The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-04 00:00:00

tacking. Now, his opinion was that the bill would not
give to purchasers that security which its framers antici-
pated. Mr. Duval, in a letter which he had written to
him (Lord St. Leonard's), had given some explanations as
to the mode in which the bill was likely to work. That
gentleman had mentioned in that letter that very great
pains had been taken to render the details of the measure
as perfect as possible. He had further stated that he be-
lieved the working of the system proposed would be ex-
tremely simple, and that, if there were in that system any
apparent complexity, it had arisen altogetherfrom his (Mr.
Duval's) desire to leave as little as possible for after deci-
sion in respect to the matters with which the bill had been
framed to deal. Well. Mr. Duval's plan had been pro-
ceeded upon, and what did their lordships suppose was the
decision at which a commission which had been appointed
to examine into the working of Mr. Duval's plan had ar-
rived ? Why that commission had come eo the conclusion
that it had proved altogether ineffectual for the attainment
of the end which it was desired to attain. That commis-
sion had illustrated their views by reference to a number
of instances in which the plan of Mr. Duval had
completely failed. The commission had further stated,
that, after a long investigation, their conviction was
that the plan of mapping, though specious in theory,
had been found deficient in practice. The noble and
learned lord then proceeded to comment upon the system
of mapping, which he felt assured would be found produc-
tive of serious expense and inconvenience. He did not
think their lordships ought to support a bill which was di-
rectly opposed to the report of the commissioners. He de-
nounced the measure before them as one which would pro-
duce great evils, and no benefit to the landed interest of
the country. The expense and the delay which the measure
would occasion would be enormous. The bill did not state
what the number of registrars and clerks, or what their sa-
laries and fees would be, and differed in this respect from
the first bill, in the schedules of which every charge was
specified. It had been said that the measure would facili-
tate the transfer of land, but it was a great delusion to sup-
pose that it would have that effect. Neither would it
shorten abstracts or
.conveyances. Upon that point he
spoke with some experience, for the first part of his life was
passed in the consideration of the validity of titles. He
should like to know whether conveyances had been short-
ened in Yorkshire, in which county there was a register?
His noble friend had mentioned the number of deeds regis-
tered in Yorkshire, but he had forgotten to state the num-
ber that had not been registered. Thousands of titles to
property in that county had come under his notice, and he
had never seen one in which all the deeds were registered.
Something had been said as to the bill being a security
against the suppression of titles. In the whole of his ex-
perience he never knew of a single instance of the suppres-
sion of a really important deed. The committee of the
other house, in 1832, stated that the suppression of deeds
was very rare. The Incorporated Law Society, in their
petition to the other house against the bill of 1851, stated
the same thing, and the commissioners had come to the
same conclusion. Why, therefore, should their lordships
legislate for particular cases, and sanction an enormous
expenditure to guard against the chance of a deed being
suppressed. Instead of the bill protecting a purchaser,
there was great danger that under it the property might be
mortgaged and the title defeated. There was also the dan-
ger arising from the registrar making a mi▪
stake in the name
of the purchaser—a mistake which might invalidate his
title. In fact, in seeking to remedy a pretended evil they
were, by this measure, introducing evils of the greatest
magnitude, which would strike at the root of every man's
title. It appeared that the registrar was not to be liable
for mistakes, but that the person injured was to have re-
course to the consolidated fund for compensation. Care,
however, had been taken to throw impedi▪
ments in his way,
by giving to the registrar power to make new rules and re-
gulations, which, if the person claiming compensation did
not comply with, he would lose all claim. It ought to be
understood that there was nothing in the law to render
long conveyances necessary. He would undertake to draw
a conveyance of any noble lord's whole property on a sheet
of common-sized letter paper. What really was wanted
was a simplification of the law of real property. At the
present day facilities existed for the transfer of land which
did not formerly exist. The system of fines and recoveries
had been swept away. Instead of a person being now re-
quired to make out a title for 60, the time had been limited
to 40 years ; and the difficulties that formerly existed
to bar a dower had been got over. No man more than he
desired to cut down unnecessary expense in titles to land.
That expense was not so great as it had been represented to
be. A country agent had furnished him with a statement
of the whole expense of the transfer of property to the value
of 1,068,0001., and it did not amount to more than 3,6211,
He wished particularly that their lordships would consider
what the effect of a registry would be on the lower classes,
even down to the labourer. He did not think their lord-
ships were fully aware of the number and smallness of the
purchases of property in land or in houses that were made
by persons in humble life. He had received many letters
on this part of the subject, which he regretted his various
duties prevented him answering, pointing out the hardship
which the measure would inflict on small purchasers, and
generally concurring in the opinion, expressed by the com-
mittee in their report, that a registry was not necessary
was not necessary for the safety of such purchasers. He
would, however, trouble their lordships with one com-
munication, which elucidated the question very com-
pletely :

