THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER hoped that hon. Members would not prolong this discussion. It was now 3 o'clock in the morning

MR. DAWSON thought the Government should put in this Amendment as an intimation to the landlords, who had so much to do with the government of Ireland, that they had commenced a new era in the administration of that country. If they desired the success of their Bill they certainly would insert it, and he had no doubt they would eventually have to thank the hon. and learned Member for Monaghan (Mr. Healy) for having suggested it. The hon. and learned Member had put his mark on another Act, and if his suggestions had been more fully carried out they would not be in the position they were in now. If they put a "Healy Clause" in this Bill they would probably make it a

success.

MR. P. J. POWER merely rose to corroborate what had fallen from his hon. Friends. He thought that if a good many of these people had the power of appealing to the Courts they would be able to prove that they were evicted for the non-payment of impossible rents. They ought to accept the Amendment. There were many difficulties in the way of carrying out the suggestion of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland, because if once reinstated the tenant might double on the landlord, and place him in a very false position. As another hon. Member had pointed out also, it was in the interest of peace during the coming winter that they asked for this proposal to be accepted.

SIR JOSEPH M'KENNA really thought the Government ought to accept this Amendment. If the landlord had to replace the evicted tenant in the position of an existing tenant before he could deal with him he would be placing himself in a very false position, because the Land Court might not, after all, allow the purchase money. It would be a very hard thing, under those circum

MR. HEALY: We did not begin until 2. We were waiting all that time.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that if hon. Members wished to persevere with the proposal he would be perfectly willing to adjourn the debate; but in that case the Bill would have to take its chance. All these points had been raised in Committee

MR. HEALY: Never before; never mentioned before.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that at all events a great many things had been discussed in Committee, and had been then decided. His right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General for Ireland had prepared Amendments to meet all the points that were then raised, and was ready to move them; but if new Amendments were to be raised it appeared to him that they would never finish the discussion of the Bill. would make an appeal to hon. Members in the most friendly spirit to conclude this debate, which he thought had been very inconveniently prolonged for all of them.

He

MR. MOLLOY said, the remarks of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were not quite fair to Irish Members. They had waited through the night until the Bill was reached, and when the right hon. Gentleman complained of new Amendments he should remember that they now heard the Government Amendments for the first time, and had at once to weigh and seriously consider them. These Amendments were half promised by the Attorney General for Ireland when the Bill was in Committee; but the right hon. and learned Gentleman had minimized the demands Irish Members made, and the fulfilment of the promises he gave. Certainly on this particular point he agreed they should take a division for their own sakes, to have it on record that they made this offer and it was refused.

MR. T. D. SULLIVAN said, he was exceedingly sorry the Government had

pears that they attempted to exercise such powers of sale and were unable to do so." Line 25, after "Commission," insert

Clause 5 (Purchase of estates and holdings).

debts and those who had not. That amounted to a statement that all the evicted tenants were dishonest men who refused to pay their just debts; but that was a statement he altogether denied. Collectively those tenants were as honest as any in the land; but they failed to pay exorbitant rack-rents dishonest claims, though legally exacted-and so they were evicted from their holdings. In this lay an evil and danger to society in Ireland, and he was surprised that the Government had not grasped this mode of dealing with it harmlessly, without injury to any class in the country. He hoped it was not too late to appeal to the Government to reconsider their determination. No class could reasonably object if the Government seized this opportunity to settle a great difficulty. The more he thought of it, the better and simpler the proposal seemed. Upon the Government must rest the responsibility of needlessly refusing a simple proposition which, if accepted, would produce excellent effects in Ireland from every possible point of view.

Amendment proposed,

In line 37, after "thereof," insert-" Provided such purchase of estate shall only be made if the Land Commission are reasonably satisfied that four-fifths of the value of the holdings will be purchased. This provision may be relaxed on special grounds with the consent of the Treasury, but only when the Land Commission are reasonably satisfied that holdings of not less than three-fourths in value will be purchased."(Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)

be there inserted." Question proposed, "That those words

MR. SEXTON said, the argument of the previous night was that a small number of tenants might coerce the majority of tenants, who, from one cause or another, were unwilling to enter into negotiations for purchase; and if the Land Commission could induce four-fifths in value of the tenants to buy them, the remainder would have to submit to the transfer of the power over them from one landlord to another. The advent of a new landlord was a thing Irish tenants did not regard with any confidence. Could the right hon. and learned Gentleman suggest any qualifying words?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES) said, he would agree to making the proportion fourfifths in value and number.

Amendment proposed, to the said "value," proposed Amendment, after insert "and number."

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment, as amended, agreed to. Amendment proposed, after "value," in last line but one, insert "and number."

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed,

At end of line 37, to add-" And in every such transaction of the purchase of an estate or holding that the Land Commission shall retain not less than one-fifth of the purchase to satisfy the purposes of the guarantee deposit as defined by section 3 of this Act."-(Mr. Sexton.)

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES) said, if the

Amendment proposed to the said proposed Amendment, to omit the words or holding."

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment, as amended, agreed to. Clause 7 (Sales of residues). Amendment proposed, in page 4, line 24, to leave out the words "do not," and insert "cannot."-(Mr. Sexton.)

