10093. What is the usual price of tenant-right on 
 these estates ^ — It varies with the size of the farm. 
 Upon very small farms they give an exorbitant price 
 
 . sometimes, upon middle-sized farms a moderate price is 
 , given. The usual price is ten to fifteen and from 
 that to twenty years' purchase of the yearly rent. 
 
 10094-. The O'Conor Don. — What is the largest 
 farm you have known to be sold 1 — We have unfortu- 
 nately so few large farms that I cannot speak much 
 from experience. I don't recollect any large farm 
 being sold. There was a farm sold some time ago in 
 county Down; It was a small farm, the rent was only 
 £10. the extent of it six acres. The tenaiit-right sold 
 for £320. 
 
 10095. Is it your opinion that on very large fai-ms 
 the tenant-right would almost disappear 1 — It would. 
 
 ; The price a man will give for a farm really means the 
 sum of money he can command. He will, as a general 
 
 ■ rule, give that without considering what return he may 
 have for his money. The limit of what he gives is 
 simply what,, he has got to give. He gives it to get 
 into possession of a farm by which he can live. 
 
 10096. Is it not often the case that a man will 
 offer more money than he has in his possession in 
 order to get a farm? — Indeed it is. I have known 
 cases where a man has had to borrow a large sum of 
 money in order to get a farm, and to pay ten per cent, 
 interest, very frequ.ently. He has to obtain on credit 
 grain, seeds, and artificial manures, and to trust to 
 the crop enabling him to pay for same ; and in nine 
 cases out of ten the weight of the loan he has to repay 
 keeps him down for years. 
 
 10097. Would a rule restricting the price of the 
 tenant-right be beneficial? — It would be very bene- 
 ficial. There is an estate — that of Mr. M'Causland, 
 where the landlord does restrict- the tenant-right to 
 a certain number of years pui-chase. He made the 
 improvements himself and expended a .good deal 
 of money in that way. The tenants on "that estate 
 appear to be as prosperous as those on the estates 
 where there is the principle of unrestricted tenant- 
 riglit. '':./- 
 
 10098. Do you know Mr. M'Causland's estate?— 
 I do ' 
 
 10099. Do you know that he does the improve- 
 ments?— I do. T held ^an "arbitration last month on 
 the occasion of a railway company .taking portion of 
 the estate. The landlord made a claim, and his agent 
 stated in the presence of the tenants whose interest 
 it was to contradict him, if his statement was incorrect, 
 that the landlord had squared the farms, drained and 
 improved them, and that was proved in every case. 
 It was also stated — and in fact the tenants told me 
 themselves — that the rule was three years tenant-right. 
 The tenants themselves don't like the rule, but looking 
 at their circumstances as a practical man, I have come 
 to : the conclusion in my own mind that they were 
 as well if not better off' upon that estate than upon the 
 estates where the tenant-right was unrestricted ^ 
 
 10099a. Chairman. — Did you understand that the 
 
 three years wasfor .the good-will exclusive of compen- 
 sation for (improvements? — Yes; I think it came 
 practically to six or seven years j)urchase including 
 improvements. That was the practical working of it. 
 
 101 00. From your knowledge of the Jl'Causland 
 estate do you thiiik that the rule of restricted tenant- 
 right works well? — I can tell you as a practical man, 
 accustomed to look into these matters, that if I were 
 employed to reporfeupon the estate for an intending 
 purchaser I would say that it is better circumstanced 
 than other estates where there is unrestricted tenant- 
 right, and that the tenants appear to be more comfort- 
 able and more prosperous. ■ - va.,, 
 
 10101. Mr. Shaw. — Are you speaking from your 
 own observation ?— Yes ; and from evidence given to 
 me by tenants and by the a^ent. I several; times 
 asked questions to ascertain if it were tKe case, beiaiise 
 it would have influenced me very much as to the sums 
 I should award to the tenants for compensation. I 
 asked the question of several of .them;- ■'«^'v .-■?-. 
 
 10102. The O'CoNfiffi' Don.— Wks;'.^tE-at?^'fvia'eiice 
 given to you on oath ?— -fit" wa,s.- '•:-.■ '"^ .'■'''. 
 
 10103. Given to you on oath by the agent of Mr. 
 M'Causland, in the presence of the tenants 1 — Yes. 
 
 10104. And they knew if they'could contradict him 
 they would get more compensation ?^-^Cfertainly. I 
 stated so several times— that it would^have a niaterial 
 effect upon the award I would give- the'tenants. 
 
 10105. They got compensation 'for' the occupation? 
 — Yes — and for the severance. 
 
 10106. Was the rent reduced in each case? — Yes; 
 the agent said so. 
 
 10107. Were you engaged in an arbitration upon 
 the railway from Strabane to Stranorlar ? — I was, but 
 not as arbitrator. , . 
 
 10 108. We had e^■id£nce from tenants who stated 
 •that.-t"heir land was taktn by the railway company — 
 ^that they did not get a shilling of the compensation — 
 and that the landlord tock the entire of the money?— 
 That is not the catee on the estate of which I had charge. 
 I would not be surprised if it was the case in other 
 parts of Ireland, and I think it a very unfair tiling. 
 I always award to the tenant compensation for sever- 
 ance, because I think it is rather the tenant should 
 ■get i-t" thaii 1;he landlord, particularly in tenant-right 
 districts, as it is the tenant-right that suffers, and not 
 'the^ landlord. 
 
 10109. Mr. KAVANAGH.^Are there many leases on; 
 "Ithe'properties you manage?— There 'are s'Ome in Down, 
 not many in Donegal. 
 
 10110. What is the custom on the expiration of a 
 . lease ?^We have always re- adjusted the rent, gi-mg 
 
 the tenant full credit for any improvements. We 
 look upon it as if a iiew tenant was coming in buying 
 the tenant-right, and are- careful that tlie increajied 
 rent demanded on the expiry of a lease shall not swamp 
 the tenant's improvements. We acknowledge tenant- 
 right at the end of the lease, and I think it is for the 
 benefit of the estate" to do so — if not, the tenant during 
 -the leCst foui\. or five; years of-. his occupation' would 
 depreciate the property, and-' the landlord would be 
 worse off than- if he had to gi-?e the tenant the benefit 
 of the tenant-right. 
 
 10111. From your experience of the Ulster custom- 
 is there any suggestion you would make regarding it? 
 — I think if the Act had been loyally received by land- 
 lord and tenant at first it would be workingTiow very 
 harmoniously. But it was iiot. . On the one side some 
 landlords thought that their rights were invaded,' and 
 they set to work to counteract it. On the other side 
 the agitators persuaded the tenants that if they only 
 agitated a little more they would get all they demanded. 
 Between the two the Act has not had a fair- chance. I 
 think the machinery of the Act also might be improved 
 in one iihportant pa.rticular, and thatistherentquestion. 
 Practically it is now settled by the County Court Judge. 
 He is the person who detennines what is a fiih- or an 
 unfair rent. In nine cases out often he knows nothing 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 345 
 
 about tte value of land, and is ignorant of agriculture, 
 and he has to listen to the most contradictory evidence. 
 I know in my own cases, as a railway arbiti-ator, if I 
 were to give my awards on the testimony of witnesses 
 I would commit the greatest outrages on common 
 sense. I have always to go on the land myself and 
 estimate the value. There should be some inde- 
 pendent expert to assist the judge to ascertain what 
 really is the fair rent. 
 
 10112. Mr. Shaw. — Woiild arbitration be possible ^ 
 — It wovild if the umpire were selected by scmie 
 independent, competent authority. The umpire should 
 be a skilled man, whose opinion would be respected. 
 
 10113. Mr. Kavanagii. — Your answer leads up to 
 what is in point of fact a principal subject of dispute, 
 and that is the qu.estion of rent t — Yes. 
 
 10114. The gist of the evidence we have received up 
 to this has been that on some estates the landlords by 
 raising the rents were practically eating up and doing 
 away with the tenant-right. I suppose you would 
 agree that such a thing is possible ]— Certainly it is 
 possible, and it is a very unfortunate thing that it 
 should be so. 
 
 10115. The consequence is that the tenants have 
 got a feeling of insecurity in their minds that 
 their tenant-right may be absorbed in that way, and in 
 consequence of that they don't like to make improve- 
 ments 1 — Certainly. There are instances where estates 
 have been most generously managed, and where the 
 tenants lived as happily as possible under the existing 
 landlord. But when another landlord came into 
 possession all that was changed — " another king arose 
 who knew not Joseph." 
 
 10116. There have been cases of that kind? — Yes. 
 
 10117. The property has been sold?— Yes. That 
 has been the root and beginning of the evil — land 
 jobbing. T wish very much that when the Landed 
 Estates Court Act came into operation the fact of the 
 sale of an estate had conferred a lease upon the tenants. 
 It would have saved much misery if that were the 
 law ; audit was a great misfortime it was not. 
 
 10118. That would have done away with the op- 
 pression of the land jobbers 1 — Quite so. Persons who 
 desired to sell their property did not mind having low 
 rents, because they knew that if the rents were low 
 they would get a greater number of years' purchase 
 from the buyer. 
 
 10119. Do you think fixity of tenvire at a fair rent 
 would bea satisfactory settlementofthedifiBculty? — Ido. 
 
 10120. That is your opinion ?— Yes. I have 2,000 
 tenants on my rent roll, and I never knew a man 
 amongst them to be evicted for anything but nonpay- 
 ment of rent. I cannot tax my memory with one 
 case. Practically upon the large estates the tenants 
 have fixity of tenure, and in reality the landlords 
 would be giving up nothing whatever by giving their 
 tenants the occupation of their lands permanently so 
 long as they paid a fair rent. 
 
 10121. As to the question of rent, how would that be 
 flxed ? — I do not think the Government of the country 
 should attempt to fix the rent to be paid by the 
 tenantry of an estate ; but when a " dispute " may 
 arise as to what may be a fair or an unfair rent, then 
 it behoves the Government to provide the best 
 machinery, independent of cost, for determining the 
 question at issue. The only possible way that I know 
 in which this could be done, would be to have a 
 skilled tribunal which could fix it fairly and impartially 
 between the parties. For my own part I think there 
 ought to be a special Land Court for decidingthe matter, 
 it should not be adjudicated upon by the Quarter 
 Sessions Court atall. I think thatwhen the Government 
 interferes between man and man, and to some extent 
 prevents freedom of contract, they are bound to provide 
 the best possible machinery for carrying it out, that is 
 in their power to provide. It is the want of iinifor- 
 mity between the decisions of the different courts that 
 gives rise to considerable dissatisfaction. The Chaii'- 
 men in some places give enormous prices to the tenants 
 for their tenant-right on disturbance ; they give 
 small prices in others, and this want of uniformity 
 
 in decisions has turned the whole thing upside down. Sept. 28, 1889. 
 I would be in favour of appointing a special court ,. -J". , 
 of, say, three skilled men who would come to each pro- jxu'rphy. 
 vLnce and hold their sessions periodically, like an 
 Assize Court and deal thei-e with any question aris- 
 ing with respect to land. There would be then uni- 
 formity established, and justice would be much less 
 uncertain than it is at present. Within the last six 
 months I have, as arbitrator, dealt witli many thou- 
 sand pounds worth of landed property, and up 
 to this there have been only three appeals. So 
 that the parties have been satisfied on both sides. 
 There is I think no reason whatever, why sensible 
 men, independent of both the parties — who from ex- 
 perience can give decisions which would command the 
 respect of the public — should have any difficulty in 
 fixing a fair and equitable rent. 
 
 10122. You think the arbitration of a skilled um- 
 jiire would satisfy both parties 1 — I think so. But 
 the question is the appointment of the umpire. 
 
 10123. Just so, that ought to be above suspicion 
 entirely 1 — Above suspicion. He should be a Govern- 
 ment ofiicial. Once the maxims of political economy 
 are set aside, the greatest care should be taken that 
 the tribunal which is to carry out the law should 
 be above all suspicion. I think it would be better for 
 the landlords themselves that there should be such a 
 tribunal, for their rents would be more secui-e. It 
 would be better for the tenants because their imj)rove- 
 ments would be secured. 
 
 10124. Chairman. — Would it be better sometimes, 
 in your opinion, to go at once to the tribunal which is to 
 settle the question without going to the arbitrators ? — 
 Perhaps so. 
 
 10125. You are aware I suppose that it is said 
 that arbitration almost comes to "splitting the 
 difference " 1 — Quite so, and that is what I object to in 
 the Judges of the County Coui'ts, for their decisions 
 very frequently amount to neither more nor less than 
 " splitting the difference." 
 
 10126. Mr. Shaw. — In fact, you think that the 
 decision is a hap-hazard affair 1 — It fi'equently must be 
 so, because the Judge is not himself a skilled man on 
 such subjects. He knows nothing about land, and 
 that is one of the ind\icements to parties to put forward 
 extravagant demands, and support them by wild 
 evidence. 
 
 10126a. The O'Conor Don. — Have you heard many 
 complaints made of the decisions of the Chairmen of 
 the County Courts 1 — I have, a good many. I had only 
 one case myself since the Land Act passed; it was 
 more to establish a principle than anything else, and 
 the Chairman gave the most extraordinary decision I 
 ever heard of in my life. 
 
 10127. Chairman. — I suppose the decisions gene- 
 rally produce dissatisfaction on one side or the other 1 
 — -Yes ; there is generally dissatisfaction on both sides. 
 The tenant does not want to give xip his land no 
 matter what compensation he gets for it — for, in fact, 
 no compensation can satisfy the tenant in some cases — • 
 especially the mountain tenant. I don't care what 
 amount of years' purchase you give a man with a hold- 
 ing of £5 or £6 a year, and a large family. What is 
 £100 to that man? It would be useless to him, 
 except to enable him to emigrate, and he may be unfit 
 by age, &c., for emigration. I would, therefore, 
 strongly guard the tenant against capricious eviction. 
 I would surround him with every safeguard possible 
 in that way, because I don't think it is good for 
 either party that capricious eviction should be possible. 
 
 10128. The O'Conor Don.— Would you apply that 
 to all sorts of holdings — for example, to grazing farms ? 
 — No. I have not had much experience of grass farms. 
 I have just been making a report for the Endowed 
 Schools Commissioners of Ireland. I have been 
 down in the south, and have gone through the 
 counties of Waterford, Galway, Limerick, Tipperary, 
 and Cork. My experience is that the tenants of these 
 grass farms have done nothing whatever in the way 
 of improvement — that their lands are just as they got 
 them in the year 1847. 
 
 2Y 
 
346 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 SepJ.28,1880. 
 
 Mr. Edmund 
 Murphy. 
 
 10129. Mr. Shaw. — When the tenant has made 
 improvementSj-would you prevent evictions 1 — Wherever 
 the tenant has made imj^rovements I would give him 
 every protection in securing them. 
 
 10130. Whether it was a grass farm or not? — 
 Certainly. 
 
 10131. What is your opinion of the general run of 
 rents — are they high or low 1 — I think, so far as my 
 knowledge goes, I have never come across a case of 
 very extravagant rent. 
 
 10132. Do you look upon Griffith's valuation as a 
 guide to the value of land? — I use it to this extent. 
 Whenever I have reason to revise the rent I look at 
 the valuation, and if I find a great difference between 
 the valuation and the rent, I think there must be 
 some reason for it, and I then try to ascertain whether 
 the difference has been created by the tenant, or 
 whether there was a want in the valuation. I some- 
 times don't find the valuation unifoi-m. I find it too 
 low in one district and too high in another. In 
 Donegal, in the mountain district, it is too low. 
 The valuators attached little or no value to mountain 
 land when they were making their valuation. In 
 Donegal the Poor Law valuation is from 20 to 30 per 
 cent, under what would be considered a reasonable 
 rent, whereas in Down the valuation is very close up 
 to the rent. 
 
 10133. Has there been a good deal of reclamation 
 in Donegal siace Griffith's valuation was made? — 
 Well, not much in my district. 
 
 10134. In the South of Ireland and the West, do 
 you think the valuation bears the same proportion to 
 the rent as in the North ? — I think the valuation is 
 too low in the South and West — at least so far as the 
 places I have seen. My experience shows me that the 
 valuation in the South and West of Ireland must have 
 been made during the depressed circumstances of the 
 country, when there were large deductions for taxes 
 and rates. On one estate in Waterford, the valuation 
 was twenty-nine per cent, under the rent ; while 
 within three miles of it, the tenants are holding at ten 
 per cent, over the valuation. The valuation is fre- 
 quently unequal. 
 
 10135. Your opinion, therefore, is that there is no 
 equality in Griffith's valuation ? — No. It is not a 
 guide in any way, except to draw attention to some 
 particular question, or you may use it as a general 
 index, and, if you find any considerable discrepancies 
 between two farms, you can then ascertain what is the 
 reason of it ; but to depend upon Griffith's valuation 
 as a correct guide to the value, would be wrong. 
 
 10136. Mr. Kavanagh. — With respect to the im- 
 provements, according to your experience, which is it 
 the tenant or the landlord that makes them ? — In my 
 experience, during the last quarter of a century on 
 many of the large estates, the landlords made the 
 greater part of the improvements. 
 
 10137. Mr. Shaw.— What has been the case in 
 Down ? — In Down there have been practically no im- 
 provements. 
 
 10138. I suppose such improvements as have been 
 made were made by the tenants ? — Well, Down was 
 originally rich arable land, and I could hardly say 
 there was much improvement necessary. On Mr. 
 Stewart's estate there has been some drainage done. 
 
 10139. Did he charge the tenants for it 1—No. He 
 did it freely. 
 
 10140. Has he done that since the Land Act'— 
 No. 
 
 10141. Mr. Kavanagh.— Since the Land Act, on 
 this estate, are we to understand that no improve- 
 ments have been made by the landlord ?— Yes that 
 i.s so. ' 
 
 10142. As a general rule, from your experience of 
 Ireland, would you say that the majority of the im- 
 provements were made by the landlords or by the 
 tenants?— The majority of the improrements were 
 made l,y the tenants. In the North, however, on 
 many of the large estates, the improvements were in 
 great part made by the landlords. 
 
 10143. By the landlord? — Yes, upon the estates ] 
 am acquainted with. 
 
 10144. Notwithstanding the tenant-right? — Not 
 withstanding the existence of tenant-right. 
 
 10145. Mr. Shaw. — What class of improvements? 
 — Drainage, fencing, and roads. 
 
 10146. The roads, I suppose, were made by the 
 county ? — I mean tenants' roads. 
 
 10147. Is fencing done by the landlords? — On Mr. 
 Stewart's estate it was done almost entirely by the 
 landlord. 
 
 10147a. What part of Ulster is that in ?— It is be- 
 tween Letterkemiy and Gweedore. 
 
 1 01 48. Is it not a poor part of the country ? — It is. 
 
 10149. Was money borrowed from the Board of 
 Works for that ?— Yes. 
 
 10150. Were the tenants charged with the interest 1 
 —No. 
 
 10151. The landlord paid it himself ?— Yes. 
 
 10152. To add it to the rent, then, I suppose! — 
 No. 
 
 10153. Did Mr. Brook do the same?— Yes. 
 
 10154. Did he add it to the rent ? — He added it to 
 the rent, I believe. 
 
 10155. Did he add the entire of it to the rent! — 
 No ; I think the tenants informed me that he charged 
 them a part. 
 
 10156. The O'Conob Don.— With respect to buil- 
 dings, as a general rule, are they done by the landlord 
 or by the tenant ? — In the North, on the large 
 estates, the landlord generally gives the slates. 
 
 10157. And the tenant builds the house? — Yes. 
 Since the Land Act the landlords have ceased giving 
 any materials, for good reasons, as they considered 
 that the more generous they had been before the Land 
 Act, the more heavily the Act dealt with them ; ia 
 fact, the better the landlord the higher the tenant- 
 right, and they paid for their own kindness seriously. 
 
 10158. Have you known any cases of inirohase by 
 tenants ? — Yes, there have been some in our district, 
 but not many. 
 
 10159. How have these tenants got on? — They ap- 
 pear to be getting on very well. I am afraid they 
 have had to borrow money from money-lenders out- 
 side the Board of Works, and are paying an exorbi- 
 tant rate of interest, which prevents them from 
 drainage and improving a good deal. 
 
 10160. Do you refer to the purchase of Church 
 lands ? — I know several of these men who are borrow- 
 ing money from the Board of Works and expending 
 it upon their holdings. 
 
 10161. Mr. Shaw. — That is a sign of improvement? 
 — Certainly. 
 
 10162. The O'Conor Don.— Have you had tlie in- 
 spection under the Board of Works of estates for the 
 purpose of seeing whether improvements were properly 
 carried out ? — Yes, and really nothing could be better 
 than the judicious way in which the improvements 
 are being done. 
 
 10163. Mr. Shaw. — Would you be in favour of ex- 
 tending the facilities for tenants becoming owners of 
 their holdings? — I certainly would, within certain 
 limits. It should be judiciously done, but I certainly 
 would be in favour of it. 
 
 10164. Do you think it would be advantageous to 
 the comitry ?— I think it would. It would give the 
 peoijle more interest in their holdings, and make it 
 personally their own advantage to improve them. 
 
 10165. The O'Conor Don.— You have had expe- 
 rience of land all over Ireland ?— I have. 
 
 101 06. Would you say that the rents, as a rule, are 
 higher or lower in the North of Ireland than in the 
 South? — In my recent inquiry for the Endowed 
 Schools Commission, I could not discover that the 
 rents were higher where there is no tenant-right than 
 where there is. 
 
 10167. Do you think the rents are as high in the 
 north as in the south ?— I think they are. It certainly 
 IS a veiy curious fact that the existence of tenant- 
 right does not appear to low«r the rent. 
 
 10168. Mr. Kavanagh.- Can you tell us anything 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 347 
 
 about the condition of the labourers in the districts you 
 are acquainted with, and their rate of wages ? — Do yoa 
 mean on the estates in the county or on the farms. 
 
 10169. I mean with respect to both, as far as you 
 have knowledge of them I—Well, upon Mr. Stewai't's 
 estate the labourers have from 7s. to 9s. a week, and 
 these men get a house, half an acre of ground, the 
 grass of a cow, and turf, at a nominal rent of 10s. 
 yearly. 
 
 10170. TheO'CoNOB Don. — First, as to'the condition 
 of the labourers that are employed by the farmers %— 
 They are the most miserable class in the world. They 
 get a cabin, and perhaps half an acre of bog, and six- 
 pence or eightpence a day, and perhaps they may get 
 a run for half-a-dozen sheep on the mountains, and some 
 of them may make occasionally a drop of "potheen," and 
 procure a little money that way. Nothing has been done 
 to improve the laboiurers' condition — the labourers who 
 are in the employment of the farmers. Their houses 
 and their families in every respect are most miserable. 
 
 10171. Mr. Shaw. — Are you speaking of Donegal 
 —Yes. 
 
 10172. In Down, I suppose, they are better off? — 
 They are slightly better oS. In Donegal the farmers 
 may sometimes get on without paying labourers. They 
 can give them a piece of ground— con acre — on which 
 they raise potatoes and feed pigs, and they live without 
 wages ; but in Down they cannot do that, for the 
 labourers must have money — they must buy firing. 
 In Donegal they have turf for the cutting. 
 
 10173. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is there a great difference 
 in the condition of the labourers now from what it was 
 in the year 1852 1 — I think so. 
 
 10174. Wages have gone up since 1852? — Con- 
 siderably ; I would say, at least, twenty per cent. 
 
 1 1 7 .5 . The position of the labourer has improved ? — 
 Yes. There are fewer of them, and the condition of 
 those that remain is certainly improved. 
 
 10176. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think that 
 laboxu-ers give more value for their money now than 
 they used to do formerly 1 — No, I think not ; quite the 
 contrary. 
 
 10177. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is there much wasteland 
 in the district of Ireland with which you are acquainted? 
 — There is not much waste land suitable for reclama- 
 tion. There is a good deal of cut away bog and that 
 sort of thing. 
 
 10178. Chaikman. — Do you think that the labour- 
 ing population generally are in a dissatisfied state ? — 
 No, I think they are not. 
 
 10179. T thought they might have the same feeling 
 of want of security as the tenant-farmers ? — No ; not 
 yet. I don't think it has come to that yet ; but it 
 will, as a matter of consequence, on the movement 
 that is going on. 
 
 10180. When they hold under a farmer, on the 
 death of the labourer who works, or in case of his 
 illness, has the farmer been known to get rid of him 
 or his family? — Yes; it might be so. 
 
 10181. In such a case as that the farmer would be 
 anxious to turn out the occupiers of the labourer's cot- 
 tage, in order to put into it some one else who could 
 work for him 1 — That would naturally be the case. 
 
 10182. Do you know has that happened ? — Well, in 
 the north there is a superabundance of labour, supplied 
 by the " small farmers," so that it is not so necessary 
 in the north as in the south that the farmers should 
 have cottier laboureis. 
 
 Mr. Edmund 
 Murphy. 
 
 10183. You restrict the number of labourers to Scpi. 2s,isso, 
 what is required ? — Certainly. 
 
 10184. Have you been also much in the south? — 
 I have. 
 
 10185. Have you had experience there? — Yes. 
 
 10186. Have you had an opportunity of observing 
 there the condition of the labourers? — Yes ; in one 
 estate I have commented on in my report the houses 
 of the labourers are in a miserable condition. Wages 
 appear in the sotith to be pretty fair. 
 
 10187. Have you observed the houses of the la- 
 bourers in the south of Ireland to be in a wretched 
 state, generally speaking ? — Yes. They are not kept 
 up by the farmers on whose lands they live, and who 
 charge them rent, which we don't do, as a general rule, 
 in the north. 
 
 10190. With respect to the tenantry of the south 
 of Ireland, did you find a great feeling of insecurity 
 amongst them 1 — Well, there was a great feeling of dis- 
 satisfaction. It did not appear to be from insecurity 
 so much as from the unevenness of rents, and also from 
 the fear that the rents would be raised. 
 
 10191. The fear the rent would be raised? — Yes. 
 I think it was more that fear than anything else, 
 and also the inequality of the rents. Some of the 
 tenants in the south got their lands in or about the 
 year 1847, and got them then at any figure they chose 
 to take them at. Others are holding at a higher rent, 
 and, of course, that is a great cause of dissatisfaction. 
 There is a feeling of insecurity on the part of those 
 who hold their farms at the low rent, for fear their 
 rents should be raised, and there is also a feeling of 
 dissatisfaction on the part of those who hold at the 
 high rent when they compare that rent with the rent 
 of others. I merely speak, from my own experience, 
 of the estates in Waterford, Tipperary, and Limerick. 
 
 10192. Did it come under your observation that 
 there was a sort of tenant-right existing in these 
 counties 1 — Yes. I found, generally speaking, there 
 was a kind of tenant-right. 
 
 10193. A permission to sell? — Yes; not so tauch 
 limited it appeared to me by the landlord as by the 
 people themselves, they not being accustomed to it. 
 It was not exactly a sale, but a sum of money is given 
 to the outgoing tenant to help him away — it is more 
 that than a sale. I don't see how the principle of tenant- 
 right could be carried out in the south, I mean in 
 the grazing districts. It, in these districts, is neces- 
 sary a man should have capital in order to stock his 
 lands with cows ; he could not, as a rule, spare money 
 to pay for tenant-right. I don't see how he could do it. 
 
 10194. Do you tiiink that the introduction of the 
 northern tenant-right into the south would be a satis- 
 factory settlement unless there was some security also 
 as to the rent ? — I think security of tenure with com- 
 pensation for improvements would be better for the 
 south than the northern tenant-right would be ; the 
 tenant who purchases the tenant-right of a farm, 
 enters upon the land weighted with a debt which, in 
 many cases, he never gets free from. 
 
 10195. Mr. Shaw. — I believe you don't know the 
 south as well as you do the north? — No. It was 
 merely from making a survey of some estates, I ac- 
 quired my knowledge of the south. 
 
 10196. Do you know that on some estates there is 
 a privilege of selling ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. John Keed Noreis, examined. 
 
 10197. Chairman. — You are Secretary of the Cole- 
 raine Tenants' Association ? — Yes. 
 
 10198. Areyoua tenant farmer? — Yes. 
 
 10199. What size of farm do you hold?— About 
 120 statute acres. 
 
 10200. Who is your landlord ?-^The E«v. John 
 Lyle, 
 
 10201. Is that an estate on which tenant-right pre- 
 vails ? — It is. 
 
 10202. Is it tenant-right in its integrity ? — Not so 
 much now as it was. They are trying to do away with 
 it, but not exactly on this estate — on an estate on 
 which I formerly had a farm — Laurence's estate, which 
 adjoins it. 
 
 2 Y2 
 
 Mr. John R. 
 
 Nortis. 
 
S48 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Stpt. 28, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. John 
 E Korris, 
 
 10203. Yoti have notliing special to note in re- 
 ference to Mr. Lyle's estate ?— Nothing special. 
 
 10204. Where was Laurence's farm situated? — In 
 the parish of Ballyrashane, near Coleraiae. 
 
 10205. This was a farm you formerly held?— Yes ; 
 my brother now lives in it still. 
 
 10206. Did he buy it from you ?— No ; he got it 
 from my father — we divided it. 
 
 10207. Your father held that farm as well as the 
 one you occupy 1 — Yes. 
 
 10208. And you succeeded to one, and your brother 
 to the other ? — Yes. 
 
 10209. There is some matter you wish to mention in 
 connexion with this farm ? — Yes ; the lease fell. Mr. 
 Cromie died in spring, 1 874. 
 
 10210. What had been the term of the lease ?— It 
 was for twenty-five years and three lives, or whichever 
 would live the longest. 
 
 10211. When that fell in what happened ?— He 
 raised the rent. 
 
 10212. What had been the previous rent? — The 
 previous rent was £42. 
 
 10213. And what was it raised to? — It is now 
 £125. 
 
 10214. Was it raised at once from £42 to £125 ?— 
 Yes ; but we had a law suit. It was decided here 
 (i.e., in Derry), and it was after the law suit the rent 
 was raised. 
 
 10215. What was the law suit? — It was when he 
 raised the rent. It was too high ; and then we tried 
 to get remuneration, under the Ulster custom, from 
 him for the farm. We entered a suit against him, 
 and we gained it at the County Court Sessions ; but 
 then he appealed to the Assizes, and Chief Justice 
 Wliiteside, who tried the case there, gave a decision 
 against us, and said there was no tenant-right at the 
 end of the lease. 
 
 10216. That there was no tenant-right at the end 
 of the lease ? — No. 
 
 10217. Is there anything more you wish to mention 
 witl\ respect to that farm ? — My brother had to sign 
 this paper previous to taking the lease. The lease is 
 not taken yet ; but he had to sign this paper, and I 
 want to draw your attention to part of it : — " And, 
 further that, inasmuch as the lessee has paid no fine 
 on being admitted to the said demised premises, such 
 premises are not subject to any Ulster custom or 
 usage." My father paid £680 for this farm about 
 eight years before the lease fell ; but after Chief Jus- 
 tice Whiteside decided against us, my brother had to 
 rdgn that paper. He had to sign it or else leave the 
 farm. He had no alternative. The document goes on 
 to say : — "That the lessee shall not be entitled, on the 
 expiration of this demise, to any compensation or right 
 whatever in respect of any Ulster custom or usage." 
 
 10218. Who was the agent on Mr. Laurence's pro- 
 perty ? — He collected the rents himself. 
 
 10219. Is your brother there still? — He is holding 
 on there to see whether anything will turn up that he 
 could get a better place, or whether there will be any 
 change in the law. 
 
 10220. Are there other tenants on that property ? 
 — There are ; both in the county Derry and the county 
 Antrim. In the county Antrim there are five tenants 
 whose rents were raised fully as high as that. Here 
 is one : Samuel A. Dunlop holds 81a. 2r. ; Govern- 
 ment valuation of the holding is £92 5s. ; the value 
 of houses, £6 Ss. — that is, £98 10s. altogether; and he 
 has to pay £198 19s. 4o. rent for that. 
 
 10221. Was that rent raised at the dropping of a 
 lease ? — Yes. 
 
 10222. Was that at the same time as the other 
 case ? — Yes, at the same time exactly. Here is another : 
 James Dunlop holds 24a. 2r. 26p. ; the Government 
 -\-aluation, £29 5s. ; the value of hoiises, £4. He pays 
 £55 Is. '2(1. for his holding. 
 
 10223. Mr. Shaw. — Are these English statute mea- 
 sure? — Yes. 
 
 10224. Is the farm near a town ? — It is about a 
 mile and a half from Portrush, and four miles fi'om 
 
 Coleraine. The other three cases are as follows : — 
 Hugh Rankin holds 25a. 1r. 28p. ; Government 
 valuation, £33 ; value of houses, £3 ; rent, £66 16a 
 M. Andrew Rankin holds 23a. ; Government valua- 
 tion, £28 10s. ; value of houses, £2 10s. ; rent, £54 
 12s. M. Hugh Reed holds 39a. Or. 5p. ; Govern- 
 ment valuation, £40 5s. j value of houses, £3 15s. ; 
 rent, £94 l4s. M. 
 
 10225. Chairman. — We may take it that, in the 
 cases of Samuel Dunlop, James Dunlop, Hugh Rankin, 
 Andrew Rankin, and Hugh Reed, these figures you 
 have mentioned are correct from your own knowledge? 
 
 Yes. There is another farm I know of, and I got 
 
 this paper sent me about it. I know the person who 
 sent it. I have the original letter sent by the land- 
 lord. The man says : — 
 
 " There is a farm known to me on which there was the 
 interest in the lease for an unexpired term of twenty-five 
 years. This farm was sold to a solvent tenant ; but the 
 landlord would not accept him as a tenant without first 
 signing a document to the effect that he would have no 
 tenant-right at the end of the lease, and thereby breaking 
 up the sale ; and no other purchaser can be got since. The 
 names are — seller — John Steen, The Doey, Portstewart; 
 purchaser, James Neely, Crindle, Myroe ; landlord, Dr. 
 Hamilton, I Prince's-road, Liverpool. The transaction was 
 five years ago." 
 
 This is the landlord's letter referred to : — 
 
 '' 1 Prince's-road, Liverpool, 
 
 Januai'y 3rd, 1876. 
 
 " SiK, Mr. Steen has written to me telling me that you 
 
 are willing to become a purchaser of his farm. I hope you 
 understand that, when the lease of thirty-one years was 
 granted to him, it was so because the new Irish Land Act 
 did away with all claim for tenant-right at the end of that 
 term. You must understand, therefore, that whatever sum 
 you are paying now will not be allowed for at the end of 
 the lease, even supposing I accepted you as tenant, which 
 at present I am not prepared to do." 
 " Yours faithfully, 
 
 " Robert Hamilton 
 " Iilr. James Neely, Crindle, Myroe, N. Limavady." 
 The tenant has got no person to buy the farm since that. 
 
 10226. Since the landlord gave that notice? — ^es. 
 
 10227. That would be known I suppose? — He had 
 made the bargain and he had purchased the farm before 
 getting that notice, and when he got it he annulled the. 
 purchase. This took place about five years ago. 
 
 10228. The O'Conor Don.— How manyyeara were 
 unexpired ? — Twenty-five. 
 
 10229. Chairman. — Are there many cases in addi- 
 tion that you wish to mention ? — These are all the 
 cases I can now think of. 
 
 10230. Are you of opinion that as a general rule 
 there are many new restrictions placed on the Ulster 
 custom throughout the country in your neighbourhood? 
 — Yes, there very often are. 
 
 10231. Has this commenced since the passing of the 
 Land Act, or are these rules or restrictions that existed 
 long ago ? — Principally since the Land Act passed. 
 
 10232. The O'Conor Don.— What have been the 
 new restrictions since the Land Act ? — The rent has 
 been raised higher since the Land Act. That is one 
 thing that has interfered greatly with us. 
 
 10233. But did they not always raise the rent ? — Not 
 to such an extent as they have done since. 
 
 10234. Then it is a question of degree rather than 
 a question of change of absolute custom? — In our 
 neighbourhood we always counted that there was a 
 custom. 
 
 10235. What was that custom ?— Wj had liberty to 
 sell. There was a periodical vahiation, generally at 
 the dropping of a lease, but sometimes 1 have known 
 cases where it has been raised four times within these 
 thirty-four years, and there was no lease, and about 
 three years ago on the last lease that «^a« taken the 
 rent was raised a fourth time. 
 
 10236. Mr. Shaw. — Were there changes of tenancy 
 on each occasion ? — No sir, a continuing tenancy. 
 
 10237. Tlie O'Conor Don.— Both before and after 
 the passing of the Land Act ? — ^Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 349 
 
 10238. At what I may call the whim of the landlord? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10239. Without any particular reason for it? 
 
 There was no particular reason. 
 
 10240. Mr. Shaw. — -Were there improvements 
 made by the tenants ? — Very great improvements. 
 
 10241. And with these improvements was the rent 
 raised? — Yes, with them they are always raised; the 
 last rise was after the building of a comfortable new 
 dwelling house. 
 
 1 0242. Built by the' tenant ?— Yes sir, 
 
 10243. Chairman. — ^Was there any offer of a lease 
 on the dropping of the old lease ? — I don't remember 
 when the old lease did drop, it was beyond my memory. 
 Before that, from year to year, since my memory they 
 wanted leases at different times before the passing of 
 the Act, and since that they got leases. It is about 
 two years ago. 
 
 10244. The O'Conor Don.— For how long?— For 
 twenty-one years. 
 
 10245. And were there anj' convenants in that 
 lease against claiming the Ulster custom at the end of 
 it ? — I am not quite sure. 
 
 10246. Mr. Shaw. — This cvistom is alwaj^s acknow- 
 ledged after a lease on these properties ? — Yes. 
 
 10247. Chairman. — Have the improvements been 
 generally made by the tenants without assistance from 
 the landlords ? — Yes, generally. In some cases there 
 were a few slates given, but these were great excep- 
 tions, and very few cases. There were very few cases 
 in my district where the landlord gave any assistance, 
 all the improvements are made by the tenants. 
 
 10248. I see you suggest that an amendment is 
 required in the Land Act with respect to the word 
 " usages." You say it ought to be " usage " instead of 
 
 ■ usages 
 
 '?— Yes. 
 
 10249. Before the Land Act there were a great 
 many varieties of usages with respect to tenant-right ? 
 - — We understood that tenant-right was that a farmer 
 had always the right to sell to a solvent tenant without 
 restriction. 
 
 10250. Was there not very frequently a rule or 
 usage that the rent might be raised on a change of 
 tenancy or raised after a certain period of years? — 
 Yes ; generally at the expiration of a lease on the 
 estate where I hold it was revalued, but where it 
 was held from year to year it was whenever the agent 
 thought right it was raised. He just went through 
 it and put on the value. 
 
 10251. That was not a favourable rule or usage for 
 the tenants ? — We did not think it was but we could 
 not help it. 
 
 1 0252. You say the word " usage " should have been 
 made use of in the Land Act, would not that have 
 established that usage ? — As a general rule we con- 
 sidered that the custom was established over the 
 country. 
 
 10253. The O'Conor Don. — Against the raising of 
 rents? — No, sir. We did not consider that; not 
 against the raising of rents, but we considered that the 
 landlord had always the power to put on such rent as 
 he thought proper. In some cases, such as I have 
 mentioned, they have extinguished tenant-right alto- 
 gether. A particular farm about three weeks ago was 
 put tip for sale and an effort made to sell it, but it 
 could not be sold on account of the rent being so high. 
 
 10254. Chairman. — Do you think there were more 
 frequently changes made before the Land Act than 
 there have been since ? — I think there are more changes 
 since than during the same time before. 
 
 10255. Before that there was a rise of rent whenever 
 the landlord chose, but he did not put the power in 
 force so often ? — He did not put it in force so often, 
 but we had no power to prevent that. 
 
 10256. But in the letter you have read the landlord 
 says because the new Irish Land Act did away with 
 all claim for tenant-right ? — That is what he says, and 
 that prevented the sale going any further, that is in 
 reference to claims at the end of the lease. 
 
 ^ 10257. Mr. Shaw. — These new rules were all con- 
 sidered invasions of the tenant-right ? — Yes. 
 
 10258. That did not exist originally ?— No. 
 
 10259. They were brought in by the constant action 
 of the landlords ? — Yes. 
 
 10260. Chairman. — Besides your suggestion that 
 the word should be changed to " usage," you say that 
 you think nothing will be satisfactory except some 
 arrangement by which the rent may be adjusted 
 fairly ? — Yes, that is the difficulty. 
 
 10261. Have you any idea as to the best way of 
 doing that? — I think by local arbitrators — one ap- 
 pointed by the tenant, the other by the landlord. 
 
 10262. And to accept their arbitration as to a fair 
 rent ? — Yes ; the tenant's improvements not to be taken 
 into consideration. 
 
 10263. That the whole should be valued, and then 
 deduct the tenant's own improvements ? — Yes ; deduct 
 the value of the buildings, and that is what I consider 
 would be a fair way of arriving at the rent. 
 
 10264. When you speak of tenants' improvements 
 do you mean buildings or other improvements ? — Since 
 I commenced to farm it was generally buildings we 
 did on our farms. I think in no case should the 
 tenant's improvements be taken into consideration. 
 
 10265. Mr. Shaw. — No matter what they are?— 
 No. 
 
 10266. The O'Conor Don —They are chiefly build- 
 ings in the North ? —And reclamation of waste lands, 
 making roads and fences. The tenants do all the im- 
 provements in the district in which I live without 
 assistance from the landlord. 
 
 10267. Chairman. — You feel that whatever outlay 
 is made by the tenant should be secured to him alto- 
 gether, and not for a limited number of years ? — I think 
 they should go as tenant-right. 
 
 10268. Your idea is that there should be no power 
 of evicting except for nonpayment of rent ? — Yes. 
 
 10269. And in that case the tenant having power to 
 sell ?— Yes. 
 
 10270. Would you wish the power of raising the 
 rent to be confined to fixed periods ? — I think covering 
 over a period of time ; and it would be necessary to 
 take into consideration the price of produce, and it 
 would take a number of years before the rent could be 
 properly fixed. 
 
 10271. That is, it should be fixed according to the 
 averaged prices ? — I think when rent requires to be 
 fixed the prices should be looked over for a number of 
 years, and then the averaged prices of produce taken. 
 That would be, I think, a fair way of arriving at the 
 amount of rent. 
 
 10272. Do you think there is a satisfactory tribunal 
 now for deciding questions between the tenant who is 
 going out and his landlord, as to the value of his 
 tenant-right ? — I think in some cases it is not satisfac- 
 tory. 
 
 10273. Do you think it would be better to have a 
 fair arbitration ? — I think so. 
 
 10274. I think you said leases were not offered at 
 the dropping of the former leases ? — Generally they 
 were not, biit new leases are oftener offered, but not so 
 generally taken as before. 
 
 10275. They have been generally offered, but not 
 generally accepted ? — Yes. 
 
 10276. They are generally for twenty-one years'? 
 ■ — In some cases for thirty-one years. 
 
 10277. And do they generally have a clause against 
 tenant-right at the end of the lease ? — I never saw it 
 until I saw it in this agreement. 
 
 10278. You say that the leases were more stringent 
 since the passing of the Land Act? — I think their 
 object was to do away as far as possible with tenant- 
 right. That is as far as I can form an opinion. 
 
 10279. And they thought they had power to do so 
 by the agreement ? — Yes. 
 
 10280. Is that the only case you know barring the 
 operation of the Land Act ? — Yes ; that is the only one 
 I am thoroughly acquainted with. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880 
 
 Mr. John R, 
 
 Norris. 
 
350 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John R, 
 
 Norris. 
 
 1 028 1 . Do you observe that there are more improve- 
 ments made where there are leases than where there 
 are not 1 — I believe there are. 
 
 10282. You say that the landlords made no im- 
 provements before, and, therefore, there is no alteration 
 in that respect now ? — No alteration in that respect. 
 
 10283. Do you know of any cases of tenants having 
 purchased their own holdings 1 — Yes. I know of one 
 case convenient to where I am. 
 
 10284. What was the size of the holding ? — It was a 
 holding in addition to the farm the man held — about 
 twenty acres. 
 
 10285. He held another?— He held twenty acres 
 before, and his neighbour sold this farm to him ten or 
 twelve years ago. 
 
 10286. Purchased it out-right— the fee?— Yes. 
 
 10287. "Was there a house on it 1 — Yes. 
 
 10288. He lives on it ?— Yes. 
 
 10289. He holds other land in connexion with it? 
 — Yes, in connexion with it. 
 
 10290. Was that under the Landed Estates Court? 
 — I am not aware about that. I cannot answer that. 
 
 10291. Do you know whether he got an advance 
 anywhere ? — No, sir, he paid it himself. 
 
 10292. The O'Conor Don.— Was it before the 
 passing of the Land Act ? — It was. 
 
 10293. Chairman. — How has he got on? — He has 
 got on very well. The farm is large now, and he can 
 afford to labour better. 
 
 10294. What is the custom on these estates, you 
 know as to Grand Jury cess since the Land Act ? — I 
 
 know of no estate but one that pays part of the Grand 
 Jury cess. 
 
 - 10294a. Mr. Shaw. — It is all put on the tenants?— 
 Yes. 
 
 10295. Even after a change of tenancy? — ^Yes. 
 
 10296. Chairman. — Are there written agreements 
 to that effect ? — ^Yes, this paper shows that : — 
 
 ''And the lessee agrees with the lessor to pay said rent 
 on the dates and in the manner aforesaid over and above 
 all rates and taxes, whatsoever, including county cess, 
 except the landlord's proportion of poor fate, and that the 
 lessee pay all future and existing rates and taxes, as afore- 
 said for the time being, payable in respect of the said 
 demised premises except as aforesaid." 
 
 10297. Mr. Shaw. — ^What are the rates in your 
 country generally? — The poor rate varies from lOd 
 to Is. id. in the poumj. 
 
 10298. For the year? — Yes. 
 
 10299. The O'Conor Don. — What is the comity 
 cess ? — ^The county cess is over 20 pence. 
 
 10300. Mr. Shaw. — You have to pay the whole of 
 that, and the half of the poor-rate ? — Yes. 
 
 10301. The O'Conor Don. — And do you think the 
 tenants would prefer signing an agreement like that, 
 or having a small addition to their rent in proportion 
 to the average county cess that had existed for a 
 number of years before, and the landlord paying half? 
 — They would be more contented if the landlord 
 would pay half. 
 
 10302. Mr. Shaw. — No matter what it was ?— Yes. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Warnock. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Warnock examined. 
 
 10304. Chairman. — You have heard what has been 
 said by the last witness Mr. Norris ; do you concur 
 generally in the observations he has made as to the 
 general question ? — I do. 
 
 10305. The O'Conor Don.— Have you any 
 particular case as to which you can give us some infor- 
 mation ? — Yes. 
 
 10306. What are you?— A tenant farmer. 
 
 10307. How much land do you hold ?— About 50 
 statute acres besides flax mills. 
 
 10308. Under whom do you hold? — The Reverend 
 Marcus M'Causland of Dublin. 
 
 10309. In what county ? — County Deny. 
 
 10310. Near Coleraine ?— Yes. 
 
 10311. Tenant-right exists on that estate? — ^Yes, 
 to the fullest extent. The points I wish to bring 
 before the Commissioners are as to the establishment 
 of a proper basis for fair rent ; cases where there has 
 been artaiti-ary raising of rent, and the Bright clauses. 
 With regard to my own estate, I have no complaint 
 to make as to the working of the Land Act. My 
 landlord has accepted the working of it loyally. Of course 
 we think our rent is pretty high. 
 
 10312. Have you any particular case of grievance 
 to make about any estate ? — Yes, I have the case of a 
 number of tenants here. 
 
 10313. Who is the la-ndlord ?— Mr. Lawrence. 
 
 10314. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is that your landlord ? — 
 No sir. 
 
 10315. Who is your landlord ?— Mr. M'Causland, 
 of Dublin, formerly of Parsonstown. The first case 
 is that of John Jameson ; his rent at the time the 
 lease dropped onthedeathof Mr. Cromie was £9 15s. M., 
 and his rent to the present, £42 8c?. 2d., Government 
 valuation £16 15s. That farm was two-thirds re- 
 claimed at the tenant's expense. Nothing allowed by 
 the landlord. 
 
 10316. The O'Conor Don.— When did the lease 
 drop ? — The lease fell about five years ago. 
 
 10317. Had it been a long lease? — Yes, an old lease. 
 I have a list of cases of the same sort. 
 
 10318. Chairman.— Is this list in the same way 
 cases within yovir own knowledge ?— YeS. 
 
 10319. And these are correct statements of the 
 
 cases? — Yes, I believe they are all correct. The 
 figures are quite correct. "John Stirling; Knock- 
 inkeragh, rent to Mr. Cromie's death, £18; rent to 
 the present, X62 ; Government valuation, £33 15s. ; 
 expenditru-e in buildings, £300; drains, fences and 
 walls, £150 ; £3 only allowed by the landlord, John 
 Thomas Stirling, Cloghan ; rent to Mr. Cromie's death, 
 £15 17s.; rent to the present, £20; Government 
 valuation, £12 8s. ; nothing allowed for improvements 
 by the landlord. J ohn Thomas Stirling (for Knock- 
 inkeragh), rent to Mr. Cromie's death, £17 ; rent to 
 the present, £51 8s. ; Government valuation, £31 K 
 nothing allowed for improvements by the landlord. 
 James ParkhiU, Creenagli ; rent in 1874, £33 13s. 6d 
 rent in 1879, £45 14s. M. ; Government valuation, 
 £29, houses included ; expenditure in buildings, £275 
 in drains, roads and fences, £75 ; of this there was 
 advanced by the landlord, £50. David M'Mullen, 
 Lisnagalt ; rent in 1869, £8 ; rent in 1870 and 1880, 
 £14; Government valuation, £5 5s.; two parts re- 
 claimed at the tenant's expense ; landlord advanced 
 £8 5s. for slates." 
 
 10320. The O'Conor Don. — Are we to understand 
 that the increase of rent was made in all these cases 
 at the same time ? — ^At the same time. 
 
 10321. It was all one lease that di-opped? — It was 
 all one lease. It was Mr. Cromie's life that determined 
 the leases of a whole district of country as far as I 
 understand. Upon the point of fixing a fair rent we 
 are all of one mind that that should be by local arbi- 
 tration, provided that if the tenant's arbitrator and 
 the landlord's arbitrator cannot agree about an umpu'e, 
 a Government sworn vimpire should be called in. 
 
 10322. Mr. Shaw. — That would satisfy you 
 generally ? — Yes. 
 
 10323. Chairman. — That is the view of your asso- 
 ciation ? — Yes. 
 
 10324. Do you think it is the view of the associations 
 generally? — Generally through the country we are 
 pretty much of one mind upon that point. What we 
 complain of is that generally, from what I have known 
 from personal observation, where the tenants have 
 improved their farms by draining, and fencing, and 
 bringing them into a high state of cultivation, the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 351 
 
 tenant who has his farm in the best state suffers most 
 when the valuator comes, and the tenant who has 
 done least suffers little or nothing. Therefore, the 
 good tenant is unable to cope with the present diffi- 
 culty. In that case we say the tenant's improvements 
 are taken into the valuation, which we consider to be 
 unjust and unfair. 
 
 10325. Then it is fear of raising their own rents that 
 has prevented tenants continuing their improvements ? 
 — Yes ; these periodical arbitrary raising of rents. In 
 a number of cases where the rent has been raised 
 pretty high, the tenant has just had one choice — either 
 to pay his rent or leave. These are the words of the 
 landlord in the case of a tenant who owns about 
 seventy acres of land, mostly clay land, and o'\\'ing to 
 these wet yearshehasbeen reduced almost to destitution. 
 I had to indorse a bill to enable him to pay his last 
 rent. There was a decree taken out at the last 
 quarter sessions against him. 
 
 10326. Mr. Shaw. — ^And this arose through the 
 failure of the crops ? — Yes ; he is a most industrious 
 man. 
 
 10327. How is he in the occupation of the land ? — 
 He purchased the tenant-right of one farm for £300, 
 and another for £165, and another so far back as 
 thirty-six years ago, when land was not so high, for 
 about £70. He is the owner of the three farms in 
 one. Here is the landlord's reply to a letter asking 
 for an abatement: — "I beg to state in reply, that if 
 you cannot meet your engagements honestly, with my 
 agent, you had better give up your farm." 
 
 10328. Who is that^—Mr. Bennett, of Upperhill, 
 England, a rector. 
 
 10329. Did he tiy to sell? — He is just hanging on 
 to see whether anything will turn up in favour of the 
 tenant. I saw the crops off that clay farm, and owing 
 to last year's wet season, he had just about five small 
 stacks, that would average about fourteen cwt. each, 
 of oats off' that farm of seventy acres ; he has a quan- 
 tity oi flax and owing to last season's wet the flax has 
 not produced (I have extensive experience of that 
 myself), up to seventy-five per cent, of the yield it 
 formei'iy did. 
 
 10330. That is this year ?— Yes. 
 
 10331. Is that general'? — Yes; I have very ex- 
 tensive experience myself. I have two flax mills. 
 
 10332. The O'Conor Don.— Was the rent raised 
 on that land lately 1 — The rent was raised lately. I 
 think about eight years ago — perhaps less. 
 
 10333. Mr. Shaw.— On that clay farm?— Yes ; on 
 what we call a clay farm, and I may say, moreover, 
 that the valuator, whom I know is considered to be a 
 gentleman who values land at the very highest pitch, 
 is brought from Ballymena, a distance of over twenty 
 miles, to value the land. 
 
 10334. What is the rent of it? — I could not state 
 distinctly. 
 
 10335. The O'Conor Don.— Could you state the 
 rent per acre ? — No. I think, as far as I recollect, it 
 is a little over £1 the statute acre. 
 
 10336. Chairman. — ^Were there any abatements of 
 rent made in your district ? — Oh, yes ; my own land- 
 lord, I am happy to say, gave an abatement, and almost 
 unsolicited, last year. He threw off' 2s. 6d. in the 
 pound in the May rent, and gave an extension to the 
 1st December, and on the November rent, paid on 
 the 1st of March, he gave an abatement of 3s. in the 
 pound, and he paid that a,batement on the coimty cess 
 and poor rate. It was on the gross rent he gave the 
 abatement, not on the net rents. 
 
 10337. Are there many other landlords did the 
 same thing ? — No sir. I am sorry to say one of the 
 most extensive landlords in the neighbourhood, Mr. 
 Lyle did not. He and I had a discussion one evening, 
 and he came ovit distinctly, that he considered twenty 
 years was quite sufficient to recoup the tenant for his 
 expenditure and improvements on any farm, and that 
 he was talking with a landlord, and the landlord 
 jitated now that the tenant farmers had got their Land 
 Act, they (the landlords) would stand upon their 
 rights with them on every point, and he seemed to 
 
 sympathise with the sentiment when he expressed it. Sept. 28, 1880. 
 He is the largest owner in the North-east Liberties at „ ~ — 
 Coleraine. ^'- Thomas 
 
 10338. The O'Conor Don. — Are his rents high? — 
 I niay just say, we consider our improvements are to 
 some extent taken into account in the valuation, 
 although I may state also that our landlord gave us 
 the best valuator, or one considered the best valuator 
 in Ulster ; that is Mr. Nolan of this city (Derry). He 
 gave liim instructions not to value the tenants' improve^ 
 ments, but I could take any man over land, which 
 when I took it was not worth moi-e than 2s. 6d., and 
 any competent valuator would say it is worth 15s. or 
 20s. an aci-e now. 
 
 10339. From your own improvements ? — Solely. I 
 have laid out on my own holdiag in about twenty 
 years; exclusive of the mills, for I don't think the 
 mills touch the question here, somewhere over £800, 
 and that inside of twenty years. It is due to say that 
 I have the utmost confidence in the fair play of my 
 landlord, so far as his judgment can guide him. 
 
 10340. Have joii a lease? — No sir. I would not 
 accept a lease. 
 
 10341. Even of the mUls ? — No sir. I have not a 
 lease of any improvements I have made. I have laid 
 out altogether about £1,400 on improvements, and I 
 never asked a lease, and a lease was never offered. 
 
 10342. Chairman. — And you would not take it ? — 
 No, not even under these circumstances. 
 
 10343. You have confidence in your landlord ? — 
 Yes ; as far as that is concerned my landlord occupies 
 with his tenants more the place of a father with his 
 family, than a landlord with his tenants. 
 
 10344. Have you any fear that that state of 
 affairs may not continue beyond the present landlord? 
 — No ; the future landlord is a colonel in India now, 
 and I have the utmost confidence in the coming man. 
 My landlord introduced him to me in Coleraine, saying 
 he was likely to be our coming landlord, and that he 
 was likely to be as good as he was. I said I hoped 
 it would be a long time before he would become our 
 landlord, and my old landlord said tm-ning to the son, 
 " Warnock and I have always got on very well." He 
 and I were not of the one politics. " Oh," I said to 
 young Mr. M'Causland, "you know I am a Liberal." 
 " Now," said young Mr. M'Causland, " father, you 
 know, I would not allow any man to dictate to me 
 about that." And when they visited my place they 
 were very much pleased with it. 
 
 10345. Are there many other landlords like that? 
 — I was discussing the subject with Mr. Norris's 
 landlord, and on the whole, Mr. Lyl'e is .a good 
 landlord, but at the same time, he would like to 
 interfere somewhat with leasehold tenant-right. I 
 have heard his brother giving evidence in what 
 we call the celebrated case of Lawrence and Norris, 
 when he attempted to say that leasehold tenant- 
 right did not exist on the estate, but the county 
 court judge said his own evidence had established 
 what he had attempted to disprove before he left the 
 box. As to the Bright clauses, I have a pretty ex- 
 tensive acquaiatance. I can give the cases of two 
 farmers. One purchased a farm for £1,333 lis., 
 consisting of sixty-seven acres. When he purchased, 
 only eleven acres were reclaimed. He has since re- 
 claimed forty-eight acres. I have seen the crops off 
 that land, and they are I think the most luxuriant 
 crops I have ever seen. It was what we call a cut- 
 out or waste bog. He had forty-five bags of oats, of 
 eighteen stones each off three statute acres of land. 
 He purchased about nine years ago. His potatoes 
 were excellent, and he will shortly have that all most 
 productive land. He has it thoroughly drained, the 
 fields squared, he has sunk a fall himself. The next 
 is the case of a landlord in my own neighbourhood, 
 and when he and I were sometimes discussing the 
 Land Act, he told me what he was going to do with a 
 jjortion, about the same size of cut-out bog. He said 
 he was going to reclaim all that, " and I will cut 
 turbary and have it pay me as I go along, and I will 
 know what you fellows charge for reclaiming land." 
 
S52 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Stpt. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Warnock. 
 
 I said then (that Is six or seven years ago), " If it is 
 to be done bv yourself, it will never be done, and it 
 will not payVoTi." In six or seven years he has re- 
 claimed to my knowledge about twelve perches of that 
 land, and there it lies not worth 2s. Gd. an acre to 
 any man, but if it was in the hands of a thorough 
 good tenant farmer who could look after it, it would 
 be in a few years thoroughly good productive soil. 
 The next case is the case of tenants who have been 
 leaseholders. 
 
 10346. The O'ConorDon. — Perpetuity leases?— No, 
 sir ; leaseholders. The former tenants were not able 
 to hold on, and they went away, taking two years 
 rent with them. The incoming tenants paid one prear's 
 rent to get possession. They got the farm in a wretched 
 state. They reclaimed thirty acres out of a farm of 
 sixty-six acres: thoroughly drained it, squared the 
 fields, buUt houses, and squared the farm yard at a cost 
 of over £1,000. The fee-simple of the same fai-m cost 
 the landlord .£600 two years before this new tenant 
 settled in it. The present landlord has bought it, and 
 he has stated distinctly to the tenants that, so soon as 
 the lease expires, he will turn them out without a 
 penny compensation. He has stated so to me. With 
 regard to another farm on the same estate, when we 
 were talking over this matter of leasehold tenant- 
 right, he said : — " Warnock, I will not give a penny 
 tenant-right at the lapsing of a lease. If any tenant 
 makes improvements, he must do so at his own risk." 
 I quoted the case of a tenant, one of the best cul- 
 tivators in our neighbourhood, and said : " There is a 
 man whose improvements you know. You see what 
 he has done in the improvement of that farm ; he paid 
 £150 for the lease to the landlord. Will you turn 
 that man out without a penny 1" " Indeed, I will," 
 said he. " Well," said I, " I hope the law wUl be 
 such that you won't get doing it;" and his reply was : 
 " By my soul, I will put him out, and I will tell him 
 it was because you challenged me on the point." 
 
 10347. The O'Conor Don.— What is the name of 
 the landlord f — Captain Giveen. 
 
 10348. Would he have power, under the present 
 Land Act, to turn him out t — Yes, at the expiration 
 of the lease, according to Chief Justice Whiteside's 
 decision. He might elect to go in for compensation 
 for improvements, if he choose ; but the landlord has 
 power to turn him out of the farm. 
 
 10349. Would it not be in the power of the tenant 
 to elect to go for compensation for improvements, re- 
 clamation, and buildings 1 — Yes. 
 
 10350. And then the landlord would be obliged to 
 pay him whatever he had expended in that way ? — ■ 
 That is, for what is unexhausted, according to the 
 opinion of the Chairman. At the present moment it 
 has almost put a stopper on high cultivation. 
 
 10351. Chairman. — High cultivation comes under 
 the head of unexhausted manures and tillage ; but the 
 other is permanent improvement 1 — There is what we 
 call reclamation — that it has stopped to a large ex- 
 tent. 
 
 10352: That he would have a right to claim for? — 
 It is a very bitter thing to go into court, and not very 
 profitable. 
 
 10353. The O'Conob Don.— At all events, the pre- 
 sent Act proAddes that a tenant who has made im- 
 provements in the way of reclamation or the erection 
 of permanent buildings upon a holding on a lease 
 made before the passing of the Act, would be 
 entitled to claim compensation for such improve- 
 ments 'i — Yes. 
 
 10354. So that the landlord could not turn him out, 
 as he said, without a shilling 1 — That is quite true. 
 That is, if a tenant would fight him on the tenant-right 
 principle, he might put him out without giving him a 
 shilling. The other case is a case where a tenant pur- 
 chased under the Bright clauses, and this point is the 
 one I wish to bring particularly forward, for it is very 
 important with regard to Ulster— that mider the 
 Bright clauses reclamation of waste land goes on at a 
 rapid speed, and the result is we can produce the best 
 flax fibre that goes into the market, so that the benefit 
 
 acts in two ways. It is good for the manufacturer of 
 Ulster as well as for the farmer himself. I know my- 
 self that, on this farm which the tenant purchased 
 under the Bright clauses, there is a large portion 
 of reclaimed land, and when that land was put 
 down in llax, it produced the best fibre that came to 
 my mill. 
 
 10355. The O'Conok Don.— The fact of the man 
 being the owner of the soil induced him to treat the 
 farm so well that it produced the best crops 1—No, 
 even the highest cultivated land is to a large extent 
 exliausted flax land, but what is reclaimed, when it 
 undergoes a thorough course of cultivation, contains 
 soil which has never been exhausted by flax cultiva- 
 tion, and hence it is best for flax growing. 
 
 10356. That is the newly reclaimed land is thebest 
 for flax ?— Yes. 
 
 10357. And the tenant who reclaims gets the best 
 of it?— Yes. 
 
 10358. He gets the new land, and he takes the lest 
 out of it ? — Quite so. 
 
 10359. Mr. Shaw. — When was this improvement 
 made in reclaiming the land, was it before the passing 
 of the Land Act ? — He purchased the land after the 
 passing of the Land Act. 
 
 10360. The judge must look into the time the man 
 has had the land, and whether he thinks he has been 
 repaid ; that is in the Act ? — Well I think it should be 
 out of it with all respect for you. 
 
 10361. The O'Conob Don. — ^This tenant you say- 
 purchased under the Bright clauses ? — Yes. 
 
 10361a. And I suppose he got a certain proportion 
 from the Board of Works ? — Yes. 
 
 10362. Had he any diSiculty in makingthe purchase] 
 — ^Well I think not ; wo hold the opinion whether 
 rightly or wrongly that the Church Temporalities 
 Commissioners are more easily dealt with as to the 
 money than where purchases were made under the 
 Bright clauses ; again these tenants, I speak of two of 
 them, have sold their title under the Bright clauses, 
 and there was a difficulty for they could not convey. 
 It had to be purchased out of the Landed Estates 
 Court. 
 
 10363. Tliey had to pay back the whole of the 
 money they had borrowed ? — Yes, and the Landed 
 Estates Court paid them back whatever capital had 
 been exhausted in the meantime. One of the results 
 is that on this farm I speak of, there is a large dwelling 
 house — it is a farm of about seventy acres — and 
 altogether the farm-house, farm-stead and yard will 
 cost about £900, and I must say it is almost marvellous 
 to see the crops now compared with what I have 
 seen. 
 
 10364. -Chaibman. — That is the good effect of being 
 the owner in fee ? — Yes, that is it. 
 
 10365. A feeling of security? — Yes. 
 
 10366. The O'Conob Don.— Do you think many of 
 the tenants in your neighbourhood would be able to 
 pay one-fourth of the purchase money ? — I don't think 
 generally they would be, perhaps I should rather say 
 that at the present rent they would not care verymuch 
 for the purchase, for we consider the scale of rent pretty 
 high owing to agricultural depression ; foreign compe- 
 tition, and the cost of production. 
 
 10366a. You don't think they would be very anxious 
 to buy at the present rents ? — I don't suppose on the 
 present rents they would be, I speak for myself, and I 
 don't think it would be safe. 
 
 10367. Chairman.— That is they wish to dunmish 
 the number of years purchase ? — That is it. It would 
 be quite too heavy at the present rent. There is one 
 point that our association wish to dwell upon ; that is 
 with regard to any ftiture legislation, that where the 
 landlord interferes with free sale of the tenant-right the 
 tenant should be empowered by law to claim the full 
 value of his tenant-right from the landlord. I might 
 mention a case in point to illustrate this. I" know a 
 widow who has been prevented by the landlord from 
 selling her tenant-right, she liad no family, the conse- 
 quence was she could not bring the tenant-right into 
 the market, and the landlord kept her hanging on ior 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 a number of years until at last slie had to yield and 
 take whatever he gave her ; she got some little cottier 
 house and a garden to live in, with a small annuity ; 
 she was entirely prevented getting her tenant-right 
 althouo-h it was decided in the same estate by the judge 
 of assize here that tenant-right existed as an article in 
 the market. That was on the Clothworkers' estate 
 which Sir Harvey Bruce purchased. In a case 
 on the Downhill estate where the tenant wished to 
 dispose of his tenant-right, a rule was established for 
 five years purchase : the tenant had no right to go 
 into the market, and when this tenant and his cousin 
 agreed to pass the farm from one to the other Sir 
 Harvey agreed to pass it first into his own hands and 
 then into the cousin's hands, but in doing so he raised 
 not only the rent 2.5 per cent., but he raised the tenant- 
 richt price 25 per cent.— that was from £32 to £40 
 rent, and he charged the incoming tenant eight times 
 £5 of tenantright in. addition. 
 
 10368. Mr. Shaw. — Is his property in your neigh- 
 bourhood 1 — Yes. 
 
 10369. Tenant-right is recognised on it 1 — Tenant- 
 right is decided to exist on the Clothworkers' estate 
 which he purchased. 
 
 10370. But on his own estate is it established 1 — 
 On the first year of the Land Act he got an estate rule 
 established as a permanent rule. 
 
 10371. What is thatl — Five years purchase. 
 
 10372. Without anything for improvements? — 
 Without anything for improvements — if the tenant has 
 made no improvements he gets five years, and if he has 
 laid out over £1,000 iu improvements he only gets five 
 years. 
 
 10373. Does he increase the rent on the falling in 
 of leases ? — I cannot say that, for there ai-e very few 
 leases. 
 
 10371. Well on a change of tenancy? — Almost 
 invariably the rent is increased. 
 
 10375. Has there been any general revaluation or 
 raising of rent? — Not a general valuation, but Sir 
 H. Eruoe raised the rents himself. There was a 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 ■W'aniock. 
 
 general revaluation over the Clothworkers which he Sejii.-is.i&so. 
 purchased. 
 
 10376. The rent has been raised considerably ?- 
 Considerably. 
 
 10377. That will eflfecttenant-right? — Considerably. 
 
 10378. Have there been any sales? — Not latterly ; 
 we were having Mr. Mooney, the auctioneer, up, but 
 in all cases, even after the decision of the Judge here, 
 he has entirely set himself against the sale of tenant- 
 right, the tenant juust hand tho tenant-right in to Sir 
 Harvey ; he goes into the market and raises whatever 
 he can on the tenant-right. 
 
 10379. Was that the rule before he bought?— No, 
 sir, in no case. 
 
 10380. How long has thisfive yearsrulebeenin opera- 
 tion on his estate ? — It was probably in Magherafelt he 
 put it, that it had interwoven itself into the custom of 
 the estate, and 1 remember distinctly that tlio County 
 Court Judge turned on the tenant farmers who had 
 been brought up as witnesses in the case, and reproved 
 them for the unmanly way in which they gave their 
 evidence. He was so severe on the way they gave 
 their evidence that Sir Harvey got up next day to 
 apologise, saying he had not interfered with the way 
 his tenants gave their evidence. 
 
 10381. There is no record of it ? — No, but it is now 
 established in the Land Court, and all the tenants 
 submit to it. 
 
 10382. Are they submitting to this rule on the other 
 estate ? — No, sir, they are not ; the auctioneer told me 
 a short time siuce that Sir Harvey's agent was there, 
 saying there would be no such thing as sale of tenant- 
 right allowed, and that the auctioneer bid it in himself 
 at what he considered the tenant-right value, and he 
 said Sir Harvey had handed the money over to the 
 tenant, but after all there was not what you call free sale. 
 
 10383. And the tenants would be deterred? — Yi-s, 
 they would not purchase tenant-right with a law suit 
 along with it. 
 
 10384. They think it is enough to buy a farm with- 
 out buying a law suit along with it? — That is it. 
 
 Mr. H. E. Morrison (with Dr. Madill, Garvagh Tenants' Association), examined. 
 
 10385. Mr. Shaw. — ^Where do you live? — Money- 
 dig, in the half barony of Coleraine. 
 
 10386. You were a tenant farmer on Lord Water- 
 ford's estate ? — Yes. 
 
 10387. You purchased your holding 1 — Yes. 
 
 10388. Are you satisfied ^vith the purchase? — No 
 mistake about it. 
 
 10389. You gave a high rate of purchase? — Yes, 
 a high rate, rather than risk a change in the landlord. 
 I was glad to do it. 
 
 10390. How many acres have you? — 118 acres and 
 six acres of bog. 
 
 10391. What was the rent that you held under ? — 
 £85 5s. 8d. 
 
 10392. What rate of purchase did you give for it ? — 
 Twenty-nine years. The bog was a separate purchase. 
 There was no nominal value put upon the bog, the rent 
 >vas upon the land. 
 
 10393. It was good land I suppose ? — It is medium 
 quality, the Ordnance valuation of land and buildings 
 IS £87 10s. 
 
 10394. You had held it for some time ? — Yes. 
 
 10395. Had you purchased the tenant-right of it? — 
 [ purchased a small portion, i)art of it was my father's 
 farm, and part my brother's, and I purchased a small 
 portion myself, about one-fourth. 
 
 10396. Y/ere there any difficulties about carrying 
 out the purchase with the Board of Works ?— In my 
 own case I had not much difficulty, inasmuch as my 
 Holding was made into a separate lot, and the convey- 
 j,noe got soon after the sale. 
 
 10397. But in the cases where there were several 
 tenants joined in a lot there was a great deal of 
 difficulty in arranging the lots ! — No. 
 
 10398. In what way then ? — It was something with 
 the Board of Works and the Treasury. 
 
 Mr. IT. E. 
 Morri.son and 
 
 10399. They were got through in the end?— With Dr. Madill. 
 difficulty ; they had to be got through at all hazards. 
 
 10400. The O'CoNOR Don. — Did it cost much to 
 get over the difficulty ? — The greatest cost was in the 
 delay. The property was sold in 1871, and some of 
 the loans from the Board of Works were not given 
 iintil March, 1874, and some of the tenants had money 
 lying -w'aiting from day to day and from week to 
 week, and perhaps had to pay interest and were charged 
 interest at the rate of 5 per cent, by the seller. 
 
 10401. By the seller of the property? — From the 
 time the Treasury hauled up the Board of Works for 
 proposing to make loans to tenants who had purchased, 
 instead of those who were about to purchase, it 
 appeared to me every possible olistruction was thrown 
 in the way of the tenants completing their purchase, 
 and if I remember aright there had to be a short Act of 
 Parliament passed to enable the Board to make the 
 loan. 
 
 10402. You know tenants who have purchased ? — 
 I know what is in my neighbourhood, but there is a 
 large portion near Limavady with which I am not 
 acquainted. 
 
 10403. What is the result of these purchases — are 
 the tenants generally as well satisfied as you are ? — I 
 should think so, they are all generally well satisfied. 
 
 10404. Are they improving their properties much 
 since ? — A good many of them are, there are two of 
 them not getting on well. 
 
 10405. Were there causes for that ?— They were in 
 back water before. 
 
 10406. Mr. Shaw. — But generally speaking they 
 are doing well and satisfied with their purchase ? — No 
 mistake about that. 
 
 10407. And you think such a process would be 
 generally acceptable to the tenants if they could buy 
 
 9.Z 
 
bSi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sq>t. 28, 1880 
 
 Mr. H. E. 
 Morrison and 
 Dr. MadiU. 
 
 their toldings ?— If they could do it ; but I am very 
 much afraid about being able to carry it otit to auy 
 extent. I take it you would look to fair play between 
 landlords and tenants, and where you would get one 
 tenant with money, perhaps on a square footing and 
 with a little money past him, you will get more that 
 are behind, that is my knowledge of the country, and 
 as a general rule I think if this whole county of Derry 
 was made into lots for sale to-morrow, you would not 
 get three lots in the whole county with three tenants 
 on each that would come up to the ideal standard set 
 up by the Lords of the Treasury. 
 
 10408. Who could give their portion of the money? 
 — N"o ; who would come up to the ideal standard. 
 Here is the ajQfidavit printed for the Board of Works, 
 it was prepared by the Treasury, and every tenant 
 who wanted a loan whether he was right or wrong 
 had to swear that or want. 
 
 1 0409. What are the principal provisions? — Clauses 
 against alienation, subletting, or subdividing. 
 
 10410. Would you object to these? — No; except 
 alienation. 
 
 10411. Not against alienation if the Treasury was 
 'well secured? — I would make a proviso for that. 
 Instead of the alienation clause in the Land Act and 
 its stringent penalties, make it that no lands thus 
 bought shall at any time be security for any money, 
 or for the payment of any other than the loan from 
 the Board. I would apply this to all lands whether 
 tenant-right or fee-simple ; the costs of bonds, mort- 
 gages, and the sales of small properties, would soon 
 swamp a number of them. In my oj)inion landlords 
 have as much need to be put from borrowing as 
 tenants, for they do borrow, many of them, in style. 
 
 10412. You think the landlords should be limited 
 as well as tenants? — Yes. 
 
 10413. What would you do with the land? — Let it 
 go to those who have the money. 
 
 10414. But the people who have the money would 
 not like perhaps to be land owners ? — Well it would 
 lowei- the value of the land. What I consider is one 
 of the causes why land is too high is the facility for 
 borrowing money. A man with a £1,000 goes and 
 borrows three or four times as much, and as he has to 
 pay interest, in a little time he will be little more 
 than a .small rentcharge on the land. 
 
 1 04 1 .5 . But people with a couple of thousand pounds 
 in business go to fifteen times what that can demand. 
 Would you extend the same principle to business ? — 
 No, that is outside this inquiry. 
 
 10416. Why make the distinction; if a man has 
 property and thinks he can bori-ow why should you 
 prevent him ? — I consider that the credit in the mer- 
 cantile part of the community is too great. It is a 
 question I don't want to go into, but I think there is 
 too much credit in all ranks of business from the manu- 
 factiu-er down to the small shopkeeper, in a country 
 village or place ; it is credit from top to bottom. 
 
 10417. Would you compel the landlord at present 
 in debt to sell until he paid his debts? — I would, but 
 give him a reasonable time. 
 
 10418. And after he jjaid the debts to keep the 
 balance? — Yes; and do what he liked with it. 
 
 10419. And you would not allow the tenant tn 
 boiTow any part of the money on the tenant-right 1 — 
 Not on the security of the property. 
 
 10420. Yoxi would allow borrowing outside the 
 property to any extent ? — Yes ; but not giving a mort- 
 gage on it or a bond. 
 
 10421. But if the costs of these bonds and mort- 
 gages and conveyances were reduced, as they might be, 
 and as they are in other countries, you would have no 
 objection? — I would still have an objection to tenants 
 borrowing. 
 
 10422. Or large people either ? — Yes. It has been 
 cast up against peasant proprietors that where they 
 have had an opportunity like most landlords they soon 
 begin to think themselves gentlemen and immediately 
 go into debt. 
 
 10423. Wouldn't the result of your Kysteni be, that 
 
 you would prevent a man borrowing on what is per 
 feet security and allow him to borrow on imperfect 
 security, and instead of getting the money at four per 
 cent, he would have to pay six or seven ; wouldn't that 
 be all the worse for the community ? — In the long run 
 I think not. 
 
 10424. Your view is there is too much borrowin" 
 of money ? — Yes. 
 
 10425. You would prevent it by an Act of Parlia- 
 ment ? — Yes. 
 
 10426. And you borrowed yourself from the Board 
 of Works?— Yes. 
 
 10427. You violated your own theory? — No. 
 
 10428. Why did you do so? — Because I might as 
 well do it as not. I say " security for any money, or 
 security for any other than the loan from the Board." 
 
 10429. Why allow that? — Because it is the only 
 means of settling this question. 
 
 10430. Would you allow the landlords to boiTow 
 from the Board ? — What for. 
 
 10431. If a tenant borrows to buy surely a land- 
 lord may borrow if he wants it on a landed property, 
 you would not confine the luxury to the tenant?— If 
 he is going to lay out the money on the property, in 
 improvements. 
 
 10432. If he is would you allow him then to 
 borrow ? — Yes ; the same as the tenant. 
 
 10433. Don't you think it would be a very difficult 
 duty you would throw on somebody ; to test all these 
 cases. Would it not be better to leave people to do 
 as they like in their own case ? — No. 
 
 10434. The other is only theory?— Yes. 
 
 10435. And you don't practice it yourself, you 
 think these tenants are doing well on the property 
 they bought ? — No mistake about that. 
 
 10436. And you think it would be well to extend 
 the facilities? — I do. 
 
 10437. And you would have laws made that wonld 
 suit the tenants? — Provided they did not injure the 
 landlords' interest, an Act of Parliament requires care 
 in preparation, laws to afford facilities to tenants 
 wishing to jDurchase. 
 
 10438. They don't always do that ? — I was present 
 in the Landed Estates Coiu-t when the Marqnis of 
 Watei-ford's property was before the examiner for 
 settlement of the rental, Mr. Donnell turned over the 
 list, and lot three was one tenant's holding, and he 
 said that that was a bad way to have it that few- 
 people would like to go into court and bid against the 
 tenant supposing he wanted to purchase the farm. 
 There is a holding, for instance, of Bobert Haslett, 
 which should sell for £1,800, and probably if £1,200 
 was bid the judge would confirm the sale, and the 
 solicitor having carriage of the sale said he was pre- 
 pared to take chance for that, and it turned out after- 
 wards he had things pretty well prepared to take his 
 chance. ' 
 
 10439. You said you knew some other properties? 
 — Yes ; the Mercers' and the Ironmongers' estates. 
 
 10440. They are in your neighbourhood? — Yes, 
 just beside me. 
 
 10440a. Tenant-right is admitted on these estates?— 
 To a certain extent. On the Ironmongers' they are 
 trying to limit it — and have been for some time— to 
 ten years rent. 
 
 10441. Is that since the Land Act? — Before it. 
 
 10442. Have they succeeded ? — I could not tell. I 
 was in the Land Court in Coleraine about 1874, and 
 there was a case before the chairman there from Mr. 
 Simpson's neighbourhood (Aghadoey), When that 
 case was decided the agent says, " Am I to understand 
 your worship rules there is no tenant-right estab- 
 lished." " Indeed," said the chairman, " you are to 
 ^lnderstand no sirch thing. There is a very important 
 point of law to be settled before that is decided yet." 
 And since then, as far as I hear, they have been trying 
 to settle every case that comes out of court, but I don't 
 understand what they do. 
 
 10443. Is it usual to raise the rents on a change of 
 tenancy 'J-Not with the London Companies. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 355 
 
 10444. On the falling in of a lease do they raise 
 the rents ?— Yes ; but there are hardly any leases upon 
 these estates. I think there are only four or five on the 
 Ironmongers'. 
 
 10445. Arojthe rents moderate on the Ironmongers' t 
 — I -would say they are fair. I would not complain 
 of them ; but they are very near the time for revising 
 the valuation. The usual term of twenty-one years is 
 nearly up, and they will be trying to raise it like other 
 people as much as they can. 
 
 10446. There is a periodical valuation ? — Yes, every 
 twenty-one years with the London Companies. 
 
 10447. Do they employ a valuator 1 — The Mercers 
 send over one of their own people, a land surveyor and 
 valuator, to measure and value their estate, and I am 
 clearly of opinion that no Englishman, however, 
 competent to value land in England, is competent to 
 value it in Ireland. Then they got the elder Mr. 
 Nolan here, but he was not able to go, and I think they 
 got his son. I don't know whether he went over the 
 whole estate or not ; but the tenants were never 
 satisfied whether they got Mr. Nolan's valuation, or 
 what valuation they got, there was a big row about it. 
 
 10448. The Company put on a rent themselves? — 
 Yes ; and followed neither of the valuations. 
 
 10449. Are you acquainted with any case of raising 
 rent in which the raising injured the tenantright and 
 eat it away 1 — I think all these rents that have been 
 put on since the Land Act have injured the tenant- 
 right. 
 
 10450. On what estates? — On what was sold of 
 the Marquess of "Waterford's and the Mercers' Com- 
 pany. I think the rents are too high. 
 
 10451. You think it was high enough before? — I 
 do. I '.^^as present in Magherafelt Land Court in 
 October, 1872, when one of the new purchasers 
 named Gilmore had an ejectment against a man named 
 Kennedy, on a part of Lord Waterford's estate. 
 
 10452. He was a tenant who bought and let to 
 tenants ? — He bought portion of a townland, and when 
 the case came on for hearing it turned out that the 
 landlord did not want the tenant dispossessed if they 
 agreed about the rent. The first thing he had done 
 after he got the property was to send the highest 
 valuator in the neighboiu-hood to revalue it, and to put 
 on a rent, and this was a very high rent ; but, before, 
 when it was under the Marquess of Waterford, it was 
 a very low rented land. The tenants were all dis- 
 satisfied and refused to pay the new rent, and he took 
 one or two of them into the Land Coxirt by ejectment. 
 He did not require to give a notice to quit as the lease 
 had fallen previously. I was summoned as a witness, 
 and it was proposed to refer the rent to the valuator 
 who had valued it and myself, and I asked the Chair- 
 man what would be the basis of the valuation, and we 
 did not seem to understand each other. He thought 
 my ideas were wild, as he said, and the case went on. 
 After it had gone on a little I proposed that the 
 Chairman himself should appoint a valuator, and he 
 considered a little, and said he would send the elder 
 Nolan, and swear him before going. The decision he 
 got the registrar to enter in the book was — he is to 
 put on a rent that is fair between landlord and tenant, 
 and such as will not infringe or militate against the 
 Ulster custom usually called tenant-right. 
 
 10453. Do you think that was a fair entry? — I 
 think nothing could be fairer. 
 
 10454. That protected the tenant's interest ? — Yes. 
 
 10455. What was the result ? — A high rent; higher 
 than its value. 
 
 10456. You think it militated in the end against 
 tenant-right ? — I have no doubt about it in that 
 case. 
 
 10457. Mr. Nolan seems to be very often employed ? 
 ■■ — Yes, he is a very respectable man, I believe he is 
 the most respectable valuator in the county. 
 
 10458. How would you settle the rents? — It is 
 very difficult to define how they are to be settled. 
 Another case, this same purchaser had most of the 
 tenants in the Land Court about a year after ; when 
 
 they were under the Marquess of "Waterford they had Sei>t. 2s, isso. 
 bog at a nominal sum. This settlement of rent was — - 
 
 referred to Mr. Nolan, and it was suggested he should m^;. ?o„ aa^ 
 take into consideration the want of these bogs which Dr. Madill. 
 they now had to pay for at £4 an acre. Those who 
 did not rent the bog had to go twice as far and pay 
 high rent as well. The Chairman instructed Mr. Nolan 
 to take into consideration the want of the bog and 
 everything in the case, and the result was again a 
 high rent, a rent above the value. I was speaking to 
 Mr. Nolan about his taking into consideration the 
 want of the bog, and he said he had never taken it 
 into consideration at all. 
 
 10459. Was he not instructed to do so? — He was, 
 but he was not present in court, and how he got 
 his instrvTctions I could not tell. That was his 
 reply, that he never took it into consideration at all. 
 
 10460. It should make a considerable difference ? 
 — The want of this bog was of itself a big rise of rent. 
 
 10461. Have you any other cases? — I think there 
 are some cases of arbitrary eviction. 
 
 10462. The O'Conor Don. — Before you leave this 
 case can you tell have any holdings been sold since 
 the increase of the rent? — One. 
 
 10463. How many years' purchase was given for 
 it? — I think the price was about £170, and the rent 
 £11 a year, that was abovit sixteen years' purchase. 
 
 10464. Mr. Shaw. — Is that a high or a low price 
 compared with other sales on other properties in 
 the neighbourhood ? — There was one case came before 
 the court and was decided by the Chairman in the same 
 townland, on the same propei'ty, about two years ago, 
 and it was finally decided here before Chief Baron 
 Palles on appeal. The Chairman awarded £300 for a 
 holding of 14a. and 13p. 
 
 10465. TheO'CoNOK Don. — Is this a case of eviction? 
 — The tenant was turned out and this is a land claim. 
 The 11a. 3r. and 30p. were valued at £7 15s. in the 
 Ordnance valuation. The difierence between 11a. 
 3r. and 30p., you may say 12a., is owing to the 
 change in a field the tenant had got since the tene- 
 ment valuation was made, but it would be rated 
 at about the same rate — that would be about £9 
 for the fourteen acres and the buildings £1. The 
 buildings were in a very poor and dilapidated state, 
 and the farm was not in a very good condition. The 
 Chairman in Coleraine awarded £300 and on appeal 
 the Chief Baron reduced it by £40 for dilapidation, 
 and allowed £40 in addition, so that he left it the 
 same as before — £300, for the fourteen acres at about 
 £9 value, so you can imagine the land was not very good 
 while the buildings were only propped up and valued 
 at £1. This same individual, the landlord of this 
 small lot, tried to limit the price of tenant-right to ten 
 years' purchase. This was the first case we ever had, 
 he had settled with a widow woman and said he would 
 giveher twelve years butthathe wouldonly give the rest 
 ten. It was before that the previous farm had been sold, 
 and when selling that previous farm he refused the best 
 tenant on the property as purchaser, he would not 
 allow him to have it. 
 
 10466. Ml-. Shaw. — Was it about the price they 
 differed ?— No. 
 
 10467. He refused through some personal motive? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10468. Did he succeed in limiting the tenant-right 1 
 — No, this case I refer to was decided by the Chair- 
 man, and that ruled it. 
 
 10469. The O'Conok Don. — What was done with 
 that holding ? — It was divided into two, and there was 
 a gentleman living beside it and he got part of it where 
 it adjoins his garden. 
 
 10470. Did he pay the fine that was put on ? — I 
 believe so, and also a share of the expenses. There is 
 another tenant living beside it who has a public house, 
 and he had married a wife who had a small farm under 
 the Mercers Company, which he sold, and agreed to 
 take the other part. The two just took it at the price 
 awarded by the court, and I believe paid £50 or £51 
 for expenses into the bargain. 
 
 2Z2 
 
Sofi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sei>t. 2S, 18S0. 
 
 W-. H. E. 
 Morrison Piul 
 Dr. Madill. 
 
 10471. Are tliere any otlier cases that jou wisli to 
 refer to ?— There are several cases of arbitrary eviction. 
 
 10172. Mention some of them ?— There was a case 
 of Eanldn against Connell, a widow. 
 
 10473. Mr. Shaw.— On theMarquessof "Waterfords 
 property ? — Yes, near Garvagh. 
 
 10474. When was that ?— About two or three years 
 
 a^o. 
 
 ^10475. It was not a case for non-payment of rent 1 
 So. There was a small portion of bog in the centre 
 of the farm included in the Landed Estates Court ren- 
 tal or by the seller which made the woman's farm 
 twenty-seven acres. This small portion of bog was in the 
 centre, it had been over-cut bog. They sent some per- 
 son to draw off tliis, and the tenant refused to allow 
 it, and complained to the landlord, and the landlord 
 said to summon him and she did so ; the case was 
 before the Petty Sessions three days in succession wait- 
 ino- to get the landlord to give evidence upon the case, 
 inasmuch as the party who had been drawing bog off 
 said he was authorized by the landlord. The case was 
 decided against the man who was drawing the bog, 
 and the landlord was asked whether in setting the farm 
 he had excluded this piece of bog out of the bulk, and 
 he said no, and he was asked was it excluded by the 
 Landed Estates Court, and his ansv/er was the same, 
 that it was not, and the man was fined in a nominal 
 sum, and the landlord was told that if he wished to 
 appeal the fine would be raised to £1. He requested 
 that that should be done, but instead of appealing to 
 the next quarter sessions, when I began to inquire 
 about it, I found they were going to take another 
 way ; having served a notice to quit, they brought an 
 ejectment, and the Chairman decided when the land 
 claim came before him that the tenant should sell, and 
 as I understand she tried to sell, but no one came to 
 bid as they don't like to interfere in a case like that. , 
 The son was entitled to part of the father's efiects and 
 he bid himself, and they went before the Chairman 
 again, but the Chairman would not recognise the son 
 as a buyer, and it was finally settled by an award 
 from the Chairman, I think he gave £320 or £300. 
 
 1047G. Which the landlord paid ?— Which the land- 
 lord paid. 
 
 10477. And tenant-right exists on that property? — 
 Yes. 
 
 10478. It is very unusual for an ejectment to be 
 brought in such cases as are called capricious evictions 1 
 — Sometimes it is done. 
 
 10480. Do you know of any? — The agent for a 
 small estate, himself the purchaser of a lot beside me, 
 was in the Land Court in Magherafelt, where he had 
 taken a tenant of his own — the first case tried there. 
 There had been some settlement made, whereby a 
 tenant under Mr. Orr was awarded £50, and the land- 
 lord, as I understand, should have paid it, and there 
 was some demurring about the payment of this, and 
 when Gilmore's case against Kennedy was settled by 
 referring it to Mr. Nolan, the Chairman said, in re- 
 gard to the payment of this £50, issue a writ, I am 
 not sure whether he said if it is not jiaid within three 
 days, and walked out. The agent sat awhile, and, as 
 he got up, said, I will tell you what I'll do ; I'll give 
 him notice to quit, and put him out. I'll learn tenants 
 to go to law with their landlords. 
 
 10481. Did he ?— I could not tell, I never heard tl ,^. 
 result. 
 
 10482. But, in a case like that, the Chairman always 
 allows the tenant to sell 1 — Yes. 
 
 10483. But if he cannot get a purchaser 1 — I cannot 
 tell then, but in the case ot Connell v. Eankin he made 
 an award, and I heard the attorney in another case at 
 Coleraine make the remark, when the Chairman had 
 ordered them to go and sell, that the value of the tenant- 
 right under the new landlord was so depreciated that 
 it was tantamount to robbing us, as no one would buy 
 at anything near the same price as when it was under 
 
 . the Marquess of Waterford. 
 
 10484. You think rent raising will destroy tenant- 
 right if it goes on 1 — There is no mistake about that. 
 
 10485. Have you any other case you wish to refer 
 to 1 — I should like to mention what took place at the 
 sale of the Marquess of Waterford's property in Dublin. 
 At the sale of the property in December, 1871, there 
 was an arbitrary and unequal price set on each lot ; the 
 seller's solicitor had a number of individuals in Court 
 each having charge of as many lots as would make a 
 little estate, and he bid them up to the set price ; -when 
 what one was in charge of was sold another took his 
 place, and so on until the whole property was sold. 
 Some of the tenants after the sale had an offer from 
 some of the parties who had been bidders, or some 
 parties for them, on the same day as the sale. 
 
 10486. They were not real sales then? — Well, they 
 had these parties to bid them up. 
 
 10487. Did the Judge know that 1 — I am not aware. 
 
 10488. Chaieman. — They were willing to give what 
 the tenants were giving? — They offered it to the 
 tenants after the sale was over, to sell it to the tenants 
 at the price it was knocked down at. The cost of a 
 conveyance from the Landed Estates Court is enormous. 
 In the case of two acres of bog the price was £35, and 
 the cost of the conveyance £14. 
 
 10489. Mr. Shaw.— On a price of £35 ?— Yes, 
 
 10490. You complain of that as being a stopper oa 
 the sale of small properties ? — "\'"ery great. In a 
 small holding on the lot beside me the purchase-money 
 was under £70, and I saw the attorney's bill a 
 day or two ago for £19 lis., besides 5s. lid. to the 
 Ordnance Department, and I consider the Ordnance 
 Department in defining the boundaries, in addition to 
 being very expensive, is incorrect. I myself had to 
 go into Court to have a boundary righted at a cost of 
 £19, or twenty times the value of the spot in question. 
 After getting the taxed costs from the other side it 
 was nineteen or twenty times what the spot was 
 worth. 
 
 10491. The boundaries, you say, are not correctly 
 defined by the Ordnance Map 1 — No ; they were not 
 correctly defined by the Ordnance surveyor. I 
 myself this year had some land in crop for the first 
 time. When my twenty-one years lease was about 
 half run I commenced to reclaim it, but gave it up, 
 and had I done so then it would have likely added 
 £2 or £3 to my new rent since 1864, and cost me 
 about or near £100 more Avhen buying. I thuik I 
 would suggest in reference to section 48 of the Land 
 Act that where three-fourths or four-fifths of the value 
 of the tenants agree to buy, and a buyer could he got 
 for the other one-fifth, instead of lending half of the 
 money to the buyer it would be more deshable to lend 
 the whole of the money to the tenant, and charge him 
 a higher rate of interest. I understand it is three and 
 a half per cent, for loans under the Board, and one 
 and a half goes to make a sinking fund, but if you 
 charged a higher rate of interest, and let it be a per- 
 manent loan at, say, four per cent, interest. 
 
 10492. Not including the capital? — No; not in- 
 cluding the capital. According to the Act, if it was 
 carriecl out, it would introduce a worse class of land- 
 lords than any at present in the country — that is, the 
 people buying these small holdings with the aid of 
 loans from the Board. 
 
 10493. Is that done on Lord Waterford's property? 
 —No. The solicitor to the Board told me that owing 
 to its being for sale under an absolute order of the 
 Court the Board could not make a loan upon that 
 section of the Act, and could not treat with the pur- 
 chaser. 
 
 10494. The O'Conoe Don.— Don't you think that a 
 purchaser under such circumstances might be obliged 
 to give perpetuity of tenure to the tenants, as he was 
 being assisted by the State to become the owner? — I 
 don't know. 
 
 10495. You are referring to cases in which the 
 Government under the Act are enabled to make ad- 
 vances to purchase the residue of property on which 
 there are tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 10496. Wouldn't itbefairtoaccompany thatloanwith 
 a condition that the tenants were to receive perpetuity 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 3 
 
 u< 
 
 of tenure at existing rents 1 — If the rents were fair, 
 but I think the other would be a more direct way, some- 
 thing like the Church Temporalities Commissioners. 
 In small holdings where the price is under £200 they 
 don't allow it to be rejiaid by an annual sinking fund 
 extending over thirty-five years, l)ut make a loan, and 
 they don't say whether it is permanent or not, at four 
 per cent. 
 
 104:96a. Mr.SiiA>Y. — You would have a whole lot of 
 
 small owners owing money to the State 1 — I look ujion 
 the Board of Works and the State as one ; in either 
 case, provided the price was fair, both ^s'ould be 
 safe. 
 
 10497. Chaieman. — Are you connected with the 
 Garvagh Tenants' Defence Association? — I suppose 
 I am. 
 
 10497a. You don't appear for them as representing 
 them 1 — I do. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 . 1880. 
 
 Mr. H. It. 
 Jlorrison and 
 Dr. Maclill. 
 
 Mr. John Raxkix, 
 
 10498. Chaieman. — You are a tenant farmer? — 
 Yes. 
 
 10499. How many acres do you hold? — About 12G. 
 
 10500. Who is your landlord? — It is on the 
 Richardson estate. 
 
 10.501. Are you a member of the Aghadoey Tenants' 
 Defence Association? — Yes. 
 
 10502. You have heard some cases mentioned by 
 ]\Ir. Morrison of hard cases on tenants. Can you 
 give us any cases that are samples of what happens 
 in your district ? — There is one case I would refer to 
 — the case of a small farm of forty acres. The tenant 
 in possession wished to sell, and asked permission from 
 the landlord. The landlord granted the permission to 
 sell by private contract. 
 
 10503. What is the tenant's name? — Samuel 
 Lament. 
 
 10504. What is the name of the landlord ?—AVil- 
 liam John Derby, Esq. He sold to a party, his name 
 is Archibald, for £310. That is for his tenant-right 
 ■of the farm, and when the purchasing tenant came 
 before the landlord for acceptance he told him the farm 
 would be subject to £5 rise of rent yearly. 
 
 10505. Was it the custom on that estate to gene- 
 rally raise the rent on a change of tenancy ? — Yes ; to 
 raise the rent on a change of tenancy. 
 
 10506. Didn't the purchaser know that was the 
 custom of the estate ? — No ; he did not. It was when 
 he came before the landlord for acceptance that he was 
 noticed the rent was to be raised £5. 
 
 10507. And was that the first he had heard of it? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10508. Was not the tenant who sold to him bound 
 to tell him what the rule of the estate was ? — This 
 was a townland bought on the estate of John Cromie, 
 Esq., by this gentleman, some 100 or 150 acres perhaps, 
 just a small townland and he had not raised the rent. 
 This was the first case of sale that had come up after 
 he had become landlord so he noticed the buying 
 tenant that the rent would be raised £5 yearly, and 
 the buying tenant refused to pay the £310 that he 
 had proposed paying to the outgoing tenant and they 
 agreed again, and the outgoing tenant dropped £25, 
 and the tenant submitted to pay the £5 of raised rent 
 with the reduction of £25 from the tenant-right, 
 the incoming tenant then went on making impi(jve- 
 ments on the farm, and expended to the amount of 
 £106 7s. on the farm, but the last two or three years 
 his crops were so inferior that he found he was not 
 able to pay the rent and take his support from the 
 farm. He asked the landlord again for permission 
 to sell, the landlord granted him the permission to sell 
 by private contract as he had bought. He would not 
 allow a public sale, but the tenant to advertise the sale 
 of the farm by private contract, that was in 1879 ; 
 but he could not get an offer, no one would buy, and 
 now he advertises in 1880 and ofiered the farm for 
 sale again, but no one will buy. The tenant is there 
 and he cannot get any one to offer him for the farm. 
 
 10509. That was caused by the fear of a second rise 
 of rent ? — The present rent and the fear of n^ore rise. 
 I could produce receipts to show that from 1860, the 
 rent was £22 yearly; that in 1862, it was raised to 
 £32 ; in 1870, it was raised to £35 ; and in 1874 or 
 1875, it was raised to £40. That is four rises from 
 1861. 
 
 Curragh, examined. 
 
 10510. The O'CoNOR Don. — Were these all on oc- 
 casions of changed tenancy? — No; not all. I think 
 there was a rise at the time this landlord, Derby 
 bought. I think it was at that time that it was raised 
 from £32 to £35. 
 
 10511. Do you know of any other case of the same 
 sort that you wish to represent? — Tliere is one other case 
 on the Edward Bennett, Esq., estate, a small farm of 
 about eight statute acres, at the yearly rent of £10 10s. 
 It was bought by a neighbour, and when he came 
 before the agent for acceptance he let him know it 
 was subject to £2 rise of rent, that is about three 
 years ago. 
 
 10512. Mr. Shaw. — On that estate was it the 
 usual custom to raise the rent ? — Yes. There were 
 ten other cases similar that I could quote on the 
 Bennett estate. 
 
 10513. You complain that the general system of 
 raising the rent on a change of tenancy deteriorates 
 from the value of the tenant-right ? — Yes. We com- 
 plain of that very much, that these periodical rises of 
 of rent tend to take from the tenant-right. 
 
 10514. Were each of these four rises that you men- 
 tion on a change of tenancy? — No. 
 
 10515. Then these were rises of rent at the option 
 of the landlord ? — At the option of the landlord, the 
 Government valuation of that first place is i;'26 10s. 
 not including buildings, and £1 5s. for buildings 
 amounting to £27 15s. 
 
 10516. That is the. holding where the rent was 
 raised to £40 ? — Yes. 
 
 10517. The O'Conoe Don. — Suppose the rent were 
 reduced for that holding to £35, do you think the 
 man could get a purchaser for £300 ? — I dare say he 
 would not. 
 
 10518. Although he cannot get any one at all at 
 £40 1 — He cannot get any one at all at £40. He is 
 obliged to remain there, he wants to get rid of it but 
 cannot. 
 
 10519. Chairman. — Will he have any chance after 
 this year being a better year for farmers? — I don't 
 suppose he wUl, owing to the import of home farm pro- 
 duce, foreign produce, and the prices being low. 
 
 10520. Have the tenants been making improve- 
 ments of late on their holdings ? — Yes. 
 
 10521. They continue to make them? — Well in 
 some cases they do. 
 
 10522. Do yorr think this system of raising the 
 rent deters them ? — Yes ; when a lease comes near 
 being exhausted, the tenant feels that the landlord 
 has it in his power to rise the rent, and of course 
 that interferes with the progress of improvements. 
 
 10523. According to you it is not only at the 
 conclusion of a lease, but at any time with tenants 
 from year to year? — In that case it was. 
 
 10524. Are there many leases on these properties ? 
 — Not many. 
 
 10525. Were there formerly leases? — Not generally. 
 
 10526. There were some? — Perhaps fifty years 
 back, but not lately. There were few leases since 
 1870. The tenants generally object to take leases on 
 the terms the landlords proposed to them since the 
 year 1870. 
 
 10527. They don't like these leases? — They don't 
 care for them in the form in which they are now 
 offered. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Rankin. 
 
358 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880 
 
 Mr. John 
 £aDkin. 
 
 10528. Do they wish to insert clauses thatVould 
 deteriorate tenant-right at the expiration of the lease 1 
 — As far as fair rents are concerned the tenants -would 
 wish that the Government would provide a way for 
 putting fair rents on. so that the tenants would be able 
 to live and allow the landlords equally fair play. 
 
 10529. Fair play on both sides 1 — Yes. 
 
 10530. You think that that should be done by some 
 means or other under a new Act of Parliament 1 — Yes ; 
 I would suggest arbitration— the tenant and the land- 
 lord each having a man. 
 
 10531. And if they could not agree the GovernmeDt 
 should arrange for an umpire 1 — Yes. I would leave 
 it in the hands of the Government to appoint a sworn 
 umpire in case the tenant's and the landlord's man 
 could not agree. 
 
 10532. Or by some independent Board perhaps that 
 might have been originally appointed by the Govern- 
 ment, but independent of the Government, and inde- 
 pendent of the landlord and tenant 1 — Certainly. 
 
 10533. You think that would be satisfactory to the 
 tenant generally ? — I think it would. 
 
 Mr. John 
 
 Simpson. 
 
 Mr. John Simpson, Aghadoey^ examined. 
 
 10534. Chairman. — You are a tenant-farmer? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 10535. How many acres do you hold? — About 
 sixty-five. 
 
 10536. Under what landlord ? — The Ironmongers' 
 Company. The principal thing I wish to bring before 
 you is, that in case of a change of tenancy there is no 
 allowance for public sale. They have made a rule, but it 
 is within twenty years that it has been established, that 
 ten years' rent is to be allowed. I think that is unfair 
 in some cases, because if one man improves his farm 
 and does the best he can with it, and has it in proper 
 order, and wishes to emigrate or go into business, there 
 is no choice for him. to take, according to the office 
 rules, ten yeai's' rent, while in the case of his neighbour 
 who has left the farm in a dilapidated state and run 
 to weeds the amount is the same. 
 
 10537. This limit of the amount .puts a bad tenant 
 in as good a position as a good one ? — Yes, as far as 
 the sale goes. 
 
 10538. Is there any other rule there you think 
 , against the tenant ? — We should wish free sale and fair 
 
 play between landlord and tenant. 
 
 10539. Do you approve of the suggestion made by 
 the last witness as to arbitration ? — Certainly ; we have 
 a valuation every twenty-one years which you have 
 heard before. 
 
 10540. You think a valuation every twenty-one 
 years is better than upon a change of tenancy ? — Yes. 
 There was one case upon that estate in my immediate 
 neighbourhood, the sale of the farm of the late Eev. 
 Dr. Browne, consisting of 110 acres. He died -without 
 any heirs, and his friends were about to sell the place, 
 and they advertised it for sale, and the agent and his 
 assistant came and posted up notices that they would 
 allow no free sale. The friends thought they had a 
 right to free sale as it was a lease, and the auctioneer 
 in face of the notice declared his terms of sale, and 
 put up the farm for auction, and it was bid up to 
 £1,600. Then another party who had been acquainted 
 ■with officialism, through a little favouritism, got into 
 possession, but the legatees of the late Dr. Bro-vnie 
 would not allow him to get it until he paid the sum 
 which was offisred, which he agreed to do. 
 
 Mr. Grocer 
 Caldwell, 
 Mr. -Walter 
 Osborne, 
 Mr. Kobei-t 
 Adams, 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Cole, and 
 Mr. Richard 
 Covle. 
 
 Mr. Gkocer Caldwell, Whitehall, Eglinton, examined (with Messrs. Walter Osborne, Egbert Adams, 
 Patrick Cole, and Richard Coyle, Deputation from the Eglinton Tenants' Defence Association, present). 
 
 10541. Chairman. — "You are a tenant-farmer? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 10542. You hold twenty acres? — Yes. 
 
 10543. Who is your landlord? — The Grocers Com- 
 pany was lately our landlord, but they sold a few years 
 ago, and it is now Mr. Da-n.dson's. We were greatly 
 pleased and delighted at the time of the passing of the 
 Land Act, 1870. and, in fact, we thought we had got 
 something worth while, and the spirit of [^the people 
 ran up and industry advanced and progressed ; but at 
 the expiration of about four years, when the working 
 of the Land Act was seen in the Land Courts, people 
 began to lose heaits, they seen it was less than they 
 thought, and they were greatly disappointed, and for 
 the last four or five years, in my circle of acquaintance, 
 there has been little or no industry by reclamation or 
 anything, but merely making dung and raising crops. 
 The energies of the people are crippled, and there they 
 are. 
 
 10544. You mention a proceeding in Court as to 
 one case ? — Yes. 
 
 10545. The result of a claim for compensation ? — 
 Yes. The landlords seem to have the same power of 
 raising the rent since the Bill as they had before, and, 
 in some cases, we considered they were worse than 
 when there was no Bill. In my part it was considered 
 that owing to the Land Bill the Company would sell, 
 and that we would be worse off' than if we had no Bill. 
 The result is, that if there is no lease on the holding, 
 the new landlord puts on a new rent, and introduces 
 customs never known on the estate before. 
 
 10546. You were under the impression that the 
 Land Act made all the existing customs legal ? — We 
 were at that time. 
 
 10547. That is true to the extent of its being made 
 legal, bat your complaint is that the remedy is not 
 
 sufficient? — My complaint is that these customs are in 
 the power of the landlord as before the bUl passed.. 
 
 10548. That it is in his power to raise the rent the 
 same ? — And he has power to evict. I don't see where- 
 in we gain any advantage where we had all the advan- 
 tages we have. The man who is industrious and pays 
 his rent believes he is secure so long as he lives 
 peaceably and modestly. 
 
 1 0549. Before the Act you had no claim for improve- 
 ments? — That is so, and there were a great many 
 cases of hardship. 
 
 10550. And you had no security for the value of 
 tenant-right ? — No, but it was the custom and it sold 
 freely for the last thirty years. It was better under 
 the Company without the bill than with the bill. 
 
 10551. Still the Act gave yoii power to go for the 
 tenant-right, and if not for that for the improvements. 
 Your complaints are that the decisions have not given 
 a fair return for your tenant-right ? — If I would be 
 permitted to say my mind on the point it is, that the 
 decisions were all adverse to the tenant, and we con- 
 sider that if it was a Conservative judge he was more 
 favourable to the landocracy, and if it was a Liberal 
 judge he would be more favourable to the people. 
 
 10552. You are not satisfied with the court to which 
 you are forced to go ? — We are not. 
 
 10553. Would you be more satisfied with some 
 independent arbitration to settle questions between 
 landlord and tenant? — That is just the great matter 
 we look to. Neither the landlord nor the tenant is a 
 proper judge to put on the rent, for of course selfish- 
 ness steps in in both cases, and to do justice we should 
 have disinterested parties to enter into the conflict 
 between the two contending parties. 
 
 10554. Have you any reason to complain of any 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 339 
 
 alteration in the rnles that existed before the Land Act, 
 any additional restrictions on tenant-right? — There 
 have been alterations in some cases. In the case of 
 coining to an action where a little farm is for sale £5 
 or £10 of a rise is an obstruction which was not there 
 before. Thatweconsideranobstruction. BaroniMaitin 
 bought three townlands here outside of Deny, and he 
 made considerable improvements, and aclded the 
 improvements to the tenants' rent, by way of 5 per c(!nt. 
 This is in my neighbourhood some twenty-oiie years 
 ago. When the farm was offered for sale — I think Mr. 
 King is the agent — a neighbour of mine went and 
 bought it for £600 or £700. He committed the 
 bargain to -writing, and he got a proviso in the bai-gaiu 
 that if a rise of rent was put on sharp, he was not 
 bound by his bargain. When they applied to King he 
 sought to raise the rent £17, and the gentleman who 
 bought said he would not take it, and King said he 
 would make him take it, and he replied that he was 
 out of his power, and the result was that he told Mr. 
 King he had a proviso, that if the rise was too sharp 
 he would not take the farm. He inquired if the man 
 who was getting the tenant-right would deduct £200 
 off it, but the man would have nothing to say to it, 
 and I understand that that farm was sold at consider- 
 able loss to the tenant. 
 
 10555. That took place before the Land Acf? — No, 
 since the Land Act. That gentleman bought a farm 
 immediately afterwards in my neighbourhood. 
 
 10556; The O'C'onor Dos. — Was it the custom on 
 that estate to raise the rent on a change of tenancy t — 
 I could not answer that directly, for in my time it 
 belonged to the Ponsonby family, and they had a long 
 lease ; it was sold and resold to Mr. Alexander in 
 18-17. It was formerly the Goldsmitlis estate, and it 
 was sold in townlands to suit purchasers, and the Baron 
 bought three of them. 
 
 10557. What was the previous renf! — I camiot 
 say. 
 
 10558. Mr. Shaw. — But the £17 rise was considered 
 excessive ? — It was and my neighbour who bought it 
 was so particular that he arranged that if there was a 
 sharp rise he would not take it. 
 
 10559. The O'Conok Don. — It was clear he expected 
 it would be raised 1 — He did. 
 
 10560. Mr. Shaw. — And he .would not object to a 
 moderate rise 1 — No ; where it is not rack-rented. 
 There are some landlords , by whom the farms are 
 rack-rented. 
 
 ^ 10561. The O'Conor Don.— Is it now let?— It< is 
 divided amongst parties, but how I cannot say. I am 
 intimate with the man who offered to buy it since I Mr. Patrick 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Grocer 
 Caklwell, 
 Mr. Walter 
 Osborne, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Adams, 
 
 "was a boy, and we are both now advanced in years. 
 
 10562. Mr. Shaw. — The raising of the rent is the 
 great difficulty 1 — It is the great difficulty. 
 
 10563. If you could settle that you would be satis- 
 fied ? — Yes. I speak for my circle of acquaintances 
 all through Deny and Limavady generally, and if 
 the question of rent could be readjusted on some 
 fair termSj the people are a healthy and industrious 
 people. 
 
 10564. Fair to both parties ? — I shall say that much 
 for my countrymen, that they don't want to infringe, 
 or to rob or do anything, even to landlords, with regard 
 to having the rent too low, but just what is fair and 
 moderate. 
 
 10565. With a fair allowance to the tenant for his 
 improvements ? — Yes, and when he has to go dig or 
 quarry out old blocks or to make drains, that he may 
 not have the impression on his mind that it will be 
 swallowed u.p in a year or two, and that surveyors 
 will be coming from Deny saying they must take the 
 place as they find it, but they did not see me with my 
 coat off. 
 
 10566. Chaikman. — Do you bury the stones under 
 the ground? — We put them in drains. They are 
 better than tiles ; there could not be better drains. 
 
 10567. Mr. Shaw. — All tliat land wants draining? 
 — Yes ; but the people have been so energetic that in 
 my portion of the country they are greatly through it 
 for the last twenty years. I know farms that are 
 doubled and trebled with himdreds of acres reclaimed 
 since I remember, and I am astonished to read in the 
 papers of a little patch here and there being reclaimed, 
 and that the tenants do nothing. I could take any 
 man over hundreds of acres of reclaimed farms. 
 
 10568. Parts of farms that the tenant has been 
 making into his land? — Yes. He has concentrated 
 his energies, and I know men who are studying when 
 they will get at this place or that place with their 
 improvements. 
 
 Cole, and 
 Mr. Richard 
 Coyle. 
 
 Mr. Pichaed Coyle examined. 
 
 10569. The O'Conor Don.— You ar 
 Carnmoney, Eglinton ? — Yes. 
 
 10570. Youhold under the Marquessof Londonderry? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10571. Your chief complaint is that whilst all the 
 improvements are made by the tenants the landlords 
 raise the rent and diminish the value of the tenant- 
 right ? — Yes, with reference to that particular estate. 
 
 10572. Can you give any particular instance of that ? 
 — It has been the custom, over the whole estate. 
 There is a witness, who came with mo, who will give 
 you a very particular instance in his own case, and I 
 would, therefore, rather deal with the general matters. 
 
 10573. Were you interested in the case you refer 
 to in your letter ? — In common with others I was. 
 
 10574. Was your own rent raised? — It was. 
 
 10575. When? — About twelve years ago. 
 
 10576. On the expiration of a lease? — Yes. 
 
 10577. How long had the lease been in duration 
 Defore ? — It was for a Kfe, but I am not certain for 
 now long. 
 
 10578. It was a very long lease ? — It was a long 
 one. 
 
 10579. Thirty or forty years? — I siippose about 
 that. 
 
 10580. At the expiration of that lease what was 
 the increased rent placed upon it ? — It was calculated 
 to be about forty per cent, on the old rent. 
 
 10581. Ml-. Shaw. — Was there a valuation made 
 
 tenant at in any way ? — Yes. The agent of the estate made a 
 valuation himself. I mean the head agent, for the 
 Marquess of Londonderry has very extensive estates in 
 the county Down, and he has one head agent over all, 
 and he is the gentleman who made the valuation. 
 
 10582. The O'Conor Don. — Are the rents now 
 above the fair value ? — Everyone says so. 
 
 10583. Are they higher than on the surrounding 
 estates 1 — Higher than some ; but on some they are 
 not so high. I would mention one in particular that 
 is rack-rented; that is Major Scott's estate. 
 
 10584. Mr. Shaw. — You consider that rack-rented ? 
 — I could give you an instance compared with the 
 Government valuation, and you can draw your own 
 conclusions : one tenant's valuation is £18, and the 
 rent £26. 
 
 10585. What is his name? — David Caldwell. 
 
 10586. Is it near a town ? — Not at all. 
 
 10587. It is not a town farm? — It is about five 
 miles from Deny. Another case is Edward Farren : 
 valuation £7, rent £12. I consider that rack-rent, 
 where there is nothing exceptional in connexion with 
 the holding to make it more valuable. I believe the 
 landlord of that estate boasts that the rent was not 
 revised for fifty years, and, it is generally believed it is 
 not necessary so far as his estate is concerr»)d. 
 
 10587a. Mr. Shaw. — Were these rents as high fifty 
 years ago as they are now? — Just so. These rents 
 were put on at a time when the price of every com- 
 
860 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 28, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Grocer 
 Caldwell, 
 Mr. Walter 
 Osborne, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Adams, 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Cole, and 
 Mr. Richard 
 Coyle. 
 
 modity was very high. At the time of the French 
 
 wars. 
 
 10588. Did these rents last through the famine ? — 
 A temporary abatement was made at that time, but 
 they have lasted ever since. On some estates in the 
 neighbourhood some of them have been reduced. 
 
 10588a. On a change of tenancy does he increase 
 the rent even on these rents ? — He does. A farm was 
 sold by order of the Chancery Court, there was an 
 attempt to sell it by auction in this city. The tenement 
 valuation was £47, the rent had been £60, and he 
 put on £10 additional. 
 
 10589. The O'Conoe Don.— What did it sell for? 
 — Thfe consequence was it did not sell at all. 
 
 10o89a. Mr. Shaw. — The rent had eaten away all 
 the interest?— Yes. 
 
 10590. Do the tenants make all the improvements'? 
 — Yes ; all the improvements on the estate. 
 
 10591. The O'Conor Don.— Have there been many 
 sales of the tenant-right interest on that estates- 
 There are not many, it is a small estate. 
 
 10592. There have been some? — Yes. 
 
 10593. At what rate did they sell?— I could give 
 you the case of a very small farm of four and a half 
 acres with a rent of £7, and the amount paid was 
 £135, but the tenant was compelled to sign an agree- 
 ment before he would get possession of the farm to 
 admit of an additional rent at any time the landlord 
 liked to impose it. 
 
 10591. On what estate was that? — Major Scott's. 
 
 10595. It sold for £135 with the.se rents on?— 
 Yes ; the tenant remonstrated for a considerable time 
 but ultimately he took it. 
 
 10596. There was no increase put on at the time? 
 —No. 
 
 10597. With regard to the Marquess of London- 
 derry's estate, at what rate does tenant-right sell on 
 it 1 — I think about twenty-five years purchase might 
 be called an average price, but I am not exactly certain 
 about it. 
 
 10598. There is no limit on that estate? — None 
 whatever. 
 
 10599. Have there been many sales of tenant-right 
 interest 1 — Several, and free sale is generally admitted 
 on the estate although I could mention an instance 
 where it was not. The tenants feel aggrieved at the 
 excessive rents they are called upon to pay on accoimt 
 of their own improvements which they themselve.s 
 have made. They have invested all their money, and 
 if there is a revaluation the rent absorbs all 'the in- 
 terest they have in the land. 
 
 lOGOO. ISIr. Shaw.— That is the great difficulty with 
 the tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 10601. The arbitrary increase of rent? — Yes. 
 
 10602. And if that could be settled in some fair 
 way you would be satisfied ? — Yes. 
 
 10G03. The O'Conoe Don. — How long ago was 
 the rent raised on the Londonderry estate — was it 
 before the Land Act ? — Yes ; on part of it. 
 
 Mr. Robert Adams examined. 
 
 10603a. The O'Conor Don. — You are a tenant on 
 the Londonderry estate ? — Yes. 
 
 10604. How much land do you hold? — Sixty-two 
 acres statute measure. 
 
 10605. Do you hold as tenant from year to year or 
 under lease ? — From year to year. 
 
 10606. State what you have to complain of in the 
 treatment you receive? — After the lease expired in 
 1873 the rent was raised. The rent was originally 
 £38 7s. 5d., and the tenement valuation £40 10s., 
 houses and all included. The agent then came round 
 and put on a valuation, and the rent was raised from 
 £38 to £59. 
 
 10607. That is in 1873?— Yes. I pointed out to 
 the agent the improvements I had made, and the land 
 T had reclaimed at a cost of £40 an acre perhaps, and 
 he said he was just instructed to take it as it stood. 
 
 10608. Without any regard to the improvements? 
 — I I'efused to pay that rent, and offered to leave it 
 to arbitration or any one to fix what would be a fair 
 rent, but he would not listen to that at all. My father 
 was a very old man, and we ultimately had to pay the 
 rent he demanded. 
 
 10609. Did you go into court? — Yes. 
 
 lOGlO. And did the barrister inquire into it? — 
 Yes ; and then v^e could do nothing but accept what- 
 ever he would give, and my father being an old man, 
 and my family small and helpless, I did not like to 
 turn out. 
 
 10611. Mr. SiiAW.— You submitted ?— Yes ; and 
 this gentleman in Deny came into court and swore I 
 was no worse off' than the rest of the tenants, and this 
 prejudiced matters. 
 
 10612. The O'ConorDon. — And the barrister after 
 hearing the case decided that the rent was a fair one 1 
 — We just submitted to the rent rather than take 
 what he might be disposed to give us. 
 
 10613. Chairjian. — That Mas before you went into 
 court? — When we went into court a second time. 
 The banister had left it ofi' thinkiEg we might come 
 to some amicable arrangement. The rent was far too 
 high. I tried all 1 could to get it reduced. 
 
 10614. You could not manage to get any reduction 
 or settlement? — No. 
 
 10615. Mr. Shaw.— Then yon let the matter drop? 
 — Yes. 
 
 10616. You are paying on j'our own improvements? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10617. And you think the rent is not only on your 
 own improvements, but too high for the land? — Yes. 
 
 10618. Would you be able to sell your interest? — 
 Not for half what it was formerly worth. 
 
 10619. You built a house, reclaimed land, and made 
 fences, and got no hel23 from the landlord at all, and yet 
 lie put on the increase 1 — Yes. 
 
 10620. Chairman. — Are the improvements all dons 
 by the tenant ? — Always. 
 
 10620a. Is there any assistance given by the land- 
 lord ? — I never knew an instance on our estate at all. 
 I heard he assisted two tenants to put up a marsh 
 ditch — only a matter of about 100 perches — it is not 
 worth mentioning. The agent who was there liefore 
 told us always to go on with our improvements ; they 
 were all our own, and not to fear. Every shilhng we 
 could scrape up we were sinking into the land in every 
 waj'. 
 
 10621. The O'Conor Don.— Do you know the case 
 mentioned in Mr. Coyle's letter, ^^ here a tenant sold a 
 farm to another tenant for £322 ? — I know a little of 
 it, but I am not aware of the particulars. 
 
 10622. The agent would not permit the farm to be 
 sold ? — It was sold by public auction, and he refused 
 to give it to the purchaser ; he wished to give it to a 
 neighbouring farmer ; and he would not give it to the 
 other. 
 
 10623. What was the result?— The farm had to be 
 sold for less to the adjoinirg tenant. 
 
 10624. Is it a rule on the estate that the farms 
 should be sold to the tenants on adjoining estates? — 
 No ; there was never any limit. We were always 
 allowed to sell to the best bidder until of late. 
 
 10625. Is that since the passing of the Land Act! 
 — Yes ; they trying to restrict us in certain ways they 
 never tried before, besides imposing high rent. 
 
 10626. Mr. KAVANAGiL—What'did the tenant lose 
 by that limit?— About £72. 
 
 " 10627. Chairman.- When was the sale?— It was 
 within the last twelve months — the last sale. 
 
 10628. The sale was affected to some extent by the 
 bad times as well as the other matter? — It did not 
 appear to me to be so, for that tenant had offered this 
 sum three or four years ago, at the time the other 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 3G1 
 
 tenant had offered for it, and it was kept in reserve 
 
 either sell it to this tenant or don't sell it at all. 
 
 10629. The O'Conor Don. — How many years' 
 jmrchase was thati — I could not say how many. 
 
 10G30. Do you know any case similar to your own ? 
 — No, but I heard them all complain of extra high 
 rents and they are unable to pay them. 
 
 10631. Do you know Major Scott's property? — 
 I do. 
 
 10632. Are the rents high on that estate t — I think 
 they are. Some of them are as high as my own, tak- 
 ino- the tenement valuation as a gu.ide. 
 
 10633. Chairman. — You say that not only are the 
 rents high, but that if you make improvements you fear 
 the rent will be again raised 1 — That is it. I had three 
 acres of waste land on my farm, cut-out bog, I had it 
 for 2s. 6(/. a year. I spent £45 in reclaiming it and 
 the fourth year after the agent came roimd and put 22s. 
 Gd. a year on it. 
 
 10634. Mr. Shaw. — You had made it land? — Yes, 
 
 and the fourth year he came round and imposed that 
 rent, and I was obliged to pay it. 
 
 10635. Chairman. — You drained with stone drains? 
 — Yes, and fenced it and had it cut away. In fact it 
 was fit for nothing hut lads bathing in the summer 
 before that. 
 
 , 10636. Mr. Shaw.— If the rents could be settled in 
 some way you would be all satisfied ? — Yes. 
 
 10G37. That is the sore point 1— Yes. That is what 
 has eaten away our tenant-right and frightened us all. 
 We don't want any extra privilege of law, but we want 
 it to be settled so that the landlord cannot come and 
 charge us perhaps 100 per cent, on our own outlay. 
 
 10038. You will give him what is fair? — Yes. 
 
 10639. Chairman. — You want fair terms and to be 
 sure that they will continue 1 — Yes. 
 
 10640. Is that the view of the tenants you know, 
 and the gentlemen who are represented here 1 — I think 
 we are all of the same mind. 
 
 Se2)t. 2S, 1S80. 
 
 Jfr. Grocer 
 Caldwell, 
 Mr. \Valter 
 Osborne, 
 Mr. Robert 
 Adams, 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Cole, and 
 Mr. Eichard 
 Coyle. 
 
 Mr. Walter Osborne examined. 
 
 10641. I want to prove to you that the tenant-right 
 in Derry and Donegal is equal to the fee-simple of the 
 liad, and in some cases it is more ; then with regard to 
 
 leasehold tenant-right I could mention cases to 
 vfhat it is. 
 
 show 
 
 Mr. Eichard Coyle recalled. 
 
 10642. There is a farm under Captain Young which 
 was valued in 1859, and in 1874 the landloi-d again 
 intimated his intention of having the land valued. 
 The tenants remonstrated as such a short time had 
 elapsed since the last valuation. The landlord said 
 that times afforded it and it was his intention to have 
 the lands revalued ajid intimated his intention of 
 emi^loyiug Mr. Nolan as valuator. After being pressed 
 the tenant accepted Mr. Nolan as valuator, and the 
 valuation was made. A short time afterwards an 
 altercation occurred between the landlord and one of 
 his tenants, when the landlord let it slip out that he 
 
 had put an additional rent of some shillings per acre 
 on Mr. Nolan's valuation. " My God ! " said the ten- 
 ant, " did you dare after what passed between us to add 
 to Nolan's valuation ?" He admitted he had done so, 
 and the tenants are ignorant to this day of what 
 Nolan's valuation is. 
 
 10643. The O'Conor Don.— What is the name of the 
 tenant? — William James Cuthbert is the name of the 
 tenant, and the landlord is Captain Young. 
 
 10644. When did this occur? — 1874 was the last 
 valuation. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Cole examined. 
 
 10644a. Chairman. — Who is your landlord ? — My 
 father holds under four different landlords. 
 
 10645. You are the son of a tenant-farmer? — Yes. 
 
 10646. What is your complaint ? — My grievance is 
 that my father has invested upwards of £2,000, on the 
 faith of the Ulster custom, on a leasehold property, and 
 that as the law stands at present he has no security. 
 
 10647. Mr. Shaw. — He has no security in the land ? 
 —No. 
 
 10648. How did he invest the money? — He pur- 
 chased the tenant-right. 
 
 10649. Did he then improve it ? — He then improved 
 it. 
 
 10650. And built upon it ? — Yes. 
 
 10651. And drained it ? — Yes. 
 
 10652. And reclaimed it ? — Yes, to a certain extent ; 
 what reclamation there was to do. 
 
 10653. How long has the lease to run ? — In one case 
 the lease will expire in two years, and in the other cases 
 the lease has six years to run. 
 
 10 i.")4. He is afraid of an increase of rent being put 
 on at the expiration of the lease ? — Yes, and his right 
 to sell the tenant-right has been disputed on one pro- 
 perty under Major Scott. 
 
 10655. After the lease ? — And during the lease. He 
 wished to dispose of this farm under Major Scott, and 
 a solvent, respectable young man who wanted a farm 
 offered £1,200 for it ; Major Scott gave permission to 
 sell, but when they went to the office, Major Scott said 
 the pui-chaser must indorse the lease. They asked 
 the nature of the indorsement, and he referred them to 
 his agent, Mr. King. They went to Limavady, to 2Ir. 
 
 King. When they went in they told him their business. 
 He asked, " What is he to give you for it, Cole 1" He 
 told the sum. " He is giving too much," he said, and 
 turned out of the office. He did not tell them the 
 nature of the indorsement, and the result was the 
 purchaser got frightened, and the farm remained on 
 my father's hands. The question of the tenant-right 
 affects us very much. 
 
 10656. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is Major Scott your 
 father's landlord ? — He is sir. 
 
 10657. Mr. Shaw. — On the other farm have you 
 any doubt about being allowed to sell after the lease is 
 out? — I hope not. Mr. Davidson bought from the 
 Grocers Company, and Mr. Lloyd is agent. 
 
 10658. And sale was allowed on the estate? — Yes. 
 As to the query whether arbitration is ever resorted 
 to as a means of determining the rent : in my father's 
 case, as to the farm he holds under Mr. Davidson, the 
 agent, Mr. Lloyd, asked him during some business 
 transaction to take out a new lease. My father wanted 
 to sublet. There is a large house on the farm and he 
 wanted to sublet some grass with it to a gentleman 
 who was taking it, and he would not allow it. He 
 said, "I will grant you a new lease of that land," and 
 my father asked, " Will it be at a new valuation ?" and 
 he said, "Certainly." My father said, " Who is to value 
 it? " and he said, "Mr. Nolan." " Wliich Mr. Nolan ?" 
 " The young man." My father would have had no 
 objection to the old man, and he said, " Will you allow 
 me to put a valuator with Mr. Nolan ?" and he said 
 " Certainly not." 
 
 10659. He had bought the tenant- rig Jjt? Yes. 
 
 " 3A ' 
 
3G2 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Saif. 2S, ISSO. 
 
 jMr GiMcer 
 Ciildwcll, 
 .^ir. Walter 
 
 >b(>nic, 
 i\ir. Kubert 
 Adams, 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Cole, and 
 Mr. Kichard 
 Covle. 
 
 Mr. John 
 M'Connell. 
 
 Mr. Bernard 
 Lou;:rhlin. 
 
 10660. And tlie iiUprovements were made by his 
 predecessor in title?— Yes; in both cases he paid for 
 the improvements. 
 
 10661. The O'Conor Don.— When did he purchase 
 the other farm ? — I think in 1856. 
 
 10662. Mr. Shaw.— Did Mr. Davidson give you 
 any idea of the rent he intended to put on ? — He did 
 not ; it fell through. With regard to the rent of our 
 own home farm which weheld on lease from Major Scott, 
 the Government valuation is £17, and tlie rent is £30. 
 
 10663. Does the £17 include houses 2— It does not. 
 106G4. And the rent is £30 1—Yes ; and there was 
 
 an additional £5 put on four years ago. When the 
 old lease expired, and my father (whp is in business as 
 well), when building on that property, asked Lhe 
 deceased. Major Scott, for some assistance, and he said, 
 " No, I won't assist you, but I will renew your lease," 
 which my father considered would be at the same 
 rent ; but when the lease expired the present Major 
 made an increase of £5. 
 
 106G5. The buildings were made by you'? — Yes; the 
 improvements were all made by the tenant. The half 
 of the county cess the landlord won't pay, and there is 
 no allowance on account of roads or anything like that. 
 
 10666. And you do all the improvements yourself? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10667. The rent question is the great difficulty ?— 
 Yes ; and security with a fair rent. 
 
 10668. There is nothing like capricious eviction in 
 your neighbourhood 'i— No, sir ; that is not common in 
 our neighbourhood at all. 
 
 10669. Then continuous occupancy is generally ad- 
 mitted? — Yes. 
 
 10670. The rent is -the sore point? — The rent is the 
 sore point. There is a case in that block which Mr. 
 Davidson bought from the Grocers' Company, in 
 which on a change of tenancy, through death, or sale 
 or anything else, there is always an additional rent 
 put on, which the purchaser is notified ; and, of course 
 that injures the tenant-right value very considerably. 
 
 10671. Is there upon the death of a man who has 
 a son or children any increase put on ? — I have not 
 known a case like that ; it is always on sales. There 
 is one case in the village of Eglinton, where the rent 
 was £50, and it was raised to £80. 
 
 10672. Was that a house and farm? — Yes, a house 
 and farm. 
 
 Mr. John M'Comneli., Moville, county Donegal, examined. 
 
 10673. Chairman. — You are a tenant farmer? — 
 My mother is a tenant farmer. 
 
 1067-1. Would you mention the case to which you 
 desire to refer ? — I furnished a series of 'casfes ; cases 
 of I'ent compared with Government valuation, and 
 estimates of the tenants' improvements. On the 
 GuUaduff property a duty day is demanded of the 
 tenants — a covey, in fact. 
 
 ■ 10675. What is the duty day ? — It is the work of 
 a man and horse and cart for each farm to be given to 
 the landlord free. 
 
 ■ 10676. Is that in the lease? — No, but the landlord 
 comes forward at any sale of a farm and says that this 
 day is to be given. My principal evidence is with 
 regard to the nibbling away of the tenant-right by 
 increases of rent on the various farms, which destroy 
 tenant-light and larevent improvement on waste lands. 
 There is a great deal of waste land in Inishowen which 
 could be improved with great advantage and on one 
 property the mountain is charged in some of the farms. 
 At Glenagivney Sir Robert Montgomery has given 
 no reduction to the tenants who were charged for 
 the run of the mountains, although he is now letting 
 off parts of the mountain in farms. He charges so 
 much to the tenant for the run or grazing of the 
 mountain, and then he has let the mountain into 
 farms besides. , 
 
 10G77. The O'Coxoe Don.— You don't know what 
 he charges to the tenants ? — I am not sure. 
 
 10678. You don't know what they pay for this run ? 
 — I think it is about 2s. an acre. 1 know of a special 
 case on Major Hazlett's property which formerly 
 belonged to Lord Caledon : the tenant had reclaimed 
 the farm out of a bog which he had got for 30s. 
 
 a year rent, and when Major Hazlett got the pro- 
 perty, he said if he did not agree to raise the rent 
 to £18 a year -he would evict him, and the man had 
 to give in to the increased rent. He had been raised 
 to £3 when only five years in occupation, to £5 in 
 four years after, and tO' £14 by Majoir Haslett's 
 father, after nineteen years. 
 
 10679. What is the name of the tenant in that 
 case ?^Bernard LafFerty. I have also mentioned the 
 case of farmers named Norris, whose rent was once 
 £20, and now it is £60, and the tenant did all the 
 improvements. 
 
 10680. He had reclaimed the land and built upon 
 it ? — He had not reclaimed it first. 
 
 10681. When last was it raised on him? — Within 
 the last twenty years, I think. 
 
 10682. It is not since the passing of the Land Act? 
 — I think they wanted to raise it since the passing of 
 the Land Act, and then he refused to pay it. 
 
 10683. But this increase was made something about 
 twenty years ago ? — I cannot say the exact time. John 
 Wigg, who did all the improvements, had his rent 
 raised from about £16 10s. to £23, and the landlord 
 never did anything. 
 
 10684. Chairman. — He holds under James Steel 
 Nicholson of Bangor, near Belfast ; was it Mr. Nicholson 
 who raised the rent ?— I am not quite clear. 
 
 10685. The O'Conor Don. — You have only heard 
 
 of these cases ? — The tenants who save the information 
 
 o 
 
 to me are ready to swear to its truth. In our own 
 case Sir Robert raised his rents a few years ago. He 
 never did anything, and the rent of our farm was raised 
 from £16 12s. to- £24 10s. We did all the improve- 
 ments, and Sir Robert never spent a shilling. 
 
 Mr. Bernard Loughlin, of Kinnigillen, Cookstown, examined. 
 
 10686. Chairman. — You wish to mention some cases 
 of raising of rent ? — Yes. I wish to mention two cases 
 with reference to the difference between the valuation 
 and the rents. There is a case of a man who paid £3 
 rent before 1870, his lease expired, and now he pays £9. 
 
 10687. On whose property is that? — On the pro- 
 perty of Lady Castlestewart. Here are the receipts 
 (produces receipts). 
 
 10688. What is the number of acres he holds ? — I 
 cannot say, but it is mountain land, and the valuation 
 is £3. The other case is the case of four brothers who 
 lived on one farm, and paid upon a joint receipt. 
 Hero is a joint receipt for £9 3s. 7d. for all the four 
 on a lease, but at the end of the lease— three or four 
 yc-ars ago—one of the brothers pays £9 8s. 8d., the next 
 puys £>J lis,, the next £10 8s., and the next £10 8s. 
 
 10689. Mr. Shaw. — In fact the rent is four times 
 as much as it was? — It is a little more than four times. 
 
 10690. The O'Conor Don. — You don't know when 
 the rent was fixed before that? — It was twenty or 
 thirty or forty years before. 
 
 10691. Mr. Shaw. — It was a mountain farm and 
 they did everything on it ? — Yes. 
 
 10692. Building and everything ? — Yes. 
 
 10693. On whose property was that?— Lord Castle- 
 stewart. 
 
 10694. Was there a valuation made, or a valuation, 
 sent ? — There was. 
 
 10695. The tenants had no voice in the matter? — 
 They had no valuator. 
 
 10696. The O'Conor Don.— Was it always the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 r.63 
 
 custom to increase the rents on the falling in of a lease ? 
 — I don't remember any other lease on that property. 
 
 10697. Had that land been greatly improved? 
 
 Yes, it had been mountain land, and the four sons 
 lived on it, and built separate houses. 
 
 10698. What is the acreage ? — They may have forty 
 acres each, but it is mountain land. 
 
 10698a. Do they consider the advance excessive? — 
 Yes, they complain very much of the rent, and on this 
 estate of the Earl ot Castlestewart, there was a general 
 valuation something about the same time, and there 
 are more than 100 ejectments at present foi non-pay- 
 ment of rent, and they are in as caretakers at present. 
 
 10699. In what part of Tyrone is that ?— It is 
 about the centre of Tyrone. 
 
 10700. It is poor land? — Yes, very poor; it is 
 between Cookstown and Strabane. 
 
 10701. Were the rents raised very much on the 
 whole estate 1 — Very much, but not so much as on this. 
 
 10702. Chairman. — Is there any crop put in on 
 these lands where the tenants are in as caretakers ? — 
 Any of them that could give any secnrity for the rent 
 he let them put in crops. 
 
 10703. Mr. Shaw. — How much rent do you think 
 they owe ! — Some of them two or three years. 
 
 10704. That is since the valuation was made? — Yes. 
 
 10705. And the existing rent became too much for 
 them to pay 1 — Yes. 
 
 10706. Chairman. — What is the name of the agent ? 
 — Major Burley Stewart. 
 
 The Commissioners then adjourned until next 
 morning. 
 
 SIXTEENTH DAY.— WEDNESDAY, 29th SEPTEMBER, ISSO. 
 
 The Inquiry was resumed this morning. 
 
 Present :— The Eight Hon. the Eael of Bessboeough, Chairman ; The O'CoNOE, Don, Aeti-ide 
 MacMoeeough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l., and William Shaw, Esq., 
 Mr. George Gather, Can-ickue (High Sheriff), examined. 
 
 M.P. 
 
 10707. Chairman. — I believe you have some infor- 
 mation to lay before the Commission with regard to 
 the estates of the London Companies? — I have. In 
 going over some papers belonging to my late brother, 
 who was a barrister and took part in public matters, 
 I came upon this extract, which is a very interesting 
 one, from a letter of Sir Thomas Phillips to Charles 
 the First, " concerning the Plantations of the London 
 Companies." The first extract is from a letter ad- 
 dressed to Charles the First by Sir Thomas Philips. 
 
 10708. What is its date?— About 1635 or 1636. 
 This is the first letter " one year's revenue of that 
 which comes to the Chamber of London will perform 
 it " — that is, building the Church at Deny, without 
 taking anything from the twelve Companies, who 
 receive from their farmers as good as £2, 1 90per annum. 
 That seems to have been the rental then of the twelve 
 Companies' estates. The second extract is from a return 
 dated in 1727 ; w-as presented to the Lord Lieu- 
 tenant and the Irish Houses of Parliament, for the use 
 of the Government. It contains a list of absentees, 
 and also the following entry — " The London Societies 
 and the Companies in the county of Derry; yearly 
 income, and fines included £8,000." 
 
 10709. Thatwasin 1727?— Yes. The first letter was 
 dated in 1635-6, at that tiine their income was £2,190. 
 
 10710. And in the interval between 1635 and 1727, 
 the rental increased from £2,190 to £8,000?— Yes. 
 To carry on the comparison I could give you. in a few 
 minutes the rental in 1868. 
 
 10711. Please do s,o ? — I have a list here as follows : — 
 Drapers Company, Rental, . . £13,000 
 Ironmongers ,, „ . . 7,400 
 Mercers „ „ . . 10,2C0 
 ClOthworkers „ „ . . 6,C0O 
 
 This estate has been since sold to Sir Hervey Bruce. 
 Salters Company, Rental, . . £15,000 
 
 Fishmongers ,, ,, . . 10,000 
 
 Grocers ,, ,, . . 6,000 
 
 This property has been since sold and part of it pur- 
 chased by the tenants. 
 
 Skinners Company, Rental, . . £12,000 
 Vintners „ „ . . 4,500 
 
 This is now called the Bellaghy estate. I should give 
 
 Mrs. Susanna Gregg, Culmore, near Londonderry, examined. 
 
 10717a. Chairman. — Are you the holder of a farm ? 
 — I am, since my husband's death, fifteen months ago. 
 
 10718. What is the size of your farm ? — I have two 
 holdings, one at Culmore under the Irish Society — and 
 the other on Mr. Hart's projierty. ' It was with regard 
 to the latter that I intended to make a statement. 
 
 10719. What Mr. Hart is that ?— Mr. 
 Hart of Kilderry. About a year ago our lease 
 
 George 
 
 pired. It was a twenty-one years lease. The rent 
 had been £37 9s. M., and Mr. Hart has raised it to 
 £48 8s. 
 
 10720. Was that on the expiration of the lease?— 
 ■Yes; and my hardship is, that after taking this farm 
 my uncle, to whom it then belonged, and from whom 
 we got it, laid out a great deal of money on it. We 
 purchased it from him a few years afterwards, and six 
 
 3A2 
 
 Si:[.t. 28, ISSO 
 
 Mr. lleirail 
 Lou.^liliii. 
 
 you a short sketch of it. The Company sold this estate 
 in 1757 to the Eight Hon. W. ConoUy for £15,000. 
 He was Sj)eaker of the Irish House of Commons, and 
 he leased away a great part of it in perpetuity, taking 
 fines and reducing rents. His successor, Thomas 
 Conolly, continued to make leases in perpetuity, of 
 such portions as had not previously -been demised. 
 The interest of the Conolly family is now vested in 
 Sir Thomas Bateson, the Earl of Strafford, and Lady 
 L. Trench. The estate contains 31,713 statute acres, 
 the valuation was £17,477, the rental about £4,500, 
 a great part of it being let in perpetuity. 
 
 10712. The O'Conor Don.— The rents were fined 
 down? — Yes. 
 
 10713. Mr. Kavanagh. — What do you say the valu- 
 ation was? — £17,477 — that is the tenement valuation. 
 
 10714. Chairman. — Proceed with your list of the 
 rentals of the companies ? — The next on the list is the 
 Merchant Tailors Company, £7,000, the Haberdasheis 
 ■ — this company sold their estate to Sir T. Beresford — 
 the present owner is the Marquess of Waterford ; part 
 of it has been again sold, and purchased by the tenants. 
 The entire estate is valued at £15,506. I do not 
 think I have the rental. The next is the Goldsmiths 
 Company. This company sold their estate in 1731 to 
 the Earl of Shelborne for £14,000. The Ponsonby 
 family were owners of the property for a long time. 
 It was again sold in the Incumbered Estates Court in 
 1855 — some of the purchasers were the tenants. The 
 thirty-two lots into which the estate was divided for 
 the purposes of the sale in 1855 sold for £109,000— 
 the gross rental is £5,055— the net rental £4,752. 
 
 10715. Can you give us the total rental of all tlio 
 companies ? — Yes ; estimating the rental of the Haber- 
 dashers Company at £13,000, and that of the Irisli 
 Society at £16,000, I make the total £124,000. 
 
 10716. Do you attribute the increase in the rental 
 to the system of tenant-right that was pursued? — 
 Partly to that. That,, was the system introduced at 
 the time of the 'plantation, and it seems to have 
 prospered. Of course part of the increase is due to 
 the general improvement of the country. 
 
 10717. Was any of it produced by the outlay of the 
 owners of the estates? — They did co-operate in some, 
 cases with the tenants. 
 
 Sept. 29, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. George 
 Gather. 
 
 Mrs. Su.'ar.na 
 Gregg. 
 
364 
 
 iRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 29, 18S0. 
 
 Mrs. Susanna 
 Gregg. 
 
 years after the farm had been purchased a new valua- 
 tion was made, and we are now paying rent on that 
 valuation. 
 
 10721. £48 8s. was the new valuation I— Yes. 
 
 10722. Was that made when the lease dropped ^_ — 
 Yes. I am compelled to pay that, and my complaint 
 is that that valuation was made on our own money 
 laid out on the farm. The Government valuation is 
 only £30 6s., and I have to pay £48 8s. 
 
 10723. Mr Shaw. — How many acres are there in 
 the farm ?— Thirty-eight arable, and ten acres which, 
 when the lease was granted, were considered reclaim- 
 able, but which did not prove to be so, for a, water- 
 course flows past the land and overflows it eight 
 months out of the twelve. 
 
 10724. You don't reside on that holding ?— No. I 
 reside on my other holding — the one at Culmore. 
 There is a good caretaker's house on it, and a cottage 
 for the ploughman, which I built myself. I got a 
 prize from the Royal Agricultural Society for the 
 cottage. 
 
 10725. The entire area is forty-eight acres? — Yes; 
 including the wild land, it is forty-eight acre.s — of that 
 I have made five acres arable, which were not so when 
 we sot it, we could not do more, on account of the 
 watercourse. 
 
 10726. Was it on reclamation and building you 
 laid out the money ? — Yes. This is an account of my 
 expenditure — lifting and removing stones, £50 ; drain- 
 ing, £50 ; planting hedges and ditches, £18 ; sinking 
 a pump, there being previously no water, £17 ; making 
 a road through the farm, £20 ; building labourer's 
 cottage, £69 ; it was for that I got the prize. The 
 watercourse has been turned, and I can now reclaim 
 the land. 
 
 10727. Who turned the watercourse ?— The tenants 
 — they joined in the expense. The landlord refused 
 to do anything. 
 
 10728. How much did it cost? — I could hardly say 
 what the total cost was. Our share was £10. 
 
 10729. Was that all the expenditure you had upon 
 the farm 1 — No ; there was levellLiig and reclaiming 
 £45 ; that includes the five acres that we were able to 
 reclaim — building out-houses, stone, lime, and slated 
 houses, £99 ; enclosing two. acres of ground and plantr 
 ing an orchard, £37 — total £415, expended on the 
 land by ourselves, and in that we were valued. 
 
 10730. Mr. Shaw. — You purchased the land ?—Wp 
 purchased the tenant-right. 
 
 10731. How much did you pay for it? — £250. 
 
 10732. It cost you over £600 ? — Yes ; and our rent 
 is now raised to £48 8s. 
 
 10733. Do you consider that an excessive rent?— 
 Yes ; the land -will not bear it. It is poor land— it 
 lies to the north west, and the under soil is a red tilth 
 which every one knows is very injurious. 
 
 10734. The area of the whole is forty-eight acres? 
 — Yes, part of it is not reclaimed, 
 
 10735. Is tenant-right recognised on the estates- 
 It is. I have the landlord's permission to sell. 
 
 10736. If you sold it what do you think you would 
 get? — I am "told £500 would be the outside at the 
 present rent, I have that from the landlord's agent. 
 
 10737. He does not restrict you ? — No, the only 
 restriction is that you must have the tenant approved 
 by the landlord. 
 
 10738. The landlord does not limit the price?— No. 
 I wish to mention that the landlord has never paid any 
 of the cess upon this holding. The county cess is £6, 
 and the poor rate and income tax £2 5s. more. 
 
 Mr. James IT, 
 M'Int vre. 
 
 Mr. Jamss H. M'Intvre, Gortin, Londonderry, examined. 
 No, I 
 
 10739. Chairman. — Are you a landowner?- 
 am a tenant farmer. 
 
 10740. Where is your farm ? — I have two difi'erent 
 holdings, I hold in the counties of Derry, and Tyrone, 
 244 acres in Derry where I live, and eighty acres :' y 
 Tyrone on the Abercorn estate. 
 
 10741. Do the points you wish to mention relate 
 to both holdings or to one of them? — Not particularly. 
 I have no special grievance of my own, but I have been 
 chosen by the society to state some facts concerning 
 my neighbours. 
 
 10742. By the Tenant Farmers' Association? — 
 Yes. 
 
 10743. Of Tyrone or Derry?— Both. The associ- 
 ations extend over the adjoining parts of the two 
 counties. 
 
 10744. You are a member of both societies ? — Yes, 
 I have been selected by both. 
 
 10745. One of your farms is held under the Duke 
 of Abercorn ? — Yes. 
 
 10746. Who is the landlord of the otLer?— Colonel 
 Stotherd, r.e. 
 
 10747. Mr. Humphreys is the agent of the Duke of 
 Abercorn ? — Yes. 
 
 10748. Who is the agent of Colonel Stotherd ?— Mr. 
 M. M'Kean. 
 
 10749. What is the case you wish to bring under 
 our notice? — I have no grievance of my own any 
 farther than that I would wish tenant-right to exist 
 at the expiration of my lease, but in no other way 
 have I any grievance. In regard to the price of tenant- 
 right I have bought and sold within the last ten years. 
 I sold two farms under the Duke of Abercorn, and 
 bought the farm where I live ten years ago. I paid 
 £4,500 for the tenant-right. 
 
 10750. What is the valuation of that farm?— £180 
 10s. 
 
 10751. Is that the eighty acre farm?— No sir, it 
 was the 244 acre farm. 
 
 10752. What is the rent of it ?— £210. 
 
 10752a. Do you think tenant-right in your district 
 
 sold higher or lower, before or after the passing of the 
 Land Act? — Aboutthe time of the passing of the Act and 
 for a few years after it, it sold higher, but latterly from 
 the bad seasons or from the American competition, or 
 from both combined, it has been declining. I sold 
 two small farms on the Abercorn estate — one of them 
 contained twenty-six English acres, the rent being £26, 
 and I sold it at £i]50 — the other was twenty-three 
 acres at £22 rent, I sold it at £565. 
 
 10753. Was there an alteration of rent at the time 
 of the sale ? — No, as far as my experience of the 
 Abercorn estate goes, I never saw anything of the 
 kind, nor anv interference with regard to the selection 
 of a tenant — only to be a good and substantial tenant. 
 
 10754. What is called a solvent respectable tenanti 
 —Yes., 
 
 10755. Mr. Kavanagh. — How many acres was this 
 farm you paid £4,000 for ? — 244 acres. 
 
 10756. How much of it is arable ?— About 200 
 acres. There is some reclaimable land upon it — I 
 expended £1,000 upon it since I got possession, and I 
 intend to expend another. 
 
 10757. It is not often such large farms are going 
 —Not often. 
 
 10758. What lease have you ? — Sixty-one years from 
 1859. I think there are thirty-nine years unexpired, 
 
 10759. Mr. Shaw.— Will tenant-right be allowed at 
 the end of a lease — is that the practice on the estate? 
 — Well it is a small estate, and I would rather see it 
 legalized. 
 
 10760. You would wish to see it legalized as was 
 proposed last session ? — Yes, because I did not pirrchase 
 the lease. I purchased the tenant right. In my 
 opinion the lease merely determines the rent for a 
 number of years, and we consider we have as much 
 right to the land after the lease is expired as we have 
 at the time of the lease — that the lease merely fixes the 
 amount of rent for a number of years. 
 
 10761. Chairman. — You think there is some doubt 
 about that at present, and that it ought to be set right 
 by Parliament ? — Ye.s. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 10762. Mr. Shaw.— It cost you about £6,000 
 altogether, and you don't like to risk that? — Yes. 
 
 10763. Chairman. — "What is the next case you 
 wish to mention 1 — My attention was drawn to this 
 as Poor Law Guardian, it was a case of land held under 
 the Irish Society — within a mile of this city ; it had 
 been held by middlemen. The sanitary officer brought 
 a repo;'t to the Poor Law Board of Londonderry, 
 showing a disgraceful state of things as far as this 
 holding was concerned. 
 
 10764. Where was if? — At Ballinagowan. 
 1076.3. Whose property is it?— It forms part of the 
 
 estate of the Irish Society. By the sanitary officer's 
 report my attention was directed to it ; it was brought 
 also under the notice of Parliament, at the time it 
 came into the Society's hands, two years ago. At 
 that time the Society proceeded to raise the rents of 
 the tenants fifteen, twenty, thirty, and, in some cases, 
 as much as fifty per cent. I have seen it often, and 
 passed it many a time ; the rent at which they wish 
 t* give leases to the tenants now is £'2 per acre for 
 poor hilly land, nearly 100 feet above the level of the 
 sea. 
 
 10766. Is that an excessive rent over what the 
 middlemen were paying? — 'Very excessive. [Witness 
 hands the Chairman a photograph]. This is a photo- 
 graph of the place, shownig the condition of the hold- 
 
 • ings on the estate, and which I beg to hand in for the 
 information of the Commissioners. AVith the excep- 
 tion of some sanitary changes there has been no im- 
 provement yet. 
 
 10767. At what tim e were these photographs taken ? 
 — :About two j'ears ago — about the time the matter 
 was broiight up by the sanitary officer. 
 
 10768. Were these buUdings, the photograph of 
 which you have handed us, similar to the buildings on 
 the farms on which this heavy rent was jJut? — Yes ; 
 and on whieb they are now insisting on those tenants 
 taking leases at £2 an acre. 
 
 10769. The O'CosoR Don. — What rent were they 
 paying to the middlemen? — I could not say ; but I 
 know they were raised from twenty to fifty per cent. 
 Professor Smyth referred to it in the House of Commons 
 at the time. 
 
 10770. The rents of the occupier.s were raised? — 
 Yes. 
 
 10771. By the Irish Society?— Yes. 
 
 10772. Chairman. — Was the reason of their making 
 no improvements that their leases ^veie running out? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10773. Were any of those tenants persons who 
 would l^e able to improve their holdings if they had 
 felt confidence that there would be no great rise of 
 lent on the dropping of the leases ? — Well, they were 
 poor people. 
 
 10774. What size were the holdings? — From five 
 to fifteen acres. About a quarter of a mile from that 
 place a property was sold under the Church Commis- 
 sioners to the tenants ; and if you would look on the 
 one picture, and on the other, there would be no need 
 of any argument for a peasant proprietary. 
 
 10775. Were the purchasers under the Church' Act 
 living in hovels, something of the same description as 
 those that are depicted in this photograph, at and 
 previous to the time they purchased ? — They were a 
 little better; but since they became proprietors of 
 their holdings they have built new houses altogether, 
 and one man that was in debt fifteen years sgo, and 
 went in debt to pay the Church Commissioners, has 
 built a fine house and offices, and has gone on 
 prosperously since he purchased. He gave his son 
 £1,000 the other day to go to New Zealand. 
 
 10776. All arising from the confidence in possessing 
 the fee-simple and not being liable to any increase of 
 rent ? — Yes. 
 
 10777. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you know anything 
 about the Bellaghy estate ? — No ; it is in a different 
 jiurt of the country. 
 
 10778. Chairman. — Is there any other case that 
 you wish to bring before us 1 — There is a case upon a 
 
 townland adjoining the parish I live in — it is also held Sept. aa, isso 
 under the Irish Society — it came into their possession jyjj.^ j"^s h 
 about two years ago. The rent the tenants were pay- M'Intyre. 
 ing to a middleman for the townland was £156 2s. 8d. 
 The new rent demanded by the Society Avas £239 76'. 
 lOd. I could give you the particulars of two farms 
 as an illustration of what took i)lace upon that town- 
 land. 
 
 10779. Please do so? — One of the farms contained 
 twenty-seven statute acres ; the rent to the middleman 
 was £25 twenty-one years ago. It was then advanced 
 to £32 17s. 4:d. His new rent is £38 17s. &d. The 
 occupier of that farm has expended between £200 and 
 £300 on permanent improvements, and never received 
 one shilling assistance from the landlords. 
 
 10780. During the twenty-one years ? — During the 
 twenty-one years. I can give another case — the case 
 of one of the most industrious and skilful farmers that 
 I suppose is to be found in Ulster. This man, his 
 name is James Crawford, bought two little holdings 
 in the townland of Rossnagallagh during the bad times 
 for I think £470. 
 
 107S1. When cUd he purchase them ?— About 1846. 
 Before that time the condition of the country was so 
 bad that there was little or no tenant-right paid for 
 farms. That man, since he bought those farms, has 
 to my own knowledge expended £500 in improvements 
 on the land. One acre adjoining me cost him not less 
 than £50, for it was not alone that he made deep 
 drains ten or twelve feet deep, but the soil is so shallovr 
 that he was obliged to draw clay and gravel from other 
 places to fill it up. Every house that was on the land 
 when he got it he pulled down, and rebuilt substan- 
 tially and well, at a cost of not less than £1,000 ; so 
 that between the purchase-money, improvements on 
 the lands and buildings, he has expended £2,000 on 
 those farms. 
 
 10782. "What was the rent? — His rent at the time 
 he purchased was £43 15s. 
 
 10783. For how many acres? — Not fifty statute 
 acres. The rent which was £43 15s. when he pur- 
 chased was raised by a middleman to £63 15s. ; and 
 his new rent is £74 Is. 7d. 
 
 10784. That was by the Irish Society ? — Yes ; and 
 in no case did he receive a single sixpence of assistance. 
 The only favour he ever asked from the agent was for 
 some thorn quicks, and they were refused. 
 
 10785. Was that by the middleman ? — No, but by 
 the agent of the Society. 
 
 10786. When was the last increase of rent put on 
 him ? — He has not acceded to it yet. 
 
 10787. He objects to it 1 — He does. 
 
 107S8. Is there a new lease offered to him on con- 
 dition of his agreeing to the increase ? — Yes, but people 
 are not fond of leases now, as the landlords generally 
 put some clauses in them for the purpose of depreciating 
 the tenant-right, or barring it altogether. 
 
 10789. Chairman. — When was the last increase of 
 rent notified to him ? — About two years ago. 
 
 10790. That was a time when agricultural affiiirs 
 were in a better state than at present ? — Yes. 
 
 10791. The new valuation I suppose was made dur- 
 ing the good times ? — Yes. I might mention that the 
 first surveyor that came over from London to value 
 the estates put a value of f 88 on Mr. Crawford's 
 holdings. 
 
 10792. Was he a man employed by the society? — 
 Yes. His name I think was Hart. 
 
 10793. Did the tenant object to that valuation as 
 being too high ?— He did, and they sent another valu- 
 ator, a Mr. Nolan, to revise it, and he reduced the 
 valuation to £74 odd. 
 
 10794. The tenant must have made that a good 
 farm from a middling one ? — Indeed he did ; it is a 
 model farm, a farm cultivated for profit, not for show. 
 They are not fancy buildings but useful farm steadings, 
 suitable to the land. I can give you another case if 
 you allow me. 
 
 10795. Mention any case the facts of which are 
 within your knowledge ?— Adjoining the townland 
 
S66 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 29, 1880. 
 
 M. James H. 
 
 M'Intvre. 
 
 lastly mentioned is Ballyon. It belonged formerly to 
 what was called the Goldsmiths' Company. It was 
 sold twenty years ago by Mr. Leslie Alexander to Mr. 
 Kennedy, through the Incumbered Estates Court. In 
 one farm upon that townland there aie thirty-three 
 statute acres. The rent paid to Mr. Alexander, when 
 he had the estate, was £11 a year. The new piirchaser, 
 Mr. Kennedy, as soon as he came into possession 
 advanced the rent to £22, and twoyeai-s ago he raised 
 it again to £38 9s. and stipulated that the tenant should 
 pay the county cess. 
 
 10796. It has been raised fi'om £1 1 to £38 9s. in 
 twenty-one years 1 — Yes. Of coiirse there was a gre;i,t 
 deal of money and labour expended on that farm dur- 
 ing that period. The tenant is an industrious hard 
 working man, he reclaimed seven acres of the land and 
 built a good comfortable house and oiEces at his own 
 expense, never having received anything from the 
 landlord. 
 
 10797. The landlord never expended any money 
 on it 1 — Never. A main drain had to be made — 
 partly through other people's property to get an outlet 
 for the water. The tenants had to do that at their 
 own expense. Now mark the case of this man. 
 Twenty years ago his rent was £11, the rent he is 
 paying now is £38 9s., he also paying the county cess. 
 That man has a neighbour whose rent in Mr. Alex- 
 ander's time was £12. 
 
 10798. For how many acres 1 — Twenty-six and a 
 half Cunningham acres. 
 
 10798. That would be about thirty acres statute 1 — 
 Yes ; his rent in Mr. Alexander's time was £12 — his 
 present rent is £39. Ho also has been reclaiming 
 and improving at his own expense. 
 
 10799. The O'Conoe Don. — When was the increase 
 put on him ? — Two years ago. 
 
 10800. Mr. Shaw. — "Was the increase all put on at 
 once or were there two increases t — There v/ere. He was 
 increased in the same way the others were. The rents 
 were all doubled when the new purchaser, Mr. 
 Kennedy, came into possession. 
 
 10801. Mr. Shaw. — And you say the tenant you 
 lastly mentioned has also improved the land at his own 
 expense 1 — He did, he got no help from the landlord. 
 The tenants upon those two farms are both exceed- 
 ingly hardworking men, and to my own knowledge 
 they have made what was only fit for snipe, good 
 fair land. There is another case which I may men- 
 tion — a farm of thirteen acres on the same townland — 
 the rent was raised two years ago. 
 
 10802. Chairman.— Is this part of the same estate? 
 — ^Yes, part of the estate of the Irish Society. The 
 former rent was £15 9s. 6d., it is now £22 6s. lid. 
 
 10803. Wliatisthe valuation?— £17 5s., the rent 
 is £5 Is. llcZ. above the valuation. 
 
 10804. How much did that man pay for n-oino- into 
 it?— £450.' ° 
 
 10805. Did he spend money on it ?— He did. 
 
 10806. Mr. Shaw.— Without any assistance?— Not 
 a farthing. There is a matter I wish to mention as 
 regards tenant-right and sales of farms. There is an 
 estate in the neighbourhood belonging to Mr. Moore ; 
 he refuses to permit sales to anyone unless to one of 
 his own tenants. Now such a restriction as that is on 
 small estates a great drawback on the right of sale. 
 It is the custom on the Abercorn property to have a 
 similar restriction, but on large estates that is practi- 
 cally no barrier, but on a small estate to restrict sales 
 in that way interferes very much. Outsiders are not 
 allowed to offer, and the tenants on tlie estate beino- 
 sure to get it, are not willing to come up to the 
 market price. I know of a case on Mr. Moore's estates 
 where the sale had to be withdrawn in consequence of 
 that restriction. 
 
 10807. Chairman. — We had a witness who said he 
 approved of the restriction, and said it was an advan- 
 tage—you don't agree with that?— No. I think on a 
 small estate it is injurious— it prevents anything like 
 free competition, and lessens the value of the tenant- 
 right. 
 
 10808. Has that been a long established custom on 
 Mr. Moore's property ?— Mr. Moore purchased the 
 estate twenty years ago. 1 think it has been the 
 custom since then. 
 
 10809. Then it was the custom on that estate before 
 the passing of the Land Act ? — Yes. 
 
 10810. Mr. Kavanagh. — I suppose when Mr. 
 Moore purchased the estate he introduced the custom ? ' 
 — I am informed that it was since 1870 Mr Moore 
 adopted the custom, and that previous ' to that year 
 sales were made to outside tenants. 
 
 10811. Mr. Shaw.— Without restriction?— Without 
 restriction. I wish to mention a matter now in con- 
 nexion with a property I am acquainted with m the 
 county Tyrone— about three miles from this. The 
 tenant is Mr. Stevenson — the landlord is Mr. Caldwell 
 of Castlederg. The tenant purchased a farm of about 
 fifty acres, fifteen years ago, at £650 — the tenement 
 valuation of it is about £50, houses and all included. 
 The rent up to four years ago was £57 a year; it j^ 
 now raised to £70 — which is £19 lO.s. above the 
 Government valuation. A great portion of these fifty 
 acres consisted of marshy land which was reclaimed— 
 the tenant drained, reclaimed, and subsoiled it at his 
 own expense, and built substantial ofiice houses upon 
 it at a cost of some hundreds. 
 
 10812. Was it on the falling in of a lease the rise 
 was made ? — Yes. 
 
 10813. Is that the usual custom? — It is. 
 
 10814. Had the landlord contributed anything 
 towards the improvements ? — No. I never knew (and 
 I know these portions of Tyrone and Derry well, and 
 am intimately acquainted with the people) I never 
 knew the landlords to give anything to wards, improve- 
 ments except what they borrowed from the Board of 
 Works, and which the tenants are repaying both 
 interest and .principal by an additional yearly rent. 
 
 10815. This practice of raising rents is your great 
 grievance ? — Yes. 
 
 10816. Some way of settling that would settle the 
 whole question' — Yes. 
 
 10817. Can yoii suggest any way of remedying it? 
 — My opinion would be that in cases where is no 
 disjjute it should be left as it is — I mean that where 
 the landlord and tenant agree as to the amount of 
 rent, they should be left to themselves to arrange it 
 between them. But in cases where they do not agree 
 as to what is a fair rent, I think there ought to be 
 some umpire appointed by Government to decide 
 between their respective valuators. Another great 
 grievance is that when a point comes up about deter- 
 mining the rent the tenant is obliged to give up 
 possession — he is under notice of eviction. 
 
 10818. You mean under the Land Act?— Under 
 the Land Act. He is, therefore, at a disadvantage; 
 for he has to quit his farm, which disorganizes liis 
 fanning operations, puts him in a state of insecurity, 
 and besides the direct loss there is a great deal of 
 indirect loss. 
 
 10819. You think that in cases of difference of 
 opinion as to rent there should not be a notice to quit! 
 — Certainly. 
 
 10820. There should be no disturbance ?— Simply 
 an ordinary notice informing the party that there 
 should be a revision of the rent ?— Yes. 
 
 10821. That notice would then be followed by an 
 arbitration and settlement of the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 10822. Do you think a system of that kind would 
 be satisfactory to the tenantry generally ? — As far as 
 I know it would. 
 
 10823. Do you think if a system of notice and arbi- 
 tration like what you suggest was established the rents 
 would be raised to any considerable extent ? — I do not. 
 In my opinion the present Government valuation 
 would ill good times, such as we had eight or nme 
 years ago, be about the fair rent. 
 
 10824. You would be satisfied with that ?— Yes, but 
 at the present time, owing to the bad seasons we have 
 had and the low prices occasioned by the importations 
 from America, I would consider Grifnth's valuation a 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 367 
 
 liigli rent. At tlie same time, tlie general impression 
 is, that if it could be settled in some way that tenants 
 would be secure in their holdings, I think the country 
 would be satisfied. The tenants want the question to 
 be settled, and to have no more of this uneasiness, dis- 
 content, and discord in the country. 
 
 10825. You don't want to be at variance with your 
 landlords 1 — No. Personally I have no variance with 
 either landlords or agents — as a rule, they are j ast and 
 honourable in every way. 
 
 10826. Would you encourage tenants to purchase 
 their holdings? — I would, in cases where the landlords 
 were willing to sell.' I disapprove of a landlord being 
 obliged to sell, but if an estate were in the market, or 
 if the landlord were willing to sell, I think preference 
 should be given to the tenants to purchase at a fair price. 
 
 10827. Do you think mstny of them would be able 
 to supply one-fourth or one-third of the purchase- 
 money 1 — I thiak one-fourth would be as much as they 
 could supply out of their own resources. 
 
 10828. You think there would be no risk in lending 
 ■a tenant who was desirous of buying his holding three- 
 fourths or even the whole of the purchase-money in the 
 north 'of Ireland, where you have the tenant-right as a 
 security ? — I think so, because the average tenant-right 
 sells at from twenty to tliirty years' purchase. The 
 two farms I sold produced thia-ty years' purchase for 
 the tenant-right. I have been present at a sale of a 
 small farm of about twenty acres on the estate of the 
 Duke of Abercorn, adjoining Londonderry, the rent of 
 which was £21, and the tenant-right sold at £1,200. 
 
 10829. Can you tell us the rule as to tenant-right 
 on the Abercorn estate "i — I don't know much about 
 the Donegal estate personally. The office rules that I 
 know on the Abercorn estate are, that if a farm is in 
 the market the tenant has liberty to sell, but the land- 
 lord or his agent claims a voice generally, though they 
 are not too strict, in the selection of the tenant. If 
 a neighbouring tenant chooses to give the highest price 
 he gets it in preference to any other person. If none 
 of the adjoining tenants give a sufficient price, I have 
 known cases of outsiders being permitted to purchase. 
 On the whole, the administration of the Abercorn 
 estate — at least of the part I am acquainted with — 
 seems to be fair. 
 
 10830. Do you think the rules on that estate would 
 be fair generally 1 — If the practice on the Abercorn 
 estate was legalized, I think the tenants would not 
 have much to complain of on the portion of the estate 
 I am acquainted with. 
 
 10831. There is one question— as to what, in cases 
 of sale of a farm, would be a fair rent — you say that if 
 none of the tenants on the property will give the fair 
 price an outsider will be allowed to buy 1 — Yes. 
 
 10832. You would want some arbitration to decide 
 what is the fair price t — I think Vhatever sum ,an 
 article produces in the market is the fair price of it. 
 
 10833. But the neighbouring tenant is to get a pre- 
 fi^ence 1 — Yes, if he chooses to give the highest price. 
 
 10834. Who is to fix the highest price 1 — The com- 
 petition in the neighbourhood. 
 
 10835. Then you would have to put it up to auction 
 first, to decide what is the highest price? — On the 
 Abercorn estate they disapprove of auctions — they 
 have proposals, which come to much the same thing, 
 because each man knows what the other is off'ering. 
 
 10836. Do the outsiders decide the price by sending 
 in proposals? — Yes. 
 
 10837. And then when the highest jjiice, which the 
 outsiders are willing to give, has been ascertained, one 
 of the tenants on the estate may say " I will take it at 
 that price"? — Yes — at the highest price offered. I 
 know a farm in the neighbourhood that a tenant was 
 selling, and the landlord purchased it at his own use, 
 at the highest price offered by- an adjoining tenant. 
 
 10838. The O'Conor Don.— Was that on the Duke 
 of Abercorn's estate ? — No ; it was an adjoining estate. 
 
 10839. Chaieman, — Is there any fixed time for 
 changes of rent on the Abercorn property ? — No ; it is 
 mostly on a change of tenancy. 
 
 10840. Would the dropping of a lease be considered Sept. 29, isso. 
 a reasonable time to make a change ? — Leases for two -y-^. j^g jj_ 
 lives and twenty-one years, are what the greater part M'lntyre. 
 
 of the leaseholds on the estate are held under, and one 
 of the lives is in being yet. 
 
 10841. Is there a new lease granted on the dropping 
 of the old one ? — I don't ■ know what there may be in 
 the future, but before this there were new leases given 
 always. 
 
 10842. On a new lease being given, I suppose there 
 would be some new agreement as to the rent ? — It is 
 likely there would. 
 
 10S43. In the case of a change of rent, -Are the 
 tenant's improvements taken into consideration when 
 estimating the value of a farm ? — I think the valuator 
 is sent down to value the property and the tenants pay 
 whatever sum the valuator puts on them. 
 
 10844. Including their own improvements? — In- 
 cluding their own improvements. But there has been 
 no new valuation for the last forty years upon the 
 Abercorn estate. The rents we are paying on the 
 portion of the estate that I am acquainted with were 
 fixed forty years ago. 
 
 10845. I understand you to say that the practice 
 on the Abercorn estate would be satisfactory if adopted 
 generally on tlie other estates throughout the country ? 
 — I think it would. 
 
 10846. But there would be something required over 
 and above the existing rules on the estate ? — Yes. In 
 fact the p.ractice on the estate is better than the rules 
 — the rules have been ignored in some cases and 
 relaxed a little in others. The practice upon the 
 estate has been generous and liberal as far as I know. 
 There is one matter I may mention : in the land cases 
 before the County Coflrt Judge, the tenant is required 
 to prove that the custom of tenant-right exists on the 
 estate. Now on small estates, where perhaps there 
 have been no changes of tenancy for many years, it is 
 often very difficult to prove the existence of the custom, 
 though there may be a moral certainty that tenant- 
 right did exist. I believe the onus of proof that 
 tenant-right existed as a custom upon any particular 
 estate is cast on the tenant. 
 
 10847. Yovi think it ought io be presumed ? — Yes. 
 In my opinion it ought to be presumed that tenant- 
 right exists on every estate in Ulster till the contrary 
 is proved, and all office rules that hinder free sale 
 ought to be abolished. I think if that was done the 
 tenants would be satisfied. 
 
 10848. Mr. Shaw. — 1 understand there has been 
 nothing like capricious eviction in your district ? — 
 No — at least very little. The people are very indus- 
 trious, and have so much sunk in the land, that it is 
 a matter of life and death with them. 
 
 10849. They must hold on 1 — They must hold on. 
 
 10850. They submit to pay rents that are too high 
 rather than go out ? — Yes. 
 
 10851. And you think that ought to be regulated? 
 —Yes. 
 
 10852. What is your opinion of the scheme of 
 peasant proprietary ? — We are not, in this neighhour- 
 hood, interested in the question of peasant proprietary; 
 as in other parts of Ireland. We sympathise with it, 
 and would be glad to have it, in so far as it can be 
 created in the regular course of purchase and sale. 
 But what we want is, security for the tenant. We 
 want the tenant to be rooted in the soil, subject to a 
 fair rent, free liberty to sell, and no eviction except 
 for non-payment of rent. 
 
 10853. You think that would satisfy the tenant? — 
 I do, and I think it right to satisfy every reasonable 
 man. 
 
 10854. And do no harm to the landlord? — None. 
 The tenants would be secure from eviction — they 
 would have their improvements secured to them^^ 
 and would bo saved from excessive rents ; on the 
 other hand the landloi-ds would be secured in the 
 punctual payment of their rencs, and a mutual good 
 feelins; would exist. 
 
368 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 iept. 2!), 1880. 
 
 Mr. \\'illiam 
 Gamble. 
 
 Mr. William Gamble, Bridge-hill, Castlederg, examined. 
 
 10855. 
 Yes. 
 10856. 
 
 10857. 
 —There 
 
 10858. 
 
 Chairman. — Are you a tenant farmer ^ 
 
 Under whom 1 — The Earl of Castles'tuart. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — Is there a Lady Castlestuart 1 
 is, his wife. 
 
 Is there a separate proi^ei-ty belonging to 
 Lady Castlestuart ? — Lord Castlestuart got a large 
 portion of property in right of his wife. He does not 
 live on the old property now — he holds an estate in 
 the neighbourhood of Cookstown as well as a large 
 property at Castlederg on which there are about 2,000 
 tenants. 
 
 10859. What is the size of your farm ?— 4.30 acres, 
 but there is a portion of it consisting of cut away bog. 
 I have XiQ acres of arable land. 
 
 10860. How much Ijog ?— The landlord hokls a 
 portion of the bog for letting to tenants — he pays the 
 rates on that portion. There may be about 230 acres 
 of wild bog round the edges of which we have improved 
 and reclaimed to the extent of 120 acres of arable, and 
 I may have about twenty acres of rough grazing 
 besides. 
 
 10861. What rent do you pay 1— About .£60. 
 
 10862. Did you reclaim the whole of the 12ij acres ? 
 — No. I bought my predecessor's interest in this pro- 
 perty, in the ye.ar 1850, for £210. I have built 
 houses, and thorough drained eighty acres of land. I 
 made miles and miles of fences. I made farm roads, 
 I reclaimed and subsoiled to the amount of forty-five 
 acres of this land. I may tell you I have a lease. 
 The reason why I give my evidence is, that I find from 
 the questions raised about tenant-right at the end of 
 a lease that my property is insecure. I have laid out 
 £2,125 on this property. I have an account here 
 showing how the money was expended. 
 
 10863. What was the term of the lease"? — The lives 
 of Her Majesty's two eldest sons — the Piinoe of Wales 
 and the Duke of Edinburgh. 
 
 10864. Were there any years in the leased — No. 
 I got a choice of lives or years and I chose the lives. 
 
 10865. How many years were offered you? — 
 Thirty-one. 
 
 10866. You are afraid your tenant-right may be 
 at an end if the lease should stop ? — Just so. 
 
 10867. You are afraid of a rise in the rentl^ — I 
 would not object to a slight rise of rent — at the same 
 time, considering that I have greatlj' improved the 
 property, I would expect that the rise of rent should 
 be moderate — it should be in relation to the improve- 
 ment of the country and the decreased value of 
 money. 
 
 10868. And not your own improvements ? — No. I 
 am not a wild man in my ideas about the rights of 
 tenants, but I do believe and insist that when a man 
 creates a property it ought to be secured to him by 
 law. 
 
 10869. The landlord contributed nothing towards 
 your improvements? — Notliing. 
 
 10870. They were all done by yourself without the 
 assistance of the landlord 1 — Yes. 
 
 10871. But with the landlord's eyes on what you 
 were doing ?^Certainly ; he applauded me for it, at 
 least his agent did, I never see the landlord. 
 
 10872. Is there much of the same kind of thiirg 
 going on on other portions of the property? — Yes; 
 there are a great many improving tenants on the estate. 
 To show the extent of the improvements I have made, 
 the last Government valuation would be a fair test. 
 In the year 1838 or 1839, Avhen the Poor Law was 
 introduced, the valuation was £50, and £13 for the 
 houses — in 1858 it was £109 annually — the increase 
 of value was created by myself I purchased my pre- 
 decessor's interest — he disagreed with the landlord 
 about a rise of rent at that time. He had originally 
 held the farm at £37 per annum — the rent is now 
 £60 — the foundation of tliat increase is, the labour 
 and expenditure of the tenant. 
 
 10873. What amount of increase was goins to be 
 
 put upon your predecessor ? — I believe they were goino 
 to raise it from £40, Irish, to £80. He objected tc 
 that increase. He was a magistrate of the county and 
 the landlord was anxious to retain him as tenant, and 
 gave him the option of appointing a valuator of his 
 own ; but he was disgTisted with the thing altof;etlier 
 and threw it up, and would not hold it. Eventually 
 it was agreed that the rent should be £60, and I, bein" 
 a distant relation, and a young man at the time he 
 gave me the place, rather cheaper than he could have 
 got for it from other people. To show the amount of 
 tenant-right that exists in some places, I will oiyg ^j 
 instance. There is an estate near Lord Castlestuart's 
 — the property of Mi-. James Greer of Omagh— ob 
 which there is a farm held by a Mr. Crockett. The 
 farm contains 117 statute acres, the valuation is i97 
 the rent £88. It was a highly improved farm, Jite 
 my own. Crockett bought the improvements from 
 his predecessor — there were ten years of the lease to 
 run. He bought it about the year 1871 for £2,110. 
 Virtually that man is in the same position as I am 
 myself. He has a large interest. He bought it in the 
 full faith that his tenant-right, at the end of the lease, 
 would be jirotected by the Land Act, in the same waj^ 
 as formerly. Now, however, we find to our cost thai 
 certain landlords take advantage of the uncertainty in 
 the law to oust the tenant altogether. I have an 
 illustration of that in the way a friend of my own was 
 treated — Mr. Smyth of Aughentain — by his landlord 
 a Mr. Bro"wne. Smyth had been a kind of imder-agenf 
 or manager for him, and ultimately got a lease of a 
 farm, for twenty-one or thirty-one years, I do not 
 recollect which, at a pretty large rent. The fana was 
 small at first, but by degrees Smyth bought in the 
 surrounduig little farms as they were offered for sale, 
 giving small sums for the tenant-right. His rent was 
 £192 12s. 6c7. At the termination of his lease Mr. 
 Brown attempted to raise the rent to £2.30. He 
 objected to this, and they went into a court of law. 
 I was asked to look over the farm, as being a practical 
 farmer, and after the matter had been some time lit! 
 gated there was an agreement come to, and Mr. Smith 
 received £1,000, deducting one year's rent, to settle 
 the claim. Now that case occurred before my eyes 
 and makes me very uneasy as to what may occur to 
 nie when my lease falls in, for £1,000 would be a poor 
 compensation to me, after the £2,500 I expended on 
 my farm. Another branch of the evidence I proposed 
 to give was in reference to the extraordinary rise of 
 rent that has been made on some neighboming pro- 
 perties, on the fall of leases. For instance, the Duke 
 of Abercorn has property adjoining where I live— there 
 is a portion of it called the Manor of Derrygoon. In 
 1866 or thereabouts the whole Manor fell out of lease, 
 and the Duke has raised the rental to one-fotirth above 
 the Government valuation. The tenants oomptam 
 bitterly of this rise. 
 
 10874. What are the rents per acre?-- 1 l»ve 
 selected two as examples : — One farm, the valuation 
 of which is £61, is rented at £74 8s. ; another farm, 
 valuation £62, rent £76 12s. ; of another farm the 
 valuation is £25 10s., the rent is £31 13.s'. 6d ; 
 another farm, valuation £28 5s., rent £36 8.5. 
 
 10875. Do you know- what the rents were before 1-- 
 I do. The rent of the first was £54. 
 
 ^10876. Then it was raised £20 ?— Yes. The rent 
 of the second farm was £54 ; it is now £76 12.'-'. 
 
 10877. Was that raised immediately on a change of 
 tenancy ? — No, these rents were raised on the falling 
 in of leases. They were heldfor the life of Lord Haddo, 
 afterwards Earl of Aberdeen, and on his death the 
 rents were raised, and have been out of lease since— 
 in face, the tenants would not take leases at the rents 
 put on them. There is a great feeling of bitterness in 
 consequence of those rises of rent — there is a great 
 deal of talk about it. Those tenants are all respectable 
 farmers, many of them friends of my own, and they 
 had in most cases, greatly improved their farms before 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 3G9 
 
 tKe increased rent was put on iheni. They say that 
 with the occasional bad seasons, and the fall in price, 
 owinfc to American competition, they are not able to 
 pay those rents, and 1 believe if there is not some 
 check put upon tliis rising of rent, the greater part of 
 the Ulster settlers will have to leave the country. We 
 are not going to shoot our landlords here, as they some- 
 times d') in the South, but certainly we have great 
 gi-ievauces to complain of, and if some remedy is not 
 afforded, we must only leave the country as soon as 
 we can. 
 
 10878. The O'Gonor Don. — When did that increase 
 of rent on the farms you mention on Lord Aberoorn's 
 property take place ? — In 1866, about four years prior 
 to the Land Act. 
 
 10879. ilr. Shaw. — In the good times, I suppose, 
 the tenants did not feel it so much t — No. 
 
 10880. They feel the high rents now in consequence 
 of the bad times'? — Yes, they have eaten up their 
 savings, and are novr beginning to feel the pinch. 
 
 10881. The O'GoNon Don. — Have there been any 
 sales on that portion of the Duke's property 1 — A few. 
 
 1088-. How much did the tenant-right fetch 1 — 
 From fifteen to twenty years' purchase. 
 
 10883. Even with the high rents? — Even with the 
 high rents. 
 
 1088-1-. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose you consider that is 
 not a test] — No test, because it arises from the ex- 
 treme anxiety of tenants who have money to settle 
 their sous on the property, and if a small farm of ten, 
 fifteen, or twenty acres becomes vacant, adjoining ten- 
 ants are anxious to get it. On the Duke of Abercorn's 
 property, where there was a limit to the price of tenant- 
 right I have known on several occasions large sums 
 of money, over and above what was paid through the 
 office, to be handed over to the outgoing tenant out- 
 side the office, and A\dthout the knowledge of the Duke's 
 agent. 
 
 10885. Is there a limit to the price of tenant-right 
 upon the estate? — There has been, but it has been 
 given up, and lately there has been no restriction. 
 There was a case in that farm of Crockett's on Mr. 
 Greer's estate. Mr. Greer attempted to limit it to five 
 years' purchase, and wished him to sign a paper 
 agreeing to give it up at any time it was wanted on 
 getting five years' rent, but he refused and it was not 
 pressed. The same thing was attempted in two or 
 three other cases on the property in which it was 
 attempted to establish the rule, but there was so much 
 evidence the other way that Mr. Greer did not 
 attempt to press it and gave it up. We do not 
 complain of any want of ireedom of sale, but we do 
 complain that the rents are unduly raised. 
 
 1088G. If the raising of rents goes on you think it 
 will injure the country'! — It will — it will totally 
 destroy the tenant-right we have got. 
 
 10887. And tho result will be to drive the tenantry 
 out of the country ? — Certainly. If I was twenty 
 years younger the county Tyrone would not see me 
 very long. 
 
 10888. How would you settle the question of renf? 
 — By arbitration — if there should be any difference as 
 to the amount of rent, let it be settled either by arbi- 
 tration or by a court established under the control of 
 Government. 1 have another case upon the Litton 
 riroperty on the townland of Drumnasbey. A farm 
 occupied by Mitchell Gormley was held under an old 
 lease which ejtpired in 1842, at a rent of £i per 
 annum. It was raised to £8 "is. on the expiration of 
 the lease. About sixteen years ago when Sir 
 Christopher Litton became landlord he raised the rent 
 to £14 10s. annually. Shortly afterwards he sold a 
 i^reat portion of it, and this townland was purchased 
 by the late John Scott of Dromore, who raised the 
 rent of the farm to £16 5s. This was since the Land 
 Act. The tenant disputed this increase of rent and so 
 f.lid some of his neighbours who were similarly circum- 
 .stanced. The cases were heard before the County 
 Court Judge, and as a kind of compromise, two different 
 valuatioiis were put in liy the tenant, and two by the 
 
 landlord. The tenant's two valuations were XI 2 and Sejit. 20,i880. 
 
 £13 5s.: the landlord's £16 5s. and £16 (is. 6d. 
 
 Mr. William 
 
 The Judge ruled that the rent should be £15 annually. Gam iio. 
 The landlord refused to carry out this arrMJigomont, 
 and the tenants, rather than go to further litigation, 
 compromised the matter as they best could ; and this 
 man eventually agreed to pay £15 10s. a year. The 
 tenement valuation of the firm is £12. 'There were 
 four other parties in the same summons with tliis man, 
 and the cases were tried at the same time — AndrH\v 
 M'Sorley, Francis M'llugh, David Craig, and .Mr.s. 
 Jane M'Kay. 
 
 10S8y. And the cases were similar? — They were. 
 
 10890. How did the Judge arrive at the sum of £15 
 as the fair rent? — By splitting the difference. 
 
 10890a. He knew very little about it I suppose 1 — 
 Almost nothing. The estate is within a mile of whei-e 
 I live, and the parties called on me to give evidence. 
 I thought it an exceedingly hard thing of Mr. Scott to 
 go to all this expense and trouble for the sake of 
 such a small amount. This farm was originally a 
 rooky barren place, and was raised from £4 rent to 
 £16 5s. The tenants were industrious and hard 
 working, and had done all the impro\ ements. The 
 late Sir H. Litton was a careless old man, who if he 
 got his rent never bothered himself, and his agent ^^•as 
 a man of the same character. Tlrat was formerly the 
 character of the greater number of the landlords in our 
 neighbourhood, but now we have got a different class 
 of agents and landlords — exceedingly sharp men who 
 will raise rents, no matter what the sufferings of the 
 people are, and ignore our improvements altogether. 
 
 10891. And destroy the tenant-right? — Yes; they 
 have done it in many parts of Tyrone. There ai-c one 
 or two other things I have to mention. One is in 
 reference to sales out of court. There were some sales 
 out of court on the projieity of Sir H. Litton, and a 
 poi-tion of two townlands was sold to the tenants out 
 of court. The sales were not carried out, because tliey 
 failed to get the money from the Board of Works. 
 The Board thought the farms were sold too dear. 
 They based their calculation upon the tenement valua- 
 tion, and there were only two tenants in a position to 
 get the required advance from them. In fact none of 
 them got it — there were two farms bought by the 
 private means of the tenants, and another tenant who 
 could have got an advance from the Board did not 
 carry It out. I may mention that that farm was 
 bought at about thirty years' purchase on the valua- 
 tion. 
 
 10892. Was that too high in your opinion? — Yes ; 
 the Boaidwould have granted the advance on that farm. 
 What the others were I do not know — they must have 
 been something higher for the Board would not gi'^'e 
 them the necessary advance. 
 
 10893. And the matter fell through ?— The pur- 
 chases all fell through except two. One of those whi.i 
 purchased was a Presbyterian clergyman who Lad 
 some little means, and the other was an industrious 
 saving farmer who gave £600 for his farm. The 
 clergyman gave £900. 
 
 10894. Those two tenants had the money them- 
 selves '? — Yes. 
 
 10895. How have they got on ? — Very well, I think 
 they are perfectly satisfied with their purchases. 
 They hav^ a spirit other farmers have not. A number 
 of other purchasers purchased glebe lands — they ap- 
 pear to have succeeded very well. Their holdings 
 were bought at a moderate sum — twenty-two and a 
 half years' purchase — which did not entrench much on . 
 the tenant-right. I think it would be a very good 
 thing if, when a property was in the market and that 
 three-fourths of the tenantry were anxious to purchase, 
 the Government would advance three-fourths of the 
 purchase-money for the purpose, and allow some re- 
 sponsible party to be appointed to deal with the owner 
 on behalf of the tenants and purchase the property for 
 them, provided it could be had at a moderate rate. I 
 consider thirty years' purchase a high rate, but if it 
 could be bought for twenty-five years' purchase I con- 
 
 :j B 
 
370 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 29, 1880. 
 
 Mr. ■William 
 Gamble. 
 
 sider it would be a boon to the tenants — not at all that 
 it could be done generally all over the country — to 
 purchase out the landlords and compel them to sell ; 
 that is not an idea that I consider practical, but 
 occasionally it could be done, and the creation of a 
 certain nimrber of j)roprietors among the tenant class 
 would encourage a spirit of enterprise in the country 
 which it very much lacks at present. 
 
 10896. Do you think that if assistance were given 
 to tenants to purchase their holdings it would be ex- 
 tensively availed oil — I do. At the same time, I don't 
 believe a general application of the system is at all to 
 be desired. 
 
 10897. The rents and the valuation in your part of 
 the country are nearly the same ? — In some cases the 
 actual rents charged are a good deal higher than the 
 valuation. There is another matter I may mention : 
 I object to the G-overnment valuation as the basis for 
 rent, because in the tenement valuation the tenants' 
 improvements are all included— any buildings the tenant 
 has put up are included. Those improvements have 
 no right to form a basis for the rent. Why should the 
 tenant be charged a rent upon his own expenditure ? 
 Whatever justice there may be in including them in 
 the value for taxation, there is no justice in making 
 them a basis for rent. 
 
 10898. Mr. Kavanagi-i. — The value of buildings is 
 given in a separate column in Griffith's valuation ? — 
 Yes ; but in the valuation book at present they are 
 grouped, houses, offices, and land. 
 
 10899. If you except that building column would 
 you consider Griffith's valuation of the land a fair 
 basis for rent ? — I would consider it a pretty fair basis ; 
 at least, it is as good a valuation as I have ever known, 
 or as we are likely to get. 
 
 10900. There are not many tenants' improvements 
 included in the valuation of the land — you are aware 
 the vakiation was made in 1852, and nothing that has 
 been done on the land in the way of draining, fencing, 
 or reclamation, since that time has been valued ? — I 
 think it was begun in 1852; but it was in 1858 it 
 came into operation in our district. 
 
 10901. Mr. Shaw.— So far as the valuation df the 
 land is concerned you say it would satisfy you pretty 
 well ? — It would satisfy me, as a basis, tolerably well. 
 At the same time, I believe, that even with that 
 valuation as a basis there would be exceptions in some 
 cases — such as my own, and the cases of other parties 
 whose rents have been increased. There is a property 
 formerly belonging to Mr. Echlin on which there were 
 some special grievances — the estate is now in Chancery, 
 Mr. Echlin being dead. 
 
 10902. What have you to state in reference to that 
 estate ? — There were some harsh cases upon it. The 
 farm of Hugh Hunter was raised from £13 10s. to 
 
 £18 IOa, and he was compelled to pay a fine of £50, 
 getting a lease at the reduced rent of £16 14s. Id 
 
 10903. The O'CoNOR Don.— When was that?-- 
 Three or four years before the Land Act — 1865 or 
 1866. Another case was that of Samuel Watson. 
 
 10904. Was his rent raised ?-^Yes ; and the water- 
 side grazing was taken from him for which the land^ 
 lord gets £9 a year, and which he and other tenants 
 had from time immemorial. Then there was the case 
 of Mrs. Watson — her rent was raised from £26 to 
 £32 12s. She also had to pay £50, and take a lease 
 besides, losing a great quantity of grazing like the 
 other tenant ; but it was again relet to her at an in- 
 creased price. The Government valuation of her farm 
 was £25. Another case was that of William Irwin 
 of Kilmore. His rent on the fall of the lease was 
 raised from £5 12s. A:d. to £18 10s. — by paying £50 
 the rent was reduced to £16 14s. id., at which rent 
 he was compelled to take a lease. The valuation of 
 the entii-e farm is £27, but this holding is only half of 
 the farm. John Irwin's case is similar — he was raised 
 from £5 12s. id. to £15 12s. M., and he also had to 
 pay £50 to the landlord. 
 
 10905. Were those lands held on long leases? 
 
 Well, yes. I remember the circumstances pretty 
 well ; the life which dropped was a pretty old one ; 
 but I could not say how long the lease had run ; it 
 may have been fifty years, I supjjose, 
 
 10906. The improvements were made by the tenants? 
 — Altogether ; and on this townland upon'whioh those 
 cases occurred there has been a very considerable in- 
 crease in the valuation from the year 1839. It was 
 then £112 ; at the present time it is £290. All this 
 increased value is due to the improvements done by 
 the tenants. 
 
 10907. The tenants^ as a general rule, make aU the 
 improvements ? — Yes. I am a man advanced in life, 
 and I have seen, during my life, very little of land- 
 lords' improvements. The Duke of Aberoorn is 
 carrying out improvements on some of his lands, but 
 he first acquires the tenant-right. Upon none of the 
 lands in the occupation of tenants does he aiford any 
 assistance. I may say for myself — one of the Commis- 
 sioners asked me awhile ago whether I had got any 
 assistance from the landlord — I got a premium of £3 
 some shilliags for drains. They gave M. a perch in 
 the year 1851, and another year they remitted half of 
 the poor rate — and that was all the assistance I ever 
 got; and my case is that of every other tenan1^-I 
 never knew any improvements in the neighbourhood 
 done by the landlord except a shooting lodge or rent 
 office, on part of a tenant's holding that had been 
 taken up. 
 
 10908. Chairman. — Is there a Tenant-right Asso- 
 ciation in Gastlederg ^—There was, but it has died » 
 natural death. 
 
 Mr. Walter 
 Connison, Mr. 
 John Donnell, 
 and Mr. John 
 Eossborough. 
 
 Mr. Walter Connison, Chairman of the County Tyrone Tenants' Protection and Land Law Reform Association, 
 
 Donemana, county Tyrone ; Mr. John Donnell, Strabane, Secretary ; and Mr. John Rossborough, Balliuaoross, 
 
 attended as a deputation from the Association for the purpose of laying evidence before the Commissioners. 
 
 Mr. Connison was first examined. 
 
 10909. Chairman.— Are you a tenant farmer ?— I 
 am a very small one. 
 
 10910. How much land have you ?— Twelve statute 
 acres. 
 
 10911. What is the name of your landlord t Mr. 
 
 Andrew M'Kimmon ; the property was veiy lately 
 sold in the Court of Chancery. 
 
 10912. Do you hold under lease? — No. 
 _ 10913. You hold from year to year with tenant- 
 right?— Yes; tenant-right is attached to it. I have 
 also a small holding in perpetuity. 
 
 10914. Are you a member of the Tyrone Tenants' 
 Ji-rotection and Land Law Reform Association ?- 1 
 am ; I am chairman of it. 
 
 10915. Are yon able to speak on behalf of the 
 association ?_I am ; it consists of a large numljer of 
 tenants. T wish to read for your information certain 
 
 resolutions which were passed by the association in 
 the year 1872, and some of the suggestions put 
 forward by the association have been carried uito 
 law since ; the association still adheres to the pro- 
 gramme which it took up at that time. 
 
 The witness read the following resolutions : — 
 " County Tyrone Tenants' Protection and Land 
 Law Reform Association. 
 
 " The following resolutions were proposed, seconded, and 
 unanimously passed, at a public meeting of this Association, 
 held at Donemana, on Tuesday evening, 5th March, 1872 :— 
 
 I. " That, whilst we desire to express our gratitude to Jlr. 
 Gladstone, Mr. Bright, and those who aided them in passing 
 the Irish Land Act, for the great boon it has conferred upon 
 the tenantry, we consider that its administration requires 
 to be carefully watched, and that the policy of Land Law 
 Reform which is initiated should bo curried out so as to 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 371 
 
 efface from the Statute Book every injustice which still re- 
 mains to prevent thorough sympathy between landlord and 
 tenant." 
 
 II. "That as the constitutional principle of trial by jury 
 does not exist under the Land Act, the administration of 
 the Act should only be intrusted to the declared friends of 
 tenant-right who sympathize with the law which they have 
 to administer, and that the Chairman should have the 
 assistance of a jury at the option of either party." 
 
 III. " That we regard the ancient and xinrestricted tenant- 
 right of Ulster as the basis of the prosperity of the province, 
 and founded on justice and we regard with dismay the 
 decisions under the Act which go to legalize the office rules as 
 being contrary to the express declaration of Mr. Gladstone, 
 iind against the interests of the tenants, of the good land- 
 lords, and of the country generally." 
 
 IV. " That as many Louses have been built in towns and 
 villages in Ulster on yearly tenancies, on the faith of the 
 tenant-right of the district, the protection which the Land 
 Act affords to agricultural tenants' improvements should be 
 extended to tenants of houses in towns." 
 
 V. " That the policy of the Leasing Powers Clauses of the 
 Land Act should be extended so as to protect every bond 
 fide lease made by a limited owner at a fair rent of tene- 
 ments in towns as well as in country districts, and that in 
 all such cases, in estimating a fair rent, any improvements 
 made by the tenant or his predecessors in title should be 
 excluded." 
 
 VI. "That, as the expensive and tedious litigation of the 
 Superior Courts is unsuited for small farmers and traders, 
 the County Court should get jurisdiction as in England to 
 administer wills, and be a Court of Equity generally for the 
 plaintiff, when the property in dispute does not exceed .£500, 
 and should be enabled to settle disputes about title up to 
 .£50 a year." 
 
 VII. " That we regard a cheap means of local transfer of 
 land as necessary to the success of a small proprietary 
 class, which it is the object of Bright's clauses to create." 
 
 ^TII. " That these clauses cannot be generally availed of 
 until the rules of the Privy Council and the Board of Works 
 have been altered, so as to cheapen the procedure, and 
 extend the facilities of obtaining loans by tenant pur- 
 chasers." 
 
 IX. " That the fiscal duties of Grand Juries should be 
 transferred to boards elected by the cesspayers ; and that 
 the payment of county cess, as between landlord and tenant 
 should, in the case of all tenancies, be assimilated to that 
 of poor rates." 
 
 X. " That for aiding in the working of the Land Act, and 
 for carrying out the foregoing reforms, we hereby form the 
 County Tyrone Tenants' Protection and Land Law Reform 
 Association, to be formed of all subscribers of 5s. towards 
 its funds ; and, as we believe that the above changes in the 
 law would advance the interests of landlords as much as 
 of tenants, and be advantageous to the people of the towns 
 as well as the farmers and labourers, and promote the 
 prosperity of the country generally, we hereby invite the 
 <;o-operation and support of all classes, and especially of 
 the members of Parliament for this county." 
 
 XI. "That a copy of these resolutions be sent to His 
 Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, the Right Rons, the Chief 
 Secretary for Ireland, the Lord Chancellors of England 
 and Ireland, Wm. E.Gladstone, John Bright, Benjamin 
 Disraeli, the Earl of Derby, the Attorney-General for Ire- 
 land, and the county MerSbers, with a request that each 
 of them will promote in Parliament and otherwise the 
 objects of the Association." 
 
 "Walter Connisou, Chairman. 
 John Donsbll, Secretary." 
 
 10916. These resolutions accord very much with 
 statements which we have been receiving from a great 
 many other witnesses with the exception of one or 
 two points which are outside our inquiry, namely, the 
 question of houses in towns and villages, the alteration 
 of the Grand Jury Laws, and the jurisdiction of 
 county courts ; these matters do not come within the 
 scope of our inquiry, but the other points which are 
 in the resolutions are matters upon which we have 
 been receiving evidence, and we are glad to receive 
 any information with reference to them?— I shall be 
 very glad to answer any questions which the Commis- 
 sioners may wish to ask me. 
 
 10917. With reference to purchase by tenants of 
 their holdings, have you cognizance of any such cases ? 
 — Yes, I arci aware of some which have taken place 
 under the Church Act, and also under the Bright 
 clauses of the Land Act in my neighbourhood. 
 
 10918. Would you mention the names of the estates Sept. 19, ih&i' 
 upon which these purchases have taken place 1 — The jj^. -^^^r 
 glebe lands of the parish of Donaheady and five town- Connison Mr. 
 lands of Sir Hervey Bruce's, have been sold to the John Donnell, 
 tenants. and Mr. John 
 
 10919. Were you a purchaser yourself in any of ^''^^'^''^'^sh. 
 the cases ? — No. 
 
 10920. In the cases of the sales of Church lands to 
 tenants was the result satisfactory ? — In some cases 
 they considered the price high — twenty-seven years' 
 purchase was demanded, and in the case of some of 
 the purchases in the Landed Estates Court by the 
 tenants of Sir H. Bruce they were unable to get 
 as much assistance from the Board of Works as they 
 had expected ; owing to some defect in the law they 
 were able to obtain only two-thirds of the purchase- 
 money reckoned upon the tenement valuation, whereas 
 under the Church Act they should get three-fourths 
 of the purchase-money estimated upon the annual 
 r-ent. 
 
 10921. Were the sales under the Church Act more 
 satisfactory to the tenants than those under the Board 
 of Works? — Yes, some few of them could not get 
 money from the Board of Works, and a great many 
 elected to borrow the money from private lenders 
 rather than get it from the Board of Works ; of course 
 they had to pay five per cent, interest for it. 
 
 10922. How have the tenants who purchased their 
 holdings in your neighbourhood got on since? — ■ 
 Generally they have got on prosperously with one or 
 two exceptions ; there were five townlanda sold out of 
 Sir Hervey Bruce's division of the Church lands, and 
 three townlands on the glebe. 
 
 10923. How many tenants ? — A great number of 
 tenants. 
 
 10924. Were they small or large holdings? — Some 
 of them were 100 acres, some 90, other's 80, and some 
 40. 
 
 10925. Were there any small tenants amongst 
 them ? — Yes, some were very small ; I think there 
 was one of them was only five shillings a year. 
 
 10926. Did he purchase? — The purchase-money of 
 his holding was only £1, and the transfer of the 
 property cost him £10. 
 
 10927. Was that under the Church Act?— No, it 
 was tinder the Land Act. 
 
 10928. Was it part of Sir Hervey Bruce's property ? 
 — It was. 
 
 10929. Did Sir Hervey Bruce hold under the 
 Church ? — No ; he held under the Bishop. 
 
 10930. Was it Bishop's land?— Yes. 
 
 10931. There are rents upon that land still, I sup- 
 pose ? — Yes ; before the sale Sir Hervey Bruce pur- 
 chased the tithes from the Commissioners at twenty-one 
 years' purchase, and he sold to the tenants at twenty- 
 seven years' a month or so afterwards. 
 
 10932. That was a good speculation?^ It was not 
 a bad one. Another matter I wish to explain is that 
 the tenants went into the thing blindfolded, and made 
 the bargain with Sir Hervey Bruce and his solicitor, 
 and he made them individually and collectively re- 
 sponsible for the carrying out of the purchases. 'There 
 were two tenants upon one townland, who were not 
 able to carry out the thing, and there was, in con- 
 sequence, a fresh survey and a new rental. One of 
 these farms was sold by auction at £180 less than the 
 price agreed to be paid by the tenants, and five other 
 tenants were made to pay every shilling of the defi- 
 ciency, and the expense which came to near £400. 
 
 10933. By Sir Hervey Bruce ? — Yes ; that was the 
 bargain they had made. The Chairman of the county 
 had a case before him in reference to it, and he said 
 that when the tenants again had to carry out a tran- 
 saction of the kind, they would probably be more 
 prudent, and have a solicitor for themselves. 
 
 _ 10934. They had no solicitor? — No; they left it to 
 Sir Hervey Bruce's solicitor, and he made them indi- 
 vidually and collectively responsible for the entire 
 purchase, and in the second rental they made a map 
 including as far as Eaphoe in Donegal ; the most ex- 
 
 3B2 
 
372 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Se{it. 29, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Walter 
 (jomiison, Mr 
 John Donnell, 
 and Mr. John 
 Kossborough, 
 
 traorclinary map you ever saw attached to a rental 
 showing a tract of country twelve or fourteen miles 
 long. 
 
 10935. Was the expense of it considerable ?— It 
 was ; it amounted on the whole to near £400 upon 
 five tenants, and they had to pay it out of their own 
 pockets. 
 
 10936. They had made no bargain about the costs? 
 — I think not. 
 
 10937. They just left themselves in the hands of the 
 landlord and his solicitor?— Yes; they were ignorant 
 of what they were doing at the time. 
 
 10938. Do you think that if a transfer of lands to 
 tenants was conducted upon a cheaper and better 
 system it would be a good thing ? — I do, there is no 
 question of it; it is a terrible thing to make such 
 charges upon them, like the case of the small farm, 
 where the purchase-money was only £7, and the ex- 
 penses of the transfer were £10. 
 
 10939. That would be by an amendment of the law 
 as to title ? — Yes ; I see no reason why the sale of 
 land should not be conducted as simply and as cheaply 
 as that of a horse. I think there should be a registry 
 kept in each district, and it might be done in the 
 petty sessions court ; the petty sessions clerk could 
 keep the registry. 
 
 10940. Upon sales of tenant-right large amounts of 
 property pass without any deed? — Yes; the transfer 
 is simply entered in the book in the office ; in that 
 way large amounts of property change hands without 
 a shilling of expense, in some cases amounting to more 
 than the fee-simple. Last week a farm in my neigh- 
 bourhood upon the estate of the Duke of Abercorn ; 
 it contained thirty-two and a quarter statute acres, a 
 tenancy at will ; the tenan1>right of that farm sold for 
 £500 ; you will say that was a large sum, but last 
 year there was £675 refused for the same farm. 
 
 10941. What was the reason of the change? — The 
 American competition and the large supplies of produce 
 coming in. 
 
 10942. Inthiscase the transfer is made in the books 
 in the office without any expense ? — Yes, without the 
 expense of a single shilling, except in some cases, there 
 is an office rule that for changing the name of the 
 tenant in the books of an office, there is a charge made 
 of 1 ^'J. in the pound. 
 
 10943. You think that there ought to be a register 
 of title kept in every county? — Yes, I think that 
 changes of title could be registered at once in the 
 locality at very little expense, and more effectively 
 and better than if done in Dublin. 
 
 10944. Mr. Kavanagh. — The sales of tenant-right 
 are not registered in Dublin? — No, another thing 
 which damped some of the sales was this. Some 
 speculative merchants are in the habitof giving credit 
 to tenants to a certain amount, and they will take pro- 
 ceedings and without ceremony come down with an 
 execution from the Superior Courts, and the first thing 
 they do is to sell the tenant-right of the farm, although 
 there might be plenty of stock and movable things on 
 the farm to satisfy their demand. 
 
 10945. Why do they do that instead of taking the 
 stock or movables on the farm 1 — I suppose they find 
 
 that selling the tenant-right is the cheapest way, as 
 they are sure to get some person who will buy it 
 from them; it is the cheapest and readiest way of 
 getting their pound of flesh. 
 
 10946. Has that man who bought the small hold- 
 ing of £2 that you mentioned, any other means of sup- 
 port besides his land ? — Yes, he is a blacksmith. 
 
 10947. What do you think is the smallest holding 
 upon which a man could live comfortably who had 
 no other means of support ? — Well, some people caa 
 live respectably upon twenty or twenty-five acres of a 
 farm, with prudence and attention to business. 
 
 10948. Unless a man had other means of support 
 would you be' in favour of selling any smaller lots than 
 twenty-five acres ? — I do not know, a man may have 
 a small bit of gTound and members of his family may 
 be engaged in other kinds of business, and thus enable 
 him to live ; he may have a son a tradesman — a shoe- 
 maker or a mason or something of that kind, and their 
 earnings contribute to the support of the famUy. 
 
 10949. Would you put any limit, or would you 
 permit a man to have his holding no matter how 
 small ? — I would, no matter how small, as long as he 
 was willing to pay a fair rent and abide by the other 
 regulations, I would allow him to retain his holding 
 and have liberty to sell it. 
 
 10950. Do you think that, in the case of a sale of 
 a property, it would be felt as a grievance by the 
 smaller tenants to be j^revented from buying, if the 
 larger ones were entitled to do so, and they prevented 
 by reason of the smallness of their holdings ? — Yes ; I 
 think it would be felt as a very great grievance by the 
 smaller men, no question about it. 
 
 10951. Because the part of the property they held 
 would, in that case,, get into the hands of new 
 purchasers ? — Yes, no doubt of it. 
 
 10952. And possibly a speculative purchaser who 
 might buy with a view to raising the rent? — Yes; 
 there are upon some estates rules by which, when the 
 new purchaser comes in, there is an addition made 
 to the rent, but it is not the case on the Duke of 
 Abercorn's estate, at least on the portion which adjoins 
 me. 
 
 10953. Is there any other observation you wish to 
 make on the points referred to in the resolutions?— 
 Well, no, some of them have been carried out since 
 into law, for example, the resolution as to giving more 
 extensive powers to the County Courts ; I believe that 
 has now become the law. 
 
 10954. Are you satisfied with the County Courts 
 being the tribunals for the decision of questions between 
 landlord and tenant ? — Yes ; there being the right of 
 appeal if either party be dissatisfied. 
 
 10955. Do you consider the County Court Judge 
 the best person to go before ? — I do not know, but he 
 is the person in authorit}-, and the Judge, at the 
 tribunal, the law has apiiointed. 
 
 10956. If any ditiiculty arose as lo fixing of rents, 
 I consider it would be fair for the landlord to appoint 
 one arbitrator, and the tenant another, and that the 
 County Court, or some other competent authority, be 
 the third party to decide in case of any difference be- 
 tween the arbitrators, and let his decision be final. 
 
 Mr. John Donnell, Dunnamanagh, Strabane, Secretary of the Association, was next examined. 
 
 10957. The Chairman.— Are you a tenant-farmer ? 
 — I am one of the peasant proprietary, as they have 
 been called. 
 
 10958. You do not hold under a landlord ? — Yes, I 
 hold under a landlord, paying him a chief rent. 
 
 10959. Do you hold in peqietuity ? — Yes, I hold 
 by lease for lives renewable for ever. 
 
 10960. How much land?— Two hundred and sixty 
 acres. 
 
 10961. Are you a member of the County Tyrone 
 Tenants' Protection and Land Law Eeform Associa- 
 tion 1 — Yes. 
 
 10962. Are you able to speak as to the opinions of 
 tenants generally in your part of the country ?— Yes. 
 
 10963. Are there, any points as regards the tenant- 
 riglit custom upon which you wish to make any obser- 
 vations ? — I have no complaints, generally speakmg, 
 of the landlords in the district, except in one case, 
 in which a tenant was desirous to sell, and the agent 
 on the property noticed him that he would have to 
 raise the rent trom £11 3s. iki. to £15. 
 
 1 0964. When did that take place ?— Two years ngo. 
 
 10965. Do you consider that that was different 
 from the custom on the estate prior to the Land Act * 
 — Y"es, and fi-om the custom of any of the othci- land- 
 lords in the district. The tenant in that case had 
 sold a farm for £150, but the purchaser woidd not 
 complete the purchase when he heard the rent wiia to 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 13 
 
 he raised, and the result was that it went into the 
 Land Court ; the parties, when they got into the 
 Court, agreed to let the Chairman fix the rent ; the 
 landlord's -witnesses, a Mr. Nolan and Mr. M'Crea, 
 valued the farm at £14 a year, the tenant's witnesses 
 valued it at £12, and one witness said he thought the 
 old rent was sufficient ; the Chairman split the diffe- 
 rence, and made the rent £13. 
 
 1096G. What was the name of the landlord in that 
 case?— Mr. Claud William Leslie Ogilby. 
 
 10967. What was the name of the tenant? — Hugh 
 M'Connomy. 
 
 10968. Was the matter settled on these terms ? — 
 It was. 
 
 10969. What deduction was made from the pur- 
 chase-money? — It was sold at £110 ; brrt I may tell 
 you that the agent stated to a friend of mine since the 
 case was in court, that the tenant's witnesses had con- 
 vinced him that the rent was high enough, though they 
 did not convince the Chairman. As long as he was agent 
 he had not raised the rent, but a new agent has, since 
 that time, come into the management of the property, 
 and the rent has been raised. 
 
 10970. What was the name? — ]\Il-. Corry collects 
 the rents, but I think Mr. Greer, of Omagh, is the 
 agent ; the former agent was Mr. Smith Chatterton, 
 a barrister. 
 
 10981. Is it a fact that you have not heard of this 
 rule of increasing rent on a sale of tenant-right being 
 adopted upon the estates until after the Land Act ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 109S2. It was not adopted on the estates in your 
 neighbourhood ? — Xot in any part that I heard of. 
 
 10983. Mr. Shaw. — Was tenant-right recognised 
 in the district before the Land Act ? — Yes. 
 
 10984. Did the Land Act make any difference in 
 it?— Very little. 
 
 10985. On Mr. OgUby's estate did it make any 
 difference? — Well, the district immediately near me 
 is the estate of Mr. James Ogilby, of Dungiven ; he 
 only receives a chief rent ; the Land Act did not 
 affect his perpetuity tenants. 
 
 10986. The Land Act did not afiect them 1 — No, but 
 the case I just now referred to was upon the estate of 
 Sir. Claud William OgUby. 
 
 10987. Are there any other cases of grievances you 
 wish to mention ? — No. 
 
 10988. Then it would appear that the relations be- 
 tween landlord and tenant are fairly good in your 
 district? — They are. 
 
 10989. We have received a copy of certain reso- 
 lutions from Mr. Connison which have been passed by 
 your Association ? — Yes. 
 
 10990. Do you concur in those resolutions? — I do. 
 
 10991. According to these resolutions the associa- 
 tion desires some amendment made, which would 
 make the position of the tenant more clear ? — ^Yes ; 
 that is our view of the Land Act. It requires some 
 amendment to define more cleai'ly the position and 
 rights of the tenant, and to give him additional pro- 
 tection. 
 
 10992. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know anything of Mr. 
 Ogilby's estate ? — Yes ; the case I referred to just 
 now was on his estate. 
 
 10993. Did he always allow tenant-right? — No ; he 
 refused it in 1847. 
 
 10994. He refused to acknowledge it? — Yes. 
 
 10995. Has it been since restored ? — Yes ; his son, 
 Mr. Claud L. W. Ogilby, has allowed tenant-right 
 since he succeeded to the property. 
 
 10996. Was that in consequence of any decision of 
 the Land Court ?— It was mainly his own act. 
 
 10997. Does he allow free sale?— Yes. 
 
 10998. Are rents upon this estate increased gene- 
 rally on a change of tenancy ? — The one instance I 
 have mentioned is the only one I know. 
 
 10999. It is not done generally ?— It is not. 
 
 11000. Is there any other information which you 
 wish to lay before the Commission ? — -With regard to 
 the subject of peasant proprietary, 1 am acquainted 
 
 T\Ir. Walter 
 Cynni.si;n, Mr. 
 John I")onnel], 
 nnd I'll-. John 
 Kodsborou:;li. 
 
 with a district upon which nearly half the occupiers Sj,it. jo, isso, 
 
 are peasant proprietors, and have been so for the last 
 
 100 years. I have taken some notes in reference to 
 
 the condition of the farms upon that district, which 
 
 I wish to lay before you. It comprises about 20,000 
 
 acres, about half of which is held under lease of lives 
 
 renewable for ever, or for 999 jcavs, in some cases, for 
 
 I believe, at one time, Roman Catholics could not hold 
 
 land by lease for lives, but should be satisfied with a 
 
 term of years. 
 
 11001. Where is this district of which you are 
 speaking ? — It lies between Plumbridge and Doneraa- 
 nagh, extending over fourteen miles. The first town- 
 land upon it is Letterbratt, and I shall read my notes 
 as to the condition of the farms upon it which are held 
 in perpetuity. 
 
 '■ Letterbratt. — 708 acres. Townlanil all leased fo;- three 
 lives renewable for ever, in four parts. Fir.st quarter ; deed 
 taken out about 1780 ; divide<l amongst four sons about 
 1830 ; one of sous bought another's portion since ; hence 
 now in three farms. 
 
 "First farm : superior dwelling and ofhce-houses ; farm 
 nicely laid out in square fields ; all cultivated up to top of 
 mountain. Second farm : superior dwelling and ofliee- 
 houses, and farm nearly all cultivated ; this tenant had four 
 sons, and he bou;ilit suitable farms for three of them, 
 giving old place to one. Third farm : much the same. 
 
 "Second quarter: deed taken out about same time. Father 
 divided with tivo sons fifty j-ears ago ; no subdivisions 
 since ; good farm house and offices suitable to holding; 
 land well cultivated. Sixth farm : deed of 1 60 acres ; no sub- 
 division or sale until about twenty }-oars ago, when father 
 divided among his two sons; superior dwellmg and olHee- 
 houses, one of sons since dead ; farm sold to an adj(jinina: 
 tenant on another townland. Second son got into litig:uion 
 with purchasers of brother's farm ; a long course of 
 Chancery and Assize law, ending in his having to sell iilso." 
 
 11002. The O'CoNOR Don.— Could you say what 
 amount of purchase-money they got on these sales ? — 
 The rate of purchase is generally fifty years purchase 
 on the valuation. 
 
 11003. Omitting the chief rent? — Subject to the 
 chief rent. 
 
 11004. Proceed with your notes? 
 " The remaininji; portion of the townland was deeded at 
 
 about same time, and divided into four parts about fifty 
 years ago ; superior dwelling and ofBce-houses, and land 
 well cultivated, but is a kind of rundale, each farm having 
 four divisions ; the plots varying from four to sixty-four 
 acres ; outlying portions sublet to tenants. On this lot no 
 subletting t-ince the Land Act, and no subdivision since 
 1850. Farm houses and oliiees on this townland were 
 valued by Ordnance Valuation in 1857 at from £i to £^ 1 0.?. 
 each, but great improvements in farm-houses and offices 
 since 1857, on several of the farms." 
 
 11005. What is the condition of the under tenants 
 on the places where the subletting has taken place ? — 
 They are pretty well off, though they are generally 
 highly rented. The small proprietors build the houses 
 and offices, reclaim the land, and let it on account of it 
 beingat too great a distance from their o wnfarm houses. 
 Eundale spreads a farm over a great district of country. 
 
 11006. Chairman. — The occupiers are tenants of 
 the perpetuity men ? — They are. It is only where the 
 system of rundale still exists that they sublet, because 
 the outlying portions ai-e too far away from the farm 
 house. 
 
 11007. Proceed with jour memoranda? — The next 
 townlands are Lisnacreight, 763 acres, and Derbrough, 
 674 acres. The tenants on these townlands were offered 
 leases for ever about 1790 on paying a small fine--- 
 about one yeai-s' rent. Only a few of f hem accepted the 
 ofier, as they had got leases for three lives a year or two 
 before. Deed taken by an outsider — last of lives only 
 expired about six months ago, very little improvements 
 on part during the last twenty years, except some sub- 
 stantial office houses since the Land Act. The tenants 
 now regret greatly their grandfathers did not take 
 leases of lives renewable for ever, and also complain 
 that the Legislature has delayed long to legalize tlie 
 leasehold tenant-right. 
 
 1 1008. The O'CoNOR Dox.— They are not in as good 
 a condition as their neighbours 1 — 'Tiiey are not. 
 
374 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 29, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Walter 
 Connison, Mr. 
 John Donnell, ' 
 and Mr. John 
 Kossborough. 
 
 11009. Mr. Shaw.— Have the rents been raised^— 
 No, the landlord has had no opportunity of raising 
 the rents. 
 
 11010. Are the leases just out ?— They are, and the 
 tenants don't know what terms they will get, whether 
 the landlord will acknowledge their tenant-right now 
 at the end of this long lease or not. [Witness continues 
 reading his memorandum]. 
 
 "Valuation of hoiises varies in 1857 from £1 to £2 15s. 
 Only one at latter rate." 
 
 11011. Showing that tenants did not build houses on 
 terminable leases 1 — Exactly. 
 
 " On deeded part valuation of houses varies from £2 to 
 £3 10s., but a number of new houses have since been built, 
 which are of a far better class—no subdivision for the last 
 thirty years, and no subletting. One of themost improving 
 tenants in Derbrough died about twenty years ago— his 
 family got into litigation — the case was pending for ten or 
 fifteen years in the superior courts, ending in the farm being 
 sold in the Landed Estates Court, and, after paying costs, 
 nothing was left for any of them." 
 
 "Gle'ncoppogah.— 1,080 acres. This townland is known 
 by four subnames, Plumbridge, Lowtown, Hightown, and 
 M'Cullaghstown. Plumbridge is owned by four or five 
 persons, whose farms vary from nine to fifty acres. All 
 appear successful and improving. One has let his farm, 
 and is doing a successful trade in the village of Donemanagh. 
 Another has built on his lot seven or eight houses in the 
 village of Plumbridge, valued at from £i 10s. to £11 each. 
 Another has built four or five houses valued from £Si to ;£! 1 
 each. Farms well cultivated, good houses and offices, no 
 rundale in this part, no subdividing for the last thirty 
 years." 
 
 11012. Yon sa.Y one man has built four or five houses 
 on his holding ? — Yes. The lower part of his farm 
 abuts on the village. 
 
 11013. There is subdivision there? — "Well, I would 
 not call letting a house and garden to a shopkeeper 
 subdividing a farm. 
 
 11014. What rent does he charge his tenants'? — 
 About a quarter above the poor law valuation. 
 
 11015. Mr. Shaw. — He bought the land I suppose ? 
 — He did. [Witness continues reading.] 
 
 " Lowtown ; farms from seventeen to fifty acres, held by 
 four or five tenants — one has built two houses in village ; 
 valuation, .£3 10s. and £1 ; all very improving ; no sub- 
 letting since Land Act — no subdivision since 1850. High- 
 town, held by about twelve in rundale ; some of these 
 have leases for 999 years. Mountain part undivided, 
 Nearly all have a prosperous look about their farms 
 and houses, and have reclaimed a good deal of waste land 
 since 1857.' 
 
 I have the Ordnance sheet here, and you can see by it 
 the reclamations made. 
 
 11016. Mr. Shaw. — What part of the country is 
 this '? — It is in the Gortin union, and near to the village 
 of Plumbridge. 
 
 11017. Is it near Newtownstewart ? — Yes. [Witness 
 proceeds.] 
 
 "M'Cullaghstown, held by two leases for 999 years 
 
 fourteen occupiers on this land — the farms vary from five to 
 tbrty acres held in rundale. They have reclaimed the 
 land up to the top of the mountain, to u lieight of near 
 900 feet. There was a great deal of subdivision forty or 
 fifty j-ears ago, none for the last thirty years. When a 
 farm is for sale it is generally bought by the adjoining 
 occupier. Must have been very hard work and patient 
 industry in reclaiming some of the land on this part ,of the 
 townland." 
 
 11018. The O'CoNOR Don.— Do they still hold in 
 rundale 1 — Yes. 
 
 11019. They have nevei: made a partition?— No, it 
 is hard to get them to agree to a partition, there are 
 so many of them. 
 
 11020. Is the system of rundale prejudicial to im- 
 provements ?— Very prejudicial. [Witness continues 
 his memorandum.] 
 
 " Aghalane-352 acres. One-half, 1 78 acres, deed taken 
 out in 1763; remained in possession of original lessee's 
 family tiU about four years ago. The owner was a success- 
 ful inerohant in St. Louis; sold to a tenant in Glencoppoo-ah; 
 good farm-house and offices ; valuation, £11. Other part 
 of townland m the hands of four owners. All of those farms 
 appear to be well cidtivated, and suitable houses were 
 
 built lately on two of them. No subdivision for the 
 last thirty years. No subletting since the Land Act. 
 
 " Clogherney One portion of this townland is deeded 
 
 the other portion is in the occupation of tenants-at-will 
 under Mr. James Ogilby. The land is let in rundale. Moun- 
 tain undivided. Three deeded farms, which are in a far better 
 condition than the others. Have not been subdivided for 
 the last sixty years. 
 
 " Doorat — 929 acres. One portion, held in perpetuity by 
 three tenants, two of them have large families of sons, and are 
 very industrious. They have reclaimed land that no person 
 with paid labour would think of reclaiming. The third tenant 
 has lately sold his lot in two parts— one half to an adjoining 
 tenant, the other half to a tenant on the Abercorn estate. 
 
 "Balix Lower — 537 acres. Only one pei-petuity farm 
 divided among two sons. One of them has reclaimed waste 
 land up the "mountain side, far above his neighbours, who 
 are tenants-at-will. 
 
 " Belnamallaght — 1,214 acres. Upper Halftown deeded 
 in 1778. The original lessee sold in two parts about eighty 
 years ago. One of the purchasers had six sons, and divided 
 the farm fifty years ago between four of them — the fifthson 
 was a doctor, and he bought a freehold farm for the sixth. 
 One of the sons has amassed a very great amount of mouey. 
 The second son died about four years ago, leaving freehold 
 and personal property to the amount of about £4,000, and 
 no family ; his money was divided among his sisters and 
 nieces ; he left the freehold property to his two nephews, and 
 he left £200 for. the poor of the district. The third and 
 fourth sons are also very well off. The owners of the other 
 half got into htigation, about twenty-five years ago, in the 
 Prerogative and Chancery Courts, ending in the attorney 
 of the successful litigant becoming his landlord at a very 
 high rent. Lower Halftown, deeded by grandfather ofpre- 
 sent owner, divided in three parts. First tenant has one 
 son and one daughter, very well off. Second tenant has 
 three sons ; he bought a freehold farm for one lately, at 
 nearly £3,000. Another a barrister-at-law. The third part 
 was divided about thirty years ago into three portions— one 
 of the owners has since sold farm to brother, he himself 
 going to a larger place. Superior dwelling and office- 
 houses On this townland. Nearly all two-story houses, and 
 slated — superior cultivation of land — and great quantity of 
 land reclaimed since 1857. 
 
 "Agheyfad — 712 acres. Leased in perpetuity in four 
 parts. First part sold to a tenant farmer in county Derry, 
 who has it let to five tenants. Second part has never been 
 subdivided, held by grandson of original lessee, who is land- 
 lord of adjoining townland ; has three sons, two of whom are 
 at Foyle College preparing for some of the learned profes- 
 sions. The other half of townland was greatly subdivided 
 sixty or seventy years ago in rundale — occupiers all in a 
 prosperous way. No subdivision for the last thirty years. 
 When a farm is for sale it is always bought by an adjoining 
 owner. 
 
 " LIsnaragh. — 787 acres. Three-fourths of this town- 
 land deeded. One quarter — Deed taken out by father of 
 present occupier, who has bought another quarter about 
 eight years ago, and several other small freeholds in 
 adjoining townlands. Third quarter owned by middlemen 
 and let to tenants, remaining portion held by four tenants 
 from year to year under head landlord, who have made 
 very great improvements on houses and lands since 1870. 
 
 " Lignagoppagh — 1 ,223 acres. Wild mountain from 800 
 to 1,860 feet above the sea. Perpetuity lease taken out by 
 one person. Since sold in five parts. No. improvements 
 made on it except a herd's house. Some of low-lying parts 
 worth reclaimiiig, but no part of townland within a mile of 
 a county road ; and tenants have no influence at Koad 
 Sessions to get it opened up by roads. The owners are all 
 freeholders in the parish, and it is used for grazing cattle 
 and sheep. 
 
 " Tyrkernaghln. — 906 acres. Only two farms deeded. 
 Deed of remainder taken out by a middleman. (1.) Deeded 
 farm. Owner had only one son who had no taste for farming, 
 and went into trade in Belfast ; and the farm was sold 
 about fifteen years ago. This farm is now all reclaimed by 
 owner, occupier, up to top of mountain, the tenants at will 
 stopping halfway. (2.) Deeded farm. On original lessee's 
 son going to the army, place sold since. 
 
 " jKooskey. — All deeded. Now held by about nine 
 occupiers most 'of whom are industrious men, and have 
 made great improvements. Nearly all have now got 
 superior dwellings and offices. M'hen a sale takes place the 
 farm is generally bought by an adjoining tenant. 
 
 "TyrconncUy — 259 acres. Deed taken out by grandfather 
 of present occupier ; no subdivision. About forty years ago 
 the then tenant had four sons ; one was sent to the drapery 
 trade in Sti-abane, another went to Australia In 1851, 
 getting his share with him ; and the farm was divided 
 between the eldest and youngest sons, the farm houses and 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 375 
 
 land are like model farms. Elaest son's family grown up, 
 two sons and two daughters, and lie has bought a free- 
 hold farm for the eldest at nearly £2,000. Ko subletting, 
 nor subdivision except the above. 
 
 " Drain 459 acres. The same may be said of this as of 
 
 Lisnacreight, except that the lease fell out about twenty-five 
 years ago. The tenants regret that their fathers and grand- 
 fathers did not take out leases renewable for ever. 
 
 "Oughtermoy. — 235acres. Deed taken out by two brothers 
 
 first part by father of present owner. He had three sons. 
 
 One went to the n.avy ; the two others were provided for, 
 o-lviniv the old freehold to the captain, who since his return 
 from active service has bought all the freeholds in his im- 
 mediate neighbourhood, employing a great staff of _ men, 
 improving and building suitable farmhouses, and letting to 
 tenants upon whom he has never raised the rents. The 
 owner of the second part also had three sons. One went 
 to the medical profession, to whom he gave the greater part 
 of the freehold, making provision for the other two 
 by buying suitalsle places. The doctor had three sons, 
 none of whom liking agriculture, they all went in to bus- 
 iness in Derry and Belfast. The youngest son has let his 
 part, and gone to the United States. 
 
 " Killiney 223 acres. Deed taken out in four parts. The 
 
 successors of the original lessees have all sold, save one. Pie 
 is selling piece by piece to adjoining owners. One of the 
 original lessees went to the army, selling his portion. His 
 successor has made great improvements. Three sons, one 
 of whom chose a mercantile life, another is an attorney, 
 and the third is living with his father. 
 
 "Binnelly. — 199 acres. Deed tal^en out in two parts. 
 First half divided into three shares about seventy years ago 
 by father among his sons, all of whom have since sold. 
 One of the purchasers of forty-one acres has since bought 
 in adjoining farms, having now 153 acres. Another pur- 
 chaser owns sixty-two acres. Second part : No division or 
 subletting from the time of original grant until sold about 
 twenty years ago, owner having only one son, who is a 
 doctor. Valuation of houses from £3 to £6 in 1 858, but 
 houses and farm-offices greatly improved since. Superior 
 cultivation of land. 
 
 "Binbuniff, 321 acres; Claggan South, 400 acres. — 
 Deeded by a middleman. Lot of small tenants on both 
 townlands, holding from year to year under tenant-right 
 landlords, but tenants not nearly so prosperous-looking as 
 the freeholders on adjoining townlands. 
 
 " Gobnascale. — 209 acres. Half of townland deeded by 
 a middleman, let to tenants; other half occupied by three 
 tenants, each holding from twenty-six to forty-six acres ; two 
 very prosperous and well off; the third got into litigation 
 ■with a neighbour, was about thirteen years in Court of 
 Chancery, and ruined by law costs, but is still in occupation. 
 
 "Stoneyfalls 123 acres. Deed taken out by an out- 
 sider, with the exception of a few houses and gardens in 
 village of Donemanagh. Tenants under the middleman 
 apparently industrious, but in regard to houses far behind 
 the freeholders in adjoining townlands. The freehold 
 
 Mr. "Walter 
 Conuison, Mr. 
 John Donnell, 
 and Mr. John 
 liosshorouffh. 
 
 houses in village mostly two-story-houses, and scaled, and Sc:it. 29, isoo, 
 generally occupied by the owners. 
 
 " Drumaan and Barran 632 acres. Deeded by a middle- 
 man. Tenants holding from year to year under a tenant- 
 right landlord ; twenty-seven tenants. Valuation of houses 
 from 1 5s. to £3 ; only one at latter value. Size of farms 
 from four to 102 acres, a great part unreclaimed mountain. 
 Great improvements made in land and houses during last 
 ten years, but general condition not up to the freehold 
 townlands. 
 
 " Leat — ISl acres. Four tenants, holding from forty to 
 fifty-two acres each. No subdivision during last thirty 
 years. No subletting. One farm sold two years ago to 
 adjoining freeholder. Value of houses from £2 5s. to £3, 
 improving and prosperous looking. 
 
 " Balhighalare. — 231 acres. Deeded originally in two 
 parts. One part, no division until about thirty years ago, 
 when owner divided Ijutween two sons, who are both improv- 
 ing and prosperous-looking. Second part, owner got into 
 litigation with a neighbour, about fifty years ago, in the 
 superior Courts about a boundary. Since divided among 
 three sons, one of whom has bought a brother's part, and is 
 apparently improving. Other, not so successful, has farm 
 sublet. Suitable dwelling and office houses. 
 
 " Windy Hill. — 150 acres. Three-fourths deeded by a 
 middleman ; let to four tenants. Remaining portion, one 
 tenant who took out deed sold, about fifteen years ago, in 
 two parts. No distinction observable between tenants-at- 
 will and freeholders. 
 
 " Gleneosh. — 356 acres. Deed of 250 acres, taken out 
 about 100 years ago ; still in possession of successor of ori- 
 ginal lessee, undivided, but a small portion sublet. Family 
 always holding a high social position in the district. Re- 
 maining portion held by tenants under a middleman." 
 
 11021. The O'CoNOR Don. — Could you give us the 
 total quantity of land which was let in perpetuity in 
 this way 1 — About 20,000 acres ; one half was sold 
 to the tenants and the other half to outsiders. 
 
 11022. About half of the estate is in the hands of 
 the perpetuity owners'! — Yes, and the other half in 
 the hands of middlemen. 
 
 11023. Is the condition of the land which is iu the 
 hands of the owners much better than where they are 
 under middlemen 1 — A great deal better. 
 
 11024. Mr. Shaw. — They have made improve- 
 naents 1 — Yeb. 
 
 11025. And the land looks better?— Yes. The 
 only drawback is the existence of rundale in some 
 places. 
 
 11026. Is there any way of remedying that 1 — K'o, 
 except to get a partition, and parties are not willing 
 to incur the expense of that. The County Court 
 might get jurisdiction to square farms, straighten 
 boundaries, and thus get rid of rundale. 
 
 Mr. John Eossboeough, Ballinacross, Donamanagh, was next examined. 
 
 11027. The Chaikman. — Are you an owner of land, 
 and a tenant-farmer 1 — I am. 
 
 11028. You are owner of 93 acres 1 — Yes. 
 
 11029. And you hold under a landlord how many 
 acres 1 — Twelve acres under Mr. Ogilby. 
 
 11030. You have heard the evidence of the other 
 witnesses 1 — Yes. 
 
 11031. Do you concur in that evidence 1 — There are 
 some things I wish to correct with regard to the evi- 
 dence about Mr. Ogilby's estate. I was agent for him 
 at the time of the passing of the Land Act, and for 
 five years after. At the time I came to live on the 
 estate, in 1860, no such thing as tenant-right existed 
 on it. He even refused to recognise tenanf>right 
 after the Land Act until he was brought into Court 
 by a tenant. The case of Coulter v. Ogilby came on 
 at the Omagh Quarter Sessions. After the decision 
 of that case tenant-right has been recognised on the 
 estate. 
 
 11032. It had existed, I suppose, in former times? 
 
 ^-It had. 
 
 11033. And he tried to abolish it?— Yes : this was 
 not the present Mr. Ogilby. The then owner is now 
 dead. During the famine years a good many of the 
 tenants were not able to keep their land, and he ex- 
 pended money on improvements, and threw the land 
 into adjoining farms. 
 
 11034. Was it an exceptional thing in that district 
 to find an estate without tenant-right? — It was. 
 Tenant-right existed on all the estates in the neigh- 
 bourhood, with the exception of this. 
 
 11035. Tenant-right is nowin existence on the estate? 
 — Yes. There were some sales of tenant-right during 
 the time I was agent, which brought fi-om fourteen to 
 sixteen years' purchase. There was a sale made last 
 spring of a farm a man had got without paying a fine. 
 It was sold for £280. 
 
 1 1036. Was it subject to a high rent 1 — £25 a year. 
 Not higher, than the neighbo^iring farms. 
 
 11037. The rent does not seem to affect the price of 
 tenant-right much ? — No. 
 
 11038. Are you a member of the Tyrone Tenant 
 Farmers' Association ? — No. 
 
 11039. Is it customary to change rents in your dis- 
 trict on a change of tenants ? — In some cases. 
 
 11040. On the falling in of a lease I suppose there 
 is a rise ? — That only seldom occurs. On the whole 
 estate thei-e was only one lease which, fell in about a 
 year ago. There has been no change since. 
 
 11041. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know the Skinners 
 Company's estate 1 — Yes ; it comes close to Mr, 
 Ogilby's. 
 
 11042 Is there tenant-right upon that estate?-- 
 Yes. 
 
37G 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 29. ISSO. 
 
 Mr. "Walter 
 Connison, Mr. 
 John Donnell, 
 and Mr. Jolin 
 Eossborough. 
 
 11043. Are the rents excessive in your district 1 — 
 I could not say tliey are excessive. I was asking some 
 of the tenants yesterday, and tliey have nothing to 
 complain of. 
 
 11044. If they are left as they are, and no further rise 
 of rent put on them, would they be satisfied? — I think 
 they would. " If I am left as I am " (said one of them 
 to me yesterday) " I have no cause of complaint." 
 
 1104.5. The O'Conoe Don.— Did Mr. OgUby spend 
 money in improvements? — A great deal of money, he 
 borrowed from the Board of "Works for the purpose. 
 
 11046. Did he charge the interest of it on the rents? 
 — Yes, he managed it himself, as he was both agent 
 and landlord. 
 
 11047. I suppose he increased the value of the 
 property considerably by the improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 11048. Does he allow the tenants to sell the tenant- 
 right in those farms as if they had made the improve- 
 ments themselves ? — Yes, there was a case of that sort 
 that occurred this year. 
 
 11049. Is not the rent that he puts on the tenant a 
 rent covering the improvements 1 — Yes. 
 
 11050. So that the man who is buying the farm 
 will have to pay for those improvements in the shape 
 of an increased rent ? — Yes. 
 
 11051. The O'CoNOB Don. — Are the rents on that 
 property higher than on the estates of the surrounding 
 landlords ? — I coiild not say they are much higher. 
 
 11052. Mr. Shaw. — Are the rents higher than 
 before the improvements were made 1 — Yes. 
 
 11053. Mr. Kavanagh. — If you had a farm to let, 
 'and had made improvements on it, and let it to me, 
 charging me no fine for going into possession — do you 
 think T would have a right to sell that ?— I think you 
 would not. 
 
 1 1 054. But you would be likely to charge me some- 
 thing for the improvements ? — I would of course. 
 
 11055. By way of interest on your expenditure? — 
 
 Yes. But I would not cliarge a higher interest than 
 would be right. 
 
 11056. Of course you admit that if I made the 
 improvements on the farm after you had let it to me I 
 would have a right to sell them ? — Yes. I think in 
 some of those cases where Mr. Ogilby sold, if it had 
 been my farm I would have objected to the sale. But 
 in the case I mentioned a while ago the tenant paid 
 nothing when he got the farm. 
 
 11057. Did not the tenant make improvements after 
 he entered into occupation ? — He made none. 
 
 11058. But the whole estate being tenant-right, it 
 would be an awkward thing to except one farm in the 
 middle of it ? — Of course ; but it was a well known 
 fact that he got the farm for nothing. I have known 
 cases on the same estate — one case especially — where a 
 man had a large farm under Mr. Ogilby under the 
 same ciixumstances, and about a year ago he paid a 
 sum of money to acquire the tenant-right. 
 
 11059. He bought the tenant-right, he being at the 
 time in occupation ? — Yes ; he paid Mr. Ogilby a 
 certain sum of money to acquire the tenant-right. 
 
 11060. Mr, Connison. — There is one matter which 
 I wish to be added to my evidence. Previous to 
 1832, in the days of the old freeholders, no person 
 could get a lease on the Abercorn estate hut a per- 
 son able to qualify that the freehold was w'orthflO 
 over and above what rent he paid. The person that 
 could not so qualify got no lease. Would not you 
 think it a hard thing if, because you were able to 
 qualify to get a lease as a freeholder, jow should be 
 put in a worse condition than a person not in a position 
 to get a lease for the accommodation of his landlord?— 
 It would appear, too, from some decisions under the 
 Land Act, that there is no tenant-right at the fall of the 
 lease, though taken o\it for the benefit of the landlord. 
 
 11061. So that in point of fact he was in a worse 
 position than the other man ? — Yes. 
 
 Eev. Edward 
 
 Longhrey. 
 
 The Eev. Edwaed Lotjgheey, Altanure Park, Londonderry, with a number of other tenant-farmers, 
 attended on behalf of the Clady Tenants Association. 
 
 11062. Chairman. — You attend here with a num- 
 ber of members of the Clady Tenants Association 1 
 —I do. 
 
 11063. Give us, in a general way, your views with 
 regard to the tenant-right question. Does it exist in 
 your district? — It exists generally, but not on all 
 estates alike. 
 
 11064. There are various regulations on different 
 estates ? — Yes ; on some estates there is unlimited free 
 sale and fair rents, with a right to live on your hold- 
 ing as long as you continue to pay the rent. 
 
 11065. Has the landlord a veto on the incoming 
 tenant ? — In some case there is no veto, and we insist 
 that there should be no veto — that when a proper 
 person presents himself as tenant there should be no 
 objection. 
 
 11066. The only qualification being that he should 
 be a solvent respectable person ? — A person of good 
 character. We would not wish to have any bad cha- 
 racters amongst us. 
 
 11067. I suppose you would say that his being able 
 to pay for the tenant-right is evidence that he is 
 solvent? — I think any man who jjurchases the 
 tenant-right of a farm and pays for it, his doing so i'S 
 quite enough to show solvency. 
 
 11068. But you think his character ought to be 
 looked into ? — If he be a man of very bad character he 
 ouglit not to be taken as tenant, but it is a very ex- 
 treme thing to exclude any man from the ordinary pri- 
 vileges of the country. Of course any man of 
 notoriously bad character ought to be excluded. 
 
 11069. You say on some estates tenant-right exists 
 in its entirety ? — Yes. 
 
 11070. On other estates it is modified? — Yes; on 
 some estates it is restilcted only in .1 small degree. On 
 otliers to a grievous extent. In some cases to such an 
 extent that it is not tenant-right at all. 
 
 11071. What are the restrictions ? — On some estates 
 the tenant-right is restricted to five years' purchase. 
 On others to three years. This exception I would call 
 a late innovation introduced within the last tlurty or 
 forty years. 
 
 11072. Before the Land Act? — On some estates 
 since the Land Act. I may mention the estate of 
 the Skinners Company, where formerly there was 
 free right of sale. TJiey are at present trying to do 
 away v.'ith the right of public sale which the tenants 
 enjoyed. 
 
 11073. They had enjoyed it formerly ? — Yes. 
 
 11074. Are there any other landlords that are 
 adopting the same system or who have adopted it 
 lately — of endeavouring to restrict tenant-right? — Mr. 
 M'Causland restricts to five years on the mountain 
 farms, and three on the home. 
 
 11075. Does he give them the price of their im- 
 provements besides ? — Well, he does not — I may say 
 from the effect of his rules on the estate no man has 
 a heart to lay oiit anything on the property. 
 
 11076. Does he make improvements himself ?— He 
 makes no improvements that I would call permanent. 
 He might give a man a few pounds for making drains 
 — but I call that no permanent improvements — yon 
 all know that drains in a certain time become useless. 
 
 11077. Does he do nothing in the way of building? 
 — No ; there is one case where he did, but the man 
 had been his bailifip, I know of no others. This case 
 to which I allude was before my time, but I am told 
 he largely assisted the man. The generality of the 
 tenants do all themselves. 
 
 11078. Are the houses and buildings on his pro- 
 perty in good condition ? — I consider the condition of 
 his estate generally is infinitely worse than that of 
 any other estate round about. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 377 
 
 11079. Is yours a mountain district? — It is, but 
 we are not the less independent on that account. 
 
 llObO. The limit of three and five years upon the 
 yalue of tenant-right in effect takes away the tenants' 
 interest in improvements? — Certainly; it acts as a 
 deterrent to the tenant expending any money upon 
 the improvement of his farm. 
 
 IIOSI. The O'CoNOR Don. — Could you give any 
 instance in which a tenant had made improvements 
 on 5Ir. M'Causland's estate and was not allowed for 
 them, over and above the three or five years 1 — I 
 could ; an instance where a gentleman named Douglas 
 bought a farm, and the man who sold it only got five 
 years' compensation — at the same time Mi'. Douglas 
 privately gave the man more. 
 
 11082. He gave him more than the five years? — 
 Yes ; Mr. Douglas gave him £70 of his own free 
 will. 
 
 11083. Mr. M'Causland stated the rule was to give 
 the tenant the value of his improvements in addition 1 
 — I do not know of any such thing existing — it might 
 be so according to his lights. 
 
 11084. Mr. Shaw. — He stated' that he used to allow 
 for manures and for other improvements in addition 
 to the five years ?-^Not to my knowledge — he has 
 never made a return for improvements — if he had no- 
 body would object to it. 
 
 11085. If they got five years for the tenant-right, 
 and full value for any improvements, there would be 
 no objection? — No. 
 
 11086. The O'Conoe Don. — Could you furnish to 
 us the names of any tenants who got only the five 
 years' compensation and who had made improvements 
 and lost them ? — There was the case I alluded to, in 
 which Mr. Douglas bought a farm from an old man 
 named Michael M'Clusky. 
 
 11087. "When did that take place? — I could not 
 give the date of it — it is sixteen or eighteen years 
 ago. 
 
 11088. How long has he been owner ? — His father 
 was in possession of the property at that time — it came 
 to him through his father about twenty years ago. 
 
 11089. He stated that he followed out the rule that 
 was in existence iu his father's time? — That would 
 not contradict what I say. The rule was introdu.ced 
 under Mr. William Gage, nov.r the agent of the Fish- 
 mongers' Company. In the time of the previous 
 agent, Mr. Whyte, there was no such thing ; there 
 was no interference with tenant-right then. The same 
 farm was again sold two years ago at five years' 
 purchase. 
 
 11090. This farm of Mr. Douglas's ?— Yes. 
 
 11091. He sold it again? — It was sold again — he 
 was put out and the farm was given to the present 
 occupier at five years' purchase. 
 
 11092. Do you know anything of the case of the 
 railway passing through the property ? — I do not ; I 
 believe that has reference to a portion of his property 
 in the north-east of the county. 
 
 11093. It was stated to us that in the inquiry 
 before the arbitrator as to the compensation, in appor- 
 tioning the amount between landlord and tenant, the 
 tenants admitted that they had no claim to the 
 improvements, and that Mr. M'Causland had made 
 them ? — I don't know anything about that — I am 
 speaking of the mountain property. 
 
 11094. It is on the mountain portion the five years' 
 limit exists, and three years on the other portion ? — 
 Yes, so I believe. 
 
 11095. Are there any other landlords in the district 
 who have carried out the same rule? — There is Mr. 
 Bruce. His rule is to raise a farm whenever it passes 
 from one tenant to another, and he goes so far I 
 believe that he wUl even raise it when it descends from 
 father to son. I am not now speaking of Sir Hervey 
 Bruce, but Mr. Bruce. 
 
 11096. Have the rents been raised on that estate? 
 — Yes, they have been raised doubly without any 
 reasonable cause. 
 
 11097. On Mr Bruce's estate?— Yes. 
 
 11098. Was that done on avaluation? — No, simply 
 
 the landlord's will. The rents were raised during the 
 time of the present Mr. Bruce's predcci'ssor by the 
 then agent, Mr. Babington. I have an instance 
 before me— Robert Withero, he had a farm at £31 
 r<'nt, but he happened to disagree with his landlord 
 about the vote for Member of Parliament, and his 
 rent was raised from £31 to £75. 
 
 11099. When was that?— At the time of Mr. 
 Greer's election, fifteen or sixteen years ago. 
 
 11100. The O'CoNOR Don.— That was before the 
 Land Act ? — Yes, since that he has gone on raising 
 rents in the same way. 
 
 ^ 11101. Chairman. — Do you think such restrictions 
 as this have led to a feeling among the tenants, that 
 the tenant-right may be done away with eventually 1 
 — Certainly. We look upon it as quite against 
 our interests and against the first principles of 
 justice, that a landlord can add to the rent at his 
 pleasure, and in other ways lesson the value of the 
 tenant's interest. 
 
 11102. Does it operate to prevent improvements 
 by the tenant ? — Of course it does. 
 
 11103. Mr. Shaw. — Have all the improvements 
 been made by the tenants on Mr Bruce's estate? — As 
 far as I know all the improvements were done entirely 
 at the expense of the tenant. There may have been 
 instances where a man gets a present from the land- 
 lonl which I cannot look upon as more than an 
 acknowledgment that he is pleased that the tenant is 
 making improvements. 
 
 11104. The general rule is that the tenant makes 
 the improvements ? — Yes, it is an exceptional case 
 where there is any assistance given by the landlord. 
 
 11105. The O'Conor Don.— What is the general 
 price of tenant-right on that estate ? — I cannot exactly 
 say. I have not known any instances of sales, except 
 one, which was a disputed sale, and in that case it was 
 £20 an acre. 
 
 11106. How many years' purchase 1 — Twenty-eight 
 years' purchase. The tenant-right varies from twenty 
 to fifty years' purchase in the district. 
 
 11107. Was there a lease ? — No lease. 
 
 11108. Does he restrict the price ? — He did in this 
 instance, he took the farm into his own hands and let 
 Mr. Coffey give judgment against him. 
 
 11109. Are there many cases in your district? — I 
 may say none, or hardly any. I only know of one or 
 two old leases, that are running out. As a matter of 
 course the nearer the end of a lease the nearer the 
 beginning of unpleasantness 
 
 11110. Have landlords been anxious since the Land 
 Act to give leases ? — Not more than they usually were 
 before the Act, but where they did offer to give leases 
 there was a clause doing away with tenant-right. In 
 one instance, the Fishmongers' Company put some 
 clauses in their leases which were injurious to the 
 tenants ; the tenants resisted, and were successful in 
 making the Company accede to their views, and the 
 leases were drawn more fairly. 
 
 11111. What is the general character of the rents in 
 your district, are they moderate ? —There are instances 
 where they are fair and instances where they are ex- 
 treme. They are extreme on parts of the estate on 
 which I am a tenant myself. 
 
 11112. Are they rents which have been fixed within 
 the last few years ? — The last of them was fixed within 
 the last three or four months. 
 
 11113. Was that on a change of tenancy ? — No; 
 the landlord sent his valuator, and raised the rent 
 according to the valuation put upon it. 
 
 11114. Was that under a new rule? — No, he was 
 only putting on a new rent ; he said he would not in- 
 terfere with the tenant-right, but simply wished to get 
 a fair value for his land. 
 
 11115. Was it a periodical valuation ? — Yes ; as far 
 as the period goes there was no objection — it was after 
 twenty or twenty-one years. 
 
 11116., You think the rent put on vvas excessive ? 
 
 I do. 
 
 11117. Did the tenants make any objection to the 
 increase ? — Tluu-c was no use in objecting — they should 
 
 Sept. 29, 1PS5 
 
 Eev. Edwavd 
 LoLighrey. 
 
S78 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 29. 18S0. 
 
 Eev. Edward 
 Longhrey. 
 
 either submit and pay the increased rent or walk out. 
 One of them was evicted for refusing to pay, but he was 
 put in again. We look upon it as a great hardship 
 that in those cases where the landlord sends his valua- 
 tor, the tenant has no locus standi, and no person to 
 represent his interests. 
 
 11118. Is he heard before the valuator? — No, he 
 knows nothing about the valuation ; he does not even 
 see the valuator — he is simply told, " Your rent is so 
 and so," and if he does not pay there is a notice to quit. 
 
 11119. He is not given the items of the valuation 1 
 — No ; he is merely told what his rent is to be. This 
 was done on the estate on which I am a tenant myself, 
 and oil which we have, on the whole, a very fair and 
 just landlord, Mr, Beresford, d.l. I give him a high 
 character, on the whole, as a landlord, but I think he 
 is getting more than he has in justice a right to get. 
 We object to the increases of rent that have been made 
 on the estate, upon the ground that the tenant is not 
 given a locus standi. He is not allowed to open his 
 nrouth ; he may object, to be sure, but what remedy 
 has he ? If he does not pay the increased rent he gets 
 a notice to quit, and all he can do is to serve his claim 
 under the Land Act, and on the trial of the claim the 
 rent is to be adjusted, and he has to depend on the 
 judgment of the Chairman of the County Court, 
 whether a good land valuator or otherwise. If he 
 considers that the rent sought to be put on is not an 
 exorbitant rent, he will give his decision against the 
 tenant, and so far I do not object. But the tenant 
 would be hardly treated in ca^e it really was an ex- 
 orbitant rent, if the decision should be against him, for 
 he would lose his- tenant-right, because, in the judgment 
 of the Court,' he was unreasonably unwilling to pay a 
 fair rent ; whereas, in my mind, even if the tenant 
 acted unreasonably in refusing, he ought still to get the 
 balance between the value of his tenant-right and what- 
 ever arrears of rent were due. 
 
 11120. In case he goes out? — He must go out. 
 
 11121. Do you also see an objection to his being 
 obliged to bo- in Court before he can know what 
 lie is to get, and before he knows what the teiTQS 
 are ? — He will hear the rent in the office. If he 
 objects to the rent he will be brought into Court upon 
 an ejectment. He then takes a proceeding himself, 
 in the form of a land claim, which is either refused or 
 gi-anted, according to the judgment of the Chairman 
 of the County Court. If he considers the proposed 
 rent exorbitant he will give judgment for the tenant ; 
 if he does not consider it exorbitant or unfair he will 
 give judgment against the tenant, who thereby loses 
 his tenant-right if he is out of possession. This is a 
 most unfair state of the law. 
 
 11122. He must first go out of the farm ?— Not 
 necessarily, before the land claim is heard, but he must 
 give up possession before he can get the compensation 
 — which is the only thing the cliairman can decree, 
 except on consent. 
 
 11123. When you say the tenant knows nothing of 
 the valuation, does not the valuator when he goes on 
 the land ask the tenant to point out his improve- 
 ments 1 — No ; he simply goes and values the land, 
 including the tenant's improvements and all. He 
 never asks the tenant to show him what improvements 
 he has made. 
 
 1112f. I suppose the valuator says to the tenant, 
 " I am called upon to value the property as it stands, 
 and I must let the landlord and tenant settle what the 
 rent is to be, having regard to the improvements done 
 by the tenant ?" — Yes. 
 
 11125. He values the farm as it stands — improve- 
 ments and all ? — Yes. 
 
 11126. Chaikman — He does not consider ho\/ much 
 of the value is due to the improvements effected by 
 the tenant 1 — He does not consider a ha'porth about it. 
 
 _ 11127. Mr. Shaw.— The tenants get no satisfac- 
 tion ?— None has, even in the case I alluded to the 
 tenant got no satisfaction. 
 
 _ 11128. Mr. Kavanagh.— Who is the valuator that 
 IS generally employed to value the farms here?— There 
 are different valuators. 
 
 11129. Have they told you that they value the 
 tenants' improvements ? — Yes. They take the laud as 
 they see it, and value it in its actual state. The 
 reason I can prove that statement is this : On the 
 same estate there are two tenants adjoining each 
 other, their farms of equal extent, quality, ifcc. On 
 one side of the fence there is a farm held by an in- 
 dustrious, hard-working man, who has improved and 
 reclaimed his land. On the other side of the fence 
 tliere is a farm occupied by a lazy tenant who has. 
 made no impj-ovements. The valuator visits them 
 both. On one of them — the one that has not been im- 
 proved by the tenant — he puts the old rent, without 
 any increase ; while on the other farm, which has beea 
 improved by the expenditure and exertions of the 
 tenant, the rent is doubled. Therefore, I conclude 
 that, whether he tells me so or not, the valuator does 
 include the improvements of the tenant in the valua- 
 tion he makes. 
 
 11130. Chaikman. — Are yon able to give us any 
 information with reference to tenants becoming pur- 
 chasers of their holdings ?-■ Yes ; there have IJeeu 
 some cases of it, but it is entirely confined to the 
 Church lands. 
 
 11131. Were the Church lands in your neighbour- 
 hood mostly bought by the tenants ? — They were, -when- 
 ever the tenant had th« means, or could procure the 
 means. Those who did not buy, it was because they 
 were too poor. 
 
 11132. What condition are they in now ? It has 
 been in operation too short a time to allow of any 
 opinion being formed as yet. Apparently they are 
 doing as well as they can. Those that were able to 
 purchase without borrowing the money are in a 
 fiourisliing condition, and making great improve- 
 ments. Where they had to borrow a large portion of 
 the purchase-money they are in a struggling way. 
 Some of them have their holdings very heavily mort- 
 gaged. 
 
 11133. Mr. Shaw. — They are not worse off than 
 their neighbours ? — No. As a matter of course, we 
 are not so sanguine about tenant 2:>roprietary if we got 
 what we are looking for — fixity of tenure, fair rents, 
 and free sale. 
 
 1113f. Yon think that would satisfy the tenants? 
 — That v/ould satisfy the generality of the tenants ; at 
 the same time, it would not prevent the tenants from 
 becoming owners of their farms, in case they were in a 
 position to purchase — and I think it woidd be de- 
 sirable in some cases, where part of an estate could 
 be sold without deteriorating the interest of the land- 
 lord in the remainder. 
 
 11135. You would not force a landlord to selH— I 
 would not. 
 
 11136. Where the tenant was willing to purchase, 
 and the landlord willing to sell, you think it desirable? 
 —Yes. 
 
 11137. And would assist the tenant to carry it out? 
 — I would. 
 
 11138. Tenant-right, in its purity, you say, would 
 give satisfaction ? — Yes. ' I look upon it as the untram- 
 melled right of the tenant to the occupancy of the soil. 
 
 11139. And the doing away of it on some estates 
 has given a great deal of dissatisfaction? — Yes. 
 The dissatisfaction has risen to a high pitch. The 
 tenants don't wish to get into an excited state against 
 their landlords — they have been up to the present ou 
 the best terms with them, and hope to continue so. 
 We object also to the rules as to turbary, and we claim 
 that, when there is turbary on an estate, every tenant 
 should have the right or privilege of cutting as much 
 turf as he requires for his own use at a fair and reason- 
 able charge. 
 
 11140. Are the charges high now? — They vary ; ia 
 some cases they are very high. From a shilling " pei'- 
 mit" it varies, until, on some estates, it is charged as 
 high as a shilling a perch. I know estates where the 
 tenants give 2«. M. or 5s. a year for permission to cut 
 turf, and often, where a man has it on his farm, he is 
 charged for cutting it ; and, even if there was a con- 
 cession made to him, giving him liberty to cut it on 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 379 
 
 his own farm, he is sometimes changed to his neigh- 
 bour's fevm, and then he is charged the full turbary 
 rate. 
 
 11141. The landlord keeps it in his own hands'? — • 
 He keeps the privilege of turbary in his own hands. 
 
 11142. The O'CoNOR Don. — Is that the case on all 
 the estates? — It is the case on all the estates. Since 
 the hwt election here, for some cause or other, on a 
 neighbouring estate, it has been raised three times on 
 the tenants, and the increase has caused a great deal 
 of dissatisfaction. Tenants are forced to think it was 
 because they made nse of the privilege of the Ballot^in 
 a way that did not satisfy some people. 
 
 11143. The privilege of turbary existed more freely 
 in the olden times than it does now ? — No comparison. 
 It was not restricted then : now it is restricted. I 
 would qualify that answer by stating, in the olden 
 time turbary was more easUy got, and there was more 
 of it — it is not so plentiful now. Therefore, a reason- 
 able charge for it would not be objected to ; but, when 
 it goes beyond reason, they do object to it. 
 
 11144. Are the farms small, as a rule, in your dis- 
 trict? — In the mountainy districts they are small — 
 from six to ten acres of arable ; when you come down 
 to what are called the "home lands," they increase up 
 to fifty or sixty acres. 
 
 11145. Are they able to live on those small farms 
 comfortably 1 — WeU, considering the times and the cir- 
 cumstances of the country, they are comfortable. 
 
 11146. The rents are not oppressively high ? — In 
 some cases they are — in many others they are reason- 
 able. 
 
 11147. Mr. Shaw. — ^Is there much weaving done in 
 your district ? — No, indeed ; aU that has disappeared. 
 It is now done by machinery, and the hand-loom trade 
 has gone out of the country. I wish to state that the 
 tenants are of opinion that, in regulating rents, a period 
 should be fixed which would not be looked upon as un- 
 reasonable for revaluing rents, and that some tribunal 
 should be established upon which they should be fairly 
 represented — such as an arbitration — and, having got 
 their award, to verify it in the presence of the County 
 Court Judge, who would give it the sanction of law — 
 they think that, inasmuch as they would be fairly repre- 
 sented on the arbitration, there wonld be no possibility 
 of prejudice in favour of one party or the other, or any 
 unreasonable hardship inflicted. 
 
 11148. Would there be any danger, do you think, 
 if such a system of revaluing rents were adopted in 
 the country, of there being a general rise of rents 1 — 
 No doubt in some places there might be a considerable 
 rise of rents. It depends upon how the tenants get a 
 right to cultivate the waste land. If a landlord gave 
 a farm to a tenant to reclaim it, at a nominal rent, in 
 that case, at the expiration of a certain time, it would 
 not be unreasonable to have a valuation made ; but if 
 from the beginning the landlord got the real value of 
 the land — previous to the improvement — if Iik got 
 that from the beginning, then I think it should be 
 looked upon as a perpetuity. 
 
 11149. Of course arbitration would only benecessary 
 in case there was a dispute 1 — Of course ; if they agreed 
 between themselves nothing more need be done. 
 Nothing is more beautiful than to see an amiability 
 existing between them. It is only in case of a 
 diflTerence between tenant and landlord that there need 
 be a resort to arbitration. In that case I think it 
 would be quite right to settle by whom the costs were 
 to be paid — if the landlord were found to be in the 
 wrong, if he were asking too high a rent, in that case 
 it would be right that he should pay the costs ; on the 
 other hand, if it appeared that the tenant was unreason- 
 able, if he refused or objected to pay a fair rent, then 
 he should bear the costs ; or if both parties were in 
 the wrong let each party pay his own costs. 
 
 11150. The existence of such a tribunal — and of 
 such a rule as to the costs — would render parties more 
 willing to come to a reasonable understanding ? — Cer- 
 tainly ; and would jDrevent litigation, and it would 
 infuse confidence in the minds of the people. The 
 tenantry are very anxious to have these principles 
 
 Rev Edw.ard 
 Louft-lirev. 
 
 established — fixity of tenure, fair rents, and free sale S'pt. 21, I88O 
 to a proper tenant, giving the landlord a light of 
 reasonable objection. 
 
 11151. Do you consider this question of fixing of 
 rent to bear strongly on the reclamation of waste land ? 
 — Certainly; on the grounds I have just told you. 
 
 11152. Is reclamation of waste land going on much 
 in your district ? — It is pretty fairly — not so much as 
 some years past. 
 
 11153. Is that from a fear of losing the value of it? 
 — Yes ; from the fear of being obliged to pay, not on 
 the value of land reclaimed, but upon the valuation 
 put upon it by reason of the expenditure of the tenant. 
 We do not deny the right of the landlord to have a 
 fair return for his land. On some estates perhaps a 
 shilling an acre is charged for unreclaimed land ; and 
 where that is the case, at the end of twenty years, the 
 tenant should not object to a fair increase of rent — 
 always give him credit for the amount of his expendi- 
 ture, for that is his capital, his property in the land, 
 as much as the fee-simple is the property of the land- 
 lord. We are very tenacious of that ; we do not like 
 that our money, our time, our labour and sweat should 
 become the property of another man. We go for 
 fixity of tenure, free right of sale, and fair rents. 
 
 Iil54. Mr. Shaw. — In case of non-payment of rent 
 you do not object to a man being turned out ? — No ; if 
 a man does not pay his rent he should not be allowed 
 to keep his farm. But I think it very hard that a 
 landlord should be allowed to take advantage of a year 
 in which a man could not pay his rent. Suppose there 
 was a bad season, or a couple of bad seasons, or that 
 the tenant sustained some misfortune, and was behind- 
 hand with his rent one year, it would be a bad thing 
 for his landlord to take advantage of that and turn him 
 out without any compensation. We think that three 
 years' limit should be allowed, and if he did not pay 
 then the landlord should put him out and sell the 
 farm, and retaining from the price the three years' 
 rent and the costs of the jproceeding, he should hand 
 over the balance to the tenant. I don't see why a man 
 should forfeit his tenant-right because he has been so 
 unfortunate as to be unable to pay his rent. 
 
 11155. Mr. Kavanagh. — You would make three 
 years' rent the limit at which the landlord might 
 evict 1 — Yes ; or if the landlord considered that there 
 was stock or produce on the farm sufficient to pay the 
 rent, let him process the teiiant and levy it. 
 
 11156. By flistraint? — No, by ordinary execution 
 like any other creditor. Another thing I would say — 
 If a man was a bad tenant, if he persistently annoyed 
 his landlord by keeping two years behind in his rent, 
 I think it ought to be left to the discretion of the judge 
 whether in such a case an ejectment should not issue. 
 
 11157. You say that fixity of tenure, fair rents, and 
 free sale would give satisfaction ? — Yes. 
 
 11158. How would you arrive at the fair rent, for 
 that seems to be the difficulty everywhere 1 — The fair 
 rent would be estimated in this way — First taking the 
 natural quality of the earth. Any competent valuator 
 would be able to say what the value of a certain piece 
 of earth is that would be under consideration. The 
 next element would be the ease or difficulty with 
 which it can be cultivated ; for in one place you will 
 find land which requires very little labour and expen- 
 diture to make it jDroductive, whereas in other places 
 land is rocky, heavy, and difficult to cultivate, requir- 
 ing a great deal of labour to bring it into cultivation ; 
 all that, of course must be taken into consideration. 
 The next element in valuation is the convenience of a 
 farm to a market, that is a most important item. 
 
 11159. What court would you have for determining 
 these matters ? — I consider a court of arbitration, such 
 as I have already referred to — a competent valuator 
 appointed on behalf of the tenant, and another on the 
 part of the landlord, with power to those two persons 
 to select a third in case they were not able to a^ree 
 and let those men come to an honest conclusion like 
 any other arbitration. 
 
 11160. In settling a scheme of this sort of course 
 we must provide for every difficulty. Suppose the 
 
 3 02 
 
380 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 2!i, 1880. 
 
 Kev. Ell ward 
 Lou^hrev. 
 
 two could not agree upon a third man (for that some- 
 times has happened), how would you appoint the 
 umpire in such a case as that 1 — In that case I would 
 give the parties a right to go before the County Court 
 Judge, and ask him to appoint a third man to be 
 umpire. 
 
 11161. Would you make the Judge the umpire 1 — 
 No, I -would give him the authority, in such a case as 
 that, to appoint an umpire — some man taken from some 
 other part of the country, and being quite independent 
 of either party. 
 
 11162. The O'ConorDon. — Have there been many 
 evictions in your district during the last year ? — I 
 cannot say that there have been any evictions for the 
 mere pleasure of evicting. 
 
 11163. Have there been evictions for non-payment 
 of rent ? — There have been some in Donegal, and a few 
 in Derry ; not a great number. 
 
 11164. Were any of a very hard character ? — Well, 
 it is hard enough where a man has to leave his farm, 
 but I don't know any extreme case such as would 
 excite public indignation. 
 
 11165. Have the landlords made any reduction in 
 the rent last year in the mountain districts 1 — In 
 general they have. On the estate to which I belong 
 he has not made any reduction, that is to say, no 
 positive reduction. He has ofi'ered to take the old 
 rent, and not to require the new rent. I call that a 
 negative reduction. 
 
 11166. Were the crops bad for the last two years 1 
 — They were not good. 
 
 11167. I suppose the failure was not so great here 
 as in some parts of the country? — Well we pulled 
 through, we tried to do so without resorting to any 
 charity. 
 
 11168. This year's harvest is better? — Yes; they 
 have a grand crop this year, and if there were good 
 j)rices now we would be able to pay this year's rent, 
 and may be a little of the last. There is an observation 
 I wish to make on the subject of fixity of tenure, and 
 allowing no landlord to put a tenant out. It may 
 turn out, perhaps, that sometimes some good may be 
 effected in a neighbourhood by a tenant being put 
 out. I will explain what I mean by an illustration. 
 In backward localities, where there is no market 
 and no mill, and where it is inconvenient for the ten- 
 ants to get the crops off their hands, or to get their meal 
 ground, except by going perhaps twenty or twenty- 
 five miles. In a case like that, where the general 
 public woidd reap an advantage by the landlord taking 
 a farm into his hands for some purpose of this kind, 
 either a mill or a market, he directly improves his es- 
 tate, and indirectly he improves the neighbourhood, 
 and he will always reap some advantage from that. 
 In a case like that, as in the case of a, railway, or in 
 the case of any other object for the public good, such 
 as making public roads, if you go through a man's farm 
 compensation is made. I would say tliat would be 
 a reasonable case where a landlord should have a right 
 to take the land from the tenant, who would have to 
 go out for the general good ; but I consider that, in 
 that case, he ought to get the full value of the farm, 
 and a sum of not less than half as much again, to 
 make up for compulsory sale, and the inconvenience 
 and hardship of being turned out of his place. An- 
 other remark I was going to make is this : in case 
 the authorities did not think fit to give fixity of 
 tenure (which, I hope,, they won't reiase us), that, in 
 case of capricious eviction, the landlord should be ob- 
 liged to pay a sum equal to double the market value 
 of the place. When T say a capricious eviction, I re- 
 gard it as the case of a landlord putting a tenant out 
 because he happens to have the power, without 
 reasonable cause shown. As a matter of course, 
 that has no application to any case in this' 
 neighbourhood that I know of, but, as Mr. Kavana"h 
 remarked, we must provide for extreme cases ; and°I 
 thmk It IS quite right that a tyrant of that kind 
 stioul.L be punished. Then with regard to tenant pro- 
 prietary, we think it should be encouraged as far as 
 possible ; and where an estate is in the market, the 
 
 tenants should have the option of buying — suppose 
 all those upon a townland, or upon an integral por- 
 tion of the property joined, so as not to deteriorate 
 the remainder, and the Government should assist them 
 to purchase. 
 
 11169. Mr. Shaw. — Would many tenants be able 
 to provide one-fourth of the purchase-money 'i — I think 
 the great majority would be able to provide one- 
 fourth. They are an industrious body of men, as a rule. 
 
 11170. What is your ojoinion as to subdivision?— 
 We disapprove of unlimited subdivision. Even if 
 peasa.nt proprietary was established, we consider that 
 allowing subdivision without restriction would lead to 
 the ruin of the country. 
 
 11171. What limit would you assign below which 
 subdivision should not be carried 1 — I think anything 
 under twelve acres would be unreasonably small. I 
 would not like, for myself, to see farms go under 
 twenty acres, but certainly from ten to twelve acres 
 would be the smallest I would allow, for I consider 
 that is the smallest quantity a man could live upon 
 with any degree of comfort. 
 
 11172. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you think a man 
 could live on ten or twelve acres without any other 
 means of support ? Suppose a man had only the land 
 to depend on for his living, what is the minimum 
 quantity that would support him ? — I think an indus- 
 trious man could live on ten acres of arable land. 
 
 11173. And a man that was not could not live on 
 twenty acres 1 — Certainly. It is wonderful what a 
 man can do with ten acres of arable land when he 
 puts his shoulder to the work of getting the utmost 
 he can out of it. I would not like to see farms less 
 than fifteen or twenty acres, but we could make the 
 limit no less than that. 
 
 11174. Is flax gx-own extensively on your district! 
 —Yes. 
 
 11176. Does it pay well? — I am sorry to say it 
 does not. 
 
 11176. Do they get their corn ground at a mill! 
 — Many of them get as much corn ground as does 
 them. They eat a fair share of oaten meal, and they 
 use a good deal of Indian meal. It is not good for 
 some constitutions, I hear, but we consider it useful. 
 
 11177. The Chairman. — On the question of sub- 
 letting have you any observations to make ? — I think 
 it would be right to allow a tenant to sublet, but he 
 should get the permission of the ofiice. 
 
 11178. I suppose you would restrict that in the 
 same way as you would restrict subdivision? — I 
 would. In some cases men sublet the whole of their 
 farms if any misfortune comes on them, and go to 
 Scotland or England to make up their loss. They 
 let their farm to some one for four or five years, and 
 after they have recovered their position to some extent 
 they come back and take up their farms again. As 
 a matter of course, these are cases that we might easily 
 lay down a rule for, but to allow people to sublet 
 as much as, and whenever, they pleased, would be 
 an encouragement to lazy people who neglected their 
 land, and could not pay their rent, to sublet it to 
 other parties, and would lead to a great amount of 
 litigation and inconvenience. 
 
 11179. Mr. Kavanagh.— Is a'farm that Ls held by 
 a man who goes away in that way subject to tenant- 
 right when he comes back ? — I do not know a case of 
 any landlord, where a case of that kind has occun'ed, 
 taking advantage of it, to take away the tenant-rigM- 
 I do not see why any occurrence of that kind should 
 destroy it. If a man's title to his property rests on jus- 
 tice, why should he lose it because he has been 
 unfortunate. 
 
 11180. You say you know cases where a man lets 
 his farm to another for a short time, and goes away 
 to Scotland or England to labour, and then comes 
 back and resumes his farm ? — Yes. 
 
 11181. Does the man to whom he lets his farm in 
 that way buy the tenant-right ? —No ; the man takes 
 it from him for the time he is away. On condition of 
 allowing him something every year in addition to the 
 rent, which goes to assist the family, or to clear off 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 SSI 
 
 aiiears of rent. I hold a little piece of land from 
 an adjoining tenant myself. I took it from him to 
 assist him, and advanced him money for his re- 
 quirements. I do not live by farming, but I have 
 some knowledge of the management of property, 
 having been all my Hf^ in the country, and farm to 
 a pretty large extent. 
 
 11182. A man going away under the circumstances 
 vou mention would generally leave his family in the 
 iiouse behind him, and give the land to some neigh- 
 bouring tenant to cultivate while he was away 1 — Yes. 
 
 11183. He then goes away for a time, comes back 
 with whatever money he has saved, and resumes the 
 occupation of his farm 1 — Yes. 
 
 11184. Of course it is not a very common thing, 
 but it occasionally occurs 1 — Yes. 
 
 11185. Chairman. — Is there any other matter you 
 wish to mention '! — I wish to say if the whole country 
 came under the rule of peasant proprietary, as a mat- 
 ter of course they wovild hold in perpetuity, and, I 
 suppose, the right in the aljsence of a will would go, 
 according to the law of primogeniture, to the eldest 
 son, and that would leuil to great injustice. The 
 country people, if they make a will, think they must 
 die. I think the law of primogeniture should be 
 altered. I don't see why the eldest son should be con- 
 sidered nearer to his father, or having more right to 
 his property than any other child. 
 
 Sepl -i'J, 1880, 
 
 Eev. Edward 
 Louglirey. 
 
 The Eael of Leitrim, Manor Vaughan, Milford, Letterkenny, examined. 
 
 11186. Chaieman. — Where is your property situ- 
 ated 1 — In Donegal and Leitrim. 
 
 11187. What is the extent of your property? — 
 About 60,000 acres in Donegal, and about 2,000 acres 
 in Leitrim. 
 
 11188. Is all that property held by tenants under 
 the Ulster custom 1 — The Donegal property is but not 
 the Leitrim. 
 
 11189. State what the custom is which is called the 
 Ulster custom on your property 1 — It is the sale of the 
 good-will subject to the landlord's approval of the in- 
 coming tenant, the landlord having the right of pre- 
 emption ; of cotu-se the good- will includes the improve- 
 ments. 
 
 11190. Includes the tenant's improvements'? — In- 
 cludes the tehant's improvements ; arrears of rent being 
 paid before the new tenant is given the farm. 
 
 11191. That is the Ulster custom generally, I think 1 
 — There are certain customs pretty general, but what 
 always, in my grandfather's time, was recognized on 
 the estate, was that the bailiffs were told to inform the 
 neighbouring tenants that the farm was for sale, and 
 they were always to have the preference, if they could 
 give a reasonable and what was considered a fair price. 
 
 11192. You did not have proposals from others first, 
 and then let the tenants bid up to that amount if they 
 chose 1 — No ; the neighbouring tenants were always 
 told first. 
 
 11193. And it went to the highest offer amongst 
 them ? — Generally ; but if the outgoing tenant was not 
 satisfied, you went further afield, and if between land- 
 lord and tenant, they were not considered able to give 
 a sufiiciently high price, they went further afield, but 
 there was that custom before the Land Act, as far as 
 I can make out from letters of my uncle, where the 
 price could be realized on the estate. 
 
 11194. Was therp any mention as to the number of 
 years' purchase 'i — No ; no mention as far as I can 
 gather. 
 
 11195. Are there anyfixed periods for changing the 
 rent 1 — I think the period of change of tenancy was 
 always looked upon as a period for reconsideration of 
 rent ; in fact that was expressed in the custom as I 
 have it written down, that the incoming tenant was 
 placed in precisely the same position as the outgoing 
 tenant as regards revaluation of his holding or other- 
 wise, and that he was placed on exactly the same 
 footing as the outgoing tenant. 
 
 11196. But as to the raising of the rent?—- The 
 outgoing tenant was subject to a rise of rent if the 
 landlord thought it was due. 
 
 11197. Before the sale? — Before the sale; at anytime. 
 
 11198. Then the seller knew he might be subject to 
 a rise of rent if the condition of agriculture improved 
 and prices rose. 
 
 11199. Mr. SHAW.^Tsthe valuation periodical or on 
 changes of tenure 1 — I don't think I am aware of any 
 periodical valuation, but generally it was at the time 
 of the change of tenancy, and the incoming tenant was 
 always informed that he would be liable to an increased 
 rent supposing the condition of agriculture improved 
 and that he was not to suppose that that was a constant 
 rent. 
 
 11200. Were there any leases'! — Oh, yes, a great 
 number of leases, and it is where there are leases that 
 the greatest distress has occurred on my estate. 
 
 11201. In consequence of the long leases? — Yes; 
 the long leases and the subdivision. I have a list of 
 the number of cases of subdivision on the two estates 
 in Donegal — there are thirty-five on one estate and 
 forty-five on the other — about eighty oases of subdivi- 
 sion. I mean eighty farms have been subdivided.. 
 I don't mean to say there are only eighty subtenants, 
 but that eighty farms have been subdivided, and in 
 some cases the number of subdivisions goes up to six 
 and in one case to nine. 
 
 11202. Were they large farms? — The case where 
 there were nine subdivisions was a farm of only fifty- 
 six acres, and the rent was only £10 13s. Id., while 
 the valuation was £17 10s. 
 
 1 ] 203. Were they mountain farms ? — No, they are 
 not mountain farms. Here is a map of the place— - 
 Drumdutton including three farms, a,nd all these are 
 subdivided. The map shows the subdivision into 
 little patches. It is not a large place. 
 
 11204. What is the acreage? — The gross acreage is 
 454. 
 
 11205. Mountain and all? — Yes; 270 acres of 
 tillage land ; 454 acres, mountain and all. 
 
 11205a. Chairman. — This was originally three 
 farms ? — Yes. 
 
 11206. And they were subdivided? — Yes, they 
 were subdivided contrary to the regulation of the 
 estate, and it has been impossible, as far as I can 
 gather, strong as is the watch and overlook, to prevent 
 it, and discover it in time. 
 
 11207. Was it long ago that these subdivisions took 
 place ? — Yes, it is a long time ago. 
 
 11208. Each ran up a house, and then a piece of 
 land was added ? — Yes ; it began by gradually creeping 
 on — first of all they put a fire into the barn. 
 
 11209. They begin by what they call two smokes ? 
 — Yes ; always two fit into the barn first, and then a 
 son marries, or something like that, and he lives in the 
 place. It is a wretched state of things, and the worst 
 of it is that it continues since the Land Act. Numbers 
 and numbers of cases have occurred since the Land 
 Act, and we are trying to grapple with it, but we 
 have so many tenants to look after that even with the 
 number of bailiffs I have it is almost beyond our 
 power to watch them. I have 1,720 tenants. 
 
 11210. Mr. Shaw. — Are these peoi^le who live on 
 pieces of the farm sons of tenants who marry? — Yes, 
 sons and daughters sometimes, but not always. 
 
 11211. There is nothing else for them to do — there 
 is no industry in the place to which they can turn ? — 
 There are local industries which they make money out 
 of. There is fishing, which ought to be encouraged a 
 great deal more than it is. We have got a fishery 
 pier there now, and I hope we will do something. 
 Tliere is the kelp and seaweed, and the people have 
 gTeat advantages in that way. 
 
 11212. There is no weaving ? — There is hand-loom 
 work, but it is dying out. 
 
 11213. They don't emigrate 1— No, not very much. 
 
 The Earl of 
 Leitrim. 
 
38i 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Sejit. 29, 1880. 
 
 The E:irl of 
 Leitrim. 
 
 A certain number have gone tliis year. A great 
 number of young women. 
 
 11214. Chairman.— You say they are in a dis- 
 tressed state '2— Yes; in all my leased lands there 
 has been more distress than in any other part_ of 
 the estate, and where these subdivision cases exist. 
 The townlands under lease have been in a wretched 
 state, and if it had not been for my work there this 
 year there would have been bad business there this 
 year — no doubt abou.t it. 
 
 11215. Have they held pretty well round the 
 dwellings or are they scattered ? — ^This map shows the 
 distribution (map produced). These are several farms. 
 
 11216. You find it very difficult to persuade them 
 to arrange it into shape?— Yes. Here is a townland 
 with subdivisions shown in colours, in which, in my 
 uncle's time, at a great expense and trouble, he had a 
 surveyor who took months to survey the place so 
 complicated is it. These marks on the map are simply 
 houses with a little garden to each. This townland 
 of Ballyhoorisy was in a most wretched state. They 
 were fighting amongst themselves, and they had all 
 agreed to have their farms squared except one man 
 who holds this townland for years in this miserable 
 state. I am told this man is willing and ready to 
 ari-ange it now. That man was in danger of losing 
 his life from holding out, and keeping the forty-one 
 tenants in chancery as it were. 
 
 11217. Mr. Shaw. — Was he a large tenant 1 — No ; 
 a small man. 
 
 11218. Was it just from crosisness or was his interest 
 interfered with ? — No ; the arrangement was, as I am 
 told, that they were to agree to sign surrenders of their 
 farms, and that no man should know until he had 
 signed the arrangement that was in store for him. 
 This was made by the valuer and surveyor. 
 
 11219. Was the valuator appointed by the land- 
 lord 1—Yes. 
 
 11220. They had no objection to that '2— No. He 
 was a man rather liked on the estate, -and the fact of 
 forty-one agreeing to his arbitration is strongly against 
 the man who would not agree. 
 
 11221. I suppose you will be able to carry out the 
 change by degrees ? — I think it will be carried out 
 eventually. 
 
 11222. Chairman. — ^When a lease drops are these 
 people taken on as direct tenants ? — Leases have fallen 
 in since I have been in possession of the estate, but I 
 have not dealt with them so far. I have had so much 
 distress to deal with that I had not time, but as a 
 rule they are. One has power under the Act to deal 
 with these cases of subdivision summarily, but the 
 hardship is so great if you do deal with them summarily 
 that one doesn't exactly know what to do. If one 
 cannot see these people out of the country in some 
 sort of way you have not the heart to turn tliem out. 
 
 11223. Then you leave them for the time under 
 middlemen 1 — Yes. 
 
 11224. Does he make a large profit out of 
 them'? — That I cannot say. The difficulty is, 
 if you alter the state of affairs, aud you 
 make them tenants, you then become subject, in the 
 event of having to deal with them hereafter, to be 
 mulcted so tremendously in the Land Court. If you 
 take them out of that position of subtenancy', and then 
 are flush of cash some day, and say, " Here is your 
 passage to America," they will meet you by saying, 
 " We will see you further. Wo are tenants now." 
 
 11225. Then you leave them as they are, and it is 
 rather a deadlock ? — I have never attempted to deal 
 with them, but that is the difficulty. 
 
 11226. Mr. Shaw. — You have a great deal of 
 mountain land? — Yes. 
 
 11227. Is there much of that improveable ? — No, I 
 think not. I have certain mountains that are im- 
 proveable. 
 
 11228. Would it be possible to draft these people 
 to this land and give them their holding at a progres- 
 sive rent— give them a better means of subsistence, 
 and relieve this place— with their consent, of course? 
 
 — I am afraid theye would be a difficulty, because 
 the people neighbouring these mountain lands lay a 
 sort of claim upon them. They are improving them 
 by degrees. They have the run of them, and it would 
 take away from their holding and their prospective 
 improvements. 
 
 11229. There is nothing that could be called 
 waste lands which could be reclaimed, and upon 
 which there could be fresh tenancies created— 
 is there much waste land? — No. I don't know 
 of any in mj neighbourhood. There are these im- 
 proveable lands. Cutting away of bog gradually and 
 so on would, no doubt, leave room for improvement, 
 but if you draft a number of these tenants from 
 thickly-populated districts there would be a great deal 
 of disagreeableness. 
 
 11230. It could only be done with their full con- 
 sent ? — They wou.ld not consent. I don't think tie 
 people themselves would go if you tried to draft them 
 out of one of these new lands. 
 
 11231. They would as soon go to America ?— They 
 would sooner. If I had the money to send them to 
 America they would go like a shot. 
 
 11232. Were there clauses in the leases against 
 subletting 1 — Yes. 
 
 11233. Don't you think your predecessors in stand- 
 ing bye and allowing this subdivision to go on have 
 committed themselves to it ? — I think they have, and 
 I think they have acknowledged it. I think my uncle 
 acknowledged it, but that is one of the hardships— 
 that you have to acknowledge it unless you catch 
 them on the ground at the moment. These cases 
 existed in his time, but he never did anything, 
 although he was continually ser^dng notices against 
 subdivision. Therefore, I feel I should be slow to 
 enforce what he did not enforce. I have the difficulty 
 in regard to making them tenants whUe the present 
 Land Act exists, tor I should be unable to deal with 
 them where they existed before the Act, but there are 
 recent cases on my property which have taken place 
 since the Land Act, and these are cases with which I 
 think I shall not be long in dealing. 
 
 11234. Chairman. — Are the new holders under 
 the leases persons who usually reside on the land, and 
 work part of it themselves ? — Yes ; and very often a 
 very small amount. 
 
 11235. They receive the rents from the sub-tenants, 
 and then pay the whole rent themselves ? — They have 
 taken fines in many cases ; I think something of tliat 
 sort. There is a case in which the original holder pays 
 only £1 as his portion of the gross rent. 
 
 11236. Do under tenants pay you in the office? — 
 No, the head tenant is supposed to bring in all the 
 money, for if I once gave a receipt to one of these people 
 I would have committed myself. 
 
 11237. What are the rents on your estate compared 
 with the valuation. I see one case in which the rent 
 is £23, and the valuation £35. The valuation on my 
 estate is, undoubtedly, low in many cases, and in many 
 of the decent-sized farms the rent is considerably above 
 the A'aluation. 
 
 11238. Here is another case, =£10 13s. 7d. rent, and 
 £12 valuation, and another of £10 13s. Id. rent, and 
 £17 valuation? — Yes. 
 
 11239. Mr. Shaw.— Are the holdings you have, 
 marked in red on the map, separate holdings 1 — No, 
 some of them have got a bit elsewhere. 
 
 11240. Chairman. — Do they hold them under a 
 middleman with tenant-right ? — Well, of course, we 
 don't know that. 
 
 11241. Mr. Shaw.— Do they sell and buy amongst 
 themselves under him ? — No ; I think they carry on 
 from father to the son. 
 
 11242. Chairman. — They are tenants from year to 
 to year ? — Fi'om him, I suppose so. 
 
 11243. jMr. Shaw.— The fishing should greatly 
 benefit them ? — I don't think the benefit would reach 
 these people, but on the coast they make nets, and fish, 
 and tliese people could be rich by fishing. It is very 
 poor land, and numerously populated 'with forty-one 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 383 
 
 families. Part of ttiis was bought by my uncle not 
 very long ago. 
 
 11244. Chaikman. — Take one of these farms still 
 imder lease, is it considered that the tenant-right 
 would exist at the end of the lease ? — No ; there, is no 
 doubt about it, it was never intended to exist at the 
 end of a lease, but whether you would allow it to 
 exist .is a matter of discretion. There are certain cases 
 in which one would have to admit some sort of tenant- 
 right. Now we have to deal with the Land Act, and it 
 is very difficult to replace what was in existence 
 before. If there was no Land Act in existence you 
 could deal with such case on its own merits. If a 
 lease drops you practically cannot turn all these people 
 off imless you pay their passage to America. 
 
 11245. Mr. Shaw. — In case where the farm has not 
 been cut up, you give them tenant-right at the end of 
 the lease — you don't turn them out I—No, never turn 
 them out ; we readjust the rents. 
 
 1 1 246. You allow them to stay on at a fair moderate 
 rent ] — Yes. 
 
 11247. That is the meaning of the lease as the rent 
 is to exist for a certain number of years 1 — Yes. If I 
 turn them out I must give them something. 
 
 11248. You feel bound to recompense them 1 — Yes. 
 
 11249. Chairman. — This is part of the property in 
 the tenant-right county t — Yes. 
 
 11250. There is no tenant-right on the other pro- 
 perty in Leitrim 1 — No. 
 
 11251. Taking the tenants generally what is the 
 position relatively when tenant-right exists, and when 
 it does it not exist? — It is rather difficult to compare the 
 two properties, one is better land. 
 
 11252. Leitrim is better land? — Yes. This parti- 
 cular bit of Leitrim is rather good land. 
 
 11253. And the people are generally better off ? — 
 As a rule. These are .just comfortable sized farms, 
 that they should be able to get on pretty well with, but 
 in the other case the farms are all too small. 
 
 11254. Partly for that reason I suppose the Leitrim 
 tenants are more satisfied and well-to-do 1 — Because 
 they are larger farms ; in fact in Leitrim the farm 
 really supports the family, but the people cannot be 
 thoroughly dependent on the land here. 
 
 11255. Do you think that arises from the Leitrim 
 people being under a different system from tenant- 
 right ? — It so happens that these people are, as a rule, 
 better off than the Donegal people. 
 
 11256. Does that arise more from the goodness of 
 the land than the tenure underwhich the peoplehold? — 
 Yes, I think that is the cause. The two bear really 
 no comparison. 
 
 11257. Is therea desire amongst the Leitrim tenants 
 to be vinder the tenant-right system 1 — I should tliink 
 they would like it. There is no doubt about that. 
 
 11258. Mr. Shaw. — How do you do with them on 
 a change of tenancy ; if a man from any cause has to 
 leave his farm, do you allow him to get anything from 
 the incoming tenant? — No. If I have (as I have had) 
 to evict for non-payment of rent I have given them 
 something to give quiet possession, and to help them 
 to make a fresh start. It is not supposed to be the 
 23rice of the good will, but it is simply J;hat the poor 
 people are paupers, and you give them something to 
 relieve them, for we cannot always make labourers' 
 places for them. 
 
 11259. There may be cases of broken down people 
 who may not want to change ? — I have not had any 
 such cases. 
 
 11260. Have you any property in Monaghan ? — No. 
 
 11261. In a case where a man wanted to change, 
 would you allow him to get something from the in- 
 coming tenant ? — In Leitrim I certainly have thought 
 over it, but in a case this winter the man did not take 
 advantage of it. I don't exactly know why. He was run 
 down, and I did not know exactly what to do about it. 
 I thought I would try and give him leave to sell. He 
 said he could pay rent no longer. I told him I wotdd 
 give him leave to sell. It is- a very dangerous thing 
 to do with the Land Act before one, because one is 
 always liable to be told that this is allowing the custom. 
 
 However, I risked it, and I thought I would make the Sept. 29, isso. 
 experiment. It is the only case that occurred on my rj-j^g EarTof 
 estate, and the result was he immediately paid his Leitrim. 
 rent. 
 
 11262. He did not sell?— No. He borrowed the 
 money on the strength of getting that leave, for it at 
 once gives you power to borrow. 
 
 1 1 2U3. It did not do you any harm 1 — No, I got my 
 rent there, at all events, I got some of the rent that 
 was due, I got a year's rent — that satisfied me. 
 
 11264. Do the tenants make the improvements ? — 
 No, I have been making the improvements. 
 
 11265. Have you built houses? — Yes, my uncle 
 always did that. 
 
 11266. And made drains? — Yes, made all the 
 improvements. There is no doubt about it, the tenants 
 do some, as they do on every property. 
 
 11267. I mean the improvements usually made by 
 the landlord ? — Yes, I make the improvements. 
 
 11268. Chairman. — Then you don't think that 
 leases are a remedy for what are called dissatisfied 
 tenants ? — I don't think they would take leases. 
 Indeed they have practically got a lease under the new 
 Land Act. 
 
 11269. "We hear generally that the tenants are not 
 inclined to take leases ? — I believe they are not in the 
 least. 
 
 11270. And we have also been told that the principal 
 reason in tenant-right districts is that there is usually 
 something put into the lease to bar tenant-right ? — I 
 have never tried it. 
 
 11271. But in known tenant-right districts is there 
 something usually to bar the working of the Land 
 Act ? — I have never attempted to bar tenant-right. 
 On my Donegal estate in fact I should fail to succeed. 
 
 11272. Mr. Shaw. — You would not chose to do it ? 
 — I don't think it would be my own interest as it 
 happens. 
 
 11273. Chairman. — Entirely changing the ideas 
 and customs on a property at once causes dissatis- 
 faction ? — Certainly, and the old custom must creep in 
 again ; the majority would still have it, and it would 
 shortly creep in again 
 
 11274. What you say is all going down as a means 
 of coming to some arrangement between landlord and 
 tenant — is there anything you would like to suggest as 
 an amendment of the present relations? — That is a 
 matter of very great difficulty indeed. 
 
 11275. Mr. Shaw. — You have not had the estate 
 very long? — No, I have no basiness to come before 
 you. 
 
 11276. You have not had any change of tenancy? 
 — Yes, I have, considering the times, had a good 
 number, and I think it is rather remarkable that on 
 an estate in these bad times, in less than a year 
 twenty-four tenants on poor, very poor, holdings have 
 sold their good will for £2,354. 
 
 11277. The O'CoNOR Don.— That was in Donegal ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 11278. Mr. Shaw. — Were they broken-down tenants? 
 —Yes. 
 
 11279. And they sold under the tenant-right system? 
 —Yes. 
 
 11280. Did you put on any additional rent ? — No, 
 I don't think in any case there was an additional rent 
 put on. 
 
 11281. The difficulty we find is the system of 
 putting on the rent when there is a change of tenancy ? 
 — Yes, there I should disagree with the tenant com- 
 pletely, and I give what I consider on my estate a 
 very good reason for raising the rent at that particular 
 period — I think it is the most convenient time as a 
 rule. One reason is, I consider a great deal of my land 
 is let at such a rate that it is what is' called live and 
 let live in a great many cases. For instance take some 
 of these farms here ; they are below the Government 
 valuation, and I am perfectly certain, the laud as 
 compared with the neighbouring townland is of 
 equivalent value, and in some cases of greater value 
 and the fact of having people upon it is a reason why 
 you defer, and are disinclined to raise the rent, but 
 
384 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 Sept. 29, 18S0. 
 
 Tlie Earl of 
 Leitiim. 
 
 the time you give that mail the privilege of joining 
 one farm to another is a very fair time for revaluing 
 your land. 
 
 11282. But admitting that this is the best time, 
 would you put any limit on the power of a landlord 
 to increase the rent, by arbitration, or anything of the 
 kind in cases of dispute ?— I think that sort of thing 
 must be done between man and man. ^ ■ 
 
 11283. But in the cases we have had before us, in 
 which the rent had been largely increased on the 
 tenants who had done all the improvements, building, 
 drainage, and reclamation, don't you think that if that 
 can be done under the law, the law is a very unjust 
 thing, and the result will be to produce a very bad 
 effect in the district generally 'i — Yes. 
 
 11284. Would it not be for the interest of the land- 
 lord, and of the community generally, that there should 
 be some means of settling the dispute 1 — It would be 
 a very pleasant thing if you could get such a board as 
 would please both parties. 
 
 1128-'>. It would not hurt the landlord ]— It might. 
 
 11286. If the lands are let reasonably ?— If you 
 could get the lands let reasonably, but it might be in- 
 jurious to the landlord. 
 
 11287. In the same way as you might do injury to 
 the tenant by the other system. Where a man is an 
 independent sort of man he would stick out for what 
 he considers a fair rent. But he has nothing else, in 
 99 cases out of 100, but to submit, or go to America 
 or some other place, and in many cases they would 
 submit to any rent sooner than change, and it is a 
 very unfortunate thing to have a feeling of oppression 
 amongst a people. Under these circumstances would 
 you think it reasonable there should be some tribunal 
 so that the landlord might say, " If you think this is 
 unreasonable, we must call in a friend to judge 
 between us"? — It is not a new man and the landlord, 
 but the old friend, the old tenant, and the landlord, 
 and neither wants to part company. Of course, 
 speaking from my point of view^ I should not, I think, 
 like it. 
 
 1 1 288. Speaking, not from your point of view of 
 class, but speaking from your point of view as a man 
 wishing to live well in the country with your neigh- 
 bours, don't you think it would be very desirable 'i — I 
 could live well with my neighbours without it. 
 
 11289. Chairman. — With your feelings — wishing 
 to do justice to your tenants and to fix a fair rent — 
 you would not like to have it. But where there are 
 men who only wish to get the largest rent they can, 
 do you think it would be desirable in these places 
 there should be some independent person to decide 
 between them ? — Well, I think, certainly it would be, 
 perhaps, best. It is practically what I do in my own 
 case. I should get what I call a practical valuator to 
 value the land. 
 
 11290. Mr. Shaw. — We have had a case before us 
 of a rise of rent, within the memory of men, from £4: 
 to .£15. That is a very large increase on one holding '? 
 —Yes. 
 
 11291. You could hardly imagine it to be just by a 
 series of advances? — I could hardly imagine it. 
 Certainly not by a series of advances ; but you might 
 have land let so low that at the end of a lease it would 
 not be excessive. The other day I let some land. I 
 wanted to shift some tenants off land in the sight of 
 my own house, and I happened to have 200 odd acres 
 of land reclaimed. I thought I would shift ten tenants 
 up there, and so clear the land in the sight of the 
 house, and I did it at great sacrifice to myself in an 
 actual and pecuniary point of view, but great advantage 
 to myself in an artistic point of view, and great 
 advantage to them, as they got their farms not only 
 cheap, but I am building them slated houses and 
 offices at a cost of a couple of thousand pounds, and 
 they don't really pay as rent the interest on the money 
 laid out on their buildings. I told them, " you will 
 have these lands at the original rent of your old farms, 
 and at the end of five years you will have them at 
 such and such a rent, and that will continue for my 
 
 life," but I should expect my successor to raise them 
 to the proper value. ' That is practically a case in 
 which there might be a very large increase of rent. 
 
 11293. They don't object to a moderate increase at 
 tht, end of a lease ?— No, I don't think so. 
 
 11294. Chaieman.— Did you give them that upon 
 written leases 1—1 shall put it into writing. 
 
 11295. It has caused a vast number of disputes— 
 the practice of not having these agreements in writing! 
 
 I agree with you, it has brought on more mischief 
 
 than anything else, the very happy-go-lucky way in 
 which tenants accept their holdings or their dwelling 
 houses, and so on. 
 
 11296. Do you know Mrs. Martha M'Connellt— 
 Miss Martha M'Connell— yes ; once a tenant in Mil- 
 ford. 
 
 11297. It is a holding, "late Robert Steel," and 
 she has written here some particulars about some rise 
 of rent that took place at different times?— My recol- 
 lection of that case is -that it came before me and I 
 dealt with it, and I offered her the farm back again 
 with the rent on it, if the son, who was the direct 
 descendant of the people who formerly held it, came 
 for it. 
 
 11298. Was it the case of the death of a tenant! 
 — No, it occurred years and years ago._ Thej were 
 turned out for non-payment of rent, I thiuk, and tiej 
 wanted to come back again in my time. I said I 
 would admit the son back again, and when we had 
 almost agreed to terms, it turned out the son was not 
 forthcoming. He never did come back. 
 
 11299. Mr. Shaw. — The farm was on your own 
 hands ? — Yes. 
 
 11300. The O'CoNOE Don.— Was it on your uncle's 
 estate ?— Yes ; the estate I inherited from my uncle., 
 
 11301. Then they had lost the farm during your 
 uncle's lifetime — Yes. 
 
 11302. Chairman.— They lost the farm, they say, 
 although their family had spent a large amount on 
 buUding. The buildings and the tenant-right was at 
 the time value for £1,500, and, they say, " the loss of 
 the buildings and of the improvements caused a debt 
 of £600 to remain against them, which was paid in 
 order to keep the property in the possession of the 
 children. The following November ejectment was 
 brought against all the property, no rent being then 
 due. At the hearing of the decree the Chairman 
 
 ■ expressed regret at being obliged to grant it " ? — That 
 is wrong ; it was an ejectment for non-payment of 
 rent. 
 
 1 1 302a. "After this eviction these children, as a last 
 resource, called on the late Earl, at Milford, and im- 
 plored him to do something for them in their destitute 
 condition, but nothing was given them, and the result 
 was I was obliged to bring them home. This property 
 is in the possession of the Buchanans on a lease fov 
 generations, and the end of all is that they have been 
 evicted without a penny compensation"? — 1 have not 
 a very clear recollection of the case at the ' present 
 moment ; not sufficiently clear to give you the details 
 of it, but it is a case I have investigated, and I came 
 to the conclusion that equitably I was not in the least 
 liable, that T^ had the farm on my own hands, and if 
 the son came forward I would as soon accept hini as 
 anyone else ; in fact, I had agreed to accept him, but 
 he was not forthcoming. I think it was a trumped 
 up story. I think she wanted to make money out of 
 it in some sort of way, and I think there were other 
 reasons besides the non-payment of rent for the family 
 being put out. 
 
 11303. At all events, you offered to consider the 
 question of one of the family being replaced ! — Yes ; 
 I agreed to accept the son, but he was not forthcoming, 
 but I refused to accept her. I had offered to. accept 
 her if she would come and reside on the farm. She 
 had business in Ramelton, and I said I could uot 
 allow the farm to go to a sub-tenant. Now, I recol- 
 lect what my decision was ; I had known she was 
 ejected for non-payment of rent, but, as a matter of 
 fact, the family left the place. I said, " Under the 
 circumstances, as you say your son ha.s sufficient capita' 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 385 
 
 to come and wm-k the farm, I wovild just as soon have 
 him as any other, and if you like to get him homo 
 he shall have the farm." The fact is, 1 am told the 
 son is not forthcoming. Their leaving Milford was 
 not creditable in some way or other, but as I am not 
 clear about that, I will not risk libelling her and the 
 family. I then said, if she came to reside there I 
 would give her the farm, but she was not prepared to 
 do so, and accordingly I said, very well, the farm 
 remains in my hands. 
 
 11304. I suppose this was before the' Land Act 1 — 
 The eviction took place before the Land Act. 
 
 11305. How is it they did not come under the Land 
 J^ci 1 — She was evicted for non-payment of rent. 
 
 11306. But she would have a claim for the value of 
 the tenant-right, or the improvements t — I suppose 
 she would. 
 
 11307. And the question is, how she did not get it? 
 — I might just be allowed to mention a rather curious 
 case with regard to the letting of land. I found a 
 great deal of land in my own hands, -1,000 acres or 
 something of that sort, which I have let since I 
 came into possession for about £2,500 to 103 tenants, 
 but I took no fines and in many cases they were ready 
 to sell ii Immediately afterwards, and the result of my 
 letting it at a reasonable rent was shown in one case, 
 I may mention of a man who had held a farm some 
 years before, there were no improvements on it, it had 
 been in my hands in. grass and I let him back at the 
 old rent, it was £7 rent. Immediately afterwards he 
 asked my leave to sell, well, I was committed to the 
 Ulster custom, and I gave him leave and he was offered 
 £80 for it on the spot, and he will not take less than 
 £150. Of course the Ulster custom works very 
 admirably in many ways, but that gives you a fair 
 idea how it works disadvantageously for the landlord ; 
 it works very well for the consolidation of small 
 farmers. 
 
 • 11308. But as long as the tenant remains there he 
 pays the rent? — Yes, but you have no corresponding 
 security or advantage Vjy letting your land low. 
 
 11309. Mr. Shaw.— You could have let it higher 
 to cover youi- expenditure, and then you would have 
 lost nothing 1 — I certainly might have let it higher, 
 but I try to' let my land at a reasonable rent, and I 
 don't try to extract the utmost I can get ; and the 
 result of letting it reasonably is that that man will 
 j)ut in another man at an unreasonable rent. 
 
 11310. It is no loss to you ? — It is indirectly, you 
 don't get your land farmed so well, and you don't have 
 the same security for your money. 
 
 11311. If the man pays a certain sum he creates 
 an interest in it for lumself? — Y^es, and he pays.it 
 how 1 . Sometimes never. The losses on my estate are 
 very large every year, sometimes they never pay, and 
 sometimes they may be a longtime in arrear, othertimes 
 the rent may not be collected for three years. 1 have 
 got three or four years rent due in many — I should 
 say most of the holdings on my estate. 
 
 11312. Do you often see these tenants yourself! — 
 Yes. ■ 
 
 11313. Mr. Kavanagh. — Did you charge this man 
 you mention nothing when he got the farm 1 — No. 
 
 11314. How does he come to hav« tenant-right? — 
 Because it existed on my estate. 
 
 11315. Don't you think it is rather hard on you to 
 allow him to sell what he never bought ? — He had been 
 evicted for non-payment of rent, and he had been on 
 the same farm and I let him back again. 
 
 11316. You said tenant-right led to the consolida- 
 tion of farms Surely, what you have shown us there 
 does not prove it 1 — I don't say it leads to the conso- 
 lidation of farms, but I think it assists where I have 
 such a lot of farms with such very small valuation. 
 It assists me in consolidating my farms satisfactorily. 
 In fact I don't think I could carry out consolidation of . 
 farms with such a numerous tenantry in any other way. 
 
 11317. But it does not seem to have worked well 
 on Drumdutton 1 — Yes ; but that is under lease. I 
 cannot deal with these people at all. 
 
 11318. That is sublet under a lease? — Yes. 
 
 11319. Of course tenant-right would not apply 
 there if there is not any tenant-right with the under 
 tenants ? — I am not quite sure, but I think there is 
 tenant-right. 
 
 11320. Mr. Shaw. — Tenant-right leads to the con- 
 solidation of farms because you get the neighbouring 
 tenants to buy? — Yes; it being the custom on my 
 estate that the neighbouring tenants should have the 
 jjreference, and I always endeavour to carry that out. 
 In fact, before the Land Act was passed, it was car- 
 ried out very determinedly sometimes to the disad- 
 vantage of the outgoing tenant, but we had to consider 
 the advantage to the estate, and the advantage to the 
 incoming tenant. As eql^itably as possible it was done, 
 but, of course, where there are such small farms the 
 Ulster custom enables you to get a stronger tenant 
 eventually upon your land, and buys out the weaker 
 one. 
 
 11321. Chairman. — Do you mean consolidation for 
 the purpose of making very large farms or only con- 
 solidation into moderate-sized holdings, on which per- 
 sons can live ? — That on any estate where the custom 
 exists regulates itself. It may eventually arrive at 
 very large farms if a man kept on buying. 
 
 11322. What is your view ? — Of course my object 
 and aim would be a tenantry who could live upon 
 their farms and not upon extraneous rtisources. Now 
 they go to Scotland, leaving their own harvest, very 
 often, to go to the bad, and winning the certain penny 
 they can get there, and taking chance for the weather 
 when they come back. 
 
 11323. Mr. Shaw. — You have a good deal of land 
 that is not mountain land, and good ? — Yes ; and 
 farmed under very favourable circumstances. 
 
 11324. Tenant-right exists in all that? — Yes. 
 
 11325. And it works well? — I think so; it is 
 certainly satisfactory to them, and it is satisfactory to 
 me. 
 
 11326. The O'Conob. Don. — Have you laid out 
 much on im])rovements ? — Yes ; I have spent £7,000 
 this winter from the Board of Works, and I have 
 spent; another thousand or two of my own. 
 
 11327. Chaikman. — What interest or addition do 
 you put on the rent for the loans? — A very few 
 tenants have taken advantage of that. A certain 
 number have at 5 per cent., and then it becomes 
 their own. They get their good- will for it afterwards. 
 
 11328. Mr. Shaw. — The five per cent, pays the 
 principal and interest?; — Yes. 
 
 11329. The O'CoNOR Don. — Could you state the 
 amount spent on those estates within the last ten or 
 twenty years iii improvements ? — No, I don't think I 
 cou.ld. 
 
 11330. Chairman. — Has it been a large amount ? 
 — Yes ; there has been a great deal of money spent. 
 We have made a great number of roads, and a good 
 deal of changing of farms. We took a good many 
 townlands out of rundale. 
 
 11331. Have you erected many farm buildings ? — 
 No ; very few farm buildings. The tenants do all the 
 improvements like that. Of course there was a num- 
 ber of houfees built, which would now become farm 
 buildings and labourers' cottages, and that sort of 
 
 Se2>l. 29, 1880. 
 
 The Earl of 
 Leitrim. 
 
 thing ; but in road-making, fencing, and draining, a 
 
 great deal was done in my grandfather's time. 
 
 11332. Do the farmers' labourers hold under you, or 
 imder the farmers ? — Some under me and some under 
 the farmers. 
 
 11333. What sort of houses have the labourers under 
 the farmers ? — There are very few of the labouring 
 class. The labouring classes, in many cases, are these 
 cottier tenants. 
 
 11334. Mr. Shaw. — In fact they are mere labour- 
 ers if there was anything for them to do? — Yes ; they 
 have all got such small holdings that they labour 
 their own holdings. Some of these small tenants are 
 nothing more than labourers, but they have no labour 
 to do for most part of the year. I think it is rather a 
 hard case with regard to tenants to have to. nav 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COiimSSION, 18S0. 
 
 Sept. i'9, IS 
 
 The Earl 
 Loitrim. 
 
 sheriffs' costs. Siijipose I obtain :i decreej and it , 
 
 to eviction, and to yetting dovm the sheriff, my 
 estate is handicapped with otJier estates, because it is 
 fnrtliest away from the sheriff. Immediately tlie sheriff 
 gets a decree he receives £1 Is. Gel. for executing 
 it j he charges Gd. per mile from Deny. Well, he 
 lives in Deny, and comes to my estate, forty or fifty 
 miles, and if the tenant redeems he has to pay Gd. per 
 mile for that eviction, whereas the tenant living 
 within a mile or two of Derry has only to pay 1 s. 
 Gd. Notonly that, but in the event of the sheriff com- 
 ing down into one district, and there were several cases 
 in that district of executing decrees, he charges Gd. ipev 
 mile for each case. I have drawn up agreements in 
 many cases wliere I have had to put them out as 
 tenants, and put them in as caretakers. There is 
 no good blinking it. You must , exercise that pres- 
 sure upon those people. You put them out as 
 tenants, put them in as caretakers, and, properly 
 speaking, as things stand now, I should bring down 
 
 the sheriff, in every case, at great cost. In all these • 
 cases they will redeem, and then they would be mulcted, 
 but I must keep them up to the mark or they never 
 would pay. I have drawn tip an agreement, and my 
 agent goes on the ground and says will you give me 
 possession, and they have done it in many cases, and 
 then the man is put in as caretaker, and he has six 
 months to redeem. The question then comes whether 
 that tenant might not, at the end of the six months, 
 say " according to the statute I have not had my six 
 months to redeem, because the sheriff did not put me 
 out," and he might come down upon me at anytime 
 afterv,rards and say I must have this farm. That is 
 the danger I am running, and yet I am doing it for 
 the advantage of the tenants. 
 
 11335. It has not done you any harm 1 — jSTo, but it. 
 has not worked itself out yet. 
 
 11336. Could not the sheriff appoint some man in 
 the district as substitute 1 — Well, he makes money out 
 of it. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Sinclair. 
 
 Mr. James Sinclair, Dundarg, Coleraine, examined. 
 
 11337. Chaieman. — You are an owner of property 
 and also an agent? — Yes; I am a joint owner of a 
 small property, and agent over several different pro- 
 perties, amounting altogether to about £:2 2,000 a 
 year. 
 
 11338. And you also farm? — Yes, I have a small 
 farm. 
 
 11339. Is that your own property? — No, I rent it. 
 
 11340. What is the system of tenant-right on the 
 properties you are concerned with ? — As far as I am 
 concerned it is entirely unlimited free sale. 
 
 11311. That is where you are owner? — All that I 
 am connected with everywhere. 
 
 11342. There is no restriction on the Ulster 
 custom ? — Thei'e is sale by auction, but reserving the 
 right of choice as to the tenant. 
 
 11343. Is there aiiction, and then when, it is bid up 
 to the closing point a tenant on the property may take 
 it at that price, reserving the landlord's right to choose ? 
 — First the adjoining tenant, and then alter that any 
 tenant on the estate. 
 
 1 1 344. Do you find that system gives satisfaction 1 — 
 I think it does. 
 
 11345. The tenants themselves like it? — The out- 
 going tenant likes it very much, but the others who 
 wish to buy the farm do not, as a rule. 
 
 11346. They do not like the holding to be auctioned 1 
 —No. 
 
 11347. They would like to have the first offer at a 
 reasonable price ? — Sometimes it is bid up beyond its 
 value very much. 
 
 11348. For the purpose of getting the property? — 
 Yes, for the purpose of getting the land. 
 
 11349. Do you have any regulation as to changes of 
 rent at any specified time ? — No, there is no regulation 
 as far as I am concerned. . , 
 
 11350. It is not a perpetuity rent? — No, but since 
 I became agent in that neighbourhood of Coleraine 
 (about 24 years) there have been only three properties 
 revalued that I am concerned with. 
 
 11351. Mr. Shaw. — On a change of tenancy do you 
 put on a higher rent ? — It has not happened with me 
 for a long time, but where there is an old lease dropped 
 out the rent is raised. 
 
 11352. But not upon an ordinary tenancy dropping 
 in ?-- No. 
 
 11353. What are the estates over which you are 
 agent? — There is the Somerset estate, Londonderry, 
 which belongs to three different owners ; an estate in 
 Antrim, of Sir Eobert Harvey; an estate in Antrim, of 
 the Rev. Stephen Bennett; another of the Rev. 
 Edward Bennett ; Sterling's estate (which is divided) ; 
 Sir John Bunbury's estate ; the Aucketell estate, in 
 Tyrone ; Mrs. Keown's, in Down ; Major Shuldham's, 
 in Derry; Mrs. Torrens', in Donegal, and our own 
 small property. 
 
 11354. Are there many leases- on these properties?- 
 — Very few. There are a few on Sir Robert Harvey's 
 estate. It was a, lease a great many years ago for the 
 life of the Queen, and a number of these leases were 
 given up in 1847, before I became agent, in order to 
 obtain a reduction of rent. Some are remaining, but, 
 generally speaking, there are no leases. 
 
 1 1 35.5. Chairman. — Have leases been offered of late 
 years ? — People don't care about them. 
 
 11356. Were they inclined to have them befoi-e the 
 Land Act ? — No, they were not ; not on these proper- 
 ties. 
 
 11357. , That was through depiendence upon the land 
 owners ? — Yes, upon these properties at all events. 
 
 11358. You have not found any difference since the 
 Act passed 1 — No, there has been no change in tliese 
 properties in the relations between landlord and tenant 
 since the Act passed. 
 
 ' 11359. Are the' tenantry generally well satisfied 
 with their position as far as you know 1 — As far as I 
 know they are. I don't hear any complaints, at least. 
 There was no general application for a reduction of 
 rent, or that sort of thing, during the last year, only 
 two estates asked. 
 
 11360. What has been the general rental per acre? 
 — It varies very much. 
 
 11361. What is the proportion of the rent towards 
 the tenement valuation ? — Of these properties that I 
 hav,e the management of, the rental altogether is 
 £21,582, and the poor law valuation £20,434. Some- 
 thing about 5 per cent, over the Government valuation. 
 
 11362. Mr. Shaw. — The valuation includes build- 
 ings ? — Yes ; I took it in that W9,y. I could give 
 you the other figures if necessary. 
 
 11363. Chairman. — Are the buUdings generally 
 erected by the tenant 1 — Pretty nearly always. The 
 holdings are small, as far as I know. 
 
 11364. Do the landlords, in any cases, contribute 
 towards the improvements ? — They do, in many cases, 
 give very hugely and liberally ; there has been a good 
 deal given, but it has been given up a good deal also. 
 
 11365. Did they cease to give after the Land Act? 
 — They did not give so much. 
 
 11366. Was it in consequence of the Land Act? — 
 Yes, because where there was an unlimited right of 
 sale they did not see that there was any encourage- 
 ment to give money away. 
 
 11367. Has there been much reclamation of waste 
 land ? — Not to any extent. 
 
 11368. Is there much cut-away bog-land on the 
 estates you know ? — Where I live myself there is 
 a great deal of reclaimable mountain pasture, but not 
 so much of cutout bog. 
 
 11369. What course do yon take as to the Grand 
 Jury cess ?-^In any property I ha,ve had anything to , 
 do with the revaluation of the tenant has cot the ad- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 38:; 
 
 vantage of that. I have only liaj one property re- 
 valued since the Land Act, and the tenants "-ot half 
 of the Grand Jury Cess. 
 
 11370. Do you allow them half in the way poor- 
 rate is allowed 1 — Yes, on exactly the same system ; 
 and as to the roads being measured into farms I 
 never include them in the measurement. 
 
 11371. It is always exclusive of the roads? — Yes, 
 and buildingSj and anj' houses, in the same way, are 
 always excluded from any valuation. 
 
 11372. Mr. Shaw. — Is the rent a lump rent, and 
 not by the acreage 1 — It is an acreage rent. 
 
 11373. And the roads are not measured in? — No ; 
 and very often rights of way — private roads — are not 
 included ; the county roads are alwaj's exempt. 
 
 11374. The Chairman. — Do you "hear much com- 
 plaint as to restrictions of the tenant-right on other 
 properties t — They do complain, but they don't com- 
 plain very tremendously. 
 
 11375. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you appi-ove of these 
 restrictions ? — Yes. I don't think the sale by auction 
 is a good thing, ceitainly, because it makes the in- 
 coming man pay often more than the holding is worth. 
 
 11376. And, of course, wherever the incoming 
 man pays more than the improvements are worth, he 
 is Tathe:^■ throwing away money 1 — I hardly ever knew 
 of any improv-ements being sold in this way. 
 
 11377. You think it is only the good-will, as a 
 rule 1 — No man "who is a prosperous tenant, and has 
 made improvements, ever sells his farm, or very 
 I'arely. 
 
 11378. That shows that tenant-right only means 
 the good-will 1 — It comes to that ; as far as good-will 
 go^s, there is no attempt at interfeiing with the man 
 coming in. 
 
 11379. Good-will is another name for tenant-right 
 — you refer to a different matter? — Yes, but it is a 
 wrong name. The improving tenant never sells, as a 
 rule. 
 
 11380. I understand •" good -will" to be tebant- 
 right and improvements, and you say it only means 
 the good-will 1 — Yes. 
 
 11381. Mr. Shaw.— The tenant does not build?— 
 He does. On the majority of these properties I have 
 the management of, the buildings are not valuable ; 
 the average holdings are small. 
 
 11382. Are they generally thatched houses ? — Yes, 
 but latterly they have improved very much that way. 
 
 11383. And such as they are they are made by the 
 tenants? — Yes; but in many cases slates have been 
 given by the landlord. 
 
 11384. And the fences are made by the tenants ? — 
 As a rule. 
 
 11385. And if there is anything like reclamation 
 of peat field, or bog the tenants do that? — On some 
 properties they do, but are sometimes assisted with 
 lime, &c. 
 
 11386. But as a general rule the tenants make 
 these improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 11387. Mr. Kavanagh. — You think the landlord 
 ought to have a veto on the selection of the tenant ? 
 — Certainly I do. On these properties we have al- 
 ways exercised it. 
 
 11388. You have exercised the right of selection — 
 that is, refused to admjt a bad tenant, although you 
 don't exercise the right of restricting the price ? — Ex- 
 actly. If a farm is advertised -to- be sold, the agent 
 often tells a man not to come at all, but that he will 
 g§t the holding at the highest price oflFered, for 
 they often raise it when they see a man bidding who 
 really wants it. 
 
 11389. Da you know that they borrow very much? 
 ^-They do, very largely. 
 
 11390. 'That must hamper the man's future in the 
 management of the farm % — I have kno-wn people to 
 borrow very largely. The times have been veiy good, 
 until the last year or two, and some people who bor- 
 rowed considerably-^up to £300 or £400 — have re- 
 couped themselves, and got clear, but other people 
 cannot do it, and it depends very much on the pre- 
 
 Mr. .James 
 Sinclair. 
 
 vious circuinfitaiLue,-! of the man — a small man, with Sept. 29, isso. 
 sons, will work himself free very often. 
 
 11391. Do you knovv' of many cases of rent being 
 raised — the great complaint is that tenant-right is 
 eaten away by the landlords raising the rent from time 
 to time ! — I know nothing of it. 
 
 11392. That is not your experience? — Certaiialy 
 not. Some of these properties have been raised, not 
 very lately, but within the last twenty years, and the 
 tenant-right sells at from fifteen to twenty-five years 
 purchase". ' These farms (produces list) were all sold 
 within the last tweh'e months. The property belongs 
 to Sir Robert Harvey. It was revalued in 1869, just 
 immediately before the Laud Act, and it was a little 
 raised, but not very much ; one farm, the rent of 
 which was XIO 12s. 5d., sold for ,£160 f another at a 
 rent of £4 9.9. 7d., sold for £80 ; aiaother at a rent of 
 £7 16s. lOcZ., sold for £230; another at a rent of 
 £11 IGs. lrf.,for£155; another at a rent of £8 10s. 5d., 
 for £130 ; another at a rent of £55, for £306 ; and 
 another at a rent of £10 7s. 1;/., at £200. Two on the 
 Somerset estate have been sold within the last three 
 months, and one, I think, about April. The last 
 mentioned was held at £14 7s. 8(1. , and it sold for 
 £345. The other two. were held at £15 14s. 8d., 
 sold for £300 ; and at £17 18s. lOd., sold for £150 
 about three weeks ago.' That was the case of a man 
 who was ejected for non-payment of rent. 
 
 11393. Were there any improvements on any ol 
 these farms ? — No ; the tenants were without any 
 means whatever. 
 
 11394. But there were houses on them? — Some of 
 them had. The £14 7s. 8(/. farm had no house on it 
 that 3-0U would put a pig into, but there happened to 
 be three tenants who were' competing for it, and I had 
 no objection to any of them. 
 
 11395. Another objection is that when estates are 
 I'evalued the tenants are taxed for their own work ? — 
 If a man puts a valuator on he will value the land as 
 he finds it. 
 
 11396. When you have a valuator on a property 
 do you give him no instructions or directions to value 
 the tenants' improvements ? — I have never had a case 
 of the sort, except where old leases have fallen in. 
 This property I speak of was revalued after I became 
 agent in 1857, and it had not been revalued before 
 that in the memory of the oldest tenant, and not one 
 knew of any change being made. That is on the 
 Somerset estate near Coleraine. 
 
 11397. Many of them felt very sore about that? — 
 No doubt that would take place if a man has improved 
 his holding very largely ; you put on a valuator and 
 the valuator cannot take that into account. 
 
 11398. Unless he received instructions to value 
 separately the land and the tenants' improvements — 
 is that ever done ?-^I never knew of that being done. 
 
 11399. Chairman. — The improvements in buildings 
 might be taken separately? — The buildings are 
 never taken into account in any of the cases. I never 
 knew buildings to be valued in an ordinary agricultural 
 holding. 
 
 11400. Mr. Kavanagh. — Then the only other im- 
 provement would be in drainage or making fences ? — 
 Yes, the ordinary improvements — in fact we get an 
 acreable value for the farm — so much an acre. 
 
 11401. The O'CoNOK Don. — Has there been much 
 money laid out in improvements by the landlords for 
 whom you manage ?— On the Somerset property, and 
 Mr. Bennett's property there was a great deal, but 
 with the other smaller landlords there was not. 
 
 11402. How much on the Somerset property?— , 
 That property was revalued in 1857, and from that on 
 for a good many years, I could not exactly say how 
 much, but there was something from about £1^000 to 
 £1,500 a year. ' ....... 
 
 11403. Chairman.— You spoke of these tenants 
 
 near Coleraine as- being pretty nearly beggars 1 -No. 
 
 I meant the 'particular ca;aes that had sold ; as a rule 
 the tenaiitsh-ere al-e solvent and- respectable. ■ ■■ -, 
 
 11404; How was it they became so ?— From bad 
 
 3 D 2 
 
38 S 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Stpt. so, If 8 
 
 Sir. Jamos 
 Siiu-Iair. 
 
 farming and from different causes. They were thriftless 
 people, and they had remained hanging on until the 
 farm was getting worse and worse. 
 
 11403. That would have the effect of reducing the 
 tenant-right ^ — No. I think they sold for quite as 
 much as they would ever get. 
 
 11406. In one case it sold exceptionally high? — 
 
 That was because it was near the town, and from the 
 fact that three tenants wanted it, any one of whom 
 would have been accepted. 
 
 11407. There was nothing particular in these 
 people that caused them to break down, but merely 
 the bad management 1 — That was all. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Sinclair. 
 
 Mr. William Sinclair, Holyhill, examined. 
 
 11408. Mr. Kavanagh. — You are a landed pro- 
 jjrietor'? — Yes, I have property both in Tyrone and 
 Donegal, near Strabane, in Tyrone, and near the town 
 of Donegal, ^jn Donegal on the sea coast. 
 
 11409. And your property is under the Ulster 
 custom 1 — Entirely. 
 
 11410. Tell us what the custom is ? — The custom is 
 that if a tenant wishes to go away, he asks the land- 
 lord's permission to sell, and the landlord always allows 
 it with the choice of the tenant reserved. If the 
 tenant brings a solvent tenant' to take his place, I 
 never make any objection otherwise. 
 
 11411. The landlord allows free sale reserving the 
 right of veto, in case an objectionable man offers as 
 tenant 1 — Tlie landlord keeps the right of veto in case 
 of objection on moral or economic grounds. 
 
 11412. But he places no reservation as to the price 1 
 — No, I have bought and sold farms myself under that 
 system. - Tenant-right is sold very high here. 
 
 11413. What is about the average? — There were 
 three farms sold on my property near Strabane, and 
 they were sold this year at twenty-one years purchase. 
 There was one sold on my Donegal property, the rent 
 was £7 5s., and it sold for £190, and 5 per cent, 
 auctioneer's fees — aboat £205 altogether. It was sold 
 in February last. 
 
 11414. You look upon that as a good price ? — It was 
 reckoned as a very good piice, and the tenant was a 
 good solvent tenant. 
 
 11415. Do you know the size of the farm? — No, T 
 don't exactly know the size, but £7 5s. was the rent. 
 
 11416. It could not have been a very large farm ? — 
 There may have been thirteen or fourteen acres. 
 
 11417. It was held at a very low rent ? — The rent 
 was moderate, but the rents there are very moderate 
 always. There was a farm sold over there on Mr. 
 Musgrave's property, £G was the rent, and it sold for 
 £200, and there was a tolerably good house xipon it 
 and he told me two other farms were sold at thirty years 
 purchase ; there was a very good house on one of them. 
 It is the small farms that realize the highest prices. 
 There were some farms sold on the Duke of Aberoorn's 
 property, not long ago, which went up to £1,600, 
 and £1,100 and that sort of price. 
 
 11418. How many years purchase was that? — 
 Twenty-three or twenty -four years purchase, and 
 there have been a great many sold at much lower 
 rates, these were exceptional rates. There have been 
 farms sold on the best part of the Duke's pro^serty in 
 the present year, for twelve or fourteen years purchase. 
 The smaller farms there is generally more competition 
 for. The farms on my property were holdings of £7, 
 £8 and £10, a year rent; a farm at £10 rent sold 
 for £210 near Strabane. 
 
 11419. Do you find that the value of tenant-right 
 holds its own, or has it increased or decreased ? — It is 
 lower now than it was, but it rose immensely between 
 1851 or 1852, and the year 1877, I think it got to 
 the highest price in 1877. I bought a farm myself in 
 1846 of which the rent was £4 10s., and I gave 
 £60 for it. I laid out £240 on it, and in the course 
 of six years I had it in grass and I was repaid my 
 money, and in 1863 I sold the tenant-right of it 
 for £300 subject to a rent of £25 a year. The ten- 
 ant who bought from me sold it over again in 1873, 
 and although he had deteriorated it very much, he got 
 £550 for it. There was another case on my property 
 a farm of which the rental was £18, and in 1864 it 
 was sold for £300, it was sold for £600 in 1877; 
 
 but since the American comjDetition became severe 
 tenant-right has fallen off, still it has not fallen very 
 much. 
 
 11420. You wish to say something about the appli- 
 cation of tenant-right to the rest of Ireland 1 — Yes, I 
 would not presume to say it ought to be applied to the 
 rest of Ireland, but I hold very much the opinion that 
 Lord George Hamilton gave in the House of Commons,, 
 thatit was theoretically wrong but practically right. All 
 you have to do is to look around this country and see- 
 the state of Ulster, and see the state of the rest of 
 Ireland, but where the circumstances are equal, I think 
 tenant-right is a good thing, I am a very strong advo- 
 cate for it, but that is only my individual opinion. 
 
 11421. Chairman. — Do you think it is the best 
 way of giving the tenants a feeling of security ? — I 
 think it has been a success where it has been practiced. 
 
 11422. Mr. Kavanagh. — What would you say as 
 to the complaints we have heard, that the habit of 
 raising the rents has pi'actically made the tenants feel 
 utterly insecure in Ulster, as it has eaten away the ten- 
 ant-right or tended to it ? — I don't believe that to be 
 the case. 
 
 11423. You don't know of any instance in your 
 experience, where the rents have been raised ? — I don't 
 know of any instances of exorbitant raising of rent. 
 
 11424. We have heard more of the effect of the fear 
 of a rise of i-ent than of actual cases ofrise of rent, (there 
 have been actual cases mentioned of a great rise ofrentno 
 doubt), but it is they that inspired the feeling through- 
 out the country ? — It is very possible they may, but 
 generally it will be found that the rise is not so un- 
 reasonable as has perhaps been stated to you. Now a 
 great part of the reclamation of land in Ulster was 
 carried on on what are called improving leases, and 
 many hold for forty or fifty years, and at the end of 
 that time a man found his rent was perhaps doubled 
 or trebled when his lease fell out, and that man 
 naturally felt aggrieved. I could give you an instance 
 of it on my own property where the rent of the 
 farm was raised from £9 10s. I think to £17 10«., 
 at the expiration of the lease which had lasted for 
 upwards of fifty years. The man complained at first, 
 however he sold the farm a very short time afterwards 
 for £420 for his tenant-right, and therefore I think the 
 man had no right to complam. I think when he got 
 £420 as his share of the concern, he had no right to 
 complain even with the I'uised rent. 
 
 11425. Of course the evidence we have heard is 
 only a one-sided story as yet, it has to be tested, and 
 you say that it is possible the instance of rent being 
 raised at the expiration of a lease, may be at the end 
 of a lease which was given for the purpose of improv- 
 ing i — Yes, beneficial teases. I have had a great deal 
 of experience in the reclamation of land, and I know 
 it constantly happens that the tenant is recouped by 
 three years crops. No land in my opinion ought to 
 be attempted to be reclaimed which won't recoup the 
 tenant inside six or seven years. It is the case in 
 other countries as well as here. In Scotland I aui 
 informed on very good authority, that a man will 
 undertake to reclaim land for five years free rent. 
 
 11426. Being allowed to hold the land free for five 
 years 1 — Yes. 
 
 11427. And then come under rent ? — Yes. Therule 
 on my property was that where these leases were 
 granted, they were granted for five years free, and then 
 for thirty-one years or the life of the tenant, at a very 
 moderate rent — 3s., or 48., or 5s. an acre. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 889 
 
 11428. That was a very low rent? — It was for cut 
 ovit bog or reclaimable mountain land. 
 
 ] 1429. Yovi think leases of that sort entirely com- 
 pensated the man for what he spent in reclaiming the 
 land?— Yes. 
 
 11430. Have you any other remarks to make about 
 the reclamation of land ? — With regard to the reclama- 
 tion of land, I would simply say that, in my opinion, six 
 or seven years do repay a tenant, and he oiight to have a 
 reasonable time after that — in the cases within my ex- 
 perience it has been thirty-one years or the man's life. 
 
 11431. Is there no large extent of waste land in 
 your district? — There is no extent of waste land in 
 the hands of the landlord, but there are many tenants 
 who have small patches of reclaimable land, and are 
 reclaiming it — there has been a wonderful amount of 
 reclamation all through this county. 
 
 11432. There have been great proposals about 
 Government taking up large tracts of land and re- 
 claiming them, are there any such large tracts that 
 you know of? — I am aware of "the proposals, but the 
 difficulty would be that there is no place to reclaim. 
 In 1847 I got a loan from the" Board of Works. At 
 that time people were very anxious to leave the coun- 
 try, and by paying their passage to America you got 
 rid of them, but at the present moment I don't know 
 of any estate about here or about Donegal where there 
 is a piece of waste ground that has not a tenant on it 
 and a tenant who is very fully determined to keep it. 
 If yon went to turn one of these men out he would 
 feel himself very much injured, and be ready to take 
 the steps that men do take. 
 
 11433. And-would he, in fact, be an injured man? 
 — That is what he considers, and if the landlord 
 offered to reclaim the land and charge him rent for 
 it, he would feel injured also. When my property 
 in Tyrone came into my hands, I offered every tenant 
 for any ground he would reclaim an advance of £i 
 an acre, to be repaid in instalments of 10s. a year, 
 without any interest, and twenty-five years' lease of 
 his farm. There was not a man who would take the 
 lease, and there was only one man who took advan- 
 tage of the advance, and that man told me in the third 
 year he was repaid. He paid me regularly. 
 
 11434. As to the objection to take leases, does that 
 arise from fear of losing the tenant-right at the end of 
 them? — No, I think they had always the idea they 
 were pretty safe, but that when a lease falls in the 
 landlord would be looking into the rent, otherwise the 
 property went on and a man might be forty or fifty 
 years without an alteration in the rent. 
 
 11435. In fact, the expiration of the lease suggested 
 a rise of rent 1 — Yes ; the fall of the lease suggested 
 it was time to look after it. I have heard that ob- 
 jection made by many farmers. 
 
 11436. Can you tell us anytloing about the glebe 
 lands in the county Donegal ? — I have been studying 
 that a good deal, and my attention was directed to it 
 a good deal by the statements of Mr. Tuke. I went 
 through a good many of them in the county Donegal, 
 and I found the actionof the Church Temporalities Com- 
 missioners in making tenant proprietors has been a total 
 failure. I found in the parish of Killybegs, which ad- 
 joins my property, there were eighty tenants and only 
 one had purchased, and in Inver forty-five tenants, 
 four of whom had piirchased — three of these are public- 
 house keepers, and the fourth man is my son's biitler. 
 In Killymad there were thirty-three tenants, of whom 
 five had purchased, but three have since sold their 
 proprietorship, and continue tenants to the man who 
 bought the residue. They sold to, him at fifteen 
 years' pui-chase, and they bought at nineteen. In. the 
 parish of Kilcar there were eighty-five glebe tenants ; 
 six of them purchased, and the remaining seventy- 
 nine sold their right of pre-emption — ^part of them to 
 Mr. Musgrave, a Belfast man, who is making great 
 improvements in that country, and the remainder to 
 a man who is a shopkeeper in the town of Killybeg, 
 and they are now ordinary tenants. In the parish 
 of Myragh, Mr. Tuke said there were three men who 
 
 bought, but there were fifty-nine tenants and four pur- Sept. 29, 1880. 
 chased. He gives the names of the three, but he ,. J^: 
 omitted one, and of the three he mentioned, one has Sinclair, 
 sold to the purchaser of the residue, and of the other 
 three I am told only one will be able to hold his 
 ground. I know that one has sold — he has ceased to be 
 a peasant proprietor and has become a tenant again. 
 Then there is the parish of Templecrone, which has been 
 the subject of newspaper correspondence and which is 
 mentioned by Mr. Tuke as having been " cited as an 
 instance of failure, and very unjustly." Mr. Tuke gives 
 an account of it which is totally inconsistent with the 
 fact, and Mr. Shaw Lefevi-e, in a letter to the Times, on 
 the 26th February, gave one which was totally false. 
 Before Mr. Lefevre's Committee, Professor Baldwin 
 gave another account which is eqvially inconsistent with 
 fact as far as I ca:n identify his statement. He does 
 not name the townlands, but he names the locality, and 
 he names the men, and, the cii'ciimstances were very 
 peculiar. The actual circumstances were these : — There 
 were fifty tenants, twenty-eight of these got the money 
 from what Mr. Shaw Lefevre calls a local usurer who 
 advances money, and the Church Temporalities Com- 
 missioners made out the deeds to this man ; he had 
 promised them that they would be allowed to .redeem, 
 and that he would only charge them 4 per cent, for the 
 money, but they did not exactly understand that 
 the conveyance was made to him. When the first 
 4 per cent, was added to their rental and demanded 
 by this man, they could not pay it, and he then said 
 he must have 10 per cent., and he raised the rent to 10 
 per cent. However, the tenants were equal to the 
 occasion, and they did not pay anything at all. This 
 was in 1876. Thirteen tenants purchased and bought 
 out and out, and five of them, as far as I can under- 
 stand after very patient investigation, were solvent — 
 one was a kelp agent, another kept a shop. The remain- 
 ing eight borrowed part of the money and par'tly sold 
 stock. These eight were always in a bad state, and were 
 on the relief lists. There remained nine more who 
 paid part of the purchase-money to the Church Tem- 
 poralities Commissioners, and pai't they kept on mort- 
 gage. These men got this land in 1876. I said to 
 one of them, " Did you pay your mortgage last year "? 
 and he said, "No." " Did you pay it the year before" ? 
 and he said, "I did not." "Did you ever pay it"? 
 " Oh," he hesitated a little, and said, he did not think 
 he did, and, he added, that he did not think he would 
 ever pay. I then said, " If you don't pay the Com- 
 missioners will foreclose the mortgage, and sell the 
 land." " Who v/ill buy it "? was his answer, and they 
 have never paid a halfpenny to the Church Temporali- 
 ties Commissioners, and there they are ; and the other 
 fellows have never paid Sweeney, and they are now in 
 combination that they will not pay the rent or this 
 mortgage money, and how the Commissioners will raise 
 the money I don't know. 
 
 11437. You think that Mr. Tuke's glowing, account 
 of the state of affairs is not correct ? — I know almost 
 everything he says is incorrect. 
 
 11438. Th(5 O'CoNOR Don.— You made use of a 
 very strong expression about Mr. Lefevre 1 Do 
 you wish to explain it?— I was informed by the 
 clergyman of the parish, who lives in the midst 
 of these people, that Mr. Shaw Lefevre had licen in 
 communication with him, and that he had given him 
 the actual facts of the case before l^v. Lefevre's letter 
 appeared in the Times. 
 
 11439. Perhaps he received difterent information 
 from other parties, and he may have trusted to one 
 more than the other? — I will tell you my reason for 
 looking upon Mr. Lefevre's evidence as more incorrect 
 than that of other people, Mr. Lefevre had nothing 
 to do but to consult Mr. Godley, and Mr. Godley's 
 letter in the Times, appeared the very day after Mr. 
 Lefevre's, and it was totally different. He ought to 
 have known the truth. 
 
 11440. Every one you say who made a statement 
 with regard to these tenants is incorrect 1 — Yes. 
 
 11441. Mr. Lefevre is incorrect : Mr. Tuke is in- 
 
890 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 ■ Sejtt.ii. 18S0.- 
 
 Mr. William 
 Sinclair, 
 
 correct ; Professor Baldwin is incorrect. Is that so 1 
 — Professor Baldwin's evidence I cannot identify, 
 because lie does not name the lands, but he names 
 the man who actually advanced the money. 
 
 11442. Do you know these tenants yourself ? — I do. 
 
 114-1-3. And you know the condition of them?— Yes. 
 
 11444. Do you live near: them'?^--I happened to be 
 - a good 'deal amongst them formerly ; a. relative of mine 
 
 was rector there. 
 
 11445. And the statements you make are from your 
 owu personal knowledge ?— From my own. personal 
 investigation. I conversed with some of those who 
 paid. i\iy [irincipal information is derived fi'om as fine 
 a s])ecimen of the Irish peasantiy as you could see. 
 He paid up and bought his place, and he said he was 
 sorry he had done so, as he could have made better 
 use of the mojiey. His name is Prank Deveney . 
 
 11446. He is one of the tenants who purchased ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 11447. How many of these are actual owners of 
 their holdings — direct owners 1 — My authority is Mr. 
 Goiliey's letter to the Times. He says that forty-one 
 purchased out and out; that the middleman had 
 twenty-eight, thirteen purchased altogether, and nine 
 held on mortgage. 
 
 1144S. On mortgage from the Church Com- 
 missioners ? — Yes, and they never paid a halfpenny 
 of their instalments, that is the statement of one of 
 them to me. 
 
 11449. What year did they purchase in? — In 1876. 
 
 11450. And you state they have never paid a half- 
 penny since 1876 ? — That is my information, I can 
 show you Mr. Burns's letter. 
 
 11451. Would you be surprised to hear that the 
 Church Commissioners themselves state that on the 
 whole the payments have been made punctually, even 
 during last year, by these purchasei-s 1 — I don't mind 
 much what the Church Commissioners say. I hold 
 with Judge Flanagan who, in his evidence before Mr. 
 Shaw Lefevre's Committee said that nobody could 
 make anything out of their accounts. 
 
 11452. Do you think they would make that state- 
 ment if it was not correct 1 — I don't say they would, 
 but I only tell you what has happened. 
 
 1 1453. You are aware a great many people's tenants 
 besides the Church Commissioners' tenants did not pay 
 this year 1 — I ara aware ; but these men told me they 
 did not iKij this year or the year before^, and the 
 man 1 spoke to told me, " I never will." I will rea'd 
 you Mr. Burns's letter : — 
 
 " After minute inquiry into the subject of your letter, I 
 find there arc nine mortgagor.s on the glebe lands, none of 
 them have paid a single instalment to the Commissioners, 
 and I fu-mly believe never will. John Deveney paid ^£315 
 purch:iH'-moncy of the glebe. Only one out of the mne 
 mortgagors got his mortgage cxecuU-d." 
 
 Mr. Tuke states. Deveney's purchase to be £209. 
 
 11454. It Avould appear from your statement as 
 well as from other information that there were fifty 
 tenants on the lands? — Yes. 
 
 1 1 455. That there were only nine who got assistance 
 from the Church Commissioners to purchase • there 
 were thirteen who purchased out and out ; thei-ofore 
 they got no assistance ? — There were nine who "ot 
 assistance. 
 
 11456. There- were only nine whom you call 
 mortgagors to the Commissioners? — Yes; that is 
 the statement of Mr. Godley in the Times of Jan- 
 uary 26. 
 
 11457. Therefore the experiment so far as it turned 
 out well or ill on this particular glebe can only refer 
 to nine out of the fifty ?— That is if you think the men 
 who sold their right to the local usurer are happy men, 
 which is a matter of opinion ; but the action of the 
 Church Temporalities Commissioners has been to create 
 a conspiracy to pay notliing, amongst many there who 
 previously were honest men. 
 
 11458. Your evidence generally with regard to 
 ohose Church sales is that very few purchased at all? 
 — Yes. 
 
 11459. Because I find in the first case you refen-eri 
 to only six bought out of eighty -five tenants,; tlieaojo 
 out of eighty, four out of fifty-nine, and four out of 
 forty-five ?- — Yes. 
 
 11460. Therefore your evidence would be that tlia-e 
 were very few jmrchasers? — Y'es ; seventeen out of 302 
 
 11461. And very few have failed to pay !?t-»-IliJi,.j 
 no means of ascertaining. The only note I hjive takm 
 is that out of the seventeen four have ceased in sij 
 years 4)0 be proprietors, and have again become; tenants 
 of the lands they held, that they sold . theivintai-Mt 
 and at a heavy loss too. / 
 
 11462. Chairman. — Do you know of any,,cg|sej^[ 
 purchase with the assistance of the Board of \Vo%! 
 — I only know one case; it is in the to^ynland;,^)f j 
 Cavan, count)' Donegal, about three miles frq^iwiere 
 
 I live, and I had no opportunity of investigating, it 
 closely, and had not directed my attention particulariv 
 to the place, but I know the people were in a ym 
 bad position, I also was told they were all on KlieSkt. 
 
 11463. Were these Church tenants a particnljily 
 jjoor class ■ of tenants? — Oh yes, the whole ; of ftat 
 country is very poor. The whole of that side of Dcme- 
 gal is poor. 
 
 11464. It is all a very poor country?— Generally a 
 very poor country. , ,,,. 
 
 11465. And have any other occupiers tliere.iljesid^s 
 these men not paid any rent last year? — Plenty pf 
 them, but there are none of them have been for, five 
 years without paying any, or at least very few of tlienj, 
 
 11466. Were they worse off after the purchase th^i 
 they were before ? — Yes. That is what they sjiy. , , 
 
 11467. They are loaded with the addition of the 
 debt ? — They find that the addition of the inj^rest on 
 the mortgage pressed upon them very heavily,! , , 
 
 11468. As a general rule, you think on the wiple, ,tte 
 jjeople would be better ofli"with the tenant-ri^l; ijystan 
 than with peasant proprietorship? — If they liave to 
 incur debt to become peasant proprietors, that is wj 
 opinion. 
 
 11469. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do not the tenants often 
 borrow largely to buy tip the tenant-right ?7-Some of 
 them do, and many of them do not. In the fovu' 
 instances on my own property this year, I ascertained 
 thatnot a single man of them had to borrow a halfpenny. 
 I have known cases where there were cousiderable 
 sums borrowed, but very seldom. Here was the tot 
 a tenant farmer put it to me. I said "I wonder so and 
 so did not buy under the Church Act." The,, nianil 
 knew had the money, and this man said " I think Ijeliad 
 better not." "Why so?"— He said "youknow"- 
 we had been speakijig of another man who tmdei^tooi 
 to pay for ten years — " in the last ten years I saved 
 enough to buy a farm for my son, and I saved Ijbe 
 money I gave niy daughtei-, we have liad very gooJ | 
 times of it, but if I had been paying 10 per cent, 
 additional, or whatever would have been the added 
 to rent of the farm, -I could not have saved a halfpenny 
 for them, and I could not have sold the farm as long as 
 there was that debt on it ; but this farm I liaf^i 
 the landlord will let me sell when I like. 
 
 1 1470. Chaiuhan. — Have you had any convereatioa 
 with these peasant proprietors '! — Yes, with one of tie 
 mortgagees and also my principal informant, Deveney 
 who has purchased out and out. 
 
 11471. He spoke well of it ?— No he said lie woultl 
 have been better ofi'if he had kept the money ana 
 traded on it. 
 
 11472. But he was on the whole content enough ■ 
 — lie made no complaints and seemed aS;if he was 
 very well satisfied he had given the £75. 
 
 1 1473. And were the others content ?— The mortga- 
 gees made no complaint. 
 
 11474. The O'CONOE DoN.— Have you laid out 
 much money on the imjjrovement of your estate.— ; 
 About £4,000 uAder the Board of ^ Works, ^nd a good 
 deal of private money. 
 
 11475. Where, you laid out money undei; t"!' 
 Board of Works, did you charge the, tenants w* 
 the whole interest ?— No, they paid 5 per ceiit., and J- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 3D1 
 
 paid six and a quarter There were very few- tenants 
 ■svlio took anything in the way of loans. There was 
 one tenant, he was my parish priest, and he got a lease 
 from mo of land he liad bought at a very low rate, and 
 the condition was that I should get him a loan of 
 £120 to reclaim upon it. He got a lease for thirty- 
 one years and his own life, and when he died the lease 
 was sold and by that time the money was all paid up. 
 He paid the full interest, but that was an agreement 
 in the lease. 
 
 11476. Chairman. — Did you make any change as 
 to improvements after the Land Act passed '1^ After 
 the Land Act passed I would not take any money at 
 all. In this country it is impossible to get lajid into 
 your own hands, unless by paying the tenant-right, 
 Avhich is something more than the fee simple. 
 
 11477. Was that case before the Land Act? — My 
 I loan was in 1847. 
 
 11478. You say it is impossil.ile now to get land 
 into you own hands 1 — For a great number of j^ears 
 no landlord would do it. 
 
 11479. You speak of the great opportunity there 
 was after the great famine of thus getting tracts of 
 grormd into your hands without clearing it 1 — At that 
 time you might get plenty of land by giving the 
 people their passage to America. I got 500 acres 
 into my hands at that time, and I utilized it to get 
 the farms enlarged, and I charged rent when I had 
 reclaimed land without refel-ence to the loan. In 1847 
 I paid 17s. poor rate, and this year the poor rate is 
 Is. 3d. 
 
 11480. The OT'oKOK Dox.— Has the value of 
 tenant-right increased or decreased since the Land Act ? 
 — I don't think it much changed. Immediately after 
 the passing of the Land Act there was a very rapid 
 rise in the price of all kinds of agricultural produce, 
 butter, beef, and everything, and between that and 
 1877, when the American produce came in, there was 
 a constant rise in the price of jJroduce and land. I 
 
 ' don't think the Act effected the relations of landlord 
 and tenant here except in these sort of matters. I 
 know the properties of the Duke of Abercorn and 
 the Marquess of Conyngham (I hold land under both 
 myself). I don't think their relations were in the 
 least changed. 
 
 11481. Doesn't the raising of rent effect the .valiie 
 of the tenant-right 1 — If a man put on an exorbitant 
 rent I suppose it might, but I have not known any 
 cases wheie it did. 
 
 11482. Chairman. — What is the state of the labour- 
 ing population? — The wages here have risen very 
 considerably, and they are very fairly off now. The 
 wages of an ordinary labourer about me are from 8s. 
 to 10s. a week, according to the man's capacity, with, 
 a house and a piece of potato ground, they get generally 
 nearly half a statute acre. 
 
 11483. Are these the labourers on the farmers' 
 holdings and holding from the farmers 1 — They have 
 holdings from the farmers. 
 
 11484. As part of their wages ? — Yes. 
 
 1 1 485. They do not pay a rent? — No. The ordinary 
 way is that a man is hired at so many shillings a 
 week. My steward hired a man yesterday at 9s. a 
 ■week, and he gets a house and a bit of ground, and 
 the right to cut turf. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Sinclair. 
 
 1 1486. What sort of houses have they ? — Generally Sejit. S9, isso, 
 thatched cottages. 
 
 11487. Not very good? — Not very good. 
 
 11488. But are they pretty comfortable in this 
 county ? — Yes. 
 
 11489. And on good terms with the farmers they 
 work for? — Very good. There are few cases of 
 dispute come to .the petty sessions. There is a matter ' 
 I wish to bring under notice as a very great grievancD' ' 
 to the tenants, and which they suffer from more than 
 formerly, the right a creditor has of sueing them in 
 the superior courts and putting them to enormous 
 expense, and if they are not able to pay, ejecting them. 
 On my own property there was a case of a man whose 
 rent was £4 15s, he owed entirely £22. The creditor 
 died, and his widow had taken out letters of administra- 
 tion. She went to an attorney and the case went into 
 the superior courts. The sheriff turned the debtor out, . 
 and the bill of costs of the plaintiff's attorney was 
 £70 for the recovery of the £22, and his own attorney's 
 bill of costs was £40, so that between them there was 
 very little left for him. There was another case tried 
 at the July sessions at Lifford, and exactly a similar 
 process had been gone through, but the man walked 
 back into possession and. the other people came and 
 tried to put him out, and there was a desperate fight. 
 The man's complaint was that the cost was so 
 very heavy. Then also with regard to administra- 
 tions there is some cheap form of administration 
 for small properties under £100, but not over that, 
 and now that the tenant right on property comes to be 
 a chattel, 1 think to oblige a person who has only per- 
 haps £200 or £300 altogether to go into the Ecclesias- 
 tical courts and take out probate is a great hard- , 
 ship. 
 
 11490. Chairman. — You think this power to have 
 recourse to the superior courts ought to be done away 
 with ? — Yea, as to small debts. 
 
 11491. Is it a new practice? — No; but the Land 
 Act has brought it into force. Formerly the landlord 
 was able to make that kind of distribution of tenant- , 
 right which he thought equitable, but now, that the 
 Land Act has come into operation, it is not so. The 
 landlord cannot interfere with the tenant-right of the 
 man who has died. 
 
 11492. You think that up to a certain sum it should 
 be confined to the County Court Judge ? — I think up 
 to a certain sum it should be so. 
 
 11493. Would you apply that also to the landlord's 
 power to recover his rent? — I think the assistant bar- 
 rister would be just as good a judge. 
 
 11494. Are you aware a bill was passed through 
 the House of Commons last session limiting the costs 
 in such cases, but it was thrown out in the House of 
 Lords? — I am not. 
 
 11495. You would be in favour of such a bill ? — I 
 would be. These administration cases are often the 
 cause of very great hardship. I know a case; where 
 there was a family settlement in the county Donegal 
 on the property of Mr. Hamilton (his solicitor told me 
 of it yesterday). A family arrangement had been 
 made after the man's death, and the son who had got 
 his share, and gone out to America, came back after 
 six years, and took out letters of administration, and 
 the people who had bought the land were turned out. 
 
 Mr. Samuel Donaldson, examined. 
 
 11496. Chairman. — You are a tenant farmer at 
 Welshtown ?— Yes. • 
 
 11497. Who is your landlord ?— Sir William Style. 
 
 11498. What is the acreage of your farm? — I farm 
 about 100 acres altogether, but not in one farm. 
 
 11499. That is held under tenant-right ?— Yes. 
 
 11500. Is there any lease? — I have a lease of 
 portion. 
 
 11501. Is the house where you live on the leased 
 portion 1 — Yes. 
 
 11502; How long has that lease to run ? — It was for 
 thirty years, and two lives. 
 
 11503. Have you built and made other improve- 
 ments 1 — I have. 
 
 il504. On the leased farm?— Yes. 
 
 11505. During the term of the lease; — Yes. 
 
 11506. Is there any covenant in the lease to make 
 imjsrovements of any .kind ? — No, sir. 
 
 11507. Do you look forward to the tenant-right 
 existing at the end of the lease ? — I do. 
 
 Mr. Samnel 
 Donaldson. 
 
392 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT 'COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 ' Sept. 29, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Samuel 
 Donaldson. 
 
 11508. Youfeelnodoubtaboutit? — ISTo doubt about it. 
 
 11509. You feel sure your landlord would not dis- 
 pute it ? — I do, the same as the other portion I hold 
 under him. 
 
 11510. Is there anything you wish to say about the 
 state of your own holding? — No. In the estate on 
 which I live, and in the adjoining estates — I know 
 them pretty closely as I am intimately acquainted with 
 the greater portion of Donegal — there has been always 
 free sale without restriction. 
 
 11511. Not throughout Donegal? — No, but on the 
 adjoining estates. The only thing is, that the land- 
 lord expects the outgoing tenant to put a tenant of 
 good character in his place. 
 
 11512. So that generally it is very satisfactory 
 between landlord and tenant ? — Very. 
 
 11513. Do you know of any parts of Donegal 
 where it is not so ? — I could not give jjarticulars, but 
 I understand there are. 
 
 11514. Do you know whether there is a feeling 
 of dissatisfaction existing any where ? — I do, and I 
 believe the people would be perfectly satisfied under a 
 tenant-right, which would make them more secure in 
 their places. 
 
 11515. Do you think they fear the power of raising 
 the rent being abused ? — I daresay some few of them 
 do. 
 
 11516. It has been stated to us, that for many 
 years past, and particularly since the Land Act, a 
 sort of unlimited power of raising the rent has been 
 put in operation ? — I have never had occasion to think 
 so in my estate or the adjoining estates. The tenant- 
 right on our estate has always been very high, and I 
 believe equally so in the adjoining estates. On our 
 estate it sells at twenty-five or thirty years' purchase, 
 and I have kno-^vn it to go as high as thirty-four. 
 
 11517. That is a proof that the rents are very mod- 
 erate ? — They are moderate. ♦ 
 
 11518. And there is confidence in the landlord? — 
 Yes, in so far as I am personally concerned on my own 
 estate, but I don't say that may be the fact with every 
 portion of the laiid in the county. 
 
 11519. Is there any time at which it is thought 
 fair there should be a revaluation and readjust- 
 ment of rents? — I could not give you much of the 
 general opinion as to that, but I believe there is nothing 
 would please tenants so much as fixity of tenure at 
 a fair rent under a landlord. 
 
 11520. As to the means of arriving at a fair rent, 
 have you anything to suggest ?— I would consider in 
 the north— lam speaking more generally of the north 
 with which I am acquainted— rent would be best 
 .settled between landlord and tenant. If they could 
 not agree, then have a Government arbitrator, one 
 apjjointed to each county for the purpose. 
 
 11521. As to the periods at which there might be a 
 change of rent, would you have it at a fixed period, at 
 a certam distance of time, say twenty or thirty years, 
 or would you have it on any sale?— I would not have 
 it at a sale. 
 
 11522. You think that is a bad time ? I do. 
 
 11523. And yon think it would be better at some 
 fixed period? — Yes. . 
 
 1 1524. As to the re-valuation, is it your opinion that 
 
 the tenants improvements should be excluded ? Yes 
 
 certain improvements, not such as buildings, drains' 
 roads, fences, but in case of reclamation, my own 
 belief IS that the landlord has a certain interest in the 
 soil, and after I reclaim the land he should o-et the 
 benefit of that interest, and the question is, what is his 
 interest. It is a mathematical question ; however I 
 am giving my belief that fixity of tenure, with fair 
 rent, is what would be best for landlord and tenant 
 
 ™ °i;'/ speaking from my own judgment altogether. 
 11515. Do you think something of the same kind 
 would be of advantage in the south ?— I think it would 
 from what I know of it. 
 
 vi.il^tf ■ ^T' f°f'* ^'""^ *^^ extension of tenant 
 i\,lit throughout tlie country would settle the disputes 
 
 between landlords and tenants ? — It would depend on 
 the extension. 
 
 11527. Do you mean in what form it was extended! ' 
 —Yes. 
 
 11528. Suppose it was extended in the form you 
 mentioned, as it stands on the properties you know? 
 I think they should be quite satisfied. 
 
 11529. Do you know any parts in the south of Ire- 
 land where there is power to sell ? — I believe few of 
 them have power to sell. So I was told in makin" 
 inquiries passing through the south. 
 
 11530. Do you know of cases of tenants having 
 purchased their holdings ? — A great many. 
 
 11531. As a general rule were they satisfied witji 
 their purchases ? — There are a good many of them 
 satisfied, but a great many of them have felt difficulty 
 in clearing off the purchase money. 
 
 11532. They are pinched for the balance? — ^Yes' 
 they borrowed it, and they find great diflBciilty in 
 paying it off. 
 
 11533. O'CoNOE Don.— You don't think there 
 should be a limit on the tenant-right ? — I think if it was 
 amicably settled between the landlord and tenant it 
 would be better. 
 
 11534. Do you think the tenant ought to get the 
 entire increased value of the reclaimed land ?— No, I 
 think there is a certain interest of the landlord in the 
 unreclaimed land, the raw material, for the tenant 
 would have had no opportunity of having that land to 
 reclaim but for the landlord, and therefore the landlord 
 has an interest in it. 
 
 11535. Suppose this tenant got this reclaimable land 
 at a low rent on a long lease, would yon not take into 
 consideration that he had a long lease ? — They would 
 not make improvements. There is an innate nature 
 ill the Irish that if they think the rent will be raised 
 they will not make improvements. 
 
 11536. How would you consider the landlord's 
 interest in this reclamation? — For instance, if the 
 tenant got a certain number of years to havp it re- 
 claimed ; then have it valued, and give the tenant the 
 interest of the capital put into the soil, the balance to 
 go to the landlord. 
 
 1 1537. How would you ascertain the capital put into 
 the soil? — Any person laying the capital out could 
 easily ascertain it. 
 
 11538. You hold under a very good landlord?— 
 
 Yrs. 
 
