Star. — 1814-04-01 (London, England)

FREEHOLDPROPERTY ATTACHMENT BIU.  Sir S. ROMILLY said, that agreeably to the notice he had given, he now rose to move for leave to bring in a bill, to enact, that the freehold property of persons who die intestate be subjected to the ply. ment of their teal debts. He did not anticipate any opposition at present to his motion; and he should therefore cOnfiner himself to shortly stating the grounds of the measure. By the law, as it now stands, any person to whom a debt is owing has the power to an est his debtor, and keep him in prison till the debt be paid. To be sure, some little relAxatiOn of this severity had been produced by the Act of last Sissign ; 'but still, whether The debtor got into his ditecorna from profligacy 9 misfortune, the creditor could keep hint for a time in durance; and if he did'not wakes' full' disclosure of his property, in Certain cases, rihe offence miglit be considered capital. A bankrupt, for instance, might suffer death for keeping back any of his property from his creditors; but there were otters %ho miglit withhold *their property • .  with impunity. While the law W2l thus severe to one class of society, and favourable to another— while it sends one man out of the world for secreting perhaps a small portion of property, and alloWs. another who has ample means to pay his just debts to escape any sort of punishment, it must be admitted that some alteration is just and necessary. What he intended was, that the Bill should apply only to men who, having freehold property at the time of their death, and being then in other respects insolvslit, leave it to descend to their heirs, and suffer their debts to remain unpaid. The law now permits the heir to live in all the comfort and splendour of life, while the honest tradesmen who may have contributed to that splendour are at last ruined, and sent to take refuge in a workhouse, because the principal property of•the heir cannot be made responsible. The principal part of his Bill would therefore be to render the freehold property of any man who dies in debt responsible to his creditors. He alluded to the Act of King 'William, called the Statute against Fraudulent Devices, and regretted that it did not gc far enough. In farther illus►ration of the necessity of his Bill, Sir Samuel observed, that it often happened, that a person had purchased an estate just before his death, with the money that ought to have gone to his creditors; and there had been instances of others, who, in desperation at their circumstances, rather than let their property go to their creditors, to the ruin of their near relatives, had committed suicide. Sir Samuel then reminded the House, that he had introduced a similar Bill seven years ago, wheit he was Solicitor-General, which had the approbation of the Government of that day. There were many objections then made to it, which he did not expect would be revived. It was stated, in particular, that the measure would lead to incessant litigation. The same, and many other objections, were raised against the Insolvent Act of last year ; but now it was in full execution, not the smallest difficulty was found , in it ; and cases have occurred where £lOO,OOO have been paid over to the creditors without the least dif ficulty. Sir Samuel then alluded to the case of Sir Roger Kerrison, of Norwich, who left estates worth 8500,000, and but for the operation of that Act, every one of the creditors might have been kept from every farthing. He knew it had been said that his Bill would tend much to weaken the aristocracy of the kingdom, and do away the distinctions of rank t but the diminution of rank was already seen amongst those who were enabled to commit injustice by living in splendour on the property of other people. The principal consequence of his Bill would be, that if the real estates of men of property were made subject to the payment of their debts, the credit of heirs would be facilitated on coming into life, and the tradesman would have a greater security ftir the obtainment of his rights. Sir Samuel concluded with saying, that he flattered himself the Bill would be allowed to pass through all its stages without opposition. The question fur leave to bring in the Bill was then put and carried.