The Sun. — London, England, 1859-02-12 00:00:00

recommendation he; with the sanction of the Government, introduced a bill for acquiring the property which it was now proposed to purchase, with the exception of the ground at the back of the Irish-office, which he thought ought also to be acquired. The bill thus introduced went through a select committee, and it afterwards went through a com mittee of the whole house, but as the bill was very much opposed by hon. and right hon. gentlemen opposite, who now brought forward a similar measure, he was compelled to withdraw it. No fault could be found with the late Go vernment for the delay, but if blame were due to any one it was to those honourable gentlemen who would not allow the bill of the late Government to proceed, and who were now about to bring in a bill nearly identical. The com mittee were unanimously of opinion that if any design were adopted it should be one pf the designs that had gained the first three premiums. But the noble lord had not give any particular reason why he had passed ov er the first and second premiums and given the erection of the new Foreign-office to the architect who had gained the third prize. He would admit that if it were to be decided that a Gothic building should be constructed in the midst of buildings that had nothing Gothic about them, no architect could be found who understood that style of architecture better than Mr. Gilbert Scott. (Hear.) The noble lord, in addition to the plan he had selected (No. 3), ought also to hang up by the side of it in the library the plans of the two other architects, in order that hon. members might see why he had taken the third design. The house might also form its own conclusion as to the effect of a Gothic building placed near the Treasury-chambers and Whitehall, with which it had nothing in common. Mr. B. HOPE thought it was apparent, as Lord J. Man ners had stated, why it was that he had passed over the architects placed first and second, according to the a ward, and given the appointment in question to the architect placed third. If hon. members looked at the end of the tables to the report of the committee they would see that there were obvious reasons for the selection made. Upon the list of judges there was only one professional gentleman, and to him, assisted by two a ssessors, was entrusted the awards. _ These gentlemen drew up the list of awards. It appeared that in these lists the name of Mr. G. Scott was placed second. According to the result of the awards of the professional gentlemen, whom they must suppose knew more of this matter than mere amateurs, the great sum total of ability rested with Mr. Scott, and that in an infinitely greater degree than in anyjother gentleman, for both the War-Office and the Foreign-Office. Upon that great sum total of ability was based the decision of the Government, and also the decision of the• noble lord, the Secretary for India, for the Indian office would be placed upon the same footing and built in the same style as the War-office. If the house reversed the judgment of the Government, what a ridiculous fix they would put the Government in, for the India Minister proposed to build a new India office out of his own pocket--(laughter)—and without having anything to do with Parliament at all. (Hear, hear.) It would be built out of the Indian revenues. If they turned do or Scott out of the Foreign-office, the building next door would be erected in some other style, and by some other architect. He (Mr. Hope) felt certain the house would not sanction such a miscarriage of common sense as that reversal would involve. The right hon. baronet opposite (Sir B. Hall) stated that he new building would be in c t e ous with those adjacent--that there would be an in congruity between its style and that of Westminster Abbey and the palace in which they then were; but the right hon. baronet had surely forgotten the style of building which he wished, when in office, to erect. He hoped the noble lord the First Commissioner of Public Works would not be deterred from pursuing his own course by this o pposition, but would adopt that pl an w hi c h had me t with the acclamation of all the distinguished men out of doors, and with the approbation of all the intelligent men of the profession. The committee appointed last session distinctly referred the question—not to the House of Com mons—but to the Government, and the Government would not do their duty if they refused to proceed in the course which had been pursued. (Hear, hear.) Mr. CONINGHAM felt bound to express his regret that the Gothic style had been adopted in the building which was about to be erected. The disadvantages of the style could not be better illustrated than by the place where the House of Commons assembled. Gothic architecture gave at the maximum of cost the minimum of accommodation, and, at the same time, a degree of darkness which, in London, was most inconvenient. The noble lord talked of the Gothic as the national style of architecture, but he would remind the noble lord of the names of Wren and Inigo Jones. The Gothic was an European style of architecture, and it was a mere revival introducing it into civil edifices. It had beauty and merits in the period when great ecclesiastical monu ments were raised, and was eminently characteristic of the spirit of that age. But the day was gone by for it. It was a barbarous style. We did not live in an age of darkness. We wanted more light, and he thought our public offices especially wanted both light and ventilation in more senses than one. He could not hear the question discussed with out recording his solemn protest against the use of Gothic architecture in public edifices. It was a style peculiar to a sect of which the hon. member for Maidstone was a distin guished representative, but it was antagonistic to the taste of the English people. (Hear.) General THOMPSON suggested that the whole matter should be postponed until the bill from India came in, and it was seen how much money we had to spare for such pur poses. (Hear.) It was far from certain that we were not on the eve of an European war, and he should be very pleasantly surprised if England managed to keep her hand out of it. Prudent individuals did not spend their money beforehand where there was a chance of important calls being made upon them, and nations ought to act on the same principle. The Government could not afford to take off such taxes as the paper duty, and yet a plan was now brought forward entailing a large expenditure, which the majority of people, he was sure, would think very ill-ad vised under the circumstances. Lord PALMERSTON—I never heard a less satisfactory explanation than that given by the noble lord opposite and the hon. member for Maidstone on two points—the selec tion of the architect and the choice of style. (Hear.) The reason which is given for the choice of Mr. Scott is that he was second in all the trials. He was second in the compe titions for the Foreign-office and for the War-office, and therefore he is put first—on the principle, I suppose, that two negatives make. an affirmative. It certainly is a new doctrine. What would be said if it were applied to horse racing, and the horse which ran second in two heats was held to be entitled to the cup ? (Laughter.) It now appears that there is not to be a War-office, and Mr. Scott, there fore, is ehosen, to build the Foreign-office, because his plan for it was deemed second best. Then, with regard to the style, it is said that Gothic has been chosen because it is the "national style," " suited to Teutonic nationalities," and all that sort of thing. I conclude, therefore, that the Secretary of State for India will be safely lodged in a pagoda, or a taj-mehal—(laughter)—in accordance with the " nationalities" with which he has to do ; and, as Mr. Scott cannot be expected to be well acquainted with that siyle, we must have an architect over from India, who will be more competent to judge of the k eculiarities of an Indian office. I think, therefore, that no satisfactory reason has been given why the two architects whose plans were better than Mr. Scott's should be set aside. I quite agree with the right hon. member for Marylebone, that it would be fitting that, if the plans of Mr. Scott are exhibited, the plans, also of the other architects which were adjudged to be bet • ter should be exhibited at the same time. (Hear, hear.) I quite agree, too, with the hon. member for Brighton in protesting against the selection of the Gothic style. (Hear, hear.) It is going back to the barbarism of the dark ages for a building which ought to belong to the time in which we live. It is said that it is intended hereafter to build on the whole space between Downing-street and Westminster Abbey, and that you are beginning with a Gothic building close to Downing-street in order to fill the whole of that space with Gothic buildings. If the choice of the Gothic style for a Foreign-office is to involve the neces sity of an immense block of buildings down to Westmin ster Abbey, you are taking the first step in a course which I deprecate in the greatest possible degree. (Hear, hear.) If your principle of congruity is to apply for the future, let it apply a little to the present also. The neighbourhood of Downing-street is full of buildings of a totally different style. There is the State Paper-office, for instance, fire proof, well placed, very convenient, and much wanted —though Mr. Scott, I am told, in order to complete the congruity of his Gothic block, says he must pull that down —just as he proposes to Gothicise the exterior of the Horse Guards for the same purpose. All the buildings in con nexion with Downing - street are of a totally different style. There are the Treasury buildings, the Horse Guards, the Admiralty, the Banqueting-house, specimens of architecture to bef finest w h ich oun ids oneanywhere. ofth e (Hear.) That is to be con fronted a by a building which, by the-bye, does not, after answer the description of the noble lord, who talks of a n ati on al iot style" for it appears that it is not to be English but Italian, or Lom bardo Gothic. I have not had t he a dvantage of visiting those climes lately, therefore I don' t exactly what the peculiarities of Lombardo Gothic are, but it combines, I sup pose, all the modifications of barb arism. (Laughter.) Look, too, at that street of palaces, (Laughter.) with all its magnificent clubs, each Take St. Paul's and Some o rs n e e t house rwill handsomer than the other. that they are handsomer in their respective venture a ty asserto t 1 a . Westminster Abbey or the Houses of Parliament. (Hear.) The Houses of Parliament are a beautiful building, but I in poi we t o v expense and ac commodation. think we have made aßutjeaar.ristakebecause made a m istake—a handsome mistake, I admit,inefec e t and cost too—are we committed for ever to go on rai sing a fter building in a style totally unsuited t o the purposes building v i ew ? Ido hope that the decision of the noble loidoiss not irrevocable. Mr. Scott, it a pp ears, is a mono maniac in not irrevocable. Mr. Scott, it appears, is a monomaniac in r e to Gothic, but he studied first, I believe, Italian and Greek architec ture, but if it is finally determined that he is to be the architect, a gentleman of his abilities would be able to draw quite as good a Greek or Italian design as this Gothic one which the noble lord favours. I hope, there fore, that he will be told to p ut a more lively front to his building than that now contemplated, and that we shall have a Foreign-office in harmony, with the other public buildings of the metropolis, e ither in the Italian or Greek style, and one that will be a d apted to the purposes in view. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BENTINCK cordially concurred w ith Genera -1 Thompson, the member for Bradford, .as to the inexpe diency of spending large sums of public money on orna mental buildings under present circumstances, when there could be little doubt that a largely increased expenditure of the country would be necessary, when their naval defences must be strengthened, and when there was a rumour that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be called upon to supply an inevitable deficiency of the revenue. At such a time it was the duty of the house not to sanction the ex- Penditure of one shilling that could be spared. REWARDS TO NCES. ,Mr. VERNON SMITH wished NATIVE to PRI ask the noble lord tne geere tary of State for India, whether any rewards Or m ar k s of h Prince s or their onour had been conferred upon the native Majesty „. Ministers who had proved faithful to her importance, as i related mutiny. The subject was one of great the most trying eied to the fidelity of those Princes under must have upon the ci rcums tances, u and the moral influence it natives of India ; and he hoped to hear from the noble lord th at such encoura g ements as he re ferred to had been conferre d. Lord STANLEY—I we question d ent t i h o at the right hon. gentle man opposite has put thi s subj ec t me, and has called the attention of the house to the to which it refers. I agree with him that at the present . ia m ov e hardly any subject Government of India, can be of greater importance to thn. and I fully concur in what he has said, tha e import ance o f recent events has con fi rmed the vie w of thawhtolse course e hool iof I n dian politicians who have always maintain e d th e of keeping up the independence and dignity na ti ve States as against the modern theories of atinexa th ese na ti ve .—(cheers, and hear, hear)--mid have contended that w e Aoki ria thew t h e /oat faith atm aid filiPpOrtgra THE SUN LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 12, 1859. case of war. The subject of rewards to our native allies has not escaped the attention of the Government of this country. Two despatches, one dated the 28th of July, from the late Court of Directors; and the other the 31st December, addressed by me to Lord Canning, have been sent to the Government of India, naming certain native princes as spe- , ~. daily deserving of reward, and calling for a report upon the claims of others. That general report we have not yet received, and I need not tell the right hon. gentleman, or the house, that in a matter of this kind it is impossible for us in this country to act without previous consulta tion with ° the local Government in India. Rewards, however, have been given to the Rajah of Putteala, by a cession of territory worth two lacs of rupees a-year, and something besides ; to the Rajah of Jheend terri tory worth one lac ; to the Rajah of Nubba, territory worth one lac ; and to the Rajah of Chirkaree some land of which the value is not known. The Guicowar has received a re-. mission of the tribute or subsidy of three lass of rupees annually which he was bound to pay for the support of a force of irregular cavalry. That subsidy has been remitted with the sanction of this country, by the advice and upon the representation of Lord Canning. The cases of Scindiah, Holkar, and the Nizam are specially mentioned in one—l think in both—of the despatches to which I have referred. That of the Rajah of Gwalior is at present under considera tion. With regard to Nepaul, the house is aware that a di s ti ng uished mark of honour has been conferred upon the able minister of that State. It has also been in contempla tion to show our sense of the assistance which we derived from the Government of Nepaul in the manner suggested by the right hon. gentleman. A correspondence has taken place upon that subject, but in a matter of that kind much discretion must be left to the authorities in India, and I have not yet heard whether any final arrangements have been made with regard to it. I can only remark, in con clusion, that I am as fully impressed, and I believe that the Government here and the Government in India are as fully impressed as the right hon. gentleman can be with the im portance of not destroying the grace and the value of these gifts by deferring them until a time when the memory of the services for which they are the rewards shall cease to be present to the THE mindsLOSS a the OF THE natives. (Chee rs CZAß.. ) Mr. BUXTON asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he had received any explanation of the conduct of Commander Dunn, of her Majesty steam-sloop Virago, who saw the Czar screw storeship go ashore off the Lizard at 2.15 on Saturday, Jan. 22, but continued his course without making any attempt to succour th e crew (12 of whom perished, besides the master and his wife), upon the ground, as he alleges. that he thou g ht ver y littl e ass i s t ance c ould be rendered. He did not doubt that the conduct of Com mander Dunn would turn out to have been perfectly right, but he thought that the matter ought to be thoroughly cleared up, in order that merchant captains might not be able to allege the example of a commander in her Majesty's navy as a reason for neglecting to assist a ship which was in peril Sir J. PAKINGTON said that he was not surprised that the hon. gentleman should have wished for some explana tion of the circumstances which attended the wreck of the Czar, and the melancholy loss of life which accompanied it, and with the permission of the house he would state the facts which were immediately reported to the Admiralty. The Czar went ashore in the middle of the day upon a rock very close to the Lizard Point. At that time her Majesty's steam-sloop Virago was between 10 and 11 miles directly to the eastward and leeward of the Lizard, and the persons on board of her distinctly saw the calamity which had befallen the Czar. The weather was then very bad, it was blowing a gale, and the sea was very heavy. In addition to the usual responsibility resting upon the commander of a ship, Commander Dunn was responsible for the safety of 200 of her Majesty's troops, whom he was conveying from Cork to Plymouth. Under these circumstances, and seeing another steam vessel much nearer to the Czar than he was, and steaming towards her, he deemed that it was his duty not to attempt to render her any assistance, but to proceed at once to Plymouth. These circumstances were at once reported to the Admiralty, and he was bound to say that the impression of the board upon receiving the statement was that it was not satisfactory ; that the duty of an officer in command of one of Her Majesty's ships to render assistance to a wrecked vessel, if it was possible, was so imperative, that Commander Dunn would have ex ercised a sounder judgment if he had at least made an attempt to succour the Czar. In consequence of this being the impression of the Board of Admiralty, orders were sent to Plymouth that there should be a court of in quiry into the circumstances. Three very experienced and able captains held that inquiry, and arrived at the conclu sion that although any attempt to render assistance to the Czar would have been attended with serious risk, the at tempt should, nevertheless, have been made by Commander Dunn, though, according to the evidence, it would have been attended with no good result. (A laugh.) That was the opinion of the officers who made the inquiry, and he was bound to add the Board of Admiralty had concurred in that opinion, and had communicated to Commander Dunn that, while recognizing the responsibility and diffi culty of his position, they thought he would have acted with a sounder judgment if he had at least made the at tempt to rescue the crew of the Czar. (Hear, hear.) The motion that the house at its rising adjourn till Mon day was then agreed to. OCCASIONAL FORMS OF PRAYER BILL. This bill passed through committee. SUPERANNUATION BILL. This bill, which stood fora second reading, was postponed . TITLES TO LANDED ESTATES. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said—l rise to move for leave to introduce a bill to simplify the title to landed estates in England. The subject is one the importance of which is now admitted by every one. The evils which are complained of and the complexities which have to be sim plified are unfortunately now no new topic. Looking back to the history of the law of real property in this country, it may, by a broad line of demarcation, be divided in sub stance into two parts. Up to the time of the Common wealth we were occupied in endeavouring, by means of legal fictions, to make the severe and simple forms of feudal law bend themselves to the advancing interests of com merce and to the wants of the people. Examples of that may be found in the introduction of the fictitious system of fines and recoveries in this country, and in the various purposes which the complicated system of uses and trusts was made to serve. When, about the period of the Com monwealth, you had succeeded by those various means in getting rid to a very considerable extent of the severity of feudal tenures, a new period commenced, which has con tinued to the present, during which the great effort has been to get rid in turn of those complex systems of legal fiction which had been useful up to that time in lessening the severity of feudal tenures. Of the latter class an ex ample is to be found in the constant and repeated efforts made after the year 1660 in this house to establish regis ters, sometimes successful, sometimes unsuccessful—suc cessful as to parts of the country, always unsuccessful as to the whole. (Hear, hear.) You find examples of the same course of action in the most useful measure by which you got finally rid of the system of fines and recoveries al together, and in a number of measures introduced with the view of limiting the various claims which formerly hung over landed estates, and thereby to a certain extent simplifying their transfer. It is remarkable during the period I have mentioned how uniform has been the complaint of the injury to landed property itself, occa sioned by the complexity of the tenure on which it was held. Upwards of 200 years ago, or thereabout, I observe Sir Matthew Hale, writing of a property which he had pur chased, said, he would willingly give one year's purchase more for it could he be sure thereby to have a good title. That was a moderate " bid" for a simplification of title to landed property. Shortly after that—namely, in 1669, a committee of the House of Lords was appointed to inquire into the question of the tenure of land, and a sentence from their report, I think, is worthy the attention of the house. " That, after serious debate and examination of several persons of the Committee of Trade and Merchants, the Lords' Committee had come to the conclusion that one cause of the decay of value of lands was the uncectainty of titles of estates, and recommend that there should be a Bill of Re gisters for the future." The value of land was very much depreciated at that time, and the other House of Parliament came to the ceneteision that the complexities of tenure had very much to do with that depreciation. I find about the year 1703 a register of deeds was introduced into the West Riding of Yorkshire, and whatever may be our opinions of the advantages of that institution the grounds on which it was established are at least deserving attention. The act by which the register was established recites " That the West Riding is the principal place in the North for the cloth manufacture, and most of the traders therein are freeholders, and have frequent occasion to bor row money on thair estates for managing their trade, but for want of a register find it difficult to give security to the satisfaction of the money-lenders (although the security they offer be really good), whereby trade is much obstructed and many families ruined." It was a measure, therefore, introduced in the belief that commerce as well as land had suffered from the want of simplification in the title to landed property. Coming down to more modern times, I find in 1846 another com mittee of the other House of Parliament addressed itself to the subject, and they reported,— " They are convinced that the marketable value of real property is seriously diminished by the tedious and expen sive process attending its transfer." Then, in 1866, a Royal Commission having been appointed take the whole question into consideration, I find in the the deopureteoiartefer, appendix to the report, to which I shall afterwards have actual loss conse quent witness after witness addressing himself to I t e t n h t e on va