nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

English lords still own thousands of arces in Ireland from the plantations

Johnny Bitte

Hey all,
Just read in then Irish Mail on Sunday (reliable I know) that a group of Lords from England still own thousands of arces here in Ireland since the plantations.

Now I m not a mad RA head here but there s definately a little voice inside me that says hold the **** on mate, surely stealing all the way back doesn't mean they should be still allowed to keep it.

Then I guess the question is who should get it if it is taken back?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Sherifu

...

JIZZLORD

hmmm, the irish mail on sunday, that bastion of journalistic integrity...
they've probably an article in the english version blasting the hatred of the irish towards the english landlords.

one of the red tops had an article in their irish about the wind that shakes the barley saying that it was an excellent film showing rebellion against the corrupt british system, Meanwhile the uk version said the film was a racist disgrace and was anti uk. etc

Flukey

You've only heard this now!

That is common knowledge since the plantations. There is land, and even rivers, up and down the country still owned by British Lords. Where have you been all your life?

nomorebadtown

as long as they're not building shopping centres and luxury apartments on it, i couldnt give a monkey's/

JIZZLORD

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/twofaced-tabloids-sneer-at-film-success-but-not-in-irish-editions-130984.html

thelordofcheese

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Hey all,
Just read in then Irish Mail on Sunday (reliable I know) that a group of Lords from England still own thousands of arces here in Ireland since the plantations.

Now I m not a mad RA head here but there s definately a little voice inside me that says hold the **** on mate, surely stealing all the way back doesn't mean they should be still allowed to keep it.

Of course they should, why should they not be allowed to keep it?

Johnny Bitte

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Of course they should, why should they not be allowed to keep it?

Because the stole it?????????

I knew that some still had land but thousands of arces?
I dunno, it just seems a little pointless for all those men and women to have died for the country to have independence and they still let these people to hold on to lands that were given to them by the dictator of the country.

JIZZLORD

they were granted the land for some reason or another, back pay, loyalty etc. but you have to remember how did the former owners get this land in the first place, more than likely in the exact same feudal way

Kernel

Many people in Dublin who own their own homes have to pay ground rent, which basically goes to English landlords of old. You can buy them out, or continue paying them the rent. They must make a nice few quid out of it all the same.

Flukey

JIZZLORD wrote: »

they were granted the land for some reason or another, back pay, loyalty etc.

Perhaps, but they were being paid with something that wasn't owned by the people giving it. Let me put it this way: If I stole some of your money, wrote a law to say it was mine, and then gave it to a friend of mine in payment for something he had done, would that be ok with you?

thelordofcheese

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Because the stole it?????????

I knew that some still had land but thousands of arces?
I dunno, it just seems a little pointless for all those men and women to have died for the country to have independence and they still let these people to hold on to lands that were given to them by the dictator of the country.

Really? Those lords who are living in england and who own all this land just waltzed in here and knicked the lot of it and no-one noticed.

What criminal masterminds they must be, real life lex luthors.

JIZZLORD

by no means am i saying that these land grabs were correct. but irish land was never controlled by the majority of the irish public until the land reforms of parnell. Huge estates were owned by the british land owners, some absentee owners with no care of what happened with their land while some were owned by owners with a great involvement in the land and their tennants. Before these landowners got their land some of it may have belonged to norman invaders, before this by irish chieftains and kings. at any stage did the average irish man and woman own the land? No. It had been under some sort of control from an aristocracy for centuries

Johnny Bitte

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Really? Those lords who are living in england and who own all this land just waltzed in here and knicked the lot of it and no-one noticed.

What criminal masterminds they must be, real life lex luthors.

Christ you are an idiot.

The fact is it was not the ruler of England to give to their ancestor's and when the Republic was formed it should have been taking back for the country.

Simple as that.

Sherifu

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Christ you are an idiot.

Bold Goose.

So, how much of your land did they take Goosey?

Ste.phen

I think jizzlord said it best.
+1

Keano

Tis my field.

*grabs pitchfork*

Insect Overlord

Igy wrote: »

I think jizzlord said it best.
+1

Plus one more from me. OP, how much does this really impact on your everyday living? Unless you plan to launch some kind of appeal against the British aristocracy in the hope that they will give you all said land to divide among the Irish people as you see fit...

RuggieBear

Can cause some problems though

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/commercialproperty/2007/0328/1175003340652.html

Carrigart Exile

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Christ you are an idiot.

The fact is it was not the ruler of England to give to their ancestor's and when the Republic was formed it should have been taking back for the country.

Simple as that.

Isn't that what Robert Mugabe wants to do

Davidius

They should take it and give it back to the clans.

AlmightyCushion

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Christ you are an idiot.

Play nice.

Rowley Birkin QC

Colleague of my dads sold a field for development without tracing the title fully. Ooops.

Developer built about 5 houses, mistake was realised, big money sent off to England to settle the difference.

ronbyrne2005

The land was here long before humans. Thinking about it owning land is a rather abstract concept. "Possesion is nine tenths of the law" is about as fair a way of determining "ownership" as anything. Should the Irish people buying and driving up land prices in poor parts of eastern europe have the land taken off them? Even if original English landowners aquired the land unethically/immorally /forcefully subsequent generations aquired a good legal title to it. Before modern "Irish" arrived on this island some other inhabitants "owned" the land. A nation's boundaries are arbitary and change over time with changes in soverignty,culture etc. If Ireland was a militarily powerful country in 1200-1900ad we would have done same to Britain and Europe and Afria and Asia, thats the way things were done back then before this stronger nation state era

Thomas_S_Hunterson

bigkev49 wrote: »

Developer built about 5 houses, mistake was realised, big money sent off to England to settle the difference.

Shoulda said nothing and squatted for the 12 years or whatever it is, and hope he wasn't found out.

/edit...woops..the leasehold agreements might prevent the transfer of ownership though, i'm not sure how they're dealt with legally

Davidius

I'm taking over your land! What do you mean "you can't"? I think you'll be happy to know that I just made a law that says it's mine! Now GTFO! :pac:

JIZZLORD

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

The land was here long before humans. Thinking about it owning land is a rather abstract concept.

I hate when people say that. it's like when land owners in scenic areas have fences damaged, gates left open etc. The owner objects and some beardy rambler makes a claim that you cant really "own" land

ronbyrne2005

JIZZLORD wrote: »

I hate when people say that. it's like when land owners in scenic areas have fences damaged, gates left open etc. The owner objects and some beardy rambler makes a claim that you cant really "own" land

Who owns the atoms that make up your body. Who owns the oxygen atoms you breathe in ? Who owns the hydrogen ,carbon ones you breathe out? Who owns the moon?

Thomas_S_Hunterson

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

Who owns the moon?

Anyone who wants some apparently:pac:

http://www.moonshop.com/

JIZZLORD

are you not familiar with the leasehold and freehold principles mentioned in that article from the times. land owners own the title for the land, ie they have the right to more or less do whatever the hell they want. in some countries if you have the title for land you own the rights to all the land below it until the centre of the earth (singapore i believe).

i do believe that i own the atoms in my body though

An Fear Aniar

It's never really been clear to me how ownership was transferred to the tenants. I think they got loans through the various Land Acts and then repaid them by "annuities" - which Dev then repudiated. Hee hee!

Well, if there had been no Norman Conquest, land ownership would still have followed the same pattern - the only difference being the ethnicity of the landlords.

Most Irish people, the "moghach" or serf class, had no rights at all under Gaelic law. These people actually found their lives improved under English rule at least for a time.

It's the same old story of the ruling elite living off everybody else, the only difference was whether they were Irish or English.

.