hundred lines used then could have been well condensed into about three. He could have said, "From constitutional lawyers and from the Supreme Courts of the various states." This would have told the whole story. On page 50 of the work we find this statement: "The new system would not disadvantage the lawyers." Then follows a full page explaining that if the Torrens law went into effect and would take from the legal profession the conveyancing part of their profession, that "it would undoubtedly be an aid to the lawyers of the country, as their professional services would be necessary in the conduct of litigation and the bringing of existing titles to land into such shape as would warrant the issuance of a certificate." For once we are heartily in accord with the argument advanced by the advocates of the Torrens system, even though that argument was presented almost a quarter of a century ago. Dual title systems are bound to produce litigation. The expensiveness of the luxury afforded to the holder of a Torrens certificate, gilt-sealed though it may be, is not to be recommended. From an address by J. L. Mack of California, before the 1918 Convention at St. Louis American Association of Title Men. The so-called Torrens law in California was passed by the State Legislature in 1897. One of the outstanding features of that Act was the safety provisions making the decree of registration safe and reliable. Each application was required to be accompanied by an abstract of title compiled by a searcher or title company under bond. The court was required to examine the abstract or appoint a referee to do so, after which examination notice was required to be given to all interested parties as shown by the petition and by the abstract; thus all interested parties, as shown by the record and by the petition, were brought before the court so that all matters affecting the title were examined thoroughly by the court or referee, and all parties served before decree of rgistration was rendered. Less than a dozen pieces of property were ever registered under the provisions of this Act although it remained in force from 1897 to December 19, 1914. The proponents of the so-called Torrens system argued that the reason why our people did not register their lands was because of the expense in placing before the court the evidence of the title, and second, because the law contained no provision for an assurance fund. Every time the Legislature met from the time the 1897 law was enacted, the advocates of this system attempted to secure an amendment doing away with the necessity of furnishing an abstract, and in other ways to lessen the cost of registration without regard to safety. But such propositions did not appeal to any Legislature, and the proponents of this system were compelled to wait until after the Initiative and Referendum became effective in our State. Then by the aid of disgruntled newspapers, certain tax title sharks, a few unemployed attorneys and socialists, (without capital), organized Torrens Title companies. These advocates adroitly secured the aid of the women, and through the Women's Clubs the Initiative was launched and the present so-called Torrens Law became effective on December 19, 1914. The outstanding feature of this new Act is the ease with which registration can be made. If it appears by the petition that the applicant, either by himself or his predecessors in interest has been in the actual exclusive or adverse possession of the land or any part of the land described continually for more than five years next preceding the filing of the petition claiming to own the same in fee against the world, and that he has, or that he and his predecessors in interest have paid all taxes during the five year period, then no abstract or other documentary evidence of title is required. Any number of persous may join in one petition. No provision is made where adverse possession is alleged in the petition to place before the court the record title or to require notice to be given to parties having interest in the premises other than those specifically alleged in the petition. The usual notice is required to be published. This Act provides for an assurance fund consisting of one-tenth of one per cent of the assessed valuation on the original registration only. No further contribution to the assurance fund is made, regardless of the number of subsequent transactions in the registered title. As soon as this law became effective the Torrens Title Companies, which were already incorporated in San Diego, Los Angeles, and Pasadena, aided by a disgruntled newspaper, having an imaginary grievance against one of the leading title companies in Los Angeles, began a campaign of education causing skillful articles to be written and printed in many of the newspapers throughout the State, and by the issuance and circulation of pamphlets and booklets, by hand-bills delivered from house to house, such as are used by a class of cheap merchants advertising bargain sales, and by a personal solicitation and house to house canvass, registration clubs were formed. Many join in one petition. The expense was pooled, and the cost of registrations ceased to be a question. This campaign of advertising, education and personal soliciting was kept up for the first three years. 'As a result, registrations in the State of California have been made as follows: 58 Counties in State. "Assurance" Fund in hands of County Clerks June 30, 1918 (estimated) $ 225.28 Total amount of "Assurance" Fund accrued to June 30, 1918 (estimated) Total assessed valuation of real property and improvements (excluding "operative property") in State of California $2,592,211,900.00 $ Assessed value of real property registered 9,150,669.00 .35% Percent age of property registered as shown Number of parcels of land regis Assessed tered to June 30, 1918, six months. of property Assessed value of by as all real prop County. 1915. 1916. 1917. 1918. Total. registered. erty in county. sessed values. Total 161 1,369 2,451 1,128 5,109 $9,150,669 $1,033,697,934 .85% TORRENS TITLE COMPANIES. Los Angeles County, 2. No plant. San Diego County 1. No plant. Orange County, none. All registrations by Los Angeles Attorneys. Imperial County, 1. Branch of Los Angeles Company closed). (now In 1915 there were six Torrens title companies in Los Angeles County. Not long since there was handed out a decision of our courts to the effect that no corporation could practice law, and this made it impossible for a Company engaged in the Torrens business to file in its own name as attorney, a suit for registration of property under the Torrens law. The companies have dwindled down to two. The practice was taken up by individual attorneys or law firms. In the Pasadena telephone directory there appears the name of a Torrens title company. I am told this concern is a fictitious corporaton, simply used by an attorney as an additional means of getting business. Los Angeles has listed in the telephone book, a Torrens title company. This is used merely as a means of attracting business for a certain law firm. I am indebted to some one of the title companies from each of said counties for these interesting figures, and for a careful survey of their respective counties. In examining these reports, we find: FACT 1.-That of the 58 counties in the State there are 49 not infected with the Torrens' germ. 78% of all the registrations are in Los Angeles County, 11% in San Diego County, 6% in Orange County, and 5% in the remaining six counties. FACT 2.-The Dr. Torrens' germ (as shown by these reports) will not work except it be nursed and fed by Torrens title companies and house to house visitation. FACT 3.-About 99% of the attorneys are immune from this germ. The bar generally condemns the system and refuses to have anything to do with it and warn their clients to beware. FACT 4.. Of the 5109 parcels registered, not a single decree was based on an abstract furnished by a title company having property indexes. A very few decrees were based on abstracts or chains of title furnished by Torrens title companies, without plant or indexes, such abstracts being prepared solely from the name indexes of the County Recorder and from the papers in the hands of the applicant. FACT 5. With very few exceptions every decree has been by default, no one being served having any interest in the property. Even lien holders so alleged in the petition are very generally not served, the attorneys relying on the printed notice, so that nearly every decree of registration in the State of California is based wholly on the statements and testimony of the applicants only. FACT 6. Banks, Life Insurance Companies, Mortgage Guarantee Companies, Loan Companies, Building and Loan Companies, and Investors generally-and almost without exception, will not accept a Torrens certificate. In at least one County, the Bankers Association gave notice that the banks would not accept Torrens certificates without a certificate from some regular title company. FACT 7.-The loans reported as made are very largely renewals, and if not renewals, the mortgages (as in case of the Federal Land Bank of Berkeley), require an abstract or policy of title insurance to accompany the Torrens certificate. FACT 8.-The registrant's trouble begins when he tries to sell or borrow. In many cases a title company is called on for an abstract, and |