HC Deb 19 May 1873 vol 216 cc150-1

[BILL 108.]

(Mr. Secretary Bruce, The Lord Advocate, Mr. Winterbotham)

COMMITTEE. [Progress 12th May.]

Bill considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Clause 4 (Renewal of investiture abolished.)


moved, after "superior," to insert— And it shall not be competent for the superior in any ease to insist upon such person taking out any charter, precept, or other writ by progress. The hon. and learned Member said, he had also prepared Provisos relating to infeftment, and confirmation, and other points which he would afterwards move.


said, it had already been determined that it was not competent to insist on charters being granted; and the Provisos proposed were altogether inconsistent with the Bill.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: — Ayes 62; Noes 102: Majority 40.


moved, after the word "superior," to add words requiring the new owner within three months after acquiring his rights to produce his titles to the superior or his agents in order that entry might be made.

After short Explanation,

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause "greed to.

Clauses 5 to 7, agreed to.

Clause 8 (Estates to vest in heirs without service.)


moved to leave out from beginning to line 11, and before "shall" insert words providing that "estate shall vest without service in case of proprietor dying intestate."

Amendment negatived.

Other Amendments moved and negatived.

Clause agreed to

Clause 9 (Completion of heirs' title.)


moved, in line after "effect," to leave out to end of clause, and insert the words "Completion of title when deceased heir not served." He thought it strange, when the Scotch system was being introduced into England, the Lord Advocate should propose to abolish it in Scotland.


opposed the Amendment. He regarded the procedure in regard to service as altogether superfluous. If there was no dispute of a man's right to succession, there was no reason why he should go through a complicated procedure; if there was a dispute, it ought to be raised in the ordinary Courts of Law, and settled in the ordinary way.


thought the attention of the Lord Chancellor should be drawn to this proposed alteration of the Scotch law before the system of service was adopted in England.


said, that the authority of the Lord Chancellor was different from that of the Sheriff of Chancery.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided:—Ayes 79; Noes 41: Majority 38.

Clause agreed to.

Committee report Progress; to sit again on Friday.