The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-01 00:00:00

lle should move that they should not rest upon their
amendments to the Bill.
Lord BEAUMONT thought it would be better for the
poor that the notice should be given twelve hours after
eviction, and that the Commons had made a mistake in
adopting the other principle.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said he could not
agree with the Noble Lord that the Commons were
wrong. The names were nothing without they could
ascertain the particulars of the case, which they could
not do unless previous notice had been given, in order to
find who were the parties entitled to relief. Without
this notice the parties might starve in the interval.
The motion was then put and agreed to.
INCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the adoption of
the Commons' amendments to this Bill. The object of
the amendments was to provide for the sale of incum-
bered estates without the intervention of the Court of
Chancery. He felt assured that it would only be neces-
sary to convince their Lordships that this could be done
with safety, to induce them to adopt them. The provi-
sions would effect that, as the parties selling under this
Bill would be bound to give notice .to all parties inte-
rested, and when all parties concurred the sale could
take place, but if ally objected they could take excep-
tion, and bring forward their objections in the Court of
Chancery, where, if they were found satisfactory, the
sale would be prevented; but when the sale took place,
with the concurrence of all partiea interested, there
would be a valuation previously made of the estate by a
surveyor appointed by the Lord-Lieutenant. The sale
when effected would constitute a good legal title against
all claimants. The Noble and Learned Lord was under-
stood to conclude by recommending that their Lordships
should agree to the Commons' amendments.
Lord STANLEY minutely reviewed the circumstances
connected with the Bill from the period of its introduc-
ton to the House of Lords down to the present time,
and gave it as his opinion that the measure now assumed
a totally different aspect from that which it presented
when their Lordships unanimously adopted it. In point
of fact, the Bill was not amended, but materially altered.
It was a new Bill, many of the original provisions hav-
ing been completely suspended, and alterations effected
by the Solicitor-General, who declared that the measure,
in the shape prepared by the Lord Chancellor on the
part of the Government, was incapable of being worked.
This he considered as a most inconvenient course of
legislation between the two Houses of Parliament.
It was highly inconvenient that at the end of a pro-
tracted session they should receive a Bill so altered in
its character, and have those alterations recommended
for their assent by the Noble and Learned Author of
the Bill. Upon the ground too that many Irish Peers were
necessarily absent from Parliament, attending to high and
important duties in Ireland, he objected to the considera-
tion of the amendments at the present time, involving as
they did twenty-three new clauses, and the alteration of
several of its old clauses. If the Bill in its new form
had to pass through the various stages of first, second,
and third readings, report, and committee, then indeed,
his objection might be regarded as trivial; but when
they were by one vote to come to a conclusion as to the
adoption or non-adoption of the measure, he thought he
was quite right in designating , the present an incon-
venient mode of legislation; and in protesting against
the further progress of the Bill, until the return of the
Irish Peers, who had given their assent to the measure
in a totally different form. He desired their Lordships
also to bear well in mind, that there was not a single
Peer or Member of the other House of Parliament pre-
pared to pass the Bill, who was willing that it should be
applied to England or Scotland; yet the English
and Scotch Peers, in the absence of the Irish Peers,
were called upon to pass the Bill, and to legislate
in a manner and on a principle respecting the sale
of incumbered estates in Ireland, which they ,were
not prepared either to advert or to advocate for them-
selves. The measure was so altered from the original,
and so completely changed in detail, that he thought it
would not be an unreasonable proposition if he were to
move that the Commons' amendments be referred to the
consideration of a Select Committee, to report on their
technical as well as practical effect. If he saw any die-
position exhibited to adopt their suggestions, ho should
make a specific motion on the subject.
The Earl of WICKLOW said that, after the speech
of the Noble Lord, he was quite prepared to have heard
him moving the rejection of the amendments, instead of
their reference to a Select Committee. He thought they
should agree to the amendments of the Commons, and
he was.confirmed in this view by the statement of the
Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack, who recom-
mended their adoption, inasmuch as the changes effected
were not of that material character to affect the principle
of the measure. Under the circumstances, he did not
think there was any necessity for the attendance of
Irish Peers to consider these amendments, because, in
addition to other reasons, it would be tantamount to a
postponement of all legislation on the subject until next
session of Parliament.
Lord MONTEAGLE thought that the Noble Lord
opposite (Lord Stanley) had rather under than over-
stated the objections to the amendments, and although
he felt the necessity for some measure on this subject, he
could not be a consenting party to alterations which so
seriously affected .the character of the Bill their Lord-
ships had unanimously carried. He had over and over
again complained of Bills being altered in tho House of
Commons when sent from the House of Lords, but he
never recollected a case where alterations had taken-
place so extensive as in the present instance. The
proper course would have been, had such alteratioris
been deemed necessary, to have withdrawn the Bill in
the House of Commons, and allowed a new one to be
brought in that House. That was what was due to the
House of Lords, and it was the course which should have
been adopted, but he considered it unfair to discuss these
amendments in the absence of so many Irish Peers, who
were so much interested in their enactment. In respect to
the proposal of the Noble Lord opposite (Stanley), which
no doubt was made in good faith, all ho proposed was
that they should refer these amendments of the Com-
mons to a Select Committee. If he thought that course
would defeat the Bill, he would oppose it; but he
thought that proper inquiry was their first duty, in order
to ascertain properly what was wanted, and then they-
could legislate on the facts and circumstances which such
inquiry divulged.
