We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Dáil

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Mount Talbot House and Lands, Roscommon.

Michael Cleary Micheál O Clérigh Fianna Fáil

asked the Minister for Lands and Fisheries if he will state (1) the total acreage of land included with Mount Talbot House, Roscommon, as sold by the Irish Land Commission, (2) to whom it was sold, (3) the price paid and (4) if there were other offers made for portion of the lands in question.

Comment on this
Frank Aiken Minister for Lands and Fisheries (Mr. Aiken) Fianna Fáil

Mount Talbot House, together with adjoining lands containing 158 acres, was re-sold by the Land Commission under purchase agreement dated 11th June, 1928, to Mr. M.J. Kelly, Ballygar, for a price of £1,300, of which £300 was a cash payment. Three other offers were received in response to the advertisement for the sale of the house and lands but, being considered inadequate, were not accepted. The 158 acres mentioned are of very inferior quality as they comprise 80 acres plantation, 10 water, 58 acres low-lying pasture liable to floods, and only 10 acres of the entire area is arable land.

Comment on this

Can the Minister say, in regard to these three offers which he mentioned, if the Land Commission had regard to the ability to pay on the part of the people who made those offers? Can the Minister tell the House if he has any information on that?

Comment on this

That is a separate question.

Comment on this

My question is in relation to the offers he says were made.

Comment on this

If the Deputy wants information on that matter he can put down a separate question.

Comment on this

Deputy Cleary's question refers to these offers made.

Comment on this

I have said that there were three other offers received in response to the advertisements.

Comment on this

But Deputy Cleary's question is if other offers were made for portion of the land in question. I take it the Minister's answer was in reference to the whole of that question?

Comment on this

And, therefore, the fourth paragraph of Deputy Cleary's question has not been answered. Perhaps the Minister would take another occasion to answer part four of that question.

Comment on this