t l h u e e d o i f ra l c a ui nd ti ed es p in ro oi sr i t l y t , to an it d s to the in London, of stance ' trans fer. ' I take, as an in stance , a statement made by an auc tioneergreat experience in deal ing t e h e t la in nded estates. He says,— his profession, and of " The effect of the present depreciate the value of all fee sim p l e of things is unfairly to and impeding transactions ; whe'reea in the Encumbered Estates Courtin the I property by obstructing aa m ren re d land in regard principle acted upon (although it is not essential or requisite to estaeblishred to titles and their confirmations w universal similar court, under the circu mstances in which property a is placed, in England and W ales or Scotland), every estate for at least three ye ars' more p urchase, a muc h larger amountsell of capital would be invested in landed and oth er real pro perty, p perty, and circulated in improvements by its bec om i naun : fettered and capable of immediate application." This estimate is a larger one than that of Sir Matthew Hale. He was willing to give one year's purchase, but the auctioneer offersthree . view of the question, Nw, the evils of which complaint i s made in general terms. olptashsink desirable to defi ne passing git from this short pre liminary The y may be said to be two. The first is the length of time which at present must elapse between the making of a bargain and the completion of the purchase. We know how the purchase of all other kinds of property is com pleted. If you buy stock you don't require to be told how many hours are necessary in which to make the transfer. If you buy railway shares, in like manner you have your purchase completed and your money paid in a few hours afterward. Perhaps the most extraordinary facility of transfer obtains in the case of ships. In five inizateS and at the opewso d ON, yot; Inlght macs 09A" tract for and actually transfer such a ship as the Himalaya p or the Great Eastern. (Hear.) It ought never to be for gotten by the owners of shipping property -in this country that, whatever may be their position in other respects, they are not subjected to the stamp duties and the difficulties of making out a title to which the owners of landed property are subjected, but can transfer their ships as if they were shares. The mode in which the transfer of a ship is effected is by a document of a simple form, and by the entry upon a register that the transfer has taken place. But compare that with what is done in the case of landed property. You buy an estate at an auction, you enter into a contract for the pur chase of the estate, you are very anxious to get possession of the property you have bought, and the vendor is anxious to get his money. But you cannot get the estate, nor can the vendor get his money, until a considerable portion of your lives has been spent in abstracts, in the comparison of deeds, in searches for encumbrances, in objections made to the title, in answers to those objections, in disputes which arise upon the answers, in endeavours to cure the defects. Not only months but years frequently pass in a history of that kind, and I should say that it is an uncommon thing in this country for a purchase of any magnitude to be com pleted—completed by possession and payment of the price— in a period under, at all events, 12 months. The conse quences of this were stated in the report of the commission to which I have already referred, in words so apposite that if the house will permit me, I should desire to read them. That commission stated in their report : " When a contract is duly entered into, the investigation u_ the title often causes not only expense but delay and disap pointment, sickening both to the buyer and seller. The seller does not receive his money nor the buyer his land until the advantage or pleasure of the bargain is lost or is passed away." Unquestionably that is one of the very great evils under which we now labour. But that is not the greatest evil. I can well imagine that the purchaser of an estate would be content to submit to delay and to some consider • able expense if he were assured that when the delay and ex pense were over upon that occasion, at all events he would have a title, as to the dealings with which for the future there would be no difficulty. Unfortunately that is not the case. Suppose I buy an estate to-day. I spend a year or two, or three years, in ascertaining whether the title is good. lam at last satisfied. I pay the expense—the con siderable expense--which is incurred in addition to the price which I have paid for my estate. About a year afterwards I desire to raise money upon mortgage of this estate. I find some one willing to lend me money provided I have a good title to the land. The man says, "It is very true that you bought this estate, and that you investigated the title, but I cannot be bound by your investigation of the title, nor can Ibe satisfied by it." Perhaps he is a trustee who is lending money, which he holds upon trust. He says, "My solicitor must examine the title and my counsel must advise upon it." And then, as between me, the owner of the estate, and the lender of the money, there is a repetition of the same process which took place upon my purchase of the estate, and, consequently, the same expense is incurred as when I bought it ; and for the whole of that I, the owner of the estate and the borrower of the money, must pay. Well, that is not all. Months or years after all this is completed, from circumstances I find I must sell my estate altogether. I find a person willing to become a pur chaser. The intending purchaser says—" No doubt you thought this was a good title when you bought this estate, and no doubt this lender of money thought he had a very good security when he lent his money; but you are now asking me to pay my money. I must be satis fied that the title is a good, one. My solicitor must look into it, and my counsel must advise upon it. Then again commence abstracts, examinations, objections, difficulties, correspondence, and delay. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) I am the owner of the estate, and I must pay substantially for the whole of that, because, although the expense there is paid in the first instance by the purchaser, of course a proportion of that expense must be borne by me, and the same proportion will fall upon the price which he will give for the estate. (Hear.) It is not necessary to dwell longer upon these, which are the salient evils to which under the present system landed property is subject. Is it possible to remedy these evils ? We all agrft: that if it can be done a great good will be accomplished. But how is it to be done? Well, of course, the first thing to do in such an inquiry is to direct our attention to precedenls. What have we by us up to this time which will afford us a guide by which we may act, and can we proceed further in the same direction ? I suggest that the house should look to the case of Ireland. What has been done in Ireland by the Encumbered Estates Court. I beg the house to observe what were the particu lar objects for which the Encumbered Estates Court was in the first instance established in Ireland. These objects were two, and they were perfectly distinct. The first object was to obtain the means of enforcing the compulsory sale of an encumbered estate, the second to give to the purchaser a Parliamentary title. Objections were at first made to the accomplishment of the first of these objects. It was said that it would be unjust to to compel the sale of an estate at a period of depression, but no one objected to the conferring a Parliamentary title upon a purchaser. But in the result the Court was unquestionably successful. The value of estates sold byit rose, and it finally became a matter of con-. sideration in this house and in committees of this house whether the system might not be extended to unencum bered estates. It was decided, and I think most wisely, that it was impossible not to extend the system to them. (Hear.) The reasons which induced the house to come to that conclusion never were and never could be answered. The reasons were these. In the first place it was said that if you do not extend the system to unencumbered estates you will have a continuance of that which has already be come a practice—the putting on of fictitious encumbrances in order to achieve a sale. Next, it was said upon a sale the encumbrancer does not give you any security that the title is one which ought to be confirmed by the Court, for of course the object of the encumbrancer will be always to conceal and not to disclose any flaw in the tile. It is his interest as well as that of any one else to re present that the title is good, and therefore there is nothing in the existence of encumbrances which would relieve you from the difficulty of investigating the title. The third reason was this, that if you had got an estate encumbered not to its full value, but only a part, the Court is always prepared to sell, and as far as that estate is encumbered, you 'are virtually doing that which you are asked to do —viz., selling by means of a Court an unencumbered estate. This house accordingly determined to permit the Court to go to the length of selling unencumbered estates. Then, another question arose. It was said you cannot stop short and say that all the power which this Court must possess is that of selling encumbered and unencumbered estates ; you must go still further ; you must give an indefeasible title not only to persons who want to purchase estates, but you must also give an indefeasible title to persons who do not want to sell. You must give them the means of publicly proving the vali dity of their title. These reasons were irresistible, and I have not heard any answer 'to them. First, it was said if you do not do this you will have fictitious sales as well as fictitious encumbrances. Persons wonld invent a colourable sale, in order to call the powers of th e C our t i n t o requ i s ition; or in • tending purchasers, knowing they might obtain a parliamen tentarytitle,would sit down and leave everything to the Court. The examination therefore would come from the Court alone, and not from the purchaser. Then if the power of the Court was confined to sales, what was to be done with other cases of transfer ? A man wants to mortgage, to let ground for building plots, on long leases, to settle family estates on marriage—all cases in which there is no sale, but just as much as a sale, requiring all doubts as to title to be removed. The result was the house came to the conclusion, in the bill of last session, that the Landed Estates Court, before called the Encumbered Estates Court, should have the power of giving an indefeasible title in all cases of sale by the Court, and to any owner of an estate who could prove his right to possess it. The advantage of this sys tem to the public in Ireland no one has ever doubted for many years past. But we must not rest satisfied with this public advantage only ; we must inquire whether any dan ger, or injury to individuals, ham been incurred by the exer cise of these powers. Fortunately, we have ample materials for forming a conclusion on this point. In 1805 a commis sion was appointed to inquire into the working of the En cumbered Estates Court. In 1856, certain bills before Parliament on this subject were referred to a select com mittee of this house, which again inquired into the working of the Court. Several hon. gentlemen who were members of that committee are still in the house ; the right hon. baronet the member for Carlisle (Sir J. Graham), the Pre sident of the Board of Trade (Mr. Henley), the Secretary for the Home Department, and the hon. members for Coventry and Devonport, were all on that committee. It was intended, when the committee was appointed, that all the different views of the question should be re presented in it. In the committee were some strong advocates of the Encumbered Estates Court, some equally strong opponents of it, and others who held a middle position and were anxious that the evidence on the question should be fully heard. There was a full inquiry into the working of the system, and the result may be shortly stated