GLEBE LOANS (IRELAND).

                   R ETU It N tn fin Ut'lll!l' Itl" tho UOllOUl'a' ,ll' 'l'1l(~ HOll ~} of Commons,
                                                  da/I"'d .llllg 21, 1 S!JN ;---.-/01",

"COpy         OF     MI~ ~!oIlL\L OF GLWi'! L OAN B OrUWW llliS £':'1 IRELAND                                  presented to
         the Chi ef Secretary to t he Lord L ieutcnf\nt in December , 1897, " lid
         ~ubsequ cnt      COITcSpOndcllce in l'cfcnmcc t her eto between t he I rish
         Gownllllent and the Most Hev. Or. He,dy, Bishop of <JJollfcrt."

                                                        (Mr, . '. D . Sulh'vcnt.)

                             OJ'rll!rt~l,   l,y   '1'11 1-:   H own: m'     COlI.\IOSS, t(l ~e   P rinit1.1,
                                                              3nl   Anqll.~t.   1898.

                         II Y A.LEXANDER 'l'HOM & UO. (L IlUTBD) .

                     \1\I1 to be PUrcllllscd, oit,ll1lr directly or through any Book!IClIer, from
              HODG!?.s, FWGIs, :md Co. (Limited), 104, Gmfton-strcet, Dublin; or
                   Enn; and Sl'OTTlSWOODB, Et~<;t H al1.iing-street, Fleet-street, }~ . C'J nod
                              32, Abillgduu.t;t.I't:.'et, 'Vestminstcr, S. W.; 01'
                      Jom'l' Mm~z:ms nnll Co" 12,·cN;tl.'eot, Edin~\Il'gh .iUI.<.l
                                     90, WCflt Nile-"tn~ct, Ol:lf!.hf{lw.

34 2 .
                             GLEBE LOANS (iRELAND).

ReTURN to an Order of the Honourable the H ouse of Commons, dated ~ l st
    Jul y, 18D8, for" Copy of Memorial of Glebe Loan Borrowers in Ireiand
    presented to t he Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant in December,
                        uent Correspondence in referellce thereto between the
       189 7) and subseq_
       Irish Government and the Most Rev. Dr. Henly, Bishop of Clonfert."


        THE RIGHT HON. GERALD WILLIAM BALFOUR,                            M.P. ,

                   CHIEF SECRET.1RY TO THE Lonn LrEUTEN' ANT OF mELAND.

       W e, the undersigned, represent ing the great majority of Glebe Loan
B orrowers in I reland, and expres~ing, we believ e, the wishes of them        an,   beer
most respectfully to bring under your notice, and through you, under th~
notice of B er Majp.sty's Government, th e heavy liab ilities we labour under in
consequence of our responsibility for Glebe Loans. Our obj ect is t.o obtain
certain alterations ill the terllls of the Loans which, if effected, ,v ill gr eatly
relieve us, without. injustice to anyone or injury to the State. Th e ~lmeud­
menta to th e existing laws that would product: the boons we seriously need
and earnestly desire, at'e only what have been " h·.ad), enacted by Pa.rliam ent
for other local loans, and, therefore, on pl'incipie at    an   events, there cnn be
no objection to t he granting of our requests.
   '11' e r espectfully request t hat Parliament be advised to take the Hecessary
steps that t he rate of inteJ'est at which Glebe LOttns "re advanced be l'educ~d
from the existing high rate of 3~ pel' cent. per annum. Parliament in its last
Session has empowerecl th e Treasury to reduce the interest on some' loallti
administered by the same Board, nnd out of the Sc'1.l1le funds as Glebe Loans,
to 2i pel' cent., care beiug taken by tbe TreitSm y that 110 loss occur to the
funds out of which the loans are advanced. The Treasury bas since so reduced
th e loans over · hich it got the red uci ng powe r, yn,rying' somewh a.t the
reduction by the duration of the loans. '\1' e ask that Her Majesty's Govern-
meut recommend P ru.·l1amen1.. to g ive similar power to reduce the interest on
Glebe Loans to 2,/: pel' cent" and we respectfully submit t hat the interest
shonld not vary with t he d uration of the loall, as t he T"easury can otherwise
guard as-a.inst loss, a.nd shoulll not seek t.o make profit out of Gle be Loans.
   W e al.o respectfully request that Parliament be advised that, wb ile the
interest on the loa.ns be not more thon 2t per cent., unless ill case of ascertained
loss to the Local Loans Fund, a longer period tha n t hirty-five years be granted
for t he repayment of t he principal. The short ness of the present period
r estricts t he payment of the loan too much to the same mdIvIdual bOlTowers,
willIe the GJehes are intended for several "'eneratio ns of clergymen. It also
                                                ~                       .
necessitates   R   needle8slv high annual per-centage for repayment, whIch, when
taken with the obligat io n of paying the interest, makes our all nual liabilit ies
press heavily upon us ano our cong regation,. Without desiring' to withhold
O penny of the money advanced, we se~k for longer time 111 which to pay
it, "" thereby oU)' burdens lUay be conside rably lightened. A repayment of
one per cent. per annum paid qnarterly or hal f-yem·J)" for such. num ber of
years as would be found sufficient for the repayment of the entire loan, instead
of the repayment of one and a half per cent. for t hirtl,-five years, wo~ ld be an
alteration in the terms of the loan that wo uld he eqmtable and benefiCial. A

