Where the Probate Court acquires jurisdiction to probate a will by the presentation to it of a proper petition for that purpose, and the publication of notice of time of proving the will, and afterwards in such proceeding admits the will to probate, its determination is final, except upon a direct proceeding by appeal or otherwise to reverse it, and cannot be questioned collaterally.

A proceeding by petition to the Probate Court to obtain an order that a former probate of a will therein be adjudged void, on the ground of want of jurisdiction, and that the will be admitted anew to probate, is not a direct proceeding to set aside the former probate, but a collateral proceeding, in which such former probate can only be attacked for want of jurisdiction, and not for irregularity.

The existence and contents of a record or other document to show the regularity of legal proceedings, may, if the original be lost or destroyed, be shown by secondary evidence, the same as of any other lost instrument.

The existence of a petition, for the probate of a will which is not on file may, after the lapse of several years be inferred, from mention thereof in the minutes of the Probate Court and reference thereto in books kept by the Clerk and papers on file, and oral testimony tending to prove, but not positively asserting the fact.

Where it was shown that a petition, since lost or destroyed, was filed in the proper Court, the object of which was to procure the probate of a will—that the testator was dead when the petition was presented, and resided at the time of his death in the county where the alleged probate was had—that the petition was drawn by lawyers whose business it was to prepare such papers—that the Court assumed jurisdiction—took proof of the execution of the will—issued letters testamentary, and ordered and approved a sale of real estate by the executor: held, that it should be presumed, after the lapse of eight years, that the petition contained a statement of the necessary jurisdictional facts.

A failure to make the order admitting a will to probate on the day specified in the notice, or to fix, by adjournment of the proceeding, a subsequent day for the order, is a mere irregularity, and does not afiect the jurisdiction.

It is not necessary to the validity of a probate that a formal judgment or decree, that the will is admitted to probate or is proved should be entered; a direct statement that the will is proved, although entered in the minutes as part of and preliminary to an'order directing letters to issue, is sufficient.

Courts will uphold where it is possible a contemporaneous interpretation of a statute under which interpretation rights of property have for many years been acquired.

The omission by the Probate Court of San Francisco in its proceedings in probating wills previous to 1855, to attach to the will and file with it for record the certificate mentioned in Sec. 24 of the act concerning estates of deceased persons, is not a fatal defect, invalidating the probates of that period.