 11539. Ojie you are not afraid of?— Not the 
 slightest. There is not much occasion to fear from 
 any of the landlords in my neighbourhood. 
 
 1 1540. But would you see any objection to theother 
 landlords, who are not so good, being obliged to do by 
 law what the good landlord does voluntarily? — Cer- 
 tainly not ; it would be well. 
 
 11541. Your landlord is quite willing to give you 
 tenant-right at the end of the lease ? — I have never 
 asked him, but I have never known the question to be 
 raised aftdi; a lease expired. 
 
 11542. Don't you think tenant-right ouglit to be 
 sanctioned by law at the end of a lease, the same as 
 without it ? — I do. 
 
 11543. What is the value of tenant-right on the 
 estate you hold ? — From twenty-five to thirty years 
 purchase. I have known it to go as high as thirty- 
 four, and, in fact, forty, and as has been said by Jb- 
 Sinclair, " the smaller the farm, the higher the price. 
 From what I know of the north of Ireland, any feeling 
 that would arise would be occasioned, not by the land- 
 lord's rAit, but by the smallness of the holding, which 
 cannot support the tenant, and by bad cultivation. 
 Most of the land I know of, if properly cultivated, 
 would at least give one-third more production by giving 
 attention to it, without greater cost. 
 
 11544. Would greater security encourage better 
 cultivation?— I believe fixity of tenu^-e at fail' rents 
 would do it, and much better than peasant proprietor- , 
 ship. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 393, 
 
 Mr. "Wybrants Olpheet, Faloarragli, examined. 
 
 Chairman. — ^You are a landowner 1 — Yes. 
 "What is the acreage of your estate 1 — 20,000 ■ 
 
 Does tenant-right exist on the property ? 
 
 11545 
 
 11546 
 acres. 
 
 11547 
 Yes. 
 
 11548. Very much as it has been described? — I 
 think it is higher in my neighbourhood. I have a 
 small class of tenants. 
 
 11549. You mean it sells higher? — Yes. 
 
 11550. But does the system exist the same? — Yes, 
 quite the same. 
 
 11551. "What about is the value ? — From thirty to 
 forty years' purchase, but I have known it to go up to 
 sixty and seventy years' purchase. 
 
 11552. Is it considered good land? — Some of it is 
 pretty good land — along the shore. 
 
 11552a. "What is generally the size of the holdings 1 
 — Small ; they are generally speaking from £2 to £6, 
 £7 and £8. Four, five and ten acres some of them. 
 The smallest about four or five acres. 
 
 11553. Have they any cut-away bog or mountain ? — 
 They have the right to turf, and the privilege of 
 grazing, on the mountains besides. 
 
 11554. Is that according to the size of their holding ? 
 — No, they generally send their cattle up to the moun- 
 tain to graze. 
 
 11555. Do they pay for that separately ? — No ; in 
 some places they have liberty to go over the mountain 
 I hold myself; I merely charge them a nominal sum ; 
 a shilling or something like that. 
 
 11556. Is it a good run for cattle and sheep? — It 
 is a good mountain ; very good for sheep. 
 
 11557. Are the tenantry pretty well ofi'? — I think 
 they are comfortably ofi' for small holdings. 
 
 11558. "Were they able to pay their rents last year? 
 — A great number of them did not. 
 
 11559. Did you ofier an abatement ?— No, I did 
 not. 
 
 11560. You gave them time? — ^Yes, I gave them 
 time. The fact of the matter is an a'batement was no 
 use. The cry of distress was what prevented a good 
 many of them coming forward — hoping to get as much 
 as they could from relief. 
 
 1 1561. Have there been many sales of late years ? — 
 Not last year, but we have a good many occasional 
 sales. Last year very few. 
 
 11562. Do you give the preference to the tenants ? 
 — Yes ; I always ask them to give the tenant adjoining 
 the first offer, and if he does not take it, to some of 
 the other tenants, and if they don't want it, then to 
 any other person who may be approved of by me. 
 
 11563. "Where the adjoining man takes it is it with 
 the view of throwing it into his holding I^Yes, to 
 put the two together. , 
 
 11564. Does he in general get rid of the house 
 upon it? — Yes; if he buys the place he throws it 
 down. 
 
 11565. Have you seen much of that consolidation 
 of two or three holdings ? — Yes, I have, but the great 
 difficulty is to prevent them subdividing again when 
 their children grow up. That is the great difficulty 
 a landlord has to deal with, to prevent subdivision ; it 
 is a thing almost impossible to prevent. The smaller 
 the holding, the poorer the people, the more inclined 
 are they to subdivide ; when a son marries they 
 give him a bit of land, and the landlord knows nothing 
 about it until there is a quarrel. 
 
 11566. That takes place whether three is tenant- 
 right or not ? — Yes, it has nothing to do with it. 
 
 11567. I don't suppose there is any law that can 
 prevent that except the law of the landlord, as far as 
 he can u^e his influence 1 — No, you must eject them, 
 and it is a difficult thing after a man has been five 
 or six years in a place to eject him. I think that sub- 
 division is the most injurious thing in the country. 
 
 11568. Have these small holders other means of 
 living besides their holdings ? — Some of them go to 
 
 Scotland as labourers ; some of them fish, and different 
 things that way ; it is along the coast. 
 
 11569. You know something of one of these cases 
 of peasant proprietorship 1 — Yes ; there was a glebe 
 near me where five tenants purchased their holdings, 
 and two purchased on another glebe, by bonowing 
 partly. One of them about three weeks ago sold 
 his holding to the landlord of the townland, stating he 
 would prefer to have his tenant-right. 
 
 11570. And the others, are they holding on ? — They 
 are holding on still, but are very poor. They got seed 
 from the union and relief like anyone else. 
 
 11571. And were the rents of these holdings pi-etty 
 well up to the full when they bought them ? — Yes ; I 
 think the highest was about £5, the lowest £1. The 
 system of introducing that sort of peasant proprietors 
 would be ruination to the country, because they will 
 subdivide and fight among themselves. About twenty- 
 five years ago there was only one perpetuity holder 
 in my neighbourhood, he had purchased a small part 
 of a townland valued at £24 Poor Law valuation. 
 He had five sons ; they have divided it, there are now 
 five houses, and these men ha^ve each families ready 
 to subdivide again. Since they got this they have 
 been the poorest people, and are continually fighting 
 amongst, themselves. They have no landlord to look 
 after them. 
 
 11572. Mr. Kavanagh. — You don't approve of the 
 scheme of planting peasant propi'ietors ? — Not of that 
 small kind. I think if a good large farmer could buy 
 his farm, these are the men we should do so ; but these 
 small holdings would perfectly ruin the country, and 
 we would have nothing bat paupers. The great diffi- 
 culty a landlord has at present is to prevent the old 
 people being put into the workhouse. They quarrel 
 and the sons send them to the workhotise. If that is 
 done the workhouse will be full. 
 
 11573. But if you guard against siibdivision you 
 would not object to it ? — But I don't see how that is 
 to be done. If a man buys a farm who is to overlook 
 and watch him. 
 
 11574. The O'Conor Don. — Is the case of sending 
 the old people into the workhouse peculiar to these 
 perpetu.ity holders? — No ; it is the difficulty the landlord 
 has to prevent them. I have cases constantly of that 
 sort. The old people think they are badly treated and 
 won't stay in the house, and if I was not there they 
 would all be put into the workhouse, but I don't 
 allow it. 
 
 11575. Is the case that you cited, of one of those 
 purchasers under the Commissioners who sold to another 
 person, the case cited by Mr. Sinclair? — Yes, it is the 
 same case. 
 
 11576. You have a considerable number of small 
 tenants ? — I have about 500. 
 
 11577. Did they pay their rents last year ? — A gcod 
 many did. 
 
 11578. Have you any tenants owing four years' 
 rent ? — I have, but they are not the smallest. I think 
 the middle class tenants are better payers than the 
 others. 
 
 11579. You are then in as bad a position as the 
 Church Commissioners? — I have some who have not 
 paid me. I have been paid, but these are arrears that 
 have been kept on for several years, since the famine 
 years. 
 
 11580. But you have none that owe you arrears of 
 late years ? — No, they mostly paid up regularly until 
 last year. 
 
 11581. I presume a good many of your tenants 
 were in receipt of relief ? — Yes, a good many. 
 
 11582. And this district is altogether very poor, and 
 if the people had no rents to pay they would be in a 
 bad way? — It is not as poor as other parts of the 
 coast of Donegal, but is a poor district. 
 
 11583. Chairman. — Is, this West Donegal? Yes. 
 
 11584. The O'Conor Don.— And if they had 
 
 ■3E 
 
 Sept. 29, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Wybrants 
 Olphert 
 
 no 
 
394 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT gOMMJSSION, 1880. 
 
 S^t. 29, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Wybrants 
 Olphert 
 
 Mr. Sinclair. 
 
 Mr. Arthur 
 Brooke. 
 
 rents to pay at all in a year like last year they would 
 be in a bad way ? — I think they would be worse ; for 
 it makes them more industrious to have rent to pay — 
 at least I have always found it so. 
 
 11585. Do you allow unlimited sale on your estate 1 . 
 —I do. 
 
 11586. Have you spent much money improvrug 
 your property 1 — I have spent a good deal. I have 
 been living there for the last fifty years. 
 
 11587. Do you consider the tenants make much im- 
 provements "i — I thiuk they have reclaimed a good deal 
 of land ; and have made fences. I think they- have 
 improved it. 
 
 11588. They erected all the buildings ? — Yes. 
 Before the passing of the Act 1 used to give them 
 timber, slates, and windows, and other things of 
 that sort occasionally, but I have not done so in the 
 same way since. My idea is, that class of tenants 
 
 do well, but without a landlord over them they could 
 not exist. 
 
 11589. You think that if they were their own 
 masters they would be sold out very soon ? — They 
 would fight. There would be family qiiarrels wluoli 
 are the worst. I believe a small holder of this class 
 cannot exist very long. 
 
 11590. If he cannot exist 1 suppose he would dis- 
 appear 1 — He would try to live as long as he could. 
 
 .11591, You think it better that he should cease to 
 appear t — If I had my way I would emigrate half pf 
 them. 
 
 11592. Don't you think that very likely making 
 them owners of the soil would result in that! — It 
 would be the result in a very few years hence. There 
 would be a new class of landlords not as good as the 
 old ones. These people would all seU, and there would 
 be this inferior class of landlords. 
 
 11593. I wish to correct what I 
 there were seventeen purchasers out of 300 tenants. 
 I ought to have said twenty. I got a return im\a the 
 union clerk, and he took only those remaining on his 
 own book. Three of the parties, having purcliased, 
 had sold to the purchaser of the residue. That made 
 
 Mr. Sinclair recalled. 
 
 said. I stated a difierence between the five who were original pur- 
 chasers and those remaining on the book. In fa«t 
 
 there were twenty purchasers out of 300. The rate of 
 labourers' wages I mentioned was on this side of 
 Tyrone and Derry. On the west of Donegal they are 
 very much lower, 6s. or 7s. a week. 
 
 Mr. Aethub Brooke, Whitehouse, Killybegs, examined. 
 
 11594. Chairman. — You are a land agent ? — Yes. 
 Mr. Murray Stewart and Messrs. Musgrave, Belfast, are 
 the owners of the properties I represent. I have a return 
 which was not made out for this occasion, and I took 
 the liberty of looking over it, as I represent a landlord 
 who has changed the rents when farms change hands. 
 There have been 147 sales of tenant-right on the 
 estate in the last fourteen years — since I became agent. 
 
 11595. On which estate 1 — Mr. Murray Stewart's 
 estate. The holdings averaged £5 12s. 3d. There 
 are 1,320 tenants, and there are 50,000 acres on the 
 estate. 
 
 115t)6. Where was this property situated ?^Part 
 near the town of Donegal, and part near the towns of 
 Ardara and Killybegs. Part of Stewart's estate was 
 bought by the Messrs. Musgrave in 1879, but my 
 evidence applies to the estate as a whole, before the 
 sale. Of the 147 sales the average number of years' pur- 
 chase of the rent was seventeen and a quarter. 
 
 11597. That is in the fourteen years? — Yes. One 
 was as high as sixty-eight, and one or two were sold 
 at five years' purchase, others at ten, and the bulli of 
 them from ten to twenty ; but the average of the 1 47 
 was seventeen and a quarter years' purchase. In 1872 
 T published a circular, it was issued to the tenants on 
 the estate, telling them that in fnture when farms 
 changed hands, they would be subject to an increase of 
 rent, the amount of which would be made known by 
 me to tlie tenant on applying for permission to self his 
 holding. Unlimited tenant-right exists with this ex- 
 ception, that hitherto we did not permit public auction 
 — the holdings were sold by proposal. Since 1872, 
 when 1 published that circular, sixty-five farms have 
 changed hands. In thirty -two of these cases I raised 
 the rent triflingly, 5s. or 10s., in one of them, I think 
 the highest £3 IGs. — from 2s. up to £3 16s. The ave- 
 rage tenant-right obtained in these thirty -two cases was 
 exactly the same as the average on the whole estate 
 — seventeenand a quarter years' purchase. The avtrao-e 
 of the thirty-three cases in which I did not raise the 
 rent was (17-02 years' purchase), so that there was 
 practically no difference between tlie cases in which I 
 raised the rent and the cases in which 1 did not. 
 . 11598. Were these rents raised to the sum at which 
 the others stood before ?— No ; in some cases a Uttle 
 higher. In some cases I made no increase because I 
 thouglit the rent was high enough, and in others be- 
 cause I thouglit the tenants too poor to pay any more 
 than they were paying, and I made no chanoe'in the 
 rent of any farm which was bought by an adjoinino- 
 
 tenant with a view to encourage consolidation of 
 farms. 
 
 11599. Was this done on valuation? — No; it was 
 just on my own valuation. My object was only to 
 put on what I considered fair, and there was never 
 any exception taken to it. Having heard that this 
 was a case that was going to be brought up, I went 
 through this list to see whether my custom made any 
 difierence in the tenant-right value. This seventeen and 
 a quarter years' purchase was the average of the whole 
 estate for fourteen years, and of thirty-two farms sold 
 since, in which 1 raised the rent, the average was the 
 same, while in the other cases in which I did not raise 
 the rent, the average was 17-02, so that practically it 
 came to the same thing. 
 
 11600. How long was it between that time and the 
 time you hud raised the rent before? — The rent was 
 raised in May, 1859, one part of the estate was 
 raised then, and in 1860 and 1861, the Donegal por- 
 tion was raised. Mr. Murray Stewart laid out a 
 large sum in improvements, such as making roads 
 ttirougii a large portion of the estate, twenty or thirty 
 miles of roads, he " squared " the different farms, and 
 broke up the system of rundale which existed, and gave 
 to each of the tenants who built a new house from 40s. 
 to 30s., besides all doors, and windows in each case. 
 He built seven new schools on the estate at a cost of 
 about £200 each, and two •schools of a superior des- 
 cription in Killybegs, at a cost of £1,500, besides re- 
 modelling two others. He also built a corn mill at a 
 cost pf .£1,500 ; gave slates and timber for, and 
 buUtin many cases the whole of, from sixty to seventy 
 good slated houses, where the size of the farms wai'- 
 ranted expenditure of the sort. 'The greater part 
 of this was done before the time he raised his 
 rents. He laid out in that way, between £30,000 ami 
 £40,000. He raised the rent £1,389 from 1847 to 1880. 
 
 11601. ^^Ulat was the total rise on these thirty-two 
 tenants 1 — £24 5s. They were very small rises. 
 
 11602. You understood that some complaint or 
 grievance might come before us ? — Yes. 
 
 11603. Do you thiuk the compilaint will be that 
 where rent is raised on a small scale it establishes the 
 principle, and some one else may come and make ttio 
 rises frequently — that thgre is a feeling of insecurity 
 that the tenant-right is being eaten up ? — Yes. The 
 rent of one whole parish there is only 2s. 2d. an acre ; 
 the .rent on i\Ir. Musgrave's estate," which he bought 
 from ilr. Conolly, is Is. Old. per acre. 
 
 11604. I'his is all very poor .land?— All mountain 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 895 
 
 tracts of land. It is crowded in parts, along the 
 shore, as thick as it can be with poor people. It was 
 this district of Glencolumbkill and parts of Kilcar, 
 that was particularly distressed. I was Clmirman of 
 the Relief Committee, wliich distributed about £5,000 
 there in relief. 
 
 11605. Was that on the relief works 1 — No ; from 
 the Duchess of Marlborough's Committee and from the 
 Mansion House Committee. It is people of the class 
 relieved who inhabit all that district along the shore. 
 They came there originally, a good many of tliem, to 
 follow fishing, and settled down on little patches of 
 ground, and as long as the fishing was good they did 
 very well, but the fishing of late has turned out badly, 
 and these people are living there in a state of nornial 
 poverty, and what I felt at the time to be a discourag- 
 ing element in the case was, that we on the Relief 
 Committee last winter, were helping to perpetuate a 
 state of things that nature never intended sliould 
 exist. As has been said, even if they pay no rent at 
 all, they could not live with any degree of conifort. 
 
 11606. Did they pay their rents there last year? 
 I received about half of the rental, but I cannot say 
 that that was half in number of the tenants, because 
 it was generally the better class of tenants who paid. 
 
 11607. Was there any abatement made? — No ; but 
 to all who paid rent on Mr. Murray Stewart's estate 
 he gave seed potatoes or coal gratis. Seed potatoes 
 were also issued on credit at cost price to tenants on 
 the Messrs. Musgrave's estate. 
 
 11608. Is it only an occasional failure in the fish- 
 ing 1— No ; for the last ten years in the Bay of Teelin 
 there was a general failure. 
 
 11609. Is there any prominent reason for that 1 — ■ 
 No ; I cannot say that there is. The people are living in 
 hopes of good fishing coming back, and they are now 
 depending on the soil, which is unable to support them. 
 
 11610. Mr. Kavanagh. — What is the remedy? 
 — There are only two, and if you mention one 
 of them you are called hard names. One is 
 employment — if there were manufactures ; and the 
 other is emigration of whole families. There is an 
 immensity of emigration, but then it is the able- 
 bodied, who leave nobody behind but the old people 
 and children, and the consequence is that the labour 
 is as bad as can be. The ground, it is said, would 
 produce one-third more. I see more women labouring 
 than men. The people who go to America very often 
 send home money, and it is often with that that the 
 rent is paid, and the tenant-right of farms purchased. 
 
 It is this American money that has raised the tenant- Sept. 29, isso. 
 right in my district to such an exorbitant price. ,. /"TT 
 
 11611. Then, even with the best cultivation, they Brooke, 
 could not support their families on tliese small hold- 
 ings ? — No ; it is generally a pasture countiy. 
 
 11612. You have lieard of the other alternative to 
 emigration — immigration on the wuste land to, reclaim 
 it? — That would not ajiply to the place. The moun- 
 tains are all in possession of the tenants, and at the 
 beginning of the cry of distress the parish priest spoke 
 of the matter to me, and also to Mr. Musgrave. He 
 had spoken to some of the people on the subject, and 
 his idea was that they might be transferred, and put 
 where there was room for them, but they would not 
 hear of giving vip their right of grazing on these 
 mountains, and in many cases they ;ire not fit for 
 cultivation. They are only useful for sheep-grazing. 
 The tenants had reclaimed little patches, but it is not 
 real reclamation, for there is no thorough drainage at 
 all. They put fences round a small patch, and three or 
 four open dr-iins, and then put potatoes in on the rough. 
 
 11613. Did they get in their cro]>s last year? — I 
 never saw that country look so fairly prosperous. 
 
 11614t Did Mr. Musgrave spend any money on 
 improvements? — He is now spending money; I am 
 not his agent for more than four or five years, so cannot 
 speak exactly as to this in the past. He has bori-owed 
 £5,000 or £6,000 from the Board of Works, and is 
 making roads with money he has in his own hands. 
 
 11615. Was that money got at the low rate 1 — Yes. 
 
 11610. What does he charge? — He is making a 
 road now which is a county-road. That he gets no return 
 for except that it gives easier access to his property. 
 
 11617. Has he laid out any money on the tenants' . 
 farms, except making these roads? — No. 
 
 11618. Or any money of his own ? — No, not on the 
 tenant's fanns, but he has laid out a good deal' of his 
 own money on land in his own hands, and on buildings. 
 There is one system, the credit system, which prevails 
 all over our district, and it is ruination to our people — 
 the shojpkeepers give thenr unlimited credit for what 
 they want. It is since the tenants' interest in the 
 land became more valuable that they have given tliis 
 unlimited credit. 
 
 11619. Then you think it ought not to be made 
 more valuable ? — No ; I don't reason it that way, but 
 I am only stating it as a fact. The country is in a 
 miserable state from that very cause. 
 
 11620. Is this Mr. James Musgrave that you men- 
 tioned ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Robert Lepper, 
 
 11621. Chairman. — You are a land agent ? — Yes. 
 
 11622. Over what amouni of property? — About 
 27,000 acres. 
 
 11623. Is it one property ? — No ; there are different 
 properties of small proprietors. 
 
 11624. Wotild you give us the names of the pro- 
 prietors 1 — There are about twenty ; Lord Donegall is 
 one, James Steel Nicholson, George Knox Gilliland, 
 Bartholomew M'Corkell, Mr. John Foster, Samuel 
 Lawther. 
 
 11625. Are these all in the county Doiiegal? — All 
 in the barony of Inishowen. 
 
 11626. Does the same system of tenant-right exist 
 on all of the properties under your management ? — 
 With one exception, that of Lord Donegall. 
 
 11627. What is the general principle, and what is 
 the exception ? — Liberty of sale to the highest bidder, 
 provided he is a man of good character and circum- 
 stances. 
 
 11628. What is the exception on Lord Donegall's 
 property ?— He does not recognise tenant-right at all ; 
 but ifx the case of the small tenants he gives twenty- 
 one years leases, and allows tie tenant to dispose of 
 his interest in place of tenant-right. 
 
 11629. Has that always been the custom ?-;- No ; 
 the townlands I mentioned only came into his posses- 
 sion five years ' ago. They were held by middlemen 
 
 Foyleview, examined. Mr. Robert 
 
 up to that period. Up to that time, while the middle- ■''^PP^'"' 
 men had been in possession, they gave luiliniited 
 power to sell the tenant-right. When the leases -jvere 
 expired he took the undertenants on as his own tenants 
 and, when wishing to sell, gives them twenty-one years' 
 leases, and any that wished to sell could do so. " Sell 
 interest in lease." 
 
 11630. On the tenant-right portion of the estates 
 are the tenantry satisfied with the system pursued 
 there ? — Yes ; I hear no complaints. 
 
 11631. Is there anything special you wish to 
 mention ? — Nothing, except as to fixing rents'. It ie 
 the only question, it strikes me, on which there is any 
 special feeling in that county. It would be better 
 settled by the landlord and tenant coming together, 
 and if they coiald not agree, haVe a Government valua- 
 tor to settle it. 
 
 11632. Do you think, as a general rule, it would 
 not come to the necessity of calling in the Government 
 valuator ? — I would not say that. I think it is possible ' 
 it might. I would have an an-angemeiit of that sort ' 
 there would be more security felt on the part of the 
 tenants. There would be greater inducement to im- 
 prove than at present. 
 
 11633. The O'Conor Don.— Has there been much 
 alteration in the rents on the estate 1 — Very little : I 
 
 3 E 2 
 
390 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMxMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept 29, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Eobert 
 Lepper. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Craig. 
 
 examined the rent books back thirty-five years, and in 
 only three cases has there been an increase, a small 
 increase, and in other cases there was a reduction of 
 from 15 to 27 per cent. 
 
 11634. When were the reductions made? — Since 
 1847. 
 
 11635. At what date?— In 1847. 
 
 1 1636. And they have remained at these low figures 
 since 1 — In the majority of cases it is so. 
 
 11637. Have there been any increases made since 
 the Land Act passed? — -Not to any great extent. 
 
 11638. What does tenant-right sell at?— It varies 
 very much ; from six years up to as high as thirty-five. 
 
 11639. Do you think the Land Act affected it ? — 
 Since 1870 it has sold higher. 
 
 11640. Is the townland of Carndonagh under your 
 management? — No, I manage some property con- 
 venient to it. 
 
 11641. Chairman. — Were the rents fairly paid up 
 to two years ago ? — Up to two years ago very fairly 
 and punctually, but they were very badly paid since. 
 
 1 1 642. Have you had any case of ejectmelit for non- 
 payment of rent 1 — I have had ejectments, but none 
 where the tenants were actually put out of thgir farms. 
 I have not had a dozen ejectments in the last thirty 
 years, on the properties I mentioned, where the tenants 
 were actually put out. 
 
 11643. It drives them to selling? — They generally 
 sell when they find there is a prospect of being ejected. 
 
 11644. What is the proportion of rent paid ?— Only 
 about half ; we offered 15 to 20 per cent, abatement. 
 
 1 1 645. What became of the people who sold out 1 
 
 Many went to America, and many became labourers. 
 
 11646. In the neighbourhood where they were 
 before? — Yes. 
 
 1 1 647. Are they generally very small farms ? — Yes 1 
 the average is £8 rent all through. Very small ia 
 mountaiu district. 
 
 11648. Something like what is described by Mr. 
 Olphert ?— Yes. 
 
 1 1 649. What state are they in this year as to crops ? 
 — ^Very good this year, altogether, the oats and potatoes 
 are good. 
 
 11650. They have been relying on fishing? — ^There 
 has been a good deal of fishiug round the coast up to 
 a few* years ago. In my neighbourhood they still fish 
 a good deal. 
 
 11651. The O'CoNOE Don. — Has there been mucli 
 laid out by the landlords in improvements ? — Not much. 
 
 11652. Have the tenants laid out much? — Not 
 much, for a number of years at all events. 
 
 11653. Chairman. — Are the houses usually thatch- 
 ed ? — Almost altogether thatched, there are very few 
 exceptions. 
 
 Mr. Wm. Craig, 
 
 11654. Chairman. — You are a tenant fanner on the 
 Duke of Abercorn's estate ? — Yes. 
 
 11655. What is the size of the farm? — About 44 
 statute acres. 
 
 11656. What is the rent ?— £40 3s. 
 
 11657. Is that a tenant-right farm? — Yes, sir. 
 
 11658. How long has the rent been fixed? — Some- 
 thing about twenty years. 
 
 11659. We have heard to day of the Duke's system 
 of tenant-right, that it is a very liberal one for the tenant. 
 Do you find it so? — We consider it so. 
 
 11660. And you are quite satisfied with the way it is 
 conducted ? — Quite. There is liberty to sell to the 
 highest purchaser, if he is a person of good character. 
 
 11661. It was said by one person that he was very 
 well satisfied with the practice, but he was not so well 
 satisfied with the rules ? — As to the rules I think they 
 were changed before I became tenant. (I have been 
 tenant twenty-six years,) and the rules differ now from 
 what they were, but I believe there was a limit as to 
 the tenant-right then. The late agent confined it to 
 seven years' purchase, and now I have known cases on 
 the estate where thirty years' purchase v/as given for 
 the tenanf>-right, but latterly T consider that tenant- 
 right has decreased in value, from pressure of the times 
 and from other circumstances — first the locality of the 
 farm and next the condition of the land and of the 
 house. I think tenant-right would increase where the 
 land is left in good condition, because where the in- 
 coming tenant had to put the land up in condition it 
 would be the same as an amount added to the purchase 
 money, and that therefore lowers the tenant-right value. 
 
 11662. You don't think there is anything to the 
 injury of the tenant in what has been done in the way 
 of changing the rules ? — No, sir. 
 
 11663. The O'CoNoa Don. — Has there been any 
 raising of rents? — Only once in the period I have 
 mentioned — twenty-six years — I cannot say how long 
 previous to that. 
 
 116G4. There is no periodical time at which rent is 
 raised? — Not that I am aware of. 
 
 11665. Mr. Kavasagh. — At the expiration of a 
 lease, do they raise the rents ? — There have been few 
 leases on the Duke's estate — that is the Donegal estate. 
 I don't know of more than two leases that have been 
 taken oiit of late years, by very improving tenants — 
 tenants who intended expending large amounts in 
 building— in dwelling-houses and ofiices. 
 
 11GG6. Your evidence is that, so far as you know, 
 there is no insecurity felt fi-om fear of the rents beinc;- 
 
 Broadlea, examined. 
 
 raised ? — I cannot say that. On the Duke's estate we 
 don't know how soon a new valuation may come. 
 When I got into this farm the rent was £33 17s. per 
 annum, and when a new valuation came I was raised 
 to £40 3s., so I have remained on for something about 
 twenty years, and I don't know how soon there may 
 be a new valuation, and I cannot say whether it may 
 be higher or lower, but we fear it would not be lower, 
 and especially tenants who improve. There is a tenant 
 beside me who has nine acres more land than I have, 
 and it is a better farm, and when the last A'aluation 
 came he was raised £2, and I was raised £6; why? 
 Because his farm was in a worse state of cultivation, 
 part of his farm is still unreclaimed. I was advising 
 him to reclaim it, but he said " I will not do it for we 
 will soon have a new valuation, and I would be saddled 
 with more rent." 
 
 11667. You think if there was a new valuation and 
 he got his new rent fixed, he would begin improving, 
 expecting there would be no revaluation for a good 
 many years ? — I think so. 
 
 11668. That would be in reliance that the Dnke 
 would not take advantage of him ? — Just so. 
 
 11669. The O'Conor Don. — Have you laid out 
 much on improvements yourself? — I have. 
 
 1 1670. What have you done in the way of improve- 
 ment? — I have built a dwelling and office houses, and 
 I have reclaimed my farm, I have made all the im- 
 provements with regard to draining and fencing, and 
 put gates on, and the like, all that I can expect to do 
 or will do to pay me, and I have my farm in as good 
 condition as many others on the estate. 
 
 11671. Have you thorough drainage in all the land ! 
 — I have. 
 
 11672. Have you made any calculation, what it has 
 all cost ? — No, sir, I did not ; I have sons of my own 
 and they wish as yet to work on the farm, I don't 
 know how soon they may turn their attention to other 
 work. 
 
 11673. What is the general size of the fai-ms?— I 
 think on the Donegal estate, from thirty to seventy 
 acres ; sometimes the farms go beyond that, farms that 
 have been consolidated of late years, where parties 
 were going out, and other parties more well to do, ha\'e 
 been able to add these farms to their own and make 
 them larger. 
 
 11674. Are there any very small farms ? —Not very 
 small on the estate where I live. 
 
 The Commissioners then adjourned until next 
 
Minutes of evidence. 
 
 397 
 
 SEVENTEENTH DAY.— THUESDAY, SOth SEPTEMBEE, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners resumed tlie Inquiry this morning. 
 
 Present : — The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessboroxjgh, Chairman ; The O'Conor Don, 
 Arthur MacMorrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l.; William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Hugh M'Kinlet, Dromosk, Ballintra, and Dr. Samuel T. Haslett, Donegal, examined. 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 11675. Chaieman. — Are you a tenant-farmer? — 
 (Mr. M'Einley)—Yes. 
 
 11676. How many acres do yon hold ? — About forty- 
 nine acres, statute measure. 
 
 11677. What is the rent 1 — My rent up to the pre- 
 sent has been £30 16s. 2d. 
 
 11678. What is the name of your landlord 1 — Colonel 
 Knox of Prehen, near this city. 
 
 11679. Who is the agent? — Mr. Thomas Colquhoun. 
 
 11680. You say £30 16s. 2d. has been your rent up 
 to the present ? — Yes. 
 
 11681. Have you any reason to believe there is 
 likely to be a change 1 — I have been served with notice 
 of a rise. 
 
 11682. How long has the present rent been going 
 on ? — The present rent was put on before I became the 
 tenant. My father and grandfather both lived in the 
 same place. 
 
 11683. Did they hold under lease ? — Originally they 
 did. I bought a good deal of the land myself. 
 
 11684. You bought the tenant-right 1 — I bought the 
 tenant-right of the greater part of what 1 hold. The 
 rent has been raised — ^by the admission of the bailiff, 
 an old man I have been talkiug to — three times within 
 living memory. I should not say it has been raised 
 three times, but it has been revalued three times. One 
 of the valuations was under the rent that was then paid, 
 and that valuation was never brought forward. The 
 rent that I am paying has been continued a long time, 
 and in 1877 we were served with a notice of another 
 rise. I was served with notice to pay a rise of £5 
 10s. lid. 
 
 11685. In 1877'!— Yes. 
 
 11686. What has been done since 1877 ?— We ob- 
 jected to pay the increase ; and in cases where farms 
 have been sold since, the bailifi' was sent to the auction, 
 and the purchaser was given to understand that if he 
 bought, he would buy with a prospect of having to pay 
 an increased rent. 
 
 11687. Would that apply to your own case ? — I be- 
 lieve it would, if I were going to sell my farm — the pur- 
 chaser would be noticed that the rent was to be in- 
 creased. 
 
 11688. Up to the present you have not come under 
 the new rent l—'No ; I have not paid it. 
 
 11689. Has any step been taken to compel you 1 — 
 No, except serving me with notice. 
 
 11690. Was there a general notice given of the in-- 
 crease of rent to the tenants ? — ^Yes ; a general notice 
 was given all over the estate. 
 
 11691. Was there any valuation made prior to the 
 notice ? — ^Yes, and in my own case I expended my time, 
 money, and energies in improving my farm for a number 
 of years. I cleared six acres of whins, and mynext neigh- 
 bour I am sure cleared ten, and on the very day I was 
 ^nishing the lastfieldl was served with thenotice. Ifeel 
 thankful that I have it in my power to come here and 
 tell it to this Commission. I have seven small children 
 and aged parents to support. God only knows what 
 my feelings were on getting that notice. I sat down 
 and cried, and cursed the day that I began to improve 
 the farm, for if I had not improved it the rise would 
 never be put on me, and I should add, the agent led 
 me to believe my improvements would be my 
 own. 
 
 11 69 2. Would you be satisfied with a fair rent to be 
 fixed by arbitration ?^I would ; at the same time I 
 
 Mr. Hugh 
 M'Kinley and 
 would beg leave to say what I know from practical ac- Dr. SaiiuelT 
 
 quaintance with the country. T am nearly a medium m an Haslett. 
 in my circumstances in our part of the country — apart 
 from a situation I got, that I made some money by. I 
 am a man loyal to the throne and Constitution. 
 I have been an Orangeman for the last twent3''-seven 
 years, so that you will not think my evidence biassed 
 against the landlord, when I tell you I have known, 
 during the past year, families compelled to pay a rack- 
 rent, and living for three months upon charity. I was 
 employed to buy kelp on the sea shore, and I had to 
 lend my hard-earned money to respectable tenants. I 
 had also to indorse their bank bills — in fact they h^ve 
 me ^o sunk with themselves, that if matters go much 
 further, it is hard to tell how they will end with 
 me. 
 
 11693. You advanced them this money for their 
 support 1 — No, but to pay their rent. 
 
 11694. Mr. Shaw. — You say that while some tenants 
 were receiving charity they paid their rents 1 — They 
 did to my own knowledge. 
 
 11695. The farms were small ? — In some cases they 
 were. 
 
 11696. In such a case as this, where you have notice 
 of a rise of rent, do you say that it ought not to be a 
 matter entirely at the option of the landlord to raise it 
 whenever he pleases, but that there should be some 
 means afforded of arriving at a fair rent ? — Exactly, 
 I think that would be acceptable, and I am giving you 
 the opinions of the leading respectable farmers whom 
 I have consulted on the subject. I may observe that 
 the statements that would apply to this locality would 
 have very little application to our part of the country, 
 as I think Dr. Haslett will also be able to testify. I 
 live in a rural district, where there ai-e not the same 
 facilities for reaching a good market that there are here. , 
 I will give you the statistics of my income and expen- 
 diture last year. I think it will give you a little in- 
 struction on the subject. First, take the outlay — rent, 
 £30 16s. 2d. ; servant's wages and diet, £30; taxes, 
 £6 ; support of clergy, £2 ; clothing for nine in 
 family, £10 ; groceries, &c., £10 ; keeping in repair 
 farming implements, £5 ; seed and manure, £20 ; 
 doctor's bills, £2 ; smith, for horse shoeing, &c., £2 ; 
 Indian meal, £15 ; making cotal of £132 16s., and 
 that is not exaggerated in any single particular. I am 
 certain I am below the mark in the grocery depart- 
 ment. 
 
 11697. That was your actual outlay, £132 16s. 1— 
 Yes, and I believe it does not include all if I had only 
 time to go into detail; Now, to meet that outlay the 
 following was my income from the farm : produce of 
 cows, £9. 
 
 11698. Do you me'an sales? — il mean the price of 
 butter. Profit on young stock, £15 ; pigs sold, £7 ; 
 produce of one barrel of flax, £6 10s. That was the 
 gross sum. 
 
 11699. You mean the produce of one barrel of flax 
 ?— Yes. 
 
 11700. Did it only produce £6 worth of flax ?— £6 
 10s. That was all — flax was nearly a failure in our 
 part of the country. Then there were oats, £15 
 barley, £4; potatoes, £20 ; sheep, £4; meadow, £10 
 grazing, £12; produce of fowls, £5; turnips, £4 
 total£lll 10s. as against £132 16s. 2d, outlay, showing 
 a deficiency of £21 6s. 2d. 
 
89S 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 lieiit. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Hugh 
 M'Kinlcy and 
 Dr. Samuel 
 T. Haslett. 
 
 11701. That was for last year, I suppose? — Yes. 
 
 11702. It was a bad year?— Yes; but the previous 
 year was very little better. I may say, I am short 
 these last three years .£60. 
 
 11703. In the charge for labour, in the account of 
 outlay you have given us, do you include your own 
 labour ? — No, I put down only the actual wages and 
 diet of the servants I had to employ. 
 
 11704. You put nothing down for your own labour ? 
 —No. 
 
 11705. Did you work yourself ? — Ye.s ; and I have 
 neither smoked tobacco nor drank liquor, except as 
 medicine, for the last sixteen years. 
 
 11706. Chairman. — How does your rent stand, as 
 compared with the Government valuation ? — The land- 
 lord's rentis £30 1 6s. M. , Government valuation, £30 6s. 
 or thereabout. My farm, I should tell you, is consi- 
 dered to be a cheap farm by strangers. I may mention 
 that the Government valuation is not a criterion in our 
 neighbourhood. I have heard persons who understood 
 it, say the valuators could be tampered with ; one man 
 boasted that he had got £11 struck off one townland 
 and put on another, besides the reviser has made 
 changes. 
 
 11707. Have you got any of your receipts ? — No. 
 
 11708. Have you got any accounts of income and 
 outlay for the previous years, like the account you Ijave 
 given us for last year 1 — No, I have no account but 
 that for last year. 
 
 11709. That was an exceptionally bad year, was not 
 it 1 — Last year was ; but this year I consider will be 
 as bad on me as last year. The only hope and confidence 
 we have is in the present Commission and Ministry, and 
 the trust that you will put us in some way that we 
 will be able to live. 
 
 11710. Mr. Shaw. — How is this year worse upon 
 you. than last 1 — I did not mean to say worse than last 
 year, but worse than the year before. The reason is, 
 prices are lower. 
 
 11711. But the produce is greater? — I admit it is 
 in some kinds of produce, but the potatoes are worse 
 this year, than last year. 
 
 11712. Is that generally the case in your neighbour- 
 hood ? — It is except with the Champion potatoes which 
 were sparingly distributed in our cormtry. 
 
 11713. What sort of potatoes did you grow? — 
 Skerry blues ; except a few stone of Champions. 
 
 11714. Have you. been growing them a long time? 
 —Yes. 
 
 11715. Did they succeed generally with you 1 — They 
 did — I had rather unusual success, but I had to carry 
 manure on my back a quarter of a mile up a hill to new 
 land. 
 
 11716. Chairman. — Have you included in the in- 
 come of your farm the value of what produce you 
 used yourself for your family ? — I have. We bought 
 nothing but the Indian meal, groceries, &c. I may tell 
 yovi that except myself and a few more upon the 
 the property, there is not a jiound of meat eaten from 
 one year's end to the other, unless now and then they 
 may be able to buy a pound or two of bacon. 
 
 11717. You have some means independent of your 
 farm ? — Yes ; but 1 may tell you from personal know- 
 ledge that before I got the agency I referred to just 
 now, I could not haVe lived, nor my father before me, 
 upon the farm, butfor my sisters', uncle, and brother that 
 went to America, and sent home money year after 
 year. 
 
 11718. There must be a good many tenants on the 
 pro] )erty who have nothing but the land to live on? 
 — They are exactly as we were; their friends are 
 trying from year to year to send them what will pay 
 at least a half year's rent, and the case is the same 
 with the majority of small tenant farmers. 
 
 11719. Do you know how many tenants are on 
 the property?— I could not say exactly— I think 
 about 100. J J 
 
 11720. Are there many small ones? — In general 
 
 thoy iive ^ui.tll. 
 
 11721. What size would they be on the avevasel 
 — They average about fifteen or twenty acres. 
 
 11722. Are the large farmers better off than th 
 small ? — As a rule they are. 
 
 11723. Mr. Shaw.— Is it poor land?— It is con. 
 sidered to be a good part of the country • w 
 tenant-right on it is not sold as high as on other 
 estates, owing to the rents being high, and the amnt 
 pretty sharp in lifting , them. There are two gale 
 days for paying rent— one in November sometimes ii 
 December and the other in January. Last year le 
 waited till A])ril. It has been the custom, if the rent 
 is not paid on the day appointed, any person not pay. 
 ing is served with an ejectment process for cueyeari 
 rent. There are four tenants — Edward Gillespie, James 
 Allen, Widow Caron, and Owen Martin-^who weie 
 unable to pay, and are at present under ejectment 
 decree. . ' ' 
 
 11724. For non-payment of rent? — ^Yes. 1 don't 
 like to say much about it — they were served 'vviti two 
 ejectment processes last year, I am sowy 'to gar 
 for one year's rent. The last one has been acW 
 ujjon. 
 
 11725. Have they any objection to their names 
 being in print? — We do not know, what 
 
 happen. 1 may be ejected for being here. N 
 
 mj 
 
 theless 1 attend as a duty to my family and to my 
 neighbours. 
 
 11726. The O'CoNOR Don. — Have there been any 
 sales of tenant-right on the estate lately? — yes; but 
 previous to the Land Act I suffered severely myself 
 by office rules. For instance — the farm adjoining 
 mine the agent allowed the tenant to sell it to the 
 highest bidder, though I asked him, as adjoining 
 tenant, to lend me £100 to buy the farm. It iras 
 sold to a stranger twice over, and when I asked 
 him to lend me £100 the answer he gave me was that 
 it would take more than £500 to stock and clear 
 that farm. He refused to lend me the money, and 
 lie allowed the farm to be sold to a stranger. I was 
 afterwards sent for to go to America. The uncle I 
 referred to a while ago died there, and left my father 
 and his family property value £15,000. I set the 
 farm in August to a respectable neighbour condition, 
 ally on the approval of the agent. I had till the 
 1st April to go back to the farm — that was my 
 covenant with my neighbour. I wrote to the agbnt 
 to ask would he sanction such a thing until I would 
 go and see would I succeed in obtaining what was 
 left to us in America. He refused to sanction 
 that. I had proposed about ten years before to sell 
 the farm — he refused to allow the farm to he sold 
 except to an adjoining tenant. That conduct of the 
 agent has been the means of keeping us out of the 
 money, for, being aliens, we conld inherit no real 
 estate in America, and, from not being able to attend 
 there, the result was we never got it. 
 
 11727. What is the usual price paid for tenant- 
 right on the estate? — It varies from five to thirty 
 years purchase. 
 
 11728. If the rents are so high how comes it 
 that there is su.ch a high price given for tenant-right' 
 — I explain it in this way : most of the men that buy 
 land about our place are men tliat went to Australia, 
 America, or elsewhere, earned money, and came home 
 desirous of a place to settle on. They generally gif^ 
 a high price. Another reason, farmers feel that for 
 their own interests, and that they are not serving their 
 country if they allow tenant-right to die out by rises 
 of rent — inasmuch as their interest in improvements 
 will'die with it. 
 
 11729. Do you think there is any wish on. the;pai't 
 of the tenantry that on the occasion of the sale of a 
 farm a tenant on the estate should have tJie^ l*re-' 
 ference as against an outsider? — In most cases that 
 is so. ' - 
 
 11730. The adjoining tenant should have thepre- 
 ference? — Well, not exactly the adjoining tenant; 
 but a tenant on the projierty. 
 
 11731. The O'Conor Don.— Have sales usually 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 3D0 
 
 been, in point of fact, to tenants on tbe estate ? — That 
 ! nsed to be the rule ; but now free sale is allowed to 
 j anybody. 
 
 11732. As a matter of fact do adjoining tenants 
 usually purchase or strangers ? — Generally the ad- 
 
 ijoirung tenant buys if he is able to do so, but I am 
 sorry to say there are few of our tenantry at present 
 able to buy ; perhaps not three on the estate. 
 
 11733. Would not your evidence go to show that 
 the land could hardly pay any rent 1 — It would for last 
 year. 
 
 11734. Have you not stated that the produce of the 
 ' '.and is, in your case, not equal to the outlay ? — Neither 
 ; vvas it last year. 
 
 11735. Mr. Shaw. — That was only in a bad year? 
 ;, —Yes. 
 
 11736. You could make things meet in good years ? 
 . We try to do so. The respectable class of fai'niers 
 
 : do not like to let the worst of their case be known. 
 
 >. The way you would know it best is, if you had access 
 
 ., to the secrets of their bedchambers and underclothing, 
 and I have known respectable tenant-farmers to go 
 into their room and eat potatoes and buttermilk 
 while they had to give their servants in the kitchen 
 
 ,^ fish or bacon. They won't stay with you unless you 
 feed them. Potatoes and buttermilk or Indian meal, 
 are the diet of the generality of the middle class 
 farmers in our district, as far as I know. Dr. Haslett 
 is here, and he can certify what I state that numbers 
 of them go to a premature grave in consequence of 
 this. 
 
 11737. From poverty? — From poverty of diet. In 
 
 - fact I am sorry to say I have felt more or less of it my- 
 self. 
 
 11738. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think there 
 should be a power of ejectment for non-payment of 
 rent 1 — For one years rent I believe it is a great error 
 and causes great injustice. I believe that morally and 
 
 ■ for the general good it is an erroneous principle. I have 
 known instances where well-to-do men — men that loved 
 
 - their country and loved its welfare, hard working and 
 industrious men, have been overtaken by misfortune, 
 sickness in their families, or loss of cattle, or have had 
 svich a season as that of last year, and because they 
 owe a year's rent the landlord has the power to evict 
 them, whereas if they had a second year they would 
 be able to recover themselves. There was the case 
 of James Allen. If that man had been allowed 
 another year he might have regained his position, 
 without the costs of two ejectments. 
 
 11739. Have those men been turned out? — No, 
 they are still on the farms, whether it is ffoni 
 the leniency of the sheriff or the landlord's good- 
 ness I do not know. 
 
 11740. They are in as caretakers, I suppose? — No, 
 they have not as yet been turned out. 
 
 11741. Did they pay the rent? — I am not sure 
 about that. Martin to my own knowledge sold his 
 only cow, and paid the rent and the costs of one eject- 
 ment, but that was last year. He had nothing left, 
 I think, to pay this year. There is another tenant, 
 named Gillespie. I have noticed him this number of 
 years. His house was burned some time ago. A 
 foolish child went up on the loft with a light, and the 
 place cavight fire. He has never since been able to 
 put a roof on part of it. He has a large family to 
 support. He got no charity last winter. He had two 
 cows and some fowl, and they were the only support 
 he had last season. If he sold them he might starve. 
 I advised him not to sell the cows, but to struggle on 
 and pay the costs when the cows would calve — that 
 it was better to do that than to sell the cows. He 
 took my advice, and the consequence is he has some 
 means now that he had not then. 
 
 i 11742. Are they mostly thatched houses they live 
 in in your district? — Mostly thatched. We had no 
 encouragement to build. My father built every stone 
 where I live. He was promised slates, but he never 
 got them, and he had to thatch the house. 
 
 11743. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know the condition of Sept. so, ibbs. 
 the tenantry upon other estates in your neighbour- jj^ j^^j^ 
 hood 1 — Not particularly. Of course I have a general M'Kinley and 
 knowledge of them. • Dr. Samuel T. 
 
 11744. Are they in a better state than the tenantry 
 on the estate you live on ? — I think they are, mostly, 
 but some of them are just as badly off as we are. • I 
 know one tenant, a very old man. I was speaking 
 to him the day before I left to come here. His name 
 is Hugh Scott. His rent has been doubled, and on 
 another estate they have been raised ; the rise was col- 
 lected, but returned last year. 
 
 11745. On what estate does Scott live? — The late 
 Mr. Chichester Hamilton's property — now Major 
 Hamilton's ; bvit Major Hamilton is not to blame for 
 that. 
 
 11746. I understood you to say your rent was not 
 raised during your tenancy ? — No, I did not pay the 
 last rise ; it was raised in my father's time. 
 
 1 1 74:7. How long ago is that 1 — I suppose fifty years 
 ago. 
 
 11748. At the same time you say the rent is high? 
 — It is high — entirely too high, as I would not take 
 on me to pay in future more than half the present rent, 
 with the present prospects. 
 
 11749. The O'Conoe Don. — How many acres are 
 in it ? — Forty-nine statute acres or thereabouts. 
 
 11750. Mr. Shaw.— Is it rough land?— About 
 twenty-two acres is. A stranger going over it would 
 think it pretty fair. For instance, the a^ent when 
 he came last spring was gratified to see, as he thought, 
 very fine grass on a four-acre field next the house ; 
 but I did not get three tons of hay off three acres of 
 it ; the other acre is under potatoes. There were not 
 three tons of hay on the three acres that the agent 
 thought looked so fine in the spring! 
 
 11751. It had a promising appearance last spring? 
 — Very pi'omising, but the land is very stifi', and has a 
 flat rock under it. In some places it has not three 
 inches deep of earth ; in others there might be a 
 foot. ♦ 
 
 11752. Have you good, crops on other parts ofth3 
 farm ? — I had seven and a half acres of hay altogether, 
 and the produce of the entire was about 150 cwt. — just 
 twenty cwt. to the acre. 
 
 11753. A ton to the acre? — A ton to the acre. 
 
 11754. Is there any way of improving the rest of 
 the farm ? — Some of the land is unreclaimable, unless 
 I draw clay from other parts and covered it. It is 
 poor, rocky land, covered over with whins. 
 
 11755. Is that the general character of the land in 
 the neighbourhood ? — There is some good land there, 
 but more of it is rough. 
 
 1 1756. Chairman. — How far are you from London- 
 derry ? — Forty-three miles. 
 
 11757. You are on the other side of Donegal? — 
 Yes, six miles from Donegal. 
 
 ,11758. Mr. Shaw.— Half way to Ballyshannon 1— 
 Yes. The parish 1 represent is as good a parish as 
 there is in that part of the country, the pariyli of 
 Drumholin. What we would consider a fair rent 
 is, to give the landlord the just value of the soil as 
 he set it to us, and that we should not have to pay a rent, 
 or continue to pay a rent, as we have been doing, and our 
 fathers, as a tax on our improvements. Wefeel that our 
 improvements are unfairly taxed when they are the 
 cause of increasing our rent, we have no encourage- 
 ment to improve under such circumstances. If we 
 had the benefit of our improvements, giving the land- 
 lord the just value of his land, both parties should be 
 content, and the tenants then would for their own 
 sakes strive to improve their holdings, and get the 
 most they could out of the soil, and not let so much 
 money go out of the country for Indian meal as we 
 are doing. 
 
 11759. The O'Conor Don.— You have not been 
 paying rent for improvements within the last fifty 
 years ? — Yes ; as every improvement done to the land 
 was done by us, by myself, my father, or grandfather. 
 
400 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sep*. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Hugh 
 M' Kinley and 
 Dr. Samuel T. 
 Haslett. 
 
 11760. But your rent has not been raised for the 
 last fifty years?— Admitting that, I say the rent was 
 raised too much then, and that we have been paying 
 too high a rent from that time to the present, and could 
 not have paid it at best times off the products of the 
 farm. 
 
 11761. Mr. Shaw.— You think the rent ought to 
 be reduced 1 — Yes. 
 
 11762. If it was fairly valued?— Yes. I say take 
 the present value of the' land in its improved state, 
 and divide that into two parts— let the tenant have 
 the value of his improvements, and give the landlord 
 his just rent — that is, the value of the land, without 
 the tenants' improvements. 
 
 11763. Do you think the tenants would improve 
 if they had security'? — I believe they would; but 
 they would have to continue the improvemeats in 
 order to continue prosperous. For instance those six 
 acres that I improved and cleared of whins, if I jy 
 not keep on every year improving, the land would 
 soon be as bad as ever with whins. 
 
 11764. You are obliged to break it up periodically | 
 — Yes. If you do not it will be covered worse in a 
 few years than ever it was. That is the natui'e of 
 whins. 
 
 11765. That causes an expense for labour ^Yes 
 there must be a continual expense going on in order to 
 keep the farm up to its present state. 
 
 Dr. Samuel T. Haslett, Flower Hill, Donegal, examined. 
 
 11766. Chairman.— Are you a holder of land?— I 
 hold a small farm. 
 
 11767. You farm yourself? — Yes. 
 
 11768. Is it your own land? — It is my own land. 
 I pay a perpetuity rent for it. 
 
 11769. Are you a dispensary doctor? — Yos. I 
 hold a dispensary in Donegal Union. I held one in 
 the Ballyshannon Union fov eight years. 
 
 11770. I presume you have had an opportunity of 
 seeing a good deal oi the country, and the state of the 
 tenantry ? — Yes. 
 
 11771. Speaking of the last two years, have you 
 found them in a' very bad state? — Yes, a very bad 
 state indeed. A great deal of poverty, destitution 
 and starvation. 
 
 11772. Arising from the failure of the crops? — 
 Yes. 
 
 11773. Mr Shaw. — Among the farmers? — Yes, 
 and the labourers. 
 
 11774-. Chairman. — Before that time how were 
 they going on ? — Betore that time there was a good deal of 
 poverty in some oi the poorer townlands under my 
 observation, but never any actuffl. starvation. 
 
 11775. As long as the crops held pretty well they 
 were able to live ? — They were as a general rule able 
 to live — thfty were able to drag through withoiit aid. 
 
 11776.. What system of cultivation did they generally 
 follow? — I think the usual rotation ot crops — green 
 crops after potatoes, and a little oats and hay on the 
 mountain tracts. The}' lived on potatoes and Indian 
 meal to a great extent. 
 
 11777. Indian meal and potatoes? — Indian meal 
 and ])otatoes to a great extent. 
 
 11778. Have you any knowledge of the rate of 
 rents in that part of the country ? — I have a consider- 
 able knowledge. 
 
 11779. What is your opinion? — On some estates 
 the rents are decidedly too high, being considerably 
 above the valuation. On others that I could name 
 the rents are more moderate, and not above the 
 valuation. 
 
 11780. Do you find that the occupiers of the larger 
 holdings are able to get on more prosperously 1 — On 
 the larger farms do you mean ? 
 
 11781. Yes — you were speakiu g of the small tenants 
 I think — did you observe any difierence between the 
 occupiers of small and large holdings ? — Decidedly ; 
 the larger holders have generally something to fall 
 back upon — somethiug they can sell in a bad season, 
 and they do not throw themselves upon poor relief or 
 go into the workhouse like the small holders. As the 
 last witness stated, they are often much worse off 
 than would appear — very much worse oflT when you 
 come to know their circumstances. As a rule they 
 keep up appearances when in reality they are ofoen 
 in a state of semi-starvatioii. 
 
 11782. Have they any other means of support 
 besides their farms? — No; farming is their general 
 means of support — there may be an odd person here 
 and tliere that has something else such as cattle 
 jobbing. 
 
 11783. Mr. Shaw. — There is no weaving !~A'o; 
 there is no manufacturing industry I know of except 
 that some of them have flax mills and corn mills. 
 
 11784. Is there any fishing ?— There is fisliing on 
 the coast — a considerable amount of fishing ; and in 
 the villages of course there are shopkeepers. 
 
 1178."». What villages? — There are two— Lalij and 
 Ballintra. They both come under ihy observation. 
 
 11786. Do you live near Ballintra? — I live two 
 miles from Donegal — on the way to Ballintra. 
 
 11787. I suppose you know the country thorougljlyl 
 
 , I do. I have been twenty-six years acting as 
 
 medical officer through the whole of it I may say. 
 
 11788. Have the tenantry been in this state.dming 
 the whole of that time ? — Sometimes better— some- 
 times worse, 
 
 11789. According to the season?— Yes. About 
 ten years ago they were remarkably well off. From 
 ten to twenty years ago they were well oif— all solvent 
 or nearly so. When I went to that part of the 
 country first there was a good deal of insolvency— they 
 could not pay their way, but they recovered from that 
 in some measure. But for the last two or three years 
 they are very poor again — chiefly from the decreased 
 value of land arising from failure of crops and foreign 
 competition. 
 
 11790. You mean the decreased value of land if they 
 were going to sell? — Yes — the decreased value of 
 what they can make by their produce and by rearing 
 stock- they don't get the same price for their cattle, 
 butter, and other produce. They do not sell at all at 
 the s.i.me rate. 
 
 11791. Are not stock, butter, and everything con- 
 nected with cattle selling very high this year?--llioi«' 
 there has been rather better demand for the last few 
 weeks. 
 
 11792. Is not butter higher this year than almost 
 it has ever been ? — I think not. 
 
 11793. Do you know what it is selling at'— Ashill- 
 ing a pound is the price at present in Donegal, it b-s 
 been much lower previously. 
 
 11794. At the time you speak of, when the teiiauti.v 
 were well off, do you know what prices they received 
 as compared with the present ? — ^3 or £4 for a cs" . 
 £6 or £8 for a year old, sometimes as high as £W "f 
 £12 for between a year and a two year old. Now you 
 won't get half of that. 
 
 11795. The O'CoNOR Don.— Do you mean to say 
 you won't get the half of it this year?- I hear there 
 has been a rise latterly, I have not been to the marlcet 
 lately. . ,, 
 
 11796. Mr. Shaw.— The amount of stock m tne 
 country has been lessened these last few years ?— very 
 much lessened. ^ l 
 
 11797. Is yours a dairy farming country ?— W o, ao\, 
 to any great extent. , 
 
 11798. Are the ..'arms large as a rule?— No, aem 
 and there yon will find a farm of thirty or forty acres, 
 but it is very rarely thev are of that size. 
 
 11799. Chairman.- Have you any rail way througJ 
 
 f 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 401 
 
 tliat part of the country 1 — Not yet ; but there are two 
 in progress. 
 
 11800. Have the farmers to convey their produce a 
 long distance to get to a market 1 — Well, there is a 
 sort of market in Donegal ; but there are so few buyers 
 that they have it all their own way, so to speak. 
 
 11801. There is not an open market, as there would 
 be if there was a railway 1 — No. 
 
 11802. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know the name of the 
 agent of the estate 1 — Mr. Gage, he has only been 
 appointed within the last two or three years. 
 
 11803. Have rents been raised on the estates in 
 your neighbourhood t — In some instances. Others are 
 much the same as they were when I came to the 
 oountry twenty -six years ago. 
 
 11804. Chairman. — You say the condition of the 
 tenantry is very poor 1 — Very poor ; there is a great 
 deal of poverty. The mountain farms are scarcely 
 worth holding, in a year like the last when the potato 
 crop failed everything goes, and there would have 
 been much starvation only for the charitable relief that 
 was afforded. 
 
 11805. Is there any difference, on the properties of 
 different landlords in the condition of the people 1 — 
 Very much difference — very great indeed. 
 
 11806. According to the rents ■? — According to the 
 rents, and according to the management of the 
 estate. 
 
 11807. Mr. Kavanagh.— What is the average size 
 of the holdings in the district in which there is so much 
 poverty? — Taking the acreage it is large enough. 
 Some of them have thirty, forty, or fifty acres of 
 mountain, the rent of which is a shilling an acre or 
 less.. 
 
 11808. Mr. Shaw. — Is that in the district where 
 you live ? — It is. 
 
 11809. I did not think there was mountain between 
 Donegal and BaUiatra? — It is over towards Pettigo 
 and Lovjgh Derg. 
 
 11810. That is a long way fi-om you 1 — Yes, but it 
 is in my district, or adjacent to it. 
 
 11811. Is that the Connolly estate? — A good deal of 
 it. 
 
 11812. Mr. Kavanagh. — In yo\ir opinion is over 
 population a cause of the distress which prevails 1 — 
 Certaialy not. 
 
 11813. You think the holdings are large enough to 
 support them ? — I think it is very hard to live on some 
 of their holdings when the potato crop faUs. It is not 
 want of size, but want of quality in the land. As the 
 last witness has stated there has been no inducement 
 held out to the tenants to improve their farms — no 
 encouragement. 
 
 11814. If on the Connolly estate, and other estates, 
 rents have not been raised for a long time, is not that 
 an encouragement ? — Well, there was a good deal of 
 confidence in the management of the estate till some 
 fifteen or eighteen years ago when a survey was made, 
 and an attempt made to raise the rents, which did not 
 succeed. 
 
 11815. It was not carried out? — It was not, owing 
 to the moral resistance of the tenantry. 
 
 11816. That was fifteen or eighteen years ago, when 
 the times were good ? — The times were fair. 
 
 11817. There has been no attempt lately made to 
 raise the rents, or any threat of it ? — Certainly not at 
 present. Since that it had been talked of two or three 
 times. There was a special attempt made about the 
 time I mention fifteen or twenty years ago. It went so 
 far that some of the tenantry — my informants were the 
 bailiff on the estate and some of the tenants themselves — 
 were informed that if they went to the rent office they 
 would be told what the rise was. They were advised not 
 to go to the rent office, but to offer the old rent when it was 
 due, and at the same time the agent was remonstrated 
 with, and the late Mr. Thomas Connolly, the then 
 owner of the estate, did not press for the rise. 
 
 11818. Are there any special cases of rent or eject- 
 ments in the district that you know of ?— I could not 
 mention any special cases of ejectment at present. 
 
 11819. Is it more a fear that there might be a rise 
 that deters people from improving than any actual rise 
 that has taken place ? — There has been actual rise in 
 some instances, but not generally on the Connolly pro- 
 perty. 
 
 11820. I am not speaking of the Connolly estate in 
 particular, but of the district generally, is that the 
 case ? — Yes ; there have been many instances of rise of 
 rent on the smaller estates. 
 
 . 11821. Have there been any purchases by tenants 
 of their holdings in your district ?— There have been 
 some purchases of Church lands, but not any others that 
 I am aware of. 
 
 11822. Didall the tenants purchase the Church lands 
 when they had an opportunity? — I know several who 
 have purchased. I know one" who did not. 
 
 11823. What is the present state of those who pur- 
 chased ? — I was speaking to some of them within the 
 last week or two. They are very contented and ex- 
 pressed themselves more satisfied than they were pre- 
 viously. 
 
 11824. Did they appear to be more comfortable 
 and living better than those who had not an oppor- 
 tunity of purchasing? — I have not been in their 
 houses, but they seemed very contented and expressed 
 themselves so. 
 
 11825. Were the Church lands let high or low 
 before the purchase ? — They were let moderately, I 
 think. 
 
 11826. At aboirt the same average as the rest of 
 the county ?— About the same. I think they were' all 
 probably under or, at least, not above the Poor Law 
 valuation — some of them considerably under it. 
 
 11827. Do you know whether the persons who' 
 bought had the money to buy or did they borrow % — 
 Some of them had a little money — one-fourth or a 
 half, and they are paying the rest off I think by yearly 
 interest. 
 
 11828. They have to pay something more than the 
 rent in order to pay oft' the purchase-money ? — Yes, 
 sir ; but I understand some of them are not paying 
 much above what the rent was. 
 
 11829. Including the interest? — Including the in- 
 terest. 
 
 11830. You think that by the feeling of security 
 they have been put in a better position 1 — Decidedly. 
 
 11831. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you know whether 
 the rents on the Connolly estate are considered high ? 
 — They are considered moderate. 
 
 11832. Do you know anything about the condition 
 of the tenantry, or what amount of arrears are due ? — 
 I do not know. I cannot speak on that point. I 
 know there are arrears due more or less, in general 
 probably not more than a year. The Connolly estate 
 is, generally speaking, moderately rented, and people 
 are very well able to live on it with economy and in- 
 dustry. 
 
 11833. Mr. Shaw. — What estates do you know of 
 that in your opinion are over rented ? — There are two 
 or three small estates, perhaps comprising altogether 
 twenty or thirty townlands ; but if this is to go before 
 the public it might not be judicious of me to mention 
 names, as I hold an official position. 
 
 11834. You. can give them to us in confidence 1 — I 
 mention names ; but the property which belonged to 
 the late Mr. James Johnston, and some other small 
 estates in the parishes of Donegal and Drumholme, 
 are rented very considerably above Griffith's valuation, 
 which is the nearest approximation to a fair standard 
 at present known. 
 
 11835. There are no others that you can think of 
 at present? — No. Mr. John Hamilton's property is 
 fairly managed. Lord A's property is generally con- 
 sidered to be very much over rented. I have no 
 knowledge of it personally, but one or two of the more 
 respectable tenants state that their rent has been un- 
 reasonably raised. I had some communication with 
 Ms Lordship about the purchase of a small property 
 near Donegal as a building plot, and tried to get a 
 promise of a lease from him, but I could not get it. 
 
 3F 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Hugh 
 M'Kinlej'' and 
 Dr. Samuel T. 
 Haslett. 
 
402 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Hugh 
 M'KinleT and 
 Dr. Saniuel T. 
 Haslett 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. It is generally -anderstood that it is not possible to get 
 sucli a thing -without a large increase, such as 25 per 
 cent, on whatever rent has been paid. 
 
 11836. That does not refer to farms?— It does not 
 refer to farms. 
 
 11837. You see a good deal of the labouring people 
 in your district I suppose ? — I do. 
 
 11838. What is their condition ?— Whenever the 
 farmers are poor I think the labourers are poorer, as 
 the farmers cannot afford to pay them. They are 
 gi-ound down to thd lowest penny they can be got for. 
 A great many of the labourers ' have been out of 
 employment latterly altogether, and dependent on 
 charity. 
 
 11839. Do they usuallyhold from the farmer or 
 from the head landlord ?— They usually hold their 
 
 " cottages from the farmfer. 
 
 '' 11840. Do they' pay rent for it, or is it part of their 
 wages? — In some cases they have it one way, in some 
 cases' the other. Sometimes they pay a rent to the 
 farmer for it — in other cases it is included in their 
 wages. 
 
 1184:1. Do they go to England and Scotland in the 
 harvest season? — -TOie labourers' do certainly, and the 
 very small farmers do too. They abandon their wives 
 and children and go away for the harvest ; but latterly 
 it is more to America 'they go than to England or 
 Scotland. 
 
 11812. They go to America altogether — not to come 
 back again 1 — They do. ' They sometimes return for a 
 year or two. I know some of them who have been 
 two or three times over. They send something home 
 to their families while aVay, and come back to Ireland 
 and remain a while; aind then go to America again. 
 That has been a custom with some of them in my 
 district. In a good many instances small farmers 
 have abandoned their farms altogether and gone away 
 with their families to America — sold their interest for 
 a trifle, and gone away. 
 
 11813. Do you employ any of the country people? 
 —I do. 
 
 11844. Do you find them pretty good working men, 
 on getting fair pay? — I think they are generally 
 speaking fair working men. 
 
 11845. If they had fair employment at home do you 
 think tbey woiild live at home comfortably, and not 
 seek it at a distance — not half emigrate, as you say ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 11846. It is a sort of half emigration when they go 
 avi-ay for a while, leaving their families behind them ? 
 — It is. 
 
 , 11847. Do you think it would be desirable to have 
 some means of inducing them to rernain at home ? — I 
 think it would. I think it is a sad thing to see the 
 country depopulated. I was told lately, by one or two 
 men on one of the small estates, that as soon as they 
 had means all the young persons on the property would 
 go to America, the whole of them. 
 
 11848. The young able-bodied men going away, and 
 the old and infirm remaining at home 1 — '^^es, and the 
 women and children are left at home to be a burden, 
 perhaps, on the ratepayers. 
 
 11849. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is there a very large 
 labouring population ? — At present there is a very con- 
 siderable labouring population. There are two railways 
 in progress of construction, and between 400 and 500 
 hands are employed on one of them, between Stranorlar 
 and Donegal. 
 
 11850. Do the contractors employ men belonging to 
 the neighliourhood 1 — I think they employ all the 
 hands in the neighbom-hood that they can get. 
 
 11851. Then it is not a population brought there by 
 the railway works ? — To some extent I think it must 
 be. I met them yesterday — ^bodies of them coming 
 home from work ; a great many of them were strange ■ 
 faces, but some of them I knew. 
 
 11852. While the railway is going on there is no 
 want of employment ? — I think not. I think there is"- 
 no -want of employment at present for anyone able and 
 willuaa; to work. 
 
 11853. Chairman. — The strangers, who are brou<»Iit 
 there by the contractor, I suppose, get into lodgings f 
 — Exactly, and they cause some circulation "of 
 money. i ,, ; 
 
 11854. Is there anything, else you -would like to 
 mention %^-Eo. The people generally are industrious 
 and loyal. At the same time, I am sorry to say, there 
 has been a considerable amount of' -discontent in .some 
 quarters, which might easily be excited into somethino 
 worse' at present. I am -very sorry to find that a 
 certain class of people who excite the populace im- 
 prudently are coming very near us, and many of the 
 population . of that 'place seem-to be glad of it, and to 
 welcome them. 
 
 11855. They hope something will come fromit?— It 
 seems so. 
 
 11856. Do you think they would be satisfied if they 
 had security for their improvements 1 — The grea;t evil 
 they complain' of, and justly, I think, is the arbitrary 
 raising of rents by a valuation which comes entuely 
 from the side of the landlord, and in which they iavt 
 no voice whatever. That, I know, has taken place on 
 some estates to a' large extent. ' 
 
 11857. Do yo-a think, if any means could Le found 
 by which a fair arrangement of rent could be made, 
 either at stated-periods' by arbitration,- or' by some 
 other means, they would be satisfied? — I believe tk 
 tenantry of whom I have any knowledge would beTery 
 easily satisfied, and very eaisUy reduced to a state of 
 complete ' colitentment '; but the incessant raising of 
 rents, and the valua;tion coming- entirely from the side 
 of the landlord, is manifestly unfair; Tenants are com- 
 pelled- to pay a tax on their own industry and improve- 
 ments. A vast deal of land is capable of reclamation 
 in that i-)art of the country, and might be made pro- 
 ductive. I have heard it stated -with great truth that 
 no valuation would be fair except what was done by a 
 Government official who had no interest, and could act 
 independently of local influences. I think that -would 
 be the fairest way. One landlord has gone so far 
 as to take by force from his tenants who owed little 
 or no arrears of rent, a portion of their land, and sell 
 or let it for whatever could be got for it to someoBs 
 else. 
 
 11858. Leaving them their- houses and the other 
 portion of their land ? — Yes. I know one man yAo 
 was turned out of house and home-^only one, indeed. 
 In those cases the landlord not only deprived the tenant 
 of part of his land, but charged him a higher rent for 
 the balance than he pi'e-viously paidfor the entir^. 
 
 11859. That could only have been done after an 
 ejectment ?--- After an ejectment, I presume, or after 
 an ejectment process was served. I don't thinlc it 
 came to an ejectment. I think it was done partly by 
 management. 
 
 11860. The O'Conor Don.— Could you give us the 
 names of these cases ? — My information is only from 
 the side of the tenants, and, perhaps, I would not he 
 justified in gi-ving the names of the landlords. I 
 allude chiefly to the isroperty which belonged to the 
 late Mr. James Johnston. . I do notknowthe present 
 owner. 
 
 11861. Mr. Kavanagh.— Could you give 'us the 
 name of the tenant who was treated iq. that -^vay ?— 
 According to my information from the tenants' .side, 
 one is Walter Earrel, another Ed-syard Gallagher. 
 
 11862. Were , they both tenants on Mjc Johnston's 
 property? — Yes. 
 
 11863. The O'Conoe Don.— What happened in 
 those cases seems to have been that they had to give np 
 part of their hmd when they fell into, arreai-, to save 
 the rest ? — Well, one of them tells me he was not iii 
 arrears and had paid ^14 for the good -will of the land 
 that he was pvit put. of. , . 
 
 11864. How could the thing be done jf.he;'vvere not 
 in arrear ?-^That I cannot i explain. He, seemed. t« 
 me rather a simjile sort of man, I give his cwu pos'' 
 tive statement, whieh is in. its. main featjir^s, is coi- 
 roborated by other persons. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 403 
 
 Messrs. Daniel Henry, Francis Conveey, and John Teaynor, all of Drumsanney, Desertmartin, examined. 
 
 11865. Chairman. — ^You are a tenant-farmer? — 
 Mr. Henry. — Yes, sir. 
 
 11866. What size farm do you hold? — There are 
 eighteen acres of, rough land and bog included in the 
 deed that -we have. 
 
 11867. Are you farming under a landlord now % — 
 No, we paid one-fourth. 
 
 11868. Were you holding on the Kilcronaghan 
 Glebe % — Yes, and these other two men as well. 
 
 11869. Did you purchase in 1871 % — We did. 
 
 11870. I see in the letter that you wrote you go 
 back before 1871, and you say that on each successive 
 rector; getting ^possession of his benefice the rent of the 
 holding was raised? — Yes. . The first rise was by the 
 Eev. 'Spencer Knox in 1839. The farm my father 
 hel^ «,t that time was raised £4 a year, and th& re- 
 maining tenants were raised in proportion. The Eev. 
 Mr. Hamilton succeeded' Mr. Elnox, and he in 1863 
 raised V it £4 5s. 9d, and the rest in proportion. I 
 have a list of the rises he made. 
 
 11871. Having to pay interest on the mortgages, 
 your annual payments are run up pretty high ? — ^Yes, 
 sir. We petitioned the Commissioners this season for 
 a consideration, but they wrote back that they had no 
 power to interfere, that the amoimt must be paid. 
 
 11872. Did you ask for an abatement? — We asked 
 for a consideration or reduction ; but they wrote back 
 that they had no power to do anything for us. 
 
 11873. Do you regret that you piirchased?- — Yes, 
 because we would have a reduction of rent if we were 
 under a landlord, and we can get none from the Com- 
 missioners, and we now have the whole poor rate to 
 pay, while if we were under a landlord he would have 
 to pay half. 
 
 11874. You could not feel sure, if you were under 
 a landlord, that you would get a reduction? — The 
 landlords have all allowed a reduction. I see no ex- 
 ceptions at all. 
 
 11875. Has there been a reduction generally by the 
 landlords in your district? — Yes. A reduction of 
 twenty per cent., or at the least ten per cent. There 
 are few so low as ten. 
 
 11876. When were the reductions made? — Since 
 May. 
 
 11877. For this year?— For the last year's rent, 
 due in November last. 
 
 11878. But then they will have to pay the fullrsnt 
 when the good seasons return ? — I don't know accord- 
 ing to the price of flax, and the produce. I don't 
 know how the tenants can raise the money to pay at 
 all, if there is. not a consideration. If the Government 
 does not show a good example I don't know who will 
 do it. If there is hot something done for the people 
 I don't see how. they can hold on at all. We complain 
 too of the purchase-money being so high on account, of 
 the rises of rent. 
 
 11879. You ' are ' speaking of 5'our own holding ? — 
 Yes, and also on behalf of all the other tenants who 
 purchased. There are thirteen of them. 
 
 ' IISSO. '!':'ou speak on behalf of the puvcLasers of 
 this property, not on behalf of the tenants' on other 
 estates?— No, we have nothing to do with them. I, 
 simply speak for myself and the other purchasers. 
 There is one of them, Patrick Quinn, his rent was 
 £7 and at the last rise £3 was put .on it. It was the 
 most oppressive thing in the world to have to pay 
 twenty-three years purchase, on such rents. 
 
 11881. What made you purchase? — People don't 
 know very often until they try, and then it is too late. 
 Wo just thought that as we would have the ■ Govern- 
 ment for landlords they would reduce it. 
 
 11882. Your landlords are not the Government, 
 but the Church Commissioners ?— Yes, sir; but the 
 Government can give them authority. 
 
 11883. In fact you would rather be under some 
 landlord and pay him rent in the ordinary way, than 
 become a purchaser of your holding, having to pay 
 
 some additional money every year, for a period of 
 years ? — Well, sir, , I won't say that. Of course we 
 would rather be independent of a landlord if we could 
 get moderate reasonable terms. I think if there was 
 a reduction of principal or interest given to us, we 
 would prefer being as we are, than imder any land- 
 lord. 
 
 11884. Would yo\j like to have the interest spread 
 over a longer time ? — No, sir ; we are paying four 
 per cent, to the Commissioners. If we could get half 
 of that taken off and pay two per cent, in place of four 
 we would be satisfied. We are pa3Tng five per cent, 
 for the other fourth, and that makes the thing hard 
 upon us. Ifvtha Commissioners would -reduce the in- > 
 terest to half, we would try to Uve, that would be two 
 per cent., and if .they.had the money in the bank they 
 would not get that, for it. , ., ;.. 
 
 11885. 'rhe:0'CoNOK Don,-,— What ,is your presfent 
 annual payment including wljat you pay to the Church 
 Commissioners, and what you pay for interest on the 
 other fourth of the pvirchase money ? — In my own, case 
 I am paying £3, 17«. Id. every half year. ■• 
 
 11886. To the Church Commissioners ? — Yes,, ,. 
 
 11887. What are -you paying for the money you 
 borrowed ? — |I borrpjvy;ed one-fourth: at five per cent. 
 
 11888. How much are you paying for that ?— £3 
 15s. yearly. ,, . 
 
 11889. Then your annual payment amounts to £ 11 
 10s. Id. ? — Yes ; £fl 15s. 'id. to the Commissioners, 
 and £3 15s. for the interest on the loan. 
 
 11890. Your rent was £11 5s. ^d.%—Yes.. 
 
 11891. Therefore you are only paying a few, shillings 
 more than the rent you were previously paying ? — Yes, 
 but in addition we have to pay the whole of the poor 
 rate, whereas we used to have to pay only half of it. 
 I had to pay £8 6s. for my deed out of my own 
 pocket. 
 
 11892. The legal expenses came to £8 6s. ? — Yes, 
 I had to pay that betore the attorney would give me 
 the deed. , . . 
 
 11893. Was that part of the purchase-money on 
 which you are paying interest ? — No, it was i];idep,en- 
 dent of the money I borrowed. ' 
 
 11894. You paid it out of your own money? — 
 Certainly. 
 
 11895. In what year did you purchase ? — In 1871. 
 It was the first glebe disposed ot, to our knowledge,, 
 under the Act. 
 
 11896. Have you made the annual payments 
 regularly since 1 — Yes. 
 
 11897. Did you pay last year? — We did, every 
 year. 
 
 11898. You are aware that every year you are pay- 
 ing off a portion of the capital? — Not a farthing. ,We 
 only took a simple mortgage, to pay the interest every 
 year till such timeas we wOuld be able to pay part of it 
 by instalments. If we would be fortunate enough, 
 as we thought at that time weanight be able, to paiy 
 ,£20 or £30, at a time, they would take it and reduce 
 the interest.,acoordingly. ' 
 
 11899. You are' merely paying the interest ? — Yes. 
 
 11900. You are, not paying any part of the prin- 
 cipal ?— No. . , , , 
 
 11901. Are all the, tenants on this glebe in the same 
 position as you ?— Yes ; all paid twenty-three yfears' 
 increased I'ent as purchase mqney. Two paid their 
 purchase money in full. 
 
 11902. And are;they all of the same opinion-r-do 
 they regret their purchase ? — Yes, sir. . 'i. ' 
 
 11903. You think you purchased at.too high arate|!, 
 ^-Yes, sir ; according to the present, times ,we , CQ\ild 
 not live by it. " It is too high. ,'■■,. 
 
 11904. What is the poor rate?^Ten to fourtepn 
 pence in the pound, on the Government v^luatioii ; _sel- 
 dom so low as 'ten. 
 
 11905. Wliat is the valuation as compared with the 
 rent?— £9 15s. is mv own valuation. 
 
 3F2 
 
 5ep<. 30, 1880, 
 
 Messrs. Daniel 
 Henry, Francis 
 Conveiy,, ancl , ; 
 John Traynor. 
 
404 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 30, 18S0. 
 
 Messrs. Daniel 
 Henry, Francis 
 Convery, and 
 John Traynor. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Spottiawood 
 Ashe. 
 
 11906. I suppose the rate is about the same in the 
 case of the other tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 11907. Were there any other glebe lands sold in 
 your neighbourhood besides this one? — There were 
 They were aU sold. 
 
 11908. Were they all purchased by the tenants? — 
 In most cases they were. On the neighbouring town 
 land of Desertmartin the glebe lands were all pur- 
 chased by the tenants. The circumstances were not 
 very favourable. Some men advanced money to the 
 tenants, and have a claim on the land. 
 
 '-I 
 
 11909. Did they purchase aba cheaper rate 
 you did ? — I believe they did. 
 
 11910. The rent on them was not so higl 
 believe not. We had to pay twenty-three yeara 
 chase on the rent, and if it was sold now I , 
 believe it would bring near the price that was 
 us for it by the Commissioners. 
 
 (The other two witnesses, Francis Convery and Join 
 Traynor, stated they concurred in the evidence giyj, 
 by Mr. Henry.) 
 
 Mr. Thomas Spottiswood Ashe, of Bellaghy Manor House, Castledawson, examined.. 
 
 11911. Mr. Kavanagh. — I believe you manage the 
 estate formerly known as the property of the Vintners 
 Company 1 — Yes. 
 
 11912. It is now called the Bella-ghy estate 1 — Yes. 
 The Yiutners Company have leased it in perpetuity. 
 
 11913. State what the circumstances of the property 
 are?— There are about 32,000 acres in it altogether. 
 From 1733 to 1802 a great part of it was leased in 
 perpetuity to tenants for three lives renewable for 
 ever. In round numbers 23,000 acres of it was so 
 leased. 
 
 11914. To how many tenants?— 219. 
 
 11915. That was leased in perpetuity on an average 
 rent of how much? — Is. 6c?. per statute acre. The 
 leases were for lives renewable for ever, with a fine on 
 the fall of each life, generally a half-year's rent. It 
 was leased at that time by the Eight Hon. W. 
 Conolly and Thomas Conolly. 
 
 11916. Have those lots been divided since? — Yery 
 much divided. In a great many cases the original 
 tenants and their descendants are oiit of it altogether 
 —great part of it has been bought up by capitalists. 
 
 11917. And those capitalis fcs I presume have sublet ? 
 They have sublet. 
 
 11918. In what condition are the tenants on the 
 farms which have been sublet? — Where there is a 
 tolerably large estate they are in a pretty fair condi- 
 tion. The worst condition is where there is a small 
 holder who has a number of cottiers under him. 
 
 11919. Were they brought in as labourers ? — Yes ; 
 and some of them are weavers. They have subdivided 
 greatly amongst then- families. There is a clause in 
 the lease reserving an increased rent in the event of 
 subdivision or alienation, but there is an exception in 
 favour of sons, daughters, or neai- relations — a pretty 
 wide exception. 
 
 11920. These were the terms on which they were 
 allowed to subdivide ? — Yes. They were allowed to 
 subdivide to sons, daughters, and near relations. 
 
 _ 11921. That would lead to pretty extensive sub- 
 di^dsion in the course of years ? — Yes. There is a 
 penal rent reserved in case of subdivision to others, 
 but it is not always enforced. 
 
 11922. Has it ever been enforced? — It has been in 
 some instances, by charging an increased rent. That 
 is all the landlords can do. 
 
 11923. It has not prevented the property being cut 
 up into small holdings? — It has not. It has only 
 enabled the landlords to get more rent. 
 
 11924. What is the condition of those leaseholders 
 as compared with the yearly tenants ? — They are in a 
 worse condition. They are greatly in debt. 
 
 11925. To what do you attribute that ?— To the 
 facility they have for borrowing money, and they do 
 not require to cultivate their farms, and to get the 
 most out of them, in order to pay their rents. 
 
 11926. The rent being so small, they are not put to 
 their best to make it, and consequently don't make out 
 of their land what they might do? — Exactly. Of 
 course there are excej)tions, but as a rule they are 
 not flourishing by any means. 
 
 11927. Is there much sale of holdings going on ? — 
 Yes, almost every year. 
 
 11928. Who are these boiight by, as a rule? — 
 
 Sometimes by men who want to farm, but generajljly, 
 capitalists, who set them to tenants. 
 
 11929. How do they treat their tenants— -do'! fc 
 charge them high rents 1 — As a rule, they chargej^ / 
 higher rents than head landlords do. 
 
 11930. Is it not the fact that many of the OBj,] 
 lessees have disappeared or become the tenam ' 
 these capitalists ? — They have become tenants in dj ■ 
 instances at yearly rents. | 
 
 11931. Do you think this is a fair example toMt 
 of what would be the case if peasant proprietary *b" 
 established through the country. I can only give nj 
 experience, which is not good, unless some clause coi 
 be enforced against subdivision. 
 
 1 1932. Unless you could guard against subdivMoil 
 — Unless you could guard against subdivision. 
 
 11933. If you could guard against subdivision, lo 
 you think it would be a good plan ? — If you coiiM 
 select your men it might be a good plan — if you coiilil 
 be sure of getting improving tenants. 
 
 11934. Is not this property divided among tlw 
 different landlords ? — ^o. There are three propriete 
 who hold it jointly — the Earl of Strafford, SirThomi 
 Bateson, and Lady Louisa Trench. 
 
 11935. They hold it jointly ?— Yes; under tlit 
 Vintners Company. 
 
 11936. Therefore, those capitalists who boughtttose 
 farms hold under them again? — Tes. i 
 
 11937. What is the general condition of the properly 
 — is it very poor ? — No ; it is rather good land. Hi ' 
 part held at will is the poorest — the mountain piil 
 which was not leased in perpetuity. The best partrf 
 the land was leased in perpetuity. 
 
 11938. You say the tenants-at-will are ^ 
 off than those who got the perpetuity ? — I thini »; 
 that is the general opinion. 
 
 11939. Is it cut up into very small holdiuf!- 
 The perpetuity portion is so. , „: 
 
 11940. What is their average size ?— Three andk 
 acres. There was a lease of twenty -four acres soP 
 the Landed Estates Court recently by a man mJ*' 
 Port who had nine tenants on the twenty-four aflW 
 
 1 1941. Is that a fair specimen of the way the estate 
 has been subdivided ? — It is. In fact we don't know* 
 full extent until a lot comes to be sold in this waj' 
 
 11942. I understand that a Mr. Henry who, Ip"*- 
 sume is a capitalist, one of those persons whom "^ 
 have described, holds eighteen leases? — Yes, and M 
 has 182 undertenants. , 
 
 11943. What is the size of their holdings-do * 
 eighteen leases comprise a large area ? — Yes ; »W 
 1,000 acres. , 
 
 11944. Are the 182 tenants on small holdings'- 
 They are. ^ . 
 
 11945. Is there much distress amongst them ^''"'i 
 they are not in a very bad condition. 
 
 11946. There is another case, that of a jUj. Ce- 
 ment, who bought up eleven leases and let the l*^" 
 to tenants? — Yes. The reason I give these cases ft 
 not that the under tenants are in such a bad s*^**' 
 but to show that the original intention of ma^""? 
 the occuiuer a proprietor, was not carried out - 
 
 11947. In another case a Captain Henderson h^s 
 purchased six leases ? — Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 40- 
 
 11948. And has sublet to a number of tenants'! — 
 Yea. 
 
 11949. Chairman. — On the sublet portion do the 
 oenants hold under tenant-right 1 — They do. 
 
 : 11950. Mr. Kavanagh. — In the cases where the 
 )riginal families remain in possession they have, as 
 ron stated, subdivided to their children, and reduced 
 •,.he holdings to very small dimensions 1 — Yes. 
 
 11951. You have mentioned the example of a person 
 lolding in a townland called Dreenan 1 — Yes, I pro- 
 luce his lease and renewal. 
 
 11952. Chairman. — The lease is dated March, 1734? 
 -Yes. 
 
 ■"■ 11953. Mr. Kavanagh. —In 1734 the lease was 
 -aade to one Downing? — Yes; and the last renewal, 
 \rhich was in 1861, was made to twenty-five persons. 
 
 11954. I suppose they were all descended from 
 7)owning 1 — Almost all of them. 
 ~ 11955. Are they all tenants'! — They are; but we 
 
 ike the head rent in one simi, and give the receipt in 
 ~'ie name of the representatives of Stafiord Downing. 
 ' 11956. There is another lease of Ballymacpeak 
 ' Tanted to Thomas M'Peak ; the last renewal was made 
 
 ) eleven persons t — -Yes, and one oi the eleven has 
 ~ ~ine undertenants. 
 
 11957. Then there are subdivisions under those 
 
 gain? — ^Yes. 
 '^'" 11958. Ballinacross was granted to five tenants ori- 
 
 inally ; the last grant was fifteen ? — Yes. 
 ~ 11959. Ballynease Macpeake, purchased by James 
 -'-Courtney, the last renewal was made in 1868 to 
 3 3venty-one people ? — The fee-farm grant was made to 
 ^-Qe i)erson but he has seventy-one undertenants. 
 .-Jhey are a very poor lot. 
 
 :- 11960. Axe the occupiers of that land in very poor 
 ;:-.ircumstances ? — Yes, and they are generally rented 
 . -.-ery high. 
 ;-,^ 11961. I suppose they have very small holdings ? — 
 
 - ^es, very small. 
 
 __- 11962. It was amongst them the distress was 
 ■ reatest when there was distress ? — ^Yes ; but some of 
 _. be original leaseholders are as bad as any of them, 
 "- heir families having subdivided. 
 
 "j 11963. Sir Thomas Bateson toldme last spring that 
 —here was a great deal of distress there ? — So there 
 -^7as. 
 
 '"-; 11964. Does tenant-right exist on that portion of 
 ' -he estate ? — It does. 
 
 11965. What is the extent of it ? — It is practically 
 K'- jolimited, except that the landlord had the choice c^ 
 ■■^'he tenant, and prefers the adjoining tenant. 
 
 11966. The price is unlimited? — The price is un- 
 limited. 
 
 11967. Have you any experience of other properties, 
 .'-jesides the Bellaghy estate ? — Yes. 
 
 '- 11968. You are a land agent? — I am. I manage 
 '^'ibout 22,000 acres besides the Bellaghy estate ; and 
 •fJ'I am also agent for some of those middlemen — for 
 i'nstance Mr. Henry. 
 
 'N 11969. Have you any remarks on the general 
 Jjuestion ; can you tell us what the custom as to giving 
 5?,eases in the, country ? — There is very little giving of 
 i eases. 
 
 - 11970. Is the tenant-right acknowledged at the 
 md of a lease ? — It is, to this extent, that the tenant 
 
 /;generally gets the choice of remaining at a rise of rent. 
 / 11971. Is he allowed to sell, if he does not choose 
 to remain ? — Yes. 
 
 11972. Then practically tenant-right is acknowledg- 
 ed at the termination of a lease? — It is, subject to 
 revision of rent. 
 
 11973. Are there many cases in your experience 
 i where the landlord has bought up the tenant-right, 
 and extinguished it ? — Not many. 
 
 11974. But you do know some cases where it has 
 been done? — Yes, I have done it myself on my own 
 property. 
 
 11975. Do you think it advisable to have any 
 restriction on the price of tenant-right ?— I think it 
 
 would be desirable for the tenant's sake to have some Sept. 30, 1880. 
 restriction to prevent them giving fancy prices as jj^. Thomas 
 they do sometimes, but there is a great difliculty Spottiswood 
 about it, where it has been unlimited heretofore, it is Ashe, 
 hard to say how you could limit it with justice to the 
 present tenant. 
 
 11976. It has been suggested by a good many 
 witnesses that it would be advisable, but they have 
 all said that if a restriction was placed on the price 
 money would be paid underhand so that practically 
 the restriction would do no good?^That would be 
 done certainly, ;' ? the limit was too low, but I would 
 be inclined to make a wide limit, say twenty years 
 purchase on the valuation. In cases where money 
 has been paid over and above it has been where the 
 limit was too small. 
 
 11977. The tenants on the other hand maintain 
 that they ought to have a right to realize all they can 
 get ? — That of course would be an advantage to the 
 men who happen to be in occupation at present but 
 it turns against the incoming tenant when he pays 
 too much. 
 
 11978. What is your opinion of Grifiith's valuation 
 as a standard for the rent ? — I don't think it is reliable 
 now. 
 
 11979. What proportion to the rent would it hold 
 in your district is it above or below ? — Generally 25 
 p: ; cent, added to the valuation m.akes a fair rent. 
 
 11980. Have you any fixed term for revaluing or 
 altering rents ? — Generally about twenty years. 
 
 11981. Do you take any means to exclude the 
 tenants' improvements or do you value all in, in the 
 new valuation ? — The valuator takes them into con- 
 sideration on most estates. 
 
 11982. Therefore as a rule you do not raise the 
 rent upon the tenant's improvements ? — No, I think 
 not, not in my experience. 
 
 11983. That has been one of the great complaints 
 made to us, that tenants are discouraged from improv- 
 ing for fear of having the rent raised upon their 
 improvements ? — There is a possibility of that being 
 done. 
 
 11984. It has not been done upon the estates under 
 your management ? — No. I don't think so. 
 
 11985. It has not been done, so far as joii know ? 
 — As far as I know it has not been done. A tenant 
 may have improved the general quality of the land by 
 pi'oper cultivation, and in that way he may be paying 
 for improvements, but on his buildings or substantial 
 specific improvements there is never any rent placed. 
 
 11986. If a tenant drained a field you would not 
 increase the rent because he drained it ? — It would be 
 very hard for a surveyor to ascertain whether the 
 tenant in occupation had drained a particular field. 
 
 11987. Are the improvements generally made by the 
 landlord or the tenant? — It is a sort of joint stock 
 business. The landlord makes the main drains, farm 
 roads, and soforth ; the tenant drains the fields — the 
 landlord gives him slates and timber when he builds. 
 
 11988. The landlord contributes slates and timber 
 for the buildings ? — Yes. 
 
 11989. Has that been continued since the Land Acfi ? 
 — A good many landlords have withdrawn that since 
 the Land Act, and do not give slates and timber. They 
 do not like to do so, because the tenant generally 
 becomes the owner of all. 
 
 11990. You admitted in a former answer that it was 
 quite possible such a feeling of insecurity might exist 
 among tenants from the apprehension of a rise of rent ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 11991. Could you suggest any way of determining 
 a fair rent where the parties disagree ? — I am not pre- 
 pared with an answer to that question. 
 
 11992. You are not prepared to suggest any mode 
 of settlement ? — I am not. 
 
 11993. Do you think it would be desirable if some 
 mode of arranging what the lair rent was could be 
 devised generally throughout the country ? — If it could 
 be done it would. 
 
 11994. If it could be done? — If it could be done, 
 
406 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Spottiswood 
 Ashe. 
 
 bvit it would be interfering witli liberty of contract a 
 good deal. I think something should be done to pro- 
 tect the tenant against an unfair rent. 
 
 11995. They complain that some of those persons 
 who bought land as a speculation have raised rents un- 
 duly 1 — I have known that to be done. 
 
 11996. Don't you think it would be lair to protect 
 tenants from that, if it could be done without injustide ?' 
 —Yes. 
 
 11997. You are not prejsared to suggest any method 
 of doing so 1 — No. 
 
 11998. Is there much waste land in your neighbour- 
 hood 1 — No, except mountain land that might be re- 
 claimed, and bog that is in course of being reclaimed. 
 
 11999. It is in course oi being reclaimed'? — Yes. 
 Generally when the bog is cut ofi the landlord lets the 
 subsoil to the adjoining tenant, at a nominal rent for 
 a time, to biing it into cultivation. 
 
 12000. You have already given your opinion as to 
 a peasant proprietary 1 — Yes, as far as my experience 
 goes. 
 
 12001. As to county cess, how is that managed on 
 the estate you hold 1 — There have not been many re- 
 visions of rent with me since the Land Act. 
 
 12002. Very few new lettings? — No, and where 
 there have been the tenant generally contracts to pay 
 the whole cess. I have given them the choice, and 
 they prefer doing so. 
 
 12003. You give them their choice of increasing the 
 rent or leaving it as before 1 — Of paying the whole 
 county cess as before or a proportionate increase of rent. 
 
 12004. In what condition are the labourers in your 
 district 1 — I think the labourers are in a fair condition 
 — better than some of the small farmers. 
 
 12005. You have no large surplus of labouring 
 population 1 — No ; there is plenty of employment ex- 
 cept in bad seasons. 
 
 12006. What is the rate of wages ?— From Is. Qd. to 
 2s. a" day without food. Farmers feed them and give 
 them less. 
 
 12007. Have I passed over any point that you would 
 like to mention 1 — I think too much at present ig left 
 to the County Court Judge, and having so many of 
 them is a great disadvantage. There is, practically, 
 one law for one county and another for another. 
 
 12008. The O'Conoe Don. — Great diversity in theix 
 opinions 1 — Yes ; one man leaning too much to the 
 landlord's side, another man to the tenant's. The 
 Landed Estates Court Judges oi' some other official 
 should go round the country and try the land cases, 
 and thus secure more uniformity. 
 
 12009. You would suggest a tribunal like the 
 Assize Court ? — ^Yes. 
 
 12010. Togo circuit and decide all land cases'! — 
 Yes. 
 
 12011. "Would you be satisfied to leave to such a 
 tribunal the decision of questions of rent in case land- 
 lord and tenant disagreed 1 — I don't know that. 
 
 12012. Chairman. — You say that is an interference 
 with liberty of contract ? — It would seem to be so. 
 
 12013. Is there liberty of cOMtfaot on the part of the 
 tenant now — the landlord can jiut on whatever rent he 
 pleases, and if the tenant does not agree to pay it he can 
 be put out ? — If the rent is excessive the tenant can 
 refuse to pay and appeal to the Land Court. 
 
 12014. By giving up his holding, he must give up 
 his farhi before he can appeal to the court '? — Yes. 
 
 12015. Mr. Kavanagh. — He cannot come into the 
 court until the decree is gi'anted to deprive him of 
 possession ? — No. 
 
 12016. Chairman. — That is what they complaiii of, 
 that before they can appeal to the court they must first 
 give up their holdings, and they don't know what sum 
 they will get from the coftrt for their tenant-right, or 
 disturbance, until after eviction 1 — Do you mean to ask 
 me if I think that a tenant should bo allowed to come 
 before the tribunal without going out of his holdino-. 
 
 12017. Yes ; it has been stated to us that a great 
 evil is that before the tenant can appeal to the Land 
 Court he mu.st first be evicted; and cases have been 
 
 mentioned in which landlords have sold farms to an 
 incoming tenant for a larger amount than the compen- 
 sation awarded by the court to the evicted tenant, so 
 that the landlord has made a; profit on the trausaction? 
 -^That may have been the casSj but I have never 
 known an instance. ' 
 
 12'018. In casesof ejeotmentfornon-paymentofrent 
 cases have been mentioned in which the landlord sold 
 th.G'farm to a now tenant, and after paying themselves 
 what rent was due, handed the balance to the ourgoing 
 tenant 1 — Yes. I have seen that done in my district. 
 
 12019. As the law stands at present the landlord 
 might sell the farm, and keep the whole of the 
 proceeds? — Yes. 
 
 12020. You have spoken of the power of selection 
 of the incoming tenant by the landlord in cases of sala 
 of tenant-right, and you said the price was unlimited 
 except by the selection of the tenant on the part of the 
 landlord — how is it ascei-tained what should belle 
 price if the landlord is to nominate the purchaser ^-, 
 It is sometimes done by arbitration. Generally where 
 the adjoining tenant is the one preferred ■ they make 
 their own bargains. 
 
 12021. If they agree, of course itis settled withoutany 
 question ; but suppose a tenant comes to you and says 
 he wants to sell Ms farm, he must sell it to some person 
 approved by you on behalf of the landlord, how is the 
 price fixed 1 — He givep as much as any other sohent 
 man would give. 
 
 12022. How does he know how much that isl — If 
 there is any difiiculty about it I generally get them in 
 before me, and after hearing what they have to say, I 
 say what is the bona fide price. 
 
 1 202 3. It was stated to us that on one estate written 
 proposals were sent in by intending purchasers, and 
 the adjoining tenant was then offered the preference at 
 the amount of the highest proposal 1 — Yes ; at the 
 highest bona fide offer. 
 
 12024. Do you think that is preferable to a sale by 
 auction 1 — I think it is. 
 
 12025. Do you think there is any risk of fictitious 
 bidding 1 — Yes, that is the obj ection. "When it is done 
 by proposal and agreement you can prevent that sort 
 of thing, biit you cannot ascertain at an auction 
 whether a bid is bona fide. 
 
 12026. I think you said there had been some in- 
 stances of landlords buying up tenant-right ? — ^Yes. 
 
 12027. And that you had done so yourself i-Yes. 
 
 12028. Is that with the view of selling the lands to 
 a purchaser, or of letting them out again 1 — With the 
 view of letting them again. 
 
 12029. In what way do you let them?— In some 
 cases I lot the holding to tenants from year to year, 
 adding to the rent the interest of the purchase-money. 
 
 12030. What are the terms of the letting ?— Such 
 as would be in other parts of Ireland where tenant- 
 right does not exist. The tenant I wanted to give 
 the land to in one case was not able to purchase it I 
 bought the tenan1>right from the outgoing tenant 
 myself, and I added the interest on the pm-chase- 
 money to the old rent and gave it to the new tenant. 
 
 12031. Then the new tenant had no tenant-rightl 
 — No; he has no tenant-right until he pays me the 
 money I advanced ; and in the meantime he pays me 
 interest on the money. In another case I let a farm 
 on lease. I put the place in order ; the tenant agi'ees 
 that any other buildings or extra things that he re- 
 quires that he should pay one-half the cost and I the 
 other half, and at the end of the lease it all becomes 
 mine. 
 
 12032. When tenant-right is bought up is_ it usual 
 to give a lease for years 1 — There are some instaUfi® 
 of it. 
 
 12033. At other times you let it from year to 
 year 1 — Yes. 
 
 12034. Then he comes under, the. Land Act^- 
 Yes ; as to compensation for improvements and dis- 
 turbance. 
 
 12035. You said that the Valuator when_ going 
 over a farm to value it takes into consideration the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 407 
 
 tenant's improvements and deducts them from the 
 valuation 1 — Yes. I can only speak from tlie General 
 experience I have had of estates ; the valuator's in- 
 structions are not to put rent on tenants' buildings. 
 
 12036. We have been told that the tenant in many 
 cases has no communication with the valuator, and no 
 opportunity of pointing - out his improvements'! — I 
 think that is very likely sometimes to be the case. 
 
 12037. Then the valuator would not be aware of 
 what niight have been done by the tenant or the land- 
 lord? — Of course he is not instructed in all oases. I 
 only speak from experience on the estates I have the 
 management of. - 
 
 12038. You. say' your practice has been as far as 
 you could to make allowance • for tenant's improve- 
 ments 1 — Yes. 
 
 12039. So that'he shouldiiot be payitig on hisown 
 outlay? — Just so. 
 
 12040. You think that a fair principle and that it 
 would be desirable to have it secured to the tenant ? 
 — I think it would. 
 
 12041. The O'Conor Don.— With regard to those 
 perpetuity leases you said they were granted 150 years 
 ago ? — Yes, the first: of them were. Some of them 
 were granted in 1802. .:■-. • 
 
 12042. Between 100 and 150 years ago ?— Yes. 
 
 12043. Is it not the fact that formerly the linen 
 trade was extensively carried on in your district 1 — 
 Yes, and weaving is carried on there still. 
 
 12044. Would you attribute the great subdivision 
 in any way to the fact that, they had this local in- 
 dustry ? — I think that had a good deal to do with it. 
 
 12045. Are jou any relative of Mr. Spottiswood 
 who appeared before the Devon Commission in 1844? 
 — I am his nephew. 
 
 12046. I see he said the subdivision was chiefly 
 attributable to the linen trade in the district ; do you 
 agree in that ? — .Yes. 
 
 12047. There is also a peculiar clause in those 
 
 leases almost pointing at subdivision by permitting it Sept, so, 1880. 
 to take place amongst widows' children and near jjj._ ji^^as 
 relatives ?— Yes. Spo.ttiawopd > 
 
 12048. Don't you think putting a clause of that Ashe, 
 sort in a lease would almost give a claim to those rela- 
 tives to exact a subdivision? — I don't know., 
 
 12049. Would not that be its natural effept upon 
 the people— pointing out and Suggesting to them to 
 divide their holdings in that way ?-i— I don't know. I 
 think they are very fond of subdividing amongst wives 
 and children. 
 
 12050. The subdivisions took place a good many 
 years ago ? — Yes ; but they are going , on still and 
 increasing. 
 
 12051. According to the evidence given in 1844 
 they existed almost to the same extent at that time as 
 now. At that time the subdivision brought down the 
 holdings to eight acres on the average ?— I think the 
 subdivision has been. increasing since. 
 
 12052. Can you give us the average. . Taking lai^ge 
 and small, what is the average size of the , holdings 
 now ? — I could not say, they vary so much. 
 
 12053. It was stated in 1844 by Mi-. Spottiswood 
 that the average size was eight acres ? — It depends on 
 whether you take the average on the number of inha- 
 bitants, including cottiers. Mr. Henry has got 1,000 
 acres, and the average size of his tenants' holdings 
 would be about that. 
 
 12054. In former .times when those leases were 
 made there was very little emigration from the 
 country ? — Very little. 
 
 12055. The people then had no resource but local 
 industry on the, land ? — Yes. 
 
 1205G. At all events you don't deny that in 1844 
 the land had been subdivided to an enormous extent ? 
 — T do not. 
 
 12057. Those small tenants — the tenants under the 
 leaseholders — I suppose don't hold by perpetuity 1 — 
 No ; they are tenants from year to year. 
 
 Mr. John Loughrey, Clonamanny House, Londonderry, examined. 
 
 12058. Chairman. — ^You are a land owner ? — Yes. 
 
 12059. What is the average of your estate ? — It is 
 about 4,000 acres altogether. 
 
 12060. Does tenant-right exist on your property? — 
 It does, fully. 
 
 12061. When you say fully, say what is the extent 
 of it ? — Tenants are allowed to sell. 
 
 12062. At the highest price ? — Yes; for whatever 
 they can get. Subject to this, that the landlord has 
 the choice of the tenant, but, at the same time, the 
 outgoing, tenant is not to lose a fraction by that. In 
 some cases very objectionable parties purchase. 
 
 12063. You reserve a veto in the case of objection- 
 able parties 1 — Yes j I can give an instance in one case : 
 a party bought a farin Subject to £9 rent. He was 
 a nian of very indifferent character in the neighbour- 
 hood, and I objected to him. He was the only man I 
 ever objected to. He was a person who, affcerwai-ds, 
 got three 'years penal servitude. It was from my 
 knowledge of his character I objected to him. I was 
 afraid if he became a tenant hei would give a great deal 
 of trouble. 
 
 12064. He was a bad example in the neighbour- 
 hood? — He #as. 'He was a party man — a leader of it 
 in fact. He 'Was the only ihari I e-^er objected to. 
 
 12065. Isee in 'Siiiswer to the question whether you 
 can suggest any alteration of the law as affecting the 
 Ulster custom. ' You say rnany ' improvements are 
 required? — I think so; if /ou allow*' rhe I will give 
 you an instance of great hardship. 
 
 13066." Mention" anything 'you can ■ suggest ? — ^I ■ 
 think where the tenants Object to a new valuation, 
 and they don't ' agree, if yoti ;sent down fifty valuators 
 -to the place they -wotrld' stil-l olgect and refuse to pay 
 anything except the old tent: I think a Grovernment 
 valuator should be sent down- by' the Chairman of the 
 county to revalue the place, then put the valuation 
 
 in the hands of the Chairman, and let him fix the 
 rent, and compel them to pay that rent, or else sell 
 their holdings. 
 
 1'2067. You think the Chairman should doit? — 
 Yes, send down a Government valuator, a disinterested 
 party, a man not connected with the neighbourhood. 
 
 12068. And that should be a compulsory rent ? — I 
 would let the Chairman fix the rent on the basis of 
 the valuation, and compel the tenant, either to pay 
 that rent or sell. , 
 
 12069. That is what you would call aii arbitration? 
 — I would call it a revaluation, and which ever party 
 was wrong, let him pay the expense. 
 
 12070. You recommend a settlement by the Chair- 
 man, in case of difference between landlord and tenant 
 as to rent? — Yes, I think that would be better than 
 to leave it to arbitrators outside, because the arbi- 
 trators that would be appointed by the tenants, are a 
 very different class from the persons who have been 
 examined before you. ; The bulk of them are under 
 £4 valuation, and the arbitrators', they would appoint, 
 would not agree with any ..respectable man. They 
 would go in determined to out down rents — and 
 would not care whether the thing was just or not. I 
 would much rather leave it to a Government valiiator 
 and the Chairman. , . ; 
 
 12071. You said you could give an instance, 
 showing' the hardship -of the present system ?-^Yes. 
 On two townlands that I hold myself. I v/as: pressed 
 two or three years to out up the. place^it was held in 
 rundale, each of the tenants having from five, to seven 
 different patches in different parts . of the, towiiland. 
 This made the place almost ..worthless^they were 
 constantly trespassing on each other, and anncjying 
 each other, and quarrelling. They asked . me to have 
 it taken out of rundale, and each man to have his. own 
 
 Mr. John 
 Loughrey. 
 
408 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. SO, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Loughrey. 
 
 lioldiiig. I did SO, and in this instance, every man 
 upon the townland, except three, were satisfied. 
 
 12072. What is the name of the townland? — 
 Mindoran. All were satisfied except three. Those 
 men, when my father bought the property fifty years 
 ago, got the land at a nominal rent. There were 
 portions of it clayey ground that did not require any- 
 thing, except a few drains to bring it into cultivation, 
 and they did each of them reclaim five acres or there- 
 abouts. None of the land was reclaimed within the 
 last twenty-five years — that was admitted , on oath by 
 one of them before the Chairman — that it was twenty 
 or twenty-five years since the last piece was reclaimed. 
 My father died thirty-one years ago, and it was never 
 revalued in his time. These three men held it at a 
 nominal rent. They struck against the valuation I 
 put on them, and refused to pay it, and I was obliged 
 to serve them with a notice to quit. They served me 
 with a land claim, and the case came on at the last 
 July Sessions, at Lifibrd. They were ofiered, if they 
 thought the valuation unreasonable, that they might 
 get another valuation made, and my solicitor men- 
 tioned it to the Chairman. He asked the men would 
 they agree to that arrangement. One of them cam.e 
 forward. The Chairman asked him was he spokes- 
 man for the rest, he said he was ; he said they would 
 go on, that they would never agree to any valuation ; 
 but take theii- compensation. They went for com- 
 pensation for disturbance, and for improvements ; and 
 did not go in for tenant-right. I may mention that I 
 believe this case of muie was brought up here, and a 
 very wrong statement made — at least there was an 
 impression on my miud, that such would be the case, 
 and I thought I would bring the matter before you. 
 
 12073. The O'Conor Don.— What is the name of 
 the townland ? — Mindoran. I will give you the 
 acreage and the rent. 
 
 12074. You proposed to change the holdings'! — 
 These three men were not interfered with — they were 
 merely valued. The first man, Hugh M'Alleny, held 
 twenty-three acres ; his old rent, was £.3 is. — that 
 was a nominal rent. The new rent, was £7. 
 
 12075. What is the valuation ?— I think .£2 15s. 
 or thereabouts, but the value of the other two was 
 £5 5s. 
 
 12076. What was the name of the other tenants? 
 —The second was the Widow M'AUeny, 28a. 3e. 31p., 
 the old rent £4, the new rent .£14 10s. 
 
 12077. What is the Government valuation of her 
 holding? — £5 5s. 
 
 12078. What was the name of the third tenant ? — 
 Neill M'Alleny, 27a. Oe. 14p.,the old rent £6 12s. 6d, 
 new rent £11 15s. 
 
 12079. Chairman. — Has there been any improve- 
 ment made on those holdings since the Government 
 valuation ? — The oldest man swore there was no im- 
 provement made and no land reclaimed for over 
 twenty years. 
 
 12080. Then nothing was done since the Govern- 
 ment valuation was made? — That was in 1852. I 
 don't suppose that there was. 
 
 12081. What was the cause of so large a rise in 
 rent over the Government valuation ? — The valuator 
 thought it was good value for it. I may state the 
 man who valued the property — I got him purposely 
 to satisfy them — was a Mr. M'Neilage. He was the 
 tenants' valuator in the land claims against Lord 
 Leitrim, and I thought he would give satisfaction, 
 and I think he has given satisfaction, for those were the 
 only three cases on the townland that were objected to. 
 
 12082. You offered them another valuator ? — Cer- 
 tainly — I would let the Chairman appoint whoever 
 they liked. 
 
 12083. What was the acreage of the last holding? 
 —27a. Or. 14p.— the old rent £6 12s Qd., new rent 
 £11 15s. You observe the second holding was 
 raised from £4 to £14 10s. This holding formerly 
 belonged to a tenant who died leaving no sons, and 
 he left the ±arm to Hugh M'Allenny's father. He 
 occupied the place as a grazing firm until he handed 
 
 it over to his son a few years ago. Each of these 
 lioldings had a portion of the waste land attached to 
 it. When old M'Allenny's son married I gave him 
 permission to give his son a portion of the land, and 
 he gave him his uncle's holding, keeping a jiortiou of 
 the clay ground near his own house — the father keirt 
 that himself, handing the son what he has now-— 
 twenty-three acres. The son complained to me at 
 the time of his father making him pay the rent 
 his uncle was paying, whUe keeping the best part of 
 the land himself. I said " I won't press your father 
 nor interfere with him in what he is going to do, but 
 Mr. M'Neilage is going to value your holdmgs, and 
 you need not pay more than whatever sum he puts 
 upon it." They never agi-eed about it — and the 
 father has never paid me a halfpenny for it smce. 
 He holds that bit of land near his own house, and 
 that brings the rent up to £14 10s. He should pay 
 £11 15s. — that is a difference of £2 15s. — for tiat 
 piece of ground is not included in the valuation at 
 all — he holds it free from all rent and taxes— and 
 that accounts for the difference between £11 16s. and 
 £14 10s. Do I make myself clear? 
 
 1 2084. I don't quite follow you ? Do I understand 
 you to say that those two lots, No. 1 and No. 2, were 
 at first combined ? — Yes. 
 
 12085. What was the total rent of the two?— 
 £7 4s. He then gives his son a portion— making 
 him pay £4 a year, and he keeping back a portion of 
 the land next the house. When the new valuation 
 was ma.de the valuator valued the portion at £14 10s., 
 whereas if he had given the whole of No. 1 to the 
 son he would be the same as the other holding, 
 £11 1.5s., but he kept a portion of it himself, and he 
 is pa)Tng neither rent nor taxes for it, and that 
 accounts for the £2 15s. of difference, hut his valu- 
 ation is only £5 5s. 
 
 12086. The O'Conor Don.— What was the upshot 
 of the proceedings before the Chairman ? — The Chair- 
 man was obliged to give them compensation ; and 1 
 was compelled to pay No. 1, a sum of £80 14s. 
 
 12087. The value of the tenant-right? — Compen- 
 sation for improvements and disturbance. 
 
 12088. How much did he award for disturbance, 
 and how much for improvements ? — I have not got that. 
 He gave them five years rent for disturbance, and £35 
 for houses, and the balance was for improvements. 
 
 12089. They had built the houses?— They had. 
 
 12090. Were the houses included in the valuation! 
 ■ — No. They were not in the valuation at all, because 
 Mr. M'Neilage was asked the question, and said he 
 never bothered about the houses, and could give no 
 information what the value of them was. 
 
 12091. Was the valuation for the land alone ?— For 
 the land alone. 
 
 12092. Did they claim for reclamation and drainagel 
 — They did and got it. 
 
 12093. Did the valuator make allowance for that 
 when he was valuing? — They have had it over fifty 
 years without paying anything for it. 
 
 12094. Was it done since the last valuation was 
 made? — No, the eldest man swore that none of it was 
 reclaimed for the last twenty-five years, or over twenty 
 at any rate, and I recollect myself that none of it was, 
 for I have been over the land constantly for I suppose 
 thirty years. 
 
 12095. Chairman.- What I don't understand is, ii 
 there was nothing done since the Government valuation 
 was made, how is it that there is such a difference 
 between the Government valuation and this new one ! 
 — There was nothing done in the way of improvement 
 for the last thirty years that I can recollect. That J 
 can swear. 
 
 12096. The O'Conor Don.— Do you consider the 
 Government valuation was much under the real value 
 of the land?— I do ; in fact it is a humbug. I cja 
 give you an instance of it on another townland on whicn 
 the tenants divided the,, land before, I can recollect 
 that is a thing that has been frequently done, foi' 
 when people hold in rundale they are ajit to fall ion 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 409 
 
 of each otlicv ; and sometimes the end is that they have 
 a distribution. In many cases where people divided 
 they divide again — say a man gave his daughter one- 
 third of a farm forty years ago — those two would make 
 what they call one holding. 
 
 12097. As far as you were concerned? — Yes. In 
 one of the townlands I cut up,-the whole thing came 
 out in ten equal shares, and those shares sometimes 
 have to be divided again between two, and sometimes 
 between three. However you divide it into shares 
 as best you can. Then the tenants come and examine 
 *he shares and dispute about them — they think one 
 better than another, and the surveyor has to go over 
 them again, and take a bit off one, and add it to 
 
 1. Hugh M'Alleny, 
 
 2. Widow M'Alleny, 
 
 3. Neil MAUeny, 
 
 Mr. John 
 Loughrejr. 
 
 another, vmtil at last when the tenants are all satisfied Sept. so, isso. 
 
 that the whole is equally divided, they cast lots for the 
 
 shares. 
 
 12098. "What has that to do with the Government 
 valuation ? — In the townlands where I have property 
 there is frequently on holdings of about £6 a difference 
 of 25s. in the valuation, while there is not a particle of 
 difference really between them. 
 
 12099. Proceed with your statement of what the 
 Chairman awarded ? — He awarded the first twenty-six 
 years purchase — the second sixteen years, and the 
 third twenty-one years. [Witness hands in following 
 statement : — 
 
 Compensation awarded 
 by Court. 
 £ S. d. 
 80 14 
 83 10 
 97 10 
 
 
 
 Old Rent. 
 
 New Kent. 
 
 A. 
 
 B. P. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 23 
 
 
 
 3 4 
 
 7 
 
 23 
 
 3 31 
 
 4 
 
 14 10 
 
 27 
 
 14 
 
 6 12 6 
 
 11 15 
 
 12100. What have you done with those holdings 
 since that time 1 — The tenants have them still ; they 
 are to leave them by 15th November next, but they 
 have not the slightest idea of doing anything of the 
 sort. 
 
 12101. When was the decision of the Chairman 
 made? — In July. 
 
 12102. Have you paid them their compensation ] — 
 No; the money is to be lodged on 1st November. 
 They got time to clear off and sell their crops and 
 remove. I had no objection to that, but they have 
 not sold their crops, they have their oats in the 
 haggarts as visual ; and haven't as yet the slightest idea 
 of going, and when they do the farms will be thrown 
 on my hands and nobody will take them. 
 
 12103. Is it not evident that the Chairman con- 
 sidered it a case of capricious eviction when he awarded 
 them such compensation for disturbance ? — He did ; 
 they went in for that case. 
 
 12104. And he agreed with them? — He did. 
 
 12105. Chairman. — You say you think that u.pon 
 a dispute between landlord and tenant as to rent, there 
 ought not to be an eviction and a land claim, but that 
 the better way would be to appeal to the Chairman to 
 settle the rent? — Yes ; I think the rent should be fixed 
 by the Chairman in the way I say — by sending a 
 disinterested valuator to put a fair value on the farm, 
 and then let the Chairman determine the rent. 
 
 12106. Would you make it obligatory on the tenant 
 to pay the rent 1 — I would not, unless the rent was 
 just. 
 
 12107. I mean, supposing the Chairman fixed the 
 rent in the way you suggest, would you make it 
 obligatory on the tenant to pay it 1 — Yes, he should 
 pay that rent, or sell. 
 
 12108. Would that be an ejectment for non-pay- 
 ment of rent ? — No ; I would say, if the tenant did not 
 wish to pay the rent let him sell. If tenants won't agree 
 to anything, if they won't appoint a valuator of their 
 own, nor agree to any valuator you propose, some 
 mode must be taken to make them do what is right. 
 On one of the townlands upon my property every 
 tenant has struck and refused to pay. They won't do 
 anything. I think they should be compelled to do 
 what I suggest. I suggest a Government valuator to 
 be appoiiited, and let the Chairman fix the rent. Let 
 the parties send a valuator of their own also and 
 examine him before the Chairman, and from their 
 evidence, and the testimony of the Government 
 va,luator, I think he should be able to anive at a fair 
 rent between the parties. 
 
 12109. Did the chairman in your case go into the 
 question of the variance of the rents you claimed, 
 comparing one holding with another? — No. There 
 was no question as to that. They simply went for 
 compensation. He was told the men had been offered 
 a new valuation. He asked them would they agree to 
 that. They replied, no, they would go on with their 
 
 clpima 
 
 12110. How many tenants have you on this town- 
 land ? — I think on the entire townland about nineteen. 
 
 12111. Are they all under ejectment? — Under 
 notice to quit. I merely want them to come to some 
 arrangement. If they would get their holdings re- 
 valued themselves, I would not have the slightest ob- 
 jection, and then have matters settled by the Court 
 with aid of a Government valuator. 
 
 12112. When was the valuation made? — Three 
 years ago. 
 
 12113. That was at the close of the good times ? — 
 Precisely. 
 
 12114. Did you make any allowance for the bad 
 times ? — I did, to those men who agreed to piay the 
 rent. Icharged noneof themapennyof theriselastyear. 
 
 12115. Some of the tenants agreed to pay? — All 
 the men on this townland agreed to pay, except those 
 three men who held at a nominal rent. 
 
 12116. You let them go on at the old rent last year ? 
 — I did. I may also mention another case on the same 
 townland where a man who was bred and born on the 
 estate, asked me to give him a piece of cut-away bog to 
 reclaim. I gave him sixteen acres, and I let him have 
 it for a couple of years for nothing. After that I said 
 to him, " I think you will have to pay me something." 
 He said, " What do you think would be reasonable ?" 
 I said a nominal, thing would be enough, and I asked 
 him to name a sum. He said he did not know, and 
 asked me what I thought would be fair. I said thirty 
 shillings. He said very well. Now I have not the 
 slightest doubt that in. twenty years' time, if a new 
 valuation was made, and £4 10s., or £5 put on that 
 piece of land, the very same sort of case will arise as 
 has taken place with those three men. Por my part 
 I think that where 'a man gets a piece of waste land 
 to reclaim he ought to have it for, say twenty years 
 almost free. 
 
 12117. You think his enjoyment of it for twenty 
 years at a nominal or very low rent recoups him for 
 his outlay ? — I do. 
 
 12118. And that it gives him good interest for his 
 investment ? — Yes ; or if they choose to start at once 
 with what would be considered a fair rent, let the land 
 be valued, and say, "when that land is reclaimed 
 what wUl it be worth ?" Suppose the value would be 
 £\ an acre. Then cut that in two, let the landlord 
 have one half of it and the tenant the other half. Give 
 him the land at 10s. an acre, and if that were done I 
 would not value that land any more, but let the tenant 
 get the most he could out of it. But when a man has 
 had land for over twenty years, paying almost nothing 
 for it, and then when the landlord seeks to get a fair 
 rent, and oflers him to appoint any valuator he 
 chooses to say what the fair rent would be, and he 
 refuses and won't do anything, I really think it is a 
 great injustice. To show you how large an interest 
 some of the tenants have in their farms, I will wive 
 you instances of sales within the last twenty years. 
 The first was that of John Gubbins, his rent was £7 
 
 m 
 
410 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 LetJgirey. 
 
 7s., lie paid £80 for. the tenant-right. It was sold by 
 public auction abouttwenty years since. Neil Doherty 
 paid £150 about seven years ago, his rent was £17 10s. 
 That was sold by private sale. John Diyer paid £150 
 for a farm at £7 rent ; that man, I think, paid high. 
 "William M'Laughlin paid £80 for a holding the rent 
 of which was £5 5s. This, after the new valuation, 
 £5 5s., is the increased rent; £3 lis. 6d. was the old 
 rent. These are the only sales I recollect within the 
 last twenty years upon the property. 
 . 12119. Could you say whether the rents on these 
 holdings are lower in proportion than the rents which 
 were objected to by the tenants who sued you in the 
 Land Court 1 — Not one bit. The only difference is 
 that the persons who brought the land claims held at 
 a nominal rent, whereas the others did not. Another 
 thing I may mention, in those oases when the land is 
 thrown on my hands no one will take the farm from 
 me again. That is one reason I say the valuation' 
 should be left to the chairman who should send some 
 person to value the farm and settle the rent. 
 
 12120. Chairman. — You would rather not come in 
 conflict with your tenants 1 — Decidedly. On that 
 townland, after I had read out the valuation, some of 
 them said that I did not read out MoNeilage's valua- 
 tion at all, that I had added to it. One of the men 
 who was valued at £8 came to me and said he thought 
 the valuation put on him was too high. I said I 
 thought not, that I thought £8 was very reasonable. I 
 believe the Government valuation of his holding is £6 
 5s. It is an old holding, there is no reclaimed land on 
 it. He said he thought £7 would be reasonable. I 
 said I would make it £7 10s., and we agreed to that. 
 I would be sorry to fall foul of any man for the saks 
 of a pound or two. 
 
 12121. Chairman.— Was this a general valuation 
 over your whole property 1 — No, sir, only on the 
 mountain townlands. On the other portion the tenants 
 held at a fair rent, and I, let them remain at 
 it. There was one portion which they asked me to 
 cut up and I did so. It was held in rundale, and Mr. 
 M'Neilage revalued it at 5 per cent, advance over the 
 former rent. Every man of them paid me last year,, 
 and never asked for sixpence reduction. The class of 
 tenants on my property have mostly very small hold- 
 
 ings, and I must say if they were let alone they would 
 give very little trouble. Of course with men hke 
 that a bad season, sickness in their families, or any 
 unforeseen raisfortune throws them back, and a half 
 year's rent is gone ; but that is & thing that cannot be 
 avoided, and you are very well off if you get the rent 
 the following year. 
 
 12122. Do you usually make an allowance of a por- 
 tion of the rent under such circumstances I^Certaiiily. 
 One of the men I did not ask to pay for I knew he 
 Gould not do so. Another of them was only able to 
 pay one-half of the year's rent. His rent was £8 10s. 
 — his valuation £7 17s. 6c?. He only gave me. half 
 the rent. I knew he could do no more. 
 
 12123. I understood you to say you would he satis- 
 fied to have a fair settlement of the rent by the cliaiv- 
 man, and a Government valuator 1 — Decidedly. 
 
 12124. And when that rent was fixed by the ohaii-- 
 man then the tenant should be obliged to accept it or 
 else to sell?— Yes, If a. man won't agree to what is 
 fair he should not be allowed to remain.' He should 
 not be allowed to remain on the land and refuse to 
 come to any terms. That was what these tenants did. 
 They told me plumply that they would not pay any 
 advance on the old rent, and that they would sue me 
 for tenant-right if I attempted to advance the rent one 
 shilling. I may also mention that on those townlands 
 some of the holdings are set at 10s. under the Govern- 
 ment valuation, and some at 10s. over. On that very 
 townland that I referred to just now, there are two 
 men whose rents are £8 9s. and £8 10s., while tlie 
 
 ^ Government valuation is £7 17s. 6d., and others are 
 let at a few shUliags under the valuation. Those men 
 who brought the land claims and were awarded com- 
 pensation by the chairman won't go out — they are 
 depending on the Land League — the compensation 
 awarded to them amounted to twenty-six, sixteen, and 
 twenty-one years' purchase respectively, but I have 
 not the slightest doubt that supposing they were set 
 up to auction to-morrow, and that tenants 'W'ere 
 allowed to bid for them, and not deterred by fear of 
 the Land League, I would get the whole of the monej' 
 that has been awarded as compensation — even at the 
 new rents for Widow M'Elany's farm alone — I have' • 
 not the least doubt of that whatever. 
 
 Mr. James 
 CaBniug. 
 
 ,Mr. James Canning, Londonderry, examined. 
 
 are a tenant 
 
 12125. The O'Conoe Don.— You 
 farmer ? — I was. I am not one uow. 
 
 12126. You did occupy a farm]— I did at Bally- 
 money, in the county of Anti-im. Those were town- 
 parks. My father had held it since 1805, and held on 
 till lately. In former times there was perfect liberty 
 to sell the good-wUl by auction, but when the present 
 agent came he put a stop to it, and allowed no sale by 
 auction. But since that we went to live on a farm 
 about half a mile from the, town, and because we were 
 not residing in the town we got an ejectment to give 
 up the townparks. 
 
 12127. Who is your landlord ?— The Earl of Antrim. 
 The present agent is Mr. M'Donald, and all the com- 
 pensation he would give was £100. Perhaps he 
 thought it was a good deal to. pay, however, we got 
 £120. We brought the case into court, and it was 
 adjourned at the Ballymena sessions for three months. 
 Townparks being excepted from the Land Act, I 
 was afraid to go before Mr. Otway, whose decisions 
 are generally in favour of the landlord and against the 
 tenant, and I wrote to a friend asking him to make 
 terms, but all he could get was £120, so v,'e took it. 
 We could easily have got £300 for our tenant-right 
 before the Land Act was passed, and as soon . as we 
 gave it up it was let to two tenants— one portion at 
 ^£3 10s., and another at £2 10s. per acre, which was 
 10s. per acre more than we paid for it. 
 
 12128. Then your evidence is that the Land Act 
 ^asmjiired you?— As far as townparks are concerned 
 decidedly. It has enabled the agent to put, I am con- 
 
 vinced, thousands of pounds in the Earl of Antrim's 
 pocket, which, by right, belonged to the tenant. 
 
 12129. Before the passing of the Land Act yon 
 would have got tenant-right in the townparks ? — We 
 would. There was perfect liberty to sell. One man 
 offered £100 for a field very convenient to town, but 
 the tenant would not take it. However, he died some 
 time after and left his farm and all he had to his sister, 
 but the new agent had come in the meantime and he 
 would only allow £30, and that was all she got, and 
 had to pay £6 law costs. 
 
 12130. Chairman.— Wasitgrass?— No; notallgrass. A 
 portion was in grass, a portion in potatoes and other crops. 
 
 12131. Was your case brought into court?— K 
 was, but the Barrister said he could not hear it, and 
 it was adjourned tUl the next sessions, and in tte 
 meantime I got disheartened about it, and I asked my 
 friend to make the best terms he could. 
 
 12132. Was it held as accommodation land in con' 
 nexion with a residence? — It was. 
 
 12133. The O'Conor Don.— It was similar to the 
 case of Williamson v. Antrim 1 — Yes. 
 
 12134. And that case was decided against the 
 tenant ? — Yes, sir. But in one case before Mr. 
 Otway he gave a decree for £56, and the man appealed 
 to the assizes, and the case came before Baron xii^ 
 Gerald who awarded the man £300. 
 
 12135. That was not a case of townparks ?--No, i 
 don't think it was. 
 
 12136. Is there any other matter you wish to bring 
 before us 1 — No. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 411 
 
 12137. Chairman. — your suggestion is that town- 
 parks sliould not be excepted from the Land Act, but 
 treated as any other kind of holding ?-^Deoidedly. 
 
 12138. Do you consider that should be the case with 
 regard to small portions of land let merely for grazing 1 
 
 — I think so. I know my father laid out hundreds 
 upon it, thinking it as good as any perpetuity, and so 
 it was nntil the present Earl came into possession. 
 His uncle was exceedingly liberal and kind to his ten- 
 antry, he let people sell at the highest figure they could. 
 
 ,?(7)l!. so, TRSO. 
 
 Mr, -Tames 
 Cannhi;'. 
 
 Mr. Daniel M'Loughlix, Carrickmaquilty, Eedcustle, examined 
 Chairman. — Are you a tenant farmer? — 
 
 12139, 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 12140. How much land have you?— 29a, 3r. 13p.' 
 
 12141. At Carrickmaquilty ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 12142. Whoisyourlandlord?— Mrs. J. M.Doherty. 
 
 12143. "Who is the agent? — Mr. George M. Harvey. 
 He became agent last November. 
 
 12144. Who was the previous agent? — Mr. Tighe. 
 
 12145. Has Mrs. Dogherty lately purchased the 
 property 1 — No ; I think she has it about forty yeais. 
 I am thirty -six years her tenant. 
 
 12146. What rent do you pay 1 — £28 4s. 
 
 12147. When was "that rent fixed? — I was paying 
 £26 4s., but in 1866 I got a notice to quit for a rise of 
 £3 12s. which I refused, and in May, 1867, I got 
 another, and I was processed for the rent. ' I went into 
 court, and the case was adjourned from the June 
 Sessions tUl October. The agent sent for me in the 
 meantime, and he raised me £2, which has still re- 
 mained on, making my pi-esent rent £28 4s. 
 
 12148. What was the date of that ?— 1867. 
 
 1 2 1 49. Is that the point you wish to bring before us 
 as a grievance? — I have another. In August, 1879, 1 
 wished to sell my place, and I went to the landlady and 
 told her I wished to sell. The agent came to me first 
 and told me, " Don't sell it unknown to us^we will 
 give you a bid; we will give you £250." I said, 
 " That is not the value of my industry." He then said, 
 " We will give you £290, but you must hold it on till 
 November." In August, 1879, 1 told her I wished to 
 sell. She said, "No; you can't sell my place by 
 auction — why won't you take proposals?" I said, 
 " That is not the way it is done on your estate, we have 
 the Ulster custom." She said it was no such thing — 
 that such a custom never was on it, and that she would 
 not allow it. I put up notices for a sale by aitction, 
 but I was desired to take the notices down. The case 
 went into the Land Court ; it was adjourned four 
 times, and after the fourth adjournment the Chairman 
 gave me £320. 
 
 12150. What was the caiLse of the adjournments ? — 
 The first was they denied the notices, and the Chairman 
 adjourned the question till next sessions. Then when 
 he came back in April he was going to give his 
 decision when the solicitor on the other side asked 
 him to postpone it till they would get evidence. He 
 postponed it again, and at last, in the June Sessions, he 
 gave his decree for £320, but they appealed to the 
 Assizes. Another thing I want to mention is that 
 when we want to sell in oiar district the landlord or 
 landlady always says, " I am going to raise the rent." 
 That was done in my case. She sent round to say she 
 would raise the rent, and in that way she deprives me 
 of the benefit of my improvements, and of my tenant- 
 right. That is the case, not only with me, but with 
 many othersbesides.' The landlord gives notice he will 
 raise the rent, and then what becomes of our custom. 
 
 12151. What was the decision in the Appeal Court ? 
 — It won't come on till March. 
 
 12152. I sujjpose all these adjournments and the 
 appeal occasion considerable expense ? — Of course they 
 do. There is very little chance for a poor man if he 
 goes to law, and even if he gets compensation where is 
 he to go ? The poorer parties have to gc to the work- 
 house in the locality I belong to. 
 
 12153. Arid aH this trouble arise from the difierence 
 bet\ireen landlord and tenant on the ' subject of rents ? 
 — That is it. 
 
 ■ 12154.1 Would you and the tenants generally, as far 
 as you know them, be satisfied to have a fair rent 
 sdttled by -some independent party, and not by the 
 landlord alone ?— Yes, sir ; fair rent and free sale, that 
 is what we want, and not to have us brought into law, 
 for if it goes to law the poor tenant gets nothing. 
 Sure, they may take my case into the House of Lords 
 before I get .a penny. On the very townland alongside 
 of me there is ' a poor widow woman ; she has been 
 served with two ejectments, and the bailiff came and 
 put her out. 
 
 12155. What is her name ?— Widow M'Govern. 
 
 12156. Sheis under eviction ? — She is. 
 
 12157. Was this while Mr. Harvey was agent? — 
 Yes. A man named Duffy has a small place on the 
 ■same townland, and he is under eviction for subletting 
 to his own son a little bit of his land. I wish -to 
 mention also that in our locality the Government 
 valuation is a little lower than the rent. £22 is my 
 valuation for the land, and £2 for the house. 
 
 12158. What is your rent?— £28 4s. 
 
 12159. Are the tenants making improvements in 
 your district ? — The improvements in my locality are 
 all .done by the tenant. If the landlords ever give 
 any money they take care to add it to the rent. If 
 they give money to slate a house for example, the 
 interest of it is added to the rent. 
 
 12160. Have these two persons — : Widow M'Govern 
 and William Duffy been actually turned out ?^They 
 got notice of ejectment. Duffy had to submit and 
 send his son away, and he had to pay £7 of law expenses. 
 
 12161. Is the widow still in possession ? — Yes; she 
 is in possession till November, until the decision of 
 the Chairman. The Chairman reserved his decision 
 till the October Sessions. 
 
 12162. Therefore neither of those persons has been 
 actually evicted ? — No. 
 
 12163. Are there any other tenants on that property 
 that have either actually been evicted, or are under 
 notice of ejectment ? — I cannot say that there are. 
 
 12164. Do you know of any on other estates in 
 your district ? — I know some were put out, and when 
 the landlords put them out, they sent them to the 
 Workhouse, take whatever they can get for the land 
 and put it in their pockets. About a year ago a 
 family named M'Laughlin were evicted — they were 
 not able to pay. 
 
 12165. On whose estate? — Mr. Arthur Carey is 
 the landlord. The mother went into the workhouse 
 and the aunt is still in the workhouse — the wife died 
 and the two women went in as paupers — that is four 
 out of one family, and the electoral division has to 
 support them. 
 
 12166'. Were they not. allowed to sell ? — They were 
 not: deprived of that, but I think the money it would 
 fetch, would not pay, the- debts that were on it to the 
 landlord and other creditors. 
 
 12167. Those people were not able to hold on?-^ 
 They were not. 
 
 12168. Do you know any other case of persons 
 
 being evicted, and having to go to the workhouse ? 
 
 No. Most of the ejectments were settled — they gave 
 security and got them settled. 
 
 12169. In this case of the M'Laughlin family, I do 
 not see that there was any fault on the part of the 
 landlord?— No. I don't say there is, but the rents 
 on that estate are very high. That is the worst 
 feature. 
 
 Mr. Dauiel 
 M'Loughlitt, 
 
 3G2 
 
412 
 
 miSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 30, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Kichard 
 Craiff. 
 
 Mr. Richard Craig, Killnaphy, examined. 
 
 12170. Chairman. — You are a tenant farmer'? — 
 Yes. 
 
 12171. 1 believe you were connected with a case 
 known as Tomkins's case 1 — Yes. 
 
 12172. Tell us how that case arose and what it 
 arose from 1 — There were eight leaseholders. 
 
 12173. Is the property owned by Mr. Tomkins? — 
 Yes. 
 
 12174. The leaseholders held under a lease for a 
 term of years 1 — Yes ; forty-one years. 
 
 12175. And the lease expired last ISTovember? — 
 Yes. 
 
 12176. When the lease expired were they asked by 
 Mr. Tomkins to agree to an advance of rent 1 — Yes ; 
 which they objected to. 
 
 12177. To what amount was the increase? — It 
 ranged from fifty to seventy-five per cent, on the 
 former rent. 
 
 12178. On their objecting did Mr. Tomkins bring 
 an ejectment 1 — Yes. 
 
 12179. Were the tenants evicted? — Yes. They 
 served a land claim after they were served with the 
 ejectment. 
 
 12180. What was the result of the land claim ? — 
 The result was that when they came into Court the 
 opinion of Counsellor Colquhoun was, that they had 
 no tenant-right at the expiration of a lease, not being 
 able to prove a sale after the fall of a lease. 
 
 12181. Did they withdraw their claim in con- 
 sequence of that adverse opinion of counsel ? — They 
 had to submit to Mr. Tomkins's terms, and accept a 
 twenty-one years lease at an increased rent. 
 
 12182. Was it a large increase? — Yes; and they 
 had to pay all taxes — they had to pay the county cess. 
 Before he would deal with the rent at all, they had 
 to accept the lease, and pay the county cess. 
 
 12183. The O'CoNOR Don.— What were the terms 
 of the lease — was there anything objectionable in it ? 
 — The point was the dsnial of tenant-right at the 
 expiration of the lease. There are eight tenants 
 whose tenancy commenced at the same time, and they 
 are all in the same condition. 
 
 12184. Is it known that tenant-right exists on the 
 estate ? — Yes, tenant-right exists there. 
 
 12185. Mr. Kavanagh. — Who was, the Chairman 
 who decided this ? — It was on the advice of their own 
 counsel they withdrew the claim. There was a sale 
 that took place in 1877 on one of the holdings of which 
 there was no lease. That holding was sold under the 
 Ulster custom.. 
 
 12186. Chairman. — The opinion of counsel was, 
 that in sjiite of the tenancies in the neighbourhood 
 that were tenancies from year to year being subject to 
 tenant-right, the claimants had no case, that these cases 
 did not affect holdings that were under lease ? — Yes ; 
 it is an unsettled question. Some judges here give it 
 as their opinion that tenant-right did not exist and 
 others gave it difierently. 
 
 12187. At all events it is very difficult 13. such a 
 case to establish a claim to tenant-right ? — Yes, at the 
 exj)iration of lease. 
 
 12188. In these leases was tenant-right barred for 
 the future ? — No, that question was not touched upon. 
 In the old lease that fell there was a clause providing 
 a money penalty, namely, that if you sold during that 
 lease the incoming tenant was to pay so much more 
 rent than the tenant who held formerly. We would 
 not accept the lease on any terms unless that money 
 penalty was struck out. 
 
 12189. Is it your opinion that where holdings in the 
 neighbourhood are held with tenant-right it ought to 
 be made clear that the dropping of a lease does not ex- 
 clude tenant-right unless it has been specially excluded 
 in the lease ? — I thought there was tenant-right all 
 round vis there with lease or without lease. I never 
 heard of it being touched in our neighbourhood. 
 
 12190. Would that be a satisfactory way of saying 
 it : — it is to be presumed to exist unless there is some- 
 thing in the lease excluding it ? — Our late Chairman 
 did not decide the cases according to the custom of the 
 property on which the cases arose, but took in the 
 neighbouring properties all round, and if tenant-right 
 existed in the neighbourhood he allowed it. 
 
 12191. But according to the opinion you have quoted 
 there must be a sale after the dropping of the lease to 
 establish the custom? — Yes, that was according to 
 counsel's opinion. 
 
 12192. His opinion being, we may presume, founded 
 on the latest decisions on the subject? — Yes. 
 
 12193. You think the Land Act ought to be 
 amended in that respect 1 — Yes. 
 
 12194. The O'Conor Don. — Was there a particulai 
 covenant in your lease against sale during the cm 
 tinuance of the lease 1 — No, but there was a penalty 
 if I sold, and the tenant who purchased (if the land- 
 lord chose to charge it) should pay an increased rent. 
 There was one case where Mr. Hanna bought a farm 
 from Mr. Barbour fifteen years before the fall of the 
 lease, and the increase was £12 a year and he paid it. 
 
 12195. And was the increased rent that was asked 
 from you at the expiration of the lease greater than 
 the increase that would have been put upon you it 
 there was a sale during the continuance of the lease 1 
 — It was. There was one for £140 to £185. 
 
 12196. What would have been the ainount of the 
 increase on this holding if it had been sold before the 
 lease expired 1 — There was no lease on that holding. 
 He had a document but not a lease. The document 
 oontauied the usual clauses for Mr. Tomkins's lease. 
 
 12197. This is not one of the leaseholder's cases!— 
 That Mr. White came under the head of leaseholders. 
 
 12198. What is the present rent upon these lands 
 as compared with the valuation ? — The valuation d 
 that farm which was raised from £65 to £80 is 
 £68 15s. 
 
 12199. Are the rents higher than the usual rents in 
 the neighbourhood 1 — I believe they are a good deal. 
 The Government valuation of one farm is £68 15s. 
 
 including houses and land and the rent is £80. 
 
 Mr. 
 
 White's farm is valued at £85 and the rent is £101. 
 In my own case the valuation is £49 5s. and the rent 
 £57. 
 
 12200. Is there any provision in the new lease you 
 have taken out against selling ? — No. We can sell to 
 the highest and best bidder, provided that the pur- 
 chaser is a solvent man and of good character. He 
 may contend it is the lease we are selling, but we con- 
 tend we should have tenant-right. 
 
 12201. Chairman. — Tenant-right at the end of the 
 lease ? — Yes, at the end of the lease. 
 
 12202. Unless expressly excluded by the lease ?— 
 The tenant-right was never touched at all. The case 
 never was gone into ; the Chairman said he could not 
 touch the rent without the consent of both parties ; so 
 when we found our tenant-right was in danger and 
 were toldupon counsel's opinion that we had not tenant- 
 right at the expiration of the lease we stopped. 
 
 12203. Then you took the land at the terms he pro- 
 posed ? — No, not at the terms he proposed. We had 
 them valued ourselves. We get our own valuators 
 and -we get the land at our own valuation. We had 
 them valued when preparing to go into court. 
 
 12204. And you got them at that valuation ?— Yes. 
 
 12205. The O'Conor Don.— And was that lower 
 than the landlord had placed upon them ? — Yes ; that 
 was reducing them from £66 to £57. 
 
 12206. You don't complain of the rents being too 
 high 1 — We do, but we cannot remedy it. 
 
 12207. You. say it was your own valuator fixed the 
 rent 1 — It was our own valuator certainly. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 413 
 
 Mi: Charles M'CALLiOif, Island of Inch, Co. Donegal, examined. 
 
 12208. Chairman. — You are a tenant on Lord 
 Templemore's estate 1 — Yes. 
 
 12209. Is Mr. Bowen the agent? — Yes. 
 
 12210. Have you any complaint to mate of raising 
 of rent? — I have. 
 
 12211. How much land do you hold? — About 
 thirty-one acres, rough and smooth, and scutch grass. 
 
 12212. What is the rent?— £2G, and in former 
 times it was £14. 
 
 12213. When was it raised? — I suppose it is 
 about thirty-five years, when it was £14. The rent 
 was then £14, and the Government valuation, 
 £14 10s. It was then raised. from £14 to £18 13s. 
 He took 15s. off for a piece he gave to a neighbour, 
 and now I pay £26, and a house I put up they took 
 from me, and Lord Temp] emore draws rent on it of £2 
 5s. a year, whereas I should get that, or it should be 
 taken off my rent. 
 
 12214. Is that rent beyond what you should pay? 
 —I consider it far beyond it. When I was paying 
 £18 I was abb to pay it, but now I am two years 
 behind. 
 
 12215. These last two years were very bad ?— Yes, 
 but I had a friend in America ; but they say they 
 won't send me any more money to support myself and 
 pay the rent for Lord Templemore. 
 
 12216. And they stopped sending iti — ^Yes. 
 
 12217. You say Mr. Bowen is a very good man, 
 but he must coUect the rents? — These were put on before 
 lie got there. 
 
 12218. Have you made any application for a redtic- 
 tion ? — Several times ; and the valuator was sent 
 round a second time to value it, and he asked me what 
 the Government valuation was, and he said I should 
 only pay one--third above that. He asked me to dig 
 where I thought the soil was bad, and he said I was 
 only to pay £21, and when I came to the foot of the 
 road, Mr. Knox, the agent, who was standing there, 
 said, " There will be no change." That was before 
 Mr. Bowen's time. Mr. Knox was what you call a head 
 agent. Mr.Colquhounwasunderhimatthattime. There 
 
 are men on the island who have places at £18, and if 
 mine was £18 1 would willingly swop with them. I 
 did not get justice. 
 
 12219. Were there other valviations at the same 
 time ? — There was a general valuation. I lost an acre 
 of the piece of land I had, and I get no compensation 
 for it, only a rood of bog which you could scarcely 
 work. 
 
 12220. Was it taken from you? — Yes ; by the side 
 of the mearings. 
 
 12221. Did you get nothing in exchaage'^ — I got 
 about a rood instead of an acre. 
 
 12222. Have you made any improvenrents of late ? 
 — No, except tumbling some ditches and making 
 improvements, but since this raise I could not improve 
 it, for I could not pay ; neither did the landlord im- 
 prove it either. 
 
 12223. The O'Conor Don.— What is the present 
 Government valuation ? — £14 10s. 
 
 12224. Chairman. — Would you have been satisfied 
 if he had put on the £21 as the valuator said? — I 
 would have striven to pay it, but the increase put me 
 out of heart entirely. 
 
 1222.5. The O'Conoe Don. — Is tenant-right allowed 
 on the estate? — Yes. 
 
 1222G. Have there been any sales? — Yes. 
 
 12227. Since the increase of rent? — Yes. 
 
 12228. How many years' purchase did they get? — 
 I could scarcely tell. There were very few places sold 
 since that time. I know a neighbour of mine named 
 Cresswell. There was a piece taken off the foot of a 
 field of his and given to a bailiff. There was a ho'use 
 on the corner of the field, and the agent took another 
 notion, and he said if the man gave him £60 he would 
 give him the land back again, and he had to pay him 
 the £60 tor his own land back again before the other 
 man put a plough in it. 
 
 12229. Chairman. — Who was that done by ? — By 
 Mr. Kennedy, who was agent before Mr. Colquhoun 
 came ; but Mr. Bowen was a very good man since he 
 came over us, if you paid all demands. 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Charles 
 M'Callion. 
 
 Mr. D. J. Boyle examined. 
 
 12230. Chairman. — Are you a tenant farmer ? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 12231. Under whom do you hold?— I hold under 
 three landlords. 
 
 12232. Where do you live?— I live at GaUoney, 
 Feeney. 
 
 12233. Who are your landlords? — The Worshipful 
 Company of Skinners in one case, Lord Waterford is 
 another, and Mr. Miller the third. None of the three 
 holdings have the same tenant-right attached to them. 
 
 12234. The tenant-right varies on each?-— Yes, it 
 varies on each. 
 
 12235. What is the acreage of the whole? — Alto- 
 crether they are about 120-acres. 
 
 ' 12236. How much laud have you under each of 
 these three landlords ?— I could not exactly define the 
 amount. There are four tenements altogether. 
 
 12237. What is the rent?— About £123; but I 
 should say there is a corn null on one of the holdings, 
 tmd a flax mill on another, and the rent of the mills 
 and lands are so mixed up that I could not say what 
 the rent on any of the land is. , r i 
 
 12238. You know the rent you pay to each ot the 
 ilifferent landlords ?— Yes. , ^, c-i ■ 
 
 12239 What are they ?— The rent I pay xo the bkm- 
 uers' Company, £75. 1 pay the three amounts separately. 
 
 12240 You say you expected protection from the 
 Land Acf!— I expected it would have come down 
 more to the protection of the tenants in general than 
 what it has done. ., . . , 
 
 12241. In what point did it fail?— I was deprived 
 <,f the privilege of buying out my own holding on Lord 
 
 Waterford's property. • I believe the word " entirety" 
 in the Land Act is a mistake — that is to say, that 
 where a property is to be sold in its entirety, and four- 
 fifths of the people agree to buy, and one-fifth is dis- 
 agreeable and will not buy — the same privilege should 
 be given to a tenant or an outsider to buy that one- 
 fifth. My property was thrown into a block ; there 
 were twenty-one tenants, and, out of the twenty-one, 
 I was able to get four-fifths able and willing to buy ; 
 the other fifth were not able, and, therefore, they were 
 less willing. I made application to the officer in 
 Dublin, and wrote to the Board of Works to see 
 whether I would get the privilege of the fifth, and I 
 would pay tor it. The gentleman told me he was not 
 aware whether that could be done, as the question had 
 never been raised. I made application for the amount 
 I supposed it would take to purchase that fifth — the 
 one-third balance I would have got myself I sent 
 that form to the Board of Works, tlirough my solicitor, 
 Mr. Lane, of Limavady ; but I found that only when 
 a ])roperty was sold in its entirety, would that privi- 
 lege be granted, and I had to come home and sit down, 
 and the tenants were deprived of the same privilege. 
 That occurred on many blocks, a good portion of which 
 was not sold. 
 
 12242. Through one tenant not wishing to buy ' — 
 No. It was because we could not get the privilege 
 from the Board of Works of the loan of this amount, 
 that would have paid two-thirds for the fifth. If the 
 property is sold in its entirety, the Act gives the privilege 
 of granting the same amount of money to even an out 
 side purcha.ser as if ho were the tenant or occii[)ier. 
 
 Mr D. 
 Boyle. 
 
414 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 33, 1E80. 
 
 Mr. D. J. 
 
 Boyle. 
 
 12243. This was not tlie entirety of Lord Water- 
 fovd's'property 1 — No ; it was only, one block, on whicli 
 tliere were twenty-one tenaats,.and manyof tliem poor 
 men, and many of tliem timid, for they were not 
 willing ; tliere was a great antipathy to touching Go- 
 vernment money at all. ' 
 
 12244. You think the privilege should be extended 
 to the whole townland tind not to the whole property! — 
 Give it to the whole property ; but give each block the 
 privilege the same as where the whole is sold. 
 Hundreds would have bought if that was so. When 
 the Land Act was proposed I happened to be on a de- 
 putation to Mr. Gladstone. This property was to be 
 divided into sections before we went to Mr. Gladstone, 
 and we anticipated such a thing, and we put the ques- 
 tion to Mr. Gladstone would the privilege be the same 
 to the block as to the estate, in its entirety, and he 
 said, inasmuch as the machinery was the same and the 
 title the same, he thought it would ; but when I came 
 practically to the Boa,rd of Works to look for assistance, 
 I have told you what occurred. 
 
 12245. Was this a deputation to Mr. Gladstone? — 
 It was a deputation to the Government, at the time 
 the Land Act was in a Bill, to show the necessity there 
 was for the introduction of these Bright Clauses — a de- 
 putation from tenants on the property of Lord Water- 
 ford, which was then put into the Incumbered Estates 
 Court to be sold. Having lived under a good landlord 
 for a good many years, our interest was considerable, 
 and we were afraid we might have to pay sharply for 
 Our improvements, and, therefore, the tenants were 
 very anxious, and they appointed a deputation to wait 
 on Mr. Gladstone, and press the importance of it. 
 
 1*2246. Whoboughtthis part of the property '^—Tlie 
 part I speak of, I got the tenants induced to go on 
 up to the figure equal to what would be likely to 
 buy, and I made an approximate calculation of what I 
 would be safe in venturing. I went to the sale, and 
 bid up to that sum, and it was bought in by Mr. 
 Smith — some Dublin gentleman who did not hold it, 
 biit handed it over to Lord Waterford again. 
 
 12247. Are you now a tenant on Lord Waterford's 
 property? — I hold this portion of Lord Waterford's 
 property still. I never changed the tenancy since, for 
 I was born and bred on Lord Waterford's property. 
 There is a sheet of queries I obtained by accident in 
 my neighbourhood, and I have no hesitation in giving 
 an affidavit to the answers which I give in it. I 
 have no very serious grievances, to complain of, and 
 they are brought out as precisely there as they possibly 
 can be. 
 
 12248. We have heard a great many points, and they 
 seem to come a good deal to the questions of the rise of 
 rent and the selection of the tenant 1 — Quite so. 
 
 12249. As to the rising of rent, do you think there 
 ought to be some fixed period when rent should be 
 raised if at all ? — That is a matter I would scarcely be 
 able to give an opinion on ; it is so difficult a mattei-. 
 If you make it periodical we are just waiting like the 
 cat and the mouse ; waiting for the time to put on the 
 increase, and if the tenant is an improving tenant it 
 will soon be worth putting on an increas.?. I ha\e a 
 memory of land which was 5s. lOigd. the Irish acre, and 
 when I improved it and brought it to a proper state 
 the first rent I paid was 17s. 6d. The increase was 
 for improvements. It had been raised from 5s. 10(?. 
 previous to my going into occupation, so that it was 
 not increased all at one time. , Yet that was under a 
 good landlord — one of the best landlords I ever knew 
 in Ireland, and I have been in every county in Ireland ; 
 that was the old Lord Waterford, the sporting man. 
 He was an excellent landlord and had good agents, 
 and they did not load the tenant heavily ; they put on 
 light increases, but the confidence was so great in the 
 landlord that they went on- improving until I have 
 known the tenant-right to. bring more- than the fee- 
 simple of other lands. That was because of the con- 
 fidence in the landlord, but when the landlord died 
 and the property fell into other hands it altered things 
 materially. The kind of landlord was more important to 
 
 the tenant, for he had laid out heavily in improvements 
 As to the manner of fixing a fair rent, I have weighed 
 and studied the subject when many farmers were asleen 
 probably in their beds, and I don't see how it is to'he 
 done unless we- take something like the basis of 
 Griffith's valuation. Have that and appoint arhitratore 
 Advantage is taken of the improved state of the land 
 which -might be brought about . by the improvenisnts 
 of the tenant, but the judges put on an iucreasB 
 of one-fourth on Griffith's valuation which was thouo-jit 
 by them reasonable, and 'latterly, ■ in the, last few 
 years when the times were good, I have noticed itlie 
 judges put on one-third, but with the, importation»i)f 
 bread stuflis from America, and with the facilities tliey 
 have for sending grain and other farm produee to this 
 country, they have so lowered the ]3ricesthat.we are not 
 able to compete and pay the present rent and taxss. 
 
 12250. You say that you don't think • the, increase 
 of rent should be left entirely with. the landlord'?— Bi- 
 no means ; it is hardly fair to do so on the tenants im- 
 provements. 
 
 12251. If 'there, is to be a valuation youthinkin 
 any case the tenants' improvements should, be„ex- 
 cluded. By all means they should be excludedi.-., Tht 
 tenants' real improvements should be excludedi , 
 
 12252. They value the buildings separately ?^Yes; 
 for the purpose of- taxation for the country's , sup- 
 port, but they ought to exclude the tenants' buildins; 
 improvement,* in fixing the rent. I don't believe .they 
 should be inclvided. Lord Waterford was never m 
 the habit of putting any rent on the houses if we 
 built them ourselves. He only increased the, rents 
 on the land ; there is a poor rate valuation, and a 
 landlord's valuation. , , . 
 
 12253. Pair consideration should be made for.. the 
 tenanis' land improvements in fixing the new reatlt^ 
 Yes ; unless the landlords had built the louses or other 
 accommodation. 
 
 12254. But I am speaking of land improvements I 
 — Certainly. Land improvements, if done by the 
 tenant, ought to be protected for the tenant, othera 
 wise he will be prevented from making improvements. 
 Now is the time nothing should be. put in the way uf 
 the tenant trying to "grow two blades of grass where 
 only one blade grew before." That is quite easily done, 
 for lam sure our country could produce double the quan- 
 tity with proper cultivation and good management. 
 
 12255. As to the selection of the tenant you think 
 that that restriction on tenant-right should be main- 
 tained ? — The landlord must have protection, I always 
 go in for taking both sides of the question, as if 1 was 
 for landlord and for tenant. I believe the laudloril 
 has a perfect ri^ht to be protected just as the tenant. 
 
 12256. You mentioned that the Skinners Company 
 compel the tenants to sell by private sale instead of by 
 public auction 1 — That is a grievance we labour under 
 on that estate, and we don't like it. 
 
 . 12257. Would public auction give as fair means. to 
 the tenantry of the property as any other? — 1 think 
 it woiild be a fairer means of disposing of then interest. 
 
 12258. Do you think there is no risk of the pii'X' 
 being run up beyond its real value ? — If it is, it is 
 public opinion does it ; if they are solvent bona fii" 
 purchasers it is fair enough, but ,ui the case of Lo™ 
 Waterford's sales, in the public court, we felt there was 
 this bidding on, and not intending to buy, white ^^'' 
 were buying our own property. 'That could not oecm' 
 at our sales in the-country, for it is known there who 
 wants the farm, and whether the bidding is bonaJU^- 
 
 12259. One of your objections to the landlord having 
 the power to fix the rent is that the tenant must pay 
 it or leave the farm ? — He generally receives a notice 
 to quit if he does not agree to gi'S'e the rent fixe"- 
 There were some parties coming hei'e from my n<'iii''' 
 bourhood, who got a notice to ^^quit from the Skiwifi's 
 Company in answer to a memorial which, they ,sent 
 respectf Lilly enough asking them to reconsider the itnt. 
 That is the usual course — adopting some course to 
 coerce or make the tenants agree to pay the rent. I must 
 say, however, that we have no very bad landlords in 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 415 
 
 this part of the north, and in all I say 'of the Skinners 
 Company, in speaking of the grievances of my neigh- 
 bours, I believe firmly that if the matters we complain of 
 were brought before that body they would treat us f kiiiy 
 and honestly. I have met the body individually and 
 collectively, and I believe if we laid our grievances 
 before them, they would give us a just verdict, but 
 they are far removed from us, and do not know our 
 circumstances, and they are not able to do us the jus- 
 tice we require. 
 
 122G0. You were very anxious to purchase if it had 
 not been for' these impediments 1 — Yes, and so were 
 many on the blocks now in Lord Waterford's hands. 
 They would clearly have bought but for this one 
 difficulty, and we could not get over it. 
 
 12261. Wa? that from seeing that in other cases they 
 prospered in the holdings they had purchased"! — Exactly 
 so. I bought my father-in-law's pi-operty privately 
 through Mr. Murdock, of Dviblin, before the sale came 
 on, and my father-in-law has made more improvements 
 since 1870 than was made for years before, because he 
 has a certainty he is working for himself. I know 
 cases where the people holding old perpetuities are 
 living on in the greatest distress, but in the case 
 of new perpetuities for this century, at all events, it 
 would be very different. I have a number of fai'mers 
 coming to me, and talking over the riiatter, and 
 the observation these few weeks has been, " It is sweet 
 to have a bit of land of your own. You can im- 
 prove it." 
 
 12262. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think they 
 would subdivide it 1 — I think it would be well not to 
 subdivide it. I see a great many difficulties when we 
 come to make a change in the land arrangements. If 
 we give every man the option of buying out his little 
 
 Mr. D. J. 
 
 JBoyle. 
 
 holding it will put a stop to the great improvement of Sept. So, isso 
 the country. • 
 
 12263. How would you improve that? — I believe 
 we should, in all our arrangements, have an eye to th^ 
 improvement of the whole aspect of the country. An 
 eye to the march of improvement that is being every 
 year introduced in the way of machinery. If we have 
 little zig-zag fields wc will never get square fields formed 
 into which wccan go with our reaping machine, and cut 
 it in a few hours, where with the other system of 
 reaping it will take as many days to do it. 
 
 122C4. How could you provide against that where 
 the holdings are so interwoven 1 — I was just trying to 
 see what I could recommend the Skinners Company 
 to do, although it is only building castles in the air, 
 and I was just thinking I would take the Ordnance 
 sheet, and chalk out straight lines, if I was the owner 
 of the estate, atid if every one of these represented a 
 farmer, as soon as any one of them was ready to sell I 
 would be the buyer, and I would say give him a fair price 
 and let him go. I would then take that farm, and put 
 such portion of it into No. 1 or 2, or any other farm as' 
 would suit that other farm, and I would go through 
 each of them until I brought the holdings up to these 
 chalk lines, and near to the farm steading. 
 
 12265. That might take along time? — If you begin 
 a good principle you are on good lines, and those who 
 would follow you would adopt them. This would not 
 cost anything, for I would make it pay its whole cost ; 
 the people who got it Avould gladly pay a fair amount, 
 and the Skinners Company would only be the guaran- 
 tors for the time being. They would then be consoli- 
 dating farms and squaring them, and bringing -them 
 into proper form for a more improved mode of culti- 
 vation. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Meek, Moneymore, examined. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Meek. 
 
 12266. Chairman. — You hold a farmi — Yes. 
 
 12267. Is it under the Salters Company"? — Yes. 
 
 12268. There is some point you wish to mention as 
 to the introduction of a new agreement 1 — Yes, I have 
 here an agreement I got from the office (agreement 
 produced). 
 
 12269. The two points in it are confining the tenant- 
 right to ten years' purchase, and making the tenant pay 
 county cess 1 — Yes. 
 
 12270. What was the date when this was first intro- 
 duced? — I could not tell, but it is ten or fifteen years 
 ago. 
 
 12271. The first point in the agreement is making 
 the ten years the maximum 1 — Yes. ■ 
 
 12272. And the second point is that you are bound 
 to pay the entire county oess as heretofore ? — Yes. 
 
 12273. That could hardly have been introduced at 
 the time you mention, because it was by the Land Act 
 any change Was made as to the payment of county 
 cess ?^That may not have been in the agreements be- 
 fore, but the other was not. I could have produced a 
 man named Brown, whose father died two years ago. 
 He went to get his name piit into the rental, and he 
 could not get it in until he would sign something like 
 this. He gave a fee for that purpose, which was not 
 returned, nor was his name entered. Having put 
 out this form of agreement, they thought it right to 
 sa,y it was to, be universal — that if a person purchased 
 he should sign it before he got his name put into the 
 rent book. The same way with a person who inlierits 
 property. This Brown is the son of a tenant. 
 
 12274. You can speak from your own knowledge 
 that the tenant is required to accept this before he 
 is allowed into, possession? — Yes, it is always spj 
 although I heard from a very authentic source that 
 they were going to make the purchasing tenant pay 
 10 per cent, more rent than existed on the farm before. 
 
 12275. In lieu of the agreement or in addition to it 1 
 ■ — I expect in lieu of it. 
 
 12276. Do you believe that this was first introduced 
 about fifteen years ago 1 — I think it must have been 
 
 introduced something between ten and fifteen years 
 ago. 
 
 12277. Up to that time had the rate of purchase 
 been entirely free ? — I understand so, but as I was not 
 brought up op. the estate I cannot say positively. 
 
 12278. But that is the view of those with whom 
 you. have- communicated ? — Yes. The other point I 
 wish to bring before you is with reference to Bright's 
 clauses of the Land Act. In this case the owners 
 proposed selling the estate, and some of us went to 
 the agent Mr. Cartwright ; but we thought he should 
 have encouraged us to purchase. He wanted us to 
 offer thirty years purchase.. The estate Was then sold 
 to a gentleman. Mr. Brown got into communication 
 with this gentleman, and when he found the feeling 
 of the tenants he drew off, and did not complete the 
 purchase ; that was Mr. Adair. 
 
 12279. Mr. Kavanagh.— Is that Mr. Adair of 
 Gweedore ? — Yes, he acted very fairly with us, and 
 said he would not buy against the tenants. 
 
 12280. Chairman. — Did the tenants purchase then ? 
 — No, the matter dropped, and the Salters Company 
 still have it. 
 
 12281., Do you think the tenants shoalcl have the 
 first offer ? — I would think so. 
 
 12282. On any property? — Yes, I think there 
 would be a feeling on the part of some landlords not 
 to give tenants an offer-, there is a feeling that tenants 
 are taking too much on them, and they would rather 
 sell to some one else. I don't mean that that is general. 
 
 12283. You think it would be a fair thing that it 
 should be made a condition in selling in the Landed 
 Estates Court, that the tenant should have the first, 
 offer at a price fixed by the Court ? — I would think 
 that the tenant should get the first offer. I live 
 close ■ to the townparks of Moneymore. , There is a 
 difficulty there in reference to the Drapers' estate. 
 They always purchased and sold their houses in town 
 and the land connected, and now they are tryinw to 
 prevent that being done. 
 
 12284. Is this in the town?— Yes, in the town 
 
416 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 5Ir. Thomas 
 Meek 
 
 and some of these parties are living partially by 
 farming and some altogether by farming. 
 
 12285. They are houses in the town with holdings 
 outside the town ? — Yes. 
 
 12286. And in separate holdings?— I think the 
 houses and lands are often put together and bought. 
 
 12287. The town house does not come under the 
 Land Act 1 — But this arises on the question of town- 
 parks. The tenants holding them think they have 
 tenant-right, and the landlords think they have not. 
 
 12288. That is the landlords of townparks ?— The 
 townparks and townhouses are united so that they 
 could scarcely be separated. 
 
 12289. The meaning of townpark holdings is hold- 
 ings near a town given in connexion with townhouses, 
 and as a separate holding, as accommodation. TJie 
 original parties built houses, and then sold them con- 
 nected with the land t — They want them to sign an 
 agreement, and I understand in the agreement they 
 state that the landlord has had possession, that he has 
 given full value for the holding, that they have received 
 it back from the landlord, and have no right to it. 
 There is a case of Philip M'Ahone who purchased a 
 house and nine statute acres at a rent of ,£23 for £1 60, 
 and that is the notice to quit he got. He has jiaid the 
 last advance and everything. The notice is to give 
 up premises in the town of Moneymore, and that pait 
 of the land containing 9a. 34p. 
 
 12290. "What was the cause of the notice to quit? 
 — He knows of no cause except it was a matter of 
 feeling. There had been an action brought against 
 the Company, and they were forced to clean a mill- 
 race round past his land, and some of the tenants were 
 asked to pay part of the expenses, and he thought it 
 did him no good, and as his rent had been raised 
 lately he refused to pay a portion of it. 
 
 12291. You wish to show that these are not town- 
 parks, but agricultural holdings '. — Yes, and that if 
 they are townparks they should not continue to be so. 
 A farmer requested me to state with reference 
 to another estate, that he holds twelve acres up 
 in the mountain district at a rent of £9 10s., twenty 
 years ago, the rent was £6 10s., and the Government 
 valuation £& 10s., now the rent is £9 10s. 
 
 12292. What is the name of the tenant ?— He 
 
 doesn't wish it mentioned (witness named the tenant). 
 He is a poor tenant, and he would not like his name 
 to be mentioned. Mr. Kobert Staples, agent, sent for 
 me to act as arbitrator in another case which 1 will 
 state, as it shows the hardship that may arise by 
 restrictions being placed on free sale. There 
 were two farmers aged men going down in cir- 
 cumstances one William' M'Conkey, and the other 
 Henry John M'Conkey ; William held a small farm 
 and Henry John a large one, William went to sell hig 
 farm ; there were two bond fide purchasers, and lie 
 could have got £600, but the landlord refused to 
 allow him to sell, and said Henry John must sell 
 his fai-m and go live with WUliam ; when a price was 
 put upon it the neighbouring tenants who were to get it 
 were not able to purchase it ; the two tenants filed a 
 land claim, and the landlord then oflfered them liberty to 
 sell, and defeated them in their land claim, but the 
 times are so changed they cannot sell for anything 
 so good as before. There was another case tiat 
 took place on the estate on which I spent most of 
 my life, the estate of Colonel Caulfeild of Stewarts, 
 town. He had brought in a new rule that the tenant- 
 right should be only £5 per acre. When tbe leases 
 dropped he sent his bailiff round to make them sign 
 an agreement that they would accept £5 at any time for 
 their tenant-right. This man (John Eussell), refused 
 to sign the paper. 
 
 12293. When was this rule made? — This rule 
 was commenced before the Land Act passed. I 
 heard the Colonel sjjeak of it before I left that neigh- 
 bourhood — before the Land Act was passed. I sold 
 my farm before the lease dropped, least I should come 
 under it. Eussell was ejected, and he brought a land 
 claim at the Quarter Sessions of Dungannon, but it 
 went against him. He appealed to the Assizes, and 
 the decision was affirmed, as he only got £50 for some 
 buildings and reclamation, and had to leave. The 
 farm was then offered to him at £130 and a higher 
 rent. He refused the farm at the higher rent, and he 
 now lives in what was a cottier house of his own. 
 There was another case under Mr. Hewitt, where 
 Russell had bought four acres and drained three of 
 them ; when the lease dropped he got a notice to quit, 
 and rather than fight he went out and got nothing. 
 
 Mr. Andrew 
 Browne. 
 
 Mr. Andrew Browne, The C'tittage, Magherafelt, examined. 
 
 12294. Mr. Kavanagh. — You are a tenant farmer? 
 —Yes. 
 
 ' 12295. You hold about thirty-four acres ot land? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 12296. Under the Salters Company ? — Yes. 
 
 12297. Does tenant-right exist there? — In n re- 
 stricted form. 
 
 12298. What is the form ?— The office restriction is 
 ten years of the Government valuation. After I 
 became tenant on that estate I immediately took in hand 
 to show that there was a great evil in this contract, and 
 on consultation with my friend, Mr. Meek, and some 
 others on the subject, we arranged to draw up a 
 memorial to the Salters Company, and get the tenants' 
 signatures to it. The object was to prove, in the first 
 place, the injustice of it if w(! could, and in the second 
 place, that it was an enforced contract, and although 
 the tenants were, one way or other, compelled to sign 
 it, it was not willingly done 1)}' any of them. I hold 
 here a co-pj of the memorial with the signatures of all 
 the tenants. I presented a copy of that memorial at 
 Salters' Hall, but it was returned to nie, stating that 
 the office business was done through their agent, Mr. 
 Cartwright. I presented the same to Mr. Cartwright, 
 with a letter, which I have here. 
 
 12299. You went to London, and had to come back 
 again ? — No, sir. It was posted, but it was returiied, 
 saying Mr. Cartwright was their agent, and their 
 business was to be done through him. I never re- 
 ceived any reply from Mr. Cartwright, although 1 
 received the signatures of all the tenants except six or 
 
 seven. The memorial was signed by the tenants, 
 through the labours of a committee of about forty of 
 the most respectable gentlemen on the estate, but it 
 would not be listened to. The sum and substance of 
 the memorial was that we begged that which the law 
 allowed us — a free tenant-right. 
 
 12300. How long has this custom been established 
 on the property? — Since about 1866. 
 
 12300a. Then, in fact, whether it is wise or not of 
 the Salters Company to keep up that agreement they 
 have not broken the law in doing so ? — I know that 
 they resisted the law ; but as I say, whether the law come 
 1 lefore or after it the morality of the question is exactly 
 the same, and when we went as memorialists we did not 
 go as demanding a right, but we went praying them to 
 do that which was j ustice, and which the law sanctioned. 
 
 12301. And your opinion is that the restriction is 
 an unjust one ?-— Yes. 
 
 12302. And you say that the usual term of tenant- 
 right is from twenty to twenty-five years' purchase?-- 
 Yes. 
 
 12303. And that you are restricted to ten?— Yes. 
 
 12304. And you are also compelled to sign some- 
 thing about jjaying the whole of the county cess ? — i es. 
 
 12305. That is the pith of what you have got to 
 say, and that you presented a memorial to the agent, 
 and you got no reply 1 — Yes, and what was asked being 
 lefused. 
 
 12306. Have you any other point?— Yes, in re- 
 ference to townparks. It has always been the custom 
 about Magherafelt, no matter what the quantity of 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 417 
 
 land, or who bought or sold it, to buy and pay for it 
 on changing hands. 
 
 12307. Chairman. — That was there was tenant- 
 right'? — There was never such a thing known as these 
 lands that are now denominated " townparks," and 
 which seem to come under the section of the Act of 
 1870 as not entitled to tenant-right. There has never 
 been any of them passed which were not bought and 
 paid for. 
 
 12308. After the Land Act?— Yes, and even Mr. 
 Cavtwright himself has bought them and paid for 
 them after that time. I have known a case where the 
 Salters Company distributed land. In 1866 the rent 
 of this particular farm was raised from £26 12s. 6J. 
 to £40. The farm contained 13a. 3r. 6p. of poor 
 land. The tenant had been allowed to get into arrear, 
 and the landlord took up possession and then divided 
 the land amongstfive tenants, charging them£66 9s. Gd. 
 of an in-put. 
 
 12309. JMr. Kavanagh. — You complain that tlie 
 Land Act has deprived the holders of townparks of 
 rights which they possessed before it ? — I complain of 
 the laxity of the Land Act which in that respect has 
 given the Salters Company an opportunity of taking 
 away our right in respect of townparks. 
 
 12310. You think it gave the opportunity by 
 omitting townparks altogether 1 — Yes. 
 
 12311. And you stand in the same position as 
 before without the assistance which the Land Act 
 gave to agricidtural holdings 1 — Yes. With respect 
 to these townparks I produce a number of documents 
 signed by j\L-. Cartwright requiring the people to pay 
 an additional twenty per cent, of rent in 1878 and all 
 the county cess. 
 
 12312. In all these holdings or only in the town- 
 parks ? — This applies to the townparks. The agri- 
 cultural holdings were raised in 1866, and the town- 
 parks are now being raised. 
 
 12313. How do you distinguish between agricul- 
 tural holdings and townparks — do you call it an agri- 
 cultural holding where there is a house a little further 
 off? — Quite so. 
 
 12314. And where there is a house in the town it 
 is called townpark 1 — It is endeavoured to do so for 
 the purpose of depriving the people of their rights. 
 
 12315. How far do they extend the name town- 
 park ? — I should say half a mile ; and in reference to 
 the denomination of townparks, in a small town like 
 this, where people live one day in the shop and five 
 days in the fields to get a living, T think it is a mis- 
 take to call the holdings there " townparks," they are 
 not townparks or accommodation according to the 
 meaning of the Act. 
 
 12316. They come under the name of agricultural 
 holdings ? — I say so. 
 
 12317. You want that made clear? — I want the 
 same protection for all lands, and then if the landlord 
 could establish a prior claim by purchase or in any 
 other way, of course let him have it. I would not 
 want to deprive him of anything that is his, but in 
 all small towns such is the condition of the people 
 that they look as much to the land as to the shops for 
 
 subsistence, and there is no accommodation land. No 
 man has more than a garden for accommodation. The 
 Salters Company have offered perpetuities, at least 
 they have given three perpetuities of house, but they 
 never offered any perpetuities of land. These printed 
 documents signed by Mr. Cartwright I am wUling to 
 lodge for inspection. 
 
 12318. They are bearing out what you state? — 
 Yes, but they are so conclusive as evidence, and 
 they show the nature of the pressure put upon us 
 to take away our land. These documents show the 
 animus that exists. Charging us a lack-rent, and all 
 the county-cess. 
 
 12319. We take it you have notices which show 
 that ? — I have met the agent on that subject. There is 
 just one other matter about these town})aiks; it is 
 stated in one of the jjapers, that the rent was not raised 
 since 1856. The townpeople's houses that they buUt 
 themselves, have beenraised to ninefold theoriginal rent, 
 while there was never a shovelful of mortar, bxrt the 
 people's own, put upon them — Raising the rent not on 
 the townparkSj but raising the rent of the people who 
 hold the townparks, and leaving the townparks un- 
 touched was the j)lan adopted, and now they come upon 
 the townparks with a rise of 20 per cent, in 1878, when 
 we are all begging. The old system in the district, 
 was that in selling, the house and the land went 
 together, the new office system is to sever the two. 
 
 12320. When did that system begin? — I really 
 could not give the date, because the difficulty with us, 
 is in getting statistics of that kind, but it has been 
 the practice, and is the practice ; it happened to my- 
 self. I bought a house and townpark, at Magherafelt, 
 about seven years ago. , When I went into the office 
 to get my name put into the rent-roll, I was informed 
 I must pay 20 per cent, of an advance on the rent. 
 I had not paid the money for these townparks, and I 
 went to the party from whom I purchased, and she 
 agreed to throw off £37 10s. of her money, opposite 
 the advance the landlord had pat upon my rent. So 
 much money taken out of the sellers' pocket, and put 
 into the pocket of the Salters Company. 
 
 12321. Were these houses built by the tenants? — 
 Everything is done by the tenants ; all the improve- 
 ments are done by the tenants, and any new buildings 
 are secured by building leases. Thathasbeenintroduced 
 by the Salters Company. They are now giving building 
 leases. 
 
 12322, 
 — Quite so 
 
 12323. The man got the land, and he built upon 
 it? — The tenants took the land on the protection of 
 the faith of the landlord. This estate of the Salters 
 Company, was sublet to the Marquess of Londonderry 
 and Sir Robert Bateson, and they treated the tenants 
 with great consideration, and this was one of the 
 reasons why irregularity arose to such a degree. They 
 built on, and the landlord saw them building, and then 
 they came and charged many of them nine times the 
 original rent. I have here three cases of tenants being 
 charged nine times the rent they were paying at first. 
 The names are E. Wilson, J. Donaghey, E. M'Menamy. 
 
 Sept. 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Andrew 
 Browne. 
 
 In old times building leases were not given ? 
 
 Mr. James Caskey, Drummond, Limavady, examined. 
 
 12324. Mr. Kavanagh. — You are a tenant on Mr. 
 M'Causland's property ? — Yes. 
 
 1232.5. Holding seventy-six statute acres? — Yes. 
 
 12320. The rent is £100 a year, and the Poor Law 
 valuation, £70 ?— Yes. 
 
 12327. Wliat is the average size of holdings on this 
 estate ? — Forty acres. 
 
 12328. You are a tenant from year to year? — Yes. 
 
 12329. What proportion does your rent bear to 
 the valuation? — It is rather more than one-third over it. 
 
 12330. Do you think the Government valuation is 
 a fair basis for arriving at the value of land ? — In 
 general it is. 
 
 12331. The rent is not too high? — It is not un- 
 reasonably higher. 
 
 12332. How long has it been at that rent ? — Seven 
 years. 
 
 1 2333. Describe the custom of the estate 1 — Three 
 years rent the tenant gets on going out, £4 an 
 acre for all manured land, and £1 an acre for land 
 laid down in seeds besides other imjDrovements such 
 as buUding houses or draining, or anything that will 
 add to or benefit the soil. 
 
 12334. That is the custom that exists throuo-hout 
 the estate ? — Yes ; that is the cu.stom. 
 
 12335. Are you and the tenants geneialiy satisfied 
 
 S H. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Caskoy. 
 
418 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Caskey. 
 
 Sept. 30, isso. with it? — I hear no complaints unless perhaps it 
 might be one who would be going back who of course 
 would like to sell, and make money out of it ; but all 
 the well-to-do tenants are satisfied. 
 
 12336. Is the rent usually raised on an incoming 
 tenant 1 — In some cases it is where there are improve- 
 ments made by the landlord, but it is not generally 
 the case. 
 
 12337. I think you said Mr. M'Causland made all 
 the improvements himself? — Yes. The bulk of them. 
 
 12338. Then the rent is not raised on the improve- 
 ment of the tenant 1 — No ; the tenants make very few 
 improvements themselves as a whole, Mr. M'Causland 
 generally makes them. 
 
 12339. Are there many leases ? — Yerjr few; scarcely 
 any that I know of. 
 
 123-10. They don't care to take them out? — Not 
 since the Land Act, the tenants since as a class are 
 not caring much. 
 
 12341. I suppose if they wanted a lease he would 
 give it ? — Yes ; he would willingly, but leases have 
 not been asked for latterly. 
 
 12342. Can you tell us the customs that exist on 
 any other estates adjoining ? — On the Waterford 
 property there is the Ulster custom. 
 
 12343. I suppose it is sale by auction? — To the 
 highest and best bidder. 
 
 12344. Do you think it is a wise thing to have sale 
 by auction and unlimited 1 — No. 
 
 1234.5. Why? — Because it takes away the tenant's 
 capital which he should improve his farm with, and 
 besides many of them have to go into debt, and often 
 at a high rate of interest. 
 
 12346. That is a very ruinous state of aifairs ? — I 
 believe it to be so. 
 
 12347. And you think as a general rule the land- 
 lord ought to have power to object to or select the ten- 
 ant ?— I would think so. I think it would be right he 
 should have that power. 
 
 12348. Do you believe it is a jprotection to reason- 
 able tenant-right on the estate 1 — I believe it is. It 
 gives the landlord a sort of veto in case of bad character, 
 or of tenants who might not be able to pay the rent. 
 
 12349. I suppose the custom on the estate is, that 
 the landlord pays the outgoing man and receives a sum 
 of money from the incoming man ? — Yes ; it is not 
 between tenant and tenant. It is always done in 
 the office. 
 
 12350. You said that Mr. M'Causland makes all 
 the improvements on the property? — Yes. The greater 
 part of them and the most valuable. 
 
 12351. We have had a great deal of evidence from 
 tenants of his ? — He has laid out £10,000 on improve- 
 m.ents alone in these last twenty years. 
 
 12352. Chairman. — Are you speaking of mountain 
 farms? — No, it is principally the agiicultural farms 
 I speak of. 
 
 12353. Do you know anything of the mountain 
 tenantry ? — I do, a little. 
 
 12354. They get more than three years ? — Yes, five 
 years. 
 
 12355. Mr. Kavanagh. — That is they are allowed 
 to sell for five years? — Not to sell, but they receive 
 five years through the office, as in the case of the low- 
 land tenants. 
 
 12356. One witness stated that Mr. M'Causland, 
 when a tenant has madeany improvements, spend a few 
 pounds on it and charges five percent, and then claims 
 all the improvements ? — I believe that is not tme, for 
 there are very few improvements made by the tenants, 
 and it is from four to five per cent, he charges, in some 
 instances fourper cent. 
 
 12357. This evidence would go to show that he 
 spends a few pounds apparently in improvements for 
 the purpose of appropriating all the tenant's improve- 
 ments ? — I don't tliink that is correct. 
 
 12358. Such cases could hardly happen without 
 your hearing ?— No, they could hardly happen without 
 my hearmg of them; they would be reported in the 
 district. 
 
 12359. Do you know Walk-mill fann?— I do. ft 
 lies a mile and a half from where I live. 
 
 12360. Could you tell us anything about it? Mrs 
 
 Gait had to leave it, but she had some property of her 
 own besides. She was a non-resident, and she let the 
 house go to wreck, and the farm was not in a good 
 state of cultivation. I don't know whether she was 
 ejected or left of her o-\vn free will ; but it was not 
 reported to be a hard case in any way. 
 
 12361. It was not ? — Not that I am aware of 
 
 12362. It was reported here that it was a very 
 extreme case of hardship, that she was turned out foi- 
 three years rent, although she had drained very much and 
 got no allowance for her improvements at all 1 — I m 
 not hear of it. 
 
 12363. Did you ever hear of Hamilton Stewart? 
 — I did. He and his wife disagreed, and as the fam 
 came by her she desired it to be given up. 
 
 12364. It was in consequence of a disagreement be- 
 tween husband and wife? — Yes; and they hei 
 separate afterwards. 
 
 12365. It is not looked upon as a case of hardship I 
 — No. It might have been by the man himself, but no 
 other people looked at in that light. I have been oftea 
 speaking to that man, and he never mentioned it to me 
 at all. 
 
 1236.6. What has been the efiect of the Land Act 
 on tenant-right ? — I don't think it has varied it veiy, 
 much. Good or bad times would affect it more. 
 
 12367. Have you had many evictions inyoiu-dis^ 
 trict ?— I never knew of any within my memory. 
 
 12368. Neither on your estate or the district sur- 
 rounding? — I never heard of any. The Waterford 
 property adjoins where I live, and there is a right of 
 sale on it, but Mr. M'Causland's is much better cir- 
 cumstanced than the Waterford estate, for a great 
 many of them went into debt for the land they bought, 
 and have to pay interest for it. I think the custom 
 is not a good one — it takes away the man's capital. 
 
 12369. Have you any experience of tenants pur- 
 chasing under Bright Clauses of the Land Act? — I 
 know of some who are neighbours of mine, but 1 have 
 not very much experience of it. 
 
 12370. Did they buy under the Church Act?— They 
 bought in the Landed Estates Court. 
 
 12371. That is, they got their money from the Board 
 of Works? — Yes. 
 
 12372. And how have they got on since? — I think 
 their circumstances have not much improved. 1 had 
 a conversation with a man the day before yesterday, 
 and he says he has a higher rent now to pay that when 
 under the Marquess of Waterford, because he bought so 
 dear, and had to borrow the money. 
 
 12373. I suppose he does not count that he is paying 
 off' the charge 1 — He does not count that much, for he 
 is pretty old, and he allows the purchase was too high. 
 
 12374. Do you think there is any danger of the 
 tenants who purchase their holdings here — after sub- 
 dividing them ? — If it was very general, they might in 
 some cases, but they h^ve not in any case yet. 
 
 12375. They have no power yet ? — I am sure there 
 is danger, and in many cases they would. 
 
 ■ 12376. You think the tendency is to sublet ?— Yes. 
 Where there are a number of sons they might give each 
 a corner of the farm, so as not to let them go away, and 
 when the sons come to have sons of their own they 
 may do the same thing. Small farms are ruuious. 
 That is one advantage on Mr. M'Causland's estate— 
 the farms can he enlarged more easily than on estates 
 where there is tenant-right unlimited. ,, 
 
 12377. What is the smallest farm on which a man 
 could support himself and family decently without 
 other means? — I think a farm of between fortyand fifty 
 acres is as little as a man could support himself and. 
 family on. 
 
 . 12378. You don't think that some of these thrifty 
 little mountain i^ien would get' on with less ? — ^They 
 might get on with difficulty, but in bad years they 
 would be sure to go to the wall. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 41.9 
 
 12379. What is the condition of the labourers in 
 your district ? — I don't hear any complaiats. I think 
 it is pretty good, as far as I am aware of. 
 
 12380. What about is theii- pay ?— The pay I give 
 is 8s. 6d. a week, a free house, fuel brought home, and 
 ground for potatoes. It amoimts in all to about 10s. a 
 week and a free house. They prefer it to 10s., and 
 they are all satisfied. 
 
 12381. Is that all the year round? — Yes, wet and 
 dry. 
 
 12382. They have no reason to complain? — No; 
 they are making no complaint that I hear of. 
 
 12383. Chairman. — Did you buy into this holding? 
 — No, sir. I came under the three years' system. 
 
 12384. Yoiu- father held it before ?— My father held 
 A farm, and his father for upwards of eighty years, on 
 the same estate. 
 
 12385. And was the house built since you became 
 tenant ? — Yes, since I became tenant. 
 
 12386. Was that building for you rather an excep- 
 tional thing ? — It was mentioned as an exceptional 
 case. Mr. M'Causland built it, but not altogether. 
 £ built part of it. 
 
 12387. Then it was by allowance it was built? — 
 Yes. . - 
 
 12388. You managed the building, and he made al- 
 lowances towards it ? — Yes ; I managed the building. 
 
 12389. What did he allow?— He stone-finished the 
 house, and I took £80 out at five 
 terest. 
 
 12390. From ^hom?— Mr. 
 it at interest, and he made a good many other improve- 
 ments on the farm, which was not in a very good state 
 when I got it. 
 
 12391. Is it the general custom with him to make 
 advances at interest ?^Yes. 
 
 12392. At five per cent.?— Yes, from four to five 
 per cent., it is generally five I think; and I have 
 known him where tenants made improvements, as in 
 the case of my father, he advanced the money and 
 charged no interest. I have known that in two cases. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Caskey. 
 
 per cent, in- 
 
 M'Causland advanced 
 
 12393. In any case where the tenant lays out money S«p<. 30, iseo 
 does he make advance of part of it and charge no 
 interest? — I think it is not the- general custom. 
 
 12394. I suppose there is a great distinction between 
 the holdings in the low lands and .in the mountain 
 tenements?— Mr. M'Causland's mo-untain holdings are 
 lower, let in proportion to the Gijvernment valuation, i 
 
 12395. They are ia a worse condition than the low 
 lands ?-t-These last two years have, been bad upon 
 them. I, , 
 
 12396. They have come hard on the mountain 
 tenants? — Yes. 
 
 12397. Do you think there are many of the mountain 
 tenants who woiild gladly improve their land, if it was 
 not for this limit of tenant-right ? — I cannot say as to 
 that. I don't think there is very much land capable, 
 of improvement about the mountains, at least it is 
 generally rough pasture land and very little could be 
 done with it. 
 
 12398. The five years include improvements? — No. 
 
 12399. You are quite sure of that?— Yes; any 
 improvements are allowed for on the tenant leaving. 
 
 12400. It was said it was three years for improve- 
 ments on the lo\v lands, and five years for improve- 
 ments on the mountain ? — I may not be correct but I 
 think the three and five years are a, kind of bonus. 
 
 12401. Mr. Kavanagh. — It, is -said he makes no 
 practical improvements and never allows forAnything, 
 and the case of one Douglas was mentioned. He 
 purchased from M'Closkey, who was only allowed to 
 get five years purchase without improvements at all? 
 ■ — That may be up near Derry. , I don't know anything 
 of that case. It is probably on the Ballymullen pro- 
 perty. 
 
 12402. Chairman. — Did you ever act for him as 
 bailiff? — No, sir. ■ 
 
 12403. He built a house for some one who was 
 acting as bailiff? — That I am sure is on the Ballymullen 
 estate. 
 
 This concluded the sittings at Londonderry. 
 
 EIGHTEENTH DAY.— THURSDAY, 14th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat in the Courthouse, Sligo, at 11 o'clock. 
 
 Present : — The Right Hon. the Eael of Bessborough, Chairman ; The O'Conor Don, and 
 
 W. Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Colonel Edward Henry Cooper, Markree Castle, Oollooney, county Sligo, examined. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 12404.. Chairman. — I believe you are Lord Lieu- 
 tenant of the county ? — Yes. 
 
 12405. You. have property in the county to the 
 extent of 30,000 acres 1 — Yes. 
 
 12406. I believe your property is not one. upon 
 which the Ulster tenant-right prevails ? — No, we have 
 never recognised any tenant-right or sale of good- 
 will. 
 
 12407. Not at any time?— No. 
 
 12408. Mr. Shaw.— ^Nothing similar to it?— No, 
 nothing. Improvements we have always recognised 
 either by enjoyment or money- payment to a man 
 leaving any improvements he has made. 
 
 12409. Are the payments by yourself or the- in- 
 coming tenant 1 — It varies ; genert^Uy by myself I 
 have almost always paid the man and put on a slight 
 increase of rent. 
 
 12410. Either rent or getting the money? — Yes. 
 
 12411. Chairman. — Is that the case generally 
 throughout yo\ir county ? — I think it is, but in some 
 cases landlords do allowa sale or the tenants to deal with 
 each other. 
 
 12412. You think that is exceptional? — I think 
 it is. 
 
 12413. Is that throughout the county Sligo? — I 
 think so. 
 
 Colonel 
 Edward Henvj 
 
 12414. Mr. Shaw. — Is it not allowed on any of the Cooper, 
 larger estates ? —I don't think it, is. 
 
 12415. Chairman. — But generally on the principle 
 of improvements if, they are leaving ? — Yes, but I 
 don't think the sale of good will, certainly on the large 
 estates, is general. 
 
 12416. Mr. Shaw. — Has it been before to your 
 knowledge that on any of the large estates in this 
 county the sale of the good will was allowed ? — No, 
 most ' landlords are rather particular now to prevent 
 the sale of good will. 
 
 12417. Chairman. — I mean leaving tenancies under 
 the Land Act in the way they were before, but subject 
 to the Land Act ? — Yes. 
 
 12418. Mr. Shaw.— You don't know Lord Pal- 
 merston's property ? — It is a long way from me. I 
 don't know the custom, but I have always understood 
 it was not tenant-right ; it almost runs into Donegal, 
 and I have always understood that the actual tenant- 
 right stopped in Donegal and never sprea,d to Lord 
 Palmerston's estate. 
 
 12419. Chairman. — Incase of a tenant leaving and 
 a new tenant coming in, do you think a secret pay- 
 ment of money ever takes place? — I should think 
 very likely, but it is not recognised by the landlord 
 
 3H 2 
 
420 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 '. 14, 1880. 
 
 Colonel 
 
 Edward Henry- 
 Cooper. 
 
 12420. And not even what they call winked at? — 
 I think not. 
 
 12421. Mr. Shaw.— You cannot help it '2— No. 
 
 12422. And you cannot be inquiring too closely 
 into a thing of that kind % — No. 
 
 1242.3. Chairman. — Then, as regards the working 
 of the Land Act, what is your opinion of the state 
 of the tenantry being satisfied with the provisions 
 of the Land Act in their favour or not % — 1 have 
 never heard any complaints. Very few land cases 
 have occurred in this county, I should say, and I 
 have never heard that they ever complained they 
 did not get compensation enough. 
 
 12424. That the compensation would be sufficient 
 and where cases have arisen they have had it satisfac- 
 torily decided % — I think so. 
 
 12425. By the County Court ■!— Yes. 
 
 12426. Is there any general rule as to the time of 
 revaluation or an increase of rent % — No, I don't think 
 there is any rule. I never heard of it on any estates 
 in the county. 
 
 12427. Is there generally a revaluation when 
 there is a change of tenancy % — Sometimes. I should 
 say there always was a re-valuation on a lease falling 
 in. 
 
 12428. Is it considered, vi^hen a tenant dies and is 
 succeeded by one of his family that that would be a 
 change where there would be a revaluation ? — I think 
 not. 
 
 12429. They usually go on in the same way? — 
 Usually go on on the same terms. There has been 
 no revaluation of my property for about twenty-two 
 years, except in cases of changes of tenancies where I 
 have paid for improvements, and the expiration of one 
 or two old leases. 
 
 12430. Mr. Shaw. — Was there a general revalua- 
 tion then on the whole property % — About twenty-two 
 years ago. 
 
 12431. Ohaiemas'. — ^Then are you in the habit of 
 making improvements or contributing towards them ? 
 — Yes, for the last ten years I have expended a very 
 large sum of money on improvements, about £15,000. 
 £4,000 on farm buildings, £5,000 on labourers' cot- 
 tages, which includes the smaller class of farmers. We 
 cannot build a farm building on a veiy small farm, 
 and I build a very good cottage for him. £3,000 on 
 planting and £3,000 on draining. 
 
 12432. Mr. Shaw. — That was done onfarms, noton 
 land in your own possession ? — All on farms. 
 
 12433. Chairman. — In these cases do you make 
 any addition to the rent % — -Yes ; they generally pay 
 a portion of the interest of the money. 
 
 12434. TheO'CoNOR Don.— How much?— Well, I 
 suppose all round about five per, cent. 
 
 12435. Mr. Shaw. — Including principal and inte- 
 rest ? — That is what they pay. 
 
 12436. That is full payment ? — Not always, because 
 in houses you have to paint and keep them up a bit. 
 Five per cent, would not repay you, and in the case of 
 drainage it is 6|- per cent. 
 
 12437. Chairman. — Do you generally do the 
 repairs ? — I do the insurance, and if I see the man ne- 
 glecting it I paint it, and the labourers' cottages I paint. 
 
 12438. The labourers' cottages you do keep in re- 
 pair, with the farmers' you expect them to keep in 
 repair ? — Yes. 
 
 12439. Mr. Shaw. — The five per cent, is perma- 
 nent ? — ^Well, it has been only goiug on for ten years, 
 but I think it is a permanent improvement. But in 
 cases where it is a main drainage, if it benefits a cer- 
 tain number of farmers I put on a per centage. I 
 think I am an exception with regard to improvements 
 lately. I think since the Land Act a good many men 
 who laid out money before have been rather afraid to 
 do it. 
 
 12440. Chairman. — That has been rather the evi- 
 dence we have had throughout ? — I think if you ex- 
 amine one or two agents here that is the evidence 
 they will give. I have been advised not to lay out 
 this money. 
 
 12441. I suppose you keep a sort of estate register? 
 — Yes ; they apply in writing. What they want I' 
 generally allow them to do themselves. They make 
 an offer to build a certain thing for a certain sum. I 
 make the main drains, and, in almost all other cases 
 I let them carry out the work under my supervision 
 and they agree to pay a certain per centage on that 
 
 12442. Do you have any signature of the tenant 1 
 — Yes. They make an application in writing, and say 
 what they want done, and they acknowledge each in- 
 stalment by their signature in the register. 
 
 12443. Mr. Shaw. — It cannot injure you ?— It is 
 done under the supervision of the Board of Works 
 and their architect approves. 
 
 12444. Chairman. — Then the money yon get 
 from the Board of Works for doing this improve- 
 ment ? — Yes, that is the way I have acted for the last 
 ten years, since the passing of the Land Act. Sup- 
 posing the Land Act would be a permanent settlemeiit 
 of the law, and that then I could work under tie 
 Land Act, I wanted to get the estate as near as I 
 could into the form in England, that the permanent 
 building and improvements should be done by tlie 
 landlord, and the tenant pay a certain per centage. 
 
 12445. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose, before your time, 
 the other practice was prevalent very muct, the 
 tenants did what they wanted ? — Yes ; and the rents 
 were lower in consequence, and there was a regular 
 scale on the estate. Ordinary thatched cottages and 
 offices were not charged anything, and the rent was 
 fixed for thirty years. Drainage less. Foreign tim- 
 ber and slates -were generally given by my pre- 
 decessor. 
 
 12446. The O'Conoe Don. — Have you altered your 
 system at all since the passing of the Land Act ?— 
 Only in borrowing from the Board of Works in that 
 way. Each man gets a notice that I will give him 
 money to carry out any improvements required on his 
 farm. I don't allow them to make any improve- 
 ments without my sanction. 
 
 12447. Mr. Shaw. — The improvements go on just 
 as usual 1 — They have done up to this. 
 
 12448. Chairman. — And you find that satisfac- 
 tory to the tenants % — I found so perfectly. 
 
 12449. I was reading in a book the other day as 
 to your property many years ago and the system 
 there pursued to lead the tenants to thef reclamar 
 tion of waste lands, in which it was stated that 
 they were given a portion of the land that had 
 been cleared, and then given an additional part, and 
 paid \d. an hour for the work on it. That is Mr, 
 Campbell Foster's book ?— I don't know that, that was 
 in 1846. 
 
 12450. How do you stand about waste lands now, 
 have you a great ' deal of these waste lands not re- 
 claimed ? — I have a very great deal of waste land that 
 is only fit for grouse shooting. I can give some infor- 
 mation about the Waste Land Company that had 
 the estate in this' county. 
 
 12451. We wUl come to that presently. These 
 holdings being such as they were before, is there a 
 custom among tenants to charge their holdings with 
 fortunes for their families, or anything of that sort %- 
 I think so. 
 
 12452. And acknowledged?— Not acknowledged by 
 the landlords ; we don't know what transactions occur 
 except a lawsuit arises in the family, but certainly 
 when they die they leave certain fortunes to the young 
 members of their family. 
 
 12453. Do they make settlements during theii- lives? 
 — They sometimes pay fortunes, and other times leave 
 it to their successor to pay. 
 
 1 2454. Do they expect the landlord to take any part 
 in seeing that is carried out ? — I think not. 
 
 12455. They must be left to fight it out themselves? 
 ■ — I think so. 
 
 12456. And do you find there is a considerable loss 
 and difficulty to the family in consequence of this 
 settlement ?^I think so. There are various ways ot 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 421 
 
 doing it ; sometimes the son, the man who is to succeed, 
 marries a wife with money and her fortune often goes 
 to buy out the younger members — there are various 
 ways of doing it. 
 
 ■12457. I see that you mention in these notes that, 
 in the case of what may be called capricious evictions, 
 there has scarcely such a thing happened amongst the 
 owners of estates, but that there have been as between 
 middlemen and their undertenants 1 — I think so ; if 
 the land cases were examined, and I thinlc Mr. Davis 
 will be able to give you some information about that 
 to-morrow, the great majority of cases wUl be found to 
 be between middlemen and their tenants. 
 
 12458. I suppose those are middlemen holding under 
 very old leases which are gradually dropiiing out? — 
 Yes. 
 
 12459. What is the usual custom on the falling in 
 of those old leases ? — To take in the undertenants. 
 
 12460. Mr. Shaw. — And generally revalue the pro- 
 perty 'I — Often to reduce the rents. 
 
 12461. Chairman. — We have been told generally 
 that leases have not been sought after since the Land 
 Act?— In o. 
 
 12462. And you find that that is the case 1 — Yes. 
 
 12463. I suppose in the old leases there were clauses 
 against subdivision and subletting ? — In man\ cuses 
 there were. 
 
 12464. But not enforced? — Not enforced. 
 
 12465. Can yoa tell us at all the proportion between 
 the rents through this county and the tenement valua- 
 tion 1 — On my own estate they are about the same, and 
 I fancy on most large estates they are let at about the 
 tenement valuation. • 
 
 12466. Mr. Shaw. — The valuation was made here, 
 I suppose, later than in the South? — I think about 
 1857, our book is dated 1857. We don't consider it 
 a fair valuation, the poor, bad lands are rather highly 
 valued, and so;ne of the good grazing land — some of 
 the best land in tlie county — is much too low. 
 
 12467. Chairman. — But we hear from Mr. Ball 
 Greene that it was not intended to be any criterion for 
 rent?— I don't think it was ; I am sure the poor lands 
 are too highly valued. 
 
 12468. In this case you make your own valuation 
 and put them lower? — Yes ; but'the average, as I say, 
 of mine are about the tenement valuation. 
 
 12469. Mr. Shaw. — You don't use that at all as a 
 guide ? — No. 
 
 12470. You take other means of ascertaining the 
 value ? — Yes. 
 
 12471. Chairman. — Now, in taking other means to 
 ascertain the value, do you employ a person of your 
 own, an experienced person of your own? — Yes, an 
 experienced man of my own and my agent together, 
 they work it out separately and compare notes. 
 
 12472. Supposing the tenant urges it is beyond the 
 fair rent ? — We compromise it. 
 
 12473. You hear what he has to say? — Yes; I 
 don't think I have raised six rents in the last seven- 
 teen years. 
 
 12474. Mr. Shaw. — But when you made that 
 general valuation ? — That was done in my uncle's time 
 before I succeeded. 
 
 12475. So that you don't know exactly how that 
 was carried through ? — No ; except that the valuator 
 will appear to-morrow, and probably can give you the 
 information. 
 
 12476. Chairman. — Then you think — not on your 
 own property but the property of others — that the 
 .Land Act has rather checked improvements; what 
 effect has it had on improvements by tenants? — I 
 think there have been less improvements of late years 
 than formerly, and I attribute it very much to the 
 large price of cattle, that they went more into stock 
 and less into tillage, made the rent easier, and were 
 not as thrifty as they were. 
 
 12477. As they became better off they were not 
 inclined to put the money they made into the land ? — 
 I don't think they were. 
 
 12478. Do you think that was owing to a feeling 
 
 that they were not secure in the land ? — I don't think Oct. u, isso. 
 so, because many landlords would give thirty years' ^ , , 
 leases to anyone who wanted it. Edward Henry 
 
 12479. Mr. Shaw. — Land in grass does not employ Cooper, 
 men as much as land in tillage ? — No. 
 
 12480. If they work land they must drain and im- 
 prove it ? — Yes. There are poor lands that unless you 
 till them there is very little use in draining. 
 
 12481. They won't give gi'ass cuntinually ? — No. 
 
 12482. It goes back to its natural heath? — Yes; 
 and to rushes. 
 
 12483. Chairman. — You refer in jonv notes to 
 property purchased by the Waste Lands Society? — 
 Yes ; it joins my property, and the estate consists of 
 about six thousand acres. It was taken ' up by the 
 Waste Land Company in 1838, and up to 1844 they 
 had reclaimed about a thousand Irish acres, plantation 
 acres, let at about £450 a year, and at that time there 
 were about sixty tenants on it. They built slated 
 houses, and they made roads, and they expended of 
 their own money £2,255. 
 
 12484. Mr. Shaw.— The tenants did?— No; the 
 Company did. 
 
 12485. Chairjuan. — Up to what date? — Up to 
 1844, previous to that the landlord had expended 
 £1,200. 
 
 12486. Mr. Shaw. — The landlord from whom they 
 purchased ? — Yes ; from whom they rented it, and the 
 tenants about £500, in fact up to 1844, £4,200 was 
 expended on it by these three, the landlord, the Com- 
 pany, and the tenants. 
 
 12487. On that 1,000 acres?— 1,000 Irish acres, 
 call it 1,800 English. The Company failed then, they 
 expected for that outlay to make a rental of about 
 £1,200 a year, but they failed. There was besides 
 about 4,000 acres mountain grazing that was not re- 
 claimed making a total of 6,000 acres, 2,000 may have 
 been reclaimed and 4,000 was grazing. When the 
 Company failed an Enj^liJiman took the estate. Mi-. 
 Dickson, he made no improvements, but he brought in 
 several tenants, he raised money on his lease, I believe, 
 and then he left the country, failed, ran away. 
 
 12488. Chairman. — He took a lease? — He bought 
 a lease or took one from the landlord, I don't know 
 which. Then a Scotchman got it and failed, and 
 then Mr. John Brett, of Tubbercurry, got it. , He 
 gave it up ; he brought in about a dozen tenants. In 
 1857, when the tenement valuation was published, 
 and Mr. Brett had it, there were seventy-nine tenants 
 on it. Mr. Brett gave it up, and another Scotchman 
 tried it, and he also gave it up, and then the grazing 
 land was taken by Mr. Robinson and Mr. Atkinson 
 and a man named Ruane, and they held it for some 
 years. They wanted to rise the rent on them, and 
 they gave it up, and now two Scotchmen have got it, 
 a man named M'Kay and a man named Beatty, and 
 I think they are supposed not to be very flourishing, 
 in fact they are managing it for some man who is 
 advancing money in Scotland. The houses of the 
 tenants that the Land Company built are out of 
 repair and uninhabited, and the land is simply gone 
 back to heath and grass and rushes. 
 
 12489. The O'Conoe Don.— Are the tenants 
 tenants from year to year ? — I think they are tenants 
 from year to year now. 
 
 12490. Mr. Shaw.— There are still these fifty 
 tenants ? — Now there are fifty tenants. 
 
 12491. And they hold not by lease I suppose? — 
 No, since 1857 there has been a reduction of twenty- 
 nine tenants, who have left it — thrown up their laivls. 
 
 12492. Chairman. — Is that cut-away-turf bog or 
 mountain ? — There is mountain at the back with some 
 of it cut away, and some of it they tried to reclaim 
 by gravelling, marling, and draining. They made 
 800 perches of road. 
 
 12493. The O'Conor Don.— In what part of Sligo 
 is this ? — It is beyond Clonacool. 
 
 12494. Is it the estate called Glensesk? — Yes. 
 
 12495. Mr. Shaw.— Near Ballina?— The western 
 portion of it is the boundary of Mayo. 
 
422 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 Colonel 
 
 Ell-ward Henry 
 Cooper. 
 
 1 2496. What was the size of these farms, large or 
 small ?— Small ; the Company began by reclaiming a 
 little bit. They made 500 perches of drains, per- 
 fectly choked np now and useless. They, by their 
 own showing, reclaimed seventy-two plantation acres 
 in 1838. In 1843 they had 800 reclaimed, in 1844 
 they had 994 plantation acres reclaimed. Mostj if 
 not all of these, have gone back into heather and grass-. 
 
 12497. The tenants have not been able to keep 
 them reclaimed 1 — No. 
 
 12498. What has become of the tenants, have they 
 emigrated? — I suppose they have. In 1867 there 
 were only sixty tenants on it when the life interest of 
 the owner was offered for sale. The Company paid a 
 rent for it. 
 
 12499. Who was the landlord ?— Mr. Taaffe. 
 
 12500. What was the rent ?— They paid £600 a 
 year rent. 
 
 12501. That was enough to smother it, they could 
 not pay it? — They estimated for a rental of £1,284 
 a year. Their rental from tenants was £400, £500 
 for 1,000 acres of land to let^ and the balance for 
 grazing. 
 
 12502. That is 10s. an acre?— Yes. 
 
 12503. It never could have brought that rent?^ 
 Well, they laid out 5,000 perches of drains and 800 
 perches of road besides buildings. 
 
 12504. Chairman. — The fifty tenants, wers they 
 placed there as labourers? — No, they came in as 
 tenants to reclaim. 
 
 12505. Mr. Shaw. — You don't know what rents 
 they were placed under, those tenants, whether it was 
 a small and progressive rent or whether they paid a 
 full rent at once ? — I should think a progressive rent. 
 The rent in 1838 was only £41, the rent for 800 
 acres was £300 in 1843, and for 994 acres it was 
 £448, at 10s. an acre. 
 
 12506. That would be only six years, that is a 
 very short time to put on a heavy rent in a reclaimed 
 mountain place ? — They expended a great deal in 
 reclaiming it. 
 
 12507. They were under a heavy rent themselves 
 and wanted to get rent in, that was enough to stifle 
 it as an experiment, one would think ? — Eleven of 
 the houses built by the Company are now in ruins. 
 
 12507a. The O'Conor Don. — The statement made 
 before the Devon Commission with regard to this is — 
 
 " The rents on new farms commenced as low as St. a 
 plantation acre, varying according to the quality of the lanfl 
 and quantity of pasture, they rise progressively to about 
 1 Os. 9d. a plantation acre in about ten years, and so con- 
 tinued for the remainder of the term." 
 
 12508. Mr. Shaw. — If a, man takes a fifty-acre farm 
 at ten shillings an acre, and only has seven or eight 
 acres workable land it is a heavy rent ? — I think the 
 Company reclaimed it first themselves in a great 
 measure. 
 
 12508a. Chairman. — This would not-beany example 
 of what is now proposed, if possible to have large re- 
 clamations, putting in permanent tenants at a very 
 low sum. 
 
 12509. Mr. Shaw.— Without a big head-rent?— I 
 may perhaps mention that I join this Property and that 
 I have on the opposite side of the valley about 4,000 
 acres, 
 
 12510. Of similar land ? — Very much the same. In 
 some parts mine, very likely, is rather better, but in 
 some it is not quite so good. My mountain I should 
 Siiy is not so good, but perhaps the lower ground is a 
 little better. I have got 4,000 acres let. 
 
 12511. How is yours let relatively to that ? — I have 
 got 4,000 acres as I say just beside, and my rental is 
 £414 a year. 
 
 12512. For the whole thing? — For the whole thing, 
 and I have got iorty-five tenants on my property. 
 There has not been a change since I succeeded to it 
 seventeen years ago, and, when I look baclv to the old 
 rental, with one exception, when I think there was a 
 middleman's lease that fell, there has not been a change 
 for thirty years on my part. 
 
 12513. You deal directly with the tenants? Ideal 
 
 directly with the tenants. 
 
 12514. Chairman. — Do you keep the main drains 
 open ? — I have done very little except building. 
 
 12515. But as to the outfalls as a general rule it is 
 left to the tenants ?— That is the diiS'culty. If you, 
 give them a good outfall it it not scoured, and the 
 lowest man objects to scour his because he says the 
 higher ones get the benefit. 
 
 12516. Mr. Shaw. — Have your tenants done much 
 in reclamation ? — Yes, they de> a great deal. 
 
 12517. And they are not meddled with?— I have 
 not increased .the rent for seventeen years. 
 
 1251S. You say your rental is about the same this 
 Company paid for the whole thing ? — Yes ; I get £400 a 
 year and the Company paid £600. 
 
 12519. So that in fact they had no room'almost to 
 make a profit out of it. They ought not to iave 
 charged an additional rent ? : — But then there ns 
 £4,000 expended on improvements. , . 
 
 12520. But the tenants on your property are pro- 
 bably doing it better'and gradually ?^-rthiQk so, because 
 my men are thoroughly solvent. 
 
 12521. The O'Conor Don. — And your estate with- 
 out having this large outlay is in as good a position as 
 where there was this large outlay on the adjoinino 
 property? — I think so, probably mine is more favoiu-ahly 
 situated on the south side of the valley, but theirs is 
 a very nice piece of ground. 
 
 1 2522. Chairman. — Is your view that the best -way 
 of doing reclamation is by getting it done solely by 
 the tenants ? — It is the only way I think it can be done. 
 I have considered this carefully, having a large tract of 
 waste land, and I cannot see my way to doing anything 
 myself. I have studied this Waste Land Company 
 carefully. 
 
 12523. Mr. Shaw. — You would have no objection 
 to sell your waste land to anyone that -vvished to ex- 
 periment on it 1 — Certainly not. 
 
 12524. Chairman. — AVhat v;ras the date of the com- 
 mencement of the reclamation on j'onr land from which 
 you get the £400 a year? — It was begun a great many 
 years ago, and it is going on always, they creep in on 
 the cut-away bog. 
 
 12525. Well then, arising out of that, I ask you 
 whether you have considered at all the question of 
 peasant proprietary ? — Yes, I have. 
 
 12526. Have you any instances of purchases by 
 tenants in your neighbourhood ? — We have none under 
 the Land Act or by the assistance of the Board of 
 Works, but a good many tenant-farmers have pur- 
 chased to-wTilands. 
 
 12527. By private sale? — In the , Landed Estates 
 Couvt, but finding their own money ; several tenants 
 of my own have done that. 
 
 1252S. Has that been done in the neighboarhoodof 
 towns or villages or outlying districts? — No, outlymg 
 districts. 
 
 12529. Have you a favourable opinion of their 
 purchasing on their own account? — Yes, I think so; 
 they are almost all stirring men, pushing then" way, 
 and have the capital to ])urchase. 
 
 12530 After purchasing they have capital to work 
 the lands ?— I don't think they hold the lands them- 
 selves, they are occupied by the tenants. 
 
 12531. Then they are in the nature of small land- 
 owners ? — Yes. 
 
 12532. Mr. Shaw.— That has been increasing latelyt 
 
 — I think so. 
 
 1253:5. Is it business men that purchase these' 
 farms? — Oh, business men do it to a large extent, but 
 I knov.^ a number of my own tenants, three or four 
 have purchased. 
 
 12534. Chairman.— Do you think they let on 
 reasonable terms to their own tenants, or are they 
 strict landlords?— I don't know at all. You know 
 the report is the smaller class of landholders let higher 
 tha,n the larger ones, that is the general impression. 
 
 12535. There is a question here that you have 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 423 
 
 answered as to any alteration or amendment in the 
 existing law regulating the relations of landlord and 
 tenant? — I have. I have mentioned there nhat it 
 appears to me some change to prevent subdivision is 
 necessary, that farms should descend to one member 
 of the family only. 
 
 12536. Mr. Shaw. — Is not that provided for 
 generally in the leases and agreements now ? — In leases 
 it always is. 
 
 12537. And in yearly tenancies you don't allow 
 them to subdivide 1 — No, but in cases of intestacy it 
 sometimes requires a law suit to prevent it. There 
 being no limit of time for taking out administration 
 has led to great injustice in many cases I know 
 of, where the man dies insolvent, his son or daughter, 
 as the case may be, gets married and brings money into 
 the place, and pays up the arrears of rent and starts 
 fresh, and then -the representative comes home a year 
 or two after, perhaps from England or America, and 
 takes out administration, and then immediately there 
 is a lawsuit. 
 
 12538. Chairman. — It is a very common case in 
 which nobody administers, but they act as if the pre- 
 decessor was alive, and never think of the difficulty 
 that arises until somebody comes home and throws 
 them into the difficulty of a lawsuit 1 — Yes. I think 
 the acknowledgment by the landlord ought to be 
 sufficient to prevent the disturbance of the tenant, and 
 there ought to be a limited time ia which they can 
 disturb the occupiers. 
 
 12539. Do you. think that can be met by an easy 
 means of taking out administration by somebody, 
 and that person should be for the time the tenant 1 — 
 It is a legal point ; but the simple remedy would 
 be to give the landlord the power of selecting the 
 tenant. 
 
 12540. Mr. Shaw. — It is very easy now under the 
 new county courts 1 — I believe the whole thing is quite 
 easy and simple, but they don't do it. 
 
 12541. The O'Conoe Don.— Would not making 
 the administration compulsory result in what you 
 object to, that the holding would have to be divided 
 amongst the family or sold out 1 — That is the difficulty, 
 and then the landloi'd steps in and prevents the sale, 
 
 . and a land case results, anything that will stop litiga- 
 tion will be for the advantage of the country. 
 
 12542. Chairman. — But at present, perhaps, you 
 have half a dozen tenants, each son and daughter that is 
 there may be the tenant 1 — If that is the case there is 
 a crisis, and it must be settled. But what hapjoens is 
 one man has money or he marries a wife that has 
 money, or a daughter marries a man with money, and 
 the whole thing is settled and goes right. The land 
 lord does not inquire, unless somebody comes forward 
 and claims to put the tenant out. 
 
 12543. Mr. Shaw. — But those are rare cases, they 
 are generally arranged by the landlord? — The land- 
 lord has no power now. 
 
 12544. Except he is asked as a friend? — I think 
 he should have the power. Before the Land Act he 
 had, because if the administrator was not the right 
 man, he could serve him with notice to quit, and now 
 such notice may land you in a law suit. 
 
 12545. But, practically, I suppose it is a rare thing ? 
 — I certainly know of two cases, but it is likely to be on 
 the increase rather than decrease. 
 
 12546. Chairman. — Your suggestion would be that 
 one, the eldest son, for instance, should be tenant ? — In 
 case of intestacy — let a man leave it to any one of his 
 family if he choses to make a will — but in case of in- 
 testacy, it should go to the widow or son. The farm 
 must go to one, or else you will have subdivision and 
 litigation. 
 
 12547. Mr. 
 the power of selecting that one ?^In case of intestacy 
 I should. 
 
 12548. But you would put some charge on it for the 
 other members of the family in case of intestacy ? — I 
 think not. 
 
 12549. Chairman. — You would leave him resp'on- 
 
 Shaw.— You would give the landlord 
 
 sible for the debt to the rest of the family, as one of 
 thorn would be now if he administered ? — I would not 
 recognise any debt at all. 
 
 12550. Mr. Shaw. — A man might have laid out a 
 great deal of money on his farm that he would otherwise 
 ]ia\e kept for his family? — Then he should make a 
 will. 
 
 12551. Chairman. — But, at all events, you consider 
 it a very difficult question? — Yes, and I think it 
 requires consideration, for I think it will involve 
 litigation and trouble. Landlords on old tenancies have 
 got more power under the Land Act than they would 
 have on new of recognising, or refusing to reoogniso an 
 assignee. At all events I think it requires considera- 
 tion, both to prevent litigation, and to prevent sub- 
 division of farms, and to encourage people to make 
 provision for their families by insurance. You can 
 insure, now, I believe, in the Post Office in different 
 ways, very cheaply. They should insure their lives 
 and not leave a debt. The great complaint, I under- 
 stand, against settlement in entail is, that it incumbers 
 properties, that you make charges upon properties that 
 weigh them down. The very same thing will occur 
 under the Land Act in tenancies ; when £100 will be 
 left on a farm to be paid it will be a millstone round 
 a man's neck. 
 
 12552. Mr. Shaw.— -It must be sold out ? — Then you 
 bring in a new tenant whom you don't know. 
 
 12553. Chairman. — You think there should be 
 some limit to the time within which a person can take 
 out administration? — I think so. 
 
 12554. And still more the time within which he 
 should be allowed to disturb the tenant recognised by 
 the landlord ? — Yes. 
 
 12555. Have you known any case of hardship 
 arising from a person coming back like that ? — I know 
 of two cases. One, a man, named Gilmour, died, 
 leaving an eldest son, and several children. He 
 married a girl with a good deal of money, paid and j)or- 
 tioned off most of the children, and died, leaving a widow, 
 and his mother. The widow took out administration for 
 her husband, and was going to put the mother out. The 
 mother found no administration had been taken out for 
 her husband, took out administration, and broke a lease 
 given by the landlord to her son, and was going to turn 
 the daughter-in-law out. The landlord steppedin, served 
 them all with notice to quit, and reinstated the young 
 widow. If the landlord had not interfered great in- 
 justice would have been done to that young woman 
 and her familj'. That was close to Sligo. Another 
 case happened near Tubbercurry. A man died in 
 solvent, and his daiighter married a man with a little 
 money, and was recognised, by the landlord that was 
 on Captain Armstrong's estate. A man came from 
 America, took out administration, and was going to 
 turn him out. The landlord interfered, and litigation 
 ensued. There were two or three trials before the 
 Chairman, and eventually the man threw up his claim 
 and went back to America, having put the tenant to a 
 great deal of costs, and the landlord. 
 
 12556. Do you find costs are a great expense in land 
 cases ? — I have only had two cases, and I certainly 
 think they are unfair. I can give you two instances. 
 I brought an ejectment against a widow, whose son, a 
 sort of lunatic, came home and cut down ,a valuable 
 ash tree. I thought that unreasonable conduct, and 
 brought an ejectment. She brought forward a land 
 claim — about £70 — and to make things simple and 
 easy I offered her £25 to give up the place. and go. 
 
 Oct. 14, 188». 
 
 Colonel 
 
 Edward Henry 
 Cooper 
 
 Amonc;st other things there was £30 for 
 
 her dwelling 
 
 house, which she claimed. I was able to prove, by a 
 man who was nearly 98 or 99, that the dwelling house 
 was built by my grandfather for a man connected with 
 the estate, and paid for Ijy him, and that item was imme- 
 diately struck out, and, I think, the woman got £30 
 out of £70, but I had to pay her costs and my own 
 about £16 or £17, to defend myself from the claim. 
 That is one of the hardships,; I think, of the Land 
 Act. I acknowledge compensation for improvements 
 to- the fullest extent, but, I think, it was very unjust 
 
4L'4 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 Colonel 
 
 Edward Henry 
 Cooper. 
 
 to put tlie burden of proof on the landlord, for lie had 
 no reason to keep any record or register of wha* he 
 did. If this had occurred a year later my witness 
 ■would have been dead, and I should have had to pay 
 £30 for this widow's house. I think the tenant should 
 prove what either he or his predecessor in title laid out 
 or expended on the estate. 
 
 12557. Mr. Shaw. — That was a smallholding? — 
 That was a small holding, but our holdings in this 
 county are very small. 
 
 12.558. Are they as a general rule 1 — Yes. 
 
 12559. The O'Conoe Don.— Would there not be a 
 similar difficulty in the tenants' way to prove 1 — Oh, 
 they know what they did, or their predecessor did. 
 
 12560. They had no more reason to keep a register 
 than the landlord 1 — T think they have more reason to 
 know. 
 
 12561. How can they prove it, may not they know 
 without being able to prove it 1 — You have got the 
 same difficulty to meet in either case, but having taken 
 so much from the landlord, you. ought not to throw 
 the burden of proof on him. 
 
 1 2562. Chairman. — That must be taken assettled?^ 
 I want to unsettle that portion of it, I think it is unfair. 
 
 12563. We have had complaints among the smaller 
 tenants as to the very heavy costs, that defending or 
 rather making their claim, entails upon them. Do 
 you know anything of the costs of litigation in the 
 County Courts? — I only know this one case of my own. 
 The law at present tends to the making of unreason- 
 able claims, and therefore it leads to people being 
 obliged to go into Court that otherwise would not. 
 If this woman had taken the £25 I offered she would 
 have been far better off, than getting .£30 from the 
 County Court Judge. 
 
 12564. I suppose these claims are very much made 
 Jut by professional men ? — Yes ; and it leaves the 
 landlord no alternative but to fight it out. 
 
 12565. Mr. Shaw. — Would not arbitration on the 
 spot be better than the County Court Judge 1 — In 
 many cases I think it would. 
 
 12566. It costs less money and you would have a 
 simple machinery 1 — Yes. 
 
 12567. Chairman. — Refusal of arbitration on either 
 side being a ground for giving costs against them 1 — 
 Yes. Whatever alterations are made should be with 
 a view of discouraging litigation, the people are too 
 fond of litigation and spend too much money on it. 
 
 12568. There is only one more question as to the 
 Grand Jury Cess on your property and the county 
 generally, whether that is divided now. 1 — I in all 
 cages offer a tenant on a new tenancy whether he 
 wishes to deduct half or pay the whole, and in almost 
 all oases they have chosen the old system, in only one 
 do I pay half the county cess. 
 
 12569. Mr. Shaw. — How is it they cho.se to do 
 that when they have a right to divide it with you 1 — 
 They prefer the old custom. 
 
 12570. Have you made it a condition 1 — I would 
 have the farm valued accordingly. 
 
 12571. The O'Conor Don. — You would put on an 
 increase equal to half the valuation 1 — I should say 
 Is. an acre would represent it. They prefer leaving 
 it as it is. The Grand Jury Cess really comes out of 
 the landlord's pocket, any sensible tenant always esti- 
 mates the expenses of the taxes. 
 
 12572. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think they do estimate 
 those taxes, their anxiety to get hold of land is so 
 great they don't look so closely into it as that 1 — I 
 think they do, I find they are pretty shrewd. One 
 question you asked was as to charging the estate, whether 
 they have got into debt since the Land Act 1 I think 
 .you will have better evidence than I can give, but it 
 is rather curious the number of civil bills, for the three 
 years preceding the Land Act the average was £4,000 
 a year. 
 
 12573. Chairman. — In the whole county? — In the 
 whole county, that is the Stamp Office return. For 
 the three years after the Land Act, it was 4,300, and 
 for the last three years, ending in 1879, it was 8.400. 
 
 12574. Mr. Shaw. — That includes all civil bill 
 decrees ? — It is not decrees, but stamps were bought 
 to that amount. 
 
 12575. Chairman. — Does that include ejectments? 
 — No, not ejectments, simply for debts. The a\(.race 
 of all kinds of ejectment processes not evictions for 
 the three years, before 1867, was 257. for tlie three 
 years after the Land Act, it fell to 170, and for the 
 last three years, it was 400 ejectment processes. 
 
 12576. Mr. Shaw. — That increase would be 
 accounted for very much by the bad times for the 
 last three years 1 — To some extent it would. 
 
 12577. Both in ejectments and civil bills?— I may 
 mention with regard to evictions, I have been obliged 
 in the last nine years to put into the sheriffs' hands 
 nineteen cases, they were all returned with the ex- 
 ception of three. 
 
 12578. For non-payment of rent? — Only one was 
 evicted for non-payment of rent. Another was this 
 land case I spoke of, the widow's son, and the otiier 
 was in a village to pull down a house and build a 
 good one. 
 
 12579. And the others were for non-payment of 
 rent? — There was only one really evicted for non- 
 payment of rent in the last nine years. 
 
 12580. The O'Conor Don.— All the other cases 
 were settled? — Yes. Here (reading) is a lease, which 
 expired, of a man named M'Loughrey and eighteen 
 others. I have taken the whole of them as direct 
 tenants. 
 
 12581. Have you had many ejectments within the 
 last twelve months ? — Not many. 
 
 12582. Chairman. — Did you put these eighteen 
 under ejectments first ? — I ejected the head, and pnt 
 out the eighteen, and put them in as caretakers, until 
 they signed an agreement, and now they are recog- 
 nised tenants. 
 
 12583. And those are oases in which you say you 
 diminished the rent probably ? — I have not increased 
 them, but I did not alter the rent. I had seven cases 
 last year, but only one was evicted really ont and 
 out for non-payment of rent, and one as I say in the 
 village, a house was unsanitary and tumbled down, 
 and I turned the tenants out on the expiration of the 
 lease, to rebuild the house. 
 
 12584. Were they replaced? — No, I gave them 
 something to compensate them, there was no land 
 case. It was just a little village, and a wretched 
 cabin in a dirty unhealthy state in it. 
 
 12585. The O'Conor Don.— Then you have had 
 very few land cases I suppose ? — I have had two, just 
 in ten years. 
 
 12586. Chairman. — You have property in Mayo 
 also? — No, my brother has. 
 
 12587. Mr. Shaw. — Have you property in Cork! 
 — No, mv brother has. 
 
 12588." The O'Conor Don.— Have you had many 
 cases in which you took up land from one tenant to 
 give to another ? — No, within the last five years, I 
 have had eighteen tenants changed voluntarily. 
 
 12589. And in none of these cases did the out- 
 going tenant get anything like tenant-right? — They 
 got no payment for it. The first man was Mr. 
 Feeney, a priest at Riverstown, I arranged with the 
 Bishop, he gave up the land, and I gave a site for * 
 chapel and glebe land for the priest, that was a 
 mutual arrangement. The next man was on lease, 1 
 paid him for his improvements, he is the accountant 
 in the Board of Works, and his mother had a farm 
 from me, she died, he wanted to give it up, and 1 
 bought the residue of the lease from him, and paw 
 him for the house and offices and things. That was 
 to suit him, it was his own wish. The next was a 
 widow, and she gave up to her brother. The next 
 was two brothers that attempted to divide their farm, 
 and I turned them out and put them back, until I coiiw 
 give one of them another farm, and I have given uua 
 another farm, he went in free without paying me anj' 
 thing. 
 
MINUTES OL' EVIDENCE. 
 
 42.- 
 
 12590. In these cases you let the land again to 
 other tenants t — Yes. 
 
 12591. Did you charge them anything like a fine 
 on going into if? — Nothing like a fine. I put on an 
 increased rent. Mr. Piries' farm, was a very valuable 
 farm indeed, and I put on a considerable increase of 
 rent. I paid him £300 for his interest. 
 
 12592. Is there any difference in the rent put on 
 the farms lately let, . compared with the f j.rms that 
 have not been lately let? — I think these are all mutual 
 changes, owing to the tailing in of leases, and therv 
 have been no changes of rent except in these few 
 cases. 
 
 1 2593. If you had land in hand to let, would you 
 cfet a much higher rent for it and that would not be 
 considered extravagant compared with the rents your 
 tenants are generally paying ■ — I am sure I could. If 
 I had land to let I could let it much higher even in 
 these bad times. 
 
 12594. Mr. Shaw. — From solvent tenants? — Yes; 
 mine is let as a rule at the valuation, so that it would 
 bear some increase. 
 
 12595. Where you make those changes of rental, 
 have you any rule on the property as to the valuation ? 
 — No ; it is valued separately by the surveyor and 
 iio'ent, they compare notes with me, and we consider the 
 various reasons. 
 
 1 2596. And then you tell the tenants the new rent ? 
 - Yes. 
 
 12597. Do you find there is any dissatisfaction ?— ■ 
 No ; I have always two or tkree men to take it up. 
 
 12598. The O'Coxoii Dox. — Would you object to 
 anything like the Ulster system being extended to 
 your property ? — Oh, very strongly ; I am afraid all 
 interest in the property would cease, and that is what 
 I am afraid of with regard to the proposals of the 
 Government. 
 
 12599. Mr. Shaw. — It would not affect you in the 
 least ; you would go on just as you are ? — It would 
 depend upon what the Ulster Custom is ; if it is the 
 Ulster Custom with office rules, the Northern land- 
 lords tell me it does not do miich harm ; but, if it 
 is an unlimited power to sell, it simply makes the 
 landlord a rentcharger. 
 
 12600. But you have veto on a tenant"? — That is 
 not what the tenants want. 
 
 12601. Chaikmax. — For a reasonable objection? — 
 It is very difficult to say what is a reasonable objec- 
 tion. If a man was known to be a poacher, would that 
 be a reasonable objection. 
 
 12602. The O'C'oxoR Don. — You would object to 
 the system being extended to your property if you had 
 a veto on the incoming tenant 1 — I should certainly ; 
 all or the great majority of the tenants came in free, 
 and I think it is a very great hardship on the land- 
 lord that they should have the power of becoming 
 ioint proprietors with him. 
 
 12603. Mr. Shaw. — You have not raised the rents 
 and don't intend to do so, and you would really be 
 placed more firmly in the saddle 1 — I think a great 
 many would rather like it, because, instead of nursing 
 a man, you can say to him : " Sell your farm, and pay 
 up your arrears." 
 
 12604. The tenants in the North, where it exists, 
 are strongly in favour of it ? — Most of them, if not all, 
 have paid large sums of money to get into their hold- 
 iua-s, and anything that would make their security less 
 valuable would be very unpopular and unjust. 
 
 12605. li it was extended to you, you would have 
 the right of raising your rents to begin with. It would 
 be hardly fair to take you and say where your property 
 has been let fairly for generations, it must come under 
 this new system at the old rents. It would not injure 
 you 1 — I don't think it would injure my property^ but 
 it would injure me as a landlord ; it is giving a joint 
 
 Colonel 
 
 Edward Henry 
 Cooper. 
 
 ownership in the land to which the tenant is not Oct. u, isso 
 entitled. 
 
 12606. The landlords in the North are very much 
 in favour of it ? — -I have read the Digest of Evidence 
 of the Devon Commissioners cai'ofully, and, as far as I 
 can find, they are against it. 
 
 12607. We have had very strong evidence from the 
 landlords in the North in favour of it? — But what 
 are the tenants asking for — are they satisfied with the 
 tenant-light that exists on many estates. 
 
 1 2608. They would prefer unlimited ; but they com- 
 jjlain very much of constant advances of rent, a thing 
 you ilon't practise, but we have found it in the North, 
 and they comjDlain very much of it 1 — As the landlord 
 loses power over his estate, and it simply becomes a 
 monetary transaction with him, rents would be raised. 
 I believe the rent is much higher in counties where 
 there is tenant-riglit than here. 
 
 12609. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think your 
 tenants would like to have their rents increased on 
 condition of their getting this power of sale 1 — I don't 
 think they would. 
 
 12610. Mr. Shaw. — Then it would not take place'! 
 — It would not take place as long as a man was solvent, 
 but when he became insolvent, or a man died intestate 
 the farm would be sold. I think it must end sooner or 
 later, in one or other going, either the liudlord or 
 tenant. 
 
 12611. It has not ended so in the north, the relation - 
 ships are perfect? — If you go to Donegal, that is a 
 tenant-right county, I don't think they are so happy 
 there as in this county. 
 
 12612. Chairman. — Do you think in spite of the 
 neighbourhood of a tenant-right county, the tenants in 
 this county are satisfied to remain as they are where 
 they get a fair landlord? — I think so, a tenant dislikes 
 being disturbed or changed, if he was to hear he would 
 get tenant-right, and at the same time there would be 
 a change of rent and revaluation ; I think he would 
 say " for God's sake leave me alone." 
 
 12613. Mr. Shaw. — But practically you carry out 
 continuous occupancy if a man pays his rent ? — Yes. 
 
 12614. That is what they want? — Yes, and they 
 have got it. 
 
 12615. But they have not got it legally, have you 
 any objection to give it to them legally? — Certainly 
 I should object. There is a great difference between a 
 custom and a right enforceable by law. Unless you 
 pi'opose to give them something more than they have 
 now, why not leave well alone? 
 
 12616. It does not prevent you improving your 
 ]>ioperty ? — It does not? 
 
 12617. Certainly not, you improve your property 
 and get a return for everything you lay out, and you 
 still are amongst your people, the people who pay you 
 rent, the relationships of landlord and tenant are 
 innumerable beside the mere money relationship? — I 
 certainly am strongly against the introduction of 
 tenant-right into my property. 
 
 12618. It is a choice of difSculties, we have a 
 difficult problem all round to settle, and the object of 
 landlord and tenant ought to be to get a settlement 
 
 that will really press the least on any class ? I don't 
 
 know much of the North of Ireland, but from what I do 
 know of it, they are not content with what they have 
 at present, Mr. Shaw. They are contented with it, if 
 it could be protected against encroachments, and the 
 good landlords are perfectly satisfied to have that done, 
 the encroachments are not made on good estates like 
 yours in the north. 
 
 12619. The O'CoNOE Don.— You would object 
 strongly to have rents fixed by an outside tribimal— 
 by arbitration?—! don't think it can ever be 
 done. 
 
 12620. Mr. Shaw.-You would not have two cases 
 probably in your hfe, it is only where disputes occur? 
 
 31 
 
426 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 (A (. 14, 1.->S0. 
 
 J'.(l«ard Henry 
 Ci>(i])cv. 
 
 — Is not lenaiit-riglit a personal property, is it not all 
 divided at the death of the tenant. 
 
 12621. It is under the Land Act, in your case it is 
 very much the case 1 — If you don't give more to the 
 tenant than the prospect of an increase of rent, I think 
 
 he would be very much obliged to you to let him alone 
 They can be let alone, it would be an optional thinc^ 
 
 very much. " 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Manniou and 
 Mr. John 
 MannioD, 
 
 Messrs. James Mannion and John Mannion, tenant farmers, Tully, examined together. 
 Mr. James Mannion, examined. 
 
 12622. Chaikman.— You live at Tully i— Yes, sir, 
 I have a division of land there. 
 
 12623. How much land 1 — Ten and a half acres. 
 
 12624. Who is the owner of the estate? — Miss 
 Mossman in London. 
 
 12625. And who is hei- agent ? — Mr. Robinson below 
 here in Sligo. 
 
 12626. Are you the actual tenant, or is your mother 
 the tenant 1 — My father sir, but he is eighty-five years 
 of age, James Mamiion is Ijis name. 
 
 12627. And you are 1 — The eldest son, he is eighty- 
 five years of age and is not able to come. 
 
 12628. Do you know anything of Catherine 
 Mannion ? — That is my aunt, her son is here. 
 
 12629. What do you pay for the farm? — 
 £21 10s. 
 
 12630. And you don't know Avhether it is ten and 
 a half Irish or English acres? — I cannot say, your 
 honour. 
 
 12631. Well now this £1 10s., do you consider that 
 is a fair rent to pay ? — I think it is. We proffered 
 him that rent for it, and he processed us then unless 
 we would give him £2 Is. an acre. 
 
 12632. He tried to raise the rent? — No, sir, he did 
 not, that was the qld rent of the division " of land, 
 .£21 10s., we offered £1 10s. an acre then. 
 
 12633. Mr. Shaw. — You have been always paying 
 £21 10s.?— Yes, sir. 
 
 12634. And you offered him 30s. an acre lately? — 
 Yes ; about a week ago. 
 
 12635. Was that wanting a reduction for the bad 
 times, it was not a permanent offer? — No, sir, for a 
 year, we were not able to pay it longer, owing to the 
 bad times and he would not take it. 
 
 12636. 
 It does. 
 12637. 
 
 Chairman. — Does that remain unpaid? — 
 And now he has processed you? — He 
 
 years 
 
 has. 
 
 12638. Mr. Shaw.— How much is due? — A 
 rent up to September. 
 
 12639. The O'CoNOB, Don.— Not more than that? 
 — No, sir, except the hanging gale they never pay 
 that. 
 
 12640. Mr. Shaw. — A year and a half in fact? — 
 Yes, sir, we proffered him £15 lis., a year's rent, and 
 he would not take it. 
 
 12641. Do you all live on that piece of land? 
 — No, sir, we have another division of land that we 
 live on, about a mile from that. 
 
 12642. How far is Tully from Sligo?— About one 
 mile in the Knooknarea direction. 
 
 12643. CiiAiEMAN. — Well, now, was it the bad 
 times the last two or three years that led you to refuse 
 to pay the rent ? — We were not able to stand it any 
 longer, it had so robbed us. Wo cut a road through 
 a quarry, and he sent men that quarried up the road 
 we made, and we cannot bring any beast there; with- 
 out danger. 
 
 12644. Mr. Shaw. — What made him quarry the 
 road? — He quarried for a jiarty's house, and now 
 there is twenty feet or thirty feet of a precipice, and 
 it is not easy to bring a beast up there, so that we 
 don't know what we will do. 
 
 12645. The O'CoNOR Don.— Who quarried this?— 
 Mr. Robinson. 
 
 12646. Did he give you permission to make the 
 road 1 — No. 
 
 12647. The landlord did not assist you? Not a 
 
 shovelful. 
 
 12648. Chairman.— Did you ever get assistance of 
 any kiad 1 — No. 
 
 12649. And have you been improving this ten and' 
 a half acres ? — Yes ; we fenced it. 
 
 12G.jO. The O'Conor Don. — Are you in the same 
 holding ? — John Mannion. — Yes ; we are brothers. 
 
 12651. Is it paid for as one holdmgl—Jameg 
 Mannion. — No ; each one gets his own receipts. 
 
 12652. I\lr. Shaw. — Are there any buildings on 
 this piece of land ? — No, sir, no one lives on it. 
 
 12653. The O'Conor Don. — How long haye you 
 had it ? — Forty-five years. 
 
 12654. How long has the rent been £21 10s.!— 
 There was part of the time it was £1 an acre, then 
 30s., and then £2, and afterwards it was raised to 
 60s. 
 
 12655. Mr. Shaw. — When was that?— About 
 twenty -three or twenty-four years ago. Some tenants 
 were not able to pay, and it was brought ha<;k 
 again. 
 
 12G.J6. Now you cannot pay that? — We are not 
 able to pay it any longer. 
 
 12657. If the times were good you could pay itf- 
 We would struggle to pay it. 
 
 12658. Is it good land? — John Maniiion.—'So, sir, 
 poor dry land. We have another division there where 
 we live — it is nearly as bad. 
 
 12659. Who is the landlord of that?— J(sm«s 
 2Iannion. — He is one Mr. Walker, sir, the land is in 
 Chancery. 
 
 12660. And how much land in that? — Ten and a 
 half acres. 
 
 12661. What rent?— We are paying £15 Is. U, 
 but they have not so much land as what we have 
 there, they have something about six and a half 
 acres. 
 
 12662. The O'Conor Don. — How many acres have 
 you for the £15 ? — Ten and a half acres. 
 
 12663. Chairman. — Is the house where you live 
 on this second holding ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 12664. Did your family build that? — Oh, yes, sir. 
 
 12665. What sort of a house was it, a thatched house! 
 — A thatched house. 
 
 12GG6. Mr. Shaw.- And offices?— Yes. 
 
 126G7. You made them yourselves ? — We did, every- 
 one. 
 
 12668. Have you a lease ? — We have not. 
 
 12G69. Was the rent ever raised ?— ^No, we had a 
 share of wrack that we used almost to knock the renti 
 out of, and that was taken off' us by the present man's 
 father, but the rent was not taken off'. 
 
 12670. What does he do with the wrack now?— He 
 sells it. 
 
 1 2671. It formerly was a perquisite of the tenant?; 
 — Yes. 
 
 12672. Don't you get enough to manure your land! 
 — We do, but we cannot sell any. 
 
 12673. You think the rent is too high ?— We do, 
 sir. 
 
 12674. Chairman.— Is any of this turf bog ?— Not 
 a sod of it. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 427 
 
 12675. Wliat do you use for firing'! — We go fifteen 
 miles for turf, up to Ballymote. 
 
 12676. Mr. Shaw. — It would be cheaper to buy 
 coal] — In these small country houses we cannot 
 use it. 
 
 12677. Chaieman- — Is there anything else about it 
 that you have to complain of] — The rent is higher 
 than the valuation. 
 
 12678. The O'Conor Don. — What is the valuation] 
 .£12 lis. in that holding. 
 
 12679. Ajid in the other holding?— J15 lis. 
 
 12680. But yon paid the rent last year] — We did. 
 
 12681. Did you get an abatement last year] — Four 
 shillings to the pound. 
 
 12682. Was it the same abatement jou wanted this 
 year ] — No, sir, it was no use to us, we could not pay 
 it. He would give us four shillings to the pound 
 this year, but it was no use to us, because we would 
 as soon leave it there to him. 
 
 12683. Mr. Shaw. — Were not the crops pretty good 
 this year 1 — They were not good on that land. 
 
 12684. Potatoes good? — We had them middling 
 fair at home. 
 
 12685. Oats I suppose is your principal crop] — It 
 is pretty fair. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Mannion and 
 Mr. John 
 Maunioa. 
 
 12686. Chairman.— Have you anything to do to OoM4, i8«». 
 help you to live, besides the land 1 — Not a heat. 
 
 12()87. Mr. H HAW. — Two families on this land] — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 12688. Both married I suppose ] — No, he is not 
 mai-ried, I am. 
 
 12689. Chairman. — Could you live pretty comfort- 
 ably four years back ] — The times were good, the crop 
 was good, and we were living middling fair, but then 
 since the crops commenced to fail and no prices at all 
 for oats, we could not live. 
 
 12690. Mr. Shaw. — Oats was the principal crop 
 j'ou grew, I suppose ] — It was, and we had to cart all 
 the manure we used up against the hill, to the land 
 along the road we made. 
 
 12691. You are not able to cart your manure up there 
 now ] — No, sir ; except by a donkey, it is dangerous 
 to drive cattle there. 
 
 12692. The O'Conor Don. — Do you rear much 
 stock ] — Four cows we keep between the two divisions 
 and the one horse each. 
 
 12693. Four cows each and one horse each ?-^ Yes. 
 
 12694. Mr. Shaw.— You work together ]— No ; 
 every family work themselves. 
 
 12695. Plough together] — Yes, plough together. 
 The witnesses then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. Owen Habt, examined. 
 Chairman. — Do you live at Tubbernaveen] 
 
 -Where is that now ] — Two 
 
 12696 
 —Yes. 
 
 12697. Mr. Shaw. 
 miles out from town. 
 
 12698. Where is it] — Half way between this and 
 Eamsborough, Knocknarea. 
 
 12699. Chaiemax. — Are you on Mr. Francis 
 Latouche's property 1 — Yes. 
 
 12700. And how many acres do you hold]— Ten 
 and a half acres ; it is my father that holds it. 
 
 12701. Mr. Shaw. — And he cannot come ] — He is 
 too old to come. 
 
 12702. Chairman. — ^What rent do you pay for the 
 ten and a haK acres ] — £24. 
 
 12703. Mr, Shaw. — Are they Irish acres]— I tliink 
 they are. 
 
 12704. Chairman. — ^What is it that you think is 
 unreasonable ? — I think it is tmreasonable to be paying 
 so much over the valuation, your honour ; the £24 
 rent is above the Ordnance valuation. 
 
 12705. Mr. Shaw.— What is the valuation]— £14. 
 
 12706. Is it worth the money, that is the question ] 
 — It is not, your honour. 
 
 12706a. Because the valuation you know is a very 
 doubtful value ]— A man cannot live on it. The other 
 tenants have theii- land under the valuation, because 
 this was taken by proposals about eighteen years, 
 and it is kept up since to that. 
 
 12707. There was competition for it I suppose] — 
 There was. My father had been turned out and he 
 had no other place to go to, and had to go there. 
 
 12708. Chairman. — He had lost a farm somewhere 
 else ]— Yes. 
 
 12709. And he must go in somewhere, and he then 
 aoreed to give a higher rent than the neighbourmg 
 tenants ?— Yes, and Mr. Kelly was the agent, and he 
 told me that it would be reduced after a little, it was 
 never pulled down a penny since. 
 
 12710. Have there been applications made to re- 
 duce in compliance with that agreement ]— There had, 
 but not this couple of years. 
 
 1271 1. The O'Conor Don.— Who is the agent now? 
 He is his own agent now. 
 
 12712. Mr. Shaw. — And the tenants beside you 
 have their land at lower than the valuation ]— They 
 have tmder the valuation. , • n -vr 
 
 12713. Have you any other land but this ?— No. 
 
 12714. No other yrsiy of living but this ]— No. 
 
 12715. Are you married ?-^No, sir; we go about 
 to the fairs. 
 
 12716. You job -and buy cattle, and make your 
 
 -Yes, sir ; we had no way of living to 
 -It is tilled, part of 
 
 money that way? 
 get married. 
 
 12717. Is most of it in grass? 
 it, about two and a half acres. 
 
 12718. You have a house on it ? — ^Yes. 
 
 12719. Was there a house there when you went 
 there ? — We repaired and put up part of it, we built 
 offices ourselves. 
 
 12720. Did the landlord give you any help] — Not 
 one bit. 
 
 12721. And he refused to reduce the rent ] — That 
 is all. 
 
 12722. Is the land wet land or dry land generally ? 
 — Dry land. 
 
 12723. Is it near the holdings of the other people 
 we had a few minutes ago ] — It is not, about two miles 
 distant. 
 
 1 2724. But it is dry cold land ] — It is not cold land 
 — nice, light sandy , land. 
 
 12725. Chairman. — Stony land? — It is stony and 
 sandy both. 
 
 12726. Mr. Shaw. — What is it worth an acre?— If 
 we got it at the valuation we would not complain. 
 The valuation was made a long time ago, and the 
 men who made the valuation did not know much 
 about it, but you know when you have to work the 
 holding. 
 
 12727. What price would you put on it yourselves] — 
 About £1 8s. an acre, the same as the neighbouring 
 tenants. 
 
 12728. The O'Conor Don.— Have you let any of 
 it ? — Not one bit. 
 
 12729. Chairman. — Are you near the sea? — No, sir. 
 
 12730. Not nearj enough to get the sea-wrack ? — ■ 
 About two miles from it. 
 
 12731. Mr. Shaw. — You would like to have it re- 
 valued ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 12732. And then you would improve on it and make 
 it better] — Yes, and it is better than when we got it. 
 
 12733. You keep cattle on it ?- We do, sir. 
 
 12734. The O'Conor Don.— What is that you have 
 got there ? — The receipts. 
 
 12735. Chairman. — That is, the receipts for the 
 rent and poor rate ? — ^Yes, sir. 
 
 12736. Did you get any abatement 1 — We got on 
 one half-year's rent 3s. to the pound, and he did not 
 give it then the next. ; 
 
 12737. The O'CoNOEDoN.—Did you pay last-year 1 
 — Yes, sir. 
 
 12738. Have you paid your rent this year ? — No, 
 not yet ; this- is the time we pay. 
 
 31 2 
 
 Mr. Ovrem. 
 Hart. 
 
428 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, isse. 
 
 Hr. John 
 Tonng 
 
 Mr. John Young, AttydufF, Ballyscannell, examined. 
 
 12739. Chairman.— "What part of the country is 
 Ballyscannell 1 — It is below Carney. 
 
 1 2740. On whose property are you holding 1 — I live 
 upon Sir Henry Gore Booth's property. 
 
 12741. Who is agent 1— Himself . 
 
 12742. The O'Conor Don. — How many acres do you 
 hold? — I hold, under Sir Henry, about thirty-eight 
 acres. 
 
 12743. Chairman. — And do you hold any other 
 land 1 — I do, sir ; I hold about fourteen acres under 
 Mr. Jones, and allow me to say, sir, that there is 
 not a better landlord in Ireland than Sir Henry ; we 
 have no complaint whatever to make of Sir Henry, he 
 is a spendid landlord. 
 
 12744. Then, what you want to tell us does not relate 
 to Sir Henry's property? — No, sir. There is not a 
 tenant on Sir Henry's property that can complain. 
 
 12745. Mr. Shaw. — It is on Mr. Jones' property? 
 — Yes ; Mr. Jones, of Mountedward. 
 
 12746. Chairman. — Whoisthe agent? — Hisbrother. 
 
 12747. What is the brother's name? — R. E. 
 Folliet Jones. (He was agent to Mr. Darley for 
 about twenty years, and owns all about it) ; and, allow 
 me to say again, Sir Henry is a credit to the county as 
 a landlord. 
 
 12748. What do you pay for these fourteen acres? 
 —£18 is. 
 
 1 2749. Does that include an arrear ? — No, I never 
 was in arrear, and there is my Poor Law valuation. 
 
 12750. The Poor Law valuation is £12 5s. ?— And 
 it is high, and the house is valued along with it. 
 
 12751. Mr. Shaw. — You don't live on that land? — 
 No, sir. 
 
 12752. Chairman. — This island of Mr. Jones' only, 
 no house ? — Thei-e is a house, it is included in that. 
 
 12753. What sort of land is it? — Cut away bog ; 
 I reclaimed it myself, drained it and fenced. 
 
 12754. Mr. Shaw. — Got no help from him ? — Never 
 a shilling. 
 
 12755. You have had it a long time? — I have been 
 tenant for forty years. 
 
 12756. Chairman. — During that time have you re- 
 claimed the whole of it from bog ? — I reclaimed about 
 four acres, and then I drained all tho rest, and fenced 
 it, and tojDdressed it. 
 
 12757. The O'Conoe Don. — How long has the rent 
 been £18 4s. 86?? — About the year 1850, it was pre- 
 vious to that the same rent. They reduced it to £15 
 because I gave it up. The landlord, the late Major 
 Jones, said, " We will not let you go, we will reduce 
 it for you," so thoy reduced it to £15, and then two 
 year after, when Frank Barboiu- came in as agent, he 
 raised it. 
 
 12758. Mr. Shaw. — He is not agent now? — No, he 
 is turned out. 
 
 12759. Chairman. — Do yovi think this land would 
 be dear at its present rent even in its present state ? — 
 I do assure you it is dear at £10. I offered to give it 
 up to him, and he would not take it. I went to the 
 landlord this time twelve months, and said, "will you be 
 pleased to send a man or two men of your own choice 
 to see the land if it is worth the money." "I will not " 
 said he. " Will you be pleased " said 1 " to come 
 down and look at the land j'ourself." " I won't" said 
 he. " Well, Mr. Jones, I am not able to pay the rent, 
 will you take it from me." " I won't" said he, and he 
 sent me that process (produced). 
 
 12760. Mr. Shaw.— Has ho much land there?— 
 About 1,250 acres. 
 
 12761. Chairman. — Do you say this rent is out of 
 proportion to what the others are paying ? — I don't 
 say it is. 
 
 1 2762. Mr. Shaw. — You think it is all rented high ? 
 I think it is rented one-third too high. Will you allow 
 me to state the condition of all the tenantry. They 
 are all paying beyond wiiat thoy can live on, and they 
 have to live on shell fish partly. 
 
 12763. Does it go down to the sea? — The whole 
 
 estate is down in a strip on the side of the sea the 
 people almost live totally on shell fi.sh, and they have 
 to give almost every shilling they make. He would 
 not give, us an ass load of wrack without payino- for it 
 
 12764. He charges for the wrack ? — He does. 
 
 12765. Sir Henry does not charge for the wrack? 
 
 Oh no, sir, he does not. 
 
 12766. Chaiem-^n. — You offered not only thatthere 
 should be an inquiry into the rent, but that he should 
 name the person ? — I said "be pleased to send any 
 judge of your own choice, or two or three." "No I 
 won't." " Would you be pleased to come yourself." 
 " No, I won't " said he. 
 
 12767. Mr. Shaw.— You would be satisfied with 
 any fair man's valuation ? — I would. 
 
 12768. Chairman. — Do you think the tenants 
 generally would be disposed to take the same view of 
 it ? — They would. I will just tell you how it is. fle 
 values the land high first; supposing now a man pays £10 
 for his land, he then says, " I will lay on 50s. for the 
 wrack on the sea shore, that is £12 10s., while the land 
 is not at present worth 10s. They used to make a 
 large quantity of kelp, and it helped to pay the rent, 
 but there is no buying for kelp now, so the poor man 
 is done. If the poor man has to sell his cow to pay 
 his rent, and his out house is waste, and he puts in perhaps 
 a shoemaker, as a tradesman, into the house, and that 
 tradesman would give him £1 a year for the rent, 
 actually Mr. Jones comes down and says, " you must 
 give me that." 
 
 12769. Mr. Shaw. — He does not compel him to 
 turn the man out? — No, he must get the rent. 
 He also would take an acre from one man, half-anacre 
 from another man, a rood, perhaps, from another 
 man, and so on, and give it to his next neighhour, 
 and he charges it to the man he gives it to, and still" 
 won't reduce the rent on the man he takes it from. 
 
 12770. Chairman. — That has been done? — I can 
 swear it. He gives and takes land between townlands 
 and farms, and two have to pay for one piece of land. 
 
 12771. When did Mr. Jones become possessed of thif 
 pi'operty? — It was in 1876. 
 
 12772. Mr. Shaw.— Hisfather died then, I suppose! 
 —Yes. 
 
 12773. But it is in the family for along time? — 
 Oh, yes. 
 
 12774. Chairman. — Were these rules of the estate 
 going on in those days, or only of late ? — I helieve 
 it is going on fifty or sixty years. 
 
 12775. Mr. Shaw. — Who was the agent before that! 
 — Mr. Patterson. He used to be squeezing the people 
 out. He would go round from house to house to see 
 in what state they would have a firkin of butter, to get 
 a hold of it. 
 
 12776. Chairman. — And those tenants, generally, 
 have they remained on for the sake of sticking to the 
 l)lace ? — They could not go anywhere else, could not 
 find any other place. 
 
 12777. Mr. Shaw. — There is no fishing thereat 
 all?— No sir. 
 
 12778. It is too rough a coast? — Yes. 
 
 12779. Kelp was a large business ? — It was a large 
 business. , It was my grandfather took this farm, and 
 kelp was then 10.s. Qd. a cwt., and he took that farm 
 for the purpose of getting seaweed to make the kelp, 
 because we could then make a, good half year's rent 
 on it. That is gone, and we cannot make the rent 
 out of the land, the seaweed is not worth lifting. 
 
 127S0. Not worth lifting for kelp ?— Except from 
 1st of March to the 1st of June, for manure, and bad 
 manure it makes. 
 
 12781. The O'Conor Don.— Does the £18 4s. M. 
 include kelp rent ? — It does include all. 
 
 12782. Mr. Shaw.— Your own landlord, you are 
 thorouglil}- satisfied with ? — He is a splendid gentle- 
 men. My own Ordnance valuation with Sir Henry is 
 £29 lO.s-.', and my rent, £24, and he gave me an 
 abatement afterwards, which I did not expect. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 429 
 
 12783. Chairjian.^TLcii it is only by means of 
 having that holding that you are able to live on at 
 all ?— Only for the holding I have from Sir Henrj-, it 
 would not support me one month. In the last five 
 years, I did not make a half year's rent under Mr. 
 Jones. I put eight yearlings on eight acres, a good 
 acre ought to feed nearly three, and I pledge myself 
 the eight acres did not feed the eight year-olds. I 
 offered to Mr. Jones to take it off my hands, and 
 give me some compensation for my outlay. '' No," 
 said he, " I won't give you a halfpenny." You may 
 say that was a bad landlord to process me for the 
 running half-year's rent [producing process], an^ there 
 is the attorney's receipt. There is another thing I 
 
 want to mention, we are charged half-a-crown for a 
 ticket for turf. He gave me a ticket for a cwt. of 
 turf, last June twelvemonths ; last June I went to 
 him for a cwt. of turf, he charged me 13«., and gave 
 me a ticket only for forty barrels, and that is the rule 
 on the estate. 
 
 12784. Mr. Shaw, — You don't get turf with your 
 farm ? — He charges 3d. a barrel, for every load of 
 turf 
 
 12785. They are small holdings'? — Yes; and he 
 gives thirty or forty barrels of turf, that would not 
 half do a tenant, and then he charges 3d. a barrel for 
 all after that. 
 
 The witness then retired. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Toung 
 
 12786. Mr. Shaw. — "What part of the country do 
 you come from t — Drumcliffe. 
 
 12787. Chairman. — Mr. Jones' estate ? — It is sir, 
 but I don't live on it now. 
 
 12788. The O'Conoe Don. — You have given up 
 the holding you had on it 1 — His agent dispossessed 
 me. 
 
 12789. When were you dispossessed ? — It is a 
 long time ago sir, about five years after the first 
 famine. 
 
 12790. Chairman. — Nearly thirty years ago? — 
 Yes. 
 
 12791. Did you go into another farm afterwards 1 
 — No sir. I have been as a caretaker ever since. 
 
 12792. Who are you caretaker for? — Mr. Wallace. 
 
 12793. What do you complain of, about Mr. Jones? 
 — I have no complaint against Mr. Jones, but his 
 driver formerly, he dispossessed me, and would not 
 allow me for my improvements or work, and took my 
 hay and sold it. When I went to get an acknow- 
 ledgement of the hay, the agent said he knew nothing 
 about it. 
 
 12794. Was this thirty years ago? — Yes sir. 
 
 Mr. John Gilroy examined. „ ., , 
 
 Mr. John 
 
 12795. Do you know anytiung tnat has been going "^""y- 
 on for the last ten years ? — No sir. 
 
 12796. Are you a tenant anywhere? — No sir, 
 except occasionally for Mr. Wallace. 
 
 12797. Mr. Shaw. — How much land did you hold 
 from him ? — Three and a half acres. 
 
 12798. And how much rent did you pay? — £1 an 
 acre. He brought a sheriff and dispossessed five of 
 us, and gave it to his sister's son, the agent, Frank 
 Barbour. 
 
 12799. How much rent did you pay? — If he gave 
 us an acknowledgement for the hay and our work, he 
 was overpaid to the best of my opinion. He set us 
 to work during a whole winter and spring. 
 
 12800. On his own land ? — On the estate, along the 
 roadside, to make a fence. 
 
 12801. Chairman. — There is not the same agent 
 now ? — No, he was made quit the agency. The value 
 of my work was seventy-five days, and we thought 
 that we should get 2s. Qd. a day, and we did not get 
 a halfpenny. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. Michael Hart examined. 
 
 12802. The O'Conor Don.— What place do you 
 live ? — Shancough, near Geevagh. 
 
 12803. Mr. Shaw.— That is near the town?— No,- 
 it is fourteen or sixteen miles away. 
 
 12804. Chairman. — I think you hold three farms, 
 do you ? — Yes, your honour. 
 
 12805. And who are the landlords? — Mr. Conboy, 
 Mr. Powel, and I had a number of landlords within the 
 last ten or twelve years, it has been changing hands. 
 
 12806. Who is the third?— Mr. Howley is the third 
 now. 
 
 12807. Do they look after their own property, or 
 have they agents ? — They are owners in full I should 
 think. 
 
 1 2808. Do they employ agents ? — No, Howley has 
 an agent on the lands, he is living at Monkstown, but 
 he does not come near us. 
 
 12809. Mr. Shaw. — What is the agent's name^ — 
 Tom Tionan. 
 
 12810. He lives on the land? — Yes, and collects the 
 
 rent. 
 
 12811. Chairman. — Do you hold eight orniae acres 
 under Mr. Conboy? — I do, your honour, something 
 about eight or nine acres of arable land with some cut 
 away bog. 
 
 12812. And what is the rent of that? — £20 even, 
 
 sir. 
 
 12813. Mr Shaw.— They are Irish acres I suppose ? 
 — I don't know when there was a survey taken of ii, I 
 don't well know how many acres. 
 
 12814. And the valuation is how much ? — £11 5s. 
 
 12815. Was that always the rent, £20, since you 
 It was since I got it from him. 
 
 12816. Chairman. — Since you got it, have you 
 
 got it? 
 
 drained and fenced the bog part ? — Yes, sir. I repeat- 
 edly opened drains in the bog, he opened them himself, 
 but they have closed in and I have had to reopen them 
 since. 
 
 12817. Do you consider this £20 rent is too high for 
 the farm? — It is, sir. 
 
 12818. Considering what you have done yourself? — 
 Far too high. 
 
 12819. Do you think it would be worth it, including 
 your own improvements ? — It would not be worth it 
 all. 
 
 12820. Mr. Shaw.— Even as it stands at present 
 with all you have done ? — Yes ; I have given it a great 
 deal of assistance and left it without tilling it at all. 
 
 12821. It is a long way -from town, from a market ? 
 — It is sixteen or seventeen English miles, or more. 
 
 12822. You have to bring your corn in here ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 12823. Chairman.— The farm under Mr. Powel, 
 how many acres is that? — Something about thirty-three 
 acres, there is a trifle of waste. 
 
 1 2824. What do you pay for that? — In one place Tpay 
 £29 capital for one division under Mr. Powel, the valu- 
 ation is £21 5s. I built a house on it and the reviser 
 was sent and added thirty shillings to my valuation, it 
 was only £19 15s. before. 
 
 12825. Then Mr. Howley's farm? -I have that 
 under Mr. Powel also ; £8 15s. is the Government 
 valuation of it. 
 
 12826. And what do you pay for that ? — £18 14s., 
 I have the receipt of it. 
 
 12827. These are bo.th under Mr. Powel ?— Yes. 
 
 12828. The O'Conor Don.— What Mr. Powel is 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Hart. 
 
430 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Hart. 
 
 tliis ? — Of Tinnecarra. Last year he abated, and was 
 pretty fair. Still we pay too muoli. 
 
 12829. Mr. Shaw. — Did you build a house on any 
 of this land 1 — I built a house on that land where the 
 reviser put 30s. and made other improvements. 
 
 12830. Mr. Shav.'.— ^Tou have no lease ?— Eo 
 lease. 
 
 128.'')1. But the rents have ' not here raised for a 
 long time ? — They ha^u not been raiserl for a long 
 time. 
 
 12832. Chairman. — How did you find the rents in 
 the better times — five years ago ] — I found them 
 always oppressive, too high at any time, and the men 
 that were tliere before me had to leave it. It is 
 always oppressive to pay such a i-ent on it. 
 
 12833. Have you ever applied for a new valuation 
 to the landlord 1 — 1 always complained of it. 
 
 12834. The O'Cosoii Don. — How long have you 
 had this land from Mr. Powel 1 — I am living on it 
 thirty years. Mr. Powel has only lately come on it ; 
 he has left it as he got it. It is not Mr. Powel we 
 have to complain of, but the inau we hail before him. 
 Mr. Thompson, you might heai' tell of him. 
 
 12S3.5. Did Mr. Powel purchase the property ? — 
 His father-in-law did, and luade it over to him in a 
 mariiage portion, 1 belie\e, and when the father-in- 
 law was about purchasing it and came to see his lands 
 previous to the purchase, wo told him the lands were 
 high, and we would expect an abatement from the 
 coming purchaser. He told us that if lie was the pur- 
 chaser, he would certainly abate, and that the lands 
 
 were high ; and when the lands were purchased he 
 came into my house and collected the tenants, and' it 
 is what he said then that he had become the put', 
 chasei-, and purchased it high, and even as hio-h ag 
 he purchased it he could get a good bid that would 
 pay him still for his trouble before he left the court- 
 house, and if we would not pay him the standino 
 rent he would take the bid. He was not a Ijad man 
 if he gave the land at the valuation, but he was us 
 great a bully as the rest, and gave the land too 
 high. 
 
 12836. How long have you had that holding of 
 Mr. Howley's? — I had it under the Thompsons long 
 before he became the owner. 
 
 12837. It is a portion of the same estate? — It was 
 sir, and that was what supplies it and left me so many 
 landlords. They made several divisions when sellin™ 
 the land. 
 
 12838. Did Mr. Howley raise the rent?— No; lie 
 left it the same. 
 
 12839. None of the landlords have raised the rente 
 since they purchased ? — Mr. Conboy raised after the 
 purchase. He added £30 a j^ear over and above the 
 rental he purchased by. 
 
 12840. Did he raise your rent in particular ?— He 
 did, sir ; I have the rent here. This will tell the 
 truth. M'Loughlin and 1 were in company, wi 
 the rental then was £41, and now £29 Mr. 
 M'Loughlin pays, and I £20. There is another cot- 
 tier who pays £1 on our division, which makes 
 it £50. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 M'Donough. 
 
 Mr. Patrick M'Donough examined. 
 
 by Percival ? — He sold 
 Conboy it ? — Twelve or 
 the Percival property 
 
 12841. Chairman. — Your holding is eighteen or 
 twenty acres ? — When surveyed formerly, under 
 Colonel Percival, it was only eighteen and a half, some 
 forty years ago. 
 
 12842. Mr. Shaw.— What rent now?— .£42 4s. M. 
 
 12843. Before it was how much ?— £27 10s. 
 
 12844. Chairman. — And the Government valua- 
 tion, you say, is now £24 ? — £24 ; I have the poor 
 rate r^eipt to show you. 
 
 12845. When was it soh: 
 it to an Englishman. 
 
 12846. How long has Mr. 
 fourteen years. 
 
 12847. Mr. Shaw.- It was 
 originally ? — It was. 
 
 12848. Chairman. — Did your grandfather and 
 father and yourself do all the work upon it in the way 
 of improvements? — No, sir; the landlord done nothiug 
 on my holding. 
 
 12849. Then .vou and your father and gnmdfather 
 have done it all ? — We did. 
 
 12850. Whatever there is in the wa)- of buildin"-s, 
 and so on ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 128.51. Thatched buildings ?— Yes, sir. 
 
 128.52. Mr. Shaw. — Comfortable houses, I suppose, 
 and offices ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 12853. Did you i,'eclaim much of the land ? — Well, I 
 did reclaim some of the land. 
 
 12854. Pie nevgr helped you? — No, only a few 
 barrels of lime I got from Mr. Conboy at one time ; I 
 think I got nearly thirty ban-els of lime. 
 
 12855. Ch.mrman. — How long is that ago? — Five 
 or six years ago. \ , 
 
 12856. Was that after doing some reclamation ? — It 
 was for reclaiming, 
 
 12857. Mr. Shaw. — You had been draining it 
 yourself ? — I had. , 
 
 12858. And it wfi-s boggy land? — Yes, sir. 
 
 12859. You think the rent too high now? — I think 
 far. too, high. 
 
 12860. It is a long way to a market? — The same 
 distance as Hart — it is the one townland. 
 
 12861. You find it difficult 'to make a li-\-ing out of 
 it ?— 1 do. " 
 
 12862. Chairman. — Is Thomas Melanny a neigh 
 bour of A ours ? — He is. 
 
 12863. What is his rent?— £36 8s. I had his 
 receipt Ifst night, and here it is. [Produced.] 
 
 12864. And, then, you say his valuation is £20 15s.l 
 —£20 5s. 
 
 12865. In his case were the houses built by hisjiri'- 
 dece.ssors ? — -They were, sir. 
 
 12866. And reclaimed and drained by them ? — Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 12867. Has there been much clone in the way of im- 
 provement since you remember it ? — -I think about an 
 acre or so. 
 
 12868. It has been done gradually through a great 
 number of years? — It has, es2)ecially since Mr. Conboy 
 came in. 
 
 12869. Mr. Shaw. — They believe in him as a good 
 landlord, do they ? — He could not be a bad one to 
 them, for they paid him the rent honestly as long as 
 they were able, until i^hey were unable. 
 
 12870. But that is owing to the bad times and the 
 high rents ? — It is, sir. 
 
 12871. Have you good crops this year? — The worst 
 potato crop in the world. 
 
 12872. What seed did you use? — Piocks and 
 
 Chairman. — Are you near the sea?— No, 
 
 Skerries. 
 12873, 
 sir. 
 
 12874. Near mountains? — Convenient to the 
 Geevah Mountains — I suppose within a mile of them. 
 
 12875. Is the land wet? — There is a part of it wet. 
 There is a river running along, and a great deal of 
 marshy land. This land we dug the bad potatoes on 
 is dry land. 
 
 12876. Have you been growing the same seed tliere 
 for several years? — Yes, sir. 
 
 12877. Mr. Shaw. — You did not try the Cham- 
 pions ? — We got none of them. We could get none of 
 them from the Guai-dians because we were over the 
 valuation. 
 
 12878. And you were not able to buy? — No, sir. 
 
 12879. Chairman. — Then are you obliged to be dig- 
 ging the potatoes and feeding the pigs with them ?— ' 
 Oh, of course. We are using them ourselves as well 
 as the pigs, and they are not fit for food. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 431 
 
 12880. At all events they will not keep ? — Yes, sir. 
 They are small, and never worse since 1846. 
 
 12881. Mr. Shaw. — -Do you usually have good 
 potatoes there 1 — Hart. — No, sir ; they are iisually bad. 
 There were not four years since 1816 that they were 
 good for eating. 
 
 12882. Do you use lime much up there? — M^Bo- 
 vjough. — No, sir. 
 
 l'-!883. Would it not be a good thiag for the land ? 
 — It is not thought much of. 
 
 12884. CiiAinMAN. — How far would you have to 
 draw the lime % — ^There are limekilas not far distant. 
 
 12885. And what would you pay for the barrel? — 
 One shilling. I use a trifle of lime sometimes, in odd 
 years thirty or forty barrels, but it was not on potatoes, 
 on oat crops. 
 
 Oc«. 14, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Patiict 
 M'Donou^h. 
 
 Mr. Michael M'Laughlin examined. 
 
 12886. Chairman. — Are you under Mr. Conboy % — 
 I am under him, comrading with these two men. 
 
 12887. What do you pay ?— I pay £29, and £13 15s. 
 is my valuation. 
 
 12888. You have no houses upon that holding? — 
 Nothing but a herd's house. 
 
 12889. Then where do you hold land besides, where 
 do you live? — I live near Kilronan, I hold land 
 from Lady Louisa Tenison, or the deceased Colonel 
 Tenison. 
 
 12890. And this holding from Mr. Conboy is? — 
 Fourteen and a half acres. There is some little useless 
 waste that I lose by cattle going in, and I drained 
 some of that, and secured it from cattle beiag lost. 
 
 12891. Mr. Shaw. — ^Was the rent raised on you? 
 — It was raised on me. 
 
 12892. When? — At the time Mr. Conboy came in. 
 
 12893. He put on something additional? — Yes. 
 
 12894. How much? — Mart. — It was £9 ; we were 
 in '•' CO." at the time. 
 
 12895. Do you thiak the rent is too high? — 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 M'Laughlin. 
 
 IPLdughlin — I am certain of it ; it is more than I 
 am able to pay. 
 
 12896. Do you till it?— I do, very little. 
 
 12897. You run cattle on it? — I do. I was short 
 at the last rent something — a few shillings — I was not 
 able to meet it, and he gave me bs. in the pound, 
 and thon I was short a few shillings after, and he 
 mentioned it on the back of the receipt, and now he 
 has us processed for a half-year's rent. 
 
 Hart. — He has processed for a year's ; there is three 
 half-years' rent due and never paid. 
 
 12898. Chairman. — That is half a yeai- owing and 
 the back half-year? — Yes. 
 
 12899. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose you have pretty 
 good oats up there ? — Middling good ; there was some 
 strange seed that did pretty well. There is no return 
 from the oat crop yet. 
 
 McLaughlin. — I hope, gentlemen, you will give us 
 fair play, and that is all we want. 
 The witnesses then withdrew 
 
 Mr. Pateick Conlon examined. 
 
 12900. Chairman. — Now, you hand in this paper? 
 — I do your honour. 
 Chairman reads : — 
 
 " We, the undersigned tenants of the late Captain 
 Thompson, Knockador, county Sligo, occupying the lands 
 of Coolamoonean, Ballinphil, Rinnatruffane (East), and 
 
 Garoke ; also, the tenants of Edward Howley, Esq., residing 
 at Monkstown, near the city of Dublin, said tenants, oc- 
 cupying the lands of Rinnatruffane (West), and Ballinphul, 
 sends before the honourable Commissioners, appointed by 
 the Government, their grievances, hoping the Government 
 ■will grant them an abatement to afford them to keep their 
 lands, said lands being raised in rents in the year 1859." 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Conlon. 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 Annual Value. 
 
 Yearly Kent. 
 
 
 A. 
 
 B. 
 
 p. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 John Conlon, 
 
 52 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 49 
 
 107 
 
 Pat Conlon, . 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 35 15 
 
 57 11 2 
 
 William Harte, 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 0_Half barren. 
 
 10 15 
 
 17 7 9 
 
 Thomas M'Donogl 
 
 h 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 0—8 of which are barren. 
 
 15 15 
 
 25 
 
 James Conlon, 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 24 
 
 Michael Higgins, 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 14 5 
 
 21 15 
 
 Dominick Early, 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 10 
 
 14 
 
 Pat Tonra, . 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 — One-half barren. 
 
 5 
 
 10 
 
 Tom Davey, . 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 12 10 
 
 James Laydon, 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 7 5 
 
 11 14 
 
 Pat Early, . 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 — Half barren. 
 
 7 5 
 
 14 14 
 
 John Hartt, . 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 1 
 
 0— 
 
 13 5 
 
 18 13 
 
 Peter Hartt, . 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 0— „ 
 
 8 
 
 11 19 1 
 
 Bernard Hartt, 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 0— „ 
 
 13 6 
 
 16 13 4 
 
 James Nangle, 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 27— „ 
 
 4 
 
 6 12 10 
 
 Thomas Hartt, 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 0— „ 
 
 6 10 
 
 10 10 
 
 Thomas Tunan, 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 0— „ 
 
 9 15 
 
 18 10 8 
 
 Owen Flynn, 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 7 15 
 
 13 9 6 
 
 Michael Convy, 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 — Half barren. 
 
 6 5 
 
 13 6 4 
 
 12901. Chairman. — Do you know all those persons 
 •who sign? — I represent them, and I will tell you how. 
 "We heard that the Commissioners would not hear 
 every man's story ; that one, a delegate, would do for 
 a number. We all assembled, and ,1 saw their re- 
 ceipts, the annual value, and the rent, and I took it 
 down. I must only say, I am from the same part as 
 the three men that went out. Landlords of our 
 neighbourhood are a great deal to blame for the distur- 
 bances; it is a poor country,_and we have no land- 
 lords. 
 
 12902. Mr. Shaw. — No one residing there? — JNo 
 landlords residing there; all foreign, except The 
 
 O'Conor Don's brother, the present member for the 
 county. I am in the parish of Geevah, and we have 
 not a landlord in the whole vicinity but Mr. 
 O'Connor. 
 
 12903. They are all small men?— Yes j all land 
 grabbers — mortgagees who bought up these little 
 patches of property at a high rent, and now strive to 
 get the discount of their money, in some form, on the 
 2)oor tenants. 
 
 12904. Chairman. — Is that by raising the rents of 
 late years ?— Don't you see, when you are heavily bur- 
 dened you cannot pay rents. 
 
 12905. Who are the landlords under whom these 
 
432 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Gonlon j 
 
 Oct. 14, 188P. tenants hold ?— All these tenants live under the late 
 Captain Thompson and Edward Howley. 
 
 12906. Can you say when their rents were fixed? — 
 That -was all a barren or a waste, and then the poor 
 tenants got it at one-third of what they are paying 
 now, and as soon as they got these lands reclaimed and 
 fit for use, a value was put on them, and they must pay 
 that or else walk. 
 
 12907. When was that done?— Sometime after 
 1846. 
 
 12908. Have those same rents continued ever since ? 
 — Oh yes, your honour, the rack-rents, and they 
 always paid them without a word of dispute, until the 
 times turned in a way that we cannot now pay. 
 
 12909. Mr. Shaw. — You live on this estate yourself? 
 — I do your honour. 
 
 12910. How much land do you hold? — Twenty- 
 eight acres. I am paying £57 lis. 2d. 
 
 12911. Chairman. — Can you give the acreages of 
 the other 1 — John Conlon, he is paying £107 a year, 
 and his annual value is only £49. 
 
 12912. Do you know how many acres he holds ? — • 
 He holds twenty-seven in one farm and about twenty 
 in the other, two different qualities of land. 
 
 12913. Mr. Shaw.— Is it poor land generally? — 
 Cold poor land. 
 
 12914. The O'Conor Don.— And who is his land- 
 lord ? — Thompson. 
 
 12915. Mr. Shaw. — Itisalong way from a market ! 
 — We have no market but in this town. 
 
 12916. Chairman. — You hold how many acres?— 
 Twenty-eight acres. 
 
 12917. Mr. Shaw. — Do you consider the rents 
 excessive ? — The rents must be altered or lowered, or 
 we cannot pay rent. The system of collecting these 
 rents is, they bring in the poor tenant three months 
 before the rent becomes due, into the bank, and you 
 must pass your bill then and there and as soon as the 
 rent becomes due you must meet the bank. 
 
 12918. Chairman. — Then they put it on the bank 
 to recover the money? — Yes. 
 
 12919. Mr. Shaw. — And there is no escaping it?_ 
 No. 
 
 12920. TheO'CoNOE Don.— Is not that very often 
 at the request of the tenant ? — Yes, if you are not able 
 to pay. 
 
 12921. Chairman. — Who is the landlord ?— The 
 late Colonel Thompson, now the minor, at present itis 
 in the Courts. 
 
 12922. Mr. Shaw. — Who is the receiver?— Mr. 
 Lynch, a Roscommon man I think. 
 
 12923. Chairman. — And who is the other land- 
 lord ? — Edward Howley. 
 
 12924. And is there an agent there ? — There is one 
 Tincler. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. John 
 M'Manus and 
 Mr. Charles 
 P. M'Kenzie. 
 
 Mr. John M'Manus, Barony Constable, Coolaney, and Charles P. M'Kenzie, examined 
 
 Mr. John M'Manus examined. 
 
 12925. Chairman. — You farm land in this county ? 
 — I do sir. 
 
 12926. Under what landlord ?— Mr. O'Hara and 
 The MacDermott. 
 
 12927. How many acres do you farm altogether ? — ■ 
 I think about 300 under both. 
 
 12928. How much under Mr. O'Hara?— Aboiit 240. 
 
 12929. And the rest under The MacDermott?— Yes, 
 this includes all description of land. 
 
 12930. Mr. Shaw.— Mountain and arable ?— Yes. 
 
 12931. You live on Mr. O'Hara'sI suppose? — I do. 
 
 12932. What is the rent of it?— The rent of the 
 entire is £126. 
 
 12933. Have you a lease? — I have a lease of only 
 one of the farms, which I hold for Mr. O'Hara. 
 
 12934. Chairman.— Of Mr. O'Hara's farm?— Yes. 
 
 12935. And the other you hold as tenant from year 
 to year? — Under lease from The MacDermott. 
 
 12936. And what is the rent of the other farm? — 
 The rent of The MacDermott's farm is £46 a year. 
 
 12937. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres ? — Sixty, of 
 that there is about twenty-five acres of good land, and 
 the rest is reclaimable. 
 
 12938. Are those Irish or English acres? — English 
 acres. 
 
 12939. Chairman.— Do you come to speak here of 
 your own case, or as to the cases generally through 
 the country of the rents ? — Oh, I know the country 
 well. 
 
 12940. Have you any reason to speal-c of your own 
 rent as being high ? — I think my own is fair enough. 
 
 12941. Mr. Shaw. — Has the rent being raised on 
 you within your own time on either of those farms ? 
 — Very little. 
 
 12942. But it has been raised ? — Very little, indeed. 
 
 12943. How long ago? — About sixteen or eighteen 
 years ago. 
 
 12944. Was that the falling in of a lease ?— It was. 
 
 1 2945. On Mr. O'Hara's?- Yes, I will tell you how 
 it was raised, it was raised to bring in the tithe-rent- 
 charge only. 
 
 12946. Which you were subject to before as a lease- 
 holder?— Yes. 
 
 12947. Have you improved it much? — Oh, yes. 
 
 12948. And you have no lease? — I have my own 
 life. 
 
 12949. And if he wished he could put on a high 
 rent ?— No. 
 
 12950. You have only the character of the man, 
 and the custom of the estate to rely on? — Yes, I built 
 a house on portion of it, it cost me about £600, 1 knew 
 I would be safe enough without a lease. 
 
 12951. Chairman. — Did the landlord contribute 
 towards improvements of that sort ? — Not as far as. I 
 was concerned. 
 
 12952. Mr. Shaw. — But does he generally on his, 
 estate? — Yes. Gives timber and slates. There are 
 some places where he gives them the means of buUding, 
 and charges them interest on the money. 
 
 12953. The O'Conor Don.— Don't you live in the 
 little town of Coolaney? — I do. 
 
 12954. It was in that village you built the house? 
 —Yes. 
 
 12955. It was not on the farm?^ — There is land 
 attached to it. 
 
 12956. Mr. Shaw ^J)id you buUd that without a 
 
 lease ? — There is a. lease, and I am one of the lives. 
 
 12957. Chairman.-^ You, have an opportunity of 
 seeing a good deal of what is going on among the 
 smaller tenantry ?- — I have as barony constable for the 
 last twenty-six years. 
 
 12958. We hear general complaints as to the rents 
 being very high ?-^They are' on some estates. There 
 is a property just adjoining Mr. O'Hara's and The 
 MacDermott's, ' which belonged to the late Captain 
 Thompson, and that is set very high, so much so, that 
 the tenantry are not able to pay any rent. 
 
 12959. Mr. Shaw. — And that is your opinion as a 
 judge of land ? — Yes. 
 
 12960. Chairman.— Do you find that is on the 
 larger estates or the small estates ? — The small estates. 
 
 12961. Mr. Shaw.— Do you know Geevah?— Yes; 
 a little. 
 
 12962. That is the same class of property ?— Yes, I 
 was receiving rents there for the late William Thomp- 
 son. The land is very bad. 
 
 12963. No tenantry can pay rent out of that and 
 live 1 — As far as I know the property, it is sold 
 since, and I believe the purchaser is not making nincli 
 of it. 
 
 12964. Chairman. — You have said you don't con- 
 sider them good tenants, but it is impossible they can 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 453 
 
 be good under the circumstances t — I did not say they 
 were not good tenants, but their rents were so hich 
 let, they could not be good. 
 
 129G5. Mr. Shaw. — But under the circumstances it 
 is very hard for a man to be industrious where the rent 
 is so oppressive? — Yes. 
 
 12966. His whole life goes trying to make the 
 rent 1 — Yes ; they live by going into debt. 
 
 12967. Is that system of billing, going into the 
 banks, common ?-,— Not in my neighbovirhood, they 
 are so situated that they cannot get bills. This 
 Knockdoo place, the owner is dead, Captain Thompson, 
 there is a receiver on it. I know they have not been 
 able to pay, they might struggle to pay something. 
 There were two poor fellows had bills in the bank and 
 they sold their cattle to pay them. 
 
 12968. Chairman. — Do you apply your observation 
 as to their inability to get on to the last few years 
 especially, or even in better times? — The last few 
 years especially. 
 
 12969. Did it apply to some extent before that ? — 
 They paid their rents punctually before. 
 
 12970. "Were they able to mp,ke a fair and reason- 
 able living out of that 1 — I don't think they were. If 
 they paid their rents they had not sufficient to stock 
 their land. 
 
 12971. Mr. Shaw. — But the rent was too high for 
 poor land away from a market town 1 — Oh, there is a 
 town near it, Sligo and Tobercurry ; too high indeed. 
 
 12972. Eighteen miles 'I — Oh, it is fair enough. 
 
 12973. Chairman. — The tenants all refer to the 
 tenement valuation, do you think that that is a highly 
 vahied part of the country 1 — I know cases where the 
 tenement valuation is high enough. 
 
 12974. You think it would be high enough at the 
 tenement valuation? — I am sure it would. I know 
 th(3 valuation of all these lands as I go along. 
 
 12975. The O'Conor Don. — Is that in your barony ? 
 — It is, sir. 
 
 12976. I did not think Geevah was? — Oh, no, I 
 am not alluding to that, except the portions I received 
 rent on. 
 
 12977. Chairman. — ^You speak generally of the 
 country you pass through and know most of? — Yes, 
 to be sure ; I know some as good land in Geevagh as 
 can be found anywhere. There is another property 
 near Coolaney, Cabra, that Mr. WUliams is the 
 owner of. 
 
 12978. Mr. Shaw.— Is that highly rented?— Yes. 
 
 12979. People, poor? — The rent is too high, and it 
 is a mountain farm, but he is giving them employment 
 for the last year or more, and they are getting 9s. a 
 week, he is giving 4a out of every pound they pay. 
 
 12980. But if they were dependant on the land 
 they would not be well off? — No ; it would be almost a 
 shame to charge them so high a rent. 
 
 12981. Chairman. — Do you think that they would 
 be satisfied if some independent person was to value 
 and say what would be a fair value ? — I am sure they 
 would. 
 
 12982. Mr. Shaw. — As between landlord and 
 tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 12983. It would be a better plan for the landlord 
 i)i the long run 1 — Decidedly better. There is another 
 "vo])erty joins that called Cappagh, it belonged to 
 ' .'.in Patrick Somers. 
 
 12984. Who does it belong to now?— Mr. Dolan. 
 
 It was purchased in the Landed Estates Court by the 
 uncle of the present owners, and the rents was raised 
 very considerably, so much so that they are very badly 
 able to pay anything. 
 
 12985. How long is that ago ? — Fifteen or sixteeri 
 years, and they are very miserable. There is no 
 employment for them. The Dolans themselves are 
 very poor, althovigh they have the pi'operty, they are 
 as poor as they can be. 
 
 12986. Would it be any advantage to that class of 
 tenants if made peasant proprietors? — Indeed it would 
 not. 
 
 12987. If they had to pay the half-yearly instal- 
 ments on that poor land 1 — The Dolans are as poor as 
 the tenants. 
 
 12988. But if they had it at a fair and icasonable 
 rent ? — If they had it as they had it before the Dolans 
 got it, every man was fairly well off. 
 
 12989. And they are industrious people ? — They are 
 industrious people. On the Williams' property, 
 before he got it, the tenants had a right of turbary, 
 and a right of mountain for the cattle, and they paid 
 nothing for it, and when he got it he took it from 
 them. 
 
 12990. What did he do with the mountain ?— He 
 took it from them also. 
 
 12991. And let it to somebody else? — Oh, no, it 
 was too bad. 
 
 12992. Did he raise the rents ?— No ; he left then 
 as they were. 
 
 12993. But the rents were too high 1 — Yes. 
 
 12994. Chairman. — Do you know whether, 
 through the country generally, there is a practice with 
 or without the landlord's consent to sell their hold- 
 ings by the tenants ? — No ; they qannot sell without 
 the landlord's consent, but I never saw the landlord 
 refuse to consent if the man who purchased was of 
 good character. 
 
 12995. Mr. Shaw. — And the tenant was broken 
 down ; they would be glad to get rid of him t — I have 
 not seen that. 
 
 12996. On good estates they are allowed to 
 charge? — They are allowed to charge if they wish 
 to sell their holdings, subject to approval. 
 
 12997. On Mr. Cooper's? — I don't know. There 
 is only a very small portion of his property in our 
 district. Lands called Carha, and they are all 
 improved and the lands drained. The rent does not 
 press on them. 
 
 12998. Chairman. — They are employed by him, do 
 you mean ? — Yes. 
 
 12999. Mr. Shaw. — And the rents are not exces- 
 sive ? — No. 
 
 13000. Labourers, how are they off in your country ? 
 — The labourers at present are employed on the 
 public works. The wages are very fair. 
 
 13001. What are they? — Nine shillings a week. 
 
 13002. And they get a free house ? — lam sjjeaking 
 now of the neighbourhood generally. 
 
 13003. I mean fixed labourers on farms ? — We have 
 very few of them ; we employ boys and men whenever 
 we require him. 
 
 13004. Chairman. — In these relief works are they 
 paid by piece-work 1 — By the day ; in some cases by 
 piece-work. As far as Williams' place is concerned 
 they are all paid by the day. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1830. 
 
 Mr. John 
 M'. VI anus and 
 Mr. Charles 
 P. M'Kenzie. 
 
 3K 
 
434 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1830. 
 
 Mr. Jolin 
 M'lVlaiins and 
 Mr. Cha'-les 
 P. MacKenzle. 
 
 Mr. Chakles P. MacKenzie, Coolaney, examined. 
 
 George 
 Errington, 
 esq., Ji.p. 
 
 13005. Chaieman.^You are acting as sub-agent ? 
 On Mr. O'Hara's property in this county. 
 
 13006. That is over 22,000 acres ?— Yes. 
 Who is the head agent 1— Mr. F. F. HamiJ. 
 
 13007. 
 ton. 
 1.300S. 
 13009. 
 13010. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — Does. he, live, there'? — No. 
 
 Where 1 — In the county Meath^ at Enfield. 
 
 I see you have given some answers as to the 
 sale and disposition of holdingfi out of Ulster, on Mr. 
 O'Hara's property, which is just mentioned, they are 
 allowed subject to the landlord's approval t — Yes. 
 
 13011. Have you, since you have been there, known 
 of many cases arising from the sale of holdings ? — Yes, 
 in a few instances, of peojjle emigrating, and such as 
 that, they sell their holdings before going. 
 
 13012. Do they get a large piice ? — From six to 
 eight years' purchase. 
 
 13013. Is there a price fixed by the landlord 1 — No, 
 they are allowed to get as much as they can. 
 
 13011. CH.-vnniAN. — And he only requires it should 
 be a person of good character 1 — Yes. 
 
 13015. A solvent man? — Yes. 
 
 1301G. Mr. Shaw. — He has a pi-eference for the 
 tenants on the property? — Yes; they always get a 
 preference. 
 
 ■ 13017. Chairman. — In any of these ca^es have you 
 found the change has been an advantage to the holding 1 
 — I cannot say it makes much difference, it is. generally 
 the same class get it. 
 
 13018. Mr. Shaw. — Your rents are paid under any 
 circumstances 1 — Yes. 
 
 1301'.J. Are they large farms ? — No, generally small. 
 
 13020. What size generally ? — From ten to twenty 
 acres. 
 
 13021. Ai-e they able to make a living on these 
 farms ? — They are ; but not a good living: 
 
 13022. Without any other means of living "? — They 
 have no other means of living unless they get employ- 
 ment from the landlord. 
 
 13023. Good land ?— Mixed. 
 
 13024. Do they improve it much ? — Yery little, ex- 
 cept reclamations by the tenants of cut-away bog. 
 
 13025. The general twenty acre men have not been 
 improving much 1 — Not to any great extent. 
 
 1302G. Chairman. — How many years have you 
 been there 1 — Six years. 
 
 13027. I see you say here that there have been no 
 evictions on this estate since the passing of the Land 
 Act of 1870, nor for many years previous to that day? 
 — No sir, there have been no evictions for the last 
 twenty years. 
 
 13028. You have heard what Mr. M'Manushas said 
 about the tenantry through the country, do you agree 
 in liis view as to the rent being high, generally, on 
 these small properties ? — I know very little about 
 these small properties, I will only answer for Mr. 
 O'Hara's estate. 
 
 13021). ISlv. SlXAff. — The rents are moderate on Mr. 
 O'Hara's estate ? — I consider they are. 
 
 13030. People able to live ? — Yes; he gives a good 
 deal of employment on his estate to the tenants. 
 
 13031. Does he give anything to help improvements? 
 — He does in many ways. 
 
 13032. Do you promote improyements ? — Yes 
 drainage and fencing. 
 
 13033. . Diaijiing, he gets moi^ey, for from the Board 
 of Works ? — No, except this year when he got money 
 from the, Board of Works, part of which went to 
 draining. 
 
 1303i. Charges interest to the tenantry? — No 
 nothing. 
 
 13035. Chairman. — Do you know of any difficulty 
 of getting money from the Board of Works 1 — No, sir. 
 
 13Q3e. .Or.m.uch delay?— No, sir. 
 
 13037. Was, that money at a low rate? — Yes; he 
 got it in two instalments,, £500 up to the present. 
 
 13038. Has he many tenants employed ? — Generally 
 forty or fifty. for the last six months — sometimes more 
 and sometimes less. 
 
 13039. Generally on their own holding — Some and 
 others of them make roads into the turbaries and 
 pasture. 
 
 13040. Mr. Shaw. — Are you from the North?— 
 Well, I am. 
 
 13041. You have tenant-right on that property just 
 as good as in the North 1 — Yes ; fixity, of tenure, fair 
 rents, and free sale. 
 
 13042. You never dispossess ? — No. 
 
 13043. And you help them and let them make the 
 best of their holdings ? — Yes. 
 
 13044. Chairman. — Is that what is called "usages 
 corresponding in essential particulars with tenant- 
 right " ?— It is. 
 
 "13045. The O'Conor Don.— Has Mr. O'Hara spent 
 much money on improvements for his tenants? — A 
 great deal ; he keepis a staff of men always improving. 
 
 13046. You could not give us the figures as to the 
 amount spent? — Generally about £500 or £600 every 
 year. 
 
 13047. Mr. Shaw. — Mr. O'Hara Jives there?— 
 Always^ sir, except for a few weeks in the year. 
 
 13048. And there is no discontent on the property! 
 — None, there is no. complaint whatever ; there are a 
 few small properties Mr. M'Manus mentioned, there 
 are complaints there. 
 
 13049. Chairman. — Do you find an inclination 
 among the tenants to ask that rents should correspond 
 "with the Government valuation ? — No ; jMr. O'JHara 
 gave them a reduction of 15 per cent, on the three last 
 half-years, and in a great many cases the rent is not 
 above the Government valuation on Mr. O'Hara's pro- 
 perty. 
 
 13050. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any large grass 
 farms ?^AVe have. 
 
 13051. Mixed, I suppose ? — Yes. 
 
 13052. But farmed on the English system, f suppose, 
 farming ? — No ; their farming needs much im- 
 provement. 
 
 13053. But they are all natives of the country, I 
 suppose, not Scotch or English? — None, their fore- 
 fathers have been on the estate for generations. 
 
 13054. Are the houses good generally on the estate ? 
 — Yes ; Mr. O'Hara helps them with slates and 
 timber free, or advances the money 
 
 [The witness then withdrew.] 
 
 high 
 
 George Errington, esq., m.p.j examined. 
 
 13055. Mr. Shaw. — You are member for the 
 county Longford ? — I am. 
 
 13056. And you have been giving some attention 
 to the state of the Land Question in that county ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 13057. You know Longford well? — Yes, I have 
 property there. 
 
 13058. Are there any cases in particular you wish 
 to call our attention to ?^ Yes, there are two estates. 
 The first is Doory Hall, the owners are a family of 
 the name .of Jessop, it is a large estate of £4,000 a 
 year, the agent is Mr. Cusack, a Dublin altorrey, he 
 
 has been agent for a great many years, and sole 
 manager. I may say, the management and circum- 
 stances of this estate have been of a very mysterious 
 kind, and they raise points that are very hard to 
 account for. But this is certain that the manage- 
 ment has been very oppressive, and it has resulted in. 
 the very deepest dissatisfaction among the tenants, 
 and has caused great uneasiness in the country among 
 the landlords, as well as farmer class. I can speak 
 of that from my own knowledge. 
 
 13059. Chairman. — Is this in the county Long- 
 ford ?— Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 435 
 
 13060. Mr. Shaw. — Are the owners living in Ire- 
 land? — The two supposed representatives, the two Miss 
 Jessops, live at Doory Hall. The result of this manage- 
 ment has been to produce various outrages. In 1866; a 
 bailiff named Freyne, was killed. In 1876, Mr. Cusack 
 was shot at and wounded in Dublin ; he has been 
 since, and is still protected by the police, two of whom 
 accompany him in Longford. Now, as for the details 
 of the management : he has evicted a great number of 
 tenants, and their land now lies waste. Well, of 
 course, it is neither let nor cultivated, and drovers 
 passing the road, turn their cattle into it. 
 
 13061. Has it been offered for letting? — Not as far 
 as 1 'can tell. I don't contend, of course, you can 
 compel a landlord to let or cultivate his laud, but I 
 say there, in the country, the feeling is intense, and 
 the excitement intense, at tenants being turned out of 
 their farms, and the farms then left idle and not let. 
 
 13062. Chairman. — Were they turned out for non- 
 payment ?^No. 
 
 13063. The O'Conoe Don. — How long ago were they 
 turned out 1 — I have details of several cases, at various 
 times. JohnDerwin's wasa hard case in the townland of 
 Brickerns; he was served with notice at the death of his 
 father, the teiiant, some five or six years ago, but 
 held on for several years, tendering the rent ; no 
 rent was taken ; the land now lies waste, and 
 Derwin lives on the land as a trespasser, and tries to 
 cultivate a portion of it. There are many other names 
 I can mention. The second point that has caused 
 great dissatisfaction is that, chiefly at the expiration 
 of leases, and in other cases also, Mr. Cusack is in the 
 habit of refusing to accept the rent though tendered. 
 
 13064 Mr. Shaw. — Leaves them there ?— They 
 tender the rent duly, and he refuses to take the rent, 
 and some have been tenants more than ten years not 
 paying rent. I will give one case of this. I have 
 visited all these cases myself. But this one I can 
 quote all the particulars of. Gregory Yorke is a poor 
 law guardian in the parish of Killashee, acreage, thirty- 
 three acres, original rent, £46 ; it was raised to £60 
 in bis father's lifetime. His father died in 1874, 
 since that time Yorke has continued upon the farm, 
 tendered his rent duly, but has not been absolutely 
 evicted. He has an exceedingly good farm, and is a most 
 respectable man, only desirous to have some soi't of 
 recognition. The land was in the father's time very 
 inferior, almost waste, a sort of furze and waste 
 land. It is now a very good farm, exceedingly well 
 cultivated, and I am sure quite worth the rent which 
 is put on, but the rent has not been taken though the 
 man is most willing to pay it. 
 
 13065. Then there is the case of John Cline? — In 
 this case a similar circumstance occurred. The rent has 
 not been taken for ten years ; they are a large family, 
 most respectable, and they offer the half year's rent 
 regularly. 1 don't, of course, contend that you can 
 force a landlord to take his rent, but it does create a 
 very great deal o± ill-feeling that the tenant should be 
 left' in this position, and I know, in the opinion of the 
 clergy -and the people of the neighbourhood, that 
 it is considered almost worse than to be positively 
 evicted, it is worse for the country, because this con- 
 tinues for years and the sore remains, while if they are 
 evicted once, there would be an end of it. This is not 
 the ease with every farm, or anything like it on the 
 estate, but a considerable number of farms are this way, 
 and the result is an amount of uneasiness and ill-feeling, 
 v/hich is very great indeed. 
 
 13060. The O' Conor Don.— If they go on holding 
 a little longer, won't they become owners in fee ?— Not 
 if they tendered the rent ; that would bar it. 
 
 ■ 13067. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose there was some 
 offence given in the first instance, that prevented them 
 going on harmoniously ?— I began by saying the thing 
 was inexplicable, but the facts are undoubted. I would 
 just say that in this case there is no question of non- 
 payment of rent, nor of objecting to the increase of rent. 
 The direct cause of the shooting at Mr. Cusack, in 1 875 
 appears from the reports of trial to have been, not those 
 
 special points, but that he had enforced penal rents in Oct. u, isso. 
 a very harsh way. A man was tried for the shooting, and „ . 
 was acquitted, but Judge Keogh used extremely strong Eni'jfAon, 
 language. It was pleaded that there was no agrarian esq., m.p. ' 
 cause for the outrage. However, Judge Keogh's lan- 
 guage, which I quoted in the House of Commons, was 
 of the strongest, for he said he had never heard a case 
 in which there was more apparent motive for outi;agc, 
 and therefore the jury should not for a moment 
 suppose there was no agrarian reason for it. The Crown 
 gave evidence that there were penal rents of a very 
 harsh kind, and Judge Keogh used this strong language, 
 he had never known penal rents enforced with such 
 severity. Another case I wish to call attention to is 
 Lord Annaly's estates in Longford. They were kindly 
 and fairly managed until the death of the late Lord, 
 when a new agent was appointed. 
 
 13068. What is the name of the new agent? — Mr. 
 O'Connor. By a general rise of rent and other 
 exactions he has caused a strong feeling against him, 
 and has now to be protected by police. It began by 
 calling in the hanging gale, and insisting iunnediately 
 after upon the payment of the rent due, the consequence 
 of which was that two half years was paid within six 
 months, and three half years some time within about 
 eight or nine. 
 
 13069. Chairman. — Was that called in by the same 
 agent? — Mr. O'Connor, yes. The rents were then 
 generally raised. In some cases the increase was not 
 excessive, but there were certainly cases to my own 
 knowledge, in which a very stiff rent followed by a 
 moderate increase became very nearly a rack-rent, 
 and that added to the previous severity has caused 
 very great suffering and very great dissatisfaction. 
 
 13069a. Can you say when the back half year was 
 called in, how soon after the death 1 — I think withiii 
 two years after the death. I am informed that in some 
 cases the tenants submitted willingly to the increase of 
 rent, though they thought it severe, on the promise 
 of the agent of improvements, buildings, and drainings, 
 and so forth, which were never done. I can give 
 instances of individual tenants,, but I should rather 
 not ; some evictions have taken place. 
 
 13070. You might say the number tliat the thing ', 
 occurred in without giving the names ? — The points 
 
 which I have raised occurred all over the estate, though 
 there were some special cases, of which I can give 
 illustrations. Would you now allow me to state in 
 two or three words the changes which I think this 
 state of things requires. It occurs to me the only 
 remedy is to give security to the tenant, and that, I 
 think, after careful considei'ation, can only be done by 
 some system which would establish fair rents, together 
 with a right of sale, commonly called the Ulster custom, 
 and this would constitute a practical fixity of tenure. 
 My plan for carrying it out is as follows : — I would 
 institute in Dublin a supreme land court with local 
 branches. The business of that court would be tlneo- 
 fold, first to keep and publish authoritative records for 
 various parts of the country, of the prices of the 
 various kinds of produce, according to which, after 
 the first valiiation, the periodical re- adjustments should 
 be made. Secondly, upon an application, either by 
 landlord or tenant, the court would have to decide once 
 for all the present letting value of a farm, taking into 
 consideration all the cii'cumstances of the holding. 
 That value would be recorded as the rent of the holding, 
 and, I lay great stress on this, it would become the 
 ground work foi' all future arrangements with regard 
 to- that farm. 
 
 13071. Mr. Shaw. — And for taxation jiurposes, I 
 suppose ?^Yes ; but on that point I am anxious to say 
 one word. I think the system of Government valuation 
 differing, and differing unequally, from the letting vali.ie 
 of land, has been the cause of the very greatest incon- 
 venience and dissatisfaction, and , I should be most 
 anxious to see some scheme by which the rental and 
 the valuation should bo assimilated. The objection is 
 that you would impose extra taxation. I don't think 
 that would matter for local taxation, and in the case 
 
 3K 2 
 
436 
 
 RISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 188U. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 George 
 Errington, 
 esq., ji p. 
 
 of imperial taxation there would be no difficulty in 
 making some allowance. 
 
 13072. Take bff a per-centage, twenty-five per cent., 
 as they do in excess taxes? — Yes. According to my 
 scheme the rent and the valuation would merge in 
 every case in which landlord or tenant submitted their 
 holding to this system. 
 
 13073. Would you not make it general all over the 
 country 1 — I would not for this reason : there would be 
 some difficulty practicfdly in ascertaining the actual 
 rent, it would lead possibly by collusion to false returns 
 being made. Periodically, every ten or twenty yeari^, 
 I should propose the landlord or tenant to be at liberty 
 to claim if they pleased a re-adjustment of rent, to be 
 decided according to the average of prices for the 
 previous period. The tenant should be at liberty to 
 sell his interest, subject to a reasonable veto on the 
 purchaser by the landlord; every such transaction should 
 be ratified and recorded by the court ; the arrears of rent 
 and all dilapidations should be paid out of the jJurchase 
 money. I should not be inclined to limit, as is often 
 suggested in that case, the price each tenant's interest 
 might be sold for, because the efl^ct of that would be 
 to discourage any improvements. And I may just 
 observe, as an answer to the objection which is often 
 made to the Ulster custom, that a sudden extension of 
 it and concession of the right all over Ireland to tenants 
 who have never regularly acquired it, would ap])ear to be 
 somewhat unjust ; but I don't think it so when you 
 consider that in reality the great majority of tenants 
 virtually do possess it. 
 
 13074. As a matter of fact ? — Yes ; whether by in- 
 timidation or whetlier by the kindness of landlords, or 
 by the pressure of pulilic opinion, they have a claim of 
 that sort, and, therefore, I think it much better to re- 
 cognise it, and make it maniigeable, as it would be by 
 sale, than by ignoring it to leave it dependent, as it 
 is now really, upon this indefinite sort of pressure, 
 or -worse, on intimidation. I merely wish to say 
 the only novelty T think in this scale is the adjust- 
 ment. All rent according to the record of prices would 
 roughly but fairly represent the increment or decrease 
 which was due to the landlord from the change of 
 times ; while the increase or decrease in the purchase- 
 monesy,. which arises from the increased or diminished 
 quantity of produce, would fairly represent the result 
 which ought to come, or would be due from the tenants' 
 exertions. I think this systeln would keep the two 
 shares perfectly separate, and would be to the advan- 
 tage of both ; and that is the difficulty, which is a very 
 important one, I think, to meet. Subletting according 
 to this would, I think, become impossible. Subdivi- 
 sion unrecognised would lose much of its advantages, 
 and I don't think there would be need of covenants, 
 because the Court would, according to my scheme, 
 have full power to assess damages for dilapidations. It 
 is not to be supposed that in the majority of cases 
 tenants would depreciate what they had paid for, and 
 were going to sell. A similar scheme was proposed 
 to Mr. Shaw-Lefevre's Committee, and it was recom- 
 mended Ijy the Committee. It was dissimilar in the 
 suggestion of perpetuity leases for fixed rents ; in that 
 case it was proposed that a money payment of ibur or 
 five years' purchase should be paid by the tenant to 
 the landlord, which money was in part to be ad^'anced 
 by the Government ; the difierence is that in thai 
 case the rent was to be fixed for ever, while in this 
 case it would fluctuate or vary according to the 
 change of times ; and, secondly, according to the im- 
 provements made by the tenant. The third duty 
 of the supreme Land Court would be to assist the 
 tenants to purchase their farms. I would enable them 
 to purchase estates and resell them, without loss to the 
 State, to the tenants. There was one point I would 
 like to refer to, which I think is remarkable with re- 
 ference to this portion of the country — a remarkable 
 feature with regard to the present agitation in this jior- 
 tion of the country. 
 
 13075. The O'Conor Don.— What portion?- 
 Mayo, Sligo, Eoscommon, and other parts of Con- 
 naught. It began and progressed most rapicUy in 
 this district. A somewhat similar thing occurred in 
 the great famine of 1847 and 1848, as will be 
 seen from the returns of the money given for the 
 relief of distress ; and again in 1869, according to the 
 statistics published, there was an excess of>agrarian 
 crime in these very districts, which determined the 
 Government to pass the repressive measures, the 
 coercivemeasuresof tJiat year. Naturally I look for 
 the cause of that, and it appears to be due to the fact 
 that there, are between thirty thousand and forty 
 thousand small tenants, who are also labourers-r-mi- 
 gratory labourers. 
 
 13076. Chaikman-. — Who go to England to look for 
 work ? — Yes. No land reform would ever meet their 
 case ; they' would still be liable on pressure of times 
 to be distressed ; and, therefore, the question becomes 
 directly one of Poor Law, and to consider whether tie 
 Poor Law is not too strict. The question arises whether 
 it is right thatforty thousandmen sliouldsjJendhalftKeir 
 lives working in other countries, and in case of distress 
 be thrown upon the one poor district in which they do 
 not work. 
 
 13077. The O'Conor Don. — How can that ever be 
 
 met ? — I will tell you. The reason of this is two-fold 
 
 the Poor Law in Ireland is more severe than in Eng- 
 land, and circumstances render it more severely en- 
 forced. 
 
 13078. Mr. Shaw. — But you would not throw it on 
 the Irish Poor Law entirely, would you ? — No. Tljedif- 
 ferences whichi wou]dproposetbalterarethree-fold,and 
 I think they meet this case. The first is that in Eng- 
 land they have union rating, while with us there is 
 rating by electoral divisions. This makes the practice 
 of the law more severe, for the elected Guardian of the 
 district has almost entirely the management of relief 
 for his own district, and it is his interest to keep 
 down relief, which makes the exercise of the law more 
 severe. 
 
 13079. The O'Conor Don.— Would not a more 
 liberal Poor Law have the effect you deprecate. It 
 would enable these people to live here at the expense 
 of the rates, and enable them to work in England all 
 the year round, except when supported by the rates 
 here 1 — If it stood alone it would, but the second point, 
 in which I propose to assimilate the law in England and 
 Ireland, is with regard to outdoor relief, and this par- 
 ticular point meets what The O'Conor Don has stated, 
 by distributing the cliarge according to the area of 
 relief I would suggest a common poor relief fund for 
 migratory labourers which would extend over England 
 and Scotland, and which would represent the ad vantages 
 which those districts obtain from the labour of those per- 
 sons. One other word — it is a most pressing recommen- 
 dation — upon this point. The Local Government Board 
 in Ireland have at' present, by an amendment of the 
 Relief of Distress Act, extended the power of giving 
 outdoor relief for two months after the termination of 
 this year — that is to say, until the meeting of Parlia- 
 ment. It appears to me most important that that 
 power should be extended immediately on the meeting 
 of Parliament, pending any other changes which may 
 be made in the law. 
 
 13080. I just wish to ask one word with regard to 
 Longford generally, you say you have inquired into 
 the relations of landlord and tenant in the county 
 Longford ? — Yes. 
 
 13081. Do you find them generally very satisfactory 
 with the exceijtion of those cases you have alluded to ? 
 —Very fairly satisfactory. 
 
 13082. And are those the worst cases you could 
 find out 1 — Certainly, they are the worst cases I 
 know. 
 
 The witness theiv withdrew. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 437 
 
 Mr. Christopher L'Estrange examined. 
 
 are agent to Colonel 
 
 13083. Chairman. — You 
 Cooper 1 — Yes. 
 
 1308-1:. The Percival estate and some others? 
 
 Yes. 
 
 13085. What is the acreage of the properties over 
 which vou are agent 1 — I could not give that. There 
 are some of them very scattered, and in different 
 imions and different counties. 
 
 13(^86. However, the acreage is very large 
 altogether '? — Very large. 
 
 13087. Are these properties in Mayo and Sligo 
 generally ? — Yes ; generally in Mayo and Sligo. 
 
 13088. You mention that the rents are not paid in 
 ]Mayo this year 1 — Very badly indeed ; particulai-ly in 
 the neighbourhood of Swineford. 
 
 13039. Is there any special reason for that in that 
 part of the country — is it worse ofi' than other parts 1 
 — They are badly off, but thei-e are a good many who 
 could pay only they are afraid. 
 
 13090. Mr. Shaw. — The land is very poor there? 
 — Yes ; it is; 
 
 13091. CU.V1RMAX. — There is no tenant-right? — 
 No ; there is not. 
 
 13092. Is there any usage corresponding to the 
 Ulster custom of tenant-right? — No. Any tenant 
 who wanted to leave, or through poverty was reduced, 
 would ask leave to give his farm up to another, and he 
 generally paid him. That was the nearest thing to 
 tenant-right. 
 
 13093. The O'Coxor Don. — On whose estates does 
 that custom exist 1 — On most of the estates I manage. 
 I acknowledge that, so far as the estates of Captain 
 Armstrong, Mr. Orme, Mr. Rashley — an English 
 gentleman — and several others are concerned. 
 
 13094. Chair.max. — That is not the case on Colonel 
 Cooper's estate? — He has occasionally allowed it. 
 When I bring a case lefore him he allows it. 
 
 13095. Mr. Shaw. — Each case comes up on its own 
 merits ? — Yes. 
 
 1309(5. There is no fixed rule? — No. Each case is 
 dealt with on it merits. 
 
 13097. Chairman. — You think that the custom 
 of allowing the sale of holdings is decreasing? — I 
 tliinlt it is rather decreasinac. 
 
 13098. That is, I suppose, not from want of in- 
 clination on the part of the tenant, but from the land- 
 lords wishing to deal with the cases themselves by 
 way of compensation ? — Well, really I may say that 
 in my office I never knew a man being refused per- 
 mission to sell, provided he brings in a tenant who is 
 solvent and to whom there is no objection. I have 
 never known a case of a man being refused to appoint 
 a man in his place. 
 
 13099. Mr. Shaw. — You don't inquire into what 
 they get? — No; but where I see a reason for the 
 change I always facilitate it. 
 
 13100. Chairman. — Do you think the system exists 
 to such an extent that it might be called a usage in a 
 corresponding sense to the Ulster tenant-right ? — It is 
 an optional usage, if I may say so. 
 
 13101. That is, it requires the permission of the 
 landlord ? — Yes. That has always been the case on 
 the properties that I manage. Generally I allow it, 
 but in Colonel Cooper's estate I cannot allow it with- 
 out bringing it before him, and I generally obtain his 
 sanction. 
 
 13102. On such changes of tenancy is it usual to 
 make any change in the rent? — No ; not generally. 
 
 13103. Inthecase of middlemen that you mentioned, 
 are there not generally changes of rent 1 — Yes ; when 
 the purchase is made by middlemen; the middlemen 
 are a lower class of men, if I may say so, and they do 
 put an increased rent on. 
 
 13104. Have there been many cases of eviction on 
 the different properties which you manage? — Not 
 many. 
 
 13105. Have there been any since the Land Act? 
 — No, I have frequently been obliged to bring eject- 
 
 ments to get the rent, but I have very seldom indeed 
 been obliged to carry them out. 
 
 13106. There has been a settlement before the mat- 
 ter came into court ? — Yes ; they bring in a certain 
 sum of money and we generally settle it. As a rule, 
 I very seldom had to bring in the sheriff to take pos- 
 session. 
 
 13107. During this last year have you had many 
 cases of ejectment for non-payment of rent? — No; I 
 have not executed any. 
 
 13108. But was it necessary to bring ejectments to 
 get the rent ? — I have not done it to any large extent 
 this year ; in fact I have never done it to a large ex- 
 tent, but tills year I refrained from it particularly. 
 
 13109. Mr. Shaw. — Has there been an abatement 
 generally given ? — Yes ; I have given as much as six 
 shillings in the pound on that poor property in Mayo, 
 and four shillings in other places, and three shillings. 
 on other property in Sligo. 
 
 1 31 1 0. On all the properties in Sligo ? — Yes ; it has 
 varied from three shillings to six — six in Mayo. 
 
 13111. Chairman. — Were the crops very bad these 
 last few years ? — Yes. 
 
 13112. So that the tenant who in other years was 
 fairly well able to pay was really unable to meet his 
 engagements ? — In many cases, Yes. 
 
 13113. Are there many who hold under lease? — 
 Not many. 
 
 13114. They are mostly all old leases ? — Only old 
 leases. 
 
 13115. And now dying but? — Yes. 
 
 13116. Was there an offer of a lease generally made 
 by the landlord after the paijsing of the Land Act ? — 
 There was, but the leases were generally declined. 
 
 13117. What was the gTound of refusal? — They 
 thought the Land Act would give them as good interest 
 in their land as most leases. 
 
 13118. Was there generally a contract barring the 
 Land Act, in the leases that were offered ? — In very 
 few cases. 
 
 13119. There was a sort of common form put into 
 many leases barring the ojDeration of the Land Act, 
 and it was supposed in some cases that that led the 
 tenants to decline the lease ? — There is a form called 
 Gerald's lease. I have seen it, and I have almost 
 always known it to be declined. I have known per- 
 haps as many as a dozen cases where they did take it, 
 but it is very seldom offered to them. 
 
 13120. Just previous to the proceedings which led 
 to the passing of the Land Act there had been rather a 
 desire on the part of the large farmers to get leases ? — 
 Yes ? there was. 
 
 13121. Then do you think there was disappoint- 
 ment afterwards in the mind of the tenants as to the 
 security they got from the Land Act? — No, I do not ; 
 I think they were satisfied. 
 
 13122. And are still satisfied ? — I think so. 
 
 13123. What is the cause of the general dissatisfac- 
 tion now — is it the rate of rent ? — I believe that is the 
 thing put forward, but I cannot say tliat on the pro- 
 perties I manage the rents are too high. On Captain 
 Armstrong's property the rent has not been changed 
 for the last thirty year^, and on Mr. Orme's about the 
 same time. When I first began to manage these lands, 
 about thirty years ago, they were in what was called 
 riindale, and I divided the lands. 
 
 13124. Mr. Shaw. — That is in Mayo? — Not very 
 much. The valuation was put on by a valuator — a 
 fair man — a man who was considered a fair man — and 
 in some cases it was a rise, but not very much of a 
 rise ; I might also add that since then a great deal of 
 bog has been reclaimed by tenants, and I have never 
 increased the rent for that. 
 
 13125. They do reclaim land — they are constantly 
 reclaiming ? — Yes ; if there is any arable land runnin" 
 down to a bog they generally work into the boo-. 
 
 13126. Chairman.— You say generally the rent is 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880 
 
 Mr. Christr, 
 L'Estrange.. 
 
438 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Christr. 
 L'EstrangS, 
 
 one-fifth or one-sixth over the tenement valuation ? — 
 Yes, about that. 
 
 13127. Does that include buildings ? — Yes, it would 
 include buildings — everything. 
 
 13128. Have the buildings generally through this 
 county been erected by the landlords, or assistance 
 given to the building by the landlords ? — The landlords 
 have assisted so far as slates, timber, windows, and 
 doors — occasionally in that way : but small thatched 
 cabins the tenants have generally built themselves. 
 
 13129. Has that assistance been continued up to 
 the present time 1 — I don't think the landlords have 
 assisted so much since the Land Bill, for the claims 
 the tenants may bring against them may rather tie 
 their hands. 
 
 13130. They are afraid their imjorovements may be 
 made to tell against themselves afterwards? — Exactly. 
 
 13131. Mr. Shaw. — They have power to prevent 
 that by registering their improvements 1 — Yes, I have 
 done that ; but if I was dead my successor might not 
 know anything about that. 
 
 13133. The books would be there showing the im- 
 provements ? — Oh, yes, they would. 
 
 13133. Chaieman. — Is that one-fitth or one-.sixth 
 over the tenement valuation a fair guide, as a general 
 rule, t'6 the rent in this country ? — I think as far as 
 the tenement valuation is a guide it is fair, but' at the 
 same time I think very often there is a low valuation 
 on good land, and rather a high valuation on bad 
 land. 
 
 13134. Mr. Shaw.— The good la^d is under-valued ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 13135. And the bad land is high enough valued 1 — 
 Yes, generally. I also manage the Percival property ; 
 it is a large property. 
 
 13136. The O'Conoe Don. — There has been no in- 
 crease in the rent on Colonel Cooper's property '? — No ; 
 when I say no, I mean it is to a very trifling extent. 
 
 13137. Mr. Shaw. — There was a revaluation about 
 twenty years ago ; were you the agent then 1 — No, I 
 was not. 
 
 13138. Chaieman. — As to the reclamation of waste 
 land, do you think there is any waste land in parts of 
 the country with which you are acquainted that could 
 be reclaimed on a large scale 1 — I think the best re- 
 clamation, would be by draining some of the large 
 rivers, and thus enable the landlords to deepen the 
 rivulets and small streams into these. 
 
 10139. So as to make a main outfall ? — Yes. 
 
 131'tO. Colonel Cooper has mentioned that he 
 thought the best reclamation was by tenants of hold- 
 ings, by their own labour and the labour of their 
 families, gi-adually increasing the amount of their land 
 by working into waste land 1 — I think it would be 
 iitterly useless to take a deep bog and try to reclaim it 
 at once ; for, until the turf is cut a^N'ay, it would re- 
 tun 1 to its old nature again. I think it would be very 
 up-hill work to begin to reclaim bog in that way. 
 
 13141. You say that, during your memory, a great 
 deal of land has been reclaimed by the tenants? — 
 Yes. 
 
 13142. And you always encouraged them by leaving 
 them free from I'ent for twenty or twenty-five years 1 
 — I have always acted on that principle ; for I think 
 if a man has reclaimed a wild bog, he should have a 
 very long enjoyment of it. I have always acted on 
 that principle. 
 
 13143. And then, at the end of twenty or twenty- 
 five years, what happened 1 — I think it would be fair 
 to have a valuation of it made then. 
 
 13144. And put it to the full valuation ?— No ; I 
 thinlc it would be unjust to put it to the highest- 
 valuation. 
 
 13145. You would leave a man fair remuneration 
 for his own labour, while giving the landlord what is 
 fair for the land ?— Exactly. I think to keep the 
 landlords' title to it, it would be necessary at the end of 
 twenty years to have a revaluation made. 
 
 13146. Mr. Shaw.— But you would not rent it up 
 to Its full value 1— No, I would not. 
 
 13147. Chaieman. — You. would put on a fair rent 
 looking to the man's improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 13148. The fair rent is really what we find is the^ 
 whole point of the question — ^the ascertaiament of 
 what is a fair rent ? — In jjuttiiig on what I call a fair 
 rent on bog, I would not put anything like the value 
 of it. I think from os. to 6s., to keep up the landlord's 
 title, would be sufiicient. 
 
 13149. But I mean upon any land — would von 
 think the tenant, or someone on his behalf, should 
 have a voice in the settlement of the rent ? — I think 
 certainly he should, and he always has. 
 
 13150. But something beyond the power of refusing 
 to pay the rent and going out '{—I don't think that is 
 the alternative. 
 
 13151. But, with many tenants, the only choice is 
 to pay the rent fixed by the landlord or go out of tlie 
 holding 1 — I think it is a very fair principle to act on 
 — that the tenant should have a voice in settling the 
 rent. 
 
 13152. Do you think the case jiiight be met by arbi- 
 tration ? — I think it might, Imt I think it is very diffi- 
 cult to find two arbitrators. I suppose, however, it 
 could be dime. 
 
 131 53. If they failed to agree there could be power 
 to call in a third ? — Yes. 
 
 13154. There should be provision made in case 
 of their not agreeing — some ultimate resort to some 
 one appointed by a Boai-d or a Commission, or even 
 the County Court Judge 1 — I think, on large farms, it 
 might be Avorth doing that, but, on small farms, it 
 would be rather a cumbrous thing. 
 
 13155. The fact of its being cumbrous might ge- 
 nerally lead to a settlement of the case without resort- 
 ing to that tribunal 1 — Yes. 
 
 13156. Mr. Shaw. — There would not be many cases 
 arise in v.-hich they would appeal to the ultimate resort? 
 — No ; I think on good estates it would hardly be 
 brought to that. 
 
 13157. It is only in extreme cases they would resort 
 to such a remedy, and it would be an advantage to all 
 parties to have such a tribunal in these cases of ne- 
 cessity ? — I think it would. 
 
 13158. The O'Conoe Don. — The property near 
 Swineford belongs to Mr. Orme 1 — Yes. 
 
 13159. You say the rents ha^-e not been paid 
 last year? — I got little or nothing. 
 
 13160. Although you ofiered 6s. in the pound re- 
 duction? — I olfered 4s. in the pound in that part of 
 the country. 
 
 13161. And, in the county Sligo, were the rents 
 paid ? — I gave 6s. reduction, near Balladeny, in Jlayo. 
 
 13102. Did they pay there? — Not many took ad- 
 vantage of it. 
 
 l:U63. In Sligo were the rents paid? — Much better 
 in Sligo than ailywhere else. 
 
 131 6 4 . Are the iinpro vements generally made by the 
 landlord or tenant on the estates with M'hich you are 
 connected? — On the in-operties I manage, works, sucli 
 as main drainage — all heavy works — are done by the 
 Lmdlord ; but the tenants do the small works. 
 
 1 31 05. Has there been much outlay by the landlords 
 in the way of improvements ? — On some of the estates 
 there has been a good deal. 
 
 131 60. The buildings you say the tenants generally 
 erected, excei)t that the landlord gives timber and 
 slates where the houses are of a better description?-— 
 Yes, and where the tenants will use., slates instead of ■ 
 thatch. 
 
 13167. The ordinary tenants' houses are very poor 
 and miserable ? — A great many of them are thatched 
 cabins. . 
 
 13168. "What would be about the average value ni 
 these tenants' houses? — The poor. law valuation I could 
 scarcely tell, for they don't put any value on these 
 thatched cabins in xaj of the poor law valuations , 
 unless they are of the better description and really 
 good, but thatched houses they do not, value at all. 
 
 13109. Mr. Shaw.— They are small holdings gene- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ■i"d 
 
 rally ?— In Mayo they avo as a rule, but, at the same 
 time, I have some up to £100 a year. 
 
 13170. lu Sligo they are larger?— Yes, they are 
 better farms. \ 
 
 13171. I suppose the really bad times for the last 
 three years account very much for the non-payment of 
 the rents 1 — I attribute it a great deal moi-e to the agita- 
 tion. I think if they were left alone they would have 
 paid. This year they could pay fairly. 
 
 13172., They have got demoralized ?— I don't think 
 that is so much the cause as following bad advice. 
 
 13173. The three years have been bad, and the last 
 year the worst of the three 1 — I admit they were Ijad 
 years. 
 
 13174. The potatoes were a failure almost entirely? 
 —Yes. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 .Arr. Chri.slr. 
 L'Estrango. 
 
 Patrick Boyle, Senr., Michael Nicholson, James Smith, Peter Boyle, John Clancy, James Clancy, 
 Thomas Meehan, Patrick Boyle, Junr., tenants on the estate of Sir Henry Gore Booth, at Dunfore, 
 examined. 
 
 13175. Chairman. — This document (produced) is a 
 list of names of tenants on Sir Henry Gore Booth's 
 estate at Dunfore, with the rent, valuation, acreage, 
 &c., of each ? 
 
 Patrick Boyle. — Yes ; we gave Our names and all 
 
 particulars. That document is correct. (Hands in 
 following list of tenants of Sir Henry Gore Booth, 
 whose rents were settled twenty-two years ago, and to 
 wliom a reduction of twenty-live per cent, was allowed 
 last year, viz.) : — 
 
 — 
 
 Kent. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Acreage. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 A. R. P. 
 
 Pat Boyle, senior, . 
 
 10 16 10 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 7 1 31 
 
 James Smith, 
 
 
 7 11 4 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 4 3 
 
 Michael Nicholson, 
 
 
 16 19 4 
 
 11 15 
 
 0— £1 5s. addi- 
 tional for house. 
 
 9 3 
 
 John Glanoy, 
 
 
 15 15 6 
 
 11 15 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Owen Brady, 
 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Pat Nicholson, 
 
 
 11 12 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 6 1 
 
 Pat Boyle, junior. 
 
 
 9 11 8 
 
 6 2 
 
 
 
 5 20 
 
 James Boyle, 
 
 
 20 5 8 
 
 14 5 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 John M'Gowan, . 
 
 
 10 
 
 7 10 
 
 
 
 5 1 
 
 Widow Kelly, 
 
 
 15 2 10 
 
 9 10 
 
 
 
 8 20 
 
 John Boyle, . 
 
 
 9 
 
 7 10 
 
 
 
 4 3 7 
 
 Michael Glancv, . 
 
 
 12 7 8 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 Luke Nicholson, . 
 
 
 24 16 10 
 
 17 5 
 
 
 
 13 1 
 
 Peter Boyle, 
 
 
 20 15 
 
 15 5 
 
 
 
 12 1 20 
 
 Ann Nicholson, 
 
 
 -16 
 
 U 5 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Widow Corritt, 
 
 
 5 1 4 
 
 3 10 
 
 
 
 2 2 
 
 Michael Doherty, . 
 
 
 2 8 4 
 
 1 15 
 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 Marthi Loughlan .. 
 
 
 7 3 6 
 
 5 15 
 
 
 
 3 3 
 
 Thomas Meehan, . 
 
 
 2 9 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Pat Brady, . 
 
 
 5 12 1 
 
 3 5 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 Prancis Kelly, . . 
 
 
 14 17 2 
 
 8 10 
 
 
 
 7 1 
 
 James Gilfether, . 
 
 
 16 17 6 
 
 12 1 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 Michael Toher, 
 
 
 16 8 
 
 10 15 
 
 
 
 9 I 
 
 Bridget M'Gowan, 
 
 
 5 5 
 
 4 10 
 
 
 
 4 2 
 
 Cormick Hargidan, 
 
 
 11 15 6 
 
 7 5 
 
 
 
 6 2 
 
 James Brady, 
 
 
 7 17 6 
 
 3 5 
 
 
 
 5 1 
 
 Michael Gillan, . 
 
 
 6 2 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 James Waters, 
 
 
 7 
 
 5 5 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 Mes,5i-g. 
 
 Patrick Boyle, 
 senr., Michael 
 Nicholson, 
 James Smith, 
 Peter Boyle, 
 Joh:i Clancy, . 
 James Clancy, 
 Thomas 
 Meehan, and 
 Patrick Boyle, 
 junr. 
 
 13176. We have had some persons here who say 
 Sir Henry is an excellent landlord? — So he is. We 
 can say the very same. 
 
 13177. You think your rent is too high? — We do, 
 but this part of the estate have been held by a petty 
 landlord hitherto. It was held by Mr. Charles Goi-e 
 Jones, and it Ls generally the petty landlords who put 
 on high rents ; but when Sir Henry came into posses- 
 sion we asked for a reduction, and he only gave us the 
 same reduction as he gave every one else. He said he 
 got the land so and he left it so. 
 
 13178. That was twenty-two years ago ?— Yes, the 
 land was in aiTCar then, and it went into Chancery, 
 and the rent was raised again when Mr. Joues 
 released it. 
 
 13179. Mr. Shaw. — Then Sir Henry did not reduce 
 
 it?— No. 
 
 13180. 
 
 13181. 
 —Yes. 
 
 13182. 
 
 He got no valuation made 1 — No. 
 
 You went to him when he abated the rent ? 
 
 When was that 1 — Twelve months last 
 summer. 
 
 13183. That was when you began to feel the pinch 
 of the bad times ? — We made proposals several times, 
 but it was no use, and when we found the times -\Yerp 
 changed -wondei-fuUy even in the grazing parts, we went 
 to him again, but it was no use. In 1873 we paid the 
 
 first rents to him, and we all applied for a reduction 
 and he refused. 
 
 13181:. He has no agent? — He has not. 
 
 131S5. Did you go to him personally '? — \es. 
 
 13186. Chairman. — In the case of Michael Nicholson 
 you say he built a house and reclaimed some of the 
 land ? — Yes, that is the general thing on that estate. 
 Part of it was cut away bog before we got it. , 
 
 Michael Nicholson. — ]\Iy house was built by me. 
 The old valuation of my place v,-as £10 lO;-'., and the 
 second valuation £11 1.5s. The ront I paid to ilr. 
 Jones was £16 5s. yearly, and then when it came to 
 Sir Henry's hands there was an .addition put on for 
 cess, raising tlie rent to .£16 19s. -Irf. That is for nine 
 acres and four perches. 
 
 13187. Chairman. — Are they Irisli acres? — Yes. 
 
 13188. Mr. Shaw. — It is far away from a town? — 
 It is nearly twelve miles away. 
 
 13189. Jt is not very rich land?— No. There is 
 part of my knd to th'S waaz of my house, and it would 
 take three acres of it to graze a cow. In 1810, this 
 townland was cut up by the landlord wlio had it at 
 that time. I recollect part of my land and if you lifted 
 a sod, it would run for ten or twenty perches; it was 
 all covered over with small pebbles find stones ■ we 
 reclaimed it and sunk these stones undemea.th iir dykes 
 and im])rovcd the land. 
 
410 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct 14, 1S30. 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 Patrick Boyle, 
 >enr., Michael 
 Nicholson, 
 Jarr.es Smith, 
 Peter Boyle, 
 John Clancy, 
 James Clancy, 
 Thomas 
 Meehan, and 
 Patrick Boyle, 
 junr. 
 
 13190. It is much better now? — It is a good deal 
 better now. 
 
 13191. Have you any other industry there except 
 the land ?— We could not live there at all on the land 
 except for some other things. 
 
 13192. You are fishermen? — Yes, I have been 
 sixteen or seventeen years a fisherman ; the majority 
 of us could not live at all except being involved in 
 debt. What we ate three years ago is not paid for 
 yet. 
 
 13193. Chairman. — You had the misfortune of 
 being under a middleman 1 — Yes, but for our being 
 under a middleman we would have been all right. 
 If we had the land as it was set to our neighbours 
 above us. Sir Henry is a very good man, but he did 
 not act well for us. 
 
 13194. Mr. Shaw. — How nrach did he get out of 
 the land before ? — Patrick Boyle — I cannot say. 
 
 13195. The lease dropped ?— It was out in 1872. 
 
 131 96. He let it to somebody — Yes. 
 
 13197. Chairman. — Would you be pleased if there 
 was some fair valuation put upon youi' land ? — Yes, 
 that is what we want. 
 
 13198. You would not object to a fair value being 
 put upon it ? — No, of course not. 
 
 13199. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think any fair valuation 
 coming in would reduce the rent? — If we could get 
 that. If a conscientious man came he should reduce 
 the rent. 
 
 13200. Chaieman. — That is what you would like to 
 see, a fair valuation of the land ? — Yes, we have no 
 objection in the world to pay it. 
 
 13201. Mr. Shaw. — How much an acre does it stand 
 all round ? — There are about six acres two roods of 
 roads in every hundred acres, and there was so much 
 stojDpage out of every acre back again. 
 
 13202. How much an acre do you pay? — I pay for 
 9a. Or. 4p., with the exception of these stoppages £17- 
 
 It is more than £2 an acre taking the stoppan-es and 
 all. 
 
 13203. You say you know the cases of all these 
 men who are with you ? — Yes. 
 
 13204. And you can speak for them all — tliey feel 
 the same thing, that the rent is above what they can 
 pay ? — Yes. Half of their holdings is bog land, and 
 they have to pay for it as arable land. 
 
 13205. Are they reclaiming it? — They are as best 
 they can, but the water flows up and destroys it, 
 
 13206. Were the potatoes good there this year !— 
 Not so bad as last year, the weather was so dry. 
 
 13207. How does that happen ? — Well there is high 
 land surrounding the valley. 
 
 13208. It is stiff land ?— No, it is boggy land. 
 
 13209. Do you get your turf there? — No, we hare 
 to go nine miles for it. 
 
 13210. You have to pay for it? — No, we got it 
 free. 
 
 13211. But you have to go nine miles for it 'i~Y(s 
 nine Irish miles. 
 
 13212. The O'CoNOE Don. — Are you allowed the 
 right of selling your interest in your holding, by Sii 
 Heniy ? — We never made any application for it. 
 
 13213. You don't know of any instance where that 
 ocoured? — There were some lately. 
 
 13214. Does he, allow you to sell to the highest 
 bidder? — I think ha had an objection until lately. 
 
 13215. None of you have ever tried to sell? — Three 
 or four years ago he would not allow it. 
 
 13216. He has changed lately? — I bebeve he has. 
 He added cess into "the former rent. I was paying £16 
 rent and then cess was added. 
 
 13217. Chairman. — You say that Sir Henry is a 
 landlord you respect '?— Certainly, and we are only 
 complaining we got no reduction. 
 
 13218. Your rent is higher than your neighbours? 
 — Yes. He is willing to do everything for us, except 
 the one thing 
 
 At. Thomas 
 Shanley. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Shanley examined. 
 
 13219. Chairman. — ^You are tenant at Curgulliai;, 
 on the estate of Sir Gilbert King ?— Yes. 
 
 13220. Where is that?— It is in the county Ros- 
 commom. He has large estates in this county also. I 
 hold this farm from him at Curgullian near Drumsna 
 in Sligo. 
 
 13221. I see you say that he is one of the kindest 
 of landlords ? — No mistake about it. 
 
 .13222. Have you anjrthing to say against him? — 
 No, but it is the custom on his estate to raise the rent. 
 
 13223. Mr. Shaw. — He raised it on you more 
 than once ? — More than six times. 
 
 13224. In your own life?— Since 1848. 
 
 13225. Who is his agent ? — He had diflierent agents. 
 His present agent is Mr. Jones, near Mohill. 
 
 13226. And as you improved the land, he raised the 
 rent ? — I don't blame liim for it, because the tenants 
 went and bid for my improvement, and I in posses- 
 sion. 
 
 13227. Why should they bid for them ?— Because 
 it was a swamp when I got it, and they said in place 
 of raising the rent he favoured me. It was not for the 
 land I bought it. I was a trader and I never asked 
 anything. He gave me only two roods first and a 
 place for a house, and I had to pay £10 for the house, 
 which was nearly completed, but that I did not 
 grumble at, for I made money of it. That was in 
 1835. 
 
 13228. Chairman. — How much do you hold now? 
 — I hold twenty-nine acres. 
 
 13229. That has been added gradually ?— No ; I got 
 the balance altogether in 1847. 
 
 13230. At what rent?— .£10 lus. at first. I hope 
 
 there is nothing against him, for it is my improve- 
 ments caused it all. ' I buried £1,000 in it. 
 
 13231. Why should he put an increase on it ?— He 
 is so innocent. 
 
 13232. Have you ever put these matters before him! 
 — No ; because when he raised the rent to £14, Isiid 
 '• It is too cheap yet," " Why" said he " Because mj 
 industry would make it cheap. 
 
 13233. You were relaiming the land ? — I reclaimed 
 twenty-two acres of cut-away bog. 
 
 13234. What is the rent?— About £29. 
 
 13235. Have you a lease of it? — No, but his word, 
 is as good. 
 
 13236. But the tenants might bid against you still! 
 — Well, but I am able to pay it. That is industry. 
 
 13237. How do you want us to protect you? — You 
 know it ; for I don't. You have a head, and I hare 
 not. 
 
 13238. Mr. Shaw.— Do you live on the laud? 
 — I do; and I can tell you a good story if yoi 
 will allow me : There is a man lives in the centre oi a 
 bog, and The O'Conor Don went down on his farm of 
 three acres, which he holds for £,\, and in place of 
 raising his rent he gave him £10. 
 
 13239. He did not raise his rent?— No; because 
 he has knowledge in his head ; he is no baby. 
 
 13240. Mr. Shaw.— Your landlord raises the rent? 
 — He does not raise it on any man but me. That turi- 
 bank is my bank. For out of that land, which was 
 valued at 2«. Qd. an acre, I have knocked il5 ^^ 
 acre. I was a road contractor, and I put all the ma- 
 nure off the roads, for fifteen miles round, into this 
 bog. It is about a mile and a half from Drunisna, 
 and all I want is to have industry secured. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 4S3 
 
 be good under the circumstances 1 — I did not say they 
 were not good tenants, but their rents were so hi^h 
 let, they could not be good. 
 
 12965. Mr. Shaw. — But under the circumstances it 
 is very hard for a man to be industrious where the rent 
 is so oppressive? — Yes. 
 
 12966. His whole life goes trying to mate the 
 rent 1 — Yes ; they live by going into debt. 
 
 12967. Is that system of billing, going into the 
 banks, common 1 — Not in my neighbourhood, they 
 are so situated that they cannot get bills. This 
 Knockdoo place, the owner is dead. Captain Thompson, 
 there is a receiver on it. I know they have not been 
 able to pay, they might struggle to pay something. 
 There were two poor fellows had bills in the bank and 
 they sold their cattle to pay them. 
 
 12968. Chairman. — Do yoii apply your observation 
 as to their inability to get on to the last few years 
 especially, or even in better times? — The last few 
 years especially. 
 
 12969. Did it apply to some extent before that? — 
 They paid their rents punctually before. 
 
 12970. Weie they able to make a fair and reason- 
 able living out of that ? — I don't think they were. If 
 they paid their rents they had not sufficient to stock 
 their land. 
 
 12971. Mr. Shaw. — But the rent was too high for 
 poor land away from a market town ? — Oh, there is a 
 town near it, Sligo and Tobercurry ; too high indeed. 
 
 12972. Eighteen miles '! — Oh, it is fair enough. 
 
 12973. Chairman. — The tenants all refer to the 
 tenement valuation, do you. think that that is" a highly 
 valued part of the country ? — -I know cases where the 
 tenement valuation is high enough. 
 
 12974. You think it would be high enough at the 
 tenement valuation? — I am sure it would. I know 
 the valuation of all these lands as I go along. 
 
 1 2975. The O'Conok Don. — Is that in your barony ? 
 — It is, sir. 
 
 12976. I did not think Geevah was?— Oh, no, I 
 am not alluding to that, except the portions I received 
 rent on. 
 
 12977. Chairman. — You speak generally of the 
 country you pass through and know most of? — Yes, 
 to be sure ; I know some as good land in Geevagh as 
 can be found anywhere. There is another property 
 near Coolaney, Cabra, that Mr. Williams is the 
 owner of. 
 
 12978. Mr. Shaw.— Is that highly rented?— Yes. 
 
 12979. People, poor? — The rent is too high, and it 
 is a mountain farm, but he is giving them employment 
 for the last year or more, and they are getting 9«. a 
 week, he is giving 4^. out of every pound they pay. 
 
 12980. But if they were dependant on the land 
 they would not be well off? — No ; it would be almost a 
 shame to charge them so high a rent. 
 
 12981. Chairman. — Do you think that they would 
 be satisfied if some independent person was to value 
 and say what would be a fair value ? — -I am sure they 
 would. 
 
 12982. Mr. Shaw. — As between landlord and 
 tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 12983. It would be a better plan for the landlord 
 in the long run ? — Decidedly better. There is another 
 |)roperty joins that called Cappagh, it belonged to 
 T ihn Patrick Somers. 
 
 12984. Who does it belong to now? — Mr. Dolan. 
 
 It was purchased in the Landed Estates Court by the Oct. i-u laso, 
 uncle of the present owners, and the rents was raised ^yj^ j^j^^ 
 very considerably, so much so that they are very badly M'.Vlanus and 
 able to pay anything. Mr. Charles 
 
 12985. How long is that ago ?— Fifteen or sixteen ^'- M'Kenzie. 
 ■years, and they are very miserable. There is no 
 
 employment for them. The Dolans themselves are 
 very poor, although they have the property, they are 
 as poor as they can be. 
 
 12986. Would it be any advantage to that class of 
 tenants if made peasant proprietors ? — Indeed it would 
 not. 
 
 12987. If they had to pay the half-yearly instal- 
 ments on that poor land ? — The Dolans are as poor as 
 the tenants. 
 
 12988. But if they had it at a fair and reasonable 
 rent ? — If they had it as they had it before the Dolans 
 got it, every man was fairly well off. 
 
 12989. And they are industrious people ? — They are 
 industrious people. On the Williams' property, 
 before he got it, the tenants had a right of turbary, 
 and a right of mountain for the cattle, and they paid 
 nothing for it, and when he got it he took it from 
 them. 
 
 1^990. What did he do with the mountain? — He 
 took it from them also. 
 
 12991. And let it to somebody else? — Oh, no, it 
 was too bad. 
 
 12992. Did he raise the rents ?— No ; he left their 
 as they were. 
 
 12993. But the rents were too high ? — Yes. 
 
 12994. Chairman. — Do you know whether, 
 through the country generally, there is a practice with 
 or without the landlord's consent to sell their hold- 
 ings by the tenants ? — No ; they cannot sell without 
 the landlord's consent, but I never saw the landlord 
 refuse to consent if the man who purchased was of 
 good character. 
 
 ■ 12995. Mr. Shaw. — And the tenant was broken 
 down ; they would be glad to get rid of him ? — I have 
 not seen that. 
 
 12996. On good estates they are allowed to 
 charge? — They are allowed to charge if they wish 
 to sell theii- holdings, subject to approval. 
 
 12997. On Mr. Cooper's? — I don't know. There 
 is only a very small portion of his property in our 
 district. Lands called Carha, and th&y are all 
 improved and the lands drained. The rent does not 
 press on them. 
 
 12998. Chairman. — They are employed by him, do 
 you mean ? — ^Yes. 
 
 12999. Mr. Shaw. — And the rents are not exces- 
 sive ? — No. 
 
 1 3000. Labourers, how are they off in your country ? 
 — The labourers at present are employed on the 
 public works. The wages are very fair. 
 
 13001. What are they? — Nine shillings a week. 
 13092. And they get a free house ? — lam si)eaking 
 
 now of the neighbourhood generally. 
 
 13003. I mean fixed labourers on farms ? — We have 
 very few of them ; we employ boys and men whenever 
 we require him. 
 
 13004. Chairman. — In these relief works are they 
 paid by piece-work ? — By the day ; in some cases by 
 piece-work. As far as Williams' place is concerned 
 they are all paid by the day. 
 
 3K 
 
434 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1830; 
 
 Mr. .Tolm 
 M'iv!iinusand 
 Mr. Cliarles 
 P. MacKenzIe. 
 
 Mr. Charles P. MacKenzie, Coolaney, examined. 
 
 13005. Chairman. — You are acting as sub-agent ? 
 — On Mr. O'Hara's property in this county. 
 
 13006. That is over 22,000 acres '?— Yes. 
 
 13007. Who is the head agent 1— Mr. F. F. Hamil-. 
 ton. 
 
 13008. Mr. Shaw. — Does he live there?— No. 
 
 13009. Where?— In the county Meath, at Enfield. 
 
 13010. I see you have given some answers as to the 
 sale and disposition of holdings out of Ulster, on Mr. 
 O'Hara's property, which is just mentioned, the}' are 
 allowed subject to the landlord's approval 1 — Yes. 
 
 13011. Have you, smce you have been there, known 
 of many cases arising from the sale of holdings ? — Yes, 
 in a few instances, of people emigrating, and such as 
 that, they sell their holdings before going. 
 
 13012. Do they get a large price? — From six to 
 eight years' purchase. 
 
 13013. Is there a price fixed by the landlord ? — ISTo, 
 they are allowed to get as much as they can. 
 
 13014. Chairman. — And he only requires it should 
 be a person of good character ? — Yes. 
 
 13015. A solvent man ? — Yes. 
 
 13016. Mr. Shaw. — He has a preference for the 
 teuapts on the property ? — Yes ; they always get a 
 preference. 
 
 13017. Chairman. — In any of these cases have you 
 found the change has been an advantage to the holding 1 
 — I cannot sa}"" it makes much difierence, it is generally 
 the same class get it. 
 
 13018. Mr. Shaw. — Your rents are paid under any 
 circumstances 1 — Yes. 
 
 13019. Are they large farms ? — No, generally small. 
 
 13020. What size generally ? — From ten to twenty 
 acres. 
 
 13021. Are they able to make a living on these 
 farms 1 — They are ; but not a good living. 
 
 13022. Without any other means of living ? — They 
 have no other means of living unless they get employ- , 
 ment from the landlord. 
 
 13023. Good land ?— Mixed. 
 
 13024. Do they improve it much ? — Very little, ex- 
 cept reclamations by the tenants of cut-away bog. 
 
 13025. The general twenty acre men have not been 
 improving much ? — Not to any great extent. 
 
 13026. Chairman. — How many years have you 
 _ been there ? — Six years. 
 
 13027. I see you say here that there have been no 
 evictions on this estate since the passing of the Land 
 Act of 1870, nor for many years previous to that day % 
 — No sir, there have been no evictions for the last 
 twenty years. 
 
 13028. You have heard what Mr. M'Manushas said 
 about the tenantry through the country, do you agree 
 in his view as to the rent being high, generally, on 
 these small properties? — I know very little about 
 these small properties, I will only answer for Mr. 
 O'Hara's estate. • 
 
 13029. Mr. Shaw. — The rents are moderate on Mr. 
 O'Hara's estate ? — I consider they are. 
 
 13030. People able to live ? — Yes; he gives a good 
 deal of employment on his estate to the tenants. 
 
 13031. Does he give anything to help improvements ? 
 — He does in many ways. 
 
 improvements ? — Yes 
 
 13032. Do you promote 
 di-ainage and fencing. 
 
 13033. Draining, he gets money for from the Board 
 of Works? — No, except this year when he got money 
 '■ ^^ ' Board of Works, part of which went to 
 
 Charges 
 
 interest to the tenantry? No 
 
 from the 
 draining. 
 13034. 
 nothing. 
 
 13035. Chairman. — Do you know of any difficulty 
 of getting money from the Board of Works ?— No, sir 
 
 13036. Or much delay? — No, sir. 
 
 13037. Was that money at a low rate? — Yes; he 
 got it in two instalments, £500 up to the present. 
 
 1 3038. Has he many tenants employed ? — Generally 
 forty or fifty for the last six months — sometimes more 
 and sometimes less. 
 
 13039. Generally on their own holding — Some and 
 others of them make roads into the turbaries and 
 pasture. 
 
 13040. Mr. Shaw. — Are you from the North t- 
 Well, I am. 
 
 13041. You have tenant-right on that property just 
 as good as in the North ? — Yes ; fixity of tenure, fair 
 rents, and free sale. 
 
 13042. You never dispossess? — No. 
 
 13043. And you help them and let them make the 
 best of their holdings ? — Yes. 
 
 13044. Chairman. — Is that what is called "usages 
 corresponding in essential jjarticulars with tenant- 
 right " ?— It is. 
 
 13045. The O'Conor Don.— Has Mr. O'Hara spent 
 much money on improvements for his tenants?— A 
 great deal ; he keeps a staff of men always improving. 
 
 13046. You could not give us the figures as to the 
 amount spent? — Generally about £500 or £600 eveiy 
 year. 
 
 13047. Mr. Shaw.— Mr. O'Hara lives there f- 
 Always, sir, except for a few weeks in the year. 
 
 13048. And there is no discontent on the property? 
 — None, there is no complaint whatever ; there are a 
 few small properties Mr. M'Manus mentioned, there 
 are complaints there. 
 
 13049. Chairman. — Do you find an inclination 
 among the tenants to ask that rents should correspond 
 with the Government valuation ? — No ; Mr. O'Hai'a 
 gave them a reduction of 15 per cent. on. the three last 
 half-years, and in a great many cases the rent is not 
 above the Government valuation on Mr. O'Hara's pro- 
 perty. 
 
 13050. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any large grass 
 farms ? — We have. 
 
 13051. Mixed, I sujopose ? — Yes. 
 
 13052. But farmed on the English system, [suppose, 
 high farming ? — No ; their farming needs much im- 
 provement. 
 
 13053. But they are all natives of the country, 1 
 suppose, not Scotch or English? — None, their fore- 
 fathers have been on the estate for generations. 
 
 1 3054. Are the houses good generally on the estate? 
 — Yes ; Mr. O'Hara helps them with slates and 
 timber free, or advances the money 
 
 |.The witness then withdrew.] 
 
 George 
 Krriiigton, 
 esq., ii.p. 
 
 George Errington, esq., m.p.^ examined. 
 
 13055. Mr. Shaw. — You are member for the 
 county Longford? — I am. 
 
 13056. And you have been giving some attention 
 to the state of the Land Question in that county ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 13057. You know Longford well? — Yes, I have 
 property there. 
 
 13058. Are there any cases in particular you wish 
 to call our atteution to?— Yes, there are two estates. 
 The first is Doory Hall, the owners are a family of 
 the name of Jessop, it is a large e.state of £4,000 a 
 year, the agent is Mr. Cusack, a Dublin attorney, he 
 
 has been agent for a great many years, and sole 
 manager. I may say, the management and circum- 
 stances of this estate have been of a very mysterious 
 kind, and they raise points that are very hard to 
 account for. But this is certain that the manage- 
 ment has been very oppressive, and it has resulted in 
 the very deepiest dissatisfaction among the tenants, 
 and has caused great uneasiness in the country among 
 the landlords, as well as farmer class. I can speak 
 of that from my own knowledge. 
 
 13059. Chairman. — Is this in the county Long- 
 ford?— Yes, 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 435 
 
 13060. Mr. Shaw. — Are the owners living in Ire- 
 land ?— The two supposed representatives, the two Miss 
 Jessops, live at Doory Hall. The result of this manage- 
 ment has been to produce various outrages. In 1 8C6, a 
 bailiff named Freyne, was killed. In 1876, Mr. Cusack- 
 was shot at and wounded in Dublin j he has been 
 since, and is still protected by the police, two of whom 
 accompany him in Longford. Now, as for the details 
 •of the management : he has evicted a great number of 
 tenants, and their land now lies waste. Well, of 
 course, it is neither let nor cultivated, and droVers 
 passing the road, turn their cattle into it. 
 
 13061. Has it been offered for letting 1 — Not as far 
 as 1 can tell. I don't contend, of course, you can 
 compel a landlord to let or cultivate his land, but I 
 say there, in the country, the feeling is intense, and 
 the excitement intense, at tenants being turned out of 
 their farms, and the farms then left idle and not let. 
 
 13062. Chaiemast. — -Were they turned out for non- 
 payment 1 — No. 
 
 13063. The O'Conor Don. — How long ago were they 
 turned out 1 — I have details of several cases, at various 
 times. JohnDerwin's wasa hardcase in the townland of 
 Briokerns; he was served with notice at the death of his 
 father, the tenant, some five or six years ago, but 
 held on for several years, tendering the rent ; no 
 rent was taken ; the land now lies waste, and 
 Derwin lives on the land' as a trespasser, and tries to 
 cultivate a portion of it. There are many other names 
 I can mention. The second point that has caused 
 great dissatisfaction is that, chiefly at the expiration 
 of leases, and in other cases also, Mr. Ousack is in the 
 liabit of refusing to accept the rent though tendered. 
 
 13064. Mr. Shaw. — Leaves them there'? — ^They 
 tender the rent duly, and he refuses to take the rent, 
 and some have been tenants more than ten years not 
 paying rent. I will give one case of this. I have 
 visited all these cases myself. But this one I can 
 quote all the particulars of. Gregory Yoi'ke is a poor 
 law guardian in the parish of Killashee, acreage, thirty- 
 three acres, original rent, £46 ; it was raised to £60 
 in his father's lifetime. His father died in 1874, 
 since that time Yorke has continued upon the farm, 
 tendered his rent duly, but has not been absolutely 
 evicted. He has an exceedingly good farm, and is a most 
 respectable man, only desirous to have some sort of 
 recognition. The land was in the father's time ver'y 
 inferior, almost waste, a sort of furze and waste 
 land. It is now a very good farm, exceedingly well 
 cultivated, and I am sure quite worth the rent which 
 is put on, but the rent has not been taken though the 
 man is most willing to pay it. 
 
 13065. Then there is the case of John Cline'? — In 
 this case a similar circumstance occurred. The rent has 
 not been taken for ten years ; they are a large family, 
 most respectable, and they offer the half year's rent 
 regularly. 1 don't, of course, contend tliat you can 
 force a landlord to take his rent, but it does create a 
 very great deal ot ill-feeling that the tenant should be 
 left in this position, and I know, in the opinion of the 
 clergy and the people of the neighbourhood, that 
 it is considered almost worse than to be positively 
 evicted, it is worse for the country, because this con- 
 tinues for years and the sore remains, while if they are 
 evicted once, there would be an end of it. This is not 
 the case with every farm, or anything like it on the ' 
 estate, but a considerable number of farms are this way, 
 and the result is an amoimt of uneasiness and ill-feeling, 
 which is very great indeed. 
 
 1306C. The O'Conor Don. — If they go on holding 
 a little longer, won't they become owners in fee ? — ^Not 
 if 'they tendered, the rent ; that would, bar it. 
 
 13067. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose there was some 
 offence given in the first instance, that prevented them 
 going on harmoniously ?— I began by saying the thing 
 was inexplicable, but the facts are undoubted. I would 
 just say that in this case there is no question of non- 
 payment of rent, nor of objecting to the increase of rent. 
 The direct cause of the shooting at Mr. Cusack, in 1875 
 appears from the reports of trial to have been, not those 
 
 special points, but that he had enforced penal rents in Od. u. u: 
 
 a very harsh way. A man was tried for the shooting, and „ 
 
 was acquitted, but Judge Keogh used extremely strong Errtn^Aon 
 language. It was pleaded that there was no agrarian e,q., m.p. ' 
 cause for the outrage. However, Judge Keogh's lan- 
 guage, which I quoted in the House of Commons, was 
 of thestrongest, for he said he had never heard a case 
 in which there was more apparent motive for outva"e, 
 and therefore the jury should not for a moment 
 suppose there was no agrarian reason for it. ' The Crown 
 gave evidence that there were penal rents of a very 
 harsh kind, and Judge Keogh used this strong language, 
 he had never known penal rents enforced wit"h such 
 severity. Another case I wish to call attention to is 
 Lord Annaly's estates in Longford. They were kindly 
 and fairly managed untU the death of the late Lord, 
 when a new agent was appointed. 
 
 13068. What is the name of the new agent?— Mr. 
 O'Connor. By a general rise of rent and other 
 exactions he has caused a strong feeling against him, 
 and has now to be protected' by police. It began by 
 calling in the hanging gale, and insisting immediately 
 after upon the payment of the rent due, the consequence 
 of which was that two half years was paid within six 
 months, and three half years some time within about 
 eight or nine. 
 
 13069. Chairman. — Was that called in by the same 
 agent? — Mr. O'Connor, yes. The rents were then 
 generally raised. In some cases the increase was not 
 excessive, but there were certainly cases to my own 
 knowledge, in which a very stiff rent followed by a 
 moderate increase became very nearly a rack-rent, 
 and that added to the previous severity has caused 
 very great suffering and very great dissatisfaction. 
 
