should not differ from all other property. | his creditors, in the same way that a son It is the duty of society in such cases to and a brother can now rob the whole of his make a just law, and to see that those who family and make them dependent upon have a natural right to be provided for, out charity-perhaps on the Union workhouse. of the property of a deceased, should not It was not until 1827 that freehold estates be left to starve, solely because he has not were made assets for the payment of debts made a will: society is bound in such a case of all classes generally. The Act was to make a will, founded at all events on passed by the present Master of the Rolls, the principle of justice. Sir John Romilly. The law is so cruel, and so much in favour of the heir-at-law, that where a person has only contracted to buy land, intending to make a will when the purchase is completed, but dying before the purchase is completed, his executors would be obliged to complete the purchase and hand the estate over to the eldest son. I take the following illustration, as to the unsatisfactory state of the law, from a work published some years ago by Lord St. Leonards, when Sir Edward Sugden. I hope, hon. Gentlemen, the possessors of landed estates will not be alarmed at this proposed modification of the law, for it cannot affect them. Their estates are almost invariably settled or entailed in such a way that they have not the trouble of making a will; their wills are generally made for them, not uncommonly before they were born. But in any cases where they happen to be free, they can always enforce the present law; they can make their own law, by merely expressing that wish in writing, their alarm is after all imaginary. There always have been in Parliament great difficulties in making any change in the laws relating to landed property. I would refer in proof of this to the difficulty the great Romilly had to contend with when he proposed to make freehold estates assets for the payment of debts. A man could incur simple contract debts to any amount, and yet his freehold estate was in no way liable for their payment. The alarm was so great that for ten years Parliament actually refused him this simple and just proposal. All that this great man could do, after ten years' labour, was to get Parliament to make the freehold estates of traders liable for the payment of their simple contract debts. The remark in his Diary" is very forcible. He says: 44 66 Many of the objections which were made to the former Bill are applicable to this-that it is an innovation; that it is to affect land without evidence in writing; that it holds out a delusive credit, &c. There has not however been a single word uttered in opposition to the Bill in any stage of it. Country gentlemen have no objection to tradesmen being made to pay their debts; and to the honour of men in trade-of whom there are a good many in the House-they too had no objection to it." And we have long since acknowledged the principle that the personal estate of intestates should provide for the maintenance of children; but we maintain the law that one child should, where real estate is concerned, as it were rob all the other children, as well as his own mother. The debtor, the owner of freehold land sanctioned by law, could rob and defraud all consequences may follow from a neglect on your "A moment's reflection will show what serious part; for suppose you purchase an estate with the £50,000 in the Funds which you have given by your will to your younger children, and which constitutes the bulk of your personal property, and should neglect to devise the estate, the money must go to pay for it, at the expense of your younger children, who would be left nearly destitute, whilst your eldest son, to whom the estate would descend, would have an overgrown fortune." He says that distressing cases of this kind are continually occurring. There appears also a difficulty as to how the person who is about to change his property from personal into real estate is to make a will. I myself have had some experience as to the alarm that exists among certain persons when it is proposed to alter a law respecting real estate; for two or three years ago I brought in a Bill, to effect a change with regard to mortgages, that a mortgaged estate should descend with the burthen, the debt, imposed upon it. That Bill happily has become law; but, although it only carried out the principle of Sir S. Romilly's Bill, that freehold estates should be assets for the payment of debts, it only passed the other House by a majority of three. Sir, I hope we shall not have that very trite saying adduced, that the effect of this Bill will be to destroy the House of Lords. The House of Lords stands on something better, I hope, than an unjust law; if it is to be supported by injustice, it will very soon fall. You could not say anything harder, or more cruel, of that august assembly than that the present law of succession is necessary for its support. In point of fact, this law could not to feel that, having submitted to the auaffect the Peers in any way; for I must thority of this feudal law, it is time that repeat, their large estates are in almost it, in its turn, should be submitted to the every instance entailed in such a way, that authority of reason; that, having been they have no power to make a will. I hitherto the slaves of it, and suffered from would remind the House that this absurd the consequences of its injustice, they in objection of injuring the House of Lords their turn will also become its judges. was used against Sir S. Romilly, when he brought in his Bill to make owners of real estate pay their debts, and was refuted by him in a masterly manner. I hope also that I shall not be told that I seek to introduce the law of Succession as it is in France. No such thing; I disapprove of the law as it exists; the parent has there a very limited power of willing. I propose, on the contrary, that he should have the fullest possible power of willing his property; but that in those cases, and those