The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-01 00:00:00

PRINCE.

Sir GEORGE GREY said that, in the absence
of the First Minister, it was his duty to make
a motion which a recent event would render
necessary. The House would, he was sure, be anxious
to take the earliest opportunity of repeating the ex-
pression of the deep interest which it feels in the domes-
tic happiness of the Sovereign. Her public and private
virtues had rendered her the object of attachment and
admiration to her people.—(Loud cheers.) Re had
to move that an humble Address be presented
to ler Majesty, congratulating her on the birth of
another Prince.—(Cheers.)
Sir R. IL INGLIS had the greatest pleasure in
seconding the motion. Every year from the first mo-
ment of ner accession had added to her fame, and had
secured to her the affection end gratitude of her peop:e.
The birth of every child bad only furnished a new mo-
tive to her people for such manifestation.
The Address was agreed to.
LANDLORD AND TENANT BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of the Bill,
Mr. CIIItISTOPIIEB, said this Bill certainly had not
the objections of former measures, inasmuch as it was
only permissive arid not compulsory, but still he ob-
jEcted to all such Bills as these on principle. There
ought to be no legislative irterf, rence between landlord
and tenant. Those two parties ought to be left to manage
their own affairs. Customs differed in different countrie-,
and it w therefore, impossible to establish any :43'i:cm
which could apply to all. But in glancing his eye ow r
this Bill he saw many objections to it in detL4ii; it omitted
to make any provision for distiaints in case of Gilepi-
datiens and slovenly management, while in some in-
still:nes it conferred upon the tenant powers which
would destroy the mutual confidence which ought
ale ays to exist between landlord and tenant. Now,
it was of the utmost importance that a
good feeling should stall times prevail between landlord
and tenant, but ho was very much afraid, whatever
might he the laudable motives of its introducer, he was
very much afraid the interference of this Bill would de-
stroy the unanimity that now exists in many counties.
If the house determined to pass the measure, he
would not put them to the troublo of dividing, but inas-
much as tlie.Gallant Member for the city of Lincoln, who
had given notice of an amendment, was not in his place,
he should take leave to move that the Bill be read u se-
coed time this day six months.

Sir G. STRICIC.LAND looked upon the Bill as a di-
rect attick upon the rights of private properly. Adam
Smitlis laid it down as the bust rule that coun-
tries could follow to allow private individuals
to manage their oa n affairs in the manner which they
thought best fur their own interest; but, although the
Bill was opposed to that principle, it was :aid the Bill
could do no harm, as it was only permissive. Well, but
the landlords and tenants of this country already pos-
sessed the power which this Bill would give them, and
since it was wholly uncalled for and quite unnecessary,
what was the use of passing a Bill which gave no peruns-
sion at all? It cominenced by stating that it was highly
expt client to allow landlords and tenants to wake
agreements for their own mutual interests. Why, did
they not possess that right at common law? Where was
the use then of passing a superfluous Bill, which might
at first sight appear to be harmless, because it was based
upon the permissive principle, but which might eventu-
ally, if it were passed into a law, become an engine of
mischief, by having it quoted as a precedent for
interfering with the rights of private property?
Marling was a very expensive process, and this Bill
provided for laying the expense of that process upon the
landlord. Now marling was a thing which was ruineus
to some kinds of land; yet this Bill would make it in-
cumbent on a landlord to marl his land, though it went

to the destruction of it. He contended that the tenant-
farmersin Lincolnshire and Yorkshire did not want this
Bill. The best suthot hies in Lincolnshire were decidedly
opposed to it, on the ground that it would cause endless
litigation, and destroy all confidence between landlord
and teftsnt.

Lord GALWAY thought the Bill was uncalled for
and unnecesEary; ho should, therefore, vote fur the
amendment.

Mr. AGLIONBY was prepared to support the second
reading of the Bill. The Hon. Baronit (Sir G. Strick-
land) treated the Bill as it it were compulsory, though
he afterwards said it was permissive; but at present no
landlord who had only a life interest in land could make
an agreement with his tenant. The Bill was only per-
missive, and en that ground he thought it might be use-
ful, and because it would bind the remainder man in cases
where a tenant for life might make an agreement with his
tenant.

lie thought it would have been more courteous to the
House and the country, and have saved the time of
Hon, Members, it; instead of allowing the Bill to pro-
ceed to its present stage, they had rejected it at once,
but having reached its second reading, he would aow
give it his support, reserving to himself the right of
moving any amendments in Committee.
Mr. PACKE said he had seen the hardships to which
the farmers of this country were exposed, end thinking
they were entitled to some relief he should vote for the
second reading.
Colonel SIBTHORP said it was alleged that the Bill
would effeA an improvement in the condition of tenants;
but he did not see that they wanted any
improvement. He was not aware of having
a discontented tenant in coy one of the estates which
he possessed in different counties. All they wanted was
a fair, liberal, and proper understanding baween land-
lords and tenants, on the principle of live and let live,
and then all such Bills as the present would be
wholly unnecessary. He should next expect that a
Bill would be introduced into the House to fix the wages
of his footman, to say at what hour he should dine, and
what he should have fur dinner. He was entirely op-
posed to the Bill, because it would be detrimental
to the interests which it was proposed to relieve,
and he should oppose it in every stage.—(Laughter.)
Mr. DRUMMOND said he should vote for the second
reading of the Bill; but unless it was so altered in Com-
mittee as to make it very much uniike what it was
at present, he should oppose the Bill in its
future stages.—(A laugh.) The farmers had lust all
confidence in the legislation of the House; but still he
should give the Bill his support in tile hope tint
when amended, it would in some degree accomplish
the object which it bad in view.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT observed that a great
authority had been 'all-red to for the purpose of show-
ing that nothing was so dangtiOUs as to fere in the
management of private property, especially. as regarded
landlord and tenant ; the object of thin Bill was not to
uterfere with the rights of those parties, but to remove