 13069a. Can you say when the back half year was 
 called in, how soon after the death 1 — I think within 
 two years after the death. I am informed that in some 
 cases the tenants submitted willingly to the increase of 
 rent, though they thought it severe, on the j^romise 
 of the agent of improvements, buildings, and drainings, 
 and so forth, which were never done. I can give 
 instances of individual tenants, but I should rather 
 not ; some evictions have taken place. 
 
 13070. You might say the number that the thing 
 occurred in without giving the names ? — The points 
 which I have raised occurred all over the estate, though 
 there were some special cases, of which I can give 
 illustrations. Would you now allow me to state in 
 two or three words the changes which I think this 
 state of things requires. It occurs to me the only 
 remedy is to give security to the tenant, and that, I 
 think, after careful consideration, can only be done by 
 some system which would establish fair rents, together 
 with a right of sale, commonly called the Ulster custom, 
 and this would constitute a practical fixity of tenure. 
 My plan for carrying it out is as follows ; — I would 
 institute in Dublin a sujireme land court with loc;il 
 branches. The business of that court would be three- 
 fold, first to keep and publish authoritative records for 
 varioiis parts of the country, of the prices of the . 
 various kinds of produce, according to which, aft'.;r 
 the first valuation, the periodical re-adjustments should 
 be made. Secondly, upon an application, either by 
 landlord or tenant, the court would have to decide once 
 for all the present letting value of a farm, taking into ; 
 consideration all the circumstances of the holding. 
 That value would be recorded as the rent of the holding, 
 and, I lay great stress on this, it would become the 
 ground work foi- all fu.ture ■ arrangements with regard 
 to that farm. 
 
 13071. Mr. Shaw. — And for taxation purposes, I 
 suppose ? — Yes ; but on that point I am anxious to say 
 one word. I think'the system of Government valuation 
 differing, and differing uneqiially, from the letting value ■ 
 of land, has been th« cause of the very greatest incon- 
 venience' and dissatisfaction, a.nd I should be most 
 anxious to see some scheme by which' the rental and 
 the valuation shoidd be assimilated. The objection is 
 that you would impose extra taxation. I don't think 
 that would matter for local taxation, and in the case 
 
 3K 2 
 
43G 
 
 KISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 George 
 Errington, 
 esq., MP. 
 
 of imperial taxation there would be no difficulty in 
 making some allowance. 
 
 13072. Take off a per-centage, twenty-five per cent., 
 as they do in excess taxes ? — Yes. According to my 
 scheme the rent and the valuation would merge in 
 every case in which landlord or tenant submitted their 
 holding to this system. 
 
 13073. Would you not make it general all over the 
 country ? — I would not for this reason : there would Le 
 some difficulty practically in ascertaining the actual 
 rent, it would lead possibly by collusion to false returns 
 being made. Periodically, every ten or twenty years, 
 I should propose the landlord or tenant to be at liberty 
 to claim if they pleased a re-adjustment of rent, to be 
 decided according to the average of prices for the 
 previous period. The tenant should be at liberty to 
 sell his interest, subject to a reasonable veto on the 
 purchaser by the landlord; every such transaction should 
 be ratified and recorded by the court ; the arrears of rent 
 and all dilapidations should be paid out of the purchase 
 money. I should not be inclined to limit, as is often 
 suggested in that case, the price each tenant's interest 
 might be sold for, because the efl%ot of that would be 
 to discourage any improvements. And I may just 
 obsei've, as an answer to the objection which is often 
 made to the Ulster custom, that a sudden extension of 
 it and concession of the right all over Ireland to tenants 
 who have never regularly acquired it, would appear to be 
 somewhat unjust ; but I don't think it so when you 
 consider that in reality the great majority of tenants 
 virtually do possess it. 
 
 13074. As a matter of fact ? — Yes ; whether by in- 
 timidation or whether by the kindness of landlords, or 
 by the pressure of public opinion, they have a claim of 
 that sort, and, therefore, I think it much better to re- 
 cognise it, and make it manageable, as it would be by 
 sale, than by ignoring it to leave it dependent, as it 
 is now really, upon this indefinite sort of pressure, 
 or worse, on intimidation. I merely wish to say 
 the only novelty T think in this scale is the adjust- 
 ment. All rent according to the record of prices would 
 roughly but fairly represent the increment or decrease 
 which was due to the landlord from the change of 
 times ; while the increase or decrease in the purchase- 
 money, which arises from the increased or diminished 
 quantity of produce, would fairly represent the result 
 which ought to come, or would be due from the tenants' 
 exertions. I think this system would keejD tlie two 
 shares perfectly separate^, and would be to the advan- 
 tage of both ; and that is the difficulty, which is a very 
 important one, I think, to meet. Subletting according 
 to this would, I think, become impossible. Subdivi- 
 sion unrecognised would lose much of its advantages, 
 and I don't think there would be need of covenants, 
 because the Court would, according to my scheme, 
 have full power to assess damages for dilapidations. It 
 is not to be supposed that in the majority of cases 
 tenants would depreciate what they had paid for, and 
 were going to sell. A similar scheme was proposed 
 to Mr. Shaw-Lefevre's Committee, and it was recom- 
 mended by the Committee. It was dissimihtr in the 
 suggestion of perpetuity leases for fixed rents ; in that 
 case it was proposed that a money payment of four or 
 five years' jDurchase should be paid by the tenant to 
 the landlord, which money was in part to be advanced 
 by the Government ; the difference is that in thab 
 case the rent was to be fixed for ever, while in this 
 case it would fluctuate or vary according to the 
 change of times ; and, secondly, according to the im- 
 provements made by the tenant. The third duty 
 of the supreme Land Court would be to assist the 
 tenants to purchase their farms. I would enable them 
 to purchase estates and resell them, ■vi'ithout loss to the 
 State, to the tenants. There was one jjoint I would 
 like to refer to, which I think is remarkable with re- 
 ference to this portion of the country — a remarkable 
 feature with regard to the present agitation in this por- 
 tion of the country. 
 
 13075. The O'Conor Do>f.— What portion!- 
 Mayo, Sligo, Roscommon, and other parts of Con- 
 naught. It began and progressed most rapidly in 
 this district. A somewhat similar thing occurred in 
 the great famine of 1847 and 1848, as will be 
 seen from the returns of the money given for the 
 relief of distress ; and again in 1869, accordina to the 
 statistics published, there was an excess of agrarian 
 crime in these very districts, which determined the 
 Government to pass the repressive measures the 
 coercivemeasuresof tliat year. Naturally I look for 
 the cause of that, and it appears to be due to the fact 
 that there are between thirty thousand and forty 
 thousand small tenants, who are also labourers mi- 
 gratory labourers. 
 
 1 3076. Chairman. — Who go to England to look for 
 work ? — Yes. No land reform would ever meet their 
 case ; they would still be liable on pressure of times 
 to be distressed ; and, therefore, the question becomes 
 directly one of Poor Law, and to consider whether tie 
 Poor Law is not too strict. The question arises whether 
 it is right thatforty thousandmen should spend half their 
 lives working in other countries, and in case of distress 
 be thrown upon the one poor district in which they do 
 not work. 
 
 13077. The O'Conob Don. — How can that ever be 
 met ? — I will tell you. The reason of this is two-fold— 
 the Poor Law in Ireland is more severe than in Eng- 
 land, and circTimstances render it more severely en- 
 forced. 
 
 13078. Mr. Shaw. — But you would not throw it on 
 the Irish Poor Law entirely , would you ? — No. The dif- 
 ferences whichlwouldpropose to alter are three-fold,and 
 I think they meet this case. The first is that in Eng- 
 land they have union rating, while with us there is 
 rating by electoral divisions. This makes the practice 
 of the law more severe, for the elected Guardian of the 
 district has almost entirely the management of relief 
 for his own district, and it is his interest to keep 
 down relief, which makes tlie exercise of the law more 
 severe. 
 
 13079. The O'Conor Don.— Would not a more 
 liberal Poor Law have the eflfect you deprecate. It 
 would enable these people to live here at the expense 
 of the rates, and enable them to work in England all 
 the year round, except when supported by the rates 
 here 1 — If it stood alone it would, but the second point, 
 in which I propose to assimilate the law in England and 
 Ireland, is with regard to outdoor relief, and this par- 
 ticular point meets what The O'Conor Don has stated, 
 by distributing the charge according to the area of 
 relief. I would suggest a common poor relief fund for 
 migratory labourei'S which would extend over England 
 and Scotland, and which would represent the advantages 
 which those districts obtain from the labour of those per- 
 sons. One other word — it is a most pressing recommen- 
 dation — upon this point. The Local Government Board 
 in Ireland have at present, by an amendment of the 
 Pvelief of Distress Act, extended the power of giving 
 outdoor relief for two months after the termination of 
 this year — that is to say, until the meeting of Parlia- 
 ment. It appears to me most important that that 
 power should be extended immediately on the meeting 
 of Parliament, pending any other changes which may 
 be made in the law. 
 
 13080. I just wish to ask one word with regard to 
 Longford generally, you say you have inquired into 
 the relations of landlord and tenant in thB county 
 Longford 1 — Yes. 
 
 13081. Do you find them generally very satisfactory 
 with the exception of those cases you have alluded to s 
 — Very fairly satisfactory. 
 
 13082. And are those the worst cases you could 
 find out? — Certainly, they are the worst cases I 
 know. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 437 
 
 Mr. Christopher L'Estrange examined. 
 
 are agent to Colonel 
 
 large 
 
 13083. Chairman. — You 
 Cooper 1 — Yes. 
 
 13084. The Percival estate and some others? — 
 Yes. 
 
 13085. What is the acreage of the properties over 
 which you are agent ? — I could not give that. There 
 are some of them very scattered, and in different 
 unions and different counties. 
 
 13086. However, the acreage is very 
 altogether 1 — Very large. 
 
 13087. Are these properties in Mayo and Sligo 
 generally 1 — Yes ; generally in Mayo and Sligo. 
 
 13088. You mention that the rents are not paid in 
 Mayo this year "i — Very badly indeed ; particularly in 
 the neighbourhood of Swineford. 
 
 13089. Is there any special reason for that in that 
 part of the country — is it worse off than other parts 1 
 — They are badly off, but there are a good many -who 
 could pay only they are afiuid. 
 
 13090. Mr. Shaw. — ^The land is very poor there? 
 — ^Yes ; it is. 
 
 13091. Chairman. — There is no tenant-right? — 
 No ; there is not. 
 
 13092. Is there any usage corresponding to the 
 Ulster custom of tenant-right? — No. Any tenant 
 who wanted to leave, or through poverty was reduced, 
 would ask leave to give his farm vip to another, and he 
 generally paid him. That was the nearest thing to 
 tenant-right. 
 
 13093. The O'Conor Don. — On whose estates does 
 that custom exist ? — On most of the estates I manage. 
 I acknowledge that, so far as the estates of Captain 
 Armstrong, Mr. Orme, Mr. Rashley — an English 
 gentleman — and several others are concerned. 
 
 13094. Chairman. — That is not the case on Colonel 
 Cooper's estate? — He has occasionally allowed it. 
 When I bring a case l efore him he allows it. 
 
 1309-5. Mr. Shaw. — Each case comes up on its own 
 merits ? — Yes. 
 
 13096. There is no fixed rule? — No. Each case is 
 dealt with on it merits. 
 
 13097. Chairman. — You think that the custom 
 of allowing the sale of holdings is decreasLag? — I 
 think it is rather decreasing. 
 
 13098. That is, I suppose, not from want of in- 
 clination on the part of the tenant, but from the land- 
 lords wishing to deal with the cases themselves by 
 way of compensation ? — Well, really I may say that 
 in my" office I never knew a man being refused per- 
 mission to sell, provided he brings in a tenant who is 
 solvent and to whom there is no objection. I have 
 never known a case of a man being refused to appoint 
 a man in his place. 
 
 13099. Mr. Shaw. — You don't inquire into what 
 they get ? — No ; but where I see a reason for the 
 change I always facilitate it. 
 
 13100. Chairman. — Do you think the system exists 
 to such an extent that it might be nailed a usage in a 
 corresponding sense to the Ulster tenant-right ? — It is 
 an optional usage, if I may say so. 
 
 13101. That is, it requii-es the permission of the 
 landlord 1 — Yes. That has always been the case on 
 the properties that I manage. Generally I allow it, 
 but in Colonel Cooper's estate I cannot allow it with- 
 out bringing it before him, and I generally obtain his 
 sanction. 
 
 13102. On such changes of tenancy is it usual to 
 make any change in the rent? — No ; not generally. 
 
 13103. In the case of middlemen that y pu mentioned, 
 are there not generally changes of rent ?— Yes ; when 
 the purchase is made by middlemen ; the middlemen 
 are a lower class of men, if I may say so, and they do 
 put an increased rent on. 
 
 13104. Have there been many cases of eviction on 
 the different properties which you manage? — Not 
 many. 
 
 13105. Have there been any since the Land Act? 
 — No, I have frequently been obliged to bring eject- 
 
 ments to get the rent, but I have very seldom indeed 
 been obliged to carry them out. 
 
 13106. There has been a settlement before tlie mat- 
 ter came into court ? — Yes ; they bring in a certain 
 sum of money and we generally settle it. As a rule, 
 I very seldom had to bring in the sheriff to take pos- 
 session. 
 
 13107. During this last year have you had many 
 cases of ejectment for non-payment of rent? — No; I 
 have not executed any. 
 
 13108. But was it necessaiy to bring ejectments to 
 get the rent ? — I have not done it to any large extent 
 this year ; in fact I have never done it to a large ex- 
 tent, but this year I refrained from it particularly. 
 
 13109. Mr. vSiiAw. — Has there been an abatement 
 generally given ? — Yes ; I have given as much as six 
 shillings in the pound on that poor property in MayOj 
 and four shillings in other places, and three shillings 
 on other property in Sligo. 
 
 13110. On all the properties in Sligo ? — Yes ; it has 
 varied from three shillings to six — six in Mayo. 
 
 13111. Chairman. — Were the crops very bad these 
 last few years ? — Yes. 
 
 13112. So that the tenant who in other years was 
 fairly well able to pay was really unable to meet his 
 engagements ? — In many cases, Yes. 
 
 13113. Are there many who hold under lease? — 
 Not many. 
 
 13114. They are mostly all old leases ? — Only old 
 leases. 
 
 13115. And now dying out ? — Yes. 
 
 13116. Was there an offer of a lease generally made 
 by the landlord after the pai^sing of the Land Act ? — 
 There was, but the leases were generally declined. 
 
 13117. What was the ground of refusal? — They 
 thought the Land Act would give them as good interest 
 in their land as most leases. 
 
 13118. Was there* generally a contract barring the 
 Land Act, in the leases that were offered ? — In very 
 few oases. 
 
 13119. There was a sort of common form jiut intO' 
 many leases barring the operation of the Land Act,, 
 and it was supposed in some cases that that led the 
 tenants to decline the lease ?^i-There is a form called 
 Gerald's lease. I have seen it, and I have almost 
 always known it to be declined. I have known per- 
 haps as inany as a dozen cases where they did take it. 
 but it is very seldom offered to them. 
 
 13120. Just previous to the proceedings which led 
 to the passing of the Land Act there had been rather a 
 desire on the part of the large farmei's to get leases ? — 
 Yes ? there was. 
 
 13121. Then do you think there was disappoint- 
 ment afterwards in the mind of the tenants as to the 
 security they got from the Land Act? — No, I do not ; 
 I think they were satisfied. 
 
 13122. And are stUl satisfied ? — I think so. 
 
 13123. What is the cause of the general dissatisfac- 
 tion now — is it the rate of rent ? — I believe that is the 
 thing put forward, but I cannot say that on the pro- 
 perties I manage the rents are too high. On Captain 
 Armstrong's property the rent has not been changed 
 for the last thirty years, and on Mr. Orme's about the 
 same time. When I first began to manage these lands, 
 about thirty years ago, they were in what was called 
 rimdale, and I divided the lands. 
 
 13124. Mr. Shaw. — That is in Mayo ?— Not very 
 much. The valuation was put on by a valuator — a 
 fair man — a man who was considered a fair man — and 
 in some cases it was a rise, but not very much of a 
 rise ; I might also add that since then a great deal of 
 bog has been reclaimed by tenants, and I have never 
 increased the rent for that. 
 
 13125. They do reclaim land — they are constantly 
 reclaiming? — Yes ; if there is any arable land runnino- 
 down to a bog they generally work into the boo-. 
 
 13126. Chairman.-— You say generally the rent is 
 
 Oct. U, 1880 
 
 Mr. Christr. 
 L'f^strange. 
 
438 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Christr. 
 L'Estrange. 
 
 one-fiftli or one-sixth over tlie tenement valuation 1 — 
 Yes, about that. 
 
 13127. Does that include buildings ? — Yes, it would 
 include buildings — everything. 
 
 13128. Have the buildings generally through this 
 county been erected by the landlords, or assistance 
 given to the building by the landlords 1 — The landlords 
 have assisted so far as slates, timber, windows, and 
 doors — occasionally in that way : but small thatched 
 cabins the tenants have generally built themselves. 
 
 13129. Has that assistance been continued up to 
 the present time 1 — I don't think the landlords have 
 assisted so much since the Land Bill, for the claims 
 the tenants may bring against them may rather tie 
 their hands. 
 
 13130. They are afraid their improvements may be 
 made to tell against themselves afterwards? — Exactly. 
 
 13131. Mr. Shaw. — They have power, to prevent 
 that by registering their improvements 1 — Yes, I have 
 done that ; but if I was dead my successor might not 
 know anything about that. 
 
 13132. The books would be there showing the im- 
 provements t — Oh, yes, they would. 
 
 13133. Chairman. — Is that one-fitth or one-sijcth 
 over the tenement valuation a fair guide, as a general 
 rule, to the rent in this country 1 — I think as far as 
 the tenement valuation is a guide it is fair, but at the 
 same time I think very often there is a low valuation 
 on good land, and rather a high valuation on bad 
 land. 
 
 13134. Mr. Shaw. — The good land is under-valued ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 13135. And the bad land is high enough valued? — 
 Yes, generally. ' I also manage the Percival property ; 
 it is a large property. 
 
 13136. The O'Conoe Don. — There has been no in- 
 crease in the rent on Colonel Cooper's property ? — No ; 
 when I say no, I mean it is to a very trifling extent. 
 
 13137. Mr. Shaw. — There was a revaluation about 
 twenty years ago ; were you the agent then ? — TSTo, I 
 was not. 
 
 13138. Chairman. — As to the reclamation of waste 
 land, do you think there is any waste land in parts of 
 the country with which you are acquainted that could 
 be reclaimed on a large scale ? — I think the best re- 
 clamation would be by draming some of the large 
 rivers, and thus enable the landlords to deepen the 
 rivulets and small streams into these. 
 
 13139. So as to make a main outfall? — Yes. 
 
 13140. Colonel Cooper has mentioned that he 
 thought the best reclamation was by tenants of hold- 
 ings, by their own labour and, the labour of their 
 families, gradually increasing the amount of their land 
 by working into waste land ? — I think , it would be 
 utterly useless to take a deep bog and try to reclaim it 
 at once ; for, until the turf is cut away, it would re- 
 turn to its old nature again. I think it would be very 
 up-hill work to begin to reclaim bog in that way. 
 
 13141. You say that, during your memory, a great 
 deal of land has been reclaimed by the tenants? — 
 Yes. 
 
 1 3142. And you always encouraged them by leaving 
 them . free from rent for twenty or twenty-five years ? 
 — I have always acted on that principle ; for I think 
 if a man has reclaimed a wild bog, he should have a 
 yery long enjoyment of it. I have always Licted on 
 that principle. 
 
 13143. And then, at the end of twenty or twenty- 
 five years, what happened ? — I think it would be fair 
 to have a valuation of it made then. 
 
 13144. And put it to the full valuation ?— No ; I 
 think it would be unjust to put it to the highest 
 valuation. 
 
 13145. You would leave a man fair remuneration 
 for his own labour, while giving the landlord what is 
 fair for the land ?— Exactly. I think to keep the 
 landlords' title to it, it would be necessary at the end of 
 twenty years to have a revaluation made. 
 
 13146 Mr. SHAw.—Eut you would not rent it up 
 to Its full value ?— No, I would not. 
 
 13147! Chairman. — You would put on a fair rent 
 looking to the man's improvements' ? — 'Yes. 
 
 13148. The fair rent is really what we find is the 
 whole point of the question — the ascertainment of 
 what is a fair rent ? — In ijutting on what I call a fair 
 rent on bog, I would not put anything like the value 
 of it. I think from,5s. to 6s., to keep up the landlord's 
 title, would be sufficient. 
 
 13149. But I mean upon any land — would vou 
 think the tenant, or someone on his behalf, should 
 have a voice in the settlement of the rent t — I think 
 certainly he should, and he always has. 
 
 13150. Btit something beyond the power ofrefusing 
 to pay the rent and going out ? — I don't think that is 
 the alternative. 
 
 13151. But, with many tenants, the only choice is 
 to pay the rent fixed by the landlord or go out of the 
 holding ? — I think dt is a very fair principle to act on 
 — that the tenant should have a voice in settling tie 
 rent. 
 
 13152. Do you think the case might be met by arU- 
 tration ? — I think it might, but I think it is very diffi- 
 cult to find two arbitrators. I suppose, however, it 
 could be done. 
 
 131 53. If they failed to agree there could be pov.'er 
 to call in a third ? — Yes. 
 
 13154. There should be provision made ia case 
 of their not agreeing — some ultimate resort to some 
 one appointed by a Board or a Commission, or even 
 the County Court Judge ? — I- think, on large farms, it 
 might be worth doing that, but, on small farms, it 
 would he rather a cumbrous thing. 
 
 13155. The fact of its being cumbrous might ge- 
 nerally lead to a settlement of the case without resort- 
 ing to that ti-ibunal ? — Yes. 
 
 13156. Mr. Shaw. — There would not be many cases 
 arise in which they would appeal to the ultimate resort? 
 — No ; I think os. good estates it would hardly be 
 brought to that. 
 
 1. 3 1 5 7. It is only in extreme cases they would resort 
 to such a remedy, and it would be an advantage to all 
 parties to ha^-e such a tribunal in these cases of ne- 
 cessity ? — I think it would. 
 
 13158. The O'Conor Don. — The property near 
 Swineford belongs to Mr. Orme 1 — Yes. 
 
 13159. You say the rents have not been paid 
 last year? — I got little or nothing. 
 
 13160. Although you ofiered 6s. in the pound re- 
 duction? — I ofl^ered 4s. in the pound in that part of 
 the country. 
 
 13161. And, in the county Sligo, were the rents 
 paid ? — I gave 6s. reduction, near Balladeny, in Mayo. 
 
 13162. Did they pay there? — Not many took ad- 
 vantage of it. 
 
 13163. In Sligo were the rents paid? — Much better 
 in Sligo than anywhere else. 
 
 13164. Are the improvements generally made by the 
 landlord or tenant on the estates with which you are 
 connected 1 — On the properties I manage, works, sucli 
 as main drainage— all heavy works — are done by tlie 
 landlord ; but the tenants do the small works. 
 
 13105. Has there been much outlay by the landlords 
 in the way of improvements ? — On some of the estates 
 there has been a good deal. 
 
 1316G. The buildings you say the tenants generally- 
 erected, except that the landlord gives timber and 
 slates where the houses are of a. better description?— 
 Yes, and where the tenants will use slates instead of 
 thatch. 
 
 13167. The ordinary tenants' houses are very poor 
 and miserable? — A great many of them are thatched 
 cabins. . 
 
 13168. "VVhat would be about the average value nt 
 these tenants' houses 1 — The poor law valuation I could 
 scarcely tell, for they don't put any value on these 
 thatched cabins in any of the poor law valuations 
 unless they are of the better description and really 
 o'ood, but thatched houses they do not value at all. 
 
 13169. jMr. Siiaw.— They are small holdings gene- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 459 
 
 rally ?— In jMa3'o they are as a rule, but, at tlie same 
 time, I have some up to £100 a year. 
 
 13170. In Sligo tliey are larger?— Yes, they are 
 better farms. 
 
 13171. I suppose the really bad times for the last 
 three years account very much for the non-payment of 
 the rents 1 — I attribute it a great deal more to the an-ita- 
 tion. I think if they were left alone they would have 
 paid. This year they could pay fairly. 
 
 13172. They have got demoralized 1—1 don't think Oct. u, isso. 
 
 that is so much the cause as following bad advice. 
 
 Mr. Christr. 
 
 13173. The three years have been bad, and the last L'Estrange. 
 year the worst of the three 1 — I admit they were bad 
 
 years. 
 
 13174. The potatoes were a failure almost entirely! 
 
 Patrick Boyle, Senr., Michael Nicholson, James Smith, Peter Boyle, John Clancy, James Clancy, 
 Thomas Meehan, Patrick Boyle, Junr., tenants on the estate of Sir Henry Gore Booth, at Dunfore, 
 examined. 
 
 13175. Chairman. — This document (produced) is a 
 list of names of tenants on Sir Henry Gore Booth's 
 estate at Dunfore, with the rent, valuation, acreage, 
 &c., of each ? 
 
 Patrick Boyle. — ^Yes ; we gave our names and all 
 
 particulars. That document is correct. (Hands in 
 following list of tenants of Sir Henry Gore Booth, 
 whose rents were settled twenty-two years ago, and to 
 whom a reduction of twenty-five per cent, was allowed 
 last year, viz.) : — 
 
 - 
 
 Rent. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Acreage. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 A. R. P. 
 
 Pat Boyle, senior, . 
 
 10 16 10 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 7 1 31 
 
 James Smith, 
 
 
 7 11 4 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 4 3 
 
 jVIichael Nicholson, 
 
 
 16 19 4 
 
 11 15 
 
 0— £1 5s. addi- 
 tional for house. 
 
 9 3 
 
 John Glancy, 
 
 
 15 15 6 
 
 11 15 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Owen Brady, 
 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Pat Nicholson. 
 
 
 11 12 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 6 1 
 
 Pat Boyle, junior, 
 
 
 9 11 8 
 
 6 2 
 
 
 
 5 20 
 
 James Boyle, 
 
 
 20 5 8 
 
 14 5 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 John IM'Gowan, . 
 
 
 10 
 
 7 10 
 
 
 
 5 1 
 
 Widow Kelly, 
 
 
 15 2 10 
 
 9 10 
 
 
 
 8 20 
 
 John Boyle, . 
 
 
 9 
 
 7 10 
 
 
 
 4 3 7 
 
 jNIichael Glancy, . 
 
 
 12 7 8 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 Luke Nicholson, . 
 
 
 24 16 10 
 
 17 5 
 
 
 
 13 1 
 
 Peter Boyle, 
 
 
 20 15 6 
 
 15 5 
 
 
 
 12 1 20 
 
 Ann Nicholson, 
 
 
 16 
 
 11 5 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Widow Corritt, 
 
 
 5 1 4 
 
 3 10 
 
 
 
 2 2 
 
 Michael Doherty, . 
 
 
 2 8 4 
 
 1 15 
 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 Martin Loughlan .. 
 
 
 7 3 6 
 
 5 15 
 
 
 
 3 3 
 
 Thomas Meehan, . 
 
 
 , 2 9 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 Pat Brady, . 
 
 
 5 12 1 
 
 3 5 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 Prancis Kelly, 
 
 
 14 17 2 
 
 8 10 
 
 
 
 7 1 
 
 James Gilfether, . 
 
 
 16 17 6 
 
 12 1 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 Michael Toher, . 
 
 
 16 8 
 
 10 15 
 
 
 
 9 1 
 
 Bridget M'Gowan, 
 
 
 5 5 
 
 4 10 
 
 
 
 4 2 
 
 Cormick Hargidan, 
 
 
 11 15 6 
 
 7 5 
 
 
 
 6 2 
 
 James Brady, 
 
 
 7 17 6 
 
 3 5 
 
 
 
 5 1 
 
 IMichael Gillan, 
 
 
 6 2 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 James Waters, 
 
 
 7 
 
 5 5 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 Patrick Boyle, 
 senr., Michael 
 Nicholson, 
 James Smith, 
 Peter Boyle, 
 John Clancy, 
 James Clancy, 
 Thomas 
 Meehan, and 
 Patrick Boyle, 
 junr. 
 
 13176. We have had some persons here who say 
 Sir Henry is an excellent landlord 1 — So he is. We 
 can say the very same. 
 
 13177. You think your rent is too high ? — We do, 
 but this part of the estate have been held by a petty 
 landlord hitherto. It was held by Mr. Charles Gore 
 Jones, and it is generally the petty landlords who put 
 on high rents ; but when Sir Henry came into posses- 
 sion we asked for a reduction, and he only gave us the 
 same reduction as he gave every one else. He said he 
 got the land so and he left it so. 
 
 13178. That was twenty -two years ago? — Yes, the 
 land was in arrear then, and it went into Chancery, 
 and the rent was raised again when Mr. Jones 
 released it. 
 
 13179. Mr. Shaw. — Then Sir Henry did not reduce 
 it I—No. 
 
 13180. He got no valuation made 1 — No. 
 
 13181. You went to him when he abated the rent? 
 —Yes. 
 
 13182. When was that ? — Twelve months last 
 summer. 
 
 13183. That was when you began to feel the pinch 
 of the bad times ? — We made proposals several times, 
 but it was no use, and when we found the times were 
 changed wonderfully even in the grazing parts, we went 
 to him again, but it was no iise. In 1873 we paid tlie 
 
 first rents to him, and we all applied for a reduction 
 and he refused. 
 
 13184. He has no agent? — He has not. 
 
 131S5. Did you go to him personally? — Yes. 
 
 13186. Chairman. — In the case of Michael Nicholson 
 you say he built a house and reclaimed some of the 
 land ? — Yes, that is the general thing on that estate. 
 Part of it was cut away bog before we got it. 
 
 Michael Nicholson. — My house was built by me. 
 The old valuation of my place was £10 10s., and the 
 second valuation £11 15s. The rent I paid to Mr. 
 Jones was £16 5s. yearly, and then when it came to 
 Sir Henry's hands there was an addition put on for 
 cess, raising the rent to £16 19s. 4d That is for nine 
 acres and four perclies. 
 
 13187. Chairman. — Are they Irisli acres? — Yes. 
 
 13188. Mr. Shaw. — It is far away from a town? — 
 It is nearly twelve miles away. 
 
 131S9. It is not very rich land?— No. There is 
 part of my land to the west of my house, and it would 
 take three acres of it to graze a cow. In 1 846, this 
 townland was cut up by the landlord who had it at 
 that time. I recollect part of my land and if you lifted 
 a sod it would run for ten or twenty perches ; it was 
 all covered over with small pebbles and stones ; we 
 reclaimed it and sunk these stones underneath in dykes 
 and im])roveil tlie land. 
 
440 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct 14, 1880. 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 Patrick Bovle, 
 .«enr., Michael 
 Nicliolsoi), 
 James Smith, 
 Peter Boj'le, 
 Jolin Clancy, 
 James Clancy, 
 Thomas 
 Meehan, and 
 Patrick Boyle, 
 junr. 
 
 13190. It is much better now? — It is a good deal 
 better now. 
 
 13191. Have you any other industry there except 
 the land 1 — We could not live there at all on the land 
 except for some other things. 
 
 13192. You are fishermen? — Yes, I have been 
 sixteen or seventeen years a fisherman ; the majority 
 of us could not live at all except being involved in 
 debt. What we ate three years ago is not paid for 
 yet. 
 
 13193. Chairman. — You had the misfortune of 
 being under a middleman 1 — Yes, but for our being 
 under a middleman we would have been all right. 
 If we had the land as it was set to our neighbours 
 above us. Sir Henry is a very good man, but he did 
 not act well for us. 
 
 13194. Mr. Shaw. — How much did he get out of 
 the land before 1 — Patrick Boyle — I cannot say. 
 
 13195. The lease dropped ?— It was out in 1872. 
 
 13196. He let it to somebody — Yes. 
 
 13197. Chair-Man. — Would you be pleased if there 
 was some fair valuation put upon your land 1 — Yes, 
 that is what we want. 
 
 13198. You would not object to a fair value being 
 put upon it ? — No, of course not. 
 
 13199. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think any fair valuation 
 coming in would reduce the rent? — if we could get 
 that. If a conscientious man came he should reduce 
 the rent. 
 
 13200. Chairman. — That is what you would like to 
 see, a fair valuation of the land ? — Yes, we have no 
 objection in the world to pay it. 
 
 13201. Mr. Shaw. — How much an acre does it stand 
 all round 1 — There are about six acres two roods of 
 roads in every hundred acres, and there was so much 
 stoppage out of every acre back again. 
 
 13202. How much an acre do you pay? — I pay for 
 9a. Or. 4p., with the exception of these stoppages £17- 
 
 It is more than £2 an acre taking the stoppages • 
 all. 
 
 13203. You say j'ou know the cases of all 
 men who are with you 1 — Yes. 
 
 13204. And you can speak for them all — they feel 
 the same thing, that the rent is above what they can 
 pay ? — Yes. Half of their holdings is bog land, and 
 the}' have to pay for it as arable land. 
 
 13205. Are they reclaiming it ? — They are as best 
 they can, but the water flows up and destroys it, 
 
 13206. Were the potatoes good there this year ?—. 
 Not so bad as last year, the weather was so dry. 
 
 13207. How does that happen? — Well there is high 
 land surrounding the valley. 
 
 13208. It is stiff" land ?— No, it is boggy land. 
 
 13209. Do you get your turf there? — No, we have 
 to go nine miles for it. 
 
 13210. You have to pay for it? — No, we got it 
 free. 
 
 13211. But jou have to go nine miles for it ?— Yes 
 nine Irish miles. 
 
 13212. The O'CoNOR Don. — Are you allowed tk 
 right of selling your interest in your holding, by Sit 
 Henry ? — We never made any application for it, 
 
 13213. You don't know of any instance where that 
 occured ? — There were some lately. 
 
 13214. Does he. allow you to sell to the highest 
 bidder ? — I think he had, an objection until lately. 
 
 13215. None of you have ever tried to sell? — Three 
 or four years ago he would not allow it. 
 
 13216. He has changed lately? — I believe he has. 
 He added cess into the former rent. I was paying £16 
 rent and then cess was added. 
 
 13217. Chairman. — You say that Sir Henry is a 
 landlord you respect? — Certainly, and we are only 
 complaining we got no reduction. 
 
 13218. Your rent is higher than your neighbours^ 
 — Yes. He is willing to do everything for us, except 
 the one thing 
 
 At. Thomas 
 Shanley. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Shanley examined. 
 
 13219. Chairman. — You are tenant at Curgullian, 
 on the estate of Sir Gilbert King ?^Yes. 
 
 13220. Where is that?— It is in the county Ros- 
 commom. He has large estates in this county also. I 
 hold this farm from him at Curgullian near Drumsna 
 in Sligo. 
 
 13221. I see you say that he is one of the kindest 
 of landlords ? — No mistake about it. 
 
 13222. Have you anything to say against him? — 
 No, but it is the custom on his estate to raise the rent. 
 
 13223. Mr. Shaw. — He raised it on you more 
 than once ? — More than six times. 
 
 13224. In your own life?— Since 1848. 
 
 1 3225. Who is his agent ? — He had different agents. 
 His present agent is Mr. Jones, near Mohill. 
 
 1 3226. And as you improved the land, he raised the 
 rent ? — I don't blame him for it, because the tenants 
 went and bid for my improvement, and I in posses- 
 sion. 
 
 13227. Why should they bid for them ?— Because 
 it was a swamp when I got it, and they said in place 
 of raising the rent he favoured me. It was not for the 
 land I bought it. I was a trader and I never asked 
 anything. He gave me only two roods first and a 
 place for a house, and I had to pay £10 for the house, 
 which was nearly completed, but that I did not 
 grumble at, for I made money of it. That was in 
 1835. 
 
 13228. Chairman. — How much do you hold now? 
 — I hold twenty-nine acres. 
 
 13229. That has been added gradually ?— No ; I got 
 the balance altogether in 1847. 
 
 13230. At what rent ?—.£ 10 lus. at first. I hope 
 
 there is nothing against him, for it is my improve- 
 ments caused it all. I buried £1,000 in it. 
 
 13231. Why should he put an increase on it ?— He 
 is so innocent. 
 
 13232. Have you ever put these matters before him ! 
 — No ; because when he raised the rent to X14, Is-tid 
 " It is too cheap yet," " Why" said he "Because my 
 industry would make it cheap. 
 
 13233. You were relaiming the land ? — I reclaimed 
 twenty -two acres of cut-away bog. 
 
 13234. What is the rent ?— About-£29. 
 
 13235. Have you a lease of it? — No, but his word, 
 is as good. 
 
 13236. But the tenants might bid against you still' 
 — Well, but I am able to pay it. That is industry. 
 
 13237. How do you want us to protect you? — You 
 know it ; for I don't. You have a head, and I have 
 not. 
 
 13238. Mr. Shaw.— Do you live on the land! 
 — I do ; and I can tell you a good story if yo« 
 will allow me : There is a man lives in the centre of a 
 bog, and The O'Conor Don went down on his farm of 
 three acres, -which he holds for £1, and in place of 
 raising his rent he gave him £10. 
 
 13239. He did not raise his rent?— No; because 
 he has knowledge in his head ; he is no baby. 
 
 13240. Mr. Shaw Your landlord raises the rent ? 
 
 — He does not raise it on any man but me. That turi- 
 bank is my bank. For out of that land, which was 
 valued at 2s. 6d. an acre, I have knocked £15 an 
 acre. I was a road contractor, and I put all the ma- 
 nure off the roads, for fifteen miles round, into this 
 bog. It is about a mile and a half from Drumsna, 
 and all I want is to have industry secured. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 449 
 
 13584. Have you done anything in tlie way of im- 
 provements yourself! — We changed the old mearings. 
 
 13585. You did not build upon it] — No. There 
 ■was a good deal of old bviildings we levelled. 
 
 13586. Do you live in the town? — I live on Mr. 
 Holmes' plot. 
 
 13587. Would you take a lease for ever at the pre- 
 sent rent? — No. 
 
 1 3588. Or become a peasant proprietor, and pur- 
 chase your holding at the present rent ?— No, sir, I 
 would require the rent to be reduced nearly one-half 
 first. ^ 
 
 Oct. 14,1880. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Jordan. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Devaney examined. 
 
 13589. Chairman. — You are a tenant under Mr 
 Ci-ethins and Mr. O'Connor? — Yes. 
 
 13590. You hold twenty acres altogether 1 — Yes ; 
 seventeen from Mr. Gethins, and three from Mr.' 
 O'Connor. 
 
 13591. How much do you pay Mr. Gethins? — £30 
 
 14s. 
 
 13592. 
 —£7 6s. 
 
 13593. 
 
 13594. 
 
 13595. 
 
 And how much do you pay Mr. O'Conor? 
 
 That is £38 altogether ?— Yes. 
 
 What is the valuation ?— £32 15s. 
 
 Do you say also that that rent is too high, 
 and that you would not take a lease for ever at that 
 rent ? — I would not give more than 20s. or 25s. an 
 acre for it, because it is cut away bog. I saw turf on 
 it myself. 
 
 13596. Mr. Shaw. — It was so convenient to the 
 town, you uould easily disjiose of your produce ? — It 
 
 was not by the land I made the rent. It was by con- 
 tracts for roads. 
 
 13597. You did not live on the land, even in good 
 times 1 — No ; we had no potatoes, except a small trifle, 
 and we were striving to earn in some other way by 
 labouring, repairing roads, and all that; and even 
 then, we could not knock the rent out of the land. 
 
 13598. The house is on Mr. Gethins' property? — 
 Yes. 
 
 13599. Did he do anything in the way of helping 
 you to repair it ? — No ; he rose my rent, about ten 
 years ago, 5s. an acre. 
 
 13600. How long are you there ? — I was born in it, 
 I may say. He purchased that place. The land was 
 held in the old time at 13s. an acre. I used to pay £1 
 a year tithe along with that rent. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Devaney. 
 
 IMr. Jame,s Taggart examined. 
 
 -You are a tenant under Mr. 
 
 13601. Chairman. 
 Gethins ? — Yes. 
 
 13602. You hold sixteen and a half acres in the 
 same neighbourhood ] — Yes. 
 
 13603. Your rent is £23, and the valuation £17 
 5s. ?— Yes. 
 
 13604. And you say that that is too high ? — ^Yes. 
 
 13605. And so high that you cannot pay it? — Yes. 
 
 13606. Mr. Shaw.— Did you buy the land?— No, 
 my father had it for twenty years. 
 
 13607. And he improved it ? — Yes. 
 
 13608. And built houses on it? — Yes. 
 
 13609. And reclaimed it and all that?— 
 was covered with whins and stones at first, 
 one knows. 
 
 13610. How long has the rent been £32 ?— For 
 twenty years. He promised to compensate us, and he 
 never gave us a shilling. 
 
 j\'r. Jamea 
 Taggart. 
 
 -Yes ; it 
 , as every 
 
 Mr. 
 
 13611. Mr. Shaw. — If the lands were revalued 
 now, you think the valuation would be reduced ? — I 
 am sure of it. 
 
 Patrick Devaney recalled. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 13612. Even taking them as they stand ? — Yes. I Devanev. 
 would not take them as they stand if I got them for 
 ever ; they are too dear. 
 
 Mr. James Taggart recalled. 
 
 13613. The O'Conor Don.— You think the land, as 
 it stands now, is not worth the rent you pay 1 — No. 
 
 13614. And it is well circumstanced, and is near 
 the town ? — Yes. 
 
 13615. Did you pay your rent last year? — I did. 
 
 13616. Is this Mr. Peter O'Conor that you refer 
 to ?— Yes. 
 
 13617. Mr. Shaw. — You are not in any business? 
 — No, sir. 
 
 13617a. This land is your only employment i — 
 Yes, and only for the manure I put into it, the crops 
 would have failed, owing to the bad substance of the 
 soil. It is light, moory soil, and I drained part of 
 it, and ran a road along the bottom of it, so as to be 
 able to carry stuflF to it. Only for the town we could 
 make nothing out of the land : the soil dries and 
 beaches the crop, and the roots die. 
 
 Mr. Jamea 
 
 Taggart. 
 
 Mr. James Hart examined. 
 
 -Where do you live? — Rusheen, 
 
 Louisa 
 is the 
 
 13618. Chairman. 
 Magheraboy. 
 
 13619. Who is your landlady ?— Lady 
 Tenisou is the landlady and James Kidd 
 agent. 
 
 13620. 
 13621. 
 13622. 
 13623. 
 13624 
 
 You hold eighteen acres? — Yes. 
 
 And your rent is £33 ? — Yes. 
 
 And the Government valuation £28 1 — Yes. 
 
 You say the rent is too much ? — Yes, I do. 
 
 What would you say would be a fair rent 1 
 — I think about £1 an acre. There are four acres of 
 cut away bog, and, besides, there were three-quarters 
 of an acre taken away by the railway. 
 
 13625. Mr. Shaw. — Did you get any allowance for 
 that? — I got a little compensation. I had it just re- 
 
 Mr. James 
 claimed and a potato crop in, and I had to give up Hart, 
 possession for some trifling compensation. 
 
 13626. The rent was not reduced ? — No. 
 • 13627. Chairman. — Not reduced for the land taken 
 off you ? — No. I am still paying for it. 
 
 13628. Did you give it up to somebody who came 
 for the company, or was there a valuator ? — I gave it 
 to the engineer. 
 
 13629. There was no valuator came there to see 
 what you ought to get for it ? — No. 
 
 13630. Was that because you were anxious to have 
 the railway coming there ?-— No ; but I knew I should 
 give it up. 
 
 13631. Mr. Shaw. — You say your rent ought to be 
 £18 although the Government valuation is £28? 
 
 SM 
 
450 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1880. 
 
 Mr, James 
 Hart. 
 
 Yes; but then I have buiit a dwelling-house and 
 offices and did all the improvements since I came 
 there. 
 
 13632. That is all included in the valuation ?— Yes. 
 
 13633. Were the houses built at the time you took 
 it ? — No. I built them myself. 
 
 13634. And the value of the improvements has 
 been added to the valuation 1 — Yes. 
 
 13635. The house is a good, comfortable house? — 
 "We cannot have them very comfortable. We have 
 them as well as we can. 
 
 13636. Did you drain any of it?— We did. We 
 took whole whins out of it. Mr. Burton, the former 
 landlord, sat down and valued it himself at 2s. 6d an 
 acre, and he said, take charge of that, Mr. Moran; 
 and when I had reclaimed it and drained it the rent 
 is raised. 1 made it worth £,1 an acre. 
 
 13637. This is handy to the town? — It is in the 
 borough. 
 
 13638. Is there that kind of land within the 
 borough ? — There is plenty of it, because it was all a 
 great, large bog at one time. There were high banks 
 of turf there, and there is nothing but bare gravel 
 there now. 
 
 13639. The O'Conoe Don. — How long is it since 
 the rent was changed ? — There was no change since I 
 came there. 
 
 13640. How long are you there? — About 18501 
 came to it. 
 
 13641. Did you pay anything when you got it?— 
 No ; I jmid no compensation. I made a bargaui witli 
 Mr. Moran, Mr. Burton's agent, at the time. Colonel 
 Tenison purchased it afterwards. 
 
 13642. He made no alteration in the rent? — No 
 sir. The place generally goes under the name of 
 Rusheen^. 
 
 13643. Did they allow the tenants to sell their 
 interest on that property 1 — Not without the consent 
 of the agent. 
 
 13644. Have there been any sales with the consent 
 of the agent ? — There have. 
 
 13645. Lately? — About four or five years since. 
 
 13646. Do you 'know how much was given for the 
 tenant's interest ? — I know a simple man came home 
 from America with £70, and he paid j670 for that 
 place. He only grows five acres. Of course the man 
 was a stupid, ignorant man ; and now, only for iig 
 sons in America, he would not be able to pay the rent, 
 They send him the rent. 
 
 13647. He is in possession now? — He is in posses- 
 sion now, and he lost his money, for he would not get 
 that money now if he tried it. He wouldn't get three 
 halfpence for the place. I would not dve him any- 
 thing for it. 
 
 A. B. 
 
 A. B. examined. 
 
 13648. Chaieman. — You are a tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 13649. How much land do you hold? — Twenty 
 acres. 
 
 13650. Your rent is X26 10s., and your valuation 
 £.1% ?— Yes. 
 
 13651. Where is the land situated ? — It is towards 
 Ballysodare. 
 
 136-52. What do 3'ou complain of ? — That the rents 
 are too high, and the rules of the estate too strict. 
 
 13653. What are the rules 1 — You are in no way en- 
 couraged to make improvements, because if you do the 
 rent may be raised. 
 
 13654. Mr. Shaw. — Have the rents been raised 
 within your memory ? — They have. I knew a man 
 who bought three and a half aci-es, and the rent was 
 £,5 5s., and on his coming in he was charged £6 a 
 year, and the valuation is about £3 15s. . 
 
 13655. Is this a large property ? — It is a very large 
 property. 
 
 13656. Have you any other cases you wish to men- 
 tion ? — Yes. I took that about two years ago, and he 
 raised the rent. The rent before I got it from the man 
 who died was £13 5s., and he measured the holding. 
 There is an acre and a half of main road on it, and he 
 said he allowed the road, but I don't think he did, for he 
 charged 30s. on the holding. The acreage was divided 
 between my brother and myself, and the rent was 
 raised from £13 5s. to £14 15s., and no allowance was 
 made for cess or roads. 
 
 13657. It is good land, I suppose ? — No ; it is nearly 
 along the mountain foot, and it is not good land 
 at all. 
 
 13658. The O'Conoe Don. — Did you jjay a fine 
 upon going into it? — No ; I paid no fine. 
 
 13659. How long before had the rent been un- 
 changed ? — I suppose it was during the tenancy of the 
 man who got it before me. 
 
 13660. You don't know how long that had been? — 
 I could not say how long that had been. , 
 
 13661. You could not say how long the rent was at 
 £131— No. 
 
 13662. Did the agent give it to you ? — Yes. 
 
 13663. He got it up from the old tenant? — Yes. 
 He died and left no family, and the place was divided 
 between my brother and myself. 
 
 13664. You had no claim on the land? — I bought 
 
 portion of the land from the deceased man, I paid 
 money in advance. Thei-e was no allowance made to 
 me of that money. I had only one year's profit 
 instead of four years. 
 
 13665. You got the land? — I got the land, with a 
 raised rent. 
 
 13666. How much had you paid him for it? — I paid 
 £20 in advance, and there was no allowance made for 
 that. That was to be for four years, and I only got one 
 year's benefit. 
 
 13667. What was the Government valuation ? — The 
 Government valuation of that small spot was £9 15s,, 
 and when the old holding was subdivided the valua- 
 tion of what I have comes up to £19. The valuation 
 was £9 15s. at first ; then it was raised to £13 5g. ; 
 and now it is £14 los. 
 
 13668. Did you ever bring this under the agent's 
 notice ? — Yes, at the time, and I was not for taking it, 
 but that I had money lost on it. 
 
 13669. Mr. Shaw. — Did he not send in a valuator 
 on the land ? — Not that I know of. 
 
 13670. Chaieman. — You said it was too high, and 
 still you took it ? — Yes ; I did not want to be out of 
 my money that I had paid. 
 
 13671. There has been no change in your rent since! 
 —No. 
 
 13672. The O'Conoe Don.— You think tlmt if you 
 were allowed to sell to-morrow with the existing rent 
 you would not get £20 for it ? — 1 don't think I would. 
 
 13673. Mr. Shaw. — Have you improved it much? 
 — I have fenced it and so on. 
 
 1 3674. You have no lease ? — No. 
 
 13675. How long ago is it since you took the new 
 holdings? — Two years ago. 
 
 13676. Chairman.— Was this an old turf bog you 
 drained ? — Yes, old cut-away bog. 
 
 13677. Did you drain it with open drains? — Yes, 
 I did not fully drain it, because if I did they miglit 
 call in a valuator, and put it on the rent. 
 
 13678. You just made open drains to run off the 
 water ? — Yes. 
 
 13679. Mr. Shaw.— You could improve it very 
 much more ? — Yes, and so could every one of the 
 tenants, and they would I am sure if they got facilities. 
 
 13680. Chairman. — Would they under-drainit?— 
 Open drains would drain it much better 1 think. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 451 
 
 A. B. examined. 
 
 Oct. 14, 1?«9. 
 
 13681. Chaikman. — You live in Carroquui, and 
 your landlord is Colonel Cooper? — Yes. I hold 
 twelve acres of arable land, and two acres of salt water 
 mareh 
 
 13682. How much do you pay for it? — I pay X23 
 16s., yearly. 
 
 13683. How long has that been the rent? — For 
 many years. My father before me paid that. We 
 had a middle landlord, and that was the rent he paid, 
 and Colonel Cooper kept up the rent. 
 
 13681. Were all the tenancies that fell in continued 
 at the same rent?- — Yes, 35s. an acre. 
 
 13685. Is it near the town? — No, it is five niUes 
 away. 
 
 13686. Is it good land? — No, it is very bad land, 
 stony gravelly land. 
 
 13687. Has he much land in that district ? — Seventy- 
 two acres besides what I live on. 
 
 13688. When did the lease under which the middle- 
 man held fall in ? — I could not exactly say, but it is 
 about sixteen or seventeen years ago. Parson Powell 
 of Edgeworthstown, was the landlord then. 
 
 13689. The present landlord had succeeded to the 
 property at that time ? — No, but his uncle had, and in 
 a year or so after that the old man died, and the 
 present landlord came into it. 
 
 13690. When the present landlord came in, did yovi 
 ever represent to him that the rent was high ? — We 
 petitioned him, and he never sent us an answer to our 
 petition. 
 
 13691. Mr. Shaw. — ^You got no satisfaction ? — None 
 whatever. 
 
 13692. Did you get a reduction last year?— We got 
 3s. in the pound on one half year's rent. 
 
 13693. Have you seaweed? — We have, but he ■*■■ ^• 
 charges us 5s. an acre for the seaweed. 
 
 13G94. That is put on the rent? — Yes, and that sea- 
 weed is no good to us. 
 
 13695. You don't sell it? — No sir; it is only just 
 for the few tons we use. It is no good for potatoes for 
 they all rot on it. 
 
 13696. Have you turf? — No sir, we have no bog, 
 and we have to go fourteen miles for turf. 
 
 13697. Had he any other land in the neighbourhood 
 before this lease fell in? — He had. 
 
 13698. Were the rents lower there? — They are 30s. , 
 an acre there. 
 
 13699. The O'Conoe Don. — Your complaint is that 
 he did not reduce the rent ? — No sir, he did not, and 
 he charged 3ys. for the marsh. 
 
 13700. Chairman. — Colonel Coojier mentioned that 
 there was a rediiction when a lease fell in ? — Yes, but 
 this happened before Colonel Cooper's time. He con- 
 tinued it at the same rent, and we sent a petition to 
 him, and he never sent an answer. 
 
 13701. Mr. Shaw. — Mr. L'Estrange knows all about 
 it ? — He was our agent at the time. 
 
 13702. Did he send no answer ? — No sir. 
 
 13703. Did you sjieak to him? — No sir, we don't 
 like speaking to Mm, and owing to my position I would 
 be the last to speak to him. The other tenants are 
 poor enough. They owe all this rent and they cannot 
 pay it. My valuation for twelve acres of arable land 
 and three acres of marsh is £23 16s; I consider £1 
 an acre woTild be high for the land not to speak of the 
 salt water marsh. 
 
 The Commissioners adjourned until next morning. 
 
 NINETEENTH DAY.—FRIDAY, 15th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat in the Courthouse, Sligo, at 11 o'clock. 
 
 Present : — ^The Eight Hon. the Earl of Bessboeough, Chairman; The O'Conor Don, and 
 
 William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Petee O'Connoe, j.p.-, Cairnsfoot, Sligo, examined. 
 
 Oct. 15, 188». 
 
 13701. The O'Conor Don. — You are an owner of 
 land in the county Sligo ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 13705. About 5,000 acres?— Yes. 
 
 13706. Do you allow the right of sale to your 
 tenants? — To any that have asked me I have per- 
 mitted it, and 1 have given a lease to some of my 
 tenants with permission in it to sell, but to give 
 me a preference of it. 
 
 13707. Have you had many instances of such sales ? 
 
 Not many ; only three, and those are caused by death 
 
 or want of ability to pay their rents. 
 
 13708. And what has been the price that has been 
 given in those instances ? — In the two instances I know 
 one gave seven years, and the other gave eight, because 
 there was a new lease given — the tenant had no lease. 
 The other man bought for a convenience to unite the 
 two fai-ms together, and gave more for it than if he 
 had asked my consent. I would have told him he 
 ouo-ht not to have given so much ; he had means to do 
 it and did it for his convenience. 
 
 13709. In aU the sales on your property were there 
 
 leases?— No. . , , „ t 
 
 13710. But you gave a lease after the sale I — it was 
 a condition, when the man was selling his interest, 
 that the purch^iser should get a lease of thirty-five 
 
 years. %^ r 
 
 13711. You did not limit the amount payable toe 
 this interest in anv way?— No; i left the purchasers 
 to their free wiU. ' 
 
 13712. Do you consider the tenants ought to have 
 a right of selling their interest in every ca,se?— In 
 many cases I. think they have a right to do it; par- 
 
 ticularly under Mr. Gladstone's bill of 1870, it 
 gives them a right they did not hold before. It is 
 my view of the case that they have a right when they 
 are in occupation, whether they 'make improvements 
 or not, they have the same right ; and after they make 
 improvements, it increases their right to sell the im- 
 provements. 
 
 13713. Is the right of sale generally acknowledged 
 by the landlords in Sligo, do you think ? — I have heard 
 it has been, but I cannot say positively. ■ I have heard 
 Mr. Wynne's agent say they allowed it, and also 
 Colonel Cooper, Mr. Phibbs, and others, but of course 
 there would be a selection of tenants made. 
 
 13714. Do you think its recognition is on the 
 increase since the passing of the Land Act ? — I think 
 it is, but I don't know how it has been in the last two 
 years ; there has been a change in the circumstances 
 of the country. 
 
 13715. Is the rent usually altered at the time of 
 sale ?— I am not at all aware of what is done on other 
 estates. 
 
 13716. You did not alter the rents in the case of 
 sale ? — ^No ; only in the case of a lease for thirty-five 
 years, I added ten per cent, which was equal to 
 Griffith's valuation. 
 
 13717. Do leases exist generally on your property ? 
 — There are some leases on it. Wherever there i^"a 
 building lease,' I give a lease of ninety-one years as 
 an inducement. 
 
 13718. Mr. Shaw. — That is in the town or neigh- 
 bourhood I suppose ? — It is in the town of Tubbercurry 
 and neighbourhood of Sligo. 
 
 3 M 2 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 O'Connor, j.p 
 
452 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 15, ISdO. 
 
 13719. The O'CoxoR Don.— Are leases on the in 
 crease or the contrary? — I don't kno-w exactly. 
 
 O'C.nnor j.r. People lately have not made applications. They made 
 applications to me about two years ago to give leases, 
 those that were building houses, and I assisted in 
 building, giving timber and slates, and instructed my 
 solicitor to fill up leases, and they have not come 
 forward since. 
 
 13720. Chaihman. — For thirty-five years I under- 
 stand? — Yes. But not for building leases. 
 
 13721. And ninety-nine ?^Ninety-one for build- 
 ings, to the tenant farmer, who built upon his hold- 
 ing. I put on no increase of rent, except merely a 
 charge for the interest on the quantity of materials 
 given to him. 
 
 13722. The O'Conor Don. — Are the tenancies held 
 under a lease generally held at a higher or lower rent 
 than ordinary tenancies ? — It depends entirely upon 
 the term of the lease and its extent. If it is an old 
 lease they are not, but on a recent lease, I think, they 
 ought to be a little higher. 
 
 13723. Then is the condition of farmers under these 
 leases better than yearly tenancies ? — They are gene- 
 rally, but there are some among the yearly tenants 
 who are very improving. 
 
 13724. Do you consider the Government valuation 
 any test of the value of the land ? — I think, under the 
 circumstances of the country, it is not a test, and if 
 the Government wished to have any test for taxation 
 or other purposes a new valuation is decidedly required 
 both for the interests of the tenants and the taxation 
 of the country. Some bogs and swampy wet lands 
 which were valued only at a nominal rate, from Is. to 
 2s. per acre, have been so improved by drainage as to 
 have become fine meadow and tillage land worth 20s. 
 per acre. I have been informed by one of the oldest 
 Grand Jurors in this county that he has twenty acres 
 which were only valued at 2s. per acre, and are now 
 worth 20s. per acre. Such is also tha case with some 
 of my lands in Carrountober. The basis of Sir R. 
 Griffith's valuation being, according to the productive 
 capabilities of the land for tillage, a much higher pro- 
 portionate rate has been placed on deep clay lands 
 than upon limestone lands, which are now become 
 most valuable for grazing purposes, the price of meat 
 being much higher than at that time, whilst grain has 
 not improved so much in price in consequence of the 
 free imports from all grain producing countries. And 
 there is another matter, might I mention it without 
 intruding on your time ? I think when property is 
 bought in the Landed Estates Court, and there is a 
 Landed Estates title, when any reduction is made in 
 the rent of the lessor those who hold head rents should 
 contribute a portion of it in proportion to the rent 
 they receive, and moreover, that, now when every tax 
 is coming upon the land, annuitants who receive a 
 considerable annuity ought to pay a considerable share 
 of the poor rate. 
 
 13725. Chairman. — Persons getting annuities out 
 of the land ? — Yes, that they should contribute their 
 portion of the poor-rate in proportion to what they 
 receive. 
 
 13726. The O'Conor Don.— What proportion does 
 . the valuation beai'tothe rent generally on yourpropcrty t 
 
 — In some instances where I purchased, in 1850, from 
 the Rev. Mr. French, it is about 5 per cent, upon an 
 av(!i-age on that property. Upon the next property 
 that 1 bought, in 1853, the average upon it is from 10 
 to 25 per cent, in proportion to the quality of the land, 
 the valuation having been made by the valuator, who 
 valued the estate for Sir Eichaid Gethin, Avith whom 
 I did not interfere. I may say I have expended 
 upon this and Mr. French's property £2,350. 
 
 1 3727. In improvements ? — In improvements ; and 
 upon the other I have expended about £1,800 in 
 schools and in making fences, and building houses for 
 some of the people. I found cottiers upon the land, 
 and I mentioned to the man who had them there, 
 "these poor men must get part of the holding which you 
 have," and I instructed the Surveyor to give them 
 
 a portion of the land, and I would build a house 
 on it. 
 
 13728. Then your improvements have been buildinw 
 houses and drainage 1 — Yes, and making roads ■ on 
 Sir Richard Gethin's property the roads are good 
 enough, but in making fences and giving quicks and 
 sinking a well and pump for the convenience of the land. 
 
 13729. Have you not a man specially employed for 
 the purpose of overseeing the improvements on your 
 property? — Since 1857. Previous to that I had a 
 man who lived upon the estate that I purchased from 
 the Rev. Mr. French, in the parish of Killery. I had 
 a tenant there who was competent to look after it. 
 When I purchased, in 1857, the estate of the late 
 Daniel Jones, of Carrowntober, I found part of the 
 property without houses, except a few on the road 
 and no reclamation of bog. They were bound by 
 their lease to reclaim a rood every year, they did 
 not reclaim three perches, except one man. Then I 
 employed a Scotch agriculturalist, named Alexander 
 Stocks. I had him for three years, as superintendent 
 of roads, making fences, looking after the erection 
 of new houses. I then advertised for an assistant sur- 
 veyor and agi-iculturalist, and employed Mr. Horan; 
 and since then I engaged a Mr. Oakes who has had 
 great evperience both as an agriculturalist and looking 
 after cattle. I have had him for about eight years. 
 He knew a good deal about the state of the country ; 
 he had been with the late Judge Torrens also, 
 employed in the county Wicklow, and in Kerry. 
 
 13730. And you have employed him chiefly to look 
 after the improvements of the tenants? — Yes, and to 
 make himself useful as far as people required his assist- 
 ance to cure cattle, <fec. He is as much thought of 
 in Sligo for that business. 
 
 13731. Chairman They like to have a man of 
 
 that kind ?— Yes. 
 
 13732. And have every confidence in him? — Yes. 
 He is a most valuable man. 
 
 13733. The O'Conor Don. — Can you give us a 
 statement of the amount you have spent within the 
 last twenty years on improvements ? — £8,000. Three 
 schools of which T am patron, under the National 
 Board, cost £2,000 I think, besides I give a gratuity 
 every year to the teachers for good conduct. I build 
 houses for their accommodation, rent free, and I give a 
 farm of two acres for agricultural purposes. 
 
 13734. Do you think, as a rule, that the landlords 
 in Sligo spend a good deal in improvements on their 
 estates? — I think so. If you look about the country 
 where they are, you will see a gi-eat deal of improve- 
 ment, and going through the country you can tell 
 whose the }ivoperty is, by the appearance of the 
 houses and gates. 
 
 13735. Do the tenants make much improvements? 
 — Some tenants do, those who have confidence in their 
 landlords. 
 
 13736. Of what character chiefly? — If they want 
 offioes they build the walls, they make fences, and 
 if they were better made in many instances, it would 
 save a great deal of annoyance at sessions in trespass 
 cases. The habit of gravelling the land is done away 
 with. 
 
 13737. Mr. Shaw. — Limestone gravel? — Yes. 
 
 13738. The O'Conor Don.— That has been done 
 away with 1 — There has not been a ton of it put out 
 for the last twenty years. 
 
 13730. What do you attribute that to?— The dis- 
 inclination of the people to take the trouble. It is an 
 old saying, " If you put down lime it will serve the 
 tenant, if you put down gravel it wHl serve the land- 
 lord." 
 
 13740. Mr. Shaw.— It is small enough for putting 
 out on land ? — Yes ; when the turf has been cut, they 
 then dig pits along, about eight or ten feet apart and 
 three or four deep, and scatter the gravel over it, anil 
 let it remain for a year or two in that way until it 
 gets into the soil. 
 
 13741. Chairman. — Then do you think it is • 
 feeling of v/ant of security that has led to their not 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 453 
 
 doing so 1 — Formerly it may have been, but I don't 
 know at present that the people would work 
 upon it. 
 
 13742. The O'Conor Don. — Do you think it repays 
 the people in a certain number of years 1 — No doubt 
 it woukl, and if they were employed by labour and 
 paid for it, it would pay the owner of the land. 
 
 13743. Is it the practice in this part of the country 
 to give land to a tenant at a nominal rent, on the con- 
 dition of his reclaiming it 1 — I have heard of it. I 
 know that between Lord Harlech and myself, we have 
 made a large mearing, and I got a great quantity of 
 limestone gravel thrown up and put upon it, and I told 
 the tenants they had better put out the gravel and I 
 would pay them a consideration for their labour, they 
 thought it was too difficult, and did not do it, and it 
 remains there -still in large heaps along the river. 
 
 13744. Chairman. — They thought it too hard? — 
 Yes, my lord. 
 
 13745. The O'Conor Don. — Do you think it would 
 be fair to charge an increased rent upon land improved 
 in that way by the tenant? — I think the tenant 
 ovight to be compensated for his labour, and 
 he has also the benefit of the crops for a cer- 
 tain time, but then I think that between the landlord 
 and the tenant — (I will give you a commercial view of 
 it for I have been accustomed to that) it is like a joint 
 stock company between them, you have the plant, you 
 work it, and have the benefit of it, but trltimately I 
 think I ouglit to have participation if you are going to 
 sell it, in the interest derived from it. 
 
 13746. Have you had many cases of ejectments? — 
 All the ejectments I have had since 1850, amoimted 
 to about five. 
 
 13747. Chairman. — For non-payment? — Yes; 
 and in three of those cases I paid the woman 
 and her family although owing me three year's rent, I 
 paid their passage to Aiperica and gave them some 
 money ; they were going to their relatives. One poor 
 man went to England. His rent was only £1 5s., and 
 when he would not come home I had an ejectment 
 issued. I said to the parties, "I will give you 
 something, and save me the trouble of going into 
 court." 
 
 13748. Have you had many cases brought into the 
 Land Court ?— None. 
 
 13749. Were your rents paid last year? — They 
 were pretty well paid ; 25 per cent. I allowed to the 
 ordinary tenants and 15 per cent, to those who hold 
 leases, and from some of them I have got no money 
 at all, so we must bear with it, until we have a better 
 state of things if possible. 
 
 13750. I think, Mr. O'Connoi', you have some- 
 thing to say about emigration ? — Yes. Last winter, 
 I was written to by a correspondent of the iVeio 
 York Herald, to whom my name had been given, 
 as knowing something of the country. I wrote 
 to him that my knowledge of the country was 
 such that every fourth year there was periodical 
 want in the poorer districts where there was a. 
 great population, and I thought if possible one of the 
 remedies we should apply would be to encourage emi- 
 gration, to pay their way out, sending first ^s the 
 Germans and Norwegians do and select a site to put 
 them on, and then to send them out. 
 
 13751. Mr. Shaw. — In families? — Yes. I have 
 been a vice-consul for Norway and Sweden for some 
 years. They sent out first agents to select localities, 
 and after that was done, they got their families to go 
 out and sent their pastor or minister with them ; the 
 same thing can be done with our population, and 
 I regret that those who don't view the case fairly 
 should not endeavour to improve their condition. 
 When a man has only four or five acres of ground 
 how can he support a family of (on an average) 
 five grown up boys and girls ? There is no employ- 
 ment for them, no means or manufactories. 
 
 13752. You think there are portions of Sligo and 
 
 Donegal where the people if they had no rent to pay Oct. is, 1880. 
 could not live in comfort on their holdings ? — De- jjj. p^j^^ 
 cidedly. Formerly you would see hundreds of them O'Connor, j.p. 
 going by train to England to work during the harvest 
 months, and perhaps they would bring home £3 or £4, 
 and they had to pay for what their family consumed 
 during the time, and a little rent for their holdings, 
 and during the winter they had nothing to do, no 
 employment. So the only course 1 see is, if the Govern- 
 ment would take up that question of emigration. 
 
 13753. There is no employment for the people in 
 this country ? — No, sir. 
 
 13754. On their land or elsewhere ? — No, there is 
 no employment for them, and they are open to every- 
 thing that occurs to disturb their minds. When a 
 young man grows up what can he do ? There ie no 
 room for him, and no employment ; the daughters are 
 the same. My view of the case would be that 
 the Government ought to lend some of the Inoney 
 belonging to the Church Surplus Fund, which we all 
 paid, and appropriate it by a loan at a very low per- 
 centage to the owners of the land, upon which those 
 people were, and to apportion the interest of it over 
 the land, to pay it back by degrees, by that means 
 you would impi-ove the condition of those who re- 
 mained and make themmore content, and you would oer- 
 tainlymake aprovision forthe others in abetter country. 
 
 13755. Chairman. — For emigration is that?— Yes; 
 for emigration purposes. 
 
 13756. Mr. Shaw. — You would lend the money to 
 the landlord ? — I would lend it to him and make it a 
 tax upon the country, but not coerce the people to 
 emigrate, for I think they would be very glad to 
 go if there was a proper arrangement made for settling 
 them in Canada, the United States, Australia, or any 
 of those colonies, and they would be able to take away 
 the surplus of the growing up population in order to 
 be a tie for them to go, and you would not have an 
 overgrown population without having anything for 
 them to do. 
 
 13757. The O'Conor Don. — And you think this 
 could be made a charge on the land on which they 
 live ? — I think so. 
 
 13758. Mr. Shaw. — You think it would be worth 
 the money to the landlord and everyone ? — Yes ; worth 
 the money to the Government and the landlord, and 
 the country, and it would improve the condition of 
 the people left behmd. If a man has four acres, he 
 cannot live, give him twenty or twenty-five, and if 
 he is an industrious man, he can support his 
 family. 
 
 13759. Your name was mentioned yesterday, by 
 one or two witnesses, Michael Jordan, stated he was 
 a tenant of yours, and that he complained of his rent 
 being too high, and that it was raised 7s. an acre ? — I 
 don't know. I left the arrangement of the rent to 
 Mr. Eobinson, my agent then, and that is twenty-seven 
 years ago, in 1853, and there was no alteration made 
 in my rents since, to any tenant. And as you men- 
 tioned that name, I wish to express my views of the 
 necessity of having some legislative enactment against 
 tenants allowing weeds to gi'ow on their farms, for 
 that man's farm is full of thistles, and they are scat- 
 tering over nei'ghbouring farms. His father was an 
 honest man, he is dead. And his mother, by my rule, 
 is the tenant. I made it a rule, that as long as 
 the father or mother lives, I recognise them as 
 tenants. 
 
 13760. There is another case of a man, of the name 
 of Devany, who states also that his rent is extremely 
 high, and that he would not take a lease for ever, at 
 his present rent ? — As far as Devany is concerned, he 
 has a very small holding from me, about three and a 
 half acres Irish. Last year there was a neighbour of 
 his, named Patrick Jordan, who could not pay his rent, 
 and wished to quit the farm, and Patrick Devany, 
 came to me, and said, " I would like to get that farm 
 of Jordan's." I said, " I would be very glad you got 
 it, because your farm adjoins his, and I would be very 
 
454 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Orf. 16,1880. 
 
 Mr. Pet«r 
 O'Connor, j.p. 
 
 glad you would deal with Lim." But Jordan, dealt 
 with a Mr. Connolly, who gave him more money, and 
 got his place. 
 
 13761. You allowed this man to sell ? — I allowed 
 him to sell. 
 
 13762. "Was his rent rateably as high as Devany's? 
 — Fully, if not more, because Devany, has the con- 
 venience of the road, it is opposite to his door. 
 
 13763. It is quite close to the town? — It is within 
 the municij)a] boundary. I look upon it as a town- 
 park, and if he were to sell it to-morrow, he would 
 get five or six years' purchase. I would mention that 
 as far as tenants demanding land, I only regret I have 
 not more land to give them, for I have frequent 
 applications. 
 
 13764. Would you be willing to give five or six 
 years purchase, if he gave it up? — I would, and I 
 would soon get a tenant for it, that would take it at 
 his rent, and pay the difference. 
 
 13765. And you don't consider the rent high ? — I 
 don't at all consider the rent high. 
 
 13766. And it has not been altei-ed for twenty- 
 seven years 1 — No, I made no alteration since I bought 
 it in 1853. 
 
 13767. Is there any other points you would like 
 to make any remarks upon? — There are some 
 things connected with the valuation. I was induced 
 fourteen j'ears ago, by the tenants on the Savage 
 property, to buy it, tliat they might become my 
 tenants. Mr. Savage, advertised it for sale, and I 
 went and looked at the place, and asked the tenants, 
 " Are you able t-o pay thLs rent," they said, " We are, 
 and will always be able to pay it." I said, " Don't 
 make that promise to me, because I would be disposed 
 to coniply with your wishes to purchase it, although 
 Mr. Savage wants more than I think it is worth." 
 They said, " We will always be able to pay," and I said, 
 " Will you take a lease of it, for twenty-one or thirty 
 years." They said, we will take thirty-one years. I 
 purchased the property for more than it is worth, 
 £7,600, and his rent was only £349 or £350 ; while 
 my rent now is only £314. So that I had only 3 
 per cent, for the interest on my money. 
 
 13768. You reduced the rent ? — I reduced it down 
 to £314. I have made 320 perches of road through 
 it, I have given every facility to them that I could. 
 The only fault I found was, that one poor man sub- 
 divided his land — he had two daughters, and they 
 
 married two sons-in-law — on a small holding, kcepincr 
 an acre to himself, and they are the only poor persons 
 I have on it. He is dead, and one of the sons-in-law- 
 is dead, and he had not paid rent for three years, so 
 that if we could prevent subletting, it would be a great 
 advantage to the people and the country. And there- 
 is a great question now, as to peasant proprietor- 
 ships. 
 
 13769. Have you had any opportunity of seeing 
 how that worked, have there been any purchases in the 
 neighbourhood 1 — I have not heard of any. Peasant 
 proprietary is a good thing. I wish they were all 
 peasant proprietors, if they had means to live by- 
 it ; if you don't give them means it will only make the- 
 country worse, but if you give them a good farm mth. 
 oppoi-tunities for paying interest to the Government,' 
 they could not do better than adopt that plan. 
 
 13770. Chairman. — You have laid out a great deal 
 of money upon your property in that way ?_I have. 
 
 13771. Are you satisfied with the result? — Quite 
 satisfied with the result, provided the people are 
 satisfied. ^ 
 
 13772. And are they satisfied now generally ?— Not, 
 lately ; if the land is to be their own they cannot be , 
 satisfied to pay rent for it. 
 
 13773. But was there any feeling of that sort until ■ 
 the bad seasons came 1 — ^I 'did not hear anything of it 
 until it commenced last year. 
 
 13774. Was not that the worst of the bad seasons? 
 — It was. I communicated my views to the Govern- 
 ment in November. I have not the honour of being 
 acquainted with the gentlemen connected with the 
 Castle, but I wrote to Mr. Bre^tt, who has great expe- 
 rience in these matters. 
 
 13775. Is that Mr. Brett, the county surveyor?— 
 Yes. I wrote to him to urge the Government to em- 
 ploy the people on their own holdings, and when their 
 holdings were put in good order to hold them on and 
 give them the means that would otherwise he given 
 them by donations ; I urged that strongly. It was 
 not attended to or you would not have had so much 
 disturbance through the country ; it would make the 
 people independent in their way. They are a fine 
 peojjle if they were let alone, the finest, I think, any- 
 where, with the strongest feelings of gratitude if you 
 do them a kindness. 
 
 The witness then withdi-ew. 
 
 Eev. Eugene 
 M'Kenna, c.c. 
 and Mr. John 
 Martin. 
 
 Eev. Eugene M'Kenna, c.c, Enniskillen, and Mr. John Martin, Lisbellaw. 
 Rev. Eugene M'Kenna examined. 
 
 13776. Chairman. — You are the Catholic curate of 
 Enniskillen ? — Yes. 
 
 13777. Are you acquainted with the peasantry in 
 the counties Monaghan, Tyrone, and Fermanagh ? — 
 Yes! 
 
 13778. And with the relations that exist between 
 the landlord and tenant in those parts of the country 
 you are acquainted with ? — Yes, pretty fairly. 
 
 13779. With the parish of Dromore, county Tyrone, 
 and Enniskillen, you are more intimately acquainted ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 13780. In any part of that district does the Ulster 
 tenant-right custoia exist? — Well, a certain custom 
 exists on some estates, but it is generally accompanied 
 with conditions, raising of rent on the occasion of a 
 sale, &c. 
 
 13781. Conditions as to the selection of a purch aser ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 13782. Mr. Shaw. — And as to the price of the 
 tenant-right, do they fix the price ? — On some estates 
 they do, and on some estates they have not the right 
 of sale at all 
 
 13783. In Fermanagh ? — In Tyrone and Fermanagh 
 also, and, moreover, there ar6 some estates in both 
 Tyrone and Fermanagh that I am acquainted with, 
 
 and the tenant-right of the farm, if sold to-morrow, 
 would not be worth a farthing. I know, for instance, 
 a farm in Enniskillen parish, and the tenant was 
 evicted for either two or three half-years rent, and he 
 got £4 or £5 for giving up possession. 
 
 13784. Was he allowed to sell if he could?— Well, 
 I am hardly able to say that, but I heard a neighbour 
 of his say that no ones bid a farthing for it. - .. - 
 
 13785. The rent was high?— The rent was so 
 high. 
 
 13786. It had been raised latel)^, the rent ?— I don't 
 know, the same landlord has forty tenants ; he has one 
 farm which was set some twenty-eight years ago for 
 either £15 or £16 rent, and the present rent is £48 10s. 
 
 13787. Chaieman.— What is the name of the land- 
 lord ? — ^Dr. Collum, a medical doctor, living in London, 
 I think. I have in my possession (produced) a copy 
 of the lease given to a tenant of his, Patrick Shannon, 
 Cavanacarragh, barony of Tyrkennedy, county Tyi'one. 
 
 13788. Was there anything in the lease that you 
 want to notice ? — Yes, I have a copy. . •• 
 
 13789. Is it a clause as to not taking advantage ot 
 the Act of Parliament ?— The lease is a lease of part 
 of this original farm that was set for £15 or £16, the 
 rent now is £34. There are two other holdings niakmg 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ; 455 
 
 up the original farm, one £8 ami the other .£6 10s. 
 This lease was given in 1875, and it obliged the tenant 
 to bnild a house of certain dimensions, slated acoordinc 
 to a plan approved of by the landlord ; the landlord, 
 however, was to give £5 for each year of five years to 
 help to erect the buildings, but if the tenant wo\ild not 
 erect the buildings within a certain time, then, at the 
 expiration of the lease, thirty years, he was to be fined 
 £150, and he was to forfeit all right, by all laws, past, 
 present, and future, and surrender the farm to the 
 landlord. , 
 
 13790. Mr. Shaw.— That is on the lease?— The 
 word "present" may not be in it, but that is the 
 meaning. 
 
 13791. Chaieman. — This was on the renewal? — 
 .There was not a lease before. 
 
 13792. Mr. Shaw. — And the farm was divided? — 
 The farm was divided, and I was showing that it was 
 raised from £16 to £48 10s. ; also the tenant is obliged 
 to pay all taxes, including county cess, and least the 
 tenant might not be sufficiently secure, there were two 
 other securities beside the tenant to carry out the 
 arrangement — two other securities, and they and their 
 heirs and executors were bound to pay this £150. 
 Also another clause, if the rent would not be paid 
 half-yearly, on the 1st of May or 1st of November, or 
 within thirty days of it, there was .£5 added as a penal 
 rent, and at present the man is processed to Ennis- 
 killen for £34, together with £10 penal rent, and he 
 is bound in the lease to take the two other holdings 
 if these two men be unable to pay their rent — he is 
 bound to take the whole farm at the full rent. 
 
 13793. Chairman. — Is this in a district where 
 tenant-right exists 1 — This is a part of Lord Belmore's 
 original estate, sold in 1852 and 1853. 
 
 13794. And is that a tenant-right county ? — It was 
 originally understood so. 
 
 13795. Is there any clause in the lease as to tenant- 
 right existing at the end of the lease 1 — Yes, the lease 
 debars the tenant from any right by virtue of any law 
 past or present. 
 
 13796. Mr. Shaw.— Is it near Enniskillen?— Within 
 three miles. 
 
 13797. Is there any reason for this increase ? — Im- 
 provements by the tenant. The land was wild, and 
 It was unimproved land, and two or three previous 
 tenants had been forced to surrender. He reclaimed 
 a great deal of land, and hence the rent was raised. 
 
 13798. This man improved his farm very much, I 
 suppose ? — Perhaps he is not long in it, because it has 
 
 -changed hands often. 
 
 13799. Was the entire rise of rent put on in 1875, 
 or had there been a, i;ise before 1 — There were several 
 rises. 
 
 13800. The O'Cowoa Don. — What rise was put on 
 in 1875 ? — I think it was about £35 then, but six 
 years before that again it was only £30, and then 
 £20 six years before that. 
 
 13801. The rent reserved in the lease, I see, is 
 £34? — Yes, but the rent of the whole farm is £48 10s. 
 
 13802. Chairman. — And this lease he was obliged 
 to take if he remained in the holding 1 — Yes. 
 
 13803. Mr. Shaw. — Did he take the lease? — Yes; 
 the poor man did not understand the lease, and I am 
 sure he would leave the country now but for his friends 
 beinc bound. He wrote two or three letters to the 
 landlord asking him to take it off his hands, and he 
 would pay up every penny due. 
 
 13804. Chairman.— Where does the landlord live ? 
 — Sutherland, Surbiton ia Surrey, I now learn. 
 
 13805. Who is the agent in Enniskillen? — Mr. 
 Burke. 
 
 1 3806. Mr. Shaw. — Are the other tenants similarly 
 situated? — Yes j except that they have no leases, and 
 
 'It is on this estate that the man I was speaking of left, 
 tliat nobody would give anything for the tenant- 
 right. 
 
 13807. When was it sold in the Landed Estates 
 "Court?— About 1852 or 1853. 
 
 1 3808. It is this side of Enniskillen ? — It is beyond 
 
 Enniskillen, in the ■• direction of Lisbellaw and Oct. 16, isso. 
 Maguire's Bridge. jj^^_ ^,^^ 
 
 13809. Chairman. — Have you found, in any case, M'Kenna, o.c, 
 there has been an inclination on the part of the land- and Mr. John 
 lord to do away with the right of sale altogether? — Oh, Martin. 
 
 yes ; many of them. 
 
 13810. Can you name any particular case? — lean; 
 Mr. Deazley, in the barony of East Omagh, county 
 Tyrone. He also resides in England ; his brother is 
 agent for him. 
 
 13811. Mr. Shaw. — He purchased it, I suppose, in 
 the Landed Estates Court?— I presume so, in 1852 
 or 1853. 
 
 13812. Chairman. — Has it been the case on any of 
 the larger properties 1 — -Yes ; it is the case on Mr. 
 Irvine's property in T}'rone. 
 
 13813. Mr. Shaw. — He lives in Fermanagh, does 
 he not ? — I think so. I know a case where a certain 
 tenant died some four years agoj bequeathing a farm of 
 his to a friend of his, and the landlord would not admit 
 the validity of the will, or the right of the tenant to 
 bequeath. 
 
 13814. Was it a relative or one of his family he had 
 bequeathed it to ? — I don't know that he was very closely 
 related, but he was a man who lived with him loilg. 
 The deceased was an old man, and it w;as some friend of 
 his who lived with him for, perhaps, twenty years. 
 
 13815. The man had no children to leave it to 1 — 
 No. 
 
 13816. Does he give permission to sell on the pro- 
 perty ? — I am not aware. I don't know of a case 
 where a tenant did sell. 
 
 13817. Chairman. — Are there any properties in 
 your neighbourhood, of which Mr. Wrench is the 
 agent ? — Not that I am aware of. 
 
 13818. Mr. Shaw. — You are not near enough to 
 the Brookes' property? — No. 
 
 13819. I su]jpose tenant-right is admitted on the 
 large properties in Fermanagh, Lord Enniskillen and 
 Erne, and those properties ?-^I think it is some £4 
 an acre. 
 
 13820. They limit the price?— Yes. 
 
 13821. Chairman. — Those restrictions of various 
 kinds did they exist before the Land Act, or intro- 
 duced since that time? — I think many of them were 
 introduced since that time. I have heard — it is 
 only hearsay — I have heard it said, before the Land 
 Act, most landlords in Fermanagh had admitted 
 tenant-right, but since it, they do not. And there is 
 another matter too general. They deny the existence 
 of tenant-right, at least, in newly-purchased proper- 
 ties, and then the tenant is not able to defend 
 from court to court ; first before the County Court, 
 and then the Assizes, and then, perhaps, to the Court 
 for Land Cases Reserved. 
 
 13822. Mr. Shaw. — He submits ? — Yes, precisely; 
 he is not able to defend. I knew one case where 
 some half dozen tenants did defend. 
 
 13823. Where was that?— It was in East Omagh 
 barony, county Tyrone, in the townland of Drumarret. 
 
 13824. What was the result of it ; did they succeed ? 
 — They did. The Chairman then was favourably-dis- 
 posed to them, and it happened the judge confirmed 
 the' decision of the Chairman, and then they were 
 threatened, or, perhaps, had to go to the Court for 
 Land Cases Reserved. 
 
 13825. And it was not carried through?— I don't 
 remember but they were threatened, I am not quite 
 certain. 
 
 13826. But it was an expensive business? — It was 
 indeed, it cost, perhaps, a couple of hundred pounds, 
 it cost a great deal. The tenants four or five in number, 
 or, perhaps, six, assisted one another, and also some 
 neighbouring tenant farmers assisted them. 
 
 13827. Was there an ejectment for non-payment ? — 
 The case was this. One farmer, whose rent ia 1852 
 was £9 10s.,. was raised to £24 16s. 4d, and about 
 three years ago there was a new increase demanded, 
 and at the same time they were served with notice to 
 
456 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 15, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Eugene 
 M'Kenna,c.c., 
 and Mr. John 
 Martin. 
 
 and 
 
 pro- 
 
 quit, but the move, it was well known was to increase 
 the rent. Well, the poor tenants were not able to pay 
 any more, and they refused to pay any higher rent, 
 and that was the cause of their being evicted, and the 
 cause of the whole law suit. 
 
 13828. Chairman. — "What was the landlord's name 
 in that case 1 — Dr. Deazley. 
 
 13829. The O'Conoe Don.— And what was the 
 result of the case being tried 1 — The Chairman gave 
 them tenant-right, some £8 or £9 an acre, and the 
 Judge confirmed the decision of the Chairman, and I 
 was saying that I am not sure whether it went to the 
 higher court, they were threatened with it, and perhaps 
 it did go there. 
 
 13830. What was done with the land since ? — The 
 land is in the hands of the landlord yet unoccupied. 
 
 13831. Mr. Shaw.— They had to go out?— They 
 had, and I know on the same property a man who had 
 ten acres, and surrendered his farm for £20 to the 
 landlord. And I know an examjjle of an increase 
 of rent on the same property : a man who lives on 
 the townland of Corbally, or Knooknahorn, he had 
 four acres-of old unreclaimed bog, that he built a house 
 on, and he was paying, twenty-eight years ago, 
 £1 8s. 9d,. rent, and his present rent is £8 8s. 
 
 13832. And he reclaimed the whole thing hinxself ? 
 — Ho' reclaimed the whole, and he is now evicted for 
 non-payment of rent, either two or three half years, 
 and he proposed to the landlord to surrender his little 
 house and farm, if he would give him some considera- 
 tion of any importance, and the landlord oifered him £2. 
 
 13833. Chaieman. — What was the tenant's name? 
 — Bernard Quin. 
 
 13834. The O'Conoe Don.- -Did he hold under a 
 lease originally ? — I presume not, I don't know. But 
 the best of the land was unreclaimed, 1 believe : 
 he built a house on it, and reclaimed the land. 
 
 13835. Chaieman. — That 'is Mr. Deazley's 
 perty 1 — Yes. 
 
 13836. Mr. Shaw. — Was that increase all at once, 
 or gradually ? — I don't know. 
 
 13837. Chairman. — Have you observed, as a general 
 rule, that it is on properties that were lately bought 
 that these increases of rent have taken place 1 — Gene- 
 rally, it is. I know a tenant farmer who has an 
 excellent landlord, but he is an old man, and confined 
 to his room for years, and the heir is some distant 
 relation, some second or third cousin, and the man does 
 not know how soon the heir may come in and posse.ss 
 the estate, and he does not know what sort of a 
 landlord the young man may be, and hence he does 
 not like to improve, having no security. 
 
 13838. Then it is a feeling of insecurity that makes 
 the tenants dissatisfied, and not inclined to impnjve ? 
 — Precisely. I know a man who has a farm convenient 
 to the county -road, between DromoreandOmagh, and 
 it is a large farm ; his name is James Wilson ; some 
 of the very best land in his farm hns commenced to be 
 covered with furze, some five or six acres, and it is 
 believed by the people in the neighbourhood that his 
 object is not to let the farm have a good appearance, 
 lest the rent may be increased. And tliere"are other 
 farms where there are old ridges with heather growing 
 over them, and some of the farms are going wild. 
 
 13839. Do you think the tenants are inclined to 
 bear increases of rent on things difficult for theDi, in 
 consequence of the dread of getting into litigation 1 — 
 Yes, I think so ; and even if they do go from court to 
 court they are not sure of success. 
 
 13840. And are the expenses very heavy on them 1 — 
 Yes, certainly. 
 
 13841. Mr. Shaw. — They are an improving tenantry 
 if they had security down there ? — I believe certainly 
 that they are naturally fond of improving, but owing 
 to the want of security they are deterred from improv- 
 ing — for instance, I know several men on large holdings 
 of unreclaimed land, and they permit their sons to-go 
 to America and Scotland instead of keeping them at 
 home making excellent land of the unreclaimed land, 
 but they dread an increase of rent. I knew a man 
 
 in the county Monaghan, I instance this to show the 
 want of security, and how the people dread it. 
 
 13842. Chaieman. — Can you give us his name? 
 — Peter M'Closky, Shanmullagh, barony of Treugh. 
 
 13843. Under what landlord? — I don't remember 
 the landlord at present. It is twenty years ago 
 perhaps, and I was not much in that country since 
 I remember his building, an excellent countiy-house" 
 slated, and it was built on a sort of eminence seen 
 by the whole country round, but I remember the 
 people saying " thifi man is acting very foolishly, he 
 will have his rent doubled, and the rent will be doubled 
 on the whole of us because it will be said that we can 
 pay a higher rent," I instance that to show the people 
 are afraid to improve. 
 
 13844. Mr. Shaw. — And don't like to see improve- 
 ments in their neighbourhood ? — Yes, I know a man 
 John M'Kenna, he rebuilt his dwelling-house ani 
 offices, and he" was afraid to slate them or to raise 
 them sufficiently high lest the rent would be increased 
 largely ; his house is in a very sheltered place, and it is 
 very troublesome and expensive to him to keep it 
 thatched. 
 
 13845. And he could aiFord to slate it? — He could 
 and buUd a much better house, but he was afraid. 
 
 13S46. Chaieman.— You think they are afraid of 
 being considered prosperous and rich for fear of having 
 the rents raised? — Precisely. 
 
 13847. And therefore they don't go into such im- 
 provements as they otherwise would do ? — Not only 
 that, but they are anxious to have the land appear 
 badly laboured and perhaps the head of the fields not 
 laboured at all and the crops not appearing very well. 
 
 13848. The O'Conoe Don. — In the case you 
 previously quoted where the men did make the improve- 
 ments was the rent raised? — That has escaped my 
 notice, I only remember the impression made on me 
 at the time, I don't remember that particular. 
 
 13849. Mr. Shaw. — You remember the feeling 
 created in the district? — Precisely. 
 
 13850. Chairman. — Is it your opinion that if the 
 people could only believe that they were fairly treated 
 that they would be as loyal as their Irish brothers in 
 Canada? — I believe they would, I know the people 
 well, I believe they are honest to the heart's core, and 
 peaceable and law-abiding, and it would be for the 
 interest and the peace of the country, and it would 
 strengthen the Government, and make the people 
 ]ieaceable, and orderly if they had security. I believe 
 that, I feel convinced of it, I know the people well, 
 that they are honest to the hearts' core, and law-abid- 
 ing. I have been on the continent, in Prance, and 
 different parts, and I don't believe there is on the face 
 of the earth a more law-abiding peojde if they had 
 security and protection. 
 
 13851. Have you had any instances of men who 
 ha^■e purchased their own holdings in the country 
 you know ? — Not much. I know some in the next 
 parish, but the circumstances were very peculiar. 
 The poor people had to borrow money in some 
 cases. 
 
 13852. Was it Church property? — Church property. 
 I don't know much about it. The general impression 
 
 is they are anxious to improve and drain, and fence ■ 
 their land and rebuild. They have not had much time 
 for that yet, but they improved a great deal, and 
 each farmer who get unreclaimed land tried to improve 
 a jJart of it. 
 
 13853. But the great difficulty was to find money 
 to buy ? — Yes, and perhaps some of them had to 
 borrow from usurers and pay high interest. 
 
 13854. And if they could get it at a moderate 
 interest you think they would be fairly well off?— 
 Certainly. 
 
 13855. Do you know the size of the holdings that 
 they purchased ? — About ten or twelve acres. 
 
 13856. How many were there ? — On this townland 
 I suppose there were fourteen or sixteen. 
 
 13857. Had they generally any means of living 
 except living out of the land ? — Not that I know of. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 4.-7 
 
 1 3858. Mr. Shaw. — Is that in Tyrone or "Fermanaghl 
 — It is Fermanagh. 
 
 i;38.59. The O'Conor Don.— They were not better 
 off than the ordinary class of tenants holding the 
 same sized farms'! — They were not. I remember a 
 case on another property ; the landlord is Mr. Darov 
 Irvine, he has some little property in the parish of 
 Dromore, county Tyrone ; he raised a tenant from 
 X9 1 Os. to £2 0. His other tenants are similarly treated. 
 
 13860. Was that on the dropping in of a lease? 
 — I did not hear that. Bnt the tenant said to the 
 landlord that he would not be able to pay the rent, 
 that he would have to leave the country, and the 
 landlord replied. The meaning of the words was that 
 the higher you ai-e rented the harder yon will work. 
 
 13861. Mr. Shaw.— The landlord said? — Yes; 
 those were not the words, but the meaning of them. 
 The like of that is talked of among the farmers, and 
 that produces a bad impression. 
 
 13862. Chaieman. — What was the name 01 the 
 tenant 1 — Michael M'LoughlLn, Dooghrock, East 
 Omagh. 
 
 13863. Were there any other farms raised on the 
 property 1 — ^Yes ; I only instance one out of twenty or 
 thirty. With regard to Mr. Deazley's property, he 
 purchased a townland about five years ago ; he raised 
 one farm, I remember, of eight acres from £8 to £16. 
 
 13864. Mr. Shaw. — Without the calling in of a 
 lease 1 — I don't know about that. 
 
 13865. You don't know the farm? — I know the 
 farm well, and the poor man. 
 
 13866. It was a very extraordinary increase of rent ? 
 — It was. 
 
 13867. For there was no special reason for it ? — 
 I don't know. Well, I know another case in the 
 barony of East Omagh, wliere a tenant paid twenty- 
 five years ago, at the time of Griffith's valuation, I 
 think, about twenty-five years ago, and he paid then 
 £•5 as his rent. And it was raised a few years after 
 to £9 14s. ; and then in 1868, a little before the last 
 Land Act, it was raised to £19 10s. 
 
 13868. The O'Conor Don. — How many acres of 
 land had he ? — About thirty-five years ago there was 
 only about three or four acres of it reclaimed. I think 
 there was a large tract ot wild land attached — there 
 must have been. 
 
 13869. Mr. Shaw.— Did he reclaim it ? — Yes. 
 
 13870. Chairman. — What is his name? — Michael 
 M'Oaughey. 
 
 13871. Mr. Shaw. — Was that the same property ? 
 — No, a Captain Storey. 
 
 13872. The O'Conor Don. — Do you know how 
 many acres there is now of reclaimed land in it ? — I am 
 not sure of the particulars. 
 
 13873. Mr. Shaw. — But the tenant did everything ? 
 — The tenant did everything. 
 
 13874. The O'Conor Don. — What is the valuation, 
 do you know 1 — I presume, on account of the £9 4s. 
 rent being added at the time of Griffith's valuation, 
 that that was the valuation. And then when there 
 was an appearance of the Land Act in 1868 he raised 
 it .£19 10s. ; and I know a case where a landlord of 
 the name of Hamilton Scott, in the parish of Dromore, 
 purchased some little property, some three or four 
 townlands. There was one farmer who held a farm at 
 the time that Mr. fecott purchased these townlands, 
 his rent was £17, and that farm is now divided into 
 four, and the rent is J75. 
 
 13875. Chairman. — What became of him. It was 
 not divided by himself among his family ?— No, indeed. 
 The tenants were chosen by the landlord ; one of them 
 was a man of the name of Brien, the other was named 
 Fleming, and there were two others. 
 
 13876. And was he evicted — the old tenant ?^I am 
 not alile to say. 
 
 13877. The O'Conor Don.— You dont know 
 whether he sold his interest in it, did he ?— I don't 
 know that, but I know that the landlord did not per- 
 mit a farm to be sold, except perhaps lately. 
 
 13878. And you don't know whether this man who 
 
 came in paid anything for coming in ?— I don't know Oct. u, i«80. 
 that. 
 
 13879. Were they new tenants, who had nothing M^'Kenna,''c.c. 
 to do with the land before ? — I tliink there was one, and Mr. .lolin' 
 or perhaps there were two, that were living on the Martin. 
 farm as cottiers. 
 
 13880. And they got some land, did they, when it 
 was divided? — I don't know the particulars, except 
 this, that the original rent of the farm was £17, that ■ 
 the present rent of the same farm is £75, and that 
 there was one, or perhaps there were two, of these at 
 least that lived on the farm as cottiers. 
 
 13S81. And you don't know what they paid as 
 cottiers for the land they held ? — I don't. I know there 
 is a tenant on the same property was evicted for non- 
 payment of rent, and he got from the landlord permis- 
 sion to sell, although it was not his custom ; he was 
 anxious to get a tenant, and no man would give any- 
 thing for the farm. 
 
 13882. Mr. Shaw.— It is standing there?— It is 
 standing there. 
 
 13883. The rent's too hiigh?— Yes. 
 
 13884. The O'Conor Don. — On the same property ? 
 — On the same property, the next farm. I think it 
 adjoins the original farm held by Patrick M'Cusker 
 for £17. 
 
 13885. Chairman. — Are there many cases where 
 labourers are on the farms under the tenant-farmers ? 
 — There are. 
 
 13886. And are they usually paying rent, or are 
 they put iato a house as part of their wages ? — Gene- 
 rally in wages they pay their rent. 
 
 13887. Are the labourers pretty well off in those 
 parts of the country ? — Some of their houses are very 
 damp and bad. 
 
 13888. As a general run the houses are bad ? — They 
 are. 
 
 13889. Are they old cabins? — There are some of 
 them new and some of them old ; but there is one 
 feature that is universal, for generally they are very 
 damp and very cold in the winter. 
 
 13890. It is a wet land?— Well, that part of the 
 country is generally damp. 
 
 13891. Do they generally have their bit of land- 
 garden with it ? — In many cases they have not any, 
 but in some cases they have, perhaps^ half-an-aui'e. 
 
 13892. Do they give them a space to put manure 
 on ? — They do generally. 
 
 13893. Changing it about from year to year?— 
 Precisely. 
 
 13894. Are there many cf the labouring classes, 
 holding under landlords, the owners of the property 1 
 — I don't know of any. 
 
 13895. Are the labouring classes pretty well satis- 
 fied with their condition ? — They have bad houses. Of 
 course, with regard to the labourers, I should have 
 said many of those who have farms send their sons to 
 labour to their neighbours, and in that sense there are 
 many. 
 
 13896. The O'Conor Don. — I want to ask you a 
 question about the first case you mentioned. The 
 lease made to this man Shannon was made^ I see, in 
 1875?— Yes. 
 
 13897. Has he built the house to which you re- 
 ferred ? — He has not yet. 
 
 13898. And, according to the terms of the lease, if 
 he had not built it within three years he was to forfeit 
 £150?— Yes. 
 
 13899. Has the landlord enforced that penal enact- 
 ment against him ? — I read the lease, and I understood 
 it was at the end of the lease he was to enforce it. 
 
 13900. Chairman. — He contracts to do it within 
 three years, but the penalty is not to be enforced until 
 after thirty-one years ? — Yes. 
 
 13901. Mr. Shaw. — And he has securities as well 
 as the tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 13902. The O'Conor Don.— "If the said Patrick 
 Shannon shall not build the said house within the 
 time and in the manner above mentioned, he shall 
 thereupon forfeit and pay to the said Robert Collum 
 
 3N 
 
ImS 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COilMTSSION, 1880. 
 
 Ee\'. Eugene 
 M'Kenna, c.c, 
 and Mr. John 
 Martin. 
 
 Oct. 15, 18S0. the sum of £150 " t — I consider " thereupon" i-efers 
 to the end of the lease. 
 
 13903. Mr. Shaw. — At all events, he can select the 
 time himself? — Yes. 
 
 13904. The O'Conor Don.— He has not, at all 
 events, put that into force 1 — ]S ot yet. 
 
 13905. I see that the clause that you object to, or 
 that the tenant objects to, about not claiming under 
 the Land Act is to the following eileot : — " That at 
 the end or termination of the said demise the said 
 Patrick Shannon shall not make, have, or be able to 
 sustain any claim under the present or any future 
 Land Act, for tenant-right, disturbance, or improve- 
 ments, as this lease is granted without fine, upon the 
 express condition that no such claim shall be made or 
 sustained." That is the clause you referred tol — I 
 think so. 
 
 13906. Mr. Shaw. — But you contend the increase 
 of rent is a fine 1 — Yes. At present he is processed 
 for ,£44, the year's rent, together with £5 for each 
 half-year. 
 
 13907. The O'Conor Don.— This holding is a hold- 
 ing under £50 \-aluation 1 — Of course it is. 
 
 13908. Can you tell iis what the valuation is ■? — I 
 cannot ; but I ]iresume it is, perhaps, half the rent. 
 
 13909. You don't know?— No. 
 
 13910. The land must be very poor land, for it is 
 thirty-one acres and three roods 1 — Perhaps of the 
 thirty-one acres there were not six acres, thirty years 
 ago, reclaimed at all. 
 
 13911. Mr. Shaw. — It is coarse, boggy land ? — Yes. 
 
 13912. The O'CoNOR Don. — But you are aware, of 
 course, that these provisions in the lease, the holding 
 being of a less annual value than £50 are not bindinsr, 
 the tenant cannot contract himself out of the Land Act 
 unless his valuation is over £501 — I did not know 
 that. 
 
 13913. You told us in the beginniiag that the original 
 rent of this was, I think, £16 ?— £16 or £15. 
 
 13914. Do you know when that rent was fixed? — 
 This part of the estate was sold in 1852 and 1853, and 
 1 don't know when it was fixed ; but at the time of 
 the sale of the estate, that was the rent ; the tenant was 
 paying that rent at the sale of the estate. 
 
 13915. But you don't know how long before that 
 rent liad been unchanged ? — I don't, indeed. 
 
 13916. You don't know whether it was not an old 
 lease — perhaps seventy or eighty years — in being ? — 
 Well, no ; it would appear it was not so old, because, 
 on the occasion of the first rise of rent, it was only £'i0, 
 and the next time it was raised from £20 to £30, and he 
 considered then it was not worth much more than £15 
 or £16. 
 
 13917. You don't know what the rent was when 
 Lord Belmore sold the property ?— Yes — £15 or £16. 
 
 13918. And all the increases since have been made 
 by Mr. Collum ?— Yes. 
 
 13919. Mr. Shaw. — He is an Enniskillen man, is 
 he not ? — Originally. There is one thing with regard 
 to Mr. Colkmi that it would be well I mentioned. 
 There is a townland named Derryharagh (?), con- 
 venient to Enniskillen, and it was purchased by 
 Messrs. Collum, on the occasion of the sale of the 
 same estate, about 1852 or 1853. The townland 
 consists of above 100 acres, and at the time of the 
 sale it was occupied by tenants ; all except about ten 
 
 acres set as town parks; the rent was raised, and 
 all the tenants gave up their holdings — except one 
 who held four acres ; the name of that tenant is 
 Francis Lightly ; his rent at the time of tlie sale was 
 £10 ; in some few years after it was raised to £12 6s. 
 and again raised, after some ten or fifteen years to 
 £14, and, about twelve months ago, the landlord sent 
 the tenant a letter demanding an increase of rent to 
 £22 16s. 3d. I have the original letter (produced) 
 which can be left with the Commissioners. The tenant 
 refused to pay that rent, and he was noticed to' quit 
 and he claimed compensation. The place was left to 
 arbitration by the County Chairman ; but those ap- 
 pointed to arbitrate were a Mr. Collum, to whom the 
 tenant did not object, because he was a good kind 
 landlord, but there were two others appointed to assist 
 in the arbitration, to whom the tenant objected — one of 
 them was the agentofLoi-d Enniskillen, who is known to 
 be averse to anytJiing like tenant-righj orcompensatio% 
 and tlie third one was Mr. Frith, J.P. About twentv 
 minutes after the Chairman left the case to arbiti-ation 
 the tenant met Mr. Fiith, and Mr. Frith said : " We 
 have you now in our power, and we will keep you 
 
 so," which caused the tenant to . At all events 
 
 the tenant did not leave the case to arbitration. 
 
 13920. He refused to go on? — Yes; it sLows that 
 the tenants frequently — perhaps generally— -do not like 
 arbitration. 
 
 13921. Did the County Court Judge appoint all the 
 arbitrators ?— He did ; but, at all events, the tenant 
 would not accept it.- 
 
 13922. The tenant' did not appoint one, and the 
 landlord one ? — JSTo. 
 
 13923. Then it was not arbitration, in the strict 
 sense of the term 1 — No ; I instance that to show that 
 the tenants generally do not like arbitration. 
 
 13924. If they could appoint their own man, per- 
 haps they would ? — I think they would prefer the Go- 
 vernment to arbitrate and settle the question. 
 
 13925. The O'Conor Don. — What was the result, 
 then, where the tenant refused arbitration ?— The 
 case of this Mr. Lightly was : he had about fow 
 acres, and he improved it very much ; he had three 
 cows and some young cattle, and he bought a great 
 deal of hay, and he happened to have a slaughter- 
 yard, and a great deal of blood and manure was then 
 taken up by boat to his little farm, so that there was a. 
 great deal of manure and a great deal of time and 
 laboiir spent in enriching the farm. 
 
 1392G. Mr. Shaw. — And he made it a very good 
 farm ? — Yes, excellent land, because the quantity of 
 manure was extraordinary. 
 
 13927. The O'Conor Don.— What was the result 
 — did he hold the farm at the increased rent or giveit 
 \\p 1 — He gave it up. 
 
 13928. And what was he paid — did he get any 
 compensation ? — He did. He got £75 compensation, 
 but the quantity of manure put on every vear was 
 wonderful. He paid half-a-crown a day wages t» 
 five or six men every week of twenty-four or twenty- 
 six of the year, on an average, to draw up the 
 farmyard manure and the blood to this little fam of 
 his. 
 
 13929. Do you know what was done with this little 
 ftu-m since? — Nothing yet ; I think it will be set as 
 townpai'ks ; so the landlord intends. 
 
 1 3930. Chairman. — You are a tenant-farmer? — Yes. 
 
 13931. And you also own flax, corn, and saw 
 mills ?— Yes. 
 
 13932. How much do you hold? — I hold about six- 
 teen acres altogether, in two holdings. 
 
 13933. They are under diff'erent landlords? — Yes. 
 
 13934. Who are the landlords ?—Y\niere I reside 
 the landlord is the Eev. Edward Denny ; and Mr. 
 Johnston, of Snowhill, is landlord of the other. 
 
 Mr. John Martin, Drumlone, Lisbellaw, examined. 
 
 13935. I will take you at once to some cases that 
 you specially mentioned, that we would like to get 
 upon the notes, and the first is as to the rules on Mr. 
 J. G. V. Porter's property? — Yes. He allows sale 
 under certain conditions, free sale by auction ; but the 
 conditions fetter the sale very much. 
 
 1 3930. What are the conditions ? — He sends out an 
 architect to look at the premises, and he draws up * 
 sijecification stating what repairs or improvements are 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 459 
 
 necessary, charges £1 to the tenant for that, and the 
 incoming tenant is bound to make these improve- 
 ments. 
 
 13937. Do you think they are unreasonable require- 
 ments 1 — I think so. 
 
 13938. That the improvements mentfoneil l)y his 
 architect are not necessary 1 — It is considered very un- 
 necessary by the tenants — that he is wishing to im- 
 prove his property far more than there is any 
 necessity. 
 
 13939. Does he also on changes of tenancy raise the 
 rent? — Sometimes. I know one case where the 
 tenant has emigrated to New Zealand, and he increased 
 .the rent by nine pounds before he would permit a 
 sale. 
 
 13940. Is any increase of rent given notice of 
 before the sale 1 — Yes, sir. 
 
 13941. So that reduces the price? — Yes; but that 
 sale occurred at a time when the people were almost 
 land-mad, and he got a very good price, notwithstand- 
 ing £0 increase of cent. 
 
 13942. The O'Conor Don.— On hov.- much?— 
 About forty acres, I think. 
 
 13943. Ohaieman. — Then, on Sir Victor Brooke's 
 estate, you say, there is a custom there upon the ap- 
 pointment of arbitrators '! — Yes. 
 
 13944. To settle the price the incoming tenant is to 
 pay 1 — Yes. 
 
 13945. How is the arbitration settled? — Mr. 
 Wrench is agent, and he appoints an umpire, and the 
 outgoing tenant appoints one, the incoming tenant an- 
 other arbitrator, and they agree upon a purchase. 
 
 13946. Then, the selling tenant has not any voice 
 in the appointment ?— Yes. 
 
 13947. Do those two name an umpire if necessary 1 
 — I am not very sure aboiit that. 
 
 13948. Mr. Shaw. — I thought the landlord named 
 the umpii-e, and the two tenants the arbitrators ? — I 
 did not hear that. 
 
 13949. Chairman. — We had it from Mr. Wrench 
 that the tenant named one and the purchaser another, 
 and if they differed he named the umpire ? — Well, I 
 am not familiar with that property, but I know they 
 had a great difficulty in getting a tenant where the 
 tenant had emigrated. • 
 
 13950. Can you say how long that has been the rule 
 on that property — is it lately introduced ? — I have 
 not heard of it. It is considered landlords are intro- 
 ducing more stringent rules since the Land Act. 
 
 13951. Without going into particulars, you say 
 that that is a general idea that the landlords are doing 
 so ?— Yes. 
 
 13952. You express an opinion in these notes that 
 all estate usages ought to be abolished, and one 
 general rule framed to apply to the whole country ? — 
 Yes. The County Court Judge has expressed him- 
 self several times as to the anxiety of the landlords to 
 get rid of the provisions of the Land Act. 
 
 13953. You say your reason for this is that the 
 tenants will submit to any exactions rather than leave 
 their holdings ? — Yes. 
 
 13954. Can you give cases to prove that? — Yes; 
 here is a case I took a note of : — The townlands of 
 
 Curren and Coolnagrane, belonging to Daroy 
 
 esq., are bought by Mr. Hurst in the Landed Estates 
 Court, occupied by nine tenants ; the rents had been 
 raised some fifteen years previous to the sale from 25s. 
 per Irisli acre to 28s., at the same time all reclaimed bog 
 was measured into farms, and the same rent charged 
 by the acre for reclaimed bog. After the sale to Hurst 
 he raised the rents, Avith three exceptions, 5s. per acre, 
 at the same time causing the tenants to sign an agree- 
 ment binding them, to pay the additional rent in 
 full, without any deduction for present or futui-e taxes, 
 also to keep the farms and houses in perfect order, and to 
 reside permanently on the land. I have a copy of that 
 agreement to one of the tenants : — 
 
 ''Memoranrlura of agreement entered into this 24th day 
 of April, 1874, between George Hurst, of Drumderg, in the 
 county of Fermanagh, esq., of the one part, and 
 
 , of Cooln.agrane, farmer, of the other part, whereby Oct. 15, I88n. 
 
 the said agrees to pay the said (jeorie Hurst 
 
 the increased yearly rent or sum of £29 9s. 6d. in "the place ^""; I^-^sene 
 and stead of the former yearly rent payable by him in respect ^ , ^ ""j '^.'^■ 
 of the lands of Coolnagrane, and said increased yearly rent M-rtin " 
 to commence and be payable from the ist day of May last, 
 
 and the said to continue on as yearly tenant 
 
 to the said George Hurst, in respect of said lands at said 
 uicreaseil yearly rent, which shall be pRyablo, half-yearly, 
 on every 1st day of iMay and Ist day of November, the first 
 I>a,yment of said increased rent to be made on the 1st day of 
 November, 1873, which increased rent shall be payable, clear 
 of all existing and future ta.^es, rates and outgoings, save 
 such as are usually defnued by the landlord, and the said 
 
 . liereby further agrees to reside permanentlv 
 
 on said lands,^ and not sub -let or con-acre the same or any 
 part thereof without first obtaining the written permission 
 of the said George Hurst, and he further agrees to keep all 
 houses, fences, gates and farm roads in good farm like order, 
 repair and condition." 
 
 13955. The O'Coxor Don. — When was that made, 
 is it since the passing of the Land Act ? — Oh, yes ; 
 24th April, 1874. The tenants at first refused to sign 
 the agreement, then they were served with notices to 
 quit; they complied, and were then charged £1 each 
 for the notice and agreement. One of the tenants, 
 James Beatty's, valuation was £35 10s., rent£46 ICi-., 
 size of farm 29 acres 3 roods. I know another of the 
 tenants in Coolgrane who was raised £11, though his 
 rent was sufficiently high before. 
 
 13956. Chairman. — Then you think the landlord 
 having the power to evict, if the tenant does not com- 
 ply with the rise of rent, the tenant ought to have the 
 right of surrendering his farm to the landlord, if lie 
 considers the existing rent too high, and then obtain 
 full compensation in the County Court ? — Yes. 
 
 13957. At present he only obtains compensation for 
 improvements? — He has not the right of surrender at 
 all ; if the landlord raises the rent he totally absorbs 
 all his improvements. 
 
 13958. He does away with the tenant-right ? Yes ; 
 but the landlord can raise the rent. 
 
 13959. But if he surrenders, and the tenant-right 
 has been reduced by increases of rent, you would say 
 he would get nothing for his tenant-right ?^No. 
 
 139G0. But then he would be able, if he chose, to 
 go for improvements ? — I don't think he would be suffi- 
 ciently compensated. 
 
 13961. You think he ought to get the full value of 
 the tenant-right, exclusive of the proposed rise of rent ? 
 Yes ; if there is not some check put on the' rising <jf 
 rents, the tenant-right will be entirely absorbed. 
 
 13962. Then you say that there is no desire at present 
 to get leases, one objection being the necessity of making 
 a new bargain on the fall of a lease ? — Yes. 
 
 13963. And also a doubt whether tenant-right 
 would exist at the close of the lease ? — Yes. 
 
 13964. Then is it your opinion that the rents gener- 
 ally through the country that you know are high ? — 
 They are high, with the exception, perhaps, of Lord 
 Erne's estate, excepting where there are old leases, 
 and they are threatened to be raised very much by 
 some landlords. 
 
 13965. What district do you speak of specially? — 
 The district between Lisbellaw arid Brookborough ; it 
 comprises Mr. Porter's, Mr. Denny's, the Rev. Mr. 
 Hall's, Colonel Irvine's, and Mr. Hurst's properties. I 
 am tolerably familiar with these properties. 
 
 13966. Is it on any of these properties that noticis 
 t( I quit were served to increase the rents ? — Yes, that 
 is Mr. Denny's, he is my landlord, audi suppose I have 
 laid out .£1,000 to improve my place, and there is a 
 notice I received in common with the other tenants 
 (produced). 
 
 13;.)67. That was served April, J879? — He has not 
 proceeded with any of those notices. 
 
 13968. Was that in consequence of the bad times t 
 —Yes. 
 
 13969. The O'Conoe Don. — Is that a notice to quit? 
 — ^Yes, but the object was to increase the rent. I had a 
 low rent and it has been doubled since the fall of the 
 lease. 
 
 3N2 
 
4S0 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 15, ISSO. 
 
 Kev. Eugene 
 M'Kenna. c <:., 
 and Mr. John 
 Martin. 
 
 13970 Chairman. — Do you know of any cases 
 where the tenants were compelled, by fear of eviction 
 to sign agreements they did not approve of? — Yes ; 
 this (produced) is an agreement that was signed that 
 way. 
 
 13971. Is there a general custom of the running 
 half year through your country ? — It was general, but 
 it has been taken up. It was on the Coalbrook 
 estate and the property I reside on, and it has been 
 taken up on both. I heard great complaints from 
 the Coalbrook tenants about taking it up. 
 
 13972. Was that taken up on a change of ten- 
 ancy 1 — No, taken up generally on the estate about four 
 years ago. 
 
 13973. I see you say that since the Land Act ten- 
 ants have had a distrust as to making improvements ? 
 — Yes, a very great distrust. 
 
 '13974. They are afraid that their improvements 
 may cause a rise of rent 1 — Yes. Now, I built a house 
 myself, that I would not build at present. There was 
 great confidence on the property I live on at one time, 
 and I built an excellent house about twelve years ago. 
 
 13975. Did you get any assistance from the land- 
 lord ? — Not one farthing, I did not even get stone on 
 the land. I built it of cut stone and brick. 
 
 13976. The O'Conor Don. — Have you not more 
 security now 1 — No, I don't know that, perhaps the 
 nature of my property would exclude me — my principal 
 property is in mills. 
 
 13977. Chairman. — Did you build the mills? — I 
 did. I can give you a case in point, I took a note of 
 it. Alexander Livingstone, a young man, has a farm 
 under Mr. Denny, and he was asking my advice about 
 roofing with boards. I advised him to slate his house, 
 and make a permanent job of it, but he said he would 
 not, because he was afraid, at the fall of the lease, he 
 would not continue on, as he would prefer emigrating 
 to being rack-rented. 
 
 13978. Do you think that is a general feeling among 
 tenants who would otherwise improve 'I — I think it is, 
 it is a feeling I have strongly myself 
 
 13979. You were going to mention the case of your 
 mill, I see you afterwards say you think such build- 
 ings as that ought to come under the' clause forcoinpen- 
 sation ] — Yes. 
 
 13980. Mr. Shaw. — It is in a country place, I sup- 
 pose 1 — Yes, and the reasonis, it is entirely agricultural 
 for the accommodation of the farmers. A neighbour oi 
 mine whose mill has lately come under the Factory Act 
 the inspector told, " We don't wish to go to the ex- 
 treme measuresoftho Act, be^gause scutch mills are more 
 agricultural than manufacturing," which is the very 
 idea I express. 
 
 13981. You say they are indispensable to the 
 tenants in the way of feeding for cattle? — Yea, that is 
 grist mills, but the scutch mills are much more im- 
 portant. 
 
 13981a. You think that also ought to apply to 
 cottages for scutchers 1 — Yes, I think that would be 
 indispensable. 
 
 13982. The result of there not being securfty for 
 such cottages you say leads to the worst description of 
 lodging houses? — Yea. A great objection to makijig 
 improvements is, the Poor Law -valuator would come 
 around, and perhaps you are paying a suflSciently high 
 rent but if you make a fine house or farm buildings 
 they will be valued, and the landlord will say your 
 valuation is higher than the rent and he will naturally 
 think he is very moderate. 
 
 13983. The O'Conor Don. — Arethe peoplegenerally 
 satisfied with the Land Court as a tribunal ?— They 
 ai-e not satisfied with the Act as it stands at all, they 
 would prefer anything rather than resort to the courts. 
 
 13984. Mr. Shaw. — Even in your own county?— 
 Yes ; the feeling of the people is very strong to retain 
 hold of the land. 
 
 13985. They don't want to be turned out, they 
 would submit to a great deal rather than that? — 
 Submit to anything. 
 
 The witnesses then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. William 
 C. Tute. 
 
 Mr. William Clifford Tute, examined. 
 
 13986. Chairman. — You are living in Sligo ? — Yes. 
 
 13987. And are the stamp distributor? — Yes, my 
 private residence is at Camphill, Colloony. 
 
 13988. Now, without going into each sejsarate case, 
 I believe you can give a return of the number of eject- 
 ment processes at various periods? — I have prepared one 
 for the Commissioners ; and I have taken it from three 
 years previous to the Land Act up to the present date. 
 
 13989. Then you are able to hand that in as a 
 correct return of those number of processes? — Pre- 
 cisely ; distinguishing them under what particular 
 denomination the ejectments were brought. 
 
 13990. And the cause of them? — Non-payment of 
 rent, permissive occupation, recovery of possession on 
 title, overholding, deserted premises — setting out each 
 of those for each year. 
 
 13991. Then have you also the land taken in 
 execution for debts ? — No, T have not. They don't 
 come under my own observation. These are the 
 processes actually issued by me as stamp distributor. 
 Colonel Cooper told me he had given directions to have 
 extracts taken from the Clerk of the Peace's book, the 
 numbers entered ; then from the sheriff the number 
 that came into his hands. These will show you the 
 causes during the diflierent periods. I have taken them 
 from three years before the Land Act to see whether 
 they were increased or diminished. 
 
 13992. The number issued is distinguished from 
 the number grantisd ? — These are the numbers issued 
 from the stamp office. 
 
 13993. Mr. Shaw. — And you don't know the end 
 of it?— No. 
 
 13994. Chairman. — You don't know how many 
 were compromised? — No, I cannot tell that, it can be 
 procured from the Clerk of the Peace and the sheriffi 
 
 13995. Just in a general view of that, have they 
 
 increased very much lately ? — They have, the highest 
 amount has been 420 in a year and the lowest has been 
 in 1871, sixty-seven for nonpayment of rent, the others 
 are mere nothing. The total in 1871 was only 116, 
 and the total in 1878 is 475. 
 
 13996. Have you got 1879 ?— I have got 1879, and 
 the three quarters of this year, I have brought them 
 down to the very latest period. In 1878 the highest 
 number was 475 for all causes. In that year, of 
 those 475, there were 420 for nonjjayment of rent. 
 
 13997. Then in 1879 ?— In 1879, 294 for non 
 payment of rent, a total of 353. 
 
 13998. And iir the first six months is it of 1880?— 
 In the first nine months of 1880, there is 151, and 193 
 is the total. 
 
 13999. 151 fornonpayment? — Yes, there appearsiiow 
 to be a cessation almost, it has much diminished. There 
 is a matter, in going over these, I thought would 
 be useful for the object of this inquiry, and that is the 
 state of the country, I mean the financial condition 
 of the small farmers, which is indicated by the number 
 of bill stamps sold for debts from £5 and under, .£10 
 and under, and £25 and under. 
 
 . 14000. Mr. Shaw.— For bills?— For bills, these are 
 given principally for goods on credit, money lendingand 
 other things which has proved very disastrous to this 
 
 country. Small farmers get guano, provisions, 
 
 and 
 
 everything else at a usurious interest for which they 
 give small bills. 
 
 14001. Chairman. — You mean they raise money 
 at usurious interest in order to buy? — No, but they 
 pass bills to traders and money lenders. To show you 
 the effect it has had, which struck me as very disas- 
 trous, I thought it would be very useful to give you a 
 return. In 1867 the number of bill stamps for Id- 
 and under sold in this county. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 461 
 
 -Has there been a regular 
 
 14002. Mr. Shaw. — A penny means how much ? 
 — £5. It amounted in 1867 to 2,644, by decrees 
 they increased, and in 1879 they were 5,499. 
 
 14003. Every man was down on every man who 
 owed him money? — Yes, and getting credit in the 
 country from gombeen men. They will bviy guano and 
 meal and pay fifty percent, for credit, six months' credit. 
 I have known guano that was sold at £ 1 3 to the trader, 
 to be sold by him at £18 for six months' credit. 
 
 14004. So that they are robbed in every way, it is 
 not the high rents alone 1 — ^^Yes. I will show a source 
 of constant draining that cannot last. 
 
 14005. It is very simple to recover money on a bill t 
 — It is an admitted debt^ and you go into the Quarter 
 Sessions and recover, and there is another profit ex- 
 tracted from the poor by that operation. For £10 
 and under in 1867, there were 2,192, they came up 
 in 1879, to 5,657. 
 
 14006. TheO'CoNORDoN.- 
 increase 1 — Yes, a steady increase. 
 
 14007. Chaikman. — Were there any large increases 
 soon after the passing of the Land Act 1 — No, a steady 
 increase. In 1870 it was 2,300, and it has gone to 
 5,400. In like manner debts of £25 and under went 
 from 2,887 to 6,000. 
 
 14008. Mr. Shaw. — Cannot that be accounted for a 
 great deal by the great increase of branch banks 
 through the country 1 — Not to any extent, but I will 
 show you the way it is ; the banks do not as a rule sue at 
 Quarter Sessions, but a trader, will frequently come in 
 and buy 200 pair of processes. Assuming that only one- 
 fourth of the bill-stamps issued in 1867 were current, 
 they would represent outstanding liabilities of £26,810 
 in this county. Estimating those issued in 1879 by 
 the same standard, they would represent debts out- 
 standing of £52,885, showing an increase of outstand- 
 ing debts of £26,075, a regular and inci-easing drain, 
 getting deeper and deeper. To prove the increase, I 
 have taken out within the same period, the number 
 of civil bill processes issued in my district. In 1867 
 there were 4,217 original civil bill stamps, in 1879 
 there were 8,362. To illustrate the injury resulting 
 from this increasing system of money lending on credit 
 or at usurious interest, I have made those extracts of 
 the number of civil bills issued within the same periods, 
 revealing the fact that the numbers are doubled. In 
 
 1879 the number was 8,362, in 1879, 4,219, an increase 
 of 4,1 45 in civil bills suits. 
 
 1-1009. Chairman. — What is the extent of the dis- 
 trict this is over? — The whole coimty. 
 
 14CtlO. Mr. Shaw. — That is a sample of other coun- 
 ties ? — Multiply that by 32, we are not the largest 
 county of Ireland. It is not alone the cost of these 
 processes, they are increased latterly since the new 
 County Court Actj that those money-lenders exact from 
 the tenants or the poor man, they will charge them for 
 the cost of the stamp, and for the filling of the process, 
 perhaps on a £5 debt they will take £1 each quarter, 
 will renew that at an usurious rate of interest and 
 put on the same charges over and over again ; it is a 
 continuous blister and drain on them. Not alone that, 
 but very recently I detected a species of fraud they have 
 been adopting, not alone against the trader, but against 
 the l■c^•enue, and it was this — one trader would issue to 
 the whole side of a county perhaps 200 processes, who 
 would fill the copies without having any original, the 
 debtor would come in and pay perhaps £l or \vhatever 
 he could of the amount of the debt, if it was over £5 
 the original process was \s., under £5 it was 6c?., and 
 6c/. for the copy, that would be Is. 6d. for each. They 
 would come in to make an arrangement, when the 
 trader would charge them both for the copy and origi- 
 nal, the original having never been issued, also for the 
 filling, and in that way they made a handsome income 
 every quarter from the miseries of the people. I laid a 
 trap for them, after the date processes could be legally 
 served, I marked every one of those which had been 
 issued from my office, and with the concurrence of the 
 Chairman, having told him what I had suspected, I 
 had then examined them in the Clerk of the Peace's 
 ofiice before they were handed back to the solicitors, 
 and found my own private mark on them, thus dis- 
 covered a number that had never been in the hands 
 of the process-server when the copy processes were 
 served, and thus they got Is. 6d. fraudulently for the 
 stamps that never existed at all. I ascertained that 
 there was 13 per cent, more copies issued than the 
 originals. The Chairman gave the process-servers who 
 were, of course, culpable, a severe reprimand, and only 
 I interceded for them, they would have been dismissed, 
 the result was the excess was reduced to 6 per cent. 
 
 (Witness hands in tabular return and retires.) 
 
 Oct. 15, 18.00. 
 
 Mr. WiHiam 
 C. Tute. 
 
 Mr. William Heron, Doonamurray, Collooney, examined. 
 
 14011. Chairman. — You are a tenant farmer, val- 
 uator, and surveyor? — Yes. 
 
 14012. Are you surveyor on the Markree estate? 
 — Yes ; and I am also employed to lay out a great 
 deal of money from the Board of Works in this and 
 the adjoining counties. 
 
 14013. And you are especially acquainted with 
 Lord Harlech's property ? — Yes ; for a great many 
 years I have been acquainted with it. 
 
 14014. Where is it situated? — There is some of it 
 near this town, but the bulk of it is about Tobercurry, 
 to the west. 
 
 14015. We have had from Col. Cooper an account 
 of his property. Apart from the property of Colonel 
 Cooper where we have been told it exists, is there 
 tenant-right admitted through the country, or sale of 
 holdings ? — No ; not generally. There is hardly ever 
 a case in which a tenant would be prevented selling 
 his improvements on getting a man the landlord would 
 not object to. The large proprietors always allow him 
 to sell his improvements. 
 
 14016. How is the value of the tenant's improve- 
 ments defined and determined?—! know on the 
 Markree estate I was generally employed to value the 
 improvements, and make a report to the landlord as 
 to what I thought he was entitled to. 
 
 14017. Did you consider yourself as an independent 
 arbitrator between landlord and tenant ?— Of course, 
 though I did consider myself independent, yet I was not 
 in a position to be theoretically independent. I gene- 
 
 rally gave satisfaction to the tenants, because my 
 principle was to try to do justice. 
 
 14018. Mr. Shaw. — You were employed by the 
 landlord? — Yes. That was in the late proprietor's 
 time. He made a general valuation before his death, 
 three or four years before. 
 
 14019. Were you engaged in that? — I was. 
 
 14020. How much was the advance? — On the 
 whole property it was about one-twelfth. 
 
 14021. Averaging over all the farms ? — Yes. The 
 electoral division of Collooney is altogether the Mark- 
 ree estate, except one townland. I have taken out 
 the rental of twenty townlands omitting the villages of 
 Collooney and Ballysodare, which with mills, &c., 
 would vitiate the value of the return, and I find that 
 the rent is £2,000, and the ordnance valuation is about 
 £100 more. 
 
 14022. Chairman. — When jou were valuing did 
 you look upon the Government vakiation as any 
 criterion of fair rent? — My experience leads me to a 
 certain conclusion about the Government valuation, 
 namely, that the good limestone and pasture lands, 
 particularly if the soil is shallow, are valued too low, 
 while wet retentive soils are valued too high. The 
 good land is valued lower than it ought to be. 
 
 14023. Do you say that on the bad land it is 
 valued too high — beyond its proper value? — I won't 
 say that, but it does not maintain its proportion be- 
 tween it and good land. 
 
 Mr. Wiiliam 
 Hei'on. 
 
462 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 15, 1880. 
 
 Mr. "William 
 Heron. 
 
 14024. Tlien, in fact, tho tenants on that land ai-e 
 paying in rates higher than their neighbours on better 
 landl — 1 think so. 
 
 140i]5. Yon mention that evictions are very rare 
 in all the country you know 1 — They are vejy rare, 
 indeed. 
 
 140:2(3. Can you name the usual cause of tliem 
 whci'e they have been enforced 1 — The usual cause is 
 for non-payment of rent. 
 
 14027. But outside non-payment of rent what are 
 the usual causes 1 — 1 have known an instance on Lord 
 Barlech's estate where a tenant "\\'as evicted for his 
 violent conduct, he threatened the life of the sur- 
 veyor. 
 
 14028. In these cases of striping land, are the 
 tenants generally satisfied? — They are not satisfied at 
 first, but in the end they are, but the difficulties are 
 so great now that we would rather let tliem be as they 
 are, sooner than attempt to mal^e any change. , 
 
 14029. The O'Ooxor Dos.— Do you think striping 
 has been interfered with ]>j the Land Act? — Yes; 
 the tenants are more refractory. We have a town- 
 land on the seashore it is in rundale, but impi'ove- 
 ment is impossible, owing to the difliculty and trouble 
 and ill-will, and we are prepared to leave it so. 
 
 14030. CHAiEMA>r. — In the old cases, before the 
 Land Act, was it the custom to put them, under notice 
 to quit in order to enforce the striping 1 — Yes ; it 
 was the ciistom to serve a notice to quit, and then if 
 there was a refractory person we would have to follow 
 it up by taking up possession, and then the landlord 
 would divide the land, and endeavour to do as justly 
 as he could. 
 
 14031. And are the refractory tenants brought 
 back again? — We endeavour to give them a fair pro- 
 portion. 
 
 14032. Did the case where Lord Harlech evicted a 
 tenant occur before the Land Act or since 1 — It oc- 
 curred before. Since the Act I have divided one 
 estate, and the tenants are in a much better position 
 now. In cases you would hardly know the jslace now, 
 they have improved so. Whereas formerly they 
 were in a hopeless state. 
 
 14033. We have been shown a table of the number 
 of bills taken out for money, are you aware whether 
 in this part of the country there have been manv deal- 
 ings in that wslj — getting money on bills for manure, 
 and so on 1 — This whole country is ruined with credit. 
 Since the Land Act came the shopkeepers thought 
 they had security, and the people are too fond, even 
 if they had money in bank, to take credit. I have 
 known people to go and take credit who had plenty of 
 money in their pockets, and of course there is plenty 
 charged for it. I have seen a great many of the 
 troubles arise in that way, from the shopkeepers look- 
 ing for their money. Some of the ejectments a-re 
 brought by the people who lend money. We had a 
 case on Colonel Cooper's estate. There was a tenant 
 who was an improving nran ; he had eighty Irish acres 
 of good land. He built a nice slated house on it, but 
 he got money from a neighbour, and he ran up a bill 
 of nearly £500. This man proceeded for his money 
 and sold hun off. Colonel Cooper was going to ptrevent 
 that and put a veto -on it. 
 
 14034. Mr. Shaw. — Was there a lease of the farm 1 
 — No. Well, Colonel Cooper thought he would stop 
 the proceedings, but he was better advised. This was 
 a bad tenant, and he said — " I have always a difficulty 
 in getting money from him, I will allow it to take 
 its course." That farm was sold and we could not 
 help it. 
 
 14035. Was it sold under the sheriff?— Yes. 
 
 14036. Was it a public sale? — I was not piresent, 
 and I cannot say, but I know it was through the 
 sheriff it was sold, and then we tried to get a little 
 place for this unfortunate man. He is living now on 
 a little farm, and by a subscription amongst his neigh- 
 bours he got £200. 
 
 14037. How much did the fiirm bring ? — About £G 
 an acre. No one would give more for it. It was a 
 
 very good farm. Where there is a breaking down 
 tenant you will see him ruining the farm befm-e vour 
 eyes, ruining it for a generation. 
 
 14038. Have there been any ejectments on Colonel 
 Cooper's property except for non-payment of rent since 
 you became connected with it? — There was one in 
 which we had an ejectment. There was a lar^e fam 
 and a great deal of bad land and some good land and 
 the tenants insisted on setting the good land at con- 
 
 ,acre, and when they would not stop for all the acent 
 could say, the land was ejected, but on the land cfaim 
 coming on there was some compromise without woinc 
 into the case. 
 
 14039. Is that the only case you had? — ^^Ve had 
 two land cases on the Markree estate. There was the 
 case of a small farm- in which the owner went to 
 America and put another party in. There was an 
 ejectment there because we would not recognise the 
 tenant's right. 
 
 14040. He bought from the other man? — No • he 
 was a sub-tenant, and then he succeeded. There ws 
 a claim made for a house, but I hunted up an old 
 fellow ninety-six years of age, and he proved that tlie 
 house was built by Colonel Cooper's gTandfather, and 
 not by any tenant. 
 
 14041. There was another case you say? — These 
 were the only cases in Colonel Cooper's estate. We 
 had only two land cases all the time, but I have been 
 in fifty land cases on other properties. 
 
 14042. The O'Conoe Don. — Are the people 
 generally satisfied with the Land Court as a tribunal 
 for settling disputes 1 — Yes ; it i^ generally considered 
 that the barrister gives at least as much as the tenant 
 should get, that he leans to the tenant's side, I suppose 
 very properly. 
 
 14043. Where a middleman dies Colonel Cooper 
 generally re- values tlie farms ? — Yes, sometimes ; no 
 doubt they pay higher than on old parts of the estate. 
 All these overcrowded townlands were cut up by 
 middlemen. I will give a case : There was a town- 
 land which was let to Mr. Powell, and I found forty- 
 two tenants on seventy-two acres of good land. That 
 is within three miles of this. 
 
 14044. They are complaining that the old rent re- 
 mains on them? — If they were not there at all we 
 would have got more rent for the land, it is along the 
 shore, and it is splendid land, and we were very sony 
 the tenants were there at all. No doubt they are pay- 
 ing a good deal more than other portions of the estate. 
 
 14045. They are not circumstanced as Colonel 
 Cooper's tenants are, but as they were in the old 
 times? — Yes. The difference, however, is not so 
 much. There is a townland where the tenant had a 
 lease for ever. In 1848 the tenant gave up the land 
 because he was not, able to pay the head-rent. We 
 took that townland; it is greatly overcrowded, and is 
 letatone-twentieth over the Ordnance valuation. There 
 is a salmon fishery belonging to the Cooper famdy 
 there, and they give it to the tenants, and it pays the 
 rent, yet the people on that townland are in a chronic 
 state of beggary from over population ; they live hke 
 grasshoppers, in a good season they are all right, but 
 when a bad season comes they suffer. 
 
 14046. Although the rent is altogether paid by the 
 fishery ? — It has not paid in the last two years ; but, 
 when it was paying, they did not seem to be very 
 flourishing. 
 
 14047. Mr. Shaw.— Are these small holdings?— 
 Yes. The fact is, if you cannot ensure the potato 
 crop to grow, you cannot have a prosperous small 
 tenantry. 
 
 14048. There is no other means of living? — No; 
 the grain is so cheap, and it takes such a lot of land to 
 make butter from cows, you cannot get the jjeople to 
 adopt the system of indoor housefeeding. 
 
 14049. That would be a great help to them ?— It 
 would. There was a great improvement about twelve 
 or fourteen years ago ; they were more anxious for 
 improvement. 
 
 14050. Chairman.- Do they grow cabbage much? 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 463 
 
 — Not so mucli as they did. Lord Harledi went to 
 trouble to form a farming society; but lie had to iTi\e 
 it up from the apathy of the farmers. 
 
 14031. Mr. Shaw. — How do you account for that 1 
 — There must be something at the bottom of it. There 
 is the townland of Drumartin ; the people hold it for 
 ever, at a rent of 7s. &d. an acre, and I defy you to 
 say there are more comfortable homes there, or any 
 better farming, than anywhere else. 
 
 14052. CuAiuiiAN. — These are perpetuities at a 
 moderate rent? — Yes, 7s. 6d. an Irish acre. 
 
 14053. And you see no difference between their 
 state and tlie state of the tenants who pay the higher 
 rate 1 — I venture to say that, if you take a townland on 
 Colonel FfoUiott's property close by, you will say they 
 are a thousand degrees better off than the perpetuity 
 men. You may account for it as you please, but it is 
 a fact. Of course, it is absurd to say that a man is 
 better off with a high rent to pay ; but, just as a horse 
 with a light load may get skittish, so a tenant, who 
 has not something to make him industrious, may 
 become lazy. I know a lot of peasant proprietors, 
 and they have nearly all come to grief : they became 
 
 .gentlemen, and they shot and fished, and gambled, and 
 did not stick to their business. I knew one man who 
 kept a racehorse, and ran against Father Maguire's 
 horse, and Father Maguire's beat him. He was sold 
 out, and a tenant-farmer bought his land and paid 
 £900 for it. 
 
 14054. The O'Cokoe Don. — How is he getting on ? 
 — He pays rent to the Colonel for a farm, and he 
 keeps the perpetuity as a grazing farm, and he is 
 getting on very well. I know a lot of people who 
 bought perpetuity holdings ; but, if they got good 
 land, they never set it to tenants. They kept all the 
 good land themselves. 
 
 14055. Chairjiax — This class of people would not 
 make good landlords themselves ? — The worst of all — 
 the most unsympathetic and worst of any. I say that 
 generally. 
 
 14056. The O'Conor Dox.— Do you think, if the 
 people had the land in their own hands, they would 
 get on well? — It is a very large Cjuestion, and I never 
 can come at it. The standard of comfoi't wants to be 
 raised in the country, and it is a thing that must take 
 time. The people must become educated, and become 
 used to more comforts. 
 
 14057. Mr. Shaw. — Better houses, and use abetter 
 system of farming ? — You cannot make a plant gr(jw 
 all at-once ; it must be encouraged and given proper 
 time. This is a matter that should be tested properly 
 and cautiously ; for the Government might find they 
 had been spending 200 millions for nothing afterwards. 
 
 14058. Colonel Cooper mentioned a case where they 
 spent a whole lot of money on drainage, and it all 
 went for nothing 1 — Yes. There are a great many 
 people talk of waste land, and why it is not reclaimed, 
 and all that. The Bog of Allan is sjDoken of ; but 
 what can you do with it 1 When it is cut away, you 
 might do something, to it, but the good land might be 
 better tilled. There is land that now only produces a 
 quarter of what it might produce. I have gone about 
 Colonel Cooper's estate, with my pocket full of bank- 
 notes wanting the tenants to take them and drain 
 their land, and I could not get them to take the 
 money. We offered it at five per cent., and we paid 
 £6 IDs. It is the small farmers who refuse to do it. 
 If drainage was extensively done, it would be one of 
 the best things for the country. 
 
 14059. The drainage only enables you to improve 
 the lands ] it Avon't make them good in itself. Why 
 ■won't the large farmers drain 1 — As a matter of in- 
 terest, they think it better to let it alone. They are 
 a pastural race, as a rule. Grain pays worse than cattle 
 now, and the labourers are getting unsatisfactory and 
 discontented ; they are beginning not to work as they 
 used ; and, the farmer says : " I can make so much 
 hutter with no bother, and pay my rent and get on," 
 he will not bother himself much. I never knew a 
 large tillage-farmer to succeed. 
 
 140G0. You know the north, they drain well there 
 and get on?— Yes, I know Derry, but they are a 
 very long way a head of us there. 
 
 140U1. Do you think the rents of the large farmers 
 might be increased if they put on large improvements 
 themselves ? -—I don't know of any case in which large 
 proprietors have taken advantage of what are called 
 the man's improvements. 
 
 14062. But that is the feeling it produces if it is done 
 on small properties 1 — Yes, they say it may be done. 
 
 14063. In the north they have done wonders with 
 their land? — They have. 
 
 14064. Chaibman. — You make some suggestions 
 as to amendments of the Act of 1870, you say to make 
 the Ordnance map as far as it goes evidence 1 — Yes. 
 
 14065. What is the object of that amendment?- -I 
 was struck in several land cases in which I was con- 
 cerned with what I thought was an injustice. I 
 recollect there was a land case in which the late Sir 
 Robert Gore was brought into Court. There was a 
 farm let in 1849, the tenants grabbed the whole lot of 
 ^^ aste bog whether the landlord would or no and kept 
 their neighbours out of it, and they were ejected, and 
 they brought forward a claim for thirty years purchase 
 of their holdings. Amongst the items for which they 
 claimed compensation was one for making fences. 
 These fences were nearly all engraved on the Ordnance 
 map which was made in 1837, I said "there is the 
 map," and counsel said " have you the men that 
 engraved that to prove it?" It is very hard to put 
 the onus on the landlord of proving everything. He 
 did not keep a record and most of the lands have 
 changed hands since 1848 and you cannot get a 
 witness for the landlord at all. I would say that the 
 Ordnance map would be in equity fair evidence. 
 
 14066. Don't you think that if the Government 
 map was taken in the landlord's case the tenant would 
 probably say why not take the Government valuation ? 
 — They are perfectly distinct ; the one is a record of 
 facts. 
 
 14067. Mr. Shaw. — But you could not tell much 
 from the map because the fences marked on it might 
 have been smashed down ; there is nothing to show 
 who made them or in what state they are at all ? — • 
 No, but in the survey of this county the fences are 
 ]iearly all shown ; but in the north of Ireland it is 
 not so close — there they only put in indications of the 
 fences. 
 
 14068. Chaiuman. — You also say you wish to 
 abolish the distinction as to the scale of compensation 
 for disturbance existing in favour of very small 
 tenancies as tending artificially to perpetuate a vicious 
 system ? — That is my idea. 
 
 14069. You also suggest to have a trained practical 
 man to act as assessor to the Chairman in land cases 
 who would visit and report to the Chairman as to the 
 state of the farm iinder consideration as to the im- 
 provements, (fee, upon it as it is impossible for the 
 Chairman to know what to think under the present 
 system as the witnesses called give different stories ? 
 — Yes, I know of a case in the county Roscommon 
 on Colonel King-Harman's estate ; in which it was 
 solemnly sworn there were £700 spent in top dressing 
 17 acres of grass land, and there was a case of Lord 
 Harlech's where certain things were sworn to and I 
 have known the Judge himself to go out to see for 
 himself j but the barrister who is a very good lawyer 
 may not be a good farmer. In the Admiralty Court 
 they have nautical assessors to advise the Judge. I 
 think it would be acting fairly to give him the assistance 
 of a man of independent opinion. 
 
 14070. Mr. Shaw. — Are you aware that that pro- 
 vision was in the Land Act as it was introduced into 
 the House of Commons 1 — No ; I was not, but I am 
 speaking against my own interest for it is better for 
 me as it is ; I get plenty of money by land cases. 
 
 14071. Chairman.— You say that in cases of 
 dispute as to the amount of rent payable on the fall 
 of a lease, &c., and in which the parties sometimes now 
 resort to the County Court the rent to be determined by a 
 
 Oct. 15, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Heron. 
 
464 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 Jlr. William 
 Heron. 
 
 jury of say three landlords, and three tenants the 
 Chairman of the County Court to act as umpired 
 — I think that would be a sensible suggestion. If a 
 tenant is not reasonable the landlord must eject him 
 which is not pleasant. 
 
 1 4072. Mr. Shaw. — That is practically arbitration ? 
 — Yes, I would call it that. 
 
 14073. The O'Conor Don.— Do yoii see any diffi- 
 culty in settling what a fair rent is 1 — Of course the 
 rent is determined more by competition than anything 
 else, and on the large estates we generally say, live 
 and let live. The rents are low, perhaps from one- 
 third to one-half lower, than in the market. The 
 landlords wishing to live amongst their tenants, don't 
 wish to take the last penny out of them, they know 
 that the tenants have built houses, and in many cases 
 
 they say it would not be fair to charge them the 
 highest rent, and practically by a rough and ready 
 method they come to do justice. 
 
 14074. Mr. Shaw. — And there is not much dis- 
 satisfaction on these estates ? — No. I know an 
 estate on which the tenants acted very fair. The 
 landlord sent a valuator, and they would not agree 
 to that, and they named me. The landlord said I 
 will take him too, and I had the difficulty of acting 
 for both, and I satisfied all the tenants except one. 
 
 14075. Chairman. — Sometimes people won't be 
 satisfied ? — The land was, most of it, naturally good. 
 They said "The land God Almighty made good we will- 
 pay the value of, but the land we made good we will 
 pay accordingly for," and if you take that into account 
 you generally please them. 
 
 Mr. F. P 
 
 Catrley. 
 
 14076. Chairman. — Where 
 miles from Ballymote. 
 
 14077. You are a land surveyor, valuator, and 
 agriculturist? — Yes, and tenant of two lioldingsof land, 
 one of twenty-one acres, and the other of twelve acres. 
 
 14078. Under whom? — The farm of twenty-one 
 acres under Mr. Sim; he purchased in the Landed 
 Estates Court, at the time the MacDermott pur- 
 chased portion of the O'Rielly estate. Neither of 
 them increased their lents since the purchase, or 
 made the slightest demand for an increase. They 
 form an exception to a small class of men who become 
 proprietors through the Landed Estates Court. 
 
 14079. Mr. Shaw. — Generally they increase the 
 rents after the purchase? — Yes. A good many of 
 those who did purchase, forced on the present unsatis- 
 factory state of things, by increasing the rents, 
 because as far as the county is concerned, there is no 
 reason to complain of a single large proprietor. I 
 have had much experience under the Land Act, for 
 both landlords and tenants, aiid I have not had a 
 single case under the Land Act, on the Temp] ehouse 
 estate, or on Sir H. G. Booth's, that is the Percival es- 
 tate, or on Mr. O'Hara's estate ; on Colonel Cooper's 
 there was one, but it was owing to a dispute between 
 a very haughty tenant and an agent, who was a sort of 
 brainless gentleman. It was really from that cause the 
 case arose. 
 
 14080. That is sometime ago? — Yes, it is about 
 five years ago. The large landed proprietors in this 
 county, are in fact, better than the Roscommon land- 
 lords, if we accept one of the Koyal Commissioners 
 present. I happened to be on his estate, and his tenants 
 are certainly very happy in being under him. The 
 land is very moderately let, and he always acted as a 
 friend to his tenants. I know portions of the estate, 
 where the land is held verx- favourably ; the 
 rents were not increased. Some tenants owed three 
 or four yeai-s' rent, and notwithstanding that The 
 Don expended upwards of £500 in improvements. 
 "Very luckily he sold out — luckil}- for himself for the 
 purchaser, who purchased eighteen months ago, has 
 got very little rent since. 
 
 14081. Has he raised the rent? — No, but I think 
 the people were spoiled through the Icindness of The 
 O'Conor Don, and the agent. The deceased Mr. 
 M'Dermot wovild take the rent in 5^. at a time, and 
 when they would not pay him, he used to give them 
 money, and he would send his own men, and money 
 for seed, and by the way, he would take the crop for 
 the rent, but when the crop was there, he would 
 forget to take it. 
 
 14082. The O'Conor Don. — The reason I sold was, 
 because they would not pay interest on the improve- 
 ments ? — They ran into arrears through kindness. 
 
 14083. Mr. Shaw. — You think kindness does badly 
 with them ? — I think over indulgence on the part of 
 a landlord with his tenants is something the same as 
 over indulgence of a parent with a child. 
 
 1 10H4. They ought to do their duty towards them ? 
 
 Mr. F. P. Cawley, Gurteen, Ballymote, examined, 
 do you live ? — Some 
 
 — Yes. As far as my experience goes in this county, 
 as well as in Roscommon and Leitrim, it is the small 
 little men who are a disgrace to landlordism, and I 
 think the Government might have remedied that, for 
 when the Land Act was passed, they might have in- 
 serted a clause, empowering the judge of the Landed 
 Estates Court, to give what the judge at the Quarter 
 Sessions Court, can give now ; an agricultural lease 
 for thirty-five years. If the judges of the Landed 
 Estates Court, were empowered to do that to every 
 tenant on an estate brought to sale, it would keep 
 away the shopkeepers and other small men who have 
 a thousand of their own, and borrow the rest. Then 
 this outcry would not be raised against our respectable 
 land .proprietors. 
 
 14085. The O'Conor Don. — You have been en- 
 gaged a great deal as a sort of arbitrator? — A great 
 deal. The rents on an entire estate in Roscommon. 
 Miss MoUoy's estate were arranged by arbitration, and 
 we have had very little cause to complain. 
 
 14086. Was itreferred in courtto arbitration? — Yes. 
 
 14087. Chairman. — Who were appointed arbitra- 
 tors ? — One arbitrator was nominated by the landlady 
 and one by the tenant. 
 
 14088. And did they name an umpire ?— Yes ; I 
 was arbitrator for the tenants, and a surveyor and 
 valuator on the part of the landlady. Mr. Lynam, 
 from Ballinaslce, was called in as umpire. We left 
 the rents as we found them, as the rents demanded 
 were excessive. The valuation, in one case, was £i 
 10s., and the rent £10 12s., at which the tenant was 
 quite content to remain as he had comfoi'tahle means, 
 but the landlady demanded £15 8s. She went round 
 the other holdings in the same way. 
 
 14089. Did you agree? — We were unanimous, but 
 I don't think the arbitration was practically fan', for the 
 man who represented the landlady was not smart. I got 
 him into a corner, and I succeeded in getting round 
 the other gentleman to my views, and the landlady's 
 arbitrator never signed the award at all. 
 
 14090. Mr. Shaw.— He did not object to it?— He 
 did not, but he could not advance reasons, and he 
 could not overcome the figures we produced. If I was 
 a landlord's man I might be different, for most profes- 
 sional gentlemen generally see through coloured glasses, 
 and as it was he could not overcome the figures. 
 
 14091. The O'Conor Don. —Did any of the tenants 
 agree to pay the rents before Miss Molloy took pro- 
 ceedings against them? — Yes ; they were content with 
 the old rents. Where tenants are struggling, they 
 naturally grumble against the rent as too high, but 
 it is owing to the want of capital. This country is 
 very deficient in capital. I know tenant-farmers who 
 hold land at the Government valuation, but in conse- 
 quence of the want of capital, they are the poorest in 
 the entire country, and I know people who have 
 capital, and who hold their lands at a pretty high rent 
 It would be dangerous for me to say, now, that the 
 rents were not too high, and they are in a comfoi-table 
 position. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 465 
 
 14092. Mr. Shaw. — Is it want of industry and in- 
 telligence that causes the difference 1 — Perhaps the 
 want of capital might be supplemented by saying want 
 of intelligence, but stUl the Irish are an imitative kind 
 of people, and if they had examples they could imitate 
 their neighbours as in sowing potatoes and grain. They 
 have no system of agriculture. I have seen a holding of 
 land in Koscommon where the Poor Law valuation was 
 £38, and the tenant was paying £75 a year 
 on a lease for twenty acres, including half a road, 
 half a river, and internal and external fences. His 
 term expired. The landlord wanted the land, and 
 I said to the tenant offer an increased rent, for 
 your land would be good value for £5 an acre 
 sooner than lose it, if we compare the rents by a 
 comparison of produce. He offered £100 a year for 
 it, and he complimented me afterwards for my skill, 
 saying it was let at £100 a year before, and then it 
 had been reduced to £3 15s. an acre. The tenant was 
 Mr. Goff, of Elphin, and the landlord, Mr. Stafford. 
 
 14093. It is tine grazing land 1 — Yes ; the summer 
 of 1876 was very dry, and I measured the grass on that 
 land three feet long. 
 
 14094. It was naturally fine land 1 — Yes; and 
 worth the money, on the whole. Still it was not 
 worth it to a tenant-farmer unless he had capital. He 
 could not make his living out of it, and lay by £100 
 a year ; but it was a convenience to this man. 
 
 14095. He would not get it at £100 ?— No ; Mr. 
 Stafford kept it in his own hands. 
 
 14096. The O'Conoe Don. — Did he pay him com- 
 pensation 1 — Mr. Stafford brought an action against 
 him for deterioration, and for over-holding, as a set-off 
 to frighten the tenant out of the claim for com- 
 pensation, and the Chairman gave something, but it 
 merely covered the expenses. 
 
 14097. Mr. Shaw. — He had done nothing with the 
 land ] — No ; he had no real claim. It was a grass 
 farm, but it was not stipulated to be entirely grass. 
 It was not a town park, although portion of it abutted 
 on the Old Castle-street of Elphin. 
 
 14098. The O'Conor Don. — Were there any other 
 cases you were engaged in that you wish to mention 1 
 — In the county Mayo there were some cases that are 
 at present attracting a good deal of notoriety. The 
 Ballintadder cases. The valuation of a holding there 
 was £5 154'. — that is the largest holding. The land- 
 lord is the Rev. Mr. Eager^ of Sandymount. He pur- 
 chased at the time Sadlier and Co. broke up. It 
 formed portion of the old Phillip's estate, of Clonmore, 
 and it arose out of John Sadlier's transactions. The 
 valuation at the time Mr. Strickland and Mr. Ellison, 
 of Loughglyn, valued it was £5 15s. I valued the hold- 
 ing at £8 10s., and Mr. Ellison put on £8 9s. l^rf. 
 The present rent is £12 10s. It was utterly impossi- 
 ble for that tenant to support his family and jiay rates, 
 and £12 10s. to the landlord. He had three cows, 
 which were sufficient for the farm, yet he could not 
 get along, for if a tenant-farmer is not able to make 
 his rent off the butter, any landlord may despair of 
 his being a good tenant. This man could not make 
 the rent by the butter, because the cows could not 
 produce it. 
 
 14099. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres has he] — 
 About five acres of pretty fair land and eight acres in 
 different processes of reclamation, and there was an 
 acre not reclaimed at all. They have great war about 
 it. They wanted me to act in the case, but I refused 
 because of the disturbed state of the country, and the 
 Land Leao-ue was unreasonable to ask me, and particu- 
 larly after^being denounced by them. They offered to 
 pay the entire rent if he made an abatement of 4s. in the 
 Ijound, but he would not give it. 
 
 14100. Are the other tenants' rents in the same pro- 
 portion ?— Yes. This is a good sample of the whole lot. 
 
 14101. You think the rents are unreasonable and 
 cannot be paid 1 — Yes ; I wrote a letter to the Clerk 
 of the Peace that the lands wei-e most exhausted. 
 
 14102. The O'Conor Don. — Were you called upon 
 by the landlord or tenant?— The Kev. Mr. Manion 
 directed the tenant to come to me. It was well known I 
 
 got a farm of land from Mr. Sim, but because I opposed 
 the treasurer of the Land League in ejecting another 
 man they got up a land meeting to denounce me, 
 and since then I became subject to great abuse. I was 
 denounced for taking a farm from which another teu:iut 
 was evicted. I have it still, and I would be an ciu my 
 of the country if I did not hold it still. The tenant 
 owed four years' rent, and I went into the house and 
 told him that the year's rent would be a.cceiitc.d, 
 and ho could not pay one shilling. I would be -an 
 enemy to society if I did not hold the land. 
 
 14103. Mr. Shaw. — Has the man left the country 1 
 — No ; I left him the use of the house, and he would 
 not herd the cattle. I left him about two acres of 
 oats and one of potatoes, in fact all the crops of the land 
 without a penny piece, and, notwithstanding that, the 
 operation of the Land League is so terrible in thu 
 country that the man would be in dread that the house 
 would be burned over their heads if they minded the 
 cattle for me. 
 
 14104. Had you any other case in Mayo similar to 
 this 1 — No ; I would refer to other cases as illustrating 
 the imperfection of the Land A.ct. There is a gentle- 
 man who is an exceptionally good landlord, and I 
 only instance his case to show the radical defect there 
 is in the Land Act. That landlord has the power if 
 he were mean enough (and I know where landlords 
 were mean enough) to confiscate the entire of the 
 tenants' improvements. That is owing to the defect 
 in the Land Act. In this case the tenants held under 
 an old lease for some fifty or sixty years ; tlie life was 
 that of a local solicitor ; the lease lapsed with his 
 life ; all the tenants' im]"jro\'ements were made during 
 the lease, and I have personal knowledge of the great 
 labour they expended on the reclamation of the land 
 and making very comfortable homesteads. The land- 
 lord sent round his bailiff asking possession as the 
 leases were expired ; accordingly they gave up posses- 
 sion, and were put in as caretakers to bring them out 
 of the Land Act. The land was let as grazing" land 
 and in conacre for three years, and at the end of that 
 time he got valuators, one of them from his own oflice. 
 The tenants expressed some dissatisfaction, and they 
 got another man and some man from the noith of 
 Ireland. Well, in one case the rent was raised from 
 £5 10s. to £17, in another from £3 to £8. Then the 
 depression of the times followed, and they were brought 
 down again. The gentleman is naturally a good land- 
 lord, but he considered that after the long enjoyment 
 of the lease these people were equitably, treated. It is: 
 a great temptation where the Land Act is so defective, 
 and it arises through the formula that the tenant 
 is to make a .claim for improvements made either by 
 himself or his predecessor in title. That is all dvcr 
 now, and these tenants have experienced the greatest 
 jjossible kindness fi'om that landlord ; he bought seed 
 oats and potatoes, and twenty-six cows for whatever 
 poor men wanted assistance, but it was a temptation 
 he could not resist. 
 
 14105. Human nature could hardly resist iti — 
 Exactly so. 
 
 14106. The O'Conoe Don.— You don't think the 
 new rents excessive, only that they were put on the 
 tenants' improvements? — Yes. The gentleman would 
 be incapable of doing anything unjust or oppressive. 
 
 14107. Chairman. — With regard to the purchase 
 of holdings by tenants, do you consider the expensos 
 attending the purchase are too great? — It is mockery 
 to a poor tenant to have to employ a solicitor and go to 
 the stamp office to certify this and that, &c. If a land- 
 lord is willing to dispose of a holding to a tenant, and 
 the tenant had the necessary capital, it would be veiy 
 easy for the Board of Works to make an advance to^ 
 the tenant and let the landlord pass a receijjt and send 
 it to the Board of Works. That would be the same 
 as if I got a simple assignment from one man to 
 another. The conditions of the Land Act, from section 
 35 on, are unworkable and sufficient to deter the 
 people from purchasing. 
 
 14108. If they were si uplcr a good many would 
 buy ? — A good many v,'o\ild. In fact, the tenant who 
 
 3 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 jAfr. F. P. 
 
466 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 15, 18S0 -v^^oiild be able should be encouraged; but the lazy 
 jjj. jTT" fellow should not get an advance of capital. If XI 
 
 Cawley ' would purchase his holding, he should not get it. 
 
 14109. The O'Conoe Don. — Do you think a con- 
 siderable portion of the tenants would be able to ad- 
 vance, say, one-third or one-fourth of the purchase- 
 money 1 — I don't thiak they would. 
 
 14110. Mr. Shaw. — Not the small men; but there 
 are men about who could ? — Yes. 
 
 ■■ 14111. And others would grow up to do it by and 
 
 bye? — Precisely. And if this man who made that 
 money be an industrious, sober man, the neighbours 
 would see that they also improved by continuing on 
 their own holdings. These cases would be a good 
 example ; but, as a rule generally, to 'say expropriate 
 landlords and establish peasant proprietary, especially 
 in the major part of Connaught, is idle. It would not 
 be thirty years until you would want to sell to another 
 class of tenantry, because the lands would be in the 
 hands of a new class and they would be subletting. The 
 new man would grind down his tenants. I know a middle- 
 man where the valuation is £3 3s. for each tenant. 
 There were four tenants and they held at twelve 
 guineas ; but now the rents the unfortunate tenants 
 have to pay is £36 12s. altogether. That middleman 
 put them to all manner of expenses and costs. He 
 had them five or six years at law ; he would be 
 defeated one time on the notice to quit, and another 
 time on the ejectment ; but the poor creatures were 
 plagued out, and The MacDermott was employed to 
 come down special to defend them, and the result was 
 that their means were all swallowed up. 
 
 14112. Chairman. — All gone in costs? — No; but 
 the middleman was not able to pay compensation, 
 and there they remained. There is no provision in 
 the Act to meet such a case. If the man was com- 
 pelled to lodge the costs beforehand, or something like 
 that, it would have a good effect. Another case of a 
 middleman was a case that arose between a tenant 
 named Keddington and a sub-tenant now dead. "When 
 all was over he had not a shilling to get after being put 
 to £20 expense. They were all worried for years with 
 these proceedings and then left in the lands after being 
 lashed with costs. There is no provision in the Land 
 Act for that. Two or three cases came under my notice 
 where the rents were doubled by the poor landlords. 
 Two brothers inherited their father's mountain hold- 
 ing beyond Tubercurry. The landlady inherited the 
 property from her father. She was married to a 
 clergyman of the Established Chiarch in London. 
 The bailiff had a good deal of power under her, and 
 he used to go round and see the amount of stock the 
 tenants had, what number of stacks of hay and oats 
 they had, and if they were doing too well the landlady 
 would squeeze more rent out of them. With the 
 worrying these men got, I had the mortification of 
 seeing one of them in the asylum in this town — he 
 got completely out of his mind. The late chairman 
 for this county, Mr. Hamilton (if every county .court 
 judge would act as he did they would put a good 
 stopper on these grinders of the poor), gave £173 as 
 compensation. It was something like thirty-seven 
 years' purchase he gave the two brothers; but the 
 poor men sent a telegram to London before the decision 
 was given offering £12 for the holding — on the result 
 of their own labour. 
 
 14113. Mr. Shaw.— How much did she want?— 
 She would only give them twenty acres entirely and ten 
 of it mountain attached to what they would reclaim 
 themselves for £25. The consequence was the chair- 
 man awarded that compensation. She would not take 
 the" £12, and from the shock to his system, and from 
 the idea that he would have to go out on the road, he 
 
 became insane and'' was sent to the a:sylum, and^tlie 
 doctors could make nothing of him, but I struck on a 
 plan myself, to pretend I had got a lease for him. I got 
 permission to go into the asylum, and saw him. I 
 said " Tom look at the lease fer you " and the verv 
 moment I did he started and in three weeks he was 
 quite well; but from the shock to the man's feehngs 
 and the fact of his being in the asylum, I would hot 
 allow him to give more than £10 a year. Such moun- 
 tain for reclamation I never travelled. The valuation 
 was £2 10s., and to squeeze out £10. 
 
 14114. What part of the country was that!— 
 Between Tubercurry and Ballina. Midway up in the 
 mountain. There is nothing in the Land Act to meet 
 that, for it empowers the chairman to give disturbance 
 money to the tenant if a fair offer is made and refused ■ 
 but then there is the direction to take into account 
 the length of time during which the tenant has enjoyed 
 the improvements, so that the Land Act was a temp- 
 tation to the bad landlord, and it was nothmg of a 
 check. The temptation was more than human nature 
 could stand. 
 
 14115. Chairman. — You think this question of the 
 rent is the difficulty of the time — how to get a fair rent 
 between the landlord and tenant? — No, security of 
 tenure at a fair rent. That can be very easily accomp- ■ 
 lished I think, if provision were made in the Land 
 Act. If I go to issue a writ out of the superior courts, 
 against a debtor, no matter what the amount of my 
 debt, I must ask the Judge of that superior court for 
 j^ermission to serve the writ ; if the landlord had no 
 power to serve at once a notice to quit, and if he was 
 obliged to go before the County Court Judge and give 
 notice to the tenant that he would make application 
 for permission to serve the notice to quit ; then let the 
 Judge of that court have authority to refuse his per- 
 mission without the landlord showing good grounds, 
 that I think would be an effectual stop. The grounds 
 would be persistence in violating the established rules, 
 and on every estate to have it properly managed; 
 there should be office rules, but I think the sanction 
 of the County Court Judge should be obtained to them 
 just as the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant or Privy 
 Council must be given to the bye-laws of a railway. 
 Por instance as to the use of turbary, the easements of 
 water, and rights of way ; all these rules should be 
 prepared and approved by the County Court Judge, 
 and notice given to the tenant of the intention of 
 seeking the apiproval. Then if the tenant persisted in 
 violating these rules, let the landlord seek permission 
 to serve a notice to quit, and if he persist let him go 
 and pay him no disturbance money, but allow him for 
 his improvements. Now however, the landlord has 
 nothing to do but serve the notice to quit, and then he 
 has complete power. 
 
 14116. Mr. Shaw. — And the temptations arein- 
 nimierable? — Yes, and I would stop that. The policy 
 of the Land Act, the Premier said, was to stop notices 
 to quit. Notices to quit were being served on the 
 farmer, and he could not follow his Industry on account 
 of it, but if the ■ landlord could not serve it without 
 the sanction of the County Court Judge it would be 
 almost equal to fixity of tenure. I know a number of 
 tenants who occupied a portion of land ; the land was 
 divided equally but, there was one portion inferior to 
 the others, and what was deficient in quality was made 
 up in quantity. The man who got an increased 
 quantity improved it, and after the improvement the 
 landlord steps in and revalued. The men who had 
 not improved were left as they were, but the man who 
 had improved his land had his rent raised. Therefore 
 his improvements were confiscated. He was a non- 
 resident landlord. 
 
 Doloncl 
 KiDg-Harman. 
 
 Colonel E. E. King-Harman, Rockingham, Boyle, examined. 
 14117. Chairman. — You are Lord Lieutenant of common, Sligo, Longford, Westmeath and Queen's 
 the county Roscommon and Justice of the Peace for Counties. The total is 72,572 acres, and the valua- 
 TfiTa ' J^f *'^®'**li' i^nd Sligo ?— Yes. tion is a little over £40,100. That is the valuation. 
 
 14U«. Where is your property situated ?— Tn Res- and the rental is a little under that. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 467 
 
 14119. You have genera Jy lived on your property ? 
 — I have. 
 
 14120. In which county is your residence? — My 
 residences are in Roscommon and Longford, but I live 
 chiefly in Roscommon. 
 
 14121. Is there tenant-right on these properties ? — 
 Yes, to a certain extent on all the properties. 
 
 14122. How far does it correspond with the Ulster 
 custom t — I should say there is hardly any affinity. 
 It is a custom that has arisen by my father and grand- 
 father recognizing tenants' improvements, and we let 
 them sell under restrictions. 
 
 14123. It would come under the definition of usage 
 corresponding with the usage of the Ulster custom ? 
 — There are so many Ulster customs. 
 
 14124. The Land Act begins with the Ulster custonj 
 and then goes on to " usages " in Ulster, corresponding 
 in essential particulars, and these usages out of Ulster 
 corresponding in essential particulars 1 — T select the 
 tenant at a limited price. 
 
 14125. Mr. Shaw. — ^What price do you fix"? — 
 Yarying according to the holding. 
 
 14126. You have no fixed sum 1 — No, it varies. 
 
 14127. You settle each case on its own merits ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 14128. Chairmax. — Is there a custom that upon a 
 change of tenancy by sale there is a revision of the 
 rent 1 — Not necessarily. 
 
 14129. Or is there a revision at any fixed period? 
 — 'No, but as a rule we revalue on the determination 
 of a tenancy. 
 
 14130. Mr. Shaw. — Ajid on the dropping of a lease ? 
 — Always on the falling in of a lease. 
 
 14131. Or upon a change of tenancy? — If a man 
 has to be put out ; it does not always foUow in a case 
 of sale. 
 
 14132. Chaieman. — Nor does it necessarily follow 
 there is a rise of rent if there is a revaluation of the 
 property 1 — On the contrary. 
 
 14133. On the falling of old leases do you find 
 where there have been under-tenants that they have 
 been paying higher rent than you would charge them 1 
 — Yery much higher. 
 
 14134. What is the custom in that case? — I tate 
 the under tenant into my immediate tenancy and give 
 them a new rent. 
 
 14135. As a rule it is below what they are paying? 
 — It is almost always below it. 
 
 14136. On the properties where tenant-right exists, 
 does the tenant generally make the improvements 1 — 
 In Longford my father has made almost all the improve- 
 ments. In Roscommon and Sligo the tenants generally 
 made any improvements except buildings, these they 
 have generally been helped with. 
 
 14137. And in cases where you make advances to 
 tenants where you are allowing for materials, have you 
 charged them anything in the way of additional rent 
 for them ? — That would depend very muoh on the cii-- 
 cumstances of the holding. 
 
 14138. You make arrangements with the tenant 
 when he proposes to make improvements ?— Yes ; as a 
 rule we do not make any charge for this assistance to 
 deserving tenants. 
 
 14139. Mr. Shaw. — Have you changed your system 
 since the passing of the Land Act ? — In that respect I 
 have not. I have a book kept by my father of the 
 Newcastle property on which all the improvements 
 made by the landlord were mapped out. (Book pro- 
 duced.) Here is an old map of Cloncallow, County 
 Lont^ford. Here is the state in which it is left with 
 all the improvements marked, with the fences, &c., 
 and if you look over the book you will find it just 
 .stops in 1870. My' father waS alive then, and he 
 stopped there. 
 
 14140. He made all the drains ?— Yes j the expen- 
 diture of the proprietor's own capital is mentioned in 
 each case. 
 
 14141. Chairman. — Do these show where the te- 
 nant has done part of the work ?— No. In this case 
 the tenants have done nothing. 
 
 14142. This is almost all drainage ? — Yes ; drainage, 
 road-making, and squaring fences. 
 
 14143. This is in large farms? — Yes; good-sized 
 holdings. That was not originally kept with any 
 object except for the information of my father as to 
 what he was doing. 
 
 14144. That is the Leinster property? — Yes. 
 
 14145. And in Connaught the tenants have usually 
 these advances made ? — Yes ; generally in any build- 
 ing the tenant builds the walls and we supply the 
 timber and slates. 
 
 14146. And the drainage is generally done by 
 you ? — In Leinster we do the drainage, in Connaught 
 we helj). 
 
 14147. Have you much reclaimable land? — No, 
 except cut away bog. 
 
 14148. What is done there — do you have open 
 drainage ? — Yes. 
 
 14149. And that is done by the tenants? — Yes, 
 generally. 
 
 14150. Do you find any diSiculty in getting them 
 to keep the outfalls ? — Yes, very great diificulty. 
 
 14151. They go back again into the same state ?^- 
 Yes ; I am doing everything now. 
 
 14152. Are you carrying on drainage by advances 
 from the Board of Works ? — Yes. 
 
 14153. Is this in districts where advances were 
 made at the low rate ? — Yes ; I had borrowed previous 
 to the low rate being made. I had borrowed a large 
 sum at the old rate. 
 
 14154. In some cases have you been in the habit of 
 giving this cut away bog to tenants for a term free ? — 
 We give it at a nominal rent of Is., or something like 
 that. 
 
 14155. And is there an arrangement at the time 
 when the new rent is to come into force ? — Yes ; it is 
 always the custom that a man has it for nothing for 
 5 years, and then for Is,, or 5s. for another 5 years. 
 
 14156. Mr. Shaw. — It is mostly in Longford this 
 land is situated 1 — No, there is a good deal in other 
 places. 
 
 14157. Chairman. — Where the tenants do the im- 
 provements, do you consider that they are usually 
 done in a way that is serviceable to themselves, or 
 that they are extravagant in their way of doing them ? 
 — It depends so much on the district. In Roscom- 
 mon the tenants' improvements are chiefly in building 
 houses, and they are too large. In Leinster it is per- 
 fectly different. I have seen a good class of improve- 
 ments being carried out. In a district where I was 
 a few weeks ago I found the tenants had been carrying 
 out a system of drainage on their own farms as well 
 as if we had done it with our own first-class surveyor 
 years ago. 
 
 14158. Have jou a surveyor who gives advice ? — 
 Yes ; and on each property. 
 
 14159. And he would point out the best way of 
 doing it ? — Yes. 
 
 14160. Have you found that they lay out three 
 times the amount necessary? — They very often lay 
 out drains all wrong, and then come to the conclusion 
 that drainage is useless or they make a fresh begin- 
 ning. 
 
 14161. Mr. Shaw. — When you speak of useless 
 fences, is that done with the view of subdivision ? — 
 No, I don't think so. 
 
 14162. Is that on large farms or small ones? — I 
 speak of small farms. 
 
 14163. In cases where you mentioned there is sale 
 by tenants allowed, you put on a limit ? — Yes. 
 
 14164. Chairman. — Some limit? — Always. 
 
 14165. You think free sale without a Hmit would 
 be objectionable? — Yery. 
 
 14166. That is, you would be afraid of the man 
 coming in exhausting his capital ? — Yes, and running 
 himself into debt. 
 
 14167. Do you think that a veto on tte ground of 
 the solvency of the tenant would meet that case ? — 
 I think the landlord should have some veto on the 
 man's character. 
 
 302 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 Colonel 
 King-Harman. 
 
468 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 15, 1880. 
 
 Colonel 
 KiiiL'-Hcarman. 
 
 14168. That, I suppose, you would always main- 
 tain ? — Yes. 
 
 14169. You think the Land Bill of 1870 has been 
 advantageous in preventing differences between land- 
 lord and tenant 1 — 1 think on the whole it has worked 
 well, as a rule I think it has stopped a great deal of 
 capricious eviction. 
 
 14170. We have heard of a case of a small landlord 
 who procee*Sed to evict, and when he went through 
 the process, and when the land claim was made and 
 a large payment awarded to the tenant, he dropped 
 the proceedings, and the tenant had to pay the ex- 
 penses, which were very heavy 1 — I should think that 
 is a rare case. 
 
 14171. It was suggested that no notice to quit 
 should be given without the consent of the County 
 Court Judge 1 — 1 don't think that would work. 
 
 14172. Notice being given to the tenant that such 
 permission was to be applied for, so that he might 
 state his easel — I don't see how the County Coui-t 
 Judge could be a fair judge in a case of the kind. It 
 would place him in a very difficult position, and one 
 he could hardly carry out. 
 
 14173. Mr. Shaw. — There are few evictions that 
 you know of except for non-payment of rent? — Very 
 few. 
 
 14174. On the large estates very few? — Yes, very 
 few. 
 
 14175. How do you get at the value in these cases 
 in which you interfere with the price. Do you ap- 
 point some one to look into the case ? — I have a com- 
 petent surveyor, and I generally, myself and my 
 agent, know sufficient of the case. 
 
 14176. You select the new tenant first? — The two 
 things go together, and generally the outgoing tenant 
 has an offer made to him before he comes to us at 
 all. 
 
 14177. It is known he is leaving? — Yes, and he 
 generally makes his arrangements subject to the land- 
 lord's consent, and the two parties come together into 
 the office and we talk over the matter. 
 
 14178. You generally let him get what he is 
 offered ? — Unless it is very exti-avagant. It is pretty 
 well known what sort of thing is allowed, and there 
 is not much trouble. 
 
 14179. You are influenced by the improvements 
 the man has made? — Yes, and I have veiy often 
 walked over the land myself. If he has it in a good 
 state I don't object to his getting a fair price. 
 
 14180. The O'Conor Don. — Do you confine the 
 sale to tenants ? — No, but it is generally tenants, and 
 I always give the preference to them. 
 
 14181. Chairman. — It has been stated one of the 
 •cliief difficulties has been the distress amongst tenants 
 arising from the bill transactions they get into at a 
 high rate of interest? — I have no doubt about it. 
 
 14182. Mr. Shaw. — That has increased in the 
 ■country ? — Immensely. 
 
 14183. Chairman. — Is there anything that you 
 would suggest ? — I think there is only one possible 
 remedy in the West of Ireland — that is, local courts 
 of bankruptcy, or giving power to the county court 
 judgo to deal as in bankruptcy with all cases of small 
 debts. I think the people have got a load of debt 
 about their necks now which it is uttcily impossible 
 to get rid of ; but if they could pay a reasonable com- 
 position they would start fair, and it would prevent 
 excessive credit being given again. 
 
 14184. Mr. Shaw. — That would lead to a good deal 
 of eviction. The good-will of the farm would be 
 administered by the assignees in bankruptcy ? — You 
 could not prevent it. 
 
 14185. The O'Conor Don. — AVould you apply that 
 to arrears of rent ? — I would let the landlord recover 
 one year, and no more. I would give the landlord 
 the lecovery he has at present — one year. 
 
 14186. Chairman. — Would this be permanent, or 
 a special way of meeting this special difficulty? — I 
 would bring it in as a temporary measure at present. 
 
 14187. Mr. Shaw. — You don't see why it should 
 
 not be a power given to the judge permanently? I 
 
 propose it as a temporary measure. 
 
 14188. The O'Conor Don.— You would treat the 
 landlord's claim as an ordinary debt and not a priority? 
 — Only for one year ; the measure being one affecting 
 the entire country, I would not give the landlord any 
 very great advantage, 
 
 14189. Chairman. — Have you considered the ques- 
 tion of a Government court of arbitration ? — I have, 
 
 14190. You introduced a bill into the House of 
 Commons in 1878 on the subject?-;— Yes, for settling 
 rents. 
 
 14191. What was the measure ? — Providing a Govern- 
 ment land judge whenever it was required in cases of 
 dispute, the tenant to chose one arbitrator, and the 
 landlord another, and if they did not agree the Govern- 
 ment land judge to be called in, the party against 
 whom the decision was to pay the costs. 
 
 14192. So it would not be a general revaluation 
 but only whenever the Government arbitrator -wsis 
 called in? — Whenever a dispute arose. 
 
 14193. The O'Conor Don.— Would you extend 
 that to every class of tenancy ? — I don't see why it 
 should not be. 
 
 14194. Mr. Shaw. — It would be a good thing for 
 the landlords, and prevent many disputes and cases of 
 ill-feeling, for it would be known the rent had been 
 fixed by an impartial person ? — I 'think the provision 
 to make the person against whom the award was 
 given pay the costs, would stop a good deal of litiga- 
 tion. 
 
 14195. The O'Conor Don. — Would you deprive 
 the landlord of all capabilitj^ of ever resuming posses- 
 sion of his land if he had it once let ? — Practically I 
 think that is the case now. 
 
 14196. Would you apply this to every description 
 of tenancy in the country — there are many cases in ' 
 which the landlord has let the land for temporary 
 purposes, and perhaps to a non-resident tenant? — I 
 would apply it to all cases that came under the Act 
 of 1870, all agricultural holdings, of course I exclude 
 demesnes and townparks. 
 
 14197. But in all agricultural holdings you would 
 give the present occupiers perpetuity? — It would 
 practically amount to that. 
 
 14198. Mr. Shaw. — You consider they have that 
 on good estates 1 — Yes. 
 
 14199. Chairman. — You don't mean there is to be 
 one final settlement of rent for ever ? — No. I think 
 the rents should go up and down the same as any 
 other commodity. 
 
 14200. Mr. Shaw.— Periodically and not fitfully ?- 
 Yes. 
 
 14201. Chairman. — Can you give us any informa- 
 tion about jieasant proprietary ? — I don't know of many 
 cases, but I think it has worked very badly indeed 
 wherever I have seen it tried. lam sorry to say I 
 am a strong advocate for it on principle, but whatever 
 practice I have seen of it is bad. 
 
 14202. You think they have been ever-loaded with 
 the debt?— Yes. 
 
 14203. Are the cases you refer to purchases under 
 the Church Act ? — Yes, chiefly under the Church Act. 
 I have seen cases in Longford and Cavan, and down 
 in the south. 
 
 14204. Small holdings ?— Yes, extremely small 
 holdings, but not all. I have known a case in 
 Armagh where the men were solvent before, and now 
 they are in very poor circumstances, and these were 
 large farms. 
 
 14205. Mr. Shaw. — That was up on the moun- 
 tainous places where the Church lands were situated 
 chiefly in Ireland? — Yes. 
 
 14206. We had evidence that they were rather 
 better off' than before in some of these places ? — I was 
 down there. 
 
 14207. The O'Conor Don.— You inquired into this 
 on the spot ? — I went down for the purpose of inquir- 
 
MI^NUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 469 
 
 14208. Chaiujian. — Do you know whether they 
 were paying charges higher than the rent was 
 before? — It was so, because they had borrowed the 
 money. 
 
 14209. Were the actual instalments in excess of 
 the former rent? — Yes. 
 
 14210. Mr. Shaw. — That and the money they 
 borrowed? — No, that itself. 
 
 14211. Chairman. — Exclusive of the money they 
 had themselves 1 — Yes. 
 
 14212. That arose probably from the high rent 
 tliey had to pay before ? — It is high and it might be, 
 but they were solvent before. 
 
 14213. Mr. Shaw. — That was not glebe land, it 
 was ordinary Church land ? — Yes. 
 
 14214. Whenever a clerg3'man had a glebe he let 
 it as high as ever he could ? — Yes. 
 
 14215. Chairjian. — I suppose the last two or three 
 years effected these men very much ] — Yes ; it effected 
 every class. 
 
 14216. Still from those cases 3-ou know you would, 
 be against giving facilities for extending the present 
 system of peasant proprietorship ? — I don't think it 
 has had a fair trial. I would give it a trial on a 
 better scale, and in selected cases. 
 
 14217. Mr. Shaw. — You would not extend it to 
 poor tenants in all directions 1 — No. 
 
 14218. Give it to the man who had something to 
 fall back upon ? — Yes. 
 
 14219. Chairman. — Do you think there is much 
 desire amongst tenants for that power instead of 
 security at fair rents 1 — No ; I think security at fair 
 vents is what the majority of them i-eally ask for. 
 
 14220. And they really understand what the two 
 things mean 1 — A great m.any in the West think they 
 arc to get the land for nothing at all, but amongst 
 reasonable farmers they want security for improve- 
 ments, and security of tenancy. 
 
 14221. And the intelligent men know that these 
 examples might be followed by those who are not at 
 present in favour of the scheme ? — Yes. 
 
 14222. Ml-. Shaw. — And you think that would 
 settle the question ? — I think so. 
 
 14223. The O'Conor Don. — Could you give us any 
 estimate of the amount expended on your property 
 dui-ing the last ten or twenty years in improvements ? 
 — My father expended about £'40,000. 
 
 14224. You are secretary of the Land Committee 1 
 ■ — Yes. 
 
 1422.5. And you have been getting, up details of 
 what the proprietors have been doing on their different 
 estates 1 — Yes. 
 
 14226. What means have you taken to verify these 
 ■statements 1 — It is almost impossible to verify the 
 statements more than I can verify the statement I am 
 giving now. We know the class of men who are 
 giving it, and probably it is correct. 
 
 14227. You propose only to furnish the aggregate 
 amount expended? — We propose giving you tlie 
 aggregate amount, and we propose giving you, if you 
 reqiiii-e it, the names of the different proprietors from 
 whom the information has been got, but not the 
 names of the properties on which the expenditure has 
 been made. 
 
 14228. I think I might ask you in connexion with 
 this subject how much you have expended yourself? — 
 My ftither expended about £40,000. I have not been 
 veiy long in possession, and exclusive of what I may 
 be laying out now — about XGO,000 — I have expended 
 about £5,000 in round numbers. 
 
 14229. In the case of reclamation of waste lands, 
 do you consider the enjoyment of the land at a nominal 
 rent ovight to compensate the tenant for reclaiming it ? 
 — I think so. 
 
 14230. And that the landlord would be entitled 
 then to put on a rent somewhat in proportion to the 
 improved value of the land?^He should give the 
 tenant full time. 
 
 14231. Mr. Shaw. — You would not put on the 
 full rent ?— No. 
 
 14232. A rent that would recognize the landloi-d's oa is, isso. 
 ownership and the tenant's rightsin the property ? — _ . ~ 
 Yes. The landlord might reasonably say this tenant King-IIannan 
 came to me asking for this land which was then mine ; 
 
 if I had not given it I might have improved it myself 
 
 and have had all the benefit myself, and I think the 
 
 ■ landlord should have a fair share of the improvement. 
 
 14233. Have you any land on your property that 
 could be made use of for any great reclamation scheme ?. 
 — No, none. 
 
 14234. It is all bits of waste attached to or adjoining 
 farms ?— Yes, and I have them working up the hilf- 
 side as far as they can, but I think they are rather 
 going back than otherwise. 
 
 14235. Has there been any general raising of rent 
 
 on your property for the last ten or twenty years ? 
 
 No. 
 
 14236. You have not raised it at all? — Yes; I 
 have raised it in certain cases where leases fell out. 
 
 14237. Chairman. — I suppose four years ago you 
 covild have raised it without very much outcry about 
 it ? — I could have raised it, and it would not have 
 been exorbitant. 
 
 14238. The O'Conob Don.— If you had had the 
 lands in your own hands you could have got higher 
 rents without their being considered exorbitant ? — - 
 Yes, much higher. 
 
 14239. You mentioned that you had some cases of 
 middlemen holding under you ? — Yes. 
 
 14240. Have you had that to any great extent ? — ■ 
 Well, considering the short time I have had the pro- 
 perty, a curiously large number of leases have fallen in. 
 
 14241. The rents their tenants paid were very much 
 beyond the rents paid you by these middlemen ? — Yes. 
 As a general rule the I'cnts were terrific, and very 
 often small tenants 'lia^ to work at ridiculously small 
 wages. In one case the tenants had to work for 6d. • 
 a day whenever they were called upon, and that was 
 not confined to the tenant himself, but the middleman 
 would call upon the son or davighter of the farmer to 
 come and work also. 
 
 14242. Is there much discontent amongst that class 
 of tenantry? — I never heard of any outcry until the 
 lease fell in, and then they came to me in a body, the 
 tenants on one hand and the landlord on the other, and 
 the landlord would complain loudly that if I interfered 
 he wovild not be able to get his labour done. 
 
 14243. Mr. Shaw.— He thought he had rights in 
 their labour ? — Yes. I told him if he paid a fair 
 day's wages he could always get a fair day's labour. 
 
 14244. The O'Conor Don.— Did you find this right 
 of sale on other estates as well as your own 1 — It had 
 grown up there very much since the passing of the 
 Act of 1870. 
 
 14245. Since the Act?— Yes, I think so. I think 
 a great many men who were opposed to anything in 
 the way of sale, and opposed to the Act of 1870, when 
 it was passed, recognized that there Avas a property 
 vested in the tenants, and they allowed it to be sold 
 under certain restrictions. I know Colonel Ffolliott for 
 one, never allowed sale until 1870, and since 1870 he 
 has allowed something in the same lines as I do myself. 
 
 14246. Had you any difficulty in getting your rents 
 last year and this year ? — Very great. 
 
 14246. Mr. Shaw.' — It is better now with the 
 season we have had ? — I think the people are disposed 
 to pay. 
 
 14247. Chairman. — Have you had any difficulty 
 with these men under the middlemen 1 — Except that 
 they were very poor. 
 
 14248. Did you make an abatement? — I made no 
 general abatement. I made abatements according to 
 the claims they had. Mj' land is let very low, and where 
 the chief pinch was felt was in the very small holdings, 
 but I did not see that twenty per cent, of an abate- 
 ment would help a man who only paid £5 or £6, and 
 I had to do without the rent entirely. 
 
 14249. Mr. Shaw. — You gave seed and labour? 
 
 Yes. 
 
 14250. How are the seeds doing? — I got champions 
 
470 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 15, 1880. 
 
 Colonel 
 King-Harman. 
 
 and ttey seem to be very good. I got a quantity of 
 Scotch and Englisli oats, and I never saw such a crop. 
 
 14251. The O'Conor Don.— Do you find any diffi- 
 culty in getting any rents ? — I think they are generally 
 inclined to pay a year's rent. 
 
 14252. Those who did not pay last year ? — Yes, and 
 they are thankful for having the indulgence shown 
 them, and I think the feelibg is good, , especially con- 
 sidering the agitation. 
 
 14253. Mr. Shaw. — It has improved very much 1 — 
 Very much of late. There was a land meeting held 
 in Boyle on last Saturday, and I did not receive as 
 much rent before, as within three days afterwards. I 
 think it was a sort of protest of my tenantry against the 
 meetings. As to the middlemen letting their holdings 
 at exorbitant rents, I don't know whether you have 
 my evidence as to the way the farmers let in con-acre. 
 I -have known many cases during the last year, where 
 I let land at fi'om twenty shillings to twenty-five shill- 
 ings an acre, and got no rent, while the farmers let it 
 in con-acre at from £5 to £7 an acre, and got it. 
 
 14254. Got it in labour 1 — Partly in cash and partly 
 in labour. Sometimes altogether in cash. That I con- 
 sider to be very common in Roscommon and Sligo. 
 
 14255. The O'Conoe Don. — It is very common to 
 
 Sublet those hbldiligs in con-acre on a bad year ? Yes 
 
 very common. ' 
 
 14256. Andtoletthegrassof it?— Yes. 
 
 14257. Do they apply for leave to do that?— No 
 they do not as a rule. . ' 
 
 14258. Mr. Shaw. — Are the labourers well paid J 
 Miserably paid, and badly housed. 
 
 14259. Chairman. — Holding from farmers ?— -Yes 
 under the farmers! 
 
 14260. As part of their wages 1 — Yes. 
 
 14261. The O'Conoe Don.— What is the rate of 
 wages ?— It varies very much. At harvest time men 
 get as good about me as in England, and at others get 
 sixpence and eightpence at the outside. 
 
 14262. Do they get potatoe ground free? — No, but 
 they are shifted about whenever or wherever the 
 farmer wants a piece of land reclaimed. They put a 
 labourer in on a piece of waste land, and let hha 
 reclaim it for some time, and then take it from him. 
 
 14263. Farmers very often reclaim bog that way! 
 —Yes. 
 
 14264. And then they put the labourer out after a 
 few years when he has brought the place iato a sort of 
 cultivation ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Cocliran 
 Davys. 
 
 M •. Cochran Davys, Solicitor, Sligo, examined. 
 
 14265. Mr. Shaw. — You are a solicitor in this 
 town 1 — Yes. 
 
 14266. And you are largely employed by the land- 
 lords ? — Yes. 
 
 14267. Do you hold any public situation? — lam 
 Solicitor to the Grand Jury. 
 
 14268. Are you acquainted with the action of the 
 landlords generally towards their tenants ? — Yes, I 
 have been acting for them for the last ten years. 
 
 14269. Is there anything like the Ulster custom on 
 the estates of the landlordsfor whom you areconcerned? 
 —No. 
 
 14270. Are the tenantsallowed to sell their lioldings? 
 — There is one landlord who does allow them, but I 
 don't think one landlord makes a custom. As a rule they 
 don't allow it. They give somethmg upon getting 
 250ssession. I think Sir Henry Gore Booth is the only 
 one who allows it. I act for Colonel Cooper, and he 
 does not allow it. Sir Henry does, but he insists on 
 a clause being inserted in the agreement against the 
 tenant claiming for the money paid on coming in. 
 Major Wood- Martin and his mother insist on the same 
 thing. 
 
 14271. The O'Conob Don. — Do they have a written 
 agreement? — Itis a regular deed drawn by the landlord, 
 in which he allows assignment on conditions therein- 
 after mentioned, and it goes on to covenant them out 
 of that clause in the Land Act which pro^'ides that the 
 incoming tenant shall get something in lieu of what he 
 paid. The landlord makes nothing by it, he knows 
 what he has, but he does not know what he is to get. 
 
 14271a. Mr. Shaw. — The landlord looks to the man's 
 character 1 — It is not always a good thing to change 
 tenancy. If the landlord has a good name, and the 
 tenant wants to sell, he has always plenty of people 
 who are willing to buy. These people have a certain 
 sum of money, and if they spend the whole of it, as 
 they often do, they have no money to stock the farm, 
 or to carry on the farming operations. I think the 
 tenant requires capital, he must pay his labourers, 
 and put his crops into the ground, arid if a man comes 
 in with every penny piece out of his pocket, how can 
 he carry on his business. 
 
 14272. Are there many changes of tenancy ?-r-Very 
 few. 
 
 14273. And very few evictions? — Almost nil. 
 Evictions for over-holding and all that. The landlord 
 never brings a notice to quit except the tenants are 
 unreasonable. I have known cases Avhere roads were 
 being made, and they refused to allow sand to be got, 
 although it did not injure them, and I have jjiven 
 
 lessons myself to some of them, but they generally give 
 in. Witli the majority of proprietors here, I am not 
 aware of anything in the nature of capricious eviction, 
 it is always for non-jjayment of rent. I have been in 
 about one-third of the cases in the land court here since 
 the Act came into operation. In one case there was a 
 tenant of Sir Henry — it was his father's case, he was agent 
 at the time — the tenant insisted on claiming a whole 
 lotof bog inhis neighbourhood. Sir Henry served notice 
 to quit, and the case came on at Ballymote, and when 
 the case was gone into, there was an offer to pay an 
 increase of fifty per cent, on the rent, and I induced 
 Sir Henry to accept the offer in a modified form, and 
 they are satisfied. There was another case, it was 
 near the boundary of Mr. Wood Martin's property, 
 where a tenant had a lease, which we asked to see. 
 " We have not got your lease, but we are instructed 
 it is out," but he refused to show it, or give any infor- 
 mation. The agent spoke to him, but it was no 
 use, and we brought an ejectment as if the lease 
 was out, and when it was produced in court, we 
 found it was out, but we failed then, because the case 
 was only brought as an experiment. The man brought 
 his claim, and got a certain amount for disturbance. 
 He said he built, and claimed for a whole lot of 
 buildings which were built by the predecessor of the 
 landlord. He got his compensation, and he was put out. 
 
 14273a. It was a small holding? — No, it was rather 
 a valuable holding, close to the town. He put himself 
 out, and the Chairman so told him — that the lease was 
 common property of the landlord and tenant, and that 
 he should take the consequences. 
 
 14274. Was there any intention of increasing the 
 rent 1 — -No. The farm was kept in the landlord's hands 
 for a couple of years, and it was let since. 
 
 1 4274a. At a higher rent ? — I think not. There was 
 a land claim by the Master of the Workhouse at Dro- 
 more West. 'That man to my knowledge would never 
 pay his rent without an ejectment for non-payment. 
 Mr. Campbell got tired of this, and served a notice to 
 quit. In my office he gave the heads of what he was 
 willing to do if left in possession, and he promised to 
 execute an agreement to that effect, but wjien I wrote 
 to him afterwards he told me he would not sign any- 
 thing, although he had promised it. It was then 
 decided against him, and I think when he paid his 
 arrears of rent he had about £6 or £8 to get. The next 
 caseis betweena middleman and a tenant. Aprominent 
 Land Leaguer in this county ejected several tenants to 
 get possession of their land, and I appeared for the 
 tenants He tried to evict them sevei-al times but 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 471 
 
 failed. . At last He) brought Ms ejectment properly. 
 We filed our claim : one got £95, and another £85, 
 and I think there was a third, but the gentleman never 
 paid compensation to the tenants, and they are in pos- 
 session to this very day. They reclaimed a lot of bog, 
 no doubt, and, poor creatures, they have nothing at all 
 to live on, for he put them in to reclaim it. He was a 
 little late iir ejecting them, and the Land Act came in, 
 and now he has to pay £95 to one of them if he is to 
 wet rid of them. That was a case of Luke Cdlleran, 
 Owen Feehily was the claimant and Luke Colleran the 
 respondent, and the note I have is, " he is a middle- 
 man, a prominent member of the Land League. 
 The claimant reclaimed a lot of bog, and respondeirt 
 wanted to get it back ; he served an ejectment, and that 
 man got £95 ; there was an appeal and it was confirmed. 
 Pat Feehily against same, like result ; he got £85." 
 
 14275. They have not got costs from him'? — They 
 have not got anything. He cannot put them out 
 without the compensation. There was another case I 
 took, Michael Tymon v. J. B. O'Brien, total compen- 
 sation £21 8s. 10(7. The respondent is a middleman 
 and a Ballymote shopkeeper. He has a small bit of 
 laud and pays a head rent for it or none at all. He 
 has some tenants on it, and when they got it into con- 
 dition a little bit, and had reclaimed it, he tried to put 
 one man out, and he got £21. He paid that and got 
 possession. Bryan Golden i'. James Begley : this was 
 a case between tenant and tenant. Coffey v. Powell, 
 Cofiey is a small shopkeeper near Gurteen, Mr. Powell 
 has some small property in this county. This man 
 built a house on some part of the land, and when he 
 built it, Mr. Coffey said it was not suitable and he must 
 give it up. The man got compensation. It was, I think, 
 rather a hard case. He had to give up the place. I 
 think he kept it at an increased rent or something like 
 that. Our present Chairman is a gentleman fond of com- 
 promises. There was another case. People named 
 Milmo proceeded against Mr. M&,cDonagh, who wanted 
 to put them out. Milmo was trustee for some girl who 
 hadaninterest in the place, but his claim was not allowed. 
 
 14276. Mr. Shaw. — Are you agent for some pro- 
 perty up at the lake ? — I was, but not now. For 
 thirteen or fourteen years I was agent for the former 
 proprietor, the owner in fee, and after his death there 
 was a deed,' a family arrangement between the various 
 pai-ties, and I was asked to act as trustee, and I was 
 not very wise to myself, for I left out -the clause 
 entitling me to fees, and as I did not vrish to act for 
 nothing, I gave it up. 
 
 14277. The people complained of the rents as exces- 
 sive 1. — I am inclined to. think they ^re slightly exces- 
 sive in some instances. 
 
 14278. They are sometimes flooded ? — Occasionally. 
 There is one of them a rather troublesome man, named 
 Ward, not a pleasant tenant, but I think on the whole 
 they are excessive. I think the land is not extra 
 good. Of course there is good in some places, but I 
 am inclined to think it is let up to its value. 
 
 14279. It is hard to live on it and pay rent ? — The 
 rents are high for the quality of the land. When I was 
 ao-ent I made an offer to the tenants to have the lands 
 revalued, but they did not like it and objected to it 
 very strongly. I wanted to see whether it was really 
 as they said, and they tenants would not have it. 
 
 14280. That was in the good times ? — Yes. 
 
 14281 . And they were afraid it would be advanced ? 
 —Yes, and there was no arrangement between them. 
 
 14282. Has there been mucli raising of rent in the 
 county. No, not as far as I know ; I heard of one or 
 two cases, but not on the large properties. 
 
 14283. Are the tenants much in debt outside their 
 landlords 1 — I am afraid they are very much. 
 
 14284. Beyond their landlords ? — Yes, to banks 
 and shopkeepers and everybody. 
 
 14285. ChaibmaN. — Are the shopkeepers, pressing 
 for their money very hard 1 — Yes, up to the time this 
 land agitation has assumed its present dangerous stage ; 
 now they are doing it in a half hearted way ; some of 
 -them are going on platforms, spouting, and at the same 
 
 time issuing processes ; others are afraid, and , Oct. 15, isso. 
 some are trying what time will do in bringing about jj-j. c^jan 
 a difference. The County Court Judge spoke very Davys, 
 strongly in one or two cases of the greed of the shop- 
 keepers, and told them distinctly if landlords acted as 
 they were acting a cry would go from one end of 
 Ireland to the other. That is true enough ; some of 
 the shopkeepers are so miserably poor they have not 
 money and they are pressed by the wholesale merchants. 
 
 14286. What were the cases he alluded to ?— The 
 pressure of small shopkeepers on persons who owed 
 them money, and refusing to give them time, and 
 when a decree is pronounced for a small amount some 
 of the poor people ask for time, and they won't get it. 
 
 14287. Mr. Shaw. — Do you find they give bills 
 for these debts I — No, not for goods, except very 
 occasionally. The shop cases very generally stand on 
 their own merits. 
 
 14288. The O'Oonoe Don. — Can you give us any 
 idea generally of the number of evictions that have 
 taken place in the district last year 1 — Yes. I find, 
 beginning in 1872, and coming down to the end of 
 July, 1880, there were from all causes 1,012 ejectment 
 decrees pronounced by the Chairman ; that is for 8| 
 years. The fourth sessions of 1880, have not come 
 
 , on yet, they begin in December and January, and go 
 on for four sessions; but 1,012 were pronounced in 
 the time mentioned, and of these 1,012, 725 were 
 for non-payment, 265 for over-holding and on title ; 
 most of these cases arise between tenants themselves — 
 persons coming in and squatting, and a great many of 
 the cases arise on quan-els between the parties them- 
 selves. In some cases where the farmers have under 
 tenants they want to get rid of them,, and T venture 
 to say that of the 265 cases, half are amongst the 
 people themselves, middlemen and small farmers. 
 
 ■ Then there were twenty-two permissive occupancy 
 ejectments ; there were put into the hands of the 
 sheriff 269 out of 725 cases for non-payment ; the 
 rest were settled ; of course the total entries were a 
 great deal more, but in a great many cases ejectments 
 are merely served to bring the tenant to his bearings. 
 The landlord brings it for the purpose of making the 
 tenant pay. He is not such a fool as to ask the 
 tenant to pay costs where he is not able to do so. 
 Then out of the 265 for over-holding and title, 124 
 reached the hands of the sheriff ; which is a much 
 larger proportion; for these are things that are intended 
 to be carried out, and five permissive occupancy cases. 
 Of the total decrees taken out from 1872 to July, 1880, 
 only 398 ever reached the hands of the sheriff 
 altogether, and of this number thirty-eight were never 
 put in force at all ; that leaves 360 of a balance, and 
 of this 360 the tenants were reinstated in 232 cases 
 by the sheriff at once as caretakers, and every body 
 knows there is hardly ever a really final eviction for 
 non-payment. Every one of the tenants out of the 
 269, came in again ; not more than a dozen go out ; 
 the landlord is not at all anxious to get rid of a tenant 
 if he can keep him in and there are very few cases on 
 large properties. 
 
 14289. During the last year how many cases were 
 there? — In 1879, the total entries were 203. I will give 
 the return of decrees since 1870 ; in 1870 there were 
 45; in 1871, 39; in 1872, 58; in 1873, 93; in 1874, 
 102; in 1875, 116; in 1876, 119; in 1877, 90; in 1878, 
 146 ; in 1879, 203 ; that is the decrees pi'onounced ; 
 and then for the period of 1880 there were 85. 
 
 14290. Out of the 203 how many were put into the 
 sheriff's hands ?— Only eighty reached the sheriff's 
 hands : seventy-three for non-payment of rent. 
 
 14291. And how many of the seventy-three were 
 reinstated as caretakers 1—By the sheriff at once, I 
 think there was not one turned out ; fourteen were 
 not executed at all, being withdrawn afterwards by the 
 
 parties. 
 
 14292. Out of the seventy-four how many do you 
 think were actually turned out 1 — I don't thiak that, 
 takinw one year with another, there are ever three 
 tenants in.a year eventually lost their holdings. 
 
'47. 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 . oa. 15, isso. 
 
 Mr, Cocliran 
 Daws. 
 
 14293. You don't think tliat last year there were 
 three occupiers put out in the county ? — I don't think 
 there were probably. There was a certain amount of 
 harm done to the tenants last year. They were taught 
 to resist any process of law, and taught not to care 
 about redemption, and to treat the whole thing with 
 defiance. Some of them went back into possession, 
 and treated the whole thing with contempt. In one 
 case I know the landlord made an arrangement with 
 the tenant and he went back and planted the farm. 
 The parish priest said he would be responsible for 
 the man. Seme of the tenants, owing to bad advice 
 as to the ejectment, have let their time go by; but J 
 do not believe three of them on 'the whole year will 
 lose their holdings. 
 
 14294. Mr. Shaw. — There have been no pui'chases 
 by tenants of their holdings in this county ? — Not to 
 my knowledge. There was one case in which the 
 property was broken up for the j)ui'pose, but no one 
 tried to purchase it. There was one matter I wished 
 to direct attention to — namely, the hardship that 
 arises in administering the assets of intestates. It 
 works great harm amongst the people themselves. 
 Hitherto, and up to the Land Act, the landlord could 
 treat with the tenants and put in the eldest son, in- 
 sisting that the mother was to live there — she was 
 named in the receipts and he was to have the place. 
 After the Land Act fellows got it into their heads that 
 there was a certain value attaching to distui-bance, 
 and that if they once got in they should get compen- 
 sation when going out ; and I know two or three 
 cases of great hardship from that. There was one 
 case on Captain Armstrong's property. A man went 
 to America twenty years ago because there was a load 
 of debt on the place. The mother struggled on, and 
 when one of the daughters came to be married the 
 landlord gave leave to the husband to come in, pro- 
 vided the debts were paid, as he would not allow the 
 people about the place to suffer. The man agreed to 
 pay the debts, and the old woman handed over the 
 farm to the landlord's bailiff, and he handed it to the 
 new tenant ; and this went on until the Land Act 
 passed, and then this gentleman who* was in America 
 came home and took out administration to the father 
 after the mother's death, and he put them all out, and 
 the Chairman said he was bound to decide no one had 
 
 a legal estate in the land until this man had adminis- 
 tered. This man put them out and the landlord 
 served him with notice to quit. However, after the 
 notice was served, he took a settlement. The next 
 case was that of a widow who gave up possession to 
 her landlord on the marriage of her son. These were 
 tenants of Mr. Gethin's. The widow's name wais 
 Gillmor. The ■ landlord gave the man a lease of the 
 farm and the money went into the pocket of the old 
 woman, and things remained that way until the death 
 of the young man, and when he died the old woman 
 gave a good deal of trouble. She took out adminis- 
 tration and repudiated the deed, and declared she had 
 never assented to the lease. The Chairman ,'said the 
 facts were against her, as her signature was to the 
 deed ; but inasmuch as she was not vested with the 
 proper authority at the time to give up possession he 
 must decide according to the law in her favour and 
 put out the young widow. 
 
 14295. Chairman". — Do you think there ouojitto 
 be a time within which some one should administtt 
 and, in default, the County Court Judge to appoint 
 some one ? — I think the real plan would be to cive 
 succession to the eldest son, if there is to be .succes- 
 sion. Often the fanii sold that way is left worth 
 nothing to anybody. A miserable farm of two, three, 
 or ten acres is left. They take out administration 
 and every one comes in to get their share of it, and if 
 it is sold at. all it is not worth anything to the man 
 who gets it : by the time he gets the ftfth or sixth the 
 valye is eaten away. Therefore, I think they should 
 not be subject to administration at all, and that the 
 old estate rules are the best rules in such cases. 
 
 14296. It depends on the estate? — Yes; but both 
 these occurred on good estates. Mr. H. Campbell, 
 who lives in this town, has property on -which a man 
 died fifty years ago. He left two sons, one who was 
 blind, and he made a fiddler of him and sent him off 
 to earn his bread ; anfl he was doing very well in Bel- 
 fast when he heard suddenly of the Land Act, and he 
 came back and brought an administration summons 
 against his brother who got the miserable two or 
 three acres, and it was only that the Chairman was a 
 strong Chairman and would not allow it, the other 
 man would have lost everything. 
 
 Sir Henry W. 
 Gore Booth. 
 
 14297. Chaikmax. — You are 
 estates in this county 1 — Yes. 
 
 14298. What is the extent of them 1. — One contains 
 11,424 acres, and the other, 12,815 acres. 
 
 14299. You succeeded your father in 1876 1 — Yes. 
 
 14300. And you had been acting as agent before 
 that t — Yes, for six years. 
 
 14301. On the subject which has been mentioned as 
 to succession, have you any rule on your estate 1 — Yes, 
 the holding goes to the eldest son, and in default of 
 the eldest son, to the second son. 
 
 14302. Do you find any difficulty in enforcing that 1 
 . — Not up to the present. I have sometimes had cases 
 Avhere they showed a little stiffness, but by sending an 
 ejectment, we have settled the matter in the way Mr. 
 Davys has described. But, where the eldest son has 
 gone to America, or anything like that, we always 
 select the second. 
 
 14303. You have had no trouble aboutit ? — I have 
 had to show my teeth once or twice. 
 
 14304. We were told yesterday by some of your 
 tenants that there could not be a better landlord in 
 Ireland, but there was one case in which it was said 
 a lease had fallen in, and the tenants were left at the 
 very high rents they were paying to a middleman. 
 They thought they should be brought under some new 
 arrangement ? — That is at Dunfore. They are practi- 
 cally paying the same rent for thirty years. The land 
 IS excellent. I have somewhat similar in my own 
 hands, and if I was to gi^e £2 an acre for feny land I 
 
 Sir Henry W. Gore Booth, Lisadill, Sligo, examined, 
 the owner of two 
 
 would give it for this. I don't think they are very 
 much above the Ordnance valuation ; they may be 
 slightly. 
 
 14305. They are much above the tenants on the 
 neighbouring property, and they think you ought to 
 consider them 1 — It is one of the largest populated 
 towns in the district, and, perhaps, one of the most 
 flourishing. 
 
 14306. Mr. Shaw. — Are the tenants the same num 
 ber as when you got it, or have they diminished !— 1 
 think they are practically the same. One man has 
 just lately given up a piece of land there. 
 
 14307. I suppose last year they felt the hard times ? 
 — Being higher let than the rest of my land I gave a 
 greater reduction. 
 
 14308. They are small holdings ?— I should think 
 about thirty acres would be the largest. 
 
 14309. Chairman. — You have over 1,000 tenants? 
 — I am not quite sure. I think 1,150. 
 
 14310. Do you allow sale of holdings in case 
 tenants wish to go 1 — I have lately allowed some sales, 
 but I have limited it, and keep my own choice of 
 tenant. I have been only trying lately to see how it 
 would act. There have been about eight cases alto- 
 gether. 
 
 14311. Your object in keeping the approval is to 
 insure solvent tenants 1 — Yes. 
 
 14312. Have you any deed drawn up? — Yes, pro- 
 viding against any payment to the incoming tenant _ 
 
 14313. We have heard that complained of! — K is 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 473 
 
 only protecting myself. If a man is allowed to sell lie 
 cannot complain. 
 
 14314. You don't restrict tim as to the sale? I 
 
 must approve of the tenant. 
 
 14315. You have never had any evictions except in 
 some cases for non-payment of rent ? — No. The entire 
 property is £2,000 or £3,000 under the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 14316. Have you had any revaluation of the pro- 
 perty, or any part of it 1 — In a few cases, but 
 very little increase has been made. At present 
 I have a number of leases falling out, but as 
 the times are bad, I am going to wait until they get 
 better — a number of old 1805 leases. 
 
 14317. On the dropping of old leases you have a 
 revaluation, and afterwards, whatever time you think 
 is a suitable time, you fix the rents 1 — Yes. When a 
 lease falls out I always have a revaluation, and, if the 
 land bears it I have an additional rent put on. I am 
 usually one of three valuators myself, to see that things 
 are right, and am opposed to high letting ; in fact I 
 am usually the lowest valuator. 
 
 14318. There is no general revaluation of the pro- 
 perty 1 — -Not in my time. 
 
 14319. Do you make any allowance towards build- 
 ings or other improvements 1 — Oh, yes, it is the rule 
 of the LisabiU property. The man generally gets lime 
 and door cases, and stone, and timber for the roof In 
 many cases, I have actually paid the price of the 
 house. 
 
 14320. "When you have done so do you put on in- 
 terest to recoup yourself ? — No. I don't think I have 
 ever done so. 
 
 14321. Do you think there are many leases made 
 since the Land Act ? — I only came in at the time of 
 the Land Act, and I don't think there is much 
 change. 
 
 14322. You have not changed your system of help- 
 ing tenants ? — No, I have not. 
 
 14323. It is very much as it was 1 — Yes, I think 
 so. 
 
 14324. With more care as to proof that it was done 
 by yourself where you make the advances 1 — Yes. 
 
 14325. Mr. Shaw. — ^You keep a register of these? 
 — There is a kind of register. 
 
 14326. Chairmajj. — As regards purchase by tenants 
 you say that speaking for yourself you would be glad 
 of auy legislative measure which would enable you to 
 sell at a fair price and enable the tenant to purchase ? 
 — -Certainly. 
 
 14327. Are you tenant for life? — I am tenant for 
 life of one property, but the other, owing to mortgages, 
 it woul^ be very diflScult to sell without an Act of 
 Parliament. 
 
 14328. Mr. Shaw. — A general Act applymg to all 
 such cases would relieve you? — Yes. I would be 
 happy to sell every acre, it would be a great saving to 
 
 me if I could get twenty-three years purchase on the 
 ordnance valuation, one-fourth added. If I could sell 
 at anything lilce a fair price it woiild be a great advan- 
 tage to me. 
 
 14329. Would many of your tenants be able to pay 
 a third or a fourth ? — It would be very hard to say, 
 I should say about one hundred might. 
 
 14330. Chairman. — Would you wish to sell separate 
 holdings to such men as wished to buy, without selling 
 the whole property ?— No. I would not sell unless I 
 could get townlands sold, because the inconvenience 
 would be so great. You would have these men fight- 
 ing with the other tenants ; and you would have no 
 hold on them ; they would ruin the tenants beside 
 them and themselves. 
 
 14331. In places where there was a sale to the 
 tenants would you make restrictions against subdivi- 
 sion and subletting ? — Certainly. 
 
 14332. Woiild they be very injurious to the tenants 
 themselves as well as to the country ? — Yes ; they 
 would inarry eacli son into the holding, and give him 
 a garden, and collect them all round themselves ; in 
 fact in my experience they always want to do that. It 
 is a very kind feeling no doubt, to have your family 
 about you, but it leads to great poverty. Only the 
 other day a man came and wanted to split up his farm, 
 and I gave him the above as a reason for not doing 
 so. There is a feeling that they like to have their 
 fanrilies about them until they fight. 
 
 14333. Family quarrels are very troublesome? — - 
 They continually come to me to settle them ; in fact 
 it has gone so far that I am obliged to keep a book for 
 the purpose. I have sometimes arranged a marriage, 
 and many marriage disputes. 
 
 14334. You think tenants, if let alone, would like 
 paternal government ? — I think it would be the most 
 successful in the end, provided they get fair play. 
 
 14335. Mr. Shaw. — You have no trouble with 
 them as a general rule ? — No. 
 
 14336. You find them industrious and anxious to 
 do their best ? — I cannot say industrious. I am very 
 fond of them, but I can hardly say they are industrious. 
 If they had more industry they would do better. 
 They usually smoke their pipes from the first of 
 December to the first of February ; then they put the 
 crop in, and then they, cut the turf; then the hay 
 and then the corn, and then go to the pipe again, if 
 they devoted the winter to a few improvements in 
 their farms it would be better. 
 
 14337. How do you account for it ? — It is the 
 natural inclination — the natural character of Irishmen. 
 As a rule the Irishman has not the persistency to go on. 
 
 14338. They are afraid of their rents being raised? 
 ■ — No. No Irishman can do steady work as a rule. 
 For myself, I would rather do a great deal of work to- 
 day and have a holiday to-morrow., They like to do 
 a great piece of work to-day and do nothing to-morrow.. 
 
 Od. 15, 1880. 
 
 Sir Henry W. 
 Gore-Booth 
 
 Mr. Francis M. Olpherts, Mount Shannon, Sligo, examined. 
 
 14339. Chairman. — You are agent to Mr. Wynne, 
 Mr. Duke, and Mr. M'Calmont ?— Yes. The Wynne 
 estate is in Sligo and North Leitrim. Mr. M 'Calmont's 
 and Mr. Duke's in Tireragh, county of Sligo. 
 
 14340. Are the tenants allowed to sell their hold- 
 ings ? — Yes. 
 
 14341. Universally? — Yes. There has been no 
 sale since I had anything to do with the properties of 
 Mr. M'Calmont or Mr. Duke, but it would be recog- 
 nized I think, and on Mr. Wynne's it always has been. 
 
 14342. Ml-. Shaw. — Does he interfere with the 
 price ? — The late Mr. Wynne wished to limit it to 
 about three years rent. 
 
 14343. He found it difficult?— No j it was generally 
 
 agreed to. 
 
 14344. Has that limit been maintained ? — No; but 
 it has gone up to five years in some instances, where 
 the buildings were pretty good; the changes have 
 been verv few. 
 
 14345. Were the improvements considered ? — No ; 
 they were thrown in ; it was merely the rental. 
 
 14346. I suppose he maintains the option as to the 
 tenant ? — Yes ; but I had no occasion to interfere, as 
 there was no well founded objection, 
 
 14347. They were generally tenants on the pro- 
 Ijerty? — Yes, always. 
 
 14348. How long have you been agent? — About 
 thirty- two years over Mr. Wynne's property, and 
 about eight j'ears over Mr. Duke's. 
 
 14349. Have you had many cases of eviction eitlier 
 for non-payment or on notice to quit ? — None on Mr..,. 
 M'Calmont's. I am agent there for about twelve ^ 
 years. One upon Mr. Duke's on notice to quit to- 
 settle a family disjDute. 
 
 14350. Was that since the Land Act 1 — Yes, about 
 two years ago, which was settled by the parties amic- 
 ably, without the aid of any court. 
 
 14351. On Mr. Wynne's estate, I suppose, there' 
 
 3P 
 
 Mr. Francis ■ 
 M. Olpherts. 
 
474 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. IS, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Francis 
 M. Olpherts. 
 
 were very few ejectments ? — On Mr. Wynne's not a 
 dozen for the last thirty years for any reason, nor more 
 than three or four in which the Habere was executed 
 by the sheriff. 
 
 14352. Do you find that the tenants have been in 
 the habit of making improvements ? — Very little of 
 substantial improvement beyond that of building offices. 
 A few of them have done that. 
 
 14353. Have they assistance? — No; they never 
 asked for it, except for forest timber, which was given 
 free or at half price. They were an independent set 
 of men. 
 
 14354. Did they drain their land to any extent 1 — 
 No ; except what Mr. Wynne has done. 
 
 14355. It is generally in a good state? — Yes. It 
 lies within four miles from town altogether to the north. 
 The Leitrim property is of the same character. 
 
 14356. Chairman. — When a sale takes place is 
 there a revaluation 1 — No. 
 
 14357. Is there any fixed period of revaluation? — 
 No. There has been no revaluation on the Sligo 
 estate. There was one on part of the Leitrim estate. 
 The rent of the particular district is £1,825, which is 
 about £26 or £27 less than it was in 1845. The 
 valuation of that is about £1,800— £1,797 exactly. 
 
 14358. Was that revalued at all ? — It was revalued 
 in 1854. 
 
 14359. Was that upon the dropping in of a lease ? 
 — No ; it was Church land, bishops' leases, and there 
 was an understanding it should be revalued every 
 twenty-one years, but that was not carried out regu- 
 larly. 
 
 14360. Did you increase the re it veiy much then 1 
 — No ; it was lowered by £26. 
 
 14361. It has continued the same since ? — Yes ; the 
 valuation is about £1,800. 
 
 14362. Mr. Shaw. — There was some complaint 
 about some property towards Clogher, Holywell? — He 
 lield a small leasehold property from Mr. Gethin, and 
 when the lease fell he discontinued the privileges which 
 they had while holding as direct tenants from him. 
 
 14363. Chairman. — He has some property in the same 
 neighbourhood, and one tenant mentioned a case in 
 which he had lost perquisites ? — I have had nothing 
 to do with them for some fifteen years. 
 
 14364. Mr. Shaw. — Did any of the tenants on Mr. 
 Wynne's estate purchase ? — No. There was one man 
 named Park, he held under a terminable lease, and he 
 bought the fee of his interest before the phange. He 
 was recommended, and the price that was asked he 
 gave, but since that I understand that the conveyance 
 was made to a relative who advanced him money. 
 Parke was offered by a solvent party three of four 
 years rent for his purchase, and to my knowledge. 
 Then there was some six or seven townlands sold, and 
 there was a townland called Ballinaleck, on which 
 there were three tenants, and I thought we could deal 
 with them, and I urged them very strongly to buy, 
 and told them how easy it would be, but they would 
 not do it, and it was bought by Mr. Lyons in 
 trust for a relative for whom he was trustee. In 
 another case where there were nine tenants, I thought 
 they might make up the purchase- money amongst 
 themselves, but they declined. 
 
 14365. That was a fair case for experiment? — Yes. 
 
 14366. And why did they decline? — I don't know. 
 I think they could have managed a third of the money. 
 I think one reason at Behey townland was that it lay 
 adjoining Mr. O'Hara's property, and I think they 
 
 , thought he would btiy it as he was a good landlord, 
 and Mr. O'Hara did buy it. There was another town- 
 land on which thei'e were four tenants, and it also 
 adjoins Mr. O'Hara's property. A man named Burke 
 feared from something he heard that an outsider would 
 
 buy it, and he, rather than be subject to him, said I 
 will give anything for it, and he gave thirty-two years 
 purchase for it. He put that forward in writing, and 
 I felt I could not avoid putting that before the Judge, 
 and he then declared him the purchaser. Afterwards 
 Mr. O'Hara botight this townland with another and, 
 this man at once withdrew. He was satisfied with 
 Mr. O'Hara. The matter was settled between him 
 and Mr. O'Hara. 
 
 14367. They were a respectable class of tenants ?— 
 Yes, and they preferred a good landlord. 
 
 14368. Chairman. — Do you know of any glebe lands 
 or Church lands being purchased by tenants ? — I know 
 of two lots of glebe property on which the tenants are 
 worse off, in the county Leitrim, than before, and some 
 of them say they would never have botight if they had 
 thought they would be pressed for the payment of 
 the instalments as they have been. 
 
 14369. Mr. Shaw. — Was that at the bad times?— 
 Before the bad times. 
 
 14370. Chairman. — They bought in expectation 
 of not being asked for the instalments ?— No, it 
 was the good times influenced them, and now I 
 believe they are very much worse off than they were, 
 and they say they would never have bought at all if 
 they had any idea that the money would hare been 
 exacted from them as it has been half yearly. 
 
 14371. Mr. Shaw. — They had to borrow too perhaps 
 at a heavy rate of interest ? — I think they borrowed 
 from the Board of Works. 
 
 14372. But they borrowed advances from others? 
 — Yes. They borrowed three-fourths from the Board 
 of Works and I think it is the instalments of that 
 which presses them. I met by appointment some of 
 Mr. Wynne's tenants in north Leitrim, and I put all 
 these queries before them and I asked them to consider 
 the matter. I said it might be looked upon that my 
 evidence was onesided, and I wished them clearly to 
 understand the thing. Yesterday I got the answers 
 from one district of county, which four or five men 
 represented, and only two signed it. I left it entirely 
 to themselves. I said I am not going to answer any 
 of the questions for you and I did not help them 
 in any way. . In Ballaghameehan I had five of 
 them altogether. I talked to them for a while and it 
 was tlois morning I got the answer : — " Honoured Sir 
 — Vv'"e the imdersigned beg to state we don't understand 
 the qiieries and we thought it better to return them 
 unanswei-ed " I did my best to get them to answer. 
 On Mr. Wynne's property the rental is £10,000, and 
 the valuation £9,300, acreage about 17,000. Mr. 
 Duke has forty tenants paying £680 ; valuation £60&, 
 acreage 1,400. Mr. M'Calmont has four tenants 
 paying £229 ; valuation £220. 
 
 14373. Chairman. — Is it your opinion that these 
 are reasonable rents? — I am so satisfied about it that 
 I told Mr. Wynne and Mr. Duke that I thought they 
 were perfectly safe in inviting a valuation at any time 
 they liked, provided there are competent people 
 selected. Mi\ Duke's would bear a higher rent because 
 he allowed me to spend £500 on the last five years on 
 it in permanent improvements of open main drainage. 
 
 14374. Has there been much expenditure on Mr. 
 Wjmne's property ? — A gi-eat deal. 
 
 14375. Since the last fixing of the rents ?— There 
 has been no fixing of the rents since I came to the 
 country. There was a good deal of money laid out 
 by the landlord without increase of rent. There was 
 no increase that I know of Instead of reducing the 
 rents in some cases drainage was done so far back as 
 1847, 1848, and 1849. 
 
 The Commissioners then adjourned until the follow- 
 ing Monday, 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 475 
 
 TWENTIETH DAY. -SATURDAY, 16th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioaers sat in Blaine's Hotel, Donegal, at 11 o'clock. 
 
 Present :— The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessboeough, Chairman, and William Shaw, Esq., M.P. 
 
 Mr. Lanty Hanlon, Lettermacaward, Stranorlar, Donegal, examined. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 14376. Chairman. — Now, lio-w many acres of land 
 do you hold ? — I cannot exactly say the number, sir. 
 
 14377. Somewhere about ?— Sixty acres. 
 
 14378. 3Ir. Shaw. — It is a mountain run, T sup- 
 pose, part of it ? — Yes. 
 
 14379. How much is arable, about ? — Well, I sup- 
 pose, there is one-haK. 
 
 14380. And the rest mountainy? — The rest moun- 
 tainy. 
 
 14381. Chairman. — Is it all held under the one 
 landlord 1 — All under the one landlord. 
 
 14382. And who is he? — Charles Deazley, sir. 
 
 14383. And who is agent of that property ? — His 
 brother, William Deazley. 
 
 14384. Is it a large property ? — No, small. 
 
 14385. Mr. Shaw.— Does he live in the country 1 — 
 The landlord Hves in Wales, and the agent lives in the 
 county Tyrone. 
 
 14386. Chairman. — What is the rent you pay now 1 
 —I pay £41 10s. 
 
 14387. And how long have you been paying that ? 
 
 Since Mr. Deazley came into the property, about 
 
 thirteen years ago. 
 
 14388. Mr Shaw. — Did he raise it ? — He did. 
 
 14389. How much ?— From £24 8s. 
 
 14390. That was the rent you paid before I — Yes, 
 that was the rent I paid to Mr. ConoUy. 
 
 14391. Was it his property % — ^Yes. 
 
 14392. Were you there long 1. — Oh, yes, sir ; before 
 I was bom. 
 
 14393. Your father before you ? — ^Yes. 
 
 14394. And the rent never raised ? — Never raised. 
 
 14395. Until it was raised thirteen years ago from 
 £24 to £41 2s. ?— Yes. 
 
 14396. And about half of it is arable, workable 
 land 1 — About hall of it is arable. 
 
 14397. Is it near Stranorlar? — No, sir ; it is about 
 twenty-three miles irom Stranorlar, there is no market 
 within ten miles of it. 
 
 14398. Chairman. — Were the buildings the work 
 of your own family ? — Altogether. 
 
 14399. No allowances? — No allowances made by 
 the landlord, except that Mr. ConoUy made some 
 allowances in his time. 
 
 14400. And when were the houses put up, generally 
 in his time ? — Altogether in his time. 
 
 14401. And he made some allowances in the way 
 of slates, or something of that kind ? — He gave slates. 
 
 14402. And any timber ? — Not that I am aware of, 
 except window frames. 
 
 14403. Mr. Shaw. — Did Mr. Deazley make any 
 allowances ? — No, sir. 
 
 14404. Not even in the bad times ? — No, sir ; not 
 a penny, 
 
 14405. Chairman. — Have you had any drainage 
 done ? — None, except I done it myself. 
 
 1 4406. How much have you drained or your family ? 
 — -I drained a great deal of it. 
 
 14407. Mr. Shaw. — You reclaimed a great deal of 
 it ? — A great deal. 
 
 14408. Are you going on reclaiming ? — Still. 
 
 14409. You have no lease? — No lease, but I have 
 not reclaimed as much as I was in the habit of doing. 
 
 14410. Chairman. — Since when? — Since Mr. 
 Deazley got the property, we have not as much con- 
 fidence as we had in Mr. Conolly's time. 
 
 14411. And would you be inclined to go on with 
 the improvements if you had a feeling of security that 
 the rents would not be raised ? — I would. 
 
 14412. What isthe Poor Law valuation ? — £21. 
 
 14413. Is that the general proportion of the rent to 
 
 the Government valuation as on the other holdings 
 around? — It is on that property. 
 
 14414. Then there was a general rise of rent ? — Yes. 
 
 14415. Was there any valuation then? — No, it was 
 made on the Government valuation, 20 per cent, over 
 the valuation ;. that is, taking in the valuation of 
 buildings as well as the land. 
 
 14416. Mr. Shaw. — You have tenant-right, I sup- 
 pose on the property ? — We have, we can sell. 
 
 14417. You are allowed to sell? — We are not pre- 
 vented from selling. 
 
 14418. Chairman. — Is there any restriction as to, 
 price ? — Not that I am aware of. 
 
 14419. Any selection on the part of the landlord of 
 the purchaser ? — Not that I am aware of ; I heard of 
 some case that there was a selection to be made. 
 
 14420. Is there anything that you might call a rule 
 of the estate upon the subject of a sale of holdings ? — 
 No, sir ; he adopted no rule to my knowledge. 
 
 14421. In Mr. Conolly's time was there any re- 
 striction? — There was. Mr. Conolly's wish was that 
 the adjoining tenant should have the benefit, incase 
 he would give as much as any other bidder, that he 
 would get the farm. 
 
 14422. How did they ascertain what any other 
 bidder would give ? — It was put up to auction, and in 
 case the adjoining tenant would give as much as was 
 bid at the auction, he got it. 
 
 14423. Mr. Shaw. — No restriction in price? — No 
 restriction. 
 
 14424. Chairman. — Is there any turf in your neigh- 
 bourhood ? — There is. 
 
 14425. On your own holding? — Oh, none there. 
 
 14426. That has all been used up? — All been used up. 
 
 14427. That is the part of the land, perhaps, that 
 you were draining ? — Yes, sir ; there was turf cut on 
 the land, and I reclaimed it. 
 
 14428. Is turbary allowed on the property ? — 
 There is. 
 
 14429. You pay for it ? — We pay for it. 
 
 14430. You have to pay for it after it has ceased 
 on your own holdings ? — We have. 
 
 14431. Mr. Shaw. — Does he charge you high for 
 the turbary ? — I pay about £1 for the right of 
 turbary. 
 
 14432. Do you pay that to the landlord?— -I pay to 
 the owner of the land, to the tenant. 
 
 14433. Chairman. — How far have you to draw it? 
 — About two miles. 
 
 14434. Mr. Shaw. — Have there been any sales 
 since Mr. Deazley bought it ? — There has. 
 
 14435. By tenants ?— There has. 
 
 Mr. Lanty 
 Hanlon. 
 
 good 
 
 prices? — Very good 
 
 14436. Have they 
 prices. 
 
 14437. Notwithstanding the rise of rent? — Yes. 
 
 14438. Lately it has been difi:erent, owing to the bad 
 times ? — There have been no sales for the last twelve 
 months or two years. 
 
 14439. Chairman. — Do you think there is any 
 feeling among the tenants generally that they don't 
 like to have their lands looking too well for fear of an 
 increase of rent ? — They have not the same confidence 
 they had in Mr. Conolly's time — they are not in- 
 clined to make the same improvements. 
 
 14440. It was mentioned in the neighbourhood of 
 Sligo that the tenant did not like to appear too well 
 off, or his land looking too well, for fear of a rise ? — 
 That is the case in our own district. 
 
 14441. Mr. Shaw. — Do you recollect the rental of 
 the property that Mr. Deazley bought ? — I do not. 
 
 3P2 
 
476 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1830. 
 
 Mr. Lanty 
 Hanlon. 
 
 14442. Nor the money lie paid for it 1 — It was some- 
 thing over £7,000. 
 
 14443. Do you know the rental now? — I am not 
 aware of it. 
 
 14444. Chairman. — Is there anything else that a 
 tenant can make money by besides his land in this 
 neighbourhood '! — Nothing, sir. 
 
 14445. Now, when this increase of rent took place, 
 did all the tenants accede to it ? — They had to accede 
 to it. 
 
 14446. How was it done — was a notice to quit 
 given ? — There were no notices served, sir ; but they 
 were noticed that this was the rent they would have to 
 pay, and fearing that notices to quit would take place, 
 they from one to another agreed to it sooner than meet 
 with any other difficulties. They were afraid of being 
 ejected. 
 
 14447. Mr. Shaw. — Afraid of law?— Yes, sir. 
 
 14448. Chairman. — When the rent was raised there 
 was at that time no compensation if you had been put 
 out on notice to quit? — No ; there was no Land Act. 
 
 14449. Do you think there has been any greater 
 feeling of security since the Land Act ? — Not much, 
 sir, on this property that T can see. 
 
 14450. Do you think the feeling of the tenant is, he 
 does not want the compensation, but he wants to remain 
 in the place ? — He wants to remain in the place, sir. He 
 does not look on compensation as equal to the benefit 
 his little holding would be to him. He looks upon it 
 as a home. 
 
 14451. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any other business 
 yourself ? — I keep a shop. 
 
 14452. You have improved the land a good deal, I 
 suppose ? — I have. 
 
 14453. What rent is it worth that a man can live 
 upon it, if he had to live upon it ?— I should say about 
 the Government valuation would be a fair rent. 
 
 14454. That is £21 ?— Yes, £21. 
 
 14455. Did you pay Mr. ConoUy £24 ?— Yes. 
 
 14456. Do you not think that a reasonable rent? — 
 I would not think it unreasonable. 
 
 14457. Is £41 the full value of the place, with all 
 your own improvements ? — That is the rent. 
 
 14458. Would any tenant give that for it, with 
 all your own improvements ? — I think not. 
 
 14459. Chairman. — Do you think you would not 
 get anything for the land if you were selling at that 
 rent ? — I am not aware, I cannot say. 
 
 14460. Mr. Shaw. — Are they Irish acres or English? 
 • — English. 
 
 14461. Are they generally English acres in that part 
 of the country 1 — Yes. 
 
 ■ 14462. But your house is on it that you keep the 
 shop in 1 — It is. « 
 
 14463. And you have no lease? — No lease. 
 
 14464. Chairman. — Is the back half year allowed 
 to run? — No, all paid up. 
 
 14465. Was that the case under Mr. Conolly? 
 
 Then the tenants had to make that up? — 
 
 No. 
 
 14466, 
 Yes. 
 
 14467. Were they given time for that? — That was 
 always left in the hands of the incoming tenant, in 
 case he sold and it was not asked for until the proijerty 
 was sold. 
 
 14468. How long were the tenants given to pay it 
 up? — Some of them never paid it at all. 
 
 14469. It was struck off?— Struck ofl. 
 
 14470. Mr. Shaw.— By Mr. Conolly?— By Mr. 
 Conolly. 
 
 14471. Chairman. — Then it did not run with the 
 sale ff the land ? — No, sir. 
 
 14472. Mr. Shaw. — Is there any ejectments there 
 except for non-payment of rent as a rule? — No. 
 
 14473. If a man pays his rent he is never disturbed ? 
 — No. 
 
 14474. You have fixity of tenure in fact?— In that 
 case we have. 
 
 14475. The same on the other properties about! 
 
 As far as I know, 
 
 14476. Chairman. — Then you have fixity of tenure 
 
 and free sale, but you have not the other, fair rents? 
 
 Yes sir, that is what we complain of. 
 
 14477. Mr. Shaw. — If that was settled in someway 
 you would be perfectly satisfied ? — Perfectly satisfied 
 
 14478. Would you care about buying yourholdin" 
 
 if it was in the market, being your own landlord? I 
 
 would be anxious to buy. 
 
 14479. If you had this fair rent you could buy still? 
 — I could. 
 
 14480. Do you think the other tenants could 
 provided there was a fair proportion allowed one-third 
 or one-fourth ? — Yes. 
 
 14481. Why did they not buy when Mr. Conolly 
 was selling 1 — They were not able of themselves to 
 buy. , 
 
 14482. Are they an improving tenantry? — They 
 are inclined to improve. 
 
 14483. Chairman. — Are you within a reasonable 
 distance of a railway ? — Twenty-three miles. 
 
 14484. Good roads? — Roads very bad. 
 
 14485. Mr. Shaw. — And you are away from a 
 market ? — Ten miles. 
 
 14486. Chairman. — Is there anything more you 
 would like to mention ? — I would wish to give a few- 
 cases. There is a man I know on the same property, 
 Pat. M'Swiney, his Government valuation was £1 and 
 his rent to Mr. Conolly during his time was 4s., and 
 the present rent is £1 16s. 
 
 14487. Mr. Shaw. — What has he, is it a house?— 
 A house and spot of land. 
 
 14488. How much land? — I cannot say, a spot of 
 bog land, that was useless and he reclaimed it himself. 
 
 14489. £1 16s. is enough for it as it stands? — Too 
 much, because in its natural state it would not be 
 worth 10s. 
 
 14490. It would go back again? — It would go back 
 again to its original state. 
 
 14491. Did he build the house?— He did. 
 
 14492. Chairman. — How long had he it at is.1— 
 Over forty years. 
 
 14493. Mr. Shaw. — He is a labourer ? — A labourer. 
 
 14494. And has that bit to live on just a house and 
 garden? — Yes, a home. There is another, Widow 
 Boyle, her Government valuation is £1, and the rent 
 she paid to Mr. Conolly was 6s., and her present rent 
 is £1 10s. 
 
 14495. She is the same kind of person I suppose, 
 living by her labour? — Yes, living by her labour, has 
 a little family and works the place, a piece of bog. 
 Charles Gallagher, Government valuation of his holding 
 is 15s., and the rent he paid Mr. Conolly was 6s., and 
 his present rent is £1 4s. * 
 
 14496. Some kiiid of labourer, I suppose ?— Yes, sir. 
 Well there is a James O'Donnell, the Goveriunent 
 valuation of this man's land is £2 10s., the rent he 
 paid Mr. Conolly was £1 14s., and his present rent 
 to Mr. Deazleyis£6 12s. 
 
 14497. It was all put on at the same time?— At 
 the same time, at the purchase sir. There is James 
 Malley, his Government valuation is £4 15s., and the 
 rent he paid Mr. Conolly was £2 12,v., and his present 
 rent to Mr. Deazley is £7 10s. 
 
 _ 14498. He lives by his farm, I suppose ? — Lives by 
 his farm, no other means. 
 
 14499. Those last two are the same ?— O'Donnell, 
 has ^ a post-office, but he is only getting £3 a year 
 for it. 
 
 14500. Chairman. — Are these all 
 town ? — A. country place. 
 
 14501. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any other case!— 
 No more. 
 
 14502. But these are all on this property ?— All 
 on this jDroperty. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 in a village or 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 Messrs. Hugh M'Ginty, Fiimybawns, Donegal; and Frai^cis Thomas, Birclihill 
 Mr. Hugh M'Gintt examined. 
 
 477 
 
 Oct. 16, ISSO. 
 
 14503. Chairmax. — Are you a tenant? — Yes. 
 1450-1. Who is your landlord 1 — Lord Arran. 
 
 14505. How many acres do you hold? — About 
 nine acres. 
 
 14506. And what is the rent you pay for it? I 
 
 pay £9 14s. M. 
 
 14507. And how long have you been paying that ? 
 — I am paying it these last twenty years. 
 
 14508. Mr. Shaw.— Was it raised then ?— Not 
 since that. 
 
 14509. Bvit when was it raised? — About twenty 
 yeai-s ago. 
 
 14510. How much was it before? — I have two 
 little places, and the place I am living in, when 1 got 
 it from my predecessor, it only paid £1 17s. 6c/. 
 
 14511. Chaihman. — Part of the nine acres? — No, 
 the five acres we wiU say. 
 
 14512. Separate from the nine ? — Yes. 
 
 14513. Mr. Shaw. — What was the other?— 
 Previous to getting this last live acres, I had the four 
 acres. 
 
 14514. What was the rent of that ?— f 2 10s. 
 
 14515. That is £1 17s. 6d., and £2 10s., were the 
 rents they were subject to, before 1859 ? — Yes. 
 
 14516. Chaieiian. — Who was the landlord then? 
 — The same. 
 
 14517. Mr. Shaw. — That was £4 7s. 6rf., and it is 
 now raised to £9 14s. ? — Yes. 
 
 14518. Why was it raised? — We got six months' 
 notice from the agent to come in, and then the rent 
 was left on on all the property, and we were subject 
 to being dispossessed if we would not submit to it. 
 
 14519. Were the houses built on it? — We built 
 the houses ourselves. 
 
 14520. And did everything, made all the improve- 
 ments ? — Made all the improvements. The place I 
 am living in, was a bog when my 2iredecessor occupied 
 it, my father-in-law, he improved it as well as he 
 could, but it was a regular waste and bog on which 
 the whole estate used to cut their turf. He built 
 \ipon it, and according as the bog was cut away, he 
 reclaimed it, and when I got it, I reclaimed it as much 
 a.s I could also, and the rent was put on it, but still it 
 is not good land yet, and never will be. 
 
 14521. Chaiemax. — Was this reclaimed by cutting 
 open drains ? — Yes, by draining, manuring, and 
 labouring. 
 
 14522. Was any part of it thorough drained ? — No, 
 only what would do ourselves. 
 
 14523. Was any part of it drained with stone 
 drains ? — Oh yes, it is all stone drains. 
 
 14524. Mr. Shaw. — And it would go back again 
 to bog. I suppose if you did not keep working at it ? 
 — It would never go back to bog, the bog is cut away, 
 but it would go back to weeds and waste. 
 
 14525. You tUl it?— Oh yes, it is well tilled. 
 
 14526. Do you keep cattle on it? — Yes, it is well 
 manured every year. 
 
 14527. Near the town? — About two miles and a 
 quarter. 
 
 14528. On the Derry-road ?— No, a little off it. 
 
 14529. Chairman. — Does it grow good grass? — 
 Some of it is pretty good, but it wants to be manured. 
 If we let it out for a year or two when the manure is 
 in good heart, it gives good grass, but then it fails. 
 
 14530. Mr. ShAW. — You must break it up again ] 
 — Yes. 
 
 14531. Chaieman-. — Do you go round it for till- 
 age in five years 1 — It is all the better if we give it 
 five, three wo generally give. 
 
 14532. What is the Government valuation? — 
 M, £3 for the place I am living in, and £3 for the 
 other. 
 
 14533. Mr. Shaw. — That isfor the houses and all? 
 — No, the land. 
 
 14534. Chaiemajt. — Have you any turf left on 
 your holding for firing ? — There is but very little. 
 
 Thomas. 
 
 Messre. Hugh 
 M'Ginty and 
 
 14535. Where do you cut turf ?— Upon Lord Arran's l'>ancis 
 mountain. 'ri,r,„,„. 
 
 14536. Is that let free? — Oh, yes, we have it free. 
 
 14537. Every tenant allowed a certain proportion? 
 — Yes, the bailiff used to claim Is. from every tenant 
 for giving him the bog. 
 
 14538. That was the rale ; the bailiff got something 
 for marking it out ? — Yes. ' 
 
 14539. Is it in banks, each tenant cutting his own 
 bank ? — Yes. 
 
 14540. Mr. Shaw. — Were all the tenants raised 
 abo\it the same time ? — They were. 
 
 14541. In the same proportion? — Generally. 
 Mr. Thomas. — The whole estate was served with 
 
 notice to quit at the time. 
 
 Mr. M'Ginty. — We had not to pay the whole rise 
 at the same time ; we paid half one year and half the 
 succeeding year. 
 
 14542. And since then you paid the advance?— 
 Mr. iPGinty — Yes. 
 
 14543. Did you get any allowance the last two 
 years ? — Not a penny. 
 
 14544. Are you allowed to sell your holdings ?-^ 
 We were at one time, but we are prohibited now. 
 About ten years ago Lord Arran made a rule; we 
 used to have liberty always to sell ; he made a rule 
 that the incoming tenant should pay 25 per cent, of a 
 rise of rent ; that was in order, I think, to prohibit 
 the tenant from selling. 
 
 14545. Twenty-five per cent, in a] leases ? — In all cases, 
 5s. in the pound. That, of course, was a great hindrance 
 to the tenant to sell. I, for one, myself, proposed to 
 sell one of the little holdings. My children left me 
 and went to other countries, and I could not occupy 
 it, and I proposed to sell it. The sale went on, but 
 the man would not take it. We wrote to Lord Arran 
 to see would he take off the 25 per cent., but the 
 answer was he would not, and the lands remain there 
 unsold. 
 
 14546. Mr. Shaw. — You thought the first rise was 
 enough, and that there would be no fui-ther rise ? — 
 So it would, quite sufficient. I considered that broke 
 the Ulster tenant-right we had all along. 
 
 14547. Of course it is no use if the rent is too 
 high ? — Yes. No man would purchase. 
 
 14548. Chairman. — When was that rule made ? — 
 About ten years ago. 
 
 14549. Have there been many sales since that time 
 on the property ? — There were a few sales, and they 
 all had that rise. 
 
 14550. And before that time was there any rise 
 upon a sale ? — No. 
 
 14551. Mr. Shaw. — You were allowed to sell?— 
 Certainly. Only a tenant got the preference if he 
 was next. 
 
 14552. The neighbour always had the preference ? 
 — He did, and that prevented an incoming tenant 
 from purchasing too, because it was not free sale. 
 
 14553. Chairman. — But under that system how 
 did they ascertain the price that the* neighbouring 
 tenant should give. Was there an auction? — Oh, 
 yes, an auction. 
 
 14554. And then after the highest bid the neigh- 
 bouring tenant had an opportunity of taking it at 
 that price? — He would, and he would not bid Is. 
 for it. 
 
 14555. Mr. Shaw. — But he would if the rent was 
 to remain as it is? — Whether or not, because he 
 knew he would get it. I think it was injurious to 
 the man disposing of his land, for he would not get 
 the value of it. There was great competition here at 
 one time for land. 
 
 14556. In good times? — Yes. Everything was 
 high — cattle, horses, pork, hay and flax. 
 
 14557. Chairman. — Were the tenants doing well ? 
 — That is the tune the rent was raised upon them. 
 
 14558. Have they been going back since then? — 
 
478 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oi'/. 10, 1830. 
 
 Mes^rs. Hugh 
 M'Ginty and 
 Francis 
 Thomas. 
 
 Certainly, there is a number' of tliem heavily in debt. 
 We were iti debt ourselves for the last few years, 
 and we would not be able to pay the rent ; it is by 
 other industry we live. 
 
 14559. Mr. Shaw. — You have other means of 
 living "i — Yes, my children in Scotland send me plenty 
 
 to keep me going, and I have a kind of trade to 
 me going. 
 
 14560. Chairman. — Do you grow flax in you 
 country? — Yes, but my land won't grow flax, it i 
 too boggy. 
 
 your 
 
 Mr. Francis Thomas examined. 
 
 14561. Chairman. — You hold on the same pro- 
 perty? — Under the Earl of Airan. I hold ten Irish 
 acres. 
 
 14562. What is your rent?— £11 5s. 
 
 14563. Mr. Shaw. — That is the present rent? — 
 Yes. 
 
 14564. What was the old rent ? — It is in two divi- 
 sions; the rent of one of them was £3 10s. to 1859, 
 it was raised to £7 18s. id., that is the rent of that. 
 The other, place paid 25s., now it pays £3 Is. id. 
 
 14565. Are they both together? — They run paral- 
 lel. 
 
 14566. You have your house on one of them, I sup- 
 pose ? — Yes. 
 
 14567. You built it yourself? — Yes; house, and 
 ofiices. 
 
 14568. Chairman. — When were the house and 
 offices bu.ilt 1 — They were built by my father. 
 
 14569. How long ago? — Something about 60 years 
 ago. 
 
 14570. Do you know whether there were any allow- 
 ances made at the time towards the expenses ? — Not 
 one shilling, they would not get as much as a stook to 
 put on the house. 
 
 14571. Mr. Shaav. — There never was anything done 
 in the way of improvement on the estate ? — No. We 
 were raised 25 per cent, in 1859, and two years after- 
 wards we were, raised 25 per cent, and two years again 
 we were raised again, and it makes up what we are 
 paying now. 
 
 14572. It was in three instalments 1 — Yes ; and 
 every time served with a notice to quit, and then 
 when we came in — there were two townlands noticed 
 to quit on the one day, our agent was Mr. Sims ; if 
 we would not say at once, " Danm. your soul," he 
 would say, " take it or leave it." 
 
 14573. You had no option? — No; I was held to 
 the place by two old jpeople, my father and mother. 
 I could not leave and emigrate, and I was held to 
 starvation. 
 
 14574. Chairman. — Were those rents fixed in con- 
 sequence of valuation ? — Yes ; there was a valuation 
 two years before — Gale's valuation. 
 
 14575. When was that ? — It was about 1847. 
 
 14576. Sent by the landlord ?— Yes. 
 
 14577. You knew it was being valued at the time ? 
 ' — Yes ; we did not know the valuation first until we 
 got the first rise, and when we objected to the first 
 rise, Sims said, "If we knew what the rents were 
 going to be we would cut our throats sooner than pay 
 them." 
 
 14578. Then the rent was not put on then ? — It 
 
 went on in two instalments. We paid the first half 
 of rise in November, 1859, and we were noticed two 
 years afterwards for the second ; and when we had 
 that paid, in two instalments, we were noticed the 
 third time to quit in May. 
 
 14579. Mr. Shaw. — This advance was in tliree 
 steps ? — Yes ; Professor Baldwin was here and exa- 
 mined Mr. Crane's books, the agent's, and he only 
 showed him one rise, and he then called on me to take 
 in my receipts. I took in my receipts and the thi'ee 
 notices to quit and left them doWn, and Professor 
 Baldwin took my receipts with him. 
 
 14580. Chairman. — There was a general notice to 
 quit, and a general notice that rents would be raised) 
 — Yes ; the notice to qnit is to agree and comply with 
 Lord Arran's rules or else give up the holding. 
 
 14581. Mr. Shaw. — You could not help your- 
 selves ? — No. 
 
 14582. I suppose there are no evictions on the 
 estate except for non-payment of rent ? — Yes. 
 
 14583. So that you have security of tenure in that 
 way, but what you complain of is the high rents !— 
 The high rents, and especially this 25 per cent, on the 
 incoming tenants, which deiJiives us of selUng our 
 places. 
 
 14584. Chairman. — What is the Government va- 
 luation you say ? — My Government valuation, houses 
 and all is £8 lOs. 
 
 14585. How much is on the holding? — Something 
 about £1 or 30s. M'Ginty — I paid £75 above my 
 valuation since the last 25 years. 
 
 14586. Mr. Shaw. — And you cut turf the same m 
 he does ? — Thomas — Yes ; on the mountam. 
 
 14587. And no help from the landlord ? — No ; this 
 land I have was left a waste. We drained it. 
 
 14588. Chairman. — Has there been any money laid 
 out on improvements in the property of Lord Arran ? 
 — Yes, in 1847 ; but if it was, it was his sub-agent kept 
 it, for the tenants inherited very little of it. In cases 
 where they were allowed Is. or 2s. a perch they were 
 given id. and 6d. ; he kept the money. His sub-agent 
 Mr. Adair, and he got a farm and manured it, and 
 dressed it, and kept it in a high state of cultivation 
 with Lord Arran's money, and when he was disquali- 
 fied from the oSice we had to pay for his bad doings. 
 
 14589. Mr. Shaw. — He is not alive now ?— He 
 died ; he died a miserable death. There was not a 
 man to put him into the cofl&n. His brother came 
 from Aiaerioa, and drank and sported the money, and 
 went a drunken lunatic out of the country. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. Jamea 
 Smullen. 
 
 Mr. James Smullen, Donegal, examined. 
 
 14590. Chairman. — You are a hotel keeper and 
 farmer ? — Yes, I am a hotel keeper, and farmer, I farm 
 a great deal. 
 
 14591. Where do you live? — I live opposite in this 
 town. 
 
 14592. How much land do you hold ? — I hold one 
 farm of forty acres statute, and another of twelve, and 
 two or three pieces of land of ten acres Irish. 
 
 14593. How much altogether ? — Seventy or eighty 
 acres statute. 
 
 14594. Under Lord Arran ? — Yes. 
 
 14595. Mr. Shaw. — Near the town ? — No, this 
 little farm is upwards of an Irish mile out of the town. 
 
 14596. Chairman. — Are they held by different 
 tenancies ? — Yes, some of them are leases, one on 
 which I buUt a flax mUl. I have a lease of. 
 
 14597. How many acres have you a lease of 1 — Ten 
 acres Irish. 
 
 14598. Mr. Shaw.— But the forty acres is without a 
 lease 1 — It is a yearly tenancy. I bought it in 1870, for 
 £300. 1 bought it from the brother of Lord Arran's 
 late agent, John Adair, I paid £300 for it. The rent 
 of it was £18, and when I had it two years, ho wanted 
 to raise me to £36, and he settled the I'ent at £30 10s. 
 
 14599. Did he send a valuator on the place ?— No, 
 they had no valuator, and if I went to sell that farm 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 479 
 
 they woxild charge twenty-five i)er cent, to the incom- 
 ing tenant. 
 
 14600. Had you notice to that aifect? — No, but 
 that is the rule. 
 
 14601. Chairman. — That isthe established rule now ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 14602. And that was made ten years ago? — Yes, 
 about ten years ago, they commenced to charge twenty- 
 five per cent. 
 
 14G03. Would you just say the rent of this hold- 
 ing 1 — That particular farm that I s[)eak of, the rent 
 is £30 10s., and it was £18 when I bought it. 
 
 14604. Mr. Shaw.— You paid £300 for it, and 
 made all the improvements with their knowledge 1 — 
 Yes, I am improving it ever since I got it. 
 
 14605. Chairman. — How long ago did you -build 
 the house ? — Adair built the house. 
 
 14606. Mr. Shaw. — But everything was done by 
 the tenant 1 — Done by the tenant. 
 
 14607. But now if you were going to sell it, the 
 incoming tenant would have to pay twenty-five per 
 cent. 1 — Yes, that is the rule. 
 
 14608. Do you think that destroys the tenant-right '! 
 — Yes, there is no tenant-right. I gave £30 a year 
 for manure for it. 
 
 14609. You drained it aU since you got it 1 — Yes, 
 and it was all roots and mires and everything, and I 
 suppose there were some acres cost me £20 and above 
 that. 
 
 14610. Chairman. — What is the general proportion 
 to the Government valuation through the property 1 — 
 The purchase money ? 
 
 14611. No, what is the general proportion between 
 the rent and the Government valuation? — Some of 
 them are a great deal higher than the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 14612. You don't know how much? — Some of 
 them are far more than a quarter, the land about the 
 town is as dear again as the valuation. 
 
 14613. Mr. Shaw. — You don't consider yours a 
 townpark? — It is an ordinary farm. 
 
 14614. Chairman. — How far from the town? — It 
 is more than an Irish mile, but it is a very bad road. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Smullen. 
 
 14615. Mr. Shaw. — A dair got it up from some ten- Orf. le, 1880. 
 ants, I suppose ? — Yes. 
 
 14616. Chairman. — Is there a residence on itl 
 No, nothing but a labourer's cottage and offices, they 
 are good, two story high, yovi can tie eighteen head of 
 cattle in them. 
 
 14617. Have you ever asked for a lease ? — No. 
 
 14618. You thought the tenant-right better?— The 
 tenant-right, if they charge twenty-five per cent. I 
 would not get first cost, the rent is too high by far. 
 
 14619. Mr. Shaw.— The rent as it is ?— Yes, £12 
 10s. of a rise, after all the money I left out on it. It 
 cost me £200 a year improvements, and £300 purchase 
 money. Lord Arran never laid out a farthing on it. 
 
 14620. Is it the general rule on the property? — 
 Yes, Lord Arran never lays out a farthing. 
 
 14621. Is it a large estate ? — He has pretty large 
 estates. 
 
 14622. Chairman. — Have there been large im- 
 provements done by the tenants of late years ? — Some 
 of them have, and some of them have not. 
 
 14623. What has been the principal improvements 
 during the last twenty years ? — Draining. 
 
 14624. And has it been done pretty well by the 
 tenants ? — Any of them that can do it, try to improve 
 a little every year. 
 
 14625. Mr. Shaw. — By their own labour? — Their 
 own industry. 
 
 14626. You are allowed to sell, but you think the 
 tenant-right is gone ? — Yes, and the landlord must be 
 pleased with the tenant ; he can object to any man 
 unless he agrees to his own ofiioe rules. 
 
 14627. That affects the improvements? — Yes, it 
 must affect the party selling it very much. 
 
 14628. You never asked for a lease ? — I would not 
 take a lease from Lord Arran at the present rent. 
 
 14629. You would not ? — I would not. 
 
 14630. I suppose any valuator coming on it and 
 valuing the farm as it stands ? — That would be making 
 me pay for my own improvements. 
 
 14631. But, if he excluded your improvements, he 
 would not put £30 a year on it ? — Without my im- 
 provements it is not worth the old rent. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 Messrs. Hugh Gallagher, Drumlonogher, and John M'Gaharen. 
 Hugh Gallagher examined, 
 
 Messrs. Hagli, 
 Gallagher an4 
 John 
 M'Gaharen. 
 
 14632. Mr. Shaw. — How far is Drumlonogher 
 from town ? — One mile. 
 
 14633. Chairman. — Are you a tenant on Lord 
 Arran's property ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 14634. What land do you hold 1 — Something like 
 about seven acres — statute acres — but it is concern- 
 ing the ofiioe rules principally, as an auctioneer, that 
 I wish to state. 
 
 14635. We have heard that there is an office rule, 
 that was made about ten years ago, about twenty-five 
 per cent, increase, on any change of tenancy ? — Yes, 
 sir ; that is since the Land Act. There has been 
 tenant-right allowed on the Earl of Arran's estate, and 
 since the passing of the Land Act, in 1870, that was 
 years after we got a considerable rise, in 1859, in Mr. 
 Syms' time, there was a new office rule established, 
 when Mr. M'Crane was agent, that if I was called 
 upon, or any other auctioneer, to sell a farm of land for 
 any tenant, there was no objection to our selling; but, 
 previous to Lord Arran's accepting a new tenant he 
 had to sign a document promising to pay twenty-five 
 per cent, of an advanced rent, no matter how high 
 the farm or place was previously. 
 
 14636. Was there a change of agents at that time ? 
 — ^It was since the present agent came, this rule was, 
 Mr. Crean. 
 
 14637. Did he introduce the rule ?— It was during 
 his time, Mr. Suns was acting for Lord Arran when 
 the rents were advanced very much. 
 
 14638. They were advanced, in 1857, after a valua- 
 tion of Gale's ? — The same. 
 
 14639. Mr. Shaw. — And all the rents were ad- 
 vanced at the same time in the same proportion 1 — 
 Not in the same proportion ; some of them were nearly 
 doubled. Mr. Gaharen bought since the rule about 
 1875, this twenty-five per cent. One of the cases 
 that it was brought to work against was a sale of 
 land belonging to Hugh M'^GLnty. He had been bid 
 up to £80 some three years ago. However, it was 
 sold for £62, on the 12th of August, 1879, to one 
 Patrick M'Crudden, ami according tcv the rules, we 
 wrote to Lord Arran, asking him to accept for the 
 vendor, M'Crudden, as' tenant. The rent was £4 
 8s., and the reply that came back to Mr. Jackson, 
 his sub-agent here, was that he had no objection to 
 M'Crudden as tenant, provided he would consent to 
 pay this 5s. in the pound, in addition to £4 8s. rent. 
 And the result was that M'Crudden would not have 
 the farm at all. I wrote a second letter, thinking 
 it would break him down, owing to the dull times, 
 and mentioned M'Ginty was tightened up, and not 
 able to pay the rent for another portion. 
 
 14640. And this M'Crudden was a solvent man? 
 — Yes ; ready to pay cash down, and holding another 
 farm under Lord Arran. In September, 1879, I sold 
 under the court, a farm at £250 ; it was a legacy 
 that was divided among brothers and brothei'S-in-law, 
 and it was by order of the court I made a sale. The 
 
480 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 10, 1S80. 
 
 Messrs. Hugh 
 Gallaghev and 
 John 
 M'Gaharen. 
 
 solicitor for the partj wlio puroliased, Mr. Mecredy, 
 objected to pay twenty-five per cent, said lie would 
 take it into the courts first, and the result was Mr. 
 Jackson caved in, and did not insist on the twenty- 
 five per cent., but that he would give him some 
 eqiiivalent for poor rates. 
 
 14641. CuAiRMAN. — Then they did not give the no- 
 tice in that case ?^0h, yes ; his bailifi' was there, and 
 gave notice, but the solicitor said he would go into 
 the courts and resist the 25 per cent., and the result 
 was, he did not put it on. I wrote, asking his lord- 
 ship in M'Ginty's case, to give me the same treatment, 
 and I was refused it. I also called an auction for a 
 widow woman, Mrs. Thomas, sister to that last 
 witness, and, owing to that 2.5 per cent., no person 
 would bid for it. One man offered me £50 for the 
 farm, if the 25 per cent, was abandoned, and the same 
 farm had been sold some four years ago at £86. 
 
 14642. When was this last sale ?— In 1879. 
 
 14643. That was a very bad time? — Yes; but a 
 man came and offered me £50 cash down if he would 
 not have to pay any rise of rent, so he ■ft'rote to Lord 
 Arran again, pleading, owing to the bad times, for a 
 remission of the 25 per cent., and the reply was, he 
 would not accept him unless he consented, so the man 
 threw it up, and the woman has written smce to try 
 and get out to America. 
 
 14644. Mr. Shaw. — So that has interfered with 
 sales? — It has ruined them. I knew otlier parties 
 who would have their lands in the market if that was 
 not insisted on ; it has destroyed tenant-right, and on 
 the adjoining estate, Mr. John Hamilton's, I called a 
 sale on one of his tenants, and his son, the major, had 
 sent a letter that there is no such tiling as any rise of 
 rent with him. 
 
 14645. He adopts a different practice? — Yes ; and 
 there is only a ditch between M'Ginty's farm and this. 
 
 14646. He does not advance rents ? — Not latterly. 
 Some years ago he put on a little increase, but he had 
 laid out some money. 
 
 14647. Allows the tenants to sell? — Yes, freely ; 
 and the parties are, to my knowledge, rather inclined 
 to go to a higher price in the purchase-money. 
 
 14648. Do you know anything of Lord Con3mg- 
 ham's estate? — No, sir. I know Mr. Murray Stewart ; 
 
 he allows sale by proposals, though public sales were 
 allowed in his predecessor's time. 
 
 14649. And Mr. Brooke's estate, he allows free 
 sale ? — Yes ; he does allow open sales. 
 
 14650. Does he put on any increase of rent? — He 
 has, in two cases, put on 25 per cent., but he travels 
 the land before the sale day. 
 
 14651. He does not do it in all cases indiscrimi- 
 nately ? — Until the last two years he did do it, but I 
 heard these last twelve months he has not. 
 
 14652. Owing to the bad times, T suppose ? — Yes. 
 
 14653. Chairman. ■ — Perhaps you may know 
 whether on any other properties there are any rules 
 of that nature at all ? — No ; except on Murray 
 Stewart's and Lord Arran 's. 'These are the only two 
 properties around here. 
 
 14654. Where there is any restriction or condition 
 on the sale ? — On Mr. Murray Stewart's there has been 
 until the last twelve months. 
 
 14655. Are there any restrictions in the way of 
 selection of tenants ? — All, of course, must be pleased 
 with the tenant, the tenant's name is submitted to 
 them. 
 
 14656. Mr. Shaw. — ^The tenant's don't object to 
 that ? — No, that is q\dte fair. The rising of the rent 
 is the whole objection. 
 
 14657. Chairman. — Either on a change of tenancy 
 or at any other time ? — Yes, sir. The rising of the 
 rent in 1859 was the hardest crush we got on the 
 Arran estate. 
 
 14658. Mr. Shaw. — That was universal ?— That 
 was universal. 
 
 14659. Tenants have been stopped very much in 
 the improvements since ? — I have known numbers of 
 men that it has crippled since. They had to consent 
 to the rise of rent sooner than leave. 
 
 14660. There is no weaving? — No manufactures 
 except this hand-sowing that I get done by the female 
 portions of the family, embroidery. 
 
 14661. That helps, then?— It does latterly much 
 more than it has done; the American market has 
 improved. 
 
 14662. That shirt-making does not extend here!— 
 No ; there is knitting gloves here ; but the embroideiy 
 is going to do a great deal of good this season. 
 
 Mr. John M'Gaharen examined. 
 
 I bought a farm aboiit 1873, I think, under his 
 lordship. 
 
 14663. Chairman.-^ What rent do,, you pay for it 
 now?— I pay £10 lis. M. 
 
 14664. What was the rent before? — £8 15s. when 
 I bought it. 
 
 14665. It was raised on the change under that 
 rule ? — Yes. 
 
 14666. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know what the rent 
 of it was in 1859 before the first rise? — M'Crudden, 
 who knows the place, minded it at £4 15s., but I think 
 £5 15s. it was befoi-e the rise. 
 
 14667. CHAiEMi>r. — How many acres? — Thirteen 
 short acres. 
 
 14668. What is the point you wish to have noticed ? 
 — The Government valuation is only £6 5s. 
 
 14669. Mr. Shaw. — Is it near the town ?— About 
 two miles and a quai-ter from it. 
 
 14670. You live in the town? — Only I do I could 
 not live on it and take the rent off it these two last 
 years. 
 
 14671. Have you buildings on it 1 — Little buildings, 
 not much. I have a man taking care of some cattle 
 I have there, a small, wee country house. 
 
 14672. But it would not support a man and his 
 family 1 — It could not at all. I have a great deal of 
 work to make up the rent. It is £50 the day better 
 than the day I got it. 
 
 14673. Chairman. — Is it all in grass ? — No ; 
 laboured some of it ; sets potatoes and oats, some of 
 it in hay. 
 
 14674. Is it land you are obliged to break up from 
 time to time ? — Yes. 
 
 14675. It would not. hold out in grass L-lfo; it 
 would run out in two years. I draw manure out of 
 this town, and only the way I wrought it would not 
 be worth £2 10s. I could not live on it if I bad to 
 live on it, and it is wasting my means in the town. 
 I have a place in town here to keep it going and pay 
 the rent. When IMr. Jackson, the agent, brought 
 forward this twenty -five per cent. I did not understand 
 it, so he told me the time was up and the whole estate 
 would be valued in a year or two, and he said, " It 
 will not be much for you to pay it for a year or two, 
 and then you will be the same as another tenant." I 
 did not understand the heavy rise it was, for it was 
 too high before it. I am paying it now these seven 
 3-ears, and there is no word about its coming off. 
 
 14676. You find it is too heavy, but, at the same 
 time, you knew there was this twenty-five per cent, 
 rule? — Yes. He said every twenty-one years the 
 estate was valued and that it was raised. I said 1 
 thought all the land was too high, so he said, " Pei- 
 haps some of it will be lowered, and whatever way 
 the rest be yours will be the same." 
 
 14677. Did he say then it would be twenty-one 
 years before there would be any other charge on you » 
 — Certamly, and that he believed there would be a 
 good deal of the rent lowered. 
 
 14678. Mr. Shaw.— What did you pay for this 
 farm ? — £150, and I earned it sore, some of it; and 1 
 am very sorry for having put it into it at all, not 
 that if I had it at a fair rent. I was reared on 
 land, and I would be living on it if I was fit to h^o 
 on it, but I could not take the rent off it. 
 
 The witnesses then withdrew. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 481 
 
 Mr. James Kelly, 
 
 14679. Chairman. — You are a farmer? — Farmer 
 and miller. 
 
 14680. Who is your landlord? — Stewart Murray, 
 Killymard. 
 
 14681. How many acres do you hold from him? — 
 I hold nine acres and three roods in one farm that I 
 bought here recently, that I have to complain of. 
 
 14682. When did you buy it? — I believe it was in 
 1875 or 1876, I don't remember exactly now. 
 
 14G83. When you bought it was there any advance 
 of rent made' — There was. I bought it from my 
 father-in-law. I was living in the house with my 
 father-in-law ; he held the place before me, and I 
 bought it from my father-in-law at home here in the 
 house, and both of us started then to Killybegs to the 
 agent where he resides. 
 
 14684. Who is the agent? — Mr. Arthur Brooke ; 
 and we went into the office to Mr. Arthur Brooke and 
 we told him that he was giving me the place for a 
 certain sum of money. He got into some difficulties, 
 and from the difficulties he got into he sold me this 
 place to pay off his debt, and then he would not allow 
 it to be sold until he would come back and see it and 
 put a rent on it. 
 
 14685. What was the rent at the time? — ,£9 8«. 
 
 14686. The old rent?— The old rent. 
 
 14687. Did he look at the place? — He came up 
 ^nd looked at the place, and some time afterwards he 
 sent me word to go to him and he would let me know 
 the rent. I had the money paid for it at this time 
 (the man could not do without the money), not ex- 
 pecting the rent would be so much, and he put £11 
 on it. I asked him would he not allow me anything 
 for the county cess, that I thought I was entitled by law 
 to be given half the county cess. He said he would, 
 but he would put half the county cess on the rent in 
 addition to the £11. I said it was as well the one 
 way as the other ; so I am paying the £11 since, and 
 if I had known it at that time, before I was paying 
 the money away, I would have let some other person 
 get the place. 
 
 . 14688. Mr. Shaw. — How much did you pay for, 
 it?— £150. 
 
 14689. Chairman. — Was he aware you were going 
 to buy it then ? — He was. 
 
 14690. And he did not tell you then there would 
 be a rise ? — He told me at the time he came to look 
 at it he would have to put rent on it if he found it 
 was worth it. My father-in-law and I made no diffe- 
 rence at this time in our work on the farm. He was 
 an old man, and I conducted the work on the farm 
 for him, and always manured and cultivated the 
 place, and he turns round and claps this rent on me. 
 
 14691. Then, had it been a rule before that not to 
 make changes of rent on changes of tenancy ? — It was 
 given out so, but it did not take place until it took 
 place in that case. On the same townland there 
 was a man, Aleck Faucett, he bought a place, and 
 there was no rent put on him ; the half of this place 
 that I purchased from my father-in-law, it was the 
 one place that was bought during the great competi- 
 tion, it went up to £150. There was a man came 
 
 Killymard, examined. 
 
 here from Glasgow that wanted to get a site to build 
 on, with plenty of money, and he was not looking at the 
 price of the land at all ; so this other place of Mrs. Mur- 
 ray's, not mine, he put up to £250, and then the next 
 tenant, Mr. Faucett, thought he was best entitled to it, 
 and the agent would not let him into the place, and it 
 cost Mr. Faucett £250 for it, which was very much 
 above the value, but he had a farm of land on both sides 
 of it, and. he did not want any person to give him 
 annoyance. He wanted to get the place to himself, 
 and there was no rent put on that. There was 
 another place bought by Mr. Gold, and he put none 
 on him, and I was the first that he put it on, and 
 there was another man, he put it on him. And there 
 was a Mr. Hammond, J. P., and he sold a farm. I 
 hold under him, in Ballydevitt, at £4 4s. 6d. I laid 
 out some money on it, and put it into a state of culti- 
 vation, and this place of Mr. Hammond's was on the 
 side of me, and he did not interfere with it. 
 
 14692. Then there was no general rule? — It was 
 given out there was this rule, but T was the first and 
 Billy M'Kelvey was the next. 
 
 14693. How long ago was this 1 — Five or six years 
 ago. And this was the first time an increase occurred 
 on a change of tenancy on the Killymard portion of 
 the estate, because he has estates down near Killybegs 
 and Ardarra. This is known as the Killymard part 
 of the Stewart-Murray estate. 
 
 14694. Had he this rule before on the other por- 
 tions of the estate ? — I believe he had. 
 
 14695. You believe he introduced the rule he had 
 on the other estates on to this estate about five or six 
 years ago ? — I. believe he did. 
 
 14696. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think you can get your 
 own money now ? — That is what I don't know. 
 
 14697. You built the house on it ? — No ; my father- 
 in-law did, we both laboured on it. 
 
 14698. You don't live on it? — No, we hold it as an 
 accommodation field. We live in town., 
 
 14699. Chairman.— Do you till it ?— Every bit of 
 it, with the exception of about half an acre, I till and 
 manure. 
 
 14700. Then you go round it and leave it part in 
 grass and part in grain 1 — Yes, and part in potatoes. 
 
 14701. Mr. Shaw. — Was it reclaimed land ? — Yes, 
 it has been reclaimed in 1847 or 1848 by the landlord 
 himself, and then he could get no person to take it off' 
 his hands. It was in a bad state of cultivation, so he 
 farmed on it a little himself, and he had it in his 
 hands from 1848 up to about twelve years ago, and 
 then he sold it for a sum of £60 to Mr. Faucett, and 
 he kept it for about three years and sold it back again ; 
 he could make nothing out of it. We had a quantity 
 of manure at that time, and we put it on the place. 
 
 14702. Chairman. — Extra value is given to some 
 extent by the neighbourhood to the town, over and 
 above the actual value of the land? — Yes. 
 
 14703. Mr. Siiaw.^ — Near manure and near the 
 market? — Yes; and then we kept the place as an 
 accommodation farm. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Oct, 16, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Jame3 
 Kellv. 
 
 Major James Hamilton, j.p., Brownhall, Ballintra, examined. 
 
 14704. Chairman. — What is your property in the 
 county ?— The amount of my property at present is 
 something over £2,000 a year of my own, and my 
 father's is about the same. 
 
 14705. Are you acting as agent for anybody? — I 
 am acting as agent for my father. 
 
 14706. Mr. Shaw. — Does your father live near 
 Donegal ? — Yes, he lives at St. Ernans. 
 
 14707. You were receiver for twelve years on the 
 estates of Mr. Connolly?—! was, sir; there were over 
 3,000 tenants on that, and about 130,000 acres. 
 
 14708. Was that all sold? — No, the property from 
 this to Ballyshannon was not sold. 
 
 14709. And you are still managing that property? 
 — No, I gave it up when it was taken out of the Court 
 of Chancery. 
 
 14710. As to that property, is it going on under, 
 the same sort of rule as existed in Mr. Connolly's 
 time ? — The part of it unsold is going on under the 
 same rules, as before. I resigned for private reasons 
 connected with the collecting of the rent. 
 
 14711. In that property tenant-right existed? — 
 Yery strongly. 
 
 3Q 
 
 Major James 
 Hamilton, j.F. 
 
482 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 Major James 
 Hamilton, j.p. 
 
 14712. Was there anything peculiar in your way of 
 collecting rents? — No. There is what is called the 
 running year on the property. When Mr. Connolly 
 died that running year went to one party and the 
 estate to another, and I was asked to collect 
 the whole running year at once. I said it was 
 impossible to do so, and I would undertake nothing 
 I had not some prospect of doing, and I resigned in 
 consequence. That was when it was taken out of 
 chancery. 
 
 14713. Have the rents remained the same since 
 you gave it up 'i — The rents have remained the same 
 on that part of Mr. Connolly's property. 
 
 14714. Then 'as to the properties that were sold, 
 amongst others this one of Mr. Deazley's, you are 
 able to tell us something about the changes of rent 
 there ? — No, I cannot say that I am, it is a long way 
 off. 
 
 14715. Chairman. — Did you consider the rents 
 very low at the time you were managing? — Very 
 low. The rents on these estates of Mr. Deazley's 
 were reduced in the famine years. A reduction 
 of twenty per cent, on the rent was made in 
 1846, which has not been resumed, so that the 
 rental was far below the letting value, and they were 
 always low let. So that makes the rest seem much 
 larger, because the twenty per cent, put on would merely 
 bring them up to what the old rental had been before 
 1846. 
 
 14716. Were there any of the holders bought their 
 own holdings? — None on all Mr. Connolly's pro- 
 perty. 
 
 14717. That was before the Land Act, and conse- 
 quently they had not those advantages of going to the 
 Board of Works ? — All the property, or very nearly 
 all, was sold before the Land Act, but, at all 
 events, none of the holders put forward a claim 
 for it. 
 
 14718. Do you know any-thing of any of the other 
 properties that were sold— what occurred since as to 
 the state of the tenantry ? — I know more of Glen than 
 anything else, but you have examined Mr. Brooke, the 
 present agent. 
 
 ,14719. At the time there were those moderate rents, 
 were the tenantry generally in a prosperous condition ? 
 — They were, generally ; but a bad year would always 
 knock them up. 
 
 1 4720. And this has been always the case ? — Always 
 the case, where you have tenants with such small 
 rents you must have them in this state, whole pages 
 of them without £1 almost in the pound column of 
 rents. 
 
 14721. Have you seen much in the way of im- 
 provements by the tenants themselves of old times, 
 and then again lately? — Very little of real improve- 
 ments,, there is a good deal of breaking up whmny 
 hills and potatoing them, but I don't call that real 
 improvement, you can always get a man to take a 
 whinny hill from you if it is near a town or a cottier, 
 and if you give it to him for potatoes he will give it 
 back to you in a couple of years clear of whins, I 
 hardly call that a real improvement. 
 
 14722. Then as to drainage ? — Tenants very seldom 
 drain. 
 
 14723. Only to the extent of making open drains? 
 — Yes, which would probably better not be made. 
 
 14724. Mr. Shaw.— Do they build houses in this 
 county ?— Yes, they buUd some houses, but landlords 
 generally give them timber and slates. 
 
 14726. From this, five miles out there are good 
 houses ?^Yes, of late years the landlord is not giving 
 as much as he did, because he is not sure of getting 
 any benefit of it. 
 
 14726. Many of them are new houses ?— Yes, the 
 late Colonel Connolly did a good deal of building, and 
 liked to have houses built along the mail car road, so 
 as to civilize the place. 
 
 14727. The tenants did most of those buildiiiKS? — 
 yes, but the stone work is very easy about 
 there is a stone quarry there. 
 
 Laghy, 
 
 14728. That is on your father's property? — No 
 Mr. Connolly's, my father's comies in between that and 
 Ballintra, and he has also property at Killymard. 
 
 14729. In old times was it the custom to give land 
 that required reclamation, to the tenants for a certain 
 number of years free, and then put a rent on!— 
 Exactly, we used to give mountain land to the tenant 
 for Is. a year for ten years, or perhaps longer, and 
 then he was to pay 10s. a year, and at the end of 
 twenty years the landlord would come in, and have 
 the land valued, and put a fair value on the land, I 
 don't say the full value, but a rent. 
 
 14730. Was that done where the tenants held in 
 rundale ? — No, you could not do it. 
 
 14731. But I mean in order to divide the holding, 
 and then gave it to him ? — The holdings generally had 
 to be divided first, and then a mountain holding 
 bought by the landlord. In my father's case he bought 
 several holdings, and put tenants out on them, helped 
 them to build houses, gave them turf banks free, and 
 at the end of twenty years put a rent on it. 
 
 14732. But many of those holdings were originally 
 in rundale. and then formed in this way by enclosing 
 the holdings ? — Not these holdings to be improved, 
 they were generally taken in mountain holdings. 
 
 14733. Mr. Shaw. — The rent was put on as a 
 moderate rent, not as the highest thing a man could 
 jiay where he had improved the land 1 — It was not the 
 full value of the land. The landlord had given his 
 capital in giving these twenty years free, and the 
 tenant had given his capital in his labour, and at the 
 end of twenty years there was an arrangement 
 made. 
 
 14734. You say from 1820 to 1855 many of the 
 estates which were in rundale were squared, and a great 
 deal of waste land reclaimed ? — Yes ; when a tenant 
 was squared, he immediately began to improve the 
 place about his house. 
 
 14735. He generally built the house, I suppose? — 
 He built the house, getting help from the landlord of 
 timber, a little money, and probably windows, and 
 very often a reduction on his rent for some years. For 
 instance, on my property down near Glenties, it is a 
 property that was paying about £400 a year, anJ they 
 got a reduction of about £100 a year for twenty 
 years, when they were squared, to enable them to get 
 strong in their new holdings. 
 
 14736. Chairman. — At that time was the reclama- 
 tion really good reclamation ? — I cannot say it was 
 good, it was tolerable reclamation. There was no real 
 drainage done, except what the landlord might do 
 iiimself, sometimes he gave prizes for the man that 
 had the best drained field of land. 
 
 14737. Mr.SHAW.- 
 mountain land. 
 
 14739. Chairman. — Throughout this country 
 generally there has been tenant-right? — Every- 
 where. 
 
 14740. We understood so from a man here who 
 said there was what they would call fixity of tenure, 
 that is the examples of capricious evictions were very 
 rare ? — Very rare indeed. 
 
 14741. And that there was pretty free sale ?— Pretty 
 free sale. 
 
 14742. But what they complain of is the introduc- 
 tion of the custom of a rise of rent on the change oi 
 tenancy? — That I understand has been the custom 
 here about Donegal. I was going to try that at one 
 time, because when prices rise, a landlord has to rise 
 his rent at some time or other. I thought it would be 
 a good thing to do it at the time of the sale, but I found 
 land might be sold two or three times, and it was con- 
 fusing, I had to drop it. 
 
 14743. Mr. Shaw. — Do you have periodical rises of 
 rent 1 — On one part of my property it has not been 
 raised since 1826. 
 
 14744. You think it destroys tenant-right ?— Well, 
 I think a rise on sales might deter the purchaser. 
 Still, on Connolly's land his rental is on the old 
 rental of somewhere about 1824 or 1823. The 
 
 -Was it mountain or bog ? — All 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 483 
 
 land had been valued, and was to have been 
 raised about 1860. I had the maps and valuation, 
 I always looked when a tenant was purchasing 
 his land, and told him what his land was valued at 
 ill the new valuation, and I said, " I don't tell you 
 you will be raised to that, but you are a purchaser with 
 notice." If a man is buying a farm worth £2, and 
 it was marked in the rental as £4, I said " You know 
 what is in the valuation." 
 
 14745. But at the same time they had such con- 
 fidence in the management of the property it did not 
 deter them t — No. 
 
 14746. But where there is a regular 25 per cent. 
 put on in all sales 1 — It is a stopper, but 25 per cent. 
 I cannot look upon as being done because some farmers 
 are not worth that. 
 
 14747. Chairjian. — In looking in these notes I 
 see you make an observation as to the Grand Jury 
 cess in which you refer to the case of tenants under 
 £4 being free from payment ^ — Yes, I think it has a 
 tendency to subdi^asion and I also think it is unfair 
 on the landlord, as, under the Land Act, the landlord 
 is bound to pay the entire county-cess for a tenant 
 under £i whether he receives that much rent or not. 
 I have a case that occurred on one property I know, 
 the rent was 10s., the Poor Law Valuation was £4, 
 the landlord therefore was liable and the county-cess 
 was 5s. in the pound, the landlord would therefore have 
 to pay £1 besides poor rates and income tax, for the 
 pleasure of receiving 10s. that is rather a hard case 
 on a landlord I think, and a tenant cap. always rise 
 his land if his land is valued at a small valuation, and 
 he puts up a house on it, the house is immediately 
 valued. I think that is a very bad principle ; we 
 want to get good houses in the country, but the 
 valuator the moment a house is built claps a value on 
 it even before the man is inhabiting it. 
 
 14748. You think farm buildings ought to be 
 excluded from taxation? — Certainly for a certain 
 time. 
 
 14749. Mr. Shaw. — The county cess is only put on 
 in new holdings, it was a matter of policy to discourage 
 disturbance on the part of the landlord 1 — I suppose 
 it was. I don't think it is a good plan and greatly 
 tends to lead to subdivisions and prevent amalgamation. 
 I have two farms of £2 4s. each near me, as long as 
 they are separate the man escapes county cess, if he 
 purchased the two holdings he would have to pay 
 county cess which would be a considerable rise on his 
 rent. 
 
 14750. There is another observation I see you 
 make on section 14 of the Land Act you think that 
 ought to be applicable to a tenant right farm 1 — I 
 was examined on that section before a Committee of 
 the House of Commons and Lord O'Hagan gave me 
 to understand it did apply, but the contrary has been 
 ruled since. That is with regard to turf, game and things 
 of that kind that section 14 refers to. With regard to 
 game perhaps you may- think it is rather a feudal opinion, 
 but I think there is some value in game, and if all 
 the tenunts had a right to kill the game, the grouse, 
 I am not talking of rabbits, there would not be a 
 grouse left in the country. On an estate of £400 a year 
 I get £70 a year out of my grouse and if it belonged 
 to the tenants they would not get a shilling or a 
 grouse, and therefore there is £70 lost to the country. 
 With regard to turf the landlord has not at present 
 absolutely by law the right to cut the turf on a tenant's 
 farm, a yearly tenant could bring him up for trespass.' 
 The turf in many cases at least in this country is on 
 some few mountain holdings, for instance all the land 
 you came through to-day from Ballyshannon, you did 
 not see a bit of turf on the whole road, all the turf is 
 up on a few mountain holdings let very cheap to the 
 tenants and if those tenants were to be able to prevent 
 the cutting of turl they would take the turf' from every 
 tenant in the whole country and make them pay for 
 it. They get their land at a nominal rent of 3d. or 
 Ad. and could let their turf to the other tenants at 
 .£4 an acre. 
 
 14751. But that is not the case now ?— No, the Oc<. ic. leso. 
 tenants do not stop you cutting, they have not come major James 
 to that. Hamilton, j.p. 
 
 14752. They have not the power? — Oh, they have 
 the power. 
 
 14753. But the landlord could prevent them?— 1 
 know Lord Lifford got an injunction from the Court 
 of Chancery. You would have to eject the tenant 
 if he refused to allow you to cut turf, and if you eject 
 him you make yourself liable to the tenant-right. 
 
 14754. But turf is common property? — It belongs 
 to the landlord and he has a right to divide it among 
 the tenants or sell it himself. 
 
 14755. Don't you think it is really an accommoda- 
 tion for the estate ? — It has been always looked upon. 
 
 14756. No landlord sells it? — Oh, yes, plenty of 
 them sell it. All about Donegal the people have no 
 bog, and would have to send ten or twelve miles for bog. 
 
 14757. And do tfee landlords sell the bog to other 
 than tenants ? — Y»g. 
 
 14758. But then there is an immense deal more 
 there than the tenants of the estate want ? — Yes ; you^ 
 always keep sufficient for the tenants, supply the, 
 tenants first. 
 
 14759. Chairman. — Well then the next thing is as 
 to the succession to a farm on a death ?^-That is a very 
 hard case, indeed. I could give you an instance of 
 that that occurred within the last year or two close to 
 myself. There were two brothers 'of the name of 
 Harren, whose father died. The elder brother took 
 possession of the farm thirty years ago, or perhaps 
 more, and turned his younger brother Out, let him go 
 and hire. When he was hired he met with a giii who 
 had a small farm of her own, paying about thirty 
 shillings rent. He married her and lived on this farm. 
 A little farm beside it at another thirty shillings was 
 to be sold, and she wi'ote to her brother in America 
 asking him would he advance her the money to pur- 
 
 , chase this farm. He said — " I will send you home 
 the money, if I come home myself I will take the 
 farm, if not you may have it." I believe he died 
 in America, at least he never came home. Last year 
 this woman's husband died, the elder brother came 
 down and said " That farm is mine, you are entitled to 
 only one-third of the value." The two farms were 
 bought by the woman's money, and she was turned out. 
 It is left to arbitration at present, but I told the woman 
 "You must make what terms you can, because I cannot 
 interfere for you any longer." In former times, before 
 the Land Act, the landlord would not have stood it. 
 Another thing required is in some way to legalise a sale, 
 the same way as cattle is sold in a fair. If a beast is sold 
 in a fair it becomes the property of the buyer. The land 
 is treated as personal property, and divided among the 
 family, but at the same time it can be followed for 
 the next twenty years by a man who has been perhaps 
 in America ; he got his passage money paid out to 
 America, which was generally considered his fair share, 
 but he comes back from America and claims the land. 
 I had a case of that not very long ago, where a tenant 
 of the name of Walsh died very much in arrear. He 
 left a small family, and the agent was going to dis- 
 possess him. This was before I got the property, but 
 the agent was going to dispossess him for non-payment ,! 
 
 of rent. , His brother came forward and said — " If 
 you will allow me to be the tenant I will try and pay 
 up the rent; you will allow me to sell off this---a 
 small portion of an outlying farm — to a neighbour, 
 which will make up the rent at present due." He sold 
 that portion to a neighbour for about ,£00, and paid 
 up his rent. In a few years more this brother fell 
 into arrear again, and he was again allowed to sell 
 another outlying portion of the farm, which he sold 
 for £60, without an ejectment being brought against 
 him ; there was an ejectment going to be brought, but 
 it was not brought on the understanding that he sold 
 up this portion. Part of this money went to take 
 some of the family off to America, some having been 
 already sent out. About four or five years ago one > 
 
 of those parties comes back from America and° takes 
 
 3Q2 
 
484 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 oa. ic, isso 
 
 Major James 
 Hamilton J.r. 
 
 out administration to the intestate estate of his father, 
 which tenancy had never been legally determined, and 
 he ejected these two men at the assizes. They held 
 on their rights ; they said — " We really bought it, and 
 bought it in the landlord's office, and were received as 
 tenants, and have been tenants now for the last ten or 
 fifteen years, and we are in possession and will fight 
 it." It was brought before the Judge and it was dis- 
 missed almost without a word of argument on either 
 side. These men lost, one £80 and the other £60, 
 they had paid for the land, and they lost their own 
 costs and had to pay about £40 to the other side. 
 The landlord in old days settled that at once ; he 
 named the new tenant, and that man was the tenant. 
 But there should be some rule by which a sale should be 
 held to be a firm sale, the same as a sale in a fair is a 
 proper sale of a cow. 
 
 14760. Mr. Shaw. — And notices in the papers for 
 claimants 1 — Yes, but you must not make it too tech- 
 nical, you have to deal with a great number of small 
 tenants, one half of them don't speak English, and they 
 are thirty miles from an attorney, and if you send them 
 to an attorney he runs up costs. 
 
 14761. That is the thing to be avoided? — I quite 
 agree in that. Of all the disputes that no w come forward 
 in the courts, nine-tenths are disputes that arise out 
 of land, family disputes, cases which would have been 
 settled before in the landlord's office at once. 
 
 14762. CHAiEMA>r. — The entry in the books is 
 "Representative of so and so"? — I always enter 
 the man's name as I used to do. The first year I 
 enter "representatives." The widow is always the 
 person selected and the eldest son. I always enter 
 them and say " If anyone likes they may take them 
 out of my book," but I always enter them. 
 
 14763. What is really required is some very simple 
 easy means of administering 1 — Some very simple easy 
 means of settlement. 
 
 14764. Or nominating a tenant as trustee for those 
 who may be entitled 1 
 
 14765. Mr. Shaw. — Or making a sale and letting it 
 stand as such? — It is harder even on the person whopur- 
 chases, and it greatly deteriorates the value of tenant- 
 right. 
 
 14766. But the sale with notice should be a final 
 thing? — It should be a final thing. 
 
 14767. And let the men who come from America 
 follow the people who get the money and not follow 
 the land? — Precisely, but it is hard enough in all 
 these cases, the father gives them a cow when they 
 are married, and it is very hard that they should be 
 allowed to come forward again when they have been 
 paid their share. I think it is one of the hardest 
 cases, and it is not a landlord's case, it does not signify 
 to a landlord much, and it is injustice to the tenants 
 I want it. There was a thing I mentioned to you 
 in those queries about tenant-right at the end of a 
 lease, where tenant-right had not been purchased by 
 the tenant at the commencement of the lease, and it 
 is a very hard case. Now, for instance, I have a 
 tenant, I am sure there will not be any disturbance 
 about it at all, for the man and I pull perfectly well 
 together ; and, therefore, I select this case. JMy father 
 purchased out several tenants near my demesne at 
 Brownhall, he purchased them out and farmed the 
 land for some years himself, he then gave it to a tenant 
 on a lease, the lease is a very old lease now, the life 
 of it is over eighty, and when that lease drops suppos- 
 ing that man says, "Jv,rin sell my interest in the 
 farm," and brings some rascal into the place, some 
 man who may be an unpleasant neighbour, and whom 
 1 can have no power of keeping out, he will say tenant- 
 right is the rule on the estate. 
 
 14768. But have you not a veto on the tenant? — 
 We have no real veto. 
 
 14769. You can object to the tenant and say you 
 wUl not have him 1 — You cannot in point of law unless 
 you can prove a case against him. 
 
 14770. Did the tenant get this farm in a perfect 
 state of cultivation? — Yes, it was the home farm 
 when my father left to go to St. Ernan's he put him 
 into it. 
 
 14771. He pays a rent for it a good rent? — Ho did 
 not pay a good rent for he was the steward's son, and 
 my father was anxious to give it to him at a reason- 
 able rent. 
 
 14772. Chairman. — You say the difficulty is the 
 landlord having to prove the custom does not exist at 
 the close of the lease?— I don't want to object to 
 tenant-right at the close of leases where tenant- 
 right exists at the beginning of leases, but if I buy a ten- 
 ant'sfarm who is going to America, and put a man into it 
 who has some capital, instead of allowing him to 
 expend X200 or £300 on his purchase, I stand in the 
 shoes of the purchaser, and put him into it so ttat he 
 has his £200 or £300 in his pocket to commence 
 operations. In the course of two or three years he 
 sells his farm and pockets his £200 or £300 which is 
 really mine. 
 
 14773. But you are sujiposed to have protected 
 yourself by a rent on the man coming in I — No; they 
 would not give you that rent. If a man was on a £20 
 farm, and you paid £400 for it, the tenant would pay 
 £400, biTt he would not give you £40 a year for it. 
 
 14774. Mr. Shaw. — Then incases Hke yours you 
 think there d ught to be a special arrangement or 
 special agreement? — I think there ought, because 
 these things were mostly done before the Land Act. 
 Where they were done after the Land Act the land- 
 lord has notice and must take care of himself, but 
 previous to the Land Act there were a great many 
 tenants whom I have put on land, and my father has 
 put on land where we purchased the tenant-right., and 
 put the man in without tenant-right in order that he 
 might have a good capital to work the land. If he is a 
 good tenant, you generally give it at a low rent. The 
 object I always had was to secure a good tenant, and 
 rents well paid, and not have the tenant rented up to 
 the mast-head. 
 
 14775. Chairman. — They would be able to claim 
 at the end of that unless you are able to prove the 
 contrary ? — Where a man holds as a yearly tenant 
 I can eject him, and so prove it; but I don't want to 
 eject my good tenants. 
 
 14776. But how is the law if you can show that 
 the custom does not apply to that particular farm from 
 its having been purchased ? — There is some difficulty 
 about that, Mr. Deazley broitght a case of that kmd, 
 and was dismissed. In cases of leases, it is almost 
 impossible for a landlord to do it. The landlord 
 cannot give a lease, until he is twenty-one, the agent 
 or bailiff is considerably over twenty-one, and the 
 life put in to the lease is probably two or three, so 
 that all the parties who can prove it, are dead before 
 the lease drops probably ; I want to have some means 
 of recording it. 
 
 14777. The tenant-right would not be worth much, 
 if the rent was to cover your outlay ? — But you see 
 that all these small tenants hardly pay £1 each. 
 
 14778. How do they manage to make the rent and 
 live ?— That I never could make out. 
 
 14779. Is there much employment there? — No 
 employment whatever in that country, there is no 
 fishing, nothing for them to do whatever. 
 
 14780. Mr. Shaw.— They go, I suppose to England 
 and Scotland as labourers ?— Some of them do, latterly 
 they go very little indeed. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 485 
 
 pro- 
 
 14780a. Chairman. — You are a merchant 
 farmer ? — Merchant and farmer. 
 
 14781. What business 1 — General business, 
 visions, and nearly everything. 
 
 14782. Mr. Shaw. — In Donegal ? — Bridgetown, on 
 the way to Ballyshannon. 
 
 14783. Chairman. — How many acres do you hold 
 altogether 1 — I hold somewhere over 150 altogether. 
 
 14784. Under several landlords'! — Several land- 
 lords. 
 
 14785. Mr. Shaw. — Who are the principal 1 — I 
 live on the Connolly property. 
 
 14786. And that is your largest farm I suppose ? — 
 I hold as large a farm under Major Hamilton. 
 
 14787. Chairman. — Which property is it you 
 would wish to bring under our notice ? — Well, I hold 
 from Major Knox as well, and that is the property. 
 
 14788. How many acres 1 — I have about four acres 
 in one place, and then I have another holding on 
 Major Knox's property. I don't know how many 
 acres, it is a grass farm, perhaps thirty or forty acres. 
 
 14789. Mr. Shaw. — Is that near where you live 1 
 — Within a mile of my place. 
 
 14790. Chairman. — Have you made much im- 
 provements on that farm t — I have made improve- 
 ments on the small portions. 
 
 14791. And what was the nature of the improve- 
 ments t — Draining and fencing, and manuring land, 
 iiliproving it in a general way. 
 
 14792. Were they stone drains 1 — Stone drains. 
 
 14793. And eiFectual ? — Yes. after working at them 
 for four or five years. 
 
 14794. Mr. Shaw. — Are they Irish acres 1 — Irish 
 acres. 
 
 14795. Chairman. — Wliat do you pay for it ? — £2 
 an aci'e on Major Knox's property for the small 
 portion of the holding, the other is 33s. or 34s. an acre. 
 
 14796. Mr. Shaw. — That is the forty acre grass 
 farm? — Yes. 
 
 14797. Chairman. — Does tenant-right exist there? 
 — No sir, I have not the tenant-right of the large 
 holdings. 
 
 14798. Mr. Shaw.— You did not buy it? — No, I 
 did not buy it, I bought the other, at least my father 
 bought the other. 
 
 14799. Chairman. — Is that a temporary letting of 
 the grass farm ? — Yes, I do not dispute the giving up 
 of that at any moment. 
 
 14800. Then it is as to the smaller holding you 
 wish to speak ? — Yes. I was noticed for an increase 
 of rent, nearly two years since. 
 
 14801. Mr. Shaw.— Over the £2 ?— Yes. 
 
 14802. Chairman. — And you consider that is an 
 advance upon your improvements ? — I do. 
 
 Mr. William Hammond, Bridgetown examined, 
 and 
 
 How much was the advance 
 
 14803. Mr. Shaw. 
 to be ?— 33^ exactly. 
 
 14804. That is one-third of an advance 1 — Yes. 
 
 14805. Chairman. — Do you think an advance like 
 that would destroy your tenant-right ? — I don't think 
 my tenant-right would be worth anything. I would 
 not get anything for my tenant-right, if I was to offer 
 it now at the advanced rent. 
 
 14806. From its being known that was proposed? 
 — Yes. 
 
 14807. Mr. Shaw. — You have not paid it yet? — 
 No. Owing to the bad season last year the increased 
 rent was not collected. 
 
 14808. Have you done everything in the way of 
 improvements that was done ? — Yes. 
 
 14809. The landlord did nothing?— Did nothing 
 
 14810. It has been in your family for a long time?' 
 — My father bought it, perhaps twenty-two or twenty- 
 three years ago. 
 
 14811. Chairman. — Is this near the town? — It is 
 near the village of Ballintra. 
 
 14812. Do you keep it in grass? — Yes; I cropped 
 it until it was in proper form for giving grass, and the 
 last two or three years I have had it in grass. 
 
 14813. Have you represented it to Major Knox? 
 — I have to his agent, Thomas Colquhoun. 
 
 14814. Mr. Shaw. — Is it a large property? — It is a 
 large property. 
 
 14815. Is he proposing to raise the rents ? — Yes; all over. 
 ' 14816. Chairman. — Has there been a valuation ? — 
 There has. 
 
 14817. How long ago ? — About two years. 
 
 14818. Mr. Shaw. — Is the advance in the same pro- 
 portion over all the tenants ? — In some cases it is up 
 to that ; in others it is not. I think that is rather 
 over the average. 
 
 14819. Do they complain of it? — Very much. 
 
 14820. They have not paid yet?— No. 
 
 14821. Chairman. — Is there anything else you 
 wish to state ? — T hold under three different landlords, 
 and I have nothing to say about them. 
 
 14822. Mr. Shaw. — The Connolly estate is managed 
 well, and tenant-right admitted ? — Yes. 
 
 14823. Your rents are fair ? — The rents are fair on 
 Major Hamilton's and the Connolly property. 
 
 14824. The tenants have nothing to complain of on 
 those properties ? — No ; anything they complained of 
 on those properties would be unjust. I hold under 
 both of them. 
 
 14825. The tenants are doing fairly, considering the 
 times ? — Yes ; I think better than on other properties 
 in the district. 
 
 14826. And tenant-right is admitted fully?— 
 Tenant-right is admitted fully. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Oct. 19, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Hammond. 
 
 Mr. James Davis, Donegal, examined. 
 
 ■Tame 
 
 14827. Chairman. — You are a farmer, I believe ? 
 ■ — Yes ; I hold about 200 acres of land, but there in a 
 part of it freehold. 
 
 14828. Wlio do you hold under 1 — I hold about four 
 statute acres under Lord Arran. 
 
 14829. Is it as regards those four acres that you 
 wish to speak ? — Yes. The complaint I have against 
 him is : It was an old brickyard when I came to the 
 town. I took it in 1851, and the agent and his sub- 
 agent could only value it at £3 1 Os. I told them it was 
 notworth anything until it was improved, and I got leave 
 to hold it until it would recoup me. I commenced to 
 drain, and cleared a large ditch away and fiUed up a 
 brick hole, and it remained at that rent. He changed 
 the agent then ; and he raised it, that was when he 
 came in, the new agent, to £4: 10s. 6d. 
 
 14830. Mr. Shaw. — What year was that ?— 
 1859. 
 
 14831. Chair.man. — That was after the new valua- 
 
 tion ? — Yes ; it was the same agent did it. Very well, 
 then, from 1859 to May 1869, they let it remain the 
 one year at £4 10s., and brought it up then to £5 lis. 
 That was the second rise it got. 'Then from May, 
 1869 to 1880, they put it to £6 18s. 6d, that is three 
 rises, that is the .present rent I am paying. Lord 
 Arran wanted but 20 per cent, put on, and he wrote to 
 Jackson, his local manager ; but when Mr. Crean, the 
 rent receiver came, he said we will put on 25 per cent., 
 because Lord Arran will have to pay half the county 
 cess ; and they put on 25 per cent., and he does not 
 pay one penny of county cess now. 
 
 14832. Mr. Shaw You have made the improve- 
 ments ? — Yes. 
 
 14833. And made it good land ? — Well, it is pass- 
 able now. 
 
 14834. What side of the town is it ?— Kellybegs. 
 
 14835. Is it near the town? — Yes. 
 
 14836. Is your own freehold land near the town ] 
 
 l)a\"i 
 
486 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Davis. 
 
 —No ; it is near Ballysliannon. I hold ninety acres 
 at Cavangarden (J) 
 
 14837. Do you farm it yourself? — VVell, i do, it 
 you call stocking it. 
 
 14838. Would you be allowed to sell this of Lord 
 ArraiVs 1 — No ; since the Land Act passed in 1870, 
 he has drawn the receipt of that as a townpark. 
 
 14839. So you could not sell it '!— No, I could not 
 sell it according to his receipt, but I dispute that, and 
 call it a holding. A neighbouring tenant, similarly 
 treated, recovered the price of his tenant-right in the 
 Land Court. 
 
 14840. Has it cost you much money, wha,t you have 
 done on it 1 — I have laid out, perhaps, £40, say 
 £30, at least. And another grievance I have 
 to state on the Murray estate, my grandfather 
 and father and myself were tenants on the Murray 
 estate, but I recollect when Mr. Murray became heir, 
 I was a boy, and we held at £28 14s. Irish, that 
 would be about £23. There was not ten acres of the 
 forty acres you could turn a plough on. My father 
 had to keep labourers ou it, and he stubbed a great 
 deal of bi-iars and slr.e trees and hazels, and drained it, 
 and they have raised it now to £45 10s., and what 
 I complain most of is Murray's agent sent a man to 
 me to say he would build me a house. I said " I 
 am very much obliged to Mr. Murray for that, but 
 it would cost him a great deal to build^ a house 
 according to the size of the farm, if he built it as he 
 did on the small farms, and I don't want to put him 
 to any expense, and I probably would not go to live 
 in it, as I am living in to^vn, and I might be tempted 
 to set it, and we would have a quarrel about it ; 
 but if he expended one-fourth of that in drainage, 
 what it would cost to build the house, it would be 
 very much better for the landlord and tenant." The 
 agent went out with me and said he would not get 
 leave to do it. I asked him to look at a battery he 
 built at the end of my land which flooded two acres 
 of it. He said " I will expend £100 on your farm, 
 and charge you five per cent." I said "I cannot pay 
 that, Mr. Wilson, but there are a great deal of labour- 
 ers unemployed in Donegal." I said, " spend you £50 
 on account of the labour, and I will bind myself to 
 spend £50 in drainage." " Agreed," he said. I com- 
 menced and spent £30 in the winter. I asked him 
 out to look at it, and he commenced mimicking me, 
 and said it was not Worth looking at. " Well," I 
 said, " they did not cost the landlord anything, and 
 do you build better." He said, " I will give you a 
 
 lease," I said, " I don't think we will be anxious to 
 get leases the way you are treating us." Then he 
 increased the rent £5 10s., and served me with notice 
 I asked what was that for, he said there was a 'great 
 deal of capital spent on the estate, and this was the 
 interest they were putting on it. I said, " My dear 
 sir, do you show me anything you have expended 
 on the townland. You have canded on improvements 
 in Kellybegs that were useless, and spent the landlord's 
 property, and will you charge me with it. " He said " it 
 is the rule on every estate, and you must submit to it." 
 
 14841. Chaieman. — You say this was Mr. Wilson! 
 —Yes. 
 
 14842. Mr. Shaw. — When was thaf!— 186U. 
 
 14843. Is there a Mr. Brooke agent nowt—Yes, 
 I have nothing to say about Mr. Brooke ; he got the 
 books and keeps them on. 
 
 14844. And they put your rent to £45 10s.!- 
 Yes, and interest on capital that he squandered. He 
 kept a staff about him, some of them from £50 to 
 £100 a year, and kept smiths and. carpenters, ami 
 spent the money of the estate during the minority oi 
 the present proprietors. 
 
 14845. But none of it was spent on your farm!— 
 Not one shilling, nor there never was a shilling on 
 the whole townland. My father held one part, and 
 Crummer another; and when Mr. Murray Stewart 
 cameinto this room, and the tenants wanted abatement, 
 he said to some of them, ' ' You are no tenants of mine," 
 and then when he came to Crummer and Davies he 
 said, " Come forward, these are my tenants, these 
 have their rents paid." Mr. Rabington had added 
 5 per cent, on our farm, and he said, "Babington 
 sweep that out, it is not those men you ought to bp 
 rising." I am paying £5 10s. for the improvements 
 done for other people, and he has raised a battery on 
 \o.j farm to get water into a mill, and he has raised 
 the rent nearly £40 on the mill in consequence of the 
 water power he gave it, and it has destroyed me and 
 the other man alongside. I thought the generosity 
 of any other landlord or agent would be such that he 
 would not take advantage of a tenant, and I never took 
 proceedings to prevent him, tliinking he would make a 
 fair deduction in the rent, and that is the way I am 
 treated. 
 
 14846. And you haVe no lease? — No lease, and I 
 have been served with notice to quit. I thought it 
 hard to leave my improvements, and ■ I am lahouring 
 under it since, and it is not worth it. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 ]Mr. .Joshua 
 ,1.11'kson. 
 
 Mr. Joshua Jackson, 
 
 14847. Chaib5IAS. — You are sub-agent on Lord 
 Arran's property 1 — Superintendent on the estate, he is 
 his own agent. He has an agent, Mr. Crean, Ballina, Co. 
 Mayo. He comes down here once or twice a year — 
 in July, to get the rents of the town, and at Christmas 
 to get the rents of the tenantry, and whatever is not 
 paid then I receive and forward to him. But all 
 other transactions are transacted bv himself. 
 
 14848. In connection with you? — In connection 
 with me about the tenantry. 
 
 14849. Mr. Shaw. — Does he come here himself? — 
 Not these last two years. 
 
 1485U. Chairman. — He has been unwell, I think? 
 — He was very unwell last Christmas, but- he used to 
 come every year. 
 
 14851. How long have yovi been engaged under 
 him ? — Nearly 23 years. 
 
 14852. Did )'0u live here before that time ? — No, 
 I li\'ed in the Co. Kildare ; held a farm of nearly 200 
 acres, paid £150 a year rent. My father and grand- 
 father lived in Kildare. 
 
 14853. Do you know how many acres there are on 
 Lord Arran's property ? — I think there are about 6,645 
 in the whole. 
 
 14854. That is including mountain grazing farms ? 
 — There are about 3,925 acres held by tenants, not 
 including townparks — Drumcliffe, Donegal town and 
 
 Donegal, examined, 
 part of Mullen's what we call townparks, but there 
 are 235 tenants upon these 3,925 acres, not mention- 
 ing the tenants of the towns or townparks. 
 
 14355. And is the rest of it mountain grazing!— 
 We have 70 acres on our own hands, and the rest is 
 mountain. I suppose there are about 2,700 acres. 
 
 14856. Are many of those tenants, small tenants! 
 — We have about 98 tenants, at £5 rent and under; 
 we have about 89 at from £5 to £10 ; we have about 
 29 from £10 to £20, and we have about 19 fromi20 
 up, and two of them pay £52 and another £84, not 
 including townparks or town tenancies. 
 
 14857. Are the grass farms generally let at a liigt 
 rate 1 — Indeed they are. 
 
 14858. Good farms? — What is on hands we get 
 £3 an acre for the grazing. 
 
 14859. Letting the grazing of the land ?— Grazing 
 for six months ; and we get, I suppose, for meadow 
 £4 10s. or £4 15s. per Irish acre. 
 
 14860. We heard that the property was valued by 
 Brassington and Gale in 1857 or about that time?— 
 Yes, it was. 
 
 14861. And about two years after that the rents 
 were raised generally to Gale's valuation ? — Yes, my 
 lord ; I did not come here mitil the last week of 185/, 
 and I was here at the old rise. Before 1 came here 
 Lord Arran had Mr. Gale and had it valued, he com- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 4S7 
 
 plained that there was irregularity, some tenants paid 
 more than others, and some paid very little, and a 
 few townlands were not divided. Mr. Gale's valua- 
 tion was put on and it was raised in three instalments. 
 1 thought it a had plan, and I represented to 
 Mr. Symes at the time, hut I was not minded. I 
 did not imderstand this country's customs, and Mr. 
 Symes, the agent, took it that it was better to 
 make three instalments of the rise. He put one 
 on in 1858, he put another on, I think, in 1859 ; 
 and, I think, the last of these was in 1860, making 
 three divisions of the ris.e. The tenants nearly all 
 were dispiating and saying it was too high every time, 
 and he did not tell therii what the rent would 
 finally be at the first rise. I suggested that it would 
 be better to tell the persons what the rent would be, 
 that they might know what they were doing, but still 
 he went on and did not tell them until the last gale. 
 When he put on the last rise he promised he would 
 not change that rent for 21 years, he called the 
 tenants together, and Lord Arran was here in this 
 very room and I was present when he promised he 
 would not rise the rent for 21 years. It so happened 
 that in 1872, 12 years after, a man wanted to sell his 
 holding in Carnbigli, and the buyer or seller wrote to 
 Lord Arran, would he allow him to be tenant. Lord 
 Arran wrote back to me saying he did not know the 
 person, and that he should pay 25 per cent, addition to 
 the rent, coming in as a new tenant on this holding. 
 When I got that letter 1 -wrote back to Lord Arran 
 suggesting that I was present when his lordship pro- 
 mised he would not rise rents for 21 years, and that 
 for the few that would change hands, I suggested to 
 his lordship not to disturb the rent but let it run out 
 for 2 1 years. His lordship did let that man pa°ss, 
 and another, and took my advice, until another man, 
 living in Mullinalamphry, got an auctioneer to sell, 
 and there was a man came home from America who 
 gave two prices for this bit of land, and the auctioneer 
 wrote to his loi'dship saying he sold the land for so 
 inuch cash, and would his lordship be kind enough 
 ■ to make this man tenant. His lordship sent that 
 letter to me, asking the usual questions, and I in- 
 quired about him and I believed he would make 
 a good tenant. But his lordship said his estate 
 was let too low ; there was this enormous sum 
 given for the tenant-right, and he was only getting so 
 much rent, and let this be the last farm that was sold 
 without the 25 per cent, being put on. He told the 
 bailiff, Sharkey, to attend the sales, and proclaim it 
 throughout the whole estate to purchaser and seller. 
 When I got that order I never said a word more ; so 
 there were 18 farms sold since, and the 26 per cent, 
 was put on nearly all. 
 
 14862. Who is Sharkey t— The bailiff of the estate. 
 
 14863. He attended and told them «— Yes. 
 
 14864. Mr. Shaw. — Some that were offered since 
 were not sold 1 — They were sold, but one man would 
 not take it. There was a man named Hugh 
 M'Ginty, he sold a little farm ; he took two farms and 
 he was to keep them together as one ; a few years 
 went by and he found he should sell one, and Lord 
 Arran gave him permission. A man of the name of 
 Pearson bought that from him, and a few years after 
 he sold the other to a man named McCrudden. 
 McCrudden wrote to Lord Arran saying he wished to 
 be the tenant of M'Ginty's farm, and Lord Arran 
 sent the letter to me, and I answered the usual ques- 
 tions. But the man was not to become tenant on any 
 account unless he paid 25 per cent. The man would 
 not pay it unless M'Ginty gave him £10 off his pur- 
 xjhase. It lay there, and it is likely the money was 
 lodged, Sharkey, the bailiff, tells me, and the man 
 would not take it, and so there it lies, and Lord Arran 
 has not changed his mind. I understood he got £70 
 for his tenant-right, and there is £4 8s. a year rent ; 
 he got very nearly 15 years' purchase. 
 
 14865. Chairman. — I suppose that Lord Arran's 
 view was that his promise of twenty-one years was 
 to the actual tenants or their representatives; but 
 
 that on a sale, he considered he had a right to make 
 increases ? — His meaning was that on anynew tenancy, 
 he would rise it on the piirchaser of the farm. 
 
 14866. ]Mr. Shaw. — But that was not stated in 
 1859 1 — I never heard that stated then. 
 
 14867. Chairman. — You, being here, saw that that 
 would give great dissatisfaction ? — I did ; and, there- 
 fore I took the liberty of suggesting to his lordship 
 not to do it, and he took my advice on one or two 
 farms, and when this auctioneer told the extraordinary 
 price this American gave for it, he put on the in- 
 crease. 
 
 14868. Mr. Si-iAW. — Do you remember the price 
 and the size of the holding? — It was in Mullina- 
 lamphry, and it was valued 8s. 5d. an acre, and it 
 was not the best land, and I believe he gave £140. 
 
 14869. For how many acres? — I don't suppose 
 there are more than eight. 
 
 14870. Irish acres? — Irish acres ; the average rent 
 is' 8s. 5d. an English acre. 
 
 14871. Chairman.— This is M'Ginty that we had 
 here to-day ? — He is from Cambigh ; there is a rent of 
 15s. 6d. an acre on his townland, and his rent on this 
 farm is £4 8s., and he sold that to Pearson, and I 
 understand, Pearson gave him £96. 
 
 14872. But the sale fell through, at all events 1— 
 Not to Pearson ; he gave the twenty-five per cent. 
 It was only in M'Crudden's case it fell through. 
 
 14873. What is the average rate of agricultural 
 rent on the estate in comparison with the poor law 
 valuation? — All the townlands average about 13s. Qd. 
 Of the 3,900 acres the average is about 10s. 6d 
 
 14874. And do you know how that stands, as re- 
 gards the poor law valuation ? — The rent of that is 
 £2,051 9s. lid., and the poor law valuation, without 
 valuing the houses, is £1,476 15s. ; as near as I can 
 go, putting houses' valuation with the land, it is 
 £1,725. • 
 
 14875. Mr. Shaw. — The houses have all been built 
 by the tenants, I suppose ?— All built by the tenants. 
 
 14876. And all the improvements made by the 
 tenants, generally? — All the improvements since I 
 came here. Lord Arran did lay out something in 
 draining and subsoiling in 1847 and 1848 ; but the 
 tenants do all on their farms. 
 
 14877. Improving their farms in the best way they 
 can ? — Yes. 
 
 14878. Do you know what rate the mountain land 
 is valued at in the poor law valuation ? — I do ; the 
 townland of Carnbigh is valued at 3s. 2d. ; that is 
 the average of the whole of the townland; that is, 
 where the tenants alone hold. We have 2,000 moun- 
 tain acres, or more, not included in this valuation. 
 
 . What the tenants hold in Clogher is valued at £125, 
 the rent and the poor rate valuation is £98 18s., and 
 the value of houses is £1 3 1 6s. ; that makes the average 
 for the tenants 4s. M. per English acre. 
 
 14878a. Chairman.— Then, it is considerably above 
 the poor law valuation?— It is considerably above. 
 
 14679. Do you think that, through the country 
 generally, the land of the same sort is let as 
 high as that?— I am not acquainted very well with 
 other estates about here ; but I really believe it is 
 very little above our . neighbours. 
 
 14880. And do you think that excess above the 
 poor law valuation is a fair letting value ?— In some 
 instances, I believe ; there were two or three came 
 under my own. notice; there were three farms they 
 disputed about putting on the rent, and Lord Arran 
 is not a , man who wishes too high a rent, if he knew 
 it. The three tenants said they would leave the valua- 
 tion to me, and. his /lordship, when he heard it, de- 
 sired me to go up and value these three farms— one 
 was bought for £320, and another for £410. I went 
 out and reduced the rent he was askmg on one £10, 
 and I reduced the other £8 ; I reduced all three. 
 Lord Arran was satisfied. I considered tha,t if the 
 rents were put on as asked, it would be too high. 
 
 14881. Mr. Shaw.— If twenty-five per cent, were 
 put on, you think they would be too high?— I think 
 
 Oct. 16, 1860 
 
 Mr. Joshua 
 Jackson. 
 
488 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Joshua 
 Jackson. 
 
 they would ; but any one that was left to me, I would 
 make it as fair as I could. Valuators of land are very 
 much praised — very much — but, in my opinion, no va- 
 luator ought to call in a surveyor at all ; they ought to 
 look at the land. They should not take the poor law 
 valuation into account. But all those farms that 
 were let at the twenty-five per cent, increase, every- 
 one of them invariably sold at eleven years' purchase 
 at least. 
 
 14882. Do you know the case of James Davies? — 
 Ida 
 
 14883. He has four acres ?— Lord Arran expected 
 that to be a townpark. 
 
 14884. Has he not improved it very much 1 — He 
 had done a great deal on it before I came, I could see 
 by the hills and holes. 
 
 14885. And he commenced with a rent of £3 10s. 
 and it is now £6 18s. 1 — That is high to be sure, and 
 it looks a great increase, but, then, that was called a 
 townpark by Lord Arran. It was a field where they 
 used to burn bricks, and the landlord's plea is this, 
 that it was let cheap, intending that it should be im- 
 proved, and then it was raised by degrees. 
 
 14886. Yes; but the man who improved it has to 
 pay the high rent ? — Yes. 
 
 14887. Chairman. — You think he was put in at a 
 low rent to begin with with the view of his improving 
 it, and then, after a certain length of time, he was to 
 have a higher rent 1 — That is the belief. 
 
 14888. Mr. Shaw. — Was it ever worth more than 
 £3 10s. when he got it? — I cannot say, but I could 
 give a guess. I know the kind of land, but at present 
 I believe if Mr. Davies had to let it he would not let 
 it at less than £Q 18s. 
 
 14889. Chairman. — He says he laid out £30 on 
 it 1 — I have no doubt that less than £30 would not do 
 what I see he has done. 
 
 14890. What would you say it is worth now'? — If 
 he was to let it himself he would get £6 an acre, or 
 £6 10s., or £7, if he was to let it for grazing. 
 
 14891. Mr. Shaw. — Then his money is throwza 
 away to a great extent 1 — No ; I think he would get 
 £90 for the farm at the old rent, £3 10s. 
 
 14892. Do you know James Smullen's farm 1 — I do. 
 
 14893. He has done a great deal on his land? — He 
 has. 
 
 14894. He paid a' good price for it?— £320. 
 
 14895. The rent was £18 and it is now £30. That 
 is a smart increase on the farm? — Yes. I valued 
 that, and there was a great deal more put on it and I 
 reduced it, and he was quite satisfied ; landlord 
 and tenant were satisfied with the price. 
 
 14896. Chairman. — At the time? — At the time; 
 and 1 believe now that it is very little too dear, if it 
 be any. 
 
 14897. Mr. Shaw. — He has spent his money, his 
 outlay on it, and he thinks he ought to get some re- 
 turn ? — He has, but I think it has repaid him for all ; 
 but that is not one of the worst cases ; that is one of 
 the best cases. 
 
 U808. Chairman. — There is another case of 
 M'Gaharen?— That was M'Crudden's case. He was 
 in debt and was served with ejectments at dilfer-ent 
 times, and was very, very poor, and he turned about 
 and sold his land. He told me one day he sold it to 
 this M'Gaharen, but there was twenty-five per cent, 
 put on. 
 
 14899. Mr. Shaw.— The first reut was £5 15,s., 
 then it was raised tp £8 l[)s., and on the sale it was 
 £10 lis. 9d. That was nearly doubling the rent? — 
 In olden times I believe they had this place for very 
 little, that is, lis. lOd. per acre — the average rent of 
 Birchhill. When I came here I was not acquainted 
 with this country as much as my own country — Kil- 
 dare, Queen's County, Carlow, and Wicklow — but I 
 considered myself, when I got acquainted with the 
 place and the tenantry and the kind of soil, that the 
 vents were too smart on many ; still if some of them 
 Had no rent to pay they would be poor. 
 
 14900. But it is a poorish land, not a kind land ?— 
 
 There is some of it very good, but there is none of it 
 there is not some little bad spot on. 
 
 14901. Chairman. — Do you think the tenants have 
 made much improvements of late years? — AH the 
 improvements are made by them. 'There are a good 
 many tenants I could point out who have improved 
 their land. I know a man of the name of Love of 
 Finnybawns. When I came here he had a piece of 
 bog and a piece of hill, the way it was left by the 
 Creator, and he has it now nearly all settled. He cer- 
 tainly does not pay a high rent at present, but if 
 they go to value him again , they will certainly put a 
 higher rent on, from his improvements thereon. 
 
 14902. Mr. Shaw— If he tries to sell he will have 
 to pay 25 per cent. ? — Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 14903. Although he has made it aU himself? — Yes 
 and round this country I understand the landlords are 
 all doing the same thing. 
 
 14904. Chairman — Do you think there is a dis- 
 continuance of improvements by the tenants since tie 
 Land Act ? — I cannot say there is. 
 
 14905. We have heard in some places that at first 
 they improved under the Land Act, but of late they 
 have ceased to do so from the feeling that it is in- 
 secvire ? — I know the feeling that is in the minds of 
 the tenantry is this — I believe improvements would 
 go on 40 or 50 per cent, more than they do if they 
 were sure the rent would not be raised for their 
 improvements. That is my opinion ; and I think 
 landlords and tenants would be helped if it was 
 settled, so that the landlord and tenant would know 
 what they were doing, and the tenant would not be 
 interfered with in improving by the raising of rent. 
 
 14906. Mr. Shaw— -It would be better for all 
 parties 1 — It would be better for all pai-ties if some- 
 thing could be done, for I am acquainted with tenants 
 in Kildare, Queen's County, Carlow, and Wicklow. 
 My brother holds upwards of 400 acres of land, and my 
 cousins from 200 or 300 acres down to 50. And I l)e- 
 lieve if something equivalent could be given, to the 
 landlord for his legal and customary right of raising 
 rent every 21 j-ears, it would be a gi-and job to have a, 
 settled and stationary rent. We will, say, give leases 
 for ever to all, and pay a half-year's rent every 31 years. 
 
 14907. As a fine or premium ? — Yes ; say an estate 
 was worth £3,000 a year. Every thirty years the 
 landlord would have £1,500, and the landlord would 
 know and the tenant would know, and he would build 
 his house and have no complaints. And if you look 
 on it and calculate it as I have done, I believe it would 
 leave the landlord 3 },- per cent, interest, and it will 
 give him as much addition to his rents as with the 
 way foreign countries are opened by steam communi- 
 cation he can expect, it would give him as much of a 
 rise as he gets now by constant increases. 
 
 . 14908. And it would satisfy the tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 14909. And improvements would goon? — I know 
 a tenant at present. He is able and willing to im- 
 prove, and that is the only thing that prevents him 
 building a slated house. In the County Kildare, on 
 Lord Aldborough's property, I had three cousins A 
 workuig tailor from Castledermot bought the pro- 
 perty, and put them out, and they had to go away and 
 not get one permy piece. There is a feeling among 
 farmers that they will not improve, and even if they 
 get leases — I have been one myself, and know the 
 feeling — they will say, even honest, industrious, 
 respectable farmers who wish to pay a good rent and 
 improve, " If I get a lease for a farm I will have it 
 good and keep it good ; but I won't improve it so 
 much against the lease is out as will leave me to pay 
 for my improvements." 
 
 14910. Chairman- And do you think the Land 
 Act, which gave compensation for improvements, did 
 not meet that fear at all ? — I am quite sure not ; fpr 1 
 will tell you why — in instances where a townland is 
 sold, supposing there is a good landlord who sells, the 
 landlord who buys thinks nothing if he wants the land 
 or his adjoining tenant wants it, of what the tenant- 
 right would come to if the man is disturbed. If t'*^ 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 489 
 
 family is to be disturbed, tlie man tbinks nothing of 
 l)aying for the tenant-right. 
 
 14911. The compensation he will have to pay, he 
 gets re-paid by one of the new meni — Yes ; and if 
 the man goes away and he is re-paid, it will be no 
 loss. 
 
 14912. Mr. Shaw — The man going out does not 
 get paid for his disturbance 1 — That is the way. Some 
 of them may live under a good landlord for a lifetime, 
 but we see, unfortunately, through many parts of Ire- 
 land, when the landlord is changed, the new one is 
 worse. 
 
 14913. Chatkman — "We were told yesterday, I 
 think it was, that the tenants of the present day are 
 apathetic and different from what they used to be, and 
 won't improve. Do you think that is the case 1 — I 
 believe the last couple of years it is so, that there 
 is a feeling amongst them that something will be 
 done, and they are lying there without moving on at 
 all. 
 
 14914. But it is not from anything different in the 
 power of setting to work, if they beli3ved themselves 
 secure 1 — I think the chief thing is, if they could get 
 a fair rent and what the people call security. 
 
 14915. Have there been many evictions on the pro- 
 perty 1 — No. Lord Arran never puts out a man 
 except for non-payment of rent, and even then some 
 of the parties owed thi'ee years' rent, and there were 
 some ejectments which he took out merely to frighten 
 them. 
 
 14916. There is no complaint as to ejectments? — 
 No. Where there is a number of poor people, if they 
 
 ■had their land, some of them, for nothing it would not 
 make them much better off'. But certainly over 
 the Poor Law valuation this estate is valued very 
 high. 
 
 14917. In comparison with the Poor Law valuation 'i 
 — In comparison with the Poor Law valuation. Almost 
 all expressed themselves — I heard several of them 
 speaking — that they would be satisfied with the Poor 
 Law valuation. That may be too low, in general, and 
 I believe so. 
 
 14918. But do you think they would be satisfied 
 with say a rent ti.xed by arbitration "i — I think the 
 reasonable, respectable tenant that expects nothing 
 only from his industry, and only wishes to pay a just 
 rent, would. But there are some, I believe, that some- 
 how or other rent is not ti-oubling thein, if they could 
 get the land by paying nothing, but they are few. 
 Certainly, Lord Arran would be the last man in the 
 world that would lay on an unjust rent, if he knew, 
 but still he thinks perhaps when people give him 
 these high rents it is all right. Some of the tenants 
 of this very townland were the first to offer £i an 
 acre to accommodate themselves, and the first to call 
 out " high rents " afterwards. 
 
 14919. He thinks the high tenant-right is a proof 
 of the increased value of the property ? — He thinks 
 when the jjeople give it to liim, it is all right, but any- 
 one I had to deal with, or when it was left to me, I 
 always lowered it when I considered it was a little too 
 high, and Lord Arran was always satisfied. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Oct. ic, isso 
 
 3Ii*. Jo-iiLia 
 .Tacks'in. 
 
 Mr. John Ward, County Cess Collector, Ballintra, examined. 
 
 14920. Chairmai;. — Where do you live? — I live 
 near Ballintra, almost half way between this and Bally- 
 shannon. My calling is a farmer, but I have been 
 collecting the county cess in Ballyshannon and district 
 for twenty- four years. 
 
 14921. Are you a farmer at present 1 — I am living 
 by the farm, and I am the sheriff's oflicer for this part 
 of the coimty Donegal, south-western Donegal, five 
 jjarishes in it. 
 
 14922. Have you anything as regards your own farm 
 that you wish to bring under our notice 1 — Well, no. 
 I live on Mr. Connolly s estate and, seeing the way my 
 neighbours are treated, I have no reason to complain, 
 but I know the causes of discontent among all the 
 farmers in the district I travel through, and their 
 general complaint is too high a rent, and the power of 
 the landlord to raise the rent still. I will give you a few 
 instances I can prove on oath as within my own know- 
 ledge. In the next townland to where I live, I re- 
 member three farms, small ones at £2 a year. 
 
 14923. Mr. Shaw. — Each? — Each at £2 a year, 
 and they are risen twice in my memory, they are now 
 up to £8 each 
 
 14924. Chairman. — ^What property was that on ? 
 
 It was on an estate of Colonel Knox ofPrehen 
 
 near Derry. 
 
 14925. Who manages that property ? — Isaac Colqu- 
 houn and Son, of Derry ; Isaac is dead, and Thomas 
 Colquhoun is agent now. 
 
 14926. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know the acreage of 
 these farms? — I think they would be about eight 
 statute acres of mountain land. 
 
 14927. They had reclaimed it, I suppose ?— They 
 had reclaimed it, the townland was squared up and 
 the people from the nestling of houses were sent out 
 to their own farms, what we call in this neighbourhood, 
 rundale, each one was sent out to their own farm, and 
 the rent was raised. The first case was two servant 
 boys bought the farm from their grandfather, and sup- 
 ported him during his life, they built a house and 
 broke up two acres of hard mountain land, and when 
 
 they had it cultivated they were risen to £9 a year, 
 and because they did not pay it they were ejected in 
 1847. 
 
 14928. Chairman. — What was the name of the 
 place ? — Ballinacarrick. 
 
 14929. And what was the name of the tenant? — 
 William M'Cafferty, and John M'Cafferty his brother. 
 They were ejected in 1847, the land lay vacant for two 
 years, until they gave it to another man at a reduced 
 rent ; £i, that man held it at and it is now risen to 
 £8. _ 
 
 14930. What is the name of the tenant now? — 
 John Graham, of Ballintra. 
 
 14931. Mr. Shaw. — The landlord did nothing 
 towards improving it 1 — Nothing. 
 
 14932. Chairman. — Was Colonel Knox a purchaser 
 of the property lately ? — Oh, no, he has it by hereditary 
 right long bfefore my memory. 
 
 14933. Mr. Shaw. — Is it a large property ? — No. 
 
 14934. And has the same system been going over 
 the whole estate? — Yes, the rise in 1878 has been very 
 great, the farm next to where I live and was born and 
 reared, was held by a man named Charles Johnson at 
 £7 a year, I remember its being raised to £12, and 
 they were noticed in 1878 to pay £21. 
 
 14935. Chairman. — Was there any very great im- 
 provements done by the tenants 1 — Yes ; there were 
 great improvements done by three sons, and they are 
 yet unmarried, living with all the industry they can 
 on the farm, and as they improved it the rent was 
 still raised. This deters the people from improvements, 
 it keeps them back and leaves them discontented, and 
 they are now in that state that they don't know 
 whether to improve or not. On the Cavangarden 
 estate, on the farm next to my own, it marches me, I 
 remember an old man with three sons, named Patrick 
 Campbell. 
 
 14936. What is the name of the landlord ? — Thomas; 
 John Atkinson, Cavangai'den. The old man got liberty 
 to build a house for the first son, the landlord being 
 paid £2 additional rent. He solicited the favour free, 
 
 3R 
 
 Mr. Johu 
 Ward. 
 
490 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Ward. 
 
 but would not get it, 
 
 When the father died, the land- 
 lord raised the' £2 a year to £7, and he is paying ^7 
 a year now, and if I was sworn as a valuator I would 
 swear positively and beyond a doubt it is not worth 
 more than £3. 
 
 14937. He has done everything for it ^— He carried 
 gravel from the hill to make land of the bog ; he 
 brought the landlord to see it and the reward he got 
 was " come into the office the first day you are passing, 
 I want you," and, to his great astonishment, he was 
 told he must pay £7 yearly in future. 
 
 14938. Mr. Shaw. — £2 for marrying the son, and 
 £5 for improving the land 1 — Yes. Now, sir, that is 
 my next neighbour. I am also well acquainted with 
 land at Bundoran, on another estate owned now by Dr. 
 Teevan, a military doctor, I believe. He has a residence 
 at Enniskillen, and he is serving, I believe, with his 
 regiment at Malta. The property was purchased in 
 1868, a portion of Mr. Connolly's estate. I know one 
 man whom I, as sheriff's officer, ejected in May last ; 
 his rent was £22, it is now £37; the tenant was 
 Andrew Kerrigan. 
 
 14939. Raisedlately?— Since 1868. 
 
 14940. By one rise or several? — By two rises. 
 First there was a rise, and the man had to sell a por- 
 tion of his land, and because he offered it for sale there 
 was an additional rent put on. Altogether, from £22, 
 it is now £37. I even went so far as to publish these 
 things in the newspapers. 
 
 14941. Do you know the land yourself 1 — I do, well, 
 and I know there is no improvement, and it is no 
 better than it was 100 years ago. It is a soil that is 
 not fit to be improved, and it is as good as they can 
 make it. . . , , 
 
 14942. Is it too dear 1 — Quite too dear. The next 
 farm to him was held by John Johnson ; the town- 
 land is Ardfarnna ; his rent was £12, and now it is 
 £22 7s. 
 
 14943. Under the same landlord? — On the same 
 land, and without any improvements. 
 
 14944. Chairman. — Who is the agent? — William 
 Rogers, of Teinpleview, near Ballyshannon. 
 
 14945; Mr. Shaw. — And all the improvements were 
 made by the tenant ? — There is no improvement on 
 this soil at all. 
 
 14946. The houses were built, I suppose? — The 
 houses were in existence long before this rise of rent 
 preveiited the tenant being able to improve, and all 
 these men I tell you are ejected. There is not a tenant 
 on all that portion of Mr. Connolly's estate there was 
 not a rise of rent put on. I am giving you this as a 
 specimen. There must be 1.50 tenants on this estate 
 that was purchased by this Dr. Teevan, his predecessor 
 was a Dr. Teevan, and it was the other purchased. 
 This has caused the tenant farmers of this barony to 
 be very discontented ; their sons and daughters are 
 leaving for America and Australia, and I can tell you, 
 gentlemen, they are leaving with a vengeance, and the 
 fathers and mothers tell them — " Don't live in a 
 country where we are so oppressed." They have quit 
 improving ; to my own knowledge, for the last twenty 
 years there is hardly any improvement going on. 
 Until there is some rule of law made to establish a 
 fair rent between landlord and tenant we will not have 
 peace in this country. We are a very peaceable 
 people, and I never yet heard a farmer say he was 
 not willing to pay a fair rent, but don't be raising them 
 when they improve the land. 
 
 14947. This has an efiect even on well managed 
 estates, it spreads about? — It has. The portion of 
 Mr. Connolly's estate in the hands of trustees has not 
 been raised these fifty-one years. The people purchase 
 at auctions with confidence on it when they won't 
 purchase at all on the others. I may tell you gentle- 
 men, I am an auctioneer since I quit collecting the 
 county cess. I have sold a great deal of land for the 
 last five years by auction, and I can sell on Mr. 
 Connolly's estate— where there is supposed to be a 
 fair rent and no rise of rent, and where they are not 
 
 afraid of a rise of rent — T can sell land on that estate 
 at from £30 up to £40 an acre. 
 
 14948. Chaieman. — Now? — Even now at the 
 present time I can sell on the Brownhall estates for 
 there is no late rise on it ; but there was a rise on it 
 later than on Mr. Connolly's, because John Hamilton 
 of St. Ernans^ and Major Hamilton, the owner, treat 
 the tenants civilly, and the tenants buy with confi- 
 deuce. But on the estates of Dr. Teevan, and Cavan- 
 garden, the tenants cannot be got to buy at all. Teevan 
 cannot prevent sale by auction, because the right of sale 
 existed before he purchased. But the Cavangarden 
 people are never allowed to sell. " If you are tu-ed 
 walk away and leave it." The son of Atkinson, of 
 Cavangarden, stood by me for two days in succession. 
 I could not sell the first day, and the second day he 
 stood by me in the pouring rain and told every body 
 " Don't buy, I won't accept you as a tenant." This 
 rises up great wrath, and people made use of expres- 
 sions that I would be sorry to tell you as a Christian. 
 The tenant had purchased, himself laid out money 
 on the place, and he would not be allowed to sell. I 
 consider, in my humble opinion, the legislature should 
 make a law imperative on the landlord and tenants 
 both to come to some arrangement to lay on a fair 
 rent. It is for the grass of a farm the value should 
 be made, not in a state of agriculture, because the 
 landlord does not supply one shilling to the tenant to 
 buy manure, seed, or labour. Then, if a farmer enters 
 into cultivation it is a speculation, like the merchani 
 in the town. Here, the farmer buys seed, pays for 
 the labour, and buys manure. Sometimes that crop 
 yields him nothing, but still he continues ; he has no 
 other way to feed his family, and if the landlord does 
 not assist him he should not be paid for that. Very 
 few farmers know what an acre of land will produce 
 in grass. Then, valuing the grass, or what it would 
 be worth in the Iiighest market, give the landlord a 
 fair share of that for his rent, and, I think, we will 
 never have peace until that is done. 
 
 14949. Mr. Shaw. — But the rent question is the 
 great difficulty ? — The rent question is the great thin^ 
 that annoys the people here ; they are paying too 
 high a rent in general. I hear a great many suggest- 
 ing the poor law valuation as a standard, but I say 
 that would not be fair. First of all the poor law 
 vakiation was not made by one man. Difterent men 
 from the valuation office came out, well instructed, I 
 am sure, and different men made different valuations, 
 and the greatest mistake I find they fell into was 
 this : they did not make a sufficient difference between 
 the good and Had soil ; they were not agriculturists, 
 they were not farmers, and they laid on a value by 
 the acre, and where they laid on £2 an acre the land 
 they laid on £1 an acre was not half as good, not one- 
 thii'd. The bad soil is worth very little, when the 
 good soil is valuable ; they made no sufficient dififer- 
 ence, they valued everything up to its full vaule for 
 taxation purpose, and, I think, that would be too 
 much for a rent. They valued the houses that the 
 men built. Where a poor man built his house, I 
 think it should be his own property without paying 
 rent for it. 
 
 14950. Chairman. — They valued them separately? 
 — Surely they did, and I have been in discourse with 
 these inen frequently about the valuation— they said 
 their valuation they would consider far too high for a 
 rent. 
 
 14951. Mr. Shaw. — Is the valuation higher or 
 lower than the rent in your district ? — It is generally 
 lower, a great deal lower. These farms I tell you 
 have been risen lately. A farm of £21 a year is only 
 valued £15 for poor rates, and is too high compared 
 with others. 
 
 14952. On Mr. Connolly's property the rent is 
 near the valuation ? — They are both nearer each other 
 than on any other estate I know of. 
 
 1 4953. Chairman. — How much, as a general mn, is 
 Mr. Connolly's estate above the Poor Law valuation ?— 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 491 
 
 There is very little on Mr. Connolly's land but is 
 above the valuation. 
 
 14954. Mr. Shaw. — How much on an average'! 
 
 In my humble opinion as far as I know it would be 
 about £3 or Mi in every £20, and some £2 in £10 or 
 £12. 
 
 14955. That is valuing houses and all? — Yes. 
 
 14956. But still the tenants are pretty well con- 
 tented on that estate 1 — They are when they see what 
 their neighbours are paying, but a good many of them 
 are paying too high near the town. The general dis- 
 content in the country arises from high rents and 
 insecurity. Some good landlords I believe had suc- 
 cessors that turned out very bad ones, and if there 
 was some security for the tenant that his improve- 
 ments would not be taken advantage of we would 
 have a contented people, and they are very industrious 
 and willing to pay a fair rent, but they are discontented 
 entirely about the rise and its coming on so often. 
 A great many tenants on Mr. Connolly's estate if 
 they got into difficulties, _and were not able to pay 
 the rent, they were not put out for a year, or two, or 
 three, until the agent woiald say, " You are going on 
 too far^ sell to the highest bidder, pay your debts, and 
 put the rest in your pocket." They were all satisfied 
 with that. 
 
 1 4957. Are the tenants in debt 1 — They are a great 
 deal. 
 
 14958. To shopkeepers and banks? — Not to banks, 
 they woidd not lend except on good security, but as 
 the sheriff's officer I can tell you that I suppose I 
 have for execution at present in the district nearly 
 150 decrees for shop debts outside rent. It is seldom 
 we get a decree for rent. 
 
 14959. In the poorer class of tenants I suppose 
 generally? — Yes. 
 
 14960. Small tenants ? — Yes; and where they have 
 been respectable tenants they go in and do their best 
 not to be exposed. 
 
 14961. And they charge for interest after a certain 
 time?— They do. 
 
 14962. Do they give bills ? — No; the shopkeepers 
 say they would have to pay the bills themselves, and 
 they must take it by instalments. But the country 
 
 . generally, owing to the bad years of 1879 and 1878, 
 and even before that, the tenants were in great debt, 
 this year appears to help them on something, yet I 
 think if it had been a bad year like the last, there 
 would have been a great waste of the people, they 
 could not stand it. 
 
 14963. Chaieman. — Before these bad times were 
 they pretty well off ? — They were a great deal better 
 off than now. 
 
 14964. But would you call them well off? — 1 
 would. 
 
 14965. Do you think they were able to lay by a 
 good fortune for their families? — For the most part 
 they were. What beats the poor peoplein this country 
 is the loss of the potato crop, they can live on that crop 
 with little else, and then they had their grass crop," 
 and cows and calves to sell, and it secured their debts. 
 But since the potato crop came in ill they have to buy 
 Indian meal and provisions, and cannot afford to pay 
 their rent. 
 
 14966. What do you mean by the failure of the 
 potato crop 1 — The potato crop is worse for the last 
 five years than it has been. 
 
 14967. Then you may say that here they have had 
 five bad years in succession ? — Yes. 
 
 14968. Mr. Shaw. — This is a good year? — Yes; 
 and there is no crop lost, no wasted crop. I hold a 
 portion on the estate of Mr. Foster, of Bell's Isle. He 
 noticed all his tenants for a rise of rent in 1878, and . 
 he made some of them pay, and others he made pass 
 notes for the rise of rent when they had no money. 
 
 14969. How much was the advance do you know?. 
 —There is one farmer m the next townland to me, 
 his rent was £15 now it is £21. 
 
 14970. Chairman.— That was in 1877 ?— In 1878 Oct. le.iaso. 
 they were noticed to pay the rise. „ 7T~ 
 
 14971. Mr. Shaw. — Did ho make them pay it then. Ward, 
 bad times and all? — Yes; he made this man pay 
 down cash, and others he took notes from. I know 
 another farmer paying £22 and he added £10 to his 
 rent. 
 
 14972. Was there a lease falling in or anything? — 
 No, no lease. There was a general rise all over the 
 estate, but some of them did not pay. One of the 
 tenants told me he paid £13 of a rise, but his rent 
 was coming near to £40. 
 
 14973. And that was the proportion all over the 
 estate ? — Yes ; there is not a single one of them that 
 has not been risen in this countfy only Mr. Connolly's 
 estate, and the Brownhall estate, Mr. John Hamilton's; 
 and I know the feeling of discontent is entirely about 
 the high rents and the power to raise rents. If there 
 was some standard made, even if it was a high one, 
 and the tenants thought it would stand at that, they 
 would go on and Avork night and day, themselves and 
 their families, to reclaim the barren soil, but the sons 
 of these men say, " What is the use of us improving, 
 we will be risen for taxation and rent, we will not 
 live here and work," and in fact when they are 
 despairing of doing well they will do ill, and go to 
 fairs and markets and spend the little money they 
 have, and then they leave the country. 
 
 14974. Mr.. Shaw.— It makes them idle? — Yes; 
 and then they will leave the country with something 
 in their breast that should not be in it. Depend upon 
 it that is the case. I mix up with them very much. 
 
 14975. And you think there is a cause for it? — I 
 am certain there is a cause. And now, instead of the 
 few persons I have named, I can name the townland, 
 the tenant's names, and the landlord's names, I sujjpose 
 fifty or sixty, to my own knowledge, where the rents 
 have been raised. I had to sheriff them out for no 
 other reason than that they were not able to pay the 
 rent. 
 
 14976. Chairman. — You had to sheriff them out? 
 — Under ejectment decrees. 
 
 14977. Mr. Shaw. — For non-payment of rent? — 
 Yes. 
 
 14978. Chairman. — What number, say in the last 
 five years? — Oh, I can hardly tell you that. I am 
 sure I took possession of more than twenty farms 
 since May last under ejectments for non-payment of 
 rent. 
 
 14979. Chairman.— In your own district ? — In my 
 own district. 
 
 14980. Chairman. — And they cannot sell? — They 
 camiot sell, would not get leave to sell in Teevan's 
 property. I advertised a farm myself for sale, being 
 an auctioneer, they gave me the sale, and the bailiff 
 came to the spot on the day of sale, and said, " who- 
 ever purchases this farm must add £2 or £3 to the 
 rent," and that stopped it. It is too high already, 
 they won't buy at that price. I have had that experi- 
 ence being the cess collector and the sheriff's man. 
 We cannot sell at all then. And it is the rule over 
 most of the property in this country, except Mr. 
 Connolly's and Hamilton's of Brownhall, to send 
 the bailiff there and say the purchaser must pay a 
 higher rent. A great portion of the landlords of this 
 country are doing everything they can to put down 
 the Land Act of 1870 to make it a useless letter in 
 the Statute Book, for the rise of rent prevents the 
 tenant-right being any use, and a man won't buy. 
 And really in 1877 and 1878 there were excellent 
 prices for little farms in this country, because when 
 a man had a son or two. and had some money made 
 up, he did not wish to let that son away to America 
 or any place, and they would consult together and 
 buy a little farm, and put the son down on it and 
 assist him there. And I know where there were three 
 sons in the house, the father would make them work 
 
 3R2 
 
492 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. IC, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. Jolia 
 Ward. 
 
 on the new farm and the old one, and no man knew 
 what his share would be until the harvest was gathered 
 in, and then he would give each of them the third 
 stook and so on. This great contention between the 
 landlords and the people did not so much exist until 
 after the Land Act. The landlords are death on the 
 people. 
 
 14981. Mr. Shaw. — Standing on their rights?— 
 Yes, and saying we will not allow this Tenant- Right 
 Bill to have effect at all, we will put on a rent that 
 will destroy it and has destroyed it. If my testimony- 
 be of any use, I would say to you, we will not have 
 
 peace in this country until there is some standard 
 made between the landlord and tenant, and the land- 
 lord will have to say, " I will stop here and cannot 
 go any further. Unless the tenants see that, they are 
 not willing to be at peace, but they are willing to pay 
 a fair rent, there will be no resistance to it at all, and 
 that fair rent ought to be ascertained, I think, 
 by arbitration, the landlord appoint a man and the 
 tenant a man, and the Government appoint an 
 umpire. 
 
 [The witness withdrew.] 
 
 Messrs. 
 Patrick 
 T^'laherty, 
 Edward 
 Flaherty, 
 John Thomas, 
 .Jaraes 
 Morrogh, 
 .Tnhn 
 
 Henderson, 
 James Cassid,.'. 
 and JaniPS 
 -M'Cafferv. 
 
 Patrick Flaherty, Dromore ; Edward Flaherty, John Thomas, James Morrogh, John Hendeeson, 
 James Cassidy, and James M'Caffery, examined together. 
 
 Patrick Flaherty, tenant on the estate of Thomas 
 Colquhoun, Derry, who is his own agent. "Rent 
 raised from £4 to £4 8s., and then to M 3«. ; valua- 
 tion, £5 ; acreage, twelve. 
 
 14982. Mr. Shaw. — When was it raised? — Four 
 years ago. 
 
 14983. Was it raised on the whole property at the 
 same time ? — Yes, some more and some less, he pays 
 half of the county cess. 
 
 Edioard Flaherty, tenant on the Colquhoun estate, 
 rent raised from £12 8s. to £18 10s., valuation, £13 ; 
 number of acres, about thirty ; bought a portion of this 
 farm lately, the rise on which was from £3 8s. to 
 £5 10s. 
 
 14984. Mr. Shaw. — At the same time the rent was 
 raised ? — Yes ; when I bought it he raised it at two 
 guineas, and it was too clear beforehand. 
 
 14985. Chairman. — Did they give the notice at 
 the sale 1 — No, it was a year after. The woman who 
 had it was forced to go to Scotland, and I had a trifle 
 of my own and 1 bid to pay it for her debt, and when 
 lie got me in he raised me two guineas. 
 
 14986. Mr. Shaw.— Before the general rise ?— No, 
 it was at that time. 
 
 14987. How far was it from that town? — Two and 
 a half miles, on the road to Killybegs. 
 
 14988. Did you do much to it in the way of im- 
 proving ? — Yes, I levelled holes, and made roads, and 
 tossed down walls and made a big improvement. 
 
 14989. The landlord never did anything ?— No, 
 except rising the rent which broke our hearts. 
 
 JoJm TJiomas, tenant on the estate of Mr. Thomas 
 Brooke, Lough Eske, rent raised from £1 5s. 2d. to 
 £2 15s., valuation £1 10s,. number of acres, two. 
 
 14990. Mr. Shaw. — When was it raised? — Eleven 
 years ago. Has another place on the same estate, 
 rent, £7 10s. ; valuation. £4 ; acreage, eight; the rent 
 of this place was raised when he bought it. 
 
 14991. Is that the practice on the estate on a sale, 
 to raise the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 14992. Chairman. — Was it an ohl practice? — No, 
 sir. 
 
 14993. Lately introduced ? — Yes. 
 
 14994. How long has it been going? — It is only 
 about two years since it has become a rule. 
 
 14995. Mr. Shaw. — How much did you pay for the 
 farm ?— £140. 
 
 14996. And you think the rent is too high ? — I do. 
 
 14997. Chairman. — Would you find it difficult to 
 get the £140 back again now ? — I would not 
 the money. 
 
 14998. Mr. Shaw.— Is that owing to the bad times ? 
 — It is a good deal, but I gave too much for it at the 
 time I purchased it, because I could not get out or in 
 to the place I was li\'ing in only through this land, 
 and if any man came in t would be a trespasser. 
 
 get half 
 
 14999. Is theri a rise of rent always on a sale on 
 this property ? — There is those last few years. 
 
 15000. But they are told beforehand there will be 
 a rise ? — Yes. 
 
 James Morrogh, tenant on Lord Arran's estate, 
 rent was £14, raised to £17 3s., and then to £21 10s., 
 valuation, £12 10s., number of plantation acres, 
 fourteen. 
 
 15001. Chairman. — Was the first rise in 1859?— 
 I cannot say, I purchased it seven years ago, and the 
 last rise was 5s. to the pound. 
 
 15002. Mr. Shaw. — And that is the rule on the 
 property ? — Yes ; I did not understand it when I was 
 buying, and when I went to pay the first rent I would 
 not be taken as tenant if I did not pay it. 
 
 15003. Chairman — Was not the bailiff present at 
 the sale ? — Yes, he was. 
 
 15004. Did he not announce it? — It was the first 
 case of the kind, and he told me if I would improve 
 on the place he would never ask it. 
 
 15005. Mr. Shaw. — But they made you pay it when 
 you went in ? — Yes. 
 
 15006. John Henderso-n, tenant on Lord Arran's 
 estate, rent originally £8 5s., was raised three or four 
 times, is now £20 4s. 6rf.' ; valuation, £12 5s. ; number 
 of acres, twenty-four. Land very bad. 
 
 15007. Mr. Shaw. — Is that the only land you have ! 
 —Yes. 
 
 15008. Chairman. — How came there to be so many 
 rises ? — According as you improve they raise you, 
 
 15009. Mr, Shaw, — You did not purchase?— No. 
 
 15010. It was in 1859 the rise was?— We paid 
 £8 5s. for this land at first, and they raised it to 
 £12 10s., then to £15, then again to £17 10s., and at 
 the end of it they raised us to £20 4s. Qd. 
 
 15011. Chairman. — Whereabouts is this ?— A mile 
 and a half from town. 
 
 15012. Mr. Shaw, — And is it bad lajid naturally? 
 — It is very ill bad land, 
 
 15013. Have you clone much to it? — We did; we 
 drained a part of it and levelled ditches, and brought 
 manure from the town, 
 
 15014. Chairman, — Do you live on it? — Yes. 
 
 15015. Mr. Shaw.— The landlord did not help him 
 in any way ? — Yes. 
 
 Morrogh. — I laid out half my purchase money on it 
 and I would not get the money at all now. 
 
 James Cassidy, tenant on Arran estates, rent was 
 £1 10s., was raised to £9 all to five pence, by several 
 rises ; valuation, £7 5s, ; number of acres, eight, 
 
 James M'Caffery, tenant on Arran estates, land was 
 10s., was raised £2 19s., by different rises; valuation, 
 £1 10s. ; number of acres, three and a half. 
 
 15016. Chairman. — Are they near the town?— 
 Morrogh. — -About four miles away. 
 
 The witnesses retired. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 493 
 
 Messrs. James Doiierty, Timothy M'Mdllan, John M'Gilligan, Philip Melly, and William Gillespie, 
 
 tenants on Mr. Stewart Mnrray's estate, examined. 
 
 WillLam Gillespie, raised from £1'2 to £1-1 ; valua- 
 tion, £11 15s. ; number of acres, lli. Our landlord 
 did great injury to us by selling the bog from us. 
 
 15035. Mr. Shaw. — Is that a change 1 — It is ; we 
 have to come and pay for it now, whereas we had it 
 before for nothing. He sold these townlands out of 
 the estate. 
 
 15036. Chairman. — And the rent remained the 
 same 1 — The rent remained the same. 
 
 15037. Mr. Shaw. — What do you pay for the bog 
 generally? — 12s. an acre. 
 
 15038. And he does not allow you to sell by open 
 sale 1 — No. 
 
 15039. I suppose with the 25 percent, you would 
 find it hard to get a purchaser 1 — I hold a farm, and 
 if there was 25 per cent, on it, I would not take a gift 
 of it. 
 
 15040. You could not make a living on it ? — No ; 
 we are not any of us able to make a living on it. 
 
 15041. Is that near the town ? — Melli/ — Within a 
 mile of it on the Killymard-road. 
 
 15042. Chairman. — Is there any waste land about 
 your neighbourhood "? — None. 
 
 15043. Is there waste land that can be reclaimed'? 
 — No, there is a great deal of land can be improved. 
 
 15044. Mr. Shaw. — On your own farm, if you had 
 encouragement 1 — If I had encouragement I could 
 lay out more than £150 in improvements, and I have 
 laid out more than £100 in my own time, and I 
 robbed myself and killed myself working. 
 
 15045. If you were sure of the rent 1 — If it was a 
 fair rent, but I will never improve at the present rent. 
 
 15046. You think it ought to be less 1 — At about 
 half the tenant could improve, and the Marquess 
 of Conyngham's tenants are cheaper than we are. 
 
 15047. It bounds your property '? — Yes. 
 
 15048. And it is considerably less than yours? — ■ 
 There ai'e none of them that is not under the Govern- 
 ment valuation. 
 
 The witnesses withdrew. 
 
 James Doherty, rent was £15, raised to £19 ; valua- 
 tion, £10 for the land only; plantation acres, IG. 
 
 15018. Mr. Shaw. — When was it raised ? — I think 
 it was raised in 1861 (producing receipts). 
 
 15019. May, 1860 ?— That is the first rise, and 
 1861 was the first payment. 
 
 15020. And the rent before that? — Was £15 a 
 year. 
 
 15021. Did you make all the improvements on the 
 land ?— I did. 
 
 15022. Drained it ? — Yes. 
 
 15023. Did you build the house 1 — Yes, but I got 
 timber and slates from him, and he put £2 extra of 
 the rate on the town on me. If I had been raised the 
 same as the others I would not mind, but he put £2 
 extra on me. 
 
 Timothy M'Mullen, rent was raised from £12 IGs. 
 3d. to £14 10s. ; valuation, £9 ; acres, 12. 
 
 15024. Mr. Siiaw. — Was that raised the same 
 time ? — Yes. 
 
 15025. And no rise of rent since ? — Yes ; barring 
 a man wanted to sell, then it is raised 25 per cent. 
 
 15026. And have any sales been attempted on that 
 plan ? — There have, but there was no sale. 
 
 15027. It destroys your tenant-right ? — Certainly. 
 
 15028. Chairman. — How long has that been the 
 rule ? — 8 or 9 years ; it is since the new agent came in. 
 
 15029. John M'Gilligan, rent £31 5s. ; valuation, 
 £32 ; 17 acres. There was no rise of rent. 
 
 15030. Mr. Shaw.— What Avas the rent before ?— I 
 don't remembei'. 
 
 15031. Did you purchase ? — I did about 20 years 
 ago. 
 
 15032. And paid a good price for it? — Plenty. 
 
 15033. Philip Melly, rent, £40 4s. ; valuation, 
 £30 10s. ; plantation acres, 30. 
 
 15034. Mr. Shaw. — You don't know what the rent 
 was before you bought ? — It was before my time. 
 
 Oct. ic, ixso. 
 
 Jlessi'N. .James 
 
 Doiurty, 
 
 Timolhv 
 
 M'MuUan, 
 
 .Tohn 
 
 ."\I'Gillig!in. 
 
 Philip Sl-jlly, 
 
 atul William 
 
 Gillespie. 
 
 Connell Gallagher, tenant on Mr. John Hamilton's estate, examined. 
 
 by different rises.] 
 
 [Rent from £2 10s. to £11 10s. 
 
 Mr. Connell 
 Gallaslier. 
 
 15049. Mr. Shaw. — ^When did he rise the rents? — 
 In 1847 and 1846. 
 
 15050. Never since 1 — He did. After my father's 
 decease I became the owner of a portion of it, and 
 my brother lived on the rest of it, and I made a 
 purchase of it, and then my rent in 1847 was £3. 
 Then I had another brother that occupied a portion 
 of it, and he was not able to meet the times, and my 
 father-in-law came over to see me and gave me money 
 to purchase it. I paid four years of aiTears, and I 
 was living a year with Mr. John when he sent a man 
 to the house who said he would leave some money in 
 1847 on my place, and at the end of 21 years I would 
 "et free of it. At the end of 20 years I went to look 
 for the reduction to the agent, in his absence, for he 
 was a very noble man, and he gave me another £1 of 
 a rise. I carried limestone on my back for three 
 quarters of a mile or a mile. I wanted a road, and 
 asked his honour to come to see it, and he came out 
 on horse-back and said £30 would not make the road. 
 I said I was a strong young man, and if I got assist- 
 ance I could make the road myself, and if he would 
 allow me a year's rent. " I' will," said he, " Mr, Pike 
 wive it to him." He went away to England, and I 
 
 made the road and I went to look for the £11, but 
 Mr. Pike said, " Begone out of my sight," and he gave 
 me another £1 rise. 
 
 15051. Did you ever speak to Mr. Hamilton since? 
 — No, I never saw him since. I told the Majoi', and 
 he said if he had the books I never would have got 
 the last rise. 
 
 15052. You ought to write to him, because he is a 
 good man ? — He is a very nice man. I got a tract on 
 Slonday monaing from Mr. John Mellor, and it speci- 
 fied in it he never gave a rise to any of his tenants 
 but I got a rise. 
 
 15053. There must be some mistake? — He sent 
 this tract for us to take a lease, but the agent would 
 not listen to it in his absence. 
 
 15054. Has he an agent? — He has, his son. 
 
 15055. Did you go to him ? — He told me he could do 
 nothing until his father came home. Says he to me, 
 naming me, " If I had got the books you never would 
 have got one penny of a rise." I said modestly, 
 when there was a wrong done could he not look over 
 it, and he said he could do nothing until his father 
 came. £30 never made the road for me. 
 
 The witness withdrew; 
 
4iJ4 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ]880. 
 
 Oct. 16, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Jlonahan. 
 
 Thomas Monahan, tenant on Mr. Alexander Hamilton's estate, examined. [Rent raised from £18 78. to 
 £21 ; valuation £15 10s. Sold part of the farm, and now pays £11 10s. on the part that remains, the 
 valuation being £8.] 
 
 15056. Mr. Shaw.— "When was there any rise of 
 rent? — I cannot really say. I suppose between eight 
 and nine years ago. I cannot really say. 
 