only, where he has made no will, all his children should be provided for. I beg to move, for leave to bring in a Bill for the better settling the Real Estates of Intestates. THE SOLICITOR GENERAL said, he had but very imperfectly heard the observations of the hon. Member in introducing the Bill, but so far as he could gather he understood that the hon. Gentleman did not wish in any way to interfere with the disposition of landed property by will, but that he merely desired to provide for cases in which no will had been made by the owner. [Mr. L. KING: Hear, hear!] That sounded a very plausible proposition There are other reasons of a special when so put; but he thought that the hon. nature which ought to induce the House, Member would find that he would have to and above all Her Majesty's Government, consider a great number of cases which at the present moment, to pass this Bill. had found no place, so far as he (the SoliYou are by degrees applying the principles citor General) had heard, in the observaof free trade to land. You have broken tions which the hon. Member had offered down many of the barriers which existed to the House. He would suggest, howbetween real and personal property. You ever, that the hon. Member should be perhave, during the last few years, because it mitted to lay his Bill upon the table, in was convenient, applied the legacy-tax, order that they might see how he proposed under the name of succession duty, to the to deal with difficulties which, in his mind, soil. The Solicitor General is about to presented themselves by the score to any break down and remove the difficulties measure such as had been proposed. With which exist in regard to the alienation of this view he should offer no opposition to land. He is about to carry out the prin- the introduction of the Bill; but he hoped ciple of giving a Parliamentary title to the that the hon. Member would not suppose land, and tread in the footsteps of the pre- that the Government wished in the slightsent Master of the Rolls, to whom we are est degree to lend any countenance to the so much indebted for having originated the idea that the order of succession to landplan, and who in times of great difficulty ed property in this country was to be established the machinery, which has been changed, or that on the death of a perbeyond measure successful in Ireland. If son who had made no will the landed then you are about to apply the commer-property would be divided among all the cial principle to the soil, and to make land family, as was the case on the Contias easily transferable as money in the nent, instead of descending, as at present, Funds; if you show by your doing so, that to the eldest son. When, however, the you have no respect for those laws which hon. Member said that he did not desire made alienation difficult and almost impos- to prevent the free disposition of real prosible, how can you, with any consistency, perty he did so in effect; because, whereas refuse to let land descend in the same way at present a man knew that if he died inas other property does, particularly when, testate his freehold estate would go by naby refusing to do so, you cause great dis-tural descent to his eldest son, he would tress and suffering? All that I ask by this Bill is, that, in the event of a person dying intestate, a uniform, and, above all, a just law, should apply to all property. Depend upon it, the day is not far distant when a demand will be made upon you to pass this Bill; the people are beginning VOL. CLII. [THIRD SERIES.] under the proposed Bill be required to make a will to effect that same object. He believed when the hon. Member came to consider the various difficulties that arose in this matter, he would see that it was by no means so simple a thing as he appeared to think. However,until the Bill was before R them, it was impossible to know how these questions were dealt with, and therefore he should offer no opposition to its introduction. LORD H. VANE said, that he had no difficulty in gathering from the observations of his hon. Friend the Member for East Surrey that his object was altogether to alter the law with respect to the descent of real estate in cases of intestacy. He (Lord II. Vane) contended, in opposition to the principle sought to be established by his hon. Friend, that in providing for cases of intestacy they were bound to look to what in all probability would have been the wills of the individuals, supposing them to have made wills; and if they found that in the great majority of instances settlements were made in a particular manner, they were bound to infer that such was the opinion generally prevalent among all classes. He believed that the hon. Gentleman was mistaken as to the law on this subject, If a man died intestate, leaving landed property, his widow was entitled to a third of it. She could not be deprived of that unless her husband had by a special bar taken it away from ber. In the case of a man without ehildren dying intestate, leaving personal property, his widow was entitled to half of it. He had no great confidence that the hon. Gentleman would produce such a measure as would meet the case, or receive the approbation of that House or of the country; but he should offer no opposition to the introduction of his Bill. MR. MELLOR said, his hon. Friend did not propose to interfere with settled estates. His hon. Friend simply proposed that where a man had omitted to make a will for himself the State should make a will for him, by distributing his estate according to the principles of equity and justice; and he (Mr. Mellor) hoped that Her Majesty's Government would find them selves able to support the Bill. He thought when they came to consider it they would find it had been most accurately described by his hon. Friend. He wished to correct an error into which the noble Lord had fallen, and he was sure the Solicitor General would agree with him. There was scarcely a conveyance in modern times in which the property purchased or acquired was not conveyed to uses to bar dower. Therefore the widow