so many incumbrancers, each antagonistic to those in priority to him, so that all who had a substantial interest in the cultivation and welfare of the estate were destitute of any authority over it. Concert in a system of management was almost impossible, and at length Hercules was invoked, and appeared in the shape of the Encumbered Estates Court. It is the difficulty of restraining the growth of puisne incumbrancers on registered land that has been the main objection with many thoughtful lawyers to a registration of title. For a further development of this view I may refer you to Mr. H. R. Droop's paper "On certain beneficial Effects of the Rule of Tacking," read before the Juridical Society in July, 1862, and published in their "Transactions."

It is provided by section 78 of the Bill that on the death of a sole proprietor, or the survivor of several, the real representative appointed by his will, or if he appoints none, by the Court, shall be registered; in the meantime the estate shall devolve at law as it would have done if not registered.

I have already mentioned the provision for a caveat entitling the cautioner to notice of an intended dealing with land on the register. There is a further provision for an inhibition to be issued by the court on the application of any person interested, "inhibiting for a time, or until the occurrence of an event, to be specified in the order, or generally until further order, any dealing by the registered proprietor with any registered land, lease, or charge" (s. 91). There is also, in section 102, a provision for an entry in the nature either of a caveat or of an inhibition, on the application of the registered owner, at the registrar's discretion without the authority of the court. There is also power, in the case of joint owners, to enter a restraint on alienation, except by order of the court, when the number of joint owners is reduced below a specified number.

The provision in section 117 for cases where a title to, or interest in registered land has been acquired by adverse possession or enjoyment, seems to be insufficient. It gives authority to the court to order a rectification of the register

after a court of competent jurisdiction has decided in favour of the title so acquired. But this may never happen, because the person in possession cannot obtain the decision of a court unless his title is disputed. The provision in the Bill of 1873 seems to be preferable, but it would be better still to allow any adverse title to be entered as a claim, which may in time become a registered title, in the manner I shall presently explain.

You will have seen that the Bill provides for the registration of the absolute ownership in fee, of a leasehold title, and of a title in dower or by the curtesy, subject or not to charges and conditions of certain kinds; but it does not allow of the entry of notices of a trust or duty, or of any qualification of the absolute power of disposition, except those which I have mentioned. Now when the registered proprietor is a trustee or mortgagee, it is essential to make some provision for giving notice to purchasers, and to the registrar, that the registered ownership does not carry with it the unlimited powers of disposition which belong to a beneficial owner. The trustee or mortgagee must be registered as trustee or mortgagee, and the Act must define the powers of disposition which will be incident to his ownership so qualified, subject to any qualification or enlargement stated in the register. Otherwise a trustee might settle the trust estate on his marriage, and there would be no relief against the objects of the settlement, as I read the provision of section 124, which preserves the equitable jurisdiction to give relief against fraud-a section from which, I may observe, some words seem to have dropped out. Notice of an equitable estate is not fraud.

Having endeavoured to give you a general notion of the scheme of registration embodied in the Bill, I have now to point out what I consider to be its principal defect—a defect, as I think, of great moment, but easy remediable. It is, that provision is made for a false instead of a true statement of title. The object of the Bill, upon which I assume we are agreed, is to establish a record of title. A record of title differs from a record of title-deeds, as a statue differs from

the marble block out of which it has been cut.

The one is

the perfect work cleared from the rubbish of the workshop, the other is the rude mass of materials upon which the artist has not yet operated.

