The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-10 00:00:00

THE SUN, LON DON, TUES D I EVENING, JU NE 10, 1840,

House, and resisting their Lordships' wishes. To that, however,
he had given his most unqualified denial. He moreover was
charged with being foolish, short-sighted, and ignorant, fancying
he had protection out of that House, the Noble Lord adding,
" but if he thinks so, he will find himself greatly mistaken."
He asserts, however, that he relies on no protection, and
feels himself actuated by no such impression as had
been imputed to him. On the contrary, it was his earnest
desire to consult the opinion of the House in every respect, as

tracts of country which had been entirely waste. But he didnot
think this was the legitimate source from which they ought to de-
rive capital, and the landlords or tenants ought not to be en-
couraged to look to it. The State had very properly removed
the impediments which prevented the landlords from impro:ing
their property, and beneficial results had ensued; but the third
was the grand source upon which he relied. The most
important of all—he meant encouraging the occupying
tenant to invest his capital in the land—(hear)—an object
which had not yet been brought under their Lordships' atten-
tion, and which was yet well worthy of their Lordships' con-
sideration, not only because there might be engaged in the
cultivation of the soil a large amount of capital which teas fib*
idle, but because that improvement would engage the indus-
try and skill of the population, give them an interest in the
soil, and a desire to maintain and increase the peace, good
order, and welfare of the country. —( Hear, hear.) Perhaps
it might seem extraordinary to talk of the capital of the occu-
pying tenants. He admitted many of them were in penurious
circumstances ; but some of that class of persons, however
they became possessed of it, were masters of sums of money
which would astonish many of their Lordships ; and one of
the most unhappy features in the state of the country was
that these men refused to invest such money in the land. In
England the tenant was anxious to display his capital to the land-
lord when about to take a farm; in Ireland, the tenant con.
cealed it, afraid that either the landlord, the clergy,
or other claimants would be more extravagant in
their demands upon him. But however this might be
with respect to money there was no doubt but in Ireland there
was a superabundance of labour and industry, and this was the
species of capital which he wished their Lordships to invite the
tenantry of Ireland to bestow upon the land.—( Hear, hear.)
He asked them not only to call forth that capital, but to give
the tenant a security in its investment. He knew that inter-
ference between landlord and tenant would be objected to by
many of their Lordships, and if the relation of landlord and
tenant were the same in Ireland as in this country he would
not advocate the present measure. Bat the circumstances of
the two countries were in this respect so widely different that
no comparison whatever could be made. In England the land-
lords were mostly resident —he would not say they were all nnin-
cumbered--but there was a kind feeling between them and
their tenantry promoted and nurtured by frequent intercourse
—the intermediate-lessees were in England almost unknown.
The farms in England were of considerable extent, extending
to many hundreds of acres. A farm of fifty or sixty acres was
generally considered small. Again there was a distinction be-
tween the farmers and the agricultural labourers. There were
some few exceptions, but as a rule, they were as a class dis-
tinct. In England also, it was the practice for the landlord in
the first instance to place the buildings in a tenantable state
of repair. Iu all parts of Ireland was the case not only dis-
similar, but precisely the reverse.—( Hear, hear). There the
quantity of land held by each tenant was small, while the num-
ber of holders was very large. The landlords were non-resi-
dents, and a large portion of the land was held by middle men,
who let it out at rack rent to other parties, who were generally
tenants at will. In fact, nearly all the land in Ireland was let
upon that tenure, leases being the exception not the rule ; un-
like England, where leases were the rule and not the exception
—the exception being in cases where successive generations had
occupied the same farms, and had full confidence in the honour
and generosity of their landlords. That the farms in Ire-
land were of the smallest possible dimensions would appear
from the Report of the Poor-law Commissioners for 1844.
That report stated that of 1,14 1,000 rateable tenants, there
were 629,000 or 630,000, or half the number, rated under 51.
In the same report, it was stated that 25 acres, 20 acres, or 15
constituted large fauns—( Hear, hear.) Twenty-five acres
was held to be an exorbitant possession of land ; and 25 acres,
down to 10 acres, or to give them the benefit of Irish acres,
from 15 to 20 statute acres were looked upon as far more than
any tenant should be allowed to occupy. These farms were
held at rack rent, and the usual practice was for the tenant to
maintain in a state of repair all buildings, drains, and fences,
or they were not repaired at all ; a duty that in England was
performed by the landlords. Let their Lordships imagine this
country divided into portions of 20 acres and under, and let
out by intermediate leases it a rack rent to the smaller holders,
tenants-at-will ; let them imagine the houses in which those
tenants resided, mere hovels ; let them imagine the soil un-
drained, and the tillage neglected. Let them imagine this state
of things, and could they expect that improvements could go
forward? Yet that was the condition of the greater portion of
Ireland.--( Hear, hear.) Was that a state of things that
ought to be allowed to exist? He would now look at the prac-
tical results of this system—of depriving the tenants of all en-
couragement to make improvements. In doing this, he would
refer to the Commissioner's Report. In the north of Ireland
a system prevailed, caled the " Tenant Right ;" but which
had been much better explained by the tenants themselves, who
called it " purchasing the good-will of the farms." The prac-
tice was, for the tenants.at-will, if they were obliged to leave
their farms, to sell out to their successors the improvements
which had been made upon the land by them during their occu-
pancy. The evil is, that unless the tenant does this, he
loses all the improvements •he may have made. There were
always needy competitors ready to take the land under this
arrangement; and there was no use in the landlords giving en-
couragement ts the tenants by low rents, as, if the tenant re-
tired, he would sell the improvement to his successor, and thus
no real benefit would be conferred. The rule and general
practice was to pay, under this system, ten or fifteen years'
purchase of the land, for the privilege of occupying it. This
was an evil only a degree less than that which prevailed in
other parts of Ireland. In the south of Ireland the farms were
