It appears from the record that a mortgage deed executed by Julio Ledesma in favor of Jose Ledesma was  presented for registration to the register of deeds of Occidental Negros sometime during the year  1925.  The mortgage was given to secure a loan of P225,000, with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum,  and covered two Torrens registered  haciendas, one of them  embracing five parcels of land and the other only one parcel.  Under Act No.  2866, the registration fee for a mortgage of that amount is P70, and the register of deeds was of the opinion that the full fee of P70 should be paid for each parcel of land  described in the mortgage. The mortgagee maintained that the registration fee could  be charged only once, that is  to say, that he was only bound to pay a fee of  P70 for all six parcels  covered by the mortgage.

By reason of this divergency in views,  the  matter was brought in consulta to the Judge of the  Fourth Branch of the Court of First Instance  of Manila,  who held  that, before registration could be had, it was necessary that the value of each property described be determined and be  made to appear either in the mortgage, or else by a separate public document, and that  separate fees,  based  upon the value of each property, be charged in accordance with the schedule contained in Act No.  2866.  From this ruling the mortgagee Jose Ledesma appeals to  this court.

The schedule of fees for recording mortgages in the Torrens register is found  in section 114 of the Land  Registration Act as amended by Act No. 2866.   The pertinent portions  of the amended section read as follows:

  "SEC. 114. Fees payable under this Act shall be as follows:

*     *     *      *      *      *     *

"For  each registration or entry, with notes in connection therewith, there  shall be collected.

"For each property or right worth three hundred pesos or less, three pesos.

"From three hundred one to six hundred pesos, three pesos and fifty centavos.

*     *     *      *      *      *     *

"From two  hundred thousand and one to three hundred thousand pesos, seventy pesos."

The amending act may not be drawn as skilfully as might be desired, but upon examination its meaning seems fairly clear.  The expression "For each property or right" does not mean that the terms "property"  and "right"  are to be regarded as synonymous.   A mortgage on a parcel of land is not property in the sense of  ownership or dominion over the land; it is  merely a right held  by  a  creditor to have the property seized and sold for the satisfaction of a debt in default of payment.  We are therefore here dealing with the fee for  the registration of a "right"  within  the meaning of the statute.  This  right consists in a mortgage for P225,000,  or, as the statute expresses it, a mortgage "worth" P225,000, and it is provided that  each right worth that much  shall be recorded in the Torrens register upon the payment of a fee of P70, plus the entry fee of 50 centavos.   The mortgage is one and indivisible; it covers all of the parcels described in it,  and  each and every parcel responds for the full  amount of the  debt secured.  It is not a mortgage executed in accordance with the now obsolete and rarely observed  provisions of article  119 of the Mortgage Law of 1893, under which each of several parcels described in a mortgage deed respond for only a portion of the total amount of the  debt secured, so that one mortgage deed might, in reality,  embrace several more or less  disconnected mortgages.  Here we have  only one undivided mortgage, or,  in other words,  one undivided right and for the recording  of which only one fee may be charged.

But  it is argued that  when several separately registered parcels of land are included in the  same mortgage,  its recording will entail  more  work than that required for the recording" of a mortgage covering" only one parcel, and that it must have been the intention of the legislature to impose larger fees where a greater number of entries were necessary.  As to this argument, it  is  sufficient  to  say that the schedule of fees clearly  shows that  it is principally a revenue measure  based on the value of the interest involved rather than on the amount of labor required for the act of recording.

Our conclusion is that, for  the purpose of taxing fees, an ordinary  mortgage on  Torrens registered  property  must be regarded as  only one  "right"  within the  meaning of section 114 of the Land Registration Act as amended by Act No. 2866; that the fee for its  recording must be based on the total amount of the debt secured, and that only one such fee may be collected for the recording in one province, irrespective of the number of parcels or  properties covered by the mortgage.   If, by reason of the location  of the properties  covered  by a  mortgage, it  becomes necessary to record said mortgage in more than one province, each register of deeds may charge the full  fee for the total amount of the mortgage.  For  instance, if one  of the parcels described in the mortgage now  before us were situated in the Province of Iloilo and the other parcels in Occidental Negros, and the mortgage should be presented in the registries of deeds in both provinces,  each  register of  deeds would have the right to  collect the full sum of P70, plus the entry fee of  P0.50, on the ground that each parcel responded for the full amount of  the  mortgage  debt and that the mortgage was recorded in two separate and  distinct registries.

The ruling  appealed from is  therefore reversed;  the respondent register of deeds will be governed by the rules herein laid down; and it is hereby ordered that, upon  payment by the petitioner  of an entry fee of P0.50 and the recording fee  of P70, the mortgage in question shall be admitted to record in the  Torrens  registry of the  Province of Occidental Negros.  No costs will be allowed in this instance.  So ordered.

Avanceña,, G.  J., Street, Villamor, Johns, and Villa-Real, JJ., concur.