§ 12. Mr. O'SULLIVANasked the Chief Secretary if he will state the cause of the delay in making a grant to Mrs. Coffey, -evicted tenant on the Kenmare estate; and whether, seeing that she has been reinstated and, while responsible for the annuity, has neither house nor stock, immediate steps will be taken to give her a Grant?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Estates Commissioners cannot from the particulars given trace the receipt of any application from Mrs. Coffey as an evicted tenant.
§ 17. Mr. JOHN ROCHEasked the Chief Secretary whether he can state the reason why the Mitchell estate, near Moylough, county Galway, is not dealt with by the Congested Districts Board in the same way as the Digby, Trench, and other estates which surround it?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe Congested Districts Board have issued an offer for the purchase of this property, and negotiations are still pending with regard to it.
§ Mr. MOOREHow many farms have the Congested Districts Board handed over to one of its own members?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI do not know. I should like to have notice of the question.
§ 18. Mr. J. ROCHEasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware* that the Vesey-Fitzgerald estate, situate at Men-lough, county Galway, was taken over by the Estates Commissioners four years ago, who afterwards transferred it to the Congested Districts Board; and whether, in view of the fact that the tenants are charged a high rent for the grass lands pending the completion of the sale, he will see that either the rents be reduced or the sale completed without further delay?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe negotiations for the purchase of the estate of M. G. Vesey-Fitzgerald and others were transferred to the Congested Districts Board by the Estates Commissioners. The Board have had the property inspected and valued, and an offer for its purchase is about to be issued.
§ 29. Mr. J. ROCHEasked why the injunction proceeding initiated by Lord Clanricarde on March last has not yet come to trial; and whether the Congested Districts Board is in any way responsible for the delay?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI understand that in the usual course of proceedings in Chancery the case could hardly yet have come to a hearing. The Congested Districts Board are in no way responsible for the delay, but they have had Lord Clanricarde put under terms to expedite the hearing of the case.
§ Mr. KILBRIDEDid not Lord Clanricarde, some time ago, ask the Congested Districts Board or the Estates Commissioners for three months' delay, and did not the Estates Commissioners or the Congested Districts Board comply with that request, and are they not so far responsible for the delay?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe delay may have been necessary in order to enable Lord Clanricarde to prepare his case.
§ 31. Mr. SHEEHANasked whether, after the question of the hon. Member for Mid-Cork in reference to the position of Mrs. Mary Richardson, a tenant on the J. S. Hunt estate, county Cork, appeared on the Order Paper, the Estates Commissioners wrote to this woman peremptorily informing her that they intended vesting her holding in her without further delay; is it the usual practice for administrative departments to anticipate the issues raised in a Parliamentary question; is he aware that some time ago the Estates Commissioners wrote to the hon. Member for Mid-Cork, in reference to this case, that they would not vest the holding in the tenant for two months to enable her to take action; has the two months so specified expired; and is it usual for the Commissioners to vest a holding in a tenant whilst a decree for interest on the purchase money has actually issued and upon which the sheriff has made no return?
§ Mr. BIRRELLOn the 30th August last the Estates Commissioners in reply to a communication from the hon. Member, informed him that to enable Mrs. Richardson to take such legal proceedings as she might be advised, to have her purchase agreement set aside, they had directed that no steps should be taken for two months to vest the holding in her. No such proceedings were instituted by her, 1419 and on the 31st ultimo, on the expiration of this period of two months, in the usual course and without any reference whatsoever to the horn Member's question, they wrote to Mrs. Richardson, informing her that the holding would be vested without further delay. The Land Commission have the same remedies for the recovery of interest in lieu of rent as they have for the recovery of unpaid instalments of a purchase annuity, and the Commissioners do not see that anything would be gained by delaying the vesting in this case.
§ Mr. SHEEHANDid not the Commissioners write to Mrs. Richardson the day after my question appeared on the Order Paper of the House?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI do not know. It does not follow that it was necessarily written in consequence of the question.
§ 32. Mr. SHEEHANasked the right hon. Gentleman whether Mrs. Mary Richardson, Gortdonaghmore, St. Ann's Hill, a tenant on the estate of J. S. Hunt, county Cork, was processed recently before the Recorder at Cork. Sessions for interest due on foot of a purchase agreement; that Mrs. Richardson alleges that she was forced to sign this purchase agreement by threats of legal proceedings for arrears of rent and other duress; that she made representations to this effect some years ago to the Estates Commissioners and was then definitely promised by them a special inspection of her holding and an inquiry into all the facts of her case; that the Commissioner now refuse this inspection and inquiry; and that Mrs. Richardson has asked that her purchase agreement be dismissed; will he say that the solicitor for the vendor first agreed to the dismissal of the purchase agreement and afterwards insisted on going on with the matter; and is it the intention of the Estates Commissioners to throw the burden of the future annuities in this case as a charge upon the rates of county Cork when Mrs. Richardson is unable to pay them?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThis estate is the subject of direct sale proceedings under the Irish Land Act, 1903. Mrs. Richardson agreed to purchase her holding, which is subject to a judicial rent, at a price which comes within the zone limits prescribed by that Act, and the Estates Commis- 1420 sioners have, therefore, no power to fix the price. Mrs. Richardson made default in payment of the interest which she had contracted to pay in lieu of rent pending the advance of the purchase money, and the Land Commission had no option but to institute legal proceedings in the County Court for its collection. No special inspection was promised as alleged, but before she signed her agreement Mrs. Richardson was informed that her case would be inquired into when the estate was being dealt with. It is open to her. if so advised, to take legal proceedings to have her agreement set aside on the ground of alleged duress. Unless the agreement is so set aside the Commissioners are bound to sanction the sale.
§ Mr. SHEEHANAs this is a case affecting thousands of tenants in the country, have the Estates Commissioners no power, where it is alleged that an agreement was obtained by fraud, to inquire into the facts?
§ Mr. BIRRELLNo, Sir. In this case the lady was given considerable time in which to take proceedings. She still can take proceedings, and unless she does so and gets the agreement set aside, the Estates Commissioners are bound to treat it as effective.
§ Mr. SHEEHANIf this lady is not able to pay her instalment of interest, am I to understand that the Estates Commissioners will insist on vesting the holding in her?
§ Mr. BIRRELLYes, unless she takes proceedings to have the agreement set aside.
§ Mr. SHEEHANIf she is unable at the present moment to pay interest, what prospect is there that, she will be able to pay the annuity if the holding is vested in her?
§ Mr. BIRRELLI cannot help it.
§ Mr. SHEEHANIn that event, will not the ratepayers, through the county council, be obliged to meet the liability in this case?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThe lady must make up her mind one way or the other. If she wants to set aside the agreement, she must ask for it to be done. So long as the agreement is in force the Commissioners are bound by it.