Chapter VII: Part 7

_Laws of other Countries._--It is impossible here to deal with the systems of land tenure in force in other countries. Only the question of the legal relations between landlord and tenant can be touched upon. In France, the Code Civil recognizes two such relationships, the letting to hire of houses (_bail à loyer_) and the letting to farm of rural properties (_bail à ferme_). To a certain extent, both forms of tenancy are governed by the same rules. The letting may be either written or verbal. But a verbal lease presents this disadvantage that, if it is unperformed and one of the parties denies its existence, it cannot be proved by witnesses. The party who denies the letting can only be put to his oath (Arts. 1714-1715). It may further be noted that in the case of a verbal lease, notice to quit is regulated by the custom of the place (Art. 1736). The tenant or farmer has the right of underletting or assigning his lease, in the absence of prohibiting stipulation (Art. 1717). The lessor is bound by the nature of his contract and without the need of any particular stipulation (i.) to deliver to the lessee the thing hired in a good state of repair; (ii.) to maintain it in a state to serve the purpose for which it has been hired; (iii.) to secure to the lessee peaceable enjoyment during the continuance of the lease (Arts. 1719-1720). He is bound to warrant the lessee against, and to indemnify him for, any loss arising from any faults or defects in the thing hired which prevent its use, even though he was not aware of them at the time of the lease (Art. 1721). If during the continuance of the letting, the thing hired is entirely destroyed by accident, the lease is cancelled. In case of partial destruction, the lessee may, according to circumstances, demand either a diminution of the price, or the cancellation of the lease. In neither case is there ground for damages (Art. 1722). The lessor cannot, during the lease, change the form of the thing hired (Art. 1723). The lessee is bound, on his side (i.) to use the thing hired like a good head of a household (_bon père de famille_), in accordance with the express or presumed purpose of the hiring; (ii.) to pay the price of the hiring at the times agreed (Art. 1728). On breach of the former obligation, the lease may be judicially cancelled (Art. 1729). As to the consequences of breach of the latter, see RENT. If a statement of the condition of the property (_état des lieux_) has been prepared, the lessee must give it up such as he received it according to the statement, except what has perished or decayed by age or by means of _force majeure_ (Art. 1730). In the absence of an _état des lieux_, the lessee is presumed to have received the thing hired in a good state of tenantable repair, and must so yield it up, saving proof to the contrary (Art. 1731). He is liable for injuries or losses happening during his enjoyment, unless he prove that they have taken place without his fault (Art. 1732); in particular, for loss by fire unless he show that the fire happened by accident, _force majeure_, or defect of construction, or through communication from a neighbouring house (Art. 1733). The lessee is liable for injuries and losses happening by the act of persons belonging to his house or of his sub-tenants (Art. 1735). A lease terminates (i.) at the expiration of the prescribed term (Art. 1737)--if at that period the lessee remains and is left in possession, there is, in the case of written leases, a tacit renewal (_tacite reconduction_) of the lease as a verbal lease (Arts. 1738-1739); (ii.) by the loss of the thing hired and by the default of the lessor or lessee in the fulfilment of their respective obligations (Art. 1741), but (iii.) not by the death either of the lessor or of the lessee (1742). The conditions of EJECTMENT are stated under that heading. The special rules (Arts. 1752-1762) relative to the hire of houses are touched upon in LODGER AND LODGINGS. It only remains here to refer to those applicable to leases to farm. The lessee is bound to stock the farm with the cattle and implements necessary for its husbandry (Art. 1766), and to stack in the places appointed for the purpose in the lease (Art. 1767). A lessee, who farms on condition of dividing the produce with the lessor, can only underlet or assign if he is expressly empowered to do so by the lease (Art. 1763). The lessee must give notice to the lessor of any acts of usurpation committed on the property (Art. 1768). If at least half of the harvest in any year is destroyed by accident, the lessee (a) in the case of a lease for several years, obtains, at the end of his lease, a refund of rent, by way of indemnity, unless he has been indemnified by preceding harvests; (b) in the case of a lease for a year only, may secure a proportional abatement of the current rent. No refund is payable if the produce was severed before the accident, unless the lessor was entitled to a portion of it, when he must bear his share of the loss, provided the lessee was not _in morâ_ as regards the delivery of the lessor's portion. The lessee has no right to a refund when the cause of damage was existing and known at the date of the lease (Arts. 1769-1771). Liability for loss by "accidents" may be thrown on the lessee by express stipulation (Art. 1772). "Accidents" here mean ordinary accidents only, such as hail, lightning or frost, and the lessee will not be answerable for loss caused by extraordinary accidents such as war or floods, unless he has been made liable for all accidents, foreseen or unforeseen (Art. 1773). A verbal lease is deemed to be for the term necessary to enable the lessee to gather in all the produce, thus for a year in the case of a meadow or vineyard; in the case of lands leased in tillage, where they are divided into shifts or seasons, for as many years as there are shifts (Art. 1774). The outgoing must leave for the incoming tenant convenient housing and other facilities for the labours of the year following; the incoming must procure for the outgoing tenant conveniences for the consumption of his fodder and for the harvests remaining to be got in. In either case the custom of the place is to be followed (Art. 1777). The outgoing tenant must leave the straw and manure of the year, if he received them at the beginning of his lease, and even where he has not so received them, the owner may retain them according to valuation (Art. 1778). A word must be added as to letting by cheptel (_bail à cheptel_)--a contract by which one of the parties gives to the other a stock of cattle to keep under conditions agreed on between them (Art. 1800). There are several varieties of the contract, (i.) simple cheptel (_cheptel simple_) in which the whole stock is supplied by the lessor--the lessee taking half the profit and bearing half the loss (Art. 1804); (ii.) cheptel by moiety (_cheptel à moietié_)--here each of the contracting parties furnishes half of the stock, which remains common for profit or loss (Art. 1818); (iii.) cheptel given to a farmer (_fermier_) or participating cultivator (_colon partiaire_)--in the cheptel given to the farmer (also called _cheptel de fer_) stock of a value equal to the estimated price of the stock given must be left at the expiry of the lease (Art. 1821); cheptel given to the participating cultivator resembles simple cheptel, except in points of detail (Arts. 1827-1830); (iv.) the term "cheptel" is also improperly applied to a contract by which cattle are given to be housed and fed--here the lessor retains the ownership, but has only the profit of the calves (Art. 1831).

