I take a rather different line from that taken by Deputy Roddy. I am not so anxious about rushing into the division of land as some other Deputies who have spoken. I speak rather on behalf of the ratepayers and the taxpayers. My reason for taking that attitude is that, as we are all aware, and as I was informed in a reply to a question put to the Minister some days ago, the arrears of annuities in Limerick amount to close on £37,000. They extend back for about five years, and it is well known that these tenants purchased on very much more favourable terms and got their land very much cheaper, than the new allottees are getting theirs. These purchasers had only to buy out the landlords' interests, and the landlords' interest was based on a fair rent which was fixed in the courts. Their annuities were at the rate of, approximately, 10/- to 15/- per acre, whilst the recently divided land is about 32/- to 33/- an acre. That, to my mind, will become a source of great worry to the ratepayers hereafter, if they have to make up the deficiency in the rates caused by the agricultural grant being withheld. The amount of the agricultural grant withheld from the Limerick ratepayers at present is something like £26,000.
For that reason alone I would ask the Minister to go slow in the future purchasing of land. Of course in the case of any land that has been purchased and an agreement signed, I do not see why it should not be divided at the earliest possible opportunity. According to what Deputy Roddy stated some land has been from 10 to 17 years in the hands of the Land Commission or the Congested Districts Board. If such land has been in the hands of the Congested Districts Board for the last 17 years, certainly there should be enough profits to redeem the whole estate within that time and the allottees should have the land now practically free. I am speaking from experience. I know one small estate quite close to my own place in Limerick which has been divided recently, the Lewis estate. There were one 65 statute acres in that estate to be divided. It was derelict for six years, and the landlord had nothing out of it during these years. Previous to that it was let at £2 per Irish acre, in con-acre. It was suitable for meadowing and it was good for nothing else. It was slobland. It was set to the men in craglands overhead for meadowing.
Some six years ago the landlord attempted to raise the rent and the local people took it on themselves to see that the rent was not raised, and as a result the place was left derelict. The Land Commission have taken it over recently and have given £1,300 for it. That would be £20 per statute acre, and it would work out very close to 32/- per acre in annuities. It would be over 30/- an Irish acre. I fail to see how the tenants of that little estate will be able to meet the annuities if the tenants on the adjoining estates, who have to pay only from 10/- to 12/- an acre, are in arrears. The tenants on this small estate will have to pay £1 per acre more than the others. I have had letters from my constituents asking me to see that these estates will be divided, but I am not going to do that. I am not going to take their advice for the reason I have given. I would ask the Minister to proceed slowly in this matter, and in any case where a bargain has not been made already to hold his hand because the value of land is coming down. An estate bought four years ago for £10,000 could, I am sure, be bought to-day for £5,000.
I am sure that these estates, between the high rates and the small price for agricultural produce, will be going back in value in the very near future, and that instead of the tenants paying annuities on £1,000 or on £500 they will only be paying on £200 or £250. That would be a great advantage to the State. I do not suggest that the Land Commission should confiscate the estate from the landlord. The landlords are entitled to get the full value for their land if it is taken over, but I think it will be much lower in value in another year or two because of the great fall in the price of agricultural produce. I am sure that half the land in Leinster would not be let for the coming year were it not that the graziers have so much stock on hands which they cannot dispose of at a profit. They would not get as much for their cattle as they cost them last year. I do not like to go too far outside my own constituency, but I would refer to one estate, the Scully estate, in Tipperary. The Land Commission inspected that some time ago and the inspector put a valuation of £4,250 on it. The owner appealed and the question of the valuation came before Mr. Justice Wylie. The valuation was increased to £6,450 —an increase of 50 per cent. If an economic rent could not be fixed on the original price, I do not see how you are going to fix an economic rent for the future on the new prices. I would like to know if any defence is made against increases of this kind, because it certainly is most unfair, most irregular, and most unjust if the valuer put a valuation of £4,000 odd on the land and the judge, who did not see the land at all, was able to increase it to £6,000.