The Express.
London, England, 1862-07-09 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-Truur, JULY &
The UAW CHANCELLOR took hie SW on the woolsack at
5 o'clock.

PETITION.
Lord BROUGHAM prevented • petition from the Omuta
of the Social Science S.eiety, paying for the introduction
We &vaned of the unitary proviswas of the Load Go-
vernment Act.
NAVAL AND VICTUALLING STORES BILL
This bill pared threesh
M =CHANT SHIPPING ACTS, &c., AMENDMENT
BILL

-
Lad STANLEY of ALDERLEY moved the second read-
ing of thus bill, which, after a diseuesiota was agreed so.
CHANCERY REGULATIONS BILL.

On the motion of Lord KIN/MOWS, it was agreed that the
house should oot meat on their amendments to this bill,
which were objected to by the House of Coromooe.
LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATaI ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

Lord CHELIIII3iTIa in moving the second reading of
this hill, said it was intended to meet a case of great in.
&victual injustice. The only person who was affected by the
clams in the act which be proposed to amend was Sir
Thomas Wilson. Sir Thomas Wilson, under his father's
will, was tesset for life of very considerable estates, and was
also lord of the manor of Hampstead-heath. Many years
ago the Finchley.roci was made through the property,
which rendered a considerable portion of it eligible for
building purposes, and particularly that part of the estate
consisting of 60 or 70 acres at the south-eastern comet of
Hampstead-heath. Sir Thomas Wilson laid out many
thousands of pounds on this part of the ground, which he
intimated to convert to building purposes. He proposed a
plan by which detached villas of an extremely ornamental
character would have been erected. As he was only tenant
for life under his father's will, with power of granting leases
for 21 years only, it was quite clear he could not carry out
his object without coming to parliament to assist him. It
was aeceosary for him, therefore, to apply to parliament for
a private act to give him extended powers of granting
leases. Considerable alarm was entertained that it was the
iatentioo of Sir Thomas Wilson to interfere with Hamp-
stead-heath. Re begged to state, on the part of Sir T.
Wilson, that from the beginning to the end he never enter-
tained such an idea. (Hear, hear.) That feeling, however,
induced a very serious opposition to the scheme. From the
year 1829 to IS:4 no less than six bills were from time to
time introduced by Sir T. Wilson to enable him to carry
oat his object. As they were all aerate bills they were,
according to the old practice, referred to the judges for their
opinion, sad the fate of these bills was rather extraordi-
nary. 'Out of the six bolls the judges reported in favour of
four. The last bill that was before that house was in 18K
and their lordships payed that bill, although the judge' re-
ported against it. It was sent down to the House of Com-
mons, and there rejected. So the matter remained till 1856,
when the bill far facilitating the sales and leases of settled
111111atas was introduced by his noble and learned f rieod opposite.
One of the objects of that act was to prevent the necessity
of persons having limited estates, in 000 sequence of the
limited powers of leasing, being compelled to apply to par-
liament fora private act. There was a clause in the act
which authorised persons —amongst others tenants for life—
to apply to the Court of Chancery for authority to grant
building leases for 99 years. There was a clause in the act
that the Coat of Chancery should not entertain the appli-
°Woo if it appeared by the bill or settlement that there
was an express declaration or manifest intention that the
parties should be limited, and should ntt possess this
power. The bill passed their lordships' house with that clause
ta it which he now proposed to amend. But in the other
house of parliament the same active and vigilant opposi-
tion which bad been offered for so many years to the pro-
ceedings of Sir T. Wilson manifested itself, and the House
Commons succeeded in introducing the 21st clause of the
act which was trained to meet the individual case of Sir
T. Wilson. That clause provided that the Court of Chan-
cery should not entertain an application to grant these
powers to any person who bad already applied to parlia-
ment for a similar object, and where the bill bad been
rejected on its merits or reported spinet by the judges.
Now, he believed there was no individual in the kingdom
to whom the list claussicould apply but Sir T. Wilson.
These bills were invariably rejected. Their lordships there-
fore would naturally ask, since the House of Commons had
showu itself so hostile, how could it be anticipated that they
would prove favourable to the present bill. But be (Lord
Cliehusford) believed that a great change had come over the
minds of its opponents. He had told their lordships that
it never was Sir Thomas Wilson's intention to interfere with

