« PreviousContinue »
character, and that the tenant would Clause 25 (Costs of reference). not have to particularize his improve- SIR HENRY JAMES moved, in page ments.
7, line 21, to leave out from “other to THE ATTORNEY GENERAL pointed end of clause; in line 23, after "costs,” out that the Committee had already de-insert “mentioned in this clause." cided that the award should be made in
Amendments agreed to. detail, and not in the lump.
Clause, as amended, agreed to. Amendment negatived.
Clause 26 (Day for payment) agreed to. On Question, “That the clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill ?”
Clause 27 (Submission not to be re
moveable, &c.) MR. MUNDELLA said, that having SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT obhad considerable experience in matters jected to the clause, as requiring further of arbitration, he felt bound to say that consideration than could now be given great hindrance would be thrown in the to it, and he, therefore, moved that it way of the arbitrators by this clause. be postponed. If the clause was intended for the pro- THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, tection of the farmer, he would come off the clause simply related to awards, and very badly indeed. He begged to move he thought might be at once disposed the omission of the clause.
of; but he was in the hands of the MR. GREGORY considered that in Committee. appointing an arbitrator you must assume MR. HERSCHELL observed, that that he was competent and that his there ought to be some control over the award would be fair and reasonable, arbitrator, and this could only be and legislation should proceed upon this effected by permitting the award to be footing
made a rule of Court. He thought it MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSEN would be better to postpone the clause feared that the practical working of the until the Committee should determine clause would be found very difficult. whether or no there was to be a system One effect would be that practical valuers of appeal. of repute, being called upon to do so MR. RODWELL was of opinion that many things which they had never had cases of appeal, under the provisions of to do before, would decline the task, or this Bill, ought, as in all other cases of if they undertook it, as their work would award, to be referred to the Superior be so much greater, they would charge Courts. more, and the expense of valuations, to landlord and tenant, would be much
Clause postponed. increased.
Clause 28 (Validity of award) postMR. PELL thought that was one of
poned. the most useful clauses in the Bill, and one that was necessary for the protection
Clause 29 (Appeal to County Court). both of the incoming tenant and the
MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN It was quite proper that the moved Amendments having for their arbitrator should state all the specific object the making the award of the facts required by the clause, instead of umpire final in all cases without referonly giving a general lump sum, which ence to the Law Courts. With great would throw an air of mystery over the deference to his legal Friends, he matter.
thought the less the farmers had to do SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT ex
with law in these matters the better.
After short discussion, Amendments, pressed a hope that the Government would re-consider the clause before bring- by leave, withdrawn. ing up the Report. Under every dis
SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT moved puted claim for compensation the tenant to omit the following words at the commight compel the landlord to produce mencement of the clause :his title, and the difficulties arising from
“Where the award is valid, and the sum such production would be very great.
claimed by neither party for compensation exAmendment negatived.
ceeds fifty pounds, the award shall be final.
Where the award is not valid, either party, Clause, as amended, agreed to.
and." Mr. Whitwell
SIR HENRY JAMES thought that agricultural details, would be more comthe object of his hon. and learned Friend petent to deal with them than County would be gained by adopting the Amend- Court Judges, and that on matters of ment of which he had given Notice- law there should be an appeal to a Supenamely, to leave out merely the words, rior Court at once. He suggested that "where the award is not valid, either the appeal to the County Court should party, and."
be done with. Committee report Progress; to sit
MR. KNATCHBULL - HUGESSEN again this day.
thought that if this was the opinion of
the hon. and learned Member for CamIt being now Seven of the clock the bridgeshire, he should have supported House suspended its Sitting.
his (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen's) proThe House resumed its Sitting at Judge on
posal to get rid of the County Court
a previous clause. Now, Nine of the clock.
however, that the Committee had de
cided that the County Court Judges AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS (ENGLAND) should be brought into the Bill, the (re-committed) BILL.-[Lords.]—[BILL 222.]
proper course would be to let them (Mr. Disraeli.)
determine questions of law only. COMMITTEE.
