The Sun.
London, England, 1834-03-31 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

,
We have taxen the earliest opportunity that
has presented itself, to notice a pamphlet by Sir
Edward Sugden, entitled Cursory Observations
on a General Re,gister—meaning a general
register of deeds. The object of the writer is to
show the inexpediency of such a measure, and
his observations may be reduced to two points
—first, that the existing registries are defective ;

and, secondly, that there are defects in the plan
recommended by the commissioners for inquir-
ing into the law of real property, to carry which
recommendation into effect a bill has been intro-
duced into parliament by Mr. Brougham. Now,
supposing that Sir Edward Sugden had esta-
blished both these propositions, it does not appear
to us that he would be warranted in the con-
clusion he draws namely, that the establish-
ment of a general registry would be inexpedient.
That the existing registries are defective,
seems to be admitted on all hands, and by
none more readily than the commissioners
themselves, who are of opinion that the
plan recommended by them will obviate
the inconvenience at present felt. To prove,
therefore, that there are defects in the present
system of registration, or even to prove still fur-
ther (which however is not attempted) that a
better plan than the one proposed might have
been devised, would not dispose of the real
question at issue, which is—registry or no re-
gistry. It is not now our intention to enter
into the general question, but we will very
shortly. Our object at this time is to dispose
of the objections of Sir Edward Sugden to the
plan of registration suggested, and to show that
his opinion is opposed to that of several per-
sons who are, to say the least, as competent
judges of the matter as himself, while, unlike
him, they are not totally irresponsible for the
opinion they have given. Of the eight com-
missioners who made the report in favour of a
general registry, and of the specific plan to
which Sir Edward Sugden objects, five
were practising conveyancers of the first
eminence, and therefore peculiarly well
fitted to judge of a question of this de-
scription. The commissioners, too, acted
under a responsibility, and in the performance
of a duty they circulated their proposed plan
throughout the profession ; they obtained a large
body of evidence and several written communi-
cations from members of the profession and from
other parties ; and, after a full consideration of
the matter, they came to the unanimous resolu-
tion that the establishment of a general register
would be expedient, and they recommended the
plan in question. Now, we cannot help think-
ing that the opinion of the commissioners, under
the circumstances we have mentioned, is entitled
to a greater degree of attention than that of Sir
Edward Sugden, who has not for many years
practised conveyancing, and who is not only
wholly irresponsible for the opinion he gives,
but, from his extensive practice in a different
branch of the law, cannot have had an opportu-
nity of devoting that time and attention to the
subject which the commissioners were from
their situation compelled to employ. It should
be recollected, too, that the opinion and recom-
mendation of the commissioners have been con-
firmed by a committee of the House of Commons.
Sir Edward Sugden asserts that " the proposed
system is a complicated one." Now, to an-
swer this general assertion satisfactorily, would
require more space than we can devote to this
part of the subject. We may say, however,
that to us the system appears quite the reverse
of complicated, and we arc borne out in that
opinion by most respectable authorities. Let
us hear what Mr. Bell, whom all will acknow-
ledge to be one of the most eminent property
lawyers, says on this point. We have selected
this gentleman as an authority, not merely on
account of his eminence, but because his testi-
mony is peculiarly unexceptionable for the rea-
sons we are about to state. Mr. Bell was to-
tally unconnected with the commission, and,
although he never entertained any doubt as to
the expediency of the principle of registration,
he is known to have been of opinion that there
would be great difficulty in framing a satisfac-
tory plan of registration. When examined
before the committee of the House of Corn-
Meng, he said, in reference to the sys-
tem proposed, " that he thought it an ex-
ceedingly good one—and that it would
obviate the inconveniences which he dreaded."
