The result of the party struggle as to Local Taxation
will pro- bably depend in no small degree on the line taken by the chiefs on both sides in relation to the Tenant Farmers' Bill, —called the• "Landlord and Tenant Bill" partially discussed in another column,. the second reading of which is fixed for the previous Tuesday (April 22nd). On that subject both the great parties are already divided. The names on the back of the Bill are Mr. James Howard• (Liberal M.P. for Bedford), and Mr. Clare Read (Conserva- tive M.P. for South Norfolk), and at the meeting of the Central Chamber of Agriculture last Tuesday, both these gentlemen had to fight •hard for the clause which proposes to render it impossible for any •tenant-farmer to contract himself out of the compensa- tion which the Bill promises him in relation to unexhausted improvements. Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, who was in the chair, brought about some compromise, the nature of which we do not accurately gather, but certainly not one which will satisfy Lord Elcho, who, as Mr. Read pointed out to him in the House of Commons on Monday, in the course of his reply to a curiously inquisitorial question, had given notice of his intention to move the rejection of the Bill before the Bill had-been printed. It is certainly a measure which will severely test the popular principles which Mr. Disraeli claims for the Tory party, and perhaps show thetenant-farmer, hitherto by inetinetConservative, that "Codlin's their friend and not Short," i.e., urban members and not county- members,—members like Mr. Howard, instead of members like- Lord Elcho (Haddingtonshire) and Mr. Chaplin (Mid-Lineoln- shire).