COKBIE'S CASE.—2 BLAND. 467

-common law, as on an attachment in this Court. Children* v.
Saxby, 1 Fern. 207. I cannot make the defendant Gilbert Mur-
dock pay the costs and take down the fence, because he is entirely
innocent; and it would be highly unjust to throw the costs and the
trouble of doing so upon the plain tiff William Brewer, because he
is the party grieved. I shall, therefore, cast the whole upon these
two trespassers.

Whereupon, it is ordered, that Gilbert Murdock be. and he is
hereby, discharged with his costs. And it is further ordered, that
the said William Murdock and Zachariah Johnson be. and they
are hereby commanded and required, without delay, to take down
and remove the fence erected by them, as stated in the proceed-
ings, and to pay all the costs of this proceeding, to be taxed by
the register, and to stand committed until the said costs are fully
paid.

CORRIE'S CASE.

CHANCERY JURISDICTION AS TO INFANTS AND LUNATICS.—CAPACITY TO CON-
TRACT.—SITUS OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY.—CONFLICT OF LAWS.

The jurisdiction of the Chancellor as to infants and lunatics.

In all cases where the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals falls short, the
Chancellor may, on petition without suit, appoint a guardian to an in-
fant; and provide for his education and maintenance, and the manage-
ment of his estate.

But under a habeas corpus, the judicial authority extends no further than to
the discharge of a citizen from illegal restraint.

The several kinds of personal incapacity to contract.

The State is bound to take care of all its own citizens; particularly infants,
lunatics and paupers.

Every one is permitted to remove his property out of the State at pleasure.

The property of a debtor or deceased person, may be detained in the country
where it is found, for the benefit of his creditors there residing, or of the
State, in opposition to any foreign administration or bankrupt, or in-
solvent laws, (a)

Land is governed by the law of the country in which it is situated.

The succession to personal property, on intestacy, is regulated by the law of
the deceased owner's last domicil. (b)

The contract of marriage, if valid where made, is, with few exceptions, valid
everywhere; but the right to personal property, as a consequence thereof,
is regulated by the domicil of husband and wife.

The appointment by * the Chancellor of a guardian, to a citizen in-
fant, resident here, should be recognized every where, so as to 489

(a) See Bank v. Sharp, 53 Md. 538.

{b} See Appeal Tax Court v. Patterson, 50 Md. 371; Freke v. Lord Carberry,
L. R. 16 Eq. 466.