Being asked his opinion of the proposed mode
of indexing (a most important part of any system
of registration), he said, " I think it would be
very simple and very ffirectual." The com-
mittee of the House of Commons say, " they
refer with great satisfaction to the plan which has
Keen suggested by the commissioners on the law
of real property, and which in the opinion of
persons most competent to form a correct judg-
ment upon this subject unites simplicity with
clearness and accuracy in a most remarkable
4egree." They add, "It is impossible within
the limits of a report to enter into the details of
this plan, but after a careful examination and
trial, your committee are satisfied that it is at
once effectual and practicable." Sir Edward
Sugden objects to a metropolitan register chiefly
because " a collection in London of all the title-
deed; of all the property in England and Wales
would in times 'of confusion and revolution
probably invite the first blow ;" and adds,
that " they who approve of Spencean prin-
ciples would doubtless consider it a con-
siderable step towards an equal division of
property, that no man could show a separate
title to any given portion of it." Not to urge
the absurdity of legislating on the speculation
of a revolution, it must be observed that every
person will have the option of depositing either
the original deed or a duplicate copy of it, and
as, according to Sir Edward Sugden, "an
Englishman likes to have his sheepskins' in
his own box, in his own castle,' "it is not
probable that the original title-deeds will be
often deposited. But admitting that the case
were otherwise, Sir Edward Sugden knows
(though the followers of Spence might not),
that the destruction of the deeds could not have
any such consequences as those which he pre-
tends to dread, the possession of the property
always furnishing a primg fade title, and putting
all persons claiming adversely to proof of their
right, a proof which would certainly not be the
less strict in the case supposed. Besides, the
objection applies with equal force to the books
of the Bank and public companies, which in-
volve property of no trifling amount, and all the
other valuable records deposited in London.
Now, let us ask, can such remote and improba-
ble contingencies as these weigh against the
superior economy, simplicity, security, unifor-
mity of practice, and facility of improvement
of a metropolitan register over district registers ?
On the score of experfse, too, it should be
recollected that the circumstance of the register
being a metropolitan register will occasion no
additional charge to persons resident in the

country, for the deeds are to be transmitted
through the post-office, and the same sum is to
be charged for postage on every registration,
whether the deeds are actually sent through the
post-office or not, and whatever may be the dis-
tance from London. Another ground of objec-
tion taken by Sir Edward Sugden to the pro-
posed plan is on account of the disclosures it
will cause. This is a favourite point with the
opponents of all registration, and it is so because
Tbeing addressed to the fears of people, it has
considerable effect. The learned gentleman
thinks the proposed system peculiarly objection-
able on this head, from the entire instrument
being accessible through the registry instead of
a memorial or partial statement. Now, the
Commissioners were unanimous in their recom-
inendation that the deed should be registered at
length ; and the committee of the House of
Commons " suggest that if registration be
adopted, unless. the register contain the whole
contents of the deed, it will in a great degree
fail in its object." The reasons for this opinion
appear to us very strong. A memorial would
often raise difficulties which an examination
of the deed itself would remove ; and if the
deed were lost, or not forthcoming, a purchaser
could not, with the notice afforded by the me-
morial, complete his contract safely. Again, by
having the deed registered at length, a remedy
would be afforded for the inconvenience at pre-
sent felt from the want of covenants for the pro-
duction of deeds, and the proof of instruments
in legal proceedings would be facilitated. We
now come to the evils of disclosure. Sir Ed-
ward Sugden says, " If all the dealings of men
of property, and all their title-deeds, were to be
disclosed to the world, the mischiefs would be
obvious ; immediate ruin would not unfrequently
be occasioned—flaws in titles would be readily
discovered—for the plan will not add to the
learning or sagacity of real-property lawyers,
and Jews" (we presume he means money-lend-
ers of all religious denominations) " would have
an opportunity of ascertaining to what extent
they could safely supply the demands of an im-
provident heir." Sir Edward Sugden adds,
" Many a young man has been saved from
ruin, because he had not the means of proving
to money-lenders what his interest was in the
family property." The learned gentleman
treats with contempt the precautions sug-
gested by the Commissioners to prevent im-
proper inspections (although to us they appear
likely to be effectual); he disregards the argu-
ments so often urged, that in a busy country
like this people will not spend their time, still
less their money, in searching a register from
mere curiosity. All this is as nothing when
opposed to his suppositious case. And then,
what is one of the mischiefs to be anticipated ?
Immediate ruin. Now, in what situation must
a man be whose immediate ruin would be occa-
sioned by ascertaining that he had sold or in-
cumbered his property ? And has it not oc-
curred to Sir E. Sugden that the registry, on
the other hand, might prevent the ruin of many
persons against whom a party contemplated the
commission of fraud by representing himself as
the possessor of property which he had parted
with or incumbered ? Another alleged evil is
the discovery of flaws in titles. Now, as the
registry is not to be retrospective, this can apply
only to future titles, and let us ask whether that
can be called an evil which, without affecting
any present rights, or even alleged rights, tends
in some degree to afford a person having a
rightful claim the means of establishing it ?
