second time. He understood that his | Scotland there were usages perfectly noble Friend would follow the words of well understood, which were never inthe Bill up to a certain point, and then add a Proviso that the customs should not apply if the landlord were able to show that upon any holding, or any property of which it was part, it had not been the custom to allow tenant right at the expiration of a lease. It appeared to him, therefore, that with that modification of the Bill, and the difficulty being cleared up that had now arisen, their Lordships would act wisely by reading the Bill a second time. THE DUKE OF ARGYLL thought their Lordships were entitled to complain of being called on to vote for a Bill which was totally different from the Bill now before them. The noble and learned Lord had made an admirablehe would not say a plausible-defence, but a really sound defence for such a Bill as he described, if only the state of facts alleged really existed. The noble and learned Lord, however, did not so much offer a defence of the Bill, as draw attention to the manner in which it affected the Land Act of 1870. Now, he (the Duke of Argyll) was one of the authors of that Act, and he entirely disagreed with the noble Earl (the Earl of Belmore) as to the general principles he had laid down as regarded that Act. He maintained that its principle was this-as had been clearly explained by the noble Earl behind him (Earl Fortescue) that where customs, properly so called-where usages generally existed, so that they might be presumed to enter into the understandings of persons making contracts, those customs and usages really formed part of the contract, and should be recognized by Parliament. Therefore, when a custom was proved to be the usage of an estate, they were imported into the contract where a lease was entered into, and became part of the contract. These customs were recognized by Parliament, and it was upon the principle of legalizing existing customs that the Irish Land Act was founded. He must complain of the charge which the noble and learned Lord made of ambiguity in the Land Act. In that Act customs and usages were recognized; but customs and usages were not confined to Ireland -they existed in England and Scotland as well, though in these countries they were more limited. In various parts of The Lord Chancellor cluded in the contract; but which, if disputed in a Court of Law, would be invariably considered part of the contract. Therefore, he contended that the late Government were perfectly right when they sanctioned usages in general terms, and left it to the Courts of Law to say what were usages. The effect of the 2nd clause of this Bill was not to enable the Courts of Law to ascertain a usage, but to import, by Act of Parliament, a new usage. The noble Earl (the Earl of Longford), who was in charge of the Bill last year, recommended this measure on the ground that it had not emanated from farmers' clubs, but was brought in by great proprietors. But did the noble Earl know what was in the mind of the conveyancer? He must say it was hardly fair for the noble and learned Lord representing the Government to recommend the House to vote for the principle of the Bill because the Bill would be subsequently altered in Committee. For his own part, he objected to the principle of the Bill, because it directed the Irish Judges to presume that there was a usage where properly there was none. If the object of the Bill was that the existence of a lease should not preclude the tenant from making a claim, why should the Bill have been brought in? If their Lordships read the provisions of the Irish Land Act, they would see distinctly that every holder of a tenement in Ulster would be entitled to make his claim according to usage, and there was no clause whatever which limited him in making it. The noble and learned Lord who was at the head of the Law in England had brought an accusation against the Irish Judges that they did not interpret the law aright, but were guided by what they considered the eternal fitness of things. THE LORD CHANCELLOR explained, that what he said was that there was a difference of opinion on the subject, and that doubts had been thrown on the meaning of the Act. Where an estate had been sold in the Landed Estates Court, and notice had not been taken of the rights which the tenant might have under the Act, those rights might be sacrificed. It was to remove these doubts that he introduced a Bill himself in 1871, THE DUKE OF ARGYLL said, he did not think the Irish Judges would be guided by the eternal fitness of things, but by their duty in ascertaining the facts. He had heard of one or two cases in which it had been found that tenants under lease were entitled to make this claim. He could not conscientiously give his vote in favour of the second reading of the Bill, under the vague expectation there would be made in Committee certain Amendments of which the House at present knew nothing. LORD INCHIQUIN said, that as the Bill was not confined to Ulster, or the Ulster landlords, those of their Lordships who resided in other parts of the country were, he thought, entitled to express an opinion upon it. He opposed the second reading, on the ground that the Bill was wholly unnecessary, and also that it was inconsistent with the rights of property. If the Bill were to pass, it would lead to claims of tenantright in every case where leases existed. Even if the Amendments suggested by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack were made, the presumption would be altered, and instead of the tenant having to prove that the custom did exist, the