iPipi f A SHORT STATEMENT CONCERNING THE CONFISCATION OF IMPROVEMENTS IN IRELAND. ADDRESSED TO THE RIGHT HON. W. E. FORSTER, M.P., Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Lreland. “ CREDE EXPERTO." A SHORT STATEMENT CONCERNING THE CONFISCATION OF IMPROVEMENTS IN IRELAND. ADDRESSED TO THE RIGHT HON. W. E. FORSTER, M.P., Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. A WORKING LANDOWNER. DEB LIN: HODGES, FIGGIS, AND CO., 104 GRAFTON STREET. 1880. PKEFACE. 3 3 3 It has been thought desirable by persons capable of of forming an opinion on the matter contained in it, that publication should be given to this Pamphlet, which was at first only intended for private circula¬ tion. The egotism of the following pages is so patent and so inevitable that it would be affectation to offer an apology for it. This much of explanation, how¬ ever, is needed. The writer has not come forward because his action is unique, or because he is promi¬ nent among those whose cause he pleads. But some¬ one should speak, if the men to whom Ireland owes almost all that is to be found of agricultural pro¬ gress in its Southern province, are still silent. The country is suffering from the results of the vio¬ lation, through many centuries, of the only principles that can lead to national prosperity. All had their share in this sad responsibility, from the supreme government to the wayside beggar. One class is at VI present singled out to be held accountable for every ill that afflicts the community. No evidence, indeed, supports this grievous indictment; but numerical weakness has invited attack. When Socrates, falsely accused, and adjudged guilty by a large majority in a popular assembly, was permitted to award his own sentence, he gave his opinion that he ought to be entertained honourably during the rest of his life at the public expense. The Government of the day, however, came to the conclusion that he should drink hemlock. Not long afterwards they disco¬ vered that they had killed the wrong man. There are people recklessly impeached, every day, before popular assemblies in Ireland, who, if not as wise as Socrates, would certainly, before a fair tri¬ bunal, be found as innocent of the crimes of which they are accused. If, being fewer in number than their assailants, they are condemned to extinction, either immediate or gradual, the result to the com¬ munity will not be the survival of the fittest. The cause which is defended and illustrated in the following pages is not the cause of oppression or injustice. It is an appeal on behalf of citizens who, in most civilized countries, would be thought worthy of State encouragement • even under weak and ig- Vll norant governments they would scarcely be made objects of State persecution. The British Constitution, at no time a success in Ireland, has well-nigh died out in the southern provinces. The only class capable of self-govern¬ ment is ruled absolutely, if the fact of having neither voice nor vote in making the laws under which you live constitutes absolute government. The gentle¬ men who are sent to Parliament have, with the rarest exceptions, no stake, agricultural or com¬ mercial, many of them no residence, in the country. They represent a part of the population which has never arrived at independence of opinion. These legislators are at present occupied in en¬ deavouring to destroy the laws which already exist. Their oratorical progress through the land may be traced always by outrage, often by blood. The issue before the intelligence of Great Britain is not one of political party in Ireland. It is a question of political existence. This country has made very great progress in the last quarter of a century. Liberty for action and enterprise has been availed of by those who know the uses of true liberty. The measures now proposed by ignorant agitators are retrograde, and calculated to lead to viii obscure and wide-spread oppression. English states¬ men and the English public should study carefully the present varied circumstances of Ireland, as well as her past records, before they proceed to per¬ manent legislation. It is with this view, and in the hope that others may follow with better right, that a ver}^ small page of her present diary is presented in the following autograph. i A SHORT STATEMENT CONCERNING CONFISCATION. HOS EGO CAMPICULOS FECI ; METET ALTER ARISTAS ? To the Right Hon. W. E. Forster, M.P., &c. Sir, I do not think that you would willingly wrong even an Irish landowner. In this conviction I appeal against the confiscation of a life’s outlay on my estate, on the assumption that the tenant has been the sole, the principal, or even the partial agent of improvement. There is a general impression abroad that the Government contemplates introducing a measure embodying, in some form, the principle of tenant- right in the south of Ireland. This principle means the conveyance by Act of Parliament to the occu¬ pier of a part of the fee-simple of the property in¬ herited or purchased by the owner. This transfer is based, so far as I know, on one or both of two propositions. First, that the tenant 2 has himself purchased his interest from his prede¬ cessor. Secondly, that he has created it by the in¬ vestment of capital or labour in permanent improve¬ ments. I am prepared to prove that neither of these reasons for such a transfer has the smallest existence in my case. Unrepresented in Parliament, and belonging to a proscribed class, I have no alternative but to ap¬ proach you, sir, directly with an appeal for justice. Three hundred years ago my lineal ancestor for¬ feited life and possessions in defence of what he believed to be the cause of his country. But though he was guilty of adhering to the unsuccessful side, and dying in arms for it, his estates were not confis¬ cated till a Royal Inquisition had been held, and the charges which had been brought against him were established. I claim no less justice at the hands of a Government which professes to represent the Liberal spirit of the day, and to be able and willing to redress wrong. I do not ask for the considera¬ tion, the allowance, the indulgence which I have never withheld from those in whose supposed in¬ terests this expected measure w^ould sacrifice my labour and outlay. I ask hut for the sternest justice. If the principle be assumed that outlay by an occupier should confer on him a title to the fee- simple of the soil, surely outlay by an owner should secure to him that which he has purchased or in¬ herited already. I 3 In the year 1851 I came into possession of my estate. Old rentals in my possession show that for many years previous to that date, there had been allowances made to tenants at the rate of about £1,000 per annum. Yet when I took up the estate there was not one drain made by a tenant, not one slated house, not a perch of road, not a yard of sub¬ soiled land : I then adopted the system of making all improvements myself, charging interest of the outlay upon the occupier, according to the circum¬ stances and increased value of the farm. The result has been that in some five-and-twenty years, I have built about eighty houses and offices, slated or tiled, made twenty-eight miles of road, built nine bridges, made twenty-three miles of fences, thorough drained about five hundred acres, planted one hundred and fifty acres of waste land, and proportionately im¬ proved the condition and circumstances of the people. In support of these assertions I venture to cite witnesses of unquestionable weight and impartiality. From the Manchester Guardian of February 11, 1880 :— . “While in the Kenmare District I had full opportunity during my stay of seeing the wonders that could be effected by an improving landlord.All over the estate I found the people decently and comfortably housed, and there was not a genuine Irish cabin on the place. Mr. Mahony has done a great deal of reclamation in the course of the last few years. Field after field was pointed out to me now green with luxuriant herbage, or broken up for potatoes or green crops, which had only recently been won from the state of nature in which it had previously lain. .... The process of reclamation is very much accelerated and done on a much larger scale when such improve¬ ments are the work of a landlord who has the necessary capital, 4 power of organisation, and practical knowledge of agriculture to carry out a large scheme of improvement over a whole estate.There can be no doubt of the utility to the country of such landlords as Mr. Mahony.” From the Daily Telegraph , January 31, 1880 :— t( An estate on the bay of Kenmare showed most conclusively what can be done, even under existing laws, when there is a disposition to do the best. The owner of this property borrowed money some years ago for the development of its resources,* and the result is visible in a series of as pretty rural pictures as eye can wish. I say nothing of the castle and its surrounding demesne, because handsome residences in Ireland are not incompatible with a good deal of neighbouring squalor. But I do insist upon the well-drained fields and neatly-kept fences, the pretty white cottages and farm-houses, stone-built and slate-tiled, the tidiness of the people, and the absence around their dwellings of the offensive accumulations that elsewhere are a stranger’s wonder and despair. After what I had seen, driving through this estate was like a ramble in a garden at the close of a desert journey.” I intrude these quotations on your notice, with a sense of humiliation, for the advertisement of one’s own efforts does violence to good taste. I would be thankful to see no cause for emerging from the obscurity of many years’ endeavour to benefit those around me. Others, whom I might name, could show a far larger expenditure, and more effective results. But I am compelled to speak, though pre¬ ferring silence, lest judgment should go by default, where accusations are loud, indiscriminate, and un¬ scrupulous, and the assailed class is ostracized from the privilege of reply in the council of the nation. * I had not the advantage of meeting this gentleman, or I could have informed him that most of the improvements which he saw were not made by loan, but by money saved from private income by strict personal economy. 5 I do not seek credit for having done my utmost to discharge my duty ; but I protest against the injus¬ tice and the impolicy of inflicting a destructive pe¬ nalty, where impartial testimony not only acquits, but eulogizes. It was intimated in the debates of last session that Government considered u that the Land Act of 1870 gave Irish tenants some kind of interest in their holdings.” I would venture to ask whether that interest is exclusive and independent of either purchase or outlay by the tenant ? I respectfully submit that an Act of Parliament may authorise, but cannot justify, the forcible transfer of one person’s property to another. The principles that define right and wrong are broader and deeper than Acts of Parliament, and their violation will displace the foundations of the community. The Act of 1870 justly protected the tenant's in¬ terest in his improvements. That, out of Ulster, it was intended to convey no further proprietorship is manifest from the clear enunciation of Mr. Gladstone himself, that he only proposed to place the ignorant and weaker of two contracting parties on a more even footing with the stronger. And this declaration was affirmed by the provision of the Act itself, which determined the limit of this interposition, for if the conveyance of unpurchased interest was con¬ templated, why should holdings exceeding £50 valu¬ ation be excluded from the benefit of the Act ? 