Lastly, as to the case of the improvident heir, if
he have an actual interest, he has clearly a
right to charge such interest, and even under
the present law may in many cases compel
the production of the instrument conferring
the interest. If he have a mere expectancy as
heir, there can be no instrument the production
of which is necessary to enable him to
raise money, nor probably would an inspection
of the family settlements show what the value of
his expectancy might be, for it is seldom that
deeds contain a rental of the estates, besides that
this information may always be obtained through
other channels, such as solicitors, receivers,
agents, or tenants. Further than this, we con-
fidently appeal to every practical man whether
the want of information of this kind has not
often had the effect of throwing persons into
the hands of money-lenders, who have made
them pay most heavily for the risk thus in-
curred ? The most important objection taken
by Sir Edward Sugden is to that part of the
plan which provides that (except in certain cases
of fraud) a person claiming under a registered
deed shall hold out against a prior unregistered
deed, although he had notice of it before he took
his conveyance. Upon this point the commis-
sioners were divided in opinion, but the majority
came to the above conclusion, and their reasons
appear to us perfectly satisfactory. The law is
so in Scotland and in France, and several of our
statutes operate in a similar manner. The deci-
sions under the English and Irish register acts
are to the contrary, but have been spoken of in
terms of dissatisfaction by several of our most
eminent equity judges. We should do injustice
to this part of the subject if we did not give
some of the reasons assigned by.the commis-
sio4ers in ' Support of their opinion. They
say, "If the public good require that a
purchaser, to have the protection of the
law, should comply with a form, and that
form be made simple and easy, a purchaser
omitting the form has no just ground of com-
plaint that the protection is not given. If the
omission were not wilful, he should still blame
his own want of care, or that of his agents.
It is greatly for the public good, that civil rights
should be capable of being ascertained without
difficulty, and for this purpose the law, on
which they depend, should as far as possible be
general, and not varying in different circum-
stances, which would lead to mistakes ; they
should be supported by evidence not open to
doubt, and as little as possible exposed to falsi-
fication. For these reasons it has been thought
necessary, in most countries, to require the title
of land to be proved by written documents, and
thereby prevent attempts to enforce pretended
claims by parole testimony, or circumstantial
evidence. A registered title possesses the ad-
vantages of certainty. and security in a high
degree ; but they will be impaired, if prefe-
rence be given to an unregistered over a regis-
tered deed, on the ground of notice. The fact
of notice will in every case be possible, and
in many probable ; there will be a tempta-
tion, therefore, to the unregistered claimant
to commence a suit, in the hope that the
other claimant may confess notice, or circum-
stances from which it may be implied ; and
there may also be a temptaion to support the
suit so commenced by false evidence." We
may add, that if registration were made an es-
sential requisite to the validity of every transac-
tion effecting land, it would no more be omitted
than is the enrolment of a security for an an-
nuity which becomes wholly void unless that
•

form be complied with. Another objection of
Sir _Edward Sugden is, that the appointment of
the Registrar-General is proposed to be in the
Crown, and of the inferior officers in the Trea-
:ury. The learned gentleman appears to think
it would be better if the registrar were appointed
by the Lord-Lieutenant of the county, and the
clerks by the chief officer. This of course as-
sumes that there should be local registries. We
have already stated why we consider a metropo-
litan register better ; and even if that plan were
not adopted, we think the public would not de-
sire to see patronage of this description in so
many or in such hands as Sir Edward Sugden
suggests. The last objection we shall allude to
is the provision that actions for damages occa-
sioned by the omission or misfeasance of any
officer of the registry shall be brought against
the Registrar-General, as the nominal defend-
ant, and the damages recovered paid out of the
Consolidated Fund. Now it appears to us that
this is an extremely beneficial provision for the
public ; the persons registering are entitled to
such a protection, and it will have the effect
of securing the appointment of proper persons
to the offices. The profits derivable from the
registry are to be carried over to the consolidated
fund, and the losses occasioned to individuals
by the officers should be paid from the same
source ; leaving the Treasury to recover from
the officer guilty of the neglect, under the secu-
rity he is required to give for the due perform-
ance of the duties of his office, the nature and
amount of which security is to be in the discre-
tion of the Treasury. We have now noticed
all the objections stated by Sir Edward Sugden
to the proposed plan that appear to us of im-
portance. We shall shortly return to this sub-
ject, being assured that if the opponents of a
general register of deeds have no other argu-
ments to urge against the establishment of a
general register than those contained in Sir E.
Sugden's pamphlet, there can be no satisfactory
reason why the reproachful question put, by Sir
R. Peel during the debates on the Reform Bill
should still be answered in the negative—" Will
your boasted reformed Parliament consent to
that measure which common honesty and com.
mon sense equally demand—a general register o:
deeds ?" Times.

