280 CUNNINGHAM v. BROWNING.—1 BLAND.

well, as trustee, immediately ceased for every purpose whatever;
except that of closing his accounts and delivering over the prop-
erty, if any, in his hands, to the legal representatives of Rebecca.
But it does not appear, that this petitioner, who was appointed by
the decree as the trustee of Rebecca, ever gave bond or qualified
as required.

The case was afterwards revived and the amount ordered to be
paid to John Cromwell, which order on appeal was affirmed, and
so the case was closed.

CUNNINGHAM BROWNING.

PATENTS FOR LAND.—THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF LAND WARRANTS.—HISTORY
OF THE LAND OFFICE, AND THE PROCEDURE THEEEIN.—CAVEATS.

The manner of obtaining a patent grant for land. The objects of an inquest
of office: the cases in which it is required; and the mode of proceeding
by caveat to prevent the emanation of a patent in England and in Mary-
land.

The origin of the land office, considered as a branch of the Chancery office;
the jurisdiction of the Judges of the land office, under the Proprietary
Government, and of the Chancellor, at present, in relation to proceed-
ings in the land office, (a)

There are five several kinds of warrants by which an applicant may obtain
a patent for the land he proposes to purchase, i. e. common warrants,
special warrants, warrants of resurvey, proclamation warrants, and
escheat warrants, (b)

The first designation of the land aimed at by one who wishes to purchase

from the State, from the date thereof, by a special warrant in the land
office, or by a special location on the surveyor's book, or by a certificate
of survey, gives an incipient title against all others.

The right thus acquired is not an equitable interest; but an imperfect legal
title, which, when completed, by a patent grant, is considered as a legal
title, by relation from the date of the incipient title, (e)

A special warrant, or a special location, to be deemed an incipient title, must
so describe a space or area of land, as to distinguish it from all other
tracts.

A caveat in the land office is a warning to the Chancellor not to put the
great seal to a patent for a certain tract of land as prayed by the holder
of the certificate of survey.

The grounds upon which a caveat may be entered are various. In general
they must be such ae show that no grant ought to be issued, because to

(a) Cited in Stallings v. Ruby, 27 Md. 155; Smith v. Devecmon, 30 Md. 479;
Chapman, v. Hoskins, 2 Md. Ch. 496; Jones v. Badley, 4 Md. Ch. 170.

(b) See Garretson v. Cote, 2 H. & McH. 459, note; Report of Daniel Dulany,
1 H. & McH. 552.

(c) Cited in Smith v. Devecmon, 30 Md. 482.