Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 19.pdf/367

 338

THE GREEN BAG

the country has its origin in Massachusetts legislation; only the provision for acknowl edging the deed before its record being derived from Plymouth colony. Now where did the inexperienced legis lators of Plymouth and Massachusetts get the ideas which led to this system of land transfer? It is, of course, possible that the whole plan was original with them, as it is certain that this particular application of the ideas was their invention; but it is more likely that they derived some hints from Old-World practice. Four sources occur to one as possible. First, the system of registering titles that prevailed on the continent of Europe, was carried by the Dutch settlers to Cape Colony, and was probably there investi gated by Sir R. Torrens on his way to Australia, and thus gave a hint for the modern system of registering land titlesSecond, the customs of some of the English cities and boroughs, of passing title by judicial process in the local courts, which after all is closely related to the common law system of passing title by fine and recovery, and to the transfer of copyhold land. Third, the statutory process of en rolling deeds of bargain and sale. Fourth, the local customs of York, Middlesex, and perhaps other counties, providing for the registration of deeds. As to the continental system, it is not probable that any of the Puritan colonists were influenced by it. The Pilgrims, to be sure, spent some time in Holland before settling in Plymouth, and might possibly have derived some hints from the law of that country, but the distinctive features of the continental system were lacking in the Plymouth legislation. The continental system is one of registering titles. By it, the contract or deed is of no importance except as a memorandum, or as a proof to be presented to the officer in charge of the registration. The operative act is the entry of transfer on the public books. There seems to be in Plymouth legislation

no idea of such a notion as that the entry in the book was in itself an operative act. The ordinary document entered on the Plymouth book was a more or less elabo rate bargain and sale deed in the English form; and the fact that deeds were recorded side by side with other contracts, and especially contracts of service, indicates that there was no idea that the transfer derived any additional force from the recording of it. The record was merely for purpose of evidence. But whatever may be true of the Plymouth ordinance it is clear that in the Massachusetts ordinance there was no notion whatever of an entry on the book as of itself operative to pass the title. The deed still remained the document of title. More must be said as to the claim of borough customs to furnish the idea of our registry acts. The type of such custom is that of London, and this custom is stated in these words: "The persons that sealed the deed must go before the Lord Mayor, or the Recorder and one Alderman, and make acknowledgement that the same is their act and deed; if a wife be a party, she is to be examined by them, whether it was done with her full and free consent, with out any kind of compulsion; in testimony of which the Lord Mayor or Recorder and Alderman set their hands to it, for which each may demand $d. and the attorney's fee for the judgment is 2d. Afterwards the deed must be delivered to the clerk of the Inrolements who at the next Hustings will cause proclamation to be made thereof according to the custom of the court." 1 Many, if not most of the English boroughs had similar customs. It will be noticed as to this custom, first, that it provides for an acknowledgment before the mayor or other city magistrate just as the Plymouth ordi nance provided for an acknowledgment before the governor or assistant, and in that respect it seems to furnish the type 1 Bohun, Privilegia Londini, 241.