§ MR. M'CARTAN (Down, S.)
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenaut of Ireland whether he will state in respect of how many holdings on the County Down estates and also on the County Antrim estates of Lady Wallace have the purchases by the tenants from 749 Lady Wallace been completed; how many agreements for purchase on these estates have been filed in the Land Commission; in how many cases did the Land Commission refuse to sanction payment of the original amount of purchase money; and if he can state the total amount which they so refused to sanction, and the total of the lesser amounts named by the Laud Commission as amounts the Commission would sanction?
MR. J. MORLEY
The Land Commission inform me that 1,092 sales to tenants have been completed on the Wallace estate up to the 26th inst. Of these, 50 were in County Down and 1,042 in the County Antrim. The total number of agreements lodged in respect of the estate was 1,894; but of these 434, which were under the Act of 1891, were in lieu of applications received under the Acts of 1885 and 1888, and for which there were no funds, or which were refused for other reasons. In 415 cases applications for advances have been refused. The Commissioners state it is not possible to answer the last paragraph of the question, as it is not their practice, when they refuse to sanction an advance, to name what sum they will be prepared to sanction, save occasionally on the application of the parties.
§ MR. M'CARTAN
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the decision of the Ulster Sub-Commission at Lisburn on the 5th instant, in the fair-rent application of Dr. Jefferson, tenant on the estate of Lady Wallace, in which the application of the tenant, whose old rent was £28 a year, was dismissed on the ground that he had sub-let a small house and garden to a labourer at a rent amounting to about 1s. a week; and whether anything will be done to enable such tenants to take advantage of the Land Acts without evicting their sub-tenants?
MR. J. MORLEY
I am informed that the case in question was dismissed on the ground that a substantial portion of the holding, consisting of a house and garden, was sub-let, without the landlord's consent, at a rent of £4 per annum. The case was dismissed judicially on the construction and effect of the 4th section of the Land Act of 1887, and 750 the Sub-Commission appear to have followed a decision on the point of the Court of Appeal.