210 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

the power to compel its own agent to bring in the proceeds of
property sold under its authority, that application may be made
of such proceeds to the purposes contemplated by the decree ?
This is not a question between the court and Key, the conven-
tional trustee, but between the court and the trustee of its own
appointment, and as to him, I apprehend, the power to pass the
order asked for, is incontestible. Glenn vs. Clapp, 11 Gill &
Johns., 8; Penn vs. Brewer, 12 io., 113; Mullikin vs. Mulli-
kin, 1 Bland, 538; Iglehart vs. Armiger, ib., 527.

[The second objection was, that on the sale of the estate by
a trustee of the court appointed for that purpose, the trustee ap-
pointed by the parties was functus officio, and could claim no
interest in the fund raised by the sale; and that, at all events,
the husband and wife as being beneficially interested, ought to
have united in the motion. To this, it was answered by the
court:]

By the terms of the deed, the trustee was, under the
circumstances therein mentioned, authorized to sell the proper-
ty, and the proceeds were to be invested upon the like trusts
and uses, and subject to the same powers and purposes, as were
declared with regard to the land, and I take it to be very clear,
that the investment spoken of in the deed, was to be made in
the name of the same trustee, and that now, the fund being un-
der the control of this court, the investment must be made in
his name, unless some satisfactory reason is assigned for the se-
lection of another. John H. Key was an indispensable party
to the original bill filed in this case—.Story's Eq. Plead., 187—
and being thus a party to the cause, it not only was his priv-
ilege, but his duty, if he saw, or thought he saw, the trust fund
in danger, to interpose for its protection. Having so interposed,
it does not become the agent of this court, whose duty it was
to sell the property, and deliver the proceeds of sale over to the
court, to say, that he is spurred on to do that which, by the
terms of the decree, he was required to do by a party who has
no interest.

[The third objection was, that the trustee for the sale under