The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1871-01-10
Land Tenure In Ireland.


A case recently adjudicated inst the Royal
Court at Dublin, illustrates very forcibly the
benefcent character Of the new Irish Land
act The Marquis Of Waterford owns e1ten-
sive estates in Londonderry. They were
granted to Beresford two hundred years:ago
when they were only of a nominal value, and
have descended to the present owner with
out any material improvements having been
made by the successive proprietors in the
two centuries. The land is cultivated by
yearly Grants, who have, nevertheless, en-
joyed the privilege of the Ulster custom,
which permits retiring tenant to sell to the
incoming tenant and require from him COM
pensation for the Improvements made by
himself and preceding tenants. This IS VIZ
tually prohibition for the landlord against
any undue increase of rent, and security for
the tenant that he will not be turned out
without compensation, while it enables him
practically to name his successor. Under
this custom the lands of the Marquis of
Waterford have descended from father to
son for generations, and the tenantry has
been almost as constant as if the holders
we're the legal owners of their section OF the
estate. But the Marquis now offers the es-
tate for sale, plan which he has long in
tended to carry out There are nearly three
hundred holders and families upon it, and
of course every one of them is affected by
the sale. Under the old system the estate
would probably have brought near It's ac-
tual value, as indicated by the possible rents
that might be required from it as improved
by the tenants. The purchaser might, if ne
chose, disregard altogether the Ulster Gus
tom, which was not recognized by the law,
and put the rents at such rate that neither
the present nor any future tenants could OBJ
tain more than the barest living from the
land which they cultivated
1t is precisely here that the Irish land act
stepped in to secure the tenants their moral
rights. The Marquis advertised the estate
for sale. The tenants secured counsel and
applied to the court to require the proprie-
tor to state in his advertisement that they
were entitled to the privileges legally recog-
nized in the land act Of last year as the
Ulster tenant right. The application was
combated by the counsel for the Marquis OF
Waterford as involving loss to himself. 1t
would be, it was argued, notification to
intending purchasers that the property was
not worth so much as it appeared TO be.
The tenants contended that without such
notice the purchaser would pay such price
that he could only obtain q fair return by
raising the rents. The judge denied the ap-
plication, and although the details of his
opinion have not reached US, we conclude
that the decision rested on the ground that
the land act itself protected the tenants,
whatever might be the terms offered by the
seller and accepted by the buyer, and that it
would be dangerous precedent for tenants
to admit that the absence of q notice on the
advertisements of the existence OF reserved
rights was fatal to their power Of enforcing
those rights. The defeat of the tenants was
in this way their victory. The Judge said
that he might make public the fact that the
tenants had reserved rights; but such
course could not be necessary, and the
rights are more secure and in better hands
than they would be if the decision had been
reversed.