LORD VENTRY, in rising to move—
That the Return of the judicial rents fixed by sub-commissions and civil bill courts, as notified by the Irish Land Commission up to and including: the 28th January 1882, be supplemented by a column giving the present gross letting value of each holding as ascertained by the Sub-Commissioners; and that it bean instruction that in all future Returns the above information be given,said, it appeared to him obvious that some such calculation as he had asked for should be made in each case by the Sub-Commissioners, for they must arrive at the gross value of each holding before they could arrive at the judicial rent, which was the net value in each case as regarded the landlord. The judicial rent was simply the value of the holding after the deductions which the Sub-Com- 1497 missioners thought themselves bound to give in each case on the part of the tenant. He could only say that if they did not arrive at the gross value in each case they certainly ought to, or their valuation would not be worth much. It would be easy to give reasons why this Return ought to be of very particular value to the landlords and tenants in defiling with the Act. It was the wish of Her Majesty's Government that these eases should, to a great extent, be settled out of Court; and if they were sincere in that wish they ought not to refuse some such statistics as he had asked for. It was evident that unless a great many of these cases were settled out of Court they would never see the end of them. To show the complications which might arise he would merely give, on the authority of a friend of his in the county of Kerry, three cases. In each the original rent was £36 4s. 6d, but the judicial rents fixed were £27 10s. more, £30 in another, and £25 in the third; so that there was a difference between the highest and lowest rent of £5. It would he very satisfactory to the landlord to know on what principle these rents were fixed. He was a gentleman who was most likely to deal in perfect fairness with his tenants, and not only to him, but the tenants also, it would he useful to know how the rents were arrived at.Moved, That the Return of the judicial rents fixed by sub-commissions and civil bill courts, as notified by the Irish Land Commission up to and including the 28th January 1882, be supplemented by a column giving the present gross letting value of each holding as ascertained by the (Sub-Commissioners; and that it be an instruction that in all future Returns the above information be given.—(The Lord Ventry.)
LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsaid, it would be impossible to "arrive at" a fair rent, unless it were known how much of the land was deteriorated by the laches of the tenant. He would, therefore, suggest that there should be added to the Return after the column giving the gross value two other columns, one showing what was allowed for the improvement of the tenant, the other what was awarded to the landlord for deterioration. The latter was necessary, because anyone who knew anything about tenants' holdings in Ireland must be aware that they were kept in the lowest possible state of cultivation.
LORD INCHIQUINsaid, that a great deal more information was wanted than was asked for by the noble Lord. They wanted to know what was the basis on which the Sub-Commissioners founded their decisions, the amount credited to the tenant for improvements, and various other items which went to form the judgment on which the judicial rent was declared. This was one of the most important matters which could be brought before Parliament. For how were landlords to deal out of Court with their tenants, as the Government asked them to do if they did not know on what basis the Sub-Commissioners had arrived at their decision? No case in which he was concerned had been brought before the Court, though some cases of his were pending; and, therefore, he had not been as yet affected by the judgment of the Court. In the county of Clare there were farms on which the soil was of a varying nature. There were rich alluvial soils bordering upon the Shannon, there were uplands, and soil of another description; and it would be easy for the Sub-Commissioners to say that they valued the alluvial soil at so much and the other kinds at so much also. Upon this declaration the landlord would be able to appeal to the Commissioners, and, if necessary, to carry the case further. But now there were no means whatever of getting the Sub-Commissioners to declare upon what basis they fixed the rent, and there was nothing to guide the landlord. Another important point was this—that whenever there was a change of tenancy the question of the amount credited to the tenant for improvements must crop up, and how was the landlord to deal with it? He could not tell how much was allowed by the Sub-Commissioners for improvements. And then, at the end of the 15 years, who was to say by whom the improvements had been made? But if the nature of the improvements was clearly stated by the Court it would be easy to say that they had been allowed for before. Every landlord in Ireland that he had heard speak on the subject was most anxious that a fair rent should be fixed, and only a fair rent. The great want was that there were no sworn valuators, for however competent the Sub-Commissioners might be, it was utterly impossible for them to go into all the various points, because of 1499 the short time at their disposal. But if they had sworn valuators who would give their testimony on oath and would be cross-examined, all these necessary points would be brought out. The best thing would be to do away with the lay Sub-Commissioners, and have only legal Sub-Commissioners, with sworn valuators. He was in the unfortunate position of having 1,000 tenants, and every one of their cases might have to be tried. From his own experience, lie could assure their Lordships that it would be almost impossible for the Sub-Commissioners to tell the value of all sorts of land in all sorts of weather. The county of Clare, to which he had the honour to belong, was in as bad a state as it could possibly be just now, not owing to the action of the landlords—if anything, they wore said to be backward in enforcing their rights—but owing to the "no rent" agitation; and yet the Sub-Commissioners were disposing of the property of innocent persons right and left without assigning any reason for such wholesale confiscation.
