*THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND said he was perfectly sure his noble friend understood the working of these matters in Ireland, but this clause might be appalling on the ground of expenditure. The County Courts of Ireland, Courts for which he had the greatest respect, administered the Land Acts very slenderly. The original assumption was that the Act was to be left entirely in their hands. It was then suggested that the Sub-Commissioners should be the administrators, and that was agreed to by the House of Commons. To add on to each of the County Courts of Ireland a Lay Assistant Commissioner would be a vast addition of expenditure which would be entirely disproportionate to the result. The County Court Judge had now the opportunity of calling in the Court valuer who, no doubt, was a temporary man, and there was no doubt it would be better to have a permanent official, but that was the counsel of perfection. Of course if money were no object, and there was likely to be no friction with the Treasury it would be better to have permanent lay assistants, but he thought that the present system worked fairly and reasonably, and in that way it gave no dissatisfaction. LORD CASTLETOWN said he thought the noble Lord was wrong about the expenditure, but, of course, if the noble Lord wished to fix these rents on a cheap and nasty system he could not help it. He would withdraw this Amendment. they desired was that such appeals as were heard should be heard in a satisfactory manner. The practice up to this time had always been that before the Sub-Commissioners very little evidence was brought in, because no attention was ever paid to it at all. The objection he had to this proposal was that it would vastly increase the costs, because everybody would be afraid of an appeal by the other side, and they would bring in reams of evidence in case an appeal might be taken by the other party. He did not know what the practice was that his noble and learned friend proposed to substitute by way of appeal, but no evidence if it be taken was admissible on appeal. The evidence had to be taken in the Court below, and there seemed to be no provision made in that regard. To him it seemed to be inconvenient and unfair. He suggested that there should be rehearings and no appeals. moved to omit appeals "rehearings." Amendment moved He and insert appeals, and insert the words apply for a "In page 38, line 38, to leave out word re-hearing." (Lord Macnaghten.) OF *THE LORD CHANCELLOR IRELAND said his noble and learned friend was not perhaps familiar with the proceedings that went on in the Land Court. His Amendment, though did contain some not appalling, points which required some consideration. One of the extreme difficulties in Amendment, by leave of the Committee, the way of the Land Court was the withdrawn. Clause 84 agreed to. Clause 85. Amendment moved "In page 38, line 36, at the beginning of the clause to insert the words subject to the provisions of this Act.'" (The Duke of Devonshire.) On Question, Amendment agreed to. LORD MACNAGHTEN hoped that the Lord Chancellor of Ireland would not think the Amendment he now proposed to move was an appalling one. All VOL. CXXVII. [FOURTH SERIES.] number of appeals that were taken. There were many thousands of fair-rent appeals still outstanding, although the Court was sitting very constantly. Owing to the drafting of the Land Act of 1881 it came about that the word "appeal " was used when in the early drafting of the Bill it was intended that the County Court Judge was to be the sole tribunal to hear fair-rent cases. When they added on to that the fact that Sub-Commissioners should be appointed, the word "rehearing" came in. There were now practically two systems-the appeal proper from the County Court Judge, and the rehearing from the Sub-Commissioner. When the matter was looked into now for the M LORD MACNAGHTEN asked what was the difference between an appeal and a rehearing, *THE LORD purpose of recasting it with a view to efficiency, it was deemed wise to consider whether the two systems should be kept up, or whether the appeals should be kept up or the rehearings, and it was decided to keep the appeals. His noble and learned friend appeared to be more in favour of keeping the system of rehearings. To the end of time there might be a difference with regard to that, but, on the whole, the system of appeal had worked as well as system of the kind could, though he did not pretend to suggest it was at all perfect. It was therefore provided that appeals should be heard by the Judicial Commissioner with the assistance of a lay assessor taken from a carefully prepared list. any CHANCELLOR OF found IRELAND said it had been that they had to deal with a particular aspect of the question, and in administration it had been proved that under the rehearing system over and over again ardly any evidence had been given in the Court below; that every thing had been reserved for the appelate Court, which was to the last degree unsatisfactory, because when it came to the rehearing, it had to be begun ab oro. to indicate that, if parties did keep back There were careful provisions in this Bill their evidence and did not make their