360 HAMMOND v. HAMMOND.—2 BLAND.

5; Welford v. Davidson, 4 Burr. 2127; Shepherd v. Mackreth, 2 H.
Blac. 284; Frith v, Leroux, 2 T. R. 58; Furlonge v. Rucker, 4 Taunt.
250; Middleton v. Gill, 4 Taunt. 208; Gwyn v. Godby, 4 Taunt.
346; Anonymous, 4 Taunt. 876; Mitchel v. Miniken, 1 Com.Law

sureties; which bonds they had returned as directed. This sale was after-
wards absolutely confirmed.

Sundry creditors of the deceased filed the vouchers of their claims, and,
among others, the defendant, as the voucher of his claim, filed an account
in the following words:

"Alexander Frazier, deceased, to John A. Frazier, Dr.

1. To one-half of the profits of the estate, from the 9th of
May, 1779, to 9th June, 1790, 11 years and 1 month, at
£139 per year............................................................... £1,429 15s. 0d.

2. To one-half of the price of timber sold by Alexander
Frazier from the plantation, estimating the whole at £100.. 50 0s. 0d.

3. To a charge on the estate for default of expending money
in the education of John A. Frazier, as directed by the
will of Alexander Frazier, deceased, say eight years at
£40 per year............................................................. 320 0s. 0d.

£1,799 15s. 0d.

Contra.

1. By maintenance eight years, estimated at £20 a year...... £160 0s. 0d.

2. By clothing 11 years at £10 per year........................... 110 0s. 0d.

By balance due............................................................. 1,529 15s. 0d.

£1,799 15s. 0d.

To balance per contra, £1,529 15s. Od. to interest thereon 9th June, 1790.
E. E. WM. KILTY, Solicitor for J. A. Frazier.

Explanation of the above account. The charge No. 1 arises from the will
of Alexander Frazier, Senior, leaving John A. Frazier the half of his estate:
and the amount estimated from the testimony in the cause, particularly that
of John Frazier. The charge No. 2 is deduced from the testimony respect-
ing the sale of the timber, that not being considered as a part of the usual
profits of the land. The charge No. 3 arises from the will of Alexander
Frazier, Senior, directing his son John A. Frazier to be educated out of
Alexander Frazier's part of the estate, and the time during which his edu-
cation was neglected is stated to be eight years, from the testimony which
proves that he was educated about three years. The credit No. 1 is fixed at
eight years, as it appears that John A. Frazier was boarded out about three
years, which expense fell on Alexander Frazier as a part of his education.
The credit No. 3 is given on an estimate formed from the testimony as to the
manner in which John A. Frazier was clothed."

After which, the case was brought before the Court for further directions.

HANSON, C., 18th May, 1797.—Ordered, that the auditor state the claims
of James Pattison against the said Alexander Frazier agreeably to the estab-
lished principles of this Court, and his own ideas, first giving notice to the
defendant of Ms solicitor, and to William Kilty, Esquire; and that having