450 FENWICK v. LAUGHLIN.—1 BLAND.

and have his claim allowed and paid out of the whole or the sur-
plus of the proceeds of the realty of the deceased * so far as
478 they will go; considering the surplus as a residuum of the
real assets which had been taken from the hands of the heirs.
But such petitioning creditor will be required to establish his
claim; to show, by the usual proofs or admissions of the party, the

entitled. Prayer to take testimony to substantiate these facts; that the
trustee be ordered to pay over to him such proportion as he is entitled to re-
ceive of the proceeds of the real estate; and for such other relief, &c.

KILTY, C., let October. 1812.—On the above application it is ordered, that
depositions In Ann Arundel County, taken on three days" notice to the
trustee or to the petitioner, be received in evidence on the hearing.

Ann Spurrier by petition stated, that she was the widow of the intestate;
that there was a large surplus to be distributed among the heirs of the de-
ceased, four of whom are minors, who reside with her, as their mother and
natural guardian; that she is unable to maintain them: and is willing to
give bond, as guardian, for any share which may be ordered to be paid to
her for them. Prayer that the surplus may be distributed; and that the
shares of the minors be paid to her.

KILTY, C., 28th January, 1813.—On the application of the heirs for a dis-
tribution of the proceeds, it is ordered, that the claims be reported by the
auditor on the 10th day of March next on the proof then exhibited, for the
final decision of the Court, when the petition of Roderick Warfield will also
be acted on. A copy of this order to be inserted three "weeks in the Mary-
land Republican.

On the 10th March, 1813, the auditor reported, that at the request of the
trustee, and in obedience to the Chancellor's order of the S8th January, 1813,
he had stated all the claims exhibited since the last report of the late auditor.
And among other things he says, "The claim No. 37 appears to be a judg-
ment in favor of Thomas Cumming on the joint and several bond of the de-
ceased and one John Cumming, and at the request of the trustee the auditor
has stated, as part of the claim, the costs of the deceased as defendant as
well as the plaintiff's costs, the whole amount as stated having been paid hy
the said trustee; and the said whole amount so stated is admitted in writing
to be a just claim against the deceased's estate by his eldest son, who admits
also that the other obligor John Gumming is insolvent. The said claim is
moreover accompanied by a certificate of John Purviance, Esq'r, as counsel
for the plaintiff, that no part thereof has been received, except what is
credited. No authentic certificate, however, is produced of the said John
Cumming's discharge under the insolvent law; supposing him to be the
principal in the bond on which the judgment was rendered. No proof that
the said John Gumming was security only. And no affidavit, that the said
judgment has been fully discharged.

KILTY, C.. 13th March, 1813.—Considering the report and statements by
the auditor and the evidence adduced, it is ordered, that all the claims, as
stated, be allowed; except the last, being the claim of T. Watkins, which is
rejected. The auditor, in stating the account with the trustee, will allot a
share to Roderick Warfield, which will be subject to the order of the Chan-