" The counsel and eminent London solicitors, who alone
appear to have been consulted on .this subject, have little con-
ception of the number and minuteness of the transactions
with which the general practitioner is conversant, and of the
effect which would be produced by the.additional expense and
delay of registration. These would not be proportioned to
amount, but would attach themselves without distinction on
every transaction. A difference in the rate of registration
fees can be a question of only a few shillings—the real bur-
den lies in those multitudinous details which rest with the
solicitor, and which will be exactly as troublesome in the
smallest as in the largest transaction. It is important to ex-
hibit the proportion of small and large transactions as ascer-
tained by actual experience. I believe that the business of
my firm represents rather a higher proportion than the aver-
age business of the kingdom; for, while the great London
offices have many larger transactions, the great body of prac-
titioners have fewer transactions above 500/. Yet an exami-
nation of upwards of 300 conveyances and 450 mortgages
transacted by my firm in the last three years, exhibits the
following per tentage proportion :

Conveyances. Mortgages.
3,0001. and upwards 3 41
From 2,0001. td 3,0001 '} ' 3
From 1,0001. to 2,0001 3O 10 26
From 5001. to 1,0001 l4 10

From 4001. to 5001 9 121
From 3001. to 4001 6 12 It
From 2001. to 3001 l9 70) 11 174
From 1001. to 2001.1. l7 13
Under 1001.

100 100
It appears, therefore, that of conveyances 70 per cent., and
of mortgages 74 per cont., are under 500/. I may add that
in 40 per cent. of the conveyances, and in 98 per cent. of
the mortgages, we were concerned for both parties. The
prevalence of this practice diminishes so much the expense
and delay, that the increase of both, resulting from the re-
gistration, will be out of all proportion to the present
amount. In these cases the cost of the conveyances under
5001. has been from 2/. to 71., and of mortgages from 1/. to
61., in proportion to the amount, exclusive of stamps. There
is nothing in the proposed system of registration which will
subtract ls. from these minor conveyances and mortgages,
and every proceeding under it will be an amount of labour
and expense. I have carefully computed the expenses which
must be incurred on every occasion, and cannot make them
less than 51. on every conveyance, and 41. 10s. on every
mortgage, exclusive of registrar's fees, and assuming that
printed forms and every facility will be provided. And in
the case of a mortgage there will be at least half the same
expense incurred in clearing it from the register on its dis-
charge; and these processes can never be waived, but must
invariably be pursued in every transaction great and small.
But tip expense, great as it is, will not be the only or even
the principal objection. A considerable and indefinite amount
of delaymust be occasioned. Delay in mortgage transactions
is of great moment. Of the 70 per cent. of mortgages under
5001., I venture to say that half were prepared and executed
within a week from the application for the money, and many
of them on the same day... Equitable mortgages or memo-
randa with deposit of title deeds are invariably completed on
the same day, and are commonly managed by bankers in
the country, without the interposition of a solicitor. This
would now be impossible. In the case of mortgages and
conveyances in general, the time occupied in searches and
subsequent registration of the deed cannot be much less than
14 days."

