HC Deb 09 April 1888 vol 324 cc702-3
MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, How many purchasers under the Irish Church Act of 1869 have applied for the full benefit of recent legislation under the 25th section of the Land Act of 1887; how many of these purchasers so applying represented simple and instalment mortgages respectively; what kinds of tenancies and descriptions of Church property are included in the benefits of the 25th section of the Act of 1887, and the total amount; what is the amount of arrears to be dealt with under the 5th sub-section of the 25th section of the Act; and, how many cases still remain to be settled of the various kinds of purchasers under the 25th section, and what is the cause of the delay in settling them?

THE SECRETARY (Mr. JACKSON) (Leeds, N.)

One hundred and forty persons, out of 430 mortgages dealt with under Sub-section 3 of the section referred to, have submitted "special circumstances" for the consideration of the Land Commissioners under subsection 4, with a view to the further extension of their terms of repayment, with consequent reductions of the instalments. These cases are all those of instalment mortgagors, the terms in the case of simple mortgagors being fixed by the third sub-section. This section of the Act of 1887 includes all mortgages on laud (but not those on perpetuity rents) under the 52nd section of the Church Act, except those already dealt with under the 23rd section of the Act of 1885. The annual income affected by the section may be roughly stated at £35,000. About £40,000 of arrears have to be dealt with under the 5th sub-section, due on 402 instalment mortgages and 183 simple mortgages. But the time allowed for payment of the portions of these arrears to be recovered has not yet expired; and it is, therefore, impossible to say how many will actually get the benefit of this section. Eighty-six instalment mortgages, in arrear about £1,000, are still unsettled, principally because the mortgagors had already applied for relief under the Act of 1885, and their legal position is, therefore, doubtful.