HC Deb 31 March 1910 vol 15 cc1446-7

asked the Chief Secretary if he could state on what plea the Sub-Commissioners who sat at Killmallock in last September raised the rent of Mr. Thomas Purcell's farm at Knockuregare, Bruff, rural district of Killmallock, from £87 18s. 6d. to £96 10s. annually; whether the Commissioners took into consideration the fact that Mr. Purcell, in addition to the £l 14s. per acre he was paying, was and is still giving £l per acre to an annuitant who has a charge on the farm; whether he was aware that the valuer for the landlords fixed the annual value of the holding at £95 10s.; have instructions been recently given to the Commissioners to raise the rent on those who wish to get a fair rent fixed, as all the other tenants on the same property as Mr. Purcell went into court a few years ago and got a reduction of 6s. per acre and their places since sold to them under the Act of 1903; why have the landlords (the Governors and Fellows of Trinity College) and the Commissioners treated Mr. Purcell in this manner, the former by refusing to sell to him and the latter by adding to their refusal in raising his rent?


In the case referred to in this question, the judicial rent was fixed by a duly constituted sub-commission court, on 4th February, 1910. The tenant lodged an appeal on the 21st instant, which will shortly be heard. The case is, therefore, sub judice, and I cannot discuss it.