in this manner :—lt was found there have been sold by the Encumbered Estates Court properties to the extent of twenty millions of money ; that the conveyances executed by the Court aeceeded 7,000 in number; adding those that have since been executed, they are not less than 8,500. The amount of acreage that has passed through the Court, allowing for the cases that passed twice, is about 3,500,000 acres. As the area for Ireland is from 20,000,000 to 21,000,000 acres, the Encumbered Estates Court has sold about one-seventh of the acreage of the country. Now, in the course of transactions so numerous, and of such magnitude, there has been no case of injury done to any individual. (Hear, hear.) Of course, Ido not enter into the question whether injury may not tave been done by selling, by the Encumbered Estates Court, a property that might advantageously been kept longer unsold ; but I contend that the Court has never sold the estate of one man as the estate of another, nor a part of any estate that was part of another. (Hear, hear.) There was great anxiety to arrive at the truth in this matter ; and it was stated by Mr. Commissioner Hargreaves that there had been only two cases heard of in which a wrong had been done in inves tigating a title under a sale of land. The house will be curious to know what those cases were, though both errors were discovered before the completion of the sale and the execution of the conveyance. One of the two cases was the right to 13 acres of a bog, to which no physical boundary existed. (Laughter.) A boundary line was assumed, by which 13 acres of this bog had been included more than ought to have been taken in. But the error was discovered before the conveyance was executed ; and as it was agreed by common consent that no sum low enough could be fixed on as compensation for this portion—(laughter)—the disputed right was given up. The other case was this—in the sale of the Martin Estates, in Galway, which were heavilymort gaged, it was found that one township was mortgaged to the Law Life Insurance-office ; this township was sold with the rest ; but again, before the conveyance was completed, the error was discovered. The insurance office, however, was so satisfied with the price obtained that the sale was never dis puted. (Hear.) From the whole evidence before the com mittee as far as I can discover, these are the only two cases in which the Encumbered Estates Court ever sold an estate of which the title could be disputed. (Hear, hear.) In the evidence the house will find a good deal of discussion about L or d Blaney's case, but this was not a question of title at all ; it was a ques ti on w h e th er th e C our t h a d acted prudently in selli ng f t e n rs t o i f n transactionssucsuch importance, there has magnitude, been in sue sa h l gr es a large estate, on which there was only a_ smalla encumbrance. Now to what is it to be attributed I think it may be attributed to three causes. First, it, has been the invariable h eir the C practice of the Commissioners to investigate the titles,in eanatdsafteintys; every case, on their own responsibility. The second cause is, I think, to be found p po v s e se e s vi se d s en to ee ca o ll n b a e n f y ore po it in th ts e t in ies th a e n powers tagentsoutrto require clearing up. The third ground of the security is this, that it is the practice, and is in the power of the Court, par that to issue advertisements of sales, and serve notices in every direction, about the laud to bo sold ; hi, fact, ill the publicity of every proceeding attending a sale by the Court.. (Hear, hear.) In these proceedings I find the explanation of the wonderful fact that in so many transactions there has not, practically, been a single error. Now, compare the faci - ties afforded by the EncunLered Estates Court with what takes place every day in this country. Many thousands, even millions of pounds, change hands on the faith only of an investigation of title by barristers. They have nothing to guide them but deeds or abstracts of deeds and compari sons of deeds and abstracts.. They cannot examine wit- nesses or take evidence on oath, or publish advertisements, or issue notices on neighbouring holders ; and yet, with all these disadvantages, such a thing as a conveyance proving a bad one is seldom heard of. Such being the case, let us see whether any reason has been suggested why that which has worked so well in Ireland—the bestowal of an indefea sible title—will not be equally beneficial and practicable in England. The only reasons which I have ever heard-- and upon a question so important it is right that we should candidly consider every argument that can be brought for ward—the only reasons are these :-Ist, it is said that in Ireland there is a registry of deeds, which enables us with greater security to know the state of every title. Next, it is said that in Ireland there is an Ordnance Survey upon a large scale of six inches to the mile ; and, farther, that in Ireland there is an uniform valuation for the whole coun . - _ try, and that these advantages being possessed by the Landed Estates Court enable it to act with greater safety than any court in England could do. I will state frankly what occurs to me upon these objections. With respect to the registry of deeds there is no doubt that if such regis try comprised every deed which could affect the land, and if the non-registry of any such deed rendered the title invalid in Ireland, that would show a vast difference between the two countries. But in point of fact such is not the case. I find it stated that there is a large class of deeds most material to the titles to estates, which are never to be found in the registry in Ireland. Thus it is said that no registered conveyance is valid against its granter. "An unregistered conveyance is valid against the granter, and he is personally bound to its fulfilment. It is also valid against persons deriving under him by marriage, descent, devise, succession, probate, administration, sur vivorship, and execution, and allpersons claiming under him by means incapable of registration." The result is, that any Court which said, " We will search the register, and take the title to be just so much and nothing more than we find there," would at once fall into the gravest errors, and the greatest injury would be inflicted upon all persons claiming in the manner just mentioned. Therefore, although I do not underrate the importance to the Landed Estate Court of this registry, yet so far from admitting that where such registry does not exist you cannot apply a similar system, as is carried on by that Court, I think it shows there is great danger indeed, where you have a register which goes to a certain extent, but not to the full extent, of engendering a false security. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the Ordnance Survey, I think that reason may be easily dealt with. It is not the practice in Ireland to sell by map, and I hope such a prac tice will never prevail here. The Ordnance Survey has nothing distinctly to do with titles. No doubt it is valuable in order to ascertain the boundaries of the estates, and the position of other properties in the same locality ; but it must not be forgotten that although we have not a survey here upon so large a scale, still we have accurate surveys upon a certain scale. Indeed, in some northern counties, Yorkshire and Lancashire, that scale has reached six inches, and perhaps in time we may have a similar survey made of all England. But then we have a large and valuable collection of maps .in the Tithe office, the preparation and completion •of which has cost, I am told, something like two and a half millions. Then, as to the third point, the uniform valuation, I have never been able to see how a uniform valuation in Ireland can be of any use to the Landed Estates Court. Valuation may be of great use if you wish to ascertain if you are get ting the true value on a sale, but with respect to title it is of no value. (Hear.) As these are the ,only reasons I have ever heard advanced against the system prevailing in Ire land being introduced into this country, I . have felt it my duty to state my views of them, and the conclusion .I have arrived at is, that they are not reasons which should deter us from following the example of Ireland if in other re spects we are agreed as to its propriety. But against those reasons we may set off that which is the case with titles in England. We have, and I say it with no intention of dis paraging the abilities of Irish conveyancers, a better system of conveyancing here than prevails in that country. We have got titles here into better order. The accounts of rentals are better kept, and the details of the holdings upon different estates are better recorded , than is the case in Ireland. This has been universally admitted even by Irish landed proprietors, who have lamented the imperfect condition of the accounts of their own rentals. The result then appears to me to be that there is no valid reason why we should hesitate to apply to this country one part, and one part only, of the system which was introduced by the Encum bered Estates Court. The part which I think we could with safety apply to England is the part by which the Court is authorised to grant an indefeasible title. The part which I would be sorry to see introduced here—be cause there is no occasion for it—is that which enables the Court to enforce a compulsory sale of encumbered estates. (Hear, hear.) The usual course of the law is sufficient to give inoumbrancers opportunities to realise their securities whenever they are inclined. I have now explained the grounds upon which I have arrived at the conclusion that it is proper to offer a scheme for conferring upon persons who prove to be entitled an indefeasible, or, as it is called, a Parliamentary title - to their lands. I will proceed to state as briefly as I can the general outline of the scheme we propose, and which is embodied in the first of l the bills which I ask leave to introduce. We propose that any owner in fee simple of land or any one who has power to dispose in fee simple of land, and who has been in pos session or in receipt of rent by himself or predecessors for I a period of five years, may come to the Court, which I will presently describe, and apply to have a declaration affirm mg his title to that particular land. He will have, in the first instance, to supply to the court an abstract of his title, and a description of the land he claims. It will bo the duty of the court to see that two things are done—first that there is shown in the document sub mitted to them a prima facie title, and next that the peti tioner shall declare his willingness to give a sufficient pledge to meet such costs as may be necessarily incurred in the further investigation of the title by the court. When this is done, the court will proceed by advertisements in the newspapers and by notices served in the vicinity of the land in question to make public the application which has been made to them, but it will be competent for the applicant to say he does not claim a clear fee simple, but that he claims a title subject to certain incumbrances, and the Court may announce that the application to them is for a title, subject to certain encumbrances. The materiality of this is, that we seek to offer the strongest inducement and to make it the interest of the applicant to state truly any incumbrance to which his land may be subject. If he does so the adver tisement will state it, and then there willbe no necessity for the person whose title is thus saved to come and object to the declaration asked for. If, however, any incumbrance is withheld from the knowledge of the Court, the publica tion of the notice will enable the incumbrancer to appear, and we provide that the costs of such appearance shall be paid by the applicant. The same course may be taken where two or more persons constitute the owners of an estate. We have fixed upon two periods in respect to which the Court shall be governed in granting declarations of title, at the end of the first of which the Court may make a provi sional declaration of title, and at the end of the second an absolute declaration