Lords Sitting of 10 August 1896

EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to be Read 2a To-morrow. (The Prime Minister).—[No. 243.]
PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BILL.
Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to he Read 2a To-morrow.—(The Prime Minister.)—[No. 244.]
TELEGRAPH MONEY BILL.
Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and to be Read 2a To-morrow.—(The Prime Minister.)— [No. 245.]
STANNARIES BILL [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with an Amendment; the said Amendment to be considered Tomorrow.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (HOUSING OF WORKING CLASSES) BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order), with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

LABOURERS (IRELAND) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order).
Clause 1,—

LABOURERS (IRELAND) BILL.

  AMENDMENT OF 46 & 47 VICT. C. 60. SS. 4 AND 7.
  (1.) In Section four of the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1883, "seven days" shall be substituted for "fourteen days" wherever those words occur.
  (2.) The notice of a subsequent meeting of a sanitary authority required by the said Section four shall not be necessary except in the case of a meeting at which a final resolution is to be passed.
  (3.) A representation under Section five of the said Act of 1883, or any certificate of a sanitary officer relating to the same, may be amended at any time prior or subsequent to the making of an improvement scheme in pursuance thereof, and the power of amendment hereby given shall include power to permit any such representation to be signed at any stage of the proceedings thereon by any person duly qualified to sign the same, and such signing shall have the same effect as if the representation had been originally so signed; provided that no amendment other than the addition of a signature shall be made without the consent in writing in the case of a representation of the persons who originally signed the same, and in the case of a certificate of the sanitary officer, and any signature added shall be verified by a member or officer of the sanitary authority.
  (4.) In Section seven of the said Act of 1883 "two consecutive weeks" shall be substituted for "three consecutive weeks," and the notices to be served under the said section may be served at the same time as, or at any time after, the publication of the advertisement in that section mentioned.
  (5.) Any notice under the said Section seven may be served on the agent of the person required to he served in like manner as on such person, and need not be served personally; provided that, if the service is by post, the letter shall be registered.
  (6.) Where the Local Government Board direct a local inquiry to be held under the said Section seven, the inspector of the Board appointed to hold the inquiry shall, not later than seven days before the day on which the Inquiry will be held, forward by post in a registered letter addressed to the usual or last-known plate of abode of every owner or reputed owner, lessee or reputed lessee, and occupier of the lands proposed to he taken compulsorily, and of the agents of such persons, a notice of the date on which the Inquiry will be held.
  THE EARL OF RANFURLYmoved, in Sub-section (6), after the words "reputed lessee," to omit the word "and," and to insert instead thereof the word "or."
  Amendment agreed to. Clause 3,—

  APPLICATION OF LANDS CLAUSES ACTS AND HOUSING OF WORKING CLASSES ACT, 1890.
  (1.) For the purpose of taking lands compulsorily by purchase under the principal Acts, the provisions of the Lands Clauses Acts with respect to the purchase and taking of lands otherwise than by agreement shall be deemed

  271
  to be amended by the provisions contained in the Second schedule of the Housing of the Working Classes Act 1890, and such provisions shall (subject as by this section provided) be deemed to form part of the principal Acts in like manner as if therein expressly enacted.
  (2.) In the construction for the purposes of the principal Acts of the provisions contained in the said Second schedule to the said Act of 1890, the "local authority" shall mean the sanitary authority, the "confirming Act" shall mean the order of the Local Government Board authorising the improvement scheme, when the same has become absolute or been confirmed, the "confirming authority" shall mean the Local Government Board, and references to the said Act of 1890 or to Part I. thereof shall be deemed references to the principal Acts.
  THE EARL OF RANFURLYmoved, in Sub-section (1), to leave out the word "section" and to insert instead thereof the word "Act."
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 8,—

  CONDITIONS FOR SALE OF COTTAGES NOT REQUIRED FOR LABOURERS.
  A rural sanitary authority may, with the sanction of the Local Government Board, sell any cottage or cottages with the land attached, which have ceased to be required for the accommodation of labourers within the district, subject to the following conditions:—
  (1.) The purchaser shall be liable for the repayment of all charges or proportion of charges attached to such cottage or cottages and the land attached as may be specified in Sections twelve and eighteen of the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1883, and subject also to the conditions of letting as specified in Section thirteen of the said Act of 1883.
  (2.) Such cottage or cottages and land shall he offered for sale at a reserve price, being not less than the charges or proportion of charges already incurred and paid by the rural sanitary authority.
  (3.) Such cottage or cottages and land shall be offered for sale at the said reserve price first to the owner or representative of the owner from whom the land for said cottage or cottages was originally purchased or taken on lease.
  (4.) If such owner or representative shall decline to purchase, or shall have neglected to do so within a reasonable time to be specified in the notice to him that such cottage or cottages and land are for sale, then they shall be offered for sale at the said reserve price to the actual occupier of the holding from which the land was taken.
  (5.) If such occupier shall decline to purchase, or shall have negleted to do so within a reasonable period of time to
  272
  be specified in the notice to him that such cottage or cottages and land are for sale, they shall be offered for sale by public auction or tender after specified advertisements in the newspapers circulating in the district, at a price, not less than the said reserve price.
  LORD RANFURLYmoved, after Clause 8, to insert as a new clause:—

  PROVISION AS TO RULES MADE BY THE LORD LIEUTENANT IN COUNCIL.
  "The power to make rules conferred upon the Lord Lieutenant in Council by Section twelve of the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1885, shall be construed as including a power to rescind, revoke, amend or vary such rules.
  Clause agreed to.
  Standing Order No. XXXIX. considered (according to Order), and dispensed with; Bill read 3a, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

LIGHT RAILWAYS BILL.
On the Order for Committee on this Bill,
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (The EARL of MORLEY)said that, as he would not have an opportunity of speaking in Committee, he wished to say a few words in regard to the Amendments on the Paper. The Amendments of the Earl of Camperdown covered, to a large extent, the suggestion he (the Earl of Morley) ventured to make on the Second Reading of the Bill; and although they did not, by simply requiring the Order to be laid on the Table of the House, give such full protection as the passing of Provisional Orders would do, he was on the whole fairly satisfied with the provision. He had great sympathy with the Amendment of Lord Welby. He did not think it was fair that municipalities or county councils should have no chance of placing their case—if they opposed the Orders of the Board of Trade—before Parliament. He trusted the House would adopt some, if not all, the Amendments on the Paper.
Bill considered in Committee.
[The EARL of MORLEY in the Chair.]
Clauses 1 to 6 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 7,—

LIGHT RAILWAYS BILL.

  CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BY LIGHT RAILWAY COMMISSIONERS.
  (1.) Where an application for authorising a light railway under this Act is made to the Light Railway Commissioners, those Commissioners shall, in the first instance, satisfy themselves that all reasonable steps have been taken for consulting the local authorities, including road authorities, through whoso areas the railway is intended to pass, and the owners and occupiers of the land it is proposed to take, and for giving public notice of the application, and shall also themselves, by local inquiry and such other means as they think necessary, possess themselves of all such information as they may consider material or useful for determining the expediency of granting the application.
  (2.) The Commissioners shall, before deciding on an application, give full opportunity for any objections to the application to be laid before them, and shall consider all such objections, whether made formally or informally.
  (3.) If after consideration the Commissioners think that the application should be granted, they shall settle any draft order submitted to them by the applicants for authorising the railway, and see that all such matters (including provisions for the safety of the public and particulars of the land proposed to be taken) are inserted therein, as they think necessary for the proper construction and working of the railway.
  (4.) The order of the Light Railway Commissioners shall be provisional only, and shall have no effect until confirmed by the Board of Trade in manner provided by this Act.
  (5.) Where an application for a light railway has been refused by the Light Railway Commissioners, the applicants, if the council of any county, borough or district may appeal against such refusal to the Board of Trade, who may, at any time, if they think fit, remit the application or any portion thereof to the said Commissioners for further consideration with or without special instructions.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNmoved, after Sub-section (1), to insert the following subsection:—

  ADVERTISEMENTS AND NOTICES.
  (2.) The party or parties making such application shall have
  published once at least in each of two consecutive weeks in some newspaper circulated in the district or some part of the district, an advertisement describing shortly the land proposed to be taken and the purpose for which the land is proposed to be taken, naming a place where a plan of the proposed works and of the lands which may be taken, and a book of reference to such plan, may be seen at all
  274
  reasonable hours, and stating the quantity of land they require; and shall further have
  served a notice in manner hereinafter mentioned on every owner or reputed owner, lessee or reputed lessee and occupier of such land, defining in each case the particular land intended to be taken, and requiring an answer, stating whether the person so served assents, dissents, or is neuter in respect of taking such land; such notice to be served
  by delivery of the same personally to the person on whom it is required to be served, or, if such person is absent abroad, to his agent; or
  by leaving the same at the usual or last-known place of abode of such person as aforesaid; or
  by forwarding the same by post in a registered letter addressed to the usual or last-known place of abode of such person;
  Every such plan shall be drawn on a scale of not less than four inches to a mile, and the book of reference shall contain the names of the owners and lessees, or reputed owner and lessees, and of the occupiers of the lands which may be taken.
  He did not wish to add unnecessarily to the expenses of the procedure connected with the Bill, but he thought it only-reasonable that when land was proposed to be taken some notice should be given to the owners and occupiers of the land.
  *THE SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (The EARL of DUDLEY)said he could not accept the Amendment. His objection to it was that it tended to stereotype procedure, which ought to be laid down rather by rule than be specified in an Act of Parliament, and which ought to be variable according to the particular circumstances of each case. He thought it would be most unwise to apply rigidly to the small undertakings contemplated by the Bill the machinery applicable to large railway schemes. His noble Friend in drafting his Amendment appeared to go on the assumption, that promoters of light railways under the Bill would require large tracts of land. The Government, on the contrary, believed that light railways would not be constructed to any great extent under the Bill unless a liberal use of the roads was granted by the local authorities, for otherwise the cost of promotion and construction would be totally out of proportion to the revenue

  275
  likely to be derived from the undertakings. They might safely assume, for the same reason, that wherever land was wanted every effort would be made to obtain it by agreement rather than by compulsory powers. He quite agreed that, in cases where land was taken compulsorily, every opportunity should be given to persons affected of objecting and laying their case before the Railway Commissioners and the Board of Trade. Clause 15 gave the Board of Trade powers in those cases of securing the publicity his noble Friend required, and, besides, he intended to move an Amendment to that clause providing that plans and sections of the proposed railway should be deposited for inspection. Moreover, further protection in that direction was provided under the Lands Clauses Act, which would be incorporated in the Bill. The primary object of the Bill was to cheapen the cost of the promotion of such undertakings, and that was far more easily obtained by the elasticity which procedure under rules allowed.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid the noble Earl opposite seemed to think that the publication of advertisements in a country notice, and the serving of notice on persons likely to be affected by the railways, would be the source of serious delay and expense. He did not know that it was a matter of great importance one way or the other, but he was surprised that a Government so eminently Conservative should resist the moderate proposal of his noble Friend. After all, it was not a great tax, either in the way of money or time, to ask the promoters of a light railway which might go through a district to take the simple steps proposed in the Amendment. He did not know if the Prime Minister had considered it, and associated himself with the objections of the noble Lord. If he read the Amendment he would see that the objections were of a trivial character, and that the Amendment was one to which no Government that had not some subterranean object in view could possibly object.
  THE PRIME MINISTER (The MARQUESS of SALISBURY)said he entirely disclaimed any subterranean object in reference to light railways. But since he had been in the House he had read
  276
  the Amendment, and he had listened to the clause which his noble Friend read from the Lands Clauses Act, and it seemed to him that the same result was achieved by the two sets of enactments. Therefore, if there was already on the Statute-book an enactment that secured sufficient publicity for all persons interested in the land, it was not worth while to have a totally different set of enactments, which would undoubtedly tend to complicate matters. He entirely agreed with the noble Earl that it was not a matter of great consequence.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNcontended that the reference to the Lands Clauses Act applied to quite a different stage of the proceedings from that with which they were dealing, and to a different set of persons. The section of the Lands Clauses Act applied to the actual purchase of estates "taken in connection therewith." But this notice had nothing to do with the Board of Trade, and did not refer to proceedings before the Board of Trade. It referred to the initial proceedings stated in Clause 7 which were before the Light Railway Commissioners, and the Amendment said that before the Commissioners proceeded notice ought to have been given to the person whose land it was proposed to take—surely a simple and reasonable thing. The Board of Trade apparently laid down the doctrine that notice ought to be given, not specifically or in pursuance of Parliamentary enactment, but by regulation. Therefore the regulation was to be made by the Board of Trade, and they were to indicate what the notice was to be, so that any person whose property was to be taken had to depend on the Board of Trade and its regulations as to what notice it received, and how satisfactory or not that notice might be. The noble Lord said he was under the impression it was proposed to take large tracts of land. He was under no such idea. But whether the tract was large or small did not make much difference. To the man whose property it was proposed to take, it was exactly the same whether his property was large or small. He then referred him to Clause 15 to satisfy him. But Clause 15 had nothing to do with the proceedings before the Light Railway Commissioners at all. It referred to certain applications to be made to the Board of Trade

  277
  in reference to the local inquiry to be held by them. He had heard no reason whatever for departing from the ordinary rule which, as the Chairman of Committees pointed out, ought to be complied with, that notice should be given to the person whose property it was proposed to take. He could not willingly assent to the doctrine of the Board of Trade that they were to have control of the notices, so he would ask their Lordships to go to a Division.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)said that if it was proposed to take a person's property one must, under the Lands Clauses Act, give notice of one's intention to take it, and of everything they wanted to take. The matter the House was now dealing with was that of preliminary notice, which might come to nothing unless the application was granted. As the Bill originally stood he should have agreed with the noble Lord, but if he would look at the Amendment he would find the Board of Trade had no power (the House was dealing with the compulsory taking of land) to vary any of the provisions of the Lands Clauses Act.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid a man might wish to appear before the Light Railway Commissioners to argue against light railways altogether. When they purchased his land and entered on occupation, it was rather late to give him notice that they would take his land.
  THE PRIME MINISTERsaid it was obvious that taking a man's land without his consent was a serious operation. But introducing a light railway into a district was hardly an operation that could do harm as long as they preserved the rights of property. He did not see why it should be necessary to give this elaborate notice and have all these complications of arrangement to prevent the possibility of a local authority setting up a light railway where it was not required. The difficulty of setting up light railways would be great enough without unnecessary formalities.
  THE EAEL OF ROSEBERYsaid that he was afraid he remained unconverted in spite of what had been said. As a matter of fact, it was surely no question of indifference to a district what course the light railway was to take. It was not an expensive or tedious formality to put
  278
  an advertisement two weeks running in the county paper to say such a railway was proposed, what course it would take, and where plans could be examined.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYsaid a part of this proposal dealt with the question of maps, and it laid down that the same sized maps used for large railway schemes should be in force in these small undertakings. Surely that procedure was out of all proportion to the undertakings the Board of Trade contemplated in this Bill. He understood that his noble Friend agreed, with regard to the later stage, that the provisions of the Lands Clauses Act were sufficient to insure that due publicity should be given. But with regard to the first stage, he should like to know how the Commissioners could carry out their duties under Clause 7 unless they gave due notice to all who might be affected by or mentioned in the clause. However, it was not a point which was vital to the Bill, and if the House was of opinion that the safeguards for publicity contained in the Bill were not sufficient, he did not wish to press the House to a Division. But he was still of opinion that the Amendment was unnecessary.
  Amendment agreed to.
  On the question "That Clause 7, as amended, stand part of the Bill,"
  *LORD WELBYmoved, to insert at the end of the clause—
  "if the Board of Trade overrule any objection made by the council of a county or county borough, they shall give notice thereof to the council, and if the council within one month of the receipt of that notice send to the Board of Trade a request, adopted by at least an absolute majority of the whole number of members of the council, that the Order shall be submitted to Parliament, the Order so far as it affects that county or borough shall have no effect unless it is confirmed by Parliament."
  The noble Lord said that the House would observe that in the Bill there was no definition of "light railway," and he understood that the provisions of the Bill applied and were intended to apply, to tramways in towns. He believed that up to the present time the local authorities of towns had had the management of their own tramway system, subject to the supreme control

  279
  and superintendence of Parliament. But the Bill proposed that Parliament should abdicate this power of control and supervision and transfer it to three permanent officials under the Board of Trade. This was a new departure in local government. He had great respect for public Departments and the work they did, and they were entitled to the respect they obtained from Parliament, "but he doubted whether so much power should be concentrated as was proposed in three officials at Whitehall. This was not a party question. As long as he remembered, both sides of politics had maintained stoutly the principle of local self-government. But if there was one subject which ought to fall within the province of local self-government it was the management of tramways in towns, and he did not think authority in such a matter of local interest should be at the discretion of a Government Department. The principle of the Bill had been approved by Parliament, and they all desired to see it carried into effect, and a fair trial given to it. But he would submit that, if a Government Department overrode the deliberate opinion of a local authority, some right of appeal should be given to that local authority. His attention was drawn to the clause as a member of the London County Council, but he made no distinction between London and other towns in this respect. His objection was to such interference with local self-government in all large towns, and the objection between London and other towns was only one of degree. It was right that there should be control over local authorities, and all parties accepted the conclusion of Parliament as final, but it appeared to him that the conclusion of Government officials was quite a different matter, against which there should be a certain right of appeal to Parliament.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYcould not accept this Amendment, which aimed at setting up a veto on behalf of county or urban Councils, and, by a bare majority, to force schemes promoted under this Bill to be submitted to the expensive and—for this purpose—inexpedient procedure of a Parliamentary Inquiry. The policy of the Bill had been to put local authorities upon the same footing with regard to their power of objection
  280
  before the Commissioners and the Board of Trade as they would be before Parliament if the promoters of a light railway were proceeding by the present method of obtaining a special Act. He believed there was no real cause for complaint, and the objections which might be urged by local authorities to a scheme of this kind would naturally carry weight before the Railway Commissioners and the Board of Trade. Moreover, he did not believe this Amendment was required by the County Councils as a whole. The Government had been in constant communication with many of the County Councils upon this subject, and in no case had they received any expression of a desire for an Amendment of this character, all the communications from these bodies being unanimous in their approval of the Bill as it at present stood. The Amendment, he believed, had been put forward primarily in the interests of the London County Council, that body, no doubt, thinking that, if this Bill passed, tramway schemes would be promoted under its provisions which might hamper them in their position in regard to the tramways which now existed. He did not believe that danger was one which could really be seriously considered. Local authorities had full power of objection before the Commissioners and the Board of Trade, and he believed the moment it was shown that a scheme under the provisions of this Bill was intended to act as a rival to the tramway schemes already existing in London, the Board of Trade would insist that it should be presented to Parliament in the ordinary course of things. It must also be remembered that the London County Council was the road authority over the main roads of London, and, therefore, it would be impossible to promote a tramway undertaking upon the main roads without obtaining the sanction of the London County Council, or at least without the Council having a full opportunity of objecting before the Board of Trade.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYattached the greatest importance to this Amendment. How the Bill had come up to the House of Lords, after passing through the House of Commons, without any such provision being made in that popular Chamber for preserving the

