THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that | involved other interests of the landlord the Amendment was absolutely unne- besides his right of pre-emption. cessary. If the landlord objected, on reasonable grounds, to any proposed purchaser, his objection would receive effect; and if he choose to exercise his own right of pre-emption, the uncontrolled selection of a new tenant would rest with him.

Amendment negatived.

LORD DUNSANY moved to amend sub-section 4, by providing that where the tenant "shall agree to sell his tenancy to some other person than the landlord, he should inform the landlord of the name of the purchaser, and state therewith the amount of the consideration agreed to be given for the tenancy The words of the clause were, 'where a tenant has agreed," and that, he thought, was rather indefinite. If a tenant, either through inadvertance, or from any other cause, did not give notice at all to his landlord that he had sold his farm to any other person, the sale was not null and void, as one might naturally suppose it would be, but it simply became voidable. As the clause now stood, the landlord had no right of pre-emption whatever.

Amendment moved, in page 1, line 21, leave out ("has agreed") and insert ("shall agree.")-(The Lord Dunsany.)

LORD CARLINGFORD said, he did not think that the dangers apprehended by the noble Lord would arise; but he (Lord Carlingford) thought they might trust the Commission with a matter of this kind, since the determination of other matters of greater importance was left to their discretion.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY asked by what possibility a sale could be allowed to stand if there had been no notice given to the landlord?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, if the landlord did not object, no harm could be done. He would not be bound to admit the purchaser as a tenant, unless he had received the proper notice.

THE EARL OF DERBY asked whether he was right in concluding from the clause, as it now stood, that a sale might be valid of which no notice had been given to the landlord?

THE EARL OF LEITRIM asked a similar question, observing that the matter

EARL CAIRNS said, he thought the point of considerable importance, as the landlord would not always wish to exercise his right of pre-emption, but would sometimes prefer that the purchaser should be the owner of the adjacent holding, or some other desirable person.

THE EARL OF DUNRAVEŃ suggested that a difficulty would arise if the tenant sold his interest without notice to the landlord and then left the country.

LORD CARLINGFORD said, that the Government did not differ on the real point, only as to the method of procedure, and therefore the Government would accept the Amendment.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the better way would be to insert the words "in writing," so as to secure that the notice should be given in writing.

Amendment, as amended, agreed to. THE DUKE OF ARGYLL moved, in page 2, line 5, after (“court,”)

("Provided that the landlords objection shall be conclusive in the case of any tenancy in a holding where the improvements in respect of which, if made by the tenant or his predecessors in title, the tenant would have been entitled to be compensated under the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, have been made by the landlord or his predecessors in title, and not by the tenant or his predecessors in title.")

The noble Duke said, the Amendment was, to his mind, of considerable importance, although, perhaps, it might not be apparent at first sight. They had now, by reading the Bill a second time, assented to its principle, and he could assure his noble Friend the Lord Privy Seal that he should neither move nor vote for any Amendment which, in his opinion, was in derogation of the main principle and purpose of the Bill. As their Lordships had voted for the second reading of the Bill, this was the only just and straightforward mode of proceeding. What he considered the main principle of the Bill was this-that every tenant in Ireland should have the power afforded of re-valuation; and, in the second place, that every tenant in Ireland, with but few exceptions, should have the power of sale. He had already stated at considerable length his objections to this power of sale, and he would now say what might be urged in its

favour. He thought it was absolutely some time or other, either by themselves just in all cases where, by the custom of or their predecessors in title, executed the country, the tenant had it, and in all all the improvements, as was generally cases in which, without the custom of the case in England and in Scotland. the country, the tenant could pay for it. He must press this Amendment on the He admitted that probably the power of Government, because the Government sale might be the most convenient form had admitted that this Bill referred to a in which the tenant could be repaid for most exceptional state of things, and improvements, and as a large proportion Mr. Gladstone had expressly said that of the tenantry of Ireland had done the he hopefully looked forward to the time improvements, it was the most proper when Ireland would be able to arrive form; and he fully admitted that the at a healthier state of things. Then, power of sale mitigated very much the why shut the door to a healthier state harshness of eviction. In the case of of things? In cases where landlords had the very smallest class of tenantry, executed all the improvements, for any though he thought the power of sale in sake, let them retain that sentiment of their case was, perhaps, the most mis- ownership, out of which the whole zeal chievous, yet incidentally it might have for agricultural improvements had its the advantage of enabling the wealthier rise. No man could pretend that this tenant buying out the poorer one, and Amendment was contrary to the printhus, to some extent, consolidating the ciples of the Bill. This matter, he property. On those grounds, he agreed thought, was even more important in there was much to be said for the power the future than in the present. As reof sale. He did not intend by his garded the efficiency of this clause in Amendment to touch the power of sale the future, the Government professed to in any of the cases to which those argu- desire that a great number of persons ments applied. Having stated the ar- would buy land in Ireland. Supposing guments in favour of free sale, he a number of tenants bought their farms thought his noble Friend the Lord Privy and made all the improvements as it was Seal would admit he had stated them expected they would do, some circumfairly, and he would remind the House stances, say, occurred which prevented of one of the strongest objections to that the farmer continuing his residence there power. In the Report of the Bess--as, for instance, sickness-and he deborough Commission, in one of the few passages with which he entirely concurred, this statement occurred"The right of free sale, even more than fixity of tenure, interferes with a landlord's right of control over his property in respect of his power to choose the tenants by whom he is surrounded, and to surround himself by those whom he prefers."