held by fear. The bulk of landlords durst not remove the idle
and improvident tenants to make way for industrious and well-
disposed tenants, with energy and capital, to improve the land.
For this state of things the Government proposed a legal
remedy. They proposed that if a tenant were obliged to leave
his farm before he realised the benefits of his improvements,
that compensation should be given him. In the plan which he
would proceed to state he might disappoint many, who ima-
gined that the measure about to be proposed would be one to
elevate the tenant at the expense of the rights of the landlords.
This was not the ease. He did not propose to interfere either
with the granting of leases, or the regulation of the rents to be
charged. He only proposed that the tenant should not be turned
out of the land penniless, or without compensation.—( Hear,
hear.) In speaking of compensation, he included in the term
tenant all who held land, with the exception of these who took
land for cropping or temporary purposes, and who made no al-
teration in the land by the way of improvement ; he meant by
landlords those immediately above the tenants who let the land
and who received the reap; and by eviction he meant the re-
moval of any party that held land in an immediate or direct
manner. There were three objects to be considered in granting
compensation. First—buildings; second—draining; third—
fencing. He might exphin that fencing was peculiar to Ire-
land, and when he spoke of fencing, he meant ditching, which
was an embankment with a ditch cut on each side of it.—
( Laughter.) With respect to buildings erected by tenants he
proposed that they should be estimated for thirty years. The
compensation to be reduced one thirtieth each year the tenant
remained in possession until the •nd'of the thirty years, when
it was presumed the tenant, if he removed, had received the
value of his outlay. The same principle was to be applied to
draining. The drains, which were to be efficiently con.
strutted, and 'at least thirty inches deep, were to
be compensated for at the rate of fourteen years, allow-
ing one-fourteenth to ba reduced each year, so that at the
end of the fourteen year: the tenant would have received all
the benefits of his drainage. The next was levelling fences.
Those who were acquainted with the south of Ireland knew
that what was called a fence in England was called a ditch there.
—(Laughter.) This force, which was an embankment, with
a ditch on each side of it, was often wide enough to drive a ear
upon it; the average width, in man: y .
instances, not being less
than eleven yards. They were '
used as inclosures of fields,
vary often
ever not more than two, or one acre of land. They
rarely
eaeh other, or were straight,
ranparitiie ti,hre to ,-e,
but were cunstructe,d in the most crooked and zig-zag
manner possible. Nor were these fences what they pur-
ported to be , for there was not a horse, cow, pig, or
sheep, far less an Irish goat, but what could easily
run over them. In fact, these were only masses of crumbling
earth. If these did no: constitute fences, their removal was
in"..ch to be desired, as by so doing a considerable addition
would be made to the acreage of the farms. It would
add 12, 14, 15, and, in some cases 20 per cent. to
the acreage. This would require no exercise of skill or
capital--nothing but labour ; and the mass removed
could, be used with great advantage for top-dressing.
The land gained by the removal of these unsightly impedi-
ments to agriculture he proposed should be added to
the quantity originally held by the tenant, and taken at
twenty years' purchase ascording to the acreable value, deduct-
hag a twentieth part for compensation. Supposing the value of
the improvement was set down at 1001., then the compensa-
tion would be diminished at the rate of 51. per annum, till the
end of twenty years. The compensation under the three
heads he had named, he proposed to be limited in extent—
namely, 31. per acre for buildings, 1/. per acre for
repairs, or 3/. per acre for draining. This compensation was
only to be allowed in cases where the tenant was ejected by
the landlord. The measure called upon the landlord to do one
of two things—either to allow the tenant a certainty of occu-
pancy, or to grant him compensation in case of his removal.
It would, however, be required for these improvements to be
be real and substantial ere compensation was allowed. He
next proceeded to speak of the machinery necessary to carry
out these arrangement=. There was an Act in existence,
known by the title of Mr. Pusey's Act, which enabled tenants
to charge the estates with the improvements which they made,
but the legal forms were so tedious and expensive as altoge-
ther to supersede the intention of the Act. The provisions of
that Bill could not be taken. The Assistant Barristers' Courts
had likwise been named, but it was very objectionable on ac-
count of the expense. The Revising Barristerheld his court dis-
tant from the localities where its adjudication would be required;
and there would be the greatest difficulty in viewing the im-
provements, or in bringing witnesses to be examined. The
only alteration that he conceived could be made, was that
devised by her Majesty's Government, which he was happy to
say had met with the aiproval of his Noble and Learned Friend
(the Lord Chancellor). It was that there should be
established in Dublin to office, and an officer who would
be entitled the Commissioner of Improvements."
They proposed that the; officer should be assisted by six assist-
ant commissioners, ant that a board—a voluntary and unpaid
board—should be also established for the purpose of granting
certificates of qualificatsan to such persons desirous of acting in
Dublin or the country listricts of Ireland—of acting as assist-
ant commissioners, to se remunerated from time to time, as
might be decided upon. Supposing a tenant, desirous of effect-
ing certain improvements in his land, he would require to write
up to the Commissioners of Improvements in Dublin for the
purpose of ascertaining whether the maximum outlay allowed
by law had been ar'ived at in this case. On receiving
back printed instructions, one to be retained by the tenant—
the other to be filled Ira and returned to the Commissioners,
and afterwards to be served upon the landlord ; and a provision
was further made, ordering that a similar notice should be also
served upon the superice landlord, so that no one who could be
really interested in the question should be left in ignoranee.
If the landlord dissentel from the intended improvements, it
was required that he he should do so within three weeks, when
a preliminary inquiry would be established—an Assistant Com-
missioner would be sere down to the spot, there to examine
into the nature of the improvements desired, and the probability
of their being found useful. He would then report to the
Chief Commissioners in Dublin the nature of those improve-
ments, the amount of outlay required, and whether that outlay
would be calculated to and to the ultimate value of the farm.

