296 CONTEE v. DAWSON.

than the proof and proceedings in the cause warrant; second,
because there is a charge of interest in said account, whilst none is
justified by the said proof and proceedings; or if any interest
should be charged, because the same is charged at too great a rate;
and because there is a charge of compound interest; third, because
if liable to interest at all, it was only from the death of Mrs.
Clerklee, which was on the 23d of November, 1818, and the same
is calculated from the 15th of October, 1818; fourth, because no
allowance is made for the expenses charged by the bankers, in
England, to the trustees of the legacy, and paid by them; fifth,
because no allowance is made for the loss upon that portion of the
legacy invested by William Dawson, in the stock of the City Bank
of Baltimore; but his estate is charged with the whole sum so in-
vested; sixth, because no credit is given for the amount of the
legacy loaned to Mrs. Clerklee; seventh, because said report and
accounts are in many other particulars erroneous and not warranted
by the proof and proceedings in the case.

26th January, 1830.—BLAND, Chancellor.—This case standing
ready for final hearing, and having been submitted, without argu-
ment, the proceedings were read and considered.

On reviewing the order of the 14th of April last, and consi-
dering the proofs taken under it, as reported by the auditor with
his statements, it appears, that a question has arisen, which was
not at all contemplated by the reasoning and explanations with
which the case was sent to the auditor.

The late trustee William Dawson, in his letter of the 9th of July,
1818, speaking of the sale of the British stocks, in which the
legacy had been invested, says 'that by the advance in the price of
the funds, and some interest since the death of Major Clerk, the
amount paid to my banker, is £2,406 14s. 2d. sterling.' When
this case was last under consideration, there was no proof by which
the allusion of this expression, 'and some interest, since the death
of Major Clerk,' could be shewn to apply to any other than the
dividends arising from the investment made by the trustees; and
which, belonging to Margaret R. Clerklee, as tenant for life of the
legacy, could not be awarded to those of her children who were
parties to this suit. I therefore directed the amount of such inte-
rest to be ascertained by proof, to be laid before the auditor; and
that the defendant Eleanor Dawson should be charged with the
principal of the amount for which the British stock sold; intending
thereby to exclude from the sum to be divided among these lega-