The Sun.
London, England, 1845-02-24 00:00:00

We think that a tenant ought to have the power of getting
back his property that has been taken under distress, at
any stage of the process, before a sale has actually com-
menced. Some slight alteration of the law will be necessary
for this purpose.
We recommend that the costs of a distress shall be limited
and regulated by law, as is done is England by the statute 57
Geo. 111., c.
And there is one further limitation upon the exercise of the
power of distress, which we think may be imposed with advan-
tage. A distress may be made by the landlord or his autho-
rised agent. It is usually made by the bailiff or driver of the
estate, and it does not appear that in practice any written autho-
rity or warrant is commonly given to the bailiff to make any
particular distress. If he is the known bailiff, it is considered
that he is the agent of the landlord sufficiently authorised.
This mode of proceeding frequently leaves too great a dis-
cretion with a class of persons with whom it ought not to rest,
and we think it of importance that the responsibility should,
As far as.possible, be made to rest upon the landlord or his
agent.
We, therefore, recommend that it should be provided by
law, that no distress shall be legal unless made by virtue of a
warrant or order to distrain in writing, signed by the land-
lord or his agent, directing the bailiff to distrain the tenants
named therein, and bearing upon the face of it the date when,
and the place at which, it is signed ; and further, that no war-
rant shall be sufficient to authorise a distress which is not so
signed within twenty days of the time when the seizure is
wade.

Our object is, to provide that the personal attention and
judgment of the landlord or the agent shall be brought to bear
upon the actual circumstances of each particular case, in
which it is thought necessary to resort to the process of distress.
We believe that, as the law now stands, any irregularity in
any part of the proceeding renders the person making the dis-
tress liable to be treated as a trespasser ab initio. We think
that some alteration should be made in this respect, and that
landlords should only be liable to an action for irregularity.
We now come to the process of
.ejectment. To enable the
landlord (unembarrassed by the niceties of re-entry for condi-
tions broken at common law) to enforce the payment of his
rent or to hare back his land, was the object of the several sta-
tutes on the subject of ejectment for non-payment of rent in
Ireland.

The earliest Iri,h statute is the I Ith Anne, c. 2, which,
after reciting the difficulties of proceeding at common law,
enacts that where more than half a year's rent is due, and the
lease contains a clause of re-entry, and there is no sufficient
distress on the premises, the landlord may serve a summons in
ejectment (similar to the declaration of ejectment in England),
without any formal demand or re-entry.
The English statute of the 4th Geo. 11., c. 28, •lontains very
similar enactments. _

In Ireland several other statutes have been passed, viz., 4th
Geo. 1., c. 5 ; Bth Geo. 1., c. 2 ; sth Geo. 11., c. 4 ; 25th
Geo. 11., c. 13 ; by which several statutes an ejectment for
non-payment of rent may be brought, if a year's rent or more
be due, although there may be sufficient distress upon the pre-
mises, although there may be no cause of re-entry in the lease,
and although there may be no lease, if there be an article,
minute, or contract in writing, ascertaining the rent payable,
giving a mere title in equity.
These statutes entitled the tenant to a right to redeem, on
paying the rent and arrears within six months after the execu-
tion of the habere.

The above is a short outline of the proceedings fur eject-
ment in the superior courts. But by the 56 George 111.,
cap. 85, amended by Ist George IV. cap. 41, a landlord may
proceed in the Assistant Barrister's Court, by ejectment for
non-payment of rent, where the rent does not exceed 501.
a-year.
By the same statute, overholding tenants whose interests
have expired, may be proceeded against in the Assistant
Barrister's Court, where the premises are held at the above
rent, the usual notice to quit being served. This statute has
given rise to some complaints.
Various returns which have been called for, both by Par-
liament and by the authority of this Commission, show a
formidable number of ejectments served, but present a some-
what different appearance, when it is seen in what proportion
of cases a decree is taken, or the writ of habere actually put
in execution.

A careful inquiry into the practical working of this statute,
has led us to think that it has, upon the whelp, proved be-
neficial to the tenant.

