asked the Minister for Fisheries whether, in the division of certain untenanted lands upon the Stafford Estate at Montpelier, Bohernabreena, an area of 38 acres, or approximately one-third of the lands divided, was granted, together with a valuable quarry, to a Mrs. Doyle; whether this lady's husband already held a farm of 51 acres from the Land Commission; and, if so, upon what grounds the lands referred to above were granted to her; whether, of the lands granted to Mrs. Doyle, some 16 acres consisted of lands which had been held by another tenant on the estate and by his father and grandfather continuously for over 60 years; and whether representations had been made to the Land Commission regarding the injustice of granting those lands to Mrs. Doyle, instead of to their original holder.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - DIVISION OF DUBLIN LANDS.
These untenanted lands of Montpelier comprising 140 acres of the lands which had been let by the former owners under eleven months letting in 3 lots to two grazing tenants, viz.: Mrs. Kate Flood, wife of Bernard Flood and the reps. of Edward Byrne, were acquired by the Land Commission under the Land Act, 1923. Mrs. Flood held the major portion of the lands, with permission to quarry.
In the division of the lands Mrs. Kate Flood was allotted and signed an agreement to purchase a parcel of land containing 46a. 1r. 14p. (which includes a quarry) to be consolidated with her parent uneconomic holding containing 5a. 2r. 9p., the Poor Law Valuation of which is £4 5s. 0d., and is situate at Friarstown Lower on the Cobbe Estate. Her husband, Bernard Flood, is tenant of a holding consisting of 24a. 3r. 19p. (together with a right of turbary) the Poor Law Valuation of which is £7 and is situate on the Cobbe Estate above referred to.
The Commissioners in dividing the lands had to consider two alternatives; either to allot them to the grazing tenants or to utilize them for the purpose for which they were purchased, viz., the relief as far as possible of congestion.
In Mrs. Flood's case the real applicant is her son, John Coughlan, by her first marriage, but as the holding which has a Poor Law Valuation of £4 5s. 0d. is in her name, the enlargement of 46a. 1r. 14p. had also to be in her name in order that it could be consolidated with the holding. In giving this enlargement the Commissioners considered it necessary that it should include a proportion of tillage land, and accordingly she was allotted a part of the land formerly let to reps. Edward Byrne. Mrs. Flood married a second time and there is a family of five children by this marriage to be provided for.
The Byrnes live on a holding which has a Poor Law Valuation of £13 and which was vested in the name of Michael Byrne. He was allotted 15a. 1r. 11p. of arable land on the above estate, for the enlargement of and to be consolidated with the parent holding in respect of which he signed a Purchase Agreement.
The area of the land held by Mrs. Flood and not allotted to her was considerably greater than the area held by Byrne and not allotted to him.
The residue of the lands was utilized to provide enlargements of 40a. 1r. 5p. and 38a. 1r. 17p. for two small holders —the valuations of whose holdings are £6 15s. 0d. and £3 15s. 0d. respectively.
Is not the real point of the matter this, that land which has been held by a family as tenants for practically sixty years, held on the eleven-months' system, admittedly, was given to another applicant after these people had made the land?
Yes. The only thing considered in the distribution of land is the quality. Allottees must be given portions of land suited for tillage purposes. That was a consideration that the Commissioners had in mind when they divided the land.