SECOND READING. (Hansard, 1 April 1886)

§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Earl SPENCER)
, in moving that the Bill be read the second time, said, he would not delay their Lordships by explaining at any length the provisions of this measure, which had received the assent of both Parties in the other House. The Bill was not a Government measure; but as no one objected to it in the other House it was thought by the Irish Executive that, as it was a useful Bill, it was one which might very well be taken charge of by them, and he had 427 accordingly been asked to take it in hand in their Lordships' House. The measure was for the purpose of extending the statutory powers in regard to trees which now existed in Ireland. Under an old Act of Parliament tenants for life or tenants for more than 30 years were entitled to register all trees planted by them after having first given notice to the owners of the land of their intention to do so. This Bill would extend this provision to other classes of tenants, and it also contained certain modifications of the old law. One of these was to enable the tenant ejected for the non-payment of rent to sell the trees he might have planted on the land or to get compensation for them, just in the same way as he would get compensation for certain other valuable improvements which were dealt with by the Acts of 1871 and 1881. There were also certain other modifications of the old statutes enabling the tenant acting bonâ fide to cut down trees himself, if he did so either before or just after receiving notice to quit. But, under certain circumstances, the landlord would have the same rights which he now enjoyed under the old Irish Acts. He did not think that he need say more on that occasion, and would content himself with moving the second reading.

§ THE EARL OF COURTOWN
said, he did not intend to oppose the second reading of the Bill, but remarked that certain parts of its provisions wore a somewhat suspicious aspect; and unless they could be satisfactorily explained he should feel disposed to move their rejection in Committee. It was somewhat remarkable that, on the eve of some great measure for the expropriation of the Irish landlords, the Government should take under their wing a Bill of this kind, which certainly did not seem to contemplate their being got rid of altogether. He quite thought that some improvement might be effected in the planting of trees in Ireland; but he certainly could not see why a tenant ejected for non-payment of rent should be placed on the same footing as the men who paid their rent, and that he also should be allowed to go on the land for twelve months after he had been ejected for the purpose of cutting the trees down. There 428 were other portions of the Bill which he did not quite understand.

§ THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (The Earl of REDESDALE)
said, he would point out that the Bill would require a considerable amount of attention from their Lordships in Committee, especially in regard to the permission to be given to the tenants to cut down trees—a power which needed very careful guarding. As their Lordships were aware, if these trees were of considerable growth the mere cutting down would not suffice. The roots might be left in the ground, and the undergrowth which would in a short time appear would be of considerable injury to the land, which, so far as farming purposes were concerned, might, until great expense had been incurred, be practically valueless for agricultural purposes.

THE EARL OF LIMERICK
said, he hoped that some interval would be allowed to take place before the Committee stage was taken. In common with his noble Friend (the Earl of Courtown) he did not quite understand the exact bearing of the 3rd sub-section of Clause 3 or Clause 4, and they ought to have the opportunity of consulting with gentlemen in Ireland on the effect of those clauses. The question was one of some importance, considering that each tenant was to be allowed to plant as he liked, and that his planting was to be considered as improvements to the land. Trees, as a rule, were many years in arriving at maturity; and, although compensation was to be given, they might be rather a detriment to the land than an improvement.