to the tenants of Ireland, end whether they regarded the con-
ditien of the former, or of the latter, the subject was equally
interesting. It would be for them to consider whether the
principles which the Government had sought to introduce
in this measure were calculated for the good of Ireland, and
whether they had steered a itilddid ctitifse, not seeking to id,
jure thtl prtipefty of the more powerful class on the one hand,
t>f to forget the rights of the humbler classes on the other.
He should leave the question with their Lordships, and he
sincerely prayed that they might so fradie it that it *otild
be found furthering the property and welfare of Ireland.
OLANRICARDE was glad to hear that the Govern-
ment had brought forward the subject of the landlords and
tenants in Ireland, because he thought that any legislation on
the subject was exceedingly difficult, and more especially was it
difficult for any private party in that House to introduce any '
measure on such a subject, and therefore he repeated he was
glad that the Government had taken the Bill into their own
hands, and he was glad also that the Irish landlords would be
relieved from any imputation which their connexion with the
introduction of the measure would be apt to create. He had
particularly observed how very cautious the Noble Lord was
in speaking of the tenants who had been evicted for arrears of
rent. Now, in his (Lord Clanricarde's) experience, he had
never known a person so evicted who had not been owing a
very large amount of rent. Landlords had been greatly abused
for having been concerned in what were called clearances, but
in some cases there were eight or ten persons existing on half
an acre of land, and it was absolutely necessary to turn out
some that the others might live. There might have been indi-
vidual cases of hardship, but he was perfectly sure that in the
great majority of cases landlords were most unjustly accused.
He was assured that, as far as this Bill went, it would do little
to remedy the evils which had been complained of.
The Earl of WICKLOW said that from what he had heard
of this measure from time to time, he had certainly expected a
great deal from it, but having now had the advantage of hear-
ing its details from the Noble Lord, he confessed he did not
think it would be found of any great benefit to any class in
Ireland. It might, however, be possible to effect some im-
provement in it in its future stages.
The Earl of ROSSE said that he thought the House and
the country ought to be very much obliged to the Noble Lord
for bringing forward the Bill, but there were many provisions
in the Bill which were objectionable, and which he would take
the opportunity of discussing on the second reading of the Bill.
For the reason which he had stated, he would not oppose the
first reading of the Bill.

