asked the Minister for Lands the reasons why all the smallholders living on, or adjacent to, the Trench Estate, Cloughjordan, County Tipperary were not considered for land when this Estate was being divided; and if he will give the name, address and acreage received in the case of each person who was given land from the Trench Estate at its division.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Division of County Tipperary Estate.
36.
I would refer the Deputy to my reply to a previous question about this estate on 18th ultimo.
I am informed that the claims of all eligible applicants were fully considered by the Land Commissioners before the limited acreage, viz. 40 acres, available for disposal on the estate was allocated.
The two successful applicants were— Martin Browne, Drumnamahaneisland, Borrisokane and Charles Coughlan, Sopwell, Cloughjordan, County Tipperary; their allotments comprised 15a. 1rd. 30p. and 24a. 2r. 30p. respectively.
Is the Minister aware that on that estate there have been a vast number of smallholders having from 18½ acres down to eight acres and that the Irish Land Commission, when allocating the last 22½ acres of that land, approached a gentleman who offered to hand over portion of his farm; that the Land Commission would not take the portion unless he surrendered the entire acreage? Is the Minister further aware that the Land Commission gave him 22½ acres, bringing his total acreage over 60 acres, while the smallholders are left without any of that estate? Will the Minister have the case reopened and investigated?
All I know is that both successful applicants were relying solely for their means of livelihood on farming as an occupation, that they were within the requisite distance of the land to be divided—there were only 40 acres to be divided—that one of their valuations was £4 5s. and the other valuation was £12. It is quite obvious to me from this information that both these men were deserving applicants. The division of any estate is a matter reserved by law as a function of the Irish Land Commission and neither I nor the Deputy can question what they in their wisdom have done.
Surely the Minister will not defend the action of the Irish Land Commission in depriving one man, Thomas Minogue, who now holds 18½ acres and who has a family, and also a man named Carroll who owns 16 acres and whose son, aged 18 years, has gone to England since the land was divided? As far as the valuation is concerned, the particular portion of Sopwell, which I know very well, comprises a lot of old bog land, of which, naturally, the valuation is low.
I cannot disclose the information that I have got from different applicants. Indeed, I think it would be very bad practice. I do know that one of the people mentioned by the Deputy is, in fact, a county council ganger and is not depending for his livelihood solely or mainly on farming. The Land Commission have to assess as between all the different people living within the distance limit as to who should get land in a case of this kind. That is the procedure that has been laid down by this House and, unless the Deputy wants that changed, that procedure must continue.
In regard to the case the Minister has mentioned of a man being a road ganger, I want to say that that man has a vast acreage taken in conacre; that he has a wife and four in family, including the boy of 18 who has since gone to England. His wife and family will not be eligible for the position in the county council when Mr. Carroll retires. The fact that he is a road ganger should not be held against anyone in regard to land division in Ireland.