§ MR. T. M. HEALYI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that for the hearing of fair rent cases in County Clare a list was issued for the months of April and May without any date specified on which the Sub-Commissioners would sit, that the lay Commissioners visited the holdings of the tenants whose cases were listed before they were heard in Court, and that the sitting was held without any official intimation to the solicitors either for landlords or tenants; is it the fact that the Chief Commission issued a list of appeal hearing for County Clare for the 13th May, that an official valuer visited the lands of those whoso appeals were listed, and that the result of his valuation was communicated from the head office to the tenants with a request that if they wished to proceed or withdraw their appeal to fill up the accompanying form, and notifying to them the fact that the list of the improvements taken by the Sub-Commission, which was the basis of the valuation arrived at by the official valuer, could be procured at the cost of 1s. from the head office, and that at the foot was given the "net valuation" of "holding referred to in this letter;" is he aware that several of the tenants, believing that this valuation was to be their future rent, forwarded the notice filled up, withdrawing their appeals, and others were so confused by the receipt of it that they were obliged to 465 travel long journeys to consult their solicitors as to its bearing on their case; that a revised list of appeals has now-been issued for Clare, which was first of all sent to the landlords and then to the professional gentlemen engaged: and will the Land Commissioners take note of the dissatisfaction caused by these practices?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR(1) The Land Commissioners report that a list of fair rent cases for hearing in the Poor Law Union of Ennis was sent to all the parties concerned, with a notice on the first page that the date of commencement would be subsequently notified. That notification was sent some days afterwards to the parties or their solicitors in regard to the first GO cases on the list which were then fixed for hearing on the 21st April. All the parties noticed appeared on that day. A few of the holdings on the list were inspected before the hearing in Court, a proper course to adopt when the Assistant Commissioners have time at their disposal. (2) The preliminary list of appeals referred to in the second paragraph was issued by the Chief Commission. Their official valuer has not yet reported the result of his valuations on that list, and therefore no communication has been sent to the parties concerned in those cases; but after that list had been issued the official valuer reported the result of his valuations in another portion of the county, and the Chief Commissioners in each of these cases communicated the result of such valuation to the appellant and his solicitor. (3 and 5) The Commissioners have no. reason to believe that the contents of the notice were misunderstood, or that the parties themselves are dissatisfied with the course adopted, which has been to place them as early as possible in possession of the results of the valuation. (4) They also report that it is not the case that the revised list was first sent to the landlords as alleged.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYIS there any objection to the Land Commissioners appending to their Report a notification to the tenants—who are mostly ignorant men—that they are not bound to accept the result of the valuation?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI will communicate the suggestion of the hon. and learned Member to the Land Commissioners.