Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1879-07-05
ALLEGANY COUNTY, MARYLAND,
Opinion of the Court of Appeals
in the Odd Fellows Opera
House Case.

House Case.
The Frostburg Mutual Bulldingl
Association
The trustees of Frostburg Lodge,
No. 40, /. O.O. +.
Judge Bartol delivered the opinion of the
Court:
The material facts in the case are
correctly stated in the arpellants'
hr sf as follows: ..-... .....
On the 23d day Of March, 1878,
"The Frostburg Lodge, No. 40, Inds-
pendent Order Of Odd Fellows" an
incorporated body, having become in
volved and unable to meet its obli-
gations, conveyed to the appellees,
Brace, Richmond and Hill, all Of its
property for the purpose of sale and
Ind distribution amongst it's creditors.
Part of the property SO conveyed was
the "Odd Fellows Hail." at Frost
burg, a large and valuable brick
building standing in part upon lot
Of ground owned by the said corpora
fion in fee, and in part upon lot
which the lodge held by an equita BILE
title, and upon which the vendor, Me-
Calloh dolds lien for balance of pur-
chase money. The former lot, sm-
bracing about three-fourths Of the
building, the trustees found to bs en-
7 numbered by several mortga, ,zes, and in
their judgment it became necessary.
before proceeding in the execution of
their trust, to obtain from the Court
conetruction Of the rights Of the sew
eral mortgages. In this view the
several mortgages coneurred, and the
bill l. the case was filed by the trus-
tees, and an amicabls suit docketed,
the mortgages having answered and
the case being submitted on an agreed
statement Of facts. The mortgage of
the appellant was dated April 18th
1876; that of John L. Miller, Decem-
ber 18th, 1876, and that of Henry
Stevens, November Gath, 1877. The
Circs;it court de ,reed that these Sow
eral mortgages are not valid legal con-
veyances, and they can operate only
as equitable mortgages; that as be-
tween themselves they take priority
according to their dates; but at the
same time decrsed chat the amount
due upon the mortgage of the appel
liant, whilst it should be carved out
of the fund, ahead of the mortgages of
Miller and Stevens, instead of going
to the appellant, should be set aside
for the purpose Of distribution
amongst certain general creditors,
who had become such subsequent to
the appellants mortgage" &c.
The question bs'ors us on this ap-
peal is as to the effect and operation
o%s the mortgage held by the appellant.
It was executed by the corporation by
Tho mas Hill, its attorney, duly ap-
r;,ted for that purpose, under the
seal of the corporation. The sup
posed defect in the instrument is the
certificate of acknowledgment, which
states that personally appeared
thomas Hill, attorney Tor the Frost
burg Lodge, No. 40, Independent Or
Ter of Odd Fellows, and acknowledged
the foregoing mortgage to be his act
and deed" The Circuit Court decided
that this certificate is defective be-
cause it states that the deed was ac-
knowledged by the attorney, not as
The act of the corporation, but as his
that is, Hills act. The Code, Art.
XIV, section 8, subsection 4, re-
quires that the certificate of &C.
acknowledgement shall contain state
ment that the grantor acknowledged
the deed to be his act, or made an
acknowledgment to the same effect.
By section % mortgages are required
to be acknowledged in the ssue man
ner ss absolute deeds. The Act of
1868, chapter All, Section l, directs
the manner in which deeds by cor
poraticns may be acknowledged. 1t
provides that "any corporation may
acknowledge any deed which such
corpo alton has power to make, Ly at
torney appointed by such corporation
under the seal thereof, and such ap-
pointment may be embodied in the
deed" In the mortgage of the ap-
pellant is embodied the appointment
of Hill as the attorney, by whom the
ackr wledgement was made. The
question turns upon the construction
of thu words Of the certificate. Hill
as 6 sorney, appeared and acknowl-