 15057. You are living on the land, I suppose?— 
 Certainly, that is my only way of living. I sold some 
 of the land since, and for what remains I pay £11 10s. 
 and £8 is my Government view. 
 
 15058. You think it is too high? — Yes, and the 
 men who came to regulate it were Government 
 viewers, they looked at the land and said to me, 
 "Don't you think that rent too high?" I said, "I 
 do." "Actually," said he, "in my heart and soul 
 I do." I don't remember his name. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Mr. James 
 
 James Oassidy, tenant on Captain Barton's estate, examined. [Rent raised from £9 10s. to £12 ; valuation 
 £8 5s. ; mountain land, about 8 acres. Also holds a farm under Major Montgomery. Rent, £3 17s. 9d. ; 
 valuation £3 5s. ; acreage 3^ There has been no rise.] 
 
 the permission to any person to sell until this very year 
 
 15060. Mr. Shaw.— When was the rise on 
 other estates ? — About eight or ten acres. I cannot 
 exactly say. 
 
 15061. Is it near the town?— No, seven or eight 
 miles from this, on the leading way to Ardara. 
 
 15062. Was the rent raised on all the estate at the 
 same time ? — Yes, and about the same way. 
 
 15063. And the land is poor land? — Very poor 
 mo"ftntainy land. 
 
 15064. Did yovi drain and improve it yourself? — 
 He gave us permission to drain a part of it at one 
 time, and after doing it and all we were looking then 
 for the money, and he was not paying us, and we 
 stopped half a year's rent for the payment ; and after 
 stopping a half-year's rent, his agent processed, and we 
 were allowed the money by the barrister, but decreed 
 for the running half-year's rent. 
 
 15065. Did he put on any interest on the money ? 
 —No. 
 
 15066. Is it a large property ? — Something about 
 eight acres. 
 
 15067. I mean the estate ? — No; it is not a very 
 large estate. 
 
 15068. But all the tenants have been raised iii the 
 same way ? — Yes ; at the same time. 
 
 15069. Have you tenant-right ? — No. 
 
 15070. Are you allowed sale? — He did not give 
 
 and he allowed a man, upon a promise, to sell this 
 year. 
 
 15071. Was he able to sell ?— Yes ; he did sell. It 
 was a woman. Her family were gone to America. 
 
 15072. She was allowed to get as much as she 
 could ? — Yes. 
 
 15073. Chaieman. — Is there any waste mountain 
 land or bog land in your neighbourhood ?— Plenty 
 of it. 
 
 15074. Plenty that might be reclaimed? — Yes; if 
 there was confidence in the landlord, and if the people 
 had any means to do it. 
 
 1507.5. Is there any that is not held by tenants? — 
 Well, there is a good part of it waste on Major Mont- 
 gomery's land, great flakes without any person occupy- 
 ing it. 
 
 15076. Mr. Shaw — They have cattle runs?— Yes. 
 
 15077; But no farms on it ?— Yes. 
 
 15078. Is it land that can be improved? — ^Yes; a 
 great deal of it can be improved, and on Colquhoun's 
 land. He raised the land very much. ' 
 
 15079. Does he put on any advance when there 
 is a sale ? — I think he prevents the sale. 
 
 15080. That is in your neighbourhood? — ^Yes. 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Mr. Francis 
 Faucett. 
 
 Mr. Francis Faucett, Rockfiekl, Belleek, examined. 
 
 15081. Chairman — You are a landowner, I believe ? 
 — Yes ; to a small extent, bi;t I am larger in the 
 tenant way. 
 
 15082. What do you hold as tenant? — I hold about 
 700 or 800 acres as tenant. 
 
 15083. On one estate ? — On a great many estates. 
 
 15084. Is there anything on these estates you wish 
 to put before us ? — Yes. My own personal know- 
 ledge where my forefathers lived is on Mr. Jones' 
 estate of Moneygiass. He lives in the County 
 Antrim, near Toomebrid^jo. The townland we hold, 
 Mullyare. we held it at £20. a year. 
 
 15085. Mr. Shavi'. — An old lease, I suppose ? — Yes. 
 When the lease fell, Mr. Jones served me with an 
 ejectment. 
 
 15086. When was that? — Immediately after the 
 Land Bill, six or seven years ago. I offered him 
 before I was served ' with the ejectment to give him 
 £80 a year for the farm. It was a very heavy value, 
 indeed, but I did not like to leave it, because it was 
 my forefathers' farm. 
 
 15087. Where you live ? — No. After my father's 
 death I was afraid to go back and live on it, kiiowing he 
 was so bad a landlord ; but I had it in my own hand, and 
 my forefathers made it so that the £26 was worth £80. 
 
 15088. What is the acreage ? — Sixty-acres of arable 
 land, and the rest mountain ; the Government valua- 
 tion is £66 a year. We went before the Land Court. 
 He would not take the £80, or tell me what he wor.ld 
 take ; the times were good, and I was anxious not to 
 lose it. When he got into the box, he swore he would 
 not give it to anyone until I had the first otFer. He 
 
 said thei-e were other parties bidding for the land. He 
 was asked what he would take for it, and he said 
 £110. We considered the thing cautiously, and 
 the Land Bill was so badly framed that, after a lease, 
 there was a difliculty in obtaining a decree for any 
 benefit, because you would have to prove the sale of a 
 farm on the estate between the dropping of a lease 
 and the making of a new rent ; that was a thiiig that' 
 could scarcely ever occur. I agreed to give the £110 
 a year, although it was not worth it, rather than give 
 it up. Under the old lease, he was not entitled to 
 game ; he was to give a lease for twenty years ; but 
 he would give no lease, unless I paid the county cess, 
 which was illegal, and let him have the land destroyed 
 with rabbits and all other kind of game. And then we 
 came to loggerheads again. I did not pay the rent for 
 three years, wanting to get my lease. He went to 
 ]Mi'. Blake, and he told him he would have to trust to 
 Faucett for his shooting over the mountains, as he had 
 always allowed him to do, and he was hunted out of 
 court. And then he served a writ on me, and I was 
 advised I had no defence, and paid him £400. Then 
 he came to me again ; we made a new arrangement 
 that I was allowed to shoot the rabbits, and he had 
 the grouse ; and it went on until this bad year came. 
 He gave all his tenants an abatement, and would not 
 give me one, and he would not take the land up, and 
 i was under the necessity of serving a notice of sur- 
 render, or else hold on. I held on, under the hope 
 that there would be something done by this Commis- 
 sion that would make me safe under this man. 
 
 1 .3 S 9 . C H Ai RM AN. — There is no tenant-right on that 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 495 
 
 estate 1 — There is teiuant-right on that estate ; but, in 
 making the arrangements for a lease, he made a bar- 
 gain that there was only five acres to be broken on 
 the place, which was nonsense — but no matter — and 
 he then put down I was to have no benefit of tenant- 
 right. We are standing in that position j-et with that 
 farm. 
 
 15090. Is that in the county Donegal "i — No ; Fer- 
 managh, MuUyare, beside Belcool. 
 
 15091. Mr. Shaw. — You considered £110 to be a 
 fair rent 1 — It is more than a fair rent. I hold a 
 place called Drumscue, near EnniskUlen, at £92 a 
 year, from Mr. J ohnson ; it is about forty -two acres ; 
 I was giving £100 a year for it. It was sold, about 
 three years ago, in the Landed Estates Court, and the 
 man that bought it, the first intimation I had from 
 him was that he had been over the land, and he was 
 informed it was worth so much more money, and I must 
 in future pay £150. This was a Mr. Irwin, of Derry- 
 gore, who had purchased it. The consequence was I 
 gave it up to him. 
 
 15092. And got no compensation? — I did make 
 an effort to get £75. I was afraid I would be put into 
 the box, and I could not swear it was worth the first rent. 
 
 15093. Had you laid out money on the place 1 — 
 Oh, yes, improved it greatly ; grazing, and hay, and 
 all that sort of thing ; had it for twenty years in my 
 own hands. 
 
 15094. You did not live on it 1 — No, I had a herd 
 on it. There is a good deal of property, besides my- 
 self, in Donegal, I would like to give you a know- 
 ledge of. 
 
 15095. Chairman. — You say, after the purchase of 
 part of Mr. Connolly's, the rent was settled by arbi- 
 tration 1 — Yes ; about ten- years ago. 
 
 15096. Mr. Shaw. — Did each party appoint their 
 own arbitrator 1 — I think so. There was always 
 tenant-right on that estate, and every man could sell 
 as he liked ; but when he came to sell under the new 
 landlord, Mr. Teevan, then came the rule that the 
 bailifi" came up, and said : " You will have to raise 
 your rent." 
 
 - 15097. Chaiemas.— You are also an agent, and 
 have the management of some properties 1 — I have ; 
 in the county Leitrim I manage property for Miss 
 Crofton ; it is a poor property, but they were always 
 able to pay their rent, and I believe the great cause 
 of that is we always allowed free sale. 
 
 15098. Without limit of prices ■?— Without limit of 
 prices. 
 
 15099. Or increase of rent afterwards ? — Yes. 
 
 15100. They felt an interest in it?— Yes. And 
 the people stuck to the farms, and it was a benefit to 
 the landlady, for she never had to lose any money, 
 and, untU this Land League business commenced, they 
 never refused to pay the rent. I gave twenty-five 
 per cent, last year of a reduction, and I got as much 
 as the poor people could pay ; and this year I gave 
 twenty-five per cent. ; but they said the Land League 
 was out the night before, and they were not to pay. 
 I left them, and I received a man's rent this morning 
 by Post-office order. 
 
 15101. You think there is reason for the dis- 
 satisfaction? — Every reason, it is an infamous state 
 of things ; a poor man will lay out his all on a holding, 
 his neighbour fancies it, and goes to the bailiff and 
 gives him something, and between them they put out 
 the poor man; If there was a proper Land Bill passed 
 it would disendow nobody but the bailiff, the tenant, 
 and the landlord, and the country, would be better 
 off 
 
 15102. You think the rent question is really the 
 main point? — The rent question is really the main 
 point, and to make it certain a tenant cannot be turned 
 out at the will or beck of any person. 
 
 15103. Mr. Shaw. — Nor his rent raised capri- 
 ciously? — Yes. They ruin the country in this way. 
 The improving-tenant that lays out his money, that 
 is, the man whose rent is raised, and that decent 
 tenant is hunted out of the country, and the scheming 
 
 speculator who would pretend he was poor that man Oct. u, issff. 
 
 is never raised. The last Land Bill was no use, if a — ■. 
 
 poor man and his landlord fell out he could bring the paucett!"'"' 
 
 tenant from one court to another, until the poor man 
 
 had to succumb he was ruined. The proper course 
 
 would be, that the tenant, if he was aggrieved, should 
 
 call for an arbitration, and the landlord should appoint 
 
 one man, and the tenant appoint another, and then 
 
 if they cannot agree there should be a Government 
 
 valuator sent down who would be an umpire between 
 
 them. 
 
 15104. A skilled man? — A free man; and there 
 ought to be one of them in every county, and that 
 man should only be left one year in one county lest 
 he should get in with the gentry and be too much 
 friends of theirs, and another thing that ought to be 
 done if they both did not as'ree, there ought to be one 
 appeal to the Barrister or Chairman, and if that rent 
 was once settled it should not rise or fall, except by 
 the price of produce, like the College lands. That 
 would be, I think, of great benefit to the country, and 
 as for no tenant-right being after a lease. I believe 
 after a lease a tenant is more injured by being thrown 
 out, after all his improvements for thirty or forty 
 years, than if he had had it for only a short time. 
 
 15105. A shor1>sighted policy to refuse tenant- 
 right ? — It is a most infernally bad system. In the 
 north of Ireland the landlords are getting some rent, 
 but in the west it would be what happened with me, 
 the Land League business. I believe the good land- 
 lord should call upon the bad landlord to make a law 
 to protect him the way he should not have any power 
 to go about the country robbing him. It injures the 
 whole community, and my impression is, that unless 
 there is a bill made for that purpose it will be very 
 bad. Mr. Connolly's estate was a very good estate ; 
 they got leave to sell always on it, the Marquess of 
 Ely's estate near me was a good estate, and up to 
 twenty-five years ago they used to get leave to sell, 
 but latterly Mr. Maude the agent has taken a new 
 way, he buys himself from them or makes a price, in 
 other words they have not free sale since he came in, 
 that is one of the rules I object to. 
 
 15106. He gets the price again from somebody that 
 comes in ? — Yes. 
 
 15107. But he makes the price ? — Yes. 
 
 15108. The buyer and seller don't come together? 
 — They may, but he gets the price. In making this 
 Land Bill there ought to be a stringent clause against 
 subdividing. If the whole community have liberty to 
 cut it up in strips they would not be able to live 
 on it, they would ruin the landlord and themselves. 
 
 15109. You would prevent subdivision? — Un- 
 reasonable subdivision, except with the written con- 
 sent of the landlord, a written stamped agreement. 
 Another thing that I think would be of great use in 
 the country would be something about this abuse of 
 the Grand Jury laws. Now, landlords have the power 
 of appointing the cesspayers, and the landlords have 
 friends magistrates, and the magistrates and the cess- 
 payers are there together, and in some instances' if the 
 landlord wanted a job he had friends there to go with 
 him, and he had always two or three friendly cess- 
 payers, the upshot of the matter is it is supposed to 
 be a fair tribunal. The landlord first makes the 
 tenants pay for the road, and then if it was through 
 a bog of no use to anyone but himself he would set 
 the bog, which was not the case in my young days. 
 
 151 lO. Is that common making the tenants pay 
 for bogs ? — Very common. In fact on the Marquess 
 of Ely's there never was any letting of bogs until Mr. 
 Maude came in. 
 
 15111. Chairman. — When did he come there? — • 
 About twenty years ago, it lets as high as £4. 
 
 15112. Mr. SiiAW.— To the tenants?— No, but to 
 other people ; and he moves the tenants about. 
 
 15113. Puts a tax on their time and industry? — . 
 Yes. If there was a law to prevent this people would 
 be more content, and they would bo better ofi', and the 
 landlords would be better oiT. ■ 
 
496 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Oct. IG, 1S80. 
 
 Jlr. Francis 
 Faucett. 
 
 15114. And this discontent is spreading tlirougli 
 tlie country even to good landlords ? — Yes, and no 
 good landlord feels himself safe now from this non- 
 sensical Land League business. At Manorhamilton, 
 last week, a most ridiculous tiling occurred ; they were 
 prosecuting men for chasing a man off his farm, and 
 the police could not get cars, the people refused them 
 cars. 
 
 15115. The Land League does not profess to say 
 " pay no rent," but only " pay no unjust rent," but of 
 course the general impression is the other ? — There is 
 another impression that the Government said the very 
 same thing, that they told the tenants to pay no rent, 
 so that really it is necessary to lia\-e something done. 
 
 15116. To settle this question finally 1 — To settle it 
 finally, and have no tinkering at it at all. And if 
 you lind any estate where there is a good landlord and 
 good tenant-right you will see the tenants more com- 
 fortable, that the rents arc paid, and they get a good 
 price for going away, and you hear no complaints. 
 The Earl of Morley has an estate in Cavan, and on 
 that estate you would get the fee-simple for the land. 
 
 15117. Chairmax. — Has that been sold? — No. 
 For the tenant-right of it you would get the value of 
 the fee-simple of the land, and that estate really, if it 
 belonged to a gentleman that never had given fair 
 play to the tenantry, or had not a good agent, would 
 bo a common mountain, and the people would be 
 begging on it. 
 
 15118. Mr. Shaw. — And that has been all created 
 by giving the tenants fair play 1 — Yes, and another 
 thing I think that ought to be avoided, preventing 
 grazing lands having the same privileges as the other. 
 In grazing lands a great deal of them have been 
 bought, and it is not fair to rob these men of what 
 they purchased. One of the tricks the landlord is 
 playing is, a man may have ten acres of land, and 
 thirty acres round it of mountain land, and they would 
 say it was all grazing land to debar compensation. 
 
 15119. Chairman. — I was just going to ask you 
 the view that the tenants have that this Government 
 "\-aluation is a fair criterion of rent 1 — It is not the 
 fair value. I have a case in the townland called 
 Coolarkin on the Earl of Erne's estate. I was away 
 from home, and they valued the farm at £70 or £75 
 a year. I appealed, and was able to prove that though 
 they valued it, there was a road at the bottom of it 
 and one mecdow below the road, and they never went 
 off the road. There was about 200 acres of mountain, 
 and fifty acres of this soapy land. I weiat in to appeal, 
 and they asked me what would I do, would I leave it 
 to themselves. I said, "no." They went out, and 
 they never went off the road again that time, and 
 offered me .£10 reduction, but I would not have it. I 
 went on with my appeal, and had my witnesses in the 
 place. On the night before, I was in the White Hart 
 Hotel stopping, and these two valuators, and two other 
 gentlemen I did not know were there. I said it was 
 a very unreasonable thing to value my land without 
 seeing it, and we wei'e near having a row about it. 
 Next day they asked Mr. Maude to come to me and 
 settle the thing at £45 a year, without going before 
 the barrister. I did accept it, and my valuation is put 
 down at £45 a year by the Earl of Erne, and it is 
 dear enough. When I was walking down the street, 
 a gentleman came up to me and said, " If you had 
 proved what you stated last night, I would have dis- 
 missed those two men on my own responsibility ; " it 
 turned out he was the solicitor for the survey, Mr. 
 Bolton. Where the good part is beside the road it 
 is over-valued, and where it is up in the mountain it 
 is not valued high enough. There is a medium class 
 of land, soapy bad land, that would never be woi'th to 
 tlie tenant more than 10s. or \'2ti. an acre, and this 
 they value more than the rocky land everywhere in- 
 variably. I have land that I pay double the valuation 
 for, and I have land I don't pay half the valuation for, 
 and both are set to me since the valuation was taken 
 out by men who knew it, so that shows it is not a 
 basis at all. Another thint,' if there is ffoina: u be a 
 
 Government valuation again you might put this thing- 
 in as a stave, that every tenant when his laud is goino' 
 to be valued should have notice served on him to meet 
 the valuator, and he would have to walk over it. I 
 had a tenant of mine who kicked up a great row. J 
 thought his valuation was not too high, and I went up 
 there with a valuator, Mr. Gaffney, who was a real judge 
 of land. When he came the man was making a great 
 row about two fields. "Why," said Mr. Gaffney, " You 
 liave no right to complain, that is valued against Mr. 
 Faucett." 
 
 15120. You were going to say something about a. 
 peasant proprietary? — The best thing that would 
 happen to the landlords would be for the Government 
 to take up land and sell it to the tenantry, and the 
 tenantry would be very much Avorse ofi'. They would 
 never be able to meet the Government in the way 
 they wrangled with the landlords. I think if they had 
 a fair valued rent, it would be better for them than a. 
 peasant proprietary. 
 
 15121. Then, as to the purchase of holdings by 
 the tenants under the Board of Works, have you had 
 any experience of that? — Very little. They have 
 some of them purchased, but I believe they were worse 
 off than before. But I cannot speak certamly. 
 
 15122. Then do you here, where you allude to 
 advances by the Board of Works, mean advances for 
 the purpose of improvement ? — No ; for the purpose 
 of purchase. 
 
 15123. You said you found it complicated? — Yes; 
 I tried it in the case of that farm of £50 a-year, but 
 I found so many clauses in it I abandoned it. 
 
 15124. What were the complicated clauses?-— I 
 cannot exactly state it now, but if I had the papers 
 I have at home I could read them out to you. That 
 is about four years ago. 
 
 15125. You think, at all events, it would deter 
 tenants from trying to purchase ? — I think, as a rule, 
 most of them would not be under the circumstances. 
 They would have to give so much ready money. You 
 have a very good trial under the Church Act, and I be- 
 lieve they are much worse off than they were before. 
 
 15126. It ought to be carefully done ? — Yes ; care- 
 fully and gi-adually. 
 
 15127. Chairman.— Do you know of any waste 
 lands that would be capable of being taken up fo;' 
 reclamation ? — Yes ; a great deal. 
 
 15128. Mountain land or bogs? — Bogs are better, 
 except at a certain altitude. If you get mountam 
 lands they will not produce crops in wet seasons, but 
 if you get into a small bog — if you get into a big bog 
 it is no use — you must first gravel it, then drain it, 
 and then break it up. The only way these bogs would 
 be valuable would be if there was a piece of bog given 
 to the tenant along with his holdings. 
 
 15129. Mr. Shaw.— And he reclaimed it?— Yes; 
 and it would cost nothing ; but, as to getting into a 
 big district of bog, I think it is impossible. 
 
 15130. Chairman.— Then you don't think it would 
 be possible to remove the tenants to a place, and give 
 them small portions to reclaim? — Well, they have not 
 capital, and would not go the right way about it Ine 
 only way is to attach bits to their holdings, and they 
 would reclaim them. And it is most unfair on Lord 
 (,)ranmore and Browne's estate, where the tenants 
 made all the improvements. I never got a farthuig 
 from a landlord in my life, and I paid thousands ot 
 pounds, and the whole look-out with the landlords is 
 how they can raise the rent — at least the bad ones. 
 It was quite clear to anyone who had anythmg to do 
 with land that when the Landed Estates Court was 
 formed, and the old gentry was sold out, there should 
 be leases given to prevent the others from robbing. -A- 
 fellow borrowed the money and looked at a townland; 
 and said that man has a good house, or a good field, 
 I will raise him, regardless of the fact that it is owuig 
 to the man's own industry. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 497 
 
 Mr. George Moore, Ballintra, examined. 
 
 Oct. IG, 1880. 
 
 15131. Chairmax. — You hold land under Colonfl 
 Knox ?— I do. 
 
 15132. How many acres? — I cannot form an 
 opinion about the number of acres. It is a very rough 
 place adjoining a mountain. 
 
 15133. Do you know the amount of tillage land? — 
 There might be on the farm, twenty acres. 
 
 15134. And there is a large extent of mountain? — 
 Yes ; there is. 
 
 15135. What rent do you. pay for it? — The place I 
 live I pay £53 for, and I hold another farm at a 
 distance that I pay £24 a year for. 
 
 15136. Making £11. Have you any reason to 
 believe that there is a rise to be made ? — I have, sir. 
 It is twelve years on the 1 9th of last month since my 
 father died. I was his eldest chUd, and came iii to 
 manage the place after him. And the very first time 
 I saw the agent, Mr. Colqwhoitn, I told him that the 
 farm I lived on was not worth the rent as it was then, 
 but that it was reclaimable, and that if there was 
 some money laid out on it it -would pay better, and 
 I asked him to get me £200 or £300 to improve it. 
 It so happened the draining of this land would be 
 very expensive. There was a great flat of fine land 
 and a hill and another flat, but the outlet of the water 
 was through a rook, and it was ver}' expensive to 
 drain it. I told this to 31r. Colquhoun, and got him 
 to come to the place, and after seeing it ho agreed 
 with me it would be of great importance to have it 
 drained. He refused to get money for me from Mr. 
 Knox, but he encouraged me. and told me I was not 
 so poor, that I was a young man, and he wound up by 
 saying — if you improve the improvements are your 
 own. I said it was natural to think that, but if I had 
 not the money I could not. He refused me a penny. 
 For the next five years I spent many a hard sore day 
 trying to improve that land, and had to cut eight feet 
 through the solid rock, which I can show to any living 
 witness, to get the water tlu-ough the rock, and I stood 
 there when it was freezing hard with the water about 
 me, and I wrought for five years. I went to the .agent 
 
 , to speak aboiit another subject, and I had not spoken 
 half-a-dozen words when he said, " I don't want to 
 talk to you about that, but there is another subject 
 — you have your land too cheap," and he sent his 
 A^aluator, and valued me £19 17s. a year additional 
 rent. I considered it h very gi-eat grievance — some- 
 thing that human nature could not bear." I know if 
 I am a fair sample of human nature I cannot think 
 to bear it. I am a married man, and though you may 
 think I look young, gentleman, I have seven children 
 and a wife. I think I have a natural afiection for 
 them, and, sooner than I would submit to it, I would 
 take my departure for America, and make a home 
 somewhere else. 
 
 15137. Mr. Shaw. — How long is this increase on 
 
 you ? — Two years. Fortunately for the tenantry, if Jfr. George 
 I may say so, there came bad years, and he has not ^^'^"^^ 
 thought of enforcing it. 
 
 15138. Were all the tenants raised at the same 
 time ? — Yes ; but not to the same extent ; some of 
 them had not been improving. 
 
 15139. Chairman. — Had there been a valuation on 
 the whole property ? — Yes. 
 
 15140. Mr. Shaw. — And your improvements were 
 valued against yourself ? — Yes ; I am in a position to 
 prove they were, and even on other estates. I know 
 cases of very great grievances. I know landlords who 
 willnot acknowledge tenant-right at all. Iknow a man 
 who holds a large farm and has a brother-in-law living 
 in Australia, and he wrote to him encouraging him to 
 go out, and he was determined to go, and went to his 
 landlord and asked him to allow him to sell, and he 
 would not get one shilling for it though he had made 
 great improvements. 
 
 15141. Chairmax. — Had there been tenant-right 
 on that property ? — I am not aware. 
 
 15142. Have you had any notice that the rent was 
 goingtobe increased again? — No, sir, no notice. But we 
 have had intimation that it was on account of the bad 
 years it was not pressed, but that it will be raised, 
 and that eventually it will be paid. I know other 
 cases where there have been farms sold under other 
 gentlemen, and half the tenant-right was destroyed by 
 the landlord sending his bailifi' there, stating that the 
 rent worild be increased. 
 
 15143. Mr. Shaw. — You consider your rent a great 
 deal too high for the farm ? — Yes. I v/ould consider 
 the jiresent rent a fair rent in its present improved 
 state ; but my father and I expended, at leant, 
 £500 on it ; and, I think, in other ways that I 
 have suffered at the hands of my landlord, perhaps 
 it is no harm for me to mention it. Last year 
 was a very bad . year for farmers and this agent. 
 Colonel Knox's agent always comes for the May rent 
 in November, and he was in the habit of coming back 
 in January for the November rent, and we a,lways 
 paid him. A great many of the tenantry, I among 
 the rest, told him that if he came at the usual time 
 we would not be in a position to pay him. He asked 
 when would it be convenient. I said about June 
 when cattle would be the highest price. He led me 
 to believe that would be time enough ; he never sent 
 a notice or his bailiff, or a line, and about the 3rd of 
 May he sent me three ejectment processes, and put 
 me to expenses. 
 
 15144. Did he do the same with the other tenants ? 
 — He did with about 20. 
 
 15145. Is he an attorney ? — He is an attorney him- 
 self. I am not quite sure about that, he has a brother 
 an attorney. 
 
 The witness withdrev/. 
 
 Mr. John Mullan, Tullyearle, tenant on the estate of Charles Johnson's representatives 
 
 Mr. John 
 Mullan. 
 
 Pays £11 6s. ^d. : valuation, £9 ; acreage, 9. 
 
 15146. Mr. Shaw. — Was the rent raised at all on 
 you ? — It was, sir, raised £2. 
 
 15147. When ? — About 5 years ago. 
 
 15148. And you are not able to live on it, I sup- 
 pose, and pay the rent ?— I would like if it was in my 
 power to have it a great deal less. It is an impossi- 
 bility for a man to be bringing forward a small family 
 under such a rent. 
 
 15149. Is it near the town? — Two miles from the 
 town. 
 
 15150. Is it rich land or poor land 1 — The land is 
 pretty fair. 
 
 15151. Which side of the town?— As you go to 
 Ballyshannon ; two miles out. 
 
 15152. That looks good land? — There are no com- 
 plaints as to the land. 
 
 15153. But it looks too high a rent to make a living 
 of? — I think as good as the land is, if there was a 
 valuation between the landlord and the tenant we 
 would get a reduction. I am certain we would. 
 
 15154. Have you built houses and done the im- 
 provements ? — Whatever was done on the farm, the 
 landlord laid out nothing. They sent us to another 
 gentleman's estate to pay £1 a rood for turf." 
 
 15155. Chairman. — Have you turf allowed oa 
 your holding ? — Not at all ; we have to go and pay to 
 Mr. John Hamilton £1 a rood for our bog. 
 
 15156. How far off? — Five miles as you go to 
 Pettigo from this. 
 
 The Commissioners then adjourned. 
 
 3S 
 
498 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S80. 
 
 Oct. IS, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Eobert 
 "W. Bourne. 
 
 TWENTY-FIRST DAY— MONDAY, 18th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat, at 11 o'clock, iii the Courthouse, Sligo. 
 
 Present : — The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborough, Chairman; The O'Conor Don, and 
 
 William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Robert W. Bourns examined. 
 
 15157. Chairman. — You live at Hatley, Carrick-on- 
 Shannon 1 — Yes. . 
 
 15158. Are you a farmer ? — Yes, I am. 
 
 15159. Any other business? — Well, I am a small 
 land agent and other things, but I principally earn my 
 living as a tenant farmer. 
 
 15160. How many acres do you hold? — I hold 
 about 500 Irish now, I gave up 100 acres of land 
 lately. 
 
 15161. The name of the landlord? — Mrs. White of 
 Carrick-on- Shannon and Mrs. Lloyd of Lissanone, Mr. 
 Garnett is her agent. 
 
 15162. Is there anything in connexion with your 
 holding under them, you wish to bring under our 
 notice 'I — Well, no ; I am an agent myself upon a 
 small estate in the neighbourhood of Carrick-on- 
 Shannon, about five or six hundred acres, but I 
 don't think it is necessary to state anything about 
 that. 
 
 15163. It is more a general observation on the state 
 of things in the country ? — It is. 
 
 15104. Well, have you noticed anything within the 
 last few years of a deterioration in the land, and con- 
 sequent on that in the circumstances of the tenantry ? 
 — Yes, I have. 
 
 15165. What do you think that arises from? — I 
 think the wet seasons previous to 1879, for four or five 
 years and I think American competition has afiected 
 the price of crops, but I think there has been a natural 
 deterioration of the land in the five years previous to 
 1879, from the wet sfasons. I know rich grass lands 
 covered with rushes, the leases bristling with clauses 
 against breaking itp. It is a very common a,nd proper 
 thing in Roscommon to prevent tenants breaking their 
 lands, rich pasture lands, but fields have gone into 
 rushes beyond any doubt. 
 
 15166. That arises from want of drainage? — Yes, 
 but these are lands you would not be allowed to break, 
 and there is no use draining unless you follow it up 
 by tilling. 
 
 15167. Mr. Shaw. — Would he not allow you to 
 break it under the circumstances of the rushes? — I 
 never asked him, unfortunately, the lands are let on 
 lease at a high rent, and the proprietor cannot afford 
 to do anything. 
 
 151G8. Chairman. — You think these arethe general 
 causes of the deterioration of the land, the wet seasons 
 and the want of drainage 1 — Certainly. 
 
 15169. Is drainage discouraged by the feeling 
 that tenants would not be allowed to break up, 
 and therefore not get the full advantage of the 
 drainage ? — That is not exactly the way I would like 
 to put it, my lord. I think it would be a most 
 important thing — in fact I wonder greatly it was not 
 done in the last session of Parliament, when they were 
 so anxious to give employment ; but I have not seen 
 it mentioned by anybody yet and I cannot understand 
 why it should not be — that is that the tenant should 
 have the same power to borrow as the landlords under 
 the Board of Works. I think that is a most important 
 question. 
 
 15170. Mr. Shaw. — But if he is prevented from 
 draining, what would be the use of borrowing? — I 
 say he should both borrow and drain. 
 
 15171. And that those clauses ought not to be 
 operative ? — Certainly. 
 
 15172. There;, ought to be some one to judge 
 whether he has a right to expend the money on the 
 land? — The Board of Works can judge. If an estate 
 is mortgaged to the masthead the Board of Works 
 
 allow money to be borrowed without consulting the 
 mortgagee, and I don't see why* the same should not 
 be done with the tenant. Indeed, there ought to be 
 a great deal of the red tape done away with in q^„ 
 borrowing. 
 
 15173. Chairman. — I think from what you say 
 in this letter that you would agree with the 
 general opinion expressed to us, that fix the value 
 of land, and you solve the question? — That is it. 
 But, I think it only right to say, since I wrote that 
 letter there, has been a very great change, far beyond 
 all doubt what would be a settlement of the question 
 three months ago would not be a settlement now. I 
 am not speaking of myself, but the general feelin" 
 abroad. In any bill to settle the land question now there 
 must be some move made as to peasant proprietary. 
 
 15174. Mr. Shaw. — But that may be part of the 
 general plan ? — Certainly. 
 
 15175. You would not make it a whole scheme in 
 itself? — I will tell you the truth of that scheme, 
 personally speaking. It is more to meet the excited 
 state of the country than that it would he any prac- 
 tical .a;oo:.l, for I am not at all a believer in the Bright 
 clauses, like others. 
 
 15176. Don't you tliink the people are sensible 
 enough if a good bill is put before them to see it is 
 for their benefit ? — Well, God grant they may 
 
 15177. But the present excitement may pass away ? 
 — Yes, it may. 
 
 1517S. Chaikjiax. — What is your opinion of the 
 Irish landlords as a class ? — Good, my lord. 
 
 15179. With exceptions 1— There are some ex- 
 ceptions. 
 
 15180. And in what class of landlords are these 
 exceptions ? — Priacipally the men who purchase. 
 
 15181. They purchase for speculation to get a 
 good return for their money, I suppose? — Unfortu- 
 nately T have known men who were good landlords 
 before, and when they purchased land they became 
 bad. I don't wish to mention names. In the County 
 Roscommon I went over an estate that I mentioned 
 there to you in the letter. I went over an estate 
 many years ago for , Mr. Guinness, afterwards Sir 
 Benjamin Lee Guinness, that Mr. O'Beirne had, and 
 I found the lands all let weU for the value, and somt* 
 of them under it. The o-\\Tier sold those lands ; some of 
 them ^^'ere bought by small landed proprietors, and they 
 exterminated the tenants completely. He went then 
 and purchased a large estate in the county Leitrim, 
 and, I believe, it was £1,700 a year, and I was told 
 to put £1,400 a year on it additional. 
 
 15182. ilr. Shaw. — It was the late Mr. Guinness! 
 — No, but I say I went over them for him. Mr. 
 O'Beirne purchased the property of Lord Bessborough 
 in Leitrim. The rentwas £1,700, and it is noAv £3,100. 
 He bought it when people were land mad. Land 
 never brought so high a value since 1870 as before it 
 
 15183. The O'Conor Don. — Land with tenants on 
 it?— Yes. 
 
 15184. Grazing farms have brought more ? — Yes. 
 
 15185. About this question of rent, how would 
 you have the rent arrived at so as to be satisfactory 
 to the tenantry? — I think, my lord, that if the tenant 
 objected to his rent he ought to serve a notice on his 
 landlord to say he would bring him into a Court of 
 Arbitration to have it fixed, and, I think, the shorter 
 and simpler would be the better for all parties, and, I 
 think, if the tenant had power to name one practical 
 valuator, and the landlord another, and then some of 
 the chairmen of the counties would be quite capable 
 
MIXUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 499 
 
 of acting as umpires— I dou't know woulil tiipy br in 
 every instance, but some would be quite capable of 
 judging — but let him bo either the jud;j,e. or a man 
 be appointed who would hold his courts of arbitration 
 in the county so many times a year, as often as 
 necessary. 
 
 15186. Mr. Shaw. — He would act as umpire? — As 
 umpire between the two parties taking ■ all the 
 circumstances of the case into consideration. 
 
 15187. And hear evidence and see the land if 
 necessary f—l would limit it if possible to the two, and 
 I would give him the power of having an expert or 
 going out himself if necessary, but I think a shrewd 
 sensible man would be able to form an idea of what it 
 was, from hearing both parties, but I would limit 
 it as far as possible, and keep out the lawyers and 
 solicitors. 
 
 15188. Chaieman. — What is j-our opinion of the 
 Avorking of the tenant-right custom generally, does it 
 exist in the parts of the country you are most acquainted 
 with 1 — There is very little tenan1>right in the part of 
 the country I am acquainted with. 
 
 15189. Would you think it could be introduced 
 with advantage in these parts of the country whero it 
 has not hitherto existed'! — Certainly it has been 
 successful in the north, and I don't see v.-hy it should 
 not be successful in the west. 
 
 15190. You would give the power of free sale and 
 the fixmg of rents by arbitration 1 — I suppose it would 
 nearly end in that. I would fix rents by arbitration, 
 but I think a landlord should have some power over 
 his estate, I would be sorry to see him a mere rent- 
 charger, I don't think that it would be for the benefit 
 of the tenantry. 
 
 15191. You would give him the option of selecting 
 his own tenant ? — I would, or give him the option of 
 paying the tenant what he would get, and taking u^) 
 the land himself. 
 
 1519:2. You would give the tenant continuoiis 
 occupation on paying his rent 7 — I think so, except he 
 did something very wrong with the holding, and I 
 think the landlords would be very well satisfied now 
 to be sui-e of getting their rents. 
 
 15193. You say in the part of the country you know 
 the tenants are looking out for more than they would 
 have accepted three or six months ago, do you think 
 that arises from crops being bad this year in your part 
 of the country 1 — The potato cj'op in the Union I am 
 in connexion with, Carrick-on-Shannon is rather a 
 failure, but I don't consider that is the reason. 
 
 15194. The O'CoxOR Dox. — You consider it more 
 due to the agitation that is going on 1 — Certainly. 
 
 15105. Chaiemax — I thought that might be the 
 cause, from your mentioning here that the potato crop 
 is bad in the district, and it might not be general 
 throughout the country 1 — I say it is a fact that the 
 • potato crop is bad, but I don't think that is the 
 reason. 
 
 15196. The O'Conor Don.— The other crops are 
 good? — Very good, the last year did not affect the 
 tenants so much as people supposed, it was the previous 
 years. 
 
 15197. Mr. Shaw. — This was, or is a really good 
 year? — Yes, but 1879 was a ruinous year, grass land 
 ■ivas worth nothing. 
 
 15198. The O'Conoe Don. — There is a good price 
 for stock this year ? — Very. 
 
 15199. And butter and everything connected with 
 the land? — Everything connected with the land is 
 brincin," remunerative prices. There has been fine 
 weather for saving the harvest, but after the four or 
 five ruinous years we have had people are only slowly 
 recovering. 
 
 15200. Chairman. — Taking your own case of the 
 grass farm, how do you find, it has stood with you for 
 the last four or five years? — I partly saved myself, 
 I don't think I did save myself for three years previous 
 to 1879. and I lost considerably in 1S70. I don't 
 allude to what I was in the habit of making, but I 
 allude to the a^ctual rents, tithes and taxes paid. 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 ^V. Bouroe. 
 
 15201. You just now 8i>oke of peasant proprietary, Oct. 18, i(i8» 
 have, there been any puri^hases ? — Well there were two 
 or three or four that occurred some years ago, and I 
 cannot say that they are good specimens of their class, 
 I think they are just about as poor as any in their 
 locality now. 
 
 15ii02. Were the purchases made before the Land 
 Act? — Yes, long before. 
 
 152u:',. The O'CoNOR Don.— Of what sized farms? 
 — Ther« is one of them very close to me of forty-two 
 acres of good land. 
 
 15204, He purchased it in the Landed Estates Court ? 
 —Ho did, 
 
 15205 He has it all in his own occupation ? — Yes, 
 he ejected one tenant that had about six acres, and 
 has it now in his own occupation, he is now in the 
 Bankruptcy Court. 
 
 15206. Chairman. — He had to provide all the 
 purchase-money ? — His father had. 
 
 152(17. The O'Conor Don.— Doyou think hehad to 
 borrow any? — I think not one shilling. What I am 
 afraid of in peasant proprietary is, I think men 
 would starve themselves to get hold of land, and leave 
 themselves very short capital for the working in the 
 future. I think the specimens we have now are true 
 specimens of the country, because these men with great 
 industry and zeal amascel a little moiiey, and what I 
 am most afraid of afterwards is subdivision. From 
 what I know of the country, I know if a man has ten 
 children and forty acres, he will give each of them four 
 acres, and I am afraid they would afterwards divide -it 
 in ten parts again. 
 
 15208. Have you seen that with these men who 
 purchased ? — It was entailed, his father wisely entailed 
 it. 
 
 15209. Mr. Shaw. — Don't you think other fathers 
 would have sense enough to do the same with small 
 lots ? — If you go to consult any man who has the 
 management of a large estate, you will find the great 
 difficiilty is to prevent them from subdividing, even 
 the mo,st industrious. 
 
 15210. Is that increasing or decreasing doyou think ? 
 — Well, in the small holdings when they have success- 
 ful years, they are more in the habit of getting their 
 sons and daughters married, that is the time that sub- 
 division occurs mo,st. 
 
 15211. Don't they go to America and hang about 
 the world more, they have railways at their own doors ? 
 ' — There has been enormous emigration since I com- 
 menced to farm, but I doubt whether it extends to that 
 class, I allude to another class. 
 
 15212. Don't you think a young man and young 
 woman instead of settling down on a couple of acres, 
 would rather go to a new country and be independent ? 
 — I would hope so. 
 
 15312a. The O'CoNor, Don. — This emigration in j'our 
 neighbourhood, has it been emigration of whole families 
 or only emigration of individuals 1 — Both. 
 
 15213. There has been a considerable number of 
 families there leaving ?-^A few. I have known small 
 land-holders go away too. There is considerable emi- 
 gration indeed. 
 
 15214. Chairman. — Were they the result of eviction 
 or voluntary emigration ? — Voluntary. There have 
 been very few evictions, there have been some, but 
 they have got back into the land again. 
 
 15215. Put back as caretakers ? — Put back in any 
 case. Faith, some of them have been put back by the 
 public. 
 
 15216. The O'Conor Don.— Took forcible posses- 
 sion ? — Took forcible possession. 
 
 15217.' Chairman. —Without redemption ?— Gone 
 back without any redemption. 
 
 15218. The O'Conor Don.— Do you know cases 
 where they have been actually put out— finally out of 
 the land— during last year? — Oh, I do. I heard of 
 one who was out of land for eight months, and went 
 back, yesterday or the day before. 
 
 3S 2 
 
500 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. l', 1380. 
 
 Mr. Richard 
 W. Coiirne. 
 
 15219. CiiAiRMAX. —Is there any reclairaable waste 
 land in your country t — A good deal. 
 
 15220. Is anything done towards reclaiming it, or 
 lias anything been done within the last few years ? — 
 In nine cases out of every ten suice the passing of the 
 Land Act of 1870, landlords have refused point blank 
 to allow their lands to be reclaimed. 
 
 15221. Mr. Shaw. — To be reclaimed? — To be re- 
 claimed. 
 
 15222. Chairman. — Do you think there are any 
 large tracts that might be got by any means for the 
 purpose of large reclamation 1 — The very thing I 
 pointed out when I commenced would be the way to 
 reclaim that land. I don't see why the landlord 
 would not have it himself. 
 
 15223. Drain it ? — A nd you can borrow the money. 
 
 15224. Mr. Shaw. — And allow the tenants to bor- 
 row money 1 — Certainly. 
 
 15225. But if the landlords prevent them, what are 
 you to do ? — I say if a tenant has 20 acres of ground, 
 and 5 acres of that red moor, let him go to the Board 
 of "Works and borrow money to improve it. 
 
 15226. Chairman. — But are all these waste lands in 
 tenants' holdings at present 1 — Principally. There is 
 a large quantity of waste land beyond me that the 
 tenants do not go on, beyond feeding on it, 
 
 15227. The O'Conok Don. — But even in that case, 
 is it not in the occupation of the tenants in the way 
 of grazing on it 1 — I don't think it is, it is not worth 
 grazing on, but I know the agent is completely against 
 it; I believe he does not a,llow them. 
 
 15228. Chairman. — Is that turf bog cr mountain'? 
 —Turf bog. 
 
 15229. Is it cut-away turf ? — Some of it, my lord, 
 but there are large quantities of it not cut away. 
 
 15230. The O'Conor Don. — But when you say, you 
 know the agent won't allow them to reclaim, do you ex- 
 tend that to the land that is decidedly in the tenants' 
 occupation, or only to this land that tenants may be lay- 
 ing claim to, and that the landlord may also claim as 
 being his own ? — I think the way it arose is this, the 
 greater number hold the land — I cannot speak from per- 
 sonal exjoerience — but I have always heard that they 
 hold land at a very moderate rent, leased land, under or 
 at about Government valuation, which, of course, is a 
 jnoderate rent, if you take into consideration there is a 
 large quantity of moors attached to these holdings. Ac- 
 cording as they were cutting away the turf bank they 
 were extending the moor outside, and I believe 
 the landlord prevented them altogether from re- 
 claiming. 
 
 15231. The landlord claimed that that waste land 
 was not in their occupation? — I don't think he pre- 
 vented them grazing on it, but I think lie objected to 
 their breaking this land, because, of course, if there 
 was anything like disturbance, there v/ould be a larg(^ 
 chum for reclamation. And thftt is tlie reason I say 
 how much better it would be for both if the tenant 
 was allowed to reclaim at once, if it cost £10 or j£20 
 or £50 to reclaim it, let there be as much borrowed as 
 would actually reclaim it, and let the tenant, while he 
 is in possession, jiay the interest on the money bor- 
 rowed. 
 
 15232. Do you think the tenants would always lay 
 it out in reclamation? — I would make him lay out 
 every shilling under the Board of Works. 
 
 15233. Do you think all the money the landlord 
 borrows is well laid out ? — It would be very much 
 better laid out by the tenant, for he would have both 
 the landlord and the Board of Works to look after 
 him. 
 
 15234. Do you think the Board of Works are cap- 
 able of looking after all the outlay on these drainage 
 and improvement loans ?— I cannot say that. You 
 cannot expect me to have a very high opinion of the 
 Board of Works, considering I live on the banks of 
 the Shannon. 
 
 15235. Mr. Shaw. — You sufler from it? — Yes, sir, 
 forty acres of ground lost. 
 
 15236. Have they not been laying out money 
 
 on the Shannon this year? — They have been pro- 
 mising it. 
 
 15237. And did nothing ?— I can see nothing. 
 
 15238. The O'Conor Don.— Is the country in your 
 district very disturbed at present ? — They have it all 
 their own way, sir. 
 
 15239. They are not paying rents very punctually? 
 — They are paying no rent beyond the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 15240. ]Mr. Shaw. — Is the Government valuation 
 higher than their rents, or lower, generally speakmg? 
 — Considerably lower. 
 
 15241. In Roscommon? — In Roscommon and Lei- 
 trim. I live in Leitrim, and I had a farm myself near 
 Boyle, from a middleman, under Colonel King-Hav- 
 man; it was £1 Qs. an acre, and I paid £2 13s. an 
 acre for twenty years, and he would not give me 8j. 
 an acre abatement. I had to throw it to him. 
 
 15242. A grass farm? — A grass farm. 
 
 15243. The O'Conok Don. — Do you know anj 
 farms in your neighbourhood that nobody is in occupa- 
 tion of and nobody would be allowed to occupy ?--! 
 don't know of any ; there are some. 
 
 15244. Are thei-e any on that estate of Mr. 
 O'Beirne's ? — I don't know ; but there is a gentleman 
 who has considerable difficulty with his tenantry in my 
 neighbourhood. 
 
 15245. Do you think that a great number of the 
 occupiers would be able to provide a portion of the 
 purchase money, if their holdings were to be sold to 
 them, the State advancing a certain portion, would 
 they be able to provide one-fourth ? — I think, if they 
 did, it would injure the future working of the land; 
 that is not the way I would suggest for the purpose. 
 
 15246. What way would you suggest for carrying 
 out the purchase scheme 1 — Let a tenant of £20, or 
 £50, or £60 a year rent pay an increase that would 
 create a sinking fund for thirty-five years. 
 
 15247. That the Government should advance the 
 whole of the money ? — I would not ask the Goyern- 
 meiit to advance anything. 
 
 15248. Who would advance it? — Let the owner 
 take the repayment ; he is nothing the worse off. If 
 a farm of land is worth £100 a year fixed by arbitra- 
 tion, instead of the rent between landlord and tenant 
 being £130 a year, let the £30 a year be funded. If 
 it was entailed property, at the end of thirty years 
 the actual value would be there to go to the benefit of 
 the entail. But I would put a clause in it that, if at 
 any time the tenant failed to pay his rent, the land- 
 lord should turn about and take the surplus, which 
 would actually guarantee the rent, after three or four 
 years, at all events. I am bound to say I have not a 
 very great belief in that myself to work for the future 
 good of the country ; but I believe there must be gome- 
 thing like it done now. I think, if there could be a 
 little legislation for the sentiments and the feelings 
 of the people, as well as for justice and law, it ^\oulil 
 be a step in the right direction. 
 
 15249. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think that would be 
 wise ? — I do ; I think it has been the bane of Ireland. 
 
 15250. That the feelings of the people were not 
 consulted ? — I think the feelings of the people should 
 be consulted in a great many cases. 
 
 15251. The O'Conoe Don.— And you believe the 
 feelings of the people are in favour of this peasant pro- 
 prietary, in some shape or form ? — You take an or- 
 dinary freize-coated man — a specimen of the tenantry 
 — and he hears a great gun in England or Scotland 
 has announced that Irish land must be free. 
 
 15252. Mr. Shaw. — He would know what a free 
 tenure is? — Yes; he takes ideas from the word 
 "free." 
 
 15253. The O'Conob Don. — He understands by 
 " free" that he has not to pay anything for it ? — Well, 
 if you come to think of it, is it not the broadest view 
 to take of it. 
 
 15254. Mr. Shaw. — It is the natural thing that 
 would su'igest itself to the ignorant 1 It would. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 501 
 
 Rev. Andrew QuiNN, P.P., Riverstown ; Andrew M'Goldrick, Hugh Fowley, and Michael Connington, 
 
 Rev. Andrew Quinn and Mr. Connington examined. 
 
 15255. The O'Conoe Don.— You are the parisli 
 priest at Ballinafad f — Riverstown. 
 
 15256. And you bring these gentlemen with you 1 
 — Yes, tenant-farmers. 
 
 15257. Representing a number of others besides 
 themselves ? — Yes. 
 
 15258. Would you state shortly what is the chief 
 complaint they have to make as to their present con- 
 
 dition 1 — I requested yesterday that the people who 
 had any complaint to make would come and give mo 
 a statement of the circumstances connected with the 
 valuation and rent particularly, and we have it em- 
 bodied in this paper. I brought these three men to 
 represent the whole ; the principal thing is that the 
 valuation is so much under the rent, and that they 
 are not able to pay the rents. (Hands in return) : — 
 
 Oct. 18, isso, 
 
 R,v. Andrew 
 Quinn, i-.p., 
 Jlcpsrs. 
 Andrew 
 M'Goldrick, 
 Hugh Fowley 
 and Michael 
 Connington. 
 
 Townland. 
 
 Landlord. 
 
 Ten.int. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 Rent. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 
 
 
 \. 
 
 B. 
 
 P. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Aghoo, 
 
 William Middleton, 
 
 Andrew M'Goldrick, . 
 
 i a 
 \ 4 
 
 
 
 
 Arable. 
 Mountain. 
 
 •17 
 
 
 
 8 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 James M'Donogh, . 
 
 VI 
 
 
 
 
 Arable. 
 Mountain. 
 
 • 28 
 
 
 
 14 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Michael M'Derraott, . 
 
 VI 
 
 
 
 
 Arable. 
 Mountain. 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 12 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 John M'Goldrick, 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Culmore, 
 
 Captain W. Martin, 
 
 Do., 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Terence Sheridan, 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Pat Noonc, 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 Carrowkeel, 
 
 A. Powell (1)* 
 
 John Brennan, . 
 
 22 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 32 
 
 
 
 IS 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. (2) 
 
 James Chirkin, . 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 
 31 
 
 
 
 21 18 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. (-3) . . 
 
 Hugh Fowley, . 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 51 10 
 
 
 
 27 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. (4) 
 
 Catherine Flynn, 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 8 10 
 
 Ballysumahan, 
 
 W. J. Griffith, 
 
 James Flnnagan, 
 
 21 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 33 18 
 
 6 
 
 22 5 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Michael Coles, 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 17 6 
 
 3 
 
 10 13 
 
 Shrananash, 
 
 William Phibbs, 
 
 Pat :Meeh:m, . 
 
 41 
 
 
 
 
 
 48 14 
 
 
 
 38 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Widow Meehan, 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 5 
 
 5 2 
 
 6 
 
 3 5 
 
 CuUenduff, . 
 
 Colonel Cooper, 
 
 I\lichael Taheny, 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 20 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 1 15 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 P.it (.'alliary, . 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 11 16 
 
 6 
 
 6 10 
 
 Castledargan, 
 
 William Middleton, . 
 
 JJiehacl Taheny, 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 Riiss, . 
 
 L. P. Duke, Esq., Dublin, 
 
 John Tighe, 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 
 16 5 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Do. . 
 
 Do. 
 
 Hugh Kelly, 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 5 
 
 
 
 8 5 
 
 Do. . 
 
 Do. 
 
 James Conway, 
 
 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 29 10 
 
 
 
 18 10 
 
 Do. . 
 
 Do. 
 
 Pat Heiver, 
 
 17 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 14 10 
 
 Do. . 
 
 Do. 
 
 Michael Laing, . 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 10 17 6 
 
 Do. . 
 
 Do. 
 
 James Laing, . 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 10 17 6 
 
 Do. . 
 
 Do. 
 
 Michael Conway, 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 18 10 
 
 
 
 12 14 
 
 Knockbreenagh, . 
 
 Mrs. C. Loughecd, Piock- 
 brook. 
 
 Michael Cogan, 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 22 15 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Dominick Breheny, . 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 
 
 26 10 
 
 
 
 18 5 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Tat Conlon, 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Widow Walsh, . 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 12 3 
 
 
 
 7 5 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 James MuUany, 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 9 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Henry Dwyer, . 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 10 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 Annaghcarty, 
 JDo. 
 
 Thomas H. Conboy, 
 Do. 
 
 Michael Corcoran, 
 Tliomas Conlon, 
 
 11 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 
 7 5 
 6 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 .Alichael Conlon, 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 6 5 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Pat M-Donogh, 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 13 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Jlichael Conlon, 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 18 2 
 
 
 
 10 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Widow Uo\le, . 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 6 10 
 
 
 
 3 5 
 
 Drumrain, . 
 Do. 
 
 John Irwin, . 
 
 Do. ... 
 
 James Cryan, . 
 Owen N angle, . 
 
 
 __ 
 
 
 12 4 
 45 14 
 
 6 
 
 
 9 5 
 34 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. . . . 
 
 Thomas Flanagan, 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 18 19 
 
 
 
 13 10 
 
 Dooiio'elaffli. 
 
 Rev. 'W'm. Robinson, &c., 
 
 Bryan Kelly, 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 16 16 
 
 
 
 11 5 , 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 .loirn Savage, . 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 4 15 a 
 
 Carrowrea gh , 
 
 R. G. Brinkley, 
 
 James Byrne, . 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 17 18 
 
 8 
 
 11 5 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Patrick M'Cormick, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 15 
 
 
 
 8 10 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 ^Hchael Travers, 
 
 
 
 
 
 11 5 
 
 
 
 8 11 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Pat Doyle, 
 
 
 
 
 
 30 12 
 
 
 
 21 15 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Henry Keany, . 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 17 11 
 
 
 
 13 15 
 
 Drumcallund, 
 Do. 
 Do • . 
 
 Henry M'Cloghry, . 
 Do. 
 
 Dominick Byrne, 
 John Downes, . 
 
 23 
 
 8 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 22 12 
 8 10 
 
 
 
 
 18 5 
 5 14 
 
 Do. 
 
 Thomas Cogan, 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 14 15 
 
 Do. 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 John Donoher, . 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 
 
 36 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 Do. 
 
 James Breheny, 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 Eathvilpatrick, . 
 
 Charles M'Guire, . | 
 
 Pat Breheny, . 
 James Brehen, 
 
 },3 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 10 10 
 
 Ardneskin, 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 
 Do. 
 Turnough, . 
 
 B. 0. Cogan, 
 Do. 
 
 Michael O'Connell, . 
 Pat Lorsney, 
 
 4 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 6 16 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 
 4 5 
 6 
 
 Do. 
 
 Henry Dwyer, . 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 9 10 
 
 
 
 6 15 
 
 Do. 
 Rev. Mr. Sullivan, . 
 
 Martin Langan, 
 Michael Connington, 
 
 5 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 40 
 
 
 
 
 5 5 
 
 26 5 
 
 
 * WoTE. — The rents < 
 
 )f 1 and 2 were raised since 
 
 1870— 
 
 3 was let since 1870. 
 
 
 
 
 15259 We will take Michael Connington, who is 
 your l&ndlord'i— Connington. —The head landlord 
 is Mr. SuUivan, I hold under a tenant of his, Mr. 
 Whittaker. _, . ^' „ 
 
 15260. What is your rent ?— The rent is £iO. 
 
 15261. And the extent of the land 1 — About thirty 
 acres. 
 
 15262. And the valuation L£2 6. 
 
 15263. Do you know what was the rent the middle 
 man pays for that ? — T do. 
 
502 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oil. IS, 1850. 
 
 Rgv. Andrew 
 Quiiui, P.P., 
 Messrs. 
 Andrew 
 M'Goldrick, 
 Hugh Fowley, 
 and Michael 
 Coanington. 
 
 15264. Howmucli^ — lie lias forty-two acres, and 
 lie pays £31 10s. for it. 
 
 15265. Mr. Shaw. — Does he hold the rest in his 
 own hands 1 — He does. 
 
 15266. He is a farmer '?— No, he is a Methodist 
 minister. 
 
 15267. Does he live in the neighbourhood? — No, 
 he lives in the county Cork at present ; his mother 
 lives there. 
 
 15268. The O'Conor Don.— His entire rent?— 
 £.31 10s. 
 
 152G9. And he charges you £40 for a portion of 
 the land ?— For a portion of thirty acres, and when he 
 was giving it to me he told me it was thirty-three 
 acres, but I found it was about thirty. 
 
 15270. How long have you held this land from him 1 
 — Ten years. 
 
 15271. And was it set by proposal at that time ? — 
 No, indeed, sir. I seen it advertised in the papers, 
 and I took it. I am an ex-head constable of CoiLsta- 
 bulary, and I was promised a large farm. 
 
 1527: 
 -Yes. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — And you have your pension ? 
 
 Iy273. Has he a lease himself, Mr, Whittaker ?-^ 
 I am not sure, .-lud it is very bad land. 
 
 15274. The O'CojfOK Don-.— Did you pay any fine 
 on going into it 1 — No, sir. 
 
 15275. Do you know anything about these other 
 men ? — About these men that are here I don't but I 
 know a good deal about the country. 
 
 15276. Do you know anything about the tenants of 
 Mr. Bernard Cogan t — No. 
 
 15277. What townland can you speak of?— Cloonagh 
 and Lavallagh ; it is very few you would meet that 
 knows the county Sligo better than I do, for I know- 
 landlords and tenants. 
 
 15278. The townland of Cloonagh, who is the land- 
 lord? — Mr. Gerin, sir. 
 
 15279. And the rent is considerably more than the 
 valuation? — More than fifty per cent, overthe valuation. 
 
 15280. Do you consider the valuation is a fair 
 standard ? — Well, 1 do, sir ; I think, if anything, it is 
 rather high, because it is composed of a hilly, very bad 
 land. 
 
 15281. Do you know have these rents been raised 
 lately ? — There was a little rise some time ago, and I 
 believe they had to go back again. 
 
 15282. They did not charge it? — In some cases 
 they did ; however, they gave a considerable reduction 
 last year, twenty-five per cent. 
 
 Mr. Andrew M'Goldrick examined. • 
 
 15283. The O'Conor Don. — You are a tenant of 
 Mr. Middleton's ? — I am. He was my landlord lately, 
 but he was not the time my land was raised. 
 
 15284. He purchased in the Landed Estates Court? 
 —He did. 
 
 15285. And your rent was raised before the sale? 
 — Yes, your honour, they were raised in 1854 and 
 1859, £7 a year; now tlie rent is £17, and the 
 valuation, £8 lOx. 
 
 15286. Was this increase in the rent made by your 
 former landlord ? — Yes, sir, and their agent. They 
 walked in both on my lands and raised the rents. 
 
 15287. Who was the previous landlord? — John 
 Ormsby, and the ag<'ut was Darby Kelly. 
 
 15288. And the land was raised just before tlie 
 sale? — Long before, in" 1854. 
 
 15289. Were all those other tenants raised at the 
 same time 1 — The same year, and the one day. 
 
 15290. James M'Donogh, rent, £28 ; valuation, 
 £14; Michael M'Dermott, rent, £18; valuation, 
 £12 10s. ; John M'Goldrick, rent, £3 ; valuation, £1 ? 
 — Yes, sir. 
 
 15291. Is that th e only townland you are acquainted 
 with 1 — No, I am acquainted with Culmore. 
 
 15292. Well, was the rent raised there? — It was, 
 your lionoux', about twenty-four years ago, by another 
 agent of the name of Smith, from the North ; he was 
 agent to Captain Martin, and that Captain Martin 
 died, and it came to Captain Woods. 
 
 15293. John M'Goldrick, rent, £35; valuation, 
 £24 ; Terence Sheridan, rent, £24 ; valuation, £18 ] 
 Pat Noone, rent, £12; valuation, £8 ?^Yes, your 
 honour. 
 
 15294. And these increases of rent were made 
 about twenty-four years ago 1 — Yes, your honour. 
 
 15295. And have they been paying that rent ever 
 since ? — Yes. 
 
 15296. And they consider it too high? — Why not, 
 your honour. 
 
 15297. I see Castledargan, William Middleton, is 
 your district ? — No, but he is my landlord. If the- 
 rent was not raised I know he would not raise it, for 
 he is a good landlord, he never raised it. I think he 
 is very good-hearted. 
 
 Mr. Hugh Fowley examined. 
 
 15298. The O'Conor Don.— Do you live in the 
 townland of Carrowkcel ? — Yes sir. 
 
 15299. Your landlord is Mr. Abraham Powell?— 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 15300. Has your n-nt lieen raised lately? — Not 
 since we got it. 
 
 15301. It was raised before you purchased it? — 
 We purchased it from his father-in-law, and he is 
 dead. We purchased the land and paid him £237 
 fine, and he is charging us for twenty acres — it would 
 not make half an acre over it. He is charging 
 £51 10s. a year, and I wouhl not be able to pay it. 
 I might as well be sent to Spike Island, for I cannot 
 stand it. 
 
 15302. You purchased the tenant's interest in the 
 land ? — It was a stock farm the landlord held himself 
 in his own hands, and set it to my father. My father 
 died and I became the tenant. My valuation is £27 
 and my rent £51 10s. 
 
 15303. Chairman. — You knew what the rent would 
 be when you gave that money? — The times were 
 better, and the tenants were much better off. I had 
 an acre of potatoes and I offered half of them to a 
 labouring man to dig them, and he would not they 
 
 were so bad. What would raise eight cows, five was 
 all I could rear on it last year. 
 
 15304. You think the land has deteriorated ?— The 
 wet season has injured it. The year we came into it 
 we kept eight milch cows, two heifers, and some 
 sheep. Last year I only kept five milch cows and 
 three young heifers, and I was not able to get them 
 in until the 3rd day of June. 
 
 15305. How long ago is it since your father paid 
 this fine for the land? — About the 6th of January, 
 coming eight or nine years, but I have the residue of 
 the fine paid. 
 
 15306. Do you know anything about- John Brennan! 
 ^He is my neighbour in the same townland. 
 
 15307. Was his rent raised, or did he buy the 
 farm ? — He complained he was paying for' land he 
 hadn't on his farm for some years. I heard him com- 
 plain ; but I don't know how he made a settlement of 
 that with the late landlord. We have not to complain 
 of the late landlord, he was a kind man, but the land 
 is too high. 
 
 15308. Who was the old landlord in this case?— 
 Mr. Lougheed, of Ballinakill. 
 
 15309. Has Mr. Powell raised the rent since he 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 iJOo 
 
 purcliased? — No, sir. Pv,ev. Mr. Qinnn. — He got it 
 Toy marriage. 
 
 15310. Are tliese rents of John Erennan and James 
 Clarkin and Catherine Flynn the same rents as when 
 Mr. Powell succeeded ■?— Yes, sir. 
 
 15311. John Brennan, rent £32, valuation £18 10s.; 
 James Clarkin, rent £31, valuation £21 ISs.; Catherine 
 Flynn, rent £14^ valuation £8 10s. Is that correct'! 
 — It is, sir. 
 
 15312. And you say there ought to he an abate- 
 ment of these rents 1 — If we don't get abatements, we 
 must quit the land. 
 
 15313. You would not say that if this land paid 
 well for a certain number of years, that the rent ought 
 to be permanently reduced to the amount that would 
 be a fair rent for the present time 1 — The Government 
 valuation would be as much as we can get through, 
 and with great struggling and difficulty we would 
 make that up now. The land has failed and got stiff 
 and bad, and when we sow the oats of an acre we will 
 not come within eighty stone of what that acre would 
 give some years ago. 
 
 15314. You think the series of bad seasons has 
 had a permanent bad effect on the land ? — If it is not 
 that has done it, we are not able to account for it, but 
 we lay the blame on it. I have a pasture field that 
 was supposed to raise five cows the summer season 
 twelve or fourteen years ago. It would starve three 
 now. It never was broken since, or cropped, or tilled, 
 but left in fat land ever since. 
 
 15315. Mr. Shaw — What is the reason of that 1 — 
 The land has failed — the land has got stiff and heavy 
 by bad seasons and wet weather. 
 
 15316. And not being broken up? — Breaking up 
 would spoil it altogether. 
 
 15317. The O'Conor Don — Is there much rushes 
 In this land? — Not much, but there is about an acre 
 of coarse sour land, some of it limestone, and about 
 twelve acres very heavy stiff land. 
 
 15318. Chairman — Do you think the tillage land 
 Las gone off also? — Gone off; we have no crops. 
 
 15319. Do you think that is from your not having 
 the same manui-e, not keeping the same amount of 
 cattle, and having less manure to put to the land ? 
 ■ — That is it, sir. We are not able to make the 
 rents off it when it cannot raise the crops. Tliere are 
 five tenants on that townland. What grew on that 
 townland of the potato crop would not support 
 any of them to Christmas Day. and what are we to 
 support ourselves on for nine months more ? C'on- 
 nini/ton — Most of those people are on the relief list 
 this year. 
 
 15320. Were the potatoes very bad this year? — 
 Focieij — They are very bad when I offered an acre of 
 them to a boy, who has no land, that if he dug them 
 I would give him half. 
 
 15321. Were they bad last year? — They were fully 
 as bad last year as they are now. 
 
 15322. Have you had any change of seed? — I got 
 about two stone of champion potatoes. They were 
 middling, but a great deal damaged. 
 
 15323. Did you get that from the Union? — I did 
 not. It was a present I got. Connington — It was 
 the Bishop of Elphin sent out a great deal. Fowley — 
 I would not get them — my valuation being £27. 
 
 15324. The O'Conoe Don — And you did not buy 
 any ? — I was not able to buy them. 
 
 15325. Chaiemas. — What soi-t of land is this? — 
 High land. 
 
 15320. On the side of a mountain ? — On the north 
 side altogether. There is twelve acres of it lost upon 
 a great brae, and there is about eight acres a little 
 fertile, with lots of sand-pits and rocks. It is about 
 eight miles from the sea. Pv.ev. Mr. Quinn— It is not 
 a mountain, either — it is a hilL 
 
 15327. The O'ConorDon. — Would these landlords 
 allow their tenants to sell their interests if they got 
 anyone to buy it l—Foioley ~Yo\-i would not get a man 
 to buy au acre of land. We never challenged him for 
 that. 
 
 Eev. Andrew 
 Quinn, r.r. 
 Messrs. 
 Andrew 
 M'Goldrick, 
 Hugh Fowley, 
 
 15328. Have there been any sales of tenants' O''_if^i8so. 
 interests in your neighbourhood? — I did not sec or 
 hear of any sales. 
 
 15329. With regard to all these other names, I 
 suppose you can speak that these figures are correct ? 
 — Eev. Mr. Quinn — They are quite correct. 
 
 15330. Are you aware of your own knowledge and Michael 
 whether these rents have been raised lately, or have Connington. 
 been a long time at the figure at which they now 
 
 stand 1 — Rev. Mr. Quinn — I have been four years in 
 that district, and I have not heard of any rise in that 
 time except in mj' own case. 
 
 15331. So that these are simply quoted to show us 
 the rents are over the valuation ?— -Eev. Mr. Quinn — 
 Yes. 
 
 15332. Not as a complaint that the rents have been 
 lately raised ? — Yes. 
 
 15333. Chairman. — Were any of those landlords 
 that are spoken of there purchasers of late years ? — 
 No, they were not. 
 
 15334. The O'Conoe Don. I see here you have 
 amongst others the townland of Rathvilpatrick, Charles 
 M'Guire, landlord ? — Yes, sir. I expected two or 
 three from that neighbourhood to-day, but the car 
 must have broken down. That rent is very high, and 
 I am surprised at it. 
 
 15335. Is that rent very high in proportion to the 
 real value of the land ? — I think it is ; ilj is a very 
 inferior land. 
 
 15336. The rent is £17, and the valuation 10 
 guineas ? — Yes. I think the rent ought not to be 
 higher than the valuation ; it is all bad land. 
 
 15337. Chairman. — How long have you been in 
 this parish ? — Four years. 
 
 15338. What was the state of most of these men at 
 the time you came to the parish ? — They were com- 
 fortable, indeed, and had a very large number of stock, 
 and I never had any complaints of any want or dis- 
 tress in the locality, but it is quite the contrary now 
 for the last year. There are complaints now, as these 
 men have said, from the failure of the crops, and they 
 have had to part with their cattle, and I attribute a 
 great deal of this to the rents they have to pay. 
 
 15339. The O'Conoe Don. — Do you think the land 
 has deteriorated from the bad seasons ? — In some 
 localities I know it has, but in other localities the 
 crops are as good as before. 
 
 15340. But if they have been paying these rents for 
 a great number of years and have been so comfortable, 
 how do you account for their becoming suddenly so 
 poor? — In the first place the potato crop was bad for 
 a couple of years, and having to meet the rents, they 
 were at once reduced. 
 
 15341. Chairman. — Having to part with their 
 cattle would prevent them keepmg the lands in good 
 condition ? — Yes ; I know parties there who had a 
 number of cattle, and they have hardly a cow now, 
 but certainly they have paid their rents. 
 
 15342. The O'ConorDon.— All the rents on this list 
 were paid last year ? — I don't know about last year, 
 but before. 
 
 15343. Mr. Shaw. — They were anxious to pay if 
 they could ? — I really believe so. As far as I can see 
 they don't repudiate that debt any more than any 
 other, but they certainly are not able to pay high 
 rents. 
 
 15344. Chairman. — What you want is help over 
 the time of difficulty ? — Fowley- — Yes ; and to give us 
 an abatement that we can pay our rents with, and 
 if we don't get it we must pitch the land there. 
 
 15345. Ml-. Shaw. — Would you give him the chance 
 of getting more in good times ? — We would, but it 
 would not be in our power even in good times. I 
 would rather go in service and earn my 10s. a week. 
 
 15346. How many acres do you say you have? — 
 Twenty acres. 
 
 15347. The O'Conor Don. — Have you much of it in 
 tillage, or is it chiefly grass ? — I had 3^ acres under 
 meadow, about 2 acres 3 roods in oats, and an acre of 
 
504 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oci. 18, 1880. 
 
 Kev Andrew 
 *>iunn, r.p., 
 Jlessrs. 
 Andrew 
 M'Goldrick, 
 Hugh Fowley, 
 and Michael 
 Connington. 
 
 potato crop not worth anything. Where I would have 
 4 tons of hay to the acre, it would not give 2| now. 
 
 15348. Is there any desire amongst the people in 
 your neighbourhood of purchasing their land and be- 
 coming owners 1 — I don't know any of them able to 
 do it in my neighbourhood. They would be very 
 liappy if they could rent the land at a fair rent, but to 
 pay the landlord the whole thing and starve them- 
 selves, it could not be done. 
 
 15349. Is it your experience. Father Quinn, that 
 there is any gxeat desire to become the purchasers of 
 their land 1 — Rev. Mr. Quinn — I think if they had 
 fixity of tenure, and could make improvements, they 
 would be perfectly satisfied. I don't think they have 
 any higher aspirations in my locality. 
 
 15350. Do you think many of them would be able 
 to pay a small portion of the purchase money ^ — They 
 would. 
 
 15351. One-fourth ] — Well, I am sure they would. 
 Although these rents are very high, we have some 
 people, notwithstanding that, that have some means, 
 and I think they would be very glad to invest it on 
 the lands. Fowley — The man that is not rented too 
 high has a little means, but the man that is over- 
 burdened camiot. M'Goldrich — I went to Mr. 
 Middleton, I owed him 2|- years, and I went to him to 
 givfe him up the land, he told me he would not ha- 
 rass the land and to keep it. Connington — My lands, 
 I offered to pay £20 for a half-year this week if I was 
 allowed 15 per cent, of an abatement. They made an 
 abatement last year of 15 per cent., but would not 
 consent to give it this year, and the land is not worth 
 half the money I pay for it. I would rather go into 
 a cabin in the back lanes of Sligo than live on some 
 estates to be persecuted by drivers or bailiffs ; any 
 sort of an election coming on the bailiff goes to the 
 tenants ordering them to vote for a certain candidate. 
 Rev. Mr. Quinn — In 1876 I came to that parish, and 
 my predecessor had 16 acres of land at £14 a year. 
 One part of it, 8 acres, which was one side of the road, 
 he reclaimed and improved very much, and that land 
 now is set at £42, three times the rent it paid before. 
 
 15352. And the improvements were all made by 
 him 1 — By my predecessor and myself, since I got it. 
 
 15353. Mr. Shaw. — A house built on it?— There 
 was a thatched cottage on it, and I slated it, and built 
 a glebe house at an expense of £1,200, house and 
 offices, and cottage. 
 
 15354. The O'Conoe Don. — But you don't iaclude 
 that ? — No. Another gentleman has got half of it, the 
 inferior part of the land, eight acres at £12 a year, and 
 I am paying £30 for eight acres. 
 
 15355. Was the rent raised when you came to the 
 parish ? — When I got possession of the place I had to 
 pay that rent for it. 
 
 15356. Was there a lease up to the death of your 
 predecessor ? — No lease. 
 
 15357. Who is the landlord? — Colonel Cooper. 
 
 15358. Mr. Shaw. — Did he give you notice to quit? 
 — No ; I succeeded to the land, and the rent was then 
 fixed. 
 
 15359. Did he notice you, you must pay this ad- 
 vanced rent ? — ^Yes ; he laid down the sum I had to 
 pay, and I paid it. 
 
 15360. Had he done anything with the land?— 
 Nothing. 
 
 15361. The O'Conor DoN.^What is the valuation 
 of the land? — £15 5s. a year for my portion, and 
 along with that we are obliged to pay all the county- 
 cess and pay half the rates. When a road is being 
 m ade this road is measured on us, and we pay for it, and 
 all the county cess besides. 
 
 15362. Was it an acreable rent or a bulk rent you 
 had to pay? — A bulk rent, there were three fields, 
 and it was so much for each field. 
 
 15363. And you considered that rent too high?— 
 Everyone considers it too high, it was because I had 
 to take it, if he charged £5 an acre I would have to 
 take it for the accommodation. 
 
 15364. You say a portion of it was taken by 
 another gentleman ? — Eight acres. I have only eight 
 acres, he pays £12 and I pay £30. 
 
 The witnesses then withdrew. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Carnegie. 
 
 Mr. John" Carnegie, Fortland, Easkey, examined. 
 
 15365. Chairman. — Are you a tenant farmer? — 
 Yes. 
 
 15366. And also a land steward? — Yes. 
 
 15367. Under whom are you acting? — John Lloyd 
 Brinkley. 
 
 15368. Land steward and estate bailiff? — Yes. 
 
 15369. Is there anything you have to say about 
 your own farm that you occupy ? — There is one thing 
 just that gives me a good deal of trouble. I feel that 
 I have laid out a good deal of money on it, and I feel 
 that it is like a sort of gambling, I don't think I have 
 any security scarcely at all. 
 
 15370. 'J'he O'Conor Don. — Have you a lease? — 
 No lease. 
 
 15371. How many acres have you? — Eorty-four, 
 it was never measured, but we guessed it at that, and 
 a farm from Mr. Brinkley, I got it from the present 
 gentleman's father. 
 
 15372. Chairman. — And is it under Mr. Brmkley ? 
 — It is in the Court of Chancery, but I believe it will 
 belong to the young gentleman. 
 
 15373. And you don't feel you have security for 
 your outlay there ? — No. 
 
 15374. Did the court refuse to give a lease? — I 
 never applied, but I don't think they would give a 
 lease, perhaps I may not be right in my idea, but I 
 don't think they would give a lease, because the re- 
 ceiver said to me they did not wish to make any 
 changes at all whatsoever in the property, to leave it 
 as they got it. 
 
 15375. Mr. Shaw. — Have you laid out much money 
 on it ? — I count that my interest in it now is more 
 than the landlord's. 
 
 1-5376. Owing to your outlay ? — Yes. 
 
 15377. Is it a large farm? — About forty-five acres 
 statute. It was a farm I got from old Mr. Brinkley 
 twelve j'ears ago. 
 
 15378. CiiAiE JIAN". — Were you farm steward at that 
 time ? — Yes, and I got it from him under these cuxum- 
 stances. It was a family named Rae had it, it was an 
 outfarm and they gave it up ; they could not hold it, 
 could not pay the rent. 
 
 15379. The O'Conor Don.— What was the rent?— 
 £24 was the old rent. They fell behind and could not 
 pay the rents, and gave it up, and Mr. Brinkley lost ;i 
 half year's rent by it. And he said he did hot know 
 what to do with it. I said he should keep it himself, it 
 was adjoining his own farm. " Well, " said he, " I have 
 plenty of ground in my own hands and we will take 
 in proposals for it." He only got two proposals, the 
 one was for the old rent and the other was for £30 a 
 year, provided that he would let them a piece of 
 another man's holding into it. ' It came in with an 
 angle and there could not be a straight mearing fence 
 made without this piece coming into it. "That does 
 not please me, " he said, " I don't know this man at 
 all that is offering. " I said, "If you would do the 
 same for me and accept me as tenant I will take 
 it on those conditions." It was in 1866; there w:i3 
 a great talk about flax at that time, and I said I would 
 like to try flax to see how it would do. So he said he 
 would give it to me, and served this neighbourmg 
 tenant with a notice to quit, to take this piece about 
 two Irish acres from him and put it into mine. B so 
 turned out that Mr. Brinkley had to go away, and 
 this was never done, and I have been paying £30 smce, 
 and the property went into Chancery. 
 
 15380. Mr. Shaw.— You never sot the two acres? 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 505 
 
 — He gave my rent in as £30, and I got the two acres 
 but I will tell you how it was done. Mr. Brinkley 
 went to the continent, and I have never seen him 
 since. The receiver said to me, " Mr. Brinkley has 
 given in the rent as £30, but we don't want to interfere 
 with the tenants, and," he said, " you can settle with 
 the neighbouring tenant and I have no objection." 
 So I bought it from him. 
 
 15381. The O'Oonoe Don. — What did you give him 
 for it 1 — £25, and I have this now and I am paying 
 ,£30 a year. I have drained most of the land and 
 reclaimed three or four acres that never was tilled ; 
 the valuation of it was £20 10s., and the rent is £30. 
 It would not have been worth it if it had not been me 
 that had it. I don't think anybody would have con- 
 tiniied to give that rent for it, and now if it was to 
 let it would go for double the rent. I would give that 
 myself, and I don't feel that I am secure in these lands. 
 
 15382. Chairman. — Are the tenants on that pro- 
 perty allowed to sell their holdings ? — ^Well, no ; they 
 are not. 
 
 15383. That was an unusual thing, letting that one 
 man sell to you the two acres 1 — Yes. 
 
 15384. It was done in order to put you into the 
 position Mr. Brinkley intended you should be 1 — Yes ; 
 they did not wish to do an injustice to me, and they 
 put me to the cost of purchasing. 
 
 15385. The O'Coxor Don. — Was the other tenant's 
 rent reduced 1 — No. The receiver told me it would 
 cost more than the whole thing was worth to bring it 
 into the Court of Chancery and change the rents, Init 
 he said if you do it privately we will have no objection. 
 
 15386. Chairman. — Then as to the property in 
 general, how many acres is the Fortland estate? — 
 There is between two and three thousand acres 
 altogether, but a great deal of it is waste bogs and 
 mountains. 
 
 13387. Is it reclaimable land much of it? — All 
 reclaimable land I may say. 
 
 15388. If it was in the hands of persons who could 
 do it, or could be done by the landlord 1 — Yes. 
 
 15389. Has anything been done in the way of 
 reclamation 1 — A little. 
 
 15390. How long ago? — About fifteen years ago, 
 the present Mr. Brinkley's father did a good deal in 
 the way of reclamation. 
 
 15391. Did he get money on loan from the Govern- 
 ment for doing it 1 — Yes, and he did a good deal of 
 drainage. 
 
 15392. And has that turned out a successful 
 operation ? — Very successful. 
 
 15393. And good value for the outlay?: — ^Very 
 good. 
 
 1-3394. Do you think that can be carried on to any 
 great extent there by fresh persons being introduced 
 o.i to the land and given it for a few years free or at 
 a low rent and leaving them to go on with the improve- 
 ments? — I am sure it could if there were proper 
 persons that understood it. As far as I have done 
 and I have done a good deal, it was a success, biit I 
 have seen other people doing it that it would not pay. 
 
 15395. That is the tenants doing it on their own 
 holdings ? — Yes, they don't do it so well. 
 
 153'J6. Is there any land that is unoccupied that 
 can be reclaimed ? — Yes, a good deal. I think Mr. 
 Brinkley has unoccupied land which he holds in his 
 own hands and lets out for cutting turf. I suppose he 
 has upwards of 1,000 acres. 
 
 15397. The O'Conor Don. — All reclaimable? — All 
 reclaimable if the turf was cut off. 
 
 1.5308. Chairman. — The cutting off of the turf is a 
 slow operation? — It is for making money of it, we let 
 it, and get about £45 an acre for it. 
 
 15399. Then it would not be a benefit to the 
 neighbourhood that the turf should be cut out rapidly 
 in order to be reclaimed ? — No.. 
 
 15400. Mr. Shaw. — Do you let it to the tenants? — 
 Yes, anilto the whole neighbourhood. 
 
 15401. Do the tenants pay for it?— No, generally 
 they get as much as they can use. 
 
 15402. Chairman.— Are they allowed to sell it? — Oct. is, isso. 
 They must pay for what they sell, they are each ^^ j~j^ 
 allowed on a turf bank about forty cart-loads for their Carnegie, 
 own use, they always were allowed that free, that is 
 
 all tenants that hold lands, to tenants with only a 
 house and garden it is not let. 
 
 15403. What effect do you think the passing of the 
 Land Act has had with regard to tenants improving, 
 do you think they have been more inclined to improve 
 or less inclined to improve than they were before? 
 — My own impression is it has made a kind of stag- 
 nation, there was a great deal more improvements a 
 few years before, than there have been since, whatever 
 has been the cause of it. 
 
 15404. In any respect do you think there has been 
 an advantage in the passing of the Land Act? — I 
 think there has been some. I think the tenants have 
 done a little more than they did before, especially 
 those that had leases, I see a good deal of tenants with 
 leases that have done a good deal since, that is the 
 principal change I have seen. But before the passing 
 of the Land Act, the landlord and tenants used to work 
 together more than they have done since. The land- 
 lord now says. Oh, you have got a claim for your 
 improvements, the thing is taken out of my hands, the 
 improvements are your own now and I will do 
 nothing. 
 
 15405. And the tenants do not feel quite secure of 
 that ? — No, don't feel quite secure at the same time. 
 
 15406. I suppose they feel less liability of being 
 evicted ? — A great deal less. 
 
 15407. So that it is so far satisfactory? — So far 
 satisfactory. 
 
 15408. And you say it is satisfactory at election 
 times ? — Very, as far as the tenantry are concerned. , 
 
 15409. Then as to the compensation that a tenant 
 would get, do you think that it is right that he should 
 be evicted before he knows what his compensation 
 would be ? — That is what I am decidedly against. 
 
 15410. You think he oiightto know? — Yes, first. 
 
 15411. But then it would be necessary in every 
 case of a notice to quit to go into the court before 
 hand ? — I am not sure about that, I have never had 
 any experience of that, we have never had anything 
 to do with that kind of thing on our own property, 
 but I think it is a hardship that a tenant should be 
 looking for his compensation and everything after he 
 is put out of his place altogether, that this thing 
 should not be settled first. 
 
 15412. Before the eviction he can have 
 tried 1 — T was not aware of that. 
 
 15413. What is your idea of the proportion that 
 the present rents bear to the tenement valuation ? — ■ 
 My idea is that the tenement valuation at the present 
 time is a fair rent, except on very good lands, which 
 are worth more — that is, first-class lands. And what 
 I call first-class land is land that will not go back 
 when left in grass. There is not a great deal of that 
 land in our district. Middling and third-class and 
 bad land is. land that when you leave it in grass it 
 goes back and back until it gives very little grass, 
 indeed. And there are other lands when you lay 
 them down that improve every year and become fatten- 
 ing grass — that is first-class land ; that is worth more 
 than the tenement valuation. 
 
 15414. Do you know any land that the wet years 
 past have had any permanent bad effect on? — I am 
 sure it has. 
 
 15415. Grass lands that it would take a consider- 
 able outlay to get into a good state again? — Yes. 
 
 15416. We have heard mentioned the growth of 
 rushes in land that was good grazing land before, but 
 is inferior now ? — Yes. I see a great growth of rushes 
 in the last few years, and a good deal of the land that 
 I reclaimed for Mr. Brinkley out of cut-away bog has 
 for the last two or three year.s been covered with 
 rushes. 
 
 15417. All that was originally wet land and 
 drained, and then from the great wet the drains were 
 
 edup? — T don't think the drains were clogged 
 
 •J i 
 
 his 
 
 cloggi 
 
506 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 188 
 
 Oct. 18, 18S0 
 
 Mr. John 
 Carnegie. 
 
 up, but all wet land in tlie wet seasons has a clammi- 
 ness about it, unless it is very good, and always feels 
 very soft in wet weather and wet sea.sons. 
 
 15418. And do you think that land will not, in 
 dry seasons, go back into the same state of goodness 
 it was before ? — TSTo, I don't think so, without being 
 broken up and tilled and re-manured. 
 
 15419. Then that land ought to be revalued in 
 ' all fairness l—J. should say so. 
 
 15420. Do the landlords in your part of the country 
 make any improvements themselves on the tenants' 
 holdings since the Land Act 1 — I don't know of any 
 since the Land Act worth speaking of, thei-e has been 
 very little in my district ; but, as I said before, there 
 was a good deal done before that. 
 
 15421. You say there have not been many changes 
 among tenants in your district? — Very few. 
 
 15422. What class of tenants are those? — All 
 classes. There are very few changes amongst them, 
 but the large proportion of the tenants in our district 
 is from six or seven to thirty acres, mostly small 
 tenants. Big farms are grazing farms. A grazier 
 tills none, but small tenants till a good deal. 
 
 15423. And have those changes you speak of 
 arisen from evictions 1 — Very few voluntarily. 
 
 15424. "What has been the course generally when 
 those tenants leave? Have fresh tenants been al- 
 lowed to buy? — Generally. Biit it is always an 
 arrangement with the landlord. 
 
 15425. With the landlord's consent? — Yes. 
 
 15426. Have they been thrown at all into the 
 neighboiiring holdings ? — Very rarely. They may in 
 an odd case, but very seldom. 
 
 15427. The O'Conor Don. — They have generally 
 been let in the same size to new tenants? — Gener- 
 ally in o\vc district. 
 
 15428. There has been no. amalgamation of farms 
 going on ? — Not to any great extent. Generally the 
 way is when a tenant is going away, sometimes 
 through adverse circumstances, something happens, 
 and they are not able to meet their obligations, the 
 landlord allows them to settle with some other one 
 that he thinks will make a suitable tenant for himself, 
 and the suitable tenant generally pays up the arrears 
 of rent, and, perhaps, gives something to the one that 
 is going away, or the heirs or whoever they are that 
 is i-esigning. 
 
 15429. Chairman. — Are there any tenants who 
 would be able, or inclined, to purchase their holdings 
 if the landlord would be willing to sell ? — I dare say 
 there is. There is none that would be able, that I 
 know of, with cash of their own. 
 
 15430. The O'Conor Don.— To pay the whole 
 amount ? — No. 
 
 15431. But would they be able to pay one- fourth 
 of it ? — I am sure there is a good many would. 
 
 15432. Chairman. — They would like to do so ? — 1 
 never heard that they would. 
 
 15433. Do you think that they would prefer a settle- 
 ment of rent, that would give them a fair rent ? — A 
 fair rent is all they want as far as I can hear. I never 
 heard a single tenant say he wanted to become the land- 
 lord of his farm, but they all say "what we want is a 
 fair rent at the valuation." 
 
 15434. Yes, but the valuation you say varies so 
 much in different places ? — Yes. 
 
 15435. It may be very low in one part and high in 
 another? — Yes. 
 
 15436. It was not intended as a basis of rent? — I 
 believe not. 
 
 15437. But I siippose landlords would not like to sell 
 to one tenant, and the neighbouring one perhaps not 
 wishing to buy ? — No, that is the great objection to that 
 kind of thing. 
 
 15438. They would like to sell together, or not at 
 all?— Yes.. 
 
 15439. Or some particular portions of an estate, if 
 all in that part would huj ? — Yes. 
 
 15440. The O'Conor Don. — There has been no ris- 
 ing of rent on Mr. Brinkley's estate, has there ? — Very 
 little, not since the passing of the Land Act, but the 
 most of it was raised shortly after Mr. Brinkley pur- 
 chased it in the Landed Estates Court, and after he pur ■ 
 chased he revised it all, and made o\it a rental for 
 himself, that was before the passing of the Land Act, 
 there have been, no changes since. Some tenants* 
 rents were not raised by Mr. Brinkley's revaluation. 
 
 15441. Mr. Shaw. — Was the rent raised then much ? 
 —Yes, there was a pretty good addition made to tKe 
 rental. 
 
 15442. To the rental after he purchased? — Yes. 
 
 15443. When you speak of a valuation, I suppose 
 you mean a valuation that would be made where a dis- 
 pute arose between landlord and tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 15444. You would not take the present Govern- 
 ment valuation as a fair one ? — No. 
 
 15445. But you mean when a dispute arose there 
 should be some means of valuing between landlord 
 and tenant ? — Yes. My idea would be, that when a 
 landlord thinks his rent is too low, let two or three 
 revisers be sent down and valtie the land, and if the ten- 
 ant thinks his land is too high, let him do the same, and 
 let whoever sends for these revisers pay the expenses of 
 bringing them down. I think that is a simple way of 
 settling the rent question, that is my notion of it. 
 
 15446. The. O'Conor Don.— Are you acting now 
 as steward on the estate 1— Yes. 
 
 15447. And in that capacity have you anything to 
 say to the tenant's lands, to the carrying out of improve- 
 
 . ments on lands in the occupation of tenants or any- 
 thing of that sort ? — Yes, I have general superinten- 
 dence of the whole estate, and see how the tenants are 
 getting on. If they want anything they apply to me, 
 and so on. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Mes3r3. 
 
 William Healy, 
 John 
 
 M'Loughlin, 
 William Foran, 
 Koger Fehily, 
 Dominick 
 Brennan, 
 Francis 
 MuUaly, and 
 Eogcr Ferney. 
 
 Messrs. William Healy, Lissbally ; John M'Loughlin, Ballyscannel ; William Foran, Eoger Fehily, 
 Dominick Brenjjan, Francis Mullaly, and Roger Ferney, tenants on Major Jones' efjtate, examined 
 tosether. 
 
 15447a. Sir George Young. — Thecase here is thatthey 
 lost some land, some twenty, some twenty-two, and 
 some twenty-six years ago ; their rent was not reduced. 
 
 15448. Mr. Shaw. — How did they lose it ?— 
 M'Loughlin. — Taken from us by the agent. 
 
 15449. Chairman. — Who is the agent ? — M'Lough- 
 lin. — Mr. Barbour was the agent at that time 
 Healy. — There was a piece of a rabbit burrow 
 attached to my land, and others was joined in it too. 
 Mr. Barbour was the agent and he saw the blown sand 
 that was rising, and going to destroy the townland. 
 He authorized us to go into Mullaghmore, about nine 
 miles from us, and take large carts of bent, it was got 
 by him from Lord Palmerston, and then we got about 
 twenty-two carts of bent grass at our own expense. 
 He got us to draw timber, and we drew it, and there 
 
 was a paling put up, and we said we would keep it for 
 a few years, until it got to perfection. Then he sent 
 three tradesmen to put up the paling, and we had to 
 support them for several days while they were at work, 
 which was very heavy. Then when he got it to per- 
 fection he set it out as grazing laud, and I pay .£10 
 rent for four acres and twenty perches since. 
 
 15450. Mr. Shaw. — You used to have the grass of 
 this ? — Healy. — It was part of our farm. It was 
 two persons joined that had five acres of this, we im- 
 proved and has it twenty years, and he never allowed 
 us a shilling of rent. I am paying £10 rent for four 
 acres twenty perches, the worst of land. 
 
 15451. Chairman. — Are the other cases corres- 
 ponding to some extent with yours ? — M'LoughUn. — 
 It is on the same property. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 507 
 
 15452. Mr. Shaw. — Wliat is your case? 
 
 M'Loughlin. — Some land that is lost off my holding. 
 
 15453. The same -way? — M'Loughlin. — The 
 same way. At the time 1 got the holding I was 
 changed from one townland to another for the con- 
 veniency of obliging another man who had the place 
 I had, and the man who had it his rent was £10 10s., 
 and I was promised an abatement, and I took it in 
 that line. Major Jones himself promised me the 
 abatement, there was about half an acre and some 
 perches taken off it, and I am paying the old rent. 
 
 15454. How much rent are you paying? — £10 10s., 
 and the valuation is £6 8s. 
 
 15455. Was any rise put on the land ? — No. 
 
 15456. Do you consider it too dear? — I do, it was 
 my agreement to get it cheaper. , 
 
 15457. Do you not have some seaweed? — ^We 
 do, but we are paying 5s. to the pound for it. 
 Healy. — Mr. Barbour took one-third of the seaweed 
 from VIS, and gave it to other tenants. 
 
 15458. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres have you? — 
 Brennan. — Twelve acres. 
 
 15459. What do you pay for it?— £11 17s. 
 What is it you complain of? — Too much 
 
 15460. 
 rent. 
 15461. 
 15462. 
 
 Is it on the same property 1 — It is. 
 Chairman. — Did you lose any land ?^ I 
 lost no land, and got no land. 
 
 15463. Mr. Shaw. — Was the rent raised lately ? — 
 No, I am paying it these thirty years. It is nothing 
 at all but bed for snipe and heather. 
 
 1 5464. And that is the same case as yotir brother's ? 
 — He is bounding me. 
 
 15465. Widow Kitty Qonnov'i — M'Loughlin. — 
 She is not here. She lost land and is paying rent 
 still for it. 
 
 15466. Chaikjiax. — This land that you lost, was 
 that included in the Government valuation ? — It was, 
 sir. 
 
 15467. What was the date of that valuation ? — It 
 was taken off before I got off the division I held at 
 the time I got it. I was to get an abatement of rent 
 because it was too dear. The man chat was in it was 
 ejected, he could not pay. 
 
 15468. The O'Conor Dox.— When did you get the 
 land ? — About twenty-seven or twenty-six years ago. 
 
 15469. Then this land was taken away before the 
 Government valuation was made? — Not at all, the 
 Government valuation was made on it at the time. I 
 think there was no valuation since that time, but the 
 valuation we hold still, £6 18s. Another man pays 
 for what I lost. 
 
 15470. And the other man is valued for it too ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 15471. Mr. SiiAW. — Did you lose some land?^ — 
 Foran. — About half an acre. Mr. Barbour took off 
 half an acre, and would not give us a reduction since. 
 
 15472. Chaieman. — That was thirty-two years ago ? 
 — Thirty-two years ago. 
 
 15473. Mr. Shaw. — Yon are paying the old rent 1 
 — I am paying the old rent since. 
 
 15474. Is it very good land?— It' is tho very best, 
 of land. The man is in the room that has the land, 
 and^ is paying rent and poor rates for it, and we are 
 paying the same, we reclaimed the land itself. We 
 are paying 5s. in the pound for wrack. 
 
 15475. The O'Conoe Don.— Who is the man that 
 has gotyonr land? — That man there, Fehily, has got 
 it, and it was measured on him over again. 
 
 15476. Chairman. — What is your case ? — 
 jUullaly. — My mother lost an acre and a half twenty- 
 six years ago, and she is paying still for that. Aboirt 
 three acres of it is not worth half a crown. 
 
 15477. Mr. Shaw. — Fehily, how many acres have 
 you 1 — Fehily. — Between eleven and eleven and a 
 half acres; the rent is £14 2s. Qd., and the valuation, 
 £9. 
 
 15478. When you got this other man's land was 
 the rent raised on you ? — That was the time the town- 
 land was squared. When he got the land squared 
 the agent did not like it and ran another mearing and 
 took it in the way that he thought the fall of the 
 water would come on it. He never told us our rent 
 after squaring it, and he put the rent of Ballyscannell 
 along with the rent of the other townland. 
 
 15479. Chairman. — Is Mr. Barbour the agent still ? 
 — Himself is the agent and landlord still. The son. is 
 the agent, and the other son is the landlord. 
 
 15480. What is your rent? — Ferney—£li:Zs. My 
 rent is high and my land very bad. 
 
 15481. How many acres? — I am not sure. 
 
 15482. And the valuation ?— £7 10s. 
 
 15483. Is that high, out of proportion with even 
 some of the other valuations 1 — Yes, sir. My land is 
 worth nothing. 
 
 1 5484. Mr. Shaw. — How long have you had it ? — 
 About thirty -two years. 
 
 15485. And you have paid rent ever since? — Ever 
 since. 
 
 15486. And how do you manage if it is so veiy 
 bad ? — T am far behind, and not able to manage, owing 
 to the bad times. 
 
 15487. What ails it ?— It is bad earth. 
 
 15488; Have you not plenty of manure beside you ? 
 — No manure. 
 
 15489. But the sea is beside you? — We are paying 
 so much for the shore, and there comes no wrack or 
 manure on our shore. 
 
 15490. The O'Conor Don. ^-Fehily, had you to pay 
 additional rent in consequence of the additional land 
 from this other townland ? — Fehily — Yes; and before 
 he squared it we were paying only £1 an acj-e for it, 
 and when Mr. Barbour came in he rose it to 25s. an 
 
 Oa. 18,1880. 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 Williamllealy, 
 
 Jcbii 
 
 M'Loiig'i'ini 
 AVilliain Fovan, 
 Koger Feh'ly, 
 Dorainick 
 lirennan, 
 Francis 
 Mullaly, and 
 Uoger FcrUL'y. 
 
 acre. 
 
 15491. Mr. Shaw.- 
 high? — Yes, sir. 
 
 Witnesses withdrew. 
 
 -You think that rent is too 
 
 Messrs. Brian M'Laughlin, John Healy, Bartley Cox, and Widow M'Hugh, tenants on Mr. Blake's - 
 
 Estate, examined together. 
 
 I was served with an ejectment. M'Laughlin — A rise 
 of rent, and we had to pay two years rent twenty 
 years ago exactly last November, the two years' rent 
 and a bad crop. 
 
 15496. You may tell me the acreage, how much you 
 each hold. Brian M'Laughlin, how many acres ? — 
 
 15492. Sir George Young. — The case here is that a 
 lease for twenty-one years was given twenty years 
 a"o, with a rise of rent from various sums tO' 35s. an 
 acre. The lease was forced on them. The orighial 
 rents were— Pat Connolly, £18 5s.; Brian M'Laugh- 
 lin, 30s. ; John Healy, 22s. M.; Widow M'Hugh, 25s. 
 an acre, all raised to 35s. 
 
 15493. Ci-iAin3iAN. — How were the leases forced on 
 you 1 — Healy — The original lease I had was £1 2s. 9c?. 
 -an acre, and they rose it to 33s. or 34s. 
 
 15494. Will you tell us how it was the lease was 
 forced upon yowl.— M'Laughlin— TweaU years ago 
 Mr. Blake, our landlord, had us noticed to take a 
 lease which vras no use to us, and forced us all to take 
 it and pay a year's rent fine, and 35s. a rise of rent. 
 
 15495. Aiid was that done by notice to quit if you 
 did notl—M'-Laiighlin — Yes, your honour. Healy — 
 
 jrcssr-. Biian 
 M'l-augliliii. 
 John llca'y, 
 Bartlpy Cux, 
 and Widow 
 Srriuah. 
 
 MLaughliii— 11 acres. 
 
 15497. John Healy?— 7fea/y— 14 acres 2 roods 12 
 perches. 
 
 15498. Widow M'Hugh, how many acres 1 — 
 Widow M' Hugh — 14 acres. 
 
 15499. Brian M'Laughlin, 11 acres, and the rent? 
 — M'Laughlin— ZQs. an acre, and then it was raised to 
 35s. an aero. 
 
 15500. Mr. Shaw. — And you had to pay a year's 
 fine?— Yes. 
 
 3T2 
 
508 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 18, 18S0. 
 
 Messrs. Brian 
 
 Jolin Healy, 
 Bartley Cox, 
 wad Widow 
 M'Hughi 
 
 15501. Chairman. — And John Healy, 14 acres 
 at 29s., and that was raised to 35s. ? — Eealy — Yes. 
 
 15502. Mrs. M'flugh, 14 acres, was 25s., and it 
 was raised to 35s.? — Widow M'Hugh — Yes, your 
 honour. 
 
 15503. And this was put on you by threat of 
 eviction ? — Yes. 
 
 15504. Mr. Shaw. — Where is if! — Knockmaree 
 direction. M'Laughlin — My valuation was only £14, 
 and I am paying £20 for 11 acres. 
 
 15505. Chairman.— Did you get any abatement 
 last year 1 — M'Laughlin — 2s. to the £1 on the pro- 
 perty. That was a poor abatement. 
 
 15506. Were there any tenants besides on the pro- 
 perty that did not come under this lease 1 — There is. 
 
 15507. Was this a case of a previous lease dropping f 
 — Yes, your honour. 
 
 15508. This was a new lease after having held 
 under lease before 1 — This was forced on us, your 
 honour. 
 
 15509. Mr. Shaw. — Had you a lease before? — 
 No ; we were yearly tenants. Healy — I had a lease. 
 
 15510. And it dropped at that time? — Healy — 
 Long before that. Mrs. M'Hugh — I am paying 
 £25 8s. rent. 
 
 15511. Chaibmast. — How many acres do you hold 
 — Bartley Cox. — 11 a. 1r. 
 
 15512. What is the rent?— £18 16s. 
 
 15513. What is the valuation?— £11 10s. 
 
 15514. Did you lose some land at any time?— 
 Twenty years ago, and the rent was never deducted. 
 
 15515. How much land was taken off? — Something 
 about two acres, there was one acre at lis. or 12s. an 
 acre, it was bad, but £2 3s. an acre I am paying these 
 twenty years more than I ought to pay. 
 
 15516. Mr. Shaw. — What was done with the land? 
 — It is there still. 
 
 15517. Added to somebody else's farm? — Another 
 man got it, and in the course of a couple of years or 
 three after, the man had to leave. ^ 
 
 15518. Chairman. — Do you hold under lease ?—l 
 have no lease, and I had to pay £11 14s. of arrears 
 that was run on the other man that had to leave. 
 
 15519. You have two farms now 1 — Yes ; and I am 
 paying double for the two acres. 
 
 15520. What is the name of your farm? — Bamar 
 slack. 
 
 15521. It is all in the same property ? — Yes. 
 Healy. My valuation is only £18, and "I pay nearly 
 £7 over the valuation. 
 
 The witnesses withdrew 
 
 Mr. Francis 
 
 Mr. Erancis Kavanagh examined. 
 
 15522. Chairman. — You are a tenant on Mr. 
 Gethin's property ? — Yes. 
 
 15533. Where? — At Ballymote. (Produces docu- 
 ment. 
 
 15524. This is an agreement for a yearly lease? — 
 No, sir, I don't understand that it is. 
 
 15525. Mr. Shaw. — Did you sign it? — My mother 
 signed it. 
 
 15526. What is the extent of your holding? — 
 Seventeen and a half acres, at £25 13s. a year. 
 
 15527. Chairman. — You don't know what it was 
 she signed ? — She signed that lease. 
 
 15528. You have not read the terms of it? — No, 
 
 15529. And you only want to put before us that 
 this is the lease under which you are holding ?— Yes. 
 sir. 
 
 15530. The O'Conor Don. — The particnlar point 
 is, that you are not to claim compensation for any 
 payment made to a previous tenant, and to pay the 
 entire Grand Jury cess. These are what you object 
 to? — Yes, sir. 
 
 15531. Mr. Shaw. — Did the other tenants have 
 to sign that lease ? — If there was an old tenant and 
 he died, and a young tenant came in, he would have 
 to sign that lease. 
 
 15532. Or upon any change? — Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Mi! mo. 
 
 15533. Mr. Shaw.— You are 
 Wynne's estate ? — Yes. 
 
 15534. How much land do you hold? — Eighteen 
 and a half acres. 
 
 15535. What do you complain of? — High rent. 
 
 15536. How far is your farm from town? — About 
 two miles. 
 
 15537. Was the rent raised lately? — It was. 
 
 15538. When? — About two years ago or two and 
 a half. It was raised £6 a year. 
 
 15539. What was the reason of that? — It was at 
 the time I became tenant. 
 
 15540. It was on a change of tenancy? — ^Yesj it 
 was raised a short time before that. 
 
 15541. How short a time? — Something about eight 
 or ten years. 
 
 15542. What rent was put upon it then? — £4, I 
 think it was reduced to £2, and then there was £6 
 put upon me. 
 
 15543. Have you any other way of living ? — I have, 
 and only for that I would not be able to pay the rent. 
 
 15544. The O'Conor Don. — How did you come 
 into the holding ? — At the time of my uncle's death. 
 
 15545. You succeeded your uncle? — I did. 
 
 15546. Chairman. — Under his will? — Well, yes, 
 under his will. 
 
 15547. Mr. Shaw. — And there was £6 put upon 
 you then ? — Yes. 
 
 15548. The O'Conor Don.— Is it within the 
 borough? — No, sir. 
 
 15549. Mr. Shaw.— Which side of the town is it? 
 — On the north, near Dunally. 
 
 Mr. James Milmo examined. 
 a tenant on Mr. 15550. Near Mr. Clarke's holding ? — Yes; he's my 
 
 next door neighboxir. 
 
 15551. Is it good land? — Only middling. It is 
 reclaimed land all, and we paid a fine, at the time we 
 became tenants, to Mr. Fawcett who reclaimed it. 
 
 15552. The O'Conor Don.— How long ago is that? 
 — About twenty years ago. 
 
 15553. What line was paid ? — I don't know ; it was 
 a high fine. 
 
 15554. Mr. Shaw. — It has fallen in to Mr. Wynne 
 since? — There was no lease, but he allowed him to 
 sell it. 
 
 15555. The O'Conor Don. — Was there any increase 
 of rent at the time of the sale ? — There was. 
 
 15556. Mr. Shaw.— Then there were two increases? 
 —Yes. 
 
 15557. You consider it too high?— Yes a great 
 deal too high. The Government valuation is £24 10s., , 
 and the rent is £38. 
 
 15558. Chairman. — £6 ofthatwasput on two and 
 a half years ago ? — Yes, it was, £32, up to the time I 
 got it, and there was no house upon it, and I took it 
 on condition I should build a house, and I could not, 
 because instead of getting any little cajjital it is losing 
 I am these last few years. 
 
 15559. The O'Conor Don.— Is it tillage land or 
 grazing ? — Both. It is better for grazing than tillage. 
 
 15560. Do you graze it yourself or do you sublet 
 it ? — No, sir, I siiblet it. 
 
 15561. Mr. Shaw. — Are you a tradesman? — No? 
 — I am doing biisiness for a gentleman as steward, and 
 I have a sort of a boy. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 509 
 
 Mr. Stephen Hughes examined. 
 
 property bought 
 
 15562. Chairman. — You are a tenant on tlie Pal- 
 merston estate '! — Yes. 
 
 15563. Wtat is the name of the place? — It is 
 Cleever Road. 
 
 15564. How far from Sligo ? — An English mile. 
 
 15565. The O'Conoe Don.— Is it within the 
 borough 1 — It is within the old borough. 
 
 15566. The Parliamentary borough ? — Yes. 
 155G7. Chairman. — Was this 
 
 lately 1 — I boxight the good will of it. 
 
 15568. This holding was bought lately ? — Yes. 
 
 15569. How long ago?— Twenty years ago ; and I 
 gave a considerable fine to the tenant who was in for 
 the improvements he had made on it.- It is a two-acre 
 field, and he built three cottages on it, and I bought 
 his improvements, including the cottages. 
 
 15570. Did you buy that with the consent of the 
 landlord ? — I thought so. I believed when I bought 
 it I shoiild have the same opportunity of disposing of 
 my interest in it. 
 
 15571. And have you no opportunity now ? — No. 
 
 15572. Do you want to sell? I did? — I made 
 an efibrt a couple of years ago and made an ar- 
 rangement with a neighbour,, when I found the 
 necessity for money and wished to turn my hand to 
 another quarter. I sold my good-wil 1 of it to a neigh- 
 bour ; the neighbour wished to have the consent of the 
 landlord and he. would not grant it. They said it was 
 against the rules. 
 
 15573. Did you make the application or did he ? — I 
 made the application. 
 
 15574. What was the answer ? — He said — and 
 everything he said I believed him — that he regretted 
 that the rules of the estate prevented him. 
 
 15575. The O'Conoe Don.— Who is he ?— I believe 
 he is Mr. Ashley. I believe the present landlord, and I 
 give him credit for the best intention. He says he is 
 bound by the rules of the estate, and they would not 
 recognise the right of free sale on the property, so I 
 have been hemmed in ever since. It is about a mile 
 from tlie town. 
 
 15576. Chairman. — That is the point of your case ; 
 you wish to have the right of sale ? — Yes, the ricjht of 
 sale. The party from whom I bought got the right. 
 
 15577. And you think the claini is esjiecially 
 strong in your case from having bought the right ?— I 
 never would have bought it if I had thought I would 
 not get the same privilege. I gave £100 hard earned 
 money. 
 
 15578. Is it within the distance of what are called 
 townparks 1 — I suppose they designate it that way. 
 It has been in the hands of three parties for the last 
 forty years. The rent is £10. I go in strong for free 
 sale. I had to do with two or three other farms for 
 the last twenty years. 
 
 15579. The O'Conor Don. — Was free sale allowed 
 there ? — No j except on Lord Erne's property. I held 
 a farm from Lord Erne, and I was at perfect liberty 
 to dispose of my interest. 
 
 15'579a. But on the other estate it is nOt? — On 
 Walker's estate out here I held a farm of 32 acres, at 
 £3 an acre, rent £26, and the valuation was £68. 
 
 Oat. 18. 1880. 
 
 Mr. Stephe" 
 Hughes. 
 
 Mr. Daniel M'Loughlin examined. 
 
 15580. Chaieiian. — You are one of a deputation 
 from the Ballyconnell estate of Mr. Gethin ? — ^Yes. 
 
 15581. And you come to complaia of high rent ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 15582. The names on this list (produced) are tenants 
 on Mr. Cethin's estate % — Yes. 
 
 15583. The point you want to bring before us is 
 that the rents are very much higher than the valua- 
 tion ? — Yes, a good deal. 
 
 15584. John Conway holds seven acres ; rent, £14 
 10s. ; valuation, £9. Peter Garvey holds four acres ; 
 rent, £4 5s. id. ; valuation, £4. Pat Kilmartin holds 
 six acres; rent, £8 12s. ; valuation, £5 15s. Daniel 
 M'Loughlin holds five and a half acres ; rent, £6 8s. 
 Hd. ; valuation, i5. What you complain of is that 
 these rents are too high 1 — Well, they are all very bad 
 land at that too. 
 
 15585. The O'Conoe Don. — Have the rents been 
 
 raised lately ? — They were raised, and we are paying 
 high rates and cess and all that. 
 
 15586. When were the rents last changed? — Since 
 1846, 1 think. 
 
 15587. They have not been changed since 1846 ? — 
 I could not exactly tell, for it is not long since I be- 
 came tenant. 
 
 15588. Chairman. — Do you say there has been a 
 loss of privileges' as well as a rise of rent ? — Yes, 
 I do. 
 
 15589. When were these changes made? — I could 
 not exactly tell, because it is not more than a couple 
 of years since I came in ; but we are always com- 
 plaining that they are raising this rent and taxes 
 every day, and it is not worth it. I am complaining 
 of it myself. It is only a few years since my father 
 died. 
 
 15590. Were yciu left what your father held? — 
 Yes. 
 
 Mr. Daniel 
 M'Loughlin. 
 
 Mr. Peter Gaevey examined. 
 
 15591. Chaieman. — You are one of the tenants on 
 this property, and you say that in November, 1874, 
 your brother-in-law's rent was £2, and in November, 
 1879, it was £2 10s.? — Yes, and my own rent in 
 December, 1878, was £4 5s. id., but my regular rent 
 was £3 7s. 2d. 
 
 15592. The O'Conoe Don. — And since when was 
 it increased? — Since 1846. 
 
 15593. You got no more land since then?— No, 
 sir, but some I had was taken off me. 
 
 15594. Chairman. — The complaint you make ap- 
 plies to all the tenants on that property ?— Yes. 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 Garvey 
 
 Mr. Francis Baebour examined. 
 
 15595. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant farmer on 
 Sir Henry Gore Booth's estate ?— Yes. 
 
 15596. And you have been a land agent? — Yes, 
 but not now. 
 
 15597. And you are well acquainted with the 
 state of the tenantry in the county ?— Yes, as well as 
 any man in the county. 
 
 15598. You hold a lease yourself ?— Yes. 
 
 15599. And improved your land very much ?— 
 Yes, "'ery much. 
 
 t ECOO. We had a statement about some properties 
 
 in your neighbourhood — Mr. Jones' tenants — and they 
 complained of their rents being high, being excessively 
 high ? — I don't think they are. I have been agent for 
 seventeen years there, and I improved the land con- 
 siderably, and I never raised the rent on them at 
 all. 
 
 15601. Is the land there very good? — No, it has 
 been a kind of marshy cut-away bog, with some arable 
 land, but capable of being improved very much. 
 
 15602. What are the rents? — The rents are from 
 £1 to £1 5s. 
 
 Mr. Francis 
 Barbour. 
 
510 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Oct. 18, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Francis 
 Barbour. 
 
 15603. Do you tliink that is a liigh rent? — No. 
 There is great facility of seaweed. 
 
 15604. Are they charged for the seaweed ?— No, 
 the tenants get it as a gift with the land. 
 
 15605. Do you know a tenant named John Young 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 15606. Is his rent too high ?— No. In 1846 and 
 1847 it was hard times, and I advised the landlord to 
 take £2 off him as a temporary abatement, and after- 
 wards the £2 was jiut on again, and that is what 
 he always complained of. 
 
 15607. Did not he offer to give up the land several 
 times'? — Not to me. 
 
 15608. There was a statement that you squared 
 townlands, and took land fiom some people and added 
 it to others, and did not reduce the rent 1 — I think 
 there was one case, we took from a man about J;hree- 
 quarters of an aoi-e. 
 
 15609. There have been statements of more than 
 that — four and a half acres in one easel- -There was 
 a piece of sand — a rabbit burrow — where the sand was 
 blowing and making the other land useless, and I took 
 a piece of ground from the tenant and planted it with 
 bent, and fenced it in. It was my intention to hand 
 it back to the tenant when it would be in an improved 
 condition, and not let it spoil the rest of the land 
 about it. 
 
 15610. Did you do that? — No, I ceased to be his 
 agent before the land was sufficiently reclaimed, and, 
 I believe he gets £4 or £5 a year for it now, and it 
 was not worth four or five pence. 
 
 15611. The tenant is still paying the old rent? — 
 Yes. 
 
 15612. And he thinks that is a grievance ? — Yes, 
 I think there is a grievance. 
 
 15613. The O'Conoe Don. — Was the bent sown 
 and the place fenced at the expense of the tenant, or 
 of the landlord ? — I fenced it and I paid for the bent, 
 and the tenants drew it, and T have made them an 
 allowance for planting the bent. 
 
 15614. Did you pay them for drawing it? — No. 
 
 15615. Mr. Shaw. — You thought you were doing 
 it at the time for the tenants? — Yes, that was my im- 
 pression, and that was the way the piece was taken 
 from them. It was not only this part was bad, but it 
 was calculated to ruin the other land. It cost a good 
 deal to fence it, and I think if the tenants got it back 
 in that improved state they would pay for the fencing, 
 but he has got as much rent off it since as would be 
 fair compensation for the landlord's outlay. 
 
 15616. He has let it to other people? — He has. 
 
 15617. Yoti have no complaint to make in your 
 own case? — No, but I want to bring a few things 
 under your notice. If every man was like the man I 
 live under there would not be much need for inquiries 
 like this in the country. I have expended a great 
 deal upon improvements — perhaps £7,000, or £8,000, 
 or £13,000. The late Sir Robert Gore Booth came to 
 me after thirty years of my lease had expired and said, 
 " I think you should give up your old lease and I will 
 make you a new one." " Weli, indeed, I think I 
 ought to be satisfied that your people would not treat 
 me badly." " But I want to do it in my own time, 
 and not leave it to other people." 
 
 15618._ That was the late Sir Bobert? - Yes. and 
 he drew me a new lease, and he agreed to every altera- 
 tion I suggested in the lease, except as to rabbits, and 
 I said, " now rabbits is a bad animal," and he said, 
 " I will give you leave to shoot them," and I said I 
 would not. He made me a new lease of three lives 
 or thirty-one years, at the same rent, and when he 
 gave the first lease, he made a reduction of is. 6d. 
 per acre, and he renewed that. He gave me 500 
 acres in one farm, and about 40 in another farm 
 along the road, and he said, " what I'ent do you think 
 I ought to charge you for that ?" " It is for you to 
 say that," and he said, "put it on yourself." I said, 
 you are getting 21s. an acre for this land, and it is in 
 a wretched condition, but I will improve it ; and I 
 said it is not worth more than 16s. or 17s., and he 
 
 said, go and get yoxir lease drawn at that, I will gig- 
 it. It is very few landlords will do that, and simi, 
 larly he gave me a mountain farm, and I have im, 
 proved that gi-eatly. I got hay off it where it was not 
 fit for wild duck or snipe. 
 
 15619. Have you a lease of that ? — I have. 
 
 15620. Are lease.s common on this property?— Uq 
 but to chosen people they are granted, and I think it 
 would be a great pity to have to give a lease to some 
 people who are not entitled to it. Wliere a man is 
 entitled to it he ought to get it. 
 
 15621. Are there many of the properties you knoir 
 anything about ? — Yes. Generally speaking, I thini 
 the landlords are pretty fair. Mr. Wynne, Sir Heniy 
 Mr. O'Hara, and Colonel Cooper — Colonel Cooper 
 they complain a little about, but they say he is not 
 to be complained much about. There are some of 
 these people who buy property — they are a curse to 
 the poor people instead of a blessing ; they buy pro. 
 perty at a high figure, and they come in and say, Mr. 
 Barbour, I am sorry I must raise your rent, I paid a 
 large sum for that. You will never get the country 
 to be prosperous unless you get the landlord and ten- 
 ant to pull together. There is a gi-eat deal of land in 
 the county that can be turned to account. I Jiave 
 made land that was a snipe walk good land. I was 
 improving it thirty-five years ago, and I don't think 
 there is a farmer in Connaught has done more at his 
 own expense. 
 
 15622. We have had evidence of very high rents 
 on some estates ? And is it not a hard thing for a 
 tenant to improve there ? — It is a very disheartening 
 thing, and they can't do it. I made land that was 
 not worth 7s. &d. worth £2 an acre. If I had had 
 landlords who oppressed me or who would not co- 
 operate with me, and come to see me and say, good 
 fellow, you are doing well. If I improved that land 
 and they said, Barbour, you must pay 10s. an acre of 
 a rise — perhaps some of them might be well disposed 
 to do that or to put on £1 of a rise — I would say, I 
 cannot do it, and it would be very unfair to do. 
 
 15623. It would sto]) improvements? — Yes. I 
 would just have gathered myself off if he had done 
 that to me. 
 
 15624. If you heard that he did it on a neighbour- 
 ing farm, it would frighten you ? — Yes. 
 
 15625. You think there should be some way of 
 regulating that kind of thing ? — Unless you try to im- 
 bibe pvire iiidustry into the people. They drink too 
 much whiskey. If you are in terror that you are 
 cutting a rod to whip yourself, you will not go on. 
 What is wanted is a good landlord, with a common- 
 sense agent, who will not raise the rent without dis- 
 cretion. I think people raise the rent more frequently 
 than they ought. I see land with a good tenant at 
 the same rent for forty or fifty years on Sir Iloherts 
 estate. I know laud fifty years without a change or 
 talk of change. 
 
 1.jG26. Would you make every landlord give terms 
 of that kind? — To good tenants they have a right to 
 do so, and if a lease was given such a clause should te 
 put into the lease as to make that tenant make certain 
 improvements annually, and let them both keep a 
 record of them, and at the expiration of the forty or 
 fifty years, if there is a valuation, it should bo modest. 
 If I improve land and make it £1 an acre better tto 
 when I bought it, I think the landlord should h „ 
 satisfied with a rise of 10s., and give the rest to tit 
 tenant. 
 
 15627. He ought not to take the whole value outoi 
 the tenant ? — No, surely not ; I think you wiU agree 
 with me on that point. 
 
 15G2S. You don't know of any case of ejectment or 
 eviction 1 — Not on Sir Henry's property. 
 
 15 029. But it has been practiced about you?— i^^' 
 and too frequently in some cases ; and if a poor m*'' 
 loses a cow, how long will he be gathering th;it up 
 again. I like the landlord and tenant to go togotliW 
 in assisting each other to enhance tlie wealth of *'"' 
 country. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 311 
 
 f 15630. In late years many of tliem bad to sell 
 cattle to try and live? — Yes to sell tlie greater portion 
 sometimes. 
 
 ; 15631. Th ey should get time for recovery ?^I think 
 there should be something done, let the landlord have 
 a fair rent, and let the tenant- have security, and then 
 let the people improve; If people were not afraid of 
 their rents being increased in consequence of their 
 own improvements, I believe the land in this county 
 and several others, could be made one-third more 
 valuable. 
 
 15632. You want to give confidence between land- 
 lord and tenant ? — I think that is the great secret in 
 any body of people who go together — confidence. 
 
 15633. Chairman. — There are great complaints of 
 tenants not improving ; do you think it is want of confi- 
 dence that leads them not to improve! — Well I do 
 believe there is a good deal in it. I believe it is the 
 sole stumbling block, because if you take and improve 
 your land and know that the rent will be raised upon 
 you and your chUd, above its value, you know that you 
 do all this at your own expense, if the landlord went 
 in with the tenant and assisted him, it would be 
 different. 
 
 15634. Mr. Shaw. — If you had not had full confi- 
 dence in you.r landlord,.you would not have made these 
 improvements 1 — No. 
 
 15635. And he has justified your confidence ? — Yes. 
 
 15636. And his son the same ?^- Yes, he is an 
 excellent good man, and he comes and takes every 
 trouble with his tenants. A good landlord will get an 
 immensity done with his tenants, 
 
 15637. And you would not object to compel bad 
 landlords to do what good landlords do; I think it 
 would be a very judicious way for the tenant in the 
 event of not being satisfied with his rent, to get one man 
 and the landlord another, and to have a third as 
 umpire appointed by the Government, and then let 
 them fix a fair just rent between tenant and landlord. 
 
 15638. That would be fair between all parties'? — 
 Yes, and it would give them confidence, a,nd show it 
 was not left to the landlord's decision to put on an 
 exorbitant rent. 
 
 15639. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think if the 
 system were adopted on Mr. Jones' estate, the rents 
 would be left as they are? — I have been just as 
 conversant with that property as I am with the seat I 
 am sitting on, and I believe the great curse or abuse of 
 the country is subdividing of farms. You have 100 
 acres, and you subdivide it into four tenancies, and if 
 a man has only got a small spot of land for his family 
 what can he do. If a man has four or five children 
 and his wife and himself on nine or ten acres, what 
 can he do. 
 
 15640. Is that the reason why they ofi'er rent so 
 high ? — I cannot tell you. 
 
 15641. Mr. Shaw. — It is poor land naturally — -Yes, 
 and if a person has a dirty house they require to sweep 
 it often. If you have a farm that requires to be well 
 di-ained, and it is kept in a dirty neglected state with 
 no one to look after it, wiat can you expect. 
 
 15642. It is getting worse daily 1 — Going back to its 
 original state. 
 
 15643. Chairman.— They state that the land is ct.is.ma 
 not at all worth what it was formerly worth ? — I think jj^. pjancis 
 it ought to be a great deal better, because I expended Barbour 
 upon that property a great deal, and I have not been 
 
 well treated in it either, I paid money out of my own 
 pocket, and Mr. Jones when he got the land improved 
 disputed the matter with me, and I went to law and 
 lost £2,000 or £3,000 by it, and the tenants have the 
 benefit of it. I added to his land while I never 
 charged any tenant a rise upon his holding. All the 
 bog land I gave out to tenajits for reclamation. The 
 drainage was always fiorgottan untU I took it in hands, 
 and he was not able to spend ihe money, and I said 
 I will spend the money. I was to be paid back at 
 £200 a yeaj-, and when I came for the money they put 
 me at defiance and said, have you got receipts for all 
 this money. I paid it in wages and all that, and kept 
 a separate book, and I did not get the people to sign 
 receipts. 
 
 15644. They spoke of the diminution in value for 
 the last six or seven years from the wet seasons ? — No 
 doubt we all felt that, that is a general thing, but in 
 the meantime I think it is from pure neglect, and from 
 not attending to the keeping of theae drains open, and 
 not giving proper attention to cultivation. 
 
 15645. Mr. Shaw. — There is no resident agent 
 now 1 — No. 
 
 15646. He is his own agent? — Yes. 
 
 have 
 
 you 
 
 16647. The O'Conor Don.— How long 
 ceased to be agent ? — About thirteen years. 
 
 15648. Do you mean to say that, with the exception 
 of this rabbit sand burrow, no land was taken from 
 tenants ? — No. 
 
 15649. No land was taken from one tenant and 
 another charged with it? — No. There was exactly a 
 rabbit buiTow of three-quarters of an acre. The 
 three-quarter aoro alluded to is not sand, but inferior 
 quality. My .intention was to go into that man's land 
 and improve it ao much that it would be a larger 
 compensation than the bit of snipe walk ; and that is 
 what I would have done, but that we quarrelled upon 
 this point which I have explained. 
 
 15650. Mr. Shaw. — You were notable to carry out 
 your own plans? — No. 
 
 15651. And they have not been carried out since? 
 — No. There has not been £2 worth done since. 
 They are good men there, and I taught them. It is a 
 good thing to have some one to teach them, and I just 
 took as much trouble in shewing the men how to make 
 drains and fences that they got fond of me and 
 approved of my plans and became more indus- 
 trious. I have done more good in the neighbour- 
 hood about me than I have done for myself, and I 
 don't think there is a man in the province has im- 
 proved as much as I have done as a tenant farmer. I 
 am seventy-four years of age, and I am sixty years 
 farming, and you may judge I have had very stiff 
 strong experience of work since. My mind was 
 always exactly like a man who would be fond of saving, 
 or fond of a good race horse. My mind went naturally 
 that way. I think the best thing you could do would 
 be to devise a plan to bring about a fair honest under- 
 standing between landlord and tenant. 
 
 Mr. Edward Kelly, Ballytibnan, examined. 
 
 15652. OiTAiRMAN.— "Where do you live ?— Within 
 a mile and a-half of Sligo. 
 
 15653. Are you the owner of lands or the occupier 
 —1 am an occupier of land. 
 
 15654. Is it a farm? — Yes. I am under two land- 
 lords. This is a farm of sis acres. 
 
 15655. On which property is this?— Now Mr. 
 Ashley. I took it first from Lord Palmerston. 
 
 15656. Mr. Shaw.— Is it within the borough?— 
 Yes. I took it in 1842 from Mr. Griffith, who was 
 then tenant at £60 a year. 
 
 15657. Chairman. — A sub-tenancy ?— Yes. 
 
 15658. What rent was it , at that time?— £60 
 a yeai'. ' ' 
 
 15659. What happened after that.?— -He had either 
 twelve or fourteen years of it at the time. 
 
 15660. Had he a lease of it? — He had a lease. 
 
 15661. For how many years ? — I forget the number 
 of years, but there was only twelve to run. Mr. 
 Walker was the local agent of Lord Palmerston at the 
 time, and I consulted him about it, as he was a friend 
 and a good gentleman, I wish they were all like him, 
 and I told him " this is too high entirely." He said, 
 "I told you vou have a chance of getting it for 
 Griffith's rent." 
 
 15662. What was the rent then? — Mine, £60. 
 Mr. Griffith's rent was £28. "At any rate they can't 
 put beyond £40 on it," said Mr. Walker. I settled 
 
 Mr. Edward 
 Kelly 
 
512 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 18, 18S0. witli Griffith, and remained there until his time was 
 
 Mr Edward ^^\^qq^_ ^^_ Shaw.— What happened then?— In 
 1847 there was a terrible crash in this town and all over 
 Ireland, in which I lost =£47,000 myself. I was obliged 
 to go to America, and I let the land for £10 a year. 
 
 15664. Still remaining the tenant '! — Yes; and I 
 came back in 1855, at the close of the Crimean war, 
 when all the produce of the land was up from 40 to 
 50 per cent, and Mr. Smith, who is now the agent to 
 Lord Enniskillen, was then the local agent. I heard 
 he was anxious to get this old house to himself and 
 repair it ; so when I arrived he put on £60, for the 
 lease had run out in the meantime. That was on 
 4a. 2r. Mr. Wynne put on £6 on the 1a. 2r., and 
 niy rent since is £66 in all. 
 
 15665. Was it continued still at the £60'!— Yes. 
 
 15666. Chairman. — On lease? — I was ofiered a 
 lease, but I refused to take it from old Mr. Kinkead. 
 When his lordship came to Cliffeney I went down to 
 meet him, and I met Mr. Smith and Mr. Kinkead 
 there. His lordship came over and gave me certainly 
 a warm shake-hands, and I just stated my case as I 
 am stating it to your lordship. He said, "I will see 
 you at Mr. Kinkead 's, and I will see the place as we 
 are passing bye ; but at any rate we will give you a 
 long lease," and I said, " Not at any rate I will not 
 have a lease at that rent," and breakfast was an- 
 nounced, and I felt so annoyed that I would not 
 accept the honour of taking breakfast with his lord- 
 shij). I spoke to Mr. Ashley frequently, and never 
 got an abatemesnt of rent. In 1879 Mr. Ashley 
 allowed £10 for repair of roof ; it cost £20 2s. Qd. 
 In 1880 he allowed £5. 
 
 15667. Mr. Shaw. — How maby acres are there? — 
 Six acres. Only 4a. 2r. belong to Mr. Ashley. 
 
 15668. And a good house? — No; a wretched old 
 nouse. I laid out a large sum on it. . 
 
 15669. What would you consider a fair rent for it? 
 — I would consider £40 a year a fair rent for it in 
 these times. 
 
 15670. Would it bring more if it was in the 
 market 1 — Not more than £40. 
 
 15671. But you have made the improvements en- 
 tirely ? — It would not let now, if it was as 1 got it, for 
 £30 a year. I laid out over £1,200 upon it. When 
 I took that I took a small little field of about an acre 
 and a half, including half a garden — one part Mr. 
 
 Wynne's and another Lord Palmerston's. The little 
 garden was a swamp, and not worth anything, and I 
 reclaimed this acre and a half of garden. I proved in 
 Court that I laid out more money on the place than 
 would purchase double the fee-simple of it ; and after 
 having it a nice field, Mr. Wynne sent his. clerk to 
 value it, and he put £6 a year on it. I said '• Why " 
 and he said, " I cannot help it. I must value it as I 
 find it there," and I paid £6 a year for it. At the 
 time of the Election in 1868 — I always voted on the 
 Liberal side — I opposed the landlord, and Mr. Olphert 
 served ine with a notice to quit, and got a decree. 
 The whole town was indignant at it, for all knew what 
 I had laid out on the place, and the consequence) was 
 that this was sold when Mr. Wynne was selling his 
 property in Dublin, at £170, and that £170 ought to 
 go into my pocket, for the place was not worth any. 
 thing when I got it. It was sold in the Landed 
 Estates Court to a gentleman in Sligo. 
 
 15672. And you got nothing for your improve, 
 ments ?— Not one farthing. 
 
 15673. The O'Conoe Don.— When did that happen! 
 — That happened in 1868 at the time of the election. 
 They did not know what to do, and they could not 
 annoy me more than to take that from me. It was 
 talked of all over town. The place was sold in Dublin 
 to Mr. Higginsfor £170, and that £170 ought to 
 have gone into my pocket except £1 an acre. 
 
 15674. Chairman. — That was called a townpark ? 
 — It could not be called a townpark, it was a swamp. 
 
 15675. Mr. Shaw. — Yot< made it what it is ?— Yes, 
 and I asked the barrister not to execute the decree 
 until I saw Mr. Olpherts ; and I saw Mr. Olpherts, and 
 asked what he meant to do with the field He said I 
 mean to take proceedings this very day, and I said, 
 that is very smart. I asked Mr. Olpherts was there 
 any rent due he knew there was not. I said, Mr. 
 Olpherts that is robbery, you might as well go into my 
 field and drive my cattle off. I said, you are worse 
 than Mr. Scully. We often heard of him, he was shot 
 at the time. 'This day came, and I was waiting for the 
 police to take possession, but the sheriflF did not come; 
 Mr. Olpherts thought better of it. 
 
 15676. But the man who purchased it took it up from 
 you ? — No; I am paying £6 a year for my own out- 
 lay. 
 
 15677. It was not that Mr. Wynne turned you 
 ovrt ? — No : I don't think he would do it. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Clarke 
 
 Mr. William Clarke examined. 
 
 15678. Chairman. — You live in the neighbourhood 
 of Sligo ? — Within a mile of Sligo. 
 
 15679. Are you a farmer? — Yes, a land sur^•eyor, 
 land valuator, and tenant farmer, extensively employed 
 in the counties of Leitrim, Sligo, and Roscommon, in 
 valuing dividing and subletting land. 
 
 15680. You do all Mr. Wynne's business? — Yes. 
 
 15681. Have you any point you wish to bring before 
 us as to your own holding ? — No, nothing about my 
 own holding. I hold it at my own valuation, and I 
 have no reason to complain. 
 
 15682. Mr. Shaw. — Are the rents raise(i on the 
 properties you value ? — -At the expiration of a lease and 
 subdividing, what we call rundale. 
 
 15683. Squaring fai-ms ? — Yes. 
 
 15684. Do you know a ma,n named Milmo in your 
 neighbourhood ? — Yes, he is a tenant of Mr. Wynne 
 and has a very good farm. 
 
 15685. His rent was raised when he went into 
 it ? — When he was declared the tenant it was raised 
 £6 over the old rent. 
 
 15686. Is that the habit on the estate? — It is 
 generally done when there is a new tenancy. 
 
 15687. Chairman. — Does the tenant coming in 
 know there will be an increased rent ? — Yes, decidedly. 
 This man was glad to get it at that, he replaced 
 his imcle. 
 
 15688. Mr. Shaw.— His uncle purchased from Mr. 
 Fawcett ?— Only a little field by the side of the 
 
 road. He gave Mr. Fawcett some little fee for giv- 
 ing it to him. 
 
 15689. Had his uncle improved the laud veiy 
 much? — No, he improved it nothing, it is the next 
 f u'lii to mine. 
 
 15690. £6 rise was put upon him? — He holds 
 twenty acres at £3 and it is a cheap farm. 
 
 15691. Are they Irish acres? — ^Yes, and in a beau- 
 tiful locality, with turf and water free and near the 
 town, just beside my own place. 
 
 15692. The O'Conor Don.— If he were allowed to 
 sell his interest, would he get a good sum 1 — When 
 the Bill of 1870 was passing through the House of 
 Commons, I was consulted on the clause respecting 
 the value of use and occupation, and the very figures I 
 reported were put into the Bill. Mr. Milmo would 
 get that now for his farm. 
 
 15693. How much is that? — five years' purchase. 
 
 15694. Mr. Shaw. — Are the tenants allowed to 
 sell on Mr. Wynne's property ? — They are, and if 
 they are not able to get a man to buy, he buys himself 
 On several occasions I have awarded them three years 
 purchase. We generally give them three years' pur- 
 chase. Very seldom a case like that happens, for we 
 have not lost any tenants except two or three siuce 
 the famine, and they went to America to benefit their 
 condition. 
 
 15695. The O'Conor Don.— Does he allow them to 
 sell to the highest bidder ? — Generally they sell to »» 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 513 
 
 adjoining tenant or neighbour. Mr. Wynne does not 
 like to introduce new tenants. 
 
 15696. He restricts the sale to his own tenants? 
 
 Yes, he confines it to his own tenants. 
 
 15697. Mr. Shaw. — But he allows them to sell out- 
 side if a tenant does not wish to buy 1 — No, he buys 
 himself, and when we buy we divide and give it to the 
 adjoining tenants. 
 
 15698. And put on a little increase of rent? In 
 
 proportion to the outlay. 
 
 15699. The O'Conor Don. — Does he limit the price ' 
 —No. 
 
 15700. When he buys himself he must put some 
 limit ? — No, he gives the highest the man can get. 
 Mr. Wynn gave permission to a tenant to sell, and I 
 consulted a neighbouring tenant, and he mentioned a 
 sum of money, and Mr. Wynne said I will give you 
 that. 
 
 15701. Mr. Shaw. — There are no evictions on the 
 property ?— No. 
 
 15702. And the rents are well paid? — Yes. 
 
 15703. There are high rents in some parts of the 
 country 1 — No doubt of it. The greatest loss of all to 
 the tenantry of Ireland was the Incumbered Estates 
 Court. 
 
 15701. The new men ?— Yes. 
 
 15705. That want to have the highest interest they 
 could get ? — That just went in to make as on mer- 
 chandise. I valued extensively for Sir Gilbert King 
 in Eoscommon and Sligo. 
 
 15706. Are his rents high? — They are reasonable 
 and well paid. 
 
 15707. Is it poor land? — No, it is grazing land. 
 At the time of the famine there was no tenantry in 
 this country could stand out better than the men who 
 were grazing. 
 
 15708. Are the farms large ? — No, they are tolerably 
 large. Small farms are the ruin of Ireland. 
 
 15709. The tenants are able to live there ?— Well 
 able. 
 
 15710. Does he allow them to sell? — I think very 
 few wish to sell. 
 
 15711. They don't want to sell? — They don't want 
 to sell, but there are some parts of Ireland that the 
 rfarms are so small it is impossible to live on them. 
 They are too small. 
 
 15712. And highly rented ?— Highly rented. Any 
 man who can keep half a dozen cows in this country, 
 can live well on the rent he has to pay. Cows and 
 calves and butter are doing very well these times. I 
 know several farmers on Mr. Wynne's estate who pay 
 their rent with calves alone. 
 
 15713. Has there been much improvement ? — Yes. 
 
 15714. By the tenants? — Yes; he encourages them 
 very piuch. 
 
 15715. Does he help them with timber and slates? 
 — He gives them plenty of timber — he has plenty on 
 his property. 
 
 15716. The O'CoNOR Don. — Doeshe encourage them 
 in any other way ? — The present man does not take 
 so much interest in that way as the Right Hon. Mr. 
 Wynne. The Eight Hon. John Wynne was exceed- 
 ingly careful of his tenants, but the present man does 
 not take quite so much interest in them. 
 
 15717. Do you think the Land Act has had any 
 eflfect in making landlords do less than they did before t 
 — I think it had, I think I know a great many cases 
 in which they were very well paid by their use and 
 occupation. 
 
 15718. Chairman. — Do they put home timber in 
 the roofs of houses ? — Yes ; it is largely used for 
 roofing under thatch. Larch is a very permanent 
 timber. 
 
 15719. The O'Conor Don. — I suppose most of the 
 houses are thatch 1 — Yes ; most of them, but the slated 
 houses are increasing. 
 
 15720. Chairman. — When they slate the houses do 
 they use the home timber? — No, not for slates. A 
 revision of the tenement valuation would be a very 
 important thing for this country. When the tenement 
 valuation was first made — I remember the time very 
 well — it was not intended for any purpose but local 
 taxation, and it did not signify anything whether it 
 was a million higher or lower, it did not add to the 
 local taxation. 
 
 15721. The O'Conor Don.— You think the tene- 
 ment valuation is now very unequal ? — ^Yes, and I think 
 when it was first brought out, there was a tarifl' of 
 agricultural produce, and everything has changed since 
 that. Beef 4:0s. a cwt, and so on, but these 
 have all nearly doubled now. 
 
 15722. You think the tenement valuation is very 
 low ? — Yes, compared with the present standard, it 
 might be very good for the scale it was laid down upon. 
 
 15723. Chairman. — Do the people generally, 
 through the country, take the Government valuation 
 as the fair value they should pay ? — The local taxation 
 is taken on it. The people think the Government valu- 
 ation was done by the Government, for the purpose of 
 rent, but it has no relation to rents at all. 
 
 15724. Mr. Shaw. — You think it should be revised? 
 — Yes, if you make any use of it, it should be revised. 
 
 The Commissioners then adjourned. 
 
 Oct. 18, 1880. 
 ]\Tr. Williant 
 
 things 
 
 TWENTY-SECOND DAY— TUESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat, at 11 o'clock,^ in the Courthouse, Castlebar. 
 
 Present :— The Right Hon. the Eael of Bessboeough, Chairman ; The O'Conor Don, and 
 
 William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. John Crean, Ballina, examined. 
 
 Oct. It, 18S0. 
 
 15725. Chairman.^— You are Lord Arran's agent? 
 — I am. 
 
 15726. Of the Mayo and also the Donegal property ? 
 — Yes, my lord. 
 
 15727. We have had some evidence as to the Sligo 
 property ? — Donegal property, I think, my lord. 
 
 15728. Yes. From some tenants, and also from 
 Mr. Jackson. At Donegal there were several tenants 
 appeared, and they entered into the question of the 
 rising of the rent, some years ago, 1857 was it? — 1854, 
 my lord, the valuation of Brassington and Gale was 
 made in 1857 in Donegal, and 1854 in Mayo. 
 
 15729. We will take the Donegal first, as to 
 some points that Avere mentioned there, and on which 
 Mr. Jackson gave some explanations. The first ques- 
 tion they raised was as to the raising of rent at that 
 
 time, which they seemed to consider was a very heavy 
 rise on them, making the rent as they say beyond the 
 value that they are able to pay ? — Lord Arran employed 
 the firm of Brassington and Gale. Mr. Gale caine 
 down and valued the estates in Mayo, and after waixls 
 in Donegal, and the principle on which that valuation 
 was made was live and let live. That was Lord A nan's 
 directions to Mr. Gale. I know in some cases the rent 
 had been under the valuation, in other cases in excess 
 of the valuation, and the tenants agreed to pay that 
 increased rent, and in Mayo the increase was put on 
 all at the same time. 
 
 15730. We will keep to Donegal first ? — In Doneo-al 
 although not acting as agent then, Mr. Sims was the 
 agent, I was emi)loyed under Mr. Sims in Ballina, 
 and I am aware that in order to make the increase' 
 
 3U 
 
 Mr. John 
 Crean. 
 
514 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO. 
 
 <Oct. 19, I8«0. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Crean. 
 
 tten put on by Mr. Gale, easy on the tenants' it -was 
 spread over a number of years. 
 
 15731. They say when the first rise was made they 
 did not know what the rises would be in other years 1 
 — I believe not, they alleged afterwards they were 
 never told what the full rise would be. 
 
 15732. So Mr. Jackson said and he regretted that 
 they were not told at once what the total rise would 
 be 1—1 was of that opinion myself when dealing with 
 the tenants afterwards. 
 
 15733. From your experience of lettings, do you 
 say the rents are not excessive for them to have paid 
 considering the circumstances of the last few years 1 — I 
 would say, taking the last couple of years which were 
 very bad, that the rents were high, but in prosperous 
 
 -years the rents were not too high. 
 
 . 15734. But these were years that were rather out 
 of the way bad, the last two years? — Oh, they were, 
 my lord. 
 
 15735. I think the time of the valuation was rather 
 a good time in Ireland? — I should say so, my loi'd, 
 although I have no distinct recollection now. 
 
 15736. Well, amongst them there were a good 
 many who were very closely round the town of 
 Donegal 1 — A great many, my lord. 
 
 15737. I suppose it maybe taken that they were 
 valued highly in comparison with those more distant? 
 — I don't believe thsy were, except persons holding 
 as townparks. 
 
 15738. That seemed to be the case, and they say 
 they were too far off to be really considered town- 
 paiks, and that they were, in fact, farms. What you 
 would call a townpark would be land held in con- 
 nexion with a house in the town '? — Yes, and in close 
 proximity to the town ; we would consider them town- 
 parks. 
 
 15739. The next point they have is the twenty-five 
 per cent, that vras put vipon a new tenant who came 
 in by purchase 1 — Yes, my lord ; Lord Arran con- 
 sidered that, after a period of twenty-one or twenty- 
 two years, some increase ought to be put on, consider- 
 ing the time the valuation was made, that the incoming 
 tenant ought to pay an increased rent ; twenty-five 
 per cent, would not, after all, be twenty-five per cent, 
 added to the rent, when we take into account that, 
 since the passing of the Land Act, the landlord has to 
 allow half the county cess for holdiiigs valued over £4 
 a year, and, under that, the -vhole cess, which was a 
 considerable item in connexion with Donegal, where 
 
 , the cess is very high. 
 
 15740. There was another point as to the valua- 
 tion which was, that, in the opinion of the tenants, 
 the farms were valued exactly as they stood, and that, 
 therefore, their improvements were included in the 
 valuation, and that they were, therefore, paying rent 
 upon the whole of their own improvements i. — I should 
 say, my lord, that, taking into account the fact that 
 there was no increase put on for twenty-four or twenty- 
 five years, they had the benefit of their own improve- 
 ments all that time without any increase of rent being 
 put on. 
 
 15741. I suppose the case was that Brassington 
 and Gale valued the farms exactly as they stood in 
 in 1854? —Yes; they have been very much improved 
 since ; there was very little improvement then, be- 
 cause most of his lordship's property was held in run- 
 dale system, and Lord Arran went to considerable ex- 
 pense to have the holdings striped. 
 
 15742. Was the fencing done for them, or were 
 they assisted in fencing when the lands were .striped ? 
 — I cannot say as to the Donegal estate. 
 
 15743. The O'Conor Don. — Did they hold in run- 
 dale up to 1854? — I believe most of tliomdid. 
 
 15744. Chairman. — Was the valuation made upon 
 it when it was in rundale? — In some cases it was. 
 
 15745. The O'Conoe Don.— Was not the valuation 
 made in 1854?— 1857 was the time that Mr. Gale 
 valued the Donegal est:ite ; in 1854 ho valued the 
 ]\Iayo estate. ■ 
 
 io746. CllAiKMAic— Well then, they say that they 
 
 were told that there should be no i ise of rent for 
 twenty one years, when they wore dissatisfied -with 
 the thi:rd i4se that came 1 — Yes, my lord. 
 
 15747. They considered that a rise upon an ia. 
 coming purchaser was, in fact, a rise upon themselves 
 because it reduced the value of their tenant-right?— 
 I am only connected with the Donegal estate for 
 ten years, and I liave never given the subject of tke 
 tenant-right question very much consideration, inas- 
 much as it did not exist on the Mayo estate. 
 
 15748. That evidently would be the case. Itliink 
 Mr. Jackson gave some explanation, which was that 
 the price obtained for the tenant-right had been so 
 very high that Lord Arran said it was evident there 
 must be a considerable value over and above the ex- 
 isting rents to enable people to give these large prices? 
 — It was for that sole reason alone that Lord Arran 
 when he saw the enormous prices given for the tenant- 
 rigiit, insisted on getting something approaching tie 
 value of his land from those incoming tenants. 
 
 15749. He reckoned the twenty-five per cent, 
 would cover what he would consider was a landlord's 
 share in the interest of the farm- ? — You see it would 
 not be twenty-five per cent, after all on the whole 
 rent since the Land Act was passed, which regulated 
 the payment of county cess by the landlord when a 
 new tenancy was created. 
 
 15750. Does. Lord Arran pay the whole county 
 cess, or half? — Wherever new tenancies have been 
 created siaco 1870, in all cases valued under £4, we 
 are obliged to allow the whole county cess, which is 
 three times more than the poor-rate; and in cases 
 over £4, we allow half the county cess, and that 
 twice a year, which is a large sum. In some cases, 
 I should say very nearly the greater portion of the 
 twenty-five per cent, is sv/allowed up by it. 
 
 15751. In small cases? — In small ones nearly the 
 entire, my lord. 
 
 15752. 1 don't think I have any notes close enough 
 of statements respecting any particular holding? — I 
 don't think they go, any of them, beyond this, that 
 the rent is high iii comjiarison with the Government 
 valuation. I believe it exceeds the Poor Law valuation. 
 
 15753. Oh, yes, very much, and that is what they 
 put forward? — I did not come prepared to give evid- 
 ence on that, knowing that Mr. Jackson would be 
 
 , examined at Donegal, I only came prepared as far as 
 the INIayo estate is concernecl, but from my knowledge 
 of the Donegal estates, the rents are about 23 per 
 cent, over the Government valuation. 
 
 15754. Hugh M'Ginty, Finnybawns, he held 9 
 acres, that was one of the cases where it was raised 
 25 per cent, ten years ago, but the original Govern- 
 ment valuation was £G ? — His Poor Law valuation is 
 .£7 15s., and, therefore, his rent is aboiit 25 per cent, 
 over the Poor Law valuation. 
 
 15755. That is now £9 14s. Gd.1 Is that close to 
 Donegal? — It is, I think, within three English miles. 
 
 1575G. That seemed to be one of the largest, and 
 he said thai; arose from the 25 per cent, on a sale, as he 
 bought, I suppose that is the cause? — Yery likely, 
 whenever the tenant purchased, Lord Arran insisted 
 on getting that increase. 
 
 15757. Can you turn to James Smullen, he had 
 40 acres? — He got a. large farm, a short time ago, he 
 is a hotel proprietor, in Donegal. Its Poor Law valua- 
 tion is i;27 10s. ; his rent £30 10s. ; and he is allowed 
 one-half county cess. 
 
 15758. Did he buy in?— He bought under the 
 Ulster Tenant-Eight Custom. 
 
 15759. Well, then, as to the Mayo estate, the 
 Mayo estate is about 23,G00 acres?— I got one of the 
 query sheets, which I have filled up and returned) 
 which may shorten matters. 
 
 157G0. 2.3,659 acres ?— Yes, my lord. That is the 
 extent of what is in the occupation of agricultural ten- 
 ants, it does not include leasehold property or fee- 
 simple property, which is very considerable on his 
 - lordshi[)'s estate. 
 
 157G1. Now, there was a great deal said about the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 515 
 
 poor-law valuation and exis^ng lents ; what is your 
 opinion of the proportion that should exist between 
 rents and the poor-law valuation? — ,1 have made 
 several calculations, my lord, in the last couple of years 
 ■with respect to the tenement valuation on his lordship's 
 Mayo property and the rents paid, and I find in 
 the three Poor-Law Unions in which the Mayo estate 
 is situated, I find, taking the average, the rent is 
 about 18 per cent, over the poor-law valuation. 
 
 15762. Eirst of all I would ask you, whether yoii 
 consider that the poor law valuation is a proper cri- 
 terion of rent 1 — In some cases it is and in some cases 
 it is not, for mistakes have been made. 
 
 15763. It is not equally placed on different hold- 
 ings in different parts of the country 1 — It is not, my 
 lord. 
 
 15764. I suppose eqvially placed as regards the ten- 
 ants who wovdd be paying the same rates 1— -As re- 
 gards paying the rates it is. 
 
 16765. It is fair as regards paying the rates, weai-e 
 told by Mr. Ball Greene ? — It is, my lord, except where 
 mistakes have been made. Mistakes have been made 
 1 know myself. In fact the poor-law ^-aluation was 
 set down at such a figure that, when you compare it 
 with the rent and the rate per acre, you will find two 
 men paying the same rent and having the same class 
 of land, stretched by each other, and the poor-L'.w 
 valuation will difier very materially. 
 
 15766. The O'Conoe Don.— You find it differing 
 in the same townland 1 — Yes. 
 
 15767. Therefore it is not unifcirm? — No, I say 
 mistakes must have been made, but, on the whole, it 
 was very fair. 
 
 15768. Chairman. — That rate on the Mayo estate 
 has been for the last twenty-five years 1 — It has, my 
 lord, they have never been increased since, except by 
 new tenants coming in. 
 
 15769. But there is no tenant-right, no sale? — No. 
 
 15770. Well, how long did you say you had been 
 here? — I have been about twenty-six years in con- 
 nexion with his lordship's Mayo estate, ten years of 
 which I have acted as agent. 
 
 15771. Are you aware of any great objection to the 
 rents before the last few bad years ? — I never heard 
 an objection until the last coxiple of years, until this 
 agitation commenced. 
 
 15772. And were the tenants prettj- comfortable? 
 — They were, my lord, and so much so that scarcely, 
 if ever, was there any arrear due up to the last 
 couple of years. One half-year's rent was always 
 paid before the other became due. 
 
 15773. Do you think they w^ere obliged, from the 
 last few years, to reduce their stock very much in or- 
 der to meet their rents ? — I believe so, the last couple 
 of years told very severely on the smaller class, and 
 indeed on the larger class. 
 
 15774. That aftected their position altogether as to 
 paying rents afterwards, because a diminution of 
 stock would diminish their ])ower of making manure, 
 and the land would get into bad order ? — It would. 
 
 15775. Do you observe that the land has de- 
 teriorated from the wet of those seasons? — I expe- 
 rienced that last year, a very wet season, and the 
 crops suffered very severely. 
 
 15776. Do you think the grass lands suffered ? — 
 They did, to this extent. In the summer months 
 wlien cattle would be expected to get on veiy well, 
 the weatlier was cold and wet and stock suflired ; 
 the n-rass did not grow so well. This year was an ex- 
 <,(;ption, because it was a good year compared with 
 the last couple of years. 
 
 15777. The O'CoxoR Don. — Is there much grass 
 laud on Lord Airan's estate? — Only three grass 
 farms. 
 
 15778. Chaiejian. — Is this land generally near 
 l)og ? — Portions of it is. 
 
 1 5779. Portions of cut-away bog ?— Portions .of cut- 
 away bo^.- 
 
 15780. And they continue to enclose land as the 
 Lurf is cutaway J—Whem the Mayo estate was striped 
 
 all this bog land was striped in with "the tepiants' Oct.ii 188«, 
 holdings, and each tenant got about six or eight acres jj^ j~^ 
 of this reclaimed bog together with his holding, at Cre'an. 
 about 2s. 6d. an acre. 
 
 15781. The O'CoNOR Dok.— On the understanding 
 that he was to reclaim? — Yes, and I have known 
 tenants who have reclaimed that bog land, and 
 are holding at that rent since, and the greater portion 
 of the rent of the arable holding was paid out of the 
 produce raised from that reclaimed land, and no in- ' 
 crease of rent was put on. 
 
 1578^., Have they ever sublet that for conacre? — 
 Very rarely, except a tenant, from some circumstances 
 getting into difiiculties, might let his land to his 
 neighbour. 
 
 15783. And in such cases what rent would he get 
 for that reclaimed bog ? — I have known instances, I 
 am speaking with reference to the arable as well as 
 the reclaimed land, where a tenant would be obliged 
 from some cause or other to let his land in conacre 
 for a year or two, and where he was paying £1 an 
 acre he often got £3 or di from his neighbour for 
 the crop for one year. 
 
 15784. Is there any custom of making advances 
 towards improvements by tenants on Lord Arran's 
 property ? — Since the passing of the Land Act very 
 few landlords do so, and Lord Arran did not feel 
 himself justified in making any improvements. 
 
 15785. But it was a custom before that time ? — It 
 was, my lord, for a series of years his lordship had 
 expended a STim of <£G,800 for improvements on his 
 tenants' holdings on the Majo estate. 
 
 15786. Between what dates was that ? — For twenty 
 years up to the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 15787. In addition to that he borrowed money 
 from the Board of Public Works? — Yery large sums 
 during 1S47 and 1848 for the piu-pose of drauuige. 
 
 15788. As to the f G,S00, was any interest charged 
 to the tenants? — Not a sixpence. 
 
 15789. As to the Public Works loan money? — 
 Nothing. 
 
 15790. Have there been any eases of rent being 
 raised on im]irovements made by the* tenants ? — Not 
 one, to my knowledge. 
 
 15791. No change of rent on a change of tenancy? 
 — There is on the Mayo estate when a new tenant 
 comes in. 
 
 15792. Do you consider the death of a tenant and 
 the incominff of the son or widow a change of 
 tenancy 1 — Oh, no, because after the tenant dies his 
 widow* is kept on, for reasons which we found neces- 
 sary in Mayo, to keep her on as long as she lives. 
 If it is not so they are treated in their old age badly 
 by their sons and dauglitei-K, if they are not con- 
 tinued as tenants. 
 
 15793. Then, when you speak of a new tenant, 
 you mean a tenant uncimuected with the family? — 
 Yes. 
 
 15794. CiiAiEMAX. — In the year 1846 was tliere 
 assistance given for getting pt-ojih^'s lioiiscs sojiarate 
 for themselves, new houses being constructiid for 
 them? — I uni not aware in 1816, but I know 
 immediately after the valuation was made in 1S54 
 most of Lord Arrau'.s pi-operty was tlieu striped, 
 and Loixl Arran assisted the tenants in every 
 way in the shape of giving them new d(iurs and 
 windows iov their houses, wlicie they wei(^ obliged 
 to build new houses, a)id in that way a consideiable 
 part of the sum of £6,S()0 v/as expended, and partly 
 in making roads. 
 
 15795.''Was part of tlie .£6,800, timber given from 
 his woods? — No, in addition to that there was a large 
 wood near the town C(.impletely cut down for the 
 purpose of su[)plying timber for roofing. 
 
 15796. Was that given free? — Yes, and at present 
 any tenant on his lordship's estate has any timber 
 he may require for roofing, or ladders, or gates 
 given free, merely except a small tiling charged for 
 the man who out.it .dow.n, perhaps Is. fur a caitjoad 
 of timber. 
 
 3U2 
 
516 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSO 
 
 Oct. 19, 16S0. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Crean. 
 
 15797. Have there been many cases of eviction 
 since you came on the property? — I don't know 
 whetlier you can call it eviction or not, but only 
 one man was turned out within the last ten years, 
 and it had reference to a tenant who disposed of 
 his holding, contrary to the wishes of Lord Arran, 
 and went to America, selling his interest. I may tell 
 you that one of the rules on the estate was that on a 
 tenant parting with his holding the adjoining tenant 
 got a preference. 
 
 15798. I thought you said they were not allowed 
 to sell? — No, and this tenant did it contrary to the 
 rules. We were obliged to serve a notice to quit and 
 evict the holding. The incoming tenant who was 
 evicted filed a land claim, and, of course, got nothing 
 for it, and the adjoining tenant got the holding. 
 
 15799. The O'Conoe Don. — Did the man who 
 paid the fine lose it 1 — He did. 
 
 15800. Chairman. — How is the turbary, is that 
 given free? — Given free to every tenant on the 
 estate. 
 
 15801. Is that given as far as they want it for 
 their own holdings 1 — Yes. 
 
 15802. Are they given it to sell? — They are not, 
 but I am afraid they do sell it. In a large estate, 
 convenient to a town, it is impossible to keep them 
 in proper bounds. 
 
 15803. Do you try as much as you can to have 
 the turf cut away, so that it shall fall in with the 
 holding? — We do, my lord, and for that purpose 
 Lord Arran, about twenty-seven years ago, ajDpointed 
 a staff, of estate superintendents, whose duties were 
 to show eacli tenant the proper management of his 
 holding, and so on, and that system has been con- 
 tinued up to the present. 
 
 15804:. What sort of improvements are they that 
 tenants speak of when they speak of reclamation of 
 land ? — The breaking uji of mountain land, draining, 
 and fencing. 
 
 15805. And they rarely thorough-drain it? — Yes. 
 
 15806. You would not call making open cuts an 
 extensive improvement ? — No ; not an extensive im- 
 provement, but it is an improvement. 
 
 15807. The O'Conor Don. — Do the tenants 
 thorough-drain ? — Not a great deal, but they are doing 
 it for the last twenty-five or twenty-six years. 
 
 15808. With stones? — In some cases they do. 
 
 15809. How do they thorough-drain bog lands, if 
 they are not open drains, what sort of drains are they ? 
 — In some cases they will cut large turf sods, and 
 when the drain is wide enough it goes down and re- 
 mains there, which is considered a better system than 
 putting stones in. 
 
 15810. Chairman. — I have heard Lord Arran 
 gives assistance in other ways to his tenants in the 
 way of medical aid? — He does, my lord, and I have 
 particular directions from his lordship never to allow 
 any of his tenants to be without medical aid, as 
 far as it is possible to ^ive it, and every application 
 made to me has been attciiiled to. 
 
 15811. Incases of men being ill and goini;- into 
 workliouse hospitals, lias he made allowance to them? 
 — He pays for their maintenance, and I think he is 
 the only exceiifcion in the country. I represent one 
 division in the Ballina Union, and I have a know- 
 ledge of what is done in that respect. 
 
 15812. What unions does the property lie in? — 
 Ballina, Castlebar, and Killala, 
 
 15813. Then, in fact, he there pays towards the 
 poor r-ates? — Yes ; and very heavily too. He saves the 
 rates in that way. They never become a burden to 
 the rates of the union. 
 
 15814. To go Ijaek again to the reclamation, can 
 you tell us how much of late years has been reclaimed 
 by means of these additions to the holdings ? — I think 
 about 500 statute acres on the Mayo estate. 
 
 15815. The O'ConorDon. — During what period of 
 time?— Since 1854. 
 
 15816. Since the land was striped? — Since the land 
 was striped. 
 
 15817. Chairman. — And has any rent been added 
 in respect of the land reclaimed ? — Not one sixpence 
 to any of the old tenants. 
 
 15818. Was there free turbary before ? — They have 
 free turbary besides in every townland. Very few 
 tenants cut the turbary on their own holdings ; they 
 take advantage of what is kept for other tenants ia 
 his lordship's hands, that is not measured at all, 
 
 15819. Tenants at a distance? — Yes; there is a 
 large tract of this mountain land kept apart from the 
 tenants' holdings in which they cut their turf every 
 year rent free. 
 
 15820. What do you think is the general value of 
 this cut-away bog that they hold without an addition 
 of rent ? — It is generally valued at from 15s. to £1 an 
 acre. 
 
 15821. That is nearly as much a;s their rent?— 
 From Is. to 2s. 6c;?. an acre was the valuation put on 
 it by Mr. Gale in 1854. 
 
 15822. If that land is worth £1 an acre, I suppose 
 it is pretty nearly as much as the rent of the other 
 land ? — With very few exceptions — of course I don't 
 include land in the vicinity of a town — £1 2s. 6c?. is 
 the average of rent on his lordship's estate, in some 
 cases it is £1 5s. or £1 7s. Qd., but the quantity is 
 very small compared with what is let at 22s. 6d 
 
 15823. And this you still say is carried on under 
 these superintendents ? — It is. 
 
 15824. And do they give advice as to the systems 
 of drainage ? — Always. I am very sorry to say that 
 since the passing of the Land Act they ai-e not taking 
 instruction in the same manner in which they took it 
 before. 
 
 15825. We have been told in some places that the 
 Land Act gave an impetiis to tenants' improvements at 
 first, but that of late yeai-s it seems rather to have 
 checked their desire to improve ? — On Loixl Arran's 
 estate, in some cases, the tenants will not take instruc- 
 tions now from the estate superintendents, and we find 
 it very diflHcult to get them to do what they would do 
 before the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 15826. Do you think that arises from some oases 
 decided in the courts, that they think they are not 
 secure in their holdings ? — The only reason I can give 
 for this is that in the majority of small holdings, many 
 of them would be disposed to join their friends in 
 America, and only wanted an opportunity of being 
 served with notices to quit and get a claim for com- 
 pensation. They will do nothing but what they like 
 themselves. 
 
 1-')S27. The O'ConorDon. — And in the way they 
 like themselves ? — Yes. 
 
 15828. Have there been many changes in the 
 tenancies on Lord Arran's estate ? — Very few. In 
 ]\la\'o, I don't suppose there has been a dozen for the 
 last twenty years. 
 
 15820. No consolidation of farms? — No; except a 
 tenant left to go to America, when tJ; ■; adjoining 
 tenant got the holding. 
 
 1583U. Have there been many such cases? — Not 
 above a dozen. AVe have been obliged to do so 
 because the holdings are very small, out of 59Q tenants 
 on his lordship's estate there are 408 not paying £10 
 a year. 
 
 15831. Chairman. — Are there any large holdings! 
 — Very few. 
 
 158:J2. Are there any holdings on lease stills 
 There are. 
 
 15833. Any given of late years?— None given 
 lately, in fact the tenants on his lordship's estate did imt 
 care abovit takins; a lease. Lord Arran in some cases 
 preferred they would, but they did not care about it, 
 for in some cases the expense is high. 
 
 15834. Are there many old leases on the estates? — 
 I think thnre are only four agricultural leases in con- 
 nexion with his lordship's estates, one of which will 
 expire in next November. They are generally for 
 twenty-ouc yc:irs. 
 
 l."jS3:i. Ai'e tlicy held in their own hands by the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 517 
 
 tenants gouerally? — They, are, my lord. No under- 
 ' tenants. 
 
 15830. The O'CouoR Don. — "What do you mean by 
 saying the expenses are high ? — The chaorge from £12 
 to £li by the solicitor for preparing a lease. 
 
 15837. Do you mean to say the solicitor charges 
 from £12 to £14 for a lease for a small holding? — 
 Yes ; it does not matter whether it is small or large. 
 
 15838. Chairman. — Is that a solicitor's charge 1 — 
 It is. 
 
 15839. The O'Conor Don.— That would amount 
 to perhaps a couple of years' rent or more t — Except 
 in cases of £40 or £50 a year, and over that tenants 
 would never think of taliing a lease at all. 
 
 15840. Chaieman. — ^Why should there not be a 
 common fori)) of lease without the intervention of a 
 solicitor at •all'! — I don't know, except it would be 
 very hard if your solicitor had been acting for you for 
 years, and he found that sort of thing going on he 
 would not like it. 
 
 158+1. Or an arrange)nent to do it for moderate 
 fees? — I should say if a question turned up in the 
 courts when any clause of that lease would be put in 
 force, I understand it should be prepared by a solicitor, 
 there is no other individual except a professional man 
 can prepare a lease. ' 
 
 15842. What I mean is, prepared in common form 
 by a solicitor, and priated and applied in all cases, and 
 if there should be anything very special a solicitor might 
 be brought in ? — He would have to go over the whole 
 thing himself again, notwithstanding that they were 
 j)rinted. 
 
 15843. AU he would require would be the parti- 
 culars of the holdings and the measurements? — 
 Nothing else, my lord, nevertheless the charge would 
 be the same. 
 
 15844. The O'Conor Don. — And the result is he 
 gets no custom 1 — The tenants refuse to take the leases, 
 don't want them, especially since the Act of 1870. 
 
 15845. Chairjian. — Is there any extent of reclaim 
 able land on which there might be improvements on a 
 large scale ? — There is, my lord. 
 
 15846. Is that land that would be available now 
 for it or only when the tuif has been cut away ? — A 
 good deal of it is fit for reclamation at pi-esent, but 
 the larger quantity cannot be reclaimed until the turf ' 
 woidd be cut away. 
 
 15847. Do you speak of that in connexion with 
 tenants' holdings, or apart and separate fro)ii tenants' 
 holdings ? — Apart and separate from tenants' holdings 
 in his lord.ship's own hands, and I may add that over 
 that very large tract of mountain land the tenants 
 have the light of commonage for their cattle. 
 
 15848. At a very low rate? — Pay nothing, except 
 in a few cases where Mr. Gale, in 1854, valued 
 these mountains, where they were very good for graz- 
 ing purposes, and immediately in connexion with the 
 tenants' holdings. In other places where it is set 
 apart for turbary for the tenants they have the right 
 of grazing. 
 
 15849. But on these mountain lands where you say 
 the land is good? — The grazing is let specially to the 
 tenants. Perhaps one tenant would have a couple of 
 thousand acres of mountain grazing. 
 
 15850. They would resist very much giving that 
 up for the purpose of reclamation? — They never would 
 be able to reclaiju anything in connexion with that. 
 They know it pays them better to keep it as grazing, 
 they till a little portion along the banks of rivers to 
 gi-ow potatoes. 
 
 15851. But what I mean is that if -there was going 
 to be a large reclamation, there would be very great 
 difficulty in getting this land out of the hands of the 
 tenants who have tsie advantage of the grazing? — 
 There would my lord, we should give it to the tenants 
 thsjnselves. 
 
 15852. By measuring oflF parts and tenants having 
 assistance to reclaim 1 — Yes. . 
 
 15853. And you think that would be the best 
 
 prospect of improvement do you 1 — I believe it would Oct. 19. isac. 
 my lord. .^ r~~ 
 
 15854. Has there been much planting on the crean. 
 property? — ^Lord Arran has gone in extensively for 
 planting since he got possession of the estate about 
 thirty five years ago, particularly since he employed 
 
 the estate superintendents, nine or ten acres a year 
 has been planted by his lordship on very rough land, 
 mountain and bog. 
 
 15855. I suppose none of the large tenants plant ? 
 — Never. 
 
 15856. Or apply themselves to do so? — Never, 
 except a few trees perhaps planted in a garden for 
 shelter round the house. And in that way his lord- 
 ship has given a vast deal of employment to the tenants 
 who had small holdings, and could afibrd to devote 
 so)ne of their time to this reclamation before the trees 
 were put in, the drainage and fencing of these waste 
 lands. 
 
 15857. Do you think thattherehasbeena very proper 
 feeling between landlord and tenant up to late times? 
 — Well as far as getting them to make any improve- 
 ments or keeping their places in neat order, such as 
 limewasliing their houses a couple of times a year, and 
 keeping away their cattle and pigs from their dwelling- 
 houses which the sanitary systean obliges them to do 
 now. 
 
 15858. But I mean by good feeling between them 
 that there was no trouble between landlord and tenant 
 up to a late period ? — Not on Lord Arran's estate. 
 
 15859. If there is any complaint now, I don't say 
 there is, do you think that has arisen during the 
 bad times? — 'There are a few complaints now as to 
 rents only, since this agitation has got up in the 
 country ; up to that time Lord Arran and his tenants 
 were, and are still, on the very best terms, although 
 he had no residence in the country, and was obliged 
 to live away, still the entire management of the estate 
 was under his control for years, and he visited the 
 tenants every year until last year, when he became ill. 
 
 15860. Do you communicate with him about the 
 maiiagement of the estate? — Almost every day my 
 Lord. 
 
 15861. Mr. Jackson told us he communicated with 
 him about the Donegal property? — Donegal pro- 
 perty, there is a portion in Sligo, but it is all under 
 lease. 
 
 15862. Can you give us any information as to other 
 properties in the neighbourhood? — Nothing beyond 
 the answers I gave to the queries which were sub- 
 mitted, which embraced everything with reference 
 to the valuation and rents of the district in which I 
 reside. 
 
 15863. Or as to anything which strikes you as 
 requiring amendment iiithe Land Act? — I don't know 
 that there is anything except the fixing of what would 
 be considered a fair rent, that is the great tiling we 
 have to contend with now, I think if we had a fair rent 
 to start with mitters would be sfttlcd in the 
 count) y. 
 
 15864. That is of course the great difficulty, how 
 would you get over that diffictilty, from the expoiience- 
 you have had, what would you recommend ? — I think 
 we ought to have a revaluation of the entire property 
 in Ireland, and fix the rents afterwards. 
 
 15865. Do you think the tona]its are led to dissatis- 
 faction from the name of Government \al))atio]i given 
 to a va,luation which landlords do not consider to be a 
 fair criterion ? — I know in connexion with Lord Arran's 
 estate, the tenants some of whom are paying eighteen 
 or twenty, and in some cases twenty-five over the 
 Government valuation, are the very best tenants we 
 have on the estates, and persons who have paid the 
 last gale of May, 1880 ; whereas tenants vdio have 
 their lands under the Government valuation in the 
 same district owe some one and a half, and others two 
 years rent. 
 
 15806. How is it they are under the poor law valu- 
 ation when the estate was all valued at the same time I 
 
518 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oa. IS. 1880. 
 
 Mr. ,Tohn 
 Crean. 
 
 — That was by Mr. Gale, lie did not take the poor law 
 valuation into consideration. 
 
 15867. Hoy/ did they come to' be left below it? — 
 I don't know, unless perhaps the valuation in such cases 
 was considered to be too high. If the tenants would only 
 agree among themselves to pay the Government valua- 
 tion on Lord Arran's estate, I don't think he would be 
 much the loser by it. 
 
 1.j868. The O'Conor Don. — There must have been 
 a mistake either by Mr. Gale or by the Government 
 valuator ; and you think it must have been by the 
 Government valuator? — Yes. Mr. Gale went very 
 carefully over the estate, and put different prices on 
 the different qualities of land. 
 
 158C9. Chairman. — How would you arrive at this 
 fair rent ? — I don't know, my lord, except the Govern- 
 ment would interfere. 
 
 15870. Value again? — Yes, my lord, a fresh general 
 valuation. 1 am afraid if it is left to the landlord and 
 tenant to fix what would be considered a lair rent, 
 they would never agree, and it would be veiy difficult 
 to arrive at a conclusion, particularly on estates like 
 Lord Arvan's, where there are a number of small 
 tenants. 
 
 15871. The O'Con'or Don. — Were the rents well 
 paid la^t year on Lord Arran's estate 1 — They were 
 not. 
 
 15872. Did he give any reduction? — He gave 10 
 per cent., but the tenants did notavail themselves of it. 
 
 15873. Chairman. — Would you say, fairly, it was 
 
 very difficult for them?'— Very difficult. We got no 
 rents at all, I may say, except from leasehold tenants 
 
 15874. 'The O'Conor Don. — Do you think that was 
 due to the inability of the people to pay, or their un. 
 willingness ? — ^Tlieir unwillingness had a great deal to 
 say to it, I believe. 
 
 15875. Chairman. — Were the tenants generally 
 do you think, in debt to the traders of the njeighbom- 
 liood? — I believe they were. - . 
 
 15876. And very much pressed by them ? — I think 
 they were. And particularly since the Land Act was 
 passed they have been afforded facilities for getting 
 into debt now which they never had before. I know- 
 that traders forced people to take things they never 
 required when the times were prosperous. 
 
 15877. The O'Conor Don. — Have you commence^ 
 the collection of the autumn rents 1 — Yes ; and they 
 are paying better than they did before. 
 
 15878. Are you allowing any abatement this year! 
 — Lord Arran has consented to allow 10 per cent, to 
 those tenants who did not pay last year on their pay- 
 ing up the 1879 rent. 
 
 15879. Are many availing themselves of that!-; 
 I think they are. Between this and Christmas they 
 will all pay up. Lord Arran regretted very much 
 he was not in a position to be among his tenants often, 
 owing to having no family residence in the country. 
 The family residence is leased, and leased before his 
 lordshij) got the property into his own hands. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Mr. .Tames 
 Scott. 
 
 Mr. James Scott, Woodbine, examined. 
 
 15880. The O'Conor Don.— You are Sir Charles 
 Gore's agent ? — Yes. 
 
 15881. And what is the extent of the estate over 
 which you are agent? — About J10,000 ayear. I don't 
 know the total acreage. 
 
 15882. Chiefly in the hands of small tenants? — 
 Small and large tenants. 
 
 1588.3. Is there any right of sale permitted on that 
 estate ? — Yes ; Sir Charles does not stop a sale. 
 
 15884. Has that always been the custom on tlife 
 estate ? — Since I became agent it has. 
 
 15885. I forget if you stated how long you had 
 been agent? — I am about l-k years agent. 
 
 15886. Has that right of sale been taken advantage 
 of very much? — The tenant gets the right of sale on 
 condition that he pleases the landlord with the incom- 
 ing tenant. 
 
 15887. Is the sale restricted to a tenant on the 
 estate, or can lie sell to anyone ? — Yes ; if the land- 
 lord is satisfied with the incoming tenant — that he is 
 solvent and of good character. 
 
 15888. And there is no interference with the 
 amount of money given ? — No. 
 
 15889. And no inquii-y made as to it? — No. 
 
 15890. Have you known many instances of sales ? 
 — Only two ; but I am acquainted with other pro- 
 perties in the neighbourhood. 
 
 15891. And is there the same rule on these other 
 properties ? — Yes. 
 
 15892. In cases where sales have taken place, how 
 many years purchase was given? — On an average 
 seven years. 
 
 1.5893. Has there been any sale in the last year ? — 
 No. 
 
 15894. Do you think the recognition by landlords 
 of this right of sale is on the increase or decrease i — 
 I don't think it is either- — well, I think it is more on 
 the increase. 
 
 15S95. More on the increase since the passing of 
 the Land Act ? — I would not say. I think it is the 
 same. I don't think the Land Act made a change. 
 
 15896. Are there many leases on Sir Charles' 
 estate ? — There are not many-,; , about five per cent, or 
 so of his tenantry. " ,,-,-, 
 
 15897. Is the granting of leases increaBing or de- 
 creasing 1 — It is mot increasing since the passing of 
 the Land Act. They don't want leases— in fact, the 
 
 leases we give are to Scotchmen, and large tenants, 
 or people of that sort. 
 
 15898. More to the larger tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 15899. The smaller tenantry don't value a lease? — 
 They would not take it. 
 
 16900. Is there much expense attendant on the 
 drawing out of leases ? — Yes ; the leases we give ge- 
 nerally cost from £5 to £7. 
 
 15901. The legal expenses ? — Legal expenses. 
 
 15902. You always place them in the hands of a 
 solicitor ? — Yes. 
 
 15903. Every individual lease is handed over to a 
 solicitor to draw out ? — Yes ; and the tenant pays. , 
 
 15904. Don't you find the tenant has an objection 
 to that? — No ; it is always the custom. 
 
 15905. Do you think that has anything to do \vith 
 their disinclination to take the lease ? — No ; it is the 
 passing of the Land Act that has prevented them. 
 
 15,906. In your opinion is the condition of the 
 leaseholders superior to that of the tenants from year 
 to year ? — I think a tenancy from year to year is of 
 more advantage to a small tenant. I have known an 
 instance on a property of my own for a tenant to give 
 up his lease and become tenant from year to year. 
 
 15907. Since the passing of the Land Act? — Yes. 
 
 15908. And was there any alteration made in the 
 rent ? — No ; the same rent. 
 
 15909. What proportion does the tenement valua- 
 tion bear to the rent 1 — On Sir Charles Gore's pro- 
 perty it is from, one-third to one-fourth over the 
 Ordnance valuation. 
 
 15910. Do you think the Ordnance valuation is n 
 fair test of rent ? — I don't find it is. 
 
 15911. Do you find it is equal on the same to\Yr.- 
 land ? — No ; it is not equal all over the countiy. I 
 hold a farm myself; the valuation is £13, and I pay 
 £30 rent. T was selling my interest in all the farms 
 in this neighbourhood ; 1 had a twenty-one years 
 lease, and this one was valued at £420, and you see 
 my rent was more than double the Ordnance valuation. 
 
 15912. And what did you get for your interest?— 
 £420. 
 
 15913. And you think that would be much more 
 thiui you would,, get for .some farms on which the 
 valuation was higher. Much more. I do not thmk 
 the present valuation a .fair test. 
 
 15914. Has there been any alteration in the rents 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 519 
 
 in my time, 
 
 tipon- Sir Charles Gore's estate ? — Not 
 and, I thinfc,'not for years previous. 
 
 15915. There is no particular period at which rents 
 are changod ?^— No. t 
 
 15916; When a change of tenancy takes place, and 
 a sale is permitted, is there any rise ? — No. 
 
 15917. Have there been many changes of tenancy 
 from any cause'? — There has been scarcely any in my 
 time, and on the other properties there are very little. 
 
 15918. Have you had any evictions ? — Yes; on the 
 property of Miss Knox, I had an eviction for non- 
 payment of rent last year, but I let the tenants in 
 again. I gave them a reduction of twenty per cent., 
 and let them in as caretakers, and they are recovering 
 themselves. 
 
 15919. In no case have you put ' them out 
 altogether and taken the land up ?— In one case I 
 served a man with an ejectment, and he asked me to 
 give him a sum of money, and he woild go to America. 
 I did so ; he owed two years rent. 
 
 15920. Was that lately ?— Last April. 
 
 15921. What did you do with the land you took 
 up 1 — I laid it down in grass lands, and the landlord 
 has it still. In another case, on the same estate, the 
 tenant gave up the land. He said his family were in 
 America, and he was not able to keep it up. I gave 
 him a small holding of tliree aci-es, and have the farm 
 in the landlord's hands. 
 
 15922. Have you made much use of the power of 
 distress? — No; I never used it except when the 
 tenants came in and voluntarily give up their crops. 
 
 l") 0:2.3. Perhaps to save themselves from other 
 creditors ? — ^Yes ; in some cases where they sunk their 
 holdings. I serve notice on the parties who have a 
 claim against them to make an affidavit of the amount, 
 and if the creditors pay us the rent I don't mind. 
 
 15-924. Chairman. — Then you would allow the 
 creditors to take the holding ? — Yes ; I think it would 
 be only fair. 
 
 159l;5. The O'Coxor Don. — You can only stop a 
 year's rent t — Only a year's rent. 
 
 15920. With regard to improvements, are the im- 
 provements generally made by the landlord or the 
 tenants — There are very little improvements, and any 
 little improvements that are made are made by both 
 to a certain extent ; the improvements consisting of 
 building thatched houses ; the landlord gives timber 
 to roof the houses, and in some cases lime or stones, 
 and the teuaut will do the remainder. 
 
 15927. Has there been much improvement in the 
 way of reclaiming land? — Very little. Latterly, 
 within the last year or two, Sir Charles Gore spent 
 .£1,160 on three townlands, £ 180 on another town- 
 land, XJrOOon another townland, and £300 on another. 
 Those works are now nearly all done. 
 , 15928. V/as that in drainage? — Main drains, 
 and making roads. 
 
 15929. Has he put on any charge on the tenants ? 
 — He has not. 
 
 15930. Is that money borrowed from the Board of 
 Works ?— Yes. 
 
 15931. You don't thinkthe tenants themselves have 
 reclaimed much land 1^-Very little ; they might re- 
 claim a bit of cut-away bog, but it is in a very in- 
 different way. To reclaim land properly it wants to 
 be thoroughly drained, and then clayed and gravelled, 
 but they never do that. 
 
 15932. If the land that was reclaimed was let alone, 
 do you think it would go back to its original state 1 — 
 It would. Any bog not reclaimed properly will go 
 back to its original state. 
 
 15933. Is there much reclaimable land there? — 
 Yes, on Miss Knox's estate of Greenwood. She has. 
 6,000 acres of reclaimableland. 
 
 15934. Are you agent on many other estates? — 
 Three. 
 
 15935. What amount of reclaimable land is there ? 
 — Mr. Ormsby's property consists of seven townlands, 
 and on that there would be about 4,000 reclaimable 
 
 15936. Is that -in the occiipation of tenaiitsat pre- Ocf, i9. ass*, 
 sent? — Every bit of it, and for the last twenty-one Mi- Jamee ' 
 years it has been let at the ordnance valuation, and Sc'ott. 
 
 the tenants owe about two years rent now. They are 
 the poorest tenants I have to deal with. 
 
 15937. Are they small tenants? — No; some of 
 them pay £60 rent. 
 
 15938. And they have not paid the last two years 1 
 — Some of those tenants. 
 
 15939. To what do you ascribe their poverty ? I 
 
 ■ think it is really laziness. 
 
 15940. Chairman.— Do you think they cannot pay? 
 — I think because the rent was so cheap they did not 
 work as they ought, because there is another property 
 adjoining it where the rent is one and a half times the 
 valuation, and they never allowed one year's rent 
 to overtake the other — that is Miss Knox's. 
 
 15941. The O'ConoeDon. — And they have not re-* 
 claimed much of this first property you mentioned ? — 
 Noj not in my time ; I am agent four or five years. 
 There has been some land reclaimed on it which was 
 well reclaimed, but it was reclaimed by a good tenant 
 who held part of it. 
 
 15942. Has he continued in occupation? — No; 
 another man has it, and that man, although the highest 
 rented tenant on the estate, has his rent paid up and 
 is well off. You will see two tenants side by side pay- 
 ing the same rent, and one man will be well off and 
 the other will not. 
 
 15943. Chairman. — Would not that depend on the 
 size of their families and the age of each of their chil- 
 dren ?— It would to a great extent. , If they had a 
 grown up family to assist them on the farm and were 
 industrious, it would. 
 
 15944. You often find them saying when the chil- 
 dren grow up a little we will begin ? — That is generally 
 the case. I have a property in Galway, and I am 
 expending £1,000 there on reclamation and im- 
 provements, and I have thirteen or fourteen tenants 
 on it, and they all work and'earn there. I wish them 
 all to work and earn there. Their rent averages about 
 £4, but some of them when they come and work a 
 month and earn what will last them another month, 
 stop at home. If they hear of my going there 
 they will go and work closely. In other places I 
 have tenants very anxious to work. 
 
 15945. You mean 'work on their own holdings? — 
 Work that I am carrying out. 
 
 15916. Have you been in the habit of allowing ten- 
 ants to get an allowance of half the Grand Jury Cess 
 on new lettings? — No, in all cases we have adhered 
 to the old custom, because the rents were there, we 
 never changed the rents. 
 
 15947. But you never make an offer to the tenant 
 of adding a little to the rent and changing the systems 
 — No, never, we let it lie as it was. 
 
 15948. I see you are in favour of a new valuation ? 
 ■ — Yes. I believe that the present valuation is no 
 standard to go by at all, and I would be in favour of 
 a new valuation by competent parties, agriculturists, 
 if possible. 
 
 15949. Appointed by the Government ? — Appointed 
 by the Government. 
 
 15950. And would you suggest any other alteration 
 in the land laws ?^I would suggest free sale to the 
 tenants. 
 
 15951. How would you settle the question of rents? 
 — There are two ways which I would be in favour of. 
 One is by arbitration. I would fix the rent by valua- 
 tion first, I think the valuation ought to be the rent 
 and then, if there was a difference, I would have arbi- 
 tration. Or if the rent was fixed, and if the landlord 
 thought he ought to have more rent, and demanded 
 more rent from the tenant, I would give the 
 tenant the option of buying out the . place at a 
 valuation, or the landlord should pay the tenant at 
 the tenant's valuation if he did not like to pay the 
 rent. On the other hand, if the tenant thought he 
 
520 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 19, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Scott. 
 
 was too highly rented, I would let the landlord buy 
 out his interest at what he objected to pay. 
 
 15952. Have the rents been well paid within the 
 last year 1 — Oh, no, we have scarcely got any rents for 
 the last year. 
 
 15953. Did they make any reduction ?— They did. 
 On Sir Charles' property, last June twelve months, 
 before there was any agitation whatever. Sir Charles 
 instructed me to tell his tenants that if they wanted 
 meal or any assistance he would give it to them him- 
 self, and they would not pay for that until the follow- 
 ing spring, that was in June. After that we got these 
 works, we borrowed money and started these works 
 in the following September. Then Sir Charles gave 
 his tenants 15 per cent, reduction on the half-year's 
 rent then due, and the following half-year he gave 15 
 per cent, reduction to all agricultural holdings, small 
 holdings, and 10 per cent, to grazing farms. 
 
 15954. And were the rents paid on this reduction 1 
 — I got one half-year's rent on that reduction gene- 
 rally, but the tenants now owe the November rent 
 and the September rent of 1879, in fact they all owe 
 one and a half-year's rent. 
 
 15955. Have you commenced collecting the autumn 
 rent yet? — I have commenced only partially fi'om 
 large farmers, we are about commencing collecting 
 from the small tenants, and we have it under con- 
 sideration whether we will give a reduction or not. 
 On Miss Knox's property they owe a year and a-half s 
 rent, and all that clear up I will give 20 per cent, 
 reduction. 
 
 15956. Do you find a better inclination to pay? 
 — They are all able to pay, but I think they are 
 intimidated. I held a rent office yesterday and a 
 respectable farmer was afraid to come in and pay me 
 rent. He met me in the street and handed me a 
 cheque. I asked him why he did not come in, a,ud 
 he said he was afraid. 
 
 15957. Do you think there is intimidation going 
 on against the payment of rent t — I am quite sure 
 there is. On Miss Knox's property people went 
 round at night and warned them not to pay. That 
 was last spring, and then I got ejectments ovit and 
 they came in and paid the rents. 
 
 15958. Had you any diflBculty in sei'ving the eject- 
 ments? — Yes, my bailiff was threatened and I was 
 compelled to send my assistant in theofficetoseiwethem. 
 
 15959. "Have you had any e'xperience of tenants 
 buying their holdings? — No, there were none in our 
 part of the countr\'. 
 
 15960. Do you think the tenants on the estate 
 with which you are connected would be able, if their 
 holdings were offered for sale, to pay any portion of 
 the purchase money? — Tlie majoi'ity would not, some 
 would. 
 
 15961. Chaibmax. — I suppose you would not like 
 sales of holdings wliei;(- some would buy and some 
 would not ? — No, 1 would not. 
 
 15962. (Jnless it went ofi' in a large portion .alto- 
 i^'ethci-, vou would not like to have tenants lying 
 alongside owners? — No, I think sales of odd holdings 
 here and there would iiijui'e the country very much, 
 because a man that would |)urchase, if ho wanted to 
 drain, would not be allowed by the tenant next him. 
 
 15963. You find diflicultie.s with tenants them- 
 .selves? — Yes, 1' have to go in and insist on one neigh- 
 Viour allowing a drain to run through his holding from 
 •another's. 
 
 15964. The O'C'osOR Dox.— Have you found more 
 difficulty in that since the passing of the Land Act ? 
 — No, just about the same. 
 
 15965. Is there any other point you wish to speak 
 of ? — As to peasant proprietai-y, I believe that would 
 ruin the country comjili.'lcly. After the passing of 
 the Land Act it was an luiderstood thing that people 
 had an increased interest in tlicir land, and they got un- 
 limited credit at most fearful interest, and in many 
 cases I know the shopkeepers to take the intei'cst of 
 the holdings for the goods got and for tlie credit. If 
 there was a peasant proprietary the thing, would be a 
 
 great deal woi-se, because they would then have a further 
 increased interest, and then the gombeen men and 
 shopkeepers would buy up all these holdings and get 
 them into their hands, and there would be another 
 class of landlords. 
 
 15966. Chairman. — But then they would notbeal- 
 lowed to be landlords, because there would be conditions 
 against subletting ? — But, don't you see if a tenant 
 gets credit and gives his holding as security for the 
 credit, this man would' come down upon him and sell 
 out his holding and buy it himself 
 
 15967. But the conditions against subletting wSuld 
 exist until the purchase-money was paid up alto- 
 gether ? — But that would not be subletting, it would 
 be selling. 
 
 15968. But he would not be a landlord, he would 
 be only an occupier until the debt to the Govern- 
 ment was paid off? — I talk of debt to his neighbours 
 
 15969. The O'Conor Don.— Don't you think it 
 would be the interest of the shopkeepers or gombeen 
 man, under .such circumstances, to sell that holding to 
 another small occupier who had laid by some means 
 and would give a large price for it ? — Among shop- 
 keepers there is always an inclination to be dabbliag 
 in land, and I find their tendency is to go out into the 
 country and buy land and re-let it at an increased rent. 
 
 15970. Supposing they were not permitted tore-let 
 it, but sell it or hold it themselves, would not the in- 
 clination be to sell it again ? — Yes, but there would 
 be a great deal of trickery, and the tenant would be 
 a loser. 
 
 15971. The actual tenant would be a loser, bat in 
 his place would there not more probably be a more 
 solvent man ? — Yes, but would there be anything to 
 prevent a man adding holding to holding, and buying 
 a lot up. 
 
 15972. Then you would be against consolidation of 
 holdings ? — No ; the small tenants on small holdings 
 they are too small to support them. 
 
 15973. Then would it not bean advantage if this 
 system of peasant proprietary led to consolidation? 
 — It would if it was done properly. 
 
 Lt974. a consolid-ation by natural means, the out- 
 going peasant proprietor selling his interest? — Yes, 
 but then don't you see my idea is that an industrious 
 man, a hard-working man, or a man that would get 
 jnoney from gombeen men, would increase holding 
 by holding until he had got a little estate, and you 
 would replace good landlords by bad ones. 
 
 15975. That would be the case if he was permitted 
 to subdivide, but if the condition of a peasant holding 
 was that it shoiild not be sublet, that the owner 
 should be the occupier, although having a right to 
 sell it, would not that difficulty be got over? — I 
 scarcely understand. 
 
 15976. Suppose there is a townland and all the 
 tenants oir it are peasant proprietors, with the con- 
 dition that they should not sublet ? — But what is to 
 prevent it being sold. 
 
 15977. Nothing, but the same condition would 
 apply to the piirchaser that he could not re-let it, he 
 would sell it again. Would not that meet the difficulty 1 
 — No, because a good many people would like to stock 
 the land, as cattle pays very well. 
 
 15978. Then your object is, it would lead to agreat 
 consolidation of farms ? — Yes ; in the hands of bad 
 landlords. 
 
 15979. Chairman. — You spoke of the employment 
 you weie giving on a property of your own, I think' 
 —Yes. 
 
 15980. Where is that?— Near MoycuUen, county 
 Gal way. 
 
 15981. What description of improvements? — It is 
 a mountain property. I am a great advocate for 
 reclamation, and when I purchased this property 
 three years ago I took in 75a., and I am thorough- 
 draining and improving, and planting trees. I have 
 600 in one townland, which I am going over; 
 but I fenced in 75a. There is a house built 
 on it and a farmyard, and I am thorough- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 521 
 
 draining, claying and planting these seventy-five 
 acres. 
 
 15982. With the intention of continuing reclama- 
 tion with a view of making a farm 1 — Yes. 
 
 15983. With a view of a residence? — Yes, my 
 lord. 
 
 159S4. Do you think that there is much in this 
 country that might be reclaimed in that -way? — 
 Tliere are millions of acres. 
 
 15985. The O'Coxor Don. — Capable of reclamation'? 
 — Capable of reclamation. I believe the mountain 
 land I am acquainted with in Erris, the Island of Aoliill 
 and Connemara — -I suppose the value of them at pre- 
 sent for grazing is fourpenoe or sixpence an acre — I 
 believe they can be made worth ten shillings an acre. 
 
 15986. Chairman. — That would be reclamation on a 
 f'leat scale ? — Yes, I believe it would be one of the 
 greatest boons to Ireland, if the Government had some 
 sj'steui of reclamation. 
 
 169S7. The O'Conok Don. — Do yon think they can 
 be made worth ten shillings an acre at an expenditure 
 that would not exceed that ? — ^At an expenditure of 
 about £10 an acre. 
 
 15988. Chairman. — Is that land at present held 
 by tenants 1 — There is a great deal of it in the 
 landlords' hands. The landlords, a good many of them, 
 hold the mountain, and allow the tenants to graze 
 cattle on them at a nominal sum, merely to give them 
 a title. There is a great deal of mountain in the ten- 
 ants' liands on Mr. Ormsby's property. 
 
 15989. Where it is in the tenants' hands, they would 
 be unwilling to lose their mountain grazing ] — Very 
 unwilling, unless they were allowed to reclaim. Mr. 
 Ormsby has two mountain townlands and thp tenants 
 came to me to get a loan of some of the money to do re- 
 claiming, but the landlord was away on the continent 
 and I was too late to get his signature. The tenants 
 were quite willing to take the money if they got 
 it. 
 
 15990. Did you ever hear of reclamation by the 
 Irish Waste Lands Company? — I don't remember, 
 except the old arterial drainage. 
 
 15991. Was that done by a company ? — No, by the 
 Government direct. I never heard of it in the west 
 of Ireland. 
 
 15992. The O'Conor Don. — You are not acquainted 
 with that estate not far from Ballina, in the county 
 Sligo ?— Who has it. 
 
 15993. It belonged to this Company ? — I don't re- 
 member. There was a lot of slob lands I know taken 
 in there near Sligo by Mr. Olpherts, Mr. Verschoyle 
 is the proprietor at present. 
 
 15994. Chairman. — I saw in a book that at that 
 time there was agentleman who had a great deal of waste 
 land that he reclaimed, employing the peojple to do 
 about one or two acres each f — What was the gentle- 
 man's name 1 
 
 15995. Mr. Keogh, Mount Jerome, near Dublin. 
 That was in the county Sligo. And then having re- 
 claimed these small bits, he fenced off portions of 
 these waste lands, and employed them at a labour rent, 
 and that was to continue for a certain number of years. 
 
 ■ I inquired when we were at Sligo, but I could not 
 tind anyone knew anything about it, do you think 
 that system can be adopted by landlords moving ten- 
 ants from where they are not holding on iDrofitable 
 land, and putting them on reclaimable land ? — What 
 I mean to do myself at that place in Galway. That 
 maintains the tenants, but I am paying one wages 
 
 nine shillings a week in summer, and seven shillings O"^*- ''> i^""- 
 a week in winter, I intend when I am done to ,, j „, 
 apjjortion out a portion of land for eacli of them, gcott. 
 reclaim it and build a thatched house, and according 
 to their improvements I will give them land, reclaim 
 it first and put a fair value on it. 
 
 15996. That is something of the same system, 
 these people are employed by you now, and they look 
 forward to becoming farmers afterwards 1 — Yes, I 
 intend to apportion out as much land as I think their 
 family can work, and supposing all landlords did the 
 same, I think it would be a good thing for Ireland. 
 
 15997. Giving employment to those who cannot 
 actually live on their holding ? — Yes. 
 
 15998. In this country, as to the labouring popu- 
 lation, I suppose the farmers are two small for them 
 to have laboui'ers under them'? — The generality of 
 farmers are, but there is a middle class of farmers who 
 may hold forty or fifty acres, they employ labourers. 
 
 15999. And have they them on their own farms'? — 
 Occasionally, they Jiave one or two. 
 
 16000. Givijig them a garden? — A garden and 
 cottage. 
 
 16001. And that forms part of the wages ? — Yes, 
 but the generality of the farmers are not able to em- 
 ploy labourers. 
 
 1G002. And have not the size farms to require them? 
 — They have not the size farms, in fact my feeling is 
 that a great many of those small tenants ought to be 
 labourers. 
 
 16Q03. They have rather too much land to be 
 labourers ? — They ought to be labourers, they go to 
 England every year, and the question is how to employ 
 them in the spare time they have at home. 
 
 1G004. To employ them at home instead of going 
 over to look for work in England? — Yes, and I 
 propose to employ them on the reclamation of waste 
 land. 
 
 16005. That might, be done by advance from the 
 Government? — It is the only way, the majority of 
 landloi'ds are too poor, there are so many charges on 
 their property. Sir Charles Gore spends a great deal 
 of money in labour, but then he is a rich man. 
 
 16006. Can you say at all the amount he si^ends on 
 improvements ? — B[e has spent for the last two years 
 those sums I have named — £ 1 , 1 6 in one place, and £400, 
 £480, and £300. He spent these four sums within 
 the last two years, they are all coming to a close now, 
 and the people were all very well. pleased to get the 
 work, and took advantage of it. For Miss Knox's 
 property I borrowed £820, I have about £300 of that 
 expended, and I spoke to them the other day about 
 paying the rent, I ofiered them 20 per cent, reduction. 
 They said they were quite willing to pay the rent if 
 the work was continued. Of course I will continue 
 the work, because I will expend the £800. 
 
 16007. In the cases of borrowing money that has 
 been going on, has there been or has it been proposed 
 to charge the tenants interest ? — No, my lord, nothing 
 I have had to do with. You see we go to the waste 
 lands which are a great deal in onr own hands, and 
 then we make main drains for the use of the tenants. 
 We try to encourage them to drain the lands into 
 these main drains. 
 
 16008. The O'Conor Don.— What Mr. Ormsby are 
 you agent for? — Mr. John Ormsby of Gortnor Abbey, 
 that is his residence in this country, but he lives 
 generally in London, he is a barrister. 
 
 Witness withdrew. 
 
 Mr. John Craven examined. 
 
 16009. Chairman. — You are atenant of Sir Charles 
 Gore's ? — I have a grazing farm fromhim, I live under 
 Captain Kirkwood, that is the residence where I live. 
 
 16010. And how much land do you hold there? — 
 Twenty -six acres where I live. I 
 farms under Sir Charles Gore. 
 
 hold two grazing 
 
 16011. What is the acreage of those? — Well it is 
 presently £1 17s. Gd. an acre. 
 
 16012. And how many acres are the farms? — In 
 the grazing farms there is fifteen in one, and twenty- 
 four in the other. 
 
 16013. That is all you hold , there, twenty acres 
 
 3X 
 
 Mr. John 
 Craven. 
 
IPJSH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 19, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Craven. 
 
 fifteen acres and Wenty-four acres % — Yes, tliat is what 
 I liold. 
 
 16014. Well, have yon anything yon would like to 
 tell us about any of those holdings ■? — The only com- 
 plaint we have is that the rent is too high, sir. 
 
 16015. What is the rent 1 — The rent where I live is 
 £48 15s. for the twenty-six acres, it is £1 17s. &d. an 
 aci-e. 
 
 16016. That is where the house is 1 — Yes. 
 
 160 17. Who built the house? — Well it was an old 
 house when I came there thirty years ago, and I had 
 to take and roof every bit of it, and build some of it. 
 The walls were very indifferent, built with stuff you 
 could not vely on, and I had to timber it all with new 
 planks out of a sawmill, and at the time I took the 
 land it was only £1 an acre. 
 
 16018. What was the date of that? — Somewhere 
 >,bout 1849. 
 
 16019. Was that a leaseholding ? — It was promised 
 a lease, but the old Captain was addicted to liquor, and 
 got out of his mind ; the lease had not been perfected 
 when he got out of his mind and went to Dublin, and 
 there was no one to apply to to have thelease perfected, 
 and when the heir came in I had no lease, and he 
 purposed to raise the land, so it was raised to 
 £\ lis. Qd. 
 
 16020. The 0'CoNORDoN.--Whenwasit raised?— 
 About seven years after that, it was then, for the 
 safety of the heir, put in the hands of Chancery. 
 
 16021. Chairman. — Was it raised by the receiver? 
 — It was Chancery's agent received. 
 
 16022. Did he raise the rent? — No, but as soon as 
 the heir came of age he received it out of Chancery's 
 hands, and came to live in the place, and raised the 
 rent to £1 17s. 6d. It remained so since. The 
 Ordnance valuation for the twenty-six aci'es is £35 15s., 
 and I would consider that it was in that case a very 
 fair value, and it is so considered by the town that the 
 Ordnance value of that part of the land was very fair. 
 
 1G023. Do you think the Government valuation is 
 a uniform test of value ?- -1 think it is there certainly, 
 but I hear them say — I have not known it — that it 
 is not equal in other jilaces. It might occur from 
 want of judgment of the persons going on the land 
 not knowing the. nature of it, but I know that there 
 never was a valuator for any pur[)ose coming on the 
 land, but valued this land high, and that is why that 
 we believe that the Government valuation has been a 
 fair one, it came between the first rent that was agreed 
 for, and the last. The last was £48 15s., the first was 
 £26. 
 
 16024. Wliat was the date when this change took 
 place of rent? — I should think, sir, about 1850. 
 
 16025. And no change since that ? — No change 
 since that. 
 
 16026. How much did you lay out, do you remem- 
 ber, on the house ? — Oh, I cannot remember. 
 
 16027. The O'Conoe Don.— Is it a slated house ?— 
 No, sir, it is thatched. Some ofiices that I built my- 
 self are slated, but I had to unroof the kind of roof 
 that was on them all, and put on a new roof. 
 
 16028. Chairman. — Was that improvement made 
 before the change of rent or after 1 — It was made before 
 and after, sir. 
 
 16029. You were just about it at the time the 
 change of rent was made ? — Yes. 
 
 16030. Did you make any other improvements be- 
 fore or after ? — Yes ; anywhere that part of the land 
 
 wanted to be drained, I drained it myself. About 
 fifteen years ago I had a very good family — three or 
 four boys — and we wrought well ourselves at it • -we 
 did not neglect it ; we both fenced and drained and 
 we never asked him for anything ; his ilieans is ojjy 
 small ; his income is only about £500 or £600 a year 
 A very nice man, indeed ; I am sure, if he had the 
 means, he would be a good man ; but, until of late he 
 had not that same, for his mother had £200 a year on 
 the property ; she died about twelve months ago and 
 now he is something better. He behaved very kindly 
 last season ; he gave 4s. to the pound reduction, and 
 6s. to widows ; there could not be a nicer man for lis 
 means — for his small income. 
 
 16031. The O'Conor Don.— Where does he hve? 
 — In the Island of Bartra, near Killala. 
 
 16032. Do you remember what the valuation of 
 your buildings are ? — Indeed, I do not. 
 
 16033. Do you complain of the rent upon Sir 
 Charles' estate being too high ? — Well, I think it is 
 rather too high. 
 
 16034. When did you take these farms? — We have 
 them about six or seven years. 
 
 16035. Did you pay anything going into them as 
 a fine ? — No ; they are only taken from year to year. 
 
 16036. Have you a written agreement ? — There is 
 every year a proposal drawn up and signed; tkej 
 would not give a tenure of them. 
 
 16037. And it is let at a difi'erent rent?— 2\^o; 
 there has not been much change. One of the farms 
 was left to Mr. Perry, by his father-in-law, and Sir 
 Arthur himself became my landloi-d for it ; but I had 
 from him the other twenty-four acres of the Castle, 
 at Killala, these seven years ; there ^vas some drainage 
 made there by Mm, and the first year wo got this in- 
 ferior part at £1 an acre, and it was raised to 30s. 
 the next year to compensate him for his drainage. 
 
 16038. AVhat is the valuation of that as compared 
 with the rent ? — I cannot tell you, because tliLs was a 
 property he purchased lately ; there are no tenants on 
 it. 
 
 16039. You take the grazing of these farms each 
 year ? — Yes. If he likes the tenant, 'he does not alter 
 him ; he gives it to him the next year again ; but, if 
 he lays out any money on it, he wishes to get it hck, 
 and the grazing is very high ; but I just believe it is 
 partly our own fault, a good deal of it ; we arc too 
 apt to outbid each other ; of coursej the landlord is 
 williug to take all he can get. 
 
 16040. Were proposals taken for this every year? 
 — Yf ell yes, sir ; he takes proposals, but he makes a. 
 choice, then, of the tenant himself. 
 
 16041 I suppose you would not take this land every 
 year, if you did not think it was worth it to you?— I 
 believe some years we don't near make the rent of it ; 
 but it so happens that, if we have stock durmg the 
 winter, they don't be in a way for sale at the first fairs, 
 and we are obliged to go into the work, back again, 
 for another season. It often turns out so, and v.-hen 
 a man has nothing but the land to depend on— no 
 other income — we must endeavour some way to make 
 something. A man tries whether he can or not; 
 sometimes he may gain, and sometimes he loses 
 heavily. In the last season we never made 10s. an 
 acre of the land that Ave pay from £2 to 50s. for i 
 but then it was a season in itself. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Messrs. James Messrs. Jajies Tunny, PATRICK O'BRIEN, Anthony Clarke, T)enis Dupyr, and Eev. Me. O'Malley, P-P- 
 
 Tunny, 
 
 Mr. James Tunny, examined. 
 
 ratriL-k 
 O'Drien, 
 .\iitliony 
 Claike, Denis 
 DiifTv, and 
 ];i--v."Mr. 
 O'Malley, p.p. 
 
 16042. Chairman ^Where do you live ?— Castle- 
 bar, sir. 
 
 16043. Are you a shopkeeperinthe town ? — Yes,sir. 
 
 16044. And do you hold any land? — Yes, sir. 
 
 16045. How much? — About ten or twelve acres, 
 very bad land. 
 
 1 6046. What sort of land is it ?- -Some of it is clay 
 land, moory land, wild bog. 
 
 16047. What rent?— £5 14s. is my valuation, and 
 my rent is £11 10s. 
 
 16048. Who do you hold under ?— Under Henry 
 Joynt. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 523 
 
 16049. Does he live in this county ?— He does, he 
 lives in Eallina. 
 
 16050. The O'Conoe Don. — Is he a middleman 1 
 
 Noj he is not, he is the minor. 
 
 16051. Chairman. — Do you hold on lease? — No; 
 tenant from year to year. 
 
 16052. Is it a property where a sale of the interest 
 is allowed ? — No, it is not, except in special cases. 
 
 16053. Did you come into it by such an arrange- 
 ment ? — I did ; by special consent of the landlord I 
 purchased out the previous tenant's interest. 
 
 16054. "Who was it you purchased out ? — Margaret 
 Pi,uane. 
 
 16055. Had Mrs. Ruane built the house on the 
 place? — ^Yes, sir. 
 
 16056. A dwellinghouse ? — There are two dwelling- 
 houses and a small house that was afterwards used as 
 a dwellinghouse. 
 
 16057. Are the two dwellinghouses there now? — 
 Yes. 
 
 16058. Then they hold under you? — No, sir; the 
 houses are unoccupied presently. 
 
 16059. What was the rent that was paid ? — £11 
 10s. It had been raised three times within the last 
 twenty years. 
 
 16060. But then you purchased it at the rent you 
 are paying now ?— Yes, at the present rent. I was 
 dragged into it. They owed me some money, and 
 requested me for God's sake to take it from them and 
 give them a few pounds for the interest, if the land- 
 lord took me as tenant. I gave them £8, and forgave 
 them £20 they owed me : and I paid £22 3s. id. as 
 arrears. 
 
 16061. TheO'CoNOR Don. — Besides forgivingthem 
 what was due to yourself ? — Yes ; and giving them 
 £8 10s. 
 
 160C2. Chairman. — That you say was by the land- 
 lord's consent ? —Yes ; and uot withstanding that the 
 agent, Francis O'Donnell, attempted to raise the rent. 
 
 16063. Is he agent noAv? — He is. And also if I 
 cut turf on the land I must pay £1 5s. for turf, 
 although I am rated, and pay poor rates and taxes for 
 that land. 
 
 16064. Was this charge for the turf paid by the 
 former tenant 1 — It was. 
 
 16065. All the payments are the same then ? — Yes ; 
 but he tried to alter it when I became tenant. 
 
 16066. — What was the date of this purchase?^ 
 23rd of Februry, 1877, or 1878, I don't know which. 
 
 16067. Are others paying in the same way for turf 
 on that place ? — Yes ; and even worse, higher. 
 
 16068. At the rate of £5 an acre, do you say? — 
 Yes, for bog. 
 
 16069. The O'Conor Don. — Is it near the town ?— • 
 No ; seven miles from the town. 
 
 16070. Chairman. — Have you heard anything said 
 a.mong the tenants about buying cattle from the land- 
 lord ? — I know one case where he was at a fair and 
 offered a poor man so much for a little bullock. The 
 man said, " I will not, it is worth so much." " Well," 
 said he, "if Tunny," meaning me, "offered you that 
 for it you would give it to him." The man got afraid 
 on the spot and did not know what he would do. He 
 might raise the rent on liirii next day. 
 
 16071. Did he say he would?— No ; but from re- 
 marks he made the man was afraid he would. 
 
 16072. Do you think he sold the bullock too cheap, 
 for fear of the rent being raised ? — Yes ; I do. 
 
 16073. But he should give notice of a rise of rent ? 
 — Yes ; but how could a i)Oor man go to the expense 
 of defending it I know a tenant that was treated 
 badly for the election of a guardian. The position he 
 is in presently is injurious to the tenants for the 
 threats he holds out to them. 
 
 Oct. 15, 18S0. 
 
 Messrs. James 
 Tunny, 
 Patrick 
 O'Brien, 
 
 16074. The short of what you say is that you have 
 no confidence in the agent ? — Not at all. I have no 
 confidence in the agent. He takes too much liberty 
 in trampling on poor tenants. 
 
 16075. Has the rent been raised in the case of 
 other tenants on the property? — None of the reiits Antliony 
 have been raised lately, except the attempt to raise nur-v'''amr'''' 
 on me about July, 1877. Rev'.Vilr. 
 
 16076. Did he give you notice of a rise? — Yes, he 0'MaUey,p.p. 
 told me I should pay more. I told him I would not. 
 
 He insisted on it to the last. I told him that he 
 should eject me first, and I would sue for compensa- 
 tion and leave it to him altogether. I have also to 
 state I called to see him to-day, and asked him what 
 abatement was he giving. He said, " I will give 5s. 
 off' one half-year's rent, and 2s. 6d. off another, pro- 
 vided you have it all paid up to November." " I 
 cannot afford to pay that," I said, " I will give you 
 Griffith's valuation, or a little under; or I will give 
 you up the land, and give me what it cost me." He 
 said it wovild not suit him. I also knew a case at 
 the time the Midland Railway was making, the same 
 landlord, Joynt, got the money the poor tenant was 
 entitled to. Where the railway ran through their 
 land and took away two or three acres they got 
 nothing for it, and they are still paying the same 
 rent. The poor people did not know what to do; 
 when they go to his office he would "bate" them and 
 kick them out. The agent came in there in our 
 presence when we were giving an abstract of our 
 evidence, and he came in and told these men that he 
 would flatly contradict what we said. With regard to 
 the statement that he attempted to get the cattle 
 from this man, the man told me himself, that is 
 my authority, and I believe the man was telling the 
 truth. I believe they are as truthful as he is. He 
 is going wild there abroad looking into the tenants' 
 faces, and a gentleman outside was obliged to 
 remove him from the way he was going on, telling us 
 we were telling lies. I also know on the same estate 
 where a tenant is rated for bog rates and ta.YCS he 
 will bring in other people and charge them £5 an 
 acre for the bog, and make no reduction from the 
 proper tenant. 
 
 16077. The O'Conor Don.— What is the tenant 
 paying for it ? — It is included in his holding, and 
 he must pay £5 an acre for it as well as the stranger. 
 
 16078. But he would not be jjaying £5 au acre for 
 a bog, and portion of it be given over to somebody 
 else? — Certainly he would. Any stranger will come 
 in and cut a bank of turf. 
 
 16079. Yes, but he would not charge two men 
 for the same portion of bog ? — No, I don't want to 
 convey that. 
 
 16080. Chairman.— When bog is taken off no de- 
 duction is made for that part of the. bog taken off?^ 
 No. He lets it as conacre every Spring, and a man 
 will pay £5 an acre for that bog. We consider it is 
 too bad, paying rates and taxes for land, and another , 
 stranger will come in and cut that bog, although it is 
 included in your holding. 
 
 16081. How much of yours is cut-away bog? — 
 There is none of it on mine. I am deteimined, if he 
 does not take the land from me, to let it next year. 
 
 16082. You said fairly you would give up the land 
 if he did not makeyou a reduction 1. — Yes, if he docs not 
 give it to me at Griffith's valuation, or less, I cannot 
 afford to pay the rent. I can bring parties in to- 
 minTow who can prove how often it was raised for 
 the la.st twenty years. The rent was thirty per cent, 
 under Griffith's valuation when this landlord got it, 
 and it has been raised from time to time since. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
524 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Ca/. 19, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Beien, CorrolDeg, examined. 
 
 16083. Chairman. — You are on Sir Roger Palmer's 
 
 Messrs. James 
 
 Patrick estate ?— I live with my father on Sir Roger's pro- 
 
 O'Brien, perty. 
 
 Anthony 16084. What is the rent you pay ?— £11 15s. 
 
 16085. And ho-w many acres'? — Well, we are not 
 
 Clarke, Denis 
 
 Eev. Mr. Sure how many. I think it may be between nine and 
 
 O'JIalley, p.p. ten acres. 
 
 16086. Has there been a general rise of rents on 
 several occasions on the property ? — There have been 
 rises on three different occasions. 
 
 16087. During what space of time? — It is about 
 twenty .years. 
 
 16088. What rise did you have ?— The land has 
 been striped, sir, and I have not near the same com- 
 plement of land now that we had at that time. We 
 were paying £13 odd before the land was striped, and 
 now we are paying £11 15s. for about half the com- 
 plement of land. 
 
 16089. Was there anything done to improve the 
 land before you got it ? — Nothing whatsoever, except 
 what improvements we done ourselves on it. We 
 have been improving it since ever we got it into pos- 
 session. 
 
 16090. Do you know the rents where this striping 
 took place, the rises that were made? — I know the 
 rents previous to the lease, but not exactly before the 
 leasing. It was £90 odd. 
 
 16091. Was it held on lease then? — The lease ex- 
 pired a good deal before that. 
 
 16092. And was £90 the rent it was held at?— 
 £90 odd. 
 
 16093. But at the time of the lease was that the 
 rent then, £90? — Yes, sir. 
 
 16094. And that continued for some time after- 
 wards ? — It did. 
 
 16095. And what was it raised to? — It was raised 
 about £1 a man on every tenant. 
 
 16095. Was it raised to £133, odd? — It was, that 
 was the last rise, that is the present rent. 
 
 16097. That was after the striping was it? — It 
 was. 
 
 16098. Were there fines paid by the tenants? — 
 There were several fines, and if they were not paid 
 immediately they were doubled. If they delayed one 
 day the worthy agent would not except the fine, the 
 fine was doubled. 
 
 16099. Were those fines for breaches of estate rules ? 
 — They were rules made by the agent, we were not 
 aware of them. 
 
 16100. They were not given out? — No. 
 
 16101. The O'CoNOE Don. — What was the amount 
 of the fines ? — From 5s. up to £5. 
 
 16102. Chairman. — Was there a fine for not having 
 the houses whitewashed? — There was different fines 
 for that, you might be fined 5s. while a man was 
 whitewashing on the house, and if he hadn't it done 
 when the bailiff and agent came round he would fine 
 him, and was fined. 
 
 16103. Was Edward Gibbons fined? — He was, and 
 him completing the work, he had not the brush out 
 of his hand, he was on the top of the house completing 
 it, and the agent comes round, "Now" said he "I 
 have you taken, you have not it completed." 
 
 16104. The O'Conor Don.— When was that?— 
 Within the last ten years, I cannot tell you the year. 
 
 16105. Is it long ago or lately ? — Somewhere within 
 ten years, say eight or nine years. 
 
 16106. Is it since the passing of the Land Act?— I 
 am not sure. 
 
 16107. Chairman. — Is there a fine for digging 
 more turf than is allowed ? — There was, sir. I know 
 my father to be fined £1 for sellina; a donkey load ' 
 of turf. 
 
 16108. That is beyond what he was allowed for his 
 own holding ?— No, sir, he had some private business 
 to go to town, he had carpenters working in the house, 
 and he said, sooner than he would take the beast 
 
 empty into town he would take a load of turf, half a 
 cwt., and he was fined £1 for that. 
 
 16109. I suppose you think it reasonable there 
 should be rules as to cutting turf, would you not 1—1 
 cannot say. 
 
 16110. That there should be some rules to prevent 
 them taking more than their .own share ? — There was 
 no rule at all when this turf was given to them. They 
 were told no rules whatsoever. The agent formed 
 these rules, and they knew nothing about them. 
 
 16111. The O'CoNOR Don.— Did they make no 
 objection to pay the fines ? — If they made an objection 
 they got a process of ejectment next week, and sooner 
 than scatter their little family they would not object. 
 
 16112. Chairman. — Have these complaints been 
 brought before Sir Roger ? — We have written several 
 letters to him, but he would not recognize our writing, 
 his agent has written contradicting ours, and I suppose 
 he accepted his and threw the rest aside. 
 
 16113. The O'Conor Don.— Who is the agent t- 
 Francis O'Donnell of this town. 
 
 16114. Chairman. — Is he a lawyer? — He is not a 
 lawyer, your honour, a land agent. 
 
 16115. The O'CoNOR Don. — He is the same gentle- 
 man alluded to by the previous witness ? — Yes. 
 
 16116. Chairman. — Are there other rules as to 
 reiuiring work from people ? — Yes, and if the tenants 
 refused to work on some of his farms he would say 
 nothiiig to them bu.t lay any fine he liked on them. 
 If they looked crooked at him he would fine them. 
 Even for trespassing on his grass passing up to his 
 oflice he fined me. 
 
 16117. The O'Conor Don. — And are those fines 
 carried on up to the present time ? — People began to 
 get a little enlightened and see the landlord was not 
 deriving the benefit of these fines, that they were 
 going into the agent's pocket, and they would not 
 pay any more. They were hardly able to pay the 
 rent. 
 
 16118. When have these fines ceased?— The last 
 five or six years, it may be longer. 
 
 16119. This paper 
 O'Brien, Peter Kerby, Thomas Flaherty, James 
 Staunton," Pat Walsh, Pat O'Brien, Michael Cusaok, 
 John Gibbon, Pat Flaherty, Thomas Harty, and 
 Edward Gibbon ; and you speak for them as well as 
 yourself? — I say the facts are true, and they have 
 stated their grievances to me a thousand times. 
 
 16120. Do you know do these rules ran through 
 the property generally, or only in this part? — lam 
 sure they don't run through the property generally. 
 This agent has a grudge against the tenants near his 
 own farm. I know an old man that came to proiier 
 liim his rent, he had four and a half mUes to travel 
 there, nine miles of a walk, and he said, " Gro baok 
 again, you would not save the hay on my farm. 
 The old man, for fear of being ejected, sent his rent a 
 second time, and he would not accept it, and then he 
 sent it a third time. 
 
 16121. What was his name?— John Phapin, he 
 lost his finger saving his hay, and worked at l^a- ^ 
 day, that is the money ; they are worse than black 
 slaves. 
 
 1612^. Do you mean to say he compels them to 
 work at lid. a day ? — He did, your honour. 
 
 16123. He set them to save the hay at so much an 
 acre t—Rev. Mr. 0' Molly — It is generally about Ss. 
 or 6s. an acre, and they lose so much time saving the 
 hay it does not come to l\d. an acre. 
 
 16124. Chairman.— Is that hay for himselfl— 
 O'Brien — It is the agent's hay, his own property. 
 
 16125. Is it at Carrowley you live? — Yes sir. 
 
 16126. Is it near Castlebar ?— About four miles. 
 
 16127. What do you say as to the rent, do you 
 complain at all of the rent, or is it a fair rent that 
 you are paying ? — We did make a complaint, we com- 
 l^laincd ^ve were not fit to pay it, and if I am, 1 an* 
 
 I have here is signed Martm 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 o:io 
 
 one in a thousand that can. I have paid money to 
 tenants, and as soon as I did the tenants lodged it in 
 the agent's hands, and to this day they cannot repay 
 me. 
 
 16128. O'CoNOE Don. — You lent them money to 
 pay it 1 — If I did, I did not'make it in Ireland. 
 
 16129. Chairman. — Were you able to pay the rent 
 fairly vmtil a few years ago ? — Yes. 
 
 16130.'And then bad times came? — Yes, their 
 crops failed and the cattle, and they could not get 
 credit. And one that could pay was in dread to pay, 
 because he said, "I will be turned out with the rest." 
 It is only one out of every 500 can pay, that is a true 
 calculation ^ I know in my own district it is the case. 
 
 16131. The bad times brought them down in stock Cc«. 19, isso. 
 and in the means of keeping their farms up as well 
 as they had done before, 1 suppose J — Yes. 
 
 16132. And the low price of stock at the same time 1 
 — It ran them without a penny, and in debt to the 
 bank and the store-keeper, und thoir neighbour that 
 had it, they borrowed off him until they could get no 
 more money, and then they could not pay, even if they 
 pawned themselves and their clothes, they could not O'Malley, p.p. 
 pay, besides a rack-rent. 
 
 16133. The O'Conor Don. — Has rent been raised 
 lately on this property 'i — Not since it was striped. 
 
 16131-. How long ago is that? — Between eight and 
 nine years ago, 1872. 
 
 Messrs. .Tames 
 Tunny, 
 Paliicli 
 O'Brien, 
 Anthony 
 CLirke, Denis 
 Duffy, and 
 F.ev. Mr. 
 
 Mr. Anthony Clarke, Ballinmaroe, examined. 
 
 16135. Chairman. — How far is your place from 
 Castlebar ? — Four miles. 
 
 16136. Who is your landlord? — Sir Eoger Palmer. 
 Is Mr. O'Donnell the agent there 1 — Yes. 
 And your holding is 29 acres, I see ? — 27 
 
 16137. 
 16138. 
 acres. 
 16139. 
 16140. 
 
 Tenant at will ? — -Yes, sir. 
 
 And your rent? — £19 ; valuation, £16 10s. 
 
 16141. Have you lost any land at anj- time latcl^y ? 
 — I did sir. The land was striped in ISGO, and he 
 took two acres of arable land, reclaimed land thu,t was 
 within thirty yards of my dwelling house, a road 
 intervened going north and south, and the land on the 
 east road, he took two acres of arable land that was 
 worth what we were paying for it, £1 an acre, and then 
 the rent was left the same on me. The rest of my 
 land is almost entirely rock, and three-fourths of it is 
 bog, and one-fourth is cut-away bog. My father before 
 me cut away turf there for years, and the tenantry of 
 the property before the land was striped thirty years 
 ago, ciit off turt, it was all a cul^away bog, and my 
 father reclaimed it, and I reclaimed about ten acres of 
 land before that striping. 
 
 16142. And you say some part of that was taken 
 away?— Two acres of the best land was taken away 
 from me, they left me the worst part, they would get 
 no one else to live in it. 
 
 16143. And you got no allowance for the part taken 
 off?— No. 
 
 16144. The O'Conor Don.— You got no other land 
 in exchange ? — No sir. 
 
 16145. Chairman. — Who built tLehouseand offices ? 
 — My father. 
 
 16146. Did he make any other improvements? — 
 He did, drained the lands, made mearings, built stone 
 walls jound the whole land, sod fenced parts of it, and 
 made a mearing eight feet or nine feet wide. 
 
 16147. Have there been any changes of rent except 
 what you consider the change by the loss of those two 
 acres? — No change since I came of age, sir, there was a 
 change sometime previous. 
 
 16148. Do you know when the rent had been put 
 at £19, at what date 1 — Something about twenty years 
 ago, 
 
 16149. We were told about fines, have you the 
 same rules ? — Yes, sir, I had to pay £2 for building 
 houses in 1869, to help the other tenants on the estates 
 to build their houses, though we never got one penny 
 from the landlord or any other tcna it when we went to 
 build there. 
 
 16150. Do you mean to say you had to pay £2 to 
 go to somebody else ? — I did, else my rent would not 
 be taken below in the office. 
 
 16151. The O'Conor Don. — Did you get land taken 
 from the other tenants ? — No, sir, my land was striped 
 before. I had nothing at all to do with that portion 
 of the townlands. I hold three-fourths of this jiortion, 
 
 and Duffy holds one-fourth, and when it was striped, 
 I had to pay £2 for the man that was some 500 yards 
 away, half a mile some of them. 
 
 16152. Chairman. — Were you supposed to have 
 got some buildings in exchange to maliie uj) for it ? — 
 Nothing at all, not a sod or stick, even the buildings 
 that my father planted in the two acres of land I 
 would not get. 
 
 16153. Would you have objected to the strijjing 
 if it was done on a fair arrangement? — I had an objec- 
 tion, but what was the use of my objecting, I would 
 have been ejected if I did not comply. 
 
 16154. The roads that pass through for the other 
 tenants to draw turf, is there any allowance to you for 
 that ? — If there was no person going on these roads 
 but the tenants, the roads would be let go so that no 
 one could pass on them, but when they let some of the 
 bog for conacre the tenants were compelled last har- 
 vest two years to go and give four days compulsory 
 labour, and to pay for carts to do the roads. They 
 were comjoelled to clean the rivers on that property. 
 
 16155. Compelled to keep the outfalls open ? — Yes. 
 
 16156. But more than their own share on their own 
 holdings of the outfall ? — No river intervened at all 
 on my land, still I was compelled about twelve or 
 fourteen years ago to work a day or two on the river 
 that intervened through that property. 
 
 16157. I see here there is a mention of an eject- 
 ment for non-payment of rent in 1872? — There was, 
 sir, a man ejected in 1872 of the name of, Flanagan, 
 and the whole cause of his ejectment was that in 1869 
 he was made pay £2 for building another man's house. 
 The man was poor, and he had to borrow that £2 
 from the bank or a gombeen man. That'person came 
 on him hard, and he was not able to pay the year's 
 rent in 1872, and was ejected. The eviction did not 
 take place ; he got time until April, before the sheriff 
 came, and he came here on a Saturday, and the agent 
 said, " If you Iiaven't tlie money here by six o'clock I 
 will send the sheriff on Monday." The poor man had 
 to get it from that young fellow that went out there 
 (Tunny), and he took the money from him, and for 
 being late, from six o'clock to seven o'clock, one hour, 
 he fined him £1 6s. Either pay £1 6s. more — him- 
 self was telling me last night — or the alternative of 
 sending the sheriff on Monday morning. 
 
 16158. What was the £1 6s. said to be intended 
 for ? — I cannot give you anj' notion in the world — 
 not having the money in due time at six o'clock. The 
 rent was £4 and the cost of the eviction was £9 6s. 
 
 161 59. The O'Conor Don.— Was the £1 6s. in addi- 
 tion to the costs ?^In addition to the costs. 
 
 16160. Chairman — And he had to pay that to re- 
 deem ? — He had, sir, certainly so. He was j ust telling 
 me last night, and he did not tell me an untruth ; he 
 had no iir:c telling me an untruth. 
 
526 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 19, 18S0. 
 
 Messrs. James 
 Tunny, 
 Patrick 
 O'Briea, 
 Anthony 
 Clarke, Denis 
 Duffy, and 
 Kev. Mr. 
 O'Malley, p.p. 
 
 Denis Duffy, examined. 
 
 16161. Chairman. — You live in tlie same to^'fll- 
 land % — Hive in the sametowrJand. 
 
 16162. — You hold under Sir Eoger Palmer? — I do, 
 sir, eight and a quarter acres. 
 
 16163. Your rent ?— My rent is £7. 
 
 16164. And have you anything to say as to the 
 rent? — My rent in 1869, previous to the striping, 
 was £6 18s., and I had about half an acre reclaimed 
 bog that myself and my father reclaimed when I was 
 a young chap, and that half acre was take a away from 
 me at the striping time, and half an acre of bog that 
 we had for the use of mud that we requiredfor manure, 
 that was taken away also. And instead of £6 18s., 
 there was ten perches more of my arable land taken 
 away, and my rent was made .£7. 
 
 16165. You had an increase of rent and yet you 
 lost land ? — Exactly, I had an increase of Is. only of 
 rent, but I had the loss of the land. 
 
 16166. You had to pay in the way the last witness 
 said, for other persons' houses ? — I had sir. Mr. O'Don- 
 nell was under-agent at that time, Mr. Norman was 
 head agent. I had not money, I was a poor man and 
 he sent one of the tenants out into the street for me 
 until I would come into the office. I told him I had 
 not the money, and that my father was sent into the 
 land by an agent named Mr. Heavysides, about twenty- 
 five years ago, and he had to throw down houses and 
 build new ones, and he was not remunerated by any 
 landlord or tenant and why should I pay £/2, to them. 
 Well, Mr. O'Donnell was under-agent then, and he 
 said"If you have not this money to-day it will be 10s. 
 this day week, and it will be an extra fine of 10s. more 
 this day fortnight" "If you carry on, sir, at that rate" 
 said I"It will exhaust the principal shortly," I had no 
 chance at all then, I had £1 of the money in my pocket 
 and I had to borrow another £1 from a man in town 
 or leave the place. 
 
 16167. What reason was given for making you pay 
 for another person's house? — I don't know. He 
 advanced £2 himself, and all the tenants, that their 
 houses stood, he compelled them to advance £2 more. 
 
 16168. The other tenants, I suppose, were losing 
 their houses by the striping, and they wanted new 
 houses, and he said it should be made up by the other 
 tenants % — Exactly so, and I was not a co-partner with 
 those tenants, and I thought I was greatly aggrieved, 
 because when my father built he had no help. 
 
 16169. The O'Conoe Don.— The striping was too 
 benefit to you ?— No, sir ; only to lose half an acre of 
 reclaimed bog, and half an acre of mud bog and ten 
 perches of arable land, and to pay 2s. extra, and £2 
 along with that. 
 
 16170. Chairman.— And the landlord was to allow 
 £2 too ?— Yes sir, exactly. He was giviiag £1- to each 
 tenant that was to build, £2 from the tenant that their 
 houses stood and £2 from himself 
 
 1G171. The O'CoNOR Don.— Then did the houses 
 stand onyoiu- land ?— Certainly, sir, this far portion 
 of the townland was striped twenty-five years pre- 
 viously, between my father and this man's father, and 
 the second striping had no interference with us except 
 in the mountain that was valued against us, miles off, 
 and I had reclaimed land on that mountain and he 
 took away that from us. 
 
 16172. But the house of the tenant who had to build 
 a new house stood on the land that was left to you? 
 —Certainly not, there was no house on the land I 
 
 lived in ; and that, my father built upon, and no house 
 since, but my own house. 
 
 16173. Chairman. — And the striping as against you 
 and the tenant ? — That was the previous stripuK? that 
 had been done long before, three-fourths of the town- 
 land were co-partners, and it was striped in 1869. 
 
 16174. The O'Conor Don. — For building whose 
 house had you to pay £2 ? — Widow Heenahan I gave 
 my money to. 
 
 16175. Where had the Widow Heenahan the house 
 she was living in at that time?— She had it ia the 
 centre of the field. 
 
 16176. It was not on your land? — Oh, lord, no 
 about half a mile from where I live. 
 
 16177. Chairman. — You say something as to these 
 fines put upon tenants % — I do, sir ; I was a little boy 
 and seen an English gentleman travelling the land in 
 pursuit of game, and it came to the ears of the bailiff 
 that I saw it, Mr. Ormsby was agent then, and he 
 fined my father 5s. for not reporting it. 
 
 16178. This is an old custom?— A real old custom. 
 . 1 61 79. Not suddenly used by Mr. O'Donnell '—No, 
 
 sir, it is dropped now to my knowledge suice 1870, 
 since the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 16180. And that saved you from these fines?— I 
 think so. Previous to 1870 my sister got married to 
 a railway ganger, he lodged in my house while the 
 railway ran through a portion of my land, and I got 
 notice from the bailiff that if I would not send away 
 that man to take lodgings elsewhere I would be sent 
 adrift myself. 
 
 16181. Then these complaints that you have as to 
 fines are mostly as to what took place before the Land 
 Act? — All these are previous to the passing of the 
 Land Act. 
 
 1C182. The Land Act at all events saved you from 
 them ? — It did, sir ; lately we could j)ay no fines, for 
 we are unable to pay our rents. We were reduced 
 for the last three or four harvests to actual, beggary. 
 Were it not for a few brothers I have in America, I 
 should be myself and my little family in the workhouse. 
 I am one of the poorest men on Sir Eoger Palmer's 
 property, and he gave relief last year to his tenantry, 
 and Mr. O'Donnell had no cause for disqualifying me 
 out of that relief He said I made myself conspicuous 
 in the laud agitation. I told him I did not, more than 
 any other man. And although we went in honourably 
 and showed him an appeal to Sir Roger Palmer, and 
 told him if there was anything wrong in it to v/rite 
 to Sir Soger, he read it, and did not say anything, 
 but in consequence of that, he disqualified me and my 
 friend here (Clarke) from getting relief, although I 
 have an old mother, eighty years of age, and four-little 
 weak children and myself and my wife all to depend 
 on eight acres of land, portion of it is pretty fair, and 
 portion of it my father reclaimed. 
 
 16183. Is it the bad seasons that came lately that 
 put you in a difficulty about paying the rent? — Cer- 
 tainly, I got envolved in the National Bank and with 
 shopkeepers iu Castlebar and Westport and with my 
 parish, the Rev. Mr. O'Malley, who gave me money 
 and got credit for me. 
 
 16184. Were those debts contracted before the bad 
 times began ? — I had a little contracted in the National 
 Bank before the bad times, but if I had, I had plenty 
 of stock to meet it, but afterwards I was not fit to meet 
 anything. 
 
 Mr. AIex,ander 
 C. Larminie. 
 
 16185. Chairman.— You are agent to Lord Lucan ? 
 — Yes, sir. 
 
 16186. What is the amount of Lord Lucan's pro- 
 perty ?— Between 60,000 and 70,000 acres. 
 
 16187. All in this county?— Yes. 
 
 16188. Do you manage the whole of it?— Yes. 
 
 16189. The O'Conor Don.- Is there a ffood deal 
 
 Mr. Alexander C. Larminie, examined. 
 
 of that in his own occupation, or is the 70,000 m 
 the hands of tenants ?— He has about 8,000 in his 
 own occupation. 
 
 16190. Out of the 70,000 ?— Yes ; out of the 
 70,000. Over 2,000 of that 8,000 has just come into 
 his possession by the falling of a lease. 
 
 1G191. Chairman. — Is there nmch ofit on lease? 
 — Except large grazing farms, very little. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCI 
 
 527 
 
 16192. These are made of late years'? — Yes; com- 
 paratively late years. 
 
 ' 1G103. They are not merely old leases? — There are 
 a considerable number of small leases granted by the 
 
 ' present owner's father, which are still in existence — 
 
 : leases for lives. 
 
 16194. "Were they holdings nnder a middleman or 
 dii-ect 1 — In some cases imder a middleman, but 
 principally direct. At present there are no middle- 
 men in the cases I speak of. I think there is only 
 one middleman on the entire estate. 
 
 16195. What is the size of farm these smaller ten- 
 ants generally hold 1 — They range wonderfully, but I 
 should think they are a very small average. The ex- 
 tent of the land is considerable, bvit the character of 
 the land is such that you would call it a small hold- 
 ing. For instance, there are in the neighbourhood of 
 this town 200 tenants who do not pay more than £4 
 a yeai-. 
 
 16196. Are the houses on the farms or in the 
 town 1 — Entirely on the lands. I speak entirely of 
 the peasantry. 
 
 16197. The O'Conor Don. — You are not speaking 
 of the town occupiers 1 — Not at all. 
 
 16198. Chairjiast. — Lord Lucan has reclaimed a 
 great deal of land on his poperty 1 — He has reclaimed 
 a great deal comparatively, but it is in his own occu- 
 pation — what he has reclaimed latterly. 
 
 16199. On the property generally have these houses 
 been built by the tenants'? — I should say so; they 
 are there for generations and generations. 
 
 16200. They are all thatched houses ? — Yes. There 
 are just a few that the late Lord Lucan built, about 
 from five to eight miles from here where he was re- 
 claiming some land, and he built some slated cottages 
 along the road, most of which have fi},llen into difsre- 
 pair. The tenants prefer living in thatched cabins. 
 
 16201. The thatched were preferred as dwelling- 
 houses 1 — Yes. The thatched house is much more 
 comfortable, and warmer than, the slated houses ; and 
 that is the reason they occupy them. 
 
 16202. "What is generally the rent per acre they 
 pay 1 — I could not give you any idea. We never let 
 it by the acre under any circumstances ; it is always 
 let at a bulk rent. 
 
 16203. Is this cut away bogl — All these tenancies 
 have bog connected with them. Of course thpre is a 
 considerable amount of arable land tailing along the 
 bog. 
 
 16204. The rents are comparatively small for the 
 extent of the holding? — Yes ; very small. 
 
 16205. Is it generally inferior land'? — No; but 
 there are such a number of tenants. I know one 
 man who has, perhaps, twenty acres of arable land, 
 partly reclaimed by himself, and partly by the late 
 Lord Lucan, has, perhaps, 100 acres of mountain bog 
 for £18 a year. 
 
 16206. These tenants who have that mountain land 
 are pretty well off ?^I think they ought to be. Last 
 year was a bad year for stock, and they did not do so 
 well, but up to last year they were fairly punctual 
 in the payment of their rents, and never complained. 
 
 16207. When were these rents generally'fixed'? — I 
 could hardly say. There has been very little change 
 for the last twenty years. Some of them have not 
 been changed in the present century. 
 
 16208. Is there anything allowed in the way of 
 .selling holding by the tenants'? — No; the landlord 
 does not allow it. It does occasionally occur, but 
 without the consent of the landlord. Very recently I 
 heard of one man who sold a small holding, for which 
 he paid £11 a year, and for which he got £60 or 
 £70. 
 
 16209. Did you allow that ?-^Neither one nor the 
 other asked permission. It is entirely contrary to the 
 rules of the estate. 
 
 16210. Then, by tliat it would seem there is a good 
 margin of profit over the rent 1 — There is, no doubt 
 about it whatever. Whenever the landlord has fixed 
 
 the rent it runs from twenty to twentji-'five per cent. . oa. 19, isso. 
 over the Government valuation. In some cases it is a „^ Alexander 
 little higher ; where the rents have been fixed recently, c. Larminie. 
 it has been fixed by the tenants themselves— some 
 land his lordship had in his own hands, and it was 
 not convenient to farm it, and he let it out. 
 
 16211. Was it readily taken'? — It was greedily 
 taken. That is nearly twenty years ago ; the land- 
 lord put no rent upon it, he left it to the tenants, and 
 these are, perhaps, the highest let lands on the 
 estate. 
 
 16212. Was that at a time when there was great 
 competition for land 1 — There was always keen com- 
 petition in this part of the country, and there is as 
 great, at least, as ever. 
 
 16213. The result was that some of the rents went 
 up too high 1 — I think they did. 
 
 16214. Are complaints made as to these rents now t 
 — Some of the lands have been given up. 
 
 16215. But otherwise do j'ou find there are com- 
 plaints about the amount of the rent ? — V\'"ell, not 
 hitherto. Of course every one is complaining now. 
 
 16216. Do you find them all saying the Govern- 
 ment valuation is a fair rent 1 — They say they are 
 desired not to pay more. 
 
 16217. More than the Government valuation'? — 
 That these are their orders — not to pay more. 
 
 16218. I suppose you do not take the Government 
 valuation as a criterion of rent 1 — Certainly not. 
 
 16219. We have been told everywhere it is no 
 criterion, the land being so unequally valued in 
 different places ? — Not only that, bu t a valuation 
 made thirty years ago, and avowedly ctmsiderably 
 under the value of the land, could not, after such a 
 lapse of time, be taken as a criterion, when the prices 
 of produce are so much increased. 
 
 16220. We have been told by some who had control 
 of the valuing, that it was not intended as a criterion 
 of the rent, but is for rating purposes? — I think 
 so. 
 
 1G221. Do you think the name Government valua- 
 tion misleads people into the belief that it is a valua- 
 tion sanctioned by the Government? — It may do so, 
 I have had very little controversy with the tenantry. 
 
 16222. The O'Conor Don.— 'They have paid their 
 rents well 1 — Not for the last year. In fact, for the 
 last ten years there has been a difficulty. 
 
 16223. Chairman. — Up to 1875 it was a good 
 time? — dp to 1877 it was a good time. 
 
 16224.— The O'Conor Don— And still there was 
 more difKoulty in collecting the rents ? — I think there 
 was. 
 
 16225. Chairman. — Wo have not had any witness 
 by whom Lord Lucan's name was mentioned. Is 
 there anything you wish to put before us ? — I have 
 been standing outside for sonre time, and I have not 
 seen any of Lord Lucan's tenantry in. I have not 
 put the smallest pressure on them to keep them away; 
 on the contrary, one man came to me and said, " I 
 have been cited to come here, and I am informed 
 Lord Lucan's tenantry are not coming near the place, 
 and I hope you have no objection ; if you have, we. 
 will not come in." And I saidj " By no means ; have 
 you anything to complain of?" and he said, " No." 
 
 1G226. If anybody should come you will have a 
 copy of what is said 1 — Very well, I should be very 
 glad of that. 
 
 16227. The O'Conor Don.— You said that some 
 land had been given up by the tenants lately ? — Not 
 lately, not vdthin the last ten years. 
 
 102 28. You have had no ejectments this last year? 
 ■ — There has never been an eviction in my time, and 
 that is sixteen years. 
 
 10229. Nor change of tenants? — No change of 
 tenants, practically. 
 
 16230. Any number going away voluntarily 1 — No, 
 none ; occasionally there may have been a change in a 
 family. 
 
 16231. These tenants who took the land by pro- 
 posal from Lord Lucan, and who are higher rented 
 
32S 
 
 iRiSH la>;d act COMMIESIOX, ISSO. 
 
 Oct. 19, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Alexander 
 C. Larminie. 
 
 than tlie otliers, have they all held the land? — In 
 most cases. Some gave up. 
 
 16232. Those that did give up were they tenants 
 residing on the land ? — In some cases not. In one case 
 the holder was in this town, the place is seven miles oiF. 
 
 162-33. He was a shopkeeper ? — No, indeed ; he was 
 a steward of my father's at the time. 
 
 16234. Is there any alteration in the present land 
 law which you think desirable ? — I should not like to 
 suggest any, really, under existing cii'cumstances. 
 As far as I was personally concerned I had never the 
 smallest trouble up to recently, in dealing' with the 
 tenants. We always made it a rule to live and let 
 live, and we never interfered with them in the 
 management of their farms. 
 
 16235. Was there much money laid out liy Lord 
 Lucan in improvements 1 — No, I cai}.not say there 
 was. Of course all arberial drainaa'e works, for which 
 
 he pays, were a great improvement to tlie tenants' 
 holdings. 
 
 16236. Chairjia:^. — It enabled them to improve 
 their own holdings, if they wished to do so 1 Yes. 
 
 16237. How much has he laid out in that way?— 
 1 could not say. There was a great reduction ninde 
 by the Government for the moneys laid out, but 
 if the full charge was made it would be £500 a 
 year. 
 
 16238. Was there anything charged to the tenant 
 as interest 1 — Never a shilling. 
 
 16239. Have the tenants availed themselves of the 
 opportunity for improving ? — I cannot say they hare 
 and if I could make a suggestion that would compel 
 the tenants to improve their land, it is the only 
 practical thing that I could do, for it is capable of very 
 great improvement. 
 
 Mr. W. E. 
 Larminie. 
 
 Mr. W. R. Larminie, Civil Service, Lower Bengal, examimed. 
 
 16240. The O'Conoe Don.— You have been in 
 India and are acquainted with the different land 
 systems existing there ? — Yes. I have come home at 
 intervals of seven or eight years, having been in India 
 about twenty years, and have spent two years at 
 home each time. I have seen the great changes which 
 are, perhaps, not so visible to people living here every 
 day. 
 
 1G241. Have you seen a great change in Ireland? 
 — Yes, in the direction of a general rise in the scale of 
 comfort ; it is simply enormous, and a great deal of 
 the present distress has, I think, arisen from a deter- 
 mination to keep up that aud not to resort to the 
 old state of misery. With regard to fixity of tenure 
 in Lower Bengal, as a rule, if a man holds for twelve 
 years, unless under an agreement, he is entitled to 
 remain in as long as he pays a fair rent, which fair 
 rent is the rent he has been hitherto paying, except 
 in cases specially noted by law. 
 
 16242. The landlord has the option of claiming an 
 increase 1 — If there was a permanent increase in the 
 value of produce, and the value of the land was thereby 
 increased, and if the tenant had been there for twelve 
 years the landlord could not keep the whole of what 
 is called the unearned increment of the land. If 
 there was a decrease the tenant could similarly claim 
 a reduction. 
 
 16243. Could they claim these at the commencement 
 of the tenure, or in any number of years afterwards ? — 
 At any time. If the matters are decided by the court 
 after the twelve years, it has to go into the question of 
 the net profit existing, and the net profit at the time 
 the rent was originally fixed. We have very good data 
 in our offices for the last eighty years. 
 
 16244. Is the landlord there in exactly the same 
 position as the landlord here 1 — The landlord in Bengal 
 was a rent collector for the State in Ltiwor Bengal. 
 The rate he ought to pay was permanently settled 
 in 1793, and he has to pay that at certain fixed dates 
 to the Government, and he gets what he can him- 
 self. 
 
 16244a. Practically the Bengal landlord was the 
 collector of the State land-tax, and the way they 
 manage is, instead of the Government collecting the 
 land tax they farmed it out to a person who paid it to 
 the Government at. a fixed rate, and these persons 
 had leave to get what they could from the occupiers ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16245. Chairman. — Was this condition of perma- 
 nent holding made at the time the person took the 
 collection ?— No, it was not until 1839 that the rule of 
 wnat we call the right of occupancy was put into law. 
 The law put beyond doubt what was a previously 
 existing custom, tliat a man could not be turned out 
 after holdrag for twelve veais. 
 
 16246. There had then begun to be a feelinc of 
 insecurity amongst the holders that led to that law 
 being passed ? — I think it was the indigo manufac- 
 turers taking up lands in order to make money a little 
 faster than they had been doing, and trying to break 
 through this rule, which caused the excitement. 
 
 16247. The O'Oonor Don.— Had the landlords in 
 Bengal ever the power of turiiing out the occupiers 
 and taking the land into their ' own possession ?— 
 Theoretically they had, practically they had not. 
 
 16248. Chairman. — Did they raise the rent?— 
 They tried to, but if they were to raise it a penny 
 there would be sometimes almost a rebellion amongst 
 their tenants. 
 
 16249. The O'Conor Don. — Suppose they had land 
 in their own occupation and let it out to tenants, would 
 they have the right to resume occupation and raise 
 the rent before the expii-ation of twelve years? — I 
 cannot really say if landlords ever do get land into 
 their own occupation. As a rule, they do not. 
 
 1G250. Have the tenants any power to sub-let !— 
 Yes, they have. I have known sub-infeudation to go 
 on to seven or eight degrees. 
 
 162.51. Does the same rule apply to the persons 
 to whom they sub-let ? — No ; it is only the cultivators 
 the right applies to. 
 
 16252. If they sublet, won't the cultivators be then 
 sub-tonants? — That is one of the most difficult points 
 to be decided now. 
 
 16253. Is it the custom to sub-let? — Very exten- 
 sively. 
 
 1 'J 2.54. What has been the practice where sub-let- 
 ting takes place — has the middleman, as we caU him 
 the right to raise the rent on the actual cultivator !~ 
 Itofton happens that he lets out the cultivation toaman, 
 and he gets half the produce, and the other man, for his 
 laboui-, takes half the produce, and if he gives him 
 manure he gets, perhaps, nine parts out of sixteen of the 
 produce, and so on. That is the usual form of sub-let- 
 ting. The chief sub-letting is of ^ound rent ; a man 
 has a large estate, and he lets it out in farms to ano- 
 ther man, who pays fines, and tries to enhance the 
 rents, and that is the cause of the great poverty, 
 everyone trying to get as much as he could out of the 
 cultivator. 
 
 16255. You think a somewhat similar system could 
 be applied to Ireland? — I do. I think the circum- 
 stances are exceedingly similar. Most of the people 
 are agricultural, and always live on the verge of star- 
 vation. 
 
 16256. But this is not much benefit to the cultiva- 
 tors in India? — They can live fairly well where 
 this prevails, and although there has been famine it is 
 ab.vays less severe than in Madras, where a different 
 sy.s';cin })rcvai's. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 529 
 
 16257. These payments by these persons whom you 
 call landlords to the State vary ? — Not from year to 
 year. 
 
 16258. Do they vary at any intervals ? — In Lower 
 Bengal it is perpetually settled, and the only time it 
 can vary is when a man fails to pay, and the Govern- 
 ment can get no one to take it, then we make a 
 permanent settlement. Sometimes a river overflows 
 
 and destroys the land, and the man is unable to pay 
 the rent, and then Government takes it up. 
 
 16259. What is the jDroportion between the pay- 
 ment he makes to the State and the payment he 
 receives from the cultivators 'i— On a fresh settlement 
 he must pay about half. In 1793 the settlement 
 varied in the most extraordinary way. The heavily 
 settled districts are not, by any means, so prosperous. 
 
 Oct. 19, 1880. 
 
 Mr. W. R. 
 Larminie. 
 
 Mr. John Staunton examined. Present. — Messrs. Edwabb Fitzgerald and Maetin Conway 
 
 Messn. 
 
 16260. Chairman. — You live at Cloughna East? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 16260a. You hold 18 acres 1 rood? — Yes. 
 
 16261. Under Mr. William Livingstone? — Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 16261a. Entirely imder Mr. Livingstone? — Yes. 
 
 16262. Your rent is £23 6s. for the 18 acres? — 
 Yes. 
 
 16262a. Is that all held under -.xr. Livingstone ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 16263. This was formerly Lord Sligo's property ? — 
 It belonged to Lord Sligo. 
 
 16263a. The whole of it?— Yes. 
 
 16264. Was that purchased by Mr. Livingstone ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 16264a. How long ago?— In ^85 3. 
 
 16265. In 1853 this was Lord Sligo's property? — 
 Yes. 
 
 16266. When Lord Sligo was the landlord what 
 was the rent ? — £6 10s. 
 
 16267. The O'Conor Don.— £6 10s. for the 18 
 acres ? — Yes. 
 
 16268. Was it under lease?— No, sir. 
 
 16269. Chairman. — Nor under lease now? — No, 
 sir. 
 
 16270. Edward Fitzgerald. — It was under lease a 
 few years before that, and they ran away, and Lord 
 Sligo then striped the land, and Mr. Livingstone 
 became the purchaser a few years afterwards, and 
 raised the rent to £12. He made a new lease, and 
 then then he raised it to £23, and some stripes to 
 £24. We had our houses and offices built, and our 
 improvements made, and we could not leave, and we 
 had to borrow our rent from the banks and loan- 
 offices, and we could not pay it last year, and we gave 
 our landlord work. I had 269 sovereigns in my 
 
 pocket and I improved the land up until I lost the Edward 
 money. There were thirty-six old houses on the land Fitzgerald, 
 when I took it, and I took them all away and I buUt 2,""^ Martin 
 one house for £46, and I was only there two years ^°^'^^^' 
 when I had to go out of it. 
 
 16271. When did you go into it?— In 1849, I 
 think. 
 
 16272. You improved the place a great deal? — 
 Indeed I did. The valuation was then only £11 5s., 
 and when I had my improvements made it was raised 
 to £14 15s., and I am paying for the last twenty-one 
 years £23 rent. 
 
 16273. Do you know what the original rent of the 
 property was ? — £78. 
 
 16274. What was that advanced to? — £230 10s. 
 The £78 was the rent that was on this property for 
 sixty years, before it was striped. 
 
 16275. Then it was bought, and how soon after 
 that was it raised to £230 %—l think the receipts 
 show that, in 1853. The increase was made up in 
 this way — Patrick O'Brien, £24 ; Edward Fitzgerald, 
 £23 j John Staunton, £23 6s. ; James Grady, 
 £6 10s. ; John Burke, £7 10s. ; Thomas Kenny, £5 ; 
 Oliver Carson, £5 ; Thomas Moran, £10 ; Bartholemew 
 Rye, £120. 
 
 16276. He is a large holder? — Yes, Mr. Living- 
 stone took the best part of the land himself and let it 
 since, and when we came in first there was no farm 
 at all, the land was all in one common. It was all 
 entirely tenanted at the time the Marquis of Sligo 
 had it, and then it was striped and it was made into 
 twelve stripes at £6 10s. Staunton, O'Brien, and I 
 were the only ones stood after the striping, all the 
 rest went away. Staunton had a good trade ; he was 
 a smith and had a few sons. It was not off the land 
 he paid' his rent. 
 
 Mr. Martin Conway examinea. 
 
 16277. Chairman. — ^Mr. Livingstone is your head 
 landlord 1 — He is. 
 
 16278. Who is your direct landlord? — Mr. Jordan. 
 
 16279. He holds a lease under Mr. Livingstone ? — 
 I suppose so. 
 
 16280. Did he hold in the same way imder the 
 Marquis of Sligo ?— He did, sir. 
 
 16281. How much land do you hold ? — Three acres 
 and something over a rood — myself and my co-partner 
 hold six acres and about a half. 
 
 16282. How much do you pay? — Myself and my 
 co-partner are paying £12 16s. on the outskirts of the 
 farm where bullocks would be swallowed at the time 
 we got it. 
 
 16283. The O'Conor Don. — How long has that 
 been the rent ?— It is twenty years next spring. 
 
 16284. What was your rent before that? — That is 
 the time I came to live on it. 
 
 16285. You took it at that rent? — Yes, he com- 
 pelled me, and the man who would tell me I would be 
 in it for all that time, but there is no other place to 
 
 goto. 
 
 16286. Had you to pay a fine? — I had £6 fine 
 myself, and my comrade paid £12 for a place without 
 a ditch or a mearing wall. 
 
 16287. Chairman. — Who was your comrade? — 
 Pat Brady. 
 
 16288. Did you divide with him afterwards or 
 have you it together now? — Both of us have it 
 divided between us into small patches. 
 
 16289. You are co-partners still? — Yes. 
 
 16290. Divided equally? — Yes— three acres one 
 rood each. 
 
 16291. Who made the division? — We agreed 
 between ourselves ; we measured six and a half acres, 
 and then we divided it into small patches between us 
 the best way we could. 
 
 16292. The O'Conor Don. — You have a piece here 
 and a piece there, and so on ? — Yes. 
 
 16293. You did not divide it so as to make one 
 dividing line 1 — No, sir ; it is only a patch here and a 
 patch there ; the place is too narrow and the land so 
 bad we had to divide it in that way. 
 
 16294. Chairman. — Was this once part of a single 
 farm held by Mr. Jordan ? — ^Yes. 
 
 16295. And this was an outlying bit he wished to 
 
 let off ?— Yqs, just on the outskirt of it afraid his 
 
 cattle would be swallowed. 
 
 16296. What Mr. Jordan is this?— He is the 
 Crown Solicitor. 
 
 16297. Is that some of the best part of that land or 
 is it inferior to what he holds himself? — He has kept 
 the best part himself altogether that he can fatten 
 
 3 Y 
 
530 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 19, 1880. 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 John Staunton, 
 
 Edward 
 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
 and Martin 
 
 Conway. 
 
 Mi. John 
 Duffy. 
 
 steep and bullocks on, but this land was only fit for 
 fattening snipe. 
 
 16298. Do you know what Mr. Jordan pays the 
 head landlord? — I am told it is £60 he is paying for 
 the whole lot. 
 
 16299. How much do his tenants pay him? — Six 
 tenants pay 4s. out of £47. 
 
 16300. Is Edward White a tenant?— Yes. 
 
 16301. And Austin Malley, Patrick Walsh, 
 Michael Cusack, Martia Conway, and Patrick Brady ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16302. Are there any other tenants on the town- 
 land ?— No. 
 
 16303. The O'Conor Don.~Do they all hold it in 
 this way, one bit here and the other there 1 — Yes. 
 
 16304. You hold altogether about twenty-five 
 acres amongst you ? — Yes ; the six of us hold about 
 that amount. 
 
 16305. Chairman. — According to the return here 
 White holds five acres one rood, Malley, Brady, and 
 Walsh the same, Conway, three acres one rood, and 
 Patrick Brady the same? — Yes; and there was not 
 such a thing as a ditch that would keep out a lame goat 
 when we came into it, and we had to m.ak6 walls and 
 everything at our own expense. 
 
 16306. You speak here for the other tenants, and 
 you consider you have suffered a great deal these last 
 few years ? — I do. 
 
 16307. And taking the state of the land and your 
 position, you say you are not able to pay this present 
 rent 1 — They are not able to pay anythiag. 
 
 16308. Did you pay anything last year? — No, sir. 
 
 16309. Has Mr. Gordon got a lease of the whole! 
 — I suppose he has a lease. 
 
 16310. Is this wet land ? — Yes, and I have it culti- 
 vated so that, ia a manner, it is worth £5 now, and 
 it was not worth sixpence when we got it — yet, that 
 does not do us any good. The land is worn out, and 
 it is not worth 2^d. to us. 
 
 16311. How were the crops at first? — First when 
 we took it the land was new, and it returned very 
 well for a few years, btit by constantly keeping up the 
 tillage the land got worn out and was not fit to give 
 anything but weeds and dirt and filth. 
 
 16312. Would not that be the case with any land if 
 you let it go on without cleaning it ? — The land that 
 he has for himself, if it was tilled for a hundred years 
 would not be worn out, for it is so good, but these 
 ou.tskirts he let to us were worth nothing. 
 
 Mr. John Duffy examined (with fourteen other tenants, introduced by the Rev. Jeremiah M'Evilly, p.p., 
 
 Aughagower, near Westport). • 
 
 16313. Chairman. — You are tenant on Mr. Charles 
 M'Donnell's property ? — Yes ; I had four landlords in 
 succession — Mr. Charles M'Donnell, Mr. Bernard 
 M'Donnell, Mr. Bernard O'Flaherty, and Colonel 
 Logan now. 
 
 16314:. Who did Mr. Charles M'Donnell buy it 
 from ? — I don't know ; he was owner when I came. 
 £45 the whole townland paid in 1845. 
 
 16315. Was there any change ? — Bernard, his bro- 
 ther, got it in 1850. 
 
 16316. Was it sold by him in 1851 ?— Yes. 
 
 16317. Who became owner then ? — Mr. O'Flaherty. 
 16318- Was the rent raised again? — Yes, to £197. 
 
 16319. Was there any reason for the great rise on 
 each change of owners ? — There was mo reason but the 
 tyranny of the landlords. 
 
 16320. Who was the agent of the property ?- Mr. 
 Smyth. 
 
 Jiev. J. M'Evilly, p.p. — ^The property, I may be 
 allowed to explain, belonged to the M'Donnell famUy 
 in fee-simple as I heard, then it was sold in the courts, 
 and Mr. O'Flaherty purchased it and managed it for a 
 few years, and he sold it again in the courts, and Miss 
 Logan bought it, and she died, leaving it to her 
 nephew, Colonel Logan, who is now possessor, and 
 Mr. Sydney Smyth is his agent. 
 
 16321. Chairman. — Did Colonel Logan raise the 
 rent? — No, sir. Mr. Smyth lowered a few acres 
 held by others. 
 
 16322. He made a reduction on becoming owner ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16323. What was that?- £12 2s. Id. on the 
 total rent. 
 
 16324. The present rent remains £179 17s. 5d?— 
 Yes. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 M'Ginn. 
 
 Mr. Patrick M'Ginn examined. 
 
 16325. Chairman. — You are a tenant in the parish 
 of Aughagower, townland of Arderry ? — Yes, sir. 
 I bought the holding in 1851 at £28. It was wasted 
 land I bought. 
 
 16326. You paid the landlord for it? — Yes; in 
 1851 I paid him £28. 
 
 16327. Who was the landlord ? — Lord Sligo, and in 
 1853 he raised it to £60, and levelled our houses, and 
 we had to pay £5 to the Sheriff. We had to build a 
 house again at our own cost without getting one 
 shilling help ft'om him. In 1854 we had to pay to 
 Mr. Smyth £81. According as we improved the land 
 he raised the rent. In 1869 we paid £98, and we are 
 paying it until we are paupers. He never woiild give 
 us one shilling reduction ; even poor-rate he put on us 
 in full. 
 
 16328. How many acres altogether do you hold? — 
 It was rough mountainous land, and there were about 
 40 or 48 acres of arable land ; it is all bleak mountain, 
 with heath growing on it. 
 
 16329. And you had the whole of it?— No, m; 
 there are eight tenants with me. 
 
 16330. You speak for them ? — I speak for all, and 
 I will prove that case as sure as you have that paper 
 in your hand ; Mr. Smyth was raising the rent from 
 day to day until he left us a parcel of paupers. 
 
 16331. Since 1869 has there been any rise?— In 
 1869 they gave us the last rise, they put it to £98. 
 
 16332. After the Land Act there was no further 
 rise ? — There was no increase since that. I am now 
 paying on rocky land, and I am not able to pay. 
 
 16333. Before that Mr. Smyth was raising the 
 rents fi-om time to time ? — Yes ; but he did not do it 
 after ; we have had no rise since 1869. We pay £98 
 for the land we bought iu 1851 for £28. 
 
 16334. In 1851 it was £28 ?— Yes, £28. 
 
 16335. The O'Conoe Don.— Did you pay a fine 
 with it ?— No, we paid no fine ; but paupers were in 
 it, and it was sold to me. 
 
 Mr. Anthony 
 Kerrigan. 
 
 Mr. Anthony Kerrigan examined. 
 
 16336. Chairman. — You live at Toulegee ?— Yes. 
 
 16337. Who is the owner of that townland ? — Lord 
 Sligo. 
 
 16338. How long have you been there? — I am 
 thirty years there. 
 
 16339. Did you come there thirty years ago ? —Yes. 
 
 16340. What was the rent then ?— £50 8s. 
 
 16341. When was the first rise of rent made?— 
 It was about twelve years after coming in. There 
 were three rises in the land since I came in. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 5S1 
 
 16342. How mucli -was it raised twelve years after 
 you came in? — It was put up to £60. 
 
 16343. Was there any otliei' rise that made it up to 
 .£84 1 — Yes ; that was at the second rise, and on the 
 third rise it was put up £10 more, according as we 
 were making improvement on the land. 
 
 16344. Fatrick M'Ginn. — My grandfather was the 
 first w?ho made a house on that village. The rent was 
 first forty-eight guineas, then it was raised to £60, 
 then to £84, and then to £94. The valuation was 
 £81. There was heath on that land, and according 
 as we were breaking that down, and carrying down 
 lime-stone every spring, the rent was raised on our 
 improvements. At that time there were forty houses 
 
 on the townland, and there are only four now, and 
 they put so much on every house in my father's 
 time, according as the house was good or bad. 
 
 16345. Mr. Shaw.— All these houses were valued 
 at that time ? — Yes. 
 
 16346. How many were there?— Forty houses at 
 that time. 
 
 16347. Were they levelled ?—Tiiey levelled all but 
 four houses. 
 
 16348. What was the date of that?— It is about 
 thirty-two years ago. I don't know what they were 
 valued at, but there was about 10s. on each house, 
 and that should be deducted from the valuation now. 
 
 Oct. i9, 1680 
 
 Mr. Anthony 
 Kerrigan. 
 
 Messrs. Edwaed Heeaghtt and Tiiady Heraghty examined. 
 
 1634&. Chairman. — You are tenants on the town- 
 land of Claddy ?— Yes. 
 
 1635G. Who is your landlord? — Lord Sligo. 
 
 16351. You want to tell us that the rent was raised? 
 — Yes. The rent of the townland was £40. Thirty 
 years aga— and the year of the famine there were ten 
 or twelve tenants in the townland. Three or four 
 of them broke, and they had to go, leaving waste lands 
 and all there ; seven of them remained in the town- 
 land and we were ejected then ; they gave us a settle- 
 ment for paying a year's rent for waste land and all. 
 We paid forty guineas, and he gave us a new 
 take of the land, and put it at £30. In two years 
 afterwards he sent a bailiff for us ; we did not know 
 what business he had with us ; we went into his office 
 and his lordship told us that he was going to raise the 
 rent up to £36. I was the only man that answered 
 him, and I offered him £35. I did not know whether 
 it was under the valuation or over it, and he said he 
 would not give it at £35. Some of them consented 
 to sign their names, and some would not. " If you 
 go outside this office, one of you, when you come in 
 again you will pay £40." We walked away, some 
 refusing to sign. Some were reconciled to sign their 
 names, and more objected, and when we were called 
 in again to pay the rent £40 was down against us, and 
 we had to pay £40. In 1875, Mr. Smyth, his agent, 
 gave us a notice, which I have here. He sent his 
 baiUff out and noticed us for £15 more of an increase. 
 We had to sign our names to it sooner than go beg 
 the world — 
 "Sir, — The Marquis of Sligo having directed me to 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 revalue the farm you hold m Claddy, and for which you Hera^ghty and 
 pay a rent of £40, we have done so, and consider that Thady 
 your rent should be increased to £5&, over and above the Heraghty. 
 rates and taxes, including the landlord's proportion of 
 county cess and poor rate. The increased rent to commence 
 from the 1st November last. In this new letting the 
 Marquis will reserve to himself all game, turf, turbary juad 
 timber, and royalties, as is usual on the estate, and I re- 
 quest your consent to this within one week." 
 
 This is dated 5th March, 1875. 
 
 16352. This is signed by Mr. Sydney Smyths- 
 Yes. 
 
 16353. He is Lord Sligo's agent? — Yes. 
 
 16354. That is signed by seven tenants altogether 
 — Yes. 
 
 16355. The O'Conoe Don. — Have you been paying 
 that rent since ? — Yes. 
 
 16356. What is the valuation? — The valuation is 
 £34 5s. 
 
 16357. You say the rent was £40 at the time of 
 the famine? — Yes; in the old times, and it was for 
 £30 before that, and it was raised in a few years to 
 £40, and the tenants were broken. 
 
 16358. Is this mountain land?— ^It is all mountain 
 land, and there are so many acres that the very sheep 
 or goats cannot trespass on it ; they have that poisoned 
 for game in the month of May, 
 
 16359. Do they get much run of the mountain as 
 well for grazing? — I cannot graze anything on the 
 most part of it; where they graze on it they are 
 crippled ; they are corrupted in their bones, and if 
 they don't get a cwt. or two of bran they never will 
 improve. 
 
 Widow Heraghty and Widow Walsh examined. 
 
 16360. Chairman. — Do you hold from Lord Sligo 
 in the townland of Bracklagh ? — Yes. 
 
 16361. You both held together ?— Yes. 
 
 16362. You hold the townland between you? — 
 Yes. 
 
 16363. In 1848 what was the rent?— £13. 
 
 16364. That was £13 between you?— Yes. 
 
 16365. Was it raised? — Yes ; it was raised shortly 
 after to £16. 
 
 16366. How many years after 1848 ? — I cannot say 
 exactly. 
 
 16367. Was there another lise made after that? — 
 There was; the £16 was raised to £20. 
 
 16368. Can you recollect when that was? — I cannot 
 say, I think about 1875, when there was a general 
 rise over the property. 
 
 16369. It was then raised to £20?— Yes. 
 
 16370. You say that the valuation is £14 ? — Yes. 
 
 16371. You mean the poor law valuation? — That 
 is it. 
 
 Widow 
 Heraghty and 
 Widow Walsh. 
 
 Messrs. Patrick Maguire and Michael Nugent examined. 
 
 16372. Chairman. — You hold the townland of 
 Keelkill together? — Yes. 
 
 16373. "Thirty years ago what rent did you pay? — 
 We paid £20 in the old time ; it was raised since to 
 £45. 
 
 16374. When was the rise? — We could not give 
 any certain date, but it was from time to time up to 
 £45. 
 
 16375. When was the last rise— in 1875? — Yes; 
 about that time. 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 16376. Did you get a notice in 1875, saying there Patrick 
 was going to be a rise? — Yes ; there was a notice that Maguire and 
 
 ^^: -WTQO ^e\ \\a vaicickrl +rt +T\a;f Michael 
 
 it was to be raised to that. 
 
 16377. Do you think that is a, rental you cannot 
 pay ? — Indeed we cannot ; nor the half of it. 
 
 16378. How were you up to 1875, with the rent 
 you had to pay then ?— At the old rent of £20 we 
 thought it was worth it at that time, but since we 
 could not pay it. 
 
 3Y2 
 
 Nugent. 
 
582 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 19, 1880. 
 
 Messrs. 
 Patrick 
 Magnire and 
 Michael 
 NugenU 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Melia. 
 
 16379. What was the rent before the last rise in 
 1875 1^— It was £38. 
 
 16380. Was that a fair rent?— It was too high. 
 
 16381. You consider you were obliged to pay the 
 new rent of £45 ? — We were obliged indeed, and his 
 lordship raised it one time up to £30, at the second 
 rise, and they were willing to pay it, and they said if 
 we give in now there will be another rise in a few 
 years, and his lordship said upon his word he would 
 
 never raise it again as it was the highest townland on 
 the estate, and he allowed us £6 for burning lime, but 
 lie raised the rent afterwards to £45. 
 
 16382. Did you get turf free ? — We had to pay so 
 much every year for turf ever since. 
 
 16383. Was turf given free thirty years ago ] — Tarf 
 was in the land we were paying for before. 
 
 Eev. J. M' Evilly. — The charge for turf is not high. 
 It is only 2s. Qd. but it is on tbeir own lands. 
 
 Mr. Patkick Melia examined. 
 
 16384. Chairman. — Do you hold the whole town- 
 land of Deryalra ? — No, sir. 
 
 16385. Do you speak for the whole townland 1 — 
 Yes, I will. 
 
 16386. How many tenants are there on it? — Four. 
 
 16387. Do you remember in 1866 what was the 
 rent ? — I am only six years in that village. 
 
 16388. Do you know what the townland paid in 
 18661— I do not. 
 
 16389. You are under Lord Sligo ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 16390. What was the old rent?— £18 when I went 
 there. 
 
 16391. What is it now ?— £26. 
 
 16392 I suppose you are the same way as the other 
 tenants, paying something small for turf ? — Yes, 2s. 6(i, 
 
 16393. Was the rise to £26 made in 1875 ?_It 
 was not. 
 
 16394. When was it made ? — We got two rises. We 
 got a rise in eight years, and two years afterwards ve 
 got another rise. Some were raised £2, and some 
 ten shillings. I am raised thirty shillings. 
 
 16395. These gradual rises brought you up to £26 
 altogether ? — Yes. 
 
 16396. You say the valuation was £15 ? — It isnoir 
 £15. 
 
 Ur. Patrick 
 MaUey. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Malley examined. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Shanley. 
 
 16397. Chairman. — How many holdings have you 
 in the townland of Bunraven ? — Four. 
 
 16398. Under Lord Sligo ?— Yes. The townland is 
 held in three divisions, and there are four holdings in 
 my division. I will speak for number two say. 
 
 16399. What is the first rent you remember there ? 
 —£28. 
 
 16400. Had you a rise after that ? — Three rises. 
 
 16401. What were the dates? — The last rise was 
 in 1875. 
 
 16402. What was the rent first ?— £28. 
 
 16403. What was the next rise ?— £2. 
 • 16404. Thatwas£30?— Yes, and £3 on the next 
 and £5 on the last, that makes £38. 
 
 16405. Mr. Shaw. — ^Your neighbours were treated 
 the same way ? — Yes. 
 
 16406. And in the same amount? — Yes. 
 
 16407. The last rise was in 1875 ?— Yes. The valu- 
 ation is £29 lis. 
 
 16408. Do you hold it in common? — We hold itin 
 common. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Shanley examined. 
 
 16409. Chairman. — You are a tenant on the town- 
 lands ot Lackane ? — Yes, under the Earl of Lucan. 
 
 16410. How many tenants hold that? — There are 
 eight holdings. 
 
 16411. You all hold in partnership? — Yes, they 
 have it in common. 
 
 16412. Was that ever raised before 1875?— Yes. 
 It is about sixteen years ago since it was raised £8, and 
 £5 8s. the next time. It was put up to £71 10s. 8ii., 
 and the last is between ten and eleven years since. 
 
 16413. You have been paying £71 10s. So?, since? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16414. Is this mountain land? — Yes, with a small 
 patch of arable land. 
 
 16415. Mr. Shaw. — How far is it from town? — It 
 is eight miles from this, and four from Westport, 
 
 and we pay £9 bog rent for bog that he has given to 
 another tenant that he should have kept for us. 
 
 16416. Chairman.- — You pay the other tenant!— 
 Yes. 
 
 1 641 7. Was that during the whole time of your hold- 
 ing? — No, I am only paying it five years 
 
 16418. Mr. Shaw. — ^You got it for nothing before 
 that ? — ^Yes, and we have to pay the other tenant now. 
 
 16419. Did you ever build any houses? — I suppose 
 they were built before I was born, and they are there 
 still. 
 
 Eev. /. M'Evilly. — Walter Burke got a large farm 
 from the Earl of Lucan and this bog was on it, and 
 when the bog had run out they were obliged to go to 
 this shaking bog. It is all on the same property. 
 There is no other bog on the estate and we have to 
 pay for it in addition to the rent. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Carney. 
 
 John Carney examined. 
 
 16420. Chairman. — You hold under Lord Sligo ? — 
 Yes, at Aughagower. 
 
 16421. Were you there in 1842 ?^I was, but I 
 had no land in my own possession. My father had it. 
 
 16422. What did your father pay ?— £2. 
 
 16423. How many acres? — Thirteen acres three 
 roods, but I am not sure of it, so they told me. 
 
 16424. Was that raised in 1867 ?— It was about 
 that time, I think. 
 
 16425. To£6?— Yes, to£6. 
 
 16426. And was there any rise in 1875? — There 
 was in 1874, I think. They served a notice on 
 Christmas Day. That was the notice he served on me 
 that Christmas Day (produces notice). 
 
 1 (34 27. That is the same document from Mr. Smyth? 
 — Yes. It was raised to £8. The notice was served 
 on Christmas Day, in the precincts of the chapel of 
 Aughagower, by the bailiff of the Marquis of Sligo. 
 I said I was not able to pay £6 in place of £8, and 
 Murphy swore I would never put any crops again in 
 the land. I would rather go out upon the-world than 
 promise to pay a rent I could not pay. It is a black 
 shaking bog. £8 I have had to pay, and there was 
 not a cartful of stones on it when I got it fiom my 
 father. I built a house forty feet by fourteen feet, 
 and offices the same, and never got a shilling towards 
 it from the office. I did some drains too. 
 
 16428. Were these open drains ?---Yes open drains 
 all about it. I had to make a division to close it va. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 533 
 
 for my cattle, and never got a halfpenny for it. He 
 gave £9 or £10 for drainage a few years ago. 
 
 16429. Did he allow it to you or did he drain it 
 himseK? — He gave me the undertaking for it, but I 
 was not able to do the work. 
 
 16430. Was the drainage done for £9 or £10 ?— He Oct. is^isso. 
 was to pay weekly for it. Mr. John 
 
 16431. He paid a man? — Yes, so much a perch ; Carnej. 
 five feet drains two and a half feet wide. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Heraghty examined. 
 
 16432. Chairman. — Do you hold under Iiord Sligo ? 
 — ^Yes ; at Mayneen. 
 
 16433. With others? — No, it is separate for itself 
 
 1 6434. How many acres do you hold 1 — I hold about 
 ten acres now; there were thirteen in it before the 
 railway went through it, and it is reduced by about 
 three acres. 
 
 16435. How long ago did you go into it? — I was 
 born there, and my father was born there too. 
 
 16436. What was the rent you first remember 
 paying 1 — The rent I remember paying first was £9. 
 When Mr. Smyth came to the ofiice he went out on 
 the land and raised the rent from £9 to £12. 
 
 16437. That was the first rise?— Yes, from £9 to 
 £12. 
 
 16438. Is that the present rent? — No, sir. We 
 had it for £1 2 until fifteen years ago, until the raiiway 
 came from Westport to Castlebar, and it took off three 
 acres of the land, and we were reduced £2 in the rent 
 until he gave the land the last rise in 1875 ; and he 
 raised it from £10 then to £13 10s., after losing three 
 acres of the best part of the land and leaving us the 
 Temnant on each side. Only that my father was old 
 — eighty-two years of age— and my mother eighty-one 
 years, I would not ha^ e remained at all, for I could 
 not rent it at that. The chief part was taken away, 
 and he valued the land taken by the railway at 13s. 
 an acre but he valued our land at 26s. an acre. Then 
 father objected to the rise in 1875, and would not sign 
 to it, and when Lord SKgo came home he sent for my 
 father ; and he went to him, and objected to pay the 
 rise. My father was going outside the office door, and 
 Lord Sligo tipped the counter and said " upon my 
 oath if you go outside you will never turn another sod 
 in the place " and my father being old had to go in 
 and sign to the rise. 
 
 16439. Was there any money allowed for the loss 
 
 of the land ? — Not a shilling. There was no lease, and 
 there was no compensation for any one not having a 
 lease. 
 
 16440. No compensation from the railway com- 
 pany ? — Not a shilling, my father made application to 
 see to get the reduced land taken for taxes, and he 
 went into the workhouse. He was told it was wiser 
 for him to go in there in March, and the Reviser told 
 him he had no power to make any allowance on the 
 reduced quantity of land. 
 
 16441. Mr. Shaw.^You are paying rates on the 
 full valuation of the land ? — Yes. 
 
 16442. Chaieman. — You are paying £13 10s., with 
 three and a quarter acres less ? — Yes, and the prime of 
 the land gone, and nothing left but the waste land on 
 each side, which was not worth sixpence a year. 
 
 16443. Rev. J. M'Evilly. — I desire to speak for 
 two men, John Sheridan, and Daniel Haliinan, as I 
 prevented them coming here. They are tenants on the 
 townland of Ballygorman, parish of Aughagaver. 
 Their total rent is £45, and their valuation £23 5s. 
 The land is owned by Mrs. Burke who holds under 
 Lord Liican. They are sub-tenants to Mrs. Burke. 
 
 16444. Was there any advance on the rent lately 
 by her % — No. That rent was settled on them by her 
 husband, Mr. Wajter Burke, and she holds since. Mr. 
 Walter Burke took the best part of the land to himself 
 and put the tenants on the worst part, the bad, 
 broken, scraggy land, and they pay nearly a hundred 
 per cent, over the valuation. The whole farm was 
 valued and consequently their portion ingloho, although 
 bad is valued the same, and they are paying taxes the 
 same as on the good part. 
 
 16445. The O'CoNOE Don. — When was this done? 
 — Rev. /. M' Evilly. — It is twenty-six or twenty- 
 seven years ago. I signed the statement of their case, 
 for I believe it is correct. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Heraghty. 
 
 Mr. Michael M'Donnell examined. 
 
 16446. Chaiemajt. — Are you a tenant at Carramore 
 -on Lord Sligo's property? — Yes. 
 
 16447. And your rent is £11 ? — Yes. 
 
 16448. These other tenants Thomas M'Greal, rent 
 
 £25, valuation £16 ; James Hogan, rent £9, valuation 
 £6; Widow Walsh, rent £7, valuation £5 10s.; 
 Laurence Geraght), rent £5, valuation £3 15s.; 
 Laurence Scahill, rent £4 9s. ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 M'Donnell. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Burke examined. 
 
 16449. Chaieman. — You are a tenant on the town- 
 land of Ayle, on the property of the Marquis of 
 Sligo I— Yes. 
 
 16150. What is your present rent? — £9. 
 
 16451. How long has it been £9? — Seventeen 
 years. 
 
 16452. What was it before? — ^£5 10s. 
 
 16453. What is your valuation? — Four years ago 
 it was £5 15s., and it was raised to £6 3s. 
 
 16454. You speak also for another tenant named 
 Sabina Burke? — Yes. She pays £5 rent, and her 
 valuation is £3 10s. Her former rent was £3. 
 
 16455. It has been raised. — Yes, to £5. That is a 
 rise of £2. 
 
 16456. When was that rise ? — Seventeen years ago. 
 
 16457. Mr. Shaw. — Did you build upon your 
 holding ?— Yes I did, and I had to pay for it. 
 
 16458. You built the house*— Yes. 
 
 16459. Chairman. — And they increased the valua- 
 tion? — Yes, tliey did rise it in the workhouse. My 
 father built the house and improved the land — about 
 Jour acres — which cost him about £60. 
 
 16460. Has the rent been raised since you built the 
 hovise ? — Yes, and since we improved the land. The 
 first time Mr. Smyth came out the land .was all in 
 hishes and scrubs, and when he came out again he 
 raised it to £5 10s., and then to £9. There are two 
 acres not worth 5s. an acre, and I have five acres more 
 under heath worth nothing at all, it would not rear 
 goats. 
 
 16461. Is this part like what you reclaimed ? — Yes, 
 the same sort of land. 
 
 16462. That might be reclaimed if you were inclined 
 to do it ? — Yes, but when he put the third rise on me 
 I had to drop it, with the load of rent he was putting 
 on me. 
 
 16463. You were notable to pay? — We lost money 
 by going on. 
 
 16464. You were afraid that the rent might he 
 raised again ? — ^Yes, if we did any more improvements 
 the rent would be raised again. We are not able to 
 live on it, nor can we leave it. 
 
 16465. Rev. /. lf'.E'm%.—On the townland of Doon- 
 castle, Richard Waters has the same case to make. It 
 
 Mr. Thomfs 
 Burk» 
 
534 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 19, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Barke. 
 
 is on the Earl of Lucan's property. I took the state- 
 ments of the tenants. The rent of the townland in 
 1851 was £80, and it was raised up to £141 ; the 
 ordnance, valuation is £113. 
 
 16466. Chaikman. — Has Eichard Waters case ever 
 been brought before Mr. Larminie ? 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 Thomas Horan 
 and Martin 
 Murphy. 
 
 16467. Rev. J. M'Evilly.—l don't know as to that 
 I am giving you what the tenants gave me after 
 examining them critically. The rent of Rockfield 
 townland was £40, it was raised in 1860 to £100 
 
 Messrs. 'fnoMAS Hoean and Martin Muephy, examined. 
 
 16468. Chaieman. — You are tenants of Lord 
 Lucan's at Dooncastle ?— Yes. 
 
 16469. What are your rents? — The rent of the 
 townland is £141 — £68 17s. M. it was for the half- 
 year in 1865 ; £70 10s. for the half-year, ending 21st 
 August, 1875, and before we had it for £80. 
 
 16470. How long ago? — 1 cannot exactly gay. 
 
 16471. Was it so in your time 1 — It was, I paid it. 
 
 16472. When was the last rise made ? — I could not 
 tell exactly. It is not ten years, but it is over five. 
 
 16473. You are both on the same townland?— Yes. 
 
 16474. You are joint tenants? — Yes. 
 
 r. William 
 Hogan. 
 
 Mr. William Hogan, examined. 
 
 16475. The Marquess of Sligo is my landlord. I 
 got a great rise in my rent. I bought at £13. My 
 valuation is £13 10s., and my rent £19 10s. I built 
 a house and reclaimed land, so that it will grow hay 
 and cabbage, and everything, and we made mearing 
 walls ; and he never gave me a penny reduction or any 
 assistance in making the improvements. I worked 
 away as far as I had money. I got £100 from 
 America, and as long as that stood me I worked 
 away. I have a large family, and I used to pay my 
 rent always correct, but I was not able to pay it last 
 year, and he processed me, and I paced out my fine 
 mare, and left myself without a mare since, and I had 
 to support my family. I had some money sometime 
 before, but I lent it to people, and I was run short, 
 and the priest would not believe me that I had none. 
 
 Mr. Smyth chargea me £10 at first, and he made me 
 a promise he would never puU down my honse. He 
 sent me a process, and notice to the whole townland. 
 I built a house with three large windows and three 
 chimneys, and out-house and stables, and reclaimed 
 about an acre and a half of land, and made beautiful 
 good land of it, and I thought he would give me £10. 
 He charged me 8s. costs on the process, and never gave 
 me a penny reduction. I am not able to meet these 
 calls, and the neighbours cannot afford to give it to 
 me. It was raised from £13 to £19 10s. 
 
 16476. Mr. Shaw. — When was it raised?— The 
 last rise is four years ago. 
 
 16477. You are not able to stand itnow? — Badly. 
 I have a large family — there are ten of us. 
 
 Mr. Walter 
 Gibbons. 
 
 Mr. Waltee Gibbons, Bunrowan, examined. 
 
 16478. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant farmer? — 
 Yes. My father's rent was £22, and it was raised to 
 £26 in 1875, and together with that I got a notice 
 including all rates and taxes, together with the land- 
 lord's portion of poor rate and public cess. Every 
 man on the estate has to pay it. 
 
 16479. You pay the whole poor rate and county 
 cess and don't get any allowance ? — No ; together with 
 that we made a great deal of improvements on the 
 land, drains under grotmd, and closed some of them, 
 built houses on it and offices, and made stone walls. 
 There are fifteen or sixteen acres of the land which 
 have all gone into heather and wet land, and it is not 
 able to graze a good sheep or cow. If they were brought 
 into it they would be dead that day twelve months. 
 There are only a few acres of good land and a cow 
 would eat it all. The poor law valuation is £20 10s., 
 and we are paying £5 10s. over that. 1 went to the 
 Marquess last year and to Lord John Brown. I would 
 get no potatoes from the union. I met Lord Sligo, 
 and I talked to him. I told him I could not get them 
 as I was a poor man — " If 1 kept the last rent I paid 
 you I would not want to be begging for them," and 
 he said, " I can do nothing for you ; if you are not able 
 to pay it give up the land." I said I was welcome to 
 do that as there was no place else for me, but the very 
 
 minute I give up the land to you and that you close 
 the door I wiU have to carry my father or leave him 
 in the workhouse. If I was single-handed I would 
 give you the land to-morrow. I have about £16 of 
 the rack rent paid ; it is very wrong and very unjust, 
 and if it continues in five years it will amount to a 
 year's rent. At the time he raised this rent from i'22 
 to £26 neither the bailiff, agent, or landlord came to 
 see the land or to know what it was worth. Either at 
 home or in the office he valued it without comiageven. 
 to see it. 
 
 16480. Chairman.— That was in 1875 ?— Yes. 
 Mr. Smyth did not come to see my father's land, but 
 in his own opinion whenever he thought there should 
 be a raised rent he raised it. He raised mine from 
 £23 to £26. 
 
 16481. How long has he been agent? — Since two 
 years after 1846. It was either in 1849 or 1850. My 
 father bought the land! In 1846 there was no one 
 in this townland able to pay rent, but three men, and 
 one was my father. The land of the village was about 
 £21 cheaper than it is to-day, and in consequence of one 
 bad year they were not able to pay the rent, and tliere 
 are four or five bad years now, and still they mean to 
 continue the old rent, with a raised rent put on since, 
 
 Mr. Owen 
 Malley. 
 
 Mr. Owen Malley, Carraroe, Aughagower, examined. 
 Your landlord is Lord Sligo? 16483a. Was that in 1875 ?— Yes, the last rise was 
 
 16482. Chairman 
 —Yes. 
 
 16483. What is it you want to say? — He raised the 
 rent on us from £12 to £16. Our valuation was 
 £13 10s., and then he raised the rent. 
 
 in 1875. 
 
 16484. A notice was sent round by Mr. Smyths- 
 
 Yes, I got that notice 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 535 
 
 Mr. Pat. Maley, examined. 
 
 16485. Chairman. — You are also a tenant of Lord 
 Sligo's ?— Yes. 
 
 16486. What have you to complain of ? — My rent 
 
 ■was £16 17s., and now it is £18 15s. My valuation 
 is £12 2s. It is just the same story, we have all the 
 same complaint. 
 
 Oct. 19, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Pat. 
 Maley. 
 
 16487. Mr. Shaw. — Are you a land agent ?^ 
 am a landlord and tenant. 
 
 16488. Who do you hold under? — I hold under 
 Colonel Kiag-Harman. 
 
 16483. In this county 1 — In Eoscommon, also under 
 Mr. Kennedy ia this county. 
 
 1 6490. Have you large farms ? — I am paying within 
 a fraction of £500 a year. 
 
 16491. AU grass lands ? — ^Yes. 
 
 16492. Have you a lease ? — I have. 
 
 1*6493. What length is the lease? — It is an old 
 lease, three lives stUl to run. 
 
 16494. The O'Conoe Don. — Where is your own 
 land 1 — In this county. 
 
 16495. In what part of the county have you pro- 
 perty under King-Harman ? — Near Boyle. 
 
 16496. Mr. Shaw. — Is your own land let to tenants ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 1 6497. Have they leases, or are they yearly tenants ? 
 — Nearly all yearly tenants. I have given leases ia 
 Eoscommon of my own lands, but my principal number 
 of tenants is in this county, and they have no leases, 
 and it was more upon the small tenancies I wished to 
 be examined. 
 
 1 6498. The O'Conob Don. — ^Have you got tenants in 
 Eoscommon ? — Yes, on my own property, which I have 
 in Eoscommon, besides the property I hold from Kiag- 
 Harman, that is also ia the neighbourhood of Boyle. 
 
 16499. Mr. Shaw. ^What do you wish to say about 
 the small tenants, are you satisfied with them ? — I 
 think something should be done to prevent subdivision. 
 No landlord likes the trouble or the expensive way of 
 goiag to court to evict them, there should be some 
 jurisdiction before magistrates to prevent it. 
 
 16500. They have subdivided? — ^Yes, and of late 
 years it is done every hour in the day. 
 
 16501. What part of Mayo is your property ia ? — 
 I have two properties, but the one I speak of is on the 
 other side of Newport, near the sea. 
 
 16502. It is mountain land ? — Yes. 
 
 16503. Large tracts of land? — Yes. 
 
 16504. Is it reclaimable land? — Itcould bereclaimed, 
 but it would not pay to do it. 
 
 16505. Would it not pay tenants to do it with their 
 own labour ? — It would. 
 
 16506. Do you allow them to do it ? — I do, and en- 
 courage them to do it. 
 
 16507. What encouragement do you give? — I pro- 
 mise them a couple of pounds for every acre they 
 reclaim, and help them. 
 
 16508. Do you put any rent on it ? — No, not for the 
 first five years, sometimes seven years. 
 
 16509. Have you a scale? — It has been done in so 
 very few cases that the five years never came. I want 
 to bring forward one or two instances of subletting 
 .and subdivision. John Sweeny held seventeen acres, 
 three roods, thirty-nine perches, at a rent of £12 10s. 
 There are eight tenants there, eight families acknow- 
 ledo-ed, and four unacknowledged, and the children are 
 thirty-two in number, that is twelve families on seven- 
 teen acres of mountain land. 
 
 16510. They have large tracts of gracing land 
 JDesides? — Yes. 
 
 16511. And that is the best thing they have?— But 
 they have no cattle, what good is it. 
 
 16512. Have they no cattle ?— No, they are m a 
 semi state of starvation. ^ 
 
 1 65 1 3. They had up to the bad years ?— No, I don t 
 suppose they ever had. 
 
 16514. Do you try to prevent subdivision ? — Yes, 
 but it is almost impossible. 
 
 Mr. EoBERT Vesey Sidney, j.p., examined. 
 No, I 
 
 165J15. There were four tenants originally on it? — 
 Yes, and they became twelve. 
 
 16516. The O'Conok Don. — In what space of time ? 
 — I could not tell. In another case, thirty-two acres, 
 with a rent of £13 15s., have eight tenants, where 
 there were originally three. 
 
 16517. Mr. Shaw. — The acreage you give is large 
 for the rent ? — Yes, that is a fenced-in holding. 
 
 16518. All the rest is mountain grazing? — Three 
 thousand or four thousand acres mountain grazing. 
 
 16519. Chairman. — Were these subdivisions made 
 before you bought it ? — Yes. 
 
 16520. Mr. Shaw. — They have a right to the 
 mountain ? — They have rundale. 
 
 16521. Do they let the grazing if they cannot put 
 their own cattle on it ? — No. In order to get the 
 estate into order no man's life would be worth six- 
 pence piirchase if he attempted to do what would be 
 necessary. 
 
 16522. The rents are very small? — Yes. Twenty 
 acres, £13 ; seventeen acres, £12 10s. ; nineteen acres, 
 £14. 
 
 16523. You collect from one person where they 
 hold in common ? — Yes. 
 
 16524. And he collects from the others? — Yea. 
 
 16525. The O'Conor Don. — What do you propose 
 as a remedy ? — There ought to be some jurisdiction to 
 prevent future subdivision. 
 
 16526. What- would you do with the people who 
 have subdivided ? — To help the tenants there is out of 
 the power of the landlord or any government. The 
 only way to do it is by assisted emigration. 
 
 16527. Mr. Shaw. — Is there much of that moun 
 tain that could be reclaimed? — Well, I daresay a 
 couple of thousand acres could be reclaimed, but I 
 don't think it would pay the cost to do it. 
 
 16528. Suppose you have twelve tenants on seven- 
 teen acres could you not attach mountain runs to each 
 of their holdings ? — They have full permission to re- 
 claim now if they wish. 
 
 16529. But it is in common now, and no one likes 
 to do a thing if he would not be doing it for himself ? 
 — Colonel Gore's family attempted it on an adjoining 
 property and they had to desist because the tenantry 
 objected to it.. 
 
 16530. Have you land that is not mountain let to 
 tenants ? — The Eoscommon land is not mountain land. 
 It is all good grass land. 
 
 16531. Did they subdivide there? — Not to the 
 same extent. The land is good. 
 
 16532. Chairman. — The man values what he has 
 that is good and doesn't like to divide it, and where 
 it is bad he tries to get something out of it from 
 another tenant? — I don't see anything but a new 
 valuation for every part. 
 
 16533. The O'Conor Don. — A new Government 
 valuation ? — Yes. 
 
 16534. Mr. Shaw.— How would that help you? — 
 It would show the people what the valuation is. The 
 present valuation is no basis whatever for the present 
 rent. 
 
 16535. Do you think it is possible to make a gene- 
 ral valuation a basis for rent ? — It would take years 
 to do it. 
 
 16536. By the time it was finished in one end of 
 the Kingdom he should begin at the other end ? — 
 Another good system would be a modified form of the 
 Longfield lease. 
 
 16537. You have no tenant-right on your property ? 
 — My father allowed tenant-right in Eoscommon. A 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 Vesey Stoney, 
 J.P. 
 
5.3G 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct, 19, 1880 
 
 Mr. Robert 
 Vesey Stone3'- 
 J. P. 
 
 man is allowed to sell any little riglit he may have in 
 the holding, but the landlord chooses the tenant. 
 
 165-38. Does the landlord generally raise the rent 
 on a change of tenancy 1 — Yes, to some small degree. 
 
 16539. And does he raise the rent on the death of 
 the father if the son comes in? — Yes, on anything 
 that is a change of tenancy, or the falling in of a 
 lease. 
 
 16540. It is generally done by valuation? — Yes. 
 
 16541. You send a public valuator? — Yes. 
 
 16542. The people are dissatisfied with their rents 
 in this country ? — They were not up to two years ago. 
 There were no people could pay better. 
 
 16543. The times were very bad?— I don't think 
 the times had anything to do with it. The very best 
 tenants I have are the men who won't pay. 
 
 16544. What do you mean by the best? — The best 
 off. A man who' pays £115 a year. I saw him with 
 two very good plough horses, a fair stock in the farm- 
 yard, and he has not paid a farthing for the last two 
 years. 
 
 16545. Had he stock on his land? — Yes. He was 
 ploughing when I saw him. 
 
 16546. "What reason does he give? — Afraid to pay 
 is the mere excuse. This is on a small property near 
 Ballinrobe. 
 
 16547. Have you had any ejectments? — I had one 
 ejectment in Roscommon, but I don't know whether 
 it is carried out yet or not. I had one on my own 
 property near Newport. It was a town house, and 
 the woman was evicted, but came back the same 
 night, and she is in it now although I have had her 
 up and fined time after time. The Land League pays 
 the fine and she is in the house stiU. 
 
 16548. Have you had any difficulty generally in 
 collecting your rents ? — ^Yes. 
 
 16549. This year and last year? — Well, it is only 
 by coaxing you can get any rent at all. 
 
 16550. Do these people on the mountain farms pay 
 well ? — They pay better than the others I have been 
 giving employment to a large extent latterly. I have spent 
 £7,000 or £8,000 in five or six years on the property. 
 
 16551. What was it on? — On drainage and reclaim- 
 ing clay land. 
 
 16552. You have it in your own hands? — Yes. 
 
 16553. Did it pay you? — I reclaimed some mountain 
 land, and it did not pay, but I reclaimed clay land 
 which was covered with stones, and that did pay, and 
 I have very good meadows on it. 
 
 16554. Did you try to reclaim cut-away bog ? — Yes. 
 It did not pay. 
 
 16555. But the clayey stony land that was cleared 
 and drained did pay ? — Yes, and I have got good crops 
 off it. 
 
 16556. Itwotddpaya small tenant to do it with 
 his own labour ? — I think if they were to do it them- 
 
 selves it would pay. If they had to pay Is. 6(^. a da 
 to a man it would not, but if they had the labom- f 
 their own family to do it, it would pay. 
 
 16557. Don't you think they would reclaim if tW 
 had held out to them the inducement of a long tenure! 
 — I don't think they care for a lease. 
 
 16558. But they like security and fixity of tenure 
 which good landlords really give their tenants, and 
 there is no eviction except for non-payment of rent!— 
 I never heard of any eviction in my neighbourhood 
 except for non-payment. 
 
 16559. If the rents could be fixed at a reasonable 
 rate, and .security given, don't you think it would 
 work well ? — The Land Act has done no good for im- 
 provements. 
 
 16560. You think there should be something fu^ 
 ther in that direction giving them a real interest, and 
 giving the landlord what was fair, of course ?— I don't 
 know. I think here and there where there is tiiift 
 whether the man got a thirty-one years' lease or a 
 hundred years' lease, it would be the same tW. 
 I think, in a hundred, you wUl not find one thrifty 
 man. 
 
 16561. You have hundreds idle in this county, and 
 the only thing they want is labour ; then you have 
 land that is not reclaimed, and land not wisely, or 
 to half its extent ' employed, so that you have the 
 raw material that would pay if you bring it into 
 shape. Don't you think there should be some manner 
 of bringing the two together ? — I think, probably, ia 
 a hundred years' time when the raw material is pro- 
 perly worked up you might begin, but I don't believe 
 it would pay at the present moment. I think it would 
 be a good thing to establish peasant proprietary as an 
 example to others, if you could get hold of one thrifty 
 man for the purpose. I would not make peasant pro- 
 prietors of any men who could not show one-fourth of 
 the money out of his own saving. 
 
 16562. These mountain lands are not worth any- 
 thing at present, so that any moderate rent would 
 be an advantage to the landlord ? — I dare say it 
 would. 
 
 16563. The O'Conor Don.— Is there any othei 
 point you wish to give evidence upon ? — I think there 
 is one thing you must take into consideration in re- 
 claiming land. If you give land to be reclaimed and 
 put a tenant on it he will want a comfortable house 
 which will cost as much as the reclamation of the 
 land. 
 
 16564. They generally knock up a house for them 
 selves ? — They will, for themselves, but if you want 
 the reclamation done they will not, and they wiU not 
 be content with the ordinary house. I have buUt a 
 few myself, and they are gradually getting into the 
 same disorderly, filthy state, with cess-pools before the 
 door the same as the others. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Burke. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Burke examined. 
 
 16565. The O'Conor Don. — Who is your landlord? 
 —Mr. M'Cabe. 
 
 16566. What is your rent?— £14. 
 
 16567. And your valuation?— £6 15s. 
 
 16568. When was that rent fixed ? — Abou t fourteen 
 years ago. 
 
 16569. Wliat were you paying before that ? — It was 
 at that time I got the land, and I got it then at £12, 
 and in three years time he raised it to £14, paying all 
 taxes, getting no allowance at any time for poor rates 
 or anything else. 
 
 1.6570. Did you do any improvements on your lands ? 
 
 — Some drains. It was a shaking bog, and hardly 
 any person could walk upon it. 
 
 16571. Was it open drains? — Yes, open drains, to 
 dry the land, otherwise we could not work upon it. 
 
 16572. What is the total rental of your townland? 
 — I think the whole amount of it is £49. 
 
 16573. Your landlord is a middleman? — Yes; an^ 
 he pays £9 15s. himself for the whole amount. 
 
 16574. And'the tenants pay him £49?— Yes. He 
 is bailiff to the landlord. 
 
 16575. When does his lease drop ?— I am not sure, 
 
 16576. Is it for lives or years ? — I don't know. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 537 
 
 Mr. Patrick Butlee examined. 
 
 16577. The O'Conor Don. — Who is your landlord ? 
 — Patrick M'Oabe. 
 
 16578. He is a middleman? — Yes; and bailiff to 
 the head landlord. 
 
 16579. Who is the head landlord "!— Lord Gilford. 
 
 16580. What is your rent?— My rent is £12. 
 
 16581. What is your valuation? — 30s., and lam 
 told by the poor law guardian that it is only 20s. 
 
 16582. Is this reclaimed bog? — Yes; and I re- 
 claimed about four acres of swampy lake where pike 
 and trout and eels were when I came there. I have 
 it giving a crop now. He gives me no compensation 
 or money towards it. 
 
 16583. When was the rent raised ? — It is thirteen 
 years this spring since it was raised. 
 
 16584. How long before was it at the same rent?— 
 Only two years. It was £S 10*., and he raised it to 
 .£10. My son was going to build, and he told him he 
 would raise it to £10 ; and my son said, " I will not 
 build ;" and he said, " Build any buildings or no build- 
 ings, you must pay it." I have the land fifteen years, 
 and when I came into it my rent was £8 10s., and I 
 built a house and barn and an outhouse, with a barn 
 for my son, and the rent was raised. 
 
 16585. Mr. Shaw. — Was ^that after the rent was 
 raised ? — Yes. 
 
 16586. Are you dividing the holding between your- 
 self and your son ? — Yes. 
 
 16587. And you are both there, now ? — Yes. 
 
 16588. The O'Conor Don. — Did he object to your 
 dividing it ? — No, he never did. 
 
 16589. Mr. Shaw. — Your son is married ?— He is. 
 
 16590. Chairman. — You were able to pay until 
 these wet years came on ? — I was, by myself and my 
 two sons going to England to earn the money. 
 
 16591. You went to England always till the bad 
 times came ? — We went in the harvest time, and came 
 home at the spring. 
 
 16592. You did not go there in the bad times? — 
 No. 
 
 16593. Before that time could you have earned 
 your living out of the land without going to England ? 
 — No, sir, I could not. 
 
 16594. Was it all bog when you came there?— It 
 was all swampy, wet bog, with neither a house nor 
 wall nor anything. 
 
 16595. The O'Conor Don. — Did you pay any fine 
 upon going into it ? — No. 
 
 16596. Do you know that the land, for which you 
 pay X49, was valued at £Q ? — I do. 
 
 Oct. 19, isso. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Butler. 
 
 Mr. Michael Duffy examined. 
 
 16597. The O'Conoe Don. — You are a tenant of 
 Mr. M'Cabe?— Yes. 
 
 16598. You have heard the last witness's evidence ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16599. And your case is the same ? — Yes. 
 
 16600. Your rent was £5,_and it was raised to £7 ? 
 — ^Yes, sir. 
 
 16601. And the poor law valuation is 25s.? — Yes. 
 The first rent I paid was £6, and he reduced it £1. 
 My father-in-law used to be grumbling, and sayiug it 
 
 was too dear, and from that out, he raised it to £7. 
 It is only common boggy land. 
 
 16602. You reclaimed and drained it? — Yes, as 
 well as ever I could. 
 
 16603. Mr. Shaw. — Do you go to England for the 
 harvest 1 — I did ; but I could not stand it. 
 
 16604. The O'Conor Don. — Have you been able to 
 pay the rent last year ? — I paid some of it. 
 
 16605. Did he make any reduction? — He gave me 
 £4 : he save it to me for £3. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Duffv. 
 
 Mr. Stephen Flynn examined. 
 
 16606. The O'Conor Don.— You are a tenant of 
 Mr. Charles Crotty's ?— Yes. 
 
 16607. What is your rent?— £7 2s. 6d. 
 
 16608. And your valuation ? — £i. 
 
 16609. Do you hold a divided holding ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 16610. What is the rent of the whole holding ?— 
 £15 5s. 
 
 16611. Tell us what you did with the land — did 
 you reclaim it ? — I did, sir. 
 
 16612. What state was it in when you got it ? — It 
 was in a very bad state — all cut away bog, part of it 
 heavy land and n.ishy land, and other patches of lea 
 land that was sewed a long time. 
 
 16613. Do you hold any other land besides this ? — 
 Yes ; we were changed down to this common land ; 
 we had for pasture very good land with it. 
 
 16614. Were you evicted ofi" the good land? — Yes. 
 
 16615. When did this happen? — i^bout twenty 
 years ago. It was not for non-payment of rent. 
 
 16616. Mr. Shaw. — Did the landlord get it into 
 his own hands ? — Yes, and he has had it ever since as 
 a farm. 
 
 16617. The O'Conor Don. — The good land was 
 taken from you, and you were put upon the bad land ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16618. When you were put upon the bog, was the 
 rent fixed at the present rate ? — It was. 
 
 16619. At £7 2s. 6d.1 — No. We bought a portion 
 of the land for £15 5s. 
 
 16620. That was the rent that was fixed upon it? — 
 Yes. 
 
 16621. You did not give any money for it? — No. 
 16623. What was the rent of the townland in 
 
 1846?— £100. 
 
 Mr. Stephen 
 
 16623. What is the rent now paid for the bog part ^'^'"''• 
 of it ?— £149. 
 
 16624. Mr. Shaw. — After taking off the clay land ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16625. Have you been allowed grazing on the land 
 that was taken from you ? — We had it one season for 
 about eight months of the year. 
 
 16626. What had you to pay for the grazing ?— £60. 
 We were not allowed the grazing ; we had to pay for it. 
 
 16627. That is, the grazing on the land that was 
 taken from you 1 — Yes. - 
 
 16628. The O'Conor Don. — Is there a rule on the 
 estate against subletting ? — Yes ; he made a rule about 
 that. Then they did sublet and he forced them to sign 
 an agreement. 
 
 16629. Did you sublet? — Yes; I am subtenant to 
 my brother. 
 
 16630. Did he fine you for that ?— Yes. 
 
 16631. What had you to pay ? — 1 5s. each, and there 
 was a woman who had to pay 5s. fine. 
 
 16632. Did all the tenants from whom the good land 
 was taken get some of this bog land ? — Yes ; all that 
 remained in the village of them. 
 
 16633. Do you know anything about the Kinnury 
 tenants 1 — I do ; I am one of them myself. We paid 
 £100 in 1846. 
 
 16634. Was that rent raised ? — It was raised at the 
 time Mr. Grotty came there. 
 
 16635. What time was that ? — I could not tell. 
 
 16636. Was it about 1853?— He is about thirty 
 years on the land altogether. 
 
 16637. What was it raised to then? — £144, about. 
 He made twenty-four stripes of the whole village and 
 common, and he put £6 on each stripe. 
 
IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. ID, 18SC. 
 
 Mr. Stephen 
 FJynn. 
 
 16638. In 1853 did lie evict any tenants'! — He did. 
 
 16639. What did he do with them ?— He evicted 
 them and turned them out — eleven tenants. He kept 
 all the clay land himself — the best part of it, and made 
 farms of the bog part ; he made a farm of the good part 
 and kept it a few years himself, but he had to sell it to 
 an Englishman — he could not live upon it. About 
 eight years afterwards he changed these tenants all 
 
 into it out of the good land. There were twcnty-tliree 
 tenants in all, and he evicted eleven. He made each 
 of the remaining tenants pay the cost of evicting the 
 others. He never gave us a copy of the lease but he 
 charged for it. I think he made us pay 3s. Qd., and he 
 made us pay deposit money for the keeping of the 
 lease — £i. He never gave us back any of this money 
 ai}d I asked it off him at dififerent times. 
 
 Mr. PatriOs. 
 Kane. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Kane examined. 
 
 16640. The O'Conoe Don.— You are a tenant of 
 Mr. Crotty's ?— Yes. 
 
 16641. Your rent is £10 and the valuation £5 15s. 1 
 —Yes. 
 
 16642. Do you pay anything besides the rent? — 
 Yes ; taxes, poor rate, and bog money. 
 
 1G643. How much bog money? — 7s. &d., all the 
 tenants pay that. 
 
 16644. Do you have to cut turf for him? — I was 
 cutting turf at 7s. 6d. on another man's bog, and they 
 processed me for it, and he promised me bogs in other 
 places, but he never did .since. He marked out a 
 strip for me for which I paid so much rent, and I went 
 in on the other man's strip to cut turf according to the 
 landlord's direction, and I paid 7s. 6d. a year for that, 
 
 but Mr. Crotty never allowed the other man a farthing 
 for that. We both paid £10 a year. He charged me 
 deposit money for a lease, and he never gave me the 
 lease or the deposit money. He read the lease to me 
 but I did not know half of what he was reading, and 
 he gave me back £2 out of the £4 deposit money, 
 because I was a poor man striving to rear a family in 
 a poor place. 
 
 16645. Have you paid the rent this year!— I 
 have paid some of it. 
 
 -16646. Mr. Shaw. — You paid as much as you could! 
 — I paid more than I could; 
 
 16647. Do you owe much? — I do, but I gave the 
 landlord the preference at all events. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 gins. 
 
 Mr. Patkick Higgins examined. 
 
 16648. The O'Conoe Don. — You are also a tenant 
 of Mr. Crotty's ? — Yes, on another townland. 
 
 16649. How many other tenants are on it? — Two 
 more. 
 
 16650. How much do you pay altogether? — £26 3s. 
 and bog money. 
 
 16651. How much for bog money 1 — 7s. 6d. each. 
 
 16652. What is the ordnance valuation ? — £4 15s. 
 
 16653. When did you take this land? — My father 
 took it fifty years before. I am about fifty years 
 there since my father. 
 
 16654. What state was it in when you father got it ? 
 — It was grass land ; there was not a sod broken on it. 
 There used to be snipe on it. 
 
 16655. Chairman. — Is it dry now? — It is, and we 
 are draining it and drying it as well as we can. 
 
 16656. How many acres of reclaimed land have you 
 yourself now ? — Between good and bad I think seven- 
 teen and a half 
 
 16657. How many are growing crops for you? — 
 Three or four acres, there is some not worth being 
 sowed at all. 
 
 16658. Is that quite drained? — It is drained but I 
 did not close them. 
 
 16659. You cut the drains deep, and left them open ? 
 — Yes. 
 
 16660. They are open drains? — Yes, the land is 
 very wet. 
 
 16661 Do you keep them open every year so as to 
 prevent their filling up again ?— -We do. 
 
 16662. Is the water always running in them? — 
 It is. 
 
 16663. The O'Conoe Don. — What is your own 
 rent?— My rent is £8 13s. id. 
 
 16664. What was the rent of the whole land for 
 which the £26 is now paid ?— The first my father gave 
 for it was £9 a year. I was paying £9 myself before 
 Mr. Crotty came in. He raised it from £9 to £26. 
 
 16665. When was that? — I think he is in it now 
 thirty years. 
 
 16666. Did he raise it all at once from £9 to £26, 
 or by degrees ? — By degrees. 
 
 16667. When was the last rise? — I think it is 
 twenty years ago. 
 
 16668. You have not been changed since? — No. 
 
 16669. Yovi have not had a rise for twenty years! 
 — No, sir. 
 
 16670. Were you processed for the rent at any 
 time ? — I was processed two years ago for a years rent, 
 and when I did not come in to settle with him in ten 
 days time — I stayed two days longer, and when I came 
 in he would not give me any settlement until I paid 
 £1 17s. 6cZ. for costs. He said I -would only have 10s. 
 to pay if I came within ten days, bnt I had to pay 
 £1 17s. 6d., and he never entered my process. 
 
 16671. Had he the process entered? — No, he had 
 not entered the process. 
 
 16672. Mr. Shaw. — Butyou coidd nothelp youraelf ? 
 — I had to go in and he would not take it from me 
 until I came in to Mr. Kelly, and settled vitt tim. 
 I buUt a house and reclaimed the land, and I never got 
 a penny help. He has my £4 yet, and he threatens 
 me if I don't pay turf money 
 
 16673. Rev. Mr. Thomas, p.p. — I think owing to 
 the small quantity of land these men had they sunk 
 into arrears. I know the arrears accumulated a good 
 deal before the bad years came. The bad prices, 
 together with the rents and the badness of the harvest 
 in England, prevented them paying their rent. 
 
 16674. The O'Conoe Don.— Wasn't this Mr. Crotty's 
 life attempted on one or two occasions ? 
 
 Rev. 3Ir. Thomas. — Yes, and he always takes a 
 pride in showing where the bullets went through Us 
 hat. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 O'Donnell. 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Donnell examined. 
 
 16675. Chairman. — Who is your landlord ?— Mr. 
 Stephen Gibbons, of Westport. 
 
 16670. How much land do you hold ?— I hold six- 
 *®^f„°':^°''i:'^*een acres altogether good and bad as it is. 
 
 ibbu. What do you pay for it ?— £15 13s. 
 
 16678. How long have you been paying the same 
 rent ? — I am paying it myself for the last si;xteen years. 
 
 16679. Mr. Shaw. — It has not been raised for a 
 good while ? — No, sir, because it was too high as it was. 
 
 16680. Is it near the town? — No, sir, it is three 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 539 
 
 miles from the towii of Westport, and the valuation is 
 ^9 6s., and paying that rent it must be out of the way- 
 dear. 
 
 16681. Is it bad land? — It is not worth 5s. an acre 
 — with rocks and stones. It is spongey ground. 
 
 16682. Did you buy it? — No, my father lived there 
 before me. 
 
 16683. Ch AIRMAN. — Did you do anything in the 
 way of improving it ? — I did. I reclaimed about an 
 acre and a half myself since I came there, I took 
 stones and rocks out of it. 
 
 16684. Was it old turf bog 1 — It was clay land. 
 
 16685. Did turf grow on it 1—No, it was hilly. 
 
 16686. Did you make the stones into walls and 
 roads ? — Yes. 
 
 16687. Did you make any drains with stones'? — 
 Yes, I did the best I could. 
 
 16688. Did you find that that improved the land a 
 good deal 1 — I found all the drains I made drained the 
 land, but I have about ten acres of hill, and it could 
 not be drained, for it is all rocks and stones, and you 
 could not get three yards without a big rock. The 
 rent was not raised on me, but it was strijjed a few 
 years before I went there, and he raised the rent too 
 high. My father lived there, and I remained there 
 and got married after he died. He is dead about ten 
 or twelve years. 
 
 16689. Mr. Shaw. — Did you ask him to reduce the 
 rent at all 1 — He would not reduce it. We offered 
 hiTTi the valuation of the land a few days ago. 
 
 16690. Before these bad times did you ever com- 
 plain ? — We often complained, but it was no use, he 
 would not reduce the rent. 
 
 16691. You built a honse 1 — Yes, my father built 
 one housej and when I got married I built another 
 
 -He said he would not give it. 
 Their valuation is 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 O'Donnell. 
 
 house. My father died, and I have got both houses Oct. 19, 1880 
 now. 
 
 16692. Ci-iAmiiAX. — What did he say when you 
 asked for a reduction 't 
 I was sent here by the townland. 
 low, and their rent very high. 
 
 16693. How many tenants are there on the town- 
 land 1 — There's John Ready, Pat. Heally, John Hanley, 
 Thomas Gibbons, Martin Murray, and others. 
 
 16694. Are their rents in the same way? — Yes; 
 the valuation is low, but it was high enough for the 
 land, and the rent is up to nearly double on each of them. 
 
 16695. Do you find by the actual working of the 
 land that you cannot make the rent properly out of it, 
 or is it only because you see that the valuation is low 
 that you think the rent high 1 — No, sir, but the land 
 is bad. 
 
 16696. You say it is not worth the rent ? — I could 
 swear to it. 
 
 16697. 'From trying it yourself? — Yes. 
 
 16698. Have you worked hard upon it? — Yes, and 
 I could say it is not worth anything like the rent, and 
 signs upon it we are not able to pay it. This last 
 three years the crops failed, and the potatoes did not 
 grow. 
 
 16699. Mr. Shaw. — Were they able to pay the rent 
 before in the good times ? — Yes they were, and did 
 pay it, but some owed two years' rent before. 
 
 1 6700. Chairman. — Before the bad years were they 
 able to lay by anything 1 — No, sir. They got along 
 with the rent paid, they might have a cow or two. 
 
 ,16701. Were any of them in the habit of going 
 to England 1 — Yes, most of them. 
 
 16702. Do you go yourself? — No, I had no help. 
 The Commissioners then adjourned until next 
 
 TWENTY-THIRD DAY— WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat in the Courthouse, Castlebar, at 10.30 o'clock. 
 
 Present : — The Eight Hon. the Earl of Bessborough, Chairman ; The O'CoNOR DON, and 
 
 William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 
 Mr. Edwin Thomas, Barley Hill, Westport examined. 
 
 Oct, 20, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Edwin 
 Thomas. 
 
 16703. Chairman. — You are an agent and also a 
 tenant farmer ? — Yes. 
 
 16704. What is the extent of yoixr agency? — One 
 agency is 7,600 acres. 
 
 16705. 7,600 acres — whereabouts is that? — That is 
 the Newport estate. Sir George O'Donnell's. 
 
 1 6706. 9,700 acres — where isthat ? — Between Clare- 
 morris and Ballyhaunis. 
 
 16707. And whose is that? — Mr. John Nolan 
 Ferrall's. 
 
 16708. 19,150 acres? — ^Yes; I was agent to that. 
 I am not agent to that estate now, but I can speak of 
 it ; in fact, I know it better than the others. 
 
 16709. Whose is that ?— The trustees of the Achill 
 Mission estate. It is on the island of Achill. 
 
 16710. Mr. Shaw. — Has that been sold ? — No. 
 
 16711. They were ti-ying to sell it? — Yes, but they 
 would not get anybody to buy it at present. 
 
 16712. Chairman. — On the properties you are con- 
 nected with, is there tenant-right or something corres- 
 ponding to it ? — There is tenant-right on all of them, 
 a sale with the consent of the landlord. 
 
 16713. Any restriction as to price? — No restriction 
 as to price whatever, provided the tenant is solvent — 
 the sale is even not restricted to the other tenants on 
 the estate. 
 
 16714. Mr. Shaw, — Is that common in the county, 
 that liberty to sell ? — On some estates it is not allowed 
 at all ; on the adjoining estate of Lord Sligo I believe 
 it is forbidden, but we have had it for years on the 
 NeNvport estate and on Mr. Fen-all's. 
 
 16715. Chairman. — Has the result been that you 
 have had no great mimber of evictions ?— I don't think 
 
 it has affected it at all, but since the land agitation I 
 don't think they would either buy or sell, in fact they 
 would not be allowed by the Land League. 
 
 16716. Mr. Shaw. — If a man was selling of his own 
 accord would he not be allowed ? — No, not even if a 
 man wished to sell and go to America. I had a case 
 last week on Lord Vaux's estate, a small estate near 
 Newport; a woman wanted to sell and go to America 
 and she would not be allowed. 
 
 16717. Chairman. — Is that from the bad times not 
 making the buying so popular? — I think they are 
 prevented ; that the idea has got into their heads that 
 they can have the land for nothing. 
 
 16718. That would be a disinclination to sell, not 
 to purchase ? — I think both, it has completely come to a 
 stand-still, 
 
 16719. Mr. Shaw. — Might it not be from the times 
 being bad and the rents high that the people don't wish 
 to invest at present ? — I don't think it is, because the 
 tenants I speak of, their rents are very small indeed. 
 
 16720. And small holdings? — Yes, too small; in 
 fact it is quite impossible for them to live on them. 
 
 16721. Chairman. — How do they support them- 
 selves then ? — They go to England and Scotland, that 
 is the way the small tenants support themselves.- The 
 average of them only hold about seven or eight acres, 
 at the outside ten acres of inferior land ; some of them 
 not so much. In Achill they are very limited indeed. 
 
 16722. What sort of land is it?— In Achill it is all 
 mountain land, reclaimed. 
 
 16723. To what extent reclaimed? — On the AchUl 
 Mission estate there are 600 tenants, and there are only 
 
 3Z2 
 
540 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oot. 20, 18S0. about 2,000 acres reclaimed, and that leaves a very 
 „ .Z7~. small amount for each tenant. 
 
 Thomaa'" 16724. Is that reclamation real and permanent and 
 
 of good description ? — It is reclaimed as far as giving 
 tillage crops. 
 
 1672.5. And land drained? — ^Well only very 
 moderately drained. 
 
 16726. Mr. Shaw.— All done by the tenants ?— All 
 done by the tenants, it is merely a mearing between 
 their open drains. 
 
 16727. Have they any commonage? — They have a 
 mountain but they pay 5s. each head for the cattle 
 they put on it per annum. 
 
 16728. What would be the rents now on that pro- 
 perty? — The rents vary from 5s. an acre to £1. 
 
 16729. There are some as high as £\ ? — Some ; very 
 few. They all live in villages at that place. It is 
 most remarkable, perhaps the only place in the west 
 they live in vUlages, and their holdings are a long way 
 from them. It is a very bad system. 
 
 16730. Then seven or eight acres would be a large 
 farm? — It would, ia fact the average is about four 
 acres. 
 
 16731. Do they fish?— Very little, it is greatly 
 neglected. 
 
 16732. There is fishing ?— Plenty of fishing, I have 
 fished myself and know what it is but it is greatly 
 neglected. 
 
 16733. They require large boats? — Yes, and they 
 ; have not got those large boats, like Yarmouth boats 
 
 and Dublin trawlers, but at the same time you would 
 have to take away a great portion of the population, 
 they are too crowded, even if the fisheries were 
 
 I opened up. 
 
 i 16734. Chairman. — Does that arise from subdivi- 
 
 i sion ? — It did. 
 
 16735. Mr. Shaw.— Is that continuing ? — It is, you 
 cannot prevent it. I never recognised it on the rental, 
 but I know it was done, you cannot prevent it. 
 
 16736. Chairman. — To a great extent they live by 
 the money they earn in England ? — Solely. 
 
 16737. Do you think anything could be done by 
 giving employment there for the reclamation of the 
 land ? — You might give employment, but I don't think 
 you could get any beneficial effect from it. I don't 
 think the people could sustain themselves on the hold- 
 ings they reclaimed. 
 
 16738. Mr. Shaw. — Is there much land reclaimable 
 in addition to the small farms ? — A good deal of land. 
 
 16739. That could be made as good as the small 
 farms? — I believe it could. 
 
 16740. If their holdings were squared and they got 
 strips of this unreclaimed land on long leases at low 
 rents, do you not think they could reclaim ? — By 
 degrees, I think a good deal could be done, by giving 
 a little each year, it is very difficult to labour it. 
 
 1G741. Is there not plenty of manure to be got ? — 
 There is not. 
 
 16742. Sea-weed? — There is not sufficient sea 
 manure for the land that is tilled at present. 
 
 16743. Chairman. — If it could be done in that way, 
 do you think it would be remunerative to the persons 
 who found the money, suppose they borrowed from 
 Government ? Do you think there would be a rent 
 payable on it sufficient to make it remunerative ? — I 
 am afraid it would not. It has been tried in some of 
 the neighbouring districts, Ballycroy, by Mr. Clive, 
 and I don't think he has made money on it. 
 
 16744. Do you think there is any desire there, on 
 the part of the people, to purchase their own hold- 
 ings ?— I think not, the system on that island is quite 
 different from other places, the holdings are so small 
 and so cut up jow could not lay them out. For in- 
 stance a strip of laud laid out years ago, there may 
 be eight different holdings on that now. 
 
 1674-5. There might be a restriping and then selling, 
 if such a tiling was to be carried out ?— Then what are 
 you to do with those who are cut out. I think emi- 
 gration is the only thing for those small people, if they 
 , can be assisted by Government. 
 
 16746. Mr. Shaw.— Would they go?_I really 
 think some of them would. 
 
 16747. Families? — Families would go if they got 
 an iaducement, it is really a miserable state of things 
 no one has an idea of it. 
 
 16748. Chairman. — Do you think if they wait 
 their land could be added with advantage to that held 
 by the others? — I do. I think if you took two-thii-ds 
 off, the rest might live. 
 
 16749. Mr. Shaw. — Are there any other large pro- 
 prietors on the island ? — Mr. Pike, he resides there. 
 
 16750. Does he allow tenant-right? — I think he 
 does. 
 
 16751. Subdividing? — He says he does not allow 
 them to subdivide, no one actually does, but you can- 
 not prevent it. Two of them live in one house and 
 divide the land between them. 
 
 16752. Divide the produce?— Yes. 
 
 16753. Chairman. ^They began by dividing tie 
 house, and then apportioning off' the land?— Yes. 
 The daughter gets married and gets one-third of the 
 land, or the son gets married and gets one-third, and 
 so on. 
 
 16754. Mr. Shaw. — But the men go to England! 
 — The able-bodied men go to England and the girls to 
 Scotland, they simply pay for these houses as lodgings 
 for the winter. 
 
 16755. Chairman. — Do the family all go?— The 
 girls go, any of those that can, to Scotland. 
 
 16756. Mr. Shaw. — The children remain there and 
 old women ? — Yes. 
 
 16757. And they are really English and Scotch 
 labourers ? — Yes. 
 
 16758. Chairman. — How is it they are not better 
 off when they have got the earnings of several months? 
 — The amount of money they bring back is on an 
 average £\Q, some may bring £1 or £8, and others 
 £15. 
 
 16759. Mr. Shaw. — Out of that they have to pay 
 rent ? — Yes, and they have as much potatoes, probably, 
 as will stand them three or four months in the winter. 
 
 16760. Chairman. — Is there turf there? — There 
 is plenty of turf free, but they have nothing else, they 
 are buying the rest of the year, going credit to all the 
 shops. 
 
 16761. Mr. Shaw. — Is there no industry in the 
 island ? — None ; no trade of any description. 
 
 16762. Do you think the land generally would not 
 pay for reclamation on a large scale ? — I think not. 
 You have first to contend with the climate and then 
 with the worst description of land, only poor boggy 
 land, some ten feet deep. 
 
 16763. Chairman. — Is the rainfall very great ?— 
 Yery ; it is one of the dampest places in the West. 
 
 16764. Can you tell the amo unt ?— No ; not exactly. 
 This has been an exceptionally dry season, but it was 
 very wet during the time I was staying there. 
 
 16765. Mr. Shaw. — Generally paying their rents 
 pretty well ? — They used to pay them uncommonly 
 well until the last few years. 
 
 16766. You reside near Sir- George O'Donnell's pro- 
 perty ? — I do. 
 
 16767. Is it mountain land ? — No ; the land is very 
 good there, some parts of it. 
 
 16768. Does he eject except for non-payment of 
 rent ? — Never. 
 
 16769. Does he buUd or improve the place, or do 
 the tenants ? — He has not done anything since the 
 passing of the Land Act. His father. Sir Richard 
 O'Donnell, spent £40,000 on the property, part of 
 which was sold in 1854. 
 
 16770. But since then he has let the tenants work 
 away themselves ? — Yes ; on the large holdings they 
 are all leased. Occasionally he gives an allowance for 
 improvements. 
 
 16771. They are, improving fairly ? — The men under 
 lease are very well off'. 
 
 16772. What are the average rents of the small 
 and large ? — The small tenants are about £7 or £8. 
 
 16773. How many acres ? — We allow them to take 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 541 
 
 in as mvich as they like of moorland, and they have a 
 freedom of grazing, but it is very hard to say, the land 
 has not been measured for some time. 
 
 1 6774. Do you put on a rent when they reclaim 1 — 
 We do not, and they have grazing free. 
 
 16775. And are they comfortable'? — Very comfort- 
 able and well paid up — the best estate I have to deal 
 with. 
 
 16776. Is it near Westport? — Within six miles. 
 The land is very good, and we have some fine tenants 
 there. 
 
 16777. Are they Irishmen or Scotchmen ?— One 
 or two Scotch, but the majority are Irish. 
 
 16778. And they are improving tenants ?— Yes. 
 
 16779. And doing well? — Doing very comfortably, 
 and can make a good living. 
 
 16780. Chairman.^Is the climate difierent on the 
 land and on the island? — I think the climate is 
 different at Newport, there is not much difference, 
 Achill is 25 miles north of Newport, but then it is 
 an island, and it is damper and colder, and then the 
 land is very different ; we have some land as good as in 
 Meath. 
 
 16781. What kind ofland is Sir George O'Donnell's? 
 — Clay gravel. 
 
 16782. Is there any limestone ?— No ; but it can be 
 got easily from the islands. 
 
 16783. Mr. Shaw.— Mr. Ferrall's is near that?— 
 No ; between this and Ballyhaunis. 
 
 16784. Are the farms very large ? — There are some 
 very fair farms — men paying £30, £40, £50, and £60 
 1 year, and others £5 or £6. 
 
 16785. They have no mountain grazing 1 — No. 
 
 16786. But they have bog there? — No, very little 
 in some places. 
 
 16787. Chaieman. — Is there tenant-right there ? — 
 Yea, 
 
 16788. Mr. Shaw. — Are they able to get any 
 money for the holdings ? — No. 
 
 16789. Did they before this? — Oh, yes , it was very 
 general, but now there is no changing at all and no 
 Duying. 
 
 16790. Paying the rents pretty regularly ? — They 
 have done up to the last year, but they all owe money 
 now — they are not allowed to pay. I went down to 
 collect the May rents, and four of the Land League 
 were outside and examined every receipt I gave, to see 
 WHS I giving a reduction. The men told me we have 
 got our money, but we are not allowed to pay it. 
 
 16791. Did you give a reduction last year? — 
 Twenty-five per cent, on the year's rent, and 10 per 
 cent, on the half-year's rent due 1st of November. 
 
 16792. Chaieman. — Is there subdivision on these 
 two properties ? — Oh, not at all to the same extent ; 
 in fact, I may say it does not go on at aU, 
 
 16793. In the island has subdivision increased 
 since the Land Act?^-I don't think it has made any 
 change. 
 
 16794. Has it made no difference in consequence 
 of the claims of all the family on the death of the 
 father ? — No, it generally reverts in that case to the 
 eldest son. Sometimes they have disputes, and the 
 other brothers leave. Generally speaking they live 
 on good terms with one anothe/ and divide the land. 
 
 16795. Then that is subdivision? — ^Yes, that is on 
 the island. 
 
 16796. Mr. Shaw. — ^Is there anyone to prevent 
 them there ; the Society does not take much trouble 
 about it ? — The agent is supposed to prevent them. 
 If I found it out I generally served an ejectment on 
 them, but it is impossible to find it out with a large 
 population. It is done before you know anything 
 about it ; you cannot watch over it in these villages ; 
 the vUlages are common and they are not paying rent 
 for the houses. 
 
 16797. Chaieman. — This was on a common ? — Yes, 
 squatters on a common. 
 
 16798. How do they keep house? — Wretchedly 
 miserable. 
 
 16799. Mr. Shaw. — The other landlords have a 
 
 rule against subdivision ? — On Mr. Pike's estate, I Oet. 20, isso. 
 believe, they subdivide, but are prevented if possible. ,, JT". 
 
 16800. But, on Sir George O'Donnell's?— It is -ihomas!"" 
 not allowed. We have a much better way of pre- 
 venting it, because the houses are not up together and 
 
 each tenant is on his own holding. 
 
 16801. Do they ask your permission to subdivide? 
 — No, they have gone away to America latterly, a 
 good many of them. 
 
 16802. Chaieman. — Do they arrange among them- 
 selves the stare, or get an arbitration ?— They arrange 
 among themselves the division. 
 
 16803. The holding itself being reckoned towards 
 the share of one of them ? — Exactly. 
 
 16804. In general the oldest ? — Yes. 
 
 16805. Are there many leases still existing on 
 these properties 1 — On the island there are no leases 
 hardly at all, but on Sir George's estate there are a 
 good many leases of the large holders. 
 
 16806. Are they underlet ? — They are not sublet. 
 
 16807. Mr. Shaw. — They don't seem to care about 
 doing it? — That class of tenants do not ; they know 
 their own interest better. 
 
 16808. Chaieman. — I see in reply to the question 
 as to any suggestion of alterations in the law you 
 say, " Ulster tenant-right should be extended to all 
 parts, and the rents fixed by revaluation " ? — Yes, I 
 think there ought to be a revaluation. 
 
 16809. You mean in place of the present Poor Law 
 valuation ? — Yes, I don't think it is a criterion to let 
 land by. 
 
 16810. And causes dissatisfaction from the excess 
 of rent over the valuation ? — It does. 
 
 16811. Do you think there ought to be, as much as 
 possible, written agreements between landlord and 
 tenant ? — Yes ; certainly. 
 
 1 6 8 1 2. So that they may know exactly the terms upon 
 which they hold 1 — I think so. I think the system 
 is much too loose now the way they hold. 
 
 16813. I suppose on the island there is very little 
 of a labouring population separate from those who are 
 called labourers ? — They are all the same. 
 
 16814. But, on the other properties are there 
 labourers on the farms ? — Yes, under the farmers, 
 and they have a house and garden as part of their 
 wages. 
 
 16815. And are they pretty comfortable? — They 
 are as long as they get the earning. 
 
 16816. What sort of houses do they get? — A fair 
 cottier's house. 
 
 16817. Built by the farmer?— Built by the farmer. 
 
 16818. Are there many labourers holding from Sir 
 George O'Donnell ? — No, there are not ; they live in 
 the town of Newport. A great deal of it is grass 
 country which does not require much labouring. 
 
 16819. Mr. Shaw. — Is it principally large grass 
 farms? — Yes. In fact they, the large farmers, found 
 labour so expensive, and crops not turning out so 
 well of late years, they found it better to turn it into 
 grass. 
 
 16820. It is hard ripening crops there? — Yes, from 
 the rains and storms. 
 
 16821. Chaieman. — I suppose these last seasons 
 have been very bad ?— Yes, there have been three 
 very bad seasons, indeed. 
 
 16822. And the previotis seasons had been very 
 good for some time ? — They had, and the three late 
 have been very bad. 
 
 16823. They got into what you may call a better 
 style of living, at all events a more expensive style in 
 good times? — Yes. 
 
 16824. And the consequence was they could not go 
 back in their expenses, and they got into debt ? — Yes. 
 There is one man in Westport, a shopkeeper, is owed 
 £5,000 in Achill. 
 
 16825. Do they keep poultry in these parts? — 
 Very few. There are dealers in Westport and New- 
 port, they buy them in the markets. 
 
 16826. Mr. Shaw. — Euy eggs too ? — Yes. 
 
542 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 1G827. But the fisliing business is not pursued ? — It 
 is utterly neglected. . I think a great deal can be made 
 out of it if properly worked, but it -would have to be 
 done by strangers, natives -would not do it. 
 
 16828. The natives would -work the boats well? — 
 
 If they were taught, but it takes them a long while 
 to learn, because they are not fishermen, and the boats 
 they have got are very inferior, also the gear. 
 
 (The -witness then -withdrew). 
 
 Kev. Anthony- 
 Waters, E.c.A. 
 
 Rev. Anthony Waters, R.C.A., Castlebar, examined. 
 
 16829. Chairman. — You have some information 
 you can give us as to the property of Mr. Falkiner 1 — 
 
 Yes. 
 
 16830. Is he a landlord in this neighbourhood? — 
 He is, sir. 
 
 16831. Close round 1 — Living in Castlebar. 
 
 16832. And the property just outside? — The pro- 
 perty within about two miles of the town, in this 
 parish. 
 
 16833. What is the point you specially wish to 
 bring under our notice? — I have been speaking to 
 the tenants, there are more landlords mentioned in 
 that paper than Mr. Falkiner, but I have given particu- 
 lar cases. In Mr. Ealkiner's they are nearly all the 
 sa-me. I have given the first there ; the valuation is 
 355., and the rent £9, I think. 
 
 IGSS-t. Five acres of land'? — Yes, sir. 
 
 16835. Is that on the ground of its being a town- 
 park ? — Not at all, it is too far off, I believe it is 
 hardly worth the valuation. 
 
 1C83G. Mr. Shaw.— Poor land?— Poor land. 
 
 16837. Is it boggy or stony 1 — It is boggy, and that 
 sort of weak, half clay ground, and bog groiind. 
 
 16838. Plas the rent been raised lately? — Not as a 
 townland, but there are some persons in the townland 
 who were asked to give an increase, for instance one 
 man told me, and told me in the presence of the whole 
 village, his neighbours, that his rent was £12, the 
 Government valuation £5. However, it must be said 
 for Mr. Falkiner, that he has put on no actual in- 
 crease, he bought at these figures, and kept it un- 
 changed. 
 
 16839. Chairman. — Is that tenant named Michael 
 Lawless ? — Yes. 
 
 16840. And are other tenants at the same? — They 
 are about the same. 
 
 16841. Mr. Shaw.— The same class of land?— 
 Yes. 
 
 16842. Chairman. — Do you know when this high 
 rent was put on ? — It was at the time it was in the 
 hands of the late proprietor, Mr. Sheridan, who lived at 
 Pheasant Hill, and he was constantly increasing it, 
 and was anxious to sell it, as he did ; he thought that by 
 iia-\-ing a high mark of rents it would go high in the 
 market. 
 
 16843. Do the tenants improve at all? — The place ' 
 is nearly in the same state for the last twenty years. 
 
 1G344. Mr. Shaw.— Is it improvable land ?— Well 
 it is a cold worn-out sort of land. 
 
 168-45. When did Mr. Falkiner purchase ?— Seven 
 or eight years ago. 
 
 16846. And up to that' time the rents were beino- 
 in sreased. — Constantly increased. 
 
 1 6847. CiiAiKMAN. — This was in Derrywash ? Yes. 
 
 16843. Mr. Shaw. — Is it a large property? — I think 
 
 the rental of it must be something about £500 or £600 
 a year. 
 
 16849. And a good many tenan'ts? — Too many ten- 
 ants for the amount of land. It is on the road from 
 this to Westport. 
 
 1G850. Chairman. In the townland of Corres, 
 John Fox ■'( -Yes ; that is a place that was bought by 
 Mr. Ii-cland. He became a bankrupt, and he mort- 
 gaged it to the National Bank for some money, and 
 he was sold out, and the land fell into the hands of 
 the National Bank, which has not changed the rental 
 since it got it. 
 
 10S.")1. Rent for six acres, £9 ?— Yes. 
 
 1G8."2. Mr SoAW.— [s it prime land ?— Well, it is 
 not :rx.l lau [ ; it is fair land some of it : some of it is 
 
 not worth anything — that sort of land that you find 
 here a good field and then a field not worth any. 
 thing. 
 
 16853. You think the rent is an excessive renti— 
 It undoubtedly is, the person who gave me that evi- 
 dence and showed me his receipts was almost walking 
 about in rags. 
 
 16854. Chairman. — Are there many tenants on it ! 
 
 Not many, six or seven ; and a portion of it is 
 
 grazed by a farmer. I don't know the extent of that. 
 
 16855. Mr. Shaw.— Where does it Ke?— To the 
 south-east of Castlebar. 
 
 16856. Chairjian. — Who manages it for the bank! 
 — The manager receives the rents. 
 
 16857. And I suppose held by them, it won't be 
 redeemed by the owner ?— No, sir ; the National 
 Bank strove to sell it several times and could not. 
 
 16858. Mr. Shaw. — Could not sell it to the tenants ? 
 — They did not make any offer. 
 
 16859. Because that seems a case where they could 
 try it if they were able to do it ? — They cotdd not make 
 up the purchase monej'. 
 
 16860. Chairman. — Could they do it if there -was 
 an advance made to them to purchase? — Some of 
 them could, others could not. One of them is a 
 National teacher, and I think he would be able to make 
 some advance. There was a case sometime ago of a 
 sale, and I was then the administrator of the place, 
 Clare Island. It was offered for sale by Mr. Berridge, 
 who bought up a portion of the Law Life property, 
 and I was mos-t anxious the tenants would buy it, and 
 I called them together and asked them would they be 
 able to manage one-fourth of — at any rate one portion 
 of the island. They began to tell me what they -were 
 worth, and 1 found by selling everything they had 
 they would not be able to do it, and it would be only 
 just washing them out. 
 
 16861. Mr. Sh.mv. — A burden they could never 
 pay ? — Yes. Two or three gentlemen came to me, and 
 one of them from the County Galway said to ine that 
 he came to the island to see it, and asked me whether 
 I thought he ought to buy it, and if so what it -would 
 be worth. I told him I was doing my best "with the 
 tenants at the time to arrange if they could buy it. 
 "How much," said he, "can I give by putting on a 
 slight increase ?" I told him if he had any notion 
 whatever of increasing it to have nothing to say to the 
 island. It was then bought by Mr. M'Donnell for 
 £12,500. 
 
 16862. Did he put on any increase ? — He strove to 
 do it in this way. Mr. Robinson, who was the agent 
 of Mr. Berridge, said to the tenants—" Add the poor 
 rates and public cess to the rent, and we -will call 
 the whole of it the rent ;" and then he said — "I -will 
 give you three receipts — one for the poor rate, one for 
 the rent, and one for the public cess." This was done, 
 and for a long time it was carried out. When Mr. 
 M'Donnell got the place, he wanted to make these three 
 things the rent alone. 
 
 16863. Was it piit do-wn. on the rental as such!— 
 Mr. M'Donnell tried to do it when he first called on 
 them for the rent ; one man paid it, and I told the rest, 
 not to pay it and they did not. Some coiTespondence^ 
 passed between myself and Mr. M'Donnell in the 
 piublic journals, and he was afterwards satisfied not to 
 put on the increase. 
 
 16864. Do you think he thought he was buying 
 three separate rents ? — I am quite sure ho kne^v the 
 rental and the state of the island from !Mr. Robinson. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 543 
 
 168G5. The tenants are very poor on the island? — 
 I think they will have to leave it. It is a place no 
 person ought to live in. I was there myself and I 
 was four weeks in it. I could not leave the island. I 
 remember a shoemaker went from there to sell some 
 things, and he was four weeks stormbound in 
 Westport, and had to live the best he could and his 
 family on the island. When they want to take cattle 
 to a fair they must leave three or four days before the 
 fair if they have any urgent need of selling the beast, 
 and sometimes the price they get will not pay their 
 expenses. 
 
 16866. Do they fish much t — No ; the fishing there 
 is a deep water fishery ; the sea is a most terri!)le sea 
 in roughness, and, in order to have a fishery success- 
 ful, there should be a large smack got, and arrange- 
 ments for a deep water fishery. They could not keep 
 such a boat at present ; they have no quay. 
 
 16867. Is the island poor 1 — It is. It could be 
 rich. 
 
 16868. Chairman. — From the fishery? — No, from 
 other sources. 
 
 16869. If there was money spent in reclamation 1 — 
 If there was it would pay forty per cent. 
 
 16870. Mr. Shaw. — And fewer people ? — There 
 are not people enough, if there was work to be done. 
 
 16871. And has Mr. M'Donnell sold it again?— 
 He has not. 
 
 16872. Chairman. — We have heard a good deal 
 that, since the Land Act, the landlords generally have 
 not felt secure of a return for their improvements 
 if they made them. Do you think that is the 
 case 1 — I think at present there is not a feeling in 
 the country in favour of improvements. I know a 
 case of this, a sort of disheartening thing for the 
 tenants. On Lord SHgo's estate, while I was at Clare 
 Island, after the Land Act, he summoned his tenants 
 abou.t Louishurgh, to the Courthouse, to meet him one 
 day, and he told them he had called upon them to 
 consent to a certain increase. There was one person 
 had a small portion of land that he took for the site 
 of a house ; his name is M'Namara ; he lives seven or 
 eight miles south-west of Louisburgh. He was a man 
 in a good position, and had land in another place, and 
 wished to make a comfortable residence for himself — 
 what they call a thatched house ; he drained this spot, 
 and made a bit of a road into it, and put good walls 
 around the place. I think there was an acre and a 
 half of it. He was paying, I thiuk, 15s. for it at 
 the time. I am speaking now from memory; 
 the man himself told me the case, and there were 
 two other priests present when he was telling me. 
 When he had the house buUt, Lord Sligo told him 
 he should pay £3 a year for it, and he paid this. 
 In about two years after that, he was told he should 
 pay £5, and he then said he would not. 
 
 16873. Mr. Shaw. — And how much land was in 
 it ? — I think about an acre and a half. I know 
 the length and breadth of it, as far as looking at i,t, 
 and I am only just making a guess now. He was 
 one of those summoned in, and was asked would he 
 pay this rent, and they all refused, the whole of them. 
 The explanation the people gave of the afi^air was 
 that Lord Sligo was trying to get out of the liabilities 
 of the Act of 1870 getting into a new contract to 
 evade the force of the Act. 
 
 1 6874. Chairman. — Well, EdwardBerry, of Knock- 
 agreenane, you say he holds five acres of land ?— Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 16875. That land he pays £7 for?— Yes, sir; I 
 took that down from the receipts. 
 
 , 16876. Under Mr. Patrick Quirm ?— There aire 
 about six tenants under Mr. Quinn ; they never can 
 be rich ; they ought to be in the workhouse every one 
 of th em . However he, too, did not raise the rents since 
 he got it ; he is a middleman, holding under lease, 
 I think, from Lord Lucan ; at any rate, I know it is 
 not his own. 
 
 16877. Mr. Shaw.— The land is bad, I suppose ?— Oct. 20. isso. 
 The land is bad, and they have not enough of it ; jjg^_ Anthony 
 they have too many of them in the place ; there ought Waters, k.c.a. 
 to he only seven or eight where there are twenty-five 
 
 houses. The land is not of a bad quality, but it 
 has been always kept under tillage, and, I think, is 
 exhausted. 
 
 16878. Chairman. — Is it liable to floods ? — Floods 
 do be in a portion of it. 
 
 16879. The O'Conor Don.— And you think it is 
 too thickly populated ? — It is. 
 
 16880. If they had no rent to pay they could 
 hardly live on it? — They could not. 
 
 , 16881. Chairman. — Do they go to England ? — They 
 do, and can hardly live in it, and I*would be very glad 
 if two-thirds of them went to England to-morrow. 
 
 16882. Mr. Shaw.— Where they ought to be, for 
 they are English labourers instead of Irish ? — And 
 so it is in nearly all the west of Ireland. In Achill, 
 I was there one time, and I was greatly amused, I 
 saw whole families going off in the spring, and locking 
 the doors and sending their cattle ofi' to the mountains 
 and going over wholesale, everyone of five or six 
 villages, going to England, and then coming back about 
 the 1st of August. 
 
 16883. Finding the crops all right and the cattle 
 all right ? — It is the only place I know where they 
 go off and lock the doors. 
 
 16884. Were you stationed there ? — No; the next 
 station to it. But about Louisburgh any man able 
 at all goes to England, and the female portion of the 
 family stay at home. He leaves the potatoes sown, 
 and the oats and the heavy portion of the work done, 
 and leaves the rest of it to be done by the female por- 
 tion of the family and the children. 
 
 16885. He brings hometlierent?— He brings home 
 the rent, and pays some debts. 
 
 16886. Chairman.-— Then under Mr. Quinn, also 
 Charles Murphy, Errew ? — Yes. I took these notes 
 fiOm receipts handed to me by these people. I don't 
 remember more than writing them down. 
 
 16886a. Eight acres, £13 10s. ?— Yes. 
 
 16887. There is a note as to his having been de 
 prived of tiwf 1 — Yes. 
 
 16888. As to paying the same rent, although not 
 getting turf? — Turf does not interfere with the rent 
 at all ; it is a different thing. In that portion, espe- 
 cially round Errew, where Sir B,obert Blosse has pro- 
 perty, a good many j^ersons have come to this parish. 
 I do not speak of any cases except those within my 
 own parish, and some were evicted by Sir Robert, 
 who came in on this place of Mr. Quinn's, and it is 
 overcrowded. A rule on Sir Robert's estate is — that 
 anyone selling turf will be evicted. And there is an 
 instance of two brothers, living in the same house, 
 and a few others, neighbours of theirs, giving turf — 
 one, as he says he is prejpared to sweai-, gave one load 
 to his brother living on another estate, and for this he 
 was evicted, he was told. A good many of them have 
 come in that way to this village of Errew, and it is a 
 sort of a refuge. There were no rigid laws connected 
 with this place, so that if a man was evicted out of 
 another estate, it was a sort of a refuge for him, and 
 he put up a shed there and stopped in it. It would 
 be far better for them, in my opinion, if they were not 
 allowed. Then there is a case of a large tenantry on 
 Lord Lucan's property. 
 
 16889. £123 rent ?—Cloonkeen. It is a joint take. 
 The names of one or two persons are on the rental of 
 Lord Lucan, and they all pay rent. They have divided 
 the land among themselves, and it is one whole com- . 
 mon take ; so that the rent would not be taken from 
 one unless all gave it. 
 
 16890. The rent being £123 altogether ?— Yes, sir ; 
 and the valuation £79 ,16s. 8|cZ., and I must say 
 with that rent it is by far the most wealthy holding in 
 this parish. 
 
 16891. Mr. Shaw. — The land is good, I suppose ? 
 
 The land is good. I know one of the ]nen to have 
 
544. 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1880. 
 
 Rev. Anthony 
 Waters, R.c.A. 
 
 £250 in one of the banks in Castlebar, and I know 
 another to have £150, and different sums. Five or 
 six of them have money in the banks. 
 
 16892. Chairman. — That is from the land being 
 sufficiently good for them to live out of it? — Yes, sir ; 
 and they stop at home and don't go to England. 
 
 16893. The O'Conoe Don. — Are the holdings large 
 or small ? — They would average fourteen or fifteen 
 acres for each person. 
 
 16894. Mr. Shaw.— They are able to make a living 
 out of it 1 — They are well — when I say well, I mean 
 comparatively speaking, considering how they live 
 here. 
 
 16895. The O'Conoe Don. — Has the rent on that 
 townland been altered lately ? — It has not been altered 
 for fifteen or sixteen years past at all events. 
 
 16896. Is it held ander lease '!— Not now ; it was 
 some years ago. 
 
 16897. Chairman. — The lease fell in, and I sup- 
 pose they were left much as before 1 — I cannot tell 
 you. 
 
 16898. Were the rents diminished? — They cer- 
 tainly were not diminished. I was asking them about 
 increases, and for fifteen or sixteen years no increase 
 was put on. 
 
 16899. The O'Conoe Don.— And after the fall of 
 the lease it was continued in the same way in common ? 
 — It was continued in the same way. 
 
 16900. And do they hold the land in common, or 
 Lave they it divided 1 — Divided. 
 
 16901. Mr. Shaw. — And they are industrious, 
 well-doing people ? — They are. 
 
 16902. The O'Conoe Don. — Every man has his own 
 land altogether 1 — Not altogether in some places — it is 
 a piece here and a piece there in some places, and in 
 other places a good large field altogether. At any 
 rate, I am sorry the other villages in the parish are 
 not in the same condition. I hold another case here. 
 Anthony Eiohardson, of Derrywash, valuation, £2 
 10s. ; present rent, £6 10s. ; pays poor rates, taxes, 
 and public cess. 
 
 16903. Mr. Shaw. — That is common, I suppose, in 
 this country ? — It is, sir ; there was a row kicked up 
 about it when I' was in Clare Island. There was a 
 gentleman in that part of the country, Mr. Louden, 
 and, I thought it too much, there were some of them 
 rated at £2, and a good many under £4 ; and when 
 Mr. M'Donnell went to add the poor rates and taxes 
 to the rent in a keen way, and increase the rent by it. 
 
 I told those rated under £i not to pay poor rates, ami 
 they did not. It was brought under the notice of the 
 Guardians of Westport ; it was discussed there for nine 
 or ten weeks every Board day, and finally it wa.s re- 
 ferred to the liOcal G-overnment Board, and the Local 
 Government Board said the landlord should pay these 
 taxes. In a good many places round Westport and 
 Louisburgh they took up the tone and refused, but 
 still in a good many cases they do pay it. 
 
 16904. Chairman. — Derrywash is the same as 
 before ? — Yes ; under Mr. Falkiner. 
 
 16905. The O'Conoe Don.— What would you think 
 it would take to support a family of an ordinary num- 
 ber of these small holders, say a family of five or six 
 money or land, how much money would it take to 
 support them ? — I would find it rather hard to answer 
 the question. I vrill answer it in this way — If one 
 of them had as much land as would graze five or six 
 head of cattle, so that they would be able to sow about 
 an acre of potatoes, and sow about an acre and a half 
 of oats, and have turf, they would live comfortably on 
 that. 
 
 16906. Mr. Shaw. — That would be about ten or 
 twelve acres 1 — Yes, sir ; the land here is very bad ia 
 some places. If we took such land as we have about 
 Cestlebar one would live on six acres. They five 
 principally on potatoes and meal, and other expenses, 
 such as travelling, never comes into their minds, and 
 they are sometimes put down for a thing — taking a 
 glass of whiskey. Really they may do it on a market 
 day or fair day coming in here, and if they take two 
 they are sure not to be entirely right in the head. 
 
 16907. They cannot bear it ?— No. 
 
 16908. They are not drunkards 1 — Oh, no, sir ; they 
 could not be. It is really horrible to think of the 
 state of the country, in my opinion, at present. Some- 
 time ago a gentleman came here, a reporter from the 
 Freeman's Journal, and I said to him to go ia to some 
 of the merchants of the town and just ask them for 
 their books, and let him see how much they had given 
 credit for, if they had given any, and let him see the. 
 real state of their accounts. - And one man had , 
 £16,000 out, another man, a man of no show what- 
 ever in town, had from his accoiints, £8,000 out, and 
 apjiarently poor men with small shops have £500 or 
 £600 out, and they themselves dealing iti banks, so 
 that if the country people were not able to pay them 
 they would all become bankrupts. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Sir Charles 
 Gore, Mr. U. A. 
 Knox, and 
 Mr. E. H. Pery. 
 
 Sir Charles Goee, Mr. U. A. Knox, and Mr. E. H. Pery. 
 Sir Charles Goee, Belleek Manor, Ballina, examined. 
 
 1 6909. Chairman. — You arealandowner in Mayo ? 
 Yes. I am a land owner in Mayo. 
 
 16910. What amount of property ■? — 15,328 acres in 
 Mayo. 
 
 16911. The O'Conoe Don. — You have also property 
 in Sligo ? — I have also property in Sligo — 8,713 
 acres. 
 
 16912. Chairman. — Speaking of the Mayo pro- 
 perty, is your property held by large tenants generally, 
 or are they small tenancies "i^In the Mayo property, 
 according to this return, which has been carefully 
 compiled by my agent for reference, the number of 
 tenants is 405, and the tenants under £10 valuation are 
 290. 
 
 16913. The O'Conor Don.— And in Sligo?— The 
 number of tenants in Sligo 281, and the number 
 under £10 valuation is 232. 
 
 16914. Chairman. — ^Then among the larger tenants 
 are they in large farms ? — Both in Mayo and Sligo 
 there exists in particular — one large farm in each — 
 inaugurated by my father, the late Sir Arthur Gore, as 
 model farms to a certain extent. 
 
 16915. In his own hands? — No, he let them to 
 Scotch farmers with a view of showing chiefly 
 
 what can be done in the way of reclamation and 
 in the way of improved agriculture, as an example 
 to the tenants. The land employed for this pur- 
 pose was, at the time, partly waste land, in the 
 ordinary sense of the term, that is, that it was not 
 productive, and the remainder, land which had fallen 
 into his own hands after the distress of 1846 and 1848. 
 As well as I remember the circumstances of the case— ' 
 I was at that time abroad in the army — what Sii' 
 Arthur did was this, he selected a site which would 
 possess sufficient water-power and such advantages, he 
 amalgamated farms thrown upon his hands, and the 
 few tenants who remained on those parts he shifted to 
 other townlands, giving them farms in place of those 
 given up. I don't think a single case of difliculty or 
 eviction occurred in consequence. He also selected a 
 site, with a view to have in its vicinity a certain por- 
 tion of unreclaimed land, which he, to a certain extent, 
 assisted the tenants, as I have done, in reclaiming. 
 These disti-icts present a very different appearance 
 now to what I recollect, when snipe-shooting over 
 them previously. 
 
 16916. What has been done with these large farms? 
 — They are still held by the same men. 
 
MLN UTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 545 
 
 16917. And carried on successfully? — "Well, these 
 are trying times. They have been carried on success- 
 fully up to this, as has been proved by the men paying 
 their rent regularly. 
 
 16918. Those who were removed at the time, and 
 put on smaller holdings, have they gone on and re- 
 claimed what they were put upon 1 — The small tenants 
 vrere not, as a rule, put on with a view to reclama- 
 tion they were merely shifted to other places where 
 tenants had vacated, where Sir Charles had reinstated 
 some of these men. {Mr. Knox. ) — The number of those 
 so treated was very fewindeed, I only remember the case 
 of three. {Sir C. Gore.) — I considered it, if I might 
 make the observation, I considered it a great advan- 
 tage that the landlord should have the power, in cases 
 of°the sort, of being able to exercise a certain authority 
 of transfering tenants, otherwise, in cases of emerg- 
 ency, where land might be thrown up, it would be 
 impossible to dearl with it. 
 
 16919. Do you find that it is difficult to-get a ten- 
 ant for land that is vacant? — I have not had an 
 opportunity of trying lately, but I know, from my 
 knowledge of the country, except in. recent times, 
 when thfs agitation may Irighten men— it being con- 
 trary to the rules of the Land League — except lor that 
 reason, there was not the slightest difficulty ; on the 
 contrary, there were two or three people looking for 
 every vacancy that occurred. 
 
 16920. Before these times, was it your custom, 
 when there was a holding vacant, to try to add it to 
 the neighbouring holdings? — Certainly, with a view 
 to consolidate holdings and make them more comfort- 
 able. It is understood so. In case a farm falls vacant, 
 a tenant will come to me almost to claim it, it would be 
 considered an injustice if I gave it to strangers. 
 
 16921. Do you allow any sale of holdings? — Yes. 
 Subject to my approval of the tenant. 
 
 16922. Has that long been the custom? — Yes, I 
 think so. I think I may say in my lather's time the 
 same custom prevailed. 
 
 16923. And was the result of that, that they im- 
 proved in size of holdings, and by that means unproved 
 circumstances altogether ? — I don't know that a sale 
 always increases the size of a farm, inasmuch as very 
 often a man from a distance would come in to purchase 
 the farm. 
 
 16924. I was speaking of where I thought you said 
 they purchased adjoining holdings or you put them in? 
 
 In a few instances, where farms have become vacant 
 
 from tenants being ejected for non-payment oi rent, 
 or where a tenant got into difficulties and ran away, 
 it would certainly be an improvement to have a 
 larger tenantry, both ior their advantage and the ad- 
 vantage of the landlord. And were holdings of that 
 character much more numerous, instead of, as I have 
 here, three-fourths on one estate under £10, I think 
 they would have more capital and cattle, and we should 
 not bo so liable to these terrible crises which occur 
 periodically. 
 
 16925. What do you think would be about the 
 average size you would like to see the holdings ? — It 
 depends greatly upon the energy oi the man and the 
 help he has at his disposal, some occupiers are indus- 
 trious, and others are very much the reverse. The 
 man that is not industrious, I don't think it would be 
 any advantage to give him a larger 1 irm. 
 