The French system just described is in force in its entirety in Belgium (Code Civil, Arts. 1713 et seq.) and has been followed to some extent in Italy (Civil Code, Arts. 1568 et seq.), Spain (Civil Code, Arts 1542 et seq.), and Portugal (Civil Code, Arts. 1298 et seq., 1595 et seq.). In all these countries there are varieties of emphyteutic tenure; and in Italy the mezzadria or metayer system (see Civil Code, Arts. 1647 et seq.) exists. The German Civil Code adopts the distinction between _bail à loyer_ (Miehl, Arts. 535 et seq.) and _bail à ferme_ (Pacht, Arts. 581 et seq.). Dutch law also (Civil Code, Arts. 1583 et seq.) is similar to the French.

The Indian law of landlord and tenant is described in the article INDIAN LAW. The laws of the various British colonies on the subject are too numerous and too different to be dealt with here. In Mauritius, the provisions of the Code Civil are in force without modification. In Quebec (Civil Code, Arts. 1605 et seq.) and St Lucia (Civil Code, Arts. 1512 et seq.) they have been reproduced by the local law. In many of the colonies, parts of the English law of landlord and tenant, common law and statutory, have been introduced by local enactments (cf. British Guiana, Ord. 4 of 1846; Jamaica, 1 Vict. c. 26). In others (e.g. Victoria, Landlord and Tenant Act 1890, No. 1108; Ontario, Rev. Stats. 1897, c. 170) consolidating statutes have been passed.

AUTHORITIES.--English Law: Wolstenholme, Brinton and Cherry,
_Conveyancing and Settled Land Acts_ (London, 9th ed., 1905); Hood and
Challis, _Conveyancing and Settled Land Acts_ (London, 7th ed., 1909);
Foà, on _Landlord and Tenant_ (London, 4th ed., 1907); Woodfall, on
_Landlord and Tenant_ (London, 18th ed., 1907); Fawcett, _Landlord and
Tenant_ (London, 3rd ed., 1905). Scots Law: Hunter, on _Landlord and
Tenant_ (Edinburgh, 4th ed., 1876); Rankine, on _Land Ownership_
(Edinburgh, 3rd ed., 1891); Rankine, on _Leases_ (Edinburgh, 2nd ed.,
1893); Hunter, _Landlord and Tenant_ (4th ed. G. Guthrie, Edinburgh,
1876). Irish Law: Kelly's _Statute Law of Landlord and Tenant in
Ireland_ (Dublin, 1898); Barton and Cherry's _Land Act 1896_ (Dublin,
1896); Quill, Hamilton and Longworth, _Irish Land Acts of 1903 and
1904_ (Dublin, 1904). American Law: Bouvier, _Law Dictionary_ (ed.
Rawle) (London, 1897); McAdam, _Rights, Remedies and Liabilities of
Landlord and Tenant_ (New York, 1900); Wood, _Law of Landlord and
Tenant_ (New York, 1888). Foreign and Colonial Laws: Field,
_Landholding and the relation of Landlord and Tenant in various
Countries; Ruling Cases_ (American Notes), (London and Boston,
1894-1901). (A. W. R.)

LANDON, CHARLES PAUL (1760-1826), French painter and art-author, was born at Nonant in 1760. He entered the studio of Regnault, and won the first prize of the Academy in 1792. After his return from Italy, disturbed by the Revolution, he seems to have abandoned painting for letters, but he began to exhibit in 1795, and continued to do so at various intervals up to 1814. His "Leda" obtained an award of merit in 1801, and is now in the Louvre. His "Mother's Lesson," "Paul and Virginia Bathing," and "Daedalus and Icarus" have been engraved; but his works on painting and painters, which reach nearly one hundred volumes, form his chief title to be remembered. In spite of a complete want of critical accuracy, an extreme carelessness in the biographical details, and the feebleness of the line engravings by which they are illustrated, Landon's _Annales du Musée_, in 33 vols., form a vast repertory of compositions by masters of every age and school of permanent value. Landon also published _Lives of Celebrated Painters_, in 22 vols.; _An Historical Description of Paris_, 2 vols.; a _Description of London_, with 42 plates; and descriptions of the Luxembourg, of the Giustiniani collection, and of the gallery of the duchesse de Berry. He died at Paris in 1826.