Those periods, although open to fur ther consideration, are these--12 months for the first, and three months for the second. We have selected those periods because we find from a statement of Mr. Hargreaves that the average period in which a sale is completed, and the distributed by the Encumbered Estates Court is 15 months. During that time p u bli c ity continues, and there exist opportunities for persons to come forward and make claims if they have any, and, considering we are dealing at once and for ever with a title, I do not think we ought to fix upon a shorter period. There are certain things which every title must be subject to, and which we do not propose to interfere with—tithe rent-charges and burdens of any de scription, and easements, which can only be discovered by an inspection of the property, such as rights of water, and other matters of that descriptio n .. So also with respect to leases. We take 21 years as the ordinary maximum dura tion of an agricultural lease, and in thnse cases in which there is a lease which does not exceed that period, and the tenant is in possession, we do not propose to interfere in any way with that lease or holding, and the title will, as heretofore, continue subject to every instrument of that de scription. These are all matters which can be ascertained by any person who may be desirous of doing so on the spot, and not matters as to which there will be any necessity of giving notice of title. Well, when the declaration of title is made we propose that its effect should be as follows :—That it should be efficacious in substance, for the purpose of change of ownership,—that is to say, that it should be a declaration which will enable a valid title to be conferred on sale or mortgage or lease of landed property—in short, on any settlement for title, or any other kind of dealing de scribed in law as taking place for valuable consideration, but that it should not be called into action when such is not the case. We further propose, that office copies should be furnished by the Court under which the provisions of the bill, if it should be passed into a law, will be administered, which documents will constitute the certificates of title of the owner of the land. We also propose that the same process should be pursued upon the occasion of a sale if the vendor or purchaser should deem it desirable to receive from the, Court an instrument of that kind. We, in addition, pro vide that in the case of any claim upon an estate which, from its nature is reducible to a simple money claim, the Court shall have the power to require that a sum should be depo - sited with it previous to the sale for the purpose of meeting the charge, should the necessity for its payment subsequently arise. We propose, moreover, that the power of conferring a title on sale should apply to sales under the Settled Estates Act, and also to estates under the control of the Court of Chancery, the new court in such cases having a discretion to decide whether or not an indefeasible title ought to be given. We also provide a safeguard with respect to decla rations of title, to which it has not been thought necessary to resort in Ireland, and to which it may not be necessary to have recourse there, but which, as it is simple in its nature, and may easily be put into operation, I think it would be undesirable not to adept as a matter of precaution. It is, that if any person should consider that he had an interest in an estate—be that interest ever so remote—which he may think would be likely to be overlooked in a declaration of title of this kind, he should be empowered to lodge with the Court a caution or caveat, setting forth his claim ; the re sult of which proceeding would be, that when application was made for declaration of title with reference to the land which was stated to be involved in the claim, the person lodging the caveat should be entitled to notice of such ap plication. He will not thus, of course, have his title to the lands in question affirmed, but be he never so apprehen sive that his claim would be overlookd, he will have nothing to do but to lodge this caveat, and to state where notice is to be served on him should a declaration of title be about to be given. (Hear, hear.) I have now stated the course which is to be pursued by the Court in dealing with this subject, and I shall therefore at once proceed to inform the house what course we intend to pursue in refer ence to the court itself. I freely admit that it would be extremely desirable if the thing could be done to make use, for the purposes which I have just mentioned, of some of the existing courts of the country. It is expedient to do so in order to avoid multiplying unnecessarily our judicial tri bunals, and the expense which is consequent upon the in crease of their number. At the same time, however, we have, after the fullest consideration, arrived at the conclu sion that the duties which would have to be discharged under the operation of the change which we are about to ask Par liament to sanction are of such a nature that there is no court at present in existence in England to which their per could advantageouslyorconveniently be committed. (Hear.) The reasons why we think such to be the case are twofold. In the first place, all ourcourts have already quite as much busine ss t o get through as they can well transact —(hear)--and could not therefore u ndertake the discharge of duties of amagnitude so great as would, under the opera tion of this new legislation, fall upon them, with the hope of being able to deal with them satisfactorily. But there is a second, and perhaps a better reason for norimposing upon them this additional labour, than That which I have just mentioned. It is that this new species of business which we propose to introduce is as different from any which our courts of law are now in the habit of transacting as one description Qfbusiness CalA be A'tva another, (Hear, hoar.) The courts which we already have are tribunals which are engaged in trying disputes between individuals—a plaintiff on the one side and a defendant on the other—and the duty of the judges in these cases is to confine themselves within the scope of the circumstances which the parties to the suit lay before them. The business with which the now court would have to deal would be, however, of a wholly different nature. It would be its duty to transact business such as that which came within the province of a conveyancer in chambers, or such as that which was now transacted by the judges of the Encumbered Estates Court in Ireland—namely, the investigation of titles, the reading of abstracts, the endea vour to discover whether all that was material to the case under their notice had been brought to their knowledge, or whether a declaration of title could, upon such ma terials as they might have been furnished with, be safely granted. When the matter, therefere, is duly con sidered by the house, I feel assured it will be apparent to every hon. member that business such as that which I have just been describing is not of a nature which renders it pro bable that it could be satisfactorily disposed of in the existing tribunals of the country. (Hear.) We propose, therefore, that a new court should be constituted to deal with this new description of business. It is fortunately one of the advan tages of our scheme, that a beginning can be made without the necessity of incurring any very considerable expense, although hereafter it may, no doubt, be found desirable to carry it out on a more extensive scale. But, be that as it may, what we now propose is that a Landed Estates Court should be constituted, with a chief and a secondary judge. The qualification as to each of those judges we propose should be this :—that he should be either a conveyancer in practice, and who had practised for 10 years ; or a person who had for a certain number of years filled the position of a judge in the Landed Estates Court in Ireland—(hear) — for it maybe found desirable and advantageous to the working of the new system, that some one of the functionaries who have presided in that court should be selected to take part in carrying the scheme into effect. (Hear.) With regard to the salaries of the new judges, what we propose to do is not to place them on a par with the judges who preside in the superior courts, but rather to regulate the amount of remu neration which they should receive with reference to the question of what might be considered a sufficient induce ment for a conveyancer in good practice and in all respects efficient to accept one of those appointments. Looking upon the matter, then, from that point of view, we propose that the salary of the chief judge should be £3,000, and that of the second £2,500 per annum. (Hear, hear.) We further propose that each of them should be provided with a secretary and a chief clerk, and that the new court should, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor, have the power to frame rules for the due regulation of the entire of its practice. We also propose that, as questions of law or fact may arise in the Court, and involve a species of litigation which would be foreign to its constitution, it should be enabled to submit such questions to the decision of some other tribunal. With respect to the financial ar rangements connected with the Court, we hold that if our scheme should turn out to be successful it will be, as the Landed Estates Court in Ireland will be, to a considerable extent, if not altogether, self-supporting. (Hear.) It is, we conceive, no unreasonable requirement to ask those who come before this Court to seek .the boon of a simple and in defensible title to their estates to pay a moderate sum in the shape of a percentage for the work which they call upon it to accomplish in their behalf. (Hear.) If that bedone, then will the Court be to a certain extent, if not altogether, self-supporting, although of course it cannot be fairly ex pected that that will be the case during the first year of its existence. I have now given an outline of the scheme which we propose and nothing more, intrimuch as I am sure it is the desire of the house that I should upon the pre sent occasion confine myself to exposition instead of being critical or argumentative. It may be said that the plan which I have sketched is all very well so far as good titles are concerned, but that it is desirable to know what we intend to do with respect to those to which there is some objection. (Hear, hear.) Indeed, the noble lord the member for Tiverton, in his usual . playfnl manner, re marked, on the first night of the session, that we proposed to give an indefeasible title to all occupiers of land ; to con vert bad titles in to good ones, and, as a consequence, to produce what no doubt would be regarded as a very popular measure. I can, however, assure the noble lord that we have no plan in contemplation for turning a bad into a good title. "What we do propose is, that those who have a good title should be enabled to obtain a declaration of it. I believe that, in point of fact, there are very few titles in this country which are not good. But there are titles which, though substantially good, are open to certain technical ob jections that are generally guarded against by the conditions of sale, and which, in strictness, are of a nature that pre vents you from saying a title is absolutely good. Yet it is very rarely the case m regard to any one of these that the technical objection could not, by a little trouble and expense, be cured. At present there are no inducements for a man whose title is open to technical defects of this kind to have them removed, because, if he sells, their removal would occasion him heavy expense, and as to the buyer, he secures himself against them by the conditions of sale. But if you were able to assure the owner of an estate that, by some such arrangement as I have described, he could cure the technical defects which now exist, and then have a de claration of title once and for all, I am much mistaken if numbers of titles liable to these objections would not be cured and made good in form as in substance, and be found to deserve the sanction of this court. The course, therefore, which