of the tenant would be very different after this Bill became law from his position hitherto, and the power of the landlord to force the tenant, or to bring pressure to bear upon him, in order to take away a lease, would be very much diminished; because, by this clause, the Bill would enable a tenant, under pressure or threat, to apply to the Court in cases where there was a judicial rent to resist more or less the powers of the landlord. Everything which would apply to the Act of 1870 would not apply now; the landlord would not be able to force upon the tenant a lease as he could under the Act of 1870, and the arrangement would not in future be one-sided. It was not absolutely to the advantage of a tenant to have a long lease; on the contrary, it might in many cases be an advantage to have a shorter lease; therefore, he thought the proposed Amendment was not desirable. If they were to look forward to the judicial lease at all, they must take care not to make the tenancy so large as to take away the landlord's interest. Both sides ought to be considered. court). The clause, as it stood, provided that the landlord and tenant might agree to a lease mutually made, "if sanctioned by the Court, after considering the interest of the tenant and the value of his tenancy." His hon. Friend, however, proposed to insert, instead of "the interest of the tenant," the words "rights and interests of the landlord and tenant respectively.' He had not the slightest doubt that the Government in introducing this Bill desired to do justice to all parties, and he, therefore, felt sure they would agree to the Amendment. Amendment proposed, In page 9, lines 15 and 16, to leave out "interest of the tenant and the value of his tenancy," in order to insert "rights and interests of the landlord and tenant respectively." interest of the tenant and the value of Question proposed, "That the words his tenancy' stand part of the Clause.” MR. WARTON agreed with the object of the Amendment, but objected to the words "rights and interests of the landlord and tenant respectively;" because that might imply that the landlord only had rights and the tenant inte He suggested the words should be "rights and interests both of the landlord and the tenant.” CAPTAIN AYLMER was glad the Government did not support the Amend-rests. ment. He would remind the hon. and learned Member for Tyrone (Mr. Litton) of the necessity of not making more absentee landlords, and that, he feared, would be the result of the Amendment. MR. LITTON asked permission to withdraw the Amendment. MR. BIGGAR objected to the Amendment being withdrawn, observing that Irishmen had not derived any advantage in past times, and did not expect to do so in times to come, as to leases. It was perfectly well known that since 1870 landlords had been constantly urging their tenants to agree to leases. If a tenant was to be entitled to appeal to the Court with regard to leases, he had better not have the powers proposed as to leases at all; for if he were a free agent he could please himself whether he agreed to a lease or not, whereas under the Bill the lease must be subject to the whim of the Judge. MR. LALOR hoped the Government would accept the Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. CAPTAIN AYLMER said, he rose to propose an Amendment on behalf of the hon. Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Har VOL. CCLXIII. [THIRD SERIES.] THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW) regretted that he could not accept the Amendment. He explained that a judicial lease was not a lease which the landlord of his own mere motion was to have the power of granting to a tenant. The Court was brought in not to look after the interest of the landlord-who was perfectly well able to take care of himself-but to protect the tenant, and it was with that view that the Court was to be empowered to sanction a lease. MR. PLUNKET said, he understood that the object of this clause was to carry on in this Bill the policy which was introduced into the Act of 1870— namely, the system of leases, which exempted a landlord from the provisions of that Act. The object of the clause, as he understood it, was to introduce a similar provision; but the intervention of the Court was to be permitted. He did not wish to insist on the language of the Amendment; but he desired the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland to explain exactly what was the mean[Twentieth Night.] E ing in this clause of the words "after considering the interest of the tenant, and the value of the tenancy?" THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW) explained that it would be the duty of the Court to ensure the interests of the tenant being respected. CAPTAIN AYLMER pointed out that the clause distinctly stated that the landlord might propose, and the tenant agree to accept, a lease, and the thing would then practically be done on such .conditions as the parties agreed upon. Then came the words "if sanctioned by the Court," and the right hon. and learned Gentleman said the Court was to see the interests of the tenant respected; but surely they ought to look at both sides of the question, and it was monstrous to say that the Court was only to look after the tenant's interest. MR. GIVAN thought the hon. and gallant Member (Captain Aylmer) was labouring under a slight misapprehension, for he seemed to forget that in accepting a judicial lease the tenant surrendered certain important rights which he possessed if he had not accepted the judicial lease. He had