Another matter which may be conveniently discussed in connection with the preparation of the conveyance is the delivery to the purchaser of the title deeds or other muniments of title, and the vendor's duty to give or procure proper statutory acknowledgments of right to production and undertakings for safe custody of any documents of title lawfully retained in the possession of the vendor himself or any other person. The general rules governing this matter upon a sale by open contract have been already stated (b). The vendor is bound, in the absence of special stipulation, to deliver over to the purchaser on completion all documents of title, which are or should rightly be in his own possession and relate solely to the property purchased, whatever be their date and whether abstracted or not (c). The documents, which must be so handed over, include not only the title deeds and such other muniments of title as will pass without express mention by a conveyance of the land itself (d), but also all documents produced for the purpose of verifying the abstract in proof of any fact stated therein; such as certificates of baptism, marriage or burial, statutory declarations as to matters of pedigree or as to the identity of the property sold, or certificates of the result of an official search for judgments or other matters (e). But of course documents, such as a marriage settlement, merely produced to show that they do not affect the land sold (f) cannot be required to be given up to the purchaser. It appears that in general the vendor is not obliged to hand over the receipts for payments made on account of any of the death duties (g); for although these may be evidence (especially in the case of succession duty) that a charge of duty on the land sold has been satisfied, they are principally evidence of the discharge of the person who made the payment from a personal liability or accountability to the Crown, and on this ground he appears to be entitled to retain them. But it seems that any written statement or certificate (such as may be given in the case of estate duty (h)) of the Inland Revenue Authorities, which merely purports to show that the land sold is discharged or free from any lien or claim for some particular death duty, ought to be delivered up to the purchaser. As we have seen (i), the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, provides that, in the absence of stipulation to the contrary, where the vendor retains any part of an estate to which any documents of title relate, he shall be entitled to retain such documents (k). It has been held that, as this Act relates only to sales of land, this enactment only applies where the vendor retains some land or interest in land, to which the documents of title relate; so that where a mortgage had been made of land together with policies of insurance on the mortgagor's life, and the mortgagee sold the land under his power of sale, but not the policies, it was decided that the mortgagee was bound to hand over the mortgage deed to the purchaser (l). This case appears to have been argued and decided solely upon the construction of the enactment quoted: but it is submitted that the matter ought rather to have been referred to the principle contended for before the Vendor and Purchaser Act was passed, namely, that where a title deed of any land sold relates also to other property of the vendor, he should be at liberty to retain it (m); and that the intention of the Act was merely to declare the law in cases where the vendor retained some land and not to legislate for eases in which he retains some personal chattels to which the deed in question is also a title deed. Suppose that land and personalty were vested in trustees by one deed of settlement, the land being settled on trust for sale, would the trustees be obliged on a sale of the land to hand over the deed of settlement to the purchaser? It is thought not. But if this opinion be right, it must rest on the above-mentioned principle; as it does not appear that the fact, that the trustees have duties to perform under the deed, is of itself sufficient to justify their retaining it. For where land alone is settled on trust for sale and the trusts of the purchase money are declared by the same deed, it is considered that the trustees are not entitled to retain the deed of settlement on a sale of all the land (n); and for this reason it is the practice to declare the trusts of the purchase money by a deed separate from the conveyance on trust for sale (o). But in any case where land has been settled along with personal chattels by the same deed either upon trust for or with power of sale, and in any other case in which some title deed of land sold relates also to personal chattels retained by the vendor, he should be careful, so long as the decision in Re Williams and Newcastle is not overruled, to stipulate expressly that he shall retain it. It does not appear that a vendor, who is not retaining any land to which the title deeds relate, is entitled to retain them on the ground that he has entered into a covenant to produce them: but in such case, as the vendor will remain under a personal liability, the purchaser must covenant to perform the obligations which were so undertaken by the vendor and to indemnify him against their non-performance (p). If the vendor should prior to the sale have given a statutory acknowledgment and undertaking with regard to any document of title, that is of course no reason for retaining it; as the acknowledgment imposes no personal liability and the undertaking imposes no liability on the undertaker after he has parted with the possession or control of the document (q). The vendor is of course not bound to obtain and hand over any documents of title lawfully remaining in the possession of any other person than himself; as whore he himself has no more than a right to their production under a statutory acknowledgment or a covenant, or where the documents are in the possession of a mortgagee of other land, or a mortgagee who is not to be paid off.