The Sun. — London, England, 1829-07-03 00:00:00

ne he ►d ROYAL HOTEL AND ASSEMBLY-ROOMS, MARGATE. 41j1P- , - • 4t : N kh, 1 4 .11 V /1 - 4- nn 1 -/ ' • i - 1 . 1y, ; 4 * . t. 1 1 7: (t , • 4 . 11 ) 1 , s• . -4 10 - k : - 1, 4 4 1 , alV e jta OiN -/or 1P HOWE, with feelings of gratitude ; begs to -K. • return his most sincere thanks to the Visitants of Margate for the liberal support he has received during the last eighte en years that he has kept the 'above Establish ment, and he flatters himself that the SUPERIOR AC COMMODATIONS OF HIS HOTEL, COMBINED WITH MODERATE CHARGES, will ensere him that ! har e of public patronage, which it is his highest ambition co Merit. LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 3, 1829. N.B.—The ROYAL MAIL STEAM-PACKETS leave Margate every Wednesday and Saturday for Ostend, at Half -past Nine o'clock; Persons travelling to the Ne therlands will obtain every useful information required, by application to F. Howe. A very sup e ri or f ou r-inside Coach leaves the WHITE B EAR, PICCADILLY; GRIFFIN'S, GREEN MAN, O XFORD -STREET; BELL and CROWN, HOL BORN ; BLOSSOMS INN, CHEAPSIDE, at HALF PAST EIGHT O'CLOCK; and BRICKLAYER'S ABMS, at NINE O'CLOCK, precisely, every morning, arriving at Margate in nine hours, without CHANGING C OACHES or COACHMEN. A Night Coach also Leaves the above Inns every evening at SIX O'CLOCK, arid arrives at Margate early the next morning. No. 11,483. PRICE 7D. To-morrow will be published, price 6s. T HE FOREIGN REVIEW, No. VII PARLIAMENTARY PAPER. REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS ON THE LAW OF REAL PROPERTY. (Continued from our Paper of yesterday.) These base fees are not unfrequently created by a tenant in tail in remainder expectant on a life estate, it being in his power to do so with out the concurrence of the tenant for life. He may afterwards die without his remainder having come into possession, or he and his issue may omit to suffer a recovery, and the estate expec tant on the base fee in course of time may be forgotten ; or, from the niceties required i n suf fering a recovery, no t w ith s t an d ing an attempt made for that purpose, the remainders over may not have been well barred. If any of these cases, on failure of the issue in tail, a new rif, , ht of . entry accrues to the remainder-man ; and this failure may happen centuries after there has been an adverse party against the first tenant in tail, and his issue, or after there has been a rightful possession under a conveyance by them. A re cent instance was proved to us of a claim effec tually made under an estate tail which had vested in possession immediately before the making of the claim, although created in the reign of Eli zabeth. possession in the cases of tenants in common, joint tenants and coparceners, without proof o' actual ouster. Black, Young, and Young, No. Si, Tavistock-street, Covent-garden; Bossange, Barthel, and LowMI, Great Marlborough-street. SMITH'S ENGLISH FLORA, This day was published, a New Edit., in Four Vole. Bvo., err • 21. Bs. hoards, THE ENGLISH FLORA By Sir JAMES E. SMITH, MD FRS ROYAL ACADEMY, SOMERSET-HOUSE. THE EXHIBITION of the ROYAL ACADEMY is now OPEN. Admission (from Eight o'clock till Seven) Is. Catalogue Is. HENRY HOWARD, R.A. Secretary. President of the Linnwan Society, &c. By the same Author, A GRAMMAR of BOTANY, illustrative of Artificial, as well as Natural Classification, ivith an Explanation of Jussieu's System. Second Edit. Svo., with 277 Figures of Plants, &c. 12s. ; or col. IL Ils. 6d. An INTRODUCTION to the STUDY of PHYSIO GICAL and SYSTEMATICAL BOTANY. In Bvo., Sixth Edit. with 13 Plates, 14s. plain, or coloured, IL Bs. beards. PANORAMAS.—PANDEMONIUM. NOW OPEN, in the Large Circle of the Panorama, Leicester-square, a VIEW of PANDE aIONIUM, as described by Milton in the First Book of PirAdi se Lost, including the Legions of Fallen Angels, nursing Lake, its Tributary Streams, &c. &c. ; the whole forming the most sublime and terrific Panorama. The . View of SYDNEY is now Exhibiting. Views of PARIS, and the BATTLE of NAVARIN, are open at the Panorama, Strand; the latter View is about to close. COMPENDIUM FLORA BRITTANICA. 7s. 601 Printed for Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green. THE ARMY. Lord Hill's Levee yesterday wal attended by Lord El phinstone, Sir H. Campbell, Lieut.-Generals Bolton, Gomm, and Eden ; Major-Gen. Sir H. Lowe, Lieut.- Col. Sir R. Mowbray, Vice-Admiral Sir B. Martin, Lieut.-Gen. Blachford, Lords C. Manners and Dartmouth, Lieut. Col. Dale, &c. A CASE OF REAL DISTRESS is re spectfully submitted to the Public, in the person Of an aged and truly reput ible Trsdesman, who has re %Wed in the City of London thirty-eight years, and justly Inidutained an honourable character,—but who now, front a "t ries of losses and misfortunes, is bereaved of every shi lling, and without the power of earning one. In corn- Iniseration of his age (upwards of 70), his bodily in firrnities, and misfortunes, twelve most respectable Gen tlemen, to whom he has been known for many years, have ro ngly recommended his case to the Benevolent and %mane, on whom his anxious hopes alone are placed. Printed Particulars may be had at the following houses, Where Subscriptions will be kindly received, and thank fully acknowledged t —Messrs. Simpkin and Marshall's, St ationers'-hall-court ; Messrs. Drayton and Ventom's, A ngel -court, Throgcnorton-street ; Mr. Danby's, Cloisters, Temple; and Mr. Chapple's, Royal Library, Pall-mall. Thomas Davison, Esq lO 0 0 By Mr. Danby 4 0 0 Lady Arden...