The Sun.
London, England, 1865-04-01 00:00:00

HOLIDAYS.

In answer to Sir S. NounrcoTE,
Lord PALMERSTON said it was the intention of the
Government to take the navy estimates on Monday, the
army estimates on Thursday, and on Friday the 7th to
adjourn until Monday the 24th for the Easter holidays.
Sir S. NORTEICOTE asked when the Bank Notes Issue
Bill would be taken?

Lord PALMERSTON said he would give an answer on
Monday.

THE BISHOPRIC OF LAHORE BILL.

Mr. D{SRAELI asked when it was proposed to proceed
with this bill ?

Sir C. WOOD said not until after Easter.
ANTICIPATED RESIDENCE OF THE POPE IN

ENGLAND.

In reply to Mr. NEWDEGATE,
Lord PALMERSTON said ho had so many things to
read, so ninny things to write, and so many persona
to see at home, that he was unable to follow up
closely the matters that appear in the newspapers abroad.
Ho had not had his attention directed to the matter until
that afternoon, and he was sorry that the rev. prolate
should have in his slYNech remarked that England was the
natural enemy of Franco. He had further to inform the
hon. gentleman that he had not seen the articles published
in the Journal des Debuts. The question of the hon. gen-
tleman anticipated the future—(laughter)—matters which
were involved hr great doubt. (Laughter.) He assumes
that in two years the Pope would be compelled to leave
Rome, that might or might not be ; but he had to inform
the lum. gentleman that the Government entertained the
greatest respect for the Pope personally(hear, hear)—
and for that great community of Christians the Roman
Catholics. With regard to the Pope taking up his resi-
dence in London, that was most unlikely. Some time ago
when matters were in a very troubled state, Mr. Russell
had stated to the Pope that in the event of his taking up
his residence at Malta every attention would be paid to his
comfort and convenience. He had to give the same answer
to the hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear.)
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND).

On the order for going into committee of supply,
Mr. MAGUIRE, in moving for a select committee to
inquire into the laws regulating the relations between
landlord and tenant in Ireland, with a view to their more
equitable adjustment, drew a melancholy, if somewhat
exaggerated picture of the state of society there at the
present moment. The country was of a peculiarly agri-
cultural character ; consequently upon a good orbad har-
vest depended the prosperity or misery of its people. But
the condition of agriculture was backward, the great body
of the farming class were housed in miserable dwellings,
the food was mean, and their prospects dismal. And the
reason there was no. improvement was the absence of all
security of tenure. If the tenant held on lease he had no
security that on the termination of that lease he would get
the land at the same rent, or at such rate as would enable
him to live, or that the improvements which he effected
would not be confiscated by eviction. It was this want
of security of tenure that had given the principal impulse
to the tide of Irish emigration, and he thought that inquiry

should be instituted in order to see if anything could be
done to arrest it and prevent the continuance of what was
an undoubted danger to the empire. He want to keep
the people at home by securing to the farm 3" ti at if he
improved his land he should not have his rant raised to a
luinous standard, or if he built a house•that it should not
become the property of the landlord ; in ;hori, he desired
to offer to the people an inducement to improve and root
them as it were in the soil. He' disputed the accuracy of
the maxim proclaimed by Lord Palmerston on a former
night, that tenants'rights meant landlords' wrongs ; and in
simply asking that the rights of labour should be respected,
he asked for nothing that would injure the landlords or
interfere with the rights of property.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER seconded themotion, and earnestly
entreated the Government to concede what was a most
moderate request. Property had its duties as well as its
rights,, and nothing was a clearer duty of the owner of
land, if ho neglected his duty and did not improve it,
than that he should not prevent the tenant from improv-
ing it, and so increasing the growth of human,food.
Lord COURTENAY, who delivered his maiden speech,
said he should give his support to the motion, although he
did not concur in all the grounds upon which it was placed
by the mover. The position of the tenant in Ireland was
by no means so good as that of the tenant in England.
Here many things were done by the landlord which there
were expected to be done by the tenant, and amongst these
were the reclamation of waste lands, drainage, and the
erection of buildings. Thinking that the relations be-
tween landlord and tenant ought not to rest, as they did
now, upon the personal character of the former, he should
like to see some legislation on the subject. Shadowing out
his own views as to the best mode of treating the question,
the noble lord remarked that it should be clearly laid down
that the tenant had no right to claim compensation for im-
provements effected without the sanction of his landlord,
and the compensation should be either pecuniary or in the
shape of a prolongation of the term of occupancy. If the
motion were not agreed to the people of Ireland would
have just reason to complain. He did not hold the doc-
trine of tenant-right, but he could not help admitting, as
the son of a proprietor of land in Ireland, that the rela-
tions of landlord and tenant there were not in a satisfac-
tory state, and that an investigation of the subject, con-
ducted by a competent tribunal, such as a committee of
that house, must be productive of good.

