Shaw v. Devecmon

Bryan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from the Circuit Court for Allegany County, sitting in equity. The proceedings appear to have been somewhat irregular, but as no question has been made on this ground, we find it unnecessary to consider it. It is admitted that there is but one point in controversy, and therefore we shall proceed to examine it without making a detailed statement of the other matters appearing in the record.

It is shown in the evidence that in August, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, Thomas Devecmon, at a public sale for taxes, purchased a tract of land called “Harker Place,” and another tract called “Sugar Hill,” both lying in Allegany County, and other tracts of land in said county. And, that, he having died before receiving a deed for the same, the collector, after his death, conveyed the land to his widow and children; the children then being infants under the age of twenty-one years. And that John S. Combs, who was the uncle of the infant Devecmons, took possession of the tracts called “ Harker Place ” and “ Sugar Hill,” and managed them for the benefit of the widow and children, accounting to them for the rents and profits. In the year eighteen hundred and sixty-eight, Benjamin E. Green, who alleged that he was the owner of these tracts at the time of the tax sale, brought an action of ejectment to recover them, and obtained a judgment by default against the casual ejector, but he made no attempt to take possession of the land.

In July 1884 these tracts were sold under a decree in equity against Green, and were purchased by Combs who took the deed in his own name. He charged the price of the property, which was eight hundred and sixteen dollars, to the Devecmons on his books. There is no doubt that it was his intention that they should have the benefit of the purchase ; and it is perfectly evident that all his dealings with them were marked with strict integrity and by a benevolent desire to promote their pecuniary interests. The circumstances were such that it was a matter of prudence to extinguish Green’s title, if it could be ²¹⁷ done on reasonable terms.

The Devecmons claimed under a tax title, and such a title was very precarious before the changes made by the Act of 1874, It was necessary for the party setting it up to prove that every requirement of the law had been observed, and that the sale was regular in every particular. Very often there were mistakes and omissions in the proceedings, and even where they were perfectly regular it was difficult to prove the facts after the lapse of many years. The Devecmon title accrued more than twenty years before the purchase by Combs, and they had held possession under it all that time. But the Statute of Limitations had not given any additional security to it, because at the time of the tax sale the owner was absent from the State, and he does not appear to have returned until 1866, about eighteen years before the purchase by Combs.

The judgment in