(l) Stat. 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41, s. 3 (6).

(m) Above, p. 122.

(n) Taylor, Evidence, Sec.1378 - 1391, 5th ed.; Stephen, Evidence, Art. 78

(o) R. S. C. 1883, Order 37, rule 4.

Taylor, Evidence, Sec. 1391 sq, 1440, 5th ed.; Stephen, Evidence, Art. 79; above, p. 122.

(q) Stat. 46 & 47 Vict. c. 52, s. 134.

Crown grants are proved by production of the original under the great seal, the privy seal or the royal sign manual; but as they are matters of public record, they are also provable by exemplifications or examined copies (y), or under the Evidence Act, 1851, by certified copies (z). But on sales, if the original be not forthcoming, it seems that the purchaser cannot require the vendor to furnish him with a copy in accordance with the general rule (a), but must examine the enrolment at his own expense (b).

Crown grants.

Deeds and private writings are, as we have seen (c), primarily proved on sales by production of the originals, and proof of execution or signature is not usually required. If any such document, which ought to be produced, be missing, its destruction or loss must be proved, either by evidence of actual destruction, or by showing that search has been made for it without result in all places where it is reasonably likely to have been deposited. If its destruction or loss be so established, secondary evidence may be given of its contents (d), such as a counterpart, draft, copy or abstract thereof proved to be correct (e), or a recital thereof in a subsequent instrument (f): but in such case the execution of the missing document must be duly proved (g). A missing document will be presumed to have been duly stamped, in the absence of anything to show the contrary (h).

Deeds.

Missing documents.

(r) Stat. 53 Vict. c. 5, s. 144.

(s) Stat. 14 & 16 Vict. c. 99, s. 14; above, p. 122.

(t) Reeve v. Hodson, 10 Hare, App. xix.

(u) See below; Taylor, Evidence, Sec.1337,1338,1377,5th ed.

(x) Sug. V. & P. 417; 1 Dart, V. & P. 318, 5th ed.; 361, 6th ed.; 1 Davidson, Prec. Conv. 552, 4th ed.; 459, 5th ed.

(y) 2 Black. Comm. 346; Taylor, Evidence, Sec. 1371, p. 1316, 5th ed.; above, p. 122.

(z) 1 Dart, V. & P. 315, 5th ed.; 361, 6th ed.; 357, 7th ed.; above, p. 122.

(a) Above, p. 121.

(b) Sug. V. & P. 431; 1 Dart, V. & P. 316, 5th ed.; 359, 6th ed.; 354, 7th ed.; 1 Davidson, Prec. Conv. 531, 4th ed.

(c) Above, p. 116.

Enrolment.

Enrolment. The proper evidence of the enrolment of any document required by Statute to be enrolled, as deeds of bargain and sale of any estate of inheritance in lands (i), conveyances to charitable uses (A;) and disentailing assurances (l), depends generally on the terms of the particular Act. But where it is the practice to deliver back the original deed to the parties from the enrolment office with a memorandum of the enrolment endorsed thereon, and purporting to be made by the proper officer, and it is his duty to make the memorandum, such memorandum is at common law sufficient evidence of the enrolment, without proof of the officer's signature or official character (m). This is the case with respect both to deeds of bargain and sale enrolled (n) and conveyances to charitable uses (o). And by a Statute of 1849 (p) it was provided that all deeds enrolled in the Petty Bag Office or in the Enrolment Office in Chancery (which include conveyances to charitable uses and disentailing assurances) should be endorsed with a certificate of enrolment under the seal of the office, and that such certificate should be sufficient prima facie evidence of the enrolment, and the time thereof. Since the 6th of April, 1880, the Enrolment Department of the Central Office has been the place of enrolment of all deeds which by any statute or statutory rule are directed or permitted to be enrolled in any of the Courts whose jurisdiction has been transferred to the High Court of Justice; and certificates appearing to be sealed with a seal of the Central Office shall be presumed to have issued from the Central Office, and may be received in evidence without further proof of authenticity (q).

(d) Hart v. Sort, 1 Hare, 1; Fitzwalter Peerage, 10 Cl. & Fin. 946, 952-3; Green v. Bailey, 15 Sim. 542; Richards v. Lewis, 11 C. B. 1035; R. v. Saffron Sill, 1 E. ft B. 93; Moulton v. Edmonds, 1 De G. F. & J. 246, 251; Tay-lor, Evidence, Sec. 398,399, 5th ed.; . V. & P. 137, 138; 1 Dart, V. & P. 142. 312, 5th ed.; 159, 353, 6th ed.; 155, 349, 7th ed.; 1 Davidson, Prec. Conv. 551, 4th ed.

(c) In litigation, when secondary evidence of the contents of a document is admitted, there is no question whether any particular kind of secondary evidence is better than another, and recourse may be had at once to oral evidence of the contents: Doe d. Gilbert v.

Boss, 7 M. ft W. 102; Taylor, Evidence, Sec. 495,5th ed.; Stephen, Evidence, Art. 70.

(f) Above, p. 141; Alexander v. Crosby, 1 J. & L. 066.

(g) Bryant v. Busk, 4 Russ. 1; see also the authorities cited in note (d), above. Execution may be presumed after a long lapse of time; Monlton v. Edmonds, 1 De G. F. & J. 246.

(A) Hart v. Hart, 1 Hare, 1; Taylor, Evidence, Sec.127, 5th ed.

(i) Stat. 27 Hen. VIII. c. 16.

(k) Stat. 51 & 52 Vict. o. 42, s. 4, replacing 9 Geo. II. c. 36, and amended by 54 ft 55 Vict. c. 73.

(l) Stat. 3 ft 4 Will. IV. c. 74, s. 41.

Exchange or partition, order of, under the Inclosure Act, 1845, and amending Acts (r), proved by a copy of the order under the seal of the Commissioners or the Board of Agriculture, according to the date of the order (s).

Exchange or partition, order of.

(m) Doe v. Lloyd, 1 Man. & Gr. 671, 684-5; Taylor, Evidence, Sec. 1462, 5th ed.

(n) Taylor, Evidence, Sec. 1462, 5th ed.

(o) Doe v. Lloyd, ubi sup.

(p) Stat. 12 & 13 Vict. c. 109, as. 12, 18, repealed with extensive savings (see Sayers v. Collyer, 28 Ch. D. 103, 107; Re R., 1906. 1 Ch. 730) by 56 & 57 Vict, c. 54.