  281
  rights and wishes of localities, was to him a mystery. What was the very moderate Amendment of his noble Friend? It was that, when a representative council of a borough or county objected to a scheme that was laid before the Railway Commissioners, they should have the right, not of veto, but of an appeal to Parliament. The noble Earl said it was to be only by a bare majority. How else did they decide any question in either House of Parliament, except by a bare majority? But, if the noble Earl was discontented by a bare majority, he had only got to insert in the clause a "proportionate" majority, and he was sure his noble Friend, rather than lose the benefits of the clause, would accept such an alteration. They had heard the old story of the great and illimitable confidence placed in permanent Commissioners, whether of the Board of Trade or other Department. He was not quite sure whether that confidence was absolutely illimitable. They had had Commissioners for many years past for whom they had the greatest esteem and respect, but still they had not that implicit confidence in them which would allow them to override the wishes of localities without possibility of appeal to Parliament. ["Hear, hear!"] Under the Bill as it stood three permanent officials, sitting in a room in Downing Street or Whitehall, might entirely override the wishes of the County Council of this great Metropolis—a body, he was aware, which was not altogether popular among their Lordships, but which it could not be denied represented the views of the people of London—on such a matter, say, as the tramways of London. ["Hear, hear!"] If the Government objected to a bare majority, but would agree to any fair proportion of votes of a County Council giving the right of appeal to Parliament, he would urge his noble Friend to accept the clause so modified. Without some such provision as this he regarded the clause as likely to overrule the openly-expressed wishes of localities, and therefore as likely to overturn the whole tendency of legislation for the last few years, and largely to neutralise that Local Government Bill in which the President of the Board of Trade took so legitimate a pride. ["Hear, hear!"]
  THE PRIME MINISTERobserved that it was undoubtedly a formidable circumstance that the London County Council should have thrown its shadow across the progress of this Bill. But he begged the House not to be dazzled with the lustre of the London County Council, and not to imagine that popular appeals to its infallibility, and to the remarkable manner in which it always represented the wishes of the people of this Metropolis, should turn the House away from the important considerations which were raised by this Amendment. The whole country was not governed by the London County Council, and the parts of the country where light railways would be required were exactly the parts with which the London County Council had very little to do. ["Hear, hear!"] The object of the Bill was to make light railways possible. They had hitherto been impossible on account of the expense of setting them up. It was desired to diminish that expense, and to do that they must diminish to some extent the precautions by which they had hitherto arranged undertakings of this kind. There were only two interests really which were possibly jeopardised by a light railway. One was the interest of private property, and the other the interest the public had in their roads. The question was whether they were bound to surround that last interest with precautions which might be very embarrassing and very costly. It was not a question of what was to be done with a light railway which was wholly within the province of one local authority. Of course light railways did not confine themselves to the province of one locality. They did not begin or end there. They might go possibly through a mile or two or a few yards of one local authority, and that local authority might desire to divert the course of the light railway and to force it into some other course which would be more suitable to their own view and their own interests; and if they gave them this power of absolute veto, even if their interest only applied to a few miles, they would enable them to exercise a dominant control over the circumstances and conditions under which the light railway was to be made, and which might very often be exercised much more in the

  283
  limited interest of the particular area over which that local authority ruled than of the general interest of the public. Where the interests simply concerned the locality over which the local authority ruled, he quite agreed in the principle that they should give them the utmost power, but where interests were affected that touched many areas or more areas than one, and where there was or might be a difference of opinion among local authorities, they must seek for an arbiter outside. He thought it was a strong Measure to say that that arbiter must always be Parliament. He did not see that there was any danger in committing that arbitration—an arbitration which probably would not arise very often, and in which there would be very little temptation to go wrong—to some body which represented the central and Imperial power rather than the local authorities. It was the natural function of the Imperial power to be the arbiter between local authorities when they could not agree. Therefore he should be sorry to give the absolute veto which this clause proposed. He thought it might tend to hinder this experiment of light railways. It was no doubt an experiment. It was an experiment which might not succeed, but which they had every ground to think would be very beneficial if it did succeed. But they must give it a chance to succeed, and they must cut down all the precautions which were embarrassing wherever they could do it without serious danger either to private rights or to public interests. He therefore thought his noble Friend was right in objecting to this Amendment. It might produce a serious embarrassment. It could not affect, to any formidable extent, the interests of that most aggressive body, the London County Council. The London County Council would very seldom have any light railway to play with, and he did not see why the interests of the distant parts of the country, where this Bill was really required, should be sacrificed in order to meet the requirements of its jealousy.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYhoped the House would not be misled by the phraseology of the noble Marquess. He spoke of the proposal as giving an absolute veto to the local bodies. The clause only sought to give to local bodies
  284
  the right enjoyed by everybody in this kingdom of an appeal to Parliament. ["Hear, hear!"] That did not seem to him to be a very great demand to make when they knew what the proceedings of the Commissioners themselves were. He hoped the House in this matter would not merely consider the case of the London County Council—a phrase which, he knew, often prejudiced good causes in that House—but would remember that the authority of every great local body in this country was jeopardised and at stake, and that, if they, by rejecting that clause, denied to these local authorities the small appeal which that clause would give them, they were casting a slur upon them which he did not think they deserved and which he thought they would be quick to resent.
  The House divided on question "That the proposed sub-section be here inserted."

  CONTENTS

  31.

  NOT-CONTENTS

  79.

  DIVISION LIST.—CONTENTS.

  Caledon, E.

  de Vesci, L. (V. de Vesci.)

  Camperdown, E.

  Carrington, E.

  Glenesk, L.

  Crewe, E.

  Hare, L. (E. Listowel).

  Hardwicke, E.

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

  Kilmorey, E.

  Morley, E.

  Kensington, L. [TELLER.]

  Portsmouth, E.

  Spencer, E.

  Loch, L.

  Stamford, E.

  Macnaghten, L.

  Suffolk and Berkshire, E.

  Muskerry, L.

  Verulam, E.

  Rosebery, L. (E. Rosebery.)

  Sackville, L.

  Falmouth, V.

  Stalbridge, L.

  Oxtenbridge, V.

  Stanmore, L.

  Powerecourt, V.

  Welby, L. [TELLER.]

  Wemyss, L. (E. Wemyss.)

  Burghclere, L.

  Wolverton, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Halsbury, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Pembroke and Montgomery, E. (L. Steward.)

  Devonshire, D. (L. President).

  Belmore, E.

  Cross, V. (L Privy Seal).

  Carnwath, E.

  Clarendon, E.

  Norfolk, D. (E. Marshal.)

  Coventry, E.

  Somerset, D.

  de Montalt, E. Dudley, E.

  Lansdowne, M.

  Fortescue, E.

  Salisbury, M.

  Ilchester, E.

  285

  Lanesborough, E.

  Emly, L.

  Mayo, E.

  Fingall, L. (E. Fingall.)

  Onslow, E.

  Harlech, L.

  Portarlington, E.

  Harris, L.

  Rosse, E.

  Iveagh, L.

  Selborne, E.

  James, L.

  Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.)

  Kilmaine, L.

  Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.)

  Waldegrave, E. [TELLER.]

  Lawrence, L.

  Lingen, L.

  Winchilsea and Nottingham, E.

  Massy, L.

  Mendip, L.(V. Clifden.)

  Minster, L. (M. Conyngham.)

  Sidmouth, V.

  Templetown, V.

  Monek, L. (V. Monck.)

  Monteagle of Brandon, L.

  Addington, L.

  Ampthill, L.

  Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.)

  Annaly, L.

  Ardilaun, L.

  Ranfurly, L. (E. Ranfurly.)

  Ashbourne, L.

  Bagot, L.

  Rathdonnell, L.

  Balfour, L.

  Rathmore, L.

  Bateman, L.

  Rayleigh, L.

  Belpor, L.

  Rossmore, L.

  Carysfort, L. (E. Carysfort.)

  Rothschild, L.

  Sherborne, L.

  Churchill, L. [TELLER.]

  Shute, L. (V. Barrington.)

  Clarina, L.

  Clifton, L. (E. Darnley.)

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)

  Clonbrock, L.

  Cloncurry, L.

  Sudley, L. (E. Arran.)

  Colchester, L.

  Teynham, L.

  Colville of Culross, L.

  Ventry, L.

  Connemara, L.

  Wenlock, L.

  Crofton, L.

  Wimborne, L.

  De Freyne, L.

  Windsor, L.

  Dunalley, L.

  Proposed sub-section negatived; Clause 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clauses 8 and 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 10,—

  CONFIRMATION OF ORDER BY BOARD OF TRADE.
  The Board of Trade may confirm the Older with or without modifications as the case may require, and un order so confirmed shall have effect as if enacted by Parliament, and shall he conclusive evidence that all the requirements of this Act in respect of proceedings required to be taken before the making of the Order have been complied with.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNmoved to add words providing that all Orders of the Board of Trade should lie on the Table of both Houses of Parliament for 30 days. The effect of the clause as it now stood was to make the Board of Trade perfectly independent of Parliament and without
  286
  any check whatsoever with regard to these Orders. He did not think such a thing had ever been done. In the present Session of Parliament there was something of the same kind proposed in another Hill, but that was stopped by their Lordships. The noble Lord who sat at the Table had pointed out to their Lordships the danger of the clause as it stood, and he also told them that this Amendment, although to a certain extent a protection, was not, in his opinion, entirely an adequate protection. He quite agreed with the noble Lord that properly speaking there ought to be some provision for something in the nature of a Provisional Order, but in putting down this Amendment he had in his mind what he believed to be the desire of Parliament to make these proceedings as cheap as possible, and therefore be simply proposed that all these Orders should lie on the Table of the Houses of Parliament for 30 days. That preserved to Parliament that general control which with regard to such a matter as light railways he hoped their Lordships would consider was absolutely essential. Why should Parliament give to the Board of Trade the absolute independence which this clause did? and if they gave the power to one public department, why not give it to any other public office? He hoped their Lordships would not forget that the President of the Board of Trade was an official that changed with the Government, and if the clause in question passed as it stood, whoever might be the President of the Board of Trade would, for the time being, have in his power the full control over the construction of light railways. The new clause he proposed delayed the matter for the shortest possible time, and if, during that time, there was no objection, the Order would go on without any expense to the parties.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYsaid the Amendment was almost identical with one proposed in the House of Commons, and defeated, after a full Debate, by a large majority. It struck at the root of the whole policy that the Government had adopted in this Bill, and therefore he most emphatically asked their Lordships to reject the Amendment. The Government believed that if it was inserted the Bill would become virtually waste paper, and that the utility of the

  287
  procedure they were trying to set up would be absolutely nullified. What did the suggestion of his noble Friend mean? He suggested that after all the expense and trouble of promoting an Order under the Bill had been incurred—after the most careful consideration had been given to a scheme, not only by an independent and impartial body of Commissioners, but also by the Board of Trade—after local inquiries had been made and evidence taken in opposition to and in favour of the scheme, a further tribunal should be brought into play and the whole matter subjected to the uncertainty of Parliamentary approval. He said again that if the proposed clause was inserted in the Bill, it would be fatal to its provisions. Was it likely that they would get a business man to subscribe money for promoting a scheme under the Bill, which at best would only hold out the hope of a slender profit, if it was to be subjected to such a course as that suggested by the noble Lord. The uncertainties under his Amendment would be even greater than they were at the present time under the ordinary method of procedure by a special Act. At least the promoters could now state their case. They could obtain counsel, call witnesses, speak as to the local want of an undertaking of the kind, but if the noble Lord's Amendment was inserted in the Bill, the scheme would be laid upon the Table of either House, would be absolutely undefended, and probably not altogether comprehended, and be made subject to a snap Division in the other House after 12 o'clock at night. It was not, of course, for him to criticise Parliament or its methods; but their Lordships knew well the ordinary condition of the House of Commons after 12 o'clock at night; what a small proportion of Members was then usually present, and how easy it was at that time to delay, and possibly to block, the final accomplishment of any proposal. Moreover, they could not answer that under this Amendment criticisms and objections would be considered on the merits of any particular proposal. Let them take the case, for instance, of an existing railway company. It would be perfectly possible for any Member in such a case to object to the Order, not because he particularly objected to it,
  288
  but because he held extreme views as to the policy of our railway system generally; and according to the Amendment every Order under this Bill was to be subject to conditions of that kind. He thought it would be most unfair to the promoters of an undertaking, after having incurred all the expenses necessary to the promotion, that their scheme should be subjected to uncertainties of that kind. He did not put forward those objections to the Amendment merely as matters of opinion. He could assure the House that there was at the present time a railway company ready and prepared to promote a number of schemes for the establishment of light or branch lines under the Bill the moment it became law, and he could state as a fact that when the Amendment analogous to the one now before their Lordships was proposed in the other House, the general manager of that company told one of the officers of the Railway Department of the Board of Trade, that if it was inserted in the Bill, every one of those schemes would be dropped by the company. His noble Friend said that what he proposed was to be without prejudice to the making of any other Order. What did he mean by that?
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid it meant that if the other House objected to the passing of the Order, then that Order would not, of course, come into force, and a new Order might be promoted.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEY: But by whom would it be promoted? If the Order was to be altered by either House of Parliament as a whole, it then meant that Parliament, without evidence, without local knowledge, and without full information as to the facts, was going to set aside an Order made on evidence given before the Commissioners and the Board of Trade, or change it according to its own views. But if the Order was to be sent back to be re-promoted, then it meant that the whole of the previous expense was to be wasted, and the cost of promoting those lines under the Bill be immensely increased. As he said at the commencement of his remarks, the Amendment went to the root of the whole matter; it would strike a serious blow at the procedure the Government

  289
  were endeavouring to set up, and it would, in his opinion, render the provisions of the Bill nugatory. He hoped, therefore, that their Lordships would reject the Amendment.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid he desired to say only one word in reply. The noble Lord seemed to think that the proposal he submitted would throw some cost on the parties. But how could it do so? The Order would lie on the Table of both Houses for 30 days, and if during that time neither House disagreed, the Order would come to an end. It was quite a mistake to suppose that this would entail any cost. Then the noble Lord seemed to be rather disturbed by some words in the clause, but he could assure the noble Lord that the clause was a common one. It would be found in many Acts of Parliament, in the Scottish Fisheries Act of last year among others. He was seriously concerned to hear that the noble Lord had such a bad opinion of the House of Commons, and particularly after 12 o'clock at night—[laughter]—and because of the possibly unfortunate condition of the House after that hour, he invited their Lordships to put the President of the Board of Trade, in whom he naturally had greater confidence as a despot, in the place of the House of Commons and the House of Lords as well. He must say that he attached great importance to Parliament retaining a control over those Orders. The President of the Board of Trade might make, and probably would make very good Orders, but he might also make bad Orders, and in such circumstances it was very expedient that Parliament should keep the control of matters of this kind in its own hands. Parliament might be trusted not to interfere without good reason. He hoped their Lordships would accept his Amendment.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYsaid the noble Lord had misunderstood him. He never said that the mere laying of the Order on the Table of the House would entail expense, but what he did say was that if the Order, under the, noble Lord's Amendment, should be sent back either to the Board of Trade or the Commissioners to reconstruct or recast, very-great extra expense would be entailed. ["Hear, hear!"] That was obvious. Then the noble Lord said that his proposal
  290
  had been followed in other Acts of Parliament, and that it was not an uncommon procedure. No more so was the suggestion made by the Government. Their suggestion also had a precedent; for instance, in the case of the Allotments Act. Land was taken compulsorily, without appeal to Parliament for a definite public purpose, and the Government were only following that precedent in the present Bill. They believed that the establishment of light railways in certain districts was for the general good, and therefore it was not straining the Constitution to come to Parliament, and ask to allow those railways to be constructed and land to be taken for the purpose.
  Amendment negatived; Clause 10 ordered to stand part of Bill.
  Clause 11,—

  PROVISIONS WHICH MAY BE MADE BY THE ORDER.
  An Order under this Act may contain provisions consistent with this Act for all or any of the following purposes—

  (a) the incorporation, subject to such exceptions and variations as may be mentioned in the Order, of all or any of the provisions of the Clauses Acts as defined by this Act. Provided that where it appears to the Board of Trade that variations of the Clauses Acts are required by the special circumstances of the case, the Board of Trade shall make a special report to Parliament on the subject; and

  (b) the application, if and so far as may he considered necessary, of any of the enactments mentioned in the Second Schedule to this Act (being enactments imposing obligations on railway companies with respect to the safety of the public and other matters); and

  (c) giving the necessary powers for constructing and working the railway, including power to make agreements with railway and other companies for the purpose; and

  (d) giving any railway company any power required for carrying the order into effect; and

  (e) the constitution as a body corporate of a company for the purpose of carrying out the objects of the order; and

  (f) the representation on the managing body of the railway of any council who advance, or agree to advance, any money for the purpose of the railway; and

  291

  (g) authorising a Council to advance or borrow money for the purposes of the railway and limiting the amount to he so advanced or borrowed, and regulating the terms on which any money is to be so advanced or borrowed; and

  (h) the manner in which the profits are to be divided, where an advance is made by a council to a light railway company as part of the share capital of the company; and

  (i) the proper audit of the accounts of the managing body of the railway where the managing body is not a local authority and the time within which the railway must be constructed; and

  (j) fixing the maximum rates and charges for traffic; and

  (k) in the case of a new company, requiring the company to make a deposit, and providing for the time of making and the application of the deposit; and

  (l) empowering any local authority to acquire the railway; and

  (m) any other matters, whether similar to the above or not, which may be considered ancillary to the objects of the order or expedient for carrying those objects into effect.

  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved in paragraph (a) after the words "variations of the" to insert the word "Lands." He said that when the Bill was in the other House an Amendment was moved to insure that where any variation was made by the Board of Trade in the Lands Clauses Act, a special report should be made to Parliament. Unfortunately the word "Lands" was omitted, with the result that under the Bill as it now stood a report would have to be made to Parliament every time an alteration was made not only in the Lands Clauses Act, but also in the Railway Clauses Act, and the Companies Clauses Act. He therefore proposed to make the omission good. His noble friend, the Secretary for Scotland, had asked him to make the word "Act" in his second Amendment "Acts," and to leave out "1845," so as to bring in the Scotch Lands Clauses Act as well as the English.
  Amendment agreed to.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved in paragraph (a) after the word "subject" to insert the words
  "and that nothing in this section shall authorise any variation of the provisions of the Lands Clauses Acts, with respect to the purchase and taking of land otherwise than by agreement."
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 11, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 12,—

  APPLICATION OF GENERAL RAILWAY ACTS.
  (1.) The Clauses Acts, as defined by this Act, and the enactments mentioned in the Second Schedule to this Act, shall not apply to a light railway authorised under this Act except so far as they are incorporated or applied by the order authorising the railway.
  (2.) Subject to the foregoing provisions of this Act and to any special provisions contained in the Order authorising the railway, the general enactments relating to railways shall apply to a light railway under this Act in like manner as they apply to any other railway; and for the purposes of those enactments the light railway company shall be deemed a railway company, and the Order under this Act a special Act, and any provision the roof a special enactment. Provided that a light railway shall not be deemed to be a railway within the moaning of the Act of the fifth and sixth years of Victoria, chapter seventy-nine, entitled "An Act to repeal the Duties payable on Stage Carriages and on Passengers conveyed upon Railways, and certain other Stamp Duties in Great Britain, and to grant other Duties in lieu thereof, and also to amend the Laws relating to the Stamp Duties," and that no duties shall hereafter be levied in respect of passengers conveyed on a light railway constructed under this Act in respect of the conveyance of such passengers upon such railway.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved in Sub-section (2) after the word "enactments" to insert the words—
  "and of the Clauses Acts so far as they are incorporated or applied by the Order authorising the railway "
  This was a technical Amendment which merely added to the machinery provided by the Clauses Acts for bringing into effect schemes authorised under these Orders.
  Amendment agreed to.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved in Sub-section (2) to omit the words—
  "Act of the fifth and sixth years of Victoria, chapter seventy-nine, entitled, 'An Act to repeal the duties payable on stage carriages and on passengers conveyed upon railways, and certain other Stamp Duties in Great Britain, and to grant other Duties in lieu thereof, and also to amend the Laws relating to Stamp Duties,' "
  and to insert instead there of the words—" Railway Passenger Duty Act, 1842."