MR. HUNT suggested that the deciClause 29 (Appeal to County Court). sion of the referees or umpires should
On Motion of Sir HENRY JAMES, words be final as to all matters of fact and as were omitted from the clause the effect to the amount of compensation; but of which would be that no appeal would that on points of law an appeal should exist where the sum was below £50. lie to the County Court, which the Go
SIR HENRY JAMES said, that upon vernment thought would be the cheapest, this part of the clause would arise the most accessible, and most expeditious question whether the appeal should or tribunal. not be to the County Court Judge. ViscounT GALWAY thought that if
MR. J. S. HARDY objected to the there was to be an appeal from the reappeal being to the County Court ferees or the umpires, it would be preferJudge. Such an appeal, from its cheap- able that it should be given to the ness, would lead to much litigation; County Court. and he should therefore prefer that the SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT said, appeal should be to a higher tribunal. the question of law, which would arise To effect his object he moved to omit in nearly every case, would be whether the words “to the judge of the county or not the landowner was the absolute court."
owner of his estate, and the County THE ATTORNEY GENERAL said, Court Judge was a most undesirable that the appeal to the County Court person to have to decide such a queswould be the cheapest and readiest form tion. He thought it would be better to of appeal, and it appeared to him, as take appeals on such questions at once to a lawyer, to be the best; it was, how-a Court of Law. ever, for those hon. Members who were MR. J. S. HARDY remarked that he more conversant with agricultural mat- attached no importance to the argument ters than he was to state what objections of the hon. and learned Member for there were to the proposal of the Govern- Oxford with reference to the absolute ment.
After what had been said by MR. GOLDNEY supported the appeal the First Lord of the Admiralty, he did to the County Court, where the case not desire to press his Amendment could be speedily decided; whereas if
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. the appeal were to be to a tribunal in London, it would operate very hardly
SIR HENRY JAMES moved, in page upon the farmers.
8, line 1, after " court,” to leave out to MR. MELDON maintained that there end of clause, and insertshould be no appeal at all from the “1, on the ground that the award is invalid; decision of the referees.
2, that compensation has been awarded to which MR. RODWELL thought that all the party claiming was not entitled; 3, or that matters of fact should be left with the and the County Court Judge shall hear and
the amount of compensation was not correct; valuers, who, being conversant with determine the said appeal, or, in his discretion,
remit the case to be reheard as to the whole or MR. FLOYER observed, that it would any part thereof by the referee or referees or be no security to the tenant to charge umpire.'
for these improvements, but the advanMR. MELDON suggested the addi- tage would be to the landlord in case tion of the following words to the the tenant should leave before his time Amendment:—“With such directions as had run out. he may think fit."
MR. GOLDNEY thought the proAmendment, as amended, agreed to. vision would be a great security to the SIR HENRY JAMES moved
tenant. Amendment, that the decision of the
MR. PELL asked, whether or no a Judge of the County Court should be tenant for life occupying a farm might final, except either party should request obtain from the County Court a charge him to state a case on a question of law on the holding? or a rejection or admission of evidence
MR. MELDON said, that by a subfor the Judge of the High Court of sequent clause it was provided that if Justice.
the landlord, under such circumstances,
ceased to be so, the charge fell through. Amendment agreed to.
SIR THOMAS ACLAND had also Clause, as amended, agreed to.
a question to ask the Attorney General. Clause 30 (Recovery of compensa- Suppose a tenant for life had not contion).
tracted himself out of the Bill, and his SIR HENRY JAMES moved, in page tenant went on accumulating improve8, line 14, after “recoverable,” to in- ments under the second class for which sert, upon order made by the Judge the consent of the landlord was not neof the County Court,” that it should be cessary, and the tenant for life died after enforced, otherwise there was no gua
two years, what security had the tenant rantee that the document handed to the against the next man? bailiffs of the County Court to be en
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL made forced was a genuine document. no reply. Amendment agreed to.
Amendment negatived. Clause, as amended, agreed to.
