have the estate for A.'s lifetime; that after A.'s death, B. shall have it for his lifetime; and that after B.'s death, C., the infant, shall have it for his lifetime; and that after C.'s death, the first son of C. who attains 21 years of age shall take the estate entailed upon him and his children.

Under such a deed A., B., and C. have, if they live and succeed to the estate one after another, only limited interests in the property. Each would only take, at the most, a right to possess and enjoy the estate for the remainder of his own lifetime. Beyond that, neither would have any interest in or power over the estate. Under such a deed or will, it is impossible to sell the estate out and out, until some son of C. has attained 21 years of age. This may not happen for 50, 60, or 80 years after the death of Lord D—, and even then the estate cannot be sold out and out, unless C. and his son agree to do so. Thus it often happens that such a deed or will has the effect of preventing any one selling the estate, or any part of it, for 80 or 100 years. During all this time Lord D's estate is kept together, and is prevented from being sold, by a dead man's deed or will.

But more than this, Lord D is allowed by law, by such a deed or will, to lay down all kinds of regulations for the management of the land, for paying annuities out of it to relations and dependents, for the management of the woods and mines, and for the investment in other land of the proceeds and rental of the estate. And however much circumstances may change during all this period of time after his death, Lord D's deed or will still ties up the estate, still regulates its management, still keeps it unsold and undivided. Well may it be said that "the dead man's hand" keeps its grip upon the estate for generations. Very often, too, an owner like Lord D- directs by his deed or will that A., B., and C. shall only have a right to receive the rents, or part of the rents, of the estate, and that the land shall belong to trustees, who shall devote the other part of the rents to buying more land, or to planting more timber, or to carrying out specified improvements, or to rebuilding the mansion, or to some other purpose. Close to where I am writing, a large estate has been given to trustees in this way. They are ordered by the will to let the mansion for a certain number of years, not to allow the heir to come into possession until he has attained a certain age, and even after that time to exercise considerable power over the property. In this case, it is possible that no one may be able to sell the land for 50 or 100 years. But let us suppose that C., the infant, has attained the age of 65 years, and that he has a son who is 20 years of age; under such a state of things Lord D's estate would be still bound by his deed or will, and could not be sold, even by C. and his son together, while his son was under age. What generally then happens is this, The father, C., says to his son, "Now, I will make you an immediate allowance of so many hundreds or thousands a year for your life, if you will join me when you are 21 years of age in making another deed like Lord D's, and tying up the estate again as he did." C.'s son, fearing that if he does not assent he will only get a very small annual allowance from his father C., and being tempted by the prospect of a handsome immediate income, and perhaps himself understanding how important it is to prevent the estate from dividing, generally assents, and then, as soon as C.'s son is of age, another deed is made by father and son, tying up the property again, making it impossible to sell any portion of it, and providing for its future management for another 60, 70, or 100 years.

By such a process as is here shortly and popularly described, the majority of the great estates of Great Britain and Ireland are kept out of the market, and tied up by deed or will, from one long period of time to another, and for successive generations, the new fetter upon the power of sale being generally added just before the time when the land would become saleable or liable to be seized in satisfaction of debts.

Mr. Cliffe Leslie says very truly of these arrangements between father and son: "It is commonly supposed that the son acts with his eyes open, and with a special eye to the contingencies of the future and of family life. But what are the real facts of the case? Before the future owner of the land has come into possession; before he has any experience of his property, or what is best to do, or what he can do in regard to it; before the exigencies of the future or his own real position are known to him; before the character, number, and wants of his children are learned, or the claims of parental affection or duty can make themselves felt, and while still very much at the mercy of a predecessor desirous of posthumous greatness and power, he enters into an irrevocable disposition, by which he parts with the rights of a proprietor over his future property for ever, and settles its devolution, burdened with charges, upon an unborn heir." 1

It is quite right to say "burdened with charges," because when the father and son make these deeds together, it is usual to provide in the deed for a settlement of money out of the rents on the son's future wife, and for other settlements upon any younger sons and upon any daughters the son may have.

I hardly need say, what must be so well known, that estates are often so burdened with charges for wives and children and relations and retainers, that many a landowner, the extent of whose land makes his acquaintance believe him to be very rich and able to keep up a great style and a great hospitality, is in reality a poor man, who cannot find money for the proper maintenance of his estate or performance of his duties.

As these deeds and wills are purposely made to bind the estate for many, many years after the death of the landowner who makes them, it becomes necessary to insert great numbers of directions to the trustees or to the successive lifeowners, as to what they may do under contingencies which may possibly occur in the long series of years. These directions are called "Powers." Thus

1 Land Systems of Ireland, England, and the Continent, p. 199.

"Powers" are inserted to enable the trustees or the successive lifeowners to grant building leases, or mining leases; to cut timber under certain circumstances; to carry out specified improvements; to increase the estate by the purchase of more land; to raise money for future wives; to charge the estate for possible future children; to raise marriage portions for daughters; to raise money to buy commissions, or for the education or advancement of children; to mortgage for many purposes; to raise money for charitable purposes, &c., &c., &c. The condition of the titles of many of these estates becomes in this way complicated in the most extraordinary way, until even the ablest lawyer finds it difficult, and often quite impossible, to ascertain the exact state of the legal ownership of such an

estate.

Vast numbers of these estates are, owing to these deeds and wills, burdened with charges for wives and widows, charges for sons and daughters, marriage portions, mortgages, covenants to other owners, building leases, mining leases, farming leases (each containing scores of provisions), rent charges to various persons, payments of insurance policies, payments of annuities, equitable mortgages, equitable claims, &c., &c.

I need not say that in vast numbers of these cases the actual possessor of one of these estates has not the faintest idea of what his own legal position is. He is told by his family lawyer and by his agent that, under the circumstances, he has only so many thousands a year to receive. Beyond that, the state of his title is an insoluble mystery.

But I am far from having given any complete idea of the powers which our law confers upon the landowner.

It not only permits him to leave the surface of his land to one set of persons, so tied up that it cannot be sold, but it allows him to leave the minerals under the surface to another set of persons, and the timber on the estate to a third. So he may give the legal ownership and management of the land to one set of persons, without any right to use for themselves any portion of the rents, and he may give the rents to another set. So, he may give the legal ownership of the estate to one set of persons, and give them a right to pay the rents to any person or persons they may select. So, he may direct that the land shall go to one set of persons after his death, and that, if some indicated event happens, it shall go away to another set of persons. So, if he finds that his son has got into the hands of the moneylenders, he may, if the land is not already settled by one of these deeds or wills, settle the land upon that son's child, so as to enable the child of the unworthy son to come into the ownership freed from every embarrassment. All these and hundreds of other strange powers are given to the owner of land by our law, although such privileges and powers would not be endured by the law of any other civilised country.

2. The evils which are caused by these deeds and wills are still further aggravated by the law of "primogeniture." By this law, if a landowner dies without having made one of these deeds or wills, and free from debt, the law, seeking under all circumstances to prevent the great estate from being lessened or divided, instead of giving each of the children a fair and reasonable portion of his dead father's or relation's property, gives it undivided, uncharged, and undiminished, to the person whom the law defines under the circumstances of the family to be the "heir" of the deceased. If such "heir" happens, according to the law, to be several females, then the estate goes undivided to those females. In the case of the owner of money dying without making a will, the law acts equitably and without being influenced by the desire to promote the creation of great estates, and divides the money in defined shares among the nearest relations, whether they be male or female. But in the case of land all such considerations are set aside and made subservient to the one paramount idea of supporting and keeping together the great estates.

3. As if to make confusion worse confounded, the law