 16926. I suppose there is no doubt you want a man 
 who would be equal to the land he has, whatever size 
 that maybe?— Yes; for instance, supposing a man 
 was an old man and had no iamUy of his own, it 
 
 . would be difficult for him to handle a large farm ; 
 whereas, if he was a young man and had help, as we 
 call it two or three sons, and I knew him to be an m- 
 dustrious man, I would like to see his farm doubled or 
 
 trebled. , . . 
 
 16927 Have the tenants beenmakmg improvements 
 themselves of late years?— They have been makiiig 
 what they call improvements ; but I cannot, as a rule, 
 say I call them improvements of a valuable character ; 
 
 the improvements generally are confined to the houses Oct. 20, isso. 
 they live in, in which they are sometimes assisted by gj^, cjj^gg 
 the landlord, and sometimes not. It has been the Gore, Mr. U. A. 
 habit on my estate to assist them with timber for the Kuox, and 
 building of houses or outhouses. The other improve- ^^'^- ^- ^- "'y- 
 ment will be drainage, which is generally ill done and 
 scarcely efficacious as regards their own farm, and not 
 being done in concert with the adjoining farmers, is 
 apt to be imperfect. T have been in possession of my 
 property for the last seven yoars ; previous to that my 
 father was constantly resident on his estate for forty 
 or fifty years ; he, to a certain extent, endeavoured to 
 control this by striping farms and adjusting farms 
 where he could, with a view to the general improve- 
 ment of all, and by making such roads and mearing 
 fences along the roads, and also main drains in con- 
 nexion, in some places, with arterial drainage, with a 
 view oi iacilitjating the tenants carrying out their 
 drains with advantage. Mr. Knox, who assisted 
 my father for many years, will tell you that those 
 were, to a certain extent, efficacious. But the general 
 improvements by the tenantry are a very ineffective 
 and imperfect drainage, a very imperfect system of 
 agriculture, and a house in which he himself lives, 
 which is not always what the sanitary authority think 
 they ought to be. 
 
 16928. Are they thatched houses? — Generally; 
 and, also, fences 1 jr his own. particular use, generally 
 sod ienoes ; my father endeavoured to got them to 
 make a better fence by giving them quicks for nothing. 
 In some instances they use them ; but they are not 
 attended to, and have fallen out of repair. 
 
 16929. Is their drainage merely open drains — not 
 stone drains ? — No. 
 
 16930. Is this stony land? — I think we might cer- 
 tainly say so, except on boggy lands. 
 
 16931. Have they cleared the stones away to make 
 fences or roads? — To^a certain extent they have ; and, 
 in your travels through this country, you will see in 
 many places where they not only had to make them 
 into fences, but into piles of stones in the fields. 
 
 16932. Can you say the amount that has been spent 
 on the property since the famine years ? — Not pre- 
 cisely ; I have only been seven years in possession of 
 the estate. I have certain data which I can give you, 
 of sums expended by loans from the Board of Works ; 
 but I can safely say this, which wdl be borne out 
 by an investigation of the facts, and also by Mr. 
 IJtred Knox, that for many years, when he was 
 managing for Sir Arthur, very shortly after the year 
 oi the iamine, it was the habit to do a great many of 
 the improvements of vi^hich I speak now, of which I 
 have no record. My father lived in the country 
 all the time, and was in the habit of spending a 
 good deal of his income on the estate. I see, in 
 the year 1847, that Sir Arthur borrowed, from the 
 Board of Works, £2,500 for improvements; I am 
 aware that some of that has been repaid; some I am 
 still repaying. Some oi it, I am aware, has been 
 part paid by the tenant ; but in no case has it been 
 all paid by the tenant ; Sir Arthur, in most cases, 
 paid half; in other cases, it was expended on the 
 property without any repayment from the tenant. I my- 
 self have a list here of sums borrowed from the Board 
 of Works in the county Sligo, £650, £536, and £254 
 in difierent parts oi the Sligo property. 
 
 16933. In what times? — Within the last seven 
 years. On the Mayo -property, I also see, there has 
 been a sum of £1,160 expended ; some of these are 
 going on still ; also a sum of £400, and another of 
 £490 on the Mayo property. 
 
 16934. Mr. Shaw. — Some of this has been under 
 the late arrangement, the advances under the EeUef 
 of Distress Bill? — A good deal of it has. 
 
 16935. Chairman. — Have the rents been raised 
 on the property in your time? — Rents in my time, 
 I think, have not been raised, as well, as my me- 
 mory serves me now, except upon two townlands, and 
 certainly have not been generally raised. I am aware 
 
 4A 
 
546 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Oci. 20, 18S0. 
 
 Sir Chai'Ics 
 Gore, Vxf. U. A. 
 Kivix. Mua 
 JUr. E. 11. Teiy. 
 
 of tliis, tliat In tlie discussions wliicli arose and the 
 examinations made for rentals by myself and my agent 
 for the purpose of this paper before me, it was stated 
 that, as a rule, the rents have not been raised on the 
 different tov/nlands for over twenty years. 
 
 1G936. In some cases interest on the borro-wed 
 money was added to the tenants' rents I suppose 1 — I 
 think that was in the case of larger tenants only. 
 
 1C937. Mr. Shaw.— On a change of tenancy 1 
 suppose you raised the rents 1. — No. 
 
 16938. On the falling in of a lease?— It does not 
 follow, I would revalue on the falling in of a lease, our 
 leases are very few. .Here is a case this moment 
 pending, a case in which a man of the name of 
 Petvie, a son of William Petrie, a well-known man 
 v/lio also holds a farm under me, his lease is falling in 
 and he is getting a new one at the same rent. 
 
 1G939. -Do you appoint a valuator? — I appoint a 
 valuator, he is generally the same man, and he gives 
 satisfaction to all parties, and my instructions to him, 
 you may attach what value to it you like — my instruc- 
 tions are, he is to value on the live and let live 
 principle, there is no use putting a rent on a man he 
 cannot paj-. 
 
 16940. You do not put a rent on the improvements? 
 — Certainly not, unless I consider he has had the value 
 of his improvements out of it, he having enjoyed his 
 improvements for such a time as would warrant me 
 in taking the matter fairly into consideration. I am 
 talking of a lease. 
 
 16941. The Q'Coxor Don. — If a man reclaimed 
 waste land, you think the holding of that land at a 
 moderate rent for a certain number of years would 
 lecouphim ? — I think so. Don't youthink in a revalua- 
 tion for taxation I would in course of time be taxed by 
 Government for this reclamation, otherwise I don't 
 see how the intrinsic value of property would increase 
 aw regards the State. In most cases tlie reclamation 
 has beeij assisted in by the landlord which puts the 
 mattei Ijeyond a doubt, that he has a right to claim for 
 the va!ut ot his improvements, and i also think if a 
 tenant has made improvements, and has had a 
 sufficient length of time to jjiofit by these improve- 
 ments, I think to a certain extent it would be fair that 
 a proportion of the improvements should be put 
 on. 
 
 10942. Have you many leases? — Not many. 
 
 ] 6943. Have you had many cases in which old 
 leases dropped out ? — Not much of lands. I have had 
 leases in towns and townparks, but not many bearing 
 on '.te present inquiry. 
 
 16944. CiiAiKJiAN. — Can you give the total rental 
 of these two jjroperties at dates of twenty or thirty 
 years ago, and at the present time ? — I am afraid I 
 woiiJd find a. ditbculty in doing so. As a rule rents' 
 have not been increased to any great extent for more 
 than twenty years, I believe, in wliich case the present 
 rental coald not exhibit a very marked increase. J 
 n;ust speak generally. 'I'here are cases in which the 
 rent would appear to be high, but \yhich I, as far as 
 comes under my notice, have endeavoured to fairly 
 put right. A case was brought to me the other day, 
 which hiid never been complained of belore, although 
 it was paid tor some time. A woman came and com- 
 plained io me her rent was excessively high. On 
 examination 1 tound that it was high, beyond those of 
 her neighbours, and on making inquiries from my late 
 agent — who is so dangerously ill now that lean obtain 
 little or no information from him, which is a great loss 
 to me-— it appeared that her predecessor had sold the 
 land, which she had purchased, without sanction, and 
 it appears it was intended by the agent to put a line 
 on, and a certain sum was added to the rental tor a 
 certain number of years, and that was not withdrawn. 
 Of course I don't recognize such a course of dealing at 
 all, and I have taken means to place that woman's rent 
 on the same basis as the others. There may be isolated 
 cases brought before you, but there are very few that 
 would not admit of some explanation. 
 
 16945. Mr. Shaw. — What was the increase on your 
 rental within the twenty years? — I think I have 
 already stated that in many townlands there has been 
 no increase for twenty years. 
 
 16946. Chairmajt. — Would the rise generally be 
 from the falling in of leases or from interest on work 
 done for them? — No. I think it would arise from 
 this, which would occur almost in any case after a. 
 length of time, that property having risen in value 
 and produce having risen in value, the landlord 
 having to pay a great deal dearer for labour derived 
 from this land, and other circumstances, he must con- 
 sider that on the same principle that he would have 
 to pay extra taxation, he was entitled to get more rent 
 for his land, as his land had risen in value as well as ' 
 other things. 
 
 16947. It was in these favourable years that op- 
 portunities came of making a change in proportion to 
 the increased prices ? — I don',t say up to the proportion 
 of increased pi'ioes. I may say that these rents were 
 cheerfully paid until the recent distress, and until ' 
 as subsequently, people have been rather taught, I am 
 sorry to say, to raise objections. Even after the pass- 
 ing of the Land Act of 1870 the general feeling was, 
 and I have frequently heard the tenants express them- 
 selves to this effect, " If this carries out all it professes, 
 we ought to be in a very good position ; it will prevent 
 our being turned out, and no one can say a word for 
 a man who does not pay his rent." 
 
 16948. Mr. Shaw. — You put a rise on lands that 
 you thought were underlet, without putting on a 
 general rise? — A valuator was got to go over the 
 farms and readjust the rent to what was considered 
 to be the value. 
 
 16949. You took the farm as it stood on the 
 principle of live and let live ? — Precisely. 
 
 16950. He took the farm as it stood? — Yes, but 
 you must not assume my directions were to value up 
 to the value of the man's improvements. 
 
 16951. Those model farms you spoke of, have 
 they produced the effect your father intended in 
 these districts? — To a limited extent. For instance, 
 as regards the growing of turni]) crops in these 
 districts, such a crop was anknown when those 
 farms were instituted, and not only do they grow 
 those green crops, and make better attempts at 
 drainage, but, in some instances, I have known those 
 farmers give assistance themselves personally, not 
 only by instructions, but by going to men's farms 
 and showing them what to do, and their example 
 has been beneficial. 
 
 16952. And has reclamation gone on to any ex- 
 tent ? — It is going on slowly. 
 
 16953. is it bog or mountain land? — Both bog 
 and mountain land. 
 
 10954. it is part of their farms at present.'— 
 Yes, the edge of their farms. 
 
 16955. And they are charged rent for it now I — 
 A great deal of this which was included in their 
 own farms originally they were paying rent for, and 
 the rent has not been increased in consequence ot 
 any improvement they have made in them. 
 
 16956. Any of those increases have not been on 
 those tarms 1 — Not in consequence of that. 
 
 16957. Then they have been on those farms?— 
 VVlien i sent a valuator to value a townland I can- 
 not say he excluded those. 
 
 16957a. Have no leases? — They would not takff 
 them. They consider they are better otf as tenants 
 from year to year. 
 
 1G958. How long before the twenty years do you 
 think there was any increase on the property. Have 
 you any record ? — I am afraid I have not. I don t 
 know of any general advance. It would be individual 
 cases, such as a change of tenancy, and so forth. A 
 man might come in and say " the farm is underlet, 
 and if you give it to me I will pay you so much in- 
 crease." 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ii7 
 
 16959. A £10 valuation would imply £15 or £10 
 rent generally ?^Certainly not. 
 
 16960. Is the valuation near the rent? — I can give 
 yoa that pretty nearly. Striking an average as fairly 
 as possible, the conclusion I came to was that in the 
 Mayo estate my estate generally was let at 25 per 
 cent, and some decimals over the tenement valua- 
 tion. In the Sligo estate it varied from 25 per cent, 
 to 30 per cent., or certainly I should be quite within 
 the mark in saying the average on the Sligo estate is 
 above, not one-third over, the Ordnance valuation. In 
 Mayo it is less. 
 
 16961. Is there much reclaimable land on your pro- 
 perty t — Plenty. 
 
 16962. And not let to tenants? — Partly added to 
 their own farms, which in time they will reclaim ; 
 but there is plenty. They have not capital or a way 
 to improve, as my father, by these model farms 
 and other means, was endeavouring to improve. We 
 are not like English capitalists. 
 
 16963. Do you think if the farmers got moderate 
 help to improve these lands, and had a certainty the 
 rent would not be raised, they would not go at it 
 more vigorously. There are many of them don't like 
 spend.ing their savings on the work. They have 
 families to provide for ? — Yes; but I think it would 
 have to be done either as a general scheme under Go- 
 vernment, or left to the landlord to direct; for just 
 for the reasons we have before gone into, the improve- 
 ments of tenants are not in concert with others, and 
 it would be very undesirable to take out ot the land- 
 lord's hands, unless the Government took it, the con- 
 trol of these works. There is certain general work to 
 be done first, and then let the tenants improve indivi- 
 dually. 
 
 16964:. You think something of that kind would be 
 a good system, ^^ith a safeguard 1 — I think there can 
 be no doubt about it. 
 
 16965. You have not the list of cases on yovir 
 property that you have revalued within the last 
 seven years ? — No ; I have not it before me at this 
 moment. 
 
 16966. The O'Coxor Don.— Have yon much of 
 this reclaimable land in your possession?— Yes ; I 
 have mountains and bogs and swampis in my own pos- 
 session. 
 
 16967. Mr. Shaw. — Is it reclaimable ? — Some worild 
 pay for reclamation, and others would not. There is 
 no question about it there is a large extent of land 
 throughout this part of the county which is reclaim- 
 able, and if properly done, would pay for reclama- 
 tion. 
 
 16968. The O'Conor Do>^— What I want to know 
 is — is that in the occupation of the landlord, or have 
 the tenants some claim \ipon it for grazing ? — A gj-eat 
 deal of it is in the hands of the landlord. 
 
 16969. With regard to the valuation, do you con- 
 sider the tenement valuation is uniform? — No; I do 
 not. 
 
 16970. Taking your own estate, do you find it uni- 
 form upon any of the townlands? — No ; I don't think 
 so. I have some qualities of land valued in propor- 
 tion higher than others. 
 
 16971. You have never looked into the matter in 
 connection with your own estate. Have you looked 
 at the valuation of individual tenants, as compared 
 witli the valuation of the townla,nd, and compared it 
 with the rent ? — No We have no need to do so. ' We 
 looked to what we considered was a fair holding 
 vulue of land. A claim, having been brought by the 
 tenants of late years that Griffith's valuation is a fair 
 I'ent, it has brought the subject under notice a great 
 deal move than previously. 
 
 16972. Have you had any evictions since you came 
 into possession of the estate?— I think there have 
 been two or three for the last seven years, in my 
 time. 
 
 16973. And in those cases were the tenants finally 
 ]rat out ? — I allude to those where the tenants have 
 
 the Land 
 
 in collect- 
 have had 
 
 been finally put out. ' The' question was previously 
 asked, for other purposes, '• within a period of ten 
 years," and I see the actual statement hero is ten for 
 ten years for non-payment of rent only. 
 
 16974. Have you had many cases in 
 Court ? — I never had one. 
 
 16975. Had you any difEoulty last year 
 ing your rents? — No, I cannot say I 
 much diffioidty as regards the Mayo property, I 
 have had more in Sligo. I have acted in a very 
 moderate and forbearing way, I consider, as regards 
 my tenants in reference to these distressed tmies. 
 Once I became thoroughly satisfied, that is about the 
 June before last, that there would be certainly 
 exceptional distress in this country I made it my 
 business on several occasions to get my brother land- 
 lords in Tirawley to meet me and discuss this question, 
 what we ought fairly to do as regards the tenants. 
 My own views at the time were that once we admitted 
 the fact that there would be exceptional distress, if 
 our rents were fair rents at other times it would, be 
 incumbent on us to offer some temporary reduction 
 with a view of enabling the honest men of the tenants 
 to pay. We had different discussions and it was urged 
 by certain landlords that the properties were difler- 
 ently circumstanced, but it was finally decided we 
 should make abatements on that gale. It was also 
 urged by me and others that we should institute 
 works and borrow money from Government — that was 
 done as I have already shown you. Furthermore vi-o 
 agreed that we Avould do everything possible through 
 our agents and reliable persons to ascertain the conditions 
 of the different parties by whom rent was due, and 
 that we should act in accordance with this that it was 
 no use to press a man who from unfortunate circum- 
 stances was not in a position to pay. All that was 
 acted upon and the result was I think we got as much 
 rent, if not more than in other parts of the country 
 where they acted on different principles, and further- 
 more I think we have been successful to a great 
 extent in maintaining the peace of that part of the 
 country, as no open outrage has occurred in barony 
 Tyrawly. 
 
 16976. And there have been no evictions there? — 
 There have been very few evictions, there may be a 
 good many decrees obtained, but verj- few of those 
 have not been reinstated. I have had more evictions 
 on my estate than I have stated, but I only alluded 
 to those who have been turned out, there are others 
 where I have reinstated the tenants. 
 
 16977. Have you had any evictions carried out 
 fully during last year ? — No. 
 
 16978. Chairman. — Are there many small land' 
 lords in your neighbourhood who have purchased of 
 late years ? — Yes. 
 
 16979. Can you say at all the state of their property 
 and the tenants upon them ? — I don't think as a rule 
 the tenants under small landlords are better off' than 
 those under large ones. 
 
 16980. We have heard generally they are worse 
 off'? — I don't like to' reflect on other people. 
 
 16981. They bought at a price and found the rents, 
 and have kept the same rents, but it appears as far 
 as we can judge that they do approach a very high 
 rent, but this is the reason given, that they bought 
 and found these rents and left them so 1 — I am sorry 
 to say there is no doubt this has occurred that a person 
 has invested capital and is anxious to obtain as mi;ch 
 interest as possible, and has put the rents up to the 
 utmost, it is that sort of landlords and landladies who 
 have not been gifted by Providence with a sufficient 
 amount of discretion, and have not exercised their 
 rights properly. I fancy if thoy had exercised a 
 little more distretion, all that is alleged against land- 
 lords as a class could not be said. 
 
 , 16982. The O'Conok Don.— Have you stated jou 
 
 allowed the tenants to sell their interest 1 Yes. 
 
 16983. Do you inquire as to the amount paid? 
 
 " -f- +!■- — T ^loj^'t ^-^^-^ it -would be any use 
 
 4A2 
 
 Od. 20, ISSO, 
 
 Sir Charles 
 Gore, Mr, U. A. 
 Knox, and 
 Mr. E. II. I'ery 
 
 No, for this reason, I 
 
)iS 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Oct. 20, ISSO, 
 
 Sir Clinrlcs 
 Gore, 3Ir. U. A. 
 Knox, nnd 
 Mr. E. H.Pery. 
 
 tlie only object I could have would be to prevent the 
 incoming tenant being pauperised by paying too much 
 and that could be got over by giving the man a back 
 hand at another time. 
 
 16984. You don't knowwhat sums have been paid? 
 — No, I don't inquire. I would not interfere with 
 sales, as a rule, except where I have reason to believe 
 the man was a bankrupt, and would not make a good 
 tenant, or was a lazy, good-for-nothing fellow. You 
 were good enough to ask me a question as regards the 
 valuation, and I should be glad if you will allow me 
 to make a remark to the effect that I think it cannot 
 
 be for a moment urged or supposed that GrifEtli's 
 valuation was a fair approximation, almost in any case 
 to the letting value of the land. 
 
 16985. Chairman. -We have had the evidence of 
 Mr. Ball Green, who said it was never intended to 
 be a criterion'? — We have Sir Eichard GrifEtli's 
 evidence to that effect. I can safely say, as far as my 
 own estate goes, I am quite satisfied, and no fair or 
 impartial man can say anything else than that Grif- 
 fith's valuation, as a rule, would be imder the fair 
 letting value, and what a tenant ought to pay. 
 
 Mr. TJteed Augustus Knox, Mountfalcon, BalUna, examined. 
 
 16986. Chairman. — You are a landowner t — I am a 
 landowner both in Mayo and Sligo. 
 
 169S7, Give the extent of your property? — 5,011 
 acres in Sligo, and about 2,000 acres in Mayo. 
 
 16988. I think I will refer to the conversation 
 we have had with Sir Charles Gore, do you agi-ee 
 generally with the views he has expressed as to the 
 dealings with the tenants and the state of the country ? 
 — Yes, generally. 
 
 16989. And as to the present state of the country? 
 —Yes. 
 
 16990. And the means by which it has been in a 
 better state than many other parts? — Yes; and I 
 believe would still remain so only for this imfortunate 
 agitation. As far as I can see, there is no wish what- 
 ever on the part of the tenantry if left to themselves 
 not to pay the rent they have been paying. On my 
 estates my tenants have not complained of any exces- 
 sive rental until this agitation commenced. 
 
 16991. ]\Ir. Shaw. — And have they complained 
 since ? — A few. 
 
 16992. InTirawIey? — f think only one man com- 
 plained, but a great many have told me the rents are 
 no trouble in the world to them, and those who have 
 paid me the rent last year paid it in dribs and drabs 
 through intimidation ; they would not even go to the 
 rent office. 
 
 16993. Was it from the bad times? — No, from in- 
 timidation. They had the money, and paid it in dribs 
 and drabs, and were so much in dread that they did 
 not go to the agent. On the night before my agent 
 held his office the property was " walked " by an armed 
 mob, and every man told not to pay. And this time, 
 when the agent went out, very few came to him. He 
 got some money from the tenants on the lands as he 
 was going to look after some workmen, and he Avas told 
 they would send him more through the Post-office. 
 
 16994. But paying by dribs and drabs would more 
 expose them to intimidation 1 — They don't think so ; it 
 is practically not so. 
 
 16995. Chairman. — What is the number of tenants 
 on your property — if you can, divide them into large 
 and small? — On my Sligo property I have 176 
 tenants; 127 of these under £10 valuation. On my 
 Mayo property I have seventy-three tenants, and 
 fifty-three of them are under £10 Poor Law vakiation. 
 
 169 90. Were they originally holding under lease? — • 
 No ; I don't think there is a leaseholder on my estates. 
 
 16997. Were they originally? — No; not for the 
 last thirty odd years. 
 
 16998. Were they brought in originally by being 
 under tenants to middlemen ? — No ; they were tenants 
 directly under the landlord on all occasions. But, at 
 the same time, my father when he had the estate 
 made leases of twenty-one years to every tenant he 
 had ; and at the expiration of those leases the tenants 
 became yearly tenants. They all expired before I 
 succeeded. 
 
 16999. When did they expire? — At different dates. 
 The leases were made in 1820, and they expired about 
 1840, and they became tenants-at-will, and remained 
 so since, and the rents have not been interfered with 
 since. 
 
 17000. Mr. Shaw. — Have you not raised the rents 
 since ? — No. 
 
 17001. Not even in individual cases? — I have not 
 raised any rents. During the latter days .of my 
 father's life the property was under the Court of 
 Chancery, The lands were let by the Court. I re- 
 member a tenant offered for one of the best farms on 
 the property a very high rent, indeed. It was ac- 
 cepted by the Court, but after he held it for one 
 year the rent was considerably reduced — voluntarily 
 reduced — and he has been paying the reduced rent 
 ever since. 
 
 17002. What part of Sligo is your property in ?— 
 Some close to Tubberciirry, and the rest on the borders 
 of the county Leitrim. 
 
 17003. Is that near Geevagh ?— Near Geevagh, 
 
 17004. Chaiejian. — Is the sale of holdings al- 
 lowed 1 — Under certain conditions. Those conditions 
 are, that I be made aware of the fact that a sale is 
 contemplated, that the name of the tenant is submitted 
 to me that I may make enquiries as to his solvency 
 and moral character, and if I approve of these I don't 
 require fui-ther than to advise the incoming tenant 
 not to over-burden himself by paying too much for 
 the good-will. In case of small holdings being parted 
 with by the occupying tenants I generally, if possible, 
 give a preference to the adjoining tenant, for the sake 
 of consolidating holdings. I don't think it is pnident 
 to have smaller holdings than ten acres on the estate, 
 
 17005. That system prevails pretty generally in 
 that neighbourhood ? — I believe so. 
 
 17006. Does it in Mayo? — Yes, I speak of both 
 estates. 
 
 17007. Mr. Shaw. — In other parts of the county 
 besides your own? — I believe so. 
 
 17008. Chairman. — Have you any part of it that 
 is waste laud? — On part of my estate there is a 
 good deal of what is called waste land — mountain 
 land. 
 
 17009. Cut-away turf bog? — A small portion, and 
 that has been reclaimed from time to time by the 
 occupying tenant. 
 
 17010. Is your opinion of the improvements made 
 by these tenants the same as Sir Charles Gore's?— 
 Very much the same. I believe a small tenant can- 
 not eflect a. thorough improvement ; he has not the 
 area. The first essential for drainage is main drainage, 
 but the man below him won't permit him to go into 
 his farm, and then he cannot make a permanent 
 inaprovement. He tries and works a little bit, and 
 then gives it up as a bad job. 
 
 17011. Have your tenants written agreements that 
 they hold under 1 — Yes. 
 
 17012. Is there a reservation of the right to make 
 drains and roads ?^No, the i-oads are made by me at 
 my own expense. 
 
 17013. Mr. Shaw.— What are the terms of the 
 agreement ? — It is a mere agreement that they are not 
 to sublet or assign. They agree to pay me a certain 
 rent for the lands as tenants from year to year. 
 
 17014. Tlie O'CoxOR Don,— How long have these 
 agreements been adopted by you ? — For the last nine 
 years, since I have been in occupation of the pro- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 549 
 
 perty. They are mtich similar to the agreements 
 adopted by the Court of Chancery. The estate was 
 from ten to twenty years \uicler the Court of 
 Chancery, and they had similar agreements, aiid I, to 
 a great extent, adopted those agreements, with certain 
 modifications. 
 
 17015. Chaieman. — I think yo\i said there was no 
 increase of rent at all 1 — No, the rents have been the 
 same for twenty years. Of course, where a new 
 tenancy has taken place, or two holdings have been 
 put together,, or where I have had a holding in my 
 possession for sometime and made inrprovcments and 
 then relet it, there has been an increase of rent, but 
 the rent has been agreed on between iis both. I have 
 taken as a basis the tenement valuation with an 
 increase of from one-third to one-fourth, accLUxling to 
 the facilities the farm presented to the tenant. For 
 instance, a farm that has been cleared of rocks has an 
 increased advantage. One on which there was a good 
 homestead and offices would be increased in A^lue, 
 and a farm that would be properly watered for the 
 convenience ot a man's cattle would be immensely 
 enhanced in value. All those things are taken into 
 consideration, and I have never had the slightest 
 difficulty in coming to an agreement with my tenants. 
 
 17016. Mr. Shaw. — All these improvements would 
 be made by you 1 — Yes. 
 
 17017. Have you had any complaints from the 
 Sligo tenants about rent? — Yes, quite recently, since 
 this agitation took place. I never had any complaints 
 before, except from one or two, and theie are always 
 grumblers on every estate, and when I have inquired 
 into the ' matter I found that there was no ground 
 for complaint ; whenever I have found a ground I 
 have redressed it. 
 
 17018. What is the acreage of your farms ? — It is 
 not by the acre my farms have been let, it is a bulk 
 rent. Wherever a farm is to be let the tenant walks 
 it and makes me a proposal, and I walk it, and form 
 my own opinion, and if we cannot agree we call in 
 a valuator. 
 
 17019. The O'Conor Don. — What is the propor- 
 tion between the valuation and the rent 1 — About one- 
 fourth under. 
 
 17020. Have your tenants thorough drained? — 
 No, they cannot do it, because thorough draining 
 is dependent upon main drainage, and they haven't 
 that. 
 
 17021. But I thought you said you had main drain- 
 age 1 — No, not in my Sligo property — the adjoining 
 proprietors would not join with me and the thing re- 
 mains as it was, although I borrowed money from the 
 Board of Works. 
 
 17022. But where you have a main drainage, have 
 the tenants thorough drained ? — No ; and I am just 
 as pleased that they have not, for their- ideas of drain- 
 ing are very meagre — they don't make a drain deep 
 enough, and then in a few years they silt wp and the 
 ground becomes a mass of rushes. 
 
 17023. Is it your experience the occupying tenants 
 do not do much thorough drainage] — Do none what- 
 ever ; they may deepen an outfall through a piece of 
 bog they have reclaimed, but they never thorough 
 drain. 
 
 17024. Mr. Shaw. — Have you had many evictions ? 
 — Not many. There was one — all these queries were 
 answered before in documents we had before us. I 
 had one eviction for non-payment of rent in the 
 County Sligo. 
 
 17025. Is that long ago ? — Well, I cannot tell you 
 the year — it is within ten years — I think that was 
 the query. 
 
 17026. Were your rents fairly paid last year ? — 
 No, they were not ; they were fairly paid wherever 
 the tenants were able to pay them, but wherever dis- 
 tress prevailed, and the tenants were poor, they were 
 only partially paid. 
 
 17027. Chairman. — But you gave them time? — 
 Oh, yes, always. As a rule they owe me nearly three 
 half years' rent. 
 
 17028. Do you attend to both these properties Oct. 20, I88O. 
 yourself? — No ; my brother is my agent. gj^ Charles ' 
 
 17029. Mr. Shaw. — Do you hold property in Done- Gore, Mr. U. A. 
 
 gal ? — No ; a namesake of mine, C^aptain Knox. 
 
 17030. Does he live in this county 1 — At Balluirobe. 
 
 17031. Chairman. — Do you live in this county ? — 
 Yes, always, all my life ; and as long as I will be 
 allowed I intend, please Cod, to do so. 
 
 17032. And you visit your estates? — Constantly. 
 I know every tenant on my Mayo property, and I think 
 in Sligo ; but the managtMuent is in the luuids of my 
 agent. 
 
 17033. The O'Coi^or Don.— I don't think you 
 stated how much you laid out in improvements ? — I 
 have laid out a good deal — my fath«a- laid out over 
 £22,000 on Ins Mayo property. 
 
 17034. What sort of improvements ? — Farm roads 
 principally, and the reclaiming of lands on the Mayo 
 property ; he reclaimed a great deal of land. The 
 whole of the demesne I am occupying was reclaimed 
 from almost waste land ; certainly half of it. 
 
 17035. Mr. Shaw. — It is good land? — Fairish. 
 
 17036. It has paid ? — I don't think it has. A man 
 will go to great expense in making a demesne which 
 he otherwise would not do in a pound, shilling, and 
 pence view. 
 
 17037. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think the re- 
 clamation of this waste land pays ? — Some class pays 
 undoubtedly, but other classes do not pay. 
 
 17038. Chairman.^ — Was a large part of this spent 
 upon tenants' holdings, improvements on tenants' hold- 
 ings?- -No; formation of roads. A man cannot 
 occupy his holding advantageously unless ho has a way 
 of getting in and out of it. The first thing after 
 fencing, a property is to drain it and then make roads. 
 In the cases after the famine, where holdings fell in — in 
 my father's time, none such occurred in my time — but. 
 when men went to America and left the holdings on 
 liis hands, he took them in hands, and under the 
 management of an agriculturist, put them in an im- 
 proved state and then relet them to tenants after- 
 wards. 
 
 17039. The O'Conor Don. — Have you been in the 
 habit of assisting tenants in theii- buildings and 
 houses? — Yes. 
 
 17040. To what extent? — I don't speak of the Sligo 
 property, I have not been in the habit of assisting any 
 tenants there, I have not been asked for assistance, 
 but on the Mayo property I have assisted my tenants. 
 
 17041. The houses are generally built by the ten- 
 ants? — Yes, almost as a rule. 
 
 17042. Chairman. — Any new buildings going on 
 of houses ? — A few. 
 
 17043. Are they slated? — No, they are too far 
 away from markets for slates ; it would cost them too 
 much to convey and carry them, the thatch is much 
 better for them, and it makes a warmer house. 
 
 17044. The O'Conor Don. — Do you remark an im- 
 provement in the houses in which the people live for 
 the last twenty years ? — There is an improvement. 
 
 17045. Chairman. — Is there anything else you 
 would like to state ? — In these queries that were sent 
 forward by the Commissioners there was a queiy to 
 which we were asked to give replies. The question 
 is — " Do you suggest any alterations or amendments 
 of the existing law regulating the relations of landlord 
 and tenant?" and I have some suggestions here. I 
 don't think I can give you any further information on 
 the matter one way or the other. I have also men- 
 tioned in that my views as to the extent of the hold- 
 ings, in the case of a peasant proprietary being estab- 
 lished, and I don't think any holding less than fifty 
 acres would be beneficial to the country ; a tenant 
 on a smaller holding than that dwindles into a iiauper 
 or a man who will get rid of his farm in a short time 
 to the fii-st man next him who sells whiskey, all the 
 small holders do that. 
 
 17046. Mr. Shaw. — Do they all do that? — Asa 
 rule. I know several of my small Iiolders who, since 
 the Landlord and Tenant Act came in, and they had 
 
 Knox, and 
 Mr. E. II. Pery. 
 
550 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 20, 18S0. 
 
 Sir Charles 
 Gore/Mr.U.A. 
 Knox, and 
 Mr.E.H.Pery. 
 
 a vested interest in tlieir land, the first tiling they did 
 was to borrow money and become indebted to the 
 various shopkeepers, and those shopkeepers have de- 
 crees against them, any one of them could sell them 
 out. The greater number of decrees obtained through 
 the country are by middlemen, the landlord is too 
 careful of his tenantry. 
 
 17047 Chairman. — I see you recommend that all 
 contracts should be in writing between landlord and 
 tenant, and entered in a county record court 1 — Cer- 
 tainly, I consider " the bargain it takes two to make, it 
 eqiTally takes two to break," and any bargain that is 
 made between two honest men should be fulfilled by 
 them, and I would enter it in a record court. 
 
 17048. Then you would recommend a land court to 
 be established in each county? — Yes, it is only a sug- 
 gestion, but I think there should be something of that 
 sort. I don't think it is right to have the case decided 
 by the County Court Judge. 
 
 17049. The O'ConoR Don.— You don't think that 
 a good tribunal? — No. 
 
 17050. Has it given satisfaction to the landlord or 
 tenant? — I don't believe it has to either party. Sir 
 Charles Gore — One proof of that is the number of ap- 
 peals, in this part of Mayo, from the Land Court to 
 the Assizes. 
 
 17051. Mr. Shaw.— On behalf of both landlord and 
 tenant ? — Sir Charles Gore. — On behalf of both. 
 
 17052. The O'Conos Don. — And have these appeals 
 been generally successful? — Mr. Knox. — In very 
 many instances. 
 
 17052 a. Chaieman.— That this court should be com- 
 posed of practical agriculturists ? — ^Yes. 
 
 17053. Who are resident in the- neighbourhood ? — 
 No, I would have them above reproach, and not local 
 men, because they are always subject to be bought 
 over. 
 
 17054. And that there should be a notice of con- 
 templated improvements given by the tenant ? — Cer- 
 tainly, because I have seen a great deal of difference 
 and counter-swearing for want of such a clause as that; 
 men will say they made a permanent improvement ten 
 years ago, and there is no proof of it except what they 
 swear to. A man will swear that the thing is done, 
 and a County Court Judge is bound to go by the evi- 
 dence before him if he believes the oath, and he will 
 say, " 1 have no proof to the contrary, it is sworn to ;" 
 consequently a decree is given for this improvement, 
 which, in nine cases out of ten, never took place. 
 
 17055. Then that they should be filed in. the Ee- 
 cord Court — any improvements given notice of and 
 executed — becoming indisputable evidence of the im- 
 provements ? — Certainly. 
 
 17056. And who the person was who made it ? — 
 Of course. 
 
 17057. Mr. Shaw. — Would you leave the fixing of 
 rents to this Court?- — Certainly not. I would never in- 
 terfere in the fixing of rent between the two interested 
 people, the one who had something to give, and the other 
 to take. No landlord is fool enough to ask a tenant 
 to give a rent he cannot pay, and he is cutting liis 
 own throat in putting on an excessive rent. The 
 landlord cannot eat his land. All ho wants is to get a 
 good income, and no landlord I know of would be de- 
 
 sirous to rack-rent his tenantry. It is the little gombeen 
 man who buys his estate at a' high figure who puts on 
 an excessive rent. They are always in the habit of 
 grinding the tenantry. 
 
 ,17058. Ought there not to be a way of checking 
 that man ? — The matter would be checked naturally 
 if the tenants had not that fearful rage for land. They 
 run it up on each other. 
 
 17059. There is nothing else in the country by 
 which they can live ? — They can do what is better ; go 
 to a country where they can live infinitely better. We 
 are overcrowded with pauper farmei-s, not with .cood 
 farmers. It was only last week I was conversing with 
 tenants, and asking them why such a tiling was not 
 better done, and they all told me they had not the 
 means ; it was v/ant of capital. A man marries his 
 wife 01! e week, and scarcely has what will pay the 
 parish priest to marry them, and that man will go 
 next v»-eek and ask for a farm which will take £50 to 
 stock it. Sir C. Gore — I am not at all sure, but that 
 such a state of things has been allowed to arise that 
 it may become necessary for the Government to in- 
 terfere, though I cannot see, on prmciple, why inter- 
 ference should exist in land more than any other pro- 
 perty. But, at the same time, I am not satisfied that 
 such a state of things may not have arisen as may 
 warrant the Government in interfering. [ believe 
 such an interference does exist already, in the Land 
 Act of 1870, and I foresaw at that time, and .so did 
 men wiser than myself, the difficulty — that once you 
 overstep the line, it is difficult to say how far you may 
 not interfere between landlord and tenant. However, 
 if it be granted — and I think it is pretty well granted 
 Qn all hands — thatsome further interference will result 
 between landlord and tenant, then I think we must 
 only reconcile ourselves to the circumstances, and re- 
 commend what is the best mode of procedure. 
 
 17060. It cannot hurt the good landlord ?— Sir C. 
 Gore — I admit there may be a necessity to check 
 small landlords, and also certain cases of exceptional 
 people, who Avill not exercise due discretion, and who 
 think, because they have a right, they must exercise 
 is to the full, without regard to the circumstances of 
 the case. I go that far, and what Mr. Knox has 
 stated 1 admit. There were several of us land pro- 
 prietors met in Ballina, and Mr. Knox propounded his 
 own view ; ours slightly differed from it, and ours 1 
 think was the majority. 
 
 17061. Chairman. — You would prevent subdivision 
 of farms by the forfeiture of the farm ? — Mr. Kiwx— 
 Certainly. 
 
 17062. In place of eviction for one year's rent, sub- 
 stitute sale of the tenant's interest ?— Yes ; I would 
 stop evictions altogether, I think. 
 
 17063. The exercise of the franchise to be depen- 
 dent upon payment by tenantry of rent up to May, as 
 now in poors rate up to July ?— Yes ; I think it would 
 help matters exceeclingly. No tenant is so well off as 
 the one who has paid his rent ; therefore, I thuik, 
 this check on the exercise of his rights of franchise 
 would a great incentive to him to pay his rent. Sir 
 C. Gore,. — As this agitation is of a political nature, 
 Mr. Knox v/ould meet it in a political way. Mr. 
 Knox. — Exactly. 
 
 Mr. Edmond Henry Pery, Coolcronan, Ballina, examined. 
 
 17064. I agree with Sir Charles Gore, and especially 
 in what he was about to offer you ; it is in fact the 
 whole question. Sir Ghas. Gore— I only put it for- 
 ward as the general views of us who met the other day, 
 and discussed the question. 
 
 17065. Chairman.— And I understand Mr. Pery 
 to say he agrees with that, and would like us to hear 
 the suggestion ?— Mr. Pery.—Yes. Sir C. Gore.~We 
 must very much crave your indulgence in attempting 
 to thrust forward this as a solution of a difficulty 
 winch has puzzled statesmen for a greai many years, 
 and I think is likely to puzzle them further. We 
 
 consider that there ought to be an abolition of com- 
 pensation for disturbance where the landlord had 
 agreed to allow free sale of the tenant's interest. 
 Secondly, the removal from the jurisdiction of the 
 Chairman of Quarter Sessions of all land cases, and m 
 lieu thereof constitute a land court for each county, 
 consisting of three persons duly qualified by training 
 and experience to adjudicate on land cases, including 
 the question of what is fair rent, and the question 
 would arise whether it would not be judicious that 
 there should be Government valuation. Thirdly, the 
 establishment of a provincial court of appeal from 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 551 
 
 this land court to consist of the members of the county 
 courtS; excepting the members of the county court 
 whose award is the subject of the appeal to the pro- 
 vincial court, five to form a quorum, the provincial 
 court of appeal to revise, affirm, or annul the award of 
 the land court, no further appeal. "We appear to be 
 satisfied to leave a good deal to the discretion of that 
 court. 
 
 1706G. The O'Conor Doif.— Would you apply this 
 to tenancies of every description? — Sir C. Gore. — I 
 would. In all the evidence I have given, I have en- 
 deavoured to lean more to the question of the small 
 tenants than to leaseholders, which I referred to as a 
 separate agreement between two men well able to take 
 care of themselves. 
 
 17067. Mr. Shaw. — But if there was a court that 
 would be a very good court to go and not go to law ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 17068. You would have a local court of skilled 
 men and riot lawyers ? — They may introduce a lawyer 
 into their composition if they choose to, certainly, bvit 
 all the other members ought to be expert in land. I 
 don't think we ought to go away without expressing 
 our sense of the very full hearing we have got, and 
 
 the great anxiety shown by the Commissioners to 
 hear us. 
 
 170G!). The O'Conor Don.— I don't think you 
 stated, Mr. Pery, that you are a landed proprietor I — 
 Mr. Feri/. — I am, in Mayo. 
 
 17070. How many acres 1 — About 5,000 acres. 
 
 17071. Mr. Shaw.— You farm too?— Yes, I have 
 500 acres in my hands. 
 
 17072. The O'OojroR Don. — Have you spent much 
 money on improvements 1 — ^I have. 
 
 17073. How much ?— I should say about £20,000. 
 
 17074. Mr. Shaw. — In what part of the county ^in 
 the same district 1 — Yes. 
 
 17075. The O'Gonok Don. — Have your rents been 
 raised of late years 1 — Not since 1868^ when 1 made 
 the last rise. 
 
 17076. You have not had many changes of tenan- 
 cies 1 — IsTo, I have not had any, btit I believe they 
 have changed amongst themselves from time to 
 time. 
 
 The witnesses then withdrew. 
 
 Oct. 2Q, 1880. 
 
 Sir Charles 
 Gore, Mr. U. A 
 Knox and 
 Mr. E.H.Pery 
 
 Rev. Patrick Lyons, c.c, Castlebar, examined. 
 
 17077. I was going to speak about AchiU, as I was 
 down there four years, and I have been requested by 
 some of the people in AchiU to represent their 
 case. 
 
 17078. Chaiejian. — If you would be good enough 
 to tell us the case you wish to represent ? — The case 
 of the estate of Mr. William Pike. He became owner 
 of an estate in that island about 1851. Before I. give 
 any evidence at all, I wish to say that from 1851 up to 
 1870 the information I shall give is from hearsay, but I 
 am quite certain what I give is true, but, at the same 
 time, I would not vouch for its complete accuracy, and 
 from 1870 up to the present time I have personal 
 knowledge. In 1852 or 1853 he became owner. 
 The rental was then about £500, it has been raised 
 since to about £1,400, and the way in which it was 
 done was this. The whole island is covered with 
 heath, and the land there is partly reolaimable, and 
 Mr. Pike, in a few years after he became owner of the 
 property, evicted a large number of tenants, and sent 
 them to settle down in the bogs, imposing the same 
 rent on them in the bogs as they were paying on the 
 land they reclaimed themselves. The lands from which 
 they were evicted are now in the possession of two 
 large graziers, Mr. P. Sweeny and the Rev. Mr. 
 Weldon, of London, at a rental of about £200 a year. 
 That rose his rent considerably. There were thousands 
 of acres there of commonage on which the people grazed 
 their cows and sheep and horses, and for which they 
 paid nothing until 1 857, when he induced them to come 
 to an agreement to pay a nominal sum, for the grazing 
 of cattle, sheep, and horses on the mountain, that 
 amounted to about £100 a year, for the people had a 
 great number of little sheep worth from 5s. to 1 5s. each. 
 When they admitted his right to the grazing he 
 doubled the charge immediately aiter. He also, in 
 1855, charged for the seaweed growing along the sea- 
 shore. 
 
 17079. They had had that free before? — They had 
 had it free before. Anxl, another thing, on the great 
 strands there the poor people had not enough seaweed to 
 manure the land, and they got stones and planted them 
 on the strand and seaweed grew on them. He charged 
 for these a certain sum each year. Up to 1870 all the 
 tenants on his property who were, with few exceptions, 
 not valued up to .£4, pa,id rates, and, of course, taxes also. 
 In 1871 the people found themselves more indepSndent 
 and they refused to pay those rates. Mr. Pike endea- 
 voured to insist on the people paying it, and the matter 
 was brought before the Board of Guardians at New- 
 poit by Mr. Bi-ice, then a Poor Law Guardian for the 
 Achill district. The guardians, rightly, I believe, my 
 
 lord, decided that the tenants were not bound to pay 
 the rates, and Mr. Pike, in order to compensate him- 
 self for the rates he should pay for the whole of the 
 tenantry, threatened to raise the charge for grazing, 
 and. to process each tenant for burning the bog. The 
 people at that time used to burn the bog, because other- 
 wise they coxild not raise any fair crop of potatoes. 
 The poor people were not able to go to law with Mr. 
 Pike, and asked him to make terms and they would 
 agree to them. The terms he m_ade were these, that 
 they would pay from that day forth a certain amount 
 of money in addition to their rent, to compensate for 
 the rates they paid before 1870, and in return the 
 grazing charge was not altered, and full permission to 
 bum given. 
 
 17080. Vf hat date was that ?— About 1871, J think. 
 Then there are two other things I wish to refer to 
 particularly. Of course the Land Act prohibited sub- 
 letting under a penalty of forfeiting a claim for dis- 
 turbance, I believe, and Mr. Pike, instead of preventing 
 people from subletting, allows them to sublet, but 
 charges £1 a year for the second house built on 
 the holding, thus, in fact, encouraging the sublet- 
 ting. 
 
 17081. Mr. Shaw.— In addition to the rent?— Oh, 
 of course. A man with £3 worth of land may have 
 two sons, and he wishes to djvide the land between 
 them, Mr. Pike allows him to build a second house on 
 that small holding, and for that house charges him £1 
 a year for ever. 
 
 17082. Chairman. — Then has there been a very ex- 
 tensive subdivision going on ? — Extensive subdivision 
 every year, to the ruin of the tenants and the benefit 
 of the landlord. 
 
 17083. And they hold too small an amount to live 
 upon ? — The way it is in Achill the people are a pri- 
 mitive people, and don't do well in America ; don't 
 speak English in the upper portion ; in the lower por- 
 tion they are fairly intelligent, and they return from 
 America because they cannot get on well there, not 
 knowing English well. The people cannot live on 
 their land, the produce of their land cannot support 
 them more than four or five months in the year, and 
 they go over. to England, every man that is able to go, 
 and every young girl from fifteen to twenty-five goes 
 to Scotland, and they come home and spend the winter 
 in their own place. 
 
 17084. Mr. Shaw. — Otherwise they could pot live 
 at all ? — Could not live at all. In 1876, my lord, ho 
 tried to raise the charge for the grazing, of horses 
 sheep, and cows on the mountains : the pco|.ile refused 
 to pay it, and he processed them in 1876. I was there 
 
 Hev. Patrick 
 Lyons, CO. 
 
552 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oc«.,20, 1S80. 
 
 Eev. Patrick 
 Lyons, c.c. 
 
 myself, and I happened to Lave a house from him with 
 two acres of land, and the land ^\'as so bad I would 
 not expend a farthing in tilling it, it was there waste. 
 He processed the people for burning because they 
 would not agree to pay a double chargeforgrazing sheep, 
 cattle and horses. He processed a hundred of them, 
 and they came out to Westport Quarter Sessions, and 
 ■he sent me a process also. I came to an arrangement 
 with him that he would not increase the charge on 
 sheep, because the wool of these sheep is the only 
 material the poor people have to make clothing ; the 
 little flannel they make themselves is the only 
 clothing they have, and I found it would be rather 
 a serious thing for him to double the charge on 
 sheep, making it 3s. on a sheep that might be worth 
 7s. He agreed not to increase the charge on sheep. 
 He and I were the arbitrators, and I let him have 
 what he demanded of an increase for the horses, 
 because there are very few horses in the place. They, 
 in return, got permission to burn. . 
 
 17085. The O'Conor Don. — Then there were arbi- 
 trators appointed'? — There were. The matter came 
 before the court, and the agent, Mr. Crampton, said he 
 would be very ahxious the matter would be settled. 
 I said I had no desire to go to court at all. Mr. 
 
 ^ Crampton is dead. So we agreed in that way, that 
 for seven years there would be no change, after seven 
 years, I suppose, he will increase the charge on the 
 grazing of the mountain again, and the way he does 
 that is, people must have permission irom him to bui-n 
 the bog, otherwise they cannot raise crops, and he sends 
 a process for the burning every time he wants to raise 
 the grazing. He is making use of the violation of 
 the Land Act of 1860 as to burning for the purpose 
 of increasing his rent. 
 
 17086. Chairman. — Did you not say that he agreed 
 to their burning bogs if they paid an increased rent 1 
 — Oh, yes, my lord. 
 
 17087. Then now is he putting on the fine again for 
 the burning 1 — He has not done it at present, the seven 
 
 years are not up. He did it in 1876. Then'tlie people 
 are really in a state of destitution the very best year'" 
 this is the very best year the poor people have had' 
 there for the last twenty years, because they cot cood 
 food. 
 
 17088. The O'CoNOR Don.— The holdings, I suppose 
 are veiy small 1 — About three or four acres on au 
 average of reclaimed bog. 
 
 17089.' Do you think people can live on those sized 
 holdings without any rent at all ? — No, I don't- tliink 
 they could, they are living on the money they earn ia 
 England and Scotland, any agent you inquire of from 
 that place will corroborate me. There is another thing 
 I wish to refer to, after Mr. Pike got the tenants to 
 admit his right to this commonage, he charges, of course 
 for the sheep and horses and cattle on the mountain 
 and this very commonage he sets to people ; supposing 
 a man takes four acres for reclamation, he chaises for 
 the houses which they build on this wild mountain 
 together with a little garden of about half-an-acre, or 
 a i-ood, £1 an acre, and then he gives the remainder for 
 nothing for two or three years, and then it is valued 
 10s. an acre, and in proportion, as it is reclaimed, it is 
 increased to 15 s. or ^£1. 
 
 17090. Does that check their improvement? — Thej 
 cannot leave the place, they must stay there. Thej 
 do not get on well in America not knowing English, 
 
 17091. Does he generally let it to the people on the 
 property 1 — Yes ; the population is very large, it is 
 6,000, and it is not fit to support 2,000. Well, then 
 the Church Missions own half the property of the 
 island, their tenants are somewhat better, oh, far 
 better ofi' than Mr. Pike's. 
 
 17092. Chairman. — Well, we have heard it is only 
 by going to England or Scotland they earn the means 
 of living ? — Yes, my lord. 
 
 17093. Mr. Shaw. — We had the agent here?— Yes, 
 a very good kind agent, Mr. Thomas. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Messrs. John 
 Hopkins, 
 MichaelMoran, 
 Micliael 
 Dunne, Patk. 
 .Joyce, Peter 
 Ph'ilpin, Patk. 
 Koche, Michael 
 Flynn, Jolin 
 Hanning, John 
 Cunningham, 
 Patk. Eoclie, 
 (No.2),Michael 
 M'Donnell, 
 John Mo! ley, 
 John Keony, 
 John 
 
 O'Donnell, 
 Patk. Moran, 
 Thomas 
 Philpin, John 
 Planner}', 
 Patrick 
 Corcoran, and 
 Patrick 
 Kearney. 
 
 Messrs. John Hopkins, Clonkesh ; Michael Moran, Rookfield ; Michael Dunne, Tourlaheen ; Patrick 
 Joyce, Bally villy; Peter Philpin, Bally viUy; Patrick Eoche, Michael Flynn, John Hanning, John 
 Cunningham, Patrick Roche (JSTo. 2) JiIichael M'Donnell, John Molloy, John Kenny, John O'Dosneu, 
 Patrick Moran, Thomas Philpin, John Flannery, Patrick Corcoran, and Patrick Kearney, tenants 
 on the estate of Mr. Charles L. FitzGerald, Turlough, (agent, Mr. Hobert Powell), examined together. 
 
 17094. John Hopkins. — Acreage, 15 ; rent, £8 15s. 
 
 17095. Michael Moran. — Twice raised since 1855, 
 his father and grandfather occupied, and they have 
 never paid more than £1 10s. 
 
 17096. Mr. Shaw.— What is it now 1— i¥orara— 
 £13 15s.; valuation, £10 15s.; number of acres, 9. 
 I have an acre of that all shrubbery, and bushes, and 
 stones, no good. 
 
 17097. The O'Oonor Don.— When was it last 
 raised ? — About six years, I think, as far as I can 
 remember after the first rise of 1855. 
 
 17098. Michael Dunn, rent for two pieces is £16 
 and £5 2s. ?>cl. ; valuation, £7 and £6 14s. ; he built a 
 house and stable about sixteen yeai-s ago and drained 
 and fenced. 
 
 17099. Mr. Shaw.— Heis it been raised at all?— It 
 was not since I got it, it was before that. 
 
 17100.j,Do you think itistoodear? — I think it is too 
 dear at the valuation of it. 
 
 17101. In good times ?^Ingood times or bad times. 
 I think it is too dear because it is very bad land. 
 
 17102. Can you not improve it? — You can blast 
 the rocks. 
 
 17103. Patrick Joyce, has nine acres, one acre bog, 
 £18 rent, £9 10s. valuation. I built a house and barn 
 in it, the man before me was paying £10 for it, and he 
 had to run away, leave it, and the way I am paying £18 
 is going ofi' to England, I have two sons there send- 
 ing me money. 
 
 17104. Mr. Shaw.— When was it raised '—Eigh- 
 teen years ago, £8. And there is one and a half acre 
 
 of that land not worth ten shillings, rocks and shore, 
 The house I live in I had to throw it down here three 
 years ago, and build it up again, and it cost me £10. 
 
 17105. The landlord did not help you?— Never. 
 Moran. — Never, but if you do anything you have to 
 pay lor your own labour. 
 
 17106. The Bally villy tenants complain there is no 
 road ? — Joyce. — We have no road only to carry a bag 
 of oats on our back. 
 
 17107. Peter Philpin, rent £12, valuation £7 5s. 
 
 17108. Chairman. — When was that raised since! 
 — About eighteen years ago. 
 
 17109. Mr. Shaw. — How much was put on then! 
 ^From £7 to £12. 
 
 17110. Chairman. — Was there a general rise then 
 over all the tenants ? — There was on the property. 
 Mr. Fitzgerald bought this property and put no rise 
 on it since he bought it. Our land is too dear at tlie 
 valuation. 
 
 17111. Patrick Roche, holds four acres, rent fSC* 
 id. ; valuation, £4:. 
 
 17112. Mr. Shaw— When was your rise?— About 
 seventeen years ago, it was Mr. Carey put the ris3 on 
 it. 
 
 17113. Chairman. — What was the rise you bad 
 then ? — It was only paying £14 then, but as far as I 
 can judge it was raised from £14 to £25, there we"* 
 three of us in it. 
 
 17114. Michael Flynn, holds four acres, rent £8 6«. 
 8d. ; valuation, £4 5s. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 553 
 
 17115. Chairman. — Was that raised the same time? 
 — ^Yes, sir. 
 
 17116. What was your advance ? — The same rent, 
 it was a new take. 
 
 17117. John Hanning, (represented by his wife.) 
 was in England, holds four acres, rent £8 6«. Sd. ; valu- 
 ation, £i. 
 
 17118. John Cunningham, holds ten acres, rent 
 £11, valuation, £7 12s. ; som'fe of it is very Bad. 
 
 17119. Chairman. — How much is your advance? 
 — There was no rise put on us at the time I came 
 there, but 'the man before me had it for £5, he was a 
 pensioner took and could not stand it. Myself and 
 my brother, James, are living on that bit of land. 
 
 17120. Patrick Roche.— i^o. 2.)— Holds 3 acres, 
 rent £4, valuation £2 16s. ^d. Miclmel M^DonneU — 
 He is an old man ; my father-in-law and I am paying 
 that rent. 
 
 17121. Mr. Shaw. — Was the land raised at the 
 same time ? — It was. 
 
 17122. How much?— From £3 10s. M. to £4; at 
 the time of regular sowing that field is all flooded. 
 
 17123. Is that all the land yo\i have to live on ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 17124. Do you go to England?— We do. 
 
 17125. Michael Flynn. — This land we have is a deal 
 of waste bog, snipe cannot live on part of it, and it is 
 good for nothing ; if you went to walk on it yourself 
 acres would shake out before you. 
 
 17126. Mr. Shaw. — Did you reclaim any of it? — 
 Flynn — We did. 
 
 17127. John Molloy. — Does not know how many 
 acres he has ; rent £6 10s. Oii., valuation £2 10s. ^d. j 
 it is all bog. 
 
 17128. Mr. Shaw. — But it was raised the same 
 time as the others ? — It was. 
 
 17129. How much did you pay before? — £4. 
 
 17130. John Kenny. — About 6 acres of bad land; 
 rent £12, valuation £7 5s. Oc?. 
 
 17131. Mr. S haw. — It was raised the same time ? — 
 It was. 
 
 17132. How much?— From £7. 
 
 17133. John McDonnell. — Does not knowhow many 
 acres or the valuation; rent £10; it was raised the 
 same time. 
 
 17134. Patrick Moran. — Eent £7 15j. Qd., valua- 
 tion £5 17s. Od. 
 
 17135. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres have you? — 
 I have 5 acres, and I reclaimed 3 acres of bog on that, 
 and made fences and drains because I could not walk 
 on it. I carried away the water, did a great deal of 
 labour, and built two stables and houses. 
 
 17136. How m\ich was the rise put on you ? — From 
 £4 15s. Qd. to £7 15s. Oc?. 
 
 17137. The O'Conok Don.— Did you make the 
 improvements after the rise or before ? — After the rise. 
 When I got it I began to improve, and I made close 
 on three acres of bog, reclaimed it, and put drains on 
 every place that there was water lodging, and strove 
 to make a little pasture, and knock a little living out 
 of it. 
 
 17138. Thomas Philpin. — Holds 3 acres; rent 
 £5 15g. Od, valuation £3 4s. 9d. I built every house 
 I have, my dwelling-house and a couple of barns. 
 
 17139. Mr. Shaw. — Is that all you have to live 
 by?— Yes. 
 
 17140. And it was raised at the same time as the 
 others ? — It was. 
 
 17141. How much raised? — From £4 5s. 2d. to 
 
 £5 15s. 
 
 17142. Michael McDonnell, rent, £5. 
 
 17143. Chairman.- What was your rent before?— 
 I don't exactly know. 
 
 17144. Mr. Shaw. — How far is this from town? — 
 Two and a half miles. 
 
 17145. Which side ?—Ballina road. 
 
 17146. It is poor land?— It is, indeed— could not 
 be wilder. 
 
 17147. The O'CoNOR Don.— Who is the agent?— 
 Mr. Powell. And along with that, when we came 
 there we had to make a little house at our own 
 expense. Michael Flynn. — This land we are talking 
 about, I can tell you, you could not travel on some of 
 it. It would shake acres before you, and you would 
 not know if you gave one step that you would not be 
 drowned in a bog-hole. 
 
 17148. Mr. Shaw. — There is plenty of turf and 
 plenty of children ? — M'Donnell. — Yes ; and no ac- 
 commodation, and plenty of poverty, too. 
 
 17149. Chairman. — Do you get the turf free? — 
 Moran, — It is a poor way for people to live on a little 
 grain of yellow meal and water, and have a heavj' rent 
 to pay. 
 
 17150. Mr. Shaw. — If you had it for nothing could 
 you live on it ? — Hardly in these times, with the 
 failure of crops. 
 
 17151. What can you do with yourselves? — We 
 strive to knock support out of it up to this. 
 
 17152. Would any of you like to go to America — 
 if half of you were taken, with the whole of your 
 families, body and bones, and put into a comfortable 
 ship in Galway, and landed on a bit of land in 
 America, and given a good start,, how would you like 
 it ? — ^We would like it well. 
 
 17153. And make a neighbourhood for yourselves 
 with the people about you ? — Yes. 
 
 17154. We are not going to do it, we have not the 
 power to do it, but we only want to know what vou 
 think of it ? — I wish it could be done for iis. 
 
 17155. Because we v/ant to look at this thing in a 
 practical way to help you ? — A'V ould it not be better for 
 us than running off to England, earning a little money, 
 and giving it to the landlord when we came home. 
 Flynn. — We are like wild geese, your honour. 
 
 17156. John Flannery. — I am a tenant to Mr. 
 Fitzgerald, in Ballyvilly. This (produced) is my Poor 
 Hate receipt ; this (produced) is the receipt for my rent 
 and the valuation ; and this is the letter I received 
 from Mr. Powell last year when I did not attend to 
 pay on the office day. I have improved something 
 about four acres or six acres of that land. 
 
 17157. Mr. Shaw. — Is it on the same townland? — 
 It is, su". 
 
 17158. You don't live on it? — I have a herd on it, 
 a workman. I got it from Mr. Kearney before the 
 place was sold. 
 
 17159. How many acres? — I cannot say. 
 
 17160. How much rent do you pay? — £66 8s. M. 
 
 17161. It was raised with the other holdings ? — It 
 was. 
 
 17162. Did you get it at the same time ? — Yes, at 
 the sa,me time Mr. Joyce and others got into possession 
 after the raising and I have improved the place, and 
 drained it. I have on \a-j land three or four rabbit 
 buiTOws, and if my labouring man goes out there to 
 interfere he is threatened with Mr. Powell, and his 
 trapper, an Englishman, goes on the land ; he is 
 threatened and watched, and if he is caught he would 
 be badly treated. These rabbits have destroyed my 
 land. 
 
 17163. Chairman : — 
 
 "Ballyvilly, Castlebar, 
 
 15<A February, 1880. 
 
 " Sir, — I sent Mr. FitzGerald's bailiff to you yesterday 
 with a receipt for your half-year's rent, ]st November, 1879, 
 and the request to hand him that amount as usual. The 
 reply he got from you, as he informs me, was that you 
 would not pay him any rent unless you were allowed 15 
 per cent, on the year's rent up to the 1st November, 1879. 
 You will know whether this is correct or otherwise. In 
 any case I require you to hand me £33 4s. id., on or before 
 Wednesday next, your half year's rent to the 1st of 
 November, 1 879. If you do not see fit to do so I shall 
 direct Mr. FitzGerald's solicitor to proceed ao'ainst you 
 forthwith for that amount. 
 
 " I am Sir, your obedient servant, 
 
 " John Powell." 
 You see by my receipt here that I have always been 
 very punctual in paying my rent. We had a meeting 
 
 4B 
 
 Oct. 20, 18S0. 
 
 Messrs. John 
 
 H"i.kins, 
 
 MichaelJIoran, 
 
 Midiael 
 
 Dunne. Patk, 
 
 Jorce, Peter 
 
 Philpin, Patk. 
 
 Eoche, 
 
 Michael Flynn. 
 
 John Hanninjc. 
 
 John 
 
 Cunnm£>ham, 
 
 Palk Koche 
 
 (No.2), .Michael 
 
 M'Uonnell, 
 
 John MoUcy. 
 
 John Kenu}', 
 
 John 
 
 O'Doniiell, 
 
 Patrick Mcraii, 
 
 Thomas 
 
 Philpin, John 
 
 Flannery, 
 
 Patrick 
 
 Corcoran, and 
 
 Patrick 
 
 Kearney. 
 
554. 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1S80. 
 
 JiTessrs. John 
 
 Jlopkins, 
 
 WichaelMoran, 
 
 Michael 
 
 Dunne, Patlc. 
 
 Jovce, Peter 
 
 Philpin, Patk. 
 
 Eoche, 
 
 Michael Flj'nn, 
 
 vohn Hanning, 
 
 John 
 
 Cunninf^ham; 
 
 Patk. Kochp, 
 
 (Nu.2), Michael 
 
 M'Donnell, 
 
 John 
 
 Blolloy, 
 
 John Kenny, 
 
 John 
 
 O'Donnell, 
 
 PatrlckMoran, 
 
 Thomas 
 
 Tiilpiu, John 
 
 llannery, 
 
 Patrick 
 
 Corcoran, and 
 
 Patrick 
 
 Kearney, 
 
 held by our parish priest Father Brennan, in Turlough, 
 and we were all summoned up there to attend. I 
 attended ; it came to an understanding, I and several 
 other people there came to the understanding that we 
 were to get this reduction from Mr. FitzGerald (I was 
 a man paying over £20), and to call upon me and 
 other tenants to see were we satisfied to take this 
 allowance, we opposed it and said we would not take 
 less than five he was giving three. I had my rent paid 
 then at that time on the 9th of May, and I expected 
 when I was paying this November rent afterwards 
 that I would get the allowance in full. He would not 
 allow me and I objected to pay the rent without 
 getting 3 per cent, in full, I had a year's rent paid at 
 the time while the other tenants here had not half a 
 year's rent paid at all. 
 
 17164. The O'Conor Don.— And you had the 
 hanging gale paid ? — I had it always paid, and because 
 I did not comply with his wishes he sends me that 
 threatening letter. 
 
 17165. Mr. Shaw.— What did you do then'!— I 
 went down and paid him. That letter was sent on the 
 15th and he furnished me with the receipt on the 13th. 
 
 17166. Chaikman. — How came the letter to be 
 written on the 15th when you have the receipt on the 
 13th ? — Because he sent the receipt up to me before. 
 
 17167. The O'Conor Don.— He was so sure of 
 getting the money he sent you the receipt? — Yes. I 
 was ignorant of the thing, I thought I should get the 
 3 per cent, in full. In this farm I have there are four 
 rabbit burrows, from which Mr. FitzGerald has, I 
 suppose, the value of my farm. I can swear he has 
 more than £66 8s. ^d. worth of rabbits taken out of 
 it every year. He has that much game out of it, and 
 me or my man cannot interfere. I have reclaimed 
 that land, it is at the rear of Mr. Powell's house, and 
 after my time and labour I believe he would sooner 
 have me out of it. 
 
 17168. Mr. Shaw. — You have no lease?— No • and 
 along with that, to boot, there is a large river running 
 at the rere of my land. He has promised me every 
 year, for the last five years, he would clean this river ■ 
 it overflows and banks up and destroys all my place' 
 so the few pounds I make on the land I am constantly 
 laying out on manure, and keeping a man at work at 
 the other end of the land. Pat Joyce there has 
 another- mearing that ns also closed up." So that all 
 the money we are giving Mr. FitzGerald is simply put 
 into his pocket ; he has not even made a road from my 
 holding. There is a passage leading from the main 
 road and at the time of the extraordinary sessions 
 I applied for £10, for making a gullet in the road and 
 conveniencing this man. It was opposed by the 
 guardians in the workhouse, and when called in the 
 courthouse here it was disallowed by Mr. Po-vrell 
 he stated that road was not required, in my hearing ■ 
 though it was necessary, those people are- his tenants 
 and they are always passing in and out through my 
 farm. My brother-in-law, Pat Flannery, has another 
 farm of the same kind, there is a rabbit burrow too 
 upon his laud. 
 
 17169. Patrick Corcoran. — Rent, £21 ; valuation, 
 £11 15s.; acreage, 16. 
 
 17170. Mr. Shaw. — Was the rise made the same 
 time as the others? — It was not, but what we are 
 paying £37 for, when my father was there we had it 
 for £20. 
 
 17171. Was it not raised at the same time as the 
 other townlands 1 — It was. 
 
 17172. Have you improved it much? — Indeed, I 
 did ; I built three stables on it and a dwelling house, 
 every-thing that was done was done by myself. 
 
 17173. Patrick Kearney. — Rent raised from £3 1 h. 
 4d to £5 10s. 
 
 The witnesses then retired. 
 
 Mr Thomas 
 Gibbons. 
 
 Mr. Edmund 
 Larkin. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Gibbons, Cullabullane, tenant on 
 
 1 7 1 74. Chairman.— Do you hand in this statement ? 
 — Yes, your honour. 
 
 17175. Reads :— 
 
 " The grievances of the said townlands are these ; we, the 
 tenants of these townlands have no leave to burn a fire of 
 weeds on our lands, and has no leave to raise, a load of mud 
 for manure ; only in a place appointed, or if we did we should 
 put it into a hole, back. We were even warned not to cut a 
 bush on our land, even in a year of famine for fire. Every 
 tenant of us were bound to be game keepers or if not we 
 were under the pain of a year's rent in a fine — that or 
 
 Sir Robert Lynch Blosse's estate, examined. 
 
 eviction. We were even warned by Sir Robert's bailiff that 
 we had a material right to be afraid of the sight of his hat, 
 notwithstanding himself as far as we could see it from us. 
 
 Signed by the tenantry." 
 
 What is your rent? — Rent £13, , and valuation 
 £7 10s. 
 
 17176. Mr. Shaw.— Was it raised lately ?— No, sir ; 
 not since we got it. " . 
 
 17177. When was that? — About seventeen years 
 ago. 
 
 Mr. Edmund Larkin examined. 
 
 17178. My story is that I paid my rent all through 
 up to this half year's rent and then I went and asked 
 time, that was about a fortnight ago, when his bailiff 
 came across me there and said if I did not pay the rent 
 now I would be processed. "There is the agent" 
 said he, "and go as far as him." "Well" said I, "I 
 will expect to get two or three months time." I went 
 to him and he would not hear me at all. 
 
 17179. Mr. Shaw. — How m'uch is your rent? — £22, 
 and half a crown out of it. 
 
 17180. Was it raised at all?— It was. 
 
 17181. When? — Twenty-two or twenty-three years 
 
 ago, there was a general rise in 1862 on the whole 
 property. 
 
 17182. How much was put on you? — £5 10s. on 
 the whole. I have three places. 
 
 17183. And he would not give you any time to pay 
 rent ? — No time he would give me. 
 
 17184. And have you paid it up pretty well? — 1 
 have. 
 
 17185. The O'Conor Don.— Is Mr. Tardy your 
 agent ? — He is. 
 
 17186. Mr. Shaw. — Did he process you?— He did, 
 sir. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 M'Donnell. 
 
 Mr. Patrick M'Donnell, 
 
 17187. Mr. Shaw. — What is your rent? — Ten guineas. 
 
 17188. How many acres? — About twelve acres. 
 
 17189. Was it raised?— It was raised in 1862. 
 
 17190. What is your cpmplaint, is it too dear?^ 
 It is too dear, and there is six acres of.it along by 
 the river, and the river is not a foot lower than it in 
 the middle of summer, and every step you would walk 
 on it in winter, the water is higher than your shoes, 
 and iu spring, and on this day of the year. 
 
 17191. Is it grass land ?— It is, it could not be tilled. 
 
 Cloncrooneen, examined. 
 
 17192. Is not the grazing good in summer? — It is 
 if it was dry, but this moment you could put a sailing 
 boat sailing over it. 
 
 17193. Is the rest of the land good? — It is not. 
 
 17194. Have you improved it, or done anything to 
 it ? — I have, as much as I could, and that is a great 
 deal. > 
 
 17195. You built your own. house ? — We did. 
 
 17196. The landlord never helps you ? — Not a shiiling 
 
 ,'i,' 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 555 
 
 Mr. Thomas Flannery examined. 
 
 17197. Mr. Shaw. — How much land have you? — 
 seventeen acres. 
 
 17198. What is your rent?— £17. 
 
 17199. What is your valuation 1—£15. 
 
 17200. When was it raised on you? — It was not 
 raised on me at all, about sixteen years ago they raised 
 it to £17 from £15. I am living away from this, 
 Lagaliilla is my townland. 
 
 17201. What is it you complain of, is the land too 
 cheap t — It j.s too dear, it is not good land, all hills, 
 if they were hollows the land would be better. 
 
 17202. Did you do any improvements on it?---I 
 have sir. 
 
 17203. Did you build "any house ? — I did, sir, I made 
 three hoiises. 
 
 17204. The landlord does not make any allowance 
 for houses ? — No, your honour, I was promised first, 
 any house I would make I would get something for it, 
 and I was promised timber and got no timber. 
 
 17205. Did he make any allowance to you in the 
 bad times ? — No, sir. 
 
 17206. No reduction ? — I got 4s. in one year's rent. 
 
 Oct. 20. 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Flanneiy. 
 
 Mr. John Mullins examined. 
 
 17207. Holds 4a. 3r. 6p. of arable land and the 
 name of 2a. of marshy bottom, and then there is some 
 3ommonage for the use of tenants, and cutting tui-f. 
 My rent is £7 10s. and I had it when the townland 
 was striped in 1855, for £5 10s.; in six months after 
 they raised it to 10s., in 1862 they raised it to 30s., 
 that leaves me £2 of a rise since 1855 up to this. 
 
 17208. Mr. Shaw. — Have you done anything on 
 the land yourseK? — I improved it and laboured hard 
 
 in winter and summer, to endeavour as much as I 
 could to knock some living out of it, and oniy for the 
 help I was getting from my friends in America I could 
 not stand it, and whatever fortune I got, as long as I, 
 could I stopped there. 
 
 17209. Do you go to England?— Not since I was 
 married. 
 
 17210. What is your valuation ? — My valuation is 
 £4 16s. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Mullins. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Hyland examined. 
 
 17211. Chairman. — How much land do you hold ? 
 — -Nine acres. 
 
 17212. How much rent do you pay?^£ll 8s. It 
 has been raised to that from £9 4s. 
 
 17213. When was it raised? — I think it is about 
 1854. 
 
 17214. What is the Government valuation ? — The 
 Government valuation is £10 5s. The valuation was 
 raised from £7 10s., and then it was raised to the 
 9ame valuation as the rent. It is very bad, cold 
 land. 
 
 17215. Mr. Shaw.— Is it bog?— No. I had por- 
 tion of a bog, but it was taken from me. I had to 
 
 make a drain, at my own expense, for the purpose of 
 cutting turf, and it is taken from me now, and I have 
 no call to it. Where I made the drain another man 
 cut his turf and smothered the drain up, and I must 
 pay for the turf now. 
 
 17216. Chairman.— You have no turf on your own 
 holding ? — I must pay rent for the turf along with 
 the rent. 
 
 Ml-. Shaw. — You used to have it free be- 
 used, and my father before me, without 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Hj-land. 
 
 17217. 
 fore ?— I 
 payment. 
 
 17218. 
 Mr. Poe. 
 
 The O'CoNOR Don. — Who is the agent? — 
 
 Mr. John Delaney examined. 
 
 17219. 
 
 witness?— 
 
 Mr. Shaw.- 
 -Yes. 
 
 -You hold a farm near the last 
 
 17220. What is your rent?— £11 3s. id. My 
 first rent was £8 10s. 
 
 17221. How long ago is that? — ^It is about thirty- 
 two years. 
 
 17222. You have had no rise since that? — They 
 raised it every way they could, from that time up to 
 this day if they could, and we could not pay our rent ; 
 nor don't pay, and we are not able to support otir 
 family for the last summer. 
 
 17223. When was that rent fixed? — I am paying 
 it ever since. 
 
 17224. Are you paying that rent for thirty years? 
 —Yes. 
 
 17224a. What do you complain of ?— That the land 
 is not able to support my family for any year, and 
 worse than all this year. 
 
 17225. Chairman. — Was the land in a worse 
 state fifteen years ago ? — It was fit to rear snipe. 
 
 17226. Mr. Shaw. — Before the bad times were you 
 able to live on it? — I was not. 
 
 17227. How did you live? — I lived in struggling 
 way, borrowing a cwt. of meal from a neighbour, 
 and so on. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Delaney. 
 
 Mr. James Amber examined. 
 
 17228. Mr. Shaw — What is your valuation ? — £8. 
 1722gA. And your rent?— £12 19s. 8d. 
 
 17229. It was not raised for thirty years ? — It was 
 raised three times. 
 
 17230. Within your own time ? — Yes. 
 
 17231. What was the rise on the first occasion ? — 
 1 cannot say exactly. 
 
 17232. What was the last? — The last was £1. 
 
 17233. When was that? — It was £1 every year, 
 and it was raised twice before that. 
 
 17234. When was the last rise?— In 1859. 
 
 17235. Is it good land? — Part of it is middling 
 fair, and part of it not worth 5s. 
 
 17236. Is it bog land? — It is of a wet nature. 
 
 17237. Did you drain it yourself? — Yes, I drained 
 it sometime age. Sir Compton Domville was paying 
 for securing the drainage money, but we have got 
 nothing for many years,' and it is wdrtK nothing 
 now. 
 
 17238. Where is it?— It is six miles from Balla. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Amber. 
 
 4B2 
 
556 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMJIISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Barrett 
 
 Mr. John Barrett examined. 
 
 17239. Mr. Shaw.— What is your rent?— £53. 
 
 17240. For how many acres? — Forty-nine acres. 
 
 17241. Was it raised on you ? — It was, twice. It 
 was raised on me the last time in 1859. 
 
 17242. Is it on the Domville estate ?— Yea. 
 
 17243. In 1859 what was the rise?— 5s. in the 
 pound. 
 
 17244. That is twenty per cent. 1 — Yes. 
 
 17245. This is a statement of your case which you 
 desire to be read 1 — Yes. 
 
 Document produced and read as follows : — 
 
 " In 1 848 I took my farm or holding, in the townland of 
 Lisnolan, from the late Sir Compton Domville, of 
 Santry House, county Dublin, or his agent, Thomas Sher- 
 rard, Esq., of 74 Blessington-street, Dublin, at £1 per acre. 
 That very year, 18-18, he gave all the tenants on the estate 
 twenty-five per cent., and during the lifetime of Sir 
 Compton, which was ten years, he never put on the abate- 
 ment, or never would, were he to live up to this day. He 
 found out the lands were too highly set, though there was 
 no tenant on the estate but could earn six months' rent out 
 of the twelve by work done on his holdings in the way of 
 improvements. As soon as Sir Compton died, executors 
 comes in after ten years, and puts on the twenty-five per 
 cent, that was never expected, and, the very same year, the 
 executors compels every tenant on the estate to pay a year's 
 rent in six months — in fact, we had to pay three half-year's 
 rent within one year in order to meet the demands of the 
 executors. As soon as we had done with the executors, our 
 present landlord, AVilUam Compton Domville, Esq., comes 
 in, and the year after his coming in on the estate, he sends 
 a valuator from Dublin, and puts from twenty-five to twenty- 
 seven and a half per cent, all over the estate, and stops all 
 the improvements, and never since gave one shilling to earn 
 to the tenants on the holdings. Now I am paying £1 5s. 
 for forty-one acres that I had from his father at 15*. 
 from the time I took it until he died. At' the time of this late 
 valuation in 18.39, by some magic they said, without ever 
 measuring one perch of my land, this valuator says I have 
 eight acres more than I was paying for. He has charged 
 me H.S. an acre for those mysterious acres from that to this, 
 which makes a sum of £67 4*. Some of those eight acres 
 I have reclaimed, at very great expense, by gravelling and 
 tilling; more of the eight acres never was reclaimed, and 
 is not-worth Is. for any purpose ; but a workman of mine 
 cuts some turf on it, for which he is charged £1 an acre, 
 and I pay 8s. for it, so they get £4: 8s. from me and my 
 workman for the worst of bog. At the time the lands were 
 striped by the late Sir Compton, when he came in for the 
 estate, his good and kind agents then allotted, to each hold- 
 ing or tenant, a portion of bog, free of charge, to cut turf 
 on it, raise mud, or reclaim it to the best advantage they 
 could ; but our present landlord, as soon as he came in for 
 
 the estate, done away with all this, and will not allow any 
 tenant cut turf without paying £3 an acre for it. Let me 
 say that if they had turf it would be less matter. 
 
 " I know some of the tenants to begoing a long distance to 
 other properties and paying high for turf, and leaving what 
 they have at the end of their own land uncut, it is so bad 
 and useless. There are a number of acres of bog at the end 
 of my land, and I go a distance of a mile and a half to Sir^ 
 Kobert Lynch Blosse's beg, and pay £4 an acre for turf 
 there; still it is cheaper than to cut at home for nothing, and 
 still I would be charged £3, if I cut it. 
 
 ' ' I now state and am prepared to prove on oath that I have 
 not one acre in my possession worth one pound, so as that 
 me and my long family could live on It. I also state and also 
 am prepared to state on oath that for the forty-one acres I 
 hold that fifteen shillings would be a high rent for it, and 
 four acres out of the eight of reclaimed and unreclaimed is 
 not worth four shillings for any use to me. 
 
 "Last year on account of the bad years past I fell into 
 one years rent in arrear here, and they served me with a 
 writ and put me to £5 expense. I hold another farm of 
 forty-three acres from the same landlord, and I did not owe 
 one penny but one half year's rent, and he included it also in 
 the writ, but I believe it was from a misrepresentation made 
 of me by the agent, .7. W. Poe, to the landlord, who I 
 believe is a good man if he was well advised ; yearly rent, 
 £33 8s. ; valuation, £35 16s. 
 
 " John Baeeett, Lisnolan." 
 
 17246. Chairman. — You sa,y you were put to i5 
 expense by law ?— Yes. 
 
 17247. Did you go into court? — No. 
 
 17248. What were your expenses caused by?— 
 They served one with a writ and they went into court, 
 but I did not. 
 
 17249. You did not appear at all ? — I wrote to them 
 since I received the writ telling them I would settle 
 with them, and to put me to no further expense — that 
 if they did I would not be able to pay it. 
 
 17250. You had to pay it all to the solicitor? — No, 
 I wrote to Mr. Poe, and he wrote back saying I had 
 no alternative but to settle with Mr. Kerrigan — that 
 is his law agent — and I had a letter from Mr. Kerrigan 
 saying he would put a stay on the proceedings until 
 they saw what could be done, and the next thing I got 
 was a letter saying, send up the amount and £5 costs. 
 I said T was not able to pay the full amount, but if they 
 took a year's rent from me — that is half a year's rent 
 for both farms, I would pay the remaining year's rent 
 by instalments. So they consented, and are taking a 
 year's rent by instalments from me. 
 
 Mr. Martin 
 Sheridan. 
 
 Mr. Martin Sheridan examined. 
 
 17251. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres do you hold? 
 — I don't know how many acres, but I pay £29 9s. lOd. 
 a year. 
 
 17252. Was that raised at all ? — It was, I suppose it 
 was at the same time as the others, but I really don't 
 know the year. 
 
 Mr. John Barrett. — At the time the valuation was 
 made the whole rise was put over the whole estate in 
 1859, and there was no rise since. 
 
 17253. Chairman. — Did you think it was a reason- 
 able rise at the time ? — I did not, and I complained 
 very bitterly against it. 
 
 17254. Mr. Shaw. — It was too high? — Yes; and I 
 am prepared to swear on oath that the land they 
 charge 25s. an acre for is not worth 15s. to any 
 tenant. 
 
 17255. And the same with the other tenants ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Highland. 
 
 Mr. James Highland examined. 
 
 17256. Mr. Shaw. — What rent do you pay? — 
 £10 4s. 
 
 17257. What is the valuation ?— £7 10s. 
 
 17258. For how many acres? — I don't know how 
 many, but it is poor land and boggy, and it is not 
 worth paying taxes for it. 
 
 17259. You find it hard to live on it?— It is very 
 hard living on it, and I could not live on it at all only 
 
 I was working at my trade. We are all starving, and 
 unable to live. 
 
 17260. You have signed this document: " We, the 
 undersigned tenants on the Domville estate, in the 
 townlands of Lisnolan and Smuthnagh, do say, and are 
 prepared to swear on oath, that the lands we hold are 
 not fit to produce crops sufiicient for the maintenance 
 of our families, owing to the exorbitant increase of 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 .■).';/ 
 
 rent over the Government valuation, -whicli \f e here- 
 
 how. Signed : 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 Yaluation. 
 
 Rent. 
 
 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 Martin Sheridan, 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 27 9 
 
 10 
 
 John Sheil, 
 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 12 10 
 
 
 
 Pat Sheil, . 
 
 9 5 
 
 
 
 13 18 
 
 4 
 
 Anthony Moran, 
 
 8 10 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 Thomas Brennan, 
 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 Bryan M'Hugh, 
 
 9 13 
 
 
 
 13 13 
 
 
 
 Pat Killilea, . 
 
 12 15 
 
 
 
 15 8 
 
 
 
 Pat Brennan, . 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 17 6 
 
 
 
 James Hyland, 
 
 7 10 
 
 
 
 10 4 
 
 
 
 Michael Moran, 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 s ir 
 
 4 
 
 We also beg to say that our improvements on our 
 sejiarate holdings amount to a considerable sum, which 
 
 we have never got any remuneration for, but in the 
 face of which our rents have been raised"? — Yes; 
 that is a true statement. The rent was raised twenty 
 years ago, and all over the property at the same time. 
 
 17261. Chairman. — How did you manage all these 
 years up to 1875 1 — The little means we had has gone 
 away now by paying rack-rent. 
 
 17262. In consequence of these last bad years? — 
 Yes. 
 
 17263. Mr. Shaw.— You are in debt ?— Yes. 
 
 17264. To the shopkeepers? — We are, and cannot 
 pay our debts either. 
 
 17265. The O'Conor Don.— You don't think the 
 land would be svifBcient to support you i£ you paid no 
 rent? — No; it is bad land, and in twenty years you 
 could not save a cock of hay off it. 
 
 Oct. 20, isso. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Highland. 
 
 Mr. Pat Sheils examined. 
 
 I am paying for twenty years £13 18s. id., and I 
 can't stand it any longer. 
 
 17266. Chaieman. — You would not be able to pay 
 for your holding if you were offered it to buy ? — No. 
 
 17267. You would like to buy it if you could 1 — I 
 would not like to buy it. 
 
 17268. Mr. Shaw. — If you were to buy it by pay- 
 ing the rent you pay now for thirty-five years, would 
 you take it ? — I would not. 
 
 17269. Would you rather get a fair reduction of 
 it, and take your chance ? — I would. I could pay my 
 way if I got it fair. 
 
 17270. The O'Conoe Don. — Would you be willing 
 to go to America if you were taken out, yourself and 
 famUy, and got land there ? — There is enough in it, I 
 believe. There is more in it than can get land in it. 
 
 17271. Mr. Shaw.— Suppose there were people 
 taken out in families, and that the people who took 
 them out looked before them, and brought them out 
 to good dry land, and put them all together in villages, 
 with good houses, and gave them a start, don't you 
 think it would be better than trying to live in this 
 wretched place ? 
 
 Thomas Brennan — There were a good many men 
 had to come back here, because they would not like to 
 live in it. He might be alive to-day and not to- 
 
 morrow. If he had a few dollars about him he was 
 shot. 
 
 17272. Suppose they went into the country places 
 and settled down, dividing it into nice farms ? — They 
 could only support themselves there. They could not 
 dispose of their stock. 
 
 17273. Chaieman — Would you rather stay at home 
 if you got a fair rent ? — Yes. I would rather just 
 live in this country. It is a wholesome climate to 
 live in, and I would sooner labour all the days I have 
 to live here if I got the land at a fair rent ; but if I 
 have to pay £9 above the Government valuation, it is 
 a great pile. When I am worn out all the time 
 labouring here, I can't say I am worth a cent. 
 
 17274. Were you in America? — 1 was; in the 
 State of Indiana with a farmer. I got four acres of 
 bog, and it was raised on me every time, and that was 
 taken from me, and I would not get leave to take a 
 load of maniire off it. 
 
 17275. Although you had it once ? — Yes ; and I 
 should pay for the fire turf, and not make a drain in 
 that, and he charged me £3 or £4 an acre. See how 
 we are treated, after our forefathers before iis keep- 
 ing these places for so many years. 
 
 17276. Mr. Shaw. — You would rather live at home 
 at a fair rent ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr Pat 
 
 Shells. 
 
 Mr. Pat Moean examined. 
 
 17277. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant on the Gib- 
 bons' estate at Westport, in the towniand of Ballyna- 
 cargy, and you say you are prepared to swear on oath 
 that the land you hold is not fit to produce crops 
 sufficient to maintain your family, owing to the exor- 
 bitant increase of rent over Government valuation ? — 
 I do. 
 
 17278. What is your rent?— £18 10*. Od. 
 
 17279. And your valuation?— £11 Os. Od. 
 
 17280. You say : " I also beg to say that I have 
 made considerable improvements on my holding for 
 which I have received no remuneration, but in the 
 face of which my rents have been raised. I am pay- 
 ing the rise for the past nineteen years." 
 
 17281. It was nineteen years ago it was raised? — 
 
 Yes. 
 
 17282. Was it bad land? — I put down about 40 
 tenants. He took them away and gave it to me. I 
 could get no way of living out of it. He and I made 
 a road through my land. I had to gravel and lime it, 
 and I could get nothing off it. He summoned me 
 twice for cutting a bit of bog, and fined me for it. 
 
 17283. The O'Connoe Don. — Did you make all 
 these improvements during the last nineteen years? — 
 I did. I built four out-houses and a dwelling-house, 
 and he promised to allow me a sum of money, and he 
 never allowed me a shilling. He promised me a 
 year's rent for making so much improvement, but he 
 drew back and would not give me a shilling. 
 
 17284. Mr. Shaw. — You have made pretty good 
 land of it ? — ^Yes. My son went away to America, 
 leaving me without labour. It is not worth a penny 
 an acre, except what I reclaimed. If I did not 
 manure it for my hay, I would not have 5 cwt. of hay 
 in the year. 
 
 17285. Do you keep cows? — I do, but I am out of 
 them at present. I have a priest in America a- 
 brother-in-law of mine, but he drew away from me^ 
 saying I was making nothing of my time. 
 
 17286. You had to sell your cattle ? — I was buying 
 provision all the time, and I had to give it to the 
 landlord. 
 
 17287. Did he make any reduction? — He did. 
 
 17288. Still you have had bad years ?— Yes ; I didi 
 not get a good crop off for three years. 
 
 17289. Are the potatoes very good? — They are 
 very poor, except our own seed ; it is not a ha'pwortht 
 of good at all. 
 
 17290. Even the reduction of rent would not help 
 you much ? — It would be worth nothing at all to me ; 
 I could not do with it. It would not help me much. 
 
 17291. Does he allow you to sell? — I would get no 
 one to buy ; I would not get a shilling for it. 
 
 17292. You have spent a great deal of money on 
 it ?— I have. My brother did part of it. He went to 
 America, and I gave him £20 for it, and I will have 
 to throw it up now. 
 
 Mr. Pat 
 Moran. 
 
IFJSH LAND ACT COMMISSIO:;, 18S0. 
 
 Oct. 20, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. Pat 
 
 Jloran. 
 
 17293. Do you owe much rent now? — I do, a you? — No ; lie has nob as yet. I lost all the money I 
 couple of years. _ ever got hold of. I gave it to the. landlord in rent 
 
 17294. He has not brought any ejectment against and I could make nothing of it. ' 
 
 Messrs. 
 
 Edward 
 
 Mitche!!, 
 
 Thomas 
 
 M'Hale, 
 
 and Stephen 
 
 Burke. 
 
 Messrs. Edward Mitchell, Thomas M'Hale, and Stephen Burke, examined. 
 
 17295. Chairman. — You are tenants of Lord Lucan, 
 in the townland of Milebush, parish of Aglish ? — Ed' 
 ward Mitchell. — Yes. 
 
 17296. Who is the agent? — Mr. Larminie. 
 
 17297. When was the rent raised last ? — Not sioice 
 the lease dropped. 
 
 17298. How long is that? — It is about twenty 
 years. 
 
 17299. You have had the same rents for twenty 
 years ? — Yes ; they were all raised at that time. 
 
 17300. What have you to say about it? — The land 
 is awfully bad. It is about £2 8s. an acre. It is too 
 dear in the present bad times. We can scarcely pay 
 rent at all. 
 
 17301. Had you any abatement made ? — No ; not a 
 halfpenny. We went to his lordship lately, about three 
 weeks ago, and he would not hear of one halfpenny 
 abatement being given. 
 
 17302. The rent you have been paying for so many 
 years was a high rent? — My father had the farm 
 before that, and I had to take it up. 
 
 17303. Did your father build the house?— No; I 
 buUt that myself, and the valuation was raised. 
 
 17304. But the rent was not raised ? — No, sir. 
 
 17305. What sort of land is it ? — ^Itwas partly rocky , 
 and bushy that was reclaimed. I took up the bushes 
 and stones and rooks, and made pretty good land of it, 
 and then tilled it. 
 
 17306. Did you make that good land since the last 
 fixiag of the rent? — Yes. 
 
 17307. Is that complaint general with the tenants 
 that the rent is too much ? — That is the whole com- 
 plaint of the village. 
 
 17308. Not of any rise ot late ?— No. 
 
 17308a. The O'Conor Don. — Does Lord Lucan do 
 anything for his tenants ? — Not a ha'pworth I ever saw 
 him do. He would not take the rent unless lie <»ot 
 every halfpenny from every one, and if they had not 
 half the rents before six months were up he would not 
 take less than the whole year's rent. 
 
 17309. Chairman. — Were the rents all joined to- 
 gether ? — Yes ; what we held by one lease. 
 
 17310. The O'Conor Don.— Do you hold by lease 
 now ?j— No. 
 
 17.311. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres have you?— 
 Six and a half acres. 
 
 17312. And the valuation was raised on account of 
 your buildings? — Yes. 
 
 17313. The other tenants with you are — Thomas 
 M'Hale; he holds seven acres at £16, and the valua- 
 tion is £10 10s. ; Michael KUcourse ; he holds four 
 and a haK acres at £9 7s. id., and the valuation is 
 £6 ?_Yes. 
 
 17314. Is it poor land ?— It is. 
 
 17315. The fourth tenant is Stephen Burke. He 
 holds four and a half acres at £9 7s. 8d, and the 
 valuation is £6 ? — ^Yes. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Armstrong. 
 
 Mr. James Armstrong examined. 
 
 17316. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant of Lord 
 Lucan's at Milebush also ? — Yes. 
 
 17317. You hold ten acres at £30, the valuation of 
 which is £18 10s. ?— Yes. 
 
 17318. Is it very prime land ? — It is pretty fairish, 
 but I did a good deal of the improvement myself. I 
 do not till it. I let it. out in good condition, and try 
 to get meadowing off it, but some of it wUl not pay 
 the rent after all my labour on it. 
 
 17319. Is it near the town? — It is a mile and a 
 quarter from the town. I have built a house upon it. 
 
 17320. And done all the improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 17321. Do you consider £30 a year too high? — I 
 consider it very much over the rent. I think the 
 valuation would be a very good rent. 
 
 17322. The O'Conor Don.— What is the rent per 
 acre ? — It is £3 just now. 
 
 17323. Is it near the land of Lord Oranmore? — 
 Yes ; it is about half a mile from it. 
 
 17324. Is it the same quality of land? — Some of 
 it ; but it is a little improved lately. 
 
 17325. Do you know what Lord Oranmore is 
 paying per acre ? — I believe it is only £1 an acre. 
 
 17326. He holds from Lord Lucan ? — Yes. He has 
 a large tract of it, of course, but still it is the same 
 quality of land. 
 
 17327. Mr. Shaw. — You are in some other business? 
 — I am in business in this town. I am an hotel- 
 keeper. 
 
 17328. This was an accommodation farm?— Yes. 
 
 17329. Thatis how the rent came to be so high?— I 
 should think it is. The competition is high, and 
 people anxious to get farms give more than the value 
 of it. 
 
 17330. Youhavetwo other holdings?— Yes; Ihafe 
 one of one and three- quarters of an acre, for which I pay 
 £3 1 2s. 6c?. I took this as an accommodation, and 1 am 
 satisfied with the rent of it. . , The other is an old take 
 of fourteen acres, for which I pay £12 16s. lOd, and 
 the valuation is £14 10s. This was valued after 
 being improved. I have it for a long time, since 1S46. 
 
 17331. The O'Conor Don.— And the rent ha,s not 
 been raised? — ^There has been no raise. There is no 
 lease of it. I succeeded my brother-in-law in it- 
 There was a good deal of improvement on it, and Lord 
 Lucan at one time wanted to dispossess him of it, tat 
 there was a promise of a lease, and he was defeated m 
 that. There was no lease however got afterwards. 
 They still continue the rent, and I am satisfied of 
 course with it. 
 
 17332. The first is what you complain of princi- 
 pally?— Yes. 
 
 1(1 r. Jolin 
 Corcoran.^ 
 
 i Mr. John Corcoran examined. 
 
 17333. Mr. Shaw.— You hold eleven acres at Mile- 
 bush, for which you pay £35, and the valuation is £19 
 10s. ?— Yes. 
 
 17334. Is it near Mr. Armstrong's? — I might say 
 it is. 
 
 17335. Have you a lease of it? — No. 
 
 17336. Was the rent raised? — It was -within the 
 last three years 
 
 17337. How much?— To £35 from £19. 
 
 17338. Was the old rent £19 ?— It was, 
 
 17339. Was that on lease? — It was. 
 And when the lease fell out it was raised *o 
 
 17340, 
 £35? 
 
 17341. 
 
 17342. 
 
 17343, 
 to reclaim every bit of it. 
 
 Within the last three years ? — ^Yes. 
 Do you consider that excessive ? — I do. 
 Did you do anything on the land ?~I ^^ 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 17344. Did you build iipon it? — There is a house 
 or two upon it now. 
 
 17345. You don't reside upon it? — No, sir. 
 
 17346. You live in town ? — I do. Oa'. 20, isso 
 
 17347. Did you complain of the high rent when it jj^ j^' 
 was put on?— I did, and since, and I got no redress. Corcoran., 
 
 Mr. Thomas Hastings examined. 
 
 17348. Mr. Shaw —You pay £26 rent i— Yes, sir. 
 
 17349. Do you live at the same place ? — No, sir, 
 not altogether. It is a bit off it. 
 
 17350. What is the name of the place? — Augha- 
 drinagh. 
 
 17351. Was the rent raised on you? — No, sir; 
 ■when I got it it was j-aised. 
 
 17352. When did you get it ? — Twenty years ago. 
 
 17353. Was that when the lease dropped ? — The 
 lease did not drop at the time, but it was a take at 
 that time. 
 
 17354. And it was raised from the old rent ? — Yes ; 
 it was £20. 
 
 17355. There was £6 put upon you ?— Yes. 
 
 17356. Was there any bog taken from you? — 
 There was bog taken from me. There ai-e twelve 
 tenants put in on the bog. 
 
 17357. Used you to have that bog before? — I am 
 paying rent and taxes for the bog. 
 
 17358. You get plenty of turf?— Yes. 
 
 17359. You pay the tax and they get the bog ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 17360. Did they pay you anything? — Not a 
 farthing, 
 
 17361. Do they pay the landlord anything? — No, 
 sir. 
 
 17362. How much is there in the bog? — I don't 
 know exactly, 
 
 17363. Do you know how much the taxes are ? — I 
 do not. 
 
 17364. It is not separated? — No, it is all put 
 together. 
 
 jrr. Thomas 
 Hiistings. 
 
 Mr. John Walsh examined. 
 
 17365. You are a tenant of Lord Lucan's on the 
 Ardvarney division ? — Yes. 
 
 17366. You pay £11 10s. rent, and your valuation 
 is £7 15s. ?— Yes. 
 
 17367. When was the rent raised? — Since we got 
 it. That was a mountainous place and not fit for a 
 farm, when we took it about fifteen years ago, and 
 the same rent that was put on it then is on it still. 
 
 ] 7368. How many years ago is that ? — 'Fifteen 
 years ago. 
 
 17369. And this rent was. put on then? — Yes. 
 
 17370. Was it lower before that ? — I could not tell. 
 17370a. The O'Conoe Don. — Did you make any 
 
 proposal for it ? — Yes. 
 
 17371. Then you fixed the rent yotirselves? — We 
 had to do it. We could not get the land except by 
 doing that. 
 
 17372. Were there houses on the land when you 
 got it ?- No, sir. 
 
 17373. Mr. Shaw. — Did you build a house ?— Yes ; 
 and my house was burned, and I built it over again, 
 except for half a year's rent, but they never gave a 
 clear receipt since. 
 
 17374. Did they never give any reduction? — No. 
 Last Friday night I had to pay the rent. 
 
 17375. Is it good land? — No, sir; it is only wet, 
 bad, barren land. 
 
 17376. How many acres altogether? — I could not 
 tell. 
 
 17377. About how many acres are jou able to 
 work ? — The best part is the mountain part. The 
 mountain j)art it is that I am trying to reclaim. It 
 is wet, swampy land, 
 
 "Mr. John 
 Walsh. 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Byene examined. 
 
 17378. Mr. Shaw. — You hold at the same place, 
 your rent is the same and your valuation ? — Yes. 
 
 17379. And you have the same case ? — Yes. 
 
 173S0. And about the same land ? — Yes ; it is next 
 to this man's (John Walsh). 
 
 17381. You have a family ?— Yes. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 O'Byrue. 
 
 17382. Mr. Shaw? — Your rent is £14, and your 
 valuation £9 ? — Yes. 
 
 17383. Was the rent ever raised since you went 
 there ? — No, sir. 
 
 17384. It is just the same case? — Yes; it is all 
 bog and mountain. 
 
 Mr. Patrick M'Donnell examined. 
 
 You are working it the best way you can ? 
 
 17385. 
 —Yes. 
 
 17386. If there was a reduction made could you 
 support your family ? — A couple of pounds would be 
 of great use. Since 1846 or 1847 I never seen such 
 a bad crop in this country. We could not save the 
 rent unless we went to England to earn it, 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 M'Donnell. 
 
 Mr. Michael O'Donnell examined. 
 
 17387. Mr. Shaw. — Your rent is £11 10s., and 
 your valuation £8 1 — Yes. 
 
 17388. You have it the same way as the others, and 
 the same kind of land ?— ifes ; and taken on the same 
 conditions. 
 
 17389. You have done everything to it. Have you 
 
 built houses 1 — No, sir. There were the walls of a 
 house built there when I came there. 
 
 17390. I Did you reclaim any land ?— Yes. 
 
 17391. Constantly at it, I suppose? — Constantly at 
 it. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 O'Donnell. 
 
560 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 20, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Saunders. 
 
 Mr. James Saunders examined. 
 
 17392. Mr. Shaw.— You pay £12 rent, and your 
 valuation is £8 10s. 1 — Yes. 
 
 17393. For how many acres? — I could not exactly 
 tell you. 
 
 17394. You took it in lump ■!— Yes. 
 
 17395. How many acres do you till of it? — About 
 tliree acres at the most. 
 
 17396. What do you do with the rest 1—1 let it out. 
 It is not worth anything. 
 
 17397. The O'Conor Don.— Do you keep any 
 stock 1 — Yes, sir ; I have got two or three little ones. 
 
 17398. Have you any sheep 1 — No, sir. 
 
 17399. Ohairjian. — Had you any sheep five or six 
 years ago ? — I had some, i 
 
 17400. Mr. Shaw.— Did you sell them lately?,. 
 Yes, with the distress, and having to build three houses 
 since I went there. One of them fell since, because I 
 had not the means of putting it up right. 
 
 17401. Did the landlord help you? — No, sir' he 
 did not give me anything. I had to buy the timber. 
 
 17402. The rent of Dominick Neary is £9 12s. and 
 the valuation is £6 10s. 1 — Yes, sir. 
 
 17403. Is he liere ?— He is, sir. 
 
 17404. Peter Philbin pays £3 rent, and the valua- 
 tion is £1 10s.? — Yes, sir. He is here, too. It is 
 just the same land. 
 
 Mrs. . ames 
 Hanagan. 
 
 Mrs. James Flanagan examined on behalf of her husband, James Flanagan. 
 
 17405. Mr. Shaw. — Your rent is £11, and your 
 valuation £7 10s. ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 1740G. This is the same case — you have done every- 
 thing on the land that has been done to it ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 17407. The landlord does not help you? — No, sir, 
 he does not. I did not see my husband from England 
 for five years, and I was processed for the rent. 
 
 17408. Has your husband been away all this time ? 
 
 — Yes ; he has been away for five years, and I never 
 got a si lining assistance from my landlord. 
 
 17409. Did your husband send you any assistance! 
 — He did, but it was small, and I have a small family 
 to rear upon it. 
 
 17410. He never came home since ? — He never came 
 home from poverty. 
 
 17411. Are your children grown up? — Thev ai'e 
 but they are not able to help me yet. 
 
 Mr. John ' 
 TMlbin. 
 
 Mr. John Philbin examined. 
 
 Mr Peter 
 Philbin, 
 
 -Yes. 
 rent, and your vakiation 
 
 17412. The O'Conor Don. — You are a tenant of 
 Lord Lucan's? — Yes. 
 
 17413. At Coursepark ?- 
 
 17414. You pay £16 16i 
 is £13 10s. ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 17415. Has your rent been altered lately? — No, 
 sir, it is just the same as long as T remember, but the 
 time is so bad we can't meet that same. I have to go 
 to England to earn the rent of it. It was only yester- 
 day I came home. 
 
 1741G. You could not make the rent out of it? — 
 No, sir. We can't make our support one quarter of 
 the year out of it. I have had no potatoes in it for 
 the last three years. 
 
 17417. How many acres are there in it ? — About 
 twenty -fo\ir acres of rough and smooth. He won't 
 allow us any compensation, we must piay the same 
 every time. 
 
 17418. Chairman.' — Did you go to England last 
 year? — I did. 
 
 17419. Were you able to get work there? — I was, 
 but I had to pay my rent -when I came home. 
 
 17420. Did you get work the same as usual? — No, 
 not the same wages as usual, they are very low. They 
 are not employing the hands the same as they usually 
 do. 
 
 17421. Is that in the last two years ? — Yes. Eng- 
 land is getting as bad as this country in a mamiov. 
 
 17422. Do yovi go there every year? — Yes, fortie 
 last five years. I could not earn my rent in this 
 country. I could not make it ofi the land. There is 
 nothing growing on the land. 
 
 17423. Did they pay you there by piecework?— 
 They paid so much a week. 
 
 Mr. Peter Philbin, Garryduff, examined. 
 
 17424. The O'Conor Don. — You are a tenant of 
 Lord Lucan's ? — Yes. 
 
 17425.. Your rent is £22 12s. 6d. ?— Yes. 
 17436. And your valuation £15 5s. ? — Yes. 
 17427. Has the rent been altered lately ? — No. 
 
 17425. When was this rent fixed? — Sixteen years 
 ago. 
 
 17429. You took it by proposal? — Yes. I took it 
 by proposal this time sixteen years. 
 
 17430. You fixed the rent yourself at that time? — 
 Yes. I paid £3 an acre for the land. There is only 
 seven acres of it, and taxes five shillings more. I am 
 paying public cess, poor rate, and towns rate. 
 
 17431. Is it near the town ? — Yes. 
 
 17432. Do you live in the town? — Yes. 
 
 17433. It is a sort of townpark? — It is within the 
 borough. Some of it had rushes on it, and it would 
 not give grass or anything until I reclaimed it and 
 improved it. 
 
 17434. Chairman. — There has been no rise upon 
 you? — There is no rise since I took it in 1864. 
 
 17435. Was it very good times then? — Yes; audi 
 could make the rent off the land then, and xintil 
 within the last four years or five ; but we camot 
 make it now at all out of the land. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Doyle- 
 
 17435a. The O'Conor Don. 
 Lord Lucan's ? — Yes. 
 
 17436. What is your complaint ? — Much the same. 
 The rent is too high. 
 
 17437. What is your rent?— £11 15s. IQd. 
 
 17438. And the valuation ?— £8 10s. 
 
 17439. Did you take it by proposal? — No, sir. If 
 was a matter of swap. Some time ago, when my 
 father lived, there was some of ''•'^ family working in 
 
 Mr. Michael Doyle examined. 
 -Are you a tenant of Lord Lucan's yard, and he took it really on account 
 of its being near the place ; but now they are all 
 scattered, and there is no one but me to pay the rent, 
 and it is too high. 
 
 17440. How many acres have you? — It was taken 
 by bulk ; it was never measured. 
 
 17441. The rent was never altered since you took 
 it ? — No, sir ; but it was taken dear. 
 
 17442. Do you ever goto England ?— I carmot go 
 as I have no one but myself. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 561 
 
 Mr. Patrick Gorw an and others, tenants on the property of Mr. Thomas Ormsby and Mr. Miller, examined. 
 
 It 
 
 [Statement by witnesses read]. 
 
 17443. The O'Conor Don. — You have heard the 
 statement read? — Mr. Patrick Gorman. — Yes. 
 
 17444. And are you prepared to say everything in 
 it is true 1 — Yes. I am sure of everything that hap- 
 pened. 
 
 17445. You are speaking on behalf of the other 
 tenants ? — ^Yes. The whole lot of the townland came 
 in. 
 
 17446. How do you know Pat Walsh was evicted 
 because he went to the races ? — He was attending a 
 horse in the yard, and he went without leave, and 
 next day he got a notice to quit. 
 
 17447. He was working ia the yard? — Yes. 
 
 17448. Was he a hired servant? — He was. The 
 wages the man had was 8tf. a day. 
 
 17449. He was turned out of the land? — Yes, be- 
 cause he did not attend this day. 
 
 17450. He left the horses unattended this day ? — 
 Yes, and he got notice the next day to give up the 
 land and got no compensation for it. 
 
 17451. When was that? — It is a good bit ago. It 
 is fifteen or sixteen years ago or more. 
 
 17452. How do you know Eleanor Carroll was 
 evicted because she would not consult the landlord 
 about a husband ? — I was living next door and I could 
 not help knowing it. When she married her daughter 
 to this man she got notice to quit. 
 
 17453. Was she going to divide the land? — No; 
 she was only bringing in this boy to assist to rear the 
 rest of the orphans. 
 
 17454. Was that the only reason ? — Yes ; that was 
 the only reason. 
 
 17455. Was the man a man of bad character? — 
 No ; he was of very good character. 
 
 17456. How long ago is that? — 'J'his happened 
 before Mr. Ormsby died. 
 
 17457. Richard Barrett, you say, was evicted with- 
 out cause ? — Yes. 
 
 17458. Mr. Shaw. — What was done with the land? 
 —Mr. O'Donnell has it. 
 
 17459. Chairman. — How much does Mr. O'Donnell 
 hold altogether ? — He has all these little holdings now, 
 every one of them. It is only three acres of one field 
 
 and four of another. It is only a small division, 
 was the heart of the village. 
 
 17460. The O'Conor Don. — You say Pat Gorman 
 was evicted because he had too many children ? — I 
 heard that that was the cause; but I know the rent 
 was paid, and I heard that that was the cause he was 
 turned out. 
 
 174G1. Does Mr. O'Donnell hold the land he had 
 —Yes. 
 
 17462. Perhaps he was evicted because Mr. O'Don- 
 nell wanted the land ? — That is the excuse. 
 
 17463. Chairman. — What is the right number of 
 children ? — He had seven or eight. 
 
 17464. The O'Conor Don. — How long ago is it 
 that the tenants were obftged to work for %d. a day ? 
 — Every day since Mr. Ormsby got the land. 
 
 17465. Are they obliged now to work for 8cZ. ? — 
 No, sir. There is no work at all now. Where he 
 lived is nov.' a farm. 
 
 17466. How long is it since he died ? — It is ten or 
 thii'teen years ago. 
 
 17467. Is there any rule now upon the estate about 
 working at any particular rate for the landlord oi- 
 agent ? — I don't know. 
 
 17468. ■ Mr. Shaw.— There is no work at all?— No, 
 there is no work at all, except an odd day Mr. 
 O'Donnell has hay to work at. 
 
 17469. The O'Conor Don.— AVhat is your rent?— 
 My rent is £10 10s., and my valuation is £5 13s. 
 
 17470. How long is it since the rent was altered ? — 
 I was paying £9 up to six j'ears ago, he raised it 30s. 
 then. 
 
 17471. Is the land near Castlcbar? — It is near 
 Manulla, five miles from this. 
 
 17472. Were all the others raised at the same time ? 
 — Only four others who had leases which dropped. 
 He came to take full possession, and we wei-e glad to 
 take it at from 30s. to £1 of a rise when v/e had 
 nothing else. 
 
 17473. Blr. Shaw. — When were the other tenants' 
 rents altered ? — Mr. Ormsby settled the rents on chem, 
 and very heavy rents too. 
 
 17474. When ?— When he got it. 
 
 17475. Is it good land? — All the good he has to 
 himself now. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1880. 
 
 Jlr. Patrick 
 Gorman and 
 others. 
 
 Mr. James Kennedy examined. 
 
 17476. Mr. Shaw. — What is your cause of com- 
 plaint ? — I asked leave one day to reap my little har- 
 vest, and he said, no, I will not give you an hour ; and 
 1 said, what will I do, when my rent is called for I 
 will have no rent to pay you. He said, I don't care 
 what you do. I said, thank God you can't keep me 
 at night, it is moonlight ; and he said, upon my honour 
 if you do you will never work a day within my gates. 
 I went away, and I worked at home until the time I 
 came next morning. He heard about it and sent for 
 me to the oiEce. I said I went to work last night. 
 He said, didn't I tell you not. You may go home now ; 
 and I said, that is what I like. Then he called me 
 back and sent me back to work that day without a ha'p- 
 worth. He fined me 5s. one night after being annoyed. 
 
 17477. You were working with him at the time 
 and got ScZ. a day ? — Yes. 
 
 17478. How did he expect you would reap the oats ? 
 — At night. 
 
 17479. But he would not allow you? — I reaped it 
 against his will. When I went into the land I was 
 up to the arms in water. I have same land still, but 
 I don't know I could put down a potato to-day. 
 
 17480. Did you get Champions? — Yes, and I have 
 them all eaten. I was afraid of the agent, and I could 
 not go for relief. I got three bags of Champions^rom 
 the union. I pay M rent, and my valuation is 50s. 
 It is wretched bad land, and if you seen it you would 
 say it would be hard for a poor man to live on it. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Kennedy. 
 
 Mr. Martin Flynn examined. 
 
 17481. Chairman. — How many acres do you hold? 
 I speak for my brother Pat. It is six in the measure- 
 ment, but it has only five in it. 
 
 17482. What does he pay ?— £9 a year. 
 
 17483. What does he complain of? — He complains 
 of rack rent on the land. 
 
 17484. That £9 is too high ?— Yes. 
 
 17485. How lohg is he paying it 1 — Twenty-four 
 years about. 
 
 17486. Why is it raok-rerted now?^It is rack- 
 rented all the rime. 
 
 1 748-7. Why did he go on with it ? — Very badly. 
 
 17488. Who is the landlord?— Mrs. FitzGerald 
 Kenny is the landlady at present. 
 
 17489. Was he in the habit of going to England to 
 work ? — Yes, and all his brothers used to go to Enc- 
 land to earn the rent. 
 
 17490. Is that the case with other tenants on the 
 property ? — It is the very same. 
 
 17491. How many are there? — There are fifteen 
 tenants, and we came here to represent the whole 
 tenantry. 
 
 17492. There has been no rise for twenty-four 
 year.i ? — There was a rise on Carramore, but not on us 
 
 4C 
 
 3Ir. Ifartin 
 FIvmi. 
 
562 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 Oct. 20, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Henry 
 Horan. 
 
 Mr. Henry HoRAif examined. 
 
 You hold under the same land- 
 17494. There has been a rise of rent of late? — ^Yes. 
 
 17493. Chaikman. 
 lady?— Yes. 
 
 I held it at £18. 
 
 17495. When?— About twenty-seven years ago. 
 The first rise I got was from £18 to £30. 
 
 17496. When was that?— That was about twenty- 
 six years ago. 
 
 17497. Was that on the dropping of a lense 1 — No, 
 sir ; we have no lease. Then we got a rise from £30 
 to £48, and put in cottier tenants, working men, on 
 other parts of my land, and it remained £48 to this 
 day. 
 
 17498. How long is that ago ?— About twenty-four 
 vears ago. 
 
 17499. Was it Major Lynch did that?— Yes. I 
 laid £18 to Major Lynch's father and himself. From 
 hat to this we are just like Indians, just striving and 
 
 starving to death, striving to keep them away from 
 our door every other minute. 
 
 17500. Was the £48 paid by several together?— 
 Yes. These cottiers came in about twenty -four years 
 ago. There were five or six paj'ing the rent. 
 
 17501. You all paid it together? — No; every one 
 paid his own part. 
 
 17502. The O'Oonor Don.— Is the land near 
 Clogher ? — It is convenient enough to Clogher. 
 
 17503. Were the cottiers working for Major 
 Lynch ? — Yes ; when he had work, and other parties 
 when he had no work. He went away, and Mr. 
 Kenny got married to his daughter, and he came in 
 then as landlord. They got no work since. It was 
 very poor employment they did give when it was to 
 be had ; 6d. to 8d. a day. ^ 
 
 17504. You can speak for all these who made up 
 this amount of £48 ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Antliony 
 Malley. 
 
 Mr. Anthony Malley examined. 
 
 17505. Chairman. — You hold land in the town- 
 land of Carrajames ? — Yes. 
 
 17506. How many acres do you hold?— I can't 
 tell. 
 
 17507. How many tenants are there on the town- 
 land?— About 120. 
 
 17508. How much rent do they pay? — We are 
 paying about £130. 
 
 17509. Who is your landlord? — Mr. MUler and 
 Mr. Ormsby. 
 
 17510. You have given a list of the tenants, with 
 their rents and valuation. Can you say whether in 
 the case of Arthiu- Swanick tlie rent was lately 
 changed? — No, sir. 
 
 17511. How long is it since there was a change in 
 the rent ? — About fourteen years. 
 
 17512. Was that on the dropping of a lease? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 17513. The O'Conok Don.- The other tenants you 
 mention are Michael Eielly, valuation, £12 15s. ; rent, 
 £18 ; Anthony Joyce, valuation, £8, rent £11 10s. ; 
 Anne Clarke, valuation, £6; rent, £8 10; Pat 
 Slauton, valuation, £6 5s. ; rent, £9 ; James Roper, 
 valuation, £5 ; rent, £7 5s. ; Michael Roper, valuation, 
 £5 1 Os. ; rent, £8 ; Pat. Brennan, valuation, £5 5s. ; 
 rent, £8 10s. ; John Burke, valuation, £6 15s. ; rent, 
 £9 10s. ; Martin Doherty, valuation, £4 10s. ; rent, 
 £6 5s. ; James Tunarty, valuation, £4 18s. ; rent, £7 ; 
 James Roche, valuation, £4 18s.; rent, £7; Pat. 
 Cunningham, valuation, £9 ; rent, £13 ; Anthony 
 Malley, valuation, £6 ; rent, £8 1 Os. ; Edward Roche, 
 valuation, £5 10s. ; rent, £10. That is a true state- 
 ment as to the rents and valuations ? — Yes. 
 
 Were they all raised about the same time! 
 There was a general valuation at that time? 
 
 17514 
 
 —Yes. 
 
 17515, 
 —Yes. 
 
 17516. What was the rent before that time?— It 
 was held in former times for £40. 
 
 17517. But immediately before the last rise?— I 
 am not sure. 
 
 17518. Was the increase very large? — No; it was 
 not large since Mr. Ormsby go it. 
 
 17519. Where is the land ? — It is near Castlebar; 
 about five miles away. 
 
 17520. Chairman. — There is a good road to it? — 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 17521. The O'Conor Don.— Who is the agent?— 
 Mr. O'Donnell of Castlebar. 
 
 17522. Chairman. — ^Your complaint is that the 
 rent is higher than the valuation ? — Yes. 
 
 17523. And is that the reason you think it too 
 high ? — It is too high. We consider the vahiation 
 high. 
 
 17524. Were they good times fourteen years ago? 
 — They were, and they are very bad at present. 
 
 17525. The O'Conor Don. — Did you pay the rent 
 last year ? — Yes. 
 
 1752G. Did you get any reduction? — We got 2s. 
 in the pound reduction. 
 
 17527. Chaikjian. — Would you like to see a new 
 valuation and take chance whether it v\rould be higher 
 or lower ? — We would. If there is a new valuation 
 it won't be higher. 
 
 17527a. Edward Roche. — The land I held was let at 
 one time for £6. Then there were two acres taken 
 ofi" it and it was raised to £10. 
 
 Me..:r?. 
 Jolin Egan 
 and Uai-k 
 Walsh. 
 
 Messrs. John Egan and Mark Walsh, examined. 
 
 17528. The O'Conor Don. — You are tenants of 
 Major-General Cox ? — Yes. 
 
 17528a. Where is your land? — Four miles from 
 Castlebar, at Knockbaun. 
 
 17529. Who is the agent?— Mr. Daly of Rochefield. 
 
 17530. What is your complaint? — When one of us 
 (Mark Walsh), first came there the rent was only 15s. 
 an aci'e. 
 
 17531. How long ago is that? — It is thirty years 
 ago, and it was raised about twenty-two years ago from 
 £1 to 25s. 
 
 17532. When was it last raised? — Eighteen or 
 twenty years ago. 
 
 17533. There has been no change for eighteen or 
 twenty years ? — No. 
 
 17534. What is the valuation ?— The valuation is 
 £8. 
 
 17535. And the rent?— £11 2s. M 
 
 17536. Have you paid that rent for eighteen years? 
 —Yes. 
 
 17537. You paid it last year? — We were forced to 
 pay it last June. 
 
 17538. Did you get an abatement?— I (Mark 
 Walsh), got an abatement at first, but it was taken off 
 me again, and the reduction was put down as arrears ; 
 because I only paid one-half year's rent. He allowed 
 me 6s. in the pound, and then the other half-years 
 rent remained, and I was processed here in June, and 
 33s. of the reduction was put down as arrears. 
 
 17539. Because yoii did not pay the second half- 
 year's rent ? — No, I did not pay the second because I 
 was not able to 23ay. 
 
 17540. Was the 6s. allowed to all the tenants who 
 paid in full ? — Yes, except in my case. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 sey 
 
 17541. What is the other man paying? — Joliii 
 Egan pays .£26 for a valuation of £14 10s. 
 
 17542. Are you allowed to sell your interest in 
 your land if you were leaving it ? — I believe it was 
 allowed. 
 
 1 7543. Have there been any tenants who have sold t 
 — No ; there was no one sold except one for the last 
 fifteen years. 
 
 17544. Do you know how much he got for it ? — No. 
 I do not. ' It was worth very little to any man. It 
 is very bad land. 
 
 17545. Has Major-General Cox been the landlord- 
 all through ? — No he has not. 
 
 17546. How long has he been landlord? — For 
 seventeen or eighteen years. 
 
 17547. Was the rent raised since he became land- 
 lord ?— Only on me (Edward Walsh), I paid £4 of a 
 rise since he came in. 
 
 17548. Did he purchase the land? — No; he in- 
 herited it. 
 
 Oct. :o, )S80, 
 
 JlesErs. 
 JohnEg.ia 
 and JJurk 
 "H'alsh. 
 
 Mr. James Gannon examined. 
 
 17549. Chairman. — You are a tenant of Colonel 
 Cufie ? — Yes, but I speak for my father. 
 
 ] 7550. Do you think the rent is too high ? — Yes. 
 
 17551. How long has the rent been the same? — 
 For twenty-four years. 
 
 17552. Is it the last two or three years that brings 
 you to feel the pinch of the rent ? — It must be for the 
 people are not able to pay the rents they were able to 
 pay in times gone by. 
 
 17553. Does it also partly arise from their not 
 being able to get the wages in England as labourers ? 
 — In some cases. 
 
 17554. And in general from the bad seasons? — 
 Yes, and the land is of inferior quality. 
 
 17555. Is it inferior to what it was two years ago? 
 — It can't be much worse than it was then, 
 
 1755G. Did they use artificial manure two or three 
 years ago ? — They did every year for the last fourteen 
 or fifteen years for turnips and a little for potatoes. 
 
 17557. You think the land is deteriorated in con- 
 sequence ? — They can't raise any crops of potatoes at 
 all on the land now. 
 
 17558. How have they been where there is a change 
 of seed ? — Some did very well, but the greater part 
 was bad. It was not the right sort. 
 
 17559. Was it intended to be Champions? — Yes, 
 but, they were not all Champions, they were mixed 
 and they were entirely rotten. 
 
 17560. Do you think they failed through being the 
 wrong sort ? — They went back after biidding through 
 the earth. 
 
 17561. Are there any holdings in good order and 
 that grow their crops as well as they did? — No. 
 
 17562. Not even this year ? — No. 
 
 17563. How many acres does your father hold ? — . 
 About ten acres. 
 
 17564. -What does he pay for it?— £13 10s. 
 
 17565. Is that about the general rate that the 
 others pay ? — Something in the same i^roportion. 
 
 17566. Is part of it cut away bog? — Yes. 
 
 17567. Has your father done any improvements on 
 the turf bog? — Yes, he improved it as well as ho 
 could. 
 
 17568. What did he do ? — He fenced and drained it. 
 
 17569. Open-drained it?— Yes. 
 
 • 17570. Did he make any stone drains? — Yes, 
 some. 
 
 17571. How is that land? — It is only middling. 
 
 17572. Is it quite dry? — Not exactly quite dry. 
 We paid a rise for the drainage of the river there, and 
 it is no use to us. There were two or three drains 
 that would be of use, but they were not cut far 
 enough up. 
 
 17573. They were not brought vip to your holding? 
 —No. 
 
 17574. And you pay rates for that the same? — 
 Yes, our garden is quite swampy. There are other 
 men here, under the same landlord, who have the same 
 case. There are two or three townlands higher than 
 the rest. 
 
 17575. How many tenants are there on these two 
 or three townlands ? — About thirty or forty. 
 
 17576. And they are in the same way as your 
 father is ? — Yes, and some cases are worse. 
 
 JTr. Ja'TOS 
 Gennoa. 
 
 Mr. Francis O'Donnell examined. 
 
 17577. Chairman. — You live in Castlebar? — I do. 
 
 17578. You are a land agent ? — Yes. 
 
 17579. And a farmer yourself ? — Yes, rather largely. 
 I pay about £800 a year rent. 
 
 17580. Who is your landlord? — I have several. 
 Lord Lucan, Sir Ptoger Palmer, IMr. Ormsby, and 
 Mr. Miller. 
 
 17581. For whom are you acting as agent princi- 
 pally ? — Sir Roger Palmer ; his is the largest estate 
 over which I act as agent, in Mayo and Sligo. 
 
 17582. We have had some of your tenants in to- 
 day ? — I heard there was some of them here. 
 
 175S3. The O'Conor Don. — We had evidence yes- 
 terday about Sir Eoger Palmer's estate, and it was 
 stated that , some years ago the land was striped ?^ 
 That is a thing that goes on yearly. 
 
 17584. But when it was striped all the tenants had 
 to pay for the building of houses upon land not tlieir 
 own, and although they did not benefit themselves by 
 the building ? — That used to be about twenty years 
 a^o. When I first became acquainted with the estate, 
 thirty-six years ago, a great proportion of it was held 
 under leases in common. As the leases fell in, the 
 rule was to have the land surveyed and what is called, 
 revalued and striped. Up to that time, and for some- 
 time before that, the mle was that the occupying ten- 
 ants were to give so much to the man who was sent 
 to a lot without a house. That has ceased for a good 
 many years, and the rule now adopted is, that the land- 
 
 lord takes the place of the persons remaining, and the 
 occupying tenant in the old house j)ays nothing. I 
 have been the principal agent for some years and under- 
 agent for many years previously. 
 
 17585. Chairman. — Under the old rule they paid 
 £2 and the lan^Uord £1 1 — Yes. We generally found 
 them huddled together if they could remain in their 
 own houses, and they would say, why should we be 
 sent away, and it was agreed that they and the land- 
 lord should join in assisting the others that were sent 
 away to new lots. 
 
 17586. The O'Conor Don.— Denis Duffy com- 
 plained that, in 1869, the land was striped, but his 
 holding was not altered, nor was there any house nor 
 any tenant living upon his land, and he was changed 
 to another jjlace, and although that was the case he 
 had to pay £2 towards building on this other man's 
 holding, and that the striping in no way benefited 
 him? — I don't believe that in 1869, or so recently, 
 such a thing happened. I believe it was only durinji; 
 the agency of Mr. Ormsby, who died in 1867, that 
 ever the thing happened. 
 
 17587. He also said he lost half an acre of land, 
 
 and that the rent was raised from £6 1 8s. to £7 ? ^ 
 
 That I cannot be positive about, for when a townland 
 is laid down one person may lose and another may 
 gain, and I could not say whether he lost a. bit or not, 
 that is a matter for the surveyor when goin" over it 
 
 4G| 
 
 Jlr. Fra i is 
 O'DoniK'U, 
 
564 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1880. 
 
 Mr Francis 
 O'Donnell. 
 
 17588. You know William Flanagan, he stated he 
 ■was ejected in 1872 for non-payment, and he was 
 fined 26s. for not having the money in time, although 
 he offered to pay a year and a half within a short time 
 after the time fixed? — That is absurd, for the fines 
 must go through my hands. 
 
 17589. Is that the case ?— No. 
 
 17590. I think it was stated by the same man that 
 it was you who fined t — No. It would not be in my 
 power to fine him, but if he paid the money by fine 
 or otherwise, it would go through my hands. I never 
 knew Flanagan to be anything but a poor man, and 
 he never had anything but the greatest indulgence, 
 and I never knew him to be anything like square. 
 
 17591. Who was agent at the time 1 — Mr. Norman. 
 I would make any wager that ever was made on the 
 subject. I tell you how it might happen. The man 
 has been more than once served with ejectment, pos- 
 session has often been taken of his house at different 
 times he was so poor, and possibly this was the cost 
 of the decree, or something like that, but to say that 
 he was charged a penny, much less a pound, as a fine, 
 is absurd. 
 
 17592. Is it true fines were levied on Sir Roger 
 Palmer's estate, for not complying with what were 
 called the rules of the estate 1 — They were always told 
 they would be charged 5s. a-piece if they did not 
 whitewash their houses, inside and outside, once a 
 year, and possibly out of 1,650 tenants five or six 
 might have been so charged, but I don't believe 'for 
 the last ten years one was charged. 
 
 17593. Were there fines for cutting turf? — No; I 
 don't remember any man being fined for cutting turf ; 
 but we put restrictions where turf is scarce in town- 
 lands. They cut it away regardless how long the 
 supply would last, and we said we will have to assign 
 you so much, and if you cut more we will have to 
 charge you for it. In a townland very close the con- 
 sequence is that you have not a sod of turf at all, and 
 for a good many miles away ; but it was not from any 
 interest, except to keep the turf lor the tenants that 
 we interfered. 
 
 17594. Chairman. — You suppose he cut more than 
 he ought, and he was charged for it 1 — sYes. 
 
 17595. The O'Conor Don. — Was it true that you 
 compelled them to save hay for you at the rate of 5s. 
 an acre ? — Perfectly untrue. I know very well the 
 party you refer to. I heard one of them make an ob- 
 servation to-day, and if you knew them half as well as 
 I do. There is Clark and Duffy, who spend their 
 time at fairs and markets, agitation and league meet- 
 ings, and nothing else. 
 
 17596. You deny that altogether about the hay ? — 
 Most positively. Anything I ever did was in the 
 open market, and I did not care who took the hay. I 
 have got hay in eight or nine places, fifteen miles 
 apart, and some I got by contract and some by day 
 work ; and I say most positively reduction, or pres- 
 sure, or anything of that nature, I never put upon 
 human being to get a benefit for myself, either by 
 saving hay or for any other piirpose. 
 
 17597. You are agent also to Ormsby and Miller's 
 estate ? — Yes. 
 
 17598. Is it true that in 1863 William Forster was 
 evicted off that estate because he would not work for 
 8d. a day, although he had his rent paid 1 — Oh, no. 
 
 17599. Was he evicted first of all t—Yes. 
 
 17600. And it would be untrue to say he had his 
 rent paid 1 — Most positively. I don't think the man 
 ever worked for any rate of wages ; he was rather a 
 respectable man. 
 
 17601. You are quite positive he was evicted for 
 non-payment 1 — Yes, one year's rent was due. 
 
 17602. Would the same remark apply to Pat 
 Walsh? It was stated he was evicted becatise he 
 went to races instead of going to work with you ? — 
 These jire all things that have no more existence than 
 I don't know what. He held a field on that estate, 
 and lived on another estate beyond the road, within 
 
 forty yards of it, and what was the reason I don't 
 remember exactly, but I don't remember either, as far 
 as my memory goes back, that he ever worked a day 
 for me. 
 
 17603. You deny that he was evicted because he 
 went to races ? — Most positively. 
 
 17604. It was said Eleanor Carroll was evicted 
 because she married her daughter without the consent 
 of the landlord ? — That may be the case, because the 
 then owner, Mr. Ormsby, was very particular about 
 parties subdividing their holding, and she had a family 
 who had subdivided. 
 
 17605. But it was a case of subdivision? — Yes 
 positively. 
 
 17606. Mr. Shaw. — They were taking the man into 
 the house it was stated ? — That is often the case when 
 you have another person in the house at the same 
 time. 
 
 17607. The O'Conoe Don. —Was there any other 
 person in the house ? — Yes. 
 
 17608. There was no grown up man? — There was, 
 and therewasagiil. Therule wealwaysfoUow — Ineyer 
 knew it to be departed from — we are yery strict about 
 subdivision — we always allow one person to get married 
 and to come into the house. 
 
 17609. Pat Gorman it was stated was evicted also! 
 — I remember the man as well as I know anyone, but 
 I don't remember his case. 
 
 17610. It was stated he was evicted because he had 
 too many children 1 — Nonsense. I don't believe "he 
 ever had a foot of land from us, he was a servant in 
 the house, he never paid rent. Pat Gorman is a ten- 
 ant there now and was here to day. 
 
 17611. Was there ever a Pat Gorman who was 
 evicted? — He was a kitchen boy and ran away with a 
 girl in the neighbourhood ; got a small holding and 
 surrendered, owing three gales of rent. 
 
 17612. Chairman. — He was turned in sometime 
 afterwards ? — Yes, Mr. Ormsby died a few years after- 
 wards. 
 
 17613. The O'Conor Don. — James Kennedy and 
 John David, were they evicted 1 — Yes. 
 
 17614. Have you their land now ? — No. 
 
 1761 5. Was he evicted although his rent was paid? 
 — I don't know why he should be evicted. 
 
 17616. Do you remember the cases of James 
 Kennedy or John David? — John Dowd is twenty 
 years out of it. I know the man well enough, he went 
 to America and came back again. I think it was when 
 he was going to America he left. 
 
 17617. Have you got his land? — No, I have not. 
 
 17618. The only one whose land you have is the 
 land of Burkp ? — I have Walshe's also, and alittle field 
 of Carroll's also. I got them a considerable time after 
 they were wasted, Mr. Ormsby had them in his own 
 hands perhaps twelve months afterwards, and Foster's 
 for the same reason. Mr. Ormsby improved the 
 place and drained it and fenced it, and I took it after- 
 wards. 
 
 17619. In all these cases were the tenants evicted 
 for non-payment of rent? — That is my believe at this 
 moment. 
 
 17G20. Chairman. — These are all close to the town ? 
 — About six miles away. I was then living there, so 
 these people were my neighbours. 
 
 17621. The O'Conor Don.— Is it true that the ten- 
 ants were obliged to work for the agent at eight- 
 pence a day ? — At that time they were all labourers, 
 and when he died they got no work and they thought 
 they were ruined. I think the rate was eightpence, 
 but the times were very different. They continued to 
 ■vV'ork for the landlord, but that was the common rate 
 of wages in the counti-y then. I remember when I 
 gave tenpence and afterwards a shilling. 
 
 17622. How long ago was that?— I left it in 1867, 
 and the wages I refer to were about ten years before 
 that. 
 
 17623. These tenants complain of their rents being 
 very high ; for instance Pat Gorman's rent is ten 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 565 
 
 guineas, and his valuation £5 15s. ? — I cannot ques- 
 tion that, foi^ I did not know I would be examined 
 about it. I did not know you would be asking about 
 any but Sir Roger's estate. 
 
 17624. They all say there has been no rise for a 
 great many years, but the rent is too high ? — There 
 has been no rise. Tt may be higher than usual, be- 
 cause they were labouring men, and earning double 
 their rent by wages. They were a sort of cottiers in 
 former times, and they continued to work both before 
 he purchased and afterwards. 
 
 17625. Chaieman. — They said when the employ- 
 ment ceased the rent was the same, and that they have 
 no means of paying it t — Of course it did. When he 
 died all the work ceased, and they thought that was 
 their injury. 
 
 17626. The O'Conor Don. — You think the rents 
 are, perhaps, rather high ? — I think, for the reasons I 
 mention, they were. These were small cottier people 
 who put in their rent by labom', and being deprived 
 of it they feel it. 
 
 17G27. Is the land bad land? — It is light lime- 
 stone under, running into bog. The limestone part 
 is very good. They have very little waste. 
 
 17628. Have the tenants made many iinprove- 
 m.ents ? — I cannot say they have. 
 
 17629. Mr. Shaw. — Anything that has been done 
 has been done by the tenants'? — Certainly. 
 
 17630. The O'Coxoa Don.— The landlords have 
 not done much ? — No ; the estates of Sir Roger 
 Palmer compi'ise 86,578 acres in Mayo, and 21,191 in 
 Sligo. The Mayo estate is let at 18^ per cent, over 
 the Poor Law valuation. That is the unleased por- 
 tion. The leased lands amount to about 14,793 acres. 
 The number of tenants on the Mayo estates is 1,637, 
 of whom 1,26') pay rents of £10, or under, and 366 pay 
 over .£10 rent. The agricultural lands unleased are let 
 on an average of twelve per cent, over the Poor Law 
 valuation. Grass and mountain land about thirty per 
 cent, over it. The number of evictions for ten years 
 ending in 1869 in Mayo and Sligo was 39, of which 
 31 T.-ere for non-payment, and eight on the title. 
 
 17631. Mr. Shaw. — They were real evictions'! — 
 Yes ; of the eight only three lived on the holdings 
 evicted, and the remaining five only held the lands 
 for grazing, so that only three of the eight vvere put 
 off' the estate, four of the five never resided on the 
 estate, and of the three who lived on the estate one 
 was evicted for assigning the holding, and two for sub- 
 division. That is for the ten years down to 1869. 
 In the ten years from 1869 to 1879 two were ejected 
 for non-payment — two very small holdings in Mayo 
 and Sligo, and six on the title, but five of them 
 were grazing farms. In two instances the interest 
 was sold by the sheriff, arid in three cases the farms 
 were sublet. The sum of £7,078 has been paid for 
 money borrowed under the Land Improvement Acts. 
 About four-fifths of it was for the Mayo estates, and 
 one-fifth for the Sligo estate. A sum of £3,297 has 
 been paid under the Axterial Drainage Acts, and 
 £4,302 has been expended in improvements by build- 
 ino-. fencing, draining, and so-forth. Part of that, of 
 course, was for assisting tenants to build their houses 
 when a place is squared. That brings us back to 
 the question of one paying the other. The landlord 
 takes the place of the tenant, and for these small cot- 
 tages he allows £5 a piece assistance. In 1854 there 
 was a general valuation of the lands, and no change 
 made in the rents since. Subletting is not allowed. 
 
 17632. Chairman. — I suppose the last two years 
 have been hard upon these people who complained 
 to-day about the rents being high ?— Of course they 
 have. They all admitted that. They said it was too 
 high at other times. 
 
 17633. But the last two years made it impossible 
 to pay iti — In Duffy's case the rent was lowered, 
 and in his townland it is barely twenty per cent, 
 over the Poor Law valuation, although let recently. 
 
 and I will give you what his ideas were some time 
 ago. I hold in my hand what I wrote out as the 
 result of a large number of people coming to me 
 this time last year — about 200 people. As many 
 as could come into the office, and I said if they 
 would take the matter easily I would take down 
 the name of every person there, and what his re- 
 quest was. Anthony Clarke, I asked what he wanted, 
 for he and Duffy lead everything, and his reply was, 
 that they came to demand 25 per cent, for men over 
 £20, and a half year's I'ent reduction for those under 
 £20 a year. 
 
 17634. This is on the Palmer estate '!— Yes. ; 
 
 17635. Was it a reduction for the bad times? — 
 Yes. Thomas Hynes, a respectaMo man and a 
 publican, said he came for the same. Another said 
 for the same. Another said he wants the land at the 
 Poor Law valuation, and to be forgiven half a year's 
 rent. Pat M'Hugh wants to be forgiven half a year's 
 rent, and 5s. for the future. Pat Duffy wants half a 
 year's rent, and twenty-five per cent, reduction for 
 the future. Then follow about ten " dittos." There 
 are three more who want half a year's rent to be 
 foigiven, and so on. 
 
 17636. Mr. SiiAW. — Did you make any reduction 
 in consequence of the bad times ? — No, but gave the 
 tenants seed potatoes free, and several thousand 
 pounds worth of meal, at cost price, of which a 
 shilling has not yet been paid. 
 
 , 17637. But you think, taking the average of years 
 and looking at the size of the holdings, that, on the 
 whole, the rents are not too high ? — I believe not. 
 
 17638. Chairman. — Yen think it is worth the 
 money to the class of tenantry who have it 1 — If I 
 could make out a list of those under £4, and even 
 down to £1, it would be hard to think they could 
 be well off'. 
 
 17639. What do they pay an acre? — Aboitt 10s. 
 or 12s. an acre, according to the quality of the land. 
 In twenty years there were only two evicted, except 
 for nonpayment of rent, and, until recent times, 
 there could not be better disposed people in the 
 world. 
 
 17640. They have got it into their heads — there 
 is the Government valuation, and they say that is the 
 full value? — It is not to be wondered at, for I find a 
 notice on the ditch purporting to be signed by the 
 tenants and cautioning them at all risks not to pay 
 a single penny beyond the Government valuation. 
 This was found on one - estate, and it referred to 
 another estate. On that other estate they were sure 
 to do the same, and those who have come in since 
 have done so by stealth. 
 
 17641. The O'Conor Don. — Yon think there is 
 terrorism used to prevent them paying the rent ? — No 
 doubt aboutit, and they applyit to the two men you have 
 mentioned there. The people say if these people 
 would stay at home they would be as able as we are 
 to pay, but because they won't they bring us into the 
 same boat. 
 
 17642. Chairman. — Don't you think the argument 
 they use is, that the Government valuation must 
 be right, because if it had been too low as a criterion 
 of rent, the landlords are persons who would have 
 managed to get it raised ? — I don't think that ever 
 entered into their heads. 
 
 17643. Mr. Shaw. — They don't go so deep as 
 that? — No. When there was some talk of getting 
 a new valuation for Ireland, and it was reasoned 
 fairly by many persons what will that do. They 
 say it will merely raise the taxes, and if the valuation 
 is raised the landlord will say the land is let too 
 low. Comparing the rents and the valuation they 
 never thought of it until it appeared in print some 
 time ago. 
 
 17644. It is the only standard they have? It 
 
 was never heard of before. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Francis 
 O'Doniiell. 
 
5GG 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, ISSl). 
 
 Ocl-M. 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Francis 
 O'Doniiell. 
 
 Mr. James 
 
 17643. It is natural enougli when the question 
 ■was raised to say, here is the Government valuation 1 
 
 Yes, but the time at -which that commenced is 
 
 very recent. 
 
 17646. Don't you think the pressure of three or 
 four bad years left them cleared out very much 1 — No 
 question aloout it. Of course their circumstances 
 were changed. 
 
 17647. And you cannot blame them for being un- 
 reasonable in some direction 1 — No ; but I know a 
 great many of them tell me this is dinned into their 
 heads, and what they did not think of yesterday they 
 are thinking of to-day. The i^eople are in the worst 
 state. 
 
 17648. A reduction of rent is a thing most tenantry 
 would like 1 — Yes ; but my experience is that who- 
 ever gave most last year has most to contend with 
 this year. 
 
 17649. Have the rents been raised generally on 
 the Palmer estate for the last fifteen or twenty 
 years! — No. The tenement valuation took place 
 about 18.52, and we did not get it until 1853. A 
 great number of leases fell in in the bad times, and, 
 of course, we endeavoured to let as much land as 
 possible at any rate or whatever way we could, and 
 when 1854 came the times were very much better. 
 We revised the rents then, and there was no revision 
 before or since. Of course the leases that fell in since 
 then may have and will be raised higher than the 
 others. 
 
 17650. And no changes of tenancy ! — There are 
 very few indeed. 
 
 17651. You have not gone to farms and valued 
 them and raised the rents 1 — Certainly not. 
 
 17652. The O'Conor Don". — Are you agent to Mrs. 
 FitzG-erald Kenny ?— No. 
 
 17653. Mr. Shaw. — Is there much waste land? — 
 I think if a man got a gift of it it would be very un- 
 profitable. 
 
 17654. Do you think the tenants would work at it 
 if they got it for themselves ?^No, for the district I. 
 speak of they have a lot of it attached to their farms. 
 
 17655. And they have not done much thatviray?' 
 — No. The only place they work is where they are 
 on limited land and the holdings are squared and a 
 quarter of an acre of "\vaste comes in — that is sure to 
 be reclaimed. And there is a gradual reclamation by 
 tenants in that way. It is principally cut-away bog. 
 If you have a deep bog you cannot reclaim it. If the 
 turf has been cut away and you are neai' a gravel or 
 subsoil and can turn it up, that is where reclamation 
 takes place. 
 
 17656. The 0'Co^'OK Dos.— There arc some other 
 statements of a similar character about fines and 
 things of that sort —I. don't care about any of them 
 for no one who knows me would believe it. J am 
 on the very best terms with every one of them, 1 
 
 17657. Chairman. -^Do many of these tenants on 
 to England?— They do. "I 
 
 17658. That has failed for the last few years!— 
 This year has been a very good year. 
 
 17659. Last year was not good? — Nor was the 
 early part of this year, but the latter end of it -was 
 very good in England. 
 
 17660. Tlie O'Conok Don. — Have you any sutobs- 
 tion to make as to alterations of the law 1 — I leave 
 that to wiser people. Clarke said he would tell you 
 I made them make roads. ' They had some dispute 
 
 "about the way going uj) to a bog, and I suggested 
 they should put down a road for themselves. We 
 made another road for their sole accommodation at an 
 expense of £50 Is. Id. in the same townland 
 
 17661. Chaikman. — One of them said there was a 
 road quite sufficient for themselves, and then the ad- 
 joining tenants got the light to ctit turf, anci kept tie 
 road so that it is imj)assible ? — There were only five 
 persons who could use the road, and they -vyoiild not 
 use it more than three days in the year. 
 
 17662. The moneys you borrowed froni the Board 
 of ^Yorks, were they used for drainage 1 — Yes. 
 
 17663. And building houses ] — No; entirely drain- 
 ina; and making farm roads. 
 
 17664. Did you drain the farms for the farmers?— 
 Yes. 
 
 17665. Not land in your own hands ? — No ; at that 
 time nor since were there more than about £i charged 
 on the estate on old leases. We exercised that to the ' 
 extent of 12s. Id. in one case, and in three cases, 
 altogether. Over the rent of the estate there was 
 never any increased valuation put on in respect of im- 
 provements. 
 
 17666. You made them make the repayments to 
 the Board of Works ?— No. 
 
 17667. It was paid by Sir Roger himself? — Yes; 
 and it has cost many an anxious day going backward 
 and forward asking the tenants to clean the drains 
 once in five years. I believe there has not been i20 
 worth of labour expended in cleaning these drains from 
 that day to this. 
 
 17668. I suppose one man says there is no usedouig 
 it, for it will not drain out past his neighbour ?— It 
 is not one that gives that answer, but every one of 
 them. 
 
 17669. Chairman. — You 
 
 17670. Do yoLi hold lands? — I pay rent to four 
 landlords. I am a newspaper proprietor by accident ; 
 farming is ray Jorte. 
 
 17671. Is there anything with respect to any of 
 these properties which you wish to call attention to ? 
 — I could, I think, give important evidence as regards 
 the rents and valuations on fifty estates in this county, 
 owing to my connexion with the newspaper and at- 
 tending these land meetings we had in the West, and 
 travelling through the c( unty with the Special Com- 
 missioner of the Freeman's Journal down here for the 
 last year. I can speak from practical knowledge, and 
 I can bring up fifty witnesses to substantiate anything 
 I say. I can give the rents, the names of the land- 
 lords, and the valuations : — 
 
 Landlord — Ormsby BlaJce, Esq. Coolcon and Bally- 
 glass townlands. 
 
 Mr. James Daly examined, 
 live in Castlebar ? — Yes. All these rents were increased, / thinh, in 1868, when 
 
 this man came into possession of the estate. Over forty 
 other tenants' rents are in like proportion ; they have 
 to pay a heavy rent also for bogs, turf, &c. These 
 people arc, in consequence of oppressive raokrenting, 
 u.nable to pay. This was the cause of the first land 
 meeting in that locality. Ormsby Blake lives in 
 Fi'ance. I have not his address. 
 
 Colonel Seymour''s esta,te, near Milltown. Townlands. 
 Islam and Milltown. 
 
 Tenants Names. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Old 
 
 Rent. 
 
 Eack Rent. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £, 
 
 S. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 James Hessean, . 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 
 
 26 13 6 
 
 D. Slattery, 
 
 17 
 
 
 ^__ 
 
 
 32 10 
 
 Widow M'Hugli, 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 J Donohue, 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 17 5 
 
 Michael Heanen, 
 
 12 10 
 
 
 
 
 23 
 
 Tat Prendergast, 
 
 22 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 4o 
 
 Tenants Names. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Racli Bmt, 
 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Michael Byrne, 
 
 , 5 10 
 
 
 
 14 15 
 
 Thomas Luner, 
 
 , 3 
 
 
 
 6 10 
 
 John Mullany, 
 
 . 3 
 
 
 
 6 10 
 
 David FUinnery, 
 
 . 3 5 
 
 
 
 11 10 
 
 M.irtin O'Donel, 
 
 . 9 
 
 
 
 16 10 
 
 Michael Flatly, 
 
 . 20 
 
 
 
 38 
 
 Catherine O'Donel, , 
 
 . 10 
 
 
 
 24 5 
 
 It was the inability of those and many other tenants 
 to pay this rackrent that caused the Milltown. meet- 
 ing. Colonel Seymour lives near Ballinasloe. 
 
 17672. You weirt to those farms?— I got these figures 
 at a meeting. The Secretary at the meeting read them 
 out before the meeting, and I published them, and they 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 567 
 
 ■were never contradicted since. I believe them to be 
 facts. 
 
 17673. Do you know any special circumstances that 
 caused the rise ? — No, the advances were within the 
 last ten or fifteen years. , 
 
 Mr. Lambert's estate, near Milltown, townland of 
 Carrowmorlare. 
 
 Tenants' Names. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 £ S. d. 
 3 
 3 10 
 1 
 
 Rack Eent. 
 £ «. d. 
 
 9 
 16 10 9 
 
 6 
 
 Catherine Brogan, 
 Mrs. Brogan, . 
 Michael Coyne, 
 Other tenants like case, like rule. 
 
 Mr. Lambert lives at Brookhill, Claremorris. 
 
 There was nothing to cause the rise but the tenants' 
 industry ; I don't go into details, I am only giving you 
 the statistics. 
 
 Miss Martin, of Tuam, landlady. 
 
 Tenants' Names. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 
 Eack Eijnt. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Robert Feerick, 
 
 . 7 
 
 
 16 10 
 
 Pat Donnelly, . 
 
 . 7 
 
 
 16 10 
 
 James Connor, . 
 
 . 27 
 
 
 7:2 
 
 Mr 
 
 . Lynshey, Stripe. 
 
 
 
 Tenants' Names. 
 
 Valuation, 
 
 
 Eaek Eent. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Jotn Flynn, 
 
 . 8 
 
 
 16 5 
 
 Michael Sheridan, . 7 5 
 
 
 12 16 
 
 Thomas Reilly, 
 
 . 6 10 
 
 
 16 4 
 
 X. Martin M'Donnell, Dunmore, landlord, townlaii 
 
 of Truacly, near Miltown. 
 
 
 Tenants' Names. 
 
 Old Eent. Valuation. 
 
 Eack Kent. 
 
 
 £ s. d. £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Pat Connor, 
 
 5 5 12 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 Michl. Connor, 
 
 5 5 12 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 Pat Corly 
 
 4 5 8 10 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 Barney O'Neill . 
 
 4 5 6 10 
 
 
 
 19 10 
 
 Th. O'.Shaughnessy 
 
 4 . 5 10 
 
 
 
 18 10 
 
 Denis Grehan . 
 
 3 4 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Pat Grehan 
 
 3 4 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 Michl. M'Dermott 
 
 5 5 8 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 These were comfortable tenants when the estate was 
 sold to Mr. M'Donnell, eighteen years ago. They are 
 now all insolvents, would be in the workhouse last 
 year, save for the seed and meal they got from the 
 Relief CommittseS. 
 
 Sir Roger Palmer's estate. - - He is one of the most 
 extensive landlords, he has refused to give a farthing 
 abatement. I am tenant to him myself. I gay hjm 
 one-fourth over the Government valuation on my farm. 
 
 On old lettings the rents were fixed so that a tenant 
 might be able to pay, but any new lettings siiiee 18G6 
 or 1870 are overrated. In the townland of Shragha- 
 cunigan the Government valuation is £61, the rent 
 was raised in 1875 to £101. The result is that the 
 tenants having three cows in 1875, have not one in 
 1880, owing to oppressive rents. This land is not 
 worth a farthing over the valuation. He had 
 the generosity to- remit £1 to a poor person, which 
 was the only remission on an estate of £40,000. 
 There was an old lease that was made about the year 
 of Bonaparte's wars, or a little after, at a very high 
 rent, that lease expired in 1874, and the" lands were 
 striped, and the rents raised from £45 or £46 tq £101. 
 
 17674. Mr. Shaw. — They were paying £4.5 to the 
 middleman? — Yes. It was increased to £101, and 
 the valuation is £61. 
 
 17675. The O'Conok Don. — Were the tenants 
 paying a middleman? — Yea. The middleman had it 
 for a few shillings. He was a member of the Palmer 
 family. Those w'ho had three or four head of cattle in 
 1874 are now actually paupers, living on the charity 
 of the world, and on ou(>door relief. I am a guardian 
 for that townland, and they all came in a body, and I 
 thought it a most humiliating thing to see so many 
 men, Avho were a few years ago wealthy, coming in to 
 look for relief. The townland of Doonaroya was 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 5 10 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 striped in 1875 by Mr. Joynt, of Ballina, and the rents 
 were increased to double the Government valuation. 
 
 17676. On the falling in of a lease ? — Yes. I know 
 the lands very well, and I will swear before my God, 
 they are not worth the Government valuation, which 
 is half what they are paying at present, and the result 
 is nearly the whole of them are paupei's. I give the 
 rent of two holdings as an average. 
 
 William M'liugh, valuation, £5, rent, £8 10s. ; 
 Michael M'Namara, valuation, £2 10s., rent, £5 10s. 
 Estate of Miss i\:Iary Lynch and Mrs. Fitzgerald 
 Kenny, at Clogher Lynch and Gatford. The valu- 
 ation of Catford, was £28, and now it is let at £54. 
 
 17677. Mr. SiiAW.— Was it raised recently?— It 
 was purchased about 1864. It was raised from £28 
 to £54. It is let to five or six tenants. I have their 
 names here, and they are paying from £5 to £9 
 rent. They are charged at the rate of £4 an acre for 
 bog. I went with the special commissioner of the 
 Freeman. I took potatoes from the ground, and tried 
 them, and I saw the starvation of the people, v/hen 
 the papers said there was no distress. 
 
 17678. Do they pay for turf in addition to the 
 rent ? — Yes, £4 an acre. 
 
 In that Clogher Lynch and Catford estate, of Miss 
 Mary Lynch and Mrs. Fitzgerald Kenny, the tenants 
 are : — 
 
 Tenants. Valuation. Eent. 
 
 Pat Mooney, , 
 John Stevens, 
 J. Staunton, 
 Widow Brown, 
 M. Flanagan, . 
 
 All these are charged £4 per acre for bog. I took 
 the rents and valuation from rent. And poor rate 
 receipts, while attending the Clogher Lynch land 
 meeting in 1879. These are the poorest of the poor, 
 owing to being compelled to pay a rack-rent, for dry 
 rock and scrub land. An indignation meeting vi'as 
 held here, to condemn evictions and rack-renting on 
 this and other properties in the neighbourhood. 
 
 Sir Robert L. Blosse's estate. On November 8th, 
 1879, the tenants of Clooncroneen and Old Derrev^, 
 were served with ejectments for one years rent. This 
 year of our Lord, in October, Ned Larkin, of Old 
 Deirew, was proceeded against by three civil pro- 
 cesses, for a half year's rent due to May last, three 
 decrees were obtained for the amount, not exceeding 
 £112, which one civil bill and one decree could be 
 sufiioient to recover the debt. Larkin, craved time 
 .for payment, and was refused. ' I ,am led to believe, 
 all the tenants, would be served similarly, v.rere it not 
 that the process officer was obstructed in discharge of 
 ■his duty, rents in these townlands are from 30 to 50 
 per cent, over the valuation. ' 
 
 Three tenants named Deasy, were evicted off this 
 estate, for selling a cart of turf, agajnst new ruks 
 introduced on the estate, these Deasys, died paupers 
 after their children scattering to foreign lands. In 
 Januaiy, 1879, two tenants, in Partly, on this estate, 
 were fined one 10s., the other £1, because the dog of one 
 killed a starved hare, that took refuge in a creel of 
 'hay, left for sheep during the inclement snow of the 
 spring of 1879. This fine was to be added to their 
 present rents continuously by increasing the rents 
 annually by that amount. 
 
 In 1876, the rents of Dempsy and Durkan, of 
 Drumadoon, were increased 25 per cent, .for the 
 alleged offence of their children or chikb-en of their 
 neighbours, of which these tenants refused to inform 
 of, started game in the presence of the sons and friends 
 of Sir Robert L. Blosse, v/ho were sporting over the 
 lands at the time, ^.he raising of the rents in this 
 arbitrary manner has had the effect of reducing these 
 poor people, to become actual paupers who lived all of 
 last year, I may say, exclusively, on our relief com- 
 mittees. To change these barbarous customs on some 
 of our western estates, are matters sorely needed 
 before peace and harmony can be restored. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. JamcB 
 Daly. 
 
568 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Daly. 
 
 Estate of Mrs. Acton, Bridgemount, Ballyglass. 
 Lands let too high. Creevagh townland. 
 
 Tenant. 
 
 Valuation. 
 £ s. d. 
 3, 
 
 John M'Gough, 
 All others like case, like rule. 
 
 Rent. 
 £ S. d. 
 8 10 
 
 Marquess of Sligo's Estate. — In and around Louis- 
 hurgh tenants are paying from 50 to 150 per cent, over 
 Government valuation, exclusive of having to pay for 
 seaweed, (fee. The bulk of these poor people are, in 
 consequence of having been rack-rented, paupers, in 
 fact some are starving in the summers of the most 
 plentiful vears. Bunrower old rent, £81 ; first rise 
 to £84 ; second rise to £94 ; third rise to £100 ; pre- 
 sent rent, £109. Valuation, £88 3s. In 1851 rent 
 of Doon was £80, increased to £141. Valuation, 
 £121. Leokann old rent, £58 ; raised to £71 10s. 
 Valuation, £57 13s. Mr. Sidney Smith is the agent 
 of the Marquess. 
 
 Maas North old rent, £44 lis. 8d. ; present, £70. 
 Valuation, £56 9s. Caramore in 1849 was £32 ; the 
 present is £64 16s. Government valuation, £44 9s. 
 7d. Ardena in 1 85 1 was let by Mr. Ililebrand at £28 ; 
 in 1853 it was raised to £60 ; in 18G9 it was raised to 
 £98 with all taxes. Valuation, £64. Toullgie old 
 rent £48 ; raised to £94, with all taxes, which means 
 5s. in the pound on the valuation. 
 
 All these lands are dear in these times at Govern- 
 ment valuation. The same ratio as regards rents and 
 valuations applies generally to all parts of the Mar- 
 qxiess's estates held by tenants. 
 
 Colonel Logan's estate at Shreeheen in 1845 was 
 let at £45 ; in 1850 Bernard M'Dowell raised it to 
 £99. In 1 85 1 the land was sold to Martin O'Flaherty, 
 who raised the rents to £192, and sold to Colonel 
 Logan, who granted a reduction of £1 2. Present rent, 
 £179 17s. 5d. Valuation, £77. Tenants paupers, 
 owing to rack-rents. 
 
 Anthony Okmsby, Esq., Ballenamore — 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 Mary Duffy, . 
 John Duddy, . 
 Pat Cavanagh, . 
 Kate Brennan, . 
 
 Valuation. 
 £ s. d. 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 3 
 2 10 
 
 Townland of Caradoyne — 
 
 Tenant. Valuation. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Pat Ruane, . . 4 15 
 
 Rent. 
 
 & S. d. 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 Rent. 
 £ s. d. 
 11 10 
 
 Rules on this estate excessive and most objection- 
 able. Pat Cavanagh, for staying at home to white- 
 wash to receive clergy, states he was fined twelve 
 days duty work. Thomas Cavanagh was compelled to 
 build a house 42 by 14 feet clear in two years; ie 
 was compelled to change same into a wild bog after he 
 had reclaimed seven acres ; he was a third time changed 
 in two years after. He was so obstinate as to refuse 
 to change a fourth time, and he was expelled the estate 
 without a penny compensation, and died in the work- 
 house. John Ruane was compelled to throw down 
 and change his house twelve yards through some wMm 
 of the landlords. After reclaiming for fourteen yeaw 
 he was driven into a mountain, where he soon died of 
 illness, it is alleged, contracted by these changes. 
 
 In Ballintaffy, the now celebrated farm known as 
 the " Land League farm," was held by Thomas 
 M'Hugh, who through some strange notion of the 
 landlord had to build a house in a sandpit 42 by 17 
 feet, having at the time a house more suitable for the 
 farm. It had the result that M'Hugh was ejected and 
 only allowed £5 compensation. Father Corbett gave 
 the poor man what took him to America, and the Land 
 League tilled and took the crop. A claim for com- 
 pensation was lodged and legal proceedings followed. 
 
 William Meade, Swinford, pawnbroker, bought a 
 townland near Swinford about 1868. He increased the 
 rent to a degree ttat tenants are now paupers- 
 
 Tenant, 
 Mrs. F., 
 
 Valuation. 
 £ s. d. 
 3 6 
 
 All the townland in like proportion. 
 Government valuation. 
 
 Rack-rent. 
 £ s. d. 
 7 10 
 
 Land dear at 
 
 Rents in Claeemoeeis Union. 
 
 Tflndlords. 
 
 Townlands. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Old Kent. 
 
 Rack-rents. 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d, 
 
 Myles Jordan, . . . 
 
 Cloonamore 
 
 108 
 
 
 
 
 
 103 16 
 
 206 15 
 
 (Mr. Jordan purchased this about 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1866 and increased rent.) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 William \\'arde, .... 
 
 Kilscaugh, 
 
 32 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 __ 
 
 65 4 4 
 
 Captain Sheffield, 
 
 Uaradoyne, 
 
 139 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 249 10 4 
 
 Murray M. Blacker, . 
 
 Culbeg 
 
 109 
 
 
 
 
 
 __^. 
 
 235 18 
 
 Mat lliggins, .... 
 
 Cbiremorris, i\reeHcbeg, 
 
 29 
 
 
 
 
 
 _^ 
 
 74 18 
 
 John French, .... 
 
 Cauran. Claremorris, Cauran, . 
 
 63 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 119 15 
 
 James Begley, .... 
 
 Near Claremorris, Ballina, . 
 
 31 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 «^ 
 
 72 10 
 
 William Bourke, esq., 
 
 Currafjldie, Claremorris, Cooneen, and 
 Murneen. 
 
 250 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 360 I 
 
 Lord Oranmore, .... 
 
 Castlemagarrott, Killecn, 
 
 79 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 ,^_ 
 
 129 18 
 
 Do., . . 
 
 Do , Newtown North, 
 
 28 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 _^ 
 
 45 5 
 
 Robert M 'Reedy, 
 
 Knockalobin, 
 
 15 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 28 
 
 Edward Rush, .... 
 
 Cullanes, Claremorris, . . . . 
 
 13 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 21 10 2 
 
 Edward Tighe, .... 
 
 l.iscolman, do., . . . . 
 
 49 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 87 5 4 
 
 J. C. Tighe 
 
 Bolcnree, do., . . . . 
 
 60 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 __ 
 
 101 7 5 
 
 Andrew O'Connor, 
 
 Met'lie, .'.... 
 
 49 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 99 
 
 Robert R. Fair, .... 
 
 Bloomliold, Soardaun, . . . . 
 
 123 
 
 14 
 
 2 
 
 — 
 
 185 18 
 
 The bulk of these lands were purchased in the 
 Landed Estates Courts. The rents were doiibled in 
 nearly every instance, while the lands are not worth 
 over Government valuation, owing to failure of crops, 
 foreign competition, &c. These lords of the soil 
 would not abate their rents, hence cause of land meet- 
 ings in the locality. Some of them have given in 1S79 
 temporary abatements of 10, 20, or in few cases of 25 
 
 per cent., which was inadequate to the depression. 
 These lands, as a rule, are not worth a farthing over 
 Government valuation. Lord Oranmore is in the 
 habit of selling most part of his lands by auction. He 
 gets the tenant to clear out on the 30th April, and he 
 will auction the grass lands. These are grass lands. 
 They were tenants' lands sometime ago, and he got 
 them out of their hands. 
 
I.1INUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 5C9 
 
 Walter M. Bourke, Curraglilee, Claremorris, Curt- 
 labo. 
 
 J. C. Walsh, esq., J.P., D.L., Castlehall, Crossmolina. Oct- 20. isso 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 Valuatl 
 
 Dn. 
 
 Kent. 
 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 P. Coneelys, . 
 
 14 15 
 
 
 
 26 10 
 
 Pat Carroll, . 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 John Regan, . 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 4 10 
 
 James Prendergast, . 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 Owen Hunt, . 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 2 15 
 
 Mace Upper — Pat Freeman, old rent £7. "When 
 purchased by father of present lord of the soil raised 
 to £12, again £15, again £17, again to £21, present 
 rent ; land bad ; Freeman a paviper, and under eject- 
 ment. Pat Regan, old rent £7, raised to £12 ; crop 
 sold in '79 for rent ; is a pauper. On Murray M. 
 Blacker's estate, near Claremorris, there resides a 
 tenant named Martin MuUdowny ; valuation £4 5s., 
 old rent £4 10s.; increased by Blacker after he be- 
 came owner to £7, again to £12 10s. Mulldpwny holds 
 about two and a-half acres indifferent arable, all the 
 rest fit to feed one cowon — a tract of land better 
 adapted for breeding snipe. 
 
 Ballycroy.- 
 fordshii-e. 
 
 -Estate of Geo. Olive, m.p., for Here- 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 John O'Donel, 
 
 Michael Calvey, 
 Henry M'Mannion 
 J. F. Corrigan, 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 1 5 
 
 1 10 
 
 28 12 
 
 46 I 
 
 d. 
 
 
 
 
 
 Eent. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 5 5 
 
 5 10 
 
 52 10 
 
 75 
 
 AU those valued under £4 are compelled to pay 
 rate.s and taxes, which amount to from 5s. to 7s. in the 
 pound on the valuation. All these lands are reclaimed 
 pat(;hes of reclaimable lands ; reclamation obstructed 
 owing to rack-renting put on as reclaimed. 
 
 Erris Barony. Captain Brabazon Twinford, landlord. 
 Townland of Athavalla, Bangor, Ems, is let as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 Tenants. rValuation. Rent. 
 
 Jacob Euddy, . 
 John Casey, 
 Pat Murphy, . 
 John Carey, 
 
 These are reclaimed from wild mountain lands, not 
 worth over the valuation. 
 
 Charles M. Coyne, of Booter.stown, Dublin. Lands 
 of Ballintra and Minion, Erris. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 11 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 28 13 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 4 4 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 9 17 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 13 13 
 
 5 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Eent 
 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 Charles Gallaher, 
 
 . 13 10 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 Dan Maally, 
 
 . 18 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 John M'Andrew, 
 
 . 15 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 John Gallaher, 
 
 . 5 15 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 Michael Gallaher, 
 
 . 1 19 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 Doolagh. Arthur Bingham, landlord. 
 
 Tenants. Valuation. Kent. 
 
 £ s. d. £ s. d. 
 
 James Carey, . . 2 17 6 
 
 (And has to give twenty- four days duty work ) 
 Michael Padden, 15 2 10 
 
 (And tw(?nty-four days duty work.) 
 
 James Denar, . . 10 2 10 
 
 (And duty work.) 
 
 These tenants are greater slaves to landlordism than 
 ever was a dusky slave to a South American planter. 
 Lands dear to live on at Government valuation. This 
 man gave two moiiths imprisonment to the wife of 
 one of the tenants, because she obstructed a process 
 server. I gave her what paid her fare to Ballina, and 
 got her her breakfast after she got out of gaol. This 
 occurred to my own knowledge on this property. 
 
 7'homas Billington, townland of Muinahollowna, 
 has let his land at £65 a year, valuation £26. Lands 
 dear at the valuation. These small landlords are the 
 curse of the country. I call them white .slave drivers. 
 
 ^mauus 01 j.uDDunai 
 Tenants. 
 
 rin ana .fl.ugna 
 Valuation. 
 
 loreteaii. 
 Rent. 
 
 Sir. James 
 Daly. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 
 Thomas Callaghan, . 
 Richard Hagerty, 
 Widow Callaghan, . 
 
 5 12 
 5 10 
 2 10 
 
 10 12 
 
 12 1 6 
 
 5 
 
 
 All these and others are ejected for the non-pay- 
 ment of this rent. Lands dear at valuation. 
 
 Bernard Coyne, esq. j.p. Lahardane. 
 Tenants. Valuation. 
 
 Michael Callaghan, 
 A. Price, . 
 F. Harte, 
 Peter Cowley. . 
 Pat M'Gowan, 
 
 d. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Rent. 
 £ s. 
 
 5 12 
 10 10 
 
 6 12 
 9 
 
 7 
 
 d. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Several others in like proportion. Lands dry and 
 rocky, very poor, dear at the Ordnance valuation. 
 
 William Kelly, Lahardane, bought this land in 
 May, '49, at £6 7s. buUt house, farmed, and reclaimed. 
 In '54 the rent was increased to £9 ; in '58 to £10 
 15s.; in '75 to £13, promising a lease at paying a 
 year's rent, £13, for farm, but got no lease. This 
 man is now ejected and a pauper. 
 
 James Price and Pat Price — ^Pirst rent, £17. 
 There were no houses when they got the land. In 
 November, 1852, they got a notice to quit in order to 
 have the rent raised. It was raised to £20, and in 
 1856 it was raised to £25. In 1872 a further rise 
 was put on and law proceedings costs saddled on the 
 tenants — settled at a rise of £17, then £25 and £42 
 is the present rent ; valuation, £21 10s. The tenants 
 advanced £42 for a lease which was never given. 
 The money advanced was not returned. They re- 
 claimed a great portion of the land at their own ex- 
 pense. The land is unwholesome. The tenants lost 
 over 150 head of cattle. Rent paid to November, 
 1878. If the years' rent, advanced for the lease, were 
 allowed to stand as a years' rent, the tenants would 
 have paid their rent to November, 1879. They were 
 processed at April Sessions, 1880, and evicted in 
 July. 
 
 F. L. Comyns, of county Galway. Rents in 
 Carrakeel estate, county Mayo. 
 
 Tenants Names. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Eent. 
 
 Tobey Gibbons 
 J. Timmoney 
 A. M. Tighe 
 
 £ s. d. 
 . 4 15 
 
 7 
 . 4 5 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 7 10 
 12 2 
 
 8 
 
 All the tenants in proportion. Ejectments were 
 served on tenants unable to pay this rack-rent for land 
 poor and dry and dear at the Government valuation. 
 
 Sir Compton Domville's land was let at 10s. It 
 was increased to £1, then to £2 10s., and it would be 
 dear at 10s. He prohibited Bridget Kerrigan from 
 getting married. (This is the work more of Mr. 
 Spencer, the agent). She got married, and because 
 she did the rent was increased to £2 10s., five times 
 what it was, in the hope of running her out, and she 
 had to leave. 
 
 Mr. Pratt, of Enniscoe, Tyrawly and county Cavan, 
 Claughbrackfar. 
 
 Tenants Names. 
 
 Valuation 
 
 Kent. 
 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Thos. Loftus 
 
 . 2 
 
 6 
 
 Neal Syran 
 
 . 4 6 8 
 
 6 
 
 Dan Cawly 
 
 . 6 4 
 
 6 
 
 Some twenty-two^ears ago Mr. Pratt nearly doubled 
 the rent on this, a large estate, set in like proportion 
 to the above lands, not worth even the valuation. 
 
 ' Lord Lucan's estate. 
 
 John Flannery, Larnaght, valuation, £8 10s. ; rent, 
 £16 ; others in like proportion. Land bad, not worth 
 even valuation. All the good lands in Mayo held in 
 
570 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Oct. 20, 1830. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Daly. 
 
 Lord Lucan's exclusive possession. Tenants who held 
 same were driven out on the bogs some thirty years 
 ago, to the workhouse, emigrant ship, or to fill paupers' 
 graves. . . 
 
 James Faulkner,' Castlehax, PheasantMU estate. 
 
 Tenants Names. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Old Kent. 
 
 Back Kent. 
 
 ' 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Thos. Brown . 
 
 11 
 
 — 
 
 30 
 
 Ml. Lawless 
 
 1 10 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Pat Walsh 
 
 3 10 
 
 2 16 10 
 
 6 3 
 
 Peter Broghan . 
 
 2 5 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 D. Walsh & Co. 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 14 
 
 Lands dear enough at valuation. 
 
 Mrs. Ruane — Land in Chancery. Townland of 
 Frahey, valuation, £36 ; rent, £57. Tenant was 
 served with nine notices to quit and writs in nine 
 years, because he would not submit to a further rise 
 of 15s. per acre, as shown by a letter which I have 
 here. All rents double the valuation. Writs are 
 served to the superior courts for a half-j^ear's rent on 
 this estate. John Coyne's estate. — He induced a 
 friend of his own to go into a farm and work it, plac- 
 ing £128 rent on him, while the valuation was only 
 £35. This tenant found it was a dead loss, and Mr. 
 Coyne is insisting in charging him the full rent. The 
 land was a long time waste, and appeared to be 
 meadow land ; but when the grass on it was taken ofl 
 it was found to be only little * herbage. The man is 
 willing to pay double the Government valuation be- 
 cause he can't run away, but Coyne will not take less 
 than treble the Government valuation. On Mr. Clive's 
 property all tenants under £4 have to pay all rates, 
 which, on an average, are from 5s. to 7s. in the pound. 
 
 17679. Chairman. — Did he reclaim their holdings? 
 — No, he reclaimed portion for himself, and when he 
 saw what he could make out of reclamation he put a 
 similar rent on the tenants for what he had reclaimed. 
 
 17680. Mr. Shaw. — Do they hold much mountain 
 land ? — They may hold ten or fifteen acres of mountain 
 land, but it is only accommodation, and worth only 
 Is. or so. 
 
 17681. If there was any expenditure it would be 
 beautiful land ? — - Yes, but this paralysed them. 
 According to the Land Act all tenants under £i are 
 not entitled to pay rates and taxes, but he runs a 
 coach-and-four through that. 
 
 17682. The O'Conoe Don.— If they refused to pay 1 
 — They go out. 
 
 17683. He would have to compensate them for their 
 improvements? — They are a primitive race; they 
 would not go , into court. Those who were evicted 
 went about their business. 
 
 17684. Were there any evictions ?— I cannot exactly 
 say on his estate, but those who left, I think, got very 
 little. From what I know of them I don't think they 
 know the Comraission is going on here now. It is a 
 wUd retired district On the sea-coast. There is a 
 property where I found one poor woman, the Widow 
 M'Goff, paying £11 on a valuation of £4 17s. She 
 told me her landlord was Councillor Ji'Dermott, from 
 Dublin. I think the place is called Shanaghey. 
 Another tenant named Eeilly pays £9 10s. for £2 
 valuation. 
 
 17685. Chairman.— How do they pay? — They are 
 two or three years in arrear. As long as the potato 
 crop grew in this county they tried to make out a 
 miserable existence ; money was very cheap. Any 
 man who borrowed a hat or coat went into the bank 
 and got £5. The bank paid the rent, and they got 
 meal to support them, and they went in to the mer- 
 chants in the town and got seeds and oats. This went 
 on for three or four years, and when the crops went 
 from bad to worse there was a regular collapse. The 
 banks paid the rents by their unbounded liberality in 
 giving money. In every little town there was a branch 
 of a new bank opened, and the money was given very , 
 plentifully and easily. The people are in debt now in all 
 du-ections, and there was aregular collapse, then they had 
 no alternative but to cling to the old rooftree by getting 
 up mdignation meetings. My obj ect in attending these 
 
 meetings was for to avert a famine, and! was 'in prison 
 for it, but I had one consolation that I was an humble 
 worker in saving the lives 6f thousands of countrymea 
 who would have actually died if we had not brought 
 their cases before the world. ' On Lord de Clifford's 
 estate, Ellen Lynskey produced a receipt for £7 a 
 year's rent, in 1879, and the Government valuation ig 
 £4 5s. This tenant complains bitterly that she is not 
 able to pay, and is a pauper, and threatened witK 
 ejectment. She has to pay for mountain for wliicli 
 she had never to pay until very recently, and aIon» 
 with this she has to pay £2 1 Is. 6d for two years' 
 grazing on mountain land. This mountain was, until 
 very recently, a commonage let into their holdintrg 
 but they have to pay for it lately. The clerk of the 
 union says she is valued at £4 5s. I have the receipts 
 of other persons in the same townlands, and they com- 
 plain of being charged for the mountain. James 
 Freeney pays £4 4s., the valuation is about li. 
 Some persons came in here to day to give evidence 
 and the process servers were on the gmOTve intowa- 
 here is a man who was served to-day with a civil bill pro- 
 cess for half ayear'srentbecausehecametogiveevidence. 
 
 17686. Who is the landlord ?—Malachi Tuohy, 
 near the town. The process servers are all day as 
 busy as they could serving them with processes. Tie 
 special Commission did great service in bringing in 
 these people to have them served ; when the people 
 found this out they ran away in all dii-ections. 
 
 17687. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think the Government 
 valuation is a fair test of the rent? — I think so. 
 I do not think it is generally; the Government 
 valuation if readjusted may be a fair average of 
 the lands of Ireland in bulk. I pay on very 
 good land with a valuation of £45, a rent of £50, and 
 I got a reduction from that landlord of twenty-five 
 per cent. He is the only landlord who tried to meet 
 the tenants half way when there was depression. He 
 is Colonel Cuffe. I hold from Lord Erne ; rent, X12 ; 
 and the valuation, £5 15s. He gave me a reduction 
 of twenty per cent., but in reality the land is not 
 worth more than the Government valuation. How- 
 ever, I want it as accommodation or I would not give 
 the rent. There are tenants there who live in their 
 holdings and rented to the same extent. They would 
 be filling paupers' graves if it were not for the relief 
 given last year. I pay Sir Hoger Pabner one-fourth 
 over the Government valuation, and that land would 
 be fair enough at ten per cent, under the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 176S8. It is poor land? — It is naturally rocky and 
 mountain land. My knowledge of farming in thL« 
 country is that wherever there are good fattening land? 
 they are worth the Government valuation, and, 
 perhaps, more. In the townland of Castleiiagarrit the 
 valuators did not strike a higher valuation than 30s. 
 Some of these lands may give ten crops of meadow. 
 These lands would be cheap at the Government valua- 
 tion ; but where there are white lands and hiUs thai 
 will grow nothing but furze, or boggy, poor land, they 
 ai'c too high at the present Government valuation. 
 For instance, in a property managed by my brother a 
 to\vnland is valued at £26, and it is let to tenants ai 
 £14. I know a neighbouring townland where I pay 
 ten per cent, over the Government valuation. J 
 could more easily pay fifty per cent, over it there 
 than these people could pay half the valuation of then 
 lands ; but, taking it all in all, I think the Govern- 
 ment valuation is a very fair valuation, if not owing 
 to the foreign competition and the depi-ession — oats 
 are at 4s. and 4s. 6cZ. a cwt. — I believe the tenants oi 
 Ireland could not live any way respectably now at the 
 Government valuation. 
 
 17689. Do you think these small farmers could live 
 on these lands if they had them for nothing ? — In very 
 many cases they could for the last three years, I thiiik 
 myself that could be veiy easily remedied. I would 
 offer as a siTggestion that if the Government purchased 
 these Y/aste lands — in Erris alone there are 155,000 
 acres of reclaimable land, not worth threepence a year 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 571 
 
 now to tlie landlord, tliey are only used that he may 
 shoot a brace of snipe or a dozen grouse off them — if 
 these were taken and let in parcels of twenty or thirty 
 acres to the tenants, giving them facilities for a few- 
 years, and giving them capital to start upon, I think 
 we should take some of these poor people off the lands 
 where they are now, and place them on this new land, 
 and give them encouragement — a loan that would be 
 repaid to the Government in thirty-five years by in- 
 stalments. 
 
 17690. Would the farmers do that 1 — I think they 
 would. 
 
 17691. "Would they go from the three or four aero 
 lots where they have been living all their lives to begin 
 again? — I put that question to 15,000 or 20,000 at a 
 meeting at Ballycroy, and they cried out that they 
 would be delighted, and I asked them would they go 
 to Minnesota if they got these lands to reclaim there, 
 and they said they would not. You could take 
 100,000 acres in Tyrawley. 
 
 17692. Would it not be better to take these people 
 out to Minnesota in families 1 — No ; I think they have 
 better- lands at home if they only reclaim them. I thiuk 
 thei-e is land enough unreclaimed in Ireland. I think 
 there is land enough in Mayo to rear twice its popu- 
 lation if brought into cultivation. 
 
 17693. Chairman. — Do you think if these men who 
 go to England remained at home and worked on this 
 waste land that that w^ould be a plan for doing it 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 17694. Mr. Shaw. — Go to Erris for the summer 
 instead of to England 1 — They would go there entirely 
 if they got any encoiTragement. 
 
 17695. How could they begin by liviiag on waste 
 land 1 — If the Government were to say, " We will 
 give you £5 an acre for reclaiming it ; will you do 
 it ]" The land could be parcelled out and di-ained ; 
 or say, give the man £100 or £150 to start with, and 
 a cottage withoiit rent for the first three or four years, 
 the money to be paid back by instalments, and to hold 
 the land for ever afterwards at a fair rent from the 
 Government. It would be a tendency towards creating 
 a peasant proprietary. It is as good, or perhaps 
 better, land than the land alongside it. Towards Bally- 
 croy I have seen land that was wild tilled and growing 
 champions that I could nearly tie my pony to the 
 stalks of, and I said what a pity the Government don't 
 take up these lands. On the waste lands of Erris, I 
 assure you, a man could make, it grow clover if he got 
 a proper iirducement. 
 
 17696. You think the people cannot be left as they 
 are on these miserable patches through the, country 1 
 ■ — No ; I think the Government are in diity bound to 
 pass an Act of Parliament that will come to the relief 
 of the tenants and fix the rent. If not there will be 
 continually disturbances in this country. This place [ 
 mention tenants can't live on it^ and you cannot have 
 peace or order until such time as there is something 
 done to remedy that state of things. I attended a 
 great many meetings — first, to avert famine ; and, 
 secondly, to do my duty in raising my voice in behalf 
 of the people. According to every improvement of the 
 times the rents were increased by the landlords— it 
 was like a clock, continually going, but you could not 
 reverse it. Cololiel Cuffe gives 25 per cent, reduction, 
 and his agent was up here, and they were running to 
 pay him the rent. 
 
 17697. There was no attempt made to prevent them 
 by the Land League ? — No ; they were encouraged to go 
 and pay it. In 1867 it was considered there was to 
 be a rising in the AVest of Ireland,' and the tenants 
 of Colonel Cuffe told him they would volunteer toi 
 a man to protect him, and they would sacrifice their 
 lives for him. 
 
 17698. You think the opposite feeling arose through 
 distress in very bad years ?— Yes, and misrepresenta- 
 tion. Where there was a trifling matter, the most 
 was made Out of it. I often read sensational cases 
 that did not happen at'all. I.sawin a couple of cases 
 where the tenants got the" full amount of compensa- 
 tion, owing to the excessive nature of the rents. 
 This was never dcme -antil this land movement took 
 
 place. Absenteeism is the curse of this country. Oct. 20,, isso. 
 
 There are three landlords who take £100,000 out of it, j^^.^ j^g 
 
 and they never spend £3,000 in it. I think it would -naly. 
 
 be a very good suggestion to tax absenteeism, and I 
 
 would expend the money. I would give every man 
 
 liberty to live whore he liked, but the man who lives 
 
 out of the country should forfeit something to it. I 
 
 would put 25 per cent, on his rental as a tax : 20 per 
 
 cent, to be spent on his own estate in reclaiming it 
 
 and building houses for his tenants, which are unfit 
 
 for beasts to live in. By that means the landlord 
 
 saves a ,large capital for himself, and you benefit him 
 
 in spite of himself. The other 5 per cent. I would put 
 
 aside to meet famine as we have had this year. 
 
 17699. If there was a bill passed giving perfect 
 security and arranging the valuation between land- 
 lord and tenant, allowing the tenant to sell his interest 
 whenever he likes, with provision for the creation of 
 a peasant proprietorship, would that meet the case t — 
 Yes, that would do. If you give facilities to create 
 peasant proprietors you would make the peasants 
 more conservative than the Conservatives. I am a 
 Land Leaguer myself, and I would not be a Land 
 Leaguer if it had anything behind it lilce revolution. 
 T would fight against it. 
 
 17700. You don't want to do anything of that kind, 
 but you want to improve the country you are in? — 
 Yes. I believe the people are misrepresented, and I 
 very often saw myself misrepresented. Instead of 
 bettering me it would make me more disloyal ; they 
 arrested me and brought me down to S]igo, and in- 
 stead of retarding me in the work it made me a spoiled 
 child. 
 
 17701. They don't know how to manage the coun- 
 trj' 1 — I wish they knew how to manage it better. 
 Ejectments should be stopped altogether ; it is rather 
 expensive for the tenant. If the tenant goes in next 
 day to pay he has 10s. costs to pay, and if the case is 
 not settled within a few days there is an expense of 
 £2 10s. Od. SirHobert Blosse is a landlord who does 
 that. If a landlord does not get his rent in due course 
 the tenant is served with a civil bill process if he is 
 not in the very day it is due. This question will 
 never be settled if the Chairman has not power to 
 adjudicate upon the rent between landlord and tenant. 
 
 17702. That is whenever occasion arises? — Yes. 
 
 17703. But in ordinary cases arbitration would be 
 well ? — Yes. I think the tenant should have the same 
 facilities of bringing the landlord into court as the 
 landlord has of bringing the tenant into court, if the 
 tenants feel aggrieved, as they really are. They 
 should have facilities of taking the landlord into court, 
 and stating thnir case before ah arbitrator who could 
 decide it, and say these rents are excessive, and fix 
 the rents that should be binding on the landlord and 
 tenant. If that was done this would' be the most 
 peaceful country in the world. To have iron'huts and 
 police barracks in ever;,- townland in Ireland would 
 not benefit matters, but make them worse. I know 
 the present Government intended to do their best, but 
 for the landlord ojiposition. They are trying to please 
 both parties, and it is a difiicult task. 
 
 17704 The O'Conor Don.— With regard to these 
 cases you mentioned of different landlords, you don't 
 mean to say that all the rents on their estates are in 
 the same proportion as the instances you have quoted 1 
 — I think I have given you a fair average. ' 'I might 
 be a little over it, but I am not much. 
 
 17705. They are not selected cases ? — Certainly 
 not. I attended 150 meetings in the west of Ireland, 
 and these cases came under my notice from time to 
 time. I published the bulk of them in my paper ; 
 and I never did so without taking up the landlord's 
 receipt. 
 
 17706. You know you might find out upon certain 
 estates, certain particular tenants who were pajdnc 
 very high rents compared with the valuation, and you • 
 might find tenants paying lower than the valuation. 
 Are we to understand that these instances you have 
 given are instances showing the general average rents, 
 or are they selected cases of high rents compared with 
 thevaluation? — The bulk of the caseslhave mentioned 
 
 4D2 
 
0/: 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880 
 
 Ort. 20, lESO. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Dalr. 
 
 Rev. John 
 Stephens. 
 
 are only the average of what the rents are in the 
 estates ; I have taken them impartially. 
 
 17707. You have quoted a case on Sir Eoger 
 Palmer's estate, -where the valuation is £60, and the 
 rent £101. We have just, immediately before you, 
 had the agent of Sir Roger before us, and he has 
 showed us that the rent was very little over the 
 valuation on the estate 1—1 think I stated at the 
 opening that any lettings made on the estate since 
 1864 are excessive ; lettings made before that, as a 
 rule, may not be excessive. I remember my father 
 paid £14, and the rent was increased to £l6, and 
 again to £20. That is three increases within my 
 memory. That he has done likewise all gver the estate. 
 
 He striped all these lands from 1860 or 1866 down to 
 1870. He had the Joynts of Ballina striping the 
 estate, and wherever he striped he increased the reats 
 to more than double in some places. Mr. O'Donnell 
 is one of these people who would wish not to gratify 
 the people, and to wring out the full rent, and that is 
 what he will never succeed. Ten per cent, may do on 
 the original rent, but in some places he should give a 
 reduction of from thirty to fifty per cent. I reclaimed 
 twenty acres of bog land myself. 
 
 17708. You give in your return of tenants' rents 
 as representing the general rate of rents upon these 
 particular estates ? — Yes. 
 
 Rev. John Stephens examined. 
 
 17709. Mr. Shaw. — You wish to make a statement? 
 — Yes. You spoke of over population, and about 
 sending out whole families to Minnesota. 
 
 17710. You think if they are sent out they should 
 be sent as Father Nugent sends them 1 — I don't think 
 they have any notion of going, and I think it is a 
 mistake to send them. If we have two million acres 
 of reclaimable land in Ireland, I think we should have 
 plenty of land for our people, and the time may come 
 when the British Empire will want her champions at 
 home. I have had letters from people who went to 
 Minnesota, and they say they would gladly come home 
 to-morrow to reclaim bog if they got it. These land- 
 lords who have this land unreclaimed should not be 
 allowed to continue this dog in the manger system, 
 but should be obliged to give them out to tenants ; 
 twenty acres say to each tenant, and in a short time 
 you will have a thriving peasant proprietary growing 
 on these lands. Say there are unreclaimed bog lands 
 to the extent of four million acres in Ireland, and that 
 there are two million acres of these reclaimable on 
 which 100,000 families could be maintained; give 
 them twenty years purchase of it at £1 an acre. 
 Tliat will only cost the Government £50 for a fifty 
 acre plot, and about £50 for a house ; paying that 
 back in thirty-five years, at £4 a year, it would come 
 to £140 ; so that at the end of thirty-five years there 
 would be a peasant proprietary in the strictest sense 
 of the word. Some men appealed to me yesterday, 
 and I asked, what bi'ought you here Pat, and they 
 said, " we came to see that they would not charge for 
 that land we reclaimed." That is the feeling, and it's 
 only too well founded. I was planting trees about 
 my church, and I had some to spare, and I offered 
 them to a countryman to plant in his avenue, but 
 he refused to take them. He said if they were seen 
 grooving they would charge him £2 a year more rent. 
 We are told we are a lazy people, but if the people 
 attempt to do anything they are made pay for it by 
 increased rent. That great man Nimmo undertook 
 to reclaim waste lands at an expense of one guinea 
 per acre, or the value of one year's crops, and if that 
 would be the only expense of it I think it would not 
 be a great undertaking. It is a sad reflection that in 
 this country we have these four million acres, that 
 have never afforded a human being one meal of food 
 and this while we boast of a Government which 
 watches over the interests of the country, whether 
 liberal or conservative ; whatever they call themselves 
 I don't see what reason we have to be so much proud 
 of this boasted constitution. 
 
 17711. Do you think if the people had these fifty 
 acre farms there would be any tendency to subdivide 
 their holdings? — The very law that gives the fifty 
 acres could provide against that, I would not give them 
 £100 or anything lilre that, for they might go away to 
 Kamskatcka or Nebraska. 
 
 Mr. Daly. — I did not mean to give it to the tenant 
 at once, but to pay him as he went on with the 
 improvements. 
 
 Rev. Mr. /Stephens. — As to over population, we hear 
 a lot, but with five and a half millions of people 
 according to the census of 1871, it is very stupid to 
 talk of over population. There is plenty of room for 
 another million on the bogs alono, and how many 
 
 millions on the grass farms where the grass sours? 
 They are reserved for fat sheep, while the people must 
 go to Minnesota or some where else to find an existence. 
 Mr. Daly remarked that the facilities persons had of 
 purchasing land in the courts was a great misfortune. 
 No doubt it is, for it has created a tribe of land 
 sharks. The old landlords with all their notions of 
 the lands being made for them and no one else ; and 
 too frequently forgetting their duties, while never 
 forgetting their rights ; they were a thousand times 
 better than the fellows who have got the land under 
 this system. There should be some system devised— 
 and you must see some means of coming to that end — 
 by which the sales in the courts should be watched, 
 and some fund given to tenants to purchase the lands 
 coming into the courts. You may see there is a 
 property coming up to the court ; don't let these 
 sharks grab it. If there was a fund given by the 
 Government, or let the property be bought by the 
 Government, then the tenants could get peasant 
 proprietary right off, under the Bright clauses. The 
 Government could easily lend at a fair rate of interest 
 the balance a man required, if he wanted to have some 
 money in his hands as capital to work the place. 
 Let me suppose a property went to twenty years 
 purchase ; a poor man held it at £15. The fee-simple 
 of his property would be £300. The Government 
 could afford to give him money at about 4 per cent., 
 and this will sink in thirty-five years, so that he pays 
 not £15 as he was paying before, but £12 interest on 
 the £300, and in thirty-five years he has paid it all 
 back with respectable interest, because he will have 
 paid instead of £300 £420. So that that would not be a 
 losing game in any sense. These large grazing farms 
 could be parcelled out into proper holdings with proper 
 offices, on which this surplus population might be 
 placed, and this with great profit to the United 
 Kingdom. There is a document here to which I 
 would like to call attention. Before I came to my 
 present position, I lived amongst a lot of people I felt 
 for very much, and in 1875, on March the 5th, the 
 Marquess of Sligo, issued quite a block of these notices 
 increasing the rent, to commence from the 1st Novem- 
 ber, before. This was written in March. 
 
 Mr. Ball/. — There is a party on Bernard Coyne's 
 property in gaol for returning into possession. The 
 first rent was £17 ; there was no house on the land 
 when got it. In 1852 they got notice to quit, in 
 order to have the rent raised. It was raised to £20 in 
 1856, and to £25 in 1872. A further rise was puton 
 and law proceedings instituted, and a settlement come 
 to ; the costs were saddled on the tenants. Now the 
 rent is £42, and the valuation is £21 10s. The £42 
 given for a lease was never returned, and the lease was 
 never given. They claimed the money when they 
 were going to be ejected. They reclaimed a great 
 portion at their own expense. They lost 150 head of 
 cattle, during their tenure of the land. One of these 
 parties resumed possession, and he was summoned, and 
 is undergoing im^jrisonment for it. He was ejected 
 for one years rent, and the landlord had one years rent 
 in his pocket ; they owed a years rent and the running 
 gale at the time they were ejected. 
 
 The Commissioners then adjourned. 
 
•MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 673 
 
 TWENTY-FOURTH DAY.— THUESDAY, 21st OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 and William Shaw, Esq., m.p. 
 (with other tenants from Castlemines). 
 
 Present : — The O'Conor Don, 
 Mr. Patrick Fox, sen., examined 
 
 17712. The O'Conoe Don. — You are a tenant on 
 the townland of Castlemines 1 — Yes. 
 
 17713. Who is your landlord ^— The Eev. Mr. 
 Jackson. 
 
 17714. What complaial have you to make ? — That 
 (producing document) is Mr. Allen's receipt. He is 
 the agent. 
 
 17715. Where does Mr. Allen live? — Near Ballin- 
 asloe. 
 
 17716. What is your complaint 1 — My complaint is 
 that I had my rent raised. My valuation is £23 10s., 
 and my rent is £60 a year. 
 
 17717. Wheu was the rent altered ? — About 22 
 years ago. There is my former receipt in JMr. Malion's 
 time. It belonged to Captain Toulis. 
 
 17718. It belonged to Captain Toulis, and Mr. 
 Jackson purchased it? — Yes, and then he raised the 
 rent up to £60. 
 
 17719. It was i;33 6s. ? — Yes, and it was raised to 
 £60. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — Nearly doubled 1 — Yes. 
 
 17720. How many acres have you? — 36a. 3r. 
 17720a. Is it good land ? — It is rocky land. 
 
 17721. Is it good grazing land? — It is light enough. 
 It is the poorest land near the Four-mile-house.- If 
 we could get any other place we would change at any 
 time. 
 
 1 7 722. The O'Conoe Don. — Did you enter into any 
 written agreement with him ? — I had to. I did not 
 
 understand the law, and if I did I would rather trans- 
 port myself. 
 
 17723. How many tenants are there on it? — Four- 
 teen. 
 
 17724. Are all the men here tenants? — Yes. 
 1772.5. And they were all raised at the same time ? 
 
 — Yes. He purchased this, and gave it to his daughter 
 as a fortune. She married Mr. Reeves. He died, and 
 then she got married to the Rev. Mr. Jackson, and 
 Mr. Allen is agent. 
 
 17726. Your present landlord did not raise the 
 j-ent ? — No. He left it as he got it. 
 
 17727. It was by marriage he got it ? — Yes. 
 
 17728. Who was the man who raised the rent? — 
 Mr. Allen. 
 
 17729. He is only the agent — who was the landlord ? 
 Mr. Goodall. — He gave the land as a fortune to his 
 
 daughter. 
 
 17730. You have two holdings? — No, my brother 
 and myself joined in it. 
 
 17731. It is held by Pat Fox and William Fox 1— 
 Yes. 
 
 17732. The .former rent of the two holdings was 
 £33 6s. — Yes. 
 
 17733. And what is the valuation of the two hold- 
 ings?— £23 10s. ■ 
 
 17734. What is the valuation of the holdings 
 separately? — They are joined in one. 
 
 Oct.ii, I^80 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Fox, senr. 
 
 Mr. William Fox examined. 
 17734a. My valuation is £11. One rent is £41 4s. 2>d., and the other £18 15s. 9d., making together £60. 
 
 Mr. 'WlUiam 
 
 Fox. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Garrihan examined, 
 £14 10s. rent, and 
 
 17735. Mr Shaw. — You pay 
 your valuation is £8 5s. ? — Yes. 
 
 17736. How much was it raised ? — It was divided, 
 and three of iis joined. 
 
 17737. The O'Conoe Don. — This is a subdivided 
 holding 1 — Yes. 
 
 17738. Was it subdivided with the permission of 
 the landlord? — It was subdivided before Mr. Allen 
 came in. 
 
 17739. And were the rents divided before? — They 
 were, the same way. We got one receipt for the 
 three. 
 
 17740. You get one receipt still ? — We do. 
 
 17741. There is only one recognised as tenant ? — 
 That is all. 
 
 17742. What is the rent for the three ? — £36. 
 
 17743. For the three ?— Yes. 
 
 17744. What is the valuation for the three? — 
 £21 10s. 
 
 17745. Mr. Shaw. — How much was the rise? — 
 It was £20 formerly, and it was raised to £36. 
 
 17746. The O'Conoe Don. — You have 21^ acres? 
 —Yes. 
 
 17747. Are they Irish acres? — Yes. 
 
 17748. The same kind of land as Fox's ? — Mostly 
 the same, there is only a wall between them 
 
 17749. Is it fairly good? — It is not good land. 
 Any place that a man can't take an acre of meadow 
 is not good land. We never broke it these 20 years. 
 It is all in grass, except the garden we have. I don't 
 live on it. 
 
 17750. Are you in business? — No sir. I have a 
 bit of land from another man where I live. 
 
 17751. Wlioro do you live? — In Ballinderry, under 
 Captain Goff. 
 
 177-')2. You have no complaint to make of him? — 
 My rent is 30s. higher than the valuation. 
 
 17753. How much land do you hold? — I have a 
 great deal of bog. 
 
 17754. What rent do you pay?— £12 10s. to 
 Captain Goff. 
 
 17755. You don't find that unreasonable? — It is 
 unreasonable enough because the land is wet and bad. 
 
 17756. How long is it since it was raised ? — It is 
 about three years ago since he raised me £3 12s. 9rf. 
 
 'Mr. Patrick 
 Garrihan. 
 
 17757. Mr. Shaw. — The land you hold is £36 a 
 
 year also ? — Yes. 
 
 17758. It is a joint holding?— Yes. 
 
 17759. The former rent was the same as we have 
 heard from others?— Yes, £20 10s. 
 
 17760. And the valuation is £19 -os. ? — Yes. 
 
 17761. The rent was fixed at the same tinif" ? — Yes, 
 
 Mr. James Garrihan, senior, examined. 
 
 Mr. James 
 the same time as the other tenants, and we are payino- Garrihan, senr. 
 that rent ever since. 
 
 17762. Are you living on the land? — I don't live 
 on it. 
 
 17763. On whose property do you live? On 
 
 Captain Goff 's. 
 
 17764. What rent are you paying there? — £16. 
 
574 
 
 lEISH' LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1880. 17765. What is your valuation ? — £12 15s. 
 
 — 17766. Has that rent been altered lately ?— Yes, 
 
 Gairim^ifenr. at the sameitime as the others,: fourteen years ago. 
 ' — ' 17767. There was a general alteration at that time ? 
 
 — I don't believe there was a general one. 
 
 17768. But was there an alteration on that town- 
 
 land ? — I suppose there was on the townland, but not 
 on the whole tenants. 
 
 17769. How much was put on yoxtrsMf ? — I could 
 not say what the old rent was. 
 • 17770. You went there since the alteration was 
 made. No, but my father died since. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Garrihan, jun. 
 
 Mr. James Gaeeihan, junior, examined. 
 
 17771. Mr. Shaw. — You live on this land? — lam 
 the only man who does live on it, and I lost £70 on 
 a house for the last twenty-two years. I clapped all 
 into it, and I am not able to take an acre of meadow 
 off it. I have about three acres of tillage. 
 
 17772. Did you try any champions ? — No sir. 
 
 17773. What is the matter with it, is it bad land ? 
 —Not too bad. 
 
 17774 You don't manure it well enough?— Oats 
 were good enough this year, but not last year. • 
 
 17775. You have it in grass, the landlord does 
 nothing ? — They spend nothing on the land. 
 
 17776. The O'Conoe Don. — Since you made' this 
 building the rent was not altered ? — No ; it was 
 altered before I built, and since the rent was raised I 
 buUt all these and lost about £70, and was not allowed 
 one-penny for it. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Hanly. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Hanly examined. 
 
 17777. Mr. Shaw. — You pay M rent, and the 
 Government valuation is £2 15s. ? — Yes. 
 
 17778. How many acres have you? — Two acres. 
 
 17779. And one is a bog? — Heathy moor, and that 
 one acre is not to the best of my opinion worth 15s. 
 at the very most. 
 
 17780. Do you live on the land ? — I do. 
 
 17781. Have you any other land ?— Not a perch. 
 
 17782. Your rent was fixed at the same time as the 
 others ?-^It was. 
 
 17783. How. much was put upon it ? — It was raised 
 from 36s. up to £4. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Gannon. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Gannon examined. 
 
 17784. The O'CoxoE Dox.— Your rent is £25?— 
 Yes. 
 
 17785. And your valuation £15 5s. ? — Yes. 
 
 17786. What was your previous rent ? — In 1871, 
 I became tenant of this land of Mr. Jackson's, and 
 the rent was raised before I came to it ; I married 
 Ganahan's widow, and I have nursed the lands these 
 nine years, never breaking a sod of it, and if I never 
 eat a bit it is not able to pay the rent. 
 
 17787. You have it all in grass? — Yes, but about 
 two acres. It is not able to keep a perch in meadow 
 or to feed £8 worth of a cow. I was going to be 
 ejected, and we made a settlement that I might get it 
 at the value. If all the gentlemen in Roscommon 
 were to walk my land to-day they would not value 
 my land at more than 14s. an acre. 
 
 17788. Mr. Shaw.^ — What made you take it at that 
 rent ? — Well, I was in America and land was thought 
 a good deal of at tlif time, and I had a few pounds. 
 
 17789. Tiw O'Coxot; Don. — Did you pay a fine? — 
 
 No, I married the widow of the tenant, and settled 
 down in it, and let out the land to groAv grass, and it 
 is just as bad. 
 
 17790. Do you live on it ?— I do. 
 
 17791. You have no other way of living ? — No sir. 
 
 17792. You don't tm much of it ?— No, I have no 
 one but myself, my family is young. I only till about 
 two acres out of sixteen. 
 
 17793. Mr. Shaw. — There is no drainage wanted 
 It is all high mountain land ? — Most of it. 
 
 17794. It does not want any reclamation, it is aU 
 fair land ?-^It is not. 
 
 17795. Have you done anything towards improving 
 it. No, but I improved the land these nine years. 
 
 17796. By feeding on it ? — Yes. 
 
 17797. The landlord has done nothing to it? — Not 
 a ha'porth. He took my means away. ' 
 
 17798. The O'CoNOE Don.— Were you evicted for 
 non-payment ? — I was ; but I settled the rent up to 
 that time. 
 
 Mr. Janles 
 Shea. 
 
 Mr. James Shea examined. 
 
 17799. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres do you hold? 
 — I think four acres. 
 
 17800. What is your rent ?—£ 5. 
 
 17801. And the valuation ? —30s. 
 
 17802. Is it reclaimed land? — Part of it bog re- 
 claimed, and that we liad atilvst for Jiothing, and then 
 
 some rent was put upon it, and then when the pro- 
 perty was going to be sold off it was put at 30s. 
 
 17803. When was the £5 put upon you ? — At the 
 same time as the others were raised. It was raised 
 from 30s. to £5. 
 
 17804. You reclaimed all this yourself ?—.'iU but 
 about one rood, and we nevei' reclaimed that .since. 
 
 Mr. john 
 M 'Garry. 
 
 Mr. John M'Gaeey examined. 
 
 17805. Mr. Shav.-. — You pay £37 rent ? — Yes. 
 
 17806. For how many acres ? — Twenty-seven acres. 
 
 17807. What is the valuation ?— £27. 
 
 17808. What was the former rent ?— I don't know. 
 It Y.'as before my time. My father v.'as not able to 
 attend here. 
 
 .17809. It was raised at the same time as the 
 others? — Yes. 
 
 17810. Do you live nn Mi» land ? — Yes. 
 
 17811. You think it is too dear i — It is £10 above 
 the valuation. 
 
 17812. Have you been able to pay the rent in good 
 times ? — Tight enough. 
 
 17813. The O'Conoe Don.— You haveall paidrent 
 up to the last year or so ? — Yes. 
 
 17814. Have you tillage on it? — Yes. 
 
 17815. Docs the landlord allow anyone to sell his 
 interest if he wishes to go away ? — I don't know. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ■575 
 
 -■ 17816. ■Has there beeii any cage in wMcli a tenant accurate list o£ the rents on the townlSuid of Gastle- Oc«. 21, I88O 
 left this townland ?^No. mine? — Yes. " M t^ 
 
 17817. You say that this' return (produced), is an Eeturn handed in as follows : — ' M'Gair^-/ 
 
 Eev. EoBi. P. Jackson, Castlemeehan, otherwise Castlemine (four miles from Eoscommon), London, Landlord 
 
 (Crawford Allen, Esq., Agent). 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 Rent. 
 
 Government Valuation. 
 
 Kent up to 1869. 
 
 Irish Acres. 
 
 - 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 
 
 Pat Garrihan, . _. • . 
 
 14 10 
 
 8 5 
 
 
 
 "i Holding suhdivided. 
 
 8 ■ 
 
 James Garraghan, senior, . 
 
 10 IS 
 
 6 5 
 
 
 
 > Former reijt of total, 
 
 6. 
 
 ;^at;Fox, junior, . _. . . 
 
 10 15 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 ) i20 . 
 
 H 
 
 James Garraghan, junior, . 
 
 ■ 12 
 
 7 5 
 
 
 
 1 Holding suhdivided. 
 
 n 
 
 William Garraghan, . . . 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 > Former rent of total, 
 
 n- 
 
 James Garraghan (James), . 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 ) £20 10 . 
 
 n 
 
 Pat Fox, senior, . , . . . 
 
 41 4 3 
 
 23 10 
 
 
 
 ) Former rent, 
 i JE33 6 . 
 
 26| 
 
 William Fox, . . . • 
 
 18 15 9 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 io| 
 
 Thomas Hanley, . . . . 
 
 - 4 
 
 2 15 
 
 
 
 1 16 
 
 2 
 
 Thomas Gannon, .... 
 
 --25 
 
 15 5 
 
 
 
 15 5 
 
 15J 
 
 James Shea, . . . • 
 
 5 
 
 1 10 
 
 
 
 1 10 . 
 
 4 waste bog. 
 
 John M' Garry, .... 
 
 37 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 16s. per acre former 
 
 rent. 
 
 27 
 
 John Scally, . • • • 
 
 14 
 
 9 5 
 
 
 
 15s. 6d. per acre. 
 
 9i 
 
 Mr. John M'Donnell examined. 
 
 many acres do 
 It is not worth 
 
 That you are able to till and work ? — ISTo. 
 This is a grass farm. No tillage 
 
 17818. The O'Oonor Don.— How 
 you hold ? — About 300 acres of bog. 
 anything. , 
 
 17819. How much arable land- have you? — lam 
 ilot sure. 
 
 17820. How much do you think ? — About seventy- 
 five acres. 
 
 17821. 
 I have it in grass, 
 of any kind. 
 
 17822. Your rent is £65 ?— Yes ; that is half 
 yearly. 
 
 17823. That is £130 a year?— Yes. 
 
 17824. When did you take the farm? — I have it 
 about thirty years. 
 
 17825. Had you it before the estate was sold ? — 
 There is about. seventy-five acres of arable land. Cap- 
 tain Eeeves was the first landlord. Mr. Jackson has 
 it at present. 
 
 17826. When did your father take the land?— 
 
 Something about twenty-six years ago. He took a 
 lease of it for twenty years, and when the lease ex- 
 pired there was £40 rise put upon it. 
 
 17827. That brought it up to the present rent? — 
 Yes. 
 
 17828. How many years is it since the lease ex- 
 pired ? — About five ye^rs. 
 
 17829. You don't live on the farm?— I do. 
 
 17830. Mr. Shaw. — Are you reclaiming any of the 
 other land ? — No ; there is tillage of no kind on it. 
 
 17831. Is it bog ?— It is most part. 
 
 17832. Could it be reclaimed ?— Well, yes j if the 
 landlord laid out anything on the drainage. 
 
 17833. You have not attempted it? — No; we re- 
 claimed some of it ; but not at present. 
 
 17834. Why don't you try to bring some of it into 
 reclamation ? — We could not from the way the rent is 
 raised on us. 
 
 17835. The rent is too high ?— Yes. 
 
 Mr. John 
 M'Donnell. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Musphy examined (on behalf of a deputation of tenants). 
 
 17849. That would be £U ?— Yes. 
 
 17850. Do you till any of it ?— Yes 
 
 17836. The 0' Conor Don. — You are a tenant on 
 the townland of HoUywell ? — Yes. 
 
 17837. Who is your landlord ?— Mr. Goodall. 
 The same landlord as in the other cases ? — 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Murphy. 
 
 '0, ho is the agent ? — Mr. Crawford Allen. 
 It is the same landlord as the Castlemines 
 It is his son-in-law, with the same 
 
 17838. 
 Yes. 
 
 17839. 
 
 17840. 
 tenants have % 
 agent. 
 
 17841. What is your complaint? — My comj)laint 
 is that the valuation is £10 10s., and he raised my 
 rent to £18. 
 
 17842. Wlien was the rise made? — In 1866, I 
 think. I got a lease in 1845, and it terminated in 
 1866. 
 
 17843. How much was the rent before ? — £15. 
 
 17844. The rent in the lease was £15 ? — Yes. 
 17845; And on the droisping of the lease it was 
 
 raised to £18?— Yes. 
 
 17846. For how many acres ?— Ten acres, 1 rood, 
 16 perches. Part of it is all rocks. It is rocky land, 
 a good part of it. 
 
 17847. Mr. Shaw. — Was the £15 enough for it ?— 
 Too much. 
 
 17848. What made yoa pay the advance 1 — I was 
 the man that was put out of another property, but not 
 for non-payment, and we were very glad to get shelter. 
 I took it first at 28ft an acre. 
 
 I till portion 
 of it, but not much, there is part of it I could not till 
 at all from the rocks. . 
 
 17851. The O'Conor Don. — ^What is it yo.u com- 
 plain about depositing money ? — At the time he raised 
 the rent I had to give £15 deposit, and it has re- 
 mained from that without interest or any account 
 of it. 
 
 17852. That he has held in his hands ?— Yes. 
 
 17853. Belonging to you ? — Yes. 
 
 17854. Did he give you a receipt for it ? — No ; he 
 drew up a proposal, and I signed the proposal. He 
 said if I did not comply he would withdraw, and I 
 had to agree. 
 
 17855. You always owe a year's rent ? — Yes. Some 
 of us are clear. 
 
 17856. Up to what date are you clear ? — I am 
 clear up to last November. 
 
 17857. You have always a running gale? — Next 
 November I will owe a year's rent, but he has £15 
 of mine. 
 
 17858. Mr. Shaw. — And he allows you no inte- 
 rest ?— No. 
 
 17859. And gave you no receipt?— No. 
 
 1 7860. The O'Conob Don.— Did you pay last year ? 
 ■ — ^Yes • 
 
576 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1S80. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Murphy. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Hunt. 
 
 Mr. Pat 
 
 Monaghan. 
 
 17861. And are all cleared up in the usual way 
 that tenants pay, only owing the hanging gale ? — ^Yes. 
 I could have brought receipts. 
 
 17862. You can answer for tne other men thattliig 
 is a correct return of their rents, &c. 1 — ^Yes. 
 [Return handed in as follows.] 
 
 CoLLiGUE. — Geokge Goodall, Esq., Pine Ridge, Famharn, Surrey, Landlord; Ckawfoed Allen, Esq., 
 
 Carramana, Kilconnell, county Galway, Agent. 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 Present 
 Kent. 
 
 Former Kent 
 tiU 1867. 
 
 Government 
 Valuation. 
 
 Deposit. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 Observations. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ S. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 A. E. P. 
 
 
 1. Martin Kenny, . 
 
 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 14 10 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 About twelve or sixteen years 
 
 2. Pat M'Dermott, . 
 
 45 
 
 
 
 
 
 31 4 
 
 
 
 21 15 
 
 
 
 49 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 ago, when father's lease fell, 
 he took four acres and raised 
 
 3. Pat Mannion, 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 14 1 
 
 
 
 10 17 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 .. 
 
 4. Pat Madden, 
 
 3.5 
 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 26 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 rent on remainder under 
 
 5. Pat Allen, . 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 
 
 26 10 
 
 
 
 26 10 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 threat of eviction ; ejectment 
 
 6. Thomas M'Dermott, . 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 15 
 
 
 
 16 10 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 process served ; we had to go 
 out on the roadside or subnut, 
 
 7. Thomas Hunt, 
 
 66 
 
 
 
 
 
 47 8 
 
 
 
 30 10 
 
 
 
 76 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 8. Walter Allen, 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 18 
 
 
 
 14 15 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 Took tvfo acres away. 
 
 9. Edward Farrell, . 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 9 2 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 
 10. John Farrell, 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 15 15 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 11. Thomas Murphy, 
 
 18 
 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 10 10 
 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 12. John Mannion, . 
 
 28 
 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 16 5 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 13. John M'Dermott, 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 15 
 
 
 
 10 15 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 14. Michael Brennan, 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 12 
 
 
 
 2 5 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 ... 
 
 
 15. Pat Farrell, 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 15 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 ._ 
 
 
 16. Pat Monaghan, 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 2 15 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 
 17. Thomas Kelly, 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 5 10 
 
 n 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 18. John Dillon, 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^.. 
 
 
 19. John Ward, 
 
 
 3 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 1 10 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 20. Malachi Keegan, 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 21. Pat Kelly, . 
 
 22. Martin Farrell, 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 5 10 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 23. William Banahan, 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 5 15 
 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 Took four acres of the best of 
 my land. 
 
 24. Pat Conry, . 
 
 47 
 
 
 
 
 
 34 4 
 
 
 
 32 10 
 
 
 
 47 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 25. Thomas M'Dermott, . 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 10 18 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 All the houses and permanent improvements made by the tenants. 
 
 Most of it reclaimed by tenants or their predecessors. 
 
 Every tenant is charged l,<t. 6d. a perch for turbary (30s. on acre for waste land where one cannot walk.) 
 
 Mr. Thomas Hunt examined. 
 
 17862a. I pay £66 ; my former rent was £47 8s., 
 and the Government valuation is £30 10s. That is 
 all rocks and bog. 
 
 17863. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres ? — About 
 fifty acres of rock and bog. 
 
 17864. When were these rents fixed ?— In 1867. 
 
 17865. On the expiration of a lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 17866. Have you been improving the land 1 — Yes ; 
 very much. We have built upon it. I lost hundreds 
 of pounds upon that farm. 
 
 17867. You have done all the improvements your- 
 self 1 — Yes ; built the house and everything else. 
 
 17868. You got no help from the landlord?— No. 
 
 17869. The O'GoxoR Don.— When did you do aU 
 this? — From 1867 down to the present time. He 
 gave us no recei]Dt for the money, and if I am not up 
 to the day he will serve me with a writ up to Dublin, 
 and throw me out on the road side. 
 
 Mr. Pat Monaghan examined. 
 
 17870. Mr. Shaw.— What sort of land is it you 17871. 
 
 hold ?— It is all red bog. I reclaimed it myself with at all. 
 gravel carried on my back. 
 
 It is cut-away bog ? — Some of it is not cut 
 
 Mr. William 
 lianalian. 
 
 Mr. William Banahan examined. 
 
 17872. Mr. Shaw.— You lost four acres of your 
 land ?— Yes ; Mr. Smith, of Holly well, got four acres 
 of my land. My rent was £18 5s. It was four acres 
 of the prime of the land. I had not three acres in 
 the world besides, and this was let to him, and my 
 rent was only reduced £2 5s. He charged me £U 
 a year rent, and my deposit was £14, 
 
 17873. You lost the best of your land ?— Yes. 
 
 17874. How many acres have you still? — It is not 
 worth measuring in acres. 
 
 17875. Was the deposit called a deposit?— Yes ; to 
 secure himself He thought we would fail when he 
 raised the rents so high. 
 
 17876. It is to your credit there 2 — It is not. We 
 are running in debt in banks and everywhere else for 
 it ; and if he dies to-morrow the money is dead. 
 
 17877. You have all paid up to November? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Pat 
 Conry. 
 
 Mr. Pat Conry examined. 
 
 17878. The O'Conor Don.— You hold 27 acres, 
 and the rent is £47 ? — Yes. 
 
 17879. How long have you been in possession ?— 
 ihese forty years. . 
 
 1 7880. Do you live on the land ? — I do. 
 
 17881. Your rent was raised at the same time? — 
 Yes ; it was raised from £34 4s. It is in two pieces. 
 
 17882. It is chiefly in grass ? — It is, sir. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 5'77 
 
 17883. l)o you sublet it at all, or let it in con- 
 acre 1 — No, sir ; except an acre. 
 
 17884. Mr. Shaw. — You don't pay for bog — you 
 have bog enough 1 — I have one acre. 
 
 17885. Do th^ tenants get bog free, or do they pay 
 for it? — They pay for it. We would not get a load 
 of mud off the cut-away bog. If we wanted to take a 
 
 rood or half an acre, he charges us £1 for it, and £1 
 deposit. I took it iirst from our agent at one guinea 
 an acre, and next year he raised it 9s. 3d. That is for 
 upland. 
 
 17886. That is not for the bog?— No; for the up- 
 land. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1880. 
 
 irr. Pat 
 Cunry. ■ 
 
 Mr. Thomas M'Dermott examined. 
 
 17887. The O'Conoe Don.— Your rent is £20, and 
 your valuation £10 18s. ? — Yes. 
 
 17888. When did you get this land?— Since the 
 others. 
 
 17889. Since the rise? — It is a couple of years. 
 
 17890. Who had it before? — A man namedMannion; 
 he was broke. 
 
 17891. Did you pay anything for coming into the 
 land ? — A deposit — the same as the rest. 
 
 17892. Nothing beyond that?— No, sir. 
 
 17893. Every tenant coming in must pay a deposit 
 of a year's rent ?— Yes ; I had to pay it at all events. 
 
 17894. How long have you been in the land? — 
 
 I had the grazing of it six 
 
 Last November you went in ? — Yes. 
 
 And did you agree yourself to pay £20 for 
 
 Since last November, 
 months. 
 
 17895. 
 
 17896. 
 it?— Yes. 
 
 17897. You are the tenant's son? — Yes. 
 
 17898. Did he let it by proposal, or select you? — • 
 He selected me. 
 
 17899. He fixed the rent himself at that figure? — 
 It was the same as it was before. 
 
 17900. The same as Mannion had to pay? — Yes. 
 
 17901. Is the land all in grass? — It is all in grass 
 at present. 
 
 17902. No tillage?— Except half-an-acre. 
 
 Wi: Thomas 
 M'Dermott. 
 
 Mr. John O'Mally examined. 
 
 -You are also a tenant 
 -Yes ; I have a small 
 
 17903. The O'Conor Don.- 
 on the Castlemines property ?- 
 property there. 
 
 17904. You don't reside on it?— No. 
 What is your rent 1 — My rent is £48. 
 When did you take the farm ?- -About 
 
 17905 
 17906. 
 
 1859. 
 17907. 
 
 the farm. 
 
 Did you take it by proposal ? — Yes ; I took 
 It was after being given up by a tenant 
 who was not able to keep it, and the land was in a 
 wretched state. Some time afterwards the landlord 
 said he should get some little spots on the farm 
 planted. I said of course I had no objection, he 
 should make any improvement he thought proper to 
 it ; and then after the planting was done I proposed 
 to the agent that I should be allowed for the planting, 
 and I got a notice to quit Therefore I left that 
 quiet, but some time after I asked again to be allowed 
 for it, and I got another notice to quit, and I was told 
 I should either surrender or give £4 more for it. It 
 was just at a time I could not conveniently give up 
 the farm. 
 
 17908. When was that ? — Twelve or eighteen 
 months ago. 
 
 17909. The £4 was put upon you? — Yes. 
 
 17910. How much land was taken for the planting ? 
 — An acre and a half. 
 
 17911. Did the planting serve the farm in any way ? 
 — No. 
 
 17912. It did not give shelter ? — No; it was some 
 whim of the landlord. He wished to make some little 
 round planting. I would set no value upon it. 
 
 17913. You got no allowance for it? — Not the 
 slightest. I always thought I was very badly treated. 
 
 17914. Was there any deposit required from you? 
 — I believe the tenant before me had to pay a de- 
 posit ; but as he wore the land out to its utmost ex- 
 tent, there was no deposit asked of me. 
 
 17915. Was the rent you paid the same as he paid ? 
 — I could not say. 
 
 17916. Your original rent was fixed by your own 
 proposal? — Yes; but it was raised since. Then it 
 was not convenient to me to give up the land, or I 
 would have preferred doing that. It is worth, at 
 least, half as much more now as when I took it. 
 
 17917. Mr. Shaw. — An acre and a half was taken 
 off, and the rent was raised ? — Yes. I got two notices 
 to quit. 
 
 17918. That is what you complain of? — Yes, and I 
 complain of it bitterly. 
 
 17919. But if you had refused to pay the increased 
 rent you would have had to be paid for improvements ? 
 — If I had thought that I would never have submitted 
 to the rise. 
 
 17920. When was the notice to quit served? — I 
 think abovit two years ago. 
 
 17921. Aren't you aware that under the Land Act 
 you would be entitled to compensation for your im- 
 provements ?— I believed that it was only small tenants 
 living upon their farms, but I did not think living 
 elsewhere I would be entitled to compensation. 
 
 17922. You are entitled to claim for your improve- 
 ments ?— I was not aware of that. 
 
 Me. JoJ.a 
 O'MaUy. 
 
 Mr. John Wabd examined. 
 
 17923. The O'Conor Don.— You pay £5 rent?— 
 Yes. When I got that land after my father's death 
 I had five acres. He has taken off two acres. There 
 were five acres in the holding before that, and he took 
 the best of it from me, and charged me £3 lis. from 
 that to this for it. The whole thing was in the 
 be<'inning £3 for five acres, and he took two of the 
 best acres. 
 
 17924. Mr. Shaw. — What did he do with the two? 
 — He gave them to another tenant. 
 
 17925. And made him pay for it ever since? — Yes, 
 
 he made him pay for it ever since. He put 10s. of a 
 rise on me along with that. 
 
 17926. iTou are there still ?— I am. 
 
 17927. That happened on the expiration of the 
 lease ? — I had no lease ; but when my father died and 
 I lianded the rent, in place of giving me a receipt he 
 handed me a notice to quit I came then, of course 
 and was glad to got my head in any place. The con- 
 ditions he put on me, and I was glad to get it even 
 then, were that I should give £3 lis. for three acres 
 less by twenty-five perches. I am paying that for 
 twenty-three years. 
 
 4E 
 
 Mr. Jolin 
 Ward. 
 
rict. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Pat 
 Madden. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Tarrell. 
 
 Mr. Pat 
 FarrelL 
 
 678 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Pat Madden examined. 
 My rent was 17s. M. an acre, and now I am paying 32s. 
 
 Ir. John Farrell examined. 
 
 Between 1846 and 1847 my father took land from 
 the landlord before Mr. Goodall got it, and he was to 
 pay ten guineas, and it was raised from ten guineas 
 to £12 10s., and twenty-four years ago he raised it to 
 £16, and charged us a deposit. 
 
 17928. Mr. Shaw. — You have been paying that 
 ever since ? — Yes. 
 
 17929. You have no other land? — No; no bog or 
 anything else, but all dry upland. 
 
 Mr. Pat Farrell examined. 
 
 17930. Mr. Shaw. — You complain of the same 
 thing? — I do. About nineteen years ago the lease 
 was out, and he raised my rent from £2 15s. to £8. 
 
 17931. Your valuation is how muchl — £5 15s. 
 
 17932. Did you erect all the buildings upon it 
 yourself % — My father-in-law did it. 
 
 17933. He made all the improvements? — Yes; he 
 reclaimed a wUd bog. 
 
 17934. The landlord did nothing ?— No. There 
 would be three or four feet of water on it, hut we 
 put sewers in it and drained it away. 
 
 Mrs. Farrell. 
 
 Mrs. Farrell examined. 
 
 17935. The O'Conor Don. — What is your husband's 
 name ? — Edward. I was put out in April last. 
 
 17936. For non-payment ? — Yes, and I had ten 
 guineas paid, and I was put out for ten guineas. 
 There was only ten guineas due and I was put out for 
 it. So I am tossed about going to gaol since. 
 
 17937. How much was the rent ?— £8 when I 
 commenced. 
 
 17938. You owed a year's rent? — Yes. 
 
 17939. And you were ejected? — Yes. 
 
 17940. Then the landlord gave you back the £10 
 deposit ? — Yes. 
 
 17941. He had a year's rent in his hands ? — Yes. 
 
 17942. He gave it back after ejecting you? — Yes. 
 
 17943. Did the barrister know that ?— No, he did 
 not Imow it was given back. 
 
 17944. Did he know it was in the landlord's 
 hands ? — Yes, but I had no acknowledgment of it. 
 
 17945. Hadn't you- six months to redeem? — Yes 
 
 17946. Why could you not redeem at once?— I 
 paid ten g-uineas. I got the decree on the 9tli 
 October, and on the 9th December I paid £10 10«., 
 and I was not able to meet him with the rest 
 
 17947. How much did you owe him ? — £21. 
 
 17948. That is two years' rent? — Yes. 
 
 17949. Where is your husband? — In England. 
 
 17950. Is he still there?— Yes. 
 
 17951. Could he not help you to pay the balance? 
 — No. I slept out for seven nights with my seven 
 children, and then I returned again into the house, 
 and I went to the workhouse, and was put out I 
 was jjut into gaol three times for taking the house 
 
 Mr. Pat 
 
 Farrell. 
 
 Mr. Pat Farrell recalled. 
 
 17952. Mr. Shaw. — You say she slept out in the 
 open air. Would none of the neighbours take her in ? 
 — She was shy to trouble them. There were only 
 two or three holdings there, and if they did that the 
 landlord might come down upon them. 
 
 17953. She got into debt, and Avas worn out 
 regularly ? — Yes. 
 
 17954. If she ffot a reduction in the rent would 
 
 she be able to keep the place ? — She would. Two of 
 the childi'en went to America, and one is in England 
 
 17955. Are they grown up ? — The eldest is 23, and 
 she is in America, and the second eldest is in America, 
 and the. little boy of 19 is in England. 
 
 17956. The land is no use unless you are able to 
 work it, and she has no one ? — No. 
 
 Mrs. Brennan. 
 
 Mrs. Bkennan, widow, examined. 
 
 17957. The O'Conor Don.— What rent do you pay ? 
 — I am paying £3 a year rent, and I am about to be 
 turned out. I have four children. 
 
 17958. How much rent do you owe? — Two years 
 rent. 
 
 17959. You could not make up one year's rent? — 
 No. 
 
 17900. Has the landlord anything in his hands of 
 yours ? — Yes, he has three pounds in his pocket. 
 
 17961. Had you any potatoes in the ground? — 
 No, I had no potatoes. 
 
 17962. How many acres have you? — I have five 
 roods. 
 
 17963. What had you in the land this year ? — I got 
 two cwt. of potatoes out of the workhouse ; but they 
 did not grow. 
 
 17964. You had no manure ? — No. 
 
 Mr. Pat Kelly. 
 
 Mr. Pat Kelly examined. 
 
 17965. Mr. Siiaw. — You are one of the tenants on 
 Holly well ?— Yes. Mr. Goodall is my landlord. I 
 was forced to build a barn and piggery. The bit of 
 land I got was very bad. I got married, and got a 
 place from Charles Blake, of an acre and a half. 
 
 When ho came in he charged me £5, and now my 
 rent is £7. I was forced to build and repair my 
 house, and I have a good house and forge now, and 
 it was no rise. Only for Mr. Smith I would not be in 
 it for fifteen vcars. 11:- is kind, and treated me well. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 579 
 
 Mr. James Kileoe examined. 
 
 Oat. 21, 1880. 
 
 17966. The O'Conor Don.— You live near Castle- 
 coote ? — Yes. 
 
 17967. You are a tenant on the property of Mr. 
 Lecky ? — Yes. 
 
 17968. What complaint have you to make of Mr. 
 Lecky's treatment of his tenants 1 — I have a list 
 (produced) of their complaiats. 
 
 17969. This is a table showing the Ordnance valua- 
 tion, the former rent, the present rent, and the 
 increase, on all the holdings on the estate ?-— Yes. 
 
 17970. You know all these yourself?—! do. 
 
 17971. What is your present rent?— £42 7s. M., 
 but since Sir George Young was round he has taken 
 off £10 2>s. ^d. There is the last receipt, up to May, 
 1880. - 
 
 17972. Has he permanently reduced your rent by . 
 that amount ? — That receipt seems to have it perma- 
 nently reduced. 
 
 17973. Is it not an allowance? — It seems to be the 
 permanent rent. 
 
 17974. Whoistheagent?— Mr. Hugh Smith. He 
 lives in Coleraine, and Mr. Lecky lives there also, 
 
 17975. Did you send him the full rent 1 — I served 
 him with a notice of surrender this time twelve 
 months, as I could not hold at the rent he was 
 charging, and I went down in January to try and 
 make some arrangement before May, and I had a 
 conversation with him there, and he told mp that 
 Griffith told him at the time they gave them the 
 Ulster custom in Derry that 25 per cent, over 
 Griffith's valuation would be a fair rent. •'' If you 
 call it fair sir, it is certainly a great difference to be 
 charging me 75." 
 
 17976. Your rent was 75 per cent, over the valua- 
 tion ? — ^Yes, at that time. 
 
 17977. Mr. Shaw. — When were the advances 
 made ? — In 1856. 
 
 17978. And not sLuce ? — No. 
 
 17979. How much was put on the holding ? — - 
 The former rent was £27 18s. 9d 
 
 17980. And he advanced it to £42 17s. 9d ?— 
 Yes. He put 17s. 6d an acre on it at one slap, I 
 did my best to improve the land, and he was as good 
 a landlord as we had in the county previous to that 
 rise. 
 
 17981. Did he purchase the land ? — He has it 
 about 80 years. It is part of the Mitchell property. 
 He was a young lad when it was bought, and he is 
 nearly eighty years of age now. 
 
 17982. Did he make a reduction in the same pro- 
 portion to all the other tenants? — No, sir. 
 
 17983. Are you the only one that got it? — Yes. 
 He gave the other tenants 10 per cent, on the May 
 gale, 1879, and 15 per cent, on November gale, 1879, 
 this is what Mr. Lecky calls 25 per cent, on the 
 year's rent, and he said, " I told my agent to give 
 you 25 per cent.," for which I thanked him, and said, 
 that was as much as any landlord had done. " Oh," 
 said the agent, "didn't you authorize me to give 10 
 per cent, on one half year's rent, and 15 per cent, on 
 the other, provided they paid their rent up to the day; 
 and that was not 25 per cent., only 12^." Having ex- 
 pressed satisfection with the Ulster tenant-right, Mr. 
 Lecky said he was one of the valuators, and there was 
 not a siagle appeal against them. I said — ■' You and 
 the o-entlemen who were with you here must have 
 valued the land conscientiously, otherwise the people 
 would not be in the state they are in now, for every 
 tenant seems to be comfortable and industrious." 
 This was in the tenant-right country in the Nortli. 
 It was a comfort to see it. Then he said he would 
 consider about the 25 per cent. I wrote to him 
 on the 17th April to know his consideration — 
 what he was going to do with regard to myself, and 
 hs never answered, but he sent up his agent on the 
 5 th May, and the agent spoke to me about the rent. 
 
 I said— "I wUl not take 15 per cent., didn't the land- o^^e!'"''' 
 lord tell you in my presence that 25 per cent, over 
 Griffith's valuation was a fair rent, and he told you 
 also to give 25 per cent, to the tenants as an allow- 
 ance. I will accept one or other, and I will not pay 
 you unless you take that from me." He would not, 
 and I sent him a cheque for the amount of the rent. 
 _ 17984. That is 25 per cent, over Griffith's valua- 
 tion ? — Yes. 
 
 17985. And he has taken that apparently for his 
 rent?— Yes. I sent him a cheque on the 17th May, 
 saying if he did not accept it as a fair year's rent to 
 send me back the cheque. He took the cheque, but 
 he did not make use of it until July, He did not 
 send me a receipt until that date, when I wrote a letter 
 on the matter. I wrote saying — " I am sure you 
 forgot to send me a receipt," and he wrote saying it 
 had escaped his memory, and he now sent me a receipt 
 for my rent. 
 
 17986. He yielded to that?— Yes; but he only 
 allowed the other tenants 15 per cent. 
 
 17987. Are they paying as high in proportion as 
 you are ? — Yes. I want to speak of the case of my 
 uncle, George Clarke, who is eighty-two years of age. 
 In 1856 the landlord came to see his property, and he 
 sent xip his brother and Mr. Smith. They walked the 
 land and saw what it was — that it was greatly im- 
 proved, and my own the same way — and what was the 
 result? He put on 17s. 6 A upon me for it. It is 
 very light subsoil. I have improved it greatly, and 
 built upon it. My uncle has reclaimed about ten 
 acres which were covered with furze when he got it. 
 He has built houses that could not have cost less than 
 £500 ; it is a dwelling-house of two stories high, with 
 a barn and a straw house and carhouse. The houses are 
 slated He has a shed that would contain forty head 
 of cattle, slated also. He built a cowhouse that he 
 can put ten head of cattle in, and slated it. 
 
 17988. All at his own expense ? — Every bit of it. 
 
 17989. Has he a lease? — No lease. 
 
 17990. All that was done before the increase? — 
 Yes ; all before the increase, and when the landlord 
 saw all this improvement, I suppose he took advantage 
 of it. My uncle was seventy years of age then, and 
 he is now eighty-two, and his son (William Clarke) 
 died leaving four children, the eldest of them fourteen 
 years of age, and the youngest eight. His farm was 
 in thi landlord's possession, and how are these children 
 to live on land that has such a rent as that on it. It 
 grieves me to think of it. [Witness began to cry, and 
 was unable to proceed for some time,] The rent is 
 £83 and the valuation is £43. There are thirty-four 
 acres of land on William Clarke's farm, and how many 
 on the old man's I can't exactly tell. 
 
 17991. How was William Clarke's rent fixed ? — It 
 was by agreement. 
 
 17992. He offered to pay that money? — Yes. 
 
 17993. When did he get it?— lii 1856. 
 
 17994. At the same time as the rise was put on all 
 the lands ? — Yes ; he got it immediately before that. 
 There is no house built upon the new land William 
 Clarke got. and he charged him this big rent upon 
 the whole. 
 
 17995. They are practically one farm? — Now they 
 are, and what is the greatest thing we complain of is to 
 see all that money laid out, and an old man, eighty- 
 two years of age, leaving these little children, who 
 cannot live upon the land. 
 
 17996. Mr. Shaw. — The rent would be high enough 
 taking in all the improvements ? — Yes. The former 
 rent would be a fair rent, 
 
 17997. He is charging for the improvements ? — Yes, 
 instead of encouraging the man ; he cannot leave his 
 money in the place, and he will get nothing for it. 
 The landlord told me, can't he sell it, but it is double 
 its vakie, and no one will take it. 
 
 17998. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think it would 
 
 4E2 
 
580 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION 1880. 
 
 Oct. 21, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Kilroe. 
 
 be fail' at twenty-five per cent, over Griffith's 
 valuation 1 — I could not honestly complain of it at 
 that. 
 
 17999. You would be satisfied with the same 
 reduction as he has made in your case ? — Yes, I would 
 bo satisfied. There are a great many people have 
 !,reat cause to complain, and it is the great cause of all 
 the disturbance there has been. 
 
 18000. Mr. Shaw.— Why don't they try to get it 
 reduced as you did ? — I had to pay the rent up to the 
 very day in order to get the reduction. If he got the 
 land for nothing my uncle would not be able to pay 
 up to the last day that way. 
 
 18001. The O'CoNOR Don.— Isn't this land along 
 the river Suck ? — Yes. 
 
 18002. Were any of these tenant's lands taken for 
 the drainage ? — Yes, some of them ; and there is no 
 great real rise on them. They were all paid compen- 
 sation by the drainage board for their weir and for 
 the piece of land taken from them. 
 
 18003. At what rate were they paid for the land 1 
 — I could not tell exactly, for I don't think it was ever 
 measured, but my piece was measured. 
 
 18004. Did you lose any land ?— Yes, I did. Mrs. 
 Blakeney is the landlady, and Mr. Smith is agent. 
 About half an acre and half a rood was taken off me, 
 and there was £39 paid for it. 
 
 18005. You don't know the annual value that was 
 put upon it 1 — No. I was paying 40s, an acre. It 
 was a piece running beside the river, but it was never 
 flooded although the river runs ojDposite it, in conse- 
 quence of the great fall at Castlecoote. There was 
 a rapid fall down to Kenny's weir, and the water 
 never came upon my land. 
 
 18006. But the lalad was wanted as a spoil bank 
 by the drainage board ? — Yes. The whole plot will 
 be taken from me. There are about 2^a. of land in 
 it. Mr. Lynam told me to get it measured. There is 
 an agreement written by the secretary that I was to be 
 paid the same proportion for the remainder of the plot 
 if it was required. 
 
 18007. Were the other tenants paid at the same 
 rate as you ? — Yes. 
 
 18008. — You don't know how much it was an acre 1 
 — I do not. 
 
 18009. Have all the tenants paid their rent this 
 last year? — 1 think there is a year's rent due on them all. 
 
 18010. Is Mr. Lecky the only landlord in that 
 district of whom complaints are made 1 — There is Mr. 
 O'Eorke, but I don't see any of the tenants here. 
 
 1801 1. Do you know anything about them yourself. ■? 
 
 a tenant there myself in Captain 
 
 — Yes. I was 
 Mitchell's time. 
 
 18012. How long ago is that 1 — About twenty 
 years ago. Here is the notice to quit served on 
 me. I got that farm of land for two years at 16s. 
 an acre, and when I had it about half a year, there 
 was a piece of bottom he wished me to take 
 and I said I would not take it at all, and he got 
 angry with me, and my uncle said it was better 
 be on terms with the landlord and take the piece of 
 bottom, and I took it half a year after I got the other 
 farm, and I was putting manure from Castlecoote to 
 Lisnavilla, two miles ofi", for two years, and I had as 
 fine a crop of turnips as ever you saw, and I had 
 potatoes after and clover two feet high, and he handed 
 me a notice to quit when I paid the first half-year's 
 rent for the bottoms, and I asked him what was that 
 for, and he said, T am going to raise the rent on all 
 the tenants, and I am going to raise it on you. "It 
 can't be possible the land I got from you two years 
 ago you are going to rise now 1 " " Oh, I am," he 
 said. I went up to settle the rent in October, and 
 two days after I settled the rent I got this notice to 
 quit. T did not go up until May, and he had the land 
 which he gave at 10s. an acre doubled, and put 4s. on 
 the upland. That was after I had put manure on it 
 for two years, and the same rise is on it from that day 
 to this. 
 
 18013. It has not b.een raised since 18571— No. 
 He advanced it at that time, and they all complauied 
 of it. I gave it up, and he divided mine ahiongst the 
 tenants. 
 
 18014. At the same rent as he was charging you! 
 — Yes ; and if he did not rise it since I am sure it is 
 not less — it was never lowered, if it is not raised 
 It is a dangerous thing to have a landlord like Mr. 
 Lecky next a landlord like Sir Charles Coote. 
 
 1801P. Mr. Shaw. — They are all satisfied with Sir 
 Charles Coote ? — Every one. 
 
 18010. And they would all be satisfied with the 
 land at the Ordnance valuation, and they are paying 
 their rents well ? — I think Mr. Holmes will get every 
 farthing due belonging to Captain Gofi" to Sir Charles 
 Coote's heir. Lord Crofton, and Mr. CaulfieliJ. There 
 is no dissatisfaction at all in these cases. 
 
 18017. The O'Conoe Don. — Has he made no abate- 
 ment ? — He has given them 4s. last year, and 1 don't 
 know what he is going to give tliis year. 
 
 18018. And they all paid last year 1 — All that were 
 able. Any one Mr. Holmes has to deal with are quite 
 satisfied. 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Dowling. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Dowling examined. 
 
 18019. The O'CoNOE Don.— You live at Kil- 
 ruskey ?— Yes. 
 
 18020. That is about four miles from Roscommon ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 18021. Mrs. Digby, of Drumdafi", is your landlady ■? 
 —Yes. 
 
 18022. You have no complaints to make of her? — 
 Decidedly not. 
 
 18023. She allows free sale to the tenants? — It is 
 usual on the property. 
 
 18024. And the tenants are generally satisfied with 
 their landlady 1 — They are. Although there is some 
 of the land bad, still the rental of the property is only 
 £\Q over the valuation. 
 
 18025. Do you know anything about the neigh- 
 bouring townland of Cooltigue 1 — Yes. 
 
 18026. That is Mr. Goodall's property ?— Yes. 
 
 18027. And the agent is Mr. Allen •?— Yes. I think 
 the valuation is £268 14s., and the rent of the pro- 
 perty is £431 10s. 
 
 18028. When was the rent altered ?— The time Mr. 
 Goodall purchased it— something about fifteen or six- 
 teen years ago. 
 
 1S029. Who was the former owner ?— Mr. 
 
 Blakeney. The old rent was £308 12s. in Mr 
 Blakeney's time. 
 
 18030. Mr. Shaw. — The tenants have been able to 
 make no improvements ? — No ; many of them are in a 
 state of beggary. I am a member of the Relief Com- 
 mittee, and they are getting relief for the last eight 
 months. 
 
 18031. That is chiefly owing to the bad times?— 
 Yes ; and the high rents. There is £408 deposit that 
 the tenants are getting no credit for. 
 
 18032. He adopted this system of deposit with all 
 the tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 18033. How were they going on before the bad 
 times ? — They were in a better state. 
 
 18034. The O'Conoe Don.— You say that from 
 1855 down to 1866 the tenants were forced by threat 
 of eviction to submit to high rents ? — That is right 
 
 18035. You have a list of the tenants ?— Yes, 
 (List produced. ) 
 
 18036. Do you undertake that this list is correct? 
 —Yes, 
 
 18037. These are HoUywell tenants ?— Yes. 
 
 18038. We have had them here ourselves ?— Yes, I 
 know you had. Of Mr. Hudson, of Fairmount, I 
 would like to say something. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 581 
 
 18059. Where does he live? — On the property at 
 present. 
 
 18060. Have the rents been raised there 1 — Doubled 
 within six yearSi 
 
 18061. Within the last six years ?— £300 and odd 
 pounds was the rent six or seven years ago. It be- 
 longed to Mi"s. Lyster, and now the rent is £600 and 
 odd. 
 
 18062. You know that of your own knowledge ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 18063. Are the tenants able to get on ? — They are 
 in a state of beggary. There were three ejectments 
 served at last sessions. 
 
 18064. They are small tenants'! — Middling fair, 
 twelve or fourteen acres. It is iour and a half miles 
 from town. 
 
 18065. What is the rent per acre? — There is a 
 great deal of moor and mountain on it. 
 
 18066. Waste land? — Yes; between bog and 
 mountain and all it cannot be less than 28s. an acre. 
 
 18067. Counting everything ? — Yes. 
 
 18068. What is the valuation of that?— I think it 
 is very little over the old rent. 
 
 18069. Was the rent increased on the dropping of 
 a lease ? — No ; there was no lease. It was property 
 that belonged to Mrs. Mills. She married Mr. Lyster, 
 and when she died it fell into Mr. Hudson's hands, 
 and when he got it he doubled the rents. 
 
 18070. Have they paid that rent?— No. 
 
 18071. Did they pay it any number of years? — 
 They objected to it and he brought them to law, 
 and I suppose there is a great deal due at present. 
 
 18072. Mr. Shaw. — They have been paying it for 
 some j'sars ? — Yes; some paid it, but they are falling 
 back. 
 
 18073. And you think the rent is excessive? — I am 
 sui-e it is. There is one widow woman and there is 
 an eviction against her j her rent sometime ago was 
 £12, now it is £18. 
 
 18074. Did she pay the rent? — She paid it for a 
 few years. I think it was a year and a half's rent that 
 was due. 
 
 18075. Were there any evictions? — There were 
 three, but none of them are carried out. They were 
 threatened, and there was an indignation meeting there 
 some time ago ; the day the Sheriff was coming, and 
 he did not come. 
 
 18076. And there were decrees taken out? — Yes; 
 in three cases. 
 
 18077. They had pretty good crops this year ? — No, 
 sir, the potato crop is very bad. I had men digging 
 potatoes yesterday and they were hardly worth digging. 
 They were small and black. I got Champions from 
 Mr Hynes and they were not worth the money. 
 
 18078. The O'Coijor Don.— Did you get any 
 Champions from the Union ? — No sir. 
 
 18079. You are above the valuation? — I am. I 
 did not apply for them. There is another townland I 
 wish to mention, but I would not wish the landlord's 
 name to be given. The land was sold in the Enciim- 
 bered Estates Court 23 or 24 years ago, and it was 
 piirchased by the father of the present owner. The 
 rental was raised immediately before the sale to £78 
 16s. lOd., and after purchase the rental was raised to 
 £130 lis. Od. That is 65 per cent, beyond the old 
 rent. 
 
 18080. When was that increase put upon it?— A 
 year or two after he bought it. One man whose 
 valuation is £18 pays £33 10s. rent. His old rent 
 was £19, and the valuation of the whole townland is 
 £87 15s. 
 
 18081. What sort of land is it ? — Some of it is very 
 good — more of it is mountain. 
 
 18082. Have the tenants been paying these rents 
 since the time it was raised ? — They have, up to the 
 last two years. They were not able to pay, and they 
 are not able to pay for what they eat, which is worse. 
 I have a right to know that. 
 
 18083. Mr. Shaw. — You are in business? — I am. 
 
 18084. The O'Conoe Don.— Are they chiefly small 
 tenants? — They are not so very small — £33, £10, £8, 
 and so on. 
 
 18085. Are they all resident tenants? — They 
 are. 
 
 18086. And have nothing else to depend upon? — 
 Nothing in the world but this land, not a single half- 
 penny. 
 
 18087. Have they any waste land attached to their 
 holdings ? — Not a perch ; every inch of it is measured. 
 
 18088. Was there any abatement made last year ? — 
 I think there was 4s in the pound in one half year's 
 rent, but in Mr Goodall's property not a penny. 
 
 18089. Were there any ejectments or evictions ? — 
 There were ejectments against all, but not evictions. 
 
 18090. Did they settle ?— They did— they settled. 
 
 18091. Was this a case that appeared in the public 
 papers ? — It was ; it was one of the hardest in the whole 
 country. 
 
 18092. It was the case in which the priest. Father 
 O'Connor, interfered ? — Yes, it was ; and he gave me 
 a list which was prepared for him at the time. 
 
 18093. The rents and the valviations cannot be dis 
 puted ? — No. These are real facts. 
 
 18094. Do you know what was the arrangement 
 come to by the tenants — was there any permanent re- 
 duction made ? — Not a penny. They got 4s. in the 
 pound abatement. 
 
 18095. Did they pay upon that? — J think some 
 paid half a year's rent with costs. That was as rduch 
 as the best of them were able to pay. 
 
 18096. Were the costs much? — I think they 
 charged them about 50s. in dach case. 
 
 Oct. 21, isso. 
 
 Mr. Joseph 
 Duwling. 
 
 Mr. Denis O'Brien examined. 
 
 18097. The O'Conor Don. — You are a tenant on 
 Mr. Dunne's property ? — Yes. 
 
 18098. Where is that? — At Rockfield, three miles 
 from the town. I hold forty-seven acres, under lease 
 made about sixteen or eighteen years ago, for a life or 
 twenty- one years. 
 
 18099. Did you previously hold under lease? — I 
 succeeded my father, who obtained a lease under the 
 title of Eichard Malone, landlord, in 1820. 
 
 18100. He lived in the county Westmeath ? — Yes. 
 
 18101. Then, on the expiration of the lease of 1820, 
 you took out a new lease ? — It was not really so. Be- 
 fore the lease expired, I had to take out a new lease ; 
 the estate was in Chancery, and Mr. Edward M. Dunne, 
 the receiver, was receiving rents for nine years before 
 the lands were sold. Then his brother Charles became 
 the purchaser. The rent then paid to the landlord 
 was £12 2s. id. Then, after the purchase, he refused 
 that rent, and said, unless J paid him £50, he would 
 not take any. He said the life in the lease was ex- 
 pired, of a brother of mine who went to America. 
 
 There was a man in this town, still living, who hap- 
 pened to be out in America two years before, and, 
 when the land was going to be sold, he was able to 
 inform me he was speaking to my brother in America, 
 and that he was living there in health. 
 
 18102. He was speaking to your brother? — Yes? 
 — He is George Fannon, a very respectable merchant 
 in this town. That very man was able to make an 
 affidavit before a master extraordinary ; and I sent it 
 to Dublin, and it was tried there two or three times, 
 and the lease could not be broken. However, he did 
 not care for that ; and he said, if I did not do that, he 
 would not take the rent from me, and he said he could 
 get a man for half-a-crown to swear the life was dead. 
 '' But, at the same time, although I am going to charge 
 you this rent, I will give you a place equally valu- 
 able." I had a mill on it, and used to bruise corn 
 for the country. He said he would improve the 
 place in such a way as tliat it would be equal to the 
 rise ; that 1 had good water power ; that he would be 
 taking no rent ; that he , would be giving me money 
 
 Mr. Denis 
 O'Brien. 
 
582 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1880, 
 
 Mr. Denis 
 O'Brien. 
 
 instead of taking it from me. He refused any rent 
 from me at the time, and I went to work at that ; it 
 was considered better than going to law. I sent to 
 Galway, where there was an eminent millwright, to 
 give estimates how I would carry on the improvements 
 at the place, and instead of the old works, I renewed 
 them with permanent works with metal wheels, and 
 threw out the old wooden wheels ; I expended at least 
 £200. In some short time after, when he saw I was 
 going on in this way, he called on me for the rent. 
 
 18103. For £50 ?— Yes, and I paidhini all through 
 since. 
 
 18104. Did he give you a new lease — Yes ; he sent 
 me a lease of surrender, and, in the course of some 
 time, because I was not inclined to consent, he gave a 
 lease. I could not depend on him, fearing he would 
 throw me out entirely. I said: "I often heard per- 
 sons say it was an extraordinary thing to double the 
 rent, but this is over four times the rent ■" and I 
 thought it was dangerous, after expending my money, 
 not to get a lease, lest he would take advantage of my 
 not having title. I did that, not having title. I was 
 well known in this town to have very good capital ; 
 but the times got bad for the trade I was at. Foreign 
 grain came in, and the trade in the mills failed, and I 
 was greatly disappointed and grieved by it. 
 
 18105. The mill did not tui-n out the same value as 
 it was 1 — No, it did not become one-tenth of the value 
 that it was. 
 
 18106. Are you paying the same rent up to the 
 present 1 — I am, but I am. in debt. 
 
 18107. Mr. Shaw.— What is the length of the 
 lease ? — A life or twenty-one years. 
 
 18108. Is the life young ? — The life is a son of mine, 
 named Thomas O'Brien, still living. 
 
 18109. Did you take any other lands besides? — I 
 did. At the time Mr. Dunne was receiver, on the 
 sale of the property, I took the holding from a man 
 named Owen Egan. He became embarrassed and 
 sold his title in the holding, and at a loss. I wrote 
 to the receiver to know if he had no objection to my 
 taking Egan's place. He wrote back saying he had 
 not, provided I paid the three half-years' rent. I 
 paid Mr. Dunne three half-years' rent, and I paid him 
 the running gale — that was four half-years' rent — and 
 I jjaid Egan £35 for his interest. 
 
 18110. How many acres were there? — Ten acres 
 or thereabouts. 
 
 18111. In the course of four or five years he took 
 this from you? — Yes. Egan owed poor rate and 
 county cess, and I paid all that was due on the land, 
 and I had manured and prepared the land, and done 
 a good deal to it. When he became purchaser he 
 told me also that Michael Egan, nephew of this Egan 
 I took the land from, had enlisted in the army some 
 years before that. I never heard of his death, but he 
 said I should give up the land, and he gave it to 
 another favoured man. 
 
 18112. Why did you give it up if you had a lease 
 of it ? — I could not know whether the man was dead 
 or alive, he enlisted. T gave up the farm, and he 
 
 not 
 
 gave me m return a piece of land — about twenty-six 
 acres — that belonged to a. man named Dwyer, from 
 Tuam, that he put out of the place. He sold Dwyer's 
 crop, and did not give him a sheaf of it for his own 
 use. It was a very poor place, and I am in the habit 
 of sowing con-acre, but this man's they told me was not 
 worth 2s. 6c?. an acre. There were three or four acres 
 of one end bad waste land, and he surveyed the whole 
 land, and charged equally for good and bad. He 
 brought in all good and bad at £1 an acre of land 
 that used not to be charged in the former lease at 
 all, and there were six acres in the old 
 measured or charged but he measiu-ed it aU. 
 
 18113. When was that done ? — When he purchased 
 the lands. 
 
 18114. When did he purchase? — Twenty-five years 
 ago, I think. I did not take the lease until I was 
 afraid he would take me short after expending my 
 money, thinking that the times would not turn so 
 bad, and I would be able to pay sooner than be diiven 
 out. I did not expect any remuneration from Mm all 
 the time, and instead of what he promised he never 
 gave me a shilling or anything up to this day. His 
 words were, "It is not money I will be taking from 
 you. I will make your place worth the rent I am ovet- 
 charging you." That is he thought that by making 
 improvements in the construction of the place lie 
 would make it equal to the rent, but he did notbing 
 of the kind. He never gave me a halfpenny. 
 
 18115. You did everything yourself? — Yes. 
 
 18116. And got no allowance? — No. I buUt a 
 dwelling-house, forty feet or forty- five feet, with four- 
 teen feet clear inside, and I built it all, and it cost 
 me, at least, over £100. I built kilns also, and threw 
 down old ones, and put in iron beams where the corn 
 is dried instead of wooden beams. They used to be 
 drying corn on straw beds, but now I do it on a more 
 expensive scale. I put in iron beams and got some 
 wire, which cost me, at any rate, a year's rent for the 
 two kilns. I did everything in fact that would enable 
 me to pay the rent. I did not like to leave the old 
 place. 
 
 18117. With regard to the second farm you took, 
 you did not get a lease of that also ? — Yes ; it is 
 coupled with the mill holding. 
 
 18118. It is all in one lease? — Yes. The chief 
 part of the rent is upion the mill. 
 
 18119. And not on the land? — The chief part is 
 on the mill. The total rent is £76 5s. lOrf. I pay 
 half-yearly, £38 2s. lid. 
 
 18120. If you had not, taken out a lease of the' 
 mill I suppose you would have given it up under 
 present circumstances ? — It would have been better to 
 me perhaps than £1,000, for I am paying from that 
 to this for the mill. Tlie old rent would be sufficient 
 if I had to keejj the place in repair, still there was no 
 earning. The times changed, people depended on 
 the foreign grain, and they used to be obliged to sell 
 their corn, and buy much cheaper food, that was what 
 they thought most to their advantage. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Doorley, 
 
 Mr. John Doorley examined. 
 
 18121. Mr. Shaw.— You live near O'Brien?— Yes, 
 next door to him. My former rent was £14 Is. Id. 
 
 18122. How long ago is that? — At the tiaie the 
 land was purchased, twenty-five years ago, and my 
 present rent is £19 lis. 2d. 
 
 18123. That was raised after the purchase? — Ex- 
 actly. 
 
 18124. At one time? — Yes at one time. 
 
 18125. How many acres have you? — 39 acres, 3 
 roods, 3 perches. 
 
 18126. Is the land better quality or worse than Mr. 
 O'Brien's?— There is part of it not worth sixpence an 
 acre. 
 
 18127. Is there half of it good land?— About half 
 
 of it. I am paying £1 an acre for what is not worth 
 sixpence an acre. 
 
 18128. You are paying £1 an acre all roundM 
 am, and part of it is not worth sixpence. 
 
 18129. Is it far from town ? — It is four mUes out 
 
 18130. You think the rent excessive ? — I do. 
 
 18131. You have been doing all the improvements 
 yourself? — Yes. 
 
 18132. The landlord never allowed you anything? 
 — Never one farthing. 
 
 18133. The O'Conor Don.— Are there many ten- 
 ants on the estate ? — -There are. 
 
 18134. Are they all paying at the same rate ? —Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 583 
 
 There are two townlands — Rockfield and Clooiieen- 
 bawn — that are not so bad as we are. 
 
 18135. Mr. Shaw. — Have you paid your rents 
 every year ? — Yes, every year. 
 
 18136. When did you pay the last rent? — I paid 
 up to May last. There is a running gale. 
 
 18137. You paid the rent alway.s when demanded 
 of you ? — Yes. 
 
 18138. Who is the agent 1 — He is a new agent from 
 Dublin or Bray, I think. 
 
 Denis O'Brien. — I sent half a year's rent to this 
 agent. He is Mr. Henry F. Findlay, Brittas, Queen's 
 County. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Doorley. 
 
 Mr. James Glancy examined. 
 
 18139. The O'Conoe Don. — You are a landowner 
 and magistrate of the county Eoscommon ? — I am. 
 ISMO. You live at Enfield, near Castlerea? — Yes 
 
 18141. You are a large occupier of grazing farms? 
 —Yes. 
 
 18142. How many acres are you altogether con- 
 nected with? — 2,500 Irish acres. 
 
 18143. That includes your property as well as your 
 farms ? — Yes ; part of it is let to tenants, about 400 
 acres is let to tenants, the rest is in my own hands. 
 
 18144. Have the tenants a right to sell their inter- 
 est in their holdings in your district? — Yes. 
 
 18145. Do you allow it ?— I do. 
 
 18146. Are the sales increasing or decreasing? — ^ 
 There are very few sales in my neighbourhood. They 
 are rather on the increase. 
 
 18147. What is the average number of years' pur- 
 chase given for the tenants' interest? — About four 
 years' purchase is what T know myself That is what 
 I give myself to tenants going out. 
 
 18148. Do you purchase from the tenants? — Yes, I 
 purchased from two who were going to America. 
 
 18149. You don't aUow them to sell? — Yes, but 
 they were offered that, and I would rather take it 
 myself. I gave them what they were ofiered. 
 
 18150. Mr. Shaw. — They were not going out in 
 distress 1 — No, they were going of their own accord 
 Their friends in America paid their passage. One man 
 had 2-^ and the other 2 acres. 
 
 18151. The O'CoNOR Don. — Do you think the rent 
 is aftected by this custom of sale 1 — No, my experience 
 is that they are nearly the same in my neighbourhood 
 for the last twenty or thirty years. 
 
 18152. You have not altered the rents on your pro- 
 perty? — No. I bought in 1862, and I did not alter 
 the rents since, except in one case. 
 
 18153. You purchased your own property in 1862? 
 — Yes, and I did not make any change in the rental. 
 
 18154. So far as you.r experience goes, you think 
 plenty of the proprietors have acted in the same way? 
 —Yes. 
 
 18155. There has been no raising of rent latterly? 
 —No. 
 
 18156. Are leases common ? — Yes, most of the 
 large grass farms are held on lease. 
 
 18157. What is the usual term? — The term is 
 thirty-one years. I have some leases for my own life 
 and lives ; leases lately were for thirty-one years. 
 
 18158. Since the passing of the Land Act, thirty- 
 one years is the usual term? — Yes. 
 
 18159. Are there many covenants in these leases of 
 •a restrictive character? — No. There are the usual 
 covenants against subletting or assigning without the 
 consent of the landlord. 
 
 18160. Are fines common on granting leases? — 
 Sometimes. I paid one myself to Lord Crofton, but 
 it reduced the rent — the interest was calculated and 
 so much taken off the rent in consideration of the fine 
 given. 
 
 18161. For what term was that lease 1 — During the 
 Duke of Connanght's life. 
 
 18162. Do you think the tenants are anxious to 
 obtain leases? — On my own property they will not 
 take them. 
 
 18163. They think they are better off without them ? 
 — They think they have more claim under the Land 
 Act without a lease. 
 
 18164. Has that feeling been observable more since 
 
 the Land Act ? — They were very anxious to get leases 
 before the Land Act. 
 
 18165. With respect to the tenement valuation, do 
 you think it is a fair standard for rent? — I think it is 
 very uneven. In some places it is quite sufiicient, and 
 in other places it is not enough. 
 
 18166. You don't consider it uniform? — I know 
 myself that land valued at £1 an acre is worth £3, 
 and land valued at the same is not worth more. 
 
 18167. Do you know a case that exemplifies that ? — 
 I do. I know land on my own estate that is valued 
 higher than the best land in the country that is double 
 its value. I know that of my own knowledge, for I 
 applotted the parish in the Ordnance valuation. I had 
 the valuation of every field before me, and I know in 
 applotting it it was not at all a fair valuation, nor 
 anything like it. 
 
 18168. You found some of the best fields lowest 
 valued? — Yes, lower than the bad fields. The highest 
 valuation in Ballintubber is a field of mine, and it is 
 not half as good as other lands in the same neigh- 
 bourhood. 
 
 18169. They have changed since the valuation? — 
 No. They valued the land by digging up the soil, and 
 wheat was the great standard then ; and in my neigh- 
 bourhood good grass land is more valuable. 
 
 18170. The O'Conor Don. — What would you say 
 is the general proportion of i"ents over valuation in 
 your district? — Excluding grass farms, which are 
 peculiar, I think the rents on the large estates are 
 about equal to Griffith's valuation. On large estates 
 where no alteration was made, but in all new lettings 
 they charge 20 to 25 per cent. more. On most of the 
 large estates there are no changes made ; they hold at 
 the old rents, which are about the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 18171. 
 1862?— No, 
 
 18172. Mr. Shaw. — When you took a new lease 
 the rents were changed? — Yes. 
 
 18173. Were they increased generally? — No, they 
 were not. I took a lease from Lady Johnson two 
 years ago, and she let me the land again at the same 
 rent, and it is at the Ordnance valuation. 
 
 18174. The O'Conor Don.— That is for grass land? 
 —Yes. 
 
 18175. And of a very good quality? — Yes; 25s. 
 per Irish acre ; but that is rather exceptional. She 
 wishes to retain her tenants. 
 
 18176. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any other case where 
 you got a new lease ? — No ; all the other leases I got, 
 I think, twenty-five years ago. 
 
 18177. The O'Conor Don. — What improvements 
 are generally made by the landlords ? — Arterial drain- 
 age, and thoroiigh drainage in some cases, and road 
 making. 
 
 18178. Has there been much, done that way by the 
 landlords ? — Yes. 
 
 18179. Have you done anything yourself? — Yes. 
 I got a loan of £1,000 from the Board of Works, and 
 I spent it on some of my tenants' lands, and some part 
 on my own land, and I have been always improving 
 the land, but it is principallj' the land I hold myself. 
 
 18180. Do you make any allowance for building, or 
 give any assistance? — No; they live in the houses 
 they always lived in. I did not make any change 
 since I got them. 
 
 18181. Do you think the Land Act has checked 
 
 Mr. Jame» 
 Glancy. 
 
 Your own rent has not been changed since 
 
584 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Glanc}-. 
 
 improvements by the landlords? — Certainly, by tlie 
 landlords. I know men who used to give the tenants 
 gates, and they are lying there now; they, used to 
 build piers for the gates, and piers that were partly 
 built when the Act was passed are so still ; the tenants 
 would never finish them. 
 
 18182. Although the gates were there ?— Yes. The 
 piers are there and the gates are there still. 
 
 18183. Are the gates there still? — Yes, lying there. 
 The landlords before that always improved more than 
 at present. 
 
 18184. Have the tenant.s been improving much 
 since the Land Act?— I don't see there is much dif- 
 ference. 
 
 1818-5. Have there been any sales to tenants of 
 their holdings'? — There were some large sales. My 
 brother bought, and John Flynn and others bought 
 large places, but none of small tenants. 
 
 18186. Was your brother a tenant? — Yes; he 
 bought by private contract ; he had a lease of the land, 
 and he purchased it by private contract from the 
 owner. 
 
 18187. Did he find any difficulty in carrying that 
 out ? — He did ; he wanted to get the money from the 
 Board of "Works, and« they would not give it unfess he 
 got a Landed Estates Court title, and that would take 
 nearly a year, and he was obliged to do without the 
 loan. 
 
 18188. Rather than incur the expense, and owing 
 to the delay ? — Yes. There are two or three other 
 sales. Plynn bought his place in the Landed Estates 
 Court, but these were men in good position and had 
 capital to spare. 
 
 18189. Did they take up loans from the Board of 
 Works 1 — My brother could not get a loan from the 
 Board in consequence of the delay in getting the 
 Landed Estates Court title. 
 
 18190. Do you think a majority of the tenants 
 would be able to pay a certain portion of the pur- 
 chase-money if the Government advanced the rest ? — 
 I don't think they would. It would take away the 
 working capital from them, and my idea is, it would 
 not improve their circumstances. It would tako 
 away what they had to stock their lands, and if they 
 borrow from the banks they are in a worse position. 
 
 18191. Mr. Shaw. — There are some large men who 
 have money saved 1 — Yes ; men of that sort could buy, 
 but the ordinary small tenants would be in a worse 
 position, for it would take away the capital out of 
 their farms. 
 
 18192. The O'Conoe Dox.— Is there much re- 
 claimable waste land t — Not any in my neighbour- 
 hood. 
 
 18193. Mr. Shaw. — There are plenty of bogs? — 
 Yes ; but they are perfectly irreclaimable unless they 
 are cut away. Cut-away bogs are reclaimable, but 
 you must cut away the high bogs. If not, and you 
 put a heavy surface on them it will sink. 
 
 18194. Doesn't it pay to cut it as turf ? — Yes and 
 it is very valuable when cut away, and it gives verv 
 good crops. 
 
 18195. The O'CoNOR Don. — The cut-away be is 
 reclaimed gradually by the people themselves and 
 tUled in small quantities ? — Of course it must be in 
 small quantities, for there is only a bit cut away each 
 year. 
 
 18196. You don't think any large reclamation 
 would be possible in the district you are acquainted 
 with? — No. I saw it tried on Mr. Pollock's pro. 
 perty, and it went back to the bog again. The 
 clay sunk through the light soil. 
 
 18197. With regard to the provisions of the Land 
 Act in regard to large pasture farms, have you any 
 observation to make ? — I am the holder of large farms 
 and in my neighbourhood shelter is very much re- 
 quired, and if the large tenants had a claim on the 
 expiration of a lease for money laid out in perma- 
 nent improvements there would be a great deal more 
 done. 
 
 18198. Mr. Shaw. — Only for actual permanent 
 improvements ?— Yes. 
 
 18199. You would not give them anything for dis- 
 turbance ?- — No. 
 
 18200. They do nothing to the land as land?-Ko, 
 but they should be paid for fences, and dividing it, 
 and so on. 
 
 18201. They get it in grass and keep it in. grass?— 
 Yes. 
 
 18202. The O'Conok Don.— You think shelter is 
 very much wanted ? — Yes. 
 
 18203. And if they had a claim for planting and 
 dividing the land you think they would plant it ?— 
 Ye? ; and it would be very much more productive. 
 
 18204 Make it into fields?— Yes; some of the 
 lands are 150 acres and 100 acres together without 
 division, 
 
 18205. TJiat will not feed as much stock as thirty 
 or forty acres divided by hedges ? — No. It never has 
 been divided. Common grass lands I am better 
 acquainted with than the other. 
 
 18206. Have there been any evictions on your 
 estate ? — No. 
 
 18207. You have had no cases in the Land Court! 
 —No. 
 
 18208. Mr. Shaw. — ^Your land, has never been 
 tilled at all ?— No. 
 
 18209. It is natural grass ? — Yes; they have been 
 held for the last hundred years as grass farms. 
 
 18210. Your tenants' land is tilled land?— Yes; 
 they till very little. I have tenants who only till an 
 acre out of thirty or forty acres. The land is very 
 bad for crops. They won't ripen. One man tiUs 
 about half an acre. 
 
 18211. The O'CoNOR Don.— The tUlage has been 
 going out amongst even small tenants ? — Yes, entirely. 
 Cattle and sheep pay them better. 
 
 Mr. Farrell 
 M'Donnell. 
 
 Mr. Farrell M'Donnell examined. 
 
 18212. The O'Conor Don.— You are a landed 
 proprietor? — Yes, about £1,300 a year. 
 
 18213. And you are also a merchant and trader in 
 Roscommon ? — Yes. I farm about 300 acres. 
 
 18214. Have you any particular case that you 
 consider a case of hardship to bring before us ? — I am 
 not individually going to make any pointed case 
 against any party, but generally to speak on the 
 subject. 
 
 18215. You consider town property should be pro- 
 tected in the same way as any other in the country ? — 
 Yes ; and I will mention a case to show that. About 
 1855 I had some money transactions with the late 
 Mr, Michael Greally, of Roscommon, to the amount 
 of about one hundred pounds, and as he was unable to 
 pay me, he assigned his interest to me of a house and 
 garden, in the town of Roscommon, subject to ten 
 
 pounds yearly. But it being in a ruined condition, 
 and without oflices, I could not get a good or a re- 
 spectable tenant, until I improved it. I built a 
 kitchen and slated it at an expense of about £w. 
 I re-roofed the house, at an expense of about f^f ; 
 boarded rooms, at an expense of £20 ; built a^ 
 oi£ce two story high, and slated it at an. expense of 
 £60; fine of house, £100; altogether amounting to, 
 £280. The lease terminated at November, 1879, tte 
 landlord, Mr. Moriarty, declmed to recognise any 
 claim in any shape, except that I might tender as any 
 other person. T declined to do so. I therefore sub- 
 mit this outline to show the course some landlords 
 adopt in Ireland. They have improved their property 
 by the labour and expenditure of the tenants, and 
 generally denied to tenants all right to compensation 
 for improvements. Since the Gladstone Act of 187o- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 585 
 
 1870 passed, tliere is some protection given to tenants 
 on lands, but none for building houses in towns. I 
 may add that it is most essential for the -welfare, 
 peace, and order of all • classes in society, that some 
 plan shall be adopted to adjust the relations between 
 landlords and tenants ; every speculation and pursviit 
 in Ireland is secured, except the occupancy in land. 
 The lawyer, the solicitor, the doctor, the apothecary, 
 the mercantile man, the broker, the jobber in cattle, 
 all have their industry secured. The tenant farmer 
 alone remains unsecured in his industry and outlay. 
 Some security in the tenure of land, and the pre- 
 vention of illegitimate increases of rent and confis- 
 cation of improvements made by the tenant. I offer 
 these remarks, as one who has long experience as a 
 mercantile man, and has expended large sums in 
 building, and acquiring landed property, within the 
 last thirty years. It is c^istomary with some land- 
 lords or their agents, when tenants become indebted to 
 mercantile men for building materials and other items, 
 to shield the tenants, and thereby prevent the traders 
 from recovering lawful debts, whereas if the interest 
 in the lands and buildings were not shielded by rents 
 due, creditors would get their debts paid or a fair 
 proportion. I am aware such cases have occurred in 
 the country and lately. Traders should be protected 
 against such transactions, and placed in a similar 
 position with landlords. 
 
 18216 Mr. Shaw. — You don't complain of your own 
 rents being too high? — No. The lands I hold are 
 held for the last hundred years, and no change has 
 been made ; but all landlords cannot be put on the 
 same level as Lord Essex. I set lands in 1854, and I 
 did not change the rent. I set lands in 1856, on 
 which I had expended £1,500 in improvements, and I 
 did make a change in that, to which I was entitled, 
 but I consider that no landlord who has not given 
 grants to his tenants to improve their land, or improved 
 it himself, has any right when the land is improved by 
 the occupying tenant to put an increase on it. I 
 believe if a man takes land at 20s. and makes it worth 
 30«. he has a right to be protected by the law of the 
 land. His industry is as much invested in that as the 
 rich proprietor's money in his estate. Security should 
 be given, and if that security is given, I believe that 
 
 peace, order, tranquility, and prosperity will reign in 
 Ireland. 
 
 18217. The O'Conor Don.— You think the land- 
 lord should be put on the same footing as to rent, as 
 the trader to whom the tenant owes money ?— Yes, 
 after twelve months they should be on equality. 
 
 18218. You would give the landlord one year's 
 rent and no more 1 — Yes. 
 
 18219. And is not that the case at present? — Yes, 
 but the landlord can evict for two years' rent ; I know 
 several cases.-. In one case whereone man owedme £Q0; 
 I was offered 2s. 6d. composition, biit that has not 
 been paid yet. The land was good, and if the man's 
 interest could be realized, it would give 10s. to every 
 man. 
 
 18220. Did these men continue to hold their lands 1 
 — They have the land yet, the land was ejected by the 
 agent, and transferred to the cousin of the party. 
 After twelve months the landlord should have no 
 precedence. He should be put on a footing of equality 
 with the traders. 
 
 18221. If more than twelve months rent was due, 
 do you say the landlord should not have power to 
 eject, and not have more power to recover than the 
 ordinary creditor 1 — By ejecting he takes all to himself 
 
 18222. You would not give him power to eject if a 
 tenant owed more than a year's rent? — No, I would 
 put him on a parity with other people. 
 
 1822.3. But the other people have no right to the 
 land ? — No ; I would give the landlord twelve months' 
 rent. 
 
 18224. Take the case of a tenant who owed two or 
 three years' rent, would that landlord never have the 
 power to eject? — I don't want to take away legal right 
 to which he is entitled, but if the tenant owed three 
 years' rent, let the landlord deduct out of the assets 
 one year's rent, and let the rest go to all the creditors 
 alike. 
 
 18225. You would oblige him to sell the interest in 
 the holaing 1 — Yes. Let him go into the market and 
 let the farm be sold by fair auction. Some arrange- 
 ment should be made perhaps with the consent of the 
 Government. Something is required to be done to 
 better the relations between landlord and tenant, and 
 the sooner it is done the better for all classes in 
 society. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Farrell 
 M'Donnell. 
 
 A. B. examined. 
 
 A. B. 
 
 18226. The O'Conor Don.— You are a tenant?— 
 Yes. ^ 
 
 18227. About five miles from Pi.oscommon? — Yes. 
 
 18228. What is your complaint ?— My rent is £8 
 yearly, and my valuation is only £3 5s. 
 
 18229. How many acres have you? — I don't know. 
 It is a bit of moory bog, very wet entirely. Twelve 
 months ago there was a foot of water under my bed. 
 
 18230. There is no drainage?— No. 
 
 18231. How long are you there? — We are there 
 about thirty years. 
 
 18232. When was the rent fixed at £8 ?— It is about 
 twenty-five years ago, I don't know what it was 
 before that. 
 
 18233. Have you a lease of it? — No. 
 
 18234. ,Mr. Shaw. — You think it is too dear?— It 
 is, I am not able to pay it at all. 
 
 18235. Were you able to pay it before the bad 
 times 1 — Stuggling. 
 
 18236. It is poor land ? — Yes. I have about an 
 acre and a half of upland, and this patch of bog which 
 was all flooded entirely. 
 
 18237. Have you any other way of living? — 
 No, sir. 
 
 18238. Do you go to England? — No, sir. I be 
 working with the landlord sometimes. I have over 
 seven score days work with him. 
 
 18239. The O'Conor Don. — What wages do you 
 get? — He was giving Is. 6d. a day this summer to 
 me draining land. 
 
 18240. Has he been doing any draiiaage in your 
 townland? — He has. I am too convenient to his 
 hoiise, and he would wish me out of it entirely, and 
 if he would give me something I would go away. I 
 think if I was out of it he would drain it. 
 
 18241. Mr. Shaw. — You are near his place? — Yes. 
 
 18242. Where would you go to? — I don't care 
 where I would go. My little boy stole away to 
 England and iny daughter to America, and all bu.t 
 one, and if he gave mo something I would go away. 
 There was a flood this time twelve months and it 
 was over a foot under my bed, and ^'t was all flooded 
 entirely. The flood was twice thi.s year over the 
 Dotatoes I am using, so I am perished in it. 
 
 18243. The O'Conor Don.— Are you near the 
 Shannon? — It is about two miles from the Eiver 
 Shannon. 
 
 18244. And is it from the Shannon the water 
 comes ? — No, it is not. Mr. Mahon made the river 
 pretty convenient to drain his land, and a small 
 shore would make it drain my land too. 
 
 18245. Mr. Siiaw. — Did you ever ask him for 
 anything ? — I told him to put me out, and he said 
 "Would you like to be transported as you Vere be- 
 fore," and I said, " Yes, and if there is a vessel going 
 two miles further away I will go in it." 
 
 18246. The O'Conor Don. — Have you paid him 
 last year's rent ? — I think I paid him in labour. I 
 have seven score days in with him this year and last 
 year. 
 
 4F 
 
5S6 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oa. 21, 18S0. 
 
 A. B. 
 
 18247. Mr. Shaw. — That is the way you pay the 
 rent ? — Yes. I have a receipt for the year before. I 
 had a bill in the bank, and I had to pay it after a 
 long struggle. The man who went bail for me kicked 
 up against me. 
 
 1 8248. It must be an unhealthy place to live ? — It is, 
 
 to be sure. He wants it for himself, and I would havp 
 to go to the workhouse. 
 
 18249. The O'Conok Don. — I suppose that could 
 hardly support you if you had nothing to pay for i+ 
 at alii — No, it would not last year. There was a 
 yard of water over the crop last year. 
 
 Mr, James 
 Mttllaley. 
 
 Mr. James Mulialey examined. 
 
 18250. The O'Gonor Don. — You are a tenant at 
 Lisagallin, about three miles from Roscommon ? — ■ 
 Yes. 
 
 18251. You hold under John Patrick Conroy'? — 
 Yes. 
 
 18252. Is he a middleman? — Yes, he bought it 
 from Mr. Booths in 1874. 
 
 18253. Did he increase the rent when he purchased 
 it 1 — He did. He got it surveyed, and increased the 
 land that we had, and made us pay for more than we 
 have and more than we ever paid for. 
 
 18254. The former rent was £5 3s., and now it is 
 m 8s. ?— Yes. 
 
 18255. What is the Government valuation? — 18s. U, 
 an acre, and there are three houses on it— £4 15s. 
 altogether. I had three and a half acres and twenty- 
 perches formerly, and he makes it now four acres. I 
 am a carpenter by trade. 
 
 18256. And it is by your trade you live, I sup- 
 
 pose 
 
 ?— It is. 
 
 18257. You could not live on this land ?- 
 am a loser by that. 
 
 -No, I 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Mills. 
 
 Mr. Michael Mills examined. 
 
 18258. The O'Conor Don.— You hold four acres 
 at d£6 8s. from the same landlord, at the same place? 
 — Yes. I never paid for four acres until he measured 
 it. 
 
 18259. Mr. Shaw. — He m-ade it grow a bit? — Yes. 
 He put on 6s. an acre. My valuation is £5 5s. 
 
 18260. You built a house on it? — Yes, a dwelling- 
 house and barn. I have no other way of living. 
 
 18261. The bad years gave you a squeeze? — Yes. 
 
 18262. Is the land near Cloverhill, where Mr 
 Conroy lives ? — Yes, it is all the same place. 
 
 18263. It is quite close to the land he holds him- 
 self ? — Yes, it is the same land. Eev, Parson Cleaver, 
 of London, is his landlord. He has raised it to 32s. 
 an acre. He bovight it for £3,300 himself, andhehad 
 .£600 of that. So he said to himself I will make each 
 of them pay so much. 
 
 18264. Are there many more tenants besides your- 
 ■ selves ? — Yes. This is a list of them — 
 
 Lisgallen. — Estate of John Patrick Coneoy, Middleman under Eev. Mr. Cleaver, of London. 
 
 Tenants. 
 
 Present Kant. 
 
 Fornn^r Rent, 
 
 Government 
 Valuation. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 Observations, 
 
 
 £ s. 
 
 d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 A. R. P. 
 
 
 James JluUooley, 
 
 6 8 
 
 
 
 5 3 
 
 4 15 
 
 f 3 2 23 \ 
 
 14 0/ 
 
 4 
 
 Three houses, valued at £ 1 5s. 
 
 Slichael Mills, . 
 
 6 8 
 
 
 
 5 11 
 
 5 5 
 
 Paying a fine of £12 sterling 
 
 Pat Rafthery, . 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 6 10 
 
 5 15 
 
 5 
 
 Paving a fine of £25 sterling. 
 
 Pat Geenoy, 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 6 10 
 
 5 15 
 
 5 
 
 Paying a fine of £15 sterling. 
 
 Peter M'Guinness, . 
 
 2 7 
 
 
 
 1 15 9 
 
 2 5 
 
 1 1 20 
 
 Paying a fine of £7 15s, sterling 
 
 Widow Igo, 
 
 5 12 
 
 
 
 4 2 8 
 
 4 
 
 3 2 
 
 
 Pat Walsb, 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 9 14 3 
 
 6 10 
 
 6 2 
 
 
 18265. Did he raise all the rents in the same way ? 
 — Yes, I paid £12 5s. when I went in before he came. 
 
 18266. That was under the previous owner? — Yes, 
 under Mr. Booth. 
 
 18267. And the other tenants' I'ents and valuations 
 are as is stated in this return ? — Yes, and they paid 
 the fines opposite their names. 
 
 18268. When Mr. Conroy increased the rent on you 
 did you object ? — We did. 
 
 18269. Did he serve you with a notice to quit ? — 
 No, we had to comply sooner than quit. 
 
 18270. You had only to take it or go out ? — Yes, 
 and when he sees it properly fenced in now he would 
 wish to have it to himself. He says he wishes he had 
 100 acres at the rent. You can't expect much good from 
 a middleman, but if you have a gentleman to deal 
 with. It is a mistake of the sort to give these men 
 the land for they rack-rent them. It is not the head 
 landlord that does the harm, but the middlemen, these 
 money borrowers and land grabbers. The people have 
 
 no claim against the head landlord. If people 
 were under The O'Conor Don they would have no 
 reason to complain. 
 
 18271. The O'Conok Don.— Did Mr, Conroy get 
 any loan for the purchase. Yes, he had to borrow 
 £1,700 from the Board of Works. 
 
 18272. Sir. Shaw. — Are you sure of that ? — Yes, I 
 have it from a most respectable man. 
 
 18273. Did he get the money from the Government? 
 — I can't tell whether it was the Government or his 
 cousin. 
 
 18274. Was he a tenant before the sale ? — He was. 
 18274a. The O'Conor Don. — Has he done anytlimg 
 
 in the way of improving the tenants' land ? — No that 
 would be the last thing he would do. I hold one acre 
 at 32s. and it only fit for snipe. He has bog and we 
 have to pay for our turf on another property. 
 
 18275. Had you a right to the turf before he came 
 in ? — Yes, all my lifetime from the Booths without 
 expense. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 58, 
 
 Mr. Laurence Kilroe examined. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1880. 
 
 1827C. The O'CoxoR Don. — You are a tenant in 
 the parish of Aghagower % — Yes. 
 
 18277. How much land % — I don't know how many- 
 acres I hold, but two-thirds of it is waste land/ ' The 
 former rent was £16, and the present rent £2-5. 
 
 18278. Who is the landlord ?—Pakenham Mahon. 
 
 18279. When was the rent raised? — About 1859. 
 1S2S0. Were you a tenant then % — Yes. 
 
 18281. What is the valuation ?— It is valued too 
 high for it is the worst land in Ireland. 
 
 18282. Are there many tenants on it? — Yes, there 
 are about SCO acres. 
 
 18283. Was it all raised at the same time % — They 
 valued it and raised some They ran across the best 
 of it, and did not mind the worst of it. 
 
 18284. Did they stripe it at that time? — They did 
 not; my rent was £16, and I was compelled to pay 
 £25 or walk out, and I have laid out over £100 in 
 permanent improvements. I wou.ld pay him well for 
 it if he left me to live on it. 
 
 18285. Were you ever offered a lease? — I was 
 offered it at £16 by Stewarts and Kincaid, and I did 
 not think it worth paying the cost of the lease the 
 land was so bad. 
 
 18286. Mr. Shaw. — You would not take a lease ? 
 — I regretted it afterwards, I have £189 paid of 
 surplus rent — compelled to pay it or walk out. 
 
 18287. Did the landlord ever lay out anything in 
 improvements t— No, I don't live by the land. I am 
 a dealer in eggs and butter. 
 
 18288. It is just a convenience to yon to live on 
 the place ? — If he left me the house I would give him 
 a fair rent and give him up the land. 
 
 18289. Is it near Roscommon? — It is six miles 
 from this. My son has a farm outside my boundary, 
 and his rent is £10 10s., and his valuation £7 15s., 
 and it is nothing better, but worse than the land I 
 hold. 
 
 18290. 
 18291. 
 18292. 
 
 Was that raised ? — Yes. 
 
 At the same time ? — Yes. 
 
 Was there no objection made ?- 
 
 ■The last 
 he took from us was at the Ordnance valuation, and 
 we gave it freely, but he came last June to demand 
 
 another half-year's rent, and sooner than be quarrelling M^^. Laurence 
 with the landlord or agent I brought in tlio Ordnance I^''™*^- 
 valuation, and laid it on the table, lie would not 
 take it, and I gathered it up and said I v/ould not 
 give more. 
 
 18293. The O'OonoR Don.— Did the others refuse 
 to pay ? — They had no rent to pay and they did not 
 come forward. 
 
 18294. They are very poor? — Yes, and they v/ere 
 not really able to support themselves, but for the 
 charity meal — they were getting relief ; the majority 
 on the property were getting relief. 
 
 18295. Are- they all small tenants? — There area 
 few large tenants, lilr. Walker and Mr. Giblan, for 
 instance, are large tenants. 
 
 1 8 2 9 G. Mr. . Shaw. — They are more comfortable ? — 
 They have all the good land on the property. They 
 are big farmers. 
 
 ISi 
 
 There has been no alteration in the rentier 
 
 twenty-one year? ' — J'J o. 
 
 18298. They don't hold by lease?— No, sir. Mr. 
 Vv"ar::er and Mr, GiLlan have leases. They arc the 
 only leases on the [)roiperty. I refused a lease, because 
 the land was not* vrorfclj. the £3 or £4, the cost of the 
 lease, but still I regretted I did not take it. 
 
 18299. The O'Oonoe Don.— I thought Mr. Paken- 
 ham Mahon was a very good landlord % — lie has rents 
 low, and is accounted very good about Strokestown ; 
 but the land is very good there. The land at Auglia- 
 gower is all furzy, heavy, rocky land. 
 
 18300. It would be very hard to make a' living out 
 of it if there was no rent on it? — I don't kiiov,- any 
 man could live on the land if it was made a present to 
 tliem, except Walker and Giblan, and another named 
 Gafirey, on the other end belovf. 
 
 18301. How many tenants are on it? — I could not 
 say exactly, but I could give a rough' calculation — 
 between twenty and thirty tenants. 
 
 18302. Mr. Shaw.- — Alias poor as yourselves ? — I 
 am able, thanks to God, to pay my rent, but it is not 
 off the land I pay it. I am an exporter of eggs and 
 butter to England. 
 
 Mr. Michael Kelly examined. 
 
 18303. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant of Mr. John 
 O'liorke, at Lisanechn ? — Yes. 
 
 18304. How much land do you hold ? — I never got 
 a return of the land. It was surveyed twelve years 
 ago, but I know the rent I pay is £16 4s. 8rf. a year. 
 
 18305. Andyour valuation?— £10 13s. 6(Z. 
 
 18306. When was it fixed at £16? — Some twelve 
 or thirteen years ago. 
 
 18307. Was it raised at that time? — No, sir. 
 
 18308. What took place then ? — He came in. The 
 land belonged to General Mitchell. He raised it for 
 two yeat'sto 30s., and then he reduced it to the old 
 rent. 
 
 18309. The present rent is the old rent ?— The pre- 
 sent rent I am paying is £16. 
 
 18310. Is that the old rent , before Mr. O'Rorke 
 became owner ? — I got an increase of rent a few years 
 before that from Captain Mitchell. 
 
 18311. But was the acreable rent the same? — The 
 acreable rent was- 25s. an acre. I got five or six 
 acres of bottom land before Mr. O'Rorke came in, at 
 1 8s. an acre. We used to earn the rent every year 
 from Captain Mitchell. 
 
 18312. He was Mr. O'Rorke's father-in-law ?- Yes. 
 
 18313. Did Mr. O'Rorke raise the rent at all since 
 he came in? — Re did. 
 
 18314. He raised it to the 30s., and then he re- 
 duced it back again to the old figure ?— He did. 
 
 18315. The present rent has not been raised from 
 what it was at the time Mr. O'Rorke became owner 
 
 ■ — No, sir 
 
 pland, and the rest is allbot- 
 nve acres in divisions here and 
 
 18316. What do you complain of? — The rent over 
 the valuation. 
 
 18317. Is it too dear? — It is. I have six or seven 
 acres of bottom, and it is not able to rear tvt-o cows 
 only two months in the year. . 
 
 18318. How much 
 I have four acres of 
 torn — between four oi- 
 there. 
 
 18319. Do you hold it in divisions ? — I do. 
 
 18320. How long ago is it since the rent v.'as fixed 
 at 25s. an acre ? — That was during Captain Mitchell's 
 time. 
 
 18321. How long ago ? — It was before I was born. 
 WEcirtEe bad times came Captain Mitchell reduced 
 it to 16s. an acre for four or five years. That is 
 twenty-seven or twenty-eight years ago. 
 
 18322. Then he restored it to the old figure?-— 
 Then when he got old, and the times mended, he raised, 
 it to 25s. 
 
 18323. And it has remained at that ever since, 
 with the exception of the two years Mr. O'Rorke put 
 it at 30s? — Yes ; with the exception of a few acres of 
 bottom that I got, and this is at 18s. There is a 
 neighbour of mine who holds two acres of land, and 
 there was never a bit eaten off it for the last twelve 
 months. 
 
 18324. On account of the fioods ? — No. He had 
 no beast to put upon it. It is gravelly bottom. 
 
 18325. Does Mr. O'Rorke allow the tenants to sell 
 
 4 F 2 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 
 Kcl!-,- 
 
588 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1S8U. 
 
 Oct. 21. 1680. 
 
 Mr. Michael 
 Kelly. 
 
 their interest if they want to go smayl — I never 
 heard anything about that. 
 
 18326. None of the tenants have gone a-way?— 
 No. 
 
 18327. Are there many tenants on the townland 1 
 — Nine or ten. 
 
 18328. Are they all small holders 1 —Some of them 
 four acres. Not one has as much land as I have in 
 the vUlage. 
 
 18329. You are the largest tenant in if? — No, there 
 is another man who has more. 
 
 18330. He is not a resident tenant? — No, he does 
 not live on it He has nearly forty acres there from 
 Mr. Coote, and fifteen or sixteen more from Mr. Lecky. 
 
 18331. He holds these as farms'! — Yes, he lives on 
 Fuerty himself. 
 
 18332. Did you pay your rent last year? — I did. 
 I owe a year's rent now. 
 
 18333. He gave no abatement 1 — He gave 4s. to the 
 pound last year, but he would give us none last May. 
 
 18334. Did you pay last May? — No, sir, we prof- 
 ferred to pav if he gave us a reduction — some that 
 had it. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Kilmartia. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Kilmartin examined. 
 
 18335. The O'Conob Don. — ^You are a tenant on 
 the townland of Oloonenbawn ? — Yes. 
 
 18336. Under Mr. Dunne?— Yes. 
 
 18337. He is dead ?— Yes. 
 
 18338. Who is the landlord now ?— The land is in 
 Chancery now. 
 
 18339. Have you got anything to complain of? — Yes. 
 I am living in a cut-away bog that is there forty-four 
 years. My holding wa,s a very small one. My rent 
 was only 5s. in the year. It was raised from 5s. to 
 8s., and from 8s. to 10s., and from that to £2 when 
 the saw they improvement made on it by hard indus- 
 trious work. 
 
 18340. Two pounds altogether ? — ^Yes. I reclaimed 
 it, and drained it, and sewered it, and spread it out in 
 the best way I could, and when he seen it was coming 
 to something, he raised it to £2. 
 
 18341. When was it last raised ?— About nine years 
 ago. 
 
 18342. How many acres have you now reclaimed? 
 — I could not say. 
 
 18343. Abouthow many? — I could not say what num- 
 ber, really. I enlarged it a good deal beyond what it was. 
 
 18344. Mr. Shaw. — You reclaimed it? — Yes; the 
 house was built at the time the valuation was made. 
 
 1834-5. Have you any other way of living ? — No. 
 
 18346. You have a family ? — I have. 
 
 18347. But you could not get a house anywhere for 
 less than that rent ? — It is with the benefit of mj own 
 hard labour. 
 
 18348. Are you near the town ? — No, sir, five miles 
 from the town. 
 
 18349. Who do you work for? — For the farmers 
 about the place. 
 
 18350. What wages do you get? — Is. a day. 
 
 18351. Is that the wages ?— It is. *■ 
 
 18352. Are you fed as well? — No, sometimes I am, 
 and sometimes I am not. In harvest time when they 
 are busy I am fed, and more times I am not 
 
 18353. Do you get pretty constant employment?— 
 No, sir. 
 
 18354. Is this near Eockfield ? — It is the same 
 property. 
 
 18356. You think they ought not to have raised the 
 rent in that way ? — I tliink it was quite wrong to raise 
 the rent on my own hard labour. 1 lost my health in 
 carrying out gravel, and sewering it, and when he seen 
 it appeared so nice, he came down, and raised the rent 
 on me to £2. 
 
 18356. What was it when you went in yourself?— 
 I was born there. £1 was the first rent I paid, and 
 he raised it to £2 
 
 Mr. Anlrew 
 DoraDa 
 
 Mr. Akdeew Doean examined. 
 
 18357. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant on the same 
 estate, and in the same townland ? — Yes. 
 
 18358. Your holding is also let in bulk like the 
 others ? — Yes. 
 
 18359. Are you a labourer ? — I am. 
 
 18360. How much was your rent raised? — It was 
 not raised at all. I am living on the side of a bog, 
 and I have no passage, and I have about seventy 
 perches to carry every thing on my back from my 
 father's own holding, that they took from us. 
 
 18361. What rent do you pay ?— £2 14s. 2cl 
 
 18362. Did you improve it?— I did. 
 
 18363. The landlord never did anything? — Never. 
 
 18364. How long are you there? — I am there 
 upwards of fifty years. 
 
 18365. He never raised the rent? — No, sir. 
 
 18366. The only thing you complain of is not haviag 
 a passage to your house ? — Yes. 
 
 18367. The O'Coxor Don.— Do the adjoining 
 tenants object to your having a passage? — It iS they 
 who object to it — the man who occupies my father's 
 holding. 
 
 18368. It is the adjoining tenants' who would not 
 allow you a passage ? — Yes. 
 
 18369. Mr. Shaw. — You cannot complain of the 
 landlord in that case ? — No ; but if I can't pay the 
 rent, he ejects me, and I am not able, and I blame that 
 upon the want of a passage. 
 
 18370. Are you near the town?^No, I am five 
 miles away. A farmer near me wants me to be run 
 out, that he may pick up my farm. 
 
 Mr. Martin J. 
 Waldron. 
 
 Mr. Maetin J. Waldeon, Athleague, examined. 
 
 r 
 
 18371.' The O'Conoe Don. — You are a tenant of 
 Mr. Jameson ? — I am. 
 
 18372. How many acres do you hold? — Eight or 
 nine. 
 
 18373. You speak of six acres and three roods? — 
 Yes ; that is a field not attached to my house. 
 
 18374. You live in the village of Athleague? — 
 Yes, and this is in the townland of Athleague, but it 
 is not attached to my house. I have a lease of my 
 house. 
 
 18375. Have you a lease of this holding? — No, sir. 
 
 18376. How long havo j-ou been in occupation ? — 
 For upwards of thirty yerrs. 
 
 18377. What is the rent?— £10 3s. id. 
 
 18378. And the valuation?— £7. 
 
 18379. Is £10 3s. id. the rent you have always 
 paid ?— Yes, up to 1873. 
 
 18380. What happened then? — Mr. Jameson refused 
 to take the rent from me and told me to send it to 
 Mr. West, who was the joint owner. 
 
 18381. This is in the joint owiiership of Mr. Jame- 
 son and Mr. West ? — Mr. J ameson's name is in the 
 receipt. I sent the rent to Mr. West and he sent it 
 back through Mr. Bourke, a solicitor here, saying he 
 was quite ignorant of what it related to. An'eject- 
 ment was then broucrlit for £16. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 5S. 
 
 18382. For what?— It was for £16 rent,, and I 
 lodged £10 3s. 4d in court, the amount of rent that 
 was due, and it would not do, and I was decreed for 
 £16. 
 
 18383. How was that ? — It appears, fifteen or six- 
 teen years ago, this field was given by the Taafie 
 family to West, of Fort Leicester, as an accommoda- 
 tion, and Mr. West left a long time ago and my 
 father got possession of the field, and we never heard 
 of any lease being in existence ; but Mrs. Drake 
 brought an ejectment against West and Jameson, say- 
 ing that £16 a year was paid by West's representa- 
 tives always to the Taafie family, who let this rent 
 
 get due in order to get me into £16 a year. The Oct. 21, 188O. 
 Chairman said it was a hard case ; but that lease only -^^ yu^m 3 
 lasted one year after 1873, and I objected then, and I Waldron. 
 have £10 3s. id. lodged in the Bank of Ireland, and 
 I will appeal to the Chairman. I have an account of 
 all the field produced for the last two years, and I 
 will prove I am not able to make £18 out of it 
 
 18384. The land was formerly set at £16 ? — This is 
 an accommodation field. For a long time it was 
 attached to Fort Leicester, and when Mrs. West died 
 Mr. Jameson got it, and then he put me under this 
 extraordinary rent, 
 
 Mr. J. C. DooRLEY examined. 
 
 18385. The O'Conor Don. — You are a merchant in 
 Roscommon ? — I am a draper. 
 
 18386. Were you formerly a pupil of the Albert 
 Model Farm ?— Yes. 
 
 18387. Are you a tenant-farmer? — ^Yes. In con- 
 sequence of my education on the Model Farm I was 
 anxious to obtain a farm of land in Eoscommon, where 
 I have some house property. I wished to pirt my 
 education into practice. I took land from the late 
 Michael Nolan, who was my cousin, giving him a fine 
 of £3 an acre and pay all the rates. I divided the 
 eight acres into portions with drains. There was a 
 fall to the river, and I practically drained it, so that 
 in the wettest season it is dry. I took it in 1869 or 
 1870. The valuation was then £7. It was portion 
 of the estate and was not previously occupied by any 
 other tenant. Still I had to pay a fine for a skirt of 
 a farm, and the valuator came and valued it at £7. 
 The gross valuation of the farm was so much^ and 
 perhaps by putting that much on mine he served the 
 landlord. Nolan, himself, was a rate-collector and 
 might have suggested that. I hold seven acres and 
 three roods, and I was paying £2 5s. 8c?., for the rates 
 at present in Eoscommon are 3s. La the pound, and 
 then there is county cess and no allowance. I drained 
 part of this land that was not fit for tillage — anything 
 that could be drained, and I would bring sub-soil into 
 use for tniage, but in consequence of the last three 
 
 years' crops not being good, I find it very difficult to 
 pay the rent. 
 
 18388. What is the rent?— £16 16s. without cess, 
 and the valuation is £7. 
 
 18389. And you apprehend that if you failed to 
 pay the rent and were ejected you would get nothing 
 for your improvements'! — That is what I think. 
 What I expect from the Commission is that they will 
 recommend I'arliament to give us our holdings at a 
 valuation, and that we will be entitled to hold and 
 not be evicted except for non-payment of a fair rent. 
 
 18390. You don't want to go back upon the 
 Griffith valuation 1 — No. I am prepared to leave my 
 land to two men, with an umpire. I know the feeling 
 of the county — mostly of the shopkeepers and farmers 
 — and what brought me forward was to point ovX that 
 I understood we are not entitled to any claim for 
 compensation because we live in towns and have^ lands 
 outside ; but I am glad to find we have. 
 
 18391. If you were ejected for non-payment you 
 would not have ? — No. The three bad seasons bring 
 me so close that I am paying rent for nothing. It is 
 my confirmed opinion from what I know of the people 
 that they never improve the land, but if they do they 
 are made pay for it. A neighbour of mine tilled his 
 land nicely for cattle show purposes, and the landlord 
 saw it and put 10s. an acre on it. That was not 
 encouraging to him to improve. 
 
 Mr. J. C 
 Doorley. 
 
 18392. The O'Conoe Don.— You hold under 
 same landlord ? — Yes ; and I am evicted for non- 
 payment of a year's rent. It was all marsh and bog, 
 and weeds when I got it. I drained it. The year's 
 rent coming due in May is not paid until July, and 
 he served me with an ejectment. I did not think he 
 would go on with it, but he took out a decree \inknown 
 to me, and threatened the sherifi' every day. , A son 
 of mine went and settled it with the agent, through 
 Mr. Tumulty, in the town here, and I gave him a 
 small fine. Tumulty bought the crops, and the hay 
 alone was able to pay the rent. 
 
 18393. Did your son sell it ? — Yes. 
 
 18394. In order to pay the rent? — Yes ; in my 
 absence. I was digging potatoes, and when I saw 
 the agent with Tumiilty come out, I didn't know 
 what was going to happen. 
 
 18395. How were you ejected afterwards? — My 
 
 Mr. John Kelly examined, 
 the 
 
 son, who is married and living with me, has a wife 
 and nine children, and he is not industrious, and the 
 agent, Mr. Duffy, got about him and said, if yoii don't 
 sell the crops now I will not allow you to take them 
 away or sell your good will. He got £27 for the six 
 acres of meadow, with three roods of potatoes, cab- 
 bages, &c. 
 
 18396. How much rent was due ? — One year's rent, 
 £20. The valuation is £6 10s. 
 
 18396a. Mr. J. C. Doorley. — He was paying more 
 than three times the valuation, and of course the 
 County Court Judge would give him a substantial 
 sum. The agent when turning him out or effecting 
 this ccmp .'omise, said I will give you two acres of an 
 adjoining bog, and I will only charge you lOs. an 
 acre for it. It was cut-away bog, but when he got 
 this man to give up quiet possession, he said no, I 
 will not give you a sod at all. 
 
 ITr. John 
 Kelly. 
 
 Mr. Peter Flynn examined. 
 
 18397. The O'Conoe Don. — You are a tenant on 
 Mr. Pakenham Mahon's property at Derry Carberry ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 18398. What do you complain of ?— In 1851 he 
 sent in a valuator and promised to pay us half of the 
 improvements. There was a large street of houses on 
 my land, and I had to level them. He told me he 
 T.ould give me lime. Well, he did that, and I was 
 
 not able to build until after 1870, and he struck a 
 rent on us at the time. It was £14 15s., and in 1859 
 he raised it £5 a year, and never gave me a penny 
 for all my laboiir. My expenses amounted to £400 
 for levelling houses and fences. 
 
 18399. -Your own expenditure? — Yes. I was a. 
 young man at the time, and I had three or four men 
 for four or five years, and I built' walls and employed 
 
 Blr. Peter 
 I'lynn. 
 
5;;C 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oc?. 21, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. rc'la- 
 Flvnn. 
 
 masons. I tumbled houses and built others, and 
 about forty feet of stabling ; but he would not give 
 me timber even for building. He made me pay for 
 the timber. I had pretty good capital then. I 
 h;id to go to the Hon, Mr. Mapother, and he would 
 not take a penny from me for the timber. The rent 
 is tl;3 same ever since. He never gave me a penny 
 compensation for all my labour. At the end of three 
 years, I claimed it, and said, how can I pay rent after 
 all the labour I have gone through. "You know 
 you said you would give us plenty of crowbars and 
 picks." 
 
 18400. Have you any complaint to make of the 
 rent? — I complain of the rise of .£5 in 1859. l\j„ 
 entire rent is £19 15s., for about seventeen acres 
 
 18401. Since 1859 there was no alteration 1_Ifo I 
 I am paying that since. He returned rae £3 lajj i 
 year, and I reclaimed about five roods of bog. 
 
 18402. Since the time you mention? — Yes. 
 
 18403. Was the townland striped at that time?— 
 It was, but this was a rough bog, and it was very 
 hard on me after reclaiming five roods of it 
 
 Mr. John 
 Flynn. 
 
 ;j .T. 
 
 Mr. John Flynn examined. 
 
 18404. The O'Conoh Don. — You are a tenant of 
 Mr. Mahon's? — Yes. I am brother of this man. 
 
 Peter Flynn, and every man there has the same com- 
 plaint to make. 
 
 Mr. P&tti»k 
 Morris. 
 
 Me. Pathick Mobeis examined (with seven other tenants of Mr. Waitman). 
 
 18405. Jlr. SiiAW. — You are a tenant of Mr. 
 AVaitiiian ?— Yes. 
 
 18-]:(J;J. What is your rent 1— My rent is £37 10s. 
 
 18407. And your valuation ? — £29 15s. 
 
 18408. Was the rent raised?— It was £21 first. 
 
 18409. When was it raised? — It was raised in 
 Dunville's time. 
 
 18410. When was the last rise put on? — Four or 
 five years ago. 
 
 18411. Was the rent raised on the whole property 
 at the same time 1 — Yes, and about the same amount. 
 Ho went on the Ordnance valuation, and raised the 
 rent so much all over. 
 
 18412. The O'Oonor Don. — Was the case brought 
 before the barrister ? — Yes. 
 
 18413. AVeren't the rents settled before him? — 
 Yes ; but he did not agree with the barrister, and he 
 gave lis a summons and plaint to Galway. He 
 appealod, and Mr. Burke, the solicitor in Dublin, 
 settled it. 
 
 18414. He was acting for you ? — Yes. 
 
 18415. He came to a settlement by which the rents 
 were fixed at the present figure? — Yes. 
 
 18416. He raised the rent 2s. 6cZ. to the pound all 
 round? — Yes, all round. Over £20 he raised 2s. Qd., 
 and under £20, 2.s. 
 
 18417. Vfho is the agent? — Mr. Sebastian Man,' 
 from Tuam. Mr. Waitman is the landlord. 
 
 18418. You did not get a lease at that time?— Ho, 
 sir. 
 
 18419. Mr. Shaw. — Have you improved the land 
 much ? — Yes, there were twelve or fourteen acres net 
 value for @s., and the tenants improved.it themselves 
 and took a great deal of stones ofi" it. 
 
 18420. Did the landlord do anything to help you t- 
 No, he took an acre from me and charged me for the 
 run. I went before him and ho would not 'speak to 
 me. 
 
 18421. The O'Gonoe Don. — How was tie rent 
 settled before the Chairman — was there an aruitra- 
 tion ? — There was not ; we had to agree to his rise or 
 give him possession. 
 
 18422. Did you agree to the rise Mr. Waitman 
 demanded? — I did, sooner than go out. I think 
 there was a compromise. He did not charge the fuE 
 amount he intended at first. He wanted 52 or 53 per 
 cent, at first. It is not worth much more than half 
 the rent I pay. 
 
 18423. How do you live?— I live by day labour 
 and taking conacre. 
 
 Mr. Joliu 
 Kennedy. 
 
 Mr. John Kennedy examined. 
 
 IS 424. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant on the same 
 property? — I come for my father-in-law, Pat Nolan. 
 I have twelve acres of cut-away bog. 
 
 16425. Are you living by the land? — No, sir; I 
 was a contractor for the last ten years. My valuation 
 is £38 and my rent £47. 
 
 18426. It was raised in the same way and at the 
 same time ? — ^Yes, I was raised £17. 
 
 1S427. And you all complain of the rent being too 
 high ? — Yes. 
 
 18428. And that you are not able to live with the 
 bad times ? — No ; Lord Orofton was about to drain his 
 
 land, and my landlord stopped it and Would not allow 
 it at all. I offered to give £2 myself, and he would 
 not do it. ' 
 
 Edward Kelly. — My son and daughter went to 
 America. They could not stay with me. 
 
 18429. You could not divide such a bit of land as 
 that ? — No, sir. 
 
 Pat Morris. — I had potatoes last year and they were 
 not worth anything. 
 
 John Kennedy.— -We. would not have any potatoes 
 but for Lord Orofton giving us seed. He is one of the 
 best men in the county. 
 
 Mi. Ethvard 
 Kelly. 
 
 Mr. Edwaeb Kelly examined. 
 
 18430. Mr. Shaw. — You are also a tenant of Mr. 
 Waitman ? — Yes. 
 
 18431. What is your rent ? — £43 a year. 
 
 18432. And j'our valuation ? — £36; my rent was 
 raised twice, just the same as the others. I cut away 
 a great deal of whins, and made drains, and squared 
 the lands. 
 
 18433. You made all the improvements on the 
 lands ? — Yes ; and built houses and stables, and a barn 
 5>Md fowl-house, and car-house. 
 
 Pat Morris.— We are noticed for the Novemtei 
 rent, and I am afraid we will not be able to pay ii ^e 
 gives us nothing. Sir, Charles Coote a^d other lana- 
 lords have nothing to fear from any tenapl here, lOi^ 
 they give us justice. It is dry, hard land. 
 
 Michael Fox. — I built a great deal of houses before 
 the rent was raised, and I was allowed nothing. 
 
 18434. Mr. Shaw.— The other tenants from Jli. 
 Waitman's property are, Michael Feeney,, Bernard, 
 Kelly, Thomas Locke, and William MuiTay?— Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 591 
 
 Patrick Naughte.^ examined (witli Bernard Kelly, Michael Brannau, an:l William Kelly present). 
 
 18435, The O'Conou Do:j.— You are tenants of 
 Mr. Fa-\voett's, at Feeragh 1 — Yes. 
 
 IS'lSe. How many acres do you hold? — About 
 twenty acres, bog and bottom. 
 
 18437. What is your rent ?— £20. 
 
 18438. What do you complain of 1 — I complain that 
 Griffith's valuation is only £12, and that I reclaimed 
 land and the landlord brought in a valuator and valued 
 the place at £16. The rent is £20, and the first 
 valuation was only £12. 
 
 18439. Mr. Shaw. — Was the rent raised until it 
 was raised to £20 1 — It was raised from £12 to £20. 
 
 Oct. 21, 1S80. 
 
 Messrs. Patk. 
 
 18440. All at one time ?— No ; from £12 to £16, 
 and from £1 6 to £20. Myself and my father reclaimed B^,"f3^[|°K'< 
 the land. It was nearly useless at first. 
 
 18441. The O'Oonor Don. — The rent has not been 
 altered for thirty years 1 — It has. 
 
 18442. When was it last changed? — About ten 
 years ago. 
 
 18443. When was the last rise put on ? — Ten years 
 ago. It was then £16. 
 
 18444. It was then raised to £20 ?— Yes. 
 
 Kelly, 
 Michael 
 Brannoii, 
 and William 
 Kelly. 
 
 Mr. William Kelly examined. 
 
 18445. Mr. Shaw.— What is your rent ?— £8 10s. 
 
 18446. And your valuation ? — £5. 
 
 18447. When was the rent raised? — In the bad 
 times. 
 
 1844S. In the famine times ?— Yes. 
 
 18449. It has not been ohansed since '( — No. 
 
 Mr. Michael Beannon examined. 
 
 18450. Mr. Shaw.— What is your rent?— £15. 
 
 18451. When was the rent last fixed 1 — About ten 
 years ago. 
 
 18452. How much was that rise? — From £10 to 
 
 £15. The original rent was £7, and then it was 
 raised to £10 ; then £12 10s., and then £15. 
 
 18453. And the last was ten years ago 1 — Yes. 
 
 18454. Before the passing of the Land Act ? — Yes 
 some years before. 
 
 Mr. Been-aed Kelly examined. 
 
 18455. Mr. Shaw. — What is your rent ? — It is £9. 
 It was £6. 
 
 18456. It was raised about the same time? — Yes. 
 
 18457. Is it bad land ? — It is very bad land. 
 
 18458. Have you done any reclamation ? — I have 
 done great improvements, and built houses and all 
 that, and then when we do all that the valuators come 
 round and value our land up mountains high, and the 
 landlord comes forward and says the rent must be put 
 above that. That is all after we have built houses 
 and all that. 
 
 Pat Naughten. — I took in a piece of bog ; he gave 
 it for two, years, and then he rented it, and he has 
 i-aised it up to £1 an acre. 
 
 18459. Wiiat you reclaimed yourself 1 — Yes, and it 
 began at 2s. 6c?. There are twenty-nine tenants, and 
 each tenant is one-fourth over the Government val- 
 uation. 
 
 18460. All the advances were made at the same 
 time ? — Yes. There were none of the tenants came 
 here but us. 
 
 William Kelly.— Iw 1846 or 1847 there were 168 
 acres, here, and iie divided the lands. It was under 
 
 lease then and the lease was broke. I held twenty 
 acres at that time. Wo had to make mearings 
 in the year of the famine. There was one side" of the 
 village was not equally rented with the othfer, it was 
 cheap. There was a rent of 26s. an acre put on one 
 part, and mine was left at 18s. The best of it was 
 left at the standing rent of £1 an aci-o, and the 
 choicest lot was put in with what was called bad, to 
 make amends, and in the course of about six years 
 afterwards he takes six acres of good land from me, 
 and leaves me bad entirely. The rent was then 18s. 
 and now it is 23s. 
 
 Pat Naughten. — I had eighteen acres of good upland 
 and lie took it from me and gave it over to me as a' 
 grass farm, and raised the rent £5. I only hold that 
 from year to year ; it was eighteen acres of good land 
 but it is only grass land now, and he can turn me out 
 of it at any time. I had it before as a regular farm, 
 and was able to pay for it. 
 
 18461. Mr. Shaw. — You say all the tenants vould 
 be here if they knew of this inquiry ? — YcfJ. 
 
 184G2. Is there anything else? — Ko. 
 
 The inquiry then closed. 
 
592 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Cot, 22, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Charles 
 C. Boj'cott. 
 
 TWENTY-FIFTH DAY— FEIDAY, OCTOBER 22nd, 1880, 
 
 The Commissioners sat tliis morning at eleven o'clock at tlie Railway Hotel, Galway, and resumed the Inquiry, 
 
 Present : — The Right Hon. the Earl of Bessborough, Chairman ; Right Hon. Baron Dowse, 
 The O'CoNOB Don, and Arthur M'Morrogh Kavanagh, Esq., p.L. 
 
 Mr. Charles C. Boycott, examined. 
 
 18463. Mr. Kavaxagh. — I believe that you are 
 Lord Erne's agent ■? — Yes, for the County of Mayo. 
 
 18464. What is the extent of that property over 
 which you are agent, or about it ? — I should think 
 about 1,600 acres. It is scattered ; some is at Castle- 
 bar, and some at Longh Mask. 
 
 18465. How long have you acted as his Lordship's 
 agent 1 — For seven years. 
 
 1S466. I believe you have been subjected to a good 
 deal of unpleasantness lately 1 — I have. 
 
 18467. Perhaps you would tell the Commissioners 
 whao exactly has happened 1 — I was instructed by the 
 Earl of Erne to collect his November rents of 1879, 
 and to allow his tenants 10 per cent abatement. I 
 cannot speak accurately to a pound, because I am only 
 going on memory, but the gross rental is either £30 
 or £31 18s. id. over Griffith's valuation. His lord- 
 ship was allowing 10 per cent on that, and asking for 
 the November rent of 1879 in some cases, and in re- 
 spect to yearly tenancies, the JMay rent of 1879. The 
 tenants all refused to pay — all but two — unless they 
 got an abatement of 25 per cent. I referred the matter 
 to his lordship, and he said he would give no more 
 than 20 per cent. I first sent a letter to them to pay, 
 and they declined, and I then took out ejectment 
 processes. 
 
 18468. Chaikman. — What was the date of this? — 
 About the 20th of September. 
 
 18469. Of this year ?— Yes. I think it was the 
 22nd of September. The ejectment processes Tvere 
 served on the 22nd September. The process server 
 only succeeded in serving three of the ejectment 
 processes. He had a force of police with him to pro- 
 tect him, but they were beaten, and he only succeeded 
 in serving three of the notices, and there , has been no 
 attempt since to serve the remainder. Those three 
 processes came off at last Ballinrobe Quarter Sessions 
 and the cases were undefended, and decrees, were 
 given. 
 
 18470. Which property was this on 1 — On the 
 Lough Mask property, in Kilmaine barony. 
 
 18471. Is that near any large town] — Near the 
 town of Ballinrobe. 
 
 18472. Mr Kavanagh. — Since that time you have 
 not been able to serve any of the processes 1 — 1 have 
 not tried to serve them, for that was the last day for 
 the Ballinrobe Quarter Sessions, and there is no 
 Sessions now until January. 
 
 1S473. Do 5'ou apprehend any difficulty in getting 
 those decrees served when the time comes for having 
 them put in force 1 — I am certain that they cannot be 
 served without a very large force of police, and if the 
 ejectment decrees have to be carried out — rand I don't 
 suppose they will — in fact I am confident that they 
 cannot, for the men are very well able to pay, but if 
 they were evicted nobody would take their land, and 
 they would be reinstated again, as is done everywhere 
 in Ireland now. They would be put in again by mob 
 force and kept there. I don't think the tenants will 
 go to decrees. I think they will pay. I myself, as an 
 agent have been subjected to terrible injuries by every 
 possible mode of malice that ingenuity could devise. 
 
 18474. Baron Dowse.— What do you attribute that 
 to ? — I attribute it to a statement of the priest of the 
 parish, in which he said he would show them how 
 it was very easy to reduce the parishioners of any 
 parish to those only who had the cause of the Land 
 League at heart. As an agent in bringing ejectment 
 processes, of course it is well known that I have not 
 the cause of the Land League at heart., and for that 
 reason the edict lias gone fortli that 1 ain to be biuiishcd 
 fvom the narisli. 
 
 18475. Who is that Parish Priest! — Father John 
 O'Malley. 
 
 18476. What is the parish? — I think it is lii\. 
 maine. ' I have a cutting here from a newspaper of his 
 speech. 
 
 18477. If every person is to be banished out of the 
 parish who has not the cause of the Land League at 
 heart that means that a great many -would be 
 banished 1 — I don't suppose it would interfere with any 
 one unless a man who showed openly that he had not 
 the cause of the Land League at heart and went openly 
 against them. 
 
 18478. How do they suppose you went against 
 them? — By bringing ejectment processes. 
 
 18479. Mr. Kavanagh. — State what sort of incon- 
 venience and malice you have been subjected to?— On 
 the 24th September, a mob came up to my house and 
 ordered off every person in my employment There 
 was not a single person left but one that I had brought 
 from Dublin, and since then he is the only person I 
 have been able to get. I have, with the assistance ' 
 of my nephew, to drive in the cows, and drive them 
 oiit, and draw out water to the cattle, take out the 
 horse and cart and drive them, under an escort of 
 police, and there is not a single sort of person allowed 
 to help me. My herd has given up) his holding, but 
 he will not give up the house, in order to prevent it 
 being given to a stranger. Others have given work, 
 but the people will not work for me. I have the 
 magistrate's orders for ejectment, but I can get nobody 
 like a special bailiff to serve. Even last Tuesday the 
 woman who washed the clothes for the house said that 
 she dare not do so again. 
 
 18480. Chairman. — Will not the magistrates when 
 they issue orders see to their being carried out? — You 
 must have a special bailiff if you want to do that I 
 can get no one to execute them. 
 
 18481. Mr. Kavanagh. — I believe you are pre- 
 vented saving your crops? — Yes. I cannot get my 
 potatoes dug nor my hay saved. I cannot get my 
 corn threshed, nor my mangolds cut, and after this 
 frost my man,L;olds will be worthless. It will be 
 hardly worth lifting if the frost is as severe as 
 here. 
 
 1 8482. Baron Dowse. — How far is your place from 
 Ballinrobe 1 — Four miles. 
 
 18483. Is it in the direction of Cong? — A little on 
 the right on the shores of Lough Mask. The police 
 have to briiag me my letters now. The messenger 
 who used to carry them, or a little postboy, was 
 threatened and struck, and my nephew, a boy who is 
 gone to school to-day, used to go with him, and drive 
 him in a pony find car in the mornings ; and he was 
 threatened, by some people who came up with a stick 
 and threatened him not to come , again. Then I sent 
 police with the boy to protect him, until he had to get 
 ready for the examination at the college to-day. Sines 
 then the Government have ordered jjolicemen to hm'i 
 out my letters daily. A woman who brought me on' 
 telegrams from the post office was threatened, and the 
 postmistress told me it was not safe to send her os * 
 messenger for fear the telegrams would be taken froo 
 her. She has brought them since, but she has ffl' 
 structions from the postmistress to tell the police 
 authorities in order that she may bring the telegrams 
 safely. I am living with ten policemen in my house 
 at present, and I have to be escorted wherever I g*' 
 by policemen. 
 
 18-184. Chairman.^How long have you been 
 acting for Lord Erne ? — For seven years. 
 
 l«46-5. Had you any trouble before this in the 
 collection of rents ! — In August, last vear, when the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 593 
 
 rents came due, ttey posted — a notice was posted on 
 my gate, with the sign of a coffin on it, and it warned 
 me not on any account to collect the rents, unless they 
 got twenty or twenty-five per cent. off. 
 
 18486. That was before they knew how the crops 
 of 1879 would turn out? — Yes. 
 
 18487. And it was a bad year? — Yes. 
 
 18488. Had 1878 been a bad year in this part of 
 the country ?— No. The injury to the tenants then 
 was the injury in the price of cattle, and the immediate 
 stopping of all credit by the local tradesmen. I think 
 that is what wound up the country so much. 
 
 18489. Did the tradesmen issue executions ? — Yes. 
 They stopped credit without any warning, and the 
 people had no provision made for that. In the year 
 1879, I fancy I am correct in stating that, there 
 was not one-fourth of the usual nvunber of harvestmen 
 coming from England and Scotland of the Irish 
 labourers, and they had nothing to come over with. 
 That would not effect IJord Erne's tenantry as they 
 are snug holders. 
 
 18490. They would not be affected by tradesmen's 
 bills so much? — No. They were middling well off, 
 and did not wish to part with what they had. They 
 are middling well off now. . 
 
 18491. lEad this system been adopted in other places 
 with others who were in trouble about tradesmen's 
 biUs ?— Yes ; they followed on the system of the others. 
 
 18492. Could you give the natnes of some of those 
 on whom you served notices? — Elwood, and Joyce, 
 and Duffy. 
 
 18493. You served notices in those three cases? — Yes. 
 They were tried at the Ballinrobe Quarter Sessions, 
 and decrees got. 
 
 18494. Then you can say positively that it was not 
 inability to pay that prevented them paying ? — I am 
 certain of that in my own mind. 
 
 18495. Mr. Kavanagh. — Now, itt Lord Eme's 
 dealings with his tenants is he liberal ? — Extremely 
 liberal. Any tenant who wants to build a barn, or 
 shed, or cartshed, or stable, or anything of that sort, 
 his lordship orders the agent to see whether the im- 
 provement is to be made, and to value the amount of 
 the cost of it ; and his lordshij) allows one half, and 
 gives timber off the estate. 
 
 18496. Baron Dowse. — Does he continue to do so 
 up to the present? — No, he does not. Within the 
 last two months I had instructions from his lordship 
 to withdraw from it. 
 
 18497. You have been appointed since the Land 
 Act ? — Yes, seven years ago. 
 
 18498. Did he make any changd with the tenants 
 in consequence of the Land Act, or anything of that 
 kind ? — I am confident ho did not. 
 
 18499. Chairman. — Did you experience any ill- 
 feeling before that time ? — Never. I believe the Earl 
 of Erne was the first landlord who gave an abatement, 
 even before I was asked by anybody. He gave an 
 abatement of 10 per cent, to the tenants in the North 
 and West, and that was the cause of ill-feeling. 
 
 18500. Baron Dowse. — Did the surrounding land- 
 lords give greater abatement?— Yes. 
 
 18501. How much did they give? — I could not say. 
 I heard that Lord Kilmaine gave 15 per cent., and I 
 heard that Lord Ardilauu gave 30 and gave meal. 
 Captain Knox has given no abatement. 
 
 18502. Who is his agent? — Mr. Darley. ■ 
 
 18503. Does he live between Ballinrobe and Cong? 
 Outside — between Creagh and Ballinrobe. 
 
 18504. Is his agent unpopular? — He is guarded by 
 two policemen wherever he goes. In the barony of 
 Kilmaine there are sixteen individuals, or sixteen pro- 
 perties under protection. 
 
 ■ 18505. Sixteen people ? — Fifteen or sixteen in the 
 one barony. 
 
 18506. Is Lord Erne's property low-lying land or 
 mountain land ? — Low-lying land. 
 
 18507. It is on the Ballinrobe side of Lough Mask, 
 and not across the lake ? — No, it is not the mountain 
 land. 
 
 Mr. Chiirlos C 
 Boycott. 
 
 18508. It appears to be good land? — It is very good Ort. 22, isso. 
 land. 
 
 18509. Is it limestone land? — Yes. 
 
 18510. What are the average rents? — They 
 bulk rents. 
 
 18511. What would they be about an acre, for we 
 would like the acreage ? — I was not prepared for that. 
 
 18512. What difterence is it from the valuation? — 
 Some is under and some over. 
 
 18513. You allow 10 per cent. ? — Yes, which briii;:;s 
 them under the valuation. 
 
 18514. And they wanted ^yhat ? — 25 percent. 
 
 18515. The effect of that would be to reduce their 
 rents by one-fourth ? — Yes. 
 
 18516. A nd that you refused ? — Yes. 
 
 18517. How many civil bills did you attempt to 
 serve ? — I think it was eleven or fifteen. 
 
 18518. Why did you not succeed in sei-ving any ? — 
 We served three. 
 
 1 851 9. And with the others you wei-e too late? — Ye^. 
 
 18520. Is there no mode of substituting service, the 
 same as in the Siiperior Coiirts ? — The solicitor made 
 application at the Quarter Sessions to allow service by 
 post, and the County Court Judge declined to do so. 
 
 18521. I don't know whether he has the power? 
 — I know he has. I am confident. 
 
 18522. The Superior Courts can substitute service. 
 You attribute the state of affairs to the ejectments you 
 served, or intended to serve, and the refusal to reduce 
 the rent below 10 per cent. ? — Yes. 
 
 18523. Are you anything worse off than the sur- 
 rounding landlords or agents? — I am. I have been 
 picked out as a victim to show the power of the Land 
 League. I am, unfortunately for myself, a farmer as- 
 well as an agent. 
 
 18524. How much land have you yourself? — 
 Where I live I have above 300 acres, and I have an 
 off farm, in all about 1,000 acres. 
 
 18525. How long have you been farming that ? — 
 All my life, or since shortly after I left the service. 
 It is pretty nearly thirty years. 
 
 18526. Then you had been living in this country 
 before being appointed land agent ? — Yes. 
 
 18527. Yoii were farming the land ? — Yes. 
 
 18528. You were in the army ? — Yes. 
 - 18529. And you left the army thirty years ago ? — 
 Yes, or nearly. 
 
 18530. And you settled there 1 — I settled in MayO/ 
 twenty-five years ago. 
 
 18531. How long have you been at l/ough Mask?; 
 — Seven years. 
 
 18532. Is it under Lord Erne ?— Yes. 
 
 18533. How did you get that. Was anybody- 
 evicted ?— No. There was an amicable arrangement. 
 The tenant had a lease and got into difliculties, and 
 the property was sold in the Incumbered Estates 
 Court, and his lordship bought the interest, and as it 
 was vacant it was given to me, and when I got it I 
 was appointed agent at the same time. 
 
 18534. Chaikman. — It was not an eviction by Lord 
 Erne ? — No. I am not quite clear, though, as I had 
 nothing to do with it. 
 
 18535. Baron Dowse. — Was any person evicted 
 from the place ? — No. 
 
 18536. You got it from people that had nothing ta 
 do with any other persons ?^-I got it from the landlord 
 direct. The former tenant had been sub-sheriff. 
 
 18537. What was his name ? — Rutledge. 
 
 18538. He was not of the ordinary farming class? 
 — No. 
 
 18539. Why do they select you for persecution? 
 
 They want to banish me from the farm. 
 
 18540. They pimish you by depriving you of the 
 labourers, in order to cripple you in ^vorkinn■ the 
 farm ?— Yes. 
 
 18541. But independent of being agent, has it 
 anything to do with what has been your line of 
 action ? — No, if I would give up the actions to-morrow 
 the workpeople would come back, and everything- 
 
 would go on smooth. 
 
 4 G 
 
594 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Charles C. 
 Bovcott. 
 
 18542. Chairman.— 
 people working with 
 
 -How long were the work- 
 you without any difficulty 
 
 arising ?— They were there up to the 24tli September, 
 and then they were turned out. 
 
 18543. And were they turned out by an order 
 from the Land League ? — Yes, a mob came up to the 
 place. 
 
 18544. Was there any difficulty about wages? — No, 
 I had a strike with them at the harvest time for a couple 
 of days, and they were back at their work at this 
 time, and working at regular wages . that they had 
 agreed on, and they now say they would like to come 
 back to work. 
 
 18545. Are they tenants of Lord .Erne's? — They 
 are not Lord Erne's tenants. They say they would 
 be glad to go in, and I believe they would like to go 
 to work. 
 
 18546. Baron Dowse. — They are part of the popu- 
 lation of the country "i — ^Yes, but they are afraid to 
 come in. 
 
 18547. Is it that they are more malicious, or that 
 they are afraid, or both? — Tliere is not a single 
 individual in the county who is not afraid. Even a 
 juror is afraid to go to Court. Every man in the 
 country is in fear, and they say that even the protec- 
 tion of the police is of po use, because they say the 
 moment the police are taken away they will be shot 
 the same as Lord Mountmorres. 
 
 18548. If every man in the country is afraid, of 
 whom are they afraid 1 — It is more than I can tell. 
 That is my only answer. 
 
 18549. Are there any marked men in the country 
 that would appear to be the source of all this ? — Yes. 
 
 18550. There are?— Yes. 
 
 18551. Are those people to your knowledge con- 
 nected with the Land League, or do you hear them men- 
 tioned in connection with the Land League ? — Every 
 man is a subscriber to the Land League. Every man 
 pays his shilling, and they don't deny it. 
 
 18552. Yoii spoke about a clergyman making a 
 speech ? — Yes, I took it from the Ti^reeniare newspaper. 
 
 18553. Ghaibman. — So far as I see by the news- 
 papers, the Land League direct the people to pay the 
 Grovernment valuation ?-^Yes. 
 
 18554. And they offer below it?— Yes. 
 
 - 18555. Have they tendered the Government valua- 
 tion ? — No. 
 
 18556. That seems to be acting against the advice 
 of the Land League 1 — Yes, but in some districts the 
 Land League send nioney to the tenants to defend 
 them or to support their families while in jail. 
 
 18557. Baron Dowse. — I saw a reason for that 
 was because a man was presumed to be innocent. Did 
 you see that ? — No. 
 
 18558. Supposing you owned this property yourself, 
 and living in the country among the people, would you 
 youi'self have reduced the rent below 10 per cent. ?— 
 I would not. I don't know whether that answer is to 
 go forth to the public. 
 
 18559. AVe all know — I know and the Commis- 
 sioners know — that the Earl of Erne is a liberal land- 
 lord, and I know myself that in Fermanagh and 
 Donegal he does not manage diffisrently from anybody 
 else, and I suppose it is the same hero ? — Yes. 
 
 18.500. And he is a liberal landlord ? — Yes. 
 
 18561. Mr. Kavanagh. — In some districts the 
 abatement was larger than Avhat Lord Erne gave in 
 his rents. Are the rents higher there? — I don't 
 know. The only two that I heard of were Lord Kil- 
 maine_ and Lord Ardilaun. I fancy Lord Kilmaine's 
 are the same as Lord Erne's, but the tenants are not 
 such a comfortable class, and the holdings are not so 
 good, and the land not so good. 
 
 18562. Are the tenants in worse circumstances? — 
 Yes. 
 
 18563. Lord Erne's are comfortable? — Yes. 
 
 18564. Baron Dowsi;.— Did he buy that estate?— 
 I don't know.. I fancy he came to it by marriage. 
 One part belonged to Mr. Cooper of Sligo. Mr. 
 
 Cooper's tenants are pretty well off. Their rents, are 
 just about the same. . 
 
 185G5. How does his agentget on? — ^He does not 
 live there. He comes there once a year and collects ' 
 the rents, and goes away. 
 
 18566. Does he get on better than you 1 — I cannot 
 say. 
 
 18567. The tenants put a pressure on you as a 
 tenant as well as acting as agent ? — Yes. 
 
 18568. Mr. Kavanagh. — I gather that in addition 
 to this sort of malice, in preventing the farnung 
 work your life is also in danger? — In hourly 
 danger. I dare not go out anywhere. If I do so 
 and meet friends afterwards, I hear of the naiTow 
 escape I have had. If I was not guarded by police 
 when driving on my car, I would not be safe, and I 
 have to be guarded going out on the land. 
 
 18569. Baron Dowse. — You are told that?— Yes., 
 
 18570. Do those people know that ? — What people? 
 18.^71. The people that tell you that? — It is my 
 
 friends that hear it. 
 
 18572. They must hear it from somebody tkat 
 knows ? — Yes, people who know. 
 
 18573. Then the whole country must be diseasedin, 
 that respect ? — It is as open as it can be. 
 
 18574. Mr. Kavaxagii.— Is it not your opinion' 
 that the country in your district is practically intimi-, 
 dated by the Land League ? — I am certain of it. 
 
 18575. And there is a sort of reign of terror?— 
 There is a sort of reign of terror in the whole coun- 
 try side. A Scotchman, who has acted for twenty- 
 five or twenty-six years for Denis Brown, who lives 
 abroad himself, got a threatening notice and a oofiin 
 on his door, the other day, to tell him to leave it — 
 that if he was not there as a Scotchman, the owner 
 could not manage himself, and no Irishman would do 
 it for him, and that they would have it for themselves. 
 That was only a fortnight ago. 
 
 18576. Chairman. — That was a threatening notice? 
 — Yes. Glenoorric is the place. There was a no- 
 tice on the blacksmith's door who shoes my horses, 
 that if he did so again he would be shot. I saw the 
 notice on the door. This notice was written by a 
 poet. It says — 
 
 ' ' Take notice, ere it is too late. 
 Or you will surely meet with Ferrick's fate." 
 
 18577. Have you had any threats from anybody 
 pei'sonally ? — No, not for a year. 
 
 18578. I don't mean letters, but personal threats ? 
 —No. 
 
 18579. Mr. Kavanagh. — ^You say not for a year. 
 Had you threatening letters ? — I have not got them 
 personally since last June twelve months. 
 
 18580. That was the time when there was a threat 
 to prevent you collecting the rents ? — Yes. 
 
 18581. Baron Dowse. — Do you think there could 
 be a change in the law of landlord and tenant that 
 would be a remedy ?— Not in my case ; for in my case 
 on the landlord's part they are offisred below Griffith's 
 valuation, and the only remedy would be to give the 
 land rent free. 
 
 18582. If there was to be a remedy,, a remedy, 
 might be come to that would satisfy both parties ?- 
 I don't think so, because you can only bind one party. 
 You cannot satisfy both. 
 
 18583. Suppose you satisfy the tenant, and no in- 
 justice is done to the landlord, could it be done?— I 
 don't think you can satisfy the tenant until you 
 abolish the reign of terror. 
 
 18584. Would not that abolish it?— If there was a 
 revaluation of the whole of Ireland and fixed rents in 
 innumerable cases it would raise the rents on the 
 tenant and that would not please him. 
 
 18585. Chairman. — Would that be the case if his 
 own improvements were excepted? — I don't know, 
 how far they would go back. I don't know how they 
 would trace it back. ' 
 
 18586. Baron Dowse.; — It goes back except for per- 
 manent buildings and.reclamationof ,waste,to twenty;! 
 years before the passing of the Act, and the making of the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 .claim — tha* is to say; ten years from tKe present 
 time. Every year the Act is in force takes a year 
 ' off, but at present, under the law, a man can make a 
 claim for ten years' general improvements made 
 before the Act? — ^Yes, and many properties have been 
 sold in the Incumbered Estates Court, just the same 
 as telegraph shares and stocks in the Court. A man 
 paid down his money for it, and became a landlord at 
 what he supposed to be the rent. Is he then to have 
 the pleasvire of paying twice over for houses and 
 other improvements on his land. He has already paid 
 for them in the Court, and if they are to be given to 
 the tenant and deducted from the landlord he will 
 have to pay for them twice. 
 
 18587. Chairman. — You say there would be no 
 means of ascertaining the tenants' interest ? — My im- 
 pression is that the landlord has bought the interest 
 which was sold in the Incumbered Estates Court. 
 
 18588. Baeon Dowse. — That would be a question 
 of how it would work, and there is a possibility of 
 
 • its not working. Suppose there were proper directions 
 given would it work satisfactorily ? — I believe the 
 best thing that could be done would be to have a re- 
 valuation of the whole of the farming land of Ireland, 
 and that taken as a fixed rent as between landlord 
 and tenant, bxit I do not believe the tenant would 
 agree to it, except where he was the gainer by it. 
 
 18589. Don't you think the whole feeling of the 
 public would be against him? — Yes. 
 
 18-590. Would it not work perfectly right? — Yes; 
 but I think that the present gain to the tenants would 
 be small. I think they would not be pleased. • 
 
 18591. Mr. Kavanagh. — As to tenant improve- 
 ment, do you admit that, as a rule, the tenants have 
 made the most of the improvements in the land 1 — I 
 believe they have. I believe it is the exception in 
 any case for the landlord to do anything except re- 
 ceive the rents. It is the general rule, and always 
 has been. 
 
 18592. Lord Erne has allowed for buildings 1 — Yes, 
 for buildings and mearing fences, and expended 
 money on roads. It is generally good land. 
 
 18593. He has helped in making roads ? — Yes ; he 
 helped. 
 
 18594. Baron Dowse. — Does he ever come himself 
 to the estate 1 — Not for ten years. He is very old. 
 
 18.595. Mr. Kavanagh. — For the seven years you 
 have been there how much has been expended in help- 
 ing improvements, in roads and the like, and in mak- 
 ing improvements ? — From £80 to £100, I suppose. 
 
 18596. Every year?—]Sro. 
 
 18597. Altogether? — Yes. On houses every year 
 £100 would cover what has been done within the last 
 six or seven years. 
 
 18598. That is in a district of abovit 1,500 acres ? — • 
 Yes. My rent is the highest rent. 
 
 18599. Baron Dowse. — I suppose the agency is not 
 worth much? — No, it is not. The rent is only 
 about £1,000 a year, and I pay £500 a year myself. 
 
 18600. Better for you to resign? — ^When acting 
 for Lord Erne, and things got into trouble and all 
 that, I would not leave ; but, if I got things quiet, I 
 would ask him to take up the agency from me. 
 
 18601. Chaieman. — You said that Lord Kilmaine 
 and Lord Ardilaun gave higher abatements than you 
 did. Are they in the same position as Lord Erne ?— 
 No. I said that Lord Kilmaine's tenants had agreed 
 to pay up, and he gave 15 per cent. I said that they 
 came down and talked the matter over, and agreed to 
 an abatement of 15 per cent. 
 
 18602. And they have paid ? — They said they 
 would pay, and his lordship and liis brother were out 
 shooting and saw poachers, and they gave them chase. 
 The people said they had as much right over the lands 
 as them, and fired shots over their heads from pistols, 
 They had them summoned at the last Court for it. 
 
 i. 18603. Earon Dowse. — You don't think there is 
 any objection to yourself persdnally? — No. 
 
 18G04 I believe you are an Englishman ? — Yes. 
 ; ^ i8j605. They don't make any objection on that 
 ffroimd ? — -Not a bit. 
 
 18606. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you know of any Oc«. 22, isso. 
 other cause, but that you have endeavoured conscien- « ^r~. „ 
 tiously to do your duty to your employer, for exciting Boycott? ^ 
 their feelings ? — I may say that I believe it is exactly 
 
 the reverse. I believe there are a few more people than 
 the country people that keep up the excitement. 
 
 18607. Baron Dowse. — And they would be wilUng 
 to assist you only that they are terrorized ?— I believe 
 so. 
 
 18608. How many ejectments during the whole 
 seven years did you serve or carry out ? — On that 
 property none. 
 
 18609. You evicted no person ? — No. 
 
 18610. Neither for non-payment of rent nor any- 
 thing else 1 — No. 
 
 18611. Then you had no land claims? — No. L 
 evicted some from the County Galway, but not from 
 Lord Erne's property. 
 
 18612. That had nothing to do, then, with the pre- 
 sent business ? — No. I had a letter from the bailiff 
 on Lord Erne's property, the other day, at Castlebar, 
 stating that I might come on any day, for the tenants 
 would pay. 
 
 18613. Do you know the Eev. John O'Malley?— 
 Yes. 
 
 18614. Are you on good terms? — Yes; he is on 
 good terms with me. 
 
 18615. What is his object in making the speech ? 
 — Merely to show the power of the Land League. 
 He is doing this withovit breaking the law of God or 
 the law of man. 
 
 18616. And he can do that? — Yes; that is what 
 he thinks, I suppose. I know there is his speech re- 
 ported that I alluded to, and the reason that I say he 
 is the leader and the instigator is, because several of 
 the workpeople told me that they would ask his per- 
 mission to come back to work. If they had to get his 
 permission to come back, of course I take it for granted 
 that he ordered them not to come. One of them is 
 getting money from the Land League. 
 
 18617. To support him ?— Yes. 
 
 18618. If you were away; do they suppose they 
 would have somebody in your place who would deal 
 more liberally with them ? — I don't know. They are 
 a very bad lot. Thirty-one civil bUl processes have been 
 issued. Ninety-five policemen, two sub-inspectors, and 
 a resident magistrate, went to serve thirty-five pro- 
 cesses for shop goods, and they succeeded in serving 
 one. 
 
 18619. Chaieman. — Is the resistance from the 
 people in the country or people coming from the town ? 
 — People in the country. 
 
 18620. Baron Dowse. — How are the laboxir'ers off? 
 — Just about me they are very well off. The men 
 about-me are lifting potatoes, and for the next fortnight 
 all will be working that way. 
 
 18621. Was there much distress there ? — No. 
 
 18622. Chairman. — You said there was a strike. 
 What was the amount of wages you were pajdng at 
 the time of the strike 1 — 7s., 7s. 6d., 9s., and lis. 
 
 18623. And did they come back at the same rate ? 
 — No ; I raised them Is. Gd. to 9s. a week. 
 
 18624. To make them all 9s. ?-— No, there is one I 
 give 15s. to. The strike was not about the amount 
 of wages so muph as to keep all the hands on till the 
 1st November, employing them at such work as I 
 wanted. They wanted all to come on at 9s., and to be 
 kept on till the 1st November. 
 
 18625. That wovild have affected the labourers and 
 not the tenants ? — No. A few of the tenants were in 
 for the harvest. I don't think there was a tenant on 
 Lord Erne's property working on my farm when all 
 the labourers were ordered off by the mob. 
 
 18626. Baron Dowse. -^You say you are apprehen- 
 sive of your life ? — My life is not worth an hour's 
 purchase. 
 
 18627. Now, if you gave up the agency do you 
 think the people would carry on this agitation?— I 
 don't believe they would. 
 
 18628. Then it is not with reference to your 
 relations as a farmer that they object ? — Not a bit. 
 
 4G2 
 
596 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 18S0. 
 Ml- Charles C. 
 
 EoTCOtt. 
 
 18629. You don't think it right to give tip the 
 agency in consequence of the condition of the country 1 
 —No. 
 
 18630. But jou think if you gave up the agency 
 the matter would be different ? — I think so. 
 
 18631. And the agency is not worth more than 
 £50 a year to you ? — Not more than that ; somethino 
 like that. ^^ 
 
 18632. You collect £1,000 and pay £500, and at 
 the outside it is not worth more than £50! — That is alL 
 
 Eev. J. 
 Gardner Eobb, 
 
 D.D., LL.D. 
 
 Eev. J. Gardner Robb, d.d., ll.d., of Galway, examined. 
 
 18633. Chairman. — I believe you were formerly a 
 Presbyterian minister at Clogher, county Tyrone 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 18634. And I believe you wish to give us some 
 information as to the tenant-right custom in that 
 district ■? — Yes. 
 
 18635. You think there was some defect in the 
 Land Act, as to its not being a sufficient check on 
 arbitrary evictions 1 — I do. 
 
 18636. Have you any instance you can mention in 
 which you think that is the case ? — There is a typical 
 case in the instance of a John Smith, of Cavanakirk. 
 
 18637. What was the cause of his ejectment ?— He 
 was noticed for an increase of rent, and refusing to 
 agree to the terms proposed by the landlord, he was 
 served with an ejectment. 
 
 18638. And did he serve a land claim? — Yes. 
 
 18639. What was the result of that! — He got 
 £1,000. 
 
 18640. Do you say that that was not sufficient 
 compensation ! — I say it was not half enough. He 
 held a farm of about 100 a<;res, the model farm of the 
 district, and it was gradually and gradually increasing, 
 and he fenced and hedged, and drained it, and brought 
 it to the highest state of cultivation at his own ex- 
 pense. 
 
 18641. Under whom was it held ! — Mr. Browne, of 
 Aughantaine, Mr. Thomas R Browne. 
 
 18642. You say he did not wish to leave the farm ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 18643. He thought he got an insufficient amount! 
 —Yes. 
 
 18644. Baron Do\ysE. — What was the increase 
 asked from him ! — I think his rent was £200, and 
 the increase would make it £250. 
 
 18645. That would be an increase of about £50 ! 
 —Yes. 
 
 18646. Chairman. — If a tenant-right system could 
 be secured by doing away with evictions, except for 
 non-pa3rment of a fair rent or bad conduct, would that 
 be reasonable ! — Yes ; and for the advantage of the 
 country and of every honest man in it. 
 
 18647. And for other parts of the country !— Yes ; 
 everywhere. 
 
 18648. Do you think it wovild be of advantage to 
 Galway ! — All over the country. 
 
 18649. It does not exist in Galway! — I don't 
 know. I am not long here, and I have had few 
 conversations with the farmers. 
 
 18650. Do you think the people in the country — in 
 the West — ^would be satisfied if they had such a law ! — 
 I believe the people generally, if they had such a law, 
 from conversations I have had, would be satisfied. 
 
 18651. You don't know what is going on in the 
 country 1 — No, not much in this part of the country. 
 
 18652. Baron Dowse. — Do you think it ought to 
 satisfy them ? — Yes. I think it ought to be fair be- 
 tween man and man. 
 
 18653. I suppose this gentleman, Mr. Smith, would 
 have been ready to pay a fair rent ! — Yes ; but his 
 son was under the impression that it was too high. 
 His son would have been responsible for the manage- 
 ment of the farm. 
 
 18654. He considered the rent was too dear! — 
 Yes. 
 
 18655. And it confiscated his interest in the farms! 
 — It did not recognise his improvements. 
 
 18656. What did the landlord do with the farms !— 
 He broke them up into fields and got a considerable 
 sum more for them by auction for two years. 
 
 18657. Do you think he made on the whole by it ! 
 — He afterwards let them on a 61 years' lease at £250 
 
 a year, thus making £50 yearly out of Mr. Smith's 
 improvements, and at his expense. 
 
 18658. But he had to pay £1,000 !— I believe he 
 did. I believe he lost nothing by it. The faOure of 
 the existing system is that the sum generally allowed 
 at Quarter Sessions is a compromise. It does not 
 come up to the just claim of the tenant, and the land- 
 lord suffers nothing. ■ 
 
 18659. Is the natural tendency that the tenant 
 would not get the outside price when the landlord 
 would get something more ! — Yes. 
 
 186C0. And then the landlord fights upon velvet 
 when he goes to a court of law ! — No matter wliat 
 the decision is he is always safe, and the unfortunate 
 tenant may go to the workhouse. 
 
 18661. What did the Smith family do!— He is 
 still looking for a farm since 1876. 
 
 18662. Has he got one !— No. 
 
 18663. Was there a house! — Yes, there was, and 
 he paid 5 per cent, on the money expended in building 
 the house. 
 
 18664. When was the lease run out!-— He was 
 allowed to remain a year or two and established his 
 claim under the Act of 1870, and he was wilhngto 
 pay the previous rent. 
 
 18665. Then he remained a year or two paying 
 the lease! — The lease was at the lower rent, i.e., the rent 
 included the 5 per cent. 
 
 18666. But the low rent he was willing to pay, 
 including the 5 per cent. ! — Yes. 
 
 18667. Mr. Kavanagh — What proportion didthe 
 rent bear to the Poor Law valuation !^It was over ; 
 Poor Law valuation, £167 10s. ; rent nearly £200. 
 
 18668. Much! — About the average in the neish- 
 bourhood — from one- fourth to one-sixth. 
 
 18669. And the rent was about the same as the 
 adjoining land ! — It was higher. 
 
 18670. But the landlord had done the buildings! 
 — The mere houses. The tenant did all the other 
 things. 
 
 18671. Baron Dowse. — The tenant was paying 
 5 per cent, on the buildings ! — Yes. 
 
 18672. And there was something beyond that!— 
 Yes. 
 
 18673. If there had been a tribunal to settle the 
 matter between them, would it have been satisfactory ! 
 — Yes, it would I am sure. 
 
 18674. Even if the tenant were obliged to pay 
 higher, it would be the award of a fair tribunal!— 
 Yes, He was willing to pay a fair rent 
 
 18675. Were you the Presbyterian clergyman !— 
 Yes. 
 
 18676. And Mr. Smith was a member of your con- 
 gregation ! — Yes. 
 
 18677. And the facts were within your knowledge! 
 Ye.s. 
 
 18678. That is a tenant-right district! — ^Yes. 
 
 18679. Were the lands well cultivated !— This 
 gentleman had introduced the best breed of cattle, and 
 had introduced machinery on his farms, and he had 
 taken prizes at all the shows. 
 
 18680. Had he purchased land close by him ! — Yes, 
 all the tenants going out got something. 
 
 18681. But the landlord compensated him to the 
 extent of £1,000 !— Yes. 
 
 18682. I believe Mr. Browne has a good estate!— 
 Yes, some good land, and some mountain land. 
 
 18683. I thought it was pretty fair land ! Whatis 
 the rental ! — About £5,000 a year. 
 
 18684. Mr. Kavanagh.— Was it for tenant-right, 
 or under the Land Act the claim was made! — For 
 unexhausted improvements. / 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 507 
 
 18685. Baron Dowse. — It was not under the Ulster 
 custom ? — No, not under the Ulster custom. 
 
 18686. Mr. Kavanagh. — The Ulster custom exists 
 in Tyrone 1 — Yes. , 
 
 18687. Baron Dowse. ^Was it the present Chair- 
 man, Sir Francis Brady who made the award 1 — Yes. 
 
 18688. Did they appeal ?— No. 
 
 18689. Why do you think, if they only got one-fourth Oct. 22 isso. 
 or one-fifth of what they applied for, did they not j.^^ j_ 
 appeal ? — I don't know. But I know Mr. Smith after- Gardner Eobb 
 wards regretted that he had not appealed. He only d.d., ll.d. 
 got one-half of what he was fairly entitled to as events 
 have showed. 
 
 Mr. J. H. Blake, of Rathville, Athenry, examined 
 
 Mr. J. H 
 
 Elake. 
 
 18690. Chaieman. — Are you a landlord? — I am a 
 land agent. 
 
 18691. I believe you are here as a representative of 
 the persons interested in the land 1 — Yes, all parties 
 interested in the land. 
 
 18692. Both landowners and land agents'? — Land 
 owners and land agents. 
 
 18693. I have not any notes of the evidence proposed 
 to be given by you ; perhaps you would say what points 
 you would like to bring before us 1 — 1 have the different 
 queries here that was to be replied to, and I will hand 
 them in [Query sheet handed to Chairman.] 
 
 18694. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you agent to Lord 
 Clanricarcje 1 — I am. 
 
 18695. Chairman. — In this district I see tenant- 
 right does not exist, but does it exist to some extent 
 in the county ? — Not to my knowledge. 
 
 18696. Or any system corresponding to if? — -None 
 whatever. 
 
 18697. Not on Lord Clam-icarde's property? — No. 
 
 18698. Not in regard to the sale of holdings? — No. 
 
 18699. Is a great deal of the land of the country 
 held under leases, already given, or have there been 
 leases lately given? — No, not to any extent. 
 
 18700. Are the lands held generally or altogether by 
 yearly tenants ? — Yes, by yearly tenants. 
 
 18701.. Under written agreements? — ^By written 
 agreements. 
 
 18702. All written agreements? — Yes. 
 
 18703. Were they existing before the Land Act of 
 1870? — Some were previous to the Land Act, and any 
 arrangements afterwards were made in accordance 
 with the Land Act. 
 
 18704. Are there any special clauses in them 
 barring the Land Act ? — No. I think the agreements 
 were all drawn in accordance with the Land Act. 
 
 18705. As regards the County cess, how is the 
 land held? — In some instances I have allowed public 
 cess, but latterly I have not. 
 
 18706. Speaking of that, is that only on the property 
 you are concerned with, but not on others ? — Really I 
 don't know what other parties do. 
 
 18707. Have you found that that system of 
 written aareements has worked well with the tenants ? 
 — I think so. 
 
 18708. And that they are satisfied? — They appear 
 satisfied. 
 
 18709. Has there been any difficulty about the rent 
 at any time within the last ten years ? — How ? 
 
 18710. As to tenants objecting to the- amount of 
 rent ? — No. 
 
 18711. You had no diiBculty in getting the rents? 
 — Latterly there is. 
 
 18712. Did you make any abatements last year? — 
 No. 
 
 18713. The rents were not generally abated? — No. 
 
 18714. Was there any difficulty in getting the rents 
 up to last year ? — None. 
 
 18715. But there has been difficulty since then? — 
 Yes, owing to the agitation going on through the 
 country. 
 
 18716. Well in the agitation, it seems there is 
 advice given to the tenants to offer and give the 
 Government valuation. Have they done so ?— I have 
 not made any collection since that advice has been 
 given. My collection did not commence yet. 
 
 18717. You say here that the rents generally on 
 the estates you represent are about five per cent, over 
 the Government valuation ? — Yes, on an average, that 
 
 is the case, but in many other cases they are consider- 
 ably under the Government valuation. I gave the 
 average. 
 
 18718. What do you consider a fair moderate rent 
 over the tenement valuation ? — I think I speak very 
 moderately when I say that 15 per cent, over the 
 tenement valuation would be a fair rent. 
 
 18719. I suppose the rents vary according as the 
 holdings are adjacent to towns, or the reverse ? — Yes, 
 according to the circumstances of the different localities. 
 
 18720. You say that up to last year no objection 
 was raised by the tenants to the rents 1 — None 
 whatever. 
 
 18721. Were they in pretty good circumstances? — 
 I think so. 
 
 18722. And there had been good times? — Yes, 
 but the two or three last years were very bad, and 
 they lost a good deal of their stock. 
 
 18723. Have the tenants done much in the way 
 of improvements on their holdings ? — As a rvile they 
 do very little. 
 
 18724. Have they generally built the houses on 
 the holdings ?— ^Well, I don't know. I cannot exactly 
 say that. I think originally they might. 
 
 18725. Are the houses mostly thatched? — Yes, 
 mostly thatched. Some are slated on the Marquess of 
 Clanricarde's estate. 
 
 18726. Did his lordship make any allowance in 
 former times for improvements? — The tenants, in 
 many instances, either got slates or timber towards the 
 improvement of their houses. 
 
 18727. Has there been any difference in that 
 system, either by Lord Clanricarde or other landlords ? 
 — I don't know. I have made no allowance since 
 the Land Act. It has checked any improvement in 
 that way. 
 
 18728. As regards the tenants it has- made no 
 change — that is, they have not improved any more 
 than before ? — Certainly not. 
 
 18729. And you say that that has not been very 
 lately? — Very lately at all events. 
 
 18730. Do you think that the tenants about two 
 or three years ago began to find difficulty from the 
 pressure of bills that they had run up with tradesmen ? 
 —I think that they came to operate largely upon 
 them. From the facilities given under the Land 
 Act the tenants were considered to have a large in- 
 terest in their holdings, and the shopkeepers gave 
 them large credit and ran them into debt. 
 
 18731. Were they able to get accommodation at 
 the Banks ? — They were able to get more accommoda 
 tion at the banks than before. 
 
 18732. Do you think that debts accumulating in 
 that kind of way had something to do with the 
 difficulty of paying the rents ? — ^Yes, certainly. 
 
 18733. Between that and the bad times? — I think 
 that extravagance of the people tended more to it 
 than the bad times. 
 
 18734. Do you think that the extravagance was 
 more than the improvement in the way of living? — 
 There was extravagance in the way of living and in 
 the clothing. The women, I think, were very ex- 
 pensive in their habits of clothing latterly. 
 
 18735. Do you think it was more so than their 
 class in life afforded ? — Yes. They idled a great deal 
 of their time. There is no industry among the women 
 now. They buy everything in the shops. In former 
 times they manufactured, as a rule, in their own 
 houses their clothing and petticoats. Now they buy 
 
39S 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. J. H. 
 Slake. 
 
 everything in tlie sliops, and they spend their time 
 very idly, I think. They used to manufacture their 
 own linen, but not now. 
 
 18736. I suppose that was partly from their being 
 able to buy in the shops cheaper than they could 
 manufacture the goods themselves 1 — T^o,- 1 don't think 
 that. 
 
 18737. Baron Dowse. — It gave them more time 
 to idle to go to the shops ? — It gave them more time 
 to idle. That is what I complain of. 
 
 18738. Chaibman. — Is there any great extent of 
 waste land in your district reclaimable^ — The cut- 
 away bogs are all reclaimable. 
 
 18739. Are they mostly at the tail end of a man's 
 farm 1 — They are bogs that they have no control over. 
 They are waste lands. 
 
 18740. Do they adjoin the farms? — Some "portions 
 adjoin. 
 
 18741. Are they added on to the farms? — I have 
 done so in many instances. 
 
 18742. Do they reclaim them? — Yes. I have set 
 some of the cutaway bog at a shilling an acre of 
 nominal rent on a graduated scale, eventually rising 
 at the end of fifteen years to 10s. an acre. I have 
 found, in many instances, the bogs in the same state 
 in which I had set them eight or ten years ago. 
 
 18743. Do you think that land valuable in its ex- 
 isting state ? — It is of very little value in its present 
 state. 
 
 18744. I suppose there is an extent. of land that 
 you would say is suitable for a great reclamation ? — I 
 don't know that there is ;. not to my knowledge. 
 
 1874-5. Baeon Dowse. — It would not be possible 
 to reclaim a limestone flat ? — No ; it would take time. 
 My brother has reclaimed some, but it cost a great 
 deal of money. 
 
 18746. Chaieman. — Do you think there is any ill- 
 feeling between the agents and landlords and the 
 tenants in your part of the country? — I think there 
 is. They look tipon us as a, different race of people to 
 what they are. 
 
 18747. You think they are changed in disposition? 
 — Yes ; they are losing a great deal of their respect 
 and allegiance towards us. 
 
 18748. Baron Dowse. — Don't you think that is 
 common among all classes of the people? — Yes, I 
 think so, among the growing classes. The old men 
 acknowledge their allegiance to a great extent. 
 
