
    *Chapman v. Tuberville.
    February Term, 1810.
    Infant Defendants- — Appointment of Guardian, i' rac-tlce In appointing guardians to defend. Intants.
    In this case one of the defendants, who is an infant, had a guardian appointed to defend him; and, for some reasons which the guardian assigned, the Court, at his instance discharged the order: and now Mr. Botts moved, that as it was the interest of the infant’s friends to decline his defence, in order to keep the plaintiff out of his rights, the clerk of this Court should be appointed as the standing guardian of the infant suitors, or that the last order should be discharged, so as to leave the first in force; but this was objected to by Mr. Williams, upon the ground that the guardian had a conflicting interest with the infant, and so the suit had stood for about a year.
    
      
      See monographic note on “Infants” appended to Caperton v. Gregory, 11 Gratt. 505.
    
   By the Chancellor.

The usual practice in this Court has been, to appoint a friend to defend an infant, and I see no necessity for departing from it: and unless the guardian who was appointed, can find some other friend, who will act for the infant, the last order may be discharged; for it really does seem as if there was some collusion in this case, from the great length of time it has been in this situation. No other person was named, and the last order was discharged.  