Lords Sitting of 4 August 1881

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Ecclesiastical Courts Regulation* (201); Superannuation (Post Office and Works) * (203).
Committee—Land Law (Ireland) (187); Removal Terms (Scotland) * (184).
Committee—Report—Presumption of Life (Scotland) * (197).

LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL.—(No. 187.)
(The Lord Privy Seal.)
LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL.—(No. 187.)

  COMMITTEE. [FIRST NIGHT.]
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  Moved, "That the House do now resolve itself into Committee."—(The Lord Privy Seal.)
  LORD DENMANrose to move, as an Amendment, that the House do resolve itself into Committee on that day six months. He (Lord Denman) had read and written out all the Amendments upon the Bill, so that he did not hastily condemn the measure; but he was sure that litigation might be increased by it, and an appeal to the House of Lords had been proposed as an Amendment.
  THE EARL OF AIRLIErose to Order, observing that it would be irregular to enter into a discussion of the Amendments at that stage of the Bill.
  LORD DENMANremarked, that he was often interrupted in that House, and referred to his Protest of 12th July, 1869, in which he showed how Lord Dunboyne, an Irish Peer, had been prevented from speaking on the Irish Land Bill. He went on to allude to 1844, when three noble and learned Lords, all pupils of a most eminent Special Pleader (Mr. Tidd), had overruled Lords Lyndhurst and Brougham on the O'Connell case, and reminded their Lordships that, although from an irregularity as to the jury, the defendant (O'Connell) escaped eight out of 12 months of imprisonment, and a fine of £5,000, yet the law was vindicated. He also alluded to 1846, when his noble and learned Relative had proposed clauses for the Protection of Life Bill, empowering the Lord Lieutenant and Magistrates to bind accused parties over
  766
  to keep the peace; and as it was in that year deemed safe to throw out the Protection of Life Bill, so he thought the present Ministry, having a Coercion Bill and an Arms Bill, might well dispense with this Bill. He feared that he might be alone, like the Father' of Lentulus, when he voted against buying off the Gauls with gold; but he could not willingly go on with this Bill, full of such sweeping changes as were devised by it, and concluded by moving his Amendment.
  Amendment moved to leave out ("now") and add at the end of the motion ("on this day six months.")—(The Lord Denman.)
  On question, that ("now") stand part of the motion, resolved in the affirmative.
  House in Committee accordingly.

  PART I.

    ORDINARY CONDITIONS OF TENANCIES.
    Clause 1 (Sale of tenancies).
    LORD WAVENEYmoved, in page 1, line 20, after the word ("thereof") to insert—
    ("Provided always, that in defect of agreement it shall be lawful for the landlord to present for the approval of the Commissioners the purchaser whose holding shall be considered most advantageous to the estate by reason of contiguity.")
    The noble Lord said, the object of the Amendment was that where two persons were willing to purchase a particular lot, the landlord should have the power of making the selection most advantageous to the estate. No damage would be done to the tenant in the circumstances.
    LORD HARLECHsaid, he was glad that this Amendment had been moved by an Ulster landlord who was in favour of tenant right. The principle was a good one, because where consolidation could be effected within certain limits it was a most advantageous thing both for landlord and tenant.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, the Amendment had been carefully considered by the Government, and he could assure the noble Lord behind him that it would be quite unnecessary, because the Bill did not contemplate, nor would the Court require, directions as to a presentation of this kind. The matter would be found to work itself satisfactorily out in practice.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the Amendment was absolutely unnecessary. If the landlord objected, on reasonable grounds, to any proposed purchaser, his objection would receive effect; and if he choose to exercise his own right of pre-emption, the uncontrolled selection of a new tenant would rest with him.
    Amendment negatived.
    LORD DUNSANYmoved to amend sub-section 4, by providing that where the tenant "shall agree" to sell his tenancy to some other person than the landlord, he should inform the landlord of the name of the purchaser, and state therewith the amount of the consideration agreed to be given for the tenancy. The words of the clause were, ''where a tenant has agreed," and that, he thought, was rather indefinite. If a tenant, either through inadvertance, or from any other cause, did not give notice at all to his landlord that he had sold his farm to any other person, the sale was not null and void, as one might naturally suppose it would be, but it simply became voidable. As the clause now stood, the landlord had no right of pre-emption whatever.
    Amendment moved, in page 1, line 21, leave out ("has agreed") and insert ("shall agree.")—(The Lord Dunsany.)
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he did not think that the dangers apprehended by the noble Lord would arise; but he (Lord Carlingford) thought they might trust the Commission with a matter of this kind, since the determination of other matters of greater importance was left to their discretion.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYasked by what possibility a sale could be allowed to stand if there had been no notice given to the landlord?
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, if the landlord did not object, no harm could be done. He would not be bound to admit the purchaser as a tenant, unless he had received the proper notice.
    THE EARL OF DERBYasked whether he was right in concluding from the clause, as it now stood, that a sale might be valid of which no notice had been given to the landlord?
    THE EARL OF LEITRIMasked a similar question, observing that the matter
    768
    involved other interests of the landlord besides his right of pre-emption.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, he thought the point of considerable importance, as the landlord would not always wish to exercise his right of pre-emption, but would sometimes prefer that the purchaser should be the owner of the adjacent holding, or some other desirable person.
    THE EARL OF DUNRAVENsuggested that a difficulty would arise if the tenant sold his interest without notice to the landlord and then left the country.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that the Government did not differ on the real point, only as to the method of procedure, and therefore the Government would accept the Amendment.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the better way would be to insert the words "in writing," so as to secure that the notice should be given in writing.
    Amendment, as amended, agreed to.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLmoved, in page 2, line 5, after ("court,")
    ("Provided that the landlords objection shall be conclusive in the case of any tenancy in a holding where the improvements in respect of which, if made by the tenant or his predecessors in title, the tenant would have been entitled to be compensated under the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, have been made by the landlord or his predecessors in title, and not by the tenant or his predecessors in title.")
    The noble Duke said, the Amendment was, to his mind, of considerable importance, although, perhaps, it might not be apparent at first sight. They had now, by reading the Bill a second time, assented to its principle, and he could assure his noble Friend the Lord Privy Seal that he should neither move nor vote for any Amendment which, in his opinion, was in derogation of the main principle and purpose of the Bill. As their Lordships had voted for the second reading of the Bill, this was the only just and straightforward mode of proceeding. What he considered the main principle of the Bill was this—that every tenant in Ireland should have the power afforded of re-valuation; and, in the second place, that every tenant in Ireland, with but few exceptions, should have the power of sale. He had already stated at considerable length his objections to this power of sale, and he would now say what might be urged in its

    769
    favour. He thought it was absolutely just in all cases where, by the custom of the country, the tenant had it, and in all cases in which, without the custom of the country, the tenant could pay for it. He admitted, that probably the power of sale might be the most convenient form in which the tenant could be repaid for improvements, and as a large proportion of the tenantry of Ireland had done the improvements, it was the most proper form; and he fully admitted that the power of sale mitigated very much the harshness of eviction. In the case of the very smallest class of tenantry, though he thought the power of sale in their case was, perhaps, the most mischievous, yet incidentally it might have the advantage of enabling the wealthier tenant buying out the poorer one, and thus, to some extent, consolidating the property. On those grounds, he agreed there was much to be said for the power of sale. He did not intend by his Amendment to touch the power of sale in any of the cases to which those arguments applied. Having stated the arguments in favour of free sale, he thought his noble Friend the Lord Privy Seal would admit he had. stated them fairly, and he would remind the House of one of the strongest objections to that power. In the Report of the Bessborough Commission, in one of the few passages with which he entirely concurred, this statement occurred—
    "The right of free sale, even more than fixity of tenure, interferes with a landlord's right of control over his property in respect of his power to choose the tenants by whom he is surrounded, and to surround himself by those whom he prefers."
    And in another paragraph they pointed out the consequences of this, and they said—
    "Except for main drainage and similar improvements on a large scale which may be undertaken by the landlord as a commercial speculation, the result of depriving them of the settlement of sale must eminently he to discourage still further, if not to extinguish, every expenditure upon the soil."
    That was a definite objection; and surely the Government would admit that, in cases where none of the arguments for free sale applied, it was a most unreasonable thing to apply this power to the destruction of the landlord's sentiment of ownership. His Amendment applied solely to cases where landlords had, at
    770
    some time or other, either by themselves or their predecessors in title, executed all the improvements, as was generally the case in England and in Scotland. He must press this Amendment on the Government, because the Government had admitted that this Bill referred to a most exceptional state of things, and Mr. Gladstone had expressly said that he hopefully looked forward to the time when Ireland would be able to arrive at a healthier state of things. Then, why shut the door to a healthier state of things? In cases where landlords had executed all the improvements, for any sake, let them retain that sentiment of ownership, out of which the whole zeal for agricultural improvements had its rise. No man could pretend that this Amendment was contrary to the principles of the Bill. This matter, he thought, was even more important in the future than in the present. As regarded the efficiency of this clause in the future, the Government professed to desire that a great number of persons would buy land in Ireland. Supposing a number of tenants bought their farms and made all the improvements as it was expected they would do, some circumstances, say, occurred which prevented the farmer continuing his residence there—as, for instance, sickness—and he desired to let it to some person whom they chose. Now, under the Bill as it stood, they could not do this without the next day the chance of this tenant selling the tenancy to some other person. He hoped the Government would agree to the Amendment.
    Amendment moved,
    In page 2, line 5, after ("court") insert—("Provided that the landlords objection shall he conclusive in the case of any tenancy in a holding where the improvements in respect of which, if made by the tenant or his predecessors in title, the tenant would have been entitled to be compensated under the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, have been made by the landlord or his predecessors in title, and not by the tenant or his predecessors in title.")—(The Duke of Argyll.)
    LORD CARLINGFORDsympathised with a good deal which had been said by the noble Duke, and it had given him a great deal of pleasure to hear him recognize some, at least, of the advantages which they believed would arise from the sale of the tenant's interest. At the same time, he was not convinced

    771
    by the noble Duke that this Amendment was a necessary one. It would, he thought, in respect to the present state of things, have a very narrow operation indeed. If it were to be adopted, he should ask that the words "substantially maintained" should be inserted with reference to the improvements, because it was obviously possible that improvements might have been made by the landlord 50 years ago, but maintained ever since by a long succession of tenants, in which case, of course, the exemption should not apply. But, setting that aside, what he said was, that in the existing state of things in Ireland cases in which landlords could possibly take advantage of this provision were of so rare occurrence that he did not think it advisable to create such an exception to the general system of tenure which the Government thought ought to be applied to the country, and this all the more, seeing that when a landlord expended money in improvements it was open to him to raise the rent of the holding in order to compensate himself for his outlay. He objected, also, to the mode in which his noble Friend proposed to proceed, inasmuch as direct exemption from the Act was preferable to this indirect exemption. He would not, however, put their Lordships to the trouble of going into the Lobby on the question.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Does the noble Lord accept the Amendment, then?
    LORD CARLINGFORD: No; but we will not go into the Lobby on it.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLL: Why does my noble Friend not answer my arguments? He has said nothing against this Amendment whatever, and I am very much afraid that his real objection is this—that it is an unpopular idea in Ireland that the landlord should ever improve his own land. He rather wishes to discourage than to encourage the improvement of the land by the landlords of Ireland. I shall certainly divide the Committee.
    THE EARL OF LEITRIMsupported the Amendment, contending that, as the Bill stood, confiscation of landlords' improvements would follow.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that if the landlord had not charged a fair rent, having regard to his improvements, this ought to be—and he had no
    772
    doubt would be—-taken into account. Then, with respect to future improvements, it was distinctly provided, that if, after the rent had been fixed, improvements were made by agreement between the landlord and the tenant, there might be an additional rent charged in respect of them. He, therefore, greatly doubted whether it was wise, in the interests of those who approved of the proposal, to insist upon this Amendment. The landlords had already, let them remember, the means of compensating themselves for their outlay on improvements. If the Amendment were to be adopted, he suggested that after the reference to the Act of 1870 there be inserted the qualifying phrase "as amended by this Act." But, while he suggested this, he must point out that it would not be wise to place tenants on estates where the landlords made the improvements in a worse position than that occupied by other tenants.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he had no objection to accept the words suggested; but he must direct attention to the argument of his noble and learned Friend. It was said that they should not place the tenant of a holding on which the improvements were made by the landlord in a worse position than the tenant of a farm where the landlord did not make the improvements. His reply to this was that the Bill itself placed the one tenant in a worse position than the other, and that, therefore, the argument for uniformity at once fell to the ground.
    THE MARQUESS OF "WATERFORDsuggested that the requirement of the Amendment should not be that all the improvements should be made by the proprietor. If this requirement were kept in, then the tenant might, by erecting a pigstye, throw the entire clause out of gear, for then it would not, of course, be possible to say that all the improvements had been made by the tenant.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYpointed out that the suggestion of the noble Marquess introduced quite a new element, because what it really amounted to was that they should exempt from the operation of the Bill farms on which some of the improvements had been made by the tenant, and some by the landlord. If they begun with a pigstye, they intro-

