§ MR. GRIEVEasked the Secretary to the Treasury, If he will state the reasons which have induced the Lords of Her Majesty's Treasury to refuse the claims of the nearest relations, on both father and mother's side, to a grant of the estate of the late William Paterson, of Paterson, who resided in Kilmarnock, and who died there in January, 1874, which estate has fallen to the Crown as "ultimus hæres," and amounts in value to upwards of £40,000; and if there will be any objection to lay upon the Table of the House a Return showing how such estates have hitherto been disposed of by the Crown when applications for grants have been made by relations of the deceased?
§ MR. W. H. SMITH, in reply, said, he was afraid that if he were to state the reasons which had induced the Treasury to refuse the claim which had been preferred at the Treasury, he should occupy too much of the time of the House upon a matter which was certainly not of special interest; but he should be glad to state the general principles on which the Treasury proceeded in dealing with cases of this sort. The Treasury, in considering first of all the claim of any individual, inquired,whether there was any evidence, either by an informal will or otherwise, of an intention to make provision for that individual. Then they considered further whether a strong claim existed on the part of individuals with regard to whom there was no such evidence. Then they proceeded to consider what would have been the disposal of the property supposing the deceased had been legitimate, and they followed the principles laid down by the law for the distribution of property in the case of legitimate persons who died intestate. But he must observe that the Treasury was simply the trustee of the Exchequer in this matter, and that, although no will had been produced, there was no evidence that a will did not exist. There was now a claim before the Treasury on behalf of persons entitled to an estate which, in the absence of a will, lapsed to the Crown in 897 1823. In that case grants were made to a number of persons, and now individuals produced a will and claimed to be entitled to the estate. They claimed from the Treasury not only the property as it existed in 1823, but the interest also of the property from that time. It was, therefore, the duty of the Treasury not to make grants rashly out of property which for the time they held, and with regard to which they must probably give an account on a future day. If, however, the hon. Gentleman would call upon him at the Treasury, he would be most happy to state to him the circumstances of the particular case about which he enquired.