HAMMOND v. HAMMOND.—2 BLAND. 375

made, should not he disturbed. The language used in the codi-
cils, * giving the sums to Charles and Harriet, shews
that by placing those sums in lieu of the negroes he 390
had disposed of, he meant to restore, so far, that previ-
ously adjusted apportionment, which he himself had interfered
with. But, this is not all; lor, as if determined that even his cred-
itors, whose rights he knew he could not absolutely control, should
not break down the equilibrium which he had established among
those objects of his bounty, by taking from one more than another,
he declares, that in case the fund set apart for the satisfaction of
his creditors should not be sufficient, that then "my executors pay
the balance of my debts from my estate generally, and from the
rents and profits; and I request and will that they give bond for
their payment, and that no administration on my estate be had in
the ordinary manner, but that the property devised to my sons
and daughters, and my grandson, shall contribute in equal propor-
tion, to the discharge of my debts;" that is, in equal propor-
tion having regard to the actual value of each portion so charged.
That this was his intention is clear, from another view of the
matter. It must be admitted, that the testator meant, in all
events, to give something to each one of those devisees; but
if their portions were of unequal value, as they are admitted to
be, and they were notwithstanding to contribute share and share
alike, then it is clear that if the amount of debts were large, the
portion of one might be wholly exhausted, and he might ultimately
get nothing, and yet leave a large donation to the others. I tun
therefore of opinion, that the contribution must be in due pro-
portion to the actual relative value of the whole property given to
each one of these devisees. Harris v. Ingledew, 3 P. Will. 98.

Bat to adjust this proportion, the principal of the sums of money
given to Charles and Harriet must be taken info the estimate as
parcels of their respective portions; and after those sums, princi-
pal and interest, have been charged against the executors who re-
ceived the assets, and first taken from the fund set apart by the
testator for the payment of his debts, as being in fact not properly
a part of it. the whole of the residue must be applied, as Jar as it
will go, to the discharge of the testator's debts; and then the sev-
eral devisees must- contribute, as specified, towards the payment
of the debts which shall then appear to be unsatisfied.

But it is said, that there remains about one hundred and fifteen
acres of land, parcel of the creditors' fund, as yet unsold; conse-
quently * the amount to be made up by contribution from
the devisees, cannot be adjusted and determined until 391
that has been sold, and the proceeds brought in and applied in
satisfaction of the debts.

It is also represented, that some of the executors have overpaid.
According to the course of the Court, in such cases, the executor