sired to let it to some person whom they chose. Now, under the Bill as it stood, they could not do this without the next day the chance of this tenant selling the tenancy to some other person. He hoped the Government would agree to the Amendment.

Amendment moved,

In page 2, line 5, after ("court") insert("Provided that the landlords objection shall be conclusive in the case of any tenancy in a holding where the improvements in respect of which, if made by the tenant or his predecessors in title, the tenant would have been entitled to

be compensated under the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870, have been made by the landlord or his predecessors in title, and not by the tenant or his predecessors in title.")-(The Duke of Argyll.)

That was a definite objection; and surely LORD CARLINGFORD sympathised the Government would admit that, in with a good deal which had been said cases where none of the arguments for by the noble Duke, and it had given free sale applied, it was a most unrea-him a great deal of pleasure to hear him sonable thing to apply this power to the recognize some, at least, of the advandestruction of the landlord's sentiment tages which they believed would arise of ownership. His Amendment applied from the sale of the tenant's interest. solely to cases where landlords had, at At the same time, he was not convinced VOL. CCLXIV. [THIRD SERIES.] 2 C [First Night.]

if, after the rent had been fixed, improvements were made by agreement between the landlord and the tenant, there might be an additional rent charged in respect of them. He, therefore, greatly doubted whether it was wise, in the interests of those who approved of the proposal, to insist upon this Amendment. The land

If

by the noble Duke that this Amendment | doubt would be-taken into account. was a necessary one. It would, he Then, with respect to future improvethought, in respect to the present state ments, it was distinctly provided, that of things, have a very narrow operation indeed. If it were to be adopted, he should ask that the words "substantially maintained" should be inserted with reference to the improvements, because it was obviously possible that improvements might have been made by the landlord 50 years ago, but maintained ever since by a long succession of tenants, in which case, of course, the ex-lords had already, let them remember, emption should not apply. But, setting the means of compensating themselves that aside, what he said was, that in the for their outlay on improvements. existing state of things in Ireland cases the Amendment were to be adopted, he in which landlords could possibly take suggested that after the reference to the advantage of this provision were of so Act of 1870 there be inserted the qualirare occurrence that he did not think fying phrase "as amended by this Act." it advisable to create such an excep- But, while he suggested this, he must tion to the general system of tenure point out that it would not be wise to place which the Government thought ought tenants on estates where the landlords to be applied to the country, and made the improvements this all the more, seeing that when position than that occupied by other a landlord expended money in im- tenants. provements it was open to him to raise the rent of the holding in order to compensate himself for his outlay. He objected, also, to the mode in which his noble Friend proposed to proceed, inasmuch as direct exemption from the Act was preferable to this indirect exemption. He would not, however, put their Lordships to the trouble of going into the Lobby on the question.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Does the noble Lord accept the Amendment, then?

LORD CARLINGFORD: No; but we will not go into the Lobby on it.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL: Why does my noble Friend not answer my arguments? He has said nothing against this Amendment whatever, and I am very much afraid that his real objection is this that it is an unpopular idea in Ireland that the landlord should ever improve his own land. He rather wishes to discourage than to encourage the improvement of the land by the landlords of Ireland. I shall certainly divide the Committee.

THE EARL OF LEITRIM supported the Amendment, contending that, as the Bill stood, confiscation of landlords' improvements would follow.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that if the landlord had not charged a fair rent, having regard to his improvements, this ought to be-and he had no

Lord Carlingford

in a

worse

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL said, he had no objection to accept the words suggested; but he must direct attention to the argument of his noble and learned Friend. It was said that they should not place the tenant of a holding on which the improvements were made by the landlord in a worse position than the tenant of a farm where the landlord did not make the improvements. His reply to this was that the Bill itself placed the one tenant in a worse position than the other, and that, therefore, the argument for uniformity at once fell to the ground.

