353 M I N U T E S OF E V I D E N C E T A K E N B E F O R E T I IE John Julian, Esq. be put upon the registry; but under the regulation I have stated I was unable — to comply with those instructions. 11 July 1838. 14845. Mr. O'Connell.'] You were concerned generally for the landlords?— In the majority of instances. 14846. And many of the tenants came to register whose landlords did not wish them to register, or opposed their registering ?— There were such instances, but not very many. When I answered, generally I was employed for the landlords, I did not mean to say I was employed for the landlords of the particular applicants. 14847. Nor did my question import it; but whether in some instances the tenants registered in spite of their landlords ?— There were such instances, but not very numerous, while I have been attending the registry. 14848. And in any instance, as a professional man, you would not, without due cause, let any man read the deed or instrument of your client, who was at all interested in picking a hole in it ?— I would not. 14840. You know that every prudent man wishes to keep his deeds from their contents being known where it is possible that any litigation may ensue from their being known ?— It is the general wish. 14850. I suppose several of the voters in King's County voted against the wish of their landlords ?— There were many, I believe, who voted against the wish of their landlords; but we have not had for some years a contest in the King's County which could clearly show whether the tenants did or did not vote against the wishes of their landlords. 14851. Mr. Lefroy.] At all events, the production of the lease could give the landlord no information that he would not have had from his own counterpart of it ?— No. 14852. Mr. O'Connell.] Must not that depend upon whether he had a coun- terpart ?— Yes. 14853. Mr. Lefroy.] Is it not the general practice for the one to have one part and the other the other ?— In very many instances the tenant has no part; the landlord has the only part, to save expense to the tenant; the landlord is considered entitled to it. 14854. Did you ever know the converse of that, the landlord having none, and the tenant having it ?— No, it is generally considered the duty of the tenant to pay for both parts of the lease. 14855. By the Registry Act, the claimant is not entitled to be registered " unless he shall have been in the actual possession of the land, or in the receipt of the rents, issues, or profits thereof, for his own use, as the case may require, for six calendar months next previous to his registry under this Act then there are certain exceptions in particular cases ?— Yes, where he gets it by marriage and so forth. 14856. As a general rule, he must have been in possession for six months? — Yes." 14857. Have you known any instances of Mr. Gibson having registered per- sons not in possession for six months previous to the registry ?— I have not known any instances in which he registered a person not in possession six months previous to the registry, but I have known instances where he registered persons not in possession six months previous to the registry, under any legal title other than as tenants from year to year. 14858. You have known him to register persons who, though in possession have been in possession under a distinct title from that given to them by the persons under whom they claim to register ?— Precisely. 14859. Have you known him to register in any instance where the posses- sion appeared to have been under a title perfectly distinct from and not con- nected with any legal title in the lease, but in a distinct legal character ?— He acted under the principle that being in possession at all as tenant for six months previous to the registry was sufficient, provided he had a lease or instrument prior to the applying to be registered, that that would entitle an applicant under the Reform Act to register. 14860. Does not the proviso except in the cases of persons who shall become entitled " by descent, succession, marriage settlement, devise or promotion, to any benefice or office," appear to show that the Legislature meant that the title to be registered must be under the instrument under which the party claimed ? — There