landlord would have to prove that it did not. If the Ulster custom, or anything approaching it, were extended to the other parts of Ireland, the value of estates, and of all reversionary interests in estates, would be diminished to a considerable extent. It exceeded his comprehension how landlords could come forward to advocate such a measure. Lord Justice Christian, in a judgment delivered in the Court of Appeal on the construction of the 28th section of the Land Act, said that hundreds of thousands of pounds belonging to the landlords of Ulster had been confiscated. Their Lordships were now asked to pass a Bill to extend the confiscation still further. THE EARL OF DERBY said, that every noble Lord who had expressed an intention of supporting the Bill on the second reading had emphatically condemned it in the form in which it now stood. The noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack had condemned it, and so had the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) who was one of the authors of the Land Aet of 1870. It was admitted on all hands that if the Bill were to pass, the one clause which contained the whole substance of it would require to be materially altered. In these circumstances, was it not rather unreasonable that their Lordships should be called on to sanction a Bill which it was not intended should be passed in its present form? If the Bill were withdrawn, and a new one, properly drawn, introduced, they would know what they were doing; whereas, it was very unfair to ask their Lordships to go to a division, and vote Aye" or No," when they could not know what it really was they were voting upon. They might, in the result, discover that they were voting for or against principles entirely out of harmony with their real feelings on the question. What he would recommend was that the Bill should now be withdrawn, and be brought up again when the Amendments to be proposed by the noble and learned Lord should have been incorporated with it. 66 LORD O'HAGAN said, that he was prepared now to vote for the Bill; but there was so strong an expression of opinion against it, in its present shape, that he thought an improvement in it would be desirable. A very small modification in the measure, such as that suggested by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, would meet the views, at all events, of his noble Friends on that (the Opposition) side of the House. As he understood the noble Earl who moved the second reading of the Bill, its provisions were not to extend beyond the Province of Ulster. The main object of the Bill being to facilitate the determination of the custom of tenant-right, where that custom existed, it appeared to him that the Bill would have more chance of success if that object was made perfectly clear. As he understood it, it was a clear and substantial question that the Bill had to settle; and the question, which was an important one, was not whether Ulster was to be governed in one way or another, but whether the Ulster tenant-right was to be legally recognized under given conditions. That which affected the Ulster tenant-right was important, for the right, as it existed, was the root of the prosperity of Ulster. Under these circumstances, he thought it highly desirable that the relations between landlord and tenant in Ulster should be permanently and definitely settled. and pay him £25,000, which was at the rate of £25 an acre, before he took possession of the land. That, however, was only an ordinary case in Ireland, and he could tell their Lordships of some extraordinary instances. The noble Lord, after citing some remarkable cases, said he would appeal to their Lordships whether they wished the same state of things to extend over the whole of Ireland? Since this Bill had been put down for second reading, he had received from an agent for considerable estates in Ireland a letter on the subject. In this communication the writer stated that the Bill introduced a totally new principle, which, in some instances, would be most injurious to the interests of the land. The writer of the letter expressed the conviction that if the Bill became law it would lead to expensive litigation in certain cases where improvements had to be paid for at the expiration of a lease. He hoped that if the noble Earl in charge of the Bill insisted on taking a division, his proposal would be rejected by a larger majority than that which threw it out last year. The Bill contained a new and vicious principle; and he felt certain that nothing was more likely to injure the prosperity of Ireland than measures calculated to interfere with the security of property in Irish land. LORD SELBORNĖ said, he doubted whether the Amendments referred to by the noble and learned Lord would be adequate to meet the case. He joined with the noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) in asking not to be called on to vote either one way or the other whilst something most material and important was wanting; since he could not, in that case, tell whether he was voting for a principle to which he objected, or against a principle to which he would readily agree. He entirely agreed with the noble Lord (Lord Carlingford), and the noble and learned Lord (Lord O'Hagan), that it was quite clear that if there was a custom, the custom should be recognized; and, further, while it appeared from what had fallen from the noble Lord, who understood better than he could do what the feeling in Ireland was, that there was no difference of opinion in the country itself as to the desirability of existing doubts or ambiguities being settled. The Bill before the House, as