JONES r. JONES.—1 BLAND. 435
Court might order an administrator, if there was such a person
here as a party to this suit, to move the Court of Appeals to direct
their officer, this sheriff, to pay this surplus to him the adminis-
trator. But the Chancellor can give no such direction to this
sheriff; because in undertaking to control an officer of the Court
of Appeals as to any disposition of money placed in his hands by
their authority, the Chancellor would thus bring this Court into
direct conflict with the jurisdiction of that tribunal, which cer-
tainly ought not to be done in ay manner or under any circum-
stances whatever. Money in the hands of a sheriff, or of a third
person, cannot be taken under a fieri facias; and the correctness
of this position generally is recognized by the Attachment Act;
1715, ch. 40, s. 7; Parke's His. Co. Chan. 274; which gives what is
called a judicial attachment as against third persons. But even that
process cannot be levied upon money which had been made, and
brought into the hands of a sheriff by virtue of a writ of fieri
facias; because no third person or other Court can be allowed to
interfere with the execution of his duty according to the command
of the process of that Court under whose authority he was acting.
Turner v. Fendall, 1 Cran. 133; Armistead. v. Philpot, Doug. 231;
Willows v. Ball, 2 New Rep. 376; Fieldhouse v. Croft, 4 East, 510;
Knight v. Criddle, 9 East, 48; Stratford v. Twynam, Jac. Rep. 418;
1831, ch. 321. Hence it is clear, that this sheriff Brown has been
improperly made a party to this suit.
Whereupon it is ordered, that this case stand over, with leave
to amend and to make proper parties.
Afterwards on the 6th of June, 1828, the plaintiffs filed in this
case the following judgment or direction of the Court of Appeals.
"Court of Appeals for the Eastern Shore of Maryland, June
Term, 1828.—Ordered by the Court, that Edward Brown, late
sheriff of Kent County, pay to such trustee as the Chancellor of
Maryland shall appoint, the sum of fourteen hundred and fifty-one
dollars and thirty-eight cents, which sum of money the said Ed-
ward Brown as sheriff aforesaid, in his return upon a writ of fieri
facias issued from this Court at the suit of Thomas Dawson against
Jesse * Jones, states to have remained in his hands after
paying and satisfying the debt, damages, costs, and charges 462
due upon the said fieri facias, and the taxes and fees due to him
the said Edward Brown as late sheriff and collector of Kent
County. The said sum of money being part of the real estate of
the said Jesse Jones, deceased. The Chancellor will distribute and
dispose of the same as he shall deem equitable and proper."
Upon all which this case was again brought before the Court and
submitted without argument.