    773
    duced an element of doubt into the whole matter.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD: That matter would be left to the Court to decide—that is, whether the improvements were permanent or not, and whether they had been made by the landlord—whether, in fact, the estate had been managed after the English system.
    THE DUKE OF LEINSTERwas understood to oppose the Amendment.
    LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEpointed out that amongst permanent improvements was main drainage, and if it were not kept up, all other improvements would be valueless. The landlord made this improvement.
    Amendment amended, and agreed to.
    THE EARL OF BELMOERmoved, in page 2, line 5, after ("court,") to insert—
    ("The landlord's objection shall be conclusive where the Ulster tenant right custom, or the benefit of the usage corresponding to such custom, has been purchased or acquired by the landlord or his predecessors in title.")
    Cases of the purchase by a landlord of the tenant's interest were by no means so rare as had been thought. He had made inquiry both within and outside Ulster, and had collected a number of cases which occupied seven pages. There were several cases in county Down; at least eight cases in county Armagh. In Antrim £4,500 had been given by a landlord for the tenant right in 116 acres, £1,200 for that right in 60 acres, £700 in 170 acres, £110 in 16 acres, and £1,500 in 72 acres. Outside Ulster he found that a gentleman in Queen's County had bought up the tenant's interest in 14 farms. He had been asked whether the landlords in such cases had not increased the rent in proportion to the sum given for the tenant right? He had made inquiry, and had been informed that in some cases possibly there might have been some increase; that in certain cases there had been none at all; and that in no instance had the rent been unreasonably increased. He was of opinion that where the landlord had acquired the tenant right he should be freed from liability under the Act; and, therefore, he moved the present Amendment.
    Amendment moved,
    In page 2, line 5, after ("court,") insert—("The landlord's objection shall be conclusive where the Ulster tenant right custom, or the
    774
    benefit of the usage corresponding to such, custom, has been purchased or acquired by the landlord or his predecessors in title.")—(The Earl of Belmore.)
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that the noble Earl had not been able to show that there were many cases to which, his Amendment would apply.
    THE EARL OF BELMORE: Sixty-five.
    LORD CARLINGFORD: In the whole Province of Ulster?
    THE EARL OF BELMORE: Sixty-eight.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he would not dwell upon that, as he did not rest on this contention. The Government were quite unable to accept the Amendment. The provision of the Land Act of 1870 was that when the Ulster tenant right custom was bought up by the landlords that custom ceased to attach to the holding in which it had been bought; but the Act went on to say that all the general provisions of the law should apply to the holding just as they applied to every other holding in Ireland. That was the principle of the present Bill. The noble Earl was proposing that to such cases the general provisions of the Bill should not attach. The landlord in such cases looked upon the purchase money of the tenant's interest as an investment. If he had not increased the rent so as to pay a return on that investment the Government could not help him as to the past; but he would be entitled to raise it for the future. The landlord could not be paid in these cases both ways, both by an increase of rent and a return of the capital sum invested.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, it was very difficult and dangerous to be certain as to what this Bill meant; but he was under the impression that that which the Lord Privy Seal said could be done could not be done. He understood the noble Lord to say that any money paid for the tenant right by the landlord would be recouped by increasing the rent. On Monday night the noble Lord assured the House, in the most solemn way, that the sum paid for the tenant right had nothing to do with the rent, that they were drawn up on parallel lines, and had nothing to do with each other. The Act of 1870 declared that where the landlord had purchased or acquired the benefit of such a usage as the Ulster Custom, the holding should not thence-

    775
    forward be subject to such usage. But now, in 1881, this Bill came in and said that all over Ireland the tenant might sell that which in the interval the landlord had purchased with his money, and on the strength of an Act of Parliament. The number of landlords who had purchased in this way was, no doubt, small; but the principle was very important. He had never before known an instance where Parliament had been so openly asked to violate the most solemn engagements. It was said that the landlord could recoup himself by raising the rent, which, in consideration of the other elements of the Bill, was, in effect, saying—"If you are a landlord, recoup yourself by raising your rent; if you are a tenant, the way to recoup yourself is to get your rent lowered." He trusted that by this Amendment, or by some similar means, those unfortunate persons who had spent many thousands of pounds on their estates would be protected.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the objection of the noble and learned Earl was more apparent than real as applied to this Bill. If the tenant's interest was bought by the landlord, he was entitled to charge interest in the shape of additional rent against the tenant; and that, no doubt, was what took place. But, apart from this purchase, what the tenant had to sell was his own; it did not belong to the landlord. ["Oh!"] His improvements were his own, and would it be contended that the landlord had a right to dispose of them? The Ulster tenant right depended upon custom on estates in Ulster, which settled the terms between landlord and tenant in many ways which deviated from the particular provisions in this Bill, under which the right of sale was given generally in Ireland. The Ulster Custom remained; and the new law being extended over all the country, it was difficult to see any sound reason for this Amendment, which would seem to suggest that those who had bought the tenant's goodwill in Ulster were to be regarded as more unjustly treated than those who never were subjected to the Ulster Custom.
    THE MARQIUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, if any person came before the noble and learned Lord and proposed to escape from engagements solemnly entered upon on the reasons he had alleged, the proposition would be repelled with expressions of indignation. "What the land-
    776
    lord bought up under the Act of 1870 was not the tenant's improvements; it was the Ulster tenant right custom. The landlord had acted under that which the Government had systematically despised and trampled under foot in this Bill, and the extent of which they appeared to have forgotten. What induced the landlords to pay up the Ulster Custom was the sentiment of ownership—the desire to be masters of their own estates, and that was the thing which Parliament solemnly guaranteed to them. Now, the noble and learned Lord said that it was a sufficient fulfilment of the promise—sufficient compensation—that the landlords should have the power which they then had of raising the rent to any extent which the tenants would pay. The sentiment of ownership was the thing which was bought up, and no proposals to give any additional rent were a fulfilment of the contract which Parliament had made. He earnestly hoped their Lordships would honour the signature of Parliament in this respect, and would not allow it to be dishonoured by accepting the proposal of the Government.
    THE DUKE OF ABERCORNobserved, that no landlord could raise his rent without rendering himself unpopular; and, therefore, the suggestion that he could do so in order to compensate himself for the loss of the tenant right was impracticable.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, the assumption of the Government appeared to be that a landlord in the case where he had bought up the Ulster tenant custom would be able to recoup himself by raising the rent; but there was this paradox attaching to the Ulster right, that in dealing with it they could not say that two and two made four. The tenant right and the landlord's fee simple together made a sum far in excess of the selling or letting value of the farm as a whole. In a case in which the landlord's interest might be worth 25 years' purchase, and the tenant right worth 25 years' purchase, the landlord could not charge additional rent representing the interest on the sum paid by him. The purchases made by landlords, though few in number, had not been made as commercial speculations, but had been made in order to liberate the holdings from a custom the operation of which they believed to be detrimental to their estates, The purchases had

    777
    been made by the landlords in order to give them the power of dealing with their land as they thought proper, and exercising freedom in the selection of their tenants. It was a great injustice when, on the invitation of Parliament, landlords had bought the tenant right with these objects, that Parliament should turn round upon them and tell them that the money they had invested had been expended in vain.
    THE EARL OF ANNESLEYsaid, it was impossible that any private person could find out the number of cases that had occurred. He had purchased tenant rights and also made improvements. The injustice proposed to be done was analogous to a tradesman claiming the payment of an account for the second time.
    THE EARL OF LEITRIMsaid, he was of opinion that the tenant's improvements would be invaded by the introduction of this Amendment.
    THE EARL OF DUNRAVENsaid, he thought the case was hardly met by the Amendment before them.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, that if this Amendment were accepted one of his own, which followed, would be useless. It had the same object, but would, he believed, attain it in a better form. He denied that the landlords had increased their rent by an amount corresponding to the sum spent on the purchase of the tenant right. On the contrary, they had in repeated cases reduced their rent. He contended that there had been no recouping on the part of the landlord. The tenant being allowed the power of sale which the Bill gave him, the landlord should be entitled to prove to the Court that he had laid out a certain sum of money that he had not been recouped, which, as a matter of common honesty, should come out of the purchase money. The form of his Amendment to give effect to this view seemed to be more consistent with the provisions of the Bill than the Amendment now before them.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYconsidered that it would be quite possible to pass both Amendments, but recommended the withdrawal of the Amendment of the noble Earl (the Earl of Belmore) if the Committee thought that that of the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) would come more within the scope of the Bill.
    Amendment (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLmoved, in page 2, line 28, after ("tenancy,") to insert—
    ("Where before the passing of this Act the landlord or any of his predecessors in title has purchased or acquired the Ulster tenant right custom or the benefit of a usage corresponding to the Ulster tenant right custom to which any holding was subject, and such holding has in pursuance of section one or section two of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, ceased to be subject to such custom or usage; or
    ("Where before the passing of this Act the landlord or any of his predecessors in title has purchased or acquired the right of sale of the tenant's interest in such holding, and where the tenant or any of his predecessors in title have been paid the consideration for such purchase or acquisition either by payment of a sum of money, or by a corresponding abatement of rent, or where the tenant or any of his predecessors since such purchase or acquisition is or are not proved to have paid money or given money's worth with the express or implied consent of the landlord or any of his predecessors in title on account of becoming the tenant of such holding; and
    ("The tenancy in such holding is sold for the first time after the passing of this Act, the landlord shall be entitled to apply to the Court to have paid to him out of the purchase moneys of the tenancy the sum which he can prove to the satisfaction of the Court to have been paid by him or his predecessors in title by way of consideration for the purchase or acquisition of the Ulster tenant right custom or of the benefit of such usage or of any right of sale of the tenant's interest in such holding; subject nevertheless to any deduction which the Court may deem just in respect of any money received by the landlord or his predecessors in title by way of fine, increased rent, or otherwise on account of the sum so paid as aforesaid.")
    The noble Duke wished to say, as one of those who were responsible for the Act of 1870, that he felt that there was an absolute contract between Parliament and those landlords in Ireland who purchased land under it. As a matter of common honour and honesty, and not as a question of policy, he held that they had no right to violate that contract. But he admitted to the Lord Chancellor and to the Members of the Government that if before this new Triumvirate, which was invested with the power not of valuing rent, but of re-distributing the property in Ireland—if before that High Commission, vested with such powers of disposing of the property of every man in Ireland, the tenant could prove that he had recouped the sum paid for the tenant right, then he admitted that the contract might be departed from; but

    779
    unless that could be shown, he contended they would be guilty of a direct and violent breach of contract. He entirely dissented from what was stated on this subject by his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor the other night, and he maintained that he was perfectly accurate when he said that this Bill would give the tenant power to sell what was not his own. From that injustice, he was sorry to say, they could not wholly escape. However, they might in some way mitigate the injustice. There were hundreds of landlords in Ireland who had allowed their tenants to sit at a far lower rent than could have been exacted from them, for the purpose of keeping out the power of sale. Their Lordships swallowed a great deal when they swallowed this proposal for indiscriminate sale by the tenant of tenant right; but he could not swallow the proposal to break faith with those who tad purchased property in Ireland under the solemn guarantee of Parliament. In moving his Amendment he was perfectly willing, as was distinctly stated in it, to take the opinion of the new Court which had been set up as to whether or not the landlord had been recouped for what it was now proposed to dispossess him of; but, for his own part, he regarded the Triumvirate as a barbarous convention of a barbarous condition of things.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he did not for a moment call in question the motives which influenced the noble Duke in proposing the Amendment, nor did he deny that there was a good deal in the considerations his noble Friend had advanced; but the adjustment of this question upon principles of absolute justice under the Bill was a more difficult matter than the noble Duke seemed to be aware of. He would not repeat the arguments he had used before, but would only say that they were merely removing impediments which previously existed by law to a man taking his own goodwill and his own improvements to the most available market. The latter part of the Amendment appeared to be quite just; but as for the other part he would ask, By whom was the landlord to be repaid? Not by the person who had received the money from him, but by the existing tenant, whether he had been a short or a long time in occupation, and whether he had derived profit from it or not. If the view taken by his noble
    780
    Friend of the Act of 1870 was sound, it would rather follow, that it might be the duty of Parliament to make compensation. He could understand the argument that a man who had sold the tenant right and received money for it should repay the landlord; but he could not understand why a man who had derived no benefit from the transaction should be called upon to do so.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, that his noble and learned Friend's argument was a good deal inconsistent with the preceding provision of his own Bill, which said that where permanent improvements were made by the landlord the landlord should be recouped. The only difference between the cases was that in the one instance the landlord had spent his money in making improvements, in the other in purchasing the tenant right. But in both cases he had spent his money. If the Amendment was not accepted a tenant who had only been in the farm some six months might sell something that was really not his own.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, the fallacy of the noble and learned Lord was this—he assumed that the person who was at present in possession had a property in the tenant right. But these holdings were different from others, in that they had stamped upon them a distinct character by Parliament, which declared that they should not be subject to tenant right, as formerly they were. By this Bill they were going to say that those holdings should be put up to see what some person would give for the tenant right. It was a fallacy to say that that money belonged to the tenant in possession. It rather belonged to the landlord, who had bought the tenant right by Act of Parliament.
    On question? (leave being given to the Earl GRANVILLE to vote in the House) Their Lordships divided:—Contents 219; Not-Contents 67: Majority 152.

