230 WILLIAMS' CASE.—3 BLAND.

fourth * part of the purchase money to be paid on the day

214 of sale, or on the day of the ratification thereof; and the
residue in five equal annual payments to be accounted from the
day of sale; the whole purchase money to bear interest from the-
day of sale, and to be secured by bonds with surety to be approved
by the trustee. And the property may be sold entire, or in such
parcels as the trustee may deem most advantageous to the parties.
If the trustee should not be able to dispose of the same at auction,
after having given public notice, as directed by the decree, then
he may make sale thereof either at public or private sale, as he
may deem most for the interest of all concerned. And it is further
ordered, that so much of the decree of the 24th of May last, as is
in any manner incompatible with this order, is hereby rescinded.

After which the trustee reported, that in pursuance of the decree
he first advertised the estate called Ceresville, in newspapers in
Washington, Baltimore, and Fredericktown, for more than three
weeks before the 24th of July, 1828; and, on that day, on the
premises offered it to the highest bidder, reserving publicly one
bid to prevent a sacrifice; and there being no bid beyond forty
dollars per acre, which would have been a great sacrifice, the
trustee was unable to sell; and now holds the same for disposal in
parcels, as may suit purchasers, at private sale.

The trustee also reported the circumstances of the estate for di-
rections * as to renewal of existing leases until it should be

215 sold. That the mill, mill-house, and appurtenances were
then under lease at six hundred dollars per annum, subject to the
cost of necessary repairs, to expire on the first day of August then
next, and which the then tenant was desirous to continue for
another year. That the ferry and ferryman's house, and black-
smith's shop were under lease to the then tenant for one year from
the fourth of May then last, at one hundred and thirty dollars;
that the farm, being the residue bulk of the estate, and embracing
all the arable land, was under lease to Daniel Hughes, for one
year, from the first of April then last, at a rent of eight hundred
dollars, subject to necessary repairs. In addition, the trustee
suggested the necessity of some authority to make such repairs of
enclosures as had been injuted or swept away by inundations of
the Monocacy River; and the necessity of renewing the lease oi
the farm some months before the termination of the lease; and for
further directions and orders in the premises.

well as in money, so here, an assignment of the bonds, as in this instance,
may be entirely within the power of the Court, and be regarded as, in many
respects, the most beneficial distribution which the devisees or claimants
could have. Hitchcock v. Sedgwick, 2 Vern. 158; Spurrier v. Spurrier, 1
Bland, 475; Coombs v. Jordan, post; Exparte Bootie, 2 Bland, 321; McMullin

v. Burns, 2 Bland, 357.