New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-08-02
LORD SALISBURY At HIS WORST.

LORD SALISBURY At HIS HORSJ.
Lord Salsbury's amendments to the Arrears
bill are poisoned arrows aimed at the heart of
Mr.. Gladstone's land measures. The first one
strikes at the element of cOmpulsion, which
gives the County Conrt, OF the Court OF the
Subj Commissioners, authority to cancel
arrears of rent for all holdings under $50
year by Grffth's valuation. The act imposes
two conditions: first, the tenant must produce
a receipt for one years rent ending November,
1881 and, secondly, he must furnish proof of
his inability to pay the full arrears. When
these conditions are complied with, the Court
as a free gift to the tenant will pay to the land
lord sum not exceeding one years rent, and
this payment will cancel all remaining arrears
Now Lord Salisbury proposes TO arm the land
lord with power of veto, which can be eXcr-
cised at discretion. The amendment will en-
able the landlord to withhold his consent when
ever he chooses to question the tenants inabll-
ity to pay the arrears. That is to say the
question of inability may be decided by the
landlord and not by the Court Settlements,
instead of being compulsory when application
is made to the Court 10y either landlord or
tenant, will only be possible when there is an
agreement between landlord and tenant.
Arrears bill on abstract principles. 1t is an
extraordinary measure designed to afford re-
lief to large class of small farmers who
are excluded from the benefits of the Land
Bin of 1881. They are impoverished tenants
who have not been able to pay their rent in bad
seasons and are menaced with eviction. 1t
is the class, dangerous because desperate,
from which the ranks of lawlessness have
been steadily recruited, and the Irish members
them elves have suggested this device for
relieving the poor tenant of his load OF debt
and giving him the chance of a new start.
The Government, in applying so exceptional a
remedy at an expense ranging somewhere
between $4,000, 900 and $40, 000,0c0 has a
right to insist upon the principle OF compulsory
settlements. If these millions were lent to
the tenants the landlords might properly be
vested with authority to refuse settlements,
but since it is a free gift, made for the pur-
pose of removing the causes OF agraran dis
content and restessness, the arrears must he
disposed of by order of the Court without ref
erence TO agreements between landlord and
tenant. We shall have to concede the diff
Guilty which the Courts will have in dscrim-
mating between the tenant who cannot and
the tenant who will not pay his debts 1t will
be almost impossible for those tribunals to
convict dishonest tenants of duplcity, and the
tendencies of such legislation will be demon
alzing. A clearance of debts will be effected
at high cost in morals as well as in pounds
sterling. This cannot be denied. Yet the
peace of Ireland seems to depend upon the
settlement of these arrears. Obviously it must
be a compulsory settlement, the Courts and not
the landlords deciding whether the tenants
are or are not able to pay their debts. Other
wise the free gift will only tend to widen the
breach between landlord and tenant.
The second amendment cuts deeper still. II
entities landlord, whenever Il holding is sold,
to recover out OF the sum received for tenant
right the amount of arrears of which he is
deprived by the action Of the present bill.
That is to say, the balance of arrears, after
the tenant has paid his years rent and the
Government has given away as much more,
shall be lien upon the tenant-right, the
free sale of which is guaranteed by the Land
Act of 1881. Lord Salisbury not only takes
the life out of the Arrears Act, brit he makes
feroci0us stab at the Land Act where it is
most vulnerable. Meagre as the dispatches
are, we do not exaggerate we think, the vital
importance OF tncSe amendments. III would
be aIrant folly for the Government to accept
either of these proposals. A settlement made
at the landlords discretion and operating as a
mortgage on tenant right for the balance of
outstanding debt would be no settlement. The
tenant would not pay years rent on such
terms, and even if he should do so, the Gov
eminent would only waste its money in I'M
profitable grants. 1t would be the most I'M
settling sort of settlement ever devised by
privileged class for its own ruin and the ends
of agrarian anarchy. The Commons will I'M
dOubtedly strike out these vicious amendments,
and if the Lords persist in making a stand, it
is not easy to understand how Mr.. Gladstone
can consent to remain responsible for the GOV
eminent of Ireland. AS for Lord Sails bury,
if he is deliberately forcing such an issue as
this upon the United Kingdom at this time
he is the blindest and most dangerous party
leader who has appeared in English public
life during the present century.
-
PARTIES CONTRASIED
r1,o Question 10 ofton ooIyo1 ,sbotbo, Al