§ VISCOUNT MIDLETONsaid, he hoped Her Majesty's Government would grant the Return moved for, as the same difficulty existed now as under the Act of 1870. There were so many Sub-Commissioners and Civil Bill Courts that it was extremely difficult to harmonize the different decisions arrived at. It might be said that when some of the judgments had been carried before the Commissioners and the final Court of Appeal the law would be systematized; but they should have to wait a considerable time before that was done, and meanwhile all would be in confusion. They wanted to know what were the actual principles upon which deductions wore made. They knew, upon the authority of the Commission over which the noble Earl (the Earl of Bessborough) presided, that Griffith's valuation furnished no true rule as to the value of land, circumstances differing so widely in different districts, and even in the same districts. Unless they knew on what basis the Sub-Commissioners took the gross value, and also the net value, it was impossible to understand the principles upon which the deductions were made. In some cases the Sub-Commissioners had stated in open Court their estimate of the gross rental and the amount of the deductions made in order to ascertain the fair letting value; but 1500 such cases were the exception, and not the rule, and what was desired was to ascertain the uniform principle of deduction on which the Commissioners acted.
§ LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that he and the Irish Government were most anxious to supply the House with any information that could be given on this subject, provided such a Return could be obtained in an accurate form, provided it did not impose on the Land Courts an unreasonable amount of labour, drawing them from their proper duties, and provided, also, the information was really useful and valuable. It was doubtful, however, whether the desired Return really could furnish any very valuable information; and it was hardly to be expected that, as the noble Lord (Lord Inchiquin) had suggested, the Return should do that which the Act of Parliament had refrained from doing, and should state in every case all the elements of the decision of the Commissioners. He could not say that day whether the more limited kind of Return asked for by his noble Friend (Lord Ventry) could be given, or, indeed, whether the records of the Courts admitted of that being done in a proper and accurate shape; but he would make inquiries, and would give a move complete answer if the noble Lord would be good enough to postpone his Motion for a few days.
LORD DUNSANYsaid, he did not think it a sufficient reason for refusing information of that kind that it would give additional labour to the Land Commissioners. It was a question of whether they would give additional labour to the Land Commissioners or would do more injustice to the landlords. With regard to the object of the Return, he thought it would be one element in establishing something of a theory on the subject, rather than leaving it altogether to the Sub-Commissioners to substitute their fancies for some reasonable ground in their valuations; and he must say, in the matter of improvements, it would be very desirable to go further than was proposed. He hoped there would be no difficulty in showing, first of all, something of the nature of the improvements—that was to say whether it was for building, for roads, drains, or anything else. He considered it was the more necessary to 1501 supply those details as he was himself very sceptical on the subject of tenants' improvements. If he was asked to say what a tenant's improvement was, he should say it was something that every reasonable farmer would improve out of existence as soon as he saw it. He never saw one but he abolished it as soon as possible. Generally speaking, the Irish tenant on his farm was without one sixpence of capital or anything else; and he denied that he could improve it even if he desired to do so. That was a general rule, although, of course, there were exceptional cases; but the alleged improvements in most cases were no improvement at all.
LORD VENTRYsaid, that, acting upon the suggestion of the noble Lord (Lord Carlingford), he would postpone his Motion until Tuesday next.
§ Further debate adjourned to Tuesday next.