6 Mr. Gladstone stated, in bringing forward that measure, “ that he hoped the time might come when its provisions might be no longer necessary in Ire¬ land/’ that he had no intention of introducing into the rest of Ireland a “spurious Ulster Custom.” “ That he himself was not prepared, nor were his col¬ leagues, to admit that the just protection of the Irish occupier afforded either an apology or a reason for endowing him with a joint property in the soil.” Mr. Low stated, on the same occasion, “We have not altered the tenure of land ; we have studiously avoided doing so ; but we have said, where a wrong can be proved we will give, within moderate and fair limits, a summary remedy.” Again, “ I hope it will be admitted on all sides that we have not been indistinct in the declaration of our intention to offer a firm re¬ sistance to all attempts to introduce principles into the Bill which would go to make the power of the landlord on his property, or the receipts he derived from it, subject to the indefinite claims of a separate and rival interest.” These statements are as important in defining the intention of the measure as if they formed a part of the preamble of the Bill itself. But if men of con¬ sular dignity can lightly ignore their own public de¬ liberate utterances, then indeed the history of popu¬ lar Government in England must record the close of the age of responsible statesmanship. Many of us who had been trying to do our best in Ire¬ land, paused in anxious suspense during the passage 7 through Parliament of the Land Act of 1870. We deplored the erroneous principle of the occupancy clause, but we accepted the good intentions of the authors of the measure, when they so distinctly and accurately limited its object to the protection of an ignorant man from the possible consequences of his own incapacity to make a profitable contract. Hence, we resumed our work with confidence in the character and stability of British statesmanship. Many who bear no good-will to the British Empire will laugh at our credulity, but shame does not come chiefly on those who suffer wrong. If Great Britain and Ireland is to remain a united kingdom, then surely a property in Kerry managed on similar principles to a property in Gloucestershire or Devonshire should be subject to the same legisla¬ tion. But if the property in Kerry be placed under a different law solely because it is on the other side of the Channel, the principle of Home Rule is logi¬ cally established. I would willingly accept the broadest programme put forward by any Farmers’ Alliance in England or Scotland, and yet I can show that I have made sacrifices and assumed responsibi¬ lities which are never expected from any English or Scotch landowner. These gentlemen in bad seasons bear their share of the depression, by abating a con¬ siderable percentage of their rents. But they do not know the anxiety of being obliged to consider for a population which, by reason of circumstances, igno¬ rance of agriculture, and want of foresight, is living 8 always on the margin of disaster. I happen to be the owner (up to the present) of a townland on the south-western coast. Its size is 700 acres ; its popu¬ lation near 300. It is forty miles away from the rest of my estate. For the last five years I have been obliged to provide that population, on the ap¬ proach of each successive winter, with a cargo of meal and flour. I have given my personal guarantee to the merchant who has supplied them, thus ena¬ bling them to lay in their stock of provisions at the cheapest time. They are fine, honest fellows, and always clear off their liabilities during the following season. By this means, I have got them out of debt to money-lenders or traders, and am myself their only creditor. During the winter of 1879, they re¬ quired less help than in previous seasons ; and though they were in a scheduled Union, and in the district of a Relief Committee, not one farthing of relief money was received by a single tenant of that little community. In the spring of 1880 I supplied them with seed potatoes from Scotland at half price, so that they are not indebted to the Union under the Seeds Act. If Government think it just and wise to make me an incumbrancer on this little estate, instead of leaving me the owner of it, I trust they will see the necessity of undertaking to provide for the people also, as any such measure will entirely relieve me of that responsibility. Owners who make all improvements on their estates in England, would be surprised if the occu- 9 piers of their farms proposed to provide for their eldest sons, by getting them married and settled down on a part of their father’s holding. Yet such is here the general, I may almost say universal, practice. A man gets his son married as soon as he can, and establishes him either in his own house or in one of his farm offices, and gives him half the farm. The consequence is that new offices are re¬ quired for both father and son. My experience is that, within a few years, father and son invariably quarrel, and the father does his utmost to get his second son married and settled with him in his own house. It is exceedingly difficult to prevent this second subdivision at present. How will it be pre¬ vented if a Tenant-Right Act still farther ties up the hands of the owner ? It may be said, u There will be severe penalties for subletting,” but the subletting cannot be proved till after the father’s death, and by that time there is probably a large family who were nominally guests till then. The law may give power to evict them, but the fear of this penalty will not prevent the evil : for the people are absolutely without foresight, and willingly risk any eventual calamity for a little present convenience. Again, landowners in England and Scotland are not accustomed to see the practice and even the very principles of agriculture perpetually violated on the farms which they have let. Yet such is the general custom here. It is not to be wondered at, that the occupiers should break down in anything like an un¬ favourable season. The wonder is that they survive 10 at all, on the system of treating the land which they pursue. They starve five cows on the land that could fairly feed three. Consequently, the meadows are never put up till May, and often till an advanced date in May. They are often not mown till Sep¬ tember and October. Weeds almost obliterate every crop and exhaust the soil. Cattle, sheep, and pigs, even poultry, are all bred in-and-in till their de¬ generacy is notoriously apparent. In fact, the least results are produced at the greatest cost to the soil. Some years since, I bought up the interest in a leasehold from a tenant. His father and he had held it for many years, and had exhausted all the naturally available land on it by successive corn crops without manure. When in their hands it starved fifteen head of cattle. I have had it in my own occupation some fourteen years, and it now carries fifty-three, in good condition. Is it to be supposed that the magic of tenant-right would have transformed these people into good agriculturists ? The season of 1879 is recorded in the history of British agriculture as unusually disastrous. In that year, the gross produce of each cow on this (dairy) farm amounted to £9 9s. for butter, sold in Lon¬ don, and £3 per cow for calves reared.* The average letting of land to agricultural tenants on my estate is £1 10s. per cow.f A tenant-right measure, * This season the return per cow will gross £17, or more than 40 per cent over last year. f The rent of dairy farms is fixed, not by their acreage, but by the number of milch cattle they can carry. Thus, a farm able to feed five cows would pay £7 10s. 11 allowing the occupier to sell the interest of his farm, will take from me and transfer to him the difference between £8 and £1 10s. if £4 be deducted as cost of labour attendant on each cow—an extravagant allowance. Or to consider the question as a matter of rent. My estate has more than doubled in worth since 1848, when Griffith’s valuation was made, owing to the care and capital expended on it. But my rents are about 40 to 45 per cent over Griffith’s valuation.* A tenant-right measure will convey to the occupier this 60 per cent, or more than half the value of the land—a value created not by his in¬ dustry, but by my outlay. The waste lands of Ire¬ land can only be brought into cultivation by heavy outlay and labour, and with a full assurance of security for such investment. But it will not en¬ courage the others to see those who have cast capital and energy into such a work deprived, by Act of Parliament, of the fruit of their labours. It would be a sad corollary for me to draw, that I had better have employed every farthing I could muster, in paying off mortgages, or in investment in other countries, and have left the district, which I have to some extent civilized, the desert which I found it. If tenant-right had been established on this estate in * I use this comparison because Griffith’s valuation is in common acceptation as a basis of calculation ; but it is very faulty and unreli¬ able. I happen to own land in two baronies, and between them there is a difference in Griffith’s valuation of more than 30 per cent. It should be remembered that this valuation was made in Kerry in 1848, on the basis of then existing prices, which were 50 per cent, below those of the present day. It was then farther reduced by the deduction of the poor-rate, which in this district brought it down by another 30 per cent. The sum that remained is Griffith’s valuation. 