The reasons alleged in defence of the Act of 1909 failed to justify, or even to explain, the changes it imposed.  An explanation must be sought in the real reasons, and they are not far to seek.  The first was that the old methods of litigation and delay, abjured by all parties in 1903, were substituted for the new methods of speed and ease, because Mr. Dillon so willed it; and the second, that the policy of abolishing dual ownership, to which Mr. Redmond stood pledged, had to be ousted, again at Mr. Dillon’s dictation, to make way for the folly of creating new tenancies, of symmetrical size, throughout all Ireland.  The Treaty was torn up because Mr. Dillon, acting as deputy for Mr. Birrell (whose main argument for Home Rule is that it bores him to be Chief Secretary), ordered Mr. Redmond to eat his words.

From this examination of the reasons for destroying the Act of 1903, the true size and nature of the financial problem emerges.  From the total of some 490,000 holdings substantial reductions must be made in respect of waste lands, grass lands, and accommodation plots, and, again, in view of the limitation on the amount that may be advanced to one person.  We ought probably to deduct 20 per cent., but if, to be on the safe side, we deduct only 15 per cent., 416,000 are left.  These, however, include some 80,000 sold before the Act of 1903, or under the Land Commissioners as distinct from the Estates Commissioners.  In respect of the 336,500 remaining, 257,474 agreements have been lodged under all categories in the Acts of 1903 and 1909.  Indeed, a larger number have been lodged, for in most cases our information is only to March 31, 1911, leaving less than 79,000 holdings that may still come into the market.  This is an outside figure, provided always that the policy of 1903 be adhered to, viz. that advances are made to occupiers and not to new men, except as under the Act of that year (sect. 2 (I) b and d, and sect. 75) in rare cases, rigidly defined, of the sons of tenants and of evicted tenants.

If the average price remains at the figure for the period March 31, 1908, to September 15, 1909—­viz.  L287—­a further sum of L22,673,000 may be required in excess of L84,099,818 already required under the Acts of 1903 and 1909; making L106,772,818.  This total includes nearly L1,000,000 for re-sales to owners and some provision for evicted tenants.  Under these heads it will not expand in a greater relative degree.  It includes, also, purchase of whole estates and of untenanted land by the Estates Commissioners and Congested Districts Board, and these may involve larger sums than were originally contemplated.  I promised to return to that point, and will now do so.  Since the Return under these heads up to March 31, 1911, tentative negotiations have been made for the purchase of a number of estates and for supplying more evicted tenants with holdings.  But this does not increase the money size of the problem by