At the present moment there is a lull in the activities of the Land Commission, and I think during this lull would be a very good time to have a general review of the whole position of land division in this country. I do believe that a review is needed. We have now had land division for 15 or 20 years and, to my mind and the minds of a large number of people, there is a good deal wrong with that land division. In the county I come from, where intensive land division has gone on for the last ten or 15 years, we who come from the practical farming type realise that the old cycle will take place again in that county, that is, that the land will go back to the ranches again unless the Land Commission realise that the lands they are giving out are not economic. A holding of 22 or 27 statute acres of land given to a man with no money is almost worse than useless. That land is going to be set by that man to some local rancher. That is what is happening in perhaps 80 per cent. of the cases in my county. The man who has got that land is perhaps a workman for this big rancher. He gets his constant employment, and sets his land for some small rent to this rancher, who has more or less a bit of power over him. The ditches, which cost a good deal of money to put there, are allowed to fall down, and the gates and piers are neglected, with the result that in a good many cases the small farms have gaps broken into them from the big man's farm. It is really the same old ranching system all over again.
What is really wrong, not so much in the last few years as in the first five or six years, say, from 1932 to 1937, is that the wrong type of applicants were selected—men who never had an outlook on land, and who had not a "bob" in their pockets. They were given farms. How they got the land, no one knows. As I said here last year, men who should not have been given a cottage garden have got farms, and they have hardly ever seen them since the day they got them. Those are the types of farms which I hold will go back to the ranching system. Those men had neither an economic nor a national outlook. They want to get all they can, to live as easily as they can, and put all the expense they can on the State. That is why I say there should be a general review of the position. In my own county and a few neighbouring counties I see the same thing happening. The land is being wilfully neglected. A man comes along and tears up the land with the plough, takes wheat off it for three or four years, and in the end will not even sow grass seed there, but leave it to go back into a wild state. I believe the Land Commission should exercise more supervision in that connection; it is not fair to the State, or to thrifty farmers, to allow that sort of thing to go on.
I should like to refer to the practice of giving five or seven acres to a cottier who lives in the vicinity of a large estate. I fully agree with the idea of giving a labouring man, living in a cottage, five or six acres to enable him to give grass to his cow or donkey, but I think that when the Land Commission give that land to the cottier they should take over the cottage and have it vested. I am a member of the Meath Board of Health and we have had cases brought to our notice where the Land Commission gave five or six acres to the occupant of a cottage. In at least one instance the man died and the board transferred the cottage, but the five acres did not go to the new cottier. What happened was that some relative of the original occupant, living some 20 miles away, got the land. He hardly knew where it was. I suggest that when land is given to the occupant of a cottage it is the duty of the Land Commission to combine that cottage with the holding and vest it, instead of having, as at present, the rent of the cottage paid to the board of health and the rent of the land paid to the Land Commission. Such a system is causing endless confusion. It would not be very difficult for the Land Commission to take over the cottage. It is wrong to have the ratepayers carrying the burden of those cottages when it is really the duty of the Land Commission to take them over and vest them in the tenants who get the five or seven acre holdings. The annuity on the combined holding could then be paid to the Land Commission.
I suggest that more care should be taken in the matter of selecting applicants for land. Unless a man has a few hundred pounds in his possession, it is almost useless to give him land. Giving land to a man who has no money is, I might say, worse than useless. It merely means putting a burden on himself and the State and eventually the land will revert to a large landholder. I am aware that fully 90 per cent. of the holdings on one estate have gone back to one man. To the credit of that man let me say that at one time he was a herd on the estate. He was a thrifty and a hard-working man and he bought one little farm after another, with the result that to-day he is the largest landholder in the area. At the same time, there must be something wrong with land division when many of the men who get small farms fall out and most of these farms revert to the large landholders.
The Land Commission should see to it, when they are giving a man a holding, that it should be of sufficient size to maintain that man and his family. I think the Minister will agree that in the Midlands, at any rate, no holding could be considered adequate unless it contains from 30 to 40 Irish acres. Any man who has a 30 or 40 acre holding can be said to be as solid as a rock. Such landholders meet with bad times and with good times, but they are never knocked out.
