15 / 112
JUNE, 1909]
The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.
11
the attitude of saying: "This duty has been
charged for years, and you never protested
against it."
(A voice—we did protest against
it). Yes, but there was no legislative measure
brought to bear on it. He will say, " The
only principle now at issue is the propriety of
increasing the duties," and to my mind that is
perhaps the only question we ought to concern
ourselves with—an unjust imposition following
up a tax which should never have been passed
in regard to tenant-purchasers.
I think we
ought to protest against the general increase
of taxes in this country by the Budget which is
now on the eve of passing. We ought to deal
with the whole problem.
MR. JAMES HENRY :
I think if we mix
up general questions with the special one
which is the subject of the resolution, it would
only weaken, not strengthen it (hear, hear).
The proposed raising of the stamp duty from
IDS. to
£1
per cent, has not yet passed—and
some people say that is one of the things to be
thrown over in the Budget—and we will have
got our answer if in the ultimate result the.ios.
will not be increased. But I think it would
be a dangerous thing, and I think it would
take away from the strength of our resolution,
if we
introduced or mixed up the general
question which does not affect us differentially
from England (hear, hear).
The resolution was passed.
The Amending Land Bill.
MR. WILLIAM FRY, Ex-President, said-
It is not out of place at this half-yearly meet
ing of our Society that we should consider for
a few moments the pending land bill which
has been introduced by the Chief Secretary for
Ireland. This bill, on its face, purports to be
an amending bill to the Wyndham Land Act.
Now, the great advantages of the Wyndham
Act were—firstly, as regards the tenant, that
he obtained much greater facilities for pur
chasing his holding. Under former Acts he
had to repay the purchase-money advanced to
him and the interest by annual payments equi
valent to 4 per cent. Under the Wyndham
Act the advance was to be repaid by a purchase
annuity at
the rate of ^3
$s.
for every
;£ioo, and at
the end of 68-J- years, both
principal and interest having been repaid to
the Government, the tenant had acquired the
fee-simple of his land free from any annuity.
The advantage to the landlord was that a
system was
introduced known as the zone
system, which obviated the necessity for the
Land Commission to value each holding on
the estate, and a
landlord could
tell
in
advance what amount of purchase-money he
could depend upon getting. The second ad
vantage
secured
to
the
landlord by
the
Wyndham Act was the bonus and the in
ducement which was offered thereby to tenants
for
life and other limited owners to
sell.
Then again the voluntary system of sales was
preserved, and
this worked well as between
landlord and tenant. As a result we profes
sional men know that the Department of the
Estates Commissioners became congested by
reason of the enormous number of estates
that were brought in for sale, but then weak
points were found
in
the administration.
Prominently there was the want of finance.
Sales were going too rapidly, money could
not be provided in sufficient amount by the
British Treasury. Losses resulted from flota
tion of Guaranteed Land Stock. The staff of
the Land Commission was quite insufficient
to keep pace with the sales that were being
brought into the Department. Accumulations
of work rapidly arose.
Then again other
questions came before the three Estates Com
missioners which occupied a great deal of
their time, and we solicitors know that, en
thusiastic as the three Estates Commissioners
have been to give effect to the policy of the
law, yet they can only do men's work, and
business has necessarily got into arrear. One
of the subjects which I think is responsible
for occupying a great deal of the Commis
sioners' time and attention has been that of
the distribution of lands that have not been
in the hands of tenants at all.
Of course
when land has been available, landless people
have been looking for it, and time has been occu
pied in endeavouring to satisfy persons who are
difficult to deal with. All classes of the com
munity have been protesting against the block
of business in the Land Commission, and we
solicitors, representing, as we do, every class
of the community, not merely landlords and
tenants, but every class, know well the feel
ing throughout the country.
Therefore,
I
venture to think that no profession is as com
petent to form an unprejudiced and as clear an
opinion on the working of the Land Acts and
their proposed amendments as we solicitors.
Now, turning to the proposed Amending Bill,
which I gather is to occupy a good deal of
Parliamentary time during the present session.
I gather that there are proposals to change the
methods of finance connected with the land
purchase.
There are proposals to raise the
tenants' purchase annuity from 3^ per cent, to