  293
  This Amendment was merely to incorporate the short title instead of the full.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 12, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 13,—

  MODE OF SETTLING PURCHASE-MOSEY AND COMPENSATION FOR TAKING OF LAND.
  (1.) Where any Order under this Act incorporates the Lands Clauses Acts, any matter which under those Acts may be determined by the verdict of a jury, by arbitration, or by two justices, shall for the purposes of the Order be referred to and determined by a single arbitrator appointed by the Board of Trade, and the provisions of this Act shall apply with respect to the determination of any such matter in lieu of those of the Lands Clauses Acts relating thereto. Provided that, in determining the amount of compensation, the arbitrator shall have regard to the extent to which the remaining and contiguous lands and hereditaments belonging to the same proprietor may be benefited by the proposed light railway.
  (2.) The Board of Trade may, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor, make rules fixing a scale of costs to be applicable on any such arbitration, and may, by such rules, limit the cases in which the costs of counsel are to be allowed.
  (3.) The Arbitration Act, 1889, shall apply to any arbitration under this section.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNmoved, in Sub-section (1), after the word "appointed," to insert the words—
  "by the parties, or, if the parties do not concur in the appointment of a single arbitrator, then."
  The object of the Amendment was that if the parties did not agree upon the appointment of a single arbitrator, one should be appointed by the Board of Trade.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYhad no objection to the Amendment, but it appeared to him rather unnecessary. As the law now stood an arbitrator would not be nominated by the Board of Trade until the parties to the dispute and to any question had failed to agree upon one. Naturally, if a railway promoter wished to take land, he would say to the landowner, "I want your land for this purpose." It would then be open to the landowner either to arrange with him about the price, or failing that to arrange about an arbitration to settle the price,
  294
  or failing that the matter would go to the Board of Trade, who would appoint the arbitrator. But, however, if the noble Lord wished the words inserted he had no objection.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid it was the ordinary procedure under the Lands Clauses Act. As a matter of fact the arbitrator was, generally speaking, appointed by the parties.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 13, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 14 (payment of purchase money or compensation) ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 15,—

  PROVISIONS AS TO BOARD OF TRADE.
  (1.) If the Board of Trade hold a local Inquiry for the purposes of this Act, Part I. of the Board of Trade Arbitrations, etc., Act, 187*1, shall apply to any Inquiry so hold, as if—

  (a) the Inquiry was held on an application made in pursuance of a special Act; and

  (b) the parties making the application for the Order authorising the light railway, and in the case of an Inquiry held with reference to an objection made to any such application the persons making the objection in addition, were parties to the application within the meaning of section three of the Act.

  (2.) The Board of Trade may make such rules as they think necessary for regulating the time within which objections must be made, the manner in which any notice under this Act must be given, and any other matters which they may think expedient to regulate by rule for the purpose of carrying this Act into effect.
  (3.) There shall be charged in respect of proceedings under this Act before the Board of Trade or the Light Railway Commissioners such fees as may be fixed by the Treasury on the recommendation of the Board of Trade.
  (4.) Any expenses of the Board of Trade under this Act shall, except so far as provision is made for their payment by or under this Act, be defrayed out of moneys provided by Parliament.
  (5.) The Board of Trade shall present to Parliament annually a report of their proceedings and of the proceedings of the Light Railway Commissioners under this Act.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved, in Sub-section (2), to leave out the words—
  "time within which objections must be made, the manner in which any notice under this Act must be given,"

  295
  and to insert instead thereof the words—
  "procedure under this Act, whether before the Board of Trade or before the Light Railway Commissioners."
  This Amendment was to make it quite clear that the rules made by the Board of Trade should apply both to the procedure before the Light Railway Commissioners and before the Board of Trade. There was a little ambiguity about the words as the Bill at present stood.
  Amendment agreed to.
  *The EARL OF DUDLEYmoved, after the word "effect," to insert the words—
  "and provision shall be made by such rules for the deposit and inspection of plans relating to the railway."
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 15, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clauses 16 to 18 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 19,—

  POWER OF OWNERS TO GRANT LAND OR ADVANCE MONEY FOR A LIGHT RAILWAY.
  (1.) "Where any person has power, either by statute or otherwise, to sell and convey any land for the purpose of any works of a light railway, he may, with the sanction of the Board of Agriculture given under this section, convey the land for that purpose either without payment of any purchase-money or compensation or at a price less than the real value, and may so convoy it free from all incumbrances thereon.
  (2.) Whenever any person who is a landowner within the meaning of the Improvement of Land Act, 1864, contributes any money for the purpose of any works of a light railway, the amount so contributed may, with the sanction of the Board of Agriculture given under this section, be charged on the land of the landowner improved by the works in the same manner and with the like effect as in the case of a charge under that Act.
  (3.) The Board of Agriculture shall not give their sanction under this section unless they are satisfied that the works for which the land is conveyed or the money is contributed will effect a permanent increase in the value of the land held by the same title or of other land of the same landowner exceeding, in the case of a conveyance of land, that which is, in the opinion of the Board of Agriculture, the real value of the land conveyed or the difference
  296
  between that value and the price, as the case may be, and in the case of a contribution of money the amount contributed: Provided also, that if the land proposed to be conveyed is subject to incumbrances, the Board of Agriculture, before giving their sanction under this section, shall cause notice to be given to the incumbrancers, and shall consider the objections, if any, raised by them.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved, after Clause 19, to add the following new clause:—

  POWER TO GRANT CROWN LANDS.
  "The Commissioners of Woods shall, on behalf of Her Majesty, have the like powers to convey Crown lands as are by this Act conferred upon persons having power, either by statute or otherwise, to sell and convey lands, except that in the case of Crown lands the sanction of the Treasury shall be substituted for the sanction of the Board of Agriculture."
  This was to allow the Commissioners of Woods to convey Crown lands in the same way as was allowed to private owners under Clause 19 to facilitate the construction of light railways.
  Clause read 1a and 2a, and ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clauses 20 to 24 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 25,—

  APPLICATION TO SCOTLAND.
  This Act shall apply to Scotland with the following modifications:—
  (1.) In Section five of this Act the expression "Secretary for Scotland" shall be substituted for the expressions "Board of Agriculture" and "Board of Trade" respectively, occurring in that section.
  (2.) References to the council of any county, borough, or district shall be construed as references to the county council of any county, or the town council, or where there is no town council the police commissioners of any burgh, or the commissioners of any police burgh, or the district committee of any district under the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1889; or in any county where there is no district committee any two or more parish councils may combine.
  (3.) "Arbiter" shall be substituted for "arbitrator," and that arbiter shall be deemed to be a single arbiter within the meaning of the Lands Clauses Acts, and in lieu of the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1889, the provisions of the Lands Clauses Acts with respect to an arbitration shall apply, except the provisions of the said Acts as to the expenses of the arbitration, in lieu of which the following provision shall

  297
  have effect, namely, the expenses of the arbitration and incident thereto shall be in the discretion of the arbiter, who may direct to and by whom and in what manner those expenses, or any part thereof, shall be paid, and may tax or settle the amount of expenses to be so paid, or any part thereof, and may award expenses to be paid as between agent and client.
  (4.) The Lord President of the Court of Session shall be substituted for the Lord Chancellor.
  (5.) The money necessary to defray expenditure, not being capital expenditure incurred by a county council in pursuance of this Act, shall be raised by a rate imposed along with but as a separate rate from the rate for maintenance of roads (hereinafter referred to as "the road rate") leviable under the Roads and Bridges (Scotland) Act, 1878, upon lands and heritages within the county, or the district, or the parish, as the case may he. The money necessary to defray expenditure similarly incurred by a town council, or police commissioners, or burgh commissioners, shall be raised by a rate imposed along with but as a separate rate from the police assessment or burgh general assessment, as the case may be. If the expenditure incurred is capital expenditure it shall be raised by borrowing in the manner authorised by the order, the rate chargeable for repayment of capital, including interest and expenses, being the same rate as is liable for maintenance as aforesaid, and it shall not he necessary for the county council to have the consent of the standing joint committee for such borrowing.
  (6.) The provisions relating to district councils shall apply to district committees or combinations of parish councils, subject to the following modifications:—

  (a) A district committee shall not be entitled to make an application under section two hereof except with the consent of the county council given at a special or statutory meeting of the council, of which one month's special notice, setting forth the purpose of the meeting, shall have been sent to each councillor.

  (b.) A resolution to give such consent shall not be passed by the council unless two-thirds of the councillors present and voting at the special meeting concur in the resolution.

  (c.) Nothing in this Act shall authorise a district committee to raise money by rate or loan, but any money necessary to defray expenditure, not being capital expenditure incurred by it in pursuance of this Act, shall he raised by the County Council by a rate imposed along with but as a separate rate from the road rate; and any money necessary to defray capital expenditure shall be raised by the County Council by borrowing in the manner authorised by the order, as in Section fifteen hereof mentioned.

  (7.) The expression "Clause Acts" shall mean the Lands Clauses Acts, the Railways Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act, 1845, the Companies
  298
  Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act, 1845, the Companies Clauses Act, 1863, the Railways Clauses Act, 1863, and the Companies Clauses Act, 1869.
  (8.) References to the Local Government Act, 1888, and the Local Government Act, 1894, shall be construed as references to the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1889, and the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894.
  (9.) In order to carry out in Scotland the provisions contained in Sub-section (1) (c) of Section five of this Act, it shall be the duty of the assessor of railways and canals, as regards any parish to which the said Sub-section (1) (c) applies, to enter on his valuation roll either the annual value of the light railway within such parish ascertained in terms of the Valuation of Lands (Scotland) Acts, or the annual value at which the land occupied by or for the purposes of the light railway would have been assessed if it had remained in the condition in which it was immediately before it was acquired for the purposes of the railway, whichever is less.
  (10.) Where a light railway constructed under the powers of this Act is owned or leased by an existing railway company, such light railway shall not be valued by the said assessor as part of the general undertaking of the railway company, but shall be valued as a separate undertaking.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (LORD BALFOUR)said this clause was the one which applied the Bill to Scotland. The last two lines of Sub-section (5) were accepted in the House of Commons by inadvertence, and he proposed their deletion. The effect of the lines was to take away the control of the Standing Joint Committee over the borrowing powers which were given to county councils, and that he did not think was an expedient thing to do. He did not think it could be alleged that the Standing Joint Committees in Scotland had been obstructive in these matters, and he knew of no difficulty having occurred through their action. At the same time it was extremely important that the Standing Joint Committee should know what was being done by the different districts in the county and what was the amount of money being borrowed, because that amount, if it became too large, naturally affected the security for the whole debt. He had communicated with the President of the Board of Trade, and he agreed that the two lines should be deleted. He moved to omit the words at the end of Sub-section (5)—
  "and it shall not be necessary for the county council to have the consent of the Standing Joint Committee for such borrowing. "
  Amendment agreed to.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved, in Paragraph (b), Sub-section (6), after the word "special," to insert the words "or statutory."
  Amendment agreed to.
  LORD BALFOURsaid that at the end of Paragraph (c), Subsection (6), by inadvertence, the word "fifteen," which referred to the 15th Section of the Bill, had got in; it should obviously be "sixteen," because it was the 16th Clause which referred to borrowing powers, and not the 15th. He therefore begged to move to delete "fifteen" and to insert "sixteen. "
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 25, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 26,—

  EXTENT OF ACT.
  This Act shall not extend to Ireland.
  Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 27,—

  DEFINITIONS.
  In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—
  The expression "light railway company" includes any person or body of persons, whether incorporated or not, who are owners or lessees of any light railway authorised by this Act, or who are working the same under any working agreement.
  The expression "Clauses Acts" means the Lands Clauses Acts, the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act 1845, and the Railways Clauses Act 1863, and the Companies Clauses Acts 1845 to 1889.
  The expression "share capital" includes any capital, whether consisting of shares or of stock, which is not raised by means of borrowing.
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYmoved, in the first paragraph, after the words "or not, who are," to insert the words "authorised to construct, or are."
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 27, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 28 (short title) and Schedules ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Standing Committee negatived; The Report of Amendments to be received To-morrow; Standing Order No. XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with; and Bill to be printed as amended.—[No. 242.]
  *THE EARL OF DUDLEYsaid that, as it was important that this Bill should go to the House of Commons as soon as possible, he should to-morrow move to suspend the Standing Order, so that the Report stage and Third Reading might be taken on one day.

LOCOMOTIVES ON HIGHWAYS BILL [H.L.]
On the Order for the consideration of the Commons' Amendments to this Bill,
LORD HARRISmoved that the Amendments to Clauses 1, 2 and 3, and to new Clause D, be agreed to.
THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAasked how the maximum speed of 14 miles an hour for these vehicles had been arrived at. A much greater speed had been contemplated.
LORD HARRISsaid that while the Bill was under discussion, several noble Lords expressed the fear that the absence of any speed limit would be dangerous. In the House of Commons the same fears obtained, and the limit of 14 miles an hour, which was considered fair, was inserted.
Motion agreed to.
LORD GLENESKsaid that he had put down a Motion "That the House do disagree with the Commons," in connection with the Commons' Amendment imposing a tax upon these light locomotives. The Bill was introduced because it was believed that these vehicles would be a great public benefit and an assistance to farmers, traders, and others interested in the conveyance of goods. But a desire to check this new enterprise was manifested in the Amendments moved in the House of Commons; and

301
the most serious of these Amendments was that which imposed a deterrent tax, amounting in all to £1 or £5 a year. But as there was a doubt as to whether an Amendment dealing with a question of taxation could be moved in the House of Lords, and as he did not wish, in the interests of the Bill, to raise a question between the two Houses, he should withdraw his Amendment.
THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAsaid that he wished to add his emphatic protest against this tax on a nascent industry. In country districts these new vehicles were looked to as a great source of relief, and he believed that they would be more important to agriculture even than light railways. They would take the place of the farmers waggon and horses, on which he was required to pay no tax. This was, moreover, an unsuitable moment to impose new burdens on an industry which everyone was endeavouring to relieve. These vehicles were to be used for the collection of agricultural produce in rural districts; a process which, in the interests of the community, it was desirable to make more easy; and he should certainly have voted against the tax if the Amendment had been pressed to a Division.
LORD HARRISsaid that the hardship was not so great as the noble Earl made out. The noble Earl would wish all these locomotives, whether used for agricultural or private purposes, to be exempt from taxation; but at the present moment all carriages, except farmers' waggons, were taxed two guineas a year under the Customs and Inland Revenue Act; and all locomotives, for whatever purpose used, had to pay a licence to the county. The maximum charge for the licence was £10, and the county authority generally exacted the maximum. It was unquestionable that these locomotives would take more wear and tear out of the roads than the ordinary horse-drawn carriage, and the Bill merely proposed to secure the county authority from being bereft of the locomotive licence altogether, as well as to require the payment of the Customs Duty. Out of the £4 or £5 payable, the County Council would get £2 or £3 instead of the £10 which they received for a heavy locomotive.
THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAmoved at the end of the new clause imposing the tax to insert the following words:—
"Provided that this clause shall not apply to any locomotive which is used exclusively for common agricultural purposes."
LORD HARRISsaid that, as the clause dealt with taxation, it was doubtful whether the Amendment was in order. The opinion of the officers of the House of Commons, whose opinion he had taken, was that the Amendment would not be in order; and the opinion of the officers of the House of Lords was that, whilst technically the Amendment could be moved, it was highly improbable that it would be accepted in the House of Commons.
THE EARL OF WINC HILSEAsaid that he would press the Amendment, as their Lordships ought to take the advice of the officers of their own House, and not that of the officers of the House of Commons.
Amendment negatived.
LORD HARRISmoved that the Commons' Amendments to Clauses 4, 5, and 6, and now Clauses D, E, and F, and the Schedules of the Bill be agreed to.
Motion agreed to.

IMMUNITY OF JUDGES.
*THE EARL OF STAMFORDrose to ask whether the attention of Her Majesty's Government had been called to the case of "Anderson v. Gorrie and Others," the defendants being Judges of the colony of Trinidad, tried in London in May 1894, before the late Lord Chief Justice and a special jury, when, notwithstanding that the jury found a verdict in express terms that one of the defendants oppressively and with malice overstrained his judicial powers to the prejudice of the plaintiff and the wilful perversion of justice, and found a verdict for the plaintiff for £500, the Lord Chief Justice directed judgment to be entered for the defendant on the ground that such an action did not lie against a Judge, which judgment has been upheld

303
by the Court of Appeal; and whether the Government is prepared to initiate or support legislation with a view to rectifying or declaring the present state of the law upon the points involved in these judgments. The House would observe that a Constitutional point—namely, the immunity of the Judges, was involved in his question. It was not his intention now to enter deeply into that question, but he ventured most earnestly to call the attention of the Government and the House to do so. The case, briefly, was as follows:—Mr. Anderson practised as a surgeon in the island of Tobago, afterwards part of the colony of Trinidad. He was a man of considerable standing, having been colonial surgeon, a justice of the peace, and twice elected a member of the legislative body of Tobago. Actions were brought against him and others informâ pauperis irregularly. The colonial Judges were said to have acted oppressively. They demanded excessive bail; they imprisoned him in default of bail, and refused him leave to appeal to the Queen in Council. The affair caused a deal of local agitation, and petitions were sent to Her Majesty's Government. Royal Commissioners were sent out to inquire into the administration of justice in the colony of Trinidad, and on their report, in which they spoke of "judicial persecution," one Judge was removed from the colony and another was interdicted. In order to secure some personal redress, Mr. Anderson brought an action for damages in England against the two surviving Judges—for one of the Judges had meanwhile died—and the jury, after seven days' trial, found a verdict for the plaintiff. The jury declared that the defendant "oppressively and with malice overstrained his judicial powers to the prejudice of the plaintiff, and the wilful perversion of justice." Before this trial came on a Divisional Court had refused to stay the action, and the late Lord Chief Justice, before whom the case was tried, allowed it to go to a jury. The late Lord Chief Justice, in face of the verdict of the jury, directed judgment to be entered for defendant, and the Court of Appeal upheld that judgment. The question, therefore, arose under the law as it was now declared, whether a person having obtained such a verdict that a Judge has oppressively and with malice
304
overstrained his judicial powers to the prejudice of the plaintiff, and the wilful perversion of justice, has any remedy against the Judge, and, if so, what remedy? He ventured to submit that there was no apparent remedy, and he was not prepared to say that such a remedy could or should be devised. It might be that the disadvantages of such a remedy would overbalance the advantages. He was unwilling to suppose that such another case was likely to arise, for the general and well-grounded respect felt by British subjects for the integrity of the judiciary anticipated the great improbability of its recurrence. Still, this unhappy instance was calculated to raise the apprehension that a Judge might again be guilty of similar practices, and if so guilty, would certainly be held not liable to afford personal redress for injuries inflicted by him. It would appear that after these judgments no person in similar circumstances would be allowed to go to a jury. Thus, "Anderson v. Gorrie and Others "appeared to be important as a test case, and the general question of judicial immunity as declared therein was being now taken up, for the matter was becoming recognised as no longer a personal one, but as a question of principle. Pressure had recently been brought to bear upon some Members of the House of Commons by memorials and letters from their constituents, especially from medical men, who were naturally greatly interested in the matter. In consequence a similar, though not identical, question was being put that day in the House of Commons, and it was thought well that the matter should be brought forward in both Houses simultaneously. On being invited to perform the task, he felt it to be his duty to ask the question. He had less reluctance, and indeed, some pleasure in bringing the matter forward, from the thought that it was possible that members of the judicial body might feel inclined to welcome any legislative enactment which should either amend or declare the law upon this point.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid no one could complain of the noble Lord in bringing forward the question, or of the kindly and judicial spirit in which it had been treated. He had some difficulty in answering the specific matter of the question, for the reason that the decision

305
of the Court of Appeal was still open to appeal to that House, and he, therefore, did not want to express an opinion judicially upon it. But, speaking generally, an action did not lie against a Judge at the instance of a suitor who thought himself injured by the judgment of the Judge. The immunity of the Judges from such action was of great importance in the interests of justice. For centuries Judges had been appointed in this country against whom no imputation could be made, and their high character was due in a great measure to their independence, not only of plaintiff and defendant, but their independence of the Government also. There was no pecuniary remedy for a suitor against a Judge, but any Judge could be removed from his office by an Address from both Houses of Parliament.