A perfect record of title should show the state of the title at the date of the last entry on it, and it should show nothing more. But for different purposes in respect of the same property or title, information differing in particularity or kind may be required. There is no difficulty in providing a record of title that shall, for whatever purpose it may be consulted, yield to each applicant the kind and amount of information he needs and is entitled to, and nothing more. Let the purpose be the purchase of the fee. What is the ultimate result of the labours of a purchaser's solicitor and conveyancer upon the investigation of the vendor's title? The cream of it is contained in the last words of the conveyancer's last opinion, "I am of opinion that a good title, according to the contract, is shown in A and B, with the concurrence of C and D." The conveyance drawn upon this opinion may be in these words, "A and B, with the consent of C and D, for £ -paid to A and B by E, convey Clay Farm to E and his heirs." With respect to every subject of ownership we can say, if we know the title, that some person or persons in esse or posse could make a perfect title to it. When the concurrence of several persons is necessary, we can generally classify them so as to say that the ownership or power of disposition of the fee is vested in one or more of them, either absolutely or subject to some more limited interest in the other or others. Let us call the limited interest a charge. For the purpose of ascertaining the necessary parties to a perfect conveyance it is sufficient to know who can dispose of the property subject to the charge, and who can release the charge. An entry on the register, therefore, that A and B are owners of Clay Farm, subject to a charge in C and D, will give to a purchaser all the information he needs for the purpose of his purchase. If the first entry of the title on the register is not of sufficient antiquity,

he must investigate the earlier title according to the method now in use. For the purpose of the sale it is unnecessary to define the interest of C and D. It is sufficient to describe it as a charge. If it can be compendiously particularized, as in the case of a lease, a mortgage, an annuity, &c., the reference to it will be more descriptive.

But the interest constituting the charge is itself a subject of ownership, and is to be so entered on the register for the purposes of alienation. It is distinguished by a symbol of figures or letters, and identified by a reference to the document which has created it, as thus :-" Charge F Z 47, created by instrument, so marked, dated 1874," the instrument or an authenticated copy being deposited in the office.

Notices of interests, which are placed on the register without the consent of the registered owner, may be divided into two classes-notices and claims. A notice is an intimation that a person who gives his name and address desires to have notice of any intended disposition of a given subject, and a short delay sufficient to enable him to communicate with the proposed transferees, or to apply to the Court for its interference.

A claim is an assertion of a title or interest, more or less adverse to the registered title, to which all persons dealing with the registered owner are bound to attend. The costs occasioned by an unfounded claim will be paid by him who registered it. A claim well founded and supported by evidence of enjoyment (as a claim of title by adverse possession under the Statute of Limitation or by prescription), will, when it is established to the satisfaction of the registrar, be registered as an ownership. All details respecting the claim (with which a purchaser will have no concern, if the claimant concurs in the sale), may be set out in a separate document deposited in the office, to be referred to in case of need. Now under one or other of these four kinds of entry on the register-ownerships, charges, notices, and claimsevery kind of interest in land may be represented and protected on the register without presenting any further impedi

ment to alienation than the actual state of the title requires; and I venture to suggest, that the Land Titles Bill should be amended so as to provide for the entry of notices and claims without any restriction. For a more detailed explanation of this scheme (which is that of the late Robert Wilson), I may refer you to a paper on "Impediments to the transfer of land," read about a year ago before the Juridical Society. One of the most formidable objections to a general register of titles is the expense which, it is suggested, it would occasion in small transactions. I believe that there is much exaggeration in what has been said on this point, and that it would be easy to provide for the registration of small purchases without any additional expense. Those who desire the luxury of a certified title may fairly be required to pay for it, but the cost of the mere registration of current transactions for the benefit of posterity, should be paid out of the Imperial revenue; but I will not detain you by dwelling further on this part of the subject.

The Real Property Limitation Bill and the Real Property (Vendors and Purchasers) Bill are included in the notice for this meeting, and are before you for discussion. I think they will effect substantial improvements in the law. I shall not trouble you with any observations on them beyond this, that the 7th sub-section of the 2nd section of the Vendors and Purchasers Bill appears to be incomplete, inasmuch as the defect of title created by the existing Registry Acts in the case of a devise by a bill which is not registered within six months after the testator's death, is declared not to be such a defect as a purchaser can insist on, but is notwithstanding left to be in substance as much a defect as it has hitherto been.