COLEGATE D. OWINGS' CASE.—1 BLAND. 349

tiff; and in support of their representation, they filed with it
several affidavits. Upon all which they prayed to be heard; that
the bill might be reinstated; that a guardian of the plaintiff might
be appointed to prosecute the suit; and that such order might be
passed as the nature of the case should require.

BLAND, C., 27th November, 1826.—Ordered, that this applica-
tion to reinstate the case stand for hearing on the fourth day of
January next;—that depositions taken by either party on one day's
notice may be read in evidence at the hearing;—that the Chan-
cellor will at the hearing require the personal presence of the com-
plainant for the purpose of informing himself upon the subject of
this application; but he desires it to be distinctly understood, that
the complainant must not be removed from home so as to subject
her to great personal inconvenience, or so as to endanger the
* health of one so advanced in years, and reduced by in-
firmities. The relation however in which all the parties 372
concerned stand to the complainant will, it is believed, insure
proper respect and attention to her personal comfort and security.
And the register is directed to transmit a copy of this order to the
solicitor for the defendant.

The taking of proofs and the hearing of this matter were several
times postponed at the instance of the plaintiff's solicitors; and
a further short delay having been granted by an order of the
29th March, 1827, the matter was soon after that brought before
the Court.

BLAND, C., 17th April, 1827.—The matter of the petition to re-
instate this case standing ready for hearing, the solicitors of the
parties were fully heard; all the proceedings and proofs were read;
and the plaintiff, Colegate D. Owiugs, having been brought into
the presence of the Chancellor, he interrogated and conversed with
her as to the subject in controversy, and also on various matters
having a tendency toward, or connected with it. All of which the
Chancellor has deliberated upon and maturely considered.

The case is of a peculiar and extraordinary nature. It is not
alleged, nor does it in any way appear, that at the institution of
this suit anything was done that ought not to have been done; or
that this proceeding was an improper one with a view to the rights
and interests of the plaintiff. Wartnaby v. Wartnaby, Jac. Rep.
377. A cloud has been impended over the title to the property
mentioned in the proceedings, which threatens to gather and
thicken by delay. The means of dispersing it, the proofs in rela-
tion to the controversy, may be more entirely, readily, and cheaply
obtained now than at any future period; therefore, justice as well
as the peace and interests of all concerned, seem strongly to re-