§ MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether he has observed that, in the land case of Ferguson v. The Earl of Gosford, the Sub-Commission decided against the tenant, and that this decision was confirmed by the Head Commissioner; if the report is accurate which represents Mr. Justice Meredith as having asked the case to be re-argued, owing to a decision in the Queen's Bench bearing on the question having been overlooked by the court, and if there is any precedent for such a course of procedure.
§ MR. ATKINSONThe case referred to by Mr. Justice Meredith was not cited by counsel on either side, and was, in fact, a decision pronounced only a few weeks previously, and not yet reported in the authorised Law Reports. Jurisdiction to review, rescind, or vary any order or decision previously made by them is vested in the Land Commission by Section 48, Sub-section 5, of the Land Act of 1881, and the Land Commission considered that the case was one in which the jurisdiction might properly be exercised. The request of the judge was at once assented to by counsel on both sides, and the case has been re-argued and stands for judgment.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLAnd I suppose the tenant will have to pay for the error of the court!