    CONTENTS.

    Canterbury, L. Archp.

    Marlborough, D.

    York, L. Archp.

    Norfolk, D.

    Northumberland, D.

    Beaufort, D.

    Richmond, D.

    Buckingham and Chandos, D.

    Somerset, D.

    Sutherland, D.

    Cleveland, D.

    Wellington, D.

    Grafton, D.

    Leeds, D.

    Abercorn, M. (D. Abercorn.)

    Manchester, D.

    781

    Abergavenny, M.

    Strathmore and King horn, E.

    Bath, M.

    Bristol, M.

    Suffolk and Berkshire, E.

    Exeter, M.

    Hertford, M.

    Verulam, E.

    Lansdowne, M.

    Waldegrave, E.

    Salisbury, M.

    Winton, E. (E. Eglintoun.

    Winchester, M.

    Zetland, E.

    Amherst, E.

    Clancarty, V. (E. Clancarty.

    Annesley, E.

    Bandon, E.

    Cranbrook, V.

    Bathurst, E.

    Doneraile, V.

    Beauchamp, E.

    Gough, V.

    Belmore, E.

    Hardinge, V.

    Bradford, E.

    Hawarden, V. [Teller.]

    Cadogan, E.

    Hereford, V.

    Cairns, E.

    Hood, V.

    Caledon, E.

    Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

    Camperdown, E.

    Carnarvon, E.

    Lifford, V.

    Chichester, E.

    Melville, V.

    Clonmell, E.

    Sherbrooke, V.

    Coventry, E.

    Sidmouth, V.

    Dartrey, E.

    Templetown, V.

    De La Warr, E.

    Denbigh, E.

    St. Albans, L. Bp.

    Derby, E.

    Devon, E.

    Abinger, L.

    Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queens berry.)

    Amherst, L.(V. Holmesdale.

    Annaly, L.

    Eldon, E.

    Ardilaun, L.

    Ellesmere, E.

    Arundell of Wardour, L.

    Feversham, E.

    Fortescue, E.

    Ashford, L. (V. Bury.)

    Gainsborough, E.

    Aveland, L.

    Haddington, E.

    Balfour of Burleigh, L.

    Hardwicke, E.

    Harewood, E.

    Bateman, L.

    Ilchester, E.

    Beaumont, L.

    Jersey, E.

    Belper, L.

    Lanesborough, E.

    Borthwick, L.

    Lathom, E. [Teller.]

    Botreaux, L. (E. Loudoun.

    Leven and Melville, E.

    Lindsey, E.

    Brabourne, L.

    Lovelace, E.

    Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.)

    Lucan, E.

    Lytton, E.

    Byron, L.

    Macclesfield, E.

    Calthorpe, L.

    Mansfield, E.

    Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.)

    Manvers, E.

    Mar and Kellie, E.

    Castlemaine, L.

    Minto, E.

    Chelmsford, L.

    Morton, E.

    Clements, L. (E. Leitrim.)

    Mount Edgcumbe, E.

    Nelson, E.

    Clifton, L. (E. Darnley.)

    Onslow, E.

    Clinton, L.

    Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

    Cloncurry, L.

    Colchester, L.

    Portarlington, E.

    Colville of Culross, L.

    Powis, E.

    Cottesloe, L.

    Radnor, E.

    Crofton, L.

    Ravensworth, E.

    De Freyne, L.

    Redesdale, E.

    De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

    Romney, E.

    Rosse, E.

    De Mauley, L.

    Rosslyn, E.

    Denman, L,

    Sandwich, E.

    de Ros, L.

    Somers, E.

    De Saumarez, L.

    Sondes, E.

    Digby, L.

    Stanhope, E.

    Dinevor, L.

    782

    Donington, L.

    Ormonde, L. (M. Ormonde.)

    Dunsandle and Clanconal, L.

    Penrhyn, L.

    Dunsany, L.

    Penzance, L.

    Ellenborough, L.

    Plunket, L.

    Elphinstone, L.

    Poltimore, L.

    Emly, L.

    Raglan, L.

    Ettrick, L. (L. Napier.)

    Ranfurly, L. (E. Ranfurly.)

    Gage, L. (V. Gage.)

    Gormanston, L. (V. Gormanston.)

    Rayleigh, L.

    Rodney, L.

    Grey de Radcliffe, L. (V. Grey de Wilton.)

    Rowton, L.

    Sackville, L.

    Hare, L. (E. Listowel.)

    Saltersford, L. (E. Courtown.)

    Harlech, L.

    Hartismere, L. (L. Henniker.)

    Saltoun, L.

    Scarsdale, L.

    Hatherton, L.

    Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)

    Hay, L. (E. Kinnoul.)

    Heytesbury, L.

    Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)

    Hylton, L.

    Inchiquin, L.

    Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde.

    Keane, L.

    Kenlis, L. (M. Headfort.)

    Somerton, L. (E. Normanton.)

    Kenry, L. (E. Dunraven and Mount Earl.)

    Stanley of Alderley, L.

    Stewart of Garlies, L.(E. Galloway.)

    Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)

    Stratheden and Campbell, L.

    Kintore, L.(E. Kintore.)

    Lamington, L.

    Strathspey, L. (E. Seafield.)

    Lawrence, L.

    Leconfield, L.

    Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll.)

    Lismore, L. (V. Lismore.)

    Talbot de Malahide, L.

    Lovat, L.

    Templemore, L.

    Lovel and Holland, L.(E. Egmont.)

    Tollemache, L.

    Truro, L.

    Lyveden, L.

    Tyrone, L. (M. Waterford.)

    Manners, L.

    Massy, L.

    Ventry, L.

    Monteagle, L. (M. Sligo.)

    Vernon, L.

    Vivian, L.

    Monteagle of Brandon, L.

    Waveney, L.

    Wentworth, L.

    Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)

    Westbury, L.

    Willoughby de Broke, L.

    Napier, L.

    Northwick, L.

    Wimborne, L.

    Norton, L.

    Windsor, L.

    O'Neill, L.

    Wynford, L.

    Ormathwaite, L.

    NOT-CONTENTS.

    Selborne, L. (L. Chancellor.)

    Canterbury, V.

    Eversley, V.

    Devonshire, D.

    Falmouth, V.

    Westminster, D.

    Leinster, V. (D. Leinster.)

    Ailesbury, M.

    Torrington, V.

    Northampton, M.

    Exeter, L. Bp.

    Airlie, E.

    Durham, E.

    Aberdare, L.

    Granville, E.

    Ampthill, L.

    Kimberley, E.

    Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) [Teller.]

    Morley, E.

    Northbrook, E.

    Braye, L.

    Saint Germans, E.

    Breadalbane, L. (E. Breadalbane.)

    Spencer, E.

    Sydney, E.

    Camoys, L.

    Yarborough, E.

    Carew, L.

    783

    Carlingford, L.

    Monson, L. [Teller.]

    Carrington, L.

    Mostyn, L.

    Clermont, L.

    Mount Temple, L.

    Clifford of Chudleigh, L.

    O'Hagan, L.

    Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

    Crewe, L.

    Dacre, L.

    Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

    Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine)

    Ribblesdale, L.

    Fingall, E. (E. Fingall.)

    Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.)

    Foley, L.

    Sandhurst, L.

    Granard, L. (E. Granard.)

    Saye and Sele, L.

    Sefton, L. (E. Sefton.)

    Greville, L.

    Skene, L. (E. Fife.)

    Houghton, L.

    Strafford, L. (V. Enfield.)

    Kenmare, L. (E. Kenmare.)

    Sudeley, L.

    Kinnaird, L.

    Suffield, L.

    Leigh, L.

    Thurlow, L.

    Loftus, L. (M. Ely.)

    Vaux of Harrowden, L.

    Lyttelton, L.

    Methuen, L.

    Wolverton, L.

    Monck, L. (V. Monck.)

    Wrottesley, L.

    Moncreiff, L.

    Amendment agreed to.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLmoved, in page 2, line 34, after ("tenancy,") to insert—
    ("Or for moneys payable to the landlord under the preceding sub-section in respect of the purchase or acquisition by the landlord or his predecessors in title of the Ulster tenant right custom or the benefit of such usage, or of any right of sale of the tenant's interest in such holding.")
    Amendment agreed to.
    EARL CAIRNSmoved to insert, in page 3, line 30, after ("usage,") the following words:—
    "(14.) Where a sale of a tenancy is made under a judgment or other process of law against the tenant, or for the payment of the debts of the deceased tenant, the sale shall be deemed to be made by the tenant, and shall be made in the prescribed manner and subject to the conditions of this section."
    THE LORD CHANCELLORobjected to the Amendment on the ground that the Bill, as it stood, did not interfere with the ordinary process of law.
    EARL CAIRNSwished to know whether the Government, after creating this right of sale, intended to allow a judgment creditor to put up a holding for sale, and thereby to deprive the landlord of all the safeguards which were thrown over the right in the previous part of the section? If so, any tenant who wanted to get rid of those safeguards would only have to allow a collusive execution to be taken out against him.
    Amendment agreed to.
    EARL CAIRNSmoved to insert—
    ("Any sum payable to the landlord out of the purchase moneys of the tenancy under this section shall be a first charge upon the purchase moneys.")
    Amendment agreed to.
    EARL CAIRNSmoved the following Amendment:—
    "(15.) A landlord, on receiving notice of an intended sale of the tenancy, may, if he is not desirous of purchasing the tenancy otherwise than as a means of securing the payment of any sums duo to him for arrears of rent or other breaches of the contract or conditions of tenancy, give notice within the prescribed time of the sum claimed by him in respect of such arrears and breaches, such sum failing agreement between the landlord and tenant to be determined by the Court, and may claim to purchase the tenancy for such sum if no purchaser is found to give the same or a greater sum; and the landlord, if no purchaser be found within the prescribed time to give the same or a greater sum, shall be adjudged the purchaser of the tenancy at that sum."
    The noble and learned Earl said, there was no doubt that the Bill gave to the landlord the right of pre-emption of tenancy on any occasion of sale, and there were many cases in which the right would be exercised; but he was bound to say that he did not think, as a general rule, the landlord would be desirous of purchasing the tenancy, and thus enter into a controversy with the tenant as to the value of the tenancy. The consequence would be that the occasions would be few on which the landlord would buy the tenancy as a purchaser; but there would be a great number of occasions on which he would take a very lively interest in the sale for other reasons. The landlord under the Bill was informed that, practically, the remedy by eviction against a tenant would be of very little worth, and that the way in which he must look for re-imbursement for arrears was by giving the power of free sale to the tenant. The tenant would be driven to make a sale of the tenancy, and the landlord would be paid out of the purchase money the sum due to him. Therefore, the landlord would have a vital interest in two things—namely, that sufficient should be produced by the sale to pay the arrears of rent and other charges; and, secondly, that some machinery should be provided by which he would really know what sum the incoming tenant paid, because their Lordships would see that as between the incoming and outgoing tenant the object of both

    785
    would be to keep the landlord in the dark as to what sum really had been paid in the change of tenancy. It was most desirable that some machinery should be provided enabling the landlord to ascertain the sum, as nothing could be easier than for the outgoing tenant to have a contract by which the incoming tenant would appear to pay a certain sum, say £100, whereas, in reality, the amount that would be paid would be £200. Nothing was easier than to pay another £100 to a third party, to be given to the outgoing tenant after the landlord was disposed of. For these reasons he thought his Amendment should be added to the clause. The landlord, if he did not wish to purchase, should be allowed to go into Court and say—"I have a claim against the tenant, and, unless that sum is forthcoming, I claim to have the tenancy adjudged to me." There could be no possible harm done to the tenant if a purchaser were found to buy at a price more than the sum due to the landlord.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that if the landlord passed over the pre-emption right, and did not wish to become the possessor, he ought not to stand in the way of the tenant realizing his tenant right in the best way he could. This Amendment would give the landlord a double advantage over the tenant. If the noble and learned Earl had proposed an Amendment simply to prevent a collusive sale the Government would have been prepared to consider it; but the Amendment, as it stood, would prevent a sale where the bona fides were undoubted, and it was of excessive stringency against the tenant.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he thought that the opportunity of collusion pointed out by his noble and learned Friend (Earl Cairns) was one of the greatest dangers they had to encounter. The danger was that the tenant would sell his holding nominally for a small price, but really for a large one, and so try to escape the debt he owed to the landlord. The sympathies of the noble and learned Lord opposite (the Lord Chancellor) were highly excited for fear the tenant might be forced to pay the rent due; but the remedy was very simple. The moment the tenant paid his arrears all the rights of the landlord given by the Amendment would fall to the ground. In other words, the tenant would prac-
    786
    tically exercise the very common right of buying in the tenancy for the price he pleased; and if he choose to pay the money due from him to the landlord the rights of the latter ceased, and no possible injury could be done to the tenant.
    LORD O'HAGANargued that if the Amendment were passed it would deprive the tenant of the advantages contemplated by the statute, inasmuch as it would tend to limit the right of free sale. Why should the landlord, if he had arrears paid to him, have any advantage over anybody else in the sale? Why should he not be in the open market competing with anybody else, so that the tenant might have freedom to obtain the largest amount which might be given in the open market for his interest in his tenant right? If the landlord got the amount of his arrears and was prepared to pay the full value according to the opinion of the Court on ascertainment of the justice of the tenant right without question, he got all he wanted and all he was entitled to. He got the amount of his arrears, he had the holding of his own land. He lost nothing whatever. Was it so very unfair that the tenant pressed by circumstances should have as fair a chance of obtaining the full value of his tenant right, the landlord having the same pull upon him as to the amount of his arrears as he would have if he went into the open market? As the Amendment was in contravention of the principle of the clause, and the machinery of the Courts, he, for one, would oppose it.
    EARL CAIRNScontended that, so far from its being in contravention of the clause, it was merely incidental to it. The object of the Amendment was that the tenant should produce the utmost shilling that could be produced upon the holding. The landlord and tenant were in the same boat. They both wanted to get the utmost possible sum that could be got for the tenant right. It might be that the landlord did not want to become the purchaser, and that he had no wish to interfere in the transaction at all except for the purpose of having his arrears paid. The tenant came to him in Ireland, and said—"I wish to sell my tenancy." "Well, you owe me arrears of £'200, and of course that is a sum which I am anxious to have." The tenant said—"It may produce that sum or it may produce less."

