THIRD READING. (Hansard, 16 August 1883)

§ THE EARL OF WEMYSS
said, he begged to present four Petitions against the Bill, one of them being from the Manchester and Salford Householders' Association, in which the Petitioners said— They could not help feeling that the principle involved in the Bill was one which, if admitted in the case of agriculture, would lead to similar interference in other branches of trade and commerce. They therefore submitted that, for the great principle of freedom of contract, the substitution of State regulation could not be regarded as in any way advantageous to the country at large. He would, therefore, as a matter of form, and also of principle, move that the Bill be read a third time that day three months.

LORD ELLENBOROUGH
said, he wished to take that, the last opportunity, of entering his protest against the Bill 692 as it stood, and he did so on the ground that it was unnecessary, since all that was just and fair in it, as between landlord and tenant, was in practice. Another grave objection was the unnecessary late period of the Session at which it had been introduced, thus preventing the Bill being adequately discussed. His fear was that the word "improvements" in it would lead to almost endless litigation, unless it were qualified by the word "efficient;" further definition being required in this particular, together with other portions of the Bill. He further deprecated hasty legislation on this, in common with other subjects, at the end of a Session. As in the case of the Irish Land Bill, it would greatly injure small proprietors, whom those holding extreme opinions on all political subjects professed their desire to see increased; and in respect to the smaller tenants, they would ultimately be entirely swept away as regarded this country, although this class of tenants, under the Irish Land Bill, had acquired rights that were not contemplated by Parliament. And with legislation thus hastily passed for Party purposes, there was no assurance that such a measure as the Bill before the House would not very shortly be followed by another measure of a similar kind.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL
begged to move an Amendment on the last subsection of the clause giving landlords and tenants, if they thought fit, "in a lease or otherwise," to dispense with any notice under the section the right to come to an agreement between themselves, in the same manner and of the same validity as if such notice had been given, his Amendment being confined to the introduction of the words "in a lease or otherwise." He considered this a very important Proviso. The healthy system of leases was already beginning to be undermined. Some tenants were unwilling to be bound by long leases; and he had heard of a large estate in 693 the South-West of Scotland where the 19 years' system had been abandoned, and yearly tenancies adopted.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
said, he doubted whether the words would not be open to misconstruction, though he quite agreed in the object of the noble Duke.

§ LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)
said, he doubted the necessity of these additional words; but he thought them quite right, and would accept the Amendment.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL
said, he considered that a very important concession.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
proposed an Amendment by which the 31st of March, 1884, should be substituted for the 31st of January, 1884, as the date at which the Act should come into force. The Bill had come upon the landed interest with great surprise. He said, in the presence of many of them, that they were not a race whose actions were hasty or precipitate, and it was cruel to them to force them to bring into operation a totally new system of law, for which no previous discussion had prepared them, at so very short notice as the 1st of January next. It should be remembered that the interval was only four months, during two of which they could get the assistance of no lawyer and solicitor, and, therefore, all the work must be confined to two months at the end of the autumn. He thought they ought to have a longer time.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
said, that if that Amendment were adopted, the consequence would be that no notice could be given in the case of Lady Day tenancies until the following Lady Day; and the result would be to delay the operation of the Act in those cases for a whole year.

CONTENTS.
Selborne, E. (L. Chancellor.)	Breadalbane, L. (E. Breadalbane.)
	Carlingford, L.
Camperdown, E.	Kenmare, L. (E. Kenmare.)
Granville, E.
Kimberley, E.	Lyttelton, L.
Morley, E.	Methuen, L.
Northbrook, E.	Monson, L. [Teller.]
Sydney, E.	Ramsay, L. (E. Dalhousie.)
Sherbrooke, V.	Reay, L.
	Ribblesdale, L.
	Somerton, L. (E. Nor-manton.)
Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) [Teller.]
	Thurlow, L.
Bramwell, L.	Wrottesley, L.

NOT-CONTENTS.
Richmond, D.	Winchester, M.
Salisbury, M.	Clonmell, E.

Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.)	Ellenborough, L.
	Forbes, L.
	Haldon, L.
Dundonald, E.	Harlech, L.
Feversham, E.	Hopetoun, L. (E. Hopetoun.) [Teller.]
Fortescue, E.
Milltown, E.	Ker, L. (M. Lothian.)
Redesdale, E.	Lamington, L.
Melville, V.	Lovat, L.
	Norton, L.
Ardilaun, L.	O'Neill, L.
Bagot, L.	Stratheden and Campbell, L.
Bateman, L. [Teller.]
Denman, L.	Ventry, L.
Douglas, L. (E. Home.)	Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss.)
Dunmore, L. (E. Dunmore.)
	Wynford, L.