HC Deb 08 March 1838 vol 41 cc702-3
Sir Robert Peel

hoped the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney-General would state whether he proposed to bring forward any measure with reference to the law of heriots.

The Attorney-General

was ashamed to confess that the subject was so difficult that he had found himself unable to grapple with it. In the course of the last Session he did introduce a Bill for the abolition of heriots, but the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge had pointed out several objections to it, which upon an after-consideration he had found insuperable. He had used his best endeavours to find out some other plan, hut without success, and he could now therefore only hope, that by the enfranchisement of copyhold, heriots would gradually cease.

Sir Robert Peel

must say, that the law relating to heriots was one of the most ridiculous blots that ever existed in any system of civil jurisprudence. If it were left in its present state, it would be the greatest reflection on the Legislature that could be cast upon it.

The Attorney-General

entirely concurred in what the right hon. Baronet had said with respect to the law of heriots, which was the barbarous remnant of a barbarous age. If the right hon. Baronet would allow him to put his name on the Committee, if he would not consider it a degradation, he should feel himself highly honoured and flattered by the permission, and he had no doubt that some suggestions would be thrown out which would enable him to prepare a measure by which this blot upon our system of jurisprudence might be wiped out of the statute-book.

Sir E. Sugden

remarked, that he had not had an opportunity of looking at the Bills introduced by the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, and, therefore, he was not in a situation to say whether he could agree to a second reading of them without a discussion. He would, however, look at them, and if he thought that it would be necessary to discuss them first, he would state his opinion to-morrow. With regard to the law of heriots, he thought that it ought to be abolished, but the question was a difficult one to deal with. The House, however, ought to be aware that it was not copyholds only which were subject to heriots, but that, as many Gentlemen knew, heriots were due in many instances in respect of freeholds. If heriots, therefore, were to be abolished, they could not be abolished by the gradual enfranchisement of copyholds, and it would be necessary to pass a general law for that purpose.

Subject dropped.