I anticipate will be taken under a measure of this kind is this—that those who desire to avail themselves of it and have perfectly good titles, will obtain a declaration in their favour ; while those whose titles are open to technical defects will attempt to cure them, and also come in to secure the same advantage. And then we all know there must, sooner or later, come a time, with regard to the very worst titles in the country, when their flaws will be taken away by long possession, if by nothing else, so that the period will arrive at which bad titles in turn will also receive the bene fit of this declaration. (Hear, hear.) If the details of this bill are found to be satisfactory, I need not dwell on the boon which it would confer upon landowners. There are so many ways of putting its advantages that it would be tedious to describe them. You may obtain in this manner that which I believe many owners of land in this country have found to be a great desideratum—viz., the means, where small parcels of land are held under different titles, of consolidat ing those titles, and getting one general title for the whole. Whereas now, in the case of building ground to be sold in plots of I or f of an acre, an abstract of title is required for each plot, and the expense of an investigation of the title has to be incurred for each, you will, by this plan, get one title for all, and an office copy or certificate of the title will be handed to each purchaser; while for the purpose of raising money on loan the advantage of such a title must be mani fest on the slightest examination. The next question to which I wish to call the attention of the house for a short time is this—What would you do with the title when you have cured it ? (Hear, hear.) Will you allow it to be clouded over again and involved in process of years in those embarrassments and perplexities from which you have delivered it ; or is there any way by which you can devise a simple and easy mode of transfer through a register, upon which you can put the name of him who has thus been declared the owner of an estate, and from time to time keep upon that register the name of some person who will at all times be able to dispose of, to transfer, and to deal with the estate, subject, of course, to any claims right of other parties who may have a to object to such a transaction ? We have here, sir, lam happy to say, a very large portion of our work done for us by those who have been in the field before us, and from whose labours we de rive very great benefit. I refer to the report of the Royal Commission upon the Registration of Titles, which was presented to her Majesty in the _year 1856. With respect to that report I feel a difficulty in speaking in any terms which can justly convey to the house the very profound impression which its perusal has left upon my mind. I I can only hope that those who take any interest whatever in this subject may either have found, or may yet find, leisure to study that most valuable document. If we look at the names of the commissioners I think they will carry the greatest possible weight with the house on a question of this kind. We have, sir, in the first place, the benefit of your experience and counsels upon a subject on which that experience and those counsels were most valuable. (Cheers.) We have the aid of my right hon. friend the Home Secre tary, who addresses himself to this question with the energy which he devotes to everything that he undertakes. (Cheers.) We have the assistance of my hon. and learned friend the member for Aylesbury (Sir R. Bethell), than whom I may be permitted to say that, whether in this house or out of it, there is no one who has been more persevering or more vigorous in his endeavours to east a reform in this as in every other branch of the law. (Cheers.) We have the hon. member for Kidderminster (Mr. Lowe), the benefit of whose service on the commission it would be impossible too highly to estimate—(cheers)—we have also the hon. member for Surrey, the hon. and learned member for Newcastle (Mr. Headlam), the present Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, the present Lord Chancellor of Ireland, a gentleman formerly a member of this house; Mr. Vin cent Scully, a very eminent conveyancer; Mr. Lewis, Mr. Wilson, and a solicitor of very great experience and emi nence, Mr. Cookson. We have adopted and we propose to the house a scheme founded, to a very considerable extent, upon the report of this commission. I say to a consider able extent, because we confine our plan of a register of titles to those cases in which a declaration of title has in the first instance been obtained. I venture to think that if at the time this Commission made their report they had possessed the knowledge of that which has since been done by this house with reference to Ireland, they also might not have been indisposed to confine their recommendations in the same way. The difficulty of going further is this, that if you do not set out with an indefeasible title you will be obliged to register the title subject to all that may pre vail in the shape of incumbrances or claims during the last 60 years. I must explain to hon. members who may not have much considered this matter what is the precise meaning of a register of title. We are very apt at the first sound of the word to confound it with something perfectly distinct from it—namely a register of deeds. Now a register of titles has nothing on earth in common with a register of deeds. The objections to a register of deeds in this country are so manifest that hardly any person in the present day would venture to propose it. Those objections are of this kind—To be worth anything a register of deeds must be made compulsory, and you must have it for the whole country. 'When you have got it it will not simplify title in the least. It only puts on a formal record the whole of that multitude of deeds and conveyances of the extent and complexity of which we already complain. You have to investigate and search just as before In addition to that, on have to pay for searches in the registry, and also to pay in some shape or other the expense of placing the deeds upon it. Moreover, the cost to the country of the establishment by which a registry of deeds could be managed, would be something which, I should think, none of us would like to contemplate. I believe the calculation is that for this country you must have the materials for registering a thousand deeds every day. In the next place a registry of deeds would interfere with and render nugatory a very large portion of the dealings in land which turn upon the deposit of deeds. (Hear, hear.) The last, and perhaps most formidable, objection to a registry of deeds is that it would involve a disclosure of the most secret transactions, settlements, and family arrangements for the borrowing of money, that I do not believe the coun try would for a moment tolerate. (Hear, hear.) Therefore I hope hen. gentlemen will put aside all idea of a registry of deeds, and allow me to describe very shortly what I re gard as a registry of titles. The best illustration we have of a registry of titles is furnished by the species of property to which I have already . referred. Take the case of a ship, or of money in the funds. A ship is built, and John Smith is the owner of it. His nom% is upon the register as the owner. When the ship comes to be sold, John Smith is the man to execute the conveyance, and if it is properly executed to another person that other person in turn has his name placed upon the register, and the name of John Smith is removed. The register is the title to the ship. The deeds are immaterial. But then it may be said, " That is all very well in respect to a ship ; but suppose there are complicated settlements and arrangements for the lending and borrowing of money, and .that variety of traffic and transaction in regard to real property which every day goes on here. Do you mean to put all that on the register ?" The answer to this is that all that now occurs both in the case of a ship and in that of Government stock, which, per haps, offers a better illustration. There are settlements, mortgages, and intricate deeds in respect of ships and stock which are behind the register altogether—(hear, hear) — but still you have this great advantage, that as long as nothing is kw to prevent the pa= wilese die iii on the register from making a transfer he can make that transfer, and the person who receives such transfer obtains a perfectly good and indefeasible title. And with regard to transactions which go on behind the settlements or mort- gages, if they are or anatum that leads theperson interested in them to desire that there should not be a transfer, and those persons are entitled to require that the ship or the stock should not be transferred, means are provided, by what is called a distringa,s, by which the transfer can be prevented, if there is reason to believe that the owner whose name is on the register is dealing improperly with the pro perty. Having once got an estate into such a position that it may receive a declaration of indefeasible title, we propose to give to the person who has that declaration of title a power to put his name upon the register, and, once on the register, it must continue there. hether the name is, or is not, in the first instance, to be put on the register, is at the option of the owner. We do not compel him to register, but if he does so, the name must continue on the register, and will always represent the person entitled to transfer the estate. The same process will take place with regard to any subdivision of estates. It will now, perhaps, be desirable that I should describe how we propose to meet the case of dealing, with the land which we have thus got fixed on the register, and I think it will be bestto show, inthe first place, what we propose to do with regard to d ealings which fall short of a transfer of the estate from one man to another. As to leases, I do not propose that the bill should affect 21 years' leases when tenants are inpossession. (Hear.) They will go on as at present, and will not be affected by the registry. With regard to longer leases, we propose that the holder of such a lease should have a right to put on the register, when his title is once placed, a leaseholder's notice—not a registry of his lease, nor a description of it, but a notice of his name and address. Where this leaseholder' s notice is entered, then, before any dealings with the estate can take place to his prejudice, it will be necessary that he should be informed of these dealings. With regard to mortgages which do not involve the transfer of the estate what we propose is this —Many people who borrow or lend money do not care a straw whether or not the fact is published at Charing-cross, while, on the other hand, many are unwilling that there should be any publicity. We shall endeavour to meet both of those cases. We pro pose that there shall be a power of registering mortgages, just in the same way as there are now registered mortgages of estates. These registered mortgages will thus be the title to the mortgage charge ; they will pass, by transfer upon the register, from one man to another; and they will always appear on the register as a check upon any dealings with the property. That will meet the case of mortgages as to which there is no desire for secrecy. But we propose that mortgages may go on unregistered, as at present, and that any person who has a mortgage may simply protect himself by a mortgagees caveat; which will reveal nothing, but will entitle him to notice before any dealings to his detriment can take place with the land, while it will also serve as a notice to any person who is about to deal with the land that this mortgagee has an interest in it. This will meet both the cases I have mentioned, ensuring, on the one hand, a benefit from publicity, since charges upon the land will thus be more easily transferred, while, on the other hand, it gives security, by means of a caveat, which will entitle parties to the notice I have mentioned. (Hear.) So much for dealings with the estate which do not amount to a trans fer. I pass now to sales and settlements. Under