LANDON, LETITIA ELIZABETH (1802-1838), English poet and novelist, better known by her initials L. E. L. than as Miss Landon or Mrs Maclean, was descended from an old Herefordshire family, and was born at Chelsea on the 14th of August 1802. She went to a school in Chelsea where Miss Mitford also received her education. Her father, an army agent, amassed a large property, which he lost by speculation shortly before his death. About 1815 the Landons made the acquaintance of William Jerdan, and Letitia began her contributions to the _Literary Gazette_ and to various Christmas annuals. She also published some volumes of verse, which soon won for her a wide literary fame. The gentle melancholy and romantic sentiment her writings embodied suited the taste of the period, and would in any case have secured her the sympathy and approval of a wide class of readers. She displays richness of fancy and aptness of language, but her work suffered from hasty production, and has not stood the test of time. The large sums she earned by her literary labours were expended on the support of her family. An engagement to John Forster, it is said, was broken off through the intervention of scandalmongers. In June 1838 she married George Maclean, governor of the Gold Coast, but she only survived her marriage, which proved to be very unhappy, by a few months. She died on the 15th of October 1838 at Cape Coast from an overdose of prussic acid, which, it is supposed, was taken accidentally.

For some time L. E. L. was joint editor of the _Literary Gazette_. Her
first volume of poetry appeared in 1820 under the title The _Fate of
Adelaide_, and was followed by other collections of verses with
similar titles. She also wrote several novels, of which the best is
_Ethel Churchill_ (1837). Various editions of her _Poetical Works_
have been published since her death, one in 1880 with an introductory
memoir by W. B. Scott. _The Life and Literary Remains of Letilia
Elizabeth Landon_, by Laman Blanchard, appeared in 1841, and a second
edition in 1855.

LANDOR, WALTER SAVAGE (1775-1864), English writer, eldest son of Walter Landor and his wife Elizabeth Savage, was born at Warwick on the 30th of January 1775. [He was sent to Rugby school, but was removed at the headmaster's request and studied privately with Mr Langley, vicar of Ashbourne. In 1793 he entered Trinity College, Cambridge. He adopted republican principles and in 1794 fired a gun at the windows of a Tory for whom he had an aversion. He was rusticated for a year, and, although the authorities were willing to condone the offence, he refused to return. The affair led to a quarrel with his father in which Landor expressed his intention of leaving home for ever. He was, however, reconciled with his family through the efforts of his friend Dorothea Lyttelton. He entered no profession, but his father allowed him £150 a year, and he was free to live at home or not as he pleased.]

In 1795 appeared in a small volume, divided into three books, _The Poems of Walter Savage Landor_, and, in pamphlet form of nineteen pages, an anonymous _Moral Epistle, respectfully dedicated to Earl Stanhope_. No poet at the age of twenty ever had more vigour of style and fluency of verse; nor perhaps has any ever shown such masterly command of epigram and satire, made vivid and vital by the purest enthusiasm and most generous indignation. Three years later appeared the first edition of the first great work which was to inscribe his name for ever among the great names in English poetry. The second edition of _Gebir_ appeared in 1803, with a text corrected of grave errors and improved by magnificent additions. About the same time the whole poem was also published in a Latin form, which for might and melody of line, for power and perfection of language, must always dispute the palm of precedence with the English version. [His father's death in 1805 put him in possession of an independent fortune. Landor settled in Bath. Here in 1808 he met Southey, and the mutual appreciation of the two poets led to a warm friendship.] In 1808, under an impulse not less heroic than that which was afterwards to lead Byron to a glorious death in redemption of Greece and his own good fame, Landor, then aged thirty-three, left England for Spain as a volunteer to serve in the national army against Napoleon at the head of a regiment raised and supported at his sole expense. After some three months' campaigning came the affair of Cintra and its disasters; "his troop," in the words of his biographer, "dispersed or melted away, and he came back to England in as great a hurry as he had left it," but bringing with him the honourable recollection of a brave design unselfishly attempted, and the material in his memory for the sublimest poem published in our language, between the last masterpiece of Milton and the first masterpiece of Shelley--one equally worthy to stand unchallenged beside either for poetic perfection as well as moral majesty--the lofty tragedy of _Count Julian_, which appeared in 1812, without the name of its author. No comparable work is to be found in English poetry between the date of _Samson Agonistes_ and the date of _Prometheus Unbound_; and with both these great works it has some points of greatness in common. The superhuman isolation of agony and endurance which encircles and exalts the hero is in each case expressed with equally appropriate magnificence of effect. The style of _Count Julian_, if somewhat deficient in dramatic ease and the fluency of natural dialogue, has such might and purity and majesty of speech as elsewhere we find only in Milton so long and so steadily sustained.

In May 1811 Landor had suddenly married Miss Julia Thuillier, with whose looks he had fallen in love at first sight in a ball-room at Bath; and in June they settled for a while at Llanthony Abbey in Monmouthshire, from whence he was worried in three years' time by the combined vexation of neighbours and tenants, lawyers and lords-lieutenant; not before much toil and money had been nobly wasted on attempts to improve the sterility of the land, to relieve the wretchedness and raise the condition of the peasantry. He left England for France at first, but after a brief residence at Tours took up his abode for three years at Como; "and three more wandering years he passed," says his biographer, "between Pisa and Pistoja, before he pitched his tent in Florence in 1821."