••• 2 0 0 W, Williams BILLETTING OF SOLDIERS. Adjutant-General's Office, Dublin, April 27, 1829. Some inconvenience having been found to arise to the service from misconstruction of the clause of the Mutiny Act regarding the billetting of soldiers, the Lieutenant- General Commanding deems it expedient to direct that the following Opinion of the Law Counsel of Governinent, which has been obtained in consequence on the subject, shall he published, for the information and guidance of the Troops serving in this command. By command of the Lieutenant-General, J. GARDINER. NION. --" Persons on whom soldiers are billetted are not to provide, but are bound to receive them into their houses. The Act alluded to states afford,' and not pro vide,' which is 61st sec. present year, 1820 and 63d sec. year 1828."—Freeman's Journal. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. ro be LEI in the most beautiful part of HAMPSHIRE, about Fifty miles from London. a ?U RNISHED MANSION with Manor and Woods. The above is situated near two Packs of Fox Hounds, and is contiguous to fine Downl, in which excellent sport with Harriers may he had. Rent moderate—no taxes. Apply to Mr. Houghton, 161, New Bond-street. SOCIETY for the DISCHARGE and RELIEF of PERSONS IMPRISONED for °MALL DEBTS, throughout ENGLAND and WALES, established 1772. President—The Earl of RONINEY. Vice-Presidents. Lord De Dunstanvilie% I Right lion. IL Peel, M.P. Lord Kenyon. I Sir F. Burdett, Bart. M.P. And Chas Edward Pigou, Esq. Treasurer—Benjamin Bond Cabbell, Esq. Auditors—John Pepys, Esq. and Colin Mackenzie, Esq. . At a MEETING of the GOVERNORS, held in Craven etrtit, on Wednesday, July 1, 1829, 8 ' 2 11 4 eases of Forty Petitioners were considered, of whom e Iv _ 7e" approved, 2 rejected, 3 inadmissible, and 3 de ierreg for want of character. Since the Meeting held on the 3d of June, Seventy nine Debtors, of whom 58 had wives and 187 children, have been discharged from the Prisons of England and Wales ; the expence of whose liberation, in c l u di ng ever y ell arie connected with the Society, was 1511. 11 s. Id. ; and th e following i ) :ENEPACTIONS RECEIVED SINCE THAT DAT, VIZ. : Th id Pennant, jun. ' Esq. A. 2 2 0 J oh cl nas N. Powlett, Esq., 3d Benefaction lO 0 0 ch n Rallies, Esq. A 1 1 0 11, 4r ,..1el award l'igou, Esq., 10th Benefaction Lountess of Balcarras A 4 0 0 .e Rev. Dr. Hughes A. 2 2 0 ''''el hapman, Esq., Treasurer of St. Thomas's Hos- Nal l4O 0 0 A Friend to the Poor, by Messrs. Drummond 5O 0 0 1Z -I Charlotte Williams Wynn by Hammersley...A 5 0 0 Aqßev. George Waddington, 'by Cocks and C0....2 2 „ 2 g 115 a% Fuller, Esq. by Hoare and Co. eV Askew. Esq., ditto A. 2 2 0 1. 4 A. '2 '2 0 lne from Hackney Coach 0 7 6 th ß enefactions are received by Benj. Bond Cabbell, Esq., e T reasurer, N o . 1, B r i c k- court, T emp l e; also by Ne followi ng B an k er s, Messrs . Drummond, Cocks, Herries, 4, timersleys, Hoare*, Whitm o r e , V eres , D orr i en ; an d by e Secretary , No. 7, Craven.street, Strand, wher e th e " h k 4 , 8 may be seen, by those who ar e i nc li ne d t o suppor t n e Charity, an d wh e re the Soci e ty mee t on t h e fi rst Wednesday in every month. ROBERT BALMANNO, Secretary. -.- GLOBE INSURANCE COMPANY. FIRE, LIVES, AND ANNUITIES. PALL-MALL AND CORNHILL. DIRECTORS. JOSEPH DORIN, Esq., Chairman. THONIAS COLES, Esq., Deputy Chairman. William Abbott, Esq. Isaac L. Goldsmid, Esq. T homas B ar k er, E sq. I M atthew Isac k e, Esq. L- hornas Barrow, Esq. John Latham, M.D. Jonathan Birch, Esq. I John Neave, Esq. Jonathan Chapman, Esq. William Phillirnore, Esq. Sir Chas. Cockerel!, Bart., Frederick J o h n Pi gou , E s l. John Peynder, Esq. l l°, Yee C om b e , E sq . Phili p Ri p l ey , E sq. Joh n Fairlie, Esq. Henry Rowles, Esq. °So rge Fraser, Esq. • Sir Walter Stirling, Bart. George Carr Glyn, Esq. James Stuart, E.q., M.P. Edward Goldsmid, Esq. Edward Vaux, Esq. Capital, ONE MILLION STERLING, t ' T he whole paid up and invested, thereby affording to ,7 Prop r i etors S ecur i ty aga i nst f urt h er Ca ll s, an d to t h e Z eitt red an immediate avail a bl e F un d f or th e payment of -.4 most extensive Losses. duell Persons whose Insurances with thi s C om p an y b ec ome at Midsummer next, are requested to take Notice, that Receipts for the Renewal thereof are now ready for delivery It the Company's Offices, and in the hands of their respec tive Agents in the Country. Insurances due at Midsummer bust be paid on or before the 9th day of July next. JOHN CHARLES DENHAM, Secretary. London Jane 20, 1829. URITISH FIRE AND DIRIECT( The Hon. Douglas Kinnaird %r Charles Sullivan, Bart. Si r Rob er t Wi grana , B art. . gtr J. S. Hippisley, Bart. Francis Frceling, Bart. Charles Auriol, Es q . °ha B e b h , Esq. tie %ea Colquhoun, Esq. ) , ; ;Tos H. Deacon, Esq. 1 4 1 .! l iam Fitzhugh, Esq. N '3411 Barwell Impey, Esq. till Malcolm, Esq. P oltablished in 1799, for Insurance against Loss or Da- L" a g , by Fi re , on t h e mos t equ i ta bl e terms, and on a prin nPle which conveys PERFECT SECURITY, WITH 'UT ANY RESPONSIBILITY whatever to he =t sured. )FFICE, STRAND, )RNHILL. las, &C. George G. Mills, Esq. Richard C. Plowden, Esq. John Soane, Esq. G. H. Sumner, Esq. Joseph Warner, Esq. Henry Webb, Esq. James West, Esq. Richard Williams, Esq. Edward H. Williams, Esq. Solicitor John Helps, Secretary. Persons effecting insurances for seven years, by one pay- Lent, are e n titl e d to an IMMEDIATE RETURN , equal 17 l a Per Cent , on b o th P rem i um an d D u ty, WHICH 41RTEMN IS CERTAIN AND NOT DEPENDENT " Any conti ngenc y. P o li c i es w ill not b e c h arge d f or sums sf SOO/. or upwards. This Offic e has always paid for damage by Fire from Lightning. Receipts for the renewal of Policies expiring at Mid "mmer, may be had at the principal Offices in the Strand 444 Csrnhill, London, and of their Agents in the Country, Who will receive Proposals for new Insurances. REDUCED PREMIUMS. let Claes .... from 2s to le. 6d. • ed Class from 35... ...to 2s. 6d. Id am. from b5......t0 4s. 6d. LIVERPOOL. WEDNESDAY, JULY I.—High water 15 minutes past eleven o'clock.—Wind S.S.E.---. Arrived the Marian, \Vestphael, from Dantzic; Heveius, Prutz, from ditto; Reliance, Harrison, from Paraiba, off; Briton, Thomas, from Charleston. CLEARED OUTWARDS.—The Manchester, —...—, for New Orleans ; Ann Paley, —, for Lisbon ; Allerton, Gill, for Jamaica; Andes, Tomkins, for New Yolk ; and Mona Castle, -, for Douglas. Passed Holyhead, inward bound, the Bee, British brig, at one p. m. DON MIGUEL'S CRUIZERS. (From the Times.) The Captain of a merchant vessel, who has ar dyed in town from a voyage, in the course of which he fell in with the blockading squadron off Terceira, (rives an account which i s a b so l u t e ly l u di crous o f the freaks played by the officers of the contemptible little tyrant, who, having obtained a sort of impu nity from his very insignificance, seems resolved to insult and brave every flag that waves on the ocean. The cases now to be mentioned relate to three of the very first class,—viz. British, American, and French. The English ship was the lialkin, pro ceeding from Terceira to Faro in ballast. She was fired upon with 20 or 30 musket balls, brought to, and detained by the Portuguese ship of war the Don John VI. Soldiers were then placed on board: she was sent to the island of St. Michael's, which is about 80 miles from Terceira, and kept for seven days, probably with the intention of making a regu lar capture of the vessel, but the Undaunted frigate chancing to come to anchor there, the Malkin was released. The French flag was not quite so respectfully treated, for the commander of the blockading squad ron actually made prize of a schooner belonging to the French merchant-service, fitted her up, and armed her as a tender, with a small party of marines on board, and the vessel in the beginning of last month was cruising as part of the Portuguese squadron off the island of St. George. Of the fate of the commander and crew of this ship, nothing is. known. The American ship, which is called the Gleaner, was also made a regular capture of by the Don John VI. She was lying at anchor off Terceira at the time, when a boat's crew were sent on board, who plundered the vessel of all she contained, not excluding articles of wearing apparel belonging to the sailors. They took her quadrant, telescopes, and even an apparatus for the whale fishery, in which the vessel was employed. They then took possession of the ship, assuming the entire charge, and navigated her to St. Michael's. There the whole of her cargo, consisting of rice, flour, and other articles, was unloaded, and she was regularly moored in the harbour with the Portuguese mooring chains, her own anchor and cables having been cut away at the time she was first taken possession of! In the race of forbearance, it is not difficult to foresee which nation will be the first to resent actively such insults as these, and that this will be the Republic. IRISH PARLIAMENTARY RETURNS. (From the Morning Chronicle.) The following catalogue raisonne of results of the approaching Irish Elections is received as a plausi ble approximation. For the County of Down, Lord Castlereagh will be returned without a contest; rumour, with her hundred mendacious tongues, has asserted that Colonel Forde, of Seaford, the late Member, will contest the point, but there is no such intention—his Lordship will walk over. For Cork, it is hard to say who will succeed Sir Nicholas Colthurst; but this much is pretty certain, that it will not be either Mr. Gerald Callaghan, or Colonel Hodder, jun. For Clare, Mr. O'Connell's success is inevitable ; as is the strange circumstance, that after all the coquetting, disclaiming, and manoeuvring which every body has seen or heard so much of, if a favourable report is sent over by the Emissary lately gone to Ireland with a roving commission, Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald will declare himself, with the full Government influence at his back—and be beaten once more, influence and all. For Wicklow, Mr. Hume is supposed to stand the best chance. For Galway, if Mr. James Daly will at last venture to put on the blushin4 honours of