Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

holds the office for life of judge of the court of land registra tion, in the State of Massachusetts:

"The petitions for registration down to-day (June 16th, 1903) number 662. The clerk of our court informs

[ocr errors]

me that the assessed value of the lands included in these petitions is a little less than six million dollars; but that the -selling value is probably more than ten million dollars.

The number of appeals taken to the Supreme Court on law, and to the superior court for trial of facts by a jury, is small.

"As to the effect of registration upon the transfer of titles, I would say that it has been in the highest degree beneficial. One of the earliest titles registered was a large tract of vacant land in Chelsea and Everett, small cities a few miles from Boston. It was this case which gave rise to the case of Tyler vs. The Judges in our Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United States. The owners of the land divided it into lots for building a great many of them, some hundreds, I think, and have sold all but three or four small lots. They say that it has happened many times, that they would sell a lot of land upon which they or the purchasers had erected a house so that the property was in condition to mortgage, and one of them has gone with the purchaser to the registry of deeds with a representative of a savings bank, or other mortgagee, and not more than half an hour has been consumed in passing the title and giving the mortgage. These owners say no one who has not tried the system of title registration could conceive of the benefits it has been to them in this instance. They escaped all the great delays that are incurred by examinations of title under the old system, and all questions as to the validity of titles. The purchasers were put to no expense about the title, and this fact really added something to the value of the land.

"This land was not only in two cities, but in two counties. If I can, in a few days I will get from the recorder's office the number of subsequent certificates issued on the original certificate in this case; the number of instruments indorsed on these certificates and an estimate of the number of volumes under the old system that the record of these instruments would make. It will serve as a good illustration of the saving the new system would be in the matter of recording and room for records.

"The use of the new system has gradually increased every half year from the beginning, in October, 1898. The constitutionality of the law was in litigation for two years and more, and no great number of petitions could be looked for till this was settled. Real estate owners are as a class very conservative. Petitions are coming more freely now-twenty-five in May, and an average of one a day thus far this month."

It may be well at this point to call the attention of the Association to the case of Tyler vs. The Judges of the Court of Registration, involving the constitutionality of the Massachusetts Land Registration Act. This was a petition for a writ of prohibition against the judges of the court of registration, and the ground of the petition was that the Act establishing the court is unconstitutional. The first and most important objection to the Act was that the original registration deprives all persons, except the registered owner, of any interest in the land without due process of law.

The Act contains provisions for serving non-residents by publication, substantially according to the method provided in our statutes. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts upheld the Act, and a writ of error from this decision was taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, and the writ dismissed by that court on the 17th of December, 1900.

So that it may be assured that there is no difficulty in the way of providing for the determination of the interests of persons. residing out of the State, as well as the interests of all other persons, including minors and persons otherwise not sui juris. The attention of the Association is respectfully directed to this case, as the opinion contains a masterly argument in support of the constitutionality of the Act.

Besides this, the Supreme Court of the United States has decided, in the case of Arndt vs. Griggs, 134th U. S., p. 316, as follows:

"A State may provide by statute that the title to real estate within its limits shall be settled and determined by a suit, in which the defendant being a non-resident is brought into court by publication."

This opinion was unanimous and was delivered by Justice Brewer. This case was cited with approval in the case of Roller vs. Holly, 176th U. S., p. 398:

Thus it will be seen that our highest court has declared in cases where the point was directly in question, that in a proceeding in rem service by publication can be perfected upon non-residents so as to bind their interests in the property.

Minors and others not sui juris are ordinarily exempted from judgments by statute, but the same power which exempts them can hold them amenable and bound. This is frequently done under proper limitations.

In all of the systems similar to the Torrens system, there is a provision for an indemnity fund, though the original Torrens system contained no such provision. This indemnity fund is created by charging a fee, in some instances, of one-tenth of one per cent., and in some instances one-fifth of one per cent., upon the value of the land when it is first registered. fund is held by the State for the purpose of reimbursing any

This

person interested in the land whose interests may have been overlooked in the registration of the title. But the instances of loss in this particular are not only rare, but the losses small. It appears from a statement made by the registrar of titles at Brisbane, Queensland, where the Torrens system prevails, that the office has been in existence for thirty-eight years. The transactions since the establishment of the office number 1,397,910, and there has only been one instance of loss through an incorrect title having been issued..

I quote from a statement made by Judge Sheldon, who is the examiner of titles for Cook county, Illinois:

"It is optional with the owner to register his land. He files in a court of competent jurisdiction his application in writing for the registration of his title. This in ordinary cases is a simple printed blank form, giving the name of the owner, description of the property and other facts concerning the condition of the title.

"All persons interested in the land and all persons in possession or occupancy must be made parties defendant. Summons is issued to all defendants. Such as reside or are to be found within the State will be served by the proper sheriff. Non-residents will be served by publication. Due opportunity to contest the matter must be afforded to all interested.

"The court refers the application to an examiner of titles, who proceeds with an independent investigation of the title. To him is submitted the abstracts of title and any oral testimony tending to determine the rights of all parties. He approves no title unless satisfied that all persons interested are before the court. If, in his opinion, the applicant is entitled to registration, he so reports to the court. To the report of the examiner any party may file objections, which are heard and disposed of

by the court.

Upon the confirmation of the report a decree is entered confirming the applicant's title and directing the registrar to issue to him the first certificate of title.

This is done

by entry in a book called the 'Register of Titles.' This book is composed of a large number of certificates of title (one on a page), bound together, numbered in the order of their issue, and each with ample space at its foot for the entry of subsequent notations affecting the title. Every certificate of title is in duplicate, signed by the registrar, and recites the condition of the title. One of these is kept by the registrar, bound in the 'Register af Titles,' and the other is delivered to the owner. This completes the initial registration.

"The certificate of title immediately upon its issuance is conclusive proof of ownership in all courts as against all parties before the court in the proceedings for initial registration, and all persons dealing with the land after registration. After the expiration of two years from the first registration, no suit attacking the title of the registered owner can be brought. No exception is made in favor of infants or persons under disability, but such persons are given recourse upon the indemnity fund. It is thus seen that all persons are bound by the first certificate of title, except those overlooked, and not made parties to the suit for registration. If the court proceeding is properly conducted there should be no persons not bound by the first certificate of title."

All of the systems provide simply but fully and completely for transfers, for mortgages, for trusts, for judgments and other liens, for notice of adverse claims, for dower, for homestead, for transmission by devise, or under the statute of distribution for the estates of intestates, for tax sales, and for proceedings in chancery.

« ZurückWeiter »