§ THE LORD ADVOCATE, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to further amend the Law of Entail in Scotland, said, it was not his purpose to occupy the time of the House long; but as the Bill related to a subject which affected very materially the welfare not only of landowners, but of tenants, and the public generally in Scotland, it was proper to indicate shortly the Amendments which the House was asked to sanction. In 1685 the system of strict entail was introduced into Scotland. It had its benefits, but it was also attended with corresponding disadvantages. The so-called owner of an entailed estate was so in name only. He could not dispose of it either during his life, or by a deed taking effect at his death, nor could he 222 charge upon it any sums which he had expended in its improvement, however valuable and lasting the improvement might be, or make any provision upon it for his widow or children. After the lapse of nearly a century the Act 10 Geo. III., c. 5, generally known as "The Montgomery Act, "was passed, to give heirs of entail certain powers of charging upon the estate a proportion (three-fourths) of the money expended by them on its permanent improvement, such money not exceeding four years' free rent. Besides the limited character of the improvements recognized, and of the proportion of the money expended thereon allowed to be charged under that Act, the procedure under it was very cumbrous and expensive. In 1825 "The Aberdeen Act" (Geo. IV., c. 87) was passed, enabling the heirs of entail to make certain provisions for their widows and younger children; the latter, however, being dependent on the children's surviving their father, and not being available for their issue if they predeceased him. Down to 1848, however, no facilities were given for terminating entails, which if made in conformity with the provisions of the Act of 1685, were really perpetual. In 1848 the then Lord Advocate (Rutherfurd) carried his Entail Amendment Act (11 & 12 Vict., c. 36), an admirably drawn measure, and one which had produced most valuable results. The main provisions of the Act were that—(1) entails might be set aside with the consent of a certain number—never exceeding three—of the heirs entitled to succeed, the nearest heir always being of the age of 25 before giving his consent; (2) that any heir born after the 1st August, 1848, might disentail an estate entailed before that date without any consent; (3) that any heir born after the date of any future entail might disentail without any consent; (4) power was given to the heir in possession to charge three-fourths of his improvement expenditure on the estate by way of rent-charge, or bond of annual rent, the rate of interest not exceeding £7 2s. per cent. such rate paying off capital and interest in 25 years; (5) instead of granting a bond of annual rent or rent-charge, the heir in possession might grant a bond and disposition in security over the estate for two third-parts of his improvement expenditure. As time had passed on, while the value 223 of "The Rutherfurd Act" was still thoroughly recognized, it had come to be felt that further relaxations of the law were necessary under their old entails. The age of 25 in the nearest heir was found to be unnecessary. In many districts the entailed proprietors could not make any further expenditure in improving their estates from the limited extent to which they could charge such expenditure thereon. Further, as more than 25 years had elapsed since the passing of "The Rutherfurd Act," it was widely felt that increased facilities should be given to heirs of entail to bar the entail, due regard being had to all substantially vested interests. In considering whether further relaxations should be made on the law of entail, it was of great importance that the distinction should be kept in view between entails made before and those made after 1st August, 1848. The latter so closely resembled settlements of entail in England that it was not proposed to interfere with them, except in allowing a nearest heir to give his consent to a disentail at 21 instead of 25, the age at which in England a remainder-man might bar an entail. In regard to old entails—that was, entails made before 1848—it was proposed (1) to make provision for dispensing with the consent of any heir except the nearest heir, due provision being made for the ascertainment of the value of the expectancy of any other of the heirs whose consent was at present necessary, and for such value being paid or secured. (2.) It was proposed to give increased facilities for spending money on the permanent improvement of the estate, and for such money being charged upon it. (3.) It was proposed to enable heirs of entail to convert existing rent-charges or bonds of annual rent over the estate into charges upon the fee of the estate. (4.) It was proposed to provide that provisions in favour of younger children should not lapse by their pre-decease, but should be available to their issue. (5.) It was proposed to improve and simplify, and as a consequence to cheapen, the procedure in applications to the Court for disentailing estates or charging them with improvement expenditure. These proposals might not satisfy those who desired a total abolition of the system of entail, but they would give great and substantial relief to many entailed proprietors, 224 and encourage them to make renewed efforts to improve the estates in their possession, which could not but be more beneficial to the tenants occupying them and to the country at large. The Bill had been introduced at the urgent request of many hon. Members on both sides of the House, and it could only be passed during the present Session if it met, as there was reason to believe it would, with general acceptance.
§ Motion agreed to.