§ MR. M'CARTAN (Down, S.)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the serious complaints made in The Belfast Morning News of the 14th and 15th instant, as to the great inconvenience of bringing the tenants of the estates of Mr. Sewallis Shirley and Mr. H. H. Shirley, at Carrickmacross, to have their appeals heard before the Land Commission at Dundalk; whether the Land Commission received a Memorial from the tenants pointing out the inconvenience and expense which attendance at Dundalk would involve; whether he is aware that the tenantry on these estates are among the poorest in Ireland, and would not be able to bear the expense of attending with their witnesses at Dundalk; whether he can say what number of appeals from the decisions of the Sub-Commissioners still remain to be heard on these estates; and, whether he will advise a sitting of the Land Commission to be held at Carrickmacross, where there is a suitable and commodious Courthouse, and where there is also good hotel accommodation?
§ THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)The Land Commissioners inform me that in the ordinary course of practice cases from the Carrickmacross Union would 1715 be heard either in Dublin or Monaghan, and that they fixed the sitting at Dundalk specially to meet the tenants' convenience and to save expense to all parties. The distance from Carrickmacross to Dundalk is 14 miles only, and there is convenient railway communication between the two places. No remonstrances were received by the Commissioners until within the last week, although the arrangement to sit at Dundalk has been public for two months. There are 150 appeals pending from the estate of Mr. Sewallis Shirley, and 116 from the estate of Mr. H. H. Shirley. The Commissioners state they are satisfied that Dundalk, which was selected with the consent of the professional men on both sides, is the proper place for the hearing of the cases, and they are unable to change the arrangements they have made.
MR. MAURICEHEALY (Cork)asked, whether there was any reason that the ordinary practice of the Land Commission should not be brought more into conformity with the convenience of the parties concerned?
§ MR. A. J BALFOURsaid, he knew the Land Commissioners were extremely anxious to meet the convenience of all parties engaged.
§ MR. MAURICE HEALYasked, was it not a fact that in this case, and in the case mentioned previously, the Sub-Commissioners were holding the sitting actually outside the county in which the tenants resided?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid, it was quite possible that a place outside the county might be the most convenient, taking all the circumstances into consideration.