It is not so with the unfortunate individuals who have only ten or 20 acres. Such holdings are definitely uneconomic and no man is able to live on them. When they are dividing the lands in Meath, Westmeath and Kildare I suggest that the Land Commission should make sure that the holdings are economic. If you divide the lands of Meath into uneconomic patches, such as I have seen in certain places, you will tend to destroy the whole economy of the country.
The best of the cattle trade of this country passes through Meath, Westmeath and Kildare. That is the main gateway to the British and the Dublin markets. Every beast worth while in the west and the south is lorried or transported in some other way to the lands of Meath, Westmeath and Kildare. That cannot take place in the future if you continue to divide the lands in those counties into small uneconomic patches. The fairly large holdings in Meath and Westmeath have been responsible for our good cattle trade up to the present. You cannot finish a beast on a 20-acre holding. Let us assume that a man needs a horse or pony, two cows and a little patch of meadow to provide the animals with fodder in the winter. What has he left to fatten cattle on, or to rear any type of live stock?
These things have been overlooked year after year, with the result that the system of land division, which should be of some use to the country, is quite the reverse. It will eventually mean completing the old cycle and you will have the ranching system all over again. I want to stop that ranching system and, if the Government want to put an end to it, they will see that every man who is entitled to land will get an economic parcel. If he does, he will be able to give employment. A man with 40 acres can give employment the whole year round to one man and he may be able to employ one or two men casually, whereas the 20-acre farm is too uneconomic to maintain the occupant and his family, not to mind giving employment. The whole system of land division on such uneconomic lines is nonsensical and I might even describe it as unnatural for any Irish Government.
I am not at all satisfied with the manner in which houses are being erected for successful local land applicants. In my own locality there are three or four houses that were started some years ago, and the roof of at least one has been left without slates or tiles for the last three years. What with the wet weather in the winters and the drought in the summers, that roof is in a perfectly disgraceful condition. I hope the Land Commission will put on a new roof, because it would be unfair to the future tenant of that house to leave the existing roof there. I cannot understand why so much attention is devoted to the migrants from other counties and so little to the local people. The Land Commission devote all their time and energy to the provision of houses, sheds, yards and everything else for the colonists, while right beside them the local men, who are lucky to get land are left without houses for a very considerable time.
In some cases nothing is done for them inside three or four years. I know some of those migrants who are very honest, hard-working men, and they are living in comfortable houses, while local men who got land at the same time are not yet supplied with a residence. In some cases even the foundations have not been laid. That is unfair and it is the cause of many grievances. It would seem that the Land Commission do not care a damn for the local people so long as they can deal satisfactorily with migrants from the West of Ireland. I should like the Land Commission to deal equally with the West of Ireland people and the Meath people, and there should be no discrimination in regard to the erection of houses.
When the Land Commission are building sheds in the future, I suggest that they should make provision for a loft in each shed. A large store would be of great advantage to farmers for the storing of crops. No provision is now made for a loft in connection with these houses. It would be of immense benefit to a small farmer if the roof on the shed that is provided could be raised about one yard, because then there would be room for storage on a loft. The cost of changing the plans would not amount to more than £5.
I am not satisfied at the way pumps are being sunk on different farms. I visited several places in County Meath at the request of tenants, and found that when the Land Commission sank pumps water was found at 15 or 18 feet, because the country was at the time flooded, while in August or September these pumps were dry. Some of the pumps that have been erected are not giving any supply of water. That is a shame and a disgrace. The Land Commission should see to it that there is a water supply available all the year round. Some people have to go miles for a barrel of water. The present system of dealing with these pumps results only in a waste of public money. That is unfair to the tenants and to the taxpayers. One of the great grievances of tenants in County Meath concerns a constant supply of water.
I asked a question in the House recently about the vesting of holdings. I am not satisfied that the Land Commission is making an effort to vest land in thrifty people who were put into possession 10 or 20 years ago. I know several holdings that have been divided for years, on which the tenants have paid their rents punctually, but they have not yet been vested. These people want to be in the position of being able to say that they own their farms, so that they can walk into the banks and ask for a loan of £100 or £200 to buy stock. They cannot do that now. If they go to the banks for a loan of money now they are told that it cannot be given. If they could get loans when they require them, it would give them a chance of improving their position, especially when it is known that they are paying their way and are credit-worthy.
