The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-06 00:00:00

EVIPERIAL PARLIAMENT..
ROUSE OF CO111(012NIALTr ID/55
BILL.
OUT-GOING TENANTS
(Continued from our Afternoond ofEditionn yesterday.)
Mr. J. O'CONNELL sal had been said that
the great populatie.n. of Ireland.
,was. an evil ; but
would the House ot Lommons give its sanction to
that opinion ? The people of Ireland were
solely dependent upon the land ; there were no
large manufactories, and very few persons employed
in commercial pursuits. The people of Ireland
mast live, but if they were to be exterminated at the
will of the landlords, why let that rule be at once
openly proclaimed, so that the people might know
what they had to depend upon. With respect to
tenant-right, it had been shown that in those
provinces where that system existed there was also
great prosperity. Tenant-right did not supersede the
necessity of leases, it was simply this—that the tenant '
should not be turned out of his occupancy without ob-
taining the means of going elsewhere. He did not wish
. the House to pass a law compelling all parties to pay
a sum for tenant-right at so many years' purchase,
what he wished was that the parties might have the
full benefit of going into the open market, and ob-
taming the full value for their tenant-right.
The House had it in its power to allay
the present large amount of bad feeling
• which existed in the country on the subject.
He thought that this measure was most desirable for
Ireland, that it was more looked to than the question
of repeal, and he was sure that if the House was
anxious to wean the people of Ireland from agitating
the repeal, they could not adopt a better course than
giving their sanction to this measure.— (Hear.)
Lord CASTLEREAGH trusted the House would
allow the second reading of the Bill to take place, in
order that the measure might go to a Committee up
stairs. If the Hon. Gentleman the Member for
Rochdale, however, would not allow the Bill to go to
• a Committee up stairs, he should, however reluc-
tantly, believing that the Hon. Member had brought
in the measure with the best intentions, feel com-
pelled to vote against the second reading of the Bill.
Captain ARCHDALL denied the statements that
had been made by the Hon. Member opposite (Mr.
John O'Connell) with respect to the Orangemen of
Ireland, but asserted that there were still plenty of
members of that body ready to put down the poi-
. sonous agitation that his conduct had given rise to.
Sir J. WALSH opposed the second reading of the
; Bill, believing that the general alteration of the law
• of landlord and tenant in Ireland could never be
productive of any good to that country. He be-
lieved that no system of legislation could by any
means satisfactorily settle the question, but of this
he was convinced, that it would never benefit the
tenant. Leave the tenants to themselves, and
they would never attempt to effect improvement
in the land, and he, therefore, called upon the
Rouse to consider before they inflicted injus-
tice upon the landlords by passing this Bill. Many
of its clauses were, in his opinion, most impo-
litic, and he was very much afraid that if other Bills
passed into a law it would have the effect of in-
creasing rather than mitigating the evils of the sister
kingdom.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. O'CONNOR highly approved of the
general tone of the speech delivered by the Hon. and
Learned Member for the University of Dublin,
notwithstanding it was regarded by the Hon. Member
for Limerick as teeming with acerbity. He denied
• the statement of the Hon. Member for Limerick, that
if they passed the Bill they would be inflicting a
juggle upon the people. On the contrary, in his
,pinion, it would confer considerable benefit upon
the Irish nation ; and if they analysed the
arguments of the Honourable Member, the
House would find that they in no way
militated against the Bill. He had no desire
to deprive the landlords of Ireland of their jest
rights, but the House must not forget that the tenant
had rights too. He directed skill, capital, and in-
. dustry to the improvement of his landlord's property,
and it was nothing but just that he should be com-
pensated whenever he was deprived of his holding.
The Honourable Member for Limerick said they
ought not to legislate upon this subject, but, in his
opinion, that was a most socialist argument, and one
that ought not to be entertained. If they were not to
legislate upon this subject, how was the poor tenant
to obtain redress for his wrongs ? The Bill under
discussion, in his estimation, did not go far enough.
It did', not provide for the performance of the
duties of those landlords who forsook their native
land for the sunny clime of Italy ; but he would,
nevertheless, be satisfied with the Bill as it stood,
and he warned the English landlords of that House
- that it would ultimately turn out for their interest
that it should be passed into a hew. The truth was,
the Hon. and Learned Member for Limerick had
mistaken cause for effect, and confounding the Bill
with that of the Secretary's for Ireland, he
had. fallen into the error of making a
most splenetic speech upon the rights of