somewhat similar alteration was made in the terms of Land Purchase hl' the
Land Law (Ireland) Act of 188 7, to t h e g reat advantage of farmers and 'land-
lords, and we feel that we are .oot unreasona.ble in expectiuO' an extension of
the same prin ciple.                                            0

   W e further r espectfully request that P arliament be recommended to treat
the remnn.nts of eXlstino- Glebe Loans as quasi-new loans, 0n the terms we
ask for new Glebe LOfi1~s . and that these quasi-new loans and fut.ure Glebe
Loans be dealt with on the t erms of the P urchase Clause, of the Land Law
(Treland) Act of 1896. This would lll'ove a great. boon to Glebe Loan
B orrowers who have beeu feel in ~ hefw ily for the burden the erection
or improvement of Glebes hM placed upon them. Very justly they desire
t hat portion of it be extended to their successors, who \Vii! enj oy what t.he
loans were contracted for, and who cannot complain at being asked to pny a
part of these loans. The Treasury does not need the payment of tbe loaus
at the time originally specified, and tbe security for these quasi-ue w loans
would be considerably better than for an ordinary uew loan.       We, therefore,
confidently seek fo r an application of the Pnrchase Clauscs of the Land Act
of 1896 to Glebe Loan s.
   The National Debt aud Local Loans A ct of 1887 provided that a sum of
five and a balf million. sterling, calculated as lost to t he Exchequer by Local
Loans, be compensated for by an alInual charge on the Local Loans Fund of
£ 130,000. Theil' portion of this annual charge Glebe Loan Borrowers have
been payin>: bi_annually for ten years-to wipe out a debt of which t.hey did
 not owe a peuny, or to wipe out portion of the National Debt, which they
otherwise, as members at' the commnnity, have done their dnty by. The
 Legislation for Glebe Loans never contemplated such a charge to be upon Glebe
Loan Borrowers, a.nd when a readjustment of fina.ncial relatIOns takes place the
inequality of t heir treatment should be redressed. In September last, tbe
ann ual charge of the £130,000 ceMed on the Local Loans F und, and PMlia-
ment will have now to direct the future disbursement of it. We respecttully
r equest Your Excellency to represent t.o the Govemment that justice and fail'
play r equire th",t as much of the Glebe Loan paymeuts as has gone or goes
to accuUlulated or accumulating profits, sho uld be placed to the credit of t he
Glebe Loan Borrowers ill due proportion.
   In conclusion \Ye beg you, Sir, to bear in mind that during- the whole time
the Glebe Loan Ads have been in operation-now twenty-seven years--not a
pen ny of the loa a has turned (>ut a bad debt, although upwards of half a
million pounds have beell lent amongst more than thirteen hundred borrowers.
The same fidelity to anI' enl!agements will, we thiuk, be Out· history in the
future; but th"t this IDay be so, our liabilities should be lightened as ulUch as
possible. They can be considera bly diminished by the application of the
principles of existing law, M pointed out, of justice, and of fail' play. For
this we humbly and earnestly ask Good Government and wise Statesmanship
will not refuse onr request.


