622 ADDISON v. BOWIE.

the realty may be directed to be applied to the payment of debts
in aid or relief of the personalty out of which the legacies are
given; in which case, at the instance of such legatees, such a tes-
tamentary appropriation may be carried into effect, but without
prejudice to creditors, (i)

Here, the testator William, clearly contemplated the payment of
all his debts in the first place, before his estate should, or indeed,
could be distributed in the manner he prescribed. It is shewn,
that he left a large amount of debts unsatisfied; and it also appears,
that his executors have not yet finally settled up his estate; and
that his creditors have not been called upon to bring their claims
before this court for adjustment and satisfaction.

This is a bill by a legatee and devisee, to have the estate of the
testator William, distributed, in order that she may thus obtain
that portion of it, to which she is entitled. This, it is manifest,
cannot be effected, until the creditors of the deceased have been
called in and satisfied. A legatee, by a bill of this kind, has a
right to call for a final settlement of the testator's estate; and, in
order to accomplish that object, as the only means of getting his
legacy clear of all incumbrance, he has a right to have his bill filed
for that purpose, treated as a creditor's bill, as regards the credi-
tors of the testator, and to have them notified to bring in their
claims. I have had occasion lately, and sufficiently to explain
the reasons and grounds of my opinion upon this subject, (j ) In
this case, there can be no final distribution made of this estate,
until after the expiration of the time allowed to the creditors to
bring in their claims. And consequently, a notification to the cre-
ditors, is the first thing that must now be directed to be done.

This case has been treated in the argument, as one in which the
testator William, had put his children, by his wife Kitty, to an
election to take under, or in opposition to his will. And I think
there can be no doubt, that it is one of that description. But it is
a case of election, accompanied by very peculiar circumstances.
The power given by the testator Baruck, to his son-in-law, is con-
fined exclusively to the real estate; and as to that estate, extends
only to a mere choice among certain persons; one, or some, or all
of whom, were to take at all events. If the testator William, and
his wife Kitty, had had only one child at the time of Kitty's death,

(t) Clarke v. Ormonde, 4 Cond. Cha. Rep. 50.-( j) Hammond v. Hammond,
ante 316.