Fortune to Mistress Pittance for Family

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 356, 17 May 1928, Page 9

Fortune to Mistress Pittance for Family

STRANGE WILLS LEFT SUGGESTION TO ALTER LAW (United P.A.—By Telegraph Copyright) Reed. 12.50 p.m. LONDON, Wed. In the House of Lords, Viscount Astor moved for the appointment of a Gelect Committee to consider a change in the testamentary law, specially with a view to preventing a man cutting off his wife and family with a shilling, and leaving his estate to some other woman. He said the laws of Scotland and Australia prevented such an injustice, yet there was a famous case in England where a man, under an early will, left his wife £1 11s weekly, and the rest to charity. He left £500,000, hut no later will was found. Another left £30,000 to his wife and children, and £1,000,000 to his mistress and illegitimate children. Viscount Haldane doubted whether any judge was capable of wisely varying wills. Perhaps the bishops might undertake it. Public opinion should compel men to do the right thing. Lord Buckmaster disliked Viscount Astor’s underlying assumption that women must be dependent on men, and that men evaded their obligations. Men and women should be socially and economically equal, free, and independent. It should be no more surprising that women seek to earn their living than men. “When a woman marries, it is too frequently regarded as the best means of providing for her for life. That is an extremely degrading way of regarding the relationship.” Lord Hailsham, formerly Sir Douglas Hogg, Attorney-General, opposed the proposition. He agreed that at present there were some hard cases. There would be more under Viscount Astor’s suggestion. If a man were determined to cut off his wife and family he would find a way of doing so, whatever the testamentary law. The proposition would entail washing a great deal of dirty linen in public. Viscount Astor withdrew the motion.