it was his intention, if possible, of making the building now in
progress fit for occupation next session.
Lord BROUGHAM remembered the time when it would
not be tolerated in either House that a man should
complain of the language used by its Members. Such
a proceeding was wholly irregular, and was not allowed
in Parliamentary usage. However, whether Mr. Barry's con-
duct were irregular or not, he would make him a present of the
concession that it was perfectly correct ; but as to any asser-
tion he had made on the promises of that gentleman, he did
not mean to retract one word. If a man before a
Committee chose to swear that by a certain period
a certain work should he completed, he must stand
by the imputation that was chosen to be put upon the breach
of such a pledge. As to its being said that the opinion was no
assurance, why everything de futuro was contingent. The
assurance was positive, specific, and understood as such.
Like a man who, having obtained small damages, comes and
asks for a new trial and then gets smaller, so having not
got much before, Mr. Barry should not get much more
now. As to the expression that he was the cause
of our absence frem the House, the delay of business
in another department was the cause; and as Tully had said
of the subject of his panegyric, that he was not eloquent but
the ideal of oratory itself—as Littleton said of Coke, that he
was net only unrivalled in his knowledge of the law, but the
name of law itself—so would he say of Mr. Barry, that he was
not only dilatory but the personification, the very name of delay.
The first plea offered was, that the building should be opened
all at once, but now the great consideration was the adorning
of the rooms. Mr. Barry considered that he should -suit the
convenience of the fine arts, whereas the real object to be
suited was the somewhat coarse but necessary art of legisla-
tion. Mr. Barry was only anxious for the accommodation of
the fine arts, and he had an ingenious excuse in submitting to
the convenience of the Commission, as Prince Albert was the
head of it. For this, it would appear, they were to be incon-
venienced in legislation.
The Marquis of CLAN RICARDE merely rose to say that
he agreed in all that his Noble and Learned Friend had said
the other evening and that night on the subject. Mr. Barry had
given opinions as to the finishing of the building which
had been perfectly falsified. At first they had a pledge that,
at the end of two years, at least a part of the building
should be ready for their accommodation • but now, at the
end of eight years, he declines giving any Pledge. He (Lord
Clanricarde) would, however, say that any assurance or
opinion coming from such a quarter was little to be relied on.
The letter which had been read by the Noble and Learned
Lord ( Wharncliffe), stated that the works would
be pushed on as soon as possible, but it was
evident that his (Mr. Barry's) whole proceeding was entirely
opposed to this. He had promised the Committee that he
would do what he could to facilitate the works, whereas he
was engaged in finishing the ornaments and decorations of the
towers, instead of attending to that part intended for the pur-
poses of legislation.
Lord CAAIPBELL said he believed that Mr. Barry was a
very great architect, and a very honourable man, but there
was not the smallest doubt but that he had set at defiance the
pledges he had given. He would illustrate his (Lord Camp-
bell's) opinion on the matter, by reference to the Society of
Lincoln's Inn-fields. They lately ordered a new hall to be
built, a more important building than the mere chamber which
was necessary for their Lordships' use, and though it was only
commenced a year and a half ago, it was now perfect, and
would be taken possession of next month. He was of opinion,
that had the architect of Lincoln's Inn-fields been employed on
the Houses of Parliament, whatever differences might have
been between the decorations, he was certain there would have
been no complaint of this kind brought forward.
Several Noble Lords presented petitions against the May-
nooth Endowment Bill.

