Deascription independent of or by reference to a plan.

(l) Above, p. 620. See an article on the subject above discussed in 26 L. Q. R. 268: but it is respectfully submitted that the learned author has overlooked the vendor's double duty of identification, and the fact that in a contract to sell land the property sold may be described with sufficient certainty to make the con-tract specifically enforceable, although the vendor may be obliged to resort to extrinsic evidence to prove that the actual land ottered in fulfilment of the contract is the same as that sold; above, pp. 6, 630. 631.

Connecting a new description with the old.

Mortgagees and trustees convey by the description under which they took.

(m) 1 Dart, V. & P. 530, 5th ed.; 601, 6th ed.; 554, 7th ed.; Davidson, Prec. Conv. i. 85, 86, 4th ed.; i. 65, 66, 5th ed. It may be noted that the converse of the question above discussed may arise, viz. whether the purchaser can require a verbal description by measurements and boundaries to be inserted in the conveyance, when the land sold is described in the contract by reference to a plan. The writer is not aware of any authority on this point, but it can only be decided by applying the principles above stated; see pp. 630 sq.

(n) See above, p. 115.

(o) For instances of the effect of a conveyance of lands described by reference to a plan, which was inaccurate, see Llewellynv. Jersey, 11 M. & W. 183; Lylev. Richards, L. R. 1 H. L. 222; May v. Platt, 1900, 1 Ch. 616; Horne v. Stru-ben, 1902, A. C. 454; Mellor v. Walmedey, 1904, 2 Ch. 525, 1905, 2 Ch. 165. For an example of a reference to a schedule of parcels and a plan controlling a general description, see Barton v. Dawes, 10 C. B. 261; lie Brocket, 1908, 1 Ch. 185, 195, 196. For a case of an ambiguous general description being controlled by recitals see Walsh v. Trevanion, 15 Q. B. 733.

(p) Davidson, Prec. Conv. i. 83, 4th ed.; i. 63, 5th ed.

(q) Above, p. 136.

(r) Goodson v. Ellisson, 3 Russ. 583, 594; see Mostyn v. Mostyn, 1893, 3 Ch. 376.

(a) Wms. Real Prop. 171. 181, 21st ed.

(t) Goodson v. Elliason, 3 Russ.

(u) This is clearly established with regard to funds of money or stock, etc.: Smith v. Snow, 3 Madd. 10; Lenaghan v. Smith, 2 Ph. 301, 302; Re Radeliffe, 1892, 1 Ch. 227; Re Palmer, 1907, l Ch. 486 . and it seems from the decree ultimately made that this principle was really recognised by Lord Eldon in Goodson v. Ellisson, 3 Russ. 696, subject to the trustee's right to be protected by the order of the Court in a case of doubt or difficulty.

(v) See Re Sanson and Narbeth's Contract, 1910, 1 Ch. 741, 749; above, p. 632, n. (k); though in that case it was considered that the trustees themselves took under a conveyance referring to a plan.

Trustee -mortgagees gratuitously releasing part of their security.

(x) The rule was that the only right enforceable by a mortgagor, and those claiming under him, against a mortgagee, whose estate had become absolute at law, was the equity of redemption on repayment of principal, interest and costs: Dunstan v. Patterson, 2 Ph. 341, 345; Chichester v. Donegall, L. P. 5 Ch. 497, 502. This rule has been modified by enactments in the Conveyancing Act of 1881 obliging mortgagees to execute a transfer of their mortgages, instead of reeonvey-ing, on the terms on which they would be bound to reconvey, and giving to mortgagors under mortgages made after that year the right to inspect the title deeds of the mortgaged property: but otherwise it remains in full force. See stats. 44 & 45 Vict, c. 41, ss. 15, 16; 45 & 46 Vict, c. 39, s. 12; Teevan v. Smith, 20 Ch. D. 724; above, pp. 124, 125, and notes.

(y) Above, p. 238.

As is well known, before the year 1882 it was the practice in drawing conveyances of land to add to the parcels, or description of the property to be assured, a number of general words, comprehending all easements, rights, privileges or advantages appertaining or reputed to appertain thereto or therewith used and enjoyed (d).

General words.

(z) Davidson,Prec.Conv.vol. ii. pt. i. 847, n., 4th ed.: see Dart, V. & P. 612, 6th ed.; 689, 6th ed : 630, 7th ed.

See Lewis on Trusts, 495,. 6th ed.: 706, 10th ed.

(b) See Blue v. Marshall, 3 P. W. 381: Pennington v. Healey, 1 C. & M. 102, 107: Re Alexander, 13 Ir. Ch. 137.

(c) See Pell. De Winton, 2 De G. &.J. 13; Dart. V. & P. 612, 613, 5th ed.; 690, 6th ed.: 630, 631, 7th ed.

(d) Wms. Real Prop. 198, 331, 516, 13th ed.: 427, 613, 623, 21st ed.; Davidson, Prec. Conv. vol. i. 91 sq.; vol. ii. pt. i. 231, 4th ed.

This addition was unnecessary and of no effect as regards any rights legally appendant or appurtenant to the land conveyed; for all such rights pass by a conveyance of the land without being mentioned (e). But so far as the general words comprised any privileges or advantages used or enjoyed with the land conveyed, they might have the effect of an express grant by the conveying party, as a legal easement or right, of some privilege or advantage previously used or enjoyed, for the benefit of or in connexion with the land conveyed, over some other land of his own (f). Since the Conveyancing Act of 1881 (g) took effect, it has been the practice to omit general words from conveyances in reliance on the provisions contained in the 6th section of that Act. These provisions resemble the general words formerly in use, not only in including in conveyances a superfluous assurance of all easements and rights appertaining to the land conveyed, but also in incorporating therein an express conveyance of all privileges or advantages enjoyed with the land conveyed at the time of conveyance (h); and this conveyance may operate, in the same manner as general words, to grant, as a legal easement or right, some privilege or advantage enjoyed in fact at the time of conveyance for the benefit of the land assured over other land belonging to the grantor (i). It is therefore necessary to consider what easements or like privileges a purchaser of land may require to be conveyed to him.