For admitting for the sake of argument, that there was any defect or imperfection in the description of the land seized, or in the levy, inquisition, or in the execution of the writs in any particular, it was all cured by the return and confirmation of the sale, and deed of the sheriff executed and delivered in pursuance of it as much as fourteen years ago. For any irregularity or defect of the kind he had alluded to, could only be taken advantage of by any party prejudiced or affected by it, at the furthest, by the second term of the court after the return of the inquisition, or on the return of the sale by the sheriff and before the confirmation of it by the court. Burton v. Wolfe, 4 Harr. 221. All the cases cited on the other side, were on such applications as he had just stated. But no exception having been taken in time for such defect, if there was any, which he denied, by any of the parties concerned, either the administrator, or the heirs at law of the deceased, the law would not allow the rights, or the interests of an innocent and bona fide purchaser, who was not responsible for any such defect, or privy to any impropriety or illegality in the mode or manner of executing the process, to be impugned or even called in question after such a long lapse of time, and particularly by a subsequent purchaser of the premises at a public sale with full notice and knowledge of his claim and title to them.