Earl CHARLEVILLE gave notice that he would, to-
morrow, move for copies of all correspondence which had
taken place between the Irish Government and certain sti-
pendiary magistrates in the King's County and Tipperary on
the subject of a Repeal meeting held in Parsonstown.

The 'Marquis of •L
ANSDO*NE presented several petitions
against the Parochial Settlements Bill, which he thought would
never reach their Lordships' House.

SMALL DEBTS BILL.

Numerous petitions were presented against the Small Debts
Bill.

Lord BROUGHAM thereupon observed that it would be
desirable to give the Commissioners the power of examining
the debtor, and getting from him the most thorough explanation.
Lord CAMPBELL said this Bill had his full support, but
there was one clause in it that was unnecessary. He alluded
to the clause which provided that it was unnecessary for a
debtor or creditor to employ a solicitor, counsel, or agent.
Now that was, he apnrehendesi, wholly unnecessary, unless
there were an Act of Parliament requiring debtors and credi-
tors to employ counsel and solicitors. Any person in a suit
might appear in person.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented a petition
against the Maynooth grant.
PORT PATRICK AND DONAGHADEE.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to put the ques-
tion of which he had given notice. He complained of the
packet system between Port Patrick and Donaghadee, and
of the niggardly manner in which the Government dealt with
the packets and these harbours. Whatever work they had com-
pleted in summer, at the expense of a few paltry hundred
pounds, was sure to be carried completely away in winter. If
they constructed a packet-station for the sum of 20,0001., it
would be a strong inducement to the Belfast Railway Company
to carry their project into effect. If they gave such a sum of
money as would make these harbours effective, they would pre-
vail upon that Company to construct their railway, whereby
they would create a shorter mode of carrying the mails from
the north of England to Belfast, than by any other means what-
ever. It was a subject of the greatast importance. He hoped
he had brought this subject forward in a manner calculated to
interest Irishmen and the public generally in its importance;
and if the House meant to serve Ireland, they would deal with
the proposition with no niggard hand.
Lord HADDINGTON said he rose to reply to a question
which his Noble Friend intended to put, but which he did
not put.—(Laughter.) If the railway which had been thrown
out was completed, the remedy which the Noble Lord com-
plained of, might have been remedied. The Government did
not think it right to lay out any large sums of money at Port-
patrick, in order to carry out the arrangements suggested by
the Noble Lord—they had already expended large sums there,
and were not inclined at present to expend more. The ves-
sels engaged in the passage between Portpatrick and Donagha-
dee were efficient, and the harbour was maintained in a proper
condition.

