474 RAND ALL v. HODGES.—3 BLAND.

found in its proper place; 1 Stark. Evid. 170; it should be required
to be recorded; and if its validity should be drawn in question,
either as to real or personal estate, an issue should be made up,
to which all who claim under it, and the heirs, should be made
parties, to be tried in the County Court of the eounty where the
original was kept; and it should be the duty of the register of
wills to attend and have it with him at the trial. The original
will should only be allowed to be taken from the office on its being
shewn to be necessary to exhibit it to a witness who coald not be
made to attend at the trial; and, in such case, the Court before
whieh the trial was to * be bad, should require bond with
483 surety for its safety. And if any will should not be drawn
in question within ten years after it had been recorded, it should
be deemed altogether valid and conclusive as well in regard to the
real as to the personal estate of which it had made any disposi-
tion, (e)

It has been urged that there is nothing to be found in all our
extensive and detailed legislative enactments, in relation to the
administration of the estates of deceased persons, which authorizes
or requires such papers as are now called for to be deposited with
the register of wills; or their being recorded by him, much less the
receiving of any copies of them, which he might give as evidence
in any way whatever.

In England neither an executor nor an administrator can be
cited by the Ecclesiastical Court, ex officio, to account; nor can a
creditor who calls an executor or administrator to account before
that tribunal be allowed to controvert the account and put him to
the proof of its statements. But a legatee, or next of kin, may
there call an executor or administrator to account, and controvert
every item of the account rendered. And therefore when an ac-
count has been so passed upon, it becomes final and conclusive
between the parties to it, by the judgment of a competent and
proper tribunal. Toller Execut. 492, 495; Canterbury v. Wills, 1
Salk. 315; Greerside v. Benson., 3 Atk. 253; Anderson v. Fox, 2 Hen.
& Mun. 259.

(e) It has been since declared, by an Act passed on the 14th of March,
1832, that every will of which probat shall be taken by any Orphans' Court
shall be retained in the office of the register, and not delivered out to any
person; and every issue of devisavit vel non from a Court of Chancery shall
be tried in the county of the office, at which trial the said will may be ad-
duced in evidence under the care of the register, or one by him deputed,
under a subpoena duces tecum, issued 'on a special order of the Court holding
such trial; and in like manner such will may be produced in evidence on the
trial in any Court of this State, of any issue involving the said will, and re-
quiring its production in the opinion of said Court; but nothing herein con-
tained shall authorize the keeping said will out of the care and custody of
the register.—1831, ch. 315, s. 16.