The Earl of DEVON said, as the principle of the mea-
sure was to facilitate the sale of incumbered estates in
Ireland, he thought that was a principle which it was
most necessary should be carried out. In regard to the
amendments of the Commons, these had been well consi-
dered, and they had found that the object of the Bill
could be efficiently carried out by other means than
through the machinery of the Court of Chancery. The
number of amendments was complained of, but these
were required from the view the House of Commons had
taken on the subject, as when it was determined not to go
to the Court of Chancery in certain cases, a great many
clauses were required to regulate the giving of notices tq
the various parties interested. Wishing, therefore, to
see the Bill pass this session, he could not consent to a
Select Committee, as it was of the greatest importance it
should become law as early as possible.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said, while the
principle of the measure introduced by the Lord Chan-
cellor was to give all reasonable facilities to the sale of
incumbered estates, the principle of the present Bill
,was
to give all unreasonable powers for that purpose. The
course of their present legislation was to get rid of a
certain class of Irish landlords; but, he would put it to
English landlords, whether the system adopted for that
purpose was a right or a just one? At all events, he
conceived that before certain powers had been taken
from the Court of Chancery and given to another
body, inquiry was necessary, in order that it might
have been ascertained to what other body such powers
should have been confided. Under the operation of the.
Act, as now amended, property would be disposed of
at so low a rate that the mortgages upon it could not be
liquidated, and therefore the parties could reap no
benefit from it. A person having a mortgage of
200 L upon an estate could put this Act in
motion; one having 1,0001. on five estates could
farce a sale of all those, and thus, by bringing
all those estates simultaneously into the market, a
proper value could not be expected for the properties,
and the real owners would, therefore, be unfairly dealt
with. Should they agree that such estates should not be
sold at less than twenty years' purchase, then that might
be sonic security to the owners; but, unless they gave
some security to the incumbrancers against fraud, they
would commit the greatest wrong on the owners of pro-
perty by passing the present measure.
The Earl of GLENGALL agreed with the Noble
Lord (Lord Stanley) that it was most necessary the
Bill should be referred to a Select Committee, as there
were so many technicalities connected with the case, that
inquiry was much wanted. He bad a great many amend-
ments himself to propose, whieh he would persist in
doing, although he might be called factious in so doing.
Considering as he did that this Bill was a Bill of rob-
bery, faction was good against robbery any day in the
week.—(Hear, hear.) If they adopted the Bill they
would run a great risk of losing the support of those
who were at present standing by the Government
and the Crown, as there would be no security to
parties getting proper value for their properties. It
was well known that there were companies formed for
the purpose of lending money on Irish estates, and he
happened to know the secret history of one forming by
six English Quakers, who had concocted a scheme for
the purpose of purchasing Irish estates, when, by their
plan, they had driven a great quantity of land into the '
market at a price far below its real value. It was not to
be supposed that these Quakers intended to go to Ireland
and reside there; no, they would again resell the land at
a profit, in small parcels, to other parties. This was the
game they were at. The facts were well known in the
offices at the east end of London, and it was from parties
such as these that this plan emanated, and who support
the Bill with that view. He asked their Lordships whe-
ther they would pass this Bill under these circum-
stances? It was not that the great body of Quakers are
engaged in this plan, but these half dozen had taken
advantage of the benevolence of their sect, and pro-
posed it under pretence of doing good. This Bill was
neither more nor less than a confiscation of pro-
perty. He asked their Lordships to mark his words.
If this Bill came into operation (said the Noble Lord)
you will do more than Mr. O'Connell was able to do, you
will repeal the union, because you will confiscate the
lauded property of the Protestant proprietors, and when
once their property is taken from them, the English
Church in Ireland will not be keg in following the
alienation of that property.—(Hear, hear.) Under the
poor-law there were four unions that were now paying
from 12s. to 17s. 9d. in the pound for poor-rates, and if
the land of these unions was thrown into the market he
asked who on earth would give a single shilling for it.
It was the opinion of the Master of the Rolls in Ireland
that this Bill was ono that ought not to pass in its pre-
sent shape, and there was no man in either country to
whose opinion more respect was due, because of late
years he had paid great attention to the subject, and had
experienced great difficulty in placing property under
receivers. For the reasons he had given, he hoped their
Lordships would allow the Bill to go into a Select Com-
mittee, where all these details would be argued impar-