§ Mr. O'DONNELLasked whether the delay in vesting the estate of W. E. Marshall, Callinaferry, county Kerry, in the tenants is due to the negligence of the Estates Commissioners, who for a year and a half after the landlord got his money never took any steps to let the tenants know that any further agreements were necessary; and whether, considering this delay, for which the Estates Commissioners are solely responsible, the Commissioners will reconsider their decision regarding those tenants and give them the benefit of purchase from the time that the landlord was paid his money?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Estates Commissioners are not responsible for the delay in the case referred to. The purchase money of the estate was paid on the 29th July, 1909. A trust deed relative to the upkeep of the embankments was prepared, approved of by trustees, and when finally settled, was sent for signature by the trustees and the tenants concerned, in March 1910, and was only returned duly signed last month. The Commissioners have no power to comply with the suggestion in the last paragraph of the question.
§ Mr. O'DONNELLWhen will the estate be vested?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI cannot say, but the matter will be pushed on quickly.
§ Mr. BOLANDasked whether a memorial was presented early in 1910 to the Congested Districts Board by the tenants on Sir Morgan O'Connell's estate, near Waterville, requesting the Board to open negotiations for the purchase of the estate; what action has been taken in the matter; and whether the landlord has now expressed his willingness to sell the property to the tenants?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe memorial referred to was received, and the Congested Districts Board wrote to the owner stating that they would be willing to negotiate for the purchase of his estate, but no reply has been received. The Board are again approaching the landlord on the subject.
§ Mr. CONDONasked whether Mr. Patrick Nagle, of Coolonan, a tenant on the estate of Lady Beatrice Pole-Carew and another, declined to sign a purchase agreement on the terms proposed by the vendors, which meant a reduction of 4s. 6d. in the £ on his second term rent, on the ground that the same was quite 530 inadequate, and that his solicitor pointed out in a letter to the inspector of the Estates Commissioners on 14th April, 1909, that the Commissioners had the right to prevent any vendor from imposing unfair terms on a tenant who had refused to sign a purchase agreement, and that it was their duty to fix a fair price at which he could afford to buy; whether the sale of the estate was closed and Mr. Patrick Nagle excluded without any intimation having been given to him or his solicitor as to what the Commissioners considered a fair price, or as to whether the Commissioners were of opinion that the price at which the vendors offered to sell the holding was an equitable one; whether intimation to the last-mentioned effect was only given to the tenant's solicitor on 3rd October, 1910, long after the sale of the estate had been closed; and whether it is in accordance with the usual practice of the Estates Commissioners to exclude a tenant who has not signed a purchase agreement without having informed him of their view on the subject of the terms offered him, and without any intimation of their intention to exclude him, or of the fact that they had excluded him, until the latter fact was obtained from them on inquiry by the tenant a considerable time subsequent to the event?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Estates Commissioners inform me that the vendors offered to sell to Patrick Nagle, a second-term judicial tenant, on the same terms as to the other second-term tenants, who had agreed to purchase their holdings. Nagle refused to purchase at these terms and, as no agreement for the purchase of his holding was lodged with the Commissioners, the holding was not included in the lands declared an estate for the purposes of sale and vested in the purchasing tenants. It was not the duty of the Commissioners to fix a price in this case, nor have they any power to compel Nagle to purchase at the price offered by the vendors, which the Commissioners considered fair. The Commissioners acted in this case in accordance with their usual practice. If he is now prepared to purchase, it is still open to him to do so by entering into an agreement with the owners.
§ Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been called to the statutes under which agricultural land is sold to tenants in Ireland not at its true value, but in non-zone cases at the amount for which a holding is security, and in zone cases at an amount exceeding 531 value and security by the measure of embarrassment and the desire to escape from untenable tenancy; whether he has made himself acquainted with the Weir case, in which prices were fixed upon nominal rents which had not been paid, and the Estates Commissioners were rebuked from the Bench for having withheld prices known by them to be in excess of both value and security, and were prohibited from making any inquiry regarding value in such cases; and whether, in order to prevent any increase of tax upon agricultural land, Revenue officers will be forbidden to assess probate or other duty on the purchase price, or treat that price for any purpose as if it were the value?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe hon. Member's objection goes to the root of the zone provisions of the Act of 1903, which were fully discussed in connection with the Act of 1909, which had the effect of reducing the maximum zone limit by two years. I see no reason to reopen the question. I have no power to give any directions to Revenue officers.
§ Mr. FLAVINasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that the tenanted and untenanted lands, the property of Mr. Eyre Stack, situate at Ballyconory, Listowel, have been offered for sale to the Congested Districts Board; whether he is aware of the number of uneconomic holdings in the district; and whether the Congested Districts Board will take immediate action for the purchase of the lands in order to relieve congestion in the district?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe estate referred to was offered to the Congested Districts Board under the Act of 1903, but the owner was informed that owing to want of funds they could not purchase the lands. The Board will again ask if he is now willing to sell.
§ Mr. FLAVINasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction existing in the Listowel union owing to the amount given by the Congested Districts Board for distribution by the parish committees; and whether he can state if the amount granted for Listowel union is given on the same principle and basis as the grants to other unions in Ireland?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe amount for Listowel parish has been given on the same principle and basis as the grants to other Unions in Ireland. I am not aware that any dissatisfaction exists.
§ Mr. WILLIAM O'BRIENasked the Prime Minister, whether he can yet arrange a date for the discussion of the present state of land purchase in Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith)I am afraid that I am not in a position to make any statement at present.