Mr. E. L. GO WEB, believing that the proposed inquiry
pointed to tenant-right, that it would raise expectations
never to be fulfilled, and that the agitation of the question
,would not be beneficial, but injurious to the interests of
Ireland, hoped the Government would not give it their
assent.

The motion was supported by Mr. Moore (Tipperary)
Colonel Greville, Dr. Brady, Mr. M‘Mahon, and The
O'Con or Don.

Colonel VANDELEUR, as an Irish landlord, gave his
warm approval to the motion, convinced that inquiry must
be productive of good.
Mr. DUNNE, speaking in the double capacity of landlord
and tenant, declared that the condition of both was most
unsatisfactory.

Colonel DICKSON would also vote for inquiry as a
moans revealing the true state of Irish properties.
_ _

Mr. COX, as a member of the Irish Society, was prepared
to support the motion.

Mr. ROEBUCK reproached Ministers with the observ-
ance of a pusillanimous reticence, and with allowing the
debate to be protracted so many hours without making any
sign. It was the function of a Government to lead, and
not to follow the house. Let there be an inquiry, for there
Was no doubt that the landlord and tenant question lay at
the root of the Nish difficulty.
After some remarks from Mr. MON-sm., who likewise
•gale his adhesion to the motion,
Lord PALMERSTON said that if there were one thing
which a nation ought to respect it was the rights of pro-
perty ; and if laws were passed infringing those rights they
might depend upon it that in the end such laws would be
injurious to the nation, however tempting the advantages
which might be expected to arise from them. He could not
bring his mind to the conviction that there would be any
justice, and therefore any permanent benefit to a country in
giving to one man the right of determining what should be
done with the property of another. When, on a former night,
he spoke of tenants' rights as landlords' wrongs, he meant
tenants' rights as ho apprehended them to be understood
in many parts of Ireland, and especially the rights pro-
posed to be conferred on the tenant of dealing with the
property of the landlord, not only without, but against
his sanction, coupled with the condition that at
some future period the tenant might compel the
landlord to Pay for alterations which he would
not himself have made, and to the making of which he had
objected when they were made. Referring to the effect
of the relations, between landlord and tenant on the
emigration from Ireland, the noble viscount observed, that
the manner in which any change in those relations was to
check emigration hqd not been satisfactorily explained. It
was the system of leases granted in the last century. for 61
years, determinable on the death of three lives, that had
prevented improvement. The tenants who held under
those leases were the least improving in the world, and
speaking from his own experience it was not until they
became tenants at will -.that they began to improve. No
doubt it was desirable to encourage improvement, and for
this purpose, that the tenant should have sectrity that on
a change of occupation lie should be reimbursed for im-
' provemcnts of a certain kind; but the fundamental basis
of any such right or claim ought to be a mutual agreement
between the parties. It was said that the Act of 1860 had
not produced the effects it was designed to aceomplish,and
th., Government could have;no objection to inquire into its
operation and results. Such an inquiry might be concluded
within a very short period ; but an inquiry into all the re-
lations between landlord and tenant would extend to a
most unreasonable time.

Mr. MAGUIRE accepted the proposal, and an amended
motion agreed to nein. con. for appointing a select commit-
tee to inquire into the operation of the Act 23d and 24th
Viet., chap. 133, relating to the tenure and improvement of
land in Ireland.