    787
    "I do not want to buy your tenant right; all I want is the sum due. I do not wish to hamper you in any way in selling your interest. Get the highest price you can get by auction or by private contract, or in any other way; but the sum due to me should be treated as a reserve price, so that if you cannot get a higher sum, then I take the holding for that sum. By all means get £200 or £300. I won't exercise my right of preventing you; and, rather than have a settlement by the Court, if you do not get more than £200, let that and the amount of the arrears be the reserve price." How was that against the principle of the Bill? He had never heard that the reserve price was against the principle of any sale.
    THE EARL OF DERBYasked if the noble and learned Earl would explain whether a tenant, having given notice of an intended sale and having reason to suppose that he would not get what he thought an ample price for his tenancy, would have the power of withdrawing from the sale? If he would have that power it did not seem to him that any injustice would be done to him by this Amendment; but if he would not have it, the Amendment would put it in the power of the landlord to take advantage of the tenant's temporary inability to find a purchaser at a fair price. At the same time, they must all be desirous of preventing collusive sales.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, he had no hesitation in answering that question. The transaction should be perfectly free, and he intended the utmost liberty in that respect to the tenant. He would be willing to add words to make that intention quite clear.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that the objection raised by the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) was the only one which he entertained. So explained, he had no objection to the Amendment. But it was quite plain that, as the Amendment stood, the tenant, if he once gave notice of sale, would be bound to go on.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, he thought the intention would be made quite clear by the insertion in line 8 of the words "and the tenant determining to proceed to a sale." He moved to insert those words.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, the Government would accept the noble
    788
    and learned Earl's Amendment with the insertion of these words.
    Amendment, as amended, agreed to.
    Clause, as amended, agreed to.
    LORD CARLINGFORDmoved, after Clause l, to insert the following clause:—
    ("The tenant from year to year of a tenancy to which this Act applies shall not, without the consent of the landlord, sub-divide his holding or sub-let the same or any part thereof.")
    The effect would be that such tenancies would be null and void, and sub-tenants so created would have no existence in the eye of the law.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLasked whether this Amendment was necessary, as he thought it was covered by the existing law? If there was one point on which all parties were agreed it was that it should not be in the tenant's power to sub-divide the holding. Why was it necessary that this Amendment should be introduced in that House?
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the object of the Amendment was to show clearly that the sub-division without the landlord's consent was illegal.
    EARL CAIRNSsuggested that the following words should be added to the clause:—
    ("Any act done by the tenant in contravention of this provision shall be absolutely void.")
    THE LORD CHANCELLORaccepted the addition, though he thought it unnecessary.
    New Clause, as amended, agreed to.
    Clauses 2 and 3 agreed to.
    Clause 4 (Incidents of tenancy subject to statutory conditions).
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDproposed to leave out the words—
    ("After notice has been given by the landlord to the tenant not to commit or to desist from the particular waste specified in such notice.")
    He said that the Government would not have put in these words if they had considered at the time what they were going to put in in Clause 12, as it affected the tenant. The word "persistent" waste therein contained was a great protection to the tenant.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, the requirement of notice would tend to limit and simplify the inquiry before the Court as to the waste. He should like

    789
    the words to remain. He did not know whether the noble Marquess was anxious to leave them out.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDsaid, he was very anxious to have these words left out.
    Amendment agreed, to.
    LORD DUNSANYmoved, in page 5, line 13, after ("notice,") to insert ("the tenant shall not break up pasture or meadow land contrary to express covenants.") That which he sought to prevent by the Amendment was one of the most destructive things that could be done on a farm.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, their Lordships had already passed a clause which provided, as one of the statutory conditions, that the tenant should not make persistent waste by the deterioration of the soil. He apprehended that breaking up ancient pasture would come within the meaning of the term "persistent waste." These statutory conditions were intended to take the place of covenants, and therefore any reference to covenants in leases would be out of place in this clause. As to a pasture which was, not ancient, there was no reason why it should not be broken up.
    LORD DUNSANYsaid, the argument did not apply, because there was an absence of persistency if all the injury could be done at once without any repetition of the wrong-doing.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that would not rob the act of the character of persistency. It would be persistent waste to burn down a house which could be burnt only once.
    LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsupported the Amendment, and suggested the omission of the reference to covenants.
    THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONconsidered the words of his noble Friend's Amendment went further than he intended, because, in his opinion, the Amendment, if adopted, would prevent any tenant breaking up pasture or meadow, which, in many cases, might be a great benefit to the landlord and tenant.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, it might be necessary to do it in the ordinary course of rotation. But if it were waste to do it, that would be only one form of waste; and if they were to enumerate
    790
    the different forms many others would have to be inserted—such, for instance, as burning the soil. He thought it would be better to leave the clause as it stood.
    LORD HARLECHalso objected to the Amendment, but believed the clause would be improved by inserting after the word "persistent," "or wanton waste."
    EARL CAIRNSobserved, that in many cases it was absolutely necessary to break up pasture.
    LORD DUNSANYexpressed his readiness to accept a modification of his Amendment, in order that his object might be carried out.
    LORD INCHIQUINsaid, that the lands with which the noble Lord wished to deal were old pasture lands of 20 years' standing, and. if those lands were ploughed up it would be an injury from which they might not recover for many years. He would suggest that the words inserted should be "the tenant shall not break up ancient pasture or meadow land."
    THE EARL OF BELMOREsaid he was owner of pasture land which was all the better for breaking up.
    LORD DUNSANYsaid, he was willing to insert "ancient pasture" in his Amendment, and to omit the latter part of it with reference to express covenants.
    Amendment negatived.
    To the words in page 5, line 13, "the tenant shall not, without the consent of his landlord, sub-divide or sub-let his holding," the following words were added:—" or any part thereof."
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved, in page 5, line 15, after (" holding,") to insert—
    ("Nor erect, or suffer to be erected thereon, save as in this Act provided, any dwelling-house in addition to those already upon the holding at the time of the passing of this Act, nor suffer to he used as a dwelling-house any building which at the time of the passing of this Act was not so used, with the knowledge and consent of the landlord.")
    He said his object was not to alter the scope of the provision against sub-letting or sub-dividing, but to make the words more effectual. All were agreed that sub-letting or sub-dividing should not be allowed. This was a matter of national concern. What they wanted to secure was that an area should not be burdened with a population it was

    791
    not able to support. Sub-letting and sub-division were brought about in this way—the tenant took in under the name of a lodger some member of the family, and established him in a cabin adjoining his own, or in a building intended for some other purpose, and not fit for the accommodation of human beings. Upon a miserably small holding, scarcely sufficient to accommodate a single family, would be sometimes found four or five families huddled together under circumstances of great misery. Hitherto landlords had been able to check such excessive sub-division; but they had now been deprived of all means of preventing it. He wished, therefore, to insert in the Bill words which would remove all doubts upon the subject.
    LORD LECONFIELDsaid, it frequently happened that the cottages had a room on either side of the door, with a kind of attic over without a window. The tenant knocked a hole through the wall, and put in a window afterwards, letting a part of the cottage to another party, and he suggested that words should be inserted to prevent that kind of sub-division.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he could not accept the latter suggestion. If they were to do battle by Act of Parliament with every piece of ingenuity that might possibly occur to an Irish tenant it would require a good deal of ingenuity and time on their part to do so. He was, however, willing to accept the Amendment of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdowne).
    THE EARL OF DUNRAVENregretted that the Amendment had been accepted.
    Amendment agreed to.
    VISCOUNT LIFFORDnext moved an Amendment exempting the landlord from liability for damage occasioned by cutting and removing turf in the exercise of his right to enter upon the holding for such purposes as mining, quarrying, road-making, draining, and sporting.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he could not accept the Amendment; but he would consider the point before the Report.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDalso objected to the Amendment, which, in his opinion, went too far.
    Amendment negatived.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDmoved, in page 5, line 28, after ("mine-
    792
    rals") to insert ("or digging or searching for minerals.")
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATEEFOEDmoved, in page 5, line 32, after ("title") insert—
    ("And which the tenant at the time of the passing of this Act may he entitled by law to cut and remove.")
    As the Bill stood the tenant could claim almost every tree. There was no intention, of course, of interfering with those that were planted for ornament or shelter.
    LORD LECONFIELDsaid, if some such Amendment as this were not accepted, in a short time there would not be a single stick of timber standing in Ireland.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that the tenant who claimed the statutory term of 15 years might have a plantation on the farm, for which he was bound to pay rent during those 15 years; and yet it was now proposed that the landlord should be allowed to come forward during that time and sweep away such a plantation.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBUBYobserved, that the landlord always had the right to take the trees which were on his property. He was now asked to give the tenant something which he never possessed before, and that was the right to those trees; and simply because the tenant made some improvement, or for some other reason, the noble Lord proposed an additional spoliation to those contained in the Bill—namely, by giving the possession of trees which the tenant never had, and to which he could not possibly lay a claim.
    EARL SPENCERremarked that a tenant who had a statutory term of 15 years would have to pay a certain rent for that particular period, and it was undesirable that the landlord should be allowed to diminish the value of the holding during that period by cutting down the trees.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDsaid, that if the tenant wished to grow trees during his statutory term he could register them under the special Act of Parliament.
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATEEFORDmoved, in page 5, line 34, leave out ("may be required,") and insert—

    793
    ("The tenant under the contract of tenancy subsisting immediately before the commencement of the statutory term was lawfully entitled to cut.")
    LORD CARLINGFORDagreed to accept the Amendment, if the words relating to "the contract of tenancy subsisting" were omitted.
    Amendment, as amended, agreed to.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDmoved, in page 5, line 38, after ("game,") insert ("as defined for the purposes of the Act twenty-seventh and twenty-eighth Victoria, chapter sixty-seven.") He said his object was to include snipe and woodcock. In many parts of Ireland snipe and woodcock were the only game, and to preserve game in Ireland without preserving snipe and woodcock would simply be like mockery.
    LORD CARLINGFORDconsidered the proposed definition unnecessary.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDsaid, if his Amendment was not accepted, a landlord would not be able to prosecute in his own name.
    EARL SPENCERsaid, the landlord would be able to prosecute under the Act of last year in his own name.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDsaid, that Act only had reference to cases where the landlord reserved his rights.
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATEEFORDmoved, in page 6, line 1, to leave out the word ("persistently,") and insert ("unreasonably") in the clause. The object was to prevent tenants from unreasonably obstructing the landlord in his shooting, even though they did not persistently do so.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORthought it would be undesirable, as a thing which was of no real consequence might sometimes be unreasonable, though, unless persisted in, it might do no harm. It was not desirable, in a clause settling conditions of tenure, to raise questions as to anything which was not of real importance between the landlord and tenant.
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDmoved, in sub-section 5, which provides that the shooting and fishing should belong to the landlord, subject to the
    794
    Ground Game Act, 1880, in line 41, after ("game,") to insert ("as defined for the purposes of the Act twenty-seventh and twenty-eighth Victoria, chapter sixty-seven;") and, in line 48, after ("1880,") to insert—
    ("And the provisions of the Act twenty-seventh and twenty-eighth Victoria, chapter sixty-seven, shall extend where such right of shooting and taking game belongs exclusively to the landlord as though such exclusive right were reserved by the landlord to himself by deed.")
    And in line 4, after ("section,") to insert—
    ("During the continuance of a statutory term, all mines and minerals, coals and coal pits, quarries of limestone and other stone and slate, gravel and sand pits, woods and underwoods, and all bogs and bog timber, turbaries for cutting turf, and rights of turbary, except such of the said rights as the tenant, under the contract of tenancy subsisting immediately before the commencement of the statutory term, was lawfully entitled to exercise, shall be deemed to be exclusively reserved to the landlord.")
    Amendments agreed to.
    LORD CARLINGFORDmoved, in page 6, after line 6, add, as a new paragraph—
    ("Nothing contained in this section shall prejudice or affect any ejectment for non-payment of rent instituted by a landlord whether before or after the commencement of a statutory term, in respect of rent accrued due for a holding before the commencement of such term.")
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBUBYtook exception to the wording of the 6th subsection of the clause, which said that during the continuance of a statutory term in a tenancy, "consequent on an increase of rent by the landlord," the Court might, on the application of the landlord, and for certain purposes, authorize the resumption of the holding, and require the tenant to sell his tenancy, or part of it, on such terms as the Court might approve. The purposes for which the land might be resumed included grants or leases of sites for churches or other places of religious worship. These were very desirable objects, no doubt, for which the landlord was to have the power of resuming the land; but this power of resumption was not to be given to every landlord. In order to be able to exercise this power, a landlord must have qualified himself by a certain special qualification.—namely, that he should

