In actual practice under the Act the landlords recouped themselves for the compensation which they had to pay to an evicted tenant by raising the rent on his successor in the tenancy in the comparatively few cases in which the evicted tenant could afford the legal costs which the filing of a claim for compensation entailed, but this much at least had been secured, that the virtual confiscation of the tenants’ improvements had been stopped.  The Act of 1870 had been passed to prevent arbitrary evictions and to secure to the tenant compensation for improvements, and in certain cases for disturbance.  It succeeded only in making arbitrary evictions more costly for the landlord, it gave the tenant no fixity of tenure since the compensation for disturbance was inadequate.  To remedy this Isaac Butt in 1876 introduced a Bill based on the “three F.s”—­fair rent, free sale, and fixity of tenure—­but it was rejected by 290 votes to 56, and several other amending Bills were thrown out by the House of Commons between 1876 and 1879.  In 1880 the Government were at last stirred to action in the introduction of the Compensation for Disturbance Bill, which caused the retirement of Lord Lansdowne from the Cabinet, and was followed by threats of resignation on the part of the Duke of Argyll.  Under the Act of 1870 only those occupiers were entitled to claim compensation for disturbance whose rents were not in arrear.  By this Bill it was proposed to extend the right to that claim to all those who were unable to pay as a result of bad harvests, and who were willing to hold their farms on just and reasonable terms, which the landlord refused.

After passing through the House of Commons, in spite of Lord Randolph Churchill’s denunciation of it as the first step in a social war, the Bill, although there had been a large majority in its favour in the lower House, was thrown out by the House of Lords at a time when the need for remedial legislation was illustrated by the presence in Ireland of 30,000 soldiers and 12,000 policemen for the protection of life and property.

The Royal Commission, under the chairmanship of Lord Bessborough, which was then appointed, reported in the following year that the Land Act of 1870 afforded no protection to the tenant who remained in his holding, since compensation for improvements could only be claimed on giving up a tenancy.  The Commissioners, by a majority of four to one, declared themselves in favour of the “three F.s,” which the leader of the Opposition denounced as “Force, Fraud, and Folly,” and the Commissioners justified their attitude by this statement, which was echoed by the Richmond Commission, which reported soon after,—­“freedom of contract, in the case of the majority of Irish tenants, large and small, does not really exist,” the reason being that tenants in occupation were ready to pay any rent rather than sacrifice the capital and labour they had sunk in their holdings.  The good seasons after 1870 had made this rise in rent possible, but with the bad winter of 1880 the results became disastrous.