ELLICOTT v. WELCH.—2 BLAND. 229

Nicholas Welch died intestate, leaving the defendants bis heirs,
and a widow, the defendant Rachel, who had since intermarried
with Warner Welch; that administration had been granted to the
widow and Joshua Warnfield of the personal estate which was
wholly insufficient to pay the debts of the deceased; and that
the land was bound by a lien to the plaintiff for the payment of
the balance of the purchase money.—Upon which it was prayed
that the land might be sold to satisfy the said claim.

As against the widow and her husband, who having been sum-
moned, had failed to answer, an interlocutory decree was passed
taking the bill pro confesso. The infant heirs, answering by their
guardian ad litem, admitted the truth of the allegations of the bill.
And the administrator, in his answer, also admitted the truth of
the plaintiff's statement; and prayed that the balance which might
remain should be paid to him to be applied, by him, under the
directions of the Orphans' Court, to the payments of such debts as
might be then due from Nicholas Welch, deceased, in consequence
of the insufficiency of his personal estate. Upon this case, on the
14th of July, 1826, a decree was passed, in the usual form, direct-
ing the land to be sold; under which it was sold accordingly, and
the sale finally ratified on the 19th of February, 1827.

The widow, with her second husband, by petition, prayed-to be
allowed a portion of the proceeds of the sale in lieu of the dower
to which she was entitled in the land sold. The plaintiff objected,
that the claim was to his prejudice; and therefore should not be
allowed.

*BLAND, C., 3d June. 1828.—The petition of Warner
Welch and Ra.chel his wife having been submitted without 244
argument,the proceedings were read and considered.

The object of the bill is to have the land sold for the payment of
the purchase money due to the plaintiff; his claim therefore carries
with it an equitable lien upon the land sold, which entitles him to
a preference in satisfaction from the proceeds of the sale over all
others; and consequently, the petitioner Rachel, according to the
Act of Assembly, 1818, ch. 193, s. 10, can only be endowed of the
equitable interest of her late husband, without prejudice to the
plaintiff's claim; that is, of the surplus which may remain after
that claim has been satisfied. But as it does not appear what is
the amount of the surplus, if any;

It is therefore ordered, that this case be and the same is hereby
referred to the auditor with directions to state an account accord
ugly, allowing to the said Rachel out of such surplus, if any, two
thirteenths for and in lieu of her dower in the equitable interest
held by her late husband in the lands in the proceedings men
tioned.