The Marquis of NORTHAMPTON did not think the Go-
vernment should hesitate to lay out a small sum of money to
make any arrangement that might facilitate the intercourse be-
tween the two countries. Nothing should be left undone to
promote a better and a kinder feeling between the people of the
two countries.—( Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH thought the harbour un-
able to accommodate the packets which left it.
After a lew words, the subject dropped.
LANDLORD AND TENANT COMMISSION

In answer to a questicn from the Earl of DEVON,
Lord STANLEY said it was not required that the com
plaining tenant sbould g up to Dublin. He would only re.
quire to write to the Commissioners, and a subsequent corn
numication would be male to the landlord.

A NOBLE LORD—Or its agent?
Lord STANLEY—Y!s, or his agent. It was a principle
in the measure that fullnotice should be given to all parties
concerned. Supposing teat the tenant shoul be evicted before
the term of his compensation expired, then the Assistant-
Commissioner would go to the spot, examine the state of the
improvements, and report the same to the Commissioner in
Dublin. He will certity whether any future deduction ought
to be taken from that tenant for the bad state of the buildings
and the drainage, and if rbt, then the tenant shall receive com-
pensation for the unexpi!ed period of the terms. It might be
said that this would bear lard on the landlords, who fiad num-
bers of small tenants on ;heir estates, and more particularly
hard on those who had tenants for life. They proposed, how-
ever, as he had already stated, to introduce a pro-
vision allowing the lardlord to withhold certain sums
by instalment in order to remunerate himself, the
period over which these nstalments extended, to be twenty
years. He thought he had now stated in detail the objects
of the Government in introducing this measure, and he had
brought forward enough, fit thought, to induce their Lordships
to give their deliberate judgments to the subject before them.
The Bill was most imporktnt, not only to the landlords but

The Earl of DEVON said that from the observations which
were made, he felt it necessary to say a few words. In the
first place, it was a very great mistake to imagine that his Noble
Friend was putting this Bill forward as a panacea to cure all
the evils which had been brought to light by the inquiry which
had taken place. It was intended to cure a particular evil, and
to give the tenant the ability to make improvements without
any apprehension,—by enabling him to put into use his only
capital, namely, himself and son, which he could not now do,
as he was afrhid that both himself and son might be turned out.
He found that in every part of Ireland there was distinct evi-
dence that in very large districts that difficulty arose, and that
persons who would be competent to make great improvements,
were prevented from doing so, from being under that appre-
hension. Perhaps, a great number had not been immediately
turned out, after having made improvements ; but if in any
district one was so turned out, the apprehension was so strong
that the whole population of the neighbourhood were restrained
from making improvements at all. He, therefore, beseeched the
House, that when they looked at it clearly, they would consider
that they were not now proposing this measure to them as a
measure calculated to produce a state of things the best that
could be produced; but that they were only endeavouring to
apply a practical remedy to that which was a great practical
evil.—( Hear, hear.) His Noble Friends in that House might
never have had any disposition on their part to turn out te-
nants without compensation. They knew that such cases had
not arisen under their own management ; but they would
find out, if they took the trouble to wade through their
evidence, that there were many instances in which
such had been the case in Ireland. Thus the want of improve-
ment may arise. Suppose that an estate may be very much sub-
divided, held by tenants from the original landlord—suppose it
to be very much divided into portions of fifteen acres or nine
acres, as was very frequently the case, it was out of the ques-
tion, from the position of the land, no matter what the goodness
of his disposition, to expect that the tenant will be able to keep
a decent house, to have his cattle well fed, or drain his land,
though it may be performed, without much of the landlord's
money, by the labour of the tenant. He would ask them to
look at the evils that existed. It was not a new question ; it was
not brought before them for the first time by the Commis-
sioners or by her Majesty's Government ; it was a question
submitted to the Legislature more than once, twice, or thrice;
as it was thought necessary, by statesmen of various opinions,
with respect to Ireland, that something should be done in
that respect. It was thought requisite that whenever a tenant
had expended his capital on any property he should be entitled
to some remuneration. It was said that it ought entirely to be
left to the voluntary arrangements of the landlord and tenants.
' There were many eases arising in which the landlords could not
make any such arrangements. With respect to the machinery
he had better say nothing, but there was one point which his
Noble Friend referred to respecting the inapplicability of the
measure. In the greatest portion of landholdings in Ireland it
would be found simple and easy of application. He knew per-
fectly well that there were many instances in which the land-
lords in Ireland had been unjustly rebuked, but making full al-
lowance for the exaggeration that had been applied to the con-
duct of the landlords, he should allow that the fact was that the
tenants were in the most miserable state, and required assist-
ance and relief, and he hoped that their Lordships would give
the measure a most calm and cool consideration.