                 ::lamuel E. Caldwell.          J obn Johnston.
                 John Tapping.                  Samuel J_ WKay_
                 Charles K. Tolland.             Samuel Currie.
                 R obert J . Arnold.             S. Cuthbert Mitchell.
                 J. Melville Irwin.              John Stewart.
                 John M'Connon.                  Thomas R. White.
                 W. G. Glasson.                  John Stewart.
                 Thomas Bill.                    J ames Connell.
                 David Cummins.                 Thomas S. Grehan.
                 J. C. Moore.                   Wm. Armstrong.

                                                                                  Dubi in Castle,
                                                                                          6tb Mo.y, 1898.


       I !till dil'ccted by the LOl'd Lieuteuant to infonll yonI' Lordship thnt, in l\ccolxll\ll ce wi th
~he Chief Sooretm y's gil-en to the cleputn tioll ou the subj ect of Loans under the
GIehe Lo3.lls ..:-\.c: t., thnt waited upon hi m on the 13th of Dece mbel', the mnttcl' hll..'\ beon bl'Olight
by the II'j:,jh G~Jvel: nm cnt \I~ der the co~lFliclel'fl.tion of t~e LC chi Commissioner:l of H er 1\[ (ljesty's
Tl'eMUl'Y, I\nd rhen' wl'dslnps have gwen the folloWlllg rensons why the tLppl iCl.~ti o n foJ' IIll
extension of '~illl e f01' l'cpnyment and n reduction of t he ra te of interest cunnot he ente l'lnilled by
them ; -
          1. These I OllllS llH1IJt be regRrded ns M vancerl 011 mor of renl pl'Opelty wit hout any
      col\atcmJ security of n. public ohat'acte!", and they therefore stand on u. different foot ilLg from
      loons secul'ccl dircctly or indil-cctly on the or other public fund .
          2. H is clearly n Cces&\ry to tl-eu.t in 0. unifom1 ma.nner nil loans secul'ed only on 1Il01'tg'lge
      of laud 01' houses, notwit;bstanding the nat,ural desire of those intel'('Sted in one clnss 1)1'
      another of ~UCll IOlLus for exceptionally favoumble tl'entmellt. The Glebe I.onns cannot
      therefore be tt'Cated apart fl'O Ui othel' classe:i of land loan s, which do not enjoy any oollu.tcl'al
      security snch as llfl.s been devised in the C9i!.e of ad vances under the Lmd PIll'cbase .acts,
          3, In t he Public 'Vorks Loans A ct of last !ressiou P ar liament deliberately confined to loans
      secureu a ll I'tLtes the l'eductilJn of terms then authorised. This l'e{luction will I)!'obnbly nhsorb
      Oyel' a "!Cries of yeal'll the saving to t he Local Loans FLUl(l due tu the aboli tion of the
      "Restitution Aunuity."
          4. No I'etluction in t he rate of interest hns been made in re~pcct of ex.isting pul)\ic loons of
      filly ChlSS except in special cil'cumfltaMes, such liS cannot he suggested in the present case;
      1101' indeed waS any such redu ction R110Wed by the Act of lll.,st session.
          5, Although it is not possible to construct 0. sepamtc dehtol' nud Cred itOl' account for [my
      singlo section of the Loc.'Li l.oans Fund, it is most pl'obnble that loo.ns on mOitgage of real
      propel'ty, owing to t he special. expenses connected ·with them, ho.\'e lIot provided any surplus
      tow(wds the" R estitution F und," or towards other clMses of loans.
          G 'l'bere is no fOUllllntion for the ideo. tlmt the Exchequer has deri\'ed any profit fl'om
      Locnl "Lonnl; j the contrary r ather being the

  TlH~i l' Lordships Mid that t hey cnn easily UndCl'fl tnnd why present Incl1l'ubeuts, &c., de rum' to
the payment of a ~inki n g fund the result of which L t o benetit t;heil' su cce!iSors j but they think
that this i" n. l!luttel' with which the n.utl.lOl'ities of t he respect.h·e ChUl'ch~s ought to delll, !\ud
they would gladly consider any proposals fur legislation to secllt'c this end.