12 1851 (when it came into my hands), and its natural consequences left to work themselves out, it would now be far on the way to rival some of those ne¬ glected and over-populated districts in Donegal, so graphically described by Mr. Tuke. Any one who supposes that to divert the care and outlay of the owner to other objects, and to substitute for it the free action and part ownership of the occupiers, would improve the condition of the country, knows nothing of the tendencies of a people whose agri¬ cultural status was at the time I refer to but little beyond that of a nomadic tribe. You might as well adopt the theory of utilizing an untrained horse, by harnessing him and flinging the reins on his neck, and leaving him to his own resources. If a law is passed on the assumption that the ten¬ ant is the only improver, it is manifest that the so- called owner is thereby relieved of all responsibility to make improvements himself, that he is not ex¬ pected to do so, and that it would be a very unwise investment on his part • for, most certainly, a man who has seen a great part of the labour and outlay of his life taken from him will place no more of his time, energy, and means in further jeopardy. If he neglects such a warning, he will deserve to lose, in the next political emergency, the remaining por¬ tion which he holds by no more just or legal title. Let the result, then, be considered of such a mea¬ sure upon a district which hitherto has been steadily developed by the owner’s capital, enterprise, and attention ; where such outlay was calculated on and 13 looked for by tbe tenant, and where both have fitted themselves into the discharge of their mutual rela¬ tionship. Whence will come the impetus and capital for the new experiment ? In a country still in a state of early transition, systematic and extensive operation will long be necessary. Who will superintend the individual efforts of those occupiers who are inclined to apply themselves to develop the soil ? Who will lead and persuade them to supply, by combination of many, the unity of action and the impartial dis¬ tribution of advantage secured by one, thinking and acting for all ? Beyond all doubt, the improvers will be a small percentage on any possible calcula¬ tion. Who will bring up the mass of those who lag behind, so as to neutralize their obstructive influence on the community ? Will the private jealousies, the unreasonable oppositions, and the inert ignorance, now overruled with difficulty under the control of a central pow'er, disappear before the magic of an independence, that lays the public good at the mercy of private option ? Some of the proprietors of this district had, last season, seen the necessity of providing seed potatoes for the tenants on their estates long before the Government had made any move in the matter. I imported fifty tons for distribution, at little more than half-price among my own people, before the measure had been proposed in the House of Commons. Who will undertake this responsibility in the next period of depression ? For I must reiterate, even at the 14 risk of tediousness, that the proprietor who has been made by Act of Parliament a mere rent-charger or annuitant on his estate, will turn to other and more secure investment for his labour and capital. Ab¬ senteeism has been often brought as a charge against landowners in Ireland. It is complained that the income of such men is diverted from expenditure in their own country. I can conceive nothing which will justify absenteeism and penalise residence so much as an Act of Parliament confiscating the out¬ lay of resident working proprietors. The experience of many years constrains me to assert, that in the south-west of Ireland if the waste lands are to be reclaimed, and if the fertility of the cultivable lands is to be preserved, in fact, if any advance is to be made or continued towards agricul¬ tural prosperity, it must be done under the leading and the control of some authority. If Government directly or indirectly make it dis¬ tasteful or unprofitable for the landowner to carry out this administration, then Government must supply some other superintendence, unless they are satisfied to see these districts drift into the hopeless condition of the coasts of Galway, Mayo, and Done¬ gal. I give a typical case illustrative of my assertion. Within the last year, a man finding himself over¬ whelmed with debts, and utterly unable to meet his rent, which was heavily in arrear, surrendered his farm, accepting a labourer’s house which was built on it for him, with a small plot of garden. He was em- 15 ployed, and showed so much intelligence and energy under the control of another, that he was soon pro¬ moted to be steward over estate works, and is able to carry them out with every satisfaction to his em¬ ployer and himself, and is far better otf than he was before. The native material is second to none in the three kingdoms. But its capacities lie unused and un¬ awakened, and need for their development a steady hand and methodical discipline. I have brought in no stranger to carry out any of the improvements effected on my estate. And they are of varied char¬ acter. For three successive years I won the gold medal for the best blocks of labourers’ cottages in Munster, all the work in them being carried out by artizans born and trained on the estate. I know estates where no systematic improvement has been carried on by the owner, where supervision has been very slight, where rents are low, and on which the tenants have been allowed to sell the in¬ terest in their farms. The most casual observer will see that they are a hundred years behind those dis¬ tricts which are administered on the system which I advocate. I know that many who must be heard with re¬ spect hold a different opinion on this subject. And instances have been quoted in which, even out of Ulster, prosperity has followed tenant-right, and the right of sale of the tenant’s interest. Notably, Lord Portsmouth’s case has been brought forward, in 16 which it was stated by Lord Granville, that the rents had doubled in the course of fifty years with¬ out any outlay on the part of the proprietor. I should not take the doubling of the rental to be a sufficient proof of prosperity. Kents will certainly rise wherever the introduction of tenant-right con¬ veys a part of the owner’s property to the occupier, for the competitive system immediately follows, both as regards the sale of the tenant’s interest, and the owner’s right of selecting the successor. But the land suffers from this double drain of the source which should supply outlay upon it. Such an estate is somewhat in the condition of a company which pays a large dividend, but pays it out of capital. The prosperity of a district is to be measured rather by the amount manifestly invested in it than by that which is taken out of it. There can be no question of its value being increased by permanent and repro¬ ductive outlay. I do not deny that this may be found where tenant-right and competitive sale exist, but it is not the natural accompaniment of such a system, and the cases in which this system exists in the South are, as far as my observation goes, character¬ ised by a total absence of outlay on the part of the tenant. The prosperity of Ulster has been much urged in evidence of the advantages of tenant-right. It seems to be admitted that in Ulster the tenant has been the original and principal improver, and his claim is therefore just, and the wisdom of establishing it by law undeniable. 17 I would ask, in passing, if in another part of the country this history be reversed, and the proprietor be found to be the original and principal, and some¬ times the only improver, is he to be outlawed from the same justice, because he has the misfortune, or perhaps in these days I ought to say, is guilty of the crime, of being an owner instead of an occupier ? But is it . a fact that Ulster is so prosperous, and that whatever prosperity it may possess as compared with the rest of Ireland is due to the existence of tenant-right. With regard to the first query, I quote from a journal written entirely in the interest of tenant-right :— “ Ulster being a province which has enjoyed for centuries the ad¬ vantage of tenant-right, and which possesses, besides, a certain amount of manufactures, its farmers may be considered as peculiarly favoured. And yet the condition of the agricultural classes in that province is, in many large districts, very unsatisfactory. In Donegal, distress of the acutest character is prevalent ; in parts of Tyrone and Derry, farmers are very much reduced ; Monaghan and Cavan are anything but pros¬ perous ; and poor land everywhere tells this season with a crushing effect on its cultivators Now if a body of farmers are really pros¬ perous, three or four bad seasons ought not to be able to reduce them to so low a condition. The Ulster farmers are frugal, very industrious, shrewd and skilful; they have a greater variety of crops than are grown in most parts of the island ; they have tenant-right, and yet, with all this, many are bankrupt, and great numbers are emigrating.” And the article arrives at the conclusion that— 11 The Prussian system of peasant proprietors should be adapted to the circumstances of the province, so as to encourage the establish¬ ment of respectable yeoman farmers .”—Irish Farmer, May 20, 1880. Here is a distinct confession that tenant-right as it exists in Ulster (the proposed panacea for all Ire- c 18 land) has failed to meet the strain of bad seasons, and ought to be superseded by a system of peasant proprietorship. But if Ulster be superior in its agricultural condi¬ tion to the rest of Ireland, it is far inferior in this respect to England or Scotland, countries where tenant-right does not prevail. Surely, if a measure is to be brought in by Government for universal application—a measure intended to start the country on the best road to wealth, peace, and prosperity, the highest and most successful precedent should be sought, and the land tenure and customs of England and Scotland should be introduced, rather than those of Ulster. Moreover, there is no evidence to show that the amount of superiority which Ulster may claim over the South of Ireland is due to tenant- right. The number of ejectments for non-payment of rent in 1879 was larger in Ulster than in either of the other provinces. The distress in Donegal was as great as in Connaught. The population of Ulster is more akin to that of Scotland than to that of the rest of Ireland. Why then should Scotland surpass Ulster so much in agriculture, unless because its system of land tenure is superior ? The system in Scotland is, briefly, that the owner should supply all the fixed capital, and the occupier all the working capital. If this system has been adopted in a wild district of the South of Ireland, and carried out not without success, is it wise to overthrow the promis¬ ing enterprise, and to substitute for it a system 19 which has neither produced prosperity nor arrested distress in another wild district in the North of Ire¬ land, The principles of political economy and of sound agriculture inculcate the investment of all available capital in the soil. But this mode of tenure tends to divorce the capital from the soil ; for the land- owner will not place money in it, and in nineteen cases out of twenty, the tenant cannot, having al¬ ready expended all his capital, and perhaps bor¬ rowed more to enable him to purchase the good¬ will.