§ MR. LYELL (Orkney and Shetland)I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that the Crofters' Commission have determined that sub-tenants, 1158 holding from a principal tenant or tacksman of a large farm or estate, are crofters within the meaning of " The Crofters' Holdings (Scotland) Act, 1886," and have entertained their applications, and fixed fair rents thereunder; whether he is aware that the First Division of the Court of Session, upon 19th March last, in the case of Robert Stewart Livingstone against Miss Mary Stewart Beattie, decided that sub-tenants are not crofters within the meaning of the said Act; whether he is aware that certain of these sub-tenants, who have been declared to be crofters, have been threatened with actions of reduction of the interlocutors of the Commission finding them to be crofters, and that all such sub-tenants who have been so declared to be crofters are exposed to such actions at the instance of their landlords; and whether the Government is prepared to take steps, with a view to the protection of said sub-tenant crofters, by amendment of the said Act, or otherwise; and, if so, in what manner?
§ MR. J. P. B. ROBERTSONIt is the case that the Crofters' Commission have determined in certain cases that subtenants are crofters within the meaning of the Crofters' Act, and have fixed fair rents. It is also the fact that the First Division of the Court of Session have decided that sub-tenants are not crofters in the sense of the Act. It was pointed out by the learned Judges that those persons are brought upon the estate, not by the landlord, but by the agricultural tenant, and accordingly that it is not surprising that the Act contains no provisions applicable to sub-tenants. I am not aware that actions have been threatened against those sub-tenants who have been dealt with as crofters by the Commissioners. The Government do not contemplate legislation on the subject.