Skip to main content

Land Court

Volume 161: debated on Tuesday 13 March 1923

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.


asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health whether, seeing that the Member recently appointed by him to the Scottish Land Court is proprietor of a landed estate in the North of Scotland and a director of a soft-goods store in Glasgow and that with one exception all the members of the Scottish Land Court are landlords, he will say whether they are permitted to adjudicate on the question of fair rents in the counties where their landed estates are situated; and whether he will now consider the appointment of a member more representative of the interests of small landholders and with a knowledge of the Highlands, the people, their language, and aspirations, so as to establish this tribunal in the confidence not only of landlords but also of small landholders?

I am informed that the member recently appointed is proprietor of a small landed estate in Caithness and that the two of her agricultural members were tenant farmers who have purchased their farms. The first-mentioned member was formerly a director of a firm of warehousemen in Glasgow, but retired from that office some months ago. In the allocation of cases care is taken to ensure that no member shall adjudicate on any application in which he is in any way interested. The importance of securing a member well qualified to discharge the duties was fully in view by my Noble Friend in making the last appointment, and he will have regard to the same considerations in making any future appointment.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the gentleman to whom reference is made in this question is a Highlander belonging to one of the principal clans in Sutherlandshire, that he has a full knowledge of the language and of the interests of the people, and that this appointment was warmly welcomed by the people of Caithness and Sutherland, and by none more than by the small landholders?

By which Cruiser detected.Number of Detections.Locus.Port to which Vessel taken.Results of Trials.
"Brenda"1Off Haddingtonshire Coast.LeithNot yet tried.
"Freya"2(a) Off Buchanness.PeterheadFined £80 or 60 days.
(b) Off Brora.Charged at seaNot yet tried.
"Minna"1Loch RoagStornowayFined £100 or 60 days.
"Vigilant"2Firth of Clyde, off Great Cumbrae.Charged at sea(a) Pined £10 or 26 days.
(b) Fined £50 or 40 days.

Is it not the fact that these vessels are quite inadequate to afford that protection it is their duty to do because of their insufficient speed?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Battersea can tell them about speed!