criminal arrangement. It is true the increasing pressure of a teeming population, and the natural instinct which, Judge Longfield tells us, is inherent in every Irish tenant—to turn himself into a landlord if he gets the chance—resulted in a state of things replete with mischief. But for the development of this unexpected phase in the Irish land system, the proprietor is by no means responsible to the degree which is supposed. Up to nearly the close of the last century the great proportion of the country was in pasture, and the population was less than half of what it amounted to in 1841. The holdings were of considerable size,[1] and when a
- ↑ Both the soil and climate of Ireland are peculiarly adapted to pasturage, and consequently to large farms, but there was a peculiar reason why, during the earlier half of the last century, the holdings were necessarily of a considerable size.
Amongst the many infamous statutes known as the Penal Laws, was one which precluded Catholics from purchasing lands, from holding a lease of more than thirty-one years, or from deriving from the permanent occupation of land any profit in excess of one-third of the rent; consequently the proprietors of estates had no option—as Mr. Thornton very justly remarks—than to let their lands to the few capitalists who could legally occupy them. I have placed in an appendix Mr. Thornton's admirable description of the circumstances under which Ireland continued to remain a grass country until the close of the last century. (See Appendix, p. 117.)
"The Protestant landlords also suffered indirectly from the operation of the same penal laws; for in letting these estates, they were to a great degree confined in the selection cf their tenants, to those who alone could enjoy any permanent tenure under them, and were exclusively entitled to the election franchise. Many landlords parted with tho whole or a great portion