the Peerage, old recollections will probably send young Mr. Martin to supply the place of his father, as conservator of the lives and Hulks of the brute creation at St. Stephen's. For Louth, as the vacancy is not yet made, and as the effect of Lord Clermont's decease is not well ascertained, and as that small but sprightly district presents the novel and frightful anomaly of two Popish Candidates, it would be hazardous to venture a prediction. For Dublin University, whenever a vacancy may occur, Mr. Wilson Croker will not be the man. Waterford, we fear, is des tined at no distant day, to fall again into the clutches of the Beresfords. Se much for Ireland in the autumn of 1829. The possible existence of these latent entails leads to great expense upon almost every transfer of real property. Not only is an abstract spew ing the title for nearly a century necessary ; but, if it appears that the property was in settlement at the commencement of such period, earlier title deeds are required, for the purpose of sliming what estates tail in remainder had been created, and whether they had been effectually barred. No length of enjoyment gives absolute security to possession ; and upon alienation, titles, to which there is no substantial objection, are found unmarketable, and a purchaser who repents of his bargain is too often furnished with a pretext for fraudulently renouncing it. To get rid of these serious. evils, we propose that when there has been an adverse possession which bars a tenant in tail who had a right to the possession, and his issue, or when there has been possession for twenty y ears under a base fee created by a tenant in tail, the remainders over and the reversion shall be barred in the same manner as if a recovery had been duly suffered. If it should be apprehended that too great en couragement might thus be given to tenants in tail in remainder creating a base fee (which cer tainly is, whilst it endures, a very inconvenient estate) the objection may be obviated by fixing, as has been proposed to us by a gentleman of the highest legal attainments, the longer term of forty years as the period of limitation in this par ticular case. We think, however, the objection to the shorter period not sufficient to make the extension expedient, though, if it were adopted, the advantages we have in view would still in a great measure be attained. We do not think that any serious injury will be done to remainder-men by this proposal being carried into effect, while it will certainly have a powerful tendency to quiet possession and to lessen expense, litigation, and fraud, upon the transfer of real property. The interest of a re mainder-man in tail expectant upon an estate tail in possession is of very unsubstantial de scription. It may be extinguished at any time by the act of the tenant in tail in possession, and if the remainder-man is barred after the pres cribed adverse possession, or rightful possession under the base fee, he is only in the same situa tion in which he would have been if an act had been done which might lawfully have been done at any time during the prescribed period. In analogy to a modern practice, we might have proposed that, after twenty years possession against or under the first tenant in tail, a jury should be directed to presume that a recovery had been suffered by him or his issue ; but we venture humbly to express our disapprobation of presumptions known to be contrary to the fact, and our preference of the plan of direct legisla tive enactment. We are encouraged to propose this important innovation of abridging the right of the remain der-man in tail by the almost unanimous opinion of those whom we have consulted, or who have favoured us with any communication upon the subject. Great practical difficulty has arisen in deter mining what is adverse possession, and when it shall be considered to have begun. This must generally be left as a question of fact for a Jury; but there are some rules of law, preesumptiones juris et de jure, which absolutely prevent the possession from being considered adverse, and the expediency of which is very questionable, as they do not see.n necessary for preserving right ful claims, and they greatly impair the healing tendency of the Statutes of Limitation. One of these rules is, that a possession which began rightfully cannot be considered as having become wrongful, that is, adverse as against the rightful owner, by being merely continued after the right of the party in possession has deter mined. It appears to us that it should be open to a jury to find that adverse possession began from the determination of the rightful estate of the party. Another rule is that in case of a lease, adverse possession so as to bar the reversioner does not commence till the expiration of the term. Where rent is reserved on a lease, we consider it more reasonable that the limitation should run from the time when the rent began to be received by a person claiming adversely, so that there shall not be a new period of limitation from the expiration of the lease. The receipt of rents and profits is equivalent to the occupation of the soil ; the per son who is in the receipt of them can do nothing more to establish his right, and the person to whom they