In 1835 he had an unfortunate difference with his wife which ended in a complete separation. In 1824 appeared the first series of his _Imaginary Conversations_, in 1826 "the second edition, corrected and enlarged"; a supplementary third volume was added in 1828; and in 1829 the second series was given to the world. Not until 1846 was a fresh instalment added, in the second volume of his collected and selected works. During the interval he had published his three other most famous and greatest books in prose: _The Citation and Examination of William Shakespeare_ (1834), _Pericles and Aspasia_ (1836), _The Pentameron_ (1837). To the last of these was originally appended _The Pentalogia_, containing five of the very finest among his shorter studies in dramatic poetry. In 1847 he published his most important Latin work, _Poemata et inscriptiones_, comprising, with large additions, the main contents of two former volumes of idyllic, satiric, elegiac and lyric verse; and in the same golden year of his poetic life appeared the very crown and flower of its manifold labours, the _Hellenics of Waller Savage Landor_, enlarged and completed. Twelve years later this book was re-issued, with additions of more or less value, with alterations generally to be regretted, and with omissions invariably to be deplored. In 1853 he put forth _The Last Fruit off an Old Tree_, containing fresh conversations, critical and controversial essays, miscellaneous epigrams, lyrics and occasional poems of various kind and merit, closing with _Five Scenes_ on the martyrdom of Beatrice Cenci, unsurpassed even by their author himself for noble and heroic pathos, for subtle and genial, tragic and profound, ardent and compassionate insight into character, with consummate mastery of dramatic and spiritual truth. In 1856 he published _Antony and Octavius--Scenes for the Study_, twelve consecutive poems in dialogue which alone would suffice to place him high among the few great masters of historic drama.

In 1858 appeared a metrical miscellany bearing the title of _Dry Sticks Fagoted by W. S. Landor_, and containing among other things graver and lighter certain epigrammatic and satirical attacks which reinvolved him in the troubles of an action for libel; and in July of the same year he returned for the last six years of his life to Italy, which he had left for England in 1835. [He was advised to make over his property to his family, on whom he was now dependent. They appear to have refused to make him an allowance unless he returned to England. By the exertions of Robert Browning an allowance was secured. Browning settled him first at Siena and then at Florence.] Embittered and distracted by domestic dissensions, if brightened and relieved by the affection and veneration of friends and strangers, this final period of his troubled and splendid career came at last to a quiet end on the 17th of September 1864. In the preceding year he had published a last volume of _Heroic Idyls, with Additional Poems_, English and Latin,--the better part of them well worthy to be indeed the "last fruit" of a genius which after a life of eighty-eight years had lost nothing of its majestic and pathetic power, its exquisite and exalted loveliness.

A complete list of Landor's writings, published or privately printed, in English, Latin and Italian, including pamphlets, fly-sheets and occasional newspaper correspondence on political or literary questions, it would be difficult to give anywhere and impossible to give here. From nineteen almost to ninety his intellectual and literary activity was indefatigably incessant; but, herein at least like Charles Lamb, whose cordial admiration he so cordially returned, he could not write a note of three lines which did not bear the mark of his "Roman hand" in its matchless and inimitable command of a style at once the most powerful and the purest of his age. The one charge which can ever seriously be brought and maintained against it is that of such occasional obscurity or difficulty as may arise from excessive strictness in condensation of phrase and expurgation of matter not always superfluous, and sometimes almost indispensable. His English prose and his Latin verse are perhaps more frequently and more gravely liable to this charge than either his English verse or his Latin prose. At times it is well-nigh impossible for an eye less keen and swift, a scholarship less exquisite and ready than his own, to catch the precise direction and follow the perfect course of his rapid thought and radiant utterance. This apparently studious pursuit and preference of the most terse and elliptic expression which could be found for anything he might have to say could not but occasionally make even so sovereign a master of two great languages appear "dark with excess of light"; but from no former master of either tongue in prose or verse was ever the quality of real obscurity, of loose and nebulous incertitude, more utterly alien or more naturally remote. There is nothing of cloud or fog about the path on which he leads us; but we feel now and then the want of a bridge or a handrail; we have to leap from point to point of narrative or argument without the usual help of a connecting plank. Even in his dramatic works, where least of all it should have been found, this lack of visible connexion or sequence in details of thought or action is too often a source of sensible perplexity. In his noble trilogy on the history of Giovanna queen of Naples it is sometimes actually difficult to realize on a first reading what has happened or is happening, or how, or why, or by what agency--a defect alone sufficient, but unhappily sufficient in itself, to explain the too general ignorance of a work so rich in subtle and noble treatment of character, so sure and strong in its grasp and rendering of "high actions and high passions," so rich in humour and in pathos, so royally serene in its commanding power upon the tragic mainsprings of terror and of pity. As a poet, he may be said on the whole to stand midway between Byron and Shelley--about as far above the former as below the latter. If we except Catullus and Simonides, it might be hard to match and it would be impossible to overmatch the flawless and blameless yet living and breathing beauty of his most perfect elegies, epigrams or epitaphs. As truly as prettily was he likened by Leigh Hunt "to a stormy mountain pine which should produce lilies." His passionate compassion, his bitter and burning pity for all wrongs endured in all the world, found only their natural and inevitable outlet in his lifelong defence or advocacy of tyrannicide as the last resource of baffled justice, the last discharge of heroic duty. His tender and ardent love of children, of animals and of flowers makes fragrant alike the pages of his writing and the records of his life. He was as surely the most gentle and generous as the most headstrong and hot-headed of heroes or of men. Nor ever was any man's best work more thoroughly imbued and informed with evidence of his noblest qualities. His loyalty and liberality of heart were as inexhaustible as his bounty and beneficence of hand. Praise and encouragement, deserved or undeserved, came yet more readily to his lips than challenge or defiance. Reviled and ridiculed by Lord Byron, he retorted on the offender living less readily and less warmly than he lamented and extolled him dead. On the noble dramatic works of his brother Robert he lavished a magnificence of sympathetic praise which his utmost self-estimate would never have exacted for his own. Age and the lapse of time could neither heighten nor lessen the fulness of this rich and ready generosity. To the poets of his own and of the next generation he was not readier to do honour than to those of a later growth, and not seldom of deserts far lower and far lesser claims than theirs. That he was not unconscious of his own, and avowed it with the frank simplicity of nobler times, is not more evident or more certain than that in comparison with his friends and fellows he was liable rather to undervalue than to overrate himself. He was a classic, and no formalist; the wide range of his just and loyal admiration had room for a genius so far from classical as Blake's. Nor in his own highest mood or method of creative as of critical work was he a classic only, in any narrow or exclusive sense of the term. On either side, immediately or hardly below his mighty masterpiece of _Pericles and Aspasia_, stand the two scarcely less beautiful and vivid studies of medieval Italy and Shakespearean England. The very finest flower of his immortal dialogues is probably to be found in the single volume comprising only "Imaginary Conversations of Greeks and Romans"; his utmost command of passion and pathos may be tested by its transcendent success in the distilled and concentrated tragedy of _Tiberius and Vipsania_, where for once he shows a quality more proper to romantic than classical imagination--the subtle and sublime and terrible power to enter the dark vestibule of distraction, to throw the whole force of his fancy, the whole fire of his spirit, into the "shadowing passion" (as Shakespeare calls it) of gradually imminent insanity. Yet, if this and all other studies from ancient history or legend could be subtracted from the volume of his work, enough would be left whereon to rest the foundation of a fame which time could not sensibly impair. (A. C. S.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--See _The Works and Life of Walter Savage Landor_ (8
vols., 1846), the life being the work of John Forster. Another edition
of his works (1891-1893), edited by C. G. Crump, comprises _Imaginary
Conversations_, _Poems_, _Dialogues in Verse and Epigrams_ and _The
Longer Prose Works_. His _Letters and other Unpublished Writings_ were
edited by Mr Stephen Wheeler (1897). There are many volumes of
selections from his works, notably one (1882) for the "Golden
Treasury" series, edited by Sidney Colvin, who also contributed the
monograph on _Landor_ (1881) in the "English Men of Letters" series. A
bibliography of his works, many of which are very rare, is included in
Sir Leslie Stephen's article on Landor in the _Dictionary of National
Biography_ (vol. xxxii., 1892). (M. Br.)