It was plain that there was a large number of conveyances
and mortages of small value in the country, the expenses
of which for conveyancesvaried from 2/. to 7/., and for mort-
gages from 11. to 6/. in proportion to the amount. Every
proceeding in these matters under this bill would be at-
tended with additional expense. In addition to this there
would be a positive delay of 14 days. The bill as it stood
would deeply injure the vast body of small purchasers—the
expenses and the delays would be ruinous, while no corre-
sponding benefit in any other direction would be given.
The system of registration would be complicated and ex-
pensive—there would be caveats, inhibitions—going to the
court—going to discharge, and other forms, all of which
would have to be paid, and, to crown all, the attorney
would come from the country to see after the transactions
in which he was engaged, and he would of course expect to
be paid in proportion to his labours. There was one
anomaly in the bill—that you might put a titlean might
on the
find
register whore no title existed, and refer to some trust
of
tdoa-
cument in which no trustee was named. This would give an
opportunitythat
his for fraudulent
frauwdualseurtuinsaeldest,haronudgthhusth
ea man
dishonest trustee. Was such a possible state of things to
be tolerated? Instead of having the security of the regis-
tration of a real title, he was to be left to the, honour or
honesty of a man who might possess neither, and the only
redress he had was that he might apply for an inhibition, on
the ground that he thought the man was an honest man, but
found the man was dishonest, for he was about to mortgage
his estate without his consent. All sorts of questions would
arise, and there would be no end to difficulties. There was
one ther point, which had reference to a question his noble
and learned friend had declared was the most impotant
question which could come before Parliament. That ques-
tion was that in order to make the system workt hoaud b
mustbeen e y
do away with notice. Now, the object of registration
was to give knowledge, and, therefore, he thought
full notice ought to be given to persons of what was
intended with regard to their property. It
asked,' if notice was not to be given, where were they to
stop ? Notices were two-fold—actual and constructive ;
and it had been alleged that equity went too far in the
definition of what was called constructive notice. If so,
he said, remedy the evil. That was the proper way to deal
with that difficulty. But the system of the noble and
learned lord put an end to common law and equity. The
proposition to register would not be responded to generally,
for at the present time in many instances whore registra-
tion was required, the parties would not always take the
trouble to register. He held in his hand the heads of the
bill prepared by Mr. Duval, before it was brought into
their lordships' house. This would explain how the matter
respecting notices stood. Mr. Duval said :
" I send you a printed copy of the Registration Bill. Upon
the clause p. 31, as to notice, and the proviso, p. 24, which
you will find struck out, the commissioners aro equally di-
vided. The consequence is, that as this provision is not
authorised by the report it will not be included in the bill as
brought in by Campbell, Sanders, Tierney, Brodie, and my-
self, are in favour of the clause, and Bell has written a long
paper on the same side, which is in the appendix to the re-
po , it • and I send you a copy of a letter he wrote to me a day
qr two ago, which, in substance, proposes what I had inserted
in the bill, and is now struck out.
that the provision saving the jurisdiction of equity, in cases
of actual
isghlyrp
The Duval referred did away with
notice clause
notice,
to
ice;butthwhihcnh i
M. im D
Mr. Duval added this proviso, Provided
always that this present provision shall be without preju-
dice to the provision hereinafter contained for preserving
the jurisdiction of courts of equity in cases of fraud,' and
by another clause in the act it was provided—
" Provided also, and be it further enacted and declared,

that this act shall not prejudice the jurisdiction of courts of
equity in cases of fraud ; and that the provisions hereinbefore
contained for giving priority to subsequent assurances regis-
tered in the manner required by this act, notwithstanding
notice of a prior assurance, or proceeding, or act, or matter,
and for protecting assurances executed during the pendency
of suits in equity, shall not be construed to enact or declare
or imply that actual notice at the time of making any assu-
rance by this act authorised to be registered, either to thi
party to or in wh•se favour suck assurance shall be made, or
his attorney or agent, 3f any such prior ,assurance, or pro-
ceeding, or act, or matter, as aforesaid, or of the pendency of
any such suit as aforesaid, or of the presenting of any peti
tion or appeal or rehearing in any such suit, shall not be
considered or made use of as evidence of fraud iu such party,
or his attorney or agent."

By that bill, then, Er. Duval provided that distinct notice
should be binding upon a party, and that he should not be
allowed, as the bill now before their lordships proposed,
to defraud a person of his property. On the 30th of March,
1834, Mr. Duval wrote again to him, saying, "There is
one point upon which I think I have made some communi-
cation to you before. It is my clear opinion that equity
must retain its jurisdiction in cases of fraud. The former
bill had such a pro vision which I introduced, instead of
leaving the party to bring an action, and I never had a
doubt of such a clause being ultimately inserted in the
bill." The commissioners, then, were equally divided upon
the point, and up to the last moment Mr. Duval was of
. .