.--.....---
Hampstead-hesth. But the opponents of the bill were
aware that Sir T. Wilson possessed the power, without any
set of parliament, asked of the manor, with the (mascot of
the homage, to grant portions of the wart" And
Sir Thomas Wilson's successor would be absolute
owner of this estate, and would be able to ex-
ercise whatever powers over it he pleased. The
opponents of Sir T. Wilson, therefore, now thought that
the beat mode of securing these objects would be to enable
Biz T. Wilson to carry out that part of the scheme which
°misted in laying out a portion of this property in villas,
because it would be a great aiklation to the value of these
villas to leave the heath unenclosed. They believed that
N Sir T. Wilson were not opposed, to this extent they
should be able to accomplish their wishes and protect
themselves against the consequent.' which they con-
templated. lie asked, therefore, whether their lordships
would hesitate to give their assent to the wood reading of
the bill, which was intended to obviate the greatest juju-
lice ever committed against an individual, and the most
vexatious opposition to the amendment of a gentleman's
property which had taken place us that house.
Lord CRA-N WORTH entirely concurred with every word
which had fallen from his noble friend as to the obnoxious
latere of this enactment. It was the obvious intention of
the clause to apply to the case of Sir T. Wilson. Now be
(Lord Crenworth) was the last person on earth to withdraw
any protection from the preservation of Hanipstruitheath
to the public : he behoved it to be essential to the well being
of the inhabitants of the metropolis. But then, if Sir T.
Wilson's successor was likely to be the absolute owner, the
only legitimate wry to preserve the heath to the public
would bete say, "Let the public purchase it." (Hear, Lear.)
It was fit also that it sbould he known that, as far as he
(Lord Cranworth) could see, the land of which Sir T.
Wilson proposed to grant building lessee bad not the
remotest connexion with Hampstead-heath. It was either
just over or under a mile from the nearest point of the
heath, being somewhere near what was called the Swiss
Cottage. He should be glad even if that lend could be laid
oat in rising walks for the benefit of the public, but that
was impossible ; and why Sir T. Wilson should nut have the
same privilege of dealing with this portion of his property
as other people with theirs, he could not conceive. At the
same time he thought one or two other amendments might
usefully he added to the measure. A noble earl had pointed
oat to him the objection that, whereas the act eutborised
the Court of Chancery to give powers to trustees to make
building leases, the trustees, although thus authorised,
could not make a binding lease without the consent of the'
Court of Chancery in each particular case. This provision
bad a meet damaging effect with those persons who had to
go to the Court of Chancery, for though the expense might
sot be more than If. or V.. and the time occupied not more
than a fortnight or three weeks, people were frightened at
the idea, and where there was a competition amongst land-
owners to grant building leases, those persons who were not
obliged to come to the court had the advantage. He fur-
ther thought that the clause, which, speaking from recollec-
tico, he believed had been introduced Into the act, requiring
notices to be given to the distric.. was wholly unee, emery
and ridiculous, for the act had nothing whatever to do with
the interstate of the public.
The Earl of MALMESBURY supported the bill, on the
ground that the object of the noble lord who iotroduced
the Settled Estatee Act had been to * great extent defeated
by what had since occurred, nod the interpretation which
had been put upon the act. He spoke from his own ex-
perience when he said that an applicant who bad obtained
powers under this act, by further having to go to the
Court of Chancery for the consent of the court to every
Jew that be made, was not in the same position as be
would have bees if be had obtained a special act of par-
limnent.

Lord REDESDALE observed that the clause, though
originally passed to meet the c►ve of Sir T. Wilson, bad
eines been found to affect the interests of several other per-
sons. He thought the clause should be repealed.
Lord BBURY said be was quite aware in bow invidious
•positions member of that house stood who vactured to
appose such $ measure as this. But he must observe that
hem noble friend (Lord Chelmsford) was in error when lie
said that Sir T. Wilson never contemplated interfering with
Hampatesil-heath, for in the preamble to the Lill of 1,•2,9
t►e ertinguiahment of rights of common over the heath
was expressly mentioned. It was also intiorrect to my
that the judges bad four times reported in favour of these
bills.

Lord CHELMSFORD said that the noble lord was en-
tirely mistaken. The judges Lad reported four tithes in
favour, and twice against the bills.
Lord EBURY could only adhere to his apprehension of
the facts, which was that the Lars never mooned in
favour of either of the bills. The will of the late Sir T.
Wilson was made in 1821, after the Regent'a.parit
had been made, and therefore it must have been
foreseen that this would be a valuable property ; and
the testator, having all the circumstances under view,
gave the present Sir T. Wilson a power of making budding
bases over his Greenwich and Charltou estates, but omitted
to give him the same power over the Hampstead property.
The inference was clear that he did not wish building leases
to be granted over the latter estate. But Sir T. Wllson was
sot precluded from applying to parliament fur statutory
powers. He was just as competent as ever be was to apply
to parliament for a private act. assisted, as he would be, by
the able support of his noble friend opposite.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the noble lord (Lord
)fiery) appeared to have a vivid recollection of the past,
when be was • member for Middlesex in the other house,
nod when, is coolueation with the other metropolitan '
members, be heeded the opposition to the Sales and Leases
el Settled Estates Bill No doubt it was a gre.t object to
re noble lord's late constituents to prevept the breath from
bu.g built upon, but the noble lord promised him that the
ilea members would unite in an effort to raise from
rh:ralsitimte of London a sem of money to buy the land
freer Sir Thomas Wilson and to compensate Lim for the
error which their opvviition to the bill had dope him. He
fir Lord Chancellor) had waited in vain for the ful-