LANDOUR, a hill station and sanatorium in India, in Dehra Dun district of the United Provinces, adjoining Mussoorie. Pop. (1901) 1720, rising to 3700 in the hot season. Since 1827 it has been a convalescent station for European troops, with a school for their children.

LAND REGISTRATION, a legal process connected with the transfer of landed property, comprising two forms--registration of deeds and registration of title, which may be best described as a species of machinery for assisting a purchaser or mortgagee in his inquiries as to his vendor's or mortgagor's title previously to completing his dealing, and for securing his own position afterwards. The expediency of making inquiry into the vendor's title before completing a purchase of land (and the case of a mortgage is precisely similar) is obvious. In the case of goods possession may ordinarily be relied on as proof of full ownership; in the case of land, the person in ostensible possession is very seldom the owner, being usually only a tenant, paying rent to someone else. Even the person to whom the rent is paid is in many cases--probably, in England, in most cases--not the full owner, but only a life owner, or a trustee, whose powers of disposing of the property are of a strictly limited nature. Again, goods are very seldom the subject of a mortgage, whereas land has from time immemorial been the frequent subject of this class of transaction. Evidently, therefore, some sort of inquiry is necessary to enable a purchaser to obtain certainty that the land for which he pays full price is not subject to an unknown mortgage or charge which, if left undiscovered, might afterwards deprive him of a large part or even the whole of its value. Again, the probability of serious consequences to the purchaser ensuing from a mistake as to title is infinitely greater in the case of land than in the case of goods. Before the rightful owner can recover misappropriated goods, he has to find out where they are. This is usually a matter of considerable difficulty. By the time they have reached the hands of a _bonâ fide_ purchaser all chance of their recovery by the true owner is practically at an end. But with land the case is far otherwise. A dispossessed rightful owner never has any difficulty in tracing his property, for it is immovable. All he has to do is to bring an action for ejectment against the person in possession. For these reasons, among others, any attempt to deal with land on the simple and unsuspecting principles which obtain in regard to goods would be fraught with grave risks.

Apart from very early and primitive social conditions, there appear to be only two ways in which the required certainty as to title to land can be obtained. Either the purchaser must satisfy himself, by an exhaustive scrutiny and review of all the deeds, wills, marriages, heirships and other documents and events by which the property has been conveyed, mortgaged, leased, devised or transmitted during a considerable period of time, that no loophole exists whereby an adverse claim can enter or be made good--this is called the system of private investigation of title--or the government must keep an authoritative list or register of the properties within its jurisdiction, together with the names of the owners and particulars of the encumbrances in each case, and must protect purchasers and others dealing with land, on the faith of this register, from all adverse claims. This second system is called Registration of Title. To these two alternatives may perhaps be added a third, of very recent growth--Insurance of Title. This is largely used in the United States. But it is in reality only a phase of the system of private investigation. The insurance company investigates the title, and charges the purchaser a premium to cover the expense and the risk of error. Registration of deeds is an adjunct of the system of private investigation, and, except in England, is a practically invariable feature of it. It consists in the establishment of public offices in which all documents affecting land are to be recorded--partly to preserve them in a readily accessible place, partly to prevent the possibility of any material deed or document being dishonestly concealed by a vendor. Where registration is effected by depositing a full copy of the deed, it also renders the subsequent falsification of the original document dangerous. Registration of deeds does not (except perhaps to a certain extent indirectly) cheapen or simplify the process of investigation--the formalities at the registry add something to the trouble and cost incurred--but it prevents the particular classes of fraud mentioned.