place, there might be a question of costs. case as perfect as possible in the first LORD MACNAGHTEN said what he was afraid of, most of all, was that if his noble friend insisted on this provision the expenses would be enormously in creased. In many cases what would happen would be that there would be a good deal of suspicion. When they went to the Court each side would be suspicious of the other, and each would be afraid the other would appeal, and they would put in enormous masses of evidence which was absolutely unnecessary, and thus increase the costs. LORD DUNBOYNE asked whether the Sub-Commissioners took any notes at all of what took place before them. He was under the impression they did not. these gentlemen went down and looked His experience, he said, had been that at a property, and the next thing one knew about it was that he got a halfpenny post-card on which was "landlord so and so, tenant so and so, original rent so much, new rent so much." That was all one knew about it. If there was to be any appeal there ought to be some note of the judgment below in order to enable the Court of Appeal to deal thoroughly with the evidence. So far as he knew in a case of this kind here, they not only had the notes of the Judge who heard the case in the Court below, but if necessary a note of his judgment as well. *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF was taken it was not allowed to be used IRELAND said so far as he knew in all in the Court of Appeal and was of no cases of appeal before the Land Com- use whatever. mission for the fixing of a fair rent a full shorthand note was taken. very On Question, "That the word pro posed to be left out stand part of the LORD MAGNAGHTEN said he did not | Clause." like to contradict the noble and learned Lord, but as a fact no shorthand note Their Lordships divided:-Contents, was ever taken, and if by chance one 42; Not-Contents, 55. Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde.) more.) Annaly, L. Ardilaun, L. Barrymore, L. Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery.) Words inserted. Fermanagh, L. (E. Erne.) Grey de Ruthyn, L. Grinstead, L. (E. Enniskillen.) | Sudley, L. (E. Arran.) [Teller.] Inchiquin, L. LORD CASTLETOWN said there was a small Amendment in his name dealing with the assessor who was to be the brain carrier of the Judge. It asked that the assessor should go down and see the holding. If he was to know anything of down and see the go the case he should holding with which he was to deal. Lord Macnaghten had an Amendment little fuller, which was, perhaps, a and therefore he would withdraw his Ventry, L. Amendment in order that the noble Lord might move his. LORD MACNAGHTEN said he would move his Amendment to include Lord Castletown's. Amendment moved "In page 39, line 5, at the end, to insert the words, who shall inspect the holding and report thereon to the Judicial Commissioner.' Lord Macnaghten.) *THE LORD CHANCELLOR *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IREOF IRELAND said there was not LAND said there was one difference, much difference of opinion on this as he had indicated already, in the point between the noble and learned Lord administration of the Land Acts of and himself. The noble and learned Lord Ireland with reference to these appeals. held the opinion that such an important He did not like to use such expressions man as an assessor should know what as blame, but it was extremely inconthe evidence was by listening and other-venient that the parties, instead of making wise, and it was necessary often to see the holding in order to tell the Judge its value. He assumed that all these topics would be dealt with by rules which would provide for all these things. He thought it might be a little dangerous to put in words which would indicate the exact point of time for the inspection, because it might well be that the Judge in particular cases might like to have an inspection in advance. He would much prefer that his noble friend would somewhat recast his Amendment so that the wording would leave it possible for the rules to cover the matter. LORD MACNAGHTEN pointed out that there was a strong objection to "rules," but he would be glad to meet the views of his noble friend, and therefore he would have no objection to omit the word" after." *THE LORD CHANCELLOR OF IRELAND said he had no objection to accepting the Amendment at this stage, but he must reserve his right to criticise it on Report. On Question, Amendment, as amended, agreed to. Amendments moved— "In page 39, line 10, after the word which to insert the words 'should have been but.'” "In line 12, after the word 'Commissioner' to insert the words 'who hears the appeal."". (The Duke of Devonshire.) On Question, Amendments agreed to. LORD MACNAGHTEN said he proposed to leave out after the word "rehearings" in line 22 all the rest of the section. He begged to move. Amendment moved-- "In page 39, line 22, after the word 'rehearings to leave out the words to the end of line 23.