HC Deb 15 August 1890 vol 348 cc1128-9
MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether in the case of "Bennett v. Beamish," No. 10, in Chief Land Commission Bantry List, 29th July, the tenant was informed, in reply to his application of 24th June, that a Court Valuer would be directed to report as to the appeal rent; did the High Chief Commission confirm the Sub-Commission rent on the next day after the hearing; was the Valuer's Report before them; and, if not, can he explain why; and, if it was not obtained, has Mr. Bennett any remedy during the next 15 years?


The Land Commissioners report that the case referred to was a cross-appeal. The tenant was informed that a Court Valuer would be sent to inspect the holding and report thereon; but owing to the illness of the gentleman who was inspecting in the district it was not possible to have the inspection made before the sitting of the Appeal Court. At the hearing of the case the Court, after hearing the witnesses for both sides, confirmed the order of the Sub-Commission, which had reduced the rent of the holding from ?145 to ?75. There is no appeal from a decision of the Appeal Court upon a question of value.


Is it reasonable that, as a promise was made to the tenant that a Court Valuer would be sent, the rent should be fixed without waiting for the Valuer's Report?


I do not gather that a promise was given to the tenant, nor is the Court bound to base its determination on the Report of the Valuer.