he read it, said that the Judge should not go into the question of fact whether or not there was a custom applicable to this particular case; and he doubted whether the Amendment supported by the Lord Chancellor would be adequate to meet the objection. He understood the noble and learned Lord to say that it was proposed that the claim should retain its general character, EARL GRANVILLE said, he rose, but that a Proviso should be added, en- not for the purpose of prolonging the abling every landlord to prove-if he debate, for he had no personal knowthought fit-that there was no such cus-ledge of the working of the Land Act tom applicable to the property. But that, by throwing the onus probandi upon the landlord, would be inflicting a hard and grievous burden upon him; and, further, the presumption in all cases would be raised against him that such custom did exist. He was convinced, under all circumstances, that their Lordships would agree with him that it was fit and proper that they should not be called on to vote at once. The right course would be to withdraw the Bill and have a new and proper one introduced, and then he hoped it would be agreed to. THE EARL OF ANNESLEY, as a resident in County Down, the very centre of the Ulster tenant-right custom, was strongly opposed to the Bill. He invited their Lordships to consider what would be the state of affairs in England, if a large Lincolnshire farmer, for example, holds 1,000 acres, had to go to his landlord in Ireland, but for the purpose of appealing to the noble Earl at the head of the Government whether he would not join in the request made to the noble Earl who moved the second reading to withdraw the Bill? From what had fallen in the debate that night, and also in that of last year, he thought that a grievance existed which ought to be redressed. He made this appeal to the noble Earl at the head of the Government in antagonism to the noble Earl who had charge of the Bill, for he felt convinced that if he pressed the second reading to a division, he would find himself, notwithstanding the powerful support of Her Majesty's Government, in a minority, and, therefore, this grievance would remain entirely unredressed. Under these circumstances, he hoped the Prime Minister would join in urging the noble Earl to withdraw the Bill, and to introduce it in a different shape, so as to meet the views which had | lation which regulated their hours of been expressed in the course of the labour. Were, then, their Lordships debate. On Question, that ("now") stand part of the Motion? Resolved in the Negative; and Bill to be read 2 on this day six months. STATE OF THE COUNTRY-DEPRES- QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS. going to agree to the prayer of the Memorial to which he had referred and that we were being ruined by having to compete with foreign nations, by whom 72 hours of labour were allowed in the week. Later on, Mr. Lister said to repeal the Factory Acts, so that the people, by working some 72 hours aweek instead of 56, might aid in reducing the intensity of the present depression? He thought their Lordships would dismiss the suggestion at once. As usual, there were three courses open to their Lordships. The first he had already THE DUKE OF RUTLAND rose to mentioned. The second was one which ask the First Lord of the Treasury, might be debated, and which he was Whether his attention has been called afraid had been somewhat popular. It to a meeting of manufacturers at was to hold our arms, open our mouths, Huddersfield on the 2nd of the pre- and wait for something to fall into them; sent month? The meeting to which to trust, in short, to Providence, and he referred was called by the President hope that something of a satisfactory of the Local Chamber of Commerce, nature would happen. That would be and was attended by a number of gen- a very easy course to pursue; but it was tlemen engaged in the manufacture of not one which their Lordships would woollen goods. The first resolution assent to. He would again refer for a passed affirmed that the present serious moment to the proposal to increase the depression in the woollen industry in hours of labour. A very important this country was largely caused by pamphlet had been written on the subforeign competition. From the state-ject by a Mr. Lister, who pointed out ments made by the several speakers at this meeting, and from the statistics of a valuable paper read by Mr. Brassey (extracts from which the noble Duke quoted), it was clear that the very greatest depression existed in the woollen trade, and that this depression was not decreasing, but increasing. They took exception to the statement of the noble Earl at the head of the Government on the 20th of April, that the volume of our foreign trade had not diminished; and seeing that foreign workmen worked 72 hours a-week they passed a second resolution, to present to Her Majesty's Government a Memorial praying for a Bill which should enable workers in factories to work 60 hours a-week, as could be done before the Act of 1874. It was clear, therefore, that the manufacturers present at the meeting desired that the hours of labour should be increased. He had sent a message to the noble Earl (the Earl of Shaftesbury), to inform him that he intended to bring the resolutions agreed to by the meeting before the notice of their Lordships; but he regretted to say that the noble Earl was unable to be present. The noble Earl had signalized himself by his devotion to the factory workers of this country, who were indebted to his ability, energy, and perseverance for the salutary legis "The Conservatives passed the