s that right or custom whereby a title of dignity or an estate in land comes to a person in virtue of his being the eldest male. Among the Jews, the eldest son or first-born had a double portion of his father's inheritance; but before the time of Moses there was no certain rule as to who should be considered the first-born. Moses decreed the abolition of this custom, and ordained that the first-born in point of time should be recognised. Among the Greeks, and especially among the Athenians, the custom of primogeniture seems even to have been more severe towards females than among the Jews. If the father died without heirs-male of his body, and without a will, the nearest kinsman on the father's side was entitled to claim the estate, to the exclusion of any daughters whom he had left. If he had made a will, it should have bequeathed his estates to parties bound to marry his daughters. The Mohammedans held that females should inherit a certain portion of whatever their fathers might leave, allowing the males a double portion. Among the Romans a somewhat different policy seems to have prevailed; at all events, it was not till the time of Justinian that daughters were placed exactly on the same footing as sons with respect to the succession to intestate property. The Germanic nations generally, with the single exception of the Visigoths, gave a decided preference to heirs-male in regard especially to the succession to land. Females were occasionally excluded from succession to the inheritance under any circumstances; and in the case where they were more favourably treated, it was almost invariably on their having no brothers.

The custom of gavel-kind, which still prevails in Kent, seems to have existed previous to the Conquest, and most probably extended over the larger portion of England and Wales. By this custom, lands within the county of Kent, unless specially excepted by an act of the legislature, descend, where the father dies intestate, leaving sons and daughters, in equal portions to the sons, to the exclusion of the daughters; but in the event of his leaving daughters only, they share the property equally among themselves. This law still exists in the copyholds of the manors of Stepney and Hackney in Middlesex, and in a few other places beyond the bounds of Kent. The custom of borough English, by which the youngest son succeeds to the whole of the inheritance on the intestacy of the father, has prevailed in Stamford, and one or two other places, time immemorial. The same custom still exists as to copyholds in different parts of England. But whether, previous to the Conquest, property descended to the sons, or indifferently to both sons and daughters, the introduction of the feudal system led to a change in the succession to property in land, and paved the way for the universal introduction of the custom of primogeniture.

Some writers have taken a very unfavourable view of the influence exercised by this custom in modern times. Adam Smith says, "Nothing can be more contrary to the real interest of a numerous family than a right which, in order to enrich one, beggars all the rest of the children." (Wealth of Nations, by McCulloch, p.171.) But however apparently reasonable, or however well supported this opinion may be, we are of opinion that it has really no good foundation. How much of the enterprise and industry, of the superior wealth and civilization of modern Europe, may be ascribed to the influence of the custom of primogeniture? It is beyond a doubt that the possession from infancy of a competency is, of all others, the most powerful obstacle to energy and enterprise. Those so situated seldom seek any kind of honourable distinction, and fold their hands in contentment with the humble mediocrity which has fallen to their lot. It is not to be expected that the monied fortunes accumulated for the younger children should equal those of the elder brother. If they be furnished with the means of establishing themselves in a profession, the capacity to rise is put into their hands; the sense of inferiority will stimulate them to exertion, and inspire them with a determination to rise to the same or even to a higher level. It is no rule for the division of property in land to tell us that merchants, bankers, and others of that class divide their property equally among the different members of their families, without any bad effects resulting from it. Such parties may carry on the business in partnership as advantageously as their father. The children of a landed proprietor can with great difficulty do this. The views of the co-heirs, so different and conflicting, are generally found to be all but insurmountable. Add to this, that the custom of primogeniture provides for the cultivation of all that is most elevated in art, in literature, and in science,—of everything, in a word, that communicates splendour and gives an enduring celebrity to nations. While doing so, it imbues all classes with the spirit of industry and enterprise. It does not appear, therefore, that the objections raised against the custom of primogeniture are entitled to any considerable notice. It is not imperative; it is a custom only, and not a right, and may be defeated in the event of the misconduct of the eldest son.

The personal property of one dying intestate shall by this rule be divided—after the widow's proportion is deducted—equally among all the children; but that the real estate shall go, in addition, to the eldest son. There is one respect in which the English law of intestacy stands much in need of revision. The personal property of the intestate is the first fund for their debts, although secured upon their estates; and it is the surplus only, if there be any, that is divisible among the children. This is in all respects a most objectionable arrangement. When an estate is burdened to its full value, the eldest son should have nothing to look to save his share of the personal property. This is in accordance with the law of Scotland. In that country, if the eldest son take the real, he gets no part of the personal estate. He is permitted to renounce the succession to the real property, and have it valued and included in a common fund with the moveable property, of which he can demand an equal share with his brothers and sisters. (The Succession to Property Vacant by Death, by J. R. McCulloch, 1848.)