are denied is virtually dispossessed. Where no rent, or only a nominal rent, is re served, very slight negligence can be imputed to the reversioner in merely not requiring a recog nition of his title from the tenant, and in such cases, till the expiration of the lease, we think there should not be a commencement of adverse possession to bar the landlord. Any rent less twenty shillings a year may for this purpose be considered nominal. The anomaly, that when the younger brother or other remote heir enters on the death of the ancestor, his possession is not adverse to the title of the elder brother, appears to lead to un certainty, and may be usefully abolished. It would be d es i ra bl e to perm i t a j ury , un d er certain circumstances, to find the fact of adverse )ossession of the trustee being always in equity die possession of the cestui qua trust. Nor aught a trustee to be permitted to change his character by purchasing the trust property from himself, except under the restrictions imposed on such a transaction by Courts of Equity. But in all cases of constructive and implied trusts, where the parties, though claiming adversely, have been held in equity to be trustees, as in the cases of purchasers for valuable consideration, with notice of the trust, or purchasers, who at the time of their purchase were, or shortly before had been, in fiduciary situations with reference to the property, as Commissioners of bankrupt, issignees in bankruptcy, solicitors, surveyors and other agents, lapse of time has always operated in equity as a bar to relief, and in all such cases we conceive that twenty years adverse possession ought to be the utmost limit to equitable inter ference, allowing for the statutable In this class may also he included the case of a trustee who has purchased from his cestui qua trust. We think, that for the sake of certainty and uniformity, these rules should no longer be left in the breast of Judges ; and that it is expedient that all equitable estates and remedies be included in the proposed enactments, by making twenty years, with allowance for disabilities, the limit for equitable interference, except in cases of undiscovered fraud, and actual or direct trust. Where a mortgagee has been twenty years in possession without any payment or promise, or acknowledgement, to spew that the relation or mortgagor and mortgagee continues, the right to redeem is gone, but evidence of any acknow ledgment in writing or by parol, to the mort gagor or to a stranger, or any memorandum or account found among the papers of the mort gagee, admitting or evidencing that he holds in that character, interrupts the bar. For this rea son mortgage titles are insecure, and for a very long period almost wholly unmarketable. When the price of land is depressed, and the mortgaged premises are not worth the mortgage money, they are abandoned by the mortgagor. From some local or general cause, or from actual im provements by the mortgagee, the value after many years is increased. A bill to redeem may then be supported by some expression the mort gagee is sworn to have used in conversation, or some private note which he is compelled to di vulge, written by him, within twenty years. In analogy to the salutary statute lately passed (9 Geo. IV., - c. 14), respecting acknowledg ments and promises to revive debts barred by the Statute of Limitations in personal actions, and to render adults liable for debts contracted during infancy, we propose that it should be enacted, that where the mortgagee is in possession, the bar in equity shall not be affected by any pro mise, statement or acknowledgment, unless it were in writing, and made by the mortgagee or the moegagor, or those claiming under the mort gagor. We now proceed to the consideration of in corporeal hereditaments, and we begin with rents. With respect to certain rents, there is at present no limitation either as to title or ar rears, except that of fifty years, created by the statute of 32 Henry VIII., which is held to pre clude any presumption of release or payment. We think the limitation as to quit rents, as well as rent charges, and all periodical payments issuing out of land other than conventionary rents between landlord and tenant, should be as similated to the limitation of actions as to the land itself; that what is tantamount to a dispos session of twenty years, should bar the right to the rent, and that the arrears, like other debts, should be barred by the lapse of s:x years. Where rent is reserved upon a lease under seal, there is no limitation as to the arrears, although in practice where there is no proof of acknow ledgement, a jury is directed to presume payment after twenty years. We conceive that a positive bar would be much preferable to a presumption which may be rebutted ; and we see no reason why annual payments should be allowed to be sued for after the expiration of six years, whether they may have been secured by deed or only arise from a simple contract. We are disposed to think that the statutes respecting landlord and tenant might be beneficially consolidated and amended, with the correction of some antiquated doctrines of the common law on the subject, and the addition of some provisions required by the changes of the