§ Mr. TIMOTHY DAVIESasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether his attention had been called to the action of the Kesteven County Council in letting off the shooting rights over small holdings belonging to the Council, without reference to the occupiers of the holdings and against their interests; whether he was aware that a memorial of protest signed by 14 of the small holders was disregarded by the Council; whether any provision for letting the shooting rights in this way was included in the scheme submitted to the Board; and what was the policy of the Board in the matter?
§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir E. Strachey)Enquiry has been made into this matter. It appears that all the occupiers signed agreements containing a clause reserving the shooting rights. After doing so they sent a letter of protest to the Small Holdings Committee of the County Council who have apparently determined to adhere to the arrangement. No provision for letting the shooting rights appears in the draft scheme submitted to the Board. Each case must be considered on its merits, but the Board do not see any objection in principle to the separate letting of shooting rights inasmuch as it enables the rents payable by the small holders to be proportionately reduced.
§ Mr. MORRELLWill the Board sanction a scheme even where the tenants 1014 object to the shooting rights being let over their heads?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYIt would be a question for consideration whether or not it was desirable to do so.
§ Mr. TIMOTHY DAVIESasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture if he was aware of the practice of certain county councils on the receipt of applications for land under the Small Holdings Act, 1908, to put a representative of the Commissioner of Canada in communication with the applicants in order to induce such men to emigrate; and whether he would take any steps to prevent the Act being carried out in this way?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYI am not aware that such a practice exists. The Kesteven County Council, to which the hon. Member for Burnley specially directed my attention in a supplementary question, strenuously deny that they have at any time followed the course suggested.
§ Mr. MORRELLWill the hon. Gentleman make inquiry as to the Lindsey County Council, Lincolnshire?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYCertainly, if the hon. Member desires.
§ Mr. ROWLANDSWill the hon. Gentleman extend his inquiries?
Mr. J. W. WILSONasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture, how many of the small holders on the Woodrow Estate, Catshill, of the Worcestershire County Council are a year or more in arrear with their instalments of purchase money; how many persons agreed to buy holdings on this estate; how many of them are still in possession of their holdings; and what is the area of land held by each person?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYTwo tenants are more than a year in arrear with their rent; twenty-seven agreed to buy their holdings; and twenty-one are still in possession of them. Eight hold 3 acres, four hold 4 acres, three hold 5 acres, four hold 6 acres, and five others hold, respectively, 7, 9, 11, 12, and 18 acres.
§ Mr. JOHN WARDAre we to understand that out of these twenty-eight who have purchased their holdings six have lost them?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYThat is a question that the hon. Member, I think, must give me notice of.
Mr. J. W. WILSONasked how many of the tenants of the Catshill allotment estate of the North Bromsgrove Urban District Council were in arrear with their rent on September 29th, 1910; what is the total number of tenants on the estate; the acreage of the same; and the rent paid?
§ Sir E. STRACHEYFive tenants were in arrear with their rent on the date named. There are eighty-two tenants on the estate, which comprises 62 acres. The rent paid is £2 10s. 6d. per annum.
§ Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTasked how many small holdings were during the year 1910 constituted upon the large estates owned by the Crown and under Government administration; and whether these bear a due proportion to those constituted on property in private ownership?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Burnley yesterday will afford the hon. Member all the information which it is in my power to give.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTWill the Government in this connection consider the advisability of converting into small holdings all farms falling vacant within the Duchy of Lancaster, and so show their genuineness in this matter?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThat does not arise out of the question on the Paper, and I should require notice.
§ Mr. MORRELLWill the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of converting into small holdings all farms falling vacant on the Crown lands?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThat again is not the question.