clause as it now stood was the dilemma put to the House by the noble result of a compromise arrived at Duke. The noble Lord had made his in the other House of Parliament, object perfectly clear. It was to obtain and as it now stood it seemed to him to some security that these transactions be very plain. All the transactions outside the zones would not be perwhich came within the zone were sanc- mitted unless exceptional circumstances tioned without any inquiry, but if they were really present; but what security fell without the zone, they would would the words proposed by the noble have to be inquired into and settled Lord give him? If the words were after hearing all the persons interested, added to the clause, the Land Commisand if the Commissioners were satisfied sioners would then be in this positionthat the price agreed upon was equitable. they would have to specify what the That was perfectly clear and distinct, exceptional circumstances were. They but if the Commissioners had also to might do so in general language. They decide whether a holding was exception- might say, "We regard this case as an ally circumstanced or not, he did not know exceptional case, and, on the whole, how they would do it. He did not know it does not seem to us to be one which what was meant by "exceptionally falls within the scope of the zones." circumstanced," and it was obvious That would not help noble Lords in the that the Commissioners would have to least. It would leave them where they make an exhaustive inquiry to arrive were. But supposing they went further at any decision upon that point. He and said that it was an exceptional case hoped the Amendment would be with- because of the situation of the estate, the character of the soil, its inaccessibility, or reasons of that sort. The moment such a decision had been promulgated by the Land Commission, a precedent would drawn. 46 *THE EARL OF WESTMEATH said that he, on the other hand, would urge his noble friend to press the Amendment. Clause 1 was now in an entirely different position from what it was when the Bill was introduced. The noble Earl who had just sat down had used the word compromise," but he failed to find in any dictionary that that word was defined to be the giving way of one side where it had got nothing. He would like to see the clause restored to its original form, but at this late period of the session he did not think it would be wise to move an Amendment with that object. The Amendment of his noble friend was a very reasonable one, and would make it more difficult for people to go outside the zones. He and others who lived in the West of Ireland believed that great attempts would be made to make this the rule and not the exception, and therefore they regarded the Amendment as affording them a certain amount of protection. The Bill, in the eyes of many, had been entirely spoiled by the, to them, unnecessary concessions of the Chief Secretary. *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE) did not think the noble Lord who spoke last answered the have been set up which would be very inconvenient to other vendors of similarly circumstanced estates, and it would follow that in all similar cases, transactions outside zones would be the limits of the permissible. That he did not think would be regarded as in accordance with the views of noble Lords who, like the mover of the Amendment, desired to restrict, as far as possible, transactions outside the limits of the zones. LORD CLONBROCK pointed out that in his Amendment “ specific" grounds were stated, not "general grounds. What he was anxious about was that these transactions should be the exception and not the rule, and he was afraid that, especially in his own part of Ireland, where agitation had been rife in the not very distant past, the smaller class of tenants would imagine that it was the intention of the Act that the zones should be relaxed, not only in exceptional cases, but in a more general manner. He wished the specific grounds to be stated by the Commissioners in order to discourage any belief that the zone limits could be relaxed freely. He felt compelled to press his Amendment. LORD CLONBROCK: They would have to state the specific grounds. *LORD ASHBOURNE said they might possibly say that, having heard all the parties, and having weighed and balanced the evidence, they had come to the conclusion that it was desirable in that case to make an exception, and to Ideal with it outside the zones. Where would his noble friend be then? He would not have advanced a step towards obtaining the information he desired, and yet the Estates Commissioners would appear to have satisfied the terms of the noble Lord's Amendment. In those circumstances, he hoped the Amendment would be withdrawn. LORD CLONBROCK said that he was, meaning of the word "exceptional" was, but he thought the terms of the Amendment would be perfectly understood by the general public, and would show that they could only hope for this exceptional financial treatment in exceptional circumstances. THE EARL OF DUNRAVEN said the Bill was an entirely voluntary measure, and in theory, at least, the vendor must be at liberty, if he was the absolute owner of the property, to sell it to anyone he liked, or to give it away. The object of the limit was to prevent improvident sales and to protect other people interested in the estates. Surely the Bill as it stood was perfectly logical, and met the whole case, because it said that if the owner proposed to sell at a price lower than the limit in the Bill, the Land Commission would have to satisfy themselves that it was not an improvident bargain, and that the other persons interested in the estate were not damaged. He thought it would be a great pity to disturb the Clause as it stood by the insertion of the Amendment. On Question Their Lordships divided:-Contents, of course, unable to say what the legal 58; Not Contents, 59. Kintore, L. (E. Kintore.) LORD CLONBROCK said that considerable importance was attached to the next Amendment standing in his name, and he hoped the noble Duke would be able to accept it. Amendment moved "In page 2, line 10, after the word afore said to insert the words provided that it any person interested in the estate makes application to the Land Commission in the prescribed manner, the order sanctioning the advance shall set forth the specific grounds for dealing with the case under this sub-section instead of under the foregoing provisions of this section.'"(Lord Clonbrock.) THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: I am advised that the wording of this Amendinent would not effect its apparent object. The object of the Amendment appears to be to provide that the Land Commission, where they sanction an advance outside the "zones," are to state their reasons for considering the price equitable; but the Amendment, Amendment, as drafted, would merely require the Land Commission to state the reasons for dealing with the case under the second sub-section, and the reasons would, of course, be that the advance was not within the zone. Although we object to the Amendment from the point of view of drafting, we also object to it in substance, partly for the reason which I have already stated, that in our opinion it would not be to the advantage but would be prejudicial to the interests of a great many of the landlords selling under this clause. We think that if the Commissioners were compelled, as the noble Lord desires, to state specific reasons for treating a sale as an exceptional case, those specific reasons would be taken advantage of by any one who wished to agitate in the direction of Wentworth, L. Windsor, L. Wolverton, L. reducing the instalments beyond the limits provided in the zones; and if in any case any circumstances analogous to those which had already been decided by the Commissioners could be brought forward that would be made the ground. for a reduction of price beyond that provided throughout the zone. As the Bill stands the Commissioners will, in every case, have to exercise an independent judgment on the circumstances of each individual case. If, however, they had been compelled to fetter themselves by giving reasons in a previous decision they might find it very difficult to escape from giving a similar decision in any case brought within the purview of that decision. I think it would be undesirable to fetter them in that way. LORD CLONBROCK thought that every man would imagine that he had a right to this special treatment, and that the adoption of the clause as it stood would lead to agitation in every case, which was seriously to be deprecated. He would prefer agitation in a limited area rather than all over the country. The Amendment was one of great importance, and he could not accept as satisfactory the reasons given by the noble Duke for refusing to accept it. *THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE said the sub-section as it read only provided that the remainder man had a right to be heard. He was to receive no grounds for the decision arrived at. If the Amendment was accepted, the remainder man would get some reason or other given in the case where he objected to treatment being allowed outside the zones. The noble Duke seemed to think that it would not pay the landlords as their did not LORD MACNAGHTEN agree with the Lord Chancellor for Ireland that the answer which the noble and learned Lord had put into the mouths of the Commissioners would be a good a body to have publicity in connection | learned Lord the Lord Chancellor for with these cases. He thought that Ireland, they would not be complying would be a very good argument if the with the provisions of the Amendment, noble Duke was always going to be in which required that they should set forth power, but there were two Parties in the the specific grounds for dealing with the State, and they felt very strongly that case under the sub-section. as the Estates Commissioners were to be Executive officers they ought to know what they were doing and the reasons that were actuating them in decisions. They were afraid that some day they might get, as they had often had before, a Chief Secretary who was not only not friendly, but very unfriendly, to their interests, and that the Estates Commissioners would be encouraged to effect sales below the limits. For that reason they felt that the more publicity they had the better. He hoped his noble friend would press his Amendment to a division. *LORD ASHBOURNE asked the noble Earl who had just sat down to consider the class of opinion he might possibly get if the Amendment were adopted. The Estates Commissioners would be told by the Amendment to state the specific grounds. They might seek to do that by saying that, having regard to the provisions of the sub-section, and having heard everyone who had a right to be heard, they had come to the conclusion that it was a case in which they could re lax the zone limits. The Estates Commissioners in the discharge of their duties were necessarily given the widest possible discretion. If the parties were dissatisfied with the grounds of a decision the Amendment would give them no remedy. *THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE pointed out that as the Bill now stood they were not called upon to give any grounds for their decision at all. If they gave the grounds, and those grounds were insufficient, he wanted an opportunity of attacking them in Parliament on those grounds. He wanted that opportunity of attacking them if they did not carry out the Act fairly. LORD INCHIQUIN contended that if the Estates Commissioners gave a decision in the form suggested by the noble and Manchester, D. Abercorn, M. (D. Abercorn.) The Farl of Donoughmore. answer. He thought it would be an evasive answer. He believed that if the Estates Commissioners were told by Parliament to give the specific grounds on would do their best to comply with the which their decision was founded, they direction. THE DUKE OF MANCHESTER asked if it was not the case that the Judges of the High Court gave their reasons for their decisions. If it was so, he did not see why the Estates Commissioners should not give their reasons. said the Amendment was moved for the said the Amendment was moved for the purpose of securing adherence, as far as possible, to the limits of the zone. LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE THE EARL OF ARRAN thought both parties had a right to know the facts on which the Commissioners based their decision. My THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: Before the Committee divides I should like to endeavour to explain a little more fully the grounds upon which we cannot accept the Amendment. point is this. If the noble Lord who has just spoken sells an estate outside the zone, and the Commissioners are required to state the specific reasons for their decision, then the existence of those specific reasons would give a handle to for agitating for the reduction of the the tenants on the neighbouring estates terms in their case, though the real circumstances of the two might be different. On Question, their Lordships divided: Contents, 64; Not-contents, 61. CONTENTS. Abingdon, E. de Montalt, E. Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry.) THE EARL OF DUNRAVEN explained he was in no way affected. Take the case that the object of the Amendment standing in his name was to avoid throwing what appeared to him to be unnecessary work upon the Land Commission. He did not think their Lordships need be at all alarmed about the Bill operating too quickly, but he thought there was good cause for anxiety lest the wheels of the machinery might be clogged by the amount of work placed upon the authorities concerned. Sub-section 2 provided for protecting the interests of the remainder man, and, of course, that was perfectly right; but it appeared to him that the remainder man was really interested only in the amount of the purchase money, and that if the total sum of all the of an estate with two tenants upon it, advances-i.e., the whole of the purchase and he hoped His Majesty's Government money-when equally divided amongst would see their way to accept the the various holdings fell within the limits, Amendment. |