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 8 (Vesting order in lieu of conveyance).

MR. SEXTON said, it was of importance that the Commission should not sell to other than tenants above a certain portion of the estate. Could a Proviso in that direction be inserted?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES) said, it was impossible to do that. It had been already settled in the 5th clause under what conditions the Land Commission could purchase. They could only purchase when satisfied that four-fifths of the tenants were willing to buy, and it was obvious the remaining fifth must be sold in some way.

On Motion of Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL for IRELAND the following Amendments made-Page 5, line 2, after "purchaser," insert "free from all charges if the vesting order so declare; " line 2, to leave out 61 rights and easements; line 4, leave out "rights and easements."

Clause 9 (Charges and rights subject to which the sale may be made).

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR

IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES) said, he proposed to strike out the words "with the assent of the purchaser." The words were inserted by the late Attorney General, and in themselves were unobjectionable; but looking at the matter carefully a lawyer might hold that they might have the effect of injuring the title of the purchaser. That was the only reason; and his attention had been called to it by the hon. and learned Member for Monaghan (Mr. Healy).

Amendment proposed, in page 5, line 24, after the word "fit," to leave out The Attorney General for Ireland

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

MR. SEXTON said, he was sorry the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Derry (Mr. Walker) was not present, because he attached importance to the words, which he held to be a protection for the purchaser against the insertion of certain conditions attaching to the holding.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 13 (Sales to be for a gross sum. Stamp duty.)

On Motion of Colonel KING-HARMAN the following Amendment made:Page 8, line 15, after "Act" insert

"And shall transmit copies thereupon to the Clerk of the Peace of the county in which the holding is situated for the purpose of local registration."

Clause 15 (Injunction to put purchaser in possession).

MR. SEXTON said, the clause provided that the Land Commission, having exercised their power as mortgagees over the sale of the holding, should proceed to exercise the functions of a tribunal to the extent of issuing an order to the Sheriff for the purpose of putting the purchaser in possession. Surely that was an excessive concentration of power.

Amendment proposed, in page 8, line 3, to leave out the words "or the Land Commission."-(Mr. Sexton.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

COLONEL KING-HARMAN said, he hoped the Government would not agree to this Amendment in a hurried manner. He did not see why the Land Commission should not exercise these functions. That the Bill had been drawn with great care was the reason put forward against important and useful Amendments on the previous night.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES) said, it was impossible that the draftsman could observe the consequences of every point. It certainly would be an anomaly that the plaintiff in an action should issue the

SECOND READING.

Order for Second Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed,

"That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)

MR. SEXTON said, under Clause 4 of this Bill the Lord Lieutenant would have power to appoint three Commissioners for the purposes of the Act; but he thought that would be too small a Board to efficiently discharge the duties to be entrusted to it. The number, he thought, should be increased to five. Power was proposed to the Commissioners under Clause 5 to transfer endowments for elementary education to the management of the Commissioners of National Education, and he took the opportunity of saying he should oppose any such transfer of power. The Commissioners of National Education used the powers they had badly, and no funds available under this Bill should be applied by them. If necessary, let the Board of National Education have an inspecting power; but he believed its existence would be a short one, and soon determined. He should certainly make his objection to this part of the clause in Committee.

the number of Commissioners would be increased to five, and also an Amendment to the 5th clause omitting the power of transfer to the National Boards.

MR. HEALY said, while offering no opposition to this stage of the Bill, it was right he should express the opinion that the Bill could by no means be accepted as a settlement of the question with which it dealt. Though they might allow the Bill to pass this year, Irish Members thought it right to guard themselves from allowing it to be supposed that they accepted it as a settlement of grievances such as that in connection with the Swords School. It was necessary something should be done to stop such scandals; and in allowing the Bill to pass now he guarded himself against any admission that this was the closing chapter of the controversy. It was not surprising that the position of the Bill should be unknown to the hon. Member for Donegal (Mr. Lea) and his Friends, seeing the way in which they discharged their Parliamentary duties. The Bill had been twice passed by the House of Lords, last Session and this Session, at the instance of the late Government; and of course, had they now been in power, the hon. Member for Donegal would not have ventured an objection to the Bill. Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time, and committed for To-morrow.

INFANTS BILL [Lords.]-[BILL 157.] (Mr. Bryce.)

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. HOLMES) said, he was very much surprised at the statement of the hon. Member, that some of his Friends entertained strong objection to the Bill, because he had been assured that the late Attorney General for Ireland (Mr. Walker) and other Members from the North of Ireland were strongly in favour of the Bill and anxious to bring it forward. As to what had been said by the hon. Member for Sligo, he had to say that he had placed an Amendment on the Paper for Committee, by which

to it?

COMMITTEE.

MR. SPEAKER: To be deferred to to-morrow.

MR. ONSLOW said, that they had been told by the Leader of the House that only Government Bills would be taken on the Wednesday; and as the Bill contained matter for grave discussion he begged to move that it be taken on Friday.

MR. SPEAKER: It is a most unusual course to take in the absence of the Member in charge of the Bill.

MR. ONSLOW said, he would beg leave to point out that a most unusual