13. Captain CRAIGasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he will inquire into the circumstances connected with the proposed sale of a farm at Bally-more, known as Fordstown, on the Pop-ham estate, near Boyle, in county Roscommon, belonging to Mrs. Eliza Anderson; whether he is aware that this 11 lady has been trying to sell the farm to private purchasers, but has failed to do so owing to the interference of the local blanch of the United Irish League, who demand that it should be sold to the Congested Districts Board and divided amongst the neighbouring tenants; that graves have been dug on the farm and horns blown to intimidate any intending purchaser; that Mrs. Anderson entered into negotiations with the Congested Districts Board, and has been offered a price much below what she would have got from private purchasers but for the intimidation which has been practised; and whether, as under the circumstances Mrs. Anderson can get no purchaser but the Congested Districts Board, he will see that she is not compelled to sell at a less price than she would have obtained if other purchasers had not been driven off?
§ Mr. RUSSELLI am informed that Mrs. Anderson is anxious to sell the farm referred to, but up to the present has been unable to do so. The people of the district are anxious that the Congested Districts Board should buy the farm and divide it amongst adjoining tenants. Some graves were dug on the farm and horns were blown near Mrs. Anderson's house. Mrs. Anderson entered into correspondence with the Congested Districts Board regarding a sale of the farm, but the Board have not yet offered her any sum for acquiring her interest in the lands pending the purchase of the fee simple. The price which the Board would offer Mrs. Anderson for her tenancy interest in the farm would be arrived at on a basis of the value of the land, and would not be affected in any way by the circumstances alluded to in the question.
§ 17. Mr. DELANYasked when the sale on the Kirk estate, Castletown, Queen's County, will be completed; whether dissatisfaction exists amongst the purchasing tenants on the property with reference to the allocation of the turbary rights, which it is asserted have been placed in the hands of one occupier to the exclusion of the great body of the tenantry; whether a memorial protesting against such exclusion has been received by the Estates Commissioners; what course they propose to adopt in this case; and will the complaints of the tenants be inquired into and due notice given to all the tenants of the date on which the inspector will visit the property?
§ Mr. RUSSELLThis estate is the subject of proceedings for sale direct by the owner to the tenants under the Irish Land Act, 1903. The memorial referred to has been received by the Estates Commissioners, and the matter is at present under consideration. The Commissioners hope to be able to make an arrangement by which each tenant will receive a sufficiency of turbary. The purchase money of the estate will be advanced and the holdings vested in the purchasing tenants as soon as practicable.
§ Mr. DELANYasked whether the farm of Kilcoake, Thompson estate, Ballybrophy, Queen's County, has been acquired by the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, what steps have been taken to ensure that the claims of small holders in the locality shall get due consideration in the distribution of those lands?
§ Mr. RUSSELLThe Estates Commissioners have instituted proceedings under the Evicted Tenants Act for the acquisition of the lands of Kilcoake on the Thompson estate, Queen's County, and, if acquired, they will be utilised for the purposes of that Act.
§ 21. Mr. O'DOWDasked whether Mr. Charles Phibbs, J.P., of Doobeg, Bally-mote, county Sligo, has stated, in reply to inquiries recently made by the Congested Districts Board regarding the sale of his untenanted land, that he owns no untenanted land outside his demesne; whether the grazing farm of Crowhill owned by Mr. Phibbs is altogether unconnected with the demesne and surrounded by the holdings of several small farmers whose valuation does not exceed £7; and, if so, whether, seeing that many families were evicted from this Crowhill farm, further steps will be taken by the Board to acquire it for the enlargement of the small holdings surrounding it?
§ Mr. RUSSELLMr. Phibbs has informed the Congested Districts Board that there are certain tenants on the Doobeg estate adjoining his demesne to whom he declined to sell their holdings at the prices offered by them, and that he had no lands to sell outside his demesne. The Board have no information regarding the farm of Crowhill mentioned in the question.
§ Mr. O'DOWDMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether we are to understand that Mr. Phibbs distinctly said he had no 13 untenanted land outside his demesne, because I live in the neighbourhood, and I can vouch for the absolute accuracy of all the statements contained in the question?
§ Mr. RUSSELLWhat I said was that the Congested Districts Board have no information regarding the farm of Crowhill mentioned in the question.
§ Mr. O'DOWDWill the right hon. Gentleman accept my representation as correct as I live in the neighbourhood
§ 25. Mr. DELANYasked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that a hay shed on the farm allotted to Michael Kelly, an evicted tenant, Kildellig, Ballybrophy, Queen's County, on the Hamilton Stubber estate, was forcibly removed by the late owner after the agreements had been signed; whether he is aware that the value of the shed was included in the purchase price which Kelly agreed to pay, and consequently proportionately increased his annuity; and can he say whether the Estates Commissioners propose taking steps to have the shed restored or, failing this, to have Kelly's annuity reduced?
§ Mr. RUSSELLThe Estates Commissioners inform me that the hay shed referred to was erected by Mr. Hamilton Stubber and removed by him before the Commissioners took over possession of the lands, and was not included in the price of the holding allotted by them to Michael Kelly. The Commissioners sanctioned in Kelly's case the same sum for buildings as in the case of the other persons for whom they provided holdings on the lands acquired on this property. The reply to the concluding portion of the question is in the negative.