It must be recollected for what it is that the Civil Bill
ejectment is a substitute.

It c nnes in the place if a proceeding in the superior courts
of which the costs falling upon the defendant were often ruin-
ous to him. Ile has no difficulty of availing himself of the right
of redemption, if he is able to redeem, and he can rely upon
matters by way of defence, which without the aid of this statute
he could have brought forward only through the expensive and
tedious process of a suit in Equity. For instance, before this
Act. was passed, if a landlord through caprice or otherwise de-
termined upon evicting a tenant to whom he had given a pro-
mise of rene Nal, upon the faith of which promise the tenant
had expended his money, the latter could not set up these mat-
ters at a defence to the action, but the legal right ef the land-
lord must prevail, and the tenant could only obtain relief by a
separate proceeding in a Court of Equity.
Upon a Civil Bill ejectment the defendant may give evidence
of such matters h!..fore the barrister, and he may examine the
plaintiff himself upon them ; and the judge, acting as a Court
of Equity, would decide the cause according to the equity aris-
ing f! um all the circumstances proved before him, and at a very
moderato expense.
Upon the whole, we do not believe that we should consult the
true interest of any class in Ireland if we were to recommend
the abolition of the remedy which is given by the statute 56
Ge c. 85, and which is usually described as a Civil Bill
ejectment.
The cheapness of this remedy is sometimes urged as an ob-
jection to it. We cannot think it consistent with any sound
principles of legislation, to keep up the expense of law pro-
ceedings, avowedly for the purpose of deterring any man from
attempting to enforce a right which the law professes to secure
to him. If such right requires limitation, this should be im-
posed by distinct and direct enactments. And further, in the
particelar case new under consideration, we greatly fear that an
increae ef expense would operate as frequently against the i
poor tenant as n his favour.
Some amendments, however, may be properly introduced
into this process. We recommend that in any ejectment
brought in any court, the plaintiff should be bound to serve
notice upon the tenant, setting forth the amount due, and how
made up ; and further, that in any writ of habere issued upon a
Judgment in ejectment for rent, the amount claimed, together
with the amount of costs, should be inserted, and that the
sheriff should have power at any time to stay the proceedings,
upon payment of the debt and costs.
The practice which necessarily prevails under the existing
state of the law, upon the execution of a writ of habere, of ac-
tually removing parties, and all their goods, out of their houses,
is often productive of much hardship upon the poor occupier,
and sometimes leads to scenes of riot and general disturbance.
It is worthy of consideration, whether a special form of acknow-
ledgment, to be indorsed upon the habere, may not be esta-
blished, upon the signature of which by the tenants, the sheriff
shall be at liberty to mske a special return of the execution of
she writ. But in such case, it would be necessary to reserve to
the court the power to direct further process under the habere,
if circumstances should render it necessary.
By the present practice, when a mesne lessee exercises his
power of redeeming under an ejectment for rent, the landlord
may be required to give up the land to him, without any occu-
piers upon it ; and it is suggested that cases have occurred in
which a mesne tenant has permitted, or even encouraged, a pro-
cess of ejectment agninst himself, in order to throw upon the
landlord the unpleasant task of removing a number of sub-te-
nants, so that he himself might, upon redeeming, obtain entire
possession of the land. This requires alteration.
The defendant, upon redeeming, is only entitled in jestice to
have the laud restored to him in the same state as to occu-
piers in which it was when the ejectment was brought; and
we recommend that the law should be amended in this respect.
The possession of the under-tenants, or occupiers, who were
upon the land when the process commenced, should, for this
purpose, be treated as the possession of the lessee.
Some additional words appear necessary in the first section
of the 6 and 7 William IV„ c. 75, in order to make it appli-
cable to a species of tenancy very common in Ireland, viz., a
lease for lives, with a concurrent term of less than sixty years ;
and also to cases in which the occupier, or any person under
whom he derives, may have acquired the possession within
twenty years, permissively, or as a care-taker, or from the
mere bounty of the proprietor.
We recommend that steps should be taken at an early period
to revise the laws relating to ejectment and distress, with re-
ference to the suggestions now made by us.
As connected with the ejectment system, we have to notice
a practice which prevails in some parts of the country, of serv-
ing, periodically, notices to quit upon large numbers of tenants
holding from year to year, not with any fixed intention of pro-
ceeding upon such notices, but in order to keep tip a continual
power over the tenant in case he should not pay his rent, or
should otherwise misconduct himself, and which may be acted
upon from caprice, or in case of any offence given by the tenant
in some matter wholly unconnected with the occupation of
his land. With a view to lessen, in some degree, the evil
resulting from this practice, we propose that in all such cases
the tenancy shall not be determined without twelve months'
notice.