 18749. Chaieman. — Have you thought of anything 
 in the way of legislation as regards land that would 
 improve the state of the country? — Really I don't 
 know. I would leave it to the Government to sug- 
 gest that. I think there are some portions of the 
 country over-populated. I think if there was a good 
 system of emigration it would benefit those who were 
 left behind, and certainly benefit those sent away. 
 There are a great many people located on portions of 
 land, and which, if they had it for nothing, they could 
 not exist on it. What can a man do on two or three 
 acres of land ? He cannot feed himself upon it. 
 
 18750. But if he has other employment he can get 
 on ?— Yes. 
 
 18751. Do the people go to England from your 
 district 1 — No, not from this locality. 
 
 18752. Mr. Kavanagh. — What in your opinion is 
 the smallest holding that a man, without any other 
 means of support, could exist upon decently — not to 
 say affluently — on the land you ajre accustomed to? — 
 I should say 25 to 30 acres. That would be a moder- 
 ate farm, or at least I would consider that moderate. 
 
 18753; Have you ever heard of the proposal of re- 
 lieving the. thickly populated districts, — that is bring- 
 ing the people from thickly populated districts, into 
 the waste lands to reclaim them 1 — I think that it 
 would be a mistake. 
 
 18754. Have you had any experience of peasant 
 proprietors, — that is farmers buying their holdings 
 under the Bright clauses of the Land Act ? — I am not 
 Aware of any case. 
 
 18755. Do you think that that would be a good 
 scheme to encourage ?— I don't thinlv it would. 
 
 18756. You don't think it would be advisable fo 
 the Government to advance money to help farmp.- 
 to buy their land? — I think' not. I don't tliint it 
 would. •> 
 
 18757. Baron Dowse. — Did you ever contemplate 
 the idea of the Treasury becoming the landlords of 
 Ireland? — Never. I think it would be a "reat mis 
 take. The few of that class that I have seen werp 
 the most* reckless and unindustrious I have ever 
 known. The greatest extorters arid the greatest spend 
 thrifts and generally went to the bad themselves —I 
 mean proprietors of land value from £100 to £300 a 
 year. 
 
 18758. Chaieman. — Were they men having tenants 
 under them 1 — ^Yes. « 
 
 18759. Small landlords? — Yes ; small landlords, 
 
 18760. Baron Dowse. — Is it not the tendencjfor 
 a man to have tenants under him ? — Yes., 
 
 18761. Is that to be encouraged do jmthmk1.~t 
 think not. 
 
 18762. Chairman. — Is it the custom for such men 
 to get the utmost they can out of the land?— One 
 case occurred adjoining Lord Clanricarde's property, 
 In reference to some Church land, a man came in and 
 purchased it. He paid £23 an acre, for it, and he 
 wanted £15 rent instead of former rent of £S 15s, 
 I did not accede to that, and he served a notice to quit, 
 
 18763. Mr. Kavanagh. — That is your experience 
 of the man when he becomes . the owner ?— Yes ; that 
 is my experience. 
 
 18764. What condition are the labourers in in your 
 district ? — I think pretty fair. They have pretty good 
 wages. . 
 
 18765. What are the wages of an unskilled, abls- 
 bodied man ? — Is. 6c?. a day, and 2s. to 2s. 6d when 
 there is a pressure. 
 
 18766. That is in the harvest time I suppose?— 
 Yes, in the harvest or in the Spring. 
 
 18767. You said that you thought 15 per cent, over 
 the Poor Law valuation would be a fair rent, btit that 
 the general rents in the district were only about 5 per 
 cent, over it ? — I mean Lord Clanricarde's estate. 
 
 18768. What is your opinion of Grifiith's valuation? 
 Is it a fair test of the rent ? — I think it is the. nearest 
 approach to the value of the land, but I don't thmk it 
 is a correct valuation. 
 
 18769. Do you think it is the same in one district as 
 in another. Is it equal in every place ? — I don't think 
 so. It was made at a time th^t there was more tillage 
 than now, and they valued the tillage more than the 
 grass lands. 
 
 18770. On the whole you do not think it a fair 
 criterion by which to arrive at the value of rent ?— It 
 is the nearest approach. 
 
 18771. And the only one ? — The only one, It is 
 the one by which the taxation is fixed. 
 
 18772. Has there been any change in the rents on 
 this property — any raising of rents ? — There was an 
 adjustment of rents tipon the fall of some leases, but 
 that adjiistment only brought the rents to what I state 
 them now to be. , ' 
 
 18773. Chairman, ^Were those at difterent dates 
 according as the leases fell ? — Yes, as the leases fell 
 A good many leases fell upon the occasion of the death 
 of the late Sir Thomas Burke, 
 
 18774. Mr. Kavanagh.— Would you take into coa- 
 sideration the case of a tenant's improvements?—! 
 put nothing on them. 
 
 18775. The general complaint we have heard is 
 that tenants improvements are always valued' when 
 readjusting the rent 1 — I avoided that in every instance, 
 and brought the rent only to the tenement valuation, 
 or a, little over it, in accordance with the valtiatoi^ 
 made by Griffith. 
 
 18776. Now as to improvements, does Lord Ckiin- 
 carde do much in the way of draining ? — There is a 
 good deal of money laid out on the estate. 1 1>*7^ 
 ]iaid over £20,000 myself for improvements in draui- 
 ina;, fencing, road-making, and arterial drainage. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 599 
 
 18777. Therefore the statement is not true tliat lias 
 been made tliat tlie improvements all belong to the 
 tenant? — Certainly not. On my nephew's estate — 
 Colonel Daly's — ^he has expended a large sum -within 
 the last 5 years, or over 5 years, in drainage and 
 reclamation. 
 
 18778. Has the Land Act made any diflference with 
 the landlords in the way of making improvements 1— 
 I think it has changed it. 
 
 18779. Have you had many evictions on the 
 estate 1 — Very, very few indeed. I think I am over 
 20 years agent to the Marquess of Clanricarde, and I 
 don't think upon notice to quit I had over two or 
 three evictions, and any others that took place were 
 for non-payment of rent. 
 
 18780. Have there been any actual evictions for 
 non-payment of rents where the tenants have been 
 displaced, or have there been many of them? — Not 
 many. 
 
 18781. Is it not the rule that although the Sheriff 
 is sent down the tenant is put back into his holding as 
 caretaker, and redeenis it 1 — Yes. 
 
 18782. Then there were very few evictions 1 — Very 
 few actual evictions. They have 6 months for re- 
 demption, and they are generally allowed in as care- 
 takers for the time of redemption. 
 
 18783. What amount of arrears do you allow before 
 yo\i bring an ejectment ? — Not 3 Tears. 
 
 18784. Baron Dowse. — How much rent do you 
 receive for Lord Clanricarde ? — £23,500 a year. 
 
 18785. How many acres does that represent ?— Over 
 50,000 a,cres. 
 
 18786. What part of the county does it lie in? — 
 Some near Galway, and some midway to Loughrea 
 and from that to Portumna. It extends from Galway 
 to the Shannon. 
 
 18787. Is there much mountain land on it? — A 
 good deal. 
 
 18788. How does it lie ? — North-west of Portumna, 
 and the south of Loughrea. 
 
 18789. But a good deal of it is very good arable 
 land? — A good deal of it is good arable land. 
 
 18790. In some places the rents are higher or lower, 
 but on the average they are 5 per cent, over the Govern- 
 ment vakiation? — Yes. 
 
 18791. Hasthere been much distress on the estate? — 
 No, there has not. 
 
 18792. Are the tenants well off ?— Yes. 
 
 18793. Is there much discontent, or did you find 
 practical evidence of discontent among the tenants ? — 
 I don't think there would be any if they were let 
 alone. 
 
 18794. With reference to the improvements Lord 
 Clanricarde' had effected, they were affecting his 
 estates? — ^Yes ; in arterial drainage, and fencing 
 farms. 
 
 18795. Does he add anything to the rent for that? 
 - -1 think there was a small addition. It was before 
 my time. 
 
 18796. But you have been instrumental in spending 
 £20,000 on the estate? — Both in the time of the pre- 
 vious agent and my own time. 
 
 18797. What was it spent for ? — Portion for 
 arterial drainage, and other portions for fencing and 
 roadpnakmg. 
 
 18798. Those were general improvements? — Yes. 
 
 18799. They were not improvements made on 
 particular farms? — General improvements which were 
 advantageous to the tenants. 
 
 18800. But it was to them in gross, and not to 
 each 1—No ; in gross. 
 
 18801. Now, with reference to the houses, you 
 found them on the estate ? — ^Ves. 
 
 18802. They are not a natural product?— No. 
 
 18803. And they were built by somebody?— 
 Yes. 
 
 18804. And probably the tenants built them?— I 
 presume, the .tenants .originally must haye built 
 them 
 
 Mr. J. H. 
 Blake. 
 
 ■ 18805. Some of the houses are slated ? — ^Yes-; a Oet. 22, I88O. 
 good number. ' 
 
 18806. As a rule, are the tenants well housed? 
 Indeed they have comfortable houses. 
 
 18807. And, as a rule, they are comfortable, and 
 pretty well off? — They are. 
 
 18808. You have not practically evicted anybody 
 for a number of years past ? — Not for years pasti 
 
 18809. Have you had any cases in the Land Court? 
 — One, I think. 
 
 18810. That is since the court was established? — 
 Yes ; I think, only one. 
 
 18811. You say that in not more than three or 
 four instances you have evicted on notices to quit ? — 
 Two or three, 
 
 18812. Did they get anything for going out? — No. 
 The case of eviction was owing to the man living 
 elsewhere, and having a farm from his lordship. He 
 tilled all the farm, and made it a draw farm, and I 
 said he should live on the farm, or give it up. 
 
 18813. He was not a resident tenant at all ? — No; 
 he was not. 
 
 18814. Then there were no evictions on notice to 
 quit ? — Very iew. 
 
 18815. There were some evictions for non-payment 
 of rent ? — There were, and I think all the holdings 
 were redeemed very nearly after the time for re- 
 demption. 
 
 18816. So that substantially upon Lord Clanricarde's 
 estate the tenants have fixity of tenure, without any 
 law giving it to them ? — Yes ; really that is the 
 case, and there is no danger of them being turned 
 out. 
 
 18817. So long as his lordship gets a fair rent they 
 are perfectly secure? — Yes. 
 
 18818. With respect to fair rents, have you had 
 any differences with a tenant as to what is a fair rent ? 
 —When adjusting the rents I stated what they were 
 to be, and the tenants stated that there was no ob- 
 jection, and that it was a fair rent, and they signed the 
 agreements. I walked most of the land, and readjusted 
 the rents, and the tenants agreed to them ; and took 
 out agreements under the terms and in accordance 
 with the Land Act. 
 
 18819. Chaieman. — That was when the leases fell 
 in?— Yes. 
 
 18820. On yearly holdings has there been a general 
 revaluation ? — ^Yes ; on one portion of the estate. 
 
 18821. But not as a rule ?— No. 
 
 18822. Baron Dowse. — Suppose a man had a farm, 
 and wanted to go away, would he have to give it to 
 the landlord, or could he agree with an incoming man' 
 to give, anything for it? — I have allowed the sale of 
 land in that way, but 1 was always anxious, if a man 
 was going away to consolidate the holdings and give 
 the land to the man adjoinmg. 
 
 18823. And would he give anything for it to the 
 outgoing tenant ? — I think he would get something 
 from the incoming tenant without me knowing of it. 
 Very often the outgoing man would owe a* couple of 
 year's rent, and the incoming man paid it. 
 
 18824. You said that there were some parts where 
 if the people lived on them they could not pay any- 
 thing ? — I think the estate near this town is very much 
 over-populated. That estate would be a great deal 
 more valuable if there were not so many people on it, 
 and those remaining would be more comfortable. 
 
 18825. Chairman. — Has that arisen from sub- 
 division ? — I have not allowed any subdivision. 
 
 18826. Has that arisen from leases? — ^Yes. 
 
 18827. Baron Dowse. — Is that in the borough of 
 Galway ? — Yes. 
 
 18828. Had they anything to do with the votes?— 
 I think the votes contributed to it. They are iOs. 
 freeholders. 
 
 18829. Chairman. — With regard to turf bogs, do 
 the tenants get them rent free, or is there a payment 
 for it? — I set thp banks at a very moderate rate, about 
 half the value they. would .set otherwise at; and, 
 every farthing of that money is laid out in repairing 
 
600 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Vot 22, ISSO. 
 
 Mr. J. H. 
 ■niake. 
 
 the roads for the advantage of the tenants in going to 
 and from the bogs. It produces about £80 a year — the 
 setting of the turf bank ; and every farthing of that is 
 laid out on the roads, and none of it ever goes into 
 Lord Clanricarde's pocket. 
 
 18830. Baron Dowse. — Supposing there was legis- 
 lation in this direction, that a man was allowed to 
 remain on his farm so long as he paid his rent, and the 
 rent to be fairly fixed between man and man, that 
 would leave things on Lord Clanricarde's estate much 
 the same as they are ? — Yes, very nearly. 
 
 18831. Such a law would do you little harm ? — ISTo. 
 
 18832. It would be a terror to evil doers, and a 
 praise to those that do well ? — Yes. 
 
 18833. Chairjian. — As regards the larger improve- 
 
 ments that Lord Clanricarde has carried out, yousa'I 
 that the tenants have not taken much advantage f 
 the improvements ? — No ; the open drains ran tlirou<»li 
 their holdings, and I cannot get them to clear thos 
 drains. 
 
 18834. Does that arise from a feeling that one man 
 
 in doing so would be assisting his neighbour? Yes' 
 
 I believe that is the reason, that one would be helpiJ 
 another. Last year I got a lot of the drains cleared 
 and could only recover a small portion of the outla/ 
 It was all for their own advantage. 
 
 18835. And the result is that any advantage they 
 had got from the drains is lost by their alloTOig them 
 to get clogged up ? — Yes, in a great measure. 
 
 Mr. Burton 
 Perase. 
 
 Mr. Burton Peesse, Moyode Castle, Athenry, examined. 
 
 18836. Mr. Kavanagii. — I believe you are a large 
 landowner?— Yes; I have 6,769 Irish acres. The 
 rental is £7,791. 
 
 18837. Do you manage your property yourself or 
 through an agent ? — I manage it myself 
 
 18838. You can give an outline of the way in which 
 you manage as to the rents ^ — I collect my own rents. 
 
 18839. I think you say that your rents have not 
 been altered for some considerable time ? — Not since I 
 came into possession, nor for some time previous. I 
 am in possession for twenty years. They have not 
 been altered, except in two or three townlands, since. 
 
 18840. Do you find any difEoulty in making the 
 alteration ? — None, whatever. 
 
 18841. Your proposal was agreed to? — Quite so. 
 In fact it was only a slight change — a mere trifle. 
 
 18842. Have you had many ejectments or evic- 
 tions? — I had one eviction in twenty years, in 1874. 
 
 18843. Was that an eviction on the title? — No, 
 for non-payment of rent. This tenant owed four years' 
 rent, and was the worst character on my entire pro- 
 perty; he left owmg me £75. I am managing the 
 property since I came into possession. 
 
 18844. I suppose you have now and again to serve 
 ejectment notices ? — No, hardly any. 
 
 18845. Then you find no diificulty in collecting the 
 rents ? — None, until latterly. In the last collection I 
 had some difficulty ; but on the whole of my property 
 it was pretty well met, I may say. 
 
 18846. Now, you expended a good deal, I think, 
 yourself, in the district? — I did expend a good deal in 
 unskilled labour as well as in skilled labour. 
 
 18847. That is in the way of giving employment ? — 
 Yes ; I have been looking over my books for the last 
 twenty years, and I find my labour bill has been from 
 £1,000 to £1,500 a year. Last year it was £1,500. 
 
 18848. That gives employment to small tenants? — 
 Yes, to all the small tenants on my own property, and 
 to others on the neighbouring properties as tar as it is 
 convenient for them. 
 
 18849. What class of holdings would supply your 
 labour ? — Generally men holding from five to ten 
 acres, and latterly men who held larger holdings, be- 
 cause the times not being so good, many were anxious 
 to earn a livelihood. 
 
 18850. What is the smallest holding a man could 
 live on, with no other means of support ? — I should 
 think from fifteen to twenty acres at least. 
 
 18851. Do you think if subdivision was allowed 
 at all, it should be limited to that ? — Yes, I do. 
 The subdivision is raining the country. The ten- 
 ants have subdivided some of the holdings without 
 my knowledge. In one case I allowed a tenant a sum 
 of money to build a barn, and he turned it into a 
 dwelling-house for his son, who had got married. 
 
 18852. Do you spend money on drainage? — Yes; 
 and last year I spent £500 for the benefit of the 
 tenants alone. 
 
 18853. Did you charge them anything for that ? — 
 They volunteered to give something, but I don't think 
 they will do so. I don't intend to charge them with it. 
 
 18854. Do you find them making any improTe- 
 ments themselves 1 — Very little. 
 
 18855. What is the average size of the holding in 
 your property ? — I should say about twenty acres. 
 
 18856. Then you have a great many tenants 1~ 
 Yes ; I have a good many small tenants — more than 
 I wash to have of that class. 
 
 18857. You find that that class of tenants do not 
 make much improvements ? — No. I find that tenants 
 who have beneficial holdings do not. 
 
 18858. Have you many leaseholders? — Not many; 
 but I find that those who have leases do not treat 
 their land as well as those who have not, especially 
 one in the county Kilkeimy. 
 
 18859. Chairman. — Are these leases whicli would 
 run out soon ? — No ; there are two lives of one of 
 them still in existence, and I think there is a term of 
 years afterwards. 
 
 18860. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have you considered the 
 question of Griffith's valuation as a guide to the rent! 
 — I think it is no safe criterion at all. It is not a 
 true test. 
 
 18861. Do you consider it is too low? — ^Muchtoo 
 low. 
 
 18862. Do you consider it is at all equal ? — No; it 
 is not equal. In some cases I have known it on good 
 land to be only half the value, and in others not more 
 than a third or a fourth. 
 
 18863. Have you many grazing farms? — Yes, but 
 chiefly in my own hands in this county. 
 
 18864. What do you say about the valuation in re- 
 gard to them ? — I think the valuation of grazing 
 farms on good land is nearer the value than it is on in- 
 different land, but it is no true guide to go by. 
 
 18865. Have you much mountain grass land?— No. 
 I have got no mountain at all. I have got a good 
 deal of bog. 
 
 18866. Chairman. — Do you consider it a fair rent 
 on the large grazing lands ? — Not nearly. 
 
 18867. Baron Dowse. — But in other cases the 
 valuation is below the rent? — Yes, considerably below 
 the rent — from one-fourth to one-half on any property 
 I have. 
 
 18868. Mr. Xavanagh. — Are there many long 
 leases on your pi'operty — such as perpetuities ? — Not 
 many. 
 
 18869. Have you considered the question about 
 peasant proprietors ? — Yes, I have ; and I consider it 
 would be the worst thing that would happen tl* 
 country. 
 
 18870. Even if not adopted in a general way?-" 
 Yes. I don't say what the result would be. I think 
 in a short time the proprietors, as you might call theffl, 
 would squander away their means, and get mortgages 
 on their holdings, and things would get back to the 
 worst. The shopkeepers would get hold of them, and 
 they would get into worse hands than at present. 
 
 18871. Suppose a farmer of 100 acres was nearly 
 able to purchase his fann, would it be any harm to 
 help bim? — I don't think so, if he could work it pro- 
 perly. The only thing is that I know tenants who 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 eoi 
 
 have liad beneficial interest in leases who Lave gone 
 to the bad more than those who worked hard for their 
 bread. 
 
 18872. You don't think the fact of ownership would 
 make a man improve, as a rule's — No. I think it 
 would make them greater idlers. 
 
 18873. Chairman. — Do you think of late years 
 they have become idlers t — Yes ; in late years they 
 have got into debt by wasting their time and going to 
 shops and markets, and different places, with no busi- 
 ness. 
 
 1887-1. Twenty years ago, when you became owner, 
 did you find that the people would improve their hold 
 ings and become owners? — I think until quite recently 
 they were better inclined to work on the land and get 
 on in the world. 
 
 18875. Do you think that things have occurred that 
 made them feel insecure 1 — No, I think they are more 
 secure. 
 
 18876. Was that before the Land Act?— I don't 
 think before the Land Act they were insecure, or 
 even thought themselves so. 
 
 18877. It was partly the insecurity of the tenants 
 that caused the Land Act "i — ^Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 18878. We have been told that for a year or so 
 after the Land Act, there was a tendency to improve, 
 and then it ceased 1 — Yes, at first there was progress 
 or an improvement, but latterly they think of every- 
 thing else, and idle half their time. 
 
 18879. Did they not think great things would be 
 got from the Land Act — that there would be security, 
 and found they could not get it except from litigation ? 
 — Yes, that was the first effect of it. 
 
 18880. Have they not a general dread of getting 
 into a law court ? — Yes, they had. 
 
 18881. Do you think that the land generally in the 
 hands of tenants is run out, and that has caused a 
 failure of the crops 1 — Decidedly. 
 
 18882. What do you attribute that to?— To bad 
 tillage and cultivation. 
 
 18883. Has that been from the habit of using 
 guano on the land ? — ^Yes, they do not make manure 
 now. They do not plough up the land in proper time. 
 I think they have lost a great deal of faith in the arti- 
 ficial manure latterly, but five or six years ago they 
 thought of nothing else. 
 
 18884. Then taking the crops off the land, and not 
 making manure, and the use of the guano injured the 
 land ? — Yes, it had that effect. For the last few years 
 I have refused to assist the tenants to use guano, but 
 to take pains to make manure, and use bones. 
 
 18885. Your property is not near the sea? — It is 
 about fifteen miles from it. 
 
 18886. Does the use of seaweed injure the land? 
 — Yes, the constant application of it. 
 
 18887. Does it force the crop? — It cauterises the 
 land very much if used constantly. 
 
 18888. Have you made any difference as to im- 
 provements since the Land Act ? — Not since the Land 
 Act. I think the tenants are pretty well pleased so 
 far as regards the improvements. 
 
 18889. Did you execute the drainage with the object 
 of giving employment ? — Yes, there was an arterial 
 drainage carried out through my property, as well as 
 on Lord Dunsandle's property, that gave the tenants 
 plenty of employment. 
 
 18890. And did it employ the people? — Yes. 
 
 18891. Were any of the small farmers employed on 
 the work ? — Yes, some of them were. I paid on my 
 property about £90 a year for the last twenty years 
 interest on drainage charge. 
 
 ■ 18892. Was that amount, or some part of it, put 
 upon the tenant or added to the rent ? — I never put 
 any of it on them. 
 
 18893. Baron Dowse. — Where is the bulk of your 
 property in Galway? What part of it? — Near my 
 own place and near Portumna and Eyrecourt. 
 
 18894. You talked of property you had in Kil- 
 kenny ? — Yes close to Freshford. 
 
 18895. Do you see any difference between the ten- 
 
 antry on the one part and the other ? — There are largf i- 
 tenants in Kilkenny — larger holdings. 
 
 18896. A better class of people ? — Yes. 
 
 18897. Do they pay their rents well? — Yes. 
 
 18898. What is the size of the farms as a rule? — 
 From 100 to 200 acres. 
 
 18899. Are they agricultural holdinga ?— Yes. The 
 only bad farm I have is where the tenant has a iio:;^- 
 ticial lease. He pays me £200 a year for it, and lie 
 receives for it £300. 
 
 18900. He has sublet it?^ — ^He has assijueil it. 
 
 18901. He is responsible to you for the orij::ial 
 rent 1 — Yes. 
 
 18902. What length of lease is that ?—T!icio arc 
 two lives to run. 
 
 18903. Do you say the land is not well looked after? 
 — It could not be worse. The present manr.'j;cr for 
 the tenant is the Bishop of Kerry, Dr. M'CartLy. 
 
 18904. How does he manage it? — I don't know. 
 He pays me the rent. It is in the most pitiable istatr, 
 the house and offices all tumbling down and going to 
 ruin. 
 
 18905. But the land in this county is in a different 
 way ? — Yes, it is. 
 
 18906. They are smaller farms ? — Yes. 
 
 18907. What do you employ the labourers in 
 doing ? — Road making and drainage, building walls 
 and reclaiming waste land. 
 
 18908. Had you any disputes with the tenant as to 
 the rents to be paid 1 — The tenants have asked for 
 considerable reductions, and I gave them what was 
 thought fair. 
 
 18909. What did you give ? — I did not give a 
 general reduction, but I gave, as I thought, the indi- 
 vidual cases deserved. 
 
 18910. Did you think it satisfactory? — I thought 
 it better to do so, although it gave more trouble. 
 
 18911. You found it worked ?— I did. 
 
 18912. Have you had any cases in the Land 
 Court ? — I had the other day. 
 
 18913. About what? — A tenant who owed two 
 years' rent said he would not keep on his holding. 
 I had served him with an ejectment, and he found he 
 could not pay, and he came to me and asked what I 
 would allow him to go away, and I told him that the 
 £100 he owed me would be fair. He said if I would 
 leave it to two gentlemen he would agree to it. I 
 left it to two gentlemen that he named, and they 
 awarded him £100, in addition to what he owed. I 
 asked when he would go, and he said in a week's time. 
 I said " No ; I will give yo\i two or three days. " And 
 I asked him what it would take to get him a lodging 
 if he went away, and he said £1 or £2, which I gave 
 him — that was £102 altogether. We parted then, 
 and he gave up his holding. Afterwards he took an 
 action against me for improvements. 
 
 18914. Then he made a land claim for improve- 
 ments ] — Yes. 
 
 18915. Did he get anything ?— No. 
 
 18916. Was the case heard before Mr. Henn ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 18917. What was the tenant's name? — BanLiuy. 
 He had a very good holding from me of sixty acres 
 of land, which he had at 10 per cent, over the valv.a- 
 tion. 
 
 18918. Baron Dowse. — Did you let it then to 
 another tenant ? — I did. 
 
 1891P. Did you get a fine ?— No. 
 
 18920. Did you make any increase of rent ? — Yes. 
 I gave it for 3s. an acre more, but I was offered a 
 fine and a higher rent. I have lost by it £150. 
 
 18921. That is the only case you had in the Land 
 Court since the Act was passed 1 — Yes. 
 
 18922. And that was one case in which you suc- 
 ceeded ? — Yes. 
 
 18923. Any improvements that are made, are they 
 made by the tenant ? — Some of them are, and in some 
 cases I have allowed for improvements. 
 
 18924. Who built the houses ? — I allowed a tenant 
 £70 for a house he built at one time, but it was not 
 in this county. 
 
 4H 
 
 Od. -'■-', ISSO. 
 
 j\Ir. Tiurton 
 I'ers^e. 
 
602 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oet. 22, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Burton 
 Persse'. 
 
 18925. Do. they generally buHd the houses-tbe^- 
 selves^ — I suppose-;- but I have no doubt that th-fey 
 were assisted' iiy my fatli.e^, and I assist them myself, 
 with timiber.; ' ' . 
 
 18926. What are tte principal towns in the neigh- 
 bourhood ? — Gal-wiayjAthenry, and Tuam. 
 
 1892V. You are not' near the coast? — No, not 
 within ten or twelve miles at the nearest point. 
 
 18928. 'Y-our property is all inland 1 — Yes. 
 
 1$929. You have. had no disputes with your tenants 
 as to reht % — No, exC'e^ in the case of a man I had to 
 evict years ago, whoSiwed four years' rent. 
 
 18930. 'You don't serve notices to quitl — No; I 
 have, not* served atiy. 
 
 V 18931. You are not unpopular among your tenants '? 
 '-^No;'I think'il'ot. 
 i 18932. .Sti^posing that any , disputes took .pl.%ce 
 between yoirand your tenants as to rent, would you- 
 liave any, Objection to any tribunal to settle them ] — 
 I would be very glad if there was such. 
 
 - . 18933. AncboTre-tKafwbukl s'atisfy' both landlord 
 and tenant 1 — Yes. 
 
 18934. If the law said you were not to, turn pL 
 the. tenant if he- paid -the rent, you would be satisfied) 
 — I would not turn him out. 
 
 18935. Practically, they have fixity of tenure with 
 you 1 — Quite so. 
 
 18936. Do you think the Land Act has in any wav 
 served the tenant 1 — It may give him a greater told 
 on the land, but it is imaginary. I made no diiference 
 since. 
 
 18937. So far as you are concerned it made no 
 change, for you would do what is honest and riglit ! 
 . — Quite so. 
 
 18938. There is a law against theft, you are aware! 
 —Yes. 
 
 18939. It would not affect you or me if there were 
 no such law, but there are others that it -should affect? 
 —Yes. 
 
 Mr. N. J. 
 EicliarcJsoii. 
 
 Mr. N. J. EiCHAEDSON, of Tyaquin, examined. 
 
 .- 1^40. Ohaieman. — Do you agree in the answers 
 given to the last two or three questions in the way 
 the Land Act has worked, or would you agree to 
 arbitration in the settlement of ditferences '{ — Yes. I 
 have had no differences. 
 
 18941. Supposing there was a difference, would 
 you agree in the opinion, that you would have an 
 impartial tribunal to settle differences % — 1 would object 
 
 _ in particular cases, but if it were general I would 
 not object. 
 
 18942. If it were a general law. you would agree 
 to it 1 — ^Yes, I would. 
 
 18943. I believe your proper-ty consists of about 
 2,500 acres? — Yes. The only points I wish to draw 
 attention to are in reference to the Poor Law valuation, 
 and also as to landlord's improvements. 
 
 18944. Well, now take the landlord's improvements. 
 Are you in the habit of making allowances towards 
 improvements ? — I have made improvements myself 
 principally on grass farms, but I have given assistance 
 to farming tenants. 
 
 18945. Mr. Kavanagh. — I think you speak with 
 the experience of a large agent, as well as a landowner 1 
 — Yes. I would rather refer to my own property. 
 
 18946. Wliat experience have you as an agent? — 
 I think there are about 5,000 or 6,000 acres in. 
 Roscommon, and some property in Galway. 
 
 18947. Now, as to the improvejnents that you 
 make on your own jjroperty, what have you to say ? 
 — As to the grass farms I make all the improvements. 
 1 allow the tenant to do nothing. I scour the 
 drains myself for they will not attend to them. 
 
 18948. You go entirely on the English system ? — - 
 Entirely. 
 
 18949. And you do everything yourself ? — Yes. I 
 pay all the rates and taxes. The tenant has nothing 
 to pay but the actual rent he agrees to pay. 
 
 18950. As to other improvements what do you 
 do 1 — I assist the tenant. Since the Land Act was 
 passed I am not so anxious, but in the last few years 
 I have given assistance. 
 
 18951. You have remarked that the effect of the 
 Laud Act has been to check improvements ? — Yes, 
 certainly. Piecently the tenants wanted me to make 
 some improvements, and I agreed, biit they would not 
 pay the interest I would have to pay on the money, 
 and the land will not be improved. 
 
 18952. What have you paid for improvements as 
 landlord's agent? — Very little, but in my father's 
 time there was £10,000, within the last ten yfears, 
 expended on drainage and planting for shelter. 
 
 18953. Have you spent much in building, or given 
 money ? — I have given timber and lime, and various 
 assistance in that way, and small sums of money. 
 
 18954. It is clearly your evidence that, as a general 
 rule, the improvements on the farms are not wlioUy 
 by the tenants ?— Certainly not, on my estate. My 
 
 tenants are very impro-dng, for I make them be so. 
 It is a small estate, and living among them I try to 
 encourage them, and they have improved, perhaps 
 more than others. 
 
 18955. Have you any difficulty about arrangincr 
 rents ? — Never. The rents were raised about twenty- 
 five years ago, by.t I know nothing about it. Since I 
 had the management, for fifteen years, there was 
 none, except in the case of a leasehold that fell in, 
 My last. November rents that I collected in May are 
 all paid. 
 
 18956. That is the hanging gale ?— Yes, my Poor 
 Law valuation is very much under the actual rents, 
 It is fully 60 per cent. 
 
 18957. On what class of land? — It is the small 
 holdings. On the grass lands it is much higher, but 
 they are improved. In small holdings the valuation 
 is 60 per cent, under the rent, but in my case the 
 valuation is absurdly low. I never had a case of non- 
 payment of rent in my life. 
 
 18958. And you have had no complaints? — Yes; 
 now since the cry about Griffith's valuation there is 
 some talk of it, but I have received the rents up to 
 the present. 
 
 18959. Was it originally reclaimed land?— It was 
 wet land, and then there was a good deal of arterial 
 drainage. The property at the time the valuation -was 
 made was in a bad way, and the tenants were poor, 
 and it looked bad. It looked, in fact, exceediagly 
 bad ; but o\^'ing to such an amount of money being 
 spent on the improvements the tenants became better 
 off. 
 
 18960. Then all the drainage was your work ? — ^0| 
 not in the case of small holdings, for they have done 
 it themselves. 
 
 18961. But you affijrded the means ?— Yes, in the 
 most of the cases. 
 
 189G2. Do you consider, with the 60 per cent, over 
 the Poor Law valuation, that the tenants' improve- 
 ments are not taken into account ? — Certainly not, for 
 the rents were fixed twenty-five years ago, and tie 
 improvements are since then. 
 
 18963. On the Roscommon property have you any 
 difficulty about the rents on the part you manage as 
 agent ? — There is now. There iS great difficulty M^ 
 in getting in the rents. 
 
 18964. Are they much over the Poor Law valuation ! 
 — 25 per cent. 
 
 18965. How long is it since they were fixedl— 
 Certainly not since the Land Act. I don't kno-wwhen 
 they were raised or when they were re-adjusted. 
 
 18966. How long are you the agent?— Since 1872. 
 
 18967. Are they large holdings ?— Some of them 
 are. 
 
 18968. Not grass farms ?— Some of them are, but 
 there is a great deal of tillage. 
 
 18969. Until the late agitation there was no diffi- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 G03 
 
 culty in arranging or getting tlie rents ? — None what- 
 ever. 
 
 18970. Those rents were not considered high? — 
 No ; the landlord of the Eoscommon property allows 
 the Ulster custom, and he has allowed £10 an acre. 
 
 18971. Then that is allowed there? — Not in the 
 district, but in that place. 
 
 18972. Do yon on your own property? — No, I do 
 not, and would not recognise it, because the incoming 
 tenant is burdened by a heavy debt. 
 
 18973. You think that the money spent in pur- 
 chasing the good-will is money kept from the working 
 of the farm 1 — It is. 
 
 18964. Are there any instances in your district of 
 properties being bought by speculators in the Landed 
 Estates Court ? — No. My father purchased a property 
 here in the Landed Estates Court, but that is the only 
 instance. 
 
 18975. You have heard complaints of rack rents 1 — 
 Yes, I have heard of it. 
 
 18976. You do not know an instance of it? — No, I 
 do not. 
 
 18977. Is there any other point you wish to give 
 information on ? — Not that I know of. 
 
 18978. Chairman — As to the Grand Jury cess on 
 new tenancies, what is the custom ? — There are only 
 two new resident tenancies, and in both cases I allowed 
 half county cess. On grass lands I pay the whole, as 
 the question does not arise. 
 
 18979. Do you agree with what was said as to the 
 cultivation of the land, and the manuring being badly 
 done ? — "Wretched. They will continue to till the land 
 instead of laying it down in grass, as it ought to be. 
 
 18980. And using too much artificial manures ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 18981. And using their own seed? — ^Yes, using 
 their own seed. 
 
 18982. Has there been much done in the way of 
 inducing them not to continue using their own seed ? 
 —I have done so by introducing champion seed, and 
 it has been successful. It is very good. 
 
 18983. As to the other crops, have they been good 
 or bad ? — Very bad, except in new land, and even in 
 new land ; but in worn-out land the potato crop is not 
 worth digging. 
 
 18984. Is some of your own land turf bog? — ^Yes, 
 a good deal of it. 
 
 18985. Is that cut away? — Yes, the tenants re- 
 claim it. 
 
 18986. But is there an increase in the rent there? 
 — Not for twenty-five years. In fact, land that was 
 not in their holdings — about 100 or 200 acres — have 
 been added in that way. 
 
 18987. What crops grow in turf bog? — Where 
 there is a shallow bog there is a particular kind of 
 grass grows which is suitable for making paper. It 
 is not sufficiently developed to say whether it will do 
 or not. 
 
 18988. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is that bent?— No, that 
 grows in sand. That is fuU of silica. This other is 
 nilic grass. 
 
 18989. Baeox Dowse. — What part of the county 
 does your property lie in ? — Five miles from Athenry. 
 
 18990. Is it north? — It is east, north-east to a 
 certain extent. 
 
 18991. Then it is altogether low-lying land? — Yes. 
 
 18992. Now, these grass farms you speak of where 
 you make the improvements, do you consider that in 
 the rent ? — Yes. In some cases there are farm 
 lettings. 
 
 18993. Those are not tenants from year to year? — 
 No. I let the farms from year to year. 
 
 18994. What rent would you get from the tenant 1 — 
 On the average I get from 25s. to 30s., and some run 
 to 50s. an acre. 
 
 18995. Have you had any cases in the Land Com-t 1 
 ■ — I had two cases of ejectment on the title. One of 
 
 the parties went to America. I paid money to his Oct. 22, I88O. 
 sister. 
 
 18996. They never made a land claim? — No. It 
 was an ordinary civil bill. I considered there were 
 too many tenants on the land. 
 
 18997. Then you have had very few cases since 
 1870? — Those are the only two cases I ever had. 
 
 18998. Have you had any cases of eviction for 
 non-payment of rent ? — I never had one for non-pay- 
 ment of rent. 
 
 18999. Had you ever any disputes with any of the 
 tenants for non-payment of rent ? — Never. 
 
 19000. Then if there was a general scheme of 
 arbitration you would not object to it? — I would 
 not. 
 
 19001. Then practically with you the tenants have 
 fixity of tenure ? — They have. 
 
 19002. So long as a man pays his rent you would 
 not turn him out ? — No. 
 
 19003. Suppose a man wanted to go to America 
 would you allow him to dispose of his interest ? — I 
 would try to buy him out. 
 
 19004. You would give it to himself? — Yes. I 
 would then let it out again. 
 
 19005. On what estate in Roscommon is the Ulster 
 custom observed? — On Mr. Dillon's. It is not 
 generally allowed, bu.t in some cases he has allowed it. 
 
 19006. Why did he allow it? Was it f air 1— 
 Because he thought it fair. 
 
 19007. That is the charm of the Ulster custom, 
 that a landlord is always sure of his rents ? — That is 
 good enough, but there are certain drawbacks. It 
 would be the custom in some parts and not in other 
 parts. 
 
 19008. The custom must have had a beginning? — 
 Yes. 
 
 19009. And without the consent of the landlord it 
 could not exist 1 — I don't know 
 
 19010. And the landlord must have found it ad- 
 vantageous for the payment of the rent ? — Some of 
 the tenants on the estate have objected to the rent 
 and tried to get it reduced. 
 
 19011. Do you know anything about peasant pro- 
 prietors ? — No. 
 
 19012. What is your opinion about the new idea 
 of buying up the landlords? — I don't know. 
 Many a landlord would like to be boxight up ; but, I 
 believe the scheme would be injurious to the country. 
 
 19013. What would you think of this. Suppose a 
 landlord was willing to sell a portion of his estate to 
 a thriving and industrious tenant who had a consider- 
 able portion of the purchase-money himself, would 
 you see any disadvantage in facilitating that? — If 
 both parties were agreeable I think it might be 
 allowed. 
 
 19014. Do you think the State should lend any 
 money ? — I have not considered this point, but it 
 might be of advantage. 
 
 19015. Were any of the properties sold under the 
 Church Act ?— No. 
 
 19016. Have you ever come across any leaseholds 
 in perpetuity ? — No. There is one leasehold but it is 
 held at under Griffith's valuation. There are twenty- 
 one years of the lease yet to run. 
 
 19017. The tenant has a good interest in it? — He 
 has. 
 
 19018. Is he better off' than his neighbours? — 
 Worse. 
 
 19019. What do you attribute that to? — Laziness. 
 He is the only tenant in debt, and I said to him that 
 he ought to look after his farm. He said the land 
 was able to mind itself I think that when they have 
 the land too cheap they think they can hold it them- 
 selves. 
 
 19020. They think they can get enough out of it 
 to enable them to live 1 — Yes, always. 
 
 Mr. N". J. 
 
 Richardson. 
 
 4H2 
 
G^'4 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, 13S0. 
 
 Mr. \Yilliain 
 Daly. 
 
 Mr. William Daly, of Dunsandle, examined. 
 
 190'21. Chairman. — You are a land agent ? — Yes. 
 
 19022. Over -\vhat extent of property? — Over 
 31,000 English acres. 
 
 19023. For one landowner? — Yes. 
 
 19024. For whom ? — Lord Dunsandle. 
 
 19025. Ts there anything connected with Lord 
 Dunsandle's property you wish to give us information 
 about 1 — I can give general information. 
 
 1902G. Is there any custom for the sale of holdiiigs 
 on the property 1 — No. 
 
 19027. Then as to improvements, what has been the 
 custom on Lord Dunsandle's property 1 — All improve- 
 muuts that have been made have been done by the 
 landlord, scarcely any by the tenant. Some tenants 
 have improved their houses. 
 
 19028. For what time do you speak? — Sixteen 
 years. 
 
 19029. Can you say, within the last sixteen years 
 or within any fixed number of years, the total amount 
 spent by Lord Dunsandle on improvements 1 — To my 
 knowledge there miist have been £3,000 laid out on 
 arterial drainage. 
 
 19030. Is that during the time you were agent? — 
 Yes. In arterial drainage before my time there were 
 £15,000 or £16.000 expended. 
 
 19031. Within the last twenty years? — Yes, and 
 since. 
 
 19032. Has any interest been charged on the 
 tenants ? — Not that I know of 
 
 19033. Was that altogether on arterial drainage ? — 
 On arterial drainage and road-making partly. 
 
 19034. That gave a good deal of employment in the 
 district as well as improving the property ? — Certainly. 
 
 19035. So far as you know have the tenants taken 
 advantage of that in improving their holdings ? — 
 Certainly not. 
 
 19036. In the way of keeping up the drainage? 
 — Certainly not. They allow them to get filled up, 
 and will not clean them out. 
 
 19037. You say that there have not been leases 
 given ? — They have not been asked for. We give 
 them if asked for. 
 
 19038. Are the tenants generally mider written 
 agreements '! — Most of them — not all. 
 
 19039. Are they consistent with the terms of the 
 Land Act ? — Yes. 
 
 19040. Even in cases of persons who could contract 
 themselves out of it 
 the Land Act. 
 
 19041. What is your opinion as to the criterion for 
 rent of Griffith's valuation ? — I think twenty-five per 
 cent, over it is a fair valuation. 
 
 19042. On Lord Dunsandle's property is that 
 carried out ? — Yes. 
 
 19043. Is that the extreme rent? — Yes, except in 
 grass farms which are improved it is very much 
 higher. 
 
 19044. Do you think the improvements by the 
 
 landlords are rather checked by the Land Act ? 
 
 Certainly. 
 
 19045. That is from the uncertainty whether they 
 would be allowed for them ? — Yes. 
 
 1 9046. That is lest it could not be proved that the 
 landlord made the improvements, the presumption 
 being that it was the tenant? — Zes. We charge a 
 nominal rent for the use of turf. 
 
 19047. Are the tenants allowed to cut any for sale ? 
 — No, but they do, a good many of them. They are 
 not allowed to do it. 
 
 19048. Then as to the general opinions on the 
 subject expressed here, do you agree generally with 
 the_ answers given by the previous witnesses ? — Yes, 
 entirely. 
 
 19049. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you know of any 
 cases of tenants purchasing their holdings under the 
 Church Act ?— No. There has been no church pro- 
 perty sold in my neighbourhood. 
 
 -We have had few lettings since 
 
 19050. Have you thought of the peasant proprietary 
 scheme ? — I have lately. ■' 
 
 19051. What is your opinion in regard to that I— 
 Decidedly injurious to the country — that is on a larcn 
 scale. In a small way it might be of use. *" 
 
 19052. Do you think if a farmer was thrifty and 
 industrious, and had money, and the landlord was 
 willing to sell if money was advanced, would it be an 
 advantage? — Yes, I think so. 
 
 19053. Would it make him a loyal man!-- Yes 
 decidedly, more loyal than at present. 
 
 19054. Then you think it would be an advantage to 
 have a few of that sort scattered about ? — Yes. 
 
 19055. Chairman. — Do you think in the case of 
 outlying property where there is not such communi- 
 cation between the landlord and tenant it would be an 
 advantage to have them ? — Yes, a few scattered over 
 the country. 
 
 19056. You would not like an estate cut up by one 
 tenant buying a portion, and another not? — No. 
 
 190.57. Mr. Kavanagh. — How long is it sinw 
 Lord Dunsandle's rents have been altered? — Not since 
 I came in as agent, and a considerable time before that 
 
 19058. And there has been no attempt to raise 
 them ?— No. 
 
 19059. Do you think they are reasonable ?— Yes, I 
 think so. 
 
 19060. What is that? — Twenty-five per cent over 
 Griinth's valuation. 
 
 19061. And you have had no complaints from the 
 tenants ? — No, not till now. 
 
 19062. Baron Dowse. — Have you ever had any 
 cases in the Land Court ? — Never. 
 
 19063. Had you any evictions for non-payment of 
 rent? — One eviction. 
 
 19064. For how long a time? — For the last sixteen 
 years there was only one eviction. 
 
 19065. Was the man turned out entirely? — Yes, it 
 was within the last six months. 
 
 19066. Is his time for redemption -up ? — No. 
 
 19067. Is he the caretaker now ? — No. 
 
 19068. He may redeem? — H^e may, but I do not 
 think so. 
 
 19069. Have you the land in your hands now!— 
 No ; we let it to a man named Hynes, but they held an 
 indignation meeting, and the man was obliged to leave. 
 
 19070. What town was that near? — Half way 
 between Athenry and Loughrea. The farm is vacant, 
 and the fences taken down, and the hay lying there. 
 
 19071. Did the fences fall down themselves or 
 were they thrown down ? — Thrown down. 
 
 19072. And the farm is lying idle ?— Yes. 
 
 19073. That is the only case you had of an eviction 
 for sixteen years ? — The only one. 
 
 19074. How much rent clid he owe? — A year anda 
 half. He had no means and he was mining the farm. 
 
 19075. Was there much crops on the farm?— No, 
 he had no crop, except one ridge potatoes, and one rood 
 of oats. 
 
 19076. Did he lose the crop? — He had none, except 
 what I have stated. He had a very nice farm, but he 
 never looked after it. 
 
 19077. Was it set at a reasonable rent? — Yes, it 
 was. 
 
 19078. Have 'you had ejectments on notice toqui'- 
 — Yes, for non-payment of rentj but never carried them 
 out. 
 
 19079. Then on Lord Dunsandle's property there is 
 fixity of tenure? — Yes. They are quite welcome to 
 live there for ever if they pay their rent. 
 
 19080. With respect to the peasant proprietors, do 
 you say if a man is thrifty and industrious, he ought 
 to be helped? — The reason I would go in for the 
 scheme, is that it might make the country more loyal 
 and peaceable. 
 
 19081. Then if that is so, the sooner the better?— 
 Yes, of a certain class. 
 
 19082. If you turned the whole country into 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 G05 
 
 peasant proprietors, do you think you would have a 
 landlord in twenty years 1 — No. 
 
 19083. I put the question this way, if you turned 
 every tenant in the county Gal way into peasant 
 proprietors, would you have a gentleman or landlord 
 in the country in twenty years 1 — I think not. 
 
 19084. Would that be an advantage to the country 1 
 — No. I only thought that peasant propiietors 
 scattered here and there would make them more loyal. 
 
 19()S.3. Chairman. — In the case of the man you Oc*. 22, laso. 
 referred to has the time for redemption come, or has ^ ~.~'. 
 he done anything for redemption ?— No, the man said p^/ 
 he would have nothing more to do with the farm. I 
 offered to get him the protection of the police. 
 
 19086. Then he loses money ■? — He does. He paid 
 i£18 ; when forced to give up the land he asked me to 
 return him the £18, which I refused, and told him 
 to go to the Land League. 
 
 Mr. AcHESON French examined. 
 
 19087. You are a landowner? — I am agent to my 
 brother, Mr. Robert Percy French. 
 
 19088. Have you any other agencies? — No. 
 
 19089. What is the extent of the property ? — I had 
 nut time to fill up the queries. It is about 5,500 
 acres. 
 
 19090. What is the rental? — The Ordnance valua- 
 tion is £3,458. 
 
 18091. What is the rental?— A little over £4,000. 
 
 19092. Have you anything to say as to improve- 
 ments ? — The improvements are checked now. 
 
 19093. What has been the outlay by your brother? 
 — He has spent some hundreds of pounds lately. 
 
 19094. Well, ^\'ithin the last twenty years? — I 
 think about £200 every year. The tenants got help 
 to repair their houses ; timber and lime and money 
 were advanced to them. 
 
 19095. Was anything done in the way of drainage ? 
 — Not much. 
 
 19096. Have the tenants not done much themselves 
 in the way of improvement ? — Some two or three have. 
 Very few. 
 
 19097. They are rather at a stand still altogether 
 then ? — Yes, very much so. 
 
 19098. Is there much turf bog there? — Yes, a good 
 deal. 
 
 19099. What do they do with the cut-away turf 
 bog ? — They don't do very much. If they leave enough 
 of the turf on the ground, it can be reclaimed, and 
 would grow potatoes. 
 
 19100. They do not do much towards reclaiming 
 it?_No. 
 
 19101. What is done, then, as to the county cess? 
 — I don't think there is any alteration since the Land 
 Act. 
 
 19102. Have you had many changes of tenancies 
 since the Land Act ? — No, for the last twenty years 
 or so the tenants are the same, and there has been no 
 change in the rentals. 
 
 19103. The rentals are something in excess of the 
 Poor Law valuation ? — In some cases it may be a 
 fourth over. In some cases they are over, and in 
 some under ; the grass farms differ. 
 
 19104. Have the rents been paid generally ? — Well, 
 they were generally. 
 
 19105. Was there much distress last year? — In 
 some places there was. 
 
 19106. Are there many labourers on the property? 
 — A good many ; they all have more or less land. 
 
 1 9 1 07. They are small tenants ? — Yes, small tenants. 
 I think out of about 280 tenants there are 227 of 
 them small tenants, all paying under £10. 
 
 19108. And under that they are regular labourers ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 19109. Are any tenants large enough to have 
 labourers under them ? — Yes, a few of them. 
 
 19110. And they have them, I suppose, and giv(i 
 them houses as part of their wages ? — No, they do not ; 
 they come from the neighbourhood. 
 
 19111. What sort of hoiises are the labourers li^■ing 
 in ? — In the ordinary thatched houses. 
 
 19112. Fairly good ? — Fairly good, thatched houses. 
 
 19113. Does your brother give them help? — He 
 gives them timber and lime. 
 
 19114. I am speaking of the labourers without 
 land ? — We have none who have no land. 
 
 19115. Mr. Kavanagh — Do you allow tenant-right, 
 or the sale of holdings on the estate ? — No ; it is not 
 generally the custom. 
 
 19116. Does it take place? — No; there are a few 
 instances, where a man has gone to America, and he 
 generally brings in a tenant, or asks my approval of 
 him, and I try to make an arrangement between 
 them. 
 
 19117. You don't know what passes betweem 
 them ? — They come to see if I approve of the tenant. 
 
 19118. But you don't know what the incoming man 
 is to give the outgoing ? — Yes. 
 
 19119. Then it is practically winking at it ? — Yes. 
 
 19120. It is not forbidding the sale ? — It is done 
 but in a few instances. 
 
 19121. Baron Dowse. — I suppose there is not much 
 change of tenancy ? — I think there have not been 
 three since I became agent. 
 
 19122. Practically your tenants have fixity of 
 tenure ? — Yes, and they have gone on there from 
 father to son. 
 
 19123. And you never thought of turning a man 
 out except for non-payment of rent ? — No. 
 
 19124. Have you any evictions ? — No. 
 
 19125. Or any ejectments ? — No. 
 
 19126. Had you any cases in the Land Court? — 
 No. 
 
 M". Acheson 
 Frjnch. 
 
 Mr. Peesse recalled. 
 
 Jlr, 
 
 19127. Chairman. — Do you wish to add anything ? 
 I wish to make one remark as to my properties — one 
 in King's County and one in County Roscommon — 
 and they are the poorest tenants. The tenants 
 have in one case their holdings under valuation, and 
 in another at the valuation, and they are the worst 
 tenants I have. 
 
 19128. Mr. Kavanagh. — The worst tenants? — Yes. 
 
 19129. Baron Dowse. — Is not the rent very fluc- 
 tuating ? — Yes. 
 
 19130. In some places it is higher than in others ? 
 — Yes. I bring this forward to show that when they 
 have the land too cheap they do not take care of it. 
 
 19131. Would you handicap them with" 
 rent ? — I would think so. 
 
 high 
 
606 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James E. 
 Jackson. 
 
 Mr. James E. Jackson, of Killaguile, near Oughterard, examined. 
 
 19132. Chairman. — Are you a land owner 1 — I am 
 an owner of land, and farm my own land, and am 
 agent over some property. A few years ago I was agent 
 for property of about £1,000 a year. The tenants in 
 my neighbourhood are for the most part small holders. 
 
 19133. We have been asking generally as to the 
 proportion of the rent to the valuation 1 — I should 
 think the rental is generally 40 or 50 per cent, over 
 the poor law valuation. 
 
 19134. Do you think it a reasonable renti — I 
 think so. 
 
 19135. Have they been able to pay it regularly up 
 to about two years ago 1 — Most of them. Some of 
 them are very poor. If they got their places for 
 nothing they could not live on them. 
 
 19136. Do they go out as labourers as a class ^ — 
 They do. Some go to England and more to Scotland. 
 They work, too, on the farms of neighbouring land- 
 holders. 
 
 19137. Baron Dowse. — Are they near the sea 
 shore ] — No ; fourteen or fifteen miles from it. They 
 are near Lough Corrib. 
 
 19138. Chaieman. — In fact, they are labourers, 
 with rather too much land 1 — The most of them have 
 not enough to live on, and they take conacre from the 
 larger farmers. 
 
 19139. That is for green crops? — The potato crop, 
 and generally speaking only that. They may sow 
 turnips, but that is all. 
 
 19140. Do they put their own manure in? — Yes; 
 guano. 
 
 19141. Do you think that to put the guano in is as 
 good as ordinary manure ? — It is ruinous to the 
 country side. We used to have good crops of wheat. 
 We used to have a ton an Irish acre, and now to get 
 15 cwt. is considered a large crop. 
 
 19142. Do the tenants sell their holdings? — No; 
 they are not allowed, but they do surreptitiously. 
 
 19143. What happens then ? — If a decent respect- 
 able man is coming in it is allowed. 
 
 19144. But it is allowed? — I have turned out a 
 man because he was a bad character. 
 
 19145. But sale is allowed? — No, it is not allowed 
 as a rule. We object to it. 
 
 19146. Baron Dowsb — But it takes place? — It 
 takes place occasionally. 
 
 19147. Chaieman. —Are the tenants at all inclined 
 to reclaim additional bits of land, such as that under turf 
 bog 1 — Yes ; and potatoes grow well on cut-away bogs, 
 but as to improving the holdings, as a rule, they do not. 
 The landlords have not much encouragement to improve 
 for them. A few years ago there was a lake in the 
 middle of the property, over which I am agent, and 
 this lake used to flood over in winter. I spoke to the 
 tenants, and said — " Would you wish a drain to be 
 made out of the lake so as to drain it." They said, 
 " Yes." I said T v/ould do it, but it would cost £40 
 or £50, and they must pay the interest, and they said 
 they did not mind. I employed themselves at fair 
 wages to cut the drain. They had asked what rent I 
 would put on, and I said Is. in the pound, and they 
 agreed to it, but when I asked for the additional rent 
 they would not pay a penny. 
 
 19148. How long ago is that? — Five years ago. 
 They were backed up by the priest. I said I would 
 have to give them notices to quit, and I did so. 
 They stUl resisted, and I served them with processes 
 of ejectment. Even at the last moment I said, "if 
 you agree to my terms, I will withdraw," and they, 
 gave in. I have been denounced ever since by the 
 priest for my harsh conduct towards the tenants. • . 
 
 19149. Baron Dowse. — Your harsh conduct con- 
 sisted in asking what they promised ? — Yes. 
 
 10150. Chateman. — Do they pay now ? — They have 
 refused to pay anything this year unless I reduced the 
 rent to the Poor Law valuation. Last year I gave a 
 reduction of half a year's rent — 50 per cent. I for- 
 gave the half' year. I think they required it. They 
 are very poor. 
 
 19151. Have you had many other cases of eject- 
 ment ? — No. 
 
 19152. Did you try that as a test case ? — No ; I took 
 proceedings against all who refused to pay — about, 
 twelve tenants. 
 
 19153. Did many go on to eviction? — I brought, 
 all the cases into Court, and after my counsel had 
 opened the case they submitted. I offered at the last, 
 moment tlais. I said I would not proceed with the- 
 cases if they agreed to the terms they had previously 
 agreed to, and they did submit ; so that there is very 
 little encouragement in my part of the world to im- 
 prove the land. 
 
 19154. Baron DowSE.-^JEIad you many cases in the 
 Land Court for claims? — Never one. 
 
 19155. Do you farm yourself ? — I do. 
 
 19156. Is your own farm near Oughterard? — About 
 four miles. It adjoins the property over which I am 
 agent. 
 
 19157. For whom are you agent ? — I am agent over 
 a small property that adjoins my own farm that 1 
 bought twenty-five years ago. I am agent to Captain 
 Martin. 
 
 19158. You say there are some parts where the 
 tenants could not live, even without having to pay- 
 rent ? — Some of the holdings are only £2 10s. a year, 
 and one only 18s. 8d. the half-year. 
 
 19159. You say they get employment as labourers? 
 — Yes ; and the oldest boys go to England and Scot- 
 land. 
 
 19160. Last year I believe there was no demand in 
 England or Scotland for labourers ?^No. 
 
 19161. And that led to a great deal of distress 1 — 
 Yes, it did. 
 
 19162. Have there been many going this year ?^- 
 A good many. 
 
 19163. I heard it said that there was not muck 
 money made this yeax ?— Yes. 
 
 19164. Would the people pay a fair rent? — I can- 
 not say. 
 
 19165. Are there any who ever dispute it ? — They 
 say they are willing to pay a fair rent. TheysteU you so, 
 but they would like to be their own valuators. 
 
 19166. I suppose the landlords do not want any- 
 thing more ? — No. 
 
 19167. And if they paid that they might hold for 
 ever ? — Yes ; unless a man sublets. 
 
 19168. And unless a man treats the land in an un- 
 husbandlike manner? — They all do that. 
 
 19169. If you were too exacting, you would hav& 
 no tenants at all ? — Yes. 
 
 19170. Is it not their interest to cultivate the land 
 as well as they can ?-.-It is ; but they are lazy. , They 
 do nothing until Spring. 
 
 19171. What do they do during the rest of the- ■ 
 year? — Go to fairs and markets, and attend wakes and 
 weddings. That is half the , winter. There is not a 
 funeral in the country that every person near does not 
 attend. 
 
 19172. You are not a native of that part of the- 
 country 1 — I am not. I am a Northern. 
 
 19173. The people are not so industrious as in the 
 North of Ireland ? — They are not. 
 
 19174. Do you think if they had the land, and that 
 tliey were to pay a fair rent, that they would have » 
 sense of security ? — I know one or two freeholders, and 
 I don't think they are better off. The letting value 
 would be about £12 a year. 
 
 19175. In the north., of Ireland the system of 
 tenant-.right has worked well? — No. I declare- 1 
 think it is monstrous. .It is twenty-five years since 
 I left the north, but I have known instances of 
 tenants giving twelve years' purchase for their hold- 
 ings. I don't think the system could be good for 
 the landlord or the tenant. 
 
 19176. Well, the north is considered the most 
 prosperous part of the country ? — Yes. 
 
 19177. And there is some reason for that? — It 
 may be the nature of the people. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 607 
 
 Mr, Peesse recalled. 
 
 19178. -OHAiRMAN.^Have you' anything to add? 
 — I' foi<got' to ikention tliat I laid out- a considerable 
 sum in houses for small tenants who_ live close to 
 thy- "pl^ce. 'They are tenants a'nd labourers as well. 
 I laid out £800 within the last twelve years. 
 
 19179. Baron Dowse. — That is practically they 
 
 are labourers' cottages ?^^It is. • I have as much diffi- 
 culty' in tSreating with them as if they were paying 
 £50. On my property they are not charged for turf 
 on any part of the estate. They get as much as they 
 can cut for their own use. They pay no ground rent 
 for this. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. 
 "Mr. Perss'e, ^ 
 
 Mr. William Malley, of Dangan, examined. 
 
 19180. Chairman. — Where do you live? — Within 
 :a mile of the town of Galway. 
 
 19181. How many acres do you hold? — We are 
 Tinder two landlords. 
 
 19182.: How much do you hold under each?— 
 16a. 1e. on one^-Mr. Mullens's property. 
 
 19183. Who is the other landlord ?— Mr. Persse, 
 of Koxborough. 
 
 19184. Baron i»owsE.— Is that Mr. Dudley 
 Persse ? — ^Yes. 
 
 19185. Ohaisman. — How many acres do you hold 
 Tinder him ? — Eleven Irish acres and one rood. 
 
 19186. What do you pay Mr. Mullens?— 
 £18 7s. M. 
 
 19187. What do you pay to the other landlord ? — 
 £22 14s. m. 
 
 19188. Have; you had any arrears of rent of late 
 years ? — No. 
 
 19189. When did you first begin on the holdiags? 
 — My father before me had the holding of Dangan. 
 
 19190. Did he die?— My father died lately, but 
 he had got the land from his own father. 
 
 19191. When did you begin to be the tenant ? — 
 Sixteen years ago. 
 
 19192. Your father was the tenant while alive ? — 
 JSTo, but to the year 1864. 
 
 19193. Baron Dowse. — Was he tenant as long as 
 Die lived ? — No. 
 
 19194. Chaieman. — ^Was it when he died that the 
 Tent was raised ? — It was raised twice. When Mr. 
 Mullens purchased the place it was raised. 
 
 19195. The O'CoNOK Don.— When did he buy the 
 3)roperty ? — I think nearly forty years ago. 
 
 19196. Ch AXEMAN. — ^When was the first change of 
 rent that you remember ? — I don't remember. It was 
 w^hen I was a child. 
 
 19197. After Mr. Mullens bought the property 
 ■when was a change made? — Immediately. It was 
 £4 10s. first, and then was raised to £9. The land- 
 lord desired me improve the land and that he would 
 compensate ine^the only compensation I got was to 
 •double the rent. 
 
 19198. What was the improvement? — Quarrying 
 stones and fencing. He sent otit a surveyor to know 
 what the land would produce. 
 
 19199. And the change then brought it up to 
 £18 7s. M. ?— Yes. 
 
 19200. What is Griffith's valuation of that hold- 
 ing?— £6 10s. 
 
 19201. Did your father build all the houses and 
 offices 1 — Yes, he did. 
 
 19202. Did your brother hold also there? — No, 
 they are all gone to Australia by the dint of bad 
 landlords. They were the cause of my poor old 
 father's death also. 
 
 19203. Baron I5pwsE. — Were Mullens and Kyne 
 of Galway your landlords ? — Yes. 
 
 19204. They that had the wine store?— Yes.. 
 
 19205. Chaieman. — Is there anything else you 
 have to say as to the other property ?— Yes, 
 
 19206. What happened there? — His rent was £30 
 first. There are three holdings. , When the lease 
 was out the landlord raised the rent £15. I am pay- 
 ing £7 10s. of that, as I have a holding and a half. 
 
 19207. Three of you, I u.nderstand, hold together, 
 and how much do you pay ? — £30 was the first rent. 
 
 19208. How long ago is it since there was a rise? 
 — Nine or ten years ago ; when the lease expired he 
 rose it £15. 
 
 19209. And made it £45 ?— Yes. 
 
 19210. Has there been any rise since that? — -No 
 rise. 
 
 19211. The O'CoNOE Don.— What was the lease ? 
 — It was the life of an old man. The landlord gave a 
 reduction on last year's rent, but nothing else. 
 
 19212. CHAmMAN.— Yousayyoupaid£22 14s. M. ■ 
 was it on that ? — Yes. There are other parties holdini,^ 
 along with me. 
 
 19213. The O'Conoe Don. — After the lease was 
 dropped was the land divided, between you? — No. 
 Last year he gave separate receipts. Before that he 
 never did it, 
 
 19214. What was your individual rent before the 
 lease dropped ?^I was not the tenant at the time the 
 lease dropped. 
 
 19215. How did you get it then ? — The parties were 
 going to Australia. 
 
 19216. Did you give anything for it? — I gave a 
 year's rent for it. 
 
 19217. Was that of the increased rent ?-^ Yes, it 
 was of the increased rent. 
 
 19218. You say that ten years ago the rent was 
 raised from £1 10s. Qd. to £2 an acre ? — Yes. 
 
 19219. Chaieman. — Is Mr. Algernon Persse the 
 agent \ — Yps. 
 
 19220. The O'Conoe Don.— Did you only give a 
 year's rent for the interest in that farm ? — That is all. 
 
 19221. Baron Dowse. — How much do you say Mr. 
 Persse raised the rent?; — He raised it £15; that is 
 £7 10s. on my part. 
 
 19222. Why did you pay him? — I would be turned 
 out of the land. 
 
 19223. How long ago is this? — About ten years 
 ago- 
 
 19224. Before the Land Act?— I believe it is, 
 
 19225. The Land Act was in 1870. Was it before 
 or after that ? — I think before that, 
 
 19226. Are you sure of that? — I am not certain. 
 
 19227. The O'Conor Don,— Didn't you say you 
 did not get the land until after the rise ? — No, I did 
 not. 
 
 19228. How do you say then he raised it on you 
 when you did not get it till after the rise 1 — It was 
 after the rise I got it certainly. 
 
 19229. Your father never had the land from Mr. 
 Persse ? — No. There was an ejectment fourteen or fii- 
 teen years ago by the Marquis of Clanricarde. Thei-,-) 
 was no cause but making improvements. 
 
 19230. Baron Dowse. — ^Who wasthe agent? — Jot.a 
 Blake and Ptichard Carthy. 
 
 Mr. William 
 Malley. 
 
008 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 188C. 
 
 Mr. Patrick 
 Malley. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Malley, Dangan, examined. 
 
 19231. Chairman. — Do you told in partnership 
 with the last witness? — I hold one holding from 
 Mullens and Coyne. Mr. Coyne is dead now. 
 
 19232. That is 13a. 2r. ?— Yes. 
 
 19233. And the rent was £12 10s. ?— Yes. 
 
 19234. The original rent was £i lOs. ]— It was at 
 one time, thirty years ago. It was then £4 10s., and 
 it has been raised now up to £12 10s. 
 
 1 9235. Is that the entire holding or the part of your 
 share 1 — My part. About twelve years ago the rent 
 was raised last. It was then raised from £9 to 
 £12 10s. 
 
 19236. Did you buy into this farm? — No; my 
 grandfather always had it. 
 
 19237. You say that after the purchase by Mullens 
 he raised the rent 1 — Yes, and it was raised since. 
 
 19238. Was that ten or twelve years ago? — Yes, 
 that was the last. The other rise was thirty years ago. 
 
 19239. And the last one ten or twelve years ago ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 19240. What was the first rise?— To £9, or to 
 double the amount of what had been paid. 
 
 19241. Have you made any improvemeDts on the 
 farm ? — Yes ; I took the stones off it and top dressed 
 it. 
 
 19242. Was it a hilly land? — -Yes; it was all stones 
 and rocks. 
 
 19243. The O'Conor Don.— Is it very near ^ 
 town? — It is in the borough here. It was like a 
 mountain — a rocky, bushy place. 
 
 19244. Do you'have to pay heavily for rates?— 
 Yes, every rate that attaches to the town. 
 
 19245. Chairjian. — Do you each pay separately 
 and get sejDarate receipts ? — Yes ; I have my last half- 
 year's receipts. 
 
 19246. Then you did not hold in partnership ?— No, 
 we did not. Mr. Persse long ago did not give separata 
 receipts. 
 
 19247. Does all the land near the town have to pay 
 rates ? — Yes. The borough of the town is only two 
 English miles out. 
 
 19248. Have you a good road? — No; there is a 
 lane going in from the good road. 
 
 19249. Isithill7?— yes. 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 Molonev. 
 
 Mr. Peter Moloney, of Rahoon, examined. 
 
 19250. Chairman. — Where is Rahoon ? — It is two 
 miles from the town. 
 
 19251. Do you hold under Mr. Ede?— Yes. 
 
 19252. Does he live in England ?— Yes. 
 
 19253. Who is the agent?— Mr. Kelly of Gal way, 
 a poor rate collector. 
 
 19254. How many acres have you ?.^-I think it is 
 17 acres, as far as I understand. I never measured it. 
 
 19255. What is your rent?— £25. 
 
 19256. How long has that rent been the same? — 
 I could not tell. 
 
 19257. As long as you have known it has it been 
 £25 ? — I have only known it, or been in it, eight 
 years. 
 
 19258. Didyoubuy it?— I did. 
 
 19259. You bought it at the rent of £25 ?— Yes. 
 
 19260. Did you give a good sum for it? — I gave 
 £140 for it. 
 
 19261. The O'Conor Don.— Who did you give that 
 to ?— To Mr. Martin Ruane. 
 
 19282. The previous tenant? — Yes. 
 
 19263. Chairman. — That was eight years ago? — 
 Yes. 
 
 19264. What have you to say about it? Has it 
 not been raised since that time ? — No. 
 
 19265. You thought it worth £140 to get it?— I 
 thought it was until I had a trial of it. I had a little 
 stock of money — £400 or £500 — and it is all gone 
 now. 
 
 19266. How did you make your money? — In Cali- 
 fornia, by working for it. 
 
 19267. Have you spent much money in building ? 
 — I have spent about £lOO. 
 
 19268. What did you do? — I spent it in draining 
 and cultivating furze and bog. 
 
 1 9269. You spent nothing in building? — No. 
 
 19270. Did you do this iiostly by spade work? — It 
 was all spade work. I could not piit a plough to any 
 of it. 
 
 19271. Was that done by getting other tenants of 
 his to join you and you would give them help, or did 
 you hold the land with others? — My holding is 
 separate from the others, and I employed day labourers 
 to assist me with the reclamation. 
 
 19272. Did they come forward to help you in work- 
 ing it ? — No. 
 
 19273. Baron Dowse. — You say others along with 
 you ? — No, there was no one along with me in work- 
 ing the land but paid labourers. 
 
 19274. Chairman. — Did you get any abatements 
 last year ?— No, I did not, and all the rest of the ten- 
 ants got it. 
 
 19275. I thought you said there was only one 
 other ? — No, only in that townland. 
 
 19276. Have you had a notice to quit in conse- 
 quence of non-payment of rent ? — No, I got a process 
 for non-payment of rent. 
 
 19277. When was that? — Last April. I have the 
 process here, (produced) 
 
 19278. What was it for — was it a year's rent?— A 
 year's rent. I got it very sudden. 
 
 19279. Did you settle that ? — Yes. I was obliged 
 to sell my sheep and borrow some money. 
 
 19280. Who is Mr. Blake ? — He is a solicitor m the 
 town. 
 
 19281. You had to settle with him?— I did. 
 
 19282. And did you pay him costs? — I had to do 
 it, and I could not afford it. 
 
 19283. Is some of the land going to waste now?— 
 Yes, for I am not able to stock it, and it is bad for 
 tillage. 
 
 19284. Why is that? — It is all boggy land, going 
 to furze bushes for the want of cultivating. 
 
 19285. Baron Dowse. — Is it too dear at the rent?— 
 Yes. 
 
 19286. Is it the same rent it was when you bought 
 it ?— Yes. 
 
 19287. Why did you buy it then 1 Was it because 
 the times were better ? — Yes. I did not know what 
 to do with my money. The times were better. 
 
 19288. How long were you in California?— Tlwee 
 years. 
 
 19289. What brought you back to this wretched 
 country ? — It was a misfortune. 
 
 19290. Is not the other a far better place ?— Yes, it 
 is far better. 
 
 19291. Chairman. — Had you losses in your cattle? 
 — I had heavy loss. I lost a fine milch cow, worth 
 £15, and I lost a bullock, worth £10, this year alone ; 
 and I lost two sheep value £5. 
 
 19292. Was that from disease or accident, or what! 
 — It was disease. It was milk fever the cow haa. 
 Two of the sheep were drowned, and the cattle were 
 lost by dry murrain, or red murrain. 
 
 19293. You gave £140 for this holding, and you 
 spent £100 on it, and do you say it is worse now than 
 when you got it ? — The land is better, but the seasons 
 are far worse. 
 
 19294. Baron Dowse. — Were you bom in that 
 place ? — I was not. 
 
 19295. Where were you born? — Three miles from 
 it. 
 
 19296. Had you any fancy for it? — I had the 
 money for it. I thought I could never spend out all 
 
MINUTSS OF EVIDS:nCE. 
 
 609 
 
 the money. ^ly father was Mr. Cummins' steward, 
 and we never paid any rent, and I did not know what 
 land was. 
 
 19297. How did you make the money you had? — 
 I was working in one of the mills for crushing the ore. 
 
 19298. Chairman. — When you lost your stock in 
 the bad years did you apply for an abatement or an 
 allowance of some sort 1 — I applied for it. 
 
 19299. And you would not be allowed any ? — No. 
 The man that was there before me gave some little 
 fine for it. He was worth £800 or £900 to my 
 knowledge. On the day he left it he was worth 
 nothing. 
 
 19300. Baron Dowse. — And you saw him leaving it 
 in that way ? — I did not know what he had when he 
 went in. 
 
 19301. Chaieman. — You did not know the difficulty 
 he experienced 1 — No, I did not. 
 
 19302. Baron Dowse. — Did the landlord know you 
 were buying it 1 — The agent knew of it, and the land- 
 lord said to the agent that he was well satisfied to get 
 a good tenant. 
 
 19303. Then your idea is that it is over-rented t — 
 It is over-rented. No one — I don't care who the man 
 is — could take the rent out of it, and tlie rent 
 alone. 
 
 19304. Did you ask for a reduction 1 — I asked the 
 agent for a reduction. 
 
 19305. What did he say l^-lle said he would not. 
 
 19306. If you were going to sell would you get 
 anything for it 1 — No. No man would pay the vent 
 I am paying for it if it was there for 100 years. 
 
 ] 9307. What do you think it is worth honestly as 
 between man and man 1 — £13 a year. 
 
 19308. The first rent ?— £13 was the first rent. 
 
 19309. If a man got it for £13 rent woiild it not 
 pay him ? — Yes. 
 
 19310. It is £25 now 1—Yes. 
 
 19311. That is a difi"erence of £12 a year ?— Yes. 
 
 19312. Does £12 a year make all the difference 
 
 between a man living in comfort and otherwise 1 — £1 
 might help a poor man. You could deprive a man of 
 an acre of potatoes for £2 alone. The oats are all 
 gone. 
 
 19313. You have a good market in Galway ? — Well 
 there is, but it is not so very good now, for the crops 
 are bad. 
 , 19314. You have nothing to sell 1— No. 
 
 19315. If you had a good harvest and a good year, 
 ooxild you make the rent ? — I could not, to do the 
 best. 
 
 19316. When you bought it you did not understand 
 the value of it '? — No. 
 
 19317. The O'Conor Don.— When you bought it 
 were any others looking for it t — No. 
 
 19318. Baron Dowse. — You were anxious to come 
 back to the country you were born and bred in t — 
 Yes, I was. When I had a little money I thought I 
 could not do better. 
 
 19319. Mr. Kavanagh.— Who settled on the £140 >. 
 — jMr. Cullen, who died since. 
 
 19320. Who was he? — He was Mr. Ede's agent — 
 the landlord's agent. 
 
 19321. He arranged that you were to give the out- 
 going man £140 1 — Yes. 
 
 19322. Did you think it was too much at the time 1 
 — Well, I did, but I thought I could knock a living- 
 out of what I had. I had £300 or £400 after paying 
 that, and I thought I would never be a day poor. 
 
 19323. Baron Dowse. — Did the man going out owe 
 rent to the landlord 1 — Yes. 
 
 19324. A_nd the landlord got the rent' out of the 
 purchase money 1 — Yes. 
 
 19325. Mr. Kavanagh. — Was anybody else looking 
 for it ?— No. 
 
 19326. Would anybody else have been foolish 
 enough to give £140 for it ? — I don't know. 
 
 19327. The O'Conor Don.— Were any other hold- 
 ings sold on the same estate 1 — No. 
 
 Oct. 2-2, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Peter 
 Moloney. 
 
 jlr. Thomas Cooley, of Newcastle, examined. 
 
 19328. Chairman. — Where do you live ? — At New- 
 castle, near Oughterard, about a mile and a quarter 
 from Galway. 
 
 19329. You hold seven acres of land under Mr. 
 Algernon Persse ? — Yes. 
 
 19330. Your rent is £27 7s. 6d. ?— Yes. 
 
 1 9331. And you are living on the land? — Yes ; I am. 
 
 19332. How long have you been tenant? — Well, 
 my father is the tenant still. He is alive. 
 
 19333. You father is the tenant?— Yes. 
 
 19334. How long has he held?— I think he has it 
 close on the last seventy years. He is in the eighty- 
 third year of his age. 
 
 19335. Was there a rise of rent on him twenty-eight 
 years ago ? — There was. 
 
 19336. Was it raised to the present rent then? — 
 It was. 
 
 19337. It was raised from the sum of £2 18s. 4rf. 
 an acre? — That was the old rent, and it was raised to £4. 
 
 19338. Has there been any other change since that ? 
 — No. I brought my landlord's two eyes to see the 
 
 . land and his bailiff and agent. 
 
 19339. Was it to see the land? — Yes. I said that 
 not a person in Europe could have done more with 
 the land than we did. I said, I shear, and cut my 
 bit of hay, and everything that waiits to be done. I 
 can do it without employing a labourer, and it is fill- 
 ing me to the neck to take a living out of this, and 
 I asked him to come and see it. On coming up he 
 examined it. He said — "Why did you hold it if it 
 was not able to pay you." I said — "I am an only 
 son, and my mother died in her seventy-sixth year of 
 age, and here is my father in his eighty-third year, 
 and if I left my old father and mother I would not 
 have luck anywhere I would go, and that is what 
 kept me in the face of the seven acres of land." There 
 
 is as much stones as would make a breakwater from 
 the quays of Galway to the lighthouse, on the seven 
 acres of land. Any man would tell you he would 
 require to have a bone-setter or a doctor to be walking 
 there, for in the dusk he would have the chance of 
 dislocating some of his bones, and I am paying 4s. l()d._ 
 for poor rate,, and 1 3s. 11 -|-d of rates four times in 
 the year. 
 
 19340. The O'Conor Don. — Are you within the 
 borough ? — Yes. I have to pay for the maintenance 
 of the roads, and 15s. for sewerage rates, 16s. for 
 water rates, and 5s. for a new church. 
 
 19341. How for a new church ? — It is a burial rate. ' 
 It is for a new cemetery. These are worse than tli(; 
 others. 
 
 19342. Baron Dowse. — Do you get any water?— 
 No. I have a spring well behind the house. Sir. 
 Persse was after walking on the opposite farm, which 
 is only separated from me by the public road, and I 
 saw him and his bailiff, and I broiight him back to 
 my farm, and I said — "What 'is the nature of tlio 
 farm you are after walking over. Is it not better 
 than all of where wo are standing." He said — " I 
 admit it is better than this." I said, you are makiui,^ 
 me pay £15 for this acre of rocks and stones you are 
 standing on. That is unconscionable. Here is one 
 old cow to do a couple of people, and all her bones can 
 be numbered, and there is not two acres of pasture. 
 
 19343. Is there not some good spots among the 
 rocks ? — No ; if you would light it with a match it 
 would blaze away. There are a few acres that my 
 father and I reclaimed in his days, but it is impossible 
 to reclaim this part. There are high stone walls, seven 
 feet high and four feet broad. I showed him the wall 
 that I cleared off, where I cut a little bit of meadow and 
 where I had cleared off fifty yards in length and 'four 
 
 4 I 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Cooler. 
 
610 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 Oct. 22, 18S0. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Cooley. 
 
 feet wide. I liad put do^v-n some to make a little 
 garden, and I said I would not have changed the wall 
 for a £10 pound note. He said-^"Well, I would 
 have been better pleased if you had let it alone. You 
 done it to make land for yourself, and you only a 
 tenant-at-will," and he said give up the land and he 
 would pay me for my crops. 
 
 19344. I suppose he would charge you rent for the- 
 land'? — He would charge me rent for the hairs of my 
 head if he could. I asked £5 from him, and it was 
 as good as a dog barking at the moon the way he 
 spoke to me. 
 
 19345. Mr. Kavanagh.— Who is your landlord? — 
 Mr. Algernon Persse. I told it to his face. 
 
 19346. Chairman. — Your land was formerly at the 
 rent of £2 18s. id. ^— Yes. 
 
 19347. And raised to £4 1— Yes. 
 
 19348. That brought it up to £27 7s. M. 'Z— Yes. 
 
 19349. Griffith's valuation was £8 ?— No ; before 
 Griffith's valuation was made, I recollect two valuators 
 going round the land, and each different man only 
 valued that spot at £8 in the year, and then the 
 Griffith's valuators when they came round raised it to 
 £13 5s., on the land, because we had a few little 
 fields by the road that we reclaimed, and they 
 thought that the rest of the holding was the same 
 as that. They thought the part behind the house was 
 like the front. 
 
 19350. You thought it was valued too high 1 — Yes. 
 
 19351. That it was all valued too high 1— Yes. 
 
 19352. Baron Dowse. — They only looked at the 
 front of it you say 1 — That was all. I asked Mr. 
 Persse to send any man to my holding to examine it, 
 and that I would be satisfied with what he would 
 say. I said — " I will be satisfied with yourself for 
 every acre it is worth to charge it, but not to be 
 making me pay £4 an acre for rocks and stones." I 
 said I would not pay it only for my father, who 
 would die in the workhouse if 1 left him. 
 
 19353. Chairman. — Did Mr. Persse make any 
 reduction to the tenants last year '? — He did. 
 
 19354. Did he make it to you ? — No, he kept it 
 from me in March. 
 
 19355. Why was that 1— In September, 1879, I 
 was not able to pay half a year's rent — that is £10 2s. 
 for one holding. The rent that I got for him in the 
 March before that was in the Bank of Ireland, from 
 Mr. M'Dowell, who always helps me. I always pay 
 him back when the harvest comes in. I was not 
 able to pay this time. I paid the full half year's rent 
 on the 23rd March, and when I went to the landlord 
 in September last I asked from him a reduction. I 
 told him that I had never broken a grain that was 
 grown — ^that it was swallowed into the ground again — 
 and I said " if you don't do something for me I will 
 Lave to throw it vq), and will have to leave it there. 
 I cannot keep it any longer." Por that holding he 
 gave me a percentage out of it. 
 
 19356. You have some other land? — Yes, but it is 
 in two holdings from the one landlord, and there are 
 two different receipts given. If I was a landlord 
 to-morrow myself I would not like anything unjust 
 to be done to me.' In general evei-y man of my class 
 from five acres up to ten or twelve, and tillage 
 farmers, something special should be done to keep 
 him from an unjust .rent. I asked my landlord to 
 give a just rent to me. 
 
 19357. Baron Dowse. — You would be satisfied if 
 it was valued between you and your landlord ? — Yes, 
 if the Government would send down a man to value 
 it fairly I would be satisfied. I am oppressed so much 
 that I am trying to live on credit, but the land is not 
 able to meet all the credits. 
 
 19358. You consider it a hardship that you should 
 have to pay for waterfor the streets of Galway 1 — Yes, 
 and to pay for sewerage rates. 
 
 19359. The O'Conor Don. — How much do your 
 rates come to on the holding 1 — I think over £6. 
 
 19360. Then you have the privilege of a vote for 
 Galway 1 — What is the vote ? It is better never to 
 
 have a vote than to^have to eat scallions and potatoes 
 on the corner of a table. 
 
 19361. If you were in the county you would have 
 two votes also? — Yes, We send the bidden member to 
 Parliament, and we ought not to have a vote at al] 
 The moment I would not be able to pay a fair-ient 
 I would hand my holding over to the landlord. Now 
 I would say that if he gave the place, althoug!) it was 
 raised five guineas before the former valuation— if J 
 got it at the present Griffith's valuation, I would be 
 satisfied, and try to make it out, and if I could not 
 make it out I would hand it over to the owner. ■ The 
 name of a townland in the county of the town is 
 Poulnaclugh, and Mr. Eedington was the former 
 occupant, and he struck the land and set it to the 
 tenant — a Mr. MulShinock. He died since. He had 
 a bad agent. He lives in the town of Galway.- JUj.. 
 Barry, the agent now, is an ex-officio policemaDj 
 and he says " you must give up this, and we will give 
 you ten or twelve acres of mountain, and he said they 
 were bujnng Mr. Redington's interest. He got a 
 decree for possession last November, and there are 
 eight or nine tenants since without a head of cabbage 
 to support themselves or anything eke. They wodd 
 not get leave to pull a bundle of hay to put under a 
 beast. They are in a terrible state. 
 
 19362. Baron Dowse. — Are these Mr. Mulchinock's 
 tenants 1 — They are his tenants. It is a happy thiag 
 to live under a good landlord, and it is an unhappy 
 thing to live under a bad landlord. I know three 
 tenants within a mile and a quarter of me who have 
 32 acres, and their land is better than mine, at £\ an 
 acre. 
 
 19363. The O'Conor Don.— Who is the landlord?- 
 The Bishop of Galway, who bought it ibr a charity 
 for the poor. He never put a shilling additional on 
 them. One of them is as poor as a church mouse, 
 with 10 acres. He gets the loan of money. 
 
 19364. Baron Dowse. — How is that? — I cannot 
 say. Pie tries to work the land as well as he caa 
 Where there is a small house and a little family it is 
 hard to support them with the necessities of life they 
 want. 
 
 19365. Chairman. — Do you think the tenants were 
 -pressed hard by having debts to pay when the bad 
 
 times came on ? — They were. 
 
 19366. How did they get into debt so much?— I 
 will show a little of my own case. I never closed an 
 eye since I got these processes for three years' manuie 
 that I was tmable to pay, and there was a respect for 
 me, and I was not sued until now. 
 
 193G7. They did not press you till now ? — No. 
 
 19368. When the times became bad they got uneaay 
 about their debts? — Yes. 
 
 193G9. Was this for guano ? — Yes, and for artificial 
 manures for the turnips and potatoes. 
 
 19370. What do you think of using artificial 
 manures ? — I never use it unless with good manure 
 and sea weed. I know it is ruining the country by 
 people putting it in by itself. It is riddling Ireland. 
 The humbler tenants have no courage to make manure. 
 They might say they might be doiiig it, and that they 
 might be turned out and another person get it. 
 
 19371. Would they not get compensation? — No. 
 Why go to law with the landlord? The solicitor 
 would get it all and the tenant would get nothing at 
 all. It would be better for a man not to look k»' 
 compensation, but to walk out as soon as he gets 
 notice to quit. 
 
 19372. Do you think that in the good times they 
 had been living better than. they should have donei— 
 No, I don't think it. 
 
 19373. It has been said so by some?— Never 
 believe them. Now, if a man got 2d. worth of bread 
 it would do his breakfast, and 6d. worth would be hi.s 
 dinner. If he gets any sort of good " Kitchen" it will 
 be Gd. worth as well. 
 
 19374. Baron Dowse.— It was said that the women 
 part of the household formerly used to manufacture 
 their linen and their petticoats, and their cloaks, but 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 611 
 
 that now-a-days they sit idle and do not, but buy 
 things in the shops and get into debt. Is that so 1 — • 
 Don't believe it. How could they sow flax on land 
 for £4: an acre, and buy a wheel for manufacturing 
 it, when my wife could go into the shop, and buy a 
 yard of calico for 4.d. Would she be fool enough to 
 kill herself for nothing. 
 
 19375. In point of fact you say they could get it 
 cheaper by going into the shop '!— -All cheaper in the 
 shop than a man who would sow the flax could manu- 
 facture it. Gentlemen put a wrong view on things 
 very often. 
 
 19376. Chairman. — They don't look upon it in the 
 right view 1 — I put it to you that at this moment I am 
 not worth a shilling to settle these processes. I declare 
 that it is the injustice of rising of the taxes that is 
 
 leaving me without sleep, or rest, or ease, or without 
 the necessities of life. 
 
 19377. Is the rate on the valuation or on the 
 rent 1 — On the valuation. 
 
 19378. Baron DowsJ?. — Do you pay more in the 
 shape of rates than you would if you were living in 
 the county? — It would be better for me to be 80 miles 
 away. There is no place like it. In the county they 
 have to pay about 3s. or 3s. 6d. 
 
 19379. They have no water rate to pay, or to pay 
 for making sewers 1 — No. How can they water a 
 horse when they have neither horse nor cart to wear 
 down the roads. Every landlord where the Queen's 
 miles runs should pay, but my little spot unfortunately 
 comes on it, and half of the road occupies more than 
 half an acre. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 Cooley. 
 
 Mr. M. F. 0' Flaherty, Lisdona, Tuam, examined, 
 land, 
 
 19380. Baron Dowse. — You are an owner of 
 Mr. O'Flaherty 1—1 am. 
 
 19381. About how much land have you ? — I have 
 two estates — one near Tuam, where I reside, the other 
 about four miles and a half from this town — both 
 together about £1,900 a year. 
 
 19382. How many acres? — 1,705 acres in the 
 property near Galway, and 852 in that near Tuam. 
 
 19383. Statute acres?— Statute. 
 
 19384. How many tenants have you ? — Thirty-four 
 on the estate near Galway, and fourteen on the other. 
 T have a good deal in grass. 
 
 19385. Laying aside the grass land from considera- 
 tion, do you find any difficulty in getting the rents 
 from the tenants of the agricultural portion of the 
 property ? — A good deal, for the last two years. 
 
 19386. To what do you attribute the difiiculty ? — 
 I have no hesitation in saying it has originated in the 
 agitation. 
 
 19387. Do you think they are able to pay ? — Those 
 who are able to pay have been the most reluctant to 
 pay. 
 
 19388. I suppose those who are best able to pay 
 have more land than the others 1 — Yes ; they are what 
 we call " strong " farmers. 
 
 19389. And are those the persons least inclined to 
 pay ? — Yes, unless I accept their own standard of rent. 
 I was told three weeks ago by one of that class that he 
 would pay me provided I took the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 19390. Is your land let at above or below the 
 valuation ? — That is a very difiicult question to answer 
 generally. I do not treat the Government valuation 
 as a uniform standard of value — in some cases the rent 
 is a little over, in many cases a good deal over. In 
 the latter I would say the value to the tenant was 
 better than in the former. 
 
 19391. Is the rent in any case under the Govern- 
 ment valuation ? — No ; in no case is it under the 
 valuation. 
 
 19392. At an average how niuch does the rent 
 exceed the valuation ? — At an average, about twenty- 
 five per cent. 
 
 19393. You say they are willing to pay the Govern- 
 ment valuation ? — Yes ; that is the standard fixed by 
 the local Land Leagues. 
 
 19394. Is there a branch of the Land League in 
 your district 1 — Yes ; there is a very active and tur- 
 bulent one in the neighbourhood of Athenry. 
 
 19395. And they have fixed as their standard the 
 Government valuation? — Yes; I was tendered that 
 by the tenant to whom I refer, or a right to be bought 
 out at seven years' purchase by the' landlord. He 
 said that was the law. I said, " I don't think it is 
 the law, as yet." 
 
 19396. He may have referred to the scale of com- 
 pensation for improvements under the Land Act ? — 
 No; I think he referred to the programme of the 
 Land League. 
 
 19397. He said that was the law ? — Yes. 
 
 19398. Did he mean the law of the land ? — Not at 
 all. "When he said it was the law, I said, " Where do 
 you find that ?" He said it was the law of the country. 
 
 19399. The O'Conor Don.— The law of the Land 
 League ? — Quite so. 
 
 19400. Baron Dowse. — Have you taken jsroceed- 
 ings agaiust any of your tenants 1 — Not this year ; I 
 did proceed in two or three exceptional cases last 
 year, and I find in a paper published in Tuam this 
 day week letters from two of the tenants complaining 
 of me. One of them is a very solvent tenant whom I 
 asked to meet me at the usual time last year; he 
 declined to do so. I said to the bailiff, " Go to Fox 
 and tell him I would be glad to see him." The bailifi" 
 went but Fox never came — the bailiff went a second 
 and a third time, but Fox declined to come. I knew 
 he had ample funds in his possession to pay his rent 
 if inclined to do so ; and I had a process served on 
 him for a half year's rent in September. 
 
 19401. That was an ordinary civil bill process? — 
 Yes ; and that was described in the report of the Land 
 League meeting as an arbitrary and harsh proceeding. 
 
 19402. It was not an ejectment? — Not at all; but 
 it was stated that I had mulcted the man in costs. 
 The costs were just eight shillings. 
 
 19403. Did you get a decree for the rent? — He did 
 not allow the case to go to a decree — he paid the rent 
 at once to my solicitor. I am described as having 
 mulcted the tenant to a grievous extent — not a very 
 pleasant thing to be held up as having done, in these 
 times. 
 
 19404. Did you take any other proceedings against 
 your tenants ? — No. 
 
 19405. Have you ever distrained for rent? — Never 
 in my life. 
 
 19406. Have you ever evicted a man on notice to 
 quit? — Never in my life. I am twenty-five years the 
 owner of one of these estates — it was sold in the 
 Landed Estates Court, the valuation being £810 a year ; 
 it is now set at £820. It was valued when I purchased 
 it by two as skilful and upright men as there were in 
 the country ; they valued it at its present rental, and 
 from that hour to this I never added one shilling to it. 
 I never evicted .any tenants except five — during the 
 whole of these twenty-five years ; and in those cases 
 the tenants owed two or three years' rent. 
 
 19407. Had you ever a case in the Land Court? — • 
 Never. 
 
 19408. Do you consider the land let at a fair rent? 
 — I consider it cheap. I hii',,. .. ^^^.^d deal of experience 
 as a farmer — both of grass and tillage farming, and I 
 consider the land well worth the present rent, allowing 
 of course for depreciation for the last two years, which 
 I considered by returning 20 per cent, to, every man 
 who paid. I allowed every man 20 per cent, except 
 the lease holders. I have given about a dozen leases 
 on the Galway property, near the town, the tenants 
 in every case having valuable interests — and of course 
 I declined to make any abatement to them. 
 
 19400. In the case of those men who said 
 
 412 
 
 Mr. M. F. 
 
 O'Flaherty. 
 
 they 
 
61: 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0, 
 
 Oct. 22, If 80. 
 
 Mr. M. F, 
 O'Flahertv. 
 
 would pay you if you accepted Griffitli's valuation, if 
 they paid you the actual rent, would you have allowed 
 them 20 per cent? — Most decidedly ; but when a man 
 declined to come near me at all, and at the end of a 
 month sent me his rent, £10 2s. 6c/., deducting 20 per 
 cent. I sent it back for the very cogent reason — tjaat 
 I had learned he had been an active disciple of the 
 Land League in my locality, doing all he could to 
 influence tlie other tenants, and in addition that he 
 v/as going to imin as fast as he could, devoting all his 
 time to Land League meetings, and going to public 
 houses and 'markets idling his time. 
 
 19410. You sent the rent back to himi — Certainly. 
 
 19411. And never got it back since'f — No. He 
 come to me last September, and said he w-anted to pay 
 me a year's rent. I said I was very glad to get it, and 
 I sat down to write him a receipt. He said, " how 
 much are you going to draw the receipt for '\ " — I said 
 " for a year's rent " He replied " I will only pay you 
 G-riflith's valuation." I said 1 would not take it. 
 We then had some conversation which it is unnecessary 
 to enter into. 
 
 19412. From what yon say, the tenantry on your 
 property, as long as tliey pay their rents honootlj and 
 fairly, have practically lixity of ten'ire 1 — Certainly. 
 
 19413. You never evict a man who pays his rent? 
 — Never. I consider it a moral crime to disturb a 
 man who pays his rent, and further I consider it 
 unfair not to give a man fair breathing time to pay. 
 
 19414. Wiio makes the improvements as a rule in 
 your neighbourhood, the landlord or the tenants? — 
 Any improvements made, are by the tenant. The 
 fact is that on the estates in my neighbourhood — 
 as is the case I believe in some other parts of Ireland, 
 the properties have been long settled, and the best 
 class of tenants keep farm steadings of the old anti- 
 quated type — thatched houses and offices — very com- 
 fortable in their way, though not very sightly, nor 
 according to modern ideas. I have no doubt that if 
 I proposed to these people to go into slated houses, 
 (as I did on one or two occasions), they would 
 object. They would consider it arbitrary and tyranni- 
 cal to interfere with their existing condition. 1 found 
 that by experience on two or three occasions. 
 
 19415. When a tenant wants to emigrate or go 
 away, does the incoming maia give him anything ? — 
 Always. I have had, as I said, only five evictions 
 during the twenty-five years I have been in 
 possession of the estate. I always allow a tenant who 
 wishes to give up his farm — in fact I consider it only 
 common honesty to do so — liberty to sell his good will, 
 provided only that he gets me an honest and jjroper 
 man as tenant. 
 
 lU4ir). Do they get much for the good will? — 
 Generally two years' lent. If the farm is a large one, 
 I dare say not so much. It always depends on the 
 desirability of the holding. 
 
 19417. And on the circumstances of the place? — 
 Quite so, and a good deal also depends on the character 
 of the landlord. 
 
 19418. You never object to a man selling his good- 
 will ? — On the contrary, I always permit it. I con- 
 sider it an act of simple justice ; and also an advantage 
 to the landlord. If a man is not thriving, and wishes 
 to leave and go to the colonies, I am strongly in favoiu- 
 of it. I approve of emigration. 
 
 19419. Would you consider it objectionable to have 
 rents fixed by a tribunal ? — I would. I have an in- 
 suparable objection to it. In my opinion the moment 
 you allow a man to interfere with the market value of 
 anything, you depreciate it, and you do not know how 
 far the interference may go. 
 
 19420. That may be so in the case of ordinary com- 
 modities ; but when a tenant is in occupation of a 
 falrm, and the landlord and tenant difi'er as to the 
 value of it, you can hardly say that it is a marketable 
 article ? — I do. There is only one way of meeting the 
 difficulty if rents are too high, and that is by lessening 
 the demand, and you can only do this by removing 
 pauperism, una the accumulative pauperism of the 
 
 country in our part of the world, is beyond what most 
 persons are aware of I know in my neighbourhood 
 620 individuals, in three country villages, who if 
 they got their holdings for nothing, could not make 
 a livelihood out of them. They must always be ia a 
 state oi chronic poverty and wretchedness, and greedy 
 for land. 
 
 19421. How do they live ? — For the last two years 
 they have lived on charity. 
 
 19422. The last two years were bad seasons. Sup- 
 pose the seasons were good, could they live ?— No ; I 
 don't care how good the seasons are, those people must 
 always be in a state of poverty. 
 
 19423. Still, somehow or other, they manage to 
 exist? — Yes, they exist, but in a kind of way which I 
 consider is disgraceful to any civilised community. 
 
 19424. Then, in your opinion, there are too many 
 peoijle in the country ? — Yes ; in those parts of it to 
 which I refer. 
 
 19425. How would you remove them?— In two 
 ways : one is by j-troviding waste lands withia tke 
 island for them, and assisting them to reclaim those 
 lands partly at the cost of the State and partly attk 
 cost of the landlord ; and there is no landlord with a 
 srain of sense that would not contribute one half of 
 
 o 
 
 the expense. 
 
 19426. Where are you to get the waste lands?— 
 That is a question I am not quite prepared to answer. I 
 assume that there is j)lenty of such land from what I 
 have seen. Take this district of Connemara. It con- 
 tains many acres of land which is now barren, but 
 which could be made valuable by a judicious expendi- 
 ture. 
 
 19427. We were told by a gentleman to-day that 
 to reclaim such land would cost more than the fee- 
 simple would be worth ? — I have seen so many diverse 
 statements on that question that I won't offer any 
 positive opinion. 
 
 19428. You said that the people you refer to might 
 be removed to the waste lands, and assisted to reclaim 
 them ? — Yes ; I would advocate either a plan of that 
 kind, or a system of generous emigration. 
 
 19429. When you speak of emigration, you have to 
 consider the wishes of the people to whom you send 
 them, as well as the interests of the emigrants ? — No 
 doubt. 
 
 19430. The majority of the emigrants who leave 
 this country are described as the flower of the popu- 
 lation. Would you think that a desirable thing for 
 the country — that the young and able-bodied people 
 should go, leaving the aged and infirm behind ? — Cer- 
 tainly not ; but I would hold out inducements to entire 
 families to emigrate to our own colonies^ or to the 
 United States ; but I have no doubt it would be a 
 greater advantage to place them on the waste lands in 
 this country, which are capable of being rendered pro- 
 ductive. 
 
 19431. You would object to having rents fixed by 
 a tribunal ? — Decidedly. I think the effect would be 
 to create a perpetual turmoil in the country. It must 
 be done by arbitration, and the Irish tenant, when 
 once he lias got a craze into his head, if Solomon came 
 on earth again and acted as arbitrator, would not be 
 satisfied with his decision. He takes up Ms ideas 
 from the Land Leaguers, or their oracle, and he wouU 
 consider any arbitration which was not in accordance 
 with those ideas false and corrupt. I believe it wouJa 
 be a source of continu.al turmoil and discontent, no 
 matter how equitably and wisely the tribunal was 
 framed. 
 
 19432. At present do differences of opinion ever take 
 place between landlord and tenant on the subject ot 
 rent ? — Certainly. 
 
 19433. How are those differences settled ?— They 
 settle themselves. The more you narrow the elements 
 of quarrel, the greater the chance of settlement j the 
 more you enlarge them by involving other persons 
 j udgments and opinions, the more you complicate the 
 matter and diminish the probability of a settlement. 
 If you lea-^ e the matter between the two parties, the 
 
iMINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 G13 
 
 cliances are in nincly-uine cases out of or.o liiindred 
 they will settle it between themselves. If you go to 
 a fair to buy stock — it is a matter of every day ex- 
 perience, if buyer and seller differ as to the price, for 
 a third party to come' and try to make a bargin ; I 
 never saw any case in which it was done that it did 
 not create confusion and prolong the controversy. I 
 think it better to lea\e the parties to themselves. 
 
 19434. The case of buyer and seller at a fair is 
 hardly the same as that of landlord and tenant. If a 
 man brings a cow to a fair, and you come to buy it, 
 he is as independent of you as you are of him 1 — He 
 may not. ' There may be times when he may want to 
 sell or you may want to buy ; buyer and seller ai'e not 
 always equally independent of each other. 
 
 19435. But is not the tenant of a farm more at the 
 mercy of his landlord 1 — Upon my word I thiaik the 
 balance is very little in favour of the landlord. Sup- 
 posing a crisis like this arises, which every man of 
 ordinary sagacity might foresee, I think the landlord 
 is in the worse position of the two, for how can 
 he meet his payments, interest, annuities, jointures 
 on his property, and his other outgoings — if the Land 
 Leaguers induce the tenants to refuse to pay their 
 rents. 
 
 19436. "We are not always, I hope, to have the Land 
 League 1 — I fear you may consider the Land League 
 as a permanent institution. 
 
 19437. You think so t — I do — that is my opinion. 
 Of course I speak with the utmost deference, but I 
 believe whatever BUI you recommend, even if it be 
 carried in the next Session of Parliament, will fail to 
 satisfy the tenantry ; and even if it should temporarily 
 satisfy them, yon will see the same agitation spring up 
 again before the end of ten years. I believe there is 
 a fixed desire or passion on the part of the Irish 
 peasant to get the fee of the land. 
 
 19438. Without paying for it? — "Well, on cheap 
 terms at all events. I think they want to be their 
 own proprietors. 
 
 19439. Do you think it would be advantageous to 
 the country to have a peasant proprietary ? — I think 
 it would be financially impossible in the first place ; 
 but in the next place, I think if we had an educated 
 peasantry — an intelligent, thrifty people — proprietors 
 of their holdings, I think it would be highly advanta- 
 geous to the country. 
 
 19440. You think it would be advantageous if the 
 whole country was covered with a peasant proprietary 
 of that descriptiofi 1 — Decidedly, provided it could be 
 carried out. 
 
 1 9441. What would become of the middle and upper 
 classes if it were carried out 1 — I think that they being 
 the minority should not complain of a change which 
 was for the benefit of the country. I would not sacri- 
 fice the interests of the community for the sake of one 
 or two privileged classes of society. 
 
 19442. Suppose your own estate was sold to a 
 peasant proprietary, would you continue to live in the 
 country ^ — "Unquestionably. I would live more happily 
 than I do at present. 
 
 19443. What would you dol — Just as I do now. 
 I would attend my Board of Guardians, I would sit as 
 a magistrate, I would act as a Grand Juror, I would 
 perform every function, duty, and office which I fulfil 
 at present. As to any social status annexed to land — 
 or territorial influence attaching to it — there is none 
 whatever now. 
 
 19444. You say you think the scheme is impossible 
 financially? — As far as I can probe the question, I 
 think it is. 
 
 19445. If it was financially possible you think it 
 would be beneficial to the country 1 — Most unquestion- 
 ably, if administered with judgment and care ; but I 
 don't think it comes within the range of practical 
 politics. I consider it a Utopian idea in the present 
 condition of Ireland. T speak of the western portion 
 of Ireland in particular. If our people were like those 
 of France or Belgium it would be difierent ; there the 
 peasantry know their business, and understand agri- 
 
 culture ; here they are ignorant of il. I have seen in Oct. 22, isso. 
 the neighbourhood of Gahvay — anyone ca]i see it in tlie jj^. jyj j. 
 harvest time in all jiarts of the country — ficklK con- O'Flalierty. 
 tainiag more weeds than cereals, but if you talk to 
 the people about the importance of \\-eeding their land 
 they will laugh at you. 
 
 19446. To what do you attribute that?— To their 
 Avant of training and education. 
 
 19447. Who is to train themi — The Government 
 should have training schools in various parts of the 
 country. It is peculiarly the province of iJoverniiifnt, 
 tliey do it in othei- countries, and even if they did it 
 in no country, common sense dictates to me that 
 nothing could be more valuable than sound and })rac- 
 tical agricultural instruction diilused among the 
 people. 
 
 1944S. Then your evidence is that if it was practi- 
 cally possible you see no objection to having tlu; whole 
 of Ireland turned into a peasant' proprietai-y 1 — Not 
 the slightest. I believe it would be the ^v'holesomest 
 change that e\cr took place. I believe it would make 
 the people contented, loyal and good s\ibjects, in the 
 fullest sense of the word, and I believe also that we 
 shall never have any one of these thint? withoi-.t 
 it. 
 
 19449. You think they won't be contented without 
 it 1 — I don't believe they ever will. I believe any 
 scheme short of it will become unpopular before the 
 end of ten years — that though it may satisfy them at 
 first it will cloy upon them and they will cry out foi- 
 something better. 
 
 19450. Don't you think that if a peasant ] iroprietarv 
 were established, so that instead of having to pay 
 rent the occupiers would have to pay an annual charge 
 to the Government for a series of years, the next thing 
 they would try would be to get rid of the charge, and 
 get the land for nothing 1 — I don't know that. I 
 think if they saw that the power they would have to 
 overcome was too strong, and beyond their physical 
 reach, they would submit — their only power in the 
 country at present consists in an immoral power — the 
 power of creating personal fear — now, they could not 
 do that with the Government. If you remove that 
 power from them — show them that the party they 
 have to deal with cannot be frightened, and will insist 
 on being obeyed — they will subside into tractaljle and 
 good citizens. That is my idea. They have a tangible 
 process now of effectuating their object — that is, by 
 infusing personal fear into the mind of every man, no 
 matter how courageous he may be — it is not a matter 
 of bravery, but reckless desperation to resist it. But 
 these people would soon see that there was no use in 
 fighting with the Government, that is eAidenced in°a 
 small way in the case of poor rates and county ces^, 
 they always pay those, because they see there is no 
 use in resisting — pay they must. Tliey have no bacl;- 
 doors, no means of escape. 
 
 19451. They could not get rid of them without 
 rebellion or civil war? — Yes ; and they regard that as 
 chimerical. At the same time, as I have already said, 
 I don't think the plan of a peasant proprietary could 
 be applied universally. 
 
 19452. Why don't you think it could be applied 
 universally? — There is no use in making a peasant 
 proprietor of a man with two or three acres of land — 
 how would he live. 
 
 19453. Then before a plan of jieasant proprietary 
 could be established you would see that each man hail 
 sufficient land to enable him to live upon it ? — Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 19454. What would be the least amount of land on 
 which, in your opinion, a man could live ? — That is a 
 relative (juestion ; it depends on the quality of the 
 land. Five acres of good land would do, but 15 acres 
 of bad land would not. 
 
 19455. Then in your opinion it would be impossible 
 to solve the question by turning the prefeent tenants 
 into a peasant proprietary ? — Certainly ; it would be 
 only accumulating and perpetuating poverty. 
 
614 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. M. F. 
 O'flahcrtj". 
 
 19456. I am afraid tlie conditions you would im- 
 pose upon your peasant proprietary would make it 
 difficult of accomplishment 1 — I think there are por- 
 tions of the country in which there are a large number 
 of occupiers who would be glad to become proprietors, 
 and quite eligible for it. 
 
 19457. Are you acquainted with any tenants who 
 Lave purchased their holduigs under the Church Act 1 
 ■ — No ; but I have myself given ten or twelve leases 
 to tenants in this locality about sixteen years ago, and 
 unquestionably they have progressed beyond theii- 
 neighbours, who are tenants from year to year. 
 
 19458. You think the sense of security has a useful 
 effect in encouraging improvement 1 — I do. I think 
 it is a most important element in progress. 
 
 19459. Suppose the land was held at a fair rent, 
 the tenant not to be disturbed so long as the rent was 
 paid, would that not give a sense of security and 
 
 satisfy the country ? — No ; for it still would leave the 
 question open — every two or three years the question 
 between landlord and tenant would crop up again. 
 
 19460. Would not the same difficulty arise if a 
 peasant proprietary were established ? — Do you mean 
 between the Government and the tenant 1 
 
 19461. Yes 1 — I think not ; the Government is not 
 like a landlord — one is an unsubstantial body whicli 
 cannot be assailed or frightened, the other is an indi- 
 vidual whom we can denounce or shoot. 
 
 19462. Do you think if a Treasury clerk, or the 
 collector of the Government annuity was shot, he 
 ought to take that in, as jsart of his duty, along with, 
 his wages ^ — I don't think the people would do any- 
 thing of the kind. I think the farther you remove 
 the corpus of his landlord from the discontented tenant 
 the better for the safety of the landlord certainly, 
 
 Colonel .James 
 O'Hara. 
 
 Colonel James O'Haka, Lenaboy, examined. 
 
 19463. The O'Conob Don. — I believe you are a 
 landed proprietor in Gah^-a}' 1 — Yes, and in Mayo. 
 
 19464. Are you not at the head of the mimicipal 
 authorities in Galway 1 — Yes. 
 
 19465. You reside near the town of Galway ? — 
 Yes, quite close. 
 
 19466. Could you state the extent of your property 1 
 — It is about 3,700 acres — that is, taking the county 
 of the town and the County of Mayo. 
 
 19467. Is it generally in the hands of tenants? — I 
 have very little in my own hands. 
 
 19468. Are they small tenants? — No, very few 
 small tenants. I have some, and most of my small 
 tenants are in the neighbourhood of the largest town 
 holdings or town parks. There are not many of them 
 of the agricultural class, but there are some. 
 
 19469. Do you allow the right of sale to tenants? — 
 Practically, I do. Not that it is recogrfised, but 
 they have in some cases sold. I have never ob- 
 jected to it. 
 
 19470. When the sales have taken place, has there 
 been much money given ? — In some cases two or three 
 years' purchase. 
 
 19471. Have your rents remained long at their pre- 
 sent figure ? — I have not changed except in two or 
 three instances. 
 
 19472. Tlien the rents have not been generally 
 changed on your estate ? — Not withm my recollec- 
 tion. 
 
 ^19473. What would you say is the general propor- 
 tion of your rents to the Government valuation ? — 
 Well, taking in the whole — that is taking in the large 
 farming class — it is one-third over the tenement valua- 
 tion, but several of the agricultural small holdings are 
 under the Government valuation. The grass farms 
 are much over the valuation, but not the agricultural. 
 In some instances they are 1 per cent. over. 
 
 19474. But you agree that the tenement valua- 
 tion is not a fair test ? — It is no fair test of value. 
 
 19475. Do you consider it uniform in the same 
 locality ? — I do not think the tenement valuation is 
 uniform in any part of the country. In fact, when 
 the tenement valuation was created — I think from the 
 nature of the tax it was made foi' taxation purposes ; 
 and the rates at the time that valuation was made were 
 taken into consideration in the valuation. In conse- 
 quence it must be uneven. 
 
 1947G. Do j^ou do much of the improvements on the 
 estate 1 — I do a great deal, and, in fact, anything of 
 the kind is done by me. The tenants do not, as a 
 rule, improve, and they are not inclined to improve. 
 
 19477. What improvements have you made? — I 
 I have made the walls dividing farms, and have made 
 drains for tenants, and in my father's time houses were 
 built, without charging for them. 
 
 19478. Did they not generally build the houses 
 themselves ?— No ; my father built the houses on part 
 of the estate, and I have myself built for a tenant. 
 
 19479. Could you give any estimate of the amoimt 
 you have spent ? — I think £1,500. 
 
 19480. Has the Land Act checked or created im- 
 provements ? — I think it has checked landlords from 
 improving, for any interest in the land was prevented 
 by it. 
 
 19481. Has it led to tenants improving it?^No, it 
 has led to tenants borrowing money on so-called 
 security. It has made them improvident; they have 
 borrowed money and got money from the banks to get 
 artificial manures, and they have got money that tliey 
 could have done much better without. 
 
 19482. Have your rents been paid well last year ? 
 — Yes, by the large tenants ; but as to the small 
 tenants I have not asked them yet, except in a district 
 where I knew they were well able to pay. 
 
 19483. Have you forgiven the rent altogether? — 
 No, but I thought it 'was an occasion on which they 
 should be given time ; they have told me they will 
 pay. 
 
 19484. Yoii are the head of the municipality here? 
 —Yes. 
 
 19485. We have heard complaints of the excessive 
 taxation of Galway ? — There are heavy taxes of course, 
 for there, are large sewerage works, but otherwise the 
 taxation is not more than in other places. We have 
 waterworks and sewerage works, which necessarily in- 
 crease the taxation. 
 
 19486. Is it not a fact that outlying districts have 
 not benefited, although they are taxed for these 
 works % — We have a rating area of two miles, and 
 within that they pay naturally. 
 
 19487. Although the occupants do not receive any 
 benefit ? — Yes. I live myself within a mile of the 
 town, and my valuation for taxation is very high in- 
 deed, and I do not benefit by the sewerage or water- 
 works, and I have to pay. I believe that everybody 
 is indirectly benefited by the advancement of the 
 town, though they do not directly get any advantage 
 from the works. 
 
 19488. Chairman. — Does the rate run the same 
 over the whole area ? — Yes, two miles. 
 
 19489. Baron Dowse. — Is it not hard on a man to 
 have to pay 4s. 6c?. for water rate, when he cannot 
 pay his rent ? — He only pays three pence in the pomid 
 unless he gets the water. 
 
 19490. He pays more taxes than he would if he 
 was in the country ? — He pays for the sewerage and 
 the water within the two mile radius that he would 
 not have to pay for in the country, but you must draw 
 the line somewhere. 
 
 19491. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you think he is bene- 
 fited by his proximity to the town 1 — Yes, by the pros- 
 perity of the town and the neighbourhood. The farmers 
 in the neighbourhood have advantages over those at a 
 further distance. My property is in the electoral 
 division of the town, and the poor rates are nearly 4s. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 G15 
 
 in the pound. I have not a, panper on the estate, 
 but I must pay all the same. 
 
 19492. The 0'Con;ob DoN.^Have you had any 
 complaints about the figure of the rents 1 — No. 
 
 1,9493. Would you have any objection, in case of 
 dispute as to the rent, to having that dispute settled 
 by arbitration ? — T should like to see arbitration much 
 more resorted to than it is. It would be better if it 
 could be agreed to. , I would be glad to see more re- 
 ferences to arbitratipn. 
 
 19494. Dq you think the County Court Judge a 
 satisfactory tribunal for settling dispvites of the kind ? 
 - — I can hardly say I do. He dpes not know much of 
 the particular circumstances of the districts he has had 
 before him. I have not had much land business 
 before the County Court Judge. I had very few dis- 
 putes with my tenants. 
 
 19495. Had you any ejectments since the passing 
 of the Land Act 1—1 had one. 
 
 19496. Was the tenant finally dispossessed 1 — Yes; 
 but it was not properly an agriciiltural holding. It 
 was more of accommodation land or town-park. I 
 had no evictions otherwise. 
 
 19497. Baron Dowse. — I suppose you would never 
 think of turning out a man if he pays his rent as an 
 ordinary thing's — No, if he pays his rent I would 
 never dream of it. 
 
 19498. Mr. Kavanagh. — Then they would hseve 
 fixity of tenure under you'? — Yes, and it is handed 
 down from father to son. I have not a written agree- 
 ment with any tenant I have of that class. If there 
 is any question as to who comes next, the son comes 
 after the father. 
 
 19499. The O'Conob Don.— What class do you 
 mean'? — I mean the agricultural class, and not the 
 grass farmers. On large grass farms the people are 
 able to take care of themselves. 
 
 19-500. Do you think that a tenant whose family 
 have been on the land for generations, and gives at 
 its present value, should have a claim not to be 
 "turned out so long as he paid a fair rent 1 — Certainly, 
 I believe they do not improve. I think that the only 
 improvement the people do is that where they cut 
 away turbary they may reclaim land. As to putting 
 capital in thp land I do not think such a thing exists 
 in this part of the country. 
 
 19501. Baron Dowse. — Whether they improve or 
 
 ^-.'•-O 
 
 not you would not turn them out so long as they paid Oct. 
 the rent 1 — No. r i i r 
 
 19502. Mr. KAVANAGii.^Supposing, some of the O'Hara. v ^ 
 tenants were going away would there not be much 
 improvement to show'! Supposing they had lived 
 
 there from father to son would there not have been 
 improvement 1 — There is very little, except , in land 
 that they may have held as turbary, and that in 
 generations they have cut it down to within a short 
 (.listance of the gravel, and made it into a sort of 
 rough land ; and they have got the profit without 
 paying practically any rent. I had a case of mine 
 where the turbary was getting short. When they had 
 finished that part of the cutting they would have to 
 get it further off. Three or four tenants were getting 
 turbary about the same place. Tlie object was to get 
 the turbary without going far. At the end there was a 
 good deal of wrangling and talking among them as to 
 ^vho owned the last bit, and I said I could not settle it. 
 I could not find out who had the right to it. I said, 
 " We will survey the land and we will see v/hether 
 it is in accordance with the map." The moment I 
 said that they settled it among themselves. They 
 did not want me to have a surveyor there at all. 
 
 19503. Have you heard many complaints about 
 the raising of rents in the district? — There is no 
 doubt there are rents raised in the district, and raised 
 too high, but it is entirely upon properties purchased 
 in the Landed Estates Court, and it is entirely the 
 result of purchases being made in that way by men 
 who have not money to pay for the land, and then 
 they have to seek for increase of rent to get a margin 
 above the interest they are paying and the rents the 
 land would produce. 
 
 19504. Chairman. — We were told that in some 
 instances the persons proposing to sell increased the 
 rents in order to ran the rental up before the sale ? — 
 I have not heard of a case of that sort. I don't fancy 
 any case of that sort would arise. 
 
 19505. That was not in this county'? — I have heard 
 of cases of rents having been raised very excessively 
 in parts of this country, but not as it were by owners 
 of property who have held it for any length of time 
 or for generations. It is generally by men who had 
 boiTOwed money, and that it was to have a margin 
 over the money they borrowed for the purchase of the 
 land. 
 
 Mr. Thomas C. Lambekt, of Galway, examined. 
 
 19508. Mr. Kavanagh. — Are you an owner of pro- 
 perty 1^1 am the owner of ^operty, and was my own 
 agent until a year or two ago. 
 
 19509. You don't manage aiiy other property'? — 
 No. 
 
 19510. Your evidence relates to your own property? 
 • — Yes, to my own. 
 
 19511. What is the extent of it?— Nearly 4,000 
 acres in Galway. and Mayo. The greater part of it is 
 ia Galway, and nearly 1,000 acres in Mayo. 
 
 19513. Are the holchngs large or small? — Gene- 
 rally small, but there are three grass farms that are 
 large. 
 
 19513. Have you had any difficulties about the 
 rents ? — Only lately. 
 
 19514. Is that since the present agitation ? — La.st 
 year. ,'tJp to that tim'e I had very little trouble, ex- 
 cept occasionally. 
 
 19515 What proportion do your rents bear to the 
 Poor Law valuation ? — It is rather hard to say. It is 
 on the average I would say a third over the valuation. 
 I have some under the valuation absolutely ; one 
 place that was sold in the Encumbered Estates Court. 
 I left the army ten years ago, and reduced the rents 
 absolutely one-third under the valuation, and satisfied 
 the tenants. I did that unsolicited. 
 
 19516. Have you had many changes of tenants?— 
 Very few. 
 
 19517. Upon a change of tenancy, have you any difli- 
 culty in settling the future rents ? — I cUd not alter the 
 rent. Only a few cases of that occurred, I don't think 
 there were more than half a dozen. If a person wanted 
 to go to America and wished to give up his holding, I 
 would say, "get me a tenant — ^one of my own tenants if 
 possible — subject to my own approval, and I wovild let 
 them settle amongst themselves what they were to pay 
 for the value of the outgoing crop and the good-will. 
 
 19518. That was a sort of tenant-right ?— A sort of 
 modified tenant-right. 
 
 19519. Then you admit sale on the estate? — Yes, 
 subject to my approval. I would like to know always 
 who is going to have the land. 
 
 19520. It is subject to a veto? — Yes, I exercised a 
 veto On one. occasion, when I said the price must not 
 go beyond so much. 
 
 19521. Have your tenants made many improve- 
 ments ? — No, none, except on one or two Occasions. 
 I have some property six miles from here. There are 
 a few tenants who have reclaimed a portion of the bof, 
 and they have made small holdings, but they hold for 
 a nommal rent. I have several also who are payin^ 
 4s. a year. I could get £1 or 30s. if I asked it. 
 
 1 9522. Are all the buildings and fences on the farms 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 C. Lambert. 
 
616 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Thomas 
 C. Lambert. 
 
 tlie tenants' work 'i — They were done years and years 
 ago. They were done in my father's time. 
 
 19523. They were done hj the predecessors of the 
 tenants 1 — I don't know who did them. 
 
 19524. Have you spent much yourself on improve- 
 ments 1 — Noj I was not able until this year. I bor- 
 rowed some money for the drainage of the bog. Up 
 to this I have not expended much. I have given a 
 tenant half a year's rent in order to roof his house, or 
 things of that kind. I have done nothing great in the 
 way of drainage or wall building. 
 
 19525. Have you had many ejectments 1 — 1 never 
 had an ejectment in my life. I would be pretty safe 
 in saying that there has not been an ejectment on the 
 property for the last twenty years. 
 
 19526. Then they have practically, under you, 
 fixity of tenure 1 — Certainly. 
 
 19527. What do you think of the Poor Law valua- 
 tion as a criterion of rent 1 — It does not mean anything. 
 It might be too high or two low. 
 
 19528. You think it is not a fair criterion to go 
 by 1 — Not for letting value. 
 
 19529. Have you thought anything about the ques- 
 tion of the establishment of peasant proprietors in the 
 country ? — So far as I can see, they would only ruin 
 themselves. 
 
 19530. You would not advocate it? — I certainly 
 would not. 
 
 19531. You don't know any cases where tenants 
 have purchased their holdings ? — No, none about here. 
 
 19532. Is there any other point that you would 
 wish to mention that I have forgotten? — I don't think 
 so. 
 
 19533. The O'Conok Don. — "When you say you 
 think the peasant proprietors would ruin themselves, 
 what do you meaii ? — I think this — that if a man got 
 the land into his own hands completely, he would not 
 keep it for m.any years. 
 
 19534. You think he would be sold out? — He 
 would not do anything. 
 
 19535. Do you think the land would be bought by 
 a more industrious neighbour 1 — Yes. 
 
 19535a. Do you think that that would be a dis- 
 advantage ? — The individual would suffer, but it would 
 be an advantage to the country. It would take some 
 time before it would work. 
 
 19536. What do you think the eventual result 
 would be 1 — The extermination of a large number. 
 
 19537. You would have another generation of land- 
 lords no better than the present 1 — Infinitely worse. 
 
 19538. But where the State would insist on having 
 no subletting, what would you say 1 — You could not 
 stop that. 
 
 19539. Could you not make that a condition? — 
 You would have a worse class of landlords than you 
 have now. 
 
 19540. That is on the assumption that they would 
 have power to sublet ? — Yes. You would have 
 another agitation. 
 
 19540a. Do you think it would be impossible to 
 prevent that ? — T don't think it woidd. 
 
 19541. Could you provide that, so long as the 
 advances remained unpaid, that the peasant proprietor 
 might sell his holding if he got into difficulties, but not 
 to subdivide or sublet ? — Yes, you might do so. 
 
 19542. Would that not prevent the establishment 
 of the bad class of landlords for thirty-five years ? — It 
 might ; but from what I know of the people I don't 
 tliink the system would be of any advantage. 
 
 19543. Baron Dowse — Do you think it would be 
 of any advantage to remove the landlord class out of 
 the country ? — No, it would not. 
 
 19544. Then they would have nobody to abuse if 
 they did that ? — No. Personally, I would be glad tn 
 leave the country if they bought my land, for I am 
 sick of it. 
 
 19545. We had a gentleman here who said that if 
 the land was bought up by the tenants he would cob- 
 tinue to live here and discharge 'his duties. Do yon 
 think the landlords would be inclined to remain in the 
 country if peasant proprietary were established ?— They 
 would not stay in the country at all. Why should they ! 
 
 19546. This gentleman seemed to think it would be 
 a sort of Elysium, and that he would have nothing to 
 do, and that he would continue to act as a Poor Law 
 Guardian, a Justice of the Peace, and a Grand Juror? 
 —I wotild be sorry to say that. 
 
 19547. Supposing the landlords were all bousht 
 out, would they remain in the country? — No; ^vhy 
 should they? ' ^ 
 
 19548. Would they remain in occupation of so 
 much of their estates as they had in their own hands! 
 — I don't know. I would have to walk out. I have 
 nothing in my own hands. 
 
 19549. The O'Conor Don. — If you were ohangerf 
 into a mere rent charger you say you would leave the 
 country ? — I would walk out to-morrow mornincr. 
 
 19550. Baron Dowse. — Suppose your tenants ''"ot 
 by law what you give them substantially, fixity of 
 tefiure, would you walk out ? — So long as my rents 
 were paid punctually, and that I could live elsewhere 
 I would as soon live away from home. 
 
 19551. The O'Conor Don.— That is, if you had no 
 control over your estate would you remain ? — So. If 
 I had no control, what interest in the country would I 
 have? 
 
 19552. Would that not drive the landlords out of 
 the country as much as a peasant proprietary?—! 
 could not say. I think that a great number are 
 absentees owing to the Land Act, and take no interest 
 in the place as long as they get their rents. 
 
 19554. Baron Dowse — If a man had Ms estate pur- 
 chased from him out and out, he would have no 
 interest ; whereas if there was fixity of tenure he could 
 evict them for non-payment of rent; he would still 
 have control over his estate, so that there is a differ-' 
 ence between the two ? — That depends on what you 
 mean by fixity of tenure : is it at the present rents 1 
 
 19555. Fair rents? — I consider my tenants are at 
 fair rents. 
 
 19556. If the law gave your tenants what you 
 already give substantially, you would be no worse than 
 you are ? — No, not if there was a periodical valuation. 
 
 19557. The O'Conor Don. — Would you approve of 
 a periodical valuation? — I would have no objection 
 whatever if the whole country was re- valued. 
 
 195r)8. Mr. Kavanagh. — If the law gave fixity of 
 tenure, fair rents, and free sale, don't you think that 
 by-and-bye the agitation would be for no rents at all ! 
 — I do. I think the next thing they would ask for 
 would be no rents at all. 
 
 19559. Don't you think the proper course would he 
 to give the people the whole of what they are entitled 
 to instead of half of what they ask ? — They want to get 
 everything. If you yield to this agitation there will be 
 another in a few years' time to get the land for nothing. 
 
 1 9559a. Would you let things remain as they are?— 
 I thiuk so. The people were perfectly satisfied until 
 a couple of years ago. 
 
 19560. What began the thing? — Michael Davitt, 
 the Fenian fellow. It began in Mayo. I used to get 
 my rents paid as regularly as possible until people 
 interfered with them. They paid me very well, and 1 
 never had any trouble. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 617 
 
 Mr. William H. Halliday, Bushy Park, Galway, examined. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. 
 
 19560a. Chairman. — You are an occupier of land ? 
 — I am. 
 
 19561. You are also a land agent 1 — Yes. 
 
 19562. And an inspector ' of land improvements 
 under the Board of Works % — I was, but I resigned it 
 some ten or twelve years ago. 
 
 19563. Where is the property for which you are 
 agent '! — In the county Sligo. 
 
 19564. About how many acres does it consist of? — 
 About 2,000 acres, statute measure. 
 
 19565. In what part of Sligo is it situated ? — Close 
 to Ballina. The property of Colonel Charles Totten- 
 ham, near Easky. 
 
 19566. Is tenant-right allowed on that property^ — 
 No ; the tenants have no right of selling, buying, or 
 transferring ; but in every instance where any tenant 
 has given up a farm, everything that he could possibly 
 lay claim to is valued and bought. 
 
 19567. Who pays for it? — Colonel Tottenham him- 
 self 
 
 19568. He does not allow sales, but he purchases the 
 interest and improvements of the outgoing tenant 
 himself? — ^Yes. 
 
 19569. There is no custom of right of sale existing 
 on the estate 1 — None whatever. 
 
 19570. Have those tenants gone away satisfied 
 where interests were bought up in that way? — The 
 tenants mostly left in difficulties and distress, and I 
 was directed by Colonel Tottenham to have every- 
 thing belonging to them valued, and the amount paid 
 to them. 
 
 19571. And were they satisfied? — They were de- 
 lighted. Their difficulties were driving them away, 
 and they were very well pleased with the arrange- 
 ment. I may observe there has never been but one 
 ejectment on the property, and even in that case the 
 tenant is in occupation yet. 
 
 19572. Have there been many changes of rent on 
 the property ? — ^There has been no change during my 
 time, except one. 
 
 19573. What was the occasion of that? — Simply 
 this : There had been no revision of the rents for fifty 
 years, and I called in a valuator having changed the 
 whole form of the farm, — in fact there was a number 
 of vacant holdings on a portion of the estate, and in 
 changing them I did not wish to put the value on 
 them myself, so I got a valuator to do it, but I did 
 not act on his valuation. 
 
 19574. Was that on the lapse of a lease? — No, it 
 was when a whole lot of the poor people went away 
 in 1848 and 1849. The result of the famine in those 
 years was that on the poorer lands great numbers 
 were evicted. The action of the Poor Law at that 
 time required them to give up their holdings if they 
 came into the poor-house, and that had the effect of 
 leaving a quantity of land vacant. 
 
 19575. When those poor people gave up their 
 farms, I presume they did not get anything? — No. 
 They were gone before the time I was appointed agent ; 
 but there is no such thing as tenant-right over that 
 whole district of country. I have lived there upwards 
 of thirty years, and know it well. 
 
 19576. What is the name of the district ?— The 
 barony of Tireragh. 
 
 19577. Do you know the barony well? — I do. 
 1957S. Mr. Kavanagh. — You say you have had 
 
 only one ejectment upon the property ?— One only, 
 and the man is living in the place still. 
 
 19579. Did he claim compensation under Clause 3 
 of the Land Act ?— No. 
 
 19580. You have no experience of that Act? — No, 
 not direct experience myself. In the case of the man 
 I refer to, he is still living there and will resume his 
 holding if he prospers. 
 
 19581. The O'Conok Don.— When was he ejected? 
 — In January, 1877. He has been put back as the 
 caretaker of his own holding until he can cleai' off his 
 debt and resume his tenancy again. 
 
 19582. Do you know whether the clauses of the 
 
 Land Act have been evaded to any extent in your h'^V^,'i'|J'"" 
 district by agreement? — I know of some instances ' ' ^' 
 where leases were taken, in which the " Leinster 
 lease " was insisted upon. 
 
 19583. Was that on Colonel Tottenham's property? 
 — No. 
 
 19584. Baron Dowse. — What do you mean by the 
 " Leinster lease "1 — I mean the lease that has got that 
 name, from having clauses barring compensation under 
 the Land Act. 
 
 19585. Suppose a lease contained one clause barring 
 the tenant from all compensation under the Land Act, 
 would not that answer the desoiiption, too 1 — Yes. 
 
 19586. You are aware, I suppose, that there is such 
 a lease, the " Parnell lease"? — Yes, I know that. 
 
 19587. Then we may as well call things by their 
 right names ; lot us call those leases you refer to 
 " Parnell leases" ? — Yes, but the " Parnell lease " was 
 not published at the time those leases were made. 
 
 19588. The O'Conor Don.— Do you regard the 
 scales of compensation given for disturbance and im- 
 provements in the Land Act reasonable and sufficient ? 
 — Yes, I think they are fair enough. A challenge 
 comes from the variety of interpretations by different 
 chairmen. There is only one thing about it I never 
 could understand : why when a man is ejected all his 
 claim is forfeited. 
 
 19589. You mean for non-payment of rent ? — Yes. 
 Why should a man's claim for disturbance be forfeited 
 for that 1 What is he but simply a bankrupt to his 
 landlord ? Why should he forfeit to his landlord more 
 than the rent which he owes to him? 
 
 19590. You are aware that a tenant who is ejected 
 for non-payment of rent is entitled to compensation 
 for improvements? — Yes, but he is deprived of his 
 compensation for disturbance, and that is what I have 
 never been able to see the justice of. 
 
 19591. You would put the tenant who was evicted 
 for non-paym.ent of rent, in the same position as the 
 man who was evicted on notice to quit ? — Precisely ; 
 except, of course, that he should be liable to pay his 
 landlord the amount of rent due. 
 
 19592. You would give him compensation for dis- 
 turbance ? — Certainly. It appears to me that a tenant 
 who is unable to pay his rent, should be ti'eated like 
 an ordinary bankrupt. If a man becomes a bankrupt — 
 if he is unable to meet his engagements — his property 
 is liable, of course, for the payment of his creditors ; 
 but he does not forfeit any legal lights. It seems to 
 me a pitiable thing to add to the misfortunes of a man 
 who is sinking, that becaiise he is a bankrupt to his 
 landlord he should be deprived of that which he would 
 have a legal right to claim if he were able to pay his 
 liability. 
 
 19593. Mr. Kavanagh. — Has the passing of the 
 Land Act had the effect of leading tenants in your 
 district to mortgage their interest in their holdings to 
 secure loans of money or debts to shopkeepers? — 
 Well, it has to some extent ; but in our district tenants 
 have not the same interest in their holdings as in the 
 North of Ireland. No man would lend a farthing on 
 the tenants' interest in a farm until lately. I never 
 heard of such a thing as a farmer getting an advance 
 of money on the security of his holding until the 
 Ulster Bank opened a branch in Ballina. We have 
 now four banks in the town — the Bank of Ireland, 
 Provincial Bank, National Bank, and Ulster Bank, 
 and the Ulster Bank send their agent to Easky, on 
 market days, to open a branch there, and he comes 
 back in the evening guarded by two policemen. 
 Until those banks came, and till the country people 
 learned to do their business through the banks, there 
 never was a word of advances being made on the 
 security of the interest of tenants in their holdings. 
 
 19594. Do you think there have been too much 
 facilities for borrowing money? — I do. 
 
 19595. The Land Act has laid the tenant open to 
 the temptation of borrowing ? — Yes. They are quite 
 conscious of it. They have been dealing on credit 
 
 4 K 
 
618 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. 
 
 Mr William 
 H. Halliday. 
 
 never looking at the price tliey were claarged, so long 
 as tliey get what they wanted. 
 
 19596. Are there many leases upon Colonel Totten- 
 ham's property ? — I think there are five or six. The 
 reason of them was this : — Mr. Tottenham some 
 years siace intended to concentrate all his property in 
 the neighbourhood of New Ross, and he determined 
 on selling the outlying estate. ' He accordingly adver- 
 tised it for sale; and he said to his tenants, "Any 
 one of you who wishes to get a lease, go to Mr. 
 Halliday, and he will give you one." I think six 
 leases were taken out at that time. 
 
 19597. When they thought Mr. Tottenham was 
 going to sell'! — Yes. The rest of them were not at 
 the trouble of asking for a lease. 
 
 19598. What was the length of those leases? — 
 Tweiit3'-one years. 
 
 1951:*9. Had they any clauses barring the Land 
 J^ct 1 — No. There were no conditions, except a clause 
 asainst swblettino; without the landlord's leave in 
 writing. 
 
 19600. Have you noticed any difference in the way 
 the tenants vrho have obtaiaed those leases have culti- 
 vated their farms from the way the tenants who hold 
 at ^vill have cultivated them 'i — No, not the slightest. 
 
 19601. Do you think that a lease has the effect of 
 encouraging a tenant to improve 1 — It has not been 
 so in this case. In fact the habits of the people seem 
 like the habits of crows ; they all follow each other, 
 all go in one groove. You can hardly find one man 
 who is independent enough to form a judgment for 
 himself on his own course of action^they all follow 
 each other. 
 
 19602. I think you stated that the rents on 
 Colonel Tottenham's property were reasonable? — 
 Very. I think if they were increased one-fourth it 
 would not pay one per cent, on the interest of the 
 money spent on the property. When Colonel 
 Tottenham became owner of the estate, he considered 
 it his duty to carry out considerable improvements — ■ 
 constructing main drains, mearing fences and other 
 improvements — for some of which, as he considered 
 it his duty to do them, he asked nothing from the 
 tenants ; for others, he charged four per cent, interest 
 on the m.oney expended. 
 
 19603. I suppose he considered that if the main 
 drains were taken advantage of by the tenants he 
 would get a share of the value of the improved lands 1 
 — I think so — at least that was my doctrine to him. 
 I told him that any money laid out in permanent 
 improvements of that nature, giving facilities for the 
 tenants effecting improvements in their holdings, gave 
 him additional security for the payment of his rent. 
 
 19604. The rent as it then existed'? — The rent as 
 it then existed ; no increase was made in the rents on 
 account of the expenditure on main drainage or mear- 
 ings. In the matter of buildings, he has expended a 
 considerable sum in the erection of houses and farm 
 offices, and for that expenditure he has charged the 
 tenants in some cases five, in other cases four and a 
 half, and in some instances four per cent. 
 
 19G05. How much money has Colonel Tottenliam 
 expended on the estate 1 — Between £7,000 and 
 £8,000. 
 
 19600. Within what period'? — Within a period of 
 twenty-six or twenty-eight years. In fact, Mr. 
 Tottenham commenced expending money in improve- 
 ments from the very first time I acted as agent, which 
 Colonel Tottenham has continued. He expended 
 money in tvi^o classes of improvements — general im- 
 provements which benefited his entire estate ; and 
 special improvements which benefited particular hold- 
 ings. He asked nothing from the tenants in return 
 for the general improvements. 
 
 19607. Baron Dowse. — It was the special improve- 
 ments he charged four and a half per cent, for? — ■, 
 Yes. 
 
 19608. Then your evidence is, that the improve- 
 ments on Colonel Tottenliam's estate have been mainly 
 carried out by the landlord '? — Every particle has been 
 done by him, or under his direction. 
 
 19609. Who built the tenants' houses'!— Tli 
 tenants, in the majority of cases, built them theiif 
 selves. We built some houses and did not charge fn" 
 them, but that was to facilitate the division of tli 
 farms. Where a nian, in consequence of the division 
 lost his house. Colonel Tottenham built one for Hm' 
 charging him nothing for it. But if a house was on 
 the farm that had not been built by Colonel Tottenhan 
 when the tenant would leave Colonel Totteniam 
 would pay him the value of it — his view of the case 
 was that he would take nothing that he had not him- 
 self bought. The tenant always got the value of what 
 he left behind him. 
 
 19610. Then the Land Act made no difference with 
 Colonel Tottenham in his dealings, with his tenants 1— 
 Not the slightest. 
 
 19611. Mr. Kavanagh; — Have any cases occurred 
 in your district where, in your. opinion, an outgoing 
 tenant — I mean on other estates than Colonel 
 Tottenham's — has obtained insufficient compensation 
 for improvements 1 — I have seen them often go awav 
 without anything at all. 
 
 19612. Under what circumstances'! — In debt. 
 They in many cases never looked for any compensii. 
 tion. In fact, before the Land, Act passed compen- 
 sation was never dreamed of. I have seen whole 
 townlands left unoccupied — the tenants leaving in a 
 body. 
 
 . 19613. That was in the famine years?— Yes.. An 
 immense mass of people left in 1847 and 1848. 
 Whole villages were swept away, and the farms 
 turned into grass lands, and remain so stUl.. 
 
 19614. Those people who left the coimtry at that 
 time were tmable to subsist on the land 1 — No. 
 
 19615. And had they remained they would he 
 starving now ? — Yes, exactly as you see many of the 
 poorer class of tenants at this day. In consequence 
 of the departure of those people a good portion of 
 the country became pasture; upon the tenantry 
 emigrating from a district it became grass in the 
 following year, and has so remained ever since. 
 
 19616. In your opinion were the people who left 
 the country and gave up their holdings at. the time of 
 the famine 'unjustly dealt with in not receiving com- 
 pensation ?-r-It was an injustice, I think, not to ha?e 
 their claims considered. There was no consideration 
 given to them. There was a loss, as a matter' of 
 course, of rent by the landlords. They were incapable 
 of paying the rent then due ; but I dare say, had the 
 buildings and improvements which they had carried 
 out been taken into consideration there would have 
 been something payable to them at that time, i£ the 
 Act of 1870 had been in operation. 
 
 19617. In your experience have the provisions of 
 the Act of 1870 worked well with respect to com- 
 pensation for improvements 1 — I have seen very little 
 of the working of it. I have only known one or 
 two claims to be made in our part of the country. 
 
 19618. I suppose there have been very few cases 
 of change of tenancy in your district? — Very few, 
 except in cases of ejectment for non-payment of rent, 
 and when those occurred the tenants were not ac- 
 quainted with any rights they possessed, and went 
 away without seeking compensation. 
 
 19619. You are speaking, I suppose, of a longtime 
 ago? — No. I am speaking of late years. I have 
 seen some few land claims made recently. They 
 have been made chiefly through the agency of solicitor 
 who make themselves known in the country as re- 
 dressers of injustice. They have taught the people 
 their rights to some extent ; and the knowledge spreads 
 very quickly. When one. man succeeds in recovering 
 compensation the news sjn'eads very quickly over the 
 district. 
 
 19620. Baron Dowse. — Have you any experience of 
 the purchase of holdings by tenants ? — No. I know 
 quite well that there wUl be an occasional transaction 
 of that kind. A man wUl come forward, when a tenant 
 is in arrear, and offer to pay the arrears of rent, and 
 take the place of the man who is in occupation. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 619 
 
 19621. That is not what I mean. What I wanted 
 to know was, have you any experience of tenants 
 purchasing their holdings under the; Ohurch Act or 
 under the Bright Clauses of the Land Act? — No. 
 There has been only one case in our district where a 
 holding was purchased; so that it forms no ■criterion. 
 
 19622. What is your opinion of the scheme of a 
 peasant proprietary ] — I think where a tenant lias 
 been so saving as to have gathered together some 
 money, and- that by a loan of part of ithe pvirchase- 
 money he would be enabled to buy his holding, I 
 think by- 'that process you have happened upon a 
 man who has the very elements that will enable him 
 to keep' his land and cultivate it to advantage— that 
 is, he has been an industrious and saving man, and 
 he will not be less -industrious and saving when he 
 becomes the owner of his holding. In svich cases as 
 that I think peasant proprietorship would be useful for 
 the country; but- as a general thing it would be a 
 humbug. 
 
 19623. You think it- would not be a wise scheme 
 for the Government to advance the entire purchase 
 money to a tenant 1 — I do not. I don't see how you 
 ■could ever expect to do one particle of good for the 
 people by such a scheme as that. You are capital- 
 ising the value of the land, and putting that on the 
 rent, making the rent on the occupier greater than 
 what is ruining the country — if you are to believe 
 them — at this moment. 
 
 19624. The thirty-five years anmdty which the 
 occupier would have to pay, must be more than the 
 present rent 1 — Certainly. 
 
 19625. Would it be so if the rent was bought up 
 at 20 years purchase ? — It must be so, because you 
 are making the tenant pay, in addition to the interest, 
 a certain instalment of the capital every year. 
 
 19626. You are not taking into account the fact 
 that Government can procure the money at S-| per 
 cent. 1 — It is a mere matter of calculation. I think 
 you will find that I am right. 
 
 19627. Are you taking into account the landlords 
 being so frightened by the agitation on the land ques- 
 tion, that they would sell their property for less than 
 its value ?— First of all, I don't believe one bit of that, 
 besides the agents are left. 
 
 19628. I don't say that I believe it either?— I do 
 not believe it at all ; but I believe that the landlords 
 bave made, what they themselves would now confess, 
 a mistake, in never taking up their real position and 
 bringing it forward for public consideration. , 
 
 19629. What is that? — They are trustees, -un- 
 questionably, of the capital which has descended to 
 them, joint shareholders in it with the occupier, and I 
 believe that nine out of ten of the landlords of Ireland 
 could, if the facts were fully gone into, show a " cleaner 
 bill of health" — as regards their dealings with their 
 trust capital — than any other class of men living; 
 That is my full conviction from the intercourse I haVe 
 had with landlords and tenants in Ireland. But no 
 doubt there is one thing to be said as regards the 
 necessity for legislation — the police are not for honest 
 men bu-t for rogues — and so with the land question. 
 
 19630. The law against larcency is not made for the 
 Jionest man but for the thief? — Just so ; that is just 
 when the necessity of legislation arises. Another 
 thing I may mention is that there is no diflSculty 
 whatever with regard to the old estates. I claim no 
 credit, you observe, in relation to the management of 
 Colonel Tottenham's estate. It came under my 
 management with the rule I have mentioned already 
 in operation,- and I had nothing to do but to keep them 
 on as well as I could. A number of the tenants met 
 me the last day I went on the property and one of them 
 asked me did I come for the rents. I said I had not, 
 that I knew it -was too soon — ^he said whenever I came 
 I was welcome. I asked them " wUl you be able to 
 pay your rents ? I hope you are better off than jon 
 were last year." They told me that they would do 
 their bes-t — -that it was right they should — and that 
 they were ready to do -their best when the time of 
 payment came.- I asked "Are you a land leaguer?" 
 
 "No," said the spokesman, "I never gave them a 
 shilling. I never was at any of their meetings. We 
 want no leayuers here." . 
 
 19631. Do you think tiiere is any alteration iii the 
 Land Law required ? — Yes. Security in their holdings 
 is required— you must gi ve them security. Practically 
 they have it on many estates. They have it on 
 Colonel Tottenham's estate — but what is reqiiired is, 
 to secure it to them by law. 
 
 19632.. Suppose the law was altered in this way— 
 that the tenant should have fixity of tenure, not to be 
 turned out as long as he paid his rent^the rent to bo 
 determined, in the event of any difference between 
 landlord and tenant, by some impartial tribunal. 
 Woidd that be a satisfactory settlement of the ques- 
 tion ? — I think it would, and that is what the landlord's 
 programme should liave put forward, and have accepted 
 long ago. The other day . an old man whom I have 
 known thirty years or more met me at a fair. I asked 
 him how he was getting on. He said " Very badly, 
 I doubt if I shall be able to hold out." I said " I 
 am very sorry to hear that, I thought you were 
 not highly rented." He said " I occupy, my land 
 under the valuation of a man who, in 18-16,, put me 
 down at £23 of rent, but since that time I have had 
 three rises put upon me." "What rent are you paying 
 now ?" said I. " I am now paying £42," he said. I 
 asked him who put the rise, on. He said that the 
 son of the man who valued his holding in 1846 at 
 £23 was now the valuator, and valued it at £49 — 
 that he told him lie could not pay that rent, and at 
 last, after great fighting they agreed to take £42. 
 Now, that was a rise of nearly 100 per cent, in that 
 man's rent, and there are many similar cases. It is 
 necessary to prevent such being done. Every gentle- 
 man listening to me knows as well as possible that 
 parties who purchased estates in the court, in many 
 cases added immediately thirty, forty or even fifty per 
 cent, to the rents often without even looking at the 
 holdings or knowing anything about them. 
 
 19633. Do you think such a law as I have mentioned 
 would satisfy the people? — I am. certain it would. 
 
 19634. You are aware, I suppose, that the Land 
 League proposes to turn the tenants over all Ireland 
 into a peasant proprietary 1 — Yes. 
 
 19635. What do you think of that ?— I think if 
 you turned them into a peasant proprietary in thut 
 wholesale way, a great many of them woidd turn 
 themselves out as fast as they could. 
 
 19636. Do you see any objection, in the case of a 
 thrifty industrious man, who has saved money to help 
 him to become a proprietor ? — Certainly not, in such 
 a case as that I would give every reasonable facility : 
 such .a man as that is certain to succeed. But if you 
 made it a universal thing, you would 23ut half the 
 people in a worse position than they are at the present 
 moment. 
 
 19637. You are of opinion that the peasant pro- 
 prietary could not live onthesmaller class of farms ? 
 — They could not subsist on the miserable holdings 
 that they have in some parts of the country, many of 
 the occupiers of such small holdings have to eke out 
 a subsistence every year by going to England or 
 elsewhere in search of labour, and many of them work 
 occasionally for the larger class of farmers, and are 
 thereby enabled to live, many exist by buying yearly 
 conacre from the larger farmers. Bu-t if a System of 
 peasant proprietary was established over the country 
 those men would get no work, the peasant proprietor 
 would do everything, with himself and a boy. 
 
 19638. Would not they get the English labour still, 
 t;iesameasnow? — No doubt theywouldgettheEnglish 
 labour, but no labourer could serve under one of those 
 peasant proprietors. They would put up a hut, may- 
 be costing less than 30.?., and would expect the 
 labourer to -give a day's work every week in the year 
 for the i;se of it. The condition of the labourer would 
 be far worse under a peasant proprietary than it is at 
 present. 
 
 19639. We cannot conceal from ourselves that the 
 real drift' and object of many- supporters of this Land 
 
 4K2 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880 
 
 Mr. Williaiu 
 H. HallidSyi ' 
 
620 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Mr. William 
 H. Halliday. 
 
 Oct. 22, 1880. League agitation is to get the land without paying for it 
 at all 1 — That is evidently the object ; but men ask for 
 much more than they expect to get, or are willing to ac- 
 cept. My reason for quarrelling with the landlords for 
 the course they have taken is, that they never put a pro- 
 gramme before the public. They have stood upon their 
 legal rights, and required the Executive to enforce 
 them. This as much as says to the tenantry, " We 
 don't care a farthing for you or your agitation," and 
 they rely tipon the bayonets of the Executive as their 
 means of meeting the difficulty, and the result is they 
 have lost their position, to some extent, and sympathy, 
 both in England and Ireland. Whereas, if they had 
 taken their stand upon their equitable rights, offered 
 fair terms to their tenants, put a reasonable pro- 
 gramme before the public, based on a secure and 
 comfortable home, they would have been in a very 
 much better position. I told Mr. Pamell himself 
 that if the landlords had a particle of nous, they 
 would cut away the whole of this rubbish on which 
 the Land League agitation is founded ; but instead 
 of that they let the tiling drift on. 
 
 19640. Would you approve of a law carrying out 
 the principle of fair rents, fixity of tenxire, and free 
 sale 1 — I don't know about fixity of tenure. I would 
 be in favour of fair rents and the right of free sale ; 
 but I would not deprive the landlord of the right to 
 get back his land, on paying the tenant full compen- 
 sation. • 
 
 19641. You would not prevent the landlord from 
 getting back his land again 1 — No. I tliink if you de- 
 prive the landlord of that power, you make him merely 
 an annuitant ; and deprive him of all control over his 
 land, if you do that. The landlord feels that he is de- 
 graded from his position ; he has lost all rights of 
 ownership over that which he regarded as his broad 
 acres, and cut him off from all interest in the country. 
 And if you do that, although we have not seen much 
 improvement effected by landlords as a rule, if you 
 degrade the landlord from his social position, and de- 
 prive him of the status he has always held, as a matter 
 of course you remove from the country a high intelli- 
 gence, and the power of improving, that wealth confers. 
 
 19642. Then what would you do 1 How would you 
 rheet the difficulty 1 — I would give the tenant security 
 in his holding. I think it is ah absolute necessity 
 that the tenant shall get security. 
 
 19643. How would you do it? — I would give them 
 leases, renewable upon adjustment of rent. 
 
 19644. Would not that be the same thing as a law 
 that the tenant should not be turned out as long as 
 he paid his rent 1 — It would, in a degree. 
 
 19645. A parliamentary lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 19646. Supposing this was the law — that the rent 
 shall be fixed, letting the landlord and tenant agree 
 on the amount of rent between themselves, if they 
 can ; and, if not, let there be some tribunal to fix a 
 fair rent 1 — ^Yes, that would do, I think. 
 
 19647. The tenant not to be turned out as long as 
 he paid his rent, did not subdivide or sublet, and 
 exercised due care in the cultivation of his holding, 
 and to be at liberty to sell, if necessary giving the 
 landlord a veto — do yon think that would be a fair 
 way to settle the matter 1 — I do ; but if you allow me 
 to make a suggestion, you must add another proviso — 
 that if he is turned out his interest need not be for- 
 feited, but may be sold in the market like any other 
 property. 
 
 19648. He could not be turned out except for non- 
 payment of rent 1 — Yes ; and suppose he is turned out 
 for non-payment, he should not forfeit his interest. 
 
 19649. Even if he were ejected for non-payment of 
 rent you would give him the interest in his holding 1 
 — Certainly. I know a man who had a farm on 
 which he put up several buildings and made other 
 improvements — his rent was to be a progressive one — 
 beginning at a nominal rent and increasing in the 
 course of years— hs laboured at his land and imi^roved 
 it considerably, but sickness broke out in his family, 
 and the consequence was he got into difficulties and 
 was unable to pay his rent — he had to give up his 
 
 farm, but when he left it it was in a greatly improved 
 
 condition from the state it was in when he got it he 
 
 left a. cottage, cow-house, and a considerable quantity 
 of fencing — he. only owed £6 of rent, but he left £60 
 behind him in the shape of improvements. 
 
 19650. When a tenant in the north of Ireland ig 
 ejected for non-payment of rent he is allowed to sell 
 his tenant-right and to pay his landlord out of tlie 
 proceeds 1 — Yes. 
 
 19651. You would secure that right to the tenant 
 in every part of Ireland 1 — Yes. 
 
 19652. So as to prevent his interest from being 
 confiscated even if he were owed an arrear of rent 1— 
 Certainly. I look upon the rent as a debt, just lite 
 any other debt, to be paid out of the proceeds of the 
 sale of the tenant's interest in his farm ; and that the 
 residue belongs to the tenant. There is one thmg 
 which is the peculiar difficulty in this country, and 
 that is, the terrible ignorance of the people. I regard 
 the Irish as the worst agriculturists in the world— they 
 are twenty times worse than the Norwegians—they 
 are without exception the worst agriculturists in the 
 world. 
 
 19653. The O'Conoe Don. — I believe you are a 
 large farmer yourself ? — I am. I have lying withm 
 one fence about 400 acres. 
 
 19654. Is it chiefly grass 1 — Every particle of it is 
 in grass. When I took it it was in tUlage. 
 
 19655. You found the tillage didn't pay 1— Yes, 
 that was one reason; another reason was that my 
 tillage crops failed. 
 
 19656. You didn't find any difficulty in dealing 
 with the people 1 — Not the slightest. The people 
 never made any mistake in any dealing they had with 
 me — they never expected anything but what was as 
 plainly told them as language could express it. Every- 
 thing was a matter of plain ^nd distinct contract with 
 them. 
 
 Who is your landlord 1 — Mr. Wingfield 
 
 19657. 
 
 Stratford. 
 
 19658. 
 
 19659. 
 
 Do you hold under lease 1 — Yes. 
 
 Is it a long lease 1 — A lease for my own life. 
 Mr. Stretford succeeded to the property on the death 
 of his uncle. Colonel Wingfield. It was from him I 
 took the land. 
 
 19660. A gentleman who was examined to-day 
 told us that he thought the same as you do as to the 
 ignorance of the people on the subject of agriculture, 
 and he suggested that the Government should establish 
 schools of agriculture in various parts of the country. . 
 Would you approve of that 1 — No. Such schools are 
 not worth one farthing. Take the Model Farm at 
 Glasnevin ; it has been a total failure as regards 
 turning out top farmers. All the agricultural schools 
 have failed ; it is the greatest nonsense in the world. 
 I will tell you what I think might be done. I 
 think the farmers ought to be allowed to obtaiu 
 loans for improvements, the same as landlords ; and 
 if an office was arranged for that purpose iu the 
 county courts, I think it could be done very cheaply 
 and effectively — through officers such as our county 
 surveyors and his assistants. The farmer who bor- 
 rowed money would, of necessity, be subject to the 
 supervision in the expenditure of that money of a 
 skilled and intelligent officer, and the improvement 
 effected, on the farm would be an example and 
 an instruction for other farmers in the district. The 
 intercourse which the farmer would have would oe 
 with an intelligent, clear-headed, practical m^in, 
 directing and pointing out how the improvejaents 
 were to be effected and how they would dovetau 
 in with the system of farming which he was carry- 
 ing on. This would have a beneficial effect in three 
 ways. It would give the farmer the meann oi im- 
 proving his land ; it would give him practical 
 instruction and knowledge, and that in the best 
 possible way ; and it would remove one of the 
 greatest evils we have in this country. The farm 
 in this country never affords the occupier more than 
 seven months occupation in the year, so that for 
 five months out of the twelve he is doing practically 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 621 
 
 nothing. Now, if during those five months he could 
 occupy his time in improving his farm, earning the 
 permanent improvements, and acquiring a practical 
 knowledge of the best mode of cultivation, and how to 
 derive the maximum of return from the land — if that 
 could be generally spread over the country the improve- 
 ment in a few years time would be very great. 
 
 19661. I believe in Scotland there is a great 
 knowledge of agriculture among the farming classes t 
 — Well, they are generally good practical farmers. 
 
 19662. Do you think the system of education in 
 Scotland has much to do in making the people in- 
 telligent and skilful 1 — Not a bit. How can a man 
 derive practical knowledge fi'om books? Literary 
 education is a very good thing in its way, but it 
 never could give a man practical knowledge. How 
 are men taught the mechanical trades? Not from 
 books — books never could teach it — but by practical 
 instruction in the workshop. It is the same with 
 agriculture. 
 
 19663. There is no harm in a man getting a little 
 literary training ? — Certainly not, quite the contrary ; 
 it is an advantage ; but you must not expect too 
 much from it. As that subject has been referred to, 
 I would observe there is a good deal of error as to 
 the superiority of the education in Scotch schools. 
 You have a curriculum in your National Schools 
 here quite as high as any of the curriculums in 
 the parochial education of Scotland. 
 
 19664. How are you to make the Irish peasant an 
 intelligent and skilful cultivator of the land ? — The 
 Irish peasant labours at this moment under this diffi- 
 culty — that he must not only overcome the force of 
 bad habits and want of knowledge, but also the force 
 of the example set him by all his neighbours. There 
 is nothing that men dread so much as to act contrary 
 to the example of their neighbours. Many a man 
 who has not the slightest wish to join the Land 
 League is obliged to do it for that reason. Whatever 
 respect the people may have for a person of the higher 
 class of society, they have no mercy whatever upon 
 one of their own order, and in that way the people 
 are lead, in my opinion, as much by fear of each other 
 as anything else. That is the influence of terror, 
 but the influence of example is very much the same. 
 During the entire thirty years that I have been 
 among the tenant farmers of Ireland I have looked 
 in vain for one particle of progress ; I have not seen 
 one particle. I was in the country when a committee 
 of the Society of Friends expended a large sum of 
 money — £40,000 — in the neighbourhood of Ballina, in 
 occupying farms, giving the people labour on them, and 
 instructing them in the science of cultivation. They 
 expended their money, but they did not one particle 
 of good. As to the agricultural societies, their in- 
 fluence, as a rule, has extended only to the landlord 
 class and the largest class of tenant farmers. As to 
 the Eoyal Agricultural Society, I regard it as any- 
 thing but an Irish society. It is wholly inapplicable 
 to the condition of Irish agi-iculture. The Highland 
 Society of Scotland turn their attention to the neces- 
 sities of the country they are dealing with, and much 
 of the improvement in the agriculture of Scotland is 
 due to the operations of the Highland Society and 
 the instruction it has disseminated among the people. 
 The want of agents of judgment dwelling upon the pro- 
 perties they do not represent, but are mere collectoi's 
 over, is a greater injury to the progress of Irish agricul- 
 tural improvement than the absentee landlords are. 
 
 19665. Do you claim no part of it as due to the 
 superiority of race ? — No ; nothing whatever. I look 
 upon the Irish farmer as equally intelligent as the 
 Scotchman, if only he had the Same chance. But to 
 come back to what we were discussing, it appears to 
 me that much advantage would be derived by aff'ord- 
 ing the tenant farmer the power of borrowing money 
 for carrying out improvements in the manner I 
 suggest. 
 
 19666. Nothing effective in the way of improve- 
 ment could be done, according to your evidence, with- 
 out first giving the tenant security ? — Certainly. The 
 
 first necessity is security, and that carries with it as a oct. i2, isso. 
 necessary element the right of sale giving a reasonable jjj. -^y^jam 
 veto to the landlord. h. Ilalliflay. 
 
 19667. Chairman. — I do not understand your plan 
 of allowing the tenant to borrow money from the 
 Board of Works, whom do you propose to be the 
 person to superintend the expenditure of the money 1 
 — I think the way it is done at present, by sending 
 down an ofiicer from the Board of Works, would be 
 expensive and probably unsatisfactory — it would be on 
 too high and lofty a scale ; but I think by an ari-ange- 
 ment through the County Surveyor's Office, it could be 
 easily accomplished — his assistants could do it — and 
 by making it part of their duties, I think you could 
 educate the people practically better than by any 
 mere book knowledge. 
 
 19668. You would have local men as olficers, whose 
 services would not be so expensive as those of tlic; 
 inspectors of the Board of Works ? — Yes. 
 
 19669. Is there much cut away bog in your neigh- 
 bourhood 1 — There is. 
 
 19670. Is much of it capable of reclamation ? — A 
 good deal of it might be reclaimed, but there is plenty 
 of room for improvement besides — two-thirds of the 
 farms in many districts of this country are soakiid 
 with water. 
 
 19671. Could not those people of whom you spoke 
 some time ago, as having very small and insufficient 
 holdings, be removed to that reclaimable land, paying 
 them for their labour upon it, until it became fit for 
 cultivation? — Yes ; biit if the relief of the small holders 
 is the point you wish to accomplish, you could do that 
 by placing them on the reclaimable but barren land. 
 
 19672. Baron Dowse. — Would not that be open to 
 the objection that if the scheme failed, the people 
 would have to be supported by the State, they could 
 not be left to starve ? — Yes ; but I think you could 
 make the plan remunerative by some such plan as I 
 have recommended, by advancing loans to the occupiers 
 on the security of the land. 
 
 19673. Are you aware that a strong feeling pre- 
 vails in England that any money which is , lent in 
 Ireland is never repaid ? — Well, I am afraid that idea 
 prevails to some extent ; and no doubt there has been 
 some foundation for it ; but I could tell you two in- 
 stances to the contrary in this very town. The tram- 
 way line has been constructed with English capital, 
 and it is doing very well ; and there is a salmon fisheiy 
 which has been purchased with English capital, and is 
 also a thriving concern. 
 
 1 9674. Is it that the salmon are more amenable than 
 the Irish tenants ? — It is no doubt a difficult task to , 
 change the habits of a people, still it has to be done, 
 and in my opinion it can be done ; but it can be done 
 in no other way but by teaching the people on their 
 own lands and making it their own interest to learn. 
 
 19675. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think the class 
 of men who are assistants to the County Surveyor 
 could be trusted to perform such duties as you sug- 
 gest ? — I think they could, they would have no temptu- 
 tion to do otherwise than right. 
 
 19676. Would not the duties require judgment 
 and skill ? — They would. 
 
 19677. Could they be depended upon, in your 
 opinion, as possessing these qualities'; — I think so ; 
 after all, the duties would require much less judgment 
 and skill than are rec^iired for engineering purposes. 
 
 19678. Is it not your experience that thorougli 
 ch-ainage requires to be looked after from beginning to 
 end — .constant supervision ? — Certainly. 
 
 19679. Do you imagine that those men could be 
 trusted to do that ? — They could not be expected to bn 
 there constantly, but I think you would find the tenant 
 himself would look after the work once he understood 
 it, and saw his interest in it. 
 
 19680. You don't think the tenant would expend 
 the money on something else ? — No ; I would not be 
 afraid of that at all, nor with supervision is it possible 
 for him to do so, the tenant could earn nearly all tlio 
 cost of imjjrovement. . 
 
 Adjourned till ioUowing morning. 
 
622 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 18S0. 
 
 Oct. 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. George E. 
 Burke. 
 
 TWENTY-SIXTH DAY— SATUEDAY, 23rd OCTOBER, 18bO. 
 
 Present -—The Right Hoe. the Eael of Bessborough, Chairman; Right Hon. Baron Dow.-iE, 
 The O'CoNOR Don, and Arthur MacMurrough Kavanagh, Esq., d.l. 
 
 Mr. George E. Bukke, Danesfield, MoycuUen, examined. 
 
 owner of land 
 I have a small 
 I am .owner in 
 
 19681. Chaieman — You are an 
 in this county, 1 believe ^— Yes, and 
 property in the County Limerick, 
 fee of 2,500 acres in the barony of Moycullen, in tliis 
 county. The valuation of the entire iS £1,040 a year, 
 and my rental is about £1,500, 
 
 19682. Is that the rental of the Galway property 1 — 
 It is the rental of both. 
 
 19683. With regard to the property in Limerick, 
 do you hold under a long lease?— I hold it in fee-farm. 
 
 19684. Then I suppose, as you hold it in fee-farm, 
 there can be no difficulty between yourself and your 
 landlord as regards that portion of your property ?— 
 None. I have no difficulty as regards my landlord ; 
 but there is a difficulty between me and my tenants — 
 a very serious diflGiculty — and one which has led to my 
 name being posted on the door of the Roman Catholic 
 church of Coolcappagh, in the County of Limerick, in 
 which parish the property is situated. 
 
 19685. Was that lately?— Yes; I heard of it 
 through the police. 
 
 19686. How did you acquire that property? — I 
 purchased it ia the Landed Estates Court. 
 
 19687. How long ago?— In the year 1876 or 1877, 
 as well as I remember. I was trustee of it under the 
 will of my father-in-law, and it was put xip under that 
 will for sale, and I myself became the purchaser. I 
 asked the two tenants that were on it to allow me to 
 get money for them from the Board of Works to be- 
 come the purchasers of it. One of the two tenants 
 was the parish priest. 
 
 19688. As a residence for the parish priest? — No; 
 he was tenant of it. After the death of my father-in- 
 law the rental was altered. The parish priest's rent 
 had been £110 a year; it was reduced £10. I con- 
 tinued to hold the property for some years, and after 
 that I advertised it for sale again, as it did not suit me to 
 continue proprietor of it, being so far from my residence 
 in Galway. Several people went to see it, but it was 
 so depreciated in the account given of it that I never 
 heard any more from them after the first application. 
 
 19689. How was it depreciated? — By the state- 
 ments of the parish priest, the Rev. Mr. M'Mahon, 
 in reference to it. I have ascertained that by sending 
 a person there. He told the people that the rent he 
 was paying was a rack rent, and that if the parish 
 priest had to live by the farm he could not exist. 
 
 19690. What was the rent you paid Lord Southwell 1 
 —£40 10s. Od. a year. The valuation is £190. The 
 rents the tenants were paying were — the parish priest, 
 £100 ; and the other tenant £182. 
 
 19691. That made f282altogether^— Yes. I should 
 mention that previous to endeavouring to sell it I 
 offered to assist those two tenants to purchase it them- 
 selves by obtaining a loan for them from the Boai-d of 
 Works. 
 
 19692. Did they accept your offer? — No. The 
 answer I got from the parish priest was, that he was 
 too old to begin now as a borrower of money, and that 
 the other tenant had also declined because he would 
 not incur the risk of a valuation by the Board of 
 Works to fix the value at which they would advance 
 the two-thirds of the purchase money. I found at the 
 Board of Works that the rule there — wliich they said 
 was imposed on them by the Treasury — -was that they 
 would only advance two-thirds of the purchase money 
 based on the valuation, not on the rental. I remon- 
 strated, and Mr. M'Clintock, the Board's solicitor, 
 very kindly offered to send down specially a valuator, 
 as he was acquainted with the district and knew that 
 property there was very much undervalued. I pro- 
 
 posed this to the tenants, and I said .1 would myself 
 pay half the cost if they would: pay the other half • 
 but they would not have it. The priest told me 
 afterwards that it was because they feared a greater 
 valuation would be put upon them. 
 
 19693. Why did the tenants fear to have a greaten 
 valuation put upon their holdings, if the resulti would 
 be that the advance of theBoard of Works would Le 
 founded on it? — Simply because they, feared tiey 
 would be made pay a much higher ,rate: of purchase. 
 The parish priest, who died in 1876, made his will 
 and by that will he bequeathed to his successor, in 
 the parish, whoever he might be, the holding and 
 the residence upon it, provided he paid £150 tu 
 his nephew for getting possession, thereby showing 
 that he had an interest in it. to at least that ex- 
 tent. 
 
 19694. The £150 was the interest in it?— Yes; 
 even to his successor, the incoming pariah priest. 
 However, the incoming priest would have nothing, to 
 say to it because he was getting a place for nothing 
 from Lady FitzGibbon, who was building him a house 
 and gi'v'ing him land rent free. I was appUed to 
 by the nephew and_ executor of the wiU of the 
 Rev. Mr. M'Mahon, p.p., the Rev. M. Potter,! c.c. 
 to know would I give him the £150 to get pos- 
 session of the farm. I at first declined, believing 
 he had no interest and no right ,to ask me an3rthing 
 for it ; but I found on consultation that he had a 
 recognised interest under the Land Act, and I offered 
 him £100 to give up the place. He took the £100, 
 and put it in his pocket and gave me possession; 
 and he then said, " Now, Mr. Burke, will you give 
 me the farm at £80 a year." That would be arediic-. 
 tion of 30 pounds from the rent fixed in 1841. I de- 
 clined. He said, " Will you give it to my nephew, 
 Bryan M'Mahon, at a rent of £80 a year on a thirty- 
 one years lease." I said no ; and I took possession of 
 the farm. He said " If you don't you will be sorry." 
 Erom that day to this, except during one winter when 
 a neighbouring gentleman was very much distressed 
 for winterage, and I was glad to get half the rent of 
 the farm for that winter, I could never get anyone to 
 look at it ; and the next thing I heard from the poUce 
 was, that I was posted on the chapel-gate in these or 
 similar words, "Any person having; a value, for his 
 life, is cautioned not to have anything to say to the 
 grass, the hay, or the land of Ballinsky, the property 
 of Burke, the exterminator from Galway." ■ That 
 was the notice that was put up on the chapel,, and that 
 farm lies waste still. 
 
 19695. When did the parish priest die? — In 1876. 
 
 19696. When was the arrangement with the nephew 
 for giving it up ? — In 1878 the arrangement was made 
 with the nephew. I should add that the curate^ 
 who was the executor of the will, did not pay the 
 rates or the county cess — he paid only one half-year's 
 county cess — he left the other half unpaid, and the 
 rates last year. 
 
 19697. What was the name of the curate?— Tie 
 Rev. Michael Potter, c.c, Rathkeale — he is tie 
 curate of Rathkeale now. 
 
 19698. The O'Conoe Don.— Did you ever bring 
 the matter under the "notice of the bishop ? — No. 
 
 19699 What diocese is it in ? — Limerick, 
 
 19700. Is there a parish priest now? — There is, 
 
 19701. Did you ever mention it to him?r^I did 
 not. In fact I have had no opportunity to do so, 
 he treated me very badly. When I was taking 
 possession of the place from the executor, the parish 
 priest asked me what would I charge to let him 
 occupy it until the house. Lady FitzGibbon was going 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 C23 
 
 to give him, would be ready for occupation. I said, 
 "Father Connory, I will let you remain in it for 
 nothing, if you will act as caretaker of it for me — if 
 you take care of the place you can remain in it, and I 
 won't charge you anything.". He accepted my offer, 
 and remaiued in occupation of the place for some 
 time. I do not know how long, for he left it without 
 ever writing or informing me in any way that he was 
 going away — he left the place vacant, and when I 
 went to take up possession I found the windows 
 broken, the chimney-pieces injured, and the place a 
 complete wreck. 
 
 19702. When was it that your name was posted 
 on the chapel door 1 — Not more than a month ago. 
 
 19703. What is the name of the present parish 
 priest 1 — The Eev. Father Connory. 
 
 19701. What was the name of his predecessor^ — 
 The Rev. Michael M'Mahon, p.p. I mention these 
 facts, because I feel that in consequence of this I have 
 been represented to the authorities in DuMin as an 
 exterminator. Those are the facts of my " extermina- 
 tion," if it is one. 
 
 19705. The rent was £100 a year L_Yes, and I 
 gave him a receipt for the year's rent, £100 ; he offered 
 me £80 a year, and told me I would be sorry if 1 did 
 not accept it. 
 
 19706. After you took up possession in 1878 from 
 the curate, did anything disagreeable happen between 
 that time and the postiug of the notices ? — Nothing 
 that I know of. 
 
 19707. Was there any interference with you'? — ■ 
 None. I advertised the place, I could not get anybody 
 to look after it. 
 
 19708. Nor anybody to take it?— No. 
 
 19709. It:^was in 1878 you took up possession from 
 the nephew t — Yes. 
 
 19710. Between 1878 and the time of the posting 
 of the notices, when did the annoyances begin ? — -There 
 were no annoyances beyond what I have told you — I 
 was not able to let the place to anyone. 
 
 19711. Was there any notice put up warning 
 persons against taking it 1 — No, nothing till within 
 the last two months. 
 
 19712. Do you suppose that there was something 
 done to deter people from taking it 1 — I am not, 
 perhaps, warranted in giving my opinion — of course 
 what I say on that point will be weighted with my 
 prejudice. 
 
 19713. How many persons offered to take it 1 — 
 None at all, but one man. 
 
 19714. What did he offer'? — I forget how many 
 years' purchase on Griffith's valuation. 
 
 19715. What did he say'? — He was a man I had 
 never seen before. His proposition .was this, " Let me 
 into possession for twelve months, that is the period 
 necessary to qualify me, and I will then buy it from 
 you." I said, " Very well, let us fix the price first, 
 and if I am satisfied with the price we can easily deal, 
 and I will assist you in every way." 
 
 19716. What price did he offer?— I think it was 30 
 years purchase on the valuation. I said it was too 
 low — the affair then dropped, but we had no quarrel. 
 
 19717. The valuation, I think you mentioned, is 
 less than the rent you were receiving ? — Yes. The 
 soKcitor of the Board of Works admitted that the 
 valuation was too low, and he was going to send a man 
 specially down to revise the valuation at the time 1 
 wanted to enable the tenants to become owners them- 
 selves. I would not have proposed it only the place 
 is so far away from me, and of course I wanted to sell 
 it to the best advantage I could. , 
 
 19718. Had you any crop on it this year ?— Yes ; 
 and it is waste on it. I am payiiig a man a shilling a 
 day for looking after it. The whole crop is on it. 
 
 1 97 1 9. Is it in tillage or grass ? — Grass. 
 
 19720. Did you put any stock on it? — No. I 
 would not venture. 
 
 19721. Why ?— Because I feared that if I did they 
 %vould not be secure. 
 
 19722. If any damage was done to your cattle would °''^- ^i^so. 
 yoii not get compensation off the county ? — The Grand Mr. GeurgeE. 
 Jury might award compensation, but who could levy Burke. 
 
 it for me ? 
 
 19723. The County officer would levy it?— I am 
 afraid they find it difficult enough to levy the ordinary 
 rates. 
 
 19724. Has there been any instance in which the 
 collectors have been refused payment of county rates ? — 
 No, not that I know of in that district. 
 
 19725. Has there been any instance in any part of 
 Ireland of refusal to pay rates ? — To be sure there has. 
 In the barony of Moycullen and Ballinahinch. The 
 difficulty the collectors have in levying the rates is 
 almost insurmountable. 
 
 19726. Have they not succeeded in levying the 
 rates there 1 — No, not fully. 
 
 19727. Baron Dowse. — Bight or wrong, you 
 thought it would be a bad speculation to put cattle on 
 it? — I did. One winter, since 1878, was the only 
 time I was able to get anything for the land. That 
 was from a neighbouring gentleman, a landlord and a 
 magistrate, who took it from me at half the rent for 
 the winter. 
 
 19728. Was that the winter of 1878 ?— No ; it was 
 the winter of 1879, I think. 
 
 19729. Is there any other matter you wish to men- 
 tion with regard to your Limerick property? — No, 
 nothing more that I could tell you ; but I thought 
 myself bound to give an explanation to show you the 
 circumstances under which I am posted and held up 
 before the county as an exterminator. 
 
 19730. With reference to the Galway property do 
 you wish to state anything ? — No ; I have had no dif- 
 ficulties with my tenants on the Galway property. I 
 don't know whether they intend to pay their i-ents 
 this year. 
 
 19731. Did they pay their rents last year ? — They 
 paid me last year, with the exception of a few. 
 
 19732. Did you make them any abatement last 
 year ? — I did ; twenty per cent., without being asked 
 for it. 
 
 19733. Have you had any evictions on the Galway 
 property ? — Only two during the entire time I have 
 held it. One of those was a quarrelsome man that 
 none of the neighbours could live with. 
 
 19734. How long ago is that ? — Abovit thirty 
 years ago. The other eviction was that of a man who 
 held a grass farm from me, and he conacred a por- 
 tion of it, and told me he would conacre it all 
 
 19735. Did you let it to him as a grass farm ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 19736. And he tilled it? — Yesj he broke up a 
 portion of it. I would not have evicted him for 
 what he did break, because he was a favourite of 
 mine, but for his avowal that he would conacre every 
 inch of it. He told me it was under the Land Act 
 that he would do it. 
 
 19737. Did he make a claim after you had evicted 
 him ?-^He did, and got the full amount of compensa- 
 tion for disturbance. 
 
 19738. How much did he get 1 — I think it was seven 
 years' purchase, from which the rent due to me was 
 deducted, and also the damage done to the farm. The 
 county surveyor, Mr. Roberts, proved that the land 
 had been seriously damaged. 
 
 19739. Did he get any balance in the shape of com- 
 pensation after these deductions 1 — Yes ; he got £24. 
 
 19740. What was the rent ?— f 11 10s. a year. 
 
 19741. Did you make the case before the Chairman 
 that you had let it as a grass farm ?^I did. 
 
 19742. What did the Chairman say ?— I don't 
 know ; but he made a decree for the full amount. I 
 believe it was the first case that ever came before 
 him. 
 
 19743. Who was the Chairman? — Mr. Henn, q.c. 
 I think his words were — " I give a decree for the full 
 amount in this case, giving the landlord credit for the 
 
624 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, If 80. 
 
 Mr. Geort;e E. 
 Burke. 
 
 rent due, and for the deterioration as proved by Mr. 
 
 Roberts." 
 had. 
 
 19744. 
 property ' 
 
 19745. 
 
 That was the only land claim I ever 
 
 Had you 
 
 — Never. 
 And the 
 
 any evictions on your Limerick 
 
 ' extermination ' 
 
 of which you 
 were guilty was what you have stated 1 — That was all. 
 1 9746. There were only two tenants on the Limerick 
 property 1 — Only two. The other tenant's period of 
 it expired on the 11th October last, and I offered 
 her a renewal of her lease at the rent which was fixed 
 in 1841, but she would not take it, nor would she take 
 the valuation that would have enabled her to become 
 owner. She is at this moment in possession as an 
 overholder, because I refused to deal with her on the 
 terms she wants. I offered to give her " Mr. Parnell's 
 lease," but she would not accept it. I then said, " I 
 will tell you what I will do — I will not disturb you, 
 nor yet will I acknowledge you as a tenant, until the 
 new legislation is effected — when the new Act of 
 Parliament is passed I will let you have your fai-m at 
 
 whatever valuation the Government may fix for the 
 rest of your life." I am sure I could not do more. 
 
 19747. You will give her the farm at the Govern- 
 ment valuation? — Yes; at whatever valuation the 
 Government may fix. She is now in full possession 
 of the holding, but I have not acknowledged her as 
 tenant, nor shall I, until I see what the new legislation 
 will be. 
 
 19748. Did you receive the rent 1 — I did not receive 
 a penny of rent from her this year. 
 
 19749. Do you see any objection to fixing rent by 
 Government valuation? — If there was a valuation 
 department, the head of which was entirely unconnected 
 with either landlord or tenant or politics — a man in a 
 position similar to one of the judges — a man of in- 
 tegrity and skill — like Mr. Baldwin for instance or 
 Mr. Brett, c.e., or Mr. Reed, or Mr. Howard — if such 
 men as those were appointed — then I say a valuation 
 by them, independent of landlord or tenant, would be 
 the best and the most satisfactory way of solving the 
 difficulty. 
 
 Mr. John Gill 
 
 Mr. John Gill, Salthill, near Galway, examined. 
 
 19750. Chairman. — Are you an owner of land? — 
 I am, and have been so from my infancy nearly. I 
 hold land from the Secretary of State for "War for 
 the time being ; from the Marquis of Clanricarde, from 
 Captain Blake Foster, and others. 
 
 19751. Do you hold on lease? — Part of what I 
 hold is on lease, but not the portion I hold under the 
 War Department. It is a lease, and it is not ; vir- 
 tually it is not. 
 
 19752. Is it a yearly tenancy? — Yes, a tenancy 
 from year to year. It is upon my land the barracks 
 have been built. When I say it is my land, it origi- 
 nally, of course, belonged to Her Majesty. 
 
 19753. Did they take some of the land to build the 
 barracks upon ? — -Yes. 
 
 19754. Is there anything as regards that land you 
 wish to state to us? — I hold that land since Lord 
 Panmure was Secretary of State for War in the year 
 1850 or 1851. 
 
 19755. Where is this land? — Quite convenient to 
 where you are sitting. 
 
 19756. Has it buildings on it? — No buildings at 
 all. I got it a complete commonage, at XI a year. 
 
 19757. Except the baiTacks, is it open land still? — 
 No ; I laid out between £400 and £600 on it. I got 
 the money from the Government at 5 per cent. 
 
 19758. In what way did you lay it out ? — Building 
 walls and reclaiming ; it is now enclosed. 
 
 19759. But not built upon? — Not built upon, ex- 
 cept the ten acres that I gave them recently for the 
 barracks. 
 
 19760. Do you use the land for grazing purposes? 
 — I do. I wrote a letter in 1865 to Earl, Grey. 
 [Witness produces a copy of the letter.] 
 
 19761. In this letter you say you regret being in a 
 position of dependence and uncertainty. What was 
 the uncertainty? — You will see if you read the sub- 
 sequent portion of the letter. They raised the rent 
 on me. 
 
 19762. Baron Dowse. — Are the facts the same now 
 as they were then ? — They are not, because the rent 
 has been raised upon me from £10 to £40. 
 
 19763. You had better read the letter. [Witness 
 reads.] 
 
 " Eglinton Hotel, Salthill, Galway, 
 3rd February, 1865. 
 
 " To THE Earl db Grey. 
 
 " My Lord,— As a tenant under the War Office, I beg 
 most respectfully to bring myself under your lordship's 
 notice as an applicant for relief. 
 
 " To be a continuous petitioner is so irksome a position 
 
 of dependence and uncertainty, that no man would be so 
 unless impelled by necessity. It is that condition that 
 brings me to; make this appeal. My utmost efforts of 
 industry are not capable of meeting the fresh loads that 
 as your tenant, I am called upon to bear, and as I cannot 
 suppose that you would, like the Egyptian taskmaster, require 
 bricks to be made without straw, or refuse the labourer 
 his hire — so surely do 1 believe that, could I use language 
 to induce your lordship to regard my petition, so surely 
 would your lordship's sense of justice afford me relief to the 
 iticrease of your own honour by a just dealing toward the 
 poor. 
 
 " When first I held the lands of Renmore it was at a 
 yearly rent of £10. At that period the late tenant -held 
 Hare Island and shore, attached from the Board of Eras- 
 mus Smith, at £5 yearly, which lands were subsequently 
 acquired by you from the same Board at an annual pay- 
 ment of £10, . . . . . i20 
 
 "In 1856 the rent of Kenmore tenancy was ad- 
 vanced to . . . . . £40 
 And in 1 861 1 became tenant of the Hare Island 
 take at a rent of . . . . jE36 
 
 " In 1863 I agreed to pay for the right of salmon 
 
 fishery along shores of said land . . £4 
 
 Making a total of . . . £80 
 
 Advancing from £20 to £80 in a few years, or 400 per 
 cent, of rise. 
 
 " The fishery, owing to legislative changes, proved a 
 total loss. Part of the seaweed shore was withheld by the 
 late tenant, and continues to be so by his successor. The 
 taxes throughout had never been paid by me, nor could I 
 have imagined that any further burdens would have been 
 added to this great advance in rent. 
 
 " This year, the collector of the Grand Jury cess and also 
 the collector of the Hoor Kate, have for the first time called 
 on me to defray those taxes, which amount for Poor Rate 
 to £7 is., for Cess to £3, and with the Cess of July will 
 make in all £14. 
 
 " Hitherto my extreme rents have taken the entire land 
 produce, leaving me nothing for labour, industry, or capital 
 employed. This addition, along with the depression of tbe 
 times entails certain loss. To hold lands so burdened is 
 not possible, and leaves no power, save that of surrender, 
 unless from your lordship's consideration. 
 
 " Many land owners have made varying concessions of 
 one-third to one-fifth off those rents laid on during the 
 slight impulse of the Crimean War, and events in cases of 
 older takes. That I do not wish to complain is evidenced 
 by my efforts to meet the rents with punctuaUty, and for 
 doing so my burdens are increased. 
 
 " I most earnestly appeal against such injustice, and out 
 of your lordship's clemency would feel assured of obtaining 
 it, could I but make the facts be clearly known. If this 
 is not granted, I can have no other course than to resign 
 the land, although by so doing I deprive myself of indus- 
 trial vocation, which, from the circumstances, could only 
 bo retained by yearly loss." 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 625 
 
 19764. Did you get any reply? — I did. I got the 
 taxes remitted ; nothing more. 
 
 19765. You never got any reduction ot rent? — Never. 
 
 19766. You did not do as you said you would — 
 give the land up ? — I did not. I did not see my way 
 to give it up. 
 
 19767. The O'Conor Don. — Has the rent been 
 raised since? — No, it has been reduced sioce. 
 
 19768. When was it reduced ? — It was reduced by 
 giving them up a certain portion of the land, upon 
 which they built the barracks. They reduced my rent 
 some £15 or £20 in consequence. 
 
 19769. The Ciiaieman. — That was for the land they 
 took from you ? — Yes. 
 
 19770. Did you, when they- took that land from you, 
 require some compensation for giving up a portion of 
 your holding for their accommodation ? — I did not ; 
 they only reduced the rent. 
 
 19771. The O'Conor Don. — When did you give it 
 up to them ? — Three years ago. 
 
 19772. It was since the passing of the Land Act? — 
 It was. 
 
 19773. The Chairman. — Did they apply to you to 
 give them the land ? — They did. 
 
 19774. And you complied? — I complied at once, 
 without saying a word. 
 
 19775. Would the land be valuable for building? — 
 It would. 
 
 19776. Baron Dowse. — Who is your landlord ? — 
 The Secretary of State for War for the time being. 
 
 19777. Mr. Childers? — Yes. I had the pleasure of 
 meeting him when he was in Ireland. 
 
 19778. Did you say anything to him about it? — 
 I did ; but he was here more upon a tour of pleasure, 
 and it was no occasion for me to annoy him by asking 
 him to go into particulars about my land. 
 
 19779. He was here for the purpose of investigating 
 the condition of the country ? — He didn't investigate 
 anything of the sort. I am the best authority upon 
 the matter, for he saw nobody else but me as a private 
 gentleman. I sent him up my card as tenant of the 
 War Department, and he saw me only, and refused to 
 see anybody else. 
 
 19780. What did he say to you ? — I was told upon 
 the platform of the railway that he and I were fac- 
 similes of each other in appearance. I sent up my 
 card, and I was shown up to him. " I believe, sir," 
 said I, "that I have the honour of speaking to the 
 Plight Honourable Mr. Childers?" "Yes, sir," said 
 he. I said, " I suppose you are aware that I am your 
 tenant?" "Yes, Mr. Gill," said he; "I got your 
 card." 
 
 19781. Did you tell him that he was an oppressive 
 and tyrannical landlord ? — No, indeed, I did not. I 
 didn't think it proper to do that. He was very civil, 
 and told me that if I would communicate with him 
 when he returned to London, he would try and do 
 something for me. 
 
 19782. Did you communicate with him since? — I 
 did not, sir ; but I will. It is quite- time enough to 
 bid the " old man " good morrow when you meet him. 
 When they look for the rent again I will communicate 
 with him. 
 
 19783. The Chairman.— Is there anything else you 
 wish to tell us about your holding under the War 
 Office ? — The only thing I would say is this, that above 
 all things they should allow the poor rates and taxes. 
 The rates in Galway are now up to 10s. 6d. or 10s. 8d. 
 in the pound, which is very excessive. The application 
 that I intended making was that if I got the entire poor 
 rates and taxes remitted I would be quite satisfied. 
 The rent is not excessive ; nor do 1 think that as a 
 class the landlords of this country — that is, what I 
 call the " old landlords "—were ever oppressive. 
 
 19784. Baron Dowse. — Do you think the War 
 Office are charging you too much rent?— They are; 
 that is, in putting the entire taxes on me, which I am 
 bound by a sort of agreement to pay. That is what I 
 consider excessive. If the taxes were remitted, as was 
 done before at one time, through the influence of the 
 late Lord Clanricarde. 
 
 19785. You got them allowed ?— I did. Oct. i3, mo. 
 
 19786. What sort of agreement have you with the y^. johnLim 
 War Office ? — It is a general agreement which is 
 
 signed by all tenants. 
 
 19787. You mean by all the tenants of the War 
 Office ? — Yes. All tenants under the War Department 
 have to sign a general agreement to pay all taxes. 
 
 19788. Was any change made at the time of the 
 passing of the Land Act ? — No change. I believe I 
 could break that agreement ; but I don't like to quarrel 
 with the Department. 
 
 19789. Your best plan is to write to Mr. Childers ? 
 — Yes, I will write to him. 
 
 19790. Is there anything else you wish to mention 
 to us ? — I am tenant of another holding under the 
 Marquis of Clanricarde since the year 1850 or 1851. 
 
 19791. Is that in this neighbourhood? — It is. 
 
 19792. What is the question there — is it a question 
 of rent ? — A question of rent. I took that holding 
 originally at a smaller figure than I am paying at 
 present. 
 
 19793. What was the rent originally ? — 10s. an 
 acre. 
 
 19794. When was it raised? — Some years ago; I 
 could not tell you exactly — between ten and fifteen 
 years ago. 
 
 19795. To what amount was it raised? — 30s. an 
 acre. 
 
 19796. Since that again has it been raised? — No; 
 it has not been raised since. 
 
 19797. Are you a tenant from year to year? — I am 
 a tenant from year to year. 
 
 19798. Why .was there such an increase? — That 
 was in consequence of the drainage. He had to pay 
 it himself in consequence of the drainage ; and a better 
 landlord is not living than the old Marquis was. 
 
 19799. He raised money from the Board of Works, 
 I suppose, for the purpose of drainage ? — Yes ; and I 
 could get from £4 to £5 an acre for that land to-day. 
 I will tell the truth. 
 
 19800. You have it for 30s. per acre?— Yes. 
 
 19801. That is not a bad bargain for you then? — 
 It is not. 
 
 19802. What can you get £4 or £5 an acre for ? — 
 For the entire of it. 
 
 19803. To use it for what purpose? — For growing 
 vegetables. 
 
 19804. Is it near the town ? — It is quite convenient. 
 I must say the Marquis . of Clanricarde's land is let 
 more reasonable than any other gentleman's land near 
 the town of Galway. 
 
 19805. Have the rents been increased in other 
 parts of the county ?— They are exceedingly high in 
 some places. It is all in consequence of parties pur- 
 chasing in the Incumbered Estates' Court. They 
 went into the market to buy land — just as they -would 
 buy any other commodity — anxious to make the largest 
 possible profit out of what they purchased. I know 
 different estates that have been purchased at from 12i- 
 to 1 o years' purchase, and on which the rents have 
 been raised 30 per cent, or more. I know that to have 
 been done even by friends of my own in this county. 
 
 19806. Raised by friends of your own? — Yes, 
 friends of my own. 
 
 19807. Unduly raised? — You may call it unduly if 
 you please. I would not call them unduly raised, 
 because the tenants were consenting parties to it. I 
 don't wish to state anything but what I think is right. 
 Lord Clanricarde's land is lower let than the land of 
 any other proprietor in this county. 
 
 19808. Are you tenant of any other landlord? — 
 Yes ; I hold land under Captain Blake Forster. 
 
 19809. Have you anything to say against him ? — 
 No, indeed ; but in his favour. He is a very good 
 landlord. I may mention that I held land some years 
 ago in Costello Bay which I was ejected from. 
 
 19810. How long ago was that? — In the year 1852 
 or 1853. 
 
 19811. It is hardly worth while going into that 
 now — a transaction of so many years ago? — Very 
 well. Then I have no more to say. 
 
 4 L 
 
626 
 
 iRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Colonel John Aecher Dalt, Raford, near Loughrea, examined. 
 
 Oct. 2a, 18BU. 
 
 ^i°Y''^T>°l"' 10812. The Chairman.— You own property near 
 
 Archer ah . -^^^^-^^^^ ?_yes. I hold property in the west of the 
 County Galway also. 
 
 19813. Whereabouts is that? — About six miles to 
 the west of the town of Galway. 
 
 19814. Can you tell us the acreage ?— About 12,000 
 statute acres altogether. 
 
 19815. What is the rental?— The rental is about 
 £5000. £3700 odd is the valuation. . 
 
 19816. Have you had any complaints or difficulties 
 with your tenants ? — I had last year. I have not had 
 any this year as yet, because we have not yet begun to 
 collect the rents. 
 
 19817. Did you make any abatement of rent last 
 year?— I did not. They paid the rents, generally 
 speaking, exceedingly well; but to the west of Galway 
 they declined to pay any rent at first, though they 
 hold their land cheaply. I served twelve of the tenants 
 in that district with ejectment notices, and after a 
 while, when they found they were going to be turned 
 out, they came in and paid. 
 
 19818. The O'Conor Don. — Is that land in the 
 neighbourhood of Carraroe ? — Xot far from it — about 
 ten or twelve miles. 
 
 19819. The Chairman. — In the case of a tenant 
 wishing to go away, do you allow him to sell his 
 holding ? — I have never sanctioned it ; but very few 
 tenants have ever left the estate. I don't think that 
 during my time any tenant has left. There is a rule 
 on the estate that they are not allowed to sell or dis- 
 pose of their holdings. 
 
 19820. The necessity for the application of the rule 
 has not arisen? — No. The same tenants have been 
 always in occupation — the farms descend from father 
 to SOD, aiid they have always paid their rent. 
 
 19821. There have been no evictions for non-pay- 
 ment? — Not until last year. Last year we had to 
 serve notices, because the tenants refused to pay. 
 
 19822. Did any of those notices go to an actual 
 eviction ? — No ; they all came in and paid, with two ex- 
 ceptions, and in those two cases the tenants were very 
 poor and really unable to pay, and I gave them time. 
 
 19823. How many notices did you serve? — Twelve 
 or thirteen. I only served them on persons whom I 
 knew to be able to pay — who were well off, having 
 means in cattle, sheep, and corn. 
 
 19824. Baron Dowse. — -'When the tenants refused 
 to pay, did they refnse generally? — They refused 
 generally. There are sixty or seventy tenants on the 
 estate, and forty or fifty of them came into the room 
 where I was speaking to my agent, and they told me 
 they could not pay, that they had no means, and were 
 not able. 
 
 19825. Sometimes they say they will pay if they get 
 a certain reduction, or that they will pay the amount 
 of Griffith's valuation : did these tenants make any 
 proposition of that kind? — They did not. They said 
 they would not pay at all. 
 
 19826. The Chairman. — Are the rents upon your 
 estate much above the valuation? — Very little above 
 it. On my estate at Raford, the tenants have the ad- 
 vantage of seaweed, which increases the value of their 
 holdings considerably, and the rents at Furbough are 
 in consequence higher than the Government valuation. 
 
 19827. They are near the seashore, I suppose? — 
 Yes. 
 
 19828. After those notices were served upon them, 
 and when they were compelled to pay their rents, do 
 you believe there was much dissatisfaction amongst 
 them ?— I don't think so. I think a great many of 
 them were pleased at being forced to pay. I believe a 
 good many of them would have paid their rent at first, 
 but were afraid to do so; but when they found that I 
 was determined to make them pay, they came in and 
 paid, and many of them were glad that it was settled 
 in that way. 
 
 19829. This year is a better one than last? — A 
 good deal better,and they ought tobe better able to pay. 
 
 At Raford, near Loughrea, we h«ve had no difficulty 
 in getting the rents — the tenants paid, and did not ask 
 for a reduction. 
 
 19830. When collecting the next rent, will it be the 
 November or May gale ? — The next collection will be 
 of the gale that fell due in May. There is always a 
 hanging half gale. 
 
 19831. Have you many tenants' of large grass farms-? 
 — I have a good many grass farms — six or seven I 
 would say — large grass farms of from 100 to 200 acres. 
 
 19832. How much do your smaller tenants hold on 
 an average? — About half of the estate is occupied by 
 agricultural holdings mostly from 20 to 60 acres. 
 The tenants are all comfortable, and pay their rents 
 regularly. 
 
 19833. You have no very small holdings?— Not at 
 this side. Some of the holdings to the west of Galway 
 are small. 
 
 19834. Would any of them be as low as five acres? 
 — No. I don't think we have anything so small as 
 five acres. The land in that part of the county is 
 is very irregular, and is let in bulk, not by the acre; 
 but I should think ten acres is the lowest quantity 
 that any of them hold. 
 
 19835. The O'Conor Don.— What would be the 
 rent? — The rent averages about £1 an acre; but 
 there is a good deal of reclaimed mountain land, which 
 the tenants take in and reclaim from time to time, 
 and there is no rent put on that. ' We have never 
 charged them for mountain land, nor for bog, nor for 
 heather. When a holding has a piece of mountain or 
 bog nearing it, they are allowed to run on it, and to 
 cultivate it, if they fence it in. 
 
 19836. Charging no rent for it? — No rent, except 
 in one instance 10s. was put upon a man for a large 
 tract of bog he reclaimed. As a general rule it is a 
 sort of commonage that is thrown in with the holding, 
 
 19837. When they reclaim land, have you been in 
 the habit of making allowances towards improvements ? 
 — No ; because they get the benefit of the improve- 
 ments ; and as a general rule the reclamation costs 
 them little or nothing. If an acre or two of bog was 
 cut away down to the gravel, the adjoining tenant 
 would till the land, and take the crop off it — they do 
 nothing more to it ; perhaps they in some cases ran a 
 drain through the middle of it — that was all. 
 
 19838. Merely an open drain, I suppose? — Yes; 
 an open drain to carry off the surface water. 
 
 19839. Do they clear away stones? — I don't think 
 so. I don't think there are many stones at the bottom 
 of those bogs. 
 
 19840. Was there any increase made to the rent? 
 — None. But I must say I intended to put an increase 
 of rent on them, I mean a small thing, in order to keep 
 my right over the land ; .but up to this it has not been 
 done. 
 
 19841. Do you assist tenants to make improvements 
 in the way of building ? — Yes ; I have assisted them 
 by giving timber, and in other ways, to build houses 
 and offices. 
 
 19842. Have you got many labourers on your estate? 
 — I have eight or nine families who are employed as 
 labourers on my own farm, where I live. I have, I 
 suppose, from twenty-five to thirty people employed 
 every day at labour of one sort or another. 
 
 19843. Have they cottages on your estate? — Yes; 
 comfortable cottages, with half-an-acre of land, and 
 wages. 
 
 19844. Have they the cottages free as part of their', 
 wages? — No; they are charged Is. a week for the 
 cottage and half-acre of land. 
 
 19845. Are there any of the farmers on your estate 
 who have labourers on their holdings? — There may 
 be a few. 
 
 19846. What condition are they in? — The houses 
 they live in are generally bad. 
 
 19847. Thatched cabins, I suppose? — Yes. There 
 are a few of them, but I think they are very few. I 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 627 
 
 recollect one or two of them, and their cottages are 
 very bad. 
 
 19848. On the larger class of farms, I suppose there 
 is little tillage ? — Yes ; they are mostly in grass. 
 
 19849. They don't require many labourers? — They 
 don't want any, merely a herd, who lives on the land, 
 and has a garden attached to his house. 
 
 19850. Might the mountain and bog land to which 
 you have referred be made valuable ? — No ; I don't 
 think you could ever make it valuable, but it might be 
 improved. It is improved by tillage to a certain extent, 
 and I think in a few years it would lay down pretty 
 well in grass, but it would never become valuable land. 
 
 19851. Baron Dowse. — What wages do you give 
 your labourers? — A shilling a day to the men. If 
 women are employed they get 8d. There is one family 
 earning 30s. a week. The father, two sons, and two 
 or three girls all employed. Some of them who are 
 good hands get Is-. 2d. or Is. 3d a day. 
 
 19852. Does that go on the whole year round? — ■ 
 It has gone on up to this ; but of course if this anti- 
 rent agitation reaches us we will have to stop. 
 
 19853. You won't stop until they stop paying rent? 
 — Certainly not. 
 
 19854. Hitherto, as I understand, your rents have 
 been paid on your Raford estate? — Yes. There are 
 a few tenants appear disloyal, at least disloyal to me in 
 the sense that they are not honest minded. They have 
 taken advantage of the agitation to avoid payment. 
 
 19855. Have they refused payment altogether? — ■ 
 They have not refused, but they have not paid. For 
 instance, when the other tenants came in to pay their 
 rents, these parties stayed away ; and when sent for 
 they say they will come, but don't come. 
 
 19856. Do they allege that the land is too dear? — ■ 
 No. I have heard no statement of that sort made by 
 any tenant of mine on the Raford estate. The land 
 is let not very much over Griffith's valuation, some 
 of it under the valuation. 
 
 19857. Have you had any cases in the Land Court ? 
 — I had one. On the Purbough estate I had to turn 
 out a man who kicked up a row. ' 
 
 19858. Did he make a claim? — Yes; and he got 
 £120. That was the only case under the Land Act I 
 have had. His eldest son was put into possession, and 
 gave his father, of his own accord, a sum of money, 
 and he went to live in Galway with another son who 
 is employed in the town. 
 
 19859. Have you had any- dispute about rents on 
 that estate? — The only dispute was last year, when 
 the tenants declined to pay any rent. 
 
 19860. They didn't complain of the amount of the 
 rents ? — Well, there may have been a few cases where 
 a man said he was charged a little more than his 
 neighbours, but as a rule there was no complaint on 
 that ground. 
 
 19861. Then on the whole you and your tenants 
 have got on, up to the present, pretty well? — We 
 have ; but a good deal of it was owing to a firm front 
 being shown to them this time last year. They tried 
 to act with me as they acted with other landlords. I 
 said, " I shall either have to give up my property or 
 force these people to pay." I knew they were able to 
 pay, and I knew that some of them were anxious to 
 pay if they were forced to do so, consequently I took 
 out ejectment notices, and served twelve of them, and 
 when they saw I was determined to carry them out, 
 they came in and paid. 
 
 19862. You never turn out a man as long as he 
 pays his rent ? — No. There was only one case since I 
 got the estate, the case I have already told you of, 
 where a man was turned out on account of a family 
 quarrel, and his son was put in. 
 
 19863. How long have you had the estate? — A 
 good many years. I have been in possession managing 
 the property since I was sixteen years of age, and I am 
 now forty-five. 
 
 19864. And except in that one instance, you never 
 have turned anybody out ? — Never. I never turned a 
 man out, never raised rents, and never altered any of 
 the old holdings. 
 
 19865. Then practically on your estate there is 
 fixity of tenure — as long as they pay the rent they may 
 remain? — Practically so, they may remain as long as 
 they please. 
 
 19866. Do any changes take place in the holdings? 
 — Very little. 
 
 19. ^67. If tenants go away, how do they arrange 
 about the incoming tenant? — If a tenant went away, 
 he might propose to my agent to give the farm to 
 some man, some friend of his, and possibly the agent 
 would accept him. 
 
 19868. Does the incoming man give the outgoing 
 tenant anything? — He possibly may do so, but we never 
 recognise anything of that sort ; nor do we know of 
 any sums passing between then;. There have been, I 
 may observe, very few instances on the estate of tenants, 
 giving us their farms. 
 
 19869. I suppose you have had very lew cases of 
 dispute as to rent in point of amount ? — Very few. 
 
 19870. Have you ever raised rents? — I have only 
 raised rents on six tenants. In every instance the 
 rents were about the valuation, and I raised them a 
 few shiUings over the valuation. 
 
 19871. Was that on the dropping of a lease? — No, 
 it was after an election. They were tenants at will. 
 It is better to tell the whole affair frankly, I suppose. 
 It was after the Galway election ; these six or eight 
 tenants all had their holdings at rents at or about 
 Griffith's valuation, and the rents of the tenants around 
 them were over the valuation. I increased their rents, 
 and brought them to a few shillings over the valuation. 
 I think there were eight tenants, and I put £24 a year 
 on them. 
 
 19872. They did not rote the right way?— They 
 did not vote the right way. 
 
 19873. I suppose only for their having voted on the 
 wrong side you would not have raised their reats? — 
 I don't say that. It was in my mind to do -it bafore 
 the election, but I did not do it till after the 
 election. 
 
 19874. Was that before the Ballot?— Yes. 
 
 19875. You knew ho,v they voted? — I knew how • 
 they voted. 
 
 19876. Mr. KivAt^AGa. — ^^How much money have 
 you expended in improvements on your estates? — I 
 have expended in improvements — not calculating what 
 I spent on the demesne, nor what I spent in orna- 
 mental improvements — in general improvements on the 
 property I have expended £8946. 
 
 19877. Within what time? — Within twenty-five 
 years. 
 
 19878. Does that include labourers' cottages? 
 — It includes labourers' cottages, drainage of grass 
 farms, and general improvements on the estate. Besides 
 that, my labour-bill comes to £500 a year on my own 
 demesne. I spend that every year, and pay them 
 regularly in weekly wages ; sometimes it goes up to 
 £800 or £900 a year. 
 
 19879. That is on the land in your own occupation ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 19880. Baron Dowse. — Who builds the houses on 
 the farms ?^The tenants, I should think. They were 
 built before my time ; but my father and grandfather, 
 I have reason to know, helped them with roofs, 
 windows, doors, and all that sort of thing ; it was a 
 sort of mutual contribution. 
 
 19881. Was any increased rent put on for that? — 
 I don't think so. I never put on any rent on account 
 of improvements. • , 
 
 19882. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have you made any 
 difference iu your practice as to improvements on your 
 estate since the passing of the Land Act ? or do you 
 go on still as you were accustomed to do before ? — I 
 have gone on, up to the present, exactly as before ; 
 but I do not intend to continue exactly as before. I 
 think I have laid out rather more money than I would 
 be inclined to lay out now if I had to begin the thing 
 over again. 
 
 19883. Baron Dowse.— Would you be willing to 
 sell to your tenants if they were assisted to pur- 
 chase? — I don't want to sell unless things chanc-e 
 
 4 L 2 
 
 Ucl. 23, ISXii, 
 
 ('olonel JoJui 
 .Vvchev T>.\^y. 
 
628 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, 1880. 
 
 Colonel John 
 Aivhev Daly. 
 
 for the worse. At present I would not be inclined to 
 part with my estate; but if the agitation went on 
 much farther, and if the tenants refused to pay their 
 rent, so that I was not able to meet my charges, I 
 would be very glad to sell. 
 
 19884. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have there been any cases 
 in your neighbourhood of tenants purchasing under 
 the Church Act, or under the Bright Clauses of the 
 Land Act ? — None. 
 
 19885. What is your opinion as to the expediency 
 of assisting tenants to purchase their holdings ? — If 
 the tenants are solvent men, and anxious to buy, and 
 if the landlord is willing to sell, I thing the Govern- 
 ment ought to help them to purchase their holdings, 
 if both parties are willing to deal. 
 
 19886. I take it you would not approve of it as a 
 general scheme over the whole country? — Not at all. 
 I think it would be fatal to the country. 
 
 19887. I suppose you would require that a man who 
 purchased his holding should have a substantial quan- 
 tity of land — sufficient to enable him to live on it ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 19888. Do you think it would be a good scheme 
 for four or five acre people ? — No ; it would be a 
 Vretched scheme — in a short time they would be 
 beggars. 
 
 19889. What, in your opinion, should be the 
 minimum? — I would say from twenty-five to thirty 
 acres should be the lowest. 
 
 19890. Of course, in any purchases made in that 
 way, subdivision should be prevented? — Subdivision 
 should be prevented; wherever it has taken place it 
 has done immense harm, and eventually beggared the 
 people. 
 
 19891. Would you also prohibit subletting? — Yes; 
 either subletting or subdivision should be prevented. 
 
 19892. The O'Conok Don.— Do you think that 
 occupiers of less than 25 or 30 acres could not 
 support themselves on their holdings ? — It depends on 
 the sort of land they hold, and on the rent they pay. 
 I would not approve of any occupier of less than that 
 quantity getting money from the State to purchase his 
 holding. I think it would be too small to enable him 
 to do any good with it. Even with 8 or 9 acres a man 
 could not do much ; but with 25 acres, if a man got a 
 little money, and was enabled to purchase, he might 
 struggle on and live. Anything smaller than that I 
 don't think he could do much with. 
 
 19893. Is not there a great difference between one 
 acre of land and another ? — A great difference ; but 
 when I speak of 25 acres, it should be moderately good 
 land. Twenty-five acres of bad land would be a 
 wretched purchase to make. 
 
 19894. When you speak of 25 acres you mean good 
 land? — Yes, fair tillage land; land that would give 
 a fair crop, and feed sheep — not poor pasture. 
 
 19895. If small holders were excluded — if all occu- 
 piers holding under 20 acres were excluded — would it 
 not practically put an end to the scheme, because it is 
 just those properties on which the holdings are small 
 that the landlords would be anxious to sell ? — That is 
 so. But I think that if people occupying under 25 
 acres of land were ready to buy, they would not be 
 able to live if they became purchasers — they would 
 not be able to pay the additional sum put on them, 
 and live and bring up their families. 
 
 19896. If that be so, would it not put an end to 
 sales ? — I suppose it would put an end to sales of 
 properties composed of small holdings. 
 
 19897. Baron Dowse. — You would, I suppose 
 consider that an advantage, because you don't think 
 they could carry on if they became proprietors ?— I (jg 
 not think they could carry on, or hope to live on small 
 pieces of land. 
 
 19898. The Chaieman. — Do you think it better 
 that occupiers of such holdings should remain in the 
 hands of landlords as at present ? — I do. 
 
 19899. You see a landlord would not be inclined to 
 sell to his larger tenants if he was to be left with only 
 the smaller tenants on his hands : how would you meet 
 that difficulty ? — I think the only way would be, in the 
 case of a holding insufficient to maintain a family, to 
 try and get the people to emigrate. 
 
 19900. Baron Dowse. — Would not making them 
 peasant proprietors be the easiest way of doin"- it— 
 wouldn't they have to disappear in the end? — I am 
 sure they would. The end would be that they would 
 go away of their own accord ; but they would, before 
 they went away, take everything they could out of the 
 land, and it would become utterly valueless. They 
 would not be able to get any remunerative crops ont 
 of it, and would have to go away. 
 
 19901. Would the condition of things be worse than 
 they are now, if you established all over the country 
 the reign of a peasant proprietary ? — I am sure it 
 would — at least that is what my experience teaches 
 me. There are men on my estate that have leases at 
 low rents, and those men always have their land in a 
 worse condition than men who have not got leases. 
 They treat their land exceedingly badly, and don't 
 work it half as well as the men who have not got 
 leases and pay a higher rent. 
 
 19902. Are those leases that are nearly run out?— 
 No, they have a long time to run still. In one instance 
 a man holds 12 or 14 acres of fair land that would 
 give a fair crop if well tilled. He has it at a very low 
 rent, yet he is poor and miserable, and his land wretch- 
 edly cultivated ; while men adjacent to him, who have 
 no leases, and paying higher rents, are well-to-do and 
 comfortable. If that man had no lease he would be 
 better off, and if hp had to pay more rent he would 
 work harder and be in a more comfortable position. 
 
 19903. The eviction which you mentioned as haying 
 taken place on your estate arose, I think you said, ont 
 of a family feud? — Yes; there were two or three 
 families in the village, the members of which were 
 continually fighting, and this man was a ringleader 
 and kept the feud ahve. I told him to go, and when 
 he refused to go I turned him out and gave the place 
 to his son. 
 
 19904. Have you any trouble when a tenant dies as 
 to his successor ? — No ; it generally passes from father 
 to son. 
 
 19905. Is it in general the eldest son that gets the 
 property ? — I don't think so. 
 
 19906. If a man dies without making a will, to 
 whom would you give the farm? — Generally if there 
 are two or three sons in the house, some of them 
 either emigrate or go away to other branches of in- 
 dustry, and one son remains ; and the son who remains 
 last in the house of his father is generally the man who 
 gets the holding. We accept him; he generally marries 
 before the father dies, and lives in the house. He is 
 generally regarded as the successor to his father, and 
 is always recognised by us. 
 
 19907. That is, you recognise the man whom the 
 father had recognised ? — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Murtin 
 Raphael H art. 
 
 Mr. Maetin Eaphabl Haet of CUfden, examined. 
 
 10908. The Chaiemak. — Are you an owner of 
 land? — I am, on a limited scale. 
 
 19909. Have you been for some time Receiver 
 upon estates under the Court of Chancery? — I was 
 Receiver over some very extensive properties in Conne- 
 mara. 
 
 19910. I beHeve they were afterwards sold in the 
 Landed Estates Court ? — Yes. 
 
 19911. I believe you have also been agent over 
 some extensive estates ? — I have. 
 
 19912. You have been for fifteen years vice-chair- 
 man of the Clifden Board of Guardians? — Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 629 
 
 19913. Is that in the barony of Balhnahinch ? — Yes. 
 
 19914. You can also give evidence as to the con- 
 dition of the tenantry in some other districts ? — Yes. 
 
 19915. Are those other districts in this county? — 
 In the County Mayo. 
 
 19916. Was there anything corresponding to the 
 Ulster Custom recognised on any of the estates under 
 your management 1 — ^No. 
 
 19917. Was sale of good-will allowed in any case? 
 — I am not aware of any case where it was allowed. 
 Generally speaking, the tenants' interests were not 
 worth selling except where there were leases. 
 
 19918. Was there one ease in which a tenant had 
 your consent to the sale of his interest ? — Yes ; I 
 allowed him to get £60 for it. 
 
 19919. Is there a desire on the part of other tenants 
 to do the same? — I am not aware. In the case I 
 refer to, the tenant was a man who was in the habit of 
 doing business for me, and I left the value of the land 
 to himself to fix, and allowed him to sell for that. 
 
 19920. Have you had other applications for leave 
 to sell ? — Not many ; I consented when asked. 
 
 19921. Can you speak also as to other properties 
 with which you are not directly connected ? — I can. 
 I can speak of estates in the west of Ireland which 
 were valued for the purposes of rent, and some of them 
 were doubled, trebled, and even quadrupled in their 
 valuations by the landlord, over and above what 
 Grif&th put on them. This refers to waste lands 
 only. It may be well that I should state the reason 
 why I am in a position to mention these things. 
 When a meeting of the landlords in the west of 
 Ireland took place in the year 1847, they requested 
 me to act as their honorary secretary, which I did, 
 and a number of papers and documents explanatory 
 of the condition of the country at that time came into 
 my possession, and they have remained with me from 
 that time to the present. 
 
 19922. Had the landlords you speak of been in 
 the habit of making much improvements ? — Those 
 landlords are all gone ; the present race of landlords 
 in this part of Ireland make no improvements, except 
 some trifling matters. 
 
 19923. Were they in the habit of making improve- 
 ments before the Land Act passed ? — No. 
 
 19924. Has everything that was done upon those 
 properties — or nearly everything was done by the 
 tenants ? — Quite true. 
 
 19925. And after those improvements had been 
 effected by the tenants, were those increases of rent 
 put on that you have referred to ? — Yes. I beg to call 
 the attention of ihe Commissioners to one case by way 
 of illustration. There are so many cases that it 
 would be tedious to mention them all. I will give 
 you a case in point which came under my own know- 
 ledge. There was a tenant who had been in occupa- 
 tion of a farm for a period of thirty-one years at a 
 rent of £100 a year ; he had built a good house and 
 offices, formed nice gardens, and improved the place 
 in every way ; but when his lease, which was for 
 thirty-one years, ran out, one-half of the land was 
 taken from him, and he was charged the same rent, 
 £100 a year, upon the other half of the land — why? 
 — Because his improvements had enhanced the value, 
 he was charged £100 a year for one-half of the land, 
 and for the houses and offices which he had himself 
 built. That was done by a man who was considered 
 — and I believe justly considered — as one of the best 
 landlords in that part of Ireland ; but such was the 
 custom of the country at the time. 
 
 19926. How long ago is that? — It is about forty 
 years ago. 
 
 19927. Who was the landlord? — I prefer not to 
 mention names. 
 
 19928. Do you consider that the Land Act had 
 any effect in checking evictions ? — I do not think it 
 had much effect that way. A landlord who wished 
 to get rid of a tenant would not be deterred by 
 having to give compensation — he would prefer paying 
 the compensation to permitting the tenant to remain 
 in possession ; and of coarse, if the tenant owed any 
 
 Mr. Martiu 
 Raphael Hart. 
 
 rent, if it was over one year's rent, he would get no Oct. 2o, I8su. 
 compensation unless under exceptional circumstances. 
 
 19929. Where he could claim for improvements? — 
 Just so. 
 
 19930. Are yon aware whether there have been 
 many actual evictions in this district since the passing 
 of the Land Act ? — Yes, a good many. 
 
 19931. Were any of them on the estates under 
 your direction ? — No. 
 
 l'.i'.)32. They were upon other properties? — Yes. 
 
 19933. The O'CoNOii Don. — Can you mention any 
 of the cases? — I would rather not. Of course we 
 all know who the landlords of the county are, but I 
 would prefer not to give the names. 
 
 19934. Mr. Kavanagh. — It is hardly fair to make 
 a general charge of that kind without giving the name. 
 If you desire it, the name need not be published, but 
 it is right to iix the charge. — If it is necessary to 
 do so, I will mention the name. A great many of the 
 evictions were on the property of the Law Life Society, 
 but I would not wish in my evidence that the names 
 should be given. 
 
 19935. How many cases of eviction do you know 
 to have been carried out on the property of the Law 
 Life Society? — I could not tell you; there were a 
 good many, but I never kept an account. 
 
 19936. Could you tell us any instances upon that 
 estate where the tenants were evicted for owing one 
 year's rent? — No, I could not ^l/e the name of any 
 person at present. 
 
 19937. Can you state positively that it occurred 
 at all? — I can state positively that it did. 
 
 19938. In many cases? — In many cases. 
 
 19939. On the Law Life Society's estate?— Yes. 
 
 19940. Was that since Mr. Berridge becaipe the 
 owner? — No ; it was before he became the owner. 
 
 19941. Was it done by Mr. Robinson while he was 
 agent ? — Of course some was done by Mr. Robinson — 
 but chiefly by Mr. Robertson, his predecessor. 
 
 19942. How long. is it since those cases occurred? 
 — I cannot tell from memory. 
 
 19943. My question was as to evictions since the 
 passing of the Land Act? — There have been a good 
 many since the passing of the Land Act, but they 
 were more numerous before. 
 
 19944. Then the Land Act had some effect in 
 stopping them? — I don't know; judging by facts it 
 had some effect that way. 
 
 19945. You said that in those cases tenants did 
 not get sufficient compensation ? Was that in cases 
 where the tenants laid their claims before a judge? — 
 I think they get proper compensation wherever they 
 are evicted on the instructions of the landlords ; but 
 when they are evicted for non-payment of rent under 
 the Act, I don't think many of them get compensation. 
 
 19946. They can bring their claims for improvements 
 before the judge? — Yes, before the County Court 
 judge ; he treats them very fairly as far as my opinion 
 goes. 
 
 19947. But you think the Act does not allow 
 them sufficient compensation ? — Those that are evicted, 
 not for non-payment of rent, but at the dictation of 
 the landlord, get what the law allows them. 
 
 19948. And you think that is sufficient compensa- 
 tion ? — I declare I cannot say. In some cases I think 
 it is not. They also get, where there are bona fide 
 substantial improvements — they get the value of those 
 improvements from the County Court judge. But it is 
 right that I should tell you that from the state of our 
 country the improvements are made simply from one 
 year to another by the tenants for their own accom- 
 modation ; for this reason, that if they did anything of 
 weight or^importance, they would not be compensated 
 for it — therefore they do nothing more in that way 
 than just to do this year what will serve their purpose 
 until next year. The land in our district is for the 
 most part of inferior quality, and they are obliged to 
 expend a great deal of their time and labour in renderin"- 
 it capable of yielding a crop ; but that does not come 
 under what is meant by improvements, because they do 
 it merely for the time being. 
 
630 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 0ct. 23, 18!<0. 
 
 Mr. Martin 
 Raphael Hart, 
 
 19949. You think that the apprehension of a rise of 
 rent or of being ejected has the eifect of deterring the 
 tenants from making any real or substantial improve- 
 ment ? — I know it has. 
 
 19950. What is your opinion of leases as a means 
 of getting over that feeling of insecurity ? — I think I 
 put my views on that point very fully before you in my 
 written statement. Short leases are deceptive; they 
 induce tenants to make improvements for which, when 
 the leases run out, the rents are raised accordingly. 
 In my opinion a new valuation should be made all 
 over Ireland ; and it ought not to be done in the way 
 it was when Sir Richard Griffith was making his 
 valuation — he took several years to do it, but it ought 
 to be completed within twelve months at furthest ; and 
 in my opinion there should be an imperative law to 
 give fee-farm grants ou that valuation to the tenants 
 in possession. 
 
 19951. That would be a perpetuity?— Yes; that in 
 my opinion would be better than any lease. That 
 would raise the tenants from their present state, 
 while it would insure to the landlord his fair rent — the 
 rent laid down by your Commission upon the basis of 
 the new valuation. The tenant when he saw that 
 every improvement he effected on his holding — that his 
 labour and expenditure — were to become his own pro- 
 perty, and never could be taken from him, I think there 
 is no doubt the result would be that instead of wasting 
 his time and money in the public-house, he would 
 employ himself upon his land and improve it in every 
 possible way, and hand it down in a better condition 
 to his successor. As things stand now, the more the 
 tenants improve their land, the worse it is for them, 
 because, as I have shown you, and I could illustrate it 
 by many cases, when a man expends his labour, his 
 money, and his skill upon his farm, his landlord comes 
 in and says, " This land is worth more than you are 
 paying for it, your rent must be increased." The tenant 
 may reply, " Of course it is worth more, but that is 
 because I laid out the labour and money upon it." The 
 landlord will answer, " I know nothing about that — you 
 must pay me an additional rent, or go out." But if, 
 on the other hand, the farm belonged to the man in 
 this sense — that his rent was fixed, could not be in- 
 creased at the will of the landlord, and that as long as 
 he paid that rent he could not be turned out, so that 
 every improvement, everything done to the farm, every 
 increase of value, would belong to the man himself — 
 that man would naturally expend all his efforts upon 
 it, as by so doing it would become more and more 
 valuable to him every day. Of course he would have 
 to pay the rent. Ejectment for non-payment of rent is 
 the only ejectment I would allow. If a tenant was 
 unable or unwilling to pay the rent, he should quit, and 
 the incoming tenant would be sure to pay the arrears 
 that were due, and to take the farm. Thus the land- 
 lord would always be sure of his rent, the land would 
 be well cultivated, the landlord, the tenant, and the 
 country would all be benefited. 
 
 19952. That would correspond very nearly with the 
 Ulster Tenant Right system ? — I think so. 
 
 19953. When you say the occupier should be the 
 owner, do you mean that he should have the oppor- 
 tunity of purchasing the farm if he chose? — I would 
 not make that compulsory — I do not think it, would be 
 right to compel a landlord to sell his property ; but if 
 the landlord was willing to sell, I think the tenant 
 ought to get a preference in the purchase. I do not 
 think anything in the shape of compulsion should be 
 exercised, but a landlord should be allowed to sell his 
 property if he chose. 
 
 19954. Then you would give fee-farm grants to the 
 tenants at the Government valuation? — Yes. 
 
 19955. And you would give the tenant power to 
 purchase up the landlord's interest in the grant? — 
 I would give the tenant every power that he would 
 have if the property were his own, save and except 
 of course that he should always pay the rent. I 
 would give him a right to sell it, to build on it, to 
 deal with it in every way he could do if it were his own, 
 subject to this proviso, that he shonld pay the rent- 
 
 power to sell it, build on it, and deal with it in every 
 way. 
 
 19956. Baron Dowse. — If an Act were passed allow- 
 ing the tenant to hold the land at a fair rent, and not 
 to be disturbed as long as the rent was paid, would 
 that answer your purpose? — That is what I want. 
 The landlord should be prevented from disturbing hini 
 so long as he got his rent, and the tenant should have 
 power to sell and improve as best he could. 
 
 19957. That would be a Parliamentary lease?— Yes 
 a fee-farm lease by Act of Parliament ; and I say from 
 my experience in matters of the kind that nothing less 
 will settle the present disturbed state of the country. 
 
 19958. Would that settle it, in your opinion I— I 
 think it would. I think the tenant would be satisfied 
 to pay the rent as fixed by Government valuation 
 knowing that as long as he paid it he would not be 
 disturbed, and that everything he did to improve the 
 value of the farm would be his own. 
 
 19959. Mr. Katanagh. — Don't you think that if 
 that were conceded, there would be very soon an agita- 
 tion against paying rent at all ? — I think not. If they 
 tried that, I would say a Coercion Act should be 
 carried out to prevent it ; but I do not think they 
 would try it. 
 
 199GO. Baron Dowse. — They would not succeed, 
 you think, if they attempted it ? — They would not suc- 
 ceed. I don't think any man of common sense would 
 attempt it. 
 
 19961. Are not there a good many men that have 
 no common sense ? — I am sorry to say there are, and 
 some of them are turning their abilities and influence 
 to bad account. 
 
 19962. The Chaieman. — Have you had any expe- 
 rience of applications for loans under the Land Improve- 
 ment Act ? — I have. I made an application for a loan 
 myself, but the objections were so many that I could 
 not get it. Mine was a lease for twenty-one years, 
 valuation £170, I only wanted a loan of fifty pounds. 
 It was not under the present Act the application was 
 made, but under the former Act. As agent I made 
 application in the name of the landlord ; he had laid 
 out some money on buildings, and he wanted to make 
 an avenue. He only wanted £250 ; his rental was 
 £200 a year, but his valuation was under £100 a year, 
 and therefore the Act of Parhameut prohibited the 
 Board of Works from giving the loan, the valuation 
 being under £100 a year, though he was a fee-simple 
 proprietor, and there was no incumbrance on the pro- 
 perty. I explained the whole matter to the Board, but 
 they wrote to me that the Act of ParUament required 
 that the valuation should be at least £100 a year. 
 
 19963. When was that ? — It is some years past. 
 
 19964. It was not under the present Act the appli- 
 cation was made? — Xo. 
 
 19965. Have you had any experience of the present 
 Act ? — Xone. 
 
 19966. The O'Conor Don. — Are you agent now 
 for any property ? — No. 
 
 19967. Have you been an agent since the passing of 
 the Land Act? — I was for some time. 
 
 19968. On whose estate? — I was agent over a pro- 
 perty belonging to a brother-in-law of mine. I had 
 the full scope of doing what I liked on it, and of 
 course I must have' done all in my power as best I 
 could for him and the tenants, until I gave the agency 
 up. There is one important matter which as an agent 
 I would like to bring under consideration. I daresay 
 you have seen in the papers a letter from Mr. A, M. 
 Sullivan, M.P., about Portacarran. I was agent over 
 that property for a friend of mine — an English gentle- 
 man. It was in the year 1863 I undertook it first. 
 I continued managing the estate for some time ; but 
 from the stringent regulations that were imposed on 
 the tenants, and that I was expected to see carried 
 out, such as prohibitions against tilling more than a 
 certain quantity of land annually, and other restric- 
 tions which I could not consider myself justified in 
 enforcing, I resigned the agency. 
 
 19970. Who was the landlord of that estate?— 
 General Anderson of London. I resigned the agency 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 631 
 
 rather than carry out the directious that were sent to 
 me, and another gentleman became agent. The pro- 
 perty was reported on by Mr. A. M. Sullivan and another 
 gentleman in their important arbitration. I retired 
 rather than continue acting as agent where printed 
 forms of agreement were sent to be signed by the 
 tenants, which were such that I could not feel myself 
 justified in having them carried out. Eor a long time 
 I had continued to act as agent saying nothing about 
 the stringent manner in which I was directed to act, 
 but which I did not do. I did not carry out those 
 regulations. I said nothing about them until some 
 party behind the scenes communicated to the landlord 
 ■ the fact that those stringent rules were not enforced 
 by me, and I then resigned my agency. 
 
 19971. Does not that property belong to Major 
 Nolan? — It does. It was sold since I retired from the 
 agency. 
 
 19972. The Chairman. — lu the pricis of your evi- 
 dence which you supplied to us you make some obser- 
 vation about absentees ? — Yes. • I know that this 
 gentleman, General Anderson, who, a man of kind- 
 ness and humanity, never would have acted in that 
 way if he had been on the spot, but he was an ab- 
 sentee ; and I do say it would be essential to put a tax 
 upon absentee landlords. They take millions out of the 
 country, and leave nothing in return for it. 
 
 19973. What do yon call an absentee? — A gentle- 
 man who lives in a foreign country, and does not live 
 in Ireland. 
 
 19974. Suppose a man lived here four months in 
 the year, and in England for the other eight months, 
 would he be an absentee? — Of course he would. I 
 say absentee landlords ought to be taxed to pay at 
 least the poor-rates on their properties. 
 
 19975. The next subject you mention in your state- 
 ment is that of waste land ? — Yes. I was in a position 
 to do that, having Griffith's valuation before me. There 
 are many acres of land in this district which are now 
 let at fair rents, but which are valued at little or 
 nothing in Griffith's valuation. I have the particulars 
 of some of them here. I was in a position to refer 
 to that matter, having the Government valuation in 
 my possession, and also being in possession of the 
 facts as honorary secretary of the meeting of landlords, 
 as already mentioned. 
 
 19976. Do you consider that land is waste because 
 the value of it was low at the time Griffith's valuation 
 was made? — Xo, not necessarily. But I consider land 
 that is left unimproved and no trouble taken with it 
 is waste land. The valuation of a farm of land I have 
 before me, containing 900 acres, is £7, 10s. I have 
 many of them of that class. Those lands are now pay^ 
 ing £50 a year; but they are generally let to large 
 farmers, and I think that is an obstruction to the pro- 
 sperity of the country, for this reason, that if smaller 
 tenants had leases — fee-farm leases — of these lands, 
 they would improve them for their own advantage. 
 The country abounds in all kinds of manure, and 
 those lands could easily be rendered valuable. They 
 are waste, because they are not tilled year after year ; 
 they are left in the same state, quite unproductive. 
 
 19977. In the bands of large graziers? — Yes. 
 
 19978. Still, those graziers pay high rents for the 
 lands, in comparison with the valuation? — They do; 
 quadruple the valuation, and in some cases more — 
 perhaps six times the valuation. 900 acres for £7, 10s. 
 is an absurdity ; and there were some hundreds of farms 
 in the same position. 
 
 19979. Do you think the large graziers should be 
 ejected ? — I would not say they should be ejected ; but 
 I would certainly object to their getting fee-farm leases. 
 I think they ought not to come under that clause. 
 
 19980. As to the question of the rates upon these 
 low let lands, have you any observations to make ? — 
 Yes. I consider that is an injustice to, the country, 
 and I believe the same thing exists in the north of 
 Ireland. I have travelled through it, and I beheve 
 it is the same. Here is a farm 900 acres in extent. 
 The poor people who live on arable land, who pay 
 high rents, and are rated at the full value — those 
 
 are the people who pay all taxes — county, cess, poor- Oct. 23, 1880. 
 rates, etc. I say all ; because where a man is paying -, . . |^~I- 
 £50 a year rent for a farm of 900 acres, which is worth i>aphael Hart, 
 perhaps £100 a year, and yet pays taxes on a valua- 
 tion of only £7, 10s., it is not worth while taking into 
 account the few shillings of taxes that man pays. The 
 taxation is borne almost altogether by the highly 
 rented tenants of arable lands. Now I say that is a 
 grievance and ah injustice to the small tenants, who 
 practically have to pay all the taxes, while the graziers 
 get off nearly scot free. 
 
 19981. He pays on a valuation of £7, 10s., while his 
 rent is £50? — Yes; and the same is the case in 
 many instances. I have had experience of it for over 
 twenty years, daring which I have been a Poor Law 
 Guardian. I brought the matter before the Govern- 
 ment, but it seems they have no power to order a 
 re-valuation of lands. I brought tlie matter before 
 the Board of Guardians, and they passed a resolution 
 which went before the Poor Law Commissioners, but 
 they failed to see their way to get a new valuation made. 
 It now comes, I submit, within the province of this 
 Commission to have a new valuation made, which would 
 be doing an act of justice even in that matter alone. 
 
 19982. Baron Dowse. — Do you think there is much 
 waste land in the country that might be reclaimed ? — 
 I know there is. I am every day walking through it; 
 and what I would suggest is that the Government should 
 purchase those lands. I may give you as an illustration 
 Mr. Mitchell Henry, M.P. He reclaimed a large 
 quantity of land, at a much greater distance from the 
 shore than many of the tracts of waste land which I 
 would suggest should be taken in hand for improve- 
 ment. His estate would repay any person the trouble 
 of visiting it, and would show what a benefit has been 
 conferred upon the district by what he has done. I think 
 the Government would do well to purchase those lands 
 and reclaim them ; and when they had a certain tract 
 reclaimed, to map it out for sale to make a peasant 
 proprietary. I think that would be making a peasant 
 proprietary without, doing injury to anybody, without 
 interfering with the rights of landlords or any one else. 
 The lands are now practically worthless, and I think 
 it would be a benefit to the country to have them 
 properly reclaimed. Abundance of every kind of 
 manure can be got for the purpose. We have coral 
 sand around our coast, which has been analyzed and 
 proved to contain 90 per cent, of lime. We have 
 shores abounding with sea-weed, and any quantity of sea 
 sand. All these form excellent manures, so that the 
 reclamation would not be a work of great difficulty. 
 
 19983. On Mr. Mitchell Henry's property has the 
 land been brought into such a state, that it would be 
 fit to dispose of to tenants ? — Yes, it is now in a 
 reclaimed condition. 
 
 19984. Is it divided among tenants? — No ; he has 
 it in his own possession. 
 
 19985. Did not it cost him more to reclaim it than 
 the fee was worth ? — I don't think it did. 
 
 19986. You are aware that he is a gentleman having 
 an income of several thousands a year ? — I know he is ; 
 but he has reclaimed all that extensive property, and 
 it is a benefit to the district, and a credit to him. 
 
 19987. It has given employment to the people? — It 
 has ; and it has created an increased production of 
 every kind of food — potatoes, corn, hay, and every 
 description of produce. He has conferred immense 
 benefit on the district. 
 
 19988. I suppose there are no tenants' houses built 
 upon this reclaimed land ? — No. 
 
 1 9989. Do you think it would pay at reasonable 
 rents let out to tenants ? — I know it would. 
 
 19990. In moderate sized farms, you think it would 
 pay ? — I know it would, for this reason — ^those lands 
 are now valued at nothing ; but if the valuation I re- 
 commend was carried out, they would be properly 
 valued, and a tenant would be very glad to get them 
 at a proper valuation when so reclaimed, and the 
 landlord would get a fair rent for them. 
 
 19991. Mr. Kaa^anagh,— That farm of 900 acres, 
 which you mentioned as being valued as £7, 10s., and 
 
632 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, 1881). 
 
 Mr, Martin 
 Raphael Hart. 
 
 let at £50 — in your opinion is it let too high ? — I do 
 not know. I am not competent to judge, but I rather 
 think not. Those big grazing farmers know very well 
 what they are doing, and this only one of hundreds. 
 
 19992. I think you said the rent had been quad- 
 rupled? — I know it has, since the time Griffith's valua- 
 tion was made, on those waste lands. 
 
 19993. Still you don't bring it forward as an instance 
 of rack-renting I — I do not, for this reason — that the 
 Government valuation was entirely under the real value 
 of that land, but this only refers to waste lands. 
 
 19994. Do you wish to recur to those stringent 
 leases that were on this property? — They were not 
 leases, they were agreements ; and they were so 
 stringent that, as I said before, rather than carry 
 them out for a sincere friend, I sent in my resigna- 
 tion. I was agent for a good many places, and I 
 determined not in any case to act harshly. And I did 
 for some time act as agent without carrying out those 
 stringent rules, till some person behind the scenes, as 
 they always do in such cases — and it is a strong reason 
 for me to ask to have a penalty put upon them — that 
 they are always informed on the wrong side — absentee 
 landlords are too often badly advised. 
 
 19995. When you gave up the charge of this pro- 
 perty, were those agreements in force ? — They were. 
 They were signed, but I did not carry them into force. 
 They were afterwards carried into force, and a good 
 deal was got up about it — a great quarrel got up 
 about it, ending in law proceedings. 
 
 19996. This was on the property of General Ander- 
 son, that was afterwards sold to Major Nolan ? — Quite 
 so. 
 
 19997. Are they in existence still? — I think not. 
 
 19998. The O'Conoe Don.— How long ago is it 
 since the Major bought this property ? — I don't know. 
 
 19999. Mr. Baron Dowse. — Was .it the Major's 
 father or himself that bought it ? — Oh, himself. 
 
 20000. When?— I don't know exactly. It was, I 
 think, about 1867 or 1868. 
 
 20001. The O'CoNOR Don?— Then, were not the 
 tenants evicted after he purchased it? — I don't think 
 they were. What was more harassing, some of those 
 tenants paid from £80 to £84 a year — very respectable 
 tenants; and to have these tenants restricted from 
 putting down more than a certain quantity of any par- 
 ticular crop, or from putting down crops except in a 
 certain rotation, was wrong. A tenant should be at 
 liberty to put down what crops he likes in each field. 
 
 20002. Mr. Kavanagh. — Do you say that it is 
 wrong to prevent a tenant taking five or six crops of 
 corn off a field in succession ? — I don't think it would 
 be right to do it if he was going to leave it afterwards. 
 But if it were a fee-farm property — if it were his own 
 — he would do what was best with it. 
 
 20003. Mr. Baron Dowse. — That is, he might 
 exhaust it at one time, but he could bring it up again? 
 — Yes. He will always do what is for the next year's 
 benefit, but not if he is to be put out. 
 
 20004. Mr. Kavanagh. — You mentioned a great 
 many evictions having taken place in your district ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 20005. Now, is that very long ago ? — I think from 
 1855 to 1865. 
 
 20006. The Chairman. — You said that a great 
 many had taken place, and many of them were since 
 the Land Act ?— Not very many since the Land Act. 
 
 20007. Mr. Kavanagh. — Can you say on what pro- 
 perties these were that happened since the Land Act ? 
 — I named a property before, although I would rather 
 not. It was the Law Life Society's property. 
 
 20008. And you don't refer to any other? — No, I 
 do not at present. I did not take any notice. I never 
 thought I would be examined at all. 
 
 20009. Were those evictions for non-payment of 
 rent ?— Yes. 
 
 20010. Have you any idea how much rent was due 
 at the time ?— Not the least. I took no trouble about it. 
 
 20011. What became of the people?— The great 
 majority of them, I think, went to America. That is 
 my impression. I know many of them did. 
 
 20012. Were they helped to go?— No. 
 
 20013. The Law Life Assurance Society gave them 
 nothing — merely turned them out? — Not that I am 
 aware of. 
 
 20014. That property has been sold since? Yes' 
 
 Mr. Berridge has it now. 
 
 20015. Was he mixed up in any of those evictions? 
 — I believe not. 
 
 20016. The O'Conor Don.— The district in which 
 you live is at all times a very poor one ? — It had been 
 very poor, and is still. 
 
 20017. There was a good deal of distress there last 
 year ? — There was. 
 
 20018. Were rents paid there generally last year? 
 — Not generally. There's some few rents paid here 
 and there this year, but not generally. 
 
 20019. Baron Dowse. — Do you think they are 
 unable to pay? — I know some of them are able, but 
 many are not. 
 
 20020. Then they are unwilling ?— Some of them 
 are. 
 
 20021. Do you think, if those people got the land, 
 not to be turned out of it unless they failed in the rent, 
 that they would be anything more willing to pay the 
 rent ? — I think they would be most willing. I think 
 every tenant would be glad, if the courses proposed 
 were laid down by the law, to pay his rent. 
 
 20022. Don't you do to the tenants what the law 
 would do to them? — I would be very sorry not to do 
 as best I could. 
 
 20023. Then why don't they pay you the rent?— I 
 can't tell you that ; there are no distinctions now made. 
 
 20024. The O'Conoe Don. — Has there been much 
 raising of rents in your district lately? — I am not 
 aware that there has been much. The Law Life 
 Assurance Society raised their rents fearfully when 
 they got the property. 
 
 20025. How long ago is that? — About twenty- 
 eight years ago. I must say, however, that all new 
 proprietors do the same, with few exceptions. 
 
 20026. But you are not aware of any instance 
 lately ? — I can't bring any to my recollection. 
 
 20027. Have you had any cases of persons going 
 into the workhouse, having been evicted ? — Some have 
 gone into the workhouse, from poverty. 
 
 20028. But I mean from cases of eviction? — I don't 
 recollect any. 
 
 20029. You reside in Clifden?— I reside in CKfden. 
 
 20030. You were the proprietor of the hotel there? 
 — Once — some years ago. 
 
 20031. The Chairsian. — I did not notice before in 
 your notes that I have here — I see now that you say— 
 " I consider corporations should not be allowed to be 
 land proprietors"? — I don't think they should. 
 
 20032. You mean such cases as the Law Life? 
 You think that the way of dealing with it won't come 
 properly before a body of persons, not one of whom is 
 responsible? — I do, my lord. I think they purchase 
 the land as a shopkeeper purchases goods, to make 
 profit out of it. "They have not — I won't say they 
 have no conscientious feelings, but I think they have 
 not sufiicient conscientiousness to be allowed to holdland. 
 
 20033. Baron Dowse. — What ^^ould you think of 
 having the English Government as landlords? — I think 
 that would be a grand thing ; that would be a grand 
 thing, because I think the Government would do 
 nothing but what they beheve to be right. 
 
 20034. But might not men do nothing but what 
 they believe to be right, yet do something that was 
 wrong ? — That is for you to judge, my lord. I cer- 
 tainly would not hke to have the man who gave the 
 lease that I saw reported in the press the other day. 
 
 20035. W;hat is that man's name?— Well, don't 
 take it down, and I will give it to you. When he 
 wants others to break up, he makes leases himself 
 which are condemned by the public. 
 
 20036. The Chairman.— How long have you been 
 connected with land in this country? — Since I was 
 very young. 
 
 20037. For the last fifty years I— Yes. 
 The witness then retired. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 G33 
 
 Mr. Michael Joyce, examined. 
 
 20038. The O'Conor Don.— Where do yon live?— 
 Rahoon, near Galway. 
 
 20039. Is it within the borough 1 — Yes. 
 
 20040. The Chairman. — Do you hold as a tenant? 
 —Yes. 
 
 20041. Who do you hold under? — Miss Julia 
 Daly. 
 
 20042. And how much do you hold ? — Two acres. 
 
 20043. How far from Galway? — About one mile 
 and some perches. 
 
 20044. What rent do you pay? — I pay £4 an 
 acre. 
 
 20045. 
 20046. 
 20047. 
 20048. 
 
 you 
 -Oh 
 
 it to 
 
 £4 an acre ? — Yes. 
 
 How long have you been paying that ? 
 For the last twelve or fourteen years. 
 The O'Conor Don. — Did you pay 
 Father Peter Daly ?— I did. 
 
 20049. The Chairman. — Do you know what the 
 rent was before that time? — It was only half what I 
 am paying now — 2 guineas or £2. It was raised then 
 "about twelve or fourteen years ago, when he got it. 
 
 20050. When Father Daly got it ?— Yes. 
 
 20051. Baron Dowse. — He was the parish priest 
 of Galway ? — He was. 
 
 20052. The Chairman.— He left it to Miss Julia ? 
 — He left it to his brother, and he left it to Miss 
 Julia. 
 
 20053. You say when he got it he raised it? — 
 Yes. 
 
 20054. How did he get it ? — He bought it in the 
 Four Courts in Dublin, or wherever it was bought. 
 
 20055. The O'Conor Don.— Who was the former 
 landlord ? — Judge Keogh's mother. 
 
 20056. It was from Judge Keogh's mother that 
 Father Daly bought it ? — I believe so. 
 
 20057. The Chairman. — The rent — had it been 
 the same as that before, for a long time? — It had 
 been for years. 
 
 20058. Had any improvement been made on it that 
 led to increased value? — No; but lately, sir, we had 
 improved on our own property. 
 
 20059. They had been made by the tenants on the 
 property ? — Yes. 
 
 20060. Not by the landlord ?— No. 
 
 20061. And what is the Government valuation? — 
 £4, 5s. 
 
 20062. As against a rent of £12?— £12, 8s. for 2 
 acres. 
 
 20063. Baron Dowse. — You have a house on it? 
 — Yes, a cabin. 
 
 20064. Is it a town park? — I believe the town 
 parks come up to my house — I don't think the town 
 parks come up so far. 
 
 20065. The Chairman. — Is the house upon it?— 
 It is. 
 
 20066. Baron Dowse. — Do you look upon it as an 
 ordinary farm — would it pay you as an ordinary farm ? 
 — It would not pay as a farm ; but I had a family, 
 and I did not want to bring them into the town. 
 
 20067. You don't look upon it as a town park, but 
 as an ordinary farm ? — I do. 
 
 20068. You pay the water rate? — Yes. 
 200-69. And the poor rate?— Yes. 
 
 20070. And does not Miss Julia pay the half of 
 'that ?— Yes. 
 
 20071. The Chairman. — All the town rates ? — Yes. 
 
 20072. Do yon pay them first, and then she takes 
 them off the rent afterwards ? — Yes. 
 
 20073. For every rate ? — We pay the town taxes 
 — about 7s. or 8s. in the year. 
 
 grain 
 
 20074. Baron Dowse. — But does she allow 
 anything more than the law allows her to do ?- 
 no, sir, not a halfpenny. 
 
 20075. Do you think it is too high ? — Oh yes. 
 
 20076. How do you live? — Working by my labour. 
 I tell you that I could not live by the land. 
 
 20077. By the 2 acres — is it good land ?— Sorrow 
 a worse in the world. It could not be worse. I 
 sowed 6 stones of barley last. year. It was not fit 
 for the market. The woman brought down 2 stone 
 of it and sold it to a man to feed pigs ; and 2 stone 
 more we had — only 4 stone altogether. 
 
 20078. And this year ?— I will never sow a 
 of oats or barley again. 
 
 20079. And what did you sow? — Potatoes. 
 
 20080. And have the potatoes turned out well ? — 
 No, indeed, very bad. 
 
 20081. What kind were they ?— Leathers. 
 
 20082. Do you make the r.ent out of it, honestly 
 between man and man ? — By the virtue of my oath I 
 would not make one-third out of it. 
 
 20083. And what do you pay the rent for — what 
 do you make your living by ? — I work. 
 
 20084. And what is the work ? — Masonry work. 
 
 20085. And you have this house to live in ? — Yes. 
 
 20086. And that bit of land?— Yes. 
 
 20087. And it is an accommodation to you. You 
 have a house to live in — you would not give it up ? — 
 I would not give it up. 
 
 20088. You would think it very bad of Miss Julia 
 to put you out? — I would sooner pay the rent. 
 
 20089. Did you ever ask her to lower the rent? — 
 I did indeed, twenty times. 
 
 20090. And what did she say to you? — She said 
 that the very minute I would clear off, maybe she 
 would. I was striving to make it up. When I asked 
 her to lower the rent, she said, " Oh, the place is nice." 
 I said, " The picture on the wall is nice, but that won't 
 pay the rent." 
 
 20091. What did she say to that?— I paid her off 
 last summer all to something like more than £1. 
 " What kind of thing is this thing we are going to get? " 
 said I ; I did not think of the word reduction. " Oh," 
 said she, " the next time we will talk about that." 
 
 20092. Did she give you any reduction? — No. 
 
 20093. Father Peter raised the rent on you? — He 
 did. 
 
 20094. And why did not you speak to him about 
 that ? — We did. We had to propose for it, and if he 
 did not like our proposal he would not have it, and we 
 did not like to have to leave. 
 
 20095. You are in the parish of Galway? — Yes. 
 
 20096. And was not he your parish priest? — Yes. 
 
 20097. And was not that very hard of him? — He 
 liked money. We were giving him the money for 
 ever, till he bought it, and then when he bought it, we 
 got a return for our money. There is not a man or 
 woman that lived in our parish — in this parish — that 
 did not put money on the altar. Every man in the 
 parish would give it, and would often borrow a 
 shilling to put it on the altar. It is a rule that the 
 clergy made in our parish, and in every parish, that is, 
 to put a shilling on the altar. 
 
 20098. But that has nothing to do with the land'? 
 
 No. 
 
 20099. The Chairman. — But that is the way he 
 bought the land ? — That is the way. I offered him £3 
 at first,' and £3, 10s., and £4 at last. I would not get 
 it if I did not. 
 
 The witness then retired. 
 
 Oct. 23, WHO. 
 
 Mr. Michfinl 
 Joyce. 
 
 Michael M'Grath, examined. 
 
 20100. The Chairman. — You live at Upper Dan- 20102. How many acres do you hold? I could 
 
 gan ? — Yes. not say how many acres. 
 
 20101. Is that near the town ? — Within 1| miles of 20103. Could not you say somewhere about how 
 the town. many? — It is by bulk I am paying rent. 
 
 4M 
 
 Mii:luiel 
 M'Grath. 
 
634 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. id, 1880. 
 iHiohael 
 
 -£5 I am paying 
 
 20104. How much do you pay ? 
 for my little spot. 
 
 20105. Baron Dowse. — Surely you could give an 
 idea of how many acres you have 1 — It is something 
 about £3 an acre. 
 
 20106. The Chairman. — Something over two acres? 
 — I think something about that. 
 
 20107. Who do you hold this land from?— Owen 
 Kearns. 
 
 20108. What do you say, it is too dear? — Too 
 dear ? No. It is not producing any crops. 
 
 20109. How long have you had it? — Twenty-three 
 years. 
 
 20110. From Mr. Kearns all the time? — Mr. Power 
 had it before Mr. Kearns, 
 
 20111. What was the rent when you came into it? 
 — The same rent. 
 
 20112. It has been the same rent all the time ? — Yes. 
 
 20113. And did you buy it when you came in? — 
 I did, sir. 
 
 20114. What did you give for it? — By the year, 
 just yearly. I paid no fine. 
 
 20115. You paid no fine? — I paid no fine. 
 
 20116. What is it then you wish to say? — I sowed 
 12 stone of oats last year. I paid Is. a stone for 
 them. It cost me two £2 for labour — two labouring 
 men and myself — and I threshed it and it produced 
 lis. 2d 
 
 20117. But that was last year? — Yes. 
 
 20118. Is it better this year? — I sowed no oats this 
 year. 
 
 20118a. Having this land so many years, what 
 would you say would be a reasonable rent? — I could 
 not knock 30s. out of it. 
 
 20119. Baron Dowse. — How do you live? — By my 
 labour. 
 
 20120. You are a labouring man? — I am a stone 
 mason. 
 
 20120a. The Ciiaieman. — You have got it all now 
 in grass ? — I have nothing sowed now but a little spot 
 of potatoes. 
 
 20121. What is the rest of it in — grass? — It is 
 laid down. It is not able to be grass. 
 
 20122. You mean it to be grass? — I do; to lay it down. 
 
 20123. You mean it is not tilled at all ? — It is not 
 tilled. Part of it is not tilled. I let it out. 
 
 20124. But what do you get ?— Nothing. It would 
 not feed one sheep. 
 
 20125. Baron Dowse. — Then why don't you leave 
 it ? — It is convenient to the town. 
 
 20126. The Chairman. — But could not you find 
 people in the town who would put something into it? 
 — I don't think it is worth Is. an acre. 
 
 20127. Baron Dowse. — Did you never think of 
 putting a goat on it?— No, sir. 
 
 20128. I can tell you they are not a bad thing ?--l 
 had a few sheep, and I had to sell them. It was not 
 able to feed them. 
 
 20129. The Chairman. — What is the Government 
 valuation ? — 1 could not say, sir, for the landlord is 
 paying the rates. 
 
 20130. Baron Dowse. — ^Have you a vote?— No 
 sir, I have not, and I pay no rates. ' 
 
 20131. You would not give it up ? — I believe I will 
 have to give it up. 
 
 20132. It has a house on it? — Yes. 
 
 20133. Then it is just worth what the house is 
 worth ? — Just that. 
 
 20134. Have you any cabbage on it? — A little. 
 
 20135. Any potatoes? — I had an acre of potatoes 
 on it last year, and I could lift enough for our own 
 use. 
 
 20136. It is manifest you could not live on it 
 unless you were a stonemason ? — I could not. 
 
 20137. The Chairman. — Is not this sort of land 
 near the town sought for by the people in the town? 
 — There is very little. It is all let in pasture. 
 
 20138. Baron Dowse. — Are there rocks in it?— 
 No, there are not many rocks on it. ' 
 
 20139. What kind of soil is it? — Poor mountain 
 land. 
 
 20140. 
 inland. 
 
 20141. 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 20142. What if you would try and keep a couple 
 of goats on it ? — The goats would eat the cabbage. 
 
 20143. Do you think it would be an advantage to 
 you to buy the land out and out ? — It would, of course. 
 When I have the house I would not like to leave it, 
 sir. 
 
 20144. But if for thirty-five years you had to pay 
 more than you have to pay now, would you Hke that? 
 — I would. 
 
 20145. To pay more than you pay now, for thirty- 
 five years ? — I would. 
 
 20146. Would you like to pay more rent ? — No, I 
 would not. 
 
 20147. The Chairman.— Would not you do it, if 
 it made you the owner in thirty-five years ? — I would, 
 of course. 
 
 20148. Baron Dowse. — What do you pay now? 
 — £5. 
 
 20149. Suppose you paid more than £5, would you 
 hke to pay that for thirty-five years, and then be the 
 owner out and out ? — I would. 
 
 20150. Do you think any human being could live 
 on that land, unless he was an artisan or workman like 
 you? — Nobody could live on it. 
 
 The witness then retired. 
 
 Is it inland or on the sea-coast ?— It is 
 This way (pointing to the north-west)?— 
 
 Mark Kerins. 
 
 Mark Kerins, Letragh, examined. 
 
 20151. The Chairman. — Do you hold under the 
 same landlady % — Yes. 
 
 20152. Is yours much the same case as to the rent, 
 and so on ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20153. When was it raised? — About fourteen years 
 ago. 
 
 20154. Raised to £6, 5s. 10<^.?— It was doubled. 
 
 20155. How long ago is that? — About fourteen 
 years ago. 
 
 20156. Did you ever hold more than what you have 
 now? — I did, sir. 
 
 20157. How many acres was it originally? — About 
 eight acres. 
 
 20158. Andhow much have you now? — About four. 
 
 20159. And when were the four acres taken? — I 
 went to America, and I left my family after me, and 
 when the lease was out, another man came and took 
 away the half of it — a third cousin of mine, one Kerins. 
 
 20160. Baron Dowse. — Are you a tradesman? — 
 No, sir. 
 
 a farmer? — A labouring 
 I work on the 
 
 20161. What are you- 
 man. 
 
 201 G2. What are you working at?- 
 spot of ground. 
 
 20163. Do you work for other people? — No. 
 
 20164. Are you able to hve on this farm? — Yeryill. 
 
 20165. But you do live on it?— I do. 
 
 20166. How many acres ? — Four. 
 
 20167. How many have you of a family ?— Nobody 
 but myself. 
 
 20168. Nobody but yourself ?— They had to go to 
 America. 
 
 20169. 
 20170. 
 20171 
 
 -Yes. 
 
 You live on this land ?- 
 Pour acres? — Yes. 
 What rent?— £7, 6s. 
 
 20172. What kind of land is it?— Very bad land. 
 
 20173. How far from the town is it ?— Little more 
 than a mile. 
 
 20174. But you never work for anybody — you live 
 on the land and by the land ? — Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 635 
 
 20175. And sucli as it is you lire on it? — Yes. 
 
 20176. And you have no family ? — 'Mo. 
 
 20177. If you had a family you could not live on 
 it? — No, sir. 
 
 20178. And why do you pay the rent if it is not 
 worth it? — Where will I go to if I don't go to the 
 poorhouse ? 
 
 20179. It is an unfair rent, you say? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20180. Did you get any abatement ? — We got 5s. 
 in the pound last year, and that is all. 
 
 20181. Five shillings in the pound? — Yes. 
 
 20182. Your crops were bad last year ? — Very bad ; 
 they could not be worse. 
 
 20183. This year ?— Only middling. 
 
 20184. What have you got in? — Potatoes. 
 
 20185. Any oats?— No. 
 
 20186. Nor barley?— No. 
 
 20187. Do you live in the same part of the county 
 as this man? — I do. 
 
 20188. What do you think would be a fair rent for 
 it ? — I think it would be fair enough at 15s. an acre. 
 
 20189. And that would be enough for it?— That 
 would be enough for it, and too much. 
 
 20190. Does the landlord get a high rent for all the 
 other lauds about ? — Some of them. 
 
 20191. Is it any advantage to you to be near 
 Galway ? — Not much indeed, sir. 
 
 20192. Do you pay the taxes? — I do, sir. 
 
 20193. Poor rates? — Poor rates. 
 
 20194. And the other rates?— Yes. 
 The witness then retired. 
 
 Oct. 23, 18»U. 
 Mark Kerins. 
 
 Abnee Bailet, Dennistowu, Castle Hackett, Tuam, examined. 
 
 Abner Bailey. 
 
 20195. The Chairman. — Are you a tenant under 
 Mr. Kirwan? — No, Mrs. Kirwan. 
 
 20196. You hold a large farm ?— Yes. 
 
 20197. How many acres ? — 200 acres. 
 
 20198. Is it anything connected with the holding 
 that you wish to bring to our notice ? — Nothing with 
 reference to my holding. 
 
 20199. It is as to the general state of things in the 
 district ? — Exactly. 
 
 20200. Will you tell us what you have to say? — 
 There are a good many complaints. People say that 
 the rents are too high. 
 
 20201. They say so in a good many places — do you 
 think they are ? — I consider that the grazing lands in 
 my district are very much higher than they were, by 
 competition. But the tillage lands in our immediate 
 neighbourhood have not been raised for the last thirty 
 years. 
 
 20202. At present the grazing lands are high? — 
 Tes, by competition. 
 
 20203. Mr. Kavanagh. — That is, by the graziers 
 bidding against each other? — Yes. 
 
 20204. The Chairman. — The tillage lands are not so 
 high ? — ^No. The inferior lands are valued too high. 
 
 20205. Baron Dowse. — Are they rented too high? 
 — They are rented too high, and they are valued too 
 high. 
 
 20206. The Chairman. — Are the rents in excess of 
 the valuation? — Oh, they are, very, in some cases. 
 
 20207. And you think the valuation is high? — The 
 valuation is generally high, in the cases before me. 
 
 20208. In the case of inferior land?— Yes. 
 
 20209. And is that general through that district ? 
 — ^It is general through our district. 
 
 20210. You think that the valuation is therefore 
 not a fair criterion of rent ? — I think so. That is what 
 I mean to convey to you. 
 
 20211. I suppose the grazing lands are higher iu 
 comparison with the other lands ?— The grazing lands 
 are higher in comparison with the tillage lands, but in 
 my opinion the grazing lands are not valued high 
 enough, according to the inferior land. 
 
 20212. To take the Government valuation all round, 
 the valuation would not be a fair criterion of rent ? — 
 That is what I would say. 
 
 20213. Is there anything else in the district you 
 can give us evidence about ? — There is nothing more. 
 
 20214. Baron Dowse. — Do you think if there was 
 a Government oflScer appointed to value the rents — to 
 settle the rents between landlord and tenant — would it 
 be useful ? — I would not give in to that altogether. I 
 would like to have free competition. 
 
 20215. Suppose a man is in a farm, living in it for 
 twenty years, and that the landlord wants to put up 
 the rent on it to more than he thinks is fair, do you 
 think it would be well to get some tribunal to fix the 
 rent ? — I think so — by arbitration. 
 
 20216. Do you know anything about any Church 
 lands that were sold in your neighbourhood ? — There 
 were some. 
 
 20217. Did the tenants buy it?— They did. 
 
 20218. How are they getting on? — I don't know. 
 
 20219. Do you think it would be a good thing to 
 enable the tenants to buy their land by lending them 
 the money ? — They ought to be helped ; but I would 
 not like to saddle a man with a debt that would be 
 hke a millstone round his neck. 
 
 20220. Suppose he had a third of the money him- 
 self, and the Government to provide the balance ? — Yes. 
 
 20221. Mr. Kavanagh. — Would you have him 
 give all the money himself? — I would. I say it is 
 better for a man to pay a fair rent than to have that 
 hanging over him. 
 
 20222. Baron Dowse. — Are you a native of this 
 part of the country ? — No, sir. 
 
 20223. What place are you from? — I am from 
 near Edinburgh. 
 
 20224. Mr. Kavanagh. — What addition would 
 you say should be put on the grazing lands ? — Well, 
 it would depend on the nature of the land. I know 
 lands that are of the character of heavy lands that 
 would bring much more than the lighter lands. There 
 is not so much difference in the rent between good and 
 bad land. 
 
 20225. Then what you would want is a skilled 
 valuator ? — Yes. 
 
 20226. Baron Dowse. — If there was a good 
 practical valuator to value the rent, and if the tenant 
 was not to be disturbed as long as he could pay that 
 rent, would that be a good thing ? — That would do. 
 
 20227. It would satisfy people — it would give them 
 courage to make improvements ? — It would. 
 
 20228. It would make them secure in their hold- 
 ings ? — Yes. 
 
 20229. The CnAiEirAN. — Do yon think it would be 
 easy to get a good practical man in each neighbour- 
 hood?— I think so. 
 
 20230. Men that would be able to give satisfaction 
 to both sides ? — Yes. 
 
 20231. Mr. Kavanagh. — You live on Mrs. Kir- 
 wan's property ? — Yes. 
 
 20232. How about the improvements on the pro- 
 perty — the drainage and fences ? — Part has been done 
 by the tenant, but principally by Mr. Kirwan. 
 
 20233. And the road walls? — Were built by Mr. 
 Kirwan. 
 
 20234. — But the internal walls ? — They were built 
 by the tenant. They divided and subdivided. It is a 
 stony country. 
 
 20235.— They divided and subdivided— you don't 
 mean that they divided their holdings ? — Oh no, the 
 fields. 
 
 20236. Baron Dowse. — How long have you been 
 in this country ? — Thirty-five years. 
 
 20237. The Chairman. — Did you come over to 
 farm ?— I came to manage for Mr. Kirwan first, and 
 then I took a farm. 
 
 20238. Have you seen many improvements in this 
 country since you came ?— Oh, a great change for the 
 
 better. 
 
 4M 2 
 
636 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oc/. 23, 1880. 20239. Do you think the people are better off ■?— 
 
 ■ — Very much. 
 
 Abner Bailey. 20240. Better dressed ?— Yes. 
 
 20241. Baron Dowse.— Do you think they are bad 
 agriculturists'? — They are, some of them. There are 
 many of them smart and cute and good farmers. 
 
 20242. The Chaiemajj. — Do you think they are 
 quick in following the example of others ?— There is 
 no country in the world so quick. 
 
 20243. Do you think they see things you have been 
 doing on the land, and if they are successful, follow 
 them? — Yes, I think in my country they have im- 
 proved very much. 
 
 20244. Baron Dowse. — This sense of security 
 would encourage them ? — It would. 
 
 20245. And improve the country? — Yes. 
 
 20246. Mr. Kavanagh. — Has there been any raising 
 of rents in your district ? — There has been no rents 
 raised except in the grass lands where there has been 
 competition. Mr. Kirwan has raised no agricultural 
 rents these last thirty-five years to my knowledge. 
 
 20247. Baron Dowse. — And has everybody acted, 
 in the same way ? — No. 
 
 20248. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have you many instances 
 of proprietors who have purchased in the Landed 
 Estates Court ? — There have been a good many. 
 
 20248a. Where? — In the neighbourhood of Tuam 
 and other places. 
 
 20249. What were they — small men that went into 
 the Landed Estates Court to buy and make as much 
 as they could out of the land ? — Some of them. 
 
 20250. The Chairman. — Are they mostly small 
 men near the town? — Mostly, near the town. 
 
 20251. Mr. Kavanagh. — I suppose on their pro- 
 perties discontent exists? — It does, sir. 
 
 20252. And on others? — It is like a disease, spread- 
 where there is little cause of complaint. 
 
 20253. Baron Dowse. — You are not dissatisfied 
 with the people you are among ? — I am not dissatisfied 
 at all. My lands are rather high. What I would like 
 would be a re-valuation — a Commissioners' valuation. 
 
 20254. You have a lease? — I have. 
 
 20255. How long? — Twenty-one years. I have had 
 a second lease of twenty-one years. 
 
 20256. Last year was a bad year ? — It was. 
 
 20257. This was a good year? — It takes a long 
 time to make up for a bad year. 
 
 20258. But it is good to get a beginning ?-^It is, 
 
 20259. Has grass land suffered much from the wet ?— - 
 Yes. But this sort of weather will improve it very much. 
 
 20260. We were told in Sligo that in cases where 
 land had had no rushes at all since it was drained, it 
 had thrown up rushes again within the last two years? 
 There are instances in this part of the country, but 
 that is since last winter — the land got sodden. 
 
 20261. Baron Dowse. — And then marsh 
 grow on it ? — Yes. 
 
 20262. The Chairman. — And then they say that 
 rents ought to be reduced in consequence? — I think 
 it will come round. Their idea was that the drains 
 had got clogged from the extreme wet. 
 
 20263. Mr. Kavanagh. — Is there any such system 
 as tenant-right in the district ? — No, I think very little. 
 
 20264. Very little ?— Very little. 
 
 20265. Baron Dowse. — Suppose a tenant went to 
 America, would he be allowed to dispose of his farm at 
 all ? — There are very few in my district have left the 
 district since I came into it. 
 
 20266. It goes on from father to son? — Goes 
 from father to son. 
 
 20267. As a tenant dies, does the son get into 
 place ? — Yes. 
 
 20268. As a rule, the landlords allow fixity 
 tenure? — You may say it is fixity of tenure. 
 
 20269. The only thing now complained of is, that 
 the rents are a little too high ? — With the competition, 
 and the lower prices of agricultural produce. 
 
 20270. The O'Conor Don. — Do you mean to say 
 there is no good price for cattle this year ? — There is 
 a good price now for both cattle and sheep. 
 
 20271. Baron Dowse. — Are not you aware that 
 the price of beef has never gone down at all? — If it 
 has not gone down in price to consumers, tenants have 
 not got the advantage, but suffered. 
 
 on 
 
 of 
 
 Mr. John 
 Gairdner. 
 
 Mr. John Gairdner, Lissbeg, Eyre Court, examined. 
 
 20272. The Chairman. — You are a land agent and 
 tenant farmer ? — I am. 
 
 20273. I believe you are land agent to Mr PoUok ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 20274. What is the acreage of the estates you are 
 connected with as agent ? — About 30,000 acres. 
 
 20275. How much land do you farm yourself? — 
 About 2000 acres. 
 
 20270. How long have you been connected with Mr. 
 Pollok's estate ? — Upwards of 20 years. 
 
 20277. Has it been customary on that estate to 
 allow a right of sale to tenants ? — No. 
 
 20278. Not in any shape? — Not in any shape. 
 
 20279. When tenants go away does he give them 
 anything ? — He arranges with them : he gives them 
 ample remuneration for anything they have in the shape 
 of crop or stock. 
 
 20280. Were you in connection with the estate at 
 the time Mr. Pollok purchased it? — Not then, but 
 very soon after. 
 
 20281. Had you anything to do with the arrange- 
 ments at that time in getting rid of the tenants ? — I 
 had something to do with them. First of all, Mr. 
 Pollok thought that the title he got from the Court 
 entitled him to get possession without any trouble, 
 whereas he found that he had to go to a great deal of 
 trouble and expense. In the end he found it was 
 better to arrange with the occupiers himself rather 
 than proceed to get possession through the law; he 
 accordingly bought them out. He never acknowledged 
 that they had any interest in their land, but he paid 
 them so much for their stock and crop, and they were 
 all amicably settled with. 
 
 20282. Did those arrangements cost him much? — 
 I could not say exactly what he paid for arranging 
 with the tenants. The fee-simple of the property, in the 
 first instance, cost him about £250,000. The buying out 
 of the tenants, and improvements which he made after 
 getting possession, cost him more than the fee-simple, 
 probably £350,000. 
 
 20283. He laid out a great deal of money in improv- 
 ing the land ? — A great deal in improvements of various 
 kinds — draining, building, and throwing it into large 
 farms for tillage and grazing. 
 
 20284. After Mr. Pollok had purchased the estate, 
 and laid out this large sum in improvements, what did 
 he do? — He set it to tenants, generally by lease in 
 large farms, at rents of from £200 to £2000 a year. 
 
 20285. Since then has he had many ejectments ? — 
 None except for non-payment of rent. 
 
 20286. Has he still any small tenants on his estate? 
 — He has about £1800 a year from which he never dis- 
 possessed any one. Upon that portion of the estate 
 there are upwards of 200 tenants. 
 
 20287. Do they hold as yearly tenants? — Yes. 
 
 20288. I suppose the large tenants hold under lease? 
 —Yes. 
 
 20289. In neither case does he recognise any right 
 of sale? — None. 
 
 20290. Has there been any alteration in his proceed- 
 ings since the passing of the Land Act? — Not that I 
 am aware of. 
 
 20291. What is the usual term of the lease that he 
 gives to his tenants ? — Nineteen or twenty-one years. 
 
 20292. Has there been any increase in the rents 
 lately?— Not lately. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 (537 
 
 20293. Has there been any increase made in the 
 rents of the small tenants since the time Mr. PoUok 
 purchased the property? — None; at least not within 
 my knowledge. I undertook the agency of the portion 
 of his property with the small tenants upon it within 
 the last ten or eleven years ; prior to that I cannot say 
 what may have taken place. There have been reduc- 
 tions on the rents of some of the small tenants since I 
 undertook the agency. 
 
 20294. How long ago is that ? — Ten or eleven years. 
 
 20295. Has Mr. Pollok had any cases under the 
 Land Act?— None. 
 
 20296. Any evictions since the Land Act? — None. 
 
 20297. Upon those small holdings, do the tenants 
 make much improvements ? — None that I am aware of. 
 
 20298. I suppose the houses in which they live were 
 put up by themselves ? — I presume they all were. 
 
 20299. Since you came into the management of the 
 estate, you have not remarked any improvement in the 
 condition of the houses or buildings ? — Not in the least. 
 
 20300. Does Mr. Pollok assist the tenants to im- 
 prove their dwellings ? — He very often assists them in 
 building houses. Since the recent Act that was passed 
 with regard to labourers' dwellings — the Sanitary Act 
 — they have been obliged to add to their buildings, and 
 he has assisted them in finding materials for walls and 
 roofs. 
 
 20301. With regard to the large farms, does Mr. 
 Pollok do everything in the way of improvement to 
 them ? — Everything. 
 
 20302. Just the same as an English landlord ? — Just 
 the same. 
 
 20303. Keeps all the fences and buildings in repair? 
 — No ; the tenants are expected to keep them in repair. 
 There are covenants in their leases to that effect — they 
 were all in thorough repair when they entered into 
 possession. 
 
 20304. Have there been any purchases of holdings 
 by tenants? — None. He always arranges with the 
 tenants who are leaving. I have always endeavoured 
 to add the holding to the adjoining one if possible. 
 Some of them are so small that if the tenants had the 
 fee-simple, and were obliged to live on them, they could 
 not do so. I think much of the destitution which pre- 
 vails at present among that class of occupiers, is owing 
 to their not having got the same amount of employ- 
 ment in labour in England during the last two or 
 three years as they had been accustomed to get in pre- 
 vious years — in addition to the bad seasons. They did 
 not bring back the same amount of money from England 
 and Scotland. 
 
 20305. Was it usual for that class of tenants to go 
 to England in the harvest season ? — Yes. Bnt for the 
 money they earned in that way they could not live on 
 their holdings, they are so small. 
 
 20306. Do Mr. Pollok and his large tenants give 
 much employment to labourers ? — They do. His largest 
 tenant, who pays a rent of £2500 a year, gives a great 
 deal of employment. 
 
 20307. Could not all those small tenants get employ- 
 ment on the estate? — No, they could not all of them. 
 
 20308. What is the average size of those small hold- 
 ings ? — The rental of that portion of the estate is £1 800 
 a year, and the number of tenants 200. That does not 
 leave much margin for a farm. 
 
 20309. Has consolidation been carried to any extent 
 vrith that class of holdings since Mr. Pollok pur- 
 chased the estate ? — ^Now and then, when a tenant goes 
 to America, his holding is added to the adjoining one ; 
 but it is with great difficulty that is done. There are 
 on an average twenty applicants for every vacant 
 holding. 
 
 20310. Did those tenants pay their rents last year? 
 — No. Some of them paid their May rent in June, 
 but a great many of them owe two or three years' rent. 
 
 20311. Did you make any abatement to them last 
 year ? — Not in the shape of money. Any abatement 
 they got I gave them in prod ace — in seed com and 
 seed potatoes. I thought it a bad precedent to allow 
 them an abatement in money. Their holdings are so 
 small, I thought the money, if I allowed it in that form. 
 
 would only get into the hands of the publican within Oct. 23, 1880. 
 twenty-four hours. ' 
 
 20312. Did you give them seed corn and potatoes? Giu-dne" 
 
 20313. Did you give the seed corn and potatoes, or 
 whatever it might be, to those who didn't pay as well 
 as to those who did pay their rents ? — Yes ; to every 
 tenant on the property, good and bad, according to the 
 size of their holdings. 
 
 20314. To all the tenants? — All the small tenants. 
 
 20315. Is there much waste land in the neighbour- 
 hood of Mr. Pollok's property that could be reclaimed? 
 — There is a good deal of bog, but I do not think it 
 is reclaimable. I don't think it would pay any one to 
 reclaim it. 
 
 20316. Do the tenants of adjacent holdings culti- 
 vate it? — They do. They take it in gradually, 
 according as the turf is cut off. 
 
 20317. Is there any rent put on it after they have 
 reclaimed it? — Not for years. I have not put any 
 additional rent on it. 
 
 20318. On these large farms you have mentioned, 
 which are let on nineteen or twenty-one years' lease, does 
 the landlord pay one-half the county cess ? — He does 
 now, when granting leases ; though, under the old 
 leases, he did not agree to pay the county cess. 
 
 20319. I suppose since the Land Act he has been 
 paying the county cess ? — Yes ; and on any new leases 
 he always pays the county cess. 
 
 20320. With regard to the small tenants, is the 
 county cess equally divided between landlord and 
 tenant? — No ; they pay the county cess. I have never 
 altered the practice in their case. 
 
 20321. Is the country in your district disturbed at 
 present ? — Not where I live ; but they are disturbed in 
 the north, where the small tenants are. 
 
 20322. Are they refusing to pay rent this year as 
 well as last ? — I have got very little rent from them. 
 
 20323. Have you any suggestion to make as to any 
 alteration in the law ? — I don't think any alteration 
 in the law could make those tenants, with such small 
 holdings as they have, anything but very poor and 
 destitute people. I don't think anything could do it. 
 Their holdings are not sufficiently large to support 
 their families. If they were made peasant proprietors 
 they would be paupers in two years if they were obliged 
 to live on the land. 
 
 20324. They really live by what they earn in the 
 harvest time in England ? — Yes. 
 
 20325. Baron Dowse. — How much do they earn in 
 the season by going to England? — I have known 
 some of them to bring back between £20 and .£30. 
 
 20325a. Would one man make that ? — Yes. 
 
 20326. The Chairman. — Some of them have sons 
 who go with them? — Yes. I should observe that 
 they go over to England very early in the year, and 
 work for the whole season ; and sometimes they don't 
 get home in time to save their own crops. You will 
 often see their wives and children endeavouring to save 
 their crop. 
 
 20327. They didn't go to England last year ?— No, 
 not to the same extent as usual in former years ; 
 some of them went, but those who went did not earn 
 much. 
 
 20328. What about this year?— I believe they have 
 been earning tolerably well this year. 
 
 20329. Do you consider Mr. Pollok has been repaid 
 for his outlay on improvements? — He gets a fair 
 return, bnt nothing like what he expected. It cost 
 him a great deal to get possession of the land in the 
 first instance, a great deal more than he ever expected 
 to have to pay. 
 
 20330. Do you consider the reclamation and 
 drainage of the lands has repaid Mr. Pollok ? — That 
 paid ; but he had to pay a great deal more money to 
 obtain possession than he ever anticipated. 
 
 20331. Then, taking that into account, he has hardly 
 been remunerated for his outlay ? — He has got nothing 
 like the return he expected when making his investment 
 in Ireland. 
 
 20332. I suppose his large tenants are the most 
 
638 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct 23, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Gairdner. 
 
 satisfactory ? — They are ; but they have been suffering 
 for the last year or two. The depression in prices has 
 much more seriously affected the large grazing farmers 
 than the smaller class of farmers. 
 
 20333. Don't you think they pulled up a good deal 
 this year ?— They did. 
 
 20334. Prices of stock are high now ? — They are. 
 A good deal of money has been made on stock from 
 last year to this year. 
 
 20335. Mr. Kavanagh. — Could you say how much 
 Mr. Pollok has expended on improvements, irrespective 
 of what he paid for getting up possession from the 
 tenants ? — I think the first cost of the property was 
 about £250,000, and I know that he at one time or 
 another has invested more than £600,000 in the 
 country. 
 
 20336. How much of that was sjjent on the actual 
 improvement of the land — in drainage, fencing, 
 changing boundaries, and everything else ? — It would 
 be merely a guess for me to say, for I do not know ; 
 I have no data to tell it from. 
 
 20337. The Chaieman. — I think you said the cost 
 of the property, including allowances to tenants, was 
 about £350,000 ?— Yes. 
 
 20338. Baron Dowse. — What was the first cost ? 
 —£250,000. 
 
 20339. It costs him that large additional sum to 
 get the tenants out ? — A part of it. 
 
 20340. And the remainder was expended in improve- 
 ments ? — Yes, after he got possession. 
 
 20341. Did he expend anything on the £1800 a 
 year portion of the estate ? — No. That portion is just 
 as it was when he got it. 
 
 20342. The expenditure was made upon the portion 
 he has leased ? — Exactly. I do not say that he has not 
 spent money on the portion occupied by the small 
 tenants, for he still assists in making buildings and 
 other improvements. 
 
 20343. I understand you to say that Mr. Pollok's 
 expenditure on the estate may be divided into four 
 classes ; there was first, the original purchase money 
 of the property ? — Yes. 
 
 20344. Secondly, what it cost him to get out the 
 tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 20345. Thirdly, what he expended in improvements 
 on the portion of the estate which he has let on lease ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 20346. And fourthly, whatever he expended on the 
 £1800ayearportion,whichis]etto small tenants'? — Yes. 
 
 20347. I want to know how much he spent on the 
 leased land 1 — It would be very hard te say what he 
 paid for what is now called the tenants' interest. He 
 never acknowledged in any case that the tenants had 
 any interest to sell, but he paid them for everything 
 they had on the land in the shape of stock or crop, so 
 that without having some data to know what value of 
 stock or crop he got for his money, I could not say 
 how much he actually expended over and above what 
 he got value for. I know this, that at one time he 
 was the best abused man in Ireland, whereas he is now 
 one of the most popular men in the country. 
 
 20348. What wages do his labourers get ? — From 
 i)s. to 12s. a week, in addition to turbary, a potato 
 garden, and a house rent free ; and some of them get 
 two or three quarts of milk in the day. 
 
 20349. Was Mr. Pollok in business in Scotland?— 
 He was a large proprietor and farmer there. The 
 hobby of his life has been the improvement of land. 
 Unfortunately for himself the great bulk of his invest- 
 ments in Ireland consisted of land in the occupation of 
 small tenants. He thought that when he was declared 
 the purchaser of it by the Incumbered Estates Court, 
 he could get possession of it without further trouble ; 
 whereas he found he had to incur very considerable 
 additional expense, and great delay, before he could 
 obtain possession from the tenants. 
 
 20350. Do you think it was the amount of money 
 they got that induced the tenants to go, or the fear 
 that they would be evicted?— It was the amount of 
 money they got that induced them to go without 
 fighting in the Courts. 
 
 20351. The O'Conoe Don.— Had he not to serves 
 large number of ejectment notices ?— Yes. Bat he 
 found there were a great many difficulties in the way of 
 getting possession in that way which caused him great 
 delay, and made hun very unpleasantly talked abont in 
 the country, and the result was he thought it better 
 more expeditious, and cheaper in the end to adopt the 
 other plan, and purchase them out. 
 
 20352. Giving them something to get up possession 
 although they had in reality no legal claun npoa bimf 
 — Yes. 
 
 20353. Has Mr. Pollok much land on his own 
 hands 1 — Yes. I manage land of the value of about 
 £6000 a year for him. 
 
 20354. What course of farming does he follow— 
 tillage, dairy, or mixed? — Mixed. About £4000 a 
 year of it is round his own dwelling-house. He has a 
 couple of farms a considerable distance off, which I 
 manage for him also. 
 
 20355. Are his large tenants principally Irish or 
 are any of them Scotch ? — They are all Irish. I don't 
 think there is a Scotch tenant amongst them. 
 
 20356. He had one large Scotch tenant, had he not? 
 — He had, but he is not there now. I don't think 
 there is one Scotchman left on the estate — they are all 
 Irish. 
 
 20357. Do you find things going on satisfactorily 
 with the small tenants ? — Yes, quite. 
 
 20358. You say they have been occasionally badly 
 off ? — Yes ; their holdings are too small to make any 
 good use of, in my opinion. 
 
 20359. Is it good land ? — It is wet land, and requires 
 draining. 
 
 20360. Do they complain of being rented too high? 
 — ^Indeed they do. 
 
 20361. Are they too high in your opinion ?— Their 
 rents are a trifle over the Government valaation. On 
 an average they pay about £1 an acre Irish. 
 
 20362. The Chaiejian. — Do they look upon them- 
 selves as holding merely on sufferance, and follow 
 the example of other small tenants? — ^I suppose they 
 do. 
 
 20363. Is anything done in the way of giving some- 
 thing to them to go away ? — Yes ; occasionally one o£ 
 them will express a desire to emigrate to America, and 
 whenever that takes place, I insist on being the party 
 to make the arrangement with him. I purchase any- 
 thing he has on the land to sell, giving him a good 
 price for it to get possession; and when I get possession 
 the first thing I do is to level the house and amalga- 
 mate the holding with the adjoining one. 
 
 20364. I understand that is done when a tenant 
 wishes of his own accord to give up his holding and 
 emigrate? — Yes. 
 
 20365. There has been no general attempt made on 
 Mr. Pollok's part to consolidate that portion of his 
 estate, as he did the others ? — ^No. 
 
 20366. Baron Dowse. — I think you said a short 
 time ago that there were twenty apphcants for any 
 farm that became vacant ? — Yes. 
 
 20367. Chaieman. — Do you refer to small holdings? 
 —Yes. 
 
 20368. The O'Conoe Don.— At the present rents? 
 — At the present rents. The greatest difficulty we 
 find in the management of the property where those 
 tenants are, is the prevention of subdivision. It is 
 impossible entirely to prevent it ; do your utmost, and 
 still it will sometimes be done. 
 
 20373. Is that to provide for the members of a 
 family? — Yes. It is the greatest difficulty connected 
 with the management of property in Ireland in my 
 experience, and it does a great amount of mischief, for 
 the result is certain destitution to the tenants them- 
 
 20374. Do you think that if a peasant proprietary 
 were established, sub division of holdings could be pre- 
 vented ? — I do not know how it could be prevented 
 unless it was made a serious crime almost. They will 
 do it in spite of all the rules and regulations you can 
 make. 
 
 20375. The younger members of a family don't go 
 
MIXUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 639 
 
 away to push their fortune in other lines of industry? 
 — They do not. The great defect is the want of enter- 
 prise. 
 
 20376. Is it not mostly the younger members of 
 families that emigrate to America? — Yes, many of 
 them do. 
 
 20377. I suppose you think the country would bear 
 
 more emigration ? — Yes. I do not see any other cure 
 for a state such as that I have mentioned. I think 
 there is too great a population in the country. 
 
 20378. Some persons have said that if we had a 
 peasant proprietary, Ireland could support 20,000,000 
 of people : would you hke to live in it under those 
 circumstances ? — I would not. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. John 
 Gairdner. 
 
 Timothy Ktne and John Kyne, both of Knockranny, 
 
 20379. The Chairman. — How far from Galway do 
 you live?— Twelve miles. 
 
 20380. On whose property ? — Surgeon-Major Kil- 
 kelly's. 
 
 20381. Do you hold by lease?— I do. 
 
 20382. When was your lease granted? — In 1822. 
 
 20383. For three lives and thirty-one years ? — Yes. 
 
 20384. Two lives ai-e now living ? — Yes. 
 
 20385. It contains 1700 acres altogether ? — About 
 that. 
 
 20386. What is the character of the land?— It is 
 nearly all moor — a heathery moor. 
 
 20387. How much of it have you reclaimed? — 
 About forty Irish acres. 
 
 20388. Between you both? — Between us. 
 
 20389. What rent do you pay for it? — We pay 
 £101, 10s. — myself, this man (John Kyne), and two 
 others. 
 
 20390. There are four of you altogether? — Four 
 of ns. 
 
 20391. Does the landlord require that there should 
 be but one receipt for the rent ? — One receipt ; he did 
 so since 1872. 
 
 20392. Up to that time, did he give separate re- 
 ceipts ? — Yes, his father and the agent did. 
 
 20393. The O'Conok Don.— Was the land originally 
 taken as one holding ? — It was leased to four brothers. 
 
 20394. Are the four brothers' names in the lease? — 
 They are. 
 
 20395. The Chaikman. — And they all hold under 
 one lease ? — Yes, under one lease. 
 
 20396. Who is the present agent? — Mr. Stapleton, 
 a solicitor. 
 
 20397. Were you anxious to make improvements 
 on your holding ? — ^Most anxious. 
 
 20398. Did you apply to the Board of Works for a 
 loan to enable you to carry out improvements? — I 
 did. I was so anxious for making improvements, that 
 I even asked him in 1872 to get the amount from the 
 Board of Works, and that-I would be satisfied to pay 
 6^ per cent, on the money. 
 
 20399. How much did you apply for? — £150; but 
 I did not get it. 
 
 20400. Why did not you get it ? — I could not say. 
 I went through the formalities, served the notices, and 
 sent the ordnance sheet to the landlord, and he pre- 
 sented them at the of&ce of the Board of Works ; but 
 he wrote to me to say that without having all the 
 lessees joined in the application they could not grant 
 the money. 
 
 20401. They should all join in the application? — 
 Yes ; so he gave me to understand. 
 
 20402. The O'Conok Don. — Were the others unwill- 
 ing to join ? — They were not asked. 
 
 20403. The Chairman. — Did you send a copy of 
 the lease to the Board of Works ?— I did not. 
 
 20404. Did they ask you to send it to them ? — I 
 answered the queries which the Board sent to me, and 
 gave them the particulars of the lease. 
 
 Moycallen, County Galway.— Timothy Kyne examined. 
 
 20405. Why did they refuse to give you the loan? 
 — I could not say. The landlord wrote to say that 
 they were unwilling, but I think it was an excuse. 
 
 20406. Do you think the landlord was unwilling that 
 you should get the loan ? — I think he was. 
 
 20407. Is the land you reclaimed going back again 
 in condition? — Yes, it is getting into its old state 
 again. 
 
 20408. Is that for want of thorough drainage? — 
 For want of being tilled again. 
 
 20409. Why don't you till it again?— I could not 
 under present circumstances. I have no facilities for 
 doing so. I have not a good road to it. 
 
 20410. Was part of the improvement you wanted 
 to make a road ? — Yes ; in order to be able to carry 
 manure to it. 
 
 20411. If you had got that loan from the Board of 
 Works, did you intend to spend money of your own 
 besides ? — I did, to the amount of £400 or £500 in 
 drainage and walls. 
 
 20412. How much did you apply to the Board for? 
 —£150. 
 
 20413. How many acres have you in your own 
 hands ?— 800 or 900 acres. 
 
 20414. It is divided between you and the others ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 20415. It was all in one lease ? — All in one lease. 
 
 20416. I understand there never was any legal 
 partition between you ? — No. I don't think the land- 
 lord wished me to get the loan. I am sure he could 
 have got it for me if he was anxious for it. 
 
 20417. He could have got it himself, and lent you 
 the money ? — He could have got it along with that, he 
 got for his own demesne. 
 
 20418. Is there any other matter in connection with 
 you holding that you wish to mention ? — Our family 
 held this land previous to the landlord getting it. 
 He purchased the property in 1803, and as soon as 
 our time was out, he raised the rent from £60 a year 
 to £110 Irish currency, and he promised to make a 
 road and to allow us £4 an acre for any land we re- 
 claimed ; but he never carried out that promise, nor 
 did he ever expend a shilling on the property. 
 
 20419. Why didn't he do as he said he would?— I 
 don't know, but he didn't do it. 
 
 20420. What is the date of your present lease ' — 
 1822. 
 
 20421. Was it before he gave the lease he made 
 the promise ? — Yes, sir ; prior to granting the lease. 
 
 20422. Surely you cannot recollect what took 
 place before 1822 ? — No ; but I saw a copy of the letter. 
 
 20423. Have you built houses on the property ? — I 
 have. The landlord refused to assist me in any way, 
 though often appKed to. 
 
 20424. Have the other tenants done so ? — Yes, 
 under similar circumstances. 
 
 20425. Are they good houses ? — They are. 
 
 20426. Was that since the date of the present 
 -Yes. 
 
 Timothy 
 Kyne. 
 
 John Kyne, examined. 
 
 20427. The O'Conok Don.— Did you join in the 
 application to the Board of Works for a loan ?— No, 
 sir. 
 
 20428. Were you asked ?— I was not. 
 
 20429. Would you have joined if you were asked .? 
 
 —I may, sir ; but I was displeased when the landlord 
 didn't give me a receipt for my rent. I understood 
 that he was discontinuing me as a tenant. 
 
 20430. He could not do that until the lease was 
 out ? — I did not know that, sir. 
 
 John Kyne 
 
G40 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, 1880. 20431. Had you anything to do with taking a 
 
 farm from Mrs. Brown ? — We both joined in that. 
 
 John Kyne. 20432. Another farm ?— Yes. 
 
 20433. You joined together and took a farm of 90 
 acres ? — ^About that. 
 
 20434. How did you hold it? — As tenants from 
 year to year. 
 
 20435. At what rent ?— f 65 a year. 
 
 20436. The Government valuation is £42?— Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 20437. What difficulty have you had about that 
 farm ? — We got the farm in March 1870. The Land 
 Act was then pending, and we were promised every- 
 thing that the Land Act would give us. Relying on 
 this promise, we began to improve the lands, and we 
 got a surveyor and mapped the fai-m, when we were 
 served with a notice not to go on with any improve- 
 ments. 
 
 20438. You began to improve, relying on the Land 
 Act ?— Yes. 
 
 20439. And you received notice from the landlady 
 not to go on? — Yes. This was the letter we got 
 from her solicitor : — 
 
 Offices, 5 Lower Dominick Street, Dublin, 
 21st day of February 1873. 
 Dear Siks, — I am instructed by Mr. and Mrs. Browne 
 to inform you that they will allow no compensation for 
 stubbing brushwood off any part of Corbally or Dovepark. 
 If yon think it desirable to have brushwood stubbed, Mr. 
 and Mrs. Browne can have it done properly free from ex- 
 pense to them. Please inform me of views on the subject. 
 They have serious objection to having brushwood cut 
 without the roots being pulled out. Of course this is an 
 imperfect way, and ought not to be allowed. Mr. and 
 Mrs. Browne wish me also to inform you that they highly 
 disapprove of con-acring land, and will not suffer it to 
 be practised on their property. 
 
 20440. The Chairman. — Surely that letter did not 
 prevent you from making improvements? — We got 
 afraid after receiving that letter. 
 
 20441. You must be easily frightened ? — We are 
 then, very easily frightened. We are paying the quit- 
 rent, and we are afraid even to ask an allowance for 
 it. 
 
 20442. Still it appears you have not been afraid 
 to improve your land ? — I have not. 
 
 20443. You say that you have laid out £200 in 
 improvements — fencing, building walls, removing stones, 
 and other improvements ? — I have, and more ; but I 
 felt disconcerted when I got that letter. 
 
 20444. That latter merely objects to your stubbins 
 brushwood lest it might not be properly done, and 
 they offered to do it themselves for you ? — Yee ; but 
 they had no notion of doing it. 
 
 20503. You say in the notes which you furnished to 
 us, that the landlord does nothing in the west?— No 
 the landlord did nothing for us. 
 
 20504. He offered to do that for you?— He did 
 not ; though the solicitor wrote that letter, he never 
 intended to do anything. 
 
 20505. Baron Dowse. — What complaint have you 
 against him ? — We want to be secure. 
 
 20506. That is, you would like to have the land 
 secure from being turned out as long as you paid the 
 rent ?— Certainly. That is very much wanting in the 
 west of Ireland, because there is such an amount of 
 labour required in order to bring the land into culti- 
 vation. 
 
 20507. If you had the land at a fair rent, and were 
 secure from being turned out, would you inaprove it 
 more than you have done ? — I would, certainly. 
 
 20508. Do you think it is a good plan to hold land 
 in partnership in the way you four are doing ?— Well, 
 sir, so far it has worked pretty well with us. 
 
 20509. Each of you is responsible for the others?— 
 Yes. We get on pretty well together ; but we think 
 the rent rather high. 
 
 20510. That is, on the yearly holding you think the 
 rent high ? — Yes. 
 
 20511. You don't think it is high on the place you 
 hold by lease ? — I do ; I think it is high on both. , 
 
 20512. Why did you take the lease at that rent if 
 it was too high ? — Our father took the lease ; but the 
 rent is too high. There is no accommodation what- 
 ever on the farm. We have to carry limestone between 
 two or three miles for burning and manuring the 
 land. 
 
 20513. Mr. Kavanagh. — How long is it since your 
 father took the place ?— In 1822. 
 
 20514. Were the prices of produce then as good as 
 they are now I — They were lower than they are now. 
 So much was my father discouraged, that he got a 
 clause inserted in the lease enabling him to give it up 
 every fifth year. 
 
 20515. And though the prices were lower when the 
 lease was made than they are now, still you think the 
 rent too high 1 — It is too high considering the qnality 
 of the land. I pay £6 an acre for other land, but it 
 pays me better than that place does. 
 
 Patrick 
 Flynn. 
 
 Patrick Flynn, Rahoon, County Galway, examined. 
 
 20516. The O'Conor Don.— Who is your landlord ? 
 —Miss Juha Daly of Salt Hill. 
 
 20517. How many acres of land have you ? — Only 
 2 acres 2 roods 34 perches. 
 
 20518. Do you live within the borough of Galway ? 
 ^I do. This holding is part of a purchase Father 
 Daly made in 1857. 
 
 20519. Was the rent raised? — It was raised from 
 £4, 5s. to £9, 10s. by Father Daly. I have had to pay 
 that rent from 1857 up to the present year. 
 
 20520. Baron Dowse. — Was he your parish priest? 
 — He was. 
 
 20521. Why didn't you complain to him about it ? 
 — It was no use complaining to him about it. 
 
 20522. The O'Conor Don.— Did you build a house 
 on the land ? — No ; the house and offices were built by 
 my ancestors. They were living there for over a 
 hundred years. I have kept the house in repair ever 
 since. 
 
 20523. Do you think the rent too high ?— It is too 
 high. It is more than double what it was before 
 Father Daly purchased it. 
 
 20524. When did you think it too high ?— I thought 
 it too high at the time Fatheir Daly raised it, but what 
 could I do? I should either submit to it, or go out. 
 
 20525. .Have you any means of support besides 
 what you make by the land ? — I have ; I am a mason. 
 
 20526. Yon could not. live on the land by itself, 
 without some additional means of support ? — I could 
 not, without doing sometliing to earn money in some 
 other way. 
 
 20527. You work at your trade of mason?— I do. 
 
 20528. Being within the borough, are you liable to 
 pay the borough rates ? — I am ; I have to pay £6 or 
 £7 a year rates. 
 
 20529. Why don't you ask Miss Daly to lower youi' 
 rent? — I often did, but she would not give an abate- 
 ment of a penny piece. 
 
 Patrick 
 Barrett. 
 
 20530. Baron Dowse. — How far from Galway do 
 you live ? — Two miles. 
 
 20531. Are you within the. borough? — No, sir; I 
 am just at the mearing. 
 
 Patrick Barrett, Claybane, County Galway, examined. 
 
 •20532. Who is your landlord? — The Alliance 
 
 Company. Mr. Robert Smith Dickson was the agent. 
 
 20533. How many acres have you? — About 12 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 641 
 
 20534. What is yonr rent? — £7 a year. 
 
 20535. How long has your rent remained at that 
 sum ? — About twenty years. 
 
 20536. It has not been raised for twenty years? — 
 No, sir. 
 
 20537. It was formerly only £5 a year? — Yes; 
 that was the rent when I got it first. 
 
 20538. Was the rent raised since you got it ? — Yes, 
 £2 a year. 
 
 20539. Did you object to it ? — No, I agreed to it. 
 
 20540. Do you know what the valuation is ? — The 
 valuation is £6 a year. 
 
 20541. Your father was the first man that put a 
 spade in it? — Yes. 
 
 20542. He reclaimed it ? — Yes. 
 
 20543. He got it from Lord Oranmoro ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20544. Did Lord Oranmore give it to him for Oci. 23, 1880. 
 any length of time for nothing ? — He got it for four ^^ p^ick 
 years free of rent to reclaim it, but after the four years Barrett. 
 
 he had to pay rent for it. 
 
 20545. There has been no increase put on you for 
 twenty years? — No. 
 
 20546. Did he remit you half a year's rent last 
 year ? — He did. 
 
 20547. Have you paid this year's rent yet? — No, sir. 
 He called on us the other day for the rent, and we 
 asked for a little reduction, but he would not give it 
 to us, so we let him go home without paying it to 
 him. 
 
 20548. Do you think the rent is too high ? — It is 
 too high in the bad times. 
 
 20549. Is that your complaint ? — It is, sir. 
 
 Maegaeet Hussey, Rahoon, Moycullen, examined. 
 
 20550. The Chairman. — What is your complaint ? 
 — We took land from Mr. John Brown of Moycullen. 
 
 20551. Who took the land? — My husband and my- 
 self. He promised when we took the place that he 
 would make a road for us, but afterwards he told us 
 to get men ourselves and do it, as we would get the 
 work done cheaper than he could do it, and that he 
 would pay the amount. So we got men to make the 
 road, and paid them for it, but afterwards when we 
 asked him to make us an allowance for the expense of 
 the road, he would not carry out his promise. 
 
 20552. Were you to be allowed the cost of making 
 the road against the rent ? — Yes, sir ; that was the 
 promise he made us, but he would not do it afterwards. 
 He would not take the rent because it was a fortnight 
 after the time. " I won't take it," said he ; "I will 
 have you served with an ejectment, and put out." " It 
 is a hard case for you to put us out on account of a 
 fortnight ; here is your half-year's rent." But he would 
 not take it. I said to him, " Will you make me the 
 
 allowance you promised for the road?" but he would 
 not do it. I laid out £200 on that laud, but as much 
 as the value of one pinch of snuflf he would not give me. 
 
 20553. You laid out £200 on the land without any 
 assistance by the landlord ? — Yes, sir, without any help 
 whatever. 
 
 20554. How many acres had you ? — 40 acres. 
 
 20555. What rent do you pay? — He charges us 
 £6 an acre ; while another tenant, a neighbour of ours, 
 has land just as good at £4, 10s. 
 
 20556. You say the rent is too high, and that he 
 won't pay you the cost of the road ? — Yes, sir ; though 
 he promised before a witness that he would make the 
 road or refund us the cost. 
 
 20557. You might process him for that ? — I would 
 not like to take proceedings against him. 
 
 20558. Do you calculate that what you paid for 
 making the road would pay the rent that you owe ? — 
 It would, and more. I had three men employed every 
 day for two months on it. 
 
 Margaret 
 Hussey. 
 
 Patrick Caebt, Drum, Rahoon, examined. 
 
 Patrick Carey. 
 
 20559. The Chairman. — Under whom do you hold? 
 — Under Mr. Francis Comyn of Woodstock. 
 
 20560. How many acres do you hold? — 5 acres of 
 upland and 14 of mountain. 
 
 20561. Do you hold both under Mr. Comyn? — Yes. 
 
 20562. As a yearly tenant? — Yes. 
 
 20563. How much rent do you pay?^ — He took the 
 best of my land from me five years ago, and promised 
 me a fair valuation, and he brought a valuator, a man 
 named Hyves, who lived in Galway. 
 
 20564. How much was the rent when you first 
 occupied it? — It was £6, %s. forty years ago. After- 
 wards he raised it— he noticed all the tenants that he 
 would raise the rent. 
 
 20565. You don't remember that ? — No; but I am 
 told such was the case. 
 
 20566. How many acres did you hold before the 
 portion you mention was taken from you? — The rent 
 was £6, %s. till about twenty-five years ago, when he 
 raised it to £3. His son, young Mr. Comyn, after- 
 wards came and took a portion of my holding from me. 
 
 20567. How many years ago is that? — About fifteen 
 years ago he gave me 3 acres 3 roods 7 perches in 
 another part of the estate. 
 
 20568. To make up for it? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20569. Were you satisfied with that exchange? — I 
 was at the time. 
 
 20570. Did he take anything off the rent? — No; he 
 increased the rent. 
 
 20571. He took away some of your land, gave you 
 another piece instead, and increased the rent? — Yes. 
 He said he would leave it to a valuator to put a value 
 
 on it. He gave me a common sterile piece of moun- 
 tain instead of the land he took from me. 
 
 20572. Do you say it was not a fair exchange? — It 
 was not, sir. He robbed me, and the people in the 
 country know it. 
 
 20573. Did you object to it?— I did, sir; and the 
 answer he made me was, that if I claimed compensa- 
 tion many is the fine summer day he would bring me 
 into the town of Galway. My rent is now £13, 9«., 
 while my valuation is only £4. 
 
 20574. Do you say the rent is too high ? — It is doubly 
 and trebly too high. Even last year, when he came 
 from France demanding his rent, I asked him to let me 
 give it up ; that it was out of my power to pay the rent 
 that he put upon me. He said he would get me taken 
 prisoner if I spoke to him. 
 
 20575. Did you pay the rent last year?— We had 
 to pay it. 
 
 20576. Baron Dowse. — What would he get you 
 taken prisoner for ?— For asking anything fair of him. 
 He is a magistrate, and I was afraid of him. I made 
 300 perches of wall, and 150 perches of dram, and 
 didn't get a penny for it. I demanded my compensa- 
 tion from him a second time. 
 
 20577. What do you mean by your compensation- 
 do you mean compensation to let you go out ? Yes sir. 
 
 20578. You said you would give up the land if 'yoii 
 got compensation ?— Yes. He said it would be many 
 a fine summer's day he would bring me into Galway to 
 the Court if I took proceedings against him. That 
 was the answer he made to me when I asked compen- 
 sation from him. 
 
 4N 
 
(542 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, 188(1. 
 Davlivr'nrvan. 
 
 Darby Curean, Furbough, examined. 
 
 20579. Do you live on Colonel Daly's estate! — I 
 do. I am a tenant of his. 
 
 20580. How much do you hold ? — About 9 acres, 
 for which I pay £9 a year. 
 
 20581. That is £1 an acre?— Yes ; but half of the 
 laud is waste, so that I am paying at the rate of £2 
 an acre for the land that is under cultivation. 
 
 20582. Are you a tenant from year to year? — I am. 
 
 20583. Do you consider the rent too high ? — I do; 
 the land is too dear ; and besides the rent, we are pay- 
 ing quit-rent and tithe-rent every year. 
 
 20584. You have to pay £9 a year ?— Yes, we had 
 to pay it. We thought last year that he would give 
 us a reduction, but he would not. The land is too 
 dear altogether. We heard that if we would pay the 
 rent, he would give us a reduction, but he did not do so. 
 
 20585. What reduction did you hear he promised? 
 — Four shillings in the pound if we paid the rent on a 
 certain day, but they didn't pay it, and he didn't give 
 them the reduction. 
 
 20586. Do you say the rent is too high? — It is 
 entirely too high. 
 
 20587. You were not able to pay the rent at the 
 time he fixed, and he would not give you the reduction! 
 — No, sir. After paying for manure and expenses I 
 could not afford to pay such rent for bad land; it 
 would not grow oats or barley. 
 
 20588. You have been paying the same rent from 
 the year 1852 ?— Yes. 
 
 20589. How did you manage to pay it until four 
 years ago ? — I struggled to pay it till the bad seasons 
 came ; as soon as the crops failed, I was unable to 
 pay it. 
 
 20590. If the seasons were good and the crops fair 
 would the rent be too high ? — It would. The tenant 
 who had it before me was broke by it, and for several 
 years nobody would take it, till I took it at last. 
 
 20591. I suppose, high as the rent is, you would not 
 like to give it up ? — How could I give it up ?— where 
 would I go, or what would I do ? I should go into 
 the workhouse. 
 
 20592. You have no other place to go to, and must 
 stay on ? — I must. If he would give me the land at 
 the fair value^ I would be contented. 
 
 .John ({liHin, 
 
 John Griffin, Lettruck, Galway, examined. 
 
 20593. You hold under Mr. Algernon Persse? — 
 I do. 
 
 20594. How many acres do you hold! — Seven 
 acres. 
 
 20595. When first you took it, what was the rent ? — 
 It was only £3 fifteen years ago. 
 
 20596. What is the rent now?— £9, 10«. a year. 
 
 20597. Was the increase made all in one year ? — 
 No ; it was raised to £6 one half-year, and the next 
 half-year to £9, 10s. 
 
 20598. What is the valuation? — About £5, 10s. 
 
 20599. Have you been making any improvements ? — 
 I have, sir — draining, tilling, and clearing stones away. 
 
 20600. Has the landlord made you any allowance 
 for the improvements? — No, sir — nothing at all. 
 
 20601. How far is it from Galway % — About two 
 miles. 
 
 20602. Is it within the borough ? — It is in the 
 borough. 
 
 20603. Have you to pay the local rates— poor rate, 
 water rate, and sewerage rate ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20604. Baron Doavsb. — What excuse did he give 
 for raising the rent twice in the year ? — I don't know. 
 It was my father was tenant at that time. 
 
 20605. Did he give you any benefit in return for the 
 increase ? — He did not. 
 
 20606. The first half-year he raised it from £3 to 
 £6 ?— Yes. 
 
 20607. And then in the following half-year he 
 raised it to £9 ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20608. Is it now too dear? — It is. 
 
 20609. Was it always too dear at that rent— even 
 in the good seasons ? — It was, sir — it always kept us 
 in poverty. 
 
 20610. Was there a rise of rents generally at that 
 time around Galway ? — I don't know that. I suppose 
 there were a great many rents raised, but I didn't know 
 anything about them at that time. 
 
 John 
 Halievty. 
 
 John Flaherty, Drum, County Galway, examined. 
 
 20611. The Chairman. — Is your holding near Gal- 
 way ? — It is three or four miles from the town. 
 
 20612. Under whom do you hold?— Under Mr. 
 Francis Corny n. 
 
 20613. Is it mountain land? — It is mountainy land, 
 and very bad land too. 
 
 20614. What rent do you pay? — £13 a year. 
 
 20615. How many acres? — I do not know exactly; 
 on that kind of land rent is not computed by the acre, 
 each holding is let in the lump. 
 
 20616. How long have you been in occupation? — 
 About eighteen years. 
 
 20617. Howdidyou get it-did you succeed to any one, 
 or was it vacant ? — It was, sir. We had another hold- 
 ing on the same estate at the time — a large holding — 
 but it was very dear, and we removed from it to this 
 place. We thought we would have a reduction of rent. 
 
 20618. Was there any promise of a reduction? — 
 There was, sir ; it was not great, but we didn't get it. 
 
 20619. Who made the promise? — The landlord him- 
 self. 
 
 20620. You were promised a reduction, but it was 
 not given ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20621. Are you quite sure of that? — I am certain of it. 
 
 20622. What did the landlord say ?— He denied that 
 he had said anything of the sort, although there was 
 plenty of evidence against him. 
 
 20623. Baron Dowse. — Is the rent too high ? — It is, 
 
 sir ; and when we went to sow potatoes in it we had to 
 pay additional rent. 
 
 20624. You had to pay additional for having sown 
 potatoes ? — Yes, sir ; we sowed potatoes on a little plot, 
 and when we did it he was told of it, and he said first 
 that he would take out the potatoes, and afterwards he 
 said we would have to pay fifteen shillings additional 
 rent for the potato garden. 
 
 20625. Was that because it was let to yon to be 
 kept in grain?— He said it didn't belong to the holding 
 at all, although I was paying for it and in possession, 
 but that there was a grass farm alongside, and that this 
 little corner was part of it. 
 
 20626. I understand you work for the landlord, and 
 he sets your wages against the rent ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20627. What wages does he allow per day?— We 
 were working for him at first at lOrf. a day, and after- 
 wards at Is. ; and when strangers were getting 15i., 
 he would only give Is. a day to his own tenants ; and 
 when a stranger would get 4s. for the use of his horse 
 and cart, the tenant would only get 2s. &d. 
 
 20628. What is the valuation of the holding for 
 which you pay £13 rent? — £4 a year. 
 
 20629. Mr. Kavanagh. — Can you tell what number 
 of acres you have ? — No. It is a tract of wild mom- 
 tain. 
 
 20630. Is there twenty acres in it?— I think there 
 ought to be. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 643 
 
 Michael O'Sullivan, Galwa^y, examined. 
 
 20631. The Chairman. — You have a farm at 
 Rahoon? — I have. 
 
 20632. Have you more than one farm? — I hare 
 several. 
 
 20633. What is your complaint? — That the rents 
 are too high. 
 
 20634. Who are your landlords? — Mr. Aide is one ; 
 another gentleman has an agent, Mr. Kelly, that I pay 
 the rents to. 
 
 20635. How much rent do you pay? — £40 a year 
 for 9 acres and some perches. I have also to pay 
 water rate, sewerage rate, and poor rate, at 4s. in the 
 pound. The valuation is £17. 
 
 20636. Is your land within the borough of Gal- 
 way ?— It is. 
 
 20637. Do you say the rent is too high? — I do. 
 Mr. Kelly, the agent, told Mr. Donnell, your assistant 
 secretary, in my presence, that it was not worth half 
 the money. I hold 30 acres from Mr. Dudley Persse, 
 for which I pay him £150 a year; the valuation is 
 £59, 15s., on which I pay 4s. lOd. in the pound poor 
 rates, sewerage rate, and two cesses, besides mainten- 
 ance rate and water rate. I have a lease of that land ; 
 and when I paid him his May rent, about two months 
 ago, I said, " My lease will be up in 1881, and this is 
 1880. I will pay you your half-year's rent up to 
 November 1880, if you will take the land off my hands." 
 
 20638. You wanted to give it up? — I wanted to 
 give it up by paying him a half-year's rent. I even 
 said to him, " I will give you £20 along with the rent 
 to take it off my hands," but he would not take it 
 from me. 
 
 20639. Baron Dowse. — Why did yon take it at that 
 rent ?— I wanted the farm at the time. 
 
 20640. Where is this farm? — Something better than 
 a mile from Galway. I gave up two farms this year 
 that were too dear on me : one at £140 a year, to Mr. 
 George Burke of Danesfield, and the other to Mrs. 
 Browue, who resides in Dublin. 
 
 20641. You gave up those farms because they were 
 too dear? — Yes. I have another farm within a small 
 distance of Galway, for which I am paying £38, 6*. 2d. ; 
 the valuation is £17 — the rent at first was £32. I 
 managed very well with that rent, but it was raised £6 
 a year in one slap on me. 
 
 20642. When was that? — Five or six years ago 
 
 20643. Whom do you hold it from ? — Mr. Stanners 
 is the landlord, Patrick Dooley is the agent. 
 
 20644. Did you offer to give that up? — I did not; 
 but I grumbled at, the rent, but the landlord gave me 
 no reduction. I have other farms, but they are worth 
 the money I am paying for them, and were it not for 
 those farms I could not' carry on. I have to keep a 
 good deal of land, as I deal largely in cattle, and have 
 to keep them threeweeks or amonth preparing for the fairs. 
 
 20645. But why keep them if they are not worth the 
 rent ? — That is why I keep them : I have to keep a good 
 deal of land from the nature of my business, that is why 
 I bave kept them so long. 
 
 20646. Do you keep a large number of stock? — 
 In the winter time I keep about 250 of cattle, not to 
 talk of sheep and horses. 
 
 20647. Do you fatten them?— Some of them I do 
 in a middling way. More of them I sell as stores. 
 
 Oct. m, i»80. 
 
 Michael 
 O'Siillivaii. 
 
 Thomas O'Fltn, Chfden Lodge, Upper Dangan, examined. 
 
 Thomas 
 O'Flvii. 
 
 20648. Baron Dowse. — Who is your landlord? — 
 Mullins and Kyne. 
 
 20649. Is your holding within the borough of 
 Galway ? — It is within the parliamentary, but outside 
 the municipal boundary. 
 
 20650. What is the rent?— £50 a year— the valua- 
 tion is £27. 
 
 20651. What is the acreage? — 17 acres. 
 
 20652. Is there any portion of it rock?- About 3^ 
 acres are greet. , If it was limestone it would be better. 
 
 20653. Were you in business in Galway? — I have 
 been in business for forty years. If it were not for 
 that I could not have supported myself, my rent is so 
 high. 
 
 20654. Did you ever ask to have your rent lowered? 
 — I spoke to Mr. Kyne in his lifetime about a reduc- 
 tion, but he stated to me that he could get the rent 
 for the land, independent of the house; yet at one 
 time he did consent to give me an abatement of £15. 
 I had laid out considerably more than £15 on the place. 
 
 20655. Was this property in Chancery? — It is now 
 in Chancery ; it was not in Chancery at that time. 
 
 20656. What put it into Chancery? — I suppose 
 some misunderstanding between the family. 
 
 20657. You are a tenant from year to year? — Yes. 
 
 20658. Why do you keep it if is so dear?— The 
 reason I keep it is this, I have no other place to go to. 
 I am living on it, and have six children who were born 
 on the place. 
 
 20659. How long are you living on it? — 24 years. 
 
 20660. Was the rent ever raised during that time? 
 —No. 
 
 20661. Have you made improvements on it? — A 
 great deal. 
 
 20662. Has the landlord done anything towards 
 improvements ? — ^Not a particle. 
 
 20663. What do you think would be a fair rent? — 
 I expect of course, if things go on as they are expected, 
 that I will get it at the valuation. 
 
 20664. If what things go on as expected? — I don't 
 know. I believe there is something in contemplation 
 — some arragement going to be made by Parliament. 
 
 20665. Some legislation for the purpose of giving a 
 man his land at a fair rent ? — Yes. 
 
 20666. Not necessarily at the valuation? — No, sir. 
 
 20667. Do you think £27 a year would be enough 
 for it ? — I think it ought ; there is a portion of it rock, 
 and it is very light land. 
 
 Colonel Thomas Seymoue, Ballymore Castle, near Ballinasloe, examined. 
 
 20668. The Ghaieman. — We iave been informed 
 that you wish to give us some evidence with regard to 
 your relations with your tenantry ? — Yes. 
 
 20669. Is it with reference to the payment of rents ? 
 — Yes. With them it is more from a conspiracy tian 
 poverty. 
 
 20670. How many acres are there in your property? 
 —3257a. Ir. 3op. English measure. 
 
 20671. Are your rents paid now? — No, not for the 
 last two years. I was never sixpence short of my rent 
 before. 
 
 20672. Did you consider them good tenants at that 
 time? — Yes. There could not be better in Ireland, 
 two years ago, than the tenants whom I now have to 
 complain of. 
 
 20673. Your complaint has reference to the last two 
 years?— Yes. Up to May 1878 I was paid up to 
 the shilling. In November 1878, the first symptom 
 made its appearance. I was in the habit of takmg 
 their bills for the amount of their rents, which were 
 always met quite regularly— in fact, my banker told 
 me that when the bills arrived at maturity, some of 
 
 4N 2 
 
 Colonel 
 Thomas 
 SeymoiTV. 
 
644 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, 1880. 
 
 Colonel 
 Thomas 
 Soymonr. 
 
 them were in the habit of remitting him the money 
 by post with a stamped envelope for him to return 
 them their bills ; when all of a sudden after the 
 November rent of 1878 they changed. The bills they 
 passed in January for the November rent — payable on 
 the 10th and Uth May 1879, they all passed except 
 one man — he did not attend. He wrote to me in a 
 day or two afterwards, to this effect : " Sii', I was 
 sorry I could not meet you^at the same time as the rest 
 of the tenants. I enclose you now my bill, and thank- 
 ing yoa for giving me the time, I am yours truly. " I 
 was quite astonished to find that at a meeting held a 
 few months afterwards, the very man who wrote that 
 letter was a proposer or seconder of a resolution de- 
 nouncing the " enormous, outrageous, exorbitant rents 
 the tenants had to pay." 
 
 20674. Have those rents been going on at the same 
 rate these many years ? — Yes, they have been unchanged 
 these last twenty-three years. I purchased this estate I 
 am speaking of — it is a small one near Tuam, one of the 
 places that are, I may say, in rebellion — in the Incum- 
 bered Estate Court in 1852. About three or four 
 years afterwards I was going to sell it, being offered 
 more than double what I paid for it, when a deputation 
 from the tenants called on me begging me not to sell it. 
 I said, " How can you expect me not to sell it, when I 
 can make so large a sum by doing so ? " They said 
 that if I would consent to retain the estate, they would 
 raise their rents. I did so, and the rents were raised 
 with their perfect consent ; and from that time till 10th 
 May 1879, they never, with the exception of one man, 
 were a penny in arrear. 
 
 20675. Have you had any evictions? — One man, 
 about twenty years ago, I evicted, and there was no 
 tenant put in his place; the others kept the land. 
 That was all I ever did. They never asked me for an 
 abatement — never hinted at it till May 1878, when a 
 tenant died, and a man came to take the land. I set 
 it to him at an advance, for the former tenant had it 
 at half the value. She had it at £25 a year, and I set 
 it to him upon an agreement to take a lease of it at 
 £32 a year for thirty-one years. That land is, I 
 believe, some of the best in the barony of Dunmore. 
 While the bills were passing, this man paid in cash 
 his half-year's rent ; he and two more paid the rent in 
 cash instead of passing a bill. They never made the 
 slightest objection to the amount of the rent. The 
 first intimation I had of any objection was a round 
 robin which I got after Mr. Parnell's meetings ia the 
 County Mayo, stating that they were all paupers, and 
 among the rest the very men who paid their rent in 
 cash instead of by bill. " We are all paupers," so the 
 round robin represented ; " and unless you give us an 
 abatement of 25 per cent, we will not pay, but will give 
 you every possible opposition." I would not accept of 
 that ; still they were such good tenants that I waited, 
 and after a time some of them paid me. The moment 
 the others heard that, a number of them came into the 
 market of Milltown where one of these man had brought 
 a load of corn to sell, and because he had paid me his 
 rent, they made him put back his corn on the cart and 
 take it away. They would not allow him to sell it. 
 
 20676. Is that sort of think going on now '— 
 It is. 
 
 20677. Except in those few cases, was any rent paid 
 to you last year? — On my Milltown property, not a 
 farthing. One tenant paid me privately, but it was with 
 fear and trembling. So much was he afraid, that it was 
 through a cheque of another person he paid me the rent 
 
 20678. Have you tried to collect your rents this 
 year ? — I dare not do it. I served them all with eject- 
 ments, and after they were served I had a letter from 
 the priest stating what a horrid thing it was to do to 
 my tenants ; that to his own knowledge four-fifths of 
 them were paupers, and were on the relief list ; that 
 but for him and the money they were getting, they 
 would be in a state of starvation. Now I had but 25 
 tenants, some of them who were paying £30 a year 
 rent, only two of them were under £10, all the rest 
 were from £10 to £32 a year, so that it is a strange 
 thing if four-fifths of them were in such a miserable 
 state as he represented. 
 
 20679. Had they money, in your opinion? — They 
 had plenty of it. At the last fair of Ballinasloe, my 
 son was in the Bank, and one of those tenants walked 
 in to change English notes that he had got for 
 Irish. 
 
 20680. Why don't you distrain them?— I never 
 distrained a tenant yet. If I did, I don't think, as 
 things are at present, I could get any one to buy what 
 was seized. 
 
 20681. Did you try? — I never did. I got processes 
 issued, but the process server swore he could not serve 
 them. 
 
 20682. Do you believe that what the priest said was 
 untrue ? — I do. 
 
 20683. And that they had stock and means to pay 
 their rent if they pleased ? — I am certain of it. 
 
 20684. As long as the law of distress is in force, 
 couldn't you have distrained them ? — I could, but I 
 never distrained a man in my life. That they have 
 plenty of money there is no doubt ; and what is ex- 
 traordinary, it appears that, with all that, they were 
 receiving the charity money. 
 
 20685. Pi-om the Duchess of Marlborough's fund? 
 — Every fund they could get it from. 
 
 20686. Although they bad plenty of means?— 
 Although they had plenty of money. 
 
 20687. Was there any bona fide distress in your 
 neighbourhood ? — I don't think so. 
 
 20688. Baron Dowse. — Was not last year a very 
 bad season? — It was no doubt a bad year, and I 
 offered to allow them 25 per cent, on the year's rent. 
 All refused but two. I did not offer to continue it for 
 two years. 
 
 20689. The Chairman. — You have never had any 
 evictions ?— Only the one I told you of, and one in the 
 King's County about twenty-five years ago. I am 87 
 years of age ; my father died sixty years ago, and I 
 never distrained a tenant or evicted any one except that 
 one person. And what is more extraordinary, I have 
 property in the King's County and in the County Galway, 
 and_ up to May 1878 I may say, except the rent of a few 
 cabins, there was not a sixpence of arrears due to me. 
 
 Jlr. George J. 
 Robinson. 
 
 Mr. 
 
 George J. Robinson, Rounstown, County Galway, and Thomastown, in the County Mayo, examined. 
 
 20690. The Chairman. — Are you a proprietor of 
 land? — I am. I have a small property near Thomas- 
 town, and I am agent over another estate. 
 
 20691. For whom are you agent? — I am agent for 
 several persons ; in all the property contains about 
 230,000 acres. 
 
 20692. What are the principal agencies you have ? — 
 Mr. Berridge's, formerly the Law Life Assurance 
 Society's estate, Mrs. Blake, and others. 
 
 20693. Is there on any of those estates anything 
 corresponding to the Ulster Custom ?— There is on the 
 property of Mrs. Blake of Renvyle. 
 
 20694. Is it allowed there?— It is, and has been in 
 existence twenty-two years. 
 
 20695. Is it subject to any restriction as to selection 
 of tenant or price ?— No, as far as I have learned. I 
 have been only recently appointed her agent, I may say 
 within the last ten years. The way I understand they 
 disposed of their holdings was by selling the good-will 
 for a bulk sum, say £5 or £10. I knew of one instance 
 where a man gave £40. 
 
 20696. What was the rent of that holding?— I 
 think the rent was £5. There was a new house 
 upon it. 
 
 20697. What is the condition of the tenantry on 
 that property?— They are poor. It is divided too 
 much. There are a lot of small tenants. 
 
 20698. Are there any large farms ? — Some. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 645 
 
 20699. Are the small tenants on that estate better 
 or worse than the small tenants upon other properties ? 
 — I don't know. They used to make a good deal of 
 money by kelp, but that trade has deteriorated con- 
 siderably. 
 
 20700. What part of the coast is it on? — It is 
 about four miles west of Letterfract, and runs to a 
 place called Curragh. 
 
 20701. On the other estates for which you are agent 
 is tenant-right allowed 1 — No. 
 
 20702. If a tenant is leaving he gets compensation 
 under the Land Act? — Certainly, if he is evicted. 
 
 20703. He gets compensation for disturbance if 
 evicted, and also for improvements if he has made 
 any ? — Yes ; but I have never had such a thing as a 
 land claim in Court. 
 
 20704. Before the passing of the Land Act, were 
 you accustomed to give tenants an allowance on leav- 
 ing? — Xo, except in a few instances, as the outlay 
 was made by the landlord in most cases. 
 
 20705. On most of the farms has the outlay for 
 improvements been made by the landlord ? — Certainly. 
 On the Law Life estate I paid from the year 1855 to 
 1870 about £40,000 in labour — in drainage, road- 
 making, buildings, and fences. 
 
 20706. Was that while it was the property of the 
 Law Life Company ? — Yes. 
 
 20707. When did Mr. Berridge become proprietor 1 
 — Shortly after that. 
 
 20708. Baron Dowse. — What is the rental of that 
 property? — The rental, including the fisheries, would 
 be close on £13,000 or £14,000 a year if it were 
 paid. 
 
 20709. The Chairman. — Is he getting it now? — 
 Not a shilMng from the small tenants. 
 
 20710. Did he get it last year?— No. 
 
 20711. Was that from inability to pay? — No, not 
 from inability. I have myself expended within the 
 last three months over £4000 in making roads on that 
 estate, yet the tenants would not pay me one shilling. 
 I am making twenty miles of road through the 
 estate for him. 
 
 20712. For the purpose of giving employment? — 
 Yes, employment to the tenantry. 
 
 20713. Baron Dowse. — Why don't they pay (he 
 rent? — It is all owing to the agitation, no question 
 about it. 
 
 20714. The Chairman. — Is that also the case upon 
 the other properties with which you are connected ? — 
 On every property I am connected with — Galway, 
 Mayo, Sligo, Leitriin, and Roscommon. 
 
 20715. Did the refusal to pay commence in 1878 ? 
 —It did. 
 
 20716. Baron Dow^se. — Was the agitation on foot 
 then? — It was very largely on foot — houghing of 
 cattle, drowning of sheep and drowning of cattle too. 
 
 20717. The Chairman. — Have you had any eject- 
 ments for non-payment of rent? — Not for the last 
 year. I had some the year before — four, I think, I put 
 in execution, but the moment after the decrees were 
 executed the people went back again and are there 
 still. 
 
 20718. Baron Dowse. — Are you not able by pro- 
 cess of law to recover the rents? — Do you mean by 
 civil bill process. 
 
 20719. Yes? — Certainly not; they are perfectly 
 valueless. 
 
 20720. Can you recover them by distress? — No. I 
 would like to see any one trying it. It would take an 
 army to distrain them. 
 
 20721. Is the whole country in a lawless state? — 
 Yes, in a perfectly lawless state. I will give you an 
 example. Take Connemara. I am agent over a small 
 property there belonging to a gentleman of the name 
 of Charles Hallam, who lives in England. The tenants 
 refused altogether to pay their rents. 1 issued eject- 
 ment processes against them, and there were fifty 
 policemen, two bailiffs, and a stipendiary magistrate 
 sent with the process server to serve them. 
 
 20722. The Chairman.— Was that in 1879 ?— No, 
 in the early part of this year. They were met by the 
 
 tenantry not alone of that small property — it is only Oa. 23, isso. 
 some £200 or £300 a year — but by the whole side of - — 
 
 the country, to resist the police. They commenced Kobin^n^" 
 pelting the pai-ty with stones, and at length the 
 stipendiary was near getting a severe blow on his head. 
 He said, " This will not do " — he was a young man. It 
 was the fu-st time he had ever acted on such an occa- 
 sion, and he began to read the Riot Act, and told the 
 police to disperse the people at once, so they charged 
 and dispersed them ; but so great was the tumult, that 
 out of ten or twelve processes they were only able to 
 serve four. 
 
 20723. Baron Dowse. — Did you go on with these 
 four cases? — I did; but the proceedings proved 
 abortive, as Mr. Hallam, who had for some time been 
 managing the property himself, had omitted to get the 
 agreements stamped, and we could not produce them 
 in Court. 
 
 20724. That evidence applies to Comiemara? — 
 Yes. 
 
 20725. Is Mr. Berridge's property there too? — 
 It is. 
 
 20726. Are you able to collect the rents on it? — 
 I have not got a shilling except from the large tenants. 
 The rents of the oyster banks and salmon fisheries are 
 regularly paid. 
 
 20727. I suppose the large tenants pay well, as a 
 rule? — Yes; and yet the large tenants were the class 
 upon whom the season pressed most heavily, and they 
 got no abatement. 
 
 20728. How do you intend to manage the small 
 tenants who won't pay ? — If I got leave to act, I would 
 make examples of some of them. 
 
 20729. Some of them ? — Yes ; those of them who 
 have means to pay and won't pay. 
 
 20730. How would you make examples of them? 
 Would you turn them out ? — Yes ; the only question 
 is how could we keep them out, and prevent them 
 taking possession again. I think the police authorities 
 are disposed to give every assistance, and they have, in 
 fact, given every assistance they can ; but when their 
 backs are turned, the tenants go back into possession 
 again. Last week over 100 were engaged assisting 
 the county cess collectors to recover the cess. 
 
 20731. We were told the other day that county cess 
 and other taxes were paid with the greatest willing- 
 ness, and that it was only the landlords they refused 
 to pay? Is that so? — Not at all. I may as well 
 explain : the estate of the Law Life Assurance Society, 
 when I assumed the management in 1855, was in a 
 most disorganized state ; the claims against tenants and 
 landlords for county cess and poor rate were alarming. 
 Under these circumstances, the Board of the Law Life 
 Association said the wisest plan was for themselves to 
 pay the taxes and to include them in the rent put upon 
 the tenants, of course giving the tenants time for pay- 
 ment according to the circumstances of each case. So 
 the matter has stood ever since, except where there 
 were leases, or tenancies created since the passing of 
 the Land Act. I used to pay by cheque £700 a year 
 for county cess, and about £2000 for poor rate. But 
 when the tenants refused to pay their rents, I said, 
 " My good fellows, I will not pay the poor rate or 
 county cess for you till you pay me the rent." 
 
 20732. As they would not pay the rent, you let the 
 county collect the cess from them t — Certainly. 
 
 20733. Were the county oflBcers opposed in the col- 
 lection of the cess ? — They were. 
 
 20734. Last year was a bad season for farmers ? — 
 No doubt it was. 
 
 20735. Did you make any abatement of rent? — 
 Yes. I offered them an abatement of 4s. in the pound, 
 and every one that paid his rent got that abatement, 
 excepting tenants over £50. 
 
 20736. If the gentlemen for whom you collect rents 
 would give you full authority, do you think you could 
 make the tenants pay ? — I don't know ; I am afraid it 
 is too late, and that the tide has turned too strong. 
 
 20737. Things have been allowed to go too far? — 
 A great deal too far. I have lived in this part of 
 Ireland for a very long time, and I must say I never 
 
646 
 
 IRISH I.AND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Pet. 23, 1880. 
 
 }tv. George J. 
 Robinson. 
 
 met TOtli a more amenable set of people, until this 
 agitation was got up. They paid their rents most 
 punctually. 
 
 20738. What has changed them?— TheLandLeague 
 agitation. 
 
 20739. Do you think the distress of the past two 
 years had anything to do with it 1 — I think they have 
 been talked a great deal into the distress by receiv- 
 ing the relief from the Duchess of Marlborough and 
 other charitable funds — the Mansion House fund, the 
 Canadian fund, and other funds — until they really 
 thought they had a right to demand it. I think it 
 demoralized them. 
 
 .20740. Did they require it? — In many cases they 
 did, but there were many cases in which it was dis- 
 graceful for them to take it. Persons who did not 
 want it, were taking from the poor man's mouth the 
 bread that charity intended for his relief. If I had 
 had the control of the relief, I never would have 
 given it indiscriminately. I would have given it in 
 labour. 
 
 20741. You think it demoralized them ? — I am sure 
 it did. 
 
 20742. That, however, was not entirely the cause of 
 their refusal to pay rents ? — No ; that was chiefly due 
 to the agitation. 
 
 20743. Is there any remedy ? — I think if an example 
 was made of half a dozen of them, you would accom- 
 plish something ; show them that you are in earnest. 
 
 20744. When the police go out to protect the pro- 
 cess servers or bailiffs, and a number of people collect 
 and throw stones, why don't they identify some of the 
 persons and prosecute them ? — In many cases they 
 cannot identify them. A very great mistake is made 
 by the constabulary authorities, in constantly changing 
 their men from one place to another. They should let 
 them remain in a place, so that they may know the 
 people, and become acquainted with their characters, 
 and be able to identify them. 
 
 20745. It occurs to me that in cases where the 
 police and bailiffs are attacked in that way, some of 
 the ringleaders of the party who attack them should 
 be prosecuted ? — So they were; they were arrested, but 
 the Crown wei'e afraid to go on with the prosecution. 
 
 20746. What were they afraid of? — They were 
 afraid they would not get a jury to convict. 
 
 20747. Why not proceed by summary jurisdiction 
 before the magistrates ? — Yes ; that was done in some 
 cases, and succeeded. 
 
 20748. What do yon think of the scheme of a 
 peasant proprietary ? — It would depend upon the class 
 of persons you made proprietors. 
 
 20748a. If you had a thrifty industrious class of 
 tenants, would it answer ? — Yes ; but you can never 
 make a successful proprietor of a man living upon 
 five or ten acres of bog. It would never do. But 
 no doubt there is a large class of men who are quite 
 capable, and would be an acquisition to the country 
 as proprietors. At the same time, I would be slow 
 to recommend a forced sale on landlords. 
 
 20749. Do you think it w-ould be a remedy for the 
 misfortunes of the country to make all the tenants 
 peasant proprietors ? — I do not. I think in ten years' 
 time you would have a great many of them sold 
 out. 
 
 20750. A gentleman who was examined said that if 
 the State assisted in the creation of a peasant proprie- 
 tary, they would have no difficulty in getting the money 
 paid by the tenants — that they would be willing to pay 
 the annuities to the Government, although they refuse to 
 pay rent to the landlords — do you agree in that ? — I 
 
 doubt it very much. I fear it would take all the 
 English army to make them pay in some parts of the 
 country. I wish to make myself clear — I speak of the 
 smaller class of tenants, such as those I have to deal 
 with in Connemara. You will meet another class 
 of peasantry in Mayo, Roscommon, and Sligo— 
 farmers paying rents of £50, £60, or £70 a yeai-— 
 men as respectable in their way as ourselves, and fully 
 as proud of their position. 
 
 20751. Do you think those men would form a good 
 material for a peasant proprietary ? — Those men would 
 but not the small occupiers such as are in Connemara. 
 
 20752. You think those would not answer as pro- 
 prietors ? — No ; some of them would be like vermin on 
 the face of the land. But there are numbers of tenants 
 even in Connemara who would make good peasant pro- 
 prietors — first-rate men. In part of the Barony of 
 Ross, for instance, you would get a class of men that 
 would be a credit to the country as proprietors. 
 
 20753. We have been told that a great number of 
 the small occupiers could not live, even if they got the 
 land for nothmg ? — That is Professor Baldwin's idea. 
 
 20754. Is it yours? — It is not. Most of these 
 people pay their rent by rearing a pig, a cow, or a pony, 
 and selling it, and pay their rent (when they do pay it) 
 with the proceeds. They could live just as well as 
 tenants, if not better, than as proprietors. 
 
 20755. Have they lived comfortably ?— Well, I 
 cannot call it comfortably ; but as comfortably as that 
 class of the people usually do. 
 
 20756. Mr. Kavanagh. — Have there been many 
 evictions on Mr. Berridge's estate? — When I first 
 became agent of the property of the Law Life, it was 
 almost a common — a great part of it was held in what 
 is called rundale. I was for three years endeavouring 
 to change that system. We had thousands of acres 
 unoccupied, but still grazed, in defiance of everything I 
 could do. They all said it was a common, and even my 
 very bailiffs were at the head and tail of the system. 
 I got the holdings squared, and served ejectments with 
 the object of placing each occupier upon his own hold- 
 ing, and abolishing this rundale system. I went over 
 the estate with a surveyor and an assistant, in order to 
 form a correct opinion as to the relative values of the 
 holdings. We did it to the best of our judgment, 
 and having divided the land — of course varying the 
 boundaries where it was necessary to do so, in order to 
 do justice between the tenants — I made them cast lots. 
 The consequence was, in order to carry that plan ont, 
 I had to serve a good many ejectments, and Sir W. 
 Gregory got a return presented to the House of Com- 
 mons, and made it the foundation of an attack on the 
 Ijaw Life Society. But nearly every one of those 
 tenants were restored to possession again. It was only 
 in a few extreme and exceptional cases that they were 
 not. 
 
 20757. The reason I asked the question was, that a 
 witness mentioned that there were a great number of 
 evictions on that estate, and I wished to have an ex- 
 planation, if it could be given? — That is the 
 explanation. Another thing I wish to observe is, I 
 have always looked on it as a maxim, especially with 
 poor and small tenants, never to let them get in debt. 
 If you let him do so, he soon becomes broken-hearted, 
 Before this agitation began, those tenants were always 
 most willing to pay ; often they almost burst the walls 
 of the office on rent day to get in and pay their rents 
 — fightmg to be the first to do so. 
 
 20758. Baron Dowse. — Those wei-e in the good old 
 times, before the Land League agitation ? — Yes ; and 
 the people would be good still if they were let alone. 
 
 Patrick Noon. 
 
 Patrick Noon, Mounteigh, County Galway, and several others, examined. 
 
 20759. The Chaieman. — You are a tenant to Lord 
 Clarem orris? — I am. 
 
 20760. Do you hold as partners? — No, sii-; we do 
 not. There is 18 acres of land divided among forty 
 tenants. 
 
 sir. 
 
 20761. Forty tenants holding 18 acres? — Yes, 
 
 20762. Do they live in forty houses? — ^Tbey do, sir: 
 in the village of Mounteigh. 
 
 20763. What is the rent?— £3, 18s. 6d, we pay. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 647 
 
 20764. Each tenant ? — Yes, sir ; for tbe house and 
 bit or land. Some of them pay more, some less. 
 
 20765. Is it equally divided among you? — It is not, 
 sir. All I have is half an acre of upland and bog. 
 
 20766. Do you complain of the rent? — Yes, sir; it 
 more than the valuation, and there was 40 acres of land 
 taken from us and given to another farmer. 
 
 20767. You don't hold by lease? — No, sir. 
 
 20768. Mr. Kavanagh. — How long is it since the 
 land was taken from you ? — It is thirty years ago. 
 
 20769. Baron Dowse. — What town are you near? 
 — Claregalway. 
 
 20770. Is that near Lough Corrib ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 20771. The Chaieman. — What do you grow on 
 your land ? — Potatoes, sir. 
 
 20772. Do you ever go to England to labour in the 
 harvest? — No, sii-.' 
 
 20773. You grow some potatoes on your land, and 
 I suppose make what you can by labour in addition ? 
 — Yes, sir ; and we cut turf and bring it to Galway 
 and sell it. 
 
 20774. Do you get the turf for nothing — are you 
 allowed to cut as much as you like?- — No, sir. I 
 brought a load of turf here to-day and all I got for 
 it was four shilhngs. That was bad wages for a man 
 and horse. 
 
 20775. Have you to pay for the turf ? — I do pay for it. 
 
 20776. I suppose your rent includes as much turf 
 as you like to cut ? — The bog is divided among the 
 whole parish. 
 
 20777. Who is the agent of the property? — Mr. 
 W. Bourke of Cong. 
 
 20778. Baron Dq-vvse. — What do you want Lord 
 Clanmorris to do? — We want him to give us a little 
 bit of land. 
 
 10770. Has he it to give? — He has not unless he 
 took it from another. 
 
 20780. Do you mean to say that 40 tenants, 
 numbering 200 in their families, live on 18 acres of 
 land ? — They could not live on it half a year, only they 
 have the bog in with it. 
 
 20781. Is that all they have to live on? — That is 
 all, sir. 
 
 20782. How do they live ? — Earning wages, going 
 about the country from one town to another. They 
 could not live on it only for that ; and unless some- 
 thing is done they will have to leave the place. 
 
 20783. Why 1 — Because for the last three years the 
 land was flooded, and the crop was drownded with water. 
 
 20784. Have any of them left th« place? — Some of 
 them that were able to go are gone to America, but the 
 most of them are not able to go. 
 
 Ocl. 23, 1880. 
 Patrick Kooa. 
 
 Petee Codyea, Rahoon, County Galway, examined. 
 
 Petev Codyra, 
 
 20785. Baron Dowse. — Are you a tenant of Miss 
 Daly ?— Yes, su-. 
 
 20786. What was your rent originally ? — £3 a 
 vear. 
 
 20787. What is it now ?— f 8. 
 
 20788. How long has that rent been on you ? — 
 Ten years ago it was increased. 
 
 20789. How many acres have you? — Three acres; 
 the valuation is £3. I drained and improved it. It 
 was rough wild mountain when I got it first. 
 
 20790. Do you consider the rent high ? — It is too 
 high. It woulS be dear enough for £4. 
 
 20791. This land, I believe, belonged to Father Peter 
 Daly ?— Yes, sir. 
 
 20792. What distance is it from Galway ? — A. mile 
 and a quarter. I have to pay the Galway rates. 
 
 20793. What are the rates you. have to pay? — ^I 
 pay 3s. lOd. poor rate, Is. 2d. sewer rate, and 3c?. 
 water rate in the pound on my valuation. 
 
 20794. Have you another holding ? — I have, under 
 Mr. Owen Kearns, two miles from the town. 
 
 20795. How many acres?- — Two acres. My father 
 built a house on it some time ago. 
 
 20796. How far is it from your other holding? — 
 A quarter of a mile. We had a lease of it at £2, 5s., 
 but the lease expired last Michaelmas twelve months, 
 and it has been raised to £4. 
 
 20797. Is that too high? — Of course it is too 
 high. 
 
 20798. Why do you keep it?— I had to keep it, for 
 I could get no other place to live in unless I came in 
 to Galway to live. 
 
 Michael Heffeen-an, near Galway, examined. 
 
 Michael 
 Heffernan. 
 
 20799. Mr. Kavanagh. — Who is your landlord? 
 — ^Mr. MuUins. 
 
 20800. What rent do you pay ?— £27, 10s. 
 
 20801. For how many acres ? — I do not know how 
 many acres are in it ; it is a bulk rent. 
 
 20802. Have you 20 acres in it?— No. 
 
 20803. Do you complain that your rent is too high ? 
 —I do. 
 
 20804. Was it raised ?— It was. 
 
 20805. When was it raised? — I think it is 15 or 16 
 years since it was raised. Mulhns and Kyne bought 
 the property, and raised the rent when they bought it. 
 
 20806. Have you been living there all your hfe? — 
 I am, and so was my father before me. 
 
 20807. Did you improve it ? — Myself and my 
 brother reclaimed 5 acres of it, drained it, and re- 
 moved stones and bushes. 
 
 20808. Did you get any assistance from the land- 
 lords ? — Not a penny. 
 
 20809. What was your former rent? — £21 a 
 year. 
 
 20810. Was it raised to £27, 10s.?— It was, sir- 
 that is, £6, 10s. more. That is what I complain 
 of. 
 
 Maetin Toole, Obans Well, County Galway, examined. 
 
 Martin Toole. 
 
 20811. How far from Galway is your holding ? — 
 Four miles. 
 
 20812. Is that on the Comyns* property? — Yes, 
 
 sir. 
 20813, 
 20814 
 2Q815, 
 
 What is your rent? — £6, 10s. a year. 
 
 What is your valuation ? — £3, 10s. 
 
 How many acres have you? — Five or six 
 acres, but it is not worth threepence an acre. 
 
 20816. Has the rent been raised since you got it ? 
 — No, sii'. 
 
 . 20817. What in your opinion would be a fail- rent ? 
 — I think it would be dear at £3. 
 
 20818. Griffith's valuation is £3, 10s.?— It is. 
 
 20819. You think it is not more than that? I do 
 
 not. 
 
 20820. Did you ever ask your landlord to reduee 
 it ?— I did not I had to build a house and stable 
 since I got it, and drain it and make fences all round it. 
 
 20821. Did he give you anything towards that ?— * 
 He did not. When I had it done, he wanted me to 
 
648 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 23, 1880. 
 Martin Toole. 
 
 work for him for ninepence a day. I told him I 
 would not, and he sent me a notice to quit. 
 
 20822. Did he proceed with the notice to quit and 
 serve an ejectment on you ? — He did not. 
 
 20823. Your complaint is that the rent is too 
 high ? — It is. 
 
 20824. If you wanted to part with it, would there 
 be people ready to give you something for it ? — I do 
 not know. 
 
 20825. You don't want to leave it? — I do not if 
 I could live on it ; but it is hard to live on it the 
 land is so dear. ' 
 
 20826. Where would you go if you left it?— r 
 not know where ; I have no place to go to 
 
 would not know 
 unless to America. 
 
 20827. Do you earn money by labouring for other 
 people? — I do not, sir. I have no one but 
 self. 
 
 my. 
 
 Edward Toole. 
 
 Edward Toole, examined. 
 
 20828. Who is your landlord ?— Mr. Martin of 
 Killina Castle. 
 
 20829. What is your rent?— £13 a year; it used 
 to be only £9. 
 
 20830. How long ago was it raised ? — Six years ago. 
 
 20831. What is the valuation ?— £9 or £9, 10s., I 
 am not sure which. 
 
 20832. Is the rent too high?— It is. 
 
 20833. Did he give you a reduction last year ? — 
 No. I asked for a reduction, and I did not get a 
 farthing. I paid him a half-year's rent on the 1st of 
 January. He required me yesterday again, and the 
 rest of the tenants, to pay him another half - year's 
 rent. A good many of them paid, but I did not ; I 
 was not able. 
 
 20834. Was your crop a bad one last year ?— As 
 God is my judge, I did not sell sixpence worth last 
 year. I had a little profit on oats this year. 
 
 20835. Did you improve your holding ? — I built a 
 house, a barn, and stable. 
 
 20836. Anything that was done you did yourself? 
 — Yes, sir ; we never got a farthing of help from the 
 landlord. We wanted him to help us to repair the 
 house before it would fall on the top of us ; but no 
 he would do nothing for us. The people may drown 
 themselves or go to America for all that the landlords 
 care ; they have no more thought for us than if we 
 were dogs.' 
 
 [Adjourned.] 
 
 Oct. 25, 1880. 
 
 TWENTY-SEVENTH DAY— MONDAY, 25th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners met to-day at 11 o'clock, in the Railway Hotel, Galway — Present: — The 
 Earl of Bessborodgh, Baron Doavse, and the O'Conoe Don. 
 
 Joseph 
 Hardy. 
 
 Joseph Hardy of Dartfield, Loughrea, County Galway, examined. 
 
 20837. The Chairman. — Are you a landowner"? — 
 Not a landlord. 
 
 20838. An agent?— No. 
 
 20839. A landholder?— A landholder. 
 
 20840. What land do you hold ? — A large extent. 
 
 20841. About what ? — Some thousands of acres— 
 nearly 6000. 
 
 20842. In various places ? — In various places all 
 through this county, and one large part of it — at 
 least 400 Irish acres — in the King's County. 
 
 20843. Is there anything in your holding that you 
 had any experience of the Land Act or of the land 
 laws generally ? — Nothing except as to the ordinary 
 land laws of the country. I have not come into 
 colhsion with my landlords under the Land Act. 
 
 20844. There is nothing special of your own 
 that you have to bring before us ? — No special 
 grievance. 
 
 20845. I believe you have given a good deal of 
 attention to the subject as regards others? — I have. 
 
 20846. Have you any views as to the extension of 
 the Ulster Custom to other parts of Ireland ? — To all 
 Ireland. 
 
 20847. You are of opinion that it would be de- 
 sirable I — Unquestionably. 
 
 20848. Have you much knowledge of the north of 
 Ireland ? — I have read a good deal about it. 
 
 20849. What is the point in the Ulster Tenant 
 Right that you think would be so especially desirable 
 to extend it? — Securing to the tenant beyond all 
 possibility of doubt the value of any improvements 
 effected by his capital or labour. 
 
 20850. We have had some evidence in the north 
 that it is not so perfectly secure, because they say 
 that so long as they have the power of raising the 
 rent on the tenants, their tenant right and their 
 interest in the thing is eaten away ? — As I understand 
 tenant right, it is not defined thoroughly in any part 
 
 of the north. I don't believe in it as it exists there, 
 But my idea would be that the Legislature should 
 define it properly, and then extend it to all Ireland. 
 
 20851. Have you much experience as to the small 
 holders ? — I have largely ; I was born in this county, 
 and reared amongst them till this day. 
 
 20852. Do you think that there is a feeling that if 
 they improved they would suffer in the amount of 
 rent? — No doubt. 
 
 20853. Do you think that that is so— that they 
 would suffer ? — In some cases there have been ; but, 
 generally speaking, I don't think you could fix it that 
 there have been harsh measures generally. 
 
 20854. You think that a few instances would cause 
 a feeling of alarm amongst the tenants ? — I am sorry 
 to say that there have been very little improvements 
 effected by those men. That is one of the grounds 
 that they always give — the want of security. " If 1 
 improve this field or that house, or make any im- 
 provements, my rent will be raised." That is what 
 they say. 
 
 20855. What view would you take as to the ques- 
 tion of rents — would you give the power to a landlord 
 to raise rents at his own discretion, or by agreement 
 with the tenant, or by arbitration? — By agreement. 
 It would, I think, be a dangerous attempt to move in 
 the direction of such a thing as arbitration. Unless it 
 be to a G overnment valuation, it should be left to no 
 other party. 
 
 20856. You think it should be a perfectly inde- 
 pendent party ? — Perfectly independent. 
 
 20857. That if the two parties cannot agree, they 
 should have power to call for an independent arbitra- 
 tion 1 — For an independent arbitration. 
 
 20858. Then, as to the question of the sale of 
 holdings by tenants, the sale of their improvements 
 and good- will, what would you be in favour of ?— 
 Unquestionably, if a tenant has improved and has 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 649 
 
 increased the value of his holding beyond what he took 
 it at, even if he took a lease of it, he should have a 
 right of free sale of all the interest that he had in his 
 laud. 
 
 20859. Would you give the landlord any power of 
 selecting the tenant to come in the place of the tenant 
 vacating the farm ? — Unquestionably. 
 
 20860. You think the tenant ought to have the 
 right of sale 1 — Clearly. On the other hand, I think 
 it would be a great injustice if a tenant were to be 
 forced upon a landlord because he chose to give a 
 certain sum of money, unless the landlord raised a sort 
 of factious opposition, if a man was a good solvent 
 tenant, and a man of character, and all that sort of 
 thing. 
 
 20861. Do you think that the difficulty as to rents 
 and the complaints of tenants has arisen from landlords 
 being in the habit of estimating the value of their farms 
 by the amount of rent they can get for them ? — In 
 great measure. 
 
 20862. By people bidding higher for the lands ?^ 
 Yes. 
 
 20863. That there are men who want to get farms, 
 and they will give almost any sum of money to get 
 possession of them ? — To get possession of them. 
 
 20864. Perfectly regardless of whether it was value 
 for it or not 1 — Yes. 
 
 20865. Do you think there have been a great 
 number of evictions for the sake of getting higher 
 rents? — I don't think there has been any solitary 
 instance of it. I have not heard of an eviction for 
 twenty-five years, save and except for non-payment of 
 rent. 
 
 20866. What do you think is the cause of the pre- 
 sent determination not to pay rent? — I think it has 
 been got up by this agitation. It is very easy to 
 arouse the minds of an excitable people. I think if 
 there had been no agitation there would not have been 
 any opposition to the payment of rents. 
 
 20867. It would be a fair thing to get an abatement ? 
 — It would. 
 
 20868. The landlords here did make abatements ? — 
 Almost every place. 
 
 20869. Do you know anything of the state of affairs 
 around within two or three miles of Galway? — No. 
 My lands principally lie in the east side of the county, 
 very near the Shannon, on the centre of the county. 
 
 20870. Are the tenants, particularly the small 
 tenants, in your part of the country in a very bad way ? 
 — -They appear to be quite excited. 
 
 20871. I did not mean politically, but their circum- 
 stances? — Not by any means. I think their circum- 
 stances were last year a great deal worse than they are 
 now, but this year their harvest has been a good deal 
 better, and I think there would have been very little 
 difBculty in tenants paying their rents but for this 
 agitation. 
 
 20872. Do you think that, up to two or three years 
 ago, the tenants were able to pay their rents and live 
 tolerably comfortably ? — Up to three years ago ; there 
 have been three years in succession in which the rents 
 have not been made. 
 
 20873. I suppose the good seasons up to that led 
 them into an improved way of living ? — What I would 
 call an extravagant way of living. 
 
 20874. And they found it difficult to go back again 
 to the old mode of living — it would perhaps not be 
 desirable that they should altogether ? — Yes. When 
 stock was dear, in place of cultivating, as their fore- 
 fathers did, a considerable portion of their farms, they 
 laid it all out in grass, became graziers in a small way, 
 and neglected the cultivation of their farms. They 
 were obliged to go to the shopkeepers and buy every- 
 thing, and the profits from grazing a small portion of 
 land were not sufficient; and I used to say to these 
 men, " If you had that field in potatoes or oats, you 
 would be able to raise more stock." 
 
 20875. By a mixed system ? — A mixed system. 
 
 20876. Was that caused by dislike to paying for 
 labour ? — In some cases ; but in many cases they were 
 able to labour themselves and their families. A great 
 
 deal of it was downright laziness, and a wish to be Oct.io,imn. 
 stockmasters in a small way, and to go from fair to , ' — 
 fair. That applies to the men having from 30 to 40 ll^y^y^ 
 acres. Many of them had little sheep plots in their 
 grounds that were not an acre in extent, and they kept 
 half-a-dozen sheep on it. That would apply more 
 to the County Galway than to Tipperary or the King's 
 County. 
 
 20877. Do you think they have done a mischief to 
 themselves by going in too much for artificial manures ? 
 — I do, clearly. 
 
 20878. They raised crops by exhausting their lands ? 
 — In a great measure. My belief is that if you grow 
 potatoes or oats with these artificial manures you 
 exhaust the land. 
 
 20879. Wonld that apply to the growing of turnips, 
 if those turnips were consumed by the sheep on the 
 lands? — No. 
 
 20880. But it is only the larger men that do that ? 
 — It is only the larger men that do that. 
 
 20881. Baron Dowse. — How many acres do you 
 farm yourself? — Nearly 6000 acres. 
 
 20882. None of it let to any person ? — No. 
 
 20883. How much do you farm in this county ? — • 
 All but 400. 
 
 20884. The 400 is in the King's County ?— Yes. 
 
 20885. None in Tipperary ?— No. 
 
 20886. Is all that arable land?— The greater part 
 of it. 
 
 20887. Is there any of it mountain land? — What we 
 call mountain land I used as winter land. I have not 
 had any of it in my possession for the last year and a 
 half. 
 
 20888. You have leases? — In many places, but in 
 the majority I have none. 
 
 20889. Who are your landlords ? — Lord Dunsandle, 
 Lord Clonbrock, Mr. Pollok, Mr. Gowing, and Mr. 
 O'Farrell. The property where I live is the property of 
 Mr. Gowing of London — 800 acres — Mr. Longworth. 
 
 20890. You must employ a large number of labourers 
 at certain times of the year ? — Yes. 
 
 20891. Are these employed the whole year round ? 
 — They are. 
 
 20892. What wages?— About 8s. a week. 
 
 20893. Do you give them any place to live in? — ■ 
 Yery few. 
 
 20894. Where do the rest live? — In the places round 
 about. 
 
 20895. They pay a rent for these themselves? — I 
 think not. 
 
 20896. Have you cottages you give rent free? — I 
 have. 
 
 20897. And they have 8s. a week in addition? — 
 They have, and potato land and fuel. 
 
 20898. Are they pretty well off ?— They are fairly.- 
 
 20899. Do you feel any difficulty in getting labour? 
 — Except at certain times of the year. 
 
 20900. As a rule you find it easy enough to get 
 labour there ? — Last year was very severe on them. 
 
 20901. Are they discontented in any way ? — Not 
 that I can see. 
 
 20902. I have heard it said that their interests and 
 those of the farmers are not identical, and that they 
 are getting up an agitation on their own account — is 
 there anything of that kind in your neighbourhood ? — 
 Not that I am aware of. 
 
 20903. Is your rent considerably above the valua- 
 tion ? — A thu'd, some of it ; others a fourth and a half. 
 
 20904. Is it in any case equal to or below it? — I 
 cannot charge my memory that it is below it. I am 
 sure it is not. 
 
 20905. You say you approve of the tenant right of 
 the north ? — Yes. 
 
 20906. But that it would require improvement? — 
 Clearly. 
 
 20907. Suppose the lands were let at a fair rent, 
 the tenant to retain possession and not to be put out 
 as long as he paid the rent and did not sublet — is that 
 according to your notions ?— That would meet all the 
 objections. 
 
 20908. And if a Government valuator was appointed 
 
 40 
 
650 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 25, 1880. 
 
 Joseph 
 Hardy. 
 
 to value the rent in case there was a difiBcnlty ? — If the 
 parties could not agree amongst themselves. 
 
 20909. The parties VFOuld be at liberty to do so ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 20910. And they might settle their differences any 
 way they liked ? — Yes. 
 
 20911. But if they could not settle them, then the 
 Government valuator might be called in ? — Yes. 
 
 20912. You have had no experience of the Land 
 Act, you say — would you think the Chairman a proper 
 tribunal for the valuation of the rent ] — I don't think it 
 is a satisfactory tribunal. 
 
 2091.3. You don't think it is a satisfactory tribunal? 
 — I think it is placing a great deal in the power of the 
 Chairman, and I think that if that power is to be placed 
 in the hands of any man, he should be a thoroughly 
 practical man, acquainted with all the different details 
 of landlord and tenant in as far as regards the letting 
 of land and everything connected with it. The Chair- 
 man is not so acquainted. 
 
 20914. But vou know that he has to go by evidence? 
 —Yes. 
 
 20915. But you think it would be well for him to 
 be a man acquainted with practical details ? — I do. 
 
 20916. Do you think it would be a satisfactory 
 tribunal to settle the rent ? — I do not. 
 
 20917. To settle the rent?— I don't know that. I 
 think the fairest way in the world would be for men to 
 settle it amongst themselves. 
 
 20918. But if not— if they could not agree?— I 
 would have a Government valuator. 
 
 20919. Do you know anything about those peasant 
 proprietors that are talked about? — No. There has 
 not been any in my neighbourhood. 
 
 20920. No Church lands?— Nothing but a small 
 glebe ; and that, 1 think, got into the hands of the pro- 
 prietor of the land about it. 
 
 20921. Do you see any objection to a man being 
 assisted by the State to purchase his holding out? — 
 I highly approve of it. 
 
 20922. But what do you think of it as a general 
 remedy for all Ireland? — I don't think it could be 
 done. 
 
 20923. But where a man is willing to sell? — 
 Clearly. 
 
 20924. And you think he should be helped? — Yes. 
 But it would not be a remedy for all Ireland ; and the 
 reason of that is that it would take too much of his 
 capital, which he should have to work his farm with. 
 There are three requisites for the improvement of land 
 
 in this country — capital, skill, and industry, 
 should be combined. 
 
 20925. I think if you had a voice in the weather it 
 would be useful ? — We can't have that. I am sorry 
 to say our cUmate is not at all a desirable one but 
 this year we have had no reason to complain. Another 
 thing I think our Government might fairly do, would 
 be to encourage the making of railways throngliont 
 this country. Where I live we are twelve miles from 
 the nearest railway station. There is very great 
 difiBcnlty in getting rid of the produce of farms. 
 
 20926. What is your nearest town? — Longhrea. 
 
 20927. And is Athenry the nearest station? — There 
 is a place called Woodlawn. That is nearer to Lougb- 
 rea than Athenry. 
 
