§ (1.) Where the tenancy of a holding has been determined at any time between the first day of May, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, and the sixth day of August, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-one, the landlord or the former tenant of the holding, or both jointly, may, within twelve months of the commencement of this Act, apply in the prescribed manner to the Land Commission to act as mediators with a view to the reinstatement of the tenant in the holding or with a view to the purchase of the holding by the tenant.
§ (2.) Upon any such joint application with a view to reinstatement, the Land Commission may declare the terms and conditions as to rent, and the payment of arrears or otherwise upon which they consider that it would be reasonable that the former tenant should be reinstated in the holding, and, upon the parties consenting within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner, may make an order reinstating the tenant in his holding upon the said terms and conditions.495
§ (3.) Upon any such joint application with a view to the sale of the holding, the Land Commission may declare the amount of the advance which they are prepared to sanction, and the conditions (if any) to be fulfilled previously to the making of such advance, and, upon the parties consenting within the proscribed time and in the prescribed manner, may order an advance, subject to the said conditions, in like manner as if an agreement had been made under Section 13 of the Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1891, as re-enacted by this Act.
§ (4.) Upon such application, whether for reinstatement or for a sale being made by either the landlord or the former tenant of the holding, the Land Commission may, if they think fit, after making such inquiry as they think advisable, serve upon the party not having made the application a notice calling upon him to state whether he consents to the application being treated as a joint application, and—
- (a) if he consents within the prescribed time, the Land Commission may proceed under this section in like manner as if the application was a joint application; but
- (b) if he does not so consent, no further proceedings shall be taken upon such application.
§ (5.) Every order under this section shall be binding upon all persons, and be final and conclusive.
§ (7.) An order under this section shall not be made in the case of a holding which, on the first day of January one thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, was in the occupation of a tenant.
§ (8.) For the purposes of this section, the expression "former tenant" shall include the personal representative of the former tenant.
§ MR. JAMES ROCHE (Kerry, E.) moved in Sub-section (1) to omit the word "between", and to insert instead thereof the word "from," so that the sub-section should read, "at any time from the first day of May."
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ MR. ROCHE moved to omit the words "the sixth day of August one thousand eight hundred and ninetyone."
§ Amendment agreed to.
*MR. SERJEANT HEMPHILL (Tyrone, N.) moved, in Sub-section (1), after the words "one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, and," to insert the words—
if the party so served does not within the prescribed time after such service object in the prescribed manner, a joint application within the meaning of the section shall be deemed to
have been made for reinstatement or for a sale, as the case may be, and the Land Commission may thereupon proceed under this section accordingly.
The object of the Amendment was to secure that when a tenant applied to the Land Commission to be reinstated, and notice of the application was served on the landlord, if the landlord did not come in and show cause why the tenant should not be reinstated, the application should have the same effect under the clause as if it were a joint application.
§ COLONEL SAUNDERSON (Armagh, N.)
objected to the Amendment because the landlord, owing to circumstances over which he had no control—such as absence from the country—might have no knowledge of this application on the part of the tenant, and also because it brought in the element of compulsion. The landlords had no objection to tenants, who left their farms against their will, and, in obedience to a conspiracy with which they had no sympathy, getting back again; but he could not support this Amendment, because it proposed that the owner of the property should be compelled within a certain time to lodge his objection to the tenant's application.
§ MR. DILLON
said the supporters of the Amendment would have no objection to every precaution being provided that this transaction was not carried on behind the back of the landlord. He therefore hoped the hon. and gallant Member would withdraw his objection.
§ * MR. SMITH-BARRY (Hunts, Huntingdon)
thought the clause went far enough in accepting the principle of arbitration, and he objected to its being further extended.
MR. T. M. HEALY
said that all the Amendment aimed at was to avoid putting on the landlord the necessity of formally assenting, or placing him in a position which his pride would not consent to. There was more than hard cash at the bottom of these unhappy disputes. He could quite understand a landlord in the position of the hon. Member for South Hunts refusing to write down a formal assent in these cases and resolving not to appear one way or the other. This was a point on which a concession by the landlords would do much to advance a settlement of these cases.
§ * SIR J. COLOMB
desired to do everything that could reasonably be done to promote voluntary arrangements, but in his opinion the Amendment really departed from the principles on which this part of the Measure was founded. In order to secure that every means should be availed of to bring the parties together, the Land Commission was brought in as an intermediary, but the Amendment appeared to be a departure from that principle.
§ COLONEL SAUNDERSON
stated that if his objection could be met in some way he should be glad, because he had every wish to blot out an unhappy page in Irish history. [Nationalist Cheers.]
§ * MR. SMITH-BARRY
pointed out that if the Amendment were accepted it would apply, not only to the plan-of-campaign tenants, but to all evicted tenants, even those evicted yesterday. He was afraid they were going a great deal too far.
§ MR. CARSON
suggested that, both sides being in substantial agreement, it should be left to the Government to bring up words on Report.
§ MR. GERALD BALFOUR
thought the words had better be settled now. The success of the clause depended on both parties proceeding in a friendly spirit; and, in his opinion, the Government would make a great mistake if they introduced into these voluntary arrangements anything to which the landlords took exception.
§ COLONEL SAUNDERSON
thought it should be sufficient if the landlord or his agent wrote a letter saying that he objected—["Hear, hear!" from the Nationalist Member.]—and accordingly suggested that the words "in the prescribed manner" should be struck out of the Amendment.
Words "in the prescribed manner" omitted from the proposed Amendment; Amendment, as thus altered, agreed to.
Sub-heads (a) and (b) Sub-section (4) struck out.
§ Clause 40, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.498
§ Clause 41,—