Star.
London, England, 1829-06-29 00:00:00

PRICE :±EVRNPENCE•

ment of the privilege in facilitating alienation, will be
almost purely beneficial.
It has been suggested, that in analogy to the law of
Scotland, and of some foreign States, founded upon the
Issucupio of the civil law, another and still longer period
of lint.tation should likewise be established, alter which
enjoyment by a person as proprietor tinder a stmp-
a cc, regularly purporting to pass the fee simple,
should give an absolute title, without regarding when
the right of the adverse claimant may have accrued ;
bet such an enactment seems unsuitable to this country,
where estates for life and long terms of year; so gene-
rally prevail; it might cncoutage the fabrication of
filse titles ;and it would be a dangerous departure from
the general rule, that possession shalt be regarded as
adverse to any particular right only from the time when
that right accrued in possession.
Yet tan this general rule, though foundeiiort obvious
principles of justice, we have to propose an esception
from which w e anticipate much benefit to use commu-
nity. One of the chief insecurities of titles irises from
the risk of estates tail, in remainder of reversion, corn•
ing into possession after prior tenants in tail and their
:Isaac have been barred by adverse posse:sic% or per-
haps for a long petiod have lost all interest in the pre.
msisiee by the creation of *hat is technically called a
.base fee. that is, an absAute estate of intim native alien-
ate like a fee siolise doting the continuance of the
textile of the tenant in tail, but which will expire on the
failure of issue, so as to give effect to the remainders
over.
These base fees we not nnfrequently. created by a
tenant in tail in remainder expectant on a loft estate, it
being in his power t..) do so without the concurrence of
the tenant for life. He may afterwards die without
his remainder having come into possession, or he s'id
his issue may omit to suffer a recovery, and the estate
expectant op the base tee in course of titre may be for-
gotten; or, boas the niceties le:tuned in suffering a lea
cover y, nawithataticling an attempt made for that pur-
pose, the remainders over may not have been well
barred. It any of these cases, on failure of the issue in
tail, a new right of entry accrues to the remainder-
; and this Name may itaprn centuries atter there
has been an adverse possession against the first tenant
in tail and . his. issue, or after three has been, a rightful
possession under a conveyance by them. A 'recent in-
stance was proved to us of a chairs elf ctually made
under an estate tail which had vested in possession im-
mediately before the rr eking of the clsim, although
created in the reign of Elizatseth.
The possible existence of these latent entails leads to
great expense upon almost every transfer of real pro-
perty. Not only is an abstract showing the title for
neatly a century necessary; but, it it appears that the
property was in settlement at the commencement of
such period, earlier title deeds are required, for, the
purpose of showing whit estates till in eemairider had
been created...and whether they had been eff ctually
barred. No length of enjoym nt gives ab.ointe seen-
ity to possession ; and upon, alienation titles. to which
there is no substantial objection, are found unmarket.
able, and a purchaser. wh.o repeats of his b again ts.ta o
often furnished with a pretext for
.ftauslulently ie-
flouncing it. . .
To get rid of these serious evils, we propose that
when there has been an adverse possession which bars
a tenant its tail Who had. a tight to the po-sesSion, and
his issue, or. when there has been possession for twenty
years pottier a base fee created by 'retain i . tail, the re-
mainders 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 encou-
ragement might thus be given to tei:ants in tail in re-
meander creating a base tee (which certainly ir, whilst
it endures, a very inconvenient estate), the objection
!nay be obviated by fizin,z, as has been propo•ed to us
by a Gentleman of the highest legal attaii.ments, the
longer teem of forty years as the period ci• limitation
in this particular case. We think, however, the objec-
tion to the shorter period not sufficient in make the
extetisii-tt expedient, thissgh, if it v ere adopted, the ad-
vantages we have in view would still in a great measure
be attained.
We do not think that any %vines injury will be done
to remainder-men by this proposal being carried into
effect, while it will ceitatoly li.ve a powei NI tendency
to quiet possession and to lessen expense, litigation,
and fraud, upon the transfer of real pt.-petty. The in-
wrest of a remainder-man in tail expectant upon an
estate tail in possession is of very unsubstantial descrip-
tion. It may be extinguished at any time by the act
of the tenant in tail in I;rissession, and if t r rem sincer-
!man is barred alter the prescribed adserse possession,
Or right' ul.possessioe under the base free, he is only in
the same situation in which he would have been if art
act had been done which might lawfully hare been
done at any time during the prescribed peried.. In
analogy to a modern practice, we might have pinioned
that, after twenty fears possession against or under the
first tenant io tail, a Jury sh:wld be directed to presume
Vial a recovery had been suffered by him or his issue ;
but we venture humbly to express our disrpi.rohatiiin
of presumptions known to be contra, y to the fact, and
our preference of the plan of dire t legislative euset-
nsent. We are encouraged to propose this important
innovate not abridging the right of the tentainder man
in tail.by the almost unanimous cytnion of those whom
we have consulted, or who have tavouted us with any
communication upon the subj ct.
Great practical difficulty . has arisen in determining
what is adverse possession, and..when it shall be con •
sidered to have begun. This must generally be left as
a question of fact for a Joey; hut these ate some tulrs
of law. puesawptiones furls et dejurr; which absolutely
prevent the possession from being considered adverse,
and the expediency of which isz'very qpestionals:e, as
they do not seem necessary for pie.eiying rightful
claims, and therreatly impair the hedingtendency
of the Statutes of Limitation. .
One of these rules is, that a posseision whictubegan
rightfully cannot be considered as having Immo
,wrongful, That is, adverse u against the rightfialoireer,
by being merely 'cc:Droved after the right of thi party
in possession bas determined. It appears to Ya 3. that it
should be open to a Jury to find that come possession
began Gem the determination of the rightful estate of
the party.... . .' 1
Another rule is, tZt in case of a lease, ASPitfeepoll-
Session so as to bar . reversioner ;foes. clot. reuaurenew
till the expiration ofttbp term. Where rent is swerved
on a lease, we cotlsider it more. reasonable
limitation shoed run from the titaisten the repfkegan
to be melted by a person claiming oltherielis:en that
c •