AN INIQUITY OF THE NEW PROPERTY LAWS
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
SIR,—A working man just prior to his death received a sum of some £400 as compensation in consequence of the closing down of works where he had been employed for many years. That sum was all he had. He died in 1929 intestate leaving (1) An only daughter by his first marriage ; (2) his widow— second wife—who has no children. The estate consists of the before mentioned £400—all personalty. The widow is mentally afflicted and unable to manage her affairs and the daughter—the deceased's own child—looked after deceased for some years before his death.
Under the old Statutes of Distribution the position would have been (the Intestates Estates Act 1890 not applying as there was issue of deceased) one-third to widow and rest to daughter—a not unfair arrangement. Under the new law the widow takes all up to £1,000, in this case swamping the estate, and the daughter, the deceased's own flesh and blood, who has looked after deceased, gets nothing. Moreover, as the widow is mentally unfit it is her next of kin—people of whom the deceased new little or nothing—who must apply for the Grant and it is they and not the daughter who will be entitled on the widow's death.
Should this catch the eye of any of those great legislators who are responsible for scrapping the old Statutes of Distri- bution they may ponder the desirability of yet another amending Act to avoid the repetition of so great an iniquity as above mentioned. Possibly some of them might care, out of their comparatively ample means, to right the poor girl in question.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