this bill any intending . purchaser of an estate will say to the ven dor, " I will give you so much money for your estate as soon as you show me that your name is on the register, and that there are no caveats. If there are caveats you must settle with them, and if you do settle with them, transfer the estate to me, and here is your money." (Hear, hear.) As to settlements, when it is wished to settle an estate, the course will simply be to transfer it to the names of the trustees of the settlement ; and we propose to adopt a most valuable suggestion made in the report of the Commission —namely, that those trustees—the house will, perhaps, excuse me for entering here upon rather a technical point of law—should be tenants in common and not joint ten ants ; that there should be no survivorship as between them which would enable the survivor to deal with the land or to part with it ; but that the moment one dies there should be an incapacity to deal with the land until another is appointed in his place. That provision will keep up the number of trustees and will, I hope, satisfactorily meet the case of a settlement. I have been speaking hitherto of transfers for valuable consideration. We propose that any merely voluntary transfers—those not made for valuable consideration—should be dealt with according to the present law of voluntary dispositions, and that if there has beenany fraud the transfer should not confer a title on the trans feree. The only other point in the scheme is that of caveats. We propos4 that caveats should be of two kinds—caveats proper and 'caveats of inhibition. Any person who thinks he has a right to be apprised of any dealings in respect to an estate upon the register may enter a caveat, the effect of which will be that no dealings can take place until the lapse of a certain number of days. If the owner undertakes to satisfy the Landed Estates Court by proper security to the extent df the whole value of the estate that the caveat has been wantonly and improperly entered, he may then, without waiting the specified number of days, have it re moved. So, also, the Court may order the caveat to be taken off after hearing the parties, and if it has been wantonly en tered the person entering it will be answerable for any damage caused by the delay. Caveats proper, therefore, will be put onthe register simply by individuals. nhibitions will be of a more permanent and formal character. Whenthere is a settlement for a great number of years, the inhibition will operate as a restraint upon sale, and will be put upon the register by the Court itself, if it thinks fit to do so, until the expiration of a particular time ; as, for example, until the children under a marriage settlement come of age. These inhibitions will be placed on the register by the Court, and it will not be in the power of any individual to enter them. With this exposition of the measure, I think the house will see that, if the machinery is fitted to work out the scheme proposed, these three advantages will be gained —first, perfectly unfettered dealings with the land, as at present ; secondly, a clear title upon the transfer, speedily and simply acquired ; and, thirdly, entire concealment of all transactions, such as settlements or mortgages, which it may be considered undesirable to disclose. (Hear, hear.) The question then arises—Where do you mean to have this registry ? 'We propose that it should be a metropolitan registry simply, and the reasons I have to assign, which I think will be satisfactory, are substantially those given by the commission. In the first place it will be under the con trol of the Landed Estates Court, and you will thus have a uniform and a safe mode of registration. In the second place, a register of titles differs greatly from a register of deeds. In the latter case it is convenient to have the regis ter as close as possible ; but in the case of a register of titles you only want to know one fact, and that may easily be ascertained in London. In the next place you have in the metropolis other registers, which must be searched on occa sions of this kind—registers of judgment and of Crown debts—and no inconvenience has been found to result from their location here. Then again you have in London the same registries with regard to stock and railway shares, and no inconvenience accrues from the arrangement. In the next place every solicitor in the country has an agent in London through whom he can make inquiries ; whereas, if you have country registries, you will still be involved in the necessity' of sending a considerable distance, and your solicitor will probably have no agent in the country whom he is in the habit of employing. (Hear, hear.) Lastly, you will save a very great expense, because you will have only one establishment in London instead of a multitude in the country. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the registry we propose also that it should be self-supporting by means of moderate fees taken in return for the service which it will perform, such fees to be a matter of future regulation; and in this way we hope that very little charge will ulti mately be imposed by the establishment of this office. (Hear.) I should add that, inasmuch as the register is to be confined to estates in respect of which there has been a declaration:of titles by the Landed Estate Court, and inas much as I have assigned a period of three months to elapse before there can be any declaration of title, it will not be necessary that the work of the registry-office should com mence at once: I propose, therefore, that the operation of this Act should be fixed by orders in Council according as it is found that the Landed Estates Court has made pro gress. (Hear, hear.) I have now, Sir, gone through—at considerable, but not, I hope, at unnecessary length— (cheers)—the measures which I have to propose. I venture to hope that they will be found on examination not ill considered, or involving any principle which this house has not already sanctioned. Ido not desire to represent them as measures which all at once, or even in a limited time, will regenerate and make simple the titles of land in this country. On the contrary, lam persuaded that a system which introduces itself without compulsion, by degrees, and just and only in proportion as it is suited to the objects it professes to attain, is the system best adapted for the tastes, prejudices, and wants of this country. (Hear, hear.) I believe that we have now a hope, without any danger, and at a trifling 'expense, of introducing a system of this kind by the measures I have the honour to propose ; and, to those who are able to avail themselves of the system, it will result in an immediate and substantial increase of the value of their lands. (Hear, hear.) I believe that it will likewise prove advantageous to the interests of commerce, because it will have the effect of making land the subject of speedy and safe bargain and traffic, which in this country it never yet has been—(hear, hear)—and I believe that if this house should on consideration—as I hope it will—think right to adopt these measures, we shall have the satisfaction of thinking that, without endangering any right of any person whatever, without suddenly interfering with any long-established practice, and without a costly array of officers or officials, we have at last taken a step, and that neither a trifling nor unimportant step, towards removing that complication and expense, which has long been the reproach of the law relating to the land of this country. The hon. and learned gentleman concluded, amid cheers, by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to simplify the title to landed estates. Sir R. BETHELL rose to express his sincere thanks to the Government for having brought forward such a bill, also to express the great pleasure with which he had listened to the most admirable speech of the Solicitor-General. It had been most lucid, and had evinced a powerful mastery of details, and at the same time the greatest attention had been paid to insuring to all a general apprehension of the subject. He congratulated the hon. member on being a member of a Government who had had the good sense to bring forward such a bill after all the previous efforts that had been made to effect a solution of such a difficult ques tion. He thought that some of the objections to the report of the committee made in 1856 had been remedied by the bill of his learned friend. The establishment of a tribunal having power to declare the indefeasibility of title was a fact which had been established by precedent in Ireland. The benefit was exhausted now in the declaration, and the machinery to carry it out was wanting, but now by this bill all would be made perfect. We wanted a man to be able to say—" My estate is on the register; give me my certificate"—that is if there was no mortgage, or if there was a mortgage there would be a notice of it. The pur chaser would have no difficulties as at present. There would be no necessity for the inquiries as to title. The pro duction of the parchment title, the necessity of its investi gation by each succeeding transferee, and of his haying the decision of a lawyer upon it being all superseded. The difficulties which had to be contended with would be easily understood. Mortgages by deposit of title deeds with bankers would go on with the utmost facility, because it would only be necessary for the owner of the estate to have from the registry a certificate that he was in a condition to deal .with the estate, and upon the production of that certi cate he would be enabled to create incumbrances upon it without difficulty. There were one or two matters which he wished to refer to, in order that attention might be di rected to themin future discussions. They naturally looked with jealousy at the creation of an additional court. They had already too many—(hear, hear) —too many opposed sys tems of procedure ; at the same time it would be ne cessary to have some court to resort to for determining questions that might arise as to prohibitions and caveats. This would be a matter of some intricacy, upon which they might possibly be informed at some later stage of the bill. There was another matter, and one which he found to be a formidable obstacle in his way in passing the Administra tion Bill through the house. (Hear, hear.) He referred to the important question of the practitioners. (Hear, hear and laughter.) He warned his hono ura bl e and learned friend that he would incur all those perils to which he was himself obliged to yield when he proposed the metropolitan registry of wills. He was compelled, chiefly by the activity of 1191194rable gentlemeA om the ether bide of the how, to submit to the establishment of local registrios throughout the country. He was afraid that his hon. and learned friend would be compelled, by the combined opposition which would be arrayed against him, to make a compromise by adopting both a local and a metropolitan registry. He entirely concurred with him as to the expediency of a me tropolitan registry, but, as he had said, he would warn him of the great difficulty which he would have to encounter. The success of the measure would depend upon the simpli city and efficiency of its machinery, upon its being so easily worked and so intelligible as to recommend itself to the country at large. He frankly admitted that it was of little consequence to the country at large by whom the measure was introduced. The hon. and learned gentleman had one great advantage in the bill being brought forward by the present Government, because it would be more generally welcome, and be accepted with greater confidence by the country gentlemen than if he had had the good fortune to prevail with the late Government to bring in such a measure. (Laughter.) He assured him that he would give him his most cordial support at all the stages of the bill, and he trusted that this great measure of legal reform would bring benefit to the community by becoming law during the present session. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DOBBS expressed general apprOval of the measure. Mr. AYRTON wished to draw the attention of the hon. and learned gentleman to one or two points. One object of the bill was to introduce a state of things which it Was the object of acts passed some 300 years ago to do, but which was repealed in four or five years. From that day to the present the attempt to give a judicial or Parliamentary title to the land had failed, and he hoped the present attempt would be more successful. He wished to have an explana tion on this point. According to the law of England, the title to land was not complete without possession, and ' l l this respect the great distinctio n ex i s t e d b e tw e en land and other species of property. He demurred to that portion of the report which expressed the opinion that there was distinction between land and stock. Mr. WALPOLE—No, no. Mr. AYRTON—Between the principles upon which they were to deal with them, which amounted to the same thing. Possession was the great distinction. A tenant for life is in possession of land, but he was not to be on the registr trust the trustee was. After twenty years' possession the e s would only have a naked estate, according to the existing law. Ho wished to know how' this difficulty was to be re medied? Mr. C. D. GRIFFITH said he should be glad to hear the expeiience of his hon. and learned friend (the Solicitor - General) in reference to the act passed last session for Ire' land. Under that act a rate of charges for transfers of land had been established which was out of all p r oportion, and much against the principles of political economy. 1 , 1 . hoped the same rate of charge would not be adopted und er this act. (" Hear, hear," from the Solicitor-General) a The rate of charge in Ireland was much too high, and the result was that charging one per cent. on all property kept large estates out of the Court. (Hear, hear.) Mr. R. LOWE considered that the introduction of this measure reflected the very highest honour and credit upon her Majesty's Government, and by bringing it forward th e Government was doing everything to benefit the landed interest—an interest with which they were supposed to very much connected. But looking at the history of pas' times, he was afraid that the exertions which the Govern ,went were making to benefit that party would not he appreciated so much as expected. (Hear, hear.) The hon• member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) had state d that the commission had fallen into a conflict of ideas in en deavouring to liken the tranfer of land to a transfer of! ship. Now the system on which the transfer of ships took place was founded in 4853, two years before this commission was constituted—and that system had completely succeeded, and, he could from his experience state, had given th e greatest satisfaction to shipowners. As to stock, thepresen, i system had been in existence for upwards of 100 years, 0 2; it required no explanation from him. What they wanted in regard to ships was a person to represent the complete ownership for the purpose of transfer, and then they le the beneficial ownership to be arranged by the family, th u e principle of arranging the title bei ng a ma tter with which the public had nothing to do. The same system would, 1)1 this bill, be carried out in regard to la n d. B u t the hon. an learned gentleman wished to know how it would be possible to connect the land with the title on the register. Th e answer. was, how was it done now ? But it was done con stantly. A man produced a number of deeds which plif; ported to belong to certain property which he wished to se"' and convey to the purchaser ; but how did the purchaser obtain his knowledge of that property? . Why, by sendini to inquire all particulars, or by going to see it himself, an then by comparing it with the description in the deeds' The same course would have to be pursued under this bi n The difficulties, if any, were dusdenz generic, and could b e easily removed in the same manner. He wished it to he understood that no suggestion had been offered for the pur , pose - of making a perfect measure which had not, during the three years' incessant labour of the commission, bee n ' considered. (Hear, hear.) Mr. MALINS said what had been said to-night had bet/ listened to by him with the greatest attention, and it shea l ! receive his best consideration. He thought it right to state the impression on his mind was that his honourable and learned friend was rather too sanguine of success. (Heat' hear, from Mr. Hadfield.) He was a great advocate v )- „ simplifying titles and transferring. lands ; and if it could h? done it would be a great be ne fit t o th e public. But gre at benefits had of late years been c on f erre d in this way, and he could say that titles to land had bee n s i m plified and the laws relating thereto had been simplified ; still he admitted that these laws were very imperfect, and if it could proved by experience that titles could be simplified, all' that the new court—call it by what name they might": could, by a declaration, give purchasers a complete title, would support the bill. When his hon. and learned Mena stated that the measure would only apply to owners in fe e and those who had been in possession for five years, tho se ~ only would be able to obtain a judicial declaration, and th e ; only in the final mode after a period of 15 months. rei A d e a these circumstances he was afraid that the measure wen not have very extensive application. The registration titles was one of very great difficulty. He was glad to li n a disclaimer against a system of general registration . 0 _ deeds. The expenses would be so great as to prevent Or system being useful. The Encumbered Estates Court Ireland had been in. operation for 10 years. If a person purchased an estate in the year 1849, and now proposed sell it, what would be the operation ? The title would coin; mence in that year, instead of going back GO years, and th at would, no doubt, be exceedingly small and advantageou, s ; but suppose dealings had taken place since 1849, or a Nriv , made affecting the property, he apprehended these doew ments must still form a part of the title. (Hear, hear, fre l° Mr. Hadfield.) So it would be in the new court. They would, no doubt, begin with a title and declaration % ownership. If they could establish the practice in regar,t land as already used in reference to stock in the fun cm !, nothing would be more simple. But unless they could sae` the legal ownership from the equitable ownership, no inge, ( l nuity, no scheme, however simple it might appear, Now, evermeetthe difficulties whichpresentedthemseloes. e r h g As long as the law permitted the variety of estates whic h could be created out of the fee simpl e , t oge th er w ith all the complication of settlements and equitable interests, sire; city of title could not be attained. And apart from t consideration,- this machinery of caveats would in a till?'" time burden the title which must be deduced from the de deed, claration of it, however far removed, whereas at present. the seller may covenant not to produce title earlier than at a certain period. At the same time he promised t ° give the bill his best consideration. Mr. HADFIELD feared the bill would not produce th e simplicity which they expected from it as long as the title was to be burdened with equitable interests. He believe d that the court would be very little resorted to, at all even ts from the northern coun ti es . The SOLICITOR-GENERAL would not enter ugl the objections ma d e t o th e bill that night, for he believeo.:: would be found they had not existence in the bill. - 13 " hoped the bill would be printed and in the hands of mere: bers on Wednesday next, and that th e y wou ld no t object v', take the discussion on the second readi n g on next Monde/ fortnight. Leave was then given to bring in a bill relating to the titles to landed estates, and a bill to provide for the registri t of landed estates, and they'were brou g ht in and read a fi t time. THE ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSION. Mr. WALPOLE moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the acts relating to' the Ecclesiastical Commission. Without entering into details that evening, he said the chief points were those four—viz., Ist, The managernen, and restoration of episcopal estates ; 2d, The accounts of the different chapters, so as to bring them under a manage,: merit similar to the episcopal property ; 3d, The principl e of local claims, as they are called, whether it might n ot be extended beneficially to other property than tithes ; 4th, The mode in which the Government proposed to Pl l an end to leases with renewals for a specific period of awe' providing in the meantime, while that process is going ° ll ' that those who have the right shall receive their renown; Leave was given to bring in the bill, and it was read first time. The house then adjourned, at a quarter to ten o'clock' till Monday. [ADVERTISEMENT).—HoIIoway's Ointment and Pills.' Disorders of Women. —From constitution and f a shioll i females have many c auses o f d erangement o f health, all Of which would be readily removed, were not native baslita' 8 ness, false mod es ty, or unskilful treatment, to prevent th e application of proper restoratives. At the two critics' periods of woman's life, the decline of girlhood and the taro of life, nature frequently requires assistance in safely ests* blishing natural changes, which are better controlled by Holloway's Ointment and Pills than by any other met . iss whatever. They are equally serviceable in all habits, whether full or spare. Under their use, headache, gi ddy; ness, and singing in the ears disappear ; depression of spirits, nervous sensations, and sallowness, vanish; the mind becomes cheerful, the complexion clear. BIRTHS. CROFT.—On the 11th inst., at 13, Camden-road Villas, the wife of Robert Charles Croft, Esq., M.R.C.S., of 4 ' daughter. Ross.--On the 9th inst. at Chatham, the 'wife of Lieut.' Col. A. Ross, R.E., of a son. SOMERVILLE.—On the 11th inst., at 13, Porehester-squar e W., the wife of Stafford Somerville, Esq., of a (laugh" ter. TALBOT.—On the 11th inst., at Ballinelea, near Dalkeit the Hon. Mrs. R. G. Talbot, of a son. MARRIAGES HAMPSON—FRANKS.—On the 10th inst., at St. MOP , Bryanston-square, the Rev. William Seymour Hampsont youngest surviving son of the late Sir Geo. F. Hampsoll Hampson, Bart., to Julia Jane, the youngest daughter of Charles Franks, Esq. SHERWOOD—ABBOTT.—On the 10th inst., at St. George't Bloomsbury, George Sherwood, youngest son of Thonw Sherwood, Esq., of Leamington, Warwickshire, to Mari Anne, only daughter of the late Charles T. Abbot, Esql of Gower-street and New-inn. DEATHS. CAMPBELL—On the 10th inst., at his residence, Barnes" place, Mile-end-road, Lieutenant A. Campbell, R. 144 aged 73. D OMVILLE.—On the 10th inst., at Ashburton House, rut' heath, Sarah Helena, the widow of tho late Sir Compton, Domvile, Bart. HARDINGE.—On the 11th ult., at Colombo, Ceylon, Fannif wife of Captain Hardinge, 50th Regt. HATTON.—On the 9th inst., at 81, Eaton-place, Vice-Ad" miral Villiers F. Hatton, aged 72. HOWISON.—On the Bth inst., at Brompton, John Howisono Esq., H.E.I.C.S. KEMPSON.—On the 7th inst., at Charlcombe Rectory, ne ar Bath, the Rev. W. B. Kempson, M.A., rector of Stok e Lacy, Herefordshire, aged 63. TAYLOR.—On the 9th inst., at Fairlawn House, Tunbridge Wells, the Lady Sarah Taylor. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO yoTIN OI of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112 1 Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in th e county ° Middlesex) eaturdaY, rebntary 12, 1859, oli IYDI. an Captai ' T ames Sir Jo] Ou Thei and u n , f ., 111 1110y Stea l:tie] t hey foi arri ved livers r treater Out as e tefor had not natur e of the and the Worksh takin WaY, ha Plete g. and thi. messes A The the Re Nvh o i e eenntry rtrou ra abl e ehi • Possibb Pe caPitl tdreet o selv es I h eent 1 .ar Indian" Celia rconthi Der cen Glared, Gent l iew is tak e rc allotte, th e Ar O N O N I s TEJ SE] *llx MITI] tra c i n ; Which stroy on the storat Ittipot Pain of ine, '----_ Ph T ties Wed) Thur Plida Squ RE E. Nv: Zs% ; . Til ( will 1 Readi Ad/ Seats, tiaracE Ch a i n u o h n • iteisi Doc won the Co Co -Kep t Mr. Tem To n tifen