These savings do not come from the landlords, so many of whom are hopelessly ruined by the combined action of our own legislature and the Plan of Campaign.  Of this ruin Colonel Lloyd has given a very graphic account.  Alluding to Mr. Balfour’s answer in the House on the 21st of June, to the question put by Mr. Macartney on Colonel Lloyd’s letter to the Times (10th of June), the Colonel repeats his assertions, or rather his accusations against the Court.  These are:—­“First, that the percentage of reductions now being given is the very highest yet made, notwithstanding that prices of agricultural produce and cattle have considerably increased; secondly, that the Sub-Commissioners have no fixed rule to guide them save one—­viz., that existing rents, be they high or low, must be cut down, although they may not have been altered for half a century; thirdly that it was reported the Commissioners had instructions to give all-round reductions of 33 per cent.; fourthly, that in the Land Court the most skilled evidence of value is disregarded, as also the Poor Law valuation; fifthly, that the Sub-Commissioners assign no reasons for their decisions; and, sixthly, that the machinery of the Court is faulty and unfair in the following instances:—­(a) If a landlord appeals and fails, he must pay costs, but if he appeals and succeeds he will not get costs; (b) tenants’ costs are taxed by the Court behind the landlord’s back; (c) their rules are constantly changing without any proper notice to the public; and (d) appeals are accumulating with no prospect of their being disposed of in any reasonable time.”

Colonel Lloyd disposes of Mr. Balfour’s denials to these statements, but at too great length to copy.  It may be taken for granted here that they are disposed of, and that he proves up to the hilt his case of crying injustice to the landlords—­as indeed every fair-minded person who looks honestly into the question, must acknowledge.  As one slight corroboration of what he says he adduces the following instances:—­

“The following judicial rents were fixed by the Assistant-Commissioners in the West of Ireland:—­

Poor Law       Judicial
Tenants’ Names.    Old Rent.     Valuation.       Rent
L s. d.         L s. d.       L s. d. 
Tom Regan         9  9 10       12  0  0      5 15  0
J. Manlon         9  2  6       11 10  0      5 15  0
C. Kelly          9 12 10       11  5  0      6  0  0
J. Kenny          4 11  4        6  5  0      2 15  0

L32 16 6 L41 0 0 L20 5 0

“The landlord appealed, and the appeals were heard a few days ago by the Chief Commissioners in Roscommon.  Two skilled valuers were employed, who valued within a few shillings of the Government valuation, and in the face of this evidence the decisions of the Assistant-Commissioners were confirmed.  These are not by any means isolated instances.  In fact they are the rule in the Land Court.”