722 ARTICLE 21

When the seal affixed shall contain the name or the official style of the
officer, any error in stating, or failure to state otherwise the name or the
official style of the officer, shall not render the certificate defective.

(3) A certificate of acknowledgment of a deed or other instrument
acknowledged without the United States before any officer mentioned in
section 1¹ shall also be valid if in the same form as now is or hereafter
may be required by law, for an acknowledgment within this state.
See notes to secs. 3 and 4.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 6. 1912, sec. 6. 1904, sec. 6. 1888, sec. 6. 1856, ch. 154, sec. 87.

7. Every officer, before whom any acknowledgment shall be made shall
give a certificate thereof and endorse on or annex to the deed such certifi-
cate, and the certificate shall be recorded with the deed.

The acknowledgment must be recorded along with the deed, and if it is not so re-
corded, the record gives no additional validity to the deed. Budd v. Brooke, 3 Gill, 230.

In making the certificate of acknowledgment, the justice acts ministerially. How the
sufficiency of the acknowledgment is determined. Lewis v. Waters, 3 H. & McH. 432.

This section referred to in construing secs. 1 and 4. Sitler v. McComas, 66 Md. 139.

Cited in In Re Universal Storage & Transfer Co., 4 F. Supp. 425.

See notes to secs. 3 and 4.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 7. 1912, sec. 7. 1904, sec. 7. 1888, sec. 7. 1856, ch. 154, sec. 88.

8. To every certificate of acknowledgment, taken without this State,
before the judge of any court having a seal, the seal of such court shall be
affixed.

Cited in In Re Universal Storage & Transfer Co., 4 F. Supp. 425.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 8. 1912, sec. 8. 1904, sec. 8. 1888, sec. 8. 1856, ch. 154, sec. 89.

9. The certificate of acknowledgment shall contain:
1st. The name of the person making the acknowledgment.
2d. The official style of the officer taking the acknowledgment.
3d. The time when it was taken.

4th. A statement that the grantor acknowledged the deed to be his act,
or made an acknowledgment to the like effect.

Where a mortgage by a corporation is acknowledged by the attorney as "his" act,
the acknowledgment though formally defective, was held valid in the light of the mort-
gage itself. Frostburg Bldg. Assn. v. Brace, 51 Md. 510. And see Basshor v. Stewart, 54
Md. 380.

An acknowledgment reading "on this —— day of August," etc., is valid when the true
date appears from the mortgage itself, from the certificate of the clerk and from the
date of record. Kelly v. Rosenstock, 45 Md. 394.
As to acknowledgments by a corporation, see art. 23, sec. 125.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 9. 1912, sec. 9. 1904, sec. 9. 1888, sec. 9. 1856, ch. 154, sec. 24.

10. All deeds conveying real estate which shall contain the names of
the grantor and grantee, or bargainer and bargainee, a consideration in cases
where a consideration is necessary to the validity of a deed, and a descrip-
tion of the real estate sufficient to identify the same with reasonable cer-
tainty, and the interest or estate intended thereby to be conveyed, shall be
sufficient, if executed, acknowledged and recorded as herein required.

Deed conveying absolute easement, held to comply with this section. Kelly v. Nagle,
150 Md. 135.

Object of this section. General description of all grantor's property held sufficient.
Roberts v. Roberts, 102 Md. 153; Lewis v. Kinnaird, 104 Md. 658.

The omission of grantee's name from granting clause, is immaterial if his name ap-
pears elsewhere on the face of deed. Bay v. Posner, 78 Md. 47.

The description of grantees in a mortgage by their firm name only, held sufficient.
Bernstein v. Hobelman, 70 Md. 40.

¹ Quaere, is not the reference intended to be to sub-sec. (1) of sec. 6?