Lord PORTMAN said that he felt the most unqualified and
sincere disappointment at the measure of her Majesty's Go-
vernment. He was the more disappointed, because he hoped
that his Noble Friend would be his best ally in carrying out a
measure which he (Lord Portman) contemplated for the
tenants in England. He was led by his Noble Friend's speech
at Liverpool to believe that he would be glad to extend the
same measure to the tenants of England as he was willing to
extend to the tenants of Ireland. He would be able, in a few
days, to bring in a measure for defining, with the aid of a Com-
mittee, tenants rights, and which would give a remedy both
to landlord and tenant, by going before arbitrators,
without going to the expense of a court of law.—(Hear.)
He did think the Noble Lord's plan was a very expensive mode
of carrying out the proposed supervision. Then, again, it
was proposed that the maximum sum to be allowed for im-
provements should be 51. per acre; he did not think that a good
mode, or a very safe one, of proceeding, for it approached too
near the lee- simple. He thought the better plan would be,
to fix the amount upon an average of a certain number of
years' rental. The next proposition was, that the expense of
levelling fences should be spread over a space of twenty years.
He could not approave of that, for the levelling of the fence
might cost the landlord 201., which he would pay at once,
while the tenant had twenty-five years to pay it. He would
not enter into the details of this measure ; and his object in
making the few observations he had done, was to show the in-
applicability of this measure to England. He was ready to
admit, that in Ireland the tenantry had a feeling of insecurity
as to their holdings; indeed, he had heard of one in-
stance where an Irish tenant had a lease of eighteen

years, yet it contained a clause of surrender every six
months, which the landlord was under the necessity of noticing
regularly, lest some advantage might be taken of him. This
state of insecurity was proposed by this bill to be remedied,
not by giving a tenant security, but compensation. He would
not detain their Lordships now ; but he would, upon a future
occasion, be prepared with a measure which he conceived would
be more applicable to England.

The Marquis of WESTMEATH would not have risen to
say anything upon this subject, but that he would be sorry that
observations should go forth to the public which would be dis-
advantageous to the class he belonged to, if he did not say a
few words in explanation. When tie first heard of this mea-
sure, he felt that it was calculated to interfere with the
rights of property, and he was of the same opinion still ;
and he did think that many of the statements made before the
Commission, as to grievances of tenants, were got up merely for
the purpose of affording an excuse fur a revolution in the
country ; but upon a calm investigation many of them would
be found to have been exaggerated. For instance, he had
heard it said that the tenants in Ireland, who may have accu-
mulated a sum of money, were afraid to let their landlords
know it, lest it should be an excuse for demanding an in-
creased rent. Now, he did not wish that that statement
should go forth to the public, and he should say that he never
heard of such instance, and therefore it should not go forth un-
contradicted. Another statement he had heard was, that the
improvements were always borne by the tenant, and that also
he knew was an exaggeration. With regard to tenants not
getting leases, he believed the report contained evidence to the
effect that many tenants had declined to take leases. He did
think that landlords would rather be inclined to give leases;
for in that case, if the tenant declined to pay his rent, the land-
lord could eject him without much trouble, while, in
the former case, they had no such remedy. As to
tenants being pressed upon by the landlords in Ireland, and
that such a thing was unknown in England, he would contend
for it that such should not be stated as a general rule, and he
denied the proposition altogether. He did not mean to say that
his Noble Friend had made these statements; hut they had
been made, and the discussion of them abroad often also in-
volved a discussion upon the safety of the landlord.
The question was then put, and the Bill was read a first time,
and ordered to be read a second time on Monday next.