ninety-three, Robert Morris and James Greenleaf purchased of the Commissioners appointed in virtue of the act of Congress of the United States entitled "An Act for the establishing the temporary and permanent seat of the government of the United States," lots numbered six, nine and ten, in square numbered seventy-four in the City of Washington for a valuable consideration, subject to the terms and conditions concerning the manner of buildings and improvements declared by the President of the United States, and the said lots having since been transferred to Isaac Polock and the principal and interest of the purchase money for said lots being paid and satisfied to the Commissioners aforesaid, it is therefore considered that the said Isaac Polock, his heirs and assigns be and they are hereby entitled to the same lots in fee simple agreeably to the acts of Assembly of the State of Maryland in such cases made and provided.

"Witness our hands this Twenty-second day of July, in the year One Thousand, Seven Hundred and Ninety-seven.

This certificate was not recorded in the book kept by the clerk to the commissioners for that purpose until May 30, 1804, the notation for record being in the following language:

"At the request of Isaac Polock, the following certificate was recorded the thirtieth day of May, A. D., One thousand Eight hundred and Four."

Frederick L. Vogt and Mrs. Rosina Kaiser, as trustees under the will of their deceased father, John H. Vogt, have a complete chain of title to a certain portion of lot numbered 10, mentioned in the foregoing certificate; and they insist that by virtue of the various instruments which constitute their chain of title, they have acquired a perfect title to the part of said lot which is described therein; but, if there be any doubt with reference to the validity of their title thereto, inasmuch as a certificate was properly issued to their remote vendors, which shows that the purchase price was entirely paid, and as they are therefore justly

entitled to a perfect title to said premises, they request that the Chief Engineer of the Army execute to them a quitclaim deed for their portion of said lot; and

The questions you desire answered are:

1. Whether or not, in view of the fact that the certificate above set forth was not recorded until seven years after its issuance, the parties to whom it was issued acquired a good and perfect title to the premises; and

2. If their title is for that reason defective, whether the Chief Engineer of the Army has authority to execute a quitclaim deed therefor, and thus render it perfect.

A proper consideration of the first question will require a review of the legislation under which the District of Columbia was established and which formed a basis of the titles to lands situated therein.

By the act of Congress of July 16, 1790 (1 Stat. 130), establishing the temporary and permanent seat of government of the United States, provision was made for the appointment of three commissioners by the President, who were given power to purchase or accept such quantity of land on the eastern side of the Potomac River for the location of a federal city as the President might deem proper, and these commissioners were required to provide suitable buildings for the accommodation of Congress. The commissioners having been appointed, in March, 1791, they made an agreement with certain proprietors of lands, and, feeling that it would be necessary for the successful administration of their offices to secure specific legislation from the State of Maryland ratifying the agreement with the proprietors and giving them powers of municipal control and certain powers to enforce the terms of said agreement, and presenting a method by which the division and sale of the lands obtained by them could be made, they addressed a memorial to the Maryland legislature; and on December 19 of that year the legislature of Maryland passed an act which was the basis of the operations incident to the foundation of the federal city.

This statute included some of the provisions pertinent to the present consideration; and it should be considered

in the light of the Maryland law in effect at the time of its enactment, which law can be best understood by a review of the legislation of that State relating to land titles.

As was said by Mr. Justice Hagner in his opinion in the case of United States v. M. F. Morris et al. (23 W. L. R. 749), the proprietary of Maryland was vested"with powers and prerogatives which fell little short of those of royalty itself."

In the language of the charter, his powers were such-as any Bishop of Durham, within the Bishoprick or County Palatine of Durham, in our Kingdom of England, ever heretofore hath had, held, used or enjoyed, or of right could, or ought to have, hold, use or enjoy."

Section 7 of the Charter of Maryland grants to Cecilius Calvert, Baron of Baltimore, and his heirs

"free, full and absolute power * * to ordain, make, and enact laws of what kind soever, according to their sound discretions, whether relating to the public state of the said province, or the private utility of individuals."

