The Sun.
London, England, 1869-05-14 00:00:00

THE STATE OF IRELAND.

The correspondent of the Daily News, inquiring into the
outrages in the south of Ireland, dates his latest commu-
nication from Clonmel. The following case, which he
details as occurring near Bansha, between Tipperary and
Clonmel, will illustrate strongly the feeling that animates
the people on the question of land tenure. A widow fell
into arrears of rent, and the landlord thought it wan ,
time to eject. He took proceedings accordingly,
and the widow's farm was given to another—a rela-
tion of the widow, who offered her some compensation.
This was indignantly rejected, and the widow came to
reside in Bansha. The new occupier never made his ap-
pearance in the town that the widow did not pour
down on him abuse, reproaches, curses, and even
filth. Ile complained, and the woman was re-
monstrated with, but in vain. She had lost her home,
and people thought that she had lost her reason.
One cold morning a report arrived in Bansha that the
house of Farmer A. was in flames. So it was, and with
the house there perished some half-a-dozen head of stock.
On investigation a box of snatches was found outside the
house, which proved that it was the work of an incen- !
diary. The ejected widow was out of bed that night, and
though no one could prove any act done, no one has any
doubt as to the perpetrator of the arson. The farmer got
compensation from the county, but he says he feels no
security as long as the widow is alive.
The same correspondent gives a story of the brother of
Mr. William Scully, who was shot some months since.
A woman owing £6O for three years' rent was requested
to leave, and was offered £4O and the back rent to do so.
She refused, and was forcibly ejected. The agents Of
the law had scarcely disappeared when Mrs. Tobin took
possession of an outhouse. When requested to leave by Mr.
Scully's bailiff, she refused, adding that "if he put a leg into
the place she would see him for it sooner or later.'
The next charge brought against her was for wilful and
personal trespass, and using threatening language. Even
now she was offered a remission of the three years' rent
due, £6O from the incoming tenant, and £4O from Mr.
Scully, snaking an allowance of £l6O. Still she refused,
though pressed to accept the terms offered. She was
bound over, herself in £5O, and two sureties in £25 each,
to keep the peace for twelve months. It was apparent,
from the course of the proceedings, that the widow Tobin
had a public opinion outside the court, on which she relied
for sympathy. On the other hand, the Daily News
correspondent heard the remark made that the
concessions of Mr. James Scully would prove
store pernicious than the rigid adherence of his
brother William to the absolute letter of the law, What
inference will tie tenantry draw from the case but that
rent is robbery? here is a woman actually offered what
would be equivalent to an eight years' purchase in the
Landed Estates Court, on condition that she would leave
a house and farm to which she had no legal title. Some-
body else may say, " I shall pay no rent at all ; I possess
and I till, why should I share with one who does not possess
ldoades
give
der ejectment,
vt ohefe l Colonel
ao
land.
possession
es le
salPsi
oUdnrwel:voohubyloudwthhba
soe he
been
eedefnasu
nssogeeffsev
ere
rotr
ehuadesl
and who does not till ?" Nor is this an extreme case.
t
eThaerrse,
riesna2nt4a,dootuhenont
money,23i
hniootehgeoprr
roebsaebnity
tfor
pa
enry
oo
fn et
hteo
psucceed t
Bh ey
tactual e ()Cs
Colonel
Purefoy is one of the landlords who has recently left the
country and gone to England.

The correspondent calls attention, on the other hand, to
what Sir William Osborne did some years back. He built
for a ragged man a cabin on the untilled mountain side,
and gave him land there at a small rent. The man,
before poor and miserable, succeeded, and became well-to-
do. Sir William soon had others applying to him for the
same privilege. He gave them what they asked; and
they also soon rose above their poverty, discontent, and
Whiteboyisrn. They really worked day and night because
they worked for themselves. " Suppose (it is asked) that
Sir William Osborne was a strict economist and purely
selfish man, and that he said to these tenants, You have
made this land very valuable, but the land being mine,
everything that you have put into it is mine also. Your
labour inheres in my property, and cannot be disassociated
from it. I need not allow you to remain on the land
at all, but I shall not exercise my full legal rights.
You must, however, give me three-fifths or five-sixths
of the produce. If you do not agree to this you
must go ; there are others who will accept my proposal.'
Would you blame the tenantry if they grumbled at a
contract of this kind, and would it not rather be an
abuse of terms to call such a proposal by the name of a
contract ?"

Summing up the information lie has received, the
correspondent says :—" I cannot but think it is the
bounden duty of the Legislature to interfere, without loss
of time, between these extreme pretensions on one side
and the other. At present the great mass of opinion lies
in the middle ; but the longer a fair bill on the question
of land tenure is delayed, the greater will be the difficulty
of dealing with it."