 20928. How long have you been farming so much 
 land as this ? — To that extent ? 
 
 20929. Yes. — I am farming since 1837. I com- 
 menced m a small way after I came from school. In 
 1837 I was the owner of a small mill, which I enlarged 
 and worked for years. In 1846 I first commenced to 
 take land for grazing purposes, and from that out to 
 this I have been gradually going on, and at some 
 times I have had even more land in my possession than 
 I have now. 
 
 20930. Do you find on the whole that the specula- 
 tion has been successful ? — It has been up to the last 
 few years, and during this past three years it has been 
 the reverse — a great deal owirig to our climate, as it 
 affected seriously our sheep farming. Our sheep 
 breeding and sheep farming has been the great thing 
 altogether. Without it we would not be able to pay 
 anything at all like the rents. 
 
 20931. The O'Conok Dox. — Is not there a great 
 change this year ? — Yes. 
 
 20932. For the better?— For the better. 
 
 20933. And have not the large farms pulled up?— 
 This year, taking it on its own basis, would be quite 
 good'enough. 
 
 20934. Baron Dowse. — Of course it requires a good 
 deal to pull up the successive losses of three years ?— 
 A great deal. There was a great loss in wool. In 
 that one article I lost £5000. As regards this railway, 
 it is a difiBcult thing to get a railway — a very difficult 
 matter. I am a member of the "Board of Guardians, 
 and last Saturday I was anxious to bring forward the 
 question of a railway from Portumna to Longhrea. 
 There is plenty of anxiety for it, but not much money 
 to make it. 
 
 The witness then withdrew. 
 
 James 
 Kilmartin. 
 
 Mr. James Kilmaetin, Sralea, County Roscommon, examined by Baron Dowse. 
 
 20936. Youj" residence is near Ballinasloe? — Within 
 two miles of the town. 
 
 20937. Are you president or vice-president of the 
 Ballinasloe Tenants' Defence Association ? — Not now, 
 sir. I was vice-president of the Tenants' Defence 
 Association. I am now a member of the council of 
 the Land League. 
 
 20938. The local council ? — Yes. We have changed 
 it from the Tenants' Defence Association to the Land 
 League. 
 
 20939. You are now president? — No. 
 
 20940. Yice-president ? — No. But a member of the 
 council of the local branch of the Land League. I 
 wish to state that I am here giving evidence, not as a 
 member of the Land League, but as an individual. 
 
 20941. But you will give us all your experience as a 
 member of the Land League. Have you any experi- 
 ence of the working of the Land Act of 1870? — A 
 good deal. 
 
 20942. According to your experience, has it worked 
 well or the contrary? — It has worked very ill. My 
 experience is that it stimulated industry and improve- 
 ments very much for a time, and after a time the 
 tenant farmers saw there was no security for their 
 improvements in the land, in consequence of the power 
 which the Act gave to landlords to raise their rents to 
 
 an unUmited extent. That checked the improvements, 
 and it created a general feeling of discontent. The 
 result of it was that the landlord having the power, 
 unless the tenant went out altogether, of raising the 
 rent, the tenant was afraid of having his own improve- 
 ments valued, and raising the rent on him. It has been 
 done in many cases. The landlord has raised the rent, 
 and thus confiscated the property of the tenant. 
 
 20943. I suppose in your opinion that state of affairs 
 was rather an inducement to the landlord to raise the 
 rent ? — It was decidedly. 
 
 20944. Have you known many instances of the rents 
 being raised in your part of the country? — I know 
 some instances. I could mention one where the rent 
 was £125 a year, tlie valuation £97, 5s. The tenant 
 was promised a lease at the expiration of his own lease, 
 and in consequence he made vast improvements. He 
 reclaimed twenty acres of bog, and at the expiration of 
 the lease the rent was raised £25, making it £150. That 
 I consider was a rack rent. The tenant would not pay 
 that rack rent, were it not that. by the working of the 
 Land Act he had no remedy against the landlord, 
 Owing to the covenants in the lease, he was after ex- 
 pending £800 or £900. 
 
 20945. If he had gone into the Court and fought 
 the landlord, he would have had to leave the place, and 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 651 
 
 take whatever compensation he could get for it ? — He 
 would. 
 
 20946. And he preferred to stay on it with his 
 family?— Yes. 
 
 20947. He understood that his lease would be re- 
 newed at the expiration of the old lease ? — The lease 
 was renewed, but at a higher rent, and the bad times 
 coming on, it was a great hardship on an improving 
 tenant. 
 
 20948. What is your idea as to pasture when con- 
 trasted with tillage farming ? — I think that all cove- 
 nants binding the tenant to keep the land in grass 
 ought to be made null and void by the Land Act, 
 because it does an immense deal of harm. 
 
 20949. But if a man takes a grazing farm he ought 
 to keep it as a grass farm? — But I think in the interest 
 of the public such contracts ought to be null and void. 
 
 20950. Whether a tenant was a large one or a 
 small one, you would not allow him to contract himself 
 out of the Land Act ? — I would not. 
 
 20951. Some people say that large farmers require 
 protection — do they ? — I think that in recent years the 
 tenants on large farms were very hard pushed. 
 
 20952. What I want to know from you is, do you 
 disapprove of pasture as contrasted with tillage? — 
 I disapprove of it in toto. 
 
 20953. Does it tend to consolidate farms ? — It does. 
 I know that landlords having lands to let, have 
 generally let it as grass farms. There was 112 acres 
 in the farm to which I refer. It is held only as a 
 grass farm, and still the tenant goes on improving and 
 reclaiming bogs, and making every improvement pos- 
 sible for an improving tenant to make. It ought to 
 be sufficient to protect the landlord, by not allowing 
 the tenant to do anything that would deteriorate the 
 land. 
 
 20954. Would you allow him to subdivide? — To 
 the extent of 30 or 40 acres. 
 
 20955. Would you allow him to sublet?— As a rule 
 I think it would be rather unfair to prevent con-acre. 
 
 20956. There is a question whether con-acre is sub- 
 letting, but my question refers to letting part of the 
 land altogether? — I would not think it right to allow 
 him to become a small landlord on his own account. 
 
 20957. But would you allow his son to hold it after 
 his death? — ^I would. 
 
 20958. Have you turned your attention to the pro- 
 moting of peasant proprietorship ? — I think that would 
 be very desirable, but I don't think the Government 
 would be able to pass a measure expropriating the 
 landlords. Mr. Gladstone would not have the power, 
 I believe, to do it. 
 
 20959. Do you think Mr. Parnell could do it? — 
 Not at all. 
 
 20960. Would you think that buying out all the 
 landlords of Ireland and selling to the tenants would 
 be beneficial ? — I think it would be beneficial. 
 
 20961. But not practicable? — No ; but with absent 
 landlords it might. I believe that peasant proprietary 
 is the basis of a fair settlement of the land question, 
 but I don't believe that in the present state of parties 
 it is possible. 
 
 20962. But wherever you find an industrious tenant, 
 and the landlord wilhng to sell, you would offer every 
 facility ? — I would. 
 
 20963. Gradually that would spread over the whole 
 country, and become a national institution in course of 
 time ? — Yes. 
 
 20964. But would you turn out the landlords with- 
 out their own consent ? — I would not think it fair. 
 
 20965. Nor without giving them compensation? — 
 That would be the amount of tlie purchase money. 
 
 20966. You would not take anything from them? — ■ 
 I would not. 
 
 20967. And you think the tenant should pay a fair 
 rent for his holding ? — That is the extent of the whole 
 question. 
 
 20968. Suppose a scheme were proposed by which 
 the tenant was to pay a fair rent, that he should not 
 be turned out as long as he paid that rent, and that 
 he should be at liberty to sell his holding if he wished, 
 
 what would you think of that ? — That would be the Oct. 25, 1880. 
 fairest thing to do. I think that would be the fairest 
 way. I know one in King's County, a bishop's pro- Ki"mavtiii. 
 perty, near Clonmacnoise, where the Ulster Custom is 
 supposed to prevail. The tenants are generally small, 
 and I know they are comfortable, because they are 
 making a great deal of improvemeuts on the land, 
 and they consider the landlord will not or cannot dis- 
 possess them of the lands, because they think the 
 Ulster Custom does prevail on the property. On this 
 estate they are comparatively comfortable, because they 
 feel that the landlord has not raised the rent on them. 
 They have the land practically at about Griffith's 
 valuation, and they are ready to sell if they chose. If 
 the Ulster Custom were defined in this way, and 
 extended in this way to all parts of Ireland, it would 
 be easy to settle the land question. 
 
 20969. Would it satisfy the people, do you think ? — 
 I think it would. I know another estate. Lord Ash- 
 town's, where the tenants are very much dissatisfied— 
 they are very poor. 
 
 20970. That is the estate that originally belonged 
 to the Gascoignes? — I don't know. 
 
 20971. It is Lord Ashtown's ]— It is. 
 
 20972. Suppose there was a difiference between the 
 landlord and tenant, how would you fix it? — By 
 arbitration — two to be chosen, one by each, and they 
 to choose an umpire; and I would have them take 
 into consideration the letting value of the lands in 
 the district, but I should not have them take into 
 consideration the tenant's improvements, so that he 
 should not be rented on his own expenditure ; but 
 not only that, but on his own tenant right sometimes 
 he gets by the Land Act seven years', and from that 
 down to two years' compensation. Previous to the 
 Land Act of 1870, this right was in existence in these 
 three counties. A tenant used to sell his goodwill as a 
 general rule. 
 
 20973. Before the Land Act?— Before the Land 
 Act the law did not recognise it, but still the landlords 
 allowed it. 
 
 20974. The Land Act of 1870 only to a certain 
 extent recognised this occupancy right? — I would 
 include not only the value of the tenant's improvements 
 in soil, but the value of his tenant right, and that would 
 be decided, I think, in the fairest way by arbitration. 
 
 20975. Arbitration by Land Court, or private arbi- 
 tration? — I think that the judge would be a very 
 proper umpire. 
 
 20976. But would not that lead to litigation in 
 nearly every case? — Yes, it would be better to have 
 all these settled outside the Land Court. 
 
 70977. What do you think of a Government arbi- 
 tration ? — It would be a very good way as long as they 
 took care not to value the tenants' improvements or 
 goodwill. 
 
 20980. Yes ; but apart from that, the principle is 
 one thing, how it should be carried out is another. Do 
 you think a Government arbitration would be a good 
 way of settling it?— I do. I think Griffith's valuation 
 was a very good valuation ; and if they bad another 
 man now like him, I think it would be well. 
 
 20981. What do you think of fixity of tenure and 
 free sale ; the Land League don't like that ? — I differ 
 with them on that. 
 
 20982. But suppose they carried the country with 
 them ? — I don't suppose even if they earned the country 
 with them, I don't think they would make the Govern- 
 ment carry it out. 
 
 20983. Do you think that would please the people ? 
 — I believe the people, when they come to see the 
 merits of the difl'erent schemes, they will fall back on 
 the old scheme, and will prefer it because they think it 
 is more likely than the other. 
 
 20984. People often ask for more than they will 
 take ? — That is very often the case. Of course I would 
 give a decided preference to peasant proprietary so 
 long as it can be obtained. 
 
 20985. But you prefer the substance to the shadow^ 
 — Yes. 
 
 20986. The Chairman.— Do vou think that the 
 
 4 O 2 
 
652 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Uct. 2a, ItSO. 
 
 Jauies 
 Kilmfirtiii. 
 
 people understand about peasant proprietary that they 
 would have to pay more than they are paying at 
 present? — I think they don't thoroughly understand 
 this question. I think if they did they would not like 
 it at all. I think the great mass of the people don't 
 understand it. 
 
 20987. We asked some the other day, and at first 
 they were very enthusiastic about peasant proprietors, 
 and when we explained it to them they were not. — I 
 should say that. 
 
 20988. Baron Dowse. — Of course if they got the 
 land for nothing? — From my knowledge of these 
 people and of these agitators, no one asks for the land 
 for nothing. They distinguish between what is right 
 and what is wrong, and want only what is fair, I 
 think. 
 
 20989. The Chairman. — Peasant proprietary and 
 security of holding ? — There is an advantage in regard 
 to peasant proprietary when the holder understands 
 that what he holds would be his for ever and ever. 
 
 20990. Suppose it was a perpetuity lease? — Still 
 there would be an advantage in peasant proprietary 
 over that — paying rent for ever and ever. 
 
 20991. Do you think that they look forward so much 
 as 35 years' distance, and consider it an advantage? — 
 They would. 
 
 20992. Baron Dowse. — Do you think the Irish 
 peasants are so anxious about posterity that they would 
 iaurden themselves for 35 years for its sake? — I don't 
 think they would burden themselves, but they would 
 make some sacrifice. 
 
 20993. The Chairman. — We have heard of some 
 landlords who have laid out large sums of money, not 
 so much on tenant holdings, but in general improve- 
 ments, such as main drains, and roads, and fences, etc. : 
 don't you think that would be a great loss to the 
 country if that were stopped? — If the] Government 
 would go on giving the tenants the same facilities as 
 the landlords have at present to improve their estates, 
 I don't think it would be a loss. 
 
 20994. In these large improvements it would require 
 the whole body of the tenantry to agree beforehand ? — 
 I think in that case it would be the duty of the Govern- 
 ment to carry on the works and apportion the cost to 
 each tenant. 
 
 20995. Like a rating district? — Exactly. 
 
 20996. As in the drainage boards? — Yes. 
 
 20997. But there is nobody to compel them there? 
 — I think that arterial drainage should be carried on 
 by the Government whether the landlords or tenants 
 agree to it or not, and then put a compulsory rate 
 upon it. 
 
 20998. Baron Dowse. — Do you farm much your- 
 self? — 112 acres; there is an immense deal of waste 
 on it. 
 
 20999. The Chairman. — You said you would not 
 object to the subdivision to his son? — Yes. 
 
 21000. Would you limit the size? — Anything below 
 20 acres would be undesirable. 
 
 21001. Would you put a new house and buildings 
 ■ on it ? — That, I think, would be a great advantage, 
 
 because I think the more we have of such farms in the 
 country the better. 
 
 21002. Under 20 acres ? — I would not wish to 
 have them below that, because it will lead to great 
 poverty. 
 
 21003. The O'Conor Don.— Do you hold by lease? 
 — By lease. 
 
 21004. How long made? — About three or four 
 years. 
 
 21005. Baron Dowse. — To run? — No; out of 
 twenty-one. 
 
 21006. The O'Conor Don. — Was the rent raised 
 when the new lease was made? — It was raised. I may 
 just say that the case to which I referred was my own 
 case. 
 
 21007. And what had been the length of the previous 
 lease? — Twenty-one years. 
 
 21008. Is it the custom to give twenty-one years' 
 leases on that estate?— It is a very small property, and 
 there are few tenants on it. 
 
 21009. The Chairman. — Who is the landlord' 
 Thomas J. Tally. '"" 
 
 21010. The O'Conor Don.— You spoke, in answer 
 to Baron Dowse, of giving security to all residential 
 tenants ? — Yes. 
 
 21011. Would you extend it to tenants holding 
 outlying farms ? — No ; it is a deplorable thing to look 
 over this County Galway, and see those vast tracts of 
 land held by graziers. I would think it a good thino' 
 to make all leases prohibiting tillage null and void. ° 
 
 21012. Baron Dowse. — You would leave the grazing 
 tenants to the law as it is ? — I would. ° 
 
 21013. The O'Conor Don.— You think the people 
 would be quite satisfied if the law appUed to residential 
 tenants ? — I think so. I look on the graziers as the 
 curse of the country. 
 
 21014. You spoke of Lord Ashbrook's estate : wben 
 were the rents raised there? — I cannot say the dates 
 but since the present Land Act. On another estate 
 that of Mr. Potts, he gave leases about four years a^o. 
 
 21015. Baron Dowse. — That is the Saunders man? 
 — Yes: he is considered a very good landlord. He 
 gave leases at Griffith's valuation, and then that was 
 raised in some cases one-fourth, and in others one-third 
 above the previous rent. The tenants have pat up 
 houses and walls at their own expense, and at the 
 drawing out of these leases a thirty-one years' lease 
 was offered, and they were prohibited in this from 
 making any claims under the Land Act, either retro- 
 spective or prospective. Several tenants came to me, 
 and I advised them not to take such a lease, and Mr. 
 Potts struck out these objectionable clauses, and gave 
 them thii'ty years' lease. But still in these leases there 
 are objectionable clauses — one is for erecting buildings 
 without the consent of the landlord, and another for 
 reclaiming bogs. 
 
 21016. The O'Conor Don. — Were these leases given 
 to small tenants ? — Small tenants. 
 
 21017. I understood from the Land Act of 1870 
 they can contract themselves out of their claims for 
 disturbance, if they get thirty-one years' lease ? 
 
 21018. Baron Do^vse. — Certainly. 
 
 21019. The O'Conor Don.— But they could not 
 contract themselves out of the permanent improvements ? 
 Xo, I believe not — reclaiming and buildings. 
 
 21020. Do you think many of the tenants with whom 
 you are acquainted would be able to provide one-third 
 or one-fourth of the purchase money of their holdings ? 
 — I suppose I am acquainted with thousands of tenants, 
 and I could scarcely point to half-a-dozen that would 
 be able to pay the money down, for they are very much 
 reduced in circumstances. I was talking to Sir George 
 Young outside. He was making mention of Lord 
 Clancarty, who is considered to be a very good land- 
 lord ; and I wish to mention the hardship of preventing 
 tenants from selling. It is not the custom on that 
 estate. One of the cases I know, too, was one of great 
 hardship. A poor woman, holding nine acres, unable 
 to carry on her farm, wished to give it up ; she claimed 
 some compensation to give it up. She would have got 
 u large sum of money if she had a right to sell it, and 
 Lord Clancarty would get a good tenant, but Mr. 
 Fowler told him that Lord Clancarty would not allow 
 any such custom. He would not allow free sale for fear 
 that it would become a custom on the estate. I 
 think it is very injurious entirely to allow any such rule ; 
 any rule on an estate that works in that way injures the 
 tenants. 
 
 21021. He does not acknowledge right of sale?— 
 No. She was in arrears of rent, and except for improve- 
 ments, she could not claim anything for disturbance. In 
 this case, I believe, Lord Clancarty gave her £18. I 
 believe she would get £100 if she were allowed to sell. 
 
 21022. Baron Dowse. — And, as in the north of 
 Ireland, the landlord would get the arrears of rent out 
 of the £100? — Certainly. This system of allowing a 
 rule on an estate to prevail works very injuriously. I 
 think it is very unfair to have one custom on one 
 estate, and another on another ; and I think, if the 
 Government were to make any change in law to 
 extend the Ulster Custom, it would be very desirable 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDEXCl. 
 
 653 
 
 to have it defined. If it would be of any service to 
 you, I could furnish you with some documents to show 
 you the inconvenience of such a rule. 
 
 21023. Of rent being charged too high? — Yes. Of 
 course I could only give those for what they are worth. 
 
 21024. Do you mean to say you are called an agita- 
 tor ? — I certainly am, because I go to these meetings, 
 and I have been the cause of getting up those land 
 meetings in our districts. 
 
 21025. I think you are a very moderate and reason- 
 able man. — I would never have taken part in it but 
 for these cases of hardship. The landlord has a good 
 right to get a fair rent. (Witness handed some docu- 
 ments to the secretary, Sir George Young.) 
 
 21026. The CHAimrAN. — Can you say how you got 
 them? — I know a case that I was instrumental in 
 bringing before the House of Commons through The 
 O'Donoghue, that of Mrs. Denis O'Brien, near Ballina- 
 sloe. The tenants had made vast improvements there. 
 I wrote down here and there the rents and valuation, 
 which show that the tenants have no security. Eleven 
 of those tenants were served with notices of ejectment, 
 demanding the rent, or otherwise double the existing 
 rent. 
 
 21027. When was it? — I don't remember the date, 
 but I think it was about three years ago. Togher is 
 the name of the town land. I will just give you an 
 example of the rents and valuation of this estqte. The 
 eleven tenants were served with processes of ejectment, 
 either demanding the rent, or double the rent. Mat 
 Kinnane of Togher, valuation £13, 6s., which may be 
 
 £13, 10s. This, however, is nearly correct, as I could Oct. 25, 1880. 
 get it. The rent £22, 8s. served with notice of eject- - 
 ment or to raise the rent to double the existing rent. Kiiinartin. 
 This tenant, I know, has made improvements. The 
 valuation is £13, 5s. 
 
 21028. You mean to say she wanted to raise them 
 to £44?— She tried to do it. But I held meet- 
 ings there, and these cases were supplied to The 
 O'Donoghue, and I think, in consequence of the pres- 
 sure of pubhc opinion, eacli desisted from proceeding 
 in each case. The valuation of that land would be a 
 very high rent if it were not for the tenant's improve- 
 ments. I have taken down another case, that of John 
 Fohey, valuation £2, 5s., rent £4, los. He was served 
 with notice of ejectment or double the rent. 
 
 21029. For double the £4, 10s.?— Yes. Another 
 case is that of John Finnan ; his rent is £3, 10s., and 
 his valuation 15s. 
 
 21030. What, did she want to raise that too?— Oh, 
 before that. 
 
 21031. Is it Mr. Denis O'Brien ?— Mrs. Denis 
 O'Brien. 
 
 21032. Did she succeed in this? — She desisted. 
 
 21033. Did she desist in all?— In all; she left them 
 the land at the old rent. As a general rule, these small 
 landlords — 
 
 21034. Who is the agent? — She has no agent, she 
 has only a small property. 
 
 21035. Baron Dowse. — You were going to say, as 
 a general rule, that these landlords? — They are worse 
 on their tenants than the old landlords. 
 
 Mr. Thomas F. Joyce, examined. 
 
 21036. The Chaieman. — You live at Mount Tyrone 
 House, near Lennane? — Yes. 
 
 21037. You are a tenant farmer ? — We farm close on 
 9000 acres of land, myself and my father, which I manage. 
 
 21038. What sort of land is it? — Mountain land in 
 Connemara. 
 
 21039. Chiefly or altogether situate in Connemara ? 
 — Chiefly in what is called the Joyce country. 
 
 21040. Does the right of tenants selling their lands 
 exist in that district ?— On some estates here and there 
 only. 
 
 21041. Who is your landlord ?— Mr. O'Kelly for 
 some of it, and we hold some under Lord Ardilaun and 
 Mr. Berridge. 
 
 21042. Do any of these landlords recognise the right 
 of sale ?— Mr. O'Kelly, the landlord on whose property 
 we live. 
 
 21043. And the others do not ?— No. 
 
 21044. Are sales increasing or decreasing? — They 
 are decreasing since the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 21045. Is the rent generally raised on the occasion .of 
 a change of tenant ? — JSTo ; a tenant must surrender the 
 land to the landlord, and it is advertised that the lands 
 are to be sold, and the highest bidder gets the land. 
 
 21046. Do you hold by lease? — Yes, some. 
 
 21047. Are they long leases? — Twenty-one years. 
 
 21048. Have you and your family always held leases 
 for twenty-one years? — No; some for longer terms 
 and some shorter. 
 
 21049. When were those leases made? — In 1860. 
 They will expire next year; and there are several 
 parties who hold under similar leases, and they will 
 not be entitled to claim compensation for improvements 
 or disturbance, and I think that they should be placed 
 in the same position as tenants from year to year. 
 
 21050. Do you consider the tribunal of Quarter 
 Sessions a good one ? are the people satisfied with it ? 
 — No, indeed they are not. 
 
 21051. Could you suggest a better tribunal? — I 
 don't know what existing tribunal would be better. 
 
 21052. It is chiefly the expense that you complain 
 of ? — Yes ; and it leaves so much to the Chairman. 
 I suppose they are generally landlords, and they have a 
 leaning to their class. I know one case of my father's. 
 He claimed compensation — he improved it in various 
 
 ways ; the landlord came into Court, and filed a set-off, 
 so that my father had to give up his claim. The 
 landlord would have expended £1000 on it; and my 
 father was obliged to pay for dilapidations, and there 
 were no dilapidations. 
 
 21053. Have you any complaints to make of the 
 covenants that have been latterly put in the leases ? 
 — Yes, I have some here : binding tenant to pay grand 
 jury cess, and to make any claim for compensation on 
 the expiration of the lease, and not to make any improve- 
 ments not required for a grazing farm on it. My brother 
 thought to go and live on a farm, which was 200 acres, 
 and he would not be allowed to build on the place. 
 
 21054. Was it a grass farm before ? — It was. 
 
 21055. Do you see any objection to the landlord 
 covenanting that it should be a grass farm ? — I do ; it 
 was large enough to support a family. 
 
 21056. Baron Dowse. — Might not it have continued 
 a grass farm and he be allowed to build an addition 
 to the house ? — He might have done so. 
 
 21057. Who is the landlord ?— Mr. Staples of 
 Queen's County. 
 
 31058. Would your brother have been willing to 
 have paid an increased rent equal to the average of 
 half the county cess, and then have the county cess 
 divided between the landlord and tenant ? — The land 
 was too dear as it was. 
 
 21059. That system for a landlord to undertake 
 to pay half of the county cess and put it on the rent, 
 would be a mere fraud on the Act of Parliament ? — It 
 would. 
 
 21060. Suppose a tenant says, " I won't pay the 
 county cess," and the landlord says, "Very well; I will 
 put it on the rent;" would not that be only a contriv- 
 ance ? — It would. Before the lease was filled up, there 
 was nothing about grand jury cess, but at the time 
 the lease was signed there was then this clause. 
 
 21061. The O'Conoe Don. — When your brother 
 agreed to pay the rent that is fixed in that lease, did he 
 understand that half of the county cess was to be paid 
 by the landlord 1 — There was nothing at all about it. 
 
 21062. And you understood that it was not to be 
 paid ? — Yes ; according to the Act. 
 
 21063. What proportion does the Government valu- 
 ations bear to the rent ? — It is a fair rent. We pay 
 
 Thomas F. 
 Joyce. 
 
654 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct 26 1880 £500 per cent, over the valuation, others £300, others 
 
 ■-^ £200. 
 Thomas F. 21064. The rent is very much more over the valaa- 
 
 ^°^'^^' tion in regard to the grass farms than the others, is it 
 
 not?— Yes. 
 
 21065. Has there been any great increasmg of rent 
 since the passing of the Land Act 1— There are a great 
 many of the landlords who have increased their rent 
 and entered into new agreements with the tenants. 
 
 21066. In Connemara ?— Yes, and in Mayo too. 
 
 21067. Baron Dowse. — How far is Lennane from 
 the borders of Mayo ? — About a mile. 
 
 21068. The O'Conoe Don.— Is there any particular 
 time on those estates in which rent is raised, or is it 
 raised at any time ?— Whenever the land is purchased 
 by new landlords — land jobbers, as they are called — 
 they generally raise the rent. They are the curse of 
 the country. 
 
 21069. That is the land jobbers ?— Yes. 
 
 21070. Are the improvements generally made by 
 the landlords or the tenants ?— All by the tenants. If 
 they are not by the tenants, they are not made at all. 
 Lord Ardilaun is doing something of that kind — 
 building houses for his tenants. 
 
 21071. Has the Land Act done anything in the 
 way of encouraging improvements I — It has rather 
 checked the growth of improvements. 
 
 21072. How so ? — The landlords objected to making 
 improvements, and the tenants are afraid. 
 
 21073. They are afraid the rents will be increased? 
 — Yes. I knew a case in which there were ten or eleven 
 of a family, and the tenant was ready to build an 
 additional room or two to his house, and the landlord 
 warned him that if he made the improveinents he would 
 evict him. His family to-day are herding with the 
 cattle out in the stable. 
 
 21073a. Who is he? — I would rather not mention 
 the name. 
 
 21074. The O'Conoe Don. — Are there many cases 
 in your district where the tenant has claimed com- 
 pensation and got it ? — Not many. 
 
 21075. Are there many evictions ? — A good many, 
 but many of them cannot claim compensation. 
 
 21076. That is, they entered on a new agreement 
 since the passing of the Land Act, and cannot claim 
 compensation ? — Yes. 
 
 21077. Are there many cases of that sort near you? 
 —Yes. 
 
 21078. On what estates? — Several — Lord Sligo and 
 others. 
 
 21079. Has Lord Sligo evicted any of those tenants 
 with whom he made this new agreement? — He has 
 evicted several of them, not at this Quarter Sessions. 
 
 21080. But within the last four years? — Yes, and with- 
 in the last six months; but many go back as caretakers. 
 
 21081. Do you know anything about tenants pur- 
 chasing their holdings? — No, they have not purchased 
 in my district. They cannot purchase, because the 
 lands are held in common. The whole of the village 
 might be sold in one lot. 
 
 21082. The tenants would not be able to purchase? 
 — Some would not; and the others could only buy 
 their own shares. 
 
 21083. Is that where there is a great extent of 
 mountain land ? — Yes ; the receipts are given in Co. 
 
 21084. The O'Conoe Don.— Do you think an 
 extension of the purchasing clauses of the Land Act a 
 true remedy ? — I think it is a very good remedy, but 
 small tenants are so poor now that they cannot buy. 
 
 21085. If there was power now, how would you 
 enable them to buy ? — The Government should enable 
 them by advances. In holdings up to £10 valuation 
 they should give them the full money. 
 
 21086. But would not they have to add an increase 
 to their rents? — I would give them a twenty years' 
 purchase on the valuation. 
 
 21087. Would you compel the landlord to give it at 
 twenty years' purchase? — I would. 
 
 21088. The Chairman. — Would you compel the 
 Government to make the rent at the Government 
 valuation? — I would. 
 
 21089. Baron Dowse. — But suppose the tenants 
 hold the mountain at a fair rent, and were allowed to 
 sell their interest, and were never to be turned out as long 
 as they paid that rent, would that be a good plan?— 
 I think it would be a very good, equitable settlement. 
 
 210'90. Do you think that it would satisfy the 
 people 1 — I think it would considerably ; but the Bright 
 clauses should be extended along with that. 
 
 21091. But we have been told that in some places, 
 even if they had the land for nothing, they could not 
 live upon it ?— Oh, they would. 
 
 21092. They havelivedupto the present? — They have. 
 
 21093. Dou you think they would be able to pay a 
 fair rent fixed by some honest man?— I think they 
 would. 
 
 21094. A Government valuator ? — Yes ; or one 
 chosen by each, and the Government to provide a third 
 man. 
 
 21095. Do you live in that part of Connemara where 
 it is said they are not paying ? — They are not paying 
 the rents. 
 
 21096. Why? — Because the rents are too high, and 
 they are not able to pay thepa. 
 
 21097. But some say they have it, and that they 
 won't pay ? — That is not true. 
 
 21098. Do you think it is true that they have the 
 rent but are unwilling to pay it ? — I am sure it is false. 
 The potatoes are failing, and the land is so bad it is 
 not able to grow wheat or oats. 
 
 21099. The Chairman. — Are the potatoes failing ? 
 — They are rotting and bad. 
 
 21100. Baron Dowse. — What is the cause of that 
 — this is a very good season ? — I don't know. 
 
 21101. Will they ever be better off ?— If the 
 champions continue as good as they are, it will be a, 
 great improvement. 
 
 21102. Do you think the land has been worn out by 
 the use of artificial manures ? — There are some places 
 where it is worn out, and in other places it is hungry. 
 
 21103. Do they use artificial manure much there? 
 — Guano ; but chiefly fannyard. 
 
 21104. That is not artificial manure — at least it 
 ought not. 
 
 21105. The O'Conor Don. — Do they still sow 
 wheat ? — They do not, in my locality. 
 
 21106. Baron Dowse. — Are they industrious?— 
 Oh, they are ; they thrash their oats at night because 
 they have not time to do it in the daytime. 
 
 21107. They are improving their holdings? — Yes. 
 
 21108. And they are an industrious population? — 
 There is no doubt about it. 
 
 21109. I want that distinctly stated, because we 
 have been told the contrary? — There is no doubt about 
 it. The people who make such statements as that 
 don't know the country, or they have stated a wilful 
 falsehood. 
 
 21110. The Chairman. — What is the custom on the 
 dropping of the lease — does the landlord have the pro- 
 posals from others, or does he just make an offer at a 
 fixed rent to the tenant? — There is no offer to the 
 tenant. It would be by open competition. I know 
 one family that had a lease of twenty-one years — they 
 were a most industrious family. They improved their 
 farms. They had built a comfortable cottage on it, 
 made roads, fences, drains, etc., and at the expiration 
 of the lease the rent was raised from £15 to £100. 
 
 21111. Baron Dowse. — That is, he was made to 
 pay rent on his own improvements ? — On his own im- 
 provements. 
 
 21112. The Chairman. — Then on the dropping of 
 the lease a tenant must make a proposal on his own 
 improvements, or lose the place altogether ? — He must 
 give a higher rent than anybody else in order to get it, 
 or at least as high. 
 
 21113. Baron Dowse. — And the question of his 
 improvements is never taken into account at all ? The 
 landlord says, "There is a farm, what will you give for 
 it?"— That is all. 
 
 21114. The CHAiRMAN.^These leases, yon say, drop 
 next year ? — Yes ; and this year more of them, and the 
 year after, according as they were given. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 G55 
 
 Mr. Thomas Palmek, Galway, examined. 
 
 live in Galway? — 
 
 21115. The Chaikman.^You 
 For forty years. 
 
 21116. You are a merchant, and also a holder of 
 land?— Yes. 
 
 21117. Within the town? — Near the town, within 
 about an Irish mile. 
 
 21118. Have you any complaint as to the rent? — 
 The rent is very exorbitant ; but independent of the 
 rent, there is the lease with all kinds of clauses, and 
 it winds up with a most extraordinary clause. 
 
 21119. How many acres do you hold? — 11 or 12. 
 
 21120. And the rent?— £64 a year. 
 
 21121. Who is the lessor?— The lessor, if it would 
 not be absolutely necessary, I would not like to 
 mention. 
 
 21122. When was the lease granted? — In 1875. 
 
 21123. And would you read the clause? — "Provided 
 always, and it is hereby expressly agreed, that the said 
 Thomas Palmer, senior, shall not make, at the deter- 
 mination of his tenancy, any claim for compensation 
 for disturbance, nor for land reclamation, nor for im- 
 provements, except improvements made with the 
 consent of the landlord." 
 
 21124. Baron Dq-wse. — That is the Parnell lease ? 
 — I am not aware. "Nor for compensation in any 
 other respect under any of the clauses or provisions of 
 the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act 1870, or any 
 other Act which may be passed during the continuance 
 of such tenancy." If there was a reform of the land 
 laws to-morrow or next year, this lease would debar me 
 from any advantage under it. 
 
 21125. Why did you take that lease?— The old 
 story — competition for land. My sons wished it. 
 There is another clause — " Provided always, and it is 
 declared and agreed, that the letting hereby made is 
 subject to the conditions or agreements herein stated, 
 and to no other condition or agreement whatsoever.'' 
 
 21126. Were you in the land when you got the 
 the lease ? — I think I was in the land. 
 
 21127. The Chaikman. — As a tenant from year to 
 year? — I am not clear. I think I was in the land. 
 
 21128. Baron Dowse. — Did you read the lease before 
 you took it ? — I did. 
 
 21128a. And why did you take it? — Land was 
 looked upon as indispensable, and the landlord had it 
 all his own way. 
 
 21129. The Chaikman. — How is the land described ? 
 is it a town park? — " All that and those the lands and 
 premises of Rahoon, situate in the parish of Rahoon in 
 the county of the town of Galway." 
 
 21130. Baron Dowse. — Is there a residence on it ? — 
 No. 
 
 21131. Then you live in Galway? — Yes. 
 
 21132. The Chairman.— Is the Land Act ? — 
 
 It is very fair. 
 
 21133. Baron Dowse. — This land that you hold, 
 has it increased value as accommodation land above 
 the ordinary letting value ? — That is so. 
 
 21134. Then it is a town park? — It is just a conveni- 
 ence. The state of agriculture is in a very wretched 
 low state from two causes— from the ignorance of the 
 
 tenantry, and the apathy and indifference of the land- 
 lords to improving the condition of agriculture. 
 
 21135. The Chaikman. — Do you speak of that 
 round the town? — Round the town and round Lough 
 Corrib and other places, anything like the low state of 
 agriculture you cannot well conceive. 
 
 21136. Do you think that low state of agriculture 
 makes it difficult to pay the rents? — Quite so. 
 
 21137. Baron Dowse. — What does that arise 
 from ? — First from the ignorance of the peasantry, and 
 second from the apathy of the landlords. 
 
 21138. Do you think it arises from want of security 
 on the part of the tenants ? — I think so. I come from 
 the north, and I was much struck with the difference. 
 
 21139. What part of the north ?— Hillsborough. 
 
 21140. The Chairman. — And it struck you very 
 much — the inferior character of the agricultm-e here ? — 
 They won't sow in time, they won't reap in time. 
 They lose a fourth or a fifth of their crops every year 
 by allowing it to get over ripe. They will see a green 
 head here and there and all shedding round about, and 
 they say till that green head ripens we will not cut. 
 
 21141. Have they the inclination not to begin till a 
 particular time ? — Oh, very much. They say the time 
 has not come to sow, or to do this or that. A friend 
 said to me, " Between Galway and Spiddal they lose 
 about £1500 a year to £2000 by corn shedding." 
 I hold that absenteeism is a frightful curse. I hold 
 that nine-tenths of the evils of this country is owing 
 to absenteeism. 
 
 21142. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that if they 
 had the land at a fair rent, and not to be disturbed as 
 long as they paid that rent, that that would be a help 
 to the country ? — Decidedly. I can't imagine that 
 there would be a second opinion about it, for I have 
 known of cases of a landlord who set land at the base 
 of a mountain, and when that was a bit improved he 
 hunted them to another place farther up the mountain. 
 
 21143. Do you mean that he took the place below 
 from them? — Yes, that he took it from them and 
 hunted them up to another place. I would be a great 
 advocate to have reclamation of waste lands on the 
 Prussian system. Where there is waste land there 
 the Government takes hold of it. They run a great 
 canal from this point to that, where the fall is, and 
 that drains the land, and then there is facility for 
 reclaiming it. Then they let it out in plots of from 200 
 to 300 acres on the 3 J % system, so that the farm would 
 become the property of the tenant in 40 or 50 years. 
 
 21144. But there are great plains there? — Connemara 
 is also a district where there is much reclaimable land. 
 
 21145. The Chairman. — A great deal of that is in 
 the hands of tenants at present — could the reclamation 
 not be done by them? — No. It could not be done by 
 them individually, as they could not manage the 
 falls. 
 
 21146. Baron Dowse. — It would need some person 
 that would be able to manage a great tract of country ? 
 — Yes. It would be a facility for tenants to come in 
 and say, "I would take 200 acres to further reclaim." 
 
 The witness then retired. 
 
 Oct. 25, 1880. 
 
 Thomas 
 Palmer. 
 
 John Ross Mahon, Esq., examined. 
 
 21147. The O'Conor Don. — You are a land agent 
 and landed proprietor ? — Not a landed proprietor. 
 
 21148. Are you a member of the firm of Guinness 
 & Mahon of Dublin?— Yes. 
 
 21149. What extent of land are you agent over? 
 — I now speak only of Galway and Roscommon, which 
 is my department. We collect £50,000 a year in the 
 two counties. 
 
 21150. Who are the chief proprietors for whom you 
 act ?— Mr. Pakenham Mahon, Lord Clonbrock, Lord 
 Westmeath, Sir William Ross Mahon, Mr.C. T.M'Caus- 
 land, Mr. Newcomen, and Mr. Lloyd of Rockville. 
 
 21151. Are the tenants allowed the right of dis- 
 posing of their holdings on any of these estates ? — No. 
 There never has been on any of them any tenant right 
 — I mean as to farms. If a man had a house in the 
 village, even if he had not a lease, he is allowed to 
 dispose of it. 
 
 21152. But it is not allowed to tenants of 
 cultural holdings ? — No. 
 
 21153. In any shape or form: 
 form. 
 
 21154. And when tenants are 
 into bad circumstances, would 
 
 Jolm Eoss 
 Mahon. 
 
 agri- 
 
 -In any shape or 
 
 leaving from getting 
 the landlord allow 
 
656 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880, 
 
 Oct. 25, 1880. 
 
 John Eoss 
 Mahou. 
 
 them anything ? — There has been in most cases some- 
 thing given to them on going out. 
 
 21155. Only small sums ?— Just what the landlord 
 thought proper to give, in order to provide for their im- 
 mediate necessities, and let them look round about them ; 
 but in fact none have been put out for many years, and 
 then for non-payment of rent. 
 
 21156. Do the landlords recognise the right of the 
 tenant to charge their holdings, and to dispose of 
 them by will ?— Well, 1 think they do. If a tenant 
 leaves his holding to another, he is recognised as the 
 tenant, unless there is some special reason to prevent it. 
 But is is unusual for that class of tenant to make 
 wills. Some do ; some do not. 
 
 21157. Have there been many ejectments on those 
 estates with which you are connected? — Not for a 
 great length of time. 
 
 21158. Were they for non-payment of rent? — All 
 for non-payment of rent. I don't think in my lifetime 
 we have ever ejected a dozen for anything but non- 
 payment of rent. 
 
 21159. Do you think the limits of compensation 
 fixed in the Land Act are reasonable? — I think they 
 are unreasonable as regards the landlords. 
 
 21160. In what way? — The houses are valueless to 
 them — cottiers' houses — and they have to pay for 
 them. The landlord pays for them and pulls them 
 down. But on the whole I don't object to — I would 
 rather see a man getting — I would rather lean to the 
 tenant. 
 
 211G1. Have you had many cases in the Land 
 Court ? — Only one in my life, and that was a few days 
 ago. 
 
 21162. Was that a case of a tenant evicted for 
 non-payment of rent ? — Yes. 
 
 21163. Baron Dowse. — Did he make a claim under 
 the Land Act?— He did. 
 
 21164. Did he say his rent was exorbitant? — I 
 don't think he did. At all events the County Judge 
 ruled that it was not so. 
 
 21165. Did he make a claim for improvements? — 
 He did. 
 
 21166. The Chairman. — Did he get a fair amount? 
 — I think he got within 30s. of what I would have 
 given him. 
 
 21167. The O'Conor Don. — What you offered 
 him before going into Court ? — No ; but what I valued 
 them at. 
 
 21168. How much did he claim?— £360. And he 
 got £130, which made a set-off against the rent, and 
 it only left 26s. or 30s. coming to him. 
 
 21169. Do leases exist to any extent on the pro- 
 perty ? — There are some leases, but not very 
 many. 
 
 21170. Have they been on the increase or decrease 
 since the passmg of the Land Act ? — No increase or 
 decrease. 
 
 21171. What term is usually given? — Thirty-one 
 years. Generally leases are given to persons who hold 
 large farms. The small farmers won't take them. 
 Generally speaking it is for lives or years, so as to 
 insure the son succeeding to the father's improvements. 
 That is my idea of giving lives. For instance, you 
 have Mr. Roberts of Strokestown, he got a lease for 
 lives, for his own life and the life of his son. 
 
 21172. You say the small tenants are not inclined 
 to take leases ? — They won't take them at all. I have 
 offered them by Mr. Pakenham Mahon's directions, and 
 not one tenant would take out a lease. They said they 
 were perfectly satisfied. They felt confident there 
 would be no ill-usage, and they would not take out a 
 lease. Tliey are under the impression that the land- 
 lord would be more liberal to a yearly tenant. The 
 whole country seems to be of that opinion, and I 
 think they are right. 
 
 21173. What proportion does the rent bear to the 
 valuation?— That it is utterly impossible to say. 
 Grass lands I let very much above the ordnance value. 
 Lands of moderate quality are let, say 25 per cent, 
 above, and lands of inferior quality are let as a rule 
 about 10 or 15 per cent., and very often not above the 
 
 ordnance value at all, the light lands sometimes a little 
 below the valuation. 
 
 21174. Has the raising of rent been on the increase 
 since the Land Act of 1870? — I don't think it has 
 made any difference. 
 
 21175. Has there been any general increases on 
 the rent of the estates which you manage, for some 
 years ? — There have been some instances. 
 
 21176. Isolated instances? — Some years ago I 
 raised the rents on the Pakenham estate. It was very 
 low set in the famine years, and I raised it to a 
 moderate rent. 
 
 21177. How long ago is that? — Fifteen or twenty 
 years ago. 
 
 21178. Before the passing of the Land Act?— 
 Before the passing of the Land Act. 
 
 21179. With respect to improvements, have much 
 been made by the landlords on these estates ? — Very 
 large improvements on some of them. Take Pakenham 
 Mahon's first. I have been agent about thirty years 
 there, and he has laid out upwards of £30,000 during 
 twenty years ending the 1st of January 1869 — 
 
 21180. This includes everything? — No. Land im- 
 provement and arterial drainage and taxes for the 
 maintenance of arterial drainage, £31,417. 
 
 21181. For those twenty years? — Yes. And then 
 for the ten years ending January 1879, there was an 
 expenditure of £14,248. 
 
 21182. Was that all expended on what we call 
 tenants' lands? — Yes; it includes the expenditure on 
 the demesne. The demesne was tenants' land too, for 
 it was set on lease. It was all expended on tenants' 
 land, but I guard myself in that way — that some of it 
 was on the demesne ; but it did not include anything in 
 connection with the demesne, such as game, or rabbits, 
 or salaries, or wages — only land improvement. These 
 accounts are taken from the accounts for each half- 
 year. They are not taken at random. 
 
 21183. flow much was spent upon the demesne as 
 distinguished from the other lands? — The demesne 
 and in connection with it, £5692 — during the ten 
 years. 
 
 21184. During the last ten .years ? — During the 
 last ten years — during the ten years ending January 
 1879. 
 
 21185. The Chairman. — A large part of that was 
 expended in giving employment ? — All in giving em- 
 ployment. 
 
 21186. Anything for drain pipes? — It is stones 
 we use, not pipes. With regard to Sir William 
 Mahon's estate, there is a reasonable expenditure on 
 that too — not very large — £600 a year as an average 
 for labour all through these twenty or thirty years. 
 It is £594 a year taking the average of ten years. 
 That is all in labour. It does not include anything 
 else. That is for the ten years ending 31st October 
 1879. 
 
 21187. Is there any other estate which you would 
 wish to mention ?— There is Mr. M'Causland's. There 
 has been a very considerable expenditure on it. He 
 is a north country man — from Derry. 
 
 21188. On Lord Clonbrock's estate what is the 
 amount spent in improvements, and the rental?— I 
 would rather put this in afterwards. 
 
 21189. If you put it in a rough way, you can 
 correct it?— The amount expended by the landlord 
 in the ten years including 1878 was £5700. 
 
 21190. Baron Dowse.— What kind of improve- 
 ments ?— Drains almost entirely. Drains is what I 
 prefer very much to lay out money on. 
 
 21191. The O'CONOE Don.— Hoad-making ?— Yes. 
 
 21192. Baron Dowse.— All for the general ad- 
 vantage of the estate ?— Yes. No interest is charged 
 for money expended on roads. This is considered 
 landlords' repairs. 
 
 21193. Are these arterial drains? — Every sort of 
 drains. 
 
 21194. Do you mean to say that you would drain 
 a tenant's field for him ? — Yes. 
 
 21195. Do you add anything to the rent for that? 
 — Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 657 
 
 21196. How much? — Under the present loans we 
 charge about 2J per cent. ; before that we charged 5 
 per cent.; and Lord Clonbrock pays the difference. 
 He only charges interest on the money. He pays the 
 principal himself. 
 
 21197. He is desirous to recoup himself and not to 
 make anything by it ? — Yes. 
 
 21198. The O'Conor Don. — What improvements 
 are made by the tenants? — On cut-away bog land 
 they bring it into reclamation. 
 
 21199. They reclaim cut-away bogs? — Yes. 
 
 21200. With regard to these reclamations, is there 
 a considerable profit ? — T believe there is a considerable 
 profit ; the first two years' crops are often sufficient to 
 recoup the outlay. 
 
 21201. But with regard to reclamations on a large 
 scale, do you think they can be profitably carried on ? 
 — I do not. 
 
 21202. Have you had any experience of that? — 
 Yes; on Lord Clonbrock's estate since childhood. 
 He reclaimed bog at an expenditure of £2000, which 
 included plant, while Mr. Birmingham was his agent. 
 It was an experiment to see how bog reclamation 
 would do. It was done on the Chat Moss principle, 
 with sod drains. It was undertaken under favourable 
 circumstances. It had a limestone quarry in the bog. 
 Then there was a portable railway so as to carry about 
 the lime. The sod drains were very cheap — merely to 
 dig the sod and reverse it. He raised very good crops 
 while he had it in his own hands, and when, reclaimed 
 he advertised it to see what he could get for it, and 
 the best offer he had was £25 a year if his lordship 
 would keep the drains in order. He sent this as an 
 essay to the Royal Dublin Society, but they said it was 
 not what they wanted. 
 
 21203. Baron Dowse. — What was the subsoil? 
 — Limestone; but I don't think they went down to that; 
 the main drains went down to the subsoil. 
 
 21204. The Chairman. — What is the state of it 
 now? — It is let at £18 or £15 a year; it has held 
 its own. 
 
 21205. The O'Conor Don. — Do you know any 
 tracts of waste land that you think would be valuable 
 for general reclamation, and for letting out for 
 occupiers to live on ? — I don't know anything of the 
 sort. I went to see Lord George Hill's improve- 
 ments, but I did not approve of them as a paying 
 speculation. 
 
 21206. Baron Dowse. — Did you see Mitchell 
 Henry's improvements ? — No. 
 
 21207. It is possible to spend more in the reclaim- 
 ing of waste land than the fee-simple is worth? — It 
 is. It is a struggle for life. That is my experience 
 of Gweedore. I daresay that in Clare and Kerry 
 there are opportunities of doing it, but in Gwee- 
 dore or Roscommon I should not hke to do it at all. 
 
 21208. The O'Conor Don.— When you say it would 
 cost more thaa the fee-simple, do you mean more than the 
 valuation of the fee as it originally stood — that would 
 be very httle, you know? — I don't. I mean the value 
 after it has been reclaimed. 
 
 21209. Baron Dowse. — You mean the value in its 
 improved state ? — That is what I mean. 
 
 21210. The O'Conor Don.— With regard to the 
 rents on the estates you manage, do you consider they 
 are reasonable? — 1 think I am fortunate. I am not 
 dealing with any distressed landlords, or persons who 
 urge me to raise the rents unfairly; on the contrary, I 
 think they are rather disposed to be very reasonable. 
 
 21211. You mentioned an instance in this paper you 
 have sent in, to show that the rents are reasonable. I 
 will take Lord Clonbrock's ? — The small tenants pay 
 12^ per cent, less than the ordnance value. The grass 
 tenants pay 20 per cent, over the ordnance valuation. 
 It is pretty much the same on Pakenham Mahon's. 
 It is rather higher than Lord Clonbrock's, but still it is 
 very little above the ordnance value, except the grass 
 lands, which are all above the valuation. 
 
 21212. You said that in '48 you took up part of a 
 town land held by small tenants ? — I took up part of 
 Sir William Mahon's. I ploughed it. I did not eject 
 
 any one. I gave plots of land to those that were Oct. 23, 1880. 
 paupers. I gave them cabins or houses, and left ~r~' 
 
 them more or less land. I got up portion of the land, jja^hon 
 and let it at 35s. an acre to a grazier. The tenants 
 have paid and are paying 28s. an acre for other parts 
 of the same town land, and find it as much as they 
 can do. 
 
 21213. For the same quality of land?— It is the 
 worst part I got up. Lord Clonbrock took the tithe on 
 himself, and he added nothing to his tenants. I only 
 know this from hearsay from himself. The same way 
 on Su- William Mahon's estate : the tithe was taken off 
 by my father in his lifetime, and the land is still let at 
 the same rate. 
 
 21214. Do you know the town lands of Derry Car- 
 berry, and Aghagower? — I do well. 
 
 21215. It was stated to us in Roscommon that the 
 rents of these town lands were very exorbitant? — There 
 is no exorbitant rent on Mr. Pakenham Mahon's estate. 
 
 21216. Take*A.ghagower, the tenement valuation is 
 £216, the rent of the town land £224. You think 
 that shows that the rent is not too high f — Oh, quite 
 evidently, 
 
 21217. The Chairman. — I understood the tenant 
 to say that there was something that was much over 
 the Government valuation ? — This is averaging it over 
 the whole town land. 
 
 21218. Do you know tenants named Kilhoe and 
 Cassidy? — I do know Killroe; he is a wealthy man of 
 his own class. He does not live by his land at all. He 
 is an egg-higgler, not dependent on land. 
 
 21219. Can it be that his land is let higher than 
 others ? — No, certainly not ; but as a rule the lands in 
 these town lands are very poor, and wherever the land 
 is very poor, tenants are very poor, but there has been 
 very large expenditure on it. All the roads — and there 
 are a great quantity of roads — had been mended at 
 great expense, by which they draw turf and other 
 things — no charge made for outlay. 
 
 21220. And has that all been done by the landlord? 
 — All ; and also arterial drainage, and no addition to 
 the rent. But there is no case of hardship at all on 
 these town lands. They are rather poor people. 
 They would be poor if they had not any rent to pay 
 at all. 
 
 21221. The holdings are small ?— The holdings are 
 small, and the land very poor. 
 
 21222. With regard to Derry Carberry ? — The 
 ordnance value of it is £80 a year ; the rental is £90. 
 
 21223. Have the rents been raised at all on these 
 two town lands lately ? — No, not lately. 
 
 21224. You cannot say when the last change took 
 place? — I cannot; but they are comfortable people, 
 and pay their rents with great regularity. I should 
 not wonder if a man named Flynn made an objection. 
 He is a very comfortable fellow. He was the guardian 
 of some minor children ; he was not using them very 
 well, and I made an arrangement which did not please 
 him, and he has not what they call in the country a 
 " wish " for me. 
 
 21225. Baron Dowse. — £50,000 a year you receive? 
 —Yes. 
 
 21226. For those noblemen and gentlemen you 
 have mentioned ?^ — Yes. 
 
 21227. Do you evict on notice to quit? — Never; 
 you may say never, practically. 
 
 21228. Then the tenants on those estates without 
 any law have fixity of tenure practically? — I think 
 they have ; that is the reason they would not have 
 leases, I suppose. But I may mention that when I 
 became agent to the Strokestown estate in 1847, it was 
 covered with paupers. The rental was £9000 a year, 
 exclusive of the demesne. The average quantity of 
 land each tenant held was 3 acres 1 rood plantation 
 measure, without counting under-tenants, and almost 
 every tenant had one or two under-tenants. 
 
 21229. How much would the under-tenants have? 
 — I cannot tell. Of course they were all absolutely 
 starving. I don't say they were starving in good times. 
 They Uved on con-acre, by taking land outside on 
 other people's estates, and growing potatoes and corn ; 
 
 4P 
 
658 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 0ct. '25, 18,s(i. 
 
 John Eoss 
 Mahoii. 
 
 and they paid their rent ■with considerable punctuality 
 till the potatoes failed, and then there was dearth, 
 absolute starvation. 
 
 21230. The Chaieman. — That was the late famine 
 time ? — Yes. I took the agency without knowing the 
 precise position in which the tenantry were. The 
 potatoes failed, and I saw the impossibility, not only 
 of rent being paid, but of the people living. I wrote 
 to Major Mahon, and said I must resign the agency 
 unless he gave me £20,000 in hard cash to lay out 
 in emigration, draining, and improvements. He said 
 that was a very serious sum of money, and he would 
 take ten days to consider the matter. At the end of 
 three days, he wrote and said he would agree to my 
 terms ; the only reservation was, he would give me 
 £10,000 the first year, and £10,000 the second year. 
 He paid me £3500 as an instalment of the first 
 £10,000, when unfortunately he was shot. Of course 
 that broke up the whole arrangement, because the 
 executors could not carry it out. However, Mr. 
 Pakenham Mahon was very liberal, and he gave them 
 all, those who were not able to stay, more or less, 
 and we then got np the farms and let them to tenants 
 adjoining ; and the estate is, on the whole, in a very 
 good way for an Irish estate. 
 
 21231. Baron Dowse. — Do you think it has very 
 much improved of late ? — Yes, very much. 
 
 21232. The Chaieman. — These improvements that 
 were made gave you an opportunity of employing all 
 the smaller tenants and their famihes ?^It did. It 
 also improved the condition of the other tenants, 
 because I gave the land I took up to others, and made 
 good-sized holdings. 
 
 21233. The O'Conoe Don.— Don you find it easy 
 to prevent subdivision ? — It is impossible. I will tell 
 you an extraordinary story. I gave land to a man 
 named Lyons, 28 or 80 acres, in '48. I saw the house 
 elongating every day, new chimneys building, but there 
 was only one door. They always denied subdivision ; 
 they came to grief the other day — they were not able 
 
 to pay the rent. Then I discovered there were four 
 families in the same house with the one door, and that 
 the tenant had let rooms and land to each of his three 
 brothers, and he had his own 5 or 6 acres free of rent, 
 as he made his brothers pay the rent for him. 
 
 21234. Of the whole holding? — Of the whole 
 holding. 
 
 21235. The Chaieman. — Do you see any means of 
 checking that ? — I do not ; it is scarcely possible to 
 do it. 
 
 21236. Baron Dowse.^Is subdivision more com- 
 mon than sub-letting ? — Oh yes, it is ; much more 
 common. 
 
 21237. The O'Conor Don. — Amongst members of 
 the same f amily ?— r-Yes. 
 
 21238. The landlord is quite unable to prevent sub- 
 division ? — Yes, I think so. 
 
 21239. You know nothing about tenants purchasing 
 their holdings ? — No. 
 
 21240. Nor about the Ulster Tenant Right?— No. 
 
 21241. Your experience is that this subdivision or 
 sub-letting would bring them back to the state they 
 were in before % — I believe so. 
 
 21242. Mr. Ross Mahon said — I believe you saw 
 that Parliamentary paper about Crown lands in Ros- 
 common and Galway.* They are town lands with which, 
 I am sorry to say, I have something to do with now. 
 It is a Parliamentary inquiry as to lands which adjoin 
 the Strokestown estate and my brother's estate in 
 Galway, and it is just the description of the Strokes- 
 town estate when I took the management. 
 
 21243. Do you know the date of it ?— I don't, but 
 I have a copy of it. It came to this, they could not 
 pay anything at all. Then there was a great deal of 
 work, and the Crown found they could not manage it, 
 and they sold all the Crqwn property, as they did not 
 wish to bring the Government into collision with the 
 people. 
 
 * Lands of Ballykilclirie, County Roscommon, returns to order 
 of House of Lords, 16th and 19th February 1847. 
 
 itavtin 
 M'Donncl 
 
 Martin M'Donnell, Esq., examined. 
 
 21244. The Chairman. — Yon live at Dunmore, 
 near Galway ? — At Dunmore, near Tuam. 
 
 21245. You are a merchant in Galway, and a landed 
 proprietor ? — Yes. 
 
 21246. What extent of property ? — Something over 
 14,000 acres in Galway, Roscommon, and a small 
 portion in Mayo — between 14,000 and 16,000 acres. 
 
 21247. What is your opinion as to the question of 
 rent in your district ? — It varies very much ; and I 
 know that the rents are high in some places, while I 
 suppose they are fair enough in others. 
 
 21248. Is it your opinion that from the rent being 
 in some places very high, a re-valuation would be 
 desirable? — It is my opinion that an arrangement 
 between landlord and tenant would be better arrived 
 at by a re-valuation, which has not been carried out for 
 the last fifty-three years, because the lands of the 
 country have improved very extensively within my own 
 knowledge, some from drainage, others from reclama- 
 tion. 
 
 21249. Is that from the expenditure of the landlord, 
 or from the work of the tenants ? — I would be inclined 
 to believe that it has been created principally by the 
 work of the tenantry. There may be instances in 
 which landlords have improved lands. I have myself 
 largely improved. I got the loan of £10,000. I have 
 employed about 80,000 people within the last seven 
 months. 
 
 21250. Your opinion is that there should be a re- 
 valuation to take the place of the existing tenement 
 valuation ? — I think if you have a re-valuation it will 
 obviate a great deal of diflficulties that now exist, 
 because of the disparity that exists between the rents 
 and the valuation. I believe it would be for the 
 interests of the community, and for that of the landlord 
 
 and the tenant, that a re-valuation should be carried 
 out. That would set this difficulty at rest. 
 
 21251. You considered the length of time that a 
 re-valuation would take?— I cannot say that, because 
 if you put a number of people to value a county 
 together, it may be done in six months. If yon take 
 the standard of the Yaluation Office for your guidance, 
 it will take a heap of time to carry out what would 
 be otherwise done in a fifth of the time. 
 
 21252. Do you think that re-valuation would answer 
 as well? — I thmk it would be an improvement. 
 
 21253. Would you value for letting purposes with- 
 out altering the existing valuation, which is for taxation 
 purposes?— If you don't value them all I don't think 
 It would be satisfactory. I think it would be quite 
 essential to the interest of the community and of every 
 one that the re-valuation that would take place should 
 be for all purposes. If you take an area of £2000 
 and tax it at Is. in the £, and that yon make it 
 £3000 and tax it at 8d., the taxation will be the 
 same. 
 
 21254. Baron Dowse.— But what about income 
 tax? — It would lessen- the general amount. 
 
 21255. It would go to the Imperial Exchequer?— 
 It would go to the Imperial Exchequer. If you send 
 any money across the channel you will never get it 
 back again. 
 
 21256. The Chairman. — Yom- view would be by 
 this re-valuation that the tenant should hold at a fair 
 rent ? — Yes, that is what I should like to see. 
 
 21257. And is it your opinion that he ought not to 
 be disturbed so long as he pays a fair rent?-r-It is. 
 
 21258. And as a landed proprietor you wish to 
 see it?— As a landed proprietor; I never put a man 
 out. ^ 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 659 
 
 21259. Baron Dowse. — And would you allow him 
 to sell? — I would, and add it to another man's holding, 
 because I believe the division of property is a great 
 evil. I knew a man named Glinn whose daughter got 
 married. The son-in-law gave Glinn £200 to come in 
 on half the holding. A second daughter married lately. 
 I learn that her husband gives £200 to be allowed on 
 the other half ; yet Glinn says his land is too dear. 
 
 21260. The Chairman. — When did you purchase 
 your land? — In 1853. I bought 6000 acres belonging 
 to Lords Fitzgerald and Vesey. 
 
 21261. It was sold in the Landed Estates Court ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 21262. What was the state of the property when 
 you got it? — It was wretchedly poor. There were 
 eight families on it, who had no means of living. In 
 '47 the property was put into Chancery. It was let at 
 16s., 18s., and 20s. an acre, and I let it to the people 
 at about 2s. or 2s. Qd. an acre less than in '47. They 
 complained that I put two or three rents on them, but 
 it is now less than they were paying in '47. 
 
 21263. Did you make any change since that? — Do 
 you mean lately ? 
 
 21264. Did you raake any change since? — I have 
 made no change in any rental of mine for the last 
 twenty or twenty-one years. I bought, some twenty or 
 twenty-one years ago, some belonging to Colonel 
 Greville. I bought a good many lands within the last 
 ten years, and I made no change upon them. 
 
 21265. The O'Conor Don. — You have not altered 
 your rent for the last twenty years ? — No. 
 
 21266. The Chairman. — Have you any of what 
 is called waste land on your property? — A good 
 deal. 
 
 21267. That might be reclaimed ? — I am doing at 
 present 60 acres. It was not bog, it was mountain 
 land. I got a great number of loans taken up. 
 
 21268. Are you going to hold it in your own 
 hands ? — I will give it to any tenant. 
 
 21269. In addition to their own holding? — If they 
 are able to attach it to their holdings ; if not, I shall 
 let it. I would add it to each man's holding sub- 
 divided between them. 
 
 21270. Is this a reclamation bystnbbling and clear- 
 ing the lands and drainage ? — Oh yes. I have drained 
 about twenty miles of drainage in the last three or four 
 months, and all this for the benefit of the tenant. 
 
 21271. You have not had time to know whether 
 this will be profitable? — No; but I know it will be 
 very good. A tenant named Moran, whose lands used 
 to be flooded, it is now beautiful for corn where he 
 could not feed a snipe on before. 
 
 21272. Are they inclined to take advantage of the 
 main drains ? — ^I am doing it all myself. 
 
 21273. Do you charge interest?—! borrowed money 
 from the Board of Works. I charged them nothing 
 for two years. I kept account, and then after two 
 years we charge it again, according to the improve- 
 ment that has been effected. 
 
 21274. Do you charge the interest and also the 
 amount of the principal? — We charge the proper 
 amount for paying interest. 
 
 21275. Do you pay yourself the money that pays 
 the debt off in thirty-five years — what do yon pay ? — 
 1 per cent. — 3^ including both ; but we don't mean 
 to charge anything more than I pay for it myself. 
 
 21276. Was it the offer of money at that low rate 
 that induced you to take it ? — Certainly. In getting 
 th rents fi'om them, I wanted to give them employ- 
 ment, and I thought I could not do better than raise 
 the lands of those people above the water. 
 
 21277. Have you found that doing that for them. 
 
 Martin 
 M'Doimell. 
 
 they now pay the rent willingly ? — Not yet. I get Oct. 25, i«8u. 
 about £6000 a year, and I have got very little for two 
 and a half years. 
 
 21278. Do you think it a good thing to allow it to 
 run on? — I do not, but we don't want to get into 
 difiBculties. 
 
 21279. Were they badly off?— Some of them. 
 21279a. Did you offer any abatement? — 50 per 
 
 cent, to every man under ten pounds, and 20 to 25 
 per cent, to every man above it; and some of those 
 who got 50 per cent, did not pay me anything yet. 
 
 21280. The O'Conor Don.— You have some land 
 about Claremorris? — I have a little about the town. 
 
 21281. In Mayo somewhere? — Some little houses 
 about Kiltimagh. 
 
 21282. Instances were mentioned of some very 
 extravagant rents on your property. I thought it 
 was in Mayo, but it must be in Roscommon? — It 
 must be in Roscommon. The way in which this was 
 put forward came from these popular meetings that you 
 have now over the country. Some of the parties will 
 go about and get eight or ten or twelve of the different 
 tenantry at the lowest figure on the valuation that will 
 suit their own purposes ; and where one man was 
 paying £10 a year, and his rating £10, 5s., and another 
 man paying £10, 10s., and his rating £9, 15s., they 
 will say nothing about the latter. If there was one man 
 whose rating was £4, and paid £7, they were sure to 
 have him brought out and paraded him. They took 
 the lowest standard in that way for the purpose. 
 
 21283. The Chairman. — Can you give the reason 
 why the rent should be in higher proportion? — The 
 valuation sometimes value one bit of land higher than 
 another, and they value frequently without knowing 
 the difference. 
 
 21284. You think that high rent as compared 
 with the valuation may arise from that cause, and 
 is no test of what the rent should be ? — No test. I 
 know one townland the value of which is about 
 £70; the rent is £160, and still the land is cheap at 
 the rent. 
 
 21285. Baron Dowse. — The cause is the difference 
 in the land ? — Yes ; where the rent is £10, and the 
 valuation £9, 15s., which is very near it, but when 
 there is a great difference, it is no test. 
 
 21286. The valuation is too low in that case? — 
 It is. 
 
 21287. Would you have an objection if the law 
 were so that the tenant and you should get some 
 independent person to value that land ? — I would not 
 have the slightest objection so long as you could put 
 a fair man to do it. 
 
 21288. If there was a reasonable valuation made, 
 you would not object to that ? — No ; it is essential to 
 the interests of the country. 
 
 21289. That a valuation of all Ireland should take 
 place ? — That would be a very important thing to all 
 proprietors. 
 
 21290. The O'Conor Don.— You think it would be 
 desirable to have a new valuation instead of the 
 Government valuation, which is so fallacious, as you 
 have pointed out to-day ? — I do ; I know of instances 
 in which the Government valuators went out to value, 
 and I believe they did not know the value of the land. 
 
 21291. Do you allow your tenants to sell theii- 
 interests if they were leaving? — I have in one or two 
 instances allowed them to sell to others, but as a rale 
 there is no such custom on the property. 
 
 21292. Do they get much for their interests? — I 
 could not say. 
 
 21293. Have you an opinion? — A man got £26 for 
 2 acres of land which he held under me for 12s. 
 
 Mr. John Graham, examined. 
 
 21297. What rent do you pay for it?— At present 
 £28. 
 
 21294. The Chairmait.— Where do you live?— In 
 Miltown, 25 miles from Galway. 
 
 21295. You hold a farm there ? — I do. 21297a. Whom do you hold under? Under Dr 
 
 21296. Howmanyacres? — Somewhere about 20acres. M'Hale. 
 
 4 P2 
 
 John Graham. 
 
660 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 25, 1880, 
 John Graham. 
 
 21298. The O'Conor Don.— The archbishop?— Yes. 
 
 21299. The Chairman.— What is it that you want 
 to tell us about— is it about your own holding ?— No ; 
 but my practical knowledge through the country. I 
 have been a deal with the people, and I know a great 
 deal about them. I know a good deal of wrongs that 
 have been on both sides. I would wish to see the 
 question amicably settled between both sides. I have 
 been contractor for works. 
 
 21300. What is your opinion of the state of the 
 country?— I think it is very bad; they are in a very 
 poor state, and if the thing could be arranged with the 
 landlord it would be an improvement. 
 
 21301. When you say it would be better to arrange 
 with the landlord, do you mean as to rent ? — Yes. I 
 think the land is let too high. 
 
 21301a. The land let too high generally: do you 
 apply that to your own case? — I don't, because it has 
 been reduced. I could state cases in the parish and 
 surrounding it, where the land has been too high and 
 is too high. 
 
 21302. State one or two of the cases. — Yes. 
 
 21303. On one or two of the properties ?— Take 
 Colonel Seymour's; the rent on that estate is now 
 double the valuation, and it is quite impossible for 
 them to pay. 
 
 21304. Baron Dowse. — Is that the old gentleman? 
 — Yes, sir. 
 
 21305. The Chairman. — He said, I think, that he 
 had not rents for many years? — He has not got the 
 rents, and they are in dispute about it, and I believe 
 they are trying to settle it now. 
 
 21306. By arbitration? — I believe he is leaving it 
 to some gentlemen ; but my opinion is that if there was 
 a re-valuation of the land entirely, it would be better 
 both for landlord and tenant, and each should have 
 their own conditions. I think the present valuation 
 would not be a fair criterion either to the landlords on 
 the one hand, or to the tenants on the other. 
 
 21307. It is an uncertain valuation? — I think so. 
 You will get holdings on one estate where one man's 
 holding would be dear enough, while under the valua- 
 tion on another holding that would not be dear at all 
 at it. The labourers are also very bad. Those who 
 have only four or five acres, if they were entirely done 
 away with and get cottages, they would be better off. 
 No man can support four or five of a family under ten 
 acres of land. He has his time lost perpetually, and 
 he has no profit by it, even if he had it for nothing. 
 If he has a family and trying to keep them respectable, 
 it is impossible for him to live without paying any rent. 
 
 21308. I suppose that in times gone by they just 
 lived on what they raised ? — Yes ; they brought over 
 rents from England, and now England is failing for 
 the last two or three years, and they brought no 
 money over, and then the credit from the shops was 
 stopped. I think if they got 9s. a week at home, 
 and if the large farmers were compelled to till their 
 lands and employ them, the labourers would be better 
 off. 
 
 21309. The large farmer only requires one or two? 
 —Yes. 
 
 21310. Would there be an opportunity of reclaim- 
 ing ? — In the vicinity where I live there are between 
 ten and twelve thousand acres of land that is covered 
 with water. It is not worth more than 5s. an acre, 
 and if reclaimed it would be worth 20s. 
 
 21311. Baron Dowse. — Whose property is that on? 
 — It commences with Mr. Vernon's and goes down to 
 Mr. M'Donnell's, and running along the river Clare. 
 
 21312. The O'Conor Don.— Has Mr. M'Donnell 
 being doing anything to that lately ?-— Not lately. 
 
 21313. Baron Dowse. — Do you farm any yourself? 
 — I do — some fourteen acres. 
 
 21314. The Chairman. — What has it been reduced 
 to?— From £28 to £21. 
 
 21315. Did you ask him for a reduction? — He made 
 it himself. 
 
 21316. Baron Dowse. — Have his tenants paid? — 
 Part of them have. 
 
 21317. What would you suggest as a remedy for 
 all the grievances of the tenants ? — That a Bill would 
 be passed, and that arbitrators should be sent down — 
 independent men — that an independent arbitrator should 
 be sent down from Dublin to fix a fair rent. 
 
 21318. What would you do with the tenant — would 
 you turn him out so long as he paid the rent? — I 
 would not turn him out. 
 
 21319. Would you allow him to sell his interest? — 
 I would. I would allow the landlord to have the veto. 
 
 21320. Do you think that would satisfy the people? 
 — I think it would. 
 
 21321. The Chairman. — That is the talk among 
 them ? — It is. 
 
 21322. Baron Dowse. — You go among them? — I 
 do, and I know their thoughts on the subject. The 
 last thing in the world that a man wishes to do is to 
 leave his house and home ; if they had that encourage- 
 ment they would do better. They go in for compensa- 
 tion, and the landlord loses a whole lot of money rather 
 than pay it. On Colonel Seymour's estate there is a 
 whole lot of money gone in this way. If there was 
 free sale that would be prevented. 
 
 21323. And the landlord would get his rent ? — Yes. 
 
 21324. The O'Conor Don. — Has Seymour issued 
 any ejectments? — Yes. The labourers will be the worst. 
 
 21325. The Chairman. — What sort of houses have 
 you ? — ^Very bad houses. I call any man who has not 
 ten acres a cottier. He must be digging it all the year 
 round, and it is in a very bad state, and he cannot 
 have it done properly. As to the crops, he cannot 
 raise them properly; and any man who has not the 
 means of keeping his farm stocked properly, and his 
 farm properly cultivated, he is sure to fail. 
 
 21326. Do you mean under the name of labourers 
 those who hold under ten acres ? — I do ; they cannot 
 live unless they get something outside that. Unless 
 they get some other provision for them they cannot live. 
 
 21327. Unless they could get it by going to Eng- 
 land there is nothing for them ? — 'I?here is nothing. 
 Absenteeism has done a great deal of harm, because 
 we have no manufactures ; but the money that goes to 
 the landlords goes to England, and all the money that 
 goes to the merchant generally goes to England as well. 
 
 21328. You say that the farmer when improving 
 does not feel secure ? — He does not. 
 
 21329. You think that the landlords also want im- 
 provement because they don't feel secure ? — That is so. 
 This land that I am now talking of, the landlords are 
 not getting their rents. They need two-thirds of the 
 land to be secured in order to get a loan, and they will 
 not do that, because they believe they would not get 
 the rise that would be necessary to repay them for it 
 That is what some of the landlords have told me. 
 
 21330. The O'Conor Don. — Do you know anything 
 about tenants purchasing their holdings under the 
 Bright clauses? — I don't think they care so much 
 about that. The present agitation has risen some of 
 that, but previous to that it was fixity of tenm-e and 
 fair rent. 
 
 2 1331. Baron Dowse. — You think that would satisfy 
 them ? — Yes. It was the banks that raised the value 
 of land ; and those grazing farmers are now nearly as 
 bad as the others. 
 
 Patrick 
 Haiily. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Hanlt of Moycullen, County Galway, examined. 
 
 21333. The Chairman. — Is it near Galway town ? 
 ■ — Within six miles. 
 
 21334.— Do you hold land ?— Yes. 
 
 21335. Yourself?— My father; he is a very old 
 man, and I act for him. 
 
 21336. How much ? — About fifteen or sixteen acres, 
 and a tract of mountain pasture. 
 
 21337. Who do you hold it under? — Mr. Mnl- 
 chinock of Dublin. 
 
 21338. What rent do yon pay for it ?— f 14, 7s. 6d. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 661 
 
 21339. Have you anything to say about the rent? — 
 It is upwards of twice the Government valuation. The 
 Government valuation is £6, and the rent is what I 
 have named. 
 
 21340. Is there a large extent of mountain ? — It is 
 in common between fourteen or fifteen or sixteen. 
 
 21841. Is this near the village? — Yes. 
 21342. Is it on lease ?— No. 
 
 21348. Was it on lease some time ago? — It was 
 never on lease. 
 
 21344. And then they hold all the mountain in com- 
 mon ? — Yes. 
 
 21345. Is there any regulation as to the amount of 
 stock each man puts on the mountain ? — No. 
 
 21346. Each puts as much as he likes? — As much 
 as they can. It is of very great extent — about 700 or 
 800 acres. Some of it is good for pasture, and some 
 of it bad — heathery and turf, part of the low part. 
 
 21847. At the end of your holding, is there a turf 
 bog ? — That has been reclaimed. 
 
 21348. As you go towards the mountain? — Yes. 
 
 21349. Reclaimed by your father ? — Yes ; the arable 
 land has been reclaimed and improved. 
 
 21850. Was not it all cut-away turf or bog? — 
 No. 
 
 21351. Who is the agent of this property ? — Maurice 
 E. Barry. He keeps a public-house in Galway. 
 
 21352. Baron DovrsE. — Is he a magistrate? — No; 
 he was a poKceman. 
 
 21353. The Chairman. — And does he look well after 
 it in the interest of the landlord ? — He does ; he is 
 rather a bit harsh on the tenants. 
 
 21354. Has there been a rise of rent? — Not by the 
 present landlord, but there was a rise in 1856 from 
 £6 to over £14 ; and the present landlord wanted to 
 take the pasture from us on which we used to graze, 
 and when we would not give him that, he served us with 
 notices to quit. That is about two years ago. 
 
 21855. Did he want to take it away and leave the Oct. -ib, 1880, 
 rent the same ? — Yes. . — • 
 
 21356. Baron Dowse.— And what made him stop? Hanlv*^ 
 — He did not stop ; he would not allow us to take it, but 
 served us with notice to quit. We waited till last October, 
 and we thought he would come to demand possession. 
 He did not come, and he did not ask possession, and we 
 thought he would give up then, but he served us with 
 ejectment processes on the 3d of last January. We were 
 all poor then, and we could not stand against him. 
 
 21857. The Chairman. — You could not afford to 
 hire counsel? — No. 
 
 21358. Baron Dowse. — What happened? — The 
 decrees were granted, and we served him then with 
 notice for compensation. When he was served with 
 the notices, he was only served two days when the 
 landlord died. Some of the tenants accepted the terms. 
 They got disheartened, and they accepted the terms 
 the agent offered them ; and others went away — myself 
 was one of them. 
 
 21359. The O'Conor Don.— What were the terms ! 
 — If the mountain was divided, it would make 60 acres 
 to each tenant. He would only give us 20 acres each. 
 
 21360. Baron Dowse. — What became of you? — 
 I served him with notice to claim compensation. 
 
 21361. What became of it? — It was to have come 
 on, but in consequence of the death of the landlord it 
 is to come on the day after to-morrow. 
 
 21362. The Chairman.- That is for evicting you? 
 — We were not evicted yet. 
 
 21363. What claim did you put in?— £207. 
 
 21364. For what — for houses, reclamation of land, 
 and disturbance? — Yes. 
 
 213G5. Baron Dowse. — This rent is too high? — It is. 
 
 21866. Even if you had all that you had before? — 
 It would be ; but if we had all that, it is too high, we 
 would not complain. 
 
 The witness then retired. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Davoren, examined. 
 
 Thomas 
 Davoren. 
 
 21367. The Chairman. — You are in the same vil- 
 lage ? — Yes, in the same property. 
 
 21368. What do you hold? — Fourteen acres and 
 some roods. 
 
 21369. And part of the mountain? — Yes. 
 And what do you pay for that? — £11, 
 
 What is the Government valuation ? — £5, bs. 
 You have had the same run of the mountain ? 
 
 21370. 
 4s. 6d 
 
 21371. 
 
 21372. 
 —Yes. 
 
 21373. What have you done about your case — were 
 you also ejected?- — Yes. 
 
 21374. And have you fought it? — (No answer.) 
 
 21875. Baron Dowse. — Is your case to come on? — 
 Yes. 
 
 21876. The Chaiejean. — There is nothing more than 
 that ? — About thirty years ago there was only 40 acres 
 of reclaimed land. £60 was the rent, and it is paying 
 £200 now. 
 
 21377. Baron Dowse. — Did the landlord ever do 
 anything to it at all ? — No, sir. 
 
 21378. Everything done by the tenants? — Except a 
 piece of road. 
 
 21379. For the general benefit? — For his own benefit 
 — for the use of the bogs. We used to have this for 
 £60, and we have now to pay £200. 
 
 21380. The Chairman.— You have to pay for turf 
 now ? — Yes. 
 
 21381. Inthe village?— Yes. 
 
 21382. What do yon think would be a satisfactory 
 settlement ? — Fair rent, fixity of tenure, and free 
 sale. 
 
 21388. Baron Dowse. — Would you like that — a 
 fair rent ? — I would. 
 
 21384. Fixity of tenure — not to be turned out as 
 long as you paid the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 21385. Do you think you could live on it if you had 
 that ? — I might struggle. 
 
 21386. The Chairman. — What is your opinion of 
 peasant proprietary ? — I think it better. 
 
 21387. Would you like to pay more, and it be your 
 own in the end ? — Yes. 
 
 21888. Bvenif yon paid more? — Yes. 
 
 21389. Could you pay more rent ? — I don't say that, 
 but I would try. It was not Mulchinock we had most 
 to complain of, but this agent. 
 
 21390. Baron Dowse.^ — Did Mr. Mulchinock ever 
 five in this part of the country at all ? — No, sir ; he 
 lives in Dnblin. He came down here once, and he said 
 he would do whatever Barry said was right. 
 
 Thomas Hanley (the preceding witness). — He would 
 not allow us the bogs, because we would not accept his 
 terms. He would not sell us the bogs. 
 
 21891. The O'Conor Don. — That is since you were 
 served with notices ? — Yes. 
 
 21892. Did not you till it last summer? — No, sir. 
 21393. Are not you in possession of it? — -Yes; but 
 
 we did not know the minute we would be put out. 
 
 Mr. Darby Tarpey, examined. 
 
 21394. The Chairman.— Where do you live ?— At 
 Bahoon. 
 
 21395. Are you one of Miss Julia Daly's tenants ? 
 —Yes 
 
 Darby Tarpey. 
 
 21396. How many acres have you? — Two acres 
 from her. She raised it up to £6, Is. l\d. 
 
 21397. When was the rise? — About twenty-two 
 years ago. 
 
662 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 25 1880 21398. Yoa have had no rise for twenty-two years? 
 
 -^ —No. 
 DarbyTarpey. 21399. What was the rent then?— £2. 
 
 21400. Baron Dowse. — Was the rent raised 
 after Father Peter Daly bought the place ? — The 
 rent was £2 when he bonght it, and he raised it 
 to £6. 
 
 21401. And Miss Julia has not raised it? — 
 No. 
 
 20402. The Chairman.— Is it a very stony place? 
 No ; it is lea land. 
 
 21403. I suppose the rent is considered as being 
 in connection with the business of the town ? Do yoa 
 live on it ? — No. 
 
 21404. Baron Dowse. — But you don't live by it? 
 —Yes. 
 
 21405. What do you live by ? — I have other land. 
 I have other land from tlie nuns. 
 
 21406. Do they treat you fairly?— They did not 
 raise it at all. 
 
 21407. You have no complaint against them ? — No. 
 
 I had another holding from Mr. Kearns, and they 
 gave me an ejectment process. 
 
 21408. Did you ever ask Miss Julia to reduce the 
 rent ?— I did. 
 
 21409. Did she?— No. 
 
 21410. Why do you keep it if it is too dear?— 
 If we did not some other man would take it. 
 
 21411. Have you a house on it? — Yes. 
 
 21412. Do you live on it? — I do. 
 
 21413. Did your father hold it?— Yes. 
 
 21414. You pay the Gralway rates ? — Yes. I had 
 another holding from Mr. Kearns, and they took it 
 from me. 
 
 21415. Did they turn you out ? — ^No. 
 
 21416. Did you claim compensation? — No. 
 
 21417. Why ?— They said they wanted^it for them- 
 selves. 
 
 21418. Why did you not claim compensation? — ^I 
 had no money. 
 
 21419. The O'Conoe Don.— Was it a town park? 
 —Yes. 
 
 Mrs. Bolton. 
 
 Mrs. Bolton, examined. 
 
 21420. Baron Dowse.— Yon live at Blake Hill?— 
 Yes. 
 
 21421. How far is that from Galway ? — Two and 
 a half miles from Galway. 
 
 21422. Is it in the borough ?— No. 
 
 21423. How much land have you? — It is stated in 
 my lease at 140 acres, but I got it surveyed lately, 
 and there is only 75 acres 2 roods 38 poles. The 
 water is measured in. 
 
 21424. You were married before ? — Yes. 
 
 21425. And did your husband hold it ?^Yes. 
 
 21426. Under what company? — The Alliance 
 Company. 
 
 21427. What was the rent?— £100. It was raised 
 to £140, and in order to get the lease I agreed to 
 give £10 more. 
 
 21428. That made it £150?— £150. 
 
 21429. Is this Alhance Company an insurance com- 
 pany ? — I think so. 
 
 21430. Is that too high a rent? — Par too high. 
 I heard many people say £75 would be enough, 
 but I feared they would not give it, and I offered 
 £100. 
 
 21431. Did your husband make any improvements 
 on it ? — A great many — removing stones from it. 
 
 21432. Did you erect any buildings? — Nothing 
 but out-o£Bces — nothing we could count. 
 
 21433. Was there sea-weed on that farm? — Yes. 
 It was of value a few years ago, but it is worth 
 comparatively nothing now. 
 
 21434. Would it make kelp ?— It would not. 
 
 21435. Would it not be of any use on the land ? 
 
 But we can't sell it. 
 
 21436. You used to sell it ?— Yes. There was a 
 demand for it a few years ago for the purpose of 
 manure, but there is no demand for it now. Whether 
 it was that the people went out of the country or not 
 I don't know. 
 
 21437. How much was it worth on an average '^ 
 
 Sometimes £60 or £70. 
 
 21438. But is it worth nothing now ? — Almost. 
 
 21439. Did you ever write to the Alliance Com- 
 pany ?— Yes ; and the agent, Mr. Dickson, of Dublin, 
 40 Upper Sackville Street; but got no satisfaction. 
 
 21440. Does he come down here?— He does, for 
 rent. 
 
 21441. What did he say?— He said he could do 
 nothing. 
 
 21442; He made a reduction last year? — He did. 
 
 21443. How much ?— £75. He made the same' to 
 all the tenants. 
 
 21444. Have you made application to have your 
 rent reduced ?— I wrote to the secretary :— 
 
 ^i^Tlf-^ }^^ *r™® ^^^ ^°''^ arrived for paying the 
 rent of this farm, I think it a fitting opportunity to ask 
 
 you to reduce the reut to something within the bounds of 
 moderation and reason. I am a person who has no ex- 
 treme views, but to do what is right and just. I am sure 
 your Company does not desire to place me in the condition 
 of a pauper. I now beg to offer you £100 per annum, 
 and I will pay the present half-year's rent at the same 
 rale if you accept my offer. 
 
 21445. Did you get an answer to that ? — I did ;— 
 
 I AM in receipt of your letter of the 21st lost., and I 
 regret to say it is impossible for the Company to comply 
 with your proposal. Bartholomew Lewis. 
 
 21446. How long has the lease to run ?^ — It is out 
 now. 
 
 21447. How long ? — Since the 1st of November last 
 year. 
 
 21448. And then you made a special agreement for 
 another year? — Till this November. In order that 
 I might not claim compensation, the letter was so 
 worded that it was a continuance of the lease for 
 another year. 
 
 21449. Did it mention that ?— It did. 
 
 21450. When will the year be up ? — Pii-st November, 
 
 21451. They have refused your offer of £100?— 
 
 _ 21452. What is the valuation ?— Griffith's valua- 
 tion is about £105; and there was some other valuator 
 came some few years ago, and put on £15 a year for 
 the sea-weed. 
 
 21453. What is the valuation as it stands .?— £120, 
 But if the sea-weed was taken off it, it would be £105, 
 
 21454. And the lease specifies 140 acres, whereas 
 you have only about 75a. 2r. 38p.?— Yes. 
 
 21455. Do you honestly say that it not worth more 
 than £100 a year ? — I do. 
 
 21456. Has Mr. Dickson made any offer to you? 
 —£150. 
 
 21457. The same rent?— The same rent, and he 
 will take no less. Mr. Lewis the secretary was down 
 here a few months ago. 
 
 21458. How long have they this property ?— About 
 the same time as we got it — about 28 years ago. 
 
 21459. They had a mortgage on it, I believe?— I 
 heard that Lord Oranmore owed them some money, 
 and they got it in that way. The farm is quite unpro- 
 tected. There are two dangerous cliffs on the farm, 
 and I have to keep a man standing watching the 
 cattle always. 
 
 21460. There are no mearing walls?— Very bad 
 ones — I may say none. 
 
 21461. Had you any attorney when you signed that 
 agreement ? — I signed it without any attorney. If I 
 did not sign it, he said he would not allow me the 
 half-year's rent, nor consider me a tenant. 
 
 The witness then retired. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 663 
 
 Mr. Matiieav Nolan, examined. 
 
 21461. The Chairman. — You live at Shrule? — At 
 Cloonban, parish of Shrule, County Mayo. 
 
 21462. How many acres have you? — About 4^ 
 acres — not 4| altogether. 
 
 21463. And you pay £8, 3s.?— £8. 3s. 
 
 21464. Do you say that is too much? — It is too 
 much. 
 
 21465. Who is your landlord ?— Mr. ITackett. 
 Some years ago — about twenty-five years ago — it was 
 bought by Mr. OTlaherty for £1700. He raised the 
 rent, and sold it to a man of the name of Hackett ten 
 years after for £4500. 
 
 21466. Has there been a rise since that ? — I found 
 that my land was only 4^ acres ; 305. an acre was my 
 rent. He said, " If you don't pay, I will serve you 
 with notice to quit." I had to pay that for the last 
 fifteen years. When I complained that I would survey 
 the land, he always said he would serve me with a 
 notice to quit. 
 
 21467. You say there was less land in it? — I paid 
 for 3 roods higher than what I held. 
 
 21468. Was that by measurement? — By measure- 
 ment I got myself. 
 
 21469. Is the road included in it? — No, but in the 
 holding. I can prove that I have only 4 acres. 
 
 21470. Not 41 ? — ^Not 4-^. I ought to have 5 acres 
 at 30s. an acre. I am 3 roods and 10 perches short 
 of my holding. There is a writ now pending for three 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. 
 
 half-years. I did not pay him for the last three gales, *I^t- Nolan. 
 and I could not pay him. I was served with processes 
 by a shopkeeper for £1 4, and I paid £7 of it. 
 
 21471. Did you offer to pay him something? — 1 
 did. I reduced the decree £2 a year for three years. 
 There is £7 due still. I have five miles to go for turf, 
 and I applied for a road there. 
 
 21472. You have not got a right of turbary?— 
 No. 
 
 21473. And you have to pay for the turf separately? 
 — I have. We have neither mountain nor anything 
 like it on the land. There are fourteen other tenants 
 on the land besides myself. There is a mile of a sort 
 of by-lane. I live on another mile farther of the 
 worst road in Ireland. The priest did not come for 
 the last four years. This is on Mr. Hackett's 
 property. 
 
 21474. Where does Mr. Hackett live 1 — In the town 
 of Headford. He and his brothers live there. They 
 are worth £1300 a year. He made it by a whisky 
 establishment, and he would not give us sixpence worth 
 if we wanted it. Some of the other tenants have more 
 land than I have. 
 
 21474a. Have you anything besides your farm? — I 
 do a little. I do a little for the trustees in. clearing the 
 river. He has risen every tenant on the property as 
 well as myself. They offered to pay it if he would 
 give a reduction. 
 
 Mr. Francis Leonard, examined. 
 
 Fraucis 
 Leonard. 
 
 21475. The O'Conoe Don. — Where do you live ?— 
 Anglohim. 
 
 21476. Whatisyour rent?— £16. 
 
 21477. How many acres do you hold? — Eighteen. 
 
 21478. When was your rent fixed at £16?— By 
 Thomas Joyce. 
 
 21479. How long ago? — About forty-two years ago. 
 
 21480. Is he your landlord ? — No. He is a young 
 man like myself. He purchased this a few years ago 
 for £3200. 
 
 21481. And then he raised the rent ? — No. But he 
 went with the bailiff on the property, and he gave the 
 land a rise, putting all the drainage on me above all 
 the tenants. He was the bailiff on the property; his 
 name was Crowe, and he wanted to get my land for 
 himself. 
 
 21482. Your holding is higher than those of the 
 other tenants ?— It is, sir. I am paying 24s. an acre. 
 
 21483. You don't think you ought to pay more than 
 the valuation ? — I think not. I don't know. 
 
 21484. Did any one tell you not to pay more than 
 the valuation ? — Well, indeed, I was told not to pay, 
 and indeed we would be afraid to pay. I think all 
 Ireland won't pay. 
 
 21485. Why would you be afraid to pay? — Well, I 
 don't know. Times are very awkward. 
 
 21486. Have you been threatened not to pay more 
 than the valuation ? — ^No. 
 
 21487. And why would you be afraid? — I would 
 be afraid. !» 
 
 21488. Baron Dowse. — Where does Mr. Crowe 
 live? — Anglohim, near Lough Corrib. 
 
 21489. Why would you be afraid to pay it?— All 
 the country people will not pay, they say ; and if you 
 do it, they might injure you. They say that. 
 
 21490. Were you advised not to pay ? — ^No, indeed. 
 
 21491. The O'Conor Don. — No one advised you 
 not to pay it ? — No. 
 
 21492. Have you the money to pay it, if you were 
 inclined ? — I would not be able to pay all the debts, 
 grand jury cess, rents, &c. 
 
 21493. Would you be willing to pay a fair rent for 
 it?— We would. 
 
 21494. You call a fair rent the valuation? — This is 
 bad land, as bad as ever you seen. Whatever way it 
 goes, we must strive to pay it. 
 
 21495. Have you been served with any notice to 
 quit? — No. We don't owe him but this half-year's 
 rent. 
 
 21496. The November rents are due in May, and 
 the May rents in November ?^ — Yes. 
 
 21497. The O'Conok Don.— Did you tell Sir George 
 Young that any one told you not to pay ? — Oh, well — 
 
 21498. Baron Dowse. — You would rather be asked 
 no questions on the subject? — Well, I would. 
 
 [The Commissioners then adjourned.] 
 
 TWENTY-EIGHTH DAY—TUESDAY, 26th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 Oel. 26, ISi^O. 
 
 The Commissioners sat at 11 o'clock at Cruice's Hotel, Limerick — Present: — The Earl of Bess- 
 BOEOTJGH (Chairman) ; Baron Dowse ; W. Shaw, M.P. ; and the O'Conok Don. 
 
 Bdmond Langlby Hunt, Esq., Cnrraghbridge, Adare, examined. 
 
 21499, The Chairman. — You are a landowner 21500. And also a tenant-farmer I — And also a 
 
 and agent? — Yes; a small landlord in the County tenant-farmer. 
 
 Carlow; a land-agent in Limerick, Tipperary, and' 21501. What is the amount of your property in 
 
 Carlow, Carlow? — The rental is about £600 a year. That is 
 
 E'luiond 
 Lang-ley 
 Hunt. 
 
664 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. 
 
 Edmond 
 Laiigley 
 Hunt. 
 
 property I got with my wife. She has a share with 
 her brother, Colonel Dillon of the 18th Royal Irish. It 
 is a joint estate, and I come in as part owner. 
 
 21502. What is the acreage of the property over 
 which you act as agent? — Between 2000 and 3000 
 acres. 
 
 21503. And as tenant-farmer how many acres? — I 
 am managing about 800 acres of land ; I am managing 
 a good deal for my nephew, and I pay rent for about 
 200 acres Irish. I gave up some large farms I held 
 last year. The rental of all amounted to over £1100 
 a year. 
 
 21504. Is there anything arising on the subject of 
 landlord and tenant on these lands of which you are 
 tenant that you wish to notice? — Yes, there is. The 
 fann I hold now I hold from Captain Phineas Bury of 
 Cork on a 21 years' lease. The lease will be up in 
 March 1883. 
 
 21505. Is it any question as to what may happen 
 on the termination of the lease ? — Yes ; the agent is a 
 particular friend of mine. I am trustee of his marriage 
 settlement. I have improved the place immensely ; I 
 got it in a very bad state. I have letters to show it 
 was called a wilderness when I got it, and it is now 
 very fit for a gentleman to live in. I have been warned 
 over and over again by the agent that as soon as the 
 lease is up the rent will be raised very considerably. 
 At the present time I pay nearly 0O5. an acre — more 
 than the value to a tenant-farmer. 
 
 21506. Mr. Shaw.— That is per Irish acre?— Yes. 
 
 21507. Is it grass land ? — No, tillage; some grass 
 land, also some meadow. 
 
 21508. The Chaiehan. — During the lease you have 
 made large outlays ? — Vast outlays ; I have made 
 gardens, and altered the whole shape of the house, and 
 made it a very nice residence indeed. 
 
 21509. How many years are to run of the lease? — 
 2J years. 
 
 21510. You began with 21 years? — Yes. 
 
 21511. Were there any covenants in the lease as to 
 making improvements? — No, there were not — just the 
 usual covenants. 
 
 21512. Mr. Shaw. — You were not bound to do 
 these things ? — Certainly not. I did them very much 
 for my own pleasure, and to make the place comfort- 
 able. I do not object to the landlord doing what he 
 likes with the property when I give it up to him. I 
 am bound to give it up, but I hold myself forward as 
 an example of what is done very often in the country. 
 
 21513. Was the house habitable? — It was scarcely 
 habitable when I got it, and it is now a very nice 
 residence. I should say I got £300 from the landlord 
 to lay out upon the house, which certainly brought it 
 to a very good state. 
 
 21514. The Chaieman. — The additional improve- 
 ments were known to him or his agent ? — Yes. The 
 agent is a particular friend of mine, and stops twice a 
 year with me. Of course I don't object to their turn- 
 ing me out, but I simply give it as an instance of 
 what may happen. 
 
 21515. Do you think such a state of things happen- 
 ing gives rise to dissatisfaction through the country ? 
 
 It is not more than three weeks ago since Captain 
 Warren, the agent, was staying as usual at my house, 
 and after dinner we discussed this question very fully. 
 His ideas were, and of course mine also, that I merely 
 hired that land for 21 years, and that I was bound as 
 an honourable and honest man, if I did not pay the 
 increased rent, to give it up in a proper state to him. 
 But I asked if that course was adopted with a tenant- 
 farmer having a large family, who could not, as I could, 
 with good means, go into Limerick, or get another 
 residence ; if he was to treat a tenant-farmer of a certain 
 class that way — turn his famOy of children out on the 
 road, as is usual in some cases, or if the rent was to 
 be raised far and away above its value— the effect 
 vrould be what we very often see in this country, that 
 the farmer will take other means of having satisfaction. 
 
 21516. Mr. Shaw.— Is the land let high enough as 
 land ?— Certainly it is. 
 
 21517. It is merely on the improvements the advanced 
 
 rent would be put?— I asked that question of Captain 
 Warren, and he said "No; of course any improve- 
 ments you made you made for your own satisfaction, 
 and being a very good farmer, you certainly made them 
 pay you." He said it was on the improvement in the 
 times since I got the lease, which I consider is a great 
 fallacy. 
 
 21518. There is not much difference? — It is quite 
 the other way. 
 
 21519. Baron Dowse. — How could he separate 
 your improvements from the farm if he was going to 
 let it? — But his answer was I held what he called 
 demesne lands. I feel my own position very strongly. 
 
 21520. Mr. Shaw. — Is this Captain Warren of 
 Queenstown? — Yes; he is agent of the property. 
 
 21521. The Chaieman. — Do you consider this is a 
 place that comes under the heading of demesne land ? 
 — I do not. 
 
 21522. Baron Dowse. — Have you ever read the 
 judgment of Judge Fitzgerald on what are demesne 
 lands, published in Mr. Donnell's book ? — I have not. 
 
 21523. Mr. Shaw. — You made it demesne land by 
 making improvements ? — It was a fine old place ; the 
 county hounds were kept there for many years. 
 
 21524. Is it close to Limerick? — It adjoins Lord 
 Dunraven's place at Adare. 
 
 21525. The Chairman. — You think demesne lands 
 should not be exempted from any law that may be 
 passed , applicable to agricultural tenancies? — Yes; 
 l3ut I think they ought to be properly defined, for it 
 would be a very bad thing if all demesne lands were 
 so. Any demesne lands let to a tenant, say for 31 
 years for generar farming purposes, or say demesne 
 lands attached to a house in which the owner has 
 never lived for a certain number of years, should not 
 be treated as demesne lands. The Bury family have 
 not lived in Curraghbridge for over 100 years. 
 
 21526. Mr. Shaw. — ^It has always been let to 
 tenants ? — Yes. The last tenant that had it got into 
 difficulties, and I then got the place ; there were two 
 years' rent due on the place. It paid then 25s. or 
 30s. an acre, and in the worn-out state in which it 
 then was, it was set to me at 48s. 9d., and I improved 
 it as I said. It was a high rent considering the con- 
 dition of the land at the time. I had private means, 
 and I wanted a residence ; but setting it for fanning 
 purposes, no farmer could pay the rent and live on it. 
 
 21527. The Chaieman. — You say those lands that 
 are used in such a way as you speak of, should be 
 exempt from any law passed, and that you have no 
 faith in the Act of 1870?— No, not with reference 
 to the demesne lands. 
 
 21528. Do you mean generally? — Yes, generally. 
 
 21529. Have you any reason for believing that the 
 Act of 1870 is not of advantage to the tenant?— In- 
 deed I have. I got a very large farm the year the 
 Act was in course of being brought before the House, 
 a clause was put into the lease debarring me from any- 
 thing I would gain under the^Act, even before the Act 
 became law. 
 
 21530. Mr. Shaw.— When it was contemplated?— 
 1 es, it was in contemplation then. 
 
 21531. The Chaieman. — You say you have no ex- 
 perience of the tenant right custom of the north ?— No; 
 and I hope very much that such evidence will come 
 before the Commission as will tend to have some sort 
 of tenant right, such as holds in the north, extended all 
 over Ireland, even though I am only aware from 
 report of the great success of the custom in the north. 
 
 21532. You are aware of something like the custom 
 — ^le by tenants being allowed in this part of Ireland ? 
 —Yes, I allowed that myself on the properties I am 
 agent over ; but it only occurs when an unfortunate 
 man is broken and owes two or three years' rent, and 
 then the great anxiety there is to possess land will make 
 others give such a sum as will very often pay us the 
 rent due and give the man going out perhaps as much 
 as will take him to the Colonies. In that way we have 
 always allowed it, but I could prevent it if I liked 
 
 21633. Do you think on estates where it is allowed, 
 there is a greater feeling of security and recompense 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 665 
 
 for outlay by tenants 1 — I know one estate, the Earl 
 of Devon's, wbich is the happiest in the south of 
 Ireland; but then the tenants on the property are 
 expected to buy the tenant right of those going 
 out. 
 
 21534. That is, the tenants on the property get the 
 first offer? — ^Yes, but the rule allows public auction 
 now, and it goes to enormous prices, in fact, too great 
 a price. The anxiety for land is so great, that the 
 people give enormous sums for worn-out bad land. 
 
 21535. Do you think if there was more opportunity 
 of buying, by the great landlords allowing this system, 
 the demand would not be so great? — I hope sincerely 
 there will be free sale of land after this Commission 
 send in their report — free sale of course under certain 
 restrictions. 
 
 21536. Baron Dowse. — Giving a reasonable veto 
 to the landlord or the tenant? — Tes; but giving a 
 reasonable one : it is so very hard to give that, and I 
 am not prepared to say what it is to be. 
 
 21537. Mr. Shaw. — You think if a man has money 
 enough, that that should be the fair test ? — I think the 
 tenant in possession should be encouraged. I have 
 gone in for tenant proprietorship to a certain extent. 
 
 21538. The Chairman. — Have you considered the 
 question of peasant proprietorship ? — I have. 
 
 21539. Have you had any experience of it? — No, I 
 have not — except my own feelings of what a great 
 power and happiness it would be to a man to feel he 
 was working on his own land. The Irish have such a 
 love for land, it would be most beneficial to the 
 country. 
 
 21540. Would that be with the view of assisting 
 them to become peasant proprietors by purchase, and 
 not by compulsion of the landlord ? — No, certainly not 
 compulsion. My proposition is, that the Government 
 should step in occasionally and buy estates in the Courts 
 — that the Government ought to purchase and sell to 
 the tenants. 
 
 21541. The O'Conor Don.— Do you say they should 
 always do that when an estate is to be sold? — No, 
 not always; but whenever they found an estate suitable 
 for the purpose. If that plan was adopted, it would 
 increase the value of Irish property very much. 
 
 21542. Baron Dowse. — Don't you think some at- 
 tention should be paid to the man himself — whether he 
 is anxious to become a peasant proprietor, and whether 
 he is an industrious man? — Certainly; but unless you 
 had a Commission through the country to take the 
 characters of these men, how would it be done ? 
 
 21543. Would you require him to have a sufficient 
 amount of capital to pay the purchase-money ? — But 
 I know people who buy lands and go out and borrow 
 the money at 20 per cent, for that purpose. 
 
 21544. Mr. Shaw. — And succeeded in the end? — 
 And succeeded in becoming bankrupts. 
 
 21545. Some of them succeeded in the end? — No ; I 
 should say few, very few. Lands in the good part of 
 the country are seldom sold at all ; it is generally worn- 
 out farms. 
 
 21546. Chairman. — Are you much acquainted 
 with the tenantry through the country? — Very exten- 
 sively. I am a very large employer, and had 600 men 
 employed at work this summer. 
 
 21547. Are these of the labouring classes? — Yes. 
 
 21548. Have they cottages? — They have very few 
 cottages at all. They are the worst-off people in the 
 country. It would be very advisable that the Govern- 
 ment, in the present state of the country, should try 
 and keep the labourers as much as possible free from 
 falling in with what is going on amongst the tenant- 
 farmers at present. There is a considerable struggle 
 to get labourers to join this unfortunate agitation 
 going on now. I have principally employed the people 
 up in the rich lands. The lower order of labourers 
 dislike the farmers— they seldom employ them ; but 
 now they are offering inducements to the labourers to 
 join them in this movement, and therefore I think it 
 would be advisable to keep them well employed this 
 winter, until this matter blows over, as it will if a fairly 
 good Land Bill becomes law. The only way to do 
 
 that is to do what was done last year, to give very Oa. 26, I880. 
 extensive employment. If they are left idle during this p, ~T 
 winter, it will be a very serious thing. LangVy 
 
 21549. Are these labourers men holding under the Hunt, 
 farmers or small farmers, or members of their families ? 
 
 — Great numbers of them are living in the villages, in 
 wretched cabins in that rich laud. The farmers never 
 think of giving them a bit of land ; and if they do give 
 half an acre for planting potatoes in, they charge £14 
 or £15 an acre for it. 
 
 21550. Are they holding under the farmers them- 
 selves, or do they pay rent to the landlord ?— They 
 never hold except a house and 5 or 6 perches of land. 
 
 21551. Given as part of their wages? — Sometimes 
 they charge them exorbitant rents. 
 
 21552. Mr. Shaw. — They generally live in the 
 villages? — Yes. 
 
 21553. Chairman. — And in the villages they are 
 not tenants of the farmers ? — No ; they pay rent for the 
 house to whomsoever the landlord may be, and generally 
 these villages are built upon the property of the pro- 
 prietors round about. 
 
 21554. I wanted to know whether the labourers 
 were on the farms of the farmers who employed them ? 
 — I have had men who were the sons of herdsmen. 
 Some farmers paying £400 or £500 a year rent, would 
 let their herdsman's son come to me, and only keep one 
 man themselves to look after the cattle ; they will not 
 give employment, and the people- know that very well. 
 
 21555. Mr. Shaw. — It is all grass land? — It is, 
 beautiful land, the best in the world perhaps. 
 
 21556. The Chairman. — They are the largest 
 farmers? — Some with 25 acres, and some with 200 or 
 300 acres. The land is very cheap there, compara- 
 tively speaking — £2 to 50.9. an Irish acre. 
 
 21557. Are they an improving class? — They are 
 not an improving class. Farming such rich lands, 
 they do not find it necessary to work hard. 
 
 21558. Do you think that arises from their being 
 able to make their way on good land easily, or from 
 want of confidence? — I don't think it is want of 
 confidence there. 
 
 21559. Baron Dowse. — They are dairy farmers? — 
 Yes, I think we have the labouring classes on our side 
 up there. 
 
 21560. The Chairman. — With the smaller tenantry 
 on inferior land, is there a feeling of insecurity as 
 to making improvements? — Certainly. 
 
 21561. That they will have to pay for them in some 
 shape ? — Yes. 
 
 21562. Mr. Shaw.— They don't build houses?— 
 No, they never think of it. The act of 1870 affected 
 them very much, for the landlords and agents used to 
 encourage improvements, but now they do not as a 
 general rule. 
 
 21563. The people are pretty well off, and could 
 spend their own money if they had security ? — 
 Certainly, I think the want of security is the great 
 evil at present. 
 
 21564. Baron Dowse. — They are afraid of the rent 
 being raised on their own improvements ? — As a rule 
 it is always done with a certain class of landlords ; it 
 is more with the new class of landlords — people who 
 buy land for the purpose of getting the highest possible 
 interest for their money. 
 
 1 21565. The Chairman. — Are these tenants willing 
 to take leases ? — No, they are not caring for leases 
 now. 
 
 21566. They trust to the remedy of the Land Act? 
 — No, I don't think they care a pin for the Land Act. 
 I don't find any of them caring three straws for it. 
 
 21567. They are looking for something better than 
 a lease? — They are always in a state of chronic 
 agitation. 
 
 21568. Expecting perhaps tenant right? — Expect- 
 ing one time Home Eule, and at another repeal of the 
 Union, and now some of them hope for the total 
 annihilation of landlords altogether. 
 
 21569. Is that the case with well to-do tenants ? 
 
 No. Well-to-do tenants here are just as loyal as they 
 are in any other places. 
 
 4Q 
 
cm 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Hunt. 
 
 Oet 2C im. 21-570. In spite of this good land, are these people 
 
 ' -^ badly off ?— No, I think they are very well off as a rule. 
 
 Edmond 21571. And yet they are dissatisfied — with what? — 
 
 Langley ^ ^^^j^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^j^^^ j ^^^^ q| tj^g people 
 
 privately that they are in reality dissatisfied, but they 
 join in this cry because they think they will gain 
 something in the end by joining in it. 
 
 21572. Mr. Shaw.— There is something wanted 
 evidently ? — There is something very badly wanted. 
 
 21573. And it is human nature to cry for some- 
 thing ? — Yes, there is something very badly wanted, 
 and something must be done or we will have rebel- 
 lion. 
 
 21574. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that if pro- 
 vision was made that a man should have his farm at 
 a fair rent, not to be turned out of it as long as he 
 paid it, with free sale, that that would be a satis- 
 factory arrangement? — The right of free sale should 
 be very well considered, because some of the landlords 
 have made improvements with their own money. 
 
 21575. But that could be taken into account in 
 fixing the rent. Suppose all these things were taken 
 into account in fixing a fair and just rent between 
 man and man; that the tenant should be allowed to 
 hold as long as he paid the rent and did not sub-let ; 
 that there was free sale with a proper veto to the land- 
 lord : would that not be a wise arrangement ? — I 
 think it would be almost impossible to do that. 
 
 21576.- Mr. Shaw. -j^ What would be the impossi- 
 bility of it?— That is a question that would take a 
 great deal of consideration. I think that would be a 
 splendid settlement if it could be arrived at. 
 
 21577. If it could be, it would be a splendid settle- 
 ment ? — Yes. 
 
 21578. And give everything that ought to be given 
 to satisfy the people ? — Most decidedly. 
 
 21579. The O'Conoe Don.— The great difficulty is 
 to arrive at what is a fair rent? — Yes, to do fair 
 justice between landlord and tenant; for although my 
 evidence is much in favour of the tenant, I still consider 
 there is a number of excellent landlords who must be 
 protected, and I don't think everything should be in 
 favour of the tenant. 
 
 21580. Mr. Shaw. — That would be in favour of 
 the landlord, and secure his rent? — I think it would 
 be. I have spoken to many landlords who would be 
 satisfied if they had any security for their rents. 
 
 21581. Baron Dowse. — Tenant right is that the 
 tenant shall hold at a fair rent, and shall not be turned 
 out as long as he pays it, and shall be at liberty to 
 sell his interest. You say you would like to see that 
 extended to the rest of Ireland ? — Most decidedly. 
 
 21582. Do you see any reason why it should not be 
 done ? — No. 
 
 21583. If the Legislature is strong enough to do it, 
 and if it wishes to do it ? — Yes. 
 
 21584. And if the House of Lords has a little 
 common- sense ? — I don't see why it should not be done, 
 but sometimes there are oflice regulations which would 
 cut away all the advantage. 
 
 21585. The Chaikman. — But the real point is 
 security and fair rents — have you any idea of the way 
 to arrive at fail' rents ? — I propose arbitration by the 
 Government, and the selection of these valuators by the 
 Government is the great difficulty — that they should 
 not be selected as men possessing the ear of those in 
 power, that they should not be appointed as men 
 recommended by a certain class of politicians, but as 
 men who really knew their work. 
 
 21586. Mr. Shaw. — They should not be local men? 
 — They should not be professional men, such as en- 
 gineers, who have very often little practical know- 
 ledge of the working of land ; they are very often 
 appointed, and, except to make a good map, they 
 know nothing about the matter. To select proper 
 valuators is the great question. 
 
 21587. Have you any views as to the present poor 
 law valuation as regards rents ? — In these very good 
 lands I speak of the poor law valuation is extremely 
 low, because at the time it was made the price of 
 butter especially was very low. The land where I 
 
 live now is a tillage country very much, and the valua- 
 tion is entirely too high on the tillage land. I don't 
 think the valuation is any criterion now. I go entirely 
 for a new valuation: of all Ireland. 
 
 21588. It is not only irregular as regards differeat 
 classes of land, but even as regards the same class of 
 land ? — Most irregular. It was made very often by 
 people who did not understand land at all, and often 
 valued off a car on the road. 
 
 21589. You look for a re-valuation, and you think 
 that that should in the first instance be through arbi- 
 tration? — I think through independent Government 
 commissioners. That would not shut out arrange- 
 ments between landlord and tenant by agreement, or 
 even by arbitration at home, if they did not agree. I 
 think if the Ulster Custom was extended to all Irdand, 
 that valuation would be necessary as well as a valua- 
 tion of the different improvements on the different 
 farms, before the value of the tenant right is decided 
 upon, for the reasons before stated. 
 
 21590. You don't think it would be necessary in 
 the first instance to have a general valuation of all 
 Ireland ? Would it not be sufficient to leave the land- 
 lords and tenants to agree if they could, apart from 
 the Government valuation, the Government valuators 
 only to be called in in the event of either party wishing 
 it? — Well, I do not think it would be sufficient, 
 because that made the difficulty that runs through all 
 my answers — that there are some landlords and agents 
 who are perfectly safe, and in whose hands everything 
 might be left, but that it would give landlords of the 
 other class I spoke of power to crush their tenants. 
 
 21591. No. Let the landlord and tenant see if they 
 can agree, and if they do not, and do not hava a 
 private arliitration, then either of them may claim a 
 public arbitration by Government officials, or something 
 of the kind ; it would leave the tenant open to hold his 
 own on the question of the rent ? — Up to the present it 
 did not do for the tenant to hold out against the rent, 
 for there was such competition if he did not give what 
 was asked, some one else would. 
 
 21592. The farm could not be put up for com- 
 petition? — But competition has always been got up in 
 a quiet way. 
 
 21593. 'The Chaikman. — That is only when a fanner 
 is evicted ; but there should be a provision that the 
 landlord should not avail himself of the power of evic- 
 tion pending the settlement of that question, if it was 
 introduced ? — My experience is, that before the lands 
 are out of lease, the rents are very often arranged 
 between the tenant in possession and the agent— that 
 is, on the properties I refer to, not on the well- 
 managed estates — the rents are raised two years 
 before the lease expires, and the world hears nothing 
 about it. 
 
 21594. That is a question arising from leases running 
 out, or in the cases of yearly tenants that is forced 
 upon them by fear of eviction? — Decidedly so. 
 
 21595. But suppose ParUament were to introduce 
 a new system of tenant right, to be based upon a new 
 scale of rents valued by a public officer, and that the 
 landlord was not able in the meantime to put the 
 tenant out ? — It would be very well to give the land- 
 lord, agent, and tenant power to settle the rent if they 
 could agree ; it would save a great deal of Htigation. 
 
 _ 21596. And save the necessity of a general re-valua- 
 tion all over Ireland at the same time, which would be 
 a source of great expense? — A general re-valuation 
 must be made before many years are over. 
 
 21597. In order to have a fair Government valu- 
 ation, do you think that wUl be necessary? — Yes, I 
 think this valuation of Mr. Griffith is now taken very 
 unholy advantage of. It has got fixed upon the mind 
 of the people, and it will be very hard to eradicate it. 
 They are refusing to pay rents altogether in some parts 
 of the country. 
 
 21599. Have they refused you? — In toto. 
 
 21600. The O'Conok Don. — Unless you took 
 Griffith's valuation ? — ^Yes ; and on our property in Tip- 
 perary they refused to give anything, even Griffith's 
 valuation. The son of one of my own tenants stood 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 6b'7 
 
 up at a public meeting, an* proposed that landlords 
 and agents should be got rid of altogether. That is 
 one of the largest tenants. 
 
 21601. Mr. Shaw. — Generally in Tipperary the rents 
 are well paid ? — I don't kno-w that they are. Certainly 
 not in mountain districts. They are very well paid in 
 Limerick. 
 
 21602. In the County Limerick ?— I think so. 
 
 21603. They are very poor in these mountain dis- 
 tricts ? — No, they are much better off ; they pay bulk 
 rents. 
 
 21604. Do yon mean by the mountain district, up 
 towards the G-altees? — No, up towards Newport, 
 Borrisoleigh, and Nenagh. 
 
 21605. The Chajrsian. — As to the purchase of 
 holdings, you say you would give every facility to the 
 tenant to purchase the fee of his land at twenty-six 
 years' purchase on a new valuation of them ? — Yes ; I 
 desire very mach a new valuation. 
 
 21606. That valuation to be made by Government 
 officials I — Yes. 
 
 21607. And that the Board of Works should ad- 
 vance three-fourths of the money at a rate of interest 
 which would pay off the imncipal and interest in 
 thirty-six years? — Yes. 
 
 21608. No interest to be paid on the loans for the 
 first three years ? — Yes. 
 
 21609. That is to give the man an opportunity of 
 settling in his holding? — Yes; if he was obliged to 
 borrow portion of the money, it would go hard with him. 
 
 21610. Mr. Shaw. — You would only postpone pay- 
 ment '? — Yes. 
 
 21611. You would not forgive him three years' 
 interest? — No. I think it is a very bad plan to for- 
 give it. 
 
 21612. The Chairman. — Yon think the Government 
 ought to buy up estates in the market from time to 
 time? — I think it would raise the value of Irish pro- 
 perty very much, for it has got into such a wretched 
 state that it is not even security for money now. 
 
 21613. And that they are to select estates if possible 
 where there are tracts of waste land that might be 
 reclaimed? — Yes, they would have a double object 
 there — giving large employment to the people in the 
 coming winter, which will be absolutely necessary for 
 the purpose of meeting distress and keeping the people 
 quiet. 
 
 21614. Do yon think if anything is done to get the 
 country quiet again, it should be by giving the land- 
 lords loans for work ? — Yes. 
 
 21615. If there is objection to the Government 
 buying up land, the question is, whether it could 
 not be done equally by inducements to the landlords 
 to take up this reclamation for themselves? — Yes, it 
 was taken up very largely last year, and I think it 
 would be taken up more this year, as it is better 
 understood. Vast good has been done in the country 
 by the money the Government gave last year. 
 
 21616. Mr. Shaw. — I suppose you are draining the 
 land with these people you employ ? — "Very largely. 
 
 21617. Is it land in your own hands, or tenants' 
 lands ? — I am draining very largely for Lord Fermoy, 
 Mr. Maunsell of Dublin, and Lord Gillimore. In some 
 instances the landlords are not charging the tenants 
 anything. They prefer giving the money to men whom 
 they know, and in some cases the tenants laid out the 
 money very badly. 
 
 21618. In "DO case do they put on more than they 
 are charged by the Government? — No. In Lord 
 Gillimore's case he has forgiven the whole of it to 
 the tenants. 
 
 21619. The Chaieman. — In these cases of purchase 
 by tenants, what is your opinion as to alienation and 
 assignment, which are forbidden at present ? — I think 
 I could not object to let them divide the land between 
 members of their own family, but I would not let them 
 sub-let, for they make the worst class of landlords in 
 the country as a rule. 
 
 21620. Would you Umit the size of the subdivisions 
 — I think I would. I would not let them go down too 
 small ; they would become cottiers again, and they 
 
 would do away with the good of having respectable Oct. 2«, ikso. 
 tenant proprietors. If a man had 100 acres, and he — " 
 
 divided it amongst eight or nine sons, they would T^Zt 
 become cottiers again. Hmit. 
 
 21621. What would be your opinion of the size of 
 the farms— About 200 acres?— About 200 acres of 
 bad land. I think in that rich land a man could be 
 comfortable on 40 or 50 acres ; on tillage farms they 
 ought not to have less. 
 
 21622. Do you think it would be better for them 
 if they were put into these divided farms, or that 
 they should continue in the good farm, the father 
 being thus enabled to send them out with something 
 in their pockets? — I believe it would be better to 
 leave the land to the eldest son. I am a younger 
 son myself, and I think it was a wiser thing to send 
 me on the world with something in my pocket. If 
 the land was divided amongst six or seven sons, the 
 old estate, instead of continuing, would go to small 
 people. 
 
 21623. Under the present rules of the Board of 
 Works, subdivision and sub-letting are entirely for- 
 bidden until the loans are paid off; but in addition 
 they forbid alienation and assignment : would you for- 
 bid a man assigning the whole? — No, I would not, 
 subject to the loan. Of course the Government would 
 have an officer in each place to see how it was done, 
 and that their interests did not suffer by the aliena- 
 tion. 
 
 21624. Do you see any objection to suta-lettings of 
 the entire holding ? — I would if that would get rid of 
 the tenant proprietorship. I wish to make tenant 
 proprietors for the purpose of trying to make the 
 people more loyal than they are. That is my main 
 object. 
 
 21625. Do you think there is any land to any great 
 extent that is capable of reclamation? — Thousands and 
 hundreds of thousands of acres. 
 
 21626. Is it in the hands of single proprietors who 
 could undertake to see the improvements carried out, 
 or is it amongst a number of proprietors? — A great 
 deal of it is in the hands of large proprietors. I wish 
 to allude to a place between Athy and Kildare where 
 there are large tracts flooded. Of course in other 
 counties there are places that could be made out. 
 
 21627. But most of that land is in the hands of 
 tenants at present ? — I suppose it is. 
 
 21628. Baron Dowse. — I have often seen the place 
 you mention under water. — Yes. 
 
 21629. Chairman. — That has arisen from the level 
 of the river ? — I think the Government should take up 
 the sinking of these big rivers. They could do so with 
 great good to the country, and that would give the 
 landlords and tenants the advantage, which they have 
 not at present, of an outfall. 
 
 21630. The O'Conoe Don.— Could that not be done 
 by local drainage boards ? — They won't go in for that 
 very extensive work. Our local boards find when the 
 engineer goes out, that the work which they imagined 
 would only come to £10,000, increases in expense .ns 
 they go on. 
 
 21631. Do you think the Government could do it 
 cheaper? — That would depend very much on those 
 who had the carrying of it out for the Government. 
 
 21632. As a rule, is Government work done cheaper 
 than work by local boards or private proprietors ? — I 
 think the Government work is generally well done, but 
 they generally employ such a number of people at 
 salaries. I am afraid they appoint too many persons. 
 
 21633. Isn't it a fact that work done by Govern- 
 ment is very expensively done, and costs more than 
 works done by individuals or local boards? — Most 
 decidedly. I can always make very well by takin"- 
 large contracts at these Board prices. 
 
 21634. And the drainage of these rivers can be 
 carried out better and less expensively by local boards? 
 I find by experience that landed proprietors are afraid 
 to go in for such enormous sums as are required for 
 these works. You won't find proprietors who will 
 make their estates responsible for the large sums re- 
 quired. 
 
 4 Q 2 
 
668 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. 
 
 Edmond 
 Langley 
 Hunt. 
 
 21635. Are you aware there is at present one 
 di-ainage district formed for 100 miles in length under 
 a local board ? — No, I am not. 
 
 21636. Mr. Shaw. — You mean that it should be 
 compulsory that the Government should compel this 
 to be done? — That has been advocated by a good 
 many, but I don't like to advocate compulsion. 
 
 21637. Or give facilities to individuals ?— Yes, I 
 would be more for giving facilities than forcing people. 
 
 21638. Or if there was a land commission, they 
 could buy these lands and let them out to tenants 1 — 
 That is what is in my mind. 
 
 21639. The O'Conok Don.— You think that would 
 pay ? — You would have thousands ready to take these 
 farms as soon as they are ready to let. 
 
 21640. What would you do with the present 
 occupiers I — I go in for waste lands that are in the 
 hands of landlords at present. 
 
 21C41. Baron Dowse.— What do you call waste 
 lands ? — I call cut-out bog waste lands. 
 
 21642. The O'Conor Don. — Are not these usually 
 in the occupation of tenants in some shape or form ? — 
 No, not as a rule — they have commonage over them. 
 There is a cut-out bog of 80 acres at Rock Barton. 
 Lord Fermoy got £1000 to level and drain it. I put 
 4000 barrels of lime into it. It was only valued at 6s. 
 or 6s. an acre when he commenced it, and now a tenant 
 has offered 50s. an acre for it. 
 
 21643. Baron Dowse. — We had evidence yesterday 
 that there was a lime-kiln in the middle of a cut-out 
 bog, and although they put down a railway and all 
 that, it was a failure. — As a farmer I have managed 
 bog land. It is the most valuable land in this county 
 if reclaimed — cut-out bogs with 8 or 10 inches of bog 
 soil with mud sub-soil. 
 
 21644. The O'Conoe Don.— You referred to the 
 drainage of a particular river. Is the land there in the 
 occupation of tenants at present ? — That is a matter I 
 have not gone into. 
 
 21645. Assuming the land that could be benefited 
 is in the hands of tenants, how would you get rid of 
 them "? — I would purchase in the first instance from the 
 proprietors. 
 
 21646. What would you do with the occupiers ?— 
 I would give them their land afterwards as peasant 
 proprietors, on the principle I mentioned. 
 
 21647. Mr. Shaav. — Do you think they would be 
 able to pay for the extensive drainage carried on by 
 the Government? — Yes, most decidedly, the land would 
 be so much improved. 
 
 21648. Do you think there would be no money lost 
 on it ? — No, I don't think there would be in the long 
 run. 
 
 21649. Or that the English tax-payers could not 
 lose in the long run ? — No ; my object is double — to 
 
 have the lands now waste support more people, and have 
 more people occupied with what they love — the 
 land. 
 
 21650. Im23rove the position of the people and give 
 them larger space? — Yes. I was in Australia for 
 years, and I never met an Irish tenant farmer who 
 would not sooner be at home, even though he was 
 better off in the Colonies. 
 
 21651. Are there periodical valuations on the pro- 
 perties you manage ? — I am agent for my nephew on 
 one estate, and we never raised the rents. 
 
 21652. Not in your memory? — No, not in my' 
 father's or great-grandfather's time, and it was on that 
 very property this man spoke last week and said all 
 landlords and agents should be got rid of. 
 
 21653. On the properties you are acquainted with 
 are there periodical valuations ? — No, there are not. 
 
 21654. On a change of tenancy I suppose there is 
 a change of rent ? — As I said before, that is done very 
 quietly. You see the rents raised and raised, and you 
 find it hard to know how it has been done. The tenant 
 must arrange it as a matter of fact. 
 
 21655. He has no option but pay it or go out? — 
 I know one instance which has come under my own 
 notice. I knew a case where the father held 35 acres ; 
 he was a very old man, and the son got married and 
 got a small fortune of £100 with his wife. The father 
 made over the lease to the son, though he was bound 
 not to make it over. He made it over for the purpose 
 of having the son get this small fortune. The agent 
 and landlord came to find this out, and they imme- 
 diately served a notice that unless the son paid an 
 extra rent and gave £100, he would be ejected for 
 non-title. The man gave the £100, and has promised 
 £10 more on the rent. That has occurred within my 
 own knowledge lately — three or four years ago, and 
 that is known over the whole country, and creates a 
 feeling of insecurity, and it is well known. I will have 
 to pay more vent or give up my place. And they 
 point out Mr. Hunt, one of the landlord class, and 
 say, "If he is treated that way, how will we be 
 treated ? " I think the feeling of insecurity is real, but 
 a great deal of it is imaginary also. 
 
 21656. They imagine it might occur in their own 
 case, every one? — Yes, on the death of an excellent 
 landlord, who knows what his son may do ? 
 
 21657. The Chaieman. — You said you were agent 
 for 3500 acres ? — Agency and management, and lands 
 I have in my own hands. 
 
 21658. Have you the management of other lands? 
 — I am laying out loans under this Drainage Act for 
 Lord Fermoy, Lord Guillamore, and others. 
 
 21659. Mr. Shaw. — You are not his agent? — No. 
 
 21660. He has considerable property in Limerick ? 
 — Yes. 
 
 William 
 Bolster. 
 
 Mr. William Bolstee, examined. 
 
 21661. Baron Dowse. — Where do you live? — In 
 the County Limerick. 
 
 21662. In what part? — About 12 miles from this, 
 middle-way between this and Charleville. 
 
 21663. Are you the gentleman whose name we 
 see associated with the Tenant Right Association ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 21664. Are you president, or vice-president, or 
 secretary of any of these tenant right associations ? — 
 I have been president of the Limerick, Clare, and 
 Tipperary Farmers' Club for twelve years. I resigned 
 the position, and it is now held by Mr. O'Flaherty, 
 who attends with me here. 
 
 21G65. Is that club still in existence? — It is, with 
 this exception, that a fortnight ago they transferred 
 themselves into a Land League. 
 
 21666. It is now called by the name of a branch of 
 the Land League ? — Yes. 
 
 21667. Are you a member of that? — Yes, as a 
 member of the club. 
 
 21668. Are you a member of the council, or merely 
 an ordinary member? — Merely an ordinary member. 
 
 21669. And you were formerly chairman of the 
 association ? — Yes. 
 
 21670. And it took in these three counties ?-^Yes. 
 21G71. Then you naturally have a good deal of 
 
 knowledge of the land question in Ireland ?— I am a 
 farmer. 
 
 21672. How much land do you hold ?— about 200 
 Irish acres under Lord Emly, within four miles of 
 Limerick. 
 
 21673. Are you entirely a tenant? — Yes, I am only 
 a tenant. 
 
 21674. iCas there been any increase of late years in 
 the rent of the various holdings in the County Limerick 
 
 and other counties with which you are acquainted? 
 
 Several. 
 
 21675. Is the tendency to increase the rent?— It 
 has been the tendency all along to increase the rent 
 and latterly to force leases. "^ 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ()Gy 
 
 21676. Does that increase take place while the 
 tenant remains in possession, or upon a change in 
 possession? — In many cases I am acquainted with, 
 particularly in Limerick, the rent has been put on in 
 such a way in the office of the agent, that the public 
 actually don't loiow what occurs there, and the tenant 
 is afraid to admit it. 
 
 21677. Even on the same tenant without any change 
 of tenancy at all ? — Yes. 
 
 21678. Has the general tendency been to increase 
 the rent? — Certainly. 
 
 21679. It is not confined, you say, to a change of 
 tenancy ? — ^Not always. 
 
 21680. The same tenant may remain in possession, 
 and an increased rent be put upon him ? — Yes, that 
 invariably happens. 
 
 21681. Is that man, so far as he consents to that 
 increase, acting as a free agent ? — I don't believe he is, 
 because he, has no other resource — to accept the rent 
 or go away. 
 
 21682. He must either give up the land ? — Or 
 
 sail. 
 
 21683. He has nothing else to go to? — No. 
 21681. Is that general? — Very general, I fancy. 
 
 21685. Has it been of late years more than before? 
 — It has been increasing. 
 
 21686. Ha,s there been any change made in conse- 
 quence of the bad times for the last three years ? — In 
 some instances there have been abatements, but really 
 abatements never compensated the farmers in any way 
 for the loss they sustained — 10 or 25 per cent, could 
 never compensate a man for the losses of the last three 
 years. 
 
 21687. Who makes the improvements on the farms? 
 — As a rule the tenants. 
 
 21688. Who builds the houses?— The tenant. I 
 know of very few built by landlords. 
 
 21689. The tenants build the houses: do they 
 make the fences? — Yes, they do everything as a 
 rule. 
 
 21690. And the landlords, according to your ex- 
 perience, do nothing except in the shape of arterial 
 drainage? — They have taken loans from Government 
 and carried on drainage. In my own farm, for instance, 
 1 got £500 from Lord Emly when I first began farm- 
 ing, and that was laid out on drainage, and the per- 
 centage of 6^ I had to pay. 
 
 21691. When these arterial drains are made by the 
 landlord with money borrowed from the Government, 
 does he add to the rent the interest he pays? — 
 He does. • I had a lease at the time. I think the 
 general rule is that the land is improved ; the tenant 
 pays the percentage, and, as a rule, the rent is 
 increased. 
 
 21692. Are the roads made by the landlords? — Oh 
 no. 
 
 21693. Do they make the farm fences between one 
 farm and another? — The landlords do nothing in that 
 way. In my exact neighbourhood, outside my boundary 
 there is a large property belonging to two or three 
 proprietors, and there is a narrow boreen which for 
 nine months of the year generally contains 4 feet of 
 water ; there is only room for the bare car to pass there, 
 there is no room for another car. It is sunk down in 
 many places 10 or 15 feet in depth. And I know a 
 tenant on that estate, he happens to be a dairyman, 
 he has some of this land, and Mr. Synan went to buy a 
 rick of hay from him, and Mr. Synan's nephew came to 
 buy it, but when he looked at this road, he said, " If I 
 got it for nothing I could not bring it out of this 
 
 passage." 
 
 21694. Who should set that road right?— The 
 landlord. There are three or four of them. There is Dr. 
 O'Brien and the representative of Dr. Nolan. From 
 the public road you can get into this man's property 
 by passing over the fields, if there was a right over my 
 farm, but there is not. 
 
 21695. Are these leases made for the purpose of 
 depriving the tenants of the benefit of the Land Act ? 
 —It is for that purpose they are made. The Land 
 Act has been rendered altogether useless, by allowing 
 
 D, , William 
 
 you mean leases for Bolster 
 
 the landlord to contract the tenant out of the improve- uct. 2(i, UM, 
 ments. 
 
 21696. The Chaiioiax.- 
 a term or for a year? — Generally for twenty-one 
 years. 
 
 21697. Baron Dowse. — You would be in favour of 
 preventing a tenant contracting himself out of the Act, 
 no matter what size of farmer he is ? — Yes. 
 
 21698. And there is no foundation for the argu- 
 ment about a tenant over £50 a year — he requires the 
 protection of the law all the same ? — His liabilities are 
 a great deal more, and I consequently think he requires 
 the same protection. 
 
 21699. And you would give it? — Certainly. He 
 has more capital sunk, and all that, and it should be 
 protected. 
 
 21700. Do you think there is a want of a sense of 
 security at present ? — Certainly. 
 
 21701. Has the Land Act conferred any benefit at 
 all on them ? — It has conferred a benefit on the very 
 small holders who are ejected ; they get seven years' 
 compensation. But then, unfortunately, when the case 
 comes into Court, the landlord trumps up some c^se of 
 dilapidation. The tenant in that position has not his 
 farm in that condition in which you would imagine a tidy 
 farmer would keep it, he is too poor for that, and then 
 this thing is trumped up, and the compensation is cut 
 down to the smallest sum. 
 
 21702. Don't you recognise the benefit at all events 
 in the Act, that it recognises the interest of the tenant 
 in the soil to some extent ? — I believe they would have 
 been better off without the Land Act. 1 think it has 
 broken a great deal of the confidence between landlord 
 and tenant. We have many good landlords, and 
 heretofore they very often assisted the tenants in many 
 ways, but they would not do it after this Act. 
 
 21703. And since the Land Act have they continued 
 to give assistance ? — Discontinued it altogether. 
 
 21704. That evidence is only confined to your part 
 of the country 1 — It is confined to the south gene- 
 rally. 
 
 21705. You know Limerick and Cork counties ? — 
 Yes ; I know nothing about the north. 
 
 21706. Suppose the tenant was allowed to hold at a 
 fair rent, and that he was to hold it without being 
 turned out except for non-payment of rent, with liberty 
 to sell his interest to any other person when leaving, 
 would that be an advantage'? — I think it would be one 
 of the greatest blessings ever extended to tliis country, 
 and tend to make us in every way industrious, loyal, 
 and thankful people. 
 
 21707. Do you think anything short of that will 
 ever settle the land question ? — No. We conceive the 
 landlord has a right to a fair rent, and he has no right 
 to more, and it is the intention of every well-disposed 
 man to give him that fair rent, and that as long as he 
 has paid that he has as much right to live on the soil 
 as the landlord himself. 
 
 21708. In many instances that could be settled by the 
 landlord and tenant without trouble at all ? — In very 
 many cases it could. 
 
 21709. And if not you would have arbitrators? — 
 Yes. 
 
 21710. How would you manage that? — ^I would 
 have three or five or any number of practical men of 
 superior position, but I would, not have theorists. I 
 would have men who knew a plough and how to 
 follow it ; and I would have these men above suspicion. 
 Of course Government officials, I presume, they should 
 be. And I would go further, for the protection of the 
 tenant as well as of the landlord, that if these men 
 made mistakes — we may all make mistakes — I would 
 have no objection to an appeal. 
 
 21711. To what tribunaH- To a judge. 
 
 21712. To a County Court judge or the judge of 
 Assize ? — The County Court judge would be the 
 cheapest. 
 
 21713. Suppose the landlord and tenant agreed, in 
 many instances the rent might remain as it is. Sup- 
 pose the landlord appointed one person and the tenant 
 another, and that they selected an umpire, would that 
 
670 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. 
 
 William 
 Bolster. 
 
 not be a reasonable way (—That would be better ; it 
 would save all expense: 
 
 21714 And then supposing they did not agree, you 
 could have some Government official, thoroughly con- 
 versant with the subject? — Yes. 
 
 21715. Would that settle the rent for any time, or 
 would you have a periodical valuation, or allow the 
 landlord and tenant at any time to question it when 
 either of them made a requisition to have the valuation 
 readjusted?— It is very hard to give an opinion on 
 that. I think in guiding them, in twenty-one years 
 time or any number of years devised, if things got np 
 wonderfully high, it would be only fair that they should 
 consider the market notes on which the rent was first 
 fixed and the market notes at the time when they 
 wanted to change the rent, and that the. landlord 
 should get a percentage of the advantage by an in- 
 creased rent, and in the same way that the tenant 
 should get the advantage if prices came down. 
 
 21716. Then a fixed period of years would be 
 reasonable ? — Yes, I think so. 
 
 21717. That being done, the tenant could rest 
 secure there would be no disturbance as long as he 
 paid that rent ?— Yes ; and it would be an inducement 
 to him to make the soil produce more than at present, 
 because he would expend capital on it, believing the 
 soil was his own. 
 
 21718. As to subdivision and sub-letting 1 — I would 
 not allow that except I held a large tract of land as a 
 farmer — say 400 or 500 acres. It would be a hard- 
 ship there to me if my child wanted to get married, 
 to say that I would not have power to give him 
 something. 
 
 21719. You would not do it without the consent of 
 the landlord 1 — I would in large cases. 
 
 21720. You would not have these very small men 1 
 — ^No, I would not go below 30 or 40 acres. 
 
 21721. That being so, you would give the tenant 
 liberty to dispose of his interest if leaving 1 — Yes. 
 
 21722. Would you give the landlord a veto on the 
 tenant 1 — I don't think it would be fair to ask the 
 landlord to accept a tenant unless he was a hona fide 
 tenant and a man of respectability. 
 
 21723. Do you think that would give security to 
 the tenant 1 — Decidedly. 
 
 21723a. And that it would satisfy people who could 
 reasonably be satisfied 1 — I think so. 
 
 21724. Have you ever turned your attention to the 
 question of peasant proprietors ? — Yes. 
 
 21724a. And what do you think with reference to 
 what are called the Bright clauses of the Land Act, for 
 the creation of a peasant proprietary ? — I don't think 
 they are sufficiently extended to be of much use. I 
 think — this is my private opinion — we should have 
 security at fair rents, with the right of sale to 
 respectable men, and with that an extension of the 
 Bright clauses. Whenever the property comes into 
 the Incumbered Estates Court, or the Landed Estates 
 Court, or the landlord wishes to sell, I should have the 
 privilege of buying my farm with money from the 
 Government, to be repaid in a certain mumber of 
 years. With that in time my grandchildren might 
 live to see a peasant proprietary growing up. 
 
 21725. You would not force itl — ^No, except a 
 property was in the Court to be sold, or the landlord 
 wished to sell. 
 
 21725a. You would not take it from the landlord 
 against his will. — Certainly not. That is my private 
 opinion. 
 
 21726. Do you think the other matter would be 
 very beneficial-^what is called the three F's % — Yes, 
 that is my idea. That was Mr. Butt's opinion, and he 
 was a great friend of mine. I believed in him. 
 
 21726a. Yon would not think it a reasonable thing 
 to expropriate the landlords 1 — I would not, I must say. 
 
 21727. Have you known any instances of purchases 
 by tenants of their holdings under the Church Act ? — 
 I have known instances, but I am not very conversant 
 with them. 
 
 21727a. Then you have no practical knowledge of 
 the matter? — ^No. 
 
 21728. Did you ever turn your attention to the 
 reclamation of waste lands ? — Yes, I have thought a 
 good deal over it. 
 
 21728a. Do you think any measure of that kind 
 would be conducive to the settlement of the country? — 
 I believe for those parts of the country that are 
 suffering so much, it would be of advantage if the 
 Government took up some of these waste lands, and 
 put the people on them who are now squatted in 
 Connemara, where they could not exist if they had the 
 land for nothing. If you created peasant proprietary 
 on these lands, it would be a great idea. 
 
 21729. That would be waste lauds not in the 
 possession of any particular individual '? You would 
 not turn out a man for the purpose of making 
 his land better, and giving it to some one else?— I 
 would force the landlord to reclaim waste land where 
 he has it. 
 
 21729a. Suppose he has not the money? — Let him 
 sell it ; he has no right to have it unless he is able to 
 manage it. 
 
 21730. Does the labourers' question press for 
 settlement at all in this part of the country ?— Very 
 much, just as much as the farmers'. 
 
 21730a. The labourers and farmers very often have 
 not the same interest? — Their real interests are the 
 same, or ought to be. 
 
 21731. But personally they have not the same 
 interest ? — No, they have not. 
 
 21731a. What should be done in reference to the 
 labourers' question ? — I think the Irish labourer is the 
 worst treated man in any part of the world. I think 
 the slaves in South America are better off ; they are 
 better fed, and better housed, and better clothed. I 
 think the labourers, in consequence of what they call 
 the clearance system, have been all swept from the 
 rural district, their cottages levelled, not with the 
 consent of the tenant, but by the power of the land- 
 lord against the tenant's wish. In my district there 
 have been tracts cleared, and these people have been 
 driven into small tovms. I know cases where there are 
 thirty beds in one room — men and women all mixed up 
 together. 
 
 21732. Labourers? — Yes. 
 
 21732a. What wages do they get in your part of 
 the world ? — They vary ; at present the wages are 
 about 2s. a day. 
 
 21733. The whole year round? — I pay 7s. a week 
 all the year ronnd, with a house and a bit of vegetable 
 ground. Against my consent, they keep goats ; how- 
 ever, the necessity arose so much that I must give 
 them the grass for a couple of goats, although they 
 are injurious things ; for this reason, I five in the 
 midst of milk and honey, I may say, with all dairymen 
 around ; and if a labourer was to pay 5s. a pint for 
 milk, they would not get it. They give it all to the 
 calves, and don't sell it. Another barbarous thing is 
 to see the little child with a brandy-bottle under her 
 arm, with bread for her father's dinner, and in the 
 bottle there is cofifee or tea without milk. 
 
 21734. Mr. Shaw. — Is that common? — It is uni- 
 versal. 
 
 21735. And the people cannot touch the milk? — 
 They would sooner give it to the calves. It is very 
 dear at present. 
 
 21736. Baeon Dowse. — What should be done with 
 the labourers? — I think he should have a cottage 
 and a vegetable garden, and that he should have the 
 privilege of having the milk of a cow. 
 
 21737. But who is to give him that •!— I think the 
 farmer should give it at a fair rent. Of course I 
 would have no objection to give him half an acre at 
 the rent I pay myself. I would have no objection to 
 help him to improve and have a cow, and to assist hira 
 in that way. 
 
 21738. Suppose a farmer does not want labour — 
 he has labour in his own family ? — Then he would not 
 want labourers at all. 
 
 21739. Audit is the farmer who wants labour you 
 would make do that? — Yes. 
 
 21740. Is the farmer to give him a cottage? — Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 (>71 
 
 21741. In consideration of what the farmer gets 
 
 himself, he should do something for the labourer ? I 
 
 think so ; they ought to feel in proportion for the 
 labourer. 
 
 21742. If there is no benefit conferred on the 
 farmer by this, how could you force the farmer to build 
 cottages by law? — Unless it could be done by law, 
 it won't be done. 
 
 21743. Mr. Shaw. — If he has a labourer employed, 
 he is supposed to want him? — If he is obliged to 
 employ him, he wants him, and then I would compel 
 him to provide for him. 
 
 21744. Baron Dowse.— At the end of a week he 
 may quarrel with him and turn him out ? — Yes. That 
 is a difficulty too. 
 
 21745. If the farmer gets something, he should 
 give something in return ?— Yes. 
 
 21746. The Chaiesian. — There is a disinclination in 
 many parts of the country to employ men all the year 
 round ? — Thei'e is. They sometimes want a herd, and 
 they don't vfish to take a man and pay him every day. 
 That is not the objection of the tenant to employ the 
 man all the year round ; he only employs him from 
 hand to mouth merely to save his harvest, and the 
 moment that is done, he does not think of improving 
 the laBd, because he fancies the improvements he makes 
 will be valued on him, and he dismisses the labourer 
 for the rest of the year. 
 
 21747. You think want of security as to improve- 
 ments affects the labourer as well ? — It tremendously 
 affects him. Prom this day forward until early spring 
 again, hundreds of men in my neighbourhood will be 
 all idle more or less. 
 
 21748. Until the spring work begins again? — Yes. 
 
 21749. As to the habitations of these labourers, isn't 
 that looked into by the sanitary authorities? — It is 
 supposed to be done, but they don't go into the whole 
 thing as they should ; if they did, they would tumble 
 down all the cottages in the country. 
 
 21750. Baeon Dowse. — And leave them without 
 any house ? — Yes. I belong to a sanitary board myself. 
 The magistrates are very lenient in carrying the laws 
 out, and the poor man puts back the pig again. 
 
 21751. The Chairman. — They are very unreasonable 
 before the officers report them ? — Yes. 
 
 21752. Mr. Shaw. — Do any of them be compelled 
 to make the bouses habitable and sanitary ? — Yes. 
 I know one man on a large property in my neighbour- 
 hood who has been summoned to throw down his 
 house, but it is up still ; and the agent and landlord 
 promised our Board to give the man £5 if we threw 
 down the house upon him. I was chairman at the 
 time, and I said " No, we'll do nothing of the kind." 
 
 21753. He wanted to get rid of the thing?— He 
 wanted to get rid of the responsibility. 
 
 21754. Baron Dowse. — And of the odium? — Yes. 
 This man pays no rent. He has the fee-simple of it 
 almost. 
 
 21755. The Chaieman.— He is a peasant pro- 
 prietor ? — Yes. 
 
 21756. You spoke about compulsory payments to 
 the labourer. Do you think it would suit to have any 
 interference as to the payments the farmer is to make 
 to the labourer, or whether he shall give the grass for 
 a cow and so much land?— I think he must be 
 charged what you call a fair rent for these things. 
 
 21757. He must either pay in rent or labour ? — No, 
 I would say labour. 
 
 21758. Do you find there is a custom where the 
 farmers have labourers, that they put them into houses 
 as labourers, and charge for it as part of their wages ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 21759. But these men are labourers— they are pay- 
 ing all the year round under that system? — Yes, they 
 are permanent labourers. 
 
 21760. In either case the principal objection is, that 
 supposing the labourer is a man with a family, and 
 gets old or dies, and the farmer says, "You must 
 clear out or get some one else to do the work ; '' if 
 there is no other labourer in the family, he must do 
 that, and the consequence is the labourers must be a 
 
 moving body? — Yes, you never can fix them in the Oct. 26, imy. 
 soil, because death or something else may cause a „^.,,. 
 
 21761. Unless they held under the landlord, and 
 are left at hberty to take employment from such 
 farmers as choose to offer it ? — I think that would be 
 rather a hardship on the farmer, for this reason : if I 
 have three labourers' houses on my farm, and the 
 three men who held the houses die, and that they 
 were independent of me altogether, I should build 
 three more houses and get three other men to do my 
 labour. 
 
 21762. I am not speaking of those farmers who have 
 their own labourers, but where the labourer lives under 
 the head landlord ? — I think the man should be obliged 
 to give his labour to the estate, provided he gets fair 
 wages. 
 
 21763. And you think the farmer in the same way 
 should employ the men belonging to that estate? — 
 Yes. 
 
 21764. Isn't it often the fact that a man becomes 
 ill, and is obliged to go away, and a stranger is 
 brought in from a distance, because he perhaps comes 
 for a little lower wages ? — Very often, I think. 
 
 21765. You spoke of the landlord, since the passing 
 of the Land Act, having left off making improvements 
 which they were in the habit of contributing towards ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 21766. Do you think since the Land Act there is 
 a feeling of uncertainty on the part of landlords as to 
 what they might get from money spent on the hold- 
 ings ? — I don't know what they may have felt, but I 
 think the tendency has been altogether to cease assist- 
 ing in any way since the Act passed. 
 
 21767. Don't you think that that arose on the part 
 of the landlords from a feeling that they were not 
 secured for outlay in improvements in consequence of 
 the Land Act? — I can't say; that is a matter for 
 themselves. 
 
 21768. Baron Dowse. — Do you think it might arise 
 from this — that the landlord says you have got the 
 Legislature to take you up, and you can do very well 
 without me ; do as best you can now ? — Yes, that has 
 been said by landlords. 
 
 21769. The Chaieman. — And the landlord says it 
 may be very difficult for him to make out afterwards 
 that he laid out this money ? — That is his answer at 
 present and since the Act passed. 
 
 21770. Both for the sake of the landlord and the 
 tenant that ought to be put an end to? — Most de- 
 cidedly. 
 
 21771. And endeavour to make a joint interest 
 between landlord and tenant in seeing the country im- 
 proved ? — That should be so. I think there should be 
 in every way a joint interest between them — ^in feeling 
 and everything else. 
 
 21772. In the case of appeals against decisions as 
 to the value of land, would you go to the County Court 
 judge ? — As the least expensive. 
 
 21773. It is expensive as a general rule now 
 going to the County Court Judges to small men ? — 
 Yes, it is expensive; but of course not near so ex- 
 pensive as going to the higher Courts. I should say, 
 in passing a bill of that description, that could be 
 made less costly by legislation. 
 
 21774. Mr. Shaw. — The cost could be fixed? — 
 Yes. 
 
 21775. The Chairman. — You think the cost should 
 be made as low as possible ? — Yes. 
 
 21776. So as to prevent hardship of money being 
 spent? — It might occur very seldom. In fact, as 
 Baron Dowse said, there are a number of cases where 
 the landlord and tenant would mutually settle their 
 rents. 
 
 21777. We have heard of a number of cases where 
 small tenants put up with anything sooner than go 
 
 into Court, from the expense they would be put to ? 
 
 I think there is a good deal of that, and I think iu 
 most cases they are in dread of the landlord, and are 
 afraid of being put out. 
 
 21778. Mr. Shaw. — If they thought they were sure 
 
672 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1S»0. 
 
 "William 
 Bolster. 
 
 to be kept in they would not be afraid ?— No. I know 
 hundreds in my own county who have tremendous 
 hardships to contend with, and they would like to be 
 before you to-day, but they are afraid. 
 
 21779. Who are they afraid of— the landlords? — 
 I know a land meeting was held last Sunday at Kil- 
 mallock, and tenants on very large estates were, I 
 know, afraid to attend for fear of the agent. 
 
 21780. Baron Dowse.— You don't think there is 
 any disinclination on the part of the tenants to come 
 and tell their grievances 1— They are not disinclined, 
 but they are afraid. 
 
 21781. Mr. Shaw.— They would be watched?— 
 Yes. 
 
 21782. Baron Dowse. — And be told, the next time 
 they went into the office, " Go to the Commission " ?— 
 Yes ; " and get what you want there, we will give you 
 nothing." 
 
 21783. Yon say there is a tendency to force leases 
 on the tenants since the Land Act ? — Yes. 
 
 21784. Could you give us an instance of that ? — I 
 don't know could 'l give the names, but I know in many 
 many cases it has been done. 
 
 2178.5. You could not give us the names? — I could, 
 if I could bring them to my memory ; but I have heard 
 of many, many. 
 
 21786. You don't remember any at present? — Yes; 
 Mr. Bevan forced a lease on a tenant of his named 
 Conway. The rent is fixed at 38s. an acre. 
 
 21787. Mr. Shaw.— Was it raised? — Yes; it was 
 raised by the lease they held from year to year 
 from time immemorial, at a lower rent, and he in- 
 duced them to take this lease for the purpose of 
 advancing the rent. They are rather illiterate people, 
 although industrious, and they did not see the drift of 
 this until it pinched them. They have got a lease 
 for thirty-one years, and the rent is increased. £76 is 
 their rent, I think, and the poor law valuation is £32. 
 They have got a thirty-one years' lease at double the 
 valuation. I may say I heard the landlord myself 
 say — I said, " Why charge them so much ; it is not 
 worth it ; it is not really worth 25s. Griffith's valua- 
 tion is only 20s." " I will give them a lease for ever 
 if they give me 5s. more." " So you may," I said. 
 " You may never turn them out at the present rent." 
 
 21788. That is within a few years? — Within two 
 years. He has taken since a cheap grant of .£200 to 
 drain the land, and he has put that on the back of 
 the lease. 
 
 21789. The O'Conob Don. — In addition to the 
 rent ? — Yes, in addition to the rent. 
 
 21790. And this tenant held before as tenant from 
 year to year ? — Yes. 
 
 21791. Do you know any other case? — I know a 
 great many, but I cannot bring them to my memory ; 
 but I know there are hundreds of them. 
 
 21792. Were there any penal conditions in these 
 leases ? — Yes ; contracting them out of any benefit 
 they have at present, or will have, in future. 
 
 21793. Mr. Shaw. — Any benefit from any land 
 legislation ? — Yes. 
 
 21794. Baron Dowse. — Even in the Irish Parha- 
 ment ? — Yes. 
 
 21795. You said increases of rent were very 
 common lately ? — That is one I have mentioned, I 
 think on the A. B. property, from which yon will 
 have a gentleman before you. I am quite certain 
 the rents have been gradually increased, and the 
 tenant has been actually afraid to tell about the in- 
 crease : it has been done in that clever way. 
 
 21796. Mr. Shaw.— That is the feeling in the 
 country ? — Yes. 
 
 21797. The O'Conoe Don. — And you think upon 
 that property the rent has been raised repeatedly since 
 the passing of the Act ? — Yes. 
 
 21798. Is that the only property on which you 
 know of an increase having been made lately? — Oh 
 no ; I think it has been made on a good many, but 
 not in comparison at all with the others. 
 
 21799. We heard that on the Devon estate they 
 are at liberty to sell their holdings ?— Yes ; I must 
 
 say that the Devon tenantry are about the happiest 
 in my county ; but on all the estates the tendency is 
 to increase the rent. 
 
 21800. Can you show us any cases that bear out 
 that feeling 1 — There are several proprietors in my own 
 neighbourhood that have been raising the rents. Mr. 
 Thomas Claucy is one ; he lives at Charleville. 
 
 21801. He has been raising the rents ?— Yes. 
 
 21802. Mr. Shaw. — You have not put your mind 
 to it to make out these facts ?— No ; I am satisfied 
 
 it is so. r„, , n, , •, 
 
 21803. Baron Dowse. — The landlord and tenant 
 don't stand on even ground at all ?— Certainly not. 
 
 21804. And if the landlord has the power to raise 
 the rents, would not the tenant be always afraid ?— 
 
 Yes. 
 
 21805. And that stops all improvement ?— Yes ; it 
 stops all energy. The argument the landlord uses is 
 that he has an equal right to do with his land just 
 as I have to do with my horse at the fair of Cahir- 
 
 ama. „ ,r r j 
 
 21806. Do you hold by lease?— Yes, I do. 
 
 21807. How long have you had the farm? — My 
 great-grandfather had it ; and before him again, I 
 believe ; but unfortunately he lost his title. He held 
 it at 7s. Gd. an acre. 
 
 21808. Your grandfather? — My father held it at 
 one time at 7s. Gd. before Lord Emly got it. 
 
 21809. Had he a lease? — A lease of lives, which 
 dropped out. 
 
 21810. When?— Sixty or seventy years ago. 
 
 21811. How long is it since you came into posses- 
 sion ? — I succeeded my father within the last thirty 
 years. 
 
 21812. About thirty years ago? — Yes. 
 
 21813. Was the lease existing then? — The 7s. Gd. 
 lease was not, but the lease my father got was in ex- 
 istence. 
 
 21814. Has that expired? — When I got into 
 possession I got married, and surrendered that and 
 got a new one. 
 
 21815. At the same rent ? — At a lower one. 
 
 21816. You cannot complain so? — I don't com- 
 plain of that. Mr. Monsell had great regard for toe, 
 and he paid me a compliment. 
 
 21817. It is no compliment seeing Mr. Monsell 
 was always in favour of the tenant; he carried out 
 his principle ? — Yes. 
 
 21818. That is the practice on his estate? — Yes. 
 
 21819. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know anything about 
 the labourers on these farms? — We have heard it 
 stated that the farmers charge high rents if they give 
 them potato ground. No doubt in some districts. 
 
 21820. That is not the case in your district?— My 
 district is not rich enough ; but about Bruff they 
 charge .£10 or £12 an acre for potato land. 
 
 21821. That is con-acre?— Yes. 
 
 21822. They are not labourers working on the 
 farm ? — No ; they are outside men. They take a 
 quarter of an acre and take away the produce. 
 
 21823. But I suppose with their own labourers 
 they are very indulgent ? — Yes ; as a rule they are 
 very indulgent. I give my men a quarter of an acre, 
 and charge them nothing for seed. I don't think you 
 could point to many landlords in the county who do 
 it. 
 
 21824. There is not much labour on the rich land? 
 — No, it is almost all in grass. 
 
 21825. And is chiefly saving the hay they use? — 
 Yes. 
 
 21826. And the labourers must be very badly ofi ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 21827. In the midst of the richest country in the 
 world ? — Yes. The very skim milk they can't get a 
 pint ; they are all getting nervous through taking tea 
 and coffee without milk. I have read that lunacy is 
 increasing very much in the country. 
 
 21828. And you think bad tea has something to 
 do with it ? — Yes ; and bad whisky. 
 
 21829. You are very largely acquainted with the 
 farmers of this country ? — I am. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 673 
 
 21830. And you state that in your opinion the 
 three F's, if thoroughly carried out, would be satis- 
 factory?— It is my opinion, and I believe it is the 
 opinioa of the country. At the same time, I don't at 
 all say we should not agitate for the other. 
 
 21831. Your opinion is that the two should go 
 side by side ? — Yes. 
 
 21832. And that the tenant ownership should be 
 formed as much as possible ? — Yes. 
 
 21833. And under conditions where it would be 
 likely to succeed ? — I think it would be a wise thing 
 for the landlords to settle the land question, for I find 
 every year it becomes worse. When I first became 
 president of the Farmers' Club, I think before we had 
 Mr. Butt in Limerick, our idea was a thirty-one years' 
 
 lease ; that is sixteen years a^o. "We crept from that 
 to a sixty-one years' lease. Then Mr. Butt came in, 
 and it was the three F's, and we forgot these two 
 things which we thought at one time would be satis- 
 factory, and now we believe we must sweep the land- 
 lords away altogether ; and I beheve really that if the 
 question is not settled soon, I don't where it will end. 
 
 21834. Baron Dowse. — That is a dangerous 
 doctrine, for if it was settled you might still keep 
 creeping on ?— No ; these three F's would satisfy us. 
 
 21835. Mr. Shaw. — You only state this as show- 
 ing the wisdom of settling the question at once ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 21836. It is from sheer necessity of settling it at 
 once ? — It is a necessity of the State, I think. 
 
 Oct. 21;, 1880. 
 
 William 
 Bolster. 
 
 21837. Mr Shaw.— You are 
 Limerick Farmers' Club ? — I am. 
 
 21838. And you have something to do with the 
 management of property ? — Yes. 
 
 21839. You are a tenant farmer yourself ? — Yes. 
 
 21840. Where? — Near Adare, on the estate of 
 Lord Dunraven. 
 
 21841. You know the county thoroughly? — Very 
 well. 
 
 21842. Have you any experience, or do you know, 
 of any cases in which the rent has been raised ?— I do. 
 
 21843. Can you give us instances? — One of my 
 landlords has raised the rent on three properties, and 
 on that portion of the estate he holds directly. My 
 landlord is tenant to Lord Dunraven. 
 
 21844. It is not Lord Dunraven who has raised the 
 rents ? — No, it is the middleman Henry Lyons. 
 
 21845. Within what time were these advances made? 
 — Within the last four or five years. On this property 
 in two places he has raised the rent, and very con- 
 siderably. I had a declaration of one of his tenants 
 (I had an interview with him), to say that his rent was 
 raised 33 per cent, in connection with a new lease. 
 
 21846. The lease had fallen in?— Yes. 
 
 21847. The O'Conor Don. — Are these increases of 
 rent general on the falling in of leases ? — I cannot speak 
 generally, but I am aware of it in this case I mention. 
 
 21848. Baron Dowse. — Was the increase too much ? 
 — The actual increase was 33 per cent. The tenant 
 paid pretty smartly before; it was high enough already. 
 
 21849. Mr. Shaw. — And the 33 per cent, put it 
 above living point ? — Yes. 
 
 21850. Is it grass land ? — Yes, prime land ; but 
 the original rent was a fine rent. 
 
 21851. You think it is too high now with the 
 advance ? — I do. 
 
 21852. That, I suppose, is a thing that has a great 
 effect in the country? — Wonderful effect. 
 
 21853. The people all know of it? — It has excited 
 the very worst passion of the people. 
 
 21854. You know Hospital ?— I do. 
 
 21855. Do you know anything of Lord Kenmare's 
 property ? — I have heard of it. 
 
 21856. You have heard that the rents were raised ? 
 — I did, exorbitant, within the last few years. 
 
 21857. That has produced an effect in the country ? 
 —Yes ; and very bad consequences too. 
 
 21858. You agree with Mr. Bolster that the cure 
 would be security for the tenant, fair rents, and free 
 sale ? — Fully. Having had the advantage of hearing 
 his evidence, I simply indorse what he said. I approve 
 of every answer he has given. If I was in his position, 
 I should have given the same answers. 
 
 21859. You think this settlement of the question 
 from your knowledge of the farmers, living amongst 
 them and knowing them intunately, would prove a 
 satisfactory settlement ? — Decidedly ; and I believe it 
 is inevitable, and if it is not done, I apprehend very 
 unpleasant consequences. . 
 
 21860. There is very bad feeling ? — Most wretched 
 feeling. You have no conception of it. 
 
 Mr. Mathew O'Flaherty, examined 
 president of the 
 
 21861. And of course the bad years brought that 
 to a point ? — Everything combined to make it press 
 terribly on the people, and they feel it. 
 
 21862. Do you know of any cases of tenants buying 
 their holdings ? — I do. 
 
 21863. Was it in the Landed Estates Court ?— No, 
 by private treaty. 
 
 21864. And they had to provide all the money ? — 
 Yes. One farm I am connected with as trustee, sold 
 advantageously. Of course all claims had to be dis- 
 charged before the money was appropriated by the 
 seller. The purchaser was not a farmer. No farmer 
 could produce the money that was paid for that. The 
 present occupants are three brothers. One of them 
 emigrated to AustraUa, and returned with £1500 ; the 
 others occupied high positions in the police, first-class 
 head constables. The sale had my approval and the 
 approval of Lord Dunraven, the landlord'; but from 
 a dozen fanners you could not produce the amount 
 they paid for it. 
 
 21866. Was it a perpetuity ? — No. There was no 
 lease even ; it was tenant right. 
 
 21867. Do you know any case where the tenants 
 have purchased perpetuities ? — No. 
 
 21868. The Chairman. — Does tenant right exist 
 on Lord Dunraven's property? — Yes, to a certain 
 extent. 
 
 21869. Mr. Shaw. — He does not disapprove of it 
 in the shghtest degree ? — On the contrary, Mr. Curling 
 thanked me for the class of tenants I got for him, but 
 I had not the smallest chance of selling it to a farmer. 
 
 21870. Was it a nice farm ? — A very highly im- 
 proved farm. 
 
 21871. What was the rent of it ?— The rent was 
 £72 for 42 Irish acres. 
 
 21872. What price did it bring ?— £650. 
 
 21873. Was there a lease? — No, sir; it was a 
 tenancy from year to year. That is not at all recognised 
 as a general rule in our country. 
 
 21874. But if it was, it would give security? — 
 Wherever the tenant got an opportunity of selling, the 
 landlord did not object; he only required that they 
 should have his approval of the purchaser. 
 
 21875. That is on Lord Dunraven's, and the same 
 with Lord Devon's ? — I beheve so, but 1 am not so 
 well acquainted with it. 
 
 21876. There are large grass farms in your part of 
 the country ? — There are. My side is the great tillage 
 side. It is towards Bruff and Hospital that the large 
 grass farms are. 
 
 21877. You know that country well? — Yes. 
 
 21878. How would you deal with these grass farms 
 on which the tenant has done nothing? — He pays a 
 very high rent for them. 
 
 21879. You think he generally pays the full value? 
 • — He does. 
 
 21880. And that he could not get much for his 
 interest ? — Certainly. 
 
 21881. In some cases he improves also? — He does ; 
 and I must say that the system of farming on these 
 grass farms is of a negligent and slovenly character ; 
 
 4E 
 
 Mathew 
 O'Flaherty. 
 
674 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26 1880. but there is no inducement to improve. The present 
 -^ system of land tenure does not admit of improvement. 
 
 ^^^"7, 21882. They don't drain?— No. 
 
 O FJaherty. ^^ggg^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ j^y o„t money ?— I 
 
 believe so positively. I hold a farm on lease, and I have 
 not ever spared a shilling I could set aside for improve- 
 ments ; my bill for compensation would be a heavy one. 
 
 21884. How long have you had that farm?— It is 
 ahout seventy years in our family. 
 
 21885. Has the lease been existing all that time?— 
 Yes. There was a lease in 1810 of one farm, and 
 another in 1821 of another farm. There was a small 
 farm of twelve acres for which I have no lease. 
 
 21886. Have there been advances in the rent? — 
 Yes, a small advance on the small bit without a lease. 
 
 21887. And your own life is the surviving hfe of the 
 lease? — Yes. I have never spared a shilliug on the 
 farm, and I have built and built— all buildings, in the 
 shape of barns, stables, coach-house, and walls, fit for 
 any demesne in Ireland, out of my own pocket. Drain- 
 age and fences I have made, and farm roads, and 
 levelled innumerable wasteful, slovenly fences. 
 
 21888. And did everything you could to improve it? 
 — And would continue to do it, if I got a new lease. 
 In fact, I asked my landlord for a new lease, and that 
 I would continue to do improvements as I had been 
 doing, and I would not get it on the terms. I am glad 
 now I did not get it. 
 
 21889. You would be willing to give an increased 
 rent? — Then I would, but not now. 
 
 21890. Then at the termination of the lease your 
 representatives would only have a claim for improve- 
 ments? — Yes, and a very limited one. I don't be- 
 lieve it would be a maximum of .£260. 
 
 21891. That is for disturbance, but nothing they 
 could give would compensate you for the money ex- 
 pended ? — No. There is a large expenditure of which 
 I kept no account at all. 
 
 21892. Are the farms generally leased in your part 
 of the country ? — No. 
 
 21893. Are improvements going on to any great 
 extent ? — No, not to any great extent. 
 
 21894. They have been up to the last bad times? — 
 There is a combination between landlord and tenant 
 about improvements on Lord Dunraven's estate. The 
 landlord gives the best portion, and the rough part is 
 done by the occupying tenant. 
 
 21895. That continues up to the present? — Yes. 
 
 21896. And it has not been interrupted by the Land 
 Act? — No. This very year there was a very nice 
 house built by a tenant in my neighbourhood. 
 
 41897. And there is practically security for the 
 tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 21898. There is no eviction except for non-payment ? 
 — No. We have old leases made in 1804, and at least 
 for sixty-five years we have them without leases on Lord 
 Dunraven's estate. 
 
 21899. And never had the slightest apprehension of 
 disturbance, and no change in the rent ? — There was 
 at one time a great attempt made by a former agent 
 to raise the rent. That was during the lifetime of 
 the late Captain Ball. 
 
 21900. That was several years ago? — It is about 
 twelve years ago. 
 
 21901. Is it since the present Lord Dunraven came 
 in ? — Mr. Curling, father of the present agent, succeeded 
 him, and there was a small increase, but it did not 
 come up to the increase Captain Ball intended at all, 
 and the, tenants were quite reconciled to it. That was 
 before the present Lord Dunraven's time. 
 
 21902. I suppose you would be very glad to buy 
 your own farm ? — I would. 
 
 21903. And I suppose a great many would be likely 
 to feel the same ? — Yes, certainly. 
 
 21904. They are comfortable, well-to-do men, many 
 of them ? — Certainly. 
 
 21905. And would be very good men to give the 
 ownership to ? — Yes. 
 
 21906. They would not subdivide it unnecessarily? 
 — ^No. I hold a very large tract of land, and I think 
 it would be fair to give me the privilege of giving some 
 
 of it to my son, or if I had two sons, dividing it be- 
 tween them. It was done by my father. 
 
 21907. Don't you think the small forty-acre man 
 might do the same ? — He might. 
 
 21908. Would there be anyway of preventing that? 
 ^It would not be a good thing. I would not recom- 
 mend too minute subdivision. I would not go beyond 
 twenty Irish acres. 
 
 21909. O'CoNOE Don; — Do yoa hold all the farm 
 in your own hands ? — ^I do. 
 
 21910. What is the rent per acre ? — The- rent per acre 
 of the land on which I live is £2, 6s. 2d., and there is 
 a rent charge of £21 a year connected with that. 
 
 21911. Do you think it worth a good deal more 
 than that ? — It is not worth so much now. 
 
 21912. Notwithstanding all your improvements, 
 owing to the change in the times? — The change in 
 the value of farm produce. It was to a certain ex- 
 tent a tillage farm, but I don't till so much at present 
 prices. 
 
 21913. Mr. Shaw. — What is the valuaition of your 
 farm ? — My valuation is £264, and my rent £417, for 
 the farm on which I Kve. 
 
 21914. Do you think Griffith's valuation is a good 
 test in these good lands ? — I think it is very badly 
 apphed, and in connection with the good lands it does 
 not at all apply equally. 
 
 Mr. BoLSTEE, re-examined. — With regard to Griffith's 
 valuation of tillage lands in Limerick ? —When Griffith's 
 valuation was made, they were actually valued higher 
 than the richest grazing lands in my county, and the 
 grazing lands at this moment are all undervalued, and 
 all the lands in our district are overvalued. 
 
 21915. It is not reliable? — Certainly not; it is un- 
 reliable. 
 
 Mr. O'Flaheett, recalled. — They were valued ac- 
 cording to the prices of produce then. 
 
 21916. The O'Conoe Don. — Do you say that agri- 
 cultural produce was higher then than it is now ? — I 
 do. 
 
 21917. Do you know what the scale af prices was at 
 that time ? — ^I do ; I have kept a record of the price 
 of every article I ever sold. 
 
 21918. You are aware that the scale of ^prices is 
 mentioned in the Act of Parliament ? — Yes. 
 
 21919. Upon which the valuation was carried out? 
 — I believe so. 
 
 21920. Did you see that the prices given in the Act 
 are higher than the prices now ? — I don't exactly re- 
 member the scale you allude to in the Act of Parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 21921. You are aware that in the Act of Parlia- 
 ment itself there is a scale of prices set forth — oats, 
 wheat, and everything else; have you ever looked at 
 that scale ? — No, I have not. 
 
 21922. It was according to that scale the valuation 
 was made, and you are not prepared to say that that 
 scale upon which the valuation was made is higher 
 than the prices at present ? — I cannot answer exactly, 
 for I don't remember the scale you allude to, but I kept 
 myself a correct record of the price of every article I 
 sold. 
 
 21923. Mr. Shaw. — You would say that the valua- 
 tion should have been made on the scale in the Act of 
 Parhament ? — Yes. 
 
 _ 21924. But that the men who made the valuation 
 did not understand their business, and made it in a very 
 perfunctory way ? — Yes. 
 
 21925. And many of them did not go upon the lands 
 at all ? — I believe sol 
 
 21926. The O'Conoe Don.— You have no tenants 
 yourself? — No. 
 
 21927. You give houses to your labourers? — I do. 
 
 21928. What wages do you give them ? — 7s. a week. 
 
 21929. Any land ? — Yes, and I give them the privilege 
 of getting the land free. The ordinary labourer pays 
 so much an acre for it in labour, but not in money. 
 
 21930. What acreable rent do you put upon the 
 land? — £6 an acre highly -manured, and tilled, and 
 cultivated. 
 
 21931. You till it for him?— Yes; in fact his 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, 
 
 675 
 
 potato crop is sown with my own seed, and treated in 
 the same way as my own. He has a house for nothing, 
 and they have a good many privileges about geese and 
 goats. They get milk at a nominal price. At one of 
 the farms I have a caretaker, and I give him grass 
 and a cow gratuitously ; I pay him £20 a year as care- 
 taker, with his grass and cow f^r nothing. He has 
 also in the winter months a stripper out of my own 
 bawn giving him milk ; that is a cow not in calf, and 
 they milk very well in the winter. 
 
 21932. How many acres have you? — About 320 
 acres altogether. 
 
 21933. The Chairman. — You said you held under 
 C. D. yourself : does he hold under Lord Dunraven ? 
 — He holds 200 acres of the estate of Dunraven, and I 
 hold from him 170 acres of the 200. 
 
 21934. Does he live on the remainder? — No; he 
 lives at Croane. 
 
 Mathew 
 O'Flalierty. 
 
 21935. He leases that to some other person ? — Yes. wc<. 26, I88u. 
 There are two small holdings attached to mine.- 
 
 21936. "What was his lease?— 999 years, and the 
 history of that lease would interest you very much. 
 His father purchased from an improvident landed pro- 
 prietor, Mr. John Copley, the interest in the lease of 
 999 years of these 200 acres for £3000, and there have 
 been paid by my father and myself to him £28,000, 
 and the other two tenants paid £2000, and the whole 
 estate has been purchased by Lord Dunraven for 
 22,000. C. D. is paying a head rent of £1 Irish per 
 acre. Lord Dunraven purchased the whole estate of 
 Donoman— about 1000 acres— for £22,000 in 1861, 
 Properties were not so high then as they have become 
 since. 
 
 21937. Mr Shaw. — Are the landlords resident? — 
 These are. 
 
 21938. They live amongst the people?— They do. 
 
 Mr. Joseph Caset, examined. 
 
 Joseph Casey. 
 
 21938. The Chairman.— Where do you live?— In 
 Rathkeale, County Limeriolj. 
 
 21939. Do you hold land ? — I hold some small shares 
 of land — -about 80 acres. I had a great quantity, and 
 I gave it up. 
 
 21940. Who was your landlord? — I have several 
 landlords. My lands are town fields. I had some 
 large farms under Sir Robert Bateson. 
 
 21941. Is there anything special as to these farms 
 that yon vrish to mention ? — ^Xo ; I got rid of them, as 
 1 considered them too dear. 
 
 21942. Mr. Shaw. — You are an auctioneer, and you 
 know a good deal about the state of the country ? — I 
 do. 
 
 21943. And the state of the farms and tenancies? — 
 Yes, I have a good deal of experience. 
 
 '21944. As an auctioneer, had you to do with the 
 sale of them ? — I had. 
 
 21945. What is the custom where there is a sale 
 under the Sheriff's order ? — I had no Sherifi's sale. I 
 had no fancy for duties of that sort. I sold but with 
 the consent and approval of the owners. 
 
 21946. These are cases where the tenant is allowed 
 by the landlord to sell ? — Yes. 
 
 21947. On Lord Devon's and the surrounding 
 estates ? — Yes. 
 
 21948. It is the custom in that country? — Yes; and 
 on Lord Annally's estate. 
 
 21949. We had Mr. Reeves, who gave evidence? — 
 Yes ; he is agent on the Pigott estate, and a good man. 
 
 21950. The Chairman. — Could you tell us the 
 amount of purchase-money they have got? — I have 
 complained myself of getting far and away more than the 
 value of the sales I had, owing to the desire of the parties 
 to get into possession, although knowing it was not 
 worth anything like the purchase-money they paid. 
 
 21951. How long ago is that? — Before the last 
 three years. There has been depression for the last 
 three years, in which property could hardly be sold at 
 all. The tenant's interest could scarcely be sold at all 
 within the last three years. 
 
 21952. That has arisen from the depression of the 
 times? — Yes, the depression and the uncertainty of 
 matters — the dread of parties lest they would have to 
 go into unsafe possessions. 
 
 21953. Do you think there has also been an in- 
 creased feeling of insecurity from the raising of rents ? 
 — Yes; the people have no spirit. 
 
 21954. Is it your opinion that the value of holdings 
 has been diminished of late years through that feeling ? 
 — I do. I believe they have been diminished from 40 
 to 50 per cent. I have reason to know. In selling 
 agricultural produce, where I got 9 guineas an acre 
 for meadow on Lord Mdnteagle's and other property, 
 I had to sell for £2, 10s. and £3 last year. 
 
 21955. These are only sold for the crop? — Yes, 
 meadows ; and they brought 9 guineas an acre. 
 
 21956. Then the question of uncertainty of tenure 
 does not arise in these cases ? — No. 
 
 21957. But the feeling 'Of uncertainty has affected 
 the value of the holdings ? — Yes ; people would not 
 venture to buy at all, seeing they have no security. 
 
 21958. How long has that feeling been in existence ! 
 — I think for the last six or seven years it has been 
 growing. 
 
 21959. Can you account for its growing after the 
 Land Act passed, when security was greater? — I 
 think since the Land Act they have less security, and 
 are more dissatisfied. 
 
 21960. But you think there has been often increases 
 of rent ? — I think much oftener since the Act passed, 
 because, as Mr. Bolster and Mr. O'Plaherty said, they 
 have appealed to the landlord, and the landlord has 
 said, Go and abide by the Act. 
 
 21961. Do you think before that time the landlords 
 had been disposed in many cases to let the rents 
 remain as they were ? — I know ti|^t ; and a better 
 feeling existed between landlord and tenant before that 
 — there was a growing feeling of confidence on the 
 part of the tenants. 
 
 21962. Do you think the feeling of insecurity has 
 prevented the tenants making improvements ? — Of 
 course ; for there is an increase put on ; and they say, 
 '^ What is the use of doing it ? we have to pay for our 
 own labour and outlay." 
 
 21963. You say it has affected the sale of holdings 
 very much during the last few years ; has that 
 affected the number of persons wishing to sell? — It 
 certainly has. 
 
 21964. Were there many who tried to sell? — Yes, 
 but there were very many failures. 
 
 21965. Mr. Shaw. — Money was scarce? — That has 
 something to do with it ; and the money being scarce 
 was caused by the same thing, so that it became general. 
 
 21966. Are the rents raised on Lord Devon's 
 property as a rule on a charge of tenancy ? — I never 
 saw it. Lord Devon and a- few others — Mr. Pigott 
 and Lord Monteagle — are an exception to all Ireland. 
 
 21967. There is no raising of rent with them? — 
 No ; that I could learn. 
 
 21968. Can you see an evident difference between 
 the tenants and their condition on these properties, 
 from the condition in other parts of the country ? — 
 There is a perceptible difference. They are all men of 
 respectability, from the position they occupy under the 
 landlord and the fair privileges they are allowed. 
 
 21969. The Chairman. — Does that apply to large 
 and small tenants I — Yes, on these estates. On other 
 estates the tenants are just about as happy as if the 
 black man had them. I cannot use coarse expressions 
 in your presence, but an auctioneer knows the inmost 
 recesses of the truthfulness of the position in which 
 these people stand, for when a poor tenant comes to 
 sell off, he tells all the pains and losses and un- 
 
 4E2 
 
676 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 188U. 
 Joseph Casey. 
 
 certainties in which he is placed, for he has to tell 
 the truth without paint or varnish to the auctioneer. 
 
 21970. In the districts that you know have there 
 been many cases of eviction? — There have been a 
 great number for non-payment. 
 
 21971. Have they been carried out? — Indeed they 
 have. I have the honour of being the deputy vice- 
 chairman of the Board of Guardians at Rathkeale, 
 and the number of notices served by the relieving 
 officers is very great in eviction cases. 
 
 21972. The O'Conob Don. — How many did you 
 receive into the workhouse ? — I daresay we had a good 
 many receiving relief in some shape. 
 
 21973. Who were evicted? — Yes, and had to give 
 up. 
 
 21974. Mr. Shaw. — And came into the house 
 within the last three years ? — Came into the house or 
 got outdoor rehef. The guardians seeing a decent 
 man whom they knew, with a family, have stretched a 
 point to give them out-door relief. 
 
 21975. They were not all farmers; some cottagers, 
 some of them held little town fields ; others houses. 
 
 21976. The O'Conoe Don.— Could you tell us 
 from the statistics of the workhouse how many of the 
 actual farmers have been turned out of their holdings 
 and had to be received into the workhouse within the 
 last three years ? — I could tell you from my own 
 knowledge of the farmers who were turned out, and 
 did not go to the workhouse but got out-door 
 relief. 
 
 21977. Who were put out of the land altogether? 
 — Yes ; and are lodging in poor cabins in the towns 
 with their families in the lowest state of distress. If 
 these three points that Mr. Bolster and Mr. O'Flaherty 
 referred to were settled, I believe the country would be 
 in peace and harmony. 
 
 21978. The CnAreMAN. — You think, from your 
 knowledge of these people, having seen them in times 
 of distress, that they would be satisfied if they had an 
 opportunity of seUing their holdings and getting a fair 
 price ? — If there was a fair valuation of land estab- 
 
 lished by some competent and trustworthy parties 
 under the Government — practical men, and that they 
 had the lands at their proper value, then, with 
 certainty of tenure and power to sell, I believe it 
 would remove all the trouble and distress that exist in 
 Ireland. 
 
 21979. Baron Dowse. — With reference to the 
 power to sell, don't the people want to remain where 
 they are without selling to anybody ? — Yes. 
 
 21980. Paying a fair rent? — Yes. Selling is only 
 the extreme case, but they will have spirit to work 
 along if they know that even if they are compelled tO 
 sell next year they will have the benefit of their labour ; 
 that all they were doing would add to the value of 
 what they had to sell. 
 
 21981. Have you ever been in the north? — No, 
 sir. 
 
 Mr. Bolster. — There was one question asked of 
 Mr. O'Flaherty — if the landlords generally Hved at 
 home ? — and he very truly answered that in his neigh- 
 bourhood they do. I live eight or nine miles from him, 
 and a great deal of our land, with the exception of 
 Lord Emly's, is held by absentees who never saw their 
 Irish estates, who were never on them, who manage 
 their properties through office agents, who don't know 
 the value of land, and, I believe, don't know an acre of 
 cabbage from an acre of potatoes. 
 
 21982. Mr. Shaw. — The majority of the landlords 
 do not hve in the county ? 
 
 Mr. Bolster. — 'No. The great bulk of the pro- 
 perty in my neighbourhood is held by absentees. 
 
 21983. Baron Dowse.^ Wherever they do live on 
 their property they are better ? 
 
 Mr. Bolster. — We have more confidence. There 
 is a rent day fixed in an office in Lim6rick ; you are 
 allowed to stand in the hall ; you are not allowed to 
 sit down, and you are treated ,with the greatest dis- 
 respect. You have to stand all day. The agent 
 knows nothing, and will enter into no conversation, 
 only down with the money. He will hear no complaint. 
 You have no complaint. 
 
 James G. 
 Barrv. 
 
 James G. Barry, Esq., examined. 
 
 21984. The O'Conor Don.— You live at Sandville 
 Grange ? — Yes. 
 
 21985. You are a landowner and agent? — Yes, 
 and farmer. 
 
 21986. You pay rent for your farm? — Yes. 
 
 21987. How much land are you connected with'? — 
 Over 20,000 acres. 
 
 21988. In what counties? — Limerick, Clare, and 
 Tipperary. 
 
 21989. For whom are you agent? — Lord Emly, 
 Lady Louisa Fitzgibbon, and two or three others. 
 
 21990. Is the right of the tenant to sell his estate 
 recognised on these estates ? — Not exactly recognised, 
 but the landlords generally give permission with 
 certain restrictions. 
 
 21991. What are the restrictions? — A veto on the 
 incoming tenant as to his solvency and character; 
 under exceptional circumstances the incoming tenant 
 contracts himself out of the Land Act. 
 
 21992. Outof the Land Act?— Yes. 
 
 21993. Do you give leases in such cases? — No, not 
 always. An agreement in writing. 
 
 21994. Baron Dowse.— On whose estate was that? 
 — Lord Emly's. 
 
 21995. Did he know that himself? — I think so. 
 
 21996. What was the size of the farm? It was 
 
 about 10 acres ; it was adjoining the demesne. 
 
 21997. What was the rent?— The rent was £19 a 
 year. 
 
 21998. Do you know that that was an illegal con- 
 tract?— No ; it was not exactly. There were two or 
 three men applied for the farm, and the purchaser 
 agreed that the money he paid, the landlord was not 
 to be accountable for. 
 
 21999. The O'Conor Don.— Did he pay much on 
 getting into possession ? — About ten or twelve years' 
 purchase. 
 
 Was the rent altered? — No. It was a 
 and never altered. The landlord paid the 
 
 22000. 
 low rent, 
 taxes. 
 
 22001. 
 
 Would you be in favour of repealing the 
 provision enabling the landlord to contract the tenant 
 out of the Land Act? — I think so; it is a source of 
 irritation. 
 
 22002. Baron Dowse. — You would not allow the 
 landlord to do it ? — No. 
 
 22003. You do it yourself? — It was a peculiar 
 case ; it was part of the demesne. 
 
 22004. It was an illegal contract all the time?— I 
 think not ; it came under demesne lands. 
 
 22005. If so, it is not within the Land Act at all?— 
 It is part of the demesne. I should not do it in any 
 other case. 
 
 22006. The O'Conor Don. — You merely provided 
 against the tenant claiming for money paid on coming 
 in ? — Precisely. 
 
 22007. Are leases general on the properties with 
 which you are connected? — Yes. 
 
 22008. For what length ?— Thirty-one years. 
 
 22009. Has the Land Act had a tendency to de- 
 crease or increase the granting of leases? — Rather to 
 increase. 
 
 22010. Are there any conditions put into these 
 leases barring the tenant against claiming under the 
 Land Act? — Generally. 
 
 22011. In all cases, whether large or small? — I 
 mean as a rule through the country, but I don't do 
 it. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 G77 
 
 21012. But as a rale through the country there are 
 coveDants put in barring the tenant from claiming 
 compensation ? — Yes. 
 
 22013. Do the tenants generally accept these leases? 
 — I don't think they do wilhngly. 
 
 22014. They have to be pressed upon them? — I 
 think so ; they prefer doing without them. 
 
 22015. In cases of grazing farms? — I think they 
 prefer having leases in these cases. 
 
 22016. But the small tenants would prefer doing 
 without them ? — Much depends on the landlord. 
 
 22017. Baron Dowse. — As a rule, would not many 
 rather have them — they would do them good — than 
 not ? — Certainly ; I meant to convey they would rather 
 have leases without restrictions. 
 
 22018. The O'Conok Don. — What proportion 
 does the Government valuation bear to the rent in 
 the properties with which you are connected? — The 
 rents are from 20 to 25 per cent, over Griffith's 
 valuation. 
 
 22019. Do you consider Griffith's valuation at all a 
 fair test for settling rent ? — Certainly not ; it has 
 nothing to say to the fixing of rent. 
 
 22020. Do you think it is uniform ? — No, I think it 
 is not. 
 
 22021. Has there been any tendency to increase 
 rents within the last ten years ? — On some properties. 
 It depends greatly on the landlord. The rents on the 
 principal properties I am connected with — Lord Emly's 
 and Lady Louisa Fitzgibbon's — never increase. The 
 rental on Lord Emly's property has not been increased 
 for more than fifty years as a rule, and his tenants 
 have not even asked for an abatement in the last 
 two years. 
 
 22022. The Chaiemak. — Not even in the last two 
 years? — No. The rents have seldom been changed. 
 
 22023. The O'Conok Don.— And on Lady Louisa 
 Fitzgibbon's? — The rents were fixed by valuation 
 within the last twenty years, and I have given them 
 this year at their request an abatement. 
 
 22024. On that property the rent was altered within 
 the last twenty years ? — It was not altered durmg my 
 time, but it was altered, I believe. 
 
 22025. Mr. Shaw. — Could you tell us the advance 
 made then? — No; it was a valuation made with the 
 consent of the tenants at the time. 
 
 22026. And the rents were raised something ? — One 
 tenant's may have been, to equalize him with his 
 neighbour, but it was a mere equalizing of rents, and 
 the tenants were perfectly satisfied. It may be more 
 than twenty years ago. There was a valuation made 
 since then, but it was never enforced. That was in 
 1876. 
 
 22027. With the view of raising the rent 1 — To as- 
 certain the then value of the property. 
 
 22028. It would have raised the rent 1 — Very 
 slightly. It would have come to about the same 
 thing. I think the rental at present is not more 
 than 20 per cent, over Griffith's valuation. 
 
 22029. What was the object of the valuation? — 
 A new owner had come in for the property. When 
 a tenant in tail comes in, it is generally valued to 
 satisfy the trustees. 
 
 22030. The O'Conor Don. — Are there many im- 
 provements made by the landlord 1 — Yes, before the 
 passing of the Act of 1870. 
 
 22031. What sort of improvements? — They allowed 
 slates and timber in most cases. 
 
 22032. Did they do drainage? — Yes; they bor- 
 rowed money and advanced to the tenants for general 
 improvements. 
 
 22033. When loans were taken from the Board of 
 Works, were the tenants required to pay the full 
 amount of the loan t — Yes, as a rule, both principal 
 and interest, at, I think, 5 per cent, interest. 
 
 22034. At any rate, whatever was paid by the land- 
 lord the tenant paid an increased rent 1 — That was the 
 agreement on Lord Emly's property until the principal 
 was repaid the Board of Works. He has recently 
 paid himself the instalments. 
 
 22035. During the bad times ?— Yes. 
 
 22036. Have you had any evictions ?— No, I have yd. 26, mo. 
 never had any. j g 
 
 22037. And no cases in the Land Court ? — No, not Barry. '' 
 on any property I am connected with. 
 
 22038. Are you acquainted with any cases of pur- 
 chase by tenants of their holdings ? — I am aware of 
 cases, but I am not personally acquainted with them, 
 except in my own locality. There are about fifty free- 
 hold proprietors — very small holders. 
 
 22039. How are they going on ? — Oh, last year we 
 had to get money wherever we could to support them. 
 We borrowed money from the Board of Works for 
 drainage, and thus kept them alive, in fact. 
 
 22040. Mr. Shaav. — What size of holding 1 — Very 
 small — from a quarter of an acre to two acres. They 
 are practically labourers. 
 
 22041. How did they originate 1 — They originated 
 by squatting on a cut-away bog. 
 
 22042. Baron Dowse. — And they got a title by 
 staying there 1 — Yes. 
 
 22043. The O'Conor Don. — You are not aware of 
 any proprietors who purchased in the Landed Estates 
 Court 1 — I have known some. 
 
 22044. How are they going on 1 — Very well ; they 
 are thriving, to all appearances. 
 
 22045. They have not subdivided ? — No. 
 
 22046. Would you suggest any alteration in the 
 Bright clauses ? — I don't believe very much in peasant 
 proprietary made by Act of Parliament. 
 
 22047. Baron Dowse. — You don't believe in it as 
 a general remedy ? — No. 
 
 22048. But you believe industrious tenants should 
 be encooraged to buy 1 — Certainly, but in a different 
 way. I have got ideas of my own about that. 
 
 22049. The O'Conor Don. — You are in favour of 
 doing away with all restrictions on the sale of pro- 
 perty ? — Certainly. I think the question of peasant 
 proprietors would settle itself if you do away with all 
 restrictions on the sale and transfer of property. If 
 you made it transferable like any other commodity, 
 peasant proprietary would settle itself. 
 
 22050. The Chairman. — You mean the property of 
 the country generally ? — Yes. 
 
 22051. Mr. Shaw. — There would be small holdings 
 in the market, and they would be bought up as a 
 matter of course ? — Yes ; that the landlord who 
 required money would be able to sell a small portion 
 to pay his debts ; but you should alter the law of entail 
 and all that at present hampers the transfer of landed 
 property. 
 
 22052. The O'Conoe Don. — You have given in a 
 plan for the settlement of the land question 1 — Yes ; it 
 was an old one drawn up in 1869. 
 
 22053. Was it in a pamphlet ?— Yes, this was what 
 
 it was : — 
 
 A PLAN 
 
 For the Settlement of the Land Question, founded on 
 the Principle of Mutual Compromise, and, as a conse- 
 quence. Mutual Gain. 
 Working Machinery. — Arbitrators in all instances shall 
 be two residents in the Petty Sessions district in which the 
 farm in dispute is situated. One to be selected from the 
 resident landlord class by the occupier, and the other from 
 the tenant farmer class by the owner. The person selected 
 from the landlord class shall be a resident in the district 
 for at least six months annually, and the tenant farmer 
 selected shall hold at least an amount of land equal in 
 extent to the farm in dispute. 
 
 Neither shall, directly or indirectly, be interested parties, 
 or in any way connected or under the influence of either 
 owner or occupier. In case of disagreement, owner and 
 occupier, by mutual agreement, may select a referee — appeal 
 from whose decision may be to Superior Land Court, and 
 appeal from arbitrators' decision to the Local Court. 
 Decision of arbitrators to be final, and entered in 
 " District Land Register," unless an appeal within fourteen 
 days, appellant paying costs. 
 
 Local Courts to be established in every Quarter Sessions 
 district — chairman of county presiding. His decision is 
 to be entered on " Land Register of District," and copies 
 given to owner and occupier on the payment of a fixed 
 sum by party gaining cause. For instance, 40 shillings 
 where farm in dispute contains over 100 statute acres ; 
 over 50 acres and under 100 acres, 30 shillings ; over 25 
 
678 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. and uuder 50 acres, 20 shillings ; over ten and under 2o 
 
 acres, 15 shillings ; over 5 and under 10 acres, 10 shillings ; 
 
 James G. under 5 acres, 5 shillings. Appeal to superior Court. No 
 
 Barry. igg^j assistance to be permitted either party before Court, 
 
 except in the mere preparation of case. 
 
 Superior Land Court in Dublin composed of two Com- 
 missioners (if possible conversant with land) and a legal 
 assessor, with clerks, etc., to hear appeals from lower 
 Courts. General registry of property to contain summary 
 of rents, and amount of fines paid, transfers of farms, etc. 
 As the greater portion of Irish properties are in settlement, 
 many mortgaged, some entailed, it shall be competent for 
 parties interested, creditors, reversioners, etc., to apply to 
 this Court to have fines received by present owners lodged 
 in Court. This Court shall decide whether the security on 
 which money was lent, property settled, etc., is depreciated 
 by the granting of perpetuity to tenants, and shall ap- 
 portion fines as they shall deem fit, with due jegard to 
 the interests of all parties concerned. In case Government 
 may consider it advisable to grant loans to tenants for 
 improvements, purchase of perpetuities, etc., same to be 
 apphed for to this Court. Interest of loans to be a first 
 charge on occupier's tenant right, and made payable 
 annually into this Court. 
 
 ■Costs of Court in any case never to exceed £25, as it is 
 necessary for the proper working of the system that the 
 cost to the tenant should be at a minimum. 
 
 Plan. — Every tenant in possession of land in Ireland, on 
 and after a date to be fixed, shall be entitled to be secured 
 in the possession of his holding at his present rent, on the 
 payment of a "fine" as hereafter fixed, said fine to be 
 considered as an equivalent for any infringement of land- 
 lord's rights or depreciation of his property by the emanci- 
 pation of the tenant. 
 
 Application of Plan. — Arbitrators, appointed as shown, 
 view the farm in presence of owner and occupier or their 
 representatives. They shall ascertain and fix the present 
 full letting annual value of the farm just as they find it, 
 according to the quality of the land, its fitness for tillage 
 or pasturage, &c. ; amount of accommodation, quantity of 
 waste, and, above all, the current rents paid for the same 
 quality of laud in the immediate locality — owner and occu- 
 pier having full liberty of bringing to their notice any 
 matters, that in the one case, were likely to enhance the 
 value, and in the other depreciate it. Arbitrators being 
 practical men, though perhaps knowing less geology and 
 botany than valuators from a Government office, fully con- 
 versant with agricultural matters, and the real not 
 theoretical value of the land in the district in which they 
 reside, can, without any very abstruse calculations, and at 
 no expense to the public, arrive at the present actual 
 letting value of the farm, and would certainly give more 
 satisfaction to all parties concerned than Government oiScials. 
 
 Having ascertained the present letting value of the farm, 
 they then consider and value all permanent improvements 
 effected by the occupier during his term, and also those (if 
 any) executed by landlord, and allow for same in calculat- 
 ing fine, except in cases hereafter mentioned. They shall 
 then ascertain the rent now paid by occupier, and also the 
 length of his term, and the actual or probable time he has 
 unexpired (if a lease exists). They now proceed to ascertain 
 the occupier's interest. This to be estimated by a com- 
 parison between the actual rent now paid and the present 
 fuU letting of farm, and the probable or actual time, in case 
 of leases, tenant's term has yet to run ; in other words, the 
 unexpired term multiplied by the difference between the 
 old rent and the present full letting value of holding. 
 This shall then be the amount of fine which landlord becomes 
 entitled to. 
 
 By the term Occupier^s Interest, nothing further is meant 
 than that annual sum which the tenant shall pocket during 
 the remainder of his term, but which then would under 
 the present system go to the landlord, over and above that 
 reasonable profit which he is entitled to, in order that he 
 may continue his business without actual loss after paying 
 the landlord the rent reserved by him. This legitimate 
 profit obviously should be sufficient to replace his original 
 expenses, together with the ordinaiy profits of stock, and 
 also the whole of his annual expenses, together likewise with 
 the ordinary profits of stock. 
 
 Now, though the law permits the landlord the reversion 
 of the occupier's interest, still some years must elapse 
 before he can possibly obtain the benefit of same, tenant's 
 term being unexpired, it is evident, in order to obtain the 
 benefit of this interest or annual sum now, he should pur- 
 chase it by paying a lump sum to the tenant ; or, in other 
 words, in order to obtain possession of the farm for the 
 purpose of increasing the rent to its full extent, he should 
 first buy out the occupier. But as the object in view is to 
 secure the tenant in his holding, and at the same time not 
 deprive the landlord of this sum which the law gives him, 
 the reversion of an equitable arrangement or compromise 
 
 will be effected by the payment of an equivalent to the 
 landlord out of the tenant's pocket. All tenants holding 
 their farms for a term of seven years or under, shall ob- 
 tain the benefit of this plan on the same principle of paying 
 a "fine," or purchasing security from eviction, the rent to 
 remain as payable at present, except in cases as hereafter 
 mentioned. 
 
 Application to Leases. — First, when occupier is in pos- 
 session over thirty-one years ; secondly, when occupier is 
 in possession over twenty-one years ; and, thirdly, when 
 occupier is in possession under twenty-one, but over seven 
 years. 
 
 Tenants holding under old lease No. 1, will, as a general 
 rule, be found paying a rent considerably under the present 
 letting of their farms. The increase value may be due 
 principally or entirely to the improvements effected by the 
 tenant, still the length of time he has enjoyed the full 
 benefit of his improvements, and the very considerable 
 profit he annually derives from his holding, may be legiti- 
 mately set off against any consideration for these improve- 
 ments. In this case, therefore, the occupier shall not be 
 allowed for past improvements (except he proves clearly 
 that some were executed recently, and that he could not 
 have reaped any benefit from same as yet). 
 
 Tenants holding No. 2 lease may be also put down as 
 paying a rent under, perhaps, considerably present letting 
 value. The same rule will apply, provided they do not 
 prove satisfactorily that during that term they had not 
 been recouped for original outlay. Tenants holding No. 
 ■ ) class of leases shall be entitled to consideration for all 
 unexhausted improvements, their term of occupation not 
 permitting them to gain the full benefit of outlay ; also the 
 rent being, as a general rule, approximate closely to full 
 value of holding. 
 
 Explanation. — A. holds a farm of 50 acres on an old lease 
 of lives, at £1 00 per annum ; one life in his lease still exists, 
 and is calculated to live for, say, ten years. The tenant 
 has been in occupation over forty years, and during that 
 time enhanced considerably the agricultural value of his 
 holding by unexhausted improvements. The present full 
 letting value is found to be £150 per annum, or one-third 
 more than the present rent. The long term during which 
 he has enjoyed the full benefit of his outlay has repaid him 
 with interest for his original expenditure ; therefore during 
 the ten years to come he will be in a condition to put by 
 this annual profit sum — i.e. £50 per annum for ten years, 
 equal to £500 — of course at considerable risk, on account of 
 depreciation of prices, blight, &c. ; therefore £500 now 
 without any labour in accumulating would be a fair price 
 for the " occupier's interest," which is different, as before 
 demonstrated, from his " tenant right." At the termina- 
 tion of his term, his landlord will certainly increase the 
 rent to its full present value, or else evict him ; but then 
 the landlord must wait for a period of ten years in order 
 to accomplish this. If he should wish to benefit at once 
 by this increased rent, obviously he must buy the " occupier's 
 interest," and further give an equivalent for tenant right, 
 or else tenant will naturally refuse to surrender his holding ; 
 in other words, he should pay fiU'st of all £500 for 
 " occupier's interest," not to mention a further sum as an 
 ejiuivalent for tenant's legitimate annual profits or " tenant 
 right." The annual interest of £600, at 5 per cent., equals 
 £25, and the increased rent only equals £50, so in reality 
 landlord only gains by his bargain an annual sum of £25. 
 Now, as the object is to give the tenant a secure term as 
 long as he pays his present rent, without injustice to the 
 landlord, an equitable arrangement is effected by tenant 
 paying a " fine " of £500 to the landlord. The tenant is 
 thus secured in his holding at the original rent for £500, 
 equal to a charge of £25 on his farm, but still £25 per 
 annum under the present letting value. The landlord, on 
 the other hand, has a sum of £500 lodged to his credit, 
 equal to an increase on his rental of £25 per annum, and 
 this ten years sooner than he could expect any increase, 
 and without trouble and expense, or the reproach or un- 
 popularity of a " notice to quit," merely for permitting his 
 tenant to continue in possession and enjoyment of what his 
 own labour and capital had effected. B. holds a farm of 50 
 acres at £100 per annum under a thirty-one years' lease, 
 ten years unexpired. He has considerably improved his 
 farm, and within the past ten years buUt certain out-offices 
 and drained a marshy corner of his farm. The arbitrators 
 consider that he has not recouped himself for all his out- 
 lay on these last improvements, but refuse to allow for any 
 others. The present fuU letting value would add an 
 additional £25 to his rent. This "occupier's interest" is 
 worth— calculated as above— £250 plus £50 allowed for 
 recent improvements ; therefore his fine would evidently 
 be £250 minus £50 as allowed for improvements, equal to 
 £200, which will be found a fair equivalent to landlord for 
 permitting tenant to continue in possession of his holding 
 as long as he pays the original rent fixed. 
 
]\ilNUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 679- 
 
 C. holds a farm of 50 acres, at £100 per annum, on a lease 
 of twenty-one years. He has been in possession only eight 
 years ; he would therefore be safe from eviction or increased 
 rent for a period of thirteen years. He has already built a 
 dwelling-house and offices, and has effected some other neces- 
 sary improvements. Arbitrators now consider his farm worth 
 an annual increased ■sum of £15. On taking into considera- 
 tion all improvements effected, they allow him a sum of 
 £95 for same. His fine would therefore be £195 minus 
 £95, equal to £100, on payment of which he obtains his 
 farm in perpetuity at the present rent. 
 
 If it should happen that the improvements in any instance 
 have been executed by the landlord, and that tenant does 
 not by paying a fair rent give an equivalent for the benefit 
 accruing, from same, arbitrators shall charge tenant an 
 additional sum, calculated according to present value of im- 
 provements, in estimating the " fine." In no instance shall 
 the amount of fine exceed fifteen years' purchase of same. If 
 it should happen that the unexpired term is less than eight 
 years, an additional charge shall be made in inverse ratio 
 to the number of yeajs unexpired. As the " occupier's 
 interest " decreases in value by the approach of the termi- 
 nation of his lease, the landlord's evidently increases as he 
 each year gets nearer to the time when the law permits 
 him to increase the present rent. 
 
 T. holds under an old lease, and has five years unexpired. 
 His present rent is £100 per annum, but the actual letting 
 of his farm is equal to £150 per annum. Multiplying the 
 difference between his rent and the present letting value by 
 eight, the minimum term, we have a sum of £400 as a 
 " iine " for purchasing a perpetuity ; but this would not be 
 now an equivalent to landlord for the prospective annual 
 increase of £50. To meet this, a further annual sum, 
 equal in amount to " occupier's interest," will be allowed 
 landlord for every year since the end of the eighth or 
 minimum purchasing year, thus increasing the fine as the 
 term decreases up to the last or maximum purchasing year, 
 when the tenant shall pay fifteen years' purchase of occupier's 
 interest, to entitle him to a perpetuity. In this case, there- 
 fore, T. pays a sum of £150, or three years' additional 
 purchase, i.e. five years' still unexpired taken from the 
 eight years, leaves the landlord entitled to three additional 
 years' purchase added to the "fine" already ascertained, 
 makes total amount of T.'s fine £550, minus aUowanee 
 for improvements. 
 
 Suppose the lease had but three years to run, the 
 difference in number of years which has elapsed since the 
 minimum purchasing year would be evidently five. There- 
 fore the addition of T.'s fine would be five times £50, and so 
 on to the last year, when the maximum would be reached. 
 
 Application of Plan to Tenants' holding from year to year, 
 etc. — Tenants at present paying a rent equal to the full 
 letting value of their holdings, shall obtain a perpetuity on 
 payment to landlord of a " fine" equal to say two years' 
 rent minus allowance for all unexhausted improvements 
 which they have not obtained as yet the full benefit of. 
 Tenants paying a rent under the present full letting value, 
 shall obtain, a perpetuity at their present rent, on payment 
 of a "fine" equal to fifteen years' purchase of difference 
 between present rent paid and actual letting value : same 
 consideration for improvements as above. 
 
 In cases where tenant considers himself paying a " rack 
 rent," arbitrators shall decide the real present letting value, 
 and shall settle the rent accordingly, and calculate " fine" 
 as in case of tenant paying full present value. 
 
 In order to offer an encouragement to tenants paying the 
 full letting value of their holding, it shall be competent for 
 them to reduce their rents by not more than one-third, on 
 the payment to the landlord of a sum equal to twenty years' 
 purchase of same. Example. — D. ipays £100 per annum 
 rent, leaving him a small margin for profit. He reduces 
 his annual rent to £66, 13s. id. by paying (say in instal- 
 ments or by loan from Government) a sum equal to twenty 
 years' purchase of the amount of rent reduced, £33, 6s. Sd. 
 + 20 =£666, Ids. id. 
 
 Examples of the purchase of perpetuities by tenants from 
 year to year. — No. 1 pays £50 per annum rent, equal to 
 the fuU present letting value of his holding. In order to 
 obtain a perpetuity, he pays £100, or two years' rent, minus 
 any sum he may be allowed for recent improvements. He 
 can also, as above shown, " fine down" his rent to £33, 6s. 
 Sd. per annum. No. 2 holds his farm at £50 per annum, but 
 it is at present worth £60 per annum ; he therefore pays as a 
 "fine" for perpetuity, fifteen times ten, or £150, minus 
 any allowance for recent improvements effected, say within 
 five years. 
 
 Evidently the inducement held out of being able in time 
 to reduce his present rent, would encourage thrifty habits 
 and a desire to work his farm to the best advantage, in 
 order that he might in time put by a sufficient sum for that 
 purpose, and thus hereafter have an increased margin for 
 profit, and consequently an increased "i"<-o™«'*" f" ^^^ 
 
 ' interest " in his^ 
 
 holding. By this plan I venture to think both landlord and Oct. 26, 1880. 
 
 tenant would be equally benefited. The farmer gets an 
 
 equivalent in money in anticipation for any loss that he James G. 
 may sustain by continuing the occupier at his present rent, Barry, 
 and the latter obtains a perpetuity by the payment of a 
 sum calculated on an equitable scale. 
 
 The principle of paying a " fine " for obtaining a per- 
 petuity at a fixed rent, may be applied to Ulster Tenant 
 Right by occupier paying his landlord a certain percentage 
 on the present market value of his tenant right when sell- 
 ing. In case of middlemen, plan may be applied as follows : 
 middlemen's interest may be purchased by landlord at say 
 ten times the difference between his rent and the rent he 
 receives from under tenants. 
 
 In all cases, and under every circumstance to which this 
 plan may be applicable, occupier shall have full power of 
 alienation, giving landlord a preference, who shall have 
 also power of entering an objection before "Local Court" to 
 the incoming tenant, on account of insolvency or other 
 sufficient reason. A small percentage might be also charged 
 on transfer. 
 
 A stringent clause should be inserted against minute 
 subdivision of farms. Let the minimum size be 30 statute 
 acres. No sub-letting to be permitted, the occupier in aU 
 cases to hold direct from the landlord. Eent over twelve 
 months in arrear may be recovered by landlord applying to 
 "Local Court" to have occupier's "tenant right" sold. 
 "Local Court" to possess summary means of preventing 
 waste and dilapidation, etc., by occupier. 
 
 All manorial rights and royalties in all cases to be retained 
 by the landlord. Nothing in this plan to apply to demesne 
 lands, houses, and grounds, let merely for accommodation 
 for sporting purposes, or in connection with the manage- 
 ment of an estate. 
 
 Neither does it apply to farms on which tenant. does not 
 reside, for instance the extensive grazing tracts in Meath. 
 In cases of this kind, leases for thirty-one years, with com- 
 pensation for all permanent improvements effected by 
 tenants, might apply. 
 
 No plan for the settlement of the land question which 
 ignores the labourer, will be satisfactory. Every labourer 
 should have, in aid of wages, say a rood or two of land 
 attached to his cottage, at a rent equal to that paid per 
 acre by his employer. Encourage farmers to have a 
 labom-er's cottage on every 40 statute acres of their farms, 
 such portions to be free from taxation. Those not com- 
 plying with this rule to have their poor rates or other 
 land taxes doubled. The erection of cottages might be 
 encouraged by loans, at a low rate of interest, from Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 22042. Mr. Shavt.— You still stick to that plan?— 
 I do to the principle of it. 
 
 22043. What is the principle of it? — -To give per- 
 petuities to the tenants at their present rental, the 
 landlord to be repaid for any prospective rent he 
 might have a claim to in future time; to buy a 
 perpetuity from the landlord at a certain rent, and 
 settle the question for ever. 
 
 22044. Had you any idea of the rate of purchase 
 the landlord should get for that ? — It depends on the 
 present rent, and what the increased value of the land 
 was likely to be. 
 
 22045. By what causes? — By natural causes, the 
 price of agricultural produce, and so forth. 
 
 22046. — Baron Dowse. — The man selling the 
 article not only sells what it is at the time, but the 
 possibility of any future gain ? — That is what I say. 
 
 22047. If you sell a young horse, you sell it with a " 
 view not merely to what it is, but what it will probably 
 come to ? — Exactly. 
 
 22048. The O'Conob Don.— You propose that 
 every tenant should be entitled to perpetuity of tenure 
 on payment of a fine to be ascertained by arbitrators ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 22049. The amount of the rent to be ascertained by 
 arbitrators ? — I would first leave it to the landlord and 
 tenant, and if they cannot agree, let them have arbitra- 
 tors, and then let the Local Court decide between them, 
 if there is a difference. 
 
 22050. Then having ascertained the present letting 
 value, they are to concede the value of all improve- 
 ments ? — Yes. 
 
 22051. And the fine to be regulated in proportion 
 to the amount of the rent and the improvements made 
 by the landlord or tenant, as the case might.be? — 
 Not exactly. Suppose a tenant has a ease, and that 
 
680 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. 
 
 James G. 
 Barry. 
 
 it has ten years to run ; the original rent was £1 an 
 acre. The times have improYed, and still there are 
 ten years to run of the lease now, and probably at 
 the end of ten years the land would be worth 30s. 
 an acre, but the landlord has to wait ten years for 
 that; and I say, ten years before the termination of 
 the lease, he agrees with the tenant to purchase the 
 prospective gain — that is, fifteen or twenty years' 
 purchase of the 10s. an acre difference. 
 
 22052. Mr. Shaw. — You would leave both ques- 
 tions to arbitration? — Yes. 
 
 22053. The O'Conoe Don. — You propose to have 
 something done for the benefit of the labourers 1 — I 
 propose that on each farm of 30 acres the tenants 
 should be encouraged to have labourers' houses, and 
 say, half an acre of land attached; and the way to 
 encourage them would be not to charge the tenant 
 poor rates for that portion of the land, or any taxes. 
 The farmer not to charge more for the land to the 
 labourer than he pays for it himself. 
 
 22054. Where he is not to pay taxes for that part 
 let to the labourer, you should have the poor rate 
 doubled on part? — Yes, that part where he has no 
 labourer. There should be one labourer for every 30 
 statute acres of arable land. 
 
 22055. Mr. Shaw. — How would you do with the 
 grass lands, where they want no labourers at all ? — 
 I would encourage them on all residential farms. I 
 am also in favour of land debentures — to turn all 
 mortgages into land debentures, transferable. 
 
 22056.. That is, the present debts due by the land- 
 lords you would turn into debentures ? — I would put 
 them into the market — debentures of £50 or £100 — 
 and make them like railway shares ; then farmers would 
 come and buy up these debentures, bearing interest say 
 4 per cent., with security on the land ; these debentures 
 not to be more than half the value of the property. 
 
 22057. You would have that all regulated by some 
 Court? — Yes; the Local Land Court. 
 
 22058. You would not leave it to the landlord to 
 do as he pleased ? — No ; it would all be done through 
 a Local Court. My idea is to have a Local Court in 
 every Quarter Sessions district, and to have a Court 
 of Appeal in Dublin. 
 
 22059. And you would be in favour of increasing 
 the ownership of land by tenants wherever you could f 
 — The way I would meet that is, I would give the 
 tenant power to fine down his rent. Suppose he is 
 paying £3 an acre, I would give him power, by pay- 
 ing twenty years' purchase, to fine it down one-third. 
 That would induce thrifty habits, and encourage him 
 to save money for the purpose. 
 
 22060. Baron Dowse. — And would you allow him 
 to fine it down to nothing at all? — Certainly not. I 
 would make a limit. 
 
 22061. Mr. Shaw.— Why would you not?— Be- 
 cause that would be expropriating landlords. 
 
 22062. But if the landlord wished it, you would 
 allow it.? — Yes; but I don't wish to force the land- 
 lord. But if they are paying £3 or so, I would allow 
 them to fine down the rent. 
 
 22063. Baron Dowse. — On these estates you 
 manage there is practically fixity of tenure? — Yes, 
 with the present owners. 
 
 22064. Do you see any objection to a law making the 
 same thing as you do become the practice? — I see no 
 objection if you don't take away the landlord's property. 
 
 22065. But do it, giving the landlord a fair rent 1 
 — Certainly. 
 
 22066. What more does he want 1 — There are two 
 interests. There is tenant right, and there is another 
 interest besides that ; I call it the occupier's interest, 
 that is, the prospective increase in the value of the 
 land from natural causes — from the increase of the 
 prices of agricultural produce — that the landlord will 
 get on some future day, I want to make the tenant 
 pay for that. 
 
 22067. Suppose he does in this way — if he pays a 
 fair rent to be fixed from time to time? — I am for 
 fixing rents now permanently, the tenant buying the 
 perpetuity. 
 
 22068. And never altering them? — Never altering 
 them ; for I think it is a better thing for tenants and 
 landlords, the one to have a fixed sum to pay, and the 
 other a fixed income. 
 
 22069. Would you ever alter it?— No; for I pay 
 the landlord for any prospective increase he may have. 
 I pay him a sum of money down now for that. 
 
 22070. Where is this money to come from? — 
 There is still a great deal of money on deposit in the 
 banks of this country. I would allow debentures on 
 the tenant's interest in the land. 
 
 22071. You have no Irish-speaking poople in this 
 county ? — Yes. 
 
 22072. Where ? — They are all over the country. 
 
 22073. What is the Irish for " debenture "?— That 
 is only a name. I don't care for the word "deben- 
 ture ; " " bond " will do equally well. 
 
 22074. Mr. Shaw. — Do you think it could be 
 carried out with small and large tenancies? — About 
 small tenancies I think the Government should come 
 in and assist them by advancing the money. 
 
 22075. The O'Conoe Don. — You would advance 
 money to purchase these perpetuities, as the Govern- 
 ment advance the money to purchase the fee-simple ? 
 — Yes ; that is what I recommend. 
 
 22076. Baron Dowse. — That is the Bright clauses 
 in another form? — Yes; I am not for making them 
 owners in fee of the land, because my experience is, 
 that if a man has to pay a certain rent, he will work 
 better, and not become idle or subdivide. I would 
 have a strict clause against subdivision. 
 
 22077. You would make him earn his bread with 
 the sweat of his brow? — With a fair margin of 
 profit ; and I would hold out inducements to fine 
 down the rent, and by taking away the restrictions' 
 from the transfer of property he might become an 
 owner himself in time. 
 
 22078. Mr. Shaw. — And you would fix the rent 
 by arbitration if they did not agree ? — Yes. 
 
 22079. And you would fix the perpetuity price in 
 the same way, if they could not agree. No ; I would 
 fix that by Act of Parliament. 
 
 22080. How could you do that ? — Say twenty years' 
 purchase ; that would be calculated by an actuary. 
 
 22081. Baron Dowse. — You would lay down the 
 principle ? — Yes. 
 
 22082. And it is a matter for calculation afterwards? 
 — Yes. I have spoken to a great many tenants on 
 this subject, and if this plan had been adopted ten 
 years ago, a great deal of the money spent on pur- 
 chasing interests in farms would have gone into the 
 landlords' pockets. They offer exorbitant rents, and 
 give twenty or twenty-five years' purchase for the 
 tenants' interest — often what the fee-simple is worth. 
 
 22083. Would the landlords approve of that? — 
 Yes ; it would have the approval of the landlords, I 
 think. 
 
 22084. The O'Conoe Don.— You are a tenant 
 farmer yourself : do you hold much ? — I hold land 
 which my family have held for eight generations — one 
 farm where I reside. 
 
 22085. A lease? — Yes; I have a lease, and the 
 rent has been doubled twice in the last fifty years, 
 and the last time since the passing of the Land Act. 
 My rent was £2 an acre, and when the lease expired 
 it was raised to £4 an acre, and I had to contract 
 myself out of the benefit of the Land Act. Some of 
 my improvements were worth £1000. I got nothing. 
 I gave my landlord up £1000 worth of property, and 
 the rent was doubled. 
 
 22087. Mr. Shaw.— Is it a large farm?— No, 
 about 80 acres Irish. I merely keep it for my ac- 
 commodation, but my ancestors had made all the 
 improvements. The present landlord has reduced the 
 rent by 15 per cent. 
 
 22088. The O'Conoe Don.— Permanently ?— Yes. 
 Of course I never made the rent off it. 
 
 22089. He is a recent owner ? — He is the son of the 
 former landlord. The Land Act of 1870, as far as x 
 can make out, recognises a certain right the tenaui, 
 has ; and then another clause deprives you of that rio-ht 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ()S1 
 
 by permitting the landlord to contract you out of that 
 right. 1 was pretty well able to take care of myself, 
 and still there is a case where I was contracted out of 
 the Act. 
 
 22090. Baron Dowse. — Would you be in favour 
 of abolishing the power to contract out of the Act ? — 
 Yes ; I would make no exception. You have all the 
 large farmers complaining and attending land meetings, 
 because there is that sense of irritation that they have 
 been left out in the cold ; wherever there is a residen- 
 tial holding, I would allow the benefit of the Act. 
 
 22091. The O'Conor Don.— You would draw the 
 
 Others merely take the land Oct. 2(i, isso. 
 
 line at residences ? — Yes 
 as a speculation. 
 
 22092. Mr. Shaw. — Was the increase excessive? 
 — I am making no complaint. I don't wish to make 
 any complaint at all, but I am giving you an example. 
 Where that can happen with me, what might happen 
 with a poor ignorant tenant ? 
 
 22093. You had improved your place ? — I say it was 
 improved to the extent of £1000 at least. That is not 
 theoretical, because another farm of the same class fell 
 out at the same time, and it was not as laxge as mine, and 
 the tenant got £800 from the Land Court in Limerick. 
 
 James G. 
 Barry. 
 
 William Uniacke Townsend, Esq., examined. 
 
 "Wm. Uniacke 
 Townit'iid, 
 
 22094. The Chairman.— You live at Spa Hill, 
 Kilfinane ?— Yes. 
 
 22095. You are a land agent over an extent of 
 £40,000 a year?— Yes. 
 
 22096. Over twenty estates ?— Yes. 
 
 22097. You mention that you are acquainted with 
 the Ulster Tenant Right Custom ? — Yes, by hearsay. 
 
 22098. You speak strongly on the subject of limiting 
 the number of years' purchase ? — Yes. 
 
 22090. Baron Dowse. — Have you any estates on 
 which the custom exists 1 — Yes. I have two or three 
 estates where it is unlimited. 
 
 22100. The Chairman. — You think it is a bad 
 thing ? — I think unlimited purchase-money is detri- 
 mental to the interests of the landlord and the tenant. 
 
 22101. For what reason 1 — I think they give not 
 only the last shilling they have, but they borrow 
 money to effect the purchase. 
 
 22102. Your experience is that it has a bad effect 
 on the tenant 1 — Yes, that is my opinion. 
 
 22103. That is, however, as to going to an un- 
 reasonable amount, perhaps at an auction bidding up 
 through excitement; and it is a bad thing for the 
 landlord as bringing in a tenant whose capital is gone 1 
 — Yes, very hkely that is the result ; and I can give 
 instances of it ou the estates with which I am con- 
 nected. There was a farm of 32 Irish acres, rent 
 £29, 7s., and the valuation £20, lbs. It was a yearly 
 tenancy, a joint holding with two other tenants. The 
 sellers' interest brought thirty-four years' purchase, or 
 £1000. 
 
 22104. The O'Conor Don.— When was that ■?- Two 
 years ago. 
 
 22105. The Chairman. — I suppose it was a very 
 low rent t — It was largely over the valuation. 
 
 22106. Mr. Shaw.- — It was a nice farm 1 — Not 
 particularly nice. The house was in a bad state, and 
 the land not very good. 
 
 22107. The O'Conor Don. — Was it situated near a 
 town, or a railway station, or anything that rendered 
 it of peculiar value 1 — No ; it was that insatiable desire 
 for land. 
 
 22108. Does that apply to the case of sales of 
 holdings out of Ulster 1 — I have one or two other 
 properties where it is unlimited also, but on the pro- 
 perty it is against our rule to allow a stranger to buy. 
 In this case he did buy, and we took proceedings to 
 put him out, and that is stayed pending the unsettled 
 state of the law. 
 
 22109. The Chairman. — That is the point — to 
 know whether a stranger is to be allowed to buy 1 — 
 Yes. 
 
 22110. That would be whether the custom was 
 allowed or not 1 — Yes. 
 
 22111. Do you think in the places in Limerick 
 with which you are acquainted, where sale by tenants 
 is allowed, they are in a more comfortable and better 
 state than on the estates where it is not allowed ? — Of 
 the two, I should say " No." 
 
 22112. They are not better off ?— No. 
 
 22113. Or better satisfied ?— Well, of course, if they 
 are allowed to sell, they are better satisfied. 
 
 22114. Where they are allowed, are they in a better 
 
 state 1 — It is so decided an advantage that I suppose 
 they are more satisfied where they are allowed. 
 
 22115. But not in a better position as to making 
 improvements t — I don't think they are. 
 
 22116. Mr. SiiAw. — Do you allow them to sell on 
 the other properties under special conditions 1 — I allow, 
 by special permission, a sale to take place. There are 
 very many changes of tenancy on those properties where 
 the custom has not existed, although I recommended 
 the introduction of it under certain circumstances. The 
 consequence of not allowing it is that the farms have not 
 been amalgamated as they would otherwise have been. 
 
 22117. The Chairman. — You were asked as to 
 evictions, and you say that during the twenty-seven 
 years you have hardly had any experience of evictions 
 carried on by yourself '! — I don't think they have 
 exceeded' twenty. 
 
 22118. That is on notice to quit 1 — Probably six on 
 notice to quit and fourteen for non-payment of rent 
 would cover them all. 
 
 22119. On all the properties you are acquainted 
 with -i—Yes. 
 
 22120. The O'Conor Don. — Have you had any 
 during the last year 1 — I have had one or two carried 
 out for non-payment of rent. 
 
 22121. The Chairman. — Is there any desire to 
 take leases now ou the part of tenants 1 — A disinclina- 
 tion compared with former years. 
 
 22122. Have they been in any cases induced to take 
 leases by the fear that they would lose their holdings 
 if they do not t — That is the natural feeling. It is, of 
 course, a sense of security. 
 
 22123. Have they been applying to take leases 
 themselves, or is it your wish to get them to take 
 them 1 — I think every tenant should have a lease, but 
 latterly I found a disposition not to take them. 
 
 22124. Do you mean leases for a term of years 1 — 
 Yes, for thirty-one years. 
 
 22125. You would wish them to take them 1 — I 
 should say every tenant should have a lease. 
 
 22126. Were leases given before the Land Act? — 
 I have so many properties, it is hard to give a general 
 answer. 
 
 22127. Whatwould be your view at that time — did 
 you wish to give leases? — Yes, I always wished to 
 give leases. 
 
 22128. And to put the leases into writing ] — Yes ; 
 where leases are given, of course they must be in writing. 
 
 22129. In these leases now given, do you contract 
 against the clauses of the Land Act, so far as you are 
 able to do so ? — Yes, over £50. 
 
 22130. In all these leases you contract against the 
 Act?— Yes. 
 
 22131. Were the tenants wilKng to do that? — I 
 never knew them to object. 
 
 22132. Did they well understand the meaning of it? 
 —They are quick enough to understand it. 
 
 22133. Do you give them anything in the way of 
 compensation for improvements in place of the Land 
 Act — that is, is there a covenant to recoup them for any 
 outlay? — It is more for disturbance they claim ; I don't 
 think there is any covenant. 
 
 22134. They would not be entitled to any compen- 
 
 4S 
 
(382 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 188U, 
 
 Win. Uniackc 
 Townsend. 
 
 sation? — No; they are outside the Land Act alto- 
 gether. 
 
 22135. Mr. Shaw. — Don't you think that that has 
 something to do with the disinclination to take leases ? 
 ^The disinclination to take leases under £50 is not 
 affected by that. 
 
 22136. Baron Dowse. — Do you put any covenant 
 into the leases under £50, contracting them out of the 
 Land Actf — Never. 
 
 22137. What is your experience as to improvements 
 going on for the last few years? — After the passing of the 
 Land Act there was a general tendency on the part of 
 landlords to cease to contribute towards improvements. 
 
 22138. Did that lead to a cessation by the tenants ? 
 — Yes ; improvements did not go on so rapidly as before. 
 I think the tendency not to assist is lessening every year. 
 
 22139. They are coming round again? — ^Yes. 
 
 22140. We understand that soon after the passing 
 of the Act there seemed an inclination on the part of 
 tenants to improve, and that that ceased after two or 
 three years — I allude to their tendency to improve 
 ceasing in connection with the additional allowance 
 from the landlord? — Their improvements were not 
 carried on so extensively iu consequence of not getting 
 the assistance. 
 
 22141. We were told that in the first few years there 
 was a tendency to increase? — Yes, I think there was. 
 
 22142. You know some cases, I believe, of purchases 
 by tenants of their holdings? — I only know of one. 
 
 22143. Was that under the Church Act?— No; I 
 think it was in the Ijanded Estates Court. 
 
 22144. What was the result there? — He was non- 
 resident, and he did not subdivide; he put up peirs 
 and improved the place slightly, but I don't think it is 
 a test case. 
 
 22145. It is desirable that further legislative mea- 
 sures should be adopted to establish tenants as owners 
 in fee of farms ? — I believe it would be very desirable 
 to have more conservative element all through Ireland, 
 and of a certain class, but I won't say peasant pro- 
 prietors, for they would subdivide ; but if they could 
 be induced to fine down their rent, it would be better 
 than peasant proprietary. 
 
 22146. You think something like what Mr. Barry 
 said would be better than purchasing ? — -Yes ; I would 
 he afraid of a repetition of distress in the bad times. 
 
 22147. You think it would be preparing for evil in 
 the future ? — I think so. 
 
 22148. What size of farm do you think is the best 
 for this rule to operate upon ? — I think the man who is 
 able to keep 25 cows : it is an element of a person's 
 comfort in my neighbourhood, how many cows he has. 
 
 22149. He ought to till 40 acres of land? — 40 to 50. 
 
 22150. These would be only large farmers ? — I would 
 not like to go under 15 cows. That would represent 
 30 acres. 
 
 22151. Baron Dowse. — ^^That is where dairy farms 
 exist ? — Yes. 
 
 22152. There are other parts of Ireland where there 
 are men with 100 acres and without 5 cows? — Yes; 
 of course I allude to dairy farming. 
 
 22153. The Chairman. — Suppose a property was 
 being sold, and that the privilege was confined to these 
 larger farmers, it would be thought very invidious by 
 the small tenants ? — The result would be very beneficial. 
 
 22154. To the larger men? — To the country. 
 
 22155. You don't think there would be any evil 
 effects in excluding small tenants from the same advan- 
 tages ? — I think it would be unwise to do otherwise. 
 
 22156. Mr. Shaw. — Have you many small tenants 
 on these properties ? — Oh yes, a great many. 
 
 22157. Under the figure you name — 40 acres? — Oh 
 yes, a great number. 
 
 22158. Baron Dowse. — Your tenants practically 
 have fixity of tenure? — They are scarcely ever dis- 
 turbed ; it almost amounts to that. 
 
 22159. The Chairman. — You mention as regards 
 temporary lettings, that they should be made more 
 easily carried out for the convenience of all parties. 
 
 22160. Do you mean temporary lettings for very 
 short periods?— Yes, there is a difficulty about that. 
 
 22161. Do you mean for a short period for temporary 
 purposes? — Yes. I should Hke to have the Act 
 amended in that respect. It is so difficult to get the 
 land back at all, and there are cases where you may 
 require to let it for a short period. 
 
 22162. That would be a short period in the land- 
 lord's interest — not in the tenant's interest? — Yes. 
 
 22163. Finding men willing to take the land for 
 these short periods, and no longer ? — Yes. 
 
 22164. Baron Dowse. — " In possession " is put into 
 the Land Act for temporary lettings ? — That is so, but 
 still you have great difficulty in framing your agreement. 
 
 22165. There is great difficulty in finding out the 
 meaning of the word " temporary " ? — There is. It is 
 very embarrassing to an agent in his ofiice. 
 
 22166. The Chairman. — You think if the tenants 
 were better aware of their position under the Land 
 Act, and exercised their rights, good would result 
 from the Act? — I think so. I don't think they are 
 aware of their position under the Land Act. I think 
 it did a great deal for the Irish tenant. 
 
 22167. Your opinion is that all sales of tenants' 
 interests should be carried out under the surveillance of 
 some Court that the landlord and tenant have confidence 
 in ? — Yes. 
 
 22168. Yon think the arrangements for selling 
 should be carried out with the approval of some Court ? 
 — I think so. 
 
 22169. So that you would not give the landlord the 
 power of interfering unfairly ? — My experience is that 
 wherever the Ulster Custom extends we have no control 
 whatever — it amounts to that in practice; although 
 there nominally is a veto, it is impossible to exercise it. 
 
 22170. And instead of the landlord's veto, you would 
 allow the landlord to say this must be decided by some 
 impartial person — by some tribunal, if there could be 
 such a Court established ? — I think it would be well. 
 
 22171. Baron Dowse. — ^According to your experi- 
 ence, is Griffith's valuation any standard at all by which 
 rents can be estimated? — Ithmk, taking a circle or radius 
 of five or six miles, the valuation is very correct ; and a 
 man who knows his business, and knows the value of 
 ground, can value one farm with another by the aid of 
 Griffith's valuation. 
 
 22172. Is it any standard by. which the rents on a 
 particular farm can be estimated? — Oh no. On one 
 estate of £5000 a year, where, with one on two excep- 
 tions, the rents have not been raised for forty-five years, 
 the rents vary from 60 to 90 per cent, over Griffith's 
 valuation, and have been paid with the utmost satisfac- 
 tion. 
 
 22173. They are not too high? — No, not at present 
 high prices ; a great deal depends on the size of the farm. 
 
 22174. Having regard to the size, the rent is not 
 beyond a fair rent ? — No. The men are able to educate 
 their children for learned professions, and to live as a 
 man would wish them all to live. 
 
 22175. The O'Conor Don. — ^Are you agent on the 
 Ashtown property ? — Yes. 
 
 22176. Is it a fact that the rent has been raised there 
 very lately? — No ; there was no general rise of rents since 
 1856, when, owing to enhanced prices of all agricultural 
 produce and an expenditure of over £10,000 for drain- 
 age, and for which no mterest had hitherto been charged, 
 there was a re-valuation and general rise of rents. 
 
 22177. Have not the rents been altered since 1856? 
 —When a tenant dies, there has been a small increase, 
 on the occasion of every death, if circumstances admit . 
 of it, to a small extent. 
 
 22178. We were told to-day that upon this estate 
 the rents have been raised again and again by the agent 
 in the office, on death or change of tenancy ? — It has 
 been done if the case admits of it. I will show you the 
 books, if necessary, and show that the rise has not been 
 at all high. On that estate, a farm rented at £62, 10«., 
 with a valuation of £35, 15«., that is, the rent was 85 
 per cent, over the valuation for 25 acres ; that farm 
 was sold, and brought £800; The house was little 
 better than in ruins, and the land quite neo-lected. 
 
 22179. That was on the Ashtown estate?— It was 
 Colonel Gascoyne's estate, but it is the same thino'. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 683 
 
 22180. The rents are not higher proportionately on 
 one estate than the other? — No; the rental of the 
 estate is between £13,000 and £14,000 a year, and 
 the rents of good lands are lower than on some of 
 the adjoining properties. That case is a very good 
 proof of that, where £800 was given for a farm of 25 
 acres. 
 
 22181. When was that? — It was last year. Two 
 joint tenants purchased it, and thought they had pur- 
 chased the good will, and in a week afterwards the 
 house was burned. 
 
 22182. Mr. Shaw. — Did the tenant go out willingly ? 
 — Yes, and sold his interest. 
 
 22183. The Chairman. — Could you give any idea 
 of the expenditure by some of the landlords on the pro- 
 perties you manage ? — On one estate I laid out annually 
 iDetween £800 and £900 before the Land Act. 
 
 22184. Could you say on all the estates how much 
 is laid out by the landlords on an average per year, or 
 altogether? — ^I should think formerly £1200 a year; 
 I don't think I put it too high. 
 
 22185. Mr. Shaw. — That is on all the properties? 
 — Yes. 
 
 221S(j. Was that money borrowed from the Board 
 of Works ? — Is ; on that estate that has been alluded 
 to there was £10,000 borrowed and spent on the estate, 
 and the rents had not been interfered with or raised in 
 consequence until the year 1856. 
 
 22187. Baron Dow^se. — Was that spent for general 
 estate purposes — drainage ? — Yes, almost altogether. 
 
 22188. The Chairman. — Did the greater part of it 
 go in giving employment to the labouring people ?^- 
 Ahnost altogether. 
 
 22189. The O'Conor Don.— There has been no 
 general re-valuation since 1856? — No, not for the last 
 twenty-four years. I think it is very desirable that the 
 labourers should be taken out of towns. They are de- 
 moralized, they have no homes there ; everything about 
 them has a disagreeable association. And it oecurred to 
 me that wherever there are houses scattered over the 
 country unfit for human habitation, the Board of 
 Guardians might serve notice on the landlord or tenant 
 within a certain time to put that house in good order, 
 and that if not they should have the power not only to 
 take up the house, but a quarter of an acre of ground 
 attached to it. 
 
 22190. The Chairman. — Let the Guardians borrow 
 
 the money, and erect a suitable slated house, and give 
 the labourer a quarter of an acre where the landlord 
 and tenant both declined ? — Yes. 
 
 22191. Mr. Shaw. — And charge them with it? 
 
 I would either purchase it out and out, or pay the 
 landlord the value of the ground, and I would increase 
 the number of houses. One of the greatest difficulties 
 at present is to get rid of the labourer. He has no 
 place to go to ; he goes into the town, and gets de- 
 morahzed. 
 
 2211)2. The Chairman.— The difficulty is, the man 
 may grow too old, and the farmer says, I must have 
 some one in his place? — I would like to see labourers' 
 houses built for them, and that they should be independ- 
 ent of the farmers, because they are not kind masters 
 in many cases. They charge very high rents. 
 
 22193. Where they are living on the holding, do 
 they usually have their houses as part of their wages, or 
 does the farmer charge them rent ? — Probably an equal 
 number of both cases ; they charge very high rents too. 
 
 22194. Don't you think the better plan would be not 
 to charge rents, but to make the house part of the 
 wages ? — I think so decidedly, because, of course, if 
 the labourer is an unsuitable servant, the farmer cannot 
 turn him out if he is a tenant without a tedious process, 
 but if he is a labourer, he puts him out by the ordinary 
 process. 
 
 22195. Mr. Shaw. — You agree with Mi-. Ban-y as 
 to the plan he suggested for the purchase of per- 
 petuities ? — I don't understand his debenture prin- 
 
 • ciple. 
 
 22196. Without going into the debenture part, you 
 agree in the other ? — Yes, provided the perpetuity is 
 not a fee. 
 
 22197. Keeping on a rent? — Yes, keeping on a rent. 
 If you leave the matter of the labourers to the Boards 
 of Guardians, who are at present principally farmers, 
 it won't be carried out. 
 
 22198. The Local Government Board would be able 
 to deal with that as reports from the sanitary officers ? 
 — It is a scandal to the country the present condition 
 of the labouring classes ; and my experience is, that if 
 you give them a comfortable house and a little piece of 
 ground they are very happy, and they are very regular 
 in their payments. Therefore I recommend that 
 more detached labourers' houses should be built in the 
 country. 
 
 Oct. 26, 188U. 
 
 Wm. Uniacki 
 Townsend. 
 
 Mr. John Froste, Clonmoney, Bunratty. 
 
 John Froste. 
 
 22199. The CnAiRMAN.^Are you a tenant ? — Yes, 
 and also an owner of land. I purchased land in the 
 Landed Estates Court. 
 
 22200. You wish to make some observation on the 
 relations between landlord and tenant, which you think 
 work evil at the present time ? — Yes. I wish to say 
 that I am over-rented for my land. 
 
 22201. How much land do you hold? — I farm about 
 200 statute acres. Where I live I hold somewhere 
 about 60 plantation acres. 
 
 22202. Are the two holdings under the same land- 
 lord ?— No. 
 
 22203. Who are the landlords ? — A gentleman 
 named John Massey Westropp is the landlord- where I 
 live. I held portion of the 60 acres up to 1871 at 30s. 
 an acre. I held from a middleman ; the lease dropped, 
 and the immediate landlord, Mr. Westropp, came as 
 landlord. I got some increase of land better than what 
 I formerly held, but the rental was doubled — instead of 
 30s. I had to pay £3. 
 
 22204. The O'Conoe Don. — How much land did 
 yon get in addition ? — I got 17 acres. 
 
 22205. How much had you before ?~ Thiry-four 
 acres. 
 
 22206. The Chairman. — That is only 51 : what made 
 up the 60? — I afterwards bought the interest of a 
 tenant in about 8 or 9 acres that ran between my place 
 and the public road. 
 
 22207. Was that from the same landlord ? — Yes. 
 
 22208. Was there a change of rent upon the sale by 
 the other tenant ? — The rent was the same as I paid 
 for my farm. 
 
 21209. Mr. Shaw. — It was not raised after the 
 purchase ? — No. 
 
 22210. The Chairman. — What is the rent of the 
 60 acres ?— £178. . 
 
 22211. With the residence on it ? — Yes ; there was 
 a dilapidated house. I improved and enlarged it, and 
 built offices. 
 
 22212. How many years have you been there ? — 
 From 1854. 
 
 22213. In that time you have improved it in the way 
 of fencing and planting ?— Quite so, very considerably 
 since 1854. 
 
 22214. Are yon holding on lease now ? — No. 
 
 22215. Mr. Shaw. — Is it near the city ? — It is mid- 
 way between here and Ennis. It is about ten miles 
 from the city. 
 
 22216. It is not benefited much by the city? 
 
 No, except it is a convenient distance from Ennis and 
 Limerick. 
 
 22217. The O'Conor Don.— What did you pay for 
 the tenant's interest? — I paid £125. 
 
 22218. For the 9 acres ?— Yes. 
 
 22219. At the £3 an acre rent ?— Yes, that was in 
 1875. 
 
 4S2 
 
684 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. 22220. The Chairman. — The time the first change 
 
 was made was when you got some additional land ? — 
 
 John Fiostp. j^^ ^,jg ^.jjjjg (.jjg middleman's lease fell out, in 1871. I 
 did not object until 1878, and then I wrote to the 
 agent asking for a reduction, and he refused. I aslsed 
 him to put my application before the landlord, and he 
 refused to do that. 
 
 22221. This change was in 1871 ?— Yes. 
 
 22222. At that time was your house built and these 
 improvements made ? — Yes, all. 
 
 22223. Then it was in 1878 you first made the 
 application ? — Yes. 
 
 22224. How was it you did not make it between 
 1871 and 1878 ? — Because the condition of the times 
 did not warrant me, I think, in doing so. 
 
 22225. It was worth it in these times ? — I thought 
 so. 
 
 22226. You found when the seasons came worse 
 that it was not ? — Yes. 
 
 22227. But taking it on the average of the good 
 and bad years, you think the rent was the utmost it 
 ought to have been in the good years ? — Quite so. 
 
 22228. You speak of it as a rack-rent of £3 an acre ? 
 —I do. 
 
 22229. Do you think you could call it a rack-rent, 
 when you were satisfied with it for so many years ? — 
 I was able to make the rent then. 
 
 22230. Mr. Shaw.— Do you live on it ?— I do. 
 
 22231. Do the other lands adjoin it? — No. 
 
 22232. The O'Conob Don. — You considered it worth 
 £125 for 9 acres? — Yes. 
 
 22233. In addition to the rent ? — Yes, for particular 
 reasons. 
 
 22234. Mr. Shaw. — It was a convenience ? — Yes, 
 for water, and it brought me to the public road. 
 
 22235. And you made the farm in every way, and 
 improved it ? — I did. I improved it very much. I 
 drained and planted it, and made good slated offices ; 
 and if I leave it now, I will leave £1000 after me, and I 
 don't wish to do that. The landlord did nothing to it. 
 
 22236. The Chaieman. — Your difficulty is that you 
 did not make an objection at the time the change took 
 place ? — I could not do it then. 
 
 22237. Mr. Shaw. — Is it rented higher than land in 
 the neighbourhood ? — Considerably. 
 
 22238. Has he other property there ? — Very much. 
 Half the land is let on lease at 31s. 6c?. 
 
 22239. What is not on lease is as high as this ? — 
 Yes, portions as high, and others not. 
 
 22240. When the leases fell in, he increased the 
 rent ? — ^It occurred in this particular case. 
 
 22241. You are coroner of a division of the county? 
 — Yes, the eastern division of the county. 
 
 22242. You have nothing to say about the other farm ? 
 • — I have. The other farm is valued at £2 an acre. 
 
 That is £130. I don't pay as much as Griffith's valua- 
 tion for it ; I pay £120. It is portion of Stafford 
 O'Brien's estate — a very good landlord. It was taken 
 in 1852, the year before Griffith's valuation was made. 
 It was let by competition, and only brought £1, lis. 
 M., although Griffith's valuation was £2, and I have 
 never paid up to Griffith's valuation since then. In 
 1856 there was a rise of 6s. an acre. 
 
 22243. The O'Conor Don. — You stated you were 
 also a purchaser in the lianded Estates Court ? — Yes. 
 
 22244. How much land did you purchase? — I 
 purchased with a brother of mine about 100 plantation 
 acres. 
 
 22245. Are there tenants on it? — No. There are 
 tenants on the place I inherited from my father. 
 
 22246. You are their landlord ? — I am. 
 22247. — Have you raised their rents ? — Never. 
 
 22248. The rents on your estate have been unaltered? 
 —Since 1855. 
 
 22249. What are your lands per acre? — It is by 
 lump more than anything else — one farm of 84 acres 
 is let for £100. 
 
 22250. Is it mountain land ? — No, it is portion 
 abutting on bog lands. 
 
 22251. What proportion do the rents bear to the 
 valuation? — The valuation is £211, and the rents 
 £240. 
 
 22252. It would appear from that, that the valuation 
 is no test at all as to the value of land ? — In some cases 
 it is not. I know very well it is not in some cases. I 
 know where three times the valuation would be paid, 
 and other cases where less than the valuation would 
 be enough. 
 
 22253. You are paying under the valuation, and 
 these tenants are paying over it, and yet you don't 
 consider they are highly rented ? — No. There was 
 only one change since I came in : there was one 
 man not able to pay, and I brought a process, but I 
 allowed him to sell, and to my astonishment he got 
 more than eight years' rent for the interest in the farm. 
 
 22254. Were there any other sales upon Mr. 
 Westropp's estate except the one to yourself? — Yes, 
 a number of lettipgs. 
 
 22255. I mean sales to tenants ? — Another. 
 
 22256. Can you tell us what was the rate of 
 purchase there ? — The rent was less than in the portion 
 I bought, and I think for 5 acres it was as high as 
 £60. 
 
 22257. What was the rent per acre there ?— £2, 
 2s. 
 
 22258. And you say that the rents on Mr. West- 
 ropp's estate are too high ? — Yes. 
 
 22259. And yet they give this enormous rate of 
 purchase ? — I would not say in this particular case it 
 was too high. 
 
 Foster Vesey 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
 Foster Vesey Fitzgerald, Esq., Moyrisk, Quin, County Clare, examined. 
 
 22260. The Chairman. — You are a justice of the 
 peace, and also vice-chairman of the Ennis Union ? — Yes. 
 
 22261. Are you a landowner? — I am. 
 
 22262. To what extent? — My acreage is 1200 
 statute acres. 
 
 22263. You are a land agent? — I am land agent 
 for all the rest of our family estates, not for any other. 
 There are 6000 acres in Clare, 450 in Louth, and 
 2400 in Kerry, and I am tenant of the remainder — 
 12,000 acres altogether. 
 
 22264. Is sale of tenants' interests allowed ? — No. 
 
 22265. Not at all?— No. 
 
 22266. What happens if they are obliged to leave? 
 — They generally try to sell, and when I have ascer- 
 tained what they can get, I give them the money 
 myself and deal with the new tenant. 
 
 22267. You have pre-emption at the highest price 
 they can get?— It practically works that way, although 
 I don't admit it. That is the way it is done. 
 
 22268. It is very seldom that has occurred ?— During 
 
 eighteen years it has occurred about eight or nine times 
 in 200 tenancies. 
 
 22269. fAnd that only in cases of tenants in arrear? 
 — It has not occurred in any other cases. 
 
 22270. You think it is not an advisable thing that 
 this tenant right should exist ?— I would prefer being 
 without it. If it was confined merely to farms on 
 which tenants had houses, I should think it would be 
 no harm, but I prefer on principle not to have it. 
 
 22271. Mr. Shaw. — Are there farms in your 
 district on which the tenants have no houses ?— Yes, 
 grazing farms. 
 
 22272. Farms not in connection with their house ?— 
 I think it is a great hardship to put a man out of his 
 residence, and anything that would avoid that I would 
 approve of, but I think it would be very unfair to extend 
 it beyond residential farms. 
 
 22273. The Chairman. — What is your opinion of 
 the working of the Land Act ?— I think it has worked 
 rather well. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 685 
 
 22274. For both landlord and tenant ?^— I think 
 so. 
 
 22275. It has been met fairly by the landlords you 
 are acquainted with ? — I think so, any landlords that 
 I know of. In lettings over £50 they contract against 
 the Land Act, and that has done no injury to any- 
 body. The landlord would continue to deal with the 
 tenant in the same way as before the Act passed ; he 
 would prefer not to have the Act, and where the Act 
 allows him to contract out of it properly, he would 
 do so. 
 
 22276. Would that be with the view of making 
 compensation himself to the tenants in case they were 
 leaving, or evading compensation altogether ? — I think 
 the contract would be against it altogether; but I 
 daresay a conscientious man would give compensa- 
 tion. 
 
 22277. Before the Act did you consider yourself 
 bound to give compensation or allow the tenant to 
 sell ? — I never knew a tenant to sell except in arrear, 
 and then his interest and mine united. 
 
 22278. Would you consider you were either bound 
 to compensate or allow him to sell? — No. I think 
 that would rest with my own good will and the terms 
 we were on with the tenant. If we were on good terms 
 with the tenant it would be done, but I could imagine 
 oases where it would not. 
 
 22279. Do you think the scale of compensation 
 under the Land Act was reasonable ? — I think the 
 scale is based on the ordnance valuation, which is very 
 unequal, and therefore it may not be reasonable in 
 some cases ; but as to the number of years' purchase, 
 assuming the valuation to be relative to the rent, it is 
 not unreasonable. The number of years' purchase, 
 however, depends on the valuation, and therefore it 
 works unequally. 
 
 22280. Have you had any difBculty with the tenants 
 within the last year or two as to payment of rent ? — 
 At present it is a dead lock. 
 
 22281. Is it on the ground of the rents being too 
 high ? — Xo ; on the ground that they wish to pay the 
 ordnance valuation. I am speaking more of my neigh- 
 bours than myself, because my rent collection does not 
 come at this particular season. 
 
 22282. Mr. Shaw. — Your last collection was pretty 
 fair ? — Yes ; we allowed an abatement. 
 
 22283. And you got your rents well ? — Yes. 
 
 22284. And you only speak from what you hear ? — 
 No. I know what occurred within the last three days. 
 I allowed 20 per cent, abatement on the collection in 
 February, and then on the collection in August some of 
 the tenants insisted on getting it again, and stopped it 
 from me, and I would not give it. I gave them receipts, 
 and left the balance due by them, which they promised 
 to pay me, and they did not. I processed them at the 
 last Kilrush Sessions, and I believe they took it very 
 much amiss. I hear they were going to shoot me, but 
 I am not certain. I came back by the steamer, and a 
 commercial man was stopped on the road, and they 
 asked for me by name, but fortunately I was not there. 
 The people were either drunk, or they wanted to shoot 
 me. If I thoroughly believed it, I should apply for 
 protection, but until they do something more I don't 
 intend to do so. 
 
 22285. The Chairman. — Did they ask to be allowed 
 to pay the Government valuation ? — No one has asked 
 that from me as yet. All they asked was the abate- 
 ment made in the previous year — that was last August. 
 SinQe that there have been land clubs formed in all the 
 parishes, binding themselves not to pay more than 
 Griffith's valuation, with receipts in full. 
 
 22286. Baron Dowse. — Are you much above Grif- 
 fith's valuation? — Yes. The average rent on all the 
 estates I manage is half over Griffith's ; that is, Grif- 
 fith's valuation is two-thirds of the rent. In Louth 
 there was a farm of 80 acres, and the valuation was 
 £2 an acre, and our rent was £3. The tenant got into 
 arrear of one year's rent. We promised to give a 
 thirty-two years' lease of it. That is the usual lease 
 since the Land Act, and the tenant got £1000 for it. 
 That is in Louth, near Ardee, and it is once and a 
 
 half Griffith's valuation. That was two years ago. Oct. 26, mm. 
 With reference to Griffith's valuation in Clare, there — 
 
 was a farm— I won't be positive as to the exact valua- ^"^"CTaid'^''-^ 
 tion — it was a little over £100 a year, and it sold for * ' ' 
 £8500. That was about sixty years' purchase. That 
 denotes what Griffith's valuation was as compared 
 with the real value of the land. There were no tenants 
 on it. It was a grass farm. Out of the 200 tenancies 
 I am myself connected with, there are five at Griffith's 
 valuation ; one is three times Griffith's valuation ; about 
 8 are double ; 20 are one-fifth over Griffith's valuation ; 
 and all the rest are one-half over. As far as my know- 
 ledge goes, if you could compare Griffith's valuation 
 >^ ith rents, the rents are once and a half the valuation. 
 The grass farm I hold in Galway is more than two 
 and a half times Griffith's valuation. I pay that rent 
 myself. 
 
 22287. Are you satisfied with the rent? — I would 
 if it was near me, and as a matter of rent I am not 
 dissatisfied. In that neighbourhood there are several 
 farms which have been let at a very much higher 
 rate than Griffith's valuation. That is in the Joyce 
 country. The rents of that district are enormously 
 over Griffith's valuation. The reason is that Griffith's 
 valuation wholly omits wool as an element of valuation, 
 and the rent in mountain sheep farms depends much on 
 mountain wool. In fact, a few years ago wool paid 
 the rent altogether. There lately was a great falling 
 off in wool ; wool is an element in sheep farms, and it 
 happens to be omitted from Griffith's valuation. If 
 there was a re-valuation, it should be taken into con- 
 sideration. Of course to value a sheep farm by corn 
 prices would be ridiculous. 
 
 22288. The Chairman. — At present the tenants 
 have an idea that Griffith's valuation is the fair value ? 
 — I don't think any tenant thinks that. They would 
 like to pay it, but I think they are all perfectly 
 aware it is greatly under the value. 
 
 22289. They would like to pay it because it is below 
 the value ? — Yes. 
 
 22290. How would you try to settle that difference ? 
 — I would have a re-valuation. I think it is a most 
 important thing — on the lines of Griffith's valuation 
 mutatis mutandis, and taking it on an average I think 
 the prices in Griffith's valuation are about 80 per cent, 
 under the present prices. I know the present average 
 price of beef is 70s., but it is 35s. in the schedule. 
 The price of every article except corn has gone up in a 
 similar way. The rise in the value of grass lands has 
 been much greater than in tillage lands. Poor tillage 
 land is not worth more now than in Griffith's valua- 
 tion. 
 
 22291. Do you think poor tillage land means poor 
 tillage land for grain crops? — Yes. I don't think 
 there is as much profit on tillage now as thirty years 
 ago. 
 
 22292. Are the tenants making many improvements 
 in your part of the country ? — In Kerry they improve 
 a great deal, and we have a few tenants in Clare 
 holding by leases who have improved very well; 
 but as a rule the tenants there, I would say, do not 
 improve. 
 
 22293. There is no change in the fences or condition 
 of the houses ? — The houses are better — that is to say„ 
 the windows open, and perhaps a little room added. 
 There is no perceptible change in the aspect of the 
 land from what it was when the ordnance survey 
 was made thirty or forty years ago. In one case 
 only I had to contest in the Land Court. 
 
 22294. They were claims on eviction? — Yes. 
 
 22295. For non-payment? — No; on the expiratioQ 
 of a lease. 
 
 22296. They were disinclined to pay an increase of 
 rent ? — No. They were satisfied to pay an increased 
 rent, but they were not satisfied to pay the rent I put 
 upon them. 
 
 22297. Baron Dowse. — Was there a decree against 
 you ? — ^No. 
 
 22298. Yon succeeded?— I' did. The ground on 
 which I succeeded was this : the farm was let at a very 
 low rent — £11 a year — and that was not more than half 
 
686 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
 oa. 26, 1880. the ordnance valuation. It had been held for twenty- 
 — TT one years at that, and they offered just a trifle over 
 Foster Vesey (51 j-jgtij'g valuation, and I wanted more. I put once 
 and a half Griffith's valuation, which was the letting 
 value, and they would not pay it. There is a clause 
 in the Act giving power to set off the benefit the tenant 
 has had by holding at a very low rent, against the 
 improvements. There was a sum allowed for improve- 
 ments, which was fully balanced by the benefit the 
 tenant had had, and one year's rent due. 
 
 22299. There was no claim for disturbance? — No, 
 there could not be on the twenty-one years' lease. 
 
 22300. Did you keep that land in your own hands 
 then?— No. 
 
 22301. You let it at the rent yon mentioned to 
 another tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 22302. Mr. Shaw. — You got yonr own price for 
 it?— Yes. 
 
 22303. Baron Dow^se. — Was that in Kerry? — No, 
 it was in Clare. 
 
 22304. Mr. Shaw. — How long is that ago? — It 
 was in May twelve months. The thing went on until 
 November. I am told there was a threatening notice 
 posted about it two days ago. 
 
 22305. The Chaieman. — Warning the incoming 
 tenant? — I should think, warning him to give it up. 
 I heard this morning from the resident magistrate in 
 Ennis that there has been a threatening notice, which 
 he has sent up to the Castle. I think it is in reference 
 to that farm. 
 
 22306. You say in Kerry there was a good deal of 
 improvement by the tenants ? — Yes ; we have made 
 leases. 
 
 22307. It is under leases they are doing it? — Yes ; 
 they are a very industrious people, the Kerry people. 
 
 22308. And are the landlords in the habit of help- 
 ing towards these improvements? — Not since the Land 
 Act. Up to the Land Act we paid half the cost of 
 fences and drains. Last year we did do works for 
 the tenants, but it was the only year, and without any 
 charge to the tenants. 
 
 22309. Are they still continuing improvements on a 
 small scale ? — I think so. 
 
 22310. How are they acting as to payment of rents ? 
 — Their rents were paid before the agitation began, 
 and they have been well paid. They are once and a 
 half the valuation. 
 
 22311. Do you know anything of the purchase of 
 holdings by tenants? — I do not, except by hearsay. 
 On the Marquis of Conynghame's estate I heard they 
 had borrowed the rest of the purchase-money over 
 what the Board of Works advanced. 
 
 22312. Mr. Shavt. — That is just being carried out 
 now ? — It is, in another wing of the same estate. One 
 wing was sold six months or more ago, and I heard 
 that they borrowed the money. 
 
 22313. The Chaieman. — Do you think, if peasant 
 proprietary is carried out, great care should be taken 
 where the tenants are holding in ruurtale? — I do; and 
 I think there should be further legislation on that 
 subject. Very often the names on the rental may 
 have been settled afterwards, and the holders in run- 
 dale become six or seven distinct tenants, and they 
 hold like a chessboard ; no landlord can rectify that 
 without notices to quit. I think the landlord should 
 not be put to the odium and danger of serving a 
 notice to quit; and how can that state of things 
 be remedied without a notice to quit, with the law 
 as it stands? It is impossible to do anything with 
 them. 
 
 22314. Baron Dowse.— Suppose the tenant does 
 
 not consider it is for his benefit, and will not agree ? 
 
 As a matter of fact they are generally left so, but if 
 they got a perpetuity of that state of affairs it would 
 be very undesirable. 
 
 22315. Suppose that with that notice to quit, you 
 served a notice that you did not wish to do anything 
 but regulate the farm, and put an end to the system of 
 rundale, and then if a tenant filed a claim, no Chair- 
 man would give him compensation ? — The very name 
 " Notice to quit," is odious. ' 
 
 22316. If the landlord looks upon it as a senti- 
 mental grievance, the tenant is entitled to do the 
 same ? — I think no landlord will attempt it in the 
 present state of the law, and they will remain as they 
 are. 
 
 22317. The Chairman.- — It is a question what 
 can be done in cases of purchase by tenants where the 
 system exists, and you think it would not be advisable 
 to allow a sale to a number of persons in rundale ? — 
 I think so ; and if it would be possible to induce such 
 a class to emigrate, it would be very important. 
 
 22318. Mr. Shaw. — ^Could you not give the County 
 Court judge the power of regulating these rundale 
 cases without expeUing the tenants ? — That is what I 
 meant to suggest ; but I know they are so tenacious, 
 that I would wish some provision without suggesting 
 eviction at all. Where there has been rundale, and 
 now it is divided legally, it is difficult to deal with the 
 case. 
 
 22319. The O'Cokoe Don.— Do you often find that 
 two or three tenants take a holding, and set it in 
 rundale to fourteen or fifteen? — The holding having 
 been separated, I find they are holding as separate 
 tenants now. 
 
 22320. Baron Dowse. — There should be some pro- 
 ceeding in the County Court, and the judge should 
 make whatever order he thought necessary ? — That is 
 what I thought. 
 
 22321. Something in the nature of a partition order? 
 —Yes. 
 
 22322. The Chaieman. — Is it your opinion there is 
 a danger of a man coming in with too much debt upon 
 hun ? — There is danger of it. 
 
 22323. Do you think, for the purpose of avoiding 
 that, purchasing fee-farm grants at low rents would 
 be better than complete purchase? — Yes. A great 
 number of landlords, to rid themselves of trouble, 
 would be disposed to make sales of fee-farm tenures. 
 
 22324. Would you allow the Board of Works to 
 advance to the tenants who purchased ? — Certainly. 
 
 22325. You think something should be done to 
 make it less expensive ? — I think so, but not without a 
 motion in Court. It would prevent fraud or misappli- 
 cation. I think making title might be simplified by 
 advertisement and a judge's order. When I wish to 
 borrow £10,000 for land improvement, I can do it in a 
 simple way, and I think a similar plan should be adopted 
 to enable farmers to take money for the purpose of 
 purchasing. 
 
 22326. What is your opinion about the reclamation 
 of waste lands ?— Well, what I call waste lands would 
 not pay for reclamation. There is a great quantity of 
 cut-out bog, and black bog that is mixed with a little 
 earth and makes red ashes, that will make very good 
 land. 
 
 22327. That is usually in the hands of tenants?— I 
 don't know that it is. It used to be ; but its value is 
 so well recognised now, that the landlords are retain- 
 ing their bogs and allowing the tenants to cut turf on 
 them. 
 
 22328. I mean the cut-away part? — No, that is the 
 property of the landlord, and is very valuable; and 
 unless it is attached to their farms, no landlord would 
 let away bog that is being cut out. 
 
 22329. He reclaims it?— He wUl get it done. He 
 will let it to a small tenant or two to take a crop off, 
 and it becomes good land, that will pay well. 
 
 22330. Baron Dowse.— That is not what is usually 
 called waste land ?— No. I define waste land to be 
 moor ; that is so little good that it is not good for 
 pasture. Red bog will not pay for reclamation. It 
 would be cheaper to buy an estate. 
 
 22331. The O'CoNOE Don. — As to monntainland? 
 —It is fit for pasture, and it is in its best state. 
 
 "22332. Baron Dowse. — Do you consider a piece 
 of land completely covered with furze waste land? 
 —No J there is some very good land covered with 
 furze. 
 
 22333. But if it is all covered with furze it would 
 be waste land ?— No person would leave land in that 
 state. At the most the expense of taking away the 
 
MIKUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 687 
 
 furze would be about £8 au acre if the furze was as 
 thick as grass, and of course an acre of land cannot 
 be purchased for £8. 
 
 22334 The Chaikman.— Would you consider that 
 reclamation at all ? — I would. 
 
 22335. Would you give it the name of reclamation 
 where it is merely stubbing furze ? — No ; I think it 
 would not come under the strict definition; furze 
 coming that way is usually from neglect. I know very 
 good land let at 2-2s. an acre, and it has been let go 
 that way, but it is good land. 
 
 22336. Mr. Shaw. — If it is covered with furze 
 it cannot be good land? — The people let it in 
 con-acre, and they burned the furze, and have taken 
 potatoes out of it ; but I think the furze will return 
 to it. 
 
 22337. Baron Dowse. — What would you say 
 stubbing the land was? — Taking the bushes out of 
 it. If it is in furze they have machinery for taking 
 it out with. 
 
 22338. I suppose waste laud may be defined as 
 land of no value to anybody in the state in which it 
 then is ? — That is as I define it. 
 
 22339. Do you think going to an expense of £12 
 or £13 an acre would pay? — No. It would cost 
 £20. 
 
 22340. You say you are in favour of written con- 
 tracts between landlord and tenant — do you think for 
 the purpose of encouraging them stamp duties ought 
 to be reduced? — Yes; and if a statutory lease ac- 
 ceptable to all parties could be fixed, it would be the 
 best solution. 
 
 223-11. Tenancies from year to year? — I would 
 like to see no tenancies from year to year, or put 
 legislative disadvantages on it. 
 
 22342. What would you put in its place? — Leases 
 for 31 years. If I approve of a tenant, I would put 
 his own life in, and that would make it eternity with 
 him. I generally get them to give one or two years' 
 rent as a fine. 
 
 22343. You don't raise the rent upon giving leases? 
 — No ; that is the only increase. In the country they 
 get very large marriage portions — larger if they have 
 got leases — and it is worth their while to pay for 
 them. 
 
 22344. Mr. Shaw. — They would rather give a fine 
 than have the rent increased ? — I think so. 
 
 22345. Baron Dowse. — The estates you manage 
 have been in your family a long time ? — The Kerry 
 estate has not, but the Louth and Clare are ancestral 
 estates. 
 
 22346. The Louth estate came from Mr. Foster ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 22347. The Kerry estate belonged to your brother ? 
 —-Yes ; my father purchased it. 
 
 22348. That was Baron Poster?— Yes. There 
 was a statement appeared in the newspapers in refer- 
 ence to Baron Foster's property. The history of that 
 property is this. It was purchased in 1817 by my 
 father. Baron Foster. I am not the Mr. Foster that 
 Archdeacon O'Connell referred to. The estate was 
 then held by a middleman at £800 a year. He 
 never paid any rent, and in 1819 he was evicted, owing 
 £1200. The tenants held under the middleman. 
 My father then had the estates mapped, and made 
 21 years' leases to every tenant at one-third less 
 than the middleman charged. At the end of 21 years 
 O'Connell's lease fell out with all the others, and 
 his rent was then raised; Archdeacon O'Connell 
 stated it was raised 25 per cent. I daresay it was, 
 but it was not raised to the amount it had been 21 
 years before — it was still less. The map made on the 
 execution of the lease did not show any improvements 
 during the 21 years' lease. I don't agree with him j 
 he says there were £800 worth of improvements. I 
 don't think there was £100 worth of improvements — 
 nothing except what a man Mving on a farm would 
 naturally expend in that time. As to trees they are 
 there still, they never cost 30s. to plant ; he says there 
 was a planting. I don't think there are five hundred 
 trees, and they are principally in a little garden round 
 
 the house. He stated his father only held one year Oet. 26; 1880 
 
 under my brother, William Foster, )jut the fact is he 
 
 held eight years. My father died in 1842, and he ^PfterVesey 
 says he was evicted in 1850. The immediate cause *^*^Seralcl. 
 of the eviction was, there was a tenant adjoining 
 him, and we wanted to give two and a half acres 
 of unreclaimed bog of no value to the tenant adjoin- 
 ing, but O'Connell refused this point blank, and in 
 the then state of the law you could not take a 
 portion of a man's farm without serving a notice to 
 quit for all. We served bim with a notice to quit for 
 all. It went to the Assizes. In order to get the 
 two and a half acres of bog, we had to evict, and 
 a great deal of ill blood was engendered. That is 
 the whole story. That was in 1850, just after the 
 famine. He brought it all upon himself by wantonly 
 refusing to give up two and a half acres of wild 
 bog. That is 30 years ago, and my brother lost 
 some rent then due by O'Connell, and had to pay his 
 own costs also. 
 
 22349. Do you think it would be desirable to 
 have some public oflicer to fix the valution, to give 
 confidence in land cases? — I do. I think the 
 expense is enormous even in the smallest case. 
 Each person is allowed to have a local surveyor 
 — who gives contradictory evidence ; they get three 
 guineas for their attendance in Court, and three 
 guineas for inspection of the land in any case, how- 
 ever trifling. I would go farther, and I would say 
 there should be a public county officer to be a valuer 
 of land. 
 
 22350. The Chairman. — Who would be a sort of 
 independent man to come and give his opinion freely 
 for both sides ? — Yes ; and if there is a pubHc valua- 
 tion made, and in a few individual cases it is not 
 satisfactory, it could go before the county Chairman. 
 If there was a public officer it would save a great deal 
 of dissatisfaction. 
 
 22351. You mean in valuing lands between land- 
 lord and tenant ? — Yes. 
 
 22352. And valuing improvements also ? — Yes. 
 Arbitration is mentioned ; that never would do in the 
 state of the country ; one dare not express an opinion 
 unless you are a county officer. 
 
 22353. You think the landlord would not be able 
 to get an independent arbitrator ? — I think the tenant 
 would name a prejudiced arbitrator, and I think any 
 arbitrators named would probably find coffins and 
 graves at their doors, and all that, and they would not 
 like to undertake the duty. 
 
 22354. Do you think if there was a possibility of 
 agreeing on arbitrators a reference to this public 
 officer would be a satisfactory way of dealing with 
 disputes ? — I think so ; but I think the Chairman 
 should deal with it regularly. I do not approve of 
 arbitration. 
 
 22355. Baron Dowse. — He would be something 
 like the referee originally mentioned iu the draft bill ? 
 — I did not know about that. 
 
 . 22356. It think it was principally on account of the 
 cost it was struck out? — The only question — for I 
 have spoken to tenants over and over again — is the 
 question of valuation. No one wishes to turn them 
 out in case they pay their rent — the Land Act makes 
 it inexpedient. 
 
 22357. Practically on your estates the tenants have 
 fixity of tenure ? — Practically they have ; they are not 
 turned out at all. In reference to tenant right, I may 
 mention that a great many new tenancies were created 
 after the famine — a vast number of tenants who never 
 built their houses; and I should say in that case it would 
 be very unfair to give these people who came in with- 
 out paying anything, the right of sale. 
 
 22358. The Chairman. — To include the houses as 
 their own improvements 1 — Yes ; where it is plain , from 
 the date of their tenancy it was impossible they could 
 have built them. 
 
 22359. As a rule the landlord did not build them ? 
 — As a rule he contributed in the way of giving timber 
 and rafters. 
 
 22360. But as a rule they do not ? — There are great 
 
088 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oci. 2(j, 1880. 
 
 Foster A'-esey 
 Fitzgerald. 
 
 exceptions. On my own estate I let a farm about seven- 
 teen years ago ; the house on it was a police barrack, 
 and it cost £250. I drained the whole farm. And that 
 man, if he got tenant right, would be selling what I 
 gave him. 
 
 22361. But the way to regulate that would be 
 in the rent ? — No ; the rent he pays is £5 for the 
 house. 
 
 22362. How did you get the house? — I got it by 
 inheritance — Lord Fitzgerald built it. 
 
 22363. And was he paid out of the rates for it ? — 
 No ; he was paid the rent while the police occupied it, 
 and then it was let to the tenant at £5 a year. 
 
 22364. It was let with the land?— Yes; but he 
 paid £5 a year for the house outside the land. 
 
 22365. Baron Dowse. — It is out of proportion with 
 the farm? — In a country that is civilised, it would 
 not be. 
 
 22366. Tou don't say this country is not civilised ? 
 — I hope it will be more so. 
 
 22367. The Chairman. — Do you think the difficulties 
 have arisen very much from the bad seasons ? — I think 
 so ; but I ihink it has arisen more from bad trade in 
 England last year than anything else ; and if you had 
 another year of bad trade in England, even if you had 
 a good season here, there would be a great deal of 
 discontent. 
 
 22368. What is your opinion as to the six months' 
 redemption ? — I believe in England if a man owes half 
 a year's rent on lease, he can be evicted, but in Ireland 
 you cannot if there is distress on the land. 
 
 22369. Baron DoM'SE. — In England you cannot evict 
 for non-payment, unless there is a contract in writing I 
 — Yes, I wish to have leases in Ireland as in England, 
 with a proper clause of re-entry, and no such thing as 
 tenancy from year to year. 
 
 22370. The Chairman. — What is yom- objection to 
 
 the power of redemption ? — Because under the present 
 state of affairs no one will bid for the land ; and if a 
 tenant is put out under eviction, he will retake posses- 
 sion, and it is a fight and terror for six months ; they 
 will force back again, and the peace of the country 
 is endangered. They seldom redeem. 
 
 22371. The O'Conok Don.— Would you think it a 
 good plan to have six months before eviction takes 
 place 1 — I think taking possession ought to be a final 
 matter, because you cannot remove a house or do 
 anything to prevent their re-taking possession as long 
 as you are subject to redemption. I think the 
 English plan is best, to make people pay their rents 
 three months after they are due. I know in England 
 they can ask a Court of equity to redeem, but not 
 after a year's rent is due, I believe. 
 
 22372. Baron Dowse. — There is this objection to 
 this clause of redemption, if the landlord undertakes 
 to do anything at all, he is subject to an account 
 afterwards : the land must lie idle f — And the^ work- 
 ing of it is, that the land lies idle for six months, 
 and during that time the peace of the country is 
 endangered. 
 
 22373. Would you give a period prior to the 
 eviction instead of after it? — That would be better: 
 the period runs from the execution of the habere at 
 present ; it ought to run from the date of the decree. 
 If the tenant does redeem, it is an injury to him, 
 because he has not dealt with the land in its proper 
 way, and it is a loss of half a year at least. 
 
 22374. Do you ever distrain at all? — No, for thirty 
 years I have never distrained ; but I think the right 
 of distress is necessary to be maintained. If a man 
 is insolvent, there is no use in decreeing him : he 
 may take in grazing cattle, and the only way you 
 can proceed is by distress. A process is a much 
 better way of recovering if a man is solvent. 
 
 Mit'luiol Lane. 
 
 Mr. Michael Lane, Ardnacrusha, Limerick, examined. 
 
 22375. Baron Dowse. — You are a tenant under 
 Colonel M'Adam of Blackwater House, and you repre- 
 sent these other tenants who are now present ? — Yes. 
 I hold 38 Irish acres at £102 a year. The Govern- 
 ment valuation is £38, 10s. It is partly tillage and 
 partly pasture land. Blackwater House is about four 
 miles from this. 
 
 22376. How long have you been paying the present 
 rent ? — I suppose about 14 years. 
 
 22377. What was the previous rent ? — £80. 
 
 22378. I believe it had been let to your father out 
 of the Court of Chancery before that ? — Yes. 
 
 22379. What rent did he pay?— About £1, 10s. an 
 acre. 
 
 22380. Is it dear at the present rent? — I consider it 
 so — very dear. I am not able to make the rent. 
 
 22381. Is that last year? — Every year that came 
 upon me. I never could have made the rent only for 
 my friends. 
 
 22382. You are a tenant from year to year ? — Yes. 
 
 22383. Did you ask for a change in the rent ? — Yes. 
 223«4. What did he say ? — He said he would not 
 
 give it. 
 
 22385. Did he say that out flat and strong ? — I 
 could not see him to say it. 
 
 22386. It was the agent?— Yes, Mr. Thomas 
 M'Adam — he is his first cousin. 
 
 22387. When the rent was raised last it was upon con- 
 ditions ? — Yes, it was upon the condition that he would 
 build a house and drain about 14 acres of my place. 
 
 22388. The house had been blown down ? — Yes. 
 
 22389. Did he build it ?— No. 
 
 22390. Did he put you off?— He made me draw 
 stone materials, and sand, and mortar, and I had drawn 
 these things and they remained there for two years, and 
 durmg that time my father got unwell and died. The 
 landlord went to Belgium then ; he was off and on before 
 that ; he bought a house in England. 
 
 He never built the house ? — No. 
 
 You built it ? — Yes. 
 
 Out of your own pocket ? — Yes. 
 
 Did you use the materials drawn there ?- 
 
 22391. 
 22392. 
 22893. 
 22394. 
 Yes. 
 
 22395. You still pay the £102 rent, and had to 
 build the house in addition yourself? — Yes. 
 
 22396. What did the house cost youf — I really 
 could not say how much it cost. 
 
 22397. Is it a good house? — It is a good slated 
 house. 
 
 22398. Did you never write to him, asking him to 
 fulfil his promise ? — I did on several occasions. 
 
 22399. What answer did he give? — He said at one 
 time he could not borrow the money from the Boards, 
 and another time he did not think he had any right to 
 build. 
 
 22400. Didn't he promise to build ?— Yes, before a 
 most respectable witness in my parish. 
 
 22401. Didn't he promise to drain it too ?— Yes. 
 
 22402. Did he drain it ?— No. 
 
 22403. Were you aole to do it yourself ?— No, I 
 was not able. 
 
 22404. Is there any portion of the land that is 
 practically useless for want of drainage ?— Yes, about 
 14 acres. 
 
 22405. I suppose you got some reduction last year? 
 —I got 15 per cent, on one half-year, and 6 on 
 another. That is 21 on the whole year's rent. 
 
 22406. That is only for one year — he did not give 
 you a permanent reduction ? — No. 
 
 22407. Has he been in the country for the last few 
 years ?— No, not for the last six or eight. 
 
 22408. Where does Thomas MAdam live ? Near 
 
 Newport, County Tipperary. 
 
 22409. Does he come for the rent? — Yes 
 
 22410. To where?— Up to Mallow Street. 
 
 22411. And you go in and pny the rent? Yes. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 689 
 
 22412. Do you never speak about the house he was 
 to build?— Yes. 
 
 22413. What did he say 1 — He said nothing. He 
 was the agent before, and then he was out of it, and 
 it was at the time he got out of it that Colonel 
 M'Adam raised the rents, and my house was blown 
 down, and the promise made. Then I said to him I 
 had a right to get some place ; even at the time my 
 house was blown down he came down to tell my father 
 and mother and all my family that we could come up 
 into his place until there would be a house built, and 
 my father had an objection to do that, and he said he 
 would remain where he was, pending that Colonel 
 M'Adam would build the house in a short time, but he 
 did not do so, and that was the cause of my father 
 dying, which I can prove by the certificate from a 
 doctor. 
 
 22414. How did it cause his death? — ^^He got 
 kidney complaint in a cold house. 
 
 22415. Do you know anything about Mrs. O'Grady's 
 case? — I do. 
 
 22416. She is on Captain Maunsell's estate? — Yes; 
 she has about 60 acres at £160 rent, and the valuation 
 is £38. 
 
 22417. Is that too much rent? — I consider it a 
 great deal too much. I think it is considered by the 
 whole people about to be a great deal too much. 
 
 22418. Do the tenants about you pay very high 
 rents? — I think in the parish I live, there is not 
 another parish has the same to complain of. 
 
 -Generally Colonel 
 
 22419. Who owns the property ' 
 M'Adam and Captain Maunsell. 
 
 22420. Has there been any increase of late years ? 
 — Considerable. 
 
 22421. How far back, generally speaking? — About 
 ten or twelve years. 
 
 22422. You said before that even if the times were 
 good it would be too high a rent?— Yes ; I never could 
 pay but for my friends. 
 
 22423. How did they pay it?— They lent it. 
 
 22424. Arethey tenants?— Yes. 
 
 22425. They can't be heavily rented ?— Well, .they 
 are considerably. 
 
 22426. How can they manage to give you money? 
 — They give it as bills in the bank. 
 
 22427. Then I suppose you are intended to pay 
 these bills ? — I must. 
 
 22428. It is borrowed money? — Yes. 
 
 22429. You are borrowing money to pay too high 
 a rent ? — Yes, for the last seventeen years I am doing 
 it. Mrs. O'Grady is going to be ejected in November 
 for non-payment. Her husband died latterly, and I 
 may tell you the place never paid the rent. 
 
 22430. It is an exorbitant rent? — It is. 
 
 22431. The O'Conor Don.— Was it raised at all ? 
 — Not since they came into possession. 
 
 22432. Is it near the town? — It is 4^ miles from 
 Limerick. 
 
 22433. Is it within the borough ? — No, we are in 
 the County Clare, and this is in the City Limerick. 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880, 
 Michael Lane. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Kane, examined. 
 
 Vat, Kane. 
 
 22434. Mr. Shaw. — You also hold under Colonel 
 M'Adam ? — Yes ; I was put out by the Sheriff on the 
 30th of August last. My rent is £58, 13s. for 21^ 
 acres. 
 
 22435. Was the rent raised at all lately ? — 
 No. 
 
 22436. How were you broke? — This was a place 
 my brother took about eleven years ago at a higher 
 rent, and he sent me to live there, and I am there 
 about five years. 
 
 22437. Is your brother tenant, or are you? — My 
 brother was tenant. He ejected me and put me out. 
 I owed two years' rent. 
 
 22438. Was it good land ?— No, sir, bad land. 
 
 22439. How far from Limerick? — Two miles. It is 
 in the County Clare. 
 
 22440. The rent was not raised after your brother 
 took it ? — No, sir. 
 
 22441. How was the man paying it before? — He 
 promised to pay the same and he ran away. 
 
 Mr. Michael Kane, examined. 
 
 Michael Kane. 
 
 22442. Mr. Shaw. — You are a tenant on the same 
 estate ? — Yes. 
 
 22443. How much land do you hold? — Twenty 
 acres at £53, Is. M. 
 
 22444. Are they Irish acres ? — Yes. 
 
 22445. Was the rent raised on you at all ? — Not 
 since I came there. 
 
 22446. You think it is too high?— I know it is. 
 The Government valuation is £18. 
 
 22447. You never can make a living out of it ? 
 
 — No, sir. I got married to the daughter of the 
 man who had the place, and I would not keep the 
 place only for my father giving me money to pay the 
 rent. 
 
 22448. The place is not able to pay the rent 
 and give you a living? — It would not give halt the 
 rent. 
 
 22449. Is it wet land ? — One-fourth is good land. 
 
 22450. Are you a brother of the other tenant of the 
 name ? — No, sir. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Grady, examined. 
 
 Pat. Grady. 
 
 • 22451. Mr. Shaw. — You hold 28 acres on the 
 same property ? — Yes, sir, at £70, 7s. 2c?. The valua- 
 tion is £22. 
 
 22452. It was not raised? — No, sir. 
 
 22453. Do you think it is too high? — I do. 
 
 22454. Do you owe much ? — One year's rent. 
 
 22455. Were you allowed anything in the bad 
 times ? — I was. 
 
 22456. The same as the others?— Yes. 20 per 
 cent, on one half-year's rent, and 12 on another. 
 
 22457. You are not able to make the rent, and live 
 
 on it? No, sir. I drained a great part of it, and I am 
 
 not able to improve the rest of it. I thought I would 
 be able to do it, but I am not. 
 
 22458. How did you get on before the bad times ? 
 — I am only there six years. I thought I could drain 
 it, and I laid out all my money. 
 
 22459. The Chairman. — The bad times came on 
 soon after t — Yes ; there was a few years good enough 
 before that. 
 
 22460. The O'Conor Don.— How did you get into 
 it 1 — I took it from Mr. M'Adam. 
 
 22461. You took it by proposal 1 — Yes, sir. 
 
 22462. Then you fixed the rent yourself ^— No, 
 sir. 
 
 22463. Didn't you say you would pay the rent 
 for it 1 — I paid the same as the man before, but the 
 man before me never paid it. 
 
 4T 
 
G90' 
 
 IRISH LAN© ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Uct. 26, 1880. 
 JohnHartigan 
 
 Mr. John Haetigan, examined. 
 
 22464. Mr. Shaw.— Who is your landlord ?— Mr. 
 
 White. 
 
 22465. How much land do you hold ?— Twenty-two 
 acres at £77, Its. The valuation is £48, Ss. 
 
 22466. Was the rent raised '!— No, it was lowered. 
 The valuation is beyond any other portion of the district. 
 
 22467. Has he any other property there ?— He has 
 only the estate I am living on, which has six or seven 
 moretenants-onit,butit is valued beyond any other place. 
 
 22468. This is in the County Clare '!— Yes. 
 
 22469. Tour farm is higher than any other ]— Yes, 
 in every way. 
 
 22470. Is the. house good I— Yes,, pretty good ; bat 
 beyond that, the other land is valued at* only £1, 6s. 
 an acre, and mine is valued at £2, 3s; 
 
 22471. Is the land better? — It may be- a shade, 
 better. 
 
 22472. Ib it a large rent ? — ^It-is far. too dear. 
 
 22473. Were you. able to get on before th& bad^ 
 times ?—ISrOj except for industry. Mr. White •livedi 
 in Fitzwilliam Square. He is dead,. and since. then the 
 abatements have been done away with, 
 
 22474. Who has the property now ?— Mr. Robert 
 White of Killaloe is the agent. 
 
 "Wm. Howard. 
 
 Mr. William Howaed, examined. 
 
 22475. Mr. Shaw.— On whose estate do you hold V 
 — On Colonel M' Adam's estate. 
 
 22476. What is your rent ?— £43. 
 
 22477. How much land have you 1 — Ten acres. The 
 
 value is £17, 5s. , . , „ t i i t 
 
 22478. Do you consider that too high ]— Indeed I 
 
 do — nearly double. 
 
 22479. Have you any other land 1 — No. 
 
 22480. That is your only way of living ?— I have 
 business, and I had an income which enabled me to 
 pay the rent. 
 
 22481. You could not make the rent out or the 
 land ?— No. 
 
 22482. It is good land % — It is fair land. 
 
 22483. Did you ask for a reduction ?— I did. I 
 am endeavouring to obtain it. I got a reduction of 
 £3, but whether he will make it permanent I don't 
 Icnow. I am asking the same now. 
 
 22484. Did you build, a house on it f—f had to 
 build two houses on it for my own accommodation, 
 and improved it. I lost £150 on improvements. 
 
 22485. Do the tenants generally do their best to" 
 improve it? — They do all in their power. 
 
 22486. But the land is too dear? — It is too dear, 
 and there are not more oppressed tenants in Clare: 
 They are willing to work day and night, . and they are 
 not able to do now for their families. 
 
 22487. The O'Conoe Don. — How long are yoa' 
 there ? — Ten years. It was purchased for me. I was 
 filling' a; situation. 
 
 22488. What was paid ? — £80 for one small holding, 
 and £70 for another. 
 
 22489. At these rents? — Yes. I was not in the 
 country at the time. 
 
 22490. The Chairman-.— 'Are yon living on the 
 farm I — I am. 
 
 •TolinAV. Scolt 
 
 John W. Scott, Esq., Roslevan, Bnnis, examined. 
 
 22491. The Chaieman.— You are agent for Lord 
 Leconfield ?— Yes. 
 
 22492. Can you say what is the custom on Lord 
 Leconfield's property as to improvements? — He has 
 been in the habit of making all the improvements 
 himself, carrying on his estate on the English system, 
 making all the drainage and buildings, and charging a 
 percentage accordingly. 
 
 22493'. He does the whole work 1 — Yes. 
 
 22494. How long has that been the custom ? — Since 
 about 1848; before which time the property was all 
 let to middlemen, and a great many surrendered in the 
 bad times, and a great many fell Out, and he would 
 not renew their leases. He took all the yearly tenants 
 into his own hands, and granted no leases, the object 
 being to try as much as possible to get them into the 
 English system, all the buildings and improvements 
 belonging to the landlord. He sent a number of 
 people to Canada; and then he formed a number of 
 model farms all over his estate, and worked them for a 
 number of years, and subsequently let them. 
 
 22495. What has he laid out in that way ? — This 
 return was prepared for the Land Committee from 
 1855 to 1879 upon his Clare and Limerick property. 
 The total comes to £44,408 on buildings, and £20,645 
 on drainage. 
 
 22496. That is on the two estates? — Yes. 
 
 22497. What is the acreage of each estate?— In 
 Clare, 36,106 acres (head rents excluded), and in 
 Limerick 6131 acres. 
 
 22498. Mr. Shaw. — Did he put on 5 per cent, or less 
 interest? — The interest raises a serious question. The 
 interest he put on was 5 per cent, for drainage, and 4 
 per cent, for buildings. That was at the time the Board 
 of Works were charging %\ per cent, for twenty-two 
 years. The tenants are rather dissatisfied because he 
 
 did not reduce it ; but I have made out that on the 
 drainage, as a general rule, 5 per cent, was generally 
 charged, and on buildings practically 4 per cent. 
 I cannot say before my time, when there were 
 larger buildings, but for the last seven years the build- 
 ings have been principally houses for the smaller people, 
 and the amount expended on that since I came was 
 £20,804, and the percentage he added- to the rent was 
 only £361, 6s. 9f?. a year. 
 
 22499. Was that for labourers ? — No. There are 
 very few labourers in Clare; small tenants up to, £5 
 and £6 a year. Lord Leconfield built them good 
 houses, and there was no pleasing them. The percent- 
 age comes to a little over 2 per cent, on the buildings. 
 
 22500. Mr. Shaw. — There were farms^ with the 
 houses? — Yes, and perhaps only paying £5 a yeaJ 
 for it. r think it right to say that a very difficult 
 question has arisen with respect to this matter within 
 the last week, for the tenants have struck against 
 this. They have taken a sample town land in the 
 west,, and they have struck against any payments 
 over Griffith's valuation, which is a repudiation of 
 all Lord Leconfield's outlay. I had three days 
 for rent paying : on the first day they paid fairly, 
 on the second day they sent in a very well- selected 
 case to refuse, and on the third day the whofe 
 town land came in, and would give notMng^ but 
 Griffith's valuation. £178 is the valuation of the 
 town land. The middleman's rent was £260, 14s. Id. 
 The agent and surveyor revised the rents, and put 
 
 ■them at £213, 19s. 7rf., two years after the, lease 
 fell in. Lord Leponfield has spent since then £386 
 in drainage, and £1636, on buildings — that is, over 
 £2000 ; and his rent is £246, 17;s..4c;.— £14 less than 
 the middleman's rent, and the tenants have refused 
 as a body to pay anything except GriiBth's valiiatiofl"; 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 691 
 
 and onone of these tenant's holdings over £500 has 
 been expended. 
 
 22501. Baron Dowse.— -Did you point out the 
 iinjustice of that ?— They would not listen to it. It 
 was a regular arranged thing to make a stand against 
 this. They won't keep the buildings in repair— they 
 -say they are iLord Leconfleld's ; and the same way with 
 the drainage. They do-nothing ; and the consequence is 
 there must be an end to the expenditure of £5000 or 
 j£6000 a year, for T don't suppose ihe will continue it if 
 they w&nft pay the percentage. 
 
 22502. The iOnAiKMAN.^He made no difference 
 after the passing of the Land Act?— No. The 
 expenditure was rather increa.sed than otherwise until 
 the last couple of years. 
 
 22503. Were the tenants badly off in the last two 
 or three years ? — "Well, no ; individuals were, but ' not 
 as a general rule. Lord Leconfield allowed me to 
 give them meal and flour, and .vast numbers have 
 got who did not want it a,t all ; and there will be 
 difficulty about repayment. And until last year there 
 were no arrears at all upon the estate, and of course 
 Jast year they fell back. 
 
 22504. But not from any exceptional distress there ? 
 • — No, not altogether. c 
 
 22505. They were worse off than in any other year? 
 ■ — They were. •; < 
 
 22506. But any declining to pay, do you'tiink it is 
 really through inability ? — No. They pro diuaed often 
 more -money out of their pocket than they^lwanted. 
 I don't believe that in Clare the generality wf tenants 
 were better able to pay Lord Leconfield than this 
 year. Some of them say they have received intima- 
 tions not to pay, but I think others are taking 
 advantage of it. It is said there is something of that 
 sort. 
 
 22507. They don't like to pay when there is a 
 chance of getting off ? — Some threats have been 
 made. 
 
 22508. Have you had many cases of ejectment for 
 non-payment since you came on the property 1 — There 
 have been very few ejectments. I have had to serve 
 three or four in the year; but except very rarely 
 I have never had recourse to the Sheriff. We never 
 bring an ejectment unless a man is broken, and un- 
 less he is implicated with his creditors, and it is 
 necessary to get a legal claim. 
 
 22509. When there is an ejectment, is a man 
 allowed to sell his holding ?^No. Lord Leconfield 
 pays him compensation. He cancels the arrear, takes 
 up the farm, and sends the man out of the country 
 with money to start with. 
 
 22510. Having done so much himself, there would 
 be little for the tenant to claim as for improvements? — 
 No bona fide improvements. 
 
 22511. Since 1848'or 1850; but all that was done 
 before in the way of building was done by themselves ? 
 . — Still it would be small. 
 
 22512. Therefore he gives them compensation for 
 the good will? — Not good will, but he gives them a 
 gratuity on leaving; the proof is that I never but 
 once had a case against me in the Land Court, and 
 in that they were defeated with costs. 
 
 22513. Have you ever had to exercise the power 
 of distraint I — No, never against an agricultural 
 tenant. At the same time it is a great assistance 
 Jiaving that power. If the creditors came in to sell, 
 which they would, and there was collusion between 
 the tenant and thfem,' it gives power to serve notice 
 on the Sheriff that there is a year's rent due, and thus 
 secxiring the rent. Which would be often lost if there 
 was not distraint. 
 
 22514. Tha,t saves the tenant from being sold ^out? 
 
 Yes. Whenever there is a tenant's interest put 
 
 np for sale, we send the solicitor to say it will not be 
 recognised. 
 
 22515. You have had cases where after that the 
 tenant was able to remain in the 'holding ?— No doubt ; 
 but generally speaking -when that comes about there 
 is a great deal of rogueiry; and the fact of know- 
 ing that Lord Leconfield won't allow it, prevents 
 
 the creditors attempting to sell. When Lord Lecon- 
 field does that, he sacrifices his own -rent. He would 
 not claim his year's rent and prevent the sale < of the 
 land too ; he gives the- creditors their fair chance. 
 _ 22516. Would you consider that as to the valua- 
 tion of land for rent purposes, arbitration might be 
 possible?— I think if you come to valuation that 
 -way, the tenant would in nine cases out of ten select 
 a man who would be a very strong partisan, and he 
 would be subject to intimidation. 
 
 22517. You think the tenant's man would be liable 
 to be biased?— Yes, or intimidated; it would be 
 highly unsatisfactory. 
 
 22518. There would be a man for the landlord? — 
 Yes; and they would come to a serious difference 
 between them. 
 
 22519. Would you have an umpire?— Yes; but I 
 don't think that would be a satisfactory result. How- 
 ever, these questions of rent don't arise on Lord 
 Leconfield's estate ; for when a tenant leaves him, it is 
 a clean sheet ; he makes a new bargain with the new 
 man. 
 
 22520. Baron Dovtsb. — But suppose the man in 
 possession said he was rented too high, the only ob- 
 ject you have is to get a fair rent, would you see any 
 objection to letting a public officer settle the rents be- 
 tween you ? — A pubUc officer and an ; arbitrator are 
 -very different. 
 
 22521. Would you see any objection to a public 
 officer? — I would sooner have a public officer. It 
 would save the landlord a deal of trouble, but at the 
 same time it would seem to be very hard that the 
 landlord should not have the benefit of free com- 
 petition. 
 
 22522. Is it free competition when the tenant has no 
 other place to go to ? — I never had a case where it 
 was so. All the properties I have ever had anything 
 to do with have not been ever -rented, and I confess I 
 would not like other people to be interfering with me. 
 •I think that probably anything of the sort would have 
 the effect on an estate like Lord Leconfield's of raising 
 the rent < considerably. 
 
 22523. It would be a benefit to him? — In a 
 pecuniary point of view, no doubt. It is possible 
 some might be lowered; but it would be very hard 
 to say if some were lowered you are not to raise 
 others. ' 
 
 22524. Is it your opinion that if there was a valu- 
 tion it should be general? — Yes, a new Government 
 valuation. 
 
 22525. Do you think there is any evil in the 
 present system of what is called Government valua- 
 tion, when that was not intended to be a basis for 
 rent? — I don't think it is a fair basis for rent at 
 all. 
 
 22526. It gives an impression of unfairness? — I 
 think Griffith's valuation is on poor land very often 
 the letting value, and in other places not at all so. 
 It was founded chiefly on the prices of corn; butter, 
 meat, and wool, and everything connected with cattle 
 has increased since then enormously, and Clare is 
 very unequally valued in relation to other counties 
 in Ireland. 
 
 22527. What is the custom with regard to county 
 cess and roads ? — I find the tenants, rather than have 
 an addition to their rents, prefer paying county cess. 
 The offer that I frequently made was to take the aver- 
 age of the five preceding years and add haff of that to 
 the rent, and in every case they declined that. 
 
 22528. What is the arrangement as to foads ?^ 
 They are taken into account in fixing the rents, but a 
 road is frequently an element for higher rent for con- 
 venience sake. Farms are always let by lump rent now, 
 and we alwa,ys take into consideration whether a 
 farm is conveniently circumstanced as to roads or 
 pot. 
 
 22529. If a new road ismade, is there an allowance 
 for it ? — No ; I only know of one case on Lord 
 Leconfield's estate. There was a new road rnade, 
 and it was for the 'benefit of the people, and it was 
 very much wanted. Lord Leconfield gave a large 
 
 4T2 
 
 Oct. 26, 1-880.^ 
 John W. Scott 
 
692 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Jolm.W. Scott 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. sum of money to the sessions, and paid half the ex- 
 pense in order to get it for them ; it gave the tenants 
 access to their farms, and was the greatest possible 
 advantage to them. If it was a road made for 
 public purposes, and not for the benefit of individuals, 
 it should ioe taken off their rents, but that rarely 
 happens now. 
 
 22530. Have you any difficulty in preventing sub- 
 division of farms? — It was absolutely prohibited on 
 the estate. But last year several cases came to my 
 knowledge ; but it is practically impossible always 
 to prevent it. In some cases they divide a field, and 
 in other cases they take the crop in common and 
 divide the produce. The father and son will do it 
 without your knowledge, and practically without 
 eviction you cannot get over it. I found several cases 
 that I was not aware of. I thought I knew all the 
 circumstances of the tenants. 
 
 22531. Had they divided the houses as well? — 
 Yes. Our houses are long low houses with a kitchen 
 and two rooms, and they break another door into the 
 bedroom, and very often have two doors. I know a 
 ease where there are two brothers ; one has to pass 
 through the kitchen of the other into the room where 
 he and his wife and daughter live. Where there is 
 no will it becomes a squabble which of the children 
 should have the farm. If there was power to sell, it 
 would make a great change amongst Lord Leconfield's 
 tenants. It would get rid of a good many of the tenants, 
 because it is a constant effort on my part to protect 
 the tenants and keep them together. 
 
 22532. Is there much turf bog ? — There is a good 
 deal. 
 
 22533. What is the custom as to that? — I have 
 taken turf bogs up, and let them at a fixed rate, and 
 they pay 10s. or £1 a year for cutting turf, and we 
 make roads. It is only a sort of surety for keeping 
 them up ; but when the turf is cut away, the bog 
 belongs to the tenant of the adjoining lands, and that 
 is what they put in claims for compensation for, while 
 letting it at what we call " mock " at £6 or £7 an acre 
 although they are only paying 6d. perhaps to the land- 
 lord, and the unfortunate people who take it up do all 
 the reclamation. 
 
 22534. Th.ey don't make open drains? — Yes, that 
 Just let the water off, and they get £6 or £7 an acre 
 for it for potatoes. 
 
 22535. Do they usually fence it in ?— No. 
 
 22536. Do you think there is much land that might 
 be reclaimed that you know of ? — Not on Lord Lecon- 
 field's property, except red bog, which is very valuable. 
 As turf is every year becoming more valuable, he does 
 not allow any to be sold off the estate ; they only pay 
 a royalty. I was agent on Lord Midleton's estate 
 before 1 came here ; there was considerable expense on 
 that property, which was all in the County Cork. 
 
 22537. Was there any system as to improvements ? 
 — Yes, he used to give slates and timlaer. Between 
 1855 and 1873, exclusive of the town, there was £5900 
 spent by the different Lord Midletons. 
 
 22538. Baron Doavse. — Was there a percentage 
 charged? — In some cases there was, but generally 
 speaking not. There was for drainage. 
 
 22539. The Chairman. — Was there a power of 
 sale ? — No ; it was sometimes done on Lord Leconfield's 
 estate prior to 1 873. There were a few cases when by per- 
 mission it was allowed, but they were either members 
 of a family, or where a tenant added to a farm two or 
 three acres of an adjoining farm. There were 'some 
 few cases where outsiders purchased, but they were 
 very few. I have been for thirty years connected with 
 the estate of the Eev. Dr. Scott, County Meath, and 
 we spent there £2000 on improvements. It is a small 
 estate of about 1500 acres. 
 
 22540. Was there no charge made to the tenants ? 
 — Not as a general rule ; in some cases there was 
 5 per cent. 
 
 22541. Were you agent for Lord Midleton from 
 1855 to 1873?— Yes. 
 
 22542. Baron Dowse. — You turned very few out 
 during all that time ? — Very few. 
 
 22543. And practically they had fixity of tenure? 
 — I have never more than once had a hostile eviction, 
 though occasionally I did bring the Sheriff to make an 
 arrangement with the tenant and get legal possession. 
 I have not called the Sheriff in question more than 
 seven or eight times in thirty years. 
 
 22544L The O'Conor Don.— Have you had any 
 cases in the Land Court? — Never but one, and I 
 succeeded; and that was to put in a member of a 
 family who ought to have had the land. Lord 
 Leconfield was put to considerable expense, and got 
 nothing for it. 
 
 22545. Mr. Shaw. — The rents have not been 
 raised on the Leconfield estate? — No, unless there is 
 a new letting, and we charge what we consider the 
 value. 
 
 22546. You always make a charge on a change of 
 tenancy ? — We put on what we consider a fair rent. 
 
 22547. You have no general valuation of the pro- 
 perty ? — No. 
 
 22548. Have you had on Lord Midleton's ? — No. 
 
 22549. You raised ■ the rents when the tenancies 
 changed ? — There were very few changes of tenancy, 
 but the rents were readjusted on a change of tenancy. 
 
 22550. On the dropping of a lease? — Yes. 
 
 22551. Was there any considerable increase on the 
 rental during your time ? — No, nothing very extraor- 
 dinary. There were a few cases in which leases fell in, 
 that had been held by middlemen. The land was 
 divided into a number of holdings, and we took the 
 small tenants into our own hands. 
 
 22552. You did not put on a higher rent than 
 before ? — No ; the effect would be to reduce the rent. 
 But I am staggered by this refusal of last week. 
 
 22553. The Chairman. — These are men well able 
 to pay ? — Yes ; those who are not, are not the men 
 who fight. Those who cannot pay are only too ready 
 to come in and throw themselves on our compassion, 
 for they know we always treat them tenderly. 
 
 James Starkey 
 
 Mr. Jambs Starkey, examined. 
 
 22554. The Chairman. — You are a farmer ? — Yes, 
 at Askeaton, and also near Newcastle. I was a member 
 of the Farmers' Club, but since they transformed them- 
 selves I don't belong to them. 
 
 22555. What is the size of your farm? — 150 acres 
 at Askeaton, and about 100 acres at the other place. 
 
 22556. Who were the landlords? — One was Mr. 
 John Nicholas Murphy of Cork, and the other Mr. 
 Henry Trench. 
 
 22557. Mr. Shaw.— You don't find Mr. Murphy a 
 bad landlord ?— No, I am his agent. 
 
 22558. He gives leases, I believe ?— Yes. 
 
 22559. Long leases?— Yes, he gave thirty-one 
 years' leases in 1850, and the tenants' Hves concurrent. 
 
 22560. And these leases are in existence? — Yes. 
 
 22561. What rent did he put on? — The rents were 
 fixed then. 
 
 22562. Were they raised then?— That was just 
 after the famine. The land had been held previously 
 by middlemen, who got all out of it. He re-let it to 
 the tenants at something like what the middlemen were 
 paying. 
 
 22563. And they were pretty well satisfied ? — They 
 were very well satisfied. 
 
 22564. And were in very good circumstances at the 
 same time? — Yes. The present agitation has un- 
 settled some of them, and they think they should have 
 it at less. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 693 
 
 22565. Griffith's valuation has got into their heads 1 
 — I suppose so. 
 
 22566. The Chairman.— They were satisfied ori- 
 ginally?— Yes; and most of them are independent 
 people with large farms. 
 
 22567. Mr. Shaw.— You are a practical farmer, and 
 
 must have a great deal of experience of land do you 
 
 think Griffith's valuation is a valuation for rent 1 It 
 
 depends on the character of the land. Some land 
 would be dear enough at Griffith's valuation, and other 
 land is cheaper at more than the valuation. 
 
 22568. It varies very much? — It varies very 
 much. 
 
 22569. It is low on good land? — Yes; and upon 
 inferior land the valuation is high enough. 
 
 22570. Mr. Murphy's land is good?— It is. It is 
 very good tillage land. It was let at double the rents 
 by the middlemen. 
 
 22571. Have you anything to say about Mr. 
 Trench's farm 1 — It is a grass farm. I don't like the 
 tenure on which I hold that farm. I feel that I am 
 too much crippled by the conditions. 
 
 22572. Is it a yearly tenancy or a lease? — Seven 
 years' lease I had of it, and it was renewed for seven 
 years more, and at present I hold it for one year 
 certain. 
 
 22573. The rent was left the same ?— Yes ; but I 
 got an abatement for this year, and I have it only for 
 one year certain at that. 
 
 22574. You have done nothing? — No, because I 
 would not be permitted to do anything. 
 
 22575. Is it capable of improvement 1 — It is. 
 
 22576. And if you had a tenure you would do it? — 
 Yes; and I have urged upon ihe landlord frequently 
 to take money from the Board of Yv^orks and I would 
 pay the interest, or to give me a tenure and encourage 
 me, but he would not do any of these things. It 
 wants to be drained. About 30 acres for the last 
 three or four years have produced nothing but 
 rushes and other aquatic plants. That could be 
 made excellent land. 
 
 22577. Has he much other land? — He has. 
 
 22578. As equally capable of improvement ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 22579. He won't do anything to it? — He has not 
 done anything. 
 
 22580. And he won't give you a tenure to encourage 
 you ?— No. 
 
 22581. Hove you applied for a lease ? — He would 
 not give more than seven years. 
 
 22582. Are the tenants generally yearly tenants in 
 your district? — They are not. Since the Land Act 
 the landlords have generally compelled their tenants to 
 take leases as far as they can, to contract them out 
 of the operation of the Act. 
 
 22583. Leases for thirty-one years ? — For twenty- 
 one years. 
 
 22584 They are all over £50 a year ? — A good 
 many of them are. 
 
 22585. They contract them out of improvements as 
 well ? — Yes. They have no claim for improvements. 
 
 22586. Are the tenants large tenants^? — They are 
 pretty large. 
 
 22587. Many of them grass farms ? — Some of 
 them are. Where I live myself was entirely tillage 
 country until the change in the circumstances of the 
 times, and now it is very generally grass. 
 
 22588. Do you live on Mr. Murphy's land? — 
 Yes. 
 
 22589. What rent do you pay ? — I pay £1 an acre 
 for the farm where I live, and the adjoining farm I pay 
 lis. an acre. 
 
 22590. An Irish acre ?— Yes. 
 
 22591. You consider that a very low rent? — I 
 consider it a very moderate rent. It is about one- 
 fourth over the Government valuation. That is about 
 the letting of all the property — it is let at about one- 
 
 * fourth over the poor law valuation, 
 
 22592. Are the rents high on other properties in 
 yonr neighbourhood ? — They are. 
 
 22593. Higher than that ?— They are. 
 
 22594 Are the tenants able to pay?— With great Oct. 2a, mo. 
 
 difficulty. A great many of them are not well able to 
 
 pay these times. James Starkey 
 
 22595. They don't improve much ?— No, thev 
 cannot. 
 
 22596. Is that owing to the want of security of 
 tenure, or the want of capital ?— It is from the fact 
 that their improvements are of no value to themselves 
 as long as they are bound not to claim for them. Of 
 course a man won't improve, if at the end of his 
 tenure his improvements may be confiscated. 
 
 22597. Have the tenants the means of improving? 
 — I think they would improve. 
 
 22598. If they had security ? — I think so. 
 
 22599. The Chaikman.— Do they go for permission 
 to agree with the landlord as to improvements? — The 
 landlord won't consent. 
 
 22600. Lest they have claims outside the lease '^ — 
 Yes. 
 
 22601. Baron Dowse. — The tenants over £50 may 
 contract not to claim anything under the Act? — Yes ; 
 and the forms of lease in use contract the tenants out 
 of all claims for everything. 
 
 22602. Mr. Shaw. — Do you know of any cases of 
 rent raising or eviction in your neighbourhood ? — Not 
 latterly. 
 
 22603. And up to the bad times the rise was on 
 any changes of tenancy 1 — Yes. 
 
 22604 Do you know of any cases of tenants pur- 
 chasing their holdings ? — I do. 
 
 22605. Under the Landed Estates Court ?~Yes. 
 
 22606. Has it been successful? — So far as I can 
 judge it has been. 
 
 22607. They borrowed from the Board of Works? 
 —Yes. 
 
 22608. Had they one-third themselves, or did they 
 borrow it ? — I could not say that ; I suppose some of 
 them had. 
 
 22609. Was it in your own neighbourhood? — Yes, 
 in the neighbourhood of Newcastle. 
 
 22610. What property was that? — It belonged to a 
 gentleman from Mallow — I don't remember his name. 
 
 22611. As far as you can judge they are well 
 satisfied? — They have large farms, and appear to be 
 well off. 
 
 22612. Improving their lands since then? — Yes. 
 Two of them have taken money from the Board of 
 Works, and one is draining his farm. 
 
 22613. Do you think if the tenants had security at 
 fair rents, to be adjusted in some way, with the right 
 of sale, they would be satisfied? — It would satisfy 
 reasonable tenants, but at present a great many are 
 unreasonable in their demands. All reasonable men 
 would be satisfied with an arrangement of that kind. 
 
 22614. Giving facilities also for purchasing?— 
 Giving full facilities for purchasing where cases 
 arise. 
 
 22615. Do you think it would be possible between 
 landlord and tenant to arrange a system of purchasing 
 perpetuities or fining down the rent? — There is no 
 doubt that would work, but a great many landlords 
 have no power to do these things. 
 
 22616. But if power was granted? — If they had 
 liberty to dispose of their lands, a great many of them 
 would come to terms with their tenants in that way ; 
 and if the Board of Works were able to make loans 
 on fair terms, tenants would pay it all. I am satisfied 
 if there was freedom of sale of estates now tied up by 
 entail, etc., along with the enforced sales in the Incum- 
 bered Estates Court, you would have plenty of land in 
 the market for tenants to purchase. 
 
 22617. Both fee-simple and perpetuities ? — Certainly. 
 
 22618. Do the landlords generally give any help 
 towards improvements in your neighbourhood in the 
 way of buildings ? — Not since the Land Act. 
 
 22619. It has decreased since? — The landlord says 
 that the Land Act has fixed the relations between 
 them, and of course if they make improvements they 
 do so under the provisions of the Land Act ; but at 
 all events that has not been the case with Mr. Murphy. 
 He has always given timber and slates free. 
 
694 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Od. 26, 1880. 22620. You think it has fallen off on the whole?— 
 
 — Yes, I think it has. 
 James Staikey 22621. There is a great deal of land in this country 
 ■jieeding drains ? — A vast quantity. 
 
 22622. And the landlords won't do it ?— They won't 
 do it under the present circuinstances. ' Some of them 
 have borrowed money this year, and expended it on 
 their properties, charging it to the tenants. That is 
 tenants' work, for the tenants pay for it. 
 
 22623. And the tenants won't make these improve- 
 ments owing to the uncertainty of their tenure ? — They 
 have no inducement. 
 
 22624. Are there many farm labourers in your 
 district ? — A good many. 
 
 22625. Working on the tillage farms? — Yes. 
 
 22626. What pay do they get?— Is. M. was the 
 current hire this year, and \s. a day each with their 
 Tiiet ; it varies according to the pressure. 
 
 22627. Have they got houses on the farms ? — Some 
 have, and some live in the villages about the country. 
 A great many after the famine years were put off the 
 land, and they congregated in villages, and are obliged 
 to go a long way to work. 
 
 22628. And they only get Is. M. ?— Yes ; when it is 
 going, and at other times they make the best terms they 
 can. 
 
 22629. What would be the wages of the men 
 employed all the year round ? — Is. a day and their diet, 
 with probably a house. 
 
 22630. In the villages they are in a poor way? — A 
 very poor way ; in fact, but for the charity last year, 
 I don't know what would have been the result ; the 
 farmers were not able to employ them. 
 
 22631. Are the rents pretty well paid this year? — 
 I don't think they are. I know myself, from experience, 
 many who are thoroughly able to pay, have not paid, 
 expecting something to happen. 
 
 22632. I suppose they all got an allowance in the 
 bad times ? — I know they got 25 per cent, with us last 
 year, but some landlords gave no abatement at all, and 
 others 10 per cent., and so on. 
 
 22633. Baron Dowse. — How can a reasonable man 
 expect anything to happen that will relieve him from 
 paying rent? — That iS the unreasonableness of the 
 present condition of things. 
 
 22634. Mr. Shaw. — Which is not likely to continue? 
 — It will continue as long as the present agitation is 
 going on ; and decidedly I am of opinion that if there 
 is not some legislative action to satisfy reasonable 
 people, they will be thrown into the vortex of this 
 agitation by and by. 
 
 22635. It will get worse instead of better, unless 
 there is some complete legislation ? — Yes. 
 
 22636. You think tinkering with it won't do now? 
 — I really think not. 
 
 22637. You think peasant proprietorship can be 
 tried in a moderate way, and safely ? — Certainly. I 
 think all revolutionary modes of dealing with land, or 
 anything else, is very dangerous and very unjust, and 
 that peasant proprietary established on these principles 
 would not be permanent. They would be sold out for 
 their debts before they would be long in possession, if 
 every man in the country were turned into a proprietor. 
 
 22638. The Chairman. — Do you think amongst the 
 smaller tenants they have any idea what purchasin"- 
 their holdings means ?— I don't think they have. 
 
 22G39. Dothey know they would have to pay interest 
 on the money, and something to pay off the capital? — 
 I don't think they have a clear conception of the mean- 
 ing of it. 
 
 22640. Baron Dowse. — Have they not a clear con- 
 ception of gripping the land? — Yes; and I think a 
 proof of that is that we don't find any ejectments 
 through the country at present. 
 
 22641. Mr. Shaw. — And some of them thmk free 
 land means to get it without paying at all ? — That 
 would suit a good many. 
 
 22642. You have many grazing farms in your own 
 district? — There are a great many about Newcastle; 
 it is a dairy country. 
 
 22643. Do you think the Land Act affects these 
 injuriously in any way ? — It affects them in this way, 
 that the tenants -who contract out of the Act won't 
 spend Is. on their farms. These lands are capable of 
 improvement by drainage, for the best lands are gener- 
 ally moist lands. 
 
 22644. And they have no benefit under the Act ? — 
 No, where they have a landlord contracting them out 
 of it. 
 
 22645. Would you give them any claim for disturb- 
 ance or good will? — I don't see why they should 
 not. 
 
 22646. Do they live on the farms generally? — Yes, 
 generally; and in some cases where lands are ex- 
 clusively confined to grass, and you are bound not 
 to till any of it, and it happens in some cases, as in 
 mine, you could not live on the land. 
 
 22647. Some people have said it would not be right, 
 in cases of non-residential farms, that he should get 
 liberty to sell his interest in that and put the money in 
 his pocket ? — The reason that it is non-residential is 
 that they won't be allowed to live on it. Generally 
 speaking, the farmer has a great number of children, 
 and he would be very glad to settle one of them on a 
 farm of that kind, and make it residential. One of the 
 great faults is that there are so many farms non-resi- 
 dential. It is one of the evils of the grazing system ; 
 and if they were not used as mere grazing runs, people 
 would settle down on them, and the country would be 
 more prosperous than at present. 
 
 22648. Mr. Shaw. — There are no houses on them? 
 — No, except herds' houses. 
 
 22649-. You are not allowed to build on them or 
 break them up ? — No. 
 
 22650. And that is against the interest of the 
 country ? — Yes. I think grass farms are quite as 
 capable of improvement as grass farms as any other. 
 
 22651. To do that you must drain and till them ? — 
 You need not till them, but you must drain them ; but 
 as he only has it from year to year, he will do nothing 
 on it, as he does not know how long he will have it. 
 
 2265-*. Baron Dowse.— Is not it a fact they let it 
 in Tipperary for nine months or one year certain ?— 
 Yes. That is one of the greatest cries against the 
 landlord system, that he can clear off all the tenants, 
 and let it for eight or nine months to graziers, who 
 are no national benefit, so far as not being consumers 
 to any extent. For instance, that case in the County 
 G-alway, where miles of country were cleared of thou- 
 sands of people, and turned into a sheep-walk and 
 cattle land; that is certainly a terrible state of things, 
 to desolate a whole country in that kind of way. 
 
 Michael Pen 
 
 Mr. Michael Pbery, examined. 
 
 22653. The Chaieman. — You are a tenant on 
 Captain Maunsell's estate ? — Yes. 
 
 22654. How much land do you hold? — About 5 
 acres. 
 
 22655. What have you to say about it?— That it is 
 too dear. 
 
 21656. What do you pay ?— My mother took it first 
 £4 at an acre, then he gave a lease for a lump sum. 
 
 22657. How much is it now ? — £20 a year. 
 
 22658. What is the valuation? £7. 
 
 22659." Is it-near Limerick .«— It is about two miles 
 away in the County Clare. 
 
 22660. Is that all you have to say? — Yes. My 
 father held it about £8 about twenty-three years ago ; 
 the Ufe he had dropped, and it was let to another man, 
 who had some other land along with it. i 
 
 22661. Then your mother took it t — Yes • and he 
 put £20 on it. " ' 
 
 22662. The O'Conoe Don.— How long is that ago? 
 — About fifteen years ago. 
 
]\1INUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 695 
 
 22663. Mr. Shaw. — Have yon any other land ? — 
 Yes ; only for that I could not pay the rent at all. 
 
 22664. Tour house is on the other land 1 — Yes ; and 
 the landlord we live under gave us an abatement, 
 which brought the rent down to the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 Michael Perrjf 
 
 22665. Did this man give you any abatement in bad Oct, 26,, 1880. 
 times ? — He gave us 20 per cent. 
 
 22666. The Chairman. — Your mother took it 
 knowing the rent to be paid ?^Yes, £4 an acre ; but 
 I don't think there are 5 acres at all in it. Some of 
 the other cases are nearly double. 
 
 Mr. Martin Hamilton, examined. 
 
 Martin 
 Hamilton; 
 
 22667. The Chairman. — How much land, do you 
 hold? — Twelve acres. 
 
 22668. "What is your rent ?— £35, 8s. 3d, and the 
 valuation is £9, 15s. 
 
 22669. Mr. Shaw.— Is it reclaimed land?— Yes. 
 
 22670. Reclaimed bog ? — ^It is not much better. 
 
 22671. The Chairman. — When was the rent fixed? 
 — Fifteen years ago next March. 
 
 22672. Are you living on the land ? — ^Yes. 
 
 22673. You have no other land? — No; I lived with 
 
 a gentleman who was giving up business^ and I took 
 up this, but I cannot pay it. I never made the rent off 
 it two years. 
 
 22674. Is it all in grass ? — ^No; but I got two acres 
 tilled. 
 
 22675. Is it cows youikeep ? — ^I keep four cows; 
 
 22676. Did you get on well up to the last few 
 years ? — I was not able to pay the rent, but I did. I 
 had some little money with my wife, and we kept on. 
 We got £4 abatement last March; 
 
 Mr. Andrew Ddndas. 
 
 22677. The Chairman. — How many acres do you 
 hold?^ — Thirteen acres. 
 
 22678. What is your rent ? — £40, and the valuation 
 is £17, 10s. 
 
 22679. Do you say this is too much ? — Oh, sure it 
 too dear. 
 
 Andrew 
 Dundag. 
 
 22680. Was it fixed fifteen years ago? — ^It was 
 fixed when I entered first about fifteen years ago. 
 
 22681. Is that all you complain of? — Yes. 
 
 22682. Have you ever asked for a reduction? — 1 
 have,, but I could not. get.it. I, got 40 per cent, offlasfe 
 time. 
 
 Mrs. Keegan, examined. 
 
 Mrs. Keegan. 
 
 22683. The Chairman. — How much land do yon 
 hold ? — 2^ acres. 
 
 22684. What is your rent?— £7, 10s., and the 
 valuation £3, 5s. 
 
 22685. And was this fixed fifteen years ago also ? — 
 No, sir ; but I am in the house and part of the k nd 
 about that time. I am not paying rent only since my 
 
 husband died. He had the rent from Mr. M'C'ausland, 
 for he was at business for him, and when he died I 
 should pay the rent. 
 
 22686. It is a cottage and land? — Yes, 2^ ajcres 
 and a house. 
 
 22687. How long ago is it since he died? — Six 
 years. 
 
 Mr. JJAMES Madden, examined. 
 
 James Madden 
 
 22688. Mr. Shaw. — On whose estate are you? — 
 Mrs. Gore's. 
 
 22689. How much land have you?— Tvventy acres. 
 
 22690. What is your rent ?— £60, and the valuation 
 £30, 15s. 
 
 22691. How long have you been paying that rent? 
 — ^I suppose over twenty years. 
 
 22692. It was not raised for twenty years ?— No, sir. 
 
 22693. Was it raised then ? — We^got a lease at that 
 time. 
 
 22694. Have you got a lease now?— It. is about up 
 now. It is within a year or two of it. 
 
 22695. Is it too dear ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 22696. Did you build upon it yourself? — ^No, sir.. 
 
 22697. Did you do anything in the way of improv- 
 ing it ? — I reclaimed it and put manure on it. 
 
 22698. What is it worth an. acre? — It is about 
 worth £2. 
 
 22699. Is it per Irish acre? — Yes, sir. 
 
 22700. The Chairman. — Is it near Limerick ? — It 
 is about two miles from Limerick. 
 
 22701. On the Clare side?— Yes, sir. 
 
 22702. Would you be allowed to sell it if you 
 wanted to go away ? — I don't know that. 
 
 Mr. Maurice Sullivan, examined. ' 
 
 Maurice 
 Sullivan. 
 
 22703. Ml'. Shaw. — ^Are you a tenant on Colonel 
 M'Adam's estate ? — I am. 
 
 22704. What is the rent yon pay? — £15, 4s. lOd. 
 —that is, £2 an acre. The valuation is £6, 15s. 
 
 22705. How long are you paying that? — Up to 
 forty years myself. My father died about thkty 
 years ago. I suppose we are five or six generations 
 
 22706. Have you always been paying £15 a year 
 for this under Mr. M'Adam ?— Yes. 
 
 22707. He has not raised it?— When I was living 
 under Captain Jackson he gave me 10s. an acre re- 
 
 duction, and it was sold at £2 an acre, and the fi^rst 
 rent I paid to Mr. M'Adam was £2. 
 
 22708. The rental put down at the sale was higher 
 than yOu were paying ? — Yes. 
 
 22709. When after the sale did you pay a higher 
 rent ? — rin about six months. 
 
 22710. When was the sale? — Eighteen or twenty 
 years agtf. 
 
 22711. Did you apply to get a reduction to what 
 you were paying before?^ — Yes ; I said I had a right 
 to have it at 30s., but they would not hear me. 
 
 22712. Is your land better than the rest ? — No. 
 
696 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oc(.'2b', 1880. 
 
 Siaiu'ioe 
 Sullivan. 
 
 William 
 Halpin. 
 
 something worse. I got 10 per cent on the half- 
 year before last, and nothing on the last. 
 
 22713. Where is this?— In the County Clare, about 
 2^ miles outside the borough stone. 
 
 22714. You could get a good price for everything 1 
 — The land is very bad. It was the remains of a bog. 
 
 22715. Is it on the new road to Clare? — Yes. It 
 
 was the remains of a bog a great deal of it, and it was 
 only commonage a good deal of it, and I reclaimed it, 
 and manured and improved it myself. 
 
 22716. The O'Conor Don. — You say it was pay- 
 ing this rent forty years ago? — Yes, but Captain 
 Jackson reduced it 10s. an acre. 
 
 22717. In the bad times'? — Yes. 
 
 22718. The Chairman.— Are you a farmer?— 
 Yes. 
 
 22719. Where?— At Newmarket-on-Pergus. 
 
 22720. How much land do you hold?— I hold five 
 different spots of land. 
 
 22721. How much altogether?— 500 statute acres, 
 or something more than that. 
 
 22722. In different farms ?— Yes, and under different 
 
 landlords. 
 
 22723. Is there any one in particular you wish to 
 speak about?— There is. I am on very happy terms 
 with all the landlords except one — Mr. Burton. I 
 took a farm from his predecessor at about £40 some 
 time ago, and since then seven agents have been placed 
 over the property, and each has increased the rent. 
 
 22724. Is this a grass farm ? — Yes. 
 
 22725. How long ago is that?— Since 1853. 
 
 22726. When was the last rise? — I took out a lease, 
 and I was compelled to pay £200 to be left in pos- 
 session. I said I would give up the place since my 
 time expired, and on every increase I was going to 
 give it up, but I did not, as I thought it would be a 
 sign of decay. 
 
 22727. Do you live on the farm? — I do not. 
 
 22728. Mr. Shaw. — What was the rent when you 
 came to the farm? — £40. Now it is £75. They have 
 put on £35. 
 
 22729. £35 in seven steps?— Yes. 
 
 22730. When was the last step?— In 1877. I have 
 got a lease now ; since these increases were put on I 
 have made no improvements on it. I took a lease and 
 paid £200 for it. 
 
 22731. That was only to gratify your pride? — Yes. 
 
 22732. How many years is the lease? — Thirty-one 
 years. About May last they changed the agent, and 
 on the 8th May the former agent wrote to me to pay 
 on or before the 12th May the rent due to Mr. Burton. 
 I did not pay it, but I sent an application for money 
 due to me for thirteen years, but when the new agent 
 was appointed I paid at once. 
 
 22733. Were the rents of the other tenants in- 
 creased every time your rent was raised? — Yes. A 
 poor man near me was valued at £32, and they wanted 
 to increase it to £40, and he told me. I said, " Make 
 an effort to pay a fine and get rid of this ; you will 
 have a new lease." He said, " How? " and I said, " I 
 will get it out of the bank for you." He was never 
 asked for an increase of rent since. 
 
 22734. The fine was not paid? — No. 
 
 22735. Are there many tenants? — There are a good 
 many. 
 
 Mr. William Halpin, examined. 
 22736. Have 
 
 all the rents ?- 
 
 they been raising 
 
 Yes. 
 
 22737. Baron Dowse. — Is this in Clare ?— Yes, it 
 is between Ennis and Quin. 
 
 22738. Inland?— Yes. 
 
 22739. Good land?— No, stony land. 
 
 22740. Do you live under this landlord? — No, I do 
 not. 
 
 22741. You have nothing to say against the other 
 kndlords ?— No. I took another piece of land from 
 another landlord about the same time, for which I 
 agreed to pay £89, and in two years after he thought 
 it was too dear, and he reduced it £20, and gave me a 
 lease. 
 
 22742. Who is that? — Mr. Studdert, There are 
 two cases of demesne lands : the owners ceased to be 
 occupiers, and they set the lands ; and No. 1, I will 
 say, the tenant did not live on it, and the place went to 
 ruin. It is nothing now but a wild common farm. 
 On another place adjoining it the tenant has got it in 
 very good order ; but in case of disturbance the man 
 who neglected the whole thing would come in under 
 the Act, his place not being a demesne, and would get 
 compensation, while the other man could not, becanse 
 he has kept the place a demesne. I am myself the 
 person who kept the place in order. 
 
 22743. Mr. Shaw. — Had you any other cases of 
 raising of rents ? — I had lots of cases. 
 
 22744. In your own neighbourhood? — Yes. 
 
 22745. Lately? — Yes. I don't want to speak of 
 them. 
 
 22746. You are in business? — I was in business, 
 but I have other sources of income. 
 
 22747. The O'Conor Don. — You have been pur- 
 chasing up holdings wherever you could get them?^- 
 No; wherever I could get a farm for the value I 
 would buy it. The place I have I have security for ; 
 and I challenge any man in Munster to have it in nicer 
 order. I built houses for my workmen on these farms 
 where I have security. 
 
 22748. Mr. Shaw. — And if you had not security 
 you would not be building? — No, of course not. I 
 have built seven or eight houses on the place I have 
 security for, but I would be very sorry to build on 
 such places as Mr. Burton has. 
 
 22749. Security is what you want ? — Yes. 
 
 22750. And fair rents? — Yes. But what did the 
 agent tell me ? I could afford to pay for bad land, 
 because I have other lands cheap. 
 
 22751. From other people? — Yes. 
 
 22752. Not from him?— No. 
 
 John Tuthill. 
 
 Mr. John Tuthill, Drummin, examined. 
 
 22753. The Chairman. — You are a tenant on 
 Captain O'Callaghan's estate? — Yes. 
 
 22754. Where? — At Drummin, 2^ miles from Lim- 
 erick. My land is a good deal over the valuation, and 
 it was raised for the last twenty-six years. 
 
 22755. When was it raised? — It was raised about 
 
 twenty-five years ago to £8, 8s., and when he gave a 
 lease he raised it 3«. to the £, and now it is £9, 13s. 3d. 
 22756. What was it at first?— At first it was £6, 
 and the valuation is £7. It was raised from £6 to 
 £8, 8s. on our improvements, and he gave leases for 
 twenty-one years, which were up last May. 
 
 .James Kane. 
 
 Mr. James Kane, examined. 
 
 22757. Mr. Shaw. — Yon are a tenant on Lord 
 Quinn's property ?— Yes. My rent is £9, and my 
 valuation £10. At one time it was only 29s. 6d. an 
 acre, and some land was reclaimed, and a man named 
 Holmes took it at £2, and I am paying £2 since. 
 
 22758. How long ago is that? — It is sixteen or 
 eighteen years ago. 
 
 22759. Is it too dear? — I would like to have it 
 cheaper if I could get it. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 G97 
 
 Mrs. Tdthill, examined. 
 
 22760. Mr. Shaw.-How much land have you?- my valuation is £4, 5s. I had it for £5. The last 
 
 t-f-*!^\ wi. . .J » . rise was in last May. 
 
 22.61. What rent do you pay?_£7, 2.. Gd., and [The Commissioners then adjourned.] 
 
 Oct. 26, 1880. 
 Mrs. Tuthill. 
 
 TWENTY-NINTH DAY— WEDNESDAY, 27th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners sat in Cruice's Hotel at 11 o'clock— Present :— The Earl of Bessboeough 
 (Chairman); Baron Dowse ; The O'Conor Don; W. Shaw, M.P. ; with Sir GeorCxE 
 Young, Bart., Secretary. 
 
 Mr. Maurice Herbert, Ballandane, near Kilmallock, examined. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880. 
 
 Maurice 
 Herbert. 
 
 22762. The Chairman. — How far do you live from 
 Limerick? — About 22 miles. 
 
 22763. Were you lately a tenant under Colonel 
 Watson ?— Yes. 
 
 22764. How did you get into possession of that 
 farm ? — J got it by my wife. 
 
 22765. What was her name? — Ellen Hayes, the 
 daughter of the lessee. 
 
 22766. Her father and her mother lived there ? — 
 No, her brother and mother ; and it was her mother 
 was the surviving lessee for a term of 21 years. 
 
 22767. When was it granted? — It expired in May 
 1879. 
 
 22768. Mary Hayes left it to your wife? — Yes. 
 22769. — What happened after the expiration of the 
 
 lease? — I paid the rent in October last. The lease 
 dropped in May 1879, and Mr. Dunscombe, the agent, 
 said I would be recognised as the tenant as long as I 
 paid the rent; but in some few days after that he 
 came and demanded possession, which I refused ; and 
 after that he served me with a Dublin ejectment. 
 After he served me my wife went to England, and 
 Colonel Watson promised her, as long as she and I 
 paid the rent, that we would be recognised as the 
 tenants of the land. We took no defence to the eject- 
 ment, depending on the agent and the landlord, until 
 judgment was marked ; and I discovered then that 
 judgment was marked, and I saw that I was deceived. 
 1 went to Cork to ask the agent for liberty to sell ; 
 but I found it was all in vain to ask for liberty, and 
 he told me that he would give me liberty to sell to 
 Mrs. M'Carthy. I had a doubt about it, and I said, 
 " Give me liberty to sell it publicly ; they are quiet 
 tenants, I believe, but, good as they are, I may get 
 better ; they will not give me the value." " I will 
 not," says he. "I will get tenants who will prove 
 themselves quite as good as they are," said I ; " and 
 they will give me whatever I like." " No," said he, 
 " but you must sell to them. I won't allow them to 
 give you an exorbitant price." " What loss are you 
 at by that? " 1 said. " It would be a great credit to 
 give it to me, after treating an unfortunate man like 
 me as you have." " It is no use ; I'll not allow it," 
 he said. 
 
 22770. You say he gave leave to sell, but limited 
 it to Mrs. M'Carthy, and made it almost useless to 
 have such permission ? — W hen I saw the way I was 
 treated, I gave in. 
 
 22771. Did you think there was an arrangement how 
 much Mrs. M'Carthy was to give? — I believe there 
 was an arrangement. This is the nicest and the finest 
 farm in the County Limerick, in the Golden Vale, and 
 in the middle of Mrs. M'Carthy's land. I believe she 
 and the agent had done the work between them. 
 
 22772. Mr, Shaw. — This is in the middle of her 
 
 land? Yes. She holds about 84 acres, and there 
 
 was about 46 acres in mine. 
 
 22773. The Chairman.— What did Mrs. M'Carthy 
 
 offer? Mrs. M'Carthy sent for me and asked me 
 
 what I would take, and I said £800 ; " under the con- 
 ditions I am bound to by Mr. Dunscombe, I suppose 
 
 I must ask too high." She offered £650. I went to 
 the bailiff then, named Foley, and he would not give 
 me anything for it. I came back that day and offered 
 her the land, and told her to go and take possession of 
 it; and she said she would, as soon as the son came 
 in. She went to Cork and settled all between them- 
 selves, and gave the money to Mr. Dunscombe. 
 
 22774. You think she paid the agent so much for 
 getting into possession ? — I understand so — I believe it. 
 
 22775. And gave you nothing? — Without giving 
 me anything. 
 
 22776. Mr. Shaw.— Did you get £650?— No. 
 That bargain was broken off then ; and I was waiving 
 patiently, thinking she was coming back to take up 
 possession and give me the £650 ; and in a day or 
 two after I got a notice saying that the Sheriff would 
 bo with me in two or three days. The Sheriff came 
 and threw myself and my family on the road. 
 
 22777. You were living on the farm ? — Yes ; and he 
 threw us out on the road. I expected £650 during 
 the time, and in a few da,ys after turning us out I went 
 to the agent in Cork. " Oh, Herbert, what do you 
 want? L thought I would never again see you." 
 " Unfortunately I have to come to see you again," I 
 said. ' " What brought you ? " said he. I said, " I 
 came in to know What were you going to do — how 
 you were going to treat me." " I am going to make 
 you a present of £100 — I will make you a present of 
 that." " I want money badly. I am a poor man, 
 indeed ; but badly off as I am, you can keep that 
 along with the rest," said I. I came home, and some 
 short time afterwards necessity compelled me to look 
 for it. 
 
 22778. Did you write to the landlord? — I wrote to 
 the landlord, and he said he would not interfere any 
 more. 
 
 22779. The Chairman. — Was this the letter in 
 January 1880 ? — Yes. [Letter produced.] 
 
 22780. He says you had better see Mr. Dunscombe 
 again, and he hopes he will give you the best terms he 
 can, consistent with his duty to the estate? — Yes. 
 
 22781. Was it after that he offered you the £100 ? 
 — No, a long time before it, I was ejected on the 
 5 th February. 
 
 22782. Mr. Shaw. — What rent were you paying? 
 — I think about £2, 13s. 9d. per acre. 
 
 22783. Irish acre?— Yes. 
 
 22784. The Chairman. — This was very prime land ? 
 — Yes, in the Golden Vale. It is one of the nicest 
 farms in the county. 
 
 22785. What do- you think it would have gone for 
 if you had been allowed to sell it? — I think I would 
 not have sold it for £2000. 
 
 22786. Mr. Shaw. — You did not want to give it 
 up at all?— No. 
 
 22787. What rent is he charging Mrs. M'Carthy ? 
 — I don't know ; it is a secret between themselves. 
 
 22788. If the landlord promised to leave you in it, 
 
 why don't you go and bring the case before him ? 
 
 This is the letter I received from him, after my wife 
 being with him. [Letter produced.] 
 
 4 U 
 
698 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880. 
 
 llauriee 
 Herbert. 
 
 22789. The Chairman. — He says he has no desire 
 to interfere with your getting any legitimate profit 
 from the sale of the farm? — Any legitimate profit 
 from the sale of the farm. 
 
 22790. That is what he says? — Yes; but there is 
 not another opportunity to call to Mr. Dunscombe, 
 and I suppose he was aware Mr. Dunscombe was able 
 to take care of himself and of both of them. 
 
 22791. Is that Griffith's valuation he means when he 
 says, " beyond what you might obtain from GriflBths " ? 
 — ^No. Griffiths was looking after it; and when he 
 saw the place, was going to interfere, and wanted to 
 get it; and said the place was nice and good, and he 
 would not like to let it out of the family. 
 
 22792. Was there any quarrel between you and the 
 Griffiths? — Yes, he wanted to interfere and drop into it. 
 
 22793. But the landlord says, " I cannot take any 
 part in the quarrel between you and him"? — There 
 was no quarrel. 
 
 22794. Mr. Shaw. — Tou did not want any one to 
 get it but yourself? — No. Griffiths wanted to get in, 
 in this way, when they saw I was treated as I was ; 
 but I did not want Griffiths or any one else. 
 
 22795. The Chairman.— He says, " I am sure Mr. 
 Dunscombe will do his best to facilitate any arrange- 
 ment you may propose, consistent with^his duty to the 
 estate"?— Yes. 
 
 22796. — Mr. Shaw. — Did you ever write to Colonel 
 Watson saying you had been offered £650 ? — Yes, my 
 wife wrote. 
 
 22797. And that you only got £100 from Mr. 
 Dunscombe? — After the £100 I did not write again 
 
 I vvas tired of it. He told me in another letter not 
 
 to wi"ite again or any more. 
 
 22798. Has he much property there? — He has. 
 He said he was bothered receiving letters, and he left 
 it to Mr. Dunscombe. He has about 300 acres, and 
 five or six other tenants. 
 
 22799. Who is the agent now? — Mr. Duns- 
 combe. 
 
 22800. I thought he bad left the country? — I heard 
 so. I heard that he is living in Dublin now. This 
 Mrs. M'Carthy worked her point beforehand when the 
 land was out of lease. 
 
 22801. Has she a large farm ? — 84 acres, and this 
 stuck into it. 
 
 Rev. Patrick 
 Meehan. 
 
 Rev. Patrick Meehan, Parish Priest of St. Patrick's, Moherlin, examined. 
 
 22802. The Chairman. — You have some point you 
 wish to bring before us? — Yes, the sad condition of 
 people in my parish, who pay enormous rents — almost 
 double the valuation — in some places once and a half 
 more than the valuation — and who during years past 
 have been altogether unable to pay it; and I have a 
 
 list of them. This (producing list) is a list of the 
 acreage, rental, and valuation of the property of the 
 Rev. Mr. Moore. He is dead, and Mr. Thomas 
 Gabbett, his brother-in-law, is the agent. It is about 
 half a mile from this; it is on the Dublin Road. 
 The following is the list : — 
 
 Patrick Lawlor, . 
 Thomas Clanchy, . 
 Mrs. Shauny, 
 John Cross, . 
 James M'Mahon, . 
 Thomas M'Mahon, 
 Patrick Mullally, . 
 Denis Woods, 
 Roger M'Namara, 
 Patrick Kirby, 
 James Clanchy, . 
 Anthony Ryan, . 
 Patrick Gallaher, . 
 Patrick Lawlor, . 
 James Hogan, 
 Patrick Ryan, 
 Mrs. Ounneen, 
 James M'Mahon, . 
 Patrick Quilligan, 
 John Bourke, 
 Michael Keehan, . 
 Mrs. Toughy, 
 Mrs. Ryan, . 
 WiUiam Power, . 
 Patrick M'Namara, 
 Michael M'Mahon, 
 John Moone, ■ 
 John Moone, . 
 Mrs. Divney, 
 Patrick Bourke, . 
 James Hannan, 
 John Ounneen, 
 John Ryan, . 
 Daniel Murphy, . 
 Patrick Cunneen, . 
 Michael Cross, 
 James Quilligan, . 
 Mrs. Purcell, 
 Michael Shannessy, 
 Mrs. Quilligan, 
 
 22803. Can you tell us when these rents were 
 raised to this point? — Some of the rents have been 
 raised on that property about 30s. an acre very lately 
 — I think four or five or six years ago. 
 
 Land. 
 
 A. E. P. 
 
 16 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 3 25 
 13 
 2 20 
 2 20 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 1 26 
 10 
 2 
 
 3 5 
 
 1 20 
 13 
 
 1 
 110 
 2 
 12 
 
 2 2 
 
 1 20 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 Eent. 
 
 £ «. d. 
 
 93 1 7 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 13 
 10 14 
 
 6 
 24 
 13 12 
 
 9 
 13 
 
 5 8 
 
 7 8 10 
 
 5 18 7 
 12 12 2 
 12 12 2 
 24 12 2 
 
 4 6 
 
 24 2 1 
 
 7 15 
 3 
 
 8 14 9 
 16 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 15 5 
 8 
 8 10 
 6 
 
 16 
 21 5 
 
 3 18 2 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 
 6 
 
 5 12 2 
 
 5 
 
 46 18 10 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 61 
 
 10 15 
 
 5 5 
 
 3 5 
 9 
 
 7 15 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 8 15 
 
 4 5 
 
 5 10 
 4 5 
 
 4 10 
 
 5 15 
 7 
 7 
 
 11 15 
 3 15 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 2 15 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 7 5 
 
 8 5 
 
 2 5 
 
 5 15 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 6 
 
 3 15 
 3 
 2 10 
 
 19 
 
 4 
 2 
 4 
 5 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 
 22804. Mr. Shaw.— 30s. additional ?— Yes, exactly. 
 
 22805. The Chaikman. — Before that, had they 
 been long at the same rent? — I should say so. 
 
 22806. T see, as a general run, they are very 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 699 
 
 small holdings?— Yes; and they could never earn a 
 livelihood by the land. Generally speaking, they 
 have a horse and cart, and they carry coal and grain 
 to the town. They could never live by the bit of land 
 it is so rack-rented. ' 
 
 22807. Mr. Shaw.— Are they market gardens ?— 
 Some of them. 
 
 22808. The Chairman.— I see that Denis Woods' 
 rent is £27 for three acres? — Yes. 
 
 22809. Mr. Shaw.— He lives on it?~Ye8. 
 
 22810. Did he build the house himself? No; I 
 
 suppose his father did before him. 
 
 22811. The landlord did not build it? — Not a 
 penny. 
 
 22812. What sort of land is this?— He uses it for 
 potatoes and vegetables, and for the last three years they 
 made nothing of it. Four years ago there was a very 
 hot season, and nothing could grow, and the potatoes 
 were like marbles; and the last years were so wet 
 that everything melted in the ground. 
 
 22813. Were they tolerably comfortable at that 
 time? — Ten or fifteen years ago they were comfort- 
 able, but latterly they are very poor. There is 
 another feature connected with that property, the day 
 
 the rent falls due they are served with processes if it 
 IS not paid. 
 
 22814. No back half-year ?— No ; the very day it 
 talis due they are served with a process. 
 
 22815. Are these treated as town parks?— Some of 
 them. There is a case belonging to Pat. Lawlor, who 
 asked as a particular favour to be examined. He 
 holds sixteen acres. There is some part of it meadow 
 land down by the canal. He was not able to pay the 
 rent, and he gave up the meadow land to the landlord, 
 and the landlord was only able to make £2 an acre 
 out of it, and he is paying £8. 
 
 22816. Many of these seem to be only like cottage 
 gardens?— Yes ; they simply take it with the house. 
 
 22817. It is in the neighbourhood of the town? — 
 Yes. They live on the little patch of land they have. 
 They have a horse and cart, and engage in the town 
 in carrying coals, etc., and by that means they make 
 out the rent. This is another list of tenants belong- 
 ing to Mr. Mahon, and the agent is Mr. James 
 Nash. He has not allowed any abatement on any 
 occasion to his tenants on the lands of Park, in the 
 parish of St. Patrick, and they are reduced to the 
 lowest on account of unjust rents. 
 
 
 Amount of Land. ' 
 
 Rent. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 
 A. E. P. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Mrs. QuiHigan, 
 
 2 2 37 
 
 21 17 
 
 15 15 
 
 William Quilligan, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 13 
 
 8 13 3 
 
 6 10 
 
 John Cunneen, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 8 37 
 
 14 3 
 
 11 
 
 Patrick Quilligan, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 26 
 
 17 6 6 
 
 12 15 
 
 Michael M'Namara, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 1 20 
 
 11 ' 
 
 6 10 
 
 Bgt. Clanchy, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 3 14 
 
 12 14 
 
 9 
 
 Mrs. M'Namara, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 7 
 
 16 7 
 
 12 10 
 
 Stephen Clanchy, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 late evicted. 
 
 
 
 Thomas QuiEigan, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 12 
 
 8. 13 
 
 4 10 
 
 Mrs. M'Mahon, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 2 10 
 
 James M'Namara, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 late evicted. 
 
 
 
 James Quilligan, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 Thomas Hogan, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 15 
 
 8 15 
 
 7 
 
 Patrick Kirby, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 7 
 
 Terance M'Namara, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 29 
 
 5 9 
 
 3 
 
 Michael Malone, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 1 23 
 
 11 8 
 
 7 
 
 Oct. '-'7, 1«80. 
 
 Rev. Patrick 
 Meehan. 
 
 22818. Is the property near the town here? — 
 Yes, about half-a-mile from the town, the same 
 way. 
 
 22819. Did you know James M'Namara, who was 
 
 evicted? — Yes; he has been in the workhouse for the 
 last winter. 
 
 22820. Was that for non-payment ?— Yes. This 
 is a list of Mr. Edward Harold's tenants. 
 
 
 Land. 
 
 Eent. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 
 A. H. P. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 Patrick Lawlor, 
 
 1 1 
 
 9 10 
 
 3 
 
 James Shauny, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 15 15 
 
 8 
 
 Michael Minihan, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 20 
 
 8 
 
 James Hannan, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 2 
 
 20 
 
 8 
 
 Bgt. Clanchy, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 Stephen Clanchy, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 110 
 
 11 10 
 
 5 10 
 
 Thomas Quilligan, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 10 8 
 
 8 8 
 
 5 10 
 
 Thomas M'Namara, . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 1 20 
 
 11 7 9 
 
 8 
 
 John M'Namara, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 8 8 
 
 5 10 
 
 John M'Namara, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 13 13 
 
 7 10 
 
 John M'Namara, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 2 
 
 12 12 
 
 10 5 
 
 Thomas Daniker, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 1 10 
 
 10 12 
 
 6 10 
 
 I wish also to give in evidence the following lists of 
 tenants' rents on other properties, viz. : — 
 
 Names of some Tenants on Mr. Frederick Henry's Pro- 
 perty, whose Rent far exceeds Griffith's Valuation :— 
 
 James Maher, Cragg Griffith's Valuation £11 5 
 
 Rent 17 
 
 Jas. Fitzgerald, Cragg 
 John Ryan (Bawn), Cragg 
 Mrs. Rourke, Cragg 
 
 John Ryan, Cragg 
 
 Martin Sullivan, Cragg 
 
 Patt Ryan, Cragg 
 
 Valuation £7 
 Rent 13 
 
 Valuation £28 16 
 Rent 63 
 
 Valuation £16 10 
 Rent 28 4 4 
 
 Valuation 
 
 Rent 
 
 £12- 
 17 
 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 £17 
 36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 £31 
 48 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 Names of Tenants on Mr. Hamilton's Property : 
 Mrs. Elliot, Cully 
 
 Valuation £33 10 
 Rent 50 
 
 Thomas Ryan, Cully 
 
 Valuation £4 15 
 Rent 7 18 
 
 4U2 
 
700 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oci. 27, 1880. Dan. Boland, Cully 
 
 William O'Brien, CuUy 
 Michael Egan, Cully 
 
 Rev. Patrick 
 Meehan. 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent . 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 £22 10 
 
 39 16 
 
 £24 
 
 30 
 
 £26 10 
 
 40 
 
 Tenants living on Mr. Balton's Property :— 
 William Kennedy (Keeper) 
 
 John Meehan do. 
 
 Denis Kennedy do. 
 
 John Gleeson 
 William Ryan, Rosagiale 
 Mrs. Waltho do. 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 Valuation 
 Rent 
 
 £37 5 
 90 
 
 £12 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 
 
 £22 
 
 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 
 
 
 
 £1 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 £27 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 40 
 
 
 
 
 
 £41 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dan. Flannary 
 Dan. Boland 
 
 Valuation £24 5 
 Rent 30 
 
 Valuation £50 5 
 Rent 70 
 
 Mr. Harold has given an abatement of rents. 
 
 22821. The rents on his property are very high 
 also. I suppose that is so all round the town? — 
 Yes. 
 
 22822. Are they town parks? — I don't think pre- 
 cisely they are. 
 
 22823. Baron Dowse. — They all live in these 
 holdings? — Yes. There is one peculiar feature. They 
 simply have a house there, and they cannot afford to 
 build out-offices ; and it is in their own dwelling-house 
 that they have the cow or whatever they have. 
 
 22824. Mr. Shaw. — Have they a lease ? — No lease 
 whatever. They are not able to build, and the land- 
 lord gives no encouragement whatever. 
 
 22825. Baron Dowse. — Are these in -the nature of 
 accommodation lands, or do the people live on them 
 themselves ? — Yes, they live on the lands. They all 
 have a house and live on the land, and they are not 
 able to build any out-offices. They could never sup- 
 port themselves by the land. 
 
 Patrick 
 
 Lawlov. 
 
 Mr. Patrick Lawloe, examined. 
 
 22826. The Chairman.— You hold 16 acres ?— Yes. 
 
 22827. Your rent is £93 ?— Yes. 
 
 22828. Have you found it is from other means 
 besides farming you make the rent ? — Yes. 
 
 22829. You work and keep horses? — Yes; I keep 
 a horse, and do horses' work, and work myself. The 
 farm itself is not able to make its expenses or anything 
 near it. Last August I could not make any hand of 
 the meadow, and the landlord was still crushing me 
 for the rent. I told him I could not make any rent 
 of it, and in order to give him an opportunity of seeing 
 what it was, I handed him over 5 acres on the day of 
 his own sale. The auctioneer and himself came on 
 the land, and they were paid £1 an acre for some of it. 
 He went to the next village, and got £4 for it, and 
 sold it for that, still holding me responsible for the 
 rest of it — about £6, 7s. 6d., including rates and taxes. 
 It is impossible to make it out of it after being bid £1 
 an acre for it. 
 
 22830. Mr. Shaw. — It is very prime land? — It is 
 sometimes covered nine months in the year with 
 water. 
 
 22831. The Chaibman. — It gives a heavy crop of 
 hay, I suppose ? — Some of it did not bear a ton and 
 a half to the acre this year. That was the outside 
 of it. 
 
 22832. You thought so ill of it, you have given up 
 that part to have it off your hands ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 22833. Did he not have it up altogether ? — Not until 
 the rent is cleared up, and where to find it I don't 
 know. 
 
 22834. That is £5, 6s. in addition ?— Yes. 
 
 22835. You wish to get rid of the lot altogether ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 22836. Of the meadow, not of the whole place? — 
 Yes, of the meadow only. 
 
 22837. Does the landlord live beside you? — He 
 lives in Dublin, and is agent in Limerick. He has 
 the other meadow in his own hands, and the day he 
 was auctioning that I gave up this meadow. 
 
 22838. The Chairman. — How long have you been 
 paying rent? — This is my fourth year in the same 
 farm, and my father-in-law thirteen or fourteen years 
 before me. 
 
 22839. Was the rent the same? — It was ever since 
 I went in. My father-in-law went in there, and only 
 lasted thirteen years with between £700 and £800 
 capital, and he died a pauper, not able to be buried in 
 the place. 
 
 22840. Mr. Shaw.— Was the rent raised at all 
 
 during the thirteen years ? — No, it was always that 
 rent. 
 
 22841. The valuation is £61?— Yes. 
 
 22842. There is a good house upon it ? — It is a 
 man from the north poor in family would want to go 
 and live in it, and that is the worse for me, for I 
 could not afford to put a ton of coals in it to warm it. 
 I am four years in it, and I have not got my coat 
 changed since the day of the death of the man before 
 me. There was not the price of a coffin to bury him. 
 I did not go to bed sooner than one o'clock any night 
 for the last fortnight. 
 
 22843. Have you got a horse? — Yes; and I took 
 a contract job here, and try to work by it. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Meehan. — The taxes are 9s. within the 
 borough, and this place is subject to all the taxes. We 
 are subject to the borough rate and the two assizes. 
 
 Patrick Lawlor. — The rent and taxes altogether 
 come to about £118 a year; and from my own labour 
 on it I have not a shilling a week, and my family are 
 neither fed nor clothed on it. 
 
 22844. Baron Dowse. — What do you grow upon 
 it ? — Every sort of vegetable. 
 
 22845. And labour as well as you can, you can't 
 make anything like the rent out of it? — No. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Meehan. — He is an industrious man and 
 civil, and an example to the entire parish. I believe 
 he cannot afford to get a coat to his back. He has 
 the same coat to his back for the last four years. 
 
 Patrick Lawloe. — I got 40 stones of flounders, 
 and I bought at Is. 4c?. without money, and I sold the 
 produce of them for lis. after all my work. 
 
 22846. Mr. Shaw.— Did the crop fail?— Yes, they 
 failed last year ; and I sold two acres of oats, and the 
 whole amount was £14, and would scarcely pay its 
 labour from the day it was sowed until it was cut. 
 
 22847. Baron Dowse.— Who built the house?— I 
 think it was the landlord. 
 
 22848. Has he ever repaired it in your time? — Not 
 a shilling. 
 
 22849. Is it a slated house?— Yes. 
 
 22850. Two storeys?— No, sir. 
 
 22851. How many rooms? — One, and I pat in a 
 partition myself. 
 
 22852. You have a kitchen and one room ? — Yes. 
 The day the rent falls due, a man goes to him, and 
 says, " I have such a thing to sell on such a day." You 
 go away then, and you don't know the day a process 
 is out to you. You go in and make up £9 or £10 if 
 you are able ; and you pay that and the cost of the 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 701 
 
 process. Some processes may go to 13s. or 14s. I 
 was processed myself once during the summer, and the 
 cost was £1, 18s. There were others processed a 
 second time for the same rent; when they made a 
 settlement, they were processed again a second time. 
 
 22853. Mr. Shaw. — You have paid the rent very 
 well all through? — I have paid since last April £75, 
 and I am £18 still in debt. I don't expect to be able 
 to pay that, although he expects I will be able to pay 
 every day. 
 
 22854. You have nothing to sell now ? — No ; would 
 I expect to support the family for the winter ? The 
 women will go to the town, and not make sixpence 
 selling vegetables. That was the prospect of the 
 family during the winter, and they are supporting 
 their families out of that, and these things are all 
 going against them now. I saw another man named 
 Thomas Clancy. He had two acres, and he had an 
 acre of a field that he could not make anything of. 
 
 He asked the landlord to take it from him, and he 
 took it, and his own driver certified it was not worth 
 a pound an acre. He raised the rent on the acre he 
 left him 30s. 
 
 22855. He had two acres, and he gave up one ? — 
 Yes ; and he is holding 30s. of a rise over his head for 
 the acre and the house he left him. 
 
 22856. Have you a lease? — No. 
 
 22857. Yon are tenant from year to year? — 
 
 22858. Has this Rev. Richard Moore a parish ? — 
 He is dead. 
 
 22859. Was he a fellow of Trinity College?— No, 
 sir; he was in Cahirciveen, Kerry, and he left it, and 
 died in Limerick, and his son is in Dublin — Rush 
 Cottage, Dublin. 
 
 22860. Mr. Spiaav. — Has he much property there ? 
 — About 100 acres. It is worth £800 a year as near 
 as I can go. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880. 
 
 Patrick 
 Lawlor. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Colleean, examined. 
 
 Thomas 
 CoUeran. 
 
 22861. The Chalrman. — You are a tenant on the 
 property of Mr. Robert Henry of Tuam ? — Yes. 
 
 22862. What do you complain of? — I am paying 
 too much rent, and I can get no abatement. 
 
 22863. How many acres? — 7^ acres, at £39, 
 8s. — a lump rent ; and my valuation is only £21, 
 10s. 
 
 22864. How long have you been paying £39, 8s. ? 
 • — About twenty years. 1 got an addition about 
 fourteen years ago, and my rent was put into one 
 receipt. 
 
 22865. Did you ever represent to your landlord 
 that the rent was too high? — I did. 
 
 22866. How often ? — Only once, last May, when I 
 was paying a half-year's rent. I said to him that the 
 year before was bad, and that I did not make the rent 
 clear of it. He said he would allow me nothing. 
 " Give me up my land," says he, " and you need not 
 keep it any longer." " And, my good gracious, if I 
 give up that, where would I go ?" Still it was no use. 
 I was hard at work during the winter as any man in 
 the country. If a man is tilling, he is always striving 
 to keep the labour going on ; and me and my family 
 is as hard at work as that man who is tilling in the 
 country. Any man living on the estate I am living 
 on would not be able to pay Mr. Henry his rent if he 
 held 16 or 17 acres; but a man holding on or about 
 8 or 9 acres, and having the work of himself and his 
 
 family, pays for no labour; and when he goes out in 
 the morning, he knows, " I'll knock a little or nothing 
 out of it by my own labour, and I am not going to ask 
 for anybody else." I am content to do that striving 
 to quit all cost and have Mr. Henry's rent. 
 
 22867. How far is it from Limerick ? — About a 
 mile. He calls for the rent on or about two days 
 after the November days, and the same way in May. 
 The bailiff is out for the rent before it is due at all — 
 perhaps it is days before; and we would be noticed 
 that the master will be here on such and such a day, 
 at Mr. Cruice's hotel. 
 
 22868. Mr. Shaw. — Are there many tenants there > 
 — There are, I believe, in or about fourteen tenants 
 on the estate. He took some of it himself and ran it 
 under grass. 
 
 22869. Is it all as high as this? — Every bit as high, 
 and higher. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Meehan. — A good deal of the land has 
 cattle on it ; and it is in contemplation, I fear, to turn 
 out three or four more tenants, and get them houses 
 elsewhere. Three years ago he turned out two very 
 good tenants, and gave them houses in some other part 
 of the place, so as to have one long farm without a 
 house. 
 
 22870. Mr. Shaw. — Is it give them houses without 
 land ? — No, give them land with the house, on another 
 part. 
 
 Mr. John Moloney, examined. 
 
 John Maloney 
 
 22871. The Chairman. — Where do you live? — I 
 live at Knocklong, in the Golden Vale. I am a 
 tenant-farmer under Lady Cooper. Mr. Saunders is 
 her agent, near Charleville. I hold 263 Irish planta- 
 tion acres, and farm another farm in this county. 
 The rent is X483. 
 
 22872. Is it connected with this farm you wish to 
 make any observation? — I have to show you that a 
 large tenant will not get land as cheap as a small 
 tenant will. In March 1879, the lease fell out, and 
 I wanted the rent to be fixed by arbitration. The 
 rent is £3 an acre ; another part of the property is 
 50s. ; and no part of the property is 60s. except mine, 
 and I asked to have it fixed by arbitration. 
 
 22873. How much was the rent under the lease ? — 
 It was within £15 of that; but my father had some- 
 thing in the lease so that there was a charge added to 
 the amount; and when his lease fell out, and as it 
 went under a new agent with this rent on it, he kept 
 
 me up to it. • , o 
 
 22874. Mr. Shaw.— Was the rent not raised?— 
 No ; the middleman was not a person who had any 
 
 interest in the tenants. He had the land himself foi 
 £1 an acre. 
 
 22875. They kept you at the rent of the middle- 
 man ? — Yes, and the agent knew all about it. 
 
 22876. The other tenants had the land lower? — 
 Yes ; no other tenant pays more than 50s. but me. 
 
 22877. The Chairman. — You would have been 
 satisfied by having the rent fixed by arbitration ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 22878. Mr. Shaw. — Is your land better than the 
 others? — Others are just as well off. The richer the 
 farmer is, and the richer his land, he is better able to 
 farm it. 
 
 22879. The Chairman. — Is there anything about 
 the other farm you wish to mention ? — No, it was held 
 by lease ; but with regard to other cases in the parish, 
 there is in my parish a gentleman-farmer, as respect- 
 able a tenant-farmer as any in Ireland, and as well 
 known, and his valuation is only £512, 5s., and his 
 present rent is £840. 
 
 22880. Mr. Shaw.— Was that raised at all?— It 
 was raised. 
 
702 
 
 IRISH LAND^ ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880. 
 John Maloney 
 
 22881. When? — It was raised since the passing of 
 the Land Act and his father held it ; and within the 
 last fifteen or sixteen years it has gone up more than 
 half what it is now — about from half £800 to what it 
 is at present. 
 