a right to go and get a statutory term and have the rent fixed; but as he surrendered those rights by accepting a judicial rent, the clause properly provided that the Court should have supervision over his interests. It was not necessary that the rights of the landlord should be protected, because those rights were subsisting rights which were not surrendered. The tenant might be an ignorant man and not understand the effect of the clause, and so he might be induced to accept a lease which would be prejudicial to his interests, while he surrendered all the privileges he would have as a statutory tenant; and that was the reason, as he understood, why the rights of the tenant and not those of the landlord were to be protected. LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL thought the argument of the hon. Member (Mr. Givan) was based entirely upon a misapprehension as to the meaning of the words. The judicial leases were suggested by the Government, because the Government recognized that in dealing with the Land Question in Ireland, they had to deal with two distinct classes of landlords-good landlords and bad landlords. Good landlords Mr. Plunket would allow their tenants to hold on for a great many years at a moderate rent, while other landlords would, to a certain extent, rack-rent the tenant. The good landlord, who had been in the habit of allowing the tenant to hold on at a certain rent for many years, would have power under this clause to suggest to the tenant that they should not go to the Court to fix a rent, but should agree together to continue the tenancy on its old terms. In that way he would exclude the action of the Bill; but he would give the tenant a certain amount of permanency in his lease. That was the object of the clause. The landlord would grant a judicial lease which would be accepted by the Court, and the landlord's and tenant's interest would be equal. He considered the Amendment on the whole a reasonable one, and the only ground upon which he disliked the language of the Amendment was that it was the same as the hon. Member for Dundalk had inserted in the 7th clause, to which he (Lord Randolph Churchill) had objected as having an insidious meaning. It had, no doubt, an insidious meaning in that clause; but he did not think it would have in this clause. He attached very considerable value to the provision as to judicial leases, because the landlords in Ireland who had managed their property fairly and well would be glad to give the tenant for 31 years or more all the advantages they had hitherto enjoyed, but on the understanding that the tenant was not then to be at liberty to take hostile proceedings against the landlord. That was the value of the judicial lease, and he considered that it was being seriously interfered with by the Amendment which the Government had accepted earlier in in the Sitting, and with regard to which he should, on Report, move the reinsertion of the words then omitted. MR. PLUNKET suggested that the hon. and gallant Member (Captain Aylmer) should not put the Committee to the trouble of dividing upon the Amendment. He still preferred the language of the Amendment to that of the Bill, and he could not understand the necessity of the words "after considering the interest of the tenant." If any reference was to be made to the interests of either landlord or tenant, it would, he thought, be better not to have a one-sided affair. But, under the cir cumstances, he would advise the withdrawal of the Amendment if the Government persisted in opposing it. CAPTAIN AYLMER observed, that there was nothing in the clause to bind the tenant to give up his statutory term, and that if he accepted a lease he did so by his own free will. Both landlord and tenant were on equal terms, and he maintained that the interests of both parties ought to be considered by the Court in deciding whether the terms on both sides were just. He regretted that the Government did not look at the matter in the same light; but he would not take up the time of the Committee by dividing. At the same time, he thought it was extremely unfair and unjust for the Government to refuse the proposal. MR. WARTON asked, whether it would still be in the power of the landlord and tenant to agree to a lease on any terms apart from the lease? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW): Certainly not. Question put, and agreed to. MR. CHARLES RUSSELL proposed, in lines 15 and 16, to leave out "and the value of his tenancy;" and explained that if any hon. Member thought it necessary to raise a discussion he should not press it. Amendment proposed, in page 9, lines 15 and 16, to leave out the words "and the value of his tenancy."-(Mr. Charles Russell.) Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be struck out stand part of the Clause." MR. W. E. FORSTER said, in agreeing to the Amendment, he did not think the proposed words were required. framers of the Bill were not open to the charge of tautology, and it was not necessary that all judicial leases should take into account "the interests of the tenant and the value of the tenancy," because the two things were distinct. On the whole, he was inclined to think that the clause would be better as it stood, than if amended as proposed. struck out accordingly. Question put, and negatived; words MR. PLUNKET (for Mr. NORTHCOTE) proposed an Amendment. The Amendment would do no possible harm, and he thought the Government would not object to it. Amendment proposed, "and where such lease is made by a limited In page 9, line 16, after "tenancy," to insert owner, as defined by the twenty-sixth section of The Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1870,' the interest of all persons entitled to any estate or interest in the holding subsequent to the estate or interest of such limited owner."