* A system which violates political economy maybe popular, but it is a poor expediency to adopt it on that account. Some thirty years since it was found necessary to pass an Act of Parliament for the sale of incumbered estates in Ireland. It is proposed now to pass an Act to cover the South of Ireland with infinitesimal estates subject to perpetual incumbrances. For the tenant must always sell his interest subject to the so-called owner’s rent-charge. It would be far better to buy out the owners, and establish universal peasant pro- * The system of leases has prevailed in those districts of Scotland which present the greatest triumphs of agricultural enterprise the world has seen. But a lease is the converse of tenant-right. It is a contract voluntarily entered into between two parties whose interests are consistent and consenting. The lessor and the lessee unite to in¬ vest their capital in the soil, and to develop its capacity to the utmost, for their mutual advantage. It is the end towards which all en¬ lightened estate management should lead. But tenant-right as advo¬ cated for the South of Ireland will permanently preclude all pos¬ sibility of arriving at such an end. 20 prietorship, for then there would be some prospect of the incumbrances eventually merging in the estate. If tenant-right be extended universally to the South of Ireland, the result will be, that increased disturb¬ ance and suffering of the body-politic, which always in one form or other follows any serious violation of the laws of political economy. A dilemma almost equally injurious in its alter¬ natives awaits the Government that introduces it; for, in the first place, as I have endeavoured to show already, rents will be raised. They will be raised because property will have been transferred from the owner to the occupier. The interest of the latter in his holding will be proportionately increased. But that increase will not be available to him, for it w T ill not give him more income, though it will give him a considerable sum in hand, if he breaks down and sells his tenant-right. Then it is manifest that he or his successor will resist the demand for increased rent. They will be sustained by every in¬ genious and well-considered plan of agitation and illegal combination. Thus Government will have on their hands a war of classes more defined and more bitter than at present, for both sides will be smarting under a real grievance. But if, on the other hand, the Government meet this difficulty, by fixing and stereotyping all rents, they will convert all the landowners in the South of Ireland into mere drones as regards their part in de¬ veloping the soil. They will be in the position of 21 those who now derive their income from chief rents or mortgages, and who never have any interest in, or even knowledge of, the lands chargeable to them. But let it be remembered that every acre of land will then have its mortgagee, and that it will be incumbered up to its letting value according to a Government estimate. How, and at what cost, will Government meet the universal outer) from the oc¬ cupiers of Ireland to deliver them from the dead weight of these rent-chargers upon the industry of the country ? And if I may venture to follow the problem still farther along the path of deepening difficulty, I would ask what means will Government find for preserving the 600,000 emancipated occu¬ piers froml apsing into the crime of landlordism ? But again, if the introduction of Ulster tenant- right is to place the South of Ireland above the dangers arising from recurrent periods of agricul¬ tural depression, we should have expected to find a strong line of demarcation between Ulster and the rest of Ireland in the year 1879. But, in point of fact, that line was not drawn from east to west , but from north to south , for the Relief Bill scheduled the western half of the island, admitting the comparative prosperity of Leinster and part of Munster without tenant-right, and illustrating the inability of that measure to prevent distress in the western part of Ulster. The real cause of the distinction is apparent, and in no way to be traced to any difference in the land tenure. The eastern half of the island is nearer 22 Great Britain, nearer European civilization. The intercourse with England and Scotland is direct ; the influence of their fairs and markets immediate. Capital is widely distributed through the population. Enterprise is varied, investments secured by intelli¬ gence in outlay. In fact, the complex interests of a modern community have grown up. As you travel westward, you gradually trace society back almost to its original simple elements. Pastoral agriculture becomes the only pursuit, but it is agriculture in its - earliest stage. More is taken out of the ground than is put into it. Dairy farmers have complained to me that their land feeds less stock now than it did twenty years ago. Yet I find it very hard to make them understand that if you always draw on your capital without renewing it, your income must decrease. Their ancestors met the difficulty by moving on to new pastures, leaving those which they had exhausted to the gradually restoring in¬ fluence of sun and rain. But population increased without any corresponding advance in knowledge of the right means of maintaining it. One fatal crop alone was but too well studied as to its capacity to support life, and its adaptability to every circum¬ stance of soil and climate. Thus the superstructure became far broader than its foundation. Periodical failures, culminating in the overwhelming calamity of ’47, have produced scarcely more warning effect than the earthquakes and eruptions of Vesuvius have had on the population round its base. The 23 survivors and their descendants build on the very ruins. This difference of condition between east and west through the whole length of the island, was clearly recognized in the Relief Bill. I merely suggest the causes ; and if tenant-right has not removed them in Ulster, it is manifest that it will not do so in the South. There can be no doubt that the landowners have not forgotten the lesson that taught these causes. One of the principal charges brought against them is that they have set themselves against the increase of population, or, in other words, the multiplication of tenancies. Whether any of them have carried out this policy with harshness has not been shown. But I write on behalf of those whose effort has been to develop the country up to the requirements and comforts of the people, rather than to diminish the population to the uncultivated capacities of the land. I claim for these silent workers that they have done far more to root the people in the soil than have the gentlemen who clamour for political changes. I know and have observed the results produced by many of those of whom I speak. I could point out large expenditure on substantial and comfortable dwellings, which can repay the owner in nothing but the satisfaction of having raised the condition and increased the civilization of the small holders who in¬ habit them. Is it just to make these houses the pro¬ perty of these holders ? Those who have the care and expense of maintaining them know that if they 24 are thus transferred, it will only be a question of time as to their degeneracy to the level of the wig¬ wams which they superseded ; and the squalor of decay will be more grim and hopeless than the pic¬ turesque misery of barbarism. There is another grievous injustice which will be inflicted by tenant-right on those who have hitherto kept it out of their estates at considerable cost. It is the custom where this tenant-right exists that, if an occupier become bankrupt, and his interest be sold, the arrears of rent due are paid up as a first charge out of the purchase-money. It has been my custom, in case of a tenant becoming bankrupt, never to demand the arrears from his successor, though there would be no difficulty in obtaining them if the farm were let by competition. I have followed this usage with the view of preserving a solvent tenantry, which I have considered to be a permanent gain, though at the cost of material present loss. The money thus sunk, and the object aimed at, will both be sacrificed, if Ulster tenant-right should be imposed upon me. Mr. McCarthy, the late representative of Mallow, urged the planting of the waste lands of Ireland, in an able letter to the public journals, at the beginning of last season ; and I think he distinctly implied that landowners were guilty of neglect of duty in this respect. I happen to have a great deal of such land, fit for nothing but planting. It would yield a crop exactly suited for the climate; for your harvest of 25 timber may be cut and gathered in, independently of all vicissitudes of weather. Its eventual return would bring many hundreds per cent on the original outlay ; while in the interim, even as a shelter for game, it would amply repay the investment. But the difficulty is, that it is all occupied. By an old Act, the tenant might plant it himself, and register the trees, so that they would be his own property. But this he never thinks of doing ; and, though pay¬ ing a mere nominal rent for such land, he would consider it a very great hardship to be deprived of any portion of it, as it adds a little to the range of his light mountain cattle. Thus, very large tracts of land are unprofitably employed, which might be made a source of wealth to the country. But the charge of this neglect cannot be consistently brought against landowners by gentlemen who would be among the first to accuse them of oppression if they endeavoured to act upon the advice so freely ten¬ dered. There are thousands of acres of land in this Union fit only for planting, which, (if they were rented at their present agricultural value, and planted and administered by the Board of Guar¬ dians), would, in a very few years, bring in far more than their rent as game preserves ; and, eventually, if properly managed, when the timber became of value, they would relieve the whole district of the burden of poor’s-rate. If the Government contem¬ plate introducing universal tenant-right, it would be well to make such reservations before doing so, for it 26 will be a difficult and most expensive matter after¬ wards. Under a system of universal tenant-right in the South, the class of persons who seek small accommo¬ dation lots, such as labourers, artizans, small trades¬ men, will be subjected to rack rents beyond any existing level, and in most cases will be altogether excluded by the terms demanded. Every one will bear me out in this opinion who has had experience of the difficulties of providing such applicants, even under the present system. The tenant always de¬ mands compensation at the rate of three or four times the rent he pays himself. Then, even in cases where sites can be obtained, the houses built will be of a very inferior description ; for labourers and artizans cannot afford to put up good slated houses, neither will the tenant be able or willing to under¬ take such an investment, all his available capital being required upon his farm. It has been stated publicly, in Parliament and else¬ where, that renta