§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)asked the Parliamentary Under Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If the Government will give military or police assistance for the proposed ejectment of Widow Flood, of Forthill, County Longford, for arrears of a rent judicially reduced; has he seen The Westmeath Examiner of 21st January, containing the following report of the remarks of the County Court Judge, addressed to the agent at Ballymahon Quarter Sessions, in reference to the proceedings against this widow:—
A tenant whose rent was reduced last October from £15 8s. to £7, was sued for the rack-rent, which drew from the Judge the observation, ' Is it possible, Mr. Bole, that you are going on for the old rent after the Land Commissioners reducing it over 60 per cent? Surely you do not expect to recover these arrears from poor people.' Mr. Bole's reply was that he had no authority from his employer to wipe out any arrears;will any remonstrance be directed by the Executive to the landlord in the case, following the precedent of the letter of the last Chief Secretary to the Marquess of Clanricarde; does he propose, on behalf of the Government, to take any steps in the case; and, can he say who is the woman's landlord?
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER SECRETARY (Colonel KING-HARMAN) (Kent, Isle of Thanet)As the hon. and learned Member is perfectly well aware, I am the landlord in the case in question. No application has been made to the Government for military or police in the matter, nor is there any intention to execute the ejectment decree at present. I have seen the newspaper report referred to. Mr. Bole, however, denies that he made the statement attributed to him; on the contrary, he said 851 that he would allow 20 per cent oft the arrear in respect of the old rent, which would have brought it below the Poor Law valuation. The amount in the decree contained half a-year at the old rent only, and two years judicial rent at £7 per annum. The Poor Law valuation of the farm is £12 15s., and, accordingly, an appeal has been lodged against the rent fixed. The tenant, however, has, of course, only been asked to pay the judicial rent from the date it was fixed. The letter to which the hon. and learned Member refers dealt with a proposal for carrying out wholesale evictions; but the writer distinctly contemplated the necessity of resorting to this process when the tenant declined to fulfil Ms legal obligation. As there is no question in this case of wholesale eviction, and as it may be hoped that there will be no eviction at all, there seems to be no parallel between the circumstances under which my right hon. Friend wrote the letter and those to which the hon. and learned Member refers to in his Question.