-(Mr. Plunket.) Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted." THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. LAW) agreed in the object of the Amendment, but explained that that object was already provided for in the 18th section of the Bill. MR. WARTON pointed out that the 18th section applied only to a fixed tenancy, and not to a judicial lease. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law) replied, that that might be quite true; but the clause with regard to rules met the difficulty. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. MR. A. M. SULLIVAN proposed an Amendment with the object of introMR. PLUNKET said, he did not wish to ducing, at that point of the Bill, that raise a controversy upon the Amendment, system of Parliamentary tenant_right and he should not therefore oppose it. with which the name of Judge LongLORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL field was associated. When the Land pointed out that "the interest of the Act of 1870 was passing through Partenant and the value of the tenancy "liament, Judge Longfield, in a letter to might be two distinct things. "The interest of the tenant" meant what was established under the Common Law, fortified by the Act of 1870; but "the value of the tenancy meant any sum of money which the tenant had paid on going into the farm; so that all the Court had to consider was what the Common Law assigned to him. Therefore, he thought that the The Times, on the 26th March, 1870, pointed out, or gave expression to, some apprehensions he had as to the failure of that well-intentioned measure, then being carried through Parliament, in some respects, and he made a suggestion as to a principle which he called "Parliamentary tenant right," which was that leases might, on the agreement of the parties, be indefinitely renewed, landlord did not consent to the reduction, the tenant would be bound to sell to the landlord at 10 years' of the reduced rent. The effect of this proposal would be this-if the tenant attempted to extort from the landlord by demanding a reduced rent which was less than a fair rent, he would be cut by the landlord, who would buy from him, on the basis of 10 years' purchase of the reduced rent; on the other hand, if the landlord endeavoured to extort from the tenant by asking an increased rent, he would be cut by the tenant, who left the farm, and received 10 times the increase asked for by the landlord. In that way it would be the interest of the landlord not to ask too much, and the interest of the tenant not to insist upon too low a rent. That would be what he would call a self-acting mechanism for effecting a fair rent without recourse to litigation, and by the simplest of all processes-namely, self-protection and selfinterest, which enabled both landlord and tenant to prevent either over-reaching the other. The system had been in operation on some farms belonging to a relative of Judge Longfield, in Ulster; and not only had the instalments of the money advanced to tenants to purchase tenant right been regularly paid, but there was not at this moment on any of those farms one farthing of uncollected arrear even for past bad seasons. security which this Parliamentary tenant right had given to those tenants had, somehow or other, brought about a thrift and a saving on the part of the tenants, which tenants elsewhere had not exhibited. He, therefore, wished to move this Amendment, the nature of which he had explained. The power to be created by the Amendment would be purely permissive, and the Court might or might not permit a lease on which the landlord and tenant had agreed. with a self-adjusting mechanism for settling a fair rent without reduction. He (Mr. Sullivan) hoped the Committee would agree that in this Bill it was desirable to introduce this principle, which could be introduced without dislocating or damaging in any way any of the other useful provisions of the measure, especially if it could be shown that the Amendment would enable the landlord and tenant to adjust the question on a fair rent from time to time without approaching the Court. The proposal which Judge Longfield made was that every tenant in Ireland should be made to purchase a Parliamentary right in his holding equivalent to the Ulster tenant right, which the tenant might have purchased for a considerable sum of money. In Ulster, a tenant would have the Parliamentary tenant right based upon the sum which the tenant had paid for his interest in the holding. Outside Ulster, Judge Longfield proposed that a similar system should be introduced by enabling the tenant to buy the tenant right in either one of these ways-by the payment of a sum of money down, or by money paid by the lessee to his predecessor in title with the expressed or implied consent of the landlord, or by money to be spent in improvements agreed on by the parties; or, in a vast majority of cases, which under this Bill were called present tenancies-that was to say, tenancies outside Ulster where the Ulster Custom had not been localized, but where the tenants, nevertheless, had succeeded, through many generations of occupancy, to an interest in the holding, as well as to their actual improvements he would allow the tenant right to