THE MARQUESS OF WATERFORD suggested that the requirement of the Amendment should not be that all the improvements should be made by the proprietor. If this requirement were kept in, then the tenant might, by erecting a pigstye, throw the entire clause out of gear, for then it would not, of course, be possible to say that all the improvements had been made by the tenant.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY pointed out that the suggestion of the noble Marquess introduced quite a new element, because what it really amounted to was that they should exempt from the operation of the Bill farms on which some of the improvements had been made by the tenant, and some by the landlord. If they begun with a pigstye, they intro

duced an element of doubt into the whole benefit of the usage corresponding to such cusmatter.

LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE
pointed out that amongst permanent im-eight.
provements was main drainage, and if
it were not kept up, all other improve-
ments would be valueless. The landlord
made this improvement.

Amendment amended, and agreed to.
THE EARL OF BELMORE moved,

in page 2, line 5, after ("court,") to

forward be subject to such usage. But | lord bought up under the Act of 1870 now, in 1881, this Bill came in and said was not the tenant's improvements; it that all over Ireland the tenant might was the Ulster tenant right custom. The sell that which in the interval the land- landlord had acted under that which the lord had purchased with his money, and Government had systematically despised on the strength of an Act of Parliament. and trampled under foot in this Bill, and The number of landlords who had pur- the extent of which they appeared to chased in this way was, no doubt, small; have forgotten. What induced the landbut the principle was very important. lords to pay up the Ulster Custom was He had never before known an instance the sentiment of ownership-the desire where Parliament had been so openly to be masters of their own estates, and asked to violate the most solemn engage- that was the thing which Parliament ments. It was said that the landlord solemnly guaranteed to them. Now, the could recoup himself by raising the rent, noble and learned Lord said that it was which, in consideration of the other ele- a sufficient fulfilment of the promisements of the Bill, was, in effect, saying sufficient compensation—that the land-"If you are a landlord, recoup your lords should have the power which they self by raising your rent; if you are a then had of raising the rent to any extent tenant, the way to recoup yourself is to which the tenants would pay. The senget your rent lowered." He trusted that timent of ownership was the thing which by this Amendment, or by some similar was bought up, and no proposals to means, those unfortunate persons who give any additional rent were a fulfilhad spent many thousands of pounds on ment of the contract which Parliament their estates would be protected. had made. He earnestly hoped their Lordships would honour the signature of Parliament in this respect, and would not allow it to be dishonoured by accepting the proposal of the Government.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, the objection of the noble and learned Earl was more apparent than real as applied to this Bill. If the tenant's interest was bought by the landlord, he was entitled to charge interest in the shape of additional rent against the tenant; and that, no doubt, was what took place. But, apart from this purchase, what the tenant had to sell was his own; it did not belong to the landlord. ["Oh!"] His improvements were his own, and would it be contended that the landlord had a right to dispose of them? The Ulster tenant right depended upon custom on estates in Ulster, which settled the terms between landlord and tenant in many ways which deviated from the particular provisions in this Bill, under which the right of sale was given generally in Ireland. The Ulster Custom remained; and the new law being extended over all the country, it was difficult to see any sound reason for this Amendment, which would seem to suggest that those who had bought the tenant's goodwill in Ulster were to be regarded as more unjustly treated than those who never were subjected to the Ulster Custom.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY said, if any person came before the noble and learned Lord and proposed to escape from engagements solemnly entered upon on the reasons he had alleged, the proposition would be repelled with expressions of indignation. What the landEarl Cairns

THE DUKE OF ABERCORN observed, that no landlord could raise his rent without rendering himself unpopular; and, therefore, the suggestion that he could do so in order to compensate himself for the loss of the tenant right was impracticable.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE said, the assumption of the Government appeared to be that a landlord in the case where he had bought up the Ulster tenant custom would be able to recoup himself by raising the rent; but there was this paradox attaching to the Ulster right, that in dealing with it they could not say that two and two made four. The tenant right and the landlord's fee simple together made a sum far in excess of the selling or letting value of the farm as a whole. In a case in which the landlord's interest might be worth 25 years' purchase, and the tenant right worth 25 years' purchase, the landlord could not charge additional rent representing the interest on the sum paid by him. The purchases made by landlords, though few in number, had not been made as commercial speculations, but had been made in order to liberate the holdings from a custom the operation of which they believed to be detrimental to their estates. The purchases had