1 2684/16
Estate of The Irish Land Commission,
formerly Estate of Sir William Mahon, County Galway, E C 6979 Assistant Under Secretary, I return Peter Molloy's Memorial to His Excellency
the Lord Lieutenant with reference to the division of the un-
tenanted lands on the above Estate which was forwarded by you
for report. The Estate was purchased by the Estates Commission-
ers under Section 6 of the Irish Land Act 1903, and they direct
me to enclose the accompanying extracts from a Report which
they have obtained from their Inspector, and to say that the
house referred to by Mr Molloy was allotted to a tenant on the
Estate whose house was in a far worse condition than Molloy's
and that as regards the cess-pools complained of, Commiss-
ioners are taking steps to have the matter remedied. I am to suggest, for His Excellency's consideration,
that Molloy might be informed that the resale of the this Estate
was carried out by the Estates Commissioners in the exercise of
the discretion conferred on the them and H.E. regrets therefore that the matter is not one
in which His Excellency he can interfere. John T. Quinan: Estates Commissioners' Officies, DUBLIN: 3rd March, 1916. 2 ESTATE OF SIR WILLIAM
COUNTY GALWAY
RE MEMORIAL OF PETER MOLLOY TO THE LORD
LIEUTENTANT.
Extract from the Report of the Estates Commisioners'
Inspector.
''''''''''''''''''''' Mr. Hogan Molloy's circumstances are as follows:-
His holding consists of land as follows:-
Area 9a Or 32p.
Purchase Money £65.
Valuation £5.15. 0. Family.
Self and wife. (Married for years and no
children. His wife is a first class National
School Teacher receiving at least £70 per
annum and Molloy himself is a police
pensioner receiving £25 per annum. Now on the scheme for division of untenanted lands on the
Estate there are roughly about 100 tenants provided for
whose valuation range from 15/- to £7 and their average
valuation is £3.10.0 Com p aring the impoverished condition of these tenants with
that of Molloy enjoying a receipt of £100 per year by way
of income with no family to provide for, and in occupation
of a holding of greater value than the majority of those
held by tenants on the estate, I think I was justified in 3 deciding not to recommend Molloy to the Commissioners
for favourable consideration in the division of lands on
the Mahon Estate. Regarding Molloy's complaint about the bad condition of
his house and its unsanitary condition I would point out
to the Commissioners that considering Molloy's means and
the position held by his wife in the district it was a
matter of choice for Molloy himself whether he continued
to live under such conditions as he describes. Further his indifference to the conditions of his premises
was, in addition to the other vital objections which I
have already stated, a very substantial reason in addition
against a favourable recommendation. In conclusion I wish to state that I never discussed
Molloy's case with any other tenant or body of tenantry
and I have no recollection of ever having received a letter
from him. Yours faithfully Signed. James C. Tynan 8/2/16