could scarcely ever derive benefit from such property; and where it was not so conveyed, and was small, just conceive what was her position. Suppose the pro perty was not worth £300, and the yearly income derivable from it only £9, the widow would be entitled not to a third of the property, but merely to one-third of the £9 during her life. He believed that many petitions had in former Sessions been presented in favour of his hon. Friend's proposition. He did not believe that intestacies arose because people were content with the existing law, but because, fancying they would never die, they continually postponed the making of their will, and at length died suddently without having made it. MR. HADFIELD approved the Bill, because it would go a great way towards accomplishing a most desirable objectnamely, the doing away with all distinction between real and personal property. It was idle to say, as an argument against the Bill, that there would be great inconvenience in distributing real property, because, even at present, leasehold property was distributable like movcable goods. Motion agreed to. Bill for the better settling the Real Es tates of Intestates, ordered to be brought in by Mr. LOCKE KING, Mr. MASSEY, and Mr. MELLOR. Bill presented, and read 1o. NEWSPAPERS, &c. LEAVE. FIRST READING. MR. AYRTON, in rising to move for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal certain Acts, and parts of Acts, relating to Newspapers, Pamphlets, and other publications, and to Printers, Type Founders, and Reading Rooms, said, that although, as he believed, no opposition would be offered to the introduction of his Bill, it was the wish of the right hon. Gentleman opposite that he should clearly know what were its objects. The subject was one which went back a number of years in the annals of legislation. The statutes which he sought to repeal were the growth of evil times, and it was necessary to recur to them to discover how they had been placed upon the Statute-book. So early as the reign of Queen Anne the Ministers of that day imagined that the periodical press was injurious to the interests of the State, that it might be applied to seditious objects, and that it was therefore necessary to take steps to repress what they deemed to be a great public grievance. He had taken the trouble to look at the current literature of that day, and he found that it was the It sentiment of the House of Commons and signs said to be entertained of subverting of the public men of that time, that what- the Government, the plots and conspiracies ever was written and whatever was pub- existing at home and abroad,—to suppress lished, however temperate and however these further powers were demanded by learned it might be, if it was adverse to the Executive, and readily conceded by an their opinions, if it was written with strength overwhelming party, backing the Minister, and purpose, ought to be regarded as a Mr. Pitt. They went even to the extent wicked and seditious libel. If it touched of preventing men from reading newsupon the affairs of religion, if it was ad- papers except in places licensed by a justice verse to the opinions of the dominant of the peace. Alehouses were, however, party in the Established Church, then it considered privileged places for reading was also an impious and blasphemous libel. journals, tapsters were made the guarSuch was the character of the Resolu- dians of public morals, but ultimately it tions of that House on publications which had a very bad moral effect, as it assoany one who read them now-days would ciated the current literature of the day regard as the most innocent and perhaps with drinking and intemperance. This the dullest publications he could read. At law enforced the custom which existed last the Members of the House were throughout the country till a comparaaggravated to the highest degree because tively recent period, to resort to a puba document was printed which was simply lichouse for the purpose of reading a translation of a State paper of the the public journals. Printers, and even States General of Holland. They assumed type-founders, and every person, howthat it was fictitious, they condemned it as ever indirectly connected with literature, a wicked libel upon the House of Commons, were brought under the notice of the and they immediately resolved themselves Government, and required a Government into a Committee of the whole House for licence to carry on their callings. the purpose of suppressing so great an evil. might be imagined that these restrictions Consequent upon that a Bill was passed, died out with the times for which they appealing rather to the pecuniary interests were enacted; but the statute remained of the country than to any public principle, unrepealed to the present day. The only to impose very heavy duties upon paper, measure of relief had been to place the upon newspapers, upon pamphlets, and power of enforcing these provisions in upon advertisements. In order to facili- the hands of the Crown, instead of tate the collection of these duties it was those of the common informer. But ought provided that every publication should such exceptional laws, framed for exbe registered at the Stamp Office. That ceptional times, to be kept dormant on was the origin of the registration, which the Statute-book, leaving to the Govern had been kept up to the present day. ment the right to enforce them whenever The next year an attempt was made to it thought fit? With these restrictions extend this registration to the authors one would have thought the constitution of writings; but it was abandoned, and was sufficiently protected against its imagifurther duties were imposed instead of it. nary enemy-the Press. But when the ConThe press being thus deemed sufficiently tinental war was brought to a close, and weighed down was left alone until 1798, mens' minds were diverted from its great when the country became involved in war, events to affairs at home, to the change from and the insurrection broke out in Ireland. the past to the factitious prosperity