LEASEHOLD TENURE OF LAND (IRELAND) ACT AMENDMENT BILL. (Hansard, 26 July 1850)

The LORD CHANCELLOR
said, that no doubt this Bill would settle the doubtful construction to which the Act 12 and 13 Vic. was open. But in order to make it I answer more fully the purpose for which it was intended, it would be necessary to fix 295 the maximum of compensation to be given, and that he thought should be at a year and a half's rent. He would, therefore, after the third reading take the opportunity of moving that a proviso to that effect be added.

The EARL of WICKLOW
said, that this measure had been introduced and conducted through the House in such a manner as to make it impossible for the House to give the clauses that consideration which they ought to have. It was introduced early in the Session, had been changed four times, and now, when it was on the point of passing, the Lord Chancellor said he should propose to introduce further alterations. But, apart from this, he objected to the principle of the preamble, which stated that "whereas certain doubts had arisen as to the meaning of certain clauses," because he held in his hand a report in which the Master of the Rolls stated that there could not be the slightest doubt as to the meaning of the Legislature in the Act. The fact was, it was brought forward for the purpose of forestalling an application about to be made to their Lordships' House in its judicial capacity by way of appeal against a decision given in the courts of law. He thought it would be the better plan now to withdraw the Bill, and, if it were really necessary, to reintroduce it next Session under the auspices of the Government. He moved that the Bill be read a third time that day three months.

§ LORD BEAUMONT
said, if their Lordships approved of the Amendment, it would be in fact an approval of the principle of taking a man's property without paying him 6d. for it. The Act as it stood allowed such a proceeding, and although it was known that the Legislature had no such intention, persons in Ireland were found who took advantage of it. In England that would be called robbery; what did the noble Earl call it in his country?

The EARL of WICKLOW
said, he called the Act a measure introduced by Her Majesty's Ministers, supported by their arguments, and agreed to by the House on those arguments.

§ LORD MONTEAGLE
said, the existing law was so doubtful, it was impossible that it could be construed consistently with common sense. He suggested that the Amendments of the Lord Chancellor should be printed, and that the Bill should be postponed, not for three months, but until some early day next week.

§ LORD REDESDALE
supported the Bill as an act of justice; but thought the House ought to be careful how it proceeded with this land of legislation. When the Act itself was read a third time, a number of clauses were introduced, in spite of his opposition, on the ground that they had not been sufficiently well considered, and it was on some of the clauses so introduced that doubts had arisen.

The BISHOP of DOWN and CONNOR
supported the proposal of the Earl of Wicklow for postponing the further prosecution of the Bill this Session.

The MARQUESS of WESTMEATH
held that it concerned their Lordships' honour not to postpone the Bill. An act of injustice had been done last Session, and this was intended to rectify it.

The LORD CHANCELLOR
said, that the two former Acts on the subject had been referred to him by the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdowne) for consideration. By the 5th section of the last of the two Acts it was expressly provided that where a change was made of a leasehold reserved rent into a fee-farm rent, compensation should be given to the landlord for that which was taken away from him by the change. There could be no doubt that it was the intention of the Legislature to give to the landlord that compensation. With regard to the mode of ascertaining the value of the landlord's interest, that was prescribed by the first of the two Acts, and there would exist no more difficulty in this case than in any other.

LORD STANLEY
thought, after the Bill should have been read a third time, it would be convenient that the Amendment proposed by the noble and learned Lord should be postponed to some day next week, that the parties out of doors might consider whether it would have the effect of remedying the acknowledged error in the present law.

§ The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE
felt bound, in justice to the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack, to say that he (the Marquess of Lansdowne) considered the Amendment proposed by that noble and learned Lord essential, both in law and equity, to the giving full effect to the intention of the Legislature.