 22882. The O'Conor Don.— Does he live on the 
 farm? — He does. 
 
 22883. Mr. Shaw. — It is a grass farm, I suppose ? 
 — Yes ; he feeds some of the best cattle on it in the 
 country. 
 
 22884. Is there a great demand for this sort of 
 farm ? — No. I called on the man, and he will likely 
 come to give evidence. When his father died and the 
 last rent was made, he remonstrated with the agent, 
 and was told that the farm would be divided and some 
 of it given to other tenants, and that he had nothing 
 to do but comply. The conditions in his lease are of 
 the hardest description. He is bound to break no 
 more than 10 acres of the 300, to sell not even the 
 potatoes, all rights under the Land Act are debarred, 
 and he is not entitled to anything for permanent 
 buildings or disturbance. 
 
 22885. Baron Dowse. — When was the lease made? 
 — It is an old lea:5e, and was made since the Land Act ; 
 and as a farmer's place it is fit for the occupation of 
 the first gentleman in the land. I could not form an 
 idea how much money has been expended on the 
 building there. 
 
 22886. All by themselves?— Yes. 
 
 22887. Mr. Shaw. — They have put up buildings 
 and made other improvements? — Yes; he got £100 
 for the last few houses he built there. 
 
 22888. How much was it advanced when his father 
 died? — I could not say. He showed me his receipts. 
 
 22889. The lease is for 31 years, I suppose? — Yes, 
 I think 21 or 31 years; and these are the conditions 
 of every lease on the same property. 
 
 22890. The Chairman. — Is the valuation of the 
 buildings included in the £512 ? — I could not say. 
 
 22891. Have the rents been raised in the same way 
 in other cases ? — Yes. I don't know any property 
 on which there is greater hardship. I know a very 
 small and industrious farmer near me well, and his 
 circumstances. His valuation is £40, 10s., and his 
 present rent is £74. 
 
 22892. Mr. Shaw. — You are aware that the valua- 
 tion of this good land is no guide for rent on that prime 
 fattening land ? — If you take into consideration that 
 this man was formerly tenant to a middleman, who 
 had no real interest in the land, and that he had never 
 charged him more than 55s., and now that he is 
 charged £3 by the head landlord ; and I don't know 
 how that man lives. I know it is something tre- 
 mendous trying to make that rent. He is day ■ 
 and night travelling about trying to make the rent. 
 Some men have to pay the rent of the farm without 
 getting any produce off it at all. It is the property on 
 which Mr. Townsend is agent. There is a tenant 
 whose rent was raised £25 within the last three years. 
 The rent is at present £250, and the former rent was 
 £225. And the rules of that property, and the way 
 the agent carries them out, is very hard. When a 
 man is going to be married, he goes to him to get 
 permission. 
 
 22893. Baron Dowse. — Permission for what? — 
 To get married. 
 
 22894. Has a man to go and get permission to 
 get married? — Yes, it is usual; and when a man 
 embarks his property, his wife is liable to be evicted. 
 Before he declares a new tenant, he will have to sub- 
 mit to a new rent. Though a man has a family, and 
 has done for them one by one, and the last was a son, 
 when the son is married there is a change of tenancy, 
 and then the rent is increased again. 
 
 22895. The Chairman. — Is the permission to get 
 married, permission that the amount the wife brings 
 in shall be charged on the property ? — No ; but on the 
 change of tenancy. When the son is admitted a rise 
 is always put on, and they have to submit to it; and 
 when the father dies, and the son gets a new tenancy, 
 there is a rise in the rent. 
 
 21896. Always a rise ?— Yes. 
 
 22897. Mr. Shaw. — On the marriage of the son, 
 on his being declared tenant upon the death of the 
 father, or the farm being sold, there is a rise ? — Yes ; 
 it was on a change of tenancy that this £25 rise was 
 put. It was when the father died in 1874 the last 
 rise was put on. 
 
 22898. The Chairman. ^-Had there been a rise on 
 the father during his lifetime before that time? — The 
 father held this on lease, and when his lease expired, 
 the father had it for, about half the present rent, and 
 it was raised then considerably on the father when the 
 lease fell in ; and when the father died, again, he put 
 another rise on the son. 
 
 22899. Mr. Shaw.— That is the rule of the estate? 
 — Yes ; I know the estate myself, and I know most of 
 the tenants, and were I to travel over that estate, and 
 go to the trouble of it, I might have found several 
 cases. 
 
 22900. Have you any other case ? — I have. I 
 know a tenant on another property, living near Kil- 
 finane; his valuation is £36, 10s., and the rent £80, 
 14s. lOd. He told me he was going to give up the 
 land. The man has gone out of the land, and taken 
 to grazing the dairy cows of another farmer. 
 
 22901. Was the rent raised lately? — I could not 
 tell. 
 
 22902. The O'Conor Don.— Who is the landlord? 
 — Mr. Darcy. 
 
 22903.— What Mr. Darcy?— I don't know what 
 part of the county he lives in, but the farm is near 
 Kilfinane. He was in the navy once as a doctor. 
 
 22904. Who is the agent? — I think he is his own 
 agent. I have a most extraordinary case in this 
 county at present, where the tenant bought the interest 
 of a house and a few acres of land for the purpose of 
 building, and opening a grocer's establishment at New 
 Palles. 
 
 22905. The Chairman.— Was it in a town ?— No, 
 a country village. 
 
 22906. A house and land? He bought a house 
 and land for the purpose of building? — There was an 
 old lease of the place; he compromised with his land- 
 lord, and bought an extension of his term for thirty- 
 five years after the expiration of the old lease that was 
 in existence, but when the old lease expired the land- 
 lord served the tenants with a notice to quit. He 
 served this man with a notice to quit also, and that he 
 was not entitled to grant him a lease, as he was tenant 
 for life himself. 
 
 22907. Mr. Shaw.— He broke his own lease?— He 
 is endeavouring to do it. He has served a notice to quit 
 at present. It has not been tried yet. William Slattery 
 
 is the tenant, and L is the landlord. With 
 
 regard to the condition of some of these farmers, I 
 know some of them to be paying their rent, and I have 
 been raising money in banks for them, trying to keep 
 them in an independent position in the eyes of their 
 landlord and agent. 
 
 22908. That is owing to the bad times ? — Certainly. 
 
 22909. Before that were they able to get on? — The 
 excessive rents and the last four or five bad years 
 ruined them, 
 
 22910. The small tenants are in a very poor way? 
 — Very poor. 
 
 22911.— And the large ones are all right? — I know 
 many of them to get broken up who were very inde- 
 pendent men, and to have gone away through excessive 
 rents. 
 
 22912. The land is very fine?— Yes; but when it 
 has a very excessive rent on it, what use is it? 
 I 22913. The Chairman.— Don't you think that the 
 rent which might be reasonable in former years became 
 excessive in the last few years from the failure of the 
 crops ? — I know it is excessive in many cases, no matter 
 what way the crops went. 
 
 22914. The O'Conor Don.— If any of these large 
 farmers were evicted, would it be difBcult to get 
 tenants at the existing rents ? — I don't think it is every 
 one has capital to stock them. 
 
 22915. Would the landlord find a difficulty in 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 703 
 
 getting a tenant at the present rent?— I don't know 
 about that. 
 
 22916. You cannot say he would not? — I think the 
 farming classes would not give it. The only case I 
 know of a big grass farm being set since the depres- 
 sion was where a farm was taken by a miller, and not 
 by a farmer at all, and he took it for experiment, to 
 try farming. 
 
 22917. Mr. Shaw. — It was there for some time^ — 
 Yes. 
 
 22918. And no one took it? — No one took it till 
 he took it. 
 
 22919. The O'Conor Don.— How long was it 
 vacant? — About six months. 
 
 22920. When was that? — It was last winter. It 
 was held by the late Captain Gubbins, the racing 
 man. 
 
 22921. Has the miller taken it at the old rent? — 
 Yes. 
 
 22922. Baron Dowse. — Has he a mill in the neigh- 
 bourhood? — Yes, sir. He has great facilities for it 
 which a large farmer would not. 
 
 22923. Mr. Shaw. — There is not much tillage in 
 your district? — Not much. 
 
 22924. All grass. 
 
 22925. Is it dairy or fattening ? — Mixed farms. 
 
 22926. This should be a pretty good year? — It is a 
 fair year. 
 
 22927. Are there any evictions in your district, 
 except for non-payment of rent ? — There have not been 
 any within my district lately. 
 
 22928. Are there leases to any extent? — There 
 have been a good many leases since the Land Act 
 came in. 
 
 22929. The landlords are pressing them on the 
 
 tenants? — Yes. There are leases now where there 
 was never talk of them before. 
 
 22930. And they all contain clauses against the 
 Land Act ? — Yes ; clauses against compensation, about 
 county cess and allowance for buildings. But I must 
 certainly say that in my case, if I had to deal with an 
 evicting landlord, the Land Act, so far as compensa- 
 tion is concerned, gives great protection. There are 
 very extensive buildings on the farm. 
 
 22931. Put up by yourself and your father?— Yes. 
 
 22932. Are the tenants allowed to sell their interest 
 on changing? — They must have the consent of the agent. 
 
 22933. And it is to tenants on the property ? — Yes. 
 
 22934. It is not a common practice? — No. 
 
 22935. There is no such thing as selling by tender 
 or public sale? — Oh no. 
 
 22936. You think that would be an advantage? — I 
 certainly think it would be. 
 
 22937. You think it would be an advantage to have 
 secui'ity ? — I am certain there is nothing in the world 
 would benefit the country more than that. 
 
 22938. And some way of settling the rent? — Yes, 
 arbitration, where the landlord and farming classes 
 would be fairly represented. 
 
 22939. If there was a dispute ?— Yes. 
 
 22940. If they could settle it themselves all right?— 
 Yes. 
 
 22941. That would satisfy the tenants ? — I think it 
 would. 
 
 22942. You know the tenants pretty well in the 
 County Limerick? — Yes; and I know there is a want 
 of security for improvements. 
 
 22943. The people won't improve their farms? — No. 
 
 22944. Even on good estates? — Even on good 
 estates. 
 
 Ocl. 27, 1880. 
 .Idlni Maloney 
 
 Rev. James Cahir, P.P., Kilmurry, Ibrickane, examined. 
 
 Rev. Jaine.s 
 Cahir. 
 
 22945. The Chairjian.— You wish to put before 
 the Commissioners some ef the grievances under which 
 your parishioners suffer ? — Yes ; the principal griev- 
 ance is the raising of rents and the rents being too 
 high. 
 
 22946. Are there several landlords in your parish ? 
 — Yes, several. I know one landloi'd who even raised 
 his rents this year, although the rent was already a 
 high one. I think the valuation in one case was about 
 £4 ; the tenant had been paying about £7, and the 
 landlord wished to raise it to £10. Some of the tenants 
 acceded to the increase, but this tenant refused ; and 
 when the landlord came for possession, he was 
 frightened. Persons came from the neighbouring 
 parishes to frighten him away. 
 
 22947. How long ago is that? — It is about a 
 month ago. He did not take up possession. This is 
 on Mr. Studdert's, a small property. 
 
 22948. Mr. Shaw. — Was the advance over the 
 whole of the property ? — It was intended over all. 
 
 22949. But it was all over the property? — He 
 sought to make it over the entire property, and he 
 commenced with them one by one, and there are still 
 some who are threatened with a notice to quit, and 
 that notice to quit would have been served, but that 
 the landlord got somewhat deterred by the spirit that 
 was shown on the day he came for possession. 
 
 22950. The Chairman.— Is Mr. Studdert a re- 
 sident ?— He is only a small landlord. He has only 
 about £100 a .year. He is a farmer himself, and 
 receives his own rents. 
 
 22951. Has he purchased of late years ? — His 
 father purchased this property. 
 
 22952. Mr. Shaw. — Does he farm his own land? 
 — He rents some land which he farms. 
 
 22953. The Chairman.— Was there another case ? 
 —Yes, there was another case in which another 
 gentleman who has property in the parish put on 
 an increase two years ago, and threatened to take 
 up the lands unless the tenant consented. I know 
 
 a tenant there ten or twenty years, and I know him 
 to have carried a great deal of sand from the sand- 
 hills. This parish is near the sea-coast ; the land 
 was worth very little, but for the manure he put 
 upon it. Two years ago the landlord demanded 
 £3 additional rent. The tenant refused, and he 
 said he would take up the land, and the tenant 
 said, " Of course, if you compel me I must pay 
 it ; " but he only paid his ordinary rent since. The 
 landlord processed him to the Quarter Sessions in 
 Kilrush the other day for the balance. He always 
 returned a balance in the receipt ; he only gave a 
 receipt on account. That is Mr. Richard GrifDth ; 
 he lives in the County Cork. The case is still pending. 
 The landlord collects his own rents ; and though a 
 very humane, kind-hearted gentleman himself, still he 
 is not acquainted with the property. His informant 
 as to his estate is not a reliable counsellor ; he is a 
 land bailiff or land warner. 
 
 22954. Is this in the County Limerick or Clare?— 
 Clare. Mr. Griffith does a great many kind acts, 
 and is a very kind man. 
 
 22955. Did he make an abaiement last year? — 
 Yes. 
 
 22956. The Chairman.— Did Mr. Studdert ?— No, 
 he added to the rent. 
 
 22957. The O'Conor Don.— Did they pay Mr. 
 Studdert the previous rent?— I think they managed 
 to pay it. I think the poor people went into banks 
 and raised money. At least I heard they were in 
 the habit of doing it; the rents were so high they 
 were obliged to do that. 
 
 22958. The Chairman. — What rate per acre is 
 the land let at ? — I don't think it is let by the acre. 
 It is a lump rent. 
 
 22959. Are there any other cases ? — These are the 
 only cases' of actual hardship that have crept up 
 lately ; but I believe Mr. Griffith shows a disposition 
 to raise his rents generally. He has got persons to 
 value his lands generally ; and he thinks his lands are 
 
704 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Rev. James 
 Cahir. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880. let lower than the gentleman employed to value them 
 fixed upon them. 
 
 22960. When was that valuation made ?— Within 
 the last three or four years. 
 
 22961. Mr. Shaw.— Has he much property there? 
 — Yes, he has a rental of over f 1000 a year. 
 
 22962. The Chaieman.— Was it a man from the 
 neighbourhood who valued for him? — I think one 
 of the persons who valued was Lord Leconfield's 
 engineer, who is attached to the property — the person 
 who values Lord Leconfield's own property. 
 
 22963. Mr. Shaw.— Are the rents pretty well 
 paid in your district? — The people do their best. 
 The times have been bad, and the land has not been 
 near so productive as some years ago. One of my 
 parishioners told me he has been working hard on 
 his land for the last thirty years, and it has gone 
 for nothing; the cold and wet seasons have im- 
 poverished the lands. The land is quite impoverished 
 by the bad seasons. Crops don't grow well ; the 
 potatoes are not fit for the food of the poor people. 
 They are obliged to buy food for themselves and 
 their cattle; the land does not feed as many cattle 
 as it used. 
 
 22964. The Chaieman. — How do the potatoes 
 stand this year ?— Some have good potatoes ; those 
 who got seed from the Guardians early are fairly off, 
 and those who got champions; but those who got 
 rocks are ruined by them. 
 
 22965. Do you think these people would be satis- 
 fied by having the rents fixed by an impartial arbi- 
 trator ? — Of course they would. 
 
 22966. Baron Dowse. — And at liberty to sell 
 their holdings? — Yes; they would wish to have that 
 liberty. 
 
 22967. And not to be turned out as long as they 
 paid their rent — would that satisfy them? — I think 
 so. They would not care to sell their holdings. 
 
 22968. Their wish is not to part with them at all? . 
 — Not to part with them at all except in extra- 
 ordinary cases. 
 
 22969. The Chairman. — You think some feeling 
 of security of that kind would enable them to make 
 from the holding suflScient to pay the rent ? — Cer- 
 taioly. It is a great discouragement to the people 
 that their lands are re - valued every other day. 
 Though there is an increase in the price of farm 
 produce, still the lands are not so productive in any 
 way. The lands will not feed the same number of 
 cattle, and even though they do fatten them, they 
 will not produce the same. 
 
 22970. Mr. Shaw. — Is it want of manure in the 
 land? — I suppose that in addition to the wet and 
 cold seasons, the grass has become impoverished. 
 
 22971. Artificial manures are too much used? — 
 No ; they don't use artificial manures. 
 
 22972. They use sea-weed? — Yes; but they don't 
 use chemical manures. 
 
 22973. Is there much bog land ? — Yes, a great 
 deal. 
 
 22974. Do they reclaim it? — They reclaim it for 
 the purpose of growing potatoes, because they always 
 blacken in the other soil, and they take in the bog 
 for potatoes. They put a good deal of sea-weed on 
 the wild mountain, to bring it into pasture ; but 
 that has been a good deal discouraged. They do 
 not like to do anything that will cause a rise in the 
 rent. 
 
 22975. Who are the principal landowners in your 
 district in point of area? — I think Lord Leconfield, 
 Mr. Griflith, and Major Kelly-Kenny. 
 
 22976. The Chaieman. — On Lord Leconfield's 
 they are pretty well ofi' ? — They are generally. 
 
 22977. Mr. Shaw. — They have the land at reason- 
 able rents, and he does a good deal in the way of 
 improvements himself ? — He does. He employs a staff 
 of men outsiders ; and if he employed a skilled drainer 
 for his lands, it would employ the people, for they don't 
 like to work under the steward on their own holdings. 
 
 22978. He does it by his own men and staff?— 
 Yes. 
 
 22979. And they don't feel it is theirs so much ? 
 
 No ; and it is not so cheap as if they did it them- 
 
 solves. 
 
 22980. The Chaieman. — I suppose he does it that 
 way to have it better done?— Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 22981. Mr. Shaw.— But they would take more 
 interest if it was done by themselves ?— They would 
 take more interest in it and take better care of it 
 themselves afterwards. I have asked before I came 
 here some of the most intelligent people in the parish 
 for their opinion upon certain questions which I saw 
 in the query sheet, and one was with regard to the 
 valuation and the proportion the rent bore to it, 
 and I have heard from them that for some years 
 past— the last three or four years — that the great 
 bulk of the land is not worth more than Griffith's 
 valuation. 
 
 22982. Is the difference between the rents and the 
 valuations much?— Oh yes; except on the Leconfield 
 property, and on part of Mr. GrifSth's, the rent 
 generally is not in excess of the valuation. It is very 
 poor land, and it does not produce the expenses of 
 working it, which are heavier now, for the best people 
 are going away to America. The neighbours I have 
 at home are not able to work as well as those who 
 have gone away, and they have to be paid, and that 
 makes the land less valuable. 
 
 22983. — The Chaieman. — That is with the larger 
 farmers who employ labourers, but take the general 
 run of small farmers working with their families? — 
 Yes ; their children are not satisfied to remain at home 
 with the encouragement they have, and until the 
 small farmer's childi-en grow up, they must employ 
 labour, and as the expense of the farming is greater, 
 they must be less able to pay the rent notwithstanding 
 the increase in prices. The proportion of the rent to 
 the valuation is at least 50 to 100 per cent, over the 
 valuation in the greater part of my parish. 
 
 22983a. Through the parish generally? — Yes, if I 
 except Lord Leconfield's, Mr. Griffith's, and another 
 small property. 
 
 22984. Mr. Shaw. — And the land is poor?— The 
 greater part of it is poor. Some near the sea is pretty 
 fair. There are restrictions which they complain of. 
 I know some people who have turf on their property ; 
 they are paying rent for it, and they are not allowed 
 to cut it or set it. One person pays an acreable 
 rent, and he has probably 10 or 15 acres of bog on 
 it, for which he pays £1 an acre, and yet he will not 
 be allowed to set it or sell it, even for the purpose of 
 improving it. 
 
 22985. The Chaieman. — Is there a great extent of 
 turf ? — Well, I think he has 10 or 15 acres. 
 
 22986. We had one witness who said it was desirable 
 not to exhaust the tm'f , as it was getting short ? — There 
 is a great deal of turf in the country, and the poor 
 people suffer greatly, for the turf comes dearer ; while 
 there is a good deal of the land idle owing to the great 
 quantity of turf underneath. It is a great loss to the 
 tenants, for they have to go a great distance for turf, 
 while they have turf at their own doors. 
 
 22987. Mr. Shaw. — That man's neighbour can't get 
 turf from him ? — Not his immediate neighbours. There 
 is a property on which tlie tenant himself can't get 
 turf for himself. 
 
 22988. The O'Conoe Don. — Beyond a certain 
 amount? — Not a sod at all. 
 
 22989. The Chaieman. — He has a place allotted to 
 him somewhere else? — No, he has Jo buy it and 
 go four or five miles to buy it, yet he has it on his 
 own farm. He has his place tilled, and in conse- 
 quence of there being so much tui-f underneath his 
 tillage is inferior. 
 
 22990. The O'Conoe Don.— He is not allowed to 
 break land in order to get the turf out of it? — Yes. 
 I till a little myself, and tillage is bad in consequence 
 of so much turf being underneath. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 ro5 
 
 John B. Hewson, Castle Hewson, Askeaton, examined. 
 
 22991. The Chaikman. — Are you a landowner? — 
 Yes, and land agent. 
 
 22992. What is the extent of your property? — About 
 1500 acres is my own, and the agency about 8000 
 acres. I have about 400 tenants at present. 
 
 22993. You have made a comparison of the rents in 
 your part as compared with the same rents previous 
 to the famine in 1847? — Y'es; I found some difficulty 
 because there were a great many changes, but I made 
 a comparison of rents in certain farms about 100 years 
 ago and the present rents. I have two old leases, one 
 made in 1754, and the other in 17G2. I am able to 
 identify these farms, and I have a table to show the 
 increase of rent in these places for that time. I have 
 also farm accounts kept from 1772, and I took the 
 prices of the different farm produces at that time. I 
 compared them with the present prices as a sort of 
 contrast to the rent. I have taken the last three cr 
 four years, and from 1772 to 1874. 
 
 22994. Baron Dowse. — Where did you get the 
 earlier items of the account ? — I got them out of farm 
 account books in our possession. 
 
 22995. You don't recollect them yourself? — Xo, 
 they were kept by my grandfather. This is the lease 
 of a farm let to a tenant in 1754. The rent reserved 
 in the lease is £48. 
 
 22996. What was the acreage? — About 70 acres, 
 but I have added the tithe rent charge then payable by 
 the tenant. That made the rent up to £54, 15s. The 
 present rent is £69, lOs.; Griffith's valuation is £50. 
 The increase of rent is £14, 15s., or 25|^ per cent. 
 These lands are now held by yearly tenants. The 
 other lease was made in 1764 ; the rent reserved in the 
 lease is £27, 17s. 6d., the tithe rent charge is £1, 5s., 
 payable by the tenant. That made £29, 2s. 6d. The 
 present rent is £38, and Griffith's valuation £30, 5s. 
 There was a rise of £8, 17s. 6d. between the present 
 time and 1764, or 30 per cent. These are the only 
 two farms I can identify the boundaries of. I took 
 out of a book of same date a list of prices, and I com- 
 pared the rise in the prices with the rise in the rents. 
 The price of fat cows £4 a head ; I put the present 
 price as £14. I take the price now of second and 
 third class cattle, considering they would more fairly 
 represent the cattle of that time. 
 
 22997. Mr. Shaw. — Have you the price by the 
 cwt. of beef, because cattle were smaller then than 
 now? — They were always large cattle in this county. 
 I have not the price by the cwt. Fat sheep 19s. ; 
 these were four-year-old wethers. I put the pre- 
 sent price as £2, 10s. Butter per cwt. £2, 6s. ; the 
 present price £6. Wool, per stone of 16 lbs. to the 
 stone, 15s. The present price for the last two or three 
 years was £1, Is. per stone of 14 lbs. In calf heifers 
 £5, 5s., now £14. Lambs 5s. — that was the top price. 
 Generally they were 4s. 6d. and 4s. 3d. ; the present 
 price is £1. Two-and-a-half-year-old heifers £2, 5s. ; 
 present price £10. Pork per cwt. 18s. ; present 
 price £2, 10s. Calves per head 13s.; present price 
 £2, 10s. Oats per barrel 10s., almost the same as at 
 the present moment. Barley £1, 2s. 8d. per barrel; 
 now only 15s. or 16s. It was higher then than now. 
 
 22998. Baron Dowse. — Have you no wheat? — No ; 
 wheat does not appear to have been grown in that 
 part of the country at all. 
 
 22999. Mr. Shaw. — Have you any account of the 
 gross amount sold off the farm ?— No, no account of 
 that. 
 
 23000. Or of any produce?— No; the country ap- 
 peared to have been almost all grazing at that time. The 
 cattle were bought at fairs, and sold again when fat. 
 
 23001. Mr. Shaw.— They did not strike a profit 
 and loss account in those times ?— No. 
 
 23002. And you have not done it ?— No, I could 
 not do anything of the kind, I saw memorandums 
 that the cattle were bought on such a day and sold on 
 such a day, and that there was so much clear gam. 
 
 23003. Bakon Dowse.— It would be curious to see 
 whether they did not make more profit then than they 
 
 do now ? — I have no way of judging, although I hold 
 iu my own hands a good deal of the lands that those 
 cattle were sold off, and know the denominations. I 
 cannot tell you who made the most, although I fancy 
 that they made as much as we do. There were no poor 
 rates at that time, and the county rates were not large 
 — they only amounted to 2,s. upon a large farm. 
 
 23004. And the cost of labour was very httle? — 
 Little or nothing. 
 
 23005. And there was no tea or sugar ? — Well, it 
 so happens that I find that tea was then 8s. a pound 
 and sugar lOd. a pound. 
 
 23006. And there was no duty on whisky ? — No 
 duty on whisky, which was then 2.'-'. Kc/. a gallon. 
 
 23007. The Eael of Bessbokough. — Y'ou did not 
 make a comparison with Griffith's valuation ? — No, I 
 did not. But a curious thing is, that I find the rents of 
 those farms — I have mentioned one of 1754 and the other 
 of 1764 — as reserved then were very close on Griffith's 
 valuation now — almost the same. In one case the rent 
 reserved is £48, while Griffith's valuation of the same 
 holding is now £50 ; but in addition the tenant had 
 then to pay £6, 15s. tithe rent charge, so that his rent 
 was higher than Griffith's valuation. 
 
 23008. Mr. Shaav. — I suppose the old rent was 
 Irish currency ? — Well, it must have been so. 
 
 23009. Was it in your own family ? — In my own 
 family. 
 
 23010. Earl of Bessboeotjgh. — At what date was 
 Griffith's valuation made iu this county ? — In 1852. 
 
 23011. Earl of Bessborough. — What do you 
 think is the effect on the letting of land by striking the 
 rates according to the tenement valuation ? — There is a 
 bonus held out to the landlord under the present valua- 
 tion to let his land high by the way the rates are 
 struck. Supposing one landlord has a farm valued at 
 £40, and let at £50, and another has a farm also valued 
 at £40 let at £70 ; the poor rate is 2s. in the pound, 
 and the landlord that has his farm let at £70 and the 
 landlord that has his farm let at £50 pay exactly the 
 same amount of poor rate. So that the present valuation 
 holds out a bonus (o the landlord to let his lands high. 
 
 23012. Earl of Bessborough. — You make some 
 observations as to the difficulties connected with the 
 reclamation of land in case of main drainage ? — There 
 is often very great difficulty. Where there is a pro- 
 perty that the tenants hold by lease, and a main drain 
 runs through all their farms, some of the tenants will 
 want to get the land drained, and others will oppose 
 the draining of the land, and it is often very hard 
 to arrange amongst the tenants about the running of 
 the drain. Another thing which I only found out the 
 other day is this. I have property held by lease, and 
 wanted to drain it all. We were raising money under 
 the Land Improvement Act at 1 per cent., and the 
 arrangement was that the tenants were to pay the 1 per 
 cent. ; that an endorsement was to be made on the backs 
 of their leases engaging to pay it, and that the leases 
 were to be restamped. When it came to be done, we 
 found that there were mortgagees and other people to 
 he dealt with also — that many of the tenants had raised 
 money from usurers and people of that kind, and we 
 had to deal with the mortgagees as well as the tenants. 
 It made the thing nearly impossible to do. They had 
 mortgaged their leases ; and I was advised that it 
 would not be safe to deal with the tenants by putting 
 an increase on their rents, unless the mortgagees were 
 made parties to it. In some cases we had to get the 
 mortgagees to sign endorsements on the backs of the 
 leases not to require any increase of rent ; and in other 
 cases we were not sure that we knew all the people 
 that had incumbrances on the place, and were afraid 
 to enter into any negotiations with the tenants about it. 
 
 23013. The difficulty in consequence of the lease 
 must occur where the tenant has got the power of 
 handing it over — of mortgaging it ? — Yes. 
 
 23014. In the reclamation of land a difficulty would 
 arise in the same way as in the case of drainage ? — 
 Y"es. 
 
 4X 
 
 Oct. 27, 1«80. 
 
 John B. 
 ITfw.soii. 
 
706 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 iicl. ii, 
 .lohu B. 
 
 i><bO. 23015. Do you think the tenants should be allowed 
 to borrow themselves if the landlords are not inclined 
 to do so ? — I think so. 
 
 23016. From the Board of Works!— Yes. I think 
 it would be a very good thing. If the Board of Works 
 took the trouble to see that the money was laid out in 
 a judicious way, it would be quite safe, for the landlord 
 would not like to incumber his property in any kind of 
 way to his disadvantage. 
 
 23017. Has much been done in the way of reclama- 
 tion and permanent improvement of late years in your 
 neighbourhood ? — ^^''ery much. In the western part of 
 the county of Limerick an immense amount of drainage 
 has been done within the last two or three years ; in 
 fact it had been going on for a long time before, but 
 it has been specially done during the last two or three 
 years. 
 
 23018. Baron Dowse. — By the landlord or the 
 tenant? — Generally speaking- by the landlord, for the 
 Board of Works would not lend to a tenant having 
 only a lose for hves. They would lend to a tenant 
 who had a fifty years' lease, but they would not lend to 
 a tenant having only a lease for three lives, which, 
 although virtually as good as the other, might termin- 
 ate suddenly. 
 
 23019. Baron Dowse. — That is strange, for it is a 
 larger estate in point of law. 
 
 Witness. — We had to raise money on one property 
 ourselves. 
 
 23020. The Chaiejian. — Then you think that in 
 any legislation there should be additional facility for 
 loans ? — Yes. 
 
 23021. And also facilities for carrying out drain- 
 ages ? — Yes. 
 
 23022. Upon leased lands ? — Yes, leased lands. 
 
 23023. On your property have you laid out much of 
 late years ? — Well, no ; we have not laid out much. 
 ~Slj own property is land that does not require drain- 
 ing — it is dry land. But we have always been in the 
 habit of allowing the tenants slates and timber when 
 they want to build, and often iron gates for their farms ; 
 in fact, any httle thing of that kind we have been always 
 in the habit of allowing them. And as we have kept no 
 record of many of these allowances previous to the Land 
 Act, if the tenants gave up the farms and the cases 
 came into Court, we should probably have to pay for 
 improvements that we allowed for long ago. Talking 
 about that, I have a lease here which was given in the 
 year 1853 by my father to a tenant, and it sets forth 
 that he gave it in consideration of certain improvements 
 which the tenant made on the farm. It was a thing 
 not very common previous to the Land Act ; but my 
 father reduced the rent and gave him a fresh lease, 
 setting forth that it was in consideration of building a 
 substantial slated house and other improvements that 
 he made. This lease was made eighteen years before 
 the passing of the Land Act, and I merely show it 
 because I believe the same thing was done more fre- 
 quently than landlords get credit for. 
 
 23024. That is, a reduction on account of tenants' 
 improvements? — Yes, a reduction on account of tenants' 
 improvements. 
 
 23025. Baron Dowse. — Before the Land Act, when 
 that lease expired, the tenants' improvements would 
 have become the property of the landlord ? 
 
 Witness. — I am quite aware of that. 
 
 23026. Baron Dowse. — I know you are, but the 
 people that read your evidence might not know it, and 
 therefore I want to have it down. What is the term 
 of that lease ? 
 
 Witness. — Three lives. He had a lease for three 
 lives. He had taken the farm originally, I think, about 
 the year 1830, at a very high rent. In the famine 
 years he was not able to pay it, and ran largely into 
 arrear; and my father told him he had laid out so 
 much money on the farm that he would not take advan- 
 tage of him in any kind of way, but would make a 
 ■fresh lease, reducing his rent £1 an acre, and giving 
 the holding for the same term as before. 
 
 23027. Is that lease in existence still ?— It is. 
 [Hands in the document.] 
 
 23028. The Chairman. — Do you follow the same 
 system as agent that you do on your own property ?— 
 Yes, in the general run. 
 
 23029. Do the 8000 acres include several properties ? 
 — There are two or three other properties. There is 
 one. of considerable size, about 5000 acres in one 
 property. I think since the passing of the Land Act 
 most of those landlords have not laid out any money. 
 
 23030. Have you made any difference since the Land 
 Act yourself ? — No. 
 
 23031. Are the tenants making improvements them- 
 selves at all ? — Well, I think very little. There is one 
 property over which I am agent, the tenants on which 
 have been m uninterrupted possession of their holdings. 
 They had leases for three lives, and they got fresh 
 leases fifteen or sixteen years ago for the same terms 
 and at the same rent that they had been paying origin- 
 ally. There are seventy tenants on that property ; and 
 except in about half a dozen cases the property has 
 been totally and utterly unimproved until this year, 
 when I borrowed £2000 myself, and drained the 
 property. That is the place I was telling you aboat 
 where I was so hampered by the leases. The land 
 is mountain land, easily reclaimed ; it could be dons 
 easily, with but a small outlay. In the case of 
 land of that description, worth 8s. or 10s. an acre, by 
 spending £10 or £12 an acre on it it could be made 
 worth 30s. or 35s. an acre. 
 
 23032. Yet very few of them have improved? — 
 Hardly any of them have touched them land. 
 
 23033. During the existence of their long leases?-— 
 Yes. 
 
 23031. Is them system of farming good or bad ?— 
 They have no system of farming at all. Ditches and 
 gripes that they originally made are closed up, and 
 some places are actually floating quagmires. 
 
 23035. Are their rents easy or heavy? — Oh, very 
 small — in some cases under Griffith's valuation. 
 
 2303 G. Mr. Shaw. — In what part of the county is 
 it? — The western side of the county — Loughill; it 
 belongs to Miss Royce. 
 
 23037. Is it boggy or mountainous? — Mountainy 
 land. A good deal of it is black surface with clay 
 sub-soil. It makes very good land when reclaimed. 
 
 23038. Mr. Shaw. — Is it out of the way of the 
 world? — No, the farthest part is 2^ miles from the 
 Shannon. 
 
 23039. What is the town? — Loughill is a small 
 village on the Shannon, and Foynes is near it with a 
 proper harbour. There are coal deposits under that 
 land too. 
 
 23040. TheCiiAiEJiAN. — Are the small tenants better 
 or worse off than the larger tenants ? — Worse off, ex- 
 cept the small tenants on the outskirts of the bogs, who 
 have sometimes reclaimed smaU spots, spent a good deal 
 of trouble in doing so, and made nice little places of 
 them ; but it is only on the outskirts of bogs and places 
 of the kind that you find small tenants able to do any- 
 thing. These are pecuharly adapted for spade hus- 
 bandry, the land being soft, and horses not being able 
 to walk on it. But they have done a good deal. The 
 arrangement generally is this — the f-armers give land 
 to them for two years for nothing ; they then impose a 
 rent of 2s. 6rf. for three or four years. Then the rent 
 goes on to 5s., and so on until they get what they 
 consider to be the full value of the place. 
 
 23041. Mr. Shaw. — These people who reclaim are 
 labourers generally ? — Labourers — yes. 
 
 23042. Are the farmers charged for the bog land 
 themselves ? — The part of their holdings that is bog is 
 very often lumped — not measured. 
 
 23043. The farmers don't reclaim as a rule? — Very 
 little. 
 
 23044. Except through their labourers? — Any of 
 them that could borrow during the last year have 
 borrowed. I have filled ever so many papers for 
 them. 
 
 23045. The Ciiaiiiman. — You have stated that the 
 Land Act has had the effect of causing a disinclination 
 on the part of landlords to make improvements? — I 
 think so. I know that on some large properties, which 
 
MLNUTE.S OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 707 
 
 I am not agent over myself, they used to lay out large 
 sums, but that has very nearly ceased now. 
 
 23046. Do you think that has been caused by the 
 difficulty of ascertaining whether or not the expenditure 
 of the money has increased the letting value of the 
 land? — I think so. 
 
 23047. And that landlords are afraid that their 
 money, as far as any return to them is concerned, may 
 be lost ? — May be lost. I think that is the reason. 
 
 23048. What have you observed about compensation 
 for disturbance as regards the condition of the tenants, 
 and as regards their creditors ? — I think the creditors 
 have taken advantage of the clauses enabhng tenants to 
 get compensation for disturbance ; very often they 
 have used it as a way of securing loans. For instance, 
 if a creditor sells a tenant out of a farm where there is 
 no clause in the lease preventing alienation, he will 
 sometimes say to the tenant, " I will throw up the farm 
 to your landlord if you don't pay nie so much of the 
 claim you have for compensation for improvements." 
 I don't know if I make myself clear. 
 
 23049. But he would not get compensation for 
 disturbance if he threw up the farm ? — Compensation 
 for improvements. 
 
 23050. I asked about compensation for disturbance, 
 and I only ask it because I see you mention the ques- 
 tion here? — I must have mistaken. 
 
 23051. You also mention about loan offices .^ — That 
 is a thing I wish to say a few words about. I have 
 no donbt that numbers of farmers are now not actually 
 in possession of their farms at all, but are only nominally 
 the tenants of their landlords, the farms being all held 
 by usurers. They have bills of sale of every single 
 thing on the farm. They own the cattle; and the 
 farmers, though ostensibly the tenants of A. or B., really 
 don't own a single thing on the whole fai-m, but are 
 working- as day-labourers to the money-lenders. There 
 are three or four men adjoining my own demesne who 
 are just in that position. They have told me that 
 their poverty was far ureater than that of the labour- 
 ing men around them, because in fact they are the 
 slaves of the money-lenders, and must work for them 
 and do everything they choose to tell them, and in 
 fact are completely at their mercy. 
 
 23052. Mr. Shaw. — But they are in possession of 
 the land still as tenants ? — No, because there are bills 
 of sale over them. As far as the landlord is con- 
 cerned, he beUeves them to be in possession, but the 
 money-lender is the real owner of the place. 
 
 23053. The bill of sale only affects chattel property? 
 — ^Bnt they have mortgages. 
 
 23054. Are these genei'ally the shopkeepers in the 
 towns ? — Generally the shopkeepers in the towns. This 
 is a thing that I wish to draw attention to. These 
 people generally have public-houses as well as loan 
 offices ; and it has been over and over again repre- 
 sented to me by people, that they have been brought 
 in and put under the influence of drink, and made to 
 sign documents that they did not know the meaning 
 of at all. That has been stated over and over again 
 to me. 
 
 23055. But they know the amount of money as a 
 general rule? — I could not say. If a man signs a 
 thing, not knowing what it is, under the influence of 
 drink, he can hardly tell whether he gets the full 
 amount of it or not. But the thing I feel so much about, 
 is that people carry on the two businesses together, and 
 take advantage of that state of things. I moved a 
 resolution at the meeting of magistrates of the County 
 Quarter Sessions last year, that no licence should be 
 given to anybody carrying on a loan office. It was 
 carried unanimously ; but the Chairman of the County 
 said he thought it could only apply to the people that 
 had been getting lice aces from that out, and that we 
 could not apply it to people that already had licences ; 
 so that in fact it has been almost inoperative. 
 
 23056. The Chairman. — You speak of loan offices. 
 Are they openly public loan offices ?— They are private 
 loan offices. In fact they are not under Government 
 i*n i^p ^ it HjI 1 
 
 23057. Have the magistrates power to enter them ? 
 
 irewsoii. 
 
 -—No, they have no power of entering. The resolu- Oct. -ii, 
 tion we moved was, that where we were aware that — 
 
 any person kept a loan office, we would not think him '^"'"^ '^'■ 
 a qualified person to give a licence to. 
 
 23058. Baron Dowse.— That is, if you had a dis- 
 cretion, you exercised it against him ? — Yes. 
 
 23059. The Chairman of the County thought that 
 in the cases of applications for transfers and things of 
 that kind you could not do it ? — No. 
 
 23060. That vested rights should be considered, 
 but that you would consider the question in new cases? 
 —Yes. 
 
 23061. The Chairman. — Have you had any cases of 
 ejectment for non-payment of rent ? — Yes. I have had 
 some cases of the sort. There is a suggestion which 
 I wish to make about that. After an ejectment has 
 been heard and a decree given, the tenant then has 
 six months for redemption. Those six months do not 
 count from the time the decree is signed by the Chair- 
 man, but date from the time when the Sheriff comes 
 to take possession of the land. Now I think this 
 very often acts very harshly towards both landlord and 
 tenant, for this reason. The tenant perhaps some- 
 times is able — in fact, very often is able — after the 
 decree is given to make up the rent and come to 
 terms. If the six months were to date from the time 
 the decree is given by the judge, the landlord would 
 not be compelled to go through the form of taking 
 possession, putting the man's eflfects out on the road, 
 and creating a great commotion in the country, but 
 the six months could go running on from the time 
 the judge signed the decree ; and it should be only 
 in cases where the tenant was insolvent and unable to 
 make up the redemption money, that as a final thing 
 the landlord should step in with the Sheriff and take 
 possession. But now you have to go through the 
 whole form and all the disagreeabilities and odium of 
 it, and besides that a certain amount of fine is put on 
 the tenant for Sheriff's fees, which he has to pay 
 before he gets back into the farm. I felt that, and 
 have held on for three or four months before I have 
 executed a decree at all, and then sometimes the 
 tenant was able to redeem. But if he had come to 
 ruin at the end of three or four months, the farm 
 might have been idle for two years. This is a thing 
 to which I attach a great deal of importance. 
 
 23062. Baron Dowse. — You would recommend 
 a period of six months from the date of the decree 
 for redemption ? — Yes. 
 
 23003. And to let the Sheriff's eviction be final? — 
 — And let the Sheriff's eviction be final. 
 
 23064. The suggestion is a valuable one, and we 
 have heard it before, but if it were carried out, would 
 you be able to execute your decree until six months 
 after you got it ? Would it not go in every case to 
 stay the execution of the decree for six months after 
 you had got it, whereas you might want to get posses- 
 sion rapidly in some instances ? — I don't see that. 
 
 23065. Your idea is to have six months for redemp- 
 tion before the decree is executed at all — isn't thiit 
 so ?— No, I did not say exactly that. I only said T 
 thought the six months should run from the date of 
 the decree, but I would not prevent the landlord, if 
 he should have occasion to do so, from putting the 
 party out before the end of the six months. But I would 
 add on for the tenant the difference between the time 
 he was put out after the date of the decree and the six 
 months. 
 
 23066. You would not diminish the length of time 
 for redemption, but would allow the landlord under 
 particular circumstances to execute the decree ? — Yes. 
 
 23067. That would require the leave of the Court ? 
 — Yes, the leave of the Court. 
 
 23068. Supposing you got a decree on the 1st of 
 November under ordinary circumstances, you would 
 not execute it until the 1st of May,?— Well, under 
 ordinary circumstances I would not. 
 
 23069. And then where you did execute the decree 
 on the 1st of May, the tenant's period of redemption 
 would have expired ? — Yes. 
 
 23070. And there would be an end of the matter— 
 
 4X2 
 
 l«8u. 
 
708 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 (let. 27, issi). 
 John 1!. 
 
 the tenant would have been given six months before 
 the execution of the decree ?— Yes. The only thing I 
 would mind in that, would be that if the landlord 
 should state to the judge that he might want to execute 
 the decree before that, in order to save the crops from 
 creditors, he should have the leave of the Court to 
 do so. 
 
 23071. And when he got leave he would be very 
 much in the condition in which he was under the old 
 law? — No; because if he did it three months after 
 the signing of the decree, that three months should not 
 count afterwards. 
 
 23072. It would make the present law the exception, 
 and leave the other law to work in ordinary cases ? — 
 Yes. 
 
 23073. The Chaieman. — You have made some ob- 
 servations as to labourers' dwellings in cases where 
 landlords are resident or non-resident ? — Yes. It has 
 been generally found that where the landlords are 
 resident the labourers' dwellings are of a very much 
 superior class. I don't speak of fancy cottages. What 
 I mean is that where the landlords are resident the 
 ordinary class of -labourers' dwellings are much more 
 comfortable than in places where there are no land- 
 lords of any kind residing. I know parts of this 
 country where there are extensive and wealthy dairy 
 farms, and the people are living in utter pigsties — 
 hovels on the sides of bogs, hardly fit for human 
 beings ; while in other parts of the country, where there 
 is a considerable sprinkling of resident gentry, I find 
 that they are very much better housed. 
 
 23074. But are the labourers pretty well off? — I 
 think they are. 
 
 . 23075. Do they get fair wages ? — Fair wages ; and 
 I think they are tolerably comfortably off. 
 
 23076. And the farmers are giving employment 
 pretty well ? — Well, the employment given by the 
 farmers is very uncertain. They give employment just 
 when they want the men, but they won't try to keep 
 them on generally through the slack months of the 
 year. I know that from being chairman of a Board of 
 Guardians. I have found that dairy girls and people 
 of that kind especially come in great numbers to the 
 workhouse in the winter months. The farmers won't 
 keep them for the two or three winter months, and 
 generally send them about their business. We very 
 often have great numbers of these coming to the work- 
 house from the farmers' houses, where they have been 
 employed in the summer time. 
 
 23077. And is it the same with the labouring men ? 
 — The same very much with them. 
 
 ■ 23078. What suggestions have yon to make with 
 reference to the Cottier Tenants Act ? — I think that if 
 it could be extended in any kind of way, if the facilities 
 for letting houses to labourers could be increased, it 
 would be an advantage. Xow, if you don't let a 
 house under the Cottier Tenants Act, you make a 
 yearly tenant of the labourer ; and if you should then 
 want to put him out and get possession of it, you 
 would have all the same trouble as with a farm of 100 
 acres. If there could be some way of simphfying the 
 letting and making the recovery of possession of houses 
 easier in the country districts, or the same as it is in 
 towns, you would do no harm to the labourers them- 
 selves, because people are very much afraid of letting 
 a labourer into a house, it is so hard to get him 
 out of it. 
 
 23079. Baron Dowse. — You would extend to the 
 country the Small Tenants Act that applies to towns ? 
 — Yes, I think so. I think that the making it difficult 
 for persons to recover property of that kind generally 
 tells against the occupiers. 
 
 23080. But is that Small Tenants Act hmited to 
 towns ? — Ko, it is not limited to towns ; but there are 
 a great many different requirements to constitute a 
 tenant under it. You have to do so and so; you 
 can't let more than an EngHsh acre of land ; you are 
 bound yourself to keep the house in repair, and the rent 
 must not be beyond a certain limit. There are a great 
 many things of that kind which might be modified; 
 there are too many conditions. 
 
 23081. But you would not wish to take away those 
 conditions for the purpose of improving the dwellings 
 of the people ? — No, I would not like, of course, to do 
 that ; but I think a great many people are prevented 
 from wishing to have them, because they are not able 
 to fulfil those conditions. As far as concerns myself, 
 I am satisfied with the law, but I think farmers do not 
 like to be bound by all those conditions. They are 
 now very unwilUng to let people into their houses at 
 all, they find it so hard dealing with them afterwards. 
 Tenants have come to me and asked me to bring eject- 
 ments against them in order to get rid of the cottiers 
 off their land. They have said, " I won't pay your 
 honour's rent until you bring an ejectment, in order to 
 get rid of so and so." 
 
 23082. The Chairman. — That is where they differ 
 about the wages and work? — Yes. 
 
 23083. Baron Dowse. — Do you think that was 
 done to throw odium on you ? — Oh no. There is very 
 considerable expense attendant upon the bringing of an 
 ejectment in the Quarter Sessions Court. A tenant is 
 not to he got out of the smallest cabin under £3 or 
 £4, for the ejectment costs £2, 10s., and there are the 
 Sheriff's and other fees besides. 
 
 23084. The Chairman. — In all cases of rjectment 
 do you think the expenses are far higher than what 
 they ought to be 1 — Far beyond what they ought to 
 be, and it falls ultimately on the occupier, though the 
 landlord may have to pay it in the first instance. As 
 I have been talking about money-lenders, allow me to 
 show you a notice of motion which was put in by a 
 poor law guardian nine or ten months ago ; it will 
 show you where the shoe pinches. It was given by 
 an elected guardian of the Rathkeale Union, and 
 was a notice " to take into consideration, on Wed- 
 nesday the 3d March 1880, the subject of the following 
 letter to the Chairman of the Rathkeale Board of 
 Guardians : — 
 
 Ireland drowned in debt : wiU the Government do any- 
 thing to get her out of it ? 
 
 Some good landlords have made noble and generous 
 sacrifices to their tenantry in the reduction of rents this 
 year, it cannot be expected that they can continue such 
 sacrifices very long ; but let them continue to act in that 
 liberal manner for the next twenty years, aye fifty, will 
 the tenant-farmers of Ireland be then out of debt? I for 
 one hold the majority of them will not — and why ? Because 
 they are so sunk in banks and loan offices that they will 
 never be able to pay the last shilling. A simple remedy 
 strikes me, and I feel I am bound to give it pubHcity, 
 hoping that some liberal, educated, and influential man 
 may take hold of (perhaps some will say my foolish ideas), 
 but if fooUsh few wiU deny but they are honest and 
 upright. Let the Government get the land re-valued by 
 competent and honest men, and let them compel the land- 
 lords and tenants to abide hj the valuation ; so long as the 
 tenant pays the rent let him be the owner of his farm ; any 
 of them that are in debt, let the Government lend them the 
 money, say at 3J per cent, for thirty-five years, and let 
 them get a mortgage on the farm for the amount. You 
 may say, what security have they for their money if a 
 tenant breaks down ? Surely in the most prosperous times 
 a tenant may fail; but if he does, let him dispose of his 
 farm to the best and highest bidder, subject to the mort- 
 gage on the farm. If this plan could in any reasonable 
 way be carried out, it would do away with banks, loan 
 offices, and frauds and trickery of every kind. Every man 
 would be paid the last farthing due to them— Ireland was 
 out of debt, and the Government paid its own, in thirty- 
 five years. 
 
 Let me take for instance a farmer owing £300 in a loan 
 office ; he must pay £60 a year interest for it. If the 
 Government gave the money at £3J per cent, he would be 
 saving £50 a year and the debt paid in thirty-five years ; 
 even if he could get the money in the bank there would be 
 at least half interest saved, and the debt wiped off in thirty- 
 five years. If he must continue paying interest to the loan 
 office he will never be able to pay the principal, and things 
 will and must go on from bad to worse. You may say the 
 country would in this way get into debt again as quickly as 
 ever ; I do not believe it would. There is no doubt but 
 there are some who would if they get the chance but I 
 think every one would be more cautious, and that no shop- 
 keeper, bank, or loan office would run an account to any 
 large amount with those who had their farms mortgaged. 
 If this or some such practical scheme were adopted' 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 709 
 
 Ireland before two years would be one of the happiest and 
 most contented countries on earth. It would do away with 
 agitation and relief committees — herself and England 
 would become one body and soul; let them forget past 
 differences — work hand and hand in the future for 
 the welfare and prosperity of each other's children. No 
 doubt the good landlords would consent to some such 
 settlements, and the harsh ones will be foolish if they don't, 
 as it is the surest way their rents can be secured to them 
 all. The good landlord, let me say, thinks it the last 
 course to quit his tenants ; he will let them go on from 
 year to year ; and they are in such a way at present that 
 thay will be able to give him but very little after supporting 
 their families and paying heavy interest on their debts. 
 The bad or harsh landlord, let him make the most he can 
 of his treachery, what can he do? If he goes to extremes, 
 sooner or later he runs a good chance of losing something 
 more precious to him than a reduction of rent ; so between 
 the good and the bad it would be their advantage that some 
 settlement be adopted, in order that their rents would be 
 secured to them, and that the country would become con- 
 tented and prosperous for evermore. 
 
 I hope, Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen, you will not think 
 it presumptuous of an humble member of your honourable 
 Board to bring the subject before you for consideration. 
 I am, Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen, 
 
 Your very obedient servant, 
 
 23085. Baroo Dowse. — There appears to be a good 
 deal of sense in that ? — Well, there is. I had nothing 
 to say as a landlord or anything else, with the form in 
 which it is put. 
 
 23086. Those are his own ideas ? — He came to me 
 before the board and said he hoped I would not laugh 
 at his notice of motion or make fun of it. 
 
 23087. You are a member of the Eathkeale Board 
 of Guardians ? — Yes, I am the acting chairman. 
 
 23088. Had you many tenants who had been 
 evicted, seeking for support in the union workhouse ? 
 — I think only one. 
 
 23089. Why, we had it in evidence yesterday that 
 a very large number of persons weje taken into that 
 union who had been ejected from their holdings? — 
 Well, would you ask for their names? 
 
 23090. I think the man said during the last two 
 or three years ? — I have attended the board more 
 regularly than any other member. The chairman of 
 the board is Sir Stephen de Tere. I only remember 
 one case of the kind mentioned, and that was a case 
 of out-door relief from the Dromard electoral 
 division. The notices that the landlord, after ejecting 
 people, must serve on the reheving officer all come 
 in to the board. A good many of these have come 
 in. 
 
 23091. Mr. Shaw. — You don't ask people when 
 Ihey are admitted whether they are ejected tenants or 
 not ? — The relieving officer in his book tells the reason 
 why the person applies for relief ; and it Is generally 
 ou his book that a tenant has been obliged to apply in 
 consequence of such and such a cause. 
 
 23092. Baron Dowse. — And you as chairman of 
 the board would see that of course? — Oh yes. It 
 would be very easy to find out by asking the 
 names. 
 
 23093. The O'Conoe Don. — Had you any eject- 
 ments on your property lately ? — Oh yes. 
 
 23094. In the last year?— At the last Quarter 
 Sessions. 
 
 23095. How many? — I served six ejectments. 
 23(196. Did you put the tenants out? — Four out of 
 
 the six settled before they went into Court ; one case had 
 been settled since ; and none have been put out. I 
 had a good many ejectments — a great deal more than 
 I liked — but in no one instance had I to put the 
 tenants out. They are all in their holdings. 
 
 23097. Do you think the number put out was large, 
 compared with the number of notices served on theBoard 
 of Guardians? — Oh, something infinitesimally small. 
 I may state that though I had a good deal to do, I 
 was not obliged to get police, but always went with a 
 single Sheriff's officer and did my business. If S per- 
 son has a pretty good name, it does a good deal for 
 you ; and another thing is, not to make it public so as 
 to cause a row. 
 
 23098. Baron Dowse. — And to have a little pluck? 
 — I just walk over quietly and take possession. I have 
 generally found the people most friendly, and have gene- 
 rally let them in as caretakers under an agreement ; but 
 I don't go and throw the house down, or do anything 
 of that kind. If I did, I suppose it would be different. 
 
 23099. Were all these ejectments for non-payment 
 of rent ? — All for non-payment of rent. I hardly ever 
 hear or know of any other. 
 
 23100. Mr. Shaw. — How much rent was due ? — 
 Generally two years, or a year and a half at least. At 
 the last Sessions I had to serve some tenants with 
 ejectments for non-payment, they paid a year's rent, 
 and another half-year coming due in a few days ; and I 
 told the sohcitor that if they offered half a year's rent 
 he might take it and let the rest lie over. If they 
 owed two years' rent, I would tell him that he might 
 take a year's rent. If there be anything else that 
 strikes me, will I be at liberty to send it in to you in 
 writing ? 
 
 The Chaieman. — Oh, certainly. 
 
 Oct. : 
 
 John B. 
 Hewson. 
 
 18311. 
 
 Edward White, Esq., examined. 
 
 Edward 
 White. 
 
 23102. The Chaiuman.— You are a landowner 
 and land agent ? — Yes. 
 
 23103. And also a tenant-farmer ? — Yes. 
 
 23104. What is the extent of the property over 
 which you are agent ? — About 6000 acres. 
 
 23105. What is the extent of the land which you 
 own ? — About 900 acres. 
 
 23106. How much do you farm? — About 800 
 acres. We calculate the acres in Irish. 
 
 23107. In the county of Limerick?— In the county 
 of Limerick, and partly in the county of 'Tipperary. 
 
 23108. On these properties over which you are 
 agent, do the landlords make allowances for tenants' 
 improvements ?— On one property only. 
 
 22109. Do you on your own property ? — I do. 
 
 23110. In what shape ?— In draining, and allowing 
 slate and timber for houses. 
 
 23111. Have you made any difference since_ the 
 Land Act ?— I have not allowed much for buildings, 
 but as regards draining I have made no change. 
 That is on my own property. 
 
 23112. These allowances are made on only one ot 
 the properties over which you are agent ?— Yes. 
 
 23113. Is there any arrangement allowing the 
 
 tenants to sell their interest in their holdings in case 
 of their wishing to leave ? — No. It is against the 
 rules of all the estates I manage, and against those of 
 my own in my predecessor's time ; but I have always 
 for the last twenty or thirty years carried out free 
 sale, but I have tried to keep supervision to the 
 extent of getting introduced to the new comer before 
 he came in. 
 
 23114. Before you gave consent? — Before I gave 
 consent ; but in no case did I ever withhold my 
 consent absolutely — I had no occasion. I acted 
 judiciously. 
 
 23115. Are there leases on these properties? — 
 Well, on some estates there are, and on others there 
 are not. Amongst my own men some have leases and 
 others have not. Any man who requires a lease gets 
 
 it. 
 
 23116. Would he get it now? — Oh yes. I en- 
 courage them to take leases, but they do not look for 
 them since the late Land Act. 
 
 23117. They don't think it any better to have such 
 tenancies? — They prefer some of them not to take 
 leases — those who think that they know more than 
 others. 
 
710 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Orf, 27, 18S0. 23118. That is, they think they get as good 
 security under the Land Act? — Better security. 
 
 ^■f'^ 23119. Do you think thj Land Act has had any 
 
 effect in checking evictions ? — Oh yes, it had. It 
 acted very wholesomely ajzainst bad landlords. 
 
 23120. You have not had, on the properties with 
 which you are connected, any evictions ? — No, not one. 
 
 23121. Have you had any ejectments? — Well, I 
 had one or two, but the things were settled after- 
 wards, 
 
 23122. Before you got into Court? — Before we got 
 into Court. I never had occasion to bring the Sheriff 
 to a man. 
 
 23123. What is the general state of your tenantry ? 
 ■ — ^They are all comfortable, except in one part which 
 is in the neighbourhood of a bog, where there are a 
 great number of small cottiers whom we never could 
 get rid of, holding 2, 3, or 4 acres. They have been 
 and are there, and would have starved only for the 
 work we gave them last winter. All the others are 
 comfortable. 
 
 22124. "Was it drainage work you gave them ? — 
 Work at drainage and reclamation. 
 
 23125. I suppose these are generally badly off 
 every year unless they get some work ? — They are 
 generally ; and they were particularly so last year. 
 It is all-important that work should be carried on 
 this winter ; if not they will be in the same misery 
 this year as they were last. 
 
 23126. Do you think such works will not be carried 
 on unless opportunities are afforded of getting loans 
 on easy terms ? — I am certain they will not. Many 
 landlords and I myself took advantage of the oppor- 
 tunities already afforded. I sought to keep my poor 
 fellows employed, and reclaimed 40 Irish acres of 
 waste bog that I never could have touched but for 
 these cheap loans ; and now I have potatoes and oats 
 growing on the reclaimed ground, and I keep men 
 employed until some neighbouring gentleman sends 
 for them elsewhere. So they are comfortable for this 
 year. But these loans are exhausted ; and I think some 
 encouragement should be given to landowners to set 
 on works this year. It will keep the tenantry 
 employed, and as long as they are employed they will 
 be peaceable. 
 
 23127. Do you think it would be advisable to give 
 farmers the power of getting money for improve- 
 ments ? — Well, in my own case I did this — I gave the 
 tenants in possession an opportunity of laying out the 
 money that was borrowed to reclaim their lands, and 
 I can say that in no case did they do it honestly or 
 well. They are continually fighting, and they don't 
 carry out the works as they ought to be carried out, 
 but try to impose on me by putting down half stones 
 or no stones at all in drains. That is the way they 
 treated me. Whether they will treat the Government 
 in the same way or not I can't say. 
 
 23128. You gave them part of the money you had 
 borrowed ? — I allowed them to expend the money I 
 had borrowed upon their own farms, and they did 
 everything they could not to expend it. Whether 
 they would act more honestly by the Government or 
 not I can't say. 
 
 23129. Mr. Shaw. — Had you any one to inspect 
 them ? — I had my own man to inspect. I got the 
 drains laid out by him as steward ; and still they were 
 continually imposing on him, and not laying out the 
 money or doing the work. 
 
 23130. The Chairman. — Is any complaint made 
 amongst the farmers of your neighbourhood of the 
 rents being too high ? — Oh yes ; they are complaining 
 very much within the last ten days. Parties that 
 were willing to pay three weeks ago say that they 
 won't do so now unless at Griffith's valuation. 
 
 23131. That is the general rule?— Within the last 
 ten days they are getting very hot here. 
 
 23132. Baron Dowse. — ^What is the cause of that ? 
 — I think it is the effect of all these meetings. It 
 follows them just like a wave of the sea. 
 
 23133. The Chairman.— Do you think the tene- 
 ment valuation is a fair rent in the case of tillage 
 
 arn-.s ? — I do in the case of tillage farms, because they 
 arc not of much value. 
 
 23134. Is it these, and not the large grass farmers, 
 that are objecting to pay more than the valuation ? — ■ 
 Yes. 
 
 23135. Mr. Shaw. — The tillage farmers have 
 reason to, object ? — The tillage farmers have reason. 
 I live among them, and have tillage land which I 
 farm myself. Tillage which is not connected with 
 grass land is of very little use. The produce of a 
 tillage farm would do no more than keep things 
 rolling ; it won't enable a man to pay the rent. 
 
 23136. Baron Dowse. — It will enable a man to 
 support his family ? — And nothing more. 
 
 23137. Mr. Shaw.— But it does not pay the rent ?— 
 It does not pay the rent. I mean farms of say 15 acres. 
 
 231 33. You think that in these cases the rents 
 ought to be brought nearer to Griffith's valuation at 
 all events? — "Very near it. 
 
 23139. Baron Dowse. — What part of the country 
 does your experience extend to? — Towards Adare. 
 The large tillage country is towards Eathkeale. 
 
 23140. Mr. Shaw.— The prices are low?~The 
 prices are low. 
 
 23141. And the years have been bad? — But if a 
 man has a tillage and grass farm, he can work it 
 because he can consume his produce for the grass 
 portion of the farm. 
 
 23142. The Chairman. — Has there been a general 
 .increase of rent within the last ten years? — Oh yes, 
 
 there has. 
 
 23143. What do you think has been the reason of 
 that? — Well, the land has become more beneficial 
 than it was previously, and people have become more 
 prosperous. They are giving most enormous fines. 
 
 23144. Was that in consequence of good crops and 
 jirices? — In consequence of the money flowing into 
 the country, and of the confidence the people had in 
 the banks, and the banks had in the people when they 
 lent money. That confidence is now entirely gone. 
 
 23145. You think that large offers were made to 
 the landlords of increases of rent? — Indeed there 
 were. 
 
 23146. To induce them to give the land? — Yes. 
 
 23147. Did that lead to evictions for the purpose 
 of having the land to give to those who made the 
 offers ? — Well, I could not say that it did. I do not 
 say that there were so many evictions at all. Of 
 course there are exceptions of very bad landlords. 
 
 23148. It only happened where the land was 
 vacant? — Yes. 
 
 23149. Mr. Shaw. — People wanted to give to 
 tenants who would give fines, and the landlords 
 wanted an increase of rent? — Well, some landlords 
 required an increase of rent, but so far as my own 
 knowledge goes, they were the exceptions. Good land- 
 lords were glad when a tenant was greatly crippled 
 and wanted to go away, to let him go and leave 
 things as they were. It was only the cruel ones that 
 extorted from the purchasers that came in and crippled 
 themselves by the purchase-money that they gave, 
 and which it was robbery to ask them for. 
 
 23150. The Chairman. — How would you meet the 
 difficulty about the objection to the payment of rent 
 and their taking the Government valuation as a 
 criterion? — It would be confiscation to give it to 
 them at the Government valuation. 
 
 23151. Would you meet the difficulty by a new 
 valuation of some kind or other ?— A new valuation 
 might quiet them; but my opinion of the state of 
 Ireland is, that this agitation goes deeper than that, 
 and that nothing of the kind would satisfy them. At 
 the same time, if there should be a new valuation, 
 first of all they would smart from it, by having to pay 
 increased taxes. Then the landlords would give them 
 the land at a rent that they could not grumble so much 
 against; but for my part I think it would be very 
 arbitrary on the part of the Government to impose on 
 us the obligation of setting the land at any valuation 
 that they should make. Still a valuation would be a 
 guide as regards value. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 711 
 
 23152. Mr. Shaw. — You think tlie tillage farms 
 are not worth more than the Government valuation ?-^ 
 No, that is small tillage farms. 
 
 23153. Then it would not be confiscation, but only 
 fair play, to give those farms at that as a rent? — No 
 it would not. 
 
 23154. But you think the other farms are let 
 cheaply enough ? — Most of the grass farms are let 
 cheaply enough. 
 
 23155. Baron Dowse. — Your term "confiscation" 
 applies to the grass farms only ? — Principally. 
 
 23156. Supposing that all tbe lands were let at 
 fair rents, such as solvent tenants could reasonably 
 pay, that would be no confiscation ? — Oh no. I hope 
 the landlords will not ask anything more than reason- 
 able renis. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — If they do they won't get them, 
 apparently. 
 
 23156a. The Chairman. — Do you think the tenants 
 have a want of confidence in the County Courts as 
 regards their decisions on land questions? — Certainly 
 they have. Then speak of them — to use a well- 
 known expression — as a "mockery, a delusion, and 
 a snare." 
 
 23157. Do you know of any particular instances? 
 ■—I did not take notice of particular cases, but speak 
 from occasionally seeing them and hearing them. 
 
 23158. Is that as to the question of compensation 
 for improvements? — Compensation for improvements. 
 It was the past improvements that they were always 
 complaining of 
 
 23159. Compensation for past improvements? — 
 The old improvements. 
 
 23160. They think the increase of rent is for the 
 purpose of the landlord getting the benefit of their 
 own improvements ? — Yes. 
 
 23161. They go into Court in the face of the chance 
 of geting .illowances for those impi-ovements ? — Yes. 
 
 23162. And they are also afraid of the costs of the 
 litigation ? — Yes, they are. They are afraid that the 
 landlord in many cases would keep the compensation 
 that would be given for the improvements, and would 
 take the land. 
 
 23163. That is, in fact, they are afraid of losing the 
 land? — Of losing the land. 
 
 23164. Baron Dowse. — But surely they don't make 
 the application to the Court till they have been served 
 with a notice to quit and are going to be turned out ? — 
 No. 
 
 23165. They would sooner settle with the landlord 
 and give what he asked than be turned out? — Yes. 
 The experiment was tried, they thought. 
 
 23166. The Chaieman. — Have you any suggestions 
 to make as to the purchase of their holdings by 
 tenants? — The Bright portion of the Act was a 
 failure on account of the difficulty of adding on farms 
 out of the town land if they did not lie convenient. It 
 was almost inoperative. 
 
 23167. Have you any .case in which you offered in 
 the Landed Estates Court for a farm ? — Yes, twenty- 
 five years' purchase of the tenant's rent, and not the 
 valuation at all ; but the selling of it would have 
 injured the town land it was on, and the thing was 
 refused. 
 
 23168. Unless the whole was sold? — Unless the 
 whole was sold. It occurs in a great many cases. 
 
 23169. Baron Dowse.^ — Have you had any experi- 
 ence in the Landed Estates Court in dealing with 
 farms except in that particular case ? — Well, I have 
 had a little. 
 
 23170. Because I have heard it said, that with the 
 exception of Judge Ormsby the judges there gave very 
 little facilities for the selling of estates. Did you hear 
 that ? — They don't give facilities. Xo, not at all. 
 
 23171. The Chaieman. — But it would be a reason- 
 able objection that it would deteriorate the value of 
 the remainder of the property ? — Well, it was a reason- 
 able objection. I would not say it was unreasonable ; 
 but no facilities were given for them, unless the whole 
 of the tenants combined to give a price that would 
 please the parties. 
 
 23172. AVhat would you suggest us to (hat — would Oct. 27, 1880, 
 you make it imperative to sell ? — Well, for the benefit , 
 
 of the country I would, but it would be a great hard- ^y7Z^ 
 ship on the owner of the estate. " ''' 
 
 23173. Would you make it at twenty-five years' 
 purchase? — Twenty-five years, perhaps, if the thing 
 were imperative. Owners might make some arrange- 
 ments as to the division of their estates. Time was when 
 people would like to get a whole town land ; but it 
 would be more advantageous now to sell ill small lots, 
 because the thing is not hkely to occur again. Twenty- 
 five years' purchase would be a very tempting thing 
 for the owners of estates. 
 
 2;]174. The Board of Works should lend three- 
 fourths of the purchase-money ? — I should think so. 
 
 23175. The suggestion is that the Government 
 should buy up those estates? — It should be small 
 portions only by way of experiment, for I don't think 
 it would succeed. 
 
 2ol7ii. Do yon think the plan of a peasant pro- 
 prietary on a small scale would succeed ? — Yes. 
 
 23177. Do you know any cases in which tenants 
 have purchased ? — Yes, I do. 
 
 23178. That is an experiment to a certain extent ? 
 — Yes, they have purchased under the Landed Estates 
 Court. 
 
 23179. What has been the result of that ?— Well, 
 they are really as bad and as unimproving as any 
 other portions of the community. They crippled them- 
 selves when going in. 
 
 23180. The O'Conor Don.— Where is that?— In 
 the neighbourhood of Kilmallock. They crippled them- 
 selves going in, and are just as unimproving as they 
 were before. 
 
 23181. Could you give us the name of the estate ? — 
 I could not at present. 
 
 23182. How many tenants were there in it ? — Two. 
 One is a good tenant. 
 
 23183. Then he is going on well ? — He is. 
 
 23184. Mr. Shaw. — He is not a peasant? — No, a 
 very different class of man. 
 
 23185. Baron Dowse. — Who are the others ? — 
 One does not solely live by farming. 
 
 23186. The O'Conor Don.— What is the size of 
 his farm ? — About 50 Irish acres. 
 
 23187. Do you think he is going on badly ? — Well, 
 he is not doing much. 
 
 23188. Baron Dowse. — He is no better than the 
 tenants? — No better than the tenants. In fact the 
 worst tenants that I have to manage are those that 
 pay large fines. They are most troublesome. In one 
 case in which the land is good the poor law valua- 
 tion is £41, 10s.- and the tenant holding under a lease 
 of twenty-five years' standing at double the poor law 
 valuation, he got into embarrassment, and sold to a 
 party for £474. 
 
 23189. The O'Conor Don.— That was a case of - 
 the purchase of the tenant's interest ? — A case of the 
 purchase of the tenant's interest. They often give 
 nearly the fee-simple value for it. 
 
 23190. They have to pay the rent in addition? — 
 The rent in addition. 
 
 23191. What I want to know is as to the case of 
 a man beconiinj;- the purchaser of the fee. In how 
 many instances liave they been unsuccessful farmers? — 
 I would not say unsuccessful at all, but not making a 
 good appearance. 
 
 23192. i\Ir. SiiAW. — Not better than their neigh- 
 bours ? — Not better than their neighbours. 
 
 23193. Baron Dowse. — These are the only two 
 cases you know of at all ? — Only two cases. 
 
 22194. Who is the second person? — I know the 
 farm, but I don't know the man. 
 
 23195. Is it a large farm? — No, it is not; it is a 
 small thing. 
 
 23196. How many acres about? — The whole estate 
 I don't suppose is more than 200 acres, in the neigh- 
 bourhood of Kilmallock. 
 
 23197. This man's farm would not be anythiug l.ke 
 200 acres ? — No, the whole thing is small. 
 
 23198. He is not worse off than his neighbours? — 
 
712 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880. 
 
 Edward 
 "White. 
 
 He is not worse off than his neighbours, but the farm 
 does not show improvement in appearance or houses. 
 
 23199. These arc the only cases you know ?— They 
 are very few. 
 
 23200. Baron Dowse.— The magic of property 
 does not seem to have turned everything that it 
 touched into gold ? — Xo, it does not. 
 
 23201. Mr. Shaw.— The bad years were against 
 them too ? — Yes, two or three very bad years. 
 
 23202. The Chaieiian. — You have mentioned 
 drainage on your own property : is there much land 
 of the same kind that might be improved ? — There is a 
 very large tract outside my ditch belonging to Lord 
 Emly. I don't think his portion of the land is at 
 present worth half-a- crown an acre, and it might be 
 made worth £2 an acre. 
 
 23203. Baron Dowse. — Why does he not .do it? — 
 I cannot tell. It is set to a tenant named Roche. 
 
 23204. Mr. Shaw.— Has the tenant a lease?— I 
 cannot tell. 
 
 23205. The Chairman. — Do you think landlords 
 ought to be compelled to improve?: — I think they 
 should, for the benefit of the community and of the 
 nation. 
 
 23206. In what way would you compel them? — 
 I have thought that the county surveyor, or some 
 other proper officer, might be called on to give a 
 return of land comparatively waste, and worth only 
 10s. an acre, but that might be made worth three 
 times that if it were drained ; and that the gentlemen 
 who owned it might be required to take money from 
 the Board of Works and drain the land ; and that if 
 they did not do so some machinery should be put in 
 force to drain it, and they should be obliged to pay for 
 it. If that were not done, the land should be sold. It 
 would give employment to the poor, keep the peasantry 
 quiet, and certainly increase the riches of the nation. 
 
 23207. Mr. Shaw. — Every one is a sufferer by the 
 present state of things ? — We know that in a new 
 colony one of the rules is, that every settler must 
 reclaim so much land every year. In this country 
 reclamation is going backwards. 
 
 23208. Baron Dowse. — Many of them in this 
 country get the land on very easy terms, and so I 
 suppose that is the reason why they keep it so? — 
 They keep it so. A great many tenants in possession 
 object to improve for fear the rent would be raised. 
 That is a universal feeling. 
 
 23209. Don't you think some plan of security of 
 tenure would be beneficial to the country ? — Very 
 beneficial. 
 
 23210. Supposing now that the rent were to be settled 
 in some way that is fair between the landlord and the 
 tenant, and that the tenant was not to be turned out 
 so long as he paid it — would that be useful ? — That 
 is, that the tenant should be paid for his improve- 
 ments? 
 
 23211. He should not be turned out so long as he 
 paid the rent? — If the rent were once fixed; but the 
 difficulty, I should say, is about coercing landlords to 
 accept a particular rent. 
 
 23212. Don't you think that in a number of 
 instances the landlords and the tenants would settle 
 the rent between themselves ? — In a number of in- 
 stances they would. 
 
 23213. And don't you think that in a vast number 
 of instances there would be no question about the 
 rent at all, but it would remain as it is ? — In a vast 
 number. 
 
 232 1 4. And then in cases where the tenant said he 
 paid too much, and the landlord said he paid too 
 little, if they went before an arbitrator, don't you think 
 they could settle it ? — Well, they might ; but I would 
 say that in that case, if the thing were not agreed to, 
 the landlord might get his land. 
 
 23215. If the thing were not agreed to, would you 
 see any objection to having a public officer, in whom 
 everybody would have confidence, to fix the rent ? — 
 Well, I would object to that, unless the landlord got 
 the opportunity of taking the land into his hands him- 
 self. 
 
 23216. Would he give the tenant anything for it? 
 — Oh, I think he should. If they did not agree as to 
 the rent, let the landlord take up the land and pay the 
 penalty imposed by the Act of 1870. 
 
 23217. But you know that under the Act of 1870 
 the landlord would not have to pay anything if the 
 tenant behaved uni-easonably and refused to pay a fair 
 rent, in which case he would not get any compensation 
 at all ? — Let the landlord consider that for himself. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — You would coerce him to drain the 
 land. That would not be much worse than to put 
 him under an obligation to fix the rent by arbitration. 
 You would not treat him with ceremony where his 
 land is undrained. 
 
 23218. Baron Dowse. — Don't you interfere far 
 more with him by your plan than you would by what 
 I was suggesting ? — It would benefit a man to have 
 his land drained. 
 
 23219. Mr. Shaw. — Would it not be a benefit to 
 have the rent fixed without squabbling and fighting 
 and having the country disturbed? — Oh, well, any- 
 thing that would conduce to the peace of the country 
 ought to be considered. 
 
 23220. Baron Dowse. — Don't you think it would 
 be a boon, even supposing they did not stand on strict 
 rii'hts, if the result were to keep the country in peace 
 and order ? — Oh, it would certainly. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — If everybody stood on his strict 
 rights, there would be no living in any country. 
 
 23221. Mr. Shaw. — It is not a mere personal ques- 
 tion between landlord and tenant — society has some 
 interest in it ? 
 
 Witness. — Yes. 
 
 23222. The Chairman. — You say there are demesne 
 lands that you think ought to be kept out of the Land 
 Act ? — Indeed there are. 
 
 28223. There is the description " demesne land " in 
 the Act at present. Is that sufficient? — It is not. 
 
 23224. Baron Dowse. — There are judicial decisions 
 about it? — Are there ? 
 
 23225. Did you ever see Mr. Donnell's book ? No? 
 Well, it is a very good book. 
 
 Witness. — A great many of the demesnes were 
 just set to parties for twenty-five years as farms. 
 
 23226. The Chairman. — Do you suggest that in any 
 alteration of the Land Act, demesne lands should get 
 the benefit of the Act ? — I should think they ought. 
 
 23227. And should "town fields," those that are 
 actually held for the purpose of accommodation ? — 
 Of accommodation. 
 
 23228. That is the description of them in the Act? 
 — Accommodation to parties living in towns. 
 
 23229. You suggest that the right of free sale 
 should be granted to tenants in all cases? — I think so. 
 
 23230. The holdings only subject to re-valuation at 
 the end of existing leases ? — Yes. 
 
 23231. But you mean re-valuation by the landlord? 
 — By the landlord. 
 
 23232. Without the tenant having any voice in it? 
 — Oh, well, if he refused to pay — 
 
 23233. Earou Dowse. — Don't you think the conse- 
 quence of that would be, that the landlord could make 
 the right of free sale completely nugatory by putting 
 a high rent on the estate ? — At the end of a lease he 
 might. 
 
 23234. Or in the case of a holding from year to 
 year, could he not make the right of free sale of no 
 use by charging a man such and such a rent ? — Well, 
 he could. 
 
 23235. That is what they complain of in the north ? 
 — He could. 
 
 23236. The Chairman. — Do you think that the 
 tenant should be entitled to receive back his outlay for 
 all his improvements irrespective of the lime he may 
 have enjoyed them?— I always thought so. Some 
 parties give up their land at the termination of their 
 leases in quite a different state from that in which 
 they got it — at double the value. 
 
 23237. You state that j'ou have some suggestions 
 
 to make as to the registering of improvements? 
 
 Yes. We, as agents, have great troubb in kccpin"- a 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 713 
 
 registration-book of improvements that we make our- 
 selves, and in proving them afterwards in Courts of 
 law. 
 
 23238. There is a means of registration now pro- 
 provided by the Act ? — There is ; but when we allow 
 a tenant for drainage and buildings, the danger is that 
 the tenant might charge us with that afterwards as his 
 own. 
 
 23239. Baron Dowse. — Lord Bessborough is re- 
 ferring to the provision enabling a landlord to register 
 his improvements ? — ^Yes. We don't do that. 
 
 23240. The Chairman. — Your suggestion is, that 
 there should be some plan including a declaration 
 before the Clerk of the Peace ? — Yes. 
 
 23241. Could thatbe cheaply done? — Cheaply,Ithink. 
 
 Edward 
 White. 
 
 23242. Then you go on to say, that when the Oct. -n, 1880. 
 declaration was lodged, the case should be heard by 
 the Chairman of the County, with liberty to appeal to 
 Assizes ? — Yes. 
 
 23243. That would be reintroducing all the expense 
 that you say people are so disinclined to go to ? — Oh, 
 well, they might not go to the Court except when they 
 wished to contest it. They might not have to go to 
 the Court at all about it. 
 
 23244. Do you think that in cases of future im- 
 provements the tenant ought first to call on the land- 
 lord to effect them ? — Indeed I do. 
 
 23245. And that if he refused, the tenant should 
 liave the power of doing them himself?— Of doing 
 them himself — yes. 
 
 Mr. Solomon Frost, examined. 
 
 23246. The Chairman. — Where do you live? — At 
 Feenagh. 
 
 23247. Is it near Limerick ? — Within eight miles. 
 
 23248. Do you hold land?— I farm about 450 
 acres. 
 
 23249. As tenant ? — As tenant. I hold 257 acres in 
 fee besides. 
 
 23250. Mr. Shaw. —Do you farm that ?— Part 
 of it. 
 
 23251. The O'Conoe Don. — Are you agent over 
 any property ? — No, I am not. I have tenants on a 
 portion of my own property. 
 
 23252. The Chairman. — Have you experienced the 
 difficulty a tenant is placed in by the increase of rent ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 20253. Tell us what it is ; under whom do you 
 hold ? — I hold from Mr. Charles Wilmot Smith, from 
 Mr. Thomas Frost, and from Mr. Edmund John 
 Armstrong. 
 
 23254. With respect to which of these properties 
 is it that you wish to mention the question of rent ? — 
 Cappagh. 
 
 23255. Whose is that ? — Mr. Charles Wilmot 
 Smith's. My father took that farm in the year 1851 
 at a yearly rent of £60. 
 
 23256. Mr. Shaw. — How many acres ? — Forty- 
 seven and a half Irish acres. The valuation is £52. 
 The rent was increased to £80 in 1858. 
 
 23257. The Chairman. — Had you made many im- 
 provements in the meantime ? — All the improvements. 
 I will tell you later on. In 1863 the rent was increased 
 to £120, which is the rent I am at present paying. My 
 father wrote several times to Mr. Smith, requesting him 
 to reduce the rent, but he saw no reason for doing so. 
 I wrote this letter to his agent, Mr. William Sydney 
 Cox, in 1879, which, if you will allow me, I will read. 
 I may tell you, before I do so, that when Mr. Smith 
 came in for this property it was in Chancery; and 
 previous to his getting it he came on the lands himself, 
 and walked them, and fixed the rent. Later on, he 
 sent Mr. Cox, as he led the tenants to suppose, to 
 value the land. I walked over my part of the lands of 
 Cappagh with him, and told him the rent I was pay- 
 ing, and he told me on the lands that if he could reduce 
 the rent for me he would. I made several verbal 
 applications to Mr. Smith, but he declined to make 
 any abatement. I then wrote this letter to him, 
 through Mr. Cox, his agent, on the 8th of January 
 1879:— 
 
 Feenagh, Six-M.- Bridge, Co. Clare, 
 
 January 8, '79. 
 
 Dear Sir,— When I last wrote, requestmg you would 
 
 bring under the notice of Mr. Wilmot Smith the excessive 
 
 rent I am paying for the farm I hold from him at Cappa, I 
 
 hoped and expected a favourable reply. I am agam obliged 
 
 r _ . ^ , i,_.i I,. „;„i,j. j-„i,o +v>o T-<>nt I pay 
 
 the most 
 
 to appeal through you, that he might take the rent 
 into his consideration. At aU times, even m the 
 prosperous years, I found it impossible to make t^e rent ; 
 ^nH Uen vnn <ro from One extreme to the other, I think I 
 
 and when you go from one I _ . 
 
 am not wrong in stating we are passmg through a jear that 
 will be as ruinous to many as the famine years. 
 
 My father 
 
 had this farm for many years — from the year 1851 to 1858 
 ■ — the yearly rent £60. By his own improvements and out- 
 lay he was made to pay £80 per year ; still his improve- 
 ments continued, and so did the rent, as it was increased 
 to £110. My father at this time was getting old, and left 
 nie the entire management of his business. I worked still 
 with a will to make it pay, but our industry was rewarded 
 by having the rent raised to £120, the amount I am at 
 present paying for the farm. I have been grappling with 
 it to try and make the rent, and done so, with as little 
 expense as possible. I solemnly pledge myself I have failed 
 to do so. If you compare the price of beef with this and 
 some years past, what was selling at £4 per owt. is at 
 present selhng from 55s. to £3, 5s. per cwt. 
 
 The corn crop has been a failure for the last two years ; 
 and the little that was in the crop was so injured by the 
 wet reason, you had two-thirds of the general crop sold at 
 four and five pence per stone. 
 
 Pigs that were selling at £3 per cwt. is now selling at £2 
 per cwt. 
 
 May God grant things may look better before long, but 
 I fear the prospects are very gloomy. With America con- 
 fronting us with her superabundance of beef, mutton, and 
 bacon, if we didn't raise a four-footed beast she could 
 supply Great Britain. I don't want to ask anything un- 
 reasonable of Mr. Smith. He has his calls as well as others. 
 I do request, as you and he know the depressed state of the 
 times, he may make me some abatement in rent now due, 
 and submit my farm to a valuation by a respectable 
 engineer — say, yourself — or any gentleman that knows the 
 value of land. I hope you or Mr. Smith won't think the 
 proposition I make unreasonable. I make it in good faith, 
 believing it just between landlord and tenant. — I remain, 
 dear sir, yours faithfully, Solomon Fr.osT. 
 
 Afterwards I met Mr. Cox at the North Munster Club 
 in this city. He told me he had had a reply from Mr. 
 Smith, and invited me to his house to read it. From 
 that letter I saw that Mr. Smith saw no reason for 
 reducing the rent ; he said that he did not increase the 
 rent on me, and he would not submit to any valuation. 
 I said to Mr. Cox that that was very unjust treatment 
 of me ; and of course I had to submit, but it was a 
 very great hardship. 
 
 23258. Baron Dowse. — What did he mean by 
 saying that he did not raise tlie rent ? — That since I 
 came into possession, after my father's death, there had 
 been no increase of rent put on me. Immediately after 
 my father's death I fell into possession, and I had 
 knowledge of the place and worked it. 
 
 23259. Were you tenant from year to year, or had 
 you a lease? — From 1851 to 1858 it was held under 
 the Court of Chancery by a seven years' lease. 
 
 23260. You don't reside on the farm ? — I do not. 
 I did reside on a farm adjacent to it. I don't know 
 whether I would be entitled to compensation or not if 
 I were evicted during the time I resided on the 
 adjoining farm, or now. I do notr eside on the other 
 farm in consequence of having been obliged to leave. 
 
 23261. Is it a grass farm ? — A grass farm. 
 
 23262. Mr. Shaw. — Did he make you no abate- 
 ment in the bad times ? — No abatement whatever. 
 
 23263. Baron Dowse. — How near is it to Limerick ? 
 — About seven miles. 
 
 4 Y 
 
 fcjolomo 
 Frost. 
 
714 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 27, 188(1. 23264. Between Six-Mile-Bridge and Ennis ?— It is 
 
 — ^ almost running into the station at Six -Mile -Bridge. 
 
 Solomon -jy-j,_ Qq^^ j jjj^g|. ga,y^ ]jas at all times endeavoured to 
 
 '"^ ' get the rent reduced for me. 
 
 23265. Where does Mr. Smith live?— At Bally- 
 nanty, Bruff, in the county of Limerick. He has also 
 a residence at a place called Killuran, in the county of 
 Clare. 
 
 23266. Mr. Sha^t.— Has he a large property there ? 
 — Not very large. 
 
 23267. — Where you have your land ? — It is not 
 large there. 
 
 23268. Are his other tenants rented high in pro- 
 portion ? — Not so high in proportion. 
 
 23269. Baron Dowse. — Supposing you were a 
 tenant that had to hve by that farm, could you Uve by 
 it ? — No more than I could go into the air or sky. It 
 would be utterly impossible for any man to do so. 
 The letter I have just read is as correct a statement as 
 if I were sworn to it. It would be utterly impossible 
 to live by it — utterly impossible. I met him also in 
 Mr. Cox's office as to the farm I mean. This Mr. 
 Wilmot Smith had some dealings with tenants on an 
 estate known as the Kingston estate. 
 
 23270. Is that the estate that was purchased by 
 Mr. Buckley? — I think it is part of the property. 
 It is at a place called Culhane, on the borders of 
 Clare, Limerick, and Tipperary. 
 
 23271. Near the Galtees? — I cannot give you the 
 exact place where the ground is, but I give you the 
 name of part of the lands. He had some trouble 
 with some tenants there. The tenants complained of 
 excessive rent. Mr. Smith made a statement in the 
 Cork Herald in justification of the rents the tenants 
 were paying, stating that the valuation of those lands 
 was not his valuation at all, but was made by Mr. 
 Cox, and that the tenants on his Clare estate were 
 pleased with Mr. Cox's valuation. Having seen that 
 statement, I met him one day in Mr. Cox's office, and 
 said, " I saw that statement of yours, sir, with 
 reference to your dealings with the tenants on the 
 Culhane estate, in which you state that Mr. Cox 
 made a valuation of that part of the Clare property. 
 I consider the rent I am paying to yon for Cappa 
 too high, and I am willing to abide by the statement 
 you made of leaving the valuation to Mr. Cox." He 
 denied having said so, and said that if I did not wish 
 to pay the rent I could surrender it. Mr. Cox said 
 that I was a young man living by land, and wonld 
 prefer getting a farm to parting with one, and that if 
 he could make some arrangement with me, it would be 
 better. But he replied by saying, " If you don't like 
 the farm I will take it off your hands." 
 
 23272. What improvements did your father make ? 
 - — The land has been cultivated and manured , highly, 
 and in fact used as a draw farm in the way of tillage. 
 It has been handled with the greatest care and atten- 
 tion, and has produced crops as much as any land of 
 the class could produce. 
 
 23273. The Chairman. — Do you think you would 
 get reasonable compensation for it under the Land 
 Act 1 — Now that I don't reside adjacent to the farm, 
 I am debarred from all compensation. 
 
 23274. Baron Do"\vse, — No, that is only for dis- 
 turbance. You would get your compensation for 
 improvements, would you not? — I am not aware. It 
 is not a grass farm. 
 
 23275. Mr. Shaw. — You have not erected build- 
 ings ? — I have made no buildings. 
 
 23276. Have you drained it? — The land is perfectly 
 reclaimed in every way. The valuation is £52, and 
 my rent is £120 — I can establish that — and the im- 
 provements have been effectually and substantiallymade. 
 
 23277. The O'Conok Don. — You could not say 
 how much money you laid out on those substantial 
 improvements ? — No, not at all. I have not the re- 
 motest idea. The place was worked by my father 
 when I was not able to be of any use at all. 
 
 23278. The Chaieman. — Was there clearing of 
 fences? — Everythmg. It is now as square as the 
 table. Every field is in perfect order. 
 
 23279. Were the fences made by your father? — 
 Every one of them. 
 
 23280. Mr. Shaw. — In fact it was made what it is 
 by you ? — By my father. 
 
 23281. Baron Doavse. — If ever you are turned out 
 of it, don't give up your claim for compensation with- 
 out good advice. Don't assume that you have no 
 claim for improvements, at all events. 
 
 Witness. — I have to add with reference to my 
 statement about the fences, that this farm was in 
 possession of Colonel O'Brien before my father got 
 it. Colonel O'Brien made some of those improve- 
 ments ; and my father gave him a sum of money in 
 payment for them. 
 
 23282. Did your father give the money to Colonel 
 O'Brien with the knowledge and consent of the land- 
 lord ? — I could not answer that question. 
 
 23283. Mr. Shaw.— It was a good while ago?— 
 1851 was the time, I think. 
 
 23284. The Chairman. —What have you to say 
 as to the other properties ? — As to Ross Managher, 
 it is not on your hst. It is a place I was removed 
 from in 1875 by Mr. Henry V. D'Esterre. His agent 
 is Mr. Frank Morice of Springfield. . 
 
 23285. You were ejected ? — I was not ejected. I 
 was obliged to surrender the place. I will tell you 
 the circumstances. 
 
 23286. Is it a grass farm? — A grass farm— not 
 entirely so, but grass and tillage. I forgot to add 
 that in my statement. 
 
 23287. Baron Dowse. — The farm you hold under 
 Mr. Smith is grass and tillage ? — Yes. 
 
 23288. The Ciiaiesian. — The one you hold under 
 Mr. D'Esterre is entirely grass ?— Yes, when I held it. 
 
 23289. How many acres does it contain? — Sixty- 
 six acres Irish. 
 
 23290. What is the rent of it?— The rent was 
 £98, 5s. 7^d. to me. 
 
 23291. What was the cause of your leaving it? — 
 My grandfather got possession of that place, and got 
 a lease of it for his own life and those of his two 
 sons, my father and uncle. My father died in 1871, 
 and in r875 we got an intimation that my uncle, who 
 was the last surviving life, had died in America. 
 Some time previous to that, Mr. D'Esterre thought 
 my uncle in America was dead, and he sent for me 
 and told me that the lease of my farm was up. He 
 was under the impression that a brother of mine who 
 was drowned was one of the lives in the lease, and 
 that it had expired. I convinced him to the con- 
 trary, explaining that the last life was that of my 
 uncle, who was then still living in America. I said 
 that the house, offices, and place were out of order, 
 and thas I was anxious to make improvements and to 
 make the place suitable and respectable, as it was so 
 near his own, because he lived at the opposite side 
 of the road — in fact, within 150 yards of my house. 
 He said that my lease was not up, and that it would 
 be time enough to speak of those things when it would 
 be. At the expiration of the lease he sent for me, 
 and said he required possession of my farm. I said 
 I thought that was not the way he would treat me, 
 the place having been so long held by my father and 
 grandfather, and that as my mother was then hving 
 with me it would be a great hardship on her to be 
 obliged to leave. He said it was too near his place, 
 and that he could not leave it to me. I said, " As 
 you complain of the house being so near, I will 
 give you the lawn and the dwelling-house, provided 
 you give me the Creg portion of the land and the 
 meadow land. He refused to do so, saying it was 
 entirely too near his place. I then asked him to give 
 me instead of the meadow land another portion of 
 his property. He declined to do so, but professed 
 great friendship for me, saying he would do anything 
 he could to oblige me. I had to submit to his terms, 
 and give him up possession of the farm. 
 
 23291a. Baron Dowse. — What were the terms ? — I 
 am not able to tell the amount, but I think he gave me 
 half a year's rent. 
 
 23292. He gave you no other land ? — No other land. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 715 
 
 23293. Mr. Shaw. — You resided in tlie place? — I 
 resided in the place, and the only reason he ever ad- 
 duced for removing me from it, was that I called it 
 Ross Managher House. His own piece was called 
 Ross Managher Cottage, but he has sicce improved on 
 the cottage, and called it Ross Managher Castle. 
 
 23294. Has he pulled your house down ? — No ; he 
 left my mother the dwelling-honse, whore she still lives, 
 for her life. But there is a front eritrance to it, and he 
 has given her no special right to go through it, but 
 only a sort of privilege, so that at any moment he may 
 close the hall door. I am almost certain that that was 
 done to remove me from the place, should I have 
 remained in it with my mother. The namiug of the 
 house was no naming of mine ; it is known on the 
 Ordnance map as Ross Managher House. 
 
 23295. The Chairmax. — What you mention as to 
 the entrance is a thing hardly affecting the letting of 
 the land and its value. State anything that affects the 
 land ? — Very well, sir. My father had something to 
 say to the supervision of the sluices of a tidal river 
 called the Owen Garney which passed by, and which 
 flows to Bunratty. A portion of the property extend- 
 ing to Bunratty belongs to Mr. D'Esterre ; and there 
 were very important sluices on that land which required 
 to be looked after. My father told his father that it 
 was necessary to do so in time, as neglect of them 
 would entail considerable expense. The sluices were 
 neglected ; the banks got broken ; the land was inun- 
 dated ; and the water ran over the crops that were on 
 the lands of the tenants. Some of the tenants made 
 trenches and dams to keep back the water from their 
 crops, lest they should be destroyed. A complaint 
 about [this was made to Mr. Robert Kerr D'Esterre, 
 and one of the tenants was sent for, and told that if 
 he did not take down the dam he would be evicted. 
 
 23296. Baron Dowse. — How long ago is that? — ■ 
 I am not able to give you the dates. 
 
 23297. It is not within the last ten years? — N"ot 
 within the last ten years. 
 
 23298. Or twenty years? — Oh yes, it is within 
 twenty years. He refused to take down the dam, and 
 it was taken down for him by some person unknown to 
 him. The rent was very high on those tenants, and in 
 consequence of their crops being destroyed they fell 
 into arrear. After some time, when he found he could 
 not get the rents from the tenants, he forgave them the 
 arrears, and took the greater portion of the lands off 
 their hands ; and they now hold somewhere about 
 half of what they then held. One of those tenants, 
 Patrick Frost, had seventy-five acres, but his son has 
 at present only thirty-two acres. His rent is at pre ■ 
 sent £3, 10s. an acre ; and I pity him, for his case is 
 as bad as any man's could possibly be. These were 
 tenants that any man might be proud of, being most re- 
 spectable, industrious people, and above the class that 
 would be parties to crime or outrage or disturbance of 
 any kind. They were so law-abiding that they were 
 never seen in a criminal court. 
 
 23299. The Chaikjian. — Have they been much 
 broken down by the loss of the lands ? — The sons 
 and daughters and little children of Patrick, John, 
 and Solomon Frost, although they dress respectably 
 and decently, have much reduced means. 
 
 23300. Baron Dowse. — After taking the portions 
 of land from them, did he charge the same rent per 
 acre for the remainder ? — He did. 
 
 23301. Has he left your mother rent free ?— No, he 
 charges her os. a year. 
 
 23302. That is practically rent free? — Practically 
 rent free. She has a kitchen garden of about fifteen 
 perches. Some of the tenants lately asked him for an 
 abatement, but he said that in consequence of having 
 to pay so much himself he could not give it. I want 
 to make reference now to the cases of other tenants, 
 without giving their names or those of their landlords. 
 
 23303. Baron Dowse.— You may tell them shortly, 
 without going into full details. 
 
 Witness. — Gentlemen who were joint landlords Oct. n, 1880. 
 
 came to shoot over a property. The tenants were glad , 
 
 to receive them, and went to meet them. They went I^qT"'' 
 to the house of one tenant, and congratulated him on ""^ ' 
 how prosperous and happy he seemed to be, as they 
 saw a pig and a little bacon hanging in their kitchen. 
 The poor man had to deny the bacon, and to say that 
 it belonged to a kind lady in the neighbourhood whom 
 they were accommodating by smoking it in the kitchen 
 for her. The man said he anticipated their move- 
 ments, and thought they were going to kill two birds 
 with one shot, which they afterwards did by putting 
 2.5 per cent, on the rent of that tenant. 
 
 23304. From seeing the piece of bacon in the kitchen ? 
 — Yes. 
 
 23305. Mr. Siiaw. — How long ago is that? — About 
 two years ago. 
 
 23306. Baron Dowse. — Was that in the county of 
 Clare ? — In the county of Clare. 
 
 23307. Mr. Shaw. — You know the things you your- 
 self are speaking of from your own knowledge ? — Yes ; 
 indeed my father held a farm from Mr. Blood, and his 
 agent was Mr. Jonas Studdert. In consequence of 
 his not voting for a landlord who was a candidate for 
 the county of Clare, an increase of 15s. was put on 
 him. 
 
 23308. How long ago is that ? — I am not able to say. 
 
 23309. The Chaikman. — How do you know what 
 the motive was? — The way I impute the motive is, 
 that my father was asked by the agent to vote for this 
 candidate, and did not do so. They were on the best of 
 terms hitherto, and soon after the increase was put on. 
 
 23310. Mr. Shaw. — And the increase was put on 
 very soon after ? — Not immediately ; I could not tell 
 the time. 
 
 23311. The Chaihman. — Was the rent excessive? 
 — Oh yes, because he was obliged to surrender. He 
 did hold it until he was tu-ed of it, as I did with my 
 farm at Cappagh. 
 
 , 23312. Baron Dowse. — Was it a grass farm? — 
 It was. There is only one other thing that I wish to 
 refer to, and that is compensation for improvements. 
 Will you hear that ? 
 
 23313. Chaikman.— Yes. 
 
 Witness. — I think the tenant is entitled to the full 
 benefit of the improvements made in his holding, and 
 that any compensation awarded to him should be the 
 full amount, without any bar as to the length of time 
 he had enjoyed those improvements. I think it is a 
 great check on the making of improvements by tenants 
 to take any from them, because by giving them the 
 full value of their improvements you stimulate them to 
 be industrious ; and it requu'es a good deal of time 
 and labour and energy to make improvements. 
 
 23314. Baron Dowse. — Supposing a man built a 
 dweUing-house on a farm, and enjoyed it for thirty or 
 forty years, according to your idea, he should' get the 
 then value of the house ? — Provided the house is in 
 substantial repair. 
 
 23315. You think that he should get the then value 
 of it, having regard to the condition of repair it was 
 in, without taking into consideration the length of time 
 he had enjoyed it ? — Yes. 
 
 23316. Mr. Shaw. — You would not apply that 
 to manures? — I would not, because the cost could 
 not be estimated ; but I would apply it to drainage 
 expenses. 
 
 23317. Baron Dowse. — The statute gives compen- 
 sation for unexhausted manures ? — It does, but it does 
 not give the full amount of compensation. When lands 
 have been improved by drainage, you leave them in 
 much better condition and heart, and increase their 
 value. Lands that may be only worth £1 an acre are 
 increased in value by such improvements to perhaps 
 £2 an acre. I say that the tenant under such circum- 
 stances is entitled to the full amount of his expend- 
 iture. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 4 Y2 
 
716 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880. 
 
 Robert W. C. 
 Keevcs. 
 
 Robert William Carey Beeves, Esq., of Killimer, examined. 
 
 23318. The Chairman. — You are a landlord in the 
 county of Clare ? — Yes. 
 
 23319. What is the extent of your property? — 
 Over 3000 acres. 
 
 23320. You are also a land agent? — No. 
 
 23321. Are you acquainted with the estate of 
 Colonel Vandeleur ? — Yes. 
 
 23322. What is the present state of the tenantry 
 on your own property? — With the exception of about 
 six or seven, they are pretty well off. I have been 
 paid all my March and May rents except by about 
 eleven tenants; and there are about five or six of 
 them that are very badly off. I paid the debts of 
 three or four of them myself; and now they are in 
 such a state that, unless I stock their land in addi- 
 tion, I don't kn ■'w what is to become of them. The 
 money-lenders in three cases were going to sell them 
 up, but I advanced them the money to pay them 
 off. 
 
 23323. To save them from being sold out of their 
 holdings ? — Yes, by the money-lenders. 
 
 23324. What would happen if they were sold up in 
 that way — would the holdings be sold too ? — Well, it 
 never has happened to me. I have never had a case 
 myself under the Land Act, or have had any dispute 
 at all with my tenants. 
 
 23325. Should you give a notice if the sale of 
 holdings is not allowed ? — I never allowed sales. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — You could not prevent a Sheriff's 
 sale from going on ; the only thing that you could do 
 would be to tell the man that bid that you would 
 evict him. 
 
 Witness. — These men all owed me two years' rent, 
 and in three cases the money-lenders would have sold 
 what little they had. They are not large holders. 
 
 23326. You did that to save them? — From those 
 money-lenders. 
 
 23327. Do you find that to be a cause of distress 
 amongst tenants ? — I believe that about me there is 
 hardly a tenant that is not security, either for some 
 one else if he be a solvent man, or for himself if he 
 be insolvent. 
 
 23328. Has that arisen within the last few years ? — 
 It came under my knowledge within the last eighteen 
 months. I daresay it may have been going on 
 gradually, but I was not aware of it until last year. 
 
 23329. You have said already that there have 
 been very few evictions on property of your own ? — 
 Very few. 
 
 23330. Or on Colonel Vandeleur's ?— Or on Colonel 
 Vandeleur's. 
 
 23331. Could you give us the numbers? — I had 
 on my own property during the last twenty years only 
 one eviction. It was of a man who owed two-and-a- 
 half-years' rent. He had no stock of any sort. I 
 gave him time and time and time, and at last he said 
 himself that if he could not do any good, he would 
 give it up. I have him now, with his family, as a 
 labourer. That is the only eviction I had. He had 
 nothing on earth in the place. He tried sub-letting 
 it, and even with that he was not able to pay the rent. 
 I allowed him to sub-let it. He had nothing on earth 
 in the place except a few hens. 
 
 23332. The Chairman. — Is it customary on your 
 property to make allowances for improvements ? — 
 I have not made many allowances. I have in 
 some cases of larger tenants. In the case of small 
 tenants, I did some drainage for them at one time, 
 but that was some years ago. I did not charge them 
 for it. 
 
 23333. Did you make any abatements last year ? — 
 I did. I gave 10 per cent, to a certain class. I gave 
 20 per cent, on one half-year, and 10 per cent, on 
 another, to some grazing tenants. I forgave some 
 half-years' rents in particular cases, namely, in four 
 or five cases of widows, and people of that sort who 
 were not very well off. 
 
 23334. In fact, you judged according to the circum- 
 
 stances of the different tenants, and gave them assist- 
 ance accordingly ? — Accordingly ; but I gave 10 per 
 cent, to everybody all round, except in the case of 
 some leases which were generally very much under- 
 let. I did not give any abatement. 
 
 23335. Have you many leases on your property 
 still running ? — I have been making a calcula- 
 tion, and I think about two-fifths of my property is 
 leased. 
 
 23336. And these are falling in from time to time? 
 — Well, they have not as yet fallen in. 
 
 23337. Are they held at. low rents? — They are 
 held in some cases for less than the Government 
 valuation — two or three of them. For one large 
 farm they pay me £128 a year, which is something 
 less than the poor law valuation. 
 
 23338. In case of a lease dropping in, do you have 
 a re-valuation of the farm ?• — Yes. *■ 
 
 23339. Are the tenants generally satisfied with the 
 rent you put on it ? — Well, I think they are. The 
 greater part of the small tenants had their land for 
 fifty-two years at the same rents as tenants from 
 year to year. My father never made any change at 
 all from what was done by my grandfather. I put a 
 small increase on them five years ago, which they paid 
 very cheerfully ever since ; and they paid the other 
 day. I gave abatements last year ; and the other day 
 — two months ago — they paid. 
 
 23340. Are they at present making any difiiculty 
 about paying ? — No, I was paid very well. It was in 
 the end of August that I was paid ; and there are 
 about twelve tenants altogether that have not paid 
 the March or May rents. There are about four who 
 owe a year's rent — the insolvent fellows. 
 
 23341. Is that the rent due up to May? — March 
 and May. 
 
 23342. The O'Conor Don.— Haven't you a hang- 
 ing gale ? — No, I have no hanging gale. I declared 
 off the hanging gale about fifteen years ago. 
 
 23343. And gave it to them ? — No ; they paid it 
 up. I don't ask for the March rent until August 
 within the year ; but I don't let one year's rent catch 
 another. 
 
 23344. The Chairman. — Are those leases at all 
 underlet? — There are some very old leases underlet; 
 and there are some leases that are let very well for 
 the value. One is curiously circumstanced. " The land 
 is higher let than any that I have in lease, the rent 
 being 60 per cent, over the Government valuation; 
 the rent, was due on the 29th of September, and 
 the tenant sent me a cheque for it on the 3d of 
 October. 
 
 23345. Baron Dowse. — Is it grass land?— It is 
 chiefly grass. 
 
 23346. Is he an under-tenant ? — No, he has it all. 
 
 23347. The Chairman. — In the case of under- 
 tenants, what rent is the middleman charging?— In 
 some cases they are charging nearly double what is paid 
 to me. In one case, in which the middleman is getting 
 £2, 10s. an acre, I am not getting more than £1, G& 
 for all the adjoining land round it. 
 
 23348. Have you found that on the falling in 
 of the leases they reduced to the under-tenant?— 
 I have not as yet. None of the leases have fallen 
 in to me. 
 
 23349. What is the general scale of letting over the 
 Government valuation ? — My own estate, roughly 
 speaking, is let for about 25 per cent, over the 
 Government valuation, and some holdings are let for 
 the Government valuation, but very few. 
 
 23350. What;is the case on Colonel Vandeleur's 
 estate I— He lets it all for 25 per cent, over the Govern- 
 ment valuation, and pays half the county cess and 
 half the poor rates, and charges them 10s. an acre for 
 reclaimed bog ; and he has offered them all leases on 
 that arrangement. 
 
 23351. Mr. Shaw. — Is that a recent arrangement? 
 — It was made about the year 1875, I think- I am 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 717 
 
 not sure of the exact year, but I think it was 1875 or 
 1876. 
 
 23352. The Chairman.— Did they accept leases?— 
 Some of them have taken leases, but I think the greater 
 number of them have not. 
 
 23353. Mr. Shaw. — There was an advance of rent? 
 — He had let his land up to that time for the Govern- 
 ment valuation ; and at that time the Farmers' Club in 
 Limerick said that 30 per cent, over the Government 
 valuation would be a fair scale of letting-, and I re- 
 member his saying to me, " I will charge 5 per cent, 
 less than what the Farmers' Club say, and they can't 
 object to that." He also allowed them half the county 
 cess. 
 
 23354. The Chairman. — Throughout the country 
 generally has there been much increase of rent since 
 the Land Act ? — I think there has. 
 
 23355. You think the landlords began to look 
 more closely to the matter? — I think the result of the 
 Land Act was to put the landlords more on their 
 rights. 
 
 23356. As a general rule, is there an arrangement 
 for allowing tenants to sell their holdings amongst 
 other tenants? — I don't think so. I don't think it 
 is recognised. I think it is very often done sub rosd, 
 the landlord winking at it; but I don't think it is 
 regularly recognised in any way. 
 
 2335'7. Your answer to the query as to whether the 
 Land Act has encouraged or checked tenants in im- 
 proving, is, that you think it has encouraged them? — 
 I think it has encouraged tenants' improvements and 
 checked landlords'. 
 
 23358. Then you think the tenants have felt that 
 they have got security for their improvements by the 
 Land Act ? — I do. 
 
 23359. It has been very often answered that it 
 rather encouraged them for a short time, but that of 
 late they seemed to have lost confidence in the security 
 that they believed they got by the Land Act? — I 
 don't think that. I think there has been a very great 
 general improvement in the land. In the west of Clare 
 there has been immense improvement, and a great deal 
 of drainage — not very well done, often ; but a great 
 deal has been done by the tenants themselves. The 
 reclaimed cut-away bog is some of the^most valuable 
 land they have now. The potatoes never get black on 
 it, or very little, when they do on the up land. 
 
 23360. Have you much turf cut-away bog land? — 
 Xot much. I have two old turf bogs near where I 
 live, that have been cut away. These I have generally 
 given to any tenants who will take them, holding 
 for nothing for two years. I then put on a small 
 rent. Tery often I did not put on anything for five or 
 six years. Then I talked to them, and asked them 
 what did they think they could pay? and in some 
 cases I got as much as f 1 an acre for it, but generally 
 from 10s. to 15s. an acre. But that land is sublet 
 again by those people to labourers, who are very often 
 the people who reclaim it ; the tenants sometimes get 
 £4 an acre for it for £1 that I do. 
 
 23361. Mr. Shaw. — Is it manured? — It is manured 
 by those labourers. 
 
 23362. The farmers don't manure it? — Sometimes 
 they do. Very often they don't. Very often it is the 
 labourers who really manure the land, and not the 
 farmers. 
 
 23363. The Chairman. — What do they do in the 
 way of drainage? — They don't do very much really 
 good drainage. They make surface drains, and some- 
 times main drains. In one case a man made a very 
 good drain himself in a cut-away bog. He asked me 
 to give the bog to him, and was quite satisfied to pay 
 rent ; and I put some rent on him after seven or eight 
 years, and since that he has been paying it regularly. 
 
 23364. On Colonel Yandeleur's estate is there a 
 large extent of reclaimed bog?— A large extent of it. 
 He charges 10s. an acre all round for reclaimed bog— 
 for what is under cultivation. 
 
 23365. The O'Conor Don.— Has he done much m 
 the way of improvements ?— The tenants have reclaimed 
 a good deal. A great deal is being done every year. 
 
 drains for them for nothing, and allowed 
 
 23366. Has the landlord done much? — He made 
 some arterial 
 them the use of them if they liked. 
 
 23367. Is it the custom on his estate to assist in 
 building? — I think he very often gives timber and 
 slates for building, but they seem to prefer thatched 
 houses ; and I believe a thatched cottage is more 
 comfortable to live in than a slated one. 
 
 2336s. Is it your habit to assist in building at all .' 
 — WeW. I have not, much. Where I live not many of 
 the small tenaiits have slated houses. To a great 
 many of them I have given timber ; and a great many 
 of them have made outhouses and cowhouses, and 
 small things of that sort, and I have always given 
 timber for that if they asked for it. 
 
 23369. The Chairman. — Do you think there ought 
 to be some tribunal that could assess rent in case of a 
 difference between the landlord and the tenant ? — Well, 
 I do. I think something of that sort would be good. 
 I think in a great many cases it is rather unfair on the 
 tenants that one landlord asks them nearly double the 
 rent that another would. A proper valuation would 
 take a great many years to make, and for that time 
 you could not have a test of the real value of the land ; 
 and I think it would prevent a great deal of heart- 
 burning and ill-will if there were some test of the value 
 of the land — if, where the tenant said he was paying 
 too much, and the landlord said he was not getting 
 enough, both could go before some competent tri- 
 bunal which could say, " The land is worth so 
 much." 
 
 23370. Do you think that in the great majority 
 of cases that would lead to their being satisfied to let 
 the rents remain as they are? — I believe that the 
 tenants, in the majority of cases, would be satisfied. 
 On my own estate, I never had a single land case, or 
 trouble with my tenants ; and I believe that the 
 majority of landlords and tenants would get on very 
 well if they were let alone. But there is a class 
 of landlords who are very rapacious, and if they 
 could be checked I think the country would be the 
 better of it. 
 
 23371. Do you think there should be some check 
 on the power of giving notices to quit? — I do. I think 
 that if annual notices to quit were done away withj 
 and the landlord had power every seven years to serve 
 a notice to quit, it would be for the better. What I 
 believe to be the real solution of the thing is to 
 encourage leases, and to encourage some sort of 
 security of tenure, without having recourse to any 
 arbitrary measure. If possible, I would rather leave 
 it to the landlords and tenants to settle the rent 
 between them ; but, on the other hand, I have known 
 a case where the landlord said, "I want £2, 10s. an 
 acre for laud," being an enormously high rent, and the 
 tenant oiTered him £2, 9s. 6d, and yet he would not 
 take it, but said he should have what he had said. The 
 man said he could not pay it, and gave up the land ; 
 and the same landlord now is in such a state that he 
 cannot get any rents at all. They won't pay him any- 
 thing. He oflfered them 30 per cent, abatement the 
 other day, and yet they won't pay him. 
 
 23372. Baron Dowse. — Was that £2, 10s. an acre 
 too much ? — Well, I think it was. 
 
 23373. The O'Conor Don. — Was it grass land? — 
 A light sort of tillage land. A bad description of land. 
 
 23374. The Chairman. — As to leases, do you think 
 that there might be some statutory form of lease? — I 
 think it a very absurd thing putting in all those clauses 
 into leases. I myself have given one or two leases with 
 a lot of clauses in them which I thought were absurd 
 — one never could enforce them. I think the land- 
 lords ought to have game and usual royalties; but 
 there are a lot of other clauses which are unneces- 
 sary. 
 
 23376. Do you think there might be some simple 
 form of statutory lease that would meet almost every 
 case that would be required? — I do. 
 
 23377. llow do they hold on Colonel Yandeleur's 
 estate ? — When he put on 25 per cent, he offered them 
 all leases. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880, 
 
 llobart W. C. 
 Kcevcs, 
 
718' 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 27, 1880, 
 
 Botert W. C. 
 Reeves. 
 
 23378. Are there old leases?— There are some old 
 leases, which have for the most part dropped in. There 
 is one thing connected with the question of money- 
 lenders which I wish to say. Nobody has any idea of 
 the extent to which they have got bold of the tenants. 
 There are really cases of tenants in which, besides 
 paying the money-lenders for them, unless you also 
 stocked their lands, I don't see what is to be done for 
 thepi. On my own estate, which is not a very large 
 one, there are five or six such cases ; and if you went 
 to a larger estate you would have more. 
 
 23379. And where they are more distressed tenants 
 too ? — More distressed tenants. 
 
 23380. Baron Dowse. — Is it a fact, Mr. Eeeves, 
 that there is a cessation in that mode now of raising 
 money? I have been told that the money-lenders 
 don't give th« money so willingly this year as before ? 
 — Well, I really don't know. I know the tenants are 
 so mortgaged that every one of them is more or less in 
 their hands. 
 
 23381. Mr. Shaw. — They are shopkeepers generally ? 
 — They are shopkeepers. 
 
 23382. Who gave them goods first ?— Oh no. They 
 are regular- money-lenders. They are generally pawn- 
 brokers. 
 
 23383. Baron Dowse. — Did the banks advance 
 money too? — They did; but I think they have a 
 better class of customers to deal with. 
 
 23384. The Chairman. — And they don't charge so 
 high ? — No, only what the rate of discount is. The 
 money-lenders always charge 20 per cent. — Is. in the 
 pound for three months, besides the cost of the bill 
 stamps, besides a couple of glasses of whisky to the 
 person who goes security for the borrower, and so on. 
 In one case, where a tenant's rent was £14, he paid 
 £10 interest to a money-lender for £50, but I gave 
 him the money at 5 per cent., which was a dead saving 
 of £7, 10s. per annum. 
 
 23385. Baron Dowse. — Do you think he will pay 
 you? — I think it is extremely doubtful whether he • 
 will nor not. I have always got on very well with 
 my tenantry, and my father did also. Last year 
 v.'as such a bad year, that I thought the chance of 
 helping the tenants was worth more than a few 
 hundred pounds — it keeps up a good feeling. I 
 think it is doubtful whether I will be paid the 
 money back or not, though I think there is one 
 man who will repay me. I don't know about the 
 others. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Patrick 
 
 O'Shaugh- 
 
 nessy. 
 
 Mr. Patrick O'Shaughnesst, examined. 
 
 23386. The Chairman.— You live at Bruff?— Yes, 
 my lord. 
 
 23387. You are a farmer? — Principally a shop- 
 keeper, but I am a small farmer — I hold seven or 
 eight acres. 
 
 23388. What is your business? — I am a draper; 
 I am a poor law guardian for the electoral division. 
 
 23389. Have you had a good deal of experience of 
 the tenantry of the county? — Well, I do know a good 
 deal about them. My principal object is to draw 
 attention to the miserable state of the labouring 
 population. 
 
 23390. We are very anxious to have some infor- 
 mation upon it : are they in a very wretched state in 
 your neighbourhood? — They are, my lord. 
 
 23391. Are they in crowded dwellings ? — Precisely. 
 Their state is very miserable. 
 
 23392. Are they not able to support themselves ? — 
 The labour they get from time to time would never 
 sustain themselves and their families. 
 
 1 23393. Mr. Shaw. — They don't get constant em- 
 ployment ? — ^No. 
 
 23394. Do they live in the towns? — Principally in 
 the towns, huddled together in small lodging-houses, 
 two or three families in one miserable house, with 
 their beds on the floors. 
 
 23395. They work during the season with the 
 farmers in the country ? — Yes, they generally come 
 into BrufF from the counties of Clare, and from 
 Cork and Kerry, in the season, and they are huddled 
 together in small lodging-houses, in a deplorable 
 state. 
 
 23396. The Chairman. — That is during the season 
 for work? — Yes, from the hay-saving until the 
 potatoes are dug — from the 1st of July until this time. 
 The permanent labourers who remain are also in a 
 wretched position. They have no dwellings. They 
 are very poorly circumstanced, and the labour they 
 get would not be at all sufiicient for their support, 
 except that their wives make out a regular trade 
 by begging through the country. 
 
 23397. These are the permanent labourers of the 
 district ? — Yes. 
 
 23398. The others are the men who come in the 
 working season? — Well, they sometimes bring their 
 wives with them. Unfortunately they sometimes 
 remain ;_ if they earn a few pounds, they become 
 located in the place in the winter, and they ultimately 
 become chargeable on the rates. 
 
 23399. That is if they stay long enough? Yes. 
 
 23400. You have had more experience of those 
 who have habitations ? — Yes. 
 
 23401. In your own district? — ^Yes. 
 
 23402. And you say their position is very bad ? — 
 They are very badly off. 
 
 23403. And that they are very badly off and very 
 badly housed? — Very badly housed, yes. Last 
 season wc had a Relief Committee in the town which 
 distributed about £400, received from the Mansion 
 House, the Land League, and private subscriptions, 
 during three months from the 10th of January to the 
 1st of April. We had one hundred of those people 
 engaged daily at Is. a day, and they were very glad 
 to get it. In some instances two or three of a family 
 were engaged ; and where there was only a single 
 person supporting himself, we were obliged to give 
 him only three days of work in the week. They 
 worked from early morning until night, in the cold and 
 wet, breaking stones ; and that I am sure would not 
 have supported them, but that their wives went 
 through the farms begging meal and milk, and any- 
 thing that they could get. 
 
 23404. Have you many resident landlords in your 
 county? — We have not — we have a few resident land- 
 lords. There are Lord Fermoy, and the O'Grady of 
 Kilballyowen. Mr. John Bevan of Elton has property 
 near Bruff, but he resides at Elton. 
 
 23405. Tliere's less employment for labourers than 
 in any other parts of the country? — Precisely. 
 
 23406. Do the farmers give them regular employ- 
 ment? — Indeed no, they do not. 
 
 23407. Only at special times? — In the season for 
 saving the crops. 
 
 23408. Mr. Shaw. — That principally occurs on the 
 lands?— Yes. 
 
 23409. And they don't keep the labourers on their 
 farms? — No; a farmer with 400 acres might not have 
 more than four or five labourers on his holding. 
 
 23410. And these would be herds or caretakers? — 
 Yes. 
 
 23411. The Chairman. — Their houses, I suppose, 
 are cabins ? — Yes, one room. They have no land. 
 
 23412. Describe their habitations? — Generally 
 speaking, there is only what you may call a kitchen — 
 no division between the sleeping apartment and the 
 place where they prepare their food. It is generally 
 one apartment, and sometimes they have a pig in one 
 corner. If they have hens or ducks, the hens roost 
 generally over the door, which is offensive and dano-er- 
 ous to health. I believe that hens and fowl generally 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 719 
 
 are worse m a samtary point of view than the pig 
 itselt. Any person opening the door of one of these 
 houses in the morning and going in, would And, if 
 there were hens roosting over the door, that there was 
 a most disagreeable smell. Then these people are 
 very badly clothed. They have a little bedding in 
 the corner thrown sometimes on straw, with a few 
 stones to keep it together, and a little covering. Some 
 years ago we had a Relief Committee which supplied 
 them with blankets, but the state. of their houses was 
 so bad that the blankets became dirty and filthy after 
 a very short time. 
 
 23413. Have their houses windows ? — Well, some- 
 times they have miserable little holes — not like 
 windows at all, though glass is so very cheap. Their 
 houses are very badly lighted. 
 
 23414. What have they in the way of a chimney ? 
 — Well, generally a hole, though sometimes a little 
 chimney is erected. In the houses of the poor about 
 the town there is scarcely a chimney at all. There is 
 some sort of opening in the roof that lets a little of 
 the smoke out. 
 
 23415. You have mentioned something as to their 
 having land ? — Yes ; I don't think that any alteration 
 in the Land Laws will have the effect of pacifying the 
 people and making them comfortable, unless some 
 provision is introduced in the way of giving them a 
 hit of ground. When they are brought to the towns 
 they are open to every temptation — no people, 
 particularly those of them that read those revolu- 
 tionary periodicals, are more so. They say to them- 
 selves. No change can make us worse off than we are. 
 If they were sent round from the towns through the 
 farmers, that would separate them from temptation, 
 and be a great means of improving their position. 
 
 23416. Would you fix the price which the farmers 
 should charge them for ground ? — ^Yes ; I would 
 suggest that they should get half an acre of ground 
 at the farmer's rent, and that the Government should 
 advance them money to build houses, charging 
 interest for it; £50 would build a comfortable 
 labourer's cottage. 
 
 23417. Who should get the loan and build ? — 
 WeU, if the tenant got the money he should be 
 compelled to build the house in a selected position. 
 It should have a kitchen, two bed-rooms, an enclosed 
 yard, and a piggery. That might be done com- 
 fortably for £50. The interest of that in addition 
 to the rent of the half-acre should be put on the 
 labourer, and made a perpetual chai-ge — not a charge 
 payable in 35 years, but a perpetual charge — for the 
 half-acre of ground and bouse. Let that be paid to 
 the tenant; and I would suggest also that the interest 
 should be collected along with the poor rate in order 
 to save the Government expense. The £1 a year 
 or 2 per cent, perpetual interest should be collected 
 in that way. 
 
 23418. It has been suggested that if neither the 
 landlord nor the tenant would make comfortable 
 dwellings for labourers, the Board of Guardians should 
 have power to borrow the money and take the land 
 for the purpose ? — Well, that would be a very good 
 suggestion. Mine would be that if the tenant 
 neglected to build the house or keep the occupier in 
 it when it was built, a penalty should be imposed on 
 him by the Board of Guardians, and applied in pay- 
 ment of the rates of the electoral division — a penalty 
 not higher than £10 or lower than £5. 
 
 23419. Baron Dowse.— If any privileges should be 
 conferred on the farmer by the Legislature, might he 
 not be denied them unless he built labourers' houses ? 
 — Well, that would be very good. 
 
 23420. The Chairman. — Might there not be many 
 cases in which the farmer would say—" I don't want 
 labourers on my holding ? "—I would make it com- 
 pulsory for the benefit of the community. If the law 
 ia to improve the farmers, they ought to improve the 
 labourers, who have as good a right to live in the 
 country as they have. 
 
 23421 The O'Conoe Don.— What would you do 
 if the labourer got ill and died, and left a helpless 
 
 family in the house, who were unable to work for the Oct. 27, 1880. 
 
 farmer ? — Well, I would not ask the labourer to work . 
 
 for the farmer at all ; I would let him make the most o^g^au h- 
 he could of his labour, and be quite independent of nessy!"^ ' 
 the farmer as long as he paid the rent; because if 
 you made it imperative on the labourer to work for 
 the farmer, they would have disagreements if the 
 labourer were not allowed to make the most he could 
 of his day's labour. The farmer might say to him, 
 "You must come to me for 2s. a day." While 
 the labourer might say, " I can get 3s. elsewhere ; " 
 and then the farmer might try to force him. Let the 
 labourer be independent of the farmer, and the farmer 
 of his landlord. 
 
 23422. The Chairman.— Would it be better that 
 
 they should both hold direct from the landlord? 
 
 Well, perhaps it might be a great deal better. 
 
 23423. The Chaieman. — And so make the land- 
 lord provide comfortable labourers' houses instead of 
 the tenant? 
 
 Baron Dowse. — That was the intention of the clause 
 in the Land Act. 
 
 Witness. — A quarter of an acre would not be 
 sufficient. In our place they will pay the farmers £6 
 an acre, along with manuring their land for them, 
 bringing their own manure ; whereas if they could 
 put that manure on their own little plot of ground it 
 would be a great improvement. 
 
 23424. And save them from having to go a dis- 
 tance ? — Precisely. It would make people say that 
 the Government were anxious to do some good for 
 them, and would pacify them. If something of 
 the kind were done you would lessen the amount of 
 police in the country. 
 
 23425. Mr. Shaw. — Would you compel the farmer 
 to keep a certain number of labourers? — Yes, I 
 would — a labourer's cottage for every £60 of valua- 
 tion. 
 
 23426. And you would leave the labourer free to 
 work for the farmer or not as he liked ? — To pay 
 the rent of the cottage and have no more to say to 
 him. 
 
 23427. You would make it a yearly hiring? — No, 
 
 I would not ; but as long as he paid the rent and , 
 conducted himself without deteriorating the house 
 and land, the farmer should have no claim against 
 him. 
 
 23428. At present the labourers are hired by the 
 year? — Yes, they are. 
 
 23429. And they get their houses? — They get a 
 house and a small haggard. 
 
 23430. What wages do that class get in your 
 country? — About a shilling a day all. the year round, 
 and their houses. 
 
 23431. Any firing ? — No, no firing, but a bit of a 
 garden of perhaps 9 or 10 perches. 
 
 23432. You would scatter the labourers that are 
 now in the towns, through the country in the way you 
 have mentioned ? — Precisely. That is my object. 
 
 23433. Do you think they would get work — is not 
 the town a more central place for them ? — The farmers 
 are obliged to come into the town every morning to get 
 labourers, they are so scarce, particularly in the season, 
 when hay is saved and corn cut. They are obliged to 
 come and take the labourers from the Cross, whereas, if 
 they were spread through the country, they could get 
 them without doing that. 
 
 23434. The country is so much a grass country that 
 it would be hard for the labourers to make a Uving if 
 they were scattered through it, whereas in the town 
 they would be more hkely to be near their work? — 
 Well, as far as the electoral division of Bruff is con- 
 cerned, they would not be far from them. If they 
 wanted to work for the farmers of the neighbourhood, 
 they could come into town in the morning. But that 
 seldom occurs. 
 
 23435. How many labourers are there in Bruff un- 
 connected with farmers 1 — Well, I think there are fifty. 
 
 23436. And there is nothing in the world but farm 
 work to keep them ? — No, nothing. 
 
 23437. There is no other labour going on in the 
 
(■20 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 27, 188(1. 
 
 Patrick 
 0'Sha\igh- 
 
 nossy. 
 
 place? — No, they have no manufactures of any 
 sort. . 
 
 23438. They are depeniJent on the wages, they pick 
 up from their labour? — Precisely. 
 
 23439. They must be in a bad way generally speak- 
 ing ?— They are, generally speaking, very badly off. 
 
 23440. Is that the way in all the small towns in the 
 county of Limerick ?— Well, indeed I think it is the 
 general rule. I was just making out the number of 
 persons in the electoral division of Bruff at £60 valua- 
 tion, and I think it would give forty-three labourers 
 for the place. 
 
 23441. That would take forty-three out of the town? 
 — Yes. In one electoral division a valuation of £75 
 would give thirty-four. To take the number scattered 
 through the whole place at sixty-three for a valuation 
 of £6000 would not be too much. The plan I pro- 
 pose would take them out and give them a sort of status. 
 
 23442. I suppose everything they buy is dear in 
 Bruff ?— Milk, although the country is a milk country, 
 is very scarce. The farmers as a rule are very con- 
 servative as regards milk. They prefer giving it to 
 their calves rather than to the poor people. 
 
 23443. What do they burn — turf or coal ? — Princi- 
 pally coal. Formerly we had turbaries, but they are 
 cut out. 
 
 23444. It must be hard enough for them to get 
 fuel ? — Very difficult. If the poor people had each a 
 bit of ground with a comfortable house, it would alter 
 their position, because instead of paying so high a rent 
 for land, they would till their own little plots. After 
 they came home in the evening at six o'clock, they could 
 tin their quarter of an acre of potatoes or oats. 
 
 23445. And they would pay less than they do for 
 their miserable lodgings in the towns? — The rent of 
 half an acre of the best land will be 30s. The interest 
 on the money advanced for building the cottages would 
 be £1 a year more. They pay more than £3 at present 
 for their miserable hovels. 
 
 23446. It would also encourage in them habits of 
 thrift and industry? — Yes. 
 
 23446a. And cleanliness? — Yes. 
 
 23447. Baron Dowse. — And give them a stake in 
 the country ? — Precisely. 
 
 23448. — Mr. Shaw. — Do they send their children 
 to school? — They do tolerably well unless they are 
 obliged to keep them at home. The priests are always 
 at them about sending their children to the monastery 
 schools, where they are being educated fairly enough. 
 The whole thing is to show them that an interest is felt 
 in them ; which would give them habits of industry and 
 loyalty, and everything conducive to the well-being of 
 the State. 
 
 23449. So that you think the farmers have not all 
 the grievances? — No, I do not think they have all the 
 grievances. I think the farmers are tolerably well 
 
 able to take care of themselves, although they have 
 grievances too. Last season a poor man was evicted 
 for non-payment of rent. Before six months the agent 
 came round to the man, who had an only daughter, 
 whom he could have got married to a young man who 
 would pay the rent and all the incumbrances. He 
 brought the young man and the priest to the agent, 
 but the latter refused to accept the young man as 
 tenant, and handed over the land to another. 
 
 23450. So that the marriage did not come off? — 
 The poor man was turned out. I thought it was a 
 great hardship — the worst case that had come under 
 my notice. 
 
 2345 L Baron Dowse. — The man was turned out by 
 ejectment 1 — Yes. 
 
 23452. Mr. Shaw. — There was nothing against the 
 young man? — Not a hap'orth. He was an amiable, 
 industrious, good young man; and if the agent had 
 accepted him as tenant, the poor man who was evicted 
 would have had a home for ever. 
 
 23453. Baron Dowse. — What was the estate?— 
 The Carberry estate. 
 
 23454. Who is the landlord? — Lord Carberry. 
 
 23455. Mr. Shaw. — It is in the hands of trustees : 
 who is the agent ? — Mr. Preke. It was the worst case 
 I know of. 
 
 23456. Because, generally speaking, that estate is 
 very liberally managed in other respects ? — Yes. It is 
 the worst case of Mr. Preke's I ever heard. 
 
 23457. Baron Dowse. — What has become of the 
 farm ? — It has been given to an adjoining farmer. 
 
 23458. Mr. Shaw. — They wanted it for consolida- 
 tion ?— Yes. 
 
 23459. Was it a fair-sized farm ? — No, a small little 
 plot of seven or eight acres. 
 
 23460. Still the young man could have made a 
 living by it ? — He could, and have given the old man 
 a home. 
 
 23461. Baron Dowse. — What happened the old 
 man? — He is in a great state of misery at present. 
 He is rather old. The poor little girl his daughter 
 was obliged to go into service. Another suggestion I 
 would make, if the scheme I have stated were to be 
 carried out, is as to the sites for the dwellings. The 
 farmers might put them in swampy places where the 
 land is bad. I would suggest that the sites should be 
 selected by the poor law guardians, the sub-inspector, 
 and the doctor. 
 
 23462. The Chaieman.^So as to get them into 
 healthy situations? — Precisely. If the selection were 
 left to the farmers, they would put them into the worst 
 part of the farms. 
 
 23463. The site should be near good water too? — 
 Precisely ; and in elevated positions where the air would 
 be good. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 •lullll (J. 
 Delmege. 
 
 John Cheistophee Delmege, Esq., examined. 
 
 23464. The Chaiehan.— You are the High Sheriff 
 of this county ? — Yes. 
 
 23465. I believe you have turned your attention to 
 the present state of this country as regards the rents ? 
 — Yes. 
 
 23466. What is your opinion as to whether the 
 Government valuation affords a scale on which rents 
 should be fixed ? — I think it is a most fallacious 
 one in every possible way. I knew Sir Richard 
 Griffith myself, and he told me he never intended 
 it for anything but taxation purposes. Prices now 
 are double what they were in 1852. The price of 
 butter has doubled. Mutton and beef then were 4,\d. 
 a pound ; their prices are nearly double that now. 
 Butter which was then 65s. a cwt. is now 120a. and 
 1306'. ; and the prices of corn and oats have increased 
 too. 
 
 23467. You think it would be of importance to get 
 it out of the heads of the people that the Government 
 have fixed on that valuation as a scale for rent? — Well, 
 
 I certainly would think it important to get it out of 
 the heads of the people that Griffith's valuation is to 
 be the foundation of the contract for rent between 
 landlord and tenant. 
 
 23468. Do you recommend a new valuation that 
 could be called a Government valuation?— I came 
 down here full of that, but a few words that I had 
 with Sir George Young on the point upset me. He 
 said if Griffith's valuation was no true valuation, and yet 
 people asked for it, then, all the more if a new Government 
 valuation should be rraade now, the people would say, 
 " That is the Government valuation, and we won't pay 
 any more. They might not even pay as much as they 
 do at present. The existing valuation is ridiculous as 
 the foundation of a contract between landlord and 
 tenant. 
 
 23469. But if a new valuation were framed on the 
 present scale of prices, and as a fair rent between land- 
 lord and tenant, what objection would there be to that 
 getting into their minds ? — Well, if it were framed 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 721 
 
 according to the present prices, I think it would be 
 very advisable. I think that whatever course is 
 adopted, it would be well to get Grieath's valuation 
 out of their heads. They have a standstill on that. 
 Most of the tenantry in the country now offer that 
 much and no more. 
 
 23470. Mr. Shaw.— But they might call any new 
 valuation a " landlord's valuation," and object to it as 
 strongly as if it were higher than Griffith's ?— As if it 
 were higher than Griffith's ? 
 
 23471. So that it would be hard to manage the 
 thing in a general way ?— It would. 
 
 23472. The Chairman. — But supposing that it was 
 to be the standard of rent, would you object to that ? — 
 I would object to any interference with freedom of 
 contract. I don't see why there should be any inter- 
 ference with freedom of contract with respect to land, 
 no more than there is with respect to any article of 
 commerce or agricultural produce. 
 
 23473. Do you think that if there should be a differ- 
 ence between landlord and tenant respecting rent, 
 arbitration would be a fair way of settling it ? — I don't 
 think it would. I don't see what business the Legisla- 
 ture has to interfere at all with freedom of contract 
 between man and man. Perhaps in Europe there is 
 not a cleverer or cannier set of people than the Irish 
 peasantry ; they are highly educated now, and are very 
 well able to make their contracts and bargains ; and I 
 don't see why there should be any Act of Parliament 
 on the subject of interference with rent, no more than 
 there should be to compel me to give my bullocks at a 
 certain price to a certain man. I would have total 
 freedom of contract. I would adopt the phraseology 
 of the Tenant League to a certain extent ; that is, I 
 would have the three " F's : " I would have fixity of 
 tenure limited to leases for sixty-one or sixty-three years, 
 which I am doing myself advantageously both for my- 
 self and for my tenantry, by which means the banks 
 would be glad to see them, and if they should be 
 marrying their sons or daughters, they would get more 
 money, and they would be enabled to go to the Board 
 of Works as stiffly as any landlord and get a couple of 
 hundreds. I would have the tenure limited to sixty-one 
 or sixty-three years. I would have free sale also, but 
 to a certain extent limited. It might happen that an 
 old couple might wish to give up farming altogether : 
 their children might be dead or gone to America'; and 
 they might wish to sell their land and come to a city. 
 The landlord might be a grasping man, and finding 
 that a good opportunity of coming in on this old farm, 
 might say " no " to every one that the outgoing couple 
 might bring. In such a case I would have an appeal 
 to the Chairman of the County as to the circumstances 
 of the man offering for the farm of the old tenant, and 
 if he should find him a proper man, I would insist on 
 his being taken. I would have freedom of sale to that 
 extent. 
 
 23474. That would be an arbitration by the County 
 Court judge ? — Precisely. 
 
 23475. Baron Dowse. — Your three "F's" would 
 be freedom of contract at rents fixed by the landlord, 
 tenure such as you have mentioned, and free sale 
 limited ?— Those are my three "F's;" but I cannot 
 see for the life of me what business the Legislature has 
 to interfere with freedom of contract. The people who 
 take land now is just as well aware of the value of it, 
 and as well able to make their bargains, as I am or 
 any one of you. They are no longer the ignorant class 
 of people that they were sixty or seventy years ago. 
 
 23476. The Chaikman.— You have not said how 
 you would arrive at fair rents ?— Ffeedom of contract, 
 my lord. 
 
 23477. Baron Dowse. — He would have fair rents 
 fixed by freedom of contract, and fixity of tenure 
 limited t — I would supplement fair rents by freedom of 
 contract. Why should I be compelled to let my land 
 for a certain sum ? „ , , ., 
 
 23478. Baron Dowse.— Yes. But what they say m 
 the north is, that they have no alternative. They are 
 on the farm. The landlord says, " I require such and 
 such a rent." They allege it is all very well to say that 
 
 the tenants have freedom of contract ; but they have Oct. 27, 188O. 
 
 no freedom of contract, for they are compelled to give 
 
 him the rent rather than go out ?— -Well, you see, Baron, i?Y ^' 
 I don't know anything about the north. JJeimege. 
 
 23479. Well, take the south — come to Limerick ? — 
 I should be sorry to see it extended here. 
 
 23480. The tenant will give the additional rent 
 rather than go out, even though he considers it an 
 unfair one?— Well, but I would give him a long 
 lease. 
 
 23481. But you should first settle the rent?— He 
 and I would settle it. 
 
 23482. But you are freer than he is ? — No, he is 
 just as free as I am. He need not take my land. 
 
 23483. But he is on your land, and his only choice 
 is between paying the increased rent and going to the 
 poorhouse? — I don't know that. 
 
 23484. Mr. Shaw. — It is the case of a man in a 
 holding. He and you come to fix the rent, and you 
 can't agree. He thinks you are putting an excessive 
 price on him. Wouldn't it be well in such cases, 
 and it would be unfair except in such cases only, that 
 there was some tribunal of skilled men, above sus- 
 picion, to settle the matter between you — wouldn't it 
 be more satisfactory for the landlord than having 
 unpleasantness ? — That is, where the tenant is in ? 
 
 Baron Dowse. — I quite agree with you when he 
 is not in. 
 
 23485. Mr. Shaw. — When he is not in, you have 
 the thing to let, and the man may please himself? — 
 He to buy, and I to sell — freedom of contract. 
 
 2348 G. Baron Dowse. — I am talking about a man 
 who is in already, and so is Mr. Shaw. 
 
 Witness. — In already, or a man who has a lease 
 unexpired f Yes. 
 
 23487. Baron Dowse. — He does not want to be 
 put out of his land. His landlord says to him, " You 
 have had that land for 30s. on lease ; I will now 
 charge you 35s." The man says, " I won't give 35s., 
 but will give 32s. — let us split the difference." He says 
 he won't give more than that, and the landlord says he 
 won't take less than 35s.: whom are they to appeal to? 
 
 23487a. Mr. Shaw. — Some tribunal above sus- 
 picion ? 
 
 Witness. — I should be perfectly satisfied with that 
 as a landlord myself, if it was above suspicion, but 
 certainly not with a tribunal of tenant-farmers. 
 
 Baron Dowse.— Certainly not. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — Decidedly not. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — What Mr. Shaw and I mean is a 
 competent man above suspicion. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — Unconnected with the district. 
 
 23488. Baron Dowse. — You would not object to 
 that, Mr. Delmege ? 
 
 Witness. — I would not. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — 1 know you to be a fair man. 
 Witness. — Well, my lord, I am obliged to you for 
 the character. 
 
 23489. Baron Dowse. — You would be satisfied 
 with a tribunal of that sort, giving a lease of sixty- 
 three years ? 
 
 Witness. — I would have no perpetuity. The 
 longest limit I would give would be sixty-one years. I 
 am giving that myself, and it is workiug satisfactorily. 
 
 23490. You are doing it yourself now? — I am 
 doing it satisfactorily, and I have no tribunal. 
 
 23491. And you knew what you were about, for in 
 addition to being a landlord, you were formerly a 
 barrister ?■ — Well, I was at it for five or six years. 
 
 23492. Would you apply the same rule to all farms 
 — grass farms, town parks, etc. — or only to farms the 
 tenants of which were resident on them, and working 
 tenants! — I don't exactly comprehend the question. 
 
 23493. At present the distinction is drawn in the 
 Land Act. Certain farms are not in the same category 
 in that Act with a farm on which the tenant resides 
 and works. Would you be satisfied to make it com- 
 pulsory to give a sixty-one years' tenure, with a rent 
 to be fixed, in case of dispute, by a public Court of 
 arbitration, in the case of all farms ? — Yes. 
 
 23494. Would you as to all farms ? — Well, no. I 
 
 4Z 
 
722 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 John C. 
 Delmege. 
 
 Oct. 27, 188U. think the knowledge of what grass land will do is much 
 more easily arrived at than the same knowledge with 
 respect to arable land. We all know what grass land 
 will do from its appearance. There is nothing hidden 
 or concealed about it, and it is apparent to every one 
 what it is. But with arable land it is different. You 
 don't know how it may turn out, and therefore I 
 would put it for arable land and not for grass land. 
 23495. And leave the grazing land to competition? 
 
 —Leave the grazing land to competition — the grass 
 parks. You would not interfere with the town parks ? 
 Some people call it accommodation land. I let land 
 near the town here very satisfactorily to butchers, 
 graziers, and jobbers, who pay me more for it than 
 any farmer could. Of course you would not interfere 
 with that ? 
 
 Mr. SHAW.^-Oh, not at all. 
 
 The witness withdrew. 
 
 Key. William 
 Gubbins. 
 
 The Rev. William Gubbins, examined. 
 
 23496. Baron Dowse. — Where do you live? — At 
 Knocklong, in the county of Limerick. 
 
 23497. Are you in a parish ? — I am a clergyman, 
 living on my private property. I never was on a 
 mission in this country. I was formerly chaplain to 
 the late Catholic Earl of Shrewsbury. 
 
 23498. But you are not engaged in any spiritual 
 functions now ? — No, 
 
 23499. What is the amount of your property ? — 
 My landed property vvith tenants is something over 
 £200 a year ; and as a tenant myself I farm over 80 
 Irish acres. 
 
 23500. Who is your landlord? — Mr. Joseph 
 Gubbins of Kilfrush, and the Misses Cooper, whose 
 father was the late owner of Markree Castle, in the 
 county of Sligo. They are now living in England. 
 
 23501. How many tenants have you ?-r-Only four 
 tenants, my lord. 
 
 23502. With reference to those tenants of your 
 own, I suppose your land is let at a fair rent ? — The 
 rent is over £200 a year. Griffith's valuation is £167. 
 For the last two years I found it necessary to give 
 them an abatement of 25 per cent., reducing their 
 rent to Griffith's valuation. In fact I found it 
 necessary as a farmer myself to do so. 
 
 23503. As a tenant renting land, are you acquainted 
 with the manner in which the Land Act of 1870 has 
 worked ? — Yes. 
 
 23504. Has it given satisfaction ? — I think it has 
 failed to do justice to the tenants. I can give cases 
 from the parish where I live in, The husband of a Mrs. 
 Power was in debt to their landlord some years ago, 
 before the Land Act of 1870 passed. With the con- 
 sent of the landlord, a person named Scanlan, the 
 man's brother-in-law, paid arrears for him to the 
 amount of £360. He got 12 acres out of 30 which 
 constituted the holding, and paid the rent to the land- 
 lord for twelve years. But a neighbouring farmer, 
 who, I believe, was examined here, came to the 
 landlord, gave him £700, and induced him to turn 
 out those unfortunate creatures. I beljqve myself 
 that that injustice done to the poor tenants arose 
 more from the anxiety of farmers to get the land, than 
 from any injustice on the part of the landlords. I 
 lived twenty years in England, and during the 
 minority of Bertram, late Earl of Shrewsbury, £ was 
 one of his guardians, and I believe myself that the 
 landlords of Ireland, taken as a body, are just as good 
 as the landlords of either England or Scotland. 
 
 23505. They are subject to more temptation? — 
 Something of that kind, I think, again, that where 
 there has been injustice done, it has been in a great 
 measure done through the agents, I have cases from 
 my own immediate neighbourhood to prove that ; but 
 I will first take my own case. Some three or four years 
 ago, the Misses Cooper came to my house. The late 
 Sir Benjamin Brodie told me that if ever I slept in a 
 low room, my life would not be a long one, and the 
 late Sir Dominic Corrigan said the same thing. I told 
 the Misses Cooper, and their agent, Mr. Sanders, that 
 I was going to build a residence, and that I wanted no 
 money from them, but only the understanding that when 
 my lease expired my lands would not be put up in con- 
 sideration of the improvement I was making. My lease 
 expired, and Mr, Sanders asked me to take a lease for 
 three years, and that after I had expended £2000, and 
 
 the Misses Cooper had told me that I never should be 
 disturbed. I wrote to my solicitor, who said, " Tour 
 rent is not over £50 a year, and you may take a lease, 
 because, under the Bright Clauses of the Act, they 
 cannot disturb you." I took the lease for three years, 
 and offered him half a year's rent, amounting to £28, 
 12s. 6d. He said my half-year's rent was £25, 3s. M. 
 I said I had the land surveyed twice, and if he doubted 
 the accuracy of my survey, let him appoint one, and I 
 would pay him if the previous survey was incorrect. 
 Notwithstanding all that, he has taken the rent for 
 the last three gales, giving me a receipt for ^£25, 
 Ss. 6d., whereas my cheques were only for £23, 12*. 
 each half-year. 
 
 23506. What is your yearly rental? — My yearly 
 rent for that land is about 20 per cent, over Griffith's 
 valuation. 
 
 23507. What is the valuation ?— £40. 
 
 23508. Then you may make your mind easy, for it 
 is the valuation that regulates the £50, and not the 
 rent. You say that the Land Act has failed in giving 
 protection to tenants by not preventing arbitrary 
 evictions; how is that? — In the case which I first 
 mentioned, and in the second which I am about to 
 mention, it has not prevented the arbitrary increase of 
 rents. I now come to a property of Lord Ashtown's, 
 near to where I live. A tenant to whom I went the 
 other day, showed me his lease. His father had had 
 the land at £1, lis. an acre, and his lease expired. 
 During the father's lifetime the land was put up to 
 £2, 15s. an acre. The father is dead, and the son is 
 in possession of the land. Mr. Townsend came to 
 him, and said, "You must pay £3 an acre." He said, 
 " I can't afford it." Mr. Townsend said, " If you don't 
 pay that, I will have you out, and I will get far more 
 than that for it." 
 
 23509. Mr. Shaw.— When did this occur ?— Within 
 the last four years. I got the tenant's lease from him 
 — a lease for one year — stating that I was going before 
 the Land Commission, but promising that I would not 
 make anything known that would injure him. His 
 father and himself had improved and built to the 
 amount of £3000, or perhaps more, and yet there is a 
 clause in the leafee by which he signs away all his 
 rights for those improvements in the event of his being 
 ejected. I think that is a cruel injustice. I tell you 
 more. There is no man more attached than I am to 
 my religion, but in politics I differ from a great num- 
 ber of Catholic priests, for I am a Conservative ; and 
 I believe that if the present Government gave fixity 
 of tenure and fair rents with their legal rights to the 
 tenants, it would put an end to all the agitation that 
 is going on, 
 
 23510. You say fair rents, fixity of tenure, and free 
 sale ? — And free sale, 
 
 23511. How would you fix the fair rents? — Of 
 course I think the rents for the last two or three 
 years have been high, even for the best of lands. 
 I have a dairyman farming 40 cows for me. He 
 could not pay me more than £8 a cow, and begged of 
 me to take them up from hini. I held him on, and 
 kept a most accurate account, and instead of making 
 £12 a cow, with all expenses paid, ?! only made 
 £7, lOs. 
 
 23512. Mr. Shaw. — You say you had to reduce 
 your rents ? — I had- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 723 
 
 23513. Baron Dowse. — Where the landlord and 
 tenant did not agree about the rent, would you object 
 to fixing it by arbitration? — I would not. I have 
 never raised tenants' rents, and I would be willing to 
 sacrifice a good deal in order to put an end to this 
 agitation. I would not willingly reduce my lands 
 to Griffith's valuation, as I don't think that would 
 be fair with respect to good grass lands on which 
 butter is made, and beef and mutton fed. Such land, 
 I think, is well worth 20 to 25 per cent, over Griffith's 
 valuation. 
 
 23514. Supposing the landlord and the tenant dif- 
 fered as to the rent, how would you settle it ? — Well, 
 there is the difficulty. 
 
 23515. Would you have any objection to an officer 
 of the Government being appointed for that purpose, 
 who would be above suspicion ? — I think that is the 
 man who would do it. Unless the Government 
 appoint an officer for the purpose, who is independent 
 of both tenant and landlord, you never will have peace 
 in this country. 
 
 23516. Do you think that such an arrangement 
 would contribute to the peace of the country ? — I am 
 confident that it would, and that the agitation which 
 is now going on would cease. During the Fenian 
 outbreak there was a meeting of twelve magistrates 
 at Knocklong. The farmers came to me, and begged 
 of me to go to a police barrack which was in possession 
 of the Fenians at the time, and try to get home their 
 sons from it. I was dining with Mr. Frenn, D.L., 
 and he said, " Gubbins, are you going to be shot ? " 
 I said I had promised them that I would go. He 
 said I was a Conservative, and that I had better not 
 go. I did go, and found them in possession of the 
 barrack, and an American officer in command of them. 
 I told them that not a man amongst them had a greater 
 love for his country than I had. Then the officer came 
 up and put a bayonet at me ; but the people told him 
 not to molest " Father Gubbins." Then he asked me 
 had I come to vindicate agents who violated natural 
 law, by not allowing a widow tenant to have her 
 daughter married without their consent ? and I say that 
 men who did so brought their country into disrepute, 
 and that unless such tyrannical acts of agents are put 
 a stop to, there may be a revolution. Now I am 
 coming to another point. I was apprehensive that in 
 the event of Wm. Power being ejected, and the land 
 taken by another person, the man who took it would 
 be shot. For that reason I went to the father-in-law 
 of Wm. Power, who lived in the neighbourhood, and 
 said to him, " Won't you take your son-in-law's pro- 
 perty ? " He said he had not so much as would pay 
 his son-in-law's debts, which amounted to £600 or 
 £700. I said, " Barry, will you do it if I get the 
 money?" I went to the agent, Mr. Saunders, at 
 Charleville, and said, "Barry will take his son-in- 
 law's farm, and I will become his surety, on the 
 condition that, in the event of his not being able 
 
 Eev. William 
 Gubbins. 
 
 to pay the £700 for which he is liable, and of my Oct. 27, una, 
 
 advancing the money myself, you will give me the 
 
 right of selling the farm again." He said, " I must 
 
 communicate with the Misses Cooper in England ; " 
 
 and I have his letter here in which he gives me the 
 
 right But here is the injustice which he has done 
 
 to me, after having given me the right. After 
 
 giving me the right, he goes and forces this James 
 
 Barry to take a lease for one year ; and by his doing 
 
 so, in the event of his not being able to pay me the 
 
 £700, the land is rendered not worth half what it 
 
 was before. This is the crying injustice which is 
 
 exciting the people and making them join the Tenant 
 
 League. Then in my own case, after having spent 
 
 £2000 in erecting the house, and getting a promise 
 
 from Major Cooper stating that I could get a lease for 
 
 ever at a rent which I thought fair, namely, £2, 10s. 
 
 an acre, Mr. Saunders only gives me a lease for three 
 
 years, and tries to force me to pay a rent of over 
 
 £50 a year, whereas my half-year's rent is only 
 
 £23, 12s. ed. 
 
 23517. Baron Dowse. — You think the remedy for 
 all this would be fixity of tenure, free sale, and fair 
 rents, to be fixed by a competent and honest valuator ? 
 — Yes. I talked to Mr. George Massey Dawson, who 
 asked me to communicate with the Commissioners, 
 saying that he wished to be examined ; but I did not 
 think it was my place to do so. He has a rent-roll 
 of £8000 a year. 
 
 23518. You said you had spoken to others? — Yes. 
 He (Mr. G. M. Dawson) said that he was for fixity of 
 tenure, fair rents, and free sale, saying that these v/^ould 
 be as much for his own benefit as for that of his tenants. 
 
 23519. Have you anything else to state ? — A young 
 man who has been examined before this Commission, 
 and who has become an active Land Leaguer, John 
 Molony, was the person who was the cause of turning 
 two tenants to whom I previously referred, Mrs. Power 
 and T. Scanlan, out by giving their landlord a bribe of 
 £700. The husband died broken-hearted, and the 
 woman is a maniac. The other day I gave a tenant 
 who owed me two and a half years' rent an abatement 
 of 25 per cent, for the last two years, and permission 
 to sell out. I also offered him a lease for ever. 
 
 23520. Was Molony the person who got the land 
 of Mrs. Power and the Scanlans ? — Decidedly ; he is 
 in possession of it. And yet that man joins the Land 
 League and pretends to be a great agitator, whereas 
 he has done a cruel injustice. 
 
 23520a. Was the rent raised on him ? — No. Molony 
 asked to pay £3 per acre, but as the other tenants 
 only pay £2, 10s., he continues to pay £2, 10s. also. 
 I could give you many more cases, but I think these 
 are more than sufficient. I say, settle the land ques- 
 tion, and I believe in my soul you will have as loyal 
 a people in this country as you have in any part of 
 the British Empire. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Mr. William Madden, examined. 
 
 23521. Mr. Shaw. — Where do you live? — At 
 Hospital, in the county of Limerick. 
 
 23521a. Who is your landlord ?— The Earl of 
 Kenmare. 
 
 23522. How many acres of land do you hold ? — I 
 hold 49. I took a lease of it in 1878. Mr. Hussey 
 compelled me to take it at £3 an acre. 
 
 23523. Was there a lease up to that time? — There 
 was, for an old life, eighty-four years of age, at 27s. 
 6d. an acre. The life in that old lease terminated in 
 
 1877. , , 
 
 23524. And then Mr. Hussey asked you to take a 
 new lease ?— He did, and pressed upon me that if I 
 did not give £3 an acre, another man had offered him 
 that rent, and he would give him the land. 
 
 23525. Did you take the lease?— I did. 
 
 23526. What was the rent?— I paid £1000 for it 
 
 six years before, expecting that the then rent would be 
 the average rent of the property. 
 
 23527. What was the old rent?— 27s. 6d. an acre 
 for 84 years of 49 acres. 
 
 23528. How much was that altogether? — £67, 15s. 
 
 23529. And the new rent is— ?— £150. There i.-; 
 an acre and a half of the road; and there are some 
 groves of trees and other waste. 
 
 23530. Which have been measured ? — Measured on 
 me. 
 
 23531. You thought, when you bought it, that the 
 rent would not be raised so much?— Not more than 
 the average rent of the property, which was from £2 
 to £2, 5s. or two guineas, over 3500 acres. 
 
 23532. Have not the rents been raised over the 
 property generally? — Yes, but he did not demand 
 them. He put 6s. or 8s. an acre on the tenants, and 
 
 4 Z 2 
 
 WilliaBi 
 Madden. 
 
724 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 William 
 Madden. 
 
 oa. 27, 1880. they complied ; but the times got bad, and a year 
 afterwards he did not demand that rent. He is giving 
 them receipts now on another form, that is, he is — 
 
 23533. Helping them on? — It was only 4s. in some 
 cases. 
 
 23534. He is not asking them to pay the increased 
 rent ? — No, they are not paying it. They are not in- 
 clined now to pay it at all. 
 
 23535. Do you consider the new rent high? — I do; 
 only for another farm that I have, I and my family 
 would be in the workhouse. 
 
 23536. You could not live on it?— No. 
 22537. Is your residence on that farm? — It is. I 
 
 have another farm in the parish, within an English 
 mile of it. I came to live on this place when I got it. 
 I bought it with the consent of the landlord, during 
 the agency of Michael Robert Ryan. I bought the 
 goodwill and interest, with the improvements and 
 planting, and have got the assignment at home. 
 In 1876 or 1877, Mr. Ryan was deprived of the 
 agency, and Mr. Hussey came in, having got the 
 appointment under the Earl of Kenmare. Shortly 
 afterwards the old life dropped, namely Miss O'Grady, 
 who lived in Dublin, and was eighty-six years of age 
 at the time of her death. The lease had run to about 
 eighty-four years. There were 100 acres at £50 a 
 year. 
 
 23538. Was yours better land? — Mine is higher 
 and drier ; but there is a river which my cattle have 
 to come round to unless they drink stagnant bog 
 vrater. 
 
 23539. Is yours grass land ? — It is all grass land — 
 upland. It is too high and dry. I would take the 
 other property sooner. 
 
 23540. Did you object to the rent?— I did. 
 
 23541. "Was it of no use? — He said, "If you don't 
 take it, the other man has offered me £3 an acre, and 
 I must give it to him. 
 
 23542. Did he know that you had paid the 
 £1000? — He knew it; he said he could not help it. 
 I have built a dairy and cowhouse within the last 
 two years. 
 
 23543. Since you got the new lease? — Yes, indeed; 
 and I have not been allowed a penny for it. It was 
 badly wanted. I built the cowhouse for twenty-four 
 cows. When I consented to his offer, what I thought 
 was that if I did not comply with his demand and paid 
 the £3 an acre, he would come back on me after I had 
 settled with them. 
 
 23544. He has done nothing for you? — Nothing. 
 
 23545. And he has taken the rent? — I tell you what 
 
 — he has done worse. This time twelve months I 
 objected to pay the £3 an acre. I said, " Mr. Hussey, 
 I am not able to pay it." " I cannot help you," he 
 said ; " if you don't pay it, give me up my land." I 
 said I had settled with the others, and that if he did 
 not reduce the rent for me and put me on an average 
 with the whole tenantry of the estate, I would not pay 
 it, and he might do what he liked with me. I did not 
 pay the rent, but carried home the money in my 
 pocket. In about a month afterwards I had a writ 
 from Dublin for the rent. I went up to Kiliarney, and 
 had to pay the £3 an acre rent, but he put me to ZOs. 
 costs ; and it cost me 15s. up there and down. That 
 was very hard — I call it cruelty. 
 
 23546. Do you think that if a valuator were sent 
 on the land, he would put a lower rent upon it than 
 that which you are paying ? — I know well that if he 
 were to value the land at each side of my ditch he 
 would. This time twelve months, when I saw Mr. 
 Hussey about my rent, I offered to wager him £20 
 that there was as good land as mine at each side of 
 my ditch set at £2 and £2, 5s. an acre. He said he 
 would not wager with me — that he had got no money 
 to wager ; and in about four weeks afterwards I 
 had the writ from Dubhn, and was obliged to go to 
 Kiliarney and pay. 
 
 23547. Did they give any reduction in the bad 
 times ? — No, not since Mr. Galway was the agent. 
 
 23548. Last year did they give any abatement ? — 
 No ; but he left them at the old rent, not charging the 
 new. 
 
 23549. He never gave you any abatement? — No. 
 
 23550. Baron Dowse. — He puts the new rent in 
 the receipt, but does not charge it ? — No ; but he is 
 only waiting until the times get up. In some cases it 
 comes to 3s., 4s., and 6s. an acre all round the 
 l^roperty. 
 
 23551. Is there anything else you would like to 
 say ? — That is the principal case, and it is a very bad 
 one. 
 
 23552. He will do so, may be? — I don't know, 
 unless the Government do something. 
 
 23553. Mr. Shaw. — The Government valuator 
 might raise your neighbours' rents without abating 
 yours? — I only want justice. I don't want to injure 
 any man, but I don't want to be treated worse than 
 others. 
 
 23554. Is it a dairy you keep on the farm you have 
 been speaking about?— A dairy on both farms. I 
 milk twenty-five or twenty-six cows, and we draw the 
 milk from the other farm up to this. 
 
 SadlitT Stoney 
 
 Sadlier Stoney, Esq., examined. ] 
 
 23555. Baron DowSE.— You live at Ballycapple 
 House, county of Tipperary ? — Yes. 
 
 23556. You are an owner and occupier of land'! — 
 I own 1000 acres, of which I have let 700, and I 
 have 300 in my own occupation. 
 
 23557. Is the right of the tenant to dispose of his 
 interest in his holding allowed on your estate ? — No, 
 not without my leave. 
 
 23558. Do you give permission 1 — I do almost 
 invariably. 
 
 22559. Without any restriction ■! — I would not give 
 permission if the proposed purchaser were a person 
 of bad character. 
 
 23560. But with the exception of a control over 
 the personal character of the tenant, you make no 
 objection 1 — I make no objection. 
 
 23561. You have given very considerable attention 
 to the land question 1 — I have, very considerable. 
 
 235G2. What particular points would you like to 
 bring before us ?— Well, I would like to bring some 
 points before you in order to settle this unhappy 
 division between landlord and tenant. 
 
 23563. You think the chief difficulty is as to the 
 question of rent 1—1 do. I am positive of it, because 
 
 I have all my land let at a low valuation, and I have 
 no difficulty whatever in getting the rent. I pur- 
 chased a town land thirty years ago ; it was then let at 
 a rack-rent, and the people were very much inclined 
 to outrage. I purchased it in 1852, and at that 
 time the selhng price of land was very low. The 
 rental then was ^297 a year. I went down to 
 the tenants and spoke to them about it, saying all 
 I wanted was to get a fair interest for my money, 
 and that I would give the benefit of my bargain, 
 which I did by letting them the land at half the rent 
 they were previously subject to. They seemed to 
 think this was rather a suspicious offer, and asked me 
 would I raise the rent afterwards on them. I said 
 no I would not, but would give them leases for three 
 lives, putting my own life in as one of them, for it 
 was a very lawless part of the country, and I thought 
 it a wise precaution to put my own life into the lease. 
 
 23564. They would have only two lives if any- 
 thing happened to you 1 — Only two. 
 
 23565. What was the result?— The result was 
 that they agreed to that, and I have had the greatest 
 possible pleasure with them ever since. I reduced 
 the rent from £297 to £153. Last season, in 1879 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 725 
 
 when every one was looking for a reduction, these 
 men came to me, and said, " Sir, although our crops 
 have been carried away by the Shannon floods, and 
 our pasture lands have been flooded, so that we are 
 actually paying rent on 70 acres of water, still we 
 will require no reduction whatever ; you stood to us 
 in worse times, and we won't see you short." The 
 poor law valuation of the town land is £157, 10s. 
 and my rent is £153, and it is paid very regularly. 
 
 23566. Do you think that in cases where the rents 
 are not satisfactorily arranged between landlord and 
 tenant, there should be some interference by arbi- 
 tration or otherwise? — No. Arbitration is a very 
 delicate subject In fact I should not like to be 
 in the position of an arbitrator; for an arbitrator 
 that would not be lenient to a bad tenant might get 
 himself shot. 
 
 23567. Supposing he were a Government official 
 sent down from Dublin, and a man who understood 
 his business ?— Well, I would rather have the rent 
 regulated in some way in relation to the poor law 
 valuation, which is well known and well understood 
 by the people. 
 
 23568. Do you think the present tenement valua- 
 tion could be taken as a standard ? — I do. 
 
 23569. Do you thirik it uniform 1 — I think that, 
 with some few exceptions, it would be better than 
 any valuation that you could get. In fact it is 
 ascertained, and if you were to get a new valuation 
 it would only raise a great deal of disturbance 
 amongst the people. There would be appeals from 
 it, and continual quarrels and fighting. On the other 
 hand, you have a settled thing which the people are 
 nearly satisfied with ; or I daresay they would be 
 satisfied with a fourth over the valuation. Generally 
 speaking that would be a fair rent. 
 
 23570. Is it your experience that the present 
 tenement valuation is really uniform on holdings — 
 that they are really valued relatively at the same 
 rate 1 — Well, no, they are not. 
 
 23571. Then any definite proportion of one-fourth 
 or one-third, or anything else, over it would not be 
 equal ] — It would be more equal than any valuation 
 that you could make now. You cannot get all 
 Ireland valued by any one man. You would have 
 different people to make the valuation, and different 
 people would have different ideas as to the value of 
 land. But where the thing is settled it would have 
 more of the confidence of the people of the country, 
 because it would give a safe and certain basis to 
 start from. 
 
 23572. You then take a basis which you admit is 
 not uniform ] — I do. I say it is generally uniform, 
 but in some particular instances it is not ; and I 
 would say that in those instances, and where the 
 parties did not agree, there should be a right of 
 appeal to have a re-settlement of it before some 
 Court of arbitration, the Chairman of Quarter 
 Sessions, or some such person. 
 
 23573. With regard to improvements : have you 
 made many improvements on your property 1 — I did. 
 I gave them slate and timber whenever they built 
 slate houses. 
 
 32574. Have you done anything in the way of 
 drainage, road-making, or fencing 1 — No, I have not. 
 
 23575. Have the tenants been improving within 
 your own estate 1 — No; as a general rule the tenantry 
 don't care much for improving. 
 
 23576. Don't they reclaim cut-away bog attached 
 to their holdings, and make such drains as are re- 
 quired 1 — No, they don't. 
 
 23577. With regard to the purchase by tenants 
 of their holdings, have you had any experience on 
 that subject ^Oh yes, I have. I think the purchase 
 of their holdings by tenants would be one of the 
 best possible things that could be adopted The 
 Bright clauses of the Act of 1870 do not extend to 
 the parties who require them. A tenant who is able 
 to pay one-third of the purchas^money of the fee- 
 simple of his farm is a very good tenant. He has 
 capital to work his farm, and is able and willing to 
 
 pay his rent ; in fact to such persons the Bright Oct. -ii, i««o. 
 clauses have been more an injury than a benefit, . — ;• 
 because in their endeavours to purchase they in- Sadliei- Stoney 
 fringed upon the capital which ought to have been 
 used_ for the stocking and working of their farms. 
 I think that poor tenants should be given the same 
 privileges that are given to landlords. I bought all 
 the tithe -rent charge of my property under the 
 Church Commissioners, the Government advancing 
 the money without any expense to me, and the 
 annual instalments, to expire in fifty-two years, are 
 less than the annual amount of tithe-rent paid 
 before. Then it is collected yearly instead of half- 
 yearly. If a land debenture stock were created by 
 the Government, and assigned to any landlords who 
 might be willing to sell their properties, the tenants 
 might be enabled to purchase their holdings in that 
 way, and it would be a great boon to them. 
 
 23578. Would you compel the landlords to sell 
 their estates at the same rate that the tithe-rent 
 charge was sold to the buyers under the Church Act % 
 — I would not compel them at all. 
 
 23579. It would be only in case they agreed to 
 sell \ — In case they agreed ; and no doubt they would, 
 for it would be greatly for the advantage of the land- 
 lord as well as of the tenant, and no loss whatever to 
 the Government, to carry out such an arrangement. 
 I would appoint a regular price. Where the land- 
 lord was willing to take twenty years' purchase of a 
 fourth over the Government valuation, which would 
 generally be a fair rent, he might apply by memorial 
 to the Board of Works, stating the property and the 
 valuation. I would not allow the landlord who rack- 
 rented his tenants to get a higher price for his land 
 on that account. He should apply to Land Com- 
 missioners, just as you apply now for loans under the 
 Land Improvement Act. They should advertise the 
 property in the papers, and after it had been adver- 
 tised three times they should grant a merging order ; 
 and then instalments should be paid by the tenant 
 taking the land, to the Government, at either 5 per 
 cent, ending in thirty-five years, or Al\ in fifty-two 
 years. 
 
 23580. If I understand you rightly, under the 
 Church Act the rate at which the tithe-rent was sold 
 was twenty-two years' purchase % — Twenty-two and a 
 half years' purchase. 
 
 23581. 'This could only apply to the landlords 
 who should be willing to sell at the same rate % — 
 Well, I think you might allow the landlords twenty- 
 five years' purchase on the Poor Law valuation, 
 which would generally be twenty years' purchase at 
 a fair rent. 
 
 23582. That could not be paid in less than fifty- 
 two years without increasing the annual rate of pay- 
 ment % — No. It could be paid in the time the Land 
 League say — in thirty-five years at 5 per cent. 
 
 23583. Then the tenant would have to pay annually 
 a greater sum than he at present pays in rent ?^No ; 
 in fact in many instances the tenant would have 
 to pay less. Suppose the case of a farm valued at 
 £40 a year. Such a farm is often let at £60 a year. 
 If the landlord were to sell it at twenty-five years' 
 purchase of the valuation, the purchase-money would 
 be £1000. That would be paid by instalments of 5 
 per cent, at the end of thirty-five years. It would 
 give fixity' of tenure. 
 
 23584. But in some instances the landlord would 
 have to sell his land for something less than twenty 
 years' purchase of his rental % — He would. 
 
 23585. Then you could not benefit the tenant 
 without expropriating to a certain extent the land- 
 lord % — I would not expropriate the landlord. I 
 would expropriate him to the extent of the amount 
 he charged over and above the value of his land, but 
 not in respect of the actual value of his land. 
 
 23586. Without going into this scheme, I would 
 ask you with respect to the present Bright clauses of 
 the Land Act, have you known any difficulties to 
 arise in the working out of them % — I have. I applied 
 to the Board of Works myself and found several diffi- 
 
726 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Sadliev Stoney 
 
 Oct. 27, 18«0. culties. First you are obliged to go into the Landed 
 Estates Court and deposit a certain sum for costs. 
 Under the 3 2d section, you must pay the costs ; and 
 the tenant must be able to advance a third of the 
 purchase-money. Then if he buys he is bound 
 down not to sub-let or assign his interest to any 
 person. I think all these conditions ought to be 
 wiped away. 
 
 23587. Do you think that sub-letting ought to be 
 permitted? — I think that when a tenant purchases 
 land subject to instalments, he might be allowed to 
 sell it if he likes, subject to those same instalments. 
 He should be put in the same position as the landlord 
 who owns his land, and can sub-let or assign as he 
 pleases. 
 
 23588. Have there been any cases of purchases of 
 their holdings by tenants in your neighbourhood ? — 
 There have been on Mr. Eowley's estate. 
 
 23589. Did many tenants purchase there 1 — Some 
 of them purchased — about two-thirds of them. 
 
 23590. How have they been going on since 'i — 
 Well, they have been going on very well. 
 
 23591. Did you remark any difference between 
 their condition and that of other tenants ? — Well, no. 
 It crippled them at the time, but they have recovered 
 it now. That is what they say — that it crippled 
 them, the payment of one-third of the purchase- 
 money taking so much out of their capital that 
 they suffered from it. In fact they could better 
 afford to pay the whole rent before, than they could 
 to pay two-thirds of it after spending their ready 
 money. 
 
 23592. In spite of that they are recovering ■? — In 
 spite of that they are recovering. They are happy 
 and contented. 
 
 23593. What is your opinion with regard to the 
 law of distress ? — Oh, that it ought to be abolished. 
 Both ejectment for non-payment of rent and distress 
 should be entirely abolished. 
 
 23594. You would leave the landlord only the 
 power of recovering his rent like any other creditor ? 
 — By sale of the tenant's interest. I would give the 
 County Courts the power of granting a sale of the 
 tenant's interest for the recovery of rent. 
 
 23595. He can do that at the present time by 
 getting judgment in the Superior Courts on ivhich a 
 fi.-fa. can be issued ? — He can. 
 
 _ 23596. But you would put him in the same posi- 
 tion as any other creditor ? — I would put him in the 
 same position as any other creditor. I certainly 
 would take away the anomaly to which I refer. His 
 interest can be sold now in the Civil Bill Court. 
 There can be a decree which can be given to the 
 Sheriff to execute. 
 
 23596a. Not for chattels real. , He has to apply in 
 the Superior Courts, at the cost 'tif two guineas, for 
 ■A. certiorari to bring up the decree ; and then he issues 
 \d& fi.-fa. 
 
 Witness.— After the purchaser is declared, he 
 now has to bring an ejectment to recover posses- 
 sion. That is a great shame. I say it should not 
 be the case, but the County Court should, in all cases 
 of under £100 a year, have the same power as the 
 Landed Estates Court. 
 
 _ 23597. What you would do is to authorize the 
 Civil Bill Court, in the case of a decree against a 
 tenant, to issue its warrant or whatever you would 
 call it, and the Sheriff to sell, and then the purchaser 
 to be put in possession by an order of the Civil Bill 
 
 Court, like an injunction of the Court of Chancery ? 
 
 No, but by the Sheriff. The Civil Bill Court sits every 
 quarter, and the applying to the Court would cause 
 delay. I would have it that so soon as the Sheriff 
 sold he should carry out his conveyance by putting 
 the man into possession. In fact I think that in 
 ejectment cases, Sheriffs and Sub-sheriffs, and bailifs 
 and process-servers, ought to be abolished. 
 
 23598. That is your third recommendation, that 
 all processes and decrees of the Superior Courts 
 should be served and executed by — 'J—By the con- 
 .stabulary. Where there is a decree for possession 
 
 if one proceed under the Petty Sessions Court Act to 
 put out a tenant within its jurisdiction, the summons 
 is served by the police and executed by the police. 
 In other cases, where a man gets a decree of a Court 
 declaring his right, it is an anomalous thing that that 
 man shall have to execute that decree at his own 
 peril if the executive government won't do it. 
 
 Baron DowSE. — Certainly, at his own peril. It 
 is a very good name for it. 
 
 Witness. — A very good name. Process-servers 
 are continually beaten, and landlords are shot, and 
 all that. 
 
 23599. Have you any remark to make about 
 demesne lands 1 — I have. There should be a dis- 
 tinction between demesne lands and lands that are 
 generally occupied by working men, and those held for 
 generations by tenants from year to year. Demesne 
 lands cannot go according to the Government valua- 
 tion, as the value is continually changing. A nice 
 house may be built on land of that description, and it 
 may be in nice order in one year and dilapidated in 
 another ; and these are lands which may be let at 
 fancy prices. They are not let to people who require 
 any legislation for the purpose of protecting then- 
 interests. 
 
 23600. Then you approve of their exemption from 
 the Land Act ? — I approve of their exemption. 
 
 23601. Would you exempt any other description 
 of holding ? — I would exempt all tenements of under 
 £4 a year valuation. 
 
 23602. Why '? — Because a tenement of under £4 
 a year valuation is not sufficient for the support of 
 a man and his family. Any man who takes a small 
 tenement like that must look for extra means of sub- 
 sistence, and consequently must be a workman. The 
 results that have followed from workmen getting 
 into occupation of those places have been the cause 
 of preventing others from being let in. If I give 
 a workman an acre of ground to keep himself and 
 his family in potatoes, that man considers himself a 
 tenant. If he is offered a penny a day more by 
 another person, he may stay out and neglect my 
 work; and if I want to evict him, I am put to a 
 great deal of trouble before the Court of Quarter 
 Sessions, and there is the question of compensation 
 besides. 
 
 23603. And you think that prevents the estab- 
 lishment of men in the position of labourers with 
 a small amount of land? — It does. In fact it is 
 the greatest injury to the labourers themselves, for 
 they cannot now get a place. The idea of a law 
 compelling landlords to build houses for the benefit 
 of labourers is all nonsense ; for no man will build a 
 house for a labourer, or let him on his land, when 
 that labourer has it in his power to snap his fingers 
 at his employer, and say to him, " I will work as I 
 hke ; if you don't lilce that, turn me off and pay me 
 compensation." I have known it in my own case. 
 My father let 3^ acres to labourers. They had them 
 at £4 a year, and were bound to work for a certain 
 time for him, but not one of them did so afterwards ; 
 or if they did, they idled their time, and then, if 
 threatened with eviction, they said, "Pay us com- 
 pensation." 
 
 23603a. You know there is this provision in the 
 Land Act, that if he holds it by virtue of his being 
 a hired labourer, he does not come under the Land 
 Act at all ?— That provision always causes a dispute ; 
 whereas if all tenements under £4 a year valuation 
 were exempted, there could be no dispute as to 
 whether tenant held as farmer on his own account 
 or as workman. That was the very dispute in a 
 recent case, in which it was established that the man 
 was a hired labourer. The general way in former 
 years was to let a house and an acre of land at a 
 certain rent, which the labourer was to pay; and that 
 rent would be charged against him, and he would also 
 get credit for his hire. Others would be only occasional 
 labourers, accustom'ed to pay the rent partly in labour ; 
 but in these cases it is generally held that the man 
 is a tenant, and entitled to compensation. 
 
MIA'UTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 727. 
 
 23604:. The O'Conok Don. — It is open to question, 
 no doubt. The best way would be to have it that all 
 persons under a valuation of £4 could be put out by 
 the Petty Sessions Court. 
 
 23606. Baron DowSE.— That would embrace the 
 case of the labourer 1 — It would embrace the case of 
 the labourer. It would not extend to any person 
 who was a farmer and lived on his farm. 
 
 23606. Would that extend to a large number of 
 persons who are occupiers, and who are protected by 
 the Land Act ? — It would. It was the greatest injury 
 that they should be protected by the Land Act. The 
 landlords are getting them out — weeding them out. 
 No person since the Land Act, as far as I know — and 
 I know a great many cases — has ever been let in as 
 the occupant of a small piece of ground. 
 
 23607. Do you know many instances of eviction 
 since the Land Act 1 — ^Well, I do. I don't think the 
 Land Act stopped eviction in the least. 
 
 23608. Has it stopped the increase of rents 1 — I don't 
 think it has. Before now, if a man had a favourite 
 servant or coachman whom he wished to pension off, 
 he could give him at a nominal rent a house and a piece 
 of ground to live on. He cannot do that now, because 
 the lower the rent the greater will be his loss if he 
 disturbs such a tenant. If that man dies, and his 
 widow marries some man of bad character, and the 
 landlord tries to get him out of the place, he cannot 
 do so without paying him compensation. 
 
 23609. Have you had many evictions or ejectments 
 yourself? — No. 
 
 23610. None within the last year 1 — None within 
 the last year. I had one case of ejectment which was 
 considered very harsh at the time, but I don't con- 
 sider that it was so. It was the case of a farm which 
 my father had always held in his own possession, 
 but he let it, just a month before he died, for twenty- 
 one years. At the end of the twenty-one years I 
 put the tenant out. I would have left him in for a 
 certain time, only for the Land Act, because his 
 lease having been made previous to the Land Act, 
 he was not entitled to compensation for disturb- 
 ance at the termination of his lease. I was not in 
 a position to take up the land at the time, and I 
 was strongly anxious to leave him in as tenant 
 from year to year until I should be able to take it 
 up ; but I could not do so, because if I had left him 
 in I would have been obliged to pay him compensa- 
 tion for disturbance. 
 
 23611. And he could not contract himself out of 
 the Act, because he was valued at under £50 a year ? 
 —Yes. Everywhere that they can contract them- 
 selves out of the Act, they do so. 
 
 23612. Are you aware that one of the direct objects 
 of the Act was to protect persons of that kind — small 
 holders '?— Small holders. 
 
 23613. And it has done so?— Well, Baron, it has 
 done so in this way. Suppose an Act were passed 
 
 that where a man' lent money under £50, if he were Oci. 27 1880 
 
 called on to pay up suddenly, he should be entitled 
 
 to require his creditor to allow him five years interest SadherStoney 
 as compensation for disturbing him in the enjoyment 
 of the money, that might be a protection to debtors, 
 no doubt, but it would prevent any man from lending 
 his money again. 
 
 23614. The O'CoNOE Don.— Have you had much 
 alteration of rents on your estate since the passing of 
 the Land Act ?— No, because I had let all my lands 
 on lease. 
 
 23615. Leases are the rule on your estate 1 — ^Before 
 the passing of the Act, I thought it was a great deal 
 better to give them leases, and, as I told you before, 
 I gave them leases for my own life. 
 
 23616. I thought that was only on one property ? — 
 Well, I have given leases to almost every one who 
 would take them. I thought, that was by far the 
 most satisfactory course ; and notwithstanding these 
 bad times, I had a man coming after me last Satur- 
 day to pay me his May rent. 
 
 23617. You came back to him rapidly, of course ? 
 — I did, and I did not expect it. I must tell you 
 that I remember, before 1851, distress was the usual 
 remedy for the recovery of rent, and there was a 
 great deal of disturbance and outrage in consequence 
 of it, AU that was put a stop to by the Act of 
 185L 
 
 23618. The 14th and 15th Victoria ?— Yes ; that 
 Act gave power to bring ejectments for non-pay- 
 ment of rent against tenants from year to year where 
 a year's rent was due. Then the landlords left it until 
 a full year's rent would be due, and the tenants got 
 into the practice of not paying one gale until the 
 other gale would be just due. It gave them six 
 months' time, 
 
 23619. That is the origin of the hanging gale? — 
 That is the origin of the hanging gale. It was in 
 order that the landlord could put out the tenant 
 whenever he pleased, because there was always a 
 year's rent due. He had more power. But if a 
 Compensation for Disturbance Bill had passed, we 
 would have had Ireland all in a ferment. 
 
 23619a. Baron Dowse. — I think we had better not 
 mind that. It did not pass. 
 
 Witness. — It did not; but we would have had 
 distress again if it did. Don't ever give the landlords 
 the right of distress. It brings two classes of Her 
 Majesty's subjects into collision who are antagonistic 
 to one another, and it will be only productive of 
 outrage, in the same way as the existence of process- 
 servers and bailiffs does. Let there be the same rule 
 for the tenant as for the landlord. If the land- 
 lord owes money, there is a proceeding to sell his 
 property in the Landed Estates Court, If the 
 tenant owes rent, let him be sold out in the same way 
 by the County Court, 
 
 The witness then retired. 
 
 • Mr. Daniel Connell, examined 
 You live in the county of 
 
 23620. Mr. Shaw.- 
 Clare ?— I do, 
 
 23621. How much land do you hold ?— Thirty-five 
 acres. 
 
 23622 
 23623 
 —I did. 
 23624 
 23625 
 
 Who is your landlord ? — Mr. Arthur. 
 You bought the goodwill of your holding? 
 
 When ? — In February three years. 
 ^„„„„. How much did you give for it ? — £550. 
 
 23626. Was there any lease of it ?— No lease. 
 
 23627. Did your landlord know you were buying 
 
 it ?— He did. 
 
 23628 What was the rent then ?— It was £61 odd. 
 I believe £30, 18s. 6d. was my half-year's rent. 
 
 23629, Has it been raised since ?— It has, IHere 
 are the two receipts. [Hands them in,] 
 
 23630, When was the rent raised ?— After the first 
 half-year's gale that I paid. 
 
 23631. Baron Dowse. — How much was the 
 crease ?— From £61, 17s. to £70. 
 
 23632. Mr. Shaw. — Did you get^a lease? — No; 
 ho offered me a lease, but I would not take it. 
 
 23633. Who is the agent?— Mr. Robert O'Brien. 
 Mr. Arthur is the landlord, I built a new house, 
 which cost me £160, 
 
 23634. Chairman. — How do you make up this ? — 
 [Hands document.] He allowed me £20 for the house. 
 
 23635. Baron Dowse. — What did you buy for the 
 £550 1 — I bought 35 acres of land. 
 
 23636. How is it held ? — From year to year. 
 
 23637. {How soon was the rent raised? — In the 
 same year that I took it, from £61 odd to £70. 
 
 23638. Mr. Shaw.— He allowed you £20 for the 
 house ? — That was all. 
 
 23639. Baron DowsE. — How long ago was that? 
 — Last year. 
 
 Daniel 
 Connell. 
 
728 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct: 27, ISSO. 
 
 Daniel 
 Connell. 
 
 out^ — He was to 
 
 23640. Mr. Shaw. — Did you sign an agreement 
 then 1—1 did. 
 
 23641. What if you were put 
 give me £20, and no more. 
 
 23642. The O'Conor Don 
 are you paying 1 — £2 an acre. 
 
 23643. Mr. Shaw. — If you are put out, you can 
 only get three years' rent 1 — That is so. 
 
 Baron Dowse. — Except the clause providing that 
 if you pay a certain sum for the farm with the know- 
 ledge of the landlord, you may recover that, unless he 
 is willing to allow you to sell. 
 
 23644. Mr. Shaw.— Is it good land ?— Some of it 
 is good. More of it is not worth 2s. 6d. an acre. 
 
 23645. Is it dear all round 1 — I know right well 
 it is. 
 
 23646. What made you give £550 for the interest 
 in it ] — I did so when the times were good. It is 
 near the town and liberties here. There is some of 
 it which a cow did not lay her mouth in for the last 
 three years. 
 
 23647. Owing to the wet ?— Yes. 
 
 23648. It wants to be drained 1 — It does. He said 
 it would be. 
 
 23649. How much of it wants to be drained 1 — 
 About half of it, or more. 
 
 23650. Would that improve it very much ? — Of 
 course it would. 
 
 23651. If it were drained, would you be satisfied ? 
 — I would not be satisfied. 
 
 23652. Baron Dowse. — You would be partly, but 
 not wholly 1 — I would, sir. 
 
 23653. Mr. Shaw.— You would like to get it at 
 the same rent at which it was held before ? — I would, 
 and less. I would like to get it at the valuation. 
 
 23654. How much is that ?— =£43, 5s. 
 
 23655. Baron Dowse. — Are they Irish acres ? — I 
 could not tell you. I think they are. 
 
 23656. Mr. Shaw. — Is there anything else that 
 you would like to say about it ? — Well, there is not. 
 
 23657. Baron Dowse. — Have you got a lease 1— 
 No. He offered me a lease, but I would not take it. 
 I could not be worse than I am. 
 
 23658. He could not evict you if he had given you 
 How much an acre a lease 1 — I know b y well he won't evict me. I 
 
 wish I was transported. 
 
 23659. The Chairman. — You don't think any one 
 else would go into it ? — Indeed I don't think any one 
 else would. 
 
 23659a. Mr. Shaw. — You were not a wise man? 
 Witness. — I was not. 
 
 23660. Baron DowsE. — If the climate had remained 
 good, and the sunshine and the rain come at the 
 proper time, you would have done very well 1 
 
 Witness.^ — I would, fair enough. 
 
 23661. Mr. Shaw. — This is a good year, you know? 
 — It is, fair enough. It is not too bad. It is not 
 very good either. People have nothing to boast of 
 at all, as long as you have to give 7d. or Sd. a stone 
 for corn. 
 
 23662. Potatoes were good 1 — Well, they were, sir. 
 
 23663. The O'CoNOR Don. — I suppose you had a 
 good deal of corn more than usual 1 — About five 
 acres and a half. On three of them there was not 
 100 stone each. 
 
 23664. Baron Dowse. — If you had plenty of corn, 
 and your neighbours had none, you could sell it at 
 higher prices ? — I could. 
 
 23665. The O'CoNOR Don.— Did you pay your 
 rent last year 1 — I did. I paid my rent last May. 
 
 23666. Mr. Shaw.— You would like to get it at 
 the valuation ? — I would. That is all that it is worth. 
 Any man who walked the land, would see the way I 
 have been treated. 
 
 23667. Are there other tenants 1 — There are. 
 
 23668. Do they all pay a high rent ?— None of 
 them pay as high a rent as I do. I hope there will 
 be something done for me. 
 
 [The inquiry was then adjourned until the follow- 
 ing morning at eleven o'clock.] 
 
 Oct. 28, 188U. 
 
 Richard 
 Staokpoole, 
 
 THIRTIETH DAY— LIMERICK, THURSDAY, 28th OCTOBER, 1880. 
 
 The Commissioners resumed their inquiry at Cruice's Hotel at eleven o'clock. There were present— 
 The Earl of Bessboeough (Chairman) ; Baron Dowse ; The O'Conor Don; and Mr. Shaw, 
 M.P. Sir George Young, Secretary, and Mr. Robert Donnell, Assistant Secretary, with 
 Mr. J. P. Kennedy, were in attendance. 
 
 EiGHARD Staokpoole, Esq., of Elm Vale, Ennis, examined. 
 
 23669. The Chairman.— You are a land agent 
 and tenant-farmer ? — Yes ; and a proprietor. 
 
 23670. What is the extent of your agency? — I am 
 at present agent over nearly 22,000 acres. 
 
 23671. In what counties 1 — In Clare and Carlow. 
 
 23672. Do sales by outgoing tenants exist as a 
 general rule on those properties ? — They do not. 
 There is no such thing. 
 
 23673. They are not allowed at all 1 — Not allowed 
 at all. 
 
 23674. Have you known instances of them 1 — I 
 have known instances of them. 
 
 23675. Are leases given at present? — Yes, leases 
 are given whenever the tenants ask for them. 
 
 23676. Are they inclined to ask for them ?— I 
 think not. There has been less disposition to do so 
 of late. 
 
 23677. What is the rule with respect to the sale 
 of leases ? — There is a clause forbidding such sales. 
 
 23678. Unless by permission? — Unless with per- 
 mission. 
 
 23679. Have you found that the facilities given to 
 tenants for raising money on their holdings since the 
 Land Act have led to any difliculties with tenants ? 
 —Since the Land Act I don't know of any case but 
 
 one in which the tenant borrowed monev under that 
 Act. ^ 
 
 23680. I mean with respect to getting loans ? — I 
 consider that it gave them great facilities for borrow- 
 ing money. The banks gave more credit than they 
 otherwise would, have done, and also the shop- 
 keepers. 
 
 23681. Was that an advantage or a disadvantage? 
 —I think it was greatly for the disadvantage of the 
 tenants. In my opinion many of them got hope- 
 lessly into debt through the facility for backing bills, 
 the general practice being that one man accommo- 
 dated another. 
 
 _ 23682. That answered well enough with the good 
 times ? — Well, when the times were good they used 
 to pay the rent by borrowing from one bank and 
 paying to another, and then getting fresh credit. 
 
 23683. The difficulty of that system would arise 
 from its dependence on climate and the crops 1 — Yes, 
 I should fancy so. We have four banks in Ennis, 
 which give them great facilities for borrowing — they 
 go from one of them to another. 
 
 23684. I suppose to some extent that is a great 
 advantage to the tenants 1 — No doubt it enables 
 them at times to meet their difficulties. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 729 
 
 23685 You seem to think it is eoine; beyond a 
 reasonable amount ?-I think so. They very krgely 
 
 fkliT'*^^!;^' °^.*.^.°'^ ^r^''^'- Many men tha^ 
 1 know have dipped themselves in doing so, by being 
 obliged to pay for others who failed to meet thei? 
 engagements. 
 
 23686. What is your opinion with respect to the 
 rents in the district you represent— are they fair and 
 reasonable rents ?— I consider the rents are reason- 
 able. On one property which I manage, and over 
 which I lately became agent, the rents are high. 
 The farms are held under leases made at a time of 
 great competition for land, and some of the rents are 
 high. In one case yesterday I had to promise to 
 reduce the rent payable under a lease. 
 
 23687. In a case where it is represented to you as 
 being an unfair rent for the tenant to pay, do you 
 look into the circumstances t — I should walk the 
 lands myself, in order to see whether there should be 
 a reduction or not. In the case to which I have just 
 referred, I recommended the proprietor to give an 
 abatement, considering the rent wholly unreason- 
 able. 
 
 ^ 23688. What do you think of the Government valua- 
 tion 1 — Well, in my opinion the Government valuation 
 is extremely uneven. In some cases it is enough, while 
 in other cases four times the Government valuation 
 would not be enough. I can give you an instance of 
 land being let at a very high rent, where there is no 
 valuation of it at all. It was reclaimed from the 
 the sea-coast. There is 
 
 edges of bogs 
 
 near 
 
 no 
 
 difficulty in getting it let for 30s. an acre; while 
 from con-acre .tenants they get £6 an acre for it. In 
 the case of the farm where I gave the reduction 
 yesterday the valuation is £20 and the rent was £30. 
 I think that at the time of making the valuation 
 circumstances which would increase the value of land, 
 such as facility of communication with towns, were 
 not taken into consideration, and that the valuation 
 was made with regard to the corn-producing qualities 
 of the soil. There are large tracts of land in the 
 county of Clare which are extremely valuable for 
 grazing purposes ; they are the very best places that 
 cattle could be turned into for winterage. 
 
 23689. You mean rocky lands 1 — Eocky limestone 
 lands. There is very good pasturage in the open 
 spaces between the stones. The valuation of that 
 description of land in many cases in the county of 
 Clare is very light. I hold a farm the valuation of 
 which is £50, while I pay £90 for it, and it is well 
 worth that rent. 
 
 23690. Then I suppose you would not take the 
 Government valuation as a criterion of the value of 
 land ? — I would not. In cases where I was let- 
 ting my property anew, I got a practical tenant- 
 farmer to say what the rent should be, coupled with 
 my own judgment in the matter ; and I offered to 
 let the tenants who were dissatisiied with the valua^ 
 tion appoint a man. 
 
 23691. Then you are always willing to let the 
 tenant who is dissatisfied have an arbitration 1 — 
 I think so. In case of a new letting I think it is 
 fair. 
 
 23692. Have the landlords whom you represent 
 done much in the way of improvement on their 
 properties 1 — Considerable improvements. 
 
 23693. Could you give me the names of some of 
 your landlords? — That is, they borrowed money 
 largely. Mr. Thomas George Stacpoole Mahon of 
 Corbally, in the county of Clare, built a large farm 
 and offices for a tenant, having borrowed money — 
 £2000— from the Board of Works. 
 
 23694. Has that been often done by landlords 1 — 
 There are several landlords in Clare whe did that 
 very extensively. Lord Leconfield built farm offices 
 for all his tenants, and drains the land for theni 
 whenever they require it. Mr. Mahon built those 
 things at the desire of a tenant who subsequently 
 surrendered his farm. ... 
 
 23695. In doing so I suppose he has some interest 
 ^an increase of rent to compensate him ?— -The 
 
 is — nearly 300 
 
 tenant agreed to pay an annual charge, pending his 
 tenancy, to the Board of Works. 
 
 23696. The entire charge 1 — Not the entire — no. 
 
 23697. The interest of the moneys—The interest 
 of the money expended on the farm offices. Mr. 
 Mahon built the house at his own expense, and pays 
 the charge on the dwelling-house. 
 
 23698. What is the amount?— I think £2000 
 was borrowed. 
 
 23699. Is it a large farm?— It 
 Irish acres of very good land. 
 
 23700. Has much money been laid out in drain- 
 age, farm roads, and other improvements of that kind 
 by landlords?— Through the country generally? 
 
 23701. Well, I meant on the estates that you 
 are connected with ?— No. On two or three of the 
 properties that I represent, arterial drainage is 
 carried on, and the landlords pay the interest of 
 the outlay. 
 
 23702. Could you say the amount that has been 
 laid out by the different landlords whom you repre- 
 sent, on their properties within the last twenty 
 years ? — Mr. Mahon borrowed, as I told you, .£2000. 
 I myself last year borrowed £1000, and have laid 
 out £400 of it ; but I can't get labourers. On the 
 land that is in my own occupation I laid out £500 
 before in drainage. 
 
 23703. Could you put in a statement of the entire 
 outlay on the properties you represent, during the 
 last twenty years ? — I can do that. 
 
 23704. With respect to improvements by tenants, 
 has that been going on well ? — No ; I am sorry to 
 say I know of very few instances of tenants having 
 made any permanent improvements. I have one 
 tenant - whom I assisted to borrow money under 
 the Board of Works, as the length of his lease 
 was not sufficient. It is close to my own place in 
 Clare. 
 
 23705. When you say that they do not make per- 
 manent improvements, do you mean that they do 
 not do thorough drainage? — Thorough drainage, or 
 permanent fences, or farm buildings, or anything of 
 the kind. 
 
 23706. Then is it only open drains for taking 
 away surface water? — They make very imperfect 
 drains. I consider that unless drains are properly 
 constructed first, and then stoned or tiled, they are 
 not permanent. Open drains are not permanent 
 improvements ; the cattle will tread them in in 
 one year. 
 
 23707. Do you think that since the Land Act 
 there has been a difference either with landlord or 
 tenant as to the amount they expend in improve- 
 ments? — I think in general through the country 
 there has been a very considerable improvement 
 effected in various places since the Land Act. 
 
 23708. You think they have not been deteriorated 
 in that respect since the Land Act? — On the con- 
 trary, I think they got the greatest encouragement to 
 improve their lands under the Land Act. 
 
 23709. Does that apply to tenants only, or to both 
 landlords and tenants?— To both. I think both 
 landlords and tenants have been encouraged. 
 
 23710. We have been told that the landlords have 
 been discouraged, from an idea that they would not 
 be able to show that the improvements were their 
 own ?-^That is' not my experience of it. In the 
 cases where I make allowances to tenants for im- 
 provements, or contribute towards their slating 
 houses, or making permanent improvements of that 
 kind, I always note down in my rent-book that so 
 and so has been done, and that such and such 
 allowances have been made for such and such pur- 
 poses. I have been frequently giving tenants slate 
 and timber for roofing houses, and allowing them 
 something if they made permanent drains on their 
 lands. 
 
 23711. Is there anything that you would suggest 
 in the shape of an amendment of the existing law 
 relating to landlord and tenant ? — One might say a 
 great deal on that, but I would not be inclined to 
 
 5 A 
 
 Oct. 28, 1«S0. 
 
 Eichiinl 
 Stackpoole. 
 
730 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 RicliaTd 
 Stiirkpnole. 
 
 Oct. -28, 1880. suggest very much. I think we -were getting on 
 very well until this recent agitation began. I had 
 not a single difference with a single tenant on my 
 property. I had a great deal of trouble about one 
 particular case which took place near Ennistymon, 
 where a man unreasonably refused to settle on the 
 expiration of an old lease. It happened last July. 
 The man was named Walsh. He was evicted, but 
 has since been reinstated by a mob. The authorities 
 at the Castle promised to prosecute them, but there 
 has been some delay about it. The parties have 
 been identified who put him back into possession, 
 but he is in possession stUl. 
 
 23712. At the end of the lease '! — It was a lease 
 under which three tenants held in partnership since 
 1814 at a very small rent. They had a quantity of 
 land in with it which was not included in the lease, 
 and for which they paid no rent. The fields lay 
 open, and the people had been constantly disputing 
 with one another in reference to the trespasses of 
 cattle ; and on the terminatioii of the lease I sent 
 Mr. Milward, surveyor, on the lands, desiring him to 
 mark out as equitable a division of the lands as he 
 could between the three tenants ; to separate their 
 farms so that they would not cross each othet ; and to 
 value the land as reasonably as they could hold it 
 and live on it ; and I promised to give them leases 
 for thirty-five years. He did so, and made the valu- 
 ation at about 12s. 6d the English acre, which was 
 even reduced by me. I offered to give them leases. 
 Two took their portions as yearly tenants ; but the 
 other man would accept no terms, because he did not 
 get his own way — because he could not get a par- 
 ticular field. I was attacked by the Land League, 
 and blackguarded as an exterminator. They said I 
 served seven notices to quit, and I don't know what 
 not. I went to the editor of the newspaper, and said 
 I would apply for a criminal information against him 
 if he did not give me the name of his correspondent. 
 He gave me the name of his correspondent, and said 
 the statements made about me Were wrong, and that 
 he would correct them in his next paper. I brought 
 him to the office of Mr. Cullinane, my solicitor, and 
 gave him the facts. The matter was brought before 
 the Farmers' Club of Clare, at their next meeting, 
 but they said that the man had no case. Nothing 
 further was done about it, and they would not assist 
 him in any way, until Mr. Parnell's meeting in 
 Ennis, which was held about the 21st of September, 
 I think. The day afterwards a mob of about 100 
 men assembled — although the police had notice of it 
 — and went on the land. They rebuilt his house, and 
 put the fellow back into the place, and he has been 
 there ever since, defying me, and the Dublin Land 
 League sent him £5. 
 
 23713. Is there any question of rent involved in 
 it 1 — No question of rent. 
 
 23714. It is only a question of the division of 
 land ? — Only a question of the division of the land. 
 He said he did not get his proper share of the land, 
 and that sort of thing. The three had been partners, 
 and they paid me equal rents. 
 
 23715. Mr. Shaw.— Were the others satisfied?— 
 The others continue in possession. At the present 
 moment the dissatisfied man has driven cattle be- 
 longing to one of the others off" the land assigned to 
 him ; and the latter is in terror of his life, begging 
 me to interfere for him and get him back his land. 
 I could only say to him that I would not charge 
 him for his occupation of it, and make him any 
 reasonable compensation. 
 
 23716. Baron Dowse. — Were these men relatives 1 
 —They are connected by marriage, but are men of 
 different names. The man who has been reinstated 
 is named Martin Walsh ; the others are persons 
 named Kelly. The lease was given to them in 1814 
 as partners. They say they reclaimed portions of 
 their land ; but that consisted in cutting the turf off 
 17 acres of bog and then 'setting it in con-acre to 
 under-tenants at £4 an acre. That is what 
 call reclamation. 
 
 they 
 
 23717. The Chairman. — What was the change 
 of rent 1 — There was a considerable change of rent, 
 because there was no valuation for the old rent. 
 The land was stated in the old lease to amount to 
 34 acres, whereas the holding in reality contained 
 54 Irish acres. 
 
 23718. Was that by the addition of the reclaimed 
 bog land? — By the addition of the reclaimed bog 
 land. 
 
 23719. Mr. Shaw.— What was the old rent?—fl6. 
 
 23720. And the newrent?— £45, Ithink— 12s. 6d. 
 the English acre. 
 
 23721. The Chairjian. — Have you had in any 
 other case to resort to eviction ?— I have had no 
 other eviction. I have cases in which I shall have to 
 evict now, because they are declining to pay any rent 
 at all, or in some cases more than the Government 
 valuation — people who have leases. Of late there 
 has been a general strike made through Clare against 
 paying more than the Government valuation. 
 
 23722. Had you any last year or 'the year before ? — 
 None last year ; and until these very recent meetings 
 I had no difficulty with any tenant except that one 
 individual — none whatever. Yesterday I was met at 
 Mr. Westropp's place, near Scariff, by tenants all 
 holding under leases, who declined to pay any rent 
 at all unless I gave them an abatement. 
 
 23723. Are leaseholders as well as other tenants 
 making those claims ? — The leaseholders particularly, 
 I think. 
 
 23724. Mr. Shaw. — Was it an abatement owing 
 to the bad times, or a permanent reduction ? — No. 
 On the last occasion I gave them an abatement of 15 
 per cent. This time they required the same abate- 
 ment, and then they pressed it further by saying that 
 they would pay no rent other than the Government 
 valuation. 
 
 23725. Mr. Shaw.— Were they old leases ]— They 
 varied in date. Some of them were leases made 
 only two or three years ago ; others were made 
 twelve or fourteen years ago. One man was a large 
 tenant, paying £120 a year, and they told him they 
 woiild shoot him if he did not refuse to pay. He 
 had refused to join the Land League a few days 
 before. The lands are let high, but he is a prosperous 
 farmer, willing to pay his way. 
 
 23726. The Chairman. — You have no wish to 
 change the tenants at all t — No, so long as they pay 
 the rent. If I thought a man's rent too high, I was 
 quite ready to reduce it ; I only wanted to do what 
 was fair. I have land in my own occupation that I 
 think I would get as much for as I could ; but I 
 would not let land too dear, because I think it is a 
 mistake to do so. 
 
 23727. The O'Conor Don.— Do you apply your 
 statement that the rents are high to all the 
 holdings under your management, or to that of this 
 one man t — ^This one man. In the case of one estate, 
 Captain Westropp yesterday told me in every case 
 to reduce the rent if I thought it was too high, taking 
 one year with another. 
 
 23728. Mr. Shaw.— And you have acted on that ? 
 — That is only on that particular estate. On all the 
 other estates I manage, I think the rents are very 
 reasonable. 
 
 21729. Has there been any advancing of rents on 
 
 those estates within the last eight or ten years ? 
 
 Hardly, except where old leases have terminated or 
 tenancies have changed. My experience is that it 
 does not, as a rule, assist tenants to hold their lands 
 too low. They fall into habits of improvidence and 
 extravagance. In many cases I know that tenants 
 holding their lands at an under value do not work at 
 all. 
 
 23730. If they have an idea that their lands are 
 held too high, does it not discourage them 1 — I don't 
 know. I don't think so. What I find is that my 
 own small tenants on my own property, if they have 
 a bit of land, are above doing anythmg else except 
 working on that particular land. This year I borrowed 
 £1000 from the Board of Works to make farm roads 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 731 
 
 and deep water-courses ; but they would not come 
 to work for me, because they had a few acres of land. 
 What I said to them was : " I cannot believe that 
 there is any distress. I believe it is disinclination 
 . on your part to pay your rent ; and if you don't 
 'eome to work and earn your rent, you shall pay me 
 the rent whether you earn it or not." 
 
 23731. What did they object to '!— They objected 
 to task work. I said to them : " I will give you a 
 way of earning labourers' wages." One of them fell 
 to work — a man who owed three gales of rent — and 
 he has since earned a year's rent on three weeks' 
 work — is. &d. a day for sinking a river course. But 
 others went away. A neighbour intimidated them 
 from going to work, because he was disappointed in 
 the expectation of being made steward to superintend 
 a parcel of men doing nothing. 
 
 23732. The Chairman. — Was this reclamation of 
 t-ut-away turf bog ? — It was a deep water-course which 
 flooded a great many acres of land in the occupation 
 of those tenants ; and the men that would have 
 been benefited by it would not work nor let their sons 
 come to work. 
 
 23733. Mr. Shaw. — Had they leases ? — They had 
 leases most of them. 
 
 23734. The Chairman. — Had the turf which was 
 eut been used by the tenants themselves on their hold- 
 ings 1 — In former times they were in the habit of 
 selling the turf. I stopped that, because first I con- 
 sidered that it was A^ery bad for the tenants to have 
 the right of selling the turf. They spent the whole 
 of their time in going backwards and forwards with 
 loads of turf, -and then they drank and quarrelled 
 and fought. So I stopped it. My tenants on the 
 part of the property where there is turf get as much 
 turf as they require for their house at £1 a year. 
 Ifear the sea-coast, where they can get sea-weed 
 
 and sand, the land becomes valuable for tillage pur- (m. ■>&, 1880. 
 poses, and as much turf as they want can be sot — — 
 for £1. *= Richard 
 
 23735. Mr. Shaw.^Do they pay the f 1 a year ^^■''^^"'°^'-- 
 to you or to the tenant who holds the bog 1— The 
 
 tenants that have bog in their holdings reclaim it, 
 and are charged no additional rent for it. 
 
 23736. But are they charged for the turf ?^They 
 are charged £1 a house to the landlord ; that is the 
 rule, because they are cutting away the soil. 
 
 23737. The Chairman. — I suppose where they 
 have cut away the turf and sold it, that has gone a 
 long way in repaying them for any reclamation of 
 the land ?— Certainly. I had a case of a land claim 
 made by a tenant who cut away 14 acres, and the 
 only reclamation he did was to set it in con-acre 
 to labourers, who paid him a high rent for it. That 
 was advanced as a claim for compensation, and dis- 
 missed by the Barrister. He cut away 14 acres of 
 valuable bog, which at the place was worth £50 an 
 acre for the turf. He then got from £2 to £4 an 
 acre for the reclaimed land ; and though he claimed 
 for improvements, when the land came into my 
 hands afterwards I had to drain it from end to 
 end. 
 
 23738. What did it set for in con-acre ?— At the 
 rate of £6 an acre. 
 
 23739. The O'CONOR Don.— You said £4 1— That 
 was one case where the place is farther away from 
 the coast. The place I speak of is not far from 
 Kilkee, where there are great facilities for getting 
 sea-weed and sand for manure. Thirty shillings a 
 quarter is the ordinary rate paid by labourers to 
 farmers for con-acre. 
 
 23740. Do the farmers manure it for them ? — No, 
 they bring the sea-weed and sand themselves. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Mr. Michael Hogan, examined. 
 
 Michael 
 Hogan. 
 
 23741. The Chairman. — You live at Eiverston, 
 Corofln ? — Yes. 
 
 23742. You are in occupation as tenant of about 
 aOO acres? — Yes. 
 
 23743. Do you represent any one? — I am vice- 
 chairman of the Corofin Union, and I represent my 
 brother guardians. 
 
 23744. Do you represent them by any resolution ? 
 — By a resolution of the board. 
 
 23745. What point is there that the board wish you 
 to bring before us ?— I have answered the inquiries 
 there. The guardians desired me to state that they 
 feel unable, in the district I represent, to pay the 
 present fixed rents ; and they have given me a few 
 items to bring under your notice, from which you can 
 clearly see that. On one estate the valuation is £119, 
 and the rent £271. It was purchased by a man 
 named Austin Moran of Welbrook over twenty years 
 ago for £1300; so that the tenants are charged about 
 20 per cent, on the purchase-money. 
 
 33746 Mr. Shaw.— Did he raise the rents?— He 
 raised the rents immediately after purchase to that 
 
 ^23747. The Chaikman.— When was the purchase 
 made?— In 1858, they tell me. 
 
 23748. Since that time, what rises have been made 
 in the rents ?-It was raised all at once to the rent 
 at present, £271, 17s, 6d. on a poor law valuation of 
 
 23749^ You cannot say at what the rent started?— 
 They told me that the rents, before it was purchased, 
 werJ at about a guinea an acre. I presume now they 
 
 "2S ^uAV^itges in the tenancies when the 
 rents we^eralsIdV-No; the tenants clung to their 
 
 ^"SJIl Were the rents raised ^t mj time ?-At the 
 
 time the landlord thought proper, which was imme- 
 diately after purchase. 
 
 23752. What is the property? — Cahermacun. 
 
 23753. Mr. Shaw. — Does he live in the district? — 
 His son is there now. He was a tenant - farmer, 
 who bought a good deal of property at the time, 
 and put extraordinary rents on the tenants. 
 
 23754. The O'Conoe Don. — When did the last rise 
 take place?— I cannot state now, but I. could send you 
 the date. 
 
 23755. The Chaikman. — Send the rent at the time 
 the property was purchased, and also the various rises 
 since. 
 
 Witness. — I shall do so. On another place pur- 
 chased by Austin Moran, there was a solvent tenant 
 who held at £60 a year,, and had spent a large sum 
 in reclaiming his land and bringing it to heart ; hut 
 the new proprietor took the earliest opportunity oi' 
 evicting him before the Land Act, and robbing him of 
 all his improvements. He let it to other tenants at 
 £180 a year, the valuation being £63. My father 
 was the tenant. He held the farm at £60 a year, 
 which he got in a neglected state, and covered 
 with scutch grass. He tilled it and brought it into 
 proper order. It was put into the Landed Estates 
 Court, and bought by this Mr. Moran, who took the 
 earliest opportunity of evicting him, and robbing him ■ 
 of all his improvements. 
 
 23757. Mr. Shaw, — Did your father live on that 
 land ? — Adjoining it ; it was part of his farm. 
 
 23758. The Chaieman. — What was the name of 
 the tenant ?— Thady Hogan. 
 
 23759. I mean in the first case? — There are several 
 tenants on that property, which is called Cahermacun. 
 
 23760. Mr. Shaw.— Is that in the county of Clare ? 
 Yes, in the parish of Kilnaboy, near Corofin. 
 
 22761. The O'Conor Don. — In the second CE^se, 
 
 5 A2 
 
732 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Hogan. 
 
 Oct. ■», i«80. after he had taken the land from your father, did he 
 divide it amongst small tenants? — Amongst small 
 
 Michael tenants. A good part of the union that I represent has 
 
 been purchased by new proprietors, and these have put 
 on those extraordinary rents — rents such as Austin 
 Moran was getting. The action of the new proprietors 
 has been instrumental in putting on the exorbitant 
 rents that the tenants under old landlords are paying. 
 
 23762. Mr. Shaw.— Is the land particularly good? 
 — It is fair land ; not fattening land, but nice sweet 
 land. 
 
 23763. The O'Conoe Don. — Did the new tenants 
 take the land by proposal? — They treated privately. 
 I believe they gave fines, but I cannot say that for 
 certain. 
 
 23764. Did they build houses ?— They built houses. 
 They were tenants that were evicted by new pro- 
 prietors. 
 
 23765. Mr. Shaw.— And were glad to get into any 
 place ? — They were glad to get into any place. 
 
 23766. The O'Conob Don. — In what year was that? 
 —In 1858. 
 
 23767. The Chaieman. — Can you give the acreage 
 of all the tenants in the first case ? — Well, I did not 
 take that from the Poor Law Board. In the second 
 case there are 90 acres. 
 
 23768. That is the case of Thady Hogan ? — Yes. 
 
 23769. The O'Conoe Don.— Do you think £2 an 
 acre too high for that land? — His son has given an 
 abatement of 20 per cent, within the last twelve 
 months, but that is a small thing. I do think £2 too 
 much. 
 
 23770. The Chaieman. — They hold from year to 
 year ? — Yes. 
 
 23771. Have they been offered leases ? — I presume 
 they don't wish to take leases. 
 
 23772. Are there any cases in your union that you 
 are aware of in which the tenants have been compelled 
 to take leases ? — Well, it is quite general for some 
 landlords in the district to force tenants to sign printed 
 agreements, debarring themselves from taking any ad- 
 vantage of the Land Act. I was obliged myself to do it. 
 
 23773. Mr. Shaw. — You had been a yearly tenant ? 
 — I am a yearly tenant of several farms. 
 
 23774. And this was imposed on you ?^ Yes; and 
 £50 increase of rent put on me. I had to sign the 
 printed agreement. I consulted my attorney, who 
 told me that I should give up the farm or do it. 
 
 23775. How long ago was this ? — Four years ago. 
 The landlord imposed it on all when he raised the rents. 
 
 23776. Were the rents raised generally on his pro- 
 perty? — They were to a great extent. The valuation 
 of my farm is £103. My father took it in 1852 at a 
 rent of £150. Before that the rent was £80. When 
 the present Lord Inchiquin succeeded to the property, 
 he put a rise of £50 on me, and I was obliged to sign 
 the agreement just referred to. 
 
 28777. Had you done all the improvements on the 
 farm yourself? — My father built walls, and laid it out 
 in divisions. I surrendered it, and said I should get 
 compensation, but found that, having signed this agree- 
 ment, I could not get any. 
 
 23778. You have given it up, then ? — No ; I continue 
 for another year. He took 20 per cent, off the £50. 
 
 23779. Have you observed that the tenants who 
 have leases with long terms to run are generally in- 
 clined to improve ? — Oh, decidedly, my lord ; provided 
 they have an interest under the lease. But landlords 
 in my district are pressing leases, and the tenants are 
 not inclined to take them. 
 
 23780. What terms are they offering ?— Thirty-one 
 years generally. 
 
 23781. When you say that improvements are made 
 when there is a long term to run, what do you mean 
 by a long term ? — Well, leases are the exception in the 
 country. 
 
 23782. You say that tenants, where they have a 
 long term to run, are inclined to improve : how long 
 should that term be?— I should say seventy years 
 would be considered a long lease in the past, but any- 
 thing short of perpetuity will not satisfy tenants now. 
 
 23783. Mr. Shaw. — Thirty-one years is not 
 enough ? — Not enough. 
 
 23784. Baron Dowse. — Supposing a man were 
 allowed to occupy his farm as long as he paid the 
 rent, and not turned out at all, and had liberty to sell . 
 his interest, and that what was a fair rent were to be 
 fixed by arbitration, if he and his landlord could not 
 agree on the subject — would that be a fair arrange- 
 ment ? — The people in my country are peaceably 
 disposed people, and only want what is fair. 
 
 23786. Would they like that? — They would like 
 that; but they have no confidence in the landlord 
 being allowed supreme control in the fixing of the 
 rent, as has been the case up to the present. 
 
 23786. Mr. Shaw. — That is a grievance ? — It is a 
 grievance. I urged on several large landlords in my 
 district — not only in my own case, but in several cases 
 for the past year — that they had a right to bear a por- 
 tion of the terrible results of the present depression. 
 They did not, but insisted on their full rents up to 
 last November — this time twelve months — and hence 
 the unpleasantness. 
 
 23787. There were two or three bad years before 
 that, and they did not consider them ? — I explained 
 to my landlords that no rent had been made for three 
 seasons before that, and they were well aware of it. 
 
 23788. The Chaieman. — We have had from a 
 witness having the management of land, that where 
 the tenant represented that the rent was too high, he 
 was willing to discuss the matter with him, and if 
 they differed, to allow a resort to arbitration : has 
 that been the case in your country ? — ^No, it has not. 
 The people would have confidence in the Government 
 valuation ; but the landlords in my part of the country 
 insist on the right of fixing the rents, and will give no 
 voice to the tenants. I will give you another case on 
 another portion of the Marquis of Thomond's property, 
 A holding was let to four tenants by a middleman 
 under the Marquis of Thomond, the rent being £46 to 
 the Marquis, £20 to the middleman, and a fat pig each 
 year. At the expiration in 1829 of the lease under 
 which that arrangement was carried out, the fat pig 
 was disposed of, but Lord Thomond kept the £66 on 
 the four tenants until the property was sold in 1858. 
 It was then bought by a very large proprietor, who 
 fixed the rent at £136. 
 
 23789. Mr. Shaw.— From £66 ?— Yes, from £66 
 to £136. 
 
 23790. The Chaieman. — Is he the owner at pre- 
 sent ? — He is. 
 
 23791. Will you give the name ? — I will — Captain 
 Blackburne. 
 
 23792. Ml-. Shaw. — Has that rent been continued 
 ever since ? — Ever since ; and they were forced to 
 take a lease for 21 years, which is now expired. The 
 ordnance valuation is £53. The tenants are thoroughly 
 broken-hearted, and begged of the board to have their 
 case brought forward. 
 
 23793. How many acres are in the holding? — 
 There are four tenants on it, and I have reason to 
 know that they reclaimed the land themselves. Some 
 of it is wild land, and they are paying 32s. an acre 
 for it. 
 
 23794. Have you any other cases to mention ? — 
 I give only a few. Most of the tenants in the Corofin 
 Union pay extraordinary rents. There is no part of 
 the country where the rents are so extreme ; and the 
 landlords, with a few exceptions, have not come to 
 the assistance of the tenants. 
 
 23795. The O'Conoe Don. — Have there been any 
 evictions in your neighbourhood ? — No ; because the 
 tenants cling to their holdings. 
 
 23796. Mr. Shaw. — And try to pay the rents as 
 well as they can? — There is a great desire on the 
 part of the people to pay the rents. Mr. Stafford 
 O'Brien's estate and several other properties are let 
 at the ordnance valuation. 
 
 23797. And the people are contented? — Well, 
 rather. They feel the pinch of the times as well as 
 others. The Guardians of the Corofin Union desire 
 me to state that they consider that the present Govern- 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 733 
 
 ment valuation would be just between landlord and 
 tenant. 
 
 23798. The Chaiemak. — Would it be just as re- 
 gards all tenants, because we are told that it varies ? 
 — In the Corofin Union I venture to say that the 
 tenants as a general rule would accept the Govern- 
 ment valuation as a satisfactory settlement of the 
 lund question. But any settlement without valued 
 rents — without having the rents readjusted — would 
 not be received as satisfactory. 
 
 23799. Mr. Shaw. — Isn't the valuation rather low 
 on some of the rich fattening land — you have not 
 much of it ? — Not much in my union ; but any 
 fattening land in Clare is valued at 40s. and ios. the 
 Irish acre, according to the Government valuation. 
 
 23800. It is not so high in Limerick ? — We have 
 only a small share of what I should call very good 
 land in Corofin Union. 
 
 23801. The O'Conor Don. — Where does the 
 fattening land lie? — Near Lisdoonvarna, and near 
 Kilfenora, and Ennis, and some by the Shannon. 
 
 23802. The Chairman. — Have there been any 
 cases in which the tenants purchased property ? — 
 Yes ; there was an instance of it on the Marquis of 
 Conyngham's property. We have not had a long 
 trial of it yet, but the tenants who purchased are very 
 thrifty and improving. 
 
 23803. How long ago is that ? — Twelve or eighteen 
 months ago. They borrowed money from their 
 friends, and through the Board of Works. 
 
 23804. Mr. Shaw. — There is another portion of it 
 in the market now ? — Yes ; and the tenants on it are 
 trying to do likewise. 
 
 23805. The O'Conor Don.— Did they pay a high 
 rate of purchase ? — I heard about 2 1 years on the rental. 
 
 23806. Was the rental low or high? — We have 
 not many such good landlords in the district as the 
 Marquis of Conyngham. It was low in comparison 
 with other properties. 
 
 23807. Baron Dowse. — Is he selling all his Clare 
 property ? — So I heard, and the tenants are trying to 
 purchase if possible. 
 
 23808. The Chairman. — Could you suggest any 
 improvement in the mode of carrying out the sales ? 
 — I think the Bright clauses should be extended, and 
 that the Government should advance the whole pur- 
 chase-money on the security of the land. 
 
 23809. The whole purchase-money ? — Yes. 
 
 23810. Mr. Shaw. — Where the tenant requires 
 it ? — Where the tenant requires it ; for I have reason 
 to know that people injure themselves by paying a 
 portion of the purchase-money, and thereby neglect 
 the stocking of their farms. 
 
 23811. They could not borrow money then, owing 
 to the regulations of the Board of Works ?— Yes- 
 only two-thirds. 
 
 23812. The Chairman. — Do you think there could 
 be any improvement in the way of lessening the ex- 
 pense of the sales ?— I do. They are very expensive. 
 
 23813. Have there been any purchases under the 
 Church Commissioners ?— None in Corofin Union. 
 
 23814. Baron Dowse. — What is your principal 
 town in the union ? — Corofin. 
 
 23815. Mr. Shaw.— Is it a small town ?— It has 
 about 1000 inhabitants. 
 
 23816. The Chairman.— What has been done by 
 tenants in the union, in the way of reclamation ?— The 
 tenants have done a great deal on the property ot 
 Captain Blackburne— an immensity. They have won 
 bad, boggy mountain land inte fair middhnglana. 
 
 23817 Are they well paid for their expenditure ?— 
 I think the landlord enjoys all the advantage of it. 
 
 23818 By the increase of rent?— Well, they pay 
 32s. an acre for this land, and they were obliged to 
 take those leases -that is, generally speaking. 1 
 don't allude to Captain Blackburne's estate, situated 
 outside the Corofin CJnion. 3 . u -,„ t\.^ 
 
 23819 How were the tenants induced to begm the 
 recl!mation-!^id they get the.land f-eV-No; they 
 all pay rent for it. In many instances after the im- 
 provements, the rents were raised; but I must say that 
 
 that has not been the case on Captain Blackburne's 
 estate. It was raised to the present rent after purchase. 
 
 23820. I suppose during the last few years, since 
 the times became bad, they have not been much 
 incUned to do so? — ^Not much. 
 
 23831. Baron Dowse. — How are the labourers 
 getting on — are they well off? — Well, they were in a 
 dreadful state until the landlords got the money from 
 Government. 
 
 23822. We have been told here that unless some- 
 thing is done this winter also, they will be in a very 
 bad way again? — Well, in our part of the country 
 works will be carried on again. Lord Inchiquin has 
 got £6000, and he has not expended it all yet. The 
 tenants feel it a grievance that nothing has been done 
 by the Government to advance them money on the 
 security of their holdings. 
 
 23823. Where the landlord does not co-operate? 
 — Where the landlord does not co-operate. 
 
 23824. Mr. Shaw.— They would be willing to 
 borrow and impro've ? — Yes, to borrow and improve. 
 
 23825. And to pay off the money themselves? — 
 Yes. I tried, in respect of a farm I have, to borrow 
 the money, and applied for it ; but my lease is too 
 short, and I could not get it. I think it would return 
 me 20 per cent. 
 
 23826. The Chairman. — You say in your reply to 
 the written queries, that no adjustment of rents that 
 could take place, except that of adopting the Govern- 
 ment valuation, would be satisfactory ? — Yes ; the 
 present rents cannot continue to be paid. 
 
 23827. But you think that a new Government 
 valuation would be satisfactory ? — Well, I think that 
 the tenants in the district that I represent would have 
 confidence in a Government valuation. It could not 
 be higher than the last, if tenants' improvements be 
 considered, the increased cost of production, and in- 
 creased cost of support of the farmer and his family. 
 
 23828. You think that it might be left between the 
 landlord and the tenant in the first instance ; that if 
 they could not agree, there might be a private arbitra- 
 tion between them ; and that if that did not succeed, 
 there should be power to call in a valuator appointed 
 by Government? — I must again mention to you that 
 the tenants will not have confidence that the landlords 
 will be disposed to alter their rents to the present cir- 
 cumstances. 
 
 23829. But even supposing they failed to agree in 
 some cases, do you not think that each might name a 
 person, and that they might endeavour to settle it be- 
 tween them ; and that if these could not agree on an 
 umpire, there should be a person appointed for that 
 purpose by some Government means ? — I must again 
 say, my lord, that the tenants have a greater desire 
 that Government should fix the rent between them 
 and their landlords. They would rather take chance 
 with a fair fixed rent. 
 
 23830. And come in and decide between them 
 without any application on the part of either ? — With- 
 out any application. That is the feeling. 
 
 23831. Baron Dowse. — Your idea is, that there 
 should be some general valuation ? — Some general 
 valuation. 
 
 23832. But a general valuation would be a very 
 long and a very tedious affair. Supposing there was 
 not to be a general valuation for some time, what 
 objection would there be to having a Government 
 valuator in the meantime to fix the rent between 
 landlord and tenant, in the event of their not being 
 able to agree ? — One thing is certain, that if something 
 be not done — and it has been discussed in our district 
 — the tenants cannot possibly hold. I know that a 
 general valuation would be very long ; but until then, 
 what you suggest would be very good. I think I 
 stated to you that the landlords, as a rule, do not wish 
 to reduce their rental under any circumstances. They 
 are always disposed to raise it. 
 
 23833. Baron Dowse. — There is a great deal of 
 human nature in the landlords in that respect. 
 
 Witness. — I think those that give in first will come 
 out best. 
 
 Uct. 2», 1H80. 
 
 Michael 
 Hosaii. 
 
734 
 
 lEISH LAifD ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Michael 
 Hogan. 
 
 23835. Mr. Shaw.— Are those that gave in soonest 
 and made reductions getting their rents ? — Yes. 
 
 23836. Baron Dowse.— I understand you to say 
 that unless some arrangement of that description be 
 made, things will not get any better? — The tenant's 
 position is a desperate one. Their rents were fixed 
 at a period of prosperity. I remember when from 
 f 15 to £18 an acre could be made of wheat, where £5 
 or £6 could not be made the last few years. 
 
 23837. Mr. Shaw.— Wasn't this a good year for 
 wheat? — The price of corn is nothing. It won't 
 pay. 
 
 23838. Baron Dowse. — Isn't it a fact that m yoVir 
 union the tenants in the bad years were not able to 
 make their rents ? — I have reason to know from ex- 
 perience, and from all my neighbours, that no rent has 
 been made for the last two or three years before this ; 
 and the landlords know it. They told me they know 
 it. Cattle were sold at cost prices for three successive 
 years. 
 
 23839. Are not the cattle doing better this year ? — 
 Quite so ; but the tenants have four years' rent to meet 
 this year, and hence it is that their position ia a 
 desperate one. To show you the anxiety that thei-e 
 is on the part of tenants to pay their rents, I may 
 mention that I have known them actually to pay 
 what they made in pigs last November to the agent. 
 They were depending during the winter on whatwe gave 
 them from the Duchess of Marlborough's, the Mansion 
 House, and the Land League funds, and in the mean- 
 time they gave all that they made in pigs to the land- 
 lord. 
 
 23840. Did the people that received relief in that 
 way pay the landlord's rent ? — They did. 
 
 23841. That amounts to this, that the people who 
 subscribed to the relief funds were subscribing to 
 pay the landlords their rents ? — Decidedly. 
 
 23842. Baron Dowse. — It is well to know that. 
 Witness. — We gave relief to parties who had 8 or 
 
 10 mikh cows last year, because but for it they would 
 have had to sell their stock and be thrown on the 
 world. Then we kept them in their holdings. 
 
 23843. Mr. Shaw. — Did yon give out-door relief 
 in your union ? — We gave it to a large extent ; but I 
 must say that we got a good deal from the Mansion 
 House and the Duchess's funds, and a fair .share from 
 the Land League. 
 
 23844. Baron Dowse. — But it was never intended 
 that those funds should pay the landlords' rents ? — 
 What could you do ? One man, who had a delicate 
 wife and six children, owed me some money, and I 
 endorsed a £5 bill for him. He had to give the land- 
 lord a part of that, reduce his bill, and also keep 
 something for his delicate wife and children. He 
 tendered the landlord a portion of the price of his 
 pigs, but he said he would evict him if he did not 
 receive the entire. The man was starving, and I 
 mentioned the case to Mr. Fletcher of the Duchess's 
 Committee. That man's wife and six children were 
 starving through the winter, and the rent was paid. 
 
 23845. Is there any foundation for the statement 
 that people would not get relief unless they paid their 
 rent ? — No, it did not exist in our part of the country. 
 The people in our part of the country are very peace- 
 ably disposed. 
 
 23846. The O'Conoe Don. — Did you give out-door 
 relief from the union to people who had numbers of 
 cows ? — We could have done so ; but we did not do 
 it, because we had what we were receiving from the 
 different funds at our disposal. 
 
 23847. Baron Dowse. — Do you mean to say that 
 you gave relief out of the Duchess's and the Mansion 
 House funds to people who had cows ? — We did. We 
 were directed by the Lord Mayor's Committee to do 
 it. In the month of March money was very scarce, 
 and if the people did not get money from us, they could 
 not have tided on until May. 
 
 23848. And they paid their rents in the meantime ? 
 ■ — Some of them had paid their rents in the November 
 previous. The May rent is payable in November. 
 
 23849. Were people helped to pay their rents out 
 of the relief funds ? — I know that parties who had 
 their rents paid had nothing to live on during the 
 winter but what we were supplying them with from 
 the different funds. 
 
 23850. Mr. Shaw. — You kept (hem alive ; other- 
 wise they would have had to live on the rates ? — Yes, 
 or the workhouse would have been overcrowded. 
 
 23851. The Chairman. — They would have had to 
 part with their stock, and had no means of living? — 
 Before the Government came to our aid with the 
 money which was expended, the farmers were not 
 able to employ the people. They were so tightened 
 that they could not afford to give a shilling to a man 
 to do their business ; and but for the different funds, 
 and the money that was expended by the landlords, 
 the working people in my part of the country would 
 have been in a very bad state. 
 
 23852. The landlords who got their rents sub- 
 scribed, I suppose, to some of those funds themselves ? 
 ■ — Yery little. Mr. Greer gave £5. I think Mr. 
 Fitzgerald gave us £10. 
 
 23853. Baron Dowse. — What you mean is, that 
 the people, having paid their rents, left themselves in 
 such a condition that they would have been starved 
 if you had not relieved them ? — Exactly. 
 
 23854. The Chairman. — Are the labourers usually 
 holding their cottages from the farmers ? — It is not so 
 much the practice in our part of the country as in 
 other districts. 
 
 23855. Do they usually hold from the head land- 
 lords? — No, they don't. They live in the towns. 
 Through the country there are labourers living on 
 patches of ground held from the tenants, but not so 
 much in our district as in other districts. 
 
 23856. Thus living in the towns, do they g«t any 
 land, like allotment-land, for growing vegetables? — 
 Up to the present they used to have con-acre, but they 
 were too poor to sow it for the last three or four years, 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 ThojuM 
 Corbett. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Corbett, examined. 
 
 28857. The Chairmak. — Where do you live ? — At 
 Balla Quin. 
 
 23858. You are a tenant-farmer ? — I am. I farm 
 195 acres. 
 
 23859. Under one landlord? — No; under three 
 landlords. 
 
 23860. Who are they ?— Mr. Creagh, Lord Inchi- 
 quin, and Lord Dunboyne. I may add that I am a 
 poor rate collector. 
 
 23861. One holding is of 45 acres ? — 45 Irish acres. 
 
 23862. Under which landlord is that ? — ^Mr. Creagh. 
 
 23863. Ton want to mention something special 
 with respect to that? — Yes. In the year 1866 I 
 succeeded my father in that farm of 45 acres. I built 
 a house on it two storeys high, and 45 feet long by. 
 
 20 feet wide. I held from a middleman at that time. 
 His interest died ; and the head landlord came in, the 
 following year, and re- valued it with the assistance of 
 his agent— or rather bis agent did it, not he, I am 
 sure — and raised the rent from £45 to £63. It was 
 held at £45 for forty-four or forty-five years before 
 that. I got a lease from the head landlord for three 
 lives, or thirty-one years. 
 
 23864. Mr. Shaw. — It was out in 1863? — The 
 head landlord's lease was given in 1863. I should 
 take the lease, for I had the house built. I built out- 
 ofiices, and made every necessary improvement that I 
 could. I planted about the house, and reclaimed some 
 bog land. In the year 1870 the landlord died, and 
 his brother succeeded him ; and he quarrelled with 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 7S5 
 
 my title, put me into the Law Courts, broke my lease, 
 and raised the rent to £73. 
 
 23865. The Chairman.— He said that his brother 
 had no power to make the lease ?— He said his brother 
 had no power to make the lease, because he was only 
 tenant for life. I had redoubled my exertions from 
 the time I got the lease firom his brother. I thought 
 I was secure, and tried to make things better every 
 day in order to secure a permanent place for myself; 
 and the consequence is, that it is as nice a little place 
 as there is in the barony. 
 
 23866. When did this happen? — In the year 1870. 
 
 28867. That was the time he broke your lease ? — 
 That was the time he broke my lease. 
 
 28868. Mr. Shaw. — And put £10 a year on you 'i 
 — And put £10 a year on me. I must tell you that I 
 refused £1200 for my interest in the place at that time, 
 in consequence of all the improvements I had made. 
 
 23869. Did he offer you a lease? — Oh, he gave 
 me a lease, but it is of no use, because I have lost 
 .£300 by the place in the last three or four years, 
 and must give it up. It is light craggy land. 
 
 23870. Mr. Shaw. — "What is the length of his 
 lease ? — Oh, he said he would give me a lease until 
 doomsday; but I said I would be just as well with- 
 out it. 
 
 23871. Mr. Shaw. — But you have the lease? — Ihave. 
 
 23872. The CnAiraiAN. — Is that the case in which 
 you said you held under successive landlords? — Yes, 
 that one case. 
 
 23873. Mr. Creagh was the purchaser of it? — No; 
 I had it first from a middleman, and I thought the 
 middleman could give me a lease. I relied on that, 
 and did not know the circumstances. Then when I 
 was under the head landlord, I was sure I was safe ; 
 but in fi»ct all tenants are debarred from making 
 improvements, from the fear they have of their land- 
 lords. No man will make a place better than he 
 finds it, as long as things are in such a condition. I 
 would not have attempted to have done the things I 
 did, if I had thought that I was in the very insecure 
 state in which I was. 
 
 23874. Are you in the Corofin Union? — No, in 
 the TuUow Union. 
 
 23875. Mr. Shaw. — Do you find the people pretty 
 well off there ? are they able to pay their rents pretty 
 well ? — Well, a good deal in my district have it at the 
 Government valuation. 
 
 23876. Who are the landlords ? — Mr. Butler. The 
 rents are fair, and his tenants are satisfied to pay them, 
 and it has been so for the last thirty years. 
 
 23877. No rise ? — No change. 
 
 23878. And no evictions ? — No evictions whatever. 
 But there are other cases where the rents are exces- 
 sive. I know cases in which the ordnance valuation 
 is £76, and the rent £185. 
 
 23879. In the same union ?— In the same union. 
 28880. Are the tenants improving their lands in 
 
 the other cases?— They are. They are improving 
 their properties where they have them at the ordnance 
 valuation, and think they are secure. 
 
 23881. Have they made the improvements them- 
 selves ?— Oh, in every case. They make the improve- 
 ments, except on the property of Lord Leconfield, who 
 makes the improvements, but charges 4 or 5 per cent, 
 for them. 
 
 23882. But in the other case the tenants do every- 
 thing ? — Yes. 
 
 Thorn »» 
 Corbett. 
 
 23883. And they are satiisfied to do so when tliey Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 feel themselves secure? — Quite satisfied. They are 
 
 always anxious to make things better if they possibly 
 can ; but indeed I must say that they experienced a 
 great deal of difiiculty last year in striving to pay 
 their rents. 
 
 23884. Still they managed to pay them? — They 
 are striving to pay. I don't think they will find 
 themselves much better this year. A great part of 
 them are small farmers — tillage farmers., 
 
 23885. The potatoes are good ? — Oh, the crops and 
 potatoes are very good indeed. It is the principal 
 thing that they depend on. The few beasts that they 
 have to sell, they keep for the rent. They have very 
 little cattle to sell, being mostly all agricultural 
 farmers in my district. 
 
 23886. On your other holdings you have nothing to 
 complain of? — Well, I have not a great deal to com- 
 plain of, certainly. I know cases in my district where 
 they have been contracted out of the Land Act of 
 1870. 
 
 23887. The Chairman. — Was that in the case of 
 new tenancies? — Oh no, tenancies made immediately 
 after the passing of the Land Act. They were obliged 
 to enter into agreements to become eleven months' 
 tenants. 
 
 23888. Mr. Shaw. — Under signed agreements? — 
 Under signed agreements. 
 
 23889. They contracted themselves out of the 
 Land Act? — Yes; and in every case they must pay 
 the county cess. Wherever new tenancies have 
 been created, an agreement was entered into that 
 they 'should pay the county cess. Invariably the 
 landlord chooses the rent, and the tenants have no 
 power of settling it. 
 
 23890. Have the rents been raised in cases of that 
 kind ? — Not recently. 
 
 23891. Not since the Land Act? — Oh, there have 
 been increases of rent in the case of the eleven months 
 tenancies. 
 
 23892. That is what I mean ? — Yes, the rents have 
 been increased, and I should say they are much too 
 high. During the last two or three years the farmers 
 lost the greater part of their little capitaL They 
 never had a great deal to spare ; on the contrary, 
 their capital has been dwindling away from them 
 year after year, and consequenely it will take some 
 time before they can recover themselves. They all 
 seem to think that the land at the ordnance valuation 
 would be fair, because the farmers are all small, and 
 they never could make much of them ; between the 
 support of their families aud providing for growing 
 up members of them, they never have anything. All 
 the tenants under £50 or £60 a year could not afford 
 to pay much more, as far as my knowledge of the 
 country goes, and I have a good deal of knowledge 
 of it. 
 
 23893. It is a struggle in the best of times?— 
 Always. There are good large farmers, and they are 
 industrious, but so far away from the markets, that a 
 good deal of their produce cannot be turned to account. 
 A few pigs and butter are all they have. Potatoes 
 and corn are the principal things. 
 
 23894. The Chairman. — Is there anything else that 
 you wish to call attention to? — Nothing else of 
 importance, further than what I have explained to 
 you. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Fkancis Mobice, Esq., examined. 
 
 23896. Baron Dowse. — I believe you live at 
 Springfield, Bunratty, in the county of Clare?— I 
 
 23897. You are the owner of property there?— 
 Yes ; I am not a large owner. 
 
 23898. How much?-About £1200 a year. I am 
 my own agent. 
 
 23899. I believe you farm land? — About 2500 
 statute acres. 
 
 23900. What is the acreage of the estates with 
 which you are connected as agent? — I should say 
 about 20,000 acres. ■ 
 
 23901. Is it all in the county of Clare ? — No; some 
 of it is in Limerick, and some in Tipperary. 
 
 Francis 
 Jloricp. 
 
73fi 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 .Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Francis 
 Moriee. 
 
 23902. Your own holding is all in Clare? — AH in 
 Clare. I do not farm all the 2500 acres for myself, 
 but in part for gentlemen for whom I am agent. We 
 have 2500 acres in our hands. 
 
 23903. Do the landlords recognise the right of sale 
 of holdings on the estates with which you are con- 
 nected? — No, I think not. In this way they do, 
 that there has never been a change of occupancy 
 that we have not paid them on going out, but 
 we don't recognise the right of sale as a matter of 
 right. 
 
 23904. But you don't disapprove of it? — Well, I 
 should not like to be compelled to do it. We have 
 never taken up land, on the properties with which I 
 am connected, from the tenant without paying him 
 more than the Land Act has given him. Sometimes 
 if the tenant says, " I want to sell," I say, " If we 
 approve of the proposed tenant, you may do so." 
 In some cases where the tenants were unsatisfac- 
 tory, we paid them ourselves and dealt as we 
 thought fit. But the cases have been very few; I 
 don't suppose that in the last ten years I have had 
 six. 
 
 23905. Have you had many evictions? — Never 
 had but three in my life. 
 
 23906. How long have you been connected with 
 these lands? — From ten to twenty years. 
 
 23907. What were the e,victions for? — Two were 
 for non-payment of rent. 
 
 23908. And one on the title? — No. One man was 
 evicted for over-holding. It was a piece of land 
 that had been held by the parish priest. He did 
 not make a will, and his nephew came in as heir-at- 
 law of his property, or something in that way, 
 and claimed to take possession, and we ejected 
 him. We wanted to hand the place over to the 
 next parish priest, as it had been the residence of the 
 priest for 50 years. This nephew over-held, and I 
 ejected him. 
 
 23909. Had you any case in the Land Court? — I 
 had. 
 
 23910. How many? — Two. One was a case in 
 which the man to whom I have just referred, brought 
 a claim. 
 
 23911. Did he succeed? — No, we beat him. He 
 had no title. 
 
 23912. What was the other case? — It was on the 
 property of Mr. Wilson Fitzgerald, near Kilrush. A 
 Kerry gentleman purchased the interest of the farm 
 some years ago, before I was connected with it. He 
 became bankrupt, and a bank clerk, at BaUymena in 
 the north of Ireland, lent him, I think, £300. There 
 was some arrangement between them that this farm 
 was to be transferred to the bank clerk in order to 
 enable him to come by his money. We found that 
 the bank clerk had never had any land, and that he 
 knew nothing whatever about it. He employed a 
 steward, who went down and let part of the place for 
 grazing, and meadowed the remainer. We found 
 that this man was not what I call a tenant, and that 
 he was letting the house and land go to the bad, and 
 we brought an ejectment against him and put him 
 out. Then he made a land claim, which was dis- 
 missed. 
 
 23913. In the two cases in the Land Court you 
 succeeded ? — We did in both. 
 
 23914. And you had only the three ejectments in 
 twenty years ? — Only the three. 
 
 23915. Have there been any increases of rent on 
 your property ? — There have been where leases have 
 fallen out, and in one or two cases where the tenants 
 gave up and sold their interest. One was a case on 
 that estate near Kilrush. A shopkeeper who held a 
 farm became bankrupt, and sold his interest to the 
 former tenant. The farm consisted of 24 acres, and 
 I think £250 was given for it within the last three 
 months without a lease, and the purchaser also agreed 
 to give £10 a year additional rent. 
 
 23916. Is the rent raised on the descent of a 
 tenancy from father to son ? — Oh, never. It is only 
 where there is a complete transfer of the farm from 
 
 one tenant to another, and it does not always occur 
 that there is a rise even then. 
 
 23917. But there are occasions on which there is a 
 rise ? — The only occasions are those I mentioned. 
 
 23918. You say that sale of the tenant's interest is 
 permitted, but not as a matter of right ?^Exactly. 
 Not as a matter of right; we always like to choose 
 the tenant. 
 
 23919. Did you put any limit to the purchase- 
 money ? — No ; but on the properties I represent we 
 have always considered that we should be at liberty 
 to choose the tenant, so as not to get a person of bad 
 character. 
 
 23920. You say you consider that the tenant should 
 be allowed any payment made with the consent of the 
 landlord, and that you know of no case where that 
 has been disputed — is that so ? — I don't know of any 
 case even where they have not had the consent of the 
 landlord. But I have had so few evictions, that I 
 have not had much personal experience in that way. 
 
 23921. How do you think the Land Act works as 
 a rule ? — I think it works very fairly. 
 
 23922. Has it given an increased sense of security 
 to the tenant ? — I think it has, decidedly. 
 
 23923. Do leases exist in your district at all? — 
 Some — not many. 
 
 23924. Do you find any disinclination on the part 
 of tenants to take leases ? — Yes ; they don't care 
 about leases at all now. 
 
 23925. What is the cause of that ? — In any case 
 where a thirty-one years' lease is offered, the landlord 
 generally asks to exclude compensation. TJiat is one 
 reason. But another and much stronger reason, in my 
 opinion, is that the tenants can go into the Land 
 Court and seek for compensation for any improve- 
 ments that they have made. That, I think, is the 
 principal reason. 
 
 23926. Do the landlords, to your knowledge, insert 
 in their leases clauses barring the tenant from claims 
 under the Land Act ? — They do in some cases. I 
 know one or two cases where they have done so. 
 
 23927. Do the tenants object to that? — Not where 
 there were transfers of the tenancies. It is never 
 done except where new tenants come in ; we have 
 never interfered with any existing tenant. In the 
 other cases, of course they would not get the land if 
 they did not come to our terms, so they have always 
 agreed to them. 
 
 23928. Is the condition of the leaseholders superior 
 to that of the tenants from year to year? — ^I don't 
 think so. On the contrary, I think the tenants from 
 year to year, as a rule, in my district are almost 
 better off. I am connected with two estates in which 
 some tenants who have old leases are the poorest I have. 
 
 23929. Do the landlords contribute towards the 
 improvement of the estates you are connected with ? — 
 Yes, in some cases a considerable amount. 
 
 23930. Have they been discouraged by the Land 
 Act from doing that ? — Until this last agitation they 
 have not in any way. 
 
 23931. The Land Act had nothing to do with the 
 agitation ? — No ; but for the last six months not 
 nearly so much has been doing by the landlords, as 
 far as my experience g. cs, as they did before. 
 
 23932. Your experience did not lead to the con- 
 clusion that the Land Act had discouraged them ?— I 
 think not. There had been quite as much done as 
 before the Act up to the time I mention. 
 
 23933. Why do you think the yearly tenants are 
 better farmers than those holding leases? — Well, I 
 only speak of the properties with which I am con- 
 nected myself. I know one property which is all 
 leased, and not a shilling has been laid out on it by 
 the tenants to my knowledge for years. 
 
 23934. As a rule, are improvements made by 
 tenants? — In some cases by the tenants, and in some 
 by the landlords. I am connected with one pro- 
 prietor who laid out £1000 during the last year. 
 
 23935. Was that on one individual holding, or on 
 the district generally? — Over his estate, and it was 
 his own money — not borrowed. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 737 
 
 23936. Was it expended in arterial drainage?— 
 Arterial drainage and house-building. 
 
 23937. For tenants ? — For tenants. 
 
 23938. And does he charge them anythintr? In 
 
 some cases he charges 5 per cent.; in other cases he 
 allows half, and they pay half; in some cases nothing. 
 
 23939. Is the 5 per cent, added to the rent ? — Added 
 to the rent. They have their choice, either to pay the 
 5 per cent., or make the improvements, and get half 
 the cost of them in cash out of the first half-year's 
 rent afterwards. 
 
 23940. Does he charge them anything for the cash ? 
 ^ — Nothing whatever for the half that is allowed. They 
 
 provide the other half. I have many cases of that 
 on Mr. Fitzgerald's property. 
 
 23941. How do the rents stand as to Griffith's 
 valuation ? — I never went into that exactly. I should 
 say that the rents on all the estates that I am con- 
 nected with are from 20 to 40 per cent, over it. 
 
 23942. It all depends on how the farms are circum- 
 stanced? — Exactly ; a great many are let under it. 
 
 23943. Lands of good quality are let 50 per cent, 
 over it? — They are. 
 
 23944. While some of the poor land is let under it ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 23945. The valuation is no test of the real value of 
 the land — is that your opinion ? — No mistake about 
 it. 
 
 23946. You say you know farms in Clare that are 
 let at three times the Government valuation, and have 
 not been surrendered, but are held by the tenants ? — I 
 do. I receive rents of extensive farms let at two and 
 a half times the Government valuation, and I know 
 land even dearer than that. 
 
 23947. The Chairman.— What sort of land is it ? 
 — Crag land — what we call " wintering," where the 
 cattle are turned out during the winter. 
 
 23948. — Baron Dowse. — High land, with grass 
 between the rocks ? — With grass between the rocks. 
 The cattle are left on it for about four months, which 
 saves hay. 
 
 23949. What sort is the soil — is it limestome ? — All 
 limestone. 
 
 23950. Has there been any general raising of the 
 rents since 1870? — None; certainly not. 
 
 23951. Has there been on the expiration of leases? 
 — I don't think there has been any increase of rents, 
 as far as I know, from 1852 up to this. After the 
 famine years there were increases of rent during the 
 years 1849, 1850, 1851, and 1852; but about 1852 
 things settled down, and there has been no increase of 
 rent since, except where there was a new tenancy or 
 the transfer of an old one. 
 
 23952. In reply to the query as to whether arbitra- 
 tion is ever resorted to, you say that rents are gener- 
 ally fixed by competent valuators ? — Yes. 
 
 23953. But that there have been very few cases of 
 arbitration ? — I never had a case of arbitration. 
 
 23954. Who are the competent valuers? — Profes- 
 sional valuers, who are applied to sometimes. 
 
 23955. Do they represent the landlord only? — 
 They are employed by the landlord. 
 
 23956. Representing himself only ? — ^Yes. 
 
 23957. They don't represent the tenant? — No. I 
 have had only one case within my knowledge. In 
 another case I am going to get a valuer to value pro- 
 perty where leases are going to fall out next 25th of 
 March. 
 
 23958. Supposing a dispute to occur between the 
 landlord and the tenant in possession as to the rent of 
 a farm, would you see any objection to a conapetent 
 valuator settling the rent between them ?— No ; 1 think 
 it would be the wisest thing to do. It would be much 
 better to have it done in that way than to have it done 
 exclusively by the landlord or the agent, who are 
 
 interested 
 
 23959 You think it would be better to have some 
 indifferent person as valuator ?-Som_e <^o^f^l?f^^; 
 of that sort would be better than leaving it o the land- 
 lord. I never had a case of the sort myself, in refer- 
 ence to an existing tenancy. 
 
 23960. Did you ever hear of the thing called polit- Oct. 28, 1880. 
 ical economy ? — Yes. -; — 
 
 23961. It would not frighten you from having a MotLT 
 valuator in a case of dispute ? — No ; I am always 
 anxious to have some one to step in between me and 
 
 the tenant, in order to get the thing off my own 
 shoulders. 
 
 23962. You think that would be fair for both 
 parties ? — It would ; but it is almost impossible to 
 get competent men. 
 
 23963. Do you think that could be arranged cora- 
 pulsorily by law ?— Well, I should not like anything 
 in the way of dealing with land to be made compul- 
 sory if I could avoid it, and I can't see how it can be 
 done to satisfy both parties. 
 
 23964. But suppose you could not avoid it? — 1 
 would swallow it then. I am for free trade in land as 
 well as everything else, and let every man make his 
 own bargain ; it cannot be settled otherwise. 
 
 23965. I have observed that there have been a great 
 number of free traders lately — a wonderful conversion 
 in that way, as far as land is concerned ? — We have 
 been free traders all our lives. I tell you we have 
 never done anything else. I only speak of the gentle- 
 men with whom I am connected, and myself. As a 
 rule, they are nearly all well off, and they are con- 
 sidered liberal. 
 
 23966. What improvements are made by the tenants 
 when they make any? — House-building principally. 
 There has been a great deal done in the way of 
 house-building. 
 
 23967. Have they done anything in the shape of 
 draining and fencing? — They do occasionally, but it 
 is not often well done ; it is imperfectly done. 
 
 23968. And I suppose bogs have been reclaimed by 
 the tenants ? — Yes, they have done a great deal in the 
 way of reclaiming bogs on the west coast of Clare, for 
 potato growing. 
 
 23969. Is any rent charged by the landlord for bog 
 given to them for some time after they reclaim it ? — In 
 several cases they don't pay any rent at all, and never 
 did, though they have been cultivating the land for 
 twenty years. In other cases 1 have charged about 
 £1 per acre for reclaimed bog. 
 
 23970. I believe the tenants get people to take 
 these reclamations from them in con-acre ? — Yes ; 
 the tenants often let it for three and four years, and 
 get large sums in con-acre. I am connected with a 
 large estate on the west coast near Kilkee, where I 
 know that tenants who pay me £1 an acre for land 
 get £4 an acre for it in con-acre. 
 
 23971. Are the tenants on your own estate and 
 those over which you are agent, well off as to turbary ? 
 — Yes, with one or two exceptions they all have 
 turbary. Only in one case do we charge for it. We 
 always give the turbary to the tenant ; not as a matter 
 of right, we charge a nominal sum for the permission 
 to cut for their own use. 
 
 23972. On the estates with which you are con- 
 nected, have the tenants practically fixity of tenure ? 
 — They have — there is no doubt whatever about 
 it. We have not turned out any one for twenty 
 years. 
 
 23973. Is there much subdivision of land on your 
 property ? — We don't allow subdivision. I have 
 been in the habit, where there is any idea of 
 subdivision, to serve a notice to quit; and I have 
 never found them to resist it. They have, in marrying 
 their sons and daughters, often tried it; but we 
 always try to keep the holdings together, and I have 
 never had to use any stronger means than serving a 
 notice to quit. I have done that in four or five cases, 
 and I never had any trouble. 
 
 23974. You did not turn them out ? — Oh, never ; 
 they gave in at once. 
 
 23975. There are a good many steps between 
 serving a notice to quit and dispossessing ? — It 
 was only a threat in my case. We never would have 
 carried it into effect. 
 
 23976. But it gives you the power to do it ? — It 
 gives us the power to do it. 
 
738 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Francis 
 Movice. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 23977. Have you ever considered the question of a 
 tenant or " peasant " proprietary, as it is sometimes 
 called ? — I have. 
 
 ■ 23978. Do you think it would be beneficial? — I 
 think not — quite the other way. 
 
 23979. Why now ? — "Well, in the first place, I don't 
 think our peasants have the money to purchase. In 
 cases where estates have been sold in the county of 
 Clare, they have had to borrow three-fourths of the 
 purchase-money. 
 
 23980. Supposing they had one-fourth, and got 
 three-fourths on reasonable terms from the Govern- 
 ment, and were thrifty, industrious men, don't you 
 think that would be advantageous ? — I don't see any 
 harm in that if they were thrifty and industrious. 
 
 23981. But that is what it would bring them to 
 after a while ? — I don't think it would. 
 
 23982. Why ? — Because my experience is — well, 
 say with regard to leases, which are analagous to it — 
 I don't find that a man who gets a lease for 31 years 
 does a bit more on it than he does as tenant from 
 year to year ; and I don't see why he would in the 
 other case. 
 
 23983. There is a great difierence between a man 
 having a lease and owning the fee ? — I believe that 
 if such a man had the fee, in ten years he would have 
 it cut up into ten divisions, and given to all his 
 children, and that in the end they would be all 
 paupers, and I do not believe the Government would 
 ever be paid the instalments. 
 
 23984. But every man has not got ten children ? — 
 Some have a great many more, and they would divide 
 the land. When I say ten children that may be over 
 the mark, but it is not much short of it. There is no 
 doubt that the tendency would be so. 
 
 23985. You are aware that by the law as it is at 
 present, any man who purchases under what are 
 called the Bright clauses, cannot subdivide until he 
 has paid all the instalments, without consent ? — Tes. 
 
 23986. But you may put that out of the question. 
 You are afraid that if this should be brought forward 
 as a panacea for the wrongs of the country, at the end 
 of some years, when we are all in our graves, the 
 people would be no better off than they are now, or 
 perhaps worse ? — Much worse. There is no doubt 
 that subdivision would take place as soon as they got 
 leave to do it. 
 
 23987. Is it not possible, on the other hand, that by 
 sales of the holdings you might have a new race of 
 landlords created ? — Of course. As a matter of course 
 that must come, as soon as a man wished to sell, or 
 got into difficulties ; and then the holdings would all 
 begin to accumulate into large ones again. 
 
 23988. But if a landlord should be willing to sell 
 to a thrifty, industrious man, should not the latter 
 be helped to buy ? — There would be no harm in 
 that. 
 
 23989. You are doubtful as to whether it would 
 be good? — No. I think it would be a very good 
 thing to help good tenants to buy — not poor small 
 ones. 
 
 23990. You say you Jiave had no experience of 
 tenants purchasing ? — I know of some holdings that 
 have been sold to tenants, but not on the estates that 
 I am connected with. 
 
 23991. Do you know anything about them? — I 
 know a few holdings that have been sold. 
 
 23992. Lately ? — Some years ago, on the ThomQnd 
 property. 
 
 23993. Are those holdings in a worse condition 
 since ? — I cannot tell you. I have never inquired. 
 I don't know. 
 
 23994. You have given your evidence without 
 having had any practical experience of the subject ? — 
 I can give you no evidence except what I really know 
 of my own knowledge. I don't mind what 1 hear. 
 I heard that they are not in as good a condition as 
 they were before, but I don't know it of my own 
 knowledge. 
 
 23995. Is there much land in your neighbourhood 
 that is capable of reclamation in a profitable way ? 
 
 I think there is ; but it is very hard to answer the 
 question, because a great deal of land — 
 
 28996. You may take it that I mean land now 
 producing practically nothing, but that is capable of 
 being improved ? — There is some of that class of land, 
 but not a great deal. In a great many cases in which 
 money is laid out on such land, if it is not looked 
 after it will go back again to the same state in which 
 it was before. 
 
 23997. What kind is the land to which you refer? 
 — Mountain land with a thin, light surface. Any good 
 bog lands will repay anything that you spend on them 
 in the w^y of reclamation. 
 
 23998. Does the tenant ever agree to pay the 
 whole county cess ? — Yes ; in all the lettings that 
 I. have made since the Land Act, the tenants have 
 agreed to pay the county cess. 
 
 23999. Do you think they object to it? — I don't 
 think they care much about it. I don't think it 
 makes any difference with them ; if they did not pay, 
 the rent would be higher. 
 
 24000. But is it the landlords that suggest to them 
 to pay the whole ? — Yes, generally. 
 
 24001. I don't suppose they would suggest it them- 
 selves ? — No. We always allow for roads or any 
 other waste. My idea is, that it is better for them to 
 pay the whole county cess. 
 
 24002. You have been asked whether you suggest 
 any alteration in the law, and you say not, because the 
 Land Act of 1870 acts admirably, giving the tenant 
 all that he could fairly expect, and helping to make 
 landlord and tenant work well together down to the 
 time when agitators interfered, which unsettled every- 
 thing — is that your opinion ? — That is my opinion. 
 
 24003. You say also that the cry this season has 
 been, " We never had so favourable a season or better 
 crops"? — That is the case. 
 
 24004. And that if they were only left alone, the 
 people would prosper ? — I think so. 
 
 24005. All interests will be ruined if this agitation 
 continues, and neither life nor property will be safe : 
 that is written down in your replies, and that is your 
 opinion ? — That is literally true. 
 
 24006. The present is a good year? — It is. 
 
 24007. But there have been three bad years ? — 
 No, two. 
 
 24008. And you say — and you have a right to your 
 opinion — that this one good year is to pay four years' 
 rent ? — I don't say that. 
 
 24009. Very nearly? — No; I only say that there 
 were two bad years — last year and the year before. 
 
 24010. One year will not suffice to pay the rent? 
 — Of course not. 
 
 24011. There is a good deal of distress and inability 
 to pay rent? — I don't think there is. I have seen 
 little distress in my neighbourhood. The principal 
 thing that the country people live on is the potato 
 crop ; and if they can get that good, they have enough 
 to keep them through the winter. 
 
 24012. Is the potato crop good this year? — Yes, 
 a capital crop this year. Wherever there have been 
 champions planted, it has been a wonderful crop — the 
 best I ever saw come out of ground. 
 
 24013. On the other hand, I have heard it said by 
 witnesses that other potatoes besides the champions 
 have turned out very badly ?— They are nothing equal 
 to the champions, but are still an average crop — much 
 more so than the crops of the last two years. 
 
 24014. Mr. Shaw.— Are the people in debt after 
 the two bad years ? — I am quite sure they are. 
 
 24015. Therefore the one year has to pay the rent 
 of this year, and of the two or three years before it ? 
 — I am quite sure that one good year would not pay 
 the rents. 
 
 24016. They are still under water ?— I think a 
 great many of them aire; but in my county of 
 Clare there has not been the distress at all that was 
 represented. 
 
 24017. In some parts, you mean ? — In the greater 
 part of Clare. Only a very small portion of that 
 county wanted much relief, in my opinion. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 739 
 
 24018. Do you know the union of Corofin' — I 
 do. 
 
 24019. Do you think that a very poor union ? I 
 
 don't think it very badly off by any means. 
 
 24020. Do you live there ?— No ; but Mr. Wilson 
 Fitzgerald's property of about £3000 a year is in that 
 union — the greater part of it. 
 
 24021. Then you did not hear of any special dis- 
 tress there? — "Well, no doubt there was general distress 
 more or less, but nothing like starvation ; but 1 think 
 the poor law would have been quite sufficient to relieve 
 it. In order to show you that the people of the neigh- 
 bourhood did not think there was much distress here, 
 I may mention that when a session was held for 
 extraordinary relief purposes in the barony, about 
 fourteen magistrates and nine cess-payers attended, 
 and they threw out every work unanimously — not one 
 was voted by them out of twenty-three. 
 
 24022. Were they right in that ?— I think they 
 were. I don't think the works were wanted. The 
 fourteen magistrates and the nine cess-payers elected 
 by the barony threw them all out. 
 
 24023. They were all large ratepayers, I suppose? 
 — Tes, some of them were large ratepayers. 
 
 24024. Do you collect the rents of Mr. Fitzgerald? 
 —I do. 
 
 24025. Did you get your rents pretty well ? — We 
 gave abatements of from 10 to 20 per cent., and got 
 nearly all the rents. 
 
 24026. Would you be surprised to hear that a 
 gentleman from that district of Corofin has stated 
 that after the tenants had paid their rents to their 
 landlords, they had nothing left, and would have 
 starved hut for the Duchess of Marlborough's and the 
 Mansion House relief funds ? — I have no reason to be- 
 lieve that. I don't believe it. I know that the fact of 
 twenty-three responsible gentlemen, more than half of 
 whom were in the district of the union, rejecting every 
 work, looked as if the distress was not very urgent. 
 
 24027. Mr. Shaw. — That throwing out of the relief 
 works was saving their own pockets ? — Well, I don't 
 know that there was a case of starvation or anything 
 of the sort. 
 
 24028. They were not starved, but they were on 
 the relief lists, and they would have been starved only 
 for that ? — Nothing of the sort. I know a man in my 
 neighbouroood whose valuation was £60, and whose 
 land was let at £100, and yet he was on the relief list 
 at Newmarket-on-Fergus. 
 
 24029. The O'Conoe DoN.^Had he any means ? 
 — He had stock on the land, but I don't know whether 
 he had sufficient or not. 
 
 24030. Mr. Shaw. — That is what we heard? — I 
 know plenty of cases of the sort. I had one labourer 
 whom I pay £2 a week to, and he and his family were 
 getting relief; and there was another to whom I was 
 paying 30s. a week during the whole winter, and who 
 was living in my place, and he was getting relief 
 also. 
 
 24031. Baron Dowse.— J^nd they were gettmg the 
 30s. and the £2 a week all that time ?— One of them 
 and his family got £2 a week. He had been with me 
 for five years. 
 
 24032. The Chairman.— Was that the wages of 
 one man ?— No ; the wages of half-a-dozen— young and 
 old. I paid them £2 every Saturday. 
 
 24033. Baron Dowse.— In what shape did they 
 get the out-door relief ? — Meal. 
 
 24034. Was that fair?— I don't think it was. 
 
 24035. Mr. Shaw.— Did you prevent it?— No, 1 
 had nothing to do with it. I refused to be on the 
 Relief Committee. The Mansion House and the 
 Duchess of Marlborough's committees gave it. _i 
 refused to be on the committee, because I thought it 
 outrageous. So many things happened that I would 
 not attend. Two clergymen, the Roman Catho he and 
 the Protestant, were on the committee, and also the 
 medical officer of the district. ,, , , , 
 
 24036 Mr. Shaw.— Did they know that these men 
 were getting wages ?-They did. There were plenty 
 of cases of that sort getting it. 
 
 24037. Then it is quite possible that what we have 
 been told is true, namely, that the tenant had to pay 
 his rent and at the same time was getting relief, and 
 getting it properly, because he would have starved if 
 he had not got it ? — Well, I don't know. Exceptional 
 cases might have occurred, but not to my knowledge. 
 
 24038. What stock had the man whose holding 
 was valued at £60 ? — I could not tell you. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — Perhaps Mr. Frost can tell us. 
 
 Mr. Frost. — There were cases in Corofin such as 
 you describe. I know one small farmer who had a 
 bit of ground and two or three cows, and who would 
 have starved only for the relief he got, in the district 
 of Corofin. 
 
 24039. Mr. Shaw. — Is that a poor district? — One 
 end of it — the western — is a poor marshy district. 
 The limestone end is comparatively well off, but ia 
 the western marshy end there were people that would 
 have starved but for the relief. It was impossible for 
 them to sell off their cattle,. they were so reduced. 
 
 24040. The Chairman. — I understand that the 
 relief was given to prevent them from parting with 
 their stock ? — They could not part with their cattle, 
 because they were so low in condition, and also be- 
 cause there was no demand for them last season ; so 
 that unless they got some food, they would have died. 
 
 Examination of Mr. MoRiCE continued. 
 
 24041. The O'CoNOR Don. — Are you a member of 
 the Corofin Board of Guardians 1 — No. 
 
 24042. Mr. Shaw. — With regard to those leases 
 that you talked of, under which the tenants did not 
 improve, were they short or long leases 1 — They were 
 nearly all leases for thirty-one years or three lives. 
 
 24043. And they had been in existence for some 
 time 1 — Yes. 
 
 24044. So that they were coming to an end 1 — Oh, 
 well, some of them were made about fifteen years ago. 
 Some of my own tenants have thiry-one years' leases, 
 and they have never laid out a shilling from the time 
 they got them. 
 
 24045. I suppose they had an idea that at the end 
 of the leases the rent would be raised 1 — Perhaps so. 
 I only give you the facts. I don't know what the 
 cause may be. 
 
 24046. The Chairman. — What is the state of the 
 labourers in your district 1 — In my district they are 
 better off than perhaps they are in many other parts 
 of the country, for we have a good many resident pro- 
 prietors just about, and they give them employ- 
 ment. 
 
 24047. Do the farmers give them much employ- 
 ment ■? — No, very little. They do nothing but save 
 their hay. They never keep them in the winter. 
 
 24048. Just in the busy times they employ them? 
 — They employ them at the busy times, and give them 
 no employment in the winter. 
 
 24049. Do the labourers hold under the farmers or 
 under the landlords 1 — I think in many cases they 
 live in the villages. All my labourers are living on 
 my own place ; and on another large property with 
 which I am connected, they all live on the estate too, 
 and have houses, and we give them potato ground, 
 and in some cases turf, and all that. 
 
 24050. In those cases they pay rent to the land- 
 lord ? — None of them pay rent. None of my people 
 pay rent. 
 
 24051. I don't mean those employed by you; but 
 on the properties where they don't hold under the 
 farmers, do they pay rent to the landlords in the 
 villages 1 — In the villages, I fancy, yes. Generally 
 in the villages the landlords let plots of land, and 
 there are houses built by the middlemen, who let the 
 houses for so much a week, and that sort of thing, or 
 perhaps so much a year, but as a rule I think the 
 people in the villages pay as weekly or monthly 
 tenants. 
 
 24052. Do you find that where they hold their 
 cottages weekly, and pay for them a pretty high rent, 
 they often part to another family? — I cannot tell 
 you that exactly. There are numbers of people who 
 
 5B2 
 
 Oct. -28, 1880. 
 
 Francis 
 Morioe. 
 
740 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 (let. 28, 1880. 
 
 Francis 
 Moi'ice. 
 
 have built houses on speculation for letting them 
 again ; and wherever there are villages, numbers of 
 the working classes live in those houses, and go 
 work to the country. 
 
 24053. Are those houses over-crowded in the vil- 
 
 lages 1 — Well, I don't think so. In the villages there 
 are plenty of houses now. No, I don't think they 
 are over-crowded. There may be cases of it, but I 
 don't think they are over-crowded. 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Frost. 
 
 Mr. James Frost, examined, 
 Shaw. — You live at Ballymorris, Crat- 
 
 24054. Mr, 
 loe ?— Yes. 
 
 24055. You are the owner of land, a tenant, and 
 also a land agent 1 — ^Yes. 
 
 24056. How much land do you farm? — 400 Irish 
 acres. 
 
 24057. Is that your own, or do you pay rent for 
 it 1 — More than half of it is my own, and I rent the 
 other half. 
 
 24058. Have you had it long 1 — For many years. 
 
 24059. Do you hold it by lease? — From year to 
 year. 
 
 24060. Have your rents been the same for a long 
 time t — There were leases, which expired, and the 
 rent was readjusted about 1850. 
 
 24061. And have continued the same ever since? — 
 And haye continued the same ever since. 
 
 24062. Where are the properties you are connected 
 with ? — Some of them are in Clare, some in Limerick, 
 and some in Tipperary. 
 
 24063. Does anything like the Ulster Tenant Right 
 exist on them ?— No. 
 
 24064. The tenants are not allowed to sell their 
 interests in their holdings 1 — No. 
 
 24065. Even with the permission of the landlord ? 
 — He never gives them permission to sell. 
 
 24066. They must give up their holdings ?• — They 
 must, and he gives them money then. We give them 
 money when that occurs, and we select the new 
 tenant. 
 
 24067. Have you a recollection of the sums that 
 you have given them in those cases ? — Last year I 
 gave a man ,£300. 
 
 24068. For giving up possession ? — He owed rent 
 and could not pay it. An ejectment was brought 
 against him for non-payment of rent, and I gave him 
 £300 when he was going away, though I think he 
 owed two years' rent. 
 
 24069. In addition to forgiving him the rent? — In 
 addition to forgiving him the rent. In other cases 
 smaller sums were given. I gave a man £20 not long 
 ago, and £50 to another, and so on. 
 
 24070. Baron Dowse.— Did you get that £300 
 afterwards from the incoming tenant ?— Not a penny 
 of it. 
 
 24071. Mr. Shaw.— Did you put any additional 
 rent on the holding ? — -Not a farthing. 
 
 24072. Did you not get arrears from the incoming 
 tenant 1 — Not a farthing. 
 
 24073. Did you let the lands ? — Immediately. 
 
 24074. At the old rent?— At the old rent. 
 
 24075. And lost the rent due ? — Lost the rent due 
 besides. 
 
 24076. Do you find that the tenants are pretty com- 
 fortable on their holdings ? — They are, because they 
 are nearly all large holdings. 
 
 24077. Grass land, I suppose 1 — Grass land. Some 
 of them are under cultivation, but they are large 
 holdings. 
 
 24078. Do you know of any other estates where 
 they are allowed to sell their interests? — I don't 
 think that in the county of Clare, or in the county of 
 Limerick, to any appreciable extent, they are allowed 
 to sell their interests. 
 
 24079. The other practice is established? — The 
 other practice is established. Since the middlemen 
 all went away in the famine years, the proprietors 
 have almost unanimously refused to permit any sale 
 of farms. 
 
 24080. Are improvements made by the tenants 
 
 generally on those properties 1 — On the properties 
 that I have to manage we make the improvements 
 ourselves, such as building houses and drainage, and 
 we don't charge them anything for them. On one 
 property that I manage I think ,£15,000 has been 
 laid out during the last thirty years in building, and 
 the owners never charged anything in the shape of 
 interest for the money. 
 
 24081. Baron Dowse. — What estate is that? — 
 Lord George Quin's. 
 
 24082. Mr. Shaw. — Are the rents high or mode- 
 rate ? — They are moderate. I myself made the valua- 
 tion in 1852. 
 
 24083. Have they changed since ? — They have not 
 changed since, except in one instance, where an old 
 lease fell out about the year 1860, and I made a 
 re-valuation, and added something — I think about 
 7 per cent. — to the old valuation. 
 
 24084. Did you give the parties a new lease? — 
 They are yearly tenants. 
 
 24085. Do you think the compensation clauses of 
 the Land Act are sufficient — do they give enough of 
 compensation to tenants in case of their ejectment ? — 
 I think compensation ought to be given to tenants 
 who have farms of a valuation of over £100 a year. 
 I think also that the fact of a tenant holding a grass 
 farm ought not to be a reason, per se, for depriving 
 him when going out of all or any compensation. It 
 is sometimes a very serious inconvenience to the 
 tenant of a grass farm to have to go out of it. In 
 the case of men holding grass farms of £100 a year 
 and upwards, I see no reason why the tenant does 
 not suifer a very considerable inconvenience on being 
 removed. 
 
 24086. You think each case should be taken on its 
 merits ? — Just so. 
 
 24087. And that in some cases the owner of a grass 
 farm has a fair claim to compensation ?— Yes. 
 
 24088. Because he has improved? — No; for they 
 are generally very little improved, but because some- 
 times it is a serious thing for a tenant to have to part 
 with his cattle nolens volens at a particular time of 
 year, and in that sense he suffers a loss. 
 
 240§9. Are the tenants generally willing to take 
 leases on the properties with which you are connected? 
 — I don't hear of any propositions being made to 
 them, but I think that since the passing of the Land 
 Act they don't very much care about them, because 
 they might be put out of compensation if they were 
 to take a lease. 
 
 24090. That is, they are afraid that they would 
 have to sign themselves out of the Land Act?— I 
 don't hear a word on the part of tenants looking for 
 leases, but I am sure it is owing to that, because the 
 leases would be bad for them. 
 
 24091. Do the landlords or the tenants pay the county 
 cess in the case of new lettings ? — In any new lettings 
 that I have made — and I believe it is the case of 
 everybody else — all the county cess is put on the 
 tenant. 
 
 24092. On a new letting? — On a new letting. 
 
 24093. They pay the whole county cess instead of 
 an advance of rent ?— Yes; that part of the Land Act 
 has become, I think, inoperative. 
 
 24093a. Have you any suggestion to make as to 
 the improvement of the existing law? — I think it 
 would be for the good of the country if the Ulster 
 Custom, or something like it, were established. 
 
 24094. That is, security of tenure? — Security of 
 tenure. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 741 
 
 24096. And fair rents ?— Fair rents. 
 
 24096. And valuation ?— Valuation either by a 
 Gcovernment valuator or arbitration. 
 
 24097. Arbitration, you think, could be carried out 
 where diiferences arise between landlord and tenant 1 
 —I really think there ought to be a general valuation 
 put on the country, founded on a really fair valuation 
 of the land, and not in the arbitrary mode in which 
 it was valued by Sir Eichard Griffith. Nothing 
 could be more unsatisfactory than it is as a criterion 
 of the value of land. 
 
 24098. It is very unequal 1 — I had the curiosity, on 
 some estates that I have to do with, to compare what 
 I believe to be the real value of the properties with 
 Griffith's valuation of them, and the discrepancy is 
 something perfectly enormous. It is surprising even 
 in the same parish, surprising even in adjoining town 
 lands, surprising even as between adjoining farms. 
 
 24099. Do you mean the diff"erence between the 
 rent and the valuation, or the difference between 
 what you value the property at, and the Government 
 valuation 1 — The difference between the rent and the 
 valuation. The rent is my own valuation, because it 
 is founded on the values I put on in the years 1850, 
 1851, and 1852. The difference between myself and 
 Sir Eichaxd Griffith is something perfectly surprising. 
 
 24100. You were the agent at that time 1 — I was 
 agent at that time. I have valued a great deal 
 of land from time to time, living in the country and 
 the neighbourhood, and the tenants and the landlords 
 being satisfied with my valuation, it is hard to think 
 that it is not tolerably right. 
 
 24101. Is the land you speak of rich grazing land 1 
 — Every kind — mountain land, grazing land, rocky 
 land, fattening land, and all kinds of land. 
 
 24102. Could you give us a few of the principal 
 cases ? — I will give the leading ones. In one town 
 land in a parish, for instance, you should take 25 per 
 cent, off the rent in order to come at Griffith's valua- 
 tion. In another town land in the same parish you 
 would only have to take off 6 per cent, from the rent 
 in order to come at the valuation. 
 
 24103. Is it equally good land in each case? — No : 
 one of them is mountain land and the other is rich 
 land. There are cases in which you have to take off 
 34 per cent., 25 per cent., and 15 per cent. 
 
 24104. The rent is that much over Griffith's 
 valuation 1 — Exactly. In one town land you have to 
 take off 20 per cent., in another 30, in another 25, 
 and in another 33. 'These are all in the same parish. 
 
 ■ 24105. Baron Dowse. — Is that the fault of the 
 valuation ] — Most decidedly it is. 
 
 24106. Mr. Shaw. — When was your valuation 
 made?— In 1852. 
 
 24107. And Griffith's was made about the same 
 time? — No, it was made in 1839. 
 
 24107a. Mr. Shaw.— No. 
 Witness. — It was made in 1840. 
 
 24108. The Chairman: — That was the first valua- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. Shaw. — That is not the one we had in the 
 poor law books. 
 
 The O'CoNOR Don. — It was reduced in 1852, but 
 they did not go over the land again ; they did it in 
 the office in Dublin. 
 
 Witness. — It is practically the same. There are 
 cases where the rent is more than Griffith's valuation 
 by 5 per cent., and there are other cases where it is 
 40 per cent, over it. 
 
 24108a. Can you tell us if the difference is greater 
 on the rich land, or on the moderate or poor land ? 
 It is greater on the rich fattening land than upon 
 the mountain land. In the case of the barony of 
 Burrin in Clare, which is rocky soil, the valuation is 
 one-third of the letting valuation of the land, that 
 is, every £100 worth is only valued at £33. 
 
 24109 But has not the special value of that land 
 been found out since Griffith's valuation— its value as 
 fattening land ?— Not at all. On the contrary, it had 
 been known long before. 
 
 24110. But it is not tillable land?— Not tillable 
 
 land. The valuation of Griffith is utterly out of pro- oa '« mn 
 portion to the actual value. In buying land, forty ^- 
 
 years purchase is given on Griffith's valuation I f''- ■^™'"' 
 bought a property myself for which I gave forty-five 
 years' purchase on Griffith's valuation. 
 
 24111. Then you did not take it as your guide?— 
 Not at all. Nobody ever takes Griffith's valuation as 
 his guide. 
 
 24112. Do you not know some places where 
 Griffith's valuation is high enough ?— On mountains 
 
 it IS. 
 
 24113. And on poor lands ?— On poor lands. 
 
 24114. Take mountain farms ?— Mountain farms, 
 and even with respect to them the valuation is some- 
 thing strange. I know two town lands within a few 
 miles of this city mountain land almost within sight 
 of the window— the rent of one of these is £100 a 
 year, and of the other £105. Griffith values one of 
 them at £50 and the other at £100. 
 
 24115. The O'Conor Don.— Do you think the 
 rents are correct relatively ?— Most decidedly they 
 are, and the town lands adjoin one another. 
 
 24116. Mr. Shaw. — You would not make much 
 difference between the farms? — Only £5 according 
 to my valuation. 
 
 24117. The Chairman. — Do you know if they 
 were valued by different persons? — I don't think 
 they were. I think they were valued by a gentleman 
 named Lynam — a Galway gentleman. 
 
 24118. The O'Conor Don. — Mr. Lynam valued a 
 good deal in Clare ? — He did. 
 
 24119. Mr. Shaw. — Then yoa are in favour of 
 extending the Ulster Custom ? — I am ; and of having 
 a general valuation of lands. It would not be half 
 so difficult a matter as people imagine. 
 
 24120. And you are in favour of giving the right 
 to sell to the tenant ? — Certainly. 
 
 24121. And of selling out large estates held by 
 companies and corporations 1 — I am. It would be 
 well to have a peasant proprietary in place of such 
 bodies as Trinity College, and according to some 
 simple scheme. 
 
 24122. You would help a peasant proprietary that 
 far, but without going to too great an extent ? — I 
 was in Germany, and devoted myself to inquiring 
 amongst the German people as to the effects of it, 
 and I think it would be very advantageous to intro- 
 duce a system like it into this country. I think they 
 would improve their holdings very much. 
 
 24123. Do you know any cases where the tenants 
 have purchased in your country 1 — I do ; but the 
 purchases have not been made long enough to enable 
 one to form a correct idea as to the result. In some 
 cases they have done a great deal to improve their 
 farms. 
 
 24124. The O'Conor Don. — Do you know the case 
 referred to by the last witness ? — I do. You could 
 not form any correct idea on the subject, for it was 
 mostly a stony district, and where it was not, they have 
 been doing a great deal to improve their holdings 
 certainly. It is in the parish of Inagh, and about 
 there. They have done a great deal to improve it, 
 and it has been certainly cleared. 
 
 24125. Mr. Shaw.— You think that is the natural 
 result of the tenants being peasant proprietors? — 
 It is. 
 
 24126. And that in all cases the same cause must 
 produce the same effects? — I was very curious in 
 Germany to inquire into it, and I saw cases in all 
 parts of Ireland as well as there. They have the 
 most barren 'soil on the face of the earth in some 
 parts of Germany, and they have been improving it 
 in a remarkable way. 
 
 24127. And you think that the Irish tenants would 
 do the same thing if they were similarly circum- 
 stanced 1 — I am quite sure they would. 
 
 24128. You think that this should be carried out 
 through a board established in Dublin for the pur- 
 chase and sale of estates? — No; but supposing that 
 the Ulster Custom were not acceptable, if a proprietor 
 were disposed to sell his estate, I think it would be 
 
742 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. James 
 Frost. 
 
 very advisable to appoint a board that could convey 
 such an estate to the tenantry, just as vre bought the 
 tithe-rent charge, which we got without any trouble 
 or expense. They said, " You pay so much a year for 
 fifty-two years, and then all will be yours for ever- 
 more." We had no trouble, but only to say yes or no. 
 
 24129. The board would stand between the buyer 
 and the seller, and make things simple and cheap ? 
 — Yes ; and not to be going to attorneys. The poor 
 creatures have no power of going to attorneys. 
 
 24130. Baron DowSE. — In most cases the land- 
 lord's title might not be quite so clear as the title 
 of the Church to the tithes? — I know that quite wejl; 
 but where the landlord chose to sell, and had the 
 power of doing so, it would be very desirable to 
 facilitate such a move, in order to enable him to part 
 with his estate on cheap terms. 
 
 24131. Where the landlord had a clear and un- 
 doubted title? — Yes. Many a landlord in this country 
 
 would be very glad to part with his estate to-morrow, 
 and would try to make arrangements between him- 
 self and his family by which it could be done, for I 
 believe a good many of us are tired of our estates. 
 In the case of men like the Marquis of Conyngham, 
 who is going to sell an estate of £10,000 or £15,000 
 a year in Clare, it would be a great thing for both 
 the tenantry and the landlord to have a board in 
 Dublin which could settle the matter between them. 
 
 24132. It would save a great deal of trouble, and 
 give the tenant a better chance of working after- 
 wards? — And give the tenant a better chance of 
 working afterwards. 
 
 24133. Are there many resident landlords in Clare? 
 — I think about one-eighth of the income of Clare 
 goes out of it. 
 
 24134. Not more than that ? — I believe there does 
 more. I am sure there does more than that. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Eav. Thomas 
 jJIsagher. 
 
 The Eev. Thoiias Meagher, P.P., of Newport, County of Tipperary, examined. 
 
 24135. The CHAIRMAN. — Tell us the points you 
 wish to bring before us. — I Tvrote to Sir George 
 Young for the queries to be answered by farmers ; 
 and I had a meeting of farmers and submitted all 
 the queries to them, and from their information I 
 gleaned the answers that I have in this paper. I 
 asked some of the farmers to go before the Com- 
 missioners, but they said they would rather I went, 
 and give their answers ; so I have them written out. 
 
 24136. The Chairman. — I don't see the use of 
 going into the tenant right of the north. The first 
 query is as to whether outgoing tenants sell their 
 holdings — can you state whether the custom is general, 
 or exists only here and there 1 — Only here and 
 there. 
 
 24137. Mr. Shaw.— Not generally?— No. [Witness 
 
 reads.] " Are such sales increasing or decreasing in 
 frequency ? — They are increasing."- 
 
 24137a. Baron Dowse. — What are these?— The 
 answers given by farmers. They desire me to give 
 them to you. 
 
 24138. Baron Dowse. — I thought you wished to 
 be examined as to some supplemental matters. 
 
 Witness. — I can give you this paper, gentlemen, 
 if you will take it. 
 
 24138a. Baron Dowse. — Put in that paper now 
 as your further evidence. 
 
 Witness. — That is quite enough. Here are in- 
 stances of Griffith's valuation and rent in parts of my 
 parish. [Hands in a document.] The information 
 is not given by myself, but I pledge myself to the 
 accuracy of it. 
 
 Mr. Daniel 
 Barry. 
 
 Mr. Daniel Barry, examined. 
 
 24139. The Chairman.— Where do you live ? — 
 At Derrygreen, in the county of Tipperary. 
 
 24140. You are a tenant on Sir Edward Waller's 
 estate ? — Yes. 
 
 24141. Who is the agent ?— Mr. Toler Garvey. 
 
 24142. Did he succeed his father as agent? — Yes. 
 
 24143. How long ago ? — Twelve months ago, on 
 the death of his father. He lives in the King's 
 County. 
 
 24144. Is there anything connected with your 
 holding that you wish to tell us ? — It is all written in 
 that. [Eefers to document.] 
 
 24145. Who is John Humphreys ? — He is my uncle 
 by marriage. 
 
 24146. Did he occupy the holding you have? — 
 Yes. 
 
 24147. How many acres are iii it ? — 120 acres 3 
 roods and 17 perches. 
 
 24148. He held under an old lease ? — Yes. 
 
 24149. For three lives ? — For three lives and thirty- 
 one years. 
 
 24150. When was that lease 
 [Produces it.] 
 
 24151. Are the lives in being?— No; the last life 
 died seventeen years ago. 
 
 24152. You are now holding under a new lease ? 
 
 Yes. 
 
 241.53. When was it given ? — In 1870. 
 
 24154. Was that after the Land Act ? — It was just 
 immediately when the Land Act was going to be 
 passed. 
 
 24155. Just before the passing of it ?— Yes. 
 
 24156. Did those who held before you reclaim 
 mountam land ?— Indeed they did ; every bit of it he 
 
 given? — In 1826. 
 
 reclaimed by his own industry and by great expense 
 and labour. 
 
 24157. Did he get any assistance from the land- 
 lord ?— He did not as much as a brass pin. The land- 
 lord did not build a house or make improvements of 
 any description. 
 
 24158. Did your uncle build the houses ? — He did. 
 
 24159. Do you know the amount of money he 
 laid out ? — It was so much that I could not tell you. 
 At the lowest calculation it was £20 an acre for 
 reclaiming mountain land. 
 
 24160. What sort are the houses ?— Some of them 
 are slated, and others thatched. 
 
 24161. Whatever they are, were they put up by 
 your predecessor ?— Yes, by my uncle. 
 
 24162. In the old lease what was the rent ?— 
 £35, 16s. a year; and then my uncle bought Mr. 
 Keenan's title. He had a rent-charge of £50, and 
 that reduced the rent to £32, 18s. a year. Here is 
 Mr. Keenan's deed. 
 
 24163. The rent was reduced by the purchase of 
 the rent-charge ?— Yes, to £32, 18s. Gd. 
 
 24164. Were some of the meadows taken off?— 
 Yes, about seven years afterwards— at the time he 
 bought Mr. Keenan's title. 
 
 24165. Was it when the new lease was going to 
 be given ?— Before the new lease was given. 
 
 24166. What were they worth ?— About £40 a 
 year — 8 acres of meadow. 
 
 24167. How were they taken off— was it by con- 
 sent ?— No, by the regulation of the agent in squaring 
 the farms. Re took it from one and gave it to 
 another, putting the rise of rent on him. 
 
 24168. How could he do that while there was a 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 743 
 
 lease 1 — He did not do it until the old lease dropped 
 off— until Mr. Smith died. There was a lease for 
 three lives. A man named Eichard Smith was one 
 , of the lives, and when; he died Mr. Garvey took off 
 the 8 acres of meadow. 
 
 24169. When did you come in yourself ^— Eight 
 years ago. 
 
 24170. What was the rent then put upon you 'I 
 
 £35, 16s. 
 
 24171. It was left the same as before ! — When my 
 uncle lost the 8 acres, the rent was left the same 
 without the meadow. 
 
 24172. Nearly the same rent as you paid when 
 you had the meadow as well ? — Yes, sir. 
 
 24173. Mr. Shaw. — Has the rent been the same 
 ever since 1 — When the life dropped off, the rent was 
 £32, 18s. Qd., and £35, 16s. was then put on, and is 
 the rent now without the meadow. 
 
 24174. That is your case 1 — I am compelled to pay 
 £33 a year. My uncle was willing to take £20 a 
 year, but the agent, Mr. Garvey, rejected it. 
 
 24175. Did you pay any money to Humphreys t — 
 
 Yes, £500. There was £350 in solid cash, and £200 
 worth of cattle given to him. 
 
 24176. In the lease is it £35 a year that is reserved, 
 or £26 ?— £35. The agent has me bound down by 
 deed, with the landlord's name signed to it to pay 
 Humphreys £33 a year. 
 
 24177. Where has he written £26 ?— That is in 
 the marriage settlement he made with me. 
 
 24178. To pay £33 altogether ?— £26, and £7 for 
 the grass of a cow. 
 
 24179. The Chairman.— That is only in the mar- 
 riage settlement?— Yes ; it was forced on me by 
 Captain Garvey. He held on agitating until he 
 compelled my uncle to do it. 
 
 24180. He would not agree until he saw what the 
 settlement was ?— He would not. My uncle would 
 not ask any money except what would please Mr. 
 Garvey. 
 
 24181. Had you to look out for meadowmg? — I 
 had now and then. 
 
 24181A. The valuation of it is £27, 15s. ?— Yes. 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Mr. Daniel 
 Barry. 
 
 The Key. Thomas Meaghek. 
 
 24182. I was asked in Dublin about the names of 
 landlords in Newport who raised rents. I said that 
 there were two cases, namely, Mr. Hamilton and Mr. 
 Henry, and that I would give particulars of the ad- 
 
 vances. I have inquired since, and found that there 
 was one advance made on Mr. Hamilton's property 
 seventeen years ago, and three advances on Mr. 
 Henry's property since 1855. 
 
 Rev. Thomas 
 Meagher. 
 
 Mr. Daniel Eyan, examined. 
 
 24183. The Chair^ian. — You live at Ballyneen 
 Oula ?— Yes. 
 
 24184. You are a tenant-farmer 1 — A small one. 
 
 24185. How much land do you hold ? — Twelve 
 Irish acres. 
 
 24186. What rent do you pay for it 1 — A gross 
 sum of £36, 7s. 3d. a year for the last twenty-five 
 years up to two years ago. 
 
 24187. What do you pay now 1 — I paid no rent 
 since next November two years. 
 
 24188. Was any more rent asked from you 1 — No ; 
 the rent was raised twenty-four years ago. 
 
 24189. From whom do you hold? — From a new 
 purchaser that came in over me two years ago. 
 
 24190. What is his name 1 — Mr. Duggan of Tip- 
 peraiy, a local merchant there. 
 
 24191. In the town of Tipperary? — In the 
 town. 
 
 24192. Baron DowSE. — You never paid him any 
 rent ? — ^No. 
 
 24193. Mr. Shaw.— Does he want to get the 
 farm ? — I asked him for a reduction of rent to what 
 it was when my mother was a young widow twenty- 
 four years ago. At iirst I thought he would give me 
 some consideration. I asked him to the place. I 
 offered him £2, 10s. an acre, and to clear off all rent 
 up to the last gale that was due ; but he served me 
 with a writ for possession of the land on the 2d of 
 
 last June. 
 
 24194.- The Chairman.— Did he name any new 
 rent to you?— No; the former rent was what he 
 demanded. , , , 
 
 24195. You thought there ought to be a reduc- 
 tion ? — I did. p ,, * J 4.- Q 
 
 24196 Was it in consequence of the bad times i— 
 Yes and the rent being exorbitant on myself. My 
 brothers and I had to work on road contracts 
 whereby we made a linng. I am a road con- 
 tractor in the county, and have executed a great deal 
 of heavy work, and by my work outside the place 1 
 helped to make my living. WitT^i-n fivP 
 
 24197. Is your farm neai Tipperary ?— Withm fave 
 Irish miles of it. 
 
 24198. Mr. Shaw. — Have you no other land ?— No 
 other land to live on. 
 
 24199. The Chairman. — You went into the farm 
 in consequence of having your business as a contractor 
 to help you to pay the rent ? — Yes ; it was upon the 
 contracts that I principally lived. I received a gross 
 total of about £46 last year from the land. Mr. 
 Duggan knows that I am a hard-working man. I 
 offered to let him come on the land with any man, in 
 order to look at it and see if he could accuse me of 
 bad management or want of industry or energy. I 
 ran into debt on account of the heavy rgnts for the 
 last three or four years, and am considerably in debt 
 to my landlord. 
 
 24200. You offered that somebody should come 
 to see what the rent ought to be ? — Yes, my lord ; 
 and that if they considered the fair value, I would 
 submit to their ruling. I asked no one on my 
 behalf, but that he should bring any parties that he 
 thought well. 
 
 24201. And he would not have a valuation by a 
 person to be appointed by himself ? — He never came 
 on the land and said he was my landlord. 
 
 24202. Has he much property? — He has £51 a 
 year to pay of head rent upon a gross rental of £220. 
 He would have had 8 per cent, on his purchase-money, 
 even after giving a reduction. My farm is on a lime- 
 stone hill. I have no water for my cattle — not even 
 for a goose — and there is no surface on it.' I had to 
 bring road stuff in order to put surface on about four 
 acres of it. 
 
 24203. Supposing a tenant on that property under 
 the former landlord, left, was he allowed to sell to 
 somebody coming in t — He was. There was no sale 
 of that kind ; but there was one tenant, a very small 
 occupier, who had only 2|- acres of land — reclaimed 
 ^jog — who was reduced under the old rent, and he 
 sold last winter with the consent of Mr. Duggan ; 
 but when the new tenant who bought, came to be 
 approved of, Mr. Duggan would not allow him to 
 have it. He caused another man to pay the same 
 money. I am her« to swear that the majority of the 
 produce of that holding, from which that man left, is 
 
 Mr. Daniel 
 Ryan. 
 
744 
 
 lEISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 2s, 1880. this year not worth the landlord's rent, and the tenant 
 
 Mr. Daniel 
 Ryan. 
 
 has gone to America. 
 
 24204. The Chairman. — You say that a man 
 bought it ■? — A man bought it. 
 
 24205. The O'CoNOR Don.— What did he pay for 
 it ?— f 35. 
 
 24206. How much was the rent? — £4, 19s.; and 
 the crop this year is scarcely worth £4, 10s. 
 
 24207. The Chairman. — Was it put in by the 
 old tenant or the incoming man ? — The incoming 
 man has had it since March last, and he put in the 
 crop. 
 
 24208. What do you think is the fair proportion 
 of the tenement valuation to the renf? — I have 
 already answered, from £10 to £15 under it. That 
 would not tell well in a tillage country ; but where I 
 live it is chiefly pasture land, which has been very 
 much improved since the valuation. 
 
 24209. You think it is from 10 to 15 per cent, over 
 the valuation for pasture land ?— I think that would 
 be considered fair. Our people are quite reasonable, 
 and willing to pay a fair rent. 
 
 24210. And what with respect to the tillage land 'i 
 — I think it would not come so high over the valua- 
 tion. From £5 to £10 over the valuation, for it has 
 not been improving so much. When good land is 
 perpetually pastured, it becomes rich and improves. 
 
 24211. In answer to the query as to whether dis- 
 tress is resorted to, you say that in the majority of 
 instances the landlord is given possession of the land? 
 —Yes. 
 
 24212. Wherever the tenant falls into arrear ? — 
 Yes, that is just correct. 
 
 24213. Is it because the land would let for more, 
 and the landlord is anxious to get possession of the 
 land in order to let it again 1 — My experience is, that 
 no matter what cattle you have on the land, the land- 
 lord does not look to them, but for possession. 
 
 24214. Baron DowsE. — He prefers ejectment for 
 non-payment to distress 1 — Yes. 
 
 24215. The Chairman. — In order to get posses- 
 sion ? — I cannot account for his ideas ; but that is the 
 course he adopts. 
 
 24216. Has any other case occurred, of a tenant 
 appealing to Mr. Duggan for assistsnce 1 — He is not 
 long there — only two years. 
 
 24217. Did the former landlords give assistance ? 
 — No, no assistance in that way. 
 
 24218. Do the landlords of the county generally 
 give assistiffice to their tenants for building 1 — Well, 
 they do not in my immediate neighbourhood ; but 
 there are some properties I know of, the landlords of 
 which did give considerable assistance within the last 
 twenty years — properties not in my immediate 
 neighbourhood. 
 
 24219. Baron Dowse. — Where does Mr. Duggan 
 live ? — In the town of Tipperary. He is a hardware 
 merchant, but also a farmer, and has a good deal of 
 land, and keeps about forty milch cows. 
 
 24220. The Chairman. — Do you know of any case 
 where the tenant on leaving, and having permission 
 to sell his holding, has not been sufficiently compen- 
 sated by what he has got for it 1 — I do. A case of 
 the sort occurred last spring, of which I have perfect 
 knowledge. A near relative of mine, who lived on a 
 property near where I lived, built a slate house and 
 made considerable improvements, although he had no 
 lease. He had a large family, and 20 acres of land 
 at £53 a year. He had the place very well done up. 
 He wanted to sell, and got the consent of the land- 
 lord to do so. The landlord consented to make a new 
 lease to the incoming purchaser, but the landlord was 
 to get £100 himself of the money, in consideration of 
 making the lease. 
 
 24221. Over and above any rent that was due % — 
 Exactly so. Well, they failed in the first sale, for 
 where there is the name of a close landlord, who 
 presses for severe rents, very few purchasers will 
 come, for the principal thing looked to is the fairness 
 of the landlord and what the land is known to be. 
 In this case very little was offered for the farm. 
 
 Then the landlord reduced privately his demand to 
 £75, and subsequently to £50. The tenant got about 
 £400 by the sale ; and when the landlord was paid 
 the arrears of rent and the .£50 in addition, the 
 buildings which the outgoing tenant had made very 
 nearly covered all the rest. He had built a_ new 
 slated house at his own cost, and drawn and paid for 
 stones for it at a great expense. 
 
 24222. But that was not compensation in Court, 
 but by arrangement ?— It was by arrangement. 
 
 24223. It was not a land claim ? — It was not. It 
 was an arrangement between landlord and tenant. 
 
 24224. Have you known any case in the Land 
 Court where the compensation has not been sufBcient? 
 No case of that sort has occurred in the locahty. 
 
 24225. Have there been in your neighbourhood 
 any purchases by tenants of their holdings ? — There 
 have been some. 
 
 24226. Do you think that the tenants from year 
 to year in your neighbourhood are as well off as 
 those who have leases ? — I think they are at present 
 better off. 
 
 24227. How do you think the purchasers are 
 getting on? — I think they are getting on poorly, 
 my lord. I have no doubt that they are getting on 
 poorly. 
 
 24228. What is the cause of that ? — As well as 
 I am able to say, it was this — that they had to 
 borrow the third , of the purchase - money _ which 
 according to the clause the tenant is supposed to 
 have ; and at that time they did not expect the 
 failure of crops and great depression th^t occurred 
 during three years; and they had afterwards to 
 borrow money from banks, j)rivate individuals, their 
 landlords, and friends. 
 
 24229. To make up their share of the purchase- 
 money ? — -To make up their proportion of it. What- 
 ever interest they will have to pay on the money 
 they borrowed from the Board of Works, will come 
 ■\-ery hard on them in consequence of the failure of 
 the crops, and so on. I am satisfied that the pre- 
 sent generation won't be much benefited by it, 
 though they are not complaining. They feel more 
 secure — more safe — and they are not grumbling, but 
 I know they are not at present better off. 
 
 24230. There is a clause in the arrangements 
 for these sales against subdivision — isn't there 1 — Yes. 
 
 24231. What do you think about subdivision 1 — 
 The answer I have already given to that is, that I 
 think it would be useful to a certain extent if sub- 
 division were allowed. I know a good deal about 
 labour, on account of my connection with road con- 
 tracts and heavy work of that nature. I pay a good 
 deal annually for labour, and have to deal with men 
 for sums of Is. and &d., and have a knowledge of 
 labour in that way that I would not derive from any 
 farm. I know that the children of the small farmers 
 are far and away better workers than any others 
 throughout the country; they are reared to hardy 
 industry by their parents; and on that account I 
 have mentioned that it would be useful to allow 
 subdivision to a certain extent, where the landlord 
 should see reason for it, and think that the people 
 were industrious and tl; riving. 
 
 24232. That is in case the landlord did not object 
 to the size of the proposed holding ? — I refer to an 
 agreement between the landlord and the tenant on 
 the subject. 
 
 _ 24233. To what extent would you allow subdi- 
 vision, and do you mean it with respect to labourers' 
 holdings only 1 — I do not refer to labourers. I think 
 it would improve the country if it were allowed to 
 a certain extent, where the farms are of considerable 
 size. 
 
 24234. What would you make the smallest farm ? 
 — I would say 15 acres — that is, if the land was 
 good. Then, if the rent were reasonable, an in- 
 dustrious family could live very well — a man could 
 rear up his family as useful members of society. 
 
 24235. Mr. Shaw.— Upon 15 Irish acres ?— Cer- 
 tainly ; I don't mean anything else. 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 745 
 
 24236. Tlxe iCHAiiiMAN. — Can you tell us anything 
 about the condition of the labourers, as you see so 
 much of them ; are they pretty comfortable 1 — They 
 are not very comfortable. The labourers themselves 
 are very good — on an average they are very fair 
 working people, but their children are not so much 
 so, because they are in those villages and places. 
 They go into company with each other, and they 
 don't go in for hard work the same as their fathers 
 do. They are reared up with their mother or some 
 members of their family, who go begging through 
 the country, gathering potatoes and alms, and they 
 are more or less reared to idleness. 
 
 24237. Is that from their being in the towns, or 
 from their not having work to attend to from an 
 early age 1 — I think it is from their being grouped 
 in the villages. 
 
 24238. If they had gardens attached to their 
 houses, do you think they would begin to learn to 
 work early 1 — I have no doubt they would, if they 
 were away from company of their own class and 
 mixed ^vith the farming classes. In the villages 
 they don't go in for work at all, but grow idle, and 
 more or less join the army. A great many men 
 from the villages joined the militia last year rather 
 than work. The children of the labouring classes 
 don't go in for work. 
 
 24239. Do the farmers in your neighbourhood 
 employ the labourers all the year round ^ — They 
 did not for the last three years. They could not 
 afford it. They were driven to great straits between 
 the shopkeepers and the landlords. They went into 
 debt in order to pay the landlord's claims. The 
 prices last year were very bad. The produce of the 
 land generally has failed very much. Last year and 
 the year before I got but two firkins of butter from 
 each cow ; and in the time of my father, when the land 
 was not as good, there used to be three got. The 
 climate is changed. In the months of May and June 
 there is no growth of the grass, and there is some- 
 thing poisonous in the air. 
 
 24240. Mr. Shaw. — But the two firkins of butter 
 bring as much money now as three did in old times 1 
 — In old times. 
 
 24241. Still you would rather have the three ? — 
 The want of the potato crop, I would be prepared 
 to swear, is the principal cause of distress in 
 Ireland. 
 
 24242. How do you account for the falling off of 
 the produce of the land? — In this way, that the 
 pasture land does not yield so much grass. 
 
 24243. And the climate has changed ? — There 
 is a biting cold in the summer season ; and at four 
 o'clock in the morning, when the farmer goes out, 
 he finds the cattle by the sides of the fences. 
 
 24244. The Chairmax.— That lasted until very 
 late this year?— It did. I had two acres under 
 potatoes last year, of what I would call good land. 
 It was a second crop. I gave the land plenty 
 of manure, and I had to give bread to the men 
 while they were digging the crop out ; and calculat- 
 ing all the expenses, including that of digging the 
 crop, it was not worth the trouble of raismg. And 
 nothing would keep the weeds out after the crops 
 
 failed. , ,, x^ ,1 
 
 24245. You say that you offered Mr. Duggan the 
 option of bringing a person to value your holding. 
 What is your opinion on the question of having im- 
 partial valuations ?— Of course I have only given 
 my opinion on the case as a humble, hard-working 
 
 man. , ^ 
 
 24246 We should like to know what means you 
 would propose as a hard-working man for settling 
 that question ?-What I have already stated is that 
 one arbitrator might represent the landlords interest 
 in the farm; another the tenants interest; and a 
 third the State. I don't know whether that wou d 
 be possible or not, but accordmg to my idea it would 
 ViP npflrest aBuroach to a settlement. 
 
 242S Sthink that the Government ought to 
 be represented by somebody, because the Government 
 
 have an interest in the welfare and comfort of the 
 people ? — I do, my lord, on that ground. 
 
 24248. Mr. Shaw.— That would satisfy the people 
 generally, you think?— Yes; it would satisfy the 
 people. 
 
 24249. The Chairman. — In such a valuation 
 you think that the landlord and the tenant ought 
 to come forward, and there and then claim any im- 
 provements that either of them had made?— I think 
 it would be only fair that if the landlord had im- 
 proved the property, or helped to build houses, or 
 make drains or fences, or anything else, that should 
 be taken into consideration in settling the rent. 
 
 24250. And the award of the arbitrators in 
 that case should bo final and binding upon both ?— 
 Yes. 
 
 24251. Do you think that, so long as the tenant 
 paid that fixed rent, no man ought to have the power 
 of removing him ? — Yes. 
 
 24252. If he failed to pay the rent, you think he 
 should have the right of free sale, with certain con- 
 ditions on behalf of the landlord, as it would be 
 unjust to have one bad tenant following another on 
 the same farm ? — Yes. 
 
 24253. That is, you would give a veto against any- 
 body that there was fair ground for objecting to ? — I 
 would freely. If a landlord finds that an industrious 
 man will give as much as a man who is not, and would 
 be a bad tenant, he ought to have a chance of putting 
 the industrious man into the place. 
 
 24254. The O'CoNOR Don. — With regard to your 
 own case, I don't understand your position. You say 
 you have not paid rent for two years. Have you 
 been served with an ejectment, or has any other pro- 
 ceeding been taken against you ? — Yes ; I was served 
 with a writ from the superior courts on the 18th of last 
 June for possession of the farm. My brother and I live 
 on the farm, neither of us being married. On being 
 served with the writ by the plaintiff's solicitor, I 
 went to Dublin, on the 28th of June, and asked 
 the solicitor who had the carnage of the sale of the 
 property to request the judge of the Court to give 
 me time till the fall of the year, in order that I might 
 be able to raise a crop, as it was milch cows I had on 
 the farm. I had it in such an improved condition, 
 that I defy any man to say that I had been indolent 
 or backward. I asked the favour of time, as it would 
 have been bad for the landlord as well as the tenant 
 that I should be put out without being allowed to 
 sell my cattle. The solicitor did not grant me that 
 favour. I went to another solicitor, Mr. Thomas 
 Vincent Kyan, of 35 Stephen's Green, who repre- 
 sents a Limerick firm, and he recommended me to 
 go before this Royal Commission. He 1 as written 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Daniel 
 
 Ityan. 
 
 stating 
 
 my case and 
 no reply 
 
 as 
 
 -Did you put in a defence ? 
 
 to Mr. Duggan's solicitor, 
 requesting a settlement, but has got 
 yet. 
 
 24255. Baron Dowse, 
 —I did. 
 
 24256. Did they ever go to trial, or did they mark 
 judgment, or what 1 how has the case been hanging 
 over since the 18th of June t — My brother was served 
 with another writ, and I wrote to the solicitor, who told 
 me he had put back the proceedings until November. 
 Since then he opened a negotiation with Mr. Duggan's 
 solicitor, but have not heard about the case for the 
 last two months. 
 
 24257. The O'CoNOR Don. — Your complaint against 
 Mr. Duggan is that he has not reduced the rent 
 which he bought in the Landed Estates' Court ?— 
 Yes ■ he had an intimation that the land was 20 per 
 cent.' too dear ; and he knew from me, previous to 
 the sale, that there would be difficulty in my con- 
 tinuing to pay the old rent, and that we were bound 
 down and in debt. An old lady, the former landlady, 
 who had a miserable annuity, was on the brink of 
 death. 
 
 24258. Baron Dowse. — Where was the case to be 
 tried ? — In the Dublin Courts. 
 
 24259. Well, he has not been very active against 
 you ? — Oh, I am making no complaint against Mr. 
 
 
 
746 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 Daniel 
 Kyan. 
 
 Duggan ! It is not with respect to my own case 
 personally that I appeared here at all, but because 
 the gentleman in Dublin recommended me to come 
 here and state my case, and give whatever informa- 
 tion I could to the Eoyal Commission as to other 
 properties. It is in that sense that I came, for I 
 have no doubt that Mr. Duggan will kindly settle 
 my case still — I really hope he wilL But previous 
 to Mr. Duggan having anything to do with me, we 
 suffered the greatest hardship from landlord oppres- 
 sion, as I can tell you, if you will allow me to do so. 
 After my father's death, in 1851, my mother was 
 crushed and compelled to yield to a rise of 155. 
 an acre on the same farm, she having nine young 
 
 children. A house was taken from us by the land- 
 lord, which was afterwards levelled and the ground 
 added to another man's holding, although we pay 
 rent for it still. I suppose £50 would not pay my 
 brother and I for the work we did gratuitously ; and 
 a sister of mine was compelled to make butter for the 
 landlord, from twenty cows, -without fee or reward, in 
 addition to the rise of rent. 
 
 24260. Mr. Shaw.— What was the name of the 
 landlord 1 — Mr. Bradshaw. His lady married a Mr. 
 Eogers ; and it was on her death that Mr. Duggan 
 came in. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Michael 
 FitzsieiaUl. 
 
 Mr. Michael Fitzgerald, examined. 
 
 2-1202. The O'Conoe Don.— You are a tenant 
 farmer ? — Yes. 
 
 2 42 03. How many acres do you hold? — Between 
 300 and 400. 
 
 24264. Who are your landlords 1 — Lord Monteagle, 
 Lady Louisa Fitzgibbon, and Mr. Robert Hunt. 
 
 24265. From which have you the largest holding? 
 — I think from Mr. Hunt. I have about 140 acres 
 from him. 
 
 24266. Have you any particular complaint to make 
 as to your own case ? — I have. 
 
 24267. What is it?— In the case of the holding 
 from Mr. Hunt, I complain of the exorbitant rent. 
 
 24268. What rent do you pay him? — £310 a year. 
 The poor law valuation of it is £170. 
 
 24269. How long have you been paying that rent ? 
 — The holding came to me on the death of a brother- 
 in-law, who left it to me by will. I have been tenant 
 for the last four years. The rent had been paid for 
 ten years previously. 
 
 24270. For about fourteen years, then, the land 
 has been paying that rent ? — That rent. 
 
 24271. What had it been paying before that? — I 
 could not tell you. The land was in the hands of 
 the landlord for some time. 
 
 24272. It was let fourteen years ago ? — Yes. 
 
 24273. What were the circumstances under which 
 it was then let ? — It was let on a lease for ninty-nine 
 years to my brother-in-law at that rent. 
 
 24274. And he took it voluntarily at that time ?— 
 He took it voluntarily. 
 
 24275. He was not the tenant before that ? — No, 
 he vt-as a young man that wanted land. 
 
 _ 24276. The Chairman.— Where does Mr. Hunt 
 live ? — He lives on the estate. 
 
 24277. The O'Conor Don.— Have you any other 
 complaint to make?— Tlie rent has been strictly 
 enforced against me, when I did not make within 
 £150 of it for the last two years. A river runs 
 through the farm, which floods a great portion of it. 
 That could be amended for a mere trifle ; and I asked 
 the landlord to give me something towards doing it ; 
 but he not only refused that, but also declined to give 
 me the use of his name in order to get money from 
 the Government for the purpose, although I would have 
 ptiid the interest on it myself. I consider that a hard- 
 ship. I would have surrendered the holding lono- 
 ago, only that I am hoping for legislation which will 
 settle the matter. I am a collector of taxes and of 
 poor rates, and have good opportunities of knowing 
 what rents should be. 
 
 24278. Do you think that if the river were drained 
 the land would be worth the rent ?— I don't think it 
 would— that is, that a man could live on it. I don't 
 live on it. 
 
 24279. Then what induced your brother-in-law to 
 offer for it ?— Well, of course, the depression of the 
 tunes IS to be taken into account. When my brother- 
 in-law died he was considerably in my debt, which 
 was the reason why I took the place at all. He 
 owed me £340. He left me the farm, and discharged 
 
 some other incumbrances that he owed; so that 
 brought me into it. I never would have taken it at 
 all, only for that. 
 
 24280. Did the landlord assign any reason for 
 refusing to allow you to borrow money? — That he 
 would not borrow money at all. 
 
 24281. But with such a term in your lease, could 
 you not have borrowed it yourself ? — I could not 
 when the poor law valuation is so much below the 
 rent. The rent should be below the poor law valua- 
 tion in order to enable you to get the money on your 
 own hook. 
 
 24282. Mr. Shaw. — How much of the term has to 
 run ? — About eighty years. 
 
 24283. You could borrow the money yourself? — 
 I think not. 
 
 24284. Did you try ?— My impression is that I 
 could not. I heard that from a lawyer. 
 
 24285. The O'Conor Don. — Have you anything 
 to say as to other landlords ? — Very little. On Lord 
 Monteagle's property the rent is strictly enforced 
 against every one of us. 
 
 24286. They have not been raised ? — They have not 
 in my case. 
 
 24287. Since when ? — It is not his bona fide estate. 
 He only rents it himself, and has a profit rent from 
 me. He rents it from Colonel Bateson. I took my 
 land in 1854, and he never raised the rent since. 
 But there are other grievances in my neighbourhood 
 to Avhich I wish to draw attention. 
 
 24288. Is the sale by tenants of their interests in 
 their holdings allowed generally in your district ? — 
 They get permission sometimes from the landlords. 
 Very few tenants sell out except those who are broken 
 down, and they get permission from the landbrd to 
 sell if they can realize anything by it ; but generally 
 an advance of rent is put on before they sell. 
 
 24289. What are the other cases which you wished 
 to mention ? — There is a small property in my neigh- 
 bourhood, belonging to a Mr. Sayers, on which the 
 people seem to be terribly aggrieved. He lives in 
 Dublin. This property was sold in the Incumbered 
 Estates Court in 1850 for £960. The first tenant 
 on it IS a man named Barrett, whose rent was raised 
 in 1854 from £14, 15s. 5cl. to £33. At the same tifae 
 he got a twenty-one years' lease, on the expiration of 
 which his rent was raised to £50. 
 
 24290. Mr. Shaw.— How many acres had he ?— 
 It is a mountain farm ; and the poor law valuation 
 m none of the cases is equal to the original rents. 
 In the case of another tenant, named Geoghegan, the 
 rent was raised from the same figure to £28, 8s bd 
 m 1854, and in 1875 to £39. John Normile paid a 
 rent of £22, 3s. 2d., which was raised to £33 in 
 1854, and to £50 in 1875. Andrew Euddle paid 
 £16 in 1850; it was raised to £19, 15s. in 1854, and 
 to £29 m 1875. Bridget Magneth paid £14, 2s in 
 1850; It was raised to £20, 10s. in 1854, and to £28 
 m 1875. John Normile paid £18 in 1860; it was 
 raised to £36 in 1854, and to £47 in 1875. Patrick 
 Normile's rent was raised from £31 to £50 in 1854 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 747 
 
 and to £80, 17s. in 1875. Besides that there was a 
 mountain attached to the different farms, which he 
 took from them and let out to tenants at various 
 rents for thirty-one years. Now the first ten years 
 they have to pay 10s. an acre j for the second ten 
 years, 15s. an acre; and for the last eleven years, 
 20s. an acre. He set parts of this mountain to a man 
 named Tilahoon for £15 ; to Patrick Barrett, for £7, 
 10s. J to James Long, for £15, 10^-. ; to James 
 Kenelly, for £3, 10s. j to Patrick Dalton, for £3, 
 10s. ; to Thomas Connons, for £3 ; and to Patrick 
 Grady, for £3. The whole mountain is valued at 
 £2, 10s. 
 
 24291. The O'CoNOR Don.— Is he his own agent "i 
 — Mr. Brown of this town is his agent. He has 
 ejected some of the tenants. Patrick Normile, whose 
 rent was raised from £50 to £80, 17s., was not able 
 to pay it, and refused to do so, and was ejected. 
 Before he was ejected he offered to leave the matter 
 to the agent, but the landlord refused. Normile 
 sought compensation, and got £187. 
 
 24292. For improvements ? — For improvements. 
 
 24293. What has been done with the farm since 1 
 — It is there lying idle. Never a tenant has 
 been got for it siace. Nobody could be got to 
 take it. 
 
 24294. "Where is the land ] — In the parish of Kil- 
 fergus, bordering on the county of Kerry. 
 
 23295. Have you- any other case to mention 1 — Oct. 2«, i«»o. 
 Well, r think these are the most important cases. — - 
 
 24296. Do you know anything of tenants pur- "t,^eral,l 
 chasing their holdings ]— Nobody in my neigbour- ° 
 hood got the opportunity, except one man named 
 Shaughnessy. I think I detailed the case in the form 
 
 I sent to the Commissioners. 
 
 24297. Has he been getting on well since he pur- 
 chased? — Very well. He got a loan from G-ovem- 
 ment to draw it, and is making vast improve- 
 ments. 
 
 24298. Do you think there is a general desire 
 amongst occupiers to purchase their holdings if they 
 got the chance 1 — No question about it. Every man 
 is desirous of purchasing his holding if he only gets 
 the means of doing it. 
 
 24299. Do they think they would be able to 
 furnish a proportion of the purchase money 1 — I 
 think several would. I don't say that all would. 
 Several are very poor on account of the times, and ■ 
 what they have gone through ; but several would. 
 
 24300. You state that in your opinion fixity of 
 tenure, fair rents, and free sale are the true solution 
 of the land question 1 — My own opinion is that that 
 would satisfy the people. Some might not be satis- 
 fied with it, but I fancy myself that it would be a fair 
 settlement of the question. 
 
 The -witness retired. 
 
 Mr. Michael Meehan, examined. 
 
 24301. The Chairman. — You live at Holycross, 
 Kilmallock ?— Yes. 
 
 24302. You are a poor law guardian 1 — I am of 
 the South Suburb Ward of the Limerick Union. 
 
 24.303. You hold 160 acres 1 — In different farms. 
 
 24304. Is there anything relating to those farms 
 that you w-ish to bring under our notice 1 — Yes. 
 
 24305. Whom do you hold under 1 — Under 
 Captain Gloucester, in the South Suburb Ward. I 
 intend to confine my evidence to that ward. 
 
 24306. How many acres are there in that farm ? — 
 Thirty in the Liberties, but not all in that farm ; 
 there are only ten in it. 
 
 24307. Whom do you hold that from 1 — Captain 
 Gloucester. 
 
 24308. Is it quite close to the towa 1 — Just so. 
 
 24309. What is the point you wish to mention in 
 connection with it? — I will commence with an 
 adjoining property, because the rents were first 
 raised on it, and they followed along into the city. 
 The property to which I refer belonged to the late 
 Sir Matthew Barrington, is situated within two miles 
 of the city, and called Dumballa. It was sold m the 
 Incumbered Estates Court. I don't hold on that 
 
 24310. In the meantime, what happened there 
 was followed in your case '?— Quite so. 
 
 24311 What was it?— The tenants on some of 
 that property held at £2, 10s. an acre. The pur- 
 chaser put the rents up to £4 an acre, and ±10 an 
 acre fine. . . ^ , . 
 
 24312. Mr. ShaW.— On the existing tenants i— 
 
 On the existing tenants. 
 
 24313 When was that ?— I cannot say whether 
 it was in 1862 or in 1858, but it was at either of 
 
 those dates. . ^ n i - 
 
 24314 Was the fame course followed in_ your 
 case ?— The next property adjoining that consists o± 
 Inchmore and Boraheen-two townlands It was 
 brought into the Incumbered Estates Court and 
 before it was sold Admiral Evans and Captain Evans 
 raised the rents 10s. an acre. 
 
 T43I5. The CHAIRKAN.-From what sum was it 
 raised?— From £3 on Inchmore to £3, 10s„ ana 
 from £3, 10s. to £4 on Boraheen. 
 
 94.SI6 Previous to the sale ! — les. 
 
 24317 Mr. ShaW.-How long is that ago ?- 
 Something over eighteen years ago, as far as I can 
 
 say. It was purchased by Captain Gloucester for 
 about £6800. He sent his land bailiff round, and 
 insisted on a rise of 10s. an acre on both townlands. 
 
 24318. The Chairman.— Did your brother hold 
 from him 1 — Yes ; he pint £1 an acre on him, as he 
 was not living on it, which, £5 I am paying to this 
 day. 
 
 24319. How was this increase imposed on the 
 tenants — did they agree to it 1 — They were obliged 
 to do so. Captain Gloucester sent his bailiff round 
 to them in order that they might sign the pro- 
 posals. 
 
 24320. They were afraid of ejectments if they did 
 not agree 1 — Certainly. I m.ay state that Mr. Evans 
 insisted on their paying the rent without giving them 
 any notice at all — that they should get the increase 
 of rent, or the tenants should give up the lands. 
 
 24321. Mr. Shaw. — Were they small or large 
 holdings ? — Well, rather small. Some are 10 acres. 
 One poor widow has 14 — that is about th$ 
 largest. 
 
 24322. Near the town ? — ^Yes. 
 
 24323. The Chairman. — ^Were the tenants living 
 on the holdings in this case 1 — Certainly. 
 
 24324. Mr. Shaw. — And living by them 1 — And 
 living by them. 
 
 24325. The Chairman. —What have you to say 
 with respect to the property of Bawnmore 1 — It 
 belonged to my late uncle, who took it in 1848, and 
 paid £200 fine. It contained 47 Irish acres, and the 
 rent was £200 a year, or £4, 5s. an acre. The 
 previous tenant owed money, and my uncle got the 
 preference then. His cattle died in 1857, and he. 
 applied for liberty to break up parts of the farm, but 
 it was refused him unless he paid a fine of £200, 
 took a lease for eleven years, and bound himself to 
 lay it down in a husbandman-like manner. He took 
 that lease in 1857, and paid the fine. 
 
 24326. What happened when the eleven years 
 expired ? — The original rent of £200 a year went on. 
 He thought he was badly treated, and Mr. Fitzgerald 
 said a fine could never be put on. It went on until 
 1872 or 1873. 
 
 24327. What happened _in 1872 or 1873 ?— The 
 agent died, and my uncle died in the same year _; and 
 a new agent came in, and served us with a notice to 
 auit unless we submitted to a further increase of 15s. 
 
 5C2 
 
 Michael 
 Meehan. 
 
748 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oet. 28, 1880. 
 
 Michael 
 Jlpehan. 
 
 an acre, making the rent £5 an acre ; which we had 
 to do. 
 
 24328. Who is the agent ?— Mr. Sidney Cox, of 
 this town. 
 
 24329. Is it far from the city?— In the South 
 Suburb Wa,rd — about two miles out. At the time 
 my uncle died I was managing for him, and I offered 
 Mr. Cox the land back if he would return £400 
 which had been spent on the land to my uncle's 
 widow ; but he refused to do so. 
 
 24330. Is there a good house on it 1 — Not a house 
 at all, except a herdsman's house. It is an accom- 
 modation farm for grazing purposes. 
 
 24331. Did she continue to live on the holding ? — 
 She never did Uve on it. 
 
 24332. Does she continue to hold it 1 — She holds 
 it up to this. She has given it now to het grand- 
 son. 
 
 24333. Did she take a lease ? — She was obliged to 
 take a lease for thirty-one years. The lands would 
 have been surrendered last year, except for the ex- 
 pectation that relief would come from the Eoyal 
 Commission or some quarter. 
 
 24334. You say that this led to something of a 
 corresponding nature on your own holding 1 — Yes. 
 
 24335. What happened in your South Suburb 
 Ward holding 1 — An increase of £5 was put on my 
 brother. My rent had been raised some years 
 before. 
 
 24336. Mr. Shaw.— Is it very prime land '2— Well, 
 it is a good quality of land. 
 
 24337. But the rent is excessive 1 — Oh dear, 
 certainly ! It was an accommodation to my uncle, 
 because he had fifty-six milch cows. 
 
 24338. The Chairman. — Is it the competition for 
 the land that runs the rent up so high ] — There was 
 no competition at all. It was the act of the agent, 
 who put 15s. an acre on the existing tenants. There 
 was no freedom of contract — either submit or walk ! 
 
 24339. Would the agent have been able to let it 
 again at that rent if the tenant had refused to pay 
 it ? — I could not give an account of that. He might 
 
 in some way ; but that has nothing to do with the 
 value of the land. 
 
 24340. Do you think that value could not be made 
 out of it 1 — I do — I swear that. The grandson of my 
 uncle was to have surrendered last year. 
 
 24341. There is a property called Eathbar belong- 
 ing Mr. Worthington ? — Yes.* 
 
 24342. It was formerly the Percy estate ■? — Yes. 
 
 24343. What happened there 1 — He purchased a 
 small holding, together with the head rent on other 
 properties. He is a solicitor in Dublin. There are 
 three small holdings. These poor people pay £4 an 
 acre. 
 
 24344. What are their names t. — Eyan is the name 
 in a letter, to which I will confine myself. 
 
 24345. Were there not two Sullivans 1 — Two 
 SuUivans and one Eyan. The witness read the 
 following letter : — 
 
 Dublin, 25th of March 1870. 
 16 Fleet Street. 
 Mr. Patrick Ryan. 
 
 Sir, — Your land and house is certainly worth more than 
 your present rent. On the rental it was set forth that the 
 rents could be increased, and Mr. Percy has told me that 
 £5 per acre is paid to all adjoining landlords (that is, my 
 landlord), and 1 have surely a right to expect the same. 1 
 wish to come to a fair understanding, so as to get on satis- 
 factorily. — ^ Yours faithfully, 
 
 P. WOETHINGTON. 
 
 24346. The O'CoNOR Don. — Were the rents 
 raised? — Five shillings an acre and five shillings 
 afterwards for the houses. 
 
 24347. Is that within the borough of Limerick 1 — 
 No. 
 
 24348. The Chairjian. — Did they all agree to the 
 increase 1 — They were obliged to do so. 
 
 24349. Mr. Shaw. — He had purchased in the 
 Landed Estates Court ? — Yes. 
 
 24350. It was stated in the rental that the rents 
 could be raised 1 — He states it. But it was never in 
 the rental It was too high before. It was cruelty 
 to put it on. 
 
 Michael 
 Stritch. 
 
 Mr. Michael Stritch, examined. 
 
 24351. The Chairman.— Do you live at Clonlara ? 
 —Yes. 
 
 24352. How far is that from Limerick? — About 
 three miles and a half 
 
 24353. How many acres do you hold 1 — Ninety or 
 ninety-one — all from Mr. Edward Joynt. 
 
 24354. What rent do you pay?— £160 now. 
 
 24355. How long have you been paying that ? — I 
 have been paying it since 1858 or 1859. 
 
 24356. Was this a part of Sir Mathew Barrington's 
 property which was sold ? — It was. 
 
 24357. Who bought it ?— Mr. Edward Joynt bought 
 it in 1856. The rent previously wa^ 14s. an acre, 
 but when it went into the Bankruptcy Court the 
 rent was raised to 21s. M. or 22s., in order to cover 
 a debt. Joynt bought it at 21s. Qd. or 22.s., making 
 the full amount .of the rent £90. Then he doubled 
 it, and I have his receipt for it. 
 
 24357a. You say that he took off .£20 ?— He took 
 off £20 after one year when he found that we were 
 unable to pay it, and were going to leave. That left 
 the rent £160, which has continued to be paid up to 
 this day. Of course we can't pay it now. 
 
 24358. Had it been in your family for many years ? 
 — In it time out of mind ; and I don't know when 
 the first of us came into it. I should remark, with 
 reference to the doubling of the rent, that he gave 
 9^ acres of marsh with a little river to us, which is 
 included in the doubled rent. 
 
 24359. Baron DowsE.— What is the value of that? 
 —The value of it is very little. There was about 
 43 acres more along with those 7 acres ; and I could 
 swear that the 7 acres were more an injury than any- 
 
 thing else, for we not only made nothing of them, 
 but our cattle died. 
 
 24360. Is it on the banks of the Shannon ? — On 
 the banks of the Shannon. It is a bit up from the 
 Shannon, but there is a dead flat between them 
 and it. 
 
 24361. Where does Mr. Joynt live?— At Cappagh 
 House, Askeaton, in the county of Limerick. 
 
 24362. The Chairman.— When did the doubling 
 take place? — In 1858. I have the receipts here. 
 
 24363. Were you able to live on it in the good 
 years ? — Of course there were two or three years in 
 which a man could pay the rent, but those were all 
 the years in which we ever made the rent. We 
 have another property worth £35 or £40, but all 
 that we could make of that and all our labour is 
 gone; and there is a year's rent due, for which, I 
 suppose, he will sweep away all our effects, for we 
 have no way of protecting ourselves. 
 
 24364. Mr. Shaw.— Did he make you any allow- 
 ance in the bad years ? — Twenty per cent, on half 
 a year's rent, and served us with a writ. He took 
 £3, 7s. &d. for rates out of the 20 per cent. 
 
 24365. The Chairman.— Was there any ejectment 
 on the estate ? — There was a man ejected. I am told 
 he is outside. 
 
 24366. Who is he? — His name is Doheny. He 
 was evicted last April, with ten young children. 
 
 24367. Mr. Shaw.— How much property did Mr. 
 Joynt buy there ? — About 220 acres. 
 
 24368. Did he raise the rents on it all ? — He did. 
 
 24369. In the same way? — There is no one now 
 on the estate who was on it when he came in 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 f4y 
 
 ^^®P* ourselves. All the others were turned out, 
 ana other tenants came m and paid the high rents. 
 A man named Hannan came in in 1865 instead of 
 Molony, and a couple of other tenants. Doheny is 
 ejected now. He had his holding when Mr. Joynt 
 came in. 
 
 24370. The Chairman — Doheny was ejected last 
 December ?— Or in May— I am not sure which. 
 
 •24371. The O'CoNOR Don.— Is he out of the hold- 
 ing altogether 1 — Out of it. 
 
 24372. Mr. Shaw.— For non-payment of rent ]— 
 For two years' rent. 
 
 24373. Baron Dowse. — Hasn't he got six months 
 to redeem 1 — I don't know. He and his ten children 
 were put out oil one of the wettest days that ever 
 came, and the house was taken down. 
 
 24374. Did any of them go back? — They went 
 back the first time, and then he put them out a 
 second time, and tore down the house. 
 
 24375. The Chairhan.— The first time was not 
 the wet day "i — No. 
 
 24376. Baron Dowse.— Well he did not cause the 
 rain on the wet day ? — Well I suppose he did 
 not. 
 
 24377. The Chairman.— Has it been taken up bv 
 any tenant now '!- No, it is there idle. 
 
 -,„^,^'^l^- There is a time for redemption up to the 
 17th of December ?— I don't know. 
 
 24379. Baron Dowse.— Six months from the time 
 he was put out I—Be is not able to redeem much 
 poor man. 
 
 24380. Mr. Shaw. He won't be able to get 
 
 back ?— Not at all. He came down fourteen or fifteen 
 years ago for the March rent ; and since then he has 
 been struggling. He had to go to a loan office and 
 pay 30 or 40 per cent, for money. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 llichael 
 Stritch. 
 
 The Earl of Limerick, examined. 
 
 His Lordship, addressing the Commissioners, said 
 — I commence by saying that I -vjTote in deference 
 to Her Majesty's Commissioners, as they were coming 
 here, to say that I would be happy to give them any 
 information in my power about the state of land 
 tenure in this part of the country, and about the 
 Land Act. As regards myself, I have had no case 
 whatever under the Land Act of 1870, so that I 
 cannot speak from personal knowledge of where the 
 Act pinches in any way. Some small matters have 
 struck me as regards the details of the Land Act. 
 I had the honour of being in Parliament when it 
 was passed. I was not opposed to the principle of 
 the Act ; the part I took rather concerned its details. 
 My impression as regards that Act is, that possibly 
 what we did not go far enough in was in establishing 
 what I may call more certainty of tenure. Possibly 
 more might have been done in the way of encourag- 
 ing leases for a satisfactory length of time. I myself, 
 on my own property, am always ready to grant leases 
 to any tenants, and a good deal of my property — the 
 greater part, in fact — is held under lease. 
 
 24381. The Chairman. — What is the acreage of 
 your property? — The acreage in the county of 
 Limerick that this inquiry would concern — the agri- 
 cultural holdings apart from the town holdings, for 
 the greater part of my property is down about 
 Bruff — is, in round numbers, about 2500 Irish acres. 
 The greater part of that — not the greater number of 
 holdings — but the greater part of it is held under 
 lease. They are old leases ; and I have always been 
 ready to grant leases whenever the tenants apply 
 for them. Excepting of course very small holdings, 
 which can hardly be called agricultural, because they 
 are not such as a tenant could live on without other 
 occupation ; what I thought at the time of the Land 
 Act and since was, that possibly more might have been 
 done to encourage leases. I always thought that 
 uncertainty of tenure was a considerable difficulty; 
 landlord and tenant were not at one as to what the 
 tenure was. It was uncertain, from there being no 
 written covenants. 
 
 24382. What length of lease would you suggest ? 
 —When I say "substantial leases," I mean that I 
 think a lease for thirty-one years is a reasonable 
 lease of a holding. I should think it a fair agri- 
 
 24383. We hear that tenants generally throughout 
 the country are not willing to take thirty-one years' 
 
 leases ? I must say, I think that since the Land Act 
 
 there has not been the same disposition to take leases 
 that possibly there was before itj but at the same 
 time I believe leases to be the most satisfactory 
 
 system of holding. , , , „j 
 
 24384. In what way would you have encouraged 
 leases under the Land Act?— I have thought ot 
 
 many ways, but it is very difficult to state exactly 
 the best way of encouraging leases. Of course, you 
 can encourage them by making it for the advantage 
 of both the landlord and the tenant, that they should 
 hold under a written agreement rather than under 
 an implied one. In what way that might have been 
 done it is rather difficult to say. 
 
 24385. Baron DowSE. — Are you aware, Lord 
 Limerick, that the Land Act did provide for the 
 case of leases for not less than thirty-one years ? 
 After the passing of that Act a tenant holding 
 under such a lease could not get compensation for 
 disturbance, although he could for improvements. — 
 Yes, I know that. I know that the Land Act did 
 do that, but still I don't think that is an induce- 
 ment. 
 
 24386. What I understand you to mean is that 
 it should have been put more in the foreground 
 of the Act 1 — More in the foreground of it. There 
 should have been a simple parliamentary lease given 
 • — one not fettered with too many conditions. 
 
 24387. A statutable lease? — Yes. Many tenants 
 won't go to the expense of a lease. If there were a 
 cheap statutable lease not fettered with too many 
 conditions established, such as it would be for the 
 advantage of both the landlord and the tenant to take, 
 it would be more desirable than the present un- 
 certainty of tenure. 
 
 24388. Would you enable tenants for life to make 
 it, and persons in the ostensible ownership of land? — 
 I would. I think it would be very desirable that 
 they should have the power to do so. In fact, I 
 would almost go to the extent of giving . tenants for. 
 life— with the consent, to be obtained cheaply, of 
 the Court, so that the remainder man might not be 
 injured— the power of giving even a longer lease 
 than thirty-one years, the landlord to have an in- 
 ducement to it by taking a fine ; but nothing ap- 
 proaching the old peppercorn leases, by which the 
 tenant for life took a large fine, and the remainder 
 man was injured. Still something might be done 
 under the control of the Court. 
 
 24389. A fair lease at what is called an improved 
 rent? A fair lease at a fair rent, but not an ex- 
 treme rent. If Parliament could devise any means 
 of doing this, it would be an advantage. 
 
 24390. In the event of a diff'erence occurring be- 
 tween the landlord and the tenant as to the rent, 
 how would you fix it?— That at present is the 
 difficulty. Of course, you might have a periodical 
 valuation of lands and State leases. 
 
 24391. Supposing the tenant says, "I am willing 
 to pay so much," and the landlord says, " I want so 
 much,' and that they cannot agree, would you see 
 any objection to a public functionary, indifferent 
 between the parties, fixing what the fair rent should 
 
 The Earl of 
 Limerick. 
 
750 
 
 IKISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 28, 188(1. 
 
 The Earl of 
 Limerir'k. 
 
 be 1— Well I am hardly prepared to say that I think 
 that would be desirable now. Of course, it is one of 
 the most difficult questions at present arising. 
 
 24392. You know that at the present time a 
 great number of persons— I don't mean in your 
 position— but a great number of proprietors are 
 asking more for the land than it is fairly worth ?— 
 I believe that that may be so in some cases, but not 
 in the majority. Possibly it may be so. 
 
 24393. What would you do with such persons ?— 
 Of course, that is the great difficulty. If the State 
 once takes into its hands the decision of what the 
 rent should be, of course the present occupation of 
 the farm by the landlord is varied, 
 
 24394. Suppose the State does not undertake it — 
 suppose that the landlord names one person and the 
 tenant another, and that they choose a third as 
 an umpire, the State not interfering at all?— Still it 
 is — 
 
 24395. It interferes with the landlord's authority? 
 — It interferes to a certain extent with freedom of 
 contract, I think. 
 
 24396. The Chairman. — It is hardly freedom of 
 contract to the tenant if he has to take whatever 
 rent is named to him by the landlord? — Oh, of 
 course, I should not say that it is. It is a difficult 
 question. He is not theoretically bound to take 
 whatever rent is offered to him. 
 
 24397. But practically? — Practically; unless he 
 leaves he will have the full value of his improve- 
 ments. 
 
 24398. On your property you don't turn anybody 
 out that pays the rent ? — No. 
 
 24399. Then, practically, you give fixity of tenure 1 
 — Practically it is. Whether it would work satis- 
 factorily if it were compulsory is another thing. Of 
 course, that is the difficulty. I think it is an open 
 question. I should say, then, in going that extreme 
 length, that I think it is an open question hereafter 
 whether it is not a necessity to have a revaluation of 
 holdings — a periodic revaluation. 
 
 24400. Would you hold that, then, to be a test 
 of the rent ? — And the State having liad a revalua- 
 tion — for I can say nothing of the present valuation ; 
 I believe it to be valueless — whether the State might 
 not then say, if the rent exceeded a certain per cent- 
 age over that valuation, that the tenant ' might, in 
 case he was evicted for non-payment, make a claim 
 for disturbance which the Chairman might consider 
 equitable — that is open to my mind as possible. I 
 think that is extreme; but. still, if a fair valuation 
 were made, — which does not exist now,— I think that 
 would be a possible solution. 
 
 24401. Do you think the Land Act has worked 
 pretty well on the whole? — I cannot speak of its 
 working, because, as I have said, I have had no case 
 under it, so that I don't know. I go entirely with 
 the Land Act in its protection of all the tenant's im- 
 provements — all permanent improvements which he 
 has made, and by which he has raised the value of 
 his holding. I think that if that is evaded in any 
 way, the Land Act should be amended to that ex- 
 tent. There are some little details about the Land 
 Act that I think work harshly both on the landlord and 
 tenant. I have put down one or two of them. There 
 is one which I think the learned Judge, who is a Com- 
 missioner, will understand technically far better than 
 I do. Where it happens that a tenant dies without 
 leaving any will, this hardship arises, that neither 
 the landlord nor the family of the tenant can desig- 
 nate exactly who the fresh tenant is to be. The 
 interest, or whatever it may be called, in the holding 
 is personalty, and therefore divisible amongst all the 
 children. I have found within my own experience 
 some very hard cases arising out of that. I know one 
 case in which the tenant was a very old man. His 
 son had received money, and gone to America, The 
 daughter lived with the father for many years at 
 at home, and married. The father became imbecile, 
 and the daughter and her husband became the 
 tenants. Shortly before the father's death the son 
 
 came back, and claimed a share of the farm, which he 
 was perfectly entitled to. I think the Land Act made 
 personalty of that which was not so before, because 
 before it the landlord could arbitrate between them, 
 and settle who should be the tenant, and what 
 should be paid to the other members of the family. 
 But now, in many cases on my own estate we have 
 to enter in the rent book the ' representatives of so- 
 and-so ; ' and in the case of a farm which might be 
 well able to support one family there are two or three 
 families, sons and daughters of the origirial tenant, 
 who practically sub-divide the farm, though still it ' 
 is entered as one in the estate book. The result 
 of this is, that when the rent becomes due each 
 one does not like paying more than his own share, 
 and tenders, perhaps, the half of it; and if the 
 others are not able to pay, you have to proceed 
 against the whole holding, and serve ejectments upon 
 all. If there could be any cheap jurisdiction by 
 which the Chairman, or any other judge, on the 
 application of the families themselves or the landlord, 
 could assign the farm to one person, on his compensat- 
 ing the others to the extent of whatever might be fair, 
 I think that would be a very great advantage. The 
 only other detail of the Land Act that struck me as 
 possibly requiring amendment was, — -as I understand 
 it, — that if the lajidlord erects labourers' cottages for 
 labourers not in his own employment, they, as regards 
 him, are agricultural tenants and not labourers, and 
 so he is deterred from doing so, because the holdings 
 come under the Land Act. 
 
 24402. If they are more than a quarter of an acre 1 
 — Yes. A quarter of an acre is not a large amount. 
 I think it would be well to benefit labourers as re- 
 gards their cottages, — although they might not be 
 labourers in the employment of their landlord who 
 lets the cottages to them, — by extending those pro- 
 visions. 
 
 24403. Baron Dowse. — There may be a good deal 
 in what you say. Sub-section 2 of Section 1& refers to 
 labourers, but to labourers working for the owner of 
 the cottage ? — So I have been advised. If I were to 
 erect a series of labourers' cottages with half an acre 
 of land to each, if they were not in my employ I 
 should not be able to treat them as labourers ; they 
 would be, qua me, agricultural holders, and would 
 come under the Land Act. 
 
 24404. The Chairman. — ^The only thing is, that 
 if they ceased to labour, the compensation under the 
 Land Act would only be a small amount, so that the 
 disadvantage would be very little ? — It might be 
 something. 
 
 24405. Baron Dowse. — What I understand Lord 
 Limerick to say is, that he would rather pay no com- 
 pensation at all ? — I build labourers' cottages for my 
 tenants in the neighbourhood. It is better that they 
 should hold direct from me. But if any of these men 
 cease to act as my laboiu-ers, and if I evict them, I am 
 considered liable to all the odium of a capricious 
 eviction. I look on the odium as almost worse than 
 the payment of compensation. 
 
 24406. The Chairman. — But would not tliat 
 under any circumstances be the case if you have 
 labourers' cottages ? — Well, of course, it might be so ; 
 but I think I should not be included in an Act of 
 Parliament as having been indulging in capricious 
 evictions against men holding agricultural holdings 
 under me. 
 
 24407. You must be under it if they are yearly 
 tenants ? — The law is so ; but I think there ought 
 to be an exemption of people holding less than half 
 an acre, and where it is jjlain that they are not 
 farmers. 
 
 24408. Baxon Dowse. — You would exempt cot- 
 tages held by labourers from the Land Act? — By 
 labourers — men who lived entirely by labour. I 
 would. 
 
 24409. The CHAIRMAN. — You would give them a 
 separate remedy ? — Of course, it is difficult to say on 
 the spur of the moment how it should be done. 
 
 24410. The O'CoNOR Don.— Have you done much 
 
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 
 
 tenants!— The improvements lia\c been in this 
 way. liie tenants, as a rule, have been the aeents in 
 doing them If they wanted any special work done 
 they have been assisted by sufficient amounts to pav 
 for buildings, stones, timber, and slates ; or if they 
 represented that they had done special work in the 
 way of removing stone walls or things of that sort, it 
 has been noted, and practically they have not suffered 
 from it, because their rents have not in any way been 
 increased in consequence. 
 
 24411. Have you made them any allowance for it ? 
 —In some cases — in the case of buildings— yes. I 
 endeavoured as far as possible to do away with 
 middlemen on the estate, and when a holding held 
 by a middleman came into my own hands, the rents 
 have been reconsidered and almost invariably lowered 
 to the under-tenant. 
 
 24412. I think you stated that most of your tenants 
 held by lease ?— The greater amount of my land is ; 
 not the greater number of holdings. I can give the 
 exact number. At Bruff there are 37 agricultural 
 holdings, and the number of leases is 1 3 j but the 
 greater amount of the land is under lease. 
 
 24413. Have those leases been made since the 
 Land Act ?— Xo ; very little of my land has fallen 
 out of holding since the Land Act. 
 
 24414. In the case of leases made since the Land 
 Act, have you put in any clauses contracting the 
 
 751 
 
 rWf S ■ 1 T '"?^ ^ ^'^^'^ ^^"°« the Land Act. I 
 
 iTnLlT /ir^-' ^^y ^'^''- I '^°^'' think any 
 tenancy has fallen m since the Land Act. At Court 
 the number of agncultural holdings on my property is 
 twenty-one, and the number of leases twelve. There 
 ni°.,S '''T''''^ V^'^l ^'"^"^ "'^"^^^ lease exceeds the 
 ZTi ""^ 11 ^''^'^- /* ^^^^-^m, about seven miles 
 trom Braff, the number of agricultural holdings is 
 twenty-two and the number of leases eleven: and 
 tnere also the acreage under lease greatly exceeds the 
 acreagenot so held. I may mention that I have spent 
 money m drainage at Court within the last ten years 
 the amount spent having been about £900. The 
 money I have found, and the work has been generally 
 done through the principal tenants, who superintend 
 It. _ 1 never charged an increase of rent on account of 
 main drainage, or on account of the amount levied on 
 the landlord in a drainage district. I am in favour 
 of an extension of the system of leases. 
 
 24415. Baron Dowse.— That is, for the purpose 
 of giving greater security to the tenants ?— To remove 
 uncertainty. I think the great evil is uncertainty. I 
 thought so at the time of the Land Act, and I think 
 so still. Uncertainty is undesirable, both as regards 
 landlord and tenant. I have said nothing about the 
 Ulster custom, because I know nothing about it, and 
 practically it does not exist down here. 
 
 The witness retired. 
 
 'Oct. 28, 1880. 
 
 The Earl of 
 Limerick. 
 
 24416. Mr. Shaw.- 
 
 perary 
 
 -Yes. 
 
 William Spaight, Esq., examined. 
 -You live at Derrycastle, Tip 
 
 24417. You are a lando^vner 1 — I am, and a tenant. 
 
 2441 8. And you are your own agent t — I am my 
 own agent, and also agent for my brother-in-law ; and 
 I am the tenant of two holdings. 
 
 24419. You represent between 4000 and 5000 
 acres t — Yes, I am the owner of over 4000. 
 
 24420. Is the right of sale allowed generally on 
 those properties to the outgoing tenants 1 — I am 
 tenant for life of my lands in Tipperary. 
 
 24421. The question I ask is, is the outgoing 
 tenant on your property allowed to sell his interest 
 in his holding "i — Oh yes. 
 
 24422. Is it the usual practice 1 — Oh yes, regularly. 
 
 24423. Do you interfere as to the amount of money 
 he gets 1 — No. 
 
 24424. There is no limit on what he can get for 
 his holding 1 — No. 
 
 24425. You select the tenant, I suppose 1 — Well, I 
 don't select him ; but if there were a man proposed 
 whom I considered very objectionable, I would object 
 to him. 
 
 24426. That is the only way in which you inter- 
 fere 1 — That is all. I never have interfered except, I 
 think, in two cases. One, which occurred a good many 
 years ago, was that of a man whose holding was 
 about £20 a year, and who got £120 for it j and all 
 I required was that the money should come through 
 me ; and I got it from the incoming and gave it to 
 the outgoing man, and it was divided between two 
 brothers. 
 
 24427. Is it usual to raise the rents on changes of 
 tenancy on your property? — Well, in that case, I 
 made no change. There was a holding sold last year, 
 the rent of which was £7, 10s., and the outgoing 
 tenant got £145 for his interest, which was twenty 
 years' purchase, all but £5. 
 
 24428 Do you think the practice oi selling 
 tenants' interests is necessary 1— Well, in that case I 
 said to the tenant, who is a very decent, industrious 
 man— "As your interest is so very great, you ought 
 to raise my rent, and give me £8 a year instead of 
 £7, 105.," and I think he paid it to me at onca Las. 
 year he said I ought not to charge him the difierciice, 
 and I did not. 
 
 24429. That was the bad year?— Yes; but he 
 agxeed to advance the rent 10s. 
 
 24430. Do you think the practice of allowing 
 tenants to sell their holdings is increasing in the 
 country 1—1 don't think there has been much done in 
 my neighbourhood. 
 
 24431. Are leases common in your part of the 
 country 1 — I think not. 
 
 24432. Have they been increasing since the Land 
 Act, or decreasing 1 — Well, I have given three or four 
 myself. Perhaps they are rather increasing. 
 
 24433. Do you raise the rent on the occasion of a 
 lease being given up 1 — No. 
 
 24434. Have you had any case under the Land 
 Act of eviction or dispossession? — Since the Land 
 Act came into operation I ejected one tenant. There 
 was a dis]pute between two brothers, and they were 
 at law — at war, I may call it. and not law — for three 
 or four years. I served a notice to quit, and got an 
 ejectment, and I put out one brother and gave it to 
 the other. I gave it to the man who always jjaid me 
 rent, and I put out the one who I thought originated 
 the fight. 
 
 24435. It was a family fight 1 — Yes ; and the 
 barrister said that the tenant whom I put out had no 
 claim under the Land Act. I asked him to oblige 
 me by assuming that the man had a full claim under 
 that Act, and b}- naming the sum that he ought to 
 get on that a.-.suriiption ; and Mr. RoUestone-Spunner, 
 our chairman of Tipperary, said he was afraid he was 
 leaning very heavily on me, and named £70. 
 
 24436. And j-ou gave that to him 1 — The rent was 
 £22 a year. I gave the brother whom I turned out 
 £70 ; and I gave the holding to the man who had been 
 working the farm as long as I had known it. 
 
 24437. Did the man that remained in pay you the 
 £70 ?— No. 
 
 24438. Did you get it again ? — No. He paid me 
 the arrears of rent. 
 
 24439. Did he pay you interest on the £70 ? — He 
 did not. 
 
 24440. You did not put anything on him ? — I did 
 not put a shilling on him. 
 
 24441. Do you get your rents as well from your 
 tenants from year to year as from your leasehold 
 tenants ? — Just as well. 
 
 William 
 Spaight. 
 
752 
 
 IRISH LAND ACT COMMISSION, 1880. 
 
 Oct. 28, 1880, 24442. Are they improving their farms 1 — Well, I 
 ,,,.,,. — think on the whole they are. 
 
 g ^f™ 24443. Just as well as the lease-holders ?— Yes. 
 
 ^'^'^ ' I am paid all my rents, and I don't think there is a 
 
 shilling due to me of the last November rent. 
 
 24444. Is that the case generally in the district 1 — 
 It is not. 
 
 24445. They have not got paid as well as you 
 have j— No. I am richer than my neighbours, and 
 they don't spend any money amongst the tenants in 
 improving their lands. In fact, they are people that 
 would have starved last year if I had not employed 
 them. 
 
 24446. Are the other proprietors to whom you 
 refer residents or absentees 1 — One of them resides 
 near Limerick, and the other in the neighbourhood ; 
 but he has only a kind of tail interest. The life 
 owner died, and it was left among half a dozen 
 members of the family. 
 
 24447. Have you any suggestions to make as to 
 the improvement of land tenure 1 — Well, my estate 
 is an electoral division in itself, and I had not a 
 pauper in the poorhouse last year. I had not an 
 individual in receipt of outdoor relief, and I am happy 
 to say I had not one in want of it. I maintained all 
 my people by employment that needed it; and I 
 found the poor neighbours of two adjoining estates 
 in work. I did not borrow anything, while I expended 
 about £1000 amongst them. As for myself, I would 
 as soon think of taking off a limb as of ejecting an 
 old tenant who paid me his rent. Of course, it would 
 deprive me of the grace of that voluntary act if I 
 were compelled to give that man what is called 
 "fixity of tenure," though I give it to him voluntarily. 
 With respect to the valuation of the Derry estate, 
 I succeeded my father in 1862. The rents had been 
 fixed in the bad times ; and there were only two 
 tenants on the estate who made any complaint as to 
 the amount of rent put on them. I walked the lands 
 myself, having had some experience of land and 
 farming mj'self, and I thought their rents were rather 
 high. I reduced one man's holding £6, and another 
 £5 — that is, from £39 to £33, and from £23 to £18. 
 That meets the (question, I think, of fair rents. 
 
 24448. They were satisfied 1 — Yes. 
 
 24449. You would not like to have tenants who 
 felt dissatisfied about their rents ? — Well, I would 
 object to receive it if I thought it was unfairly 
 fixed. 
 
 24450. So that they have fixity of tenure on your 
 property, and fair rents, and free sale 1 — Yes, I give 
 them the full right to sell. 
 
 24451. So that they can't complain 1 — The widow 
 who sold last year, whose case I referred to, got £14.5 
 for 6 acres of land subject to £7, IO5. a year. 
 
 24452. There are plenty of men in the country 
 who don't give these advantages 1 — I am sorry to say 
 there are. 
 
 24453. Don't you think they ought to be compelled 
 to do what you do voluntarily 1 — Well, I don't like 
 the word " compelled." 
 
 24454. At all events, you do it 1 — I do it of my 
 own free will and accord. Of course, if it be necessary 
 for the public weal that, it should be made compulsory 
 on, me, I would willingly submit pro bono puhlico, 
 although it would deprive me of a kind of feather in 
 my cap. 
 
 24455. You find it successful in your case, at all 
 events ? — I do. As landlords are charged with so 
 many inhuman acts, I may mention that just at the 
 coming in of the Land Act I ejected a tenant. I had 
 reason to find fault with him on account of private 
 matters, which I need not go into. His holding was 
 one of £28 a year. I said to him, " I don't want to 
 be making an exposure by bringing an ejectment ; I 
 will give you £120 to go out." He would not take 
 it. I said, " Mind if I bring the sheriff, I will not give 
 you a farthing." I brought the sheriff, put him out, 
 and took possession of the holding, which I have kept 
 ever since. He was the most improving tenant, per- 
 haps, on the estate ; and after I had ejected him I 
 
 sent his neighbour and another tenant to value his 
 improvements, saying that I would not take 6d worth 
 of his labour without paying him. They valued 
 everything he had done, including drainage, manures, 
 and buildings — he had a tidy little homestead ; and 
 after deducting from the total my rent, and the 
 expenses of the ejectment to which he had forced 
 me to, I gave him a cheque for a balance of about 
 £50. 
 
 24456. Are improvements generally made by the 
 tenants] — No, not all on my property. For instance, 
 this very day I ordered out three lots of timber. I 
 am a merchant as well as a landowner, and the 
 senior member of the firm of Spaight & Sons ; and 
 since the Land Act we have found that there has 
 been an immense increase in building through the 
 country by the farming classes themselves. In my 
 own case I have spent fully £3000 ; and I may say 
 that I have re-housed the whole of my labourers and 
 tenantry. That has cost me over £3000 ; and I have 
 never charged them M. for it in the shape of an 
 increase of rent. 
 
 24457. Then you think the tenants themselves are 
 building far more than they used ? — Generally so, to 
 a very great extent. In fact, it has produced a 
 perceptibly large increase in the import trade of 
 Limerick. 
 
 24458. TheO'CoNORDoN. — Have you laid out much 
 money in other improvements besides buildings ? — 
 No, I don't think I have. I have drained and fenced 
 a good deal last year on lands in my own occu- 
 pation. 
 
 24459. The Chairjian. — You mentioned having 
 built labourers' cottages? — I have re-housed all my 
 labourers. 
 
 24460. Are these labourers on your own farms? — 
 They live on my own estate, and work on my own 
 land, and I have re-housed every one of them, giving 
 them boarded rooms overhead, and boarded rooms 
 below for their sleeping apartments. 
 
 22461. Are they pretty comfortable on your pro- 
 perty ? — To give you an instance, I may say that 
 for the last seven years I have not had a man in 
 the poorhouse excei:)t one that I sent to the work- 
 house hospital. 
 
 24462. Are they comfortable on other pro- 
 perties % — They are not so well off as they are on 
 mine. 
 
 24463. Have they tolerably good houses generally 
 throughout the country 1 — Well, my neighbour, Mr. 
 Parker of Castle Lough, has done what I have done, 
 namely, re-housed all his labourers ; but with the 
 exception of him and myself, I don't think the. neigh- 
 bouring proprietors have done anything. 
 
 24464. Are the labourers generally in small cabins ? 
 — They are in bad, old cabins. I have only one of 
 them left, inhabited by a poor man aged eighty-four. 
 He came last year to ask my leave to sell his holding. 
 He said he came because his brother had stolen from 
 him the price of a pig which he had sold to pay his 
 rent, and he was determined not to give his brother 
 the chance of inheriting his land, as he had behaved so 
 dishonestly. I told him that if he sold his interest 
 for £20 or £25 his brother might steal that money, the 
 same as he had the price of the pig; and I therefore* 
 did not allow him to sell, but I said to him, " You 
 have as good a right to live out of this townland 
 as I have, and I will make a bargain for you 
 with an adjoining tenant;" and the bargain I 
 made for old Patt — which was this old man's 
 name — was that while he lived he was to get 6rf. 
 a day. 
 
 24465. The Chairman.— Had he land as well as a 
 cottage ?— He had about two acres of land as well as 
 his cottage. He has been residing for the last twelve 
 months on the other tenant's land, wliich I thought 
 better for him. 
 
 ^ 24466. Mr. Shaw. — And he occupies the house ? — 
 You could hardly call it a house. It is one of the old 
 style of cabins — a wretched, miserable hovel. 
 [This closed the inquiry at Limerick.] 
 
REPORT 
 
 OF 
 
 HER HAJESnS COMMISSIONERS OF INQUIRY 
 
 INTO 
 
 THE WORKING OP THE 
 
 LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) ACT, 1870, 
 
 AND THE 
 
 ACTS AMENDING THE SAME. 
 
 VOL. II. 
 
 DIGEST OP EVIDENCE. 
 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE, PART I. 
 
 ^r^sjnt^tt lo hat\i Pows^s of Hatrlianwnl Jjg Commanb of ptr ^aj^sia- 
 
 DUBLIN : 
 
 PRINTED BY ALEX. THOM & CO, 87, 88, & 89, ABBEY-STREET, 
 
 THE QUEEN'S PRINTING OFFICE. 
 FOR HER majesty's STATIONERY omOE. 
 
 liii. 
 
K h- I 
 
 ^:\^ 
 
 '^:'^y0 
 
 PtJr 
 
 ,-r^». 
 
 < --^-V- 
 
 <tM 
 
 
 '■:.^ *5i. { 
 
 
 *r-,-i 
 
 )f,M' 
 
 <;r 
 
 T'^"?^- 
 
 ¥ -■d. 
 
 ^-*^*^ 
 
 V. V*'- 
 
 mTV 
 
 ■*7- A.. 
 
 V *:i^ 
 
 %JL 
 
 J^'M 
 
 '^,:.^.- 
 
 s..^XM 
 
 .r> 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^"f^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 ■" ^ -t.^^