The East India Governor-General's Powers, &c., Bill;
the Courts of Justice Concentration, Site,. Bill; and the
Sheep and Cattle Bill, were read a third time and passed.
The Enclosure Bill went through committee.
Mr. LYGON obtained leave to- bring in a bill to pro-
vide for the episcopal superintendence of certain educa-
tional, and charitable institutions.

On the motion of Alr.Grßsos a select committee was ap-
pointed to inquire into the upper Thames:navigation.
The other business on the paper was also disposed of,
and the house adjourned at half-past 11 o'clock.

The Piccadilly and Park-lane New Road

Bill,

The following is the Report of the Referees on the
Petitions of-1. The Duke of Sutherland ; 2. The
Duke of Buccleuch ; 3. The Marquis Conyngham
4. The Guardians of the Earl of Eldon ; 5. The
Hon. Henry Butler Johnstone Munro ; 6. Sir E.
C. Kerrison, M.P. ; and 7. The Executors of the
late Henry David Blyth, Esq.

" This is a bill promoted by the Metropolitan Board of
Works, for opening a communication through Hamilton-
place betweon Park-lane and Piccadilly.
" The petitioners, who appeared by counsel before the
referees in opposition to the bill, were the abore-named
noblemen and gentlemen, being the lessees under the Crown
of houses in Hamilton-place and of No. 140, Piccadilly.

" Objections were taken to the bill on behalf of these
petitioners, partly on the ground of engineering defects
but mainly on account of the insufficiency of the Parlia-
mentary estate, which states the amount required to be
expended for the purposes of the bill at £lO,OOO.
" The items into which the estimate may be divided aro
three

" The cost of the land required for the road.
" 2. The formation of theroadway and incidental works.
" 3, Compensation for the property required to be taken
or which may be affected by the works.
"Much evidence was given, both by thn promoters and
by the petitioners, with reference to these several items,'
the opinions of experienced architects and valuers wero
adduced on either side in support of their respective views.
" 1. With respect to the cost of the land required.
" Some portion of jhe proposed road would be made
through that part of Hyde-park which' is now within the
enclosure of Ilamilton-gardens, and is the property of the
Crown, and another portion through land belonging to the
Dean and Chapter of Westminster.

" The valuations of these two portions of land by Mr.
Charles Lee on behalf of the petitioners were, for the
Crown land, £6,577, and for the Chapter land, £2,730,
making together £9,307.

"The sum provided by the promoters' estimate for pur-
chase of land was £1,500 in the whole, but it was stated by
them that this sum was to be allocated exclusively to the
purchase of the Dean and Chapter's property. With regard
to the Crown land, they avowed that they had designedly
made no provision for purchasing it; relying upon the dis-
tinct information given to them by the Chief Commissioner
of Works that, although the legal estate of the Crown in
that part of the Park would not 1)3 surrendered to them,
the roadway which it was sought to obtain power to carry
through it would be permitted by the Crown to be male
without payment.

"In support of this statement they referred to two letters
of the Chief Commissioner of Works, dated respectively
Dec. 6 and Dec. 24, 1864, addressed to the Lords Commis-
sioners of the Treasury, and which are set out at pages 13
xnd 17 of the correspondence printed by order of the House
of Commons.

" For the land proposed to be purchased from the Dean
and Chapter of Westminster, the promoters' estimate of
£1,500 may, in the opinion of the referees, be assumed to
be not unreasonable.

"2. With regard to the cost of executing the roadway
and incidental works, there was no material difference of
valuation. Tho promoters assume that it may be done for
£1,900. Mr. Leo estimated it at £2,050.
" The important difference and the main contention be-
tween the parties related to the item of compensation.

