The Express.
London, England, 1853-07-09 00:00:00

PUBLIC BUSINESS.

LANDLORD BILL.
The house went into committN On th;s bill, resuming its
ommideration at clause 32.

Teacst---adeOis clause wen agreed to, after a little con-
versation, without amendment.
Mr. M'MAIION had a notice on the paper to move the
omission of clause 38; but the hon. gentleman not having
been " called" in time, the clause quietly slipped into the
bill, without a word of opposition.
On clause 43,
Col. OREVILLE moved, as an amendment, to omit
the words, " or any landlord."
fir. KEOGH (Solicitor-General for Ireland) said the
26th section of the 9th Oeo. IV., which was similar in
spirit to the present clause, and which made provision for
the wilful damage of a tenant, only applied to houses, and
he would suggest that they shouid follow that precedent
here, by tinkle g the clause applicable alone to tenements.
After a few words from Mr. Will/Ulla and Sir 3.
YOUNO,
Mr. NAPIER promised to introduce words to meet
the views of the gallant colonel who had moved the
amendment.
Mr. V. SCI:LLY said the 41st clause subjected a tenant,
who was guilty of waste, to a charge of misdemeanour and
two years imprisonment. This was most unjust, and cer-
tainly too great a power to entrust in the hands of police
magistrates.
After a few words from Col. Dr us s and Col. Oairmi.z,
who withdrew his amendment, the clause was agreed to.
Col. OREVILLE moved the emission of clause 44, which
glees the assistant barrister and the magistrates assembled
he petty serious the same power of ejectment which is now
only exercised by the Court of Chancery.
The committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the claw 6l
Against it lB-43
The clause was accordingly agreed to, as were also clauses
43 and 16.
On clause 47, which empowers the landlord to remove a
tosent at will from his premises if he should wilfully
Ware or destroy any part thereof,
V SCULLY moved the omission of the clause.
The committee divided—
Tor the claws
APIs" lB-41
TM dame was then agreed to, as were clauses up to
ois clause 63, which provides that the laadlord before
pettiest la a distress must obtain the warrant of a ma-
gistrate,
Sir A. BROOKE moved the omission of the clause, on
the grosiad that the (misting right of distress operated less
lniureinely on the tenant than would a law which would
eject him altogether if there was a gate's rent due. Ile
thought there should be a right of distress also, in order to
prevent the tenant from malting a fraudulent mucosa& of
the crop.
The claw was agreed to, as were clauses up to 70.
On clams 70, which empowers the landlord to distrain
grooms crops.
Mr of proposed that tits words costarring the
power of dietraiaing growing crops should be struck out.
(Hear, hear.) Up to the year 1816, the landlords in Ire
land had not the power of distraining growing crops. In
that year the power of &Wail:ling growing crops was con-
ferried upon the landlord, and continued up to 1816. Its
operation had been so injurious in Ireland, that Sir R. Peel
abrogated the power, and so the law remained up to the
present time The present bill proposed to go back to that
abrogated system in epposition to experience, and the opi-
nion of some of the beet authorities in Ireland. lie hoped
therefore the committee would support his proposition.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but before
the division lad commenced, the house was summoned to
the House of Lords by Mr. Putman, the Yeoman Usher of
the Black Rod, to hear the royal assent given to several
bills, for the names of which see Lords' report.
The Speaker returned, with the members who had accom-
panied him, precisely at 4, and the house immediately
adjourned till 6 o'clock.
The house resumed at six o'clock.
IMPORTATION OF SALT INTO INDIA.
Sir J. PAKINOTON begged to ask the President of the
Board of Control whether he intends to introduce in the
bill for the future government of India any provision for
the purpose of giving greater facilities for the importation
of salt into India