§ Mr. FLYNNasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the Estates Commis- 1338 sioners have yet sanctioned the purchase scheme of the Rathcoole portion of the estate of Sir George Colthurst, baronet (near Banteer, county Cork); if so, can they explain why four sub-tenants—namely, John Buckley, Patrick Lane, and John O'Leary, of Laght, and William Coleman, of Bolomore—who signed agreements, have not received due notification of the purchase arrangements; and whether these sub-tenants are to be included in the sale?
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND (Mr. R. R. Cherry)I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that the holdings on this estate have been vested in the tenants. The portions of the holdings which were sub-let were not declared to be separate holdings for the purpose of the sale, and the occupiers continue to be sub-tenants to the purchasing tenants.
§ Mr. J. C. FLYNNHas the right hon. Gentleman any information to show him that these sub-tenants actually signed their agreements, that the price was agreed between them and their immediate landlord, and can he say why the Commissioners have not dealt with these cases?
§ Mr. CHERRYI have no information to that effect; in any case, it is within the discretion of the Estates Commissioners to decide whether they will sell to the subtenants or to the tenants direct.
§ Mr. P. J. O'SHAUGHNESSYShould not sub-tenants who are in occupation get a preference of purchase above the heads of the tenants, and was not that the intention of the Act of 1903?
§ Mr. CHERRYNo, Sir. The Act of 1903 left a discretion to the Estates Commissioners to deal directly with the subtenants, but there was no obligation upon them to take that course.
§ Mr. O'SHAUGHNESSYWill the right hon. Gentleman communicate with the Estates Commissioners and tell them that in all cases tenants in occupation should have the right of preference to their holdings?
§ Mr. CHERRYI will communicate with them, but I could not undertake to instruct them to do that.