[To THE EDITOR OF TILE "SPECTATOR.']
SIR,—IS it not an obvious answer to Mr. Tuke's argument— that to one million of persons in Ireland ownership would not be more advantageous than annual tenancy—to say, "If tenants who pay rent can live, no matter how, a fortiori, owners paying no rent will live so much the more easily "? I am aware that Mr. Tuke has data for the pessimism of his letter. I heard, e.g., lately that an acknowledged judge of land—a Conservative who had visited Ireland for sporting purposes—declared of land in Kerry that he could not imagine how tenants could pay the rents, even as fixed judicially, and live. But Mr. Tuke seems to me, if I may say so, too much choked with the dust of figures to make allowance for agencies not calculable by arithmetic. In 1849, the Duke of Sutherland gave permission to some evicted cotters to settle on "an unproductive waste, not worth three shillings an acre." Some twenty years later that land was "returning annually twenty-one shillings an acre rent, and presenting a beautiful picture of fertility, peace, and prosperity, with a thoroughly grateful and attached peasantry." If tenants whose rents were raised more than sevenfold in twenty years thrive so in Scotland, will Mr. Take maintain that in Ireland— much more in England—owners of small allotments would not have substantial ground for hope ?—I am, Sir, (tc.,
Previous page
