JONES v. STOCKETT, 4l9

have latterly refused to make any further advances, whereby he has
been unjustly deprived of the most important benefit intended for
him by the testator; that there were sundry debts due to the testa-
tor, which the defendants Stockett and Wayman had neglected to
sue for and collect; and, amongst others, a debt due from the de-
fendant Stockett) secured by mortgage for $3,186, with interest
from the 5th of May, 1811, payable annually; which interest had
not been accounted for. Whereupon, the bill prayed that the trus-
tees might be ordered to render a true account of the management
of the trust fund; that they might execute the trust; that the resi-
due of the legacy to this defendant Ann might be invested; and the
residue of the trust property ascertained and invested in some pro-
ductive fund, and the rents of the lands, and the interest of the money
paid over to the guardian of this plaintiff, for his maintenance and
education; that the said trustees might be ordered to collect imme-
diately all debts due to the testator, the interest of which was not
punctually paid annually, and be compelled to pay interest on all
sums improperly retained in their hands, and to give security for
the faithful performance of their trust, and that the plaintiff might
have such other relief as the nature of his case might require.

It appears, from a certificate of the register of wills of Anne
Arundel county, that John Shipley had, on the 27th of July, 1828,
given bond as guardian of Larkin Shipley.

On the 22d of September, 1828, the defendants Jones and wife
put in their answer to this bill, and admitted the before-mentioned
facts and proceedings, as therein stated, and prayed that the mort-
gage of the estate of the defendant Stockett might not be considered
as a part of the legacy given to them, but that the trustees might be
ordered to collect the estate of the testator, and make an invest-
ment of the balance of their legacy, giving to them an opportunity
of making a suggestion of what might appear to them to be fit and
proper objects of investment, they being alone interested in the
said investment. And they say that they are willing that the
balance of their legacy may be brought in and invested as before
directed, although the bringing in of the sum of $3,552, as before
stated, into this court, was not only not prayed for by these defen-
dants, but was contrary to their wishes, and occasioned to them a
loss of five months interest, as aforesaid; and that the course taken
heretofore by this court, without the desire, and to the disadvan-
tage of these defendants; is now prayed for and requested; because
it will be more satisfactory and safe, and there will be no proba-
bility that the same may not be promptly invested.