468 CORRIE'S CASE.—2 BLAND.

enable such guardian to collect and bring his ward's property within
the jurisdiction of this State.

JAMES CORRIE, by his petition, stated that his brother, John
Corrie, late of the Island of Trinidad, had died there, leaving a
considerable real and personal estate, which, by his last will, he
had given to the children of his six brothers and sisters; that the
petitioner had eight infant children, who were consequently en-
titled to one-sixth part of the estate so devised and bequeathed:
and that by the laws of Trinidad, the estate so given to his infant
children could only be recovered by their guardian. Whereupon
he prayed, that he might be appointed their guardian for that
purpose.

BLAND, C., 31st May, 1830.—It is clear, that in all ordinary
cases, arising wholly within the jurisdiction of Maryland, this
Court, when it may be proper for it to act at all, may make an ap-
pointment of a, guardian to an infant upon petition only, without
any bill filed or suit in Court, Eyre v. Shaftsbury, 2 P. Will. 118,
120; Ex parte Birchell, 3 Atk. 813; Ex parte Salter, 2 Dick. 769; S.
C. 3 Bro. C. C. 500; Ex parte Wheeler, 16 Vex. 266; in the matter
of Woolscombe, 1 Mad. Rep. 213; O'Keeffe v. Cazey, 1 Scho. & Left:
106; Villareal v. Mellish, 2 81 Swan, 536, note; Pratt v. Pratt, ante,
429; (c) and therefore, if this be a case in which it may act with
propriety, there can be no doubt, * that it may, upon this
490 petition alone, make such an appointment as is called for,

(c) Ex parte Ross.—Oliver Bond Ross, by his father and next friend,
James Boss, filed his petition here, in which he stated, that his father had
purchased for him ten shares of stock in the Union Bank of Maryland, for
the paying of the instalments, drawing the dividends, &c. on which, it was
necessary he should have a guardian appointed: and therefore prayed, that
his father might be appointed his guardian, &c.

HANSON, C., 16th April, 1805.—The Chancellor has considered the petition
of Oliver Bond Ross, and is by no means satisfied that it is necessary, or that
it will be deemed proper for him to exercise the power of appointing a guar-
dian in the present case. From the 101st Act of 1798, ch. 13, it clearly ap-
pears, the idea of the Legislature, that a father is by nature, entitled to act
as guardian of the property as well as the person of his child, unless, &c. &c.
The Chancellor makes these remarks, in order that his decision may not be
considered hereafter, as a precedent, respecting the right, or power of a
natural guardian. And as it is impossible, that his appointment, concurring
with the order or institution of nature, can be injurious; it is Decreed, that
James Ross, of Baltimore, father of the petitioner, be, and he is hereby con-
stituted guardian of the said Oliver Bond Ross, for the purpose only, of
superintending and managing the shares and interest of the said Oliver B.
Ross, in the Union Bank of Maryland; and of paying the said bank or re-
ceiving from it, money for the said Oliver: and of acting in the premises, to
all intents and purposes, as the said Oliver, if of full age, might act for him-