have been raised in cases where the occupiers have increased the value of their holdings by their own outlay and industry. No such case has ever come within my observation, neither have I seen any specific authenticated instance of it brought for¬ ward as occurring in the South of Ireland ; but if such acts of injustice have taken place, I do not think any language used by gentlemen of the Land League, or their representatives in Parliament, can be too strong to stigmatize the w r rong. The agricultural prosper- 27 ity of our country depends very much upon the increase of such men amongst us. Wherever they are found, they cannot be too highly valued. I have a very few of them, really industrious, intelligent farmers, and I prize them greatly, and would make great sacrifices rather than see them discouraged ; but they do not number anything like five per cent of the occupiers. The truth is, that the mass of the people have no taste for agriculture. Mechanics, mathematicians, writers for the press, soldiers, traders, orators ; these they would be by nature and choice, while uniformity of circumstance and ab- , sence of opportunity keep them clinging to the soil on which they were born. When set free by emigration from the monotonous necessity which presents to them but one vocation in life at home, they abundantly prove the truth of this assertion ; for, under fairer skies, with a far more fertile soil, the charm of absolute ownership attracts but a small portion of them to agricultural enter¬ prise. I have before me a letter written to his brother, by a man whom I helped to emigrate to the United States many years ago. He says :— “We have in this country unoccupied lands greater in extent than Great Britain and Ireland and France, all free to its citizens, or at a price of five shillings an acre, and strange to say, the Irish, as a class, prefer public works, and living in cities, with their baneful influence on their children and themselves, to going on the land, while the Ger¬ mans and other nationalities take up farms.” This is valuable evidence, as being the observation of the son of an Irish farmer, a shrewd and practical 28 man, who drew his own inferences from what he saw before him. I have been able to do some little to¬ wards helping a good many young men, sons of farmers, to other callings in life, and wherever 1 have been able to follow their histories, I find that they have succeeded most admirably. As native agri¬ culturists, growing up on their paternal farms, more than ninety per cent, of the rural population are failures. He must be an enthusiast indeed, who thinks that an Act of Parliament will, like a fairy wand waved over them, transform these failures into successes. Yet it is of the greatest importance to the country that those occupiers who show taste for agriculture and enterprise in developing the re¬ sources of the soil should be, by every possible means, protected and encouraged. I do not write to deprecate any measure which may be proposed in their favour ; on the contrary, I think that a dis¬ criminating legislature should remove every obstacle from the way of those who are, in whatever sphere and measure, serving their country. My object is to urge that no class disabilities should be imposed upon any, but that full confidence should be im¬ planted in the minds of all who are upon the path of progress. This I am certain of, that the develop¬ ment of the agricultural resources of the country is to be effected only by patient, continuous effort. The idea of prosperity made easy by legislation is but the quackery of political agitation. Gentlemen, more distinguished for luxuriance of rhetoric than for 29 accuracy of observation, have painted a very bright future for the whole land, when the present system shall have been superseded by universal tenant-right, or universal peasant-proprietorship. If such sweeping changes be accomplished, Ireland will not become a prosperous Arcadia, till after a process of natural selection, and an experience of realities more severe and pitiful than the present generation can well imagine, for the laws of political economy will inevitably and inexorably disestablish the weaker members of the community. The small percentage of good agriculturists to be found now among the occupiers would no doubt make successful peasant proprietors. And the advantage of such a class to the community will not, I imagine, be ques¬ tioned by anyone. But if all the land in Ireland were held in this way, this prosperous minority would soon begin to obtain mortgages on, or other¬ wise buy up, the farms of their less enterprising neighbours. In France they are accustomed to rent them. Would that be permitted here under the new regime ? If not, there would soon be excellent ma¬ terials for a new agitation. The axiom now in favour, that the man who tills the soil must own it, should be reversible and compulsory if it has any meaning. It involves the axiom, that the man who owns the soil must till it . He must not employ others to do it for him. What will become of the present class of labourers ? They will have neither land nor hire. The Utopia must be inaugurated by the 30 expulsion of such loose members of society. And if any proprietor is found guilty of inducing his neigh¬ bour to work for hire, or of hiring land from him, both criminals should be banished, for it will not be possible otherwise to stamp out the disease. All this is puerile. I fully admit that it is so. But so is the maxim from which I have logically derived it. The sad part of it is, that such maxims represent the measure of political economy at present attained by the great majority of the agricultural population of the South and West of Ireland. These are the doctrines of the journals which they read, and of the leaders to whom they listen. And surely it must be evident, that the districts where these shallow fallacies are most loudly proclaimed, and most sincerely received, are the most incapable of discharging the responsibilities which they propose to accept so lightly. The extension of the Ulster custom to the South of Ireland has been represented as advisable, because that whereas Donegal and many parts of Connaught are alike unhappily circumstanced as to poverty and over-population, yet violence is rare in Donegal and common in Connaught. I do not think this state¬ ment has been sufficiently supported. But whatever be the merits of the comparison between Connaught and Donegal, Munster certainly does not justify the argument. Such a proposition, however, must be tried on its merits, before it can be accepted as worthy of the 31 civilization of the age, or of the Constitution of Great Britain. It distinctly places a premium on crime* for it ad¬ vocates concession where deeds of violence have been most notorious. And surely it is not a wise expediency for any Government to cease to be a terror to evil doers. Moreover, the injustice is too apparent. In the de¬ bates in Parliament of last Session it was stated many times by gentlemen on the Liberal side of the House, that the great majority of Irish landowners were most fair and considerate, and that cases of in¬ justice or oppression were very few indeed, but even these few were not cited. Let any such charges be proved, and those in whose interest I write will heartily approve of any right measure which may punish the evil-doers, and provide against the recur¬ rence of the offence. But a Bill which imposes in¬ discriminate disability, and confounds the innocent with the guilty, will displace the course of justice, and overwhelm the lesser wrong in the greater that is intended to redress it. Parliament has not disfranchised the British Islands because of some cases of bribery or intimidation. It has not transferred three-fourths of the property of husbands to wives all over England because a certain number of the former have been found guilty of cruelty and violence. Is Ireland to become the subject of an experiment in governing which would be considered clumsy even by an African Potentate ? 32 But again, the argument in favour of extending Ulster tenant-right to other parts of Ireland, because there is violence in Connaught and none in Donegal, does not apply to Munster. In a debate on the Con¬ stabulary Estimates last session, it was urged that the employment of the police in enforcing the re¬ covery of rents was an evidence of the injustice of the demand. Inadequate as the reasoning is, I am for my part willing to be tried by this test. In the year 1852, I applied for the removal of the force which occupied a police barrack on my estate, as I wanted the building for a farm-house. They were taken away, and I have never since applied for their assistance in any way. I have never been in the Land Court. The sheriff has never been on my estate. With many small tenancies, there could not but be instances of bankruptcy and falling in of farms in one way or other, and such has been the case. I have consolidated a good many holdings, and very much to the benefit of the community, but I have never considered non-payment of rent alone a sufficient reason for proceeding against a man. If he were ill-conditioned towards his neighbours, drunken, and more thriftless in his habits than common, I should not endeavour to avert his fate, which would generally overtake him at other hands than mine. But I have had men in sore difficulties whom I believed to be reduced by no fault of their own. I have nursed many such men through their financial troubles, lending them money and other- 33 wise helping them, and some of them are now the most well-to-do farmers in the district. Would tenant-right meet such a strain as this ? I will prove that it could not. Last spring I had three evictions, the only ones in eight-and-twenty years. No display of force whatever was required. They went out on possession being demanded by my bailiff. I will give the cases as briefly as possible. The first was one in which 'the tenant, with his wife and family, fled to America to escape his credi¬ tors, owing me two years’ rent. He left his mother on the farm with one of her children, but without a penny or a four-footed beast. They surrendered the land, being utterly unable to do anything with it, and I sent them to America. The second case was that of a man who owed two years’ rent, and money (lent to try and pull him through his difficulties) to the amount of nearly two years’ rent besides. In addition to this, he owed over seven times his yearly rent to other creditors. His entire liabilities amounted to near £300, on a farm paying £16 per annum rent. The man ran away to America to escape his creditors, and died, leaving his wife and family behind. I took up pos¬ session from them, but put them back again for six months, to give them the chance of recovering, and have finally re-established the son in the farm on his repaying the loan and two pounds more. The third case was that of a man who owed three years’ rent, and a loan amounting to