MR. HUNT moved an Amendment, Clauses 31 to 33, inclusive, agreed to. with the view of meeting an objection
taken by the hon. and learned Member Charge of Tenant's Compensation. for the City of Oxford (Sir William Clause 34 (Power for landlord, on
Harcourt). The clause said, paying compensation, to obtain charge payment, to make an order charging the hold
“The Court shall have power, on proof of the for himself).
ing with repayment of the amount paid,” MR. FLOYER moved, in page 8, line 41, after “Act,” to insert, * for an im- and he proposed to insert after the provement of the first class.” There was word “payment” these wordsa great difference in the character of the “On being satisfied of the observance in improvements comprehended severally good faith of the conditions precedent thereto under the first, second, and third classes, imposed by the Act.” and, in his opinion, there could be no
Amendment proposed, reason for charging the holding with improvements not of the first class. In page 9, line 1, after the word "payment,"
MR. HUNT opposed the Amend- to insert the words “ and on being satisfied of ment. The hon. Member would see, the conditions imposed by this Act.”—(Mr.
the observance in good faith by the parties of on reflection, that in some cases—such Hunt.) as that of the incumbent of a benefice
Question proposed, “That those words who let the glebe farm, but had no be there inserted.” personalty of his own.
If he died or left, the tenant had no remedy, if the SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT said, improvement could not be charged upon that this Amendment would merely get the holding. The law did not recognize rid of the difficulty by evading it. the incoming tenant, who could only THE ATTORNEY GENERAL held deal with his predecessor through the that it introduced a reasonable and landlord.
proper precaution. Sir Henry James
MR. MELDON moved to add to the paid by instalments; but, as the tenant Amendment the words
would in most cases want the money
im"And that such payment did not exceed in mediately in order that he might take amount the value of the improvement actually another farm, he thought it desirable made by the tenant."
that the clause should be omitted. Amendment proposed to the proposed
MR. MELDON thought that it was Amendment, to add, at the end thereof, for the benefit of the tenant that the the words
clause should be retained, else he would
have no chance of obtaining compensa"and that such payment did not exceed in amount the value of the improvement actually tion from an impecunious landlord. made by the tenant.”—Mr. Meldon.)
MR. DODSON wished to know from MR. DODSON thought the Amend- the authors of the Bill why they agreed
to omit Clause 7 ? ment of the hon. Member for Kildare
MR. HUNT said, the clause was not an infinitely better and more intelligible one than that of the First Lord of the in the original Bill, but had been inAdmiralty.
serted in it on the Motion of the Lord
Chancellor of the late Government. He MR. HUNT remarked that it did not
was unable to defend it. go so far as his proposal. MR. KNIGHT said, they were im
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON posing on the County Court Judge complained that there was not some duties which he could not perform, had charge of the Bill in the House of
better understanding between those who He thought the whole clause simply Lords and those who had charge of it absurd.
MR. GOLDNEY protested against here. The former agreed to the clause the assumption that the landlord and and the others agreed to take it out.
Amendment agreed to. tenant would conspire to defraud the
Clause struck out. remainderman. Question put, “That those words be
Clauses 36 and 37 agreed to. there added."
Clause 38 (Application of Act to land The Committee divided :-Ayes 91 ; of Duchy of Lancaster). Noes 168: Majority 77.
MR. GOLDSMID inquired whether it
was not necessary first to obtain the conAmendment (Mr. Hunt) agreed to.
sent of the Crown to such a provision ? Clause, as amended, agreed to.
MR. DISRAELI said, that the assent Clause 35 (Power for landlord to of the Crown had been already obtained. obtain charge for tenant, in certain Clause agreed to. cases). MR. MELDON moved, in page 9,
Clauses 39 to 42, inclusive, agreed to. line 29, after “tenant,” to insert
Notice to quit. * Provided, That in case of the landlord being
Clause 43 (Time of notice to quit). a limited owner no such order shall be made by the Court unless upon such notice being given
MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSEN as is mentioned in the concluding part of the moved an Amendment to the effect that foregoing section."
two years' notice should be substituted MR. HUNT had no objection to the for one, as proposed by the clause. insertion of the proviso, because he He made the proposal with diffidence, hoped the Committee would, on the sug- but it was one that had met with favour gestion of the hon. Member for Mid- with the Farmers Club and other agriLincolnshire, strike out the clause. cultural bodies, and its acceptance would Amendment agreed to.
be hailed by tenant farmers generally MR. CHAPLIN moved to leave out in desiring to give increased security of
as an earnest of the sincerity of the House the clause.
tenure. He reminded the Prime MiniMR. GOLDSMID hoped the hon. ster that he himself had once made a Gentleman would explain the reasons similar proposal. which had induced the Government to accede to the Amendment.
