British bull-dog, whelp, and cur would be
pulverised and made top-dressing for the soil." Canon Keller afterwards
expressed disapproval of this speech of Hayes, and this coming to the
knowledge of Hayes in America, Hayes denounced Keller for not daring to
do this at the time in his presence. Since then Canon Keller has been
much more violent in tone.

_Q_. I don't want to carry you through a long examination, Mr. Ponsonby,
but I see typical cases here, about which I should like to ask a
question or two. Here, is Callaghan Flavin, for instance, described by
Canon Keller as one of eight tenants who "had to retreat before the
crowbar brigade," and who "deserved a better fate." Canon Keller says he
is assured by a competent judge that Flavin's improvements, "full value
for L341, 10s.," are now "the landlord's property." What are the facts
about Mr. Flavin?

_A_. Mr. Flavin's farm was held by his cousin, Ellen Flavin of Gilmore,
who, on the 7th of February 1872, surrendered it to the landlord on
receiving from me a sum of L172, 10s. 6d. I obtained a charging order
under section 27 of the Land Act, entitling me to an annuity of L8, 12s.
6d. for thirty-five years from July 3, 1872. It was let to Callaghan
Flavin in preference to other applicants, July 3, 1872; and in 1873, at
his request, I obtained a loan from the Board of Works for the thorough
draining of a portion of the farm. Thirteen acres were drained at a cost
of L84, 6s. 3d., for which the tenant promised to pay 5 per cent.
interest, which I eventually forgave him. There was no house on the
farm. He took it without one, and I did not want one there. He built a
house himself without consulting my agent, and then wanted me to make
him an allowance for it. I told him he had thirty-one years to enjoy it
in, and must be content with that. About the same time he took another
farm of mine at a rent of L35. Since I came into my property in 1868 I
have laid out upon it in drainage, buildings, and planting--here are the
accounts, which you may look at--over L15,000, including about L8000 of
loans from the Board of Works. In the drainage the tenants got work for
which they were paid. I gave them slates for the buildings, with timber
and stone from the estate, and they supplied the labour. There is no
case in which the outlays for improvements came from the tenants--not a
single one. I repeat it, Canon Keller's tract is a tissue of fictions.

What nonsense it is to talk about