                                          I ha,,!;! the honour to be,
                                                         :My Lord Bishop,
                                                               Your Lol'dsllip's obedient servant,
                                                                                            D. HARREL.
  'f he Most Reverend Bi shop He:..tly, D.D"

                                                              St. Mary's, Sunnyside, Droglleda,
                                                                                          July 17th, 1898.
        I am directed by the Most. Re\'ereucl Dr. Healy, Bish op of CJowen. to forward you, for
the consideration of the Lords of Her Mu.j p.sty's l ull.Smy, the reply of the Glebe Loan BorrolVers
of Ireland to Theil' Lordships' communication refusing the prayer of their M.emorial of December
                                           I the bonour to be, Sir,
                                                           Very respectfully y om·s.
                                                                         JOHN OURRY, P.P.,
                                                                             Hon. Sec.,
                                                                   Glehe Loan B :)lT.Jwers' Associa.tion.

  Sir D, Harrel,
           Assistant Secretary to the
                    Lord Lieutenant of Ireland,

                     THE GLEBE L OAN QUESTION.


  The followin g is tbe authorised reply prepared on behalf of the Glebe Loan
Borrowers to the reply of the Treasmy to their Memorial :--
   The reasons given by the Lords of the Treasury for not elltel'tainin~ the
req uest of Glebe Loan BOlTowers for" reduction of the interest of their loans,
and an exten:sion of the time of repayment, have been arrived at on a partial
consideration of the case, which was not fully presented, and are illet by the
following replies : -
  The first reason given for refusal means that loans secured on r rates can
be lent at less interest than loans advanced on mortgage of real property
without any collateral seemity of a public character.
        (a.) This arises out nf the Local Loans Act of 1897, but, not out of the
     Glebe Loan Act, unless in so far as ~he latter has become, to its detriment,
     incorporated in the former. No such distinction was thought of when
     the term s of Glebe Loans were arranged.
      (b,) No such distinotions should be made t o tbe detriment of Glebe
    LOllllers when their security is a Parliamentary one, and provc;d to be
    pedcc t in all the aspec ts for which security is need ed.
       (c.) Wh en it enacted the" Principal " Glebe Loan Act, Parliament fixed
    the terms on tbe prescnt security at the lowest interest compatible wit!>
    freedom froll loss, out of a sense of justice and equality, and out of' "
    desire to keep a solemn undf;rtaking and pledge.-(:::>ee Prime ·Minister's
    and Ohief Secretary's speech es on the occasion). Why the Treasury can not
    e ntertain the H,pplicl;l.tion that Parliament grant, on the same security,
    Glebe Loalls at the lowest tenns now compatible with fi'eedom froll) loss,
    Glebe Loaners fail to see. Surely the security Parli2.went was slttisfied
    with in 18,0, when tbat security was yet. untested, should be deemed
    satisfactol'Y now, when 27 years' ex.perieo(·e has proved it to be perfect.
        (d.) Loans secured on rates are not always lent on less interes, thau
     loans advanced on lllortgllge wiLhout collAt.el'al security of a public
     character. They are lent as cbeap for land purchase, and the terms for
     Glebe Loans were arranged as t hey are that they wight be the saille as
     those (In which money \n\S then advanced for land purposes in Irelund
     (see Hansard, 26th July, 1870).    These have developed ioto the present
     terms of land purchase, and so shou:d the te rms for Glebe Loans, which
     were del iberately modelled on them,
         (e. ) To imply that the collatel'al security of Glebe Loans does notjustif')'
      Parliament in granting them at reduced interest, when such reductIOD can
    . take place without loss 01' risk, is to make Pariialllento ut as wrong whell
      it granted loans on t erms that made them less free from I~sk 01' loss than
      the terms sought by Glebe loaners would at present make tbem, The
      present Eeeurity was good enough in the eyes of Parliament for t ho. loaos
      at 3 ~ per cent" wben 3 per cent. Consols stood at 88, and when It was
      untested , and the same security ougbt t o be good enough in the .eres of
      P arliament at 2t per ceDt, mterest, when H ome Government Secuntles are
      over 112, a nd when the security has been IllOst satisfactorily i est cd.
  2. The second l'eason for refusal states t hat t here must. be uniforlU treat-
1llent for all loans secured only on. lllor~gage of land or ho us~~, and i mpl ie~
that Glebe Loans are s',cured only In tillS mauoe l', 01' at least t hat they ha,'e
not the security" devised" for land purchases. Therefore they are not to get
the same terms.