UGANDA RAILWAY BILL.
THE PRIME MINISTER,in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said: The matter has been before the House more than once, and opinions in favour of mating this railway have been expressed on both sides of the House. It is about four or five years since, standing in this place, I first urged that such a railway should be made, and I am glad to be able to move this Bill, carrying out that view at the present time. I regret that circumstances, which I daresay were inevitable, have prevented the Measure being undertaken before. There are two considerations of important public policy which justify a departure in this case from the ordinary practice of Parliament in respect to rail ways in any part of Her Majesty's possessions. In the first place I believe it is felt that the construction of such a railway would be the most fatal blow to the slave trade which could possibly be delivered—["hear, hear!"]—because all slaves are now conducted to the coast by caravans. It is needless to say that if this railway be made slaves will not be conducted by it. Put the railway will have a much more important effect than that. It will dry up the supply of caravans, and the trade which supports them. Caravans would cease to be profitable, and therefore would
306
cease to be used, because the difference in the cost of sending 60 lbs. on a man's head and sending it by railway is a sun' too enormous not to have an immediate and dominating effect. Therefore, the state of things that will come to pass will be that caravans will have passed out of use, and if a slave caravan is found going down to the coast, its character will be proclaimed by the very fact that it is a caravan, and it cannot possibly escape the vigilance of the authorities or avoid the punishment due to such a crime. There is another consideration which I think recent events have brought before us. What has happened in Matabeleland shows that it is a position not exempt from danger, when the assertion of your authority is very far in advance of your power of moving up either supplies or forces, or any other instrument of your dominion, so that the authority may be challenged, and yet you may not be able to take with rapidity the full measures necessary to assert it. There is no doubt that the authority of our Protectorate in Uganda is completely recognised, and that there is every prospect of a peaceful, and, I hope, rapid development of that country. Put still the circumstance exists that it is separated from the coast by 600 miles, and of that 600 miles the first hundred are almost entirely waterless, and that the tsetse fly prevails in every part of the road. The result is that all communications have to be conducted by caravans, and every kind of supply has to be carried in loads of 60 lbs. on men's heads. What has happened in the South of Africa shows it is a state of things which it is not wise to acquiesce in permanently, and I think not only the prosperity of Uganda but its security, and the facility with which the advantages of British rule will be extended to it, will be largely increased when we are able to announce that this railway is complete. Financial measures have been taken, so that it will progress, I trust, without delay or change of policy or purpose, and I believe it will have a most beneficial effect in fostering British trade and establishing the newly-born dominion of Great Britain on that continent. [Cheers.]
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I do not rise to say a single word on the subject of the Measure, partly because

307
it is a Bill purely financial in its character, and, therefore, I take it, outside our competence, and from the more gratifying reason that I fancy that the question of the Uganda railroad is one of those rare but none the less grateful questions on which both sides of the House are agreed. ["Hear, hear!"] I can only assure the noble Marquess, in respect to something that fell from him, that the late Government took the earliest opportunity practicable in their judgment to submit the proposal for the railway to Parliament. What I would strongly say is that I believe that, great as your expenditure has been for putting down the slave trade on the coast of Africa, vast as are the efforts you have put forward for the abolition of that horrible traffic all over the world, you will never have struck a blow at it so fatal and direct as the construction of this railway that the Government have set on foot. ["Hear, hear!"] I do not believe anybody who could see at all clearly the ordinary results of ordinary causes, could doubt for a moment that, when it fell to be the duty of the Government to take over the remote territory of Uganda, that it would be necessary, as soon as may be, to connect it with the coast by a railroad. I should not, if I may say so, advise the noble Marquess to base his argument for the railroad much on the existence of the fly, because I have always understood that the fly existed but sparsely on the route, and that only for a few miles on the coast. That is a minor criticism on which I do not wish to dwell. What I would rather have heard from the Prime Minister than the arguments in which I agree with him is, what is the cause of the great increase of the estimates for the railroad beyond that originally laid before us. Of course, in these matters, one is well aware that the cost and the estimate are usually figures that are materially different. None of us have carried out the smallest enterprise without realising that truth to its fullest and most painful extent. But I am afraid this is not a difference between cost and estimate, but a great rise in the estimate itself, and I think the cost will rise not
308
disproportionately; and it would have been more gratifying to the House if the Prime Minister had been able to tell us how the increase arises, and had not confined himself to the arguments in which we cordially support him. [Cheers.]
THE PRIME MINISTER: I hope this is a covering estimate—that is to say, that if anything it is in excess of what the expense is likely to be. The noble Lord asked me the cause of the increase of the estimate. I must answer that it is due to the original sin of the engineer. I never heard of an engineer who was not too sanguine a man. But in this case there is a special cause for the increase of the estimate—the necessary inadequacy of the original survey. I do not hint that anyone was to blame, because over such a vast and unknown territory it was inevitable that the survey should be rather summary, and it has been found necessary to alter the course in some places and undertake engineering difficulties more formidable than originally contemplated, and these considerations have increased the estimate. I think, perhaps, that the weight of the rails has been rather increased over what was originally proposed, but that has been done on the best engineering advice. But I am not skilful enough to go into all the details on which the rise of the estimate is justified. I think the noble Earl will find satisfaction for his curiosity in the papers already published. At all events I think he will join with me in saying it is better to put before Parliament a full estimate of what we believe is likely to be the cost, and so avoid the reproach which might be directed against us that we consciously skimped the estimate so as to make it more acceptable to Parliament.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I do not deny that Ministerial statements and explanations are usually anticipated in the daily Press or in Papers submitted to Parliament. I only wished to have an official statement from the noble Marquess.
Read 2a (according to Order); and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order).
LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL.
  PART I.—LAND LAW.
  Clause 1,—
  PART I.—LAND LAW.

    FAIR RENTS.—AMENDMENT AS TO IMPROVEMENTS.
    (1.) Where the Court fix a fair rent fair holding, the Court shall ascertain and record in the form of a Schedule, unless both landlord and tenant shall otherwise request—
    (a) The several classes of land found upon the holding, marking each class on a map, and showing in respect of each class the estimated area thereon and the sum which should be the fair rent thereof (per acre or per class) on the assumption that all improvements thereon were made or acquired by the landlord;
    (b) the annual sum which should be the fair rent of the holding on the assumption that all improvements thereon were made or acquired by the landlord;
    (c) the condition as to cultivation, deterioration, or otherwise of the holding and the buildings thereon;
    (d) the improvements made wholly or partly by the tenant or at bis cost, and with respect to each such improvement—

    (i) the nature, character, and present capital value thereof, and the increased letting value duo thereto;

    (ii) the date (so near as can be ascertained) at which the same was made; and

    (iii) the deduction from the rent made on account thereof;

    (c) the extent (if any) to which the landlord has paid or compensated the tenant in respect of each such improvement;
    (f) the improvements made wholly or partly by or at the cost of, or acquired by, the landlord;
    (g) such other matters in relation to the holding as may have been taken into account in fixing the fair rent thereof, or as may be prescribed from time to time, including all such particulars as are set forth in the form in the Second schedule to this Act (so far as such particulars are not inconsistent with the other provisions of this section), such form being similar to the form (commonly known as the "Pink schedule") which the assistant Commissioners have for some time previous to the passing of this Act been required by the Land Commission to fill up when fixing the fair rent of a holding; and
    (h) the fair rent of the holding;
    and a certified copy of the record shall be sent by post to each party, and the record shall be admissible in evidence on its mere production from the proper custody.
    (2.) No rent shall be allowed or made payable in respect of an improvement made by the tenant on a holding by reason only of the work constituting such improvement not being suitable to the holding.
    (3.) For the purpose of the Land Law Acts, as amended by this Act, a tenant shall be deemed to have been fully paid or compensated for every improvement made by him in pursuance of a contract entered into for valuable consideration.
    (4) For the purpose of the Land Law Acts, as amended by this Act, a tenant shall not be deemed to have been paid or compensated for any improvement not made in pursuance of a contract entered into for valuable consideration, except to the extent to which the Count, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, are of opinion that valuable consideration has been given by the landlord in respect of the improvement.
    (5.) A contract by a tenant not to claim, on quitting his holding, compensation for any improvement made by him shall not authorise the allowance of any rent in respect of any improvement except to the extent to which the court, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, are of opinion that valuable consideration has been given by the landlord in respect of the entering into that contract.
    (6.) Section 4 of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, shall not authorise the allowance of any rent in respect of an improvement made by the tenant, if made 20 years before the passing of the said Act, and not being a permanent building or reclamation of waste land.
    (7.) For the purpose of this section valuable consideration shall not be held to have been given by reason of the mere letting of the land on lease or otherwise, or the mere enjoyment by the tenant of any improvement where the rent of the holding was not fixed, reduced, abated, or, after the improvement was made, allowed to remain unaltered with the object of recouping the tenant for his expenditure of capital and labour in making the improvement; and, in the case of an improvement made in pursuance of a contract entered into for valuable consideration, such object shall be implied where not expressed.
    (8.) No deduction shall be made from the fair rent named in this section by reason of the mere right of occupation vested in the tenant.
    (9.) Sub-sections (2) and (4) of Section 5 of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, and Sub-section (1) of the same section in the case of sales after the passing of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, shall not have effect in the case of applications to fix a fair rent.
    *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR AVAR (The MARQUESS of LANSDOWNE)moved to leave out Sub section (1) and to insert instead thereof—

    AMENDMENT AS TO IMPROVEMENTS.
    (1.) Where the Court fix a fair rent for a holding, the Court shall ascertain and record in

    311
    the form of a schedule, unless both landlord and tenant shall otherwise request—
    (a) the annual sum which should be the fair rent of the holding on the assumption that all improvements thereon were made or acquired by the landlord;
    (b) the condition as to cultivation, deterioration, or otherwise of the holding and the buildings thereon;
    (c) the improvements made wholly or partly by the tenant or at his cost, and with respect to each such improvement—

    (i) the nature, character, and present capital value thereof, and the increased letting value duo thereto;

    (ii) the date (so near as can be ascertained) at which the same was made; and

    (iii) the deduction from the rent made on account thereof;

    (d) the extent (if any) to which the landlord has paid or compensated the tenant in respect of each such improvement;
    (e) the improvements made wholly or partly by or at the cost of, or acquired by, the landlord;
    (f) such other matters in relation to the holding as may have been taken into account in fixing the fair rent thereof, or as may be prescribed; and
    (g) the fair rent of the holding;
    and the said schedule shall be in the form set out in the First schedule to this Act or in such other form as may he prescribed, and a certified copy of the record shall on the prescribed application be sent by post to each party, and the record shall be admissible in evidence on its mere production from the proper custody.
    The noble Marquess said the House would recollect that in Committee Clause 1 was considerably modified at the instance of Lord Templetown, who earnestly and successfully pressed on the House the necessity of requiring from the Court fuller particulars of the data on which their decisions as to fair rents were arrived at. He hoped his noble Friend would not take it amiss if he frankly told him that he was not entirely satisfied with the shape in which the Amendments had left the clause. If their Lordships would look at the Bill they would see that, in the first two or three lines of the clause, the Court was directed to ascertain and record in the form of a schedule a great number of particulars set out in the following subsections. After these particulars were enumerated, the Court was, in Sub-section G, further directed to ascertain such other matters as had been taken into account in fixing the fair rent, including all such
    312
    particulars as were set forth in the Second schedule to the Act, and it was explained that the Second schedule was to be virtually identical with the pink Paper of which their Lordships had heard so much. It would be evident to the House that this schedule mentioned in Sub-section G would be different from the schedule which, at the beginning of the clause, the Court was directed to frame and supply to the litigants. That schedule would contain the whole contents of the schedule to be embodied in the Act, but a good deal more. There would in short, be two schedules, and he was afraid a good deal of complication would arise. Now what the Government proposed was that there should be only one schedule, and that that schedule should be printed with the Act of Parliament. They would find in the Amendment in his name a draft schedule containing the particulars contained in the earlier part of Clause 1, and also the contents of the pink Paper, but amplified and with an addition which he knew some of his noble Friends were anxious to have made, the addition of a money column showing the rent per acre or class of the different sorts of land. ["Hear, hear!"] The schedule in that form would be supplied to the parties on application and he believed it would contain all the information they could desire or expect.
    *VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWNacknowledged the conciliatory attitude of the Government towards the Amendment to the clause. He was gratified with the way in which the noble Marquess had dealt with them. He himself had carefully gone through the schedule attached to the list of the Amendments, and as far as he could see they embodied all the recommendations which he had put before the House in such a form that he could express his complete approval of it.
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAhad given notice of his intention to move, after Clause 1, to insert the following clause:—
    Where the Court have once fixed a fair rent for a holding, no further revision of rent shall

    313
    take place at the end of the first or any subsequent judicial term except in relation to—

    (a.) A rise or fall, if any, in the price of produce proper to be grown on the holding (due allowance being made for a rise or fall, if any, in the cost of production); and

    (b.) any improvement which the tenant proves—

    (1.) he has executed without compensation before the commencement of the first statutory term; and

    (2.) has not already been taken into account in fixing a fair rent.

    And, in the event of a revision being made, the Court shall send by post to each party a certified statement showing how the fair rent has been arrived at.
    The noble Lord said it would be within the recollection of the House that Lord Monteagle and himself proposed a clause almost identical, dealing with the principle on which Sub-Commissioners were to go in ascertaining what was a fair rent, and an appeal was made by the Prime Minister to withdraw the clauses, in view of their great importance and the short time the Government had to consider them. Lord Monteagle fell in with the appeal; but after consultation, he himself had thought it his duty to persevere with the clause. But before the House divided the Prime Minister again made a strong appeal to him not to divide the House, on the same grounds that the time was short, the Amendment having only appeared on the Paper that morning; and the importance of the question was so great, it was hardly fair to expect the Government to accept the Amendment at such short notice. He felt the force of that appeal, and although the Divisions taken immediately before and after made it quite certain that if he had persevered with the Amendment they would have had the power to add it to the Bill, he consented not to then press it, on the distinct assurance of the noble Marquess that before the Report stage he would consider it. He rose to ask the noble Marquess what had been the result of that consideration, and whether he could, on behalf of the Government, accept the clause?
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEacknowledged the noble Earl's courtesy in postponing his Amendment. Since then the Government had carefully considered the matter. He fully understood the objects with which the noble
    314
    Earl had made this Motion. He would like to see—as would most of their Lordships—the Land Commission Court given something in the nature of a definite basis upon which to proceed. They would find, not only in Ireland, but in other parts of the United Kingdom, that two perfectly honest valuers would differ widely in their estimate of the value of the same farm, and one had even known cases where the same valuer would take a somewhat different view of the value of a farm according to the conditions of climate under which he had visited it. The noble Earl asked their Lordships so to arrange matters that these personal factors should be, as far as possible, excluded, and that on each revaluation of the farm the Court should proceed upon the basis of the original valuation, modifying it only in relation to alterations in the price of produce or the improvements executed by the tenant. That, at first sight, was an extremely attractive proposal. It certainly was not one which could, for a moment, be represented as being put forward entirely in the interest of the landlord, because one effect of it would be to transfer to the tenant a very considerable part of what was usually spoken of as the unearned increment. But the clause as it stood was so drafted that the Court would have to proceed upon the basis of the fair rent first fixed upon the holding. As he said the other evening, he believed it was notorious that the fair rents fixed by the Commission during the first few years of its existence were extremely unequal and untrustworthy, and they could not possibly accept these fair rents—which had been distinctly impugned by so many noble Lords—as a solid basis for the fixing of future revised fair rents. But there were other difficulties which stood in the way of the adoption of the recommendation of the noble Earl. He should mention in the first place that, if they were to adopt the Amendment of the noble Lord opposite to the present proposed new clause, the new system could only come into operation 15 years hence —that was to say, upon the second and subsequent revisions of rent by the Court of Land Commission. He was not at all clear that it was worth while for the sake of

    315
    what, after all, would be a comparatively remote improvement in the procedure of the Court, to introduce the novel and untried system which was recommended to them. The revision of the rent in relation to prices sounded an extremely simple matter, but he did not think it was quite as simple as the noble Earl supposed. In the first place, the noble Earl, who had paid so much attention to agricultural questions, must be perfectly aware that a fall in prices of a certain percentage did not by any means necessarily involve the result that rents should fall in the same ratio. If a farmer lost, upon the whole of the commodities which he extracted from the land, a certain percentage by a fall in price, it might very often follow that his actual loss would be equivalent to a very much larger percentage of the rent he paid the landlord. Then there were other questions by which the calculation would be complicated. There might be a cheapening of the commodities sold by the tenant, or, on the other hand, a cheapening of those he had to buy. Again, the products of the farm might have altered in the intervening time, or the whole condition of the neighbourhood might have changed. All these were points which the Court would have to consider, and he was afraid that by telling them that they were to consider the fluctuations of prices in reference to the tenant's rent they were, after all, not giving them a very much increased measure of that guidance which the noble Earl was so anxious to afford them. He must frankly tell the noble Lord that he regarded this proposal, excellent in its intentions, as somewhat of the character of a counsel of perfection, and he would respectfully urge upon him not to press it on the House.
    LORD MONTEAGLEremarked that the noble Marquess said that varying rents in accordance with the variation of prices was not so simple as it looked. Quite so. But what was the present procedure? The Land Court at the present time had to take all these matters into consideration, and, in addition, had to take into consideration the value of the land, and go upon the land and value it. "What he understood the noble Earl to aim at was to restrict the Land Court to the
    316
    consideration of these fluctuations, which were independent of the action of the tenant, and only to exclude from their consideration the value of the land. Another objection of the noble Marquess was that the ratio of variation of the rents would not be direct—that they could not say that rents were varied as directly as prices varied. He thought that point was amply provided for by the parenthesis in Sub-section A of the noble Lord's clause. But no doubt the principal objection, and, as he had admitted, the fatal objection to the consideration of the proposal at this stage, was that of novelty, and admitting, as he did, that it was a novel proposal, he ventured to ask the noble Lord opposite to be content with the discussion he had raised, and not to press the matter further.
    THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAsaid if this Amendment was negatived he would ask to say a few words in reply to the noble Marquess when the other Amendment came on.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    THE EARL OF WINCHILSEAsaid he thought it would be unfortunate if it were to go forth that there was no answer to what the noble Marquess had said on various points. It was quite true, as the noble Marquess had said, that different valuers took different views of the same holding and of different holdings, and he had also said that climatic conditions might affect the same valuer in valuing the same farm. He was told it was not an uncommon thing for Sub-Commissioners to value a farm when there was a foot of snow on the ground, and he quite admitted that those were climatic conditions which might lead to various and, no doubt, erratic conclusions. The next argument of the noble Marquess was the deprivation which this clause might cause the landlord of part of the unearned increment of the farm, such as might accrue from the propinquity of a railway. He was quite certain landlords would be very willing to give up a problematical advantage for the sake of the advantage of a firm and definite principle beneath their feet. Who ever heard in Ireland of a Sub-Commissioner allowing an increase of rent because a railway had come close