The dissenters have plainly overrated their
force and mistaken their interest. Their cla-
mour has been listened to by Ministers with that
attention which men panic-stricken are accus-
tomed to give to all violent demands. But Mi-
nisters have it not in their power to gratify
the wants of these noisy suitors, even if their
wants were more particularly expressed than
they have been hitherto. Lord Grey, indeed,
is anxious to give dissenters degrees, and, of
course, a voice in the government of the uni-
versities ; yet this very same man is verbally
strenuous in upholding the connection between
Church and State. Is his Lordship of such
flimsy intellect as not to be able to see that, in
giving to dissenters a control over--for that is
what is meant by their admission to the privi-
leges of the universities—he is actually giving
up the principle of a State church ? Is he not
perverting the intention and defeating the purpose
of our universities, which is mainly and essen-
tially the cultivation and nourishment of
the religion of the State ? Would one
single shilling of the present collegiate endow-
ments have been bestowed had the donors con-
templated the possibility of their bounty going
to the support of those who recognise no church
at all ? In the name of justice let Lord Grey
answer this question before he proceeds to re-
model the universities, in obedience to the dic-
tates of republicanism, or the boisterous swag-
gering of a dissenting minority. It cannot be
the true and permanent interest of Ministers to
lend themselves to the dissenters. But they
may gain a precarious and temporary advantage
by concession. By concession they may patch
up their crazy machinery--they may mend their
disjointed and ricketty vehicle so as to enable
it to go on for some few months more. True,
it will tumble, and jolt its passengers to
death, and sway and roll in perpetual andmo-
mentarydanger of being overturned ; but still it
will go. To men as rapacious of power as
Lord Grey's associates any sacrifice of prin-
ciple, any exposure of wickedness, is but a light
matter when set in balance against the sweets of
power, however perilous or dishonest. Even-
tually Lord Grey will find himself no match for
the aristocracy which he has insulted, and the
church which he has betrayed. We may rea-
sonably demand, before we concede the general
question, what is meant by the " Dissenters ?
We presume we must include all that dissent
from the Church of England. The Atheist,
Deist, and Sceptic are, therefore, Dissenters.
All denominations of religion, however opposite
—Wesleyans and Unitarians, Anabaptists,
Ranters, Quakers, Socinians,
Jews—all are
Dissenters. Can the conscientious Separatist
really believe that his condition will be bettered
by demolishing the church, and wilfully re-
moving from himself the only legal protec-
tion he now enjoys against the tyranny of
Atheism ? Can he believe that his own do-
minion would be endured for a day by a people
who will have thrown off their allegiance t? a
Church immeasurably more tolerant, more mild,
requiring less sacrifice and severity of its disci-
ples, than any existing sect ? Assuredly
nothing can be imagined more entirely and un-
speakably false than the notion that the cry
against the Church is the cry of religion. If it
be so, how comes it that the scoffer and blas-
phemer join " their most sweet voices so
readily in the chorus ? The Dissenters are
most anxious to convince the world that they
are conscientiously prohibited from touching the
Church revenues, even if they had them in their
grasp. We are bound to believe them. Yet
we cannot but remember that just two hundred
years ago the same sanctimonious and disin-
terested profession was made ; and that, after
Laud had been brought to the block, there
were sectarians found whose scruples did not
hinder their acceptance of such ecclesiastical re-
venues as the liberal Government of that day
had not previously appropriated.—Morn. Post.

We learn from a correspondent that the
Trades' Unions are spreading to a fearful extent in
this county. Much as we are grieved at such intelli-
gence, we confess it does not come upon with surprise.
It is but the natural working of a system, the seeds of
which were sown and fostered under the influence and
patronage of his Majesty's ministers. "As ye sow, so
also shall ye reap," is a maxim of high and unquestion-
able authority ; and we fear, in this case, too soon about
to be verified. Secret combinations amongst the citi-
zens are the surest indication of the downfall of a king-
dom. The cankerworm is at the heart of the British
oak-=its noblest branches visibly wither and decay ;
and, in a few short years, it must be uprooted and torn
from its foundation, without some friendly hand sup-
plies a speedy and powerful remedy. Unless means
be found to suppress the secret societies forming in the
different provinces of the kingdom, no man's life or
property can be safe for a moment, and England may
expect ere long the same sanguinary measures that are
at once the disgrace and terror of the Irish people.—
Sorneridshire Gazette.