SECOND READING. (Hansard, 2 July 1884)

§ COLONEL NOLAN
rose to move the second reading of the Bill, when—

§ MR. WARTON
, rising to Order, said: I submit that as the Bill has not been printed, the Motion for the second reading ought not to be allowed.

§ MR. HEALY
That is no objection. On a former occasion the late Speaker permitted the second reading of a Bill to be moved which had not been printed.

§ MR. SPEAKER
I have to say, in reply to the point of Order raised, that the fact of the Bill not having been printed is not a fatal objection. It is for the House to judge whether the fact should interfere with its further progress.

§ COLONEL NOLAN
proceeded to move the second reading. The Bill had been presented on three previous occasions; but unfortunately, through an accident, 1835 it had not been printed this year. However, the House was familiar with its previous provisions, and any change which might be in it this year was in the direction of modification.

§ MR. WARTON
I rise to Order.

§ MR. SPEAKER
I must ask the hon. and learned Member not to "rise to a point of Order" when there is no point of Order before the House. If he persists, I must call the attention of the House to the practice of the hon. and learned Member in rising to so-called points of "Order," when he has really nothing to bring forward.

§ COLONEL NOLAN
, resuming, said, the object of the Bill was to give compensation to tenants for improvements in towns having a population under,30,000. He did not seek to give a tenant of a town building' the same interest in his house as the tenant of a farm had in his holding; but he thought that some consideration ought to be shown a tenant of a house in a town who improved the letting value of the property by building offices or making other erections. Many landlords did not look after their houses at all, and the tenantry very often had to allow them to go to decay or to leave them. If the tenant spent money in improving the property he held, when the lease expired he might have to pay an increased rent, or give up the improvements whenever the landlord wished to take possession of the house. This state of things had a very bad effect, as no guarantee was given to tenants who made improvements, and those who did not make them were not encouraged to increase the value of the property, which they held. The Bill proposed to give compensation to the tenant when he had actually increased the letting value of a house, though not for any fancy improvements. He thought that if the Bill were passed with some limitation, perhaps, to towns numbering 30,000 or 40,000 inhabitants, the towns in Ireland would be greatly improved in appearance. As the Bill had not been printed, he would undertake that the Committee stage should not be taken without full Notice being given; but he hoped the House would allow the second reading to be taken then.

§ MR. TREVELYAN
said, he had no doubt what the duty of the Member of the Government who was attending to the Business that afternoon was in reference to this Bill—the only possible course he could adopt was to ask the House to adjourn the debate. There was no Rule which forbade the second reading of an imprinted Bill; and the House might, perhaps, have allowed it on rare and special occasions. This was not, however, such an occasion; and the description of the Bill, as given by the hon. and gallant Member for Galway (Colonel Nolan), made it plain that the Bill included an important and novel principle which the House ought to have distinctly before it. He could not regard the Bill as in the least a Bill of small proportions, or so pressing that they should deviate from the usual custom. He must, therefore, ask the House to adjourn the debate.

§ MR. HEALY
said, that, in his opinion, the hon. and gallant Member could not resist the Motion of the Chief Secretary for Ireland, which was not unreasonable. He hoped the Government would on a future occasion be able to consider the Bill in a favourable light, as there was a strong feeling on the subject in Ireland.