The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-26 00:00:00

bvtlinN !;int

LONDON, THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 1845.

The House of Lords did not sit.
The House of Commons met at. Four.

The South Wales Railway Bill was, after a short con-
versation, ordered to be referred back to the Committee,
leave being given to the Committee to sit on Monday

next.

Mr. Sergeant MURPHY'S motion for the re-committal
of the Wexford and Carlow Railway Bill was withdrawn
after a short conversation.

Mr. COBDEN then brought forward his motion for the
appointment of a Commission to inquire into the relative
merits of the broad and narrow gauges. _ _ _

The motion, which was seconded by Mr. M.
PHILLIPS, and acceded to by Sir G. CLERK, on the
part of the Government, was agreed to.

. . _
The Lunatic Paupers Bill passed through Committee.
On the Report on the Statute Labour (Scotland) Bill
being brought up,
Mr. SMOLLETT moved the re-committal of the Bill,
for the purpose of adding certain clauses.

After a short discussion the Bill was re-committed,
several new clauses were added, the House resumed, and
the report was brought up and agreed to.

The House then resolved itself into Committee on the
Dog Stealing Bill.
The second clause, inflicting a penalty of 20L for a first
offence of dog-stealing, and transportation for a third,
was opposed by Mr. WATSON, on the ground that the
punishments were too severe, and supported by Mr.
CIIRTEIS.

Mr. LIDDELL proposed to alter the penalty for the
second offence from transportation to a fine of 201., or
imprisonment, with or without hard labour, provided it
did not exceed eighteen months. After some further
observations the amendment was agreed to. On the
question that the clause, as amended, stand part of the
Bill, Mr. lismns moved the omission of the clause. The
Committee then divided, when the numbers were—For
the clause, 33 ; against it, 6 ; majority, 27. The clause,
as amended, was then agreed to.
The remaining clauses were agreed to after some
little discussion. The House resumed, and the Bill was
reported.
The House then resolved itself into Committee on the
Smoke Prohibition Bill, on the motion of the Earl of
LINCOLN.

The several clauses were, after some discussion,
agreed to, and, the House having resumed, the report
was ordered to be brought up on Friday next.
The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
he House adjourned at twelve o'clock.

The debate in the house of Lords on Tuesday night,
on the Tenants' Compensation (Ireland) Bill, was at
once entertaining and instructive. We have no wish to
speak invidiously of Irish landlords. Their conduct has
been, no doubt, in former years very highly culpable ;
but we are strongly impressed with the belief that, as a
body, they are now, and have for some time past, ex-
tensively improved both in the discharge of the duties
exacted by the relations in which they stand to their
tenants, and their own personal deportment in the dis-
charge of their duties to society in general. And at all
times, both among her native proprietors and her Eng-
lish owners, she has reckoned individual landlords not to
be surpassed for intelligence, steadiness, and liberality
by those of any other country in Europe. Among
all political parties and all religious persuasions these
excellent examples base been found. The Presbyterians
of the north, the Roman Catholics of the south, the
Protestant aristocracy of England, the ancient nobility and
gentry of Ireland, have, in many instances, shown a degree
of patriarchal kindness to their tenantry—consulting and
providing for their wants, aiding the improvements of
their homesteads, building chapels and schools for them,
cutting and improving roads for their accommodation,
and at heavy charges to themselves—which may well be
allowed to be set against a large account of by-gone
generations of delinquent landlords. Still, it must be
allowed that these have been, and are, but brilliant ex-
ceptions to a general rule, tried by which, the majority
cf Irish landlords are certainly far behind the great
bulk of the same class in England. And this proposi-
tion we think we can establish by a very simple test.
The principle that the tenant who has but the usufruct
for a limited term of that property which his landlord
holds either for a much longer term, or abso-
lutely in fee, should receive compensation for such per-
manent improvements as he has made in that property
during his tenure of it, is one of simple equity, to put it
at its lowest value. It might also be shown that it is
also one which it should be the policy of the State
to encourage. It seemed somewhat strange on Tues-
day night to find so many Peers, Irish landlords, con-
tending, on their own behalf and that of other Irish
landed proprietors, that this equitable and politic prin-
ciple would be ruinous in Ireland. It seemed some-
what remarkable to find such a combination of opponents
to the measure as the Marquis of LONDONDERRY and
Lord MONTEAGLE, the Marquis of CLANRICARDE and
Lord BEAUMONT. We greatly doubt whether any
English landlords of large possessions could be found,
who would venture to denounce so fair a principle,
when affirmed on the part of English tenants. Why,
then, should that which is fair, equitable, and
expedient Tload the English tenant, be treated
otherwise than expedient, equitable, and fair
in respect of the Irish tenant ; and with regard to
the former Lord CAMPBELL expressly affirmed that the
principle of English law was decidedly in favour of this
principle of the Bill. We could understand the opposi-
tion of the other Peers to the Bill, if it had rested on
Lord CAMPBELL'S assumption that the clause to which
he particularly adverted was so worded that it would
make compensation compulsory on the landlord, even
where the tenant had made alterations, &c., which were
decidedly prejudicial to the property. With submission
to the Noble and Learned Lord these would be very
i"lrish" cases of improvements indeed, and it is only for
enreptoly the
Lord tenant,
that the Bill proposes to secure com-
pt
In sahtiiosnNLEY appears to have completely
disposed of this objection by showing that the details of
the measure had been so prepared asntdo guard against
sanctioning such an abuse.
, we must
considerations
remember that Lord
s,txA .
because,
authority
in
supportof this Bill i to be taken
quite apart 'tom all political
much to his honour, he is well known to
be one of the

0
..._, ::,2--' .-''''''‘ ' it
4 ‘.U1,.. , 7:2::. i
1,, ~, q.....:•:-.- 24.2`\,„ t..,` •:$llO4,- V.0,,-, -
A. .
..4.
_.:44''''
443V4. ; r"'". '':•.-
.....-47,0- ._...1
~11....-e : '5...,.,,,,,,,'-'. ' 1114
;-0 4
z t 0 ':::" rm o
'"*.n."..e....:4',
: ~