nt, the tenant, who bound himself to pay a fixed annual sum
as rent for a long term of years, found himself bound to deliver a much
larger share of produce; and the purchaser under the Ashbourne Act found
that what looked so easy in figures soon became impossible in fact, as the
prices of his produce fell so rapidly that each successive payment became
more oppressive until it finally became impossible. Thus it looks now as
if by the appreciation of gold all that was gained for the tenant is more
than lost, and that in the future his condition may be worse than in the
worst days of rack-renting. In recent years this has become plain to those
who have the good of Ireland at heart; they have taken the alarm, and are
outspoken on the threatening evils. Among these is the Most Reverend Dr.
Walsh, Archbishop of Dublin. In a recent interview he says, referring to
the rise in the value of gold:

"All this is indisputable; it is now fully in the public view; yet
not even an attempt is being made in Parliament, or even out of
it, to bring about an equitable readjustment of the conditions
which are proving so disastrous in other nations, conditions too
that are imposed under the provisions of statutes enacted as
measures of protection for the tenants. The Irish Land Acts of
1881, 1885, and 1891 have, nevertheless--as a result of the
increased and increasing value of our present unbalanced and
consequently untrustworthy monetary standard of value--become
fruitful sources of difficulty, and may very soon become fruitful
sources of disaster, to those for whose benefit they were
intended."

Again, referring to the importance of some remedy, possibly that which
bimetallism might provide, he says:

"The adoption of bimetallism or of some equivalent remedy, if
there be any equivalent remedy, is, I am convinced, a matter of
imperative necessity; that is, if the agricultural tenants of
Ireland--and I do not limit this to Ireland--are to be saved from
otherwise irretrievable ruin. If things go on as they are, even
the excellent land purchase scheme, which is associated with the
name of Lord Ashbourne, may become, before many years are over, a
source of widespread disaster to the tenants who have purchased
under it."

Again, in view of the steady and dangerous increase in the burdens of the
obligations entered into under either of the acts referred to, by