THE CROFTER COMMISSION. (Hansard, 20 March 1890)

§ (11.37.) DR. CLARK (Caithness)

I want to say a word or two on a question outside of Ireland. I am compelled to do so because we have been unable during the last two years to get the question brought before the House—I refer to the proceedings of the Crofter Commission. I am much dissatisfied, first with the increasing cost of the Commission. Last year we voted over £9,000, and we have voted a supplementary £1,000. This year the Estimate has increased to £9,600 for extraordinary 1346 payments to Sheriff's officials. During-the three and a half years the Commission has been in operation it has had about 7,000 cases before it, and it has reduced rents from £40,000 to £28,000. This is being done at a cost of over £10,000 a year. The fact is that if yon had voted the money to the people in the first instance they would have been richer than under the present system, because the Commission has cost more than the people have got in rebate of rent. I brought in a Bill by which the Crofters' Commission could sub-divide itself into three portions. Since that sub-division very curious things have occurred, Two and a half years ago the reductions of rent were 50 per cent., and of arrears about 75 per cent. Last year a change occurred. In the old Court there were three Commissioners, the chairman being a Sheriff, who, I believe, tried to act as fairly as he could, and his assessors being, one an old factor, and the other a large farmer. Under that Court the reductions were what I have stated. The old factor is now chairman and his assessors are two large farmers; the result being that the reductions in rent are not more than 30 per cent., whilst, with regard to arrears, instead of adopting a fair system, the Commissioners are taking a course which will land all the small farmers in the Bankruptcy Court. They are required to pay a sum equal to three years' rent. But they cannot do it. It is a physical impossibility. They have been rack-rented, and, having been rendered poor in that way, they find it impossible to pay three years' rent in one year; the consequence being that the landlord sues them. Unless something is done the result of this will be rioting and disturbance in Caithness and some other places. The people are not going to lose the rights they possess under the Act quietly. I would point out—although I do not dwell upon it now—that it is hardly a usual thing for a gentleman who is going to be a Judge in these cases to go and dine with the landlords and their factors. I am sorry that we have held our tongues so long. There is no doubt that grave 1347 dissatisfaction exists at the attempts which are being made by legal process to turn these men out of their holdings; and I tell the Lord Advocate and the Government that the probability is that if an attempt is made to carry out this unjust eviction it will be resisted. Something must be done to put a stop to this endeavour to collect impossible arrears at an impossible time; at any rate, the people should have the right of appeal to the three Commissioners sitting together—though how the appeal could be heard I do not know, if one of the Commissioners goes to Mull, another to Sutherlandshire, and another somewhere else. If the Commissioners meet to hear appeals before the evictions are attempted, much trouble will be saved.