    795
    have previously raised the rent of his tenant. Now, he (the Marquess of Salisbury) was entirely desirous of protecting the right of the landlord to deal with the rent; but he had never, in his wildest moments, gone so far as to look upon the raising of the rent as a special mark of holiness in a landlord. He, for one, should venture to claim for landlords who had not risen to so exalted a height of virtue as to raise their rents the liberty of building churches on their estates. He therefore moved to omit the words "consequent on an increase of rent by the landlord."
    LORD CARLINGFORDpointed out that the noble Marquess had not read an important part of the clause, which empowered the landlord to resume—
    ("The holding, or part thereof, for some reasonable and sufficient purpose having relation to the good of the holding or of the estate.")
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: But why is it to be consequent upon an increase of rent by the landlord?
    LORD CAELINGFORDexplained that, as the Bill stood, the power of resumption was confined to the case of statutory terms not created by the intervention of the Court, but by the mere fact of the landlord and tenant having agreed upon an increase of rent without having recourse to the Court. He would, however, take this opportunity of stating a proposal which the Government was prepared to make on this subject. It was this—first, that the power of resumption should be made universal in all cases and in respect of all statutory tenancies, beginning from the time of the passing of the Bill; and, secondly, that for a certain number of years there should be no power whatever under any circumstances to convert present into future tenancies. That was to say, the creation of future tenancies would be for a certain time postponed. If their Lordships were prepared to consider this suggestion in its double aspect, the Government would be prepared with words on Report to carry it into effect. If they were not disposed to accept it, the only course open to the Government would be to stand by the words which the noble Marquess wished to omit.
    THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, the noble Lord had raised a much larger question than that brought forward by the noble Marquess; it was one requiring a good
    796
    deal of consideration, and ought to be kept distinct from the other.
    THE DUKE OF AEGYLLsaid, he was not sure that the Committee fully understood the nature of the mine that had been sprung upon it by the observations of the Lord Privy Seal. When he left the Government, and when the Bill was introduced into Parliament, it was a fundamental idea of the Government, and a fundamental principle of the Bill, that there should be a distinction between future and present tenancies. Every possible device was adopted in the Bill to make present tenancies continuous and almost permanent. They were, in fact, to be entails in favour of the present tenants of Ireland. But the Prime Minister left open a door through which in some future time they might hope to return to a healthy and natural condition of things in Ireland. A door was, in fact, left open for a return to the principle of freedom of contract; and the Government had repeatedly said that they looked to that result as the ultimate hope for peace in that country. The Lord Privy Seal, who, for all he knew, was one of those who had always been jealous and suspicious of the notion of a return to the natural state of things in Ireland, now proposed to substitute for a very innocent proposal of the noble Marquess opposite a complete abandonment of what he (the Duke of Argyll) considered the fundamental principle of the measure. His noble Friend said that the postponement of the power to create future tenancies would be temporary. Well, they all knew what would occur. Another agitation would be got up, and the postponement of the power would be continued indefinitely. The suggestion of the Lord Privy Seal was the result of his hatred of the plan by which a door would be left open for a return to freedom of contract. He did not believe that the Irish tenants were alarmed at the proposal that bits of their land might be taken from them for certain purposes, for they understood that they would be properly compensated. He quite understood, however, that many of them disliked the idea of a return to the principle of freedom of contract for themselves and their landlords, although they insisted upon absolute freedom to contract between themselves and their fellow-tenants. He would much rather keep the Govern-

    797
    ment to the fundamental principles of the Bill than assent to the further Amendment which had been indicated.
    THE DUKE OF ABERCORNwas understood to say that where the statutory terms were granted landlords would not make improvements.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that if landlords wanted to resume possession for any of the purposes named, they must sacrifice the valuable privilege of freedom of contract; and yet in another Bill simultaneously introduced into the House by the Government it was provided that persons in possession of land might make leases of it for the erection of churches and schools and for the promotion of public education. But as regarded this Bill the question was why the power of resumption given by the clause was restricted to a special class of landlords—namely, those who had raised their rents. The inconsistency of these provisions showed the haste with which the proposals of the Government were made. The Committee would do well to reflect upon them more than the Government had done.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, the clause as it stood would induce a landlord who wanted to build a church to raise the rents of his tenants.
    EARL FORTESCUEwished to say a word on the matter as a sanitary reformer. The evil consequences in Ireland of the overcrowded and bad state of labourers' cottages were enormous; and it was monstrous that they should have a large question brought before them when all they cared for in the clause was the very simple power of enabling the landlord to resume for the purpose of building decent dwellings for the labourers.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYcould assure the noble Marquess that the proposal which had been described as the springing of a mine was not made without the fullest consideration.
    LORD WAVENEYhoped that the Government would not give up this clause.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that the power of resumption was an exceedingly important modification of the statutory term, which might be made under the direction of the Court for reasonable and sufficient purposes, and not alone for the building of churches or schools.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, no doubt it was important; but the question was why it
    798
    should be limited to cases in which there had been an increase of rent.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he understood the noble Marquess to adhere to his Amendment in spite of the important modification which the Government had offered to make; but if the offer were not accepted and the Amendment were carried, the Government would not consider themselves bound by the offer that had been made.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, that the Government professed a desire that landlord and tenant should agree; but the way they proposed to induce them to agree was by making the unfortunate landlord raise the rent.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, he began to despair of getting a clear statement on this question. What he understood to have taken place was this. An Amendment moved by the noble Marquess opposite was met by a statement of the Lord Privy Seal that it was the intention of the Government to accord to the landlord an universal right of resumption, instead of the very limited right now accorded by the Bill. But the Lord Privy Seal added that, in order to quiet the minds of the Irish tenants, he intended to accompany this modification of the Bill by a proposal under which the conversion of present into future tenancies should be delayed for an indefinite time, which he did not name. In these circumstances, their Lordships ought to accept the Amendment of the noble Marquess, which was not foreign to the object of the Lord Privy Seal; and when they had before them that mysterious and indescribable proposal for quieting the minds of the Irish tenants, they would be able to consider it with the attention it deserved.
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE EARL OF PEMBROKEmoved, in page 6, line 12, after ("estate") to insert ("or for building purposes.") He said that the Government probably intended to give the landlord the right of resumption for building purposes, and the only question was whether that object was covered by the words "for the good of the estate." An ingenious lawyer might argue that the good of the landlord and of the estate were two different things; and, therefore, it would be desirable to have a distinct declaration on the subject.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he had no doubt that the words in the Bill covered the object of the noble Earl, and that the words proposed were unnecessary.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, it was quite possible the Court might say that a scheme of building was not for the good of the estate. Therefore, his noble Friend proposed to insert the words in question, to indicate one of the purposes which should be deemed for the good of the estate. He thought, however, a subsequent Amendment to be proposed by the noble Earl (the Earl of Belmore) was preferable.
    Amendment (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
    THE EARL OF BELMOREmoved, in page 6, line 12, after ("estate") to insert—
    ("Or for using or letting the same for manufacturing purposes, or for building ground, or for villa sites or gardens.")
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the words "for the good of the estate" embraced every purpose for which the landlord ought to have a right to resume possession.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYasked whether "for the good of the estate" meant for the good of the proprietor's pocket, or did it mean the actual improvement of the land as land '?
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEasked whether the words meant "for the advantage of the proprietor;" if so, why was this not stated on the face of the clause?
    THE LORD CHANCELLORobjected to these words.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLasked whether it was the intention of the Government that the proprietors should have the power of resumption in order to apply the land as building land'?
    THE LORD CHANCELLORreplied in the affirmative.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLasked why, then, they should not say so in the Bill? There were many estates on which the sole hope of redemption lay in converting a portion of the land to building purposes.
    Amendment (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
    EARL CAIRNSmoved the insertion of the words "including the use of the ground as building ground."
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, the Government would accept this Amendment.
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause, as amended, agreed to.
    Clause 5 (Repeal of part of s. 3 of Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, and enactment of new scale).
    THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREmoved, in page 6, to leave out from ("provides") in line 27, to ("as") in line 32, both inclusive. He said that he fully understood the necessity of protecting tenants against capricious evictions; but the old scale of compensation was sufficient, especially as the Bill put within the reach of the vast majority of tenants what was practically a 15 years' lease, renewable for ever.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that though in the case of the great majority of the tenants the sale of the tenants' interest would take the place of the scale of compensation adopted in 1870, and would be better for all parties, there would be a residuum of tenants who would not find protection in the sale of their interests and with whom it was necessary to deal in another way. The Government, therefore, proposed to retain the sections giving compensation for disturbance, and also, influenced by the opinion of the Judges who were administering the Act of 1870—many of whom said that in cases frequently before them they felt the amount of compensation which they were empowered to award was too small—to increase the scale, and strengthen the power of the Court.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he hoped the Amendment would not be adopted. He admitted, of course, that through the medium of the scale of compensation it would be possible to give absolute perpetuity of tenure; but the change proposed by the Government would not make the scale prohibitive.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, the noble Lord had stated that there was a small residuum of tenants who would have no saleable interest. It was a strange thing that, because this small residuum of tenants had holdings which were of no value, they were not only to be compensated for those holdings, but compensated on a far higher scale than had been known up to this time, Many of the

    801
    County Court Judges said the remedy up to the present time had been the Compensation Clause of the Land Act of 1870. They said cases had come before them in which the landlord was willing to pay full compensation, because he was certain to get a new tenant who would come in and recoup him all he had paid for compensation. Therefore, the very cases which the County Court Judges said they wished to provide for were cases in which, according to their own statement, there was a power of sale on the part of the tenant; and, consequently, it would be unnecessary to resort to the new Compensation Clause of this Bill. He had heard no argument for making compensation to the tenants on a very much higher scale than hitherto. It was proposed to increase the compensation, and in some cases to nearly double it.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYcontended that the argument of the noble and learned Earl who had just spoken was inconsistent. He did not object to the continuance of the clause of the Act of 1870; but he was opposed to the clause being made satisfactory. The County Court Judges, whose judgment might be accepted on this point as superior to that of even the noble and learned Earl, gave it as their experience that the clause of 1870 had been found to be imperfect.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that when the County Court Judges, or a certain number of them, gave an opinion that this compensation was not sufficient for the purpose, they did not know that it was contemplated to enact a system of free sale. All the cases they cited for the purpose of establishing that this compensation was insufficient were cases which never could arise under a system of free sale. Their opinion might, therefore, be put aside, because it applied to a system which had now altogether ceased to exist. He did not think the clause was of the first importance, because he agreed with the Lord Privy Seal that in the working of the Bill this Compensation Clause would almost entirely disappear. Still, as far as it went, he entirely agreed with the Amendment that was now before the Committee, because it seemed to him that the system of compensation in its principle was anomalous, and that it was not to be defended on any of the ordinary
    802
    principles on which property was based. It was impossible to defend a system of compensation for disturbance which applied to tenants paying £500 or £1,000 a-year, for it was quite absurd to say that such tenants were weak persons who were unable to make a contract for themselves, and it was palpably ridiculous to give it the extension proposed.
    On question, That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 91; Not-Contents 180: Majority 89.

    CONTENTS.

    Selborne, L. (L. Chancellor.)

    Carew, L.

    Carlingford, L.

    Carrington, L.

    Grafton, D.

    Clermont, L.

    Somerset, D.

    Clifford of Chudleigh, L.

    Westminster, D.

    Dacre, L.

    Ailesbury, M.

    De Mauley, L.

    Bath, M.

    Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.)

    Lansdowne, M.

    Northampton, M.

    Emly, L.

    Ettrick, L. (L. Napier.)

    Airlie, E.

    Fingall, L. (E. Fingall.)

    Camperdown, E.

    Foley, L.

    Chichester, E.

    Granard, L. (E. Granard.)

    Derby, E.

    Durham, E.

    Greville, L.

    Fitzwilliam, E.

    Hare, L. (E. Listowel.)

    Ilchester, E.

    Hatherton, L.

    Kimberley, E.

    Houghton, L.

    Minto, E.

    Kenmare, L. (E. Kenmare.)

    Morley, E.

    Northbrook, E.

    Lawrence, L.

    Spencer, E.

    Leigh, L.

    Suffolk and Berkshire, E.

    Lismore, L. (V. Lismore.)

    Sydney, E.

    Loftus, L. (M. Ely.)

    Yarborough, E.

    Lovat, L.

    Lyttelton, L.

