Sir John A. Macdonald has before him a Herculean labor, verily he has to clean out an Augean stable. Let us hope that he will prove equal to the task, and that in any appointments he may make he will show that as Minister of Justice, his oath forbids his consenting to the prostitution of the judicial office, and that he has at heart the regeneration of the Bench in the Province of Quebec.

WILLIAM H. KERR.

OF MORTGAGES PASSED OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE CREDITOR.

Merchants of this Province, as well as foreigners, often secured their accounts with their customers by taking mortgages upon their lands, which are merely accepted by the notary on their behalf. It is therefore of great practical importance to inquire into the validity of such mortgages.

There is no doubt that a debtor may go before a notary and there acknowledge himself indebted to his creditor, and that such notarial acknowledgment is valid and binding without the interference of the creditor; but if the promise be made under terms favorable to the debtor, v. g., a term of payment, it is clear that the same requires to be accepted by the creditor, to be perfect and complete; for delay cannot be granted but by the creditor himself.

But a mortgage or hypothec is not merely a promise to pay at some future day; it is at the same time an agreement, which of course must be executed and signed by both parties. This clearly results from the 2020th article of our Code: "Conventional hypothec results from an agreement." Our system of hypothecating being special and not general, the consent of the creditor to take a mortgage upon the special real estate hypothecated, is necessary to constitute a valid title.

It must be admitted that the text-books and the decisions of the courts both in Canada and in France, where the same system of mortgage prevails, do not all support this view. The question has been raised in this Province in the case of Ryan vs. Halpin (6 Lower Canada Rep. page 61 et seq.) and has been differently decided by our courts. The Superior Court, composed of the Honorable Justices Day, Smith and Vanfelson, held the mortgage

so given out of the presence of the creditor to be null and void. but their judgment was reversed in the Court of Appeals, com posed of the Chief Justice La Fontaine and the Honorable Jus tices Aylwin, Duval and Caron. A considerable number of authorities were cited on both sides, and it cannot be fairly assumed that this single decision, in direct opposition to the opinion of the Honorable Judges in the Court below, can be looked upon as settling the jurisprudence in the matter; and as the Court of Appeals is at present differently composed-the Honorable Justices Badgley, Drummond and Monk having replaced the late Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Aylwin, and moreover as its ruling is not consistent with the true and well settled principles of law, there is still a great chance of seeing the Court of Appeals revising in this case, as in many former instances, its own decision.

The Court of Appeals seems to have entertained some doubt upon the soundness of its ruling in the case of Ryan vs. Halpin, as to the non-acceptance of the deed; for the Honorable Judges relied principally upon the fact that the creditor personally caused the deed to be registered, which, according to their Honors' view,, amounted to an acceptance of the mortgage. However, the following authorities maintain that the inscription or registration by the creditor personally, or at his request, does not constitute a legal and valid acceptance or ratification :-Cour de Cassation, arrêt of the 21st February, 1810; Cour Royale de Paris, 23nd April, 1835, Lyon, 9th May, 1837; Cassation, 5th August 1839.

The necessity of the acceptance, either in the same, or by a separate deed, is clearly laid down by the text-books and the jurisprudence, and by the 1029th article of our Code, declaring that "a party in like manner may stipulate for the benefit of a third person, when such is the condition of a contract which he makes for himself; and he who makes the stipulation cannot revoke it, if the third person have signified his assent to it."

The acceptance by the creditor must be made in an authentic form, and if made by an attorney, the procuration must be special, and also in an authentic form.

"For the purpose of alienation," says article 1703 of our Code, "and hypothecation, and for all acts of ownership other than acts of administration, the mandate must be express."

A mere letter of attorney is not sufficient. Art. 2040 of the

Code says: "Conventional hypothec cannot be granted otherwise than by acts in authentic form." Consequently, all requisite conditions to a mortgage must appear in an authentic form; and hence an attorney cannot give, nor accept a mortgage or hypothec without a power of attorney in an authentic form, that is before a notary in Lower Canada or in the best form known in foreign countries, duly authenticated if executed elsewhere. It is now a settled rule that an attorney appointed by a letter of proxy from the debtor, is not sufficiently authorized, Riom, 31st July, 1851, S. V. 51, 2,698; Cassation, 12th November, 1855, S. V. 56, 1,254; Cassation, 7th February, 1854, S. V. 54, 1,322; Amiens, 9th April, 1856, S. V. 56, 2,333; Toulouse, 1859, S. V. 59, 2,407. The French Code, like our Code and the old French law prevailing in Lower Canada, merely requires the deed of mortgage to be in an authentic form; it does not, expressly and verbatim, say that the power of attorney to grant the same should be likewise in an authentic form; but as the consent of the debtor to mortgage is a requisite of a hypothec, that consent must appear in an authentic form.

Likewise the consent of the creditor must appear in the same form,—and so it has been lately held and maintained by Courts of Justice and by Jurists in France. So says Zachariae § 266, t. 2, p. 14: "L'hypothéque établie au profit d'un tiers par un acte dans lequel celui-ci n'a pas figuré, doit être aceeptée par acte notarié." See also Grenier, Hypothèques, t. 2, No. 388 note; Toullier, Code Civil, t. 7, No. 287, p. 350: Troplong, Des Hypothèques, t. 1, No. 368; arrêt of the Cour de Cassation, 21st February, 1810; Metz, 24th November, 1820; Toulouse, 31st July, 1830; Pothier, Hypothèque, pp. 421, 422; 13 Duranton, p. 67, No. 79; 1 Battur, 292, No. 149, &c.; Riom, arrêt of the 31st July, 1851.

