ORDER OF THE DAY. 106 LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL.-[BILL 135.] COMMITTEE. [SIXTH NIGHT.] Bill considered in Committee. ORDINARY CONDITIONS OF TENANCIES. MR. GIVAN moved, in page 1, line 13, after "only," insert "But if the landlord shall unreasonably decline or omit to give his consent to the sale to more than one person, the Court may give such consent." time, to be known to the House. I shall consider it my duty to ask to be allowed to make the statement on a future day. Cries of "Go on!"] Well, if I have the indulgence of the House, I will state the matter, which I think I can do in a few sentences. The circumstances under which we stood at that moment were these. The Russian Army was close to Constantinople, and the British Fleet was also close to that city. There was great uneasiness lest a collision should take place between them, and in the event of a collision having taken place, or in the event of hostilities, it had certainly been agreed to in principle by the Cabinet that Indian troops should be brought to Europe. But no decision had been taken as to the time and manner of their coming, nor had I any reason to believe at that time that any order for their movement had been given. In fact, I do not think that any order had then been given. A day or two before the statement I made to the House, and to which the Home Secretary has referred, a proposal had been made to the Russian and British Governments by another Power, that, in order to facilitate the negotiations that were going on, and to prevent the danger of a collision, the British Fleet and the Russian troops should simultaneously withdraw to a certain distance from Constantinople. That proposal had been made and had been accepted in principle by the British Government, and on the morning of the day on which I made my statement before the holidays we had just received a telegram to say that it had also been accepted by the Russian Government. I therefore believed that at the moment I spoke the matter was quite at an end, that the two Powers would withdraw their forces, that there was no longer a risk of a collision, and that, consequently, there would be no necessity for moving the Indian troops. It was under those circumstances that I gave the answer which I did. I afterwards explained to the House how it was that the movement of troops was decided upon by action in India; but, in reference to my own statement, I was stating that which I then fully believed to be true-namely, that not only was there no special danger at that particular moment, and nothing inconvenient in adjourning for the holidays, but that I had reason to believe exactly the contrary. He submitted that the tenant was entitled to a further concession than the Bill at present gave him, and that the proposal contained in the Amendment was absolutely necessary, in order to prevent the continuance of that friction on this important subject which had hitherto existed between the landlord and tenant. It was as well that the Committee should understand at the outset that he was not in favour of giving to the tenant an absolute and unrestricted right of sale; and he was not in favour of giving him any right to sub-divide his holdings, except under certain restrictions, because he was of opinion that such a right conferred upon the tenant might in future work evil to himself, and evil to the country. At the same time, he considered that the power of the landlord, under all circumstances, to prevent the sub-division of a holding, was detrimental to the interest of the occupier and a hardship to private individuals. It could not be denied that the tendency of the landlord class had been to take into their possession, on all possible occasions, land from which the tenant had been evicted, and there had also been a tendency on every occasion when there was a sale to amalgamate the farm about to be sold with the adjoining holding. To a limited extent he believed that both of these objects were perfectly legitimate; but, at the same time, he knew that they had been carried too far, and that there had been an amount of amalgamation and an amount of depopulation throughout the country for the purpose of consolidating farms that had been exceedingly detrimental to Ireland, and especially to that portion of Ulster with which he was most intimately acquainted. He knew large tracts of land in Ulster in which he could recollect numerous homesteads containing contented, and comparatively prosperous families, on which there was not at this moment the vestige of a human habitation. The old residents had been evicted, and the population had gone away and scattered themselves over the country, the land remaining either in the hands of the owners themselves or of wealthy Scotch settlers. Looking at the statistics in regard to agricultural holdings in Ireland, he might mention that between the years 1841 and 1879, a period of just 38 years, the number of holdings had been reduced by 90,500. Incredible as it might appear, hon. Members not acquainted with the habits of the Irish people, and more intimately acquainted with the agricultural population of England-incredible as it might appear to them-he had no hesitation in saying that among the most contented and prosperous tenants in Ireland were tenants holding farms containing from 12 to 25 acres of land. He knew in his own neighbourhood that some of the best tenants, farming very good land and being industrious sober people, had money in the bank, had sent their children abroad, and even put some of their sons into the learned professions, out of farms of 15 