The history of land registration follows, as a general rule, a fairly uniform course of development. In very early times, and in small and simple communities, the difficulty afterwards found in establishing title to land does not arise, owing to the primitive habit of attaching ceremony and publicity to all dealings. The parties meet on the land, with witnesses; symbolical acts (such as handing over a piece of earth, or the bough of a tree) are performed; and a set form of words is spoken, expressive of the intention to convey. By this means the ownership of each estate in the community becomes to a certain extent a matter of common knowledge, rendering fraud and mistake difficult. But this method leaves a good deal to be desired in point of security. Witnesses die, and memory is uncertain; and one of the earliest improvements consists in the establishment of a sort of public record kept by the magistrate, lord or other local authority, containing a series of contemporary notes of the effect of the various transactions that take place. This book becomes the general title-deed of the whole community, and as long as transactions remain simple, and not too numerous, the results appear to be satisfactory. Of this character are the Manorial Court Rolls, which were in the middle ages the great authorities on title, both in England and on the continent. The entries in them in early times were made in a very few words. The date, the names of the parties, the name or short verbal description of the land, the nature of the transaction, are all that appear. In the land registry at Vienna there is a continuous series of registers of this kind going back to 1368, in Prague to 1377, in Munich to 1440. No doubt there are extant (though in a less easily accessible form) manorial records in England of equal or greater antiquity. This may be considered the first stage in the history of Land Registration. It can hardly be said to be in active operation at the present day in any civilized country--in the sense in which that term is usually understood. Where dealings become more numerous and complicated, written instruments are required to express the intentions of the parties, and afterwards to supply evidence of the landowner's title. It appears, too, that as a general rule the public books already described continue to be used, notwithstanding this change; only (as would be expected) the entries in them, once plain and simple, either grow into full copies of the long and intricate deeds, or consist of mere notes stating that such and such deeds have been executed, leaving the persons interested to inquire for the originals, in whose custody soever they may be found. This system, which may be regarded as the second stage in the history of land registration, is called Registration of Deeds. It prevails in France, Belgium, parts of Switzerland, in Italy, Spain, India, in almost all the British colonies (except Australasia and Canada), in most of the states of the American Union, in the South American republics, in Scotland and Ireland, and in the English counties of Yorkshire and Middlesex. Where it exists, there is generally a law to the effect that in case of dispute a registered deed shall prevail over an unregistered one. The practical effect is that a purchaser can, by searching the register, find out exactly what deeds he ought to inquire for, and receives an assurance that if, after completion, he registers his own conveyance, no other deeds--even if they exist--will prevail against him.

The expenses and delays, not to mention the occasional actual losses of property through fraud or mistake, attendant on the system of making every purchaser responsible for the due examination of his vendor's title--whether or not assisted by registration of deeds--have induced several governments to establish the more perfect system of Registration of Title, which consists in collecting the transactions affecting each separate estate under a separate head, keeping an accurate account of the parcels of which each such estate is composed, and summarizing authoritatively, as each fresh transaction occurs, the subsisting rights of all parties in relation to the land itself. This system prevails in Germany, Austria, Hungary, parts of Switzerland, the Australasian colonies, nearly the whole of Canada, some of the states of the American Union, to a certain extent in Ireland, and is in course of establishment in England and Wales. The Register consists of three portions:--(1) The description of the land, usually, but not necessarily, accompanied by a reference to a map; (2) the ownership, giving the name and address of the person who can sell and dispose of the land; and (3) the encumbrances, in their order of priority, and the names of the persons for the time being entitled to them. When any fresh transaction takes place the instrument effecting it is produced, and the proper alterations in, or additions to, the register are made: if it be a sale, the name of the vendor is cancelled from the register, and that of the purchaser is entered instead; if it be a mortgage, it is added to the list of encumbrances; if a discharge, the encumbrance discharged is cancelled; if it is a sale of part of the land, the original description is modified or the plan is marked to show the piece conveyed, while a new description or plan is made and a new register is opened for the detached parcel. In the English and Australian registries a "land certificate" is also issued to the landowner containing copies of the register and of the plan. This certificate takes the place more or less of the old documents of title. On a sale, the process is as follows: The vendor first of all produces to the purchaser his land certificate, or gives him the number of his title and an authority to inspect the register. In Austria and in some colonial registries this is not necessary, the register being open to public inspection, which in England is not the case. The purchaser, on inspecting this, can easily see for himself whether the land he wishes to buy is comprised in the registered description or plan, whether the vendor's name appears on the register as the owner of the land, and whether there are any encumbrances or other burdens registered as affecting it. If there are encumbrances, the register states their amount and who are entitled to them. The purchaser then usually[1] prepares a conveyance or transfer of the land (generally in a short printed form issued by the registry), and the vendor executes it in exchange for the purchase money. If there are mortgages, he pays them off to the persons named in the register as their owners, and they concur in a discharge. He then presents the executed instruments at the registry, and is entered as owner of the land instead of the vendor, the mortgages, if any, being cancelled. Where "land certificates" are used (as in England and Australia), a new land certificate is issued to the purchaser showing the existing state of the register and containing a copy of the registered plan of the land. The above is only a brief outline of the processes employed. For further information as to practical details reference may be made to the treatises mentioned at the end of this article.