Factory Act and the Liberals Free Trade; and these are antagonistic to each other; and I say that we cannot have restricted labour and unrestricted competition. The question, therefore, narrows itself to this issue-are we to make our factory operatives slaves, in order that we may compete with our rivals, or are we to protect both the labourer and the produce of his labour?" Now that gentleman attended the meeting at Huddersfield, and, presumably, was a consenting party to the resolution in favour of extending the hours of labour from 56 to 60 hours. What had caused the change in his opinion? Perhaps he had read the words recently uttered by his noble Friend-namely, that reciprocity was a phantom, and he might have thought that, as he could get no relief in that direction, there was nothing for it but to lengthen the hours of labour. He (the Duke of Rutland) quite admitted that reciprocity was now a phantom; but he asked whether, if they put on duties on foreign imports, reciprocity would not, instead of being a phantom, become a living power? No fewer than 168 articles had been taken off the tariff, and only 22 remained on. THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD: My Lords, I have listened with great interest to my noble Friend's expression of his views, which reminded me almost of the days of my youth, when I heard doctrines of the same kind enforced by himself with the same energy and determination. But I do not think my noble Friend has treated me very fairly in respect of the manner and the occasion which he has selected for bringing these matters before the House. In the first place, the Question, of which my noble Friend had given Notice, was whether my attention had been called to a meeting of manufacturers at Huddersfield on the 2nd of May? I keep my eye on public meetings as much, probably, as any Member of your Lordships' House, but, unfortunately, that meeting escaped my observation; and my noble Friend, by an inadvertence which I am sure was quite unintentional on his part, did not in his Notice give me any clue to the subject which had occasioned that meeting, and which he thought of sufficient interest to justify him in bringing it under the notice of your Lordships. But from the statement which my noble Friend has now made, I gather that the meeting was held in a manufacturing town of repute, in consequence of the general depression and distress, in reference to which I made some remarks a short time ago. I did not collect from my noble Friend anything which really seemed to meet the observations I then made. By way of refuting my remarks, he quoted the opinion of a gentleman (Mr. Brassey), who, although I do not know him, I have no doubt is a competent witness to the fact, that not merely the value of our woollen exports, but the amount-the volume of Why should they not say to foreign | when we ought to take some step for Powers-"Take off your duties, and we ameliorating the condition of our comwill treat you in the same way?" If they merce and industry, even if we were to did, reciprocity would become a force; follow the example of those poor unnow it was as an enormous gun, with- enlightened French, or Germans, or out either powder or shot, but properly Canadians. loaded it would become as formidable as one of the Armstrong guns. They had been, on a late occasion, reminded of the number of Treaties they had with foreign nations containing the "most favoured nation" clause, and it was said that they were bound to treat all those nations in the same way. That might be so; but he saw that last night there was a short debate on this subject in "another place," and that Mr. Bourke stated that the French Treaty had lapsed in December, and that other Treaties were about to lapse. Might he not suggest that those Treaties might not be renewed at all, or else renewed leaving out the "most favoured nation" clause, or in any other way in which life could be given to reciprocity? He now came to the third course which they might adopt, and which he believed was most likely to be conducive to the interests of the country; and that was to put a moderate duty on foreign imports. In favour of such a course he could cite Chatham, and Pitt, and Huskisson, and Thiers, and Bismarck, and Derby, and George Bentinck, and, might he not add, the name of Disraeli? These were some of the greatest statesmen who had ever lived, and they had all advocated a system of import duty. There was not a country under the sun, with the exception of this, which had not adopted the system. Would it not, if adopted here, relieve those who were suffering from the depression of trade, by means of indirect taxation? They now raised, on an average, £120,000,000 a-year by taxation and rates, and of that sum £20,000,000 only was raised by indirect taxation. Was that a fair proportion as between the two systems? No one, he thought, could say that it was. For all these reasons he hoped they would make some compensation to the hard-them pressed manufacture of which he had spoken, by putting some duty on foreign imports, and protecting, not one industry or two, but all the industries of this great country. The ultra-Free Traders seemed to think that all the world was mad except themselves; but he hoped he had shown that the time had come The Duke of Rutland has considerably diminished. But, as a matter of fact, I never gave an opinion upon the state of the particular trade to which my noble Friend has called our attention this evening. I spoke generally, when I said that while the value of our exports had fallen off their volume remained unchanged. That statement was made upon official |