."The petitioners may be divided, in regard to this quel-

tion, into two clarzes ;one consists of the lessees of the
houses in Hamilton-place which will or may, in wholo orin

part, be taken or interfered with for the purposes of the bill.
The other consists of the leases of houses in Hamilton-
place, or in the part of Piccadilly adjoining thereto, which
it was alleged wouldbe injuriously affected and depreciated
in value by the conversion of Hamilton-place from a cul de
sac into a public thoroughfare.
The latter class of petitioners, in order to make good
their claims to compensation, would have to bring their re-
spective cases within the operation of the 68th section of
the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, under the category
of lands or houses injuriously affected' by the construc-
tion of the works. Such cases may involve some important
questions of law, and may possibly come under the adjudi-
cation of the legal tribunals. The referees desire to refrain
from giving any opinion as to the validity or invalidity of
such claims; but it appears clear to them that claims of
this nature, founded upon allegations of contingent and
consequential injury, in respect of which the promoters
entirely deny their liability, are not such expenses as they
{tile promoters) are required to provide for in their Parlia-
mentary estimate.

" The properties which come under the other class, as
being subject to be taken, in whole or in part, for the pur-
poses of the works, are the houses numbered 5,6, and 7, in
Hamilton-place.

"The case of No. 7, however, stands upon this footing :
The house is included within the limits of deviation, but
the promoters distinctly stated that it is not their intention
to take or interfere with it in any respect, and that they
will consent to be strictly confined to the line of the road
as laid down upon their deposited plans, leaving these
premises unaltered.

"Nos. 5 and 6 have each a garden attached to them. The
proposed roadway would cut off a small portion (about 20
superficial feet) from the garden of No. 5. It would inter-
sect and take away a large portion of the garden of No. 6.
According to the arrangement proposed by the promoters,
the space taken from the garden of No. 5 would be com-
pensated by throwing into it a much larger piece of ground
(about 1,000 superficial feet), and they consider that by so
doing they would indemnify the proprietors and leave no
further claim for compensation in respect of No. 5.
" The deterioration which would be caused to No. 6 by
the loss of garden ground and other injury is estimated by
them at £6,600, which their estimate would be just enough
to cover.

"According to the valuations of the witnesses for the
petitioners on the other hand, there would be a deterioration
in value of No. 5 amounting to £B,OOO, and of No. 6 amount-
ing to £6,000. The evidence on this part of the case was
very conflicting; but it appeared to the referees that the
houses in question, from their peculiar character and the
circumstances of their position, possess to a considerable
extent what may be called a fancy,' or speculative value,
depending on individual taste and sentiment, and therefore
not capable of being estimated according to a strict standard
of market value,

" Such being the case, the referees, feeling the difficulty of
arriving at a precise conclusion, and of determining before-
hand what the value of the property in question may be in
case the proposed roadway should be constructed, aro not
prepared to pronounce a positive opinion that the estimate
of the promoters will prove insufficient for the purpose of
the required compensation. -
" The objections taken to the works on engineering
grounds were confined to two points. Tho first related to
a power at present contained in the bill of deviating from
the level of the intended road, as shown upon the sections.
This abjection was met on the part of the promoters by
declaring their intention to expunge these powers from the
bill, and to adhere to the levels shown. The second and
more material objection was to the alleged deficient width
of the roadway, which, as appears from the plans, would
allow no more than 28ft. 4in. at the narrowest point for the
carriage-way, measured between the kerbstones. Theso
dimensions may no doubt be regarded as less ample than,
with a view to public convenience, might be desired.' Ft
should, however, be observed that the proposed width is
the utmost that can be afforded between the houses on
either side of Hamilton-place, as they now stand, and that
greater width could not be obtained without sacrificing
property of large value.
"It appears to the referees under these circumstances
that the question, in this respect, is not to be regarded as
one of mere engineering merits or details, but involves
considerations affecting the expediency of the proposed
route and the genoral merits of the scheme, which belong
properly to the Committee on the Bill, and• not to the
referees.

"HUGH EDWARD ADAM, Chairman."

Metropolitan Board of Works.

The ordinary weekly meeting of the Metropolitan Board
of Works was held yesterday at the office, Spring-garden;
Mr. John Thwaites in the chair.

FINANCE.

The cash statement of the Finance Committee was pre-
sented, which showed the following balances in the hands of
the treasurer—Current accounts, £256,177 10s. Bd. ; depo-
sit accounts, £318,300 ; total, £604,467 108. Bd. ; Govern-
meat securities, £51,371 10s. 10d.; checks ordered but not
presented, £17,083 Bs. 7d.