We have seen (a), that whenever the purchaser's adviser obtains notice from any document or fact appearing on the abstract or produced or elicited in the course of investigation of the title that a person entitled to some legal estate or interest in the property sold holds the same upon some trust (b) or subject to some equity, he must see that title is properly deduced through or from all persons beneficially entitled under the trust or equity, unless the circumstances be such that a good title can be made without the concurrence of the beneficiaries, as in the case of a trust for or power of sale. When lands are vested in trustees, it is frequently desired to keep notice of the trusts off the title. This is especially the case when mortgages are made to trustees; and it has been the regular practice, whenever a mortgage is held by trustees, to represent in the mortgage deed that they are jointly entitled in equity as well as at law (c); and also, when such a mortgage has had to be transferred to give effect to an appointment of new trustees, to frame recitals in the deed of transfer which shall not disclose the trust. Thus, if John and Thomas are trustees who have invested part of their trust money on mortgage, and Thomas wishes to retire from the trust, Charles being appointed in his place, Charles is duly appointed a trustee in the usual way, and then a separate deed is executed between the three whereby, after a recital that the principal money and interest now owing upon the security have become and are the property in equity of John and Charles, John and Thomas assign the mortgage debt and convey the mortgaged lands to John and Charles (d). It has been held that, when recitals of this kind are met with, they may and indeed shall be accepted by a purchaser without inquiry (e). Conveyancers therefore, though of course they are well aware for what purpose such statements are made, do not seek to go behind them, and abstain from inquiries which, if answered, would oust their client from the position of a purchaser for value obtaining the legal estate in good faith without notice of any trust. The acceptance of such statements seems to rest on the presumption that all things have been rightly done (f). Thus, if A. and B., who have been parties to deeds which have conferred on them an absolute title at law to some land or mortgage money, choose to acknowledge that the land or money belongs in equity to C. absolutely, a purchaser from them is justified in accepting this acknowledgment as rightly made, and in assuming, without further evidence, that the whole beneficial title is, as stated, in C. And he is not bound to make and should refrain from making any further inquiry in the matter, such as whether the trust admitted by A. and B. in C.'s favour is declared by any document. He is, it is conceived, justified in such circumstances in accepting a conveyance of the land or a transfer of the mortgage from A. and B., with the concurrence of C, without making any further investigation of C.'s title or as to the nature of the alleged trust. Where the legal title is correct on the face of the abstract, the purchaser is not entitled to object to it on the mere suspicion of some equity adverse to the title (g). It is, of course, quite a different matter if some document be disclosed to the purchaser, showing that A. and B. are trustees of the land or money on certain particular trusts, as for C. for his life and after his death for his children. In that case the purchaser has notice of the trusts declared by the document, and must have regard to them; he is no longer entitled or bound to accept as correct any statement by A. and B. that they are jointly entitled in equity as well as at law or are trustees for C. On the contrary, the purchaser is entitled to require and should ask for all such information respecting matters connected with the trusts so disclosed as he could have demanded if no such statement had been made (A). For example, where a mortgage has been made to several persons jointly, and it is disclosed to a purchaser that they hold upon the trusts declared by a particular deed of settlement, it should be ascertained that these persons are or were the duly appointed trustees of the settlement and were empowered to invest their trust funds on mortgage and can give receipts for the mortgage money when repaid (i). And where land has been conveyed to several persons jointly in fee, and it is disclosed that they are trustees of some settlement, a purchaser from them must find out whether they are duly appointed trustees and were empowered to invest their trust funds in the purchase of land and are empowered to sell the land and can give good receipts for the purchase money; and if it appear that such powers have not been conferred upon them, he must require the concurrence of all persons beneficially entitled, and should not accept the title if this cannot be obtained or some beneficiary be under an insurmountable disability.

Notice of trust.

(a) Above, p. 170.

(h) Note that notice that the legal owner holds in trust is sufficient to put the purchaser upon inquiry, although the name of the cestui que trust or the purposes of the trust be not disclosed by the notice; Bank of Montreal v. Sweeny, 12 App. Cas. 617, 621, 622; Perham v. Kempster, 1907, 1 Ch. 373, 380.

(c) This was done, before 1882, by the joint-account clause then usual, and has since been usually accomplished by the operation of sect. 61 of the Conveyancing Act of 1881; Wms. Real Prop. 569, 21st ed.

(d) See Davidson, Pree. Conv: vol. ii. pt. ii. pp. 51-53, 805, 806, 4th ed.; 2 Key & Elph. Prec.

Conv. 242. 243, 4th ed.: 224, 225, 8th ed. Where a deed of this kind is abstracted as part of a vendor's title, the purchaser's advisers must of course see that it is duly stamped. Such a transfer, if made between beneficiaries, requires an ad valorem stamp: but as a transfer made for effectuating the appointment of a new trustee it would not require a higher stamp than 10s.; see stat. 54 & 55 Vict. c. 39, s. 62, and First Schedule, tit. Mortgage; 10 Edw. VI I. c. 8. s. 74 (6); Davidson, Prec. Conv. vol. iv. pp. 609, 610, 3rd ed. It the mortgage money should exceed 2,000/. and the stamp be 10s. only, the vendor should he required to have the deed duly stamped with the proper ad valorem stamp. If in such case the deed be stamped with an adjudication stamp of 10*. the purchaser cannot require it to be further stamped: see stat. 54 & 55 Vict. o. 39, b. 12 (5, 6 a); and it is thought that he is not thereby affected with notice of any trust.