_England and Wales._--The first attempt to introduce general
registration of conveyances appears to have been made by the Statute
of Enrolments, passed in the 27th year of Henry VIII. But this was
soon found to be capable of evasion, and it became a dead letter. A
Registration Act applying to the counties of Lancaster, Chester and
Durham was passed in Queen Elizabeth's reign, but failed for want of
providing the necessary machinery for its observance. The subject
reappeared in several bills during the Commonwealth, but these failed
to pass, owing, it would seem, to the objection of landowners to
publicity. In 1669 a committee of the House of Lords reported that one
cause of the depreciation of landed property was the uncertainty of
titles, and proposed registration of deeds as a remedy, but nothing
was done.

During the next thirty years numerous pamphlets for and against a
general registry were published. In 1704 the first Deed Registry Act
was passed, applying to the West Riding of Yorkshire. In 1707 the
system was extended to the East Riding, and in 1708 to Middlesex.
These Middlesex and Yorkshire registries (modified considerably in
practice, but not seriously in principle, by the Yorkshire Registries
Acts 1884, 1885, and Land Registry [Middlesex Deeds] Act 1891) remain
in operation, and are greatly valued by the smaller proprietors and
mortgagees, owing to the security against fraud which they provide at
a trifling cost. The selection of these counties seems capricious: its
probable explanation is that in them trade was flourishing, and the
fortunes made were frequently invested in land, and a protection
against secret encumbrances was most in demand. In 1728 and 1732
Surrey and Derby petitioned, unsuccessfully, for local registries. In
1735 the North Riding Deed Registry Act was passed. In 1739 a General
Registry bill passed the Commons, but did not reach the Lords. Next
year the Lords passed a similar bill, but it did not reach the
Commons. In 1759 a General Registry bill was thrown out by a majority
of one. In 1784 Northumberland unsuccessfully petitioned for a local
registry. After this the subject went almost out of sight till the
Real Property Commission of 1828. They reported in 1830 in favour of a
general register of deeds, but though several bills were introduced,
none were passed. In 1846 a committee of the House of Lords reported
that the marketable value of real property was seriously diminished by
the tedious and expensive process of the transfer of land, and that a
registry of title to all real property was essential to the success of
any attempt to simplify the system of conveyancing. In 1850 a Royal
Commission reported in favour of a general register of deeds, and in
1851 Lord Campbell introduced a bill accordingly, but it was opposed,
and was dropped. In 1853 Lord Cranworth introduced a bill, which
passed the Lords but not the Commons.

Hitherto only registration of deeds had been considered, but in 1854 a
new Royal Commission was appointed, which reported in 1857 in favour
of a register of title. The scheme they recommended was substantially
embodied in a bill introduced in 1859 by Lord Cairns--then
Solicitor-General--but a dissolution stopped its progress. In 1862
Lord Westbury had the satisfaction of carrying the first act for
registration of title. This act enabled any landowner to register an
indefeasible title on production of strict proof. The proof required
was to be such as the court of chancery would force an unwilling
purchaser to accept. Only a few hundred titles were registered under
this act, and in 1868 a Royal Commission was appointed to inquire into
the causes of its failure. They reported in 1870, making various
suggestions of detail, and especially adverting to the great expense
caused by the strictness of the official investigation of title before
a property could be admitted to the register. In the same year Lord
Hatherley introduced a Transfer of Land Bill, but it was not proceeded
with. In 1873 Lord Selborne introduced a Land Titles and Transfer
Bill, following more or less the recommendations of the report of
1870, proposing for the first time compulsory registration of title
upon every next sale after a prescribed date. Lord Cairns again
introduced this bill (with some modifications) in 1874, but it had to
be dropped. In 1875 Lord Cairns's Land Transfer Act of that year was
passed, which was much the same as the former bill, but without
compulsion. This act had no better success in the way of voluntary
general adoption than the act of 1862, but as its adoption has since
been made compulsory, its provisions are important. Its most
noticeable feature, from a practical point of view, is the additional
prominence given to an expedient called "Possessory" registration
(which also existed under another name in Lord Westbury's Act),
whereby is removed the great initial difficulty of placing titles on
the register in the first instance. Two sorts of registration were
established, "Absolute" and "Possessory." The effect of an absolute
registration was immediately to destroy all claims adverse to the
registered title. But this was only to be granted on a regular
investigation of title, which, though not so strict as under the
former act, yet necessarily involved time and cost. Possessory
registration, however, was to be granted to any one who could show a
prima facie title--a quick and cheap process. But the effect of such
registration would not be immediately felt. It would not destroy
existing adverse claims. It would only prevent new difficulties from
arising. In course of time such a title would be practically as good
as an absolute one. In 1885 the duke of Marlborough introduced a bill
for a registry of titles, and in the following vacation Lord Davey
wrote three letters to _The Times_ advocating the same thing on the
general lines afterwards adopted.[2] In 1887 Lord Halsbury, by
introducing his Land Transfer Bill, commenced a struggle with the
opponents of reform, which, after ten years of almost continuous
effort, resulted in the passing of his act of 1897, establishing
compulsory registration of title. Lord Halsbury introduced bills in
1887, 1888 and 1889. Lord Herschell, who succeeded him after the
change of government, introduced bills in 1893, 1894 and 1895, these
last three being unanimously passed by the House of Lords on every
occasion. The bill of 1895 reached committee in the Commons, but was
stopped by the dissolution of parliament. In 1897 Lord Halsbury (who
had returned to the woolsack) again introduced the same bill with
certain modifications which caused the Incorporated Law Society to
withdraw its opposition in the House of Commons, and the act was
finally passed on the last day of the session. Under it the Privy
Council has power to issue orders declaring that on a certain date
registration of title is to be compulsory on sale in a given district.
The effect of such an order is to oblige every purchaser of land in
the district after that date to register a "possessory title,"
immediately after his purchase. The compulsory provisions of the act
extend to freeholds and (by a rule afterwards made) to leaseholds
having forty years to run. No order except the first can be made, save
on the request of a county council. The first order was made in July
1898. It embraced the whole administrative county of London (including
the City of London), proceeding gradually by groups of parishes. Under
this order upwards of 122,000 titles had been registered by 1908,
representing a value exceeding one hundred millions sterling.