    317
    to a farm. The noble Marquess also said that the fair rents which were fixed immediately after 1881, were not fair rents at all. They admitted that these people were incapable of fixing fair rents, and yet they were now sending them out for another term of 15 years on their duties without any principle or guidance whatever. He believed in so far as it was possible to do so, that a great many of the effects of the re-valuation of 1881 not having been completed, were remedied by the Act of 1887, which was based on prices. With regard to what the noble Marquess said as to a fall prices not involving a fall of rent of similar or precisely the same amount, he thought the noble Marquess would recollect that he did ample justice to that argument in the speech in which he introduced the clause. Then the noble Marquess and the noble Lord opposite both addressed an argument founded on the novelty of the system. But though the actual system might be a novel one, the principle was not a novel one at all. It was really the principle on which they acted in making voluntary reductions of rent in England. All it asked was to extend for the benefit and guidance of those to whom they intrusted those enormous and irresponsible powers in Ireland, the same principle on which they gratuitously acted for the benefit of all parties concerned, and to their great advantage, he thought, in England. In view of the period of the Session at which they had arrived, and of the appeal of the noble Marquess, he would not press this clause further, but he ventured to hope that the next time that Government attempted a final and complete settlement of this question this principle would find such favour that it would be embodied in the Bill.
    Clause 3,—

    STATUTORY TERM AND BIGINNING OF JUDICIAL RENT.
    (1.) On the expiration of a statutory term in a present tenancy the tenancy shall continue a present tenancy subject to the same rent and conditions (including the statutory conditions) as during the statutory term, until the tenancy is determined, or a new statutory term for the holding begins, and an application to fix a fair rent may he made at any time during such continuance of the tenancy; and no objection to such application shall he allowed which could
    318
    have been but was not taken upon the application for a previous judicial rent, or being then term was overruled.
    (2.) Where the Court on application fix a judicial lent for a holding, the judicial rent and statutory term shall begin from the gale day next after the date of application, or, if a preceding statutory term is then current, from any later gale day on which that statutory term expires.
    (3.) The judicial lent fixed by order of the Court for a holding shall, as from the gale day from which it begins, be the rent payable by the tenant of the holding; and where it differs from the previous rent, whether or not a judicial rent, then in respect of the period which may have elapsed since the gale day from which it began, the difference, if the judicial rent so fixed is higher than the previous rent, shall be paid by the tenant, and if the judicial rent so fixed is lower, may, if it has been actually paid by the tenant, be deducted from any rent subsequently payable by him, unless the judicial rent exceeds fifty pounds a year, in which case the difference may be deducted from any rent subsequently payable by him to the landlord to whom such difference has been paid, or to his personal representatives, or where the estate of such landlord has determined may be recovered from such landlord or his personal representatives.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to insert at the end of the clause—
    "Provided that where the judicial rent does not exceed £50 a year, the amount made by the tenant may be recovered from the person to whom the difference was paid, or his personal representatives."
    The proviso, his Lordship said, enabled a new landlord, from whom a small tenant had deducted part of his payment of rent, to recover from the former landlord.
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 4,—

    JUDICIAL TERM IN CASES OF AGREEMENTS.
    In the case of a tenant who applied to the Court under Section sixty of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, on the first occasion on which it sat, to have a fair rent fixed, and who, since making that application, has signed an agreement under Sub-section (6) of Section eight of the said Act, the statutory term so created shall, where the judicial rent has been received as having accrued due from the gale day succeeding the date of application, for the purpose of an application to fix a fair rent, be held to date from the day on which the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, came into force.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to leave out from the words "gale day" to the end of the clause, and insert the word—
    "next after the day on which the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, came into force, be held for the purpose of an application to fix a fair rent to date from that gale day "
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 5,—

    EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN HOLDINGS.
    (1.) The Land Law Acts, except Section seven of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881 (which amends the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, in respect of compensation for improvements), shall not apply to the following tenancies:—
    (a.) To a tenancy in any holding which is not substantially either agricultural or pastoral in its character, or partly agricultural and partly pastoral, or the main object of the letting of which was for a residence:
    (b.) To a tenancy in any holding which substantially consists of—

    (i) land being or forming part of a home farm; or

    (ii) land which when first demised was demesne, and which the provisions of the contract of tenancy, or the circumstances of the case, show was intended to be preserved as demesne or resumed as demesne by the landlord; or

    (iii) land incorporated in a demesne by the tenant, and forming part of a demesne at the time the application to fix a fair rent is made:

    (c.) To a tenancy in a holding (other than a holding let to be used wholly or mainly for a dairy farm) which is let to be used wholly or mainly for the purpose of pasture—

    (i) if it is of the rateable value of upwards of fifty pounds; or

    (ii) if the tenant does not actually reside on the holding, or where the holding adjoins or is ordinarily used with another holding, then on the latter holding.

    (2.) Where a distinct and substantive part of the property held under one demise is demesne land, or is not agricultural or pastoral in its character, or is an incorporeal hereditament, and the court consider that that part is not the substantial part of such property, the court may, if they are of opinion that, apart from the fixing of a fair rent, the separation of the property into two parts will not diminish the value of the landlord's interest therein, direct that that part shall thenceforth be, or, if it is an incorporeal hereditament, be treated as, a separate holding, and shall, unless the tenancy has expired, be held at such rent during the continuance of the tenancy as the court determine to be the proper proportion of the rent reserved by the demise,
    320
    and the court may fix a fair rent for the remainder of the property held under the demise, and the said Acts shall apply to that remainder as if it were a separate holding.
    (3.) Where a holding is held by joint tenants or tenants in common, and such tenants have worked and occupied separate portions thereof, and the division of the holding was made prior to the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, the court, on the application of any joint tenant or tenant in common, may, if it think that it is just, and that no portion of the holding, when divided, will be of less than ten pounds valuation, fix a fair rent upon the portion of the holding so separately occupied.
    (4.) Nothing in this section shall extend to any holding in respect of which a judicial rent has been fixed before the commencement of this Act.
    THE EARL OF BELMOREmoved to omit the words "during the continuance of the tenancy."
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE EARL OF BELMOREmoved the following proviso to Sub-section (2):—
    "Provided, however, that the tenancy in respect of the portion so treated as a separate holding shall be determinable at any time by the landlord on giving six calendar months' previous notice of his intention so to do."
    The object of the proviso was to provide that if a holding, partly agricultural and partly non-agricultural, had been divided and, therefore, one part of it was outside the Act, it should be in the power of the landlord, on giving six months' notice, to resume possession of that part which was not under the Land Acts.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid he was afraid they could not accept the Amendment. If the tenancy was a tenancy-at-will the landlord could, of course, terminate the tenancy of that part of the holding which the Court decided not to be within the Land Acts; but if the tenancy were a leasehold then they thought that the lease should run on, and that the tenant should hold both that part of the holding which came under the Acts and that which did not come under the Acts, according to the terms of his covenant.
    Amendment by leave, withdrawn.
    The EARL of ARRANhad an Amendment on the Paper to leave out Subsection (3), but before his Lordship moved,
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid the House was rather in a singular position with regard to this sub-section. He was told that it was, as a matter of fact, struck out of the Bill in Committee, but it was printed in its place in the Bill. He presumed they must regard it as not, strictly speaking, in the Bill. He had, however, a suggestion to make to the noble Earl, and that was that they should reinstate the sub-section in the Bill, striking out the words, "that no portion of the holding, when divided, will be of less than £10 valuation," and then putting in at the end of the clause, with the object of protecting the landlord in the manner which the noble Earl desired, these words:—
    "Provided that such order fixing a fair rent shall not have the effect of increasing the liability of the landlord for rates and taxes in respect of the holding, and such order shall not he made if the Court are of opinion that the interests of the landlord in the holding will lie injuriously affected thereby otherwise than by the mere fixing of a fair rent."
    It seemed to him that these words gave the landlord the full amount of protection which the noble Earl could desire for him.
    THE EARL OF ARRANacknowledged the courtesy of the noble Marquess for taking into consideration the mistake made in reference to this sub-section. He would just like to say that, though that was one of the objections put before him as to the clause, it was not the chief one, which was the permission to subdivide at all. If he was in order, he would suggest that the consideration of the matter might be put off for an hour or two, or until a later stage of the Bill. [Ministerial cries of "No, no!"] Under all the circumstances he would be disposed to accept the proposition made—["hear, hear!"]—but he thought the words "consent in writing" by the landlord might be inserted. ["No, no!"] Did he understand the noble Marquess to consent to this?
    *THE MARQUESS OK LANSDOWNEsaid it would be impossible to accept those words. As he was advised, the clause was intended to deal with cases
    322
    of joint tenancy where the tenants held in a sort of rundale, and where a de facto division of the holding had taken place, each tenant taking a section of the holding but remaining liable for the rent of the whole. It would be an unheard-of thing that the consent of the landlord in writing to the division of the holding should be obtained. If that was stipulated, the effect would be to render the clause absolutely nugatory.
    THE EARL OF ARRANsaid that, as he understood the clause, it would only come into effect where tenants occupied separate portions. He did not understand that rundale would be affected by it.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid the original tenancy would have been a joint tenancy, and the tenants would subsequently have divided it among themselves.
    VISCOUNT DE VESCIappealed to the Government to postpone the sub-section to a later stage in order that it might be more fully understood. ["No, no!"]
    LORD MONTEAGLEalso made an appeal that the matter might be postponed.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORput the Question that the sub-section, as amended, be reinstated, and declared "The Contents have it." Immediately several Lords exclaimed, "Not-content!" and, after the lapse of a few seconds,
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR,addressing the Earl of Arran, said, "Do I understand the noble Lord to challenge a Division?"
    THE EARL OF ARRAN: Yes.
    The House was cleared for a Division, but, on the Question again being put,
    THE LORD CHANCELLORdeclared, "The Contents have it."
    Sub-section ordered to be re-inserted.
    Clause 6,—

    EXCLUSION BY SUB-LETTING OF HOLDING.
    (1) For the purpose of the Land Law Acts, the tenant of a holding shall be deemed to be in bona fide occupation thereof notwithstanding—

    (a) that any dwelling-house on the holding, not being the dwelling in which the tenant for the time being resides, and not having been erected by the tenant in breach of his contract of tenancy or

    323
    of a statutory condition, is sublet to or in the occupation of another person; or

    (b) that any other part of the holding is, otherwise than in breach of the contract of tenancy or of a statutory condition, sublet to or in the occupation of another person, if the sub-letting was made before the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, or if it was substantially in substitution for a letting existing at that date; provided that the amount of land so sub-let shall not exceed one-eighth of the holding, nor one statute acre for each house or allotment, nor five acres in the aggregate.

    Provided also that—

    (i) for the purpose of the foregoing provisions of this section, a breach of the contract of tenancy shall not he deemed to have taken place if the landlord waived such breach;

    (ii) the foregoing provisions of this section shall not apply unless the Court think it reasonable to entertain the application having regard to the acreage of the holding and to any other matter which they think should be taken into consideration, and the Court may entertain the application notwithstanding that any such house or part of a holding is occupied by a person to whom it has been sub-let in contravention of Section two of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881.

    (2.) Where a part of the property held under one demise is sub-let, and the property was let to the tenant subject to the tenancy of some other person in the part sub-let, the Court may, in any case to which Sub-section (1) of this section does not apply, direct that the part so sub-let shall thenceforth be, or if it is an incorporeal hereditament be treated as, a separate holding, and (unless the application to the Court is made on the expiration of a lease) that the same shall be held during the continuance of the tenancy at such rent as the Court determine to be the proper proportion of the rent reserved by the demise, and the Court may fix a fair rent for the remainder of the property held under the demise, and the Land Law Acts as amended by this Act shall apply to that remainder, as if it were a separate holding.
    Provided that, if the landlord so elect, the Court shall, in any case to which this sub-section applies, order that the tenant of the part so sub-let shall he the tenant of such landlord as his immediate landlord.
    (3.) The sub-letting of any such dwelling-house as is referred to in Sub-section (1) (a) of this section during the continuance of a statutory term or after its expiration shall not be deemed to he a breach of any statutory condition, nor shall the Second section of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, apply to any such sub-letting, whether made before or after passing of this Act.
    THE EARL OF ARRANmoved, in paragraph (a), Sub-section (1), after the word "condition," to insert the words" or enactment." He said the Amendment was intended to provide that the subletting referred to in the clause should not include sub-letting contrary to the Act of 1881.
    *LORD ASHBOURNEsaid the introduction of the word "enactment" in line 2 did not appear necessary, and in line 5, as the next Amendment proposed would be contradictory of the later words of the clause.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    THE EARL OF ARRANsaid he would also ask leave to withdraw the next Amendment, namely, after the word "condition" to insert the word "enactment."
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    THE EARL OF ARRANmoved, in paragraph (b), Sub-section (1), after the word "person," to insert the words:—
    "unless it be shown that such sub-letting was made by the tenant for the purpose of making a profit by the sub-letting, or not solely for the duo cultivation of his holding and."
    He said he understood that the object of this clause was to prevent sub-letting being made for purposes of profit—that the sub-letting should be confined to what was necessary for the due cultivation of the holding. But as the clause now stood, he believed there was nothing in it to prevent the tenant building dwelling-houses on his holding not necessary to its due cultivation and letting them out for profit. None of those houses would be under the clause. It seemed to him that a tenant in this way might build and sub-let any number of houses on his holding without any regard to the area specified.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid he feared the Amendment would narrow the operation of the section more than was desirable. The effect of the Amendment would be to render it impossible for a farmer to sub-let a cottage except to a labourer on the farm. Let them take the case, for example, of an arable farm which had been laid down

    325
    to grass. A number of cottages appropriate to an arable farm might be built on that farm, but the same number of houses would cease to be appropriate when the farm was laid down to grass. Why should not one of those cottages be sub-let to a suitable tenant?
    THE EARL OF ARRANsaid he had in his mind that under the clause the tenant might be able to build a villa on his holding in the proximity of a town, the effect of which might be to prevent the landlord ever resuming the land for building purposes.
    LORD HARLECHthought that if they allowed any number of cottages to be erected on a farm, they would soon have to put the Congested Districts Act into force.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid that the erection of such buildings as the noble Earl contemplated would be a breach of the statutory condition.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to transpose Sub-section (3), placing it before Sub-section (2).
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 8,—

    TURBARY AND OTHER PROFITS, EASEMENTS, AND PRIVILEGES.
    Where on an application to fix the fair rent for a holding it is proved to the Court that the tenant of the holding, by virtue of his tenancy, has by the permission of the landlord been accustomed to exercise any privilege over land belonging to the landlord, the withholding of which privilege would materially diminish the value of the holding to the tenant, the landlord shall be required to elect whether he will or will not allow the tenant to exercise as of right during the statutory term, under the same restrictions and conditions as theretofore, that which he previously exorcised by permission, and, if the landlord consents to so allow, such exercise shall be secured to the tenant by the order fixing the fair rent, and if the landlord refuses to so allow, the fair rent shall be fixed having regard to such refusal.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved, after the word "theretofore," to insert the words "or such other restrictions and conditions as may be agreed on by the landlord and tenant." He said that this and the following Amendment were additions to the new clause with regard
    326
    to turbary and easements. They had not provided for the enforcement of necessary regulations for the exercise of these privileges, and the two Amendments enabled the Court to make arrangements for their being exercised in a manner consistent with the interests of the estate and consistent with the practice and usage which had hitherto been followed. ["Hear, hear!"]
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved, at the end of the clause, to insert the following new Sub-section:—
    "(2.) Where an Order securing the exercise of any such privilege is so made, the Court, during the continuance of the statutory term, may, upon the application of the landlord or of any other tenant exercising the like privilege, restrain the tenant from exercising the privilege in any manner than that authorised by the Order or by any reasonable regulations of the landlord made in pursuance of the Order."
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 9,—

    LETTINGS BY PERSONS NOT ABSOLUTE OWNERS.
    (1.) The Land Law Acts shall apply and be deemed to have always applied in the case of tenancies created by a limited owner or by a mortgagor or mortgagee in possession, and the tenancies shall not be or be deemed to have been determined (except in the case of fraud or collusion or a letting at a gross undervalue) by the cesser of the interest or possession of such limited owner, mortagor or mortgagee, and the person entitled on such cesser to receive the rent of the holding shall stand in the relation of landlord to the tenant of the holding, and have the rights and be subject to the obligations of landlord accordingly.
    (2.) Provided that, where a fair rent has been fixed after the passing of this Act in the case of a tenancy to which this section applies, the person entitled on the said cesser to receive the rent of the holding may, within the prescribed time after becoming entitled to receive such rent, apply to the Court in the prescribed manner, and the Court, after giving such person and the tenant of the holding an opportunity of being heard, may proceed as follows:—

    (a) if of opinion that by reason of a fine or premium having been paid the rent was reduced, or that otherwise the fair rent fixed was unreasonable, the Court, may vary the fair rent; and

    (b) if of opinion that a fair rent ought not to have been fixed, the Court shall declare that the said person and the tenant shall be in the same position as if this section had not been enacted.

    (3.) This section shall not apply to a tenancy created by a limited owner in a holding the substantial part of which at the date of the letting was demesne land, whore the mansion-house is let with such demesne land, or the application of the Land Law Acts to the tenancy would materially diminish the value as a residence of the mansion-house situate on and theretofore occupied with the demesne.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved, in Sub-section (2), to leave out the words—
    "has been fixed after the passing of this Act," and to insert the words "has, after the passing of this Act, been fixed for the first time."
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 10,—

    TENANCY NOT INVALIDATED BY REASON OF SUB-LETTING BY LANDLORD.
    A contract of tenancy entered into, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, by a landlord in violation, either of the Act of the seventh year of the reign of King George the Fourth, chapter twenty-nine, intituled "An Act to amend the law of Ireland respecting the assignment and sub-letting of lands and tenements," or of an agreement against subletting in his lease, shall not as between him and the tenant holding under such contract be, or be deemed to have been, void or voidable, and a superior landlord shall be deemed to have expressed a sufficient consent, in the manner in which the consent is required by law to be expressed to a sub-letting made in violation of such Act or agreement, unless within a reasonable time after the sub-letting came to the knowledge of himself, or his agent, he served on the lessee or sub-tenant notice of his dissent from the sub-letting, or instituted a proceeding against the lessee founded upon the said violation.
    LORD MONTEAGLEmoved, after the words "of this Act by," to leave out the word "a" and to insert the words "an immediate." He had put down the Amendment merely for the purpose of raising a drafting question which he put to the noble Marquess in Committee. To the ordinary layman he thought it would appear obvious that the words "landlord" in the second line of the clause and "lessee" in the last-line but two, which words seemed to refer to the same person, would be more conveniently covered by one expression. He therefore suggested the insertion of the words "an immediate landlord" in both cases. In both cases the middleman was the person referred to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEadmitted that at first sight the wording was a little puzzling, but he had had the point inquired into, and he was assured the wording of the clause was perfectly correct as it now stood.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Clause 15,—

    EJECTMENTS FOR NONPAYMENT OF RENT IN CASE OF HOLDINGS UNDER LAND LAW ACTS.
    In the case of any ejectment which shall be or has been brought for the nonpayment of the rent of a holding to which the Land Law Acts as amended by this Act apply, where the rent in arrear exceeds two years' rent, the tenant may pay, tender, deposit, or lodge, under sections sixty to seventy-one of the Landlord and Tenant Law Amendment Act (Ireland), 1860, the sum of two years' rent instead of the sums therein respectively required to be paid, tendered, deposited, or lodged, and upon such tender, payment, deposit, or lodgment, the tenant shall be in the same position under those sections as if two years' rent were the sum due for rent up to the gale day preceding such tender, payment, deposit, or lodgment; and the balance of the rent due to such gale day shall he recoverable by the landlord as if the same were a debt due to him by the occupying tenant, but shall not be recovered by ejectment for nonpayment of rent or distress. Provided, however, that this section shall not apply to any proceeding in ejectment in which an Order has been or shall be made under the Thirtieth section of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, nor to any arrears of rent the subject of any such Order.
    VISCOUNT DE VESCImoved, after the words "sum of two years' rent," to insert the words—
    "together with the costs on the undertaking in respect thereof by the said Act required."
    The Amendment was practically the same he moved in Committee when the Government promised to consider the matter by Report. In all legislation subsequent to 1860, costs were expressly mentioned, and he thought it would be satisfactory if the noble Marquess could consent to the insertion of the words.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid he was told the clause as it stood met his noble Friend's object, but they were willing to insert words which would render the point no longer doubtful. In line 26 he proposed to insert after the