acres for which they paid a fair rent. He had no hesitation in saying that if Ireland were populated now with an agricultural population settled in holdings from 15 and 30 to 40 and 50 acres, it would be a richer country, and a better support to England than it was now with large consolidated farms. He was quite sure that when he referred to the immense diminution which had taken place in the number of holdings, many hon. Members would say, "So much the better." Well, those who said that did not know Ireland as well as he did, because he knew that the towns and villages in the neighbourhood of those depopulated districts, where the commercial inhabitants were once in a flourishing and prosperous condition, were now on the verge of bankruptcy, Mr. Givan and that, even as regarded the farmers themselves, they had not available for agricultural purposes the same number of labouring men they had in olden times when the population was more dense; and, consequently, in the management of their farms they were obliged to pay a higher amount of wages than was formerly the case. Coupled with this fact, there was the further fact that since 1841 the increase of farms of above 30 acres was 112,000, made up as follows:In Ulster, 32,000; Connaught, 19,000; Munster, 40,000; and Leinster, 21,000. There was also this extraordinary fact connected with the system of agricultural holdings in Ireland-that since 1845 the increase of farms between 50 and 500 acres had been 20,314. Now, he did not believe that from the history of any country, and especially from the history of Ireland, it could be authentically deduced that farms of 500 acres were at all practical for the purpose of maintaining a wealthy and a prosperous agricultural population. Those large farms which had sprung up since 1845 were chiefly occupied and used for sheep and cattle. Perhaps some would say a better population than the Irish race. But if he appealed to some of our departed Generals and greatest Commanders, to speak of the men who had carried the English flag from time to time to victory and glory, he was sure they would not say that it was for the benefit of either Ireland or England that the best blood of the Irish race should be driven to other countries. It was calculated that since the year 1845 there had been 2,000 farms created, ranging from 500 to 5,000 acres in extent, and it was estimated that there was a total of 4,000,000 acres thus appropriated in these large farms which, divided into farms of 40 acres, would give 100,000 additional holdings. contended that if this land was thrown at once into the market in Ireland it would for a long time appease any land hunger that might exist, and which was, at the present moment, doing so much mischief in that country. He would respectfully suggest to the Prime Minister that there was a class of cases in which the people to which they applied had a reasonable right to sub-divide. They were formerly mountainous districts, and by the industry of the tenants they had been turned into arable land. our He He by-and-bye the agent made out a new ledger and consolidated the three holdings, putting them into one, and henceforward the three farms were united. The effect of what the agent did was not appreciated or understood by the tenant; but by-and-bye one of his sons married, and then the tenant wished to transfer one of the farms to him. He accordingly went to the agent and said "Please to put my son's name into one of the farms.' But the agent said "No, I don't know any such farm." There might have been a new agent or a new landlord who knew nothing of the history of what had taken place, or there might have been a purchaser under the Landed Estates Court after the farms had been consolidated. The agent went on to say-"My policy is to keep up the consolidation of the farms and to keep the holdings as large as possible, and I will not, therefore, permit subdivision." In a moment the hope of a man's life was blighted. His family was unsettled, and all his arrangements were upset; and then, after consultation with his family, the sons found that they were obliged to reconcile themselves to the arbitrary refusal of the agent, and to console themselves with the knowledge that there were fertile plains and wide lands abroad. The result was that, although the tenant was entitled in all equity to restore the farm to its original state of sub-division, he was prevented by the transaction which had taken place, and his sons were lost to the coun knew cases where men-now old menwere years ago farming 50 or 150 or 200 acres of land, which, in numerous cases, were covered with moss and moor and bog. Those men had large families, and they had reclaimed a very large portion of their holdings with the view of settling some of their sons upon them in their own immediate vicinity. No doubt it was originally one holding; but the amount of arable land there now, compared with the amount of arable land there at the beginning of the tenancy, was as 20 to 1. They had reclaimed acre after acre with the assistance of their sons, and he could not see how the interest of the landlord was prejudiced, but, on the contrary, he thought it would be improved, by allowing the tenants to divide a portion of their farms among their sons. The rental would be more secure, a greater stimulus to industry would be given to the entire family, and the extent of the holding would be large enough to afford a tract for more than one respectable son. The power of the landlord capriciously and without reason to refuse such sub-division was a power which in his (Mr. Givan's) opinion ought to be