RAND ALL v. HODGES.—3 BLAND. 473

Elliott, 1 H. & J. 1; Collins v. Nicols, 1 H. & J. 400; Cheney v. Wat-
kins, 1 H. & J. 533; Massey v. Massey, 4 H. & J. 142; Darby v.
Mayer, 10 Wheat. 465. (Since affirmed by 1831, ch. 315, s. 1—
passed 14th March, 1832.) It would, therefore, seem clearly to
follow, that here, as in England, if it became necessary to estab-
lish a will of real estate, that, on application, this Court would
lend its aid, and order the register, if the original will were then
in his keeping, to deliver it to the applicant, on his giving bond
for its safe return, for the purpose of having its validity investi-
gated and determined upon in due course of law; or, considering
the original will as being a part of the public records of the State,
relief might be had by a special legislative enactment, (d)

*From this brief review of the law in relation to wills, it
is evident, that none of those cases relied on, which shew, 482
that the Court of Chancery has undertaken to have the original
will itself taken from the custody of the register and delivered
out to a party, or brought before the Court for the purpose of in-
vestigation and proof, can have any material bearing upon the
matter now under consideration.

It may not, however, be amiss to observe, that, in relation to
the probate, and custody of wills, our law appears to stand as much
in need of amendment as that of England. "I have often thought
it a very great absurdity," says Chancellor Hardwicke, "that a
will which consists both of real and personal estate, notwithstand-
ing it has been set aside at law for the insanity of the testator,
shall still be litigated upon paper depositions only in the Ecclesi-
astical Court, because they have a jurisdiction on account of the
personal estate disposed of by it. I wish gentlemen of abilities
would take this inconvenience and absurdity into their considera-
tion, and find out a proper remedy by the assistance of the Legis-
lature. But, as the law stands at present, it is not in the power
of this Court to interpose, so as to stop the proceedings in the
Ecclesiastical Court " Montgomery v. Clark, 2 Atk. 378. The
original will itself should in all cases, be committed entirely to the
safe custody of the register of wills, as a part of the documents
of his office, for which he should be expressly held responsible;
since as an original it can only have authenticity from its being

(d) The register of wills of Baltimore was authorized by a special Act of
Assembly, to deliver the original will of Robert Burney, deceased, to his
heirs, to enable them to establish their title, as such, to lands in Ireland, of
which he had died seised in fee simple.—1807, ch. 12. By a similar Act the
register of wills of Worcester, was authorized to deliver the original will of
Joseph Delastatius, deceased, for the purpose of having it recorded in Acco-
mack County, Virginia.—1808, ch. 89. And by a special Act the register of
wills of Charles County was directed to transmit the original will of Daniel
of St. Thomas Jenifer, to the Court of Appeals, to be there used in a case
then depending, and then to be returned.—1822, ch. 117.