The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1901-01-05
Loyal the British but Protest Against
the 0dous Land System in Vogue.
Sweeping Denuncaton of Landlordsm Which Running
the People of the Entire Island.
W. RUSSELL Lately Dismissed from the Salisbury Cabinet
Delivers a Magnificent Address.

. starting point of the land commission.
How did they act? The reduction in
: rent during the first judicial term
averaged 20 per cent. There was not
!, a witness before the Morley commit
| tee, from Sir Edward Bewlcy down,
who did not admit that during the
: early years from 1881 to 1886 the rents
: had been fixed too high-in other
words, that the commission had lacked
, the courage to do what was right.
, They were deferred and intimidated by
the Lords committee in 1882 and they
} were handicapped by the decision of
the court of appeal in Adams VS.. Dun
seath-a decision which had to be re-
; verscd by legislation in 1896, so clearly
was 1t against the intentions of parlia-
: ment. | say tonight and without re-
serve. that had the land courts given
due consideration to the tenants prop
erty the act of 1881 would have made
a reduction of 20 per cent on this
ground alone. Instead of doing SO
they reduced the rent by 20 per cent
reduction which was made to cover
an allowance for the tenants property
as it stood in 1881, a reduction of %
per cent on account of the fall in
prices. the doubled cost of labor and
the loss inevitable in bad seasons, Is
an inadequate reduction. The acts
hHVn hnar
fairly administered. The statutes have
been correct in intention. But what
Is the use OF passing an act of parlia-
ment and then appointing administrat-
ors opposed to it's very conception, and
who proceed to strangle It? The entire
governing class in Ireland looks upon
the land code ns n system of robbery.
Starting with that, how can one expect
fair administration? This, then, is our
first reason for proposing change-vis.,
the complete breakdown of the present
system 1t has utterly failed.
My second reason is because the
present system us it stands is running
the country And here let me point
out a fundamental mistake that is
everywhere made when this question
is considered outside of Ireland. Peo
pie talk of landlords and the land
system in Ireland and in England as
II they were one and the same thing.
There is absolutely no analogy be-
tween the two things. In England the
! landlord is the sole and only owner Of
the land, buildings and everything in
| and upon the soil. He let's the farm
| at Il given rent as II going concern.
! He eracts and maintains the home and
| farm buildings. He drains and fences
| the land-in fact, the owner acts as
| owner, and as a matter of fact he
gives back to the land much of what
| he gets as rent In many cases the
rent simply represents 3 per cent on
| the expenditure in maintaining the
| farm as II going concern. Compare
| this with the Irish system. The Irish
| landlord owns nothing but the bare
| sOil--hc has erected no farm buildings;
| he has neither drained nor fenced the
| land; he has made no farm roads.
All this has been done not by the man
| who is called the owner, but by the
occupier.
The naked truth Is that the Irish
landlord takes, but does not give back.
He draws what is In fact, if not in
law, a rent charge That is all. Not
a sixpence does he spend on the land.
and much of what he draws is spent
out OF the country. Could two systems
be more unlike? The Irish system
may be summed up thus: First, there
is a landlord whose one object is to Sc
cure his rent, and lie performs no
duty to the property he owns; second,
there is the occupier, afraid to improve
the land because in due time the land
commission will arrive, and in spite of
acts of parliament, win rent to some
extent upon whatever improvements
he may have made; third, there is the
laborer, ground to powder between the
two parties--crowding into the towns
or crossing the Atlantic, until there is
hardly man capable of doing days
work in some parts of the country.
Could there be a worse system? And
add to all this the miseries of gigan-
tic lawsuit going on constantly in ev-
cry parish-cases dragged from court
to court, with an array of. lawyers {
and judges revellng in the spoils. No \
country could stand it, Ireland least
Of all. And it must end, for mending
is impossible
His third reason for what he admit
ted to be u revolutionary proposal
was that the future is one Of great