clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search		 search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 167   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

JONES VS. BADLEY. 167
the hire or work and labor of the slaves, and I shall decree ac-
cordingly.
MCLEAN, for Complainant.
ROBERT J. BRENT, for Defendants.
[The decision in this case was affirmed upon appeal by a divided
court. See 4 Md. Rep., 532.]
J. D. JONES,
vs.
ELIJAH BADLEY
AND
JOHN T. DARBY,
CAVEATS IN THE LAND OFFICE,
SEPTEMBER,1850.
[LAND OFFICE--ESCHEAT PATENTS.]
AN escheat grant will pass all the land comprehended within the true location
of the tract escheated; it relates back, by operation of law, to the original
grant, and is within the rule of law, of relation between grants and certi-
ficates.
But this doctrine of relation is founded upon a principle of equity, and where
an escheator expressly excepts from his survey a part of the tract escheated
and does not pay for it, the doctrine does not apply.
As a general rule, lands which have escheated cannot be taken up under a
common warrant as vacant lands.
But where no fraud or imposition has been practiced upon the State, and there
were no improvements upon the land which the party had taken up under a
common warrant, honestly supposing it was vacant, paid the purchase money
therefor and erected improvements thereon, the grant will not be refused
though the land be escheat.
The Chancellor, sitting as judge of the land office, may decree according to
equity and good conscience, and agreeably to the principles established in
the High Court of Chancery, as if the matter were brought before him by a
bill in chancery.
It is a general rule of the land office to issue the patent when the right is doubt-
ful, in order that the party may not be deprived of the privilege of taking
the judgment of a court of law upon its efficacy.
[The following opinion of the Chancellor was delivered by
him as Judge of the Land Office upon caveats filed to two cer-
tificates therein referred to. The facts of the case are fully
stated in the opinion.]

  		clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 4, Page 167   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  November 18, 2025
Maryland State Archives