410 JONES v. STOCKETT.—2 BLAND.

to reside; Buchanan v. Hamilton, 5 Ves. 722; or had absconded on a
charge of forgery; Millard v. Eyre, 2 Vex. Jun. 94; or had been guilty
oi' a breach *of trust; Ex parte- Phelps, 9 Mod. 357; or even
where his co-trustees, there being several others, had a great
aversion to act with him. Uvedalev. Ettrick, 2 Cha. Ca. 180. The
Court may also appoint a new trustee in the place of one who de-
clines to act. —— v. Roberts, 1 Jac. & Walk. 251. But if the
deed or will should even expressly clothe a trustee with a discre-
tionary power to appoint a new one, still the Court will not permit
him to do so, without its sanction; it not being a sufficient answer to
say, that the Court will take care to prevent the consequences;
the mischief is, in a great measure, done by the appointment; the
necessity of getting back the legal estate. Webb v. Shaftesbury,
7 Vex. 487; Bayley v. Mansd, 4 Mad. 226; Southwell v. Ward, 5
Cond. Cha. Rep. 409. The Act of Assembly has provided, that
if any person shall die, leaving real or personal estate to be sold
for any purpose, and shall not, by will, or other instrument of
writing, appoint a person as trustee to sell or convey; or the person
appointed shall die, or refuse to act, the Chancellor may appoint a
trustee for such purpose. 1785. ch. 72, s. 4. But although a trus-
tee, who had accepted the trust, may, by the consent of most of
the cestuis que trust, and with the sanction of the Court, because
of his unwillingness to continue any longer in the office, be. dis-
charged, and another appointed in his place; yet the ceatuis que
trust must be fully apprised of his application to be discontinued.
Rex v. Simpson, 3 Burr. 1467. And if it appears that the most
interested, or greater part of them are not then in being, or are
incompetent to consent, his request will not be gratified, since
he cannot, by any act of his own, without communication with
his cestuis que trust, denude himself of the character of trustee till
he has performed his trust. O'Keeffe v. Calthorpe. 1 Atk. 18; Crewe
v. Dicken, 4 Ves. 100; Chalmer v. Bradley, 1 Jac. & Walk. 68,

Here, however, it does not appear that there is any just cause of
complaint against these trustees; and the trustee Wayman, having
voluntarily taken upon himself the trust, cannot now be permitted
at his pleasure, to abandon it; and there is no one competent to
consent to his discharge on behalf of the infant plaintiff Larkin
Shipley and his issue, and the feme covert Ann Jones and her
issue, who are the principal, if not the only cestuis que trust.
The Act of Assembly declares, that in cases where trustees have
been appointed by last will and testament to execute any trust,
and any person interested in the execution thereof shall shew that
* it is necessary for the safety of those interested, that the
436 trustees should give bond and security, the Chancellor may
order them to do so; and if they shall fail to comply, to displace
them. 1785, ch. 72, s. 10. The decree of the 5th of November,
1829, which required these trustees to give bond, was passed with