HC Deb 28 July 1896 vol 43 cc925-6

(1.) Where an agreement for the purchase of a holding is made after the commencement of this Act, and the Land Commission have sanctioned an advance for such purchase, the purchaser shall he discharged from all liability to the vendor in respect of any liabilities affecting the holding at the date of the agreement, including all rent and arrears existing at such date; but if the advance is refused the agreement shall be void, and the tenant shall be liable to pay rent as if from the gale day prior to such refusal.

(2.) Interest at the rate agreed on, on the purchase money from the date of the said agreement until the day from which the purchase-annuity begins, shall be payable half-yearly on the first day of May and first day of November by the purchaser, and shall be paid to, and be collected and recoverable by, the Land Commission, in like manner as if it were an instalment of the purchase-annuity charged upon the holding, and when received by them shall be paid to the person in receipt of the rent at the date of the agreement or such other person as may prove himself to be entitled thereto, and if the advance is refused shall, unless the agreement otherwise provides, be allowed by the landlord to the tenant as a payment on account of rent.

*SIR J. COLOMB moved in sub-section (1) to leave out the word "sanctioned" and insert instead thereof the word "made." He thought that the change was a sweeping and disastrous one. At present when the landlord and tenant made an agreement of sale and purchase, all arrears and debts due to the landlord were to cease and determine on the advance being made, but the sanction was a very different thing to the advance being made. The position would be, unless this Amendment were accepted, that the Land Commission might sanction the sale at a less price than that which the landlord had agreed to. The landlord might refuse to go on, and the tenant would have his debts wiped out. He did not blame the Chief Secretary, but he did blame his legal adviser the Attorney General.


said he did not feel the blame, because the hon. Gentleman was hopelessly wrong, and if he would read for himself the second section he would see that, under the existing system, the advance was not made, although the agreement might be sanctioned, until the landlord's title was ascertained. That might take a considerable time. Under the clause, the moment that the Land Commission approved of the agreement and were willing to make the advance, they made an Order vesting in the tenant the land, so that there was no interval of time between the sanctioning of the agreement and the vesting Order.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

MR. T. M. HEALY moved to insert after the words "for such purchase," the words, "such sanction shall be signified by an Order and." It was not safe for either the landlord or the tenant that any loose practices should be allowed in the office of the Land Commission. He therefore thought that those gentlemen, after they had sanctioned a purchase, should write out an Order giving the particulars of the transaction.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 20,—