taken from him, provided that his refusal to permit the sub-division was purely capricious, wholly unreasonable, and not founded upon any ground consistent with his own protection or with the good of his estate. He knew there was another class of holdings which he might put still stronger. No ambition of the small Irish farmer was greater or more legiti-try. Then, he asked, if this was to be a mate than the ambition of procuring farms in his own immediate vicinity for his sons. He had known farmers, particularly on good estates, where the landlord and the agent were respected, and the families lived in comfort at fair rents to save up and hoard money for the purpose of acquiring adjoining land. They were able to purchase farm No. 1; this was done with the sanction of the agent, and the first time they went to pay the rent they got two receipts. That went on for some years, and they were able to purchase another farm and then another. Having three or four farms they got three or four receipts. Then, after a while, at the instance of the agent, the whole sum was put into one receipt, and the rent of the respective holdings was marked on the back of the receipt; but Land Bill dealing with the rights of the tenants, why should there not be some provisions in it to protect cases of this kind? All he wanted was that in regard to tenants with large holdings and land enough to make a comfortable arrangement with their family, and especially where the holdings. were originally separated, restricted sub-division should be permitted, and that the landlord should be deprived of the power of putting an unreasonable and capricious veto upon the sub-division. At the same time, he would not place the power of sub-dividing the farms in the hands of the tenant, because he knew that in Ireland there was a tendency towards excess of sub-division; and so great and so foolish was the love of an Irishman for the soil that he would prefer settling his sons on a few acres of land rather than send them | in which he has put his Amendment, has abroad. It was only where the landlord taken great pains to avoid anything that unreasonably refused to give his consent might be injurious to the interest of the to a sub-division that he would bring in landlord. On the contrary, he has taken the intervention of the Court; and if great pains to show that he is anxious there was a Court competent to settle to maintain as well as he can the interest questions of rent it ought to have power of the landlord. But the first objection to dispose of this question also, limited I take to the Amendment is that it is by the proviso that such sub-division evidently calculated to be injurious to should not in any case prejudice the in- the interest of the landlord. My hon. terest of the landlord in the holding. Friend, in the terms of his Motion, has He did not think it would be fair for the not only, like hon. Gentlemen oppotenant to sub-divide his holding, and in site, withheld absolute discretion from this way reduce the chance the landlord the tenant, but he also imposes upon had of getting the rent or increasing the the Court the duty of compelling the compensation for disturbance in case of landlord to sub-divide his property if he eviction; but he did think, taking into unreasonably refuses to comply with the consideration the size of the holding, its wish of his tenant. Although I think history, and all the surrounding circum- my hon. Friend has laboured with earstances, that, if the Court should be of nestness and sincerity in this behalf, I opinion that the sub-division would not do not think it is altogether in his power be prejudicial to the landlord's interest to secure the object he has in view. For in the holding, it should have the power example, I am presuming that we shall of giving consent to the sub-division on now adhere to the principle of the Act such terms and conditions as it might of 1870, and of the present Bill in this think proper. He hoped the right hon. respect-that the compensation for disGentleman, who was so vigorously de- turbance shall be on a varying scale, fending the Bill in its entirety, would, and that the amount of compensation when he came back after the Whitsun- for large holdings shall be less than that tide Recess, be prepared to make some which is to be obtained for small holdconcessions. Certainly, a concession in ings. But if that is so, there will be this respect would prevent great irri- very serious difficulties you will have to tation, and would give widespread satis- encounter in breaking up large holdings faction. If reasonable concessions were into small holdings. If it is also promade, so as to give the tenant the vided that the farm, when broken up, right of free sale and confidence in shall form the ground for a larger claim the Court before which he had to go, for compensation for disturbance against and also to extend the number of peasant the landlord than would be the case if proprietors, he thought the Bill would the holding remained a large one, I do be one that was calculated to throw a not think it would be possible to make considerable quantity of oil upon very this enactment distinctly compatible with troubled waters. entire justice to the landlord. But, beyond this, there are many other matters involved. Beyond this I urge the argument, which was scoffed at by the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell), that the privilege which it is now proposed to give to the tenants had been, in a manner, in the contemplation of the tenants themselves. I thought that a serious and a weighty argument; but the hon. Member for Cork ridiculed it, as he was perfectly entitled to do in a Parliamentary sense, and said "You are giving to the tenants a great many things they had not expected." What Amendment proposed, In page 1, line 13, after "only" to insert the words" but if the landlord shall unreasonably decline or omit to give his consent to the sale to more than one person, the Court may give such consent."