MULLIKIN v. MULLIKIN.—1 BLAND. 505

* cross bill. But according to the present course of pro-
ceeding, as well in England as in Maryland, the Court may 537
if called on dispense with a cross bill, and pass a decree upon the
whole case, as well in favor of the defendant as of the plaintiff;
as that the one convey the property, and the other pay the pur-
chase money. Dorsey v. Campbell, note, 356. But a decree to
redeem may result in a foreclosure without a cross bill to forclose;
as if a bill tiled by a mortgagor for redemption is by decree dis-
missed, because of the money not being paid at the time directed
by the decree to redeem, that operates as a foreclosure, and is
equivalent to a decree for foreclosure; The Bishop of Winchester
v. Paine, 11 Vex. 199; but the dismission of such a bill merely for
want of prosecution has not that effect. Hansard v. Hardy, 18
Ves. 460.

It appears, that this case was submitted, and such a decree pre-
pared and presented to the Chancellor as the parties thought
proper to have passed without opposition or contest, which was
accordingly signed. A decree might have been passed against
the plaintiff commanding him to pay, as well as against the de-
fendants ordering them to perform their part of the contract by
conveying the property, as had been stipulated, on the payment
of the purchase money. But this decree is. according to the an-
cient course, only in favor of the plaintiff and against the defend-
ant; and therefore this petitioner can only obtain the relief he
asks by a bill in the nature of a cross bill, it being now entirely
too late to alter the decree in any manner whatever.

Whereupon it is ordered, that the said petition be and the same
is hereby dismissed with costs.

After which the other parties filed a bill, in the nature of a cross
bill, against Ephraim Etchison, for the amount of the purchase
money so ascertained to be due, and it was on the 28th of March,
1829, decreed, that Etchison pay the balance then due, and upon
the payment thereof, that the plaintiffs execute a conveyance to
him for the land, &c.

*MULLIKIN v. MULLIKIN. 538
TRUSTEES AND PURCHASERS AT CHANCERY SALES.—DISTRIBUTION.

A trustee, who had been appointed to make sale under a decree, ordered to
bring the purchase money with the bonds and notes received or taken
by him, into Court, and displaced, because of his misconduct, (a)

(a) Approved in Sewall v. Costigan, 1 Md. Ch. 210.