    329
    word "lodged" the words "in respect of the rent und arrears exclusive of the costs"; and after the word "however" in line 27 the words, as a new section, "but nothing herein contained shall relieve the tenant from paying or undertaking to pay costs as provided in the sub-section."
    VISCOUNT DE VESCIasked leave to withdraw his Amendment
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved after the word "lodged" to insert the words "in respect of rent and arrears exclusive of the costs."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to insert after the words "Provided, however" as a new sub-section, the words—
    (2.) "But nothing heroin contained shall relieve the tenant from paying or undertaking to pay costs as provided in the sub-section."
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTHregretted that his noble Friend had not been able to insert in the clause some words which would have the effect of saving the hanging gale in the case of a great number of estates. As the clause now stood a landlord would be compelled where a tenant owed one year's rent immediately to take ejectment proceedings. This morning he received a letter from Lord Carlingford, in which that nobleman said the effect would be very mischievous, not so much in the interest of the landlord, but in the interest of the tenants. ["Hear, hear!"] On Lord Carlingford's estate there had been the custom of a hanging gale for one year, and the noble Lord looked with considerable apprehension on the very invidious position in which he would now be placed, for he would be practically compelled, at the very moment a tenant owed him one year's rent, to issue ejectment proceedings. The clause would result in hardship to a large class of tenants throughout Ireland.
    THE LORD CHANCELLORreminded the noble Earl that there was no Amendment before the House.
    THE EARL OF PORTSMOUTH, to put himself in order, formally moved the following subsection:—
    "Provided, however, that, in the case of any holding comprised in an estate upon which the usage known as hanging gale or gales prevails, such gale or gales of rent shall not for the purpose of this section be deemed to be rent in arrear and shall not be affected by anything contained in this section."
    The present effect of the clause would in the case of many estates—large estates—which had been most kindly managed, be that in order to protect themselves the landlords would have to take short proceedings against their tenants. The object of all Irish land legislation was to, wherever possible, recognise customs and not to put landlords and tenants in any prejudiced position because of prevailing customs.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid the clause was not drafted with any idea of interfering with the customary arrangements between landlord and tenant peculiar to different estates, but he thought it quite possible that the noble Lord was right in believing that the clause would have a certain effect upon those estates where it had been usual to collect rent six months or 12 months in arrear. He had considered carefully whether it was possible to devise any means of meeting these cases, but he found it entirely impossible to do so without running counter to what he conceived to be the avowed intention of the clause. The intention of the clause was that, where a tenant owed a considerable number of years' rent, he should be allowed to tender two years' arrears in in so far as proceedings by ejectment payment, and that thereupon he should, for non-payment of rent were concerned, be discharged of all liability, except in respect of earlier arrears, which his landlord could recover from him, not by ejectment for non-payment of rent, but by the remedies of an ordinary creditor. If they had attempted in this clause so to arrange matters that the tenant on coming out of court, and after paying two years' arrears to his landlord, still had attached to him the liability for an arrear of twelve months under the head of what was commonly known as the hanging gale, they would, he conceived, have departed from the principle of the

    331
    clause. The noble Lord might be correct in saying that the effect of the change in the law might in some cases be to drive landlords to insist upon more punctual payment of the tenants' obligations. If that led to any hardship or ill-feeling no one would, he was sure, regret it more than the noble Lord or himself, but he had found it quite impossible to alter the clause in the direction the noble Earl suggested.
    LORD HARLECHthought the case might be met by inserting "three years" for "two years." That would include any hanging gale there might be. [A laugh.]
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Clause 18,—

    AMENDMENT AS TO MORTGAGE OR SETTLEMENT OF HOLDINGS.
    The alienation to one person only of a holding by way of mortgage, or family settlement, or where marriage forms a portion of the consideration, or otherwise than for consideration in money or money's worth, shall he subject to the provisions of Sub-section six of Section one of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, but shall not in other respects be deemed a sale within the meaning of that section.
    *THE MAEQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to insert the words:—
    "subject to the provisions of Sub-section six of Section one of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, but shall not in other respects be deemed a sale within the meaning of that section,"
    and to insert instead thereof the words:—
    "a sale within the moaning of section one of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, but the provisions of the several sub-sections thereof other than Sub-section (6), shall not apply thereto."
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 2,—

    GROUND OF APPEAL TO BE STATED.
    Rules under Section 50 of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, may provide that, subject to the qualifications (if any) contained in those rules, every notice of appeal under the Land Law Acts shall state the grounds of appeal, and on the hearing of the appeal no grounds of appeal shall, save by leave of the court, he entered into except those so stated. For the purpose of this section, "appeal" includes "rehearing."
    THE EARL OF BELMOREmoved to leave out the words, "for the purpose of this section 'appeal' includes 'rehearing.'" Under the clause as it stood the appellant was bound to state the grounds of appeal, and on the hearing of the appeal to confine himself to the grounds stated. This provision was calculated to increase costs by compelling the appellant to get his appeal stated by counsel. The effect of his Amendment would be to enable the appellant to bring up other points, particularly points of law.
    *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND (LORD ASHBOURNE)said his noble Friend was labouring under an erroneous impression as to the effect of the clause. The word "appeal" by itself was too narrow, and it was desirable to deal with all forms of re-hearings and appeals to the Land Commission. His noble Friend seemed to be under the impression that additional cost would be incurred by the appellant being compelled to state the heads of his appeal. But that was done now, and there was no reason to anticipate any addition to the cost.
    Amendment by leave withdrawn.
    Clause 28,—

    AS TO GUARANTEE DEPOSIT.
    (1.) The Land Commission, on making an advance, may dispense with the whole or any part of the guarantee deposit being made or retained if they think the security for the repayment of the advance is sufficient without it.
    (2.) The Land Commission may, if they think fit, on application, pay to the person entitled thereto the whole or any part of the guarantee deposit made or retained in respect of advances under the Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1891, except in a case where any part of the deposit has been actually applied in pursuance of the Land Purchase Acts.
    (3.) In the case of any advance made otherwise than under the Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1891, the Land Commission may pay out of the guarantee deposit to the person entitled thereto a sum equal to the portion of the advance which at the end of any decade is ascertained under the provisions of this Act to have been repaid.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (2) after "Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1891," to insert "or the Redemption of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1891."
    Amendment agreed to.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEalso moved to insert the same words "1891" in Sub-section (3.)
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 30,—

    EXTINGUISHMENT OF SUPERIOR INTERESTS.
    (1.) Where any land has been sold under the Land Purchase Acts, as amended by this Act, or where a lessor or grantor has signified his consent to the Redemption of Kent (Ireland) Act, 1891, a Land Judge may, if he think fit, order that the sale of such land, or the sale consequent on the lodgment of such consent, as the case may be, shall be made discharged from superior interests as defined by this section or from any of them, and in every such case the land shall be vested accordingly, and such superior interests, or the value thereof, shall become a lien upon, and to be redeemed or satisfied out of the purchase money of such land.
    (2.) The powers of apportionment given to the Land Commission by Section ten of the Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1885, and Section sixteen of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, shall extend to superior interests and be exercised in such manner as shall appear equitable, and shall not be limited to an apportionment between the land sold and the residue of the land subject to the superior interest.
    (3.) The price or compensation to be paid in respect of a superior interest, or of any apportioned part thereof, shall be determined in the manner provided by Sub-section (3) of Section sixteen of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, for the redemption of annuities, rent-charges, and rents: Provided that, if a Land Judge is of opinion that any such superior interest is of no appreciable value to the persons entitled thereto, the purchase money of the land may be distributed without regard to such superior interest.
    (4.) If a superior interest, or the benefit arising thereunder, is settled land within the meaning of the Settled Land Act, 1882 to 1890, the person who constitutes the tenant for life, or who has the powers of a tenant for life under those Acts, shall have power to enter into any consent in relation to the sale being made discharged from such superior interest, and to the redemption or satisfaction of the same out of purchase money.
    (5.) Where a superior interest is subject to an incumbrance as defined by the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, the Land Judge shall, for the purpose of distribution of the price or compensation payable in respect of such superior interest, have the same powers as if such incumbrance had been charged directly upon the land sold.
    (6.) Superior interest shall include any rent, rent charge, annuity, fees, duties, or services payable or to be rendered in respect of the land sold to any person, including Her Majesty and
    334
    Her successors, and any exceptions, reservations, covenants, conditions, or agreements contained in any fee-farm grant, or other conveyance in fee, or lease under which such land is held, and, if such land is held under a lease for lives or years, renewable for ever, or for a term of years of which not less than sixty are unexpired at the date of the sale, shall include any reversion or estate expectant on the determination of such lease or expiration of such term, and notwithstanding that such reversion or estate may be vested in Her Majesty and Her successors.
    (7.) Nothing in this section shall affect the rights of the public or of any class of the public in respect of the land sold, or the rights of any person or persons in respect of the waters of any stream or watercourse or of any right of way.
    (8.) The Land Commission or the High Court shall not in any case be empowered to make any further requisition as to title than a purchaser would be entitled to make under the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, or any Act amending the same.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (1) to leave out the words "a Land Judge may, if he think fit, order that."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (1) to leave out the word "from," ("from superior interests,") and to insert instead thereof the word "all."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved at the end of Sub-section (1) to insert the full and new Sub-section.
    "2. A vesting order shall be subject to such exceptions and reservations as are specified in the order, if they were contained in the agreement for purchase or subsequently agreed to by the vendor and purchaser and have been approved by the Land Commission, and the Land Commission are satisfied that the effect of such exceptions and reservations was explained to and understood by the purchaser, or the purchaser is represented by a solicitor other than the solicitor of the vendor."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (3) to leave out the words "a Land Judge is," and to insert instead thereof the words "the Court are."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (5) to leave out the words" Land Judge," and to insert instead thereof the word "Court."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to insert at the begining of Sub-section (6) the words "the expression."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (6) after the words "successors, and any," to insert the word "estate."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (8) to leave out the words "further requisition as to title than a purchaser would be entitled to make under," and to insert instead thereof the words "requisition as to title, the making of which by a purchaser would be prevented by."
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 31,—

    FRAMING OF AND DISPENSING WITH VESTING ORDER AND REGISTRATION OF TITLE ON PURCHASE.
    (1.) The Land Commission shall prepare the vesting order, or if they see ht to dispense therewith, shall fiat the agreement for the purchase of the holding, subject to such conditions, exceptions, and modifications as they think necessary; and on the advance being paid into the High Court, such fiat shall have effect as if it were a vesting order made by the Commission in relation to the holding purchased, and the provisions of this Act referring to vesting orders shall apply and be construed accordingly.
    (2.) The Land Commission shall, immediately after the vesting order or fiat, prepare and transmit to the registering authority under the Local Registration of Title (Ireland) Act, 1891, the prescribed particulars as to the holding, in order that the title of the purchaser to the ownership of the holding may be registered pursuant to that Act.
    (3.) Section thirty-four of the said Act (which relates to the correction and rectification of the register) shall extend to a vesting order or fiat as if it were the register, save that the jurisdiction of the Court for the purposes of this Act shall be exorcised by the Land Commission.
    (4.) An agreement for purchase, a vesting order, or fiat, shall not operate to convert the interest of the purchaser into real estate.
    LORD INCHIQUINmoved to omit Sub-section (1). He thought it would be
    336
    better for all concerned that the landlord's solicitor, who was certain to be fully acquainted with all the circumstances of the holding, should continue to prepare the vesting order. If the duty of preparing it were thrown upon the Land Commission, they would have to summon the solicitor to the vendor in each case—which would increase the costs—and they would have to engage a large staff of additional clerks to do the work.
    *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELANDsaid the provision which the noble Lord proposed to omit was inserted by the Government in order to facilitate and quicken, and it might be cheapen, the purchase operations of the Land Commission. It was found that the present arrangement, by which the solicitor to the vendor provided the vesting order, was sometimes the cause of delay, as the Land Commission had to wait until the solicitor brought in the vesting order. It had been found necessary that the preparation of the vesting order should be made more rapid; but the change proposed would not dispense the solicitors of the parties from the duty of seeing that the vesting order was in proper shape. He could not see that the proposal would lead to any increase of cost, and it would certainly lead to a substantial decrease of delay. As to the fiat, the Land Commission would only proceed by fiat when the vesting order was dispensed with; and as the whole proceedings were in the hands of competent lawyers, the fiat would never be substituted for the vesting order unless it was desirable.
    LORD INCHIQUINthought it would lead to much less trouble if the vesting order were left to the landlord's soliciter. But, of course, the noble and learned Lord's statement altered the case, and he should not press the Amendment.
    LORD MACNACHTENsuggested the addition of some words which would indicate that it was the duty of the Land Commission to prepare the vesting order with reasonable dispatch. There was nothing in the clause to put any time limit to the task.
    *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELANDthought the words suggested would be unnecessary.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Clause 32,

    AS TO REDEMPTION OR APPORTIONMENT OF ANNUITIES, BENT-CHARGES, ETC., UNDER 50 AND 51 VIC, C. 33, SS. 15, 16.
    (1.) For the purpose of the distribution of, or other dealing with, an advance paid into the High Court under this Act, Sections 15 and 16 of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, and any other unrepealed enactment in the Land Purchase Acts, or this Act, relating to the redemption or apportionment of charges on holdings, or otherwise to the distribution of the purchase-money of a holding, shall apply as if the High Court were the Land Commission and the money paid into that Court were the bidding.
    (2.) Where any annuity, rent-charge, or rent, ordered under the said sections to be redeemed is subject to any incumbrance as defined by the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887, the High Court shall have the same power in relation to that incumbrance under the said Section 15 as that Court would have if the incumbrance were charged upon the land sold.
    (3.) For the purpose of an agreement respecting the redemption price of any annuity, rent-charge, or rent apportioned under the said Section 16, the High Court may determine the parties by whom such agreement may be made or by whom the consent may be given for the determination of the price by the High Court.
    (4.) The said sections, as amended by this section, shall apply to any contingent liability for any annuity, rent-charge, or rent, in like manner as they apply to the annuity, rent-charge, or rent itself, and where any contingent liability has no appreciable value, the money may be distributed without regard to such liability.
    Amendments made:—Words in Subsection (1) "paid into the High Court under this Act" struck out; words in Sub-section (1) "the High Court were the Land Commission, and the money paid into that Court" omitted, and words "the money" inserted instead thereof; word "High" struck out from Sub-section (2) and Sub-section (3); word "contingent," occurring twice in Sub-section (4), struck out.—(Marquess of Lansdowne.)
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to insert the following new subsection:—
    "(5.) Where any liability for any annuity, rent-charge, or rent is apportioned and redeemed out of the purchase-money and a right of indemnity in respect of such liability exists, the person entitled to the purchase-money shall be entitled to the proportion of the annuity, rent-charge, or rent so redeemed, in like manner as if he had purchased the same, and the Court, after due notice to all persons interested, shall make provision as to the future payment of such
    338
    portion of the annuity, rent-charge, or rent so purchased, and as to the laud to be liable thereto, and such other provisions as appear to the Court necessary for carrying into effect this enactment."
    LORD MACNAGHTENasked whether this sub-section was necessary? It was very complicated, and had the curious effect of compelling the man who sold to buy an annuity. He was not at all sure that the Land Commission would have jurisdiction over the person with whom it was proposed to deal—not the landlord or the tenant, but some person who was indemnifying the land from the rent-charge.
    *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELANDsaid that the clause had been drawn by those specially competent to deal with the question. He was assured that the clause was necessary and workable.
    Amendment agreed to.
    LORD INCHIQUINmoved, to leave out Clause 32, as he was informed that it was practically provided for by the new Clause 30.
    *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND: It is not all provided for.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Clause 33,—

    AS TO EASEMENTS, ETC., WHEN VESTING ORDER IS MADE.
    (1.) A holding vested in a purchaser by a vesting order under this Act shall continue to have appurtenant thereto and to be subject to, as the case may be, any previously existing easements, rights, and appurtenances; and any privilege previously in fact enjoyed, whether by permission of the landlord or otherwise, in such manner and for such time that, if the holding had belonged to a different owner from the rest of the estate, it would have been an easement or right, shall be an easement or right within the meaning of this section, and shall be appurtenant to or exercisable over the holding, as the case may be.
    (2.) The vesting order may, if the Land Commission think fit, declare that the sale is made subject to or free from any particular easement, right or appurtenance, and such declaration shall have full effect.
    (3.) This section shall extend to any sale on declaration of title made by the Land Judge in pursuance of the Landed Estates Court (Ireland) Act, 1858, in like manner as if it were herein re-enacted with the necessary modifications.
    LORD INCHIQUINmoved, at the end of the clause, to insert the words,—
    "Provided, however, that this section shall not apply to any privilege enjoyed by permission of the landlord, or otherwise over lands in the occupation of such landlord."
    He said that it would be exceedingly obnoxious to the landlord if the words of the clause were extended over land which he had in his occupation after the tenancy had ceased.
    THE EARL OF BELMOREsaid that this was the clause on which her Majesty's Government obtained the solitary victory on Friday. He then moved an Amendment which was consequential to the striking out of Clause 8 and the substitution of another clause. The present Amendment provided that, if a landlord had sold a farm to one of his tenants, and that tenant had had the privilege of cutting bog, for instance, the landlord should be at liberty to reserve to himself his own bog, having no longer any connection with the tenant.
    *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELANDsaid that the Amendment was out of keeping with the structure of the clause. If a tenant had enjoyed rights or easements over a property owned by someone not his own landlord for a certain number of years, he would have a legal title to those easements. But, in consequence of the law of common ownership, the tenant would have no legal title if the property were that of his own landlord. This was felt to be a hardship. The Amendment of his noble Friend suggested that, although it might be reasonable to give these rights over the land of other tenants of the landlords, it would not be reasonable if the lands chanced to be in the occupation of the landlord himself. But his noble Friend would see that the rights, to be good and made legal, should be in use and operation for a great number of years, sufficiently long to have given a clear and absolute legal right in the event of these being not over the property of the same landlord, and that was thought to be safeguarded by the circumstance that it must be upon clear recognised use going back a great number of years. He did not think there would be any foundation for distinguishing lands that chanced to be in the occupation of the landlord from those in the occupation of
    340
    his tenants. This was a reciprocal clause. From its construction it would be seen that if the tenant had over his own farm certain rights in the habit of being used by other people, they were preserved against him, and this was to be borne in mind.
    LORD MACNAGHTENsaid this was not confined to easements but rights. What rights were in contemplation of the authors of the Act? What was the meaning of "shall be appurtenant to or shall be exercisable over the holding"?
    *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELANDsaid the words were intended to deal with the double aspect of the matter. If the tenant was in the habit of using them he was to retain them, but if other people were in the habit of exercising rights over his land they were to retain those rights.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    THE EARL OF ARRANmoved, in Sub-section (1), after the words "purchaser shall," to insert the words "in the event of the sale being carried out." He said that in the Act of 1888 this provision existed, and the vendor was discharged from all liability in respect of rent and arrears from the date of the conveyance being sanctioned. He submitted that it was necessary that the words of the Amendment should be inserted.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: I am assured that this is unnecessary, and the point the noble Earl is anxious to safeguard is covered by the words, a few lines further down, "if the advance is refused the agreement shall be void."
    THE EARL OF ARRAN: That is not the point. When the sale has been sanctioned the tenant may refuse to carry out his agreement.
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 39,—

    SALES UNDER THE LANDED ESTATES COURT ACT.
    (1.) Where an absolute order for the sale of an estate, comprising holdings to which this section applies, has been made under the Landed Estates Court (Ireland) Act, 1858, and either a receiver has been appointed over the estate or the estate is so circumstanced that it would independently of this Act he sold without the

    341
    consent of the owner as to price, the following provisions shall have effect:—

    (a.) The Land Commission shall, at the request of the Land Judge, cause the estate to he inspected, and a report to he made by two Commissioners respecting the estate, and the circumstances thereof, and the price at, and the conditions under which, the sale of the holdings to the tenants under the Land Purchase Acts can properly be made.

