lease so granted:¾He was to receive, from the immediate collectors of them, the alienation fines, the collection of which these instructions permitted to be transferred from the clerks, or the private agents theretofore employed, to the farmers of the quit rents, and to receive all fines and forfeitures becoming due to his lordship under acts of Assembly, or at common law, which were in the first instance to be collected by the sheriffs: He was, like other officers, to use his utmost endeavours to discover lands omitted on the rent rolls, and was to render an annual account to the revenue board of all his transactions.     The proprietary not satisfied with all these arrangements, erected another office under the denomination of supervisor of accounts, lands, and revenues in and from the province of Maryland, which was vested in John Morton Jordan Esq. then in England, by a short kind of commission dated the 16th August, 1768, which authorised him to open a correspondence with such persons as he might think qualified to give information or assitance towards the improvement or collection of the proprietary's revenues, or the better regulation of his manors; and directed that the board of revenue should transmit yearly, a double set of accounts to England, one to the said supervisor, and the other to Hugh Hammersly, Esq. his lordship's secretary, and that the said board should receive and pay proper attention to whatever information and assistance Mr. Jordan might from time to time communicate to them. This commission however did not long remain in force. Mr. Jordan was sent over to Maryland in the character of agent and receiver general, and dying soon after, was succeeded by Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, Esq. who had, before, held that office under the appointment of the revenue board, and who now continued to hold it until the proprietary rights were dissolved by the revolution.     The proceedings of the board of revenue shew in a strong manner the propensity of the old government to view the land office as a private revenue establishment, not subject to the controul or inspection of the regular provincial authorities. They were, indeed, the same persons who held responsible offices in the government;¾the governor being one, and the others being generally, besides their particular posts, members of the council; but it was as a board of revenue agents alone that they acted in land affairs. Until then, whatever appeal there was from the decisions of the judges of the land office was to the governor, either as such or in the character of chancellor. This board not only assumed an appellate jurisdiction in contests in the land office but undertook to act upon various applications that had not even passed through that office. Their proceedings, in short, began to