MACKUBIN v. BROWN.—1 BLAND. 387

and Samuel * Van.sant and Mary Ann his wile, or their .,,
solicitors on or before the twenty-third instant. QH

After which the matter was brought before the Court, and having
been discussed by the solicitors of the parties, the case was in-
formally referred to the auditor for the purpose of stating accounts
upon the principles assumed by the respective parties. But, as
they could uot agree as to some points deemed important, the case
was again submitted to the Chancellor for his instructions upon the
following questions;

" Can the heirs-at-law of Brown, in this stage of the proceed-
ings, impeach the correctness of the administration accounts!
Are those accounts to be presumed correct until the contrary is
shewn by the heirs-at-law, or are the petitioning creditors bound
in the first instance to prove the correctness of said accounts?
Can those accounts be opened for the purpose of charging interest
on balances in the hands of the administrators at any time prior
to the passing of the final account?"

BLAND, C., 6th July. 1827.—The decree for a sale, having been
founded upon the fact of the insufficiency of the deceased's per-
sonal estate to pay his debts, has uecessarily established that point.
Therefore the correctness of the administrator's accounts cannot
now be impeached by the heir for the purpose of turning any
creditor, who comes in after that decree, away from the pur-
suit of the real assets under it, to seek payment out of the per-
sonal assets. This general expression of his opinion, the Chan-
cellor conceives, will be a sufficient answer to the three ques-
tions submitted. But if the solicitors have other views, or wish
for more special directions, the Chancellor would rather hear them
first.

Whereupon it is ordered, that this case be and the same is
hereby referred to the auditor with directions to state an account
accordingly, or such other accounts as may be required by either
party.

On the 5th of September, 1827, the auditor returned and filed
his report of sundry statements made according to the nature of
the case and as required by the parties. To this report both
parties excepted, and the case was thus again brought before the
Court.

BLAND, C., 4th October, 1827.—The matter of the petitions
filed in this case by Marriott and Shipley, and by Vansant with
that of Stockett and wife in opposition thereto standing ready
* for hearing, and the solicitors of the parties having been
heard, the proceedings were read and considered. "