The Sun.
London, England, 1867-06-27 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF COMMONS—YESTERDAY.
The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.
TENURE OF LAND (IRELAND) BILL.

Sir C. O'LOGLILEN moved the second reading of this
bill, which dealt with the question of the tenure of land.
The main object of the bill was to discourage tenure at will,
and to substitute in its place the grantingof leases. The lion.
and learned gentleman contended that a tenancy from year
to year was the most objectionable tenure that could exist
in any country, because no occupier felt inclined to im-
prove Lis land, litte as ho was to be turned out of his
hulling at six mouths' notice. The bill was a permissive
one, nal it di I nut deal wills tenancies at present in ex-
istence, bat it referred only to tenancies comtusneed after
the passing of the Act, and it also ona ;tett that in the ab-
sence of any agreement in writing the tenancies should
be taken to be leasehold, and for the term of twenty-
one years. With respect to tenants-at-will, the
most effective way was to put every difficulty
in the way of persons insisting on them, and therefore he
proposA that the notices to quit shoull be given 12
mouths beforehand, instead of six, and that the tenant
sho .11 be entitled to ono half of the cluoty c-ss front the
landlord. In the next place, he proposed that the land-
lord should lose the right of distress, which, in conse-
quence of the guards thrown around it by the Legislature,
was never used iu Ireland exoept for purposes of
oppression. The bill also gave the right of compensation
to a tenant from year to year —if dispossessed by a notice
to quit—for the growing crops or manure that may
have been put upon the land, and compensation was also
given for tenant right where the man was turned out
against his will, and that racing stock should not be liable
to the landlord beyond the amount of the racing money.
Ile did not ask the house to accept the whole of the
clauses of the bill, but that which he was must anxious for
was that the house should affirm the preamble of the bill,
which was to discourage the system of year to year tenan-
cies, and the encouragement of granting leases in writing
for a given term of years. He believed the bill would
be productive of the greatest good in Ireland, and
that in a short time that country would become as quiet
as Scotland. The reason that it was not so was because
in the one country the land and Church question had been
settled, which made the people contented and loyal, whilst
in the other both those questions were in process of agita-
tion, which rendered the people disloyal and discontented.
Sir HARVEY BRUCE moved the rejection of the
bill ; ho did not attlibute the unhappy state of Ire-
land to the causes stated by the hon. and learned
member, but to former legislation of that house,
who repressed the rights, the commerce, the in-
dustry of the country, and which it would take years
to restore. He thought a great deal of the discontent was
caused by the introduction of little paddling bills into Par-
liament, and to parties who were continually haranguing
the people from the platform respecting the lost rights and
abject condition. He thought the bill would not carry out
the intention of the hon. and learned gentleman, and
therefore he moved that the bill be read a second time that
day six months.

Mr. C. FORTESCUE supported the motion for the
second reading of the bill, which agreed in many respects
with the one he brought forward last session.

Mr. Green and Lord Claud Hamilton opposed the bill,
and Mr. O'Beirne, Sir John Gray, and Sergeant Barry
supported it.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND sup-
ported the amendment, because he believed the bill would
work badly both for the landlord and tenant. He con-
tended that the landlords and tenants in Ireland should be
left to make the best bargain they could, each for himself,
without legislative interference, and a law compelling a
landlord to grant a 21 years' lease was both objectionable
and unjust. He denied that the state of the land and
Church question had made the people of Ireland either
disloyal or discontented, and it was idle, untrue, and
unfounded in fact, to say that either of the two nations
had anything to do with the organisation of the Fenian
conspiracy. The petty annoyances devised by the origi-
nator of the bill to be fastened on the landlord were most
unjust, and of such a nature that he felt sure they would
never receive the sanction of Parliament. If it was
thought necessary to impose any such condition on the
landlord, the proper way, in his opinion, was to do the
matter openly and honestly. He regarded the provision
of the bill giving the tenant a right to compensation for
loss or injury he might sustain by being dispossessed
of his land as one of the most extraordinary propositions
ever submitted to Parliament for its approval. The bill
was a most mischievous one, and therefore he felt certain
the house would reject it.
Mr. REILLY supported the bill, because it sought to
give a certainty to tenure iu place of a year to year occu-
pation, which acted injuriously upon the tenant, because
lie, feeling no certainty in his occupation, refrained
front bringing that land into the best state of cultiva-
tion, because the result of his doing so would
be to induce his landlord to demand an increased rent, and
in the event of the tenant not submitting to the demand
he was served with' a notice to quit, and thus all the bene-
fit of his exertions fell to the lot of the incoming tenant,
who had agreed to give the increased rent the landlord
had demanded, which, owing to his not having to perform
the labour of improving the land, ho was enabled to pay.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. READ opposed the bill. He thought it was im-
properly set forth in the preamble, because after a perusal
of its enactments he thought if ought to be called an act
compelling landlords to grant leases under pains and
penalties. As an English farmer he held land under
six landlords as tenant at will, and in only one
instance (lid he hold any written agreement. Ho did
not say ho should not prefer a lease, but the non-
possession of that did not induce him or others similarly
situated to turn Fenians. With regard to the
competition for Lull, he did not think it could
exist in a much stronger form in Ireland than
it did in England, because ho was familiar with a case in
which a tenant of a certain farm died, and within a very
few hours after there were no less than 18 applicants for
the possession of the farm, which. fell to the share of one
of them in preference to the descendant of the late tenant,
who bad expended a great sum of money on the land, for
which no compensation was ever given.

Mr. KENNEDY and D. BRADY supported the bill.
Mr. FORDYCE was addressing the house in favour of
the bill at a quarter to six, at which hour the debate
was adjourned.
ITYPOTLIEC AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The Lords' amendments to this bill were agreed to.
The house then adjourned.

MARKE TS. -- This day.
METROPOLITAN CATTLE.

The supply of beasts on sale hero b-day was very mo-
derate. The trade for most breeds ruled quiet at Mon-
day's currency, the top quotation being 5s 4d to 5s 6d per
81bs. The supply of sheep in the pens was moderate.
For most broods thore•was a fair demand at full prices.
Prime Downs and half-breds realised 5s 4d per 81bs.
Prime breeds were a steady demand, and realised 7s per
81bs; but inferior qualities were very dull. Calves—the
supply of which was moderate—moved off slowly at late
rates. The trade for pigs was quiet on former terms.