The Trustee Act, 1850.

New trustees.

(u) Stats. 13 & 14 Vict. c. 60, and 15 & 16 Vict. e. 55, repealing and consolidating stats. 11 Geo.

IV. & 1 Will. IV. c. 60, 4 & 5 Will. IV. c. 23, and 1 & 2 \ c. 69.

(x) Stat. 13 & 14 Vict. c. 60, s. 32 (y) Stat. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 55, s. 9.

(z) Sect.

Charity property.

County Courts.

Property held for religions or educational purposes.

Literary and scientific institutions. Burial grounds. Power to appoint new trustees.

(a) Stat. 13 & 14 Vict. c. GO, s. 34.

(b) Sect. 45. Stats. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 137, s. 48; 18 & 19 Vict, c. 124, s. 15; 23 & 24 Vict. c. 136; 25 & 26 Vict. c. 112; 32 & 33 Viet. c. 110.

(c) Stat. 33 & 34 Vict. c. 9'7, s. 78.

(d) Stat. 28 & 29 Vict. c. 99, s. 1.

(e) Stat. 13 & 14 Viet. c. 28.

(f) Stat. 17 & 18 Vict. c. 112, s. 12.

(g) Stat. 32 & 33 Vict. c. 36.

(h) Stat. 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145, s. 34.

(i) Sect. 27.

The concurrent existence of two distinct systems of jurisprudence is a peculiar feature of English Law. On one side of Westminster Hall a man may succeed in his suit under circumstances in which he would undoubtedly be defeated on the other side; for he may have a title in equity, and not at law (being a cestui que trust), or a title at law and not in equity (being merely a trustee). In the former case, though he would succeed in a chancery suit, he never would think of bringing an action at law; in the latter case he would

Stamps on appointment of new trustees.

Law and equity distinct systems.

(k) The words Court of Chan-cery here used extend to and include the Court of Chancery of the County Palatine of Lancaster. Stat. 28 & 29 Vict. c. 40.

(l) Stat. 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145, s. 28.

(m) Stat. 33 & 34 Vict. c. 97, s. 78.

succeed in an action at law; but equity would take care that the fruits should be reaped only by the person beneficially entitled. The equitable title is, therefore, the beneficial one, but if barely equitable, it may occasion the expense and delay of a chancery suit to maintain it. Every purchaser of landed property has, therefore, a right to a good title both at law and in equity; and if the legal estate should be vested in a trustee, or any person other than the vendor, the concurrence of such trustee or other person must be obtained for the purpose of vesting the legal estate in the purchaser, or, if he should please, in a new trustee of his own choosing. When a person has an estate at law, and does not hold it subject to any trust, he has of course the same estate in equity, but without any occasion for resorting to its aid. To him, therefore, the doctrine of trusts does not apply: his legal title is sufficient; the law declares the nature and incidents of his estate, and equity has no ground for interference (n).

A step has been taken towards the amalgamation of law and equity by the Common Law Procedure Act, 1854 (o), which confers on the Courts of Common Law an extensive equitable jurisdiction. The plaintiff in any action, except replevin and ejectment, may claim a writ of mandamus commanding the defendant to fulfil any duty in the fulfilment of which the plaintiff is personally interested (p), and by the non-performance of which he may sustain damage (q). In all cases of breach of contract or other injury, where the party injured is entitled to maintain and has brought an action, he may claim a writ of injunction against the repetition or continuance of such breach or injury (r). If the defendant would be entitled to relief against the judgment on equitable grounds, he may plead, by way of defence to the action, the facts which entitled him to such relief (s); and the plaintiff may reply, in answer to any plea of the defendant's, facts which avoid such plea on equitable grounds (t). But the facts pleaded must be such as would entitle the person pleading them to absolute and unconditional relief in the Court of Chancery, otherwise the plea will not be allowed (u). The change effected has not therefore been so great as might, at first sight, have been supposed. Another act of parliament has conferred a common law jurisdiction upon the Court of Chancery: - the Chancery Amendment Act, 1858 (x), now empowers the Court of Chancery to award damages like a Court of Law in all cases of injunction and specific performance (y); and the amount of such damages may be assessed, or any question of fact tried, by a jury before the Court itself (z), or by the Court itself without a jury (a).

Common Law Procedure Act, L854.

(n) See Brydges v. Brgdges,d Ves. 127. (o) Stat. 17 & 18 Vict. c. 125.

(p) Sect. 68. (q) Sect. 69.

We shall now take leave of equity and equitable estates, and proceed, in the next chapter, to explain a modern conveyance.

The Chancery Amendment Act, 1858.

(r) Stat. 17 & 18 Vict. c. 125, s. 79.

(s) Sect. 83.

(t) Sect. 85.

(u) Mines Royal Societies v. Magnay, 10 Exch. 489; Wode-house v. Farebrother, 5 E. & B. 277; Wood v. Copper Miners'

Company, 17 C. B. 561; Flight v. Gray, 3 C. B. N. S. 320; Gee v. Smart, 8 E. & B. 313; Jeffs v. Day, 1 Law Rep. Q. B. 372.

(x) Stat. 21 & 22 Vict. c. 27.

(y) Sect. 2.

(z) Sects. 3, 4.

(a) Sect. 5.