The Irish standard., 1903-01-03
A Shopkeeper Who Took a Farm Belonging
to Protestant Family Has
Paid the Penalty.
His Catholic Neighbors Refused to Trade
With the Fellow for Being
A Land Grabber.

States and even in England. The
rough methods Of former years have
been set aside. The boycott today Is
quiet, orderly, but determined, effec.
tive, and mercilcss.
The Tallow case is presented here
because 1t shows the injustice and suf-
fcrlng which must he spread, even
where man under the BAN seeks to
he liberal and just, If the Irish land
problem is not to be ended by parlia-
mcnt at the February session. For
the land trouble is the source of all
lreland's troubles, and England now is
opening it's eyes, after scores of years
of blindness and tinkering, to this fact.
The ruined man in the ",rallOw case"
was himself an Irish nationalist. He
purchased the farm in the first in
stance as an act Of assistance to the
tenants, who were about to be re.
moved. The result certainly is strong
est proof Of the tcnacity with which
Irish tenants hold to their law that nc
man Shall take up cvicted land and
| thus assist a landlord. The boycott
was kept up in the face of the pro-
tests of the priests and of the counsel
for the bishop himself
1t was in 1850 that there died in the
town of TallOw Il Protestant attorney
of the name of Parker. He frequently
had been employed as counselor by the
landlord class of County Wexford, and
| he held three farms which he had as
sumed MS Il leasing tenant from the
duke of Dcvonslire
When Parker died the farms revert
ed to his eldest son, and the latter dy-
ing In 1894 t..c property passed to four
surviving daughters Of the elder Park.
er by will. Here the trouble began,
for neither of the four sisters, after
the death Of their brother, would ac-
knowledge herself as the renting ten.
ant. They wrangled among them
selves. Three years passed without
rental being paid, and at the end Of
that time the landlord, in view Of tile
arrcaragcs, secured from the land COM
mission, with the consent Of the Park
crs, Il decree for the sale of the ten
ant right Of the three holdings The
farms In this case, it will be under
stood, were farms in fact as well as
namc,, and not the crlmpcd patches OF
the congcstcd districts of the west OF
Ireland.
In 1898 an auction was held and two
of the farms were sold to man
of the name of O'COnncll for $1,25O.
He has since held these tracts without
protest, for the Parker sisters offered
no objection to the sale. lie paid no
compensation to the Parkers whatever,
but direct to the landlord. The third
holding bore the name of Roseville,
and one of the Parkcrs pleaded with
David OKccffc, tallow merchant
who conducted a large corn and grain
trade, to buy in the place for them.
But for this request, Mr.. O'Keeffc
asserts, he never would have mcddled
with the property.
"All l can say" said hc in discus
!; sing the case, "is that l purchased the
land for them as favor. have
, merely sought the return of the money
l paid out and which was promised"
, He paid the duke Of Devonshire
! 5000 to hold Rosevillc, which was
subject to /; rent of $3.50 and taxes
aggrcgating $3.50. The sale of this
property occurred Feb. %, 1898, and by
: the terms Of the purchase Mr.. O'Keenfe
, was bound to pay an additional yeur's
; rent over and above the price given,
. as another twelve months had elapsed
in the interval before til. s,iae was
t consummatcd. In the end, thus. lie
5 had paid out $4,000 in the effort to
aid the Parkers to redeem the place.
The family held the house another
year and Mr.. OKceffe awaited the
, promised payment. When the twelve
months came around another years
rent and taxes had accrued. The
: Parkers did not meet this obligation,
! though they had now had the benefit