GENERAL REGISTRY BILL. (Hansard, 4 October 1831)

§ Mr. Ayshford Sanford
presented a Petition from 1,200 Landowners and Inhabitants of the county of Somerset, against the Registration Bill. The petitioners represented to the House, that the measure would seriously affect the owners of small properties. They stated, as a fact, that two-thirds of all the existing mortgages were on properties which were under the value of 300l. He hoped the hon. Member would not press forward the Bill at present, or he should feel bound to oppose it.

§ Mr. Strickland
said, they had an institution of this nature in Yorkshire since the time of Queen Anne, and it was now expected that institution was to be abolished wantonly and from the mere love of change. It would excite less alarm if the deeds were to be deposited in each local district, rather than to have one central mausoleum to hold them. He had a strong suspicion that the whole affair would turn out to be a job. He was instructed by his constituents to require that Yorkshire should be exempt from the operations of this Bill.

§ Lord Morpeth
said, he had obtained the promise of the hon. and learned Member (Mr. John Campbell) that Yorkshire should be excluded from this Bill, and he was sure that no breach of faith would be committed towards him.

§ Mr. John Campbell
said, that if the Registration Bill were passed into a law it would reduce expense; and as to the notion of this measure being a job, he would ask was he accused of jobbing? He could assure the House that he had refused much higher offices than ever the Chief Registrar under this Bill could expect to enjoy. He was also charged with something like a breach of faith; but he denied that any such charge could be made against him. When the Bill went into the Committee the noble Lord would be at perfect liberty to move that Yorkshire should be exempted from the operation of the Bill.

§ Lord Morpeth
disclaimed intending to make any imputation of breach of faith against his hon. and learned friend (Mr. J. Campbell), but if the Bill went into the Committee he would move that Yorkshire be exempted from its operation.

§ Mr. Hunt
said, that the reason why the people considered this Bill to be a job was, that all the lawyers in the House were in favour of it.

§ Mr. Croker
expressed his entire approbation of this Bill. The necessity of a registry for landed property was so self-evident a proposition, that he was quite surprised it could meet with any opposition. If this Bill were carried, its author would do as much for the benefit of the country as any other individual had ever been able to accomplish.

Mr. O'Connell
said, the Bill was highly necessary, and it should have his most decided support. It was so much the reverse of a professional job, that it would lessen the emoluments of every branch of the legal profession.

§ Mr. Crampton
concurred in the necessity of a general registry of landed property not only as a security to landed proprietors, but to other classes who advanced money on landed property.

§ Mr. Burge
said, that a measure like the present should not be precipitated through the House. Time must be allowed for its provisions to be understood, and it ought to be most fully discussed. It should certainly be printed and distributed before it was further proceeded with.

§ Colonel Sibthorp
presented a similar Petition from the Corporation and general Landowners of the city of Lincoln. A system of registration could afford no security to property, and in fact its adoption would only gratify idle curiosity. It would do small landowners a serious injury and he certainly would oppose it at every stage.

Mr. Wilks
said, there could be no doubt, but that in many districts of the county of Lincoln there was a strong feeling against the Registration Bill. He hoped, at least, that the Bill would not be pressed during the Session, and that the whole country might have time to consider it.