ART. 54] WARRANTS. 1325-

When depositions under a warrant of re-survey are evidence In a later suit..
To what matters the proof may extend. Caution money. Prority between
an elder and junior survey. Stewart v. Mason, 3 H. & J. 507.

For cases involving the construction of the act of 1839, ch. 34, In connec-
tion with the act of 1818, ch. 90, see Hoye v. Swann, 5 Md. 237; Mitchell v.
Mitchell, 1 Md. 54.

See notes to sections 29 and 33.

1904, art. 54, sec. 31. 1888, art. 54, sec. 29. I860, art. 54. sec. 22.
1854, ch. 322, sec. 2.

31. The surveyor, before he executes any warrant issued under the
preceding section, shall give reasonable notice to the owners and occu-
piers of all the adjacent lands, if the same be occupied, if the owners
reside in the county where the lands lie, and if the adjacent lands be
occupied or unoccupied and the owners do not reside in the county, the-
surveyor shall give notice of the time he will execute such warrant by
advertisement in some daily newspaper published in the city of Balti-
more, not less than six times, the first publication to be at least two
months before the execution of such warrant.

Ibid. sec. 32. 1888, art. 54, sec. 30. 1860, art. 54. sec. 23.
1854, ch. 322, sec. 3. 1894, ch. 191.

32. The surveyor shall return to the land office within six months
from the date of such warrant a certificate of survey and plot, together
with the depositions relating to the possession and occupancy of the
lands resurveyed and proof of the notice by publication or otherwise1
given to the owners or occupiers of the adjacent lands, and upon return
of such certificate and proofs, if no caveat or objection be made within
six months after such return, the commissioner of the land office shall
issue a patent thereon to the person or his heirs, or assigns who obtained
such warrant of resurvey.

A deputy surveyor has no authority to survey lands lying in another
county. A caveat will be sustained on that ground, but if the patent has been
granted without fraud a good title passes. Hammond v. Ridgely, 5 H. & J.
245.

A warrant must be legally pursued within the time prescribed. Proprie-
tary v. Dorrel, 1 H. & McH. 2.

As to plats returned by the surveyor being evidence, see Chisholm v. Perry,
4 Md. Ch. 32.

See notes to sections 30, 40 and 41.

Ibid. sec. 33. 1888, art. 54, sec. 31. 1860. art. 54, sec. 24. 1781. ch. 20, sec. 8.

33. Any person may obtain an escheat warrant by application to
the commissioner of the, land office, unless some other person has
obtained or is entitled to a warrant affecting the land.

If another person has already obtained or is entitled to a warrant, no-
title passes to a party subsequently applying unless the first party fails to
comply with the rules of the land office. When such a warrant is issued.
it amounts to notice that no other warrant will be Issued within one year.
The legislature may direct the commissioner to issue a patent, but can not
annul a patent already issued. Smith v. Devecmou. 30' Md. 481; Steyer v.
Hoye, 12 G. & J. 202. See also, Chapman v. Hoskins. 2 Md. Ch. 486; Hoye v.
Johnston. 2 Gill. 316; Hammond v. Norris, 2 H. & J. 130; Hath v. Polk, 1
H. & McH, 363; Beall v. Beall. 1 H. & J. 348; Jones v. Badley. 4 Md. Ch. 167-