    (b.) The Land Judge, after giving all parties, including the tenants, an opportunity of being heard, and considering the report and any offers that may be made for the purchase of the estate or any part thereof, and any other matters that may be brought before him, and the general circumstances of the estate, shall make to the person appearing to be in occupation as tenant of each holding on the estate, an offer to sell to him the fee simple of the holding, and the arrears of rent then due from him in respect thereof, at such price, and subject to such conditions, whether as to the payment of part of the price in cash, or as to the offer to one tenant being conditional on the acceptance by other tenants of the offers made to them within a limited time, or otherwise, as the Land Judge may consider reasonable and just having regard to the interest of all persons interested in the estate.

    (c.) The offer shall be communicated in such manner as the Land Commission think fit to the person appearing to be in occupation as tenant, and if it is accepted, then, on fulfilment of the conditions, the said person shall be deemed to have agreed to purchase the holding within the meaning of the Land Purchase Acts, and the sale shall be completed accordingly.

    (d.) If it appears to the Land Judge that the tenants of holdings on the estate to the extent of not less than three-fourths in number and value according to the rateable value under the Irish Valuation Acts, have accepted the offers under this section, he may, if having regard to the circumstances of the case he thinks it expedient, order that the remaining tenants or any of them shall be deemed to have accepted the offers made to them, and this section and the Land Purchase Acts shall apply accordingly; provided that such order shall not apply to any tenant if the purchase-money of his holding would exceed the limitation on the amount of the advance imposed by Section two of the Purchase of Land (Ireland) Amendment Act, 1888, and the holding of such tenant shall not be taken into consideration in estimating the three-fourths above mentioned.

    (e.) Subject to the prescribed rules any person aggrieved by any Order of the Land
    342
    Judge made under this section may apply to the Court of Appeal to re-bear the matter, and the matter shall be reheard accordingly.

    (f.) Where a receiver has been appointed over part of an estate this section shall apply to that part in like manner as if it were an estate.

    (g.) The foregoing provisions of this section shall apply only to holdings which are agricultural or pastoral, or partly agricultural and partly pastoral.

    (2.) Any person in occupation of and paying rent for a parcel of land (including the owner of an estate in occupation of a mansion-house or demesne forming part of the estate) held under a letting by the Land Judge or Receiver Judge may agree to purchase such parcel of land, and the same shall be deemed a holding and such person a tenant, and the Land Judge or Receiver Judge, as the case may be, a landlord within the meaning of the Land Purchase Acts.
    (3.) At any time after an absolute Order for the sale of an estate or part of an estate has been made in pursuance of the Landed Estates Court (Ireland) Act, 1858, the foregoing provisions of this section so far as they are applicable may upon the application of the owner be applied to such estate, although a receiver has not been appointed over the estate, and the estate is not so circumstanced that it would, independently of this Act, be sold without the consent of the owner as to price; provided that no advance shall be made to the owner to purchase any mansion-house or demesne forming part of the estate.
    (4.) Rules under Part two of this Act may be made for carrying into effect this section.
    LORD INCHIQUINmoved, in Sub-section (1), to leave out the word "either" ("either a receiver"); and, further, to leave out the word "or" ("over the estate or"), and to insert instead thereof the word "and." The noble Lord said the object of the Amendment was to confine the Order for the sales mentioned in the clause to oases in which the estate was insolvent. There were many estates which were perfectly solvent, and if the clause remained as it was the Order must stand to have them sold. By making the alterations he suggested, the Court would be prevented from considering itself justified in selling up an estate which might in itself be perfectly solvent, because the clause provided that on every estate where a receiver had been appointed the Court must sell. Receivers were appointed in many cases where the mortgage interest was in arrear, or the case might be in lunacy.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid there was no ground for the apprehension expressed by the Mover of the

    343
    Amendment. The whole section was covered by the words in the first line, "where an absolute Order for the sale of the estate has been made." In the case of an estate owned by a minor or lunatic that condition would not be fulfilled, and, moreover, he understood that in the case of a minor it would be in the custody of the Lord Chancellor, who would take care no improper sale of the estate took place. No doubt it was extremely difficult to distinguish between an estate which could be described as a solvent, and one which could be described as an insolvent estate. The fact of the estate being in the charge of a receiver was one of the most satisfactory tests upon which they could depend, although it was not the only test. It was not desirable to make the alteration suggested.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    THE EARL OF BELMOREmoved, in paragraph (b), Sub-section (1), to leave out the word "shall," ("shall make to the person") and to insert instead thereof the words "may if he think fit." He said the effect of this would be to give the Land Judge discretion whether he would make over the estate to the tenant.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid the alteration would change the drift of the clause. As he understood, the Judge was vested with the fullest discretion with regard to the conditions upon which the sale might be allowed to proceed. But when once he was satisfied that the conditions were just and reasonable, it was intended that he should make an offer to the tenants. If the Amendment were adopted, the option given would be of an entirely different kind. He might be able to say that certain terms and conditions were fair and reasonable, and at the same time it might be open to him to deny to the tenants an opportunity of buying their farms.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved, in paragraph (b), Sub-section (1), to leave out the word "and" ("and the arrears of rent then due,") and to insert instead thereof the words "discharged from."
    Amendment agreed to.
    LORD ENCHIQUENmoved the omission of paragraph (d). He remarked that Irish landlords felt strongly that if the clause stood as it did it would be the first move towards compulsory purchase, because it provided that where sale was to be carried out it could be done compulsorily if three-fourths of the tenants agreed. His proposal was to leave that provision out, because they had a strong feeling that if the thin end of the wedge of compulsion was allowed to come in in this Act it would be used against them, and practically before long compulsory sale might be the result.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid the Government regarded this as a very important provision, and he thought the noble Lord's fear that it might contain what he called the "thin edge of the wedge of compulsion" was without sufficient foundation. The compulsion the noble Lord was apprehensive of was compulsion directed against the landlords, and used to compel them to part with their estates. The compulsion which this clause contemplated was a certain amount of compulsion, not on the landlords, but on a minority of the tenants in the interests of the majority. There might be a proposal for the sale of an estate upon equitable terms, approved by the Land Commission and the Land Judge, and greatly desired by the main body of the tenants. In a case of that kind would it be desirable that the whole transaction should be brought to an end because a minority of the tenants hung back and were averse to acquiring their farms? The adoption of the proposal would go very far towards jeopardising the success of the clause.
    *THE EARL OF ERNEsaid that on Friday night he moved the rejection of the clause, and stated fully his objection to the principle of compulsion, the germs of which appeared to lie in the sub-section, but it appeared to be thought that what he regarded as a dangerous experiment should be carried out. As he did not see how it could be, successfully, without this sub-section, he appealed to his noble Friend whether it was worth while to press the Amendment.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Clause 46,—

    APPLICATION TO LAND COMMISSION FOR RE-INSTATEMENT OF TENANT OR FOR PURCHASE OF HOLDING.
    (1.) Where the tenancy of a holding has been determined at any time after the first day of May, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-nine, the landlord or the former tenant of the holding, or both jointly may, within twelve months of the commencement of this Act, apply in the prescribed manner to the Land Commission to act as mediators with a view to the reinstatement of the tenant in the holding or with a view to the purchase of the holding by the tenant.
    (2.) Upon any such joint application with a view to re-instatement, the Land Commission may declare the terms and conditions as to rent, and the payment of arrears or otherwise upon which they consider that it would be reasonable that the former tenant should be reinstated in the holding, and upon the parties consenting within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner, may make an order reinstating the tenant in his holding upon the said terms and conditions.
    (3.) Upon any such joint application with a view to the sale of the holding, the Land Commission may declare the amount of the advance which they are prepared to sanction, and the condition (if any) to be fulfilled previously to the making of such advance, and upon the parties consenting within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner, may order an advance subject to the said conditions in like manner as if an agreement had been made under Section thirteen of the Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1891, as re-enacted by this Act.
    (4.) Upon such application, whether for reinstatement or for a sale being made by either the landlord or former tenant of the holding, the Land Commission may, if they think fit after making such inquiry as they think advisable, serve in the prescribed manner upon the party not having made the application a notice calling upon him to state whether he consents to the application being treated as a joint application, and if the party so served does not within the prescribed time after such service object, a joint application within the meaning of the section shall be deemed to have been made for reinstatement or for a sale, as the case may be, and the Land Commission may thereupon proceed under that section accordingly.
    (5.) Every Order under this section shall be binding upon all persons, and be final and conclusive.
    (6.) An Order under this section shall not be made in the case of a holding which, on the first day of January One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, was in the occupation of a tenant.
    (7.) For the purposes of this section, the expression "former tenant" shall include the personal representative of the former tenant.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved in Sub-section (7), after the words
    346
    "shall include the," to insert the words "heir or"; and after the word "representative," to insert the words "as the case may be."
    Amendments agreed to.
    Clause 48,—

    SAVING OF ULSTER TENANT RIGHT CUSTOM.
    Nothing herein contained shall prejudice or affect any right, benefit, or presumption exercised or enjoyed under or by virtue of the Ulster tenant right custom or any usage corresponding thereto.
    *THIS MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to leave out the word "herein," and to insert instead thereof the words "in this Act."
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 49,—

    APPLICATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF PARTS OF ACT.
    (1.) Part One of this Act shall, save as is by this Art expressly provided, apply to every proceeding pending at the commencement of this Act.
    (2.) The provisions of this Act with respect to a vesting order shrill not apply to proceedings in respect of an advance sanctioned before the commencement of this Act, or of any agreement for the purchase of a term of years made before the commencement of this Act, and the enactments relative to such proceedings shall continue to apply, notwithstanding their repeal by this Act.
    (3.) An application to fix a fair rent for a holding shall not be refused on the ground of any previous decision with reference to the holding or any part thereof, whether between the same parties or otherwise, if such application can be sustained under this Act or any of the Land Law Acts as amended by this Act, and where such application can be so sustained, the holding shall be deemed to be and to have remained a present tenancy as from the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881.
    (4.) Parts One and Two of this Act shall be construed as one with the Land Law Acts, and together with those Acts may be cited as the Land Law Acts, and shall apply to all holdings to which the Land Law Acts, or any of them, as amended by this Act apply, and Section twenty-two of the Land Law [Ireland] Act, 1881, shall apply as if the said Acts and Parts of this Act were part of the foregoing provisions of the said Act of 1881, within the meaning of the said section.
    (5.) Parts Two, Three, and Five of this Act shall be construed as one with the Land Pur-

    347
    chase Acts as herein defined, and, together with these Acts, may be cited as the Land Purchase Acts.
    (6.) Part Four of this Act shall he construed as one with the Congested Districts Board (Ireland) Acts, as defined in the Congested Districts Board (Ireland) Act, 1894, and together with those Acts may he cited collectively as the Congested Districts Board (Ireland) Acts.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to leave out Sub-section (2).
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to omit from Sub-section (3) the words—
    "such application can he so sustained, the holding shall he deemed to he and to have remained a present tenancy as from the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881,"
    and to insert instead thereof
    "a tenant would, if this Act had been in force at the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, he now a present tenant, and either the landlord has not, since the mid decision, resumed possession of the holding, or if he resumed the tenant has redeemed, the tenant shall be deemed a present tenant for the purpose of any such application."
    Amendment agreed to.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved after Sub-section (5), to insert the following new sub-section.
    (6.) "The provisions of Part III. of this Act with respect to superior interests and a vesting order shall not, without the consent of the vendor and purchaser, apply to proceedings in respect of any agreement made before the commencement of this Act."
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause 51,—

    REPEAL OF ACTS.
    The Acts specified in the First Schedule to this Act are hereby repealed to the extent mentioned in the third column of that schedule.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEmoved to leave out the word "First" and to insert instead thereof the word "Second."
    *VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWNmoved to insert the following new clause after Clause 51:—
    (52.) "The present system of appointing court valuers from amongst the land sub-commissioners shall cease, and in future the court valuers shall be permanent officials of the Crown and be independent of the Land Commission."
    348
    He said that the other night he laid down the principle that where a man's property was taken from him, he was entitled to an account, and he would go a step further and say, that when a man appealed, he was entitled to appeal to an independent person on the subject as to which he was aggrieved. On a recent occasion he pointed out that at this moment the Court Valuers attached to chief Commission were chosen from among the Sub-Commissioners, and as a consequence the Sub-Commissioners practically reviewed their own decisions, because one would be a Court Valuer for three months, and would then return to be a Sub-Commissioner. He also pointed out, that whilst A and B were practically revising and reviewing each others rents, it might not be impossible that there should be some sort of a fellow feeling in the matter, and that, without intending any harm, there should be a good deal of forbearance exercised towards each other's valuation. He based his claim for the insertion of the new clause, on the ground that it was equally fair and important to landlords and tenants. It was not a question whether they were going to be fair to landlord or tenant, but what was asked by the clause was, that they should be equally fair to both. If there was anything wrong in the clause, it would apply to both. A great reason in favour of this clause was that at present when a case came on for re-hearing neither party could cross-examine the Court Valuers. He pointed out that after the passing of the Act of 1881 a certain number of Court Valuers were appointed to be used solely for appeal purposes, and what was asked for was a reversion to that old method. At present the system was this:—A acted as a Sub-Commissioner in Antrim and might act as Court Valuer, say, in Armagh. B acted as a Court Valuer in Antrim and might act as Sub-Commissioner in Armagh. A was called to revise B's decision in the one case, and B to revise A's in the other case; the consequence might be a tacit understanding between them, such as was vulgarly expressed by the phrase, "Scratch me, and I'll scratch you." The result was that the Court Valuer's valuation, which the Court regarded as final, almost invariably coincided with the Sub-Commissioner's, and the appeal

    349
    was no appeal at all. He contended it was a great grievance in Ireland that the Court Valuers, upon whom so much depended, were not entirely independent people. He begged to move the clause.
    *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEthought the noble Lord must have made his observations more with a desire to attract attention to this subject than with any hope that the Government should introduce at this stage a clause dealing with this branch of the subject. He realised the importance of having in the position of Court Valuers men of experience, and, above all things, thoroughly independent and trustworthy. As far as he could make out, the complaint of the noble Lord was that occasionally a Sub-Commissioner acted as a Court Valuer, or a Court Valuer acted as a Sub-Commissioner. He must say on the face of that he saw nothing that would lead one to suppose that such an employment of these officials constituted, in any sense, an abuse. He was told that if the Land Commission desired to send down a Court Valuer they very often sent down one of the Sub-Commissioners to value. He would ask the noble Lord whether it was not the case that a lay Sub-Commissioner and a Court Valuer were not persons in whom one would expect to find the same sort of qualifications? He should imagine the man who was thoroughly competent for the one purpose would be also thoroughly competent for the other. It was suggested by his noble Friend that there had been cases when these officials had been employed under circumstances which led to the idea that there was something like an understanding between them as to the standard at which they should value the lands. Of course, if any case of that kind could be pointed out, he had no doubt the matter would receive the attention of the Land Commission, but as to the general practice of employing these gentlemen either as Court Valuers or as Sub-Commissioners he could, he confessed, see nothing which was to his mind suggestive of a grave abuse. He was afraid he could not encourage the noble Lord to expect that they would incorporate his recommendation in the Bill.
    THE EARL OF BELMOREsaid it was not so much a matter of grave abuse. It was a matter of whether it was
    350
    expedient that this sort of practice should be carried on of employing a gentleman one month as a Sub-Commissioner and perhaps six months hence as a Court Valuer. He thought there was a certain amount of a case for what the noble Viscount asked, and he hoped the Government would not, at any rate, refuse the Amendment without giving it a little more consideration and advancing some stronger arguments than he had yet heard.
    THE EARL OF MAYOsaid the noble Marquess held out no hopes that this system would be amended or improved in any way. All they asked for was that Sub-Commissioners and land valuers should not be interchangeable. This appeared to be a reasonable demand, and if they had some sympathy from the noble Marquess they would feel much happier, and they would feel that the re-valuations would be more justly and more properly carried out.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELANDsaid his noble Friend in charge of the Bill had shown, in the way he spoke, the greatest sympathy with the very important subject that the valuations for the head Court should be made by capable and upright men. But while recognising the great importance of these topics, it would be impossible to give an undertaking that the highly-paid men who were Land Commissioners should not be employed suitably and in suitable districts, and when they were available, to make valuations which might give the most valuable information to the head Commission.
    *VISCOUNT TEMPLETOWNsaid that, in withdrawing this clause, he would only point out, in reply to the noble Marquess, there was one very important qualification which the Sub-Commissioners and valuators had not in common. There was no independence in the valuator. The valuator was practically the final Court of Appeal against whom they appealed, and he was not an independent part of the body who fixed fair rents. It was one huge firm settling rents all over the country, and they were simply appealing from one member of the firm to another. The valuator ought to be entirely distinct from that firm.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    The Schedules were agreed to in the following amended from:—

SCHEDULES.

  FIRST SCHEDULES.—FROM OF SCHEDULE FOR RECORD.
  Particulars of Holding taken into consideration in fixing the Judicial Rent.

  No. of Ordnance Sheet.

  County

  Tenant

  Record No.

  Landlord

  Date upon which holding inspected

  day of

  189

  Who attended inspection on behalf of Landlord?

  Do, on behalf of Tenant?

  1. Character of holding:—
  The land in a holding may be all of uniform character, or it may consist of two or more of the qualities of land indicated in the following Schedule, which should be car, fully filled up according to the facts. The acreage of each class of land found in the holding should be sot out in the column given for the purpose, and this area should be marked off with a blue coloured line on the Ordnance Survey Map of the holding, and also marked with the letter or letters corresponding with same in the Schedule. Those areas should be stated with as near an approach to accuracy as under the circumstances is possible. The record number of the holding should in each case be marked on the Map, and where more than one holding is marked on the Map a Schedule of holdings with the record numbers and tenants' names is to he written on the right hand margin on the Map. The exterior boundaries of each holding must be carefully marked on the Map with a red coloured line.

  (1.) SCHEDULE of classes of land.

  —

  Area in Statute Measure.

  Fair Rent per Acre (excluding Buildings), on the assumption that all Improvements thereon were made or acquired by the Landlord.

  GRASS LANDS.

  A.

  R.

  R.

  £

  s.

  d.

  A. 1st class

  B. 2nd class

  C. 3rd class

  D. 4th class

  E. 5th class, mountain and unre claimed bog

  F. 1st class, permanent meadow

  G. 2nd class, permanent meadow

  LAND IN TILLAGE OU WORKED IN ROTATION, INCLUDING PASTURE OR MEADOW OF A TEMPORARY CHARACTER.

