HO YE v. PENN.—1 BLAND. 25

his three sons Benny, Roby and Zachius, as joint tenants, of whom
the two first are the survivors; and by another deed of the 7th of
May, 1792, he conveyed another parcel to his two sous Charles and
William as joint tenants; and, by a third deed of the 24th of July,
1792, he conveyed the residue of his real estate to his children
Betsy Peiin, William G. Peun, Sarah Penn, and Caleb Penn, as
joint tenants; that the defendant Waters had conveyed all his
real estate, being a tract of land in Anne Arundel County, to his
brother-in-law the defendant Evan Gaither, that those convey-
ances were made without am valuable consideration, in fraud of
these plaintiffs, alter they had given their bond to Edward Gwinn;
and in fraud of other creditors; that Ignatius Pigman was not a
resident of this State: and that Charles Penn, Senr., was dead
insolvent. Whereupon the plaintiffs prayed, that they might, by
substitution, stand in the situation which Edward Gwinn would
have been in; that the defendants might respectively pay and
contribute in satisfaction of the money the plaintiff's have paid,
such sums as might be proper; and, that the plaintiff's might have
such other and further relief as was suited to the nature of their
case.

The order warning the absent defendants to appear and answer
was published as required. The defendants Benny Penn, Wil-
liam G. Penn, and Elizabeth Penn, put in their answers: and the
infant defendants John Penu, Lucy Penn, Ann Peun, Greeiibury
Penn, and Sarah Peun, answered by their guardian; Caleb Penn
died, and his interest survived. By consent of parties, commis-
sions were issued, and testimony taken and returned. It was ad-
mitted, that the late Charles Penu, Senr., had executed the bond
as a surety of Ignatius Pigman, and it was agreed that the audi-
tor should state an account of the sum due to the plaintiffs, sub-
ject to all exceptions. Pursuant to which agreement the auditor
calculated the interest upon the amount of the judgments up to
the 11th of Jnly, 1810, making an aggregate amount then due of
£1,394 0s. 5d.

KILTY, C., 1st May. 1811.—The Chancellor has considered the
arguments of counsel on each side in their notes in writing; and
has examined the proceedings iu the suit. Several grounds of
defence are taken; first, that Pigman was in prosperous circum-
stances at the time lie purchased the goods from Gwinn. and re-
mained so more than seven years after. It does not appear how
*this can affect the right of the complainants; unless some
fraudulent delay or collusion was proved to the injury of
Penn.

The bond of Edward Gwinn was dated the 21st of September,
1788, but was not payable until the 21st of September, 1792. And
although it seems to be admitted, that Pigman was the principal,