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

HOLIDAYS,

In answer to Sir S. NOILTHCOTE,

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. NORTHCOTE asked when the Bank Notes Issue
Bill would be taken?

Lord PALMERSTON said lie would give an answer on
Monday.

-THE BISHOPRIC) OF LAHORE BILL.

Mr. DISItAELI 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 many things to write, and so many persons
to see at home, that ho was unable to follow up
closely the matters that appear in the newspapers abroad.
He had not had his attention directed to the matter until
that afternoon, and ho was sorry that the rev. prelate
should have in his speech remarked that England was the
natural enemy of France. He had further to inform the
hon. gentleman that ho 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 in groat doubt. (Laughter.) He assumes
that in two years tho Popo would be compelled to leave
Rome, that might or might not be ; but he had to inform
the hon. 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 Popo taking up his resi-
dence in London, that was most unlikely. Some time ago
when matters wore 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. Ho had to give the same answer
to the hon. gentleman. (Hear, hoar.)
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
exeggorated 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 groat body
of the farming class wore housed in miserable dwellings,
the food was mean, and their prospects dismal. And the
reason there was no impro'vement was the absence of all
security of tenure. If the tenant held on lease he had no
security that on tho 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
clone to arrest it and prevent the continuance of what was
an undoubted danger to the empire. He wally, 3,1 to keep
the people at home by securing to the farm 3r ti .at if he
improved his land he should not have his nut raised to a
uinous standard, or if he built a house that it should not
become the property of the landlord ; in shoe, 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. FORS TER seconded the motion, 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 he 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, ho 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. GOWER, 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'Conor Don.

Colonel VANDELEUR, as an Irish landlord, gave his
warm approval to the motion, convinced that inquiry must
be productite 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
means 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 Irish difficulty.
After some remarks from Mr. MONSELL, who likewise
gave 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, ona former night,
he spoke of tenants' rights as landlords' wrongs, ho meant
tenants' rights as he 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 had 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 security that on
a change of occupation he should be reimbursed for im-
provements 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 accomplish,and
the 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 nem. con. for appointing a select commit-
tee to inquire into the operation of the Act 23d and 24th
Viet., chap. 153, relating to the tenuro 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 Mr.Grosos 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 between Park-lane and Piccadilly.
" The petitioners, who appeared by counsel before the
referees in opposition to the bill, were the above-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 are

three :

" The cost of the laud 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 th' promoters and
by the petitioners, with reference to these several items,
the opinions of experienced architects and valuers were
adduced on either side in support of their respective views.
" 1. With respect to the cost of the land required.
" Some portion of the 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 Leo 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 bo 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 tho 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 bo surrendered to them,
the roadway which it was sought to obtain power to carry
through it would bo permitted by the Crown to be made
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
a.nd 17 of the correspondence printedby order of the House
of Commons.

" For the land proposed to be purchased from the Dean
and Chapter of Westminster, the promoters' estimate of
.01,500 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. Lee 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 ques-
tion, into two classes ; one consists of the lessees of the
houses in ilanillton-place which will or may, in whole or in