" See also Thomas v. Von Kapff, 6. G. J. 381; 15 C.J. 1252. Assuming then that the covenant to pay taxes ran with the land and was binding upon all owners thereof claiming title under the mortgagor, it is apparent that Waring could not, by buying the land at a tax sale, held in consequence of the failure of some holder of the equity of redemption therein to pay the taxes due thereon, destroy the right of the mortgagee to enforce the lien of the mortgage against it, if Waring at the time he took the tax deed from the treasurer of Prince George's County was himself the holder of the equity of redemption therein, but at most he could only become "seised under the tax deed in trust" for the mortgagees. Lansburgh v. Donaldson, 108 Md. 692. But it is contended that Waring was not at the time he took the tax deed the holder of the equity of redemption in the property, because when Youmans conveyed the property to him, he, Youmans, had nothing to convey, since whatever interest he had in the property had been forfeited to Prince George's County. But an examination of the Public Local Laws of Prince George's County shows that, up to the time Waring took the tax deed therefor, he as the holder of the equity of redemption had a statutory right to redeem the property.

That a tenant cannot acquire, as against his landlord, a title based on taxes which the tenant was under obligation to pay, applies as well where the obligation of the tenant to pay the taxes is imposed by statute as by express agreement. Landsburgh v. Donaldson, 108 Md. 689, 71 A. 88; Walker v. Harrison, 75 Miss. 665, 32 So. 392; Reily v. Lancaster, 39 Cal. 354. A title acquired by a tenant, based upon taxes which the tenant was under obligation to pay, is held for the benefit of his landlord, and the purchase of such a title operates merely as payment of the tax and as a redemption from the tax sale.