
    Eckels v. Stuart.
    
      Partition—Practice, C. P.—Master’s report—Insufficient findings—Review.
    
    Where two masters make two reports conflicting as to facts and law as to the proper distribution of a fund raised by a sale in partition, and the court makes no clear findings of its own as to the essential facts of the case, the decree will be reversed with directions to send the case to a new master for a specific report on the facts and the respective claims on the funds.
    Argued April 25, 1904.
    Appeal, No. 223, Jan. T., 1903, by Harrisburg Trust Company, from decree of C. P. Cumberland Co., on bill in equity in case of J. W. Eckels v. Mary L. B. Stuart.
    Before Mitchell, C. J., Dean, Beown, Mesteezat and Thompson, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Bill in equity for partition.
    The opinion of the Supreme .Court sufficiently states the case.
    
      Error assigned was the decree of the court.
    
      W F. Sadler, for appellant.
    
      E, M. Biddle, Jr., for appellee.
    
      May 23, 1904:
   Per Curiam,

This case is unfortunately not in condition to enable the court to decido it intelligently. Two masters in partition were appointed and after a sale of the property made separate reports as to the proper distribution of the fund, differing not only as to the facts and the law as between the litigating parties, but also as to more personal matters. The learned court below devoted most of its opinion to a criticism of one of the reports, and then made a qualified confirmation of the other, with some exceptions, but it made no clear finding of its own, as to the essential facts on which the cardinal question of the discharge of the mortgage by the sale must finally turn. The consequence is that we are presented with diverse views of such facts, and with no clear standard by which to decide between them. The.decree is therefore reversed, with directions to send the case to a new master for a specific report on the facts and the respective claims on the fund. Costs of this appeal to abide the final adjudication.  