times, according to the precedents lately set in other departments of the law, by which we think the most essential service has been rendered to the community. To this subject we propose to give detailed attention hereafter. The law relative to the prescriptive right to profits and easements to be taken in or enjoyed over the soil of another, appears to us to require amendment. This right can be only established by what is deemed legal proof of an adverse en joyment of 640 years. By the ancient rule of the common law, enjoyment of such a right was to be proved from the time whereof the memory of man runneth not to the contrary, or during legal memory. Had this meant as far back before the dispute arose as could be proved by living witnesses according to the usual dura tion of human life, the rule would not have We likewise think it would he proper to enact that where one individual has several estates it the same land, when his right of entry is barred as to one estate it shall be barred as to all ; at present he and those claiming under him have ;, new period of twenty years on the vesting in possession of each estatr. By the present law, there is no limit to ac tions of escheat, of waste, or of dower while the widow lives. If real actions are abolished, the lord and the reversioner or remainder-man mina of course pursue their remedy by ejectment within twenty years, but for the dowress a spe cial enactment will be necessary, as till dower is assigned she has no right of entry. Cases have been stated to us in which upon sales consider alole delay and expellee have been occasioned by searches to ascertain the deaths of women who once were actually dowable, or cannot be shown not to have been dowable out of the land. The evil seems to be of frequent occurrence. There can be no hardship in requiring the widow to commence her suit within twenty years from the death of her husband. As she can hardly be ignorant of her rights, were it not for breaking in upon the uniformity of the Jaw, a shorter pe riod even might without injustice be prescribed. We propose limiting the recovering of arrears of dower to six years. In case of intestacy it has been decided that, as to all rights occurring after the death of the intestate, the Statutes of Limitation only begin to run from the grant of administration. Hence a right to a chattel interest in lands may be kept alive, notwithstanding adverse possession, to the expiration of the term, however long ; and in stances have occurred of serious practical incon venience from this state of the law. It seems to us that, with respect to chattel interests in land, the period of limitation should begin to run from the time when the right of entry has arisen, and might have been acquired by taking out letters of administration. The next of kin and creditors of the intestate, we think, cannot justly complain, if for twenty years they have neglected their rights ; and great injustice might be done to the party in possession by allowing a stale claim to be brought forward after a longer lapse of time. We here take occasion to observe that the ob jections which may be advanced to our proposal of abridging the longer periods of limitation, as well as of abolishing fine and non-claim, will be materially lessened if a general registry shall be established. The means of knowing the state of the title to any property will then be afforded to every claimant, and long delay in prosecuting - a claim will be both less likely to happen and less entitled to indulgence. The various Statutes of Limitation which have been hitherto passed in this country (with the exception of an enactment in 53 George 111., c. 127, s. 5, confining suits for recovering the value of tithes to a period of six years) apply only to legal remedies, and therefore have no direct operation on equitable estates or interests. But according to the maxim that " Equity fol lows the Law," Courts of Equity, in analogy to the Statutes of Limitation, have laid down rules by which they have refused relief, where if the estate of the claimant were legal instead of equi. table, lapse of time would be a bar to a legal remedy. They have disregarded the periods of sixty, fifty, and thirty years allowed for bringing writs of right and writs of entry, and (as it is now generally understood) have adopted as the limit of their relief the period of twenty years given b) the statute of 21 Jac. 1, c. 16, for making an entry on lands or bringing an eject ment,—adhering likewise to the statutable pro , visions respecting disabilities,--but excepting certain cases affected by fraud or trust. The question arises whether the direct opera tion of the Statutes of Limitation should still be confined to legal remedies, or whether there should not be express legislative enactments upon this subject applicable to equitable estates and interests. As adverted to above, the Legislature has already begun to apply limitation to suits in equity, and we conceive that this system may now be advantageously acted upon. When the ancient Statutes of Limitation passed, equitable jurisdiction was of small account; but a very large proportion of the real property of the country is now subject to that jurisdiction, and there seems no sufficient reason why