more than a D 34 half-year’s rent. He surrendered possession, and his farm is re-let to him for grazing for six months, on his paying the rent in advance for that time, hut he has cleared off none of his past liabilities. I do not think that anyone who understands the effect of tenant-right will affirm that, under that sys¬ tem, these people could have been kept on their farms. I am acquainted with an estate in the South of Ireland where tenants are allowed to sell their inte¬ rest. Last year, some of them came to the proprie¬ tor in their difficulties, and when he told them to help themselves by disposing of the good-will of their farms, they said, “That is of no use. We can¬ not get anything for them these times.” Yet three years ago, I heard a man offer fifteen years’ rental for an average farm on that estate. But I will cite an- other important witness. In a letter, published in the Cork Examiner , of Sept. 19, 1879, Mr. M‘Elroy, Secretary of the Antrim Tenant-Right Central Asso¬ ciation, writes as follows :— ({ Speaking from an Ulster stand-point, I am sorry to admit that the tenant-right custom has not stood the test of hard times. It is vanishing at the first touch of adversity. The value of tenant-right has been reduced thirty per cent, at least, and, in many instances, farms cannot be sold at all. A tenure which is so easily affected by temporary circumstances, is unsatisfactory, and hence students of the land question here are looking toward the extension of peasant pro¬ prietorship as the only adequate remedy for all agricultural ills.” If this gentleman believes that a community of small fee-simple estates will be superior to all agri- 3o cultural ills, I will not dispute the theory with him, but his experience as to the powerlessness of tenant- right in Ulster to maintain any advantage in times of depression, ought to have much weight with legis¬ lators who will have to consider the proposition of extending that measure as a panacea for all ills that may afflict the South of Ireland. De minimis non curat lex. Yet I claim for the small sphere in which I have administered another system, that that system has proved itself capable of meeting a time of de¬ pression. Under this system, the owner has no financial benefit to gain by evicting a tenant, for he does not recover his arrears from the capital of the incoming man. It is, therefore, manifestly to his advantage to make common cause with the man in distress, who, in better times, will repay his consi¬ deration. A consolidation of interests thus grows up, which, I can testify, has not only withstood the test of hard times, but also up to the present mo¬ ment, dangerous as the boast may be, the influence of reckless agitation. There is evidence, then, clearly to prove that a man who purchases tenant-right loses his investment at the very time when he most requires its aid—viz., in bad seasons, when land is depreciated in value. Depreciation is common, however, to other interests besides land ; but there is this vice inherent in the purchase of tenant-right, which is not common to other investments—viz., that it is unproductive in good seasons. 1 ) 2 36 I have before me the case of a tenant of Mr. Price, of Saintfield, Co. Down. Rent is £7 16s. 9d. The purchase-money of the tenant-right, £315, or forty times the rental. Thus, besides his rent, this man pays £15 15s. per annum to his banker or some money-lender. Or if the money was paid out of his own pocket, he loses the interest, which amounts to the same thing. Thus he has to pay nearly three rents for his land, instead of one. If no tenant-right existed, his capital might be fructifying in railway shares or other such investments, and he would have his farm rent-free, and as much more to go toward his income. It will be contended, I know, that the security of tenure which he purchases in his tenant- right compensates for all loss of income ; but this is a pure fallacy, for his security means that, if he is evicted, he can recover his purchase-money. But if his money be invested in railway shares, he has the same sum to fall back on in case of eviction, with this advantage, that it has been paying him a divi¬ dend all the time. If it be represented, however, that his rent is far below the value of the land, and that there is a margin of profit equal to double the rent, and that therefore his investment is financially sound, then I say that an argument cannot be founded on such a case for application to the South of Ireland, for if the rents be high there (as is pro¬ claimed by those who agitate for a change of tenure) then manifestly such a margin cannot exist. It must also be remembered that, in a great part 37 of Ulster, there are other investments open to the man who has sold his tenant-right, so that his capital may still remain in the country. In the South, he would either become a retail trader (a most strug¬ gling and uncertain business), or he would, in nine cases out of ten, emigrate. Thus, he would take the purchase-money out of the district altogether, thereby depriving an undeveloped country of so much capi¬ tal, and leaving the farm under a perpetual rack- rent. In the interest of occupier, then, as much as in that of owner, I appeal against the legal imposition of this custom upon communities from which it has been intelligently, earefulty, and at considerable cost to the proprietor, excluded up to the present time. I am sure that I do no more than justice to her Majesty’s Government, when I express my belief that it is actuated by a sincere desire to promote the wel¬ fare of Ireland, and give full consideration to the equitable rights of all classes in the island. I am persuaded that there are eminent men in the Cabi¬ net, who hold, with the Duke of Argyle, that, “ if it were really to be the case, that every time the Liberal party is out office, and comes back again into power, some great reconstruction of the Irish Land Act is to be expected, there would be little hope of the condition of Ireland.”—Speech of August 3rd, 1880. If such statesmanship prevails in council, it will be easy to blow aside the froth of agitation, and to arrive at the residue of real difficulty. 38 This arises from the weakness of one of the classes unhappily and unnaturally set at issue, rather than from the power of the other. In England, a fair field and no favour are the terms of the battle of life. In Ireland, one of the combatants ties up his own limbs, and enters the lists crying out vehemently to the bystanders to handicap his rival in like manner. Let the causes of this inequality be fully admitted. Absence of all openings for occupation at home, ex¬ cept agriculture, sentimental attachment to the soil on which he was born, ignorance of the resources of the world, want of capital to take advantage of them : all these may explain the reasons of the moral weakness of the occupier in Ireland. Yet it is easier to account for it than to relieve it by legislation. The real remedy is in his own hands. Whenever he determines to avail himself of it, the problem is solved. As soon as he makes up his mind to invest his natural intelligence, his energy, and his labour in the rich and wide fields which invite him in more favoured continents, he will cease to be the slave of circumstances at home. Till then he will continue to rig the market against himself by competition. Till then there will be a plethora of material in the body-politic (excellent material if it had only room for development), for which those whose advice is most in vogue know no treatment but blisters and blood-letting. Let the present race of landowners 39 be mulcted, banished, or exterminated, and the evil will be in no whit diminished. Its sphere will be changed only, for competition will still be king. So far as the landowner is concerned, however, his power to take advantage of this position is reduced by the Land Act to a single point. He may increase the rent with or without pretext. Against this the tenant has no direct remedy. He has only an alter¬ native. He may refuse to pay the demand which he considers exorbitant; and if he is thereupon evicted, he can be awarded considerabie compensation. The ignorance to which I have alluded, may actuate him to submit to the injustice and retain his holding, rather than accept the alternative which would pro¬ vide him with capital to start in another country. If he can be protected from this possibility of extor¬ tion, I see no other contingency left uncovered by the Land Act. The framers of that Act seem to have left this point unprovided for, because they did not see how they could touch it, without putting the contracting par¬ ties altogether into leading strings. In truth, the path beyond present legislation bristles with difficul¬ ties. Even Judge Longfield’s bold and ingenious design is by no means free from them. If I venture to dispute so high an authority, it is because he has courteously invited discussion, and because he seems to admit no exceptions to the application of the measure he recommends. In an article in the Fort - 40 nightly Review (August, 1880) on Land Tenure in Ireland, he lays down the situation as follows :— i( The position of the Irish landlords is now very precarious. They have property without political power to defend it; and that property is an object of envy to the electors, who, in case of spoliation, will know exactly what share of the spoils will fall to themselves. The ruin of the landed proprietors is certain if they fall into the common mistake of yielding nothing to justice and everything to clamour.” I venture to suggest that the first of these propo¬ sitions is unsound, the second is unproved. If there were no law in the land or no government capable of enforcing it, then the position of people “ with pro¬ perty ” of any kind, “ yet without political power to defend it,” would be very precarious indeed. If an intention was manifested on the part of the majority to take this property from them, it would be a judi¬ cious course for them to yield voluntarily a portion to their spoilers, even with the slight hope of secur¬ ing the rest. Still I should scarcely expect one who had exercised legitimate authority, while law and order existed, to give such advice ; much less could I conceive a policeman, in a well-governed country, finding a man surrounded by a number of persons determined to rob him of all he possessed, and ob¬ serving to him, “You are in a precarious position. Do not you perceive that you are in a hopeless mi¬ nority ? I should advise you to distribute the con¬ tents of your purse among these honest people. Very likely they will then let you keep your watch.” But with regard to the second proposition of Judge Longfield, that “ the ruin of the landed proprietors 41 is certain if they fall into the common mistake of yielding nothing to justice and everything to cla¬ mour,” I would go farther, and say, that their ruin would be not only certain, but deserved. But I humbly submit that the charge of injustice has not been proved against them. It is customary in civi¬ lized countries to try a man before you hang him, and a charge unproved remains a calumny. Until the landowners of Ireland, as a body, be found guilty of some more grievous crime than that of being in a minority, it is surely unconstitutional, as well as unjust, to inflict on them the forfeiture of a third of their property. It may be. however, that Judge Longfield intends that the tenant shall obtain the interest in his farm by honest purchase.