The Sun.
London, England, 1870-06-24 00:00:00

THE IRISH LAND BILL
On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
the Earl of LUCAN rose and made a violent speech
against the measure, which he denounced as a robbery,
outrageous and illusory, and one that was not wanted by
the tenants of Ireland. The bill had been brought for-
ward solely for the benefit of the landlords, and the com-
motions that had been got up in its favour had all been
attributable to the influence of the Government. Earl
Granville declined to reply to the noble lord's remarks,
which he thought ought to have been made when the
second reading of the bill was under consideration.
Their lordships then went into committee on the bill,
On clause 1, relating to the Ulster custom, being pro-
posed, Lord CAIRNS moved to insert words setting forth
that such holding should be on the estate of which such
holding at the passing of the Act forms a part. The
amendment, which was opposed by Lord Halifax, Lord
Dufferin, and Earl Granville, was withdrawn.
The Earl of DARTRY also moved an amendment, to the
effect that nothing in the Act should affect the right of
the landlord either to refuse or accept a new tenant upon
any change of tenantry, but it was withdrawn. On the
motion of Lord Cairns, the clause was so amended that
the Ulster custom was to cease - when the landlord had
" acquired".as well as purchased it. The Duke of RICH-
MOND moved an amendment that the option given to the
tenant under the Ulster custom to claim compensation
under the other clauses should only apply if the court was
of opinion that it involved no injustice or breach of con-
tract. Earl Granville thought the amendment useless,
but Lord Cairns differed from him in opinion. The Lord
Chancellor of Ireland (Lord O'Hagan) made his maiden
speech in the House of Peers in supporting the view
Earl Granville had taken of the proposal. He expressed an
opinion that if the bill passed, without material alteration
it would prove a blessing to Ireland, and tend more than
anything else to strengthen the attachment to the throne.
The noble lord spoke under extreme nervousness for a
few moments, but before he had finished his remarks he
had entirely recovered his self-possession. The amend-
ment was opposed by Lord Westbury and the Lord Chan-
cellor, and supported by the Marquis of Salisbury, who
pounced upon one of the observations of the noble duke
and learned lord who proceeded him, and said his lord-
ship by accident had stated the true object of the bill,
which was to upset altogether all past contracts. A divi-
sion at one time seemed imminent upon the amendment,
but as Earl Granville promised to consider the proposal
of the noble duke previous to the bringing up of the re-
port, the noble duke withdrew his amendment. The
clause as amended was then agreed to.
Clause 2 was agreed to after a verbal amendment had
been made at the instance of the Earl of Leitrim.

On clause 3, which relates to compensation for dis-
turbances in the absence of custom, the Duke of Rim-
moND disapproved7of the entire scale of compensation as
set out in the bill. In his opinion the Government pro-
posal was too high, and would entirely fail as far as small
holdings were concerned. He therefore moved to limit
the highest scale of compensation to six years instead of
seven, and to reduce the limit from holdings of £lO value to
£4 and under, and to limit the five years scale to holdings
under £2O instead of £3O. A discussion followed the pro-
position, which was supported by Lord Clancarty, the
Earl of Bandon, the Earl of Meath, Earl Grey, and the
Marquis of Salisbury, but Lord Granville, Earl Russell,
the Duke of Argyll, and Viscount Halifax strongly opposed
the amendment. Their lordships divided, when there
appeared,
For the amendment ..
Against

Majority against 2l
Another amendment was moved by the Earl of LITCH-
FIELD, to the effect that when the rent had been raised in
consequence of improvements effected by the landlord a
deduction should be made in the annual sum claimed as
the rent for the purposes of compensation, not exceeding
5-per cent. interest on the sum so expended in improve-
ments effected by the landlord, and that there should be
a presumption in the absence of evidence to the contrary
that the increase was in consequence of the outlay.
This amendment was opposed by the Government. A
division took place, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it
The Government were thus again in a minority this
time of 41.
On the motion of the Duke of RICHMOND the paragraph
was struck out giving a tenant in a higher class of the
scale an option of claiming to be compensated in so much
of his rent as will bring him into a lower class, with the
understanding that Government would bring in the
proviso again with the amendments necessary to bring it
into harmony with the rest of the bilL
The Earl of CLANCARTY moved an amendment, that no
compensation should be given for disturbance under the
clause to any tenant exhibiting an example of habitual
drunkenness, vice, or immorality, or who had been con-
victed for felony or misdemeanour.
The amendment was withdrawn, but not before Lord
CAIRNS had expressed an opinion that the Government
ought to frame some words to encourage moral conduct
on the part of the tenant.
An amendment was then moved by the Duke of RICH-
MOND, that the letting land in conacre should disqualify
for compensation for disturbance.
. The House divided, when there appeared-
-1 A. 9

For the amendment
Against
The amendment was carried in this case also against
the wishes of the Government by a majority of 34. The
Duke of Richmond then moved an amendment that in
any assignment of a will otherwise than by will the
assignee shall not be entitled to compensation for dis-
turbance unless and until he has been accepted by the
landlord. Earl Granville objected to the proposal, as it
would take away the right which the tenant had by com-
mon law and custom. Lord Cairns was of a different
opinion—he did not think the amendment would deprive
the Irish tenant of any existing legal right. A long
discussion ensued, which ended in time being allowed to
the noble earl (Granville), on the part of the Govern-
ment, to consider the propriety of framing a clause to
meet the amendment.
The Chairman reported progress at five minutes to one,
when their lordships'adjourned.