    Canterbury, V,

    Methuen, L.

    Falmouth, V.

    Monck, L. (V. Monck.)

    Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen)

    Moncreiff, L.

    Monson, L. [Teller.]

    Leinster, V. (D. Leinster.)

    Monteagle of Brandon, L.

    Powerscourt, V.

    Mount Temple, L.

    Sherbrooke, V.

    O'Hagan, L.

    Torrington, V.

    Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

    Exeter, L. Bp.

    Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

    Aberdare, L.

    Ribblesdale, L.

    Ampthill, L.

    Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.)

    Ashburton, L.

    Belper, L.

    Sandhurst, L.

    Blachford, L.

    Saye and Sele, L.

    Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.)[Teller.]

    Sefton, L. (E. Sefton.)

    Skene, L. (E. Fife.)

    Braye, L.

    Somerton, L. (E. Normanton.).

    Breadalbane, L. (E. Breadalbane.)

    Stafford, L. (V. Enfield.).

    Calthorpe, L.

    Camoys, L.

    Sudeley, L.

    803

    Suffield, L.

    Waveney, L.

    Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll.)

    Wenlock, L.

    Wolverton, L.

    Thurlow, L.

    Wrottesley, L.

    Vernon, L.

    NOT-CONTENTS.

    Beaufort, D.

    Redesdale, E.

    Buckingham and Chandos, D.

    Romney, E.

    Rosse, E.

    Leeds, D.

    Sandwich, E.

    Manchester, D.

    Somers, E.

    Marlborough, D.

    Sondes, E.

    Norfolk, D.

    Stanhope, E.

    Northumberland, D.

    Strange, E. (D. Athol.)

    Portland, D.

    Strathmore and King-

    Richmond, D.

    Sutherland, D.

    Waldegrave, E.

    Winton, E. (E. Eglintoun.)

    Abercorn, M. (D. Abercorn.)

    Abergavenny, M.

    Clancarty, V. (E. Clancarty.)

    Bristol, M.

    Exeter, M.

    Combermere, V.

    Hertford, M.

    Cranbrook, V.

    Salisbury, M.

    Doneraile, V.

    Winchester, M.

    Gough, V.

    Hardinge, V.

    Amherst, E.

    Hawarden, V.

    Annesley, E.

    Hereford, V.

    Bandon, E.

    Hill, V.

    Bathurst, E.

    Hood, V.

    Beauchamp, E.

    Hutchinson, V. (E Donoughmore.)[Teller.]

    Belmore, E.

    Bradford, E.

    Brownlow, E.

    Lifford, V.

    Cadogan, E.

    Melville, V.

    Cairns, E.

    Sidmouth, V.

    Caledon, E.

    Templetown, V.

    Carnarvon, E.

    Clonmell, E.

    St. Albans, L. Bp.

    Coventry, E.

    Dartrey, E.

    Abinger, L.

    Denbigh, E.

    Alington, L.

    Devon, E.

    Amherst, L.(V. Holmesdale.)

    Doncaster, E. (D. Buecleuch and Queens berry.)

    Annaly, L.

    Ardilaun, L.

    Ellesmere, E.

    Arundell of Wardour, L.

    Fortescue, E.

    Gainsborough, E.

    Ashford, L. (V. Bury.)

    Haddington, E.

    Aveland, L.

    Hardwicke, E.

    Balfour of Burleigh, L.

    Harewood, E.

    Bateman, L.

    Lanesborough, E.

    Beaumont, L.

    Lathom, E. [Teller.]

    Borthwick, L.

    Leven and Melville, E.

    Botreaux, L. (E. Loudoun.

    Lovelace, E.

    Macclesfield, E.

    Brabourne, L.

    Mansfield, E.

    Brancepeth, L. (V Boyne.).

    Manvers, E.

    Mar and Kellie, E.

    Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.)

    Morton, E.

    Mount Edgcumbe, E.

    Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.)

    Nelson, E.

    Onslow, E.

    Castlemaine, L.

    Pembroke and Montgomery, E.-

    Chelmsford, L.

    Clements, L. (E. Leitrim.)

    Portarlington, E.

    Powis, E.

    Clifton,L. (E. Darnley.)

    Radnor, E.

    Cloncurry, L.

    Ravensworth, E.

    Colchester, L.

    804

    Colville of Culross, L.

    Norton, L.

    Crofton, L.

    O'Neill, L.

    De Freyne, L.

    Oranmore and Browne, L.

    De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

    Ormathwaite, L.

    de Ros, L.

    Ormonde, L. (M. Ormonde.)

    Digby, L.

    Dinevor, L.

    Penrhyn, L.

    Donington, L.

    Plunket, L.

    Dunsandle and Clanconal, L.

    Poltimore, L.

    Raglan, L.

    Dunsany, L.

    Ranfurly, L. (E. Ranfurly.)

    Ellenborough, L.

    Elphinstone, L.

    Rayleigh, L.

    Foxford, L. (E. Limerick.)

    Rodney, L.

    Rowton, L.

    Gage, L. (V. Gage.)

    Sackville, L.

    Gormanston, L. (V. Gormanston.)

    Saltersford, L. (E Courtown.)

    Grey de Radcliffe, L. (V. Grey de Wilton.)

    Saltoun, L.

    Sandys, L.

    Hartismere,L. (L. Henniker.)

    Scarsdale, L.

    Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)

    Hay, L. (E. Kinnoul.)

    Heytesbury, L.

    Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)

    Howard de Walden, L.

    Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde.)

    Hylton, L.

    Inchiquin, L.

    Stanley of Alderley, L.

    Kenlis, L. (M. Headfort.)

    Stewart of Garlies, L. (E. Galloway.)

    Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)

    Strathnairn, L.

    Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

    Strathspey, L. (E. Sea field.)

    Lamington, L.

    Talbot de Malahide, L.

    Leconfield, L.

    Templemore, L.

    Lovel and Holland, L.(E. Egmont.)

    Tollemache, L.

    Tredegar, L.

    Lyveden, L.

    Trevor, L.

    Manners, L.

    Ventry, L.

    Massy, L.

    Wentworth, L.

    Monteagle, L.(M. Sligo.)

    Westbury, L.

    Willoughby de Broke, L.

    Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)

    Wimborne, L.

    Napier, L.

    Windsor, L.

    Northwick, L.

    Wynford, L.

    Clause, as amended, agreed to.
    Clause 6 agreed to.

  PART II.

    INTERVENTION OF COURT.
    Clause 7 (Determination by court of rent of present tenancies).
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYmoved, in page 8, lines 15 and 16, to leave out the words (" after having demanded from such tenant an increase of rent.") He did not think that such a demand should be a condition of the landlord's access to the Court. He thought it hardly required argument to show that the landlord and tenant should have equal access to the Court, and, when there, be treated on equal terms. He was again obliged to think that there was some especial grandeur

    805
    attaching to the landlord who increased his rent, for it was only those who should have increased their rent who would have access to the Court. Could he conceive himself selecting any class of landlords, or any special disabilities, he should be rather inclined to lean against landlords who increased their rents. But such was not the view of the wise men who ruled them. He would have justified his opinion to the House and attempted to demolish the arguments of the Government if they had condescended to give the slightest reason for the abnormal limitation of the provision under consideration. As matters stood, however, he would simply propose that landlords and tenants, like all other subjects of Her Majesty, should be placed upon the same level with regard to their rights of access to Courts of Justice; and with that view he begged to move that the words ("after having demanded from such tenant an increase of rent, which the tenant has declined to accept,") be removed from the Bill.
    LORD CARLINGFORDexplained the reason of the limitation to which the noble Marquess objected was a desire to induce the parties, if possible, to settle their affairs out of Court. If a landlord should wish to increase his rent, and should not be influenced by the desire of keeping out of Court to come to an agreement with his tenant, he would not be prejudiced by the limitation provided in the clause. He could not accept the Amendment.
    THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, that he could see no reason, nor had he heard any, for placing a landlord who had not raised his rent in a less advantageous position than a landlord who had raised his rent.
    EARL CAIRNSasked what a landlord was to do who desired to have recourse to the Court for some other purpose than that of raising his rents?
    THE LORD CHANCELLORasked for what conceivable purpose could the landlord be disposed to go to the Court if he did not want to increase the rent? He would not go to the Court to get the rent reduced. If the tenant did not want to go to the Court to get the rent reduced, he would assuredly not go to get it increased. The motive for putting the clause in its present form was that it indicated that if the landlord did wish his rent increased, the better course for him would be to propose the increase he
    806
    thought right, and then, if he and his tenants could not agree, to go to the Court.
    THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he did not think the Amendment very material; but he thought the landlord who desired to protect himself ought to have the opportunity afforded him of going to the Court, even though he had never entertained the idea of raising his rent. He might wish to sell his estate, and to be able to state the amount of the rental as it would stand in future.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLpointed out there was another occasion when a landlord might wish to go to the Court, and that was when he was denounced by the Land League as a rack-renter. It was well known that over and over again professional agitators had gone about denouncing certain landlords as rack-renters; and tenants, as an excuse for non-payment of their rent, said they were coerced by the Land League. Therefore, he could conceive the landlord wishing to go to the Court to prove before a judicial authority that he was not a rack-renter. He could not conceive why the Government should debar him from doing that.
    THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, the obvious reason for the limitation in this clause was that the Government, as he understood it, considered that the Court was a necessary evil. They wished to encourage recourse to it as little as possible. He hoped the Government would stand by the words of the Bill.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he could not admit that the provision in the clause was unreasonable. In the present relations of landlords and tenants in Ireland it was a matter of doubtful policy to encourage the landlords to go to the Court when they did not require an increase of rent, and bring their tenants—generally poorer men than themselves—into Court.
    Amendment agreed, to.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYmoved, in page 8, lines 20 and 21, to leave out the words (" and having regard to the interest of the landlord and tenant respectively.") They had been embarrassed frequently in dealing with this Bill by finding, from time to time, strange phrases, wholly unintelligible or useless in the position in which they were placed. They had never hitherto been able to obtain from the Government any clear

    807
    or satisfactory account of these curious fragments occurring in various parts of the Bill; and they were compelled, therefore, to conclude that they were really the seed-bed in which legislation by inadvertence grew up—that they were planted there with a purpose—not with a purpose, but an accidental intention—of creating in future time some right for some favoured class at the cost of some other class The words he had quoted furnished an illustration. They were one of the wandering fragments to which he had referred. If the Court was not composed of dishonest men, why should they be told that they were to consider the interests of the parties before them? It was like telling a Judge and jury to consider the interests of the plaintiff and defendant respectively. This curious phrase was much more like the end of a lame peroration in some speech than the wording of a sober clause in a grave and important Act of Parliament. Then, it might be asked, why not leave it? Well, Courts of Law had an awkward tendency to imagine—it was very foolish of them—that when the Legislature said something it meant something; and if the meaning was not evident in the words, they would seek it by some mysterious juxtaposition, and strive to honour the Legislature by fixing a meaning to all the words they might use. They had every reason to believe, both from what generally took place in such cases, and from what they had heard from Ireland, that some meaning or other—and that a meaning rather advantageous to the tenant than the landlord—would be placed on this phrase by the Court. The words were either surplusage, or worse than surplusage. If surplusage, they had better not be retained; if worse, the sooner they were got rid of the better.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he did not know whether the noble Marquess attached much importance to this Amendment or not. It was true the words were not the words of the Government; they were introduced by the House of Commons. They did not make any substantial change. The Government looked upon them as nothing but a general instruction to the Court to give both parties a fair and impartial hearing. He did not see the cause for alarm.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, the words were not accepted until after a
    808
    good deal of consideration had been given to them. He knew that a good deal of suspicion attached to these words; but he could not conceive why. As originally proposed, the Government believing that the tenant was the weaker party, and required special protection, the Court was directed to consider his interest alone; but that was felt to be so unfair that this direction was extended to the interest of the landlord also.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, it was proposed to leave out the words altogether; but in the interest of the tenant the words were inserted as they now stood in the Bill.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORasked, was it not right that the Court should have regard to the interest of the tenant and to the interest of the landlord? The words would alleviate dissatisfaction among the smaller tenants in Ireland; and he thought their Lordships would act wisely in retaining them.
    EARL CAIRNSsaid, the words in the clause were as full as could be desired without the words objected to.
    THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, the Amendment was verbal and unnecessary, and he hoped it would not be agreed to.
    THE EARL OF ANNESLEYsaid, that in Ulster the value of tenant right was often double the value of land; and if the Court had regard to the interests of landlord and tenant, as indicated by this fact, the landlord might be ruined.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that as the words were admitted to be surplusage, he was afraid he must divide the Committee.
    On question, That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 93; Not-Contents 184: Majority 91.

    CONTENTS.

    Selborne, L. (L. Chancellor.)

    Dartrey, E.

    Derby, E.

    Cleveland, D.

    Fitzwilliam, E.

    Devonshire, D.

    Kimberley, E.

    Grafton, D.

    Minto, E.

    Somerset, D.

    Morley, E.

    Northbrook, E.

    Westminster, D

    Saint Germans, E.

    Ailesbury, M.

    Spencer, E.

    Northampton, M.

    Suffolk and Berkshire, E.