* If this is his meaning, as I have heard some say is the case, it in no wise appears in the article to which I refer. But granting it to be so, I would venture to point out what seem to be serious objections to his measure, especially in the South of Ireland. The starting of the lease would then involve the purchase by the tenant of an interest worth seven years’ rental of his farm. Is this to be compulsory, universal, and at present rates ? Then the owner who has let his land lowest will suffer in proportion to his moderation, and the man who receives a rack- rent will be rewarded in proportion to his rapacity. Is Government to revise all rentals previous to * See Appendix. 42 fixing the rate ? Then you are landed in a re-valua¬ tion of Ireland, a process already proved to be rela¬ tively most unequal and misleading. But when these preliminaries have been arranged, where is the tenant to find the capital ? If, as a rule, he has seven years’ rent in his pocket, why were Bills of Relief passed ? Why did he need abatements, and why is he in arrear ? I suppose it is not necessary to discuss the ques¬ tion of his borrowing the money. But if, on the other hand, the lease is intended to be only a matter for private arrangement, where both parties happen to agree as to terms, then the whole measure may be consigned to the dead-letter office of all permissive legislation. Again, suppose the case of an estate on which the Longfield Lease is universally established. Will not the transfer of so much of the ownership of the land seriously affect the security of family portions, charges, mortgages, &c., &c. ? But does this measure give the tenant more pro¬ tection against increase of rent than the present Land Act gives him ? I think not. For when the time of revision comes, he must pay the increased rent, or accept the alternative. Let us consider the case of two tenants, whose valuation alike is £8, and their rent £10. One remains under the Land Act: the other accepts a Longfield Lease. The latter buys a partnership iti the land, by which his rent is reduced to £7. When the time of revision arrives, 43 the landlord demands a rent of £10. The tenant refuses to pay, and is bought out at seven times the amount of increase demanded, viz., 3 X 7 = £21. (Of course he receives his original deposit also, a matter which does not touch the case.) The tenant who remained under the Land Act is likewise called on to pay £3 in addition to his rent of £10= £13. He refuses to pay, is ejected, arid claims compensation. If his claim has any fairness, he will receive £70 or £91, as the sum may be cal¬ culated on the original rent or the increased rent. If I were a tenant I should prefer to remain under the Land Act. As a landowner, desiring to con¬ tinue my improvements, and to preserve those already made, I should prefer to sell a portion of the farm outright rather than enter into a promis¬ cuous partnership in the whole. When the question of advancing beyond the pre¬ sent Land Act comes to be beaten out and sifted in Parliament, the difficulties of further legislation will be manifest. In certain manufactures there are departments in which the niceties of manipulation cannot be sup¬ plied by machinery, and therefore, the intelligent versatility of the human hand is still retained for the service. Somewhat similar are those needs in the Irish social system which the machinery of legislation will always fail to supply. I believe these requirements can only be met by the establishment of land courts, 44 wherein carefully chosen commissioners should sit, vested with large discretionary powers. It is no¬ thing to the disparagement of the gentlemen who preside in the present land courts, to say that they are not experts in agriculture. However high their other qualifications, they are obliged to form their judgments on this point from the very contradictory opinions which come before them in evidence. Thus the most extravagant claims are put forward in the hope that their very boldness may carry some con¬ viction, and public demoralization is the inevitable result. Men of education, thoroughly acquainted with the principles and practice of agriculture, of honourable minds, and gifted with common sense, could not fail to come to a true conclusion as to the just rent of a farm, upon the evidence of a personal inspection. I do not think that any one who seeks only for justice would object to leave such a matter to their decision. This would be a very different thing from fixing the rental of all Ireland by a general valuation. On the contrary, I believe it would be a practical test of the needlessness of such a measure ; for, after a few decisions, no cases would come into court that had not some substantial foundation ; and the present fermentation would be reduced to the residue of real wrong. Districts where peace has hitherto prevailed would be allowed to continue their course of quiet development. And the circumstances and customs which distinguish provinces, districts, and minor 45 subdivisions, might be treated with an appreciation beyond the scope of an Imperial Act. The importance of these questions to society in Ireland forbids them to be relegated as an appendix to the ordinary business of a County Court. The} 7 demand separate and special qualifications. And to meet these requirements, there should be a Court of Commissioners for every province, who should be entrusted with the administration of the present Land Act. If owner and occupier desired to submit any question to arbitration by mutual agreement, they would thus have an authority fully qualified to decide any issue brought before them. Such de¬ cision should then be obligatory, with right of appeal to a quorum of the provincial Commissioners, who should sit for this purpose at a certain period of the year. I think there might be a farther power also given to these Courts, in cases where an occupier claimed that he was the sole improver, and that his rent had been increased as a consequence of his own outlay. If he could prove upon investigation that he had been paying a full rent for the land before he began to improve, and that his further claim was estab¬ lished, the Court might be empowered to order the sale of the land to the tenant under an extension of the Bright Clauses of the Land Act. The number of years’ purchase should be fixed by Act of Parlia¬ ment, so that there might be no inducement to beat down the market price by agitation. For instance, 46 twenty-five years' purchase might be the established price ; but the permanent improvements of the ten¬ ant should be deducted from the purchase-money to be paid by him. These improvements, however, should be measured by a very different criterion from that which passes current in the present Land Courts. Nothing should be accepted as an improve¬ ment which did not come up to the standard at present required by the Board of Works, in the in¬ spection of loans granted by them. Of course, though in this suggestion the number of years’ pur¬ chase might be fixed and invariable, the rent on which that purchase should be based would be a matter for the decision of the Court. The Commis¬ sioners might have power to call in a professional public valuator to assist their own opinion, and there could be little doubt as to their arriving, in such cases, at a just estimate. In cases where the present owner had bought the property, and had not himself increased the rent on account of the occupier’s improvements, the State should bear the loss consequent on the deduction for those improvements, because the purchase had been made on the security of the State. I do not attempt to indicate the source from whence the capital should be derived to assist the tenant in his purchase. This is too wide a question for the scope of this paper ; but I think it will be evident that the antecedents of the tenant, his industry, and his enterprise, will afford full security to the State for his ability to 47 repay the loan. A peasant proprietary so derived would be manifestly taken from the best of the present occupiers, and would lead the experiment with every prospect of success. On the other hand, these Courts should have power to deal with equal authority with misde¬ meanours on the part of the occupier. If misuse of the land, injury or waste, destruction or neglect of the owner’s improvements could be proved against him, he should understand that he also will be held accountable for such misconduct. Once the principle of free contract is set aside, all parties alike must be made to do their duty. If my proposal is not in character with the spirit of the British Constitution, still less so are the circumstances for which it is in¬ tended to provide. If such a jurisdiction were es¬ tablished, no real wrong need be left without redress. Cheap and effective litigation would be within reach of contentious spirits ; and a region of calm would be prepared for the reception of that conflict which seems iioav on the way to its ultimate issue at the muzzles of the blunderbuss and the revolver. I am aware that objections can be raised to this plan by both the sides who are now at issue. Owners will be unwilling to place so much power in the hands of a Commission. But it would be better for them to run the risk of an occasional wrong decision, than to have a part of their whole estates taken from them by some sweeping legislative measure. It will also be said that the appointment 48 of such Commissioners would be a matter of party patronage. Such, indeed, is one of the unhappy privileges of the British Constitution. Yet every branch of the administrative department in the country is already characterised by a high sense of responsibility, and a general absence of party bias. The qualifications of such men as I indicate would be high, and if there is a difficulty in finding them, that fact itself would be a safeguard against incon¬ siderate appointments. I fully admit this difficulty ; and it is a serious one. But the three kingdoms should be open to candidature; and within such a limit there is no lack of suitable men, if the salaries were sufficiently high to bring them forward, and if the selection be exercised with a sense of the import¬ ance attached to the office. Some such measure, if it were passed, would carry on its work without prejudice to any concurrent legislation which may tend to the creation of a pea¬ sant proprietary, or of small fee-simple estates, nor would it hinder