§ MR. PATRICK O'BRIEN (Kilkenny)I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the tenants on the Drapers' Company's Estate, County Londonderry, who purchased their holdings six years ago, under the Land Purchase Acts, on a rental fixed by arbitration, have been recently served with processes for arrears of rent due before and subsequent to the arbitration; that 59 there is a general opinion on the estate that the arbitrators fixed the rents too high; and that, in the case of John Diamond, of Boveagh, whose purchase money was fixed at £60 by the arbitrators, Mr. Murrogh O'Brien, the Land Commission Valuer, considered £50 the outside value of the holding; and whether, as Diamond and the other tenants are likely to be evicted for nonpayment of this rent, and their purchase arrangements for which the State credit is pledged rendered void, he will cause an Inquiry to be made into all the circumstances of the case.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOUR.The first part of this Question appears to be framed under a misapprehension. Where sales have been completed, tenant purchasers cannot be ejected by a former landlord, and the third section of the Act of 1888 releases such purchasers from all rent and arrears. The proceedings referred to by the hon. Member could not, therefore, be taken against tenant purchasers. Possibly he has in mind the service of ejectment processes on some of the tenants to whom the Land Commission refused to make advances for the purchase of their holdings, though I am informed that in none of these cases are arrears claimed for the period prior to the arbitration. The Land Commissioners were not parties to the arbitration as to certain holdings on the Drapers' Estate, though the Commissioners are aware that at the close of the arbitration a very large number of agreements were entered into by the tenants on the basis of the prices named by the arbitrators. As to the case of John Diamond. In 1888 he agreed to purchase for £76, but the application was refused, the Inspector having reported that the holding was in a very bad condition, that the tenant was a pauper, and that no rent had been paid for years. In 1890 a new agreement was entered into for £60, being the price fixed by the arbitrator. The Inspector suggested that if an advance were made to a tenant circumstanced as Diamond was, it should be limited to £50 with an increased guarantee deposit of one-third, but the vendors declined to accept the terms suggested and the case was dismissed. Mr. Murrogh O'Brien never inspected the holding or made any report on the subject.