164 WINDER v. DIFFENDERFFER.—2 BLAND.

KILTY, C., 12th September, 1810.—It is ordered that the said
report and statements be confirmed; but before any application of
the balance can be made, it is accessary for the Court to be in-
formed of the situation of the heirs, to whom their proportions
ought to be paid, and their separate receipts, according to the will;
although it is stated by the trustee, that, they conceive, they have
nothing to do with the business. The trustee is directed to report
to the Chancellor the names, situation, and places of residence of
the heirs; and any further knowledge which he may bare obtained
a.s to the debts, and the means of paying them; and the object, and
the present situation of the suit mentioned by him.

The trustee Vincent reported, in obedience to this order, that
the testator Charles Rogers left, at the time of his death, the fol-
lowing children and devisees, namely, Sarah wife of Henry B.
Bailey, Catharine wife of John Diffenderffer, who were then living;
Ann wife oi' Alexander Martin, who died without issue about the
4th of May, 1807, after having by will given a legacy to her hus-
band's mother, and devised her estate to her husband's daughter,
who then resided in Massachusetts; and Mary the wife of George
Lee, who by her will devised her estate to her husband, who was
then living in Baltimore, died leaving no child. That Sarah the
widow of the testator was then dead, after having by will be-
queathed several legacies; but what debts she owed, or what estate
she left, except as before reported, this trustee could not say. That
the debts of Charles Rogers had been all paid, that came to the
trustee's knowledge; except a small account in settling of which
there had been some little difficulty, but oi' small consequence.
That the devisees Bailey and wife, and Differderffer and wife in-
stituted a suit in Baltimore County Court claiming the whole
estate, after the death of Ann Martin and Mary Lee as vested in
them, under the will of Charles Rogers; and that suit was deter
mined by said Court in favor of Mrs. Bailey and Mrs. Diffenderffer
by the opinion of the Court, that the estate of said Eogers is vested
in them * under this will, upon the death of Mrs. Martin and
175 Mrs. Lee. Such this trustee has understood to be the nature
of the said action and the judgment of the Court; from which an
appeal was made, and the record now remains in the Court of
Appeals for trial there. That the money of the estate in this trus-
tee's hands, he is and has been ready to pay over as his Honor
shall direct, as well the part audited to the widow, as that to the
heirs; who are satisfied on that subject, waiting oniy for a decision
in the Court of Appeals. That the balance due Sarah Rogers, at her
death, this trustee has been ready and willing to pay to the execu-
tors, and would have paid; but the heirs, although not disputing
the account, conceived the money due on that account ought not
to be paid until the determination of the Court of Appeals.