the introduction of any Act for con¬ verting life tenants into absolute owners, or for simplifying the transfer of title. Thus those districts which have hitherto been ad¬ vancing in the path of peaceful development would be left to pursue their course ; and that confidence so necessary for the prosperity of all classes, and at present so sorely shaken, might be restored on a firmer footing than before. I am not so sanguine as to imagine that this pro- 49 position will meet in any degree the demands of the present agitation ; but it will take away, not only the actualities, but almost the possibilities of in¬ justice. Every step beyond this limit is in the direction of tyranny. All who wish only for justice and liberty should separate themselves from the party of outrage. The object of the latter is un¬ qualified spoliation. They seek expropriation of one class, and exclusive appropriation by its successor. It is strange that the Liberal Party in England do not perceive that this movement in Ireland is anti- Liberal. It looks for no enlargement of the frame¬ work of society, in favour of the whole population. It does not find fault with the fact of property in land being vested in individuals. It merely seeks to transfer that ownership and make it more absolute. It desires to establish possession in the hands of the most conservative of races, and the most conservative of classes. If this were accomplished, the next agi¬ tation would be for protective duties on the import¬ ation of any article which formed a staple commodity of Ireland. Would English Liberalism approve such a course ? Doctrines naturally hostile cannot long be marshalled under one banner. Surely the mo¬ dern history of France and Belgium should teach this well-proved lesson. In France there is a terror which can overawe even the red spectre. Let the hecatombs of Pere La Chaise, let the long fusillades of Satory bear record to the ruthless panic in which a landed democracy can trample down its natural foes. E 50 Whatever may lie hidden in the troubled future, any concession possible in the present Parliament must fall far short of satisfying the leaders of present agitation. But it may be sufficient to discourage, beyond recall, men who have hitherto thrown their energies and the means at their disposal into the cause of their country’s progress. Those who are acquainted, even superficially, with the South of Ireland know that, the question which an investi¬ gator learns to ask, on a tour through the country, is not as to the mode of tenure in any district, but as to the character of the owner. I have not written these few pages to maintain that all owners do their duty in this respect; but I do maintain that where they do not do it, no other substitutionary agency is to be seen at work. And I farther maintain, that the districts which present the most hopeless ap¬ pearance, and the most miserable population, are those where power has long gone out of the owners’ hands, and has been exercised by lessees, holding for long terms at low rents. Irish proprietors have been advised by some who profess friendship for them to yield with grace that which otherwise may be taken from them by force. Such counsels generally imply that they should ask for the universal imposition, by law, of tenant-right with all its accompaniments, upon those parts of the country hitherto free from this custom. It may be that many may be found willing to accept cheerfully the proposal, nor is there any rea- 51 son why they should wait for legislation to avail themselves of it. Others of us, however, feel that we are thereby called to surrender that which we or our predecessors have purchased, and honestly paid for, on the security of the British Constitution, and on which we have since laid out, in developing that purchase, a farther amount, in many cases equal to the original price. But beyond this, we feel that we are invited to sacrifice to a reckless experiment the convictions and experience of our whole lives. We are bidden to overturn a system which stands, unequalled, on its own merits ; a system which derives its origin, not from past barbarism and neglect of duty (the true first causes of tenant-right), but from the most ad¬ vanced, the most enlightened, and the most success¬ ful examples of agricultural economy which the nineteenth century can afford. It may be that all this will avail nothing. It may be that votes will be given in Parliament as lightly as accusations have been brought outside it. But the integrity of our cause does not rest on the evidence of inventive oratory. It stands silent, but undeniable, in those districts where the face of nature has been changed by our labours, and its features will be traced by their solidity through ge¬ nerations of decay. The difficulties of the path on which we have patiently travelled are not now appa¬ rent. It was no slight matter often to overcome even the material obstacles. But, beyond these, 52 we have contended against ignorance, against preju¬ dice, against misrepresentation—some of us against violence. These foes have been in front. But when the Government of the country takes us in rear, the cause is lost. Yet, a garrison that has honourably defended it¬ self is allowed to march out with the honours of war. Give us the same privilege of an alternative as is conceded to the occupier when terms which he con¬ siders impossible are demanded of him. Let us have compensation for our improvements, and com¬ pensation for capricious disturbance of possession. Let the Government honestly buy us out. On very moderate terms of purchase we should be able to pay off our mortgages, and retain an in¬ come far beyond that which is now lessened by self- imposed obligations and unacknowledged sacrifices. But I for one would humbly stipulate that it should be paid in ready capital or in Government securities. It has been suggested that we should be paid off by instalments, levied during a period of years, from the future owners. But I must respectfully confess that I have no desire to be condemned to angle for the wrecks of an annuity in the deluge of the new regime. I should be sorry to sever relations that have sub¬ sisted for many generations with a people for whom I have the sincerest affection—a people whose virtues far exceed their weaknesses, and whose very weak¬ nesses claim consideration. 53 But rather than see the gradual ruin, through ig¬ norant legislation, of a life’s systematic labour, I would prefer, together with the staff of assistants that, in different capacities, have worked so long and faithfully with me, to colonize a district in some free land, where enterprise is not discouraged, and where life and capital are secure. I have the honour to be, Right Honourable Sir, Your faithful servant, R. J. MAHONY Dromore, Ken mare. APPENDIX. The following is Judge Longfield’s proposal, refer¬ red to in the text, quoted from Fortnightly Review , August 1st, 1880. “ With this view I venture to propose a system by which it shall be lawful for any tenant who pleases, in any part of Ireland, to acquire a 4 Parliamentary tenant-right ’ in his holding, either by agreement with his landlord or by obtaining a declaration from the court that his holding shall be subject to this right. This I suggested several years ago in an essay published by the Cobden Club. The essence of this system is that the tenant-right becomes certain, and that its value is determined by the parties themselves without litigation or dispute. It also provides for the case of a fall as well as a rise in the value of land, and while it gives security to the tenant it does not divorce the landlord from the land. “ The system I propose is this, that the Parliamentary tenant-right shall be worth seven years’ purchase of the rent, and that the rent shall be adjusted by the parties themselves, at the expiration of every period of ten years, in the following manner. If neither party proposes a change, which will most usually happen, the rent will remain unaltered for another period of ten years, and so on from time to time. I am justified in thinking that this will be the most usual case by the fact that a tenancy from year to year often lasts a considerable time without any change being made in the rent. “ If, however, either landlord or tenant desires a readjust¬ ment of rent it may be effected in the following manner:— Suppose the rent is £60, which the landlord thinks ought to be increased to £'80. When the time for readjustment arrives, he serves notice on the tenant that he will require this in¬ crease of rent. If the tenant consents the rent is forthwith increased to £80; but if the tenant dissents he must give up 56 APPENDIX. the land, receiving as compensation £ 560 , that is to say, seven years’ purchase, not of the rent which the tenant for¬ merly paid, but of the increased rent which the landlord has demanded. This appears fair to both parties. The landlord cannot complain that the seven years’ purchase is calculated on too high a rent, as it is the rent which he himself de¬ manded. The tenant cannot complain that the compensation is too small, since it is calculated on a rent which he refuses to pay. A similar privilege is given to the tenant if an alter¬ ation of prices or other circumstances should make him con¬ sider the rent too high. When the time for readjustment arrives the tenant serves notice on his landlord that he re¬ quires the rent to be reduced to £ 50 . If the landlord agrees, the rent is reduced to £ 50 ; but if he dissents he must get possession of the land, and pay as compensation to the tenant the sum of £350, that is, seven years’ purchase of the rent which the tenant claims to be sufficient after allowance made for the value of the tenant-right. This mode of calculating the compensation makes it the interest of both parties to be reasonable. The landlord, by demanding too much, increases the compensation which he must pay. The tenant, by offer¬ ing too little, reduces the price which he must accept for his tenant-right. “ I shall give an account in numbers. The exact figures are immaterial, but I give them to make the principle more easily understood. Suppose the rate of interest to be five per cent., the tenant holding a farm at £60 rent, and, having ac¬ quired a Parliamentary tenant-right worth seven times sixty, that is £420, has a farm for which £81 would be a fair rent, being the rent which would leave him a fair return for his labour and skill and capital. If the tenant is not satisfied with this position, and seeks to reduce the rent to £50, he puts it in the landlord’s power to make him sell for £350 a tenant-right which is worth £420. On the other hand, if the landlord demands a rent of £70, he must pay £490 for a ten¬ ant-right which is worth only £420. Under those circum¬ stances, it is not probable that any change will be made in the rent, unless an alteration in the value of the land should make a readjustment reasonable.” Printed by Porteous and Gibbs, Dublin.