10 CRAPSTER v. GRIFFITH.—2 BLAND.

administrator or guardian. But he cannot confirm the account
No. 4, reported by tiie auditor, in which he makes the allotment
to the parties of different negroes by name. There are two modes
by which this may be done in the Orphans' Court. One under the
Act of 1798, ch. 101, sub-ch. 11, sec. 16, by making the distribu-
tion on a day appointed: and the other under the Act of 1810, ch.
34, sec. 5, by the appraisement of commissioners, on which, if
necessary, a sale may be ordered. The last Act is not obligatory
on the Orphans' Court; but they may resort to the former, which
in this case is considered preferable. And if this Court has any
jurisdiction or power in the case, it may adopt the modes pre-
scribed for the Orphans' Court, or a course analogous to them.

It is therefore ordered, that this Court will on Thursday, the 3d
day of February next, make a distribution of the negroes men-
tioned in the proceedings, and in the auditor's account No. 4;
provided a copy of this order be served on the defendant Lyde
Griffith, before the 26th day of the present month. The Chan-
cellor will also, on that day, determine as to the other parts of the
report, and decree accordingly. It is however to be observed,
that the counsel for the defendant, relying possibly on the de-
fence set up, has not given to the auditor instructions to state an
account in any other manner, or shewn how the balance would
stand, after excepting the negroes as specific articles, if his excep-
tions should prevail.

After which, the parties having had time to consider and pre-
pare for the further argument of the case, on the suggestions of
the Chancellor, they put in some further notes in writing of the
arguments on which they respectively relied, and the case was
again brought before the Court.

KILTY, C., 12th February, 1814.—The Chancellor has again ex-
amined the proceedings in this case, and considered the additional
notes put in for the defendant and since for the complainant.

* The most material point in controversy is, that respect-
13 ing the settlement in money, or in specific articles, as to
which the Chancellor has already expressed his opinion, which is
not altered. The objection to the credit of $150, on account of the
negro girl, appears to be reasonable, inasmuch as the complain-
ants, on setting aside the settlement or receipt No. 6, ought not to
retain any benefit arising from it. The negro girl ought, there-
fore, to be returned, as also the land, which, not being conveyed,
the auditor did not bring into the account. This will render neces-
sary an alteration in the account No. 3, which is made in an
account stated by the Chancellor marked No. 5, leaving the
balance in money $235.83, instead of $41.88. The Chancellor does
not perceive anything in the evidence from which a greater allow-