§ *THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. WALTER LONG,) Liverpool, West Derby, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, explained 232 that it proposed to remove two difficulties which had arisen since the compromise on this subject in 1886. Part of that compromise was to the effect that, whereas extraordinary tithe rent-charge would only have been charged on that portion of the farm subject to extraordinary cultivation, the future tithe rent-charge should be fixed at a sum then arranged, and should apply to the whole, and not merely to part of the farm. Unfortunately, by a case which had been recently heard, that compromise had been upset, and so a part of the compromise—and a very important part from the title-owners' point of view—had not been effective. The other small change the Bill sought to make had regard to sales. When a property came for division in consequence of a sale, the Board of Agriculture had no power to apportion extraordinary tithe rent-charge as it had to apportion ordinary charge. The Bill sought to remove the injustice in the one case, and to give the Board of Agriculture the same power in the second case as they had in regard to ordinary tithe.
§ Bill read a Second time, and committed for Thursday.