HL Deb 22 August 1883 vol 283 cc1640-3

Commons reasons for disagreeing to certain of the Lords' Amendments and Commons Amendments considered (according to order).

Page 2, line 3, after ("improvement") insert— ("Provided that no compensation shall he claimed under this section in contravention of any specific agreement existing at the time of the passing of this Act between the parties in reference thereto.")

The Commons disagree to the Amendment in page 2, line 3, for the following reason:— Because it is inconsistent with the principle of the Bill, which provides that in the case of existing tenancies, where the tenant has no right to compensation under the terms of his tenancy, he shall nevertheless he entitled to compensation under this Act, and there is no reason for making a distinction in the case where compensation is excluded by the terms of the contract from the case where it is excluded by implication of law unless where the compensation is excluded for valuable consideration, which case is provided for by clause six.

Moved, "That this House do not insist on the Amendment in page 2, line 3, to which the Commons have disagreed."—(The Lord President.)

THE EARL OF GALLOWAY

said, he would move to amend the Proviso in the same sense as the amended Proviso moved in the preceding Bill by his noble Friend (the Marquess of Salisbury).

Amendment moved, to leave out all the words after ("House") and insert ("do amend their Amendment in page 2, line 3.")—(The Earl of Galloway.)

LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)

said, that, under protest, he would acquiesce in the Amendment being carried.

On Question? agreed to.

Amendment amended accordingly.

The next Amendment not insisted on.

Page 2, line 39, after ("Act") insert— ("Where in the case of a tenancy under a lease current at the passing of this Act there is in such lease, or in any relative writing made prior to the passing hereof, an express stipulation limiting the outlay on any improvement specified in the second part of the schedule hereto, the tenant shall have no claim to compensation under this Act for any such improvement in excess of the sum provided for in such stipulation. The landlord and tenant may, if they think fit, dispense with any notice under this section, and come to an agreement between themselves in the same manner and of the same validity as if such notice had been given.")

Commons Amendments to the above Amendment.

Line 2, leave out ("commencement") and insert ("passing.")

Lines 9 and 10, leave out ("in terms of the lease or otherwise.")

First Amendment agreed to.

Second Amendment disagreed to.

Page 3, line 14, after ("Act") insert— ("The last preceding provision of this section relating to a particular agreement shall apply-in the case of a tenancy under a lease current at the commencement of this Act in respect of an improvement specified in the third part of the schedule hereto, specific compensation for which is not provided by any agreement in writing or custom.")

The Commons disagree to the Amendment in page 3, line 14.

Amendment insisted on.

The next two Amendments not insisted on.

Certain Amendments made by the Commons to certain of the Amendments made by the Lords agreed to.

Page 10, leave out Clause 29.

The Commons disagree to the omission of Clause 29. Because it is expedient that a power of be-quest of leases should be conferred. By the law of Scotland a lease is heritable, and descends to the heir-at-law, while the stocking descends as personalty to the executors, and much inconvenience and hardship have resulted to families in consequence of the separation of the rights. Further, the heir is frequently unskilled in agriculture, and unable to perform the tenant's part of the obligations in the lease.

The Commons propose to amend the clause restored to the Bill as follows:—

(Bequest of Lease.)

"(29.) A tenant may by will, or other testamentary writing, bequeath his lease to any person (herein-after called 'the legatee'), subject to the following provisions:—

  1. (a.) The legatee shall intimate the testamentary bequest to the landlord or his known agent within twenty-one days after the death of the tenant, unless he is prevented by some unavoidable cause from making intimation within that time, and in that event he shall make intimation as soon as possible thereafter.
  2. (b.) Intimation to the landlord or his known agent by the legatee shall import acceptance of the lease by the legatee.
  3. (c.) Within one month after intimation has been made to the landlord or his known agent, he may intimate to the legatee that he objects to receive him as tenant under the lease;
  4. (d.) If the landlord or his known agent intimates that he objects to receive the legatee as tenant under the lease, the legatee may present a petition' to the sheriff, praying for decree declaring that he is tenant under the lease as from the date of the death of the deceased tenant, of which petition due notice shall be given to the landlord, who may enter appearance, and state his grounds of objection; and if any reasonable ground of objection is established to the satisfaction of the sheriff, he shall declare the bequest to be null and void; but otherwise he shall decern and declare in terms of the prayer of the petition.
  5. (e.) The decision of the sheriff under such petition as aforesaid shall be final.
  6. (f.) Pending any proceedings under this section, the legatee shall have possession of the holding, unless the sheriff shall otherwise direct on cause shown.
  7. (g.) The provisions of this section shall apply notwithstanding a clause or stipulation in any lease excluding assignees.
  8. (h.) If the legatee does not accept the bequest, or if the bequest is declared to be null and void as aforesaid, the lease shall descend to the heir of the tenant in the same manner as if the bequest had not been made."

Moved, "That this House do agree with the Commons in the said Amendment."—(The Lord President.)

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON

said, he had originally moved the omission of the clause; but, as amended, he did not think it would be so objectionable.

THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH

said, he thought the objection to the clause was as strong as ever. The clause was not proposed by any Member of the Government, but was forced upon them. He protested especially against Sub-section (g), which enabled leases to be assigned; and in that permission was contained the danger that unfitted persons would be the assignees. The case of the heir-at-law was a different case, for everyone knew who the heir-at-law was, and could make arrangements accordingly. He most decidedly complained of being called upon, at that period of the Session, and in that hurried manner, to consider the Amendments which had been made to the original clause. He looked upon the clause as one of the worst in the Bill. It was a direct attack on the present arrangements, and he could see no reason for it. He would propose to omit the sub-section he had referred to.

Amendment moved, to amend the said Amendment, by omitting sub-section (g).—(The Duke of Buccleuch.)

THE EARL OF ABERDEEN

said, that in Scotland this provision would be most heartily welcomed by the tenants as a great boon.

Amendment to said Amendment agreed to.

Amendment made by the Commons, as amended, agreed to.

The last amendment to which the Commons have disagreed not insisted on.

A Committee appointed to prepare reasons to be offered to the Commons for the Lords disagreeing to one of the Commons amendments to the Lords amendments and insisting on one of the amendments to which the Commons have disagreed: The Committee to meet forthwith: Report from the Committee of the reasons to be offered to the Commons; read, and agreed to: And a message sent to the Commons to return the said Bill, with the amendments and reasons.