Under the operation of this act, at the expense of a slightly
increased cost on all transactions during a few years, persons dealing
with land in the county will ultimately experience great relief in the
matter both of cost and of delay. The costs of a sale (including
professional assistance, if required) will ultimately be for the
vendor about one-fifth, and for the purchaser (at the most usual
values) less than half, of the present expenses. The delay will be no
more than in dealings with stock. Mortgagees will also be protected
from risks of fraud, which at present are very appreciable, and of
which the Redgrave and Richards cases are recent examples. Further
particulars of the practical operation of the acts will be found in
the Registrar's Reports of 1902 and 1906, embracing the period from
1899 to 1905 inclusive, with comments on the general position,
suggestions for future legislation, &c. In the autumn of 1908 a Royal
Commission under the chairmanship of Lord St Aldwyn, was appointed to
inquire into the working of the Land Transfer Acts. The evidence given
before them in October, November and December 1908 comprised a general
exposition by the registrar of the origin and history of the acts, and
the principles of their working, and suggestions for amendments in
certain details. It also comprised the experience of several
landowners and others, who had found the acts highly beneficial, and
who had carried through a large number of dealings under absolute
titles, without professional help, very quickly, and at a greatly
reduced cost.

_Scotland._--In Scotland registration of _deeds_ was established by an
act of 1617, which remained unaltered till 1845. There are also acts
of 1868 and 1874. The registry is in Edinburgh. Deeds are registered
almost invariably by full copy. The deeds are indexed according to
properties--each property having a separate number and folio called a
"search sheet," on which all deeds affecting it are referred to. About
40,000 deeds are registered annually. The consequence of the existence
of this register is to render fraud in title absolutely unknown. Forty
years is the usual period investigated. The investigation can, if
desired, be made from the records in the registry alone. The fees are
trifling, but suffice to pay the expenses of the office, which employs
between 70 and 80 permanent officers in addition to temporary
assistants. The total costs of conveyancing amount, roughly speaking,
to between 1 and 2% on the purchase money, and are equally shared
between vendor and purchaser. In 1906 a royal commission was
appointed, with Lord Dunedin as chairman, to inquire into the
expediency of instituting in Scotland a system of registration of
title.

_Australia and New Zealand._--These states now furnish the most
conspicuous examples in the British empire of the success of
registration of _title_. But prior to the year 1857 they had only
registration of _deeds_, and the expense, delay and confusion
resulting from the frequent dealings appear to have been a crying
evil. Sir Robert Torrens, then registrar of deeds in South Australia,
drew up and carried an act establishing a register of title similar to
the shipping register. The act rapidly became popular, and was adopted
(with variations) in all the other Australasian states in the years
1861, 1862, 1870 and 1874. Consolidating and amending acts have since
been passed in most of these states. Only absolute title is
registered. All land granted by government, after the passing of the
several acts, is placed on the register compulsorily. But voluntary
applications are also made in very large numbers. It is said ordinary
purchasers will not buy land unless the vendor first registers the
title. The fees are very low--£1 to £3 is a usual maximum--though in
some states, e.g. Victoria, the fees rise indefinitely, _ad
valorem_, at a rate of about 10s. per £1000. Insurance funds are
established to provide compensation for errors. At a recent date they
amounted to over £400,000, while only £14,600 odd had been paid in
claims. All the registries pay their own expenses. Bankers and men of
business generally are warm in their appreciation of the acts, which
are popularly called Torrens Acts, after their originator, who, though
not a lawyer, originated and carried through this important and
difficult legal work.

_Canada._--Registration of _title_ was introduced in Vancouver Island
in 1861, was extended to the rest of British Columbia in 1870, and was
in 1885 adopted by Ontario, Manitoba and the North-West Territories.
Only Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island
retain the old English system, plus registration of deeds. The three
provinces which have adopted registration of title have adopted it in
somewhat different forms. In British Columbia it is similar to Lord
Westbury's Act of 1862. The North-West Territories follow closely the
Torrens Acts. The Ontario Act is almost a transcript of Lord Cairns's
Act of 1875. The fees are very low, seldom exceeding a few shillings,
but all expenses of the office are paid from this source. The Ontario
registry has five district offices, as well as the central one at
Toronto. This is apparently the only colonial registry not open to
public inspection.