TESTAMENTARY LAW 3425

and notice given in accordance with this section. A proceeding in accordance with this
section does not protect a distributee improperly receiving money. Alexander v. Leakin,
72 Md. 201. Cj. Macgill v. Hyatt, 80 Md. 257.

Where an estate has been distributed after a compliance with this section, decedent's
wife and daughter who live in Ireland and did not know of death of intestate nor
participate in distribution of his estate may not recover from administrator nor from
those who receive estate as legatees or distributees. The orphans' court may determine
who are distributees or next of kin entitled to the estate; jurisdiction of equity denied.
Redwo9d v. Howison, 129 Md. 593.

Administrators or executors are not required to ascertain creditors, if any, of dis-
tributees, or to notify them of an intention to distribute estate; administrator or
executor assumes no risk, so far as creditors are concerned, in paying distributees before
passing of account. Effect of postdated check. Am. Agri. Chem. Co. v. Scrimger, 130
Md. 392.

This section referred to in construing sec. 145—see notes thereto. Williams v. Holmes,
9 Md. 287.

Cited but not construed in Wood v. Conrey, 62 Md. 544; Biddison v. Mosely, 57 Md.
94; Jones v. Jones, 36 Md. 463; Gibbons v. Riley, 7 Gill, 84.

For petitions asking the direction of the orphans' court as to distribution, under this
section, see Bartlett v. Ligon, 135 Md. 622; Mack v. Pairo. 136 Md. 180; Albert v.
Safe Dep. Co., 132 Md. 105 (costs of proceedings directed to be paid out of estate).

What the orphans' court can determine under sec. 243 on a petition filed under this
section. Gallagher v. Martin, 102 Md. 117.

This section referred to in construing sec. 74—see notes thereto. Smith v. Dennis, 33
Md. 449.

See notes to secs. 145 and 146.

As to the jurisdiction of equity over suits for legacies, see art. 16, sec. 105.

As to the distribution by fiduciaries under the jurisdiction of equity, see art. 16,
sec. 231, et seq.

Guardian and Ward.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 149. 1912, sec. 144. 1904, sec. 143. 1888, sec. 144. 1798, ch. 101,
sub-ch. 12, sec. 1. 1807, ch. 136, sec. 4. 1829, ch. 216, sec. 5. 1834, ch. 291, sec. 1.

1888, ch. 446.

152. Whenever land shall descend or be devised to a male under the
age of twenty-one years, or to a female under the age of eighteen years,
or any such male or female shall be entitled to a distributive share of the
personal estate of any intestate, or to a legacy or bequest under a last will
or codicil, or may acquire any real or personal property or estate by gift
or by purchase, and the said male or female shall not have a guardian
appointed by last will and testament, agreeably to law, the orphans' court
of the county in which such infant shall reside shall have power to appoint
a guardian to such infant until the age of twenty-one years, if a male,
and until the age of eighteen, if a female or married; and such appoint-
ment may be made at any time after the probate of the will, or administra-
tion granted on the estate of the deceased under whom the infant appears
to be so entitled to land, and it may be made if the court shall think proper,
in the case of personal estate, either before or after the administrator shall
have passed his account.

The term "residence" as used in the statutes relating to appointment of guardians is
synonymous with "domicile." The ward cannot himself change his domicile by removal
because he is not sui juris; nor does removal of ward to another state or county by rela-
tives or friends affect his domicile. Quaere, whether an uncle, after the death of both
parents, may become a natural guardian. In view of secs. 192 and 164, a natural guardian
who has not given bond cannot change domicile of a ward. Sudler v. Sudler, 121 Md. 48.

No appeal lies from action of orphans' court in appointing a guardian. The interest
and not the wishes, of the ward should control in such appointment. Compton v
Compton, 2 Gill, 241; Sudler v. Sudler, 121 Md. 48.

The right to appoint a guardian is not affected by fact that a court of some other
state has made a similar appointment. There may be a domestic guardian having charge
of infant's property, and a foreign guardian having charge of his person. A guardian
appointed in another state has no authority to sue here. Kraft v. Wickey, 4 G. & J. 342.

The expression "lawful age" as used in a will, construed in light of this section.
For many purposes a female does not arrive at her majority until she is twenty-one
McKim v. Handy, 4 Md. Ch. 236.