§ Lords' Amendments to Commons' Amendments to Lords' Amendments to be considered forthwith.
§ Motioe made, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in their Amendment."—(Mr. Herbert.)
§ MR. RAMSAY MACDONALD (Leicester)expressed regret that his hon. friend had accepted the Amendment. The Bill had been whittled down very considerably. He understood that the effect of the Amendment now before the House was to exempt existing leases. There were, he was informed, a very large number of sub-tenants paying rent to intermediate landlords, who in turn paid rent to the superior landlords. The effect of the Amendment was that these inferior tenants who had paid rent to an intermediate landlord might be distrained if the intermediate landlord had not paid his rent to the superior landlord. The Bill, therefore, might result in very grave injustice to subtenants.
MR. HERBERT, who was indistinctly heard, said the hon. Member was under a misapprehension as to the effect of 2295 the Bill. He did not think there was any real substance in the Amendment made by the Lords. He hoped the House would agree to the Amendment.
§ MR. CROOKS (Woolwich)[...]sd he would like to hear the opinion of the Attorney-General on the subject. Supposing a man had paid his rent to an intermediate landlord, what would happen if the superior landlord came in and seized his goods?
§ THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir W. ROBSON,) South Shieldssaid he regarded the Amendment a sserious inroad on the value of the Bill. It was for the House to say whether it was worth fighting.
§ MR. CROOKSIt is worth fighting.