1322 LAND OFFICE. [ART. 54

1904, art. 54, sec. 21. 1888, art. 54, sec. 19. 1860, art. 54, sec. 12.
1852, ch. 361, sec. 1.

22. If no person appears to contest the said application on the day
so appointed, a patent shall issue to the applicant; but if opposition be
made to the issue of such patent, the party making such opposition
shall, by a day to be designated by the commissioner of the land office,
not exceeding thirty days, file in the land office his objections in writing
to the issue of said patent.

Ibid. sec. 22. 1888. art. 54. sec. 20. 1860, art. 54, sec. 13. 1852, ch. 361, sec. 1.

23. The said commissioner shall fix some day, not less than ten nor
more than twenty days after the objections are filed, to hear such appli-
cation and shall then hear the respective parties, if they appear before
him, and if not, he shall proceed to determine ex parte the rights of
the parties claiming to be interested and shall, within thirty days after
such hearing, decide in favor of or reject the application as to him shall
seem right and proper, filing his reasons therefor in writing.

Ibid. sec. 23. 1888, art. 54, sec. 21. 1860, art. 54, sec. 14. 1781, ch. 20, sec. 6..

1789, ch. 35, sec. 4.

24. The said commissioner shall have full power and authority to
hear and determine all disputes which may arise concerning the validity
of surveys made under warrants or orders issued by him; and also all
disputes concerning the issuing of patents; and in all disputes that
come before him, he shall have full power to decree thereon according
to equity and good conscience and the principles established in courts
of equity.

A caveat will not be dismissed because the caveator falls to show an
interest in the matter in dispute. When a caveat will be dismissed. Where-
a warrant is applied for on land already granted, the party holding the
former grant should be summoned and heard. Armstrong v. Bittinger, 47
Md. 111; Patterson v. Gelston. 23 Md. 446 (overruling on the latter point,
Glttlngs v. Moale, 21 Md. 135); Chisholm v. Perry, 4 Md. Ch. 32.

In the absence of positive law or rules of the land office, general principles-
of equity control. Chapman v. Hoskins, 2 Md. Ch. 486; Jones v. Badley, 4
Md. Ch. 167.

When the applicant obtains an equitable interest agreeably to the rules of
the land office, he can compel a grant. Howard v. Moale, 2 H. & J. 249.

This section referred to in distinguishing between the commissioner's
ministerial and judicial duties. Jay v. Van Bibber, 94 Md. 693.

Formerly the chancellor was judge of the land office. The Chancellor's
Case, 1 Bl. 649.

Cited but not construed in Cunningham v. Browning. 1 Bl. 312.

See sections 41 and 45 and notes.

Ibid. sec. 24. 1888, art. 54, sec. 22. 1860, art. 54, sec. 15. 1846, ch. 92.

25. In any matter pending in the land office in which the commis-
sioner for the time being may have been counsel or may be interested
or related to the parties and on that account incompetent to act, he shall
certify the same in writing to the judges of the fifth judicial district,
who shall thereupon hear and decide such case or appoint some person
to do so, which decision shall have the same effect and be liable to the
same incidents as the decision of the commissioner of the land office.*

*On sections 25 to 45 of this article, see art. 91. "Surveyor." sections 1 to 18-