         Glebe Loaners reply that t heir loans are not secured merely on
     mortgage of real property valued at far Illore than the loao, which is not
     thc case in. laud purchase. T here is, besides, the personal liability of
     the actual ll1cumbent at all t Ulles, and of t hree solvent bailsmen. Even
     ~he securit~ alluded to as " devised" for hmd pU~'chase has its equivalent
     III the Slll ln~~ Fund of Glebe Loans whICh IS IU the possessio'l of the
     Treasury. I1'10reover, t he .ecurity alluded to as "devised" for land
     purchase has been dispensed wit.h, whereas tbe security of the Sinkio"
     Fund of Glebe Loans always renlains inc reasing with its years. Th~
     comparison , therefore is entirely in favour o f t he security of Glebe

     Loans; but should t here be an inferiority, let Glebe Loan BOlTowers be
     required to make it up first, and on doing this, let them get similar
     treatment fol' their loans.

   3. The t hirr! reason for refusal states that P8.r1i "ment delibemtely confined
to loans secured on rates the reduction of terms authorised by t he Act of
18D7, and that this reduction will probably abso rb a saving of £130,000 a
year, up tu this effected for the "Restit,ntion Annuity."

       (co.) Glebe Loaners seek to have tbe limit.tion removed u S being
     unfair; and if the Act of 189 7 cannot be amended to benefit thew, tbe
     Glebe Loall A.ct easily can.

        (v.) But Parliament has not confined to loans secured on the rates t he
     reduction alluded to, unless loans under the Military Land Acts, and
     under Section 663 of the Merchants Shipping Act of 1894, a re so
     secured as, in the sense of rates" in the Act, they are not.

         (c.) The reductioJlreferred to cannot" absorb" t he saving alluded to,
     as the reduced rates of iut·erest th"t are to be charged" may be fixed by
     the TrellsUl'Y from time to t ime," and" shan be such rates, not less than
     2~ per ceut. per annum as in the opinion of the Treasury are sufficient to
     enable snch loans to be made without loss to the Local Loans F und."-
     (GO and 61 Vic., chap. 51, 1 (1). Thus, t he i nterest cannot go below 21 pel'
     c~nt. a.nd need not go so lo w. Aud 'it way be varied " from t ime to time."
     The money advanced costs the Treasury not more than 2! pel' cent. and
     oIJe.eighth pel' cent. more than covers the working expeuses- ( Local
     Loans Accounts, 1895- 96 and J 8%- 97). Therefore the red uced rates mu.t
     pay tor themselves as well by arrangement as ill r esult, unless there be
     llul.ladministratioll; and the £ 130,000 annually saved will remain
     untouched, and is " to be applied as Parliament may direct."-(60 and
     61 Vic., chi" 5J, 4 (3).

      (d.) It is manifestly inequitable and unfair if favoured borrowers are
    to be allowed to " absorb" the profits arising from other loans t.h~n their

      (e.) Most of the loans from which the £130,000 of ann ual profit arise,
    will continue ior a long time in existence, and similar profit must 0::011 -
    tinoe to accrue. This profit cannot be absorbed by the r educed loan",
    which cannot cause loss, and t herefore must pay their way. Is it to be
    allowed to ",ccumulate and swell a fund whose capital is forty millions,
    while those who contribute t o the accumulation needlessly over,
    burdened with lel\alliabilities which it enacts 1