We further recommend, with a view of encouraging leases,
that the stamp duty, in all cases where the rent does not
exceed 501. per annum, and the term shall not be less than
M years, or more than 31 years, be reduced to 2s. 6d. ; but
that this reduction should only apply to leases prepared
according to a form to be specified in the schedule of an Act
to be passed for that purpose, and which should also provide
that all tenants holding under such leases, shall do so on certain
simple conditions, including particularly, an undertaking on
the tenant's part not to sublet or subdivide, and on the part of
the landlord an obligation to make allowance to the tenant for
improvements, either according to the mode we have suggested,
or such other as Parliament may adopt. We believe that the
revenue would gain, rather than lose, by such an alteration.
A further improvement would be made, if the practice were
introduced of describing, shortly, the buildings (if any)
actually existing, or which the landlord allows to be erected on
the premises; and it would be desirable, that a cheap and easy
mode of registering such documents with the clerk of the
peace should. be provided.
In any inquiry relative to the occupation of land, the subject
of rent and valuation must necessarily come under consideration.
We have endeavoured, as far as possible, by our examina-
tion of witnesses, to ascertain the average rent usually de-
manded in different places, and the result will be generally seen
in the evidence taken in each pat ticular district.
But it would be idle to attempt to draw any general con-
clusion from the evidence, applying, as it does, to so many dif-
ferent parts of the country, under every variety of circum-
stances by which the value of land can be affected.
We were glad to find that notwithstanding the great and in-
creasing competition for land, the practice of endeavouring to
fix the fair value by a close valuation is becoming every day more
enctoralo; and although very loose modes of valuation still pre-
vail extensively, yet there is evidence to 'stove a growing
disposition try adopt'sounder principles in this respect. It ap-
pears that in some cases, public boards, having the manage-
ment of estates, are directed by the Act under which they are
conitituted, to advertise and let their lands to the highest bid-
der ; we think that power should be given, in such cases, to let
land upon a fair and valuation.
We must also notice a ora plaint that has been brought be-
fore
us by many witnesses'.
They alle,ze that the roads for which the landlord had ori-
ginally received compensation, as
well as rivers and water-
courses, are included in the measurements' of their farms After
u
careful examination, it appears to
in fixing that
generally this cir-
cumstance is taken into consideration
fo the rent of the
farm ; still we ate of opinion, that all grounds misapprehension
on this subject should be removed by the omissionr in future
surveys of such roads and rivers from the measurement
which the acreable rent is computed. We are gla to
find,
from the testimony of many intelligent witnesses, that the
latter practice is becoming general.
AGENCY.

It must frequently happen that the landlord cannot give that
personal attention and superintendence which, under present
circum_tances, are essential to the proper management of land
in Ireland. This naturally leads us to make a few observations
with respect to agents, a most numerous class, comprising per-
sons of almost every rank of life, of various qualifications, and
upon whose conduct the comfort of a large population and the
tranquillity of a district frequently depend. We examined se-
veral agents resident in Dublin, under whose management
numerous estates are placed, some of which appear to be well
conducted; but, as a general proposition, we must express our
opinion that in cases in which the landlord is not resident it is
Ofimportance that the principal agent should reside either upon
or near to the estate which he manages.
The estates of large absentee proprietors are frequently ma-