HAMMOND v. HAMMOND.—2 BLAND. 323

applicable to the payment of his debts; yet it seems to have been
unsettled, at common law, how tar estates in remainder or rever-
sion were to be considered as assets present or future. And for-
merly here, as in England, a notion prevailed, that such estates
could not be sold in the first instance. Charles v. Andrews, 9 Mod.
151: Bac. Abr. tit. Heir and Ancestor. I; Rum. on Assets, 152,
168. (a)

(s) HINDMAN v. CLAYTON.— This was a creditors bill, filed on the 18th of
August, 1792, by James Hindman and others, against Richard E. Clayton
and others, alleging that the late Solomon Ciayton was indebted to the
plaintiffs; that his personal estate was insufficient to pay his debts; and that
his real estate descended to his children and heirs. Whereupon it was
prayed that the real estate, be sold. &c.

The infant defendants, answering by their guardian ad litem. admitted the
insufficiency of the personal estate of their late father; and that he was in-
debted to the two plaintiffs, as they charged in their bill; (the amount
claimed by one of them was, however, left blank in the bill and answer,)
that their father did not die seized of the several tracts of land in the bill
stated; but only of a fee in remainder, expectant upon an estate for life,
&c.; that their grandmother Hannah Clayton is the tenant for life in the
aforesaid lands, and is willing and agreed to join in the conveyance of the
aforesaid part of a tract of land, called Neglect, for the benefit and advan-
tage of these defendants: provided the creditors of their father Solomon
Clayton will consent to wait for the balance of their claims until it can be
raised out of the profits of the other lands above mentioned, which expec-
tant estate these defendants humbly apprehend it would be greatly to their
disadvantage to sell during the continuance of the particular estate.

HANSON, C., 31st January. 1794.—This case standing ready for decision,
and being submitted on the bill, exhibits and answer, and the same, with
all other proceedings, being, by the Chancellor, read and considered, and it
appearing to him proper to exercise the discretion vested in him by law, in
refusing the relief prayed by the bill, and that the proposal made by the
defendants is fair and reasonable, and the Chancellor being satisfied of the
insufficiency of the personal estate of their deceased father; and the claim
of James Hindman, one of the complainants, being established to his satis-
faction,

It is Decreed, that all the right, title and interest which hath descended
from, or been devised by, the said Solomon Clayton, to the defendants in
and to part of a tract of land in Queen Anne's County, called Neglect, be
sold for the payment of his just debts; provided that Hannah Clayton. who
appears, from the answer aforesaid, to be tenant for life thereof, shall first
convey to the trustee hereafter by this decree appointed, and his heirs, all
her right, title and interest therein and thereto, in trust to the intent that
he shall sell the same agreeably to the directions hereof, and for the pur-
poses herein mentioned, &c. (Peter Edmondson appointed trustee to make
the sale, &c.) He shall then, provided the said Hannah Clayton shall make
the said conveyance, and not otherwise, give notice by advertisement, in-
serted at least three weeks successively, in some convenient newspaper, and
set up at convenient public places, of the time, place, manner and terms of
sale; and, at the same time, and in the same manner, he shall give notice to
the creditors of the said Solomon Clayton, to exhibit, within three months