the regula tion of such property should continue to be left to the variable discretion of a Judge. A case very recently occurred where an estate subject to a mortgage in fee being in settlement, with an ultimate limitation to the right heirs of a parti cular person, a stranger, on the expiration of the previous estate, entered, claiming to be entitled under the limitation, and he and his son upon his death, continued in quiet possession, paying interest on the mortgage, for twenty years. After a difference of opinion between Judges of great eminence, it was held that the devisee of of the person really entitled under the limitation was barred by lapse of time. This decision, although generally approved of, has been cen sured by some, and the doctrine founded upon it may be qualified in subsequ en t cases . H ence , without a positive law to refer to, some uncer tainty and uneasiness must prevail, and prac tising lawyers sometimes find it impossible to give a confident opinion upon titles submitted to them. It appears to us that cases of fraud and trust may be introduced as exceptions to the general enactment respecting the period, within which equitable relief may be granted, and that con sistently with the legislative rule upon the sub ject, power may remain in Courts of Equity to enforce the performance of direct trusts, of what ever standing, and to relieve against long con cealed fraud when it is discovered. It is generally said that no length of time is a bar to relief in equity in cases of fraud and trust ; but this proposition, we apprehend, is to be con fined to cases of undiscovered fraud, aNd actual or direct trust. After the fraud is known, there is no reason why subsequent lapse of time should not be effective as a bar. In cases of actual or direct trust, as where the trust remains in the trustee himself, who has undertaken the trust, or in persons claiming through or under him without valuable consideration, no lapse of time can or ought to be a bar to relief, as there cannot in such a case be any adverse possession, the been unreasonable. But the limits of legal me- I mory %ere formerly fluctuating. They were long made to depend upon the period for bring- ; ing a writ of right, which till 32 Henry VIII., , was not any certain period before the commence ment of the suit, but dated from some historical event fixed from time to time ; as the beginning of the reign of Henry I.; the return of King John out of Ireland ; the journey of King Henry 111. into Normandy, or the coronation of , King Richard I. The last epoch being fixed by the Statute of Westminster 2, c. 46, as the time back asliving sumption of an enjoyment ccom the remote era. In some cases, however, the practical remedy fails, and the rule produces the most serious mis chiefs. A right claimed by prescription Js al ways disproved, by spewing that it did not or could not exist at any one point of time since the commencement of legal memory, or although it originated before the commencement of legal me mory, that at some subsequent period the ser vient tenement, or that over which the right is exercised, and the dominant tenement, or that to which the right is attached, once belonged to the same individual, whereby the prescriptive right was extinguished. Amidst these difficulties, it has been usual of late, for the purpose of sup porting a right which has been long enjoyed,but which can be shown to have originated within time of legal memory, or to have been at one time extinguished by unity of possession, to re sort to the clumsy fiction of a lost grant, which is pleaded to have been made by some person seised in fee of the servient to another seised in fee of the dominant tenement. But besides the objection of its being well known to the Coun sel, Judge, and Jury, that the plea is unfounded in fact, the object is often frustrated by proof of the title of the two tenements having been. such dint the fictitious grant could not have been made in the manner alleged in the plea. The contrivance therefore affords only a chance of protection, and may stimulate' tiro adversary to an investigation for an indirect and inischievouS end of ancient title deeds, which for 0 - 41 fair" purpose have long ceased to be of any use. We propose that legal memory, with respect to this species of property, shall always be 161;03 to be sixty years ante litem motam, or rather that adverse enjoyment during this period oiany profit or easement in or over the soil of another, shall be conclusive evidence of a right to such profit or casement. It will still be for a jury to determine, in case of dispute, whether the right has been exercised conventionally or ad versely, and there will be no greater danger than at present of a licence or limited grant becoming the foundation of a prescriptive right. But it must not be open to the part) denying the . right to contend that from leases or other particrdat estates it could not have been lawfully granted by the occupier of the soil within the sixty year:;: It can only be in very rare cases that the owner of the fee, or at least an estate of inheritance, has not been in possession during some part of such a period ; and even in that case he might have put an end to any usurped right by bringing au