  4. The fourth r eason for r efusal states that reductions on exist ina loans arfr
unusual, unless in s~)ecial circUlllstauces, which . nccordincr to the L~rds of the
Treasury, do not eX in t he Cl1.8e of Glebe Loans.
                   lst                                              ~
       Glebe Loaners respectfully reply that special circumstances of an
     extraordinary kind do exist in this case for reduction .                     Parliament
     intended Glebe Loans to be advanced on the easiest terlllS consistent with
     freedom from loss. (See H ansard, 26th J uly, 1870). It wa s under a
     solemn obligation, and a pl edge from Ministers, t hat they would
     endeavour to efiect such legislation that property ,-alued at one and a
     hal f millions was g iven for less than £ 180,000 for" certain position of
     the I ri.h clergy, and that the Church Disest. blishment Act became law.
     The " principal " Glebe Loan Ac ~ endeavoured to fu lfil t·hat ull(lertaki n",
     as it all o\Ved money to be advanced at its then market value. Si n~e
     then, Glebe Loans have been almost always advanced i:1.t higher terms
     t han   the~ r   Ul:trket val ue. a.nd profit, have been accruing to the credit of
     some public funds.            This is an aritbm ctical certainty, and clearl y
     contrary to the intentions of Parliament in passing the Ohurch Di~­
     establishment Act, and in enacting Glebe Loan legislation, These,
     surely, are special eircUlDstn.nces; and, if the equity of the case and the
     pledges of lI'l misters and the intentio ns of Parliament are to be canie"
     out, Ie"" interest must be charged on Glebe Loans.
  5. The fi fth r eason for refusal implies tbat, us most prob"bly there have
been no profits on loans secured on rea] property owing tu special e:~pe l1 ses,
t here ha\'8 been no profits on Glebe Loa ns,
       Glebe Lonner, r espectfully asser t tLat t he e~pense. on thei r loans have
     been t he minimulll , and that tbere must have been large profit s on them.
     A special aCCOlll1t can easily be co nstructed, and. ought to he, as the
     matter js ve!'y im port..'1.ut, a.nd    ltS   Glebe Loans    Hl'e   the creation of   Or
     special Act of Parliament.
   6, The si xth and lal;t reason for refu sal stntes t hat the          II   Exchequer" has
del'i ved no p rufit fl'om local loans.
        P rofits from them hase, nevertheless, accrued , and to the amount of
     severnl millions, as t he Local Loans Accounts up t o date abundantly prove.
     W h ile .. t h e Exchequer " may be de"iving no profit. from them, other
     interests in the State undoubtedly are. £1,300,000 have gone from
     th em to r ed uce tbe National Debt, (end by them t be capital of the L ocal
     Loans Fund has risen enormously. To cease contributing towards tlu-se
     profits Glebe Loaners seek. They otherwise as cit izens discharge their
     duties towards the funcls benefited, and an equitable disbursement of tbe
     profits   t1.l r~ndy   accumulated from their contl'ibuti oLJs, it is not unreaSOD-
     "ble of'them in all t be circumstances of the case to desire and expect.

  The L orcls of the Treasury acknowledge the unfairnes, of tbe arrangement
by which one generation of i"9umbents, &c., has to pny for bouses, &9" that
will serve for sev eral generatIOns, and tl:ey          InVIte   proposals for l eglslatrve
       (a.) In the opinio n of GlebeLoaners some aid would be afforded by amend-
    ing 13ection 2 of Clause 4 of 34 and 35 Vic. , char' 100, so that tbe ,ectlOn,
    now obsolete, would l'ead-" 2. The discharge 0 any debt calcu lateC1 at par
    as due and incurred b6fore t be l Oth AUi\'ust, 1897, under tbe Glebe Loan
    (Ireland) A cts." This would convert eXlsting loans into new loans on the
    terms the Treasury decline to bave altered, Rnd at a price t he" principal ".
    Glebe Loan Act never contemplated to be exceeded.

       (0.) Let Parlialllent pass an Act whereby nil .mount from the Local
     Loans Fund , equivalent to the profits derived from the Glebe Loans
    since 188 7 , be placed to the credit of the Gle be Loaners' accounts, in due
    proportion to t he mnoun t and duration of their loans.

   The enactment of both t hese proposals \\'o uld le>tve the interest and length
of the Glebe Loans untouched. Glebe Loaners. however, most respectfully
urge that the Local Loans Act of 18',7 be amended so as to enable thew to
payoff their existing loans by the issue of new loans on the reduced terms
fix ed by the Treasury. If this be uot immediately practical , Glebe Loaners
req uest that Clause 7 of 33 and 34 Viet., ch ap. 112, be alllended, so that" 5"
be chanoed into 31, ;tnd "35 iuto the number of YCIU"S the Treasury would

calculat: t o suffice for the repayment of the loans on the new tenus, and
reg[~l'dillg the loans as repayable at pa.r.
~COpy   or lh.o .. ~. or G...... 1.00... Iltooaow_
  ' .' .......u \_...... 10          u.. l...., ~ 10
  .... I.on!    u..,I.oo_. ;••_too<,               I~, ud
  .,,1-'1_' c........_1 _              In ........ uoo u........
  .................... ~_" ..... II,. Moo'
  R.... l lo-   lI"'r. l liMopofcs..f,..-t..~

                (1".   r.   D. S.U, .....)

    _ .. .,no "_«(0-_ .... ,........
                  ..~A.,.~.I ~



          ... T H" ,"",,",
                            .   ~. ... & . . . .

To top