Sessional_Paper_1886-1887 — Page 497

APPENDIX TO REPORT FROM THE LAND COMMISSION. OF 1886-87.

5.

28. Would it be more useful to record the documents in extenso; or, if the system can be improved in any other way, in what respect?

29. Do the registers of Titles in the course of time-by giving notice of old transactions-outstanding legal estates which probably cannot be got in, and other things,—become an impediment, rather than an assistance, to the Title?

30. Would you suggest that the Register of Titles, so far as it gives notice to a proposed purchaser or mortgagee, should be limited as to time? For example, an owner's registered Title is in order for the last 17 years, but is not market- able owing to apparently outstanding estates created more than 17 years ago not having been got in. If the Title could be limited to 16 years so that no notice could be obtained of prior defects would such Title be marketable ?

31. If you suggest a limit of time what tiine would you consider a reasonable limit considering the circumstances of the Colony and the number of absentee owners?

32. Would it not in your opinion be better to provide by Ordinance for settling such questions by citing the parties, apparently having claims, before a Court to shew cause why a clear Title should not be granted, or what other method would you suggest?

33. When part only of a Lot is sold it is registered as a section, and when part only of a section is sold it is registered as a sub-section, and so on-and by reason of blocks of buildings having been erected in a direction not intended nor thought of when the Lot was originally sold it happeus in many cases that one house stands on two and sometimes three Lots, and the Title to one house occupies 3 folios of the different register books so that three searches of three different Lots are necessary to ascertain the state of the Title to one house. How do you consider questions of this sort should be dealt

with ?

34. If by register of the Title to a house by name or street number, how would you propose the identification of the house and ground it stands on should be kept clear?

35. The owner of a house standing upon portions of three separate Lots has to pay proportions of Crown Rents to three different owners of the remaining portions of the Lots-the owner of a remaining portion being looked upon as directly responsible for the whole Crown Rent to the Crown. How would you deal with the question of payments of proportions of Crown Rents in such cases?

36. By what legal means does the owner of a remaining portion recover the proportion of Crown Rent due from the section holders, and section holders from the sub-section holders and so on ?

37. If a sub-section holder pays up the Crown Rent to prevent forfeiture (there being no remaining portion or no remaining portion owner) how does he recover the proportions from the owners of other sections and sub-sections?

38. What powers of cross distress are usually given in cases of sales and purchases of sections and sub-sections?

39. Do you consider the system hitherto practised of permitting sections and sub-sections to be registered a good system

or not?

If not, state objections and whether it would be desirable for all holders of sections and sub-sections to hold direct from the Crown under a new Lease from the Crown, and if so the reasons for your opinion?

40. Numerous Deeds have been, and are still being, executed by the Attorneys of absentee owners; how is the Memo- rial evidence of a Deed executed by an Attorney under power seeing there is no evidence in the Land Office records that such a power exists?

41. Would you insist on the Power of Attorney being registered when land is dealt with under it?

42. Many Powers of Attorney are missing, and Deeds executed under them, and their Memorials, cannot by any means be proved to be properly executed and signed by the proper parties. How do you consider that cases of this sort which render a Title unmarketable-should be dealt with, so as to render the Title marketable, if no other defect exists?

43. The Memorial of a Deed gives no statement of the usual covenants the Deed contains-such covenants being presumed-If the law were that every Deed should be taken to comprise certain usual covenants would Deeds and their registration become in your opinion-more simplified?

44. Are the forms of Memorials generally adopted for registration, in other respects, sufficient as secondary evidence of missing Deeds? If not what defects are there and how do you consider they should be remedied?

45. When the Title to a lot was defective owing to a comparison of the description of the Lot gathered from the Title Deeds with the Lot itself shewing the original ground has been added to, it was customary for the Crown to accept a surren- der of the Lot and grant a new Lease with corrected boundaries, and adjusted rental. If the former Lot was sold at a premium an extra premium would be assessed and charged at the same rate for the additional area.

Now, if the surrender