I was misunderstood when I spoke here on previous occasions about the Gaeltacht colonies. What I intended to do was to speak strongly against a class of people who should never have got land or grants. I was referring to some of the worst types, to men who never worked their holdings. All they wanted was money to drink. I was not criticising the colonists, but people who had drunk themselves out of holdings they had previously. I am satisfied that migrants from Mayo, Kerry, and other counties have proved themselves to be a fine manly body of men. I have given employment to some of them, and I have nothing to say against them. I am glad to say that an improvement has taken place in the conduct of those that I criticised, and that they are mingling in a friendly way with the local people. There is not as much brawling now as there was in the past. Some of the conduct that took place in some of these colonies was a disgrace. The conduct that occurred in Athboy at one period was a perfect disgrace. There were drunken brawls and incidents that were never known to occur in Meath previously. I am not condemning all the people. Some of those who have come to Meath are a fine class of people. With the administration of the law, these people will probably settle down and become useful members of the community. The section that I criticised may be a small section, but certainly conduct that took place did a great deal of harm to the policy of migration. If it was allowed to continue, what other attitude could be expected from the local people? I am glad to say that the newcomers are mingling with the local people now.
I am not satisfied that the Land Commission are dealing satisfactorily with the claims of large numbers of farmers sons in the county, when estates are being divided. A farmer's son with £200 or £300 in his pocket should not be passed over in the division of land. The only way to make these colonies a success is to get the migrants to mix with the people in the district. The tendency at present is to erect 15 or 20 houses in an isolated district. I consider that that is only causing friction and doing harm. If Meath or Westmeath people were put into holdings side by side with colonists, goodwill would be created. The present policy is resulting in one class looking down on the other, when one is as good as the other. I ask the Land Commission to try to bring about goodwill by putting the Meath people and the western people on an equal basis. It should be remembered that about 98 per cent. of the local people applied for holdings that were given to these colonists, and were turned down. Consequently, there is bound to be some dissatisfaction. The Land Commission should try to mix the holdings.
I am not against the policy of bringing people from the West of Ireland. It would be unnational to oppose that policy. Those who have visited the West of Ireland realise that the people there had to try to live on three or four acres of what was perhaps mountain land. Most of the migrants speak the Irish language but, in my opinion, the language will be killed if there is not a link between the people in Meath and the people in the west. If there were fair-sized colonies, so as to form a chain of holdings from the west to the midland colonies, the Irish language would be preserved by the people. Those who have come up from the west speak the Irish language now but I believe that in five or six years' time they will lose their knowledge of the language. Many of them are ashamed to speak Irish at the present time because they are amongst people who do not know Irish. Those of us who believe in fostering the Irish language doubt if it is a good thing to isolate small numbers of people in a strange place. It would be a better policy to bring migrants up slowly and to have colonies consisting of 200 or 300 people every 15 or 20 miles from Mayo to Meath. If the large ranches that I heard Deputy Nally referring to, some of which contain from 500 to 2,000 acres, were divided, it would relieve congestion in the west, and the owners of these estates could be given not 300 acres, but 80 acres of land, on which they could make good in County Meath. They will make good on that land; they will give employment; and they will buy cattle from the West of of Ireland, but if you divide the county into the small scraggy patches into which you are dividing it at present, you will live to regret it because you will kill the cattle export trade if you tear up County Meath as you are doing at present.
I am not speaking without experience of this matter. I have full experience and I mix with the people who export cattle. To-day they are shaking their heads and saying that if the present process goes on the cattle trade will be finished within 20 years, and all we shall be able to export will be poor scraggy stores. While we are in the position that we are able to hold any market to which we send our fat cattle, we ought to try to hold it and not to kill it. It is grand to have land in the country capable of finishing a beast early in June without any artificial feeding whatever, and is it not worth while nursing and conserving that land? I do not want that land divided into 1,000 acre ranches, but into economic patches on which a man can finish his cattle. I suggest that the Land Commission should pay more attention to these matters and less to the whispering in different counties that so-and-so should get land, and when they get the land you find that they have not got a "bob" to work it.
