WINDER v. DIFFENDEEFFER.—2 BLAND. 165

KILTY, C., 15th December, 1810.—Since the order of the 12th
of September last a report has been made by the trustee of the
matters directed therein; by which it appears, that the debts of
Charles Bogers have been paid; except an account of small conse-
quence; and the executors of Sarah Bogers have informed the
Court, that they wait for the sanction of the account rendered by
the trustee. On this part of the case the trustee is authorized and
directed to pay to the said executors of Sarah Eogers the sum
reported due to her representatives, being $227.83. As to the
balance of $2,889.47 due to the heirs, the trustee is authorized and
directed to pay one-fourth part thereof to Sarah Bailey, and to
take her separate receipt therefor; according to the will of Charles
Eogers; and one-fourth part to Catharine Diffenderffer, taking her
separate receipt therefor. For the two other fourth parts a further
order will be given on the determination of the appeal in the suit
mentioned in the report.

Some years after which, the trustee Vincent, in a letter, dated
on the 23d of November, 1814, addressed to the Chancellor, says:
"I inform you of my resignation of the trust in the estate of the
late Charles Rogers, and given it into the hands of Mr. John
Diffenderffer one of the heirs-at-law." There does not appear to
have been any order passed upon this resignation; but on an
application, dated on the 20th of December following, made by
John Diffenderffer, in which, among other things, he says, "on
examining the account of Mr. Samuel Vincent, trustee of the late
Charles Bogers' estate, I find that he has charged a considerable
sum of money to Sarah Bailey, Ann Martin, and Mary Lee; it
appears to me, by * the will of the late Charles Eogers, that
they are not to receive, or entitled to any, till his debts 176
were paid, which was completed on the 9th of April, 1808.''

KILTY, C., 25th March, 1815.—On the application of John Dif-
fenderffer. who married one of the heirs, and on the resignation of
Samuel Vincent the trustee, the Chancellor has examined the for-
mer proceedings. Before any further order can be made it will be
necessary for him to be furnished with a transcript of the proceed-
ings in the suit by Mrs. Bailey and Mrs. Diffenderffer, which were
carried to the Court of Appeals as mentioned in the report of
Samuel Vincent.

This case having been again brought before the Court, and some
further explanations given as to the particulars mentioned in the
last report of the trustee Vincent.

KILTY, C., 8th July, 1817.—It being represented, that there is
an error in the report, as to the suits in the Court of Appeals men-