390 HAMMOND v. HAMMOND.

ing the sums of money to Charles and Harriet, shews that by
placing those sums in lieu of the negroes he had disposed of, he
meant to restore, so far, that previously adjusted apportionment,
which he himself had interfered with. But this is not all; for, as
if determined that even his creditors, whose rights he knew he
could not absolutely control, should not break down the equili-
brium which he had established among those objects of his bounty,
by taking from one more than from 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 grand-
son, shall contribute in equal proportion to the discharge of my
debts ;' that is, in equal proportion, 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 devi-
sees; but if their portions were of unequal value, as they are ad-
mitted 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 am 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, (u)

But to adjust this proportion, the principal of the sums of money
given to Charles and Harriet must be taken into the estimate as
parcels of their respective portions; and after those sums, principal
and interest, have been charged against the executors who receiv-
ed 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 far as it will go, to
the discharge of the testator's debts; and then the several 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-

(w) Harris v. Ingledew, 3 P. Will. 98.