opinion, as he (Lard St. Leonard's) was, and always should
remain, that direct notice should be binding upon a party.
The object of registration was to give notice. If a man
had notice it would bo the most inequitable of all transac-
tions to say it should not be binding. It was very tedious
to go through all the points of the subject, but it was most
important that their lordships should be made acquainted
with them. Thus it would be seen that the act, as originally
drawn, intended to save the jurisdiction of equity in cases
of fraud. But this had subsequently been struck out. The
noble and learned lord made the original bill of 1851 more
stringent by his alterations. But he thought the bill would
have no chance of passing the two houses of Legislature in
its present shape. In the first place, the great expense and
the vast number of deeds to be registered would have to
be seriously considered. The Incorporated Law Society,
in a memorial to Parliament, had ventured to tell the
house that the number of instruments to be registered
would be upwards of 300,000, or at the rate of 1,000 a day.
This vast mass of documents would have to be examined
by a corresponding number of persons, and an enormous
deal of room would be required for the deeds and for the
accommodation of those who wished to consult them. The
expense of each registration would be Si.; and if he de-
diicted one-third from the number stated by the Law
Society there would remain 200,000, and this would bring
the expense to 1,000,0001., a-year, besides 2,000,0001. or
3,000,0001. to start with. Were the house prepared to incur
that expense? The object of the bill, it was said, was to
relieve the burdens on land ; it would really increase those
burdens. It would necessitate a large expense, without
any corresponding benefit. People refused to submit to
the house tax. Would they be hkely to submit to a regis-
tration tax of so large an amount—a tax from which, like
the house tax, there would be no escape ? The bill in 1851
was called a Bill for Registration in England and Wales.
But his noble and learned friend had recently struck
out Wales, and he should be glad to know the reason why
Wales was excluded ?

Lord CAMPBELL—WaIes is comprehended in the bill,

Lord ST. LEONARDS—If so, the noble and learned
lord deserved great credit for the ingenuity and cleverness
with which he had disguised the circumstance. He had
read the bill through, and had been unable to discover
that it extended to Wales. If the bill would work well,
he would have given it his support. If they must have a
registration, let it be local and domestic, and not central-
ised, like this bill. The bill was no protection against
fraud—it ought not to contain anything by which a man
would he enabled behind your back to sell your estate. It
was said that the object of a general registration was to
prevent forgery; but so far from the bill doing this, it would
invite and assist forgery. By this bill there was no cer-
tainty that a deed was what it was represented to be, a
real deed ; it might be a forged deed ; but, forged or not,
it must be registered. He regretted to say that cases of
forgery were committed by agents and solicitors, who had
a person's deeds, and who used those deeds without the
owner's knowledge, executing a mortgage and transferring
the land. The forgery in several instances had remained
undetected for years, for the offence would not appear on
the registration. But registration would give a certain
validity to a spurious deed, and therefore the bill, instead
of being any protection against forgery, added to its faci-
lities. There was another point to which he begged to
direct attention, and that had reference to the disclosures
of the transactions of private life. At one time it was
thought quite right that a party should be compelled to
disclose all the circumstances connected with his title.
But times changed, and he recollected that Lord Kenyon
had told a person who had come into court with his deeds
to sit on the box, and let no man see his title. He had to
apologise for having trespassed so far on their lordships'
attention ; but the importance of the subject demanded a
lengthened investigation. However, he hoped his observa-
tions would be received in the same spirit in which he
tendered them. (Hear, hear.)

Lord CAMPBELL felt sanguine, notwithstanding the
objections raised by his noble and learned friend (Lord St.
Leonard's), that they would go into committee on this bill.
Indeed, his noble and learned friend would have acted
better had he reserved his observations until the mea-
sure had arrived at that stage when every objection
raised by him could be fully discussed. However, unless
the noble and learned lord had more cogent reasons to ad-
vance against the bill than those put forward by him that
evening, he thought his opposition must vanish into thin
air. He entertained the highest opinion of the noble and
learned lord's acquirements as a lawyer; indeed, he re-
garded him as a consummate master of law—(hear]—but,
nevertheless, he seemed to have an unaccountable horror
of registration. The noble lord declared himself a friend to
registration ; if so, why not prove it by going into com-
mittee, where the bill could be moulded into any shape ?
In every country where registration was adopted it had been
eminently successful. It had been so in Scotland, in Ire-
land, in the colonies, and on the Continent. The noble

and learned lord had adverted to the expense of regis-
tration, as also the necessity of a vast building to contain
these documents. He could assure their lordships that
the commission which inquired into the subject came
to the conclusion that such a building—a fire-proof
building—could be erected for 20,0001., and sufficiently
extensive to hold all the deeds of England and Wales for
the next sixty years, and that for 20,0001. a year, a suffi-
cient number of officers of character and importance might
be engaged to take charge of them. (Hear.) What was
more, such an institution might be made self-supporting.
(Hear, hear.) Another objection raised was the expense
which registration would entail on small purchasers. But
though that was objectionable, yet it could easily be re-
medied in committee, and a scheme devised which might
make the expense insignificant. (Hear.) The noble and
learned lord relied much on the point that mistakes might
be made in the registrar's office, by which loss would be
certain to occur to the parties registering. But the noble
and learned lord should have remembered that all the