I know also that things are "slipped across" the Land Commission in my county. I know certain types of men who, when asked by the Land Commission inspector: "Can you show me your money?" are able to take £100 or £150 out of their pockets, with the result that the inspector thinks that these are men who are going to make good. But where does such a man get that money? He gets it from the big farmer beside him who gave it to him for the day the inspector was to call, and, the day after, the money is handed back and the small farm this man gets is secured by the big farmer beside him on the 11-months' system. I urge the Land Commission, if they are going to divide any more land, not to listen to stories from these warriors but to go to the local clergyman, who knows every man in the parish, of whatever denomination, and who will tell you honestly and straightforwardly: "Give So-and-so land because he will work it, but do not give it to So-and-so because he is no good." In that way, you will get proper land division and you will not allow these fellows to "slip it across" you.
When large estates in County Meath are divided there is always the problem of the disposal of the big mansion. There are many of these mansions, built of the best of granite, with stabling and lofts that any man would envy, but, unfortunately, under the blind policy of the Land Commission for a number of years, men have come with axes and crowbars, have torn them down and made roads from the material, while people in the country are crying out for granaries for the storage of grain. It is the duty of the Land Commission to see that buildings of that type, which are roofed with the best slates and timber, are not allowed to fall into a condition of complete neglect, and it is their duty to leave an adequate supply of land with these places so that the community, whether religious or otherwise, may take it over and make a success of it. It is terrible that we who regard as a difficult problem the provision of labourers' cottages should tear down these great monuments. They may be monuments of inequity in the past, built on the sweat of slaves, but they are there at present, and they are Irish property, and the Land Commission should think twice before tearing down even one of them. I ask the Land Commission to realise that they are more valuable than as material for making yards and roads. Let them be utilised for something. There are men in this country and in America longing to pay good money for these mansions so that they may live in decent surroundings and give employment, and I urge the Land Commission not to destroy them in future.
I mentioned last year the case of Mrs. Connolly, a widow, of Flathouse, Dunboyne, and, in that regard, the Minister's predecessor more or less promised that he would have her case investigated and, if possible, provide her nephew with a holding. In that case, about 200 acres were taken for which this widow did not get even a five-pound note. She has a nephew with a young family who applied for land, but was turned down, and I ask the Minister, as a matter of justice, to see that this young man gets a farm, because that woman was robbed bare-facedly by the Irish Land Commission at the call of a local club. I am not afraid to say that. The agitation was started solely by people who got land, half of whom will never work it, and, to gain their own ends, that woman was robbed. Why is not justice done in this matter? Is this woman not deserving of justice when she was robbed of her holding? No credit would be due to the Government for giving a holding to the nephew and rectifying some of the bad work done.
In County Meath, there is a large number of estates with hundreds of acres of timber and the Land Commission are in a quandary as to what they should do with it. They have told me that the areas are not large enough for forestry purposes, and, as there is very little bogland and no hope of fuel for the coming year in those districts— the timber has been lying there for 20 years, having been knocked down by storms, but no man is allowed to go in and carry any of it out on his back— I ask the Land Commission to open these timber areas to the poor during the present emergency and give this timber out as firewood—I do not care at what price—because these are areas in which it is not possible to get a sod of turf. Let this timber be utilised and let the old woods be replanted, because it is a pity to see them as they are. If they are left as they are, they are going to constitute an eyesore.
Now that there is a lull in land division, I urge the Land Commission to exercise great care, as I and others have suggested before, to ensure that the old vicious system of ranchers does not return. The ranchers will come back in spite of you, if you do not give economic farms to men who are fit, able and willing to work, and if you give land to men who are able to "slip it across" you by showing £200 which does not belong to them at all. Let them ask the proper people who should and should not get land. If they do so, they will have very little trouble. There is no use in poking around and asking one man about his neighbour, because the old tradition in this country is: "If I can get it, to hell with the rest." Every man wants it for himself, and if he thinks his neighbour is about to get a farm, he says: "He is a terrible character. Down that fellow. If you only knew what his father did before him." Every man wants a farm, but there are only a few to be given out in the different areas, and I ask the Land Commission to waken up because they are being fooled morning, noon and night by "quick" fellows. I called them certain names last year, and I may be sorry for doing so, but everything I said was perfectly true, and I defy contradiction of it.
