The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-25 00:00:00

COPYIIOLD TENURES BILL.

Mr. J. STEWART moved that the Report on the
Copyhold Tenures Bill be brought up.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN opposed the reception of
the Report, on the ground of want of notice. He wished
to discuss the Bill clause by clause.
Mr. AGLIONBY said the Bill had been frequently be-
fore the House, and hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman
would let it pass the present stage, and defer his obser-
tions to the third reading.
Sir E. SUGDEN contended that the Bill was not pro-
perly understood, and therefore he should wish to have
it discussed. He did not object to the principle of com-
mutation, but he did to the compulsory powers given by
the Bill to the majority of copyholders of binding the
minority. He objected to the commutation being taken
as a corn rent, and he should certainly divide the House
upon it. The provisions relating to mines and minerals
required great consideration. The whole Bill required
a discussion in Committee, at which he hoped the legal
Members of the House would be present.
The Report was then brought up. On the motion that
the Bill be re-committed,
Mr. J. STEWART denied that there had been even
any desire to smuggle the Bill through the House. Its
promoters had always courted discussion, but found
that the opposition to it was concentrated in the
person of the Right Honourable Gentleman, and
that therefore during his absence there could be
no discussion. How was it if the tenants objected to the
Bill, that no petitions had ever been presented against
it ? On the contrary, there had been petitions to be in-
cluded in its provisions. The Bill was no more compul-
sory than any enclosure Bill. The corn rent had been
considered on the whole as the fairest for all parties. If
the clause relating to mines were the only objection of
the Right Hon. Gentleman, he was willing to give up
that clause for the sake of getting the Bill paised.
Mr. DARBY said he had before objected to the Bill.
He thought the Hon. Gentleman was mistaken in sup-
posing that tenants would consider the Bill as beneficial
to them. He would be happy to see the Bill passed in a
modified form.

Mr. G. HOPE thought the disadvantages of the pre-
sent state of the law were such, that persons who were
most averse to the change would be glad to see the pro-
posed alteration carried into effect.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that, in his opinion, this Bill
was one of the greatest boons that had ever been granted
to tenants. He hoped the House would consent to let
the Bill pass through its present stage.
Sir E. SUGDEN then withdrew his motion.
On clause 8 being proposed,
Sir K SUGDEN proposed the omission of the clause.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL supported the clause.
Mr. WAKLEY said that if the Right Hon. and
Learned Gentleman divided the House, he would divide
with him. He thought it was unjust that the public
should be called upon to pay the expense of the commu-
tations, as they would have to do if the clause were
suffered to pass.
Mr. HOPE said the compulsion was the same upon a
minority of lords as upon a minority of tenapts.
After a few words from Mr. BRISCOE,
Mr. STEWART said the expenses would be paid by
the parties, and not by the public, as stated by the Hon.
Gentleman.

Mr. HUME said this was a buying up of grievances,
and that he thought they would be bought up cheaply.
The House was about to divide, when,

Sir EDWARD SUGDEN said he would postpone his
opposition to the third reading.
The Report was then agreed to, and the Bill ordered
to be engrossei and read a third time on Thursday.
The Report on the Court Houses (Ireland) Bill was
received.

The Report cm the Turnpike Roads Bill was brought
up, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time on Friday.
On the motion of the Hon. F. MAULE, the Boroughs
Improvement Bill, and the Buildings Regulation Bill,
sent down from the Lords, passed through Committee,
on the understanding that if any Hon. Member should
desire to discuss any of the clauses, the Bills should be
rc-committed.