The fact that the deed of mortgage is accepted by the notary on behalf of the creditor, is of no importance. Evidently the notary has no authority for doing so. Many commentators are even of opinion that, when the notary so meddles with the interests of one of the parties, the deed passed before him is null for want of authenticity; and so the Cour de Cassation and other tribunals lately held. Cassation, arrêt of the 3rd August, 1847, J. P., vol. 2, p. 697; Toulouse, arrêt of the 31st July, 1830; Rouen, arrêt of 2nd February, 1829; Troplong, Des. Hyp., vol.

2, p. 637.

VOL. II.

DD

D. GIROUARD.

No. 4.

LA QUESTION DES REGISTRES.

Depuis quelques années, les contestations d'une nature mixte,, c'est-à-dire, civiles et religieuses à la fois, sont devenues fréquentes à Montréal. La cause de Guibord a donné occasion aux tribunaux de se prononcer sur les relations de l'Eglise et de l'Etat. Le démembrement canonique de la paroisse de NotreDame a aussi fait surgir des questions de la plus haute importance. L'Evêque Catholique-Romain du diocèse réclame le droit, sans suivre aucune des formalités prescrites par la loi, d'ériger des paroisses, de démembrer celles déjà érigées ou de les unir; il maintient que ces paroisses doivent être reconnues par l'Etat comme ayant le droit de posséder et acquérir des biens, de les administrer comme fabrique. Il prétend en outre que les curés de ces paroisses, ayant le droit de faire des baptêmes, mariages et sépultures, ont comme conséquence immédiate le droit de les constater par des registres de l'état civil; parce que le baptême et le mariage sont des actes purement religieux sur lesquels l'Etat n'a aucun controle, et qu'il doit reconnaître dans l'intérêt des familles.

Le juge Berthelot, sur la requête de quelques curés de ces paroisses, a accordé des registres; mais comme son jugement n'est pas motivé, nous ne saurions dire s'il a entendu décider la question telle que nous venons de la poser. D'un autre coté, le juge MacKay a décidé cette question dans la négative, en refusant après plaidoirie contradictoire d'authentiquer des registres pour les curés de ces paroisses canoniques.

Cette contestation, qui dure malheureusement depuis trop longtemps, a récemment été posée devant la Législature Provinciale par M. Trudel, qui demanda :

"1o. Si c'est l'intention du Gouvernement d'introduire un bill établissant un nouveau mode de reconnaissance civile des paroisses?

"20. Si c'est l'intention du Gouvernement d'introduire un bill faisant disparaître tout doute concernant le droit qu'ont les curés des paroisses canoniques de tenir des registres de L'état civil ?"

L'Hon. Proc. Général a déclaré qu'en effet, sur la demande de

l'Episcopat, le Gouvernement avait décidé d'introduire un bill établissant un nouveau mode de reconnaissance civile des paroisses, mais que l'archevêque l'avait prié, au nom de ses confrères, de suspendre tonte action sur ce bill pour le moment. Il dit de plus que le gouvernement serait toujours heureux d'accorder les demandes du corps des Evêques qui forme la plus haute autorité ecclésiastique de la Province.

Quant à la seconde question, le gouvernement croyait qu'il était de son devoir d'intervenir immédiatement. Par une décision du juge Berthelot, les curés de cinq des paroisses canoniques de Montréal se trouvaient en possession des registres de l'état civil, tandis que par une décision contradictoire du juge McKay, cinq autres paroisses se trouvaient privées de ces registres. Ces deux jugements soulevaient des doutes qu'il était important pour l'intérêt des familles de faire disparaitre.

La matière en litige va donc être réglée d'une manière définitive par une législation spéciale. Néanmoins, il n'est pas sans intérêt, au point de vue de l'histoire du Droit Canadien, de noter les prétentions respectives des parties dans ce débat célèbre. plaidoirie de M. Pagnuelo est sans contredit l'argumentation la plus complète qui ait été faite en faveur de la cause de l'Evêque, tandis que le jugement de l'honorable juge McKay résume parfaitement la position assumée par le Séminaire de St. Sulpice, tantôt par l'entremise de la Fabrique et tantôt par celle de quelques citoyens. La rédaction de la Revue Critique croit se rendre utile en publiant l'un et l'autre.

LA RÉDACTION.

Mémoire présenté par M. Pagnuelo à l'Hon. Juge McKay, et contenant le résumé de sa plaidoirie verbale.

Ex parte

Les curés des paroisses catholiques romaines de St. Jacques-le-Majeur, St. Patrice, Ste. Brigide, St. Joseph et Ste. Anne, de Montréal,

Et.

Requérant l'authenticité pour leurs registres de baptêmes, mariages et sépultures.

C. S. Rodier, Alfred Larocque et divers autres,

I

Intervenants.

Les registres authentiques doivent être tenus, sous peine