    Airlie, E.

    Sydney, E.

    Camperdown, E.

    Yarborough, E.

    809

    Canterbury, V.

    Houghton, L.

    Falmouth, V.

    Kenmare, L. (E. Kenmare.)

    Gordon, V. (E. Aberdeen.)

    Kenry, L. (E. Dunraven and Mount-Earl.)

    Leinster, V. (D. Leinster.)

    Lawrence, L.

    Powerscourt, V.

    Leigh, L.

    Sherbrooke, V.

    Lismore, L. (V. Lismore.)

    Torrington, V.

    Loftus, L. (M. Ely.)

    Exeter, L. Bp.

    Lovat, L.

    Lyttelton, L.

    Aberdare, L

    Methuen, L.

    Ampthill, L.

    Monck, L. (V. Monck.)

    Ashburton, L.

    Moncreiff, L.

    Belper, L.

    Monson, L. [Teller.]

    Blachford, L.

    Monteagle of Brandon, L.

    Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) [Teller.]

    Napier, L.

    Braye, L.

    O'Hagan, L.

    Breadalbane, L. (E. Breadalbane.)

    Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

    Calthorpe, L.

    Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

    Camoys, L.

    Carew, L.

    Ribblesdale, L.

    Carlingford, L.

    Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.)

    Carrington, L.

    Clermont, L.

    Sandhurst, L.

    Clifford of Chudleigh, L.

    Saye and Sele, L.

    Sefton, L.(E. Sefton.)

    Crewe, L.

    Skene, L. (E. Fife.)

    Dacre, L.

    Somerton, L. (E. Normanton.)

    De Freyne, L.

    De Mauley, L.

    Strafford, L. (V. Enfield.)

    Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.)

    Sudeley, L.

    Emly, L.

    Suffield, L.

    Ettrick, L. (L. Napier.)

    Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll.)

    Fingall, L. (E. Fingall.)

    Foley, L.

    Thurlow, L.

    Granard, L. (E. Granard.)

    Vernon, L.

    Waveney, L.

    Greville, L.

    Wenlock, L.

    Hare, L. (E. Listowel.)

    Wolverton, L.

    Hatherton, L.

    Wrottesley, L.

    NOT-CONTENTS.

    Beaufort, D.

    Beauchamp, E.

    Buckingham and Chandos, D.

    Belmore, E.

    Bradford, E.

    Leeds, D.

    Brownlow, E.

    Manchester, D.

    Cadogan, E.

    Marlborough, D.

    Cairns, E.

    Norfolk, D.

    Caledon, E.

    Northumberland, D.

    Carnarvon, E.

    Richmond, D.

    Clonmell, E.

    Sutherland, D.

    Coventry, E.

    Wellington, D.

    Denbigh, E.

    Devon, E.

    Abercorn, M. (D. Abercorn.)

    Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queens berry.)

    Abergavenny, M.

    Bristol, M.

    Eldon, E.

    Exeter, M.

    Ellesmere, E.

    Hertford, M.

    Feversham, E.

    Salisbury, M.

    Gainsborough, E.

    Winchester, M.

    Haddington, E.

    Hardwicke, E.

    Amherst, E.

    Harewood, E.

    Annesley, E.

    Lanesborough, E.

    Bandon, E.

    Lathom, E. [Teller.,]

    Bathurst, E.

    Leven and Melville, E.

    810

    Lovelace, E.

    Chelmsford, L.

    Lytton, E.

    Clements, L. (E. Leitrim.)

    Macclesfield, E.

    Mansfield, E.

    Clifton, L. (E. Darnley.)

    Manvers, E.

    Mar and Kellie, E.

    Clinton, L.

    Morton, E.

    Cloncurry, L.

    Mount Edgcumbe, E.

    Colchester, L.

    Nelson, E.

    Colville of Culross, L.

    Onslow, E.

    Crofton, L.

    Pembroke and Montgomery, E.

    De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

    Powis, E.

    de Ros, L.

    Radnor, E.

    Digby, L.

    Ravensworth, E.

    Dinevor, L.

    Redesdale, E.

    Donington, L.

    Romney, E.

    Dunsandle and Clanconal, L.

    Rosse, E.

    Rosslyn, E.

    Dunsany, L.

    Sandwich, E.

    Ellenborough, L.

    Somers, E.

    Elphinstone, L.

    Sondes, E.

    Foxford, L. (E. Limerick.)

    Stanhope, E.

    Strange, E. (D. Athol.)

    Gage, L. (V. Gage.)

    Strathmore and Kinghorn, E.

    Gormanston, L. (V. Gormanston.)

    Verulam, E.

    Grey de Radcliffe, L.(V. Grey de Wilton.)

    Waldegrave, E.

    Zetland, E.

    Harlech, L.

    Hartismere, L.(L. Henniker.)

    Clancarty, V. (E. Clancarty.)

    Hay, L. (E. Kinnoul.)

    Combermere, V.

    Heytesbury, L.

    Cranbrook, V.

    Howard de Walden, L.

    Doneraile, V.

    Hylton, L.

    Gough, V.

    Inchiquin, L.

    Hardinge, V.

    Kenlis, L. (M. Head fort.)

    Hawarden, V. [Teller.]

    Hereford, V.

    Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)

    Hill, V.

    Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

    Hood, V.

    Lamington, L.

    Hutchinson, V. (E Donoughmore.)

    Leconfield, L.

    Londesborough, L.

    Lifford, V.

    Lovel and Holland, L.(E. Egmont.)

    Melville, V.

    Sidmouth, V.

    Lyveden, L.

    Templetown, V.

    Manners, L.

    Massy, L.

    St. Albans, L, Bp.

    Monteagle, L. (M. Sligo.)

    Abinger, L.

    Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)

    Alington, L.

    Amherst, L. (V. Holmesdale.)

    Northwick, L.

    Norton, L.

    Annaly, L.

    O'Neill, L.

    Ardilaun, L.

    Oranmore and Browne, L.

    Arundell of Wardour, L.

    Ormathwaite, L.

    Ashford, L. (V. Bury.)

    Ormonde, L. (M. Ormonde.)

    Aveland, L.

    Bateman, L.

    Penrhyn, L.

    Beaumont, L.

    Plunket, L.

    Borthwick, L.

    Poltimore, L.

    Botreaux, L. (E. Loudown.)

    Raglan, L.

    Ranfurly, L. (E. Ranfurly.)

    Brabourne, L.

    Brancepetn, L. (V. Boyne.)

    Rayleigh, L.

    Rodney, L.

    Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.)

    Rowton, L.

    Sackville, L.

    Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.)

    Saltersford, L.(E. Courtown.)

    Castlemaine, L.

    Saltoun, L.

    811

    Sandys, L.

    Templemore, L.

    Scarsdale, L.

    Tollemache, L.

    Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)

    Tredegar, L.

    Trevor, L.

    Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde.)

    Tyrone, L. (M. Waterford.)

    Stanley of Alderley, L.

    Ventry, L.

    Stewart of Garlies, L.(E. Galloway.)

    Vivian, L.

    Wentworth, L.

    Stratheden and Campbell, L.

    Westbury, L.

    Willoughby de Broke, L.

    Strathnairn, L.

    Strathspey, L. (E. Seafield.)

    Wimborne, L.

    Windsor, L.

    Talbot de Malahide, L.

    Wynford, L.

    THE EARL OF PEMBROKEmoved, in page 8, line 23, after ("rent,") to insert—
    ("Provided always, that where application is made to the court under this section in respect of any tenancy, and the court is of opinion that the tenant of the holding in which such tenancy subsists, or his predecessors in title, has or have caused or suffered such holding to become deteriorated, contrary to the express or implied conditions constituting the contract of tenancy, the court may refuse the application, or may postpone the further hearing of the same until after the performance by the tenant of such conditions as the court may think proper.")
    He said, that this Amendment was a very important one. Its object was to prevent the deterioration of the holding. One of the greatest dangers which would arise under the Act was that it would hold out a strong temptation to the tenant to allow his farm to get into a bad condition during the last year, with the view of obtaining a lower rent for the next 15 years. The Irish landlords had a right to demand that they should be protected against that kind of thing. He doubted whether, as the Bill stood, the Court would hold that such conduct was "unreasonable" within the meaning of the "equities" clause, and would, on that ground, refuse a statutory term. The Amendment was the outcome of persons who had thoroughly considered the subject. It would be a wise and fair way of meeting a difficulty, and no honest tenant in Ireland need fear anything whatever from it.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that such a case as was contemplated in the Amendment would be prevented by Clause 8, which provided that where the Court was of opinion that the conduct of either landlord or tenant had been unreasonable, the Court might refuse the application or accede to it, subject to certain conditions.
    Amendment agreed to.
    LORD VENTRYmoved, in page 8, line 23, after ("rent,") insert—
    ("Provided always, that the court shall not entertain an application made under this section by any tenant who owes more than one-half year's rent until satisfied that such tenant has tendered to his landlord within one year previous to his making such application a sum or sums equivalent to one year's rent of his holding.")
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, the Amendment was inconsistent with the intentions and with some of the provisions of the Bill.
    LORD VENTRYpointed out that the Amendment ran on the same lines as the clause relating to arrears of rent.
    Amendment (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved, in sub-section 3, which provides that where the judicial rent of any present tenancy has been fixed by the Court such present tenancy shall be deemed to be a tenancy subject to statutory conditions, to leave the following words out:—
    ("With this modification, that, during the statutory term in a present tenancy consequent on the first determination of a judicial rent of that tenancy by the court, application by the landlord to authorise the resumption of the holding or part thereof by him for some purpose having relation to the good of the holding or of the estate, shall not be entertained by the court, subject nevertheless to the provisions in this Act contained for the benefit of labourers in respect of cottages, gardens, or allotments. Provided also, that such application for resumption may be entertained by the court, if it is satisfied that before the passing of this Act the reversion expectant on the determination of a lease of the holding was purchased by the landlord or his predecessors in title with a view of letting or otherwise disposing of the land for building purposes on the determination of such lease, and that it is bonâ fide required by him for such purpose.")
    He remarked that he could discover no reason for drawing this distinction between the first statutory term of 15 years and a subsequent term.
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he could not consent to the Amendment. The Government thought it of great importance that every tenant in Ireland should feel that he had it in his power to obtain a fixed term of at least 15 years, not liable to the chances of resumption by the landlord.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLwas entirely at a loss to understand what object the Government had in putting so heavy a

    813
    penalty upon landlords as that proposed by the 3rd sub-section of the clause.
    THE MARQUESS OP SALISBURYremarked, that the object of the Government was to show the tenantry of Ireland that they were extremely zealous in punishing the Irish landlord; and the 3rd sub-section, which the Government wished to retain, was an example of their zeal in that direction.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, the object of the clause was of the greatest importance in the estimation of the Government. Its object was to give the tenants of Ireland 15 years' rest; and if the noble Marquess thought that a laughing matter, those who were responsible for the government of the country took a different view. He might remind the Committee that nearly all their Lordships were landlords. They might not agree with many of the tenants' ideas on the subject—and he certainly did not agree with them all—but it was unreasonable to think that because their Lordships held certain views that they were to dominate entirely over the opinions of all 'who were concerned in a settlement of this question. He warned their Lordships from looking at the matter in such a light; and as there was an obvious reason why Ireland should have a respite from disturbance for 15 years, he hoped their Lordships would not resist the retention of the words proposed to be omitted.
    THE EARL OF AIRLIEsupported the Amendment.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, he quite understood the object of the Government. But the unrest of Ireland was not due to the inequality of the laws, for the Prime Minister himself had said that the laws of Ireland were more favourable to the tenant than those of any other country. The unrest was caused by the false doctrines which had been preached in Ireland, and which had been encouraged by the language of Ministers. It was most important that this privilege should be left to the owners of land for the good of the country. He could not support the Amendment, because he did not think it fair and just, and he wanted nothing to be given to the landlord that was not fair and just.
    THE EARL OF ANNESLEYasked, how it was possible to expect to obtain a respite from the agitation existing in Ireland if they refused such an Amendment
    814
    as this, which would prevent landlords from having the power of doing good to the country when they wished?
    THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that he would be exceedingly glad to believe that there would be a respite to agitation. Nothing would be more gratifying to all of them, and it was simply to bring about that result that the clause was framed. They felt that, as landlords, it was necessary that they should make some little sacrifice to avoid friction as far as possible. They therefore thought it well to postpone for a time the exercise of those privileges of the landlord, which, though in themselves reasonable, might cause great harm if too freely exercised.
    EARL FORTESCUEsaid, that, for the first time, he would vote with the Government. There was a good deal in the reasons they had given; but there was no justice in the course they proposed to take. He was afraid that the Government were too hopeful in thinking that there would be a respite of agitation.
    On question, That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 77; Not-Contents 195: Majority 118.

    CONTENTS.

    Selborne, L. (L. Chancellor.)

    Aberdare, L.

    Ampthill, L.

    Ashburton, L.

    Devonshire, D.

    Belper, L.

    Westminster, D.

    Blachford, L.

    Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) [Teller.]

    Ailesbury.M.

    Northampton,M.

    Breadalbane, L. (E. Breadalbane.)

    Derby, E.

    Calthorpe, L.

