HC Deb 21 March 1892 vol 2 cc1318-9
MR. P. O'BRIEN

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Land Commission were aware, when they sanctioned the sale of the Drapers' Company's estate to the occupying tenants, that one of the terms of sale was, that the expense of conveyancing was to be borne by the Drapers' Company; and, if so, why is Mr. Harbisson, solicitor, of Magherafelt, allowed to charge conveyancing fees to Mr. James Convery, a purchasing tenant on the same estate; and will the Land Commission see that the terms of agreement are carried out by the delivery, without cost to Mr. Convery, of the conveyancing order now held in lieu of fees by Mr. Harbisson?

Mr. JACKSON

As I have said, in answer to a previous question, the vendors did, in accordance with agreement, pay the expenses of carrying out the conveyance. But the purchasing tenant referred to employed a solicitor to examine the conveyancing order, for which a charge of 10s. 6d. was made, and is recoverable from the purchasing tenant.

MR. P. O'BRIEN

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the conveyancing order was delivered to the solicitor, who refused to give it up?

Mr. JACKSON

The Land Commissioners report that according to the endorsement on the agreement they delivered the order to Mr. Harbisson, and they know nothing more about it.

MR. P. O'BRIEN

But I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say the statement in the question is correct—that the expenses of conveyancing were to be borne by the company?

Mr. JACKSON

As I have stated, the Land Commission forwarded the order to the solicitor, whose name was endorsed upon it.

MR. P. O'BRIEN

But why is Mr. Harbisson allowed to charge fees against the tenant when the company undertook to pay the cost?

Mr. JACKSON

It was arranged between the purchaser and the Drapers' Company that the latter should pay the cost of conveyancing; but, in addition to that, the purchaser employed a solicitor to examine the conveyancing order on his behalf.