28 HOYE r. PENN.—1 BLAND.

Before a decree can be made, some further proceeding is neces-
sary. Either, that Waters should, on application for amendment,
be struck out of the bill, if the complainant's counsel should
think it safe and ad\isable to make such an application; or, that
he should be compelled to appear; or the necessary orders be
applied for, and passed for taking the bill, as against him, pro
confesso; and also, that his wife, the other devisee, should be
made a party in order to have her interest in the land affected.
After which the decree should be for a sale of the interest of
Waters and wife for half oi the debt: and Perm's for the other
half, in the first instance, but leading each eventually liable for
the whole.

On the 19th of September, 1811, the plaintiffs filed a bill of re-
vivor, in which they stated, that Evan Gaither was dead, and by
his will had devised his interest in the property in dispute to
Nathan Waters and Susanna his wile; against whom the plaintiffs
prayed relief, a subpoena, &c.

KILTY, C., 24th March, 1812.—This case had been submitted
on notes; but was considered by the Chancellor as not ready for
decision tor the reasons stated in his order of September 18th.
1811.

Since that time process has issued against Nathan Waters and
Susanna his wife: and, such of the parties as appeared have been
heard by their counsel at the present term.

The Chancellor finds no reason to change the opinions, which he
had formed, and which were expressed by him in his order above
referred to: and by Ins remarks in writing, dated the 1st of May,
and the 18th of September, 1811; and will proceed to decree ac-
cordingly.

* Since the order of Ma\ 1st, 1811, a bill of reviver has

34 been filed by the complainants, Hoye and Stoddart, against
Nathan Waters and Susanna his wife, devisees of Evan Gaither,
whose death is therein stated. The death of Susanna has since
been suggested on the docket; but her interest is considered as
surviving to Nathan Waters; and, against him there has been an
attachment, with proclamations, which enables the Chancellor to
take the bill pro confesso against him.

With respect to the sums due, the Chancellor is of opinion, that
as there was no decree to account, but only an agreement of the
parties to have the sum due stated; the burn of £459 9s. 7 1/2d.,
charged as interest in the auditor's statement, ought not to be
made principal as is usual in other cases.

It is thereupon decreed, that the bill of the complainants, as
against Nathan Waters, be taken pro confesso. It is further de-
creed, that the real estate, stated in the bill to have been con-