    Durham, E.

    Camoys, L.

    Fitzwilliam, E.

    Carew, L.

    Fortescue, E.

    Carlingford, L.

    Kimberley, E.

    Carrington, L.

    Minto, E.

    Clermont, L.

    Morley, E.

    Clifford of Chudleigh, L.

    Northbrook, E.

    Saint Germans, E.

    Crewe, L.

    Spencer, E.

    Dacre, L.

    Sydney, E.

    De Mauley, L.

    Yarborough, E.

    Elgin, L. (E. Elgin and Kincardine.)

    Falmouth,V.

    Emly, L.

    Gordon,V.(E. Aberdeen.)

    Ettrick,L.(L. Napier.)

    Fingall,L.(E. Fingall.)

    Leinster, V.(D.Leinster.)

    Foley, L.

    Granard, L.(E. Granard.)-

    Powerscourt, V.

    Torrington,V.

    Hare, L.(E. Listowel.)

    Kenmare, L.(E. Kenmare.)

    Exeter, L. Bp.

    815

    Kenry, L. (E. Dunraven and Mount-Earl.)

    Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.)

    Lawrence, L.

    Sandhurst, L.

    Leigh, L.

    Sandys, L.

    Loftus, L. (M. Ely.)

    Saye and Sele, L.

    Lyttelton, L.

    Sefton, L. (E. Sefton.)

    Methuen, L.

    Skene, L. (E. Fife.)

    Monck, L. (V. Monck.)

    Strafford, L. (V. En- field.)

    Monson, L. [Teller.]

    Monteagle of Brandon, L.

    Sudeley, L.

    Suffield, L.

    O'Hagan, L.

    Thurlow, L.

    Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

    Waveney, L.

    Wenlock, L.

    Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)

    Wolverton, L.

    Wrottesley, L.

    Ribblesdale, L.

    NOT-CONTENTS.

    Beaufort, D.

    Ilchester, E.

    Buckingham and Chandos, D.

    Jersey, E.

    Lanesborough, E.

    Grafton, D.

    Lathom, E. [Teller.]

    Leeds, D.

    Leven and Melville, E.

    Manchester, D.

    Lovelace, E.

    Marlhorough, D.

    Lytton, E.

    Norfolk, D.

    Macclesfield, E.

    Northumberland, D.

    Mansfield, E.

    Portland, D.

    Manvers, E.

    Richmond, D.

    Mar and Kellie, E.

    Somerset, D.

    Morton, E.

    Sutherland, D.

    Mount Edgcumbe, E.

    Wellington, D.

    Nelson, E.

    Onslow, E.

    Abercorn, M. (D. Abercorn.)

    Pembroke and Mont-

    gomery, E.

    Abergavenny, M.

    Powis, E.

    Bristol, M.

    Radnor, E.

    Exeter, M.

    Ravensworth, E.

    Hertford, M.

    Redesdale, E.

    Lansdowne, M. [Teller.]

    Romney, E.

    Salisbury, M.

    Rosse, E.

    Winchester, M.

    Rosslyn, E.

    Somers, E.

    Airlie, E.

    Sondes, E.

    Amherst, E.

    Stanhope, E.

    Annesley, E.

    Strange, E. (D. Athol.)

    Bandon, E.

    Strathmore and Kinghorn, E.

    Bathurst, E.

    Beauchamp, E.

    Suffolk and Berkshire, E.

    Belmore, E.

    Bradford, E.

    Verulam, E.

    Brownlow, E.

    Waldegrave, E.

    Cadogan, E.

    Winton, E. (E. Eglintoun.)

    Cairns, E.

    Caledon, E.

    Zetland, E.

    Camperdown, E.

    Carnarvon, E.

    Clancarty, V. (E. Clancarty.)

    Clonmell, E.

    Coventry, E.

    Combermere, V.

    Denbigh, E.

    Cranbrook, V.

    Devon, E.

    Doneraile, V.

    Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)

    Gough, V.

    Hardinge, V.

    Hawarden, V.

    Eldon, E.

    Hereford, V.

    Ellesmere, E.

    Hill, V.

    Feversham, E.

    Hood, V.

    Gainsborough, E.

    Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

    Haddington, E.

    Hardwicke, E.

    Lifford, V.

    Harewood, E.

    Melville, V.

    816

    Sherbrooke, V.

    Inchiquin, L.

    Sidmouth, V.

    Kenlis, L. (M. Headfort.)

    Templetown, V.

    Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)

    St. Albans, L. Bp.

    Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

    Leconfield, L.

    Abinger, L.

    Lovat, L.

    Amherst, L. (V. Holmes-)

    Lovel and Holland, L.

    dale.)

    (E. Egmont.)

    Annaly, L.

    Lyveden, L.

    Ardilaun, L.

    Manners, L.

    Arundell of Wardour, L.

    Massy, L.

    Monteagle, L. (M. Sligo.)

    Ashford, L. (V. Bury.)

    Aveland, L.

    Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)

    Balfour of Burleigh, L.

    Bateman, L.

    Napier, L.

    Beaumont, L.

    Norton, L.

    Borthwick, L.

    O'Neill, L.

    Botreaux, L. (E. Loudoun.)

    Oranmore and Browne, L.

    Brabourne, L.

    Ormathwaite, L.

    Brancepeth, L. (V. Boyne.)

    Ormonde, L. (M. Ormonde.)

    Brodrick, L. (V. Midleton.)

    Penrhyn, L.

    Plunket, L.

    Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.)

    Poltimore, L.

    Raglan, L.

    Castlemaine, L.

    Ranfurly, L. (E. Ranfurly.)

    Chelmsford, L.

    Clements, L. (E. Leitrim.)

    Rayleigh, L.

    Rodney, L.

    Clifton, L. (E. Darnley.)

    Rowton, L.

    Clinton, L.

    Sackville, L.

    Cloncurry, L.

    Saltersford, L. (E.Courtown.)

    Colchester, L.

    Colville of Culross, L.

    Saltoun, L.

    Cottesloe, L.

    Scarsdale, L.

    Crofton, L.

    Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)

    De Freyne, L.

    De L'Isle and Dudley, L.

    Stanley of Alderley, L.

    Stewart of Garlies, L.(E. Galloway.)

    de Ros, L.

    Digby, L.

    Stratheden and Campbell, L.

    Dinevor, L.

    Donington, L.

    Strathnairn, L.

    Dunsandle and Clanconal, L.

    Strathspey, L. (E. Seafield.)

    Dunsany, L.

    Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll.)

    Ellenborough, L.

    Elphinstone, L.

    Talbot de Malahide, L.

    Foxford, L. (E. Limerick.)

    Templemore, L.

    Tollemache, L.

    Gage, L. (V. Gage.)

    Tredegar, L.

    Gormanston, L. (V. Gormanston.)

    Trevor, L.

    Tyrone, L. (M. Waterford.)

    Grey de Radcliffe, L. (V. Grey de Wilton.)

    Ventry, L.

    Harlech, L.

    Vernon, L.

    Hartismere, L. (L. Henniker.

    Wentworth, L.

    Westbury, L.

    Hatherton, L.

    Willoughby de Broke, L.

    Hay, L. (E. Kinnoul.)

    Heytesbury, L.

    Wimborne, L.

    Howard de Walden, L.

    Windsor, L.

    Hylton, L.

    Wynford, L.

    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that the Amendment he now had to move was complementary to one which had been already accepted. Its object was to carry further the exception made

    817
    with regard to English-managed estates. By the Amendment made in the 1st clause, it was decided that free sale should not exist upon English-managed estates, and the Amendment which he was now about to propose would exempt such estates from application to the Court to fix a judicial rent. It was unnecessary to argue at length in favour of this exemption. For many years a great deal of money had been expended in bringing those estates up to the level of English estates, and unless this exception was made, such efforts would be discouraged. He begged to move in page 9, line 14, to leave out (" may if it think fit") in order to insert ("shall if the landlord so requires.")
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he would be willing to accept the Amendment if the noble Marquess would consent to retain the words with regard to the improvements that they should be "substantially maintained."
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that, practically, the improvements were maintained by the landlord; but if the tenant occasionally cleared out a ditch, it might be alleged that the improvements were not substantially maintained by the landlord.
    THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that the word "substantially" implied that the landlord in the main maintained the improvements.
    THE DUKE OF ARGYLLremarked, that in Scotland the tenant was under the obligation to maintain the improvements, subject to wear and tear. What he wanted to know was whether the word "substantial" was put in to give case to the Court in its interpretation of the clause, or whether, on the contrary, it was intended to make it more rigid?
    LORD LECONFIELDobjected to the use of the word "substantial," on the ground that if it were employed the tenant might, under the clause, require the landlord to carry out any substantial repairs which were rendered necessary by the neglect of the former.
    Amendment agreed to.
    LORD CARLINGFORDmoved, in page 9, after sub-section (5.) insert as a separate sub-section—
    ("6.) Subject to rules made under this Act, the landlord and tenant of any present tenancy to which this Act applies, may, at any time if such tenancy is not subject to a statutory term,
    818
    or if the tenancy is subject to a statutory term, then may, during the last twelve months of such term, by writing under their hands, agree and declare what is then the fair rent of the holding; and such agreement and declaration on being filed in court in the prescribed manner, shall have the same effect and consequences in all respects as if the rent so agreed on were a judicial rent fixed by the court under the provisions of this Act."
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYexpressed approval of the Amendment.
    Amendment agreed to.
    LORD INCHIQUINmoved to insert, in page 9, line 39, after the word ("term,")—
    ("Provided, that nothing in this section shall apply in the case of any tenancy in a holding the rent payable in respect of which amounts to or exceeds one hundred pounds.")
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, the Amendment of the noble Lord was one of the greatest importance, and he had looked forward to its being pressed in their Lordships' House. His interest in it was the greater because it was moved by a near Relative of his in "another place," where it received a large amount of independent support. The arguments brought forward in support of it appeared to him to be unanswerable. On the one hand, it affected only a very small number of tenants, and on the other it recognized a principle upon which, till now, they had always insisted—the principle that these large tenants were men perfectly able to protect their own interests and not requiring the protection of exceptional legislation. They could not, however, consider the proposal on its merits alone. When it was made in "another place" it encountered the strenuous opposition of the Prime Minister, who founded his opposition on the statement that if the Amendment were agreed to, and these 12,000 tenants excepted from the benefit of this clause, there would remain in Ireland a focus round which the discontent of the future would centre, and which would prevent the Bill from having the good effect which he anticipated for it. These words were, no doubt, weighed by the Prime Minister, and it was their Lordships' duty to weigh them also. They must look forward to the events with which they were likely to be brought face to face during the coming winter. He could see no reason for anticipating that this Bill would

    819
    allay the agitation now prevalent in Ireland. Already there were sinister indications that that agitation was likely to be renewed in a shape not less dangerous than that which it had hitherto assumed. Under these circumstances, what would happen if this Amendment were insisted on? The agitation would continue, and they would be told that it was attributable to the alteration made in the Bill by their Lordships. They had already had some experience of the manner in which the House of Lords "mutilations" had been misrepresented, and they might depend upon it that in this case the agitation would be justified as a legitimate protest against their Lordships' action. There was another reason which induced him to think that this Amendment might be dispensed with. They had already inserted in the Bill provisions dealing specially with holdings which had been improved by the landlords, and in a later part of the measure an Amendment would be moved dealing with the question of leases. Both of these Amendments would principally affect the larger holders, whom the noble Lord wished to exclude. Under these circumstances, he ventured to ask his noble Friend whether the inconvenience which might arise from the acceptance of his Amendment might not outweigh any advantages to be derived from it by the landlords?
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDhoped his noble Friend would withdraw his Amendment. If the line were to be drawn anywhere it ought to be at £20; but it was the larger tenants whose number it was desirable to increase, and to agree to the Amendment would be to discourage men from taking or buying holdings of £100 in value.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he was disposed to join in the appeal made to the noble Lord. If the Amendment were inserted the tenants to whom it applied would think after the language of the Prime Minister that the vote of the House was specially levelled against them. The advantage to the landlords would be very slight, and would not compensate for the discontent and disaffection which it would excite.
    LORD CARLINGFORDheartily concurred in what had been said against the Amendment. The tenants against
    820
    whom it was directed were the very men whom the Government wished to protect, for they were the tenants who were most ready to make their own improvements, and the effect of the Amendment would be to discourage them from laying out any of their capital on their holdings.
    Amendment (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
    LORD VENTRYmoved, in page 9, line 39, after ("term") insert—
    ("Provided that if the tenant has not before the expiration of the statutory term paid and satisfied the rent payable during the same a further statutory term shall not commence, and the tenant shall become a future tenant.")
    LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, he could not accept the Amendment.
    THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORDsaid, he hoped the Amendment would not be pressed.
    Amendment (by leave of the Committee) withdrawn.
    House resumed; and to be again in Committee To-morrow.

  ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS REGULATION BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to amend an Act of the Parliament holden in the Third and Fourth Years of the reign of Her present Majesty, chapter ninety -three—Was presented by The Earl BEAUCHAMP; read 1a. (No. 201.)
  House adjourned at a quarter before One o'clock A.M., till Four o'clock.