Lords Sitting of 29 June 1848

MINUTES.
Took the Oaths.—The Marquess of Abercorn.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Bankrupt Law Consolidation.
2a Commons Inclosure; Law of Entail (Scotland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. From Buckland, and several other Places, against the Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on the Sabbath.—From several Charitable Institutions of Bath, for the Exemption of Hospitals and other Charities from the Payment of Legacy Duty on Bequests made to them.—From Mullinacuffe, against the present System of National Education in Ireland.—From Alpington, and other Places, in favour of the Health of Towns Bill.—From Dysart and Nesling, against the Marriage (Scotland) Bill, and the Registering Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill.—From Hatherleigh, for the Enactment of Sanitary Measures.

ECCLESIASTICAL UNION AND DIVISION OF PARISHES (IRELAND) BILL.
On the Order of the Day being read for receiving the Report of the Amendments,
LORD STANLEYsaid, though he concurred in agreeing with the noble Lord opposite, that the object of this Bill was a most beneficial one, he could not refrain calling the attention of their Lordships to the fact that it omitted to do what all similar measures on the subject had done—namely, to provide that the consent of the patron of the benefice should be obtained to the division of a union or to the consolidation of parishes. He thought they ought not to deviate in so important a principle from their former legislation on this subject. It was quite true that the patron would be entitled by this Bill to state his objections to the Lord Lieutenant and to the Privy Council of Ireland, who were to take them into consideration, but then the decision was to rest with them. He could not understand also why it should be proposed to apply the measure to private patrons only, and that the Crown should be exempted. He did not, however, wish to oppose the measure at its present stage, but merely threw out these remarks for the consideration of the noble Earl opposite, previous to the third reading.
EARL FORTESCUEsupported the Bill, which, he said, had been framed with the consent of the most rev. Prelate the Primate of Ireland.
After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE,
The EARL of RODENcondemned the measure, and thanked the noble Earl for calling the attention of their Lordships to it.—Amendments reported.

LAW OF ENTAIL (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR moved the Second Reading of this Bill, the object of

1307
which was to assimilate the law of Scotland with respect to entails to that of England. He did not apprehend that any of their Lordships would be of opinion that the present defective state of the law of entail in Scotland was such as ought to be continued. The present state of the law did not affect merely private individuals, but the country generally. There could be no doubt that the agricultural interests, and those of all who were concerned in the landed property of the country, were affected by a law which prevented the sale of landed property in many cases. Long experience had proved that the law of entail in this country was satisfactory, and that they would have a safe precedent to guide them in respect to Scotland. The three first clauses of this Bill were framed with extreme caution, in order to assimilate the law of Scotland with that of England. The Bill provided that parties wishing to disentail their estates should first have the consent of the parties next entitled; whatever interest there might be beyond the three was not to be considered, when opposed to the vast advantages which must accrue from the assimilation of the law. The measure was one which would confer a great boon on Scotland.
The DUKE of BUCCLEUCHsaid, it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the second reading of this Bill; but he must state his opinion, that there never had been brought under their Lordships' consideration any measure of so sweeping a character as this; affecting the possession and inheritance of property in Scotland. It was no small alteration in the law which was proposed; at the same time he was not prepared to say that some alteration was not necessary in the existing law of entail in Scotland. He knew there was a prejudice against this law as it was in force in Scotland; but he believed its general practical operation had been most beneficial to the country, and that it had often protected property which under different circumstances would have been split up in small portions. He believed that this Bill in some instances went beyond the law of England. He would not trouble their Lordships with any further observations, but would consent to the second reading; and he moved that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.
After a few words from Lord CAMPBELL in support of the Bill,
The DUKE of ARGYLLsaid, that the clamour and agitation which had been
1308
raised against the present law in Scotland, had been raised by those who knew little or nothing of its working, and in places where there was a tendency to democratic opinions. This Bill was a great and important change in the present system, which should not be lightly consented to; and, like his noble Friend (the Duke of Buccleuch) he should consent to the second reading of the Bill, and support the Motion for referring it to a Select Committee.
The DUKE of MONTROSEexpressed his satisfaction that the noble Lord who moved the second reading of this Bill had consented to its being referred to a Select Committee. He had no doubt that such a course met with the approbation of nearly every noble Lord present.
The EARL of MINTOsaid, that he believed the object of the Bill was to assimilate the Scotch law of entail to the law of England, and therefore he entirely approved of it. A feeling of discontent had arisen, in consequence of the present law, which was by no means confined to democratic towns, and which this Bill was in every way calculated to remove.
Bill read 2a.
House adjourned.