the tenants of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) Much
oppression had been inflicted by the English nation
upon Ireland, but he could not conceal from himself
the fact that England had been no less oppressed by
the Irish representatives in that House, and the ma-
jority of them were following up that system of
injustice towards England by trying to convince her
Members that this measure was a mockery, a
delusion, and a snare.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
If Lord Clarendon's plan of sending lecturers through
the country were adopted, great good could not fail
to ensue—not mere theorists, who travelled through
the country with " white feathers and cockades,"
but practical men.—(Loud laughter.) Let the
landlords do their duty—but they were too
proud to do so, too proud to identify them-
selves with agriculture.—(Cries of "No, no.") He
was glad to hear it; but in his time the land-
lords were so; in fact the words of Sheridan
were very applicable to this country, namely, that it
was a " poor and a proud one." He could not sit
down without recommending the House not to be Ted
away by the speech of the Honourable Member for
Limerick.
Sir G. GREY said, as the Secretary for Ireland, on
the last day on which the Bill was before the House,
entered fully into the reasons that induced the Go-
vernment to withhold its assent from the Bill, be
would not now needlessly occupy the time of the
House. He bore testimony to the practical speech
of the Honourable Gentleman the Member for the
- University of Dublin.—(Hear.) The next question
_ was fraught with great difficulties ; but if they
thought that they could pass a law to settle all ar-
rangements between landlords and tenants in all parts
of Ireland they were much mistaken. When a tenant
took land at lOs. an acre
which he believed he could,
raise to the value of 30.5.' he
should stipulate to take
given period.—(hear.) To him it
the land for a
appeared that the interests of thmeostandlords and
promotion
thr.t
tenants were identical ; and it was
they should act together for the
tection of their common interests. l•i'haencißpigrob-s
Honourable Baronet then read an advertisement
which had been published in some of tahgeenftuoefese
County papers, issued by Mr. Price, the
Marquis of Lansdowne, !and Mr. Fitzpatrick, stating
that farms were ready to let for terms of 21 or 30 veari
on conditions which would secure to the tenant fair
• value for his improvements. When the Landlord
And Tenant Bill came before the House, he should be
prepared to show the facilities which it gave for
adjusting such matters between landlords and tenants.
lie certainly could not agree in the proposal that the
mere tenancy-at-will occupancy of any person
should be sufficient to give a claim upon the land-
lord for compensation upon a change of tenancy,
for such was one of the provisions in
the Bill now before the House. He felt certain
that such a principle was not one which the House
would recognise, and it was his opinion that if such
expectations were held out by its consenting to the
second reading of the Bill, the most injurious results
would be the consequence. He was also of opinion that
any attempts at legislation upon the question inits pre-
beet form would only lead to the most extensive litiga-
tson. Upon these nounds, therefore, he trusted that the
_
would agree with him in the opinion that it
was riot advisable to allow the Bill to proceed any
further.
made to himti by to tine appeal which had been
I. O'Connell) es,
y theuinloon. Member for Limerick (Mr.
Orangemen were W whether armed bands of
of Ireland, he was allowedsueetla to wander about the north
for him to say that there at it was almost unnecessary
foundation for any such assertion.wnot the least shadow of
Mr. FAGAN said that ;et. not been able to
discover what there was in the had
of the Hon.
call forth the
lliember for Limerick calculated
tofr Nottingham
hoa_t that Hon.
. denunciations of the Hon. Member
(Mr. F. O'Connor). He thougt
Member had gone considerably
bnislwr ae
make that attack.
y to
Colonel BLACK-ILL opposed the se
of the Bill. With respect to the question of tch
Ulster
tenant-right, he begged to state that he was connectede
;with some property in the north of Ireland where
lot was acknowledged, upon which he had
e
that
been comp,,lled
to bring more ejectmentsthatneruwpoans
other property where the tenant-right of Ulster
not recognised. He thought it much better that no
legislation should take place upon the subject of
tenant-right.
Mr. P. SCROPE alluded to the state of discontent
_ existing among the people of Ireland, and called upon
the House to endeavour to adopt some measures to
fut an end to the disgraceful state of things existing
en that country,. The character of the agriculture of
Ireland was of the most crude and barbarous kind,
and there was no doubt that this was the result of
the existing law of landlord and tenant in Ireland,
and the uncertainty of tenure dependent thereon.
Mr. Drummond, in his celebrated letter, in which he
]rat announced the great truth " that property had
Its duties as well as its rights," stated that the
enornaou extent of the subdivision of the land
was the saw* of great evil to Ireland. He had