Section 18 of the charter nullified the statute Quia Emptores, or any other "thing, cause, or matter" which would in any wise interfere with the free disposition of the soil of Maryland by the proprietary, his heirs and assigns, leaving such disposition entirely within the discretion of Lord Baltimore and his successors.

Under the sweeping terms of this charter there is no doubt of the power of the proprietary to affix such conditions to the transfer of real estate as he might deem desirable in his discretion, the only restriction being that the laws made should be "consonant to reason and be not repugnant or contrary (but so far as conveniently may be) agreeable to the laws, statutes, customs, and rights of this our Kingdom of England."

As a consequence of the conditions of the new country, the difficulties of accurate surveys, and the disposition to seize upon wild lands, it became necessary in the latter part of the seventeenth century for the proprietary to promulgate various laws for the ascertainment of bounds and the quieting of titles; and with a view of preventing further confusion an act was passed June 6, 1674 (Kilty's Land

holder's Assistant, Appendix, p. xxxvi), stating in its preamble the following purpose:

"For the better establishing of a way and method of conveying of manors, lands, tenements and hereditaments, within this province, for the future; and for the avoiding of all abuses and deceit, in encumbering estates by mortgages, and otherwise, by the owners of lands and hereditaments to the prejudice of purchasers for valuable considerations, and such as lend their monies upon real securities."

This act provided that no

one

"manors, lordships, lands, tenements or hereditaments whatsoever * * * shall pass, alter or change from to another * * * except the deed or deeds * * be made by writing indented and sealed; and that the same be acknowledged in the provincial court of this province, or before two of the privy council of this province, or in the court of the same county, or before two of the justices of the peace of the same county where the same manors, lordships, lands, tenements and hereditaments do lie; and be enrolled * ** in the provincial court of this province, or in the county court where the land doth lie: the same enrollment to be made within twelve months, next after the date of the said writings indented."

This law was confirmed by the laws of 1676, chapter 2, and by the act passed June 3, 1715 (1715, Kilty's Laws of Maryland, chap. 47, sec. 5), this law was referred

to as

* * *

"a very good law that no manors, lordships, lands, tenements and hereditaments whatsoever within this province, should alter, pass or change from one to another * * * except the same were acknowledged and enrolled as in the said law is directed."

The law of 1715 enacted that whatsoever deeds had been enrolled should be taken and adjudged to be effectual in law, but that if any deed or reconveyance was not enrolled according to law "nothing has passed by said deed or deeds, conveyance or conveyances, not enrolled as aforesaid." Two other similar laws were recited in the

act of 1715, and in connection with each of these laws it was specifically enacted that if deeds were sealed and delivered, but not enrolled according to the intent of the law, nothing passed by such deed or deeds. Section 8 of said act provided—

"for the better ascertaining and way and method for conveying of manors, lands, tenements and hereditaments for the future, and for the avoiding abuses and deceits by mortgages

by enacting that

"no manors, lands, tenements or hereditaments whatsoever, within this province, shall pass, alter or change, from one to another, whereby the estate of inheritance or freehold, or any estate for above seven years, shall be made or take effect in any person or persons, or any use thereof to be made, by reason of any bargain and sale only, except the deed of conveyance by which the same shall be intended to pass, alter or change the same, be made by writing indented and sealed, and the same to be acknowledged in the provincial court, or before one justice thereof, or in the county court, or before two justices of the same, where such manors, lands, tenements or hereditaments do lie, and enrolled within six months after the date of such writing indented as aforesaid."

In an act passed December 6, 1766, being chapter 14, laws of 1765 (Kilty's Laws of Maryland), reference is made to chapter 17, acts of 1715, heretofore quoted, in the preamble, reciting that the said act

"extends to and regards only such conveyances as operate by way of bargain and sale; and the good ends and purposes of the said act are now in great measure eluded by the frequent use of conveyances by feoffment, lease and release, confirmation, release, limitation and declaration of uses, and other modes of conveying"

and further reciting that

"a general registry of all deeds and conveyances of land, would very much tend to the security of creditors and purchasers, the preservation of titles, and thereby to the advancement of the value of real estates, and particularly