purchase by estimating the value of such equitable interest as the tenant had in the farm, including therein the Ulster tenant right where it existed. The question of fair rent would be adjusted in this way. The tenant having agreed upon a fair rent for a certain term of years, which the Amendment proposed should be 15, if, at the end of the 15 years, the landlord claimed a higher rent, the tenant might either assent to it or elect to go out; but in the latter case, the landlord would be bound to pay the tenant 10 years' purchase of the increased rent which he de- THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR manded. On the other hand, if a tenant | IRELAND (Mr. LAW) thought it would demanded a reduction of rent, and the be certainly inconvenient to introduce Mr. A. H. Sullivan Amendment proposed, The In page 9, line 20, after "applies," insert "Provided always, That a judicial lease may be a lease for a Parliamentary tenant right, according to the form in the Schedule to this Act annexed, or such similar form as the Court may prescribe from time to time."-(Mr. A. M. Sullivan.) be there inserted." the Amendment into the clause, and he | 9th clause was sufficiently wide to cover pointed out that, as the clause stood, the Longfield Lease, if the parties agreed there was no reason why the Court to such a lease. But he (Mr. Parnell) should not adopt leases such as those should like to see the Amendment indicated by the hon. and learned Mem- brought forward in a different shapeber, if only they were agreed upon by in the shape of a new clause, after the landlord and tenant. The Court had to 7th clause, empowering the Court, after see that the conditions were fair, and it it had, on the application of the landwould be quite competent, under the lord or the tenant, determined upon a clause, for the Court to consider and judicial rent, to grant to the tenant adopt the Longfield Lease if they liked. some such lease as this, instead of on a MR. PLUNKET said, the proposal 15 years' statutory term. In this way had attracted a great deal of attention the difficulty as to fixing the future rent in Ireland, and, like everything which after the expiration of the statutory Judge Longfield had brought before the term, might be got rid of. The rent public, it was extremely ingenious. It would be fixed according to the arrangewas brought forward in 1870-but then ment under the Longfield system. The he (Mr. Plunket) thought rather as a landlord and tenant would be able to rival scheme to the Bill of the Govern- agree upon the rent at the expiration ment and during the debate the Prime of the statutory term, and there would Minister had announced that if it was be no more reference to the Court. intended as a rival scheme, he preferred This would provide a certain practicable his own proposal. He (Mr. Plunket) plan for settling future rente, after the should not regret the adoption of the judicial fair rent had been once settled. scheme in the present Bill, and he This was a subject which he thought thought it had some recommendations as well worth the consideration of the Gocompared with the general scheme of vernment in the interval before coming the Government. In the first place, it to the new clauses; and if his hon. and avoided the constant interference of the learned Friend (Mr. A. M. Sullivan) were Court, and would work easily, if volun- to withdraw the Amendment now, in tarily adopted by both parties. In the order to see how he might bring it up second place, it did, to some extent, again as a new clause after Clause 7, make provision for bad years and vary- the Government might perhaps be ining seasons, for it regulated the rent at duced to agree to some such proposal. times when the landlord might be in- The proposal, if adopted, would get rid clined to ask for increased rent, or a of a great deal of the friction which tenant might be inclined to ask for a do- would undoubtedly arise under the procrease. If, however, as the right hon. visions of the Bill, as it at present and learned Gentleman the Attorney stood, with regard to future revision. General for Ireland had stated, the Longfield Lease might be adopted under the present clause, he would not now advance any further argument. MR. GLADSTONE: The whole of this debate has been exceedingly interesting, and the tone of the Committee is pacific. I have not the slightest inclination to vary it. But there is nothing to prevent the inclusion of the Amendment within the terms of the judicial lease. The hon. and learned Member (Mr. A. M. Sullivan) wants to have a judicial lease fixed, and the Bill fixed, so as to have the movement of the rent according to the Longfield Lease, and not according to the statutory judicial lease. MR. PARNELL said, he believed that the proposal for the Longfield Lease was brought forward in 1870, not as a permissive proposal, but rather as something the Court might do instead of giving the tenant compensation for disturbance under the Act of 1870-that the Court might, upon application, grant such a lease. It appeared to him that the great objection to the Amendment, as at present proposed, was that it would not be operative. As had been pointed out by the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ire-plication of the parties. land, practically speaking, the Court could adopt this lease under the present MR. PARNELL: To give power to the Court. MR. GLADSTONE: Yes, on the ap MR. PARNELL: Not of both parties. Bill if it chose; and undoubtedly the that the proposal of the hon. and learned |