officers would be liable to actions in such case ; and, as far
as the system was in operation at present, no mistake was
ever known to have occurred. As to the objection raised
on the ground of disclosure in the case of wills, he should
say they had the will of Napoleon Bonaparte to deal with,
as well as those of the highest personages in the country,
and yet he never heard of any evil resulting, or even com-
plaint made, on the ground of disclosure. One of the

great advantages of the. bill was, that under its provisions,
when the registration was once made, no subsequent in-
strument could affect the property. His noble and learned
friend said that they ought to be governed by the opinion
of the solicitors in that matter. Now, he admitted that
the solicitors were a most respectable and intelligent body
of men, but there prevailed among them an esprit de corps,
which prevented them, in his opinion, from being the best
judges upon a question of this character. The country
solicitors were, however, no doubt the most powerful and
influential body in the kingdom. They had great influence
in both houses of Parliament ; but, notwithstanding that
influence, their lordshins had on a former occasion passed
that measure, and would, he felt persuaded, pass it again.
The want of a registration of deeds had long been felt as a
great evil in thiscountry. In the reign of Charles 11. a
Parliamentary committee had specially recommended two
measures for the benefit of the landed interest—the one
being a registration of deeds, and the other the prevention
of the importation of Irish cattle. (A laugh.) The cele-
brated John Evelyn had in his diary expressed his belief
of the great advantage to be derived from a system of•re-
gistration, while ho feared that its adoption would be pre-
vented by " those locusts," the attorneys. The first act
of the reformed House of Commons had been, he (Lord
Campbell) was sorry to say, the rejection of a registration
act. That had been an inauspicious commencement of the

career of reform ; but he believed it had been mainly owing
to the influence which the country solicitors had exercised
in that house. With respect to the question of the notice,
he believed that it would be a most unwise provision, and
one fatal to the efficiency of the bill, that the necessity of
notice should be allowed to throw any doubt upon the title
to a property. His noble and learned friend had objected
to the measure as one of a centralising character. But his
noble and learned friend might, if he should think proper,
propose that there should be a registration within every
. .

electoral division, or poor-law union, or other district he
might choose. Me (Lord C.) felt bound, however, to state
that he would most strenuously oppose such a proposition ;
for he believed that a metropolitan registration would be
more efficient and more economical than a system of pro-
vincial registrations. He believed, too, that it would be
infinitely less inconvenient. In considering that point, it
should be remembered that all England and Wales might
at present be looked upon as one great city, and that peo-
ple at present travelled more rapidly to London from
Northumberland or from Cornwall than they had travelled
to it not many years ago from Bedfordshire or Warwick.
shire. With a system of provincial registrations they
would have discrepancies of practice, and one great secu-

tyagainst litigation would then be destroyed. There
were some persons who said, that although a system of re-
gistration might have been an excellent thing some twenty,
or thirty years ago, the time for it had gone by. Now he
believed that greater nonsense than that had never been
written or spoken. No other improvement could be a
substitute for registration, because registration was the
foundation of all improvements in the law of real property.
His noble and learned friend had told them that he could,
on a page of note-paper, write a deed which would transfer
the largest property in the kingdom; and he (Lord C.) felt
that his noble and learned friend could not more benefi-
cially employ his transcendant talents than in drawing up
a model deed of that kind. (A laugh.) He should go
further, and say that if such a deed could be framed he
would heartily concur in passing an act of Parliament
making the use of it compulsory on all parties. Ho trusted
that his noble and learned friend would not divide the
house against the second reading of the bill ; and if his
noble and learned friend should go to a division, he trusted
that a majority even of the small number of peers then
sitting 'on the opposition benches, would support the mea-
sure. He earnestly hoped, for the credit of their lordships'
house, that the bill would then be read a second time. It
had already been adopted by their lordships, after great
deliberation on the part of lay lords as well as of law lords
ds;
and he should say that upon that question lay l
who were practically conversant with the working of the'
present system, were as capable of arriving at a e
conclusion as law lords could be. His noble and l orrecte
friend had formerly been opposed to other bills reacrnomed.
mended by the real property commissioners, but had since
acknowledged that experience had proved tt;
him the bene-
ficial character of those measures. He
confidently believed
that in the present instance, as in those former instances,
the alarm of his noble and learned friend would be shown
to be groundless, and that the day would come when he