Amendment proposed, in page 12, MR. CHAPLIN said, the clause pro- line 11, to leave the word “a,” in order vided that, under certain circumstances, to insert the word "two." - (Mr. the compensation to the tenant was to be Knatchbull-Hugessen.)
MR. ASSHETON objected to the advantage was derived, would be overAmendment, because he regarded it as ridden. He hoped Her Majesty's Goa most grave interference with the tenure vernment would be able to accept his of the greater part of the land of this Amendment; if not, he should feel it his country-namely, with yearly holdings. duty to take the sense of the Committee
MR. M‘LAGAN supported the Amend- upon it. inent, as without it the Bill would be of a revolutionary character.
Amendment proposed, Question put, " That the word 'a'
In page 12, line 12, after the word “same,"
to insert the words "unless the year of tenancy stand part of the Clause."
shall have commenced in the months of April The Committee divided :-Ayes 202 ; or May."-(Mr. Chaplin.) Noes 39: Majority 163.
Question proposed, “That those words MR. CHAPLIN moved, in page 12, be there inserted." line 12, after the word “
same,” to insert “unless the year of tenancy shall have MR. MELDON expressed a hope that commenced in the months of April or the Committee would not accept the May.” He said, that when a farm was Amendment, which was one of the most to be vacated the sooner the tenancy unjust and unfair that could possibly came to an end the better it was for the be conceived as regarded the interest of farm, for the outgoing tenant himself, the tenant farmers. for the incoming tenant, and for the MR. BEACH said, that in Hants the general consumer. He had always felt Michaelmas tenancy prevailed, and that the strongest objection to a 12 months' it was found to act just and fair to both notice to quit, but had deferred to the parties, and he objected to a tenant representations made to him as to the being turned out at a six months' notice, feelings of the tenant farmers. In the which would materially affect the value parts of the country with which he was of his stock, and not give him sufficient acquainted a Michaelmas entry was the time to find another holding. rule, and a Lady Dayor May Day entry the MR. MONCKTON said, the tenants exception, and the object of his Amend-attached more importance to this part of ment was, instead of omitting the clause, the Bill than to any other portion of it, to obtain the exemption of those holdings and he hoped the Government would which were held on Lady Dayor May Day accept the Amendment. He should entries. A Michaelmas holding differed prefer to see the whole clause omitted very much from those entered upon in the from the Bill. Spring. One of the chief operations was COLONEL KINGSCOTE said, it was the cleaning of the land and preparing it no hardship that a tenant should only for the crops, and under such a holding it have six months' notice. The incoming mattered little whether the notice was tenant would recompense him for his six or 12 months. With a Lady Day clearing the land, and a six months' entry and six months' notice, however, notice was equally beneficial for the it was the incoming tenant who per- tenant as for the landlord. formed that operation. He might be LORD ELCHO said, no landlord who told that people might contract them- had a good tenant would think of getting selves out of the Bill. That remark ap- rid of him, and it was now proposed plied to his own proposal also; but he that a bad tenant, who was deteriorating protested against accepting anything as the land, and lessening the supply of permissive which he should reject as com- food, should be able to pursue that course pulsory. There was one golden rule in six months longer. that House, which was to let well alone. MR. GOLDSMID said, it would be In the county which he had the honour better to omit the clause. The six to represent-and there was none which months' notice was only required for had attained a higher position in agri- the purpose of getting rid of a bad culture—every farm, without exception, tenant. He should vote against the was let on a Lady Day entry, and with clause. a six months' notice to quit. That sys- MR. FLOYER said, the Committee tem they believed to be an excellent appeared to be legislating on the as
But if this clause remained un- sumption that every landlord was a good altered, that custom, from which so much one, but their object should be to meet