Assuming that an apparently good title is deduced by the abstract, the next matter for consideration is, the evidence which a purchaser may require in support of it;and this subject naturally divides itself into two heads; viz., first, what evidence may be required of the existence and genuineness of abstracted documents; and, secondly, what evidence may be required of other matters of fact.

Acceptance of title shown by - to what it extends.

Defects in client's title must not be disclosed to client entitled to take advantage thereof.

Verification of abstract - what evidence may be required in proof of documents and facts.

(q) Att.-Gen. v. Sitwell, 1 Y. & C. 570; Ward v. Trathen, 14 Sim. 82; 8 Jur. 303.

(r) See Deverell v. Lord Bolton, 18 Ves. 505.

(s) Alexander v. Crosby, 1 Jo. & L. 666.

(t) Taylor v. Blacklow, 3 Bing. N. C. 235.

A private Act of Parliament is sufficiently proved by the printed copy, if printed by the Queen's printer; and a recent Statute renders it unnecesssary to prove that the copy purporting to be, was in fact, so printed (u); nor was such proof previously necessary as respects private Acts which contained the usual clause making printed copies evidence: in default of such evidence, an Act should be proved by a copy examined with the original (v).

An award under an Inclosure Act is proved by a copy, or extract, signed by the proper officer of the Court, if the enrolment have been made in one of the Courts at Westminster; or by the Clerk of the peace for the County, or his deputy, if the inrolment have been made with the Clerk of the peace (w).

Copyhold assurances are proved by the copies of Court Roll signed by the steward; and it appears that, in strictness, evidence may be required of the steward's handwriting, except, perhaps, where he is dead, and the document is above thirty years old and comes from the proper custody (x): such a requisition, however, when even modern copies come from the proper custody, is not usual in practice, unless there are special grounds for suspicion: copies authenticated by the steward are evidence, although they are not the copies originally delivered to the tenant (y); and so also are mere examined copies (z): the purchaser may, it is conceived, in the absence of special agreement, generally compel the vendor (at his own expense) to verify his abstract by the production of authenticated or examined copies, in cases where the originals are lost, even although the steward will allow the purchaser to inspect the Court Rolls (a); probably, however, the rule might be different when, as may often happen, the vendor's solicitor, by being himself the steward, or otherwise, is enabled to produce the original Rolls at the proper place for verification of the abstract, and can prove the loss or destruction of the original copies, so as to avoid any difficulty which may be raised by the doctrine of Whit bread v. Jordan (b). If the vendor be thus obliged to procure fresh copies for the purpose of verification, they will (unless he retain, or sell to another person, an estate of greater value held under the same title) belong to the purchaser (c). If a surrender have been by attorney, the power of attorney must be produced, and evidence must be given of the principal having been alive at the time of its being acted on (d); and where the power was not given for valuable consideration, inquiry should be made whether it was revoked prior to its apparent exercise: the statement of a power of attorney on the Court Rolls is secondary evidence of the original, if the latter cannot be found (e).

As to proof of private Acts.

Of awards under Inclosure Acts.

Of copyhold assurances.

(u) 8 & 9 Vict. c. 113, s. 3.

(v) 1 Jarm. Conv. by S. 169: as to proof of old private Act, which has been omitted from the Parliament Roll, see Doe v. Brydges, 7 Sc. N. R. 338.

(w) See 41 Geo. III. c. 109, s.

35; 3 & 4 Will. IV. c. 87, s. 2.

(x) 1 Scriv. on Cop. 497; Wynne v. Tyrwhitt, 4 Barn. & Ald. 376.

(y) Breeze v. Hawker, 14 Sim. 350.

(z) See Doe v. Freeman, 12 Mee. & W. 844; and examined copies, not signed by the Steward, do not require Stamps: S. C.

Deeds abstracted must be proved by the production of the originals, if not lost or destroyed (f); the attesting witnesses (if alive), may, perhaps, in strictness be required to prove the due execution (g), unless the deed is thirty years old and comes from the proper custody (h); but this, where a modern deed comes from such custody (i), is never urged in practice except upon special ground (j): when a deed has been executed by attorney, the same requisitions and inquiry should be made as in the case of a surrender by attorney (k): where the loss or destruction of a deed can be proved (l), secondary evidence may be given of its contents; but proof must also be given of its due execution and delivery (m); an attested copy, however, taken and kept for 110 years in a public office, of a deed which could not be found, was admitted by Lord Hard-wicke as sufficient evidence of the original; and he intimated that, under the special circumstances, a plain copy would have been admissible (n): so, in a recent Peerage case, the House of Lords admitted as evidence an attested copy of a settlement dated in 1693, produced from the proper custody, and according to which possession of the estates had gone for many years (o). Examined copies of deeds required by Law to be enrolled, are, it appears, sufficient evidence of the originals; but, where the enrolment is not compulsory, a copy is evidence only as against the parties on whose acknowledgment enrolment was made, and their representatives (p): and the non-production of the original should be accounted for (q). The recital of a deed is evidence of its existence as against all parties executing the deed containing the recital, and those claiming under them, but is no evidence of its contents or effect beyond what its name and nature necessarily imply, unless proof be given of its loss or destruction (r): an examined copy of the memorial of a deed registered in a Register County is secondary evidence of the deed as against the parties thereto, and all persons claiming under them (s), but probably not as against strangers (t).