CHANCERY 637

section as to the investment of the proceeds is secondary to the provision authorizing
the decree of sale, though the intention is that the proceeds of sale shall be invested.
Generally a purchaser at a judicial sale who has paid the purchase money need not
. concern himself with its subsequent application. Powell v. Bailey, 138 Md. 171.

Bill held sufficient to give the court jurisdiction under this section; parties; title
upheld. Saml. Ready School v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co., 121 Md. 517.

For a bill filed by a life tenant against the trustees and remaindermen praying a
sale under this section, see Poultney v. Emerson, 117 Md. 656.

The court has a right to decree a sale at the instance of a life tenant; jurisdiction
under this section upheld. Krone v. Linville, 31 Md. 144.

Generally.

A judicial sale will be upheld collaterally if Jurisdictional facts are proven, although
a Jurisdictional allegation in the bill is lacking—see art. 5, secs. 30 and 31. Bill de-
murrable. The whole theory of this section is that parties in being represent persons
unborn. An infant party to a suit is not more bound than those unborn, by representa-
tion. Beggs v. Erb, 138 Md. 350.

When a trustee has an implied power of sale under a will, the validity of a sale
by him is not affected by the fact that he applies for a decree under this section
instead of acting under the will. Under this section, it must appear that the sale was
advantageous to the parties at the time of the decree. A decree authorizing sales to be
made from time to time upon application to be thereafter made to the court, does not
conform to this section. Preston v. Safe Deposit Co., 116 Md. 214.

Under this section a court of equity, with all interested parties before it, may decree
the sale of any kind of an estate. This section held applicable, if facts justify it, to
property held as tenants by entireties where the property has been injured by fire.
Masterman v. Masterman, 129 Md. 179. And see Brell v. Brell, 143 Md. 450; Roth v.
Roth, 144 Md. 555.

Apart from this section equity has no authority to decree a sale of title of unborn
remaindermen. A portion of the proceeds of the sale may not be reserved from the
reinvestment prescribed by this section for distribution at once to life tenant. This sec-
tion does not admit of a present money payment in lieu of a life interest. Benson
v. Denson, 125 Md. 359.

This section referred to in upholding the power of trustees to sell property under
a power of sale in a will, irrespective of whether that particular property had been
held by the testator in his lifetime. Carter v. Mullin, 123 Md. 329.

Exceptions to the title of property sold under this section, overruled. Stewart v.
Kreuzer, 127 Md. 4.

Primary purpose of this section. This section extends the doctrine of representation
to the eases therein mentioned by providing that the parties in being shall represent
unborn parties. The constitutionality of this section has never been called in question,
and it confers upon equity jurisdiction which it did not theretofore have. Kingan
Packing Assn. v. Lloyd, 110 Md. 623.

Under this section a farm devised to the wife and children of L., upon which a
charge is made for the support of L. and his family, during life, may be sold. Dis-
position of proceeds. Object of this section. The fact that the will shows an intention
that the life tenant shall hold a farm for the benefit of himself and family, does not
defeat the application of this section. Downes v. Long, 79 Md. 384.

A bill under this section on behalf of an infant should be filed in infant's name,
but its being filed in the name of guardian is an irregularity which, as long as it stands
unreversed, does not .affect the binding nature of the decree. Where a purchaser
appeals from an order ratifying the sale, the decree directing the sale is not open
for review. Where the court has jurisdiction the question of the proof that the sale
was advantageous, will not be inquired into upon purchaser's appeal. Newbold v.
Schlens, 66 Md. 587.

If the court has jurisdiction, mere irregularities in proceedings or proof, will not
sustain exceptions to the sale by the purchaser. Benson v. Yellott, 76 Md. 168;
Rieman v. Von Kapff, 76 Md. 421; Newbold v. Schlens, 66 Md. 587.

This section held to afford the only means for a sale of ground-rents devised for life,
with remainders over. Murphy v. Coale, 107 Md. 209.

In a proper case, equity will decree a sale under this section for the purpose of
using the proceeds to compromise litigation. Caldwell v. Brown, 66 Md. 296.

For cases holding that the plaintiff had no such interest in the property as enabled
him to ask for a sale under this section, see Bannon v. Comegys, 69 Md. 418; Newbold
v. Schlens, 66 Md. 589.

Unborn children and grandchildren held to be bound, along with parties in being,
under the act of 1862, ch. 156. Dunnington v. Evans, 79 Md. 91. And see Benson v.
Yellott, 76 Md. 169.

Where trustee appointed to make sale of land limited in remainder, in selling part
of the land imposed certain restrictions on the part not sold, held that such restrictions
were binding on remaindermen. Gittings v. Morris, 156 Md. 565.

Where trustee appointed to sell land and re-invest funds, and proceeds distributed
by auditor's report to same person as trustee for benefit of life tenant in accordance