action on the case for an injury to his reversion by the exercise of it. Without making adverse enjoyment during the new period of limita tion conclusive evidence of the right, compa ratively little advantage would arise from the rc , duced limit of legal memory. The disabilities of the parties against whom this prescription is to run must likewise 1 regarded. But we are of opinion, that with respect both to profits and easements a shorter period, viz. twenty years, should also be established as afford ing presumptive evidence of right, liable to be rebutted by proof, that during that time the set vient tenement was occupied under a lease, or was held by a tenant for life, or by a person under disability. The effect of the twenty years enjoyment should not we think, be defeated by the existence of an estate tail. At present the exercise of a right of common or the use Of A ' way or of water, or any easement for twenty yeatg i constitutes a prima facie case to establish the right ; and the rule may be continued without . inconvenience. But we thi n k th e necessity of alleging the grant of an easement in pleading might in all cases be dispensed with. Thew right to an easement, generally speaking, is in truth acquired, not by any deed, but by the ac quiescence for a given period of a party compe tent to interrupt the exercise of the right ; and this is now in substance considered equivalent to a grant though no grant be executed. In a de claration for disturbance of an easement it is enough to state, that the plaintiff is possessed of the tenement, and that the right is appurtenant to it. When an action is brought for any thing done in the exercise of the right, there seems no sufficient reason why the right must be traced to its origin, or why it should not be permitted in the plea as well as in the declaration to allege the defendant's possession of the tenement, and that by reason thereof he is entitled to the right ID; appurtenant. The party should not be put under greater difficulties, if he be in possession, and au action is brought against him for exercising the right, than if he be out of possession, and he brings an action for the obstruction. The evi dence is the same in both instances, and we think the party who claims the right, whether plaintiff or defendant, should be allowed simply to allege, that he is entitled to it as belonging to the tene ment in respect of which it is claimed, and to establish it presumptively by proving an adverse enjoyment of twenty years, and conclusively by an adverse enjoyment of sixty years. Prescrib ing in a que estate, that is in right of the owner of the fee, and those whose estate he has, and tracing title to the possession of the domi nant tenement from the owner of the fee would thus be dispensed with, and records in actions of trespass to try these rights materially shortened and simplified. Where there is an actual grant, it may be rendered available as now in pleading and in proof. While on this subject we may suggest the propriety of enacting, that where a right to land, or any interest in it, is iii dispute, it shall in no case be necessary to plead the Statute of Limita tion, either affirmatively or negatively ; and that upon proof of the facts, the title shall, to all pur poses, be considered as rightfully and absolutely gained or extinguished by the operation of the statute. It seems to us also that legal memory might be reduced to sixty years, with respect to pre scriptive obligations arising out of the possession or tenure of lands, such as to make fences or to repair roads. Evidence of antecedent usage may be admissible on either side ; but if the jury believe that the act has been done as often as occasion required, for a period of sixty years, on the footing of obligation, this ought to be suf ficient to establish the obligation, without con sidering whether it did or could exist in the reign of Richard I. after which seisin must be proved to maintain a It has been suggested that exceptions ought writ of right, it was from thence adopted as the to be introduced with respect to casual rights commencement of legal memory. When 32 and obligations the occasions for exercising or Henry VIII., provided that there should be a enforcing which very rarely occur ; but rights progressive period of limitation for writs of right, and obligations which remain dormant for sixty legal memory ought, preserving the existing years, and do not rest upon express contract, analogy, to have been considered as intending a to be proved by written documents, may pro period of sixty years next before the dispute bably be entirely disregarded as more likely arose. But unfortunately the analogy to writs of to cause litigation than to produce any real right was dropped, and the reign of Richard I. benefit. was adhered to, and is considered the commence- The extinguishment of rights and obligations ment of legal memory for all purposes at the pre- by nonuser, will require corresponding rules, sent day. The practice of the Courts has created which seem much preferable to the fiction of non a remedy to this inconvenient and absurd rule in existing releases and surrenders. ordinary cases; for proof of enjoyment as far Whether legal memory could be reduced to a r T-