Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 23.pdf/413

 381

Correspondence USELESS BUT ENTERTAINING First Lawyer—Suppose we go out and take something. Second Lawyer—-From whom? “Fee simple and the simple fee, And all the fees in tail, Are nothing when compared with thee,

Thou best of fees — fe-male." — The Caldron.

A Chicago lawyer tells of a newly-elected squire in Minnesota, who was much elated by his honors, but not quite sure that he could sus

tain them gracefully. So for some time previ ous to his assumption of the oﬂice. he hung about the courts to get a tip now and then as to legal procedure. One phrase struck him par ticularly, and it was not long before he had an opportunity to utilize it. When, sitting in judgment on his ﬁrst case, the testimony was all in and the arguments made, His Honor cleared his throat and delivered himself of the following: — “The court takes this case under advisement until next Thursday morning, when it will render a verdict in favor of the defendant." —-L1'pp1'neotl's.

Correspondence AMENDMENTS TO THE NEW YORK TORRENS LAW

framed by friends of the old title in

surance

system

or enemies

of

the

Torrens, and the amendments proposed

To the Editor of the Green Bag: — Sir: I have just received the current issue of the Green Bag, containing editorial article under the title of "The Torrens System in New York." I did not know that this subject had created such a wide interest.

But as

it has taken the form of public dis cussion, I hope you will allow me to reply to some of the statements made. Referring to the Torrens System of Land Title Registration in this state, Otherwise known as article 12 of the

Real Property Law, and the amendments thereto, passed by the New York Legis lature in 1910, you say:— "These amendments seem to have been largely the result of a compromise and not to have aooomplished all that was desired by those who wished to strengthen the law. Efforts are likely t0 be made, therefore, to amend the law still

further, to remove the apprehensions of those who believe that the law affords too great an 0PPOrtunity for fraud and mistake on the part Of examiners, etc."

The bill now before the Legislature of New York to amend the law was

do not tend to strengthen the law or to simplify it, or to afford greater protec tion to the parties in interest, but would merely serve to make the procedure more cumbersome and expensive, and to throw additional obstacles in the path of property owners who desire to register their titles. This is more fully set forth in an editorial in the current issue of Bench and Bar where it is shown that these proposed amend ments have never been authorized or approved by the New York State Bar

Association, but are simply the recom mendations of a sub-committee. You also say in your article that “one speaker at the meeting of the New York Bar Association said that under this law a man may go to Europe for six months, and return to ﬁnd that his title to property may have passed absolutely

to another.”

I was not aware that any

lawyer had made any such stupid and absurd statement. But if he did argue thus, it is clear that the speaker had not

familiarized 'himself with

article

12