HAMMOND v. HAMMOND.— 2 BLAND. 317

was an infant, in respect of the real estate descended, the parol
demurred; or, in other words, the farther prosecution of the suit

and of this order, be served on the said Jesse Holliugsworth, or either of his
counsel, appearing in the suit, before the first day of February next.

On the 29th of January. 1808. Elisha Tyson. John Heslip and others, by
their petition, stated that they had each of them purchased a part of the
real estate in the proceedings mentioned, the title to which had been drawn
'in question by the bill filed on the first February, 1805. by Rollingsworth
and wife; that they had purchased upon a representation, and in confidence,
that they should obtain a good title, which could not have been made to
them until after the deed had been made good by the Act of 1807, ch. 52:
that if they had had possession, and had improved the same before that
time, they must have done so at their own risk; in consequence of which,
they had not taken possession of. or improved, the property so purchased by
them, or derived any benefit therefrom: but that they were then willing to
keep it; provided they were not. compelled to pay interest on the purchase
money, which the trustee threatened to make them pay. Whereupon they
prayed relief, &c.

KILTY, C., 30th January, 1808.—The Chancellor cannot decide a matter
which may be so important as to the principle and the amount on the peti-
tion as it stands. There must be either a petition or a bill, making the credi-
tors, who were complainants in the suit, parties, as well as the trustee.

On the 2d of March. 1808, the auditor made a report, in which he says
that he had stated an account between the estate of Parkin & McKenna and
the trustee: that he had charged the said estate, with the amount of claims
in account No. 1, including interest to the 15th of May, 1804. the time when
the said sales were made, and interest on the aggregate theu due to this day.
and the trustee's commission; and that he had credited the estate with the
amount of sales to this day, as directed by the trustee; and there appears to
be the sum of $3,871 deficient in discharging the said debts from the sales of
the real estate, besides the payment of the costs arising in this Court, as per
account No. 2 more fully appears. He further says that he had stated
another account between the said estate and the trustee, charging the said
estate with the amount of claims, as stated to the loth of May, 1804, and in-
terest on the principal sums then due on each claim, to this day, and the
trustee's commission: and credited the amount of sales and interest as afore-
said; and there is a deficiency, by this mode of statement, of $2,287,09, as
per account account No. 5 more fully appears. The auditor further says
that he had examined the accounts produced by the defendant Carey, the
executor of McKenna: and stated an account between the said executor and
the estate of Parkin & McKenna. to shew the assets which came to his hands:
and there appears a balance of $4,491.83 in his hands, of the personal estate;
for which sum there has been no order of the Orphans' Court for the applica-
tion thereof, as per account No. 6 more fully appears. That of the said
executor's accounts No. A and B, appear to have been settled by the Orphans'
Court, where he has been allowed a commission on $50,852.27, amounting to
$5,085.84. That exhibit C, is an account wherein he is charged with addi-
tional sums received, amounting to $4.427.67: and he charges the estate with
a dividend paid $18.41; and the sum of $105.37 for disbursements for which
he has produced receipts; except for the two first; items amounting to $9.37;