resulting This was the occasion of further law, by from loans, and the enormous expenditure of which the restrictions were increased, the the country, and to the necessity of economy registration was made more minute, a form and a reform in Parliament, then again of declaration was required of the owner- the Government, in 1819, resorted to exship of every newspaper, and a declaration treme measures of restraint against the whether any Foreigner was interested in Press. At that time there were, no doubt, it-then, perhaps a reasonable precaution many publications of so extravagant and against the State receiving any injury. extreme a character, as to call for represThat measure had been repealed; but sion by the arm of the law. But the most of its provisions had been re-intro- Government, instead of prosecuting all duced into the existing law. In 1799 an- journals and pamphlets really injurious other Bill was proposed by the Executive, to the welfare of the State, endeavoured the apology for which was the dangerous to bring odium on the whole press, so as state of the country, the treasonable de- to be able to ask Parliament to lay still further restrictions on its liberty. The Gladstone) proposed the abolition of the Government introduced another measure, stamp duties on newspapers, he intended, which required every person undertaking at the same time, to repeal nearly all the to print a newspaper or pamphlet-in short statutes then in force; but in consequence anything less in quantity than might be of the objections which were taken to such a called a volume-or anything published at course, the right hon. Gentleman, to obviate a cheap rate, to enter into recognizances, any delay in the settlement of the fiscal quesand find two sureties to the Crown of tion, relinquished his design, and almost all £300 in London, and £200 in the country, the most obnoxious provisions of the law were in case the publication should contain any left on the Statute-book. The object of his matter held to be a seditious or blasphe- (Mr. Ayrton's) Motion was to sweep away all mous libel. That law further enacted those vexatious statutes, and to limit the severe and extravagant penalties on any per- laws affecting newspapers and pamphlets to sons twice convicted of such an offence. the general enactments that regulated all Two years afterwards, as a measure of publications. There was no principle that mercy, they brought in a Bill mitigating entitled them to draw any distinction bethe severity of the penalties in cases of tween a large book and a small one, a conviction, but at the same time aggra- dear book or a cheap one; but, under vated the pressure on publication by in the existing laws, the press was made creasing the amount of the security from liable to an exceptional legislation. The £500 to £400 in London, and from £200 public had ample protection in the law to £300 in the provinces. That security that required a copy of every work, was also further extended, and enforced large or small, even a single sheet to be not merely in cases of seditious and blas- delivered to the Trustees of the British phemous libel, but anything that might be Museum, and provided, in any case of deemed a libel on a private individual. omission of such delivery, that the pubThe security was made available, not lisher could be summoned before a justice merely for the protection of the State, of the peace, and fined. The Copyright but of any individual who might prove Act also required every publisher desiring himself aggrieved by a publication. That the protection of the laws relating to literawas the extreme limit of restriction. ture to register his publication at StaThe House would thus see that the trade tioners' Hall. Thus we had sufficient of printing and publishing was considered means of knowing who was the proprietor so totally different from every other calling of any work printed in this country, whatin the country; that these measures against ever its character. We had other statutes it could only be justified either by the directed expressly against criminal publiexigencies of the times, or by assuming cations. that every man connected with literature was to be held a public delinquent, or common barrator, to be put under restraint before he could be allowed to carry on his calling. He thought the House would not accept the latter alternative. After some time, when the reform of Parliament had been accomplished, and the dread of the dangers that were anticipated from it had entirely passed away, an agitation began for relieving the current literature of the day from the difficulties in which it was placed, the enormous taxes imposed on it, and the restrictions by which it was fettered. When the duties were reduced in 1836 the statutes above noticed, with some exceptions, were repealed, but many of the most vexatious restrictions respecting registration and security were reenacted. In the course of several years the direct taxes were diminished. In 1836 when the right hon. Gentleman who was then Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. One of these enabled the authorities, when any publication was adjudged to be a seditious or blasphemous libel, to have all the impressions of it seized, and prevented from circulating to the injury of the community. Another Act passed two Sessions ago provided for the suppression of obscene and other improper books. The latter measure was an excellent illustration of the soundness of his views against vexatious restrictions on trade, for in its original form, it contained several very extravagant provisions, interfering with the convenience of legitimate trade; but at his instance the objectionable clauses had been expunged, and in its amended shape the Act had worked satisfactorily. This showed the adequacy of the law to protect public morality, without infringing the rights of honourable traders. The statutes, however, which he sought to abolish imposed vexatious restrictions on honest men who had no wish to violate the law, but placed no effectual restraint on those who had |