  H. 1st class

  I. 2nd class

  K. 3rd class

  L. 4th class, reclaimed mountain or bog

  X. Waste (description)

  Total area

  2. For what description of stock is the grass land best suited?
  3. Carrying power in sums or collops of grass land, stating the months during which the season usually continues, and how hay is provided?
  4. How is the holding used?
  5. The condition as to cultivation, deterioration or otherwise of the holding and the buildings thereon. Does the soil show traces of improvement or of deterioration, and to whom is the improvement or deterioration to be attributed?
  6. Does the holding or any part of it require to be drained, and if so, how much of the holding? Mark part requiring drainage on map by thin parallel black lines.
  7. IMPROVEMENTS: Proved in Court (excluding buildings) whether made by landlord or tenant, which are at present a bonâ fide benefit and suitable to the holding and are found to exist on inspection, to be stated in detail, together with the nature, character, and present capital value thereof, and the increased letting value due thereto, and the date, so near as can be ascertained, at which the same were made, and the deduction from rent made.
  8. BUILDINGS: If tenants state so, if landlords specify particulars of same, the date, so near as can be ascertained, at which they were made, state fair annual value, whether they have been kept in repair, and by whom, and any deduction from rent made on account thereof, and the extent (if any) to which the landlord has paid or compensated the tenant in respect thereof made on account thereof.
  Improvements under this head shall be distinguished according as—

  (a) they have been made wholly or partly by or at the cost of the tenant; and

  (b) the landlord has paid or compensated the tenant in respect thereof.

  9. SITUATION: As to markets, railways, and county roads.
  10. What per centage (if any) has been added for proximity, or what (if any) has been deducted in consequence of remote position?
  11. (live particulars of any right of turbary, commonage, mountain grazing, or seaweed—and state whether turbary is inside or outside holding, what amount has been added for any of those appurtenances.
  12. LOCAL RATES—
  Average poor rate in £1.
  Average county cess in £1.
  13. Special incidents of holding, such as aspect, elevation, and water supply, and general observations.

  To be signed by Lay Assistant-Commissioners

  day of

  189

  14. The following improvements included in enumeration in paragraph No. 7 were made or acquired by the tenant or his predecessors in title, and are exempted from rent.
  15. For what rights (if any) referred to in answers to query No. 11 has an addition been made to the rent?
  16. Upon what assumption with regard to the respective liabilities of landlord and tenant as to rates and taxes mentioned in answers to query No. 12, has the judicial rent been fixed?
  To be signed by Legal and Lay Assistant-Commissioners.
  17. The annual sum which should be the fair rent of the holding on the assumption that all improvements thereon were made or acquired by the landlord.
  18. The fair rent of the holding.
  19. If tenancy has been purchased since the Land Act, 1870, give date and amount of purchase-money on each sale.
  20. What changes of rent have been proved in evidence?
  To be signed by Legal Assistant Commissioner alone.

  SECOND SCHEDULE.—ACTS REPEALED.

  Session and Chapter.

  Short Title.

  Extent of Repeal.

  44 & 45 Vict, c. 49.

  Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881.

  In section eight, sub-section two, from "as from the period "down to" decision of the court," and subsection three, from "from the rent day" down to "has been given."

  Section twenty-four, from "as follows" to "fair rent for the holding," being the end of sub-section one.

  In section twenty-six from "the Land Commission may advance "down to "payable by the tenant," being sub-section four.

  Section twenty-eight, from the beginning down to "purchaser therein mentioned," being sub-sections one and two.

  In section thirty, sub-section three, from "on the terms" down to "1870," where that figure next occurs, and from "and shall pay" down to "receive the same."

  Section thirty-three.

  In section fifty-eight, sub-section one, sub-section two, down to "home farm or" and sub-sections three and four.

  48 & 49 Vict. c. 73.

  Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1885.

  In section two, from "it shall not be lawful" to the end of the section, being paragraph (c).

  In section four, the words "such value to be calculated according to the table in the Schedule to this Act."

  Section nine, sub-sections one and two.

  In section fourteen, from "the Land Commission shall register" down to "local registration."

  In section seventeen, from "the additional members of the Land Commission" down to "with the said additional Commissioners."

  Section twenty-four.

  50 & 51 Vict. c. 33.

  Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1887.

  Section one, down to "passing of this Act."

  In section four, from "a tenant may also" to "and otherwise."

  Section five.

  Section seventeen.

  In section eighteen, from "section thirty-four" to the end of the section, being sub-section two.

  51 & 52 Vict, c. 49.

  Purchase of Land (Ireland) Amendment Act, 1888.

  Section one, down to "said sub-section and."

  Section three, save as regards agreements for purchase made before the passing of this Act.

  Section six.

  54 & 55 Vict. c. 48.

  The Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1891.

  In section four, sub-section two, from "in paying to the guarantee fund," to the end of the sub-section, being paragraph (b).

  Section seven, from "and an annual sum" to end of section.

  Section eight, as respects any purchaser's insurance money paid before the commencement of this Act.

  In section twenty-nine, sub-section one, from "provided that" to "Act, 1881" where those words next first occur; and sub-section two.

  In section forty-two, from "the expression annual value" to "so determined."

  Standing Order No. XXXIX. having, on the motion of the MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE, been suspended,
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEformally moved "That the Bill be read the Third time."
  EARL SPENCERsaid he desired to say a few words at this stage. This Bill dealt with a very important matter, and was brought forward a long time ago. As the Duke of Devonshire had said, it was intended to carry out certain pledges made by Members of Her Majesty's Government. It was in one sense a compromise, because it stood between those who were most advanced in the cause of the tenants, and those who wished to leave the law as it stood, but it had been accepted in the other House by the Irish representatives, not as a complete measure, but as one containing many clauses which opened the Land Courts to the Irish tenants. Since it had been in their Lordships' House some very important Amendments had been made in it. He saw in that morning's papers a document signed by certain leading Irish landlords—it might be said to be a manifesto—and learned that those noble Lords who had been instrumental in carrying Amendments had not intended to wreck the Bill and had not done so. [Cheers.] What was the meaning of wrecking a Bill? If they meant that they had not driven a torpedo into the vessel and scuttled it they might be right. But if they had introduced Measures which would stop the machinery of the ship or had covered the deck with a large amount of wreckage from the fire of the artillery, then, he said, they had waterlogged it if they had not altogether wrecked it. [Cries of "No!"] This was particularly the case with regard to the Tenure Clauses, which formed almost the most important part of the Bill in the eyes of the Irish occupiers. The Bill had been amended in the four important matters relating to turbary, the money limit on the Pasture Clauses, the town parks, and the restrictions on the Courts from taking into consideration the occupation right of the sitting tenant. Those four changes, he conceived, were very deadly in their effect on the operation of the tenure principle. He did not speak in any way on the part of the Irish representatives
  358
  or on the part of the Irish tenants, but he could not conceive that those who represented the tenants in another place would be able to accept the Amendments, in consequence not only of what they had said in another place, but of their pledges to their constituents. He thought that was a very grave matter. It was a grave matter to offer to a country, or to a large body of people in it, a Measure which they repudiated, disliked, and in no way accepted. From the point of view of those who were against giving self-government to Ireland, that seemed to him to be a very dangerous proceeding, and one entirely opposed to sound policy. It might be that many of those who wished, like himself, that a more extensive system of self-government should be given to Ireland might find a solid argument in the proceedings in their Lordships' House; but though he firmly adhered to all the views he ever held on that subject, he did not share that opinion with regard to this Bill. He desired that the benefit of the fresh legislation should be extended as soon as possible to the Irish people, and he therefore regretted that those great changes had been introduced. One very remarkable thing was to be noted in regard to this Debate. He regretted that the Prime Minister was not then present, because he must refer to him in connection with a point of considerable importance. It seemed to him a very strange and remarkable thing that when one of the principal Measures, if not the largest Measure, of the Session, was proposed in Parliament by Her Majesty's Government, the Prime Minister of the country, who had such enormous influence in directing its policy, had not said a word on the subject. The Secretary of State for War, in introducing the Measure, compared himself to a tame elephant endeavouring to allure the Irish landlords into the in-closure. He was afraid that, notwithstanding the great moderation, ability, and skill which the noble Marquess had shown in conducting the Measure, he had not succeeded in capturing them. There were others besides the Irish landlords who had to be convinced on this subject. There were some, no doubt, even in the Cabinet, and above all there was the noble Marquess the Prime Minister, for if they called to mind speeches of his they would remember that he had—

  359
  in the strong language he was capable of using—denounced in former days land legislation after the Bills of 1870 and 1881. It would have been instructive to have heard the reasons that had induced the noble Marquess to support this Measure. It would have been very useful to all of them, and especially so to that large number of English supporters of the noble Marquess who had on this occasion remained absent from the House, and had refused to follow the standard he had raised. He did not know whether the Prime Minister could have persuaded the Irish landlords, but he felt sure that if he had given the arguments that had induced him—at one time the stern and strong opponent of this legislation—to adopt this Measure, it would have done much to induce his supporters to follow him. He was aware that this was not the last occasion when the Bill would come before them. He did not know what Her Majesty's Government would do when the Amendments went down to the House of Commons, but he sincerely hoped and trusted that they would, as far as possible, maintain all the great principles involved in the Measure, and that, when the Bill came back, after the Commons' remarks on their Lordships' Amendments, they would show a firm front and try to carry it in its original shape. He should deeply regret if this were not done. He felt that if their Lordships adhered to their Amendments, they would place themselves in a very false position. Ought it to be said that their Lordships' House, which was a House of landlords, dealt in a matter of this sort entirely in the interests of the landlords, and in that way had refused to meet what was considered to be a grievance of the Irish tenants and submitted for their approval by a Conservative Government? If they adhered to that course they would be incurring what, no doubt, would be a serious danger, not only to Ireland, but to the independence and strength of their Lordships' House.
  THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYsaid he could not allow the Third Reading of the Bill to pass without saying a few words on behalf of himself and those with whom he had worked in the course of the passage of this Measure. The noble Earl who had just sat down had alluded to a letter which he had read in
  360
  that morning's papers signed by himself and other Irish landlords. The noble Earl said that in that letter they disclaimed any idea of wrecking the Bill. He indorsed that statement most heartily—["Hear, hear!"]—on behalf of himself and those with whom he was working. They had always said they would have welcomed a Bill which was calculated to be of benefit to Ireland, and which would have acted justly to all classes of the community. So far from wrecking the Bill, they flattered themselves they had gone far to remedy the gross imperfections with which on many points it bristled when it came up to their Lordships' House. If there was one person who had gone a long way towards losing the Bill it was the noble Earl, for were the advice he had given to his friends in the House of Commons—the Nationalist Members—followed, the Bill would be wrecked. He trusted that advice would not be followed, but that the Members of the House of Commons would note and appreciate the fact that the Bill was sent back to them in a shape in which it would at least give satisfaction to a certain section of the community, and that was the vast majority of their Lordships' House, and it certainly did not give satisfaction to anyone when it entered the portals of this House. He had hoped Her Majesty's Government would have met some of the proposals he and his Friends made more cordially than they did. It would, for instance have been gracious on the part of the Government to have acceded to their request in regard to Clause 1, and not have forced them to go to a Division. The House of Commons virtually accepted the principle that the Sub-Commissioners should specify their reasons for granting the enormous reductions of rent, but the details were never entered into, because the Bill was hurried through the House of Commons in a most unjustifiable manner. When it came up to their Lordships it was in a crude condition, and absolutely devoid of those safeguards which not only their Lordships, but the House of Commons and the country, had a right to expect and demand. He therefore maintained that the Division on Clause 1 must be adhered to. Upon that clause the Government simply did what it was their

  361
  duty to do, and he and his Friends declined to accept the alteration made as any concession whatever to the landowners. ["Hear, hear!"] The Government themselves, recognising the dangerous and mischievous character of Clause 8, which dealt with turbary, withdrew the clause, and substituted for it a clause of a less mischievous and less hurtful character. As to Clause 30, too, the Government made no concession to the landowners of Ireland. In the Debate on the Second Reading he told the Government that though the Purchase Clauses of the Bill were intended to be attractive, they would absolutely kill purchase if they were allowed to stand unamended. The omission of the clause, therefore, was no concession to him and his friends, but it was a real benefit to the country, and to those tenants whom the Government proposed to benefit. Clause 39 was one of great importance; he believed the Government regarded it as the most important one in the Bill. What did he and his Friends do in respect of that clause? They made a concession to the Government; they were conciliatory. They, however, knew full well that there was an enormous number of people who looked with the gravest apprehension, he might say the greatest terror, at the manner in which they anticipated the Bill would work. They conceded to the Government a principle of which they greatly disapproved. They permitted the Government to carry a clause which embraced the principle of compulsory sale or purchase. Never before had that principle been advanced in their Lordships' House. He maintained that, so far, the concessions had been all on their side. He would like the noble Marquess to tell them what concessions he considered he had made to them. Then he came to the clause proposing to raise the rateable value from £50 to £100. They divided against that clause because they believed that it was contrary to the principles of the Act of 1881. They did not know why the Government of the present day should seek to infringe the Act of 1881 by admitting to the benefit of the Fair Rent Courts a certain class of the community whom Mr. Gladstone went out of his way to exclude. The noble Earl said he had always wished the tenants to take advantage of the Fair Rent
  362
  Courts. Why, then, did he not insist upon such a clause being inserted in the Act of 1881? Mr. Gladstone gave his reasons for not admitting those over £50, and Mr. Parnell declared it was unnecessary to admit them. All he and those who acted with him asked was that the matter should remain as it was under the Act of 1881. The noble Earl alluded to the question of town parks. They divided on that question because they were assured by Lord Macnaghten that were the clause to be carried as it stood, town parks would be abolished. Their action throughout had been reasonable and conciliatory. To-day they had not-divided upon a single Amendment, but had done their utmost, he would not say to perfect the Measure, because it was not a perfect Measure, but to remedy the defects with which the Bill came to their Lordships' House. He trusted that their Lordships, having taken up a line upon certain points of the Bill, which they considered of vital importance, would not be induced to give way on those points. [Cheers.] It might be said—it had been said by the noble Earl—they were trying to wreck the Bill. They were not crying to wreck the Bill. They desired to see it accepted in another place, but if alterations were made in another place which their Lordships considered to be unjust to any section of the community in Ireland, or which would render unworkable those parts of the Bill which they thought they had made workable, then he could only trust their Lordships would adhere to the action they had taken during the past week. ["Hear, hear!"] He sincerely trusted to see the Measure placed on the Statute-book, but if the Bill was not carried into law it would not be the fault of those who had the real benefit and happiness of Ireland at heart. [Cheers.]
  THE EARL OF DUNRAVENsaid he rose principally to express his very deep regret that his noble Friend had made perhaps a premature, and, at any rate, a very strong appeal to the House to adhere to the Amendments which they had moved, whatever might be their fate in another place. The noble Marquess said that he did not wish to wreck the Bill, but he and his noble Friends had shown themselves so powerful in the House that, full of their exuberant vigour, like young lions at play, they

  363
  were more destructive than they understood. He felt very sure that if some of the Amendments made by their Lordships were disagreed with in another place, and were insisted on by the House of Lords, they would succeed in wrecking the Bill. It was a source of great regret to him that except on one solitary occasion he had been unable to vote in the same Lobby with the noble Lords who were landowners in Ireland. He voted with them on the first Amendment, because it seemed impossible to vote against it. But as to some of the Amendments—especially that lowering the letting value from £100 to ££50—it was beyond his comprehension how any Irish landlord could think them desirable either for the country or for any individual landlord. The noble Marquess said that what he objected to was that the Government were departing from the principles of the Act of 1881. The noble Marquess seemed to forget that he was not living in 1881 now, and he paid no attention whatever to the imperfections which the last 15 years had shown to exist in the Act of 1881. He himself did not approve of anything in the Act of 1881; but it was the duty of any sensible man to accept the legislation of 15 years ago; and, if it were found not to work smoothly in some respects, to remove the defects. He could not conceive how anyone could suppose that it could be an advantage to Ireland, or anything but a disadvantage to the landowners in Ireland, that there should be a small class of tenants excluded from the Bill to which all their friends and neighbours were admitted. Everyone of such excluded tenants must be a centre of discontent. He had never been able to see what the harm was in this Bill as it came to the House, except in some very few details. Noble Lords had failed to point out anything which would have caused any serious damage to Irish landowners. Certainly there was nothing to do half the damage to landowners which would be done if this Bill did not become law. Much of the Bill would be of great advantage to the landowners, because peace, quiet and contentment in Ireland was as beneficial to them as to any other class. He sincerely hoped that his noble Friends would very seriously consider their position should the Bill come back to the
  364
  House in a materially different shape. If they persisted in these Amendments, they would do great damage to the power and reputation of the House of Lords. That House had a great reserve of force and power, which could be used with good effect—as it was used recently—for saving the State. But that reserve ought not lightly to be frittered away. It would not add to the strength or reputation of the House or to the affection with which it was regarded by the country if this Bill were lost because a number of noble Lords, all interested in Irish land, had insisted on Amendments which could not be accepted by those representing the tenants in the House of Commons. If the Bill were wrecked great injury would be done to the small owners in Ireland—the very class whom noble Lords desired to benefit. Two things were of great importance in Irish land legislation—to facilitate purchase, to return through purchase to a sound system of land tenure as soon as possible; and to maintain a great number of the present landowning class in Ireland as possible. If this Bill did not pass, the consequences in Ireland would be anything but what could be wished.
  THE EARL OF BELMOREsaid that Earl Spencer had referred to their Lordships as a House of landlords. No doubt most of them were landlords; but some of them were representative Peers of Ireland, and of those he was the senior Peer. He wished to say most emphatically that he and the other Irish Representative Peers did not consider themselves as merely representing themselves or the landlords of Ireland, but felt bound, to the best of their ability, to represent all the people of Ireland. Of course, many of the people differed from them in religion and politics, but there were many subjects common to all, on which they represented the people's opinions as well as their own. As to the new turbary clause which the Government had brought up, he did not think it mischievous in any way, and believed that it would be very useful. As to the Town Parks Clause, if he had thought that the intention of Her Majesty's Government would be carried out in the way in which the drafting of the clause indicated, he should have been quite willing to see it accepted. But the House was assured by the noble and

  365
  learned Lord who some years ago drafted the clause defining town parks, that if the clause in the Bill were accepted there would he no more town parks in Ireland. That would be a serious thing, not only for the owners, but for the towns; and the House was quite justified, failing a safe definition, in rejecting the clause. As to the £50 limit, all he would say was that if, for reasons of public policy, Parliament thought it right to transfer the property of one person, to whom it had been expressly reserved, to another person, compensation ought to be paid. If one of these £50 tenants had a road cut through his holding he would be ready enough to claim compensation. He had never desired to wreck the Bill, and he had never for one moment since the Bill was introduced into the House of Commons believed that it was in danger in either House. He hoped it would pass in the form most consistent with justice to both parties. It might be received with disappointment by some tenants who had expected more than they were ever likely to get, but he was sure that the reasonable men among them would see, when it came into operation, that they received substantial benefit from it.
  Bill read the Third time, and passed.

PUBLIC HEALTH (IRELAND) BILL.
THE EARL OF RANFURLY,in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said that it amended the law relating to public health in Ireland, and assimilated it to the law in England. It gave additional powers to the Local Government Board and enabled them to vest rural authorities with the powers of urban authorities. It also enabled sanitary authorities to combine for the purpose of executing work within their own districts. The Bill enabled urban authorities to divide a district into parts, to put a separate assessment on any part or parts, a proviso being inserted that such assessments should be fair and equitable, to levy a private improvement rate, a water rate, and to grant superannuation allowances for duties performed under the Public Health Act. The Local Government Board was also given power to constitute port sanitary authorities where
366
needed, and to assign them certain jurisdictions, powers, rights, and duties.
Bill read 2a, according to Order, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House to-morrow; and Standing Order XXXIX. to be considered in order to its being dispensed with.

LOCAL TAXATION (IRELAND) ESTATE DUTY BILL.
Bill read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a to-morrow.—(Lord Ranfurly.)—[No 246.]
House adjourned at Ten minutes before Ten o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Five o'clock.