-(Lord Macnaghten.) their case as perfect as possible in the Court of first instance, should either make no case or a very inadequate case and thus delay the business in the Court of Appeal, when if they had taken the trouble to make a case in the lower Court they could have had a decision quicker provision put in to indicate to the parties and cheaper. Unless there was some that they might not only incur delay but that they might be mulcted in higher doubt it would be unsatisfactory. If the stamps or costs in this section, no words went out it was desirable that something should be put in in place of them, and if the noble Lord consented to those words going out on the understanding that he reserved his full right to consider whether he should put in other words on Report, he had no objection to the Amendment. LORD MACNAGHTEN said the noble Duke could add what he liked on Report, but it would be more satisfactory if those words were struck out now, On Question, Amendment agreed to. *THE EARL OF WESTMEATH said they had considered this clause very carefully and had come to the conclusion that it was so very mischievous that they could do nothing with it but omit it altogether from the Bill. There were a great number of landlords who had tenants whose rentals were less than £5 a year, and they rightly objected to such a tribunal as this and no case for appeal unless the rent had been varied more than 20 per cent. It was a distinct invitation to the tribunal to vary the rent each time by 19 per cent. until the rent was reduced to nothing at all. The only ground upon which such a clause could be supported was the ground of economy. But it was false economy to take away | financial arrangement, and that it was people's property in this way. Not one agreed to after consultation with the member of the Government could Treasury, and I am not in a position to support the clause and would not desire say that the representatives of the to, and he hoped, unless some satisfactory financial interests of the country in the explanation was forthcoming, which other House may be able to give their he did not think was possible, consent to such an important departure that their Lordships would support as the omission of this clause. his Amendment and get the clause taken out of the Bill altogether. He moved. Amendment moved *THE EARL OF WESTMEATH said he was much obliged to the noble Duke, and he hoped he would use his great influ ence with his colleagues in the other "To leave out Clause 87."-(The Earl of House to induce them to adopt an Westmeath.) equally reasonable attitude. THE EARL OF ARRAN said they all hoped, and most of them believed, that this Bill was going to work, but nobody could be sure that it was going to be an operative measure. Therefore he sug gested that no economy should be made in the judicial procedure until they saw how the Bill would work. It would be like a man throwing away his life-belt before he knew whether he could swim. He hoped the Government would agree to the withdrawal of this clause and wait two or three years before they sought to incorporate it in the Bill, so that they might see if the Bill worked. THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: This clause, which I cannot say I have had much opportunity of considering, appears to have been introduced mainly with the object of economy, which is a very desirable object, considering what a very large expenditure of public money in Ireland the Treasury has sanctioned under this Bill. This proposal was chiefly dictated by a desire to give effect to an undertaking given by the Government of Ireland, that every effort would be inade to reduce what appears to be the excessive and ever-increasing cost of the land laws of Ireland. I am unable, however, to say that strong and able arguments from the point of view of the landlords have not been urged against the clause, and I shall not ask the House to divide against the Amendment. In saying that, however, I must ask noble Lords to understand that I cannot, in assenting to this course, give an undertaking as to what view may be taken of such an Amendment as this in the House of Commons. I believe it was part of the On Question, Amendment agreed to. Clause 88. Amendment moved "In page 40, line 17, after the word' reason to insert the word 'solely.'"-(The Duke of Devonshire.) On Question, Amendment agreed to. Amendment moved "In page 40, line 19, to leave out the word judicially and insert the words 'in the absence of other provisions.'"-(The Duke of Devonshire.) On Question, Amendment agreed to. Amendment moved to insert the words 'as from the commencement "In page 40, line 21, after the word 'apply' of this Act.'”—(The Duke of Devonshire.) On Question, Amendment agreed to. LORD CASTLETOWN said that after the debate which took place last night with reference to Trinity College, Dublin, and the very eloquent and able appeal made by his noble friend Lord Rathmore, he did not wish to press the matter farther, but would ask the noble Duke in charge of the Bill whether he could not discuss with Mr. Wyndham the point that was raised on this question in the other place by Mr. Healy. Mr. Healy dealt with the matter in an able and instructive fashion, and in the reply of the Chief Secretary it was suggested that a Commission might be appointed during the next year or two to deal with this very crucial point. Could not the noble Duke consult the Chief Secretary |