The object of this Section is to give security to the Corporation for the money they lend by a mortgage on the new premises, and to give them as security all the interests that everybody has in the site. There was a similar Clause in the Act of 1916, and it worked very well, except in one way, and that was that the Judge in construing this Sub-section (2), when he came to the word " may " at line 16, said that the word " may " was not " shall," and he did not do it. The idea is this : that if money is borrowed to build a new house on a site owned by a number of people in different interests—there is the man in occupation who has a lease for thirty or forty years, and there is another above him who has a lease for ninety-nine years, and there is the owner—and the idea was that if a new house was built on a site held in that way it was not fair that the whole repayment of the money borrowed from the Corporation should be made by the man who happened to have the lower and smaller interest, and that it ought to be spread over all the interests and borne between them. This provision gave the Judge under the former Bill power to apportion it, but he always refused to do it. Would you put in " shall " instead of " may " in this Bill ? I think it would be well to get something like that in on the Report Stage, and pass it as it is for the present.

You would have to put the word " shall " in two places instead of " may."

It is better to pass it as it is and look into it on the Report Stage.

We are quite willing to accept that amendment. I do not know what consequential amendments would be necessary.

If we pass it now, I will try to draft an amendment before the Report Stage and send it to you. There is another matter in connection with this Section. " The Judge " is mentioned here. In the old Act of 1916 there was no trouble about it. The Judge was the Land Judge. Would you call him in this Bill a Judge of the High Court ? I suggest that you insert as an additional Sub-section—Sub-section (15) the following :—

" (15) The Judge referred to in this Section shall be the Judge of the High Court, to whom the duty of exercising jurisdiction under this Section shall be assigned."

In the other Act the assignment was made by the Lord Chief Justice. I suppose that in this case the position will be assigned by the Chief Justice.

Question : " That Section 7 (formerly Section 5), with the additional Sub-section (15), stand part of the Bill," put and agreed.