§ Mr. HAYDENasked whether the estate of the representatives of H. B. Brabazon, situated in the parish of Ballinlough; 2119 county Roscommon, has been offered to the Congested Districts Board; and whether, in view of the fact that the holdings upon this estate have been injured by the drainage works carried out on the Dillon Estate by the Congested Districts Board and not continued through the Brabazon Estate, the Board will take immediate action for its purchase and improvement?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThis estate has been offered to the Congested Districts Board and will be inspected as soon as practicable. The hon. Member is, in the opinion of the Board, under a misapprehension in thinking that the drainage words carried out on the Dillon Estate have caused injury to the holdings on the Brabazon Estate.
§ Mr. HAYDENasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he was aware that, according to certificates received from the County Council Office, Galway, the amount of land formerly held by the Messrs. Payne on the Pollock Estate, in the county Galway, and now taken over by the Estates Commnssioners, is 409 acres 3 roods 29 poles, and that the valuation of the same is £228; that, according to these certificates the land held by the firm in the townland of Glinsk is 74 acres 1 rood 34 poles, Ardagh 277 acres 3 roods 12 poles, and Ardagh 57 acres 2 roods 23 poles; whether land in any other places besides these formerly held by Messrs. Payne has been surrendered by them to the Estates Commissioners; and, if not, whether he would explain the figures given by the Estates Commissioners that the area of the land acquired by them in exchange for land on the Crofton estate in the county Roscommon is 523 acres and the valuation £326 10s.?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe hon. Member has kindly furnished me with certificates showing that the area and valuation of the lands mentioned in the question are as stated therein, but the Estates Commissioners inform me that the lands surrendered by the Messrs. Payne on the Pollock Estate included the lands of Ballincurry in addition to those mentioned by the hon. Member.
§ Mr. HAYDENCan the right hon. Gentleman give the area of distribution and the valuation?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI have not the valuation, but the area is 177 acres 2 roods 20 perches.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEasked the Chief-Secretary for Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have sent an inspector to inquire and report on the condition of the tenants on the estate of Captain Murphy, at Lullymore, Rathangan, county Kildare; if he can state how many tenants on this property occupy uneconomic holdings; how much grass land Captain Murphy has on his own hands; how much grass land on his property Captain Murphy has let on the eleven months' system; will he explain why the inspector did not visit these lands; can he say whether the tenants will be apprised of his coming in order that they may be able to point out the existing conditions, or their solicitor, who has sent a memorial to the Estates Commissioners on their behalf, will be informed of the date of visit; and what steps the Estates Commissioners are prepared to take to relieve the congestion on this estate and give the occupiers the benefit of the provisions of the Land Act of 1903?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Estates Commissioners have referred the Papers in this case to an inspector, who will visit the property and make inquiries, pending which the Commissioners are not in a position to answer the points raised in the question. The tenants and their solicitors will be duly advised of the date of the inspector's visit.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he could say on what date the sale of the Latouche estate, in South Kildare, was sanctioned by the Estates Commissioners; whether the schedule of tenants in occupation, with area of farms and amount of purchase money agreed upon, has been carefully examined; has this schedule been supplied by the landlord, his land agent, or solicitor acting on his behalf; did it include all the tenants, large and small, in occupation of holdings on the estate; if not, why were any excluded; can he state the amount of advance sanctioned for purchase on this estate to any one family consisting of father and son; whether the Commissioners have satisfied themselves that both were genuine tenants and entitled to such advance; and whether care has been taken that the limit allowed by the Act of 1903 has not been exceeded, and that no collusion has taken place between any of the parties concerned with the object of obtaining an advance for purchase in excess of the amount sanctioned by law, 2121 thereby defeating the provision of the Act of 1903 limiting the amount of State aid for purchase?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe advances in respect of the greater part of this estate were sanctioned by the Estate Commissioners in March last. The vendor lodged a Schedule of Tenancies in the prescribed form which included particulars of all tenancies proposed to be sold. The case of advances to father and son referred to is probably that of William Ashe and William W. A she, who obtained advances of £4,687 and £7,000 respectively. The Commissioners satisfied themselves by inquiry that both the Ashes were bonâ fide tenants, and that the circumstances of each case were such that the advances applied for should be sanctioned.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEAm I to understand that the schedule furnished to the Estates Commissioners of tenancies on this estate contained the names of all the tenancies?
§ Mr. BIRRELLYes, the names of all the tenancies which were proposed to be sold.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEThere were some not included in the schedule. Why were they left out?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI do not know whether that was so or not. If any of the tenancies were left out, it would be because the Estates Commissioners thought they could not be treated properly under the Act.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEDoes the right hon. Gentleman mean to say that the land agents in supplying the Commissioners did not leave out purposely the names of about ten small tenants?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI have no knowledge whatever of the circumstances of the case. All I know is that the schedule contained all the tenancies proposed to be sold. Whether some small tenancies were omitted I do not know.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEOn what principle did they sanction the sale of a portion of the property?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe hon. Member knows perfectly well that it is within the discretion of the Estates Commissioners to decide in regard to a particular holding whether it could be properly treated under the Act.