course
of the

been charged with bringing "wholesale charges"
against the landlords of Ireland, he denied that he
bad done so. He was fully aware that there were
landlords in Ireland as good as in this country, but
they were assembled as legislators, and it was their
duty to endeavour to adopt measures for
the prevention of anything like injustice or oppression
upon the part of any of the landlords. He hoped that
the question now before the House would be perma-
nently settled before the close of the present session.
It appeared that the tenant-right existing in Ireland
had existed for a considerable length of time. It
had been said that it would be better to leave
that question to be settled by the custom of
L liter, and not by legislative enactment. This
tenant right was similar to the " customary
tenure" which had lately been legalised in this coun-
try. Another system of tenant right was that of oc-
cupancy, giving a right to compensation; this no doubt
arose from the peculiar situation of the tenant, who,
if turned out of his little holding, had no means
whatever of obtaining the means of existence. He
did not think that the proposed measure would satis-
factorily settle the complicated question, and he should
therefore feel compelled to give his opposition to the
second reading.
Colonel RAWDON said that he should support
the second reading, in deference and respect to the
feelings of the people of Ireland, hut, at the same
ime, reserved to himself the right of adopting any
which he thought proper in the future stages
Bill.

Mr. SCULLY supported the second reading of the
Bill. It was most essential to the well-being of the
people of Ireland that they should have something
like certainty in the occupation of their lands.
Until some settlement of this question was made,
the House would find that agrarian outrages would
continue.
Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD replied. He
had heard nothing to induce him to change his
opinion upon the justice and importance of the Bill.
If all the landlords of Ireland were generous and
humane, there would be no necessity for the measure ;
but he regretted to say that the majority of the Irish
landlords were not of that class; and in justice therefore
to the oppressed tenants, he should press the motion
for the second reading of his Bill to a division.—
(Hear, hear.) It had been urged that there was no
necessity for the Bill, as the custom of tenant right
could be established under the common law. That,
however, was a mistake ; tenant right in Ireland
could only be established by a legislative enactment,
and it was not until he had made himself convinced
of this that he consented to introduce this Bill.—
(Hear, hear.) He was not so absurd as to think
that the clauses of the Bill were incapable of altera-
tion, and let the House sanction the second reading,
and he would readily consent to amendments in the
Committee.
The House then divided, when there appeared--
For the second reading ... 22
Against it
_ . . . .

Majority against it —123
GREAT YARMOUTH FREEMEN DISFRAN-
CHISEMENT BILL.

Mr. SEYMER moved the second reading of
this Bill. He said he supported the Bill because it
was necessary to purify the constituencies of the
kingdom, and where this proved ineffectual to disfran-
chise them. A freeman who could sell his vote for 3/.
ought not to be entrusted with the exercise of the
franchise. The Hon. Gentleman read a number of
extracts from the evidence adduced before the Select
Committee, to show that the electors ought to have
the franchise taken out of their hands, as they had
shown themselves unworthy to exercise the great
trust delegated to them by the Reform Bill. No one
of common sense could doubt that gross and open
bribery was practised at the last and previous elec-
tions for Great Yarmouth.
Mr. LUSHINIiTON seconded the motion.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered
to be committed this day week.
VOID ELECTIONS.

On the motion of Mr. HUME, the following mo-
tion was agreed to That in all cases where the
seat of any Member has been declared void by an
Election Committee, on the grounds of bribery or
treating, no motion for the issuing of a new writ
shall be made without previous notice being given in
the votes."