-(Mr. Givan.) Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted." MR. GLADSTONE: I at once commence what I have to say by two admissions-one is that the adoption of a Motion such as this seems to be desired by a very large proportion of the Members from Ireland. I am prepared to make this admission, and the second is, that I think my hon. Friend the Member for Monaghan (Mr. Givan), by the form Mr. Givan we are giving to the tenants by the present portion of the Bill is the privilege of selling their tenant right. Am I to be told by the hon. Member for Cork that that is a new and gratui- | hold it to be a matter of the highest imtous proposition, without foundation in portance to bear in mind that we have the traditions of the people, in the prac- had various authorities, all thoroughly tice of the people, and in the expectations competent and respectable, examining of the people? [Mr. PARNELL: I re- into the state of the Land Question in ferred to a particular class of tenants.] Ireland, and that these authorities, acting I altogether disclaim all participation in under the sanction of the Crown, notwiththat particular argument of the hon. standing differences on a multitude of Gentleman. It is surely one thing to things, have all unanimously agreed on remove restrictions in the disposal of an this-that it is desirable to introduce the interest which exists in a certain form jurisdiction of the Court for the purpose of under the Land Act of 1870, as was ably determining judicial rents. If I found shown by my hon. and learned Friend the myself on their authority, which I think Member for Christchurch (Mr. Davey), ought to carry immense weight in the and afterwards in a more definite form, minds of reasonable men, I must conand another to import a privilege that is sider up to what point that weight of entirely novel in its character. Then let authority is to be carried, and I am not us see what more is to be said, for there entitled to plead that general authority is a great deal more to be said; and I for the purpose of bringing within the can assure my hon. Friend that if the jurisdiction of the Court matters which question did not involve considerations have never been examined or recomof the gravest character, I should feel mended, and matters which I have disposed to give every weight to the no right to say are recommendations representations of Members for the which have ever been in the slightest Irish constituencies in order to meet degree within the scope of the inquiries their views. But let us consider the of any of the Commissions. Now, my scope and basis of the Bill. The Bill hon. Friend has founded his Amendment makes, I admit, two large and serious upon the mischief which, as he thinks, changes. I do not say they are of equal has resulted from the undue tendency to magnitude, because I do not think they the consolidation of agricultural holdings in Ireland. I do not pretend to that acquaintance with the agricultural condition of Ireland which would enable me to support the statement of my hon. Friend; but I can well believe it, and I most certainly have the strongest conviction that the landlords of England have committed a great and serious error in this respect within the last 30 or 40 are. The first is that it guarantees tenant right, with respect to which I may say that it is not only established already in very extensive portions of the country, concentrated in Ulster, and dispersed over the rest of Ireland, but that it is also recommended to us by a very great weight of authority from without. The other great change, and the greatest change of all-at least, in my judg-years, and have proceeded on a total ment, by far the greatest change of all is the introduction of the jurisdiction of the Court to fix judicial rents between the landlord and the tenant. In making so great a change as that, and in assigning to a Court the determination of that which is properly and economically, in all ordinary circumstances, far better settled by private agreement, we must consider both the grounds of that recommendation and the limits within which it is made. I hold it to be a matter of the greatest importance-and I would assure the hon. Member for Mid Lincolnshire (Mr. Chaplin), if he were here, that it is not for the purpose of fastening upon him a personal responsibility, but of pressing on the mind of the House the due significance of a great public fact that I have always insisted on-1 misapprehension in assuming that the way to make agriculture cheap and profitable is to make the holdings large. They are now paying the penalty of their mistake, and I have not seen a landlord of whom I have inquired what has been the difference to him in the present distressed state of agriculture between a large holding and a small holding, who has not told me that his losses on a large holding has been far greater than upon a small one. Then, by any fair and legitimate means we cau use, we should be glad to promote, if we can, any rational movement in another direction; but that is a question of public policy. It is a question, undoubtedly, of public policy; but it is one we cannot see our way to taking out of the hands of those entitled by law to adopt the |