ART. 93] ORPHANS' COUET. 2125

said court may be enforced by attachment and sequestration as afore-
said; and if the said judgment, decree, decision or order be for the
payment of money the property sequestered may, at the discretion of
the court, be applied to the purpose for which such judgment, decree,
decision or order was given; and if the judgment, decree, decision or
order shall be for the payment of costs, and the party or parties against
whom the said judgment, decree, decision or order for the payment
of costs shall be rendered shall be entitled to a distributive share of
the estate in which the suit is involved, the court may order said costs
to be paid out of said distributive share.

Guardians.

The orphans' court has no Jurisdiction to authorize a guardian to invest
the ward's funds in a loan to the guardian himself upon his promissory
note bearing interest. Fidelity Co. v. Freud, 115 Md. —.

This section referred to in discussing the authority vel non of the orphans'
court, to appoint a guardian ad litem. Williams v. Holmes, 9 Md. 289.

This section referred to in discussing the jurisdiction of equity to appoint
a guardian. Corrie's Case, 2 Bl. 502.

As to the jurisdiction of the orphans' court to allow a guardian to exceed
in expenditures the income of a ward's estate, as to personalty and also as
to real estate, see sec. 165.

Costs and counsel fees.

The powers of the orphans' court can not be extended by construction or
Implication. The power to allow a fee for advice given an administrator in
his individual capacity and before his appointment, denied. Flater v. Weaver,
108 Md. 677. And see, Browne v. Preston, 38 Md. 380; Townshend v.
Brooke, 9 Gill, 91.

The orphans' court has no power to allow residuary legatees costs and
counsel fees Incurred in fighting the claim of an executrix. Bell v. Funk,
75 Md. 371.

Generally.

The Jurisdiction of the orphans' court is limited to inquiries relative to
the probate, such as testamentary capacity, fraud, undue influence and the
execution of the will. Courts of law and equity must determine what
passes under the will, and questions of title dependent upon the operation
and effect of the will, and decide upon the right of disposition. Schull v.
Murray. 32 Md. 15. And see, Ramsey v. Welby, 63 Md. 588; State v. Warren.
28 Md. 356; Blackburn v. Craufurd, 22 Md. 466: Michael v. Baker, 12 Md.
169; Spencer v. Eagan, 9 Gill, 482.

Orphans' courts are courts of special limited jurisdiction, and are confined
to the letter of their authority. They must exercise their powers In accord-
ance with the law. and the necessary jurisdictioual facts must not be left to
inference but must affirmatively appear upon the face of their proceedings.
This section referred to in construing article 21, section 81—see notes thereto.
Norment v. Brydon, 44 Md. 116; Taylor v. Bruscup, 27 Md. 225; Lowe v.
Lowe, 6 Md. 352; Conner v. Ogle, 4 Md. Ch. 452.

This section does not mitigate against the authority of the orphans' court
to determine who are next of kin and entitled to distribution under section
235—see notes thereto. Blackburn v. Craufurd, 22 Md. 466. Of. Ramsey v.
Welby, 63 Md. 588; State v. Warren, 28 Md. 356.

The orphans' court has no jurisdiction to determine the validity and
amount of claims due creditors, although such claims may be passed for
payment. Levering v. Levering, 64 Md. 413; Schwallenberg v. Jennings, 43
Md. 559: Bowle v. Ghiselln, 30 Md. 556; Miller v. Dorsey, 9 Md. 323.

The orphans' court has no jurisdiction to pass on title to personal prop-
erty except under section 244 on a charge of concealment by the adminis-
trator. How other questions of title to personal property may be deter-
mined. Fowler v. Brady, 110 Md. 208.