HC Deb 28 July 1896 vol 43 cc907-10

In the case of any ejectment brought for the nonpayment of the rent of a holding to which the Land Law Acts as amended by this Act apply, where the rent in arrear exceeds two years' rent, the tenant may pay, tender, deposit, or lodge under Sections sixty to seventy-one of the Landlord and Tenant Law Amendment Act (Ireland), 1860, the sum of two years' rent instead of the sums therein respectively required to be paid, tendered, deposited, or lodged, and upon such tender, payment, deposit, or lodgment the tenant shall be in the same position under those sections as if two years' rent were the sum claimed; and the balance of the rent then due shall not be recovered by ejectment for nonpayment of rent or distress.

MR. MAURICE HEALY moved to insert in line 13, after the word "ejectment," "which shall be or has been."

Amendment agreed to.

MR. MAURICE HEALY moved to leave out the word "claimed," and to insert instead there of the words "duo for rent up to the gale day preceding such tender, payment, deposit, or lodgment."

Amendment agreed to.

MR. M AURICE HEALY moved at the end of the clause to add, nor shall the holding be sold or affected by or under any judgment, execution, or proceeding taken in respect of such balance of rent. He explained that his object was to provide that where a landlord had already recovered two years' rent, he should not then take ejectment proceedings against the tenant. The hon. Member observed that in the Committee stage, the Chief Secretary expressed the opinion that these words gave too wide an application to the clause, and the right hon. Gentleman undertook to consider the matter with a view to seeing whether it was not possible to carry out the object aimed at by the Amendment. He did not see any proposal down on behalf of the Government, and accordingly he moved this Amendment, the words of which he regarded as much too narrow instead of too wide.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

thought the words of the hon. Gentleman were quite accurately drafted, but he could not admit that he himself gave any pledge or undertaking to deal with the Question. He had carefully considered the matter and while he admitted that something might be said for the contention of the hon. Member, on the whole he was not disposed to go beyond the clause as drafted. He did not think that the landlord after He had obtained two years' arrears from the tenant would then proceed by ejectment. [Mr. MAURICE HEALY: "The good landlord would not but the bad landlord would."] The adoption of the Amendment would mean that after the landlord had got his two years' rent, he should then have taken away from him the rights possessed by other creditors. The principle of the clause was that while the landlord should have his exceptional privilege of two years' arrears he was not afterwards deprived of any rights which an ordinary creditor would have.

MR. DILLON

expressed his regret that the right hon. Gentlemen had not been able to accept the Amendment. This was a matter of great importance. He (lid not believe that a respectable landlord would exercise this right, but the law was made to restrain not the reasonable or fair landlord, but the unreasonable landlord. If a landlord on an ejectment got two years' rent paid in cash, he must be a harsh man if he would not accept that as a reasonable discharge of the debt. But to give him, after the ejectment proceedings had been quashed by the payment of two years' rent, the right of proceeding forthwith on another and harsher method of ejecting the man out of his holding, appeared to him to take away from the tenant, in regard to the bad landlords, all real protection in this matter.

* MR. SERJEANT HEMPHILL

thought the right hon. Gentleman was not quite correct in saying that the landlord would be in the same position as any other creditor with regard to the rent over and above the two years' rent. The landlord was in a much better position than any other creditor. Supposing a landlord recovered the two years' rent on an ejectment and there still remained two other years' rent due. The very day after he got his decree of ejectment he could maintain an action for the other two years' rent. He recovered judgment on the foot of those latter two years' rent and he could then put the sheriff in. The sheriff sold the tenant's interest and the landlord bought it in and might then maintain an ejectment on the title and so recover possession of the holding.

*SIR J. COLOMB moved to add at the end of the clause the words, and such debt shall have priority over all mortgages or other charges placed upon the lands by the tenant, or by the creditor of any tenant. He remarked that the clause prevented the landlord from recovering by process of ejectment more than two years' rent, and the object of the Amendment was to make the arrears beyond that sum a prior charge upon the land. Anyone who knew Ireland was aware how necessary it was to have some provision of this nature in the interest of the tenant himself. It was pretty certain that when the tenant came to owe so large an amount to the landlord, he owed yet a great deal more to the shopkeepers and other persons. The reason in many cases why the tenant was allowed to accumulate large amounts of arrears was that the too considerate landlord, who knew the difficulties the man was in, wished to give him time. ["Hear, hear!"] In those matters he thought they should consider the interests of the smaller landlords, and there were no fewer than 62,000 in Ireland owning less than 500 acres each. He agreed entirely with the principle of preventing the large accumulation of rent, but where that took place some regard should be had to the other debts the tenant owes, in the interests of the tenant and landlord alike.

MR. GERALD BALFOUR

said it was impossible to accept the Amendment. The effect of the words would be to appropriate the tenant's holding for the payment of arrears.

Amendment negatived.

Clause 13,—