But Sec. 9 of the 1917 Act abolishes the distinction as to whole and half blood entirely.

SECTION 302. THE NEXT OF KIN OR COLLATERAL HEIRS "of the blood of the first purchaser" would next inherit in default of issue, parents, brothers and sisters and their issue, subject to life estates in husband or wife. The "perquisitor" is the person who first, in the line of descent, purchased the land. In Parr vs. Bankhart, 22 Pa., 291, A. purchased land during his wife's life. She died in 1825. A. died intestate in 1845, survived by a son, B. who died unmarried and childless in 1852 survived by two paternal aunts and two maternal uncles. The parental aunts were of blood of the first purchaser and took the real estate to the exclusion of the maternal uncles. Read the opinion of the Judge of the lower court. (Note that the law as stated in the second apragraph of the syllabus has been amended by the Act of 1855 extending the application of "representation." Compare Sec. 307, par. IV.)

The "blood of the first purchaser" doctrine was abolished by Sec. 13 of the 1917 Act, P. L., 438.

SECTION 303. THE HUSBAND OR WIDOW took the real estate absolutely in default of lineal or collateral relations of the blood of the first purchaser.

SECTION 304. To prevent escheat and in default of all possible next of kin or heirs or spouses above mentioned as competent to take, the real estate "shall pass to and be enjoyed by the next of kin of such intestate, without regard to the ancestor or other relative from whom such estate may have come". By Act of 1917 the "known heirs or kindred" come in before the surviving spouse upon any balance.

SECTION 305. In default of all such heirs, etc., the estate "shall go to and be vested in the Commonwealth by escheat": Sec. 12, Act of 1833, Purd., 2002; Sec. 24 of 1917 Act. Compare Sec. 308, post. Compare Sec. 553, post, in re collateral inheritance taxes.

SECTION 306. Consanguinity-lineal or collateral-and affinity are explained by Blackstone and need little explanation here. The former exists between persons descended from the same stock or common ancestor. Grandfather and grandson are related by lineal consanguinity and second cousins by collateral. In Pennsylvania we determine

“degrees” of consanguinity by the civil method. A man's brother is of the second degree and his cousin is of the fourth. We count upward to the common ancestor and downward to the relative. By the canon law the count was from the ancestor to the more remote one of two relatives: McDowell vs. Addams, 45 Pa., 430,-where an estate went to a grandmother in preference to an uncle. (Compare Whitaker's Appeal, 175 Pa., 139, cited in Sec. 307, IV.) Relationship depending upon marriage is affinity.

SECTION 307. The seven canons of descent formulated by Lord Hale and illustrated in Blackstone are authoritive in Pennsylvania only to a limited extent. To illustrate:

ascend." In Pennsylvania an estate may ascend and a man's grandmother may be his heir.

preferred

II. "Male issue shall be admitted before the female. No distinction is made in this respect in Pennsylvania by the Intestate Act.

III. "Where there are two or more males, in equal degree, the oldest only shall inherit; but the females all together." Primogeniture is abolished by the Intestate Act. Compare Sec. 283, supra. An older son has the first bid in a partition case and was entitled to a now obsolete estate tail-Guthrie's Appeal, 37 Pa., 9,-but the preference goes for nothing else.

IV. "Lineal descendants, in infinitum shall represent their ancestor." Thus if a man leaves a son, a daughter and three children of a deceased son the estate will be in nine parts and the son will have three parts, the daughter three and the three grandchildren will "represent" their dead father and take a ninth each. This is descent per stirpes. If there were nine grandchildren and no children each would take per capita. If all of the descendants are of the same degree they take per capita, otherwise per stirpes. See Act of 1833, Purd., 1997. The Act of 1833 provided that there should be "no representation admitted amongst collaterals after brothers' and sisters' children" but an amendment of 1855 extended this to grandchildren of brothers and sisters and to children of uncles and aunts: Purd., 1999; Sec. 11 of the 1917 Act provides to the same effect. The Act of 1887 extended the right of representation amongst all collaterals sprung from the

125

decedent's grandparent subject to the other provisions of the Intestate Act and to the provisions of the Act of 1855, just referred to: Whitaker's Estate, 175 Pa., 139. "The issue of a deceased child, grandchild or other descendant of a deceased grandparent shall take, by representation of their parents respectively, such share only as would have descended to such parents, if they had been living at the death of the intestate." Sec. 12, clause 3 of the 1917 Act, P. L., 438. The Commissioners thought this not in "harmony" but "as it has been in effect for thirty years" they slapped it in: Report, 1917, page 36.

V. "On failure of lineal descendants the inheritance shall descend to his collateral relations, being of the blood of the first purchaser. This was the general rule in Pennsylvania until 1917, and has been explained. On failure of all such collaterals, and there being no surviving spouse, the "blood" was not necessary. It must be remembered that parents come in before collaterals. See table above, Section 288.

VI. "The collateral heir must be the next collateral kinsman of the whole blood." This was partially true in Pennsylvania prior to 1917. In default of any members of the first six classes in the table given above, Sec. 288, brothers and sisters of the half blood would inherit if they are of the blood of the perquisitor. This distinction against half blood did not apply to uncles and aunts, it was confined to brothers and sisters.

VII. "In collateral inheritances the male stock shall be preferred to the female." *** This is not the rule in Pennsylvania.

ESCHEAT

SECTION 308. This is title by “purchase" and "an obstruction in the course of descent, and a consequent determination of the tenure, by some unforeseen contingency." 2 Blackstone, 244. It results propter defectum sanguinis from failure of issue or propter delictum tenentis--from fault of the tenant.

SECTION 309. There were many instances of escheat in England that could not occur here. Taking up the reasons given in Blackstone, Fage 246:

1, 2, 3. The Intestate Act, Sec. 24, P. L., 1917, 442, provides that