JUDGE L. H. PIKE, Toledo: I move that the report be accepted, and that the Treasurer be authorized to pay the Secretary the amount expended by him.

Seconded, and carried.

THE PRESIDENT: The report of the Treasurer.

The Treasurer read his report, which was as follows:

TREASURER'S REPORT.

To the Ohio State Bar Association :

MR. PRESIDENT: I beg leave to submit to you my fifth annual financial report, and I ask permission to make some suggestions for your consideration.

The Treasurer charges himself as follows, viz. :

At the close of the last annual session there was scarcely any cash balance in my hands.

As I have expressed the desire to be relieved of the labors as well as the honor of the office of Treasurer, it may not appear out of place if I make a suggestion, which is to some extent to be my excuse for my own errors which have frequently occurred, both to the annoyance of the members of the Association as well as to the undersigned.

Since I filled the position of Treasurer I have collected about $3,500, averaging about $760 per year; but when it is taken into consideration how many members and dollars have been lost to the Association, in spite of the most diligent efforts of the Treasurer (not so much from the desire to collect the petty sum of $2. from each member, as to retain the members on the rolls), you will readily excuse the blunders; especially if you knew how many distinct acts your Treasurer has to perform before he has received, entered, acknowledged, paid out and accounted for $760.

It is impossible to expect efficient work from a busy lawyer; you must expect the duty to be discharged in a perfunctory or slovenly sort of way. The membership is large enough, the funds ample, and both may be increased if the Treasurer could employ at a moderate expense an efficient assistant. The number liable to suspension, if the rules were strictly enforced, would even now take off the roll of membership about one-fourth of the number, but the present Treasurer assumed the gratuitous, though not very pleasant, task of sending two or three gentle admonitions to delinquents rather than let "any guilty man escape." My successor may not feel like doing it; we have no right to expect it, and yet many gentlemen treat the Treasurer as if he was a well-feed officeholder. I therefore make the foregoing suggestions and explanation, to be taken into consideration by the Association for the benefit of my successors. Respectfully submitted. L. H. PIKE, JULY 10, 1892.

Treasurer.

PUT-IN-BAY, July 13, 1892.

We have examined the foregoing report of the Treasurer, find the same correct, and approve the same. We recommend that the Treasurer be allowed a sum of money annually, not exceeding $75, to enable him to employ proper assistance in the discharge of his official duty. J. D. SULLIVAN, W. C. CULBERTSON, Auditing Committee.

The report of the sub-committee of the Executive Committee, attached to the report of the Treasurer, was read by the Secretary. (See above.)

GENERAL JONES: I move that the report of the Treasurer be approved, and that Judge Pike in the future have authority to employ such assistants as he may see fit to assist him as Treasurer. Seconded and carried.

THE PRESIDENT: The reports of the standing committees—first, the Executive Committee.

JUDGE BURKET: I have no written report, the programme shows the work of the committee during the year. We have had four meetings, two at Columbus and two at Put-in-Bay, and submit a programme, and are happy to announce that all the persons who have promised to be here and make addresses are here, and there will be no disappointments this year. So far as the expense of the matter is concerned, why, that has taken the usual course. If necessary, we will furnish a written report to the Secretary. I should state further: we appointed the meeting for this place, because it has been the wish for years, that whenever the hotel was in shape to hold the meeting, it should be held here. The hotel authorities have furnished us this room, and have said to us that it would be free of charge. Therefore, a vote of thanks, at least, is due to the Hotel Victory for their courtesy, and I move that a vote of thanks be tendered them accordingly.

The report of the committee was accepted, and the vote of thanks passed.

THE PRESIDENT: The next is the report of the Committee on Judicial Administration and Legal Reform.

MR. CHARLES PRATT, Toledo: Mr. President-I have a report to present to the Association, but I am sorry to say that it is not

signed by the full committee, and also to say that we have been unable to get, during the year, a full meeting of the committee. An effort was made to have a meeting of the committee to consider the several matters that were referred to it at the last meeting of the Association, during the holidays, at Columbus. A full meeting of the committee very likely would have been obtained at that time but for the prevalence of the grippe, which kept away several of those who would otherwise have been present. We have not had, and have not now, a full representation of the committee at this meeting, but we have a quorum, and the report which I present is agreed to by four of the five who are present, there being a dissent only as to one of the recommendations by one of the members of the committee present. The matters that were referred to this committee are matters of the greatest importance, and the committee has given considerable time and attention to a consideration of these subjects, and has the following report to present:

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE'S REPORT.

PUT-IN-BAY, OHIO, July 13, 1892.

To the Ohio State Bar Association:

GENTLEMEN: Your Committee on Judicial Administration and Legal Reform presents its report as follows:

First. The Australian Registry System.

At the meeting of this Association in 1891, the then Committee on Judicial Administration and Legal Reform, among other recommendations, reported as follows (page 67):

5th. The committee reports in favor of some new system of preserving and proving titles to real estate in the line of that commonly known as the Australian System, but is not sufficiently informed to make any more definite recommendation at this time. .

Upon the consideration of this report, the following action was taken by the Association (page 89):

On motion of Mr. Wheeler, the subject-matter of the recommendation was referred back to the committee, with instructions to prepare and furnish to the Association at its next meeting a statement of the different systems for the preservation of records relating to real estate.

The committee has not been able to fully comply with so sweeping a requirement, but has made considerable effort in endeavoring to obtain information in the line of examination.

What is known as the "Torrens System" was introduced into the province of Manitoba in the year 1885. The committee has obtained from prominent attorneys at Winnepeg, in that province, information in reference to this system, and in reference to its. operation. there; and has also procured, and has here now for submission to the Association, the statutes of Manitoba for the year 1889, containing what is termed the Real Property Act of that province (pages 101 to 170), and has also obtained a package of blank printed forms which are used under said act. This act and these forms are incumbered and made more complicated than would seem to be necessary by reason of the peculiarities of their statutes and proceedings, and might be made more simple, as it would seem, in adapting the same to our system. The substantial provisions of 'the same seem to be:

1. A division of the province into districts designated as "land districts," in each of which there is appointed a district registrar, who is to be an attorney and to have an office. There are also examiners of titles, clerks, a surveyor, draftsman, and other necessary officers for the carrying on of the business required under the act.

2. This office does not necessarily take the place of the former registers or recorders of deeds, and the registrar has only to take action upon such property as shall be brought under the new system by the voluntary application of the owner of the property.

3. Any owner of property situated within the district may bring it under the operation of the act by filing with the registrar a sworn application for a certificate of title under the act. In this application he states the nature of his title and the incumbrances, if any, upon the same, and is also required to make a deposit of a certain fee, in proportion to the value of the property, for the purpose of covering the expense of the examination of his title to be made, and also for the purpose of creating an assurance fund as a protection against any injury that any other party may suffer by reason of the action taken in the proceedings.

4. The title of the applicant is thereupon examined by the official examiners, and if it is ascertained that there is any person who