
    Benjamin U. Keyser, Receiver, &c., vs. George Breitbarth, Administrator, &c.
    Probate. No. 236.
    < The Chief Justice and Justices Mao Arthur and Cox sitting.
    Í Decided March 30, 1883.
    An appeal from the action of a justice of this court holding a Special Term for Orphans’ Court business, is to be taken in the same manner as an appeal from the action of a justice holding any other special term of the court.
    STATEMENT OE THE CASE.
    This cause came up on appeal from an order of the justice holding the special term of the court for Orphans’ Court business. In behalf of the defendant it was moved to dismiss the appeal, because of non-compliance with the requirements of the Maryland Act of, 1798, chap. 101, sub chap. 15, sec. 18.
    N. H. Miller in support of the motion :
    The act of 1798, requires, in case of an appeal, the transmission of a tz’anscript of the proceedings in the Orphans’ Court, duly certified by the register of wills. Although the powers and jurisdiction of the Orphans’ Court of the District were by act of Congress of June 21st, 1870, sec. 4 (16 Stats., 161), thereafter to be held by a justice of the Supreme Court of the District, holding a special term for that purpose ; yet by sec. 5 of the same act, all laws and parts of laws relating to the Orphans’ Couz’t so far as applicable to the Supreme Coui-t, are continued in force. The Maryland Act of 1798, chap. 101, sub-ch. 15, sec. 18, prescribing a mode of appeal, is applicable to the Supreme Court of the District ; and appeals from the action of the justice holding the special term for Orphans’ Couz’t business are still to be governed and z’egulated thereby.
    R. K. Elliot and Leigh Robinson, contra:
    
    The 5th section of the act of Congress of June 21st, 1870, while continuing in force all such laws and parts of laws relating to the Orphans’ Court as might be applicable to the Supreme Court, also repealed all such laws and parts of laws not so applicable. The section of the. Maryland act is not so applicable, the mode of appeal thereby prescribed being both cumbersome and wholly unnecessary. Moreover, Congress has, since the passage of the act of June 21st, 1870, recognized the decrees and orders in special term for Orphans’ ■Court business of the Supreme Court of the District of ■Columbia (R. S. D. C., Sec. 930) ; and appeal from such decrees and orders lies in the usual way.
   Mr. Chief Justice Carttbr

delivered the opinion of the court.

By virtue of the act of Congress of Juné 21st, 1879, this court has succeeded to all the powers and jurisdiction •of the old Orphans’ Court ; which powers and jurisdiction are now exercised by a justice of this court holding .a special term for that purpose. Such special term so held is, to all intents and purposes, exactly similar to any other special term of the court. The 18th section of sub-chapter 15, act of Maryland, 1798, chapter 101, so far as it prescribes a process of appeal,'is not applicable to this court; our machinery is much simpler and fully sufficient for the